Print Page - Top 25 talk

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: Lurker on March 23, 2005, 09:02:04 AM

"To finish not only behind them, but 4th, says that they were the worst team in the Final Four..."

Uh, I don't see York ranked in the Top 3.

I refuse to believe that a neutral court game that is decided in the final minute should be the only factor used in evaluating two teams. If the neutral court is decisive, yes, but the game played between Rochester and Calvin in Salem was not enough to wipe out the whole season. Calvin has 2 wins over Albion, 1 over Wheaton, and 1 over Aurora. What other Rochester wins match those?

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 23, 2005, 10:14:30 AM

Yes, Johnny, most voters look at the entire 30-some games when making a decision, not just one game.

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: Old School on March 23, 2005, 12:20:05 PM

J.C.M.,

The four teams that make it to Salem aren't automatically ranked #1-#4, nor are they assumed to be the best four teams in the nation. I mean, all because Point started out the year #1 and then went into the NCAA tourney #1 and then won the National Championship by the largest margin in NCAA history (D3), doesn't mean they are the best team in the nation, oh wait a minute. :-)

(Message edited by shorty on March 23, 2005)

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 23, 2005, 03:56:55 PM

Sager--I really didn't take the SCIAC into consideration when makeing my comment it was more a "reverse psychology" ploy. Given the heavy load of Midwest teams in the poll I figured someone would be throwing that argument out soon.

Its interesting but an uncle of mine lives in the Bay Area and always refers to his trips to Michigan and Ohio as going to "The East Coast" and he's originally from Michigan, clearly he's been Californized.

I agree almost 100% with Calvin's ranking, look at that schedule as a whole. I don't think anyone in D3 played one as tough even IWU.

JCM---watch the D1 tournament and final poll I can garuntee you the Final Four teams will not be ranked 1 thru 4, nor will "The Four" best teams in D1 be in St. Louis.

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 23, 2005, 06:39:06 PM

Sac,

Though there is a MUCH better chance of it, since they don't worry so much about travel costs in d1 - the regions are much more closely balanced than in d3.

Barring a TRUE Cinderella, it is doubtful that you will see any of the d1 Final Four teams finish 13th! (A ranking which I think was probably STILL too high for York, considering who they beat to get there, and how badly they lost once they did.)

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: Johnny C. Monebonne on March 24, 2005, 10:06:43 AM

My last point on this topic - because frankly, I went to a rival school of UR and can't believe I am arguing on their behalf. I am not arguing that the four teams that make the Final Four finish 1-4. But the logic being used by both the Calvin supporters and even by Pat don't mesh well. I 100% agree that if UW-SP came out of a strong region and beat teams that would have better represented in the Final Four, then they should be ranked higher. But - and follow along closely here - UR BEAT CALVIN IN THE FINAL FOUR! SAC - I guarentee you that the final poll in DI would show a team that beat another in the Final Four ahead of them in the final ranking. A body of work over 30 games ...well, correct me if I am wrong, but after a slow start without their starting PG, UR won like something like 18 of their last 19 games ... and last I checked, the UAA is a pretty good conference. Come on people, they lost only 5 games all year including the title game. I think it has more to do with people on the panel being embarrassed they had a four loss UR team ranked 21st going into the final poll than anything. Like I previously said, the official poll anyways is the NCAA ... and UR is the national runner-up and Calvin the 3rd place team ... I am sure UR cares more about this than the final D3hoops poll ...

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 24, 2005, 12:12:59 PM

Johnny, for what it's worth, I was an impartial observer at the Calvin/Rochester semifinal, and I'm still surprised that Rochester won. In my mind Calvin was clearly the better team, and I think it took guts for the voters to acknowledge this in the final poll. When one team beats another, it is good evidence that they are the better team, but it is not conclusive evidence. As John Rusnak posted on another board, is Bucknell a better team than Kansas?

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: Old School on March 24, 2005, 01:25:51 PM

I'm confident that the NCAA doesn't have a poll, unless you are talking about the NCAA tourney being the official "poll."

Prior to the tourney starting, Calvin was 14th with 294 points. Rochester was 21st with 103 points. Calvin went on to beat #11 Wheaton (we are using the current rankings at the time) on the road, #20 Aurora on the road, unranked Mississippi College on a neutral court, and then beat #9 Albion on the road, in the Sectional finals before losing to Rochester in Salem. Rochester beat unranked Union at home, #2 Amherst on the road, and then #22 Potsdam State on a neutral court before taking care of Calvin and losing to Point.

As a result, Rochester gained 5 spots and 157 points on Calvin. Not bad. I remember during the season when Wittenberg lost at home to Wooster in 3 OTs, who was ranking just a bit higher. I thought for sure Wittenberg would drop (simply because it was a loss, a similar Rochester argument that Rochester BEAT Calvin, so they should be better). Anyway, Wittenberg actually gained a spot after a loss AT home! So it goes.

Other Notes:
Interesting to see Trinity jump 7 spots. They had to have been favored the first two games, and then beat a lower ranked team (Hanover) on a neutral court, before losing a close one to Point.

Surprised that Salem St. dropped out after going 1-1 in the tourney, including a 1-point loss AT #22 Potsdam St.

More surprised that Oshkosh moved into the Top 25 without even playing a game, gaining 34 points. And, Platteville moved up without playing as well. Wartburg dropped 5 spots without a game.

Apparently no one was impressed with St. John Fisher. They dropped 14 spots after suffering their FIRST loss on a neutral court to Potsdam St.

Interesting to note that the top six in the women's poll stayed in the top six, though the order was obviously different. According to the poll prior to the tourney, #1 Scranton, #4 Southern Maine, #5 Randolph-Macon and #6 Millikin made the Final Four. #2 Bowdoin lost to Scranton in the Sectional Final and #3 Bates lost in the sectional semis to Southern Maine. Can you say CHALK? How boring! :-)

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: Old School on March 24, 2005, 01:46:43 PM

... and last I checked, the UAA is a pretty good conference.

Not this year.

Plus, I'm not sure if I can forgive anyone who loses to Superior AT HOME. Superior started the conference season with 9 losses, won three conference road games, all to teams with losing conference home records. :-)

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: BedtimeForBonzo on March 24, 2005, 02:15:09 PM

quote:
Interesting to see Trinity jump 7 spots. They had to have been favored the first two games, and then beat a lower ranked team (Hanover) on a neutral court, before losing a close one to Point.

Agreed, but Trinity was the only team Point was in danger of losing to during their championship run. Does Point they win if they're playing somewhere else? Well, probably yes, but the performance in front of 2500 rabid Pointer fans was impressive. TU's utter lack of success in previous playoff runs (0-3 this century) may have actually worked to the Tigers' favor in some strange way.

I have to admit I was surprised to see them end up at #3. And pleased.

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 24, 2005, 02:49:06 PM

Have you forgiven Stevens Point for losing to Superior at home in 2004, OS? Now, granted, that Superior team was all of 6-10 in conference, while this year's was a lowly 5-11!

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: Lurker on March 24, 2005, 03:03:07 PM

I think the voters struggled with what to do with Trinity all season long. I followed them since they were an IWU opponent.

Trinity lost to a D1 and some D2's early and it seems like the voters were not sure how to evaluate those games. After they beat Illinois Wesleyan in Texas over the holidays they started to get a lot of respect in the poll. Then, they lost 2 bad games in a row I think, which dropped them back down. Trinity finished the season on a good run and won the early round playoff games vs Dallas and Pomona-P. I think when they beat a very good Hanover team (a team that had just won at Illinois Wesleyan) at the sectional and then played Stevens Point to the final minute the voters finally realized how good Trinity was. Their final jump of 7 spots was a correction of sorts I think.

I was part of the group that traveled down to Georgetown, Texas with IWU and saw Trinity play. IWU played a lot of great teams this year, but overall I thought Trinity was the best IWU opponent, followed closely by Hanover, then Wheaton. That is why I sure didn't like the bracket when it came out realizing that for IWU to get to Salem, the Titans would have to go through Hanover (#7), Trinity (#3), and Stevens Point (#1).

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: Johnny C. Monebonne on March 24, 2005, 03:04:34 PM

Look, from my vantage point, you can take every team in UW-SP bracket and put them ahead of UR - if the wise people who run this poll feel that bracket was just absolutely stacked. I just think it makes the poll quite questionable and really a slap to UR that they are behind a team they beat in the tournament. I don't care who Calvin beat during the year - it is who they lost to when it mattered most. For Pat to say that they look at all season versus one game is irresponsible - it is the final poll and the tournament games should be weighted accordingly. How else do you justify dropping Fisher down based on one game then - the two contradict themselves. And that one game is not just any game - it is win or go home.

So all of you Calvin supporters who think they were better than UR - I have news for you ... YOU WERE NOT WHEN IT MATTERED MOST. Take your wins against Wheaton, Aurora and all those powers that you beat on your way to the Final Four ... they obviously did not prepare you enough to beat UR in the money contest. UR will raise their national runner-up banner at the Palestra ... and you can hang your #2 ranked D3Hoops.com banner at your gym ... knock yourselves out!

For somebody to use the Bucknell/Kansas analogy is pompous and arrogant - this was not a one game upset special. Christ, they went on the road and beat the #2 team in the country. UR is the national runner-up ... this poll loses a lot of credibility by not recognizing that fact and for its moderator coming in here and defending it makes it look that much worse.

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 24, 2005, 03:14:26 PM

I thought you were done with this subject. :-)

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mike Dougherty aka Knightstalker on March 24, 2005, 03:34:34 PM

Settle down Francis. Rookies sheesh

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: Bob Mackenzie on March 24, 2005, 04:26:05 PM

Calvin hasn't seen the need to hang any banners that say "we're #2".

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 24, 2005, 04:43:30 PM

Johnny,

I'm really not concerned. I'll defend the poll when it's right and I'll be candid when I think it's wrong. These are rankings, not standings, and even though one game here or there might contradict the rankings, I feel VERY confident, as a neutral observer, that Calvin was the better team this season.

I voted that way. So did others. It wasn't that difficult a decision for an unbiased participant. But it wasn't at #2 and #3 on my ballot, it was at #5 and #6, behind Trinity, Hanover and Illinois Wesleyan.

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: bamm on March 24, 2005, 08:07:02 PM

Not that anyone is going to be happy that I'm continuing this charade, but I feel like adding my two cents. As a Rochester native and someone who saw UR play several times this year I simply don't believe they are a top ten team. I'm not even sure they are top 15.

They put together a great run at the end of the season, played some very good defense, and overachieved. They should be proud of their season. Considering who they lost -- two top-notch interior players (Jones, Larkin) -- I was surprised at their success. Simply put, they are overranked, not underranked.

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: not josh reed on March 24, 2005, 09:23:20 PM

So Bamm, whats your take on #16 Potsdam and # 17 Fisher? Do you agree with their final ranking? I did see the game in Amherst and was impressed in how well Potsdam played and how well they were coached. In that game Fisher never got into a rhythm and never got started. Due to this their shooting was abysmal at best. Potsdam did a great job disrupting their game from the tipoff, and Fisher never seemed to adjust.
They had a couple of close games down the stretch however always figured out how to win. Their 41 point win over a very good RIT team, with out Mike McGee for 35 minutes of the game showed how important rhythm was to their team. It was simply an awesome display of basketball.
Up to the Potdsam game they had run the table... In my humble opinion, they do not deserve to have dropped out of the top ten.
Interested in your thoughts.....

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 24, 2005, 10:09:26 PM

What Top 25 team did St. John Fisher beat all season? Massey has St. John Fisher at 27, which I find pretty interesting.

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: not josh reed on March 24, 2005, 10:21:55 PM

Fisher beat Springfield who was ranked 19th

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: not josh reed on March 24, 2005, 10:25:17 PM

and Fisher beat RIT 4 times who beat U of R who is ranked #4. go figure..........

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 24, 2005, 10:52:07 PM

was ranked 19th. What are they now that the season is over?

And two degrees of separation is pretty meaningless, not-Josh.

That's a pretty weak argument.

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 24, 2005, 11:03:33 PM

The x beat y who beat z games CAN be fun (though silly) - anyone want to meet the challenge of 'proving' CalTech is not only 'better' than UWSP, but 'better' than Illinois?

I bet there is SOME chain that could do it! :-)

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 24, 2005, 11:15:13 PM

Cabonney, Massey has #1894 Trinity College of Florida starting an upset path to #1 University of North Carolina. :-)

Penn and the Yalies do it again!

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: not josh reed on March 24, 2005, 11:19:24 PM

lol, thought I would get a reply during halftime of west viginia/tt.
Is Potsdam a 24 point superior team to Fisher? They were that day in Amherst but I think a second game would be much more even.
Is Fisher a 41 point superior team to RIT.
It was on Feb 27th
My argument is simply put, losing one game after running the table should not drop the Cardinals from 4rth to 17th.
But in closing, in real life I am a pharmacist, not a coach or a basketball analyst, Fisher thanks for the fun this year, D3 hoops thanks for the podting area, and bear, bamm and all thanks for the insights.
Go Vest virginia!!

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 24, 2005, 11:47:14 PM

A loss to the only ranked team on the schedule made it happen. Fisher was only ranked so high going into the tournament because it was undefeated.

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: Old School on March 24, 2005, 11:57:16 PM

First of all, congrats to Jason Kalsow for winning NABC Player of the Year, joining fellow Pointer Amanda Nechuta. Stevens Point is the only school, in any division, to have men's and women's winners in the same year and the only D3 school to have a Player of the Year in both men's and women's basketball in history. Story OK, enough bragging!

BedtimeforBonzo,
I guess I'm not totally disagreeing with Trinity's ranking. They impressed me a lot. It's not like every team that played Point jumped that many spots! :-)

I said it was interesting, not surprising.

Pat,
No, I haven't forgiven Point for losing at home to Superior in 2004, it cost us the WIAC championship! Well, ok, the National Championship last year helped heal those wounds a little :-)

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: bamm on March 25, 2005, 01:12:44 AM

Not Josh,

Fisher is simply a tough team to rank, based on the fact they haven't played any other teams that are ranked around them (aside from Potsdam). Since they lost to the only team around them, I don't have a problem with the Cards being ranked below PSU.

Personally, I think Fisher is about where they belong (at #17). They played a schedule that was very favorable to them. Not a lot of physical teams, a lot of games in the Rochester area. When they did play a physical team, they got handled. That's not to say they are a bad team, I think they are top 20, but that Potsdam game was pretty convincing. Just completely shut down that SJF offense.

And believe me, as an RIT fan, I know what that Fisher team is capable of. They were a good team but they ran into a bad matchup.

That being said, I think Potsdam is underranked. I was surprised they lost to Rochester, and if they played again I would bet on the Bears. In my opinion Potsdam should be around the 10 spot.

But finally, back to Fisher, I wish they would have gotten to play more top competition (aside from a decent RIT team, the Potsdam game, and one game against Springfield). As an RIT fan, I'm glad they beat up Rochester in the Chase, but it would have been nice to see Fisher and UR play. It's simply very difficult to find an appropriate spot in the rankings for Fisher.

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: not josh reed on March 25, 2005, 11:38:58 AM

bamm thanks for your thoughts. Maybe in future years Fisher will work to increase their SOS. Perhaps an early season game with the local powerhouses such as U of R, Potsdam and Hartwick, (lol couldnt resist) to further improve their program.

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: Bigdaddy on March 25, 2005, 08:48:26 PM

Pat...when the season was over...U of R came out over Calvin...when you asked who U of R had beaten that were in the top 25...you did not seem impressed by teams that were ranked higher earlier in the season.

U of R came out and beat Calvin on a neutral court as well as beating a Potsdam team that had no trouble with Fisher.

Amherst at #2 also went down to U of R. I was at the game. AMherst did not have a prayer of defending or rebounding against U of R on the interior.

Putting Calvin higer than U of R in the last poll of the season because of some early season wins shows lack of foresight...well...lack of any sight.

U of R supported the value of the Eastern Bracket as well as showing who the better team was between them and Calvin. The end of season Poll should have showed this and didnt.

As for Potsdam...they made it to the elite 8 and only got a mid teens rating..but its par for the course of how the poll goes...no suprise. But for a team that won their game against Calvin...getting the lower rating...because of an early season game against Albion or Wheaton? This is obtuse.

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: Old School on March 25, 2005, 10:03:56 PM

obtuse, isn't that a form of a triangle?

Bigdaddy, Pat isn't the only one who votes on the poll. There are 24 others. U or R beat Calvin in the semis, but obviously some people still think Calvin is the better team...

because of an early season game against Albion or Wheaton?

Try in the NCAA tourney. Hardly "early season". You have to remember, it's not just ONE game that the final rankings were based on. Since the last poll, Calvin went on the road THREE times, beating higher "seeded" teams each time, and also beat Mississippi College on a neutral court. U of R had one home game, one away game and one neutral court game, with only the away game at Amherst as the only higher seeded opponent. I think things might have been a little different had U of R manhandled Calvin. As it is, U or R won on a long three pointer nearly at the buzzer.

You also have to realize that nearly all of the posters who agreed with Calvin being ranked higher than Rochester are all neutral observers and the ones who were at the game felt that Calvin was the better team. Rochester just happened to win that particular game. Get over it, we all did.

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 25, 2005, 10:45:10 PM

Bigdaddy, I believe I asked that Top 25 wins question about ST. JOHN FISHER, not Rochester. You just wasted a bunch of people's time attacking something I did not say.

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: not josh reed on March 25, 2005, 11:06:55 PM

Hey obtuse Big Daddy, Is it true that Shawshank prison is located in Potsdam? No wonder the Potsdam team was so physical, they must work out in the prison weight room,lol.

(Message edited by not josh reed on March 25, 2005)

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: The Bear on March 25, 2005, 11:41:33 PM

Actually Not Josh (I'm a Bills Fan so I hate that name )

The prison that Shawshank was modeled after is located in Maine. There are no prisons in Potsdam, only colleges.

Our players are gentlemen off the court and excellent students, 7 of them are in the honors program. They are frequently seen in the weight room at the college.

Potsdam players learned at the Wooster game in '04, that they would have to be more physical to advance farther into the tournament. They took that knowledge to heart with positive results.

Your comment is inappropriate.

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: not josh reed on March 26, 2005, 12:15:28 AM

Bear, My comment was in jest, regarding the use of the word obtuse. My post gave you a fine opportunity to further commend your north country boys. (well done I might add)
As a son of a prison guard (Clinton Prison)my first use of weights in High School were ones confiscated from the same prison after Attica.
Stop being so defensive, and laugh a bit. Potsdam is a great School as is Clarkson and a great community to go to be a college student in.
For the record, I too am a Bills Fan and spiderman Daryl Talley was my favorite Bill, btw Shawshank Redemption was a great movie!

(Message edited by not josh reed on March 26, 2005)

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: The Bear on March 26, 2005, 10:23:52 AM

So when are we going to get a decent slot receiver???

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: Jukebox Hero on March 27, 2005, 06:46:36 PM

The only definite in this Potsdam/Fisher debate is that Potsdam is above Fisher, which is the way it should be and the way it worked out. I think everything else is comparing apples and oranges and is pretty worthless at this point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on August 16, 2005, 12:29:19 PM

Anybody have a top 25 yet (or even top 10, or top 5?) I think it's pretty safe to say that my two-time defending champs probably WON'T be ranked #1 in the country to start the year (though I think they deserve it until it is taken from them)... heck, they probably won't even be picked first in the WIAC, though that isn't necessary for Point to actually WIN the WIAC (Five conf championships in six years, two years ago was the only one they didn't win, and they lost that in the last game of the season) Point was only picked to win the WIAC this past season, I believe.

Over on the WIAC board, the talk has been about Oshkosh, seeing that they return every player who played meaningful minutes. York (PA) is coming off of their 4th place finish, and, though they didn't have a great showing at the final four, they now have some tradition to build off of, and I believe they return a lot of their players.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on August 22, 2005, 01:57:37 PM

I think a top 25 may be a bit premature. It's hard to even know who's back for sure and how any under-the-radar transfers may have panned out. Just to run down some of the top teams from last season.

Obviously, the Point lost quite a bit (that's an understatement and if you need more information, please do your homework before posting here).

Calvin is losing four seniors, but only two of their top 6 contributors.

Trinity Graduated all five starters (5 of their top 6 scorers).

Rochester loses Hauben and Perez, along with the #2 scorer on the team. I'm sure they'll do just fine in region again, but they were no threat without Perez to start last year, so I doubt they will be better losing Hauben as well.

Albion only loses two starters and their leading scorer returns.

Amherst graduated two starters, but I hear they brought in a strong recruiting class.

Hanover graduated half of the only six guys that ever played last year.

The Woo only lost one starter and return a huge group of contributors.

Wittenberg only lost two of their top 8 scorers.

That fabulous freshman class that got IWU a really high preseason ranking last year are now Juniors and the team lost no one of consequence (if all return).

Again, I want to make the disclaimer that this is only if all eligible players return and of course you never know with D-III.

Just as an extra St John Fisher lost four seniors, but only two were real contributors to a very deep team.

I'd say of last year's final top ten: Calvin, Albion, Wooster, Wittenberg and IWU (in no particular order) have the strongest teams returning. I've heard Oshkosh is strong in the WIAC. JCU is unpredictable, but they bring a strong contingent back. Any of those other top teams from last year can certainly reload. And of course there are always the sleepers.

It's something to think about anyway, for the next three months.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on August 22, 2005, 04:07:01 PM

Calvin lost their starting point gaurd with little in reserve and all everything Dan Aultman who could have and maybe should have been MIAA MVP.

They will find it VERY hard to replace both these guys. But they do return some very good players including Andy Draayer......you'll be hard pressed to find many better 3pt shooters and Josh Meckes who really started becoming a force late in the season.

Plus they still have the underated and underappreciated Kevin VandeStreek roaming the sidelines.

Calvin's probably the most deserving team from the MIAA to get pre-season ranking. Tough to call them top 10.

Albion lost too much, Hope has a plethora of talent but ALOT of questions about returning injured players.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on August 22, 2005, 05:28:11 PM

Hoopsfan,

You misdated the 'fabulous freshman class' from IWU - the MOST key players will be seniors this year. But you are right that they graduated no one of key importance. Barring any losses for other reasons, I'd expect they will enter the season ranked in the top 3, and probably #1.

The 'fly in the ointment' would be that VERY disappointing first-round loss at home in March - but it's not like Hanover was 'chopped liver' (or CalTech - take your pick of gratuitous shots)! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on August 22, 2005, 06:45:35 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on August 22, 2005, 01:57:37 PM
I think a top 25 may be a bit premature.

Thus why I said "Or a top 10, or a top 5." The reason why I even mentioned a top 25 is the basic fact that the thread is "Top 25 Talk," and I figured I'd at least PRETEND to try and stay on topic, even if the thread hadn't been posted in since March.

And I don't need any more information about SP's graduating Seniors... I know them personally and follow SP, the WIAC, and D3 Basketball extensively.

If I had to put out a top 5 for next seaon (and yes, it might be a bit premature, but I figure hey, I'm bored, and it might spark some more conversation), here's what it would look like:

(this is also based on a bit of info that you guys just provided)

1) IWU
2) UW Oshkosh
3a) Wittenberg
3b) Wooster
5) Amherst

Point should still be in the top 15, and I think York should as well. Like I said before, they return quite a few from last year's team, and they've gotten a taste of the top and it should make them hungrier for more.

I think Oshkosh is a legit top 5 team. They're the last team to beat UWSP, took them to the wire in the conference tournament, return almost everyone, and should improve even more this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on August 23, 2005, 10:14:40 AM

Point,

I wasn't meaning to insinuate that you didn't know about the Point. I was merely trying to fend off some new poster who inevitably fills up the board with idle chatter and no real knowledge. Again, I really know nothing about the current state of most of those teams. As a New England guy, Amherst is the only school in the top ten that I get off-season info about usually. I hear they have a decent class coming in and they are always well prepared, but I thought they were overrated last year and that this year's team will not be as good.

I guess at this point I see a consensus developing already: IWU, Wooster and Wittenberg. I like the Oshkosh team too. I thought they deserved the benefit of the doubt from voters last season, but I'd like to see how they fair in the early season before throwing them into the top 5.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on August 23, 2005, 10:25:47 AM

Also, sorry about mixing up the class status of the IWU guys. I'm not sure where my math went wrong 1+1+1+1 you know... it's tough. I took another look at last year's roster and I didn't realize just how big this senior class at IWU really is. Maybe I'm a bit nuts, but early on it seemed like this class could win more than one title with all the talent, but now the struggle for one seems like a lot of pressure. Oh well you never know and that's why we love D-III.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: True Basketball Fan on September 07, 2005, 10:59:45 AM

All this talk about Oshkosh, they haven't done anything yet. Too much hype killed the......whatever, you know what I mean. I don't doubt their talent, but let's give them some breathing room before we stick them next to IWU, and all those expectations.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 07, 2005, 10:36:47 PM

TBF (and Hoops Fan),

Yeah, I know what you mean! I can't help but wonder if that is at least partly the explanation for IWU.

With that incredible class (augmented by a nearly as incredible class the next year), I confess that I was disappointed they didn't reach the final four in 04, and shocked they didn't make it out of the first round in 05 - though, I repeat, losing to Hanover was NOT exactly like losing to Cal Tech!). With hopes that Scott Trost doesn't allow his players to access this site, I'm gonna be totally bummed if they don't win it all this year! ;)

Since I'm sure my sentiments are not confined to d3hoops.com, yes, that is pressure! Ease up on Oshkosh, and I'll try to ease up on the Titans (I suspect they feel exactly the same way I do, but are too savvy to say so)! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: True Basketball Fan on September 07, 2005, 11:01:33 PM

Even if IWU doesn't win it all this year, it wouldn't be fair or intelligent to call the careers of Dauksas and Amelianovich anything less than outstanding. Anybody that disagrees needs to sit and think about, or better yet write down, all of the great teams and players who fell short of a national championship. If your list is less than one page long then you don't really know basketball well enough to label anybody as failures.

Anyway, I think their chances are good. I just hope they don't doubt their ability and let the past haunt them when things get tough, and let the snobby IWU fans and alumni (some of them) get in their heads about how they're supposed win it all, because "We are Illinois Wesleyan". Last time I checked they've won it all a few times in the past century. That hardly qualifies for anybody to complain about the "problems at Illinois Wesleyan", I think they are doing quite well, better than most in fact.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 07, 2005, 11:33:24 PM

TBF,

Actually, we've only 'won it' once (we were NAIA until 1980[?], and kept getting knocked out by schools that are now NCAA d2 or d1).

But just like my d1 football fave (Michigan, who has also only 'won it' once in the last 55 years [though, unofficially, 10 times before that!]), we're almost always IN THE HUNT - I can live with that ALMOST the king, even if we don't make it this year (though I'd STILL be bummed!). ;D

And you're right - regardless of what happens, Dauksas and Amelianovich will go down as all-time greats! I once wondered whether or not Keelan could even match up with Jack Sikma, but have since come to my senses and realized that for a d3 school, Jack was a once-in-a-lifetime (millenium?) player.

But (warning to all d3 opponents!) even if they don't do it this year, watch out for the Jones twins, et. al., next year - the Titans national championship came the year AFTER the 'greatest senior class ever' graduated! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: True Basketball Fan on September 08, 2005, 12:03:33 PM

You are absolutely right, the Jones twins are downright scary. Also, don't forget about Freeman, he's no slouch. Throw a few decent guards around them (ones that will distribute them the ball all the time!) and the Titans will not drop off much from contending again.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 08, 2005, 06:01:19 PM

Chris and Cory Jones graduate from Illinois Wesleyan this year. The returning twins next season will be the Freeman's - Zach & Andrew.

IWU's senior class is...

Adam Dauksas* (2005 CCIW M.O.P.)
Keelan Amelianovich* (2004 CCIW M.O.P.)
Cory Jones*
Matt Arnold*
Chris Jones
Jason Fisher
Steve Schweer
Mike McGraw

* Returning starters

(Junior Zach Freeman is the other returning starter.)

This group attempts to lead IWU to something that has not been accomplished in the CCIW in 30+ years and only twice in league history - 4 consecutive conference titles. (Augustana won 4 in a row from 1971 to 1974 and Wheaton from 1956 to 1959.)

Dauksas will be a 4th-year starter this season - he helped the Luke Kasten/Seth Hubbard/John Camardella group win the league his freshman year. The rest of the Titan senior class has been in the mix the last two seasons.

Whatever this group accomplishes this year is just icing on the cake of a great ride in my eyes. I've seen too many very good teams come up short in the playoffs to know that the stars really all have to align properly to get to Salem. IWU's 1989-90 team that lost to DePauw in the Elite Eight...the 1994-95 team that lost to Steve Alford's Manchester team in the Elite Eight...last year's Titan team that got knocked out by Hanover...all talented enough to win a national championship. Same goes for Hanover's teams the last two years...Trinity (TX) last year...Wash U in 2002-03...Wooster in 2003-04...etc, etc.

A Final Four run requires a lot of things - including a lot of luck - to all come together at the same time. I think of IWU's Final Four teams of 1996, 1997, and 2001 and all of the bounces of the ball here and there that could have sent them home. Heck, the 1997 IWU national title team needed a 12 foot, baseline, from halfway behind the backboard shot by Bryan Crabtree in the final seconds to beat Rose-Hulman in the 2nd Round (at home). Or the 1996 team that lost to Rowan in the national semifinal game on one of the most improbable tip-ins you will ever see. I'm sure the UW-Stevens Point fans who saw the game vs Lawrence @ Puget Sound in 2004 can tell us about bounces of the ball too.

If the 2005-06 Titans get to Salem, great. If not, this IWU fan will enjoy the ride provided by this group. They are fun to watch because of how hard they play game-in and game-out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: True Basketball Fan on September 08, 2005, 08:30:03 PM

Sorry about the mistake, I didn't realize that the Jones are graduating already. It seems like I was just watching them in high school. Where does the time go!? Nevertheless, the Freeman twins are equally scary.

Good for you, Titan Q. You are true fan who appreciates the success of your team and doesn't measure their worth by how many rings are on their fingers (National Championship ones, not CCIW, they have plenty of those!). I'd applaud you if I could but I don't have enough posts......yet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 08, 2005, 10:55:05 PM

Q,

I'll give you the karma that TBF couldn't! ;) My way of making up for that brain fart (I keep thinking the Freemans are the seniors and the Joneses are the juniors - I'll keep it straight someday!).

To amend my earlier warning to d3 opponents: even if IWU falls short THIS year, watch out for SOME pair of twins, et. al.; the Titans' national title came during what was viewed by most as a 'rebuilding' year! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: True Basketball Fan on September 11, 2005, 09:52:44 AM

What about Whitewater? Weren't they ranked last year for awhile? I know they lost a few guys, but Pat Miller always comes up with a ringer or two every year via DI transfer or something. I could see them being the 3rd team from the WIAC in the TOP 25. Platteville and Stout were also ranked last year, but I find it hard to believe there will be 5 WIAC teams in the TOP 25.

Where will Hanover land this year? I know they lost their All-American guard. They couldn't be in the TOP ten in again, could they?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 11, 2005, 12:39:02 PM

Hanover lost shooting guard Matt Moore, post player Tommy Dennis, and forward Ryan Lanning to graduation, but they will still be a very good team this season. Top 15 caliber probably.

6-7/215 sophomore Robby Brown started to get a lot of P.T. at the end of last season - he is big and he is going to be a player. Sophomore guard Clint Parker also saw time down the stretch of his freshman year.

The Panthers return point-guard Nate Minyard, 6-4 forward Ben Lye (who has rarely started in his career, but may be their best player), and 6-3 small forward Brian Chrin. They have plenty to contend in the HCAC.

Hanover's system is really all about interchangeable parts. Of any team I can think of, they probably have the most ability to be consistently good from year to year because they never seem to rely on just one or two players.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: True Basketball Fan on September 11, 2005, 05:37:47 PM

I figured you'd know, considering they've had IWU's number the last couple of seasons. :-[

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on September 15, 2005, 02:12:05 AM

Ease up on Oshkosh, and I'll try to ease up on the Titans

Just as an FYI, Chuck, UW-Oshkosh's nickname is the Titans.

Welcome to my world, re: having a school relevant to a discussion share the nickname of your alma mater. A day doesn't go by on CCIW Chat when I don't feel some niggling irritation over the fact that both North Park and Augustana are called the Vikings. It's not that I'm that turf-conscious regarding the nickname -- I've even suggested that NPU should be the "bigger" school in terms of gallantry by abandoning the nickname and calling itself the Fighting Swedes instead. It's just an inconvenience, similar to the inconvenience borne by the North Park student section, which has to alter its cheers whenever Grey Giovanine & Co. come to the big city for a basketball game.

Having a very limited amount of gallantry myself, though, ;) I shall continue to refer to Augustana by their age-old CCIW alternative nickname, the Doggies (as in "Augie Doggies").

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on September 15, 2005, 11:12:37 AM

Greg instead of Vikings how about the Berserkers, that would be a great team name.

Ypsi, just remember the twins class is in inverse alphabetical order.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on September 15, 2005, 03:47:52 PM

Agreed, Mike. The Berserkers would be an outstanding nickname, especially for a school of Scandinavian origins such as North Park. In fact, those of us who sat in my section of the crackerbox back in the mid-eighties used to call ourselves "the Berserkers".

We were even going to have Berserker t-shirts made, but we probably ended up spending the money on beer instead.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on September 15, 2005, 07:43:30 PM

I have had many friends refer to me as a berserker, must be the long blonde hair and red beard. Sometimes I really love the Ahlstrom (sp) blood from my mothers side, add in the Irish from my fathers side and I could see a group calling itself the Berserkers would figure t-shirt money was better spent on beer.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: True Basketball Fan on September 15, 2005, 09:04:29 PM

What would be the womens teams' nickname......lady berserkers. Ya, that sounds good, I like that. How about, berserkettes? That's even better! :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on September 16, 2005, 06:54:39 AM

North Park is too politically correct to use separate monikers for the men and women anymore. In the seventies and into the eighties, North Park's women's teams were called the Vikettes. They got rid of that name, thankfully; as a friend of mine wrote in the school paper, it made the women's teams sound more like a kickline of Vegas chorus girls than athletes. After that, they were briefly the Lady Vikings. But the North Park women's teams have been called the Vikings for seventeen or eighteen years now, or something like that, and there's no way that the school would ever again hint at anything but identical treatment of the men's and women's sports at the school by giving the teams different nicknames.

NPU has a lot of company among American colleges and universities in that regard. It's a sign of the times. Interestingly, the CCIW school that bucks the unisex-nickname trend is also the school that's currently engaged in a staredown with the NCAA over its American Indian nickname and logo: Carthage. The men's teams at Carthage are the Redmen, and the women's teams are the Lady Reds.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on September 16, 2005, 11:47:13 AM

NJCU did the same thing a few years ago, instead of having the Gothic Knights and the Lady Gothics they are both just the Gothic Knights.

Maybe Carthage should just become the Redpersons or Redpeople. They could just make the NCAA happy and become the Carthaginians.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: True Basketball Fan on September 16, 2005, 12:15:07 PM

That's a great idea.... "redpersons" has such a fantastic zing to it, just what you're looking for in a nickname.

I've noticed this past year that some schools are now referring to freshman as a freshperson instead. So in a sense, it's not that far fetched for Carthage to adjust their nickname.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on September 16, 2005, 12:41:40 PM

Oh, I remember back around 1990 I was doing some PA work for a local high school. I was at a girl's basketball game and I announced the team as "The Lady Raiders" and the coach stormed over and said "We're not the Lady Raiders - we're the Raiders, got it!"

I always asked after that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Warren Thompson on September 16, 2005, 02:51:18 PM

I think the Carthage 'Elephants' has a nice, historically-accurate ring to it. Maybe even the 'Fighting Elephants' would work.

Or they could simply call themselves the 'Hannibals.'

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on September 16, 2005, 03:09:00 PM

But if a player ever got into a fight on the court or on the field and lost it and bit someone, they would forever be known as Hannibal the Cannibal. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Warren Thompson on September 16, 2005, 03:27:07 PM

Nay, say not so, 'stalker. This is D3; we don't "bite" opponents, though we just might occasionally sally forth and "smite" them.

["Biting" is for the lower divisions.]

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on September 16, 2005, 04:56:06 PM

Due to the subject of your post Warren, I was tempted to smite you (after all, this IS D3...) but instead you get my applause ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Warren Thompson on September 16, 2005, 05:03:22 PM

And you, PointSpecial, hereby receive my karmic anti-smite

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on September 16, 2005, 05:46:14 PM

Warren, how about calling Carthage the Punics? I always like nicknames with classical references. When a pair of suburban high schools on Chicago's North Shore, New Trier East and New Trier West, merged a couple of decades ago to form New Trier Township High School, they had to come up with a new nickname. They chose to call themselves the Trevians, naming themselves after the Belgic tribe (the Treveri) conquered by Julius Caesar during his Gallic Wars whose tribal capital still bears their name in its modern incarnation as the German city of Trier.

Scott, a similar incident happened at a North Park home women's basketball game last year. The PA announcer, an assistant football coach who was new to the Park, introduced the team as "the Lady Vikings". NPU's assistant coach glared at him so hard that I thought she was going to ignite his hair with her eyes.

TBF, a few years back North Park began officially referring to freshmen as "first-year students". It went over like a lead balloon, so now they're called "freshmen" again. I'm certainly not opposed to inclusive language, but it was refreshing to see that officially-enforced political correctness has its limits.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Warren Thompson on September 16, 2005, 07:06:39 PM

Greg:

Interesting comments.

Now I await some team calling themselves the "Gepids" in honor of a much-ignored European tribe that has never, ever gained proper recognition. Why, if not for the Gepids, the world would never have ... or couldn't have ... or ... well, you get the picture, don't you?

Long live the glorious Gepids. May their accomplishments always shine.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Warren Thompson on September 16, 2005, 07:23:53 PM

Greg:

That some high school students know anything about "Trier" (and J. Caesar and the Gallic Wars) is well-nigh frightening. Next we'll hear about seventeen- and eighteen-year olds debating the merits of the Macedonians v. the Persians.

Where will it all end, I ask ya?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 16, 2005, 08:26:01 PM

Hey, would you guys PLEASE note the name of this board!!

So, what are the top 25 classical nicknames? ;D I would think that 'Trevians' has GOT to be pretty high on the list!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on September 16, 2005, 08:54:03 PM

Ya know, Gregory, calling them "first year students" is probably a lot EASIER once cease to become 1st years and move on to that second, third, and fourth year. Well, hmm... that doesn't make much sense... oh, I remember the point I was going to make... it takes most kids (albiet at most schools, which are not private... er, actually, there MAY be more private schools, but less people attend them... so, most students... which may just be at less schools... so this wouldn't really apply to North Park... but read on anyway, I guess?)... where was I? Oh yeah. It takes most kids more than 4 years to graduate college these days. I personally have no problem with Frosh, Soph, Jun, Sen... Super Senior, Super-Duper Senior (yep, that's me... on all of my transcripts etc, I'm a continuing 2nd sem Senior... but in all actuality, I was a Super Senior last year and a Super-Duper Senior this... though, really, I was a red-shirt senior last year, and I'm just finishing up my degree now... and I redshirted my first year, so we could call the first-year/Freshmen simply redshirts) but in light of my parenthetical comments, it wouldn't make much sense to call the non-athlete simply a redshirt insead of a 1st year, because, of course, we can't redshirt in D-3 anymore... Hmm...

Yeah, so, if you wanna keep the whole "Frosh, Soph...etc" thing going, then you'll just add Super and Super-Duper Senior to the list, and let that be that. But... Hmm... what happens if it takes 7 years? Let's just call them Doctors! ;D

P.S.... Lucky I'm not an English Major... or it would have taken me LONGER than 6 years to finish my undergrad... I don't seem to have that whole brevity thing down, do I?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on September 16, 2005, 09:30:35 PM

PS, brevity is overrated. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 16, 2005, 11:07:35 PM

PS,

At every school I know of, Freshman, Sophomore, etc., is a matter of credit hours completed, not years on campus. I have a student this year who hopes to be a Senior by next year - he has been attending EMU every year for 17 years! (Obviously, he has averaged slightly less than 2 courses a year; an extreme case, but not THAT different from many of our students who work full-time and/or must drop out from time-to-time to earn tuition.)

It is not at all uncommon here to have a 5th year student who has just become a Junior. We DO have a large number of students who finish in four years, and I'm sure a majority finish within six years, but there are many for whom 7, 8, 10, etc., is necessary.

EMU does have a pathetic (though recently improving) NCAA graduation rate for football and men's basketball, but compared with the 6-year time period the NCAA uses, neither is THAT far below the student body as a whole, and for MOST sports, the scholarship athletes are far ABOVE the overall student graduation rate.

At many (if not most) d3 schools, the traditional FSJS four-year degree is still the norm; for the majority of college students, overall, four years is NOT the norm. As a college instructor (and a father of kids soon heading off to college!) I don't LIKE it, but that is the reality today.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 16, 2005, 11:12:28 PM

Greg,

'applaud' to you for the brilliant irony: 'brevity is overrated' in what has to be the shortest post you have ever made! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on September 16, 2005, 11:23:19 PM

The USA Today version of that post:

Brevity? Overrated.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on September 17, 2005, 02:22:41 AM

Mr. Ypsi (screw it, it's easier and more fun to just say "Cab"... and it's more brief, so I'll go with that, 'cause I suppose it can be a goal...)

So... Cab,

The whole "credit hours" makes sense. I think technically I've been a "second semester Senior" for a full year, and I wasn't a "first semester senior" until I was half way through my 4th year. I also remember being a "first semester sophomore both before AND after the first semester of my college career (what can I say? I knew I was going to be at Point for 4 years (after transferring after my first), so why take more of a load then I had to?). (and so my 4 turned into 5... but whatevs) (Do I use too many parentheses?)

In an interesting development (and probably less of a ploy to prevent students from spending a tremendous amount of years in college and more of a ploy to just flat out make more money) UWSP two years ago informed students that if they reached a certain number of credit hours (165) before getting a degree, there would be a surcharge added to their tuition fees (and I believe that it was equal to the tuition... so they basically payed double, though I'm not positive about that). My major is 37 credits (plus the Gen. Ed. credits) and I "lost" credits from my a) former engineering major b) the Education stuff from my former Math Ed stuff, and I'm still at just 105, or something like that, and I'm only going to be taking at most 30 credits this school year, so you've gotta be taking hardcore semesters, EVERY semester, and trying to get like 2 majors and 3 minors, with no crossovers, to get to that, I think...

What's this thread called again? ??? Oh wait, tis the off-season, it really doesn't matter!!! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: True Basketball Fan on September 17, 2005, 08:35:44 AM

I would rate that last post as #3 on the TOP 25 List of most irrelevant topics on this thread. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on September 17, 2005, 11:13:03 AM

Pat, if my post had been included in one of those Reader's Digest Condensed Novels, it would've read:

"Brief? Eh."

Warren, I think that the nickname for New Trier was originally suggested by a teacher or an administrator, not a student. And I'm with you on the matter of "Gepids" being a terrific nickname -- although I've always been a bigger fan of the Heruls in terms of obscure Germanic barbarian tribes.

However, it should be noted that the Gepids received their rather derisive name from their rivals the Visigoths; in Gothic, gepanta means "slow". I'm not sure I'd want to root for a team whose name originally meant "the slow ones".

They weren't a complete historical cipher, though. The Gepids led the coalition that destroyed the Huns and thus restored the freedom of the Germanic tribes at the Battle of the Nedao in 454 AD, the year after Attila died of a drunken nosebleed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on September 17, 2005, 11:30:55 AM

One....

Two....

Three...

Stop it you crazy boy people!!!!!

Yeah, like that is going to work...

rolls eyes -----> ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on September 17, 2005, 12:11:55 PM

Pat,

I think the USAT version might have included a nifty color graph of some type.

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on September 17, 2005, 12:31:48 PM

:D Totally... probably bar or line graph showing the decreasing enjoyability of brevity over a 10 year span.. something like that.

Argh! Now I am contributing to the problem... curse you people! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: True Basketball Fan on September 17, 2005, 08:52:03 PM

Nevertheless.........

I've got two CCIW teams, three WIAC teams, three MIAC, two HCAC teams, one NIIC team, two IIAC teams, and two MWC teams all in the preseason Top 25. That's 15 of the top 25 teams within at most a half a day's driving from the windy city. Basketball is good in other places, but I like the Midwest the best. We'll see how many come from all of those conferences I mentioned, I don't think I'm off by much.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on September 17, 2005, 10:27:57 PM

Two from the NCAC, too. And the OAC and MIAA are usually strong, although they may not have any preseason Top 25s. Midwest (Minnesota to Ohio, diagonally) basketball is definitely the best IMHO.

I'm not sure which teams you are talking about, but just off the top of my head I'd be surprised to see five preseason Top 25 teams come out of the MIAC and IIAC. Then again, I don't pay a lot of attention to the Western Region between the Mississippi River and the Coast Ranges.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: True Basketball Fan on September 18, 2005, 11:42:20 AM

I'm thinking Wartburg and Buena Vista out of the IIAC, and Albion and Calvin, possibly Hope from the MIAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on September 18, 2005, 12:20:16 PM

Ahh -- there's the rub.

The MIAC is the Minnesota conference. The conference you're referring to is the MIAA.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: True Basketball Fan on September 18, 2005, 04:32:52 PM

Michigan Intercollegiate Athleteic Conference sounded good.......thanks for correcting my blunder. BTW, I've got nobody in the MIAC in the Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: formerbant10 on September 19, 2005, 01:51:15 PM

True Fan, clearly the Midwest has the deepest amount of talent...that goes w/o saying. Any chance of having some northeast teams in your top 25?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: True Basketball Fan on September 20, 2005, 01:52:23 PM

I'm sure there will be a few. I'll have to get back to you on that one, just became extra busy at work.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: titan2000 on September 24, 2005, 10:25:08 AM

I wonder if the UW-O Titans will be number 1 after defeating the Lawrence Vikings in 2 OT by a score of 87-85 in their 2005/2006 opener at Alexander Gym in Appleton.

Will the lack of respect for LU bring them down, or will it just be another win in the ratings game ? ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 24, 2005, 12:27:50 PM

Let the annual Street & Smith's debate begin...

(Division III preview by Chuck Mistovich, Basketball Times)

1. Illinois Wesleyan
2. Mississippi College
3. UW-Oshkosh
4. York
5. Virginia Wesleyan
6. Ursinus
7. Amherst
8. Ramapo
9. Wittenberg
10. Wilkes

Illinois Wesleyan

Coach Scott Trost's Titans are loaded. The top eight scorers return on this senior-laden team that was 21-5 last year, and they are looking every bit as good as the Wesleyan team that won the NCAA Division III Tournament in 1997. All-America candidates are 6-6 Keelan Amelianovich (17.9 ppg, 4.8 rpg) and 6-3 Adam Dauksas (15.1 ppg, 5.6 apg). Wesleyan also features 6-7 Zach Freeman (14.2 ppg, 6.8 rpg) and three 6-6 inside men who make the Titans look more like a Division II team than Division III. These seniors have reached the NCAA playoffs three straight years with a combined 64-18 record.

Street & Smith's Preseason All-America Team:

First

Keelan Amelianovich, Illinois Wesleyan
Adam Dauksas, Illinois Wesleyan
Tyler Rhoten, Trinity (Conn)
Justin Wansley, Randolph-Macon
Tyler Winford, Mississippi

Second

Chris Braier, Lawrence
Sekani Francis, Lehman
Cedric Isom, East Texas Baptist
Kyle Myrick, Lincoln (Pa)
Daniel Russ, Wittenberg

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on September 25, 2005, 02:26:59 AM

I see four teams in that poll that might not be in my preseason Top 25: 2, 6, 7, 10.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: True Basketball Fan on September 25, 2005, 05:38:30 PM

I agree, Mississippi College at #2. That's ridiculous, they don't play anybody. Unfortunately, they'll probably stay up there with their lack of competitive opponents, then get ousted by a midwest team in the NCAA Tourney.

Who would you put up in those 4 spots mentioned?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on September 25, 2005, 05:43:34 PM

Well, they won't "stay up there" because Street & Smith (thankfully) does not do anything other than a preseason poll. :)

I don't have enough information to so a legitimate preseason poll at this time, but I would have UW-Oshkosh and Illinois Wesleyan in the top two spots (might be a coin flip)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on September 25, 2005, 06:04:32 PM

A coin flip to decide between UW-O and IWU? A tight Titan tie? ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 25, 2005, 07:38:41 PM

Well,

As long as Titans are in the top two slots, I guess I could live with either order!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 25, 2005, 08:45:49 PM

Pat,

Out of curiosity, does Smith & Street (and the other one-shot wonders, with one page for d3) even do a poll? Isn't it more likely an intern assigned to produce 'something, anything' to give a slop to (ie, hopefully sell a few copies to) those wierdos who root for anything above d1?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: True Basketball Fan on September 25, 2005, 09:15:35 PM

Their poll is always very different than say, D3hoops.com. I know which one is more accurate, as do all of you. I imagine their research is minimal, but so is their focus. They probably shouldn't even do a poll at all and just stick to giving those extra pages to the DI scrubs.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 25, 2005, 11:09:17 PM

Street & Smith's does a Division III Top 10 each year, but they do not have any sort of ongoing poll.

As noted above, the S & S 2005-06 Division III preview was done by Chuck Mistovich, who is the Small College Editor for Basketball Times magazine. I don't know much about Mistovich, but I do know he has been covering small college basketball (NAIA, NCAA II, NCAA III) for a long time.

A sample of a couple articles by him I found via Google search...

http://nabc.collegesports.com/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/021805aaa.html

http://nabc.collegesports.com/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/011905aaa.html

I think it is fair to say that Street & Smith at least found someone who knows small college basketball to put together their small college pieces.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 25, 2005, 11:37:37 PM

Q,

I'm not sure it is 'fair to say' Smith & Street [and, yes, that is a deliberate mis-statement of their name] has come up with an expert for d3 - can anyone really be an expert on NAIA, d2, and d3? It may be an improvement on my presumed intern, but is it REALLY any major progress?

I'd be curious as to this 'expert's' top 25, 'cause his top 10 sure looks weird (not that I'm complaining about IWU, mind you!).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 26, 2005, 12:54:20 AM

Chuck, I did not say they came up with a "D3 expert." I said:

"I think it is fair to say that Street & Smith at least found someone who knows small college basketball..."

I posted his notes on Illinois Wesleyan. Notes on 2, 3, 4, and 5...

2. Mississippi College

The Choctaws were supposed to be rebuilding last year. Instead they reloaded. Only one senior returned to the team, but 11 newcomers and 6-5 freshman Tyler Winford (11.9 ppg) joined the program and carried coach Don Lofton's club to a 24-5 finish and Sweet 16 appearance in the NCAA Tournament. The return of four starters, 16 total lettermen and more recruits should energize Mississippi College, whose opponents shot just 38.9 percent from the field and averaged only 62.5 points per game last season.

3. Wisconsin-Oshkosh

The Wisconsin Intercollegiate Athletic Conference has produced four NCAA champions in the last seven years. Wisconsin-Stevens Point is rebuilding and probably won't win its third in a row, so Oshkosh may very well carry the league banner this time. After all, the Titans were the last team Stevens Point lost to, during a WIAC game last February. Coach Ted Van Dellen returns four starters and nine other lettermen from last year's 19-8 team. Defense is the Oshkosh game, as the Titans allowed just 62.7 points per game last season. Top returnees are 6-7 Jim Capelle (14.4 ppg, 5.4 rpg), 6-3 Andy Jahnke (14.6 ppg) and 7-1 Kerry Gibson (11.7 ppg, 6.5 rpg).

4. York

The Spartans won't surprise anyone this year, not after their school-record 28-4 mark and a Final Four appearance in 2004. Coach Jeff Gamber welcomes back seven veterans, led by 6-3 Brandon Bushey (16.0 ppg) and double figure scorers Kenny Fass, 6-7 Chad McGowan, and 6-8 Brian Singer. York has size, depth and talent - all attributes of a potential national champion.

5. Virginia Wesleyan

The Marlins are deep and talented, with four starters and 13 lettermen back from a 24-6 team that received and NCAA bid last season. There is plenty of firepower with the likes of 6-5 Brandon Adair (18.2 ppg, 7.8 rpg), 6-1 Ton Ton Balenga (12.7 ppg), and 6-0 Marques Fitch (10.5). Coach Dave Macedo has only three seniors on this experienced team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on September 26, 2005, 01:01:53 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 25, 2005, 07:38:41 PM
Well,

As long as Titans are in the top two slots, I guess I could live with either order!

Does this mean that you're going to be road-tripping to Westminster (PA) games this year, Chuck? :D

Speaking of Chucks ... Chuck Mistovich certainly has impeccable credentials. He's been around forever. I can remember subscribing to some broadsheet -- it might've been Basketball Times, if they were using a broadsheet format on newsprint back then -- back in the early eighties, because Mistovich's column in it was the only source for D3 basketball's national scene (that was much more of an oxymoron then than it is today ;)) that I could find anywhere.

But in retrospect, I'm sure that what Mistovich was doing was recycling press releases. I strongly doubt that he was actually getting out to a lot of D3 gyms during the season to come up with his own material, especially since his beat also included NAIA and NCAA's D2. It was a long time ago, but I distinctly remember that the CCIW program that made the most appearances in his column (his column consisted of two- or three-sentence blurbs on various teams or players, for the most part) was Elmhurst. I remember how that used to confuse and frustrate me, since Elmhurst was the rock-bottom program in the league during the eighties. Thinking back on it now, I'm sure the reason behind those mentions in the column was because Elmhurst had an SID who had Mistovich on his mailing list.

I'm grateful that he was actually writing that column, though, such as it was. The pre-d3hoops.com era was the Dark Ages for those of us who wanted to follow D3 outside of our own leagues. His column, and the annual Street & Smith D3 preview, were like the D3 basketball version of the Berlin Airlift. I used to haunt convenience stores every September waiting for that S&S issue to come out so that I could find out what such mysterious entities as Salisbury State, Southern Maine, and Muskingum were up to.

Now the S&S preview looks shabby and under-researched by comparison, thanks to this website. Still, if I ever run into Chuck Mistovich, I'm gonna shake his hand and give him a hearty "thank you" for all the tidbits I gleaned from him over D3's years in the information wilderness.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 26, 2005, 08:55:25 PM

Wow! In a back-handed sort of way, I've finally arrived! I've been put in my place by not one, but TWO Hall of Famers! ;) [Actually, this is probably NOT the first time. In fact, I have a vague recollection of one dippy post where Q, Greg, DC, and sac all piled on - if only it had been a fball post, I could gain 15 yards!]

Q, I admit that 'expert' is an overstatement of what you said. But from Greg's post, it appears he IS a BIG step up from 'some intern'. (But I still say his top 10 seems a bit goofy!)

Greg, I'd take your suggestion of a road trip to Westminster, but the Erie area is only a FEW miles closer than Bloomington or Oshkosh! If I'm gonna see Titans, they'd better be nationally-ranked Titans! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on September 27, 2005, 12:28:52 AM

Well, I wasn't really trying to "put you in your place", for whatever that's worth. I was just taking the opportunity of Chuck Mistovich's name coming up in conversation to wax a little nostalgic about the days of yore when his column was the closest thing we had to what this website offers in the present day. It's no secret that I can go on like a sentimental old geezer at the drop of a hat.

But if you derive some masochistic satisfaction from having a post corrected by multiple HOFers, Chuck, don't let me get in the way of your fun. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: formerbant10 on September 29, 2005, 09:20:45 PM

Does anyone really think Ursinus should be #6??? They went to 3OT's with Rhode Island College and got destroyed by an underachieving Trinity last year. McGarvey is a good player, and McElvy (sp??) can shoot the ball well but they didn't have much after that. I remember them having a huge kid on the bench, but he was pretty raw...I'm assuming S&S's Trinity in the breakthroughs is from CT, but to be honest I think they will be better than Amherst this year. But that's just my opinion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: True Basketball Fan on September 30, 2005, 09:46:13 AM

Ursinus is their idea of making sure the Northeast is represented. I think there a few teams that are much better than them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: formerbant10 on September 30, 2005, 11:38:56 AM

What other teams from the NE, even though Ursinus isn't really, do you think should be in front of them?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: True Basketball Fan on October 01, 2005, 08:30:10 AM

I think WPI is going to be very good, they should be at least #6 or 7. St. John Fisher should be #6 or 7 also, especially with what they've got coming back. Endicott returns some key players, I also think they should be close to the Top ten, like #11 or 12. Oswego State is going to be very tough, even better than last year, they'll creep into the top 10 early in the season. That's all I know.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 03, 2005, 11:05:58 AM

OK, Fisher isn't in the NE. They had a good run last year, but until they play a NE schedule, they don't count in my book. I said it last year and I think it still applies this year. New England will be OVERRATED again in the national polls this year. WPI may be the cream of the crop as wierd as it sounds to name a team outside the NESCAC, but it could be true. Amherst should be very good again and Trinity better be decent.

I don't think any team from New England deserves a top ten. None of them deserved it last year and it will be the same case this time around. That being said, NE still needs to be better respresented in the 40-11 range. It seems like our region gets no repsect when we deserve it and too much when we don't, which justifies the lack of respect when we're good. Vicious cycle.

You made my day claiming that a team from my little CCC should be #11 or 12, but that's just laughable, even to Endicott. The CCC is moving high profile in the Northeast, but we're not at that level yet. CSC, sorry Colby-Sawyer for the uninitiated has a monster team, but they have underacheived for the past few seasons, so I won't start my annual hyping of them just yet. If they play to their talent, with the schedule they have, they will be a factor come March. Endicott has over acheived the past few seasons, return good talent, although they lack leadership. They did manage to steal Brandeis' top recruiter as their new head coach, so there might be a nice freshmen class coming in.

Also rans, Salem State returns talent, but they fell short last year with a better team. The LEC and NEWMAC will also produce some quality teams, but its a bit early to predict if any of them will have tournament hopes. Also, until this sophomore class graduates, Brandeis will have sleeper status. There is a lot of talent there which could break out if they ever get used to the UAA travel schedule.

That's probably enough for now.

PS- York may be good, but there's no way they make the final four last year under a properly seeded tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: formerbant10 on October 03, 2005, 11:44:55 AM

Hoops Fan, why do you think Trinity will be decent and Amherst very good. Amherst lost their best player, and Trinity has the top player in NE coming back with a lot to prove. What about Springfield, they return the core led by Derke Yvon. They played Amherst very well in the NCAA's, any shot of them being ahead of WPI?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: True Basketball Fan on October 03, 2005, 11:04:47 PM

You're being very technical. Fisher is in the northeast part of the country, thus, I consider them a northeastern team. And so is Ursinus, there are hundreds of teams that are to the south and west of them, that puts them northeast of all those hundreds of teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 04, 2005, 09:22:32 AM

We don't want to get into the East versus Northeast debate. Sure they are in the Northeast part of the country, but so long as they get to pad their records with the mediocre-at-best East region, we in the NE will take exception to being included with them.

WPI will be better than Springfield, although both should still be good. Trinity should have been much better last year and they underacheived, so I'm not going to hype them too much this year. I hear Amherst has a really good class coming in, coupled with the fact that they always seem to do better than expected, even when expectations are high. This early in the season it is really just trends that we're working with anyway.

I don't want to get my hopes up too much, but Colby-Sawyer has the talent to compete with the big boys, but again until my CCC can prove it belongs, I'm not going to hype them, just mention them enough to stay on the radar. Endicott lost the starting point guard and are bringing in a new coach--that to me is enough to keep them down for another year. Not that they will be pushovers this season, but really next year will be their best chance for this group of players to do well.

Salem State seems to have lost quite a bit. They have talent, but tend to lack chemistry, coupled with a week league, and poor recent post-season showings, tends to make me doubt them.

The sleepers for me will be the NESCAC suprises (I couldn't tell you at this juncture who will rise to the top). Bates did well last year, establishing a really scary reputation for their home court fans. Brandeis, maybe this isn't the year, but you never know. Also, there could be some sleepers in the CCC, no one to scare the big boys regionally, but enough to mess with a SOSI or whatever they call it now.

I still don't think any team in NE deserves a top ten spot, but the non-conference schedules of the top contenders are stacked, so if someone is going to make a claim, we should know by New Year's.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: formerbant10 on October 04, 2005, 09:51:16 AM

Hoops Fan, agreed with Trinity underachieving...I think I would know better than most. They have a lot to prove this year, but it might take a while to gel as the starting five at the beginning of the season should have 4 new faces compared to last year's starters. But I wouldn't count them out later in the year to make a very strong run powered by Tyler Rhoten. I know Amherst got a transfer from Brown, solid player who's very very very athletic and Hixon will have the offense running to perfection as usual. Bates could be good, but they lost two wings who had started the previous 3 years, so they have some holes to fill. I don't know too much about the other conferences, but I know CSC got spanked by Trinity a few years back in the NCAA's when they were claiming to be just as good as the NESCAC, so I would hold off on them right now. I completely agree with keeping the NE out of the top ten in the preseason.
To be completely honest, Illinois Wesleyan scares the hell out of me with all their horses.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 04, 2005, 10:58:29 AM

The big dogs in the Midwest really are on another level when compared to the teams from the NE, at least this year. Obviously, Williams winning the whole thing gave them credibility. The NCAA seems to want to put each region on equal footing when the obviously aren't. Again, not to take anything away from York, they were and are a solid team, but it would have been near impossible for them to work their way through the Midwest bracket.

I'm no CSC fan, in fact their perennial winning drives the rest of us in the CCC a bit nuts. I don't think there has ever been a time when they could claim equality with the NESCAC (even though they did beat Amherst a few years ago, which was totally a combination of the best home court advantage in the region and Amherst looking passed them). This year, however, they do have the guns to make waves, if they can put it all together. They haven't put it all together yet, so I don't think they are worthy of any sort of pre-season ranking.

Amherst and WPI should get top billing in the NE, Trinity right on their heels. I am a Rhoten apologist up and down. (It still drives me nuts that any sane human being can argue he's not the best player in the NESCAC). I think Trinity can beat anyone, but I don't have confidence they can put together a whole season.

I really need to buckle down and take a look at the rest of the country so I can figure out just how many NE teams should be ranked. I think I'd stick with 3-4 with one or two others getting votes.

Certainly you are right, IWU, Hanover, Wittenburg, Wooster, the Wisconsin teams, etc seem to be a cut above...but that's why they play the games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: formerbant10 on October 04, 2005, 11:29:41 AM

We have been saying that about Rhoten for the past 2 years now. The most dominant player in the NESCAC in the past couple of years. Scored 30 on Schiel (NESCAC POY) playing on one foot having not practiced the entire week up to the game. Should've had 36 or 37, but didn't get the ball the last 2 minutes of the game. I know there have been other good players in the league the last couple of years, but no one has been able to stop him, ever. He scored 39 against Coupe and Stovell as a freshman. Has averaged over 20 ppg in his career.
Again, can't argue with only 3 or 4 teams in the top 25. It's tough to keep Amherst up there after losing Schiel, but they always find a way to win....They made it to the final four the year after Zeija graduated, I'm sure they'll do very well again this year. I don't know enough about WPI to say anything about them, but they'll have a huge target on their back this year. Which is much tougher to play with....see Trinity's records the last 2 years......than to sneak up on teams. They won't be overlooked this year, that's for sure.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on October 04, 2005, 01:14:58 PM

I'm not sure what to make of Wittenberg and Wooster. On the one hand, they're dominant programs in Ohio, having run up a combined record of 93-6 the past two seasons (regular season and conference tournament, and excluding games against each other, in which Witt has a 4-2 edge.) On the other hand, these two powerhouses have a 3-4 record in the past two NCAA tournaments (all 3 wins belong to Wooster), with all but one of these games at home--and three of the losses to OAC champ John Carroll.

One easy explanation is that the NCAC provides no competition to the "W's." In the past two seasons, the only blemish on either team's NCAC schedule not inflicted by the other was Witt's shocking 2OT loss at Denison last season (avenged 6 weeks later by a margin of 38 points.) Otherwise, these two W's put up 55 conference wins against the "Little 8." But even if you ignore the NCAC, the W's went 38-5 against all comers the past two years; in fact, these two have won 24 of ther past 25 regular season non-conference games--the only loss since Dec. 10, 2003 was by Witt at WashU by 3 points.

This season looks like more of the same for these collossi. Witt lost its point guard and one wing to graduation, but returns their outstanding frontcourt of Dan Russ and Dane Borchers, and has brought in an enormous freshman class to help fill the vacancies. Wooster lost big man Matt Schlingman, but just one other contributor from its 9-man rotation.

I guess the voters have to decide if "more of the same" from Witt and Woo means 25+ win seasons (and thus spots in the top 10) or more early exits in March.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 04, 2005, 04:53:42 PM

Even if they are inflated by the weak conferernce, I have to say they put out good products, at least on par if not better than whoever emerges from the "Eastern" side of the bracket each spring.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on October 05, 2005, 04:27:45 PM

Actually, Wabash and OWU has given them games in the past, just not wins.

Last year Wooster beat OWU by one OT at OWU and Wabash gave them a tough game at Wabash (until it became foul shooting time.)

As for Witt - Wabash scared them at Chadwick (again until it was foul shooting time) then took them to OT in the tourney.

So the NCAC has a big 2, a second two that CAN compete but doesn't quite get over the hump, and a little 6. That does hurt their tourney preparedness, I believe, with only about 6 competitive games a year in conference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: True Basketball Fan on October 05, 2005, 11:07:21 PM

I know Endicott is a stretch but........

Nobody's talking about Oswego, am I way off thinking they are serious contender for the TOP 10 group?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on October 05, 2005, 11:11:19 PM

I know what you're trying to say, smeds, but the unvarnished truth is that Wooster and Wittenberg have compiled a record of 19-0 the past two seasons against Wabash and OWU, with an average margin of victory of 15.6 ppg. There were the two OT games you mention, but otherwise these games tend to be comfortable victories for the big dogs. What it amounts to is that against Wabash and OWU, the W's have to play well and hard to win by by 10-20 points, whereas against the other six (Allegheny, Denison, Earlham, Hiram, Kenyon, and Oberlin, for the uninitiated) 10-20 point margins (or more) are generally a given.

Wooster and Wittenberg usually play each other three times a season, with the third being the conference championship game. These are the games that the two teams focus on, being reasonably certain of wins in the other games from January forward (again, 55-1 the past two years in the conference.) With these three games being essentially the only post-December preparation for the kind of competition they'll face in March, it may be that both over-prepare for their specific opponent. Then in March when they face a team that is very different in style from Woo or Witt and much, much better than the "little 8," they are unable to adjust quickly enough and lose. A perfect illustration of this is John Carroll. Their up-tempo, pressure defense style is unlike either Woo or Witt. Result: 3-0 vs. Woo/Witt the past two seasons, with all three games at the NCAC team's gym.

There's no solution for this; the conference membership is unlikely to change (nor do I want it to change, at least not for reasons of competitiveness), and non-conference games in February are practically impossible to schedule. It's just something I think the fans should consider when trying to guess who will be there in Salem next March.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 05, 2005, 11:29:08 PM

David,

Excellent post. Woo and Witt have always reminded me of UM and OSU in fball in the 70s and 80s - they ALWAYS battle for the championship, but are not ready for the tourney/bowl game.

Except, alas, in 2003, when IWU beat #2 Hanover (away) then lost to #4(?) Woo (also away) - though I think that was also a year you then lost to JCU?!

ala Emily Litella: never mind.

(You beating the battle-tested Titans was OBVIOUSLY a major upset! ;))

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on October 05, 2005, 11:50:42 PM

That was a year that Wooster lost to JCU in the sectional final at Wooster. And I believe that IWU team played a style very much like Woo/Witt: take the break if available, otherwise work for the high percentage shot with picks and the extra pass, play man defense, five crash the boards, etc. Hanover played that way, too. That was a region we all thought was stacked, and it was JCU, with a completely different style, that represented us in Salem.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on October 06, 2005, 01:59:37 AM

David -

Not at Wabash's home court - those are close games and closer than free throw time would imagine. If they didn't have such a young team this season I think we would have beaten both Wooster and Witt on our home court - we just didn't have that something to carry us over the top. I saw both of those games and it just was the little things in the second half.

It's the other 6 that need upgrades, stat.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: formerbant10 on October 20, 2005, 03:05:48 PM

Pat, when does your top 25 come out?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: True Basketball Fan on October 26, 2005, 09:01:59 PM

Ya, I'd like to see yours, the Street's and Smith AND the D3News lists are bogus and borderline idiotic (not entirely but about 60% of it is). Your top 25 is the one everybody is waiting for.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on October 26, 2005, 09:24:31 PM

Endicott? Oswego? Top 10???? Please tell me that was a joke that i jsut did not understand.

I suspect that you will be seeing a Preseason D3hoops.Com Poll sometime VERY soon!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on October 26, 2005, 09:28:03 PM

Of course, one big reason the D3Hoops Top 25 poll is worth waiting for is that it isn't released in the summer, before practice even starts. We're just now finding out who is and isn't back, and I'd consider that to be basic information for doing a ranking.

Because we have to wait for it, it's a good poll, and because it's a good poll, it's worth waiting for.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 26, 2005, 09:34:17 PM

David,

You beat me to it! It's only been a few days since anyone even knew what the rosters would be - a REASONED projection will probably take a few more days!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 27, 2005, 12:54:02 PM

The poll is ready. I'm just waiting for my tech person to finish fixing something so I can actually post it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 27, 2005, 01:19:18 PM

Let the fun begin...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 27, 2005, 03:30:15 PM

Fun.
Begin.
:)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on October 27, 2005, 04:13:42 PM

I think the fun will begin when games are played. Right now it's dart boards, voodoo dolls, smoke, mirrors, and chicanery.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 27, 2005, 05:50:19 PM

Gotta love the chicanery.

And because the new board doesn't have a direct link:

The New Top 25 (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on October 27, 2005, 06:24:22 PM

QuoteTheir up-tempo, pressure defense style is unlike either Woo or Witt. Result: 3-0 vs. Woo/Witt the past two seasons, with all three games at the NCAC team's gym.

Yes, JCU is 3-0 vs. Woo/Witt the past two seasons. They are 2-0 @ Witt and 1-0 @ Wooster. But, JCU was also playing this style when Wooster beat them to go to Salem in '02. Witt is the team that has yet to figure out how to beat a team that plays JCU's style.

This brings me to my next point in that it looks like Wooster is going to be playing more up-tempo JCU like basketball this year. So, seeing as how Witt has had trouble with JCU's up-tempo pressure style, maybe Wooster can give them the same problems and neutralize Witt's dominant interior play. Just something to ponder...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: joe smith on November 15, 2005, 04:41:52 PM

How does a team that goes 24-4 last year, make it to the NCAA tourny, return everyone but 2 players, and not get any votes for the top 35. I'm talking about Bethany College. This team has won over 16 games 4 out of the past 5 years. 3 conference championships in those 5 years, 2 ncaa berths (one which they made to the 2nd round and lost to eventual Nat. Champion Otterbein), and 1 ecac berth. I know the PrAC is no conference to brag about but this team has been consistent and deserves some national recognition.
2000: 16-10 PAC champs, ecac
2001: 21-8 PAC champs. 2nd round ncaa
2002: 11-15 4th place PAC
2003: 18-9 PAC runner-up
2004: 24-4 PAC champs, 1st round ncaa
90-46 (.662 win percentage)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bbald eagle on November 15, 2005, 05:02:43 PM

Quote from: joe smith on November 15, 2005, 04:41:52 PM
How does a team that goes 24-4 last year, make it to the NCAA tourny, return everyone but 2 players, and not get any votes for the top 35. I'm talking about Bethany College.

John Carroll University ousted Bethany 76-48 in the first round of the NCAA Tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 15, 2005, 05:30:35 PM

No small conference deserves recognition that fast, especially one that isn't even in Pool A yet. A lot of the strong programs from weaker conferences had to be really, really good for quite a while before they got automatic respect. I'm glad you're hear to keep us informed about Bethany, but please be realistic. Trinity (CT) didn't get any respect either and they certainly have a better case in terms of recent rep and conference play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: joe smith on November 15, 2005, 08:22:24 PM

I agree with both of you. Just thought i'd throw the discussion out there. Thanks

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on November 16, 2005, 01:52:26 AM

joe -

You have to understand than when you play a schedule that is less than stellar and then you get CRUSHED in a first round game, it's unlikely that top 25 votes are going to be in the offing.

The only win of substance was early in the year to Muskingum and the next best team in the league was barely .500. That combined with the butt-kicking that the only top 25 team on the schedule gave Bethany makes me suspicious that the 24-4 record was not quite top 25 caliber.

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: joe smith on November 16, 2005, 02:26:37 PM

I agree not top 25 but maybe 1 or 2 votes. John Carroll did make it pretty far if I do recall and Bethany was in the game up until the 2nd half. I know only the final score is taken into consideration. Their schedule I agree was their biggest achelles heel. When I played for Bethany when we lost to Otterbein in 2001, I don't even think we got any votes for the final pool and we made to the 2nd round to a team that did get votes so it's all a wash to me anyway.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on November 16, 2005, 02:43:10 PM

joe -

good luck this season, but let's try not to live our lives based on things that happened 'back in the day.'

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: joe smith on November 16, 2005, 02:49:19 PM

Enough said Coach C. Enjoy the best basketball around this season in d3 hoops.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 17, 2005, 09:36:32 AM

Old School,

What's the status of that poster's top 25 you spoke about last season? Are we gonna start it up in January?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on November 17, 2005, 10:39:47 AM

Yeah, I think that could be a neat thing to do.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 17, 2005, 12:52:07 PM

Yeah, someone emailed me about that earlier this year. If I get ambitious, it'll start at the beginning of the year, after all the holiday tourneys. I'll keep you informed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on November 19, 2005, 11:51:47 AM

I know #8 Albion lost last night to UM-Dearborn (NAIA). Any other top 25's have a rough first night?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 19, 2005, 12:03:46 PM

http://d3hoops.com/schedule.php?date=2005-11-18&team=m

::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on November 19, 2005, 12:09:55 PM

FDF - Remember the scoreboard of D3Hoops gives top 25 scores first before going to Alphabetical for everyone else.
;)

Other top 25 losers in addition to 8 Albion were 7 St John Fisher (to Great Lakes Baldwin Wallace), 11 Virginia Wesleyan to Trinity Tx, 13 UW Whitewater to Loras

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on November 19, 2005, 02:55:57 PM

OOPS - All I can say is old age ain't for sissies! :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on November 20, 2005, 11:40:59 AM

So much for Bethany....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 21, 2005, 11:19:17 AM

I'm not sure if there will be a new poll this week or if we're waiting until next week, but here it goes:

#1 IWU wins over TX-Dallas and Wabash
#2 Oshkosh hasn't played yet
#3 Wooster wins over Kalamazoo and Stout
#4 Puget Sound win over Evergreen State
#5 Amherst wins over Fitchburg State and Endicott
#6 York wins over Desales and Dickinson
#7 St. John Fisher loss to Baldwin-Wallace, win over Deleware Valley
#8 Albion loss to Michigan-Dearborn (non d3), win over Depauw
#9 Hanover wins over Webster and Maryville (Missouri)
#10 Wittenberg wins over Tufts and #23 Rochester
#11 VA Wesleyan loss to Trinity (TX), win over NC Wesleyan
#12 Ramapo wins over Medgar Evers and FDU-Fordham
#13 Whitewater loss to Loras, win over Robert Morris-Springfield
#14 Wartburg win over Concordia-Moorhead, loss to Briarcliff (non d3)
#15 Elmhurst loss to Hope
#16 John Carroll wins over Emory and Henry and Mount Saint Joseph
#17 WPI wins over Worcester State (OT) and Nichols (both games WAY too close)
#18 Randolph-Macon wins over Averett and Lebanon Valley
#19 Gustavus Adolphus win over Luther
#20 Platteville win over Simpson, loss to Robert Morris-Chicago (non d3)
#21 Mississippi College win over Carver Bible
#22 Aurora wins over McMurry and Wheaton (IL)
#23 Rochester win over Alfred, loss to #10 Wittenberg
#24 Calvin wins over Grace and Whitworth
#25 Catholic wins over Salve Regina and UMASS-Dartmouth

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on November 21, 2005, 12:58:00 PM

Gang -

No poll this week. A few more games should help settle things a bit. To me the UWWW loss was the most surprising.

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 21, 2005, 06:42:19 PM

The UW-Whitewater loss to Loras shocked me. Especially considering Whitewater had just played D1 Marquette really tough (8 point game with a few minutes left) a few days before in exhibition play. Loras went on to get beat by North Central of the CCIW (picked to finish 4th or 5th in the conference) by 13 the next night in a game that really wasn't very close.

Loras did have a good season last year - 18-8 overall, 12-4 in the IIAC, including a win over Buena Vista. But still, that's not a game a top 3 WIAC team should lose.

Big in-region loss for a Whitewater team that's more than likely a Pool C candidate due to how good UW-Oshkosh is...and a big in-region win for Loras.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 21, 2005, 08:50:06 PM

I'm really more surprized at the collapse than the loss. I mean, losses happen, teams have off nights, especially early in the year (teams aren't running on all cylinders)... but they had an 18 point lead with 12 minutes to go. I honestly can't remember a meltdown like that since Lawrence came back and forced overtime against Sul Ross State out in Tacoma in '03-'04 (SRS had an 18 pt lead with a little over 11 to go... see box score HERE. (http://www.lawrence.edu/athletics/mbasketball/stats0304/ncaa3.htm) It takes a concerted effort to give up an 18 pt lead with 12 minutes, either from the leading team, the trailing team, or a combination of both. Sul Ross had 9 TO's in the last 12 minutes. UWW was 1/8 from the field in the last 5 minutes, but the 18 point lead had already disintegrated by then (they held just a 3 pt lead... see that box score HERE. (http://www.uww.edu/athletics/mbasketball/UWW-LORM.HTM) What's odd to me is that UWW had just 4 of their 17 turnovers during that 12 minute span. Granted, after an answering fg the proceeding possession after UWW took their 18 pt lead, the Warhawks turned it over the next two possessions, which lead to 4 Loras points (and suddenly the 18 pts was 12, with 10:31 to go). I guess it just surprized me that Whitewater self-destructed like they did with that lead. Maybe I'm not giving Loras enough credit, but Whitewater teams of years past would turn the heat UP when they went on a run, not let it slip away, for the most part.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Downtown on November 22, 2005, 06:20:10 PM

See Pointspecial, the collapse doesn't surprise me.

I will challenge Whitewater's toughness any day of the week. I have been paying attention closely like you guys have for the past 3 years. The one thing I notice is that at times, Whitewater gets soft, and when things go bad, they go REALLY bad.

Another problem for them is defense, which may be linked to not being tough mentally. And they played well for 22 minutes, and then it just came undone. Against Robert Morris was the Whitewater team we expected to play like.

Already Whitewater is inconsistent and we are two games into the season. :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 22, 2005, 10:41:27 PM

I'll agree that WW has been weak at times... but historically, Whitewater has pulvarized non-conference teams... their athleticism is more than most non-WIAC teams can handle (heck, most WIAC teams can't match up individually with UWW athletically, but they make up for it with team play).

That said, they have seemed to self-destruct towards the end of the season the last few years. I have attributed this to them not improving as a team (relying on their personal athleticism... ok, basically, I'm fluffing it up, they play individually, boardering on selfishly) while the teams they play certainly do.

And the defense can also be attributed to players trying to do it all themselves... if they don't trust their teammates, and try and do it all themselves, then, in the longrun, against great opponents, they will fail. Now... if their teammates can't be trusted, then it's another thing altogether, but... I think you're on the ball with saying they aren't mentally tough. It takes a lot more than sheer athleticism to play defense for the full 35 seconds, possession after possession. It's the mindset of a TEAM, and I think it is instituted from above. Now, this is by no means a knock on Pat Miller, I'm not in a position to do that, but I know first hand that Jack Bennett breathed defense, and it wasn't merely coincidence that UWSP was in the top 5 in defense the last 2 years in their Nat. Champ runs.

Btw, Oshkosh loses to Lawrence 82-75 tonight. There's plenty to talk about them, too, starting first with Yanke's performance... 5 points, none in the second half. For Oshkosh to reach their potential, they need him to do much more than that to take the weight off of Capelle... which in turn will give Gibson more space inside.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on November 23, 2005, 03:55:58 AM

Quote from: PointSpecial on November 22, 2005, 10:41:27 PM
I'll agree that WW has been week at times... but historically, Whitewater has pulvarized non-conference teams... their athleticism is more than most non-WIAC teams can handle (heck, most WIAC teams can't match up individually with UWW athletically, but they make up for it with team play).

That said, they have seemed to self-destruct towards the end of the season the last few years. I have attributed this to them not improving as a team (relying on their personal athleticism... ok, basically, I'm fluffing it up, they play individually, boardering on selfishly) while the teams they play certainly do.

And the defense can also be attributed to players trying to do it all themselves... if they don't trust their teammates, and try and do it all themselves, then, in the longrun, against great opponents, they will fail. Now... if their teammates can't be trusted, then it's another thing altogether, but... I think you're on the ball with saying they aren't mentally tough. It takes a lot more than sheer athleticism to play defense for the full 35 seconds, possession after possession. It's the mindset of a TEAM, and I think it is instituted from above. Now, this is by no means a knock on Pat Miller, I'm not in a position to do that, but I know first hand that Jack Bennett breathed defense, and it wasn't merely coincidence that UWSP was in the top 5 in defense the last 2 years in their Nat. Champ runs.

Btw, Oshkosh losses to Lawrence 82-75 tonight. There's plenty to talk about them, too, starting first with Yanke's performance... 5 points, none in the second half. For Oshkosh to reach their potential, they need him to do much more than that to take the weight off of Capelle... which in turn will give Gibson more space inside.

Gentlemen, I was at this game and I wrote a long post to give you guys some insight, but my time expired on my login and it didnt post. Its too late now i'll follow up tomorrow

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on November 23, 2005, 12:49:40 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 21, 2005, 06:42:19 PM
The UW-Whitewater loss to Loras shocked me. Especially considering Whitewater had just played D1 Marquette really tough (8 point game with a few minutes left) a few days before in exhibition play. Loras went on to get beat by North Central of the CCIW (picked to finish 4th or 5th in the conference) by 13 the next night in a game that really wasn't very close.

Loras did have a good season last year - 18-8 overall, 12-4 in the IIAC, including a win over Buena Vista. But still, that's not a game a top 3 WIAC team should lose.

Big in-region loss for a Whitewater team that's more than likely a Pool C candidate due to how good UW-Oshkosh is...and a big in-region win for Loras.

Quote from: PointSpecial on November 22, 2005, 10:41:27 PM
I'll agree that WW has been week at times... but historically, Whitewater has pulvarized non-conference teams... their athleticism is more than most non-WIAC teams can handle (heck, most WIAC teams can't match up individually with UWW athletically, but they make up for it with team play).

That said, they have seemed to self-destruct towards the end of the season the last few years. I have attributed this to them not improving as a team (relying on their personal athleticism... ok, basically, I'm fluffing it up, they play individually, boardering on selfishly) while the teams they play certainly do.

And the defense can also be attributed to players trying to do it all themselves... if they don't trust their teammates, and try and do it all themselves, then, in the longrun, against great opponents, they will fail. Now... if their teammates can't be trusted, then it's another thing altogether, but... I think you're on the ball with saying they aren't mentally tough. It takes a lot more than sheer athleticism to play defense for the full 35 seconds, possession after possession. It's the mindset of a TEAM, and I think it is instituted from above. Now, this is by no means a knock on Pat Miller, I'm not in a position to do that, but I know first hand that Jack Bennett breathed defense, and it wasn't merely coincidence that UWSP was in the top 5 in defense the last 2 years in their Nat. Champ runs.

Btw, Oshkosh losses to Lawrence 82-75 tonight. There's plenty to talk about them, too, starting first with Yanke's performance... 5 points, none in the second half. For Oshkosh to reach their potential, they need him to do much more than that to take the weight off of Capelle... which in turn will give Gibson more space inside.

Quote from: Mr. Downtown on November 22, 2005, 06:20:10 PM
See Pointspecial, the collapse doesn't surprise me.

I will challenge Whitewater's toughness any day of the week. I have been paying attention closely like you guys have for the past 3 years. The one thing I notice is that at times, Whitewater gets soft, and when things go bad, they go REALLY bad.

Another problem for them is defense, which may be linked to not being tough mentally. And they played well for 22 minutes, and then it just came undone. Against Robert Morris was the Whitewater team we expected to play like.

Already Whitewater is inconsistent and we are two games into the season. :o

Gentlemen I was in attendance for that game so I will share some insight with you. I don't believe it was a case of whitewater self destructing or collapsing. To be fair to both teams, ww was not ready for that game from a strategy stand point and i put that on the coaches and loras was a bit better than they thought. For instance, the 13pt lead ww was able to build in the 1st half was a result of loras settling for the 3pt shot and not making them. Hence loras shot 21% from the field on 7-32 & 4-19 from 3. Their poor % was not a result of ww good defense, they just missed some open shots. Some of those long rebounds from missed 3's lead to transition baskets for ww. Combine that with Loras' inability to get to the foul line in the 1st half only 4-7 and ww was able to build a lead of 13pts that would eventually grow to 18.

2nd half action obviously was totally different. WW inability to defend Loras' high pick & roll offense really played out in the 2nd half. Loras looked to attack the basket instead of settling for the 3pointer. They were able to get to foul line and get easier baskets. Hence: shooting 61% from the field on 16-26 fg and 14-16 from the foul line. Loras' energy and efficiency slowed WW transition game down and allowed loras to chip away at the lead. Scoring 10 more pts from the foul line in the 2nd half without the clock moving one second was huge in the comeback.

Now here's why I don't believe the coaching staff had WW ready for this game. They had no consistent game plan to defend loras' screen & roll offense. The ball defender would go over the top of the screen and there would be no help giving loras a lane to the basket. Sometimes the ball defender would go underneath the screen leading to a wide open jump shot. Once WW made a commitment to how they would play loras it was too late. The ball defender started to go over the top and the screen defender would help with a step and show. However, there was no help for the helper leaving the screener wide open for either a shot or layup. Gentlemen, i put this one more so on the coaching staff than the players. Another questionable move WW made was sitting a player who was 5-5 from the field with 10pts and 4 reb. in only 11min of action. He had no foul trouble and no turnovers. Now I don't want to speculate about why he set the player because I wasn't near the bench and i don't know much about the program. It just seemed odd. WW does play a ton of players. i believe 11-13 different players got into the game. Outside of all of that WW still had a chance to win the game down the stretch, but pt guard play was terrible. He took bad shot after bad shot. For whatever reason they stopped going inside to their 6-8 post player who was having a nice game. All in all WW didn't play as well as expected and Loras was better than advertised. I was looking forward to a NCC vs WW match up my self. So we all were a bit disappointed from that stand point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on November 23, 2005, 12:57:32 PM

The Loras vs NCC game was ok. Loras just didn't have the man power to match NCC inside. Loras double teamed Simmons everytime he touched it in the post. They also played a ton of 3-2 zone. NCC started to pull away around the ten minute mark of the second half on two big 3's by Dan Walton. He had a huge game scoring 33pts on 14-17 shooting. NCC was in control of the game the entire way going up by as many as 18pts before the subs came in around the 3 min mark. At any rate, it appeard NCC had a game plan defensively for Loras screen and roll offense and carried it out. Good win the for the Cards. Nice start to to the season at 2-0 with Benedictine on 11/30 at home.
Cardinal pride starts with me!! Go Cards!!

CP

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 23, 2005, 07:01:19 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on November 22, 2005, 10:41:27 PM
Btw, Oshkosh losses to Lawrence 82-75 tonight. There's plenty to talk about them, too, starting first with Yanke's performance... 5 points, none in the second half. For Oshkosh to reach their potential, they need him to do much more than that to take the weight off of Capelle... which in turn will give Gibson more space inside.

If TVD was smart, he would've thrown it into Gibson EVERY possession. LU didn't have anything to stop him. The fouled him in the 2nd half and he made his FTs. He was unstoppable. LU doubled him and that's when Capelle and Jahnke have to show up and make their shots. Defensively, Oshkosh was horrible. Offensively, it's Gibson or nothing. They should've pounded it inside more. Gibson could've had 40.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 23, 2005, 09:25:41 PM

Hmm... here's something to think about... I think I've discovered a new D3hoops.com curse!

In seasons starting with odd numbered years (such as this one, 2005-2006), the second ranked team will LOSE its first game!

It happened two years ago (Gustavus Adolphus actually lost their first two), it happened 4 years ago (IWU lost to Concordia (WI) in their first game).

I guess we won't be able to test this theory until the 2007-2008 season, but...

Hey, wait... actually, now that I think about it, IWU lost their first two games as well... That doesn't bode well for Oshkosh in their next game!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 24, 2005, 01:24:29 AM

PS, you should win some sort of award for coming up with such an obscure factoid. I doff my chapeau to you, sir! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: True Basketball Fan on November 24, 2005, 01:44:32 AM

I know Lawrence is good, but I'm the most surprised with their win over Oshkosh, or is it that Oshkosh is a bit overrated, and that we shouldn't be that surprised.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on November 26, 2005, 09:58:52 AM

PS -

Usually one can count on Sager or Raplh for the obscure D# hoops fact. YOu are now in a category all by yourself.

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on November 26, 2005, 09:08:41 PM

Final: #3 Wooster 77 Methodist 63

First round game at the Emory & Henry tourney in Virginia. Wooster was led by James Cooper with 21 points.

Methodist has won the USA South Conference the last two seasons and been in the NCAA D3 tourney both years.

Wooster plays host Emory & Henry in the tourney championship game tomorrow afternoon.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Matt Letourneau on November 26, 2005, 10:59:06 PM

#25 Catholic defeated Scranton 72-63 today...

I hope this calms down some talk that CUA doesn't belong in the Top 25. Scranton never led in the 2nd half, and CUA didn't even get particuarly special performances from their big guns. They've a very deep, well rounded team with a lot of size and guys that can shoot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on November 26, 2005, 11:10:35 PM

Note 9 of the top 15 have lost through Friday's games :o :o

Those unscathed are IWU, Woo, Amherst, York, Hanover (Barely), and Witt.

Also note 5 WIAC schools were voted for..3 in the top 20, 2 down below - all 5 have lost in the first week

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augiedad on November 26, 2005, 11:32:51 PM

As expected, Hanover lost at all to the #4 NAIA D1 team, Robert Morris.

http://www.hanover.edu/sports/hcmbb.htm

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on November 27, 2005, 12:11:05 AM

That's just bad tourney drawing, there. Everyone knows that if you host, you play the pansy the first round! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 27, 2005, 01:15:01 AM

Well, Oshkosh manages to break the two-loss curse by smashing Finlandia 80-49.

Per the Oshkosh website...

UWO lead FU 32-25 at halftime and score the first 14 pts our of the gate to start the second to take a 46-25 lead and never look back.

As noted, the top 5 (at least as noted in the votes from the past top 25 poll found here) WIAC teams all have at least one loss. In fact, the WIAC, who has consistenly lead all other conferences in non-conference winning percentage in recent years (I don't have any stat on that... does anyone else?), appears to be faltering a bit. Hmm... well, I was going to figure out the winning percentage, but some of the records appear to be wrong... UWW is only 2-1, not 3-1, UWPlatte is 3-2, not 4-3 (and it's late... I don't have the energy to look the rest up).

But I DO know....

that UWSP, who hadn't lost a regular season non-con game since the last millenium (Dec 29, 1999) lost tonight. Whitewater had lost just 3 non-cons since the 2000-2001 season. They lost their opener. Oshkosh, who is the conference favorite, dropped their first non conference game. Platteville, who is currently #20 in the country, stands at 3-2 (their wins have been blowouts, the losses have been close).

It's going to be interesting to see how the WIAC turns out. Traditionally, the WIAC has had multiple teams in the top 25 throughout the year (especially at the beginning of the year, before the conference canabalizes itself). However, the two teams "leading" (at least in total wins) the WIAC at the moment are UW La Crosse (5-0) and UW Superior (3-0), both whom pulled up the rear in the last three seasons, taking (or tying for) 7th, 8th, or 9th in the conference. One might question the competition (Superior went 9-0 in non-con last season on their way to a 5-11 conference record, this year's opponents are a combined 0-9, and Sup has won by margins of 1, 1, and 7 points), but La Crosse's wins have been impressive (23, 19, 10, 12, and 13) even though they've been playing possibly sub-par competition (a these teams are a combined 7-12, with wins over teams -Lakeland and Coe- who have beaten conference opponents UWSP and UWEC). Interestingly, Platteville also handily beat the team, Loras, who handed Whitewater their first loss.

What does it all mean? It's too soon to tell. But it appears that a pecking order may be filtering out and that teams other than the usual suspects may find themselves atop the WIAC standings, and into the top 25 before the year is through.

The real test begins Wednesday, with the first conference games. It seems SO early to be starting in the conference... but the time is here!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on November 27, 2005, 11:26:46 PM

Final: #3 Wooster 150 Emory & Henry 101

Not a typo...Wooster set an all time school record for most points in a game as they totally outplayed the host Wasps to win the E&H tourney. :)

Wooster was led by Tom Port with 33 points, James Cooper with 26 points and Tim Vandervaart with 20 points and 17 boards.

Wooster shot 70% from the floor, held E&H to 32% and outrebounded E&H by a 73-36 margin. E&H plays the "System" style hoisting up three point shots and Wooster had too much talent and defensive intensity for them.

Wooster is 4-0. Next up is Denison in the NCAC opener. GO SCOTS!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 29, 2005, 11:34:42 AM

New Top 25 out

1    Illinois Wesleyan (25)    4-0    625    1
2    Wooster    4-0    591    3
3    Wittenberg    4-0    525    10
4    Amherst    2-0    510    5
5    Puget Sound    2-1    497    4
6    York (Pa.)    3-0    484    6
7    UW-Oshkosh    1-1    438    2
8    Hanover    4-1    405    9
9    Albion    3-1    369    8
10    Worcester Polytech    4-0    308    17
11    Randolph-Macon    2-0    297    18
12    Rochester    4-1    286    23
13    Gustavus Adolphus    3-0    255    19
14    Hope    4-0    254    —
15    Lawrence    2-0    227    —
16    Mississippi College    3-0    224    21
17    St. John Fisher    2-1    211    7
18    Wartburg    3-1    193    14
19    Catholic    4-0    169    25
20    UW-Whitewater    2-1    160    13
21    John Carroll    3-1    129    16
22    Elmhurst    2-1    125    15
23    Virginia Wesleyan    2-1    112    11
24    Ramapo    2-1    98    12
25    Augustana    2-0    87    —

Dropped out: No. 20 UW-Platteville, No. 22 Aurora, No. 24 Calvin.

Others receiving votes: Hampden-Sydney 81, Albright 77, Baldwin-Wallace 76, Maryville (Tenn.) 74, Rutgers-Newark 35, Lincoln 31, Transylvania 27, UW-Stout 20, Trinity (Texas) 18, UW-Platteville 16, Calvin 15, Potsdam State 14, Williams 9, Carroll 9, Aurora 9, Widener 7, Trinity (Conn.) 7, Ursinus 6, Southwestern 6, UW-Stevens Point 4, Hamilton 3, St. Thomas 1, New York University 1, Dominican 1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 29, 2005, 11:36:30 AM

Lincoln should have been in this week, but they will definately make it next week after beating RMC last night. Their crazy schedule could bode well if they post in impressive record. Finishing the season early means they can climb the rankings while other teams fall.

VAWes and Whitewater both fell last night as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njlincolnlion on November 29, 2005, 12:06:06 PM

Hoops Fan:

Where do you think Lincoln will end up in the top 25 poll, if they don't suffer a set back between now and the next poll?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 29, 2005, 04:09:32 PM

Gosh, I have no idea how to predict that. I think a lot of it will depend on how the current 25-15 slots do over the next week. Although, I think Lincoln deserves any spot between 25 and 15 that they get. They have already played a rough schedule and it just gets crazier for them. Assuming they perform equally valiantly the rest of the season (no major injuries or strings of losses, I think they have already made a case for themselves, expecially when considered regionally).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on November 29, 2005, 07:36:29 PM

How much respect would Lincoln get from the voters? Some may be reluctant to pull the lever for Lincoln just because it's a bit out of the ordinary.

Not that they wouldn't be deserving, and they did pick up a goodly number of votes this time around.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 29, 2005, 08:36:08 PM

Did anyone besides me notice that the top three teams this week are also the top three teams all-time (in terms of total wins, that is)?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wpifan on November 30, 2005, 09:06:29 AM

So far this year WPI is looking good, ranked 10 in the country. I guess we will see if they beat Williams. Good luck guys!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on November 30, 2005, 09:58:52 PM

Final: #2 Wooster 109 Denison 73

Wooster gets their opening NCAC road win at Denison. :) Wooster made 15 three point shots tonight and had six players in double figures led by James Cooper with 19 points, Kyle Witucky with 16 points, Devin Fulk with 15 points, Tim Vandervaart with 14 points and Tom Port with 13 points.

Wooster is now 5-0 and plays at Earlham on Saturday afternoon.

GO SCOTS!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 30, 2005, 10:25:00 PM

On opening night in the WIAC, a final from Stevens Point...

UW-Stevens Point 74
(#7) UW-Oshkosh 61

Changing of the guard game? Not tonight.

I'm not sure the WIAC has a great team right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 30, 2005, 11:28:30 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 30, 2005, 10:25:00 PM
I'm not sure the WIAC has a great team right now.

I'd agree with that. RIGHT NOW, there aren't any really clear great teams.

Oshkosh was clearly overrated at the beginning of the season. Though they were playing well at the end of the year last year, they were inconsistent (they lost to La Crosse at home, Eau Claire took them to overtime in the quarterfinals of the WIAC tourney). Funny, Ted VanDellen said HE thought they were overrated... (the guys on Hoopsville said they thought it was coachspeak... I'm not so sure).

After La Crosse's good start, they lost to Whitewater tonight. Whitewater is an enigma to me, I really don't know what to think about them at this point in the year other than the fact that they're not consistent. Platteville has lost a couple this season, but then they go ahead and take care of Elmhurst tonight. Stevens Point lost to Lakeland, but then they bounce back and down Oshkosh, fairly convincingly, to run the home winning streak to 24 games. Stout looks like they may be a top team in the conference, and they have the win against St. Thomas to show, and played Wooster tight. They destroyed rival Eau Claire 72-35 tonight.

I think that a number of WIAC teams have the potential to be a national contender by the end of the year. IMO, any one of Stout, Whitewater, La Crosse, Oshkosh, Platteville, or Stevens Point could emerge. It's just WAY too early to really make an educated guess as to which team it will be. Some of these teams are young and need to discover themselves. Some have great potential and expectations and need to rise to the occasion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 01, 2005, 09:48:03 AM

I've liked Stout since last year. They didn't quite get it together, but they seemed to have a really strong foundation. We'll see how it works out this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on December 01, 2005, 05:02:18 PM

I am also struck by the WIAC's lack of dominance against non-conference foes so far this year. Not sure what to make of all of this.

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on December 01, 2005, 08:00:44 PM

Quote from: Coach C on December 01, 2005, 05:02:18 PM
I am also struck by the WIAC's lack of dominance against non-conference foes so far this year. Not sure what to make of all of this.

C

Coach, I know what to make of it. OVERRATED!!! I'd take the top five teams in the CCIW over the top five teams in WIAC this year!!! Any comments from the chat room...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 01, 2005, 08:30:39 PM

... Like Elmhurst over Platteville...? Oh, wait a second...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 01, 2005, 08:39:47 PM

I'd hate to pass judgment on the basis of an early-season tournament played far from home, but I watched UW-Stout closely in their two games at Wooster and they're not remotely as good as Stevens Point was last year. The only reason they beat St. Thomas (by 1 in OT) is because of poor coaching decisions by the Tommies' coach. The game with Wooster was never really in doubt. Stout's a very athletic team, and you can see they have talent; but if they're the best in the WIAC this season, then the WIAC is down.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 01, 2005, 11:40:18 PM

So, the WIAC is dead and buried and now joins the ranks with the [fill in the blank]? ;)

Well, there were 10 1st team All-Conference players last year and 7 of them were seniors. The top two teams, Platteville and Point, both lost two senior 1st team All-Conference players (Reitzner and Temperly for Platteville and Kalsow and Bennett for Point). It's early. I'm surprised about some of the hiccups the WIAC has had in preseason, oops, I mean nonconference (just kidding GS!). For the record, Stout is picked 4th by the SIDs.

The WIAC is hardly overrated. They've proven in the past that they are one of the top conferences in the nation. Anyway, we'll see where we stand in Feb.!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 02, 2005, 12:13:34 AM

OS,

Don't go getting paranoid on us! I haven't seen anyone claiming (or even implying - well, maybe Cardinalpride, but he was still only saying top 5) that the WIAC is not still the overall #1 conference in d3. It's just that the EARLY signs don't seem to suggest that the WIAC has a legitimate threat for the title.

Someone may yet emerge, but right now I'm not expecting a Wisconsin team (unless it is Lawrence!) to be in Salem. And I am by no means 'burying' Oshkosh after three games!

(Though with NP's early success, just MAYBE the CCIW is the top-to-bottom #1 conference THIS year! LONG way to go on that!)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on December 02, 2005, 12:25:16 AM

Quote from: PointSpecial on December 01, 2005, 08:30:39 PM
... Like Elmhurst over Platteville...? Oh, wait a second...

PS, Platteville is one of the top 3 or 4 teams in the WIAC and so is Elmhurst for the CCIW. Platteville should be able to win a home game by a single point. A game that they could have easily lost as well! Give me something better than that!!! Your top 3 teams all have bad losses. You can't say the same for the CCIW!!

Cardinal Pride starts with Me!! Go Cards!!! :) :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 02, 2005, 01:33:28 AM

I'm not saying or implying that the WIAC is not still the top conference in D3 hoops. Indeed, I'm implying the opposite: because the WIAC is the top league, it must have teams better than Stout. And I'm not a Stout hater; I had the distinct feeling throughout the Stout/St. Thomas game that I was watching a playoff preview. Both are good teams with a lot of potential. But neither seemed to be up to the standard set by Stevens Point the past two seasons, Eau Claire before that, or any of the great Bo Ryan Platteville teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 02, 2005, 03:44:26 AM

You guys are being mighty hard on the WIAC -- and prematurely so, IMHO. Why is everyone in such a rush to judgment already? I'm looking at my office calendar right now and, unless my eyes are playing tricks on me, today's date appears to be December 2. Some of you sound as though you're already prepared to hand out NCAA bids. :D

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 02, 2005, 12:13:34 AM
(Though with NP's early success, just MAYBE the CCIW is the top-to-bottom #1 conference THIS year! LONG way to go on that!)

I have no idea what you're talking about, Chuck. NPU has had no early success this season. The Vikings have been badly beaten by a Benedictine team that looks as though it may be facing a down year; they lost to CURF for the first time in four decades, and in the crackerbox to boot; they lost big to a wretched St. Norbert team; and they've won a pair of one-point home contests over a couple of teams that any CCIW squad should've turned into grease spots.

If you're arguing that NPU's performance to date is proof of the CCIW's relative prowess, then you're subverting your own argument. The Park has all sorts of excuses -- youth, injuries -- but the bottom line is that they are floundering.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: retired12 on December 02, 2005, 01:52:52 PM

Potsdam has started 4-0, but still not in the top 25 even after last years success. Anyone out there with thoughts on this?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 02, 2005, 02:32:39 PM

It's pretty simple. They only had a 2-0 record when the most recent poll was out. They play in the notoriously weak East Region. While their team last year had a good record, they still lost three games to SUNYAC teams, played a schedule weaker than 300 other schools and didn't get a win over a good team all year. In the NCAA tournament they barely beat a mediocre-at-best Salem State team (by one), schooled St John Fisher (a team with an equally suspect schedule) and then got smoked by Rochester.

While the record looks good and they have to be considered a favorite in the region, none of those things give them Top 25 credentials.

Oh yeah, and they graduated seven guys off last year's squad.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on December 02, 2005, 03:39:09 PM

retired -

2-0 doesnt get much attention this time of year. Let's see how things look on Sunday.

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 02, 2005, 03:58:34 PM

We heard a lot last year about Potsdam being the shiznit as well...and that schooling by Rochester I think makes a lot of people look at them with suspicion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 02, 2005, 08:10:08 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 02, 2005, 03:44:26 AM
You guys are being mighty hard on the WIAC -- and prematurely so, IMHO. Why is everyone in such a rush to judgment already? I'm looking at my office calendar right now and, unless my eyes are playing tricks on me, today's date appears to be December 2. Some of you sound as though you're already prepared to hand out NCAA bids. :D

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 02, 2005, 12:13:34 AM
(Though with NP's early success, just MAYBE the CCIW is the top-to-bottom #1 conference THIS year! LONG way to go on that!)

I have no idea what you're talking about, Chuck. NPU has had no early success this season. The Vikings have been badly beaten by a Benedictine team that looks as though it may be facing a down year; they lost to CURF for the first time in four decades, and in the crackerbox to boot; they lost big to a wretched St. Norbert team; and they've won a pair of one-point home contests over a couple of teams that any CCIW squad should've turned into grease spots.

If you're arguing that NPU's performance to date is proof of the CCIW's relative prowess, then you're subverting your own argument. The Park has all sorts of excuses -- youth, injuries -- but the bottom line is that they are floundering.

Greg,

Well of course I'm ready to hand out NCAA bids - all the CCIW teams, plus CalTech, Maine Maritime, ...! ;D

As for NP, while I understand why YOU are disappointed (and I am too, a bit, but I will be picking them for last in the CCIW) - they have shown me ENOUGH in the pre-conference season that I don't think there is ANY other conference in the country (except MAYBE the WIAC) where I would pick them for dead last. (There are some conferences where I would even pick them for first, but I'd prefer not to name them!)

For your sake (especially) as well as the CCIW's, I'm really rooting for NP to get back in the 'mix' soon. As a Titan, I'm NOT wishing for you to totally recoup your 'glory years' ;D, but definitely not an automatic 8th place pick!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on December 02, 2005, 08:14:23 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 02, 2005, 08:10:08 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 02, 2005, 03:44:26 AM
You guys are being mighty hard on the WIAC -- and prematurely so, IMHO. Why is everyone in such a rush to judgment already? I'm looking at my office calendar right now and, unless my eyes are playing tricks on me, today's date appears to be December 2. Some of you sound as though you're already prepared to hand out NCAA bids. :D

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 02, 2005, 12:13:34 AM
(Though with NP's early success, just MAYBE the CCIW is the top-to-bottom #1 conference THIS year! LONG way to go on that!)

I have no idea what you're talking about, Chuck. NPU has had no early success this season. The Vikings have been badly beaten by a Benedictine team that looks as though it may be facing a down year; they lost to CURF for the first time in four decades, and in the crackerbox to boot; they lost big to a wretched St. Norbert team; and they've won a pair of one-point home contests over a couple of teams that any CCIW squad should've turned into grease spots.

If you're arguing that NPU's performance to date is proof of the CCIW's relative prowess, then you're subverting your own argument. The Park has all sorts of excuses -- youth, injuries -- but the bottom line is that they are floundering.

Greg,

Well of course I'm ready to hand out NCAA bids - all the CCIW teams, plus CalTech, Maine Maritime, ...! ;D

As for NP, while I understand why YOU are disappointed (and I am too, a bit), I will be picking them for last in the CCIW - they have shown me ENOUGH in the pre-conference season that I don't think there is ANY other conference in the country (except MAYBE the WIAC) where I would pick them for dead last. (There are some conferences where I would even pick them for first, but I'd prefer not to name them!)

For your sake (especially) as well as the CCIW's, I'm really rooting for NP to get back in the 'mix' soon. As a Titan, I'm NOT wishing for you to totally recoup you 'glory years' ;D, but definitely not an automatic 8th place pick!

NP may not finish last in the WIAC. Has anyone seen UW-EC lately! :) :) :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 02, 2005, 08:17:05 PM

cp,

Good point! OK, I don't think NP would finish last in ANY conference except the CCIW!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 02, 2005, 10:26:11 PM

You haven't seen NPU play, Chuck. I have. Trust me, they are somewhere south of competent at the moment. I do not want to ponder whether or not they are worse than UWEC, or Wilmington (or whoever is going to inhabit the OAC basement this season), etc. All I am saying is that you cannot gauge the strength of the CCIW by NPU, because the Vikings are not guaranteed to hold up their end of the bargain if the league was to play a full eight-game challenge against another league.

Getting back to the Top 25, I'm going to see three of those teams tomorrow -- Illinois Wesleyan, Elmhurst, and Hanover. I've seen Elmhurst once already, and this season's IW team is of course essentially the same edition that Scott Trost has trotted out for the past two years, but this'll be my first look at a Hanover team in I don't know how long. It'll be a fun day of basketball tomorrow.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 02, 2005, 10:39:16 PM

Chuck, I too have seen NPU play, at least the UW-W scrimmage. They are not that bad. We can stink it up down here in the ASC sometimes. NPU would probably would finish in the mid-pack of both divisions just because the road trip to Foster and Kedzie would rank up there with the Louisiana College/Mississippi College or the Sul Ross State/Howard Payne trip! ;D

I feel for Gregory. Those 5 (and I counted all five of them) NCAA banners on the NPU gym certainly look good. He just happens to play inthe best top-to-bottom conference in the country.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 02, 2005, 11:27:24 PM

Boy, I hate it when somebody takes the other side in an argument and compliments my alma mater in the same breath. What's a guy to do? :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 02, 2005, 11:31:55 PM

I've seen Eau Claire play and they are not very good...and I saw them win (vs. LMC power Concordia)! EC got spanked by Stout by 37 at home. They scored just 35 points. Ouch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: unbearable on December 03, 2005, 11:13:12 AM

Smedindy,

Were you at Amherst for the sectionals last year? Potsdam didn't get schooled by Rochester. It was a 2 point game with 5 minutes to go. Free throws at the end stretched it to the final margin, as sometimes happens when you desparately try to lengthen the game. By the way, Rochester (from that notoriously weak East Region) did advance to the national championship game.

Potsdam vs. St. John Fisher was a schooling. Had the starters not been pulled in the middle of the second half, it could have been a 35-40 point win, instead of 24.

I think the (unwritten) point that retired12 was making was a preseason top 10 for Fisher and others receiving votes status for Potsdam seems incongruous, regardless of graduation losses.

Salem had a pretty dominant center, who was honorable mention All-American. Sometimes big guys can carry a team in D3. I'm sure the name Metzalaars might ring a bell. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 03, 2005, 11:36:22 AM

Though Smedindy said they got schooled by Rochester, it was Hoops Fan that first pointed out that Potsdam got smoked by them. So maybe you should also direct your frustrations to Hoops Fan! >:(

;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 03, 2005, 11:43:43 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 02, 2005, 11:27:24 PM
Boy, I hate it when somebody takes the other side in an argument and compliments my alma mater in the same breath. What's a guy to do? :D

Perhaps we can talk to the Chicago Transit Authority to make the southern terminus of the Brown Line extend to Pineville, LA. There is no "el" in Pineville, LA. :D :D

No-el, No-el, No-el, No-el...'tis the season. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 03, 2005, 03:08:38 PM

Final: #2 Wooster 83 Earlham 81 OT

Wooster doesn't play their best game and they escape from Richmond, IN with a close road win in overtime. LaRon Henry of Earlham hit a shot at the buzzer in regulation to send the game into overtime. Kyle Witucky, Wooster's senior point guard, hits the game winner at the buzzer in OT.

Wooster was led in scoring by Tim Vandervaart, James Cooper and Kyle Witucky today. Wooster is now 6-0 and will play Oberlin next at home on
12/7.

GO SCOTS!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 03, 2005, 05:55:21 PM

#1 Illinois Wesleyan 71 U. of Chicago 67

Titans also have a close road win today as they knock off Chicago. Game was tied 28-28 at the half.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: imderekpoe on December 03, 2005, 07:30:04 PM

Here's one Wooster fan that's happy to see IWU win today!! It seems that every time the Scots move to #1 their next game is against Wittenberg and they lose! At least they won't have the added pressure of that #1 ranking next Saturday night!

Go Scots!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 03, 2005, 09:26:51 PM

Final: Carnegie Mellon 72 #12 Rochester 71

Bad home loss for Rochester as CMU hits the winning shot with just over 2 seconds left in the game. Rochester had won 23 straight UAA games at home until today's loss. Rochester already has 2 home losses this season and will no doubt drop in the next national poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 03, 2005, 09:41:33 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on December 03, 2005, 09:26:51 PM
Final: Carnegie Mellon 72 #12 Rochester 71

Bad home loss for Rochester as CMU hits the winning shot with just over 2 seconds left in the game. Rochester had won 23 straight UAA games at home until today's loss. Rochester already has 2 home losses this season and will no doubt drop further in the next national poll.

'...drop further'? They ROSE 11 slots between the pre-season and week one polls!

With that much of a move, they strike me as a team that voters mostly have no clue about. If so, a loss (their second) AT HOME to a team receiving ZERO votes is probably a death knell - I suspect they will fall totally out of the poll next week (low 20s AT BEST).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: tommygun on December 04, 2005, 03:57:57 AM

I tried last year to convince people that the UAA was probably a little better league then people thought. To no avail despite the fact that the only team in the league to make the tournament made it to the final (only to finish two spots behind the team it beat in the semis in the final poll). I would again ask you to consider the possibility that a 6-0 CMU team with two first team all UAA players back, one of which is a player who was considered to be one of the top 10 players in the country by this web site before the 03-04 season might be a little better than the people who write into this sight might realize.

Again the UAA's non-conference record (before tonight) was 30-10 which compares very favorably to almost every other league. A Chicago team that was picked 6th in the pre-season polls lost to the unbeatable IWU by four. Rochester has a 2 point loss to Witt, and a 1 point loss to CMU (a team that won 19 games last year, and again has their two best players back). Keep in mind Rochester beat John Carroll by 30. I would ask you to consider the possibility that perhaps CMU should be receiving some votes in the top 25 poll instead of the fact that Rochester lost to a very good league opponent by 1 as some kind of season killer for them. If Wooster had lost to Earlham tonight would that mean they aren't good? Of course not. It's basketball, sometimes a good team loses. Rochester probably has a very good team. CMU also probably has a very good team. One of them had to lose. I will try once again to point out (probably to no avail) that the UAA is a much better league than people on this site realize.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fritzdis on December 04, 2005, 06:15:21 AM

tommygun,

I'm not saying you're wrong about how good CMU might be this year, but look at the teams they beat before Rochester:

Wash & Jeff: 0-5
Grove City: 1-3, their only win is over 0-4 (and 0-25 last year) Medaille
Oberlin: 0-7
Bethany: 4-3, this was CMU's only decent win, and it was at home by only 2 points
La Roche: 1-2, their only win is over 0-3 (and 4-21 last year) Hiram

There's nothing impressive about going 5-0 against that schedule. The victory over Rochester is a bit of a validation of their record, but I doubt it's enough to get them more than maybe a few votes. That said, I don't think the voters will push Rochester all the way out the top 25 because of a 1 point loss to a top conference opponent.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 04, 2005, 11:07:24 AM

I don't think anyone questions the top of the UAA year-in and year-out...I know I don't. Afterall, between Rochester, Wash U, and Chicago, I believe the conference has had a team in the D3hoops.com Top 10 just about every week since Pat Coleman's crew started doing a poll. Between following Illinois Wesleyan (which plays Chicago and Wash U every year) and making the annual trip to Salem where I saw Seth Hauben and Rochester, I know how good the UAA's champ has been every year...I'd say the UAA's best has been right there with the CCIW's best for the last 8 or 9 years.

The UAA isn't a very deep league most years though like the WIAC, CCIW, and OAC are pretty consistently. The last few years, there has been a significant falloff after the #1 team, and an even bigger falloff from #2 to #3. There has only been one UAA team in the D3hoops.com Top 25 poll...and it is not because the second best team gets overlooked in the poll, but rather because a second team doesn't seem to put together a strong Top 25 case over the course of the full schedule. Like Wash U in 2003-04...the UAA's second place team beat CCIW champ Illinois Wesleyan but lost to Webster of the SLIAC. Or last year's runner up Carnegie Mellon drops games to Westminster and Grove City. Now can UAA teams besides the champs knock off good teams? Absolutely - Chicago had a chance yesterday vs #1 IWU. But, again, they're prone to inconsistency. I think for a league to get that national respect as one of the best, it's gotta have 3 teams in the Top 25 discussion pretty regularly.

I'm not sure the Carnegie Mellon victory @ Rochester was a huge surprise. Afterall, as pointed out below, CMU returned two 1st Team all-conference players and Rochester lost a ton (Hauben, Gabe Perez, etc). My suspicion is that the UAA does not have one great team this year as the league has had lately, but rather a bunch of pretty even squads. I'll bet Carnegie Mellon, Rochester, Wash U, Chicago, and maybe another team play a lot of very close games against each other this season. I think it will be an enjoyable season for fans of a lot of UAA schools to follow...and for the rest of us looking in from the outside.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: tommygun on December 04, 2005, 11:16:27 AM

I don't necessarily disagree. But they pounded the "bad" teams in question. I believe the Wash & Jeff and G.C. (usually pretty good, apparently a little down this year) games are traditional games, and LaRoche is local for them as well. I'm simply saying that they proabably are better than people on this site realize. As I pointed out last year there are lots of teams that haven't played a ton of great teams to this point. Wooster has beaten one team with a winning record and almost lost to Earlham. Same thing, does that mean they don't deserve a high ranking? Of course not, you can only beat who you're playing that night. The problem with any pre-season poll is exactly this. Anyone assumed to be good has to prove that their not good. Any team assumed to not be good has a huge level of burden placed on them to prove they are good. Especially in d-III where your not on TV and people tend to see the couple of teams in the league they follow a national league like the UAA suffers in this setting.

The main point of my post from before is that if you drop Rochester almost out of the poll you are again doing a disservice to the UAA. It once again is a top league (I'm not saying the top league, just a top league,) and to simply say well Rochester isn't as good as last year so the league is down (which is exactly what people incorrectly said last year,) is a mistake. The voters wouldn't have no OAC or MIAA or other leagues of that ilk with no teams in the top 25. All evidence suggests the UAA is every bit as good as those leagues (again I'm not saying better.) Simply as good yet never get half the recognition these other quality leagues receive on this site.

The other problem is that when league play starts in a month it is very difficult for teams to move much because no matter what you do its only against league opponents. So if the perception is that the UAA is down then the teams can't ever have a good win because no matter who they beat it's a team that's not ranked, or not ranked very high. So remember that when Chicago beats some people at home this year, it's the same team that lost to IWU by four. That was all I was saying.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 04, 2005, 11:19:17 AM

I was at the Illinios Wesleyan/Chicago game yesterday. After the game I recalled that last year's national champion, UW-Stevens Point, had some trouble at the Ratner Center a year ago. Looking back at that boxcore, Chicago led the #1-ranked Pointers 29-20 at halftime...IWU was tied yesterday at 28. UW-SP's lead (once they got it) in the 2nd half was very similar to what IWU's was yesterday in the 2nd...the Pointers just didn't get that big push from Chicago in the final 3 minutes.

http://www.uwsp.edu/athletics/mbb/04-05/MBBGM-02.HTM

http://www.iwu.edu/~iwunews/sports/mbb2006/miwu5.htm

Mike McGrath is a good coach and he seems to prepare his team really well. These aren't the first two times he's given a great team a ballgame.

Chicago is a good team when they're making their 3's, as the Maroons did vs IWU connecting on 9 of 20 attempts. They'll probably be a very inconsistent team though, prone to nights like they had earlier this week at Wheaton, a team picked to finish in the in the bottom half of the CCIW this season. Chicago was 4-21 from beyond the arc in that game and was down 15-16 points most of the 2nd half.

The UAA gets another crack at Illinois Wesleyan Saturday as the Titans visit Wash U.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: tommygun on December 04, 2005, 11:43:01 AM

Titan Q the argument last year was the exact opposite. The league was deep but the top teams couldn't compete with the top teams in other leagues. This culminated with the absolute slap in the face Rochester received by being voted below a Calvin team it beat and had an almost identical record to. I'm not unreasonable I could certainly understand the argument with them being voted behind Trinity. If they had beaten Stevens Point would they have been voted sixth?

I'm simply saying the UAA fights an uphill battle on this site. When N.C. lost to Santa Clara at the beginning of last year were they not top 25 worthy? When Mich St. lost to Hawaii should that preclude them from being in the top 25 and out of the tournament? Of course not. Yet the losses you point out are exactly that, early losses by a couple of points to pretty good teams from weaker leagues at the very beginning of the year. If a team is from a league that the people on the site perceive to be good then things like this are largely overlooked, but if not then you are reminded forever about the one game that was lost as opposed to the overall excellant quality of play.

I'm getting a little long winded so I'll let it go. My points are all I heard last year was, "well I just think the UAA is down." "I just think Calvin is better than Rochester." When there was absolutely no hard evidence to support these claims (in fact to the contrary most of the evidence refuted these claims, see game played Rochester v. Calvin). There are very few teams that beat everybody all the time at any level in today's college basketball. You would be hard pressed to find a couple of teams in d-III that could go into Rochester, Wash U., Chicago, NYU, CMU, and even Brandeis and not come away with a couple of losses, especially given the travel and the two games in 36 hours.

I'm simply asking the people who vote to consider the possibility that the league which at least at the top of it (Roch, CMU, Wash, NYU) is devoid of these "bad losses," so far this year are possibly a little better than people think. Just remember when you talk about the top of the league if the coaches know anything (which they very well may not) Chicago is not at the top of the league this year. Again does that mean IWU wouldn't win the UAA, of course not. They probably would. It would just be a lot tougher than most people realize.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 04, 2005, 11:58:31 AM

Tommy, I agree with just about everything you've said. And yes, I do think the UAA "fights and uphill battle" in terms of perception, just as a lot of Division 1 conferences do.

The good news for conferences like the UAA, MWC, and others that feel this way is that there is really zero subjectivity left in the Division III tournament selection/seeding process. The tournament field is determined strictly by in-region records, Quality of Wins Index, and pretty much all black and white factors. UAA teams are on a level playing field with everyone else and the conference will have a chance to keep changing those perceptions on the court in March.

The uphill battle you speak of only affects polls, and polls like the D3hoops.com Top 25 really don't mean anything. The NCAA regional poll is the only one that matters.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 04, 2005, 12:53:47 PM

I am amused that there's so much crying about a loss dropping someone out of a poll that hasn't been voted on yet, let alone released.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 04, 2005, 01:37:26 PM

Pat, your Top 25 has arrived! It is the authoritative source of D3 prowess! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: tommygun on December 04, 2005, 01:37:51 PM

Pat that's totally fair. I just saw someone post how a bad loss for Rochester would probably knock them out of the poll, and it got my blood pressure up a bit.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PowerBall on December 04, 2005, 02:10:33 PM

Rochester gets a lot of pats on the back, (no pun intended) but is in the process of reloading. The Tartans may have wins over teams that have presently losing records but they've handled them decisively. Having attended several of the games I see were they have a killer instinct to put teams away and not let up as they have in the past. They deserve recognition and votes to the elite bracket of top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: retired12 on December 04, 2005, 08:34:51 PM

Well Potsdam is 5-0 after a 24 point win yesterday. Any thoughts on this weeks top 25 more specifically if Potsdam will be included. Also,I agree with the fact that the East region is generally a weak region but with any team getting (UofR) getting to the finals last year, they deserve a little credit.
As regards to the Potsdam UofR game it was a 2 point game with 3:30 to go and if Potsdam could have bought a shot who knows what the outcome would have been. Overall I think Potsdam deserves a little credit and at least a top 25 ranking. Any thoughts?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 04, 2005, 11:03:14 PM

Quote from: retired12 on December 04, 2005, 08:34:51 PM
Well Potsdam is 5-0 after a 24 point win yesterday. Any thoughts on this weeks top 25 more specifically if Potsdam will be included. Also,I agree with the fact that the East region is generally a weak region but with any team getting (UofR) getting to the finals last year, they deserve a little credit.
As regards to the Potsdam UofR game it was a 2 point game with 3:30 to go and if Potsdam could have bought a shot who knows what the outcome would have been. Overall I think Potsdam deserves a little credit and at least a top 25 ranking. Any thoughts?

I'm not a voter in the poll, but I love trying to psych it out, so here goes:

Jumping all the way from just 14 points to into the top 25 is unusual, but early-season polls are much more volatile than later ones. I'll take a stab that Potsdam WILL enter (though only at 24 or 25), and that Rochester will fall to the 20s (not sure whether low 20s and still in, or high 20s and not quite in).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 05, 2005, 10:50:31 AM

Here is comes; let's see if I can get this up before the poll actually comes out.

1. IWU (5-0) wins over St. Xavier (non-d3) and a close one at Chicago
2. Woo (6-0, 2-0) wins at Denison and at Earlham (OT)
3. Witt (5-0, 1-0) win over Denison
4. Amherst (4-0) wins over Springfield and Westfield State
5. Puget Sound (4-1, 2-0) wins at Lewis & Clark and Pacific
6. York (4-0, 1-0) win over Goucher
7. Oshkosh (2-2, 1-1) loss at Stevens Point, win at Superior
8. Hanover (4-2) loss at #22 Elmhurst
9. Albion (4-1) win over Manchester
10. WPI (7-0) wins at Lasell, Williams and against RIT
11. RMC (5-1, 3-0) loss at Lincoln, wins at Lynchburg, Wash & Lee, and Roanoke
12. Rochester (5-2, 0-1) win at St Lawrence, loss to Carnegie Mellon
13. GAC (5-0, 2-0) wins over Bethany Lutheran, Hamline and Concordia-Moorhead
14. Hope (6-0) wins over Wheaton (IL) and Carthage
15. Lawrence (5-0, 2-0) wins at Wisc Lutheran, Ill College and Knox
16. Mississippi College (5-1, 3-1) wins over Howard Payne and at Concordia-Austin, loss at MH-B
17. St. John Fisher (2-1) idle
18. Wartburg (4-1, 1-0) win over Luther
19. Catholic (5-1, 1-1) loss at Mary Washington, win over Marymount
20. Whitewater (3-2, 1-0) loss at Carroll, win at LaCrosse
21. JCU (4-1, 1-0) win over Wilmington
22. Elmhurst (3-2) loss at Platteville, win over #8 Hanover
23. Va Wesleyan (4-3, 2-1) losses at Salisbury and to Hampden-Sydney, wins at Roanoke and Wash & Lee
24. Ramapo (4-1, 2-1) wins over Kean and at Rutgers-Camden
25. Augustana (4-0) wins over St Ambrose (non-d3) and Simpson

This looks to be one of those years where the majority of the top 25 just never seems to work itself out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on December 05, 2005, 10:58:12 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 03, 2005, 11:43:43 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 02, 2005, 11:27:24 PM
Boy, I hate it when somebody takes the other side in an argument and compliments my alma mater in the same breath. What's a guy to do? :D

Perhaps we can talk to the Chicago Transit Authority to make the southern terminus of the Brown Line extend to Pineville, LA. There is no "el" in Pineville, LA. :D :D

No-el, No-el, No-el, No-el...'tis the season. ;)

I think Ralph was working on a new Egg Nog recipe. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 05, 2005, 10:59:32 AM

I expect to see Lincoln, Hamden-Sydney and Albright get in, although there could be a lot of mix-up as voters try to make sense out of all these teams beating each other up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njlincolnlion on December 05, 2005, 01:09:23 PM

Hoops Fan:

I have to believe, Lincoln will be ranked highter that RM-C, given the margin of victory the Lions had over the Yellow Jackets. Albright beat Lincoln by 1 on a buzzer beater, and they are still undefeated, so I would not be shocked to see them ahead of us.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 05, 2005, 01:19:05 PM

Albright seems to be a lock to get in and I would assume Lincoln is next, but after that its hard to tell because I don't know if there will be more than two teams drop out.

It's too early in the season to know whether the voters will just adjust things based on wins and losses or if it is early enough that a lot of them will do major shifting.

I just don't know.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 05, 2005, 01:32:44 PM

Anyone have any thoughts about UWSP breaking BACK into the top 25? They have only one loss, a road loss to Lakeland, who in turn has only one loss, to La Crosse, who in turn only has one loss, to Whitewater (who, as we know, has fallen twice early in the year).

Now, UWSP has their win over Oshkosh... but those with votes may think much less of Oshkosh after their two early season losses.

Whadda ya think?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 05, 2005, 01:37:08 PM

I think this week is more of a case of teams not falling out, rather than teams working their way in.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Spencer Beaty on December 05, 2005, 09:32:37 PM

6-0 and no love Murvul College has beaten everyone they have played and will play but they get no love cause they are in a no good conference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 05, 2005, 09:38:41 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 05, 2005, 01:19:05 PM

Albright seems to be a lock to get in and I would assume Lincoln is next, but after that its hard to tell because I don't know if there will be more than two teams drop out.

It's too early in the season to know whether the voters will just adjust things based on wins and losses or if it is early enough that a lot of them will do major shifting.

I just don't know.

My gut hunch is that we are in for several more weeks of unusual volatility (at least WITHIN the top 25; how many enter or leave may be no more than usual) - this is shaping up as a "who the hell knows" sort of season, though you are probably right about only two dropping out. Va Wesleyan is definitely gone, Whitewater is dubious, but Elmhurst is PROBABLY mostly unchanged with a loss AT a former top 25 team, then a win over #8.

I'm guessing Lincoln is definitely in, Potsdam is likely; beyond that, I have no clue.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 05, 2005, 11:22:55 PM

PS,

I don't see Point getting in. They only have 4 votes, a big drop from the preseason, 59 or so? That loss was to an LMC team. Lakeland looked good and yeah, they only have one loss to La Crosse, but Point won't crack the top 25. I think if they were undefeated, they would've cracked it last week since they were 26th in the preseason poll. Oshkosh was a big win considering they were #7, and I think if they sweep this week, they'll be in next week. But, one game at a time. Whitewater is usually pretty tough at home and that La Crosse team is looking solid thus far.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 05, 2005, 11:23:58 PM

Quote from: Spencer Beaty on December 05, 2005, 09:32:37 PM
6-0 and no love Murvul College has beaten everyone they have played and will play but they get no love cause they are in a no good conference.

I think there are something like 30 undefeated teams left. Are we supposed to rank all of them simply because they've beaten eeryone they've played. Come on.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 06, 2005, 09:02:51 AM

1    Illinois Wesleyan (25)    5-0    625    1
2    Wooster    6-0    588    2
3    Wittenberg    5-0    567    3
4    Amherst    4-0    517    4
5    Puget Sound    4-1    516    5
6    York (Pa.)    4-0    489    6
7    Albion    4-1    410    9
8    Hope    6-0    390    14
9    Lawrence    5-0    379    15
10    Worcester Polytech    7-0    375    10
11    Gustavus Adolphus    5-0    333    13
12    Randolph-Macon    5-1    257    11
13    Hanover    4-2    234    8
14    UW-Oshkosh    2-2    228    7
15    Wartburg    4-1    217    18
16    Rochester    5-2    177    12
17    Augustana    4-0    169    25
18    St. John Fisher    2-1    168    17
19    Albright    5-0    140    —
20    Elmhurst    3-2    131    22
21    Baldwin-Wallace    5-1    127    —
22    UW-Stout    5-1    118    —
23    Lincoln    7-1    115    —
24    Hampden-Sydney    5-0    110    —
25    Ramapo    4-1    108    24

Dropped out: No. 16 Mississippi College, No. 19 Catholic, No. 20 UW-Whitewater, No. 21 John Carroll, No. 23 Virginia Wesleyan

Others receiving votes: John Carroll 97, Maryville (Tenn.) 96, Catholic 86, Carnegie Mellon 79, Mississippi College 64, UW-Stevens Point 60, Ohio Northern 47, Transylvania 22, Potsdam State 19, Trinity (Texas) 15, Carroll 15, Widener 12, Rutgers-Newark 7, UW-Whitewater 4, St. Thomas 4, Mary Washington 4, Calvin 3, Hamilton 2, New Jersey City 1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 06, 2005, 09:05:40 AM

Murvul did get some love. They'll be in soon enough.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njlincolnlion on December 06, 2005, 09:18:22 AM

I know it's only the second week, but it's great to see Lincoln in the top 25 ;D . Thanks to all the voters, and I hope the Lions continue, the momentum.

Is there any way to find out what games were cancelled last night? Lincoln was suppose to play Richard Stockton at home, but I didn't see the game referenced in the "scoreboard".

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 06, 2005, 09:30:45 AM

Pat says Lincoln was snowed out. I'll take his word for it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njlincolnlion on December 06, 2005, 09:32:03 AM

Silly Me....Lincoln didn't play last night, I misread their schedule. ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njlincolnlion on December 06, 2005, 09:40:03 AM

Finally got it all sorted, Lincoln was scheduled to play Richard Stockton (Pat was right ), the game has been postphoned until 2/6/06. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 06, 2005, 12:04:03 PM

Quote from: njlincolnlion on December 06, 2005, 09:40:03 AM
Finally got it all sorted, Lincoln was scheduled to play Richard Stockton (Pat was right), the game has been postphoned until 2/6/06. :D

You were questioning Pat? ??? :o ;D

HOOPS FAN,

If you are going to post the Top 25, I'd appreciate it if you'd post it in TABLE format, it's easier to read! lol :D just kidding. (major sarcasm there). Does anyone realize how hard it is to format a table with this new program??? Wow. With some help, I figured out how to do it...and needless to say, I don't even put the WIAC pick em league in table format.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 06, 2005, 12:59:23 PM

The voters are in an even more volatile mood that I realized! In only two weeks, Hope and Lawrence have gone from 59 and 24 votes, respectively, to the top ten!

I am curious about the LACK of movement for Potsdam, though - despite being undefeated (with a win over Rochester), they still have basically the same paltry vote total they had pre-season. Any voters want to comment on what you DON'T like about them? :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 06, 2005, 01:33:16 PM

I'm pretty surprised to see Lawrence jump up even more this week. They did win two road games, but Knox and Ill. College are usually pretty horrible, so it's not like they beat Ripon and Carroll on the road. The teams that were around the 10-14 places basically stayed the same, while Larry U jumped from 15 to 9. Interesting. I think that the Vikings probably should've been ranked coming into the season, so I guess this is the voters making up for that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bj5485 on December 06, 2005, 01:36:40 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 06, 2005, 12:59:23 PM
The voters are in an even more volatile mood that I realized! In only two weeks, Hope and Lawrence have gone from 59 and 24 votes, respectively, to the top ten!

I am curious about the LACK of movement for Potsdam, though - despite being undefeated (with a win over Rochester), they still have basically the same paltry vote total they had pre-season. Any voters want to comment on what you DON'T like about them? :-\

Potsdam has not played Rochester this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bj5485 on December 06, 2005, 01:39:44 PM

It isn't really surprising that Potsdam hasn't moved much. When you consider what they lost via graduation and the fact that they have 10 new players including 8 freshman and that most voters haven't seen them play then they won't get much love without a long winning streak.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on December 06, 2005, 01:42:01 PM

Add to that the only decent team they have played so far is Wilkes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 06, 2005, 02:04:08 PM

My bad! :( I somehow got it into my head that they beat UR - how, I have no clue!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njlincolnlion on December 06, 2005, 02:12:11 PM

Old School:

You are so right, I don't know I was thinking about questioning Pat :-[ .

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on December 06, 2005, 02:44:05 PM

Nice to see the Great Lakes Region strongly represented! Four teams in the top 8, and BW cracks in at #21, and one could argue they have been under-rated so far this season. They have a win over #18 SJF and their only loss was to #7 Albion by 3 points.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 06, 2005, 05:01:03 PM

Hope #8

Yeah, I finally have something to talk about in here and not be clueless. ;D

Welcome back to the top 10 Hope.....first time since week 13 of 2004, which is much more recent than I thought.

yeah anyway.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 08, 2005, 03:37:59 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 04, 2005, 11:07:24 AM
I don't think anyone questions the top of the UAA year-in and year-out...I know I don't. Afterall, between Rochester, Wash U, and Chicago, I believe the conference has had a team in the D3hoops.com Top 10 just about every week since Pat Coleman's crew started doing a poll.

This post stuck in the back of my head since I first saw it, but I was on the road and not in a position to check out this assertion. Now that I'm resettled, I've had a chance to look at my rankings database and, as I anticipated, this claim is a bit overstated.

There was a time when the UAA was a top 10 regular. In the '02-'03 season, WashU was in the top 10 each week, and Rochester was there in 13 of the 15 polls. In fact, these two were ranked 1-2 for six straight weeks that season. The following year, Rochester was in the top 10 in every poll. WashU. was in the top 25 in two polls, but that was it.

That glory faded, however, last season. WashU wasn't ranked at all last year, and Rochester cracked the top 10 just three times (preseason, week 1, and final.) In a nine-week stretch (weeks 3-11), there was no UAA team anywhere in the top 25, and in week 9 no UAA team even received a single vote.

Rochester has been ranked in each of the '05-'06 polls, but has not cracked the top 10.

No other UAA team (including Chicago) has been in the top 25 at any point in the past 3+ seasons.

In summary, in the 50 most recent D3Hoops.com polls, stretching back to the '02-'03 preseason poll, there has been at least one UAA team in the top 10 34 times (68%), which may be solid representation but hardly amounts to "just about every week." Furthermore, in the past 17 polls (since '04-'05 week 2) the conference has been represented in the top 10 just once: Rochester at #4 in last year's final poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 08, 2005, 05:05:18 PM

David, I should have worded that better, but I do feel comfortable with the intent of my statement/post.

Chicago was a national power under Pat Cunningham in the late '90s (right about the time the D3hoops.com poll came out), making the 1998 Sweet 16 @ Platteville. Then in the early years of Mike McGrath's tenure Chicago was great...hosted a Sectional, made Elite 8 in 2001. In 2002 and 2005 Rochester was in Salem. Wash U was very good in 2001 and 2002, then rated #1 at times during the 2002-03 season.

The UAA has had at least one "national power" just about every year for the last few years. Had I just said that, it would have saved you some time today!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 08, 2005, 06:50:08 PM

Yeah, I understand what you were driving at, Q; I just want to make sure that the casual reader didn't take away an incorrect impression of what is verifiable fact. It's the lawyer in me, I guess. ::)

Hey, I see you're headed my way after Christmas. I guess I'll see you at Santa Barbara in a few weeks!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 08, 2005, 06:58:51 PM

Are you in California now?? Drop me an e-mail with the scoop...

bobquill@aol.com

Hope you can make the Tom Byron Classic at Westmont. As I said on Hoopsville this week, "Where but Division III can you have #1 (IWU) vs #5 (Puget Sound) and have just 20 people in the stands?!"

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 08, 2005, 08:10:16 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 08, 2005, 06:58:51 PMAs I said on Hoopsville this week, "Where but Division III can you have #1 (IWU) vs #5 (Puget Sound) and have just 20 people in the stands?!"

Heh. That's a good line, Bob.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on December 08, 2005, 09:05:36 PM

Everyone knows the best parties are in California! 8) ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Spencer Beaty on December 08, 2005, 09:13:22 PM

7-0 and still no love MURVUL college in maryville tennesee deserves a spot on the top 25 not just also recieving votes

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 08, 2005, 09:20:50 PM

Well, we only vote once a week, so the 7-0 Maryville hasn't even been up for a vote yet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 08, 2005, 11:21:07 PM

QuoteTom Byron Classic at Westmont

Oh, please tell me this isn't named for the person who popped into my head immediately.

/was a college student in the 80's.
//watched certain 'movies' while a college student in the 80's
///does not have a purge function on his memory

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 09, 2005, 01:15:23 AM

Warning: Do not Google to find out what the heck Smedindy is talking about. :o

Scott, my sense of humor is sufficiently warped enough for me to get a bit of a laugh out of the fact that a Christian college hosts a basketball tournament called the Tom Byron Classic. In fact, just reading the words "Tom Byron Classic" now induces a constant series of chuckles.

Westmont's head coach in the sixties and early seventies was a guy by the name of Tom Byron. He's presumably the namesake of the tournament. And I feel fairly certain in guessing that it's not the same Tom Byron who appeared in those "certain 'movies'" that you saw in your reckless youth. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 09, 2005, 01:22:44 AM

I guess the question we must ask now is, how did this immediately pop into smeds' head? Malfunctioning purge function notwithstanding, I guess he left enough of an impression that he, um, sticks out in your memory. :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 09, 2005, 01:33:54 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 09, 2005, 01:22:44 AM
I guess the question we must ask now is, how did this immediately pop into smeds' head? Malfunctioning purge function notwithstanding, I guess he left enough of an impression that he, um, sticks out in your memory. :P

... and thus commences the First Annual D3hoops.com Tom Byron Classic Double Entendre Festival. ::)

This is going to ruin April's week -- especially when you consider that this event at Westmont will be one of the few interesting experiences involving D3 teams that she's likely to witness in SoCal this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 09, 2005, 01:57:27 AM

Don't worry, April's going to be hanging out back east that week and will miss the Tom Byron Classic. According to Q's post, the thrust of which is that the Classic won't be well-attended, it will be just Q, me, and 18 others who will be coming.

::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on December 09, 2005, 02:44:45 AM

I freeking love you guys :-*

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

On the plus side, I get to see Wheaton play Whittier :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 09, 2005, 03:30:20 AM

Too bad that you'll probably be the only Wheaton fan at the Wheaton @ Whittier game. If Whittier was coming to Wheaton I'd probably see if I could round up all the old Richard Nixon masks we used to wear at North Park back when Bill Warden was coaching North Central and he'd bring his Cardinals into the crackerbox. I don't think there'd be anything wrong in letting the Wheaton football team borrow them for a game.

(The 37th president of the United States was an alumnus of Whittier, and Warden bears a striking resemblance to him.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 09, 2005, 04:59:08 AM

Speaking of Wheaton, April...

I just got back from the midnight showing in Green Bay of The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe.

Apparently, Wheaton College has a whole room full of stuff in regards to C.S. Lewis and the Christian Allegory-type stuff in movies...or something like that. I was reading an article in the U.S.A. Today (or was it the Milwaukee Journal?) about the movie and it quoted some professor at Wheaton. Guess that made me think of you...not that I need a reason. (that sounded really bad, didn't it?) ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 09, 2005, 05:58:01 AM

Quote from: Old School on December 09, 2005, 04:59:08 AM
Speaking of Wheaton, April...

I just got back from the midnight showing in Green Bay of The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe.

Apparently, Wheaton College has a whole room full of stuff in regards to C.S. Lewis and the Christian Allegory-type stuff in movies...or something like that. I was reading an article in the U.S.A. Today (or was it the Milwaukee Journal?) about the movie and it quoted some professor at Wheaton. Guess that made me think of you...not that I need a reason. (that sounded really bad, didn't it?) ;)

That's the Marion Wade Collection. It contains C.S. Lewis's old wardrobe, which has a rather whimsical do-not-touch sign next to it that warns that Wheaton College is not responsible if you climb into the wardrobe and disappear. The Wade Collection also contains the writing desk at which J.R.R. Tolkien penned Lord Of The Rings.

The Wade Collection was a featured stop on my tour when I visited Wheaton as a high-school senior and prospective English major. My student tour guide apparently thought that the possibility of having such proximity to this literary reliquary would sway me into choosing Wheaton over some other college, as though Lewis's dusty old coat closet and Tolkien's desk could somehow make me a better writer through osmosis. Frankly, I was a lot more impressed by the giant stuffed mastodon Wheaton had in their science building. In fact, I kept pushing "Mastodons" as the unique and logical choice when Wheaton went about changing the nickname of its sports teams a few years ago. I still like "Mastodons" about 1000x more than "Thunder" ... but I'm not of the tribe of orange and blue, so why should they care what I think?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 09, 2005, 08:45:13 AM

Ah, but Indiana - Purdue Fort Wayne (IPFW for short) are already the Fighting Mastodons.

I wonder how much fight are in extinct animals, though.

I looked on the Westmont web site and I am relieved. Whew! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 09, 2005, 08:57:00 AM

IWU last played in the Westmont College tourney in 2001-02, Scott Trost's first year at IWU. It was the first year I was doing radio for WJBC and we were positioned at one of those temporary-type press tables right in the middle of the bleachers (much like the broadcast location at Elmhurst for any CCIW fans). During the Alberta (Canada) game , it was so empty and quiet in the gym, I remember Seth Hubbard at the FT line with the ball in his hand, preparing to start his pre-FT routine, looking over a me (as I'm doing some sort of color commentary) as if to say, "Could ya keep it down...I'm shooting a FT here." Literally, every player on the bench and on the floor could hear ever second of play-by-play/commentary...to be honest, it made calling the game kind of challenging. "A very careless pass by Luke Kasten..." [Kasten looks over]

IWU never played the host in the tournament that year, so the game vs Alberta (which ended up not even counting as a real game...but that's another story) and the game vs St. Xavier were both in front of about 20 people...just the 20 traveling IWU parents/fans. This year, IWU will have a pretty good contingent in Santa Barbara. The parents of all of the guys in the rotation make just about every road trip. There is also a group of fans that has started making the holiday trip each year. And I know there are some IWU alums in California that are planning to make it this year. Seeing IWU play in an empty gym was just very odd, as the Titans travel so well on the road just about everywhere.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 09, 2005, 09:09:13 AM

I am looking forward to that IWU vs Puget Sound game. Most teams work so hard to slow the Titans down and make it into a halfcourt 65-63 type game. (Hanover and Trinity-Tx really did this well in recent years.) Puget Sound is not Grinnell, but they are really up-tempo. The loggers are averaging 91 points per game after averaging 93.3 last year. They take an average of 70 FG per game...to put that into perspective, IWU averages 53 FGA per game. Puget Sound's opponents only average 54 attempts per game. Quite an advantage to take 16 more shots than your opponent every time out! Puget Sound opponents average 31 turnovers per game...opponent assist to turnover ratio is .43 to 1, which is as low as I can recall seeing. A really good number there - a sign that you're the type of team that makes it difficult for the opposition to run their stuff - is about .85 to 1. I remember Hampden-Sydney having a very scary number in 2002-03 when IWU faced them...but it wasn't .43.

http://www2.ups.edu/athletics/mbasketball/teamstat.htm

Grinnell takes 99 shots per game...they force 29 turnovers...opponent A:TO ratio is .95 to 1. I've never seen Puget Sound play, but I think their style is much different than Grinnell's. I've heard people claim that Puget Sound runs some type of "modified Grinnell system", but I suspect it is a totally different style of up-tempo play.

What IWU does best is run the floor...it will be fun to see someone let them do that for once.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 09, 2005, 12:09:29 PM

After seeing Puget Sound the last two years against Stevens Point, the key to beating UPS is not allowing the Loggers to force you to make too many mistakes. UPS forced 14 UWSP turnovers in both games. The times when UPS was making their runs was when the press was causing turnovers. There was a point in the second half two years ago when UWSP went from being up 20 to being up just 7, with 7 minutes to go in the game. Point helped this cause by missing 7 of their first 10 baskets (5 of those I believe were fairly uncontested lay-ups). Point didn't help their cause, and Puget Sound took advantage.

The style that UPS has plays is definately an uptempo game. They press with 4 players in the backcourt and one at half court. They double the ball off the inbound and take away the first pass. The remaining man the last two years has been very quick and athletic, playing safety, but going after the over-the-top pass, and he got it a few times.

Offensively, UPS plays a spread offense, 4 out, 1 in, and they rely very much on dribble penetration to get their offensive action moving. They have no qualms about tearing a defense that is spread too thin to shreads with dribble drives (and, especially last season, Forward Zach McVey finished well when the his defender had to help on the drive). If a team cuts off the penetration, then they kick to open shooters (and these guys just let 'er RIP). They will take NBA distance 3 pointers without qualms. Curtiss Chase has that range and won't hesitate to shoot it.

Like Grinnell, they hit the offensive boards hard. Two years ago, they shot 37 3's and had 13 offensive rebounds. They still lost by 21. Last year, they shot 26 and seemed to play a BIT more conventionally. They shot 26 3's and grabbed 6 offensive boards. They're relentless on crashing, and pick up right away, as soon as the ball goes through the hoop.

Point beat UPS the last two seasons in a couple of ways. First, they took what UPS MADE them take. This included taking shots early in the shot clock that are decent shots (especially lay-ups that were open because UPS doubled on the half court as well). Point also was able to throw over the top and get 2 on 1 situations against the UPS half court defender. Nick Bennett was 13/17 two years ago, for 37 points. Last year, they took away the over-the-top pass better... but UWSP was able to run their half court motion. Eric Maus was 7/7 from the field for 18, Jason Kalsow was 6/7 for 16.

This game will test IWU's ball handlers. And EVERYONE will have to handle the ball, even in the full court. It just depends where the double comes from and who is open. Jason Kalsow had 5 turnovers two years ago, as did Eric Maus had 6 last year. But, because UPS doubles so much, there are LOTS of chances for assists. Nick Bennett had 6 assists (most off 2 on 1 situations) two years ago and Jason Kalsow had 7 last year (most to Eric Maus, who was open under the basket b/c of the doubleteam).

In both games, the defense of the Pointers really won the game for UWSP. They played quite a bit of 3-2 zone, which stuck a defender right in the gap in which the UPS ball-handlers were trying to penetrate. Two years ago, Neil Krajnik had 7 steals, the team had 13, and caused 16 UPS TO's. Last year, Point got 6 steals and caused 11 TO's.

2003-2004 box score (http://www.uwsp.edu/athletics/mbb/03-04/mbbgm-31.htm)
2004-2005 box score (http://www.uwsp.edu/athletics/mbb/04-05/sect02.htm)

Much has been said about IWU's size. This will be to their advantage. Looking at their roster, it looks like UPS has added some size (2 freshmen at 6'7", one at 6'5" and one at 6'4"). What they lack in size, they try to make up for in quickness, and against most teams they can do this. If IWU can see and pass over the double team, they will always be one step ahead of the Logger defense, and this will lead to easy baskets.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 09, 2005, 12:21:54 PM

Point, outstanding analysis of UPS.

Titan Q, I am looking forward to your analysis.

I would appreciate a knowledgeable poster to contrast UPS and Grinnell.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 09, 2005, 12:34:59 PM

FWIW, PointSpecial's description of UPS' offensive scheme sounded like he was describing Wooster. The Scots play a more conventional man defense (no press). Just thought you'd like to know.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 09, 2005, 01:57:21 PM

Head over to the MWC page and talk to jeffp. He's the Grinnell guru over there.

I've seen both play. I was at the PS/Point game last year and I've seen Grinnell play at Lawrence and at Ripon. jeffp doesn't like me too much because I basically don't have great things to say about Grinnell. But, we've kissed and made up and we both understand we all have our own opinions! :P

In my opinion, Grinnell is more of a helter skelter team. It doesn't really look like they have a "plan". They go out and pressure like crazy and then when they do have the ball, they penatrate and actually pass up open 2's to throw it out and launch crazy 3's. I have yet to see Grinnell play this year. In the Ripon game (the 2nd Grinnell game I saw), they were a little more controlled, but overall, they played the same way.

Puget Sound, on the other hand, looked like they knew what they were supposed to do. Both teams pressure like crazy, but PS was more disciplined. Offensively, PS actually used their big man and he scored pretty well, if I remember, as opposed to Grinnell, who basically used their big man as a pivot to find the 3-pt. shot.

As Point Special said, ball-handling is the key.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 09, 2005, 01:59:01 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 09, 2005, 12:34:59 PM
FWIW, PointSpecial's description of UPS' offensive scheme sounded like he was describing Wooster. The Scots play a more conventional man defense (no press). Just thought you'd like to know.

I actually didn't like to know. lol. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 09, 2005, 07:56:27 PM

OS, UPS's use of their big man was a change from two years ago. He actually was pretty successful (6/11, 19 points) against Point last year after not taking a shot the year before. If I remember correctly, it appeared that he'd spent some time in the weight room, and he was definately a force.

OS's comments about the differences between Grinnell and UPS are pretty appropriate, I think. I've only seen Grinnell on ESPN, but from almost every account I've read about them, they don't seem to use that many principles that could be interpreted as "good sound basketball." It's cased many of the "System" (or Offenestration, I'm trying out a new name!)'s critics to say that it isn't really basketball, or not GOOD basketball, at least.

UPS definately has enough sound aspects in their game that it can, and should be dubbed as "good sound basketball." Now, it may be good sound ball on steroids, but...

They've just got the game on fast forward. They try and score in bunches, but they're using generally sound methods to accomplish this.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 09, 2005, 08:33:22 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on December 09, 2005, 07:56:27 PM
OS, UPS's use of their big man was a change from two years ago. He actually was pretty successful (6/11, 19 points) against Point last year after not taking a shot the year before. If I remember correctly, it appeared that he'd spent some time in the weight room, and he was definately a force.

OS's comments about the differences between Grinnell and UPS are pretty appropriate, I think. I've only seen Grinnell on ESPN, but from almost every account I've read about them, they don't seem to use that many principles that could be interpreted as "good sound basketball." It's cased many of the "System" (or Offenestration, I'm trying out a new name!)'s critics to say that it isn't really basketball, or not GOOD basketball, at least.

UPS definately has enough sound aspects in their game that it can, and should be dubbed as "good sound basketball." Now, it may be good sound ball on steroids, but...

They've just got the game on fast forward. They try and score in bunches, but they're using generally sound methods to accomplish this.

In discussing Puget Sound I noted that you used the adjective 'sound' four times - good job! Applause to you!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 09, 2005, 11:25:58 PM

If a #5 team beats a #1 team in front of 20 people, does it make a sound?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on December 09, 2005, 11:27:23 PM

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 09, 2005, 11:44:03 PM

Quote from: sac on December 09, 2005, 11:25:58 PM
If a #5 team beats a #1 team in front of 20 people, does it make a sound?

It depends how many of those 20 fans are fans of the #5 team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 10, 2005, 12:50:24 AM

Quote from: sac on December 09, 2005, 11:25:58 PM
If a #5 team beats a #1 team in front of 20 people, does it make a sound?

The scenario described AIN'T gonna happen for 3 reasons:

1. There ain't gonna be 20 people - IWU alone will bring more than that.

2. #1 (IWU) ain't gonna lose to #5 (USP).

3. Mr. Ypsi loves saying 'ain't gonna' and would have to stop if #1 or #2 happened. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 10, 2005, 01:23:27 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 10, 2005, 12:50:24 AM
2. #1 (IWU) ain't gonna lose to #5 (USP).

Univ. of Sound de Puget? :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Loggerville on December 10, 2005, 03:26:06 PM

Just a comment on crowd size for the IWU v. UPS game....sounds like IWU will travel well, and I would suspect the Loggers will also have a nice following. Senior guard Chase Curtiss is from Santa Cruz, former UPS stand-out Matt Glynn grew-up in the area, and Coach Bridgeland use to run the UCSC program and has ties to the area. I would guess these factors alone will draw more than 20 folks out for some fine hoops on the 29th.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 10, 2005, 05:32:25 PM

Quote from: Old School on December 10, 2005, 01:23:27 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 10, 2005, 12:50:24 AM
2. #1 (IWU) ain't gonna lose to #5 (USP).

Univ. of Sound de Puget? :D

Sorry 'bout that! Somehow typing UPS doesn't seem right unless I'm sending a package! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: titanfan on December 10, 2005, 05:43:56 PM

Illinois Wesleyan beat Wash U. today 83-56. A nice win on the road for the number one ranked Titans.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 10, 2005, 06:28:53 PM

I have to root for anyone who once coached the Banana Slugs.......go loggers!

#8 Hope 82 Aquinas (NAIA II) 75

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 10, 2005, 10:48:19 PM

Final: #2 Wooster 86 #3 Wittenberg 83

In case anyone missed the story on the home page :), Wooster won the big game tonight. Witt shot 52% from the floor, made 22 of 23 from the charity stripe and still lost this game.

Wooster won because they forced 15 Witt turnovers to only 7 for the Scots and Wooster also made 11 three pointers to only 3 for Witt. Wooster's guards pressured Witt all night and were the difference in this game.

Great game by both teams and the second half had many lead changes. Finally, James Cooper hit a three pointer from 25 feet with just 4 seconds left to ice the win. Tom Port led Wooster with 25 points and Daniel Russ had 33 points for Witt.

Witt should remain in the Top 5 IMO because they played a great game and easily could have won this battle.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on December 10, 2005, 10:51:13 PM

Ramapo will probably drop out of the top 25 after losing tonight to NJCU 98-78. NJCU should go from getting vote to getting votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 10, 2005, 11:12:04 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on December 10, 2005, 10:48:19 PM
Final: #2 Wooster 86 #3 Wittenberg

...83.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 12, 2005, 01:11:20 AM

Former #2 Oshkosh dropped their 3rd game this season and 2nd in the WIAC, losing to Stout at Kolf. They'll probably drop out too.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: True Basketball Fan on December 12, 2005, 08:26:54 AM

North Central might pick up some votes this week. They could crack the TOP 25 by the end of this month. The only game I see that is difficult is @ Franklin on Dec. 28. If they win that one, that would most likely put a 4th CCIW team (only 8 teams in conference) in the TOP 25. WOW!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 12, 2005, 09:22:13 AM

Has anyone seen the keys to the Stout bandwagon? I think I left them in here last February.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 12, 2005, 10:18:10 AM

1. IWU (6-0) win at WashU
2. Woo (8-0, 4-0) wins over Oberlin and #3 Wittenberg
3. Witt (6-1, 1-1) win at Cedarville, loss at #2 Wooster
4. Amherst (6-0) wins over WNEC and Worcester State
5. Puget Sound (4-1, 2-0) idle
6. York (5-1, 1-1) win at #19 Albright, loss at Salisbury
7. Albion (5-1) win at Spring Arbor
8. Hope (9-0) wins over Madonna, Aquinas and at Trinity Christian (bad week for Catholicism, I guess)
9. Lawrence (6-0, 2-0) win at Carthage
10. WPI (9-0) close win at Endicott (61-60) and a win at Roger Williams
11. GAC (6-1, 2-1) loss to St Thomas, win over MN-Morris
12. R-MC (6-1, 4-0) win over Eastern Mennonite
13. Hanover (6-2) wins over Earlham and Rose-Hulman
14. Oshkosh (3-3, 1-2) win at St Norbert, loss to #22 Stout
15. Wartburg (6-1, 1-0) wins at Grinnell and over Ashford
16. Rochester (6-2, 0-1) win at Hobart
17. Augustana (7-0) wins at Rockford, Coe and Concordia (IL)
18. St John Fisher (4-1) wins at Fredonia and Geneso
19. Albright (5-2, 2-0) losses to #6 York and at DeSales
20. Elmhurst (5-2) wins at Kalamazoo and to Rockford
21. Baldwin-Wallace (6-1, 1-0) win over Muskingum
22. Stout (7-1, 4-0) wins at Superior and at #14 Oshkosh
23. Lincoln (7-1) idle
24. Hamden-Sydney (6-0, 3-0) win over Lynchburg
25. Ramapo (5-2, 3-2) win at Montclair, loss at NJ City

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 12, 2005, 10:22:35 AM

I would assume we'll lose Ramapo and maybe Albright. York and DeSales are no slouches, but you never know. Also, Oshkosh may be out as well, although that's a long way to drop. I expect the top five to stay the same, although Witt might drop a little, for some unknown reason.

JCU won this week, so they are prime candidate to enter. I think St Thomas should get some votes, although I don't know if it will be enough. Maryville had a big win over Transy. I think Mellon deserves a spot as well.

It's going to be real tough to figure out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 12, 2005, 11:26:47 AM

And we'll probably get the requisite post saying Maryville is being disrespected. I don't think they'll move up yet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 12, 2005, 12:50:28 PM

Umm, only two teams in the bottom 10 of the Top 25 lost. So it will be tough for a lot of teams to get in.

I think I'll change my mind on Oshkosh. That would be a pretty big drop for them considering they did lose to a ranked opponent and it was by a 3-pter at the buzzer. I'll keep them in, barely.

I thought Whitewater might crack the Top 25, but I've since thought otherwise, even though they beat Point and Superior.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bouttime on December 12, 2005, 01:05:23 PM

What are people's feelings about Carnegie Mellon getting into the top 25 this week?

They have a 9-0 record with quality wins against Bethany and then Union this past weekend. They got some votes last week and hopefully enough to get in this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bouttime on December 12, 2005, 01:23:43 PM

Also how could I forget the Tartan's huge win at Rochester?!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on December 12, 2005, 01:25:17 PM

bouttime - I see you are new to D3hoops, and likely a CMU fan, and as I am a former Pittsburgher, from way back - I'll give you my 2 cents worth. CMU will slowly climb as they continue to win. The win over Bethany means little - Bethany is not doing as well as they did last year, and with the way they failed in the tourney last season, have received little recognition as being a quality opponent. The win AT Union, I personally think, was a QUALITY win, one that should earn CMU additional votes. Having gone to RPI myself, with UNION the big rival, I know that Union is year in year out a solid program, and tough to beat at home after a 500 mile road trip. Wonder why CMU didn't play RPI up there rather than Skidmore (Mike Griffin, the RPI coach is a former Pittsburgher) .
A loss to Princeton (my assumption) shouldn't hurt CMU's quest - what things will really come down to is how CMU performs agianst the traditional UAA powers such as Wash U, Rochester, and NYU

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bouttime on December 12, 2005, 01:35:59 PM

The weekend with Skidmore and Union was set up as a home and home series with CMU and W & J. Skidmore and Union came to Pittsburgh last year and this year was up in New York. The Union coach was the one who organized it and Im not too sure of the future of the teams playing again.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 12, 2005, 01:43:56 PM

Mellon already beat Rochester; I think they deserve a spot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 12, 2005, 01:54:39 PM

bouttime, I believe that you need four more fans shouting "We perceive a great degree of disrespect amongst the participants of this message board!" to get to the Top 25. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bouttime on December 12, 2005, 05:57:53 PM

I feel like the Tartans past history as a time might be stuck in the minds of the pollsters as opposed to the great basketball that they are playing this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 12, 2005, 10:20:45 PM

New Top 25 D3Hoops poll is out this evening.

I want to thank the Top 25 voters for not penalizing #3 Wittenberg on their close road loss to #2 Wooster. The Tigers played a great game at Wooster and could easily have won the game.

Top 5 teams are unchanged this week with Witt still at #3. York fell from 6 to #10 this week. Wooster and Amherst each got one #1 vote this week with the remaining 23 going to IWU.

Three new teams in the Top 25 this week are #22 Maryville, #23 Carnegie Mellon and #24 John Carroll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njlincolnlion on December 12, 2005, 11:16:56 PM

Ugh :'(. Lincoln lost tonight to Wilkes (at Wilkes) 107-99 in OT. Myricks had 41. Hopefully successfull showings this weekend will keep the Lions in the top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on December 13, 2005, 02:09:57 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 12, 2005, 01:43:56 PM

Mellon already beat Rochester; I think they deserve a spot.

anyone who beats rochester deserves a spot in my book :D ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on December 13, 2005, 06:58:49 AM

Anyone else surprised to see GAC fall from 11 all the way out of the top 25? I know that the loss to St. Thomas doesn't "look good", but they are "#26" and there are others in the poll with "bad losses" - some of them with even more than 1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bamm on December 13, 2005, 08:25:05 AM

Randolph-Macon is hosting a nice early season tourney this weekend, as njlincolnlion mentioned, with #11 R-M, #17 Lincoln, #20 St. John Fisher, and 6-1 Lake Erie playing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 13, 2005, 09:12:22 AM

Not suprised on GAC at all. I think the voters went of rep; I've been hearing how the Tommies are the only decent team in the conference this year since pre-season. I think that had an impact.

Also, you gotta expect Lincoln is going to lose a few of these road games, even to teams they shouldn't lose to; the schedule is just so grueling.

Here's the new top 25:

1    Illinois Wesleyan (23)    6-0    623    1
2    Wooster (1)    8-0    598    2
3    Wittenberg    6-1    543    3
4    Amherst (1)    6-0    537    4
5    Puget Sound    4-1    496    5
6    Albion    5-1    462    7
7    Hope    9-0    457    8
8    Lawrence    6-0    435    9
9    Worcester Polytech    9-0    393    10
10    York (Pa.)    5-1    389    6
11    Randolph-Macon    6-1    293    12
12    UW-Stout    7-1    274    22
13    Augustana    7-0    271    17
14    Hanover    6-2    251    13
15    Wartburg    6-1    245    15
16    Elmhurst    5-2    199    20
17    Lincoln    7-1    185    23
18    Baldwin-Wallace    6-1    180    21
19    Rochester    6-2    174    16
20    St. John Fisher    4-1    171    18
21    Hampden-Sydney    6-0    125    24
22    Maryville (Tenn.)    8-0    120    —
23    Carnegie Mellon    9-0    114    —
24    John Carroll    6-1    108    —
25    UW-Oshkosh    3-3    69    14

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on December 13, 2005, 09:12:40 AM

RMC's tournament looks to be among the really stong attractions coming up on the schedule. While it may not have looked to be quite as rough a set of pairing when it was scheduled, it now has 4 of the top 50 or so teams in the nation and 3 of the top 20.

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 13, 2005, 09:15:45 AM

What's odd is the two voters who went away from IWU, granted other teams are good, but a consensus #1 usually deserves the benefit of the doubt, at least until they lose.

It's also odd that the Tommies didn't get in after GAC fell all the way out. I would have thought one of them would remain, but the points for those last few teams is so low, almost anything could happen.

That R-MC tournament will probably have a lot of implications for the poll next week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on December 13, 2005, 10:20:07 AM

I noticed Ohio Northern almost craked into the top 25 this week (#28). They have been very impressive early on in the season. They have been winning by an average margin of almost 20 ppg and their only margin of victory in single digits was their 1st game of the season against DePauw (8 points). Granted, they haven't really played anybody.... Yet!! That will change dramitically in the next week! Starting tomorrow when they host #18 Baldwin Wallace. That is followed up by a road trip to Cleveland to take on John Carroll who is back in the top 25 at #24. And, as if that wasn't enough, they will travel to take on #3 Wittenberg one week from tonight. If we didn't have a grasp on just how good the Polar Bears are before this week, we should have a very good idea by this time next week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on December 13, 2005, 10:35:59 AM

Ramapo really dropped down from 25 to a mythical 38. I expected to see them drop but not that much. Only 12 votes this week, I don't know how many they had last week on the preseason poll is showing in the archives.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 13, 2005, 12:06:35 PM

I think a lot of their votes were because of the decent showing last year and the presumed need for a NJAC team in the top 25. Maybe they just realized that it probably wasn't as necessary as they thought.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 13, 2005, 12:09:09 PM

LAST WEEK'S TOP 25 (http://d3hoops.com/top25/06/week2.htm)

This should help ya Knightstalker. All I did was change the web address. You're right, it's not listed in the archives.

Here's the new top 25: last week's point total in (...) Last row is last week's position

1    Illinois Wesleyan-623 (625)   1
2    Wooster-598 (588)   2
3    Wittenberg-543 (567)   3
4    Amherst-537 (517)   4
5    Puget Sound-496 (516)   5
6    Albion-462 (410)   7
7    Hope-457 (390)   8
8    Lawrence-435 (379)   9
9    Worcester Polytech-393 (375)    10
10    York (Pa.)-389 (489)    6
11    Randolph-Macon-293 (257)   12
12    UW-Stout-274 (118)   22
13    Augustana-271 (169)   17
14    Hanover-251 (234)   13
15    Wartburg-245 (217)   15
16    Elmhurst-199 (131)   20
17    Lincoln-185 (115)   23
18    Baldwin-Wallace-180 (127)   21
19    Rochester-174 (177)    16
20    St. John Fisher-171 (168)    18
21    Hampden-Sydney-125 (110)   24
22    Maryville (Tenn.)-120 (96)   [27]
23    Carnegie Mellon-114 (79)   [29]
24    John Carroll-108 (97)   [26]
25    UW-Oshkosh-69 (228)    14

[27] GAC-64 (333) 11
[32]Albright-20 (140) 19
[38] Ramapo-12 (108) 25

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 13, 2005, 12:48:21 PM

Added those links to the sidebar.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 13, 2005, 01:06:15 PM

Ummm, Amherst gets a first place vote. They've won all their games, but only one against an opponent with a winning record. Interesting. :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 13, 2005, 03:49:47 PM

I don't question Amherst or Wooster getting first consideration - they sound like excellent teams. I do kind of question what would have happened in the past 7 days for someone to make the switch from Illinois Wesleyan.

* On Saturday IWU won by 27 points @ Wash U (now 6-3) - a pretty solid team.

* Wooster beat 0-10 Oberlin by 59 and of course won by 3 at home vs #3 Wittenberg.

* Amherst beat 2-6 Western New England by 21, 2-4 Worchester State by 29, and 2-4 Emmanuel by 30 (all 3 at home).

Again, not questioning Wooster or Amherst as #1 teams, but just not sure how you decide IWU is the #1 team when you vote on Monday 12/5 and change on the Monday 12/12 ballot, based on what happened during the voting period.

In my opinion, the voters owe a little extra duty of care with those #1's...I'd really have to have solid evidence to make a switch there from one week to the next.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 13, 2005, 04:02:06 PM

Clearly Q, the Eastern bias in the poll is showing through. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 13, 2005, 04:04:47 PM

Maybe someone mis-placed their previous ballot and just, uh, forgot who he put at #1 and just winged it??? ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 13, 2005, 04:21:21 PM

Sac, the folks in California probably think IWU (Bloomington, Illinois) is #1 due to "eastern bias"!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 13, 2005, 04:30:32 PM

I had to lose a voter because he couldn't make the deadline. The new voter had a different opinion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on December 13, 2005, 04:43:20 PM

Oh sure, Pat - give us the real scoop - and have it make sense - that's no fun ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 13, 2005, 04:56:47 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 13, 2005, 04:30:32 PM
I had to lose a voter because he couldn't make the deadline. The new voter had a different opinion.

OK, but the OTHER vote? :D

(If the new voter was the Amherst partisan, it makes sense - beating #3, even narrowly and at home, might make someone move COW over IWU.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PowerBall on December 13, 2005, 05:16:45 PM

The addition of CMU to the top 25 may surprise many but as the season continues more will jump on the bandwagon of support. They are poised to play Princeton and learn alot about themselves. If they hold true to form they will build from that encounter.

They then have a few out of conference games mixed in along with a challenging trip to the northeast. A much better Brandies team than has been fielded in the past awaits them in Boston and a solid NYU team will also set the challenge for the new year to begin. If they can take these games with solid wins and stay healthy they should be able to make a strong case for themselves moving up the Top 25 list and position themselves to win their conference.

There is a lot of basketball left to be played.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on December 13, 2005, 11:29:30 PM

Most people didnt get a chance to see or hear of Carnegie's exhibition at the University of Pittsburgh last year (yes, the one with Taft and Krauser), but CMU was up by 2 at half time and up by as much as 7 in the second half until their two best players (Maurer and Barlow-Wilcox) fouled out with about 10-12 minutes left and then got blown out. People may be suprised at how well they fair against a D1 opponent. I am not saying they are going to win, just that Princeton may be surprised if they take them too lightly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on December 13, 2005, 11:33:08 PM

I forgot to include the article if you were interested or didnt believe me:

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/sports/college/pitt/pittsburghlive.com/tribune-review/sports/college/pitt/s_270246.html

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 13, 2005, 11:47:55 PM

Pat,

I assume you'll have one more poll prior to the holidays and then won't have one until the new year?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 14, 2005, 01:01:47 AM

We will vote next week, then take the following week off, yes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bouttime on December 14, 2005, 12:20:41 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on December 13, 2005, 11:29:30 PM
Most people didnt get a chance to see or hear of Carnegie's exhibition at the University of Pittsburgh last year (yes, the one with Taft and Krauser), but CMU was up by 2 at half time and up by as much as 7 in the second half until their two best players (Maurer and Barlow-Wilcox) fouled out with about 10-12 minutes left and then got blown out. People may be suprised at how well they fair against a D1 opponent. I am not saying they are going to win, just that Princeton may be surprised if they take them too lightly.

Also when approached this year about making the Pitt-CMU game a regular thing since the 2 schools campuses are right next to each other, Pitt refused to play CMU this year. I think that says alot in itself.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 14, 2005, 12:50:25 PM

Quote from: bouttime on December 14, 2005, 12:20:41 PM
Also when approached this year about making the Pitt-CMU game a regular thing since the 2 schools campuses are right next to each other, Pitt refused to play CMU this year. I think that says alot in itself.

It says to me "we have nothing to gain by playing CMU. Nobody would come to see it except some nostalgic locals, the win wouldn't help our RPI, and if (god forbid) we lost, we'd be a laughingstock. So what's in it for Pitt?"

If only more D1's would do this calculus...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on December 14, 2005, 01:12:12 PM

David, I am not disagreeing with you about Pitt having nothing to gain, but the attendance at last year's exhibition game was ~9000 with tickets sold at normal prices, which is about 75% capacity of the Peterson Events Center. You would expect the attendance to be somewhat higher for a regular season game. Also, the coverage in local media was rather larger considering, as you said, that Pitt was playing a d3 opponent.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 14, 2005, 01:28:59 PM

I admit that I know nothing of the city or the schools involved, so please correct any misconceptions I have. With that caveat, it seems to me that 9000 fans and decent media coverage is good news for CMU but bad news for Pitt; as you say/imply, a "regular season game" (by which I gather you mean a D1 opponent for Pitt in the place of CMU) would be expected to draw more fans and attract more media coverage. If there's some traditional rivalry to be maintained, or a community event to be celebrated, or some other non-basketball-related reason to have such a game, then I'm all for it. But without those aspects it sounds like a no-win situation for Pitt.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on December 14, 2005, 05:21:46 PM

I agree with you about them not having much to gain. I think what bouttime was saying was that since they agreed to play last year and won't this year, there is obviously some other reason they dont want to play and that may be that they are afraid CMU would give them a tough game and don't want to take the chance. Also, all I was saying with me first comment was that I think CMU is tougher than most people give them credit for, they have some really quality players and I wouldnt be surprised to see the Princeton game be competitive.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on December 14, 2005, 05:48:51 PM

If a Division III team is going to beat a Division I team, Princeton is a good place to start.

A little while ago the Tigers had the lowest scoring DI offense in the country. They are currently averaging just 49.3 ppg.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 14, 2005, 08:12:48 PM

I think that's semi-by design, though, the way they play offense.

Morgan State and Morehead State seem to be the dregs this year, according to Sagarin.

Morehead lost to perennial featherweight Maryland - Eastern Shore, at home.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Lefty on December 14, 2005, 09:37:57 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on December 14, 2005, 05:48:51 PM
If a Division III team is going to beat a Division I team, Princeton is a good place to start.

A little while ago the Tigers had the lowest scoring DI offense in the country. They are currently averaging just 49.3 ppg.

You might be right on this comment.....Princeton lost to Monmouth tonight 41-21. That is pathetic!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 14, 2005, 10:29:06 PM

That'll happen when you shoot 9-41 from the floor. :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on December 14, 2005, 10:46:05 PM

Wow! 21 points!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 14, 2005, 10:57:05 PM

Per Princeton's site, they start...

G Geoff Kestler (6-3/200, Fr)
G Kevin Steuerer (6-5/200, So)
F Noah Savage (6-5/230, So)
F Kyle Koncz (6-7/200, So)
C Patrick Ekeruo (6-8/220, Jr)

Not big at all for D1 standards and very inexperienced.

Carnegie Mellon starts...

(weights not listed on CMU roster)

G Geoff Kozak (6-0 Sr)
G A.J. Straub (6-2 Sr)
F Marques Johnson (6-4 Sr)
F Clayton Barlow-Wilcox (6-4 Sr)
F Nate Maurer (6-7 Sr)

CMU appears to be about average in terms of D3 height...they start 4 seniors.

On the surface it seems like Top 25 D3 team should hang right with Princeton.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 14, 2005, 11:01:18 PM

What I'd really like to see is a Princeton/Grinnell matchup.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 14, 2005, 11:19:54 PM

QuotePer Princeton's site, they start...

G Geoff Kestler (6-3/200, Fr)
G Kevin Steuerer (6-5/200, So)
F Noah Savage (6-5/230, So)
F Kyle Koncz (6-7/200, So)
C Patrick Ekeruo (6-8/220, Jr)

Not big at all for D1 standards and very inexperienced.

They'd be a huge team in the NCAC, at least. And I've seen some smaller D-1 teams as well, especially in the Ivy and Patriot League (and sometimes the Atlantic Sun, SWAC, MAAC, Southland, Big South, and MEAC).

And really, I know the Ivy is D-1, but they are a kin to D-3. I think only Lafayette of the Patriot league is the last team not to give out scholarships (not counting the service academies, but that's a different type o' dog anyway).

How about Redlands and Air Force? Since I believe Air Force is now the best team playing the Princeton offense. (Apologies to Northwestern and Samford).

Did I have a point?? ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 14, 2005, 11:33:43 PM

They'd be a TALL NCAC team, but I don't know about 'huge.' 6'7"/200 doesn't make me think 'huge' so much as 'stick figure', and 6'8"/220 isn't a whole lot thicker.

Here's Wittenberg's starting 5:
G Pat Denbow (6'0"/155 Jr.)
G Phil Steffes (6'1"/190 Sr.)
W Kenny Brady (6'4"/205 Sr.)
W Dane Borchers (6'8"/215 Sr.)
P Daniel Russ (6'9"/210 Sr.)

I think Russ and Brady are actually a little beefier than that. Granted, Witt is the biggest team in the NCAC and probably among the biggest D3 teams in the country, and (except for that 2-guard) they're about the same size/weight at the Princeton Tigers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 14, 2005, 11:44:49 PM

Well, I was think more on the line of the Denisons, Earlhams and Wabash's of the NCAC, which I think is more in line with the norm of D-3. Of course, Witt being Witt they have to put their players on the rack to make them taller, right?? ;D

6'5 - 230 is a big boy, though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 14, 2005, 11:46:43 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 14, 2005, 11:33:43 PM
They'd be a TALL NCAC team, but I don't know about 'huge.' 6'7"/200 doesn't make me think 'huge' so much as 'stick figure', and 6'8"/220 isn't a whole lot thicker.

Here's Wittenberg's starting 5:
G Pat Denbow (6'0"/155 Jr.)
G Phil Steffes (6'1"/190 Sr.)
W Kenny Brady (6'4"/205 Sr.)
W Dane Borchers (6'8"/215 Sr.)
P Daniel Russ (6'9"/210 Sr.)

I think Russ and Brady are actually a little beefier than that. Granted, Witt is the biggest team in the NCAC and probably among the biggest D3 teams in the country, and (except for that 2-guard) they're about the same size/weight at the Princeton Tigers.

Yet you list a 6'9 210 lbs. guy! lol

Princeton is huge compared to Stevens Point

G-Hicklin 6-4, 180
G-Rortveldt 6-5, 170
F-Krull 6-4, 225
F-Bauer 6-5, 232
F-Grusczynski 6-5, 192

We're beefy, but not tall. In fact, at La Crosse, guard Steve Hicklin did the jump ball to start the game. Needless to say, we lost the tip.

We also have Al-Amin, usually first off the bench at a stout 5-8, 135

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on December 14, 2005, 11:50:24 PM

I don't know if you realize this, but no matter what their size, conference or what you may perceive of Princeton basketball, the fact remains they are still a division I team that has had 19 consecutive winning seasons (you can check their 2005-06 media guide on page 4). I don't know of many schools that have had that many winning seasons in a row in any conference or division. Also, I know that they may not be in the strongest conference, but they play some tough out of conference opponents like Wake Forest and Stanford in the coming weeks. They may be having an off couple games or may not be as strong this year as in the past, but they get quality basketball players and with that many winning seasons in a row, they must be doing something right. I wouldn't throw them into the middle of the pack in DIII quite yet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 14, 2005, 11:51:17 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 14, 2005, 10:57:05 PM
Not big at all for D1 standards and very inexperienced.

I beg to differ. Seems like guys are leaving after their sophomore years all the time now...maybe some of those Ivy Leaguers are making themselves eligible for early entry into...those law firms! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 14, 2005, 11:53:08 PM

I think our comparisons, at least mine, are a little tongue-in-cheek and just comparing "sizes". Dick Bennett's Badgers averaged in the 50s and did just fine in the Big 10. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 15, 2005, 12:00:43 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 14, 2005, 11:01:18 PM
What I'd really like to see is a Princeton/Grinnell matchup.

I've been advocating that match-up on another board ("Who's running the Grinnell system"?), but we have to channel Pete Carrill's Princeton teams! No substitutes allowed for the ultimate 'system/anti-system' showdown!

21 IS amazing - you usually see that only in an overmatched hs girls' bb score! And a BLOWOUT win by scoring 41...?!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 15, 2005, 12:06:06 AM

Quote from: Old School on December 14, 2005, 11:46:43 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on December 14, 2005, 11:33:43 PM
They'd be a TALL NCAC team, but I don't know about 'huge.' 6'7"/200 doesn't make me think 'huge' so much as 'stick figure', and 6'8"/220 isn't a whole lot thicker.

Here's Wittenberg's starting 5:
G Pat Denbow (6'0"/155 Jr.)
G Phil Steffes (6'1"/190 Sr.)
W Kenny Brady (6'4"/205 Sr.)
W Dane Borchers (6'8"/215 Sr.)
P Daniel Russ (6'9"/210 Sr.)

I think Russ and Brady are actually a little beefier than that. Granted, Witt is the biggest team in the NCAC and probably among the biggest D3 teams in the country, and (except for that 2-guard) they're about the same size/weight at the Princeton Tigers. [emphasis added]

Yet you list a 6'9 210 lbs. guy! lol

Yes, I think 6'8"/220 and 6'9"/210 are pretty comparable.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 15, 2005, 12:11:25 AM

I'm all for old school hoops and trying to hold teams under 50 or so. Some called Dick Bennett's teams blah - I loved watching them set screens, move without the ball and play defense first and foremost.

BTW - There's a boys team here in Indiana - Cannelton - that just lost 88-14 to Washington Catholic.

http://www.washtimesherald.com/sports/local_story_346132531.html

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on December 15, 2005, 12:15:58 AM

Go CMU.

Princeton = evil.

Signed, Penn Student

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 15, 2005, 12:23:32 AM

Heights/weights can definitely be deceptive. Illinois Wesleyan starts...

G Adam Dauksas (6-3/190, Sr)
G Jason Fisher (6-2/210, Sr)
F Keelan Amelianovich (6-6/210, Sr)
F Cory Jones (6-6/215, Sr)
C Zach Freeman (6-7/210, Jr)

I am not sure if that looks like a "huge" D3 team on paper, but the 2005-06 Titans are by far the "biggest" IWU team I have ever seen. They're all upperclassmen and they've hit the weight room hard since their freshman year...something IWU teams under Dennie Bridges really did not do. IWU is also extremely athletic at just about every spot.

Last Saturday IWU faced the following Wash U lineup...

G Neal Griffin (5-10/145, Jr)
G Scott Stone (6-1/155, Sr)
F Tyler Nading (6-6/195, Fr)
F Troy Ruths (6-6/225, So)
C Mike Grunst (7-0/225, Sr)

On paper it would appear IWU was "smaller" in the post, but the Titans completely manhandled Wash U physically and athletically. IWU out-rebounded the Bears by 20...

http://www.iwu.edu/~iwunews/sports/mbb2006/miwu6.htm

And against Illinois, the Titans (playing without starting forward Cory Jones) were giving up 3 & 4 inches at each spot in the frontcourt, but they did not get pushed around much in that game. It was actually 6-3/175 freshman 2-guard Jamar Smith that got the Illini on track by hitting a number of 3's when IWU had the game tied at 41 with 14:00 to play.

http://www.iwuhoops.com/ILLINI.HTM

So, since I started the discussion topic I will be the first to concede that the roster really doesn't indicate how "big" a team is. Hanover is a great example...some of the "biggest" 6-4 kids you'll ever see.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 15, 2005, 12:36:11 AM

Good point. Dan Russ (6'9"/210) definitely plays bigger than Dane Borchers (6'8"/215) because he's more muscular. Both of them play "bigger" than UW-Stout's Nonemacher twins, who go 7'0"/255 (Jacob) and 7'0"/240 (John), both of whom look a little like exclamation points.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bouttime on December 15, 2005, 11:06:03 AM

Quote from: gordonmann on December 14, 2005, 05:48:51 PM
If a Division III team is going to beat a Division I team, Princeton is a good place to start.

A little while ago the Tigers had the lowest scoring DI offense in the country. They are currently averaging just 49.3 ppg.

Princeton is going to have to either figure out a way to put more points on the board or figure out a way to stop CMU's 91.6 points per game. This might be as close as the "system/anti-system" game that Mr. Ypsi wanted.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 15, 2005, 12:32:19 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 15, 2005, 12:23:32 AM
So, since I started the discussion topic I will be the first to concede that the roster really doesn't indicate how "big" a team is. Hanover is a great example...some of the "biggest" 6-4 kids you'll ever see.

And of course, sometimes it does. I remember the two years Stevens Point went out east for the Final Four and their opponents really were outmatched "size-wise." I specificially remember the announcers talking about how All-Americans Ben Coffin (2004, Williams)) and Seth Hauben (2005, Rochester), among others, really hadn't seen anything like Point's size and had their problems.

When Point had their big lineup in, and used zone, opponents were looking at:

Eric Maus 6'9"/219
Jason Kalsow 6'7"/229
Kyle Grusczynski 6'6"/203
Nick Bennett 6'5"/194
Jon Krull 6'4"/230 or Brian Bauer 6'5"/245

This was with Jason Kalsow playing point-forward.

Seth Hauben was 2/5 for 8 points and 8 rebounds
Ben Coffin was 5/13 for 10 points and 6 rebounds

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Lefty on December 15, 2005, 03:37:51 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on December 14, 2005, 11:50:24 PM
I don't know if you realize this, but no matter what their size, conference or what you may perceive of Princeton basketball, the fact remains they are still a division I team that has had 19 consecutive winning seasons (you can check their 2005-06 media guide on page 4). I don't know of many schools that have had that many winning seasons in a row in any conference or division.

New Jersey City University has a streak of 29 straight winning seasons.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on December 15, 2005, 03:54:55 PM

Quote from: njcu_fan on December 15, 2005, 03:37:51 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on December 14, 2005, 11:50:24 PM
I don't know if you realize this, but no matter what their size, conference or what you may perceive of Princeton basketball, the fact remains they are still a division I team that has had 19 consecutive winning seasons (you can check their 2005-06 media guide on page 4). I don't know of many schools that have had that many winning seasons in a row in any conference or division.

New Jersey City University has a streak of 29 straight winning seasons.

And Hope has 26 straight entering this year

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 15, 2005, 04:03:54 PM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on December 15, 2005, 03:54:55 PM
Quote from: njcu_fan on December 15, 2005, 03:37:51 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on December 14, 2005, 11:50:24 PM
I don't know if you realize this, but no matter what their size, conference or what you may perceive of Princeton basketball, the fact remains they are still a division I team that has had 19 consecutive winning seasons (you can check their 2005-06 media guide on page 4). I don't know of many schools that have had that many winning seasons in a row in any conference or division.

New Jersey City University has a streak of 29 straight winning seasons.

And Hope has 26 straight entering this year

Wittenberg's last losing campaign was in 1955-56 (8-12); they were 13-13 in 1967-68. That's 37 straight winning seasons, and 49 straight non-losing ones. Wittenberg has had 15 losing seasons in 94 years of basketball.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on December 15, 2005, 04:11:54 PM

NJCU has 29 straight winning seasons, 34 straight non-losing seasons. Coach Brown has 22 of the winning seasons himself. The last NJCU/JCSC coach to have a losing season is current AD Larry Scheiner in the 69-70 season.

In fact NJCU has 11 losing seasons in 74 years of playing basketball. I have to admit that there 10 seasons with no record, and it appears that there was no team from 41-42 until after WWII ended. 11 losing seasons in 64 is more accurate to me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on December 18, 2005, 12:10:36 AM

I guess everyone that was jumping on the Maryville bandwagon must have caused a shift resulting in the bandwagon to derail. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 18, 2005, 07:53:47 PM

Final: #2 Wooster 133 Westminster 110

Wooster was led in scoring by Tom Port with 32 points, James Cooper with 28 points and Tim Vandervaart with 19 points.

Wooster made 12 three pointers in this game but Westminster made 18 three pointers to keep this game under a 25 point margin. Wooster shot 64% from the floor and 50% on three pointers to secure the win tonight.

Wooster moves to 9-0. :) Baldwin Wallace is next on 12/29.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on December 18, 2005, 08:20:22 PM

I see a bunch of people have jumped on my comment about the consecutive winning seasons. I realize there are a bunch of historically good DIII teams, all I was saying is that Princeton is a historically pretty good DI program and that just because they have played some awful games this year, they are still a DI caliber team. Hopefan states on another board that DIII is 0-43 against DI this year; therefore, I was just stating that no matter who the DI team, a DIII school is going to be in for a fight at best.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 19, 2005, 10:07:31 AM

First, I think there are quite a few D1 schools who IWU could beat easily; no one has ever heard of them, but still. I agree, Princeton is good, even though they have been pretty sloppy this year thus far. It should be a fun game to watch.

Anyway, the last one before a holiday break:

1. IWU (7-0) win at Illinois College
2. Wooster (9-0, 4-0) home win over Westminster (PA)
3. Wittenberg (6-1, 1-1) idle
4. Amherst (7-0) home win over Emmanuel
5. Puget Sound (5-1, 2-0) neutral win over PSU-Behrend
6. Albion (7-1) neutral wins over UDallas and LaGrange
7. Hope (9-0) idle
8. Lawrence (6-0, 2-0) idle
9. WPI (9-0) idle
10. York (6-1, 1-1) win at Juniata
11. Randolph-Macon (7-1, 4-0) home win over #17 Lincoln
12. Stout (8-1, 4-0) win at Bethany Lutheran
13. Augustana (7-0) idle
14. Hanover (6-2) idle
15. Wartburg (6-1, 1-0) idle
16. Elmurst (7-2) home wins over Marian and Olivet
17. Lincoln (8-3) overtime loss at Wilkes, win at Baptist Bible, loss at #11 Randolph-Macon
18. Baldwin-Wallace (8-1, 4-0) wins at Ohio Northern and at home over Capital
19. Rochester (6-2, 0-1) idle
20. St. John Fisher (5-1) neutral win over Lake Erie
21. Hampden-Sydney (7-0, 3-0) home win over NC Wesleyan
22. Maryville (8-1) loss at Averett
23. Carnegie Mellon (9-0, 1-0) idle
24. John Carroll (6-2, 3-1) home overtime loss to Ohio Northern
25. Oshkosh (5-3, 1-2) win at Carroll, home win over Haskell Indian Nations

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 19, 2005, 10:12:09 AM

Lots of idles this week. I don't see much change. John Carroll is probably out, although perhaps unfairly. Lincoln may drop a few spots, even though they played tough. I hope Maryville doesn't drop to far either, both teams are solid B contenders with losses to pretty good teams this week.

If I'm voting, JCU is out and Ohio Northern is in. ONU has won every game with the exception of a two point loss to #18 Baldwin-Wallace. This includes the 12 point, overtime win at #24 JCU this week. They seem to have earned it.

I'm not sure Oshkosh deserves to saty in, but they beat a good Carroll team on the road, so I'm not sure they deserve to drop out just yet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: digs on December 19, 2005, 10:42:19 AM

I think if you were looking for a D3 win over a D1 school you could find an easier team than Princeton to beat. We may not get it this year because of scheduling and it will always be rare since anyone that is beatable by a D3 school would be stupid to schedule the game. Nothing to gain and everything to lose--including future recruits.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 19, 2005, 10:50:10 AM

Shenandoah does play at Longwood this year. That may be winnable.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 19, 2005, 11:20:04 AM

I'm not sure its winnable, but probably the closest we've got. Now if someone could schedule Stony Brook or Stetson, then we might have a game. Also, I'm fairly confident IWU could beat anyone in the SWAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on December 19, 2005, 11:46:09 AM

hoops fan , having seen IWU demolish Wash U this year, I feel they are at a level that could compete with any of the lower teams in several of the eastern conferences, ie the Sienas and FDUs, the Ivys the New England schools like New Hampshire, Maine, the patriot schools like Colgate. I don't have them in front of me so I can't be more specific, but you get my drift. I really think IWU is that good, and that well coached.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 19, 2005, 01:36:09 PM

I don't disagree; I think that's the point I was trying to make. I honestly think they could score a D1 AQ playing in the SWAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 19, 2005, 02:00:31 PM

Siena is usually holds its own in the MAAC. They had a down year or two recently, but usually they're up there. Same with FDU in the NEC.

Jackson State is 197th in the Sagarin ratings and Southern is 185th in the Pomeroy rankings. And according to Sagarin, the Atlantic Sun and the MEAC are worse than the SWAC.

I have no doubt many D-3 teams could be Savannah State.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 19, 2005, 02:01:40 PM

I'm about 99% sure that IWU would defeat crosstown D1 Illinois State pretty convincingly this year. Most ISU fans who also follow IWU to some degree concede that the Titans are the better club. ISU, a program with a pretty solid basketball history, has been in rebuilding mode the last 2-3 years...they're picked to finish last in the Missouri Valley, which may be the best mid-major conference. If IWU is better than Illinois State - which again, I am very comfortable in saying - than the 2005-06 Titans are better than a lot of D1's.

Illinois State is at #158 in the Sagarin Rating right now, with 176 D1 teams under them. I honestly think that is right about where IWU would fit into the rankings. I'd say the same about last year's UW-Stevens Point team.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/bkt0506.htm

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 19, 2005, 04:21:26 PM

I hadn't been paying much attention to Massey yet as he doesn't have a D3 ranking up yet, but I just noticed he has all the teams listed in his big ranking. Suprisingly, Wooster (at 109 overall), Wittenberg, Hamilton, Augustana and Hope are all above IWU. I know Massey doesn't work itself out until the end of the year, but pretty good respect for D3 early on.

This puts Wooster ahead of the likes of Missouri and Fresno State and all six of the above schools above Georgia Tech and Purdue.

Interesting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 19, 2005, 04:49:30 PM

Those early season Massey ratings have some, ahem, irregularities in them! I look for them to sort out in mid-January or so.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 19, 2005, 06:02:22 PM

#5 Puget Sound vs Cal Tech tonight.......

whats the over/under on margin of victory for Puget Sound? I say 45

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 19, 2005, 06:03:02 PM

Interestingly, above I said I felt IWU would fall at about #158 in the Sagarin rating based on where Illinois State is. Masey has IWU at exactly #158!

http://masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb

Massey has a note on the site: "Early season ratings will fluctuate significantly until a sufficient number of games have been played." Any computer-based poll like that takes until about late January to really round into shape.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on December 19, 2005, 06:43:55 PM

Quote from: sac on December 19, 2005, 06:02:22 PM
#5 Puget Sound vs Cal Tech tonight.......

whats the over/under on margin of victory for Puget Sound? I say 45

at least...

Though honestly, I 'm not sure Puget Sound should really be a #5 team after the game I saw last night... I guess I'll learn more as the season goes on. :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 19, 2005, 08:12:49 PM

Perhaps, but your shoes might tell you something about judging teams on one game. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 19, 2005, 09:18:41 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 19, 2005, 08:12:49 PM
Perhaps, but your shoes might tell you something about judging teams on one game. :)

LOL!! I'd forgotten about that!

April, did they taste 'just like chicken'? Or more reminiscent of kimchee and spam?! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 19, 2005, 09:27:45 PM

Quote from: sac on December 19, 2005, 06:02:22 PM
#5 Puget Sound vs Cal Tech tonight.......

whats the over/under on margin of victory for Puget Sound? I say 45

I'm thinking closer to 85 than 45. UPS pressed Behrend right up to the last possession last night, and they were up 18-20 at the time. I expect their press to result in a 2 or 3 to 1 turnover to shot attempt ratio today, so if they do it for 40 minutes it could be a 100 point margin.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on December 19, 2005, 11:15:36 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 19, 2005, 08:12:49 PM
Perhaps, but your shoes might tell you something about judging teams on one game. :)

all my shoes told me is that the NCAA criteria and brackets stink, not that rochester was truly a final four caliber team :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 19, 2005, 11:17:37 PM

To get there, they still had to win games that you thought they were incapable of. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 20, 2005, 12:22:40 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 19, 2005, 09:27:45 PM
Quote from: sac on December 19, 2005, 06:02:22 PM
#5 Puget Sound vs Cal Tech tonight.......

whats the over/under on margin of victory for Puget Sound? I say 45

I'm thinking closer to 85 than 45. UPS pressed Behrend right up to the last possession last night, and they were up 18-20 at the time. I expect their press to result in a 2 or 3 to 1 turnover to shot attempt ratio today, so if they do it for 40 minutes it could be a 100 point margin.

Good call, sac. 123-74, a very respectable 49-point margin. Go Beavers!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on December 20, 2005, 01:52:53 AM

sac -

Great call. Wish I had a dim on the game. Oops! Can't say that.

As for the Massey ratings, it's really hard to look at these on any level until conference play begins, but the d3 rankings are particuarly suspect. Let's chill for a while.

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 20, 2005, 02:09:18 AM

Quote from: Coach C on December 20, 2005, 01:52:53 AM
sac -

Great call. Wish I had a dim on the game.

If you'd had several of them on the game, would that be a dim sum?

*rim shot*

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 20, 2005, 08:51:28 AM

Here, here April (boo Rochester). I thinks UPS lost a lot more than many of the voters realize, but then again they are way out there with no one else around, so it will take a few losses in conference for people to understand... or the game against IWU next week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 20, 2005, 08:57:31 AM

Here's the new one:

1    Illinois Wesleyan (23)    7-0    623    1
2    Wooster (1)    9-0    598    2
3    Wittenberg    6-1    555    3
4    Amherst (1)    7-0    533    4
5    Puget Sound    5-1    501    5
6    Albion    7-1    462    6
7    Hope    9-0    460    7
8    Lawrence    6-0    445    8
9    Worcester Polytech    9-0    398    9
10    York (Pa.)    6-1    396    10
11    UW-Stout    8-1    335    12
12    Randolph-Macon    7-1    324    11
13    Augustana    7-0    290    13
14    Hanover    6-2    242    14
15    Wartburg    6-1    238    15
16    Elmhurst    7-2    228    16
17    Baldwin-Wallace    8-1    214    18
18    St. John Fisher    5-2    160    20
19    Hampden-Sydney    7-0    152    21
20    Rochester    6-2    150    19
21    Lincoln    8-3    145    17
22    Carnegie Mellon    9-0    90    23
23    St. Thomas    5-1    85    —
24    Ohio Northern    8-1    79    —
25    UW-Oshkosh    5-3    67    25

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 20, 2005, 09:01:56 AM

Maryville got dropped right out for one loss; you would have thought that the past five years or so of consistent play would have afforded them some slack... Averett may not be a tourney team, but they are pretty good. Ohio Northern got in, which is very mnuch deserved. R-MC beats a ranked opponent and loses a spot to Stout; that's pretty rough. Witt, UPS, and Hope all lost a decent amount of points in the voting and most of it went to Stout and R-MC, closing the gap between the top ten and everyone else. Very interesting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 20, 2005, 09:08:07 AM

Come to think of it, all of the big drop offs have lowered considerably.

Week 3:

The gap between #10 and #11 was 96 points.
The gap between #15 and #16 was 46 points.
The gap between #20 and #21 was 46 points.
Those were the most obvious dividing lines.

Week 4:

Things seem to be changing as more voters get a chance to decide for themselves and make adjustments.
The gap between #10 and #11 is 61 points.
The gap between #15 and #16 is 10 points.
The gap between #20 and #21 is 5 points.

This leaves fewer and fewer points available for the teams at the bottom, but things seem to be consolidating. What I see is a lot of potential for movement if one or more of the top 8-10 teams takes a big fall.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 20, 2005, 01:22:38 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 20, 2005, 09:01:56 AM
R-MC beats a ranked opponent and loses a spot to Stout; that's pretty rough. Witt, UPS, and Hope all lost

R-MC beat that ranked opponent on Monday, so it probably didn't figure into this week's poll. That's my guess.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fritzdis on December 20, 2005, 01:28:40 PM

Quote from: Old School on December 20, 2005, 01:22:38 PM
R-MC beat that ranked opponent on Monday, so it probably didn't figure into this week's poll. That's my guess.

He's referring to the other ranked opponent they beat in the last 2 days (Lincoln), which did count.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 20, 2005, 01:29:50 PM

On the women's side, interesting to see the #1 team lose and still retain top spot.

Week 3

1. Southern Maine (7-0) 623 votes
2. Bowdoin (7-1) 544
3. Brandeis (6-0) 541

Week 4

1. Southern Main (7-1) 562
2. Brandeis (6-0) 558
3. George Fox (9-0) 553

Bowdoin doesn't play and drops three spots to 5.
George Fox was 6th at 8-0 with 499 votes in Week 3.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 20, 2005, 01:31:15 PM

fritzdis,

Missed that one! Thanks. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 20, 2005, 01:53:35 PM

Quote from: Old School on December 20, 2005, 01:29:50 PM
On the women's side, interesting to see the #1 team lose and still retain top spot.

Week 3

1. Southern Maine (7-0) 623 votes
2. Bowdoin (7-1) 544
3. Brandeis (6-0) 541

Week 4

1. Southern Main (7-1) 562
2. Brandeis (6-0) 558
3. George Fox (9-0) 553

Bowdoin doesn't play and drops three spots to 5.
George Fox was 6th at 8-0 with 499 votes in Week 3.

Actually Bowdoin did not play and lost only 2 votes to 542. The 4th place team (Wash U StL 10-0) received 544 votes.

I interpret that to mean that there was no change in the voters' impression of Bowdoin. Southern Maine came back to the pack! ;) :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 20, 2005, 03:54:26 PM

What I find a bit curious is that the team that beat Southern Maine, Salem State, is 8-1 (I'm sure that's part of the reason SM stayed #1 while Millikin dropped to #7 - that and the earlier win over Bowdoin), yet Salem State did NOT make the top 25 (they were the equivalent of 29th)!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on December 20, 2005, 04:04:14 PM

Mr Ypsi -

Yeah if I lived in Salem State land (thank God I don't, it's cold enough in NJ) i would have some questions for the voters.

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 20, 2005, 05:34:48 PM

I think you know full well how hard it is to go from zero votes (which SSC deserved after losing to Clark and not having beaten anyone of consequence) to the Top 25. Since Luther was already doing the same, it was even harder for people to make room for two teams.

Luther won on the road by 20-some points at last year's defending champ. Salem State won at home, where they were 12-1 last year, even in a down year for them (20-7).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on December 20, 2005, 07:30:51 PM

Pat -

I wasn't arguing that SSU deserved an immediate ranking, but yeah someone may need ot explain the process a bit to a team that knocked off the #1 team in the country. (Who then stayed at 1).

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 20, 2005, 08:24:12 PM

Good thing it wasn't a playoff game - otherwise Pat would HAVE to call Salem #1! ;)

Happy birthday, anyway, you little kid! :D [Fot those totally confused, this relates to conversations on TWO other boards, but I trust Pat will understand!)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 20, 2005, 09:07:24 PM

Maybe THREE other boards, if we're still talking about the women's top 25 in the men's top 25 room. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: titanfan on December 20, 2005, 10:16:57 PM

Final from the Shirk Center in Bloomington, Illinois:

#1 Illinois Wesleyan 72
#14 Hanover 61

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on December 20, 2005, 10:18:24 PM

It was sort of overshadowed by Hanover/IWU, but No. 3 Wittenberg beat No. 24 ONU 65-54. Not a bad showing for the Polar Bears, losing by 11 at Witt's place. ONU goes 1-2 in three straight games against B-W, JCU and Wittenberg.

No. 21 Lincoln gets by Greensboro 85-81 to win their eleventh of the season in fourteen games. They play CNU (7-1) tomorrow in what will be a big game for both teams.

No. 15 Wartburg plays University of Mary Washington (5-2) late tonight, 8 PM local time in the Las Vegas tournament. If you've got broadband, you can check it out on http://www.kwar.org/kwar.ram.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 20, 2005, 10:46:00 PM

"Not a bad showing" by ONU in terms of losing to the #3 team by 11 on the road. But it sounded like it was indeed a "bad showing" as ONU shot just 31% overall (24% from the arc) and committed 15 turnovers in 66 possessions. Witt shot only 29% in the first half, but won the game by getting ONU's bigs in foul trouble and then taking advantage with their big front line (6'9" Dan Russ, 6'8" Dane Borchers and 6'5" Kenny Brady combined for 52 points and 18 boards), shooting 54% in the second half. This was a good win by Witt, overcoming poor shooting against a very good team. It will turn out to be a "good loss" (from a QoWI perspective) for ONU, but I think that Witt exposed some issues they will need to address.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 20, 2005, 11:17:13 PM

The IWU / Hanover game was about what I expected, really. Wabash hung with IWU but they pulled away at the end, and Wabash could have beaten Hanover at Hanover had they shot better. So I'm not surprised by this result.

(Not that games against Wabash are the be-all and end-all, but it is a common opponent and all...)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 20, 2005, 11:36:18 PM

I really hope that the NCAA passes the bylaw that allows the designation of games in school holidays to be "in-region". That will add new importance to these intra-semester games! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 21, 2005, 04:02:52 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 20, 2005, 01:53:35 PM
Quote from: Old School on December 20, 2005, 01:29:50 PM
On the women's side, interesting to see the #1 team lose and still retain top spot.

Week 3

1. Southern Maine (7-0) 623 votes
2. Bowdoin (7-1) 544
3. Brandeis (6-0) 541

Week 4

1. Southern Main (7-1) 562
2. Brandeis (6-0) 558
3. George Fox (9-0) 553

Bowdoin doesn't play and drops three spots to 5.
George Fox was 6th at 8-0 with 499 votes in Week 3.

Actually Bowdoin did not play and lost only 2 votes to 542. The 4th place team (Wash U StL 10-0) received 544 votes.

I interpret that to mean that there was no change in the voters' impression of Bowdoin. Southern Maine came back to the pack! ;) :)

We're saying the same thing! Bowdoin didn't play, lost only two votes from 544 to 542 but STILL DROPPED TO 5th! Not sure what the voters' impression with Bowdoin is, but three teams all of a sudden become better than them! ??? Anyway...back to the men's side. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on December 21, 2005, 08:13:10 AM

That is perhaps the premier game thus far in D3 and seems to bear out the voter's thinking on the teams in question.

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 21, 2005, 10:51:35 AM

I just looked at the Wolfe rankings and IWU is #342 and #2 in D-3. His top rated team is WPI.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ashleyjb on December 21, 2005, 01:57:20 PM

What are the Wolfe rankings? Where can you find them?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 21, 2005, 03:03:54 PM

http://prwolfe.bol.ucla.edu/cbasketball/ratings.htm

Here you go!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 21, 2005, 04:12:39 PM

WPI is way overrated, although they have been playing better of late. I guess they don't deserve to get trashed too much, just don't drink the kool-aid yet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 21, 2005, 05:01:08 PM

Quote from: Coach C on December 21, 2005, 08:13:10 AM
That is perhaps the premier game thus far in D3 and seems to bear out the voter's thinking on the teams in question.

C

???

Which game are you talking about, C? In my mind, the premier game so far (at least on the men's side) has been Woo/Witt I, and I agree that it bore out the voter's thinking on the teams. But that can't be what you are referring to.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 21, 2005, 07:03:45 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 21, 2005, 05:01:08 PM
Quote from: Coach C on December 21, 2005, 08:13:10 AM
That is perhaps the premier game thus far in D3 and seems to bear out the voter's thinking on the teams in question.

C

???

Which game are you talking about, C? In my mind, the premier game so far (at least on the men's side) has been Woo/Witt I, and I agree that it bore out the voter's thinking on the teams. But that can't be what you are referring to.

Coach C can respond himself, I'm sure, but I'm pretty sure he was talking about Southern Maine-Bowdoin. We'd been discussing why #1 Millikin dropped all the way to 7th with their first loss, while SM lost points, but stayed #1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on December 21, 2005, 08:58:50 PM

I like the Wolfe rankings, it has the UAA as the strongest conference in DIII. At least those guys are getting some respect from somebody.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 21, 2005, 09:09:29 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on December 21, 2005, 08:58:50 PM
I like the Wolfe rankings, it has the UAA as the strongest conference in DIII. At least those guys are getting some respect from somebody.

I think that alone explains why Wolfe gets little respect! ;) ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on December 21, 2005, 09:28:42 PM

Top Ten DIII Conferences according to Massey...

44 Wisconsin IAC
45 Ill & Wisc
48 UAA
60 NESCAC
64 IIAC
65 OAC
67 HCAC
69 MWC
72 MIAA
73 CAC

Maybe this is just a good year for the UAA? ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 21, 2005, 10:17:28 PM

Quote from: diehardfan on December 21, 2005, 09:28:42 PM
Top Ten DIII Conferences according to Massey...

44 Wisconsin IAC
45 Ill & Wisc
48 UAA
60 NESCAC
64 IIAC
65 OAC
67 HCAC
69 MWC
72 MIAA
73 CAC

Maybe this is just a good year for the UAA? ;)

Could be, but did you note the omission of the NJAC (and ODAC)? Perhaps Massey is not particularly reliable even by the start of winter!

Happy winter solstice, everyone!

April, our last day reaching above freezing was in November - enjoy California weather! ('cause you will surely catch grief on the d3 bb boards!) ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on December 21, 2005, 11:02:20 PM

80's predicted this weekend ;D

and, lol.... am I quoting it as the bible? naah, just saying that wolfe isn't the only one giving the UAA lavish respect...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 21, 2005, 11:25:50 PM

Forecast is we may actually hit 40 this weekend! :'(

#3 for UAA just strikes me as far too high - don't forget that that conference includes (swamp shoes) Rochester! ;)

I notice you didn't include the rankings for the SCIAC.

Hmmm - good bball or good weather? (Thinks hard!) Wanna trade places? ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 21, 2005, 11:35:47 PM

Yeah, it's still a bit early for all of the power ratings to be sensible.

At least they have the sense not to overinflate the NCAC, because they have the very, very good (Wooster, Witt)- and the very, very bad (Hiram, Oberlin). Kind of like my house.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 21, 2005, 11:50:27 PM

Smed,

You've brought to mind a topic I've kind of wondered about - there is often discussion of the most competitive, BALANCED conferences, but I wonder if the NCAC has the strangle-hold on the most UNBALANCED conference.

Is there any other conference that has one or more national title contenders, but also one or more absolute cellar-dwellers?

(Despite the current woes of NPU [who are not THAT bad], the CCIW doesn't merit comparison since NPU has more national titles than anyone else!)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on December 22, 2005, 01:59:49 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 21, 2005, 09:09:29 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on December 21, 2005, 08:58:50 PM
I like the Wolfe rankings, it has the UAA as the strongest conference in DIII. At least those guys are getting some respect from somebody.

I think that alone explains why Wolfe gets little respect! ;) ;D

Just another comment on the UAA. I know most of the teams haven't played many tough games, but the conference has an overall winning percentage of 76% (53-17), including everyone being above 0.500 and two undefeated (CMU, NYU), not a bad start. It will be interesting to see if they can keep it up. Also, that winning percentage is sure to go down once they enter league play (there has only been one league game so far, CMU over Rochester).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 22, 2005, 04:13:19 AM

Kind of surprised the WIAC is that high considering they were thought to be having a down year. I guess it has evened out. The big boys like Oshkosh (#2 preseason, now with 3 losses), Platteville (lost to Dubuque), Whitewater (los to Loras) and Point (at Lakeland)have all had their hiccups. But up-and-comers like Stout and La Crosse have improved and closed the gap. Only Eau Claire, River Falls and Superior look to be assured 7-9 in the WIAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on December 22, 2005, 10:28:25 AM

Mr. Ypsi Nailed it!

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 22, 2005, 01:10:58 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on December 22, 2005, 01:59:49 AM
Also, that winning percentage is sure to go down once they enter league play (there has only been one league game so far, CMU over Rochester).

To paraphrase the Guiness commercial: "Brilliant!" :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on December 22, 2005, 03:23:42 PM

I am also surprised at the CAC being that high, but I don't know how the ranking is calcualted and the York success might be more substantial in the ratings than the futility at Goucher.

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 22, 2005, 04:03:27 PM

Any surprize at the UAA's high standing might be out of place at this point... Their non-conference winning percentage is the highest in the country at 76%! The CCIW is only at 65%, even with the three undefeated squads. The WIAC is at 74%.

I noted this on your other thread, OS, but the WIAC IS still winning about 3/4 of their non-con games (a bit down from the 80% we're used to, but the season isn't over yet).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 22, 2005, 06:31:42 PM

In defense of the CCIW (though I realize PS wasn't attacking them!), NPU has hit such rock-bottom (2-8, losing at home to a SLIAC school!) that Greg Sager is taking a 'mental health break' from Posting Up (but remember that they have more championship banners than any other team), and Carthage is off to an uncharacteristic start (3-6, but their coach was on the bench for several of NPU's titles - they'll be back!). Other than them, the conference is winning 80% of their games.

If we add in Wheaton, a perennial national power, who is WAY below standards this year (they graduated 4 of 5 starters, and lost the other [a future conderence MOP, IMO] for 'religious reasons' [not further publicly elaborated] plus two others who probably would have been starters this year - NO team can 'reload' from THAT degree of loss!), the top 5 in the CCIW have won 88% of their non-conference games.

I realize that EVERY conference's record would improve if you 'kick-out' the bottom 2 or 3 (duh! ;)), but just wanted to explain the 'special circumstances' of the so-far less than stellar CCIW record!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 22, 2005, 07:34:38 PM

I've seen two UAA teams play this season - Chicago and Wash U. I'm interested to see how they do in the UAA this year so I have some frame of reference on the quality of the league.

I'd take the CCIW's top 4 vs any league's top 4 this year. In the order I'd rank them right now...

1. Illinois Wesleyan (8-0)
2. Augustana (8-0)
3. Elmhurst (7-2)
4. North Central (8-0)

Augie has played a weak schedule as has North Central, but I think they're both very good teams. (NCC's head coach is Todd Raridon - the longtime and very successful coach at Nebraska Wesleyan.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 22, 2005, 07:46:24 PM

I'm going to be VERY interested to see what happens to North Central come conference play. Will they self-destruct like last season, or will they get it together and have a good conference showing?

Time will tell!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on December 22, 2005, 08:08:00 PM

PS -

I think that one of the reasons that NC has not gotten much Top 25 love this year stems from the self-immolation of last season. This is a brutal conference and most voters want to see how things pan out a bit.

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on December 22, 2005, 10:09:40 PM

Quote from: Old School on December 22, 2005, 01:10:58 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on December 22, 2005, 01:59:49 AM
Also, that winning percentage is sure to go down once they enter league play (there has only been one league game so far, CMU over Rochester).

To paraphrase the Guiness commercial: "Brilliant!" :D

Guinness is spelled with two n's, but otherwise good joke ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 22, 2005, 11:46:40 PM

You know, all this conference talk in regards to nonconference records and all that, should be discussed in the new Inter-conference thread! lol. :o

Though, I guess it is still Top 25 related!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on December 23, 2005, 05:36:05 PM

Quote from: Coach C on December 22, 2005, 08:08:00 PM
PS -

I think that one of the reasons that NC has not gotten much Top 25 love this year stems from the self-immolation of last season. This is a brutal conference and most voters want to see how things pan out a bit.

C

True

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 26, 2005, 11:14:03 PM

Regarding the proposed Poster's Top 25 Poll

I've decided not to run one. If anyone else is willing to set it up and keep track of all the information, I'd be happy to be a voter. Sorry to bust anyone's holiday bubbles. :'( It seems like a lot of work that I don't want to commit to! :-\

I do have a list of potential voters, so if someone wants to get one running, I can send you the list I compiled last season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 26, 2005, 11:33:03 PM

Quote from: Old School on December 26, 2005, 11:14:03 PM
Regarding the proposed Poster's Top 25 Poll

I've decided not to run one. If anyone else is willing to set it up and keep track of all the information, I'd be happy to be a voter. Sorry to bust anyone's holiday bubbles. :'( It seems like a lot of work that I don't want to commit to! :-\

I do have a list of potential voters, so if someone wants to get one running, I can send you the list I compiled last season.

Fortunately, the best part of the d3 season comes during the (mostly) lightest part of my 'season' - if no one else volunteers, I will do the Posters Top 25. I CANNOT guarantee that it will run EVERY week, but I'll do my best. If anyone can offer a better situation, I encourage you (no, I BEG you) to step forward, but otherwise I will do it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on December 27, 2005, 08:33:32 AM

Cabs - thanks for...

can we call that volunteering? - maybe only in the military sense of the word ;D

P.S. I would love to be a voter

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 27, 2005, 09:17:34 AM

Oh, can we still do a bottom 10?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on December 28, 2005, 09:35:59 PM

Carnegie Mellon beat Princeton tonight 51-46, leading the game probably more than 35 minutes of the game. Sloppy game overall for both teams but Carnegie did what they had to do.

Go Tartans

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 28, 2005, 10:04:18 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 27, 2005, 09:17:34 AM
Oh, can we still do a bottom 10?

#10 Princeton... :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bouttime on December 30, 2005, 08:39:31 AM

I'm interested to see how a win against a D1 team affects CMU's ranking. I feel that with their win and losses by several teams ahead of them that they will see a nice jump up in the polls.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 30, 2005, 11:06:30 AM

bouttime, this might not be the answer you were implying, but to remind the "newbies", the ranking in the various polls may be impacted by the win.

The result against a D1 school (or any other non-D3 school) has no effect on the NCAA Regional Rankings. The first of three weekly rankings will be released on Feb 8th.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 31, 2005, 09:36:01 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 26, 2005, 11:33:03 PM
Quote from: Old School on December 26, 2005, 11:14:03 PM
Regarding the proposed Poster's Top 25 Poll

I've decided not to run one. If anyone else is willing to set it up and keep track of all the information, I'd be happy to be a voter. Sorry to bust anyone's holiday bubbles. :'( It seems like a lot of work that I don't want to commit to! :-\

I do have a list of potential voters, so if someone wants to get one running, I can send you the list I compiled last season.

Fortunately, the best part of the d3 season comes during the (mostly) lightest part of my 'season' - if no one else volunteers, I will do the Posters Top 25. I CANNOT guarantee that it will run EVERY week, but I'll do my best. If anyone can offer a better situation, I encourage you (no, I BEG you) to step forward, but otherwise I will do it.

Alas! No one else has stepped up!

IF I am to do it, here are the rules:

I'm loathe to do 'by invitation only' since there are so many posters I don't really know. But I also want to guard against 'drive-by' posters. Thus, votes will be weighted: HoFers' votes are tripled, Starters and above are doubled, everyone else is at face value. (Statuses are as of the first poll - no later changes.)

Voters are allowed one pass - anyone who has not voted in the first two polls will not be allowed in (we want SOME consistency in the 'pundocracy')!

Anyone who seems (to me!) to be overly 'homerish' will be confronted off-line. If you convince me that the voting was legit, it will count. If not, it won't. (If this provision is unacceptable, I DID beg other people to take over the polling!)

Any objections (or suggestions or additions) to these rules should be posted by Jan 4; after that date they are THE LAW.

Votes for the first poster-poll must be submitted by 5pm, Jan 10 (for games thru Jan 8th). Send votes (or whatever!) to cabonney@netscape.net.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bouttime on January 01, 2006, 08:13:36 PM

Ralph, I was just curious about how it impacts the top 25 rank.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 01, 2006, 09:26:02 PM

bouttime, the d3hoops.com web site is being upgraded, so I cannot confirm the rankings from 2 weeks.

If I were to speculate the rise that CMU gets from the win, I would expect maybe another 25 votes in the vote total, e.g., every voter will rank CMU one spot higher by virtue of the win. I have not calculated the impact of any teams that have lost inthe last 2 weeks.

I will bet that CMU fans will be abuzz about the team when they return. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 01, 2006, 09:35:53 PM

Here's Carnegie Mellon in the polls this season.

Preseason: no votes
Week 1: no votes
Week 2: effective rank 29 (79 votes)
Week 3: rank 23 (114 votes)
Week 4: rank 22 (90 votes)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 01, 2006, 09:38:50 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 01, 2006, 09:26:02 PM
bouttime, the d3hoops.com web site is being upgraded, so I cannot confirm the rankings from 2 weeks.

Shouldn't be -- the site was only momentarily offline on New Year's Eve and earlier this afternoon. Only outdated, dumbed-down technology (such as, unfortunately, the built-in AOL browser) would show otherwise. You'll get a better browsing experience and more recent information webwide by using your PC's Internet Explorer rather than AOL's built-in IE.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 01, 2006, 11:34:16 PM

Thanks, Pat. I went over to msn.

bouttime, the voters seem to be consolidating their opinions. No one from #15 on down had an unexpected outcome. I can imagine that CMU might get more votes that would have gone to teams below them, but I don't think that they rise in the polls.

This week's polls may not show much change.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 03, 2006, 11:08:03 AM

Was there a vote this week or are we waiting until next week?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2006, 11:29:00 AM

There is a vote this week. We have a couple coaches and SIDs at new year's-type tournaments so we pushed it all back a day.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 03, 2006, 03:06:26 PM

Gotcha, we'll be looking forward to it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 03, 2006, 10:45:14 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 01, 2006, 09:26:02 PM
bouttime, ... f I were to speculate the rise that CMU gets from the win, I would expect maybe another 25 votes in the vote total, e.g., every voter will rank CMU one spot higher by virtue of the win. I have not calculated the impact of any teams that have lost in the last 2 weeks.

bouttime, CMU picked up 49 votes, about 2 more votes per voters! Twenty-five more would have left CMU in a tie with Lincoln for 21st. The Tartans "catapulted" (how about that for a great Medieval verb ;D :D ) to 19th on the strength of those extra 24 votes!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 04, 2006, 12:25:18 AM

Final from L.A...

Occidental 73
#4 Amherst 68

Great game to listen to.

Absolutely ridiculous that a game like this doesn't count for anything (not "in-region").

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: IWU DC on January 04, 2006, 12:46:26 AM

so exactly how many losses will it take for hanover to drop out of the top 25? 4 losses this early and still this highly rated?

Their wins arent exactly overwhelming...the opponents they have beaten (not including Berea whose record i could not find) have a combined record of 24-40. One would think they would have to come out on top in one of their big matchups and show the voters an impressive win to still deserve a top 25 ranking with this many early season losses.

just my two cents.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 04, 2006, 01:27:50 AM

Centre's the only thing close to a bad loss on this schedule, and Centre only has three losses itself. People extol the virtues of Robert Morris-Chicago all the time and don't you guys think that the two CCIW teams are worthy opponents? After all, to see some talk, the CCIW is invincible.

That's why it has taken so long to fall out of the poll. The voters respond to bad losses more than anything.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 04, 2006, 01:50:01 AM

Great game at the Rock tonight. Oxy took it to Amherst throughout the first half, as Amherst looked lost on offense the whole time, and at the other end had no answer for Sam Betty, Oxy's 6'7" junior wing with great instincts in the paint. Oxy's sophomore point Gemayal McBride simply owned Amherst's point (soph. Andrew Olson), which helped keep the Lord Jeffs in an offensive funk for 20 minutes. But Olson hit a big NBA 3-pointer with 0:01 in the half to reduce the Oxy lead from a disheartening 9 to a manageable 6.

In the second half, Amherst executed much better, and a couple of ticky-tack fouls on McBride forced him to spend a good part of the half on the bench. Oxy had plenty of chances to put the game away, but kept missing free throws, and Amherst ground their way back to a tie. That's when Oxy stepped up the defensive pressure, began to out-hustle the Jeffs, and started hitting free throws. The game was still in doubt right up to the last two possessions, but Oxy's defense kept Amherst at bay and pulled out the victory.

This game might have come out differently on a neutral court, but I'm willing to say that the better team won tonight. Certainly the best player on the floor, at least at the offensive end, wore Tiger white--that being Sam Betty. As long as Amherst failed to deny the entry pass, he pretty much did whatever he wanted inside: drive left, drive right, pull up jumper, dish back out.

As for Amherst, while they are a quality team who showed a lot of poise in their comeback, there is no way that they deserve the #1 vote they are getting. Of the teams I have seen, IWU and Wooster are clearly better, and UW-Stout, St. Thomas, Puget Sound, and (obviously) Occidental are right in the mix with the Lord Jeffs.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 04, 2006, 04:04:44 AM

Rober Morris-Chicago is awesome. NAIA or not.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 04, 2006, 08:19:31 AM

Below is a post I made last week on the WIAC board re: Robert Morris-Chicago. Hanover's close loss to them should be looked at very favorably.

I've seen Hanover twice this year and there is no question that they are not as good as the last two years. They lost so much from last year's team - Tommy Dennis, Matt Moore, and Ryan Lanning - and the guys stepping into those roles just aren't at that level...at least yet. Hanover is probably OK at 20-25, but if they fall out of the poll at some point it wouldn't surprise me.

Great HCAC game Saturday - #25 Bluffton @ #24 Hanover.
-----
Just a heads up on NAIA D1 #6 Robert Morris-Chicago...they're unbelievably talented. Their best players are...

* Reggie George (6-10, Jr) - transfer from D1 Iowa State.

* Freeman Taylor (6-6, Jr)

* Jerome Harper (6-5, Jr) - McDonald's All-American...transfer from JUCO, D1 Cincinnati

http://www.hoopscooponline.com/visitors/mcdonalds.html

* James Parker (6-1, Sr) - transfer from D1 Butler

* Aaron Wellington (5-11, Sr) - transfer from D1 Maryland Eastern Shore

* Melvin Council (6-3, Jr)

Any D3 team that hangs with Robert Morris-Chicago, as Wash U (lost by 3), Platteville (lost by 6), and Hanover (lost by 7) did, should be commended.

http://www.robertmorris.edu/athletics/mensbasketball/chicago/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 04, 2006, 09:06:01 AM

For anyone who hasn't seen it yet:

1    Illinois Wesleyan (24)    10-0    624    1
2    Wittenberg    10-1    565    3
3    Wooster    10-1    541    2
4    Amherst (1)    8-0    535    4
5    Albion    9-1    493    6
6    Hope    11-0    483    7
7    Lawrence    8-0    471    8
8    Puget Sound    8-2    445    5
9    Worcester Polytech    9-0    402    9
10    UW-Stout    11-1    399    11
11    York (Pa.)    8-1    398    10
12    Baldwin-Wallace    10-1    343    17
13    Augustana    10-1    330    13
14    Wartburg    8-1    238    15
15    Hampden-Sydney    9-0    220    19
16    Elmhurst    8-3    202    16
17    Randolph-Macon    9-2    200    12
18    Rochester    6-2    159    20
19    Carnegie Mellon    10-1    139    22
20    St. John Fisher    5-2    121    18
21    Lincoln    12-3    115    21
22    Ohio Northern    8-2    108    24
23    Mississippi College    8-1    85    —
24    Hanover    7-4    67    14
25    Bluffton    10-1    65    —

Dropped out: No. 23 St. Thomas, No. 25 UW-Oshkosh.

Others receiving votes: Widener 60, Catholic 58, Transylvania 43, UW-Whitewater 37, Maryville (Tenn.) 33, North Central 31, Ramapo 24, UW-Oshkosh 16, Hamilton 13, Occidental 11, St. Thomas 9, New Jersey City 8, Washington U. 7, Gustavus Adolphus 7, Virginia Wesleyan 6, Carroll 6, John Carroll 4, Calvin 3, Trinity (Texas) 1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on January 04, 2006, 09:43:10 AM

WOW - 4 Great Lakes Region teams in the top 6

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 04, 2006, 10:34:41 AM

I think Baldwin Wallace is proving their mettel at this point. Those teams from the Great Lakes Region are really rolling so far. Check out this chain: Witt's only loss is to Wooster, their only loss is to Baldwin Wallace, their only loss is to Albion and their only loss is outside d3.

Normally chains like this fall apart quickly and don't make for ver accurate rankings, but this one seems to hold up quite well. You throw in Hope to the mix (who hasn't lost yet, but could top the chain with a win over Albion on the 11th) and you've got a solid core of 2-6 which would be hard to argue with. Add Stout, Lawrence and any two of the following (Amherst, WPI, UPS, Augustana or Wartburg) and you've got a kick-ass top ten.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 04, 2006, 04:10:06 PM

With Amherst's loss last night, next Wednesday nights game between Hope and Albion in Albion could be a #4 vs #5 matchup.

Not to get ahead of ourselves of course but Hope faces Kalamazoo and Olivet this week, while Albion plays Adrian and Tri-State. Both should win both games.

Quite a matchup coming our way!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 04, 2006, 10:09:31 PM

Stout lost at the buzzer to La Crosse

66-56 with 3:27 remaining, North Central leads Illinois Wesleyan

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: titanfan on January 04, 2006, 10:14:04 PM

It 66-60 North Central over Illinois Wesleyan @ the Shirk Center with 2:30 to play. This North Central team is really good.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 04, 2006, 10:36:53 PM

IWU falls to NCC - going to be an interesting poll next week!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 04, 2006, 10:45:04 PM

1,- 2 - 3 - 4 from the Great Lakes?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 04, 2006, 10:48:37 PM

sac,

Barring upsets, I judge that highly likely (except I doubt IWU will fall THAT far).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 04, 2006, 10:54:54 PM

I doubt that as well Cabs, but its going to be tough to sort out that top 5.

Incidently the way the NCAA ranks teams, #1 and #2 in the GL would be Albion and Hope (no inregion losses) Witt and Woo have both lost in region.

Looks like I might get to see Final Four caliber teams eliminated in round 2 and 3 again this year >:(

........of course I now expect a meteoric rise from NCC into the top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 04, 2006, 11:16:04 PM

Yep. I think most of the voters were waiting for this game to find out what North Central was made of and as long as they were competitive I would have put them on my ballot win or lose.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 05, 2006, 02:02:36 AM

I imagine the top 5 will be nearly unanymously Albion, Hope, IWU, Witt, and Woo (alphabetically!) - I could make a good case for ANY order amongst them! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 05, 2006, 08:56:47 AM

Half the top 25 lost last night: IWU, Stout, Wartburg, Elmhurst, ONU... well half of them that played anyway... or else it just seems that way.

Anyway, I really thought this Wartburg team was underrated. Anyone closer to the situation know more? Was I way off or is Loras just a lot better than we thought?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 05, 2006, 09:07:17 AM

Obviously, another night or two like this one, and the whole thing is screwed up, but it looks like a boon for the GL teams in next week's top 25. Although I can see six or seven teams getting first place votes; it should be very interesting indeed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on January 05, 2006, 11:20:06 AM

Another night like this and it's screwed up? It's a mess now!!!!

I have to think that if hope remains undefeated, they are the #1 team in the nation, and they should be ok against Olivet. That sets up a meeting with top 5 Albion on the 11th.

Should be interesting!

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 05, 2006, 12:56:37 PM

They may very well be the best team. Not sure where the voters will come down on it, but Hope was on my short list. I expect IWU might still get a couple of No. 1 votes. Won't say more here because I don't want to influence the voters.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 05, 2006, 01:16:31 PM

Not sure about Loras. They did beat Whitewater to start the year off and the Warhawks are 4-0 in conference and 8-2 overall. But then again, Loras got smoked by Platteville and they are 1-3 and 6-6 overall! ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 05, 2006, 01:35:53 PM

I'm sure at least one of the voters will stick with IWU and I can imagine whoever the heck has been voting for Amherst will be able to convince him or herself to continue now that IWU has lost as well. Witt, Woo, Albion and Hope are obvious choices, Larry hasn't lost yet. Any or all of those teams could see top votes; I'm really looking forward to seeing how things pan out... lots of movement.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on January 05, 2006, 03:21:54 PM

I could understand the loyalty to Amherst as like many upstate New York and New England teams it sits out over the holidays. A 1/03 loss to Occidental with Williams coming up 1/7 might change that vote.

Not expecting 24 first places votes for IWU but not anticipating a single vote either. Its non-conference wins were against quality D3 & NAIA teams with significant margins of victory.

With Hope and Albion going head to head on 1/11, its possible voters will take a 'wait and see' approach on those two teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 05, 2006, 04:06:41 PM

How about we put those aforementioned five teams in a hat and draw them out? We could have David Stern MC it, in his own style. "The fifth ranked team in D-3 Hoops.Com is.....Amherst...." :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 05, 2006, 04:19:41 PM

Coach C and Pat, I don't want Hope ranked #1.

Unless we're talking about the final poll, attendance or best facility. ;D

My prediction is

1. IWU
2. Witt
3. Woo
4. Albion
5. Hope

But the points margins will likely narrow significantly. "Wait and see" on Hope/Albion seems logical to me. Of course we should probably wait and see what happens THIS weekend first.

One thing to consider

Albion beat BW by 3
BW beat Woo in 2 OT
Woo beat Witt by 3 on last 2nd shot

Personally these 4 GL teams may be to close to be able to logically rank in a correct order.

....and NCC debuts in the top 15 :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 05, 2006, 04:31:52 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 04, 2006, 10:34:41 AM

I think Baldwin Wallace is proving their mettel at this point. Those teams from the Great Lakes Region are really rolling so far. Check out this chain: Witt's only loss is to Wooster, their only loss is to Baldwin Wallace, their only loss is to Albion and their only loss is outside d3.

Normally chains like this fall apart quickly and don't make for ver accurate rankings, but this one seems to hold up quite well. You throw in Hope to the mix (who hasn't lost yet, but could top the chain with a win over Albion on the 11th) and you've got a solid core of 2-6 which would be hard to argue with. Add Stout, Lawrence and any two of the following (Amherst, WPI, UPS, Augustana or Wartburg) and you've got a kick-ass top ten.

I posted this before all the upsets the other night, but the chain is very interesting (as aluded to by sac). The Great Lakes is going to be a very tough region, especially if they get teamed up with the Midwest again in the tourney.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 05, 2006, 05:35:12 PM

Illinois Wesleyan has played a very tough schedule to date, and in my opinion (having seen all 11 of the games) the North Central team the Titans faced last night was the toughest IWU opponent to date by far.

Trying to evaluate each opponent at its best and ranking them as neutral court games might turn out, I think I'd go...

1. North Central (lost at home 74-70)
2. St. Xavier - NAIA I (won at home 81-61)
3. Westmont - NAIA I (won on road 76-60)
4. #8 Puget Sound (won neutral 104-87)
5. #24 Hanover (won at home 71-61)
6. Wash U (won on road 83-56)
7. Wabash (won on road 79-67)
8. Olivet Nazarene - NAIA I (won at home 87-68)
9. Chicago (won on road 71-67)
10. Texas-Dallas (won neutral court 71-58)
11. Illinois College (won on the road 85-57)

Sometimes the games don't end up as they are supposed to on paper. For example, I feel 8-3 Wash U is a better than 7-4 Chicago and I think the full UAA season will show that (Chicago is a solid team though), but IWU won at Wash U by 27 in a game IWU was up as much as 40 I think and won at Chicago by 4. There are going to be games where the "underdog" just simply outplays the favorite and there are going to be games when absolutely everything clicks for the favorite and it leads to a blowout win, sometimes even over a very good team.

Last night's IWU/NCC game was one of those cases where NCC just outplayed Illinois Wesleyan, but the underdog Cardinals are actually very close in talent to Illinois Wesleyan -- that formula is going to lead to an upset almost every time. In the Chicago game, IWU was just simply more talented and, as well as the Maroons played and as close as they game got at the end, Chicago just wasn't going to win the game without IWU making some big mistakes (say, missing FT's, turning the ball over, etc). I'd same the same about the IWU/Puget Sound game last week...a very substantial talent gap.

The voters have a tough job. They have to sort through the entire body of work (the full schedule to date), which is something that gets easier as the season goes on. Now they are looking at 10-12 games played instead of 2-3. They have to try to identify the games where a given team may have overperformed and the games where a team underperformed. This week they'll have to ask themselves where IWU's entire body of work stacks up vs Wittenberg's, Hope's, Wooster's, Albion's, etc. In this case, you really can't argue with however it turns out. Too close to call. And in general, as long as the voters truly are looking at the complete picture - and not over-reacting to one game - it is hard to argue with how they vote. Afterall, this is Division III - they didn't all just watch the IWU/North Central game on ESPN2. Most of the voters are just looking at a piece of paper with numbers on it, just like we are.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on January 05, 2006, 09:23:17 PM

Q -

Actually, I would argure that it gets easier to a point, and then it begins to get harder to sort thought the whole season. This may be exactly the point where it starts to get harder and the voters start earining their pay.

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 05, 2006, 09:35:38 PM

Quote from: Coach C on January 05, 2006, 09:23:17 PM
Q -

Actually, I would argure that it gets easier to a point, and then it begins to get harder to sort thought the whole season. This may be exactly the point where it starts to get harder and the voters start earining their pay.

C

Actually, this week is 'easy' - just take Smed's suggestion (except for his Amherst example - they can go in the 6-9 drawing with Lawrence, UPS, and WPI!) and do a blind drawing amongst IWU, Witt, Woo, Albion, and Hope. I'm firmly convinced those will be nearly unanymously the top five, but have NO clue in which order they will fall!

Assuming no weekend upsets, MY order (for what little it is worth!) would be the order I listed them, with (if no further losses the next week) the winner of Hope-Albion jumping all the way to #1 the following week. That's how close I see the top five (or perhaps the top six - I think Lawrence should probably also be in the draw).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 05, 2006, 10:20:23 PM

Illinois Wesleyan (10-1)
* Loss: vs North Central (10-0), 70-74
* Wins vs D3's .500+:
- @ Wabash (8-3), 79-67
- @ Chicago (7-4), 71-67
- @ Wash U (8-3), 83-56
- vs #24 Hanover (8-4), 72-61
- (n) #8 Puget Sound (9-2), 104-87

Wittenberg (11-1)
* Loss: @ #3 Wooster (10-1), 83-86
* Wins vs D3's .500+:
- (n) Tufts (8-2), 69-65
- @ #18 Rochester (7-2), 52-50
- @ Transylvania (10-2), 62-51
- vs #22 Ohio Northern (8-3), 65-54

Wooster (10-1)
* Loss: vs #12 Baldwin-Wallace, 108-113 (2OT)
* Wins vs D3's .500+
- vs #10 UW-Stout (11-2), 90-82
- vs #2 Wittenberg (11-1), 86-83

Amherst (8-1)
* Loss: @ Occidental (9-1), 68-73
* Wins vs D3's .500+:
- (n) Westfield St (8-5), 102-77
- (n) Pomona-Pitzer (5-4), 61-42

Albion (10-1)
* Loss: vs Michigan-Dearborn (NAIA 2, 4-8), 77-88
* Wins vs D3's .500+:
- (n) Juanita (6-6), 78-59
- (n) #12 Baldwin-Wallace (11-1), 75-72
- vs #16 Elmhurst (8-4), 74-66
- @ Adrian (6-6), 75-58

Hope (12-0)
* Loss: n/a
* Wins vs D3's .500+:
- vs #16 Elmhurst (8-4), 70-53
- vs Lakeland (9-4), 54-46
- vs John Carroll (8-4), 89-77

Lawrence (8-0)
* Loss: n/a
* Wins vs D3's .500+
- vs UW-Oshkosh (8-4), 82-75 (OT)
- @ Milwaukee Engineering (8-4), 74-53

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 05, 2006, 10:35:55 PM

Nice work Q

Good luck voters, I don't envy your task. ??? ??? ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 05, 2006, 10:52:22 PM

Q,

After seeing your summary, I'll stick with my earlier post (except perhaps NOT including Lawrence - I'd forgotten that their ONLY impressive win was over Oshkosh, which doesn't seem NEARLY as impressive now as it did then).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 06, 2006, 05:16:51 AM

I think most of us will agree that Oshkosh might have been a little overrated at the beginning of the season. And, to tell you the truth, I was amazed that Lawrence was left out of the preseason Top 25, though the voters have made up for that since then...even though they really haven't beaten anyone! So actually, the voters have over-compensated Lawrence! ??? They've beaten two LMC teams, two perennial bottom feeding MWC teams, winless Goucher, Vanguard (no clue on them), Carthage and Oshkosh.

My point isn't Lawrence, it's Oshkosh!

Anyway, Oshkosh has played a pretty tough schedule. They lost to Lawrence (in overtime) for the 3rd year running, this time in Appleton. They lost to Point at Quandt, lost to ranked Stout on a long three-pointer at the buzzer, lost to ranked Wartburg and handed Carroll College their only loss of the season. So, that's pretty decent. Sure, if you're a great team, you should be winning those games, but they aren't losing to cupcakes! >:( The teams that they lost to have a combined 36-8 record now. Point (9-4), Lawrence (8-0), Stout (11-2), Wartburg (8-2), with the latter two teams just losing their 2nd games of the year this week.

With four in-region losses already, it'll be hard for Oshkosh to get a Pool C bid, but if they get into the tourney, I think they'll do well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on January 06, 2006, 08:50:26 AM

I wasn't necessarily limiting my analysis of the difficulty of voting the poll to the top 9. I think it really is hard all the way down. Q has done what I think most voters do with the information that Pat provides every week. it just takes a ton of time to do that for 40 or so teams.

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 06, 2006, 12:21:58 PM

OS,

I wasn't intending to imply that Oshkosh was a weak team - just that they were clearly not the #2 team that Lawrence first got the attention for beating.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on January 06, 2006, 01:53:42 PM

Personally, if I were voting I think I would have to put Witt #1. Especially after seeing how their schedule stacks up to the others in the mix. If I had to wager a guess, it would be that Witt and IWU swap positions followed by Wooster, Albion and Hope. I agree with sac in that there should be a "wait and see" on Hope and Albion until their meeting next week. I also don't know if I would vault the winner of that game to #1. Although, the voting will probably be so tight, it wouldn't take too much of a swing for that to happen.

It's just when you go down the chain that Hoops Fan brought up, these teams seem just about as even as you could get! I guess we can look forward to on heck of a Final 4, umm, I mean sectional, wherever that might end up being??!! ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 06, 2006, 02:42:19 PM

Sectional? With the depth in the Great Lakes, two of these teams may end up playing in the second round. Wait, is the second round sectionals? I get so confused with this new format. Regionals determine the final four, right? So sectionals pick the final 16, which would make the second round sectionals... which means my post is now totally obsolete. Thank you and goodnight.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 06, 2006, 03:09:33 PM

Regarding Oshkosh, I'm going to say the SAME thing I've said so many times before this year. They started off the year highly over-rated. Just because they returned everybody from last year's team and because the individual players, on paper, are talented, and because they were the last team last year to beat UWSP, doesn't mean they deserved, by any stretch of the imagination, the #2 ranking in the preseason poll. Q has said it quite a few times before, but you've really got to look at Oshkosh's "full body of work" last year. Did they beat UWSP? Yes, they did, on their own home floor. But they lost last year, at Eau Claire. They lost at home to La Crosse. It took overtime to dispense Eau Claire in the first round of the conference tournament, AT HOME. Heck, it took overtime to dispense with Superior AT HOME in the second half of the season.

What this shows is that, while Oshkosh had the ability to get up for big games, they also had the undesirable ability to play down to their opponents when the opponents weren't top notch. Oshkosh was an 8 loss team last year. They had a history of playing poorly in games that didn't have a lot of hype. There definately were, and I believe still are, questions about how well the team played AS a team, and definate questions about their team defense and how hard they played.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2006, 03:50:37 PM

I think that's borne out of a feeling that the best team in the WIAC is by default a national title contender. It seemed like that team was Oshkosh. Apparently not.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 06, 2006, 05:29:21 PM

I agree with that sentiment, and, while Oshkosh was the "pick" this year, at least from the SID's, I don't think that there was a WIAC team this season that PRESEASON was a national title contender.

The WIAC teams earn their mettle by passing the test of time and surviving the rather grueling in-conference schedule. After making my last post, I was going to write another, saying that the WIAC may, in fact, be down this year (I think I wrote that to you about a month ago over IM while Hoopsville was on air). There's only one team (La Crosse) that is undefeated this year in the non-con. The usual suspects Oshkosh (2 non-con losses) Point (3 non-con losses) Whitewater (2 non-con losses) and Platteville (2 non-con losses) haven't completely dominated their non-conference foes like they've done as a collective group, in years past. There may be a changing of the guard, but I've felt all season like there was a vacuum at the top with the graduation of the major contributors to Point's 2 time Nat. Champ. teams. Which teams had the most talent and experience coming back? Oshkosh, La Crosse, Stout, Whitewater. Which teams are near the top? WW, LaX, Stout. Point is back near the top, and this just proves the talent of the guys who weren't top contributors but were just role players, or even guys who didn't play at all.

But with Point, they're just SO young, and this has been proved this season. They're in second in the league, but they've lost games they shouldn't have. As the year goes on, this team will just gain experience and get better.

Who is the "team to beat" in the WIAC right now? I'd say it's gotta be Whitewater. They've rather quietly taken the lead in the conference race. Tomorrow's Point/Stout game is a big game and with it, the conference will start to spread out a bit... but as we saw 4 and 5 years go in the WIAC, the conference title is won in late January and February, not at the New Year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 06, 2006, 06:06:21 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 06, 2006, 05:29:21 PM
I agree with that sentiment, and, while Oshkosh was the "pick" this year, at least from the SID's, I don't think that there was a WIAC team this season that PRESEASON was a national title contender.

The WIAC teams earn their mettle by passing the test of time and surviving the rather grueling in-conference schedule. After making my last post, I was going to write another, saying that the WIAC may, in fact, be down this year (I think I wrote that to you about a month ago over IM while Hoopsville was on air). There's only one team (La Crosse) that is undefeated this year in the non-con. The usual suspects Oshkosh (2 non-con losses) Point (3 non-con losses) Whitewater (2 non-con losses) and Platteville (2 non-con losses) haven't completely dominated their non-conference foes like they've done as a collective group, in years past. There may be a changing of the guard, but I've felt all season like there was a vacuum at the top with the graduation of the major contributors to Point's 2 time Nat. Champ. teams. Which teams had the most talent and experience coming back? Oshkosh, La Crosse, Stout, Whitewater. Which teams are near the top? WW, LaX, Stout. Point is back near the top, and this just proves the talent of the guys who weren't top contributors but were just role players, or even guys who didn't play at all.

But with Point, they're just SO young, and this has been proved this season. They're in second in the league, but they've lost games they shouldn't have. As the year goes on, this team will just gain experience and get better.

Who is the "team to beat" in the WIAC right now? I'd say it's gotta be Whitewater. They've rather quietly taken the lead in the conference race. Tomorrow's Point/Stout game is a big game and with it, the conference will start to spread out a bit... but as we saw 4 and 5 years go in the WIAC, the conference title is won in late January and February, not at the New Year.

Although, the preseason favorite to win the WIAC may be overrated or just not playing at their best right now, whoever wins that league will be a force come tournament time. Simply because they will be battle tested.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on January 07, 2006, 01:42:09 AM

With NYUs win over Rochester tonight by 18 it looks like they might be legit this year. It also sets up a great game for Sunday between the undefeated violets (11-0) and #19 CMU (11-1), fresh off their easy win over Brandeis.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 07, 2006, 09:31:03 AM

It also begs the question of just how fast a team can go from 0 to 60 mph in terms of the Top 25 poll. NYU didn't receive even one stinking vote in last week's poll, but when the ballots go out early next week the pollsters could find the Violets sitting at 12-0 and the proud new owners of a pair of victories over Top 25 teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 07, 2006, 09:46:28 PM

#3 Wooster 97 Washington & Jefferson 72

Wooster easily wins the Wash & Jeff tournament knocking off the Presidents on their home floor. The College of New Jersey (8-2) was a tougher opponent for Wooster in the first round last night but the Scots won that game as well.

Wooster was led tonight by Evan Will with 20 points, James Cooper with 17 points and Tom Port with 12 points.

Wooster is now 12-1 and next up is a road game at Allegheny on 1/11.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 07, 2006, 10:09:50 PM

...pair of victories over Top 25 teams.

The nonshrinking Violets aren't the only team to pull that trick over the last 4 days. ;D

The Wilmington Quakers in the OAC have beat both #12 Baldwin Wallace (today it was 64-61 on BW's court) and #22 Ohio Northern on 1/4, also a big road win.

At 12-1 overall and tied for first in the OAC at 5-1, Wilmington should also be in the Top 25 at this juncture and they didn't get any votes in the last poll either.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 07, 2006, 10:13:42 PM

I find it hard to fault the voters for not voting for NYU given their penchant for wracking up a gaudy non-conference record before UAA play brings them down to earth.

Exhibit A: This year NYU has beaten three teams with winning records – Ursinus (8-4), St. Joseph's (L.I.) (7-5) and Westfield State (8-5). They sport two wins over Polytech, a win over first-year Immaculata, a win over Elmira (3-8) and an OT win over Mt. St. Vincent. I can't justify putting them in the Top 25 with that slate.

Exhibit B: In 2004-2005 NYU went 8-1 before UAA play began and 8-9 afterwards. In 2003-2004 NYU went 9-0 before UAA play began and 12-9 afterwards. In 2002-2003 NYU went 7-2 before UAA play began and 5-11 afterwards.

Yes, the win against Rochester is nice.

But what, before that, made the NYU worthy of Top 25 votes? If they play all CUNYAC teams and go undefeated, are they better than other teams playing better schedules?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 07, 2006, 11:21:52 PM

To bring a topic discussed on the SCIAC board (and elsewhere) back to its natural home:

NCC (still undefeated and conqueror of #1 IWU) obviously should enter the top 25 (probably entering all the way up in the mid-teens). Wilmington (winner over TWO top 25 teams this week and still only one loss) obviously should enter the top 25. IF NYU beats CM, they would also have TWO wins over top 25 teams this week (and still be undefeated, if previously untested) and should obviously enter the top 25. Occidental downed #4 Amherst and still has only one loss (though, again, their wins otherwise are pretty undistinguished) at least deserves serious consideration for top 25. And several teams JUST outside the top 25 continued to win this week.

BUT, for new teams to enter, sombody has to drop out (does that put me in the running for Mr. Obvious? ;D) - who?

With two losses this week (one bad, one highly respectable) on top of three earlier (respectable) losses, I'd say Elmhurst is toast. #25 Hanover lost its 4th game and is (for now, at least) history. #21 Lincoln and #22 ONU both lost and are probably gone. Anyone else? (Is Rochester in danger? Stout lost twice, but starting at #10 will probably cling to life in the low 20s. IF NYU downs CM, is CM in trouble?)

Also, neither NYU or Wilmington had ANY votes this past week, and Oxy only had 11 - has any team ever jumped THAT far in a single week half way through the season?

Thoughts?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 07, 2006, 11:41:37 PM

Again, we should just put 35 names in a hat and draw 'em out. They'll shift again next week! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: formerbant10 on January 08, 2006, 12:51:16 AM

With the top 2 NE teams losing, is there any shot some of the other NE teams will get any votes this week?

Bates, Trinity, and Tufts are all at 9-2, one of them should be able to get some votes from somebody.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 08, 2006, 01:09:37 AM

Quote from: formerbant10 on January 08, 2006, 12:51:16 AM
With the top 2 NE teams losing, is there any shot some of the other NE teams will get any votes this week?

Bates, Trinity, and Tufts are all at 9-2, one of them should be able to get some votes from somebody.

Although the NCAA has 'regional quotas' (almost), the d3hoops.com poll does not. There are still a lot of 0 or 1 loss teams (many with tougher schedules) hoping for their shot at the top 25. Bates, Trinity, and Tufts can join the queue! But I suspect they will be several slots behind NCC, Wilmington, Occidental(?!), and NYU (IF they beat CM later today), as well as several JUST shy of top 25 teams who continued to win.

One or more of your teams MAY (or may not) join the ranks of ORV; don't expect anything more than that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 08, 2006, 11:45:26 AM

Mr. Ypsi:

Good question about who will drop out.

I suspect these teams will but it's just a "top of my head" guess...

- No. 25 Hanover who lost to Bluffton. It's another loss for a team clinging to the Top 25.

- No. 22 ONU who lost to Wilmington. The Quakers will steal some of their votes.

- No. 21 Lincoln who lost to Leb Val. If they lost to Messiah and beat Leb Val, they may've been okay. But the Dutch are not a strong team so that loss will hurt.

- No. 16 Elmhurst who lost to Millikin and Augustana. An 0-2 week puts you in danger unless you're Top 10 (see UW-Stout). Losing to an unranked team hurts even more. Plus I'm not sure voters will put four CCIW teams on their ballots with NCC emerging.

- No. 18 Rochester IF NYU beats CMU. UR is now behind two UAA teams in the standings, CMU and NYU. The Violets will be a strong candidate (finally) if they beat CMU and could steal some of UR's votes.

Amherst, WPI and Stout will fall, but not out of the poll. Wartburg could drop, too.

So Wilmington, Oxy, NCC and maybe NYU on. Hanover, ONU, Lincoln, Elmhurst and maybe Rochester off.

Hey, looks like there's room for one more surprise team to get in the Top 25. :)

Btw, Hope went from ORV with 59 to No. 14 between the Preseason and Week 1. That's the biggest jump I can remember in recent polls.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 08, 2006, 01:27:36 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on January 08, 2006, 11:45:26 AM
Btw, Hope went from ORV with 59 to No. 14 between the Preseason and Week 1. That's the biggest jump I can remember in recent polls.

I had our crack staff check this out. Hope gained 195 points in that week one poll, but so did Wittenberg, going from #10 to #3. Lawrence topped both, gaining 203 points to go from ORV (24 votes) to #15. These are the biggest jumps so far this season. During the season (as opposed to from preseason to week 1), the biggest gain belongs to UW-Stout in week 3, gaining 156 points to move from #22 to #12. The biggest drop belongs to Gustavus Adolphus, which shed 269 points in week 3, dropping out from #11 to ORV (64 votes).

The biggest gainers and losers tend to be in either the Week 1 or Final polls. Here's the biggest movers the past 4 seasons, including the biggest regular season mover where applicable:

'04-'05:
gainer: Rochester +401 in Final poll (#21 to #4) (...and UR fans still complain about this ranking)
gainer (regular): UW-Oshkosh +169 in week 3 (#24 to #14)
loser: Franklin & Marshall -319 in week 7 (#11 to ORV/27 votes)

'03-'04:
gainer: Lawrence +334 in Final poll (#23 to #7)
gainer (regular): Wittenberg +167 in week 11 (#18 to #10)
loser: UW-Whitewater -227 in week 12 (#7 to #15)

'02-'03:
gainer: Gustavus Adolphus +505 in Final poll (#24 to #3)
gainer (week 1): Illinois Wesleyan +208 in week 1 (ORV/36 votes to #14)
gainer (regular): Wooster +150 in week 2 (#20 to #14)
loser: Christopher Newport -266 in week 12 (#11 to #23)

'01-'02:
gainer: Randolph-Macon +308 in week 6 (#25 to #11) (then in week 7 they gained another 229 points and moved to #1)
loser: Illinois Wesleyan -440 in week 1 (#2 to #24)
loser (regular): William Paterson -387 in week 2 (#8 to ORV/34 votes)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 08, 2006, 01:42:32 PM

Dave:

That's incredible work. Wow. Definitely karma for you.

By the way, Carnegie Mellon leads NYU by 5 at the half in NYC. The kids on WNYU are doing a very nice job. The link is off the Daily Dose if you want to listen in.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 08, 2006, 08:54:45 PM

Talismanred.com has North Central #1. Looks like these records are updated through last night, which is pretty impressive.

http://talismanred.com/ratings/hoops/byrate4.txt

1 North Central 11 0 692
2 Hope (MI) 13 0 668
3 Illinois Weslyn 11 1 651
4 Wittenberg 12 1 633
5 Occidental 9 1 625
6 Lawrence 9 0 621
7 Wooster 12 1 619
8 New York Univ. 11 0 613
9 Hampden-Sydney 10 0 604
10 Hamilton 8 0 602
11 Baldwin-Wallace 11 2 602
12 Wilmington (OH) 12 1 600
13 Carnegie-Mellon 11 1 596
14 Albion 11 1 595
15 Puget Sound 10 2 585
16 Amherst 9 1 584
17 Bluffton 11 1 583
18 Ohio Northern 9 3 580
19 Wis.-Whitewater 10 2 580
20 Wis.-LaCrosse 12 2 579
21 Augustana (IL) 12 1 575
22 Tufts 9 2 572
23 Worcester Tech 10 1 569
24 Mississippi Col. 10 1 568
25 Carroll 8 1 567
Transylvania 11 2 567
Wis.-Stout 11 3 567

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: patcummings on January 08, 2006, 11:18:33 PM

Wow...if Talismanred (not sure who that is anyway) has NYU #8...wow...what a complete and utter joke. That, to me, is more haughty than North Central, who could certainly merit some top billing. The competition NYU has faced is nowhere near that of tens of schools under it...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 08, 2006, 11:26:46 PM

Quote from: patcummings on January 08, 2006, 11:18:33 PM
Wow...if Talismanred (not sure who that is anyway) has NYU #8...wow...what a complete and utter joke. That, to me, is more haughty than North Central, who could certainly merit some top billing. The competition NYU has faced is nowhere near that of tens of schools under it...

Prior to this week, anyway!

Yeah, there are a number of howlers there - Oxy will be #24-28, I predict, not #5. And look at #14-16!

If you scroll down the full list from the link, you'll find some teams that are probably 100 or more slots out of where they belong.

Maybe there is a reason that I, too, have never heard of Talismanred! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njlincolnlion on January 09, 2006, 09:27:17 AM

I still can't believe Lincoln lost to Lebanon Valley ??? . This loss is really gonna hurt.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 09, 2006, 11:08:39 AM

Here is my rundown as of Sunday:

1. IWU (11-1, 1-1) home loss to North Central, win at Carthage
2. Wittenberg (12-1, 3-1) wins over Kenyon and at Oberlin
3. Wooster (12-1, 4-0) neutral win over New Jersey, win at Wash & Jeff
4. Amherst (9-1) loss at Occidental, win over Williams
5. Albion (11-1, 2-0) wins at Adrian and vs Tri-State
6. Hope (13-0, 2-0) wins over Kalamazoo and at Olivet
7. Lawrence (9-0, 3-0) win over Ripon
8. Puget Sound (10-2, 4-0) wins over Pacific Lutheran and George Fox
9. WPI (10-1, 1-1) win at Babson, home loss to Clark
10. Stout (11-3, 4-2) home loss to La-Crosse, road loss to Steven's Point (2OT)
11. York (11-1, 1-1) wins over Brockport State, Lebanon Valley and Messiah
12. Baldwin-Wallace (11-2, 5-1) win at Mount Union, home loss to Wilmington
13. Augustana (12-1, 2-0) wins at North Park and over #16 Elmhurst
14. Wartburg (9-2, 2-1) loss at Loras, win at Cornell
15. Hampden-Sydney (10-0, 4-0) win at Bridgewater
16. Elmhurst (8-5, 0-2) home loss to Millikin, loss at #13 Augustana
17. Randolph-Macon (12-2, 7-0) wins at Bridgewater and over Guilford and Emory & Henry
18. Rochester (8-3, 1-2) win at Rochester Tech, loss at NYU, win at Brandeis
19. Carnegie Mellon (12-1, 3-0) wins at Brandeis and at NYU (2OT)
20. St. John Fisher (8-2, 2-0) wins at Cazenovia, Utica and Hartwick
21. Lincoln (14-4) wins at Franklin & Marshall, neutral win over Messiah and a neutral loss to Lebanon Valley
22. Ohio Northern (9-3, 4-2) home loss to Wilmington, win over Captial
23. Mississippi College (10-1, 7-1) wins at Texas Lutheran and Schreiner
24. Hanover (8-5, 1-1) win over Franklin, home loss to #25 Bluffton
25. Bluffton (12-1, 2-0) wins over Manchester and at #24 Hanover

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PowerBall on January 09, 2006, 12:08:25 PM

I can see CMU making a jump in the Top 15 but NYU has yet to recieve a vote and I don't think one win over Rochester will get them many unless UR donates them over to a fellow UAA member. Not happening.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bouttime on January 09, 2006, 12:47:11 PM

Quote from: PowerBall on January 09, 2006, 12:08:25 PM
I can see CMU making a jump in the Top 15 but NYU has yet to recieve a vote and I don't think one win over Rochester will get them many unless UR donates them over to a fellow UAA member. Not happening.

I completly agree with this. After its second loss it conference Rochester will drop out of the top 25. After going 1-1 on the season against real opponets NYU will get some votes but will not make the top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on January 09, 2006, 12:51:12 PM

One correction to Hoops Fan's list, Rochester's loss was not at home, it was at NYU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 09, 2006, 03:28:06 PM

I think NYU has a shot at getting in. They beat Rochester and took Mellon to double OT. Their schedule hasn't been that tough, but I think they deserve a spot. We'll see how many voters actually agree with me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bouttime on January 09, 2006, 04:16:49 PM

Only 4 of NYU's 11 wins are against teams with winning records. Two of their wins were against 2-6 Polytecnic. I think these facts shows that NYU hardly merits being included in the top 25

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TheFence on January 09, 2006, 05:26:20 PM

I can't believe I'm lobbying for NYU, but 11-1 is 11-1 no matter who you play. Yes it's a week schedule, but a decisive win over Rochester is huge and taking CMU to 2 OTs is big as well. Again Top 5 Wooster only beat Rochester by 1 so that should show you how good a win that was for the Violets. A good week-end for NYU should get them in. If not I'm sure NYU will prove tough throughout the very tough UAA this year and earn it's merit at some time down the line

Time will tell.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 09, 2006, 05:48:14 PM

Quote from: TheFence on January 09, 2006, 05:26:20 PM
I can't believe I'm lobbying for NYU, but 11-1 is 11-1 no matter who you play.

Actually, no, it's not.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 09, 2006, 06:02:01 PM

Quote from: TheFence on January 09, 2006, 05:26:20 PMAgain Top 5 Wooster only beat Rochester by 1 [...]

I believe you are thinking of "Top 5 Wittenberg" (soon, presumably, to be "Top 1 Wittenberg.") Mistaking Wooster and Wittenberg won't increase your life expectancy in Wooster or Springfield, Ohio. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on January 09, 2006, 07:15:42 PM

Quote from: TheFence on January 09, 2006, 05:26:20 PM
Again Top 5 Wooster only beat Rochester by 1 so that should show you how good a win that was for the Violets.

It was Wittenberg and yes, they only beat them by one, but it was the 2nd game of the season for Witt and it was at Rochester. Yes, NYU beat Rochester convincingly, but it was at NYU, not at Rochester.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 09, 2006, 08:09:02 PM

New top 25 is out:
1. Wittenberg
2. Hope
3. Wooster
4. Albion....

...hmm. I think I see a trend here! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 09, 2006, 08:31:31 PM

Mid-season gains of 200 or more points in one polling week are rare; the feat hasn't happened since Randolph-Macon did it in the '01-'02 season (see my post #509 on previous page of this discussion). But this week not one but two teams pulled it off:
#12 North Central gained an astounding 270 points (that's nearly 11 positions on the average ballot)
#17 Wilmington leapt up 209 points from having ZERO points cumulative this season. That may be the largest jump from 0 in the history of the men's poll.

In the "what goes up, must come down" department, we also had two drops of more than 200 points (think of 200 points as 8 stories; usually fatal):
#18 UW-Stout dropped 224 points to fall from 10th
Elmhurst lost 201 points (99.5% of their support) to drop from 16th; they cling to one vote for #25 on one ballot.

Congratulations to Wittenberg for what I believe is their first ever #1 ranking in the D3hoops.com poll. Whodathunkit for D3's winningest program of all time!

Quite a shake-up this week! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 09, 2006, 08:52:02 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 09, 2006, 08:31:31 PM

Congratulations to Wittenberg for what I believe is their first ever #1 ranking in the D3hoops.com poll.

That David Collinge is a truly magnanimous gentleman for a Wooster alum! ;) :D 8)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 09, 2006, 09:21:34 PM

A dynamic of the poll that will be big factor the rest of the way is the relative strength/weakness of various conferences. Wittenberg, a solid choice as the new #1, plays in the NCAC where the Big 2 are just not challenged all that often...and Witt has already played their game at Wooster.

Here is Witt's schedule the rest of the way...

Jan 11, 2006 Earlham
Jan 14, 2006 Hiram
Jan 18, 2006 Ohio Wesleyan
Jan 21, 2006 at Allegheny
Jan 25, 2006 Wabash
Jan 28, 2006 at Denison
Feb 1, 2006 at Earlham
Feb 4, 2006 Wooster
Feb 8, 2006 at Ohio Wesleyan
Feb 11, 2006 at Hiram
Feb 15, 2006 at Wabash
Feb 18, 2006 Allegheny

Meanwhile, a team like #5 Illinois Wesleyan has 5 regular season games remaining vs teams that currently are or have been in the poll -- 2 vs Elmhurst, 2 vs #10 Augustana, and 1 at #15 North Central.

Hope and Albion have to play each other twice and Calvin twice, and there's always a 4th team in the MIAA that knocks a contender or two off.

The WIAC teams will beat the daylights out of each other...it is one of those kinds of years in Wisconsin.

I think the voters are going to have a hard time evaluating the top of the poll as the season goes on because some of the key top five candidates - from the likes of the CCIW, MIAA, and WIAC - are without question going to lose games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on January 09, 2006, 11:34:37 PM

The UAA also seems to be getting some more attention with 4 of the 8 teams in the conference getting votes this week, you can see deiscanton's post on the UAA board for a summary.

Obviously CMU has the edge at this point by opening up with 3 road wins, but it will be interesting to see how they do at WashU and Chicago (which is a road trip that had not been swept in sometime before CMU did it last year to set up the title game with Rochester). They will also need to hold serve at home which they failed to do twice last year against very beatable oponents (Brandeis and WashU).

Also, I am glad that CMU dropped a non-conference game to regain focus after the big win at Princeton rather than a conference game. They could win the UAA for the first time since the league's inception after being picked to finish fourth in the preseason (which I couldn't really understand after they finished second last year and returned their two leading scorers as well as several other key reserves).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 10, 2006, 05:31:24 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 09, 2006, 09:21:34 PM
Meanwhile, a team like #5 Illinois Wesleyan has 5 regular season games remaining vs teams that currently are or have been in the poll -- 2 vs Elmhurst, 2 vs #10 Augustana, and 1 at #15 North Central.

You mean #12 North Central! :) :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 10, 2006, 07:53:14 AM

I do think this year OWU and Wabash can definitely give the "Big Two" fits. 'Bash has rolled off 8 in a row. So I don't think Witt is all that secure.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njlincolnlion on January 10, 2006, 09:01:25 AM

Well it's was nice while it lasted having Lincoln in the top 25. Hopefully, now that the conference schedules are in full swing, the current Top 25 will start to knock each other out, Lincoln wins it remaining games, and gets back into the top 25, with the NCAA's being our ultimate goal.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 10, 2006, 09:48:51 AM

Here's the new one:

1    Wittenberg ( 8 )    12-1    594    2
2    Hope (9)    13-0    576    6
3    Wooster (2)    12-1    574    3
4    Albion (2)    11-1    536    5
5    Illinois Wesleyan (4)    11-1    518    1
6    Lawrence    9-0    491    7
7    Puget Sound    10-2    441    8
8    Amherst    9-1    435    4
9    York (Pa.)    11-1    433    11
10    Augustana    12-1    380    13
11    Hampden-Sydney    10-0    321    15
12    North Central    11-0    301    —
13    Baldwin-Wallace    11-2    256    12
14    Randolph-Macon    12-2    253    17
15    Worcester Polytech    10-1    233    9
16    Carnegie Mellon    12-1    222    19
17    Wilmington    12-1    209    —
18    UW-Stout    11-3    175    10
19    Wartburg    9-2    163    14
20    St. John Fisher    8-2    160    20
21    Bluffton    12-1    151    25
22    Mississippi College    10-1    142    23
23    UW-Whitewater    10-2    96    —
24    Occidental    9-1    84    —
25    Transylvania    11-2    57    —

Dropped out: No. 16 Elmhurst; No. 18 Rochester; No. 21 Lincoln; No. 22 Ohio Northern; No. 24 Hanover.

Others receiving votes: New York University 50, Widener 49, Rochester 48, Ohio Northern 34, Lincoln 34, Maryville (Tenn.) 32, Calvin 18, Hamilton 11, Carroll 10, Washington U. 8, UW-La Crosse 8, UW-Oshkosh 7, Virginia Wesleyan 6, New Jersey City 3, Catholic 3, Elmhurst 1, St. Thomas 1, UW-Stevens Point 1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 10, 2006, 09:52:52 AM

I have a hard time putting Witt at the top. They do have a great rep and an amazing defense, but they haven't been all that impressive this year. For the reasons mentioned below, I'm not willing to give either Woo or Witt the top spot, but between the two, Wooster seems to be the better team. It's just a bit strange. Then again, Albion seems a little better than Hope, fortunately we get to find out for sure this week. And as much as I usually denegrate the talent level in the eastern regions, York looks legit this year. I've been very impressed with what they have produced, the one loss excepted. Although, have any of you ever driven to Salisbury, MD? It's like in the middle of nowhere. You wouldn't expect such a tiny piece of land to be so difficult to navigate, but it would tire anyone out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bamm on January 10, 2006, 10:00:36 AM

Tough game tonight for an East-region team getting some votes in the top 25 and one of the remaining unbeatens. Hamilton (8-0) travels to Utica College (8-2). Utica is probably the only real challenger to St. John Fisher in the Empire 8 this season (Fisher just beat them on Friday after trailing by 10 in the 2nd half).

Also, UR has a chance to make it's case for getting back in the Top 25 this weekend if it can win the oldest tourney in D3 basketball, the JP Morgan Chase in Rochester. If seedings hold they should face Fisher in the finals.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on January 10, 2006, 10:06:07 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 09, 2006, 09:21:34 PM
A dynamic of the poll that will be big factor the rest of the way is the relative strength/weakness of various conferences. Wittenberg, a solid choice as the new #1, plays in the NCAC where the Big 2 are just not challenged all that often...and Witt has already played their game at Wooster.

Quote from: Titan Q on January 09, 2006, 09:21:34 PM
Hope and Albion have to play each other twice and Calvin twice, and there's always a 4th team in the MIAA that knocks a contender or two off.

Q,

I'll give you the WIAC and CCIW as being much tougher. But I don't see much difference between the MIAA and the NCAC. Hope and Albion IMO are clearly the 2 best teams in that conference. Calvin is a solid 3rd, but beyond that, I really don't see a 4th team from the MIAA this year that could concievably give Hope or Albion trouble. Adrian has usually been that 4th team of late, and they barely beat Oberlin back in December. As Smeds mentioned, Wabash and OWU are no pushovers. If I recall, Wabash gave IWU a pretty good game back in November. Winning at Chadwick is never an easy task. Even Earlham could cause some problems. They already took Wooster to OT in Richmond. The Quakers have played a very tough schedule and they have at least been respectable in those games. Once you get below Earlham in the NCAC, I will agree that there aren't many challenges left. But to say that beyond Witt and Wooster there aren't many challenges is a bit of a stretch.

As I said, IMO, you could make the same argument about the MIAA this year beyond Hope, Albion and Calvin. I seriously doubt that the likes of Alma, Adrian, Kzoo, Olivet and the rest will challenge either of the 2 big boys of the MIAA. And I think Calvin could easily fall into the same category as Wabash and OWU and even Earlham from the NCAC.

My point is, I don't think it's fair to discount the NCAC by saying it's basically a 2 horse race, when the same could easily be said about the MIAA.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 10, 2006, 10:14:52 AM

Hamilton is interesting. They have played a very weak schedule thus far, with Brockport, Messiah and Endicott being the cream of the crop. I'm not saying they are undeserving of votes, but they have yet to prove they can compete with top tier teams. However, their schedule provides them few opportunities for doing such. They could run the table with little trouble if they get by Utica tonight.

Hamilton's schedule, however, looks impressive compared to fellow undefeated Widener. I know they will get tested a bit more in conference, but thus far have played nobody. Their closest game was an OT affair with Lebanon Valley who lost by 46 to York. The current record of Widener opponents thus far is an amazing 39-101. They haven't played a team with a winning record since Galludet before Thanksgiving. I've never seen a cupcake schedule like this. I'm not putting them down or anything, I just think its amazing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on January 10, 2006, 10:19:55 AM

There is a good game in the NEWMAC tonight between the first place (in the conference) MIT Engineers (9-2) and the #15 WPI Engineers. MIT beat Wheaton on the road last saturday after Wheaton had just crushed Clark by 25, and we all know who Clark beat.

MIT has the ability to give WPI a run for its money, Mike D'Auria is one of the best scoring guards I have seen in the country (averaging over 22 ppg).

It will be interesting to see... Go Engineers!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bamm on January 10, 2006, 10:26:45 AM

I agree about Hamilton -- not real impressed yet. If they get by Utica tonight, they may only be challenged the rest of the way two or three times. It could be an interesting final weekend of the regular season for them if they run the table, as they have to make the long trek to the North Country (through the Adirondacks) to play Clarkson and St. Lawrence. Could be trouble.

I feel the same way about Amherst, really. Their best player is gone (Schiel) and they've lost their only real test (Occidental). After seeing them in the regional they hosted last season, I felt all three of the visiting teams (Rochester, Potsdam, Fisher) were better than they were. If they hadn't beaten Williams I wouldn't even consider them Top 25 material.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TheFence on January 10, 2006, 11:23:09 AM

I think MIT can give WPI a run. I saw Endicott give WPI all they could handle and quite frankly if WPI is not exposed tonight they will be before long. If WPI is the class if the NEWMAC, then the NEWMAC is done consierable this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 10, 2006, 11:39:00 AM

Quote from: cardinalpride on January 10, 2006, 05:31:24 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 09, 2006, 09:21:34 PM
Meanwhile, a team like #5 Illinois Wesleyan has 5 regular season games remaining vs teams that currently are or have been in the poll -- 2 vs Elmhurst, 2 vs #10 Augustana, and 1 at #15 North Central.

You mean #12 North Central! :) :)

hehe.... I love it. Things like this and your signature always make me giggle. I love how much you love your team. It's very fun. ;)

Quote from: ScotsFan on January 10, 2006, 10:06:07 AM
My point is, I don't think it's fair to discount the NCAC by saying it's basically a 2 horse race, when the same could easily be said about the MIAA.

Interesting points. It may be more true this year than it has been since I started watching basketball that these conferences are closer to even. I don't know if it's still true, but the massey ratings for the lower MIAA schools was down alot. And Wabash has made strides in the last couple of years. I just don't know though. IWU is so up and down this year, it's extremely hard to gauge a team by their performace against them.

Fortunately, it really doesn't matter what I think about whether or not the conferences are equal. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 10, 2006, 11:47:30 AM

Quote from: bamm on January 10, 2006, 10:26:45 AM
If they [Amherst] hadn't beaten Williams I wouldn't even consider them Top 25 material.

What's so special about Williams (beating them in Amherst)?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bamm on January 10, 2006, 11:50:32 AM

Quote from: TheFence on January 10, 2006, 11:23:09 AM
I think MIT can give WPI a run. I saw Endicott give WPI all they could handle and quite frankly if WPI is not exposed tonight they will be before long. If WPI is the class if the NEWMAC, then the NEWMAC is done consierable this year.

On a neutral court, WPI barely snuck by RIT (two point game in final minute). At RIT, Rochester beat RIT by 42. Make your own judgements.

Quote from: Old School on January 10, 2006, 11:47:30 AM
What's so special about Williams (beating them in Amherst)?

Nothing, other than I suspected they could beat Amherst and are 9-3 with an equally unimpressive schedule... although they lost by only two to previously mentioned WPI.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mactitan on January 10, 2006, 11:57:13 AM

I expected North Central to finally break the top 25, but has anyone seen a team debut at #12? It proves to me that the voters are paying attention. A lot of other polls would have been a lot slower in reacting to a team that was off the preseason radar. Its still a strange thing about all polls though, after last week how could anyone consider IWU a better team than North Central? Yet there are the Titans, 7 spots ahead of a team that just beat them at their own place. I understand how it happens, and I don't mean this as a criticism, but doesn't it seem to defy logic on some level?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 10, 2006, 12:00:23 PM

Quote from: bamm on January 10, 2006, 11:50:32 AM
On a neutral court, WPI barely snuck by RIT (two point game in final minute). At RIT, Rochester beat RIT by 42. Make your own judgements.

Whitewater lost to Loras on a neutral court by 2. Platteville smoked Loras by 24 on a neutral court. Does that mean when whitewater plays at Platteville on Wednesday, Platteville is gonna win big? Probably not. That's my judgement! :D Whitewater is probably favored.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bamm on January 10, 2006, 12:02:44 PM

Yeah, I agree you can't play the seven degrees of this team or that team game. Just wanted to point out something that stuck out at me. You could just as easily make the argument that WPI is a solid team because they know how to pull out the close games, which Rochester has struggled to do (Wittenburg, CMU). :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 10, 2006, 12:08:55 PM

Speaking of Loras, aren't they a darkhorse no one is talking about? They stepped up for big wins over Wartburg and Whitewater. I guess they have to prove themselves in the conference first (quite the gauntlet there to run). I didn't expect them to be quite that good... that's all I'm saying.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 10, 2006, 12:12:51 PM

Quote from: mactitan on January 10, 2006, 11:57:13 AM
I expected North Central to finally break the top 25, but has anyone seen a team debut at #12? It proves to me that the voters are paying attention. A lot of other polls would have been a lot slower in reacting to a team that was off the preseason radar. Its still a strange thing about all polls though, after last week how could anyone consider IWU a better team than North Central? Yet there are the Titans, 7 spots ahead of a team that just beat them at their own place. I understand how it happens, and I don't mean this as a criticism, but doesn't it seem to defy logic on some level?

In all honesty, when a team jumps from nowhere to #12, I think it's the opposite. I think the pollsters AREN'T paying attention to the team. If they did, they probably would've moved North Central into the Top25 gradually. I mean, my thinking is, they go from 31 votes to #12 and 301 votes after ONE game vs. Ill. Wes? Seriously...One of two things should've happened...they should've been in the polls earlier or they shouldn't have had such a high debut, IMO.

How can anyone consider IWU a better team than North Central? I'm not taking anything away from North Central, because in all honesty, I don't know much about them. But two years ago Superior beat Stevens Point in Point to end the year and then Point beat them 3 days later in the WIAC tourney on the way to the National Championship. Believe me, I'm not comparing Superior with North Central, but it is one game...a big win for NCC, but one game and plenty to go in the tough CCIW. Ill Wes has played a much tougher schedule as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 10, 2006, 12:19:31 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 10, 2006, 12:08:55 PM
Speaking of Loras, aren't they a darkhorse no one is talking about? They stepped up for big wins over Wartburg and Whitewater. I guess they have to prove themselves in the conference first (quite the gauntlet there to run). I didn't expect them to be quite that good... that's all I'm saying.

Not sure about Loras. Not to make light of the game, but that Whitewater game was the 1st of the year. Since then, Whitewater has rolled through the conference. That same Loras team also lost to Platteville by 24 and the Pioneers are anything but world beaters this year, just 2-3 in the conference and only 7-6 overall. So it goes. They lost to Simpson (and they lost to Platteville by 30)...sorry, no more 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon!

Anyway, I don't know much about the IIAC other than it's usually Wartburg or Buena Vista and it's definitely not Buena Vista this year! I mean, on a national, or even regional scope, how good are teams like Coe, Simpson and Central? Come NCAA tourney time, Wartburg and Buena Vista never seem to do very well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on January 10, 2006, 01:22:36 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 10, 2006, 09:52:52 AM
Then again, Albion seems a little better than Hope, fortunately we get to find out for sure this week.

Interesting - considering Albion's loss was to an NAIA school that has a record of 3-8 last time I checked.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 10, 2006, 01:29:57 PM

ScotsFan, I do agree that the MIAA and the NCAC are just about even. Hope/Albion vs Wooster/Wittenberg is a push and, heck, I've seen Wabash -- it wouldn't surprise me if they're better than the MIAA #3, whoever that is.

I was trying to get at the poll as it stands right now and how the schedules the rest of the way will affect things. In other words, Witt has already played their toughest game of the season -- the game at Wooster. While the Tigers will have some tough games the rest of the way, they will be the "favorite" in every remaining regular season game. On the flip side, Albion and Hope have yet to square off yet. Most likely, that will be a split with the home teams winning just as the Witt/Woo series probably will be. In the CCIW, Illinois Wesleyan has at least two games where I feel on paper the Titans will be underdogs (I'd say that if IWU were ranked #1) - @ North Central and @ Augustana.

So really just getting more at the fact that Wittenberg, the current #1, is in great shape to stay locked into that #1 spot the rest of the way. I think their remaining schedule is more favorable than teams like Hope, Albion, Illinois Wesleyan, and even Wooster, which still has to play @ Wittenberg. It will be interesting to see how the voters handle this situation. Usually, you do not see a team lose #1 votes without losing a game, but I guess we could see that based on teams below Witt securing great wins (like Hope over Albion, let's say). Earlier this year IWU lost a 1st place vote to Wooster after the Scots defeated Wittenberg, so it does happen.

And let's not forget about the WIAC. We may not see a WIAC team ever make the Top 5 the rest of the way based on the dynamics of the poll, but I feel pretty strongly that whatever team emerges as that league's champ will be one of the best 5 Division III teams in the country.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 10, 2006, 01:58:59 PM

If Hope beats Albion at Albion on Wednesday, they could move past Wittenberg into the #1 slot, even if Wittenberg retains all of its first-place votes. Look at the top of the poll:

1. Wittenberg [8]...594
2. Hope [9]...576

Those first place votes were worth 200 points to Witt and 225 to Hope. Subtracting, that leaves Witt with 394 votes spread over 17 ballots (23.18 per ballot), and Hope with 351 votes from 16 voters (21.94). In other words, the average voter who doesn't think Witt is #1 thinks Witt is #3, whereas the average non-Hope voter thinks Hope is #4. That gives Hope a little more traction to use with a big road victory. Suppose just half of those non-Hope voters move the Dutchmen up two places on their ballots after a road win at Albion, at the expense of Albion, Wooster, IWU, or whoever may be ahead of them, and everything else remains the same. The revised vote totals would be

1. Wittenberg (8 or fewer)...594 or fewer
2. Hope (9 or more)...592 or more

It's probably not possible for Hope to move up two places on 8 ballots without disturing Wittenberg's point totals, but even if it were, we'd have a virtual tie. And I think that's the worst-case scenario for Hope following a victory at Kresge.

Hope's week doesn't end on Wednesday, as folks with even a passing interest in D3 national hoops know. They have a game of some importance on Saturday as well. (Hope's schedule. (http://www.d3hoops.com/school_info.php?school=Hope&team=m)) Wittenberg, by contrast, has home games against Earlham and Hiram this week; games where wins mean nothing and losses (possible, at least against Earlham) would be devastating.

I think a 2-0 week for Hope will vault them to #1, where they might stay for at least the remainder of the month.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 10, 2006, 02:01:05 PM

Dave:

Wow. I continued to be amazed by your math prowess. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 10, 2006, 02:04:04 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 10, 2006, 01:58:59 PM
If Hope beats Albion at Albion on Wednesday, they could move past Wittenberg into the #1 slot, even if Wittenberg retains all of its first-place votes. Look at the top of the poll:

1. Wittenberg [8]...594
2. Hope [9]...576

Those first place votes were worth 200 points to Witt and 225 to Hope. Subtracting, that leaves Witt with 394 votes spread over 17 ballots (23.18 per ballot), and Hope with 351 votes from 16 voters (21.94). In other words, the average voter who doesn't think Witt is #1 thinks Witt is #3, whereas the average non-Hope voter thinks Hope is #4. That gives Hope a little more traction to use with a big road victory. Suppose just half of those non-Hope voters move the Dutchmen up two places on their ballots after a road win at Albion, at the expense of Albion, Wooster, IWU, or whoever may be ahead of them, and everything else remains the same. The revised vote totals would be

1. Wittenberg (8 or fewer)...594 or fewer
2. Hope (9 or more)...592 or more

It's probably not possible for Hope to move up two places on 8 ballots without disturing Wittenberg's point totals, but even if it were, we'd have a virtual tie. And I think that's the worst-case scenario for Hope following a victory at Kresge.

Hope's week doesn't end on Wednesday, as folks with even a passing interest in D3 national hoops know. They have a game of some importance on Saturday as well. (Hope's schedule. (http://www.d3hoops.com/school_info.php?school=Hope&team=m)) Wittenberg, by contrast, has home games against Earlham and Hiram this week; games where wins mean nothing and losses (possible, at least against Earlham) would be devastating.

I think a 2-0 week for Hope will vault them to #1, where they might stay for at least the remainder of the month.

My confidential resources reveal a "psy-ops payola" scheme by the Calvin Boosters Club to select D3 voters to "over-hype" Hope preceding the Calvin-Hope games this year. The extent of pay-off has not been revealed, but we look for some of this to be exposed during the questioning of Judge Alito. ;) ;D :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on January 10, 2006, 02:31:04 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 10, 2006, 02:04:04 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 10, 2006, 01:58:59 PM
If Hope beats Albion at Albion on Wednesday, they could move past Wittenberg into the #1 slot, even if Wittenberg retains all of its first-place votes. Look at the top of the poll:

1. Wittenberg [8]...594
2. Hope [9]...576

Those first place votes were worth 200 points to Witt and 225 to Hope. Subtracting, that leaves Witt with 394 votes spread over 17 ballots (23.18 per ballot), and Hope with 351 votes from 16 voters (21.94). In other words, the average voter who doesn't think Witt is #1 thinks Witt is #3, whereas the average non-Hope voter thinks Hope is #4. That gives Hope a little more traction to use with a big road victory. Suppose just half of those non-Hope voters move the Dutchmen up two places on their ballots after a road win at Albion, at the expense of Albion, Wooster, IWU, or whoever may be ahead of them, and everything else remains the same. The revised vote totals would be

1. Wittenberg (8 or fewer)...594 or fewer
2. Hope (9 or more)...592 or more

It's probably not possible for Hope to move up two places on 8 ballots without disturing Wittenberg's point totals, but even if it were, we'd have a virtual tie. And I think that's the worst-case scenario for Hope following a victory at Kresge.

Hope's week doesn't end on Wednesday, as folks with even a passing interest in D3 national hoops know. They have a game of some importance on Saturday as well. (Hope's schedule. (http://www.d3hoops.com/school_info.php?school=Hope&team=m)) Wittenberg, by contrast, has home games against Earlham and Hiram this week; games where wins mean nothing and losses (possible, at least against Earlham) would be devastating.

I think a 2-0 week for Hope will vault them to #1, where they might stay for at least the remainder of the month.

My confidential resources reveal a "psy-ops payola" scheme by the Calvin Boosters Club to select D3 voters to "over-hype" Hope preceding the Calvin-Hope games this year. The extent of pay-off has not been revealed, but we look for some of this to be exposed during the questioning of Judge Alito. ;) ;D :D

Ralph - I'm not surprised - that's typical behavior for the Calvin Bosters Club. I'm just surprised that you are in the know, but then that shouldn't surprise me either. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 10, 2006, 03:04:22 PM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on January 10, 2006, 02:31:04 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 10, 2006, 02:04:04 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 10, 2006, 01:58:59 PM
If Hope beats Albion at Albion on Wednesday, they could move past Wittenberg into the #1 slot, even if Wittenberg retains all of its first-place votes. Look at the top of the poll:

1. Wittenberg [8]...594
2. Hope [9]...576

Those first place votes were worth 200 points to Witt and 225 to Hope. Subtracting, that leaves Witt with 394 votes spread over 17 ballots (23.18 per ballot), and Hope with 351 votes from 16 voters (21.94). In other words, the average voter who doesn't think Witt is #1 thinks Witt is #3, whereas the average non-Hope voter thinks Hope is #4. That gives Hope a little more traction to use with a big road victory. Suppose just half of those non-Hope voters move the Dutchmen up two places on their ballots after a road win at Albion, at the expense of Albion, Wooster, IWU, or whoever may be ahead of them, and everything else remains the same. The revised vote totals would be

1. Wittenberg (8 or fewer)...594 or fewer
2. Hope (9 or more)...592 or more

It's probably not possible for Hope to move up two places on 8 ballots without disturing Wittenberg's point totals, but even if it were, we'd have a virtual tie. And I think that's the worst-case scenario for Hope following a victory at Kresge.

Hope's week doesn't end on Wednesday, as folks with even a passing interest in D3 national hoops know. They have a game of some importance on Saturday as well. (Hope's schedule. (http://www.d3hoops.com/school_info.php?school=Hope&team=m)) Wittenberg, by contrast, has home games against Earlham and Hiram this week; games where wins mean nothing and losses (possible, at least against Earlham) would be devastating.

I think a 2-0 week for Hope will vault them to #1, where they might stay for at least the remainder of the month.

My confidential resources reveal a "psy-ops payola" scheme by the Calvin Boosters Club to select D3 voters to "over-hype" Hope preceding the Calvin-Hope games this year. The extent of pay-off has not been revealed, but we look for some of this to be exposed during the questioning of Judge Alito. ;) ;D :D

Ralph - I'm not surprised - that's typical behavior for the Calvin Bosters Club. I'm just surprised that you are in the know, but then that shouldn't surprise me either. :D

Isn't all of this assuming Hope beats Albion, which seems like a tall order to me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dark Knight on January 10, 2006, 03:22:06 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner
My confidential resources reveal a "psy-ops payola" scheme by the Calvin Boosters Club to select D3 voters to "over-hype" Hope preceding the Calvin-Hope games this year. The extent of pay-off has not been revealed, but we look for some of this to be exposed during the questioning of Judge Alito. ;) ;D :D

Ralph, I'm hurt that you would suggest such a thing! Hope clearly belongs at #1 and Calvin doesn't have a chance.

Besides, they have the best condiments!
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hope.edu%2Fimg%2Ffieldhouse%2F05ddevosconstruct145.jpg&hash=d1a934c96f39212bbf00b06760cef80c404fa8f5)

Not to mention the best new mascot. Go Flying Olieballen!
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmembers.chello.nl%2Fh.hendriks32%2Foliebollen.jpg&hash=5119a07b0557117ad62cf69633ad7b8c9c887c28)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on January 10, 2006, 03:51:16 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 10, 2006, 03:04:22 PM
Isn't all of this assuming Hope beats Albion, which seems like a tall order to me.

It maybe a tall order but the last 3 years historicals say Hope & Albion usually split. And for some reason,over the past 3 years, each has a 50/50 chance of losing to Adrian, not exactly a powerhouse in the conference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on January 10, 2006, 04:14:45 PM

Quote from: bamm on January 10, 2006, 12:02:44 PM
Yeah, I agree you can't play the seven degrees of this team or that team game. Just wanted to point out something that stuck out at me. You could just as easily make the argument that WPI is a solid team because they know how to pull out the close games, which Rochester has struggled to do (Wittenburg, CMU). :)

You have to admit that losing a close game to Wittenberg and CMU is not the same thing as pulling out a close wins against a 5-4 RIT team (5 pts), a 5-5 Endicott team (1 pt.), a 5-6 Babson team (5 pts), or a 4-6 Worcester State team (OT).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on January 10, 2006, 04:24:09 PM

To add to what I said a few minutes ago, either WPI plays down to their competition (which would explain all the close games) or they are just not a very consistent team (or they are overrated which I wont go as far as to say because I have not seen them play). That goes to show how a 5-6 Clark team can beat them (after losing to Wheaton by 25, which shows Clark is streaky as well).

I just think there are a handful of teams right now that are getting alot of attention that are not based on substance. For example, I personally believe that the NYU and WPI schedules are very comparable (alot of cupcakes and 2-3 tough games), yet NYU lost to a 12-1 CMU team and WPI lost to a 5-6 Clark team, yet WPI gets a whole lot more votes.

Just something to think about...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 10, 2006, 05:20:10 PM

Massey has the CCIW squads 1 and 2...

http://masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&sub=III&mid=6

1 N Central IL 1.462
2 IL Wesleyan 1.160
3 Wittenberg 1.081
4 Hope 1.047
5 Lawrence 1.026
6 Wooster 0.967
7 Occidental 0.954
8 Hamilton 0.927
9 Carnegie Mellon
10 Hampden-Sydney 0.829

As far as strength of schedule*, Massey has...

1. Carthage
2. Illinois Wesleyan
3. Wittenberg
4. Otterbein
5. Rochester

(* Massey has D2 Upper Iowa incorrectly listed as a D3 and actually has them with strength of schedule #1. )

Carthage still has to play Augustana twice, North Central twice, and IWU once!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on January 10, 2006, 05:33:20 PM

As for the conference Ratings:
W L
UAA 62 19
CCIW 55 31
WIAC 49 22
NESCAC 77 28
OAC 41 26

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 10, 2006, 06:18:54 PM

Quote from: diehardfan on January 10, 2006, 11:39:00 AM

hehe.... I love it. Things like this and your signature always make me giggle. I love how much you love your team. It's very fun. ;)

Thanks Diehardfan! Since the name "Diehardfan" fan was already taken by a much better looking person than me, I went with cardinalpride. It seemed appropriate. I really enjoyed reading your webpage. :) How did a small town girl from Virginia end up in California? :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 10, 2006, 06:58:56 PM

Quote from: Old School on January 10, 2006, 12:12:51 PM
Quote from: mactitan on January 10, 2006, 11:57:13 AM
I expected North Central to finally break the top 25, but has anyone seen a team debut at #12? It proves to me that the voters are paying attention. A lot of other polls would have been a lot slower in reacting to a team that was off the preseason radar. Its still a strange thing about all polls though, after last week how could anyone consider IWU a better team than North Central? Yet there are the Titans, 7 spots ahead of a team that just beat them at their own place. I understand how it happens, and I don't mean this as a criticism, but doesn't it seem to defy logic on some level?

In all honesty, when a team jumps from nowhere to #12, I think it's the opposite. I think the pollsters AREN'T paying attention to the team. If they did, they probably would've moved North Central into the Top25 gradually. I mean, my thinking is, they go from 31 votes to #12 and 301 votes after ONE game vs. Ill. Wes? Seriously...One of two things should've happened...they should've been in the polls earlier or they shouldn't have had such a high debut, IMO.

How can anyone consider IWU a better team than North Central? I'm not taking anything away from North Central, because in all honesty, I don't know much about them. But two years ago Superior beat Stevens Point in Point to end the year and then Point beat them 3 days later in the WIAC tourney on the way to the National Championship. Believe me, I'm not comparing Superior with North Central, but it is one game...a big win for NCC, but one game and plenty to go in the tough CCIW. Ill Wes has played a much tougher schedule as well.

One reason why NCC flew under the radar for so long was because of their horrid finish a year ago. They started 13-1 a year ago and reached as high as 18th in the poll. Then, they proceeded to lose 9 of their last 11 games. So, coming into this year, the pollster were reluctant to give them any attention after a 10-0 start. However, when you're undefeated and knock off the unanimous #1 at their place, Then follow that performance up with another road win by 30pts. against the preseason #22 in Aurora Univ., the pollsters had no other choice but to pay attention.

By the way, the massey ratings has NCC rated #1 overall with a SOS of 12. One slot ahead of, you guessed it, IWU!! :) :)

http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&sub=III&mid=6

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 10, 2006, 08:36:25 PM

Quote from: cardinalpride on January 10, 2006, 06:58:56 PM
One reason why NCC flew under the radar for so long was because of their horrid finish a year ago. They started 13-1 a year ago and reached has high as 18th in the poll. Then, they proceeded to lose 9 of their last 11 games. So, coming into this year, the pollster were reluctant to give them any attention after a 10-0 start.

Yeah, you hit the nail on the head here.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on January 10, 2006, 08:52:44 PM

WPI barely snuck by MIT at home tonight, final 60-58.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bamm on January 10, 2006, 10:29:07 PM

Top 25 vote getter Hamilton (previously 8-0) goes down at Utica (9-2) tonight 84-74. I have been told they were missing 3 starters.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 11, 2006, 01:59:32 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 10, 2006, 08:36:25 PM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 10, 2006, 06:58:56 PM
One reason why NCC flew under the radar for so long was because of their horrid finish a year ago. They started 13-1 a year ago and reached has high as 18th in the poll. Then, they proceeded to lose 9 of their last 11 games. So, coming into this year, the pollster were reluctant to give them any attention after a 10-0 start.

Yeah, you hit the nail on the head here.

I understand the thinking, but I don't agree with it. It smacks of what I call "historical bias", a pernicious tendency among pollsters to let long-term reputations, previous seasons, etc., creep into their judgment. I've always felt very strongly that a poll is supposed to reflect the current season, and the current season only.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 11, 2006, 02:13:23 AM

I agree with the idea that the poll should reflect the current season and current season only...but, does this mean that every undefeated team should be ranked #1 through whatever then? When do you do the first poll? What if there are 25 undefeated teams at that time? I totally agree with you, Greg, and preseason polls can really screw things up, but what to do, what to do?

On one board, someone posted something like: 11-0 is 11-0 no matter who you play, and then I think Pat responded that it wasn't...which is true.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 11, 2006, 02:35:40 AM

A little more statistical nonsense, for your viewing pleasure.

Did you know that the Week 6 men's poll was the 100th mens poll in the history of D3hoops.com? The poll was inaugurated with the preseason poll for the 1999-00 season. Congratulations to Pat and crew for this milestone! :)

Amherst has the longest current streak of appearances in the top 25, now at 55, starting with the 2001-02 final poll. Wooster follows closely with 53, and then there is a gap to Wittenberg and Puget Sound, tied at 30 consecutive weeks. IWU is in fifth at 25 weeks.

Wooster is the only men's team to receive votes in all 100 polls (in the top 25 in 92 of them). :o UW-Whitewater has the second-longest votes-received streak, at 69 polls, followed by Amherst (56), Lawrence (36), and Puget Sound (32).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 11, 2006, 10:24:21 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 11, 2006, 01:59:32 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 10, 2006, 08:36:25 PM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 10, 2006, 06:58:56 PM
One reason why NCC flew under the radar for so long was because of their horrid finish a year ago. They started 13-1 a year ago and reached has high as 18th in the poll. Then, they proceeded to lose 9 of their last 11 games. So, coming into this year, the pollster were reluctant to give them any attention after a 10-0 start.

Yeah, you hit the nail on the head here.

I understand the thinking, but I don't agree with it. It smacks of what I call "historical bias", a pernicious tendency among pollsters to let long-term reputations, previous seasons, etc., creep into their judgment. I've always felt very strongly that a poll is supposed to reflect the current season, and the current season only.

Greg, I agree with you. The problem is many pollsters never see a team upclose. They rely solely on information (what's read and heard) and sometimes that information is based on a team's history. Because of that history, pollsters take the "wait and see approach". It's human nature to take that approach. I don't agree with it, but that's the way it is until everything is compurterized. However, computers sometimes take the fun away. Another compelling question is how do pollsters look at the poll itself? Do pollsters select the top 25 based on how they may finish the year? Or, Do they select them based on how they're playing from week to week? I'd be willing to bet it differs from pollster to pollster. Which is another reason teams fly under the radar for so long.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 11, 2006, 10:59:19 AM

Or it could be because North Central started the season with Robert Morris-Springfield, Loras, Benedictine, Illinois Tech, Adrian, Mount Marty and Ripon.

Don't act like North Central's level was self-evident from that group. Mount Marty might have been the best team in there and we have no basis of comparison for them with anyone else. Loras didn't prove itself worthy of anything until the same night that NCC did.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mactitan on January 11, 2006, 11:28:01 AM

The reason I said that NCC's high debut is evidence of the pollsters paying attention is that all too often in polls, when a team is not ranked, it takes the voters a long time to admit that they were wrong. Nobody expects the pre-season poll to never change. What I want from a good poll is the ability to make corrections as the season goes on. There were good reasons that a 10-0 NCC team was not ranked, but the win at IWU in effect validated the previous 10 wins in a way that a win at Millikin would not have. I commend the poll for being able to roll with the ebb and flow of the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 11, 2006, 01:05:58 PM

The d3hoops.com poll changes more honestly and dramatically than any other I've ever seen (outside computer rankings, that is). I think the group of assembled voters knows when they've been mistaken, but at the same time, they have been around for a while and know a loss doesn't necessarily mean too much in terms of overall ability. You can complain if you want, but its the best we got.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 11, 2006, 04:03:54 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 11, 2006, 10:59:19 AM
Or it could be because North Central started the season with Robert Morris-Springfield, Loras, Benedictine, Illinois Tech, Adrian, Mount Marty and Ripon.

Don't act like North Central's level was self-evident from that group. Mount Marty might have been the best team in there and we have no basis of comparison for them with anyone else. Loras didn't prove itself worthy of anything until the same night that NCC did.

Pat, relax. My last post was referring to a more general perspective of all pollsters not just D3 pollster and definately not just NCC. Stop being so defensive. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 11, 2006, 04:06:57 PM

I wished I lived in California so I could have as much free time as Dave. ;D

Plus I could wear these 8) more often

Kudos to you Dave.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 11, 2006, 04:07:34 PM

oops forgot to mention #2 Hope at #4 Albion tonight.

I'm off.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 11, 2006, 04:08:05 PM

Quote from: mactitan on January 11, 2006, 11:28:01 AM
I commend the poll for being able to roll with the ebb and flow of the season.

Dido!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on January 11, 2006, 04:16:12 PM

I will admit to some of that historical bias Pat is talking about. When a team finishes horribly, i will tend to discount them at the beginning of the next season under the theory that whatever was wrong would take a lot to fix in the off-season.

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 11, 2006, 04:38:12 PM

Quote from: cardinalpride on January 11, 2006, 04:08:05 PM
Dido!

I'm sure we can all appreciate the various talents of Dido; her voice is quite unique, but does she really deserve an exclamation point?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 11, 2006, 04:58:54 PM

The problem with using what happened last year in decisions about this year, is that there is no way the voters know why things went bad. Just using North Central as an example, I know they had some "personnel issues" last season right before the slide.....issues that were not a factor at the start of this season. Unless voters are going to actually dig into that stuff (which they can't), there is no way they should be using what happened last year when they cast their ballots this year.

I can see the argument that NCC, even at 8-0 or 9-0 (whatever it was), hadn't really proven itself in 2005-06 until the win over Illinois Wesleyan. The fact the Cardinals did not enter the poll until this week makes sense, for the same reasons it makes sense to me that Wilmington just got in. But I'd hate to hear that some voters are actually considering the fact that "Team X went in the tank last year, so I'm not going to vote for them yet." That's not fair.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2006, 05:24:55 PM

Q,

I would agree with you that a one-season collapse should not account for much the next season, for the reasons you gave.

But I can't agree with Greg's extending that to 'reputation' or 'historical bias'. Sure, EVENTUALLY voting should reflect only this season. But early on, and even through probably the midway point of the season, specific outcomes should be put in the context of consistently good (or bad) coaches and programs. Because of the historical continuity, I simply assume that teams like Witt, Woo, IWU, and a handful of others are among the nation's elite - until they prove otherwise. I find it eminently reasonable that it took Hanover, for example, far longer to fall out of the poll than it took some other teams. On the other hand, a SLIAC team, or for that matter, Hamilton or Widener, is going to have to do something eye-popping to gain the benefit of the doubt (and Hamilton just showed why!).

North Central is kind of an in-between case. They have had some success, but not consistently. The DO have a very highly respected coach. Still, scheduling Cupcake U for nearly all the pre-conference games may not overcome those lingering doubts - they were undefeated going into Bloomington, sure, but probably 30 other schools in the country would have been as well!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 11, 2006, 05:55:00 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2006, 05:24:55 PM
On the other hand, a SLIAC team, or for that matter, Hamilton or Widener, is going to have to do something eye-popping to gain the benefit of the doubt (and Hamilton just showed why!).

I refer you to my earlier post where the "strength" of Widener's schedule was discussed... it's really quite amazing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 11, 2006, 06:45:28 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 11, 2006, 10:59:19 AM
Or it could be because North Central started the season with Robert Morris-Springfield, Loras, Benedictine, Illinois Tech, Adrian, Mount Marty and Ripon.

Don't act like North Central's level was self-evident from that group. Mount Marty might have been the best team in there and we have no basis of comparison for them with anyone else. Loras didn't prove itself worthy of anything until the same night that NCC did.

I'm not saying that North Central should've been ranked prior to their game at Illinois Wesleyan, because their list of opponents had indeed turned out to be a modest one by this season's standards. In fact, I think that the 31 votes that they had received in the prior poll was just about right, given their record and their strength of schedule. I was commenting in general upon the issue of historical bias, a phenomenon which both you and Coach C confirmed exists.

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 11, 2006, 01:05:58 PM

The d3hoops.com poll changes more honestly and dramatically than any other I've ever seen (outside computer rankings, that is). I think the group of assembled voters knows when they've been mistaken, but at the same time, they have been around for a while and know a loss doesn't necessarily mean too much in terms of overall ability. You can complain if you want, but its the best we got.

I agree. One of the prime virtues of the D3hoops.com poll is its ability to make quick and reasonable course corrections.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2006, 05:24:55 PMI would agree with you that a one-season collapse should not account for much the next season, for the reasons you gave.

But I can't agree with Greg's extending that to 'reputation' or 'historical bias'.

But that is historical bias, Chuck. History consists of the previous season, as well as the ten or twenty or thirty seasons before that. My point was that a team should be judged upon the current season, not any season or stretch of seasons that came before it.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2006, 05:24:55 PMSure, EVENTUALLY voting should reflect only this season. But early on, and even through probably the midway point of the season, specific outcomes should be put in the context of consistently good (or bad) coaches and programs.

I heartily disagree. By necessity the preseason poll has to reflect the previous season. From Opening Day on, however, the poll should reflect the current season. I think that on the whole the D3hoops.com poll largely does this, as you tend to see a lot of bounce up and down the ladder over the first few polls. But this whole "put in the context of consistently good (or bad) coaches and programs" idea opens Pandora's box. It introduces all sorts of things that are not germane to what the poll is supposed to reflect, which is the relative strength of the current season's D3 teams. Historical bias not only deviates from the objective data available -- this season's slate of games -- it's also, as Q said, a fairness issue.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2006, 05:24:55 PMBecause of the historical continuity, I simply assume that teams like Witt, Woo, IWU, and a handful of others are among the nation's elite - until they prove otherwise. I find it eminently reasonable that it took Hanover, for example, far longer to fall out of the poll than it took some other teams. On the other hand, a SLIAC team, or for that matter, Hamilton or Widener, is going to have to do something eye-popping to gain the benefit of the doubt (and Hamilton just showed why!).

I can't tell you how much I disagree with you on this, Chuck. My agitation is making me type a lot faster than normal. :D What you're advocating is tantamount to giving some teams an extra boost and others a penalty for reasons that have nothing to do with the pertinent database at hand.

You're also quite wrong about Hamilton, if you're focusing upon historical worthiness or the lack thereof. Coming into this season "Ham Tech" had won 601 games over the past thirty seasons (which is pretty darn remarkable for a D3 school that wasn't even allowed to take part in the D3 tourney until a little over a decade ago) and recorded 31 straight winning seasons. The Continentals have been in eight of the past eleven D3 tournaments. Widener, too, is a team with a storied past: Two Centennial Conference titles this decade, two past D3 Final Four appearances, and three 20-win seasons and an average of 17 wins a year over the past ten years.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2006, 05:24:55 PMNorth Central is kind of an in-between case. They have had some success, but not consistently.

They've actually been one of the weaker programs in the CCIW over the past decade and a half. In fact, North Central's legacy pales in comparison to those of Hamilton and Widener -- both recently and long-term.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2006, 05:24:55 PMStill, scheduling Cupcake U for nearly all the pre-conference games may not overcome those lingering doubts - they were undefeated going into Bloomington, sure, but probably 30 other schools in the country would have been as well!

Not fair, Chuck. North Central had perennial power UW-Whitewater appear in the Cardinals' tipoff tourney. Is it Todd Raridon's fault that the Warhawks stumbled against Loras? They played Ripon in Hawaii, and the Redhawks are annually among the best that the Midwest Region has to offer. Again, is it North Central's fault that Ripon's having a rare down year? Loras, Benedictine, and Adrian are typically fairly decent programs; the latter two appear to be a little down this season, while the Duhawks are definitely on the upswing. And Mount Marty just notched a win over NAIA-2 #4 Dordt last week.

North Central's sked wasn't as tough as those of Carthage, Elmhurst, and Illinois Wesleyan this season, but it's an overreach to accuse them of "scheduling Cupcake U for nearly all the pre-conference games".

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 11, 2006, 05:55:00 PMI refer you to my earlier post where the "strength" of Widener's schedule was discussed... it's really quite amazing.

See, that's a valid indictment of Widener, because it's based upon the 2005-06 season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 11, 2006, 07:37:50 PM

The coaches are part of the teams, and how good or bad a coach is is directly relevant to how good or bad the team is. Coaches, unlike players, are fairly evaluated over multiple years. So while I agree that teams should be ranked based on their composition and performance this season, I think it is reasonable to consider the coach's curriculum vitae over the years in the determination of how good a team is this year. Put another way, I think a team of 15 players coached by Steve Moore will be a better team than the same 15 players coached by me, and the rankings should acknowledge this fact.

Am I the only one who is interested in the fact that the current poll is the 100th poll in D3hoops.com history?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on January 11, 2006, 07:46:13 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 11, 2006, 06:45:28 PM... My point was that a team should be judged upon the current season, not any season or stretch of seasons that came before it

Greg - With due respect your entire response is replete with historical recitations. Following your thinking -- Hamilton's prior 31 season records, Widener's storied past, North Central actually been one of the weaker programs in the CCIW over the past decade and a half... In fact, North Central's legacy pales in comparison to those of Hamilton and Widener -- both recently and long-term (your words not mine) -- are not relevant as you seem to be arguing the case for -- a team should be judged upon the current season, not any season or stretch of seasons that came before it.

If you limit to the current season only then many of the teams in the Top 25 in Week 1 would not be there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2006, 08:19:41 PM

Greg,

We're probably just going to have to agree to disagree, unless you can do better than that. You demonstrated that your knowledge of d3bb history is better than mine (but I already knew that!) - my examples were ill-chosen. But, yes, I will assume at the outset of the season that Wooster is better than Eureka (based on history!), UNLESS they both prove otherwise. And both starting 4-0 (has Eureka EVER started 4-0?) is NOT going to change my mind. Even Wooster starting 0-4 and Eureka starting 4-0 will change my mind ONLY in the context of who did they play (which, of course, is history again).

While the results of a given season may EVENTUALLY disprove the assumption, generally speaking 'good' programs remain good and 'bad' programs remain bad.

I suspect we agree that pre-season and early-season polls are somewhat pernicious in 'locking-in' this truism (or 'historical bias', as you prefer), but if Pat didn't do pre- and early-season polls, what the hell would we have to talk about in December?! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Briton Backer on January 11, 2006, 08:59:10 PM

#4 (soon to be #1???) Albion beats #2 Hope easily tonight. Dominating the entire game. They led by 20 at halftime and between 25-30 for most of the second half.

Brandon Crawford leads the way for Albion with 20 points and 10 boards. That makes every game but one this year that Crawford has had at least 20 points and 10 boards. If there is a better player or team in the country, I'd like to see them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 11, 2006, 09:03:07 PM

Wooster didn't play Eureka tonight but they got the road win! ;D

Final: #3 Wooster 102 Allegheny 71

Wooster made 15 three point shots tonight and that stat plus some key steals were big factors in this game.

Wooster was led tonight by James Cooper with 17 points, Devin Fulk with 17, Tom Port with 16 and Tim Vandervaart with 16.

Wooster is 13-1, 5-0. :) Next game is Saturday AT Wabash.

GO SCOTS!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: imderekpoe on January 11, 2006, 10:04:19 PM

DC,

I find your historical musings on the poll very interesting! It certainly is an affirmation of the quality of the Wooster's program over the past 6+years that they have received votes in every poll. Am I correct that the majority of the 8 weeks that they were out of the top 25 occurred in the 2001-02 season??

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2006, 10:20:05 PM

Quote from: sac on January 11, 2006, 04:06:57 PM
I wished I lived in California so I could have as much free time as Dave. ;D

Plus I could wear these 8) more often

Kudos to you Dave.

David,

I thought sac already gave credit to your research!! ;D

But that IS impressive - who was IN the top 25 the most weeks, total (I'm guessing Woo #1, IWU #2). Right?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 11, 2006, 11:07:46 PM

As mentioned

#4 Albion 76 #2 Hope 58

First, I'd like to congratulate the D3hoops.com pollsters for sticking with the Brits in the pre-season top 10. I think most assumed through graduation that Albion wouldn't be the same team as a year ago. But as I mentioned last spring I didn't think Albion would fall that far off......they have too much talent in that program right now.

Is Albion the #1 team in the country? I don't know, tonight they were. They certainly took it to a team that had played very well last week. They are strong inside and when they hit the three's they are tough to beat. They play excellent defense and are quicker at every position than I remember.

I admonished the pollsters last year for completely missing the Britons in the pre-season. This year they got it right.

Is Hope 18 points worse than Albion?......well technically yes tonight they were. But this was not the same Hope team I've seen all year. Albion had a lot to do with that for sure. But tonight was one of those, if it can go wrong it will go wrong nights.

Bottom line is I think these are two top 10 teams, and will be in the mix for NCAA bids at years end. I can definately envision either of these teams winning out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 11, 2006, 11:24:38 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2006, 10:20:05 PMwho was IN the top 25 the most weeks, total (I'm guessing Woo #1, IWU #2). Right?

Unfortunately, my spreadsheet isn't set up to easily count that; it'll end up being a manual count, and that might take some time.

But no way IWU is #2. Probably it's Wooster then UW-Stevens Point.

Quote from: imderekpoe on January 11, 2006, 10:04:19 PM
Am I correct that the majority of the 8 weeks that they [Wooster] were out of the top 25 occurred in the 2001-02 season??

Yes; seven weeks in '01-02, and the preseason poll for '02-'03.

Here's a new tidbit to savor.

Weeks at #1
Carthage 22
UW-Stevens Point 13
Washington U. 12
Williams 12
Hampden-Sydney 9
Illinois Wesleyan 8
Calvin 5
UW-Platteville 5
Randolph-Macon 4
Wooster 3
Rochester 2
Amherst 1
Catholic 1
Chicago 1
Otterbein 1
Wittenberg 1

Unanimous #1 selections (keeping in mind that #1 in the final poll is always unanimous; these are marked with *)

UW-Stevens Point 10**
Hampden-Sydney 6
Washington U. 5
Carthage 3
Illinois Wesleyan 2
Calvin 1*
Catholic 1*
Otterbein 1*
Williams 1*

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 11, 2006, 11:42:11 PM

I don't think Witt will be supplanted as #1 quite yet. Just a gut feeling.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: goscots on January 11, 2006, 11:59:14 PM

I agree with smedindy.

If Hope had won I could see the voters moving them into #1, but not a #4 team. Sounds like Wittenberg played a good game against a dangerous Earlham team. No reason to move them out of #1 yet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 12, 2006, 12:49:25 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 11, 2006, 11:24:38 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2006, 10:20:05 PMwho was IN the top 25 the most weeks, total (I'm guessing Woo #1, IWU #2). Right?

Unfortunately, my spreadsheet isn't set up to easily count that; it'll end up being a manual count, and that might take some time.

But no way IWU is #2. Probably it's Wooster then UW-Stevens Point.

Ten teams with the most appearances in the top 25
1. Wooster 92
2. UW-Stevens Point 85
3. Hampden-Sydney 79
4t. Catholic 70
4t. Illinois Wesleyan 70
6. Franklin & Marshall 66
7t. Wittenberg 64
7t. Williams 64
9t. Buena Vista 62
9t. Hanover 62

Ten teams with the most appearances anywhere in the poll (top 25 + ORV):
1. Wooster 100
2. UW-Stevens Point 98*
3. Wittenberg 91
4. Hampden-Sydney 88
5. Catholic 86
6t. Hanover 85
6t. Franklin & Marshall 85
8. Buena Vista 83
9. UW-Whitewater 82
10. Amherst 81

* One of the Pointers' two non-appearances was last week (2005-06 Week 5), which snapped a 92-poll appearance streak.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2006, 01:20:30 AM

David,

You beat me to the post!

I just hand-tabulated, and only scored what I was GUESSING were the top six (I probably got 4 right, but Calvin and UW-Platteville, I must have been thinking too long ago!), but my numbers don't quite match yours (2 are the same, 2 are only off by one - don't know who is right?!)

I calculated (for actual top 25 appearances):

Wooster, 91
UWSP, 85
Hampden-Sydney, 78
IWU, 70

(I got Calvin at 46, UW-Platteville at 34.)

Since the overwhelming majority of schools have NEVER appeared in the top 25, Calvin and UW-Plateville are still rather elite, even if not AS elite as I thought they were!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 12, 2006, 01:26:53 AM

Is Ill. Wes. OK? Obviously NCC was pretty good, but they did lose at home. Then a 1-pt game at Carthage and now an OT game vs. Milikin? Wow.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 12, 2006, 01:38:50 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2006, 05:24:55 PM
North Central is kind of an in-between case. They have had some success, but not consistently. The DO have a very highly respected coach. Still, scheduling Cupcake U for nearly all the pre-conference games may not overcome those lingering doubts - they were undefeated going into Bloomington, sure, but probably 30 other schools in the country would have been as well!

First of all YPSI, you can say what you want about NCC's schedule. Whitewater, a preseason top 15 team was in our tournament this year. We just didn't have the opportunity to beat them because Loras took care of them first. We then took care of Loras. The Duhawks have since beaten another top 15 team in Wartburg just last week. We also played Benedictine and Aurora who we play virtually every year. Both were ranked a year ago and AU was preseason #22 this year. NCC only beat them both by a combined 55pts. As a matter of fact, both schools beat Wheaton this year at Wheaton! Adrian and Franklin are usually decent teams. Adrian is little down this year, but we beat them by 23 at their place. Franklin beat both Wheaton and Millikin this year by 15pts apiece in Indiana. What did NCC do to them? They were up by as many as 25 at their place before the bench took over. Ripon and Mt Marty are usually decent teams every year as well. It's not NCC's fault those teams may not be playing their best baskeball this year. Oh by the way, going into tonights NP game, the massey ratings suggest only 10 other D3 teams in the country have played a tougher schedule than NCC! Would it make you feel better if NCC scheduled Duke or Illinois? What do you want from the Cardinals?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2006, 02:23:21 AM

CP,

Calm down, mes amis! I had NCC 9th in the country on my ballot! And, yes, I realize that their schedule ended up being MUCH more cupcake than they expected when they made the schedule. You want to argue that there aren't 30 teams that would have been undefeated against that schedule?!

For Massey to rate their schedule the 10th toughest in all of d3 tells you all you need to know about Massey! Except I suspect you misread something. While I have issues with Massey, I can't believe they would screw up THAT badly. In retrospect, the schedule NCC MADE was not that bad, but the schedule they PLAYED was weak, to be kind.

To date, you have exactly ONE impressive win (and those of us with ties to Bloomington are painfully aware of where that occurred!) - you MAY be the best team in the country, or you may be the 40th and got lucky. I'd prefer a bit more data one way or the other!

I have to get up to teach in less than 4 hours (where HAS the time gone?!), so good night!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2006, 02:49:27 AM

Quote from: iwumichigander on January 11, 2006, 07:46:13 PMGreg - With due respect your entire response is replete with historical recitations. Following your thinking -- Hamilton's prior 31 season records, Widener's storied past, North Central actually been one of the weaker programs in the CCIW over the past decade and a half... In fact, North Central's legacy pales in comparison to those of Hamilton and Widener -- both recently and long-term (your words not mine) -- are not relevant as you seem to be arguing the case for -- a team should be judged upon the current season, not any season or stretch of seasons that came before it.

You're not following the gist of my post, IWM. I made those points about Hamilton, Widener, and North Central specifically to refute their being valid examples of Chuck's argument, which is that historical performance ought to be taken into consideration when evaluating teams. He had their historical performances backwards, overrating North Central's and underrating Hamilton's and Widener's, and I simply pointed that out.

The histories of Hamilton, Widener, and North Central (up to and including the 2004-05 season) shouldn't be relevant to the poll. What I was doing was pointing out that Chuck was using bad examples for his argument, not agreeing with his argument. Think of it as David Carradine in Kung Fu knocking the gun out of an outlaw's hand. As a Shaolin monk, Kwai-Chang Caine doesn't believe in using guns, and he would thus never use the outlaw's gun once he's disarmed him. But he's for darn sure not going to let the guy use it against him or anyone else. ;)

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2006, 08:19:41 PMWe're probably just going to have to agree to disagree, unless you can do better than that. You demonstrated that your knowledge of d3bb history is better than mine (but I already knew that!) - my examples were ill-chosen. But, yes, I will assume at the outset of the season that Wooster is better than Eureka (based on history!), UNLESS they both prove otherwise. And both starting 4-0 (has Eureka EVER started 4-0?) is NOT going to change my mind. Even Wooster starting 0-4 and Eureka starting 4-0 will change my mind ONLY in the context of who did they play (which, of course, is history again).

Use Concordia (IL) as a better example for your purposes, as Eureka is actually 4-10 and came out of the gate by losing three of their first four games. CURF, by contrast, won their first three games this season -- and CURF is a school whose program is historically as bad, if not worse, than Eureka's.

So who would I have assumed was the better undefeated team back on Thanksgiving Day: 3-0 CURF or 2-0 Wooster? Well, Wooster, of course. That's in large part due to the fact that Wooster had beaten far better teams -- the Scots' win over Wisconsin-Stout alone was worth CURF's three wins combined. But I would've made the same assumption that you did that Wooster was much better than the Cougars based upon past history. But the point is ... so what? If you're a pollster, you don't send back a ballot to Pat that's filled out on the basis of assumptions (or at least you shouldn't, in my opinion). You send back a ballot that's filled out on the basis of the reams of hard data that Pat is sending you regarding how each of the top fifty (or hundred, or whatever) teams has performed to date this season.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2006, 08:19:41 PMWhile the results of a given season may EVENTUALLY disprove the assumption, generally speaking 'good' programs remain good and 'bad' programs remain bad.

No argument with you there. But, again, I don't see such assumptions as being germane to the polling process. I trust that Pat's voters are making their decisions based upon the actual performance on the court this season of each of those teams.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2006, 08:19:41 PMI suspect we agree that pre-season and early-season polls are somewhat pernicious in 'locking-in' this truism (or 'historical bias', as you prefer), but if Pat didn't do pre- and early-season polls, what the hell would we have to talk about in December?! ;D

That's a whole 'nother can of worms, one that Pat and I opened up about six or seven years ago. (How long has it been since we had that whole early-season-poll debate, Pat?) We can hash it out again if you'd like, since you missed the first go-round. But by dabbling in poll esoterica so we might be taxing people's patience. I've been known to do that on Posting Up from time to time. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Briton Backer on January 12, 2006, 07:00:56 AM

With respect to Albion/Witt #1 debate (assuming both teams win Saturday), it seems to me that the 9 voters who thought Hope was the best team in the country going into last night, after seeing Albion literally spank Hope, have got to give the Britons their votes. Add those 9 to the 2 they got last week and 11 no. 1 votes for the Britons is going to definitely put them in the running.

You also have to factor in that any voter who doesn't put Albion at 1, really has to put them at worst at 2. Albion just dominated the prior #2, was ranked 4 and beat this exact #3 Wooster team last year (an Albion team people in the MIAA were saying had "dropped off"). In any event, the only team out there a voter could justify puting over either Albion or Witt is Albion or Witt. Therefore, on the 25 ballots, they should be 1-2 in some order (preferably alphabetical). If that is the case, it will be a race for the 13 #1 votes needed to take first.

All just fun talk however, as we know the real #1 will be decided on the court in Salem.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 12, 2006, 07:58:12 AM

Albion over Hope
Albion over Baldwin-Wallace
Baldwin-Wallace over Wooster
Wooster over Wittenberg

Seems pretty cut and dry to me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 12, 2006, 09:36:43 AM

Quote from: sac on January 12, 2006, 07:58:12 AM
Albion over Hope
Albion over Baldwin-Wallace
Baldwin-Wallace over Wooster
Wooster over Wittenberg

Seems pretty cut and dry to me.

That's what I've been saying all week. I know Wittenberg gets a lot of respect from a lot of people, and deservedly so, but what have they done so far that makes them a legitimate #1 team? They've beaten quite a few teams in the 20-30 rankings. I have been impressed with their defensive abilities, I just don't see a dominant team here. The same goes for Wooster (just to show I'm not biased). I would have probably said the same for Albion before the beating last night.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 12, 2006, 10:37:09 AM

I think the fact that Wooster only beat Wittenberg on a last-second shot in a home game doesn't scream out that Wooster is absolutely the better team. What's that game like with no homecourt advantage? That's what we're trying to determine.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 12, 2006, 10:49:13 AM

I agree with Pat there, that its very hard to tell who is better between Witt and Woo, however, my contention that neither one has been impressive enough to earn the first place spot in the poll is still valid. I think some other teams have impressed me more with better schedules. Again, this is personal opinion and i'm certainly not saying they don't belong amongst the top teams. I just don't think either school has put out a resume that blows the other contenders away.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 12, 2006, 10:53:12 AM

I'm not sure anyone anywhere has put out a resume that blows the others away. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TheFence on January 12, 2006, 11:12:28 AM

I'm not saying it is a no brainer but you'd have say Wooster is better team than Witt right now. Wooster beat Witt albeit by a last second shot and at home. This of course may change down the line but today with both teams having 1 "quality loss" you'd have to say that Wooster is the better team. They beat them head to head isn't that the best possible tiebreaker.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 12, 2006, 11:13:09 AM

If you were compiling standings, yes. But we're compiling rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 12, 2006, 11:22:20 AM

Since Lawrence and North Central are the last remaining unbeaten teams, they should then be ranked #1 and #2 by default. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 12, 2006, 12:06:47 PM

I do not think there is a clear-cut #1 right now. I'm very impressed by Albion's convincing win over Hope last night, but to be honest, I look at the "complete body of work" for both Albion and Hope, and I'm not any more sold on these two than I am on Wittenberg, Wooster, or Illinois Wesleyan...or in my mind, North Central for that matter.

Regarding Hope...

Hope beat Elmhurst by 17 in the opener at DeVos Fieldhouse. Elmhurst led 44-43 with 10:50 to play in the game and Hope led by just 5 with 5:30 to play. The Dutchmen finished the game on a 16-4 run. I wasn't there, but from looking at the running play-by-play, it appears to have been a very competitive game for 35 minutes. Again, the first game at DeVos in front of a crowd listed at 3201, in other words I'm pretty convinced Hope was playing with a lot of passion in that one and didn't just sleepwalk past non-conference Elmhurst for 35 minutes...

http://elmhurst.edu/~athletic/Home/M-Basket/stats/2005-2006/melm01.htm

While I personally viewed Hope as the #2 team before last night, I have to ask -- who have they beaten besides unranked Elmhurst??

http://www.d3hoops.com/school_info.php?school=Hope&team=m

Hope beat Cornerstone by 20 on a neutral court and Aquinas by 1. Perennial NAIA II power Cornerstone (11-8) is down this year...fellow NAIA II Aquinas is 10-9. John Carroll is 9-5. Wheaton and Carthage have shown they can play with good teams, but those aren't "signature wins" this year obviously.

Regarding Albion...

Elmhurst played at Albion on December 29. It was 65-64 Albion with 2:29 to play...from the 14:34 mark of the 2nd to :29 remaining, Albion's biggest lead was 5 points. Again, I wasn't there, but it looks like a game that came down to a few plays in the final couple of minutes and couple bounces of the ball....

http://elmhurst.edu/~athletic/Home/M-Basket/stats/2005-2006/melm11.htm

Elmhurst, ranked #15 at the time of the Hope game and #16 at the time of the Albion game, dropped out of the D3hoops.com Top 25 after losing a CCIW home game to Millikin - the same Millikin team that took IWU to overtime at MU last night (and yes, the same Millikin team that lost to 3-11 North Park at home Monday) - and losing at #10 Augustana by 4 points 3 days later.

Now, do I think Albion played with more passion and energy and with more focus last night vs Hope in a huge MIAA game than they did vs non-conference opponent Elmhurst? Absolutely. You all know I'm quick to remind all of us to keep the "human element" of the game in mind when we get too sucked into the comparative scores game. But at the same time, it sure appears to me that unranked Elmhurst can play with both Hope and Albion...especially considering those games were played on the home floors of the MIAA teams.

CCIW followers would probably collectively rank the league right now:

T1. Illinois Wesleyan
T1. North Central
3. Augustana
4. Elmhurst

(IWU plays at Elmhurst Saturday.)

It is not that I don't think Albion is a #1 candidate, but I'm still not seeing anything that makes them any better than the other candidates.

Title: Midwest Conference Basketball Live Webcast Friday, Jan. 13
Post by: MWCSID2005 on January 12, 2006, 12:25:13 PM

The Midwest Conference will webcast four contests with live audio and video free of charge on Friday, January 13.

The matchups feature Grinnell College at Lawrence University and Lake Forest College at Ripon College. The women's contests tip-off at 5:30 p.m. with the men's contests to follow at 7:30 p.m. Links to the webcast are available at www.midwestconference.org and on the athletic websites of each participating institution.

The release linked below gives more information on the webcast, as well as previews for each contest.

http://www.midwestconference.org/wbasketball/WebStreamJan12.pdf

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 12, 2006, 02:06:27 PM

I wouldn't say there is a clear-cut number one either. I'm just saying that I can't put much faith in any of these team's schedules to this point. You made the arguments for Hope (of whom I was skeptical well before last night's game) and Albion. Allow me to put my two cents in for Wooster and Wittenberg.

Concerning Wooster:

They beat Wittenberg, but we have to discount that for this discussion. The win over Stout is getting less impressive every week. They lost their game to Baldwin-Wallace, the only other big time team, which leaves their best win as either the OT game at Earlham or neutral court victories over New Jersey or Methodist. No one else should have or did, come close.

Concerning Wittenberg:

They beat a decent Tufts team, but it was neutral and the first game of the season, so you can't tell much of anything. Two points over Rochester in Rochester is about what can be expected. Transylvania is #25 this week, but probably shouldn't be and Ohio Northern somehow turned an OT win over JCU into a national rep overnight. Their best win may very well be over Cedarville, who isn't even in d3.

In my view Albion's had the better go of things, but honestly, IWU makes the most sense. They lost that game to NCC, but I've seen many a heavy favorite overlook the first conference game. Their schedule has been solid all the way through (with the exception of IC). Wabash, Hanover, WashU, and UPS all have nine wins or more and even Chicago has been better than expected.

I know a lot of the posters can't say it too loudly because they are IWU fans, but if we're analyzing things this way, to me, IWU is the only team that makes sense. (Although, NCC's schedule has not been the cupcake every has accused them of... Augie's has been a lot easier.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2006, 04:04:03 PM

I agree with you about Illinois Wesleyan to a point, Hoops Fan, but I think that the thing that's holding them back is the fact that they lost at home. Home losses carry more weight than do road losses. Also, I don't think that the voters will be inclined to give the Titans much credit for eking out a one-point win over 4-9, 1-2 Carthage and an overtime decision over 8-6, 1-2 Millikin in their two most recent games. I suspect that Wesleyan's play since New Year's Day has eroded some of the impressiveness of their November and December performances in the minds of the pollsters. Of course, I'm just guessing at that.

(A win at Elmhurst on Saturday could probably go a long way to restoring the Titans in the good graces of the pollsters, especially if it's by a convincing margin.)

Transylvania lost last night to 8-6, 1-2 Mt. St. Joe, so they're not going to be in the Top 25 next week. If they hold serve on their home court and beat #21 Bluffton on Saturday, they'll likely drag the Beavers down with them.

I like what Q had to say about the human element, although I'm a bit more inclined than him to give Albion cred for horsewhipping Hope so badly. Every game lost by one of the top teams thus far has been a close game, except for Albion's (which is anomalous, as I'll explain in a moment). The domination of the Dutch by Albion is even more impressive than the mere fact that the Brits won the game.

The other thing working in Albion's favor is the calendar. The lone loss for the Brits was a bad one, an 88-77 decision on their own floor to a Michigan-Dearborn team that's only 4-10 this season. UMD led by ten at the half in that game and pretty much held the Brits at bay, as Albion never got any closer than eight with :56 left.

However, that was the first game of the year, played on Opening Day (Nov. 18). It was a classic illustration of the idea that a D3 team shouldn't play an NAIA team in their first game, since it was already the fifth game of the season for UMD. More importantly, the calendar and Albion have both moved on and the relevance of that game has receded. The Britons have rattled off a dozen wins since then. The losses suffered by the other contenders are all at least three weeks more recent than the Albion loss, with the least fresh (Wittenberg's loss to Wooster on December 10) coming in the seventh game of the year for the Tigers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 12, 2006, 04:13:32 PM

Carthage isn't holding weight with me, mostly because their record is skewed poorly by superior competition. Sure, they aren't as good as their fans want you to think, but they are much better than their record.

I think I mentioned Transy had no business being in the top 25 and I generally thrown out the first game of the year for most teams when considering ranking, especially when its to a non d3 opponent who's on their fifth game, like you pointed out. I never thought Hope deserved to be as high as they were, so the Albion win only solidified my position. In fact the only thing that game proved to me was that Albion was worthy of being considered in the top 5 at all.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on January 12, 2006, 04:26:58 PM

I know everyone has been talking about the top of the rankings, but what do people think about WPI? The have had a relatively weak schedule and struggled with 4 ~0.500 teams (OT win, 1 pt win, 5 pt win, and loss to clark). Only 5 teams they have played are over 0.500 and only 3 are more than 2 games over .500 (Lasell 8-4, Williams 10-3, and MIT 9-3).

Also, the top of the NEWMAC seems to be very even with Wheaton, WPI, MIT, and Clark all at 2-1, it will be interesting to see if WPI can seperate themselves or if one of the other teams will take advantage of the oppurtunity. Another interesting note is that of those 4 teams at 2-1, only MIT has not lost at home yet. Home court could play a role with most games being so close this far.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 12, 2006, 04:30:07 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 12, 2006, 12:06:47 PM

It is not that I don't think Albion is a #1 candidate, but I'm still not seeing anything that makes them any better than the other candidates.

I look at it a bit different than you, Q. From my perspective, rankings should not be about who the best team is because that will ultimately be determined in the tournament. I believe rankings should be determined by taking the top teams and ranking them according to whose playing the best right now. I think that can be determined by who a team has played, where they've played them, and when they've played them. For example, Hope had the majority of 1st place votes. Apparently, more of the pollsters believed they were the #1 team overall moreso than anyone else based on who they've played and how they were playing up to this point. Albion, a consensus top 5 team, defeats Hope in a conference rivalry game, convincingly. Albion is still undefeated against D3 opponents. None of the other top 5 teams can say that, and they beat the #2 team in the country who received the majority of the 1st place votes. Based on all the info. being read and written, I would have to believe Albion is the top ranked team right now. They're a top 5 team, they're playing better than any of the other top 5s, and they have a big win to prove it! I love NCC, and I'll support any worthy CCIW team. However, barring any setback before the next poll comes out, Albion should be rated #1!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 12, 2006, 04:35:04 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 12, 2006, 02:06:27 PM

In my view Albion's had the better go of things, but honestly, IWU makes the most sense. They lost that game to NCC, but I've seen many a heavy favorite overlook the first conference game. Their schedule has been solid all the way through (with the exception of IC). Wabash, Hanover, WashU, and UPS all have nine wins or more and even Chicago has been better than expected.

Do you believe IWU overlooked NCC an undefeated team? And if so, Carthage and Millikin as well?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 12, 2006, 04:41:09 PM

I don't agree with you that the rankings should be the best now; I think its a current prediction of who the best teams in the country are. In other words, a tough loss to a good team on the road means virtually nothing unless there is evidence that the team isn't as good as you thought (ie no defense, poor FT shooting, lots of turnovers, etc).

I don't think IWU overlooked them persay, but I don't think they were prepared for the level of play they got when the conference schedule started. I know these guys are vets now, but with all the hype and the early season success, I can see where the loss and the close game following it came from.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 12, 2006, 04:48:49 PM

I forgot to weigh in on the WPI question. I've thought they were ranked too high all season (the same with Amherst). The voters, over the last few years, have gone from disresecting the NE region to a seeming fear of underestimating it. Amherst should be solidly in the 8-13 range. I thought WPI was a 15-20 team to start the year and probably not in the top 25 after a few games. Once they lost, it was sold for me. With the way they've been playing, I would bet money that they aren't even going to win their conference (the tournament at least). They will be lucky to finish with a good enough record to get a pool C spot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 12, 2006, 05:23:25 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 12, 2006, 04:41:09 PM

I don't agree with you that the rankings should be the best now; I think its a current prediction of who the best teams in the country are. In other words, a tough loss to a good team on the road means virtually nothing unless there is evidence that the team isn't as good as you thought (ie no defense, poor FT shooting, lots of turnovers, etc).

I don't think IWU overlooked them persay, but I don't think they were prepared for the level of play they got when the conference schedule started. I know these guys are vets now, but with all the hype and the early season success, I can see where the loss and the close game following it came from.

You sound like an IWU apologist! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 12, 2006, 05:27:01 PM

cardinalfan--Albion won at HOME not at Hope.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 12, 2006, 05:30:53 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 12, 2006, 04:41:09 PM

I don't agree with you that the rankings should be the best now; I think its a current prediction of who the best teams in the country are. In other words, a tough loss to a good team on the road means virtually nothing unless there is evidence that the team isn't as good as you thought (ie no defense, poor FT shooting, lots of turnovers, etc).

I guess we'll agree to disagree.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 12, 2006, 06:02:04 PM

On the topic of Carthage...

This week on Hoopsville, Pat Cummings, a D3hoops.com Top 25 voter and someone who knows Division III as well as anyone, said, "Illinois Wesleyan is not in the top 3 because they barely beat Carthage...not because they lost to North Central." Pat is probably absolutey correct in his explanation of Week 6 poll dynamics. A few thoughts though...

Carthage went 4-7 in the non-conference - they left the IWU game 4-8. Let's say the Red Men had replaced the following 7 games on their schedule...

vs Concordia (CA) - outstanding NAIA D1 program
vs Westmont - solid NAIA D1 program
vs Calvin (neutral)
@ Hope
vs Carroll
vs Lawrence
vs Gustavus Adolphus

(all losses)

...with the following 7 teams from Augustana's non-conference schedule...

Clarke
Rockford
Coe
Concordia
Lake Forest
Rose-Hulman
Marian

Is it safe to say Carthage - the team that took IWU to the buzzer Saturday and had a lead at Elmhurst with 3:15 to go last night - would have gone at least 5-2 there? If so, the Red Men enter the IWU game 9-2. Same guys, same team, same everything. So IWU defeats the 9-2 Carthage Red Men by 1 point in a hard-fought CCIW game, and instead of it being viewed as a head-scratching bad performance by Illinois Wesleyan, it is viewed as a very good road win.

See how that gets a little fuzzy?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 12, 2006, 06:08:00 PM

Another comment Pat made on that same Hoopsville show was that Carthage should now be used as " barometer" for comparing teams since they've played so many good teams. He pointed out that Hope won by 14 over Carthage. I don't recall if Pat was directly making a Hope/IWU comparison using Carthage, but in general I think comparative scores can be a tricky road to go down when you're comparing games in different locations (home, away, neutral).

For example, Illinois Wesleyan only won by 1 over Carthage...at Carthage. Does that necessarily say anything about Hope in relation to IWU? The game vs Hope (in which Carthage led by 4 at halftime, by the way) was at Hope -- a team with one of the best homecourt advantages in the country. The game vs IWU was at Carthage. Put it this way -- anyone think Albion is 18 points better than Hope today, or are you, like me, going to wait until the game @ Hope is played to draw conclusions?

Again, Pat Cummings is probably 100% correct in his explanation of how voters view results based on an opponent's record (like Carthage's bad record) and how comparative scores are used by the voters. I just like to keep all of us thinking of a couple things:

1) A good record does not mean a team is good and a bad record doesn't mean a team is bad.

2) That comparative scores game is tricky even though we all get tempted to play it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on January 12, 2006, 06:22:35 PM

Q -

You're right on both of those things. But honestly, you sometimes have to look at comparative scores, especailly when teams play a lot of non-D3 competition.

I thought Hope was better than Albion. I also thought IWU was better than NCC. Based on the games, though i can't say that now.

We will know a bit more as a few more league games are played.

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Briton Backer on January 12, 2006, 06:22:49 PM

Sort of hate to drag on the discussion, but I'm not sure that the home vs. away logic applies to the Albion-Hope game. First, as per an extended discussion on the MIAA board, the home team had lost something like the last 7 games between these two. Also, Albion is not back in session yet and Hope travels better than perhaps any team I have witnessed in 20+ years of following D3 hoops. As the radio announcers for both Hope and Albion mentioned last night, it hardly seeemed like an away game for the Dutchmen. I don't put as much stock in the home-away thing. But, I thought it was worth mentioning since many on this board seem to.

On another topic, if the point of the poll is to predict which team is most likely to be left standing at the end, then they may as well start giving extra points to any team outside of the Great Lakes region, and probably the Midwest as well.

Whether Albion is number 1, 2, or 4 (I find it hard to believe that even Hoops Fan or Titan Q will argue that the Brits should fall below 4) doesn't matter much at this point in the seaon only a few games into the conference season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2006, 06:59:42 PM

Quote from: cardinalpride on January 12, 2006, 05:23:25 PMYou sound like an IWU apologist! :)

I don't buy Hoops Fan's explanation for Illinois Wesleyan's loss to North Central, but let's be fair to Titans fans on this one. Not even the most diehard drinker of the green Kool-Ade made any excuses for Wesleyan after that loss. To their credit, the postgame talk on CCIW Chat from Wesleyan fans centered around how well North Central had played, and on what a quality team the Cardinals have this season.

Quote from: Titan Q on January 12, 2006, 06:02:04 PM
Is it safe to say Carthage - the team that took IWU to the buzzer Saturday and had a lead at Elmhurst with 3:15 to go last night - would have gone at least 5-2 there? If so, the Red Men enter the IWU game 9-2. Same guys, same team, same everything.

Bob, while I buy your basic premise about the one-point win over Carthage not being as much of a black eye for your alma mater as it appears to be at first glance, at the same time I'm not so sure that we're talking about the "same everything" if Carthage had played Augie's non-conf sked instead of running that gauntlet that Bosko Djurickovic set up for them this November and December. I'd argue that the schedule that left the Red Men 4-7 going into CCIW play made them a tougher and more prepared team than they would've been if they had gone 9-2 or 8-3 playing Augie's schedule. I'm surprised that you're the one making this argument, because you're usually the first to point out that a rugged pre-conference schedule tends to better prepare a team for league play.

As for the comparative scores thing, one thing that should be pointed out if we're using Carthage as a barometer (something that people are already doing with Elmhurst) is the fact that 10-0 and sixth-ranked Lawrence handed the Red Men a 14-point defeat in mid-December ... on Carthage's home floor.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2006, 07:10:21 PM

Quote from: Briton Backer on January 12, 2006, 06:22:49 PM
Sort of hate to drag on the discussion, but I'm not sure that the home vs. away logic applies to the Albion-Hope game. First, as per an extended discussion on the MIAA board, the home team had lost something like the last 7 games between these two. Also, Albion is not back in session yet and Hope travels better than perhaps any team I have witnessed in 20+ years of following D3 hoops. As the radio announcers for both Hope and Albion mentioned last night, it hardly seeemed like an away game for the Dutchmen.

Your first point isn't really relevant, since the quirky road-team-wins tendency of the past few seasons' worth of the Hope/Albion series is not a predictor of this season's games. Those last seven games had no bearing upon last night's game, nor will they have any bearing upon the rematch in Holland.

Your second point, however, is an excellent one. If the homecourt advantage is largely neutralized, if not reversed, by the composition of the crowd, then that needs to be taken into consideration as far as the home/road analysis is concerned.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2006, 07:14:54 PM

Albion certainly did muddy the waters! If Hope had won, I think there is little doubt they would have been (decisively) #1, and Albion might well have dropped out of the 'big five' (I suspect that at least Lawrence would have passed them, perhaps one or two others).

But, of course, 'counter-factuals' can be amusing, sometimes even enlightening, but they are still counter-factual! Hope did not win - what a mess! I would say a STRONG case can be made for three teams (Albion, Witt, IWU) being #1, and a decent case could probably be made for Woo.

My question: do people think that Hope will hang on to (at least) #5, or was the margin of loss such that they will get lapped by Lawrence? (All this assumes, of course, that all relevant teams win this weekend.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2006, 07:35:29 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2006, 07:10:21 PM
Quote from: Briton Backer on January 12, 2006, 06:22:49 PM
Sort of hate to drag on the discussion, but I'm not sure that the home vs. away logic applies to the Albion-Hope game. First, as per an extended discussion on the MIAA board, the home team had lost something like the last 7 games between these two. Also, Albion is not back in session yet and Hope travels better than perhaps any team I have witnessed in 20+ years of following D3 hoops. As the radio announcers for both Hope and Albion mentioned last night, it hardly seeemed like an away game for the Dutchmen.

Your first point isn't really relevant, since the quirky road-team-wins tendency of the past few seasons' worth of the Hope/Albion series is not a predictor of this season's games. Those last seven games had no bearing upon last night's game, nor will they have any bearing upon the rematch in Holland.

Your second point, however, is an excellent one. If the homecourt advantage is largely neutralized, if not reversed, by the composition of the crowd, then that needs to be taken into consideration as far as the home/road analysis is concerned.

I'll have to take issue with your first paragraph - pardon my 'historical bias' ;), but I thinking you're overlooking the psychology of sports. If the road team has won 7 straight, home court may begin to feel like a negative. There is a HUGE difference between 'we hope we can win' and 'we expect to win'. At what point (if any) would you say that such a streak DOES become relevant psychologically (or in simply indicating that home-court is NOT an advantage) - 12 straight? 25 straight?

John Cooper had to go as OSU's footbal coach (despite a stellar record overall) because it had become obvious that 'that team up north' had gotten into his head and he could not win even in the year's that he clearly had the better team. I doubt that Michigan will ever consistently beat Tom Izzo's Spartans even if they someday have a better team than MSU - psychology matters.

And because psychology matters, history matters. Contrary to the disclaimor that mutual funds are required to make, 'past performance DOES affect future results'! While it should be out-weighed as quickly as possible by current year performance, history SHOULD be A factor in early (and often even in mid-season) poll voting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 12, 2006, 07:35:43 PM

"I'm surprised that you're the one making this argument, because you're usually the first to point out that a rugged pre-conference schedule tends to better prepare a team for league play."

Greg, I think you've missed my point. I was simply making the case that

1) All else being equal, had IWU defeated a "9-2" Carthage team by 1 point it would have been viewed a lot differently on paper by fans, voters, etc. than a 1 point win over a "4-7" team, and

2) This same Carthage team could have easily been 9-2 with a different non-conference schedule.

In no way was I trying to suggest that Carthage would have actually been a better team had they played Augie's weak schedule. Everyone knows my feelings on the importance of playing a strong non-conference schedule.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 12, 2006, 07:36:57 PM

Quote from: sac on January 12, 2006, 05:27:01 PM
cardinalfan--Albion won at HOME not at Hope.

Sac, I did correct that mistake. Sorry. By the way, the name is Cardinalpride. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 12, 2006, 08:00:44 PM

"As for the comparative scores thing, one thing that should be pointed out if we're using Carthage as a barometer (something that people are already doing with Elmhurst) is the fact that 10-0 and sixth-ranked Lawrence handed the Red Men a 14-point defeat in mid-December ... on Carthage's home floor."

Another good example of how it is tough to figure out what to make of comparative scores. Let's take IWU @ Carthage and Lawrence @ Carthage...

* IWU won by 1
* Lawrence won by 13

* There were 350 in the stands for the Lawrence game
* There were 1075 for IWU

* IWU was up 45-44 at the half
* Lawrence was up 30-29 at the half

* With 6:00 to play IWU was up 4 pts
* With 6:00 to play Lawrence was up 4 pts

* Lawrence went on a 7-0 run from 5:56 to 4:10 to take control, get up 11, and coast in
* Malik Imani drilled a long 3 for Carthage at 5:53 to make it a 1 point game vs IWU and it was back and forth the rest of the way.

http://www2.carthage.edu/athletics/mens/basketball/lu.htm

http://www.iwu.edu/~iwunews/sports/mbb2006/miwu12.htm

I always try to compare how the game was actually played when looking at common scores, and not just the final score - I tried to do that above with the Elmhurst vs Hope and Albion games. But with these two games, for example, the fact that Lawrence pulled away and IWU didn't -- what exactly does that mean if you are voting in the poll and trying to evaluate IWU vs Lawrence? Did IWU do something wrong and Lawrence something right? Did Carthage do something better vs IWU than vs Lawrence? Is it harder or easier to play on the road vs 350 people or 1075? Was it 50/50 fan support or 90/10 Carthage?

In general terms, all I'd be able to say is both games were "very competitive" - beyond that, I have no idea what they mean.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2006, 08:58:52 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 12, 2006, 07:35:43 PM
"I'm surprised that you're the one making this argument, because you're usually the first to point out that a rugged pre-conference schedule tends to better prepare a team for league play."

Greg, I think you've missed my point. I was simply making the case that

1) All else being equal, had IWU defeated a "9-2" Carthage team by 1 point it would have been viewed a lot differently on paper by fans, voters, etc. than a 1 point win over a "4-7" team, and

2) This same Carthage team could have easily been 9-2 with a different non-conference schedule.

In no way was I trying to suggest that Carthage would have actually been a better team had they played Augie's weak schedule. Everyone knows my feelings on the importance of playing a strong non-conference schedule.

I see your point. I just think that your "same everything" line was a bit misleading because it invites a qualitative examination of how good a team Carthage would've been had they played an alternative schedule, that's all.

As for the comparative scores thing, I certainly agree with you that the methodology of examining comparative scores needs to be as precise as possible if you're going to use that method -- and, although I'm not 100% gung ho on using comparative scores, we have to take into consideration the fact that the Top 25 pollsters do look at them.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2006, 07:35:29 PMI'll have to take issue with your first paragraph - pardon my 'historical bias' ;), but I thinking you're overlooking the psychology of sports. If the road team has won 7 straight, home court may begin to feel like a negative. There is a HUGE difference between 'we hope we can win' and 'we expect to win'.

First of all, you're ascribing more weight to this than I'm pretty sure any of the Hope or Albion players do. I'd wager that it never even occurred to a bunch of them that this quirky seven-game streak was in effect. Ballplayers tend to be a lot more ahistorical than us avid fans; most of them were probably aware that the teams split by winning in each other's gyms last season, but I doubt that most were aware that it was a seven-game trend. And I really doubt that those of them that were aware of it cared one whit about it.

Last night's rout by the home team over the road team simply exposed the streak for what it was: A statistical anomaly of the type that becomes possible when two programs are relatively evenly-matched over a certain span of time, a trend over the past four years that I'm sure most MIAA fans would agree describes the Britons and the Dutch.

Second, are you actually arguing that an Albion player would ever consider himself disadvantaged to be playing at Kresge? Or, even more unbelievably, are you actually arguing that a Hope player would ever feel as though home court (whether at the Civic, Dow, or now at DeVos) was a negative? Really? At home in front of 2,500-3,000 screaming Dutchies clad in orange? You're straining the bounds of logic with this one, Chuck.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2006, 07:35:29 PMAnd because psychology matters, history matters. Contrary to the disclaimor that mutual funds are required to make, 'past performance DOES affect future results'! While it should be out-weighed as quickly as possible by current year performance, history SHOULD be A factor in early (and often even in mid-season) poll voting.

First of all, past performance doesn't affect future results nearly as much as you think it does in terms of streaks. Players come and go after four years, and their link to long-term streaks only goes as far as the games in which they participate. Second, we're not talking about a one-sided streak -- one-sided streaks are far more likely to weigh psychologically upon a team than a quirky streak that evens out between both teams. Third, we're talking about road games. Any scintilla of psychological doubt cast by a streak such as this one pales in comparison to the homecourt advantage enjoyed by both teams -- particularly Hope, with its legion of fans.

The Hope/Albion thing really does not help your argument that historical bias should be a valid element of compiling the Top 25 poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 12, 2006, 09:53:53 PM

Albion's home court wasn't neutralized at all. Albion had more fans there and were more vocal. I would say Albion fed off their fans all night.

Hope had a nice contingent as always but it was no larger than most trips to Albion except for the bus-load of students who made the trip. The only thing missing were some Albion students and their band. Even still they had a pretty good group of Britons.

I think the radio guys were embelishing a little.

Its a very tough place to play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 12, 2006, 09:55:41 PM

Carthage was once up by 17 in the first half on Hope as well. :o

Cardinalpride===you'll have to forgive me I'm still a little dazed and confused from Sager's Vander Hide post in the MIAA room this morning.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 12, 2006, 10:01:15 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2006, 07:14:54 PM
My question: do people think that Hope will hang on to (at least) #5, or was the margin of loss such that they will get lapped by Lawrence? (All this assumes, of course, that all relevant teams win this weekend.)

This will depend on the Hope/Calvin result. Another stinker like Wed and Hope plummets. Should they win I think they hover in the 5-10 range. If they win BIG like Albion over Hope big then they probably cling to #5 or #6.

This is a good team, Albion just had one of those nights where they had all the answers. Many of their fans expressed that they couldn't believe how well their guys played and even their coach said to me they can't play better.

Hope shouldn't drop far but that margin is going to make people leary.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2006, 10:56:50 PM

sac,

I certainly don't think Hope will fall to the 5-10 range if they beat Calvin (even narrowly) - I was just wondering how people felt about 5 vs 6?! I'm apparently more up on your team than you are! :D

Greg,

I must confess that the 'road-streak' 'historical bias' comments were to get your goat - I see it worked! ;D (I'm sure that WAS just a statistical 'fluke' - SOMETIMES heads does come up 7 in a row even with an honest coin!)

But SOMETIMES 'history' does become a psychological issue - I'm not sure John Cooper would have EVER won another game against Michigan (players come and go, but coaches [sometimes] stick around a lot more than 4 seasons). Even if players are not that up on history, their coaches are, which may in turn affect the players. I contend that good programs may win an extra 2-3 games a season they would not have otherwise won due to a psychological intimidation factor (and it doesn't really matter whether that is of the players directly, the coaches, or the 'home team' advantage of the fans).

I therefore contend that history is a perfectly valid component of poll votes UNTIL such time that this season's results render it moot. Which, depending on circumstances, may be only 3-4 games, may be 10 games, or may be virtually the entire season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 12, 2006, 11:21:18 PM

Mr. Y

Actually I'm very up on the Dutchmen I just think the dynamics of voting psychology will push Hope down quite a bit. They won't garner any top 4 votes for sure.

22 point beatdown by another top 5 opponent is not one voters will brush aside

They won't face another team playing at that level the rest of the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2006, 11:38:53 PM

Quote from: sac on January 12, 2006, 11:21:18 PM
Mr. Y

Actually I'm very up on the Dutchmen I just think the dynamics of voting psychology will push Hope down quite a bit. They won't garner any top 4 votes for sure.

Your last sentence is probably correct - but, then, will ANYONE but Albion, IWU, Witt, and Woo (to list them alphabetically and not tip my hand!) get any top 4 votes? (Lawrence MAYBE gets 1-3.) I just can't see Hope falling any lower than MAYBE beneath Lawrence - hence my 5 vs. 6 question. You really think there is a serious chance of them falling farther than that?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 13, 2006, 01:28:23 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2006, 10:56:50 PMBut SOMETIMES 'history' does become a psychological issue - I'm not sure John Cooper would have EVER won another game against Michigan (players come and go, but coaches [sometimes] stick around a lot more than 4 seasons). Even if players are not that up on history, their coaches are, which may in turn affect the players. I contend that good programs may win an extra 2-3 games a season they would not have otherwise won due to a psychological intimidation factor (and it doesn't really matter whether that is of the players directly, the coaches, or the 'home team' advantage of the fans).

I never discount the possibility of psychological intimidation that can come from playing in a hostile environment, Chuck. I've heard players openly confess to being psychologically intimidated by a good team playing at home in front of a big crowd. Heck, a former CCIW player once admitted on CCIW Chat a year or so before you discovered this website that he'd been psyched out under those types of circumstances during his career. (I didn't say this, because he already hated me and at 6'6", 230 he'd kill me on sight if he ever saw me, but I'd never want the guy on my team -- if you're that psychologically brittle, there's no way I want you on the floor wearing my team's uni in a big game.)

I would never reduce it to a formula, though. The human psyche isn't that predictable. Besides, there are plenty of players who react in the exact opposite manner. They venture into a crowded gym filled with hostile fans to face a great team, and the pressure and the mass vitriol directed at them only makes them better. Some players wilt under those circumstances (such as the former CCIW player I mentioned), some thrive under it (e.g., the 1987 North Central center that Cardinalpride and I discussed a few weeks ago, Mike Bohannon, or Wheaton's center from earlier in this decade, Lukas Moo). By and large, good teams with lots of good fans will gain a psychological edge at home. But it isn't written in stone that it'll manifest itself in any given situation, nor is it really quantifiable (although Vegas betting formulas are designed to take home court into consideration).

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2006, 10:56:50 PMI therefore contend that history is a perfectly valid component of poll votes UNTIL such time that this season's results render it moot. Which, depending on circumstances, may be only 3-4 games, may be 10 games, or may be virtually the entire season.

You keep saying this, but your argument doesn't give any evidence for it. Besides, you're confusing primary and secondary causation in terms of winning ballgames. If a good team has a good fan base that makes it incrementally more difficult to beat them in their gym, and that fan base arises from past history, then the origin of that fan base is secondary causation to the team winning at home (and relatively minor secondary causation at that, since fan support has only a limited effect at best upon a game) and is thus not germane to the polling process. The only matter germane to the polling process is the primary factor present in the data examined by the pollsters, i.e., a team scoring more points than its opponent.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 13, 2006, 02:10:36 AM

I would never reduce it to a formula, either - sorry if my '2-3 games per year' came off that way. Wasn't meant to be a formula, just a general average. Different players react different ways. The more you hate on Chauncey Billups, the more he is gonna KILL you! :D

I THINK I understand what you are saying about primary and secondary causes, except you are totally leaving the coaching staff out of it. A loyal fan base will have certain postive effects on a program, but continuity of AD and coach are even more crucial. And the fans, AD, and coaches collectively (in whatever proportions) WILL have historical memories (whether or not the players do).

History DOES matter! (And being after 2 am after I had 3 hours sleep last nite also matters - for tonite, I bid you farewell! Resume tomorrow?! ;D)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 13, 2006, 02:33:46 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 13, 2006, 02:10:36 AMHistory DOES matter!

I never said it didn't. I said that it shouldn't matter when a Top 25 pollster fills out his ballot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie_superfan on January 13, 2006, 04:38:17 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2006, 07:10:21 PM
Quote from: Briton Backer on January 12, 2006, 06:22:49 PM
Sort of hate to drag on the discussion, but I'm not sure that the home vs. away logic applies to the Albion-Hope game. First, as per an extended discussion on the MIAA board, the home team had lost something like the last 7 games between these two. Also, Albion is not back in session yet and Hope travels better than perhaps any team I have witnessed in 20+ years of following D3 hoops. As the radio announcers for both Hope and Albion mentioned last night, it hardly seeemed like an away game for the Dutchmen.

Your first point isn't really relevant, since the quirky road-team-wins tendency of the past few seasons' worth of the Hope/Albion series is not a predictor of this season's games. Those last seven games had no bearing upon last night's game, nor will they have any bearing upon the rematch in Holland.

Your second point, however, is an excellent one. If the homecourt advantage is largely neutralized, if not reversed, by the composition of the crowd, then that needs to be taken into consideration as far as the home/road analysis is concerned.

I don't think you can say the home court advantage was neutralized at all, regardless if there were even more and louder away fans at the game. Home court advantage does not only come down to the people making the most noise. Through experience, I always thought that the crowd was a great advantage but more important was being comfortable with the rims, gym lighting, shooting backdrop, etc. Maybe it is just me but practicing every day on the same court offers a distinct advantage over a team that comes and plays there once a year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 13, 2006, 05:56:03 AM

Quote from: augie_superfan on January 13, 2006, 04:38:17 AMI don't think you can say the home court advantage was neutralized at all, regardless if there were even more and louder away fans at the game. Home court advantage does not only come down to the people making the most noise. Through experience, I always thought that the crowd was a great advantage but more important was being comfortable with the rims, gym lighting, shooting backdrop, etc. Maybe it is just me but practicing every day on the same court offers a distinct advantage over a team that comes and plays there once a year.

I agree with the value of homecourt familiarity, AS, especially with the value of experience against a particular shooting backdrop -- in our league, North Central is a location that is often cited as being a problem for visitors due to having a shooting backdrop that's different from those of the other seven schools. But I don't necessarily think that those things are more important than fan support. When there's more fan support for the away team than for the home team, it can have a double effect -- it can spur on the visitors, and it can be demoralizing to the homestanders.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 13, 2006, 09:17:54 AM

I agree with Mr. Sager, when voting for a team in the top 25, after games have been played, then history does NOT matter. How the teams are playing matter. Wilington and Bluffton may have had history against them early in the season, but now they should have been recognized for their play, not the reputations of the school.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 13, 2006, 09:41:48 AM

Quote from: sac on January 12, 2006, 09:55:41 PM

Cardinalpride===you'll have to forgive me I'm still a little dazed and confused from Sager's Vander Hide post in the MIAA room this morning.

No problem. You're forgiven. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 13, 2006, 09:47:23 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2006, 06:59:42 PM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 12, 2006, 05:23:25 PMYou sound like an IWU apologist! :)

I don't buy Hoops Fan's explanation for Illinois Wesleyan's loss to North Central, but let's be fair to Titans fans on this one. Not even the most diehard drinker of the green Kool-Ade made any excuses for Wesleyan after that loss. To their credit, the postgame talk on CCIW Chat from Wesleyan fans centered around how well North Central had played, and on what a quality team the Cardinals have this season.

Greg, that's true. I was just having some fun with Hoops Fan regarding his explanation about IWU's approach to CCIW opponents.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 13, 2006, 10:14:23 AM

Quote from: Briton Backer on January 12, 2006, 06:22:49 PM
(I find it hard to believe that even Hoops Fan or Titan Q will argue that the Brits should fall below 4)

On the contrary, Albion has been above Wooster, Witt and Hope in my mind since the break. The game this week only solidified their position in my mind.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on January 13, 2006, 11:46:21 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 12, 2006, 04:13:32 PM

I never thought Hope deserved to be as high as they were, so the Albion win only solidified my position. In fact the only thing that game proved to me was that Albion was worthy of being considered in the top 5 at all.

This is what I don't understand. Albion has been ranked ahead of Hope all season. What happened last week that caused the voters to all of the sudden jump on the Hope bandwagon? Personally, I questioned why Hope would suddenly leapfrog Albion last week. It's not like Hope had any more impressive wins the week before to warrant the leap. They beat Kzoo and Olivet compared to Albion's wins over Tri-State and Adrian. Had Albion stayed ahead of Hope in the polls, they might've had a better chance of passing Witt in the polls next week, although, I wouldn't necessarily agree with that either.

As for the most dominant team argument, I don't see any clear cut #1. I think the way the #1 votes are so spread out reflects that. There are several very good teams, but you could make an argument that any of the top 4 or 5 could be #1. Based on schedules, I don't think you can argue against IWU's, especially now that CCIW play has begun. But to discount Witt's and Wooster's schedules any more than Hope's or Albion's isn't a fair judgement IMO. All four have gone up against some pretty good teams and some not so good teams, and I don't really see any one of their schedules sticking out much more than another. I also don't buy into the argument over Albion's only loss. Yes, the fact that UM-D is NAIA and had 5 games under their belts gave them an advantage, but they are not a good team. Also, Albion beat BW, but that game could have easily gone the other way, just like BW's double OT win over Wooster could have easily gone the other way.

All I'm saying is basically, you could make a case for any of the top 4 teams in the poll next week no matter how they are ranked. Witt should stay #1 IMO, with Albion right on their heels. Wooster should probably stay #3 depending on how their game at Wabash goes, and IWU should be #4 depending on how their game at Elmhurst goes. That's just how I see it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 13, 2006, 12:02:54 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 12, 2006, 08:00:44 PM
* There were 350 in the stands for the Lawrence game
* There were 1075 for IWU

How many IWU fans were at the Carthage/Lawrence game, though? :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 13, 2006, 12:10:59 PM

Quote from: ScotsFan on January 13, 2006, 11:46:21 AM
What happened last week ...

Everyone's No. 1 team lost, giving people a chance to re-evaluate the top of their entire ballot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 13, 2006, 12:49:29 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 12, 2006, 06:02:04 PM
On the topic of Carthage...

This week on Hoopsville, Pat Cummings, a D3hoops.com Top 25 voter and someone who knows Division III as well as anyone, said, "Illinois Wesleyan is not in the top 3 because they barely beat Carthage...not because they lost to North Central

I said the exact same thing when I sent my poll to Ypsi.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on January 13, 2006, 03:35:53 PM

Errr - I respect both you and Pat OS, but I am not sure that I agree 100%. The loss WAS a factor in dropping them.

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on January 13, 2006, 04:13:27 PM

Coach C - agree. In reality, probably a little bit of both influenced the IWU vote.

As for the upcoming poll, let's see what the weekend brings. Heck, the voters could take the easy way out an scatter five first place votes to each of the Top 5! Would that be something!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 13, 2006, 04:27:39 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 13, 2006, 02:33:46 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 13, 2006, 02:10:36 AMHistory DOES matter!

I never said it didn't. I said that it shouldn't matter when a Top 25 pollster fills out his ballot.

I'm just not following the logic of your argument. If you acknowledge that history matters, then why should it NOT be a legitimate factor in voting? I'm not talking about in the 12th poll - by then the current season provides adequate data. I'm talking about in the early polls, when there IS little data from this season.

We assume that a victory over, say, a Wooster in game three is much more impressive than a win over, say, Caltech, but afterall, neither Wooster or Caltech would have enough of a record THIS season to say that for sure. We base it on history (and usually correctly). Later on, when more data is in, we can reconsider. Lawrence's meteoric rise in the rankings was largely due to beating #2 Oshkosh. In retrospect, it was a good win, but not nearly the win we all though at the time.

Since strength of schedule is a meaningless concept early in the season, we (of necessity) judge strength of schedule, quality wins, etc., largely on the reputation of the opponents - history again.

I suggest that NOT including history as a factor in voting would be both impossible and irresponsible. As the season progresses, and provides its own data, the factor will be of diminishing importance. But without factoring in history, we may as well simply dispense with polls and rely on Massey!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 13, 2006, 04:46:26 PM

Quote from: iwumichigander on January 13, 2006, 04:13:27 PM
Coach C - agree. In reality, probably a little bit of both influenced the IWU vote.

As for the upcoming poll, let's see what the weekend brings. Heck, the voters could take the easy way out an scatter five first place votes to each of the Top 5! Would that be something!

lol... that's not the easy way out! that would take a lot of effort to coordinate :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 13, 2006, 05:12:54 PM

Not to put words in Pat's mouth, but I interpreted his statement as saying IWU fell as far as they did because of the Carthage game. That otherwise they might have stayed in the top four.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 13, 2006, 05:17:45 PM

Yeah, Ypsi can I rank teams as tied in my poster's poll? I'd love to give out 1/9ths of votes to a whole mess of teams at the top!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dansand on January 13, 2006, 06:27:08 PM

Albion is obviously outstanding this year and Brandon Crawford is putting up Jeff Gibbs-type numbers. The question I have is, how in the world did they lose to UM-Dearborn? Maybe some of the MIAA posters could offer some insight.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 13, 2006, 07:08:15 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 13, 2006, 04:27:39 PMI'm just not following the logic of your argument. If you acknowledge that history matters, then why should it NOT be a legitimate factor in voting? I'm not talking about in the 12th poll - by then the current season provides adequate data. I'm talking about in the early polls, when there IS little data from this season.

History -- or, to be more precise, a proven coach or an experienced team or great crowd support, or some sort of combination of these things -- matters in that it may have an effect upon the outcome of a game. But, again, you're confusing primary causes with secondary and even tertiary causes. The outcomes of the games themselves are what ultimately matters. Anything that influences the outcomes of those games -- whether it be a proven coach facing an inexperienced one, the best player on one of the teams suffering from the flu, a ref who calls a bad game, whatever -- is important only inasmuch as it affects the game. They're factors that are part of a greater whole, and the greater whole -- the outcome of the game -- is what is considered.

See where I'm going with this? I'm saying that the judge at a baking contest compares the taste of one pie to another. You're saying that the judge should take all the pies back to the lab to find out how much monosodium glutamate each pie contains, or whether or not the contestants are using confectionary sugar or corn syrup, before actually biting into the pies. Plus, you're saying that last year's contest winner should get extra credit in this year's contest based upon the tastiness of last year's pie, while the novice baker should be penalized for not having paid his or her dues.

The early polls (say, weeks two and three) are distorted by their reliance upon the preseason poll in addition to the games that have been played. They constitute the acme of what you desire -- a polling situation in which factors other than this season's results count. They're always the most inaccurate polls of the year, in that they usually "bounce" the most wildly in terms of teams moving up and down the ladder and in that they tend to be the ones that least reflect the final poll. As I said earlier, I argued several years ago with Pat that he should dispense with the first couple of polls, since they're tainted by the influence of an extraneous, non-relevant factor (the preseason poll, which shouldn't matter at all once games begin). Pat's not going to give up running those first couple of polls, and I can understand why -- the interest is there among people to see those polls. But those first couple polls or so are tainted to a degree, and I regard them with a lot of suspicion.

Now, on top of that, you enter the picture and start arguing that extraneous factors other than actual game results should be valid aspects of balloting until midseason, and that just baffles the heck out of me.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 13, 2006, 04:27:39 PMWe assume that a victory over, say, a Wooster in game three is much more impressive than a win over, say, Caltech, but afterall, neither Wooster or Caltech would have enough of a record THIS season to say that for sure. We base it on history (and usually correctly). Later on, when more data is in, we can reconsider. Lawrence's meteoric rise in the rankings was largely due to beating #2 Oshkosh. In retrospect, it was a good win, but not nearly the win we all though at the time.

Chuck, don't make me quote The Odd Couple on the subject of the word "assume". :D

You're lumping a lot of things together under the word "history" here. Yes, a win on Opening Weekend over Wooster is considered more solid than a win over Caltech. But this goes back to the preseason poll, in that a win over Wooster is a win over a team that returns a lot of players from a 20-win team the previous season, while a win over Caltech is a win over a team whose players, even if they are returnees, are carried over from a nearly-winless outfit the season before. If Wooster does not return a big chunk of the previous season's rotation, that Opening Weekend win means a lot less. Look at it this way: While people will make a fuss over beating Illinois Wesleyan early in the season in 2006-07 based simply upon the program's reputation, it won't mean nearly as much in terms of the poll as a win over Illinois Wesleyan would've meant early this season, because the Titans are going to lose so much to graduation in the intervening period. It's the reason why, although I'm sure Lakeland and Clarke fans were delighted to beat UWSP before the holidays, pollsters and national observers took little note of it. The Pointers are not the same team as the one that won the last two national titles.

Speaking of WIAC teams, Wisconsin-Oshkosh is a prime example of why the early polls should be viewed with such great suspicion. I'm not knocking the pollsters for ranking the Titans so high in the preseason, since the evidence indicated that they were a good educated guess for success in 2005-06. But their #7 ranking in the first week's poll and #14 ranking in the second week's poll were clearly unmerited by actual performance; they were up that high only as a residual of their preseason ranking, and their presence in those lofty perches taints those first two polls. By week three they were #25, and based upon their current status that appears to be more justifiable.

Ranking teams upon criteria other than actual wins and losses this season is, as Q said the other day, inherently unfair. It's also an invitation to court inaccuracy, as UWO so amply demonstrated in the first two polls. Top 25 rankings should be handed out upon the basis of the Smith-Barney principle. In other words, teams should be ranked the old-fashioned way ... they earn it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 13, 2006, 07:35:49 PM

Pat, you are correct. Pat Cummings was basically saying that just based on the North Central loss, IWU would have been #2 or #3, but when combined with the close game vs Carthage 3 days later, it resulted in the drop all the way to #5. As I stated, I think Pat Cummings is absolutely correct about the Week 6 poll dynamics and how the voters evaluated IWU when they voted Monday.

This is where I wish we (D3 fans, poll voters, etc) could all see more games. I think most people who watch 4-9 Carthage play leave saying, "Wow do they have a lot of talent." Lawrence head coach John Tharpe told me exactly that two weeks ago. Again, Carthage followed up the near upset over IWU by nearly winning at Elmhurst Wednesday. In all 9 of their losses (all vs good teams), they've been competitive:

vs Concordia (CA) - 75-78
vs Westmont - 69-72 (OT)
vs Calvin - 78-82 (tied with :50 to play)
@ Hope - 61-75 (17 pt lead in 1st half, tied with 13:55 in game)
vs Carroll - 74-82 (tied with 3:19 to play)
vs Lawrence - 65-78 (down 4 with 5:56 to play)
vs Gustavus Adolphus - 70-77 (2 pt game with :58)
vs IWU - 79-80
@ Elmhurst - 73-78 (led by 5 with 3:28)

Now, the 2005-06 Red Men obviously can't close games, but based on the above, a close win over Carthage shouldn't be viewed as something bad just because they have a bad record. My basic point was that when evaluating opponents, we all need to make sure we're not just looking at the opponent's record.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 13, 2006, 08:39:12 PM

Greg,

I have concluded that we are not really in disagreement, we're just using terms a bit differently. I think I caught on to that with your baking contest - what YOU are not taking to account is that with early polls, the judges (voters) are NOT tasting pies, they are tasting ingredients! (Or, at most, half-baked pies!) And what I'm calling history is far more than just the preseason poll - we would also no doubt give more credit for an early win over, say, Millikin than an early win over, say, Eureka. These assumptions are based (largely) on what I am calling history (after all, I'm sure even Pat's most conscientious voters don't go over all 400+ rosters with a fine-tooth comb). We assume (usually correctly) that even a mid to lower level CCIW or WIAC teams is PROBABLY better than even a higher level (not necessarily #1) SLIAC or LMC team (before you jump on my example, I'm aware that Eureka is not a higher level team even in the NIIC).

[BTW, I'm pretty sure that "when you assume you make an ass of u and me" predates the Old Couple - I knew that gag in the 1950s.]

That 'history' does make up an improperly large factor once this season's data has become more telling is, no doubt, exacerbated by overly-early polling and the 'human nature' tendency that voters are NOT going to look at things totally from scratch each week. Quite naturally, they are going to take their ballot from the previous week as a template, and move teams up or down from that starting point. Polling before most teams have played at least 8-10 games is not really justifiable logically. BUT, I'm not arguing for Pat to abandon the pre-season and/or early season polls - like I said, what else would we have to talk about in December?! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 13, 2006, 08:54:08 PM

Quote from: dansand on January 13, 2006, 06:27:08 PM
Albion is obviously outstanding this year and Brandon Crawford is putting up Jeff Gibbs-type numbers. The question I have is, how in the world did they lose to UM-Dearborn? Maybe some of the MIAA posters could offer some insight.

It was mentioned just a few posts ago -- NAIA teams can start practice and play games earlier than D-III schools can. It makes no sense for D-IIIs to play NAIAs early in the season because they come in at a disadvantage. Apparently it was UM-Dearborn's fifth game while it was Albion's opener.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 13, 2006, 09:42:35 PM

I agree. Sometimes Wabash brings an NAIA team for their tip-off tourney, and their record is like 3-2 or 4-1 already.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dansand on January 13, 2006, 09:45:03 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 13, 2006, 08:54:08 PM
Quote from: dansand on January 13, 2006, 06:27:08 PM
Albion is obviously outstanding this year and Brandon Crawford is putting up Jeff Gibbs-type numbers. The question I have is, how in the world did they lose to UM-Dearborn? Maybe some of the MIAA posters could offer some insight.

It was mentioned just a few posts ago -- NAIA teams can start practice and play games earlier than D-III schools can. It makes no sense for D-IIIs to play NAIAs early in the season because they come in at a disadvantage. Apparently it was UM-Dearborn's fifth game while it was Albion's opener.

Good point. I've seen the same thing when Augustana plays their cross-river rival St. Ambrose. Quite often it's their second or third game while the Fighting Bees have played eight or ten. Still, it's surprising considering how bad Dearborn is.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 13, 2006, 09:51:04 PM

I think Albion's loss to them could be just 'one of those things'.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie_superfan on January 13, 2006, 10:50:24 PM

I know there are some people that dont necessarily agree with the built-in historical bias of the early season polls. Also, there are some that say there shouldn't be a poll for a few weeks until we have some more info on the current season.

This past year, the BCS used a new poll, the Harris Interactive poll, which didn't come out until late September when most teams had already played 3 or 4 games. I thought I remember them saying that their reasoning for this was to take out that built-in bias that comes with a preseason poll. So I compared the 1st Harris poll to the AP poll at that date and here are some of my findings:

24 out of 25 teams were in both polls
17 out of the 25 teams were ranked the same in both polls
4 were ranked differently by 1 place
3 were ranked differently by 2 places

Looking at this, I don't think that releasing early season polls will create a worse poll once some games are played. These results tell me that either the Harris voters maybe were making their own early season polls eventhough they weren't being tallied yet or maybe they kept seeing the AP & Coaches polls which influenced them.

I don't know if the same dynamics would happen with a D3 poll as they did with an NCAA football poll (we all know that the NCAA has some ranking problems in football, with the BCS and all). I just thought I'd bring this up as another source to generate some discussion, if we don't already have enough of that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 14, 2006, 12:42:01 AM

Gentlemen, as long as humans are in control of the polls, "historical bias" will creep in. It's just that simple. Computers don't have an opinion. People do. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying computers are the way to go. However, because we base opinions on what we see, hear, read, feel, and conclude, "historical biases" are bound to creep in. Right or wrong.

Greg, you used the "judge in the pie contest" example. Nice example. The difference is the judge actually gets to taste All the pies. Many pollsters don't actually get to see all the teams play and they rely on information that sometimes isn't pertinent. "Historical Bias" falls into that category. Whether it's right or wrong is as much someones opinion as the actual D3 poll or any other poll for that matter. Basically, what I'm saying is its all an opinion. Why should we analyze someone elses opinion unless it's just complete nonsense.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 14, 2006, 01:32:00 AM

Earlier today, in this swift-flowing stream of posts, a poster wondered aloud how Hope could have passed Albion in the poll without beating anyone noteworthy. Only the pollsters and poll compiler can answer that, of course, but in playing around on my spreadsheet, I came up with a plausible mathematical way for something like this to happen. If you are interested, and are ready to be bored, read on; if not, I suggest you move on to the next post. :)

Suppose we live in an 8-team universe, and those 8 teams, listed alphabetically, are Albion, Caltech, Hope, Illinois Wesleyan, Immaculata, Lawrence, Wittenberg, and Wooster. There are 8 pollsters who rank these 8 teams every week. The polls are scored with 8 points for a first-place vote, 7 for second, and so on. In Week N, here's the 8 ballots:

Wittenberg: 1-1-1-2-3-4-2-3
Wooster: 3-2-3-4-2-3-1-4
IWU: 4-3-2-3-5-2-3-2
Albion: 2-5-6-5-6-5-7-1
Hope: 8-8-7-1-1-1-6-7
Lawrence: 5-4-5-8-4-7-4-5
Caltech: 6-6-8-7-7-8-5-6
Immaculata: 7-7-4-6-8-6-8-8

The Week N poll therefore looks like this:
1. Wittenberg (3) 55
2. Wooster (1) 50
3. IWU 48
4. Albion (1) 35
5. Hope (3) 33
6. Lawrence 30
7. Caltech 19
8. Immaculata 18

In Week N+1, everyone plays the only other team in our universe, let's call them Duke, and everyone except Caltech beats them. Duke, however, upsets Caltech. In the next poll, every voter decides to drop Caltech to #8 and otherwise leaves their ballots unchanged. So the Week N+1 ballots are

Wittenberg: 1-1-1-2-3-4-2-3
Wooster: 3-2-3-4-2-3-1-4
IWU: 4-3-2-3-5-2-3-2
Albion: 2-5-6-5-6-5-6-1
Hope: 7-7-7-1-1-1-5-6
Lawrence: 5-4-5-7-4-7-4-5
Caltech: 8-8-8-8-8-8-8-8
Immaculata: 6-6-4-6-7-6-7-7

The Week N+1 poll is
1. Wittenberg (3) 55
2. Wooster (1) 50
3. IWU 48
4. Hope (3) 37
5. Albion (1) 36
6. Lawrence 31
7. Immaculata 23
8. Caltech 8

Despite the fact that no poster changed their opinion about how the the seven teams east of Pasadena rank vis-a-vis one another, Hope passes Albion in the poll.

This may be an extreme (and extremely silly) example, but I'm trying to make a point: that it's not just what you do that affects your ranking; who is around you in the poll, and how they do, also affects your ranking.

We now return you to your regularly-scheduled programming... ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 14, 2006, 01:47:50 AM

Quote from: cardinalpride on January 14, 2006, 12:42:01 AM
Gentlemen, as long as humans are in control of the polls, "historical bias" will creep in. It's just that simple. Computers don't have an opinion. People do. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying computers are the way to go. However, because we base opinions on what we see, hear, read, feel, and conclude, "historical biases" are bound to creep in. Right or wrong.

Greg, you used the "judge in the pie contest" example. Nice example. The difference is the judge actually gets to taste All the pies. Many pollsters don't actually get to see all the teams play and they rely on information that sometimes isn't pertinent. "Historical Bias" falls into that category. Whether it's right or wrong is as much someones opinion as the actual D3 poll or any other poll for that matter. Basically, what I'm saying is its all an opinion. Why should we analyze someone elses opinion unless it's just complete nonsense.

Your first paragraph is utterly correct, though I would change 'historical biases' to 'judgment'!

Greg's use of the 'judge in the pie contest' WAS good, because it illustrated WHERE I feel he went astray! You added that the d3 judges (voters) don't get to taste all the pies. Correct. I observed that (in early polls) they are tasting ingredients (or, at best, half-baked pies), not pies. Also correct. But I think you went astray in your conclusion.

Unless you PREFER a strict computer analysis (e.g., Massey), don't denigrate the human element in polls. I PREFER (good) polls BECAUSE they include judgment, and that judgment is (early on) for the most part what I mean by 'history'!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on January 14, 2006, 08:42:03 AM

I htink what most people are talking about here is not really historical bias as much as it's a preference given to voting for a proven coach and program over an unproven coach and program.

Let's also remember that part of the reason to do a poll is to generate interest in our sport. A pre-season poll does that really well since it usually incluses a large number of teams and gets people focused on the coming games. There IS an element of FUN involved !

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bamm on January 14, 2006, 09:07:33 AM

The City of Rochester gets the Chase Championship game we all were hoping for. Tonight @8 #20 St John Fisher will take on U of Rochester. Both teams blew out their tourney opponents yesterday (SUNY Brockport and Roberts Wesleyan).

Edge to UR this year as the championship is in their gym... which will be packed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on January 14, 2006, 09:51:35 AM

Rochester has lost to two ranked opponents in their gym this year, let's see if they can get one against Fisher...it is a big game for them after struggling last weekend (18 point loss to NYU, 1 point win vs. Brandeis).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 14, 2006, 11:06:31 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 13, 2006, 08:39:12 PMI have concluded that we are not really in disagreement, we're just using terms a bit differently.

I disagree. :D There is a bona-fide difference of opinion here. I think that the Top 25 poll should be conducted on the basis of this season's game results. You think that introducing other elements into consideration is permissible.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 13, 2006, 08:39:12 PMI think I caught on to that with your baking contest - what YOU are not taking to account is that with early polls, the judges (voters) are NOT tasting pies, they are tasting ingredients! (Or, at most, half-baked pies!)

I have absolutely no idea what this means, Chuck.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 13, 2006, 08:39:12 PMAnd what I'm calling history is far more than just the preseason poll - we would also no doubt give more credit for an early win over, say, Millikin than an early win over, say, Eureka. These assumptions are based (largely) on what I am calling history (after all, I'm sure even Pat's most conscientious voters don't go over all 400+ rosters with a fine-tooth comb). We assume (usually correctly) that even a mid to lower level CCIW or WIAC teams is PROBABLY better than even a higher level (not necessarily #1) SLIAC or LMC team (before you jump on my example, I'm aware that Eureka is not a higher level team even in the NIIC).

Pat goes to great lengths to keep the preseason poll from degenerating into the carnival of anecdotal guesswork or ranking-by-reputation to which you allude. He marshals a considerable amount of data on the top hundred or so teams from the previous season, and passes it along to his pollsters. The preseason poll is not based upon historical assumptions along the lines you mention (e.g., the CCIW and WIAC mid- or lower-level teams being better than the upper-tier SLIAC and LMC teams). It's based upon going over that top quartile's rosters with the fine-toothed comb that you were so sure doesn't exist. Since the upper-tier SLIAC and LMC teams weren't in that top quartile, or they're at best on the outer edges of it, they become irrelevant to the process.

It's the reason why Aurora was ranked higher in the preseason than either Calvin or Rochester. Both the Knights and the Yellowjackets reached the Final Four last season, and they play in leagues that are historically superior to the NIIC. Plus, Calvin beat Aurora by double digits on the Spartans' own floor in last season's tourney. Someone making the anecdotal assumptions based upon historical evidence that you tout would've put the Knights and the Yellowjackets ahead of the Spartans. But roster evidence showed that Calvin and Rochester lost staggering amounts of minutes and production from last season's rosters due to graduation, while Aurora had superstar Larry Welton and a decent portion of his supporting cast (esp. playmaker Courtney Carson and forward Jeremy Cartwright) returning.

It's also a little strange to see you touting the presumptive inflexibility of D3's pecking order with regard to leagues by saying that the lower slots in power conferences can be ranked out-of-hand above the higher slots in the more lowly conferences. It's strange because you've been the biggest advocate of conference-ranking fluidity on Posting Up this year. Aren't you the one who has stated in various rooms over the past two weeks that the UAA may have passed the WIAC this season in terms of overall conference strength? A reassessment that drastic blows all of the previous assumptions of the kind that you're making here right out of the water.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 13, 2006, 08:39:12 PM[BTW, I'm pretty sure that "when you assume you make an ass of u and me" predates the Old Couple - I knew that gag in the 1950s.]

You could be right about that, since I was born in the sixties and can cheerfully plead young'un status on that point. ;D

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 13, 2006, 08:39:12 PMThat 'history' does make up an improperly large factor once this season's data has become more telling is, no doubt, exacerbated by overly-early polling and the 'human nature' tendency that voters are NOT going to look at things totally from scratch each week. Quite naturally, they are going to take their ballot from the previous week as a template, and move teams up or down from that starting point. Polling before most teams have played at least 8-10 games is not really justifiable logically. BUT, I'm not arguing for Pat to abandon the pre-season and/or early season polls - like I said, what else would we have to talk about in December?! ;D

I have no argument with the existence of the preseason poll. And I probably wouldn't have much dispute with a mid-December poll kicking off the season's series of Top 25s, although I naturally wouldn't take it as seriously as a later one. But, as I said, I agree with you that the early season polls fulfill popular demand, and I completely understand why Pat offers them. I don't think that their methodology is sound, but I'm not the guy in charge here.

Quote from: cardinalpride on January 14, 2006, 12:42:01 AM
Gentlemen, as long as humans are in control of the polls, "historical bias" will creep in. It's just that simple. Computers don't have an opinion. People do. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying computers are the way to go. However, because we base opinions on what we see, hear, read, feel, and conclude, "historical biases" are bound to creep in. Right or wrong.

I agree that a polling system that relies upon human voters will probably never reach 100% objectivity. But the perfect should not be the enemy of the good. Objectivity is something that pollsters should be striving to attain, don't you think?

Quote from: cardinalpride on January 14, 2006, 12:42:01 AMGreg, you used the "judge in the pie contest" example. Nice example. The difference is the judge actually gets to taste All the pies. Many pollsters don't actually get to see all the teams play and they rely on information that sometimes isn't pertinent. "Historical Bias" falls into that category. Whether it's right or wrong is as much someones opinion as the actual D3 poll or any other poll for that matter. Basically, what I'm saying is its all an opinion. Why should we analyze someone elses opinion unless it's just complete nonsense.

First of all, I'm happy that you didn't butcher my analogy (sorry to use a cross-culinary reference ;)) the way that Chuck did with that "tasting ingredients, not pies" jazz. You're right that the best way to "taste" a team is to see it, and the inability to see every halfway-decent team in D3 is a tremendous obstacle that D3hoops.com Top 25 pollsters have to face that isn't shared by, say, D1 football pollsters. But I think that reliance upon historical bias in the absence of actually seeing a team is a copout, because from everything I've learned about Pat's methodology I know that he goes to great lengths to give his pollsters all the information that they need in terms of game results, updated on a weekly basis.

Yeah, it's all opinions. I just want the opinions to be the best ones possible if they're opinions that count (i.e., the opinions of pollsters), and I want them to be fair.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 14, 2006, 01:47:50 AMUnless you PREFER a strict computer analysis (e.g., Massey), don't denigrate the human element in polls. I PREFER (good) polls BECAUSE they include judgment, and that judgment is (early on) for the most part what I mean by 'history'!

I prefer good polls, too. And what I'm saying is that the first couple or so polls of the season are ipso facto not good polls, because of the paucity of hard data available.

Quote from: Coach C on January 14, 2006, 08:42:03 AM
I htink what most people are talking about here is not really historical bias as much as it's a preference given to voting for a proven coach and program over an unproven coach and program.

Uh, Coach, that's the exact definition of "historical bias" with which Chuck and I have been working over the past few days! :D

Quote from: Coach C on January 14, 2006, 08:42:03 AMLet's also remember that part of the reason to do a poll is to generate interest in our sport. A pre-season poll does that really well since it usually incluses a large number of teams and gets people focused on the coming games. There IS an element of FUN involved !

I heartily agree, which is why I've said all along that I fully understand why Pat offers both the preseason poll and those first few polls of the season. You make a good point when you mention the generating-interest aspect, because a lot of the media attention that this website has drawn across the country is as a result of the polls. More than anything else on this site (certainly more than Posting Up :) ), it's those polls that have established D3hoops.com as the premier authoritative source on the subject of Division Three basketball in the eyes of the media.

I fully endorse the preseason poll, in and of itself. It's a great way to get people talking about the upcoming season, a great method to draw press attention to various teams, and a useful reference point as the season goes along. It's where the preseason poll bleeds into the regular season's polls and taints them (e.g., UW-Oshkosh) that I have a problem with it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: albionbritfan on January 14, 2006, 11:27:24 AM

Quote from: dansand on January 13, 2006, 06:27:08 PM
Albion is obviously outstanding this year and Brandon Crawford is putting up Jeff Gibbs-type numbers. The question I have is, how in the world did they lose to UM-Dearborn? Maybe some of the MIAA posters could offer some insight.

won.

I think some of what Pat and others mentioned about the in-game experience for UM-Deardorn was true, especially given Albion was playing its first game without Travis Depree and Michael Thomas, who were the clear leaders of last year's Elite 8 team on both the offense and defense sides. Plus UM-D shot just lights out in the game, if I can remember correctly (similar to the shooting clinic Albion put on against Hope this week). Still no excuse for Albion, they absolutely should have won the game.

The big question for Albion fans was "how good are we going to be without Depree and Thomas and Champine (a very promising freshman who was like 6-7 but had a 7-foot wingspan or something ridiculous like that)?" Needless to say, we were very scared by that first game and had visions of a long, tough season. But Albion has rebounded nicely since then.

Crawford is a beast on the inside, despite being double- or triple-teamed when gets the ball in the post. He has already been the MIAA player of the week four times, and he is likely going for his fifth if he has any sort of performance against Alma and the Brits win. This, despite the fact that most MIAA posters/pundits picked Andy Phillips to be the preseason MIAA MVP, and D3hoops selected Phillips as a first team all-American (Crawford was picked on the fourth team).

Albion fans also expected Silas and Gibbons and Way to contribute to the team, but the unexpected contributor to the Brits has been the play of their starting PG, Michael Bailey. Holy cow, the kid is like 5' 10" at the tallest, but he has remarkable quicks and, if left open, will can the three. His dribble penetration is great and he has the ability to find the open man, usually Way or Crawford, on the rotation by the D.

As for why Hope got ahead of Albion in the poll, I don't think it's brain surgery, requiring Ns or N+1s for that matter. In week 5's poll, Albion and Hope had all of 10 points difference between them. Quite simply, voters felt forced to look elsewhere for a number 1 team in week 6, with IWU's loss to NCC and close game vs. Carthage. Witt and Wooster both had a loss (like IWU not bad losses, but nonetheless), and Amherst lost the same week as IWU. Hope was undefeated, has a very, very, very good roster and had been putting some impressive winning margins up against their opponents. It's completely feasible, not a bad call by the voters in the least, especially if they feel compelled to now slide their votes Albion's way. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: albionbritfan on January 14, 2006, 11:34:39 AM

And either way, it's a heck of lot more interesting this year debating the Top 25 than last year, when UW-SP owned it with short intermittent appearances by IWU and Wooster. So let's take a step back and be thankful, people.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on January 14, 2006, 12:06:41 PM

Ok Greg -

So how do you propose ranking two teams that look similar on paper from similar conferences, one that is an established winning program and one that has no pedigree?

Do you give the nod to the winning program, or just skip ranking them because you can't brek the tie without using 'historical bias?'

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 14, 2006, 12:55:21 PM

Just my opinion but historical bias probably exists more in the earlier polls of the season. As more games are played I think it becomes easier to rank teams based on THIS seasons performance.

But there's no doubt historical bias exists in all polls.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 14, 2006, 01:19:11 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 14, 2006, 11:06:31 AM
I agree that a polling system that relies upon human voters will probably never reach 100% objectivity. But the perfect should not be the enemy of the good. Objectivity is something that pollsters should be striving to attain, don't you think?

I think lost in all of this discussion is the question of what a poll actually is (or should?) describe. Whether it is a poll of informed voters or an "objective" computer analysis, either way what we have is an attempt to stack the teams up, for a "Team X is better than Team Y and would be the favorite in a game played between them."

Also lost in the "historical bias" argument is the coach. On the CCIW page, posters have noted that Bill Harris teams play a certain way, and even if they are extremely young, they will still play very hard and put themselves in the position for some upsets. Coaches prepare the players for the games, and if one coach is better than another at this preparation, then a less talented or experienced team may have an advantage against a more talented or experienced team.

Quote from: albionbritfan on January 14, 2006, 11:34:39 AM
And either way, it's a heck of lot more interesting this year debating the Top 25 than last year, when UW-SP owned it with short intermittent appearances by IWU and Wooster. So let's take a step back and be thankful, people.

I dunno, I sure enjoyed last year ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on January 14, 2006, 01:40:06 PM

Good Day for top 25 basketball, looks like all 25 teams are in action.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on January 14, 2006, 01:45:50 PM

And in the first final, #16 Carnegie Mellon beats a tough Christopher Newport team 94-81, at Newport, in a game where they led by almost 30 at times and by over 20 most of the second half. The win takes CMU to 13-1 and CNU goes to 10-4. Carnegie finishes its non conference record 10-1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 14, 2006, 02:14:35 PM

Quote from: Coach C on January 14, 2006, 12:06:41 PMSo how do you propose ranking two teams that look similar on paper from similar conferences, one that is an established winning program and one that has no pedigree?

Do you give the nod to the winning program, or just skip ranking them because you can't brek the tie without using 'historical bias?'

"Similar" and "identical" are not the same thing. You can always find a way to distinguish between similar-looking teams from similar conferences based upon how they've done thus far in the season.

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 14, 2006, 01:19:11 PMI think lost in all of this discussion is the question of what a poll actually is (or should?) describe. Whether it is a poll of informed voters or an "objective" computer analysis, either way what we have is an attempt to stack the teams up, for a "Team X is better than Team Y and would be the favorite in a game played between them."

Agreed. And my point is this: The fact that one team has a shining pedigree in D3 basketball and another does not doesn't necessarily translate into determining favorites and underdogs. If it did, then perennial OAC doormat Wilmington wouldn't be the team to beat in that conference right now, and perennial OAC (and national) powerhouse Otterbein wouldn't be looking up from the bottom of the heap with a 1-6 conference record. But if we allow historical bias to seep into polling considerations, we end up sticking a finger in the eyes of teams like Wilmington and Carnegie Mellon.

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 14, 2006, 01:19:11 PMAlso lost in the "historical bias" argument is the coach. On the CCIW page, posters have noted that Bill Harris teams play a certain way, and even if they are extremely young, they will still play very hard and put themselves in the position for some upsets. Coaches prepare the players for the games, and if one coach is better than another at this preparation, then a less talented or experienced team may have an advantage against a more talented or experienced team.

Agreed, and whatever benefits can be derived from having a good coach are manifested in game results. If a team has a good coach, then he'll find a way to win more often than not, and the team can be rewarded in the poll upon that basis. Again, you're seeking to reward a team for possessing a component that ought to lead to winning; I'm seeking to see teams rewarded for using that and other components and actually winning with them. One is a partial explanation of theory; the other is a manifestation of concrete results. My way is a demonstrable means of predicting the outcomes of games played between this year's teams (in other words, picking favorites and underdogs), and yours isn't.

Good coaching aside, though, Bill Harris does not have the players this season to have his team be reasonably considered favorites against the conference's ranked or receiving-votes teams, even at home in King Arena. And that is demonstrably true if you look at how Wheaton has performed this season.

Is Wheaton capable of pulling off a CCIW upset against Illinois Wesleyan or North Central or Augustana or Elmhurst based to at least some degree upon Harris's coaching acumen? Sure. But I wouldn't count on it, and counting on it is what determining favorites and underdogs is all about. Giving Harris too much credit skews the results if you take the poll into consideration. Say Wheaton had managed to stave off the frantic one-man comeback Augie staged in the last ninety seconds of Wednesday's ballgame in Rock Island. According to the judgment of someone who is taking the Bill Harris legacy into consideration, the upset is mitigated from Augie's point of view because they were facing a proven coach (never mind what this says about Augie coach Grey Giovanine ;)). Guess what? That judgment would have been wrong. Wheaton does not have a good team this season, and a Wheaton upset at Augie would've been a catastrophic loss for the hosts no matter how you sliced it or tried to make excuses for it. It would've been a loss for which Augie should've been severely penalized in next week's poll. Saying that they were beaten by a good coach would give them an excuse that they didn't deserve, because Wheaton's performance this year does not merit awarding that excuse to bail out Augie.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 14, 2006, 03:58:22 PM

Final: #3 Wooster 111 Wabash 76

Wooster absolutely thumps Wabash in Crawfordsville on the Lil' Giants home floor. I know comparative scores are not always accurate but this is a much more impressive result than Illinois Wesleyan's 12 point win at Wabash earlier this season.

Wooster was led by James Cooper with 25 points and Tim Vandervaart with 24 points, 13 boards and 6 assists. Wabash couldn't stop either one of them and they combined for 40 points in the 2nd half.

Wooster notched this big victory even though Tom Port, one of Wooster's best players, only played 3 minutes in the 2nd half before he fouled out.

Two nice road wins for the Scots this week!
Wooster is now 14-1, 6-0 in the NCAC.

GO SCOTS!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 14, 2006, 04:47:19 PM

From my eyes, Wooster is a better team than IWU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 14, 2006, 04:59:59 PM

Hope rebounds from Wed's thrashing to equally thrash rival Calvin.

Hope 73 Calvin 55

Hope led by 30, Calvin finished the game on a 17-5 run.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 14, 2006, 06:05:43 PM

Interesting week for the Clucks of Trinity who destroy Clark (who beat WPI) by 27 and then tip Amherst in OT.

Two wins is better than the alternative.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: albionbritfan on January 14, 2006, 06:10:19 PM

Albion up by 16 at the half. Alma goes all-world in the second half, hitting 10 3-pointers and committing only two turnovers. Albion misses 5 free throws in the last half-minute of the game, but wins by 3. Not necessarily the way Albion should or could have won, but a win nonetheless. Alma is a far better team than their 0-and-everything W-L records of recent past.

Also in the MIAA, Hope returns the favor to Calvin. Big win for Hope in the new barn. Should at least help break any fall in the top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 14, 2006, 06:33:54 PM

I realize there are still plenty of top games to go which will affect the answers, but three early questions:

Does #11 Hampden-Sydney losing BOTH games this week drop them all the way out of the poll? (I'm gonna guess, barring later action tonight, that they barely stay in - say, 23 or 24.)

Does #25 Transylvania beating #21 Bluffton today atone for the earlier loss, or just drag Bluffton down with them? (I'm guessing the latter - both will be among the ORVs next week. Though this one is especially dependent on other action - if their likely replacements also lose, then 'never mind'!)

So, who the heck is #1? I would have earlier predicted that Albion would jump to the top spot, but Witt destroyed Hiram (admittedlty a bad team), Woo annihilated a very solid Wabash team (IN Crawfordsville), while Albion barely survived a so-so Alma team. If IWU can win big at former top 25 Elmhurst, things may get REALLY interesting. Dart board time?! ;D

On a related note, Hope's crushing of arch-rival Calvin (they were up 30 before the subs let Calvin make the final a bit more respectable) probably will keep them from falling below 5 or 6.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 14, 2006, 08:13:31 PM

One more question about voters' reactions:

#14 Randolph-Macon soundly defeated #11 Hampden-Sydney (away), then today lost at home to (#37) Virginia Wesleyan. I realize such a question cannot be answered in a vacuum (depends on how other teams near them in the rankings did), but would you guess that they would tend to go up, down, or unchanged?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on January 14, 2006, 09:07:34 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 12, 2006, 04:48:49 PM

I forgot to weigh in on the WPI question. I've thought they were ranked too high all season (the same with Amherst). The voters, over the last few years, have gone from disresecting the NE region to a seeming fear of underestimating it. Amherst should be solidly in the 8-13 range. I thought WPI was a 15-20 team to start the year and probably not in the top 25 after a few games. Once they lost, it was sold for me. With the way they've been playing, I would bet money that they aren't even going to win their conference (the tournament at least). They will be lucky to finish with a good enough record to get a pool C spot.

Hoops Fan,

Looks like you were right. Amherst lost again and this time at home, while WPI still continues to play close games against average teams. It will be interesting to see where they are ranked in next weeks poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie_superfan on January 14, 2006, 10:36:38 PM

Big CCIW night:

#10 Augustana wins at Carthage; 73-70

#5 Illinois Wesleyan loses at Elmhurst; 72-64

#12 North Central loses at Millikin; 59-58

First loss of the year for North Central, now 12-1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bamm on January 14, 2006, 11:01:27 PM

East Region Update:

#20 St John Fisher defeats UR tonight in the Chase Championship @ UR.

With a North Country sweep this weekend, SUNY Cortland is now 12-1. There only loss on the season came by one to the Trinity squad that beat Amherst tonight (in their season opener). The twelve straight wins should probably earn them some Top 25 consideration, despite a weak SUNYAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: albionbritfan on January 14, 2006, 11:20:35 PM

Well I guess with today's turn of events, the #1 votes have to consolidate to Witt, Woo & Albion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 14, 2006, 11:44:10 PM

Quote from: albionbritfan on January 14, 2006, 11:20:35 PM
Well I guess with today's turn of events, the #1 votes have to consolidate to Witt, Woo & Albion.

I'd guess they will suck up most if not all of the top three votes (Lawrence might grab 1 or 2). I'll predict Lawrence 4th and Hope 5th. After that it gets really dicey. I'm not sure IWU deserves 6th with 2 losses in two weeks, but what is the alternative? Maybe York, but their schedule can't begin to compare to IWU's. Puget Sound (if they win tonight) might be a possibility, except IWU beat them decisively head-to-head. Augustana is a possibility, but their pre-season schedule was rather suspect, and they are surviving games rather than winning them. Amherst lost again. Cinderella North Central went down. Other Cinderella, Wilmington, went down. Hampden-Sydney went down twice and will be praying to stay in the poll at all, not worried about 6th. So, by default, #6 may be IWU afterall!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on January 15, 2006, 12:20:43 AM

Who do you think has a chance of getting in the top 10? Do you think anyone from the high teens could jump as far as 10? With IWU (#6), Amherst (#8), Hampden-Sydney (#11), North Central (#12), Randolph-Macon (#14), Wilmington (#17), and UW-Stout (#18) all losing at least one game this week so far. Also, WPI and Augustana have played really close games against weaker opponents (which I do not think is a big deal because I am not a voter but some may consider this). It seems like, in addition to the top of the rankings, the middle is also wide open and about to undergo some serious shuffling.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 15, 2006, 12:44:52 AM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 15, 2006, 12:20:43 AM
Who do you think has a chance of getting in the top 10? Do you think anyone from the high teens could jump as far as 10? With IWU (#6), Amherst (#8), Hampden-Sydney (#11), North Central (#12), Randolph-Macon (#14), Wilmington (#17), and UW-Stout (#18) all losing at least one game this week so far. Also, WPI and Augustana have played really close games against weaker opponents (which I do not think is a big deal because I am not a voter but some may consider this). It seems like, in addition to the top of the rankings, the middle is also wide open and about to undergo some serious shuffling.

I think the top 10 will come in 3 distinct groups:
Group A: Wittenberg, Wooster, Albion, Lawrence (in that order)
Group B: Augustana, Hope, IWU, Puget Sound, York (Pa) (but in what order?)
Group C: Baldwin-Wallace

That means it's the same top 10 as this week, except that B-WC is in and Amherst is out. This presumes a win tonight for UPS.

UPDATE: UPS did win tonight, 112-103 over Whitman.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on January 15, 2006, 02:21:41 AM

BW's loss to Wilmington is looking a bit worse now that following the win at BW, Wilmington lost to Muskingham at home and then to 5-10 Mount Union, but I think you are right and they will most likely end up in the 10 spot. It will be interesting to see how the rest of the top 25 pan out.

I live in the New England area now and I think it has been interesting how things have turned out because no team or group of teams have put themselves head and shoulders above the pack. There are some teams with better records than others, but nearly every game in the NEWMAC, NESCAC, etc. seems to be a toss up (although I guess this could be said about alot of league games across the country recently).

And a final word on my alma mater: CMU won easily today at Christopher Newport (and again the score was closer than the game was overall because CMU has about 1400 freshman on the team that don't want to play defense or take a single charge. I had to painfully sit through this spectacle at Brandeis and from what I hear this has happened half a dozen times this year, but I digress...). It will be interesting to see if they can keep taking care of business in the UAA, they just finished up a 7 game road trip that lasted over a month and took them all over the east coast. They play their first two home games of the conference schedule against Case Western and Emory this coming weekend. This weekend should have been a confidence boost for their 3 leading scorers, Maurer, Wilcox and Johnson (23, 20, 20 pts against a CNU team that took Lincoln to OT).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 15, 2006, 03:34:12 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 14, 2006, 01:47:50 AM

Unless you PREFER a strict computer analysis (e.g., Massey), don't denigrate the human element in polls. I PREFER (good) polls BECAUSE they include judgment, and that judgment is (early on) for the most part what I mean by 'history'!

Mr. Ypsi I believe there is a confusion between "historical Bias" and "historical fact". The human element in polls does not have to be biased. History may play a part in judgement, but that history has to be based on facts not biases. For example, the preseason CCIW poll has wheaton finishing ahead of millikin. Why? Millikin returned more players(6) that gave them good production than wheaton(2) from a year ago. That's a historical fact that's pertinent. However, the coaches selected wheaton ahead of millikin due to wheaton's success in the league in recent years. Although that's true, it's not pertinent to a current poll because wheaton's success had very little to do with their returning players. That's the "historical bias" I'm referring to.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: albionbritfan on January 15, 2006, 08:54:18 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 15, 2006, 12:44:52 AM

I think the top 10 will come in 3 distinct groups:
Group A: Wittenberg, Wooster, Albion, Lawrence (in that order)
Group B: Augustana, Hope, IWU, Puget Sound, York (Pa) (but in what order?)
Group C: Baldwin-Wallace

DC-
I agree with your groupings except I will take in:
A: Witt, Albion, Woo, Lawrence-I think Albion's beatdown of Hope and Hope's subsequent drubbing of Calvin will get Albion over the 30-some vote gap between Albion and Woo from last week's poll. I think Albion will get more #1 votes this week than last but I'm not confident it will be enough to overtake the #1 outright. It would be cool, don't get me wrong, but I'm not greedy and it's fairly meaningless at this stage of the game. [Although I fear Albion would have to win out the MIAA to get to #1 prior to the conference tourney championships, with the good possibility that Woo and Witt blow through their schedule and have one more showdown for the #1 poll spot.]
B: I'll take the order of Puget Sound, York, Hope, Augustana, IWU

The other question is: if the CCIW is looking as deep as it is right now--IWU, NCC, Aug, Elm & Mil (!?!)--and we have an expanded tourney bracket this year, do THREE CCIW teams get to dance? Either way, I think the adjective to describe the CCIW teams that get in will be "battle-tested."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 15, 2006, 09:16:46 AM

Another near miss for now 4-10 Carthage. Last night the Red Men led by 1 with 1:16 to play vs a very good Augustana team but lost by 3. On Wednesday they led by 4 at Elmhurst with 3:00 to play and found a way to lose. And of course a few days before that they lost by 1 at home to Illinois Wesleyan. Carthage is going to knock off one of the leagues top 4 before the season is over...I'm pretty confident of that.

I feel like the CCIW has four extremely legit Top 25-caliber teams -- Illinois Wesleyan, North Central, Augustana, and Elmhurst. I hope the voters step back and look at who Elmhurst lost to (@ Hope, @ UW-Platteville, @ Albion, @ Augustana, vs Millikin) and how competitive every one of those games was. Albion is going to get quite a few 1st place votes -- Elmhurst trailed 65-64 with 2:24 to play at Albion. The Millikin loss at home was a head-scratcher at the time, but the Big Blue took IWU to OT Wednesday and then defeated North Central last night.

The CCIW is as strong as I can recall it. Not only is there parity (I'm not really sure which team among those four is the best), but I believe the top four teams are all good enough to make deep playoff runs. (They won't all make the tournament though obviously.) Heck, the teams that will probably finish 5th and 6th - Carthage and Millikin - are dangerous teams. North Park even got in the action by winning at Millikin (just after Millikin won at Elmhurst) and Wheaton, probably the 7th place team this year, was up 7 at Augustana with 3:00 to play Wednesday.

From a Top 25 poll standpoint, the CCIW teams are going to beat each other up so bad they'll probably never be ranked quite right. Kind of like what happens in the WIAC most years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 15, 2006, 09:23:21 AM

The CCIW's schedule for the upcoming week...

Wednesday:

Millikin @ Augustana
North Central @ Carthage
Elmhurst @ North Park
Wheaton @ Illinois Wesleyan

Saturday:

North Central @ Augustana
Illinois Wesleyan @ North Park
Wheaton @ Elmhurst
Carthage @ Millikin

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 15, 2006, 10:00:32 AM

"B: I'll take the order of Puget Sound, York, Hope, Augustana, IWU"

One would hope Illiniois Wesleyan would not fall below Puget Sound in the poll. IWU defeated Puget Sound on a neutral court in a game IWU led by 21 at halftime and 21 with 11:05 to play. The Loggers made a run to get within 6 with 4:22 to play, but IWU won the game by 17 which is about the average margin IWU led by in the contest.

Anyone at that game in Santa Barbara, CA knows that IWU is just simply better than Puget Sound (a good team).

http://www.iwu.edu/~iwunews/sports/mbb2006/miwu9.htm

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: formerbant10 on January 15, 2006, 10:12:44 AM

It's tough to disagree with Titan Q saying that IWU is a better team, but are they playing better right now?? I think that is what will be reflected in the polls, as opposed to their head to head matchup at the beginning of the season.

And I agree with you stating that the CCIW teams will beat each other up so they won't be ranked right all year. All I know is that it must be a helluva lot of fun to be able to watch such high-caliber games during the regular season out there. That being said, I think Puget Sound will be in front of IWU in the poll. But again, that means nothing in regards to how far each team will end up going in the tourney if they both make it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 15, 2006, 10:29:59 AM

In the CCIW, Carthage, Millikin, Wheaton, and North Park each have eight conference games vs teams that have been in the D3hoops.com Top 25 this year - 2 each vs Augustana, North Central, IWU, and Elmhurst.

That is brutal.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dansand on January 15, 2006, 10:31:36 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 15, 2006, 10:29:59 AM
In the CCIW, Carthage, Millikin, Wheaton, and North Park each have eight conference games vs teams that have been in the D3hoops.com Top 25 this year - 2 each vs Augustana, North Central, IWU, and Elmhurst.

That is brutal.

And Millikin has already won two of those.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 15, 2006, 10:40:39 AM

Quote

I think Albion's beatdown of Hope and Hope's subsequent drubbing of Calvin will get Albion over the 30-some vote gap between Albion and Woo from last week's poll.

Quote

What this perspective ignores is that Albion just barely squeezed by a very average Alma team yesterday. A 3 point win against a very average Alma team doesn't convince me that Albion should suddenly jump over Wooster in the poll.

Alma got beat by Denison on a neutral court in the last 2 weeks and Denison is in the bottom half of the NCAC. Albion beating Alma by 3 points is unimpressive to say the least.

Top 5 in my opinion:

#1 Wittenberg
#2 Wooster
#3 Albion
#4 Hope
#5 Lawrence

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 15, 2006, 10:51:31 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 15, 2006, 10:00:32 AM
One would hope Illiniois Wesleyan would not fall below Puget Sound in the poll. IWU defeated Puget Sound on a neutral court in a game IWU led by 21 at halftime and 21 with 11:05 to play. The Loggers made a run to get within 6 with 4:22 to play, but IWU won the game by 17 which is about the average margin IWU led by in the contest.

Anyone at that game in Santa Barbara, CA knows that IWU is just simply better than Puget Sound (a good team).

IWU was clearly the better team in December, even though we were surprised when UPS made a second-half run at the Titans. Whether that means they still the better team, though, is the issue. I would still take IWU on a neutral court; the differential is both size and talent is too great. Therefore I, personally, would continue to rank IWU ahead of UPS. (Of course, it helps matters that I probably wouldn't have UPS in the top 10.)

But IWU is subject to the "what have you done for me lately" clause in the rankings manual, the same clause WSF is trying to invoke against Albion.

I think Wooster stays marginally ahead of Albion partly because the Brits' showing against Alma doesn't help them (doesn't really hurt, either), but mostly because Wooster had a position-and-a-half lead (38 points) on Albion and thrashed a pretty good Wabash team on the road yesterday. But either way, the top 3 positions should be pretty close.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 15, 2006, 11:09:50 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 14, 2006, 11:44:10 PMAugustana is a possibility, but their pre-season schedule was rather suspect,

Grrrr ... non-conference, not preseason! :'(

Quote from: hugenerd on January 15, 2006, 02:21:41 AMAnd a final word on my alma mater: CMU won easily today at Christopher Newport

I'll say. CMU won by 13 points, and the Tartans were up by 27 in garbage time when Tony Wingen emptied his bench. Say what you will about the weakness of the USAC, but Christopher Newport was nevertheless playing at home, where they're always extremely tough to beat, and the Captains were 10-3 going into the game. I'm also very impressed by the fact that CMU hasn't played a home game since all the way back on December 6, and they've gone 6-1 in that stretch. They've beaten Rochester, NYU, and now Christopher Newport on the road this year, as well as D1 Princeton. If I'm a pollster, I start giving the Tartans some serious props right about now.

Quote from: cardinalpride on January 15, 2006, 03:34:12 AMMr. Ypsi I believe there is a confusion between "historical Bias" and "historical fact". The human element in polls does not have to be biased. History may play a part in judgement, but that history has to be based on facts not biases. For example, the preseason CCIW poll has wheaton finishing ahead of millikin.

Rule #1 of following the CCIW is, "Don't take the preseason coaches poll seriously." For one, it tends to be an exercise in gamesmanship among the coaches more than anything else. And what is more biased than a bunch of coaches playing head games amongst their league peers? For another, it's almost always wildly inaccurate. I did a study of it a couple of years ago and found that at one point the coaches had picked the league champ wrong thirteen out of seventeen seasons. Plus, I can think of at least two occasions in the past decade in which the coaches picked a team to finish in the second division that subsequently went on to win the CCIW title. One was Elmhurst (picked #6) in 2001. The other was Illinois Wesleyan (picked #5) in 1997. All Wesleyan went on to do that season was win the national championship.

The CCIW coaches poll is a nice PR device, and it's a get way to get discussion going about the league every fall. But give it credence at your own peril.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 14, 2006, 11:44:10 PMthey [Augustana] are surviving games rather than winning them. [snip] So, by default, #6 may be IWU afterall!

True enough about Augie, but surviving games is better than losing them. The fact remains that the Doggies (14-1, 4-0) are all alone in first place in the CCIW, and the only remaining undefeated team in league play. Meanwhile, Illinois Wesleyan (12-2, 2-2) trails Augustana by two full games in the CCIW standings, and the Titans are a missed Drew Gensler FT with 33 seconds remaining in regulation and a missed Kyle Jeffery buzzer-beater from being 0-4 in the CCIW. If Augie is surviving games rather than winning them, then the Titans are both surviving and losing.

Quote from: Titan Q on January 15, 2006, 09:23:21 AM
The CCIW's schedule for the upcoming week...

Wednesday:

Millikin @ Augustana
North Central @ Carthage
Elmhurst @ North Park
Wheaton @ Illinois Wesleyan

Saturday:

North Central @ Augustana
Illinois Wesleyan @ North Park
Wheaton @ Elmhurst
Carthage @ Millikin

After North Central stunned Illinois Wesleyan in Bloomington eleven days ago, I said that I was impressed by the Cardinals but still not quite convinced that they were Top Ten material. Well, this will be the week that proves what the Cardinals are made of.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Briton Backer on January 15, 2006, 11:12:09 AM

Woo Scots Fan,
Nobody is suggesting that Albions win at Alma is what should vault the Britons over Wooster, it is Albion's beating of Hope on Wednesday and also the fact that your exact same Wooster team couldn't beat Albion when they played 10 months ago. I guess I would rather Albion learn how to react when the chips are down and win a few close regular season games, rather than blow out everybody in the league and then panic and lose to Albion in a close game in the tournament like your Scots.

The voters bias towards Wooster's name and history may indeed keep Wooster above Albion. But if my memory serves me correct these voters kept Wooster above Albion in this poll all year long last year as well, but that didn't matter much when you had to travel to Albion to get beat in the tournament.

Either way, my guess is that Albion could care less about the Top 25, when the real rankings come out (the Great Lakes regional rankings), given Albion's undefeated regional and D3 records and with wins over regional powers Hope and Baldwin-Wallace. given the objective criteria used in calculating the regional rankings, Albion is likely a shoe-in for #1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 15, 2006, 11:23:27 AM

Quote from: Briton Backer on January 15, 2006, 11:12:09 AM
Woo Scots Fan,
Nobody is suggesting that Albions win at Alma is what should vault the Britons over Wooster, it is Albion's beating of Hope on Wednesday and also the fact that your exact same Wooster team couldn't beat Albion when they played 10 months ago. I guess I would rather Albion learn how to react when the chips are down and win a few close regular season games, rather than blow out everybody in the league and then panic and lose to Albion in a close game in the tournament like your Scots.

The voters bias towards Wooster's name and history may indeed keep Wooster above Albion. But if my memory serves me correct these voters kept Wooster above Albion in this poll all year long last year as well, but that didn't matter much when you had to travel to Albion to get beat in the tournament.

Either way, my guess is that Albion could care less about the Top 25, when the real rankings come out (the Great Lakes regional rankings), given Albion's undefeated regional and D3 records and with wins over regional powers Hope and Baldwin-Wallace. given the objective criteria used in calculating the regional rankings, Albion is likely a shoe-in for #1.

I can't tell if this is gloating over having won that game in March, or sour grapes over not getting some expected measure of respect for having done so. Either way, what's past is prologue. The results of Wooster vs. Albion last season (should) have no bearing on this season's poll.

Furthermore, Wooster's team is far from the "exact same;" in fact it could hardly be more different. The personnel is vastly different, as three of the four post players either graduated or otherwise left the team, leaving this year's Scots a tremendously undersized team (the center is 6'6", and three guards start). Secondly, that led directly to a radical change in philosophy, with Wooster running and focusing on the perimeter game, and playing more aggressive defense. Wooster is fourth in the nation in scoring, despite not being a "System" team.

Albion is also a very different team than they were in March, at least on paper. DePree and Thomas are gone, and the offense revolves around Brandon Crawford, a player for whom Wooster would probably have no answer. If Wooster and Albion were to play today, the games plans would be so different from last year's game as to render the teams unrecognizable.

So even if a game played in a different season could have any bearing on this season's rankings, that game at Kresge wouldn't be it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 15, 2006, 11:29:27 AM

"...the Titans are a missed Drew Gensler FT with 33 seconds remaining in regulation and a missed Kyle Jeffery buzzer-beater from being 0-4 in the CCIW."

Had Drew Gensler made that 2nd FT to put Millikin up 1 with :33 to play, was IWU not going to get the ball back, Greg? I've seen IWU get jobbed down in Decatur a lot of times over the years, but surely they were going to let those final :33 play out, right?

You are correct though - IWU could be 0-4.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 15, 2006, 11:38:40 AM

"The fact remains that the Doggies (14-1, 4-0) are all alone in first place in the CCIW, and the only remaining undefeated team in league play. Meanwhile, Illinois Wesleyan (12-2, 2-2) trails Augustana by two full games in the CCIW standings..."

Greg, I think it is somewhat misleading to use the conference standings at this early stage to make poll voting decisions. Augustana, for example, has not played a road game vs one of the other top four teams. IWU has...and lost at EC. North Central has...and won at IWU. Elmhurst has...and lost at Augustana. I think you've gotta let more of those games play out before you use the standings to evaluate a league like the CCIW.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Briton Backer on January 15, 2006, 11:56:45 AM

Collinge,
I agree with last year's result. I just was having some fun with the sensitive Scot fans. But with respect to things that do matter for this year's poll:

At this point of the season, unless there is a head-to-head matchup, we can only go by similar opponents (which of course, is imperfect, but the best thing available until tournament time). Because Albion is undefeated in D3 with a number of quality wins, it compares favorably in these comparisons. For example, Wooster beat Witt, Baldwin-Wallace beat Wooster, and Albion beat Baldwin-Wallace. Albion beat Elmhurst, Elmhurst beat IWU. IWU beat Puget Sound.

People try to discount Wooster's loss to BW because it came in a OT and was a close game. In the same breath, people on this board are trying to discount Albion's win yesterday because the final score was closer than expected. I have read similar posts discounting Albion's win over BW because it was close. In my mind, I am thrilled that Albion has won a number of close games. The players seem to believe that in a close game, they will find a way to win.

I agree that the top 5 teams are all very close and have very good resumes, but the fact remains a loss is a loss and a win is a win. When the tournament comes, you have to be able to win the close games. There is no arguing that Wooster and Witt are very good teams. It is just puzzling that the assumption seems to be that Albion cannot climb above them. What makes this even more baffling is that there were many who seemed poised to proclaim that Hope should move to number 1 if they had beaten Albion, despite the fact that they did not seem to have a more impressive resume at the time.

I am not suggesting that Albion clearly deserves to be ranked above Witt and Woo, I am just curious as to why the idea is so quickly dismissed by posters on this board.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 15, 2006, 12:12:16 PM

"Albion beat Elmhurst, Elmhurst beat IWU..."

Brit, I've posted a few times on this topic lately, so I will spare everyone another long rant. I will just say that what you are attempting to do via comparative scores is a little misleading in that where the games are played is so significant. Albion beat Elmhurst at Albion in a game that was decided in the final couple minutes (65-64 with 2:24 to play). Last night IWU lost to Elmhurst in a close game at Elmhurst.

If you want to try to compare two teams via a common opponent (like Albion vs IWU) I really believe it helps to compare similar location (home/road). So in this case, let's wait until Elmhurst plays at IWU on Saturday Feb. 4 since Elmhurst was on the road for the Albion/EC game.

Head-to-head games on a neutral court are obviously the poll voter's best friend....like IWU vs Puget Sound. It is hard to argue with those results.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 15, 2006, 12:22:10 PM

Quote from: Briton Backer on January 15, 2006, 11:56:45 AM
I agree that the top 5 teams are all very close and have very good resumes, but the fact remains a loss is a loss and a win is a win. When the tournament comes, you have to be able to win the close games. There is no arguing that Wooster and Witt are very good teams. It is just puzzling that the assumption seems to be that Albion cannot climb above them. What makes this even more baffling is that there were many who seemed poised to proclaim that Hope should move to number 1 if they had beaten Albion, despite the fact that they did not seem to have a more impressive resume at the time.

I am not suggesting that Albion clearly deserves to be ranked above Witt and Woo, I am just curious as to why the idea is so quickly dismissed by posters on this board.

I think you may be reading too much into this. It's not really a question of whether Albion deserves consideration as #1; I think most people would agree that they do. But whether they will achieve #1 is as much a question of logistics as anything else. Albion is 38 points behind Wooster (rightly or wrongly), and another 20 points further back of Wittenberg. Can they overtake these teams on the strength of thrashing the then-#2 team, the holder of 9 votes for #1? Certainly, it is possible. I wouldn't be unhappy in the least if that happens. But I don't think it will; it require too many voters to decide, based on that one game (and possibly the result of Hope/Calvin, and ignoring the Woo/Wabash and Witt/Earlham results), to change their opinions of Albion vis-a-vis the NCAC teams.

Wooster lost at home in 2OT to a very good team, and that has hurt their ranking (i.e., without that loss, the Scots are #1 for sure.) It is true that Albion beat this same team, by 3, almost two months ago, on a neutral court, when both teams were still trying to figure out how to compensate for the loss of departed All-American players (Thad Davis and Travis DePree.) I'm sure that this win helped and continues to help Albion in the rankings. But when you start playing the A beat B who beat C who beat D game, you start to lose me, especially when you are talking about games that were decided by one possession (a list which includes last year's Woo/Albion game, by the way).

To my mind, what really distinguishes Albion's resume from Wooster's and Wittenberg's is the Britons' loss to UM-Dearborn. There are extenuating circumstances (like the fact that it was Albion's first game but Dearborn's fifth or whatever), and it was a long time ago (longer ago that the BW game mentioned above), and in my mind shouldn't count for much of anything in the rankings. But when you are deciding how to differentiate between three teams, each with some good quality wins and just one loss, and those losses are a) on a last second shot on the court of a consensus top 5 team, b) in double overtime against the presumptive #10 team, and c) by 11 points to an NAIA team that, from what I have heard, is pretty mediocre, I can see how you'd be able to rank these teams 1-2-3, if only by a hair's breadth.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on January 15, 2006, 12:30:40 PM

DC, Q, et al. -

Agreed that the head to head results are important, but as they age and things happen to each team, you also have to weight recent events in the calculus for voting.

I am not saying that today IWU is not as good as Puget Sound today, just saying that the head to head is not he be all and end all.

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 15, 2006, 01:31:19 PM

Oh, yes, there's one other thing I feel compelled to mention:

Quote from: Briton Backer on January 15, 2006, 11:12:09 AM
Either way, my guess is that Albion could care less about the Top 25, when the real rankings come out (the Great Lakes regional rankings), given Albion's undefeated regional and D3 records and with wins over regional powers Hope and Baldwin-Wallace. given the objective criteria used in calculating the regional rankings, Albion is likely a shoe-in for #1.

Don't forget about Carnegie Mellon. The Tartans have a 9-0 regional record, which includes wins over 11-1 NYU, 7-3 Rochester, and 9-4 Bethany (as well as some ultra-low-QoWI wins over Oberlin and W&J). By contrast, Albion is "just" 5-0, with wins over 7-1 Hope and 11-2 B-W. I think if the regional rankings came out today, CMU would be the front-runner, followed by Albion, then Witt and Woo perhaps tied for 3rd, then Hope and the OAC teams.

Teams and fans that overlook Carnegie Mellon do so at their own peril.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 15, 2006, 03:51:13 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 15, 2006, 11:29:27 AMHad Drew Gensler made that 2nd FT to put Millikin up 1 with :33 to play, was IWU not going to get the ball back, Greg? I've seen IWU get jobbed down in Decatur a lot of times over the years, but surely they were going to let those final :33 play out, right?

There's quite a bit of difference, psychologically and tactically, from playing your last possession from behind and playing your last possession from a tie.

Neither game's result was cast in stone. Heck, Jeffery's shot could've gone in and yet Carthage could've had a dead-ball foul called on them in the process, giving Wesleyan one last chance with a second left. My observation was more along the lines of scoreboard-watching than of actual game flow.

Quote from: Titan Q on January 15, 2006, 11:38:40 AMGreg, I think it is somewhat misleading to use the conference standings at this early stage to make poll voting decisions. Augustana, for example, has not played a road game vs one of the other top four teams. IWU has...and lost at EC. North Central has...and won at IWU. Elmhurst has...and lost at Augustana. I think you've gotta let more of those games play out before you use the standings to evaluate a league like the CCIW.

League standings will always be misleading to a degree until the regular season has been played out, because their incompleteness begs the question. That's a given. And I'm pretty sure that the pollsters will weigh that. Nevertheless, you can't just dismiss league standings out of hand ... and when a team already has a two-game lead in the standings over another team only four games deep into the conference season, it's almost unavoidable that the pollsters will take that into account as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie_superfan on January 15, 2006, 03:51:53 PM

Not really a top 25 question, but does anyone know when the first NCAA regional rankings come out?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 15, 2006, 03:58:28 PM

February 8th is the first of 3 NCAA Regional Rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: albionbritfan on January 15, 2006, 04:03:47 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on January 15, 2006, 10:40:39 AM
Quote
I think Albion's beatdown of Hope and Hope's subsequent drubbing of Calvin will get Albion over the 30-some vote gap between Albion and Woo from last week's poll.
Quote

What this perspective ignores is that Albion just barely squeezed by a very average Alma team yesterday. A 3 point win against a very average Alma team doesn't convince me that Albion should suddenly jump over Wooster in the poll.

Alma got beat by Denison on a neutral court in the last 2 weeks and Denison is in the bottom half of the NCAC. Albion beating Alma by 3 points is unimpressive to say the least.

Top 5 in my opinion:

#1 Wittenberg
#2 Wooster
#3 Albion
#4 Hope
#5 Lawrence

WSF-
My perspective also ignored that Albion beat BW on a neutral court and BW beat Woo at home. I really don't care honestly if Woo is #2 and Albion is #3 or vice versa. It will be close (less than a dozen points either way, if anyone wants to take the over/under) and it is irrelevant at this point. Time will tell who should rank at the top.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 15, 2006, 06:33:48 PM

You all should become lobbyists. ;D ;)

I'm voting

!. Albion
2. Wooster
3. Wittenberg
4. Lawrence
5. Hope

....and I feel comfortable with that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on January 15, 2006, 06:59:48 PM

Is it just me, or does Lawrence seem a bit untested. They have played only one team with a winning record in their last 10 games and only 3 overall (Grinnell, Milwaukee Engineering and UW Oshkosh). Not to compare them to any other teams, but there were some unbeaten teams earlier this season that were ranked extremely high that have had some interesting results recently. Also, they don't play anyone other than Carroll and Grinell (who they already beat at home) who have winning records the rest of the season (I guess Carroll will be a test in their next game, but again it will be at home). I guess what I am trying to say is that it is hard to know how good a team is when they don't play more than a couple tough games after November. Just a thought...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 15, 2006, 08:33:28 PM

Quote from: sac on January 15, 2006, 06:33:48 PM
You all should become lobbyists. ;D ;)

I'm voting

!. Albion
2. Wooster
3. Wittenberg
4. Lawrence
5. Hope

....and I feel comfortable with that.

Those are my top 5 as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 15, 2006, 11:45:19 PM

Week in review:

#1 Wittenberg 14-1, Beat Earlham and Hiram
#2 Hope 14-1, Lost at #4 Albion, beat Calvin
#3 Wooster 14-1, Won at Allegheny and Wabash
#4 Albion 13-1, Beat #2 Hope, won at Alma
#5 IWU 12-2, Won at Milikin, lost at Elmhurst
#6 Lawrence 12-0, Beat Grinnell and Lake Forrest
#7 Puget Sound 12-2, Beat Whitworth and Whitman
#8 Amherst 10-2, Beat Wesleyan, Lost to Trinity
#9 York (PA) 13-1, Beat Marymount and St. Marys (MD)
#10 Augustana 14-1, Beat Wheaton, won at Carthage
#11 Hampden Sydney 12-2, lost at #14 Randolph Macon, lost at Roanoke, beat Washington and Lee
#12 North Central 12-1, Won at North Park, Lost at Millikin
#13 Baldwin Wallace 13-2, Won at John Carroll, beat Marietta
#14 Randolph Macon 13-3, won at Hampden Sydney, Lost to Virginia Wesleyan
#15 WPI 13-1, Beat Fitchburg St., won at Springfield
#16 Carnegie Mellon 13-1, won at Christopher Newport
#17 Wilmington 12-3, Lost to Muskingum, lost at Mount Union
#18 UW Stout 12-4, Lost to UW River Falls, beat #23 UW Whitewater
#19 Wartburg 12-2, Beat Central, won at Simpson, won at Dubuque
#20 St. John Fisher 11-2, Beat Geneseo St. and Brockport St., won at Rochester
#21 Bluffton 13-2, Beat Franklin, lost at #25 Transylvania
#22 Mississippi College 12-1, won at LeTourneau, won at ETBU
#23 UW Whitewater 11-3 , Won at UW Platteville, lost at #18 UW Stout
#24 Occidental 11-1 , Beat La Verne and Cal Lutheran
#25 Transylvania 12-3 , Lost at Mt. St. Joseph, Beat #21 Bluffton

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on January 16, 2006, 12:33:13 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 15, 2006, 03:51:13 PM
Nevertheless, you can't just dismiss league standings out of hand ... and when a team already has a two-game lead in the standings over another team only four games deep into the conference season, it's almost unavoidable that the pollsters will take that into account as well.

If you dismiss the league standings then you dismiss the how they played. Gosh, all you would have is ... HISTORY. And, of course, you could then have a bias :'(

BUt then I could be confused because aren't the league standings and the game played history anyway?!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 16, 2006, 02:20:08 AM

Quote from: iwumichigander on January 16, 2006, 12:33:13 AMIf you dismiss the league standings then you dismiss the how they played. Gosh, all you would have is ... HISTORY. And, of course, you could then have a bias :'(

BUt then I could be confused because aren't the league standings and the game played history anyway?!

I dunno, IWM, but if it makes you feel any better rest assured that you've confused me pretty thoroughly. :D

Quote from: sac on January 15, 2006, 06:33:48 PMI'm voting

!. Albion
2. Wooster
3. Wittenberg
4. Lawrence
5. Hope

....and I feel comfortable with that.

Is that a martyr's robe that your wearing underneath your yellow HOF blazer? :D

Quote from: hugenerd on January 15, 2006, 06:59:48 PM
Is it just me, or does Lawrence seem a bit untested. They have played only one team with a winning record in their last 10 games and only 3 overall (Grinnell, Milwaukee Engineering and UW Oshkosh). Not to compare them to any other teams, but there were some unbeaten teams earlier this season that were ranked extremely high that have had some interesting results recently. Also, they don't play anyone other than Carroll and Grinell (who they already beat at home) who have winning records the rest of the season (I guess Carroll will be a test in their next game, but again it will be at home). I guess what I am trying to say is that it is hard to know how good a team is when they don't play more than a couple tough games after November. Just a thought...

Hugenerd, I dare you to post this in the room of the Rodney Dangerfield League, aka the Midwest Conference. They'll come after you with the pitchforks and torches so fast it'll make your head spin. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 16, 2006, 02:49:25 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 16, 2006, 02:20:08 AM
They'll come after you with the pitchforks and torches so fast it'll make your head spin. ;)

Or they'll throw a haiku at you... ??? ::) ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 16, 2006, 07:25:09 AM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 16, 2006, 02:49:25 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 16, 2006, 02:20:08 AM
They'll come after you with the pitchforks and torches so fast it'll make your head spin. ;)

Or they'll throw a haiku at you... ??? ::) ;)

Even worse.

BTW, PS, you've got Illinois Wesleyan losing to #12 Elmhurst in your Top 25 wrapup, but Elmhurst wasn't ranked last week. And the first OAC school to beat #17 Wilmington last week was Muskingum, not "Muskingham". A nice job overall, though, and a useful aid for those who wish to participate in the Mr. Ypsi posters' poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on January 16, 2006, 10:41:49 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 16, 2006, 02:20:08 AM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 15, 2006, 06:59:48 PM
Is it just me, or does Lawrence seem a bit untested. They have played only one team with a winning record in their last 10 games and only 3 overall (Grinnell, Milwaukee Engineering and UW Oshkosh). Not to compare them to any other teams, but there were some unbeaten teams earlier this season that were ranked extremely high that have had some interesting results recently. Also, they don't play anyone other than Carroll and Grinell (who they already beat at home) who have winning records the rest of the season (I guess Carroll will be a test in their next game, but again it will be at home). I guess what I am trying to say is that it is hard to know how good a team is when they don't play more than a couple tough games after November. Just a thought...

Hugenerd, I dare you to post this in the room of the Rodney Dangerfield League, aka the Midwest Conference. They'll come after you with the pitchforks and torches so fast it'll make your head spin. ;)

I am not trying to piss anyone off, but I think it isnt hard to argue that they have had a weaker schedule than the rest of the top 10. Only playing 1 game against a top 25 team the whole season, and playing them in your first game (Oshkosh was #2 at the time but has since dropped out completely), doesn't really tell you much about how your team stacks up against the other top 25 teams. I know alot of teams are in this boat because of weaker conferences but only time will tell where someone should be ranked.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 16, 2006, 10:59:14 AM

Thanks GS... I thought I had it right, but I figured I'd probably get a couple wrong (I mean, 25 teams, most played two games, I got two wrong... that's only 4% error, is that acceptable? ;) )

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 16, 2006, 11:27:10 AM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 16, 2006, 10:59:14 AM
Thanks GS... I thought I had it right, but I figured I'd probably get a couple wrong (I mean, 25 teams, most played two games, I got two wrong... that's only 4% error, is that acceptable? ;) )

The key is to find them yourself and utilize the edit function... that's how I get by each week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on January 16, 2006, 04:13:31 PM

I just checked this and I could not pass up the oppurtunity to mention it. The new Wolfe Rankings are out and guess who is #1:

============================================================================
Rank Team Div W L PF PA Rating Chg
============================================================================
1 Carnegie Mellon NCAA-III 13 1 1244 1071 2.248 2
2 Wittenberg NCAA-III 14 1 1045 789 2.118 -16
3 Lawrence NCAA-III 12 0 969 777 2.099 34
4 Baldwin-Wallace NCAA-III 13 2 1358 1178 1.847 27
5 Illinois Wesleyan NCAA-III 12 2 1091 927 1.767 -84
6 Wooster NCAA-III 14 1 1533 1176 1.754 31
7 Augustana IL NCAA-III 14 1 1073 908 1.734 0
8 North Central IL NCAA-III 12 1 1067 813 1.728 -138
9 Albion NCAA-III 13 1 1056 924 1.672 57
10 Hope NCAA-III 14 1 1169 919 1.666 -40

(sorry if the formatting sucks because I just copied and pasted the table)

UAA is also the highest ranked conference, followed by the NESCAC, WIAC, CCIW, and NEWMAC.

http://prwolfe.bol.ucla.edu/cbasketball/ratings.htm

Scroll down to rank by division, its easier that way.

The new rankings for Massey aren't out for this week yet, but it will be interesting to see where they have everyone.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 16, 2006, 04:21:46 PM

Yeah, that's about where I had them all.

It is interesting though to see how many very good teams are in the top ten so early in the season. It's not often the computers do so well. The order might be debatable, but its hard to argue with any of those teams being in the top ten right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 16, 2006, 04:23:03 PM

Top 25 (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/) is out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 16, 2006, 04:25:17 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 16, 2006, 04:13:31 PM

http://prwolfe.bol.ucla.edu/cbasketball/ratings.htm

Scroll down to rank by division, its easier that way.

The new rankings for Massey aren't out for this week yet, but it will be interesting to see where they have everyone.

Gosh, I didn't even realize there was a Vermont Tech and I lived there for eight years. It's not that big of a state; where could they be hiding that thing?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 16, 2006, 04:30:46 PM

I don't understand why Puget Sound remains so high in the rankings? Sure they were good last year, but they lost so much and their results have been so unimpressive. They lost by 17 to IWU; they only beat George Fox and Whitman by 9 and Whitworth only by 1. None of those West Coast schools have proven to be better than any other. They are beating each other; it's just that UPS doesn't play the cream of the crop out west and somehow keeps their ranking. I just don't get it. Occidental seems a much better team, with a better record and a tougher schedule. It blows my mind why they are so far apart.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 16, 2006, 05:17:49 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 16, 2006, 02:49:25 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 16, 2006, 02:20:08 AM
They'll come after you with the pitchforks and torches so fast it'll make your head spin. ;)

Or they'll throw a haiku at you... ??? ::) ;)

One of those inevitables from being in a conference with many good academic schools. The CCIW could probably break into haikus, but there are a couple schools whose current student posters probably couldn't even spell haiku! :D ...not to mention that a couple of the regulars have never struck me as poets. ::) :P

Hoops Fan, I have a feeling that you may be right about Occidental being the top team in the far West Region... when I get a chance to check them out, I'll be sure to post my thoughts on the two schools, and how they might compare.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 16, 2006, 05:20:15 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 16, 2006, 04:30:46 PM
I don't understand why Puget Sound remains so high in the rankings?

Better to ask how they got so high than why they remain so high. They remain so high for obvious reasons: They didn't do anything this week to merit them falling.

Otherwise, I would point at the York problem -- there's a credibility question with them too, and it's hard to picture York being better than any of the teams above it. Is Augustana better? Maybe, but they lost to since-plummeted UW-Stout and only beat Elmhurst among the other big three in the CCIW (must still play IWU and North Central twice apiece).

Also, careful with margin of victory in run-and-gun games. A 17-point margin in a 104-87 game is like a 73-61 game at a normal pace.

I don't think Puget Sound is that good either, but the continual aghastness is odd considering that last week they were no different than this week in terms of ranking resume.

BTW, saw Whitman play. That team isn't awful. And they beat Mount Union, which Wilmington didn't do. Whoa, now I sound like a coach, singling out one head-to-head result that makes my point. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 16, 2006, 05:54:27 PM

Posting Up Hall of Famer David Collinge has seen Puget Sound play two games and also saw the Occidental/Amherst game. I'm interested in his take on the UPS vs Oxy issue. I think Puget Sound is a bit too high at #7, but I do think they're a legit top 10-12 team.

I was at the IWU/Puget Sound game in Santa Barbara, and while I certainly wasn't very impressed with the Loggers in the first half (IWU led by as much as 23), I was in the 2nd half when the effects of their system kicked in. IWU's players were just gassed in the 2nd half and a 79-58 lead at 11:05 turned into a 90-84 lead at 4:22. The Titans hit a couple big shots to get control of things and then secure a 17-point victory, but it did get down to 2 possessions. After seeing that game I could certainly understand how Puget Sound came back from down 18 in the 1st half at Division I UC-Riverside. Their full-court pressure is as intense as any you will see and they just keep coming at you. They have two really good players - 6-6/215 senior Zach McVey and 6-2 guard Chase Curtiss. Those two would start for any Division III team I've seen.

I think Puget Sound is a good team. Comparing them to teams I am familiar with (in the CCIW), I'd say they are not as good as #6 Illinois Wesleyan and #9 Augustana, they are about dead even with #13 North Central, and they're better than unranked Elmhurst.

http://www.iwu.edu/~iwunews/sports/mbb2006/miwu9.htm

http://www2.ups.edu/athletics/mbasketball/ups1221.htm

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 16, 2006, 06:13:50 PM

I've seen Puget Sound play Penn St.-Behrend at a neutral site (Caltech) and play IWU at another neutral site (Westmont), and I saw the Oxy/Amherst game, which was at Oxy. Based only on those three games, and leaving aside some very valid concerns about travel, I'll say I was considerably more impressed with Oxy than with UPS. It's tough to compare UPS with anyone who doesn't play the up-tempo offense and all-press defense; as Q suggests, it will keep them in a whole lot of games. But I wonder how effective it is against a good, athletic team that has played against that style before. If you really know what is coming, you might be better able to utilize your bench and change your gameplan to account for the fact that your players will be dog-tired by the 10:00 mark of the second half. In a one-game matchup, I think UPS might give Oxy fits (much like how they gave IWU fits), but in a rematch I'd probably take Oxy (and I'd certainly take IWU, by 25 points or more.)

There are some in the SCIAC room who think Oxy is inconsistent, especially when it comes to road games. I've never seen them on the road, so I can't comment about that. But Oxy's power forward Sam Betty played a spectacular game against Amherst, and I'd anoint him as the best player between Oxy and UPS.

I have seen (in person) six of the top 25 teams (Wooster and UW-Stout being the others), and I'd probably rank them in pairs: first, Wooster and IWU; second, Oxy and Amherst; and third, Stout and UPS. If I really dug down and did the research, I'd probably have Oxy somewhere near #10 and UPS more like #15-18.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 16, 2006, 06:17:20 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 16, 2006, 10:59:14 AM
Thanks GS... I thought I had it right, but I figured I'd probably get a couple wrong (I mean, 25 teams, most played two games, I got two wrong... that's only 4% error, is that acceptable? ;) )

Aww, now you're making me feel bad, PS. And I even tried to lessen the sting of correcting you with a compliment. My diplomacy skills must be lacking today. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dansand on January 16, 2006, 08:01:00 PM

Quote from: diehardfan on January 16, 2006, 05:17:49 PM
One of those inevitables from being in a conference with many good academic schools. The CCIW could probably break into haikus, but there are a couple schools whose current student posters probably couldn't even spell haiku! :D ...not to mention that a couple of the regulars have never struck me as poets. ::) :P

Limericks are really more my style than haikus.

"There once was a man from Rock Falls..." :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 16, 2006, 09:27:49 PM

A couple of milestones in this week's poll:

#10 Baldwin-Wallace enters the top 10 for the first time in poll history.
#24 NYU enters the top 25 for the first time in poll history.

I'd like to note, one week too late, that Wilmington reached a special milestone last week; their debut at #17 was the first time in poll history that the Quakers received any votes at all. Quite a debut!

Congratulations to these squads on their achievements!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 16, 2006, 09:41:57 PM

Dave, here's a project for ya ;D

Find out how many times two conferences have had 2 teams in the top 5. Let alone 1 conference with 2 teams.

Your homework is due tommorow afternoon. I get home around 3:30. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 16, 2006, 10:18:58 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 16, 2006, 06:13:50 PMI have seen (in person) six of the top 25 teams

David, I was all set to feel sorry for you for your exile to D3's version of Siberia ... but it turns out that you've seen more Top 25 teams than me thus far this season. It appears that you've become the John James Audubon of D3 snowbirds.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 16, 2006, 10:32:40 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 16, 2006, 10:18:58 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 16, 2006, 06:13:50 PMI have seen (in person) six of the top 25 teams

David, I was all set to feel sorry for you for your exile to D3's version of Siberia ... but it turns out that you've seen more Top 25 teams than me thus far this season. It appears that you've become the John James Audubon of D3 snowbirds.

Yeah, I've been fortunate. My total would have been 8 if a) St. Thomas had been able to hold on to their ranking, and b) I had known that Lawrence was passing through town the last week of December. I'm afraid my total will stay at six, barring some unforeseen SCIAC miracle. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on January 16, 2006, 10:45:56 PM

New Massey's are out:

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&sub=III&mid=6

They go something like this:
Lawrence, Wittenberg, Wooster, Carnegie Mellon, Hope...

Conferences:
UAA, WIAC, CCIW, OAC, HCAC...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 17, 2006, 01:40:32 AM

Quote from: sac on January 16, 2006, 09:41:57 PM
Dave, here's a project for ya ;D

Find out how many times two conferences have had 2 teams in the top 5.

You might be surprised to learn that this has happened 9 times in the 101 polls to date:
2005-06 Week 7: NCAC (Wittenberg 1, Wooster 2), MIAA (Albion 3, Hope 4)
2005-06 Week 6: NCAC (Wittenberg 1, Wooster 3), MIAA (Hope 2, Albion 4)
2003-04 Week 8: NESCAC (Amherst 1, Williams 3), ODAC (RMC 4, HSC 5)
2002-03 Week 13: ODAC (RMC 1, HSC 4), UAA (WashU 2, Rochester 5)
2002-03 Week 6: UAA (WashU 1, Rochester 2), ODAC (RMC 3, HSC 4)
2002-03 Week 5: UAA (WashU 1, Rochester 2), ODAC (RMC 3, HSC 5)
2002-03 Week 4: UAA (WashU 1, Rochester 2), ODAC (RMC 3, HSC 5)
2002-03 Week 3: UAA (WashU 1, Rochester 2), ODAC (RMC 4, HSC 5)
2002-03 Week 2: UAA (WashU 1, Rochester 2), ODAC (RMC 4, HSC 5)

Quote from: sac on January 16, 2006, 09:41:57 PMLet alone 1 conference with 2 teams.

Including the 18 instances cited above, this feat has been accomplished by 8 conferences (CCIW, MIAA, NCAC, NESCAC, NJAC, ODAC, UAA, and WIAC) a total of 59 times, which is almost 6 out of every 10 polls. It's happened in every season, a minimum of 4 times per season. In the 2002-03 season, it happened in every poll. The most frequent pairings are Hampden-Sydney and Randolph Macon (ODAC--15 times), Wittenberg and Wooster (NCAC--13 times), Amherst and Williams (NESCAC--8 times), and Rochester and Washington U. (UAA--8 times). The other duos are Carthage/Wheaton, Carthage/IWU, Albion/Hope, Albion/Calvin, Rowan/WPU, Chicago/WashU, UW-Eau Claire/UW-Stevens Point, and UW-EC and UW-Platteville.

Quote from: sac on January 16, 2006, 09:41:57 PMYour homework is due tommorow afternoon. I get home around 3:30. ;D

I always turn my work in early; it intimidates the other students! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 17, 2006, 03:05:31 AM

Quote from: dansand on January 16, 2006, 08:01:00 PM
Limericks are really more my style than haikus.
"There once was a man from Rock Falls..." :)

Aaah! Make it stop! Make it stop!! :-X :-\ :D

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 16, 2006, 10:18:58 PM
It appears that you've become the John James Audubon of D3 snowbirds.

Best analogy ever... EVER. Though it begs the question, did David shoot all the teams he saw to bring back with him. :D

Quote from: David Collinge on January 16, 2006, 10:32:40 PM
Yeah, I've been fortunate. My total would have been 8 if a) St. Thomas had been able to hold on to their ranking, and b) I had known that Lawrence was passing through town the last week of December. I'm afraid my total will stay at six, barring some unforeseen SCIAC miracle. :)

I'm still sorry about the Lawrence thing... ahh! :( But hey! We get to see Albion too whenever we watch the tape. :)

I've actually seen three of the top 25, soon to be four, whenever I get around to going to an Oxy game. This includes Puget Sound, York, and RMC. Relative to eachother, I'd say they are in the right places in the poll relative to eachother, aside from Puget Sound, which I think may be not as good as York. This is about four times shorter than my normal list, but it's better than nothing. Basically Greg, where there's a will there's a way. :)

I, however, enjoy IDing plants much more than birds, so there is no appropriate name for me. :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 17, 2006, 04:13:05 AM

Quote from: diehardfan on January 17, 2006, 03:05:31 AMI, however, enjoy IDing plants much more than birds, so there is no appropriate name for me. :P

Go google Euell Gibbons. He was before your time, but those of us old enough to have watched TV in the 1970s remember him well, either for his notorious Post Grape Nuts commercial ("Ever eaten a pine tree? Many parts are edible.") or as a Johnny Carson punchline.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 17, 2006, 08:35:13 AM

Actually, the Massey Ratings I use include MOV and are:

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&sub=III&mid=1

there:

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 17, 2006, 09:25:47 AM

Quote from: diehardfan on January 17, 2006, 03:05:31 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 16, 2006, 10:18:58 PM
It appears that you've become the John James Audubon of D3 snowbirds.
Best analogy ever... EVER. Though it begs the question, did David shoot all the teams he saw to bring back with him. :D

My thoughts exactly; I especially like the use of all three names.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on January 17, 2006, 09:56:58 AM

I believe he also stuffed them to keep in his office.

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on January 17, 2006, 10:12:43 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 17, 2006, 04:13:05 AM
Quote from: diehardfan on January 17, 2006, 03:05:31 AMI, however, enjoy IDing plants much more than birds, so there is no appropriate name for me. :P

Go google Euell Gibbons. He was before your time, but those of us old enough to have watched TV in the 1970s remember him well, either for his notorious Post Grape Nuts commercial ("Ever eaten a pine tree? Many parts are edible.") or as a Johnny Carson punchline.

I used to love it when he held out that handful of twigs and bark as he told us how delicious it was.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on January 17, 2006, 10:15:35 AM

Quote from: Coach C on January 17, 2006, 09:56:58 AM
I believe he also stuffed them to keep in his office.

C

Davids office could get crowded pretty quick is he does this, unless he keeps them in his basement.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ds on January 17, 2006, 11:16:44 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 17, 2006, 01:40:32 AM
Quote from: sac on January 16, 2006, 09:41:57 PM
Dave, here's a project for ya ;D

Find out how many times two conferences have had 2 teams in the top 5.

You might be surprised to learn that this has happened 9 times in the 101 polls to date:
2005-06 Week 7: NCAC (Wittenberg 1, Wooster 2), MIAA (Albion 3, Hope 4)
2005-06 Week 6: NCAC (Wittenberg 1, Wooster 3), MIAA (Hope 2, Albion 4)
2003-04 Week 8: NESCAC (Amherst 1, Williams 3), ODAC (RMC 4, HSC 5)
2002-03 Week 13: ODAC (RMC 1, HSC 4), UAA (WashU 2, Rochester 5)
2002-03 Week 6: UAA (WashU 1, Rochester 2), ODAC (RMC 3, HSC 4)
2002-03 Week 5: UAA (WashU 1, Rochester 2), ODAC (RMC 3, HSC 5)
2002-03 Week 4: UAA (WashU 1, Rochester 2), ODAC (RMC 3, HSC 5)
2002-03 Week 3: UAA (WashU 1, Rochester 2), ODAC (RMC 4, HSC 5)
2002-03 Week 2: UAA (WashU 1, Rochester 2), ODAC (RMC 4, HSC 5)

Good research. I found two more weeks in the 00-01 season.
2000-01 Week 13: UAA (Chicago 3, WashU 4), NCAC (Wittenberg 2, Wooster 5)
2000-01 Week 12: UAA (Chicago 3, WashU 4), NCAC (Wooster 1, Wittenberg 5)

We had to play at WashU and Chicago between week 12 and week 13 that year--I guess it left an impression.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on January 17, 2006, 12:24:56 PM

I found four more instances of NJAC teams being ranked in the top 25 at the same time.

02-03 Week 7 WPU and MSU
02-23 Final Ramapo and MSU
03-04 Week 1 Ramapo and MSU
03-04 Week 2 Ramapo and MSU

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 17, 2006, 01:01:01 PM

I think they were going for two teams in the top 5, knightstalker.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on January 17, 2006, 01:36:32 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 17, 2006, 01:40:32 AM
Quote from: sac on January 16, 2006, 09:41:57 PM
Dave, here's a project for ya ;D

Find out how many times two conferences have had 2 teams in the top 5.

You might be surprised to learn that this has happened 9 times in the 101 polls to date:
2005-06 Week 7: NCAC (Wittenberg 1, Wooster 2), MIAA (Albion 3, Hope 4)
2005-06 Week 6: NCAC (Wittenberg 1, Wooster 3), MIAA (Hope 2, Albion 4)
2003-04 Week 8: NESCAC (Amherst 1, Williams 3), ODAC (RMC 4, HSC 5)
2002-03 Week 13: ODAC (RMC 1, HSC 4), UAA (WashU 2, Rochester 5)
2002-03 Week 6: UAA (WashU 1, Rochester 2), ODAC (RMC 3, HSC 4)
2002-03 Week 5: UAA (WashU 1, Rochester 2), ODAC (RMC 3, HSC 5)
2002-03 Week 4: UAA (WashU 1, Rochester 2), ODAC (RMC 3, HSC 5)
2002-03 Week 3: UAA (WashU 1, Rochester 2), ODAC (RMC 4, HSC 5)
2002-03 Week 2: UAA (WashU 1, Rochester 2), ODAC (RMC 4, HSC 5)

Quote from: sac on January 16, 2006, 09:41:57 PMLet alone 1 conference with 2 teams.
Including the 18 instances cited above, this feat has been accomplished by 8 conferences (CCIW, MIAA, NCAC, NESCAC, NJAC, ODAC, UAA, and WIAC) a total of 59 times, which is almost 6 out of every 10 polls. It's happened in every season, a minimum of 4 times per season. In the 2002-03 season, it happened in every poll. The most frequent pairings are Hampden-Sydney and Randolph Macon (ODAC--15 times), Wittenberg and Wooster (NCAC--13 times), Amherst and Williams (NESCAC--8 times), and Rochester and Washington U. (UAA--8 times). The other duos are Carthage/Wheaton, Carthage/IWU, Albion/Hope, Albion/Calvin, Rowan/WPU, Chicago/WashU, UW-Eau Claire/UW-Stevens Point, and UW-EC and UW-Platteville.

Quote from: sac on January 16, 2006, 09:41:57 PMYour homework is due tommorow afternoon. I get home around 3:30. ;D

I always turn my work in early; it intimidates the other students! ;D

You must have missed the paragraph under Sac's post hopefan.

I don't believe the NJAC has ever had a team in the D-3 hoops top 25

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 17, 2006, 04:24:20 PM

Well done DC.......I'd forgotten abou the years with the ODAC and UAA schools.

Interesting stuff.

I also don't recall Albion and Calvin both being ranked so high. Short term memory I guess.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 17, 2006, 06:19:59 PM

Quote from: ds on January 17, 2006, 11:16:44 AM
Good research. I found two more weeks in the 00-01 season.
2000-01 Week 13: UAA (Chicago 3, WashU 4), NCAC (Wittenberg 2, Wooster 5)
2000-01 Week 12: UAA (Chicago 3, WashU 4), NCAC (Wooster 1, Wittenberg 5)

We had to play at WashU and Chicago between week 12 and week 13 that year--I guess it left an impression.

Nice catch; thanks. :-[ For some reason, I had the UAA teams listed (incorrectly) in my database as 2001-02. So that means the total for 2 conferences with two teams each in the top 5 is 11, but the total for one conference with two teams in the top 5 is unchanged (59)...unless and until someone else finds another error! :)

Quote from: knightstalker on January 17, 2006, 12:24:56 PM
I found four more instances of NJAC teams being ranked in the top 25 at the same time.

02-03 Week 7 WPU and MSU
02-23 Final Ramapo and MSU
03-04 Week 1 Ramapo and MSU
03-04 Week 2 Ramapo and MSU

Quote from: knightstalker on January 17, 2006, 01:36:32 PM
You must have missed the paragraph under Sac's post hopefan.

I don't believe the NJAC has ever had a team in the D-3 hoops top 25

???

For the record, the NJAC had two teams in the top 5 in week 10 of 1999-2000 (Rowan #3, WPU #5.) There have been 8 weeks where there were two NJAC teams in the top 25, and another 13 where there were three NJAC teams in the top 25. If you mean to say that you don't think there's ever been an NJAC team in the top 5, that's also quite wrong; it's happened 14 times in 13 polls, starting with the very first poll which had WPU ranked #3. So I'm really not sure what you're saying here, KS.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on January 17, 2006, 07:32:12 PM

The NJAC not having a team in the top 25 was a typo, I meant top 5 and I was going from memory as I was at work and did not have time to go further back then I did.

I also think I looked at some womens polls because I wasn't paying attention to details, I forgot that Pat quite often alternates them on the Top 25 page, probably based on which one he gets all the submissions for and compiles first.

WPU is the only NJAC team to finish in the top five though. I actually forgot all about the Horace Jenkins teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 17, 2006, 07:39:50 PM

Quote from: knightstalker on January 17, 2006, 07:32:12 PM
WPU is the only NJAC team to finish in the top five though. I actually forgot all about the Horace Jenkins teams.

I've been TRYING to do that for nearly 5 years now! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 17, 2006, 07:51:56 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 17, 2006, 07:39:50 PM
Quote from: knightstalker on January 17, 2006, 07:32:12 PM
WPU is the only NJAC team to finish in the top five though. I actually forgot all about the Horace Jenkins teams.

I've been TRYING to do that for nearly 5 years now! ;)

I am, too. McMurry and Anrdrew Ottaro shut down Jenkins until the last few minutes at the free throw line, but they could not shut down everyone else on WPU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 17, 2006, 07:59:59 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 17, 2006, 07:51:56 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 17, 2006, 07:39:50 PM
Quote from: knightstalker on January 17, 2006, 07:32:12 PM
WPU is the only NJAC team to finish in the top five though. I actually forgot all about the Horace Jenkins teams.

I've been TRYING to do that for nearly 5 years now! ;)

I am, too. McMurry and Anrdrew Ottaro shut down Jenkins until the last few minutes at the free throw line, but they could not shut down everyone else on WPU.

Our game was just about the opposite - Horace just about single-handedly knocked us out of the title game.

I was really rooting for him to make it with the Piston's so he could be on the side of the 'good guys' ;), but Detroit was just too loaded at his position and he rarely made it off the bench.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on January 17, 2006, 08:18:23 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 17, 2006, 07:59:59 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 17, 2006, 07:51:56 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 17, 2006, 07:39:50 PM
Quote from: knightstalker on January 17, 2006, 07:32:12 PM
WPU is the only NJAC team to finish in the top five though. I actually forgot all about the Horace Jenkins teams.

I've been TRYING to do that for nearly 5 years now! ;)

I am, too. McMurry and Anrdrew Ottaro shut down Jenkins until the last few minutes at the free throw line, but they could not shut down everyone else on WPU.

Our game was just about the opposite - Horace just about single-handedly knocked us out of the title game.

I was really rooting for him to make it with the Piston's so he could be on the side of the 'good guys' ;), but Detroit was just too loaded at his position and he rarely made it off the bench.

I was hoping that Larry Brown would get Isiah to sign him, but they took too long and he is playing overseas again.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 17, 2006, 09:16:52 PM

You guys needed Tim Judge. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on January 17, 2006, 09:38:17 PM

If he can pass and defend and fits under the cap we will take him.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 17, 2006, 09:38:27 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 17, 2006, 09:16:52 PM
You guys needed Tim Judge. :)

In case anyone else is as clueless (or memory-impaired) as I, here's a quote from CUA's website:

Quote#11 Tim Judge (6-0 G)
West Chester, Pa.
Archbishop Carroll HS
Scored 12 points and hit all five free throws in the NCAA title game. Turned a steal into a three-point play with 4:43 to go to give CUA a 56-51 lead. ... The team's top defender, helped hold first-team All-American Horace Jenkins to 11-for-44 shooting in the Cards' last two playoff games with William Paterson.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 17, 2006, 10:42:13 PM

The new weekly stats (thru 1/15) are out, and I thought I'd take a look at how the top 4 national teams compare:

Scoring Offense:
4. Wooster 102.2
76. Hope 77.9
Albion, Wittenberg not in top 100

Scoring Defense:
1. Wittenberg 52.6
22. Hope 61.3
74. Albion 66.0
Wooster not in top 100

Scoring Margin:
1. Wooster +23.7
7. Wittenberg +17.1
8. Hope +16.7
59. Albion +9.4

FG% offense:
3. Wooster 53.4
25. Albion 49.7
63. Wittenberg 47.7
Hope not in top 100

FG% defense:
2. Wittenberg 35.3
24. Hope 39.2
89. Albion 41.9
Wooster not in top 100

3PFG per game:
8. Wooster 11.2
Albion, Hope, Wittenberg not in top 100

3PFG%:
4. Wooster 43.9
25. Albion 40.9
43. Wittenberg 39.1
Hope not in top 100

Free Throw Percentage:
13. Wittenberg 75.9
Albion, Hope, Wooster not in top 100 (egad!) :o

Rebound Margin:
16. Wittenberg +8.9
20. Albion +8.7
39. Wooster +6.5
53. Hope +5.6

NCAA statistics website (http://web1.ncaa.org/stats/StatsSrv/rankings?sportCode=MBB&rpt=wkly)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 18, 2006, 09:58:02 PM

Anyone around might want to tune into the Wheaton @ IWU game... Wheaton just tied up the game with three and change... and is on the line.

www.wetn.org
www.wjbc.com

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 18, 2006, 10:22:34 PM

IWU wins in overtime... hmmm ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 18, 2006, 10:30:07 PM

Some struggles in the top 10 tonight:

at Catholic 69
#8 York 67 (OT)

#2 Wooster 102
at Hiram (3-13) 91

at #3 Albion 64
Kalamazoo (5-11) 58

at #5 Lawrence 86
Carroll 81

at #6 IWU 87
Wheaton (5-9) 81 (OT)

#1 Witt and #4 Hope win easily at home

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 18, 2006, 10:46:40 PM

If carroll is really the #2 MWC team this year, they are probably a pretty good squad... Assuming the do well for the rest of the week, I hope they garnish some more top 25 votes next week. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 19, 2006, 01:02:50 AM

Quote from: diehardfan on January 18, 2006, 10:46:40 PM
If carroll is really the #2 MWC team this year, they are probably a pretty good squad... Assuming the do well for the rest of the week, I hope they garnish some more top 25 votes next week. :)

They might, but you probably hope they garner more of them. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 19, 2006, 02:23:14 AM

:D :D :D

Ahhh! I feel like a Carthage fan :-[

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 19, 2006, 02:26:23 AM

Quote from: diehardfan on January 19, 2006, 02:23:14 AM
:D :D :D

Ahhh! I feel like a Carthage fan :-[

Way to add insult to injury tonight Diehard! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 19, 2006, 02:30:41 AM

the insult to injury could be that in addition to my team losing to a top 5 team on overtime, I said something that made me look utterly idiotic :'(

I should have said carthage student posters... guys like kmark totally excluded! though I'm sure he doesn't read this board I just had to clarify :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 19, 2006, 03:59:25 AM

Quote from: diehardfan on January 19, 2006, 02:30:41 AM
the insult to injury could be that in addition to my team losing to a top 5 team on overtime, I said something that made me look utterly idiotic :'(

I should have said carthage student posters... guys like kmark totally excluded! though I'm sure he doesn't read this board I just had to clarify :-\

You have over 3000 posts. You get a pass for one hiccup! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 19, 2006, 09:17:57 AM

You know there's an edit button April, you can go fix your mistakes and then Pat's post becomes very enigmatic.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 19, 2006, 09:37:44 AM

Three ARV teams that I thought should be in the top 25 proved their mettle last night. Oshkosh took out Whitewater, VA Wesleyan finished off HSC's horrible week and Carroll stuck close at Lawrence. I was also a ONU supporter, but now maybe the voters will have to take a look at Muskingum.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on January 19, 2006, 10:23:43 AM

Quote from: diehardfan on January 18, 2006, 10:46:40 PM
If carroll is really the #2 MWC team this year, they are probably a pretty good squad... Assuming the do well for the rest of the week, I hope they garnish some more top 25 votes next week. :)

I always like a little parsley with my votes, makes them much more palatable.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 19, 2006, 10:28:30 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 19, 2006, 09:17:57 AM

You know there's an edit button April, you can go fix your mistakes and then Pat's post becomes very enigmatic.

Yes, but I quoted her, and the edit doesn't change the quote. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 19, 2006, 10:50:20 AM

True, true. Never try to beat the master.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 19, 2006, 12:09:31 PM

Sorta like this Hoops Fan:

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 19, 2006, 10:28:30 AM
I love it when people who haven't played anybody good whine about not being in the Top 25.

(And this is where I get banned) :-[

Quote from: cardinalpride on January 19, 2006, 03:59:25 AM
one hiccup

If only! :D

Now back to the top 25 instead of making me feel like I'm back in third grade and getting made fun of on the back of the bus where the driver can't hear... or uhm... come to think of it, is participating :'( ....

Albion got by Kalamazoo in a squeeker last night.... whereas Wooster beat Kalamazoo by 18. I'm NOT saying that Wooster is 12 points better than Albion. What I am asking is... do you think this widens the gap, and possibly gives Wooster a few more first place votes?

Another question... what do you do with IWU?

While they are certainly overflowing with talent, and are feeling some good karma and momentum now, after their overtime win vs their rival Wheaton...

NCC creamed Carthage last night, after IWU had trouble with them. NCC also actually beat IWU already this season, at IWU... and while NCC lost at Millikin by 1 pt, it took IWU to overtime to beat them. NCC has the most brutal opening set in the CCIW by far, playing their first six games on the road, and have three road wins already in a league that is very difficult to win on the road. When does NCC start getting ranked higher than IWU?

Augie too, is arguably in the drivers seat in the conference, as they are undefeated in the CCIW.

Merely curious. (Prepare to be bombarded by IWU people.) :D ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 19, 2006, 12:19:11 PM

I'll get banned with you, but unfortunately its always Pat catching me in my errors and never (yet) the other way around.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 19, 2006, 02:50:05 PM

"Augie too, is arguably in the drivers seat in the conference, as they are undefeated in the CCIW."

April, Augustana has really just won games they should have won as a "contender" - at North Park, at home vs Elmhurst, at home vs Wheaton, at Carthage, at home vs Millikin. They are 5-0 but haven't played @ North Central, @ IWU, or @ Elmhurst yet. You can't use the term "driver's seat" quite yet for Augustana (in fact, you can't use it yet for any CCIW team). Let's wait until they play North Central at home Saturday at then at IWU Wednesday before we start talking about the driver's seat.

This is similar to what I mentioned on Hoopsville this week regarding the WIAC. My point was that Stevens Point should not have been considered the "favorite" just because they were 6-1. Sure 6-1 is good, but the Pointers haven't played @ Oshkosh, @ Stout, and even @ Platteville, the team that just beat them at home, for that matter.

In balanced leagues like the WIAC and CCIW it is best not to try to use the early season standings as a method of "ranking" the teams. You have to let some of the big games play out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 19, 2006, 03:01:54 PM

Speaking of the WIAC. I know the poster's hated to be wrong about Oshkosh being so high in the polls pre-season, but they certainly appear to be the strongest contender now. With that win over Whitewater last night, they might actually make it back in the poll this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 19, 2006, 03:11:09 PM

"NCC creamed Carthage last night, after IWU had trouble with them. "

April, all indications on the CCIW board are that Carthage just didn't show up to play last night...and that is coming from Carthage posters. After the IWU/Carthage game, the Carthage fans were praising the Red Men for playing incredibly hard, blah, blah, blah. Now, I obviously wasn't in Kenosha last night so I can't confirm how Carthage played vs NCC, but this is one of the dangers of playing that common opponent game. What if Carthage was as brutal as their fans make it sound...is it accurate to draw a comparison to IWU?

I think there is a very good chance North Central is the CCIW's best team...again, they beat IWU at IWU. But I don't think there is any reason to use a common opponent score to prove that. NCC and IWU already played a head-to-head game - a game where Keelan Amelianovich had a shot with 3 seconds left to tie the game. In other words, we already know IWU and NCC are just about dead even. The fact that IWU and Carthage played a close one (just like Augie and Carthage did in Kenosha) while NCC blew Carthage out in the same building means just one thing.........the common opponent game can be very misleading.

I mean, how do you explain North Park winning at Millikin, Millikin winning at Elmhurst, and Elmhurst winning at North Park?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 19, 2006, 03:22:49 PM

Oh, I get it now, April. It works kinda like this:

Quote from: diehardfan on January 19, 2006, 12:09:31 PM
I really do think IWU is getting the raw end of the deal; they never get enough respect.

In fact, it's kinda fun.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on January 19, 2006, 04:03:54 PM

I was looking over Carnegie Mellons schedule and I noticed something, every team the play from here on out currently has a winning record. So I decided to see how tough the rest of the top 13 teams schedules are in terms of opponents being over 0.500 (a team that is currently 0.500 was not counted for this list):

(Teams with over half their games against opponents with winning records are highlighted)

Wittenberg 4/9
Wooster 4/9
Albion 3/9
Hope 2/9
Lawrence 2/9
IWU 5/9
Puget Sound 4/10
York 5/10
Augustana 6/9
Baldwin-Wall. 4/9
Carnegie 11/11
Amherst 8/11
NCU 7/10

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 19, 2006, 05:05:21 PM

Quote from: diehardfan on January 19, 2006, 12:09:31 PM

NCC creamed Carthage last night, after IWU had trouble with them. NCC also actually beat IWU already this season, at IWU... and while NCC lost at Millikin by 1 pt, it took IWU to overtime to beat them. NCC has the most brutal opening set in the CCIW by far, playing their first six games on the road, and have three road wins already in a league that is very difficult to win on the road. When does NCC start getting ranked higher than IWU?

Diehard, NCC jumps ahead of IWU and augie with a win at augie on saturday, a win at home against elmhurst, a win at wheaton the following saturday (sorry), and a home win against IWU on 2/1. After this upcoming stretch, NCC should find themselves in the top 5 of the polls and clearly in the driver's seat of the CCIW.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 19, 2006, 05:18:23 PM

If all that happens, they better get some #1 votes...I know they'd have mine.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 19, 2006, 05:22:54 PM

Here is a quote from Carthage head coach Bosko Djurickovic from the most recent Carthage press release...

"We're not in the ballpark with North Central. They're the best team we've faced all year. This was the first time, in a long, long time, that we weren't competitive at any point in the game.

http://www2.carthage.edu/athletics/mens/basketball/release.html

Bosko has played the following ranked teams this year...

#4 Hope
#5 Lawrence
#6 Illinois Wesleyan
#9 Augustana

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 19, 2006, 05:27:00 PM

Maybe I'm late on this April

But I wouldn't put too much importance of margin in conference games vs non-conference.

Once you get into conference play everything is familiar, you usually know all of the opposing players and more importantly their plays. It really becomes more a test of wills than anything else.

Familiarity adds to motivation.......I think this helps to explain IWU's troubles in the CCIW as well as other close conference tilts we've seen and will see.

Albion v Kzoo is a rivalry game, the schools are right down the highway from each other. A close margin in that game is not unusual by any means. The talent gap becomes less important in games such as this. Plus at this point Kzoo has played about 12 more games since that Wooster game. I hope they're a better team by now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 19, 2006, 05:48:37 PM

Sac, I heard an interview recently with U. of Illinois head coach Bruce Weber. He was asked about the difference between playing good teams in the non-conference and conference games (Illinois was undefeated in the non-conf and has lost at Iowa and at Indiana in the Big Ten). He said something like, "It's night and day. Once you get into the conference, everyone knows your players and exactly what you're trying to run. They break down every bit of film and expose any weakness you have. People know you in the non-conference, but the degree of scouting and preparation within the conference is much greater."

This is no different at all in Division III. During the Santa Barbara trip, IWU head coach Scott Trost was joking about a conversation he had with North Central coach Todd Raridon. Scott was asking which IWU non-conference tapes Todd wanted per CCIW tape exchange rules and Todd responded, "Just send us the games in California...we have all of your other games already." Raridon had sought out tape on all 8 of IWU's non-conference games before Christmas from opponsing coaches.

This is the same in the MIAA, WIAC, NCAC, etc - when you get into conference play, it's a whole new ballgame. This is why Illinois looked a whole lot better vs Missouri than they have vs Iowa and Indiana, and the reason Illinois Wesleyan looked a lot better vs St. Xavier and Westmont (teams every bit as talented as good CCIW teams) than they have in their 5 conference games.

The great teams adjust to the adjustments...that's where it gets fun.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 19, 2006, 07:50:33 PM

The Wooster/Kalamazoo game was the first game of the season for both teams. FWIW.

Tom Port, Wooster's All-America candidate power forward, reportedly suffered one broken and one sprained wrist last night, the result of a hard foul by a Hiram player on a dunk. I haven't heard anything about how long he'll be out. Wooster has tough(-ish) games each of the next three Saturdays: vs. 10-6 OWU (1/21), vs. 7-8 Earlham (1/28), and at #1 15-1 Wittenberg (2/4.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 19, 2006, 07:53:45 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 19, 2006, 05:22:54 PM
Here is a quote from Carthage head coach Bosko Djurickovic from the most recent Carthage press release...

"We're not in the ballpark with North Central. They're the best team we've faced all year. This was the first time, in a long, long time, that we weren't competitive at any point in the game.

http://www2.carthage.edu/athletics/mens/basketball/release.html

Bosko has played the following ranked teams this year...

#4 Hope
#5 Lawrence
#6 Illinois Wesleyan
#9 Augustana

TQ, I think Bosko has a short memory! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 19, 2006, 09:57:41 PM

Quote from: diehardfan on January 19, 2006, 12:09:31 PMAnother question... what do you do with IWU?

While they are certainly overflowing with talent, and are feeling some good karma and momentum now, after their overtime win vs their rival Wheaton...

Oh, really? If I was a Titans fan, I sure wouldn't be feeling "some good karma and momentum" after last night's game. Granted, Wheaton is doing what young teams with potential often do -- they're improving every game. Nevertheless, they were still 5-8 going into last night's game. And to anyone who has seen the two teams this season, it's patently obvious that there are serious talent and size gaps between them to go with the experience gap. Finally, the game was played in Illinois Wesleyan's gym.

All things considered, if I was a Titans fan and I was walking out of the gym after watching my team eke out that overtime win last night, I'd be equal parts relieved and worried. "Good karma and momentum" are the last things I'd think my team had.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 19, 2006, 10:06:42 PM

Q----I literally turned to an Albion guy next to me and told him it looked like Albion knew all of Hope's defensive tendencies. I don't think I'm far off, they had Hope scouted well.

I really don't know how much work Hope does with game tapes, they seem to be a little more old school when it comes to scouting teams.

I don't know if its the same in the CCIW but pretty much half of the MIAA teams play in the same summer league along with a number of NAIA teams. These players are certainly familiar with each other.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 19, 2006, 10:08:23 PM

Amen, Greg,

And I've been pumping up Wheaton on several boards lately (if they could restart the season with how they are playing NOW, there is NO WAY they would be 5-9). Still, IWU should have won handily in Bloomington.

I predicted just 3 or 4 weeks ago that Wheaton would finish 7th in the CCIW. I now think they are a credible possibility to make the initial tourney. I'd still say the most likely candidates are (in alphabetical order, 'cause I sure have no idea anymore of the bball order!) Augie, Elmhurst, IWU, and NCC. But both Millikin and Wheaton are definite threats to finish in the top four.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 19, 2006, 10:13:59 PM

IWU players, fans, coaches (and color analysts for that matter) all seemed to feel great about the way IWU played last night, Greg. I've had a chance to talk to a lot of people today in passing who were at the game and all seem to have the same feeling -- it was simply a great college basketball game. A Wheaton grad. co-worker of mine summed it up best. Regarding his Wheaton Thunder he said, "That is the best I have seen a team play in my life and lose."

I can see where you're coming from, and Mr. Ypsi too, as two people just looking at the game on paper, but you're off in your assessment of how people who were at that game feel. Those who saw the shots Wiele, Fiddler, and Mohan hit just simply tip their cap the Wheaton College, as I do, and say, "great game." IWU shot 54.7% from the field, had All-American Keelan Amelianovich (27 pts) hit a game saving shot, had All-American Dauksas score 12 pts w/ 9 assists and just 3 T.O., and had a 16 point, 18 rebound performance by junior Zach Freeman. Just a fun game to watch.

By the way, same Wheaton team that was up 7 with 2:05 to play at Augie, right? At what point do we shift from both of these games being flukes to the possibility that the young and talented Wheaton team is getting better every day and can play?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 19, 2006, 10:28:29 PM

http://www.pantagraph.com/articles/2006/01/19/sports/104178.txt

A few quotes that kind of sum up that Wheaton/IWU game...

"It's a lot of fun to win again," said Amelianovich after Wesleyan's first home triumph in 28 days. "Both teams played with a lot of energy the whole game, and both teams hit a lot of big shots. It was a fun game for the players and a fun game for the fans."
-----
"It's important our guys feel good about themselves and they do in there," IWU coach Scott Trost said from just outside the Titans' locker room. "The kids just hung in there and hung in there and kept believing and found a way. We have to use this to get our confidence back. Hopefully this propels us a little bit."
-----
"That's the type of year we've had. We played hard. We had chances to win it," said Wheaton coach Bill Harris after his team's sixth loss by six points or less. "Let's face it, Keelan and Adam hit some big shots which you expect your senior All-Americans to do."
-----
The 6-foot-8 Wiele was nothing short of amazing. Having made 6 of 20 3-point attempts entering the game, Wiele nailed 6 of 8 from beyond the arc on his way to a career-high 22 points.

"We think he's going to be OK," Harris said. "Sometimes freshmen don't know enough to be scared."

I love the Harris quote about Wiele.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 19, 2006, 10:40:06 PM

I didn't call the game a fluke, Bob. I said that Wheaton is a young team with potential that is improving every game. Nevertheless, I stand behind what I said. I would not walk out of Shirk Center last night feeling that my team had "some good karma and momentum" if I was a Titans fan, regardless of how well Wheaton played. There is a considerable gap between Illinois Wesleyan and Wheaton in terms of size, talent, and experience -- a gap which you have done more to emphasize in playing up the Titans than anyone else on Posting Up -- and the Titans were playing at home in front of over 2,000 green-clad fans to boot.

I don't doubt for a moment that Wheaton played a tremendous game, and that any accolades sent their way are well-deserved. But I don't see how this can therefore be spun into a positive for Wesleyan. You and the rest of the Titans fans on Posting Up have done far too much to build up this year's Wesleyan team for it to be otherwise. The fact that it came on the heels of Wesleyan's two CCIW losses and two other razor-thin wins over other distinctly inferior teams only amplifies my feeling that you're spin-doctoring this one.

We all know how hard it is to win in the CCIW, and we all agree that the top dog gets everyone's best game. But the gulf between the Wesleyan and Wheaton teams is too big for Titans fans to derive "good karma and momentum" from last night's home overtime win, IMO.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 19, 2006, 10:43:08 PM

Q,

I didn't say it was a fluke, but a senior-dominated team (with TWO All-Americans) should easily handle a freshman-dominated team, no matter how good they are - and I say that as an up close observer of the Fab Five at Michigan.

Bill Harris is CLEARLY my early (conference) season pick for coach of the year. No matter how good they are, I can't believe he has taken these kids this far this quickly. (How scary would they be if they still had Kent Raymond? Shudder! ;)) I've expressed my admiration for him numerous times (with their personnel losses, he's the only reason I was picking them for 7th rather than 8th), but this may be a coaching job for the ages.

Or maybe he just got "lucky", and Wiele is the second-coming of Sikma? ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 20, 2006, 02:48:30 AM

Quote from: sac on January 19, 2006, 05:27:00 PM
Maybe I'm late on this April, But I wouldn't put too much importance of margin in conference games vs non-conference.

:D Actually, I thought I expressed pretty clearly that I didn't think anything related to that... I was just curious what people thought the VOTERS would think. I knew it would get interpreted though. Sorta inevitable with this sorta topic. Personally, at the moment I think I have Albion OVER Wooster :D And though I did think your opinions on the subject were interesting, I already agreeed with you, so :P

Lol... Greg, I don't necessarily think it makes sense, but I tuned into the WJBC broadcast for the last few minutes, after the Wheaton one ended, so I know that's how they feel, so I thought I'd mention it. The greenies are very resilient. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 20, 2006, 06:38:49 AM

Quote from: diehardfan on January 20, 2006, 02:48:30 AMLol... Greg, I don't necessarily think it makes sense, but I tuned into the WJBC broadcast for the last few minutes, after the Wheaton one ended, so I know that's how they feel, so I thought I'd mention it. The greenies are very resilient. :D

You certainly are packing a lot of innuendo into the word "resilient", aren't you? ;)

Incidentally, I want to publicly apologize to Q for using the term "spin-doctoring". I thought that his allegiance to Wesleyan was unduly coloring his response to Wednesday night's game, and I still do, but "spin-doctoring" was probably a needlessly inflammatory term for me to use to describe that response.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 20, 2006, 09:01:04 AM

So.... when did this turn into the CCIW Chat?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 20, 2006, 04:33:56 PM

One little prediction: Puget Sound is going down tonight to Willamette.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 20, 2006, 04:40:05 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 20, 2006, 09:01:04 AM

So.... when did this turn into the CCIW Chat?

Well, hey - Top 25, CCIW Chat ... what's the difference? ;) ;D

At least all the talk WAS about top 25 teams (or explaining why a narrow win over Wheaton is not as bad as their record would suggest).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 20, 2006, 06:05:02 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 20, 2006, 09:01:04 AM

So.... when did this turn into the CCIW Chat?

The original CCIW Chat turned into Bosko Chat, so we needed to branch out. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on January 20, 2006, 08:02:57 PM

Lovely - the CCIW Takes over the World plot expands.

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 20, 2006, 08:14:49 PM

Quote from: Coach C on January 20, 2006, 08:02:57 PM
Lovely - the CCIW Takes over the World plot expands.

Don't go jumping ahead of the plot!

Today - d3. TOMORROW the world! ;) ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 20, 2006, 10:13:22 PM

CCIW = College Conference of Illinois and the World? Contemplating Conquest of the Indo-European World?

Anyway...

Case Western Reserve shocks #11 Carnegie Mellon tonight in Pittsburgh, 72-69.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 20, 2006, 10:48:35 PM

Well, geez o pete. Is this going to be another wacky weekend?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 20, 2006, 11:01:17 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 20, 2006, 10:48:35 PM
Well, geez o pete. Is this going to be another wacky weekend?

Are there any other sort of weekends (worth living)? :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: titanfan on January 20, 2006, 11:33:23 PM

And Wash U. knocks off NYU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 20, 2006, 11:36:07 PM

The UAA is such a brutal travel conference, though that doesn't explain CMU's loss. Pittsburgh to Cleveland is virtual walk down the block compared to some of these trips.

NYU was held without a FG for the final 10:25 of the second half. D'oh!

You think it's a fun night for men. Check out the top three scores on the women's side.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2006, 12:31:18 AM

Quote from: gordonmann on January 20, 2006, 11:36:07 PM
You think it's a fun night for men. Check out the top three scores on the women's side.

Guess its a 'push' for NYU and WashU tonite - let's hear it for the underdogs!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 21, 2006, 12:40:37 AM

Quote from: gordonmann on January 20, 2006, 11:36:07 PM
The UAA is such a brutal travel conference, though that doesn't explain CMU's loss. Pittsburgh to Cleveland is virtual walk down the block compared to some of these trips.

Gordon, it must be a "bus" thing! They must have taken a bus, like the majority of D3! It threw off their rhythm. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 21, 2006, 12:55:30 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 21, 2006, 12:40:37 AM
Quote from: gordonmann on January 20, 2006, 11:36:07 PM
The UAA is such a brutal travel conference, though that doesn't explain CMU's loss. Pittsburgh to Cleveland is virtual walk down the block compared to some of these trips.

Gordon, it must be a "bus" thing! They must have taken a bus, like the majority of D3! It threw off their rhythm. ;)

The bus must have thrown them (the Spartans) into their rhythm; it was the homestanding Tartans who lost.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 21, 2006, 01:22:09 AM

Boink! Rim shot! Over the backboard! Out of bounds! :-\

Thanks David! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 21, 2006, 01:57:04 AM

The entire UAA must've gone against form tonight. I was at the Brandeis @ Chicago game this evening, and the Judges (who had been 0-3 in the league going into the game) won going away, 72-60, sparked by 17 points apiece from their exotically-named backcourt of Florian Rexhepi and Kwame Graves-Fulgham.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 21, 2006, 09:16:34 AM

QuoteOne little prediction: Puget Sound is going down tonight to Willamette.

Good call. The schools didn't send the score, but it's posted on the scoreboard now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 21, 2006, 11:32:21 AM

West coast schools would get more coverage if they could manage to report scores.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 21, 2006, 11:47:27 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 21, 2006, 11:32:21 AM
West coast schools would get more coverage if they could manage to report scores.

D3Poster: Mr Chairman, I move that the above quotation be placed in the FAQ.

Chariman: Is there a second?
...
...
...
Chairman: The motion fails for the lack of a second from the West Coast.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: JMW1973 on January 21, 2006, 12:13:39 PM

How come my alma mater, SUNY Cortland, is getting no love on the web site? 14 wins in a row is 14 wins in a row! And their only loss was by 1 point to Trinity (CT). They are like Air Force (also a 1-loss team) when it comes to the polls. I hope things even out in the end and C-State gets its day in the top 25!

Also, the Lady Dragons deserve some love as well! Try 7 wins in a row and a 12-2 record.

That means Cortland's hoops teams are 26-3. Could they be one of the hoops schools in D3 this year? That record might be hard to top, but it's great nevertheless.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 21, 2006, 12:26:04 PM

Quote from: JMW1973 on January 21, 2006, 12:13:39 PM

That means Cortland's hoops teams are 26-3. Could they be one of the hoops schools in D3 this year? That record might be hard to top, but it's great nevertheless.

Not so hard, Hope's men and women are a combined 30-2.

As for Cortland, SUNYAC schools will always have a hard time getting respect, most on this site are dubious to East Region schools despite Rochesters run a year ago. Their hovering around the top 15 and with this weeks doing they'll get a look for ranking.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 21, 2006, 12:48:01 PM

Lawrence's teams are a combined 26-1.

Rochester isn't in the SUNYAC, which doesn't help Cortland's cause. JMW, what's the signature win on Cortland's schedule? The combined record of the teams Cortland has beaten is 91-107 (91-93 against teams other than Cortland), which isn't awful but isn't great either.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 21, 2006, 04:05:56 PM

#1 Wittenberg is on the air, trailing Allegheny (6-9) by 8 with about 13:00 left.
http://www4.wittenberg.edu/news/athletics/mbasketball/index.html

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 21, 2006, 04:23:15 PM

Holy same wavelength batman, that's right around when I posted something on the Daily Dose about that very game. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 21, 2006, 05:44:48 PM

Daily Dose readers know that #1 Witt pulled it out, 61-56. #3 Albion was not so fortunate, losing at home to Calvin, 69-66.

A game to watch out for tonight is Ohio Wesleyan (10-6) at #2 Wooster. (7:30pm, available at http://www.wooster.edu/interactive/). Wooster takes the floor for the first time in three years without their senior co-captain and floor leader Tom Port (out with a broken wrist.) The Scots need to find a way to replace his 16.5 points, 6.1 rebounds, 3.0 assists, and 28.8 minutes, not to mention his 65 inches on an otherwise pretty short team (starting five is 6'0", 6'0", 6'3", 6'5", and 6'6").

Another big game tonight is #13 North Central at #9 Augustana. For audio details, check out the Daily Dose.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2006, 05:50:22 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 21, 2006, 05:44:48 PM
Daily Dose readers know that #1 Witt pulled it out, 61-56. #3 Albion was not so fortunate, losing at home to Calvin, 69-66.

A game to watch out for tonight is Ohio Wesleyan (10-6) at #2 Wooster. (7:30pm, available at http://www.wooster.edu/interactive/). Wooster takes the floor for the first time in three years without their senior co-captain and floor leader Tom Port (out with a broken wrist.) The Scots need to find a way to replace his 16.5 points, 6.1 rebounds, 3.0 assists, and 28.8 minutes, not to mention his 65 inches on an otherwise pretty short team (starting five is 6'0", 6'0", 6'3", 6'5", and 6'6").

Wow! That's the same height as Earl Boykins! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 21, 2006, 07:03:44 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2006, 05:50:22 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 21, 2006, 05:44:48 PM
Daily Dose readers know that #1 Witt pulled it out, 61-56. #3 Albion was not so fortunate, losing at home to Calvin, 69-66.

A game to watch out for tonight is Ohio Wesleyan (10-6) at #2 Wooster. (7:30pm, available at http://www.wooster.edu/interactive/). Wooster takes the floor for the first time in three years without their senior co-captain and floor leader Tom Port (out with a broken wrist.) The Scots need to find a way to replace his 16.5 points, 6.1 rebounds, 3.0 assists, and 28.8 minutes, not to mention his 65 inches on an otherwise pretty short team (starting five is 6'0", 6'0", 6'3", 6'5", and 6'6").

Wow! That's the same height as Earl Boykins! ;)

Oops. :-[ Make that 77 inches. That's what I get for trying to be cute! ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 21, 2006, 07:07:35 PM

That's where the metric foot comes back to bite you. Or kick you. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 21, 2006, 07:11:19 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 21, 2006, 07:07:35 PM
That's where the metric foot comes back to bite you. Or kick you. :)

Iamb truly sorry I made that error. :P ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 21, 2006, 07:13:14 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 21, 2006, 07:03:44 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2006, 05:50:22 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 21, 2006, 05:44:48 PM
Daily Dose readers know that #1 Witt pulled it out, 61-56. #3 Albion was not so fortunate, losing at home to Calvin, 69-66.

A game to watch out for tonight is Ohio Wesleyan (10-6) at #2 Wooster. (7:30pm, available at http://www.wooster.edu/interactive/). Wooster takes the floor for the first time in three years without their senior co-captain and floor leader Tom Port (out with a broken wrist.) The Scots need to find a way to replace his 16.5 points, 6.1 rebounds, 3.0 assists, and 28.8 minutes, not to mention his 65 inches on an otherwise pretty short team (starting five is 6'0", 6'0", 6'3", 6'5", and 6'6").

Wow! That's the same height as Earl Boykins! ;)

Oops. :-[ Make that 77 inches. That's what I get for trying to be cute! ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 21, 2006, 07:18:13 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 21, 2006, 07:11:19 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 21, 2006, 07:07:35 PM
That's where the metric foot comes back to bite you. Or kick you. :)

Iamb truly sorry I made that error. :P ;D

:D :D :D At least you didn't try to "Mae West" yourself out of that one.

(That one is so old, I may need to expalin it. :-\)

http://www.flatfiverecords.com/live/maewest/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 21, 2006, 07:21:12 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 21, 2006, 07:18:13 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 21, 2006, 07:11:19 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 21, 2006, 07:07:35 PM
That's where the metric foot comes back to bite you. Or kick you. :)

Iamb truly sorry I made that error. :P ;D

:D :D :D At least you didn't try to "Mae West" yourself out of that one.

(That one is so old, I may need to expalin it. :-\)

http://www.flatfiverecords.com/live/maewest/

:D But, the Mae West joke doesn't work so well when you're talking about a man who is six feet five inches, does it? :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 21, 2006, 07:29:54 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 21, 2006, 07:21:12 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 21, 2006, 07:18:13 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 21, 2006, 07:11:19 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 21, 2006, 07:07:35 PM
That's where the metric foot comes back to bite you. Or kick you. :)

Iamb truly sorry I made that error. :P ;D

:D :D :D At least you didn't try to "Mae West" yourself out of that one.

(That one is so old, I may need to expalin it. :-\)

http://www.flatfiverecords.com/live/maewest/

:D But, the Mae West joke doesn't work so well when you're talking about a man who is six feet five inches, does it? :D

:D :D :D ;D 8)

But we were talking about Wooster, weren't we?

:D :D ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 21, 2006, 08:10:45 PM

Had to smite you for that one, Ralph. >:(

And no, I'm not glad to see you, that IS a roll of dimes in my pocket.

:)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 21, 2006, 08:16:23 PM

I apologize! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 21, 2006, 08:25:26 PM

:-* ;)

In the meantime, and in spite of any anatomical deficiencies they may have, Wooster is not having much trouble with OWU. The Scots are leading by 14 about 6 minutes into the 2nd. The Scots are shooting well over 60% for the game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 21, 2006, 08:41:11 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 21, 2006, 08:10:45 PM
Had to smite you for that one, Ralph. >:(

And no, I'm not glad to see you, that IS a roll of dimes in my pocket.

:)

That was a strong smite! I haven't been able to access the d3sports (Posting up) server consistently since I posted that! :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ziggy on January 21, 2006, 08:57:43 PM

Calvin takes down #3 Albion today

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 21, 2006, 09:04:06 PM

Final: #2 Wooster 103 Ohio Wesleyan 94
Playing without Tom Port, Wooster still gets the win over the Bishops. James Cooper picked up the slack with a career high 37 points for Wooster, Tim Vandervaart had 15 points and Kyle Witucky chipped in 11 points.

Wooster is now 16-1, 8-0 in NCAC. :)

GO SCOTS!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie_superfan on January 21, 2006, 10:35:26 PM

#13 North Central 79
#9 Augustana 85

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: titanhammer on January 21, 2006, 11:17:33 PM

Wooscotsfan or other NCAC followers: a few years ago, I was able to make it out to Ohio and witness Kenyon (coached by former teammate of mine, David Kunka) host Dennison. Dennison won the game going away. While I was impressed with the swimming banners at Kenyon, I can safely say that my high school team was better than the Kenyon team I watched.

My question is this, how is the overall talent level of the conference this year? Will Wooster and Witt be challenged by anyone this year other than each other? Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 21, 2006, 11:21:23 PM

The talent is better, Kenyon, Denison, and Hiram are all improving, though the records may not show it the talent is better. Wabash, OWU and Earlham are all pretty tough teams to face. But no one is near Witt and Wooster, because they seem to get better as the rest get better.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 21, 2006, 11:27:32 PM

Quote from: titanhammer on January 21, 2006, 11:17:33 PM
My question is this, how is the overall talent level of the conference this year? Will Wooster and Witt be challenged by anyone this year other than each other? Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

If by "challenged" you mean "challenged for the conference title," then the answer is 'no.' But both teams have already been "challenged;" Wooster had to go to OT to beat Earlham, and Allegheny gave Witt fits just this afternoon, losing by 5. Last year Ohio Wesleyan took Wooster to OT, and Denison actually beat Witt in 2OT. So the challenge is there, but over the long haul, teams like Wabash, Earlham, OWU, and Denison are playing for third place.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: titanhammer on January 21, 2006, 11:29:53 PM

Smedindy, did you attend the IWU/Wabash game where IWU won by 12? If so, how do you think Wabash played that game?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 21, 2006, 11:44:24 PM

titanhammer - David's answer is a good one that Wooster and Wittenberg are still clearly at the top of the NCAC but usually being challenged a couple of games per year by other teams.

Still, the last time that Wooster lost to a NCAC opponent other than Wittenberg was in February 2002 against Wabash.

Having said that, Wooster still plays Earlham, Wabash and at Ohio Wesleyan once more before the end of this regular season, plus a very tough road game vs. Witt. Wooster could very easily lose any of those four games particularly if Tom Port, Wooster's best player, misses all of them with his fractured nonshooting wrist and if Wooster's outside shooting is cold on a particular night. Current prognosis is that Tom Port will hopefully return in 3 to 6 weeks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 21, 2006, 11:50:39 PM

QuoteSmedindy, did you attend the IWU/Wabash game where IWU won by 12? If so, how do you think Wabash played that game?

I thought Wabash played up to their potential in the first half - and let the game get away in the second half. This Wabash team has a tendency to be inconsistent during games at times, sometimes in critical moments.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 22, 2006, 01:10:52 AM

Incidentally I got to see the Kenyon swimming banners when Dave Kunka gave me a tour of their facility a couple years ago when he and I did the Wooster-Ramapo game. Pretty impressive.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 22, 2006, 01:22:33 AM

I went to Kenyon last year, and what caught my eye were the trophy cases. Evidently there is a rule that says that each varsity sport gets the same amount of space in the trophy cases; so in the men's basketball section, there is a tall, prominent trophy for finishing second in some 4-team holiday classic a couple of decades ago, whereas in the women's swimming case there are so many national championship walnut-and-bronze plaques that they're stuck in there sideways so they'll all fit. :D

By the way, Kenyon is supposed to open their new multi-million dollar athletic facility on Wednesday, when the men's hoops team hosts Wooster.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: titanhammer on January 22, 2006, 02:39:39 AM

"Larry" getting some pub tonight on ESPN for being the only men's undefeated college basketball team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 23, 2006, 10:34:34 AM

Time to do it up:

1. Wittenberg (16-1, 7-1) wins over OH Wesleyan and at Allegheny
2. Wooster (16-1, 8-0) wins at Hiram and vs OH Wesleyan
3. Albion (14-2, 5-1) win over Kalamazoo, home loss to Calvin
4. Hope (16-1, 5-1) wins over Adrian and at Alma
5. Lawrence (14-0, 8-0) wins over Carroll and at St. Norbert
6. IWU (14-2, 4-2) wins over Wheaton and at North Park
7. Puget Sound (13-3, 7-1) loss at Willamette (I called it), win at Linfield
8. York (14-2, 4-2) loss at Catholic, win over Mary Washington
9. Augustana (16-1, 6-0) wins over Millikin and #13 North Central
10. Baldwin-Wallace (15-2, 9-1) wins over Heidelberg and at Wilmington
11. Carnegie-Mellon (14-2, 4-1) home loss to Case Western Reserve, win over Emory
12. Amherst (12-2, 2-1) wins at Elms, at Wesleyan and at Connecticut College
13. North Central (14-2, 3-2) wins at Robert Morris-Springfield, at Carthage and a loss at #9 Augustana
14. WPI (15-1, 5-1) wins at Coast Guard and over Wheaton
15. Wartburg (14-2, 7-1) wins over Buena Vista and Coe
16. St. John Fisher (12-3, 3-1) win over Rochester Tech, home loss to Nazareth
17. Randolph-Macon (15-3, 10-1) wins over Roanoke and Washington & Lee (OT)
18. Mississippi College (14-1, 11-1) wins over Texas-Dallas and Texas-Tyler
19. Occidental (13-1, 4-0) wins at Whittier and Redlands
20. Hampden-Sydney (12-4-6-4) home loss to VA Welseyan, loss at Emory and Henry
21. Stout (13-4, 6-3) win at Platteville
22. Transylvania (14-3, 5-1) wins at Hanover and over Manchester
23. Whitewater (11-4, 6-2) home loss to Oshkosh
24. NYU (14-2, 3-2) win at Hunter, loss at WashU, win at Chicago
25. OH Northern (12-4, 7-3) loss at Muskingum, win at Capital

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 23, 2006, 07:31:13 PM

As I'm sure you've seen, the new top 25 is posted. As always, there are a few milestones for which congratulations are in order:

#3 Lawrence, #8 Baldwin-Wallace, #11 North Central, and #20 Transylvania have achieved their highest ranking ever (i.e., in poll history);
#7 Augustana has tied it's highest-ever ranking (2003-04 Week 1);
#25 Carroll enters the top 25 for the first time; and
Bates (ORV) receives votes for the first time ever.

Congratulations to the coaches, student-athletes, and fans of these fine programs!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 23, 2006, 09:25:10 PM

Alright I need opinions on why UW-LaCrosse is not ranked or even receiving votes. 15-3 overall, a best in the WIAC 14-3 in-region record.

I'm stumped ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 23, 2006, 09:29:50 PM

Quote from: sac on January 23, 2006, 09:25:10 PM
Alright I need opinions on why UW-LaCrosse is not ranked or even receiving votes. 15-3 overall, a best in the WIAC 14-3 in-region record.

I'm stumped ???

They tied for 20th in the Posters' Poll (which I am about to post). We in no way mean to compete with the real poll, but this is exactly the sort of discussion I had hoped to provoke!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: titanfan on January 23, 2006, 09:30:36 PM

Sac,

I had UW-Lacrosse on my posters poll ballot!

I was very surprised they received no votes in the real poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 23, 2006, 09:43:55 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 23, 2006, 09:29:50 PM
Quote from: sac on January 23, 2006, 09:25:10 PM
Alright I need opinions on why UW-LaCrosse is not ranked or even receiving votes. 15-3 overall, a best in the WIAC 14-3 in-region record.

I'm stumped ???

They tied for 20th in the Posters' Poll (which I am about to post). We in no way mean to compete with the real poll, but this is exactly the sort of discussion I had hoped to provoke!

Aw c'mon guys! We are talking about UW-Whoever! All of those UW's look alike! :-\ ??? ::) When I threw the darts at the WIAC board on Saturday night, I got Oshkosh, Stout and Lacrosse. I know I will not be able to reproduce that next week. But who cares? It's the WIAC!

In the 2005-06 polls, there will be 6 WIAC's who receive votes, and the Pool A bid will be 18-10 and then run the table! ::) :P :D :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on January 23, 2006, 10:07:47 PM

I gotta really think any of these receiving votes would have been better choices for #24 or #25 - Trinity (Conn.) 35, Elmhurst 35, Ohio Northern 33

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 23, 2006, 10:26:09 PM

Ralph,

I can definitely identify with that post!

I figure a ballot with NO WIAC teams is virtually an invalid ballot, but there is also no one who has separated themselves. On my PP ballot I eventually put Oshkosh #20, LAX #24, and Whitewater #25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njlincolnlion on January 23, 2006, 10:30:16 PM

iwumichigander:

It's just my two cents, but I think the pollsters has it right, and I'm quite satisfied with Lincoln at #24 ;D.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 23, 2006, 10:31:04 PM

4 WIAC and 4 CCIW teams receive votes... confusion abounds :D

Quote from: iwumichigander on January 23, 2006, 10:07:47 PM
I gotta really think any of these receiving votes would have been better choices for #24 or #25 - Trinity (Conn.) 35, Elmhurst 35, Ohio Northern 33

Caroll is a great choice for the top 25... the played #3 Lawrence really close this week, they beat Whitewater who is receiving votes, Carthage @ Carthage, and they lost to Oshkosh by only one. I'm confused as to why they are a bad choice? ???

I'm all for Elmhurst being ranked, especially after they thoroughly trashed my Thunder, but the fact is that Lincoln is a pretty strong candidate for a Pool B with their season almost over, and a high QOWI and good record. I don't really blame voters for going with a team that will very likely be there Selection Sunday.

Aside from the fact that I still think that Oxy is probably better than Puget, and Va Wes is probably better than RMC, this looks like a great poll to me. Great work by the voters!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 23, 2006, 10:37:06 PM

I struggled to put Oxy on my PP ballot - because their SOS is heinous. I do think that matters.

I almost pulled the trigger on Carroll but I have Lincoln high and I think 24th is good for them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 23, 2006, 10:39:17 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 23, 2006, 10:37:06 PM
I struggled to put Oxy on my PP ballot - because their SOS is heinous. I do think that matters.

It matters; but FWIW, I'll personally vouch for Oxy. They're quite good, and I have little doubt that they should be among the top 25 teams in the nation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 23, 2006, 10:41:43 PM

I did vote for them on my ballot, finally, but I guess the proof will come in tourney time, like it always does.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 24, 2006, 12:38:07 AM

Quote from: sac on January 23, 2006, 09:25:10 PM
Alright I need opinions on why UW-LaCrosse is not ranked or even receiving votes. 15-3 overall, a best in the WIAC 14-3 in-region record.

I'm stumped ???

No votes at all. That's what stumps me.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 23, 2006, 10:26:09 PM
Ralph,

I figure a ballot with NO WIAC teams is virtually an invalid ballot, but there is also no one who has separated themselves. On my PP ballot I eventually put Oshkosh #20, LAX #24, and Whitewater #25.

You left Stout off your ballot? They beat Whitewater the week before! Whitewater lost their only game of the week at home.

I wouldn't really say the CCIW has anyone that has totally separated themselves from the rest, aside from Augustana, who is 6-0 with three other teams at 4-2 or 3-2.

Quote from: diehardfan on January 23, 2006, 10:31:04 PM
Caroll is a great choice for the top 25... the played #3 Lawrence really close this week, they beat Whitewater who is receiving votes, Carthage @ Carthage, and they lost to Oshkosh by only one. I'm confused as to why they are a bad choice? ???

Carroll is long overdue to get into the poll, April, but this isn't the week they should've debuted. Sure, they hung tough with Lawrence, but they barely beat a poor Beloit team at home. as I said in the Poster's Poll board, it was like when Ill. Wes. barely beat Carthage, it hurt them more in the polls than the actual loss to North Central. Had Carroll romped on Beloit at home by 20+, I would've even voted for them in the Poster's Poll (I did the week before).

You make points about Carroll beating Whitewater and losing to Oshkosh by one. But, when were those games? The Whitewater game was the 2nd game of the season and the Oshkosh game was mid-December. I'm not trying to take anything away from those wins, but they were months ago. What, the voters are finally figuring out that Carroll is a good team now? They should've been in the Top 25 awhile ago. That's my point. Now was not the time, IMO. Did you notice that Carroll has the same amount of votes as they did last week? :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 24, 2006, 01:36:01 AM

I really wanted some WIAC advice on voting, but neither you nor PS had yet voted on the PP, and I didn't want to contaminate that. In retrospect, I probably would swap Stout and Whitewater, but it wouldn't really change anything.

The WIAC appears to be even MORE of a mess than usual! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 24, 2006, 02:29:24 AM

Quote from: Old School on January 24, 2006, 12:38:07 AM
Carroll is long overdue to get into the poll, April, but this isn't the week they should've debuted.

Well, you can't complain about the timing, either they're worthy or they're not. :)

As for the vote total, yes, I did notice that. I thought it was oddly low for a Top 25 team and then I looked and saw that indeed, it was. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 24, 2006, 02:37:17 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 24, 2006, 02:29:24 AM
Well, you can't complain about the timing, either they're worthy or they're not. :)

Come on Pat, even you can't believe that! They were worthy back then and they are worthy now (if they were in the poll before!). A loss and then a close win at home against a subpar Beloit team doesn't deem them worthy if they weren't in the poll in the first place.

So, yeah, I am complaining about the timing! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 24, 2006, 02:42:12 AM

Oh yeah, another thing, Pat...

I was adding up all the votes of each team so far in the Top25 poll (and those receiving votes) and my numbers don't add up.

The total vote count in the preseason poll is 8121, the 1st week is 8126 and then Weeks 2 and 3 (only got that far) are both at 8125. So, I looked over the preseason poll again to make sure I got the votes correct and I did, and they still come out to be 8121. Are my eyes bad or can this actually happen with the numbers off? Just curious.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 24, 2006, 03:41:24 AM

Yeah, David Collinge points these out to me occasionally. I don't recall what caused these two initially, probably a typo on my part at some point. But I usually stick with the poll once it's released unless the error is really heinous, like running last week's No. 1 votes or something like that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sixer on January 24, 2006, 04:22:16 AM

How did WPI drop down a spot when they went 2-0 for the week and moved to the top of their conference? Carnegie Mellon is the #14 slot above WPI and they lost at home to unranked Case Western

People may complain that WPI has won a lot of close games, but they're still 15-1 and have an opportunity to avenge their only loss @ Clark tonight.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 24, 2006, 04:24:31 AM

Carnegie Mellon is not relevant to WPI dropping. Wartburg is the team that passed WPI, if you look at the previous week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 24, 2006, 08:43:55 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 24, 2006, 04:24:31 AM
Carnegie Mellon is not relevant to WPI dropping. Wartburg is the team that passed WPI, if you look at the previous week.

Sixer, Wartburg gained 70 votes, almost 3 places on each of the 25 ballots. :)

The Massey MOV (Margin of Victory) ranking has WPI at a very weak #51. That is not much respect for the NEWMAC or the opponents in the Northeast Region.

http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&sub=III&mid=1

WPI is only 24th in Massey's Ratings that do not use MOV.

http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&sub=III&mid=6

Pat's pollsters are giving you "much more love" than the number crunching thinks you deserve. ;)

One other thought that has to be in the back of everyone's mind is that the 2003 Williams team is the only Northeast Region team to win one of the 31 D3 Championships since 1975. :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 24, 2006, 09:02:19 AM

WPI's problem is not that they win close games, it's that they win close games repeatedly, and against sub-par competition. A top 25 team should not even be close to some of those teams, even on a bad night. The NE Region got overrated at the beginning of the year and WPI is still enjoying the benefits of that. I think some voters are starting to realize that they just aren't up to the level of some of the Midwest schools.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on January 24, 2006, 10:03:01 AM

WPI's problem has nothing really to do with MOV. It has to do with QOO - quality of opponent. And we can't relly say that the NE is overvalued to the MW since we have so few inter-region games due to the NCAA's brilliance.

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 24, 2006, 10:14:00 AM

Quote from: Coach C on January 24, 2006, 10:03:01 AM
And we can't relly say that the NE is overvalued to the MW since we have so few inter-region games due to the NCAA's brilliance.

C

I can say it, C.

No qualms.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 24, 2006, 07:27:01 PM

A statistical anomaly in the Posters' Poll this week (not having access to Pat's data, I obviously don't know whether or not this happens in the d3hoops poll): Wartburg finished 9th, even though NO voter listed them higher than 10th! Consistency of opinion can do wonders! Nearly all our voters had Wartburg 10th or low teens - their worst ranking was 16th; the teams they beat out usually had one or more votes higher than 10th, but also some very low rankings (or were left out entirely).

This 'consistency of opinion' may shed some light on rankings changes that otherwise seem incongruous.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on January 25, 2006, 09:24:39 AM

Hoops fan -

Wouldn't you really rather be able to show it, rather than just say it? I hate the way this sytems forces us to look at regions in a vacuum with no good compartive data.

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 25, 2006, 09:30:37 AM

I guess ideally it would be nice, but coming from a small school conference, I like that teams aren't penalized for not leaving a weak region. I think there needs to be a little more incentive to take a trip now and then, but to open the floodgates totally seems too much like the d1 problems that drive me away from their competition. I like the idea of counting trips when class isn't in session as region games. I think that gives the schools who want to improve their national rep the chance to do so, but it also allows for schools who just want to test their team without regional repercussions to do so during the rest of the season. There are pros and cons for any system that is proposed, but the fact of the matter is, encouraging Illinois and Wisconsin schools to travel extensively in the East and NE and vice versa probably is beyond the realm of what D3 was created to do.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on January 25, 2006, 09:56:18 AM

Hoops fan -

I could not disagree more with your last sentence. Part of D3 basketball is about educaiton. What better way to see NYC, Philly, DC, LA, the SEA-TAC area than to travel on the college's dime and play a few games? You get to see the Liberty Bell, our nation's capital, or the Arizona desert. (I personally recommend the fianl trip over the holiday break!)

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 25, 2006, 10:15:19 AM

But there are also coaches too concerned with their QOWI or national standing to take a trip that counts for in-region. I think developing a way for coaches to choose between a game that "counts" and one that doesn't is the best way to compromise. Making holiday games in-region no matter the opponent can do that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 25, 2006, 10:30:07 AM

Many schools don't have the budget or largesse for that kind of travel, either.

Though, if you look at it, the teams from the NE that do sneak out of region seem to have issues, as the power ratings for that region as a whole show. There are enough games out of region, I think, to get a handle on how stinky some of those teams really are.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 25, 2006, 10:33:10 AM

That's a very true statement. It's also possible for any even remotely astute observer who watches two different games to judge talent level. I think anyone will agree to that.

I didn't want to touch on the money issues with travel, but its true. A lot of small schools have to do some rediculous fundraiding just to make a tourney trip someplace that isn't even all that far away.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on January 25, 2006, 11:58:01 AM

Well, I look at these trips as both educational trips as well as recruiting trips. They get your current player exposed to the world and they also give you another thing to tell prosepctive students.

Some of the teams arent that good, but I think that can be said in nearly every region. Yeah, maybe the GL and MW are heavy this year, but how do we really know what WPI or Cortland or Amherst would do against Lawrence or Augustana or ONU?

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie_superfan on January 25, 2006, 12:01:01 PM

smedindy,

What are your power rankings all about? Do you run a program yourself or do you somehow average out what things like Massey and Wolfe do?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 25, 2006, 12:04:49 PM

Quote from: Coach C on January 25, 2006, 11:58:01 AM
how do we really know what WPI or Cortland or Amherst would do against Lawrence or Augustana or ONU?

It's still going to be a guess unless you mandate certain teams playing each other. I rank teams based on common opponents or opponents opponents, etc. It might be easier to tell if they played more head to head, but it wouldn't be any more accurate. To me, I'd rather see an equal opportunity tournament before I see equal opportunity regular season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on January 25, 2006, 01:07:35 PM

My point is that I don't think we can get to an equitable post-season with the current in-season competition restrcitions. We need to be able to play the D3teams we want when we want and have all the games count toward post-season selections and seeding.

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 25, 2006, 01:11:05 PM

I'm afraid that will bring too many of the problems of d3. Maybe this is a valid motivation for splitting d3 into two divisions; I don't know.

Then again, with our current post-season, even amazing resumes in the MW and GL will still not get to the final four. I'm an East Coast guy and I know we're getting the good end of this deal, but it's still not fair.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 25, 2006, 01:30:40 PM

Augie -

I use Massey and Wolfe, and the Massey SOS, and a factor I add in myself. It's easy enough for me to do on a spreadsheet. I developed the theory in helping me suss out the NCAA Division I field of 65 - and I like it. It works for me - and it's fun to play with.

Of course, I'm a stats / numbers guy so I need the data!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 25, 2006, 04:57:47 PM

Smeds,

I just looked at Massey for the first time this season, and there's something I don't understand (lots of things, probably, but one I want to ask you about.) 'MOV' is 'margin of victory' right? If so, how is it that Wooster is #3 in the non-MOV ranking and #6 when MOV is included, when the Scots lead the nation in MOV? One would think that adding MOV to the calculation would help Wooster, not hurt them.

Does Massey somehow take into account what the MOV "should" be? Wooster's MOV is inflated both by the comparative weakness of their schedule and by their up-tempo style of play; does Massey somehow take this into account?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 25, 2006, 05:14:48 PM

If Massey uses "opponents-opponents" numbers those may hurt Wooster. I don't know.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 25, 2006, 05:24:09 PM

There is a diminishing returns on MOV because of who you play.

Pasting Oberlin by 231 doesn't help much at all because that's what you are 'supposed' to do if you are Wooster. So even though Wooster leads the nation in MOV, it's who they have played that has hurt them. Which makes sense, I feel, because you need to prove yourself against the best, not the dregs.

The win against Wabash helped a great deal. That was rather unexpected.

His other ratings don't factor in scoring at all - it just if you won or lost.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 25, 2006, 06:27:25 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 25, 2006, 05:24:09 PM
There is a diminishing returns on MOV because of who you play. ...

The win against Wabash helped a great deal. That was rather unexpected. ...

smed, is that another example of "Wabash always fights!" ? ;) ;D :D :D :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 25, 2006, 07:15:48 PM

Ah, I should have said "the MARGIN of the win against Wabash!" Especially since it was a five point game right before half, and the history of Wabash playing Wooster very tight at Chadwick.

This is what you get for posting on an empty stomach!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie_superfan on January 25, 2006, 10:02:52 PM

Great Augustana vs. IWU game going on right now.....Augie up 4 with about 3 min. left

Watch live at www.cciw.org

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 25, 2006, 10:14:11 PM

Final: Augie 57, IWU 54.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 25, 2006, 10:19:20 PM

Wittenberg dispatches the Little Giants by 15. Now this, THIS is probably an expected margin of victory!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 27, 2006, 01:05:59 AM

For fun...I was bored. Total votes for each week. Enjoy.

OK, this is pretty simple to read. Top team (Ill. Wes) is the team with the most votes for the year so far. Every team that has gotten a vote is listed each week. The N/A obviously means they didn't receive any votes for that week. The number in bold each week represents the 25th ranked team, to give you an idea of how many votes it takes to get into the Top 25. Every team under that number just received votes that week. Got it?

Notice that Carroll had 40 in each of Week 7 and 8, but made the Top 25 in the latter poll. A far cry from the 115 it took Catholic just to break the Top 25 in the preseason.

TEAM	Total	Pre	Wk 1	Wk 2	Wk 3	Wk 4	Wk 5	Wk 6	Wk 7	Wk 8
Ill. Wes.	5245	616	625	625	623	623	624	518	478	513
Wooster	5210	522	591	588	598	598	541	574	592	606
Wittenberg	4900	330	525	567	543	555	565	594	610	611
Albion	4186	360	369	410	462	462	493	536	590	504
Puget Sound	4164	499	497	516	496	501	445	441	467	302
Amherst	4136	406	510	517	537	533	535	435	318	345
York (Pa.)	3819	405	484	489	389	396	398	433	465	360
Hope	3733	59	254	390	457	460	483	576	531	523
Lawrence	3543	24	227	379	435	445	471	491	506	565
Worester Poly	2820	175	308	375	393	398	402	233	272	264
Augustana	2562	82	87	169	271	290	330	380	453	500
Randolph-Macon	2201	170	297	257	293	324	200	253	207	200
Wartburg	2051	241	193	217	245	238	238	163	223	293
Baldwin-Wallace	2010	24	76	127	180	214	343	256	359	431
St. John Fisher	1681	370	211	168	171	160	121	160	218	102
Stout	1585	3	20	118	274	335	399	175	96	165
Hanover	1542	336	405	234	251	242	67	N/A	7	N/A
Oshkosh	1521	539	438	228	69	67	16	7	25	132
Carnegie Mellon	1254	N/A	N/A	79	114	90	139	222	327	283
Rochester	1168	127	286	177	174	150	159	48	23	24
Mississippi College	1167	152	224	64	39	44	85	142	181	236
Hampden-Sydney	1160	46	81	110	125	152	220	321	105	N/A
Elmhurst	1157	207	125	131	199	228	202	1	29	35
North Central	957	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	1	31	301	289	335
Gustavus Adolphus	861	168	255	333	64	34	7	N/A	N/A	N/A
Lincoln	737	N/A	31	115	185	145	115	34	38	74
Whitewater	659	245	160	4	13	10	37	96	68	26
John Carroll	547	176	129	97	108	33	4	N/A	N/A	N/A
Virginia Wesleyan	541	292	112	N/A	N/A	2	6	6	30	93
Ramapo	528	274	98	108	12	12	24	N/A	N/A	N/A
Occidental	504	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	11	84	155	254
Catholic	501	115	169	86	31	35	58	3	N/A	4
Maryville (Tenn.)	489	19	74	96	120	61	33	32	46	8
Transylvania	459	68	27	22	14	16	43	57	72	140
Ohio Northern	426	N/A	N/A	47	61	79	108	34	64	33
Bluffton	290	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	65	151	61	13
Albright	278	24	77	140	20	17	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Stevens Point	236	113	4	60	8	9	N/A	1	28	13
Wilmington	226	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	209	17	N/A
Calvin	191	119	15	3	6	5	3	18	1	21
Widener	187	N/A	7	12	14	26	60	49	6	13
St. Thomas	175	1	1	4	66	85	9	1	8	N/A
Platteville	172	156	16	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Carroll	149	8	9	15	21	N/A	6	10	40	40
Aurora	142	133	9	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
NYU	130	N/A	1	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	50	66	13
Springfield	108	108	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Southwestern	99	93	6	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Ursinus	93	87	6	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Trinity (Texas)	85	5	18	15	16	30	1	N/A	N/A	N/A
Trinity (Conn.)	64	N/A	7	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	22	35
Potsdam State	57	24	14	19	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Hamilton	56	22	3	2	2	3	13	11	N/A	N/A
New Jersey City	55	11	N/A	1	17	15	8	3	N/A	N/A
Rutger-Newark	42	N/A	35	7	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Mary Washington	39	31	N/A	4	4	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Cortland State	32	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	30	2
Buena Vista	26	26	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Washington U.	24	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	2	7	8	N/A	7
Pomona-Pitzer	22	22	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Hobart	21	21	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Hardin-Simmons	16	16	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Union	16	14	N/A	N/A	2	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Williams	15	6	9	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
King's	13	13	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
La Crosse	8	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	8	N/A	N/A
Salem State	7	7	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Methodist	6	6	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Scranton	5	5	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Loras	4	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	1	3
Bates	3	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	3
William Paterson	3	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	2	1
McMurry	2	N/A	N/A	N/A	2	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Dominican	1	N/A	1	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Keene State	1	N/A	N/A	N/A	1	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 27, 2006, 01:30:04 AM

Wow... nice work! That makes trends (both for individual teams and for the poll itself) easy to find!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 27, 2006, 01:58:56 AM

OS, cool! I applaud!

I'm not sure what it means, but I like it. The Titans will almost certain slip to 2nd next week, but they were so highly regarded early on it is EXTREMELY unlikely they will ever fall below 3rd on the cumulative totals.

You do realize, of course, that you are now morally obligated to reproduce this tally each week for the rest of the year! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 27, 2006, 03:06:48 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 27, 2006, 01:58:56 AM
You do realize, of course, that you are now morally obligated to reproduce this tally each week for the rest of the year! ;D

It's excel spreadsheet, it wouldn't be that hard to update. I'd probably have to drop a week each time so it fits though.

I like Wilmington. No votes to 209 to 17 to no votes in consecutive weeks!

Elmhurst's 202 to 1 is good too! In contrast, fellow CCIWer North Central went from nobody (31) to somebody (301) in one week...wonder who they beat that week on the road! ;D

Preseason overrated?

Gustavus Adolphus
Hanover
John Carroll
Ramapo
Albright
Platteville
Aurora
Springfield

All teams that had a lot of votes to start but are nowhere near the polls now.

I was gonna do it by conference too, but there are some teams I don't know what conference they are in off-hand and was too lazy at the time to look it up...I may do that in the future.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 27, 2006, 09:32:03 AM

So Oshkosh is the only team to fall out of the top 25 and then get back in? Did I miss any of them?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 27, 2006, 09:33:12 AM

Nevermind that, I missread a few of those near the bottom.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2006, 12:57:54 PM

Springfield is having just a crazy season. They are 5-13 but with five losses by four points or less, nine by six points or less.

Only recently have the wheels come off a little, with two losses in January by double figures, their only two of the season by that margin.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 27, 2006, 09:41:20 PM

Old School if you get real bored tomorrow try doing a weighted average for the voting.

Week 8 multiplied by 8, week 7 by 7 on so on down.........might bring up a new revelation or two. ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 27, 2006, 09:47:16 PM

Albright and Ramapo rightfully aren't on the national radar. But unlike Springfield they are both in the chase for their conference's automatic bid. So they may redeem themselves yet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: devossed on January 28, 2006, 01:48:40 AM

Quote from: sac on January 27, 2006, 09:41:20 PM
Old School if you get real bored tomorrow try doing a weighted average for the voting.

Week 8 multiplied by 8, week 7 by 7 on so on down.........might bring up a new revelation or two. ???

That's too much time on one's hands--but you're right--inquiring minds want to know...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 28, 2006, 02:49:56 AM

Here is the weighted voting rank by team. This means that the preseason and 1st week's poll's votes were multiplied by ONE. Week 2's votes were multiplied by 2 and so on. Using the weighted voting system, I guess it gives more value to where you are later in the season. Better to end on a strong note than to start on a strong note, I guess!

In the [DIFF/RNK] column is a positive or negative number. For example, Ill. Wesleyan drops two spots using the weighted system, as opposed to the actual votes. Teams such as Occidental (+10) gain the most.

DIFF/RNK	TEAM	Total
1	Wooster	21616
1	Wittenberg	21385
-2	Illinois Wesleyan	20530
0	Albion	18626
3	Hope	18076
3	Lawrence	17457
-2	Puget Sound	16076
-2	Amherst	15964
-2	York (Pa.)	15341
1	Augustana	13581
-1	Worcester Polytech	11428
2	Baldwin-Wallace	10962
-1	Randolph-Macon	8723
-1	Wartburg	8628
1	Stout	7458
3	Carnegie Mellon	7440
7	North Central	6668
-3	St. John Fisher	5977
2	Mississippi College	5229
2	Hampden-Sydney	5091
10	Occidental	3676
1	Elmhurst	3602
-3	Rochester	3325
-7	Hanover	3314
-7	Oshkosh	3261
0	Lincoln	3033
7	Transylvania	2426
7	Ohio Northern	2049
-2	Whitewater	1937
6	Bluffton	1762
2	Maryville (Tenn.)	1632
-7	Gustavus Adolphus	1452
-4	Virginia Wesleyan	1432
5	Wilmington	1373
-3	Catholic	1029
-8	John Carroll	975
4	Widener	917
8	NYU	867
5	Carroll	800
-10	Ramapo	792
1	St. Thomas	655
-4	Stevens Point	603
-6	Albright	509
-4	Calvin	476
6	Trinity (Conn.)	441
4	Trinity (Texas)	226
10	Cortland State	226
6	New Jersey City	182
4	Hamilton	178
-7	Platteville	172
8	Washington U.	147
-7	Aurora	142
-6	Springfield	108
-6	Southwestern	99
-6	Ursinus	93
-4	Potsdam State	76
-1	Mary Washington	51
-3	Rutger-Newark	49
7	La Crosse	48
10	Loras	31
-3	Buena Vista	26
9	Bates	24
-3	Pomona-Pitzer	22
8	William Paterson	22
-4	Hobart	21
-3	Union	20
-5	Hardin-Simmons	16
-4	Williams	15
-4	King's	13
-3	Salem State	7
-3	Methodist	6
1	McMurry	6
-4	Scranton	5
1	Keene State	3
-1	Dominican	1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 28, 2006, 02:56:11 AM

Very nice job, OS. This may be the most helpful chart related to the Top 25 I've seen yet. In the words of Paul Westerberg, color me impressed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 28, 2006, 03:02:11 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 28, 2006, 02:56:11 AM
Very nice job, OS. This may be the most helpful chart related to the Top 25 I've seen yet. In the words of Paul Westerberg, color me impressed.

Take back calling me a sloth on the other board then! lol. Just kidding. I deserved that one! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 28, 2006, 03:07:25 AM

And not to be outdone...here's the weighted list by conference

CONF	DIFF/RNK	TEAM	Total
ASC-E	10	Mississippi College	5229
ASC-W	-4	McMurry	6
ASC-W	9	Hardin-Simmons	16
CAC	-2	York (Pa.)	15341
CAC	-4	Mary Washington	51
CAC	-7	Catholic	1029
CCIW	-7	North Central	6668
CCIW	1	Illinois Wesleyan	20530
CCIW	-3	Elmhurst	3602
CCIW	-1	Augustana	13581
CENT	4	Ursinus	93
E8	1	St. John Fisher	5977
GSAC	-4	Maryville (Tenn.)	1632
HCAC	5	Transylvania	2426
HCAC	7	Hanover	3314
HCAC	-8	Bluffton	1762
IIAC	-1	Wartburg	8628
IIAC	-3	Loras	31
IIAC	-3	Buena Vista	26
IND	0	Lincoln	3033
LEC	-1	Keene State	3
LL	-3	Union	20
LL	-3	Hobart	21
LL	-6	Hamilton	178
LMC	1	Dominican	1
MACC	1	Widener	917
MACC	-4	Scranton	5
MACC	4	Albright	509
MAC-F	-4	King's	13
MASCAC	-5	Salem State	7
MIAA	-2	Hope	18076
MIAA	-10	Calvin	476
MIAA	0	Albion	18626
MIAC	-4	St. Thomas	655
MIAC	-7	Gustavus Adolphus	1452
MWC	-2	Lawrence	17457
MWC	-4	Carroll	800
NCAC	1	Wooster	21616
NCAC	-2	Wittenberg	21385
NESCAC	8	Williams	15
NESCAC	8	Trinity (Conn.)	441
NESCAC	-3	Bates	24
NESCAC	3	Amherst	15964
NEWMAC	1	Worcester Polytech	11428
NEWMAC	10	Springfield	108
NIIC	6	Aurora	142
NJAC	1	William Paterson	22
NJAC	-6	Rutger-Newark	49
NJAC	6	Ramapo	792
NJAC	-6	New Jersey City	182
NWC	3	Puget Sound	16076
OAC	5	Wilmington	1373
OAC	-3	Ohio Northern	2049
OAC	7	John Carroll	975
OAC	-1	Baldwin-Wallace	10962
ODAC	-2	Virginia Wesleyan	1432
ODAC	2	Randolph-Macon	8723
ODAC	1	Hampden-Sydney	5091
SCAC	-7	Trinity (Texas)	226
SCAC	6	Southwestern	99
SCIAC	10	Pomona-Pitzer	22
SCIAC	2	Occidental	3676
SUNYAC	-7	Potsdam State	76
SUNYAC	-1	Cortland State	226
UAA	7	Washington U.	147
UAA	2	Rochester	3325
UAA	4	NYU	867
UAA	2	Carnegie Mellon	7440
USAC	-4	Methodist	6
WIAC	7	Whitewater	1937
WIAC	3	Stout	7458
WIAC	8	Stevens Point	603
WIAC	-6	Platteville	172
WIAC	-3	Oshkosh	3261
WIAC	-3	La Crosse	48

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on January 28, 2006, 12:37:58 PM

Ok. I am not sure why these charts are valuable. Any insights for me?

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 28, 2006, 02:35:30 PM

Final: #2 Wooster 99 Earlham 63

Wooster was led by Tim Vandervaart with 26 points, 12 boards, 6 assists and 4 steals. Also for Wooster, James Cooper had 20 points and freshman Brandon Johnson chipped in 15 points.

Wooster shot 63% today, made 8 three pointers and outrebounded the Quakers by 23 boards. Brandon Miller had 32 points for Earlham.

Wooster moves to 18-1, 10-0 NCAC. :) Next up is Allegheny on 2/1

GO SCOTS!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 28, 2006, 05:25:02 PM

Final: Emory & Henry 101 #18 Randolph-Macon 89

Big upset here as the #18 team goes down. Emory & Henry is not that good of a team. Wooster beat them earlier this year 150 to 101 on E&H's home floor, so I am having trouble understanding how RMC lost this game. The ODAC seems a little down this year with no great teams in their conference?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 28, 2006, 05:53:57 PM

The 'system' teams can all rise up and beat someone - it's the nature of the beast.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 28, 2006, 06:27:45 PM

I don't know if Macon is back at full strength yet (All-American Justin Wansley has been injured, did not play Wednesday). E&H is also at .500 now and has won its past six home games.

But yes, no great teams in the ODAC. The end of December and beginning of January proved that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 28, 2006, 08:07:02 PM

For the most part, it's been a good day to be in the Top 25. Lots of double-digit victories for ranked teams.

UW-River Falls surprises UW-Oshkosh 58-56. River Falls has just four wins in conference -- two over winless Superior and one a piece over Stout and Oshkosh.

They aren't ranked, but Stevens Point lost to Edgewood by 1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 28, 2006, 08:55:43 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on January 28, 2006, 08:07:02 PM
For the most part, it's been a good day to be in the Top 25. Lots of double-digit victories for ranked teams.

UW-River Falls surprises UW-Oshkosh 58-56. River Falls has just four wins in conference -- two over winless Superior and one a piece over Stout and Oshkosh.

They aren't ranked, but Stevens Point lost to Edgewood by 1.

I thought that the LMC never ever beat the WIAC! :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 28, 2006, 09:23:35 PM

Indeed, Wansley did not play today either.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 28, 2006, 09:39:04 PM

Witt systematically dismantles Denison, 74-49, giving up just 13 points in the first half.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 28, 2006, 11:29:54 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 28, 2006, 08:55:43 PM
I thought that the LMC never ever beat the WIAC! :o

That's actually Point's second loss to an LMC team... they lost to league leading Lakeland earlier this season.

Point has lost 7 games this season, by an average of six points... who says that experience counts for nothing? (Point has 4 Freshmen averaging 15+ minutes).

Ironically, even though they've lost 4 non-conference games (after not losing a regular season game against non-con opponents for 5 seasons) and have a really young team, like I said above, and lost to Oshkosh on Wednesday, the Pointer's back their way into the conference lead, [EDIT... sorry, they're a half game behind both Oshkosh and Stout, tied with Whitewater] as Oshkosh and Whitewater BOTH lose conference games tonight.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 28, 2006, 11:43:45 PM

Oh, that wacky WIAC. Put on a blindfold and throw darts at a dartboard to pick your winners if you're in the WIAC pick'em game, folks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 28, 2006, 11:48:24 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 28, 2006, 11:43:45 PM
Oh, that wacky WIAC. Put on a blindfold and throw darts at a dartboard to pick your winners if you're in the WIAC pick'em game, folks.

Mostly true, but make sure you have a really tiny area labelled 'Superior'. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 28, 2006, 11:49:12 PM

For all you east-coast night owls who have nothing better to do on a Saturday night... ::)

...there's a good 'un going on out at Eagle Rock. #16 Occidental is leading Pomona-Pitzer 40-38 with about 10:00 left. To listen in, follow the link from the front page of this site.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 29, 2006, 12:00:03 AM

Quote from: Coach C on January 28, 2006, 12:37:58 PM
Ok. I am not sure why these charts are valuable. Any insights for me?

I just wanted to see if anyone would really do it ;D.

Weighted averages will give you an idea of the current opinions of teams .......and.....uh such.......really I don't know I just thought it might be interesting

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 29, 2006, 12:09:02 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 28, 2006, 11:48:24 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 28, 2006, 11:43:45 PM
Oh, that wacky WIAC. Put on a blindfold and throw darts at a dartboard to pick your winners if you're in the WIAC pick'em game, folks.

Mostly true, but make sure you have a really tiny area labelled 'Superior'. ;)

Eh, it doesn't have to be that small... just stick it up in the extreme upper-lefthand corner!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 29, 2006, 12:20:40 AM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 29, 2006, 12:09:02 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 28, 2006, 11:48:24 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 28, 2006, 11:43:45 PM
Oh, that wacky WIAC. Put on a blindfold and throw darts at a dartboard to pick your winners if you're in the WIAC pick'em game, folks.

Mostly true, but make sure you have a really tiny area labelled 'Superior'. ;)

Eh, it doesn't have to be that small... just stick it up in the extreme upper-lefthand corner!

:D :D :D :D :D :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 29, 2006, 12:22:13 AM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 29, 2006, 12:09:02 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 28, 2006, 11:48:24 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 28, 2006, 11:43:45 PM
Oh, that wacky WIAC. Put on a blindfold and throw darts at a dartboard to pick your winners if you're in the WIAC pick'em game, folks.

Mostly true, but make sure you have a really tiny area labelled 'Superior'. ;)

Eh, it doesn't have to be that small... just stick it up in the extreme upper-lefthand corner!

Won't cut it. In blind-fold darts I release late (I'm right-handed) and throw high - you got me pickin' Superior just about every game!

(Oh right, you're TRYING to sabotage me! ;) ;D)

May have to give up blind-fold darts anyway. It has so far led to the deaths of 4 bar-maids, 6 spectators, and 3 competitors - I'm afraid the cops are starting to get suspicious.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 29, 2006, 12:22:58 AM

#16 Occidental pulls it out, downing the Sagehens 53-52.

If anyone was listening, rest assured that the losing squad was in fact Pomona-Pitzer, and not Claremont(-Mudd-Scripps) as the Oxy announcer kept saying. He can be forgiven, as all five of these schools are collectively known as "the Claremont Colleges." (http://www.claremont.edu/)

At one point, the Pomona fans were heard to cheer "Safe-ty-Scho-ol." to the Oxy fans. :D

BTW, it has been suggested that the Pomona-Pitzer mascot (Sagehens) is the only necessarily female mascot in D3, but I don't know if this was every proved. Can anyone affirm or deny?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 29, 2006, 12:25:24 AM

You aren't counting womens' teams, right, such as the Kenyon Ladies, or the Oberlin Yeowomen, or the CMS Athenas.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 29, 2006, 12:29:02 AM

Quote from: smedindy on January 29, 2006, 12:25:24 AM
You aren't counting womens' teams, right, such as the Kenyon Ladies, or the Oberlin Yeowomen, or the CMS Athenas.

Um, right. I suppose I could have phrased that better, but I had several distractions at the time. :-[ (That also accounts for my asking if it was "every" proved.) ::)

What I'm wondering is if there are any other MEN's teams playing under a nickname that is necessarily female.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 29, 2006, 12:31:51 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 29, 2006, 12:22:13 AM
Won't cut it. In blind-fold darts I release late (I'm right-handed) and throw high - you got me pickin' Superior just about every game!

I may have found your problem... a righty releasing late (depending on their follow-through) would hit low, not high. Think of it like throwing a ball... if you release it too late (REALLY too late, but it proves my point) then you throw the ball at your shoes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 29, 2006, 12:36:46 AM

I checked, not in D-3, though Delaware are the Fighting Blue Hens.

What I find funny is that Muhlenberg are the Mules for both men's and women's (and the D-2 school that is the Mules use Jennies for the women's teams).

Also, Fairfield are the Stags for men's and women's (think about it). It was funny, I saw a Fairfield / St. Peter's womens hoop writeups and it was the Peahens against the Stags. Hmmmm.... ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 29, 2006, 12:39:49 AM

PS,

I'm pretty much a side-arm guy with darts. Hence, late = left.

But could you testify at my up-coming trial? The prosecutor decided to follow through with all those 'near-dart-board' deaths - perhaps you could convince the court that MY throws would have only punctured their feet! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 29, 2006, 12:41:37 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 29, 2006, 12:29:02 AMWhat I'm wondering is if there are any other MEN's teams playing under a nickname that is necessarily female.

The Fighting Violets of New York University come pretty darn close. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 29, 2006, 12:49:44 AM

Violets? Since I do like purple as a color, I don't mind it that much.

It could be worse, they could be named the "Raw Umber" or "Thistle" (The Box of 64 - knows all!)

Nothing tops the Vincennes Lincoln High School Alices here in Indiana...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 29, 2006, 12:50:19 AM

Ah, dueling 'comedy' riffs on a Saturday night - a clear sign that the top 25 held mostly to form! Just two upsets (at 18 and 21), a couple of close games, and a whole bunch of predictable blow-outs.

With nothing REAL to discuss, we return you now to stags and violets vs. the legal risks of blind-fold darts. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 29, 2006, 12:55:49 AM

Common law murder, as everyone knows (everyone I talk to, anyway ;D), is a malice crime, and statutory murder is a specific intent crime. Unless there's something you're not telling us, I doubt that the prosecutor will be able to prove the necessary mens rea from the fact that you throw darts like a girl. Therefore you wouldn't need to run through the Daubert factors to qualify Point Special as an expert witness so he can testify on your behalf.

Of course, if your dart game is so awful as to amount to criminal negligence, you might be looking at a stretch for manslaughter... :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 29, 2006, 01:10:32 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 29, 2006, 12:55:49 AM
Of course, if your dart game is so awful as to amount to criminal negligence, you might be looking at a stretch for manslaughter... :)

See, I really don't think you'd have to worry about manslaughter... If they're anywhere near a dartboard, then they're knowingly putting themselves at risk, blindfolded or otherwise... and you're not being particularly reckless in your actions (you're just following the "rules" of the game!)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 29, 2006, 01:12:35 AM

Now David,

You managed to combine sexist and inaccurate in a single post! (Admittedly, sexist and inaccurate USUALLY go together.)

I've yet to see a female whole copied my side-arm motion - they have always done the same old, boring vertical throw. I used to do that too, but found a throw with the elbow at only about a 30 degree angle (but my shoulder dropped about 30 degrees, so it really is side-arm) worked better for me.

BTW, absent a blind-fold my dart game is actually pretty good - I've won a couple of tourneys and lots of bar bets.

Oh, s*** - I'm blowing the comedy routine now!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 29, 2006, 01:14:34 AM

Quote from: smedindy on January 29, 2006, 12:49:44 AM
Violets? Since I do like purple as a color, I don't mind it that much.

How do we know that they're named after the color? They could be named after the flower ... or after the little girl in Peanuts. It's an absurd reach for any of the three possibilities to be described as "fighting".

Quote from: smedindy on January 29, 2006, 12:49:44 AMIt could be worse, they could be named the "Raw Umber" or "Thistle" (The Box of 64 - knows all!)

Raw Umber rocks as a nickname. I can hear the P.A. announcer now during the player introductions: "Let's get ready to ... raaaaw umberrrr!"

I may even see if I can talk my beach volleyball team into calling itself Raw Umber next summer.

Crayolawise, however, I was always a burnt sienna fan.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 29, 2006, 01:21:04 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 29, 2006, 12:39:49 AM
But could you testify at my up-coming trial? The prosecutor decided to follow through with all those 'near-dart-board' deaths - perhaps you could convince the court that MY throws would have only punctured their feet! ;D

...but then...

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 29, 2006, 01:12:35 AM
BTW, absent a blind-fold my dart game is actually pretty good - I've won a couple of tourneys and lots of bar bets.

I'm pretty sure I can get the former statement admitted, at least as a prior inconsisitent statement, and perhaps as a party admission or a statement against interest. You haven't got a dart-punctured leg to stand on, my friend. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 29, 2006, 01:22:46 AM

Violet was actually kind of a bad-ass in the early Peanuts. No, she wasn't Lucy - but she had a sharp tone and put Charlie Brown in his place a few times. And she was the mud-pie queen.

The NYU media guide says the nickname originated from the 1880's when it was customary to plant Violets around the old NYU buildings. However, no one knows if the school adopted the color first, or adopted the nickname first.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 29, 2006, 01:55:06 AM

Now David, we all know that d3hoops.com postings are inadmissible in court by ruling of, um, help me out here, guys; who was it that ruled that these posts were not admissible? I've got it - Alito! Yes, Judge Alito ruled that postings on d3hoops.com cannot be admitted as evidence since anyone posting on said site is obviously an idiot, and we cannot allow evidence from known idiots.

You MAY not want to include the preceding citation on your California Bar Exam.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 29, 2006, 08:41:55 AM

Quote from: smedindy on January 29, 2006, 12:25:24 AM
You aren't counting womens' teams, right, such as the Kenyon Ladies, or the Oberlin Yeowomen, or the CMS Athenas.

or the Hardin-Simmons Cowgirls. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dansand on January 29, 2006, 09:50:55 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 29, 2006, 01:14:34 AM
Crayolawise, however, I was always a burnt sienna fan.

Friday night in D-I, Marist "burnt Siena." ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 29, 2006, 11:08:35 AM

Oh dan, ..........dan dan dan. ::) :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 29, 2006, 02:56:48 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 28, 2006, 08:55:43 PM
Quote from: gordonmann on January 28, 2006, 08:07:02 PM
They aren't ranked, but Stevens Point lost to Edgewood by 1.

I thought that the LMC never ever beat the WIAC! :o

Yeah, I witnessed both losses to Lakeland and Edgewood. I have no problem with the Lakeland loss. If you want to read my rant on the Edgewood game, feel free to check the WIAC or LMC page. Please keep children under 13 from viewing though! j/k.

With Whitewater and Oshkosh losing, you can forget about a Pool C bid...though La Crosse and Stout are both still in the running.

Point's inexperience this year will only help them next year...at least that's what I keep repeating to myself to keep me from finding a sharp object and doing harm to my cats or myself! lol. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 29, 2006, 06:01:23 PM

Lakeland took Hope to the wire and could have won in Holland. It took a 10-0 run very late in the game for Hope to survive.

Lakeland hasn't lost since and is 17-4, they play good defense as all Wisc. schools seem too.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 29, 2006, 06:03:01 PM

Final from Elhurst: Augustana 63, Elmhurst 60.

Since the last poll, Augie has won @IWU and @Elmhurst! While I don't expect them to jump the queue and reach #1, I'd be disappointed if they didn't get any #1 votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 29, 2006, 06:49:25 PM

With road wins over Illinois Wesleyan and Elmhurst and a home win vs North Central, I think Augustana now has more quality wins than the teams receiving 1st place votes in the current poll. I am also interested to see if the Vikings get 1st place votes.

As I posted on CCIW Chat, I think Elmhurst should make the new poll. If you're voting for Augustana, IWU, and North Central, I don't know how you could leave Elmhurst off your ballot -- they've lost by 4 and 3 to Augie, defeated IWU, and won at North Central. I've seen Elmhurst 3 times and I'm positive they're a Top 25 team...interested to see what the voters see on paper.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 29, 2006, 06:54:12 PM

The middle to end of the top 25 is close enough - it is likely that Elmhurst could be 26-30 in many people's minds, so I can see leaving them off.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 29, 2006, 06:56:24 PM

smed,

While Elmhurst, alas, does have some bad early-season losses, I doubt ANYONE in the bottom half of the top 25 has their resume of impressive wins.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 29, 2006, 07:15:41 PM

Ypsi - the losses counter balance the wins. You can't extol one without taking the other into account. I'm a big believer in 'the body of work'.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 29, 2006, 07:19:14 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 29, 2006, 06:56:24 PM
smed,

While Elmhurst, alas, does have some bad early-season losses, I doubt ANYONE in the bottom half of the top 25 has their resume of impressive wins.

Millikin isn't an early-season loss.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 29, 2006, 07:48:23 PM

smed,

Agreed, but please note that 4 of their 6 losses are to teams currently ranked in the top 7! I'm not suggesting they belong above the low 20s or high teens, and such teams are SUPPOSED to lose to top 7 teams. Find me ANYONE in the bottom half of the top 25 with wins over teams of the IWU and NCC caliber.

Pat,

Millikin is a total enigma - how can a team with their record have wins over both Elmhurst AND NCC (an take IWU to the wire)? My take is that they are much better than their record, but extremely streaky and currently wracked with injuries. (Arrgh! You've gone and forced a Titan to say something good about the Blue!)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 29, 2006, 07:57:13 PM

As well as Augustana has played, I'm not sure they'll pry many No. 1 votes away this week.

The top three teams won out. Lawrence held Grinnell to a really low number of points and is still undefeated. Witt's only loss is to Wooster. Wooster's only loss is to Baldwin-Wallace.

Put that next to UW-Stout (Augustana's loss), even if that was a while ago, and that will make it tougher to convince a signficant number of people to switch their top vote.

As for Millikin, enigma or not, they are 9-9. For all their close games, they are 2-5 since early January. It doesn't help Elmhurst's cause to be one of those two loses.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 29, 2006, 08:29:23 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on January 29, 2006, 07:57:13 PM
As well as Augustana has played, I'm not sure they'll pry many No. 1 votes away this week.

The top three teams won out. Lawrence held Grinnell to a really low number of points and is still undefeated. Witt's only loss is to Wooster. Wooster's only loss is to Baldwin-Wallace.

Put that next to UW-Stout (Augustana's loss), even if that was a while ago, and that will make it tougher to convince a signficant number of people to switch their top vote.

As for Millikin, enigma or not, they are 9-9. For all their close games, they are 2-5 since early January. It doesn't help Elmhurst's cause to be one of those two loses.

As I said, I don't expect Augie to BE #1, but NO #1 votes would surprise me a bit. As you noted, the top 3 all held serve, but none had a week NEARLY as impressive as Augie's.

You're correct that Millikin's conference record is 2-5. But what does it tell you that the 2 wins have been Elmhurst AND NCC (meanwhile being NPU's ONLY two victims) - they ARE an enigma. Obviously it doesn't HELP Elmhurst to be one of those two victims, but it didn't keep NCC out!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 29, 2006, 08:51:26 PM

Voters could also choose to wait, considering No. 1 and No. 2 face off on Saturday. Some No. 1 votes will be up for grabs after that game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 29, 2006, 09:01:25 PM

Pat,

Good point! I hadn't noticed that on the schedule. I hope your voters have long memories, because Augie's schedule is pretty modest THIS week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 29, 2006, 09:34:19 PM

The question is for me now is IWU ALL that. Sure, they're a fine team, but the struggles of late, and what I saw in C'ville in November, they're not as good as Wooster or Witt and it tells me their first half issues against Wabash weren't a total fluke.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 29, 2006, 10:21:28 PM

Quote from: sac on January 29, 2006, 06:01:23 PMLakeland hasn't lost since and is 17-4, they play good defense as all Wisc. schools seem too.

They also run the best motion offense I've seen in the past couple of years. I think that any LMC team will be up against it in the tournament (it remains to be seen how the NAC will fare in March after the merger), but Lakeland may have the best chance any LMC team has had in quite a while of pulling off a major first-round upset.

Quote from: Titan Q on January 29, 2006, 06:49:25 PMAs I posted on CCIW Chat, I think Elmhurst should make the new poll. If you're voting for Augustana, IWU, and North Central, I don't know how you could leave Elmhurst off your ballot -- they've lost by 4 and 3 to Augie, defeated IWU, and won at North Central. I've seen Elmhurst 3 times and I'm positive they're a Top 25 team...interested to see what the voters see on paper.

I agree that Elmhurst is Top 25 caliber in terms of their talent level, but the 'jays have played up to that talent level with less frequency than a lot of other teams. I can only go by what I've seen in this regard; I saw Carnegie Mellon on Friday night, and while I suspect that the Tartans will land at about #17 or #18 in this coming week's poll after their split @ Chicago and Wash U, I have to say that on a neutral court I'd take Elmhurst over CMU. But a voter can't just wave away the fact that Elmhurst has six losses, or that one of them was a woeful home stumble against an iffy Millikin team.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 29, 2006, 07:48:23 PMMillikin is a total enigma - how can a team with their record have wins over both Elmhurst AND NCC (an take IWU to the wire)? My take is that they are much better than their record, but extremely streaky and currently wracked with injuries. (Arrgh! You've gone and forced a Titan to say something good about the Blue!)

I don't know if they are "much better than their record", Chuck. They have no good non-conference wins. They have the two big CCIW upsets and the near-upset against Illinois Wesleyan, but they've also lost twice to North Park and were absolutely pasted by Wheaton in a game in which the Big Blue were down by double digits for 35 minutes and were losing by 29 when Wheaton coach Bill Harris called off the dogs. I also don't know if "wracked with injuries" is accurate. They've lost one starter, spot-up shooter Mike Gavic (who was their third or fourth option on offense), to a torn ACL, and a bench player (Byron Graven). Other CCIW teams (NPU and Carthage) have sustained worse in-season losses.

Quote from: gordonmann on January 29, 2006, 07:57:13 PMThe top three teams won out. Lawrence held Grinnell to a really low number of points and is still undefeated. Witt's only loss is to Wooster. Wooster's only loss is to Baldwin-Wallace.

Put that next to UW-Stout (Augustana's loss), even if that was a while ago, and that will make it tougher to convince a signficant number of people to switch their top vote.

Why is this a bad loss, Gordon? UW-Stout is 15-4, 8-3 and the co-leader of the WIAC. The Blue Devils beat Augie by four points up in Menomonie, WI. I can see keeping Wooster above Augie based upon their comparative results against UW-Stout (Wooster beat the Blue Devils by eight in the Wooster gym at the beginning of the season), but Augie's loss was hardly disgraceful.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 29, 2006, 10:26:55 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on January 29, 2006, 07:57:13 PM
...Put that next to UW-Stout ...

GM,

You imply that the Stout loss was a "worse" loss than Witt's to Woo, Woo to Bald-Wally, and Larry to...

Well, you imply that the Stout loss is better than the first two.

I'm not so sure. Woo lost to Bald-Wally at home. That, I believe, is why the voters have placed Witt over Woo, even though Woo beat Witt. So we've got Witt losing, in OT, at Woo, Witt losing at home, to Bald-Wally, Lawrence losing to noone, and Augie losing at Stout. You've then got to look at who's been challenged more.

Lawrence has had a few games where they've been challenged... but their strength of schedule doesn't rival Augie's. One could argue that Larry U wouldn't be undefeated if they played in the CCIW.

I'm going to go ahead and say that Augie deserves to be placed ahead of COW because their loss was on the road instead of at home... so now it's just Witt vs. Augie.

Let's look at the losses... Witt, like I said, lost at COW, Augie lost at Stout. Which of these is a "better" loss? One might argue that, looking at the records would point to Witt... but look closer at Stout's opponents. Stout lost at Wooster (as did Wittenberg) but they then loss three conference games in a row in early January. These losses were by 2, and in double overtime. The third loss was against River Falls, who, at just 5-14, appear to be a rather poor team... but this team just beat Oshkosh, who was leading the WIAC.
Would Witt have lost those games? It's hard to say... but one could easily make the arguement that Witt's record wouldn't be the same if they played in the WIAC (even in a "down" year for the WIAC like this year).

All-in-all, I think it's essentially a wash, but I think that Augie needs to be spoken about in the same breath as COW, Witt and Larry. I tend to agree with Pat... let's wait until the NCAC giants duke it out a second time, and see how Augie does against North Park and Carthage. These are two bottom CCIW teams, both games at home... but just ask Elmhurst and NCC how much fun it was playing against the other bottom CCIW, the Blue Boys of Millikin.

Quote from: smedindy on January 29, 2006, 09:34:19 PM
The question is for me now is IWU ALL that.

I think that's a valid questions, Smed. While IWU had some impressive early-season wins, there's something definately not Normal in Bloomington (sorry!). I can acknowledge that, on paper, the Titans are very talented. They've shown that in past seasons, getting it done in the CCIW. But there's a reason why you play the game. There are untangibles and in a league like the CCIW, there's nothing to be taken for granted.

I would say that IWU has just had a few bumps in the road, but, while they're a few bounces from being 8-0 in conference, they're also a few bounces from being 2-6. You've really got to look at MORE than just "talent" to figure out what's gone a-miss.

Looking at the last loss, they had 21 turnovers and missed 9 free-throws. In the loss against Elmhurst, they had 16 turnovers and made 5/12 ft's. These don't seem like the qualities of a program gearing up for a conference championship and beyond... On the season, they've turned the ball over 32 more times than their opponents and committed 9 more fouls. All-told, things don't seem to be running on all cylinders.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 29, 2006, 10:28:46 PM

I don't see where Gordon said the loss was "bad" -- just what it was in comparison to others.

A bad loss is losing to a sub-.500 team. This is not a bad loss and Gordon never said it was.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 29, 2006, 10:30:54 PM

I think the fact that Wooster lost to B-W AFTER they beat Witt is why they're #2 to Witt's #1. Timing, as always, the key to life.

Quotebut one could easily make the arguement that Witt's record wouldn't be the same if they played in the WIAC (even in a "down" year for the WIAC like this year).

No one's record would be the same if they played in an uber-conference, though. You have the company you keep, and sure the WIAC is much stronger than the NCAC top to bottom, that doesn't mean that Witt and Wooster aren't fine teams. And having seen Wooster in person, I can assure you they are as good or better than the Wooster team that went to Salem.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 29, 2006, 10:40:39 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 29, 2006, 06:49:25 PM
As I posted on CCIW Chat, I think Elmhurst should make the new poll.

Though Elmhurst has shown they are a good team, I'm not really sure that they deserve to make the new poll. Have they had good showings against good teams? Yes, they have. They've beaten conference foes North Central and Illinois Wesleyan, and they were right there with Augie, twice. But, as you've said on Hoopsville before, you need to look at the entire "body of work." Though Elmhurst has performed well in lots of these games, they still have 6 losses, including two to teams that are right around .500 in Millikin and UW-Platt. And playing right with a team can only count for so much... I mean, a moral-victory is only a victory in your mind... and though this can turn into a win on paper, there's no direct corollary. Just ask Carthage... their "close call" against IWU turned into two close calls against Elmhurst and Augie... and when you follow that up with a loss to North Central, all it adds up to is an 0-4 record.

I don't discount that Elmhurst is a good team. But I think they need to do a little more than beat the teams as their level in conference, even if it is a top conference.

I think the best thing for Elmhurst (and IWU and NCC for that matter) is the conference tournament. These three teams, along with Augie, are going to have a battle until the finish... and an absolute war for one weekend in late February.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 29, 2006, 10:49:29 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 29, 2006, 10:26:55 PM
I'm not so sure. Woo lost to Bald-Wally at home. That, I believe, is why the voters have placed Witt over Woo, even though Woo beat Witt. So we've got Witt losing, in OT, at Woo, Witt losing at home, to Bald-Wally, Lawrence losing to noone, and Augie losing at Stout. You've then got to look at who's been challenged more.

Lawrence has had a few games where they've been challenged... but their strength of schedule doesn't rival Augie's. One could argue that Larry U wouldn't be undefeated if they played in the CCIW.

I'm going to go ahead and say that Augie deserves to be placed ahead of COW because their loss was on the road instead of at home... so now it's just Witt vs. Augie.

First, a couple of corrections. 1) Witt's loss at Woo was not in OT, it was by three. The margin was provided by a 25 footer by Wooster's James Cooper with 0:04.1 left. The game was at Wooster, true, but it was during Wooster's Christmas break, so the crowd factor was not what it could have been. All in all a good loss for Witt, but not an OT loss. 2) You then have "Witt losing at home to Bald-Wally" (which is a nickname I've never heard, BTW). Of course that's a typo, it was Wooster with that loss, as you clearly know. But it bears mentioning that the loss was in double overtime.

Now, as to the comparative results of Wooster and Augie vs. Stout. What you say is true: Augie lost at Stout, and Stout lost at Wooster (again, early in the season with a smallish, docile crowd). But Wooster beat Stout decisively. The Scots led by 8 at the break, then went cold early in the second half, with Stout climbing back to a 64-61 lead, before Wooster took control and ran out to an eight-point victory. I was at that game, and I was never seriously concerned about the outcome.

Augie has had a great start to the season, and deserves to be ranked very highly (although, frankly, I have to wonder how overrated North Central and, especially, IWU are). But I don't think they merit a ranking ahead of Wittenberg or Wooster at this point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 29, 2006, 11:02:12 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 29, 2006, 10:49:29 PM
"Witt losing at home to Bald-Wally" (which is a nickname I've never heard, BTW).

That is a typo... I meant Woo. I'd go back and change what I wrote, but I assume that people who would read my post will read yours as well, so it would be pointless.

And I came up with "Bald-Wally" all by my lonesome, sitting right here at my computer! ;D I like calling schools by shortened versions of their name... 'cause I think it sounds cool... maybe this will catch on!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 29, 2006, 11:16:02 PM

David,

Augie beat NCC at home, then IWU in Bloomington, then Elmhurst in Elmhurst, in three consecutive games.

Could Witt, Woo, Lawrence, Hope, Albion, etc., have done that streak? Obviously we will never know, but my personal answer is NO. With no disrespect intended whatsoever to the previously named teams, that is why I am putting Augie at the top of my Posters' Poll ballot.

Likewise, Elmhurst will be on my ballot somewhere, because I just don't think anyone in the bottom half of the top 25 has anywhere near their overall resume - nevermind their six losses!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 29, 2006, 11:30:41 PM

Mr Y--I believe Hope could have!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 29, 2006, 11:33:40 PM

Since we're lobbying for Augie I'll lobby against it

Augie has had a fast rise in the polls the last two weeks. They are slowly gaining attention as a top 5 team. I don't think you move a team from out of the top 10 to #1 in 2 weeks unless a whole boatload of top 10 teams lose and that doesn't happen.

Augie is getting plenty of respect in the polls right now..........which I'll again remind people are a collection of individual opinons.

I'm with Pat, lets wait and see how next Saturday shakes out......the current top 6 did nothing this week to lose a place in the poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 29, 2006, 11:43:50 PM

QuoteLikewise, Elmhurst will be on my ballot somewhere, because I just don't think anyone in the bottom half of the top 25 has anywhere near their overall resume - nevermind their six losses!

Have you dared to look outside that box and look at other teams that may be ignored?? The gamut of teams needs examining, not just the allegedly sacrosanct top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 29, 2006, 11:44:40 PM

Quote from: sac on January 29, 2006, 11:33:40 PM
I'm with Pat, lets wait and see how next Saturday shakes out......the current top 6 did nothing this week to lose a place in the poll.

Aside from IWU, you mean, I assume.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 29, 2006, 11:53:04 PM

ooooh yes of course Pat.......I was thinking about my top 6.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 29, 2006, 11:53:14 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 29, 2006, 11:16:02 PM
David,

Augie beat NCC at home, then IWU in Bloomington, then Elmhurst in Elmhurst, in three consecutive games.

Could Witt, Woo, Lawrence, Hope, Albion, etc., have done that streak? Obviously we will never know, but my personal answer is NO.

I agree that we will never know, so with that caveat my personal answer would be YES. If I were voting, I'd answer that hypothetical question YES for anyone I think should be ranked ahead of Augustana, which at a minimum includes Wittenberg and Wooster. More to the point, I'd favor Witt and Woo over Augie in a neutral court game, which I think is the essence of ranking teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 29, 2006, 11:57:02 PM

smed,

Yes, and I still don't see anyone.

sac,

Like I said, I can't prove it, but I have my doubts about Hope pulling off the trifecta.

Pat,

Since you knew he was directly addressing me, that was just cruel! ;D

I'm STILL convinced that man-for-man IWU has the most talented team in the country. I have no clue what is going wrong. My heart still says they will win it all in Salem; my head says if they don't turn it around REAL quick they won't ever get the chance to show it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 30, 2006, 12:13:21 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 29, 2006, 10:49:29 PM

Augie has had a great start to the season, and deserves to be ranked very highly (although, frankly, I have to wonder how overrated North Central and, especially, IWU are). But I don't think they merit a ranking ahead of Wittenberg or Wooster at this point.

DC, North Central is not overrated. They play in a tough league unlike Witt and Woo. The three losses NCC have are by a grand total of 10pts. Two of them being on the road. The other being an overtime loss at home. In all three losses, NCC held the lead all but the last 2 min of each game. NCC was ahead of Augie by 3 with 1:51 remaining when a bad call by an official fouled out its point guard and best perimeter defender. Rick Harrigan (augie's best player) scored eight of the final 9pts of the game during that span. The NCC's pg that fouled out was defending him and was doing a fairly decent job. NCC loses at Millikin by 1 due to bad ft shooting down the stretch. The elmhurst loss in overtime was due to elmhurst having a great night. Offensively, they hit just about everything and got career nights from 2 players that normally are not scorers for them. NCC could easily be undefeated right now at 18-0. I'm convinced NCC could beat any of the top teams in the country. As far as IWU is concerned, I've only seened them once this year so I can't argue on their behalf. However, There is no rest in the CCIW. Every night is a grind and I believe IWU's losses are a direct result of the strength of the league. Their only losses are to the other top three teams in the league NCC, Augie, and Elmhurst. All are top 25 teams in my opinion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 30, 2006, 09:24:22 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 29, 2006, 11:57:02 PM
Like I said, I can't prove it, but I have my doubts about Hope pulling off the trifecta.

Well I can't prove it either. So I guess we're stuck. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 30, 2006, 09:25:27 AM

I saw Lawrence play at Grinnell this week, and while it's not a traditional game, the Vikings were so impressive. Their defense was incredible and their ballhandling and composure of every player on the bench was awesome. The coach does annoy me, even though I recognize how truly good he is. I didn't think they could do much to improve in the second half and he came out with some adjustments that made the game much easier for them. Very solid team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 30, 2006, 09:42:52 AM

1. Witt (18-1, 9-1), wins over Wabash and at Denison
2. Woo (18-1, 10-0) wins at Kenyon and over Ealrham
3. Larry (16-0, 10-0) wins at Monmouth and at Grinnell
4. Hope (18-1, 7-1) wins at Tri-State and at Kalamazoo
5. IWU (15-3, 5-3) home loss to #7 Augustana, home win over Carthage
6. Albion (16-2, 7-1) wins at Olivet and over Adrian
7. Augustana (18-1, 8-0) wins at #5 IWU and at Elmhurst
8. Baldwin-Wallace (17-2, 11-1) wins over JCU and at Marietta
9. York (16-2, 6-2) wins at Galludet and over Salisbury
10. Amherst (16-2, 4-1) wins at Babson and over Colby and Bowdoin
11. North Central (15-3, 4-3) home loss to Elmhurst, win at Wheaton
12. Puget Sound (15-3, 9-1) wins over Lewis & Clark and Pacific
13. Wartburg (17-2, 10-1) wins at Central and over Dubuque and Simpson
14. CMU (15-3, 5-2) loss at Chicago, win at WashU
15. WPI (17-1, 7-1) wins at Clark and at home over Babson
16. Occidental (15-1, 6-0) wins over Mudd-Scripps and P-P
17. Miss Coll (17-1, 14-1) wins at Louisiana Coll, and over Austin and U of the Ozarks
18. R-MC (17-4, 12-2) home win over Lynchburg, loss at Emory & Henry and a win at Guilford
19. Stout (15-4, 8-3) wins over Eau-Claire and at Whitewater
20. Transy (16-, 7-1) wins at Franklin and at Anderson
21. Oshkosh (15-5, 8-3) win over Stevens Point, loss at River Falls
22. St. John Fisher (15-3, 6-1) wins over Alfred, and at Elmira and Ithaca
23. VA Wesleyan (18-3, 13-1) wins at Guilford and Emory & Henry
24. Lincoln (18-4) Idle this week.
25. Carroll (15-2, 9-1) home win over Ripon, wins at Grinnell and Illinois College

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 30, 2006, 04:57:22 PM

The new poll is out...

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/

I guess my thoughts on Elmhurst being a team that should be in the Top 25 are based on how well they have played against ranked teams, even though they lost 4 of the games...

vs #4 Hope - lost at Hope by 17, but it was a tie game at 9:33 to play and a 5 pt game at 5:30

vs #5 Augustana - lost by 3 at Augie, lost by 3 at home

vs #6 Albion - lost on road by 8, but it was 65-64 with 2:29 to play

vs #8 Illinois Wesleyan - won at home by 8

vs #14 North Central - won on road by 3

I'd argue that if the poll is "right", teams 20-25 would have about a 1-5 record in the games listed above. Should team #20 win @ #4 Hope? Or on the road/at home vs #5 Augustana? Or @ #6 Albion? Or vs #8 Illinois Wesleyan? Or @ #14 North Central? I think the 20th ranked team could play well and go 1-5 there. Heck, #20 could play great and go 0-6 for that matter. So then I look at how close the game were, and Elmhurst was right in every one in the final minutes except Hope...and that game was a lot closer than the 17-point margin indicates. To me, I think there is a lot of evidence there to suggest that the Bluejays can play with some of the nation's top teams.

Regarding EC's two losses to non-ranked teams, I guess I do not believe losing at UW-Platteville by 1 on 2 FT's with :01 to play is a bad loss. That brings me to the home loss to Millikin being their only "bad loss." In addition to the fact that Millikin has proven they can play with good teams on certain nights (Millikin took IWU to OT and beat North Central), I guess I just feel that almost every team is going to have at least one "head scratcher" type game. Wooster went to OT vs Earlham...Wittenberg was only up 2 pts at Allegheny with :36 to play...Albion lost at home to Calvin, etc.

St. John Fisher (15-3) is ranked #21 with wins over Delaware Valley, Hobart, Fredonia St, Geneseo St (twice), Lake Erie, Cazenovia, Utica, Hartwick, Brockport St, Rochester, Rochester Tech, Alfred, Elmira, and Ithaca. Losses are to #7 Baldwin-Wallace (n), at Randolph-Macon, and at home to 6-12 Nazareth. Two questions. What would St. John Fisher's record be with Elmhurst's schedule and would they be ranked? What would Elmhurst's record be with St. John Fisher's schedule and how high would they be ranked?

I look at Elmhurst's complete body of work, including how the losses played out, and I see them as a Top 25 team. I concede that my opinion is affected by having seen the Bluejays play -- this is a team with one of the top players in NCAA Division III (Chris Martin), a really good 6-10 post player (Nick Michael), and a lot of solid role players around them. They're a good team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 30, 2006, 05:02:38 PM

Milestones in the Week 9 poll:

All-time highest ranking for:
#5 Augustana
#7 Baldwin-Wallace
#12 Occidental
#19 Transylvania
#23 Carroll

UW-Stevens Point receives no points; only the 3rd time in 103 polls that this has happened (the others being week 5 of this season and week 5 of 1999-00).

#8 Illinois Wesleyan is in the top 10 for the 38th time, tying conference foe Carthage for #7 on the all-time list in this category. The Titans can catch 6th-place Washington U. next week with their 39th top 10 week. #1 Wittenberg is in the top 10 for the 26th time, tying them for 15th with Buena Vista.

Congratulations to these great programs on their achievements.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 30, 2006, 05:46:20 PM

I have Elmhurst on my ballot but I still don't have a problem with the Jays not being in the Top 25.

Elmhurst has had cracks at good teams outside their conference and come up short. Losing to Millikin (who just got swept by North Park) doesn't help nor does losing to Platteville. No matter how it happened, Platteville is 9-9.

I agree with Q that each team should be allowed a "head scratcher" or two, like Albion-Calvin or Witt-Allegheny. But I also like to see teams beat quality opponents out of conference which Albion (B-W) and Witt (ONU) have done.

This isn't intended as a knock on the CCIW. I've been pretty high on their teams all year. IWU has been in my Top 10 all year. I've had three teams in the Top 15 for a while now. And I added a fourth (Elmhurst) this week.

Then again I was high on the CCIW teams last year, too, when they went 0-2 in the tournament. Tough opponents or not, home or away, at some point the CCIW teams need to beat ranked teams other than each other if they are the premier conference in D3. Beyond IWU-UPS there isn't much else to point to since early last season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 30, 2006, 06:25:17 PM

As a follow-up to Gordon's post, I thought I'd take a look at out-of-conference wins by top 25 teams over other top 25 teams:

#1 Wittenberg: defeated #19 Transylvania 62-51 (at Transylvania)
#2 Wooster: defeated #17 UW-Stout 90-82 (at Wooster)
#3 Lawrence: defeated #24 UW-Oshkosh 82-75 (OT) (at Lawrence)
#4 Hope: none
#5 Augustana: none
#6 Albion: defeated #7 Baldwin-Wallace 75-72 (at Allegheny/neutral site)
#7 Baldwin-Wallace: defeated #2 Wooster 113-108 (2 OT) (at Wooster); defeated #21 St. John Fisher 88-79 (at Westminster Pa./neutral site)
#8 Illinois Wesleyan: defeated #13 Puget Sound 104-87 (at Westmont/neutral site)
#9 York (Pa.): none
#10 Amherst: none
#11 Wartburg: defeated #24 UW-Oshkosh 65-57 (at Las Vegas/neutral site)
#12 Occidental: defeated #10 Amherst 73-68 (at Occidental)
#13 Puget Sound: none
#14 North Central: none
#15 WPI: none
#16 Mississippi College: none
#17 UW-Stout: defeated #5 Augustana 70-66 (at Stout)
#18 Carnegie Mellon: none
#19 Transylvania: none
#20 Virginia Wesleyan: none
#21 St. John Fisher: none
#22 Lincoln: none
#23 Carroll: none
#24 UW-Oshkosh: defeated #23 Carroll 70-69 (at Carroll)
#25 Trinity (Ct): none

I hope I haven't missed any.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 30, 2006, 06:43:14 PM

Had some time to kill, and was curious what schools have top teams in BOTH men's and women's bball.

Only three schools had top 25 teams on both polls, and they were in the same order on both: Hope (4th men, 7th women, an astonishing 1012 points out of 1250 for the two polls combined), Baldwin-Wallace (7th men, 8th women, a highly respectable 2nd place finish with 883 points), and Mississippi College (16th in each poll).

Five school had ranked men's teams, and women's teams good enough to receive votes: Lawrence (3rd men, 14 votes women), IWU (8th men, 1 vote women), Puget Sound (13th men, 16 votes women), Carroll (23rd men, 4 votes women), and UW-Oshkosh (24th men, 18 votes women).

Four schools had ranked women's teams, and men's teams good enough to receive votes: NYU (12th women, 19 votes men), Randolph-Macon (13th women, 50 votes men), Calvin (14th women, 27 votes men), and Rochester (24th women, 10 votes men).

Finally, two schools were unranked in either, but received votes in both: Bates (8 votes men, 27 votes women) and UW-LaCrosse (1 vote men, 12 votes women).

Apologies in advance if I missed anyone. Congrats to all (especially Hope and B-W).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: JMW1973 on January 30, 2006, 06:48:46 PM

Cortland goes 2-0 and LOSES a vote. What are these pollsters thinking?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 30, 2006, 07:13:56 PM

They're thinking a two point home win against Buffalo State isn't impressive - compared to what other teams may have done. Dropping from 2 to 1 point isn't like the end of the world.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2006, 08:42:07 PM

Quote from: JMW1973 on January 30, 2006, 06:48:46 PM
Cortland goes 2-0 and LOSES a vote. What are these pollsters thinking?

I believe they're thinking, damn, this Elmhurst team is pretty good, they should be ahead of Cortland State.

You can't look at the poll in isolation. You have to look at what all the other teams did, too.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bamm on January 30, 2006, 09:49:29 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 30, 2006, 04:57:22 PM
St. John Fisher (15-3) is ranked #21 with wins over Delaware Valley, Hobart, Fredonia St, Geneseo St (twice), Lake Erie, Cazenovia, Utica, Hartwick, Brockport St, Rochester, Rochester Tech, Alfred, Elmira, and Ithaca. Losses are to #7 Baldwin-Wallace (n), at Randolph-Macon, and at home to 6-12 Nazareth. Two questions. What would St. John Fisher's record be with Elmhurst's schedule and would they be ranked? What would Elmhurst's record be with St. John Fisher's schedule and how high would they be ranked?

General consensus on the Fisher/RMC game (@ RMC) was that Fisher was easily as good as RMC and could and/or should have pulled that game out. They didn't, too bad. A close-game loss on a neutral court to #7 Baldwin-Wallace is also not something a team should be ashamed of. I personally think that team is right where they belong in the poll -- they're not an elite national team, but they are a good team that will be able to compete with almost anyone in the country.

Now if you want to talk about an East team that shouldn't be getting votes... 12-6 Rochester is up for discussion after getting absolutely blown out at Chicago yesterday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on January 30, 2006, 10:23:51 PM

I think that many of the pollsters are thinking "Gee there are about 25 or 30 teams better than Cortland. At least"

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 31, 2006, 09:29:00 AM

Cortland has an awful schedule and they lost twice. Fisher took forever to get repsect last year with an undefeated run through a similar schedule. I think they are about where they need to be.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: devossed on January 31, 2006, 11:28:47 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 30, 2006, 04:57:22 PM

I think the 20th ranked team could play well and go 1-5 there. Heck, #20 could play great and go 0-6 for that matter...To me, I think there is a lot of evidence there to suggest that the Bluejays can play with some of the nation's top teams.

They could go 0-6 and shouldn't drop far at all, but unfortunately we're stuck with the subjectivity of human pollsters who wouldn't see that. I agree and think they can play with any top teams (look at the closeness of the games you pointed out) and do think they'll be a tough nut to crack come tourney time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 31, 2006, 11:40:04 AM

The same thing happens in the WIAC. There are a bunch of teams in the 18-30 range that would struggle to win four games in the WIAC, but we have to discount some of these teams because they beat up on each other. It's exactly the reason so many of the WIAC teams are getting votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 31, 2006, 01:07:40 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 31, 2006, 11:40:04 AM
The same thing happens in the WIAC. There are a bunch of teams in the 18-30 range that would struggle to win four games in the WIAC, but we have to discount some of these teams because they beat up on each other. It's exactly the reason so many of the WIAC teams are getting votes.

River Falls is a stellar 5-14 on the season and just 4-7 in conference yet, they did something Augustana couldn't do...go into Menomonie and beat Stout! River Falls also just upset Oshkosh at Karges after Oshkosh came in winning 12 of 13, or something like that. The top four teams have 3 losses and La Crosse is just a game back in the loss column.

Just curious if anyone wants to look this up...the WIAC has five of their nine teams within ONE game of 1st place.

How do the other conferences compare? Just curious.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Rhodes Scholar on January 31, 2006, 01:27:02 PM

Quote from: Old School on January 31, 2006, 01:07:40 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 31, 2006, 11:40:04 AM
The same thing happens in the WIAC. There are a bunch of teams in the 18-30 range that would struggle to win four games in the WIAC, but we have to discount some of these teams because they beat up on each other. It's exactly the reason so many of the WIAC teams are getting votes.

River Falls is a stellar 5-14 on the season and just 4-7 in conference yet, they did something Augustana couldn't do...go into Menomonie and beat Stout! River Falls also just upset Oshkosh at Karges after Oshkosh came in winning 12 of 13, or something like that. The top four teams have 3 losses and La Crosse is just a game back in the loss column.

Just curious if anyone wants to look this up...the WIAC has five of their nine teams within ONE game of 1st place.

How do the other conferences compare? Just curious.

The NJAC has three teams tied for first with 8-4 records, followed by three teams with 7-5 marks, followed by three more teams who are 5-7.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 31, 2006, 02:04:12 PM

Quote from: Old School on January 31, 2006, 01:07:40 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 31, 2006, 11:40:04 AM
The same thing happens in the WIAC. There are a bunch of teams in the 18-30 range that would struggle to win four games in the WIAC, but we have to discount some of these teams because they beat up on each other. It's exactly the reason so many of the WIAC teams are getting votes.

River Falls is a stellar 5-14 on the season and just 4-7 in conference yet, they did something Augustana couldn't do...go into Menomonie and beat Stout! River Falls also just upset Oshkosh at Karges after Oshkosh came in winning 12 of 13, or something like that. The top four teams have 3 losses and La Crosse is just a game back in the loss column.

Just curious if anyone wants to look this up...the WIAC has five of their nine teams within ONE game of 1st place.

How do the other conferences compare? Just curious.

Six teams in the NJAC within a game of first place.

River Falls has the benefit of familiarity with Stout, a short trip to Menomonie and the chance that Stout was overlooking them. Stout wasn't overlooking Augustana, I'm sure, since they were in the Top 20.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on January 31, 2006, 02:21:06 PM

Nine of the ten NJAC teams are still alive for one of the six playoff spots in the conference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 31, 2006, 05:15:19 PM

It's still way early for a lot of conferences to be blown apart yet. The NESCAC has five teams within two games and all five of them have 4 regional losses or less. They are just dominating the NE this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 31, 2006, 05:24:03 PM

As opposed to any other year?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 31, 2006, 07:47:53 PM

Quote from: Old School on January 31, 2006, 01:07:40 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 31, 2006, 11:40:04 AM
The same thing happens in the WIAC. There are a bunch of teams in the 18-30 range that would struggle to win four games in the WIAC, but we have to discount some of these teams because they beat up on each other. It's exactly the reason so many of the WIAC teams are getting votes.

River Falls is a stellar 5-14 on the season and just 4-7 in conference ...

I hadn't noiced that record 'til you pointed it out.

So RF is 1-7 nonconference and 4-7 in the WIAC - hmmm! And here I always thought you guys were tough! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 31, 2006, 10:13:34 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 31, 2006, 05:15:19 PM

It's still way early for a lot of conferences to be blown apart yet. The NESCAC has five teams within two games and all five of them have 4 regional losses or less. They are just dominating the NE this year.

Call me when they play a round-robin schedule otherwise their standings are completely irrelevant to any conversation comparing different conferences or regional records.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 31, 2006, 11:37:50 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 31, 2006, 05:15:19 PM
It's still way early for a lot of conferences to be blown apart yet. The NESCAC has five teams within two games and all five of them have 4 regional losses or less. They are just dominating the NE this year.

NESCAC....zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

I'm with sac! :)

Also, I don't think it's too early to see what conferences have run-away leaders or not. The WIAC is nearly 3/4 done with their conference schedule (11 of 16) and just about all of the conferences are past the midway point of their respective schedules.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 31, 2006, 11:43:00 PM

Our league plays a round / robin minus two (due to travel concerns with a few teams) and I sometimes feel inadequate about that - it's not like the NESCAC schools have to drive from Meadville, PA to Crawfordsville, IN on a weekday. Beating the snot out of Babson and Connecticut College doesn't do much good, I don't think, when an extra game against Trinity or Tufts or Bates could really help.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 01, 2006, 12:43:21 AM

Quote from: smedindy on January 31, 2006, 11:43:00 PM
Our league plays a round / robin minus two (due to travel concerns with a few teams) and I sometimes feel inadequate about that - it's not like the NESCAC schools have to drive from Meadville, PA to Crawfordsville, IN on a weekday. Beating the snot out of Babson and Connecticut College doesn't do much good, I don't think, when an extra game against Trinity or Tufts or Bates could really help.

Depends on what you mean by help.

The NESCAC gets more than their share of pool C bids because they DO play the (absurd) NCAA tourney rules just right. They don't beat each other up, and instead feast on NE teams who are mediocre, but have gaudy records because they play the truly lousy! For NCAA tourney purposes, it is the CCIW and WIAC who do it wrong. If top CCIW teams played more games against top SLIAC teams instead of each other, they'd have 4 (or more!) teams in the tourney!

Nevertheless, for those who care about CONFERENCE standings, anything short of a double round-robin is a disservice. To use the usual NESCAC standings lately (rather than this year), how fair is it to Trinity if both Amherst and Williams happen to be road games? In the NCAC, how fair is it if a team gets to play Woo and Witt only once this year? (I'll make an exception for large, two division, conferences: a double round-robin within the division, and once each again teams in the other division is the best one can do!) Aside from those two division conferences, anything short of a double round-robin makes a mockery of the conference championship. Unless a team is truly dominant, the schedule-makers rather than the teams may decide the title.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on February 01, 2006, 09:42:55 AM

When the NJAC split the ten teams into two five team divisions that is what they did. Each division played a round robin and then once against the teams in the other division. I thought this would help the NJAC get two teams in but only NJCU made it in 03-04. It was abandonded last year when NJCU left for a year and we are back to double round robin this season which I like better even though the NJAC endes up beating each other up, I think it makes for a stronger champion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 01, 2006, 09:59:36 AM

The MWC does the double round-robin minus two, which is helping Grinnell this year as they only have to play Carroll once.

The NESCAC is ovbiously the class of the NE region; they always are. However they rarely have five teams among the six best teams in the region. Usually the top of some of the other conferences can compete, but they're not having it this year. If I were a Midwest fan, I'd be worried about the "nationally by regional criteria" when it comes to these NESCAC teams this year. I think its dumb too, but its going to give them a better shot at three tournament teams, when the CCIW deserves it just as much, if not more.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on February 01, 2006, 12:42:38 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 01, 2006, 09:59:36 AM
The MWC does the double round-robin minus two, which is helping Grinnell this year as they only have to play Carroll once.

The MWC is a rather different case. They have an abbreviated schedule for academic reasons (22-23 games), and they play in a region with some pretty great teams. People are already whining and moaning about how Lawrence doesn't play anyone... can you just imagine if they played two more conference games? :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 01, 2006, 12:45:19 PM

We've been kind of discussing this on the MWC board, but it seems like it would be more fair to cut out two non-con games and make the conference schedule a full round robin, especially when only four teams make the tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on February 01, 2006, 12:53:58 PM

Oh, I totally agree that it is more fair as far as internal conference affairs are concerned... the fairness of things like that drive me nuts (some sorta wheaton complex about how everyone should be doing the fair and right thing, but anyhow).... I was just pointing out that the situation is significantly different. :)

The anal retentive in me had to correct my spelling.... (cough) :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 01, 2006, 12:59:13 PM

I'm not defending the NESCAC, just saying that they are much more competitive amongst each other than in years past. Although, I think the emergence of five teams to the top of the region is more a case of the region being down slightly this year. Not to take anything from Bates and Tufts, they are good, but the NESCAC, overall is no better than it was last year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on February 01, 2006, 01:12:02 PM

It actually never occured to me that you were defending the NESCAC. I think we are completely in agreement here... as long as you admit that it is probably better for the best MWC schools to play a CCIW school, or a WIAC school, or a HCAC school over one of the bottom teams in their conference. :P ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 01, 2006, 02:26:31 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 01, 2006, 12:43:21 AM
The NESCAC gets more than their share of pool C bids because they DO play the (absurd) NCAA tourney rules just right. They don't beat each other up, and instead feast on NE teams who are mediocre, but have gaudy records because they play the truly lousy! For NCAA tourney purposes, it is the CCIW and WIAC who do it wrong. If top CCIW teams played more games against top SLIAC teams instead of each other, they'd have 4 (or more!) teams in the tourney!

They don't beat up on each other because they only play each other ONCE! I know what you mean.

OK, so the NESCAC beats up on weak NE teams and then, in turn, have great records, but how does that explain their high (if they do) QOWI if all the teams they beat up on suck? It's a serious question. I mean, are they beating up on bad teams that are beating up on really bad teams? So, does that mean we have to look at the opponents' opponent's records?

At first thought, I would love just to play the other WIAC teams just once, adding another 8 nonconference in-region games, but then again, I wouldn't change it at all. I love being able to play the home and home series. One thing I would probably do is go the MWC route and just have the top four make the conference tourney and having the top seed host a Friday/Saturday tourney.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: formerbant10 on February 01, 2006, 02:31:30 PM

One would have a very hard time finding any NESCAC player that doesn't want to play each team twice during the regular season.
But as Mr. Ypsi stated, the NESCAC schedule fits exactly what the NCAA looks for in its rankings. So I think it would be just as hard finding a Coach or Athletic Director that would even be thinking about playing the double round robin.
But not having as many conference games does hurt some of the NESCAC teams who often have trouble scheduling so many non-conference in region games b/c many of those teams from the weaker leagues in the NE are not always willing to play the Amherst's and Trinity's. Trinity doesn't even have a full 24 game regular season this year. And last year a few teams backed out of facing the Bants before the season began.
Clearly I'm biased in my opinion, but I wouldn't expect the way the NESCAC plays to be changing anytime soon. And recently, on a national level, they have had multiple teams deserve to be in the tournament. But so did the "power" conferences from the Midwest. And it's a shame that some of those deserving teams did not qualify.
The only way to maybe change the way the NESCAC plays is if the NCAA were to change how it ranked teams, but even that would not be a guarantee....after all look at football.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 01, 2006, 02:39:15 PM

ya know, I have no problem with the NESCAC not playing a full round robin........thats their conferences perrogative

........as long as the NCAA gives equal favoritism to the Witt/Woo Hope/Albions IWU/Augustanas and keeps them separate in the NCAA brackets like they did with Amherst and Williams a couple years ago. That was a travesty.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 01, 2006, 02:40:11 PM

That's how Amherst got stuck into the four year home-and-home with Colby Sawyer that resulted in a loss and two games with a margin of victory under ten. Scary for them in the non-conference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 01, 2006, 02:47:29 PM

The NESCAC beats up on the stronger NE region teams (which would get drilled in many of the conferences in the GL and Midwest region), who make their hay on the dregs of the world. But really, if they used a sensible SOS rating, it wouldn't be a factor.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 01, 2006, 02:52:24 PM

It's like if your region had four conferences like the SLIAC. Just imagine the possibilities.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: formerbant10 on February 01, 2006, 03:56:09 PM

sac, you're right about the Williams/Amherst split. But at least they held up their end of the bargain by getting to Salem. But at the same time, it gives the NCAA less incentive to change their thinking as to what they are doing.
And don't expect that the Midwest teams will get separated too far, because that would cost too much money. The NCAA will save money by sending a NE team into another bracket because the states are smaller and the travel is less.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 01, 2006, 03:58:27 PM

I'll just be happy if they move some Great Lakes teams to the Mid Atlantic. I've said it over and over again, Witt and Woo can both get to the York/Harrisburg area without requiring flights. It certainly would have made sense last year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 01, 2006, 04:36:07 PM

Quote from: Old School on February 01, 2006, 02:26:31 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 01, 2006, 12:43:21 AM
The NESCAC gets more than their share of pool C bids because they DO play the (absurd) NCAA tourney rules just right. They don't beat each other up, and instead feast on NE teams who are mediocre, but have gaudy records because they play the truly lousy! For NCAA tourney purposes, it is the CCIW and WIAC who do it wrong. If top CCIW teams played more games against top SLIAC teams instead of each other, they'd have 4 (or more!) teams in the tourney!

They don't beat up on each other because they only play each other ONCE! I know what you mean.

OK, so the NESCAC beats up on weak NE teams and then, in turn, have great records, but how does that explain their high (if they do) QOWI if all the teams they beat up on suck? It's a serious question. I mean, are they beating up on bad teams that are beating up on really bad teams? So, does that mean we have to look at the opponents' opponent's records?

At first thought, I would love just to play the other WIAC teams just once, adding another 8 nonconference in-region games, but then again, I wouldn't change it at all. I love being able to play the home and home series. One thing I would probably do is go the MWC route and just have the top four make the conference tourney and having the top seed host a Friday/Saturday tourney.

The Quality of Wins Index currently has little to do with quality of wins! It only considers your opponent's record - even if their .667+ in-region winning percentage came from beating up on The College of Midgets, it is still a 14 or 15 point win!

So yes, if you want it to live up to its name, it would need to include opponents' opponents record (and even opponents' opponents' opponents, etc., though there would come a point of diminishing returns)!

I would suspect that formerbant10 has nailed it - the players (and probably most fans) would prefer a double round-robin, but the coaches and ADs do doubt understand that they are playing the NCAA's (absurd) system just right.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 01, 2006, 04:37:55 PM

Bottom line: none of us would be complaining if our conference was pulling it off.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 01, 2006, 04:50:50 PM

Hey, we'd still find SOMETHING to complain about - it's who we are! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 01, 2006, 05:08:31 PM

no you'd probably be defending yourself against the rest of us complainers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 01, 2006, 05:14:25 PM

I'd be complaining about only 1 Hope/Calvin matchup per year.

Now THAT would be a travesty!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 01, 2006, 05:18:26 PM

Amherst and Williams play twice every year, but only one of them counts as a conference game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dansand on February 01, 2006, 05:34:04 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 01, 2006, 04:36:07 PM

The Quality of Wins Index currently has little to do with quality of wins! It only considers your opponent's record - even if their .667+ in-region winning percentage came from beating up on The College of Midgets, it is still a 14 or 15 point win!

Ypsi,

The College of Little People!

(There's no emoticon for "chastisement" or I would have used it at the end of that one.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 01, 2006, 07:13:58 PM

dansand,

I seriously considered The University of Dwarves, but decided against it! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NW Hope Fan on February 01, 2006, 09:53:28 PM

Albion goes down tonight to Tri-State University 77-72. Sets up a big game in Holland on Sat.
(I guess it would have been a big game anyway, but Albion will come in fighting mad.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 01, 2006, 10:23:45 PM

Oof.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 01, 2006, 11:08:59 PM

Wow! Tri-State looked OK when I saw them at Wabash, but I didn't think they'd cause anyone grief in the MIAA. Oopsy!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 01, 2006, 11:23:43 PM

(With apologies to Oldsmobile - and even that reference may be to old for some!) "This is not your father's Tri-State"! I don't think anyone will mistake them for top 25 material, but they have gone and gotten downright respectable this year!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 01, 2006, 11:33:19 PM

Yeah, but this is also what's wrong with the system. A loss to Tri-State should hurt Albion in seeding and in "C" purposes, and it doesn't at all because of their status.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 01, 2006, 11:54:29 PM

In MIAA play they've played everyone tough at home except Hope.

They took Calvin to OT before losing, and have won all their other homies except for Hope.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 02, 2006, 12:02:58 AM

Oh, and btw, just when you thought you had the WIAC figured out (before last Saturday, Oshkosh was leading, tied with Whitewater, and they both lost)... well, Oshkosh lost again, and now it's Stout who's on top, leading Point and Whitewater by a 1/2 game and La Crosse and Oshkosh by a full game.

Each of these top 5 WIAC teams has to play at least 2 of the others in their last 4-5 games. This ain't even CLOSE to being done yet.

And the crazy thing is that one of these 5 teams isn't going to host in the conference tournament... so which ever teams end up 4 and 5 are going to have to battle in the first round!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 02, 2006, 01:35:04 AM

And just think if the WIAC teams only played each other once! lol.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 02, 2006, 09:16:12 AM

Well my voting for Stout only seems to be working out right now.

And after Albion's loss last night, I guess that whole conversation about top 6 shake-up goes right out the window. There is definately going to be some movement now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bouttime on February 03, 2006, 12:46:01 PM

Tonight's CMU/WashU game holds some extra meaning for Tartan's head coach Tony Wingen. A win tonight will make him the winningest coach in CMU history. A win for the Tartans will also give the the lead in the very tough UAA conference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NW Hope Fan on February 04, 2006, 04:41:39 PM

Hope wins 74-55 against Albion.

Quote from: sac on February 04, 2006, 04:42:03 PM

Hope returns the favor HOPE 74 Albion 55

Hope outscored the Brits 24-3 over a 9 minute stretch from 11:40 to 2:40

Phillips 12, Carlson 11, Voisin 11, VanderHeide 9, Cramer 9, Immink 9....all in the last minutes.

Crawford 22 and 9 rbs

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 04, 2006, 09:18:11 PM

Final: #2 Wooster 86 #1 Wittenberg 77

HUGE win for Wooster as they beat Witt on their home floor in a sold out building. Wooster has virtually clinched the NCAC regular season title.

Wooster led the entire game after an early tie at 5-5. Wooster won this game by shooting a higher percentage from the floor and by making 12 three pointers in this game.

Wooster was led by James Cooper with 24 points, Tom Port with 13 points, Tim Vandervaart with 12 points while Brandon Johnson and Andy Van Horn each had 11 points.

Wooster is now 20-1, 12-0 in the NCAC. Sweet road win! ;D

GO SCOTS!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 04, 2006, 09:26:32 PM

Speculation, anyone?

Will Woo and Witt simply trade places, or will Witt fall below still undefeated Lawrence and once-beaten Hope (who won big over #6 Albion)?

Also, how far will Albion fall - losing (even big) to Hope probably wouldn't hurt much (afterall, they beat them big earlier), but they also lost to so-so Tri-State this week. 9th? 11th? 14th?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 04, 2006, 09:30:25 PM

Witt trailed by anywhere from 4 to 13 points virtually the entire game; I don't recall that it was ever a "one-possession" game after the opening couple of minutes. And the game was at home. Wooster of course will move to #1, with upwards of 20 first-place votes. I'd expect the Tigers to be passed by both Lawrence and Hope, and perhaps Augustana depending on how the Vikings do tonight.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 04, 2006, 09:59:50 PM

I could see Witt falling to fifth, possibly!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 05, 2006, 12:15:21 AM

Wooster has now won 20 or more games for 10 consecutive seasons:

2006: 20-1
2005: 27-3
2004: 26-4
2003: 30-3
2002: 21-7
2001: 24-4
2000: 26-3
1999: 25-4
1998: 22-6
1997: 23-6

Congratulations to Coach Steve Moore and the rest of the Wooster program on a tremendous decade of excellence! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 05, 2006, 01:28:17 AM

I wasn't overwhelmed by Witt. I think their backcourt scoring (or lack thereof) will be a problem in the tourney. In my mind, I'm not entirely sure Witt is better than, say, Baldwin-Wallace, whom I admit I have not seen.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 05, 2006, 01:49:22 AM

What'd you think of Wooster, Pat?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 05, 2006, 02:14:48 AM

Not quite what I was expecting from the numbers, but obviously playing Witt had some impact.

I wonder if this was typical. Lot of reliance on the outside shot early though they did not fall apart when the shots didn't fall in the second half. I wonder if they might throw it inside more when they're not facing a team with Borchers and Russ on the interior.

On a night when Witucky wasn't much of a factor and Port wasn't himself they beat a Top 10 team. What else needs to be said? Cooper looked like the leader of this team tonight.

Also thought they were well-coached (though that is nothing new). There are some teams in the Top 10 which I am not so sure are well-coached, so that's a plus. Wish they had more competition. Can you trade a couple teams to the OAC for, say, Muskingum? :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on February 05, 2006, 02:29:49 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 04, 2006, 09:30:25 PM
Witt trailed by anywhere from 4 to 13 points virtually the entire game; I don't recall that it was ever a "one-possession" game after the opening couple of minutes.

If I'm not mistaken, David, Witt had the lead down to 40-37 at one point late in the first half before Woo closed the half with a 9-3 run to lead 49-40 at half.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 05, 2006, 03:21:48 AM

Yes, that's right, Witt was within 3 briefly late in the first. My mistake. They also closed to 4 with about 4:00 left in the game.

Pat, Vandervaart sees more action down low on offense against other opponents; so do Will and Port, to a degree. But as you know, when they're not playing Wittenberg, well, they're playing Earlham or OWU, or even Oberlin or Hiram. The question of "what will Wooster do on the night that the shots aren't falling?" has been asked frequently, but it basically hasn't happened yet. A week or so ago they had some trouble at Kenyon, but no real trouble with Kenyon, so it didn't really answer the question.

As far as Witt's game was concerned, yes they depend heavily, perhaps too heavily, on Russ and Borchers, and get little offense from the guards, but it should be noted that it was Wooster's gameplan to make sure that the perimeter jumpers were contested. I'm guessing that that strategy was at least part of the reason for the Tigers' inability to score from outside tonight.

Nice broadcast, good job Pat and Lenny.

Oh, and the last time we made a deal with the OAC, all we got was Hiram. :P We did get Witt from the OAC, though. Imagine what the NCAC (and Wooster's schedule) would look like without that deal! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 05, 2006, 08:35:56 AM

You'd be looking at about 25 years of 20 win seasons DC. ;D

Plus we might have heard from Ohio Wesleyan, Alleghany and possibly Kenyon more often.....they all had some good teams years ago.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 05, 2006, 08:58:22 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 05, 2006, 03:21:48 AM
Will

About him, impressed. He didn't do much in the first half but made some nice moves during that stretch in the second half. Was deceptively good.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 05, 2006, 12:44:50 PM

Will's been sick most of the week, FWIW. He could only play 5 minutes on Weds, and he reportedly had a couple of days of 102-degree fever. But it doesn't sound like dehydration was a problem for anyone in the HPER Center last night! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: imderekpoe on February 05, 2006, 05:53:45 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 05, 2006, 08:58:22 AM
Quote from: David Collinge on February 05, 2006, 03:21:48 AM
Will

About him, impressed. He didn't do much in the first half but made some nice moves during that stretch in the second half. Was deceptively good.

I've noticed in several games this year that Will has not had a great 1st half, but has really turned it up a notch in the 2nd. Last night his 2nd half contributions were so much more than the stat line could show. Everyone on the Scots had gone cold and Witt was making one of their comebacks. Will made good aggressive moves and scored 6 or quick points that really kept things going the Scots way. He was definitely one of the stars of the game for the Scots.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 05, 2006, 06:06:57 PM

I think his stat line showed alright too, frankly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 06, 2006, 10:08:18 AM

1. Witt (19-2, 10-2) win at Earlham, home loss to #2 Wooster
2. Wooster (20-1, 12-0) home win over Allegheny, win at #1 Wittenberg
3. Lawrence (19-0, 13-0) wins at Ripon, over Knox and over Illinois College
4. Hope (20-1, 9-1) wins over Olivet and #6 Albion
5. Augustana (20-1, 10-0) wins over North Park and Carthage
6. Albion (16-4, 7-3) loss at Tri-State and loss at #4 Hope
7. Baldwin-Wallace (19-2, 13-1) wins at Heidelberg and over Otterbein
8. IWU (17-2, 7-3) wins at #14 North Central and over Elmhurst (OT)
9. York (18-2, 8-2) wins at Goucher and Marymount
10. Amherst (19-2, 6-1) wins at Brandeis, Williams and Middlebury
11. Wartburg (17-4, 10-3) loss at Luther, loss at Coe
12. Occidental (16-2, 7-1) win at Caltech, home loss to LaVerne
13. Puget Sound (17-2, 11-1) wins at Pacific Lutheran and George Fox
14. North Central (16-4, 5-4) home loss to #8 IWU, home win over Millikin
15. WPI (19-1, 8-1) wins at UMass-Boston (OT) and at MIT
16. Miss College (19-1, 16-1) wins at Austin and U of Ozarks
17. Stout (17-4, 10-3) wins at River Falls and over #24 Oshkosh
18. Carnegie Mellon (17-3, 7-2) wins over WashU and Chicago
19. Transylvania (18-3, 9-1) wins over Mt St Joseph and at Bluffton
20. VA Wesleyan (19-3, 14-1) win over Randolph-Macon
21. St John Fisher (17-3, 8-1) wins over Hartwick and Utica
22. Lincoln (19-4) win at Delaware Valley
23. Carroll (18-2, 12-1) wins over St Norbert, Lake Forrest and Knox
24. Oshkosh (15-7, 8-5) loss at Lacrosse and loss at #17 Stout
25. Trinity (CT) (16-4, 6-1) win at Middlebury, loss at Williams

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: digs on February 06, 2006, 04:39:21 PM

Tough year for the WIAC. Only one top 25 team late in the year and on Top 10 teams. Also just one team clinging to the top 25 on the women's poll. Anyone have theories as to why they are down?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 06, 2006, 04:48:04 PM

Quote from: digs on February 06, 2006, 04:39:21 PM
Tough year for the WIAC. Only one top 25 team late in the year and on Top 10 teams. Also just one team clinging to the top 25 on the women's poll. Anyone have theories as to why they are down?

Standard demographic theory and the Laws of Probability...

They shall be back! ;) :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 06, 2006, 04:58:14 PM

I don't think the WIAC is down, its just that they are too even. After several years of a consensus favorite, they are back to duking it out and keeping each other from the tournament. However, the west region isn't too strong this year, so they might sneak an extra team in, if Whitewater can win out to the conference final. I also think Stout can get in if they lose the conference final and finish with 5 losses or less in region.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 06, 2006, 05:16:25 PM

I will agree that the WIAC is a strong conference, and the demographics afforded a powerful state school conference are compelling.

I make the case that the WIAC has the best #30 to #130 (UW-Eau Claire) teams in the country. They do not get to cherry pick their non-conference games the way that the UAA members can schedule themselves.

Massey's MOV has Emory at #173 and Case at 152.

http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&sub=III&mid=1

Massey has WIAC's at #16, #18, #24 and #31.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TeeDub on February 06, 2006, 06:23:07 PM

Where's Coe?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 06, 2006, 06:28:18 PM

Quote from: Jordis Rocks on February 06, 2006, 06:23:07 PM
Where's Coe?

#53!

http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&sub=III&mid=1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 06, 2006, 06:44:53 PM

I disagree with you Hoops Fan. From a WIAC guy... the WIAC is down because of a lack of dominant seniors. The teams this year all seem to be at the relative same level because they have stooped to each other's level, as opposed to raising their game to a higher standard. I attribute this to a lack of senior leadership.

The favorite to win conference each of three years prior (and maybe even longer, I'd have to look it up and I don't want to right now!) was a senior laden team. Last year, it was Point, and Point won the conf title, tied with Platteville, who also had alot of seniors. The year before, River Falls (and they won the title, thanks to losses by Whitewater and Point on the last night of the season). Three years ago, Oshkosh was favored, and Point actually ran away with the title by 3 games... Point drew a hot Gustavus Adolphus game and didn't make it out of the second round but Oshkosh made it to the Elite 8.

The favorite this year was Oshkosh. This team is lead by a bunch of juniors, albiet from the third place team last year, and they were the last team to beat Point (also in the last game of the regular season). This season, Oshkosh has flat out underachieved... but they were over-rated at the beginning of the season. The problem wasn't the talent... it was there, for sure... the problem was that this team knew how to lose in tough games a whole lot more than they knew how to win. Last year, Oshkosh was a 19-8 team... that's impressive in some rights... but at the same time, they lost 8 games. I had some questions early on about their defensive prowess and their over-all team togetherness, and I think we've seen that this team has underachieved.

Who's the favorite right now? It's gotta be Stout... 2 of their last 3 are at home, plus a bye (and they're half a game up, putting the pressure on Point and Whitewater). But it essentially is Stevens Point who holds their own destiny... they play co-second place Whitewater on Wednesday and leader Stout on Saturday.

I think, even though the WIAC has appeared down (from their less than absolutely dominant non-conference sked, which we're used to) which ever team comes out will still make a strong showing. I think there's an inevitable Lawrence/UW Somebody matchup looming, as well...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 06, 2006, 10:46:52 PM

Milestones in the week 10 poll (poll #104):

*Highest-ever ranking achieved by:
#2 Lawrence
#3 Augustana
#5 Baldwin-Wallace
#14 Mississippi College
#17 Transylvania
#22 Carroll

*Coe College receives votes for the first time ever.

*Albion and St. John Fisher are each in the top 25 for the 25th consecutive week, the 6th longest active streak.

*Streak watch:
Amherst is in the top 25 for the 59th consecutive week; all-time record: 62 weeks (Catholic 1999-2003; UW-Stevens Point 2001-05)
Wooster is in the top 10 for the 34th consecutive week; all-time record: 38 weeks (Carthage 2000-03)
Wooster also extends their record streak of receiving votes to 104 consecutive weeks (i.e., every poll ever released)

Congratulations to all of these fine programs!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 06, 2006, 11:12:37 PM

Does it count also that Coe received a vote from me in the posters poll?

Ok, maybe not...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 07, 2006, 01:37:06 AM

WIAC. Week 10, 2005 Poll: Games through Jan. 30.

#2 Stevens Point 17-2
#21 Platteville 13-5
#22 Stout 12-5
#23 Oshkosh 15-5

NOTE-Stout and Oshkosh both dropped out in the following poll and Whitewater had votes in both Weeks 10 and 11 (that's all I looked at). You can only assume Stout and Oshkosh were handed their 6th losses, and possibly 7th.

Week 10, 2006 Poll: Games through Feb. 5.

#12 Stout 17-4

Oshkosh (just dropped out) 15-7
Whitewater (RV) 15-5
La Crosse 17-5
Stevens Point 15-7

So, record-wise, aside from Point, the overall records of the teams are pretty even from a year ago.

I think it's down a little bit simply because the WIAC didn't have a very good nonconference season, otherwise those records of Oshkosh and Point would be a lot better. Or, maybe the WIAC is just playing tougher nonconference schedules! ::)

Point Special also makes a very valid point regarding the lack of senior leadership that exists in the WIAC this year. Last year it was very easy to pick the All-Conference team with the likes of Bennett, Kalsow, Reitzner, Temperly etc. 7 of the 10 1st team all-conference players were seniors.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 07, 2006, 02:25:05 AM

Quote from: Old School on February 07, 2006, 01:37:06 AM
7 of the 10 1st team all-conference players were seniors.

And of the other 3, two were Sophomores (and just one Junior). On the Honorable Mention team, there were 2 Juniors, 2 Sophs, and 1 Frosh.

Like I said in my previous post here, I think Oshkosh was clearly over-rated at the beginning of the season... but they had appeared to turn it around. Well, three straight losses later, the ship hasn't just sprung a leak, it's starting to sink... This team is by no means out of it (Heck, no team is out of it because of the conference tournament) but they've obviously got some problems to figure out... and they need to do it sooner rather than later, or they'll find themselves having to travel throughout the Conference Tourney (in all likelihood)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 07, 2006, 08:56:57 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 06, 2006, 10:46:52 PM
Amherst is in the top 25 for the 59th consecutive week; all-time record: 62 weeks (Catholic 1999-2003; UW-Stevens Point 2001-05)
Wooster is in the top 10 for the 34th consecutive week; all-time record: 38 weeks (Carthage 2000-03)

If they both stay there through the final poll of the year, both records will fall. I can actually say, as much as I whine about teams receiving votes based on history, that both of these schools deserve the records they are working on here.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fisheralum03 on February 07, 2006, 11:47:43 AM

Hey Pat, when does the first OFFICIAL set of regional rankings come out???I read somewhere on the message board that it should be around feb 11?? is that correct?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 07, 2006, 12:00:28 PM

I'm pretty sure its tomorrow. Yeah, just checked the handbook, it's tomorrow. Then two rankings will follow the next two Wednesdays (Feb 15 and Feb 22). The final rankings (used for selection) will not be released to the public.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 07, 2006, 12:44:13 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 07, 2006, 12:00:28 PM
The final rankings (used for selection) will not be released to the public.

That's interesting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 07, 2006, 12:52:18 PM

Quote from: Old School on February 07, 2006, 12:44:13 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 07, 2006, 12:00:28 PM
The final rankings (used for selection) will not be released to the public.

That's interesting.

I think its good. I mean representatives of the schools and conferences make up the committee; its not smart to give shafted schools the physical evidence to whine and complain because the NCAA sets the standards and the committees follow it. They don't need to take more crap than they already get.

By the way, I may be wrong on this, but I don't think the final rankings of d1 teams ever get released either. Their committee sits in a room and does it nationally, while we have eight that do it privately. Its the same system, its just a little less fair for the non-revenue producing divison.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 07, 2006, 12:53:58 PM

To all:

As you know, I do a power rating amalgamation, and I just updated it. Here is the top 25:

1. Lawrence
2. Augustana
3. Wooster
4. Wittenberg
5. Baldwin - Wallace
6. Hope
7. Illinois Wesleyan
8. WPI
9. Amhesrt
10. Carnegie - Mellon
11. Wisc - Stout
12. Transylvania
13. Lincoln
14. Tufts
15. Carroll
16. Puget Sound
17. St. John Fisher
18. Cortland State
19. North Central
20. York (PA)
21. Mississippi College
22. Bates
23. NYU
24. Ohio Northern
25. Wisc - LaCrosse

The Bottom 10:

395. Daniel Webster
394. Principia
393. Maine - Presque Isle
392. Green Mountain
391. Maranatha Baptist
390. Bard
389. Thiel
388. Massachusetts College
387. Centenary
386. Anna Maria

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 07, 2006, 12:58:06 PM

Smed, are you submitting your power rating in the Posters' Poll? :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 07, 2006, 01:02:01 PM

No, the timing doesn't work - but I use it as a guide for my voting. I don't ALWAYS trust the computers, but it spots teams that I may have missed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 07, 2006, 01:54:02 PM

Quote from: smedindy on February 07, 2006, 12:53:58 PM
To all:

As you know, I do a power rating amalgamation, and I just updated it. Here is the top 25:

1. Lawrence
2. Augustana

15. Carroll

Interesting that you have Lawrence ahead of Augustana. I know that Lawrence is undefeated, but Augustana, I feel, plays in a much tougher conference with the likes of Ill. Wes, North Central and even Elmhurst (all who have been ranked, though not sure if "rankings" figure into your formula) with only one more loss. I would also think Carroll might be a little higher since they've only lost to your #1 rated team and to Whitewater, who was "ranked" when they played them, I believe.

Obviously being in the same conference, LU and Carroll have basically played the same schedule, with LU beating Oshkosh in OT and Carroll losing by one. I dont' want you to think Carroll should be #3 or anything though! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 07, 2006, 02:51:07 PM

Rankings mean nothing, its power rankings that matter. Lawrence's SOS is quite good, too (28th vs. 11th for Augie). Carroll is down due to their SOS (53rd).

All this will change, of course, in due time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 08, 2006, 12:20:13 AM

Quote from: smedindy on February 07, 2006, 02:51:07 PM
Rankings mean nothing, its power rankings that matter. Lawrence's SOS is quite good, too (28th vs. 11th for Augie). Carroll is down due to their SOS (53rd).

All this will change, of course, in due time.

So, where does Lawrence's "power ranking" come into play that it is superior and makes up for LU's SOS of 28, against Augie's SOS of 11?

It's your formula! Just trying to figure it out a little bit and get an explanation. And I'm not even an Augie fan. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 08, 2006, 12:55:45 AM

OS, I wondered the same thing!

Smed, how can an SOS of 28 possibly translate into a #1 ranking. My hunch would be that (unbeknownst to you) SOS is NOT a real factor in your rankings (i.e., somewhere in the calculations, it got squelched).

Unless W-L record is the OVERWHELMING criterion, an SOS discrepancy that large should send up a HUGE red flag.

Your rankings do not at all upset me (Lawrence, Augie, Woo, Witt, etc., are as rational as any), but your rationale seems a bit weak.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 08, 2006, 01:05:10 AM

I would think having the 28th-toughest schedule among 395 or so teams is pretty good.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 08, 2006, 01:19:12 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 08, 2006, 01:05:10 AM
I would think having the 28th-toughest schedule among 395 or so teams is pretty good.

Obviously pretty good for top 25 (or even top 10) purposes, but for #1?! (He didn't give enough info for full analysis, but #2 was 17 slots ahead in SOS!)

I suspect there may be a glitch in his program, that's all.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 08, 2006, 01:26:45 AM

Both are in the 90th percentile of schedules. I don't think you have to have a Top 10 schedule to be a Top 10 team. The results are important as well as the schedule. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 08, 2006, 01:48:21 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 08, 2006, 01:05:10 AM
I would think having the 28th-toughest schedule among 395 or so teams is pretty good.

I agree. But so is the 11th toughest schedule...which Augie has according to smedindy. I'm trying to figure out, and I'm sure we'll get an answer from him, where the difference comes in, if it's not the rankings (which I never thought it was).

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 08, 2006, 01:26:45 AM
Both are in the 90th percentile of schedules. I don't think you have to have a Top 10 schedule to be a Top 10 team. The results are important as well as the schedule. :)

So, that one loss Augie had at Stout makes up the difference? I haven't checked the actual scores, but maybe LU is blowing out all their opponents while Augie is just scraping by. Not sure.

I'm not questioning his program at all, just want an explanation. Like I said, I'm not even an Augie fan or an LU hater, just curious! ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 08, 2006, 02:06:38 AM

Agreed, but would a 1-game difference in results overcome a 17 slot difference in SOS?

And (I wonder) who are those other 26 teams in the top 28 SOS, and what are their records?

As I said earlier, SOS of 28 may be helpful for top 25 (maybe even top 10), but for #1?! [By no means am I knocking Larry. While I had them third on my ballot (1. Woo, 2. Augie), PP voters overall had them 2nd.]

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 08, 2006, 02:22:30 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 08, 2006, 02:06:38 AM
Agreed, but would a 1-game difference in results overcome a 17 slot difference in SOS?

Out of 395 teams, that a 4% difference. Aren't you the statistics professor?

I don't know what smed will answer to these questions but the fact remains that this is NOT a big difference in strength of schedule.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 08, 2006, 02:39:49 AM

Pat,

Yes, I'm the stat prof. And a 4% difference in standing (among 395 teams) would mean the difference between first and 16th (which is FAR more than the difference being discussed)! I've often had reason to think I should have thought before I posted - perhaps you should realize that you should have that epiphany as well.

I have no problem with you - why do you have such a problem with me?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 08, 2006, 08:39:42 AM

SOS is one factor, but the power ratings from Wolfe and Massey are a second factor (which Lawrence tops Augie) and then there is my own factor, of which Lawrence tops Augie. And SOS is the lowest of the three factors. I weight the factors as to their importance in my eyes.

In order the questions I state are:

1. Did you win?
2. How did you play?
3. Who did you play?

I use SOS so teams like Gordon and Bethany don't charge way up the rankings.

BTW - Wooster's SOS is 37 and they're third. A big reason Carroll is down is that the Wolfe rankings don't like them that much, whilst Wolfe loves WPI.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 08, 2006, 08:43:52 AM

Oh, and it may be moot. This week Augie plays Wheaton (217) and Millikin (204) whilst Lawrence plays Carroll and Beloit (135), so Augie's SOS will slip this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 08, 2006, 09:38:43 AM

I hate SOS, that's why I follow a sport with a real tournament, as flawed and faulty as it may be.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 08, 2006, 10:34:43 AM

But SOS is a valid measure, much more so than the wacky QOWI. If you have two 20 win teams, and one beats up on the shrimps and minnows of the world (I'm looking at YOU, NESCAC) and one plays a tough schedule, who IS more likely the better team???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 08, 2006, 11:03:54 AM

I agree to a point, but all you really know is that one team didn't have to work as hard to win 20 games; it really doesn't tell you who is better.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 08, 2006, 11:18:13 AM

Hey did you guys know (I'm sure Pat did) that the d3hoops.com Top 25 poll is now the official "coach's poll" for division III; it's even on the NCAASports website.

Nice recognition; I don't think it was there last year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 08, 2006, 12:53:32 PM

Yeah, I noticed that this week. I just posted that on the Pool C board, I think! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 08, 2006, 01:40:30 PM

Hoops Fan - of course not - that's why you have a power rating factor as well as a SOS. The power ratings say how well you played. It's all a puzzle, and each piece fits in with the other.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 08, 2006, 01:59:24 PM

There are no numbers to tell me which team is better. I'll give you that numbers can tell me which team should be better, but it proves nothing. Although I do love stats and numbers (not to knock your profession.) I just hate getting caught up in using computer rankings and such to argue over the merits of various squads. (Again, you don't rely totally on numbers, so I'm not trashing you here, just those people, you know who they are.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fisheralum03 on February 08, 2006, 03:07:21 PM

does anyone know when the regional rankings will be announced/posted? is it today. I thought it was (THE FIRST OFFICIAL ONES)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 08, 2006, 03:11:29 PM

It is today; we're waiting on the Pool C board with baited breath. It seems like the best place to discuss them here.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 08, 2006, 03:42:03 PM

Hoops Fan - if you don't have some statistical measures, there is no way to address the strengths or weaknesses of any team, and to see how good one team is relative to another. And even then, due to styles of play, injuries, etc. it's not a guarantee.

And because it's athletics, things do happen. Hiram could beat Wooster. Nazareth did beat St. John Fisher. You play that game another 10 times and St. John Fisher beats then 9 out of 10, at least. Same with Curry over Trinity. And this year, the most unlikely result in all of college hoops was Marshall beating West Virginia

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 08, 2006, 03:46:18 PM

I appreciate the numbers, I do. A lot of my opinions come from a lot of numbers, because I don't travel to all these games. I just hate when people spout off some statistic as proof one team is better than another.

Unless its a score (and sometimes not even then), all those numbers are are indicators, not proof. That was my only point.

Now, we pay attention to QOWI, etc because that has some bearing on how teams get selected, but no one is going to argue that it proves anything.

Numbers give us evidence, not fact, at least when it comes to basketball. That's all I'm saying.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 08, 2006, 04:08:28 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 08, 2006, 02:39:49 AM
Pat,

Yes, I'm the stat prof. And a 4% difference in standing (among 395 teams) would mean the difference between first and 16th (which is FAR more than the difference being discussed)! I've often had reason to think I should have thought before I posted - perhaps you should realize that you should have that epiphany as well.

The 4% difference in strength of schedule, 11th to 28th, is 17 spots. Your example is 15 spots. Do please inform me as to what I am missing.

I wasn't talking about difference in standing at any point. I was talking about your blowing up a molehill of strength of schedule into a mountain of difference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 08, 2006, 08:53:35 PM

Final: #1 Wooster 129 Hiram 67

Wooster got some revenge tonight because Hiram was the team that undercut Tom Port on a dunk when he broke his wrist. :)

Wooster made 22 three pointers in this game and had 7 players in double figures points including Devin Fulk with 21, Andy Van Horn at 16, Kyle Witucky at 15 (5 three's), Tom Port with 15, Tim Vandervaart with 13, Marty Bidwell with 12 and Brandon Johnson with 10.

Wooster shot 57% from the floor and 50% on three pointers.

Wooster is now 21-1, 13-0 NCAC. ;D

GO SCOTS!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on February 08, 2006, 09:09:49 PM

If the score on the scoreboard is correct, Wheaton beat WPI tonight. Looks like WPI couldnt pull out their Nth 5 point or less win in a row.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: titanfan on February 08, 2006, 09:12:20 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on February 08, 2006, 09:09:49 PM
If the score on the scoreboard is correct, Wheaton beat WPI tonight. Looks like WPI couldnt pull out their Nth 5 point or less win in a row.

Boy, I've been avoiding putting WPI into my posters poll all year because I don't think they're anywhere near as good as their record. I finally succumbed to "peer pressure" and their 19-1 record and put them in at 25 this week. I guess I picked the wrong week! ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 08, 2006, 09:23:55 PM

Final: #6 Wittenberg 66 Ohio Wesleyan 54

Wittenberg gets a nice road win. Tigers were led by Daniel Russ with 24 points, Kenny Brady with 13 points and Greg Hill chipped in 12 points.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 08, 2006, 09:43:20 PM

#3 Augustana seems to be in a spot of trouble with Wheaton (Il).
For audio (and, I believe, video), http://www.wheaton.edu/wetn/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 08, 2006, 09:50:09 PM

#25 Calvin dumps #4 Hope 59-58 on a buzzer-beating trey (0:01.7) from freshman Veldhouse.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 08, 2006, 10:03:37 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 08, 2006, 04:08:28 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 08, 2006, 02:39:49 AM
Pat,

Yes, I'm the stat prof. And a 4% difference in standing (among 395 teams) would mean the difference between first and 16th (which is FAR more than the difference being discussed)! I've often had reason to think I should have thought before I posted - perhaps you should realize that you should have that epiphany as well.

The 4% difference in strength of schedule, 11th to 28th, is 17 spots. Your example is 15 spots. Do please inform me as to what I am missing.

I wasn't talking about difference in standing at any point. I was talking about your blowing up a molehill of strength of schedule into a mountain of difference.

smed, OS, and I WERE talking about difference in standing, specifically 1st vs 2nd (a distance of ONE spot, in case there are any mathematically-challenged lurkers out there). Since Augie had a noticeably higher SOS (true, it is only 4% if considering all 395 d3 schools, but it would be equally true to say that 28th is more than twice as far from the toughest schedule as 11th!), OS and I were both wondering if SOS really factored into the ratings as much as smed assumes it does. It was hardly intended as making a mountain out of a molehill, just alerting smed that his result didn't 'feel' right in terms of how he says his formulation works.

(And I'm not sure the 4% of 395 schools is really relevant - we would probably all agree that there are AT MOST perhaps 60-70 schools that are likely to EVER be within hailing distance of a #1 vs. #2 debate!)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie_superfan on February 08, 2006, 10:06:36 PM

#3 Augustana 60
Wheaton (Ill.) 64

Rick Harrigan was hurt for a lot of the 2nd half. Big shots down the stretch by Wheaton's senior leader, Tony Bollier. 2 FTs by Mohan with 8 secs left to seal it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 08, 2006, 10:07:04 PM

Looks like the 'baby Knights' of Calvin are growing up as fast as the 'baby Titans' did two years ago!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 08, 2006, 10:54:57 PM

Ypsi, it certainly does, and now the point is moot, isn't it. The difference between 11 and 28 is small - if Lawrence had Wooster's SOS then Augie would have been in first.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 08, 2006, 11:03:21 PM

Quote from: smedindy on February 08, 2006, 10:54:57 PM
Ypsi, it certainly does, and now the point is moot, isn't it. The difference between 11 and 28 is small - if Lawrence had Wooster's SOS then Augie would have been in first.

Yes, I would say that Wheaton rendered THAT discussion moot!

With Augie, Hope, and WPI already going down tonite, it's gonna be another challenging week for top 25 voters!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 09, 2006, 12:08:17 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 08, 2006, 10:03:37 PM
Since Augie had a noticeably higher SOS (true, it is only 4% if considering all 395 d3 schools, but it would be equally true to say that 28th is more than twice as far from the toughest schedule as 11th!),

Understood. As long as you understand that I am challenging the fact that 11th to 28th is noticeable.

Thankfully Smed understands.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 09, 2006, 12:41:47 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 09, 2006, 12:08:17 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 08, 2006, 10:03:37 PM
Since Augie had a noticeably higher SOS (true, it is only 4% if considering all 395 d3 schools, but it would be equally true to say that 28th is more than twice as far from the toughest schedule as 11th!),

Understood. As long as you understand that I am challenging the fact that 11th to 28th is noticeable.

Thankfully Smed understands.

Since Wheaton pretty much rendered the discussion moot, I hope this will be the end, BUT...

I never contended the difference between 11th and 28th was major (just that I thought it might not have had the weight in smed's ratings that he thought it did), but 'noticeable'?! Is the difference between d3hoops.com #11 Puget Sound and (putative) #28 Coe noticeable? ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 09, 2006, 12:43:22 AM

Quote from: augie_superfan on February 08, 2006, 10:06:36 PM
#3 Augustana 60
Wheaton (Ill.) 64

I can hear diehardfan yelling and screaming from California, "WAHOO!" or something like, "I used to go there and give cookies to the players!!!" :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 09, 2006, 12:47:54 AM

Quote from: Old School on February 09, 2006, 12:43:22 AM
Quote from: augie_superfan on February 08, 2006, 10:06:36 PM
#3 Augustana 60
Wheaton (Ill.) 64

I can hear diehardfan yelling and screaming from California, "WAHOO!" or something like, "I used to go there and give cookies to the players!!!" :D

Wow!!! What was that? ???

I just thought I saw an e-cookie going across the monitor screen! :D :D :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 09, 2006, 01:00:08 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 09, 2006, 12:47:54 AM
Quote from: Old School on February 09, 2006, 12:43:22 AM
Quote from: augie_superfan on February 08, 2006, 10:06:36 PM
#3 Augustana 60
Wheaton (Ill.) 64

I can hear diehardfan yelling and screaming from California, "WAHOO!" or something like, "I used to go there and give cookies to the players!!!" :D

Wow!!! What was that? ???

I just thought I saw an e-cookie going across the monitor screen! :D :D :D

Miraculously (given my computer skills!) I just intercepted it! It was e-delicious!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 09, 2006, 02:44:11 AM

And now they are using it to track your every movement!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 09, 2006, 04:39:32 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 09, 2006, 02:44:11 AM
And now they are using it to track your every movement!

And here we all thought that April was just some harmless coed who moved to Cali after graduation to do something nature-y ... while all along she's been an NSA operative specializing in cybernetic surveillance.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: digs on February 09, 2006, 08:47:11 AM

In the future I advise all coaches against scheduling Wheaton on Feb. 8. #3 and #13 both come out of the night with losses to Wheaton...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 09, 2006, 09:08:55 AM

QuoteI never contended the difference between 11th and 28th was major (just that I thought it might not have had the weight in smed's ratings that he thought it did), but 'noticeable'?! Is the difference between d3hoops.com #11 Puget Sound and (putative) #28 Coe noticeable?

Not out of 396. That's the key - 396.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 09, 2006, 09:37:34 AM

So now do I get some support that WPI and Calvin should switch places in the poll?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 09, 2006, 10:55:38 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 09, 2006, 04:39:32 AM
And here we all thought that April was just some harmless coed who moved to Cali after graduation to do something nature-y ... while all along she's been an NSA operative specializing in cybernetic surveillance.

Two years ago when I picked her up on the way to Salem, she did bring her computer, which weighed about 1,000 pounds, and we threw it in the trunk. I thought it was strange that she brought that thing along! Maybe it was to do "work" for the NSA while in Salem. She also flew back, so maybe she had to do a detour to Washington, D.C. to upload her "findings". :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 09, 2006, 11:04:01 AM

I have to come to the aid of Worester Polytech since I picked them in my survivor league and I placed 2nd behind Hope!

Schedule
Worester State +8 OT
Nichols +7
Bridgewater State +9
Salem State +25
Lasell +8
Rochester Tech +5
Williams +2
Endicott +1
Roger Williams +15
Babson +5
Clark -5
MIT +2
Fitchburg State +22
Springfield +6
Coast Guard +5
Wheaton (Mass.) +5
Clark +2
Babson +5
Mass-Boston +4 OT
MIT +1
Wheaton (Mass.) -2

Look at all those blowouts! 18 of 21 are single digit games! Come on, give the Engineers a break! :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 09, 2006, 12:03:57 PM

What exactly is the aid there. Even I didn't know it was that many. Now, I'm glad I've had them out of my posters poll since the beginning.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on February 09, 2006, 12:41:33 PM

I am assuming you were being sarcastic Old School, otherwise I agree that your comments make absolutely no sense.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 09, 2006, 01:58:02 PM

Sometimes sarcaism is hard to type, hence the :P. Sorry. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on February 09, 2006, 02:11:20 PM

I was more responding Hoops Fan's comment because it seemed he was taking you somewhat seriously.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 09, 2006, 02:13:46 PM

I always take OS seriously, even though he rarely is; things are more fun that way.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 09, 2006, 07:16:43 PM

Quote from: smedindy on February 09, 2006, 09:08:55 AM

QuoteI never contended the difference between 11th and 28th was major (just that I thought it might not have had the weight in smed's ratings that he thought it did), but 'noticeable'?! Is the difference between d3hoops.com #11 Puget Sound and (putative) #28 Coe noticeable?

Not out of 396. That's the key - 396.

I would assume that the d3hoops.com poll is out of 396 as well! A majority of them may have a snowball's chance in hell of ever being in it, but they are all eligible. (Just because Pat's crew is too danged lazy to rank-order all 396...! ;))

You'll need a different argument.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 09, 2006, 07:20:17 PM

**SCREAM**

Enough already.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: woosterbooster on February 09, 2006, 07:28:07 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 09, 2006, 07:16:43 PM
IJust because Pat's crew is too danged lazy to rank-order all 396...

Darned straight. And it's even much easier than that! If they'd just rank 395 of them, most of the rest of us could then determine what went where with the other team... ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on February 09, 2006, 08:38:56 PM

396? you want me to rand 396? ok let me start at the bottom ... hmm ... cal tech ... now who? Gosh there are a lot of bad teams.

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 09, 2006, 09:13:56 PM

Quote from: Coach C on February 09, 2006, 08:38:56 PM
396? you want me to rand 396? ok let me start at the bottom ... hmm ... cal tech ... now who? Gosh there are a lot of bad teams.

C

But are you SURE CalTech wouldn't beat, say, Maine-Presque Isle?! ;)

Actually, deciding the top 25 and bottom 25 would be a piece of cake compared with deciding between #196 and 197!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 10, 2006, 01:21:58 AM

No. I HAVE all 396 ranked. You all are just behind the times! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 10, 2006, 09:00:14 AM

Caltech is definately not the worst team in the country this year.

Also, if anyone cares about the real top 25. ORV and South region sleeper Howard Payne lost last night... done in by McMurry's system- style ball.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hjmphelp on February 10, 2006, 09:04:46 AM

Nice big score, Hoops Fan, but wrong school. MacMurray is the school running system ball. McMurry is just running up the score. ;D :D ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 10, 2006, 09:20:24 AM

They shoot a lot of threes (30-50% of their field goals; yes, I checked the other box scores to be sure); it looks about as close to me as some of those other so-called "system style systems." Fine, I'll take my medicine. I can;t figure out the differences between the M(a)c's anyway (sorry Ralph, but its true). I know they are in different states, but that's about it; I still have trouble remembering which is which.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 10, 2006, 09:31:17 AM

Quote from: jeffp on February 10, 2006, 09:04:46 AM
Nice big score, Hoops Fan, but wrong school. MacMurray is the school running system ball. McMurry is just running up the score. ;D :D ;D

Good morning, Jeff! :)

You amended your post before I could finish, nevertheless here goes... ;)

Assistant Coach Russell Vanlandingham reunited with his mentor, Ron Holmes this year. They are implementing the up-tempo system that they used with the 2000 Elite 8 and 2001 Sweet 16 teams. That system increases the number of cycles in a game by taking acceptable shots quickly and getting back to playing defense, especially if you can shorten the offensive cycle to about 10-12 seconds instead of 25-30 seconds per possession. This system is more like Coach Nolan Richardson's "forty minutes of hell" than the Grinnell style.

Actually McMurry has had 3 starters to leave the team this year, including 2 point guards and a post. The chemistry is still good, so McMurry adjusting the system to the players that remain. McMurry goes about 10 deep, so they "sub" about every 3-5 minutes. Last night, McMurry got 51 points off the bench.

As for the margin of victory, one of the conference tie-breakers is margin of victory, up to 10 points. Second-place McMurry had to "max" that one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 10, 2006, 10:09:24 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 09, 2006, 02:44:11 AM
And now they are using it to track your every movement!

Only now noticed this post.

Coming from April, I'm trusting it is not THAT kind of e-cookie (more like olinemom's e-brownies)! ;D

(Though Greg's follow-up post does have me worried!)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 10, 2006, 10:58:58 PM

If I read right, C-M lost at home to NYU tonight. Oopsie! :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 10, 2006, 10:59:38 PM

A couple of NESCAC results tonite relevant to the polls:

Amherst annihilated Bates, 88-52.
Tufts beat Trinity (CT) in OT, 84-80.

(Amherst and Trinity were the home teams.)

Only Amherst was IN the d3hoops.com top 25 (and the Posters' Poll top 25), but Bates and Trinity were receiving votes in both, and Tufts was receiving votes in the PP (something tells me they will be receiving votes in the real poll next week - pending tomorrow's results, of course).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 10, 2006, 11:44:07 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 09, 2006, 04:39:32 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 09, 2006, 02:44:11 AM
And now they are using it to track your every movement!

And here we all thought that April was just some harmless coed who moved to Cali after graduation to do something nature-y ... while all along she's been an NSA operative specializing in cybernetic surveillance.

:D :D :D :D :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 10, 2006, 11:59:00 PM

Whitworth 46, Puget Sound 24, HALF
http://www.ksbn.net/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 11, 2006, 12:13:59 AM

Big OOPSY :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 11, 2006, 12:18:39 AM

UPS is a second-half team; their style is to wear out their opponents with endless full-court pressure and up-tempo offense. So I wouldn't chalk up the 'L' just yet. But it's not looking too good (57-34, 14:24 remaining.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: woosterbooster on February 11, 2006, 12:40:49 AM

24 points in a half in an uptempo offense? Were they shooting at the wrong basket? And even missing most of those?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 11, 2006, 12:43:21 AM

UPS is shooting in the mid-30% range, and is 2 for many from beyond the arc.

Whitworth 88
UPS 64
5:42

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 11, 2006, 12:48:29 AM

Whitworth has so far out-scored UPS by 2 in the second half - but that's only for the first 14:18 of the half. Maybe the UPS surge is coming! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 11, 2006, 12:52:17 AM

Not happening for the Loggers tonight; the Whitworth bench has been cleared.

Whitworth prevails, 98-74.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 11, 2006, 01:10:34 AM

While the official poll had UPS 11th (and the PP had them 12th), and although UPS is one of IWU's 'signature wins', I'm feeling a whole lot better that I already had them only 18th. Depending upon what other teams do, of course, at this point I doubt that UPS will be on my ballot again at all this year.

[And I still have trouble with a school being UPS - aren't they the guys in the brown shorts?! ;D]

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 11, 2006, 10:44:27 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 11, 2006, 01:10:34 AM
...I'm feeling a whole lot better that I already had them only 18th.

And I had them 17th. One skeptical voter did not rank them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 11, 2006, 03:39:25 PM

Final: #1 Wooster 95 Wabash 71

Wooster had 6 players in double figures today led by Tom Port with 17 points, Devin Fulk with 14 points, Tim Vandervaart with 13 points, Kyle Witucky with 12 points, James Cooper with 10 points and Andy Van Horn with 10 points. Scots made 13 three pointers today. :)

This game was over at halftime as Wooster led 59-29 and the Scots bench played a big portion of the 2nd half. Wabash was led by Andrew Zimmer with 15 points and Gary Simkus with 13 points.

Wooster is now 22-1, 14-0 NCAC. ;D

GO SCOTS!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 11, 2006, 03:48:01 PM

Amherst 52, Tufts 36 HALF

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 11, 2006, 08:11:28 PM

WPI fell twice this week - how far will they fall in the poll?

Although I seem to recall Pat saying a team losing twice typically falls about 8 places, I'll predict they drop out completely. I suspect their support was kinda soft - 8 of 12 teams above them had worse records. At 19-1, the feeling may have been that (despite a questionable schedule) they have to be somewhere pretty high. With that schedule and three losses, I predict they are gone.

Comments?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 11, 2006, 08:14:31 PM

As Pat and others have pointed out on numerous occasions, you can't look at a team in isolation; where they are ranked depends both on what they do and what others in (and out of) the poll do.

With that caveat, I agree: WPI is gone.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 11, 2006, 08:19:17 PM

David, that's absolutely true (and I included that caveat just 3 posts earlier when talking about UPS - didn't want to beat the poor dead horse)! ;D

(Though for posters whining about their teams ranking, it apparantly cannot be repeated often enough!)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie_superfan on February 11, 2006, 10:45:33 PM

Tough night in the CCIW:

#3 Augustana 71
Millikin    73

- Augie loses on a buzzer-beater

#7 Illinois Wesleyan 66
Wheaton   69

Carthage      85
#15 North Central 73

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 11, 2006, 10:57:23 PM

So it's Millikin 73-71, not Augie??

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 11, 2006, 11:12:13 PM

Point comes from 18 down with 13 minutes to go to shock #12 (?) Stout in Menomonie, 69-68, even without senior forward starter Brian Bauer. That's gotta hurt Stout...more in the Pool C board.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie_superfan on February 11, 2006, 11:52:32 PM

Yeah....sorry, Augustana LOST to Millikin...I've changed my previous post

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 12, 2006, 12:00:21 AM

Quote from: augie_superfan on February 11, 2006, 11:52:32 PM
Yeah....sorry, Augustana LOST to Millikin...I've changed my previous post

We understand. Those tears can make your keyboard slippery! :'(

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 13, 2006, 09:38:19 AM

Lots of shakeups in the poll coming this week. A lot of questions to be answered as well. Like, will people actually stop voting for WPI and tell me I was right all along? (Same goes for UPS, by the way).

I'll try to run down the happening this week, if the individual team pages ever load (this always happens Monday morning. I'm not sure if its me or the site, but hey, whatever.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 13, 2006, 10:18:53 AM

1. Wooster (22-1, 14-0) wins over Hiram and Wabash
2. Lawrence (20-0, 14-0) win over Beloit
3. Augustana (20-3, 10-2) loss at Wheaton (IL), loss at Millikin
4. Hope (21-2, 10-2) loss at #25 Calvin, win at Adrian
5. Baldwin-Wallace (21-2, 15-1) wins over Mt Union and at Muskingum
6. Wittenberg (21-2, 12-2) wins at Ohio Wesleyan and Hiram
7. IWU (18-4, 8-4) win over Millikin, loss at Wheaton (IL)
8. York (21-2, 10-2) wins at Hood, over Catholic and at Mt St Mary
9. Amherst (22-2, 8-1) wins at Lasell and over Bates and Tufts
10. Albion (18-4, 9-3) wins over Alma and at Kalamazoo
11. Puget Sound (18-4, 12-2) loss at Whitworth, win at Whitman
12. Stout (18-5, 11-4) win over Superior, loss to Stevens Point
13. WPI (19-3, 8-3) loss at Wheaton (MA), home loss to Coast Guard
14. Mississippi College (21-1, 18-1) wins over Letourneau and East Texas Baptist
15. North Central (18-5, 7-5) wins over Wheaton (IL) and North Park, home loss to Carthage
16. Carnegie Mellon (18-4, 8-3) loss to NYU, win over Brandeis
17. Transylvania (19-4, 10-2) win over Hanover, loss at Manchester
18. Occidental (18-2, 9-1) wins at Cal Lutheran and over Whittier
19. VA Wesleyan (21-3, 16-1) wins over Lynchburg and at Bridgewater
20. St John Fisher (20-3, 11-1) wins at Alfred, and over Elmira and Ithaca
21. Lincoln (20-4) home win over Richard Stockton
22. Carroll (19-2, 13-1) win at Ripon
23. Wartburg (18-4, 11-3) win over Loras
24. Ohio Northern (17-5, 12-4) loss at Wilmington, win over Marrietta
25. Calvin (18-5, 11-1) wins over #4 Hope, and at Olivet

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 13, 2006, 10:36:55 AM

I'm not sure what to make of the CCIW anymore, either the whole conference is that much better than everybody else or they've all been beaten and worn down by the competition so that our opinions of them are inflated. I just don't know what to do with them right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 13, 2006, 03:07:45 PM

I'm having trouble gauging York... I mean, they've got the same record now that they did at this point last season... But what does that mean? Have they improved since last year, and are they legitimately a National Championship contender, or are they a team that, depending on the bracket, are essentially a lock for a Salem slot, just to be destroyed by teams from the midwest (little m) and Great Lakes?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 13, 2006, 03:20:21 PM

I've been high on York at the beginning of the year and doubtful over the last month, but this week's results have changed my mind again. They kicked the crap out of Catholic, avenging their only legitimate loss (the Salisbury game was obviously a slip-up that got them focused), but Catholic came out and beat them.

I just have this feeling that they are head and shoulders above just about everyone in the East (geogrpahical area, not NCAA region). If they had played Lincoln or Amherst or even one of the UAA schools, I might be able to judge them better. I think they are very good; they lost basically nothing from last year.

It still is a crapshoot about where to place them nationally though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 13, 2006, 03:27:31 PM

I talked to some of the players last year after we'd won our 2nd title and after they'd been rather humbled... From the way the guys were talking, they knew they needed to step their game up to reach that next level, nationally. They've got plenty of motivation... they've tasted the cream at the top, and it tastes so good... If they reach Salem again, and they're playing a team that HASN'T been there in the last 3 or 4 years (in other words, the players have never been there), then I'd say they've got an advantage... The whole mistique of the Final Four can be pretty intimidating, even though it is a lot of fun. Two years ago, at the Friday night dinner, we were eying up all the players from the other teams... trying to figure out who the best team was. Last year, we KNEW who the best team was ( ;)) and the other teams were still trying to figure it out.

I'm not trying to say that they lacked focus last year... but it's hard to truly focus when you don't exactly know what's coming next.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 13, 2006, 03:40:07 PM

I have to assume Amherst/Rochester and York are the favorites to come out, just because they have team leaders who have been there before. I may include Lincoln in that group in terms of talent, but it will take a good string of play to get there, even out of the Eastern Half of the country. Experience will mean a lot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 13, 2006, 04:17:36 PM

I was suprised after a home loss to Point, Stout only dropped one spot (though they did lose almost 60 votes). Also nice to see Whitewater back in the Polls. They've been on a roll. Of couse, Oshkosh was on a roll when they jumped back into the polls and then proceeded to lose right away! lol. ;D Whitewater crushed Point on Wednesday at Quandt.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 13, 2006, 04:29:25 PM

Whitewater definately deserved it; they've been on a nice roll of late. They also have the easiest road to a regular seasn WIAC title.

I am suprised OH Northern still got 27 votes. I know I'm a big fan, but the 2-4 OAC teams have been proving how even they are. Its tough to say one is better than another at this point, especially to the tune of 20-some points.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 13, 2006, 04:41:18 PM

27 points = average of one spot per voter

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 13, 2006, 04:50:49 PM

Were they really mentioned on every ballot? If so, then I'll shut up. It just seems odd that they (who weren't all that well loved by the voters to begin with) would stay up there after a loss. I guess its more of the confusion that this week has brought on.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 13, 2006, 04:55:01 PM

This week's poll is #105.

Congratulations to the following teams which reached (or tied) their highest ranking ever in the D3hoops.com poll (it goes without saying, BTW, that the #1 team is always on this list):
#3 Baldwin-Wallace College
#6 York College (also reached #6 in preseason and Weeks 1 and 2 polls this season)
#11 Mississippi College
#14 Carroll College

Streaks, Milestones, and Tidbits
* This is the fourth consecutive week with the same teams comprising the top 10, albeit in a different order each week.
* The College of Wooster is in the the top 10 for the 75th time, extending their record in this category, and for the 35th consecutive week (record: Carthage, 38 weeks)
* Illinois Wesleyan University is in the top 10 for the 40th time, moving into 6th place all time in this category, and in the top 25 for the 75th time (4th all time).
* Amherst College is in the top 25 for the 60th consecutive week (record: (tie) Catholic University and UW-Stevens Point, 62 weeks)

Congratulations to these fine programs on their achievements!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 13, 2006, 04:58:19 PM

No, I know they weren't on every ballot (they weren't on mine, for example) but I'm not sure at that low in the voting it's meaningful to parse what they got and, say, Wilmington didn't.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 13, 2006, 05:06:21 PM

I was just trying to bring something up. There wasn't a lot that stuck out at me this week. That was one of them. The OAC has been very interesting this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 13, 2006, 05:07:00 PM

Some background to these weekly posts of mine that I thought you might find interesting:

Data through poll #105

Most appearances in top 25 (bold indicates current top 25 member):
1. Wooster 97
2. UW-Stevens Point 85
3. Hampden-Sydney 80
4. Illinois Wesleyan 75
5. Catholic 70
6. Wittenberg 68
7t. Amherst 65
7t. Franklin & Marshall 65
9. Williams 63
10t. Buena Vista, Hanover 62

Longest active top 25 streak (record: 62):
1. Amherst 60
2. Wooster 58
3t. Puget Sound 35
3t. Wittenberg 35
5. Illinois Wesleyan 30
6t. Albion 26
6t. St. John Fisher 26
8. Wartburg 19
9. York (Pa.) 16
10t. Augustana, Hope, Lawrence 11

Most appearances in top 10 (bold indicates current top 10 member):
1. Wooster 75
2. Hampden-Sydney 59
3. UW-Stevens Point 55
4. Amherst 49
5. Catholic 41
6. Illinois Wesleyan 40
7. Washington U. in St. Louis 39
8. Carthage 28
9t. Christopher Newport 33
9t. Rochester 33

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fisheralum03 on February 13, 2006, 05:33:30 PM

do you think there will be a D3 prediction page for the bracket for the tournament like in football. I know they have one in D1?? It would probably take a lot of work to do though

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 13, 2006, 05:40:28 PM

Longest streak of top 10 appearances (bold indicates active streak):

1. Carthage 38 (2000-03)
2. Wooster 35 (2004-curr.)
3. Hampden-Sydney 31 (2002-04)
4. Williams 30 (2002-04)
5. Washington U. 29 (2001-03)
6. Illinois Wesleyan 28 (2004-curr.)
7. Catholic 25 (2001-03)
8. Calvin 24 (1999-2001)
9t. Hanover 23 (2003-05)
9t. Rochester 23 (2003-04)
9t. Wooster 23 (2000-01)

12. Albion 22 (2005-curr.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 13, 2006, 05:51:10 PM

Dave--your weekly poll tidbits are becoming a favorite. Good work.

Albion has managed to stay in the top 10 consecutively through all the losses.

I guess its important which week you lose.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 13, 2006, 06:54:29 PM

Quote from: fisheralum03 on February 13, 2006, 05:33:30 PM
do you think there will be a D3 prediction page for the bracket for the tournament like in football. I know they have one in D1?? It would probably take a lot of work to do though

Not entirely sure what you mean but I'll address both scenarios that jump to mind:

Will we predict who makes the tournament field? Yes, about 95% sure we will. Not sure how we'll get the mechanics of it done but we'll try. My Sunday hours and the new Selection Monday release time make it challenging.

Will we have a contest for users to predict the tournament outcome? Yes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 13, 2006, 08:03:36 PM

Quote from: fisheralum03 on February 13, 2006, 05:33:30 PM
do you think there will be a D3 prediction page for the bracket for the tournament like in football. I know they have one in D1?? It would probably take a lot of work to do though

I'm sure those "predictions" could easily be posted on the 2005-2006 Men's basketball tourney board.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 13, 2006, 11:05:20 PM

It isn't the mechanics of putting them on the site, it's the time it will take me to make accurate projections. I work until 1:30 a.m. on Monday morning, so I have to be done before I leave for work ... except I am not sure if games will be done by then.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on February 13, 2006, 11:54:55 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 09, 2006, 01:00:08 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 09, 2006, 12:47:54 AM
Quote from: Old School on February 09, 2006, 12:43:22 AM
Quote from: augie_superfan on February 08, 2006, 10:06:36 PM
#3 Augustana 60
Wheaton (Ill.) 64
I can hear diehardfan yelling and screaming from California, "WAHOO!" or something like, "I used to go there and give cookies to the players!!!" :D
Wow!!! What was that???? I just thought I saw an e-cookie going across the monitor screen! :D :D :D
Miraculously (given my computer skills!) I just intercepted it! It was e-delicious!

Quote from: Old School on February 09, 2006, 10:55:38 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 09, 2006, 04:39:32 AM
And here we all thought that April was just some harmless coed who moved to Cali after graduation to do something nature-y ... while all along she's been an NSA operative specializing in cybernetic surveillance.
Two years ago when I picked her up on the way to Salem, she did bring her computer, which weighed about 1,000 pounds, and we threw it in the trunk. I thought it was strange that she brought that thing along! Maybe it was to do "work" for the NSA while in Salem. She also flew back, so maybe she had to do a detour to Washington, D.C. to upload her "findings". :D

How do I miss this stuff? First that kimchi cookie random tangent somewhere, and now this... that's it, I'm never leaving my computer again. :P

Sorry I've been so busy, I love you too guys. :-*

Incidenally, I gave cookies to those guys in January, thanks to work I now have a laptop, and the NSA has a much bigger budget than the non-profit I work for. :P :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 14, 2006, 12:11:43 AM

April,

WHAT?!! You leave your computer?!

Pat, I think you should cut her off! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on February 14, 2006, 12:12:55 AM

Quote from: augie_superfan on February 11, 2006, 10:45:33 PM
Tough night in the CCIW:

#7 Illinois Wesleyan 66
Wheaton 69

Tough how? ;)

Hoopsfan, I have no idea what's going on with the CCIW... if you wanted me to rank these teams, I wouldn't be able to do it.

Cause I'm sitting here and I think... would I put Augie first? No... IWU? No... NCC? Naa... Elmhurst? Uhm??

Some of it has to be them beating up on eachother... but some of it is all this weird emotional stuff... it's almost like this is the girls league (only I am allowed to make comments like this... every else makes them at their own peril! :D )

Mostly I'm just trying to figure out who gave the other three votes for Wheaton in the poll in CCIW chat. :D (I was kidding... mostly because Wheaton needs a lot of things to fall into place to make the tourney, not because I think we wouldn't have a shot considering how things are going! but who are all these serious people??) :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on February 14, 2006, 12:18:19 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 14, 2006, 12:11:43 AM
April,

WHAT?!! You leave your computer?!

Pat, I think you should cut her off! ;)

Dear lord yes... work and life have me EXTREMELY busy right now... I've been trying to catch up tonight (make it through all the multiregional boards, but that's it) and it was at the expense of packing for another business trip I'm taking tomorrow. :o :-\ If it wasn't for the front page and glances at the scoreboard, I'd have no idea what was going on around the nation.

Ah.. to sleep in my own bed... for a normal number of hours... what a sweet thought. :'(

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 14, 2006, 12:53:41 AM

What?! You don't have a laptop and WiFi?! There are times when you cannot be connected?! ;D

Only teasing - sorry you are working so hard. I'm spoiled - I only have (depending on semester) about 18-24 hours a week that I'm scheduled to work. Don't misunderstand - I work 45-50 hours a week, but most are when I choose to do it (often 6pm to 2am). And contrary to the perpetually 'linked' generations, I treasure the time that I am absolutely unreachable (I do NOT own a cell phone, and never plan to, nor do I have a PDA, laptop, etc.) The only 'Blackberries' I own go on my pancakes. Undoubtedly this makes me a 'geezer', but I'm quite content with that status. When I'm off, I'm off (unless I WANT to be on).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 14, 2006, 01:46:34 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 14, 2006, 12:53:41 AM
What?! You don't have a laptop and WiFi?! There are times when you cannot be connected?! ;D

Only teasing - sorry you are working so hard. I'm spoiled - I only have (depending on semester) about 18-24 hours a week that I'm scheduled to work. Don't misunderstand - I work 45-50 hours a week, but most are when I choose to do it (often 6pm to 2am). And contrary to the perpetually 'linked' generations, I treasure the time that I am absolutely unreachable (I do NOT own a cell phone, and never plan to, nor do I have a PDA, laptop, etc.) The only 'Blackberries' I own go on my pancakes. Undoubtedly this makes me a 'geezer', but I'm quite content with that status. When I'm off, I'm off (unless I WANT to be on).

This speech from the third most frequent poster in D3Sports.com history.
Mr. Ypsi's posting stats (http://www.d3sports.com/post/index.php?action=profile;u=394;sa=statPanel)
;D
(Signed, the 14th most frequent poster in D3Sports.com history. :D)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 14, 2006, 08:53:03 AM

I'm not sure any of us have a right to speak about time spent on or off this site. We really just have to forget the fact that half our social interaction revolves around basketball that 80% of the country doesn't even know exists.

There, I said it, and we never have to speak of it again. It's a fantasy world and everyone else doesn't have a clue what they're missing. I'm sure this is perfectly normal, in fact preferable, behavior for same adults.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 14, 2006, 05:57:56 PM

Forgive me if this has been asked and posted...

Anyone know how many times in the history of the D3hoops.com poll one conference has had 4 teams in? The CCIW currently has #9 Augustana, #10 Illinois Wesleyan, #21 North Central, and #25 Elmhurst. I'm guessing we have had 4 WIAC teams a few times?

Thought it'd be worth a mention on Hoopsville tonight.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 14, 2006, 06:34:11 PM

Q,

David has been compiling all the stats about past polls, but the icon says he's off line at the moment - hope you reach him in time!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 14, 2006, 07:09:33 PM

On the women's side, the ASC has 4 this week...
McM, Hardin-Simmons and Howard Payne on the West (3 out of 8 )
Miss College on the East (1 out of 7)

Not quite as impressive, but interesting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Jon on February 14, 2006, 08:22:23 PM

My profile clearly indicates my bias, but I would be interested in hearing any discussion on the two 20-win teams not receiving Top 25 votes, Lakeland (20-5) and Alvernia (20-4).

Okay, maybe I don't care so much to hear the Lakeland angle, but if I'm gonna throw something out there I gotta be fair to all schools that meet the criteria.

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 14, 2006, 08:53:03 AM
We really just have to forget the fact that half our social interaction revolves around basketball that 80% of the country doesn't even know exists.

Unfortunately for most of the country I think that percentage may even be a bit low.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 14, 2006, 08:27:10 PM

I discussed Alvernia with a couple of voters this week and if a home game against Montclair State (12-11) is the best non-conference win and there are losses to F&M and Albright (zero votes) then it was really hard to make a case for them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 14, 2006, 08:40:01 PM

Lakeland hasn't played anyone and won. They lost to La Crosse who is ranked in the West Region. If this was last year and they beat Point, then they'd get some street cred. Beating up on Lake Forest, Northland Baptist Bible College, Ill. Tech and Viterbo aren't going to win you any points, especially since only Lake Forest is a D3 member. They were more than respectable vs. Hope, but that's still a loss. Losing to future conference members in NIIC reps Benedictine and Rockford isn't helping either. The only solid nonconference win is against Point, and they aren't even receiving any votes...they're just in the WIAC, so that looks good.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Jon on February 14, 2006, 08:43:46 PM

I had a feeling those two loses would come back to bite the Crusaders.

I think the beauty of an expanded March bracket will be the opportunity for more teams to understand just how they stack up against the competition. Now the trick is to assure a place in the expanded bracket.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 14, 2006, 08:53:20 PM

Final: #1 Wooster 97 Kenyon 72

Wooster clinches their 11th NCAC regular season title! :)

Wooster led by more than 30 points before clearing the bench. Wooster had 5 players in double figures tonight led by James Cooper with 21 points, Tim Vandervaart with 13 points, Evan Will with 13 points, Tom Port with 11 markers and Brandon Johnson with 10 points.

Wooster is now 23-1, 15-0 in the NCAC! ;D Next game at OWU on 2/18.

GO SCOTS!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 14, 2006, 09:44:48 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on February 14, 2006, 05:57:56 PM
Forgive me if this has been asked and posted...

Anyone know how many times in the history of the D3hoops.com poll one conference has had 4 teams in? The CCIW currently has #9 Augustana, #10 Illinois Wesleyan, #21 North Central, and #25 Elmhurst. I'm guessing we have had 4 WIAC teams a few times?

Thought it'd be worth a mention on Hoopsville tonight.

That's correct. The WIAC has done this six times in three seasons, as follows:
2004-05, week 10: SP 2, P'ville 21, Stout 22, Oshkosh 23
2002-03, week 8: SP 9, WW 11, Oshkosh 20, Stout 25
2002-03, week 5: SP 6, Osh 14, EC 16, WW 22
2002-03, week 4: SP 6, Osh 9, EC 15, WW 22
2002-03, week 3: SP 6, Osh 10, EC 21, WW 22
2001-02, week 11: SP 14, Osh 15, WW 20, LaX 24

No other conference has accomplished this feat, until the CCIW did it this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 14, 2006, 09:55:09 PM

Wow.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 14, 2006, 10:14:43 PM

David,

I knew you'd come through! (Hope it was in time for Q's broadcast.)

What's even more impressive about the WIAC being previously the only conference is that they did it with SEVEN different teams!

More evidence that, although I suspect the WIAC is only battling the NESCAC for #3 THIS year (#1 CCIW, #2 UAA), they are perennially the OVERALL best conference in d3.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 15, 2006, 04:55:17 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 14, 2006, 10:14:43 PMMore evidence that, although I suspect the WIAC is only battling the NESCAC for #3 THIS year (#1 CCIW, #2 UAA), they are perennially the OVERALL best conference in d3.

Chuck, I'm still not ready to hand the silver medal to the UAA this season. I've seen three UAA teams thus far this season (Chicago three times, Carnegie Mellon and Brandeis once apiece), and I'll see Wash U as well next weekend. Based upon what I've seen it looks to me as though the UAA is a top-five-for-sure conference -- but probably not better than the WIAC. I've seen UW-Whitewater this season, too, and I think they'd beat Carnegie Mellon. I also think that the top four teams in the CCIW would each beat Carnegie Mellon on a neutral floor.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TheFence on February 15, 2006, 08:21:13 AM

Probably the wrong board but I'd have to disagree with Mr Sager, and I would have the UAA the #2 conference this year. Both conferences ( WIAC and UAA)are elite in 2006 and therefore they beat each other up. The tie-breaker for me has to be non-conference performance and I think the UAA edges the WIAC out this season.

At the top of the conferences you may be right Whitewater and the top four from the CCIW may beat Carnegie Mellon this year. But you may be wrong, Carnegie Mellon did beat Princeton who now has 7 D1 wins. So just because you think the Top of the CCIW and WIAC are better than Top of the UAA doesn't make it fact. The fact is we'll never know unless the meet come march.

At the bottom of the conference the UAA definately has the edge in my book. Both Emory and Case are better than River Falls, Eau Claire, and Superior. Of course the same 'we'll never know argument' applies here as well. However records and quality wins seem to be a pretty good indicator here. Both Case and Emory have solid wins in the conference and out of it, which to me makes them a tougher bottom of the conference game to win.

The UAA may not be as good as the WIAC year in and year out but in 06 the UAA deserves some respect, Top 2 respect in my book.

Of course I say all of this proudly not having seen a WIAC game this season. (I have seen multiple CCIW and UAA games as well as NESCAC games.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 15, 2006, 10:07:46 AM

I've said it before, I think the bottom of the UAA is far superior than the bottom of any other conference. There is much more parity and at a high level in the UAA than in any other conference. However, I'm not sure the top teams (Rochester, CMU, WashU, NYU) are on par with the top two teams in any other major league. Augie and IWU seem to be on a higher level, and probably the WIAC teams as well. Amherst might be better, but probably no one else in the NESCAC.

I'd have to go: CCIW, WIAC, UAA, and then a conglomeration of several conferences with quality teams, but not quite on the elite level. NESCAC, ODAC, MIAA. I think the OAC and the MWC are better than they get credit for as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bamm on February 15, 2006, 10:21:06 AM

Hoops Fan -- In your opinion is this year's Amherst squad better than last year's, even with the loss of Schiel? I was pretty unimpressed with their showing against Rochester on their home floor in the NCAA's last March. Would this team fair better?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 15, 2006, 10:58:28 AM

I think there is less talent on this team without Schiel, but this team has the experience from last year and a lot of very good returning players. I think they are poised to do better and be a tougher out than last year's squad. Honestly, I didn't pay enough attention to the contributions of the returning players last year to know how much they've improved. I can't realistically comment on talent level, but their level of play is definately up. I think they are better as a team than last year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 15, 2006, 10:59:20 AM

That being said: I still don't think they belong in the top ten; I'm not sure there is anybody east of Wooster who does right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 15, 2006, 11:22:22 AM

Who, east of Wooster, would you rank highest?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 15, 2006, 11:49:40 AM

I think CMU, York, VA Wesleyan, Randolph-Macon, Lincoln, Amherst, Rochester, maybe NYU, but I'm not toally sold and Ursinius. I think they are all playing pretty well, but not on the level of a top ten team. Add Cortland or Fisher if you want ten.

This is in no particular order, although I think York, Amherst and the UAA and ODAC schools are probably near the top.

Everyone forgot about RMC when Wansley went down for a while, but they have been playing great of late; I hope they can make the tournament and get put into the A/MA region to give it some more depth.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bamm on February 15, 2006, 12:09:33 PM

Fisher belongs on that list, but I'm not sure about Cortland. Fisher choaked away a game @ RMC. They won @Rochester, something only CMU has done in the UAA. They also played Baldwin-Wallace tough on a neutral floor. Their inside play is much improved over last year, they seem tougher (and that should have been a goal after getting pounded by a big, physical Potsdam squad in the NCAA's last year).

Cortland plays great defense, but the knock on them is they have trouble scoring and don't have a go-to-guy. Having seen them play twice, those are valid points. But any team that plays solid D and has several three point threats (which they do) has a shot in any game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 15, 2006, 12:12:40 PM

You've convinced me. I'll put Fisher in there to make it an even ten.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on February 15, 2006, 12:48:05 PM

Quote from: TheFence on February 15, 2006, 08:21:13 AM
Carnegie Mellon did beat Princeton who now has 7 D1 wins.

Another note on Princeton, they are now 5-2 and second place in the Ivy League.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 15, 2006, 01:59:37 PM

True, but they've been a little closer to the earth in recent weeks. If they can win the UAA outright I'll put them at the top.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 15, 2006, 02:33:54 PM

It's time again for my power rating amalgamation, after Sunday's games.

Now before someone goes postal, yes Lawrence did slip to #4. But their SOS slipped while Wooster's and B-W's improved and only 3.5 rating points (in my system) separate 1st though 4th, while there is a 19.5 gap between 4th and 5th. So basically, take 1-4 as a group that could all really be #1.

Needless to say, Wooster's SOS will dip with their game against Kenyon last night.

1. Wooster
2. Baldwn - Wallace
3. Wittenberg
4. Lawrence
5. Hope
6. Amherst
7. Augustana
8. Illinois Weslyean
9. Carroll
10. Lincoln
11. Carnegie Mellon
12. York (PA)
13. Tufts
14. Transylvania
15. St. John Fisher
16. Calvin
17. Wisc - Stout
18. Va. Wesleyan
19. Albion
20. Wisc - LaCrosse
21. Puget Sound
22. NYU
23. North Central
24. Wisc - Whitewater
25. Cortland State

Mississippi College's SOS took a huge dive (229 to 266) - thanks to games against weak sisters. They're now #30 due to that.

The Bottom 10:

395. Daniel Webster
394. Green Mountain
393. Maranatha Baptist
392. Maine - Presque Isle
391. Principia
390. Centenary
389. Massachusetts College
388. Albertus Mangus
387. Bard
386. Anna Maria

Gotta love the NE region, eh?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Grutte Dirk on February 15, 2006, 03:11:02 PM

What league traditionly recieves the least respect in the ranks, then produces in the NCAA's?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 15, 2006, 04:00:38 PM

I think the ranking does a fine job of giving recognition to the teams that ultimately prevail in the tourney.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 15, 2006, 04:02:50 PM

I'm glad you said this, because I was looking at the message trying to figure out if there were any conferences that fit the premise of his question. I couldn't come up with any.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 15, 2006, 04:07:03 PM

Now the regional rankings on the other hand...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 15, 2006, 04:28:33 PM

How about the MIAC? Some of the schools have had good NCAA runs in recent years.......but they certainly aren't considered Final Four material every year coming out of the rugged West. Those teams always seem to get the short end in the poll as they're almost always ranked behind UW schools.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 15, 2006, 05:07:08 PM

They've only made the Final Four once. The MIAC is indeed 10-9 in the postseason since the pool system came into play, but take out Gustavus Adolphus' 5-1 sprint to Salem in 2003 and you're left with something far more mediocre.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 15, 2006, 05:16:14 PM

Rethinking the question.........its sort of loaded.

Most often individual teams seem to get respect in the poll despite their weak conferences. It sure didn't hold back WPI this year.

I think Pats pollsters are pretty good at picking out the questionable schedules. It would be interesting to see what teams with great records who were ranked relatively low in the D3hoops poll flopped out of the tournament early.

I bet the poll has nailed most of them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 15, 2006, 09:59:23 PM

So much for #4.

Wabash 51, Wittenberg 46! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 15, 2006, 10:07:22 PM

Reportedly, B-W also went down, as did Albion. Looks like probably ANOTHER big shake-up in the rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: larry_u on February 15, 2006, 10:26:00 PM

Lawrence 64 Carroll 63 on a Kevin Bradley Buzzer beater...

LU stays undefeated and will now host the MWC Tournament

3 peat!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 15, 2006, 11:01:52 PM

Pat, do you have the stats for all the conferences somewhere, since the Pool System? If you don't have it off hand (like is posted on the d3football page) then don't worry about it... I just wondered what it looked like.

UW Whitewater beats Oshkosh tonight by 10 and nails down at least a share of the WIAC title. Point lost to Platteville, so Stout is now the only team that can catch the Warhawks (granted, with a Warhawk loss).

The WIAC finally appears to be shaking out:

1 Whitewater* 12-3
2 Stout 11-4
3 La Crosse 10-5
3 Stevens Pt 10-5

5 Oshkosh 9-6
6 Platteville 7-8
7 River Falls 5-11
8 Eau Claire 4-11

9 Superior 0-15

If the season were to end today, I believe that Point would be the 3rd seed and La Crosse the 4th (because Point swept them).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 15, 2006, 11:12:33 PM

Off-season Research Project:

I propose that Pat select a Blue-Ribbon Committee to compile the post-season records of the various teams and conferences, Pool A, B or C, Men and Women, and post it on the boards by next fall!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 15, 2006, 11:21:03 PM

I AM a math major, graduating in May... perhaps I can find a grant somewhere to "fund" my research so I'll get paid for it, and we'll get our results!

... not that compiling win/loss records is extremely tedious math (necessitating the talents of one who obtains a certain prowess in upper math... but...)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 15, 2006, 11:22:06 PM

Heck we can probably as DC to do it. ;D :D ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 15, 2006, 11:29:49 PM

Quote from: sac on February 15, 2006, 11:22:06 PM
Heck we can probably as DC to do it. ;D :D ;)

I sure hope there's some questions about D3 men's hoops top 25 and national championship selection pool system on the California bar exam.

Pete is the coach of State U., a Division 3 school in the State of Columbia. His team has a conference record of 12-4, but one member of his conference, City College, is a provisional team. State U beat City College twice. State U. also compiled a 6-3 record against teams in its region. State U. lost to County Tech, which is neither in State U's conference or region, and is 179.8 miles from State U, according to Microsoft Streets and Trips 2004. State U. has been ranked in the D3hoops.com top 25 in 6 of the past 7 weeks, reaching a high ranking of #17 in week 7. They are currently ranked #22, and have a QoWI of 9.763. If State U. wins the remainder of its games, will it qualify for the tournament? If so, under which Pool? Will they get a home game in the first round? What will their year-end ranking be? Discuss.

Bring it on! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 15, 2006, 11:34:06 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 15, 2006, 11:21:03 PM
I AM a math major, graduating in May... perhaps I can find a grant somewhere to "fund" my research so I'll get paid for it, and we'll get our results!

... not that compiling win/loss records is extremely tedious math (necessitating the talents of one who obtains a certain prowess in upper math... but...)

Now understanding the QOWI, or better yet, developing an acceptible multi-region SOS would be an admirable post-graduate study proposal!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 15, 2006, 11:35:05 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 14, 2006, 06:31:17 PM
Since the playoffs took their current form, with Pool B and C and 30-some automatic bids:

Conference W L Pct.
Wisconsin Intercollegiate Athletic Conference 24 6 .800
Ohio Athletic Conference 16 6 .727
Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association 13 6 .684
New England Small College Athletic Conference 21 11 .656
Capital Athletic Conference 13 7 .650
College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin 15 9 .625
University Athletic Association 14 9 .609
New Jersey Athletic Conference 12 8 .600
New England Women's and Men's Athletic Conference 11 8 .579
State University of New York Athletic Conference 9 7 .563
Great South Athletic Conference 7 6 .538
MAC Freedom League 7 6 .538
Massachusetts State Collegiate Athletic Conference 7 6 .538
Minnesota Intercollegiate Athletic Conference 10 9 .526
Old Dominion Athletic Conference 12 11 .522
North Coast Athletic Conference 9 9 .500
Northwest Conference 8 8 .500
Little East Conference 7 7 .500
Centennial Conference 6 6 .500
MAC Commonwealth League 6 7 .462
Liberty League 5 6 .455
Southern Collegiate Athletic Conference 5 6 .455
American Southwest Conference 7 9 .438
Midwest Conference 5 7 .417
Pennsylvania Athletic Conference 5 7 .417
Heartland Collegiate Athletic Conference 4 6 .400
Iowa Intercollegiate Athletic Conference 4 6 .400
Southern California Intercollegiate Athletic Conference 4 6 .400
Allegheny Mountain Collegiate Conference 3 5 .375
Skyline Conference 3 6 .333
USA South Athletic Conference 3 6 .333
Presidents' Athletic Conference 1 2 .333
Empire 8 2 6 .250
City University of New York Athletic Conference 1 6 .143
Great Northeast Athletic Conference 1 6 .143
Northern Illinois-Iowa Conference 1 7 .125
Independents 1 9 .100
North Eastern Athletic Conference 0 1 .000
North Atlantic Conference 0 5 .000
Commonwealth Coast Conference 0 6 .000
Lake Michigan Conference 0 6 .000
St. Louis Intercollegiate Athletic Conference 0 6 .000

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 15, 2006, 11:45:08 PM

Pat,

Which year is the starting point for "Since the playoffs took their current form..."?

I'm guessing 1999-2000, from the tabulated results?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 15, 2006, 11:56:30 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 15, 2006, 11:45:08 PM
Pat,

Which year is the starting point for "Since the playoffs took their current form..."?

I'm guessing 1999-2000, from the tabulated results?

Well, the SLIAC is 0-6 in the table, and we know that they've had exactly one team in the draw each season (via Pool A; no pool Cs). Thus it's a table of 6 years of results. Thus it begins with the 1999-00 season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 15, 2006, 11:58:34 PM

David, that was the way I was calculating it, but wanted confirmation in case I has overlooked something.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 16, 2006, 12:00:19 AM

Yes, the pools system started in 1999-00.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 16, 2006, 12:26:17 AM

Pat's compilation of conference results highlight the "Power Conferences" as well as any measure one could devise.

IMHO, the Power Conferences seem to be a winning percentage of .600 and above.

The weakest seem to be below .400.

The great middle is well documented. The real effect of this is to demonstrate that the only way to get a high winning percentage is to the Elite 8 or Final Four on a frequent basis. Otherwise, the cumulative "one-and-done" effect is seen at the bottom.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 16, 2006, 12:51:54 AM

On that note Ralph... I wonder what the correlation between post season winning percentage and non-conference winning percentage would be...? A few of these have been compiled over the years, and actually, I think D3hoop's new schedule (with the non-conference tab) would make this relatively easy to figure out... well, as easy as compiling the non-con records of each of the 396 teams, but...

My guess would be that there's a relatively strong correlation between the winning percentages, but it isn't 1 to 1... Even in the strongest conferences (talking regular-season here) the top teams aren't always the top in the country, and likewise, even in conferences that are rather top-heavy, sometimes these upper-echelon teams are at the upper echelon of the nation, as well as their conference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 16, 2006, 04:42:07 AM

Quote from: TheFence on February 15, 2006, 08:21:13 AM
Probably the wrong board but I'd have to disagree with Mr Sager, and I would have the UAA the #2 conference this year. Both conferences ( WIAC and UAA)are elite in 2006 and therefore they beat each other up. The tie-breaker for me has to be non-conference performance and I think the UAA edges the WIAC out this season.

At the top of the conferences you may be right Whitewater and the top four from the CCIW may beat Carnegie Mellon this year. But you may be wrong, Carnegie Mellon did beat Princeton who now has 7 D1 wins. So just because you think the Top of the CCIW and WIAC are better than Top of the UAA doesn't make it fact. The fact is we'll never know unless the meet come march.

At the bottom of the conference the UAA definately has the edge in my book. Both Emory and Case are better than River Falls, Eau Claire, and Superior. Of course the same 'we'll never know argument' applies here as well. However records and quality wins seem to be a pretty good indicator here. Both Case and Emory have solid wins in the conference and out of it, which to me makes them a tougher bottom of the conference game to win.

The UAA may not be as good as the WIAC year in and year out but in 06 the UAA deserves some respect, Top 2 respect in my book.

Of course I say all of this proudly not having seen a WIAC game this season. (I have seen multiple CCIW and UAA games as well as NESCAC games.)

I trust my eyeballs, not the records of teams that don't have any common opponents. I've seen the CCIW's top four, and I've seen UWW, and I'm dead certain that they're better than CMU -- and that's no knock on the Tartans, who are a fine ballclub. I will concede, though, that the bottom UAA teams are better than what you usually see on the bottom of a D3 conference. I watched Brandeis take it to Chicago to capture what was then the first conference win of the year for the 'deis, and I was impressed by them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 16, 2006, 04:47:52 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 15, 2006, 05:07:08 PM
They've only made the Final Four once. The MIAC is indeed 10-9 in the postseason since the pool system came into play, but take out Gustavus Adolphus' 5-1 sprint to Salem in 2003 and you're left with something far more mediocre.

Hamline made it to the Final Four in 1977. And St. Thomas got there in 1994. Both teams finished fourth.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 16, 2006, 04:55:35 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 15, 2006, 11:12:33 PM
Off-season Research Project:

I propose that Pat select a Blue-Ribbon Committee to compile the post-season records of the various teams and conferences, Pool A, B or C, Men and Women, and post it on the boards by next fall!

I actually have this all at home. I'll have to dig it out, though -- I only have it on hand once a year, during tournament time when I update it. Unlike Pat's printout, it covers individual schools as well as conferences, and it goes all the way back to the D3 tourney's genesis in 1975.

I can't vouch for its complete accuracy with regard to conferences, though, since I don't have the exact dates of formation and/or induction into the D3 ranks for each conference. Plus, there's a few schools whose conference status I'm unsure of back in the early days of D3.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 16, 2006, 09:31:53 AM

So I guess the WIAC does benefit in one area by beating each other to a pulp and only getting one bid. Their lone entry is usually pretty good and produces quite a nice post-season record for the conference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 16, 2006, 11:50:00 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 16, 2006, 04:47:52 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 15, 2006, 05:07:08 PM
They've only made the Final Four once. The MIAC is indeed 10-9 in the postseason since the pool system came into play, but take out Gustavus Adolphus' 5-1 sprint to Salem in 2003 and you're left with something far more mediocre.

Hamline made it to the Final Four in 1977. And St. Thomas got there in 1994. Both teams finished fourth.

Both predate the pools system and the D3hoops.com Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 16, 2006, 06:18:07 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 15, 2006, 11:01:52 PM
If the season were to end today, I believe that Point would be the 3rd seed and La Crosse the 4th (because Point swept them).

And then we'd play Platteville again...oh, the joy.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 16, 2006, 06:27:11 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 16, 2006, 09:31:53 AM
So I guess the WIAC does benefit in one area by beating each other to a pulp and only getting one bid. Their lone entry is usually pretty good and produces quite a nice post-season record for the conference.

West
1 Occidental 11-1 18-2 (Tied with Claremont-Mudd-Scripps in SCIAC)
2 Wisconsin-Stout 15-4 18-5 (WIAC)
3 Puget Sound 13-2 18-4 (Tied with Willamette in NWC)
4 Wartburg 16-3 18-4 (Leads IIAC)
5 Wisconsin-La Crosse 16-5 18-5 (WIAC)
6 St. Thomas (Minn.) 17-5 19-5 (Leads MIAC)
7 Wisconsin-Whitewater 13-5 17-5 (Leads WIAC)
8 Carleton 15-4 18-5 (MIAC)

Despite the loss to "unranked" Stevens Point AT HOME, Stout actually moved up a spot in the regional rankings. They play at La Crosse this weekend, so another loss wouldn't be too damaging...though I think they'll pull out the win. If they win the conference finale and fall in the conference tourney, I'm confident they should get a Pool C bid.

Occidental and Wartburg went down last night, so Stout could almost afford to lose Saturday and in the conference tourney and be in good shape, IMO.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 16, 2006, 07:38:36 PM

I seriously think that Stout and La Crosse are playing for an at-large bid. Here's the shakedown for the matchup on Saturday... if La Crosse beats Stout (and Stevens Point beats Superior) then Point becomes the 2 seed, La Cross the 3rd, and Stout the 4th. If Stout beats LaX, and Whitewater loses to Eau Claire, then Stout and Whitewater share the conference title, Stout gets the 1 seed, WW #2, Point #3, and Oshkosh gains the #4 seed (because they split with the top 2... LaX lost both to Oshkosh).

Personally, I'm rooting for La Crosse. This would give Point the #2 seed and a matchup against River Falls, and, given a win, a second round home game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 16, 2006, 08:51:01 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 16, 2006, 11:50:00 AMBoth predate the pools system and the D3hoops.com Top 25.

True, but the Bilk didn't specify which poll he was talking about in his original question. There were other (definitely inferior) polls that predated the D3hoops.com Top 25, e.g., the NABC poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 16, 2006, 09:06:49 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 16, 2006, 08:51:01 PM
[ There were other (definitely inferior) polls that predated the D3hoops.com Top 25, e.g., the NABC poll.

Where is Barry Robinson these days.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 16, 2006, 09:28:03 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 16, 2006, 08:51:01 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 16, 2006, 11:50:00 AMBoth predate the pools system and the D3hoops.com Top 25.

True, but the Bilk didn't specify which poll he was talking about in his original question. There were other (definitely inferior) polls that predated the D3hoops.com Top 25, e.g., the NABC poll.

Since those polls are dead, I am pretty sure that that was not the topic of discussion. :)

Don't forget Basketball America. I remember at the beginning of the 2001-02 season they GRACIOUSLY offered to let us merge with their poll. I told them we weren't interested.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on February 16, 2006, 09:30:12 PM

Pat, before you took over the site wasn't there a poll on it? Or was that just the NABC poll?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 16, 2006, 09:37:38 PM

We ran the NABC poll on the site until starting our own, yes. I don't know if the Centennial Conference ran the NABC poll on the site before 12/1/97.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 16, 2006, 10:48:16 PM

Quote from: sac on February 16, 2006, 09:06:49 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 16, 2006, 08:51:01 PM
[ There were other (definitely inferior) polls that predated the D3hoops.com Top 25, e.g., the NABC poll.

Where is Barry Robinson these days.

Barry's old Columbus Multimedia poll may be dead and gone, but we still have a rogue ranking coming out of the Great Lakes: smedindy's Power Ranking Amalgamation.

So is Smeds the new Barry? ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 17, 2006, 12:21:35 AM

I may be a rouge, but I'm no Barry... :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 17, 2006, 01:08:06 AM

Quote from: smedindy on February 17, 2006, 12:21:35 AM
I may be a rouge, but I'm no Barry... :D

Senator, I knew Barry Robinson. I worked with Barry Robinson. Barry Robinson was a friend of mine. Senator, you're no Barry Robinson!

Wait a minute...wasn't he talking to a guy from Indiana, too? :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 17, 2006, 04:03:35 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 16, 2006, 09:28:03 PMSince those polls are dead, I am pretty sure that that was not the topic of discussion. :)

You know me. I don't like to assume anything. Besides, we've talked about other polls on this site before. No reason why the Bilk couldn't have been thinking of any and every D3 poll that's come around the bend ... whoever the heck the Bilk happens to be. :)

Didn't the AP do a D3 poll for awhile, too? I'm trying to remember what poll it was that had Augustana #1 in the nation back in '82 when North Park beat them with the Mike Gordon buzzer-beater from halfcourt, as discussed on CCIW Chat last weekend. Prikkel would probably remember what poll that was. He's much better with 1982 stuff than he is with 2006 stuff. :D

I miss Barry. Not just because of his poll, but because he was a nationally-oriented D3 fan who also took a passionate interest in a team (Ohio Wesleyan) that doesn't get a lot of play in the NCAC room. Their one remaining advocate, Bishopsfan, is pretty sporadic.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: woosterbooster on February 17, 2006, 08:25:30 AM

I'm looking to find out if there are any teams who are good bets to make the tournament field that have already completed their regular season schedules (not their league tournaments). I've found only two so far, Virginia Wesleyan and Randolph Macon.

Anyone know of any others?

Thanks, Jack

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 17, 2006, 09:44:48 AM

Lincoln is done with their schedule. The whole NESCAC is done.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on February 17, 2006, 03:11:16 PM

The rest of the NEWMAC finishes up tomorrow. WPI is already done.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 17, 2006, 05:18:49 PM

Lakeland (16-3, in-region LMC) has an outside shot. They have 5 teams ahead of them in the Midwest Region, but two are CCIW teams and two are MWC teams, while Transy is the other one. At the least, they could have just two teams ahead of them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 18, 2006, 05:09:12 PM

Final: Ohio Wesleyan 86 #1 Wooster 83

Bishops pull the upset on their home floor knocking off #1 Wooster. OWU was led by Andy Warnock, Ben Chojnacki and Kyle Holliday all with double figure points.

Wooster had 4 players in double figures today but didn't shoot well enough to get the job done. Wooster was actually down 11 points with 3 minutes left, mounted a comeback and then missed a three pointer at the buzzer that would have sent the game to OT.

Congrats to Ohio Wesleyan on the big upset.

Wooster is now 23-2, 15-1 NCAC. Wooster next plays Kenyon in the NCAC tourney and the Scots will host the NCAC tourney finals if they get by the Lords.

GO SCOTS!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 18, 2006, 05:09:53 PM

More carnage at the top of the poll today. Aside from Wooster's loss, #3 Baldwin-Wallace is dropped by Capital in Columbus, 76-71.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 18, 2006, 05:21:46 PM

Things I've learned about the 2005-06 D-3 hoops season.

1. No one wants a Pool B bid besides Lincoln.
2. No one wants to be ranked in the top 10 and / or top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 18, 2006, 05:58:37 PM

Quote from: smedindy on February 18, 2006, 05:21:46 PM
Things I've learned about the 2005-06 D-3 hoops season.

1. No one wants a Pool B bid besides Lincoln.
2. No one wants to be ranked in the top 10 and / or top 25.

...besides Lawrence.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 18, 2006, 07:00:07 PM

True 'dat...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 18, 2006, 07:54:31 PM

With losses this week by #1 Wooster (today), #3 Baldwin-Wallace (both Wednesday and today), and #4 Wittenberg (Wednesday), Lawrence will obviously be #1 (quite possibly unanymously). IF they can win the MWC tourney, they would presumably stay there for the final regular season poll.

If that happens, they will be the first team to ever finish in #1 while being unranked in the pre-season poll (they had 24 points, which placed them well down in the ORVs). The only other time a team began even outside the top ten was the first poll, when Calvin started at #22. Otherwise, Chicago started at #8, Randolph-Macon at #6, and Carthage, Williams, and UWSP at started and finished at #1.

Yet another tidbit in what a wacky season this has been!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on February 18, 2006, 08:51:51 PM

Nice piece of research there chuck... you've officially been karmaed for that one. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Maq Diesel on February 19, 2006, 09:51:52 AM

What does a team have to do to get just one vote for the top 25. Gordon College has a pretty good resume and can't seem to sneak into the voting. I understand they don't play in the greatest conference in the world, but wrapping up the regular season at 22-3 (including 17 straight), 21-2 in-region and 15-1 in conference and a QOWI in the top 14, what is preventing them from getting votes? Teams from the CCC have had at least one vote for the last 4 years and I think Gordon is as deserving as any of those teams and has great stats to back it up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 19, 2006, 11:43:52 AM

Quote from: Maq Diesel on February 19, 2006, 09:51:52 AM
What does a team have to do to get just one vote for the top 25. Gordon College has a pretty good resume and can't seem to sneak into the voting. I understand they don't play in the greatest conference in the world, but wrapping up the regular season at 22-3 (including 17 straight), 21-2 in-region and 15-1 in conference and a QOWI in the top 14, what is preventing them from getting votes? Teams from the CCC have had at least one vote for the last 4 years and I think Gordon is as deserving as any of those teams and has great stats to back it up.

What does a team have to do to get just one vote for the top 25[.] sic ?

Maq, I will tackle that question. I am a South Region fan. The South Region is only very, very average. We have not had a South Region team to make the Finals in the last 6 years.

As I look at whom Gordon has played, they lost to a very average Emory in the UAA and only beat a relatively weak Piedmont in the GSAC.

As a contributor to the Posters' Poll I am certain that many of my colleauges look at that ballot and can easily find 25 more worthy candidates. Pat's more experienced pollsters likewise do the same.

As I try to evaluate the quality of play in the Northeast region relative to teams that I know, I see that Endicott defeated the GNAC-leading Norwich, who lost to Texas Lutheran on a neutral floor. Texas Lutheran is at the bottom half of the ASC-West, only a "mid-major" among D3 conferences. That doesn't give me much confidence in the invincibility of the CCC. As for having such good numbers, please see my response (not a URL) to a Trinity CT fan concernng the general impression of teams in the Northeast and the records that they have on the Pool C board.

Re: Pool C
« Reply #243 on: February 16, 2006, 11:54:41 pm »

Gordon would have a stronger case if they were undefeated with a "quality" convincing road win over Emory. If Gordon makes it to the Northeast Sectional finals (Elite 8 ), then I will consider them for a vote. Otherwise I will assume that Gordon has benefitted from the same intra-region dynamics that the NESCAC has.

Have a good week! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 19, 2006, 12:02:13 PM

Gordon's SOS is pretty weak. I'm not convinced.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 19, 2006, 06:37:11 PM

Updates for this past week's games for the top 25 (and 21 others 'knocking at the door' - or in a couple of cases, NOT ANYMORE) are on the Posters' Poll page.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: woosterbooster on February 19, 2006, 07:57:32 PM

Are there now any teams that have already secured NCAA bids by virtue of winning a conference that does not have a conference tournament?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 19, 2006, 08:35:30 PM

Not for men. Claremont-Mudd-Scripps needs one win or one Occidental loss.

Tomorrow the ODAC will award the first men's tournament bid.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 20, 2006, 09:39:54 AM

In Gordon's defense, they aren't used to the travel to Georgia and Emory started playing pretty well right after that. I would put Gordon #3 or #4 in the NE right now. However, I also don't believe #3 or #4 in the NE deserves to be in the Top 25. So there you have it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on February 20, 2006, 09:46:43 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 20, 2006, 09:39:54 AM

In Gordon's defense, they aren't used to the travel to Georgia and Emory started playing pretty well right after that. I would put Gordon #3 or #4 in the NE right now. However, I also don't believe #3 or #4 in the NE deserves to be in the Top 25. So there you have it.

Which in the overall scheme of things is still pretty damn good.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 20, 2006, 09:56:47 AM

Here is goes:

1. Wooster (23-2, 15-1) win over Kenyon, loss at Ohio Wesleyan
2. Lawrence (22-0, 16-0) wins at #14 Carroll and over St. Norbert
3. Baldwin-Wallace (21-4, 15-3) loss to Ohio Northern and loss at Capital
4. Wittenberg (22-3, 13-3) loss at Wabash, win over Allegheny
5. Hope (23-2, 12-2) wins over Alma and Tri-State
6. York (23-2, 12-2) wins over Galludet and at Mary Washington
7. Amherst (23-2, 8-1) win over Connecticut College
8. Albion (19-5, 10-4) loss at #19 Calvin, win over Olivet
9. Augustana (21-4, 11-3) win over #10 IWU, loss at #21 North Central
10. IWU (19-5, 9-5) loss at #9 Augustana, win over North Park
11. Mississippi College (24-1, 21-1) wins over Louisiana College, at TX-Dallas and at TX-Tyler
12. VA Wesleyan (24-3, 17-1) wins over E Mennonite (twice) and Guilford
13. Stout (19-5, 12-4) win at LaCrosse
14. Carroll (20-3, 14-2) loss to #2 Lawrence, win at Beloit
15. Occidental (18-4, 9-3) loss to Redlands and a loss to CMS
16. St. John Fisher (22-3, 13-1) wins at Nazareth and Rochester Tech
17. Puget Sound (20-4, 14-2) wins over Willamette and Linfield
18. Lincoln (20-4) idle
19. Calvin (20-5, 13-1) wins over #8 Albion and Kalamazoo
20. Carnegie Mellon (19-5, 9-4) loss at Emory, win over Case Western Reserve
21. North Central (20-5, 9-5) wins at #25 Elmhurst and over #9 Augustana
22. Wartburg (19-5, 12-4) loss at Buena Vista and a win over Cornell
23. Transylvania (21-4, 12-2) wins over Franklin or Defiance
24. Whitewater (19-5, 13-3) wins at Oshkosh and Eau Claire
25. Elmhurst (17-8, 9-5) loss to #21 North Central, win at Wheaton

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: digs on February 20, 2006, 01:24:04 PM

How far do you think Oxy will drop? I could see them falling out of the top 25 with the 2 conference losses. The SCIAC does not have much of a reputation so the voters will likely look at these losses less favorably than say Wartburg's loss to BV or Carnegia Mellon to Emory. Rightly or wrongly it seems that if you take a loss in a non-major conference it seems to have a greater impact than losses in the so called power conferences (even if those losses are to a bottom half team--see losses to Wheaton in the CCIW).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2006, 01:29:43 PM

I think they are going to be out of the Top 25, yes.

Reputation, shmemputation -- if Wartburg or CMU lost at home to a sub-.500 team they would plummet too. The UAA and IIAC are not considered power conferences (although the UAA might be able to make that claim this year).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: digs on February 20, 2006, 02:50:59 PM

Pat, I don't disagree, but Wheaton lost to Redlands and yet when a CCIW school loses to Wheaton they don't get a big knock on their votes. Transitive theory I know. I believe that Oxy should drop out, but also think that they will never get the benefit of the doubt that a power conference school will get. Over the years voters tend to be right more than not, but conference wins are tough in any conference and the expectation that you need to be nearly undefeated in some conferences to gain national recognition is tough to acheive no matter what the level of the conference plays at. The bottom feeders in every conference get up for the game against the "big dog" so the intensity is high for every game for these so called "big dogs" and they are bound to slip up along the road.

Also note that Augie lost to 2 under .500 teams last week, on the road however, and dropped 6 spots and 171 points. Oxy would drop 10+ spots and 173 points (241-68, highest total of next vote getter) if they drop out of the poll.

Again I doubt they deserve to be in the top 25 after their performance last week, but am just pointing out why some "West Coast Whiners" might complain.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 20, 2006, 03:10:29 PM

I think Augie has a better 'rep' - and except for North Park the CCIW is a pretty stout conference top to bottom, whilst the SCIAC is sketchy in the middle.

The Massey SOS ratings for Oxy also bring it to light.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: digs on February 20, 2006, 03:19:44 PM

Quote from: smedindy on February 20, 2006, 03:10:29 PM
I think Augie has a better 'rep' - and except for North Park the CCIW is a pretty stout conference top to bottom, whilst the SCIAC is sketchy in the middle.

The Massey SOS ratings for Oxy also bring it to light.

And yet the only quailty non-conference win for either Wheaton or Millikin is Wheaton's win over the U of Chicago-hardly a powerhouse this year. I would call those team's non-conference results more sketchy than stout this year. (Sorry April.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 20, 2006, 03:42:55 PM

However, Oxy's SOS is 209, whilst Wheaton is 10 and Millikin is 50. Millikin did play some pushovers, but they really whaled on them.

Oxy did beat Amherst, but beating up on La Sierra twice isn't going to help them, at all. And the body of work of Cal Lutheran, Whittier, Redlands and LaVerne can't really matchup with the CCIW middle of the road teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2006, 03:54:22 PM

Quote from: digs on February 20, 2006, 02:50:59 PM
Pat, I don't disagree, but Wheaton lost to Redlands and yet when a CCIW school loses to Wheaton they don't get a big knock on their votes. Transitive theory I know.

Not just the transitive theory, but connecting together games played six weeks apart. If you look at the Wheaton lineup in terms of age and starting experience, you would know there is reason to expect them to get better.

Our voters know this because we got preseason info from Wheaton, since they were a Top 25 team last year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2006, 03:56:10 PM

Quote from: digs on February 20, 2006, 02:50:59 PM
... am just pointing out why some "West Coast Whiners" might complain.

The whiners are wearing thin on me. I got a phone call and three e-mails in the past week from West Coast residents asking why their teams weren't on the front page after beating Occidental.

THEY WERE ON THE FRONT PAGE!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: digs on February 20, 2006, 04:01:01 PM

I am just saying that the mid level CCIW schools did not beat anybody of significance in their non-conference schedule just like the mid level SCIAC teams did not have any significant non-conference wins.

And my other point was that no matter what conference you are in a low to mid level team is going to get a few wins that they shouldn't get and a top team is going to get knocked off a time or two. I feel this is a natural fact. It just seems to hurt the teams from the "weaker" conferences the most. In the CCIW those losses are thrown out because it is a "tough conference you are bound to lose a few" but that doesn't go for other conferences.

As far as SOS -- that ultimately means nothing about the actual team only about the teams they played.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 20, 2006, 04:03:22 PM

I guess the only solution is to add an opponents-opponents category into the factors. Wait, I sure hope those rumors are true or else this will not have the desired satirical effect.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 20, 2006, 04:17:58 PM

Well, look at the NCAC. Witt and Wooster lost games recently, but they were to Wabash and Ohio Wesleyan, pretty decent teams.

Last year, Witt got beat by Denison, and that hurt them in the polls, big time, for a while.

Had any of the top CCIW teams lost to North Park, then they'd plummet.

Had Oxy lost early in the season, they'd have time to recover. I'm interested in seeing where B-W is in the polls. I knocked them down in my ballott into the mid-teens, but in my heart I know they're a top 10 team. Some may still vote them that way.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 20, 2006, 04:19:21 PM

Pat - I told our SID that we picked the wrong day to beat Wittenberg! With all the carnage elsewhere and Larry just winning by two on a last second shot, it was bad timing!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2006, 04:21:05 PM

Indeed. Most nights that would have gotten you the main photo instead of third billing. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fisheralum03 on February 20, 2006, 04:23:29 PM

Pat, when are the QOWI rankings come out. It is interesting to look at those to see where the potential rankings MIGHT and keyword is MIGHT be for Regional Rankings or even the NCAA pairings next Monday if things turn out the way they should. Yes, I know, this time of year things NEVER turn out the way they should That is why I love College Basketball whether it be D1 or D3.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2006, 04:25:03 PM

QOWI is what I am working on as we speak ... while waiting for the last women's Top 25 ballot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 20, 2006, 05:40:53 PM

New top 25 poll (#106) news and notes, bar exam version:

First, congratulations to Lawrence for scaling the heights to #1 for the first time in poll history. The unbeaten Vikings join a very select group, becoming just the 17th team to reach the #1 ranking. (Seven of these 17 squads are presently in the top 25, by the way.)

In addition to Lawrence, these teams reached their highest D3hoops.com ranking this week:
#4 York (Pa.)
#8 Virginia Wesleyan (first-ever top 10 appearance)
#10 Mississippi College (first-ever top 10 appearance)

Amherst is in the top 10 for the 50th time and in the top 25 for the 61st consecutive week. If the Lord Jeffs are ranked next week, they'll tie the record for consecutive top 25 appearances, currently shared by Catholic and UW-Stevens Point. (Wooster's current streak is just two weeks behind, at 59.)

UW-Whitewater received votes for the 75th consecutive week.

Congratulations to all of these fine programs on their accomplishments!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 21, 2006, 03:08:24 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2006, 04:21:05 PM
Indeed. Most nights that would have gotten you the main photo instead of third billing. :)

Pat, I suspect that when people whine to you about their teams' getting left off of the front page (e.g., the MWC and SCIAC people) they're actually whining about not getting the main photo and/or lead story.

Look on the bright side. At least the whiners are looking at the front page, rather than heading straight to their Posting Up bookmarks without passing Go and collecting $200. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 21, 2006, 03:33:35 AM

Ehh, I'm not convinced they are reading the front page. There's evidence on either side. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 21, 2006, 08:44:57 AM

Occidental loses again, justifying the precipitous drop from the poll this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: digs on February 21, 2006, 08:54:14 AM

Quote

Over half of Redlands minutes are played by freshmen an sophmores... I would expect that they got better too.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 21, 2006, 03:32:45 PM

Perhaps, but also pretty sure the ceiling is higher for Wheaton than it is for Redlands, considering where they came from last year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 21, 2006, 09:03:42 PM

Final: #3 Wooster 96 Kenyon 44 :)

Wooster cruises to an opening game win in the NCAC tournament. Wooster was led tonight by freshman Brandon Johnson with 17 points, James Cooper with 14 points, Andy Van Horn with 13 points, Tom Port with 10 points and Devin Fulk also with 10 points. Wooster shot 55% from the floor tonight and made 12 three pointers.

Wooster will now host the NCAC tournament semi-finals and final game this coming weekend.

Wooster is now 24-2 this season! ;D

GO SCOTS!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: woosterbooster on February 22, 2006, 08:39:35 AM

Yesterday, I ran a simulation of the possible matchup between Lincoln University of Pennsylvania and The College of Wooster. In a game that was tight all the way, Lincoln prevailed, pulling away at the end to win 97-88.

This matchup had intrigued me because of the uptempo styles of both teams, but also due to the presence of Lincoln's All-American guard, Kyle Myrick. Myrick didn't disappoint, going for 37 on 11-17 shooting and adding 9 assists. Shooting guard Sam Wylie threw in 26, eventually going 7-15 behind the arc after a dismal first half.

The contest was defined by aggressive defense, Wooster coughing up an uncharacteristic 21 turnovers to Lincoln's 17. The Wooster guards got into foul trouble early, mostly from attempting to control Myrick. Point guard Kyle Witucky eventually fouled out, only managing 24 minutes played, and the other three guards (Cooper, Johnson, and Fulk) all finished with 4 fouls.

See the boxscore here:

http://arkski.com/~jwood/Lincoln-Wooster.jpg

See the simulation's game screen here:

http://arkski.com/~jwood/Screenshot.jpg

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: devossed on February 22, 2006, 09:50:51 AM

Wooster Booster--

Here's a project for you...run sims with all possible games between the top 5 teams in this week's poll. I'd be interested in the results and to see if Larry would remain at #1 at the end of it!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 22, 2006, 10:05:06 AM

So how much faith do you put in this simulation? Would you consider Lincoln a top 5 team now?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: woosterbooster on February 22, 2006, 10:28:30 AM

Quote from: devossed on February 22, 2006, 09:50:51 AM
Wooster Booster--

Here's a project for you...run sims with all possible games between the top 5 teams in this week's poll. I'd be interested in the results and to see if Larry would remain at #1 at the end of it!

I'm hoping to sim the whole tournament, which would be 58 games. I've been creating those teams that either already have bids or have an excellent chance to get one. Once the draw sheet is released, I'll begin, and will have a few days headstart on the real thing but it will be impossible for me to keep pace. Still, it should be fun and interesting.

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 22, 2006, 10:05:06 AM

So how much faith do you put in this simulation? Would you consider Lincoln a top 5 team now?

I actually think that the data that goes into the simulation is pretty good. Teams are rated in a number of categories, as are individual players. SOS is included, as can be homecourt advantage, although this game was played on a neutral court.

But the game that I played is just one game, and as much must be done manually (such as substitutions), it takes about 45 minutes to finish, so I can't really run multiple sims, it's just for fun. And, one game doesn't really reveal a whole lot, except that these two teams are certainly competitive. I was impressed with Lincoln, as only one other team that I've matched with Wooster has beaten them, that being Wittenberg, but they lost two out of three.
The question, though, isn't just is Lincoln a top five team, but is Wooster? :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njlincolnlion on February 22, 2006, 11:19:26 AM

Wooster Booster:

I hope simulations...........like dreams come true :) .

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie_superfan on February 22, 2006, 01:11:37 PM

Wooster Booster,

What program do you use to run those simulations?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on February 22, 2006, 01:57:26 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 21, 2006, 03:32:45 PM
Perhaps, but also pretty sure the ceiling is higher for Wheaton than it is for Redlands, considering where they came from last year.

Ponders this... it's been a while since I've been to King Arena ( :'( ) but I think you are right, and our ceiling is indeed higher. :D

I actually agree with both of you... I remember thinking... hey we lost to Redlands, but Redlands can't possibly as young of a team as we are... and when I looked up the roster, and compared it to the box score, I actually thought... ouch, because Redlands does have a young team. Esepcially from the perspective that it is a young team, having to learn a whole other system of playing basketball.... That is a little different from just learning to play at the college level.

On the other hand, Wheaton has both a young team, and had an unexpectedly short roster. Last year, Redlands could prepare for the situation they were going to be in, Wheaton had no way to predict that all sorts of key players who were expected to return wouldn't be on the roster (or even at the school) come November.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on February 22, 2006, 02:24:31 PM

Iwent looking to see if the regional rankings were up, and found that the NCAA has a "coaches poll" - hmmmmm ;)

http://www.ncaasports.com/basketball/mens/polls/rankings/diviii-coaches

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 22, 2006, 02:45:03 PM

Yeah, you never noticed that the d3hoops poll was being listed on ncaasports.com? It's a nice recognition of Pat's good work.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: walzy31 on February 22, 2006, 04:03:40 PM

That "screen shot" looked a lot like it had a Microsoft Excel lay out...

Does the simulation take into account crowd noise, water in-take, or hours of the sleep the coaches had the night before the game?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: woosterbooster on February 22, 2006, 05:01:16 PM

Quote from: walzy31 on February 22, 2006, 04:03:40 PM
That "screen shot" looked a lot like it had a Microsoft Excel lay out...

Does the simulation take into account crowd noise, water in-take, or hours of the sleep the coaches had the night before the game?

It is an Excel program/game/sim, called AtR, Above the Rim basketball. It's free, and if you're interested, send me a PM and I'll tell you where to get it.

All coaches are assumed to have no sleep on the night before the game, and to have had lengthy arguments with their wives before arriving at the gym. The players fluid intake is equal and non-alcoholic - pregame anyway. All crowds produce the same level of mayhem, except if the contest is at Oberlin.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 22, 2006, 05:05:13 PM

Quote from: Wooster Booster on February 22, 2006, 05:01:16 PM
All crowds produce the same level of mayhem, except if the contest is at Oberlin.

In which case they are "non-existant?"

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 22, 2006, 05:27:09 PM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on February 22, 2006, 02:24:31 PM
Iwent looking to see if the regional rankings were up, and found that the NCAA has a "coaches poll" - hmmmmm ;)

http://www.ncaasports.com/basketball/mens/polls/rankings/diviii-coaches

It does look familiar, doesn't it! Even down to the vote count!

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: devossed on February 23, 2006, 12:33:31 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 22, 2006, 05:27:09 PM
Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on February 22, 2006, 02:24:31 PM
Iwent looking to see if the regional rankings were up, and found that the NCAA has a "coaches poll" - hmmmmm ;)
http://www.ncaasports.com/basketball/mens/polls/rankings/diviii-coaches
It does look familiar, doesn't it! Even down to the vote count!

Seriously, though--if that's the case, then I would think that the NCAA "committees" would at least look at it when concocting the regional rankings, right? It would make sense to look at an "official" poll that your governing body sponsors, doesn't it???
;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: digs on February 23, 2006, 01:17:20 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 21, 2006, 03:32:45 PM
Perhaps, but also pretty sure the ceiling is higher for Wheaton than it is for Redlands, considering where they came from last year.

Pat,

I'm really not trying to piss you off on this, but I do not understand why last year's results raise the ceiling on this year's team--assuming that both teams are considered young. Isn't the ceiling on any team is determined by the players on that particular team not what other players on that team did in past years?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 23, 2006, 01:53:49 PM

Devossed,

The NCAA is locked into its system of ranking, even if they looked at the d3hoops.com poll very carefully, they still are bound to rank by the numbers, in region record, QOWI and record vs other ranked opponents, etc.

They are not allowed to judge one region better than another. They get some of that with the secondary criteria, but we don't know when that applies.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 23, 2006, 09:06:19 PM

A couple of great WIAC games going on... check the WIAC in-game boards, both games are 4 point games, Stout and Whitewater leading fairly early in the second halves.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 24, 2006, 12:32:36 AM

Quote from: digs on February 23, 2006, 01:17:20 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 21, 2006, 03:32:45 PM
Perhaps, but also pretty sure the ceiling is higher for Wheaton than it is for Redlands, considering where they came from last year.

Pat,

I'm really not trying to piss you off on this, but I do not understand why last year's results raise the ceiling on this year's team--assuming that both teams are considered young. Isn't the ceiling on any team is determined by the players on that particular team not what other players on that team did in past years?

No, honestly, I just don't think so. I think the track record of the program as a national Top 25 threat means that they get better kids and may indeed have better coaching, therefore the ceiling is higher.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Matt Letourneau on February 24, 2006, 01:20:35 AM

The NCAA 'coaches poll' lists WPI as "Worchester Tech." As someone who was born and raised in Central Massachusetts and watched high school tournament games in that gym, I object!!!

Drop the 'h,' in spelling AND in pronunciation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 24, 2006, 01:26:11 AM

Don't know why they can't just copy and paste the poll from the press release like everyone else. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 24, 2006, 01:41:57 AM

Quote from: Matt Letourneau on February 24, 2006, 01:20:35 AM
The NCAA 'coaches poll' lists WPI as "Worchester Tech." As someone who was born and raised in Central Massachusetts and watched high school tournament games in that gym, I object!!!

Drop the 'h,' in spelling AND in pronunciation.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 24, 2006, 01:26:11 AM
Don't know why they can't just copy and paste the poll from the press release like everyone else. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: digs on February 24, 2006, 09:45:16 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 24, 2006, 12:32:36 AM
Quote from: digs on February 23, 2006, 01:17:20 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 21, 2006, 03:32:45 PM
Perhaps, but also pretty sure the ceiling is higher for Wheaton than it is for Redlands, considering where they came from last year.

Pat,

I'm really not trying to piss you off on this, but I do not understand why last year's results raise the ceiling on this year's team--assuming that both teams are considered young. Isn't the ceiling on any team is determined by the players on that particular team not what other players on that team did in past years?

No, honestly, I just don't think so. I think the track record of the program as a national Top 25 threat means that they get better kids and may indeed have better coaching, therefore the ceiling is higher.

This goes to my original post--voters (at least one of them) have a bias based on past performance and reputation and thus Oxy dropped farther after thier 2 losses and other schools don't drop as far after 2 similar losses. I don't quite know why you will never admit that the voters have some bias--everyone has biases based on their experience. In the case of the voters, I trust that you have selected people with great experience and their bias is based on a lot of past experience and knowledge. This isn't wrong just a fact.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 24, 2006, 10:19:10 AM

York is killing me, just when they look like they are flying high, they get pulled down again. Maybe the team is buying into the success every time I do and that's what's tripping them up?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 24, 2006, 01:07:40 PM

Quote from: digs on February 24, 2006, 09:45:16 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 24, 2006, 12:32:36 AM
Quote from: digs on February 23, 2006, 01:17:20 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 21, 2006, 03:32:45 PM
Perhaps, but also pretty sure the ceiling is higher for Wheaton than it is for Redlands, considering where they came from last year.

Pat,

I'm really not trying to piss you off on this, but I do not understand why last year's results raise the ceiling on this year's team--assuming that both teams are considered young. Isn't the ceiling on any team is determined by the players on that particular team not what other players on that team did in past years?

No, honestly, I just don't think so. I think the track record of the program as a national Top 25 threat means that they get better kids and may indeed have better coaching, therefore the ceiling is higher.

This goes to my original post--voters (at least one of them) have a bias based on past performance and reputation and thus Oxy dropped farther after thier 2 losses and other schools don't drop as far after 2 similar losses. I don't quite know why you will never admit that the voters have some bias--everyone has biases based on their experience. In the case of the voters, I trust that you have selected people with great experience and their bias is based on a lot of past experience and knowledge. This isn't wrong just a fact.

But you are assuming that past performance and reputation is a 'bias' - Pat was arguing that, at least until this year's version of a team has shown what is really is, past performance and reputation are perfectly legitimate variables, for the reasons he cited (and I would add 'evidence of institutional support for athletics').

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 24, 2006, 01:52:44 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 24, 2006, 01:07:40 PM
Quote from: digs on February 24, 2006, 09:45:16 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 24, 2006, 12:32:36 AM
Quote from: digs on February 23, 2006, 01:17:20 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 21, 2006, 03:32:45 PM
Perhaps, but also pretty sure the ceiling is higher for Wheaton than it is for Redlands, considering where they came from last year.

Pat,

I'm really not trying to piss you off on this, but I do not understand why last year's results raise the ceiling on this year's team--assuming that both teams are considered young. Isn't the ceiling on any team is determined by the players on that particular team not what other players on that team did in past years?

No, honestly, I just don't think so. I think the track record of the program as a national Top 25 threat means that they get better kids and may indeed have better coaching, therefore the ceiling is higher.

This goes to my original post--voters (at least one of them) have a bias based on past performance and reputation and thus Oxy dropped farther after thier 2 losses and other schools don't drop as far after 2 similar losses. I don't quite know why you will never admit that the voters have some bias--everyone has biases based on their experience. In the case of the voters, I trust that you have selected people with great experience and their bias is based on a lot of past experience and knowledge. This isn't wrong just a fact.

But you are assuming that past performance and reputation is a 'bias' - Pat was arguing that, at least until this year's version of a team has shown what is really is, past performance and reputation are perfectly legitimate variables, for the reasons he cited (and I would add 'evidence of institutional support for athletics').

That is basically what digs was saying, albeit in a different way. We're down to semantics now boys; its where every serious conversation on this site leads if we let it get far enough. Oh the joys of Posting Up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 24, 2006, 02:12:00 PM

Hoops,

I hardly think 'bias' vs. 'legitimate variables' is a semantic quibble! ;D

As for the Oxy case, I think they fell further than some other teams not because of 'reputation', but because they did not have the same level of positive resume THIS year that the others did. Their only 'signature' win, Amherst, was at home two months ago. Their only other 'solid' wins, CMS, PP, and Whitworth, all came at home and all at least a month ago. So when they beat CalTech by only 14, barely beat Whittier, then proceeded to lose three straight (including to Redlands at home), I think it was quite reasonable to wonder if the wheels on the bus were beginning to wobble! And that is ALL from this year's evidence, not reputation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 24, 2006, 02:43:27 PM

I wasn't commenting on those words specifically, but on the full statments. Both of you said that voters use previous year's results in their evaluation of teams. Neither of you said this was wrong, however you used different terminology to explain it. Thus the semantics!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on February 24, 2006, 03:01:15 PM

Semantics, Schementics, just bust out the steel cage and throw down.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 24, 2006, 03:31:12 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 24, 2006, 02:43:27 PM

I wasn't commenting on those words specifically, but on the full statments. Both of you said that voters use previous year's results in their evaluation of teams. Neither of you said this was wrong, however you used different terminology to explain it. Thus the semantics!

But in his later post he used Oxy's bigger drop-off as an example of previous results and reputation. I suggest it can be fully explained just by THIS year's results.

I contend that previous history and reputation are fully legitimate variables over, oh, say, the first-third of the season. If they are STILL being used in the last-third of the season they reflect an illegitimate bias. That's (to me, at least) an important distinction, not a semantic quibble.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 24, 2006, 03:39:08 PM

Agree to disagree, Ypsi. Digs mentioned how his perceived "bias" was legitimate, while you talk about a "legitimate variable." From the outside of the debate (where I am firmly planted) that appears to be a trivial difference.

That being said, let me add one more thing:

Who cares?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 24, 2006, 03:57:53 PM

HF,

As a statistics instructor, I care. ;D Bias is always ILlegitimate!

But, don't worry, I'm done! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 24, 2006, 04:43:10 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 24, 2006, 03:57:53 PM
As a statistics instructor, I care. Bias is always ILlegitimate!

I knew that was coming.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: digs on February 24, 2006, 05:32:54 PM

Yipsi,

The discussion started before Oxy lost the third. But the real arguement over bias was when Pat said that Wheaton had a bigger upside than Redlands at the time of their early season meeting. His arguement for this was based on what they had done in privious years, so they obviously could improve more in the 6 weeks since this meeting. I contended that what the school had done in privious years was irrelavant in terms of these two teams since we seemed to agree that both teams were young teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 24, 2006, 05:50:51 PM

digs,

But your Oxy example to illlustrate the 'bias' was yesterday, long after their third straight loss. That was why I sought to show that no previous year or reputation biases were needed to explain why Oxy fell further than some other teams.

BTW, I'm glad you share my view that we are discussing, not arguing! Hoops unwittingly tapped one of my pet peeves as a statistician - 'legitimate bias'. There ain't no such thing!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 24, 2006, 09:24:09 PM

Final: #3 Wooster 84 Earlham 74

Wooster was led tonight by James Cooper with 19 points, Tim Vandervaart with 15 points and Tom Port with 11 points. Brandon Miller had 22 points and LaRon Henry added 18 points for the Quakers.

Wooster and Wittenberg will now meet for the third time this season in the NCAC tournament final game tomorrow night....with the automatic NCAA bid at stake.

Wooster is now 25-2 ;D

GO SCOTS!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 26, 2006, 10:41:49 AM

Quote from: digs on February 24, 2006, 05:32:54 PM
Yipsi,

The discussion started before Oxy lost the third. But the real arguement over bias was when Pat said that Wheaton had a bigger upside than Redlands at the time of their early season meeting. His arguement for this was based on what they had done in privious years, so they obviously could improve more in the 6 weeks since this meeting. I contended that what the school had done in privious years was irrelavant in terms of these two teams since we seemed to agree that both teams were young teams.

I would've agreed with you, Digs, since I went 15 rounds with your adversaries on this exact same topic at the beginning of the season. I strongly dislike the fact that bias creeps into the polls in any way, shape, or form whatsoever, and I think that the first few polls of the season are to some degree tainted by it. Nevertheless, I didn't jump to your defense in this debate because, as Chuck pointed out, Oxy's bona-fides were pretty shaky. If I'm going to try everyone's patience by rehashing that endless argument from this fall ::), I want to have a better case with which to argue it than the 2005-06 Occidental Tigers. They had a nice season, but not one that was properly suited to my rhetorical purposes. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 27, 2006, 10:14:48 AM

If I'm not mistaken, there is one more vote today, right?

1. Lawrence (24-0) wins MWC with wins over Knox and #15 Carroll
2. Hope (26-2) wins MIAA with wins over Alma, #11 Albion and at #13 Calvin
3. Wooster (25-3) wins over Kenyon and Earlham, lost to #6 Wittenberg in the NCAC final
4. York (24-3) win over Goucher and a loss to Catholic in the CAC semis
5. Amherst (25-2) wins the NESCAC with wins over Conn Coll, Bates and Tufts
6. Wittenberg (25-3) wins NCAC with wins over Denison, OH Wesleyan and #3 Wooster
7. Baldwin-Wallace (24-4) wins OAC with wins over Mt Union, Wilmington and #22 OH Northern
8. VA Wesleyan (25-3) wins ODAC with a win over #25 Randolph-Macon
9. Augustana (21-5) loss to #12 IWU in the CCIW semis
10. Mississippi College (27-1) won the ASC with wins over Sul Ros State, McMurry and Howard Payne
11. Albion (20-6) win over Adrian, loss to #2 Hope in the MIAA semis
12. IWU (20-6) win over #9 Augustana, loss to #19 North Central in the CCIW final
13. Calvin (22-6) wins over Olivet and Kalamazoo, loss to #2 Hope in the MIAA final
14. Stout (21-6) wins over River Falls and Stevens Point, loss to #20 Whitewater in the WIAC final
15. Carroll (21-4) win over Grinnell and a loss at #1 Lawrence in the MWC final
16. St. John Fisher (24-3) wins E8 with wins over Rochester Tech and Utica
17. Puget Sound (21-4) wins NWC with a win over Whitworth
18. Lincoln (23-4) wins the East Independent Tournament with wins over Mitchell and St Joe's (ME)
19. North Central (22-5) wins the CCIW with wins over Elmhurst and #12 IWU
20. Whitewater (22-5) wins WIAC with wins over Eau Claire, La Crosse and #14 Stout
21. Transylvania (24-4) wins HCAC with wins over Defiance, Mt St Joseph and Franklin
22. Ohio Northern (21-6) wins over John Carroll and Muskingum, loss to #7 Baldwin-Wallace in the OAC final in OT
23. WPI (22-3) wins NEWMAC with wins over Wheaton (MA) and MIT
24. Carnegie Mellon (20-5) win over Rochester (and a UAA title)
25. Randolph-Macon (22-6) lost the ODAC final to #8 VA Wesleyan

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 27, 2006, 10:15:17 AM

Anyone else find it odd that #11-15 all lost, but #16-21 all won?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njlincolnlion on February 27, 2006, 12:06:45 PM

Hoops Fan:

If there is one more vote today, maybe Lincoln will move up even more and make more school history.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 27, 2006, 12:37:18 PM

I don't see why not, lots of teams above them lost, and they actually played some games this week, so you never know. It's hard to believe York is so much higher than Lincoln. I have to assume, based on the season, that they are pretty evenly matched.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 27, 2006, 03:25:21 PM

Yes there is a poll this week. Hopefully tonight, maybe during Hoopsville, it will be completed. Selection Sunday always pushes back the start time for voters because I usually don't get them the info in a timely manner.

Hoops Fan, I suspect York and Lincoln will be closer today than last week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 27, 2006, 03:29:20 PM

Pat,

I'm curious, I guess anyone can answer as well, do you think Hope is going to steal any votes from Lawrence after the impressive MIAA tournament they just ran through?

That Hope squad is looking quite formidable.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 27, 2006, 03:37:23 PM

I can't see how, if you are the king and you are undefeated, how you can still not be the king.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 27, 2006, 03:41:35 PM

Quote from: smedindy on February 27, 2006, 03:37:23 PM
I can't see how, if you are the king and you are undefeated, how you can still not be the king.

I would agree, but Hope still has votes, it hasn't been unanimous and even me (a season-long LarryU supporter) has to admit that Hope's weekend was quite impressive.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 27, 2006, 03:51:02 PM

Lawrence's weekend didn't suck.

I don't know if any votes will turn over but certainly the top spot will stay in Appleton.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fisheralum03 on February 27, 2006, 03:55:03 PM

is there going to be a top 25 today??

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: devossed on February 27, 2006, 04:09:18 PM

Quote from: fisheralum03 on February 27, 2006, 03:55:03 PM
is there going to be a top 25 today??

See Pat's post from this afternoon:

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 27, 2006, 03:25:21 PM
Yes there is a poll this week. Hopefully tonight, maybe during Hoopsville, it will be completed. Selection Sunday always pushes back the start time for voters because I usually don't get them the info in a timely manner.

Hoops Fan, I suspect York and Lincoln will be closer today than last week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 28, 2006, 01:54:23 AM

Top 25 News and Notes, Vol 7, Issue 107

The top news story: #4 AMHERST appears in the top 25 for the 62nd consecutive week, tying the record held by UW-Stevens Point and Catholic. Congratulations to the Lord Jeffs!

Congratulations also to Lake Erie College and Huntingdon College, both of which received votes in the Top 25 poll for the first time ever!

Schools that achieved or tied their highest D3hoops.com Top 25 ranking ever this week include
#1 Lawrence
#2 Hope
#7 Virginia Wesleyan
#8 Mississippi College
#10 North Central (first-ever appearance in top 10!)[/i]

It's a round-number week for #3 Wittenberg:

20th consecutive week in the top 10,
30th week overall in the top 10, and
70th week overall in the top 25.

Calvin is in the top 25 for the 50th time.

Congratulations to these outstanding programs on their achievements! 8)

Addendum: Condolences to #21 Albion and #25 Ohio Northern, the only top 25 teams left out of the NCAA draw. :-\

To the other 23 ranked and 36 unranked teams, good luck in the tournament!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 28, 2006, 09:39:03 AM

Thanks for the update DC, isn't Wooster approaching some kind of record as well?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 28, 2006, 12:22:26 PM

Wooster is the holder of a number of records (most total Top 10 and 25 polls, most total and most consecutive weeks with votes), but yes, they are approaching another. If they are in the final (i.e. post-tournament) top 10, that will tie them with Carthage for the longest consecutive top 10 streak, at 38. They'd likely then take that record outright in next season's preseason poll, seeing as they return 8 men of their 9-man rotation. BUT...to hang on to the top 10 in the final poll will require at a minimum that they beat RMC and Transy, and probably the winner of the Miss. College bracket as well...that's a very tall order. So that streak is in serious jeopardy.

Whereas Amherst will definitely be in the final top 25, and take that consecutive weeks record for their own.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 28, 2006, 01:30:13 PM

Here's my final power rating amalgamation of the year:

1. Lawrence
2. Wittenberg
3. Hope
4. Baldwin - Wallace
5. Wooster
6. Amherst
7. North Central
8. Wisc - Whitewater
9. Transylvania
10. Carroll
11. Augustana
12. Lincoln
13. Puget Sound
14. Calvin
15. Illinois Wesleyan
16. Wisc - Stout
17. Ohio Northern
18. Carnegie Mellon
19. Tufts
20. Virginia Wesleyan
21. St. John Fisher
22. Mississippi College
23. York (PA)
24. Worcester Tech
25. St. Thomas (MN)

The Bottom 10:

395. Daniel Webster
394. Green Mountain
393. Maine - Presque Isle
392. Principia
391. Centenary
390. Anna Maria
389. Maranatha Baptist
388. Massachusetts College
387. SUNY - Purchase
386. Bard

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 28, 2006, 02:09:34 PM

So basically what all these polls and ratings tell us is that Ohio Northern got screwed by being in a really competitive conference and losing a few too many. I guess only one or two (Albion) sad stories like that isn't too bad with a 59 team tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 28, 2006, 02:15:59 PM

Yep, Ohio Northern and Albion are the two that stick out.

Wilmington was #30 in my eyes, but if ONU can't go, neither can Wilmington.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Sam Johnson on February 28, 2006, 03:13:08 PM

Since this was the final poll of the year (for the regular and conference season anyhow) it looks like Lawrence has created a little history. If I'm not mistaken, they are the 1st team in the history of this poll to start unranked (they were "Others Recieving Votes" in the pre-season poll) and finish ranked #1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 28, 2006, 03:42:27 PM

Quote from: smedindy on February 28, 2006, 02:15:59 PM
Yep, Ohio Northern and Albion are the two that stick out.

Wilmington was #30 in my eyes, but if ONU can't go, neither can Wilmington.

When doing my projections, I actually had Wilimgton ahead of ONU, but both after Albion in the GL region.

Quote from: Sam Johnson on February 28, 2006, 03:13:08 PM
Since this was the final poll of the year (for the regular and conference season anyhow) it looks like Lawrence has created a little history. If I'm not mistaken, they are the 1st team in the history of this poll to start unranked (they were "Others Recieving Votes" in the pre-season poll) and finish ranked #1.

It's not the final poll, its the final regular season poll. There will be one more after the tournament. Lawrence already has the record. No team has ever reached #1 during the year, which started out of the Top 25. I thinks that's how it is anyway. Sager can confirm.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Sam Johnson on February 28, 2006, 04:04:57 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 28, 2006, 03:42:27 PM
Quote from: Sam Johnson on February 28, 2006, 03:13:08 PM
Since this was the final poll of the year (for the regular and conference season anyhow) it looks like Lawrence has created a little history. If I'm not mistaken, they are the 1st team in the history of this poll to start unranked (they were "Others Recieving Votes" in the pre-season poll) and finish ranked #1.

It's not the final poll, its the final regular season poll. There will be one more after the tournament. Lawrence already has the record. No team has ever reached #1 during the year, which started out of the Top 25. I thinks that's how it is anyway. Sager can confirm.

Care to revise HF? I noted that it was the last regular season poll. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Sam Johnson on February 28, 2006, 04:06:29 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 28, 2006, 03:42:27 PM
Sager can confirm.

Full disclosure requires that I admit that I'm pretty sure I heard this from Gregory in the first place. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 28, 2006, 04:12:59 PM

I just meant that you can't say they "finished" in #1, because nothing is finished yet.

Still, I do think they are the only team to ever start outside the Top 25 and reach #1 in the same season, finished or not, so the point is moot. (As Jesse Jackson likes to say).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 28, 2006, 04:13:38 PM

Yeah, if they don't win it - they won't finish #1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 28, 2006, 04:14:18 PM

I believe Mr. Ypsi did the legwork on that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 28, 2006, 04:20:22 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 28, 2006, 04:14:18 PM
I believe Mr. Ypsi did the legwork on that.

Whoever it was; it wasn't me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 28, 2006, 04:28:40 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 28, 2006, 04:14:18 PM
I believe Mr. Ypsi did the legwork on that.

Guilty as charged - with all the times you've chided me for not doing my homework, that must have really stayed in your memory! ;)

I notice that the national champion has always been unanimously #1 in the final poll. Several years that certainly wasn't surprising, but a couple of years the eventual champ was low enough in the last regular poll that at least 1 or 2 dissenters would not have shocked me. Do you require your voters to put the champ #1, or have they all just done it anyway?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 28, 2006, 04:48:43 PM

Why wouldn't the champ be #1. If they're not, that's just wrong. I mean, if York (NY) somehow won it all - I think the voters would reward them as #1 in the poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 28, 2006, 05:14:31 PM

Quote from: smedindy on February 28, 2006, 04:48:43 PM
Why wouldn't the champ be #1. If they're not, that's just wrong. I mean, if York (NY) somehow won it all - I think the voters would reward them as #1 in the poll.

This goes back to a philosophical debate held earlier (where I was distinctly in the minority among those who spoke up!) - is there a difference between 'hottest' and 'best'. If a poll is to reflect a 'body of work', not just a recent streak, I'd suggest that there IS a difference. If York (NY) were to win the tourney, they would clearly deserve to be known as The Champions - and yet would probably still not have cracked the top 100 (or at least top 50) in YOUR rating system!

By MY understanding of the difference between polls and tournaments, Villanova and NC State deserved to be known as The Champions, but there is no way I would have voted them #1.

(BTW, this is NOT to knock the merits of any past DIII champions - I believe Catholic had the lowest ranking going in, but they were still a highly respectable 14th.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 28, 2006, 05:28:10 PM

But a poll, of course, is rather moot when a champion has been crowned. I pay no attention, really, to the final polls in most sports, because the championship is won on the field.

And I don't check the final power rankings after the champion has been declared.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 28, 2006, 05:41:24 PM

Quote from: smedindy on February 28, 2006, 05:28:10 PM
But a poll, of course, is rather moot when a champion has been crowned. I pay no attention, really, to the final polls in most sports, because the championship is won on the field.

And I don't check the final power rankings after the champion has been declared.

Again, a difference in perspective. If ALL you care about is who won the title, why even HAVE a final poll? I figure the tourney winner gets the walnut-and-bronze and has the pleasure of forever being known as that year's champion - no one can take that away (well, except for the NCAA if rule-violations come to light - I forget, did 'nova have to vacate the title, or was it just Howard Porter who was stripped of his MVP)!

To me, a final poll can be a referendum on "is this REALLY the best team overall, or a sufficiently good team who got hot (and perhaps lucky) at the right time?" If the champ is AUTOMATICALLY #1, that purpose is defeated.

(Of course, I also like seeing who the voters think #2-#25 are!)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 28, 2006, 05:55:38 PM

But the poll is an imperfect beast, it can only fan flames of an arguement if a fluke winner appears, instead of celebrating that win.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 28, 2006, 06:12:54 PM

Quote from: smedindy on February 28, 2006, 05:55:38 PM
But the poll is an imperfect beast, it can only fan flames of an arguement if a fluke winner appears, instead of celebrating that win.

I don't think anything pollsters can do is likely to dampen the celebration much!

And, certainly, a single-elimination tournament is far from a 'perfect' beast! By my use of the word 'best', the best team does NOT always win. Aside from such obvious possibilities as a team's best player sprained an ankle in the previous round (and the second-best is running a fever), true upsets DO occur. One of the many reasons I liked Al McGuire is that he made no bones about it: "Marquette was NOT the best team that year." If NC State played "Phi Slamma Jamma" Houston ten times, they obviously won one - you really think they would even win two? (MAYBE, but three - no way!)

The Champion forever gets to keep the hardware, but I will not concede that they are AUTOMATICALLY 'the best'.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Sam Johnson on February 28, 2006, 06:19:31 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 28, 2006, 04:14:18 PM
I believe Mr. Ypsi did the legwork on that.

Shoot! I was hoping to get over here and correct myself...not in time i guess. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 01, 2006, 08:58:49 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 28, 2006, 05:41:24 PM
If ALL you care about is who won the title, why even HAVE a final poll?

You have the final poll so a team that comes in unnoticed that moves to the sweet sixteen can get twenty or so votes and be bragging it all its friends for the next decade.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on March 01, 2006, 01:34:09 PM

Well, and there is the fact that the other person in the final game isn't necessarily #2. The people in the final four aren't necessarily the top four, the people in the sweet sixteen aren't necessarily the top sixteen, etc. The tournament gives the opportunity for all sorts of new evaluations based on the always helpful comparative scoring. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njlincolnlion on March 01, 2006, 02:08:34 PM

Hoops Fan & April:

Hopefully Lincoln will be the team that takes advantage of being in the "Big Dance" for the first time, and have a magical run.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on March 01, 2006, 03:23:30 PM

That's a good point April... at least a few times in the recent past, the runner-up wasn't second, or the team that took 3rd in the Final Four isn't #3 on the poll (the one I can think of off the top of my head is UWSP in 2000... they lost in the Elite 8 to Eau Claire, but were #3 in the poll).

Trinity (Tx) last year was also 3rd, after not making the Final 4... and Calvin, who placed 3rd in the NCAA's eyes, was #2, with Rochester at #4.

Heck, in 2002-03, Wooster lost to Williams in OT in the semi's, yet they were #2 instead of Gustavus Adolphus (who lost in the National Championship game).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 01, 2006, 07:47:54 PM

On Jan. 25, in the Daily Dose (http://www.d3hoops.com/dailydose/?p=118#comments), I posted this in response to something Dave McHugh had stated in the blog:

QuoteThe most current poll is week 8. "In the Top 25 by the NCAA Tournament" I take to mean "in the final regular season top 25." In every season but one, there have been three teams that went from zero points in week 8 to within the top 25 by season's end. In fact, two of these teams made it to the national championship game. Here's the list:

2004-05: #17 Gustavus Adolphus, #21 Rochester (national runner-up), #23 UW-Platteville
2003-04: #19 Illinois Wesleyan, #21 UW-River Falls, #24 Catholic
2002-03: #23 Albion, #24 Gustavus Adolphus (national runner-up), #25 Ursinus
2001-02: none
2000-01: #15 McMurry, #19 St. Johns, #24 Maryville (TN)
1999-2000: #18 Widener, #20 Cortland St., #25 Franklin

I'd say there's still a fair amount of shaking out to do.

Now that the final regular season poll of 2005-06 is here, I thought I should update this. In a break with the tradition, this season there was just ONE team who received no points in the Week 8 poll but entered the NCAA tournament as a member of the top 25; that team is #24 St. Thomas.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 01, 2006, 09:45:02 PM

Out of curiosity how many team ended up ranked that weren't ranked to start the year.?

....and, how many teams were ranked to start the season but did not make the NCAA tournament?

I am both to lazy and hungry to look it up.......

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 01, 2006, 09:56:48 PM

About a month and a half ago, I ran a post that had all the teams that received votes in the Top 25 poll. I also listed the "weighted" votes...multipliers for each week (multiplied by 1 for preseson and Week 1, multiplied by 2 for Week 2, multiplied by 13 for Week 13).

Here is the final tally for the Regular Season Polls. It's a bit much, but what do you expect for a full season? The list is by the weighted voting sytem (WTD); the next column is the actual number of votes received throughout the year (TOTAL); and then the number of weeks the team received votes (WKS)-14 weeks that include the preseason poll.

PL	TEAM	WTD	Total	WKS
#1	Wooster	53644	8143	14
#2	Wittenberg	50671	7578	14
#3	Lawrence	50461	6530	14
#4	Hope	48548	6490	14
#5	Amherst	41387	6406	14
#6	Illinois Wesleyan	41205	7158	14
#7	York (Pa.)	40461	6092	14
#8	Albion	38108	6021	14
#9	Baldwin-Wallace	37648	4440	14
#10	Augustana	36452	4703	14
#11	Puget Sound	31382	5567	14
#12	Mississippi College	24213	2853	14
#13	Stout	22206	2925	14
#14	North Central	19834	2148	10
#15	Worcester Polytech	19828	3635	14
#16	Virginia Wesleyan	18242	1997	12
#17	St. John Fisher	18107	2750	14
#18	Carnegie Mellon	14556	1933	12
#19	Wartburg	14471	2648	13
#20	Lincoln	13259	1634	13
#21	Carroll	12152	1139	13
#22	Occidental	11831	1315	9
#23	Transylvania	11312	1264	14
#24	Calvin	10977	1072	14
#25	Randolph-Macon	10455	2358	14
#26	Whitewater	8703	1211	14
#27	Elmhurst	5955	1376	14
#28	Hampden-Sydney	5091	1160	8
#29	Ohio Northern	4564	653	12
#30	Oshkosh	4116	1612	13
#31	Rochester	3415	1178	10
#32	Hanover	3314	1542	7
#33	Bluffton	1762	290	4
#34	Maryville (Tenn.)	1686	495	10
#35	NYU	1599	203	7
#36	St. Thomas	1461	239	11
#37	Gustavus Adolphus	1452	861	6
#38	Wilmington	1434	231	4
#39	Trinity (Conn.)	1273	150	7
#40	Catholic	1055	503	9
#41	John Carroll	975	547	6
#42	Widener	917	187	8
#43	Whitworth	847	71	3
#44	Ramapo	792	528	6
#45	Cortland State	672	71	7
#46	Stevens Point	615	237	9
#47	Albright	509	278	5
#48	Carleton	462	40	4
#49	Ursinus	315	111	5
#50	Trinity (Texas)	314	92	8
#51	La Crosse	272	27	6
#52	Tufts	264	21	2
#53	Coe	260	26	1
#54	New Jersey City	206	57	7
#55	Washington U.	194	28	6
#56	Hamilton	178	56	7
#57	Platteville	172	172	2
#58	Southwestern	153	105	3
#59	Bates	146	16	3
#60	Aurora	142	142	2
#61	Springfield	108	108	1
#62	Baruch	98	10	2
#63	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	77	6	2
#64	Potsdam State	76	57	3
#65	Christopher Newport	55	5	1
#66	Mary Washington	51	39	3
#67	Rutger-Newark	49	42	2
#68	Willamette	36	4	1
#69	Loras	31	4	2
#70	Buena Vista	26	26	1
#71	William Paterson	22	3	2
#72	Pomona-Pitzer	22	22	1
#73	New Jersey	22	2	1
#74	Hobart	21	21	1
#75	Union	20	16	2
#76	Hardin-Simmons	16	16	1
#77	Williams	15	15	2
#78	Lake Erie	13	1	1
#79	King's	13	13	1
#80	Huntington	13	1	1
#81	Howard Payne	10	1	1
#82	Salem State	7	7	1
#83	Methodist	6	6	1
#84	McMurry	6	2	1
#85	Scranton	5	5	1
#86	Keene State	3	1	1
#87	Dominican	1	1	1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on March 01, 2006, 11:54:58 PM

OS:

That's pretty cool. Thanks for putting this together.

Sac:

Interesting question. Here are the teams ranked in the preseason who didn't make the tournament (rankings in parentheses).

UW-Oshkosh (2)
Albion (8 )
Hanover (9)
Ramapo (12)
Wartburg (14)
Elmhurst (15)
John Carroll (16)
Gustavus Adolphus (19)
UW-Plattville (20)
Aurora (22)
Rochester (23)

And here are the ones who finished in the Top 25 but weren't there to start (votes received in parentheses). The threshold for cracking the preseason Top 25 was 115 votes.

#1 Lawrence (24)
#2 Hope (59)
#6 Baldwin-Wallace (24)
#10 North Central (0)
#13 Augustana (82)
#17 Carroll (8 )
#18 Lincoln (0)
#19 UW-Stout (3)
#20 Transylvania (68)
#23 Carnegie Mellon (0)
#24 St. Thomas (1 - Bragging rights for someone!)
#25 Ohio Northern (0)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 02, 2006, 12:25:59 AM

gordonmann's post got me wondering about the #2 final ranking - danged if Hope is not ALSO the only #2 not to appear in the pre-season rankings!

In fact, last year's start of final (regular season) #2 Amherst at #11 was a record low at the time. EVERY other regular season final #2 started in the pre-season at #4 or higher: 99-00: Hampden-Sydney, #2; 00-01: Wooster, #3; 01-02: WashU, #2; 02-03: WashU, #1; 03-04: Hanover, #4.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 02, 2006, 09:13:13 AM

Wow, you guys need to get some more sleep, I think.

But seriously, really cool numbers work.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BVHawk on March 02, 2006, 11:52:23 AM

Wartburg was overrated all season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 02, 2006, 12:24:16 PM

Quote from: BVHawk on March 02, 2006, 11:52:23 AM
Wartburg was overrated all season.

They were playing pretty well before Christmas. Give them some credit. They obviously lost it in conference, but they did deserve their ranking for a while.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 02, 2006, 12:38:56 PM

Quote from: BVHawk on March 02, 2006, 11:52:23 AM
Wartburg was overrated all season.

A Buena Vista supporter might want to be more judicious when discussing overrated teams from the IIAC. Some might remind you to look in the mirror in previous years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TeeDub on March 02, 2006, 04:03:33 PM

Quote from: BVHawk on March 02, 2006, 11:52:23 AM
Wartburg was overrated all season.

Hmmm? Does beating an overrated team make you good or bad...I'm confused.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on March 02, 2006, 08:12:57 PM

QuoteHmmm? Does beating an overrated team make you good or bad...I'm confused

Yes!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: woosterbooster on March 02, 2006, 08:57:55 PM

Quote from: smedindy on March 02, 2006, 08:12:57 PM
QuoteHmmm? Does beating an overrated team make you good or bad...I'm confused

Yes!

Easily the most succinct yet ambiguous post I've ever seen. Consider yourself the beneficiary of an additional 20% worth of karma.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 03, 2006, 08:44:40 AM

Fantastic!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: woosterbooster on March 03, 2006, 09:21:58 AM

Nice try, Hoops Fan. :-)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 03, 2006, 10:03:01 AM

I was just adding my parise to yours in regards to Smed's response. I thought it was fantastic. I certainly might have been able to potentially come up with some sort of quasi-ambiguous post, if I had given some measure of time or thought to the topic, maybe.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on March 03, 2006, 10:15:27 AM

Hey, now, plenty of Smed-love to go around!! ;D

Anyway....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: woosterbooster on March 03, 2006, 11:41:56 AM

Hoops Fan -

I've allotted you .3 points of Karma. Of course, the lack of sophistication in the forum software disallows me the ability to officially pass this on, but I've duly noted it in my NCAA (DIII) Karma Notebook. Should you, at some time in the future, be deemed worthy of another .2 points (I round up), a full point will be added to your D3Hoops stats.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 03, 2006, 11:43:54 AM

I'm smiting you .1 points for being cheap. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 03, 2006, 12:20:25 PM

Pat commented on the Hope-Lawrence for #! debate over in the MWC and it sparked a question. I thought it might be more appropriate here.

Do you think the winner of the NCAA tournament necessarily should be the #1 at the end of the year?

I would say yes in most circumstances, but what about this one:

A team like Tufts goes through the tournament winning games by one or two points, some in overtime, the whole way through. They beat a cinderella in the final four to make the championship against, for example a Lawrence which has hypothetically won every game by 15 points or more. In the final, Tufts plays out of their minds and Lawrence struggles with poor shooting, but an otherwise decent performance. Tufts wins the game and the title, but they were clearly not the best team on the floor.

You've got a 25-7 national champion and a 28-1 runner-up. Do you still have to vote for Tufts in the final poll or is there leeway there? Do you penalize a great team for having one bad, albeit immesely important, game?

You can substitute anyone for those teams depending on the year. I'm more concerned with people's thoughts about whether winning the tournament automatically makes you #1 or if there is room for other teams to receive #1 votes?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: woosterbooster on March 03, 2006, 12:39:00 PM

I don't know, but my feelings are that if you win it on the floor, no matter in a lucky fashion or not, you deserve the number one ranking. After all, DIII is lucky to have this tournament where teams can get the opportunity to win it on the court. The NCAA still irks me with DI football where they can't seem to find the way to make that happen with a little 8 or 16 team tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 03, 2006, 12:44:30 PM

I think the only vote for No. 1 I would accept other than the winner of the NCAA Tournament would be if a team snubbed from the tournament had claim to the No. 1 spot. As close as we've ever gotten on that, I believe, is Capital's inexplicably being left out of the 2002 tournament. Otterbein, which Capital played to the nub three times, won the title. Capital finished No. 8 in the final poll and got several No. 2 votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 03, 2006, 01:32:05 PM

It would be hard for me to vote a team #1 that was clearly not as good as some others just because they got hot for one weekend.

Again, this is an unlikely scenario, but still, if we're giving them the title of best team on the year (implied by the ranking), I would hope they would have made a decent case throughout the year. Any of the top 15-20 teams in the country, maybe the whole top 25 would be unquestionably #1 if they were able to run the tournament, but if someone below that happened to win, I think there might be some voters who doubt their #1 credentials.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on March 03, 2006, 01:41:04 PM

I look at it this way. You win the championship on the court, the field etc. you are number 1 no matter your ranking at the start of the post season. Following your reasoning the Colts were really the number one NFL team this past season even though they lost to the Steelers who then went on to win it on the field. You win, you are ranked number one period. Just my stupid opinion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 03, 2006, 02:14:47 PM

See I wouldn't agree with your NFL analogy. The 32 teams in the NFL and 12 in the playoffs are very different than the 400 in d3 and the 59 in the tournament along with the deserving teams who get left out.

Admittedly, this is would be a very unlikely situation. I was just using it to gauge people's ideas of voting.

We could use the extreme example. Would you think less of someone for voting Lawrence #1 if they lost to Wisconsin Lutheran by 1 in triple overtime in the championship game? I picked Tufts originally because they had an easier path and frankly a more legitimate shot.

I wouldn't hesitate to call that team the National Champion or expect them to forgo the accolades that accompany the great feat that winning a tournament like this, but I don't think that necessarily makes them #1. That being said, it would take pretty dire circumstances for me not to vote the winner of the tournament #1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on March 03, 2006, 02:21:11 PM

No, if you win the title, you are #1.

Period.
Paragraph.

And I don't care if it IS York (NY) - they won it - they get to be #1.

And it's not getting hot for a weekend. It's getting hot for three weeks against some stout competition.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 03, 2006, 02:27:09 PM

If Tufts beat, Endicott, Cortland, Hamilton and WPI by one or two points each, that's not all that impressive to me.

Winning the final four, would however, require them to get hot for a weekend.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 03, 2006, 02:27:30 PM

I just want someone to admit that it could be a possibility, even if it had a one in a million chance.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on March 03, 2006, 10:48:10 PM

No, Hoops Fan - win by one, win by 100, you win that many games in a row - you're hot - no matter what.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TigerFan_1973 on March 03, 2006, 11:09:24 PM

Quote from: Wooster Booster on March 03, 2006, 12:39:00 PM
The NCAA still irks me with DI football where they can't seem to find the way to make that happen with a little 8 or 16 team tournament.

It might interfere with the studies of the scholar-athletes at the big schools!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on March 04, 2006, 10:51:20 AM

"scholar athletes at big schools" -- sounds like an oxymoron! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 04, 2006, 10:19:16 PM

If I were a fan of Oxy.........I'd be offended by that. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 06, 2006, 09:25:34 AM

It sounds like a great screen name for a poster. I wonder if anyone has it already?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dark Knight on March 13, 2006, 03:01:35 PM

I wonder if anyone every calls their hoops team the "Oxy 5" -- and whether they ever get acne.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 14, 2006, 06:36:02 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on September 24, 2005, 12:27:50 PM
Let the annual Street & Smith's debate begin...

(Division III preview by Chuck Mistovich, Basketball Times)

1. Illinois Wesleyan
2. Mississippi College
3. UW-Oshkosh
4. York
5. Virginia Wesleyan
6. Ursinus
7. Amherst
8. Ramapo
9. Wittenberg
10. Wilkes

Illinois Wesleyan

Coach Scott Trost's Titans are loaded. The top eight scorers return on this senior-laden team that was 21-5 last year, and they are looking every bit as good as the Wesleyan team that won the NCAA Division III Tournament in 1997. All-America candidates are 6-6 Keelan Amelianovich (17.9 ppg, 4.8 rpg) and 6-3 Adam Dauksas (15.1 ppg, 5.6 apg). Wesleyan also features 6-7 Zach Freeman (14.2 ppg, 6.8 rpg) and three 6-6 inside men who make the Titans look more like a Division II team than Division III. These seniors have reached the NCAA playoffs three straight years with a combined 64-18 record.

Street & Smith's Preseason All-America Team:

First

Keelan Amelianovich, Illinois Wesleyan
Adam Dauksas, Illinois Wesleyan
Tyler Rhoten, Trinity (Conn)
Justin Wansley, Randolph-Macon
Tyler Winford, Mississippi

Second

Chris Braier, Lawrence
Sekani Francis, Lehman
Cedric Isom, East Texas Baptist
Kyle Myrick, Lincoln (Pa)
Daniel Russ, Wittenberg

From almost 6 months ago. They had all four Final 4 teams in their Top 10...not a bad effort.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 14, 2006, 07:31:07 PM

Their pre-season AA teams look pretty good, too. I suspect Myrick and Braier will probably be first-team, rather than second, though I'm unsure who will get unseated.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 14, 2006, 08:06:26 PM

On the All-American team, ETBU's Cedric Isom was first team All-South Region and MissColl's Tyler Winford was 2nd team All-South.

Both players had good seasons, altho I have to believe that the breadth of the panel on the polls and the teams was not as wide as Pat Coleman's.

Miss College's style of play does not match up well in the Great Lakes Sectional.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 15, 2006, 08:52:36 AM

Strangely, Keelan may be the one unseated as he failed to garner a first team Midwest position.

I see Myrick, Dauksas, Rhoten, Wansley and Braier.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 15, 2006, 03:53:55 PM

I've addressed this elsewhere but just for the record here, we are not obligated to use the All-Region team as a guide when choosing All-Americans. We retained control over the All-American process when we agreed to administer and host the SIDs' All-Region team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 15, 2006, 04:28:14 PM

Good for you Pat; smart move.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 20, 2006, 05:42:32 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on March 14, 2006, 06:36:02 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on September 24, 2005, 12:27:50 PM
Let the annual Street & Smith's debate begin...

(Division III preview by Chuck Mistovich, Basketball Times)

1. Illinois Wesleyan
2. Mississippi College
3. UW-Oshkosh
4. York
5. Virginia Wesleyan
6. Ursinus
7. Amherst
8. Ramapo
9. Wittenberg
10. Wilkes

Illinois Wesleyan

Coach Scott Trost's Titans are loaded. The top eight scorers return on this senior-laden team that was 21-5 last year, and they are looking every bit as good as the Wesleyan team that won the NCAA Division III Tournament in 1997. All-America candidates are 6-6 Keelan Amelianovich (17.9 ppg, 4.8 rpg) and 6-3 Adam Dauksas (15.1 ppg, 5.6 apg). Wesleyan also features 6-7 Zach Freeman (14.2 ppg, 6.8 rpg) and three 6-6 inside men who make the Titans look more like a Division II team than Division III. These seniors have reached the NCAA playoffs three straight years with a combined 64-18 record.

Street & Smith's Preseason All-America Team:

First

Keelan Amelianovich, Illinois Wesleyan
Adam Dauksas, Illinois Wesleyan
Tyler Rhoten, Trinity (Conn)
Justin Wansley, Randolph-Macon
Tyler Winford, Mississippi

Second

Chris Braier, Lawrence
Sekani Francis, Lehman
Cedric Isom, East Texas Baptist
Kyle Myrick, Lincoln (Pa)
Daniel Russ, Wittenberg

From almost 6 months ago. They had all four Final 4 teams in their Top 10...not a bad effort.

True, and far be it from me to badmouth Chuck Mistovich, but he also picked three teams for his Top 10 that failed to win their respective conferences and subsequently missed making the national tournament field. I can't for the life of me figure out why he and whatever intern(s) he's got working for him picked Wilkes, a team that didn't receive even a single vote in the D3hoops.com preseason Top 25. Someone must've tipped him off that the Colonels had a 6'8" transfer from the College of Charleston sneaking onto the campus at the last minute. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 20, 2006, 07:20:51 PM

Pat,

When does your final poll come out? I'm guessing this week sometime, tomorrow?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 21, 2006, 07:04:11 PM

Top 25 News and Notes, Vol. VII, Issue 108

The final men's top 25 poll (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/) is out!

As unofficial (and self-appointed) D3hoops.com Men's Top 25 Historian, let me add my congratulations to Virginia Wesleyan for winning the national championship. :) The Marlins move up to the unanimous #1 position in the final poll, becoming just the 18th member of the elite fraternity of teams who have reached the top spot in the poll.

Debutantes:

Three other squads turned their outstanding tournament performance into all-time highest rankings:
#7 Transylvania (first time ever in top 10)
#10 Lincoln (first time ever in top 10)
#22 Tufts (first time ever in top 25)

Further congratulations to Utica and SUNY-Farmingdale for receiving votes in the poll for the first time ever.

Streakers:

#4 Amherst is ranked in the top 25 for the 63rd consecutive week, establishing a new record in this category (the previous record of 62 weeks was shared with Catholic (1999-2003) and UW-Stevens Point (2001-05). Amherst's streak dates all the way back to the final poll of the 2001-02 season.

#9 Wooster is ranked in the top 10 for the 38th consecutive week, tying the all-time record held by Carthage (2000-03). Wooster's current streak began in Week 9 of the 2003-04 season, and considering that they lose just one senior to graduation and return two All-Americans (http://www.d3hoops.com/tow/06/menallam06.htm), it seems likely that this record will be broken in next year's preseason poll.

Wooster also extended their perfect run of receiving votes to 108 consecutive weeks[/u] (i.e., every week in the poll's history.) That means that the longest streaks of all time in all three of these categories (receiving votes, top 25, and top 10) are active streaks.

#8 Puget Sound has now received votes in 40 consecutive polls[/u]. For #23 Albion, this streak stands at 30 weeks[/u]; for #21 Carroll and ORV Occidental, the streak has reached 10 weeks[/u].

Milestones:[/u]

#9 Wooster is in the top 25 for the 100th time[/u].
#15 UW-Whitewater is in the top 25 for the 50th time[/u], and has now received votes in 90 polls[/u].
#6 Hope is in the top 10 for the 20th time[/u].
#24 William Paterson and ORV Ohio Northern each received votes for the 50th time[/u]. Christopher Newport's one vote marks their 70th week[/u] with at least one vote in the poll.

Congratulations to all of these fine programs on their achievements, but most of all congratulations to #1 and National Champion Virginia Wesleyan!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on March 21, 2006, 07:16:54 PM

I was really happy to see Farmingdale get votes. The way they are building their basketball program reminds me of the way CNU built their football program. Play good competition and it will reward you in the long run. The kids that got blown out by teams like NJCU four years ago made a little noise in the tournament this year.

Congrats to VWC, number 1. If it can't be a NJ school I am happy it was one from a state and region I really enjoyed living in for several years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 22, 2006, 01:26:41 AM

David,

Have you done anything with the Women's Poll? I'm curious what schools have been tops in both - e.g., Hope this year finishes at #1 and #6. I'm guessing that is probably not THE best ever, but it must be close. Has any school ever ranked #1 in both simultaneously (if so, I'll guess WashU)?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 22, 2006, 07:35:05 AM

David -

Curious... I noticed the top four teams were in order of how they "finished" the season in Salem. How many times has it happened that the four teams who got to the Final Four... were actually voted 1 through 4, just as they finished?

Congrats to IWU on a good season and an incrediable finish in the tournament. You certainly represented the school, CCIW, and region extremely well.

It was also nice to finally meet and see Keelan, Adam, and Zach. They are incrediable players and its too bad IWU has to lose two of them. They are all class acts, but Dauksas certainly impressed me in the last few weeks when ever I chatted with him (including when he walked up to me to initiate a conversation).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 22, 2006, 07:52:58 AM

Very nice, David!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 22, 2006, 08:38:04 AM

Quote from: d-mac on March 22, 2006, 07:35:05 AM
David -

Curious... I noticed the top four teams were in order of how they "finished" the season in Salem. How many times has it happened that the four teams who got to the Final Four... were actually voted 1 through 4, just as they finished?

This previously happened in 2003-04 and 2000-01.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 22, 2006, 08:45:49 AM

You beat me to it... :D

In order of tournament finish, with final ranking shown:
2006:
#1 VWC
#2 Wittenberg
#3 IWU
#4 Amherst

2005:
#1 UW-SP
#4 Rochester
#2 Calvin
#13 York (Pa)

2004:
#1 UW-SP
#2 Williams
#3 JCU
#4 Amherst

2003:
#1 Williams
#3 Gustavus Adolphus
#2 Wooster
#4 Hampden-Sydney

2002:
#1 Otterbein
#3 Elizabethtown
#2 Carthage
#6 Rochester

2001:
#1 Catholic
#2 William Paterson
#3 IWU
#4 Ohio Northern

2000:
#1 Calvin
#2 UW-Eau Claire
#8 Salem St.
#4 Franklin & Marshall

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 22, 2006, 08:53:28 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 22, 2006, 01:26:41 AM
David,

Have you done anything with the Women's Poll? I'm curious what schools have been tops in both - e.g., Hope this year finishes at #1 and #6. I'm guessing that is probably not THE best ever, but it must be close. Has any school ever ranked #1 in both simultaneously (if so, I'll guess WashU)?

No, I don't do anything with the women's poll; maybe this offseason I'll take that on. The best finishes for schools in both polls would be as follows:
2006: Hope (Men #6, Women #1)
2005: Trinity (TX) (Men #3, Women #7)
2004: UW-Stevens Point (Men #1, Women #4)
2003: Wash U. (Men #8, Women #4)
2002: Wash U. (Men #5, Women #3) and DePauw (Men #4, Women #4)
2001: Wash U. (Men #10, Women #1)
2000: UW-Eau Claire (Men #2, Women #3)

If any school has held the top spot in both polls simultaneously, it would probably be either Wash U. or UW-Stevens Point, and I don't doubt that it has happened. But since I don't track the women's poll, it would be as easy for you to look this up as it would be for me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 22, 2006, 09:14:58 AM

I think I remember a headline about that some time in the last year or two. One of the Point Championship years I think Stevens Point had #1 in both polls the same week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njlincolnlion on March 22, 2006, 11:01:20 AM

Congratulations to the Lincoln University Lions on making the D3 Hoops top ten for the First time in school history. Kudos also to Lincoln's Kyle "Fase" Myrick on being named D3 National Player of the Year (another first for Lincoln). Myrick's first team All American honor makes it consectutive years for a Lincoln athlete making the first team. Jarrett Kearse was on the team for the 2004-2005 season.

Congratulations to Lincoln's coach Garfield Yuille on being named the D3 Regional Coach of the Year & D3 Independent National coach of the year.

We can't wait until next year and hope the Lions Basketball team continues the phenomenal progress exhibited over the last two years under Coach Yuille and his staff.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 22, 2006, 05:41:12 PM

Since I am the resident Pointer fan here, I guess I'm morally obligated to check up on this:

I started with the 2003-2004 season since both were in the Final Four that year.

03-04' Week 3 Point men #2; Point women #4
03-04' Week 4 Point men #2; Point women #4
03-04' Week 5 Point men #2; Point women #3
03-04' Week 6 Point women #1; Point men #2

04-05' Preseason Point men #1; Point women #4

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 23, 2006, 08:44:11 AM

Wow, I really thought I saw a headline about that, but I guess they only made it to #1 and #2.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on March 24, 2006, 07:09:22 PM

Quote from: Old School on March 22, 2006, 05:41:12 PM
Since I am the resident Pointer fan here...

Hey, don't I get any credit?! :P ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 24, 2006, 10:13:20 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on March 24, 2006, 07:09:22 PM
Hey, don't I get any credit?! :P ;)

You rent, I own. lol. ;D

OK, I'm the resident Pointer fan who didn't play for the team...is that better? ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 27, 2006, 10:59:56 AM

Yeah, I agree. You can't be "fan" and "former player." Usually fandom comes with being a former player. Former Player is higher on the ranking than "fan" anyway. It's like a vice-admiral saying "I'm also a lieutenant commander."

Bill Walton isn't just a UCLA fan, he's a former player.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on March 27, 2006, 12:16:28 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 27, 2006, 10:59:56 AM
Former Player is higher on the ranking than "fan" anyway. It's like a vice-admiral saying "I'm also a lieutenant commander."

Does anyone else have the urge to call Point Special "Vice Admiral Point Special" now? :D ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 27, 2006, 12:27:05 PM

I think Lieutenant Commander Special has a nice ring to it, but to each his (or her) own. Seeing as how he is metaphorically both, I assume either would be acceptable.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: woosterbooster on March 27, 2006, 01:23:23 PM

Is a Vice Admiral one who is in charge of dealing with vice? Or would he be a person, much like our Vice President, who specializes in committing such acts? ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 27, 2006, 04:14:59 PM

Well, now we have the real title:

Point Special, Admiral of Vice

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on March 27, 2006, 10:44:25 PM

For the last year I have been the Deputy Vice Commander of my VFW post. This year I get to become the Vice Commander. I think I will stay there and never move from that position.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 28, 2006, 06:01:57 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 27, 2006, 10:59:56 AM

Yeah, I agree. You can't be "fan" and "former player." Usually fandom comes with being a former player. Former Player is higher on the ranking than "fan" anyway. It's like a vice-admiral saying "I'm also a lieutenant commander."

Bill Walton isn't just a UCLA fan, he's a former player.

True ... but last night Old School stayed in a Holiday Inn.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: joehakes on March 28, 2006, 11:08:29 AM

It's gonna be a long summer, isn't it?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 28, 2006, 12:14:21 PM

Quote from: joehakes on March 28, 2006, 11:08:29 AM
It's gonna be a long summer, isn't it?

Yes, but it should be interesting, so long as the Admiral sticks around.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on March 28, 2006, 05:26:05 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 28, 2006, 06:01:57 AM
True ... but last night Old School stayed in a Holiday Inn.

I don't get it... the only thing Holiday Inn reminds me of is "Blast from the Past" ("Dangerous, Poisonous Gas!!!)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on March 28, 2006, 05:35:41 PM

I guess I'd be Vice Admiral Special (Ret). Would that make Coach Bennett former President Bennett, and Coach Semling the current president?

The thought that comes to my mind with all of this "rank" talk is the scene in Top Gun where they introduce "Charlie", the civilian contractor... I guess that's what you guys all are, huh?

Ha ha, I don't have to salute you!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 28, 2006, 06:43:34 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 28, 2006, 06:01:57 AM
True ... but last night Old School stayed in a Holiday Inn.

Quote from: diehardfan on March 28, 2006, 05:26:05 PM
I don't get it... the only thing Holiday Inn reminds me of is "Blast from the Past" ("Dangerous, Poisonous Gas!!!)

Oh come on April! It's actually the Holiday Inn Express, you know, those commercials where the guy sounds all smart, but he's not a "doctor/pilot/rodeo clown/cowboy etc", he just stayed at a Holiday Inn Express!

Quote from: PointSpecial on March 28, 2006, 05:35:41 PM
The thought that comes to my mind with all of this "rank" talk is the scene in Top Gun where they introduce "Charlie", the civilian contractor... I guess that's what you guys all are, huh?

I'm not as good looking as "Charlie"...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 29, 2006, 08:56:51 AM

Quote from: PointSpecial on March 28, 2006, 05:35:41 PM
I guess I'd be Vice Admiral Special (Ret). Would that make Coach Bennett former President Bennett, and Coach Semling the current president?

The thought that comes to my mind with all of this "rank" talk is the scene in Top Gun where they introduce "Charlie", the civilian contractor... I guess that's what you guys all are, huh?

Ha ha, I don't have to salute you!

Stick to vice, Admiral, the humor is just not doing it for you.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on March 29, 2006, 05:54:28 PM

Quote from: Old School on March 28, 2006, 06:43:34 PM
Oh come on April! It's actually the Holiday Inn Express, you know, those commercials where the guy sounds all smart, but he's not a "doctor/pilot/rodeo clown/cowboy etc", he just stayed at a Holiday Inn Express!

Uhm, I don't watch TV. It rots your brain. ;D

Seriously though, I don't usually bother. I'm much too conservative to enjoy most of the stuff that's on these days. I couldn't tell you a single movie that's out in the theatres right now. :-\

I spend most of my free time reading. Right now I am reading the Ender Series by Orson Scott Card for the 80 billionth time... so basically I'm rotting my brain with Science Fiction novels instead. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: woosterbooster on March 29, 2006, 07:35:18 PM

I read that series a few years ago. I liked the first book (Ender's Game, wasn't it?), but thought it went downhill a bit from there. The best part, I thought, regarded the game that they played in the school, a sort of zero-gravity futuristic combination of capture the flag. Someday the NCAA might sanction it as a sport, and we can have a DIII forum to argue about it. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on March 29, 2006, 07:48:15 PM

Quote from: Wooster Booster on March 29, 2006, 07:35:18 PM
I read that series a few years ago. I liked the first book (Ender's Game, wasn't it?), but thought it went downhill a bit from there. The best part, I thought, regarded the game that they played in the school, a sort of zero-gravity futuristic combination of capture the flag. Someday the NCAA might sanction it as a sport, and we can have a DIII forum to argue about it. :)

Oh man, that would be awesome. I would definitely go back to college to use my eligibility!

I actually like the later books better in many respects. They are a lot more intellectual rather than military strategy focused.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 30, 2006, 09:25:04 AM

Quote from: diehardfan on March 29, 2006, 07:48:15 PM
Oh man, that would be awesome. I would definitely go back to college to use my eligibility!

I doubt you'd have more than one year left, April. I'm still not sure on all the specific ins and outs of the elligibilty rule, but its very tough to remain elligible for athletics after getting a degree.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 30, 2006, 11:02:04 AM

Good news is zero-degree capture the flag isn't likely to be governed by the NCAA, at least in the early going, so eligibility wouldn't really be an issue. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on March 30, 2006, 11:46:11 AM

If you guys knew how awesome the game in those books was, you would think that one year of eligibility was worth it! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 30, 2006, 08:42:25 PM

The heck with zero-degree capture the flag. If I'm going to go back to North Park and use my eligibility in a non-NCAA-sanctioned sport, it's going to be for a man's game: 43-man squamish.

http://www.collectmad.com/madcoversite/index-quiz_olympics.html

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on March 30, 2006, 08:45:57 PM

okay.. it's not zero degree... it's zero-gravity

and, it's like capture the flag plus space suits and weapons ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 30, 2006, 09:57:51 PM

OK, enough of these 'sissy' sports - I want to see d3 add quidditch to the sports roster!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on September 21, 2006, 11:44:52 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 22, 2006, 01:26:41 AM
David,

Have you done anything with the Women's Poll? I'm curious what schools have been tops in both - e.g., Hope this year finishes at #1 and #6. I'm guessing that is probably not THE best ever, but it must be close. Has any school ever ranked #1 in both simultaneously (if so, I'll guess WashU)?

To celebrate the six-month anniversary of the asking of this question, I thought I'd answer it. :)

The 2002-03 preseason polls had Washington U. (Mo.) as the #1 team for both the men and women. Both teams maintained their #1 ranking through the first 11 regular season polls. After starting 23-0, each team lost on Feb. 23, 2003, at Rochester:

The men lost 83-82 (OT) to the then-#8 Yellow Jackets and fell to #2 (behind Randolph-Macon.) They finished 24-2 and ranked #8 after losing to then-#13 Illinois Wesleyan in the second round of the NCAAs.
The women lost 82-73 to the then-#23 Yellow Jackets and fell to #3 (behind UW-Eau Claire and Hope.) They lost in the sectional final to then-#21 Trinity (TX) and finished 26-2 and ranked #4. Trinity went on to win the national title; Rochester also went to the Final Four, finishing 4th.

Those 12 polls at the beginning of the 2002-03 season are the only times that one school has held the top spot in both polls.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on September 22, 2006, 12:00:54 AM

:D I believe that qualifies you for the HEINZ ketchup and mustard awards for randomness. :)

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hope.edu%2Fimg%2Ffieldhouse%2F05ddevosconstruct145.jpg&hash=d1a934c96f39212bbf00b06760cef80c404fa8f5)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on September 22, 2006, 12:28:16 AM

I'll take that as a condiment. ;D

Not so random; I've been on the ultra-tedious chore of logging seven years of women's polls into my database off and on the past six months, something I hinted at in March:

Quote from: David Collinge on March 22, 2006, 08:53:28 AM
No, I don't do anything with the women's poll; maybe this offseason I'll take that on.

Anyway, when baseball season winds down, and they start playing that goofy violent sport with the oblong ball, I start to get into a basketball frame of mind. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on September 22, 2006, 12:42:50 AM

Are you referring to badminton? :P I know you're not referring to football, cause if you were then I would have to take your Heinz award away. :D

Quote from: David Collinge on September 22, 2006, 12:28:16 AM
I'll take that as a condiment. ;D

Hah! Quality. I like how we keep doing this even though Scott doesn't ever see it. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on September 22, 2006, 08:57:25 AM

I agree on that oblong ball sport. Such a bastardization of rugby; it's not even funny.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 05, 2006, 03:04:25 PM

Someone on the NESCAC board said Street & Smith's d3 preview is out already. I can't find it anywhere; little help?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 05, 2006, 06:24:19 PM

Street & Smith's Top 10 is...

1. Wooster
2. Mississippi College
3. Virginia Wesleyan
4. Baldwin-Wallace
5. St. Thomas
6. Amherst
7. Maryville (TN)
8. UW-Whitewater
9. William Paterson
10. Wittenberg

Their All-America team is:

1st
Brandon Adair, Virginia Wesleyan
James Cooper, Wooster
Tori Davis, Baldwin-Wallace
Isaac Rosefelt, St. Thomas
Tyler Winford, Mississippi College

2nd
Ton Ton Balenga, Virginia Wesleyan
Jon Krull, UW-Stevens Point
Luis Martinez, William Paterson
Tom Port, Wooster
Joe Werner, UW-LaCrosse

"Possible Breakthroughs" are:

Albright, Augustana, Bates, Bridgewater State, Calvin, Carroll, Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, Cortland, Hamilton, Hope, Howard Payne, John Carroll, Lincoln, Mass-Boston, Mass-Dartmouth, New Jersey City, New York U., North Central, Ohio Northern, Plattsburgh State, Randolph-Macon, Roanoke, Rochester, Rutgers-Newark, Scranton, St. John Fisher, St. John's, SUNY Potsdam, Tufts, Utica, Williams, UW-Oshkosh, UW-Stevens Point, UW-Stout, Worcester Poly, York

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 05, 2006, 06:27:26 PM

The Street & Smith's NAIA Top 10, for anyone interested, is:

1. Robert Morris (Chicago)
2. Louisiana State-Shreveport
3. Oklahoma City
4. Mountain State (W Va)
5. Texas Wesleyan
6. Azusa Pacific (CA)
7. Georgetown (Ky)
8. Oklahoma Baptist
9. Union (Tenn)
10. Olivet Nazarene (IL)

(S&S does not break NAIA into two divisions for their rankings.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on October 05, 2006, 08:21:19 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 05, 2006, 06:24:19 PM
Street & Smith's Top 10 is...

1. Wooster
2. Mississippi College
3. Virginia Wesleyan
4. Baldwin-Wallace
5. St. Thomas
6. Amherst
7. Maryville (TN)
8. UW-Whitewater
9. William Paterson
10. Wittenberg

Their All-America team is:

1st
Brandon Adair, Virginia Wesleyan
James Cooper, Wooster
Tori Davis, Baldwin-Wallace
Isaac Rosefelt, St. Thomas
Tyler Winford, Mississippi College

2nd
Ton Ton Balenga, Virginia Wesleyan
Jon Krull, UW-Stevens Point
Luis Martinez, William Paterson
Tom Port, Wooster
Joe Werner, UW-LaCrosse

"Possible Breakthroughs" are:

Albright, Augustana, Bates, Bridgewater State, Calvin, Carroll, Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, Cortland, Hamilton, Hope, Howard Payne, John Carroll, Lincoln, Mass-Boston, Mass-Dartmouth, New Jersey City, New York U., North Central, Ohio Northern, Plattsburgh State, Randolph-Macon, Roanoke, Rochester, Rutgers-Newark, Scranton, St. John Fisher, St. John's, SUNY Potsdam, Tufts, Utica, Williams, UW-Oshkosh, UW-Stevens Point, UW-Stout, Worcester Poly, York

Where is Wheaton on this list? ???

gasp... shock...horror :'( :D ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on October 05, 2006, 08:33:35 PM

Explain to me why Maryville (TN) deserves that number 7 spot. Solid team, but at number 7.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on October 05, 2006, 08:55:47 PM

I think anyone is going to be pretty hesitant to explain or justify Street and Smith, because generally, in a broad sense, they don't make very much sense to us either! :D

For example, right off the bat. VaWes is the national champ, returns everyone who was a major contributor, and is not picked first...why??? ???

Don't worry about it, for most of us, it's just a curiosity thing. And it makes us very, VERY grateful for the obviously much more extensive work the guys in charge of the D3hoops.com poll do in their research! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 05, 2006, 11:05:53 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on September 24, 2005, 12:27:50 PM
Let the annual Street & Smith's debate begin...

(Division III preview by Chuck Mistovich, Basketball Times)

1. Illinois Wesleyan
2. Mississippi College
3. UW-Oshkosh
4. York
5. Virginia Wesleyan
6. Ursinus
7. Amherst
8. Ramapo
9. Wittenberg
10. Wilkes

Illinois Wesleyan

Coach Scott Trost's Titans are loaded. The top eight scorers return on this senior-laden team that was 21-5 last year, and they are looking every bit as good as the Wesleyan team that won the NCAA Division III Tournament in 1997. All-America candidates are 6-6 Keelan Amelianovich (17.9 ppg, 4.8 rpg) and 6-3 Adam Dauksas (15.1 ppg, 5.6 apg). Wesleyan also features 6-7 Zach Freeman (14.2 ppg, 6.8 rpg) and three 6-6 inside men who make the Titans look more like a Division II team than Division III. These seniors have reached the NCAA playoffs three straight years with a combined 64-18 record.

Street & Smith's Preseason All-America Team:

First

Keelan Amelianovich, Illinois Wesleyan
Adam Dauksas, Illinois Wesleyan
Tyler Rhoten, Trinity (Conn)
Justin Wansley, Randolph-Macon
Tyler Winford, Mississippi

Second

Chris Braier, Lawrence
Sekani Francis, Lehman
Cedric Isom, East Texas Baptist
Kyle Myrick, Lincoln (Pa)
Daniel Russ, Wittenberg

Last year's Street & Smith's ranking. They did have all 4 Final Four teams in their Top 10.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on October 05, 2006, 11:10:03 PM

Wow... I'm just going to sit here with my mouth hanging open in amazement for a while. They picked all four of the final four contenders in their top ten. Wow. There's some teams that didn't belong there, and the places are a little confused, but... dang... :o

PrideSportBBallGuy... never mind. :D ;)

The D3hoops.com poll is still better. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on October 05, 2006, 11:16:06 PM

Quote from: diehardfan on October 05, 2006, 11:10:03 PM
Wow... I'm just going to sit here with my mouth hanging open in amazement for a while. They picked all four of the final four contenders in their top ten. Wow. There's some teams that didn't belong there, and the places are a little confused, but... dang... :o

PrideSportBBallGuy... never mind. :D ;)

The D3hoops.com poll is still better. ;D

The D3Hoops.com preseason poll (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/06/index.html) had all of the final four in the top 11.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 05, 2006, 11:36:06 PM

Quote from: diehardfan on October 05, 2006, 08:55:47 PM
I think anyone is going to be pretty hesitant to explain or justify Street and Smith, because generally, in a broad sense, they don't make very much sense to us either! :D

For example, right off the bat. VaWes is the national champ, returns everyone who was a major contributor, and is not picked first...why??? ???

I would expect Virginia Wesleyan to be the #1 team in any Division III preseason poll - they deserve it - but I'd entertain debate on it. The Marlins beat Illinois Wesleyan in the national semifinal by one possession and the same with Wittenberg in the title game. They play great team basketball and they have some guys who play huge in the clutch, but I certainly didn't leave Salem in March thinking they were any better than, say, Lawrence or Wittenberg or Illinois Wesleyan.

Virginia Wesleyan is obviously going to be #1 until someone knocks them off, but if a team like Wooster is supposed to be significantly better this year I'd listen to the argument for them being #1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on October 06, 2006, 01:01:05 AM

Going back to d3hoops preseason poll of 99-00 year to present day. Whomever was in the 9-13 spot preseason. (3 out of 7 times) Ended up winning the National Championship. I think you all can debate where Wooster will be preseason. I think Street & Smith are banking on that they will be in the 9-13 range. Once that preseason poll comes out from d3hoops, we might have our National Champions in that range. Virginia Wesleyan could be that case (UW-Stevens Point) where they are Final, Preseason, then Final. ;D ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 06, 2006, 08:55:34 AM

I just like that they're not afraid of the regional bias and always put Mississippi College up in the top. MC has a good squad, but no one sees them.

I don't know who Street & Smith have doing this preview, but they know just enough to make it seem like they know what they're talking about. Probably helps the profit margin to operate that way.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 06, 2006, 10:19:12 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on September 25, 2005, 11:09:17 PM
Street & Smith's does a Division III Top 10 each year, but they do not have any sort of ongoing poll.

As noted above, the S & S 2005-06 Division III preview was done by Chuck Mistovich, who is the Small College Editor for Basketball Times magazine. I don't know much about Mistovich, but I do know he has been covering small college basketball (NAIA, NCAA II, NCAA III) for a long time.

A sample of a couple articles by him I found via Google search...

http://nabc.collegesports.com/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/021805aaa.html

http://nabc.collegesports.com/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/011905aaa.html

I think it is fair to say that Street & Smith at least found someone who knows small college basketball to put together their small college pieces.

The above is a post I made last year at this time regarding who does the Street & Smith's preview. It is not D3hoops.com obviously, but I do feel like they at least give it a decent effort nowadays.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 06, 2006, 10:28:28 AM

I agree. Chuck Mistovich's credentials are impeccable when it comes to small-college basketball. He's been covering this beat for a long time. Thing is, he's just one guy -- and we all know how impossible it is for one person to cover the entire waterfront when it comes to D3 basketball, given the national spread of teams and the absence of television exposure. That's the beauty of Pat's poll -- one person isn't required to see every team, because it's all farmed out among various pollsters. Plus, Mistovich's beat is much bigger than D3 men's basketball -- he also covers D2 and NAIA, which means that there's even less of him to go around as far as D3 is concerned.

All things considered, it's impressive that Mistovich gets as close to getting it right as he does.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 06, 2006, 01:10:53 PM

It doesn't hurt that there is a website dedicated to information about d3 basketball that gets several million hits every season. That seems like it would make his job a little easier to do well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 06, 2006, 02:27:28 PM

If Mistovich is using d3hoops.com as a journalistic source, it'd be nice to know. Not that I subscribe to Basketball Times anymore, but can anyone who does get the magazine attest to Mistovich ever citing d3hoops.com as a source?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 06, 2006, 03:01:23 PM

I didn't necessarily mean he used the site as a source, but it certainly is a great place to find leads on information that may not fall into your lap.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 06, 2006, 03:14:08 PM

That's what a source is!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 06, 2006, 03:52:50 PM

Yeah, but not enough that you'd have to cite it anywhere.

If he was perusing the press releases or something and saw that obscure d3 school A has set a conferece record for margin of victory or something and he checks into it. That's something he might not have known without the site, but not something he would have to cite anywhere.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 06, 2006, 05:40:28 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on October 06, 2006, 01:10:53 PM
It doesn't hurt that there is a website dedicated to information about d3 basketball that gets several million hits every season. That seems like it would make his job a little easier to do well.

I'd like more information on this website you are talking about. A website dedicated to information about d3 basketball? Wow. ;D ;) :D I'm sure it's a pretty sweet site! I wonder if it has a message board. That'd be cool to talk trash (not that I would do that, but maybe someone else would). 8)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 07, 2006, 01:01:20 PM

I'm not much for talking and I don't think I'd ever post on a message board about d3 basketball. Weird.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 09, 2006, 11:37:18 AM

Hello ...

I don't think that Mistovich needs d3hoops.com to be his middleman for school press releases, since that's been his bread-and-butter all along as a Basketball Times columnist. I'm sure that he's on the mailing list of any school that bothers to send them out. But there's a lot of other info to be gleaned from this site other than access to school press releases, and if he is using d3hoops.com as that kind of an information clearinghouse, it'd be good form if he gave the site a mention -- even if he isn't quoting from it for attribution.

Again, I haven't read his column in years, and for all I know he does mention Pat's site in it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 09, 2006, 01:51:39 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 09, 2006, 11:37:18 AM
Again, I haven't read his column in years, and for all I know he does mention Pat's site in it.

Wow, so potentially, this could be the most pointless conversation any of us has ever had. That would be an amazing feat, given the inanity of off-season chat on this site.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 09, 2006, 02:19:51 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on October 09, 2006, 01:51:39 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 09, 2006, 11:37:18 AM
Again, I haven't read his column in years, and for all I know he does mention Pat's site in it.

Wow, so potentially, this could be the most pointless conversation any of us has ever had. That would be an amazing feat, given the inanity of off-season chat on this site.

Agreed. Whenever someone on CCIW Chat gripes about us going off on an unproductive tangent, we can just paste in this conversation in its entirety. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 09, 2006, 03:05:45 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on October 06, 2006, 08:55:34 AM

I just like that they're not afraid of the regional bias and always put Mississippi College up in the top. MC has a good squad, but no one sees them.

I don't know who Street & Smith have doing this preview, but they know just enough to make it seem like they know what they're talking about. Probably helps the profit margin to operate that way.

MC is that good. I just strongly disagree with the way that MC plays when they get into the meat of the Great Lakes Region. They try to play traditional Great Lakes style ball and lose everytime. They do not use their quickness; they do not stretch the other teams deep bench. MC's #9, #10 and #11 players are almost always very strong. They have more athleticism that the Great Lakes Ohio Valley area teams, but then go half-court/slow down pace that does not stress the stamina of the really better #1 -#5 players that we see on those northern teams.

That being said, Tyler Winford is that good. He needs to be on the floor 27-29 minutes a game, more than the usual 20-22 that he sees.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 09, 2006, 05:12:52 PM

I wasn't saying they weren't good. I'm a huge MC fan. I was giving S&S some credit for recognizing that they are a top team, even if their results in the tournament in recent years has seemed to indicate otherwise.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 09, 2006, 05:18:17 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on October 09, 2006, 05:12:52 PM

I wasn't saying they weren't good. I'm a huge MC fan. I was giving S&S some credit for recognizing that they are a top team, even if their results in the tournament in recent years has seemed to indicate otherwise.

Thanks for the props to an ASC team. I wasn't implying that you were disparaging MC. I just used that as a segue to talk about the Choctaws.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 09, 2006, 05:20:55 PM

Duly noted.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on October 10, 2006, 11:55:27 PM

MC loses to GL teams in the tournament because they don't play good enough defense and are too short. Their speed is overrated as Calvin was a quicker team in 05 and ran MC out of the Gym.

MC was the 4th best team at Albion, and the 4th best team at Wittenberg. In each case I saw teams in the previous round that were better than MC.

jmho

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: oldreporter on October 11, 2006, 07:38:04 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 09, 2006, 02:19:51 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on October 09, 2006, 01:51:39 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 09, 2006, 11:37:18 AM
Again, I haven't read his column in years, and for all I know he does mention Pat's site in it.

Wow, so potentially, this could be the most pointless conversation any of us has ever had. That would be an amazing feat, given the inanity of off-season chat on this site.

Agreed. Whenever someone on CCIW Chat gripes about us going off on an unproductive tangent, we can just paste in this conversation in its entirety. :D

Sager--
With your quip about pasting in a past conversation, I just couldn't resist... ;D

My all time favorite post dates back to the 99-00 season, when you made up a list of why the CCIW was the "wildest conference in the land." Note that I don't usually copy and save posts (this being the only one I have)! This one was too good to leave to memory, and I've been looking for an opening to repost it in honor of your humor...and then had to find it in the many old files I have...

QuoteSager's Top Ten Reasons Why the CCIW Is The Wildest Conference In the Land:

10) North Central whips first-division North Park by seventeen, and three days later is whipped in turn by lowly Elmhurst by a whopping thirty-two...and both games are played in the airplane hangar.

9) Micah Watkins attempts as many treys as Rick Alspach, and makes more...yet North Park still defeats nationally twelfth-ranked Carthage.

8.) Korey Coon finally snaps out of his slump...and he does it in a game where Wesleyan loses at home (of all places) in its most crucial contest to date of the season.

7) Two absolutely *huge* games with conference title and NCAA bid implications go right down to the wire...and yet the best game of the night is a double-overtime tilt between also-rans Millikin and Augustana.

6) Carthage outrebounds North Park by seven, and outdoes the Vikes on the offensive boards by a massive ten-carom margin...and still loses.

5) Bosko Djurickovic shows up for a game looking unusually dapper. Guess that that muted gray ensemble is going back into the closet and never coming out again.

4) All-everything Mastodon superstar Lukas Moo plays less than a half and fouls out, in Wesleyan's gym...and his Wheaties still leave McLean County with a "W" and a first-place tie in the CCIW loss column.

3) A CCIW Chat post becomes prime locker-room bulletin board fodder. Redmen Walking's post from Friday about "pretty boy Alspack [sic]" and "the Viking ship is sinking" is copied off numerous times by one of the NPU assistant coaches, taped to various walls in and around the ol' crackerbox, and is also taped to every player's locker in the NPU locker room. And when the final horn sounds, everyone in blue and gold wants to know who Redmen Walking is, so that they can give him a big thank-you hug.

2) Bill "Benches? We don' need no steenking benches!" Harris finally picks up the elusive win in Bloomington...and he does it by having a deeper bench than Wesleyan.

1) Sager celebrates the big win by listening to North Park alums (and Carthage fans) Mark Pytel and Chris Sitowksi warble "You've Lost That Lovin' Feeling" on the Hollywood karaoke machine.

It doesn't get any weirder than this.

Heh. I love it. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 11, 2006, 09:14:53 AM

Now that was high quality.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 11, 2006, 10:22:15 AM

Thank you, gentlemen. And may I also note for the record that I am absolutely terrified by the fact that oldreporter can quote verbatim a post of mine that's almost seven years old? :o :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 11, 2006, 01:01:50 PM

That was a nice blast from the past on a lot of names.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: oldreporter on October 12, 2006, 04:38:51 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 11, 2006, 10:22:15 AM
Thank you, gentlemen. And may I also note for the record that I am absolutely terrified by the fact that oldreporter can quote verbatim a post of mine that's almost seven years old? :o :D

That's how us reporters (former or otherwise) are...long memories...like elephants. But having a computer to save the text also helps. (and if gentlemen was directed at Hoops and me, that should be lady and gentleman 8))

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 13, 2006, 08:38:58 AM

My apologies, oldreporter. You know what they say about people who assume ... :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: chocsrock34 on October 14, 2006, 07:54:17 PM

MC is seen once again as the #2 team by street and smith but unfortunately that's how they started last year. But with Mike Jones returning to the bench and key players like Winford and Broomfield this could be the year they take it all the way

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: FisherDynasty on October 17, 2006, 05:11:28 PM

Look for Fisher & U of R to come out of the East region Once again. However, I believe both teams are still a year away from getting back to the Elite 8. Fisher has excellent big men this year but young, inexperience Guards. U of R will be solid overall but doesnt have any fantastic scorers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on October 18, 2006, 11:57:19 PM

Instead of bugging Pat with an e-mail, I will just ask it here. When does d3hoops usually release the real and only preseason poll that matters?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 19, 2006, 02:06:35 AM

Around Nov. 1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 20, 2006, 12:19:47 AM

Quote from: PrideSportBBallGuy on October 18, 2006, 11:57:19 PM
Instead of bugging Pat with an e-mail, I will just ask it here. When does d3hoops usually release the real and only preseason poll that matters?

What a brown noser! lol :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on November 01, 2006, 10:59:00 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 19, 2006, 02:06:35 AM
Around Nov. 1.

Alright Pat. Nov. 1st is here. (haha)

I know it says around, but to me thats the start of the season. When debates can begin about who should be where and such. Once that poll is released I will tell you 4 teams I think will be playing for the National Championship.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 01, 2006, 12:39:10 PM

Some ballots are in already, I'm guessing most of them. However you need to give Pat an extra day or two during this overlap season between basketball and football.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on November 01, 2006, 12:47:18 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 01, 2006, 12:39:10 PM

Some ballots are in already, I'm guessing most of them. However you need to give Pat an extra day or two during this overlap season between basketball and football.

Hoops fan. I don't really care when it is released but like I said those polls mark the beginning of the season. No reason to fault sombody who is excited to get it started.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 01, 2006, 01:32:40 PM

I'm not faulting you, I'm just saying that your eagerness doesn't have to be expressed as asking about the poll again. It's not as if Pat isn't going to put it out as soon as he can. He's probably pretty stressed these days and it seems when we (and I do it too) clamour for things, it can get to be an imposition on someone who does all of this, essentially, for free.

I wasn't trying to rebuke you or anything. I said it more to let Pat know that we're not being pushy. I'm sure he gets tired of saying "I'm doing the best I can" all the time, so I thought I'd do it for him.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 01, 2006, 02:11:58 PM

It's out.

http://www.d3hoops.com

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 01, 2006, 02:13:34 PM

Wow, I knew Ohio Northern was underrated last year and they returned a lot, but are they really top 5 good? Some give me a scouting report here.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bouttime on November 01, 2006, 04:11:09 PM

Ohio Northern returns six seniors from last year's team that was a couple of wins from making the NCAA tournament. The key returners include Greg Badenhop (15 ppg) and Bart Hostetler (11 ppg and 7 rpp). They have size returning to the middle with Mike Hunter and Jake Cannan. The OAC preseason poll was released today also and ONU was picked to finish second in the conference behind Baldwin Wallace. ONU however is one spot behind BW in the national preseason poll. Either way it looks to be another very competitive season in the OAC and Ohio Northern will have a chance to prove its ranking with games vs. Wittenberg (Dec. 19th) and at Wooster on Dec. 29th.

Heres the ONU basketball website for more information.

http://www.onusports.com/MHoops/index.html

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 01, 2006, 04:42:02 PM

Mark your calendars now for the Mose Hole Classic, to be held at the College of Wooster Dec. 29 and 30. The participating teams are #5 Ohio Northern, #8 Calvin, [#26] UW-La Crosse, and the host #2 Scots. The opening round pairs Calvin and LaX, then ONU and Wooster, with the winners and losers squaring off the following day. That's a pretty nice field for a holiday tournament!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 01, 2006, 05:04:27 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on November 01, 2006, 04:42:02 PM
Mark your calendars now for the Mose Hole Classic, to be held at the College of Wooster Dec. 29 and 30. The participating teams are #5 Ohio Northern, #8 Calvin, [#26] UW-La Crosse, and the host #2 Scots. The opening round pairs Calvin and LaX, then ONU and Wooster, with the winners and losers squaring off the following day. That's a pretty nice field for a holiday tournament!

That's a mighty impressive looking tourney, at least NOW! Better hope none of the teams pulls an Oshkosh!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 01, 2006, 05:14:13 PM

Oshkosh was still formidable, even after they lost their ranking.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 01, 2006, 05:23:05 PM

Top 25 News and Notes, Vol. VIII, Issue 109

One of the voters is quoted on the front page to the effect that this poll was very difficult to figure out. Evidently there were other voters with the same quandry, as a whopping sixty-five schools received votes. That's the most since the 2001 preseason poll (66) and the fifth-most in poll history. By way of comparison, the previous 4 preseason polls had 56, 54, 59, and 55 teams receive votes (in chronological order). Included in this season's 65 are four schools who had never received votes in any prior poll: Gordon College, Mary Hardin-Baylor University, University of Massachusetts-Boston, and Rhode Island College. Congratulations to these debutantes!

High-Water Marks:
Aside from the four first-timers, #4 Wisconsin-Whitewater and #12 Tufts reached their all-time highest rankings in this poll. Congratulations to the Warhawks and Jumbos!

Streakers:
Each of the three record ranking streaks are current, and each was extended another week in this poll:

#2 Wooster is in the top 10 for a record 39th consecutive week, extending the record it had shared with Carthage;
#3 Amherst is in the top 25 for a record 64th consecutive week, extending their own record; and
Wooster extended their votes-received record to a perfect 109 consecutive weeks.

Congratulations to these outstanding programs!

Also of note in this category:

North Central College is in the top 25 for the 10th straight poll.
Wittenberg received votes for the 40th straight week; York (Pa.) for the 30th straight week; and Elmhurst for the 20th straight week.
Albion received no poll votes, snapping a streak of 30 straight weeks as a vote-getter.

Milestones:

#8 Calvin is a top 10 member for the 30th time;
#23 Maryville (TN) is in the top 25 for the 30th time;
#20 Occidental is in the top 25 for the 10th time;
#10 Wittenberg received votes for the 100th time;
#3 Amherst and #21 Hampden-Sydney received votes for the 90th time;
Williams received a vote for the 80th time;
Wheaton (Ill.) received votes for the 70th time;
#6 Baldwin-Wallace and Elmhurst received votes for the 40th time;
UW-La Crosse received votes for the 20th time; and
#12 Tufts received votes for the 10th time;

Hoping I haven't forgotten anyone, congratulations to all of these schools!

Here's to another great season of D3 Hoops! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on November 01, 2006, 05:58:06 PM

Like I said I will give my 4 possible national champions. (In no order)

Mississippi College
Lawrence
Whittenberg
Va. (Wesleyan)

To make that call with 4 teams out of alot (I am not sure the actual number), I would consider that bold. Hold those picks to me until the end of the year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 01, 2006, 06:26:44 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on November 01, 2006, 04:42:02 PM
Mark your calendars now for the Mose Hole Classic, to be held at the College of Wooster Dec. 29 and 30. The participating teams are #5 Ohio Northern, #8 Calvin, [#26] UW-La Crosse, and the host #2 Scots. The opening round pairs Calvin and LaX, then ONU and Wooster, with the winners and losers squaring off the following day. That's a pretty nice field for a holiday tournament!

I might have to have those two opening round games of that tourney as two of the 10 weekly National Pick Em League games.***

*** self promotion

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 01, 2006, 08:06:40 PM

Excellent job as always Dave, I look forward to your poll reports for the rest of the season.

I don't think those streaks by Wooster and Amherst are in any danger, any time soon.

I predict Albion from the MIAA will be receiving votes by Christmas, still a solid program with good talent. They've got a player who the MIAA may get real tired of seeing if he turns out as good as I've been told.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 01, 2006, 08:58:33 PM

Thanks, sac. :)

Here's a quick recap of the poll records for the men and the women, backdated to the end of last season, for anyone who may be interested:

Most weeks receiving at least one vote: Men--Wooster (108/108); Women--Washington U., Scranton, Hardin-Simmons (109/109)
Most consecutive weeks receiving at least one vote: same as above (current)

Most weeks in the top 25: Men--Wooster (100/108); Women--Washington U. (109/109)
Most consecutive weeks in the top 25: Men--Amherst (63, current); Women--Washington U (109, current)

Most weeks in the top 10: Men--Wooster (79/108); Women--Washington U. (101/109)
Most consecutive weeks in the top 10: Men--Wooster (38, current) and Carthage (38); Women--Bowdoin (74, current)

Most weeks ranked #1: Men--Carthage (22/108); Women--Washington U. (53/109)

The Washington U. women have never been ranked lower than #14. In seven years, 109 polls. Amazing.

Note: the women have had one more poll than the men entering this season. There was a Week 15 poll for the women, but not the men, in 2003-04.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 02, 2006, 04:07:35 AM

Quote from: PrideSportBBallGuy on November 01, 2006, 05:58:06 PM
Like I said I will give my 4 possible national champions. (In no order)

Mississippi College
Lawrence
Whittenberg
Va. (Wesleyan)

To make that call with 4 teams out of alot (I am not sure the actual number), I would consider that bold. Hold those picks to me until the end of the year.

I hope that you're just picking four possible championship teams rather than putting together an actual Final Four, PSBBG. Why? Because if you were putting together what you think will be the 2007 Final Four, you should be aware that the D3 tourney bracket will not be designed in such a way that your Final Four would be possible.

Remember, geography (i.e., saving money on the travel costs that the NCAA has to foot for each team) is of paramount concern when the tournament field is constructed. Roughly half of D3's 395 men's basketball schools are located in the northeastern corner of the United States, as defined by everything northeast of Pennsylvania's borders with Ohio and West Virginia, and everything north of Virginia's borders with Maryland and Delaware (or, as I like to call it for simplicity's sake, the Allegheny/Potomac Line). Roughly speaking, the 200 or so schools north and east of the Allegheny/Potomac Line constitute the Northeast, East, Middle Atlantic, and Atlantic regions.

This is, by far, the most geographically compact half of D3. That means that the tournament teams within its four regions are not dispersed far and wide throughout the bracket. Each of the schools in those four regions gets to stay comparatively close to home. Therefore, they won't all be able to be picked off prior to the Final Four. I can guarantee to you that at least one, and possibly two, of the four sectionals will consist entirely of teams north and east of the Allegheny/Potomac Line.

None of that half of D3 is represented in your Final Four. And that's why your predicted Final Four -- if predicting an actual Final Four was indeed what you were doing -- can't possibly come to pass.

* Mississippi College is a South Region team that is much closer to the teams in Texas and Missouri than it is to the ODAC and USA South teams on the eastern side of the South Region; in fact, the Choctaws play in a conference, the ASC, that mostly consists of schools from the Lone Star State. Come tournament time, the Choctaws or their Texan brethren either end up playing against West Coast teams or (as is more often the case) Great Lakes Region teams at a site in Michigan or Ohio.

* Lawrence is a Midwest Region team located in northern Wisconsin, which means that (like Mississippi College) the LU campus is nowhere near close enough to the Allegheny/Potomac Line for the Larries to be bracketed into a sectional with Northeast, East, Middle Atlantic, and/or Atlantic region teams.

* Wittenberg is in western Ohio. It's within 500 miles of the Allegheny/Potomac Line, but the Tigers (who are a perennial tourney team) have never been assigned to the same section as northeastern teams. To assume that this will be the year that they get bracketed together with, say, St. John Fisher, Rochester, and Lycoming is taking a huge leap of faith. It's far more likely that one of the other top Ohio teams such as Wooster, John Carroll, or Baldwin-Wallace -- all of whom are in northeastern Ohio, much closer to the Allegheny/Potomac Line than is Wittenberg -- would be moved to an East Region or Middle Atlantic Region site for a sectional than would be the Tigers.

* Virginia Wesleyan is a South Region team, but it's close enough to the Allegheny/Potomac Line to be bracketed into a sectional with teams from southern Pennsylvania (Middle Atlantic Region) or New Jersey (Atlantic Region). In fact, more often than not that's the kind of sectional companions with which ODAC teams have tended to end up in recent tournaments.

Your basic mistake is that you neglected to include a team from the northeastern corner of the country. Geography favors them in terms of the Final Four, especially the Northeast and East regions. They're the two regions that represent the northeasternmost area of the United States (and D3); in other words, teams from the Northeast and East regions are the least likely to end up playing teams from Springfield, OH or Clinton, MS or Appleton, WI prior to reaching Salem. The only time under the current D3 tourney format that a team from New England has played a team from west of the Allegheny/Potomac Line was in 2001, when a clever bit of bracketological trickery put Mass-Dartmouth in the Ohio Northern sectional, where they were blown out in the sectional semis by a team from Wisconsin (Carthage). But that was a case of a Northeast Region team being moved into someone else's section; for your scenario to take place, Wittenberg or Virginia Wesleyan would have to be moved northeastwards into a sectional involving teams from the Northeast Region. The Northeast Region is the most populous region in D3, and it's too remote and too heavily populated with D3 schools for it to take in strays from the South or Great Lakes. In fact, the Northeast and East are typically paired together for sectional purposes for ease of travel.

Put another way, if you are actually putting together a Final Four, you can have three of the four teams you named make it to Salem, but you can't have all four make it there. Like it or not, at least one of the four regions in the northeastern U.S. (Northeast, East, Middle Atlantic, and Atlantic) will be represented in the Final Four. If I were you, I'd jettison one of your picks and look to include a team from New England, eastern New York State, or the NYC area such as Amherst, Tufts, William Paterson, Bates, WPI, Mass-Boston, Gordon, Hamilton, etc., as your fourth Final Four team.

Even if you were merely picking four possible champions, rather than making an actual preseason Final Four prediction (it's unclear which of those two things you were trying to do in your post), it's risky to omit good teams from the New England, eastern NYS, and metro NYC areas. One of them will be in Salem, which means that you forfeit 25% of your chance to be right even before the first jump ball on November 17.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njlincolnlion on November 02, 2006, 09:07:43 AM

I would have thought Lincoln would have been a bit higher in the rankings, but I'll take #16 in the pre-season poll. Lincoln gave Va. Wesleyan all they wanted in their home and lost by one. The Lions lost Kyle Myrick, however the entire team returns led by All American candidate Sami Wylie, and a excellent group of recruits.

The Orlando Classic game with North Central and season opener aganist Widener are going to be a good barometers for the respective teams.

Games with Ramapo and NJCU are also going to be tough!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 02, 2006, 10:21:56 AM

Lincoln hasn't ever really gotten much respect in the poll (or at least as much as I thought they deserved). I didn't honeslty expect them to be as high as 16 after losing Myrick. I think that says a lot for the program.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 02, 2006, 07:15:06 PM

Gregory, if the ASC has gotten anywhere in the playoffs, the ASC has been sent way far away!

To 2000 Champion Calvin (Elite 8--McMurry),

lost to 2001 runner-up Wm Paterson at Christopher Newport (Sweet 16--McMurry),

lost in 2002 at home in the 2nd round to Lewis & Clark after the bye (MissColl),

lost in 2003 at Maryville TN in the 1st round (Miss Coll),

lost in 2004 in OT to Lawrence at Puget Sound (Sul Ross St -- Sweet 16),

in 2005, lost at Trinity (first round --UT-Dallas) and lost to Calvin in Albion (MissColl--Sweet 16)

or 2006 lost to Transy at Wittenburg (Miss Coll -- Sweet 16).

I don't think we can get past the Ohio Valley--Great Lakes!

I would like to see us do that, but I am skeptical!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 02, 2006, 08:34:59 PM

Am I the only one who was surprised that NYU didn't get any love from the pollsters at all? The Fighting Violets (I can't help but chuckle everytime I type NYU's nickname :D) return nine of the top ten players from a 2005-06 edition that went 18-7, 7-7 in what was probably the toughest top-to-bottom season in UAA history, and among those nine returnees are the 2006 UAA Player of the Year, 6'6 center Jason Boone, and an All-UAA second-teamer in 6'4 forward Michael DeCorso.

I'm also a bit surprised that Ramapo didn't get any votes, either. The Roadrunners return two All-NJAC guards and got a 6'5 transfer from D2 New Jersey Tech. Any time a team from that tough conference returns two players who got year-end recognition, it makes me sit up and take notice. However, given the notorious fluidity of NJAC rosters, I can better understand casting a skeptical eye at the Roadrunners than I can grasp the reason why the Fighting Violets got a similar snub.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on November 02, 2006, 09:19:24 PM

I can't believe that Baruch gets no preseason love.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on November 02, 2006, 10:35:48 PM

Gents:

Some interesting ideas on some of the Atlantic/East teams who didn't get votes. I can't answer for every voter, but here are my preliminary thoughts on the three you mentioned.

Baruch: You know the phrase, "you never get a second chance to make a first impression." Well, when you play in one of the smaller, generally weaker conferences of Division III, you don't get many "second chances" to impress the voters and show you deserve Top 25 consideration.

Baruch had voters' attention last year when they started 21-3 and were ranked No. 1 in the Atlantic region as I recall. They had an even bigger opportunity to show they were legit when the NCAA made them hosts for the first two rounds of the tournament.

Unfortunately for the Bearcats didn't do much to impress national voters in either case. They finished the season by losing to Lehman, nearly losing to bottom-seed Medgar Evers in the conference tournament, losing the CUNYAC title game to York (N.Y.) and losing at home in the first round to Villa Julie (who isn't considered a power either). They didn't get a vote in the final poll.

By contract, SUNY-Farmingdale won their tournament, beat Ursinus on the road in the first round and played Va. Wes well. The Rams got votes in the last poll of last year and the Preseason this year.

NYU: As I've mentioned on these boards before, my biggest hesitation on NYU they seem to have great starts every year against the weaker teams in the NYC metropolitan area. Then when they take their undefeated or one-loss record into conference play, that success disintegrates. From what I've heard Boone is a great player. But until the Violets start playing tougher teams early in the year or finish above .500 in the UAA, they aren't really on the radar for the Top 25.

Ramapo: I looked at the NJAC to see who else besides WPUNJ merited consideration. I have to confess that I didn't look closely enough at Ramapo because of their 9-9 record in conference. But two all-conference players returning for a program with fairly recent postseason success means something. I'll keep a close eye on them over the next couple weeks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on November 02, 2006, 11:18:06 PM

I was just joking about Baruch, I haven't even had time to really consider who is coming back in the NJAC. I finally checked out the NJCU roster today. Damn new job and having to actually work again. >:(

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 03, 2006, 01:35:05 AM

Quote from: gordonmann on November 02, 2006, 10:35:48 PMNYU: As I've mentioned on these boards before, my biggest hesitation on NYU they seem to have great starts every year against the weaker teams in the NYC metropolitan area. Then when they take their undefeated or one-loss record into conference play, that success disintegrates. From what I've heard Boone is a great player. But until the Violets start playing tougher teams early in the year or finish above .500 in the UAA, they aren't really on the radar for the Top 25.

I know about NYU's reputation for snacking on cupcakes before the UAA season begins, GM. Unlike, say, Chicago (which always plays a tough non-conf schedule), I always dismiss the Violets' performances in November and December. Their 18-7 overall record last year was therefore not really a factor in why I thought they merited consideration for this year's preseason poll. It's the return of so many players, especially Boone and DeCorso, from a team that managed to go .500 in the toughest UAA season I can remember -- that's what made me think the Violets deserved some votes. Nobody else in the league has two All-UAA players returning, and the fact that one of them was the 2006 POY cinches it. If you wait until they've dominating the league by the end of the upcoming regular season before you start voting for the Violets, you'll have waited too long to do right by them.

While we're on the subject of the UAA, I thought Wash U would get more support in the poll than they did. I think that they have the pieces in place to have a really dynamite team this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on November 03, 2006, 02:54:07 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on November 01, 2006, 04:42:02 PM
Mark your calendars now for the Mose Hole Classic, to be held at the College of Wooster Dec. 29 and 30. The participating teams are #5 Ohio Northern, #8 Calvin, [#26] UW-La Crosse, and the host #2 Scots. The opening round pairs Calvin and LaX, then ONU and Wooster, with the winners and losers squaring off the following day. That's a pretty nice field for a holiday tournament!

I'd say!! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on November 03, 2006, 09:28:55 AM

Gregory Sager-

Yes it was possible national champions. I am well aware that can't be a final 4. If It was my final 4 I would have said final 4. I said possible champions, not possible final 4.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 03, 2006, 09:29:06 AM

There's a top tier in the E-NE regions that NYU just hasn't seemed able to enter yet. I'd agree that they need to do more in conference before they get that kind of consideration. Brandeis has an equally talented team that no one in New England looks forward to playing, but when they do appear on the big boys' schedules, they usually end up on the losing end. It's those big wins against better teams that need to increase.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njlincolnlion on November 03, 2006, 09:53:53 AM

Hoops Fan:

Thanks for your response, I think Lincoln has establish a sound program during the last two years (I believe the Lions were 47-12 over the last two years under Coach Yuille). Two years ago, the Lions had an All American in Jarrett Kearse. Last year Kyle Myrick was an All American and D3Hoops POY. This year Sami Wylie should be an All American candidate, and the Lions have two 6'7 forwards who transferred in along with last years team (minus Myrick) and two excellent freshman guards.

Lincoln again starts most of their game on the road, which has made the team "battle tested" when playing in tournaments.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on November 03, 2006, 10:11:30 AM

What is it that I said, because if you want some evidence I can back up my picks up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 03, 2006, 10:42:28 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 03, 2006, 09:29:06 AM
There's a top tier in the E-NE regions that NYU just hasn't seemed able to enter yet. I'd agree that they need to do more in conference before they get that kind of consideration.

I don't think they've entered the second tier, either, the one with teams such as Gordon, WPI, etc. last year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 03, 2006, 12:44:10 PM

Far be it from me to argue with Pat, who definately has seen more basketball than me, but I wouldn't put last year's Gordon and WPI teams in the same breath either. Regardless, NYU and like schools won't get the love until they prove they can compete and win against the best in some form or another.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on November 03, 2006, 09:18:29 PM

Gregory--

That's a fair point on NYU, I suppose. My only counter would be that NYU wasn't a Top 25 with those guys last year. Maybe they aren't Top 25 again this year with those guys either.

That's not to say they shouldn't have had a couple votes. They just wouldn't have had mine. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FisherDynasty on November 04, 2006, 02:34:12 PM

NYU or UofR whomever ousts who at home this year, since UofR is so tough to be at the Palestria, should take the #1 spot in the East Region this year, with St. John Fisher who lost a lot of last years guard play but returning some studs inside and a terrific freshmen class should be following a close third.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 06, 2006, 09:06:24 AM

Did you see that RIC score? I know it was just exhibition, but is there more info? Did Iona not play their starters or what?

Can RIC really be that good?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on November 06, 2006, 11:38:04 AM

I looked up the Iona website and they had a writeup on the game - nothing mentioned about any regulars sitting or out with injuries, though two Iona frosh were among the leading scorers mentioned - also, 5 from RIC in double figures!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 06, 2006, 12:26:50 PM

RIC's been strong, but I never expected them to put on a performance like this. I guess we'll see how they do before Christmas and determine if they are for real. They got some votes in the Top 25, so someone has seen them coming.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Spencer Beaty on November 11, 2006, 09:56:13 PM

I think people should really consider Maryville (TN.) as a force to be reckoned with. They only lost one senior and they have two good players in Bobby Golden and Bo Mason. They are 8 or 9 deep and have a fairly easy schedule.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 12, 2006, 08:30:48 AM

Quote from: Spencer Beaty on November 11, 2006, 09:56:13 PM
They are 8 or 9 deep and have a fairly easy schedule.

That's not something you want to brag about when trying to get ranked. It has the exact opposite effect.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: MC Boy on November 13, 2006, 01:11:57 AM

I think that the Chocs will get the respect nationally this year by getting further than the Sweet 16 and hopefully winning it all. Mississippi College all the way!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Maq Diesel on November 13, 2006, 05:27:37 PM

RIC is good I'm sure but what you need to realize is that Iona graduated or lost 4 of their top 5 scorers from last year which accounted for 59 points out of their 79 points scored per game. So RIC might be good but they beat D1 team but it is a D1 team from a weak conference that is reloading after one of the most succesfull runs in the schools history. Will RIC be good for sure but don't get fooled into thinking they beat the Iona team that made the Big dance last year, it was a shadow of that team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 14, 2006, 09:07:15 AM

Well so has Maryville reached the point where their name regocnition trumps their schedule strength? We'll have to wait and see.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BVHawk on November 15, 2006, 10:22:41 PM

Watch for Buena Vista to slowly creep into the Top 25. They're still pretty young, but now the majority of them have a NCAA Tourny appearance under their belts from last year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 16, 2006, 09:04:01 AM

I've got BV on my sleeper list, although I know nothing about them really at all. I just know they've got history and playoff experience. They've also got a tough schedule, so we'll know what we've got pretty early on with them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 17, 2006, 03:00:33 AM

I saw them last December in the Elmhurst tournament. I was not impressed; they looked like a motley collection of odds and ends that didn't really fit together. They lost by ten to a team of streetballers from Olivet that wound up 6-20 on the season. Then, lo and behold, Buena Vista gets its act together and wins the IIAC tourney and a ticket to the big dance!

I'm still scratching my head over that one, but I'll say one thing about it -- Brian Van Haaften is one heckuva basketball coach.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 18, 2006, 12:39:56 PM

Since the new Scoreboard doesn't seem to isolate the top 25 the way the old one did, I thought it might be useful to update top 25 scores here. Additions and corrections are welcome.

Friday, Nov. 17:
at #2 Wooster 128, Cabrini 71
at #3 Amherst 101, NYC Tech 66
at #4 UW-Whitewater 85, Martin Luther 61
#5 Ohio Northern 74, DeSales 57 (at Elizabethtown)
#6 Baldwin-Wallace 110, Curry 70 (at Alvernia)
#7 William Paterson 84, Wentworth Tech 69 (at Drew)
at #8 Calvin 98, Concordia (Wis) 76
#9 St. Thomas 72, #20 Occidental 63 (at La Verne)
#10 Wittenberg 57, Swarthmore 46 (at Haverford)
at #12 Tufts 85, Lasell 80
#15 Randolph-Macon 106, Penn St.-Berks 59 (at Lycoming)
#16 Lincoln 98, Widener 91 (OT) (at Franklin & Marshall)
York (N.Y.) 98, at #18 Christopher Newport 92
at #19 North Central 97, East-West 58
#21 Hampden-Sydney 87, Roberts Wesleyan 85 (at Westminster Pa.)
at #22 Puget Sound 124, UC-Santa Cruz 86
at #24 Augustana 78, St. Norbert 57

Thanks to Robert Goulet and Algernon for the NCC and H-SC scores as posted in the CCIW Chat and ODAC Conversation rooms, respectively.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 18, 2006, 12:43:43 PM

Thanks DC. I'm worried about William Patterson now. Wentworth is not that good and WPU had to shoot 51% to beat them. I hope they weren't ranked too high.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on November 18, 2006, 10:05:22 PM

Final: #2 Wooster 85 Mt. Union 60

Wooster made 13 three pointers tonight as they won easily in the championship game of the Al Van Wie Tournament.

Wooster was led by Tim Vandervaart with 22 points, James Cooper with 20 points and Tom Port with 12 points. Scots won the battle of the boards 38 to 31.

Wooster is now 2-0 and next plays at NAIA Walsh on 11/25.

GO SCOTS!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 18, 2006, 11:42:22 PM

Sat. Nov. 18:
at #2 Wooster 85, Mt. Union 60
at #3 Amherst 98, Thomas 64
Illinois Wesleyan 69, at #4 UW-Whitewater 68 (OT)
#5 Ohio Northern 76, at Elizabethtown 60
at Alvernia 71, #6 Baldwin-Wallace 62
#7 William Paterson 55, at Drew 37
at #8 Calvin 79, Benedictine 60
#9 St. Thomas 60, at La Verne 46
#10 Wittenberg 68, Haverford 53 (at Swarthmore)
Rhode Island Coll. 95, at #12 Tufts 84
#15 Randolph-Macon 81, at Lycoming 66
#16 Lincoln 119, Delaware Valley 90 (at Franklin & Marshall)
#25 UW-Stevens Point 93, at #17 Carroll 75
at #19 North Central 63, Bluffton 49
#21 Hampden-Sydney 93, at Westminster (Pa.) 84
at #22 Puget Sound 130, Menlo 102

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 19, 2006, 01:39:35 PM

By the next poll we should be able to re-integrate rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 19, 2006, 11:20:35 PM

Hopefully people will post thoughts on the Top 25 teams/candidates they see.

I saw #4 UW-Whitewater play this weekend at the UW-W Tip-Off Tourney, where there were knocked off in the title game by Illinois Wesleyan in overtime. Like every good WIAC team I've ever seen, the 2006-07 Warhawks are huge. Their frontcourt starters are 6-5 Mark Anderson, 6-7 Mike Toellner, and 6-8 Andy Freund. Big guys off the bench include 6-6 Billy Kolinske, 6-4 Rob Perry, 6-6 Kori Vernon, and 6-9 Dustin Mitchell. UW-W doesn't list weights on their roster, but these guys are all wide shouldered and strong (6-4 Perry plays 6-7). They are also athletic, not just big, slow space-eaters. When you see Whitewater in the layup line, you think you're watching a mid-major Division I team.

To play with Whitewater, a team will have to have a lot of size and athleticism. Illinois Wesleyan's big guys are not as tall or wide as Whitewater's, but they are extremely athletic -- 6-4 Darius Gant had 8 rebounds, 6-6 Andrew Freeman pulled down 10, and 6-7 Zach Freeman had 14 boards. (Amazingly, IWU actually out-rebounded Whitewater 47-28.) A small/unathletic Division III team would just get manhandled by the Warhawks.

As big as they are, I'm not sold that UW-Whitewater is a Top 5 team though. I am also not sold they will win the WIAC, as they are picked to do. With 2005-06 WIAC player of the year Jeremy Manchester (point-guard) graduated, they're really lacking a go-to guard. They have decent guards, but but not great. Whitewater also seems to be lacking something intangible -- not sure if it's chemistry or killer instinct or what, but I didn't feel like I was watching a Final Four type team. A lot of that is certainly due to the fact that I saw them play Game 2 of the season and they are working in several new players, but I just feel like they are missing something.

UW-Whitewater is a really good team, but probably should be ranked in the 10-15 range. Again, it wouldn't surprise me if they go on to finish 2nd or 3rd in the WIAC regular season. After winning at #17 Carroll this weekend, if UW-Stevens Point wins at #13 Lawrence Tuesday I'd probably start to think the Pointers are the early season favorite in the WIAC. We'll see.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 20, 2006, 01:23:30 AM

Titan Q,

A few WIAC thoughts...

As I posted in the CCIW page right after the UWW/North Park HERE (http://www.d3sports.com/post/index.php?topic=4592.msg598225#msg598225), as well as on the WIAC page after the initial ratings went out, I felt (and still feel) that UWW's rating was inflated. In short, many of the questions that North Central will have to figure out are the same ones that Whitewater will. Even if their guards (like Riley) are seniors, they don't have a ton of experience, especially when the game is on the line. For Whitewater to take the next step, they need their point guard to be able to step up and hit free throws, not miss the last 5, which would have either sealed the game, or demanded a miraculous play from IWU. The point guard is the guy who you want to have the ball in their hands at the end of the game (the assumption being that they are the best ball-handler), so to request that your point guard is a clutch free throw shooter shouldn't be too much to ask, especially for an elite team.

It really makes me think back to Duke a few years ago with Jason Williams... for a while there, he was downright miserable at free throws, especially when the game was on the line. Now Duke was talented enough that they still were able to get the W... but Jason Williams brought more to the game, and his team, than Gio Riley does (or at least has) for WW. Perhaps this is asking too much early in the year, but championship teams find a way to win and do the things they NEED to do... they limit mistakes, take advantage of the other team's mistakes (what it sounds like happened in the first half). It doesn't really seem like Whitewater played terribly throughout. Despite Riley shooting 1-7 from the line, the Warhawks still shot 73% from the line. Perhaps what I mentioned above (the PG being the go-to guy late in the game) is what caused UWW's downfall. It wasn't that they didn't create opportunities, causing 31 IWU TO's.

Your point about UWSP is a good one, IMO (and I'm not just playing the homer). Point is still really young (two seniors, three juniors) but it is the players that they do have that really are key. Krull has started since he was a freshman. He was what really turned Point around half way through the year after SP dropped 3/4 games in 2004 and has started ever since. He's showed flashes of what is possible (scored 25 during the National Semi final as a freshman, 20+ in the National Championship game as a soph) and routinely comes up with key plays (too many to mention... just a few, a key steal for a bucket in crunch-time during the '04 Elite 8 game at UPS against Lawrence, the huge bucket over Trinity (TX)'s big 6'10" stud Sean Devins in '05 to keep Point in the game in the Elite 8 game). This is an underclassman taking it upon himself to carry the team. It's not totally unheard of, but it's something that has propelled him to his current level... he's been in the trenches and leads by example.

PG Steve Hicklin is another player who was thrust in a tough position, going from third string to starting in the playoffs when Tamaris Relerford was hurt in '05 and he played tremendous against Puget Sound, who throws everything but the kitchen sink at teams. He had 3 assists to just 2 turnovers, hit 9/9 from the line and scored 15 points. He added 2 more assists and three points (1/1 from the line) in the Elite 8 game against Trinity, and then in the Final 4, he had 8 assists to one TO, was perfect in the Championship (including hitting a huge three to secure the lead for Point going into the half that set the tone for the dominating second half). So, in 4 starts, he was 13/14 from the line, 13-5 assist to TO ratio and lead Point's defense which held the last four opponents to an average of 56 pts per game.

All of these stats are great, however, when you have two All-Americans and a host of upperclassmen as supporting characters. But last year, these guys led Point (along with two lone seniors) to a good year... where freshmen played the majority of the minutes. And what is most amazing is that Point led the country in free-throw percentage (only 2 D-1's were better) and TO's, averaging just over 10 (only 3 D-1's were better). This team is going to do nothing but get better... but Point's downfall may come in their lack of an inside presence. As I said Point lost two posts in Bauer and Bouche to graduation and return just two true posts. But they found ways to win last year against the WIAC's huge teams... so I think that the future is bright!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 20, 2006, 05:54:38 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 19, 2006, 11:20:35 PMWhitewater also seems to be lacking something intangible -- not sure if it's chemistry or killer instinct or what, but I didn't feel like I was watching a Final Four type team. A lot of that is certainly due to the fact that I saw them play Game 2 of the season and they are working in several new players, but I just feel like they are missing something.

They are definitely missing something, all right ... free throws at the end of games. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njlincolnlion on November 20, 2006, 08:55:09 AM

I was impressed with F&M's "pounding" of Widener in the consolation game of the F&M's Tip-Off Tournament since Lincoln beat Widener in OT in the first round. Lincoln shook off the "opening game jitters" soundly defeated Del. Valley by 19 ponts in the champioship game. This was the same Del. Vallet team that had an easy win over F&M in the opening round. I would suspect that Lincoln would move up in the pools with some of the other pre-season ranked teams losses in in week 1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 20, 2006, 11:02:05 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 19, 2006, 11:20:35 PM
Hopefully people will post thoughts on the Top 25 teams/candidates they see.

Second-ranked Wooster opened the season at home, hosting a tournament with three less-than-spectacular teams. Without threatening opposition, it's dangerous to draw many conclusions about the Scots, but here's my observations from the top of the bleachers.

Friday's game against Cabrini was little more than a practice session, but it was a great practice. Wooster ran away early and hid, ringing up a 128-71 shellacking. Eleven different Scots contributed to 25-45 shooting from the arc, with All-American candidates James Cooper (24, 6 of 9 from arc) and Tom Port (19, 5 of 7 on treys) leading the way. On defense Wooster forced 26 turnovers, including 11 steals, and held the Cavaliers to 45% shooting (30% from deep).

On Saturday, the Scots played with much less enthusiasm and style, and still easily dismissed Mt. Union, 85-60. Cooper contributed another 20 points, but the key to the game was tournament MVP Tim Vandervaart, who had his way inside, scoring 22 on 9 of 10 shooting. Vandervaart, an undersized 6'6"/210 center, scraps and battles and plays well beyond his size, and has a spin move that is all but unstoppable. Although he tends to be overshadowed by his All-America teammates, he has been named all-conference each of the last two seasons, and his play may be the most important factor in determining how far the Scots will advance this spring.

The Scots' rotation seems to be the eight returning lettermen (4 of them returning starters) plus one plebe forward, 6'6"/245 Craig Elam. Sophomore Brandon Johnson stepped into the large shoes of 4-year starting PG Kyle Witucky and turned in a performance worthy of tournament Defensive MVP, contributing 11 assists, 8 steals, and 23 points on 7-for-13 shooting from the arc in two games (49 minutes). James Cooper took over as point guard when Johnson rested, and the offense didn't miss a beat, so that potential problem may not be much of a worry.

Although Cabrini and Mt. Union may not have been much of a measuring stick, the Scots' schedule gets dramatically tougher right away. On Saturday they travel to Canton, Oh. to play Walsh, the 2005 NAIA-2 national champs who finished ranked #3 at 27-7 and reached the quarterfinals of the NAIA tournament last season. Walsh is ranked #7 in the preseason NAIA-2 poll (http://naia.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl-div2/spec-rel/110106aaa.html). Then on the following Tuesday, Wooster welcomes Georgetown (Ky.) to Timken Gymnasium. The Tigers are ranked #8 in the preseason NAIA-1 poll (http://naia.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/110106aab.html) and lost an exhibition game to Louisville at Freedom Hall by a mere 2 points. The Tigers were 26-8 last season, finishing with a national ranking of #11, and are off to a 6-1 start in non-exhibition games this season. And looming on the schedule in just over two weeks (Sat. 12/9) is the first of the two regularly scheduled matchups with archrival and tenth-ranked Wittenberg. By Dec. 10, we should know a lot more about how well Wooster will match up on the national scene.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BVHawk on November 21, 2006, 03:20:38 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 16, 2006, 09:04:01 AM

I've got BV on my sleeper list, although I know nothing about them really at all. I just know they've got history and playoff experience. They've also got a tough schedule, so we'll know what we've got pretty early on with them.

BV is a young squad still with a lot of talent in the soph class. They get better as the year goes on and it shows since they've won the last 5 IIAC Conference Tournaments.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BVHawk on November 21, 2006, 03:23:50 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 17, 2006, 03:00:33 AM
I saw them last December in the Elmhurst tournament. I was not impressed; they looked like a motley collection of odds and ends that didn't really fit together. They lost by ten to a team of streetballers from Olivet that wound up 6-20 on the season. Then, lo and behold, Buena Vista gets its act together and wins the IIAC tourney and a ticket to the big dance!

I'm still scratching my head over that one, but I'll say one thing about it -- Brian Van Haaften is one heckuva basketball coach.

If you would have told me BV was going to be the AQ in the IIAC last December I would've laughed you out of the gym as well. Those talented freshmen from a year ago are now sophomores, but I still think we're a year away from making some noise in the NCAA Tourny.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 21, 2006, 04:14:17 PM

I assume the first regular season poll will be released next Tuesday due to the short week?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 22, 2006, 03:39:32 AM

Yep. We found last year that worked well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 22, 2006, 12:44:24 PM

Happy Thanksgiving to all!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 22, 2006, 05:01:23 PM

Despite the fact that Stevens Point blew a huge lead, I still have a lot of confidence in this team. As I posted over in the WIAC board, the shots in the 2nd half just didn't fall. Lawrence's shots off the rim were bouncing in and ours were bouncing out. I'm not using this as an excuse, but it's just the way the ball rolls sometimes.

Naturally, when a team comes back from a huge deficit, you think that they "clamped down" on defense and shut down the other team. Though LU's defense did get better in last 10 minutes of the game, Point did themselves in a couple of ways. They missed some contested layups that they should've made and they made some mistakes that I can't even blame on youth. Jon Krull made two of these mistakes, dribbling the ball up impatiently and getting the ball stolen from him and also forcing his way into an offensive foul. Krull wasn't the only one at fault, but these stood out. Not your normal Pointer play!

The 3-pt shooting has not been good aside from the first 5 minutes of the Carroll game. 8-29 and 3-15 isn't very good. But, the inside and midrange work of Krull, Hicklin, the outstanding Beamish, Drew Jackson, El-Amin and freshman Matt Moses have been excellent. Over half of Point's points (38) were in the paint against Lawrence.

Defense, as usual, has been a staple of the two wins as well. Players such as Shawn Lee, Drew Jackson and Matt Moses have played outstanding defense, as has soph. Beamish and the usual suspects. Point's defense last night was really good. 20 TOs by Carroll and 14 from a solid Lawrence team.

Point has beaten two very good, 2006 tournament teams on their home floors. Very impressive. We get Ripon, the 3rd of the three MWC powers at home this weekend. I'm looking forward to it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 22, 2006, 09:25:12 PM

#10 Wittenberg survives a scare at Capital, 73-68 in two overtimes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dark Knight on November 25, 2006, 01:05:30 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on November 22, 2006, 09:25:12 PM
#10 Wittenberg survives a scare at Capital, 73-68 in two overtimes.

#5 Ohio Northern, Johnson and Wales (Fla)
#8 Calvin 81, Aquinas 65
#13 Lawrence 89, Wisconsin Lutheran 75
#14 Hope 80, Cornerstone 76
#17 Carroll 86, Colorado-Colorado Springs 105
#18 Christopher Newport 91, Southern VA 87
#20 Occidental, Notre Dame de Namur
#22 Puget Sound 98, Northwest Christian 91

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on November 25, 2006, 08:45:13 PM

Final: #2 Wooster 85 Walsh 68

Wooster notched a solid road win tonight over Walsh University in Canton. :)

Wooster was led by North Canton native Tim Vandervaart with a career high 32 points. James Cooper added 14 points, Devin Fulk had 13 points and Tom Port chipped in 8 points.

Wooster is now 3-0. :) Next up is NAIA power Georgetown on 11/28.

Georgetown only lost to D1 Louisville by 4 points (at Freedom Hall) earlier this year so this should be a real test for Wooster.

GO SCOTS!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 26, 2006, 12:20:06 AM

#14 Hope 76 #8 Calvin 54 at Calvin

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njlincolnlion on November 26, 2006, 02:34:18 PM

Lincoln University defeated DII Cheyney University of PA 103-95 on a neutral site (Temple University) last night. The Lions are 3-0 early in season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 26, 2006, 10:30:46 PM

Top 25 weekend recap:

#1 Virginia Wesleyan (1-0) was idle.
#2 Wooster (3-0) def. Walsh (NAIA), 85-68, Sat.
#3 Amherst (2-0) was idle.
#4 UW-Whitewater (3-1) def. Beloit, 76-51, Sat.
#5 Ohio Northern (4-0) def. Coll. of the Bahamas, 113-45, Sat., and def. Johnson & Wales (FL), 74-60, Sun.
#6 Baldwin-Wallace (3-1) def. Olivet, 74-71, Sat.
#7 William Paterson (3-1) lost to York (NY), 65-56, Sat.
#8 Calvin (3-1) def. Aquinas (NAIA), 81-61, Fri. , and lost to #14 Hope, 76-54, Sat.
#9 St. Thomas (2-0) was idle.
#10 Wittenberg (4-0) def. Transylvania, 66-59, Sun.
#11 Mississippi College (1-1) def. Mary Hardin-Baylor, 75-47, Sat.
#12 Tufts (2-2) lost to Brandeis, 99-89, Sun.
#13 Lawrence (2-1) def. Wisc. Lutheran, 89-75, Fri., and def. Concordia (WI), 72-62, Sat.
#14 Hope (2-0) def. Cornerstone (NAIA), 80-76, Fri., and def. #8 Calvin, 76-54, Sat.
#15 Randolph-Macon (2-0) was idle.
#16 Lincoln (3-0) def. Cheyney (D2), 103-95, Sat.
#17 Carroll (1-2) lost to CU-Colo. Spgs. (D2), 105-86, Fri., and def. Colorado Coll., 91-79, Sat.
#18 Christopher Newport (2-2) def. Southern Va. (NAIA), 91-87, Fri., and def. Maryland Bible (?), 87-67, Sat.
#19 North Central (3-0) def. Frankin, 85-61, Sat.
#20 Occidental (2-2) def. Notre Dame de Namur (D2), 66-59, Fri., and lost to Cal St. Stanislaus (D2), 75-71, Sat.
#21 Hampden-Sydney (3-1) def. Ferrum, 77-64, Sat.
#22 Puget Sound (3-1) def. Northwest Christian (NAIA), 98-91, Fri., and lost to Warner Pacific (NAIA), 109-102, Sat.
#23 Maryville (TN) (2-1) def. Oglethorpe, 92-88, Sat., and lost to Emory, 93-82, Sun.
#24 Augustana (3-0) def. Washington U. (MO), 75-73, Sun.
#25 UW-Stevens Point (3-0) def. Ripon, 90-76, Fri.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on November 27, 2006, 10:52:10 PM

Top rank Virginia Wesleyan goes down to up and coming Averett 81-73!! That's Averetts second win against a ranked opponent. They also beat 21st rank Hampden-Sydney 66-59 last week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 28, 2006, 09:36:51 AM

We should have a good amount of shake-up in this first poll. I assume it will be out some time today.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 28, 2006, 11:50:44 AM

It's already out HF. It actually was out last night!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 28, 2006, 12:18:25 PM

Oh. The top25 link at the top of the home page didn't go to the new one so I missed it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 28, 2006, 12:19:59 PM

Wow. I thought for sure Brandeis would get more votes than that. They've been impressive thus far, although we'll know for sure when they play Amherst next week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 28, 2006, 01:02:28 PM

Top 25 News and Notes, Vol. VIII, Issue 110

The preseason poll included a staggering 65 teams with voting support, and the first two weeks of play haven't cleared up the confusion much. In the Week 1 poll, there are still 58 schools with at least one vote. That's the most teams to receive votes in a regular-season poll since the first two weeks of the 1999-2000 regular season, when the poll was still in its infancy. It goes without saying that there's still a lot of sorting out left to be done as the season toddles along.

Debutantes:

#21 Bates cracked the top 25 this week for the first time in school/poll history.
Prior to attracting national attention with their upset of #1 Virginia Wesleyan, Averett attracted the attention of the voters, receiving votes in the poll for the first time ever. Brandeis is also a first-time vote-getter this week.

Congratulations to these programs!

Streakers:
Congratulations to #2 Wooster and #3 Amherst, who continued their record-setting streaks this week:

Wooster's 40th consecutive appearance in the top 10 is their 80th overall, both records;
Amherst has now been in the top 25 for 70 weeks, including the past 65 consecutive polls, extending their record of consecutive poll appearances; and
Wooster extends their perfect streak of vote-getting to 110 weeks, with a record 102 of them sufficient to qualify the Scots for a top 25 ranking.

Other streakers of note:

#6 Wittenberg and #22 Puget Sound are both in the top 25 for the 40th consecutive week; and
#20 Mississippi College and Worcester Polytechnic Institute each attracted voting support for the 25th straight week.

Congratulations to these programs!

Milestones:

As noted above, this week is #2 Wooster's 80th top 10 appearance, and #3 Amherst's 70th top 25 appearance.;
#22 Puget Sound is a top 25 team for the 40th time overall (as well as 40th consecutive week.) #4 Ohio Northern is a top 25 team for the 30th time, and #1 Virginia Wesleyan is in the top 25 for the 20th time.
#24 Illinois Wesleyan and Catholic each received votes for the 90th time. The voters selected Rochesterfor the 70th time, #5 Hope and #15 Augustana for the 60th time, UW-Platteville for the 50th time, #1 Virginia Wesleyan and Ramapo for the 40th time, and Southwestern and Manchester for the 10th time.

Congratulations to these programs as well, and to all of D3 for a great start to the season! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on November 28, 2006, 01:13:51 PM

How are you getting to the poll? All I can see to is the pre-season poll

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 28, 2006, 01:16:05 PM

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25.php?date=2006-11-28&team=m (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25.php?date=2006-11-28&team=m)

Sorry, FDF, I meant to include that link in my ramblings. I assume it's only temporary, until the women's poll is released.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 28, 2006, 03:14:47 PM

There's also a link under the VAWES story on the front page.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 28, 2006, 04:20:59 PM

I know this is the men's poll, but I noticed that Wheaton (IL) dropped from #5 in the women's poll to completely out! I think they are 2-3, losing to Oshkosh and Point in consecutive nights. Point women just spanked them! Anyway, back to our regularly scheduled men's talk... :P

Is there any record fall like that in the men's side in recent history?

Surprised to see the Point men go from #25 to #9. Wow.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on November 28, 2006, 04:31:16 PM

I have to say I was also suprised to see the Hope men jump all the way to #5. Nothing like beating your rival early

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 28, 2006, 05:44:31 PM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on November 28, 2006, 04:31:16 PM
I have to say I was also suprised to see the Hope men jump all the way to #5. Nothing like beating your rival early

...and convincingly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on November 28, 2006, 08:52:38 PM

Final: #2 Wooster 80 Georgetown (KY) 73

Wooster gets a very impressive win over a 7-1 Georgetown squad ranked #8 nationally in NAIA (I).

Wooster was led in scoring by Tim Vandervaart with 22 points, 14 boards, Tom Port with 16 points, James Cooper with 14 points and Devin Fulk with 13 points.

Wooster won this game by outshooting and outrebounding a much taller Georgetown team.

Wooster is now 4-0. :) Next up is Earlham on Saturday.

GO SCOTS!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 29, 2006, 09:34:08 AM

Big win for Wooster; they are looking mighty dominant, although it will mean more if they can beat Witt by double digits.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on November 29, 2006, 01:31:42 PM

From the unexplainable - Despite having no votes in the preseason poll, Howard Payne garners 18 vote points after finishing the first week 0 - 3. ??? ??? This must be a misprint or programming error somehow - is it possible that Transy should have been there instead, as they lost all votes from the first week despite 2 wins and a close loss to Wittenburg??? Curious........

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 29, 2006, 01:45:46 PM

Looks like someone meant Hope and picked the wrong team out of the dropdown menu. Grr....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 29, 2006, 01:53:19 PM

Fortunately, 18 more vote-points for Hope doesn't change anything. Nice catch, hopefan. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on November 29, 2006, 03:00:07 PM

Wow...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 29, 2006, 03:06:09 PM

I see its fixed already on the Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 29, 2006, 04:08:05 PM

Quote from: hopefan on November 29, 2006, 01:31:42 PM
From the unexplainable - Despite having no votes in the preseason poll, Howard Payne garners 18 vote points after finishing the first week 0 - 3. ??? ???

Maybe they were just REALLY good losses. ??? ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 29, 2006, 04:52:53 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 29, 2006, 01:45:46 PM
Looks like someone meant Hope and picked the wrong team out of the dropdown menu. Grr....

Gotta be careful with the ole drop down menu! When submitting my ballot just this week, I was attempting to vote for Washington U and before hitting "submit", realized I was about to slot Waynesburg #23!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 29, 2006, 05:43:55 PM

Hey OS, you planning on doing a posters poll this year again? If so, are we gonna have nifty drop down boxes to screw our ballots up with too?! 8)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 29, 2006, 05:50:51 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on November 29, 2006, 05:43:55 PM
Hey OS, you planning on doing a posters poll this year again? If so, are we gonna have nifty drop down boxes to screw our ballots up with too?! 8)

I was the posters' poll guy, and yes, it will start in January (but no drop down boxes, sorry!)

I'll leave those sorts of electoral snafu's to Katherine Harris and Pat! ;) ;D

(Pat, please note the emoticons before banning me! :D Bet you've never been linked with her before! :o)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 29, 2006, 07:40:49 PM

OH SHOOT! Sorry Ypsi, my severe apologies to you! Can't wait to see how everything shakes up in the next month... methinks that things will look much different then than they do now.

As long as our ballots don't have dimpled or hanging chads, then I think we'll be ok... Unless the #2 team calls for a recount, that is...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 29, 2006, 09:45:54 PM

PS,

No harm, no foul!

I like that d3sports.com does a pre-season poll (and continues with the early weeks) - makes for good discussions. But any polls earlier than 8-10 games into the season are [IMHO] pure speculation.

I rather doubt that #2 will call for a recount (or that we will have a problem with hanging chads!) - no sane person is going to mistake our poll for Pat's gold standard of d3 polling! But it's fun! :D

In the early going it is looking like Wooster, not Va Wes, but fortunately I don't have to cast a ballot for another 5 weeks! (And I have much more time to figure out my beloved Titans - new coach, 8 of top 9 graduating, yet I STILL think they are a major threat in the post-season!)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 29, 2006, 10:16:40 PM

I think IWU will get better as the season goes on. With a new coach, they're still figuring out things the way that Rose wants to do things, and with rather inexperienced players, they need to just play with each other to get used to the flow. The JV schedule is really a plus for these guys... they at least have played at college speed, or very close to it for a season or two behind last year's senior class, whereas at schools without the JV games, the underclassmen only see time if it's a blowout.

BTW, #9 Point knocks off #19 Oshkosh 89-76 (this is actually an upset... game on Oshkosh's floor and Oshy was picked ahead of Point in the WIAC preseason poll), and La Crosse (receiving 8 votes) beats #8 Whitewater by 3ish.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 29, 2006, 10:27:57 PM

The CCIW has had a terrible week so far. In three losses, the CCIW team was probably the underdog:

Carthage 67 @ Carroll 75 (Mon)
#24 IWU 73 @ St. Xavier 75 (Tues)
Wheaton 77 @ Chicago 81 (tonight)

But last night, #14 North Central got drilled 85-69 by Aurora at home...and tonight #15 Augustana is losing by about 25 @ their Quad City rival St. Ambrose, an unranked NAIA II team.

Last year the CCIW had 4 teams good enough to get to Salem (IWU, North Central, Augustana, Elmhurst)...not sure there is one this year. It's early though.

As a fan of a "reloading" team that cannot get to 12-2 in the conference, I am all for the 2007 CCIW race being an ugly, knock-down/drag-out affair! IWU might be able to go 9-5 behind Zach Freeman, the Shirk Center, and a few good bounces. Who knows.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njlincolnlion on November 29, 2006, 11:41:57 PM

Lincoln defeats New Jersey City 92-84 after committing 28 turnovers! The Lions bench outscored the Gothic Knights reserves 44-17 before a crowd of over 1600.

The win gives Coach Yuille his 50th win with 12 losses as he begins his third season at the helm of his alma mater's cagers. Lincoln has scored 90 plus points in all four of the wins this season, and has a 19 game win streak at home.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 30, 2006, 07:08:04 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 29, 2006, 04:52:53 PMGotta be careful with the ole drop down menu! When submitting my ballot just this week, I was attempting to vote for Washington U and before hitting "submit", realized I was about to slot Waynesburg #23!

Waynesburg! Waynesburg! Party time! Excellent!

(Sorry. I've always wanted to do that, and never had the chance until now.)

[/80s flashback]

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on November 30, 2006, 09:26:37 AM

Schwing!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on November 30, 2006, 11:14:46 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 29, 2006, 09:34:08 AM
Big win for Wooster; they are looking mighty dominant, although it will mean more if they can beat Witt by double digits.

I'm not sure I agree with this logic. I know it's early in the season and all, but Wooster just beat one of the better programs in NAIA DivI the other night in pretty impressive fasion. Personally, as good as Witt has been, I don't see them as being as good top to bottom as Georgetown (KY) this year, so I don't really agree that beating Witt by double digits will make this Scots team look more dominant than they look by beating G'town. Maybe it would solidify in people's minds that they appear to be a dominant team by beating Witt by double digits. But at the same time, I wouldn't discount Wooster if Witt happens to play them close or even beats them. For one thing, the game is at Springfield so Witt will be enjoying the homecourt advantage. Besides, this is a rivalry game and anything can happen. The chances of a double digit win by either team are usually not the norm no matter how much of an advantage one team might have over the other on paper. When you go down the rosters of both Wittenberg and Wooster, it wouldn't be much of a stretch to conclude that Wooster could very easily win this game going away. But, going by the history of this matchup, the underdogs are usually the ones that come away with most of the wins and especially when one or the other is ranked #1 in the country as Wooster will likely be when the 2 of them square off a week from Saturday in Springfield. So, I guess what I'm saying is to expect the unexpected in this game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on November 30, 2006, 11:31:05 AM

Quote from: PointSpecial on November 29, 2006, 10:16:40 PM
I think IWU will get better as the season goes on. With a new coach, they're still figuring out things the way that Rose wants to do things, and with rather inexperienced players, they need to just play with each other to get used to the flow. The JV schedule is really a plus for these guys... they at least have played at college speed, or very close to it for a season or two behind last year's senior class, whereas at schools without the JV games, the underclassmen only see time if it's a blowout.

I agree about IWU getting better as the season progresses. The Titans already have one of the DIII's best big men to build around. If their youngsters can develop and mature over the course of the CCIW dogfight, I don't see it as much of a stretch for IWU coming away with the automatic bid. There really isn't any clear-cut favorite to run away with the CCIW, so who's to say that IWU couldn't get it done. And if they get in to the big dance, who knows what kind of a run they could make?

Quote from: PointSpecial on November 29, 2006, 10:16:40 PM
BTW, #9 Point knocks off #19 Oshkosh 89-76 (this is actually an upset... game on Oshkosh's floor and Oshy was picked ahead of Point in the WIAC preseason poll), and La Crosse (receiving 8 votes) beats #8 Whitewater by 3ish.

Pretty impressive win by LAX. It's not inconcievable for them to be ranked in the top 25 when they make the trek to Wooster for our annual holiday tournament at the end of December and this would make all 4 teams in the field ranked in the top 25 with 3 already ranked in the top 10. I did notice that the Eagles have a couple of tough road games vs. top 10 opponents on their schedule between now and then as they travle to UWSP a week from Saturday and then on to St. Thomas the week before X-mas. After those tough games, they may no longer be ranked heading into the Wooster tournament, but they will certainly have been battle tested!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 30, 2006, 12:41:36 PM

Nice posts their Scotsfan, I especially agree with the Witt/Woo discussion... everything is thrown out in a rivalry game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 30, 2006, 03:19:53 PM

Yes, I agree with PS that ScotsFan is spot-on about the Witt/Woo game upcoming. Still, just in case it's less than clear to everyone, it's okay with me if Wooster goes ahead and wins by double digits anyway. :D

Triple digits would be better still. 8)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 30, 2006, 03:48:00 PM

Quote from: ScotsFan on November 30, 2006, 11:31:05 AM
I did notice that the Eagles have a couple of tough road games vs. top 10 opponents on their schedule between now and then as they travle to UWSP a week from Saturday and then on to St. Thomas the week before X-mas. After those tough games, they may no longer be ranked heading into the Wooster tournament, but they will certainly have been battle tested!

Or be ranked really high after winning both of those games...which is a possibility.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on November 30, 2006, 06:29:13 PM

Quote from: Old School on November 30, 2006, 03:48:00 PM
Or be ranked really high after winning both of those games...which is a possibility.

No doubt about it, if LAX doesn't lose another game between now and their date at the Wooster tournament, we could be talking about all 4 teams in the top 10. Of course, ONU, Calvin and Wooster have to do their part in continuing to win as well for this to happen. ;)

BTW, I do have a personal connection with LAX in case anyone is interested. My cousin is an All-American wrestler for the Eagles finishing 3rd at nationals last season and winning his weight class at the WIAC championships.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 30, 2006, 10:39:14 PM

This is NOT a prediction (in fact I highly doubt it), but it would not TOTALLY shock me if Virginia Wesleyan, Ohio Wesleyan, and Illinois Wesleyan all made the final four. What I can't find is the fourth member to make it a clean sweep.

Wesley is currently 0-3, Wesleyan is 1-2 (though they trounced Williams AT Williams), NC Wesleyan is 3-3 (with a VERY suspect schedule), and Nebraska Wesleyan is 4-2 (but 2 wins are over 1-4 St. Scholastica, while another is over 1-2 Finlandia). To have an all Wesleyan final four we may have to import perennial d2 power (though down the last couple of years) Kentucky Wesleyan! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on November 30, 2006, 11:16:21 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 30, 2006, 10:39:14 PM
This is NOT a prediction (in fact I highly doubt it), but it would not TOTALLY shock me if Virginia Wesleyan, Ohio Wesleyan, and Illinois Wesleyan all made the final four. What I can't find is the fourth member to make it a clean sweep.

Enough of this Methodist fervor! :P

I envision Wooster, Hampden-Sydney, Hanover and Buena Vista all in Salem this year so the Presbyterians can rule the Final Four! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 30, 2006, 11:43:41 PM

Illinois Wesleyan has a tenuous (at best) relation with the Methodist church anymore, so this was a name-game, not a sectarian challenge! ;D

Your final four, while unlikely, looks at least as good as mine (especially since I had to 'import' a d2 team)! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 01, 2006, 01:31:46 AM

Hmm... UWSP, UW La Crosse, NJCU, and one of the SUNY schools...? Secular heathens for the national title?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njlincolnlion on December 01, 2006, 10:12:10 AM

Lincoln will participate in a D2 (Salem International) tournament. Would a loss or two (in the torrnament) affect Lincoln's ranking? Likewise did Lincoln's win over D2 Cheyney help the Lions in the rankings?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mattgrubb on December 01, 2006, 03:04:59 PM

wooscotsfan,
this is not a prediction either, but sure would be a good time
don't rule out the fighting scots of maryville college from that all presbyterian final four just yet.
Maryville college has an affiliation with the presbyterian church.
I think the scots are due to break out of this 2nd round every year funk, they have the talent, but not the discipline yet and it sure would be a fun time with the guys from Wooster and Hanover, both those teams knew how to party when in was in school.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 01, 2006, 03:09:25 PM

We're going for the all Ducth final four this year

Hope, Calvin, Central, Lebanon Valley

very unlikely to happen however ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 01, 2006, 03:39:54 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 30, 2006, 10:39:14 PM
This is NOT a prediction (in fact I highly doubt it), but it would not TOTALLY shock me if Virginia Wesleyan, Ohio Wesleyan, and Illinois Wesleyan all made the final four. What I can't find is the fourth member to make it a clean sweep.

Coach Holmes had all three of his big men decide in the first week in August not to play this year, each for various reasons. Otherwise, I was counting on McMurry as a Methodist 4th! :-\ :(

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 01, 2006, 04:55:41 PM

I'd hope for a final four of Anna Maria, Lawrence, Alma, and Hiram, but I'm afraid it might turn into a rubber of bridge. ::):P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 01, 2006, 09:00:07 PM

Game 1 from the CCIW/MIAA Challenge...

Wheaton 73
#10 Calvin 62

Wheaton, IL and Grand Rapids, MI are 202 miles apart, so to the NCAA, this game basically didn't happen.

Carthage vs #5 Hope tips in a few minutes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 01, 2006, 10:59:44 PM

Game 2 from the CCIW/MIAA Challenge (@ Carthage):

Carthage 71
#5 Hope 65

Carthage is picked to finish 7th in the CCIW preseason coaches poll, which is pretty consistent with where the CCIW Chat posters have them. I didn't consider Wheaton over Calvin on a neutral court much of an upset, but this one certainly was.

I'm not sure the CCIW has a national title contender this year, but I can't remember a season with this much parity, top to bottom.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 01, 2006, 11:44:03 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 01, 2006, 10:59:44 PM
Game 2 from the CCIW/MIAA Challenge (@ Carthage):

Carthage 71
#5 Hope 65

Carthage is picked to finish 7th in the CCIW preseason coaches poll, which is pretty consistent with where the CCIW Chat posters have them. I didn't consider Wheaton over Calvin on a neutral court much of an upset, but this one certainly was.

I'm not sure the CCIW has a national title contender this year, but I can't remember a season with this much parity, top to bottom.

Q, bite your tongue! ;D

While I'm 'not sure' the CCIW has a title contender, I certainly wouldn't rule out NCC (with their amazing front line) or for that matter our Titans (it helps that two of them are twins, and the rest played together on JV!). And I'd never totally rule out a team led by Bill Harris and Kent Raymond. Then you've got teams led by Giovananne and Bosko. NEVER say that the CCIW has no title contender - while some years are disappointing, they ALWAYS have someone who is a contender (even if they don't make the 'sweet 16')!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 02, 2006, 01:14:44 AM

Per the live stats on UPS's website, Willamette is leading in OT with :26 121-117

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 02, 2006, 01:23:41 AM

UPS came back and forced 3 TO's and scored a couple of layups, going to double OT.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 02, 2006, 01:39:09 AM

Wow, going to 3rd OT. I wish I could catch a radio feed... I've just got the live stats! 131-131

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 02, 2006, 01:54:05 AM

UPS wins a thriller 140-137 in 3 OT against 1-win Willamette

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 02, 2006, 10:05:00 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 01, 2006, 11:44:03 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 01, 2006, 10:59:44 PM
Game 2 from the CCIW/MIAA Challenge (@ Carthage):

Carthage 71
#5 Hope 65

Carthage is picked to finish 7th in the CCIW preseason coaches poll, which is pretty consistent with where the CCIW Chat posters have them. I didn't consider Wheaton over Calvin on a neutral court much of an upset, but this one certainly was.

I'm not sure the CCIW has a national title contender this year, but I can't remember a season with this much parity, top to bottom.

Q, bite your tongue! ;D

While I'm 'not sure' the CCIW has a title contender, I certainly wouldn't rule out NCC (with their amazing front line) or for that matter our Titans (it helps that two of them are twins, and the rest played together on JV!). And I'd never totally rule out a team led by Bill Harris and Kent Raymond. Then you've got teams led by Giovananne and Bosko. NEVER say that the CCIW has no title contender - while some years are disappointing, they ALWAYS have someone who is a contender (even if they don't make the 'sweet 16')!

Chuck, having been to 9 of the last 10 Division III Final Fours, I have a good feel for what a national championship contender looks like. Last year's IWU team, for example...this year's Wooster team. Teams with good inside/outside balance, great depth, chemistry, one or more go-to guys, etc.. There is a big, big difference between a "Sweet 16 contender" - which the CCIW has every year, maybe even multiple - and a "national championship contender."

Right now all of the CCIW teams have big questions to answer. North Central is the league favorite but their backcourt is a huge issue...Illinois Wesleyan has an All-American post player and a nice starting 5, but absolutely no depth...Augustana has a ton of depth, but is still looking for that one go-to guy...Wheaton may have the best guard in Division III and a great perimeter game, but it is to be determined if they have enough low post play...Elmhurst has a great 4/5, but do they have enough perimeter play...Carthage is lacking another good big guy to compliment Schlemm...etc.

Your statement, "...I certainly wouldn't rule out NCC (with their amazing front line) or for that matter our Titans (it helps that two of them are twins, and the rest played together on JV!). And I'd never totally rule out a team led by Bill Harris and Kent Raymond. Then you've got teams led by Giovananne and Bosko..." sounds warm and fuzzy, but lacks substance. I pull for the CCIW teams as hard as anyone and I hope some of the key questions above get answered positively, but until then I am going to call it like it is.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 02, 2006, 12:24:42 PM

Great commentary Q!

Both years I was in Salem with Point, the four teams that made it were very balanced inside and outside, with great go-to guys. A great example would be the Williams team that won the championship in '03 and that we just barely beat in '04. With Crotty and Coffin, they had two legitimate All-Americans who could take over games.

Ironically, it was Chuck Abba and Tucker Kain who almost won the game for Williams. These two guys combined for 44 of Williams' 82 pts and combined shooting 10/20 from deep. I guess it just shows that, even more than the star power, National contenders have a supporting cast for their star(s) who can carry the load if asked to. At Point, we had Gruscynski, Krull, Relerford, Maus, all guys who could, and did step up and hit shots, get steals, rebounds, hit half-court shots (TWICE)...

I really like this year's Point team too. They seem to have just about the deepest compliment of excellent guards that I've seen in D-3. But Point seriously lacks an inside scoring threat other than Krull, and at 6'4", he can't maneuver inside against 7 footers. It also seems they should struggle defending teams with good big guys inside, but somehow that didn't seem to make a difference on Wednesday... Still beat Oshkosh despite Kerry Gibson inside, though Point did hit 54% of their 3's, 90% of their free throws, and had an 18-2 assist to TO ratio. Also, last year, they beat Stout 2/3 and Oshkosh 1/2, both teams with significant inside threats.

I think that, right now, the CCIW has some growing pains to go through, but by the time late February and March come around, there will be one team (or more) that will begin to pull away due to the in-league schedule... when you can't take a night off, it really prepares you for big games in February and March!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 02, 2006, 02:13:16 PM

Anyone have any info on this Lincoln 201 point game?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 02, 2006, 04:45:22 PM

Final: #2 Wooster 84 Earlham 62

Wooster was led today by Tom Port with 19 points, Brandon Johnson with 17 points, Tim Vandervaart with 14 points and James Cooper with 11 points. Scots shot 58% from the floor and they also made 8 three pointers to stretch the lead in this game.

Wooster is now 5-0. :) Scots next play at Oberlin on 12/6.

GO SCOTS!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 03, 2006, 02:53:19 AM

Safe to say these two will drop significantly

previous #10 Calvin lost two this weekend
Wheaton 73 Calvin 62
Carthage 74 Calvin 54

I saw the Calvin v Carthage game and it was a dominating win by Carthage, Calvin has lost to all 3 of the other teams in the MIAA/CCIW challenge by 22, 11 and 20......and didn't look good doing it.

previous #5 Hope lost two this weekend
Carthage 72 Hope 65
Wheaton 73 Hope 70

Hope had chances to win both particularly the Wheaton game but simply executed poorly in the final minutes of both games. Hope has looked good in all 3 games I've seen.

I would really look at Carthage if I were voting, they were very impressive in my eyes, of course I saw them win by 20. Its a good team and so far they've played 4 games against tournament teams from last year and won 3 of those 4. Pretty impressive.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 03, 2006, 03:09:05 AM

RE Lincoln, look at my comments in the blog section. I watched SportsCenter tonight and it made #4 (?). I watched a Lincoln player steal the ball as it was being brought up at half court and pull up for three, with noone in front of him defending the basket. That's just trying to run up the score, that is playing without class.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 03, 2006, 03:20:01 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 01, 2006, 04:55:41 PM
I'd hope for a final four of Anna Maria, Lawrence, Alma, and Hiram, but I'm afraid it might turn into a rubber of bridge. ::):P

Once again Mr. Collinge pulls off a quip that earns him my vote for Posting Up POTW. The only thing that would've made me laugh harder at this post is if he had ended it with a, "Get off my lawn, you damned kids!"

As for the CCIW, I think that both Q and PS make good points. I'm not sure yet that the CCIW really has a Final Four contender, although the league as a whole may actually be stronger this year than last (inasmuch as the bottom four from last year appear to be making significant inroads, as Calvin and Hope will attest). It might end up being a year in which the league doesn't get multiple teams as deep into the big dance as last year, but the overall non-conference record might actually improve, because there's no laggards at the bottom dragging the league totals down.

But PS is right about the fact that the CCIW conference schedule is a terrific crucible for creating good teams. The intensity level within league play is very high no matter what the league looks like, but in a year in which there are absolutely no nights off for anybody that grueling two-month slog of fourteen highly-charged contests could very well make a team emerge much stronger, Nietzsche style, at the end of February than it may have looked at the end of December.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njlincolnlion on December 03, 2006, 10:22:25 PM

Point Special:

I'll email the Lincoln coach and ask him to have the player jam the ball instead of pulling up for a three. I would tend to think a jam is much easier to make than a trey.

I admit the score and/or magin of victory was a bit much, but would you ask your bench not to score when they really don't have many opportunities to play? If you negate the pull up trey, what other negatives would you have? Additionally, did you have the same comments when Redlands had their blowout?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 03, 2006, 10:49:14 PM

Quote from: njlincolnlion on December 03, 2006, 10:22:25 PM
Point Special:

I'll email the Lincoln coach and ask him to have the player jam the ball instaed of pulling up for a three. I would tend to think a jam is much easier to make than a trey.

I admit the score and/or magin of victory was a bit much, but would you ask your bench not to score when they really don't have many opportunities to play? If you negate the pull up trey, what other negatives would you have? Additionally, did you have the same comments when Redlands had their blowout?

I've always enjoyed your posts, and had a soft spot for Lincoln, but this is NOT acceptable.

"I admit the score and/or margin of victory was a bit much" - no, they were not a bit much, they were obscene! Still doing full court press when up by 100+: obscene! CONSTANTLY going for the immediate three rather than milking the clock: obscene!

Can't you understand that in d3 we still think of 'sportsmanship' as a VALUE, not an antiquated relic? What you did to a team that I dare say would lose to the WORST team in d3 by 20 (and probably several hundred [thousand?] high school teams) was just not sportsmanship (or even common decency).

Much as I liked your posts, I'm kind of glad your school will be leaving d3 VERY soon. :(

[Perhaps they were just practicing d2 ethics, as a transition?]

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ChicagoHopeNut on December 03, 2006, 11:14:59 PM

In addition to what Mr. Ypsi said above. What Lincoln did was appalling and obscene. And if see some of the stories on the internet about the game is that Lincoln not only embarassed itself but it also embarassed all of DIII sports. I can't seem to sign in on the posts from the main d3hoops.com page but I find the fact that so many people are attempting to "defend" or "rationalize" Lincoln's display rather disappointing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njlincolnlion on December 03, 2006, 11:20:45 PM

To All:

I apologize for Lincoln's actions.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 03, 2006, 11:51:00 PM

Quote from: njlincolnlion on December 03, 2006, 11:20:45 PM
To All:

I apologize for Lincoln's actions.

I hope you understand that none of this was addressed to you personally. I (we?) think you are great personally, but have some issues with your coach!! :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 04, 2006, 01:49:24 AM

Quote from: DCHopeNut on December 03, 2006, 11:14:59 PM
In addition to what Mr. Ypsi said above. What Lincoln did was appalling and obscene. And if see some of the stories on the internet about the game is that Lincoln not only embarassed itself but it also embarassed all of DIII sports. I can't seem to sign in on the posts from the main d3hoops.com page but I find the fact that so many people are attempting to "defend" or "rationalize" Lincoln's display rather disappointing.

You need to register first.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 04, 2006, 01:52:20 AM

Quote from: njlincolnlion on December 03, 2006, 10:22:25 PM
I admit the score and/or magin of victory was a bit much, but would you ask your bench not to score when they really don't have many opportunities to play?

By my count, Sami Wylie scored 36 of the final 56 points. If you didn't have a starter in the game it would be a little easier to make that argument with a straight face.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pg04 on December 04, 2006, 02:00:58 AM

Quote from: PointSpecial on December 03, 2006, 03:09:05 AM
RE Lincoln, look at my comments in the blog section. I watched SportsCenter tonight and it made #4 (?). I watched a Lincoln player steal the ball as it was being brought up at half court and pull up for three, with noone in front of him defending the basket. That's just trying to run up the score, that is playing without class.

The fact that it was on sportscenter makes it even worse... It makes it seem cool to score as many points as possible when routing an opponent.

Well, this isn't a video game and there are people with feelings on the other end of the court....

(Not trying to make this overly sappy, by the way)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 04, 2006, 10:20:33 AM

I'm all for having the bench go all out. Lincoln shoots threes and presses; that's what the bench should be doing. If they score 200 points doing that, then fine. However, the fact that Wylie stepped foot on the court after half-time is embrassing. That Lincoln team is more than capable of destroying this Marion team without the starters in.

Props for not telling the bench guys to back off, but a big slam for letting Wylie back on the court. If I'm remembering correctly, Myrick got his record without having to blow-out an opponents, Wylie shouldn't have been allowed to break it by doing so.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sunny on December 04, 2006, 11:32:07 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 04, 2006, 10:20:33 AM
However, the fact that Wylie stepped foot on the court after half-time is embrassing.

Not to mention monumentally stupid. Imagine if he had suffered a season-ending injury jacking up all those shots in the second half?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 04, 2006, 05:02:02 PM

Aside from Hope losing, I'm not sure if anyone else above Stevens Point lost. If they did, Point could be a Top 5 team, beating yet another ranked opponent on the road (Oshkosh). They have ranked Whitewater at home this week and then a tough La Crosse game this weekend.

Re: Lincoln

I don't know the details of the game and won't bother looking. If Lincoln was up 50 at the break, no starters should've played the 2nd half. I'm all for the bench players playing all-out and getting some "reps" in. They probably don't get to do that much. If the bench players play all or the majority of the 2nd half, even they can stand around for awhile without jacking up 3's (last 5 minutes?). Anyone tries to show me up on the soccer field, they'll find themselves with a limp.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 05, 2006, 09:16:12 AM

New Top 25 is up. Not suprisingly Wooster is on top. ONU is sitting in #3; I'll be interested to see if this is an all-time high for them.

Still wondering how the upstart NE teams aren't getting many votes. I understand the lack of history, but still, you'd think the NE voters would be giving them a little credit, right?

Brandeis, Keene State and RIC have all looked better than Gordon, but they can't seem to gain much ground.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 05, 2006, 09:17:37 AM

You're talking Brandeis, for example? They aren't on many ballots right now -- I wonder if voters are waiting to see if they beat Amherst.

I think Amherst is beatable, though less so at LeFrak.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 05, 2006, 09:21:04 AM

Yeah, I know everybody's waiting for that game, but even if Brandeis loses, wouldn't they still be in contention for a Top 25 spot? I mean it's not like they'd be losing to a bad team? I just feel like they've proved quite a bit already, especially to the NE voters. I do give the rest of the country the benefit of the doubt because they so sorely stunk it up in conference last season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 05, 2006, 12:12:55 PM

Top 25 News and Notes, Vol. VIII, Issue 111

Two weeks into the season, and we still have 53 teams receiving votes. This week the top 25 saw a shake-up, including at the top, but the inevitable shake-out is still on the horizon.

Congratulations to the new #1 team, a familiar name to readers of this column: the College of Wooster. Although Wooster is almost a permanent member of the top 10 (having been ranked there 81 times in 111 polls), it is actually only the 6th week that the Fighting Scots have reached the top step of the ladder. In the 2000-01 season, they reached the top in Week 12, and lost to arch-rival Wittenberg that weekend. In the 2004-05 season, the Scots became #1 on two separate occasions (Weeks 7 and 13), and both times lost to Wittenberg that week. Then last season, when Wittenberg was #1, #2 Wooster knocked them off to take over the top spot. So who is on the Scots' schedule this week? I mean, besides Oberlin? That's right, #6 Wittenberg. Stay tuned to this channel for further developments. :)

Debutantes:

#8 Whitworth has reached the top 10 for the first time in poll history; and
#20 Averett broke into the top 25 for the first time ever, in just their second week receiving votes.

Congratulations to the Pirates and Cougars!

Streakers:
In nabbing the poll's top two spots, Wooster and Amherst extended their record streaks:

#1 Wooster is in the top 10 for the 41st consecutive week, and received votes for the 111th straight time, and
#2 Amherst is in the top 25 for the 66th consecutive week.

Elsewhere,

#2 Amherst is in the top 10 for the 10th straight week;
#4 Virginia Wesleyan and #10 Lincoln are in the the top 25 for the 10th consecutive time each;
#25 UW-Whitewater received votes for the 80th consecutive week;
Baldwin-Wallace received votes for the 20th consecutive week, but had their streak of top 25 appearances snapped at 15 straight.

Congratulations to these great programs!

High-Water Marks:

#8 Whitworth, #17 Bates, and #20 Averett each set new highest-ever-ranked marks in this poll;
#3 Ohio Northern, #5 St. Thomas, and #10 Lincoln each tied their highest ranking ever (ONU, Week 14 of 2000-01; UST, 4 weeks in the 2001-02 season; and Lincoln, last year's final poll.)

Congratulations on these achievements!

Milestones:

#3 Ohio Northern is a top 10 team for the 10th time;
#5 St. Thomas is a top 25 team for the 40th time;
#13 Mississippi College received votes for the 60th time;
#9 Lawrence received votes for the 50th time; and
Keene St. received votes for the 30th time.

Congratulations to these teams, and to all who continue to make this such a great game! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 05, 2006, 11:29:19 PM

Another nice win for the CCIW as Elmhurst defeats #14 UW-Oshkosh...

http://athletics.elmhurst.edu/home/news/4837931.html

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 06, 2006, 09:20:20 PM

Final: #1 Wooster 95 Oberlin 76

Wooster gets the road win over Oberlin. Scots had 6 players in double figure points tonight led by Tom Port and James Cooper each with 17 points. Wooster made 10 three pointers tonight.

Wooster is now 6-0. :) Next up is #6 Wittenberg at Springfield on Saturday!

GO SCOTS!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 07, 2006, 01:40:06 AM

Point wins a barnburner at Quandt against Whitewater...3-pter at the buzzer by Brian Beamish wins it 75-73.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 09, 2006, 09:34:05 PM

Final: #1 Wooster 68 #6 Wittenberg 65 :)

Wooster gets a very nice road win at Witt by hitting two big three point shots in the last 2 minutes of the game. They also nailed two critical free throws with 7 seconds remaining.

Wooster was led by Brandon Johnson with 18 points, Tom Port with 13 points and James Cooper with 11 points.

Wooster is now 7-0. :) Next up is NAIA Cedarville next Saturday.

GO SCOTS!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 10, 2006, 12:07:01 PM

Here's a roundup of this week's top 25 scores (Dec. 4-10):

#1 Wooster (7-0) won at Oberlin 95-76 and won at #6 Wittenberg 68-65
#2 Amherst (7-0) won at MIT 79-47 and def. Brandeis 84-74
#3 Ohio Northern (6-1) won at Heidelberg 75-70 and lost to Baldwin-Wallace 94-77
#4 Virginia Wesleyan (6-1) won at Bridgewater (Va.) 82-57 and won at Hampden-Sydney 78-60
#5 St. Thomas (6-0) won at Hamline 81-66 and def. Macalester 77-72
#6 Wittenberg (6-1) def. Cedarville 66-61 and lost to #1 Wooster 68-65
#7 UW-Stevens Point (7-0) def. #25 UW-Whitewater 75-73 and def. UW-La Crosse 67-64
#8 Whitworth (10-0) won at UC-Santa Cruz 76-52
#9 Lawrence (4-1) was idle
#10 Lincoln (5-2) lost at Ramapo 95-71
#11 Augustana (6-1) def. Clarke 74-56 and def. Coe 70-47
#12 William Paterson (7-1) def. Montclair St. 66-50 and won at Rutgers-Camden 82-35
#13 Mississippi College (4-1) was idle
#14 UW-Oshkosh (3-2) lost at Elmhurst 55-52 and won at UW-Stout 64-50
#15 UW-Platteville (6-1) lost to UW-La Crosse 69-56 and won at UW-River Falls 70-66
#16 Randolph-Macon (4-3) lost at Lynchburg 78-70 and lost at Eastern Mennonite 80-77 (OT)
#17 Bates (8-0) won at Thomas 76-54 and def. Maine-Farmington 76-56
#18 Johns Hopkins (9-0) won at McDaniel 91-66 and de. Dickinson 76-60
#19 North Central (4-2) lost to Harris-Stowe 73-64 (neutral site) and won at Robert Morris-Springfield 85-75
#20 Averett (7-0) def. Rust 79-61 and def. Piedmont 73-67
#21 Puget Sound (6-1) def. Puget Sound Christian 114-56
#22 Hope (4-2) def. Grace Bible 88-63 and def. Goshen 85-72
#23 Aurora (6-0) def. Wisconsin Lutheran 100-91 and won at Maranatha Baptist 110-44
#24 Wheaton (Ill.) (5-2) def. Principia 112-52
#25 UW-Whitewater lost at #7 UW-Stevens Point 75-73 and won at UW-Superion 82-71

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 10, 2006, 02:33:47 PM

DC - thanks for the work on the Top 25 roundup! One karma point to you.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 10, 2006, 02:49:19 PM

Thanks, wsf. I just have some spare time on my hands while the exterminators are fumigating our usual home! ;) :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 11, 2006, 06:54:03 PM

Nice work DC, I enjoy your informative posts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 11, 2006, 07:25:42 PM

Thanks. :)

I've updated the scores post above to reflect Sunday wins by Whitworth at UC-Santa Cruz and by Averett vs. Piedmont.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on December 11, 2006, 09:27:13 PM

What is everyone's take on the Amherst game, is a 10 point margin of loss, small enough to get brandeis some credit, or was the deficit too large. I hope the later is not the case, because it is clear that is was a very evenly matched game, with the exception of a small run late in the first half by amherst. It also seems like someone might have a reputation with the new england officials and that certainly did not help the judges on their opposition's floor.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 11, 2006, 09:34:13 PM

It's hard to tell but it raises Brandeis in my estimation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 12, 2006, 12:15:30 PM

Top 25 News and Notes, Vol. VIII, Issue 112

It looks like the settling process may have begun. After three weeks of near-record level participation in the top 25 voting, the poll returned to a semblance of normality this week. About 17% of the teams that received votes last week fell off the table this week. Four new squads were added to the voting, but they nabbed only a collective 18 votes, about two-tenths of one percent of the available votes. At the other end of the scale, nine of last week's top ten teams remained in that august group, despite two of them losing games this week. Seven of those nine teams saw their voting support increased, further consolidating the top of the poll, and helping to establish a mini-break between the #8 (Whitworth, 420) and #9 (Lawrence, 355) positions.

Wooster maintained their hold on the #1 spot in the poll, nabbing one first-place vote from #2 Amherst. Wooster defeated #6 Wittenberg at Springfield, marking the first time in that rivalry-within-a-rivalry that the team ranked #1 going into the game won the game. Oddly, each time the #1 team has been involved in that game, the visiting team has come out on top. Despite the loss, the Tigers maintaind their position as the #6 team in the poll, due in part to the drop of #7 Ohio Northern, 17-point losers at home to unranked Baldwin-Wallace. Wittenberg and Ohio Northern square off in Ada next Tuesday (12/19.)

Debutantes:
Congratulations to the Guilford College Quakers, who for the first time ever received votes in this week's poll.

Streakers:
The record streaks are all still intact:

#1 Wooster, with 112 straight poll appearances and 42 straight weeks in the top 10, and
#2 Amherst , with 67 consecutive top 25 placements.
#21 UW-La Crosse attracted voter interest for the 10th straight week.
Illinois Wesleyan saw their consecutive voting streak snapped at 39 straight weeks.

High-Water Marks:
#4 St. Thomas achieved its highest-ever rank this week, as did #15 Averett, #16 Bates, #19 Aurora, and #21 UW-La Crosse. #8 Whitworth tied their highest-ever mark for the third straight week. La Crosse re-enters the top 25 for just the second time ever, having been absent since early 2002. Congratulations to all these teams!

Milestones:

#4 St. Thomas and #10 Augustana are each in the top 10 for the tenth time;
This week marks #6 Wittenberg's seventy-fifth appearance in the top 25;
Calvin received votes for the 80th time;
#24 DePauw and Occidental are vote-getters for the 40th time each, and North Central attracted the voters' attention for the 20th time.

It bears occasional mention that all of the records in this category are held by #1 Wooster, who has been in the top 10 eighty-two times, in the top twenty-five 104 times, and in the list of vote-getters a perfect 112 times.

Congratulations to all of these outstanding programs! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 12, 2006, 04:19:04 PM

As usual, very impressive stuff, DC. And I thought I spent a lot of time on d3hoops! lol :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 12, 2006, 05:37:35 PM

Quote from: Old School on December 12, 2006, 04:19:04 PM
As usual, very impressive stuff, DC. And I thought I spent a lot of time on d3hoops! lol

You might have missed it, but he's been doing this every week for some time now. It's very impressive. I have a hard time keeping up my "teams with a win in the NCAA tournament" spreadsheet; and that's easy.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 12, 2006, 05:47:29 PM

+1 David! Thanks!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 12, 2006, 06:07:24 PM

Thanks, everyone; I'm glad you enjoy it. It makes the effort worthwhile. :)

I do a similar weekly report for the women's top 25, over in the women's top 25 (http://www.d3sports.com/post/index.php?topic=2890.270) room, if you're interested.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on December 13, 2006, 02:05:11 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 12, 2006, 12:15:30 PM
Top 25 News and Notes, Vol. VIII, Issue 112

It looks like the settling process may have begun. After three weeks of near-record level participation in the top 25 voting, the poll returned to a semblance of normality this week. About 17% of the teams that received votes last week fell off the table this week. Four new squads were added to the voting, but they nabbed only a collective 18 votes, about two-tenths of one percent of the available votes. At the other end of the scale, nine of last week's top ten teams remained in that august group, despite two of them losing games this week. Seven of those nine teams saw their voting support increased, further consolidating the top of the poll, and helping to establish a mini-break between the #8 (Whitworth, 420) and #9 (Lawrence, 355) positions.

Wooster maintained their hold on the #1 spot in the poll, nabbing one first-place vote from #2 Amherst. Wooster defeated #6 Wittenberg at Springfield, marking the first time in that rivalry-within-a-rivalry that the team ranked #1 going into the game won the game. Oddly, each time the #1 team has been involved in that game, the visiting team has come out on top. Despite the loss, the Tigers maintaind their position as the #6 team in the poll, due in part to the drop of #7 Ohio Northern, 17-point losers at home to unranked Baldwin-Wallace. Wittenberg and Ohio Northern square off in Ada next Tuesday (12/19.)

Debutantes:
Congratulations to the Guilford College Quakers, who for the first time ever received votes in this week's poll.

Streakers:
The record streaks are all still intact:

#1 Wooster, with 112 straight poll appearances and 42 straight weeks in the top 10, and
#2 Amherst , with 67 consecutive top 25 placements.
#21 UW-La Crosse attracted voter interest for the 10th straight week.
Illinois Wesleyan saw their consecutive voting streak snapped at 39 straight weeks.
High-Water Marks:
#4 St. Thomas achieved its highest-ever rank this week, as did #15 Averett, #16 Bates, #19 Aurora, and #21 UW-La Crosse. #8 Whitworth tied their highest-ever mark for the third straight week. La Crosse re-enters the top 25 for just the second time ever, having been absent since early 2002. Congratulations to all these teams!

Milestones:

#4 St. Thomas and #10 Augustana are each in the top 10 for the tenth time;
This week marks #6 Wittenberg's seventy-fifth appearance in the top 25;
Calvin received votes for the 80th time;
#24 DePauw and Occidental are vote-getters for the 40th time each, and North Central attracted the voters' attention for the 20th time.
It bears occasional mention that all of the records in this category are held by #1 Wooster, who has been in the top 10 eighty-two times, in the top twenty-five 104 times, and in the list of vote-getters a perfect 112 times.

Congratulations to all of these outstanding programs! :)

DC, I'm curious to know where NCC fits into the news and notes section of your report. Thanks!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 13, 2006, 03:49:53 AM

Under Milestones, if I read correctly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 13, 2006, 10:52:58 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 13, 2006, 03:49:53 AM
Under Milestones, if I read correctly.

Yeah, I'm not sure what you mean, cardinalpride. ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on December 13, 2006, 04:35:47 PM

I'm guessing that cardinalpride would like to know what North Central's numbers are, even if they currently aren't at a round number that you would note in the weekly report, DC. So cardinalpride probably wants to know what NCC's high water mark is, and its current streaks, even if they aren't at a milestone stage.

At least, that's the best I can figure...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: woosterbooster on December 13, 2006, 06:13:33 PM

In the Massey Ratings this week, Wooster has moved into the top spot among DIII teams and is #143 overall. Directly behind them, at #144, is Wisconsin Stevens-Point. These two DIII schools lead all NAIA schools in the ratings and only trail six DII schools: #96 North Dakota State, #110 Virginia Union, #112 Winona State, #125 Central Missouri, #126 Emporia State, and #139 Southeastern Oklahoma.

Wooster and Wisconsin Stevens-Point lead such DI programs as George Mason, Iowa, Princeton, St. Josephs, Minnesota, and Utah.

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on December 14, 2006, 03:59:02 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 13, 2006, 10:52:58 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 13, 2006, 03:49:53 AM
Under Milestones, if I read correctly.

Yeah, I'm not sure what you mean, cardinalpride. ???

Quote from: scotsbrod on December 13, 2006, 04:35:47 PM
I'm guessing that cardinalpride would like to know what North Central's numbers are, even if they currently aren't at a round number that you would note in the weekly report, DC. So cardinalpride probably wants to know what NCC's high water mark is, and its current streaks, even if they aren't at a milestone stage.

At least, that's the best I can figure...

what Scotsbrod said is correct. I would like to know if NCC has any kind of streak of its own going right now. Also, it's high water mark. I do realize whatever the numbers maybe that they're not milestones nationally but could be milestones as far as NCC's history is concerned. I hope this is a bit more clear. Thanks in advance BC!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 14, 2006, 09:25:32 AM

Actually they updated Massey since yesterday and Stevens Point is now tops for D3. But it's still way too early for his algorithms to fit because after Averett at #3 it's Mary Washington, Guilford and Johns Hopkins.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 14, 2006, 09:42:29 AM

I really wonder how good Johns Hopkins is. McMurry lost to Rowan in the Hopkins tourney by 5 points, without our starting point guard who sustained an ankle injury in the first minutes of play. Hopkins only beat Rowan by 2. Rowan has since lost to Ramapo.

Comparative scores are somewhat challenging, but I don't think that the algorithm has settled Hopkins into its correct range.

JHU's next game is versus MissCollege at the Westmont Tourney.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: woosterbooster on December 14, 2006, 10:42:38 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 14, 2006, 09:25:32 AMActually they updated Massey since yesterday and Stevens Point is now tops for D3. But it's still way too early for his algorithms to fit because after Averett at #3 it's Mary Washington, Guilford and Johns Hopkins.

Yep, it sure is updated, must have happened shortly after my post. For some reason, they're still missing Wooster's win over Mt. Union, which would probably help them out a bit.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 14, 2006, 11:03:14 AM

North Central has been in the top 10 one time, when they were #10 in Week 13 of last season. They had a 12-week ranking streak going (back to Week 6 last season) until this week; prior to that they had only cracked the top 25 twice, in Weeks 7 and 8 of the 2004-05 season (#21 each time). As noted above, NCC has received votes in 20 polls, including the last 15 consecutively. The first time they received votes was in Week 8 of 2003-04 (13 votes), the only votes they received that season.

Hope that helps. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on December 14, 2006, 12:26:26 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 14, 2006, 11:03:14 AM
North Central has been in the top 10 one time, when they were #10 in Week 13 of last season. They had a 12-week ranking streak going (back to Week 6 last season) until this week; prior to that they had only cracked the top 25 twice, in Weeks 7 and 8 of the 2004-05 season (#21 each time). As noted above, NCC has received votes in 20 polls, including the last 15 consecutively. The first time they received votes was in Week 8 of 2003-04 (13 votes), the only votes they received that season.

Hope that helps. :)

Thanks DC! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 14, 2006, 09:48:56 PM

Wheaton missed a 3 at the buzzer, falling to Division I Northwestern (Big Ten) by 2 points. The Thunder led most of this game.

Wow.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: patcummings on December 15, 2006, 08:46:42 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 14, 2006, 09:48:56 PM
Wheaton missed a 3 at the buzzer, falling to Division I Northwestern (Big Ten) by 2 points. The Thunder led most of this game.

Wow.

Wow is right Bob. Northwestern isn't exactly Utah Valley State or UC-Riverside in the D1 ranks. A CCIW over a Big Ten would be MAJOR. As the score stands, it almost counts as a win to me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 15, 2006, 09:01:19 AM

What the heck happened last night? Was there some crazy alignment of planets or something?

Wheaton loses to Big-Ten Northwestern and it turns out to be an upset after Wheaton leads most of the game? Penn-State Altoona beats Lincoln in some sort of karmic backlash? Gordon gets beat by 17 at Husson? Luckily Rutgers-Camden lost or we might have collapsed the universe.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 15, 2006, 09:52:23 AM

Chicago Tribune article...

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/college/northwestern/cs-061214nugamer,1,5559401.story?coll=cs-college-headlines

Northwestern has a win over DePaul...DePaul beat Kansas. A Thunder "W" would have done some fun things for all opponents that beat Wheaton as the season plays out.

Oh well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 15, 2006, 11:48:15 AM

And OH what might have been! One more 3-pointer would have done it, and Wheaton shot a woeful 3-18 from the arc. I've asked elsewhere when the last time Kent Raymond went 0-6 from 3-land, but so far no reply - I'll hazard a guess of 'never'!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 15, 2006, 12:45:51 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 15, 2006, 11:48:15 AM
And OH what might have been! One more 3-pointer would have done it, and Wheaton shot a woeful 3-18 from the arc. I've asked elsewhere when the last time Kent Raymond went 0-6 from 3-land, but so far no reply - I'll hazard a guess of 'never'!

Getting good 3-point looks is very difficult against a good Division I team. One of the biggest differences between Division I and Division III is the quickness at the guard spots. I'd guess that is most of the reason for Wheaton's 3-18 3-pt shooting and point-guard Kent Raymond's 2 assits to 8 turnovers.

Here is the boxscore from IWU's exhibition vs U. of Illinois last year:

http://www.iwu.edu/~iwunews/sports/mbb2006/ill-iwu.htm

The Titans were 6-18 from beyond the arc and there just were not many clean looks vs Dee Brown, Rich McBride, Brian Randle, and the Illini's other perimeter defenders.

Earlier this year, Wash U was 3-21 from 3 vs Southern Illinois, a really good Missouri Valley team that plays nasty defense. The D3 Bears had 3 assists and 25 turnovers.

http://siusalukis.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/stats/2006-2007/siu1.html

Versus Division III teams this year Wash U is shooting .436 from 3 and has a team A:T.O ratio of 1.7.

It is just a lot different when you are playing against that caliber athlete. For all of us who speculate if the Korey Coon's, Ryan Knuppel's, and Rick Harrigan's of Division III - to use a few former CCIW All-American shooters as examples - could have played Division I, you have to consider how differently they'd be defended at that level. It is a lot harder to a) get open and, b) get a shot off.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 15, 2006, 12:50:28 PM

That sounds like the laying down of a gauntlet to me, so here it goes:

Raymond hasn't shot less than 50% from three since the Benedictine game where he went 0-4. That's four games in a row with him shooting 6-8, 4-8, 3-6 and 2-2.

You have your last 0-fer listed there. He was 2-10 in the loss to Whitworth, which was an off shooting night for him, but going back to the 04-05 season Raymond has never had a game where he took more than 4 shots without making one.

There have only been six games in his career that ended without Raymond hitting a three, two 0-4, two 0-1 and an 0-0.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 15, 2006, 01:52:09 PM

Thanks for he research, Hoops! +k to you.

Q, While I grasp the point you are making (and mostly agree), note that IWU went SIX of 18. If Wheaton could have just gone FOUR for 18 (and I doubt the NU backcourt contained a Dee Brown), ESPN and papers across the country would probably have had their lead story! Oh, what might have been! :o

While the game, of course, doesn't even exist for pool C purposes, I'm guessing it will mean a LOT on the coming poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 15, 2006, 02:26:57 PM

A few photos from the IWU/Illinois exhibition that help illustrate my point about perimeter defense vs DI...

http://www.iwuhoops.com/illinif.jpg

http://www.iwuhoops.com/illinim.jpg

http://www.iwuhoops.com/illiniad.jpg

In that third photo, note that Dee Brown is guarding Adam Dauksas one-on-one 3 feet across halfcourt. And in the first two, the way the Illini defenders "sit down" and guard...and they of course are quick enough to move laterally when you dribble. You're just not going to see that type of pressure vs most D3 teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 15, 2006, 02:58:00 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 15, 2006, 01:52:09 PMQ, While I grasp the point you are making (and mostly agree), note that IWU went SIX of 18. If Wheaton could have just gone FOUR for 18 (and I doubt the NU backcourt contained a Dee Brown), ESPN and papers across the country would probably have had their lead story!

NU doesn't have a Dee Brown, but the Wildcats aren't a bunch of plodding plowhorses, either. Bill Carmody's style is predicated upon his team's ability to hold down the other team's score with intense defense. No D1 school has scored more than 63 points against them in regulation -- and the Wildcats held a very respectable DePaul team to a mere 39.

Note what Bob said in CCIW Chat about how NU denied Kent Raymond the ball in that final 17-second sequence. That's a very, very difficult thing to do for a D3 team; Raymond is such a good player on our level that it's extremely unlikely that any one player can guard him so thoroughly as to keep the ball out of his hands for that long if Bill Harris is running a play for his sophomore star. As Bob said, it's the quickness of D1 guards that makes it possible for them to do things like deny Raymond the ball when the game is on the line. The fact that Wheaton's guards turned the ball over eleven times (they average seven), including eight by Raymond alone, should tell you something about the Wildcats backcourt. Don't sell NU short with regard to guard quickness.

(NU's forwards, on the other hand, appear to be another story entirely.)

Sac made an excellent point, though, about Carmody's style. While it's conducive to keeping Northwestern in the game against better D1 opponents, it also serves to give really good small-school teams a better chance to upset them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 15, 2006, 02:59:29 PM

I believe technically they didn't deny him the ball, they just didn't start the clock when he got the ball so it had to be inbounded again, after which time he was indeed contained.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 16, 2006, 02:31:53 PM

Top 25 scores, week of Dec. 11-17 (watch for updates):

#1 Wooster (7-0) def. Cedarville 104-95
#2 Amherst (8-0) won at Worcester St. 70-42
#3 Virginia Wesleyan (6-1) won at Newport News Apprentice 85-67
#4 St. Thomas (6-0) is idle
#5 UW-Stevens Point (9-0) won at Viterbo 75-49
#6 Wittenberg (6-1) is idle
#7 Ohio Northern (6-1) won at Mt. Union 64-51
#8 Whitworth (10-0) is idle (until Jan. 2)
#9 Lawrence (4-1) lost to #25 Carthage 93-86 (2OT)
#10 Augustana (7-1) won at Cornell 64-60 and hosts Wartburg Sun.
#11 William Paterson (8-1) won at FDU-Florham 70-57 (and lost at Seton Hall 83-56 in an exhibition)
#12 Mississippi College (5-1) def. Schreiner 83-69
#13 UW-Platteville (6-1) lost at RMC-Springfield 82-74
#14 Johns Hopkins (9-0) is idle (until Dec. 29)
#15 Averett (8-0) def. Newport News Apprentice 85-68 (and had a game at So. Virginia cancelled)
#16 Bates (8-0) is idle (until Jan. 5)
#17 Puget Sound (6-1) won at La Verne 114-104
#18 Lincoln (5-3) lost at PSU-Altoona 95-86
#19 Aurora (6-0) lost at Edgewood 68-65
#20 Wheaton (Ill.) (5-3) lost at Northwestern (Ill.) 41-39
#21 UW-La Crosse (6-3) lost at Carleton 75-64 (OT)
#22 Hope (4-2) won at Aquinas 65-62
#23 Chicago (6-1) won at Illinois Wesleyan 64-60
#24 DePauw (6-1) hosts Illinois Tech Sun.
#25 Carthage (5-1) won at #9 Lawrence 93-86 (2OT)

**UPDATED** for Saturday's final scores (including Puget Sound/La Verne)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 16, 2006, 10:02:28 PM

Final: #1 Wooster 104 Cedarville 95

Wooster went on a 28-12 run to start the 2nd half and take control of this game. This was a nice win over a solid 9-1 NAIA squad, ranked #9 nationally in NAIA Division II. ;D

Wooster was led tonight by Tom Port with 29 points, James Cooper with 23 points, Tim Vandervaart with 19 points and Devin Fulk with 12 points

Wooster is now 8-0. :) Next game is at Pomona Pitzer (CA) on Monday.

GO SCOTS!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 17, 2006, 12:17:55 AM

Having seen Wash U, #23 Chicago, and #24 DePauw, I think Wash U is underrated in the current D3hoops.com Top 25. I'm pretty sure Wash U is the best of the three.

If UW-Whitewater start clicking, I'd rank them ahead Wash U, Chicago, and DePauw...I think the Warhawks are more talented.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 17, 2006, 12:58:48 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 17, 2006, 12:17:55 AM
If UW-Whitewater start clicking, I'd rank them ahead Wash U, Chicago, and DePauw...I think the Warhawks are more talented.

Talent only gets you so far! ;D This year's Point team is hardly the most talented team in the WIAC, but they might be the best TEAM. With apologies to the rest of the Championship teams in 2004 and 2005, aside from Jason Kalsow and Nick Bennett, Point probably didn't have the most talent either. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: zonescantstopme on December 17, 2006, 05:04:31 PM

How far out did Lincoln fall with those two losses, with them being independant does that hurt their NCAA chances

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 17, 2006, 07:06:33 PM

Quote from: zonescantstopme on December 17, 2006, 05:04:31 PM
How far out did Lincoln fall with those two losses, with them being independant does that hurt their NCAA chances

Lincoln will fall out to the Top 25, and their Pool B chances got more tenuous.

See the Pool B board. IMHO, Lincoln is now on the Pool B bubble, but I will start my Pool B speculations in January.

Remember there are only 3 Pool B bids this year to spread around the NAthCon, the Pres AC, Maryville and the GSAC, Chapman, Lincoln, UDallas, etc.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 17, 2006, 07:21:38 PM

Top 25 scores, week of Dec. 11-17 (final):

#1 Wooster (7-0) def. Cedarville 104-95
#2 Amherst (8-0) won at Worcester St. 70-42
#3 Virginia Wesleyan (6-1) won at Newport News Apprentice 85-67
#4 St. Thomas (6-0) was idle
#5 UW-Stevens Point (9-0) won at Viterbo 75-49
#6 Wittenberg (6-1) was idle
#7 Ohio Northern (6-1) won at Mt. Union 64-51
#8 Whitworth (10-0) was idle (until Jan. 2)
#9 Lawrence (4-1) lost to #25 Carthage 93-86 (2OT)
#10 Augustana (7-1) won at Cornell 64-60 and def. Wartburg 92-77
#11 William Paterson (8-1) won at FDU-Florham 70-57 (and lost at Seton Hall 83-56 in an exhibition)
#12 Mississippi College (5-1) def. Schreiner 83-69
#13 UW-Platteville (6-1) lost at RMC-Springfield 82-74
#14 Johns Hopkins (9-0) was idle (until Dec. 29)
#15 Averett (8-0) def. Newport News Apprentice 85-68 (and had a game at So. Virginia cancelled)
#16 Bates (8-0) was idle (until Jan. 5)
#17 Puget Sound (6-1) won at La Verne 114-104
#18 Lincoln (5-3) lost at PSU-Altoona 95-86
#19 Aurora (6-0) lost at Edgewood 68-65
#20 Wheaton (Ill.) (5-3) lost at Northwestern (Ill.) 41-39
#21 UW-La Crosse (6-3) lost at Carleton 75-64 (OT)
#22 Hope (4-2) won at Aquinas 65-62
#23 Chicago (6-1) won at Illinois Wesleyan 64-60
#24 DePauw (6-1) def. Illinois Tech 84-63
#25 Carthage (5-1) won at #9 Lawrence 93-86 (2OT)

**UPDATED** for Sunday's final scores

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 17, 2006, 07:25:40 PM

Not a good week for the non-SP UW's...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2006, 08:39:59 PM

In three polls, the CCIW has already had 5 different teams ranked (though IWU and NCC have fallen out). Since Elmhurst has won 7 straight since an opening loss (including over two WIAC teams), I wonder if the CCIW can get 75% of the teams in before the conference season even begins? :)

On a different note, Wheaton played only one game this past week and lost it. But considering it was by two points to a D1 school, I wonder if they will actually RISE in the poll?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 18, 2006, 12:36:38 AM

Point, Oshkosh, Whitewater, Platteville and La Crosse have also been in the Top 25. I don't see Stout, Eau Claire, River Falls or Superior getting in. :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 18, 2006, 12:39:17 AM

I honestly thought Stout would have a chance at the beginning of the year... but when they lost their backcourt, their chances dropped considerably. Two 7 footers or not, if they don't have the guys to feed them, they'll starve on the blocks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 18, 2006, 03:04:39 AM

Quote from: Old School on December 17, 2006, 12:58:48 PMWith apologies to the rest of the Championship teams in 2004 and 2005, aside from Jason Kalsow and Nick Bennett, Point probably didn't have the most talent either. :D

"Aside from that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play?" ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 18, 2006, 11:33:06 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2006, 08:39:59 PM
On a different note, Wheaton played only one game this past week and lost it. But considering it was by two points to a D1 school, I wonder if they will actually RISE in the poll?

I think there's a good chance they go up a couple spots considering the 2 teams directly ahead of them Lincoln and Aurora both lost.

Behind them is Hope, who they beat by 3, Chicago who beat Wheaton by 4, DePauw who also lost to Chicago but by 8. Carthage who has 1 loss. Wheaton's only other loss was to 10-0 Whitworth.

Actually looking at it maybe Chicago should be ahead of Wheaton.

Could be close but I bet Wheaton moves up 1 spot. Truthfully I was more impressed with Carthage than Wheaton when I saw the two play 2 weeks ago, but Wheaton is very good.

Is there a poll this week?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 19, 2006, 12:02:46 AM

Final: #1 Wooster 97 Pomona-Pitzer 77

Wooster jumped out to a 12-0 start and actually led this game by 30 points in the 2nd half before the Sagehens cut the margin in garbage time. :) Wooster was led by Tom Port with 18 points, Brandon Johnson with 18 points, James Cooper with 16 points and Devin Fulk with 13 points. This was a solid road win for Wooster.

Pomona-Pitzer was led by David Knowles with 22 points and Jabarri Reynolds with 21 points.

Wooster is now 9-0. :) Next up is California Baptist on Wednesday.

GO SCOTS!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 19, 2006, 12:16:34 PM

Top 25 News and Notes, Vol. VIII, Issue 113

The poll exhibited some exam-week stability, with nine top 10 teams, 22 top 25 teams, and 46 of 48 vote-getters achieving the same status this week. There was a certain shuffling of positions, such as Lincoln losing 161 points and #18 Carthage gaining 123, but generally speaking, stability was the rule of the week.

Wooster remained in the #1 spot in the poll for the third straight week. #2 Amherst held on to its three first place votes, but #3 Virginia Wesleyan sliced their gap in half, gaining 21 points on the Lord Jeffs. North Central re-entered the poll at #24, which means that exactly half of the CCIW is ranked this week, with a fifth team (Elmhurst) in the "others receiving votes" category.

Debutantes:
In keeping with the "stability" theme, no teams meet the requirements for "debutante" status this week.

Streakers:
The record streaks are all still intact:

#1 Wooster, with 113 straight poll appearances and 43 straight weeks in the top 10, and
#2 Amherst , with 68 consecutive top 25 placements.
Calvin attracted voter interest for the 30th straight week;
#9 Augustana and #19 Hope each received votes for the 20th consecutive poll.

High-Water Marks:

#12 Averett continues to plow new ground, reaching an all-time high ranking for the third straight week;
#23 NYU also reached an all-time high this week; and
#4 St. Thomas, #8 Whitworth, and #16 Bates each held their ranking, matching their all-time highs.

Milestones:

#5 UW-Stevens Point is ranked for the 90th time;
#18 Carthage is a member of the top 25 for the 60th time;
#9 Augustana and #11 Mississippi College are each top 25 teams for the 30th time;
#15 Puget Sound received votes for the fiftieth time;
UW-Oshkosh is a vote-getter for the 80th time, while Aurora and Lincoln attracted votes for the 20th time each.

Congratulations to all of these outstanding programs, and a warm Happy Holidays to all! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: woosterbooster on December 19, 2006, 03:45:55 PM

Twenty-third in the DIII poll, an all-time high. This from NYU, a school that was near the forefront of New York City basketball back in the early 1960s. NYU sported such stars such as third-team AP All-American Barry Kramer, he of the one-handed hesitation jump shot, and Happy Hairston of Los Angeles Laker and Miller Lite Beer fame. (His was one of the best commercials, the one where he's spinning a ball on his finger in a bar, removes his hand, and the ball continues to spin)

From the Wikipedia on Hairston:

In 1971-72, Hairston grabbed 1,045 while his teammate Wilt Chamberlain pulled down 1,572. This remains the only time any two NBA teammates have grabbed more than 1,000 rebounds in the same season. He led the Lakers in both rebounds and field goal percentage during the 1973-74 and 1974-75 seasons, and set an NBA record for most defensive rebounds in a quarter with 13 (vs. the Philadelphia 76ers, November 15, 1974).

During his 11 seasons in the NBA, Hairston averaged 14.8 points and 10.3 rebounds.

After his retirement in 1975, Hairston established the Happy Hairston Youth Foundation in Century City. With financial help from celebrities like Kelsey Grammer, the foundation found bright children from broken homes and paid for their college education. He also hosted a celebrity golf tournament.

Hairston died at the age of 58 in Los Angeles from complications due to prostate cancer.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 19, 2006, 07:20:55 PM

Big matchup as #6 Wittenberg and #7 Ohio Northern battle it out tonight

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 19, 2006, 09:13:59 PM

ONU wins 68-51. Polar Bears had the lead pretty much the whole game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 19, 2006, 09:42:07 PM

FINALLY, Top 25 rankings appear to be working on the daily scoreboard pages.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njlincolnlion on December 20, 2006, 02:03:16 PM

Ralph:

Lincoln will get back the five players in January (hopefully sooner) which should get them back on track, the flip side playing North Central without the "five" could add an additional loss on the Lions record.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 21, 2006, 12:19:53 AM

Final: Cal Baptist 94 #1 Wooster 89

Wooster was beaten on the road by a big NAIA Division I team tonight. Wooster hung in this game and only trailed by 3 points with one minute left before the Lancers made the clinching free throws on their home floor. Scots were led by Tom Port with 21 points, James Cooper with 20 points and Devin Fulk with 15 points.

Cal Baptist was led by big 6'9" Andrew Bruckner with 24 points, 6'7" Mark Roussin with 19 points, Junior Denson with 18 points and Jemell Swafford with 13 points. 6'9" Andrew Bruckner is 270 lbs and is a Division I transfer from UC Irvine. Wooster had no answer for the big guy.

Wooster is now 9-1. Next up is Ohio Northern on 12/29.

GO SCOTS!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 21, 2006, 01:57:25 AM

I guess the next question is this.... does a loss to a good NAIA team drop Woo from the top spot in the nation?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 21, 2006, 02:49:26 AM

Good question. It's not like Cal Baptist is unbeatable, like when Calvin went west and played Biola and Azusa Pacific in 1999-2000.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 21, 2006, 07:14:05 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 21, 2006, 02:49:26 AM
Good question. It's not like Cal Baptist is unbeatable, like when Calvin went west and played Biola and Azusa Pacific in 1999-2000.

It's a little hard to get a read on just how good Cal Baptist is by GSAC standards. While I doubt that they're up to the level of those Biola and Azusa Pacific teams of seven years ago, the Lancers did take Pepperdine to overtime in a preseason exhibition, and they played D2 CSU-Stanislaus tough a couple of weeks ago. On the other hand, while I'm wary of doing the comparative-scores thing, I should also point out that Cal Baptist lost to a Concordia (OR) team that was in turn beaten by a nothing-special squad out of the NWC, Willamette (3-6, 0-2). Plus, the Cal Baptist website explicitly refers to the win over Wooster as an upset and uses the adjective "stunning" to describe the victory. The implication in the article is that Wooster's wins over three nationally-ranked NAIA teams counts for much in Cal Baptist's estimation of their foe; reading the game story (headlined rather ridiculously, "When the Wooster crows"), one gets the distinct impression that Wooster's resume led the Lancers supporters to think that this game was going to be an uphill battle for their team.

All in all, it's hard for anyone who hasn't seen Cal Baptist to say just how difficult a test they present by D3 standards. I'm sure that the Lancers are good, but how good? Answer that, if you can, and you'll be able to answer the question of how this should affect Wooster in the next Top 25 poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 21, 2006, 08:09:05 AM

The GSAC is one to the top 2 or 3 NAIA D1 leagues. I've seen two Illinois Wesleyan games vs Westmont College on holiday trips. In 1997, IWU's national championship team defeated Westmont by 8. Last year IWU won by 18 while ranked #1 in Division III. Both times I left very impressed with the talent level at Westmont, and I believe those Westmont teams both finished middle of the GSAC pack.

I don't know anything about Cal Baptist's 2006-07 team, but on paper it was probably a game a lot like IWU's last year vs Westmont. Going into that one I looked at it like a road game vs a CCIW contender -- it was going to be tough, but one the #1 team in the nation should win. (Westmont was not quite as good as the 4 teams that made the CCIW conference tourney last year, but just a notch behind.) IWU played well in that game and handled Westmont on their floor. I am guessing Wooster had a little bit of an off-night and Cal Baptist played well. It was probably an upset, but not anything to get too worked up over.

Now, if Cal Baptist goes on to win the GSAC or maybe even finish 2nd, I'll change my tune to say Wooster was not really even favored to win the game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on December 21, 2006, 10:02:14 AM

Like Titan Q said, it's really too early to determine how much of an upset it was, if it was an upset at all. A couple of things Wooster can take from this loss is that they won't be facing a 6'9" 270 lb. Div I transfer the rest of the season. And another is that this loss doesn't exhist in the eyes of the NCAA so it doesn't really hurt them in terms of when seedings for the tournament are handed out.

As for the #1 ranking, I wouldn't be surpised to see Amherst take over as the #1 team. They are undefeated after all. It's just a matter of how far Wooster will drop IMO. Do they just swap places with Amherst or does Va. Wes. pass them as well. After all, their only loss is looking better and better the more Averett keeps winning.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 21, 2006, 11:43:39 AM

I am not blown away by Averett. There's a lot of road in that league, back to back road games on weekends. And their leading scorer broke his hand and is out for at least another four weeks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 21, 2006, 12:28:00 PM

Let's not get too far ahead of ourselves here. Pat, please correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't expect that there will be a new poll this Tuesday. That's been the tradition in the past, not to have a poll on the Tuesday nearest Christmas. If so, the next poll would be released on or about Jan. 2 and include games played up to and including Dec. 31. Between now and then, Wooster will have played #7 Ohio Northern as well as either Calvin or UW-La Crosse; Amherst will have played at Trinity (TX); Va. Wesleyan will have played two tough games in Belton, TX; #4 St. Thomas will have played La Crosse; #5 Stevens Point will have played #9 Augustana; and so on. There's a lot of good hoops left before we have to take up the debate of who's number 1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 21, 2006, 02:24:28 PM

Top 25 games, 12/18-25:

#1 Wooster (9-1) lost at Cal Baptist 94-89
#2 Amherst (8-0) is idle
#3 Virginia Wesleyan (7-1) is idle
#4 St. Thomas (6-1) lost to UW-La Crosse 62-54
#5 UW-Stevens Point (9-0) plays at Regis (CO) Sat.
#6 Wittenberg (7-2) lost at #7 Ohio Northern 68-51 and won at Otterbein 79-72
#7 Ohio Northern (8-1) def. #6 Wittenberg 68-51
#8 Whitworth (10-0) is idle
#9 Augustana (9-1) def. Rckford 78-44
#10 William Paterson (8-1) plays at CCNY Sat.
#11 Mississippi College (7-1) def. Tex. Lutheran 77-53
#12 Averett (9-0) def. Marymount 88-72
#13 Johns Hopkins (9-0) is idle
#14 Lawrence (4-3) lost at UW-Oshkosh 88-75
#15 Puget Sound (8-1) plays at Chapman today
#16 Bates (8-0) is idle
#17 Wheaton (IL) (5-3) is idle
#18 Carthage (8-1) def. Olivet 82-63 and Marietta 82-51, both at Las Vegas
#19 Hope (6-2) def. Purdue-North Central 88-79
#20 Chicago (7-1) is idle
#21 UW-Platteville (6-2) is idle
#22 DePauw (8-1) won at Kenyon 53-52
#23 NYU (7-0) is idle
#24 North Central (5-3) won at Benedictine 74-54, lost to Lincoln 75-53 at Orlando, and plays Gwynedd-Mercy Fri. in Orlando
#25 Christopher Newport (5-3) lost to John Carroll 92-71 and plays Fisk today, both in Greensboro NC

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 21, 2006, 02:35:45 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 21, 2006, 12:28:00 PM
Let's not get too far ahead of ourselves here. Pat, please correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't expect that there will be a new poll this Tuesday. That's been the tradition in the past, not to have a poll on the Tuesday nearest Christmas. If so, the next poll would be released on or about Jan. 2 and include games played up to and including Dec. 31. Between now and then, Wooster will have played #7 Ohio Northern as well as either Calvin or UW-La Crosse; Amherst will have played at Trinity (TX); Va. Wesleyan will have played two tough games in Belton, TX; #4 St. Thomas will have played La Crosse; #5 Stevens Point will have played #9 Augustana; and so on. There's a lot of good hoops left before we have to take up the debate of who's number 1.

The UMHB tourney should be a good one. Ripon is the 4th. UMHB plays well at home and they have a beautiful new facility (http://www.umhb.edu/athletics/cbasketball/facilities.html).

HSU is "dinged up". Dinkins and Peters are out, and Zach Pickelman is playing with a hurt wrist.

VWC can show us what it takes to get to Salem.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 21, 2006, 02:39:37 PM

Just saw this posted in the NESCAC room:

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 21, 2006, 01:23:39 AM
The next vote is scheduled for release Jan. 3.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 21, 2006, 03:23:08 PM

Wooster would still be my #1 if I had to submit a ballot today.

As a voter, the team I am struggling with is Amherst. I have a hard time considering them for #1 with the schedule they've played so far. Take out Brandeis, and the other 7 are a combined 19-42.

Not saying Amherst isn't a #1 caliber team, but I feel like I have no way to verify that right now. Several unranked teams I have seen - like Wash U, Elmhurst, UW-Whitewater, and Illinois Wesleyan - could be 8-0 with that schedule. I know Brandeis is tough, but I think the four I mentioned above could beat them at home.

http://www.d3hoops.com/school_info.php?school=Amherst&team=m

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 21, 2006, 09:47:51 PM

Top 25 scores post (above) has been updated to reflect these scores:

UW-La Crosse 62
at #4 St. Thomas 54

#6 Wittenberg 79
at Otterbein 72

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 21, 2006, 10:36:48 PM

Congrats to Coach Koelbl and crew!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 21, 2006, 11:02:14 PM

Isaac Rosefelt did not dress for the Tommies tonight.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 21, 2006, 11:04:58 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 21, 2006, 11:02:14 PM
Isaac Rosefelt did not dress for the Tommies tonight.

I understand that Rosefelt is a key part of the Tommie's success. But, I don't think that should taint La Crosse's win in Minnesota tonight. You play with who you got. :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 21, 2006, 11:06:14 PM

Well, that's fine and all, but the fact remains that it wasn't St. Thomas' full squad by far and thinking that UWL beat the fourth-best team in the country is a little misleading. The squad that took the floor tonight was considerably less than that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 21, 2006, 11:09:30 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 21, 2006, 11:06:14 PM
Well, that's fine and all, but the fact remains that it wasn't St. Thomas' full squad by far and thinking that UWL beat the fourth-best team in the country is a little misleading. The squad that took the floor tonight was considerably less than that.

I'm not going to argue much, Pat, but ONE guy sits out and it's not their full squad BY FAR?...or am I missing something and others sat out?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 21, 2006, 11:21:08 PM

When one guy averages 16.7 points, 11.2 boards and 3.0 blocks, you tell me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: woosterbooster on December 21, 2006, 11:35:37 PM

Quote from: Old School on December 21, 2006, 11:04:58 PMYou play with who you got. :P

The original line didn't hold water when Donald Rumsfeld said it, and the paraphrase is leaky also. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on December 21, 2006, 11:41:01 PM

I think Greensboro Men is deserving of one vote this week. I mean #25 couldn't beat the two teams Greensboro went ahead and beat this weekend. I am not going to sit there and argue it. They may not have played anybody, but like I said #25 couldn't do it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 21, 2006, 11:45:07 PM

It's a great argument for up-again-down-again CNU going down again. It's not a great argument on its own for Greensboro getting a vote, though -- you might be better with Greensboro arguing on its own merits rather than trying to compare it to CNU.

Gboro has two more games before we vote next.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 21, 2006, 11:56:33 PM

OS,

This ain't the fball boards anymore, where 'one guy' (with the OCCASIONAL exception of a qb or rb) makes no big difference. Think Indiana State (they were the whole team, except for Larry Bird) or Navy (hey, they had everyone except David Robinson)! St. Thomas without Rosefelt just isn't St. Thomas!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 22, 2006, 12:08:30 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 21, 2006, 11:21:08 PM
When one guy averages 16.7 points, 11.2 boards and 3.0 blocks, you tell me.

Yet he still isn't the leading scorer on the team! lol. :o

It looks like Mike Keating is an "alright" player as well. 16.0 pts/gm and 10.4 reb./gm. Not to mention Schnettler chipping in 20.3 a game! :D It's not like they didn't have other options.

No big deal. Like I said, I don't know much about St. Thomas anyway...I'm done arguing La Crosse's win! ;D

I guess I could argue someone's future win over Point as "misleading" if Jon Krull didn't play...but he leads the team in points (16.3), rebounds (5.9) and assists (32 total). ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: woosterbooster on December 22, 2006, 01:03:57 AM

Rosefelt was a first-team NABC (National Association of Basketball Coaches) All-American as a junior. DIII Hoops second team. The guy is good, and St. Thomas misses quite a bit if he's not suited up.

http://www.stthomas.edu/tommies/shared/shownews.cfm?ArticleID=4122

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 22, 2006, 03:19:27 AM

Quote from: Old School on December 22, 2006, 12:08:30 AM
I guess I could argue someone's future win over Point as "misleading" if Jon Krull didn't play

Sure. That's just reality.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on December 22, 2006, 09:32:20 AM

Pat-

Well one thing can be certain Gboro only lost came to a very underatted Guilford team. They beat a very good John Carroll team. That is about it.

On the issue of stats. I know of one school in the south where stats are very misleading. (I saw it on the women's side) A team could have 18 steals but the other team only has 8 TO's :o

9-0 Johns Hopkins IMO is very overrated is about as overratted as Duke (sorry I am not a Duke fan, so take that statement coming from someone who despises Duke) I just don't know how Duke can lose pretty much all their playmakers on offense and be ranked as high as they are. They are really sloppy out there. I think ACC will not be kind to them.

On the issue of JH I don't know how a team with 178 TO's can be 9-0. Either the teams they played aren't very good. Or they somehow can capitalize on what they have. I think its the former, because only 3 out of the 9 teams they play currently have winning records. I thouht some sort of strength of schdeule was used in the polling. That is just my opinion.

(This is an arguement of overrated JH. This is not an arguement of the who should be in the Top 25.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on December 22, 2006, 09:49:42 AM

I'll put in my opinion on the whole Rosefelt issue. First and foremost I want to say that it was a very good win for UW-Lax. On the road at St. Thomas and coming into this game in almost a must win mode considering the 2 games they have looming on the schedule in the Mose Hole. They got the job done against a good basketball team.

I do feel, however, that they caught a break by catching the Tommies without their AA Rosefelt. Not only did St. Thomas miss Rosefelt on the offensive end, they missed his presense on the defensive end as well. I'm sure Joe Werner didn't mind not seeing Rosefelt on the floor as he seemed to have a pretty good night on the offensive end scoring 21 points on 8-14 shooting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 22, 2006, 09:51:14 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 22, 2006, 03:19:27 AM
Quote from: Old School on December 22, 2006, 12:08:30 AM
I guess I could argue someone's future win over Point as "misleading" if Jon Krull didn't play

Sure. That's just reality.

The win is on the LAX schedule no matter who played, so it's a good win for them. However, who are you picking if they meet again at full strength? That's the real question.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 22, 2006, 09:51:39 AM

Top 25 games, 12/18-25 (updated):

#1 Wooster (9-1) lost at Cal Baptist 94-89
#2 Amherst (8-0) is idle
#3 Virginia Wesleyan (7-1) is idle
#4 St. Thomas (6-1) lost to UW-La Crosse 62-54
#5 UW-Stevens Point (9-0) is idle (their game at Regis (CO) Sat. has been cancelled)
#6 Wittenberg (7-2) lost at #7 Ohio Northern 68-51 and won at Otterbein 79-72
#7 Ohio Northern (8-1) def. #6 Wittenberg 68-51
#8 Whitworth (10-0) is idle
#9 Augustana (9-1) def. Rockford 78-44
#10 William Paterson (8-1) plays at CCNY Sat.
#11 Mississippi College (7-1) def. Tex. Lutheran 77-53
#12 Averett (9-0) def. Marymount 88-72
#13 Johns Hopkins (9-0) is idle
#14 Lawrence (4-3) lost at UW-Oshkosh 88-75
#15 Puget Sound (9-1) won at Chapman 117-111 (OT)
#16 Bates (8-0) is idle
#17 Wheaton (IL) (5-3) is idle
#18 Carthage (8-1) def. Olivet 82-63 and Marietta 82-51, both at Las Vegas
#19 Hope (6-2) def. Purdue-North Central 88-79
#20 Chicago (7-1) is idle
#21 UW-Platteville (6-2) is idle
#22 DePauw (8-1) won at Kenyon 53-52
#23 NYU (7-0) is idle
#24 North Central (5-3) won at Benedictine 74-54, lost to Lincoln 75-53 at Orlando, and def. Gwynedd-Mercy 66-44 in Orlando
#25 Christopher Newport (5-4) lost to John Carroll 92-71 and lost to Fisk 72-71, both in Greensboro NC

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 22, 2006, 12:38:32 PM

Sure got a lot of response and conversation going with this topic! I'll have to argue more!

BTW, after the suspensions of FIVE Lincoln players (any of those starters), Lincoln still went out and smoked North Central by 20 or so...what are the thoughts on that? I was just curious since losing five players and possibly some starters must have had some kind effect on their team, and yets they beat a ranked North Central team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 22, 2006, 12:39:52 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 22, 2006, 09:51:14 AM
However, who are you picking if they meet again at full strength? That's the real question.

And that's the one that's most close to what I would consider with a Top 25 vote.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Downtown on December 22, 2006, 12:44:56 PM

I think with St. Thomas losing to La Crosse is just another example of how strong the WIAC is this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njlincolnlion on December 22, 2006, 02:02:52 PM

Old School:

Two of the "Lincoln Five" were starters, and two were key reserves.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 22, 2006, 02:13:57 PM

Quote from: Old School on December 22, 2006, 12:38:32 PM
Sure got a lot of response and conversation going with this topic! I'll have to argue more!

BTW, after the suspensions of FIVE Lincoln players (any of those starters), Lincoln still went out and smoked North Central by 20 or so...what are the thoughts on that? I was just curious since losing five players and possibly some starters must have had some kind effect on their team, and yets they beat a ranked North Central team.

North Central has really struggled in the non-conference season. After being picked to win the CCIW in the preseason coaches poll, the Cardinals have lost 3 games -- at home to Aurora by 16, on a neutral court to a bad NAIA Harris-Stowe team by 9, and the recent blowout at the hands of Lincoln.

North Central has a fantastic returning frontline - led by Daniel Walton and D3hoops.com preseason All-American Anthony Simmons - but they lost their backcourt from last year. They started the year going with two very average seniors at the guard spots but they've already made the switch to their two really promising freshmen guards. NCC will probably be a very good team at some point this season, but they're still finding their way right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 22, 2006, 02:40:58 PM

Should be another fun year of following the CCIW. The best 4 in the non-conference have been:

#9 Augustana (9-1) - home win by 2 over Wash U, blowout loss @ NAIA St. Ambrose
#17 Carthage (8-1) - wins over Hope, Calvin, and Lawrence
#18 Wheaton (5-3) - D3 losses to #8 Whitworth and #20 Chicago, 2-pt loss @ Northwestern, wins over Hope and Calvin
RV Elmhurst (8-1) - wins over UW-Oshkosh and UW-Whitewater

North Central (5-3) is current #24, but will probably fall out in the next poll. Illinois Wesleyan (6-4) has lost to 3 good Division III teams (Ohio Wesleyan, Wash U, and Chicago) and has pretty good wins @ UW-Whitewater and @ Hanover. IWU should keep getting better as the season progresses. North Park (8-3) is much improved and appears poised to give everyone trouble, especially at home. Millikin (5-4) looks like the #8 team right now, but there is a lot of talent on the Big Blue roster. They're trying to work a lot of freshmen in right now.

I think Augustana is overrated at #9 -- I believe the CCIW's top four this year (whoever those turn out to be) all belong in the 15-25 range. I'm sticking with my theory that the CCIW doesn't really have a Top 10-type team this year - it may have had 4 last year - but there is a ton of parity.

Augustana plays @ #9 UW-Stevens Point on 12/30. Augie has been without their 6-9/230 center Dain Swetella for the last 3 games and sounds like he won't play vs UW-SP.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 22, 2006, 05:09:23 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 22, 2006, 02:40:58 PM
Augustana plays @ #9 UW-Stevens Point on 12/30. Augie has been without their 6-9/230 center Dain Swetella for the last 3 games and sounds like he won't play vs UW-SP.

Very nice review on the CCIW "preseason" schedule, Titan. ;D :D I might come up with something for th WIAC.

Anyway, if that center plays, that would be a big boost to Augie's chances. Point is very small along the front line, but we do have plenty of players to throw at the big guys in the middle. We have been able to limit most opposing big guys thus far and Krull has done an excellent job containing them...offensively, it's a lot easier for Krull if he doesn't have to shoot over some guy like 7 footer Gibson or get bumped around like I heard he did a little against a monster like Werner.

From what I remember, Brian Schmitting from Ripon was the only big guy to really have his way.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dansand on December 22, 2006, 06:43:06 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 22, 2006, 02:40:58 PM
Augustana plays @ #9 UW-Stevens Point on 12/30. Augie has been without their 6-9/230 center Dain Swetella for the last 3 games and sounds like he won't play vs UW-SP.

Q,
Dain was dressed and, according to what I heard, could've played Wednesday against Rockford (which would have been pointless). With another nine days of rest I would think he'd be ready to go against the Pointers. If he is, the bigger question is how well will he play. He hasn't had a very good year so far. If he plays the way he's capable and they can get Oliver Rorer back healthy I don't think Top Ten is out of the question, but I would have to agree with you, I definitely don't think they're the 9th best team in the country right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on December 23, 2006, 02:57:37 PM

IMHO there is NO WAY Augie is the #9 team in the country currently. Dan is correct.

LOOK at the teams they have beaten.
St. Norbert, Beloit, Clarke, Cornell, & Rockford are all very bad to terrible. They have a combined 9 wins!

Simpson & Wartburg are a combined 1 game over .500.

Washington & Coe are the only decent teams they have beaten, and most CCIW fans would tell you those wins should have been expected even though both teams have a very good record to date.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 23, 2006, 03:03:32 PM

Agreed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on December 23, 2006, 03:17:38 PM

With regard to the above posts concerning the LaCrosse win over St. Thomas-----

I saw Rosefelt play last year, and would say he was probably the single best player I saw the entire season. This includes seeing the CCIW's predominant studs several times. I submit that assessment is supported by his selection this season as a FIRST TEAM pre-season All-American.

While its true that "you play with whats available," I feel that should Rosefelt have been available, the odds that the outcome would have been a LaCrosse victory, would have been veryyyy long indeed.

It was certainly a good win for LaCrosse. I do think it was fortunate they caught St. Thomas on the particular night they did.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 24, 2006, 10:08:38 AM

Top 25 games, 12/18-24 (complete):

#1 Wooster (9-1) lost at Cal Baptist 94-89
#2 Amherst (8-0) is idle
#3 Virginia Wesleyan (7-1) is idle
#4 St. Thomas (6-1) lost to UW-La Crosse 62-54
#5 UW-Stevens Point (9-0) is idle (their game at Regis (CO) Sat. was cancelled)
#6 Wittenberg (7-2) lost at #7 Ohio Northern 68-51 and won at Otterbein 79-72
#7 Ohio Northern (8-1) def. #6 Wittenberg 68-51
#8 Whitworth (10-0) is idle
#9 Augustana (9-1) def. Rockford 78-44
#10 William Paterson (8-1) won at CCNY 63-51
#11 Mississippi College (7-1) def. Tex. Lutheran 77-53
#12 Averett (9-0) def. Marymount 88-72
#13 Johns Hopkins (9-0) is idle
#14 Lawrence (4-3) lost at UW-Oshkosh 88-75
#15 Puget Sound (9-1) won at Chapman 117-111 (OT)
#16 Bates (8-0) is idle
#17 Wheaton (IL) (5-3) is idle
#18 Carthage (8-1) def. Olivet 82-63 and Marietta 82-51, both at Las Vegas
#19 Hope (6-2) def. Purdue-North Central 88-79
#20 Chicago (7-1) is idle
#21 UW-Platteville (6-2) is idle
#22 DePauw (8-1) won at Kenyon 53-52
#23 NYU (7-0) is idle
#24 North Central (5-3) won at Benedictine 74-54, lost to Lincoln 75-53 at Orlando, and def. Gwynedd-Mercy 66-44 in Orlando
#25 Christopher Newport (5-4) lost to John Carroll 92-71 and lost to Fisk 72-71, both in Greensboro NC

Happy Holidays!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 24, 2006, 07:08:08 PM

Through four weeks

TEAM	Tot. Pts.	Pre	Week 1	Week 2	Week 3	Week 4
Wooster	2996	538	594	620	622	622
Virg Wesleyan	2880	623	623	521	548	565
Amherst	2822	512	553	581	590	586
St. Thomas	2369	310	457	518	541	543
Ohio Northern	2332	397	510	560	431	434
Wittenberg	2204	298	461	506	471	468
Stevens Point	1997	122	320	481	537	537
William Paterson	1502	355	239	237	317	354
Whitworth	1422	57	168	353	420	424
Lawrence	1370	241	200	341	355	233
Augustana	1310	126	256	243	320	365
Mississippi College	1287	289	143	230	303	322
Hope	1087	237	484	116	100	150
Lincoln	972	216	308	253	178	17
Whitewater	850	406	325	105	10	4
Johns Hopkins	813	41	93	153	259	267
Bates	808	83	110	187	205	223
Baldwin-Wallace	808	363	282	70	53	40
Puget Sound	789	141	97	128	198	225
Calvin	778	347	311	64	19	37
North Central	739	182	273	151	63	70
Randolph-Macon	720	231	291	198	N/A	N/A
Platteville	690	21	60	211	264	134
Averett	685	N/A	15	141	243	286
Oshkosh	580	87	160	218	63	52
Wheaton (IL)	542	35	46	106	143	212
Christopher Newport	421	191	34	59	68	69
DePauw	398	45	59	86	82	126
Occidental	357	178	68	40	28	43
Tufts	328	251	33	13	12	19
Aurora	323	11	22	108	154	28
La Crosse	313	93	8	66	123	23
Carthage	313	N/A	N/A	52	69	192
Chicago	297	11	19	37	89	141
Carroll	262	203	42	17	N/A	N/A
Hampden-Sydney	255	160	46	49	N/A	N/A
Maryville (TN)	173	135	27	11	N/A	N/A
New York Univ.	163	N/A	N/A	32	59	72
Rochester	162	62	37	37	13	13
Gordon	160	57	40	50	13	N/A
Ill. Wesleyan	149	63	69	17	N/A	N/A
Brandeis	134	N/A	1	29	54	50
Washington U.	118	3	7	29	38	41
Worc. Poly	114	49	12	11	20	22
Ohio Wesleyan	83	11	17	47	4	4
Utica	80	26	18	12	12	12
Rhode Island C.	67	1	36	7	9	14
York (NY)	64	N/A	64	N/A	N/A	N/A
Catholic	64	28	32	4	N/A	N/A
Transylvania	52	51	1	N/A	N/A	N/A
Elmhurst	45	16	N/A	N/A	N/A	29
York (Pa)	32	31	1	N/A	N/A	N/A
Hamilton	29	8	9	12	N/A	N/A
Gust. Adolph.	27	27	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
St. John Fish.	26	26	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Widener	24	24	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Salem St.	24	4	3	1	4	12
Buena Vista	24	23	1	N/A	N/A	N/A
Ramapo	21	N/A	2	N/A	9	10
Rutgers-Newark	19	N/A	N/A	N/A		19
Coe	18	11	6	1	N/A	N/A
Guilford	17	N/A	N/A		3	14
Stout	15	6	9	N/A	N/A	N/A
Mary Hard-Bay.	15	15	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Clare.-Mudd-Scr	14	14	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Mass-Boston	12	12	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Southwestern	11	N/A	11	N/A	N/A	N/A
Keene St.	9	N/A	N/A	5	3	1
New Jersey City	8	1	7	N/A	N/A	N/A
Ursinus	7	7	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Manchester	6	N/A	5	1	N/A	N/A
John Carroll	5	N/A	N/A	N/A	5	N/A
Hardin-Simmons	5	5	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Cortland St.	4	4	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
SUNY-Farmingdale	2	2	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Bluffton	2	N/A	N/A	N/A	1	1
Williams	1	1	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
King's	1	1	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 24, 2006, 09:24:11 PM

Small correction, Old School -- Bluffton has received one point in each of the last two polls, not 1+4, so they should be down with SUNY-Farmingdale.

(Good heavens, am I really posting on Christmas Eve? How pathetic is that ...)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 24, 2006, 10:18:00 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 24, 2006, 09:24:11 PM
Small correction, Old School -- Bluffton has received one point in each of the last two polls, not 1+4, so they should be down with SUNY-Farmingdale.

(Good heavens, am I really posting on Christmas Eve? How pathetic is that ...)

Not sure where I came up with that, on excel, I had it right, not sure how that happened...anyway, not only are you posting on Christmas Eve, you're correcting MY posts! lol :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 25, 2006, 10:47:41 AM

Top 25 games, 12/25-31 -- LOTS of holiday tournaments (UPDATED with Friday's results):

#1 Wooster (9-2) lost to Ohio Northern 91-84 and hosts Calvin Sat.
#2 Amherst (8-0) is at Trinity (TX) Sun.
#3 Virginia Wesleyan (7-2) lost at Mary Hardin-Baylor 63-62 and plays Hardin-Simmons Sat., at UMHB
#4 St. Thomas (7-1) def. St. Scholastica 82-76 and plays UW-River Falls Sat, both at River Falls
#5 UW-Stevens Point (9-1) lost at Northern Michigan 101-92 and hosts #9 Augustana Sat.
#6 Wittenberg (8-2) def. York (NY) 69-62 and hosts IU-Southeast Sat.
#7 Ohio Northern (9-1) won at Wooster 91-84 and plays UW-La Crosse Sat., both at Wooster
#8 Whitworth (10-0) is idle
#9 Augustana (9-1) plays at #5 UW-Stevens Point Sat.
#10 William Paterson (9-1) is idle
#11 Mississippi College (8-1) def Johns Hopkins 75-51 and plays Westmont (CA) Sat. at Westmont
#12 Averett (9-0) is idle
#13 Johns Hopkins (9-1) lost to Mississippi College 75-51 and plays Thomas More Sat. at Westmont (CA)
#14 Lawrence (5-3) def. Allegheny 69-57 and def. Ursinus 70-65, both at Daytona Beach
#15 Puget Sound (9-1) is idle (lost exhibition to Simon Fraser 101-93)
#16 Bates (8-0) is idle
#17 Wheaton (IL) (6-3) def. Nazareth 94-89 (OT) and plays Rivier Sat., both at Staten Island
#18 Carthage (8-1) plays at Lewis Sat.
#19 Hope (7-2) def. Trinity Christian 69-53 and hosts Rochester (MI) Sat.
#20 Chicago (7-2) lost to Coe 70-67 and hosts Cornell (IA) Sat.
#21 UW-Platteville (7-2) def. Richard Stockton 64-51 and plays Randolph-Macon Sat., both at R-MC
#22 DePauw (9-1) def. U. of Dallas 104-78 and plays Hamilton Sat. at Tampa
#23 NYU (8-0) def. SUNY-Old Westbury 85-55 and hosts Clark Sat.
#24 North Central (IL) (6-3) def. Albion 69-58 and plays at Judson (IL) Sat.
#25 Christopher Newport (6-4) def. Fisk 86-74 and hosts Oswego St. Sat.

Happy New Year! :)

It's entirely possible that I've lost track of the won-loss records, so I appreciate any and all corrections! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 25, 2006, 05:14:17 PM

Thanks OS. Although Gordon getting more points thus far than IWU makes me laugh. I'm sure Joe Hakes is loving that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 28, 2006, 02:56:28 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 25, 2006, 05:14:17 PM

Thanks OS. Although Gordon getting more points thus far than IWU makes me laugh. I'm sure Joe Hakes is loving that.

I hear that Joe asked OS to send him that Excel file so that he could use it as his office PC's screensaver. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gccfan on December 28, 2006, 05:59:14 PM

I'm looking forward to seeing how the Mississippi College-JHU game turns out. I think the Choctaws are a very strong team that should be poised for a longer run in the tournament this year after what I thought was a disappointing loss in the Sweet 16 last year. JHU better take care of the ball or it could be a long night. Another note from the ASC, is there any chance that UT-Dallas might start receiving some votes? They have started the season 10-0 and have really only had 1 or 2 close games thus far. I think they could possibly give MC a good run at the ASC championship this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 28, 2006, 06:38:13 PM

Quote from: gccfan on December 28, 2006, 05:59:14 PM
I'm looking forward to seeing how the Mississippi College-JHU game turns out. I think the Choctaws are a very strong team that should be poised for a longer run in the tournament this year after what I thought was a disappointing loss in the Sweet 16 last year. JHU better take care of the ball or it could be a long night. Another note from the ASC, is there any chance that UT-Dallas might start receiving some votes? They have started the season 10-0 and have really only had 1 or 2 close games thus far. I think they could possibly give MC a good run at the ASC championship this year.

I too am looking forward to the MC-JHU game. "Six degrees of Kevin Bacon" places JHU beating Rowan by 2 and Immaculata by 13. McMurry lost to Rowan by 5 and beat Immaculata by 14. McMurry lost to MC by 16, but 2 days later, MC only beats HSU by 2. ??? For you non-ASC fans, the Abilene road trip is always tough. Miss Coll probably left on Wednesday, rode 650 miles by bus, and played their rival McM on Thursday. (McMurry and MissColl have the 2 best records in the ASC over the last 10 years.) The Choctaws were up for the McMurry game. Pat Coleman talks about how Coach Jones lit a fire under the Choctaws (http://www.d3hoops.com/dailydose/?p=213#comments). Two more nights in Abilene can wear a team down, and then MC had to play the pre-season ASC-West favorite HSU on Saturday.

gccfan is right about the exposure for the Choctaws and the ASC. I really wonder how this game will come out! Go Choctaws! Play like you are in the Golden Dome back in Clinton!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 28, 2006, 06:42:28 PM

#5 Stevens Point loses to D-2 Northern Michigan this afternoon 101-92. I'm not sure the last time that Point let up over 100 pts, it's been a VERY long time...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 28, 2006, 06:47:23 PM

gcc, I think that UT-Dallas needs to sweep the Abilene road trip over McMurry and HSU to certify its "Top 25 worthiness".

I think that the ASC is a solid second tier conference. Lots of very good teams that can make some noise, but everyone is waiting for that breaktrhu season. The ASC best is almost definitely Top 25, but the next 2-4 teams are somewhere between Top 40 and Top 60.

For the sake of the Top 25 then, "if yew ain't Top 25, then yew ain't (excrement)!" ;) I think that UT-Dallas breaks in solidly, when they are at least 21-2 with losses only to D-1 UT-Arlington and MissCollege on the road!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gccfan on December 28, 2006, 07:39:09 PM

Thanks Ralph, even though I'm not a UTD fan, I'm hoping they run the table like that to give the ASC a little more exposure.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 29, 2006, 09:28:40 PM

Final from Wooster:

Ohio Northern 91
Wooster 84

Real nice job by Pat and Jared on the D3hoops.com call. Great game to listen to.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hoopstar on December 29, 2006, 09:35:43 PM

#11 Miss. College 46

#13 John Hopkins 21

17 minutes remain

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bouttime on December 29, 2006, 09:36:34 PM

With back to back wins over Witt and Wooster, does Ohio Northern get serious consideration for the #1 spot? I believe they do and with at win tomorrow against UW-Lacrosse, they will be the #1 team in the land.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: chocsrock34 on December 29, 2006, 10:57:32 PM

MC 75-51 final

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 29, 2006, 11:08:20 PM

Quote from: bouttime on December 29, 2006, 09:36:34 PM
With back to back wins over Witt and Wooster, does Ohio Northern get serious consideration for the #1 spot? I believe they do and with at win tomorrow against UW-Lacrosse, they will be the #1 team in the land.

They would have to jump 2 unbeaten teams, one already has 3 first place votes and the other is UW-Stevens Point. I'm not sure they jump Va Wesleyan. Prior to beating Witt and Woo they had lost at home to the only really good team they'd played.

Top 4 for sure

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 29, 2006, 11:10:41 PM

bouttime:

Unless ONU loses tomorrow I think the decision on my ballot will come down to ONU or UW-Stevens Point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on December 29, 2006, 11:15:05 PM

Just posted on the UMHB website...

UMHB 63 Va Wes 62

I thought JHU was overrated and wasn't ready to make much of the Choctaws' win. But there's no downplaying this one. Very big one for the ASC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 29, 2006, 11:26:31 PM

Quote from: sac on December 29, 2006, 11:08:20 PM
Quote from: bouttime on December 29, 2006, 09:36:34 PM
With back to back wins over Witt and Wooster, does Ohio Northern get serious consideration for the #1 spot? I believe they do and with at win tomorrow against UW-Lacrosse, they will be the #1 team in the land.

They would have to jump 2 unbeaten teams, one already has 3 first place votes and the other is UW-Stevens Point. I'm not sure they jump Va Wesleyan. Prior to beating Witt and Woo they had lost at home to the only really good team they'd played.

Top 4 for sure

UW-Stevens Point is no longer undefeated, although I'm not sure that their loss (at D2 Northern Michigan) should count for much.

ONU looked pretty darn good tonight. They still have a tough game tomorrow vs. LaX, Stevens Point hosts a good Augustana team Sat., and Amherst has a toughish one Sunday at Trinity (Tex.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 30, 2006, 12:10:32 AM

Quote from: gordonmann on December 29, 2006, 11:15:05 PM
Just posted on the UMHB website...

UMHB 63 Va Wes 62

I thought JHU was overrated and wasn't ready to make much of the Choctaws' win. But there's no downplaying this one. Very big one for the ASC.

Gordon, the ASC has always been one of those conferences where the teams are so close in talent that they beat each other up and then don't get the notice nationally.

I said the other night that I thought that the ASC-West has four teams that can compete in the Top 40-60 range and 6 in the Top 60 on both sides, but we are usually "going to their place" and so we lose.

I want to see UT-Dallas at D-1 UT-Arlington on the stage (literally at Texas Hall in Arlington) tomorrow night. Yes, the court is actually on the stage!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 30, 2006, 12:17:39 AM

My Dec. 19 ballot was:

1 Wooster
2 Virginia Wesleyan
3 St. Thomas
4 UW-Stevens Point
5 Amherst
6 Mississippi College
7 Whitworth
8 Wittenberg
9 Ohio Northern

This is where it gets tricky as a voter. Sometimes it is hard to talk yourself into moving a team up 6-9 spots from one ballot to the next, but I have always been inclined to make a large "correction" when I feel it is warranted.

In this case, ONU defeated Wittenberg soundly at home (won by 17, led by double digits the final 10:00) and won on the road at Wooster. The win at Wooster is very impressive to me -- Timken is one of the great venues in Division III and this Wooster team is a national title contender. Considering these wins and what has happened above them on my ballot, I am probably with Pat in making my #1 decision between UW-Stevens Point and Ohio Northern, assuming UW-SP beats Augustana, which they should. (ONU's 17 point loss at home to Baldwin-Wallace remains a head scratcher to me, and the reason I had them down to #9, but sometimes you just have to erase a team's worst game and give 'em a mulligan.) UW-SP's loss to a good D2 team is a non-factor to me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 30, 2006, 12:20:54 AM

I have posted before that I'm struggling to evaluate Amherst. I cannot move them into the #1 slot until they play a couple more tough opponents (the home win over Brandeis was good). I don't think a win at this year's 5-5 Trinity (Tx) team will mean too much to me.

UW-Whitewater was rated #4 in the preaseason poll. They are now 6-4 with narrow losses to Illinois Wesleyan, UW-La Crosse, UW-Stevens Point, and Elmhurst. Now let's say instead of playing that schedule so far, UW-Whitewater had played:

vs. New York City Tech
vs. Thomas
at Emmanuel
vs. Western New England
vs. Springfield
at MIT
vs. Brandeis
at Worcester State

My guess is that UW-Whitewater would be undefeated and in the discussion for who is moving to #1 Tuesday. Same players, same team...just a different schedule. And the difference between being ranked #1 and the third from last "receiving votes" team. Conversely, what would Amherst's record, and ranking, be with UW-Whitewater's schedule?

As a voter, I love the teams that play good schedules because even losses can help validate their positioning in the poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 30, 2006, 01:02:03 AM

Nicely analyzed Q. I'm just wondering if the other voters will see the same picture for Amherst as you, especially because they were voted in as second (with three first place votes already). They curretly have 49 more points than SP, and 152 points more than ONU. Now, I really do think that a lot of this will be cleared up tomorrow... it ONU beats La Crosse and Point knocks off Augie, then both teams have added another win against a good team. It makes the decision tough between the two, but ONU's previous loss by double digits at home to Baldwin Wallace may carry some weight, especially because Bald Wally lost their last to 5-4 Edgewood. Now, Edgewood is a bit of an enigma themselves, knocking off Aurora and BW, but...

I'm not looking forward to trying to figure out my poster's poll and it doesn't really "count" for anything!

My question is this... what if UW LaX knocks off ONU? They shoot back into the top 25 for sure, but it's seemed like the Eagles get up for big games and don't for games that aren't so big... I dunno. Loses to Loras an Carleton are a bit of a tarnish on their record, but big wins might offset that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 30, 2006, 01:45:03 AM

And you said you didn't have computer access, Point Special! lol. ;D So far so good on getting your players in the WIAC fantasy league.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 30, 2006, 01:50:10 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 30, 2006, 12:17:39 AM
...ssuming UW-SP beats Augustana, which they should.

What makes you say that? Obviously you know more about Augustana than I do. What kind of team do they have and what are their weaknesses?

Point's real weakness is interior defending...though they've had some good games before. They got shredded at Northern Michigan, granted against a stud D2 6'8" monster, who also launched 3's with no problem, but their overall defense was pretty bad, especially in the middle...does Augie have a big man that can cause problems?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 30, 2006, 09:21:40 AM

Quote from: Old School on December 30, 2006, 01:50:10 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 30, 2006, 12:17:39 AM
...ssuming UW-SP beats Augustana, which they should.

What makes you say that? Obviously you know more about Augustana than I do. What kind of team do they have and what are their weaknesses?

Point's real weakness is interior defending...though they've had some good games before. They got shredded at Northern Michigan, granted against a stud D2 6'8" monster, who also launched 3's with no problem, but their overall defense was pretty bad, especially in the middle...does Augie have a big man that can cause problems?

OS, I'm of the opinion that Augustana is overrated at #9. They're a good, solid team, but much more like a #15 team than top 10. Augie beat unranked Wash U (8-1) by two points at home -- I've seen both teams, and they are dead even as that game would indicate. The Vikings also have a nice 23-point home win over Coe (8-1), but I don't think any of their other wins are all that impressive (St. Norbert, Beloit, @ Simpson, Clarke, @ Cornell, Wartburg, Rockford). And they were absolutely drilled at Quad City rival St. Ambrose (NAIA), 77-54. St. Ambrose (7-7) is a pretty good NAIA II team, but not great. Again, I will use the "What if they had played UW-Whitewater's schedule?" theory -- Augie would have at least a couple more losses and wouldn't be #9.

Augustana starts:

G Drew Wessels, 6-1 Sr. (7.8 ppg, 3.2 ppg, 5.1 apg)
G Jordan Delp, 6-0 Jr. (12.5 ppg, 2.7 rpg)
F Nate Swetella, 6-7 Sr. (8.2 ppg, 3.4 rpg)
F Shaun Rose, 6-6 Sr. (5.1 ppg, 4.6 rpg)
C Dain Swetella*, 6-9 Jr. (9.6 ppg, 4.5 rpg)

* Hasn't played the last 3 games (injury) - I have no idea what his status is today.

Augie has a lot of interchangeable parts off the bench. At the 2-4 spots, they really don't lose much when reserves come in. Senior point-guard Drew Wessels makes them go. He is not a scorer, but rather your protypical ball-handling, offense initiating point-guard...and probably the best on-ball perimeter defender in the CCIW. 6-9 junior center Dain Swetella is better than his stats so far indicate -- he is a pretty solid D3 low post man.

Grey Giovanine's teams are famous for their hard-nosed, pressure defense. Last year Augie opponents had 341 assists and 444 turnovers (0.77 A/T.O.). In 2004-05, it was 313 assists and 449 turnovers (0.70 A/T.O.). They play great man-to-man defense and pressure the heck out of the basketball, wherever it is. It looks like your Pointers are very good at distributing and taking care of the ball though (149 assists, 88 t.o - 1.69), so it is an interesting matchup. Augie won't wow you and they don't really have a star player on this team, but they can usually play with anyone due to their defense. They are kind of one of those "win ugly" teams due to their style.

If UW-Stevens Point is a legit top 5 team, they'll handle Augie today at home. If they do not, the CCIW will have the 2006 calendar year sweep of the WIAC, and you don't want that!

@Elmhurst 98, UW-Whitewater 91 (12/17/06)

@Elmhurst 55, UW-Oshkosh 52 (12/5/06)

IWU 69, @UW-Whitewater 68 OT (11/18/06)

IWU 85, @UW-Whitewater 71 (3/4/06)*

@Augustana 77, UW-Stout 70 (3/4/06)*

* NCAA Tournament

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FisherDynasty on December 30, 2006, 04:23:35 PM

How is St. John Fisher getting no votes for top 25. I know they lost a lot from last year and Im okay with them not being in the top 25 yet but they should be one of the border teams. they are about to be 6-1 with wins over UofR, Geneseo, and York Pa. (all possible ncaa tournament teams) and with past years success they should be getting votes. UofR is getting votes (who fisher beat) and Utica who is in Fishers league but havn't beaten fisher in 5 years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gccfan on December 30, 2006, 07:46:55 PM

Looks like UT-Dallas may have to start getting some votes after beating UT-Arlington today and improving to 11-0.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 30, 2006, 09:14:39 PM

gccfan, I saw UTD tonight. They played a very disciplined well-controlled game. They move the ball well. Martin Salinas was able to hit some early 3 pointers and put UTD up by 7 (19-12) at the 13:08 mark in the first. UTA led 35-34 at the half. Salinas gave Trinity all it could handle 2 years ago in the first round in Trinity's 66-60 win over UT-D. IMHO, he is All-Region at the least.

Jordan Eppink is a very good freshman cneter (6'5" from Spring, TX Houston suburb). He missed some FT's at the end but did not hurt them.

Scott Rodgers from The Woodlands,TX is a 6'1" freshman who came off the bench for 19 points. Rodgers was expecting looks from D1's, but got none and so was convinced to walk onto UT-D team when he arrived on campus this fall. Rodgers got most of his points by taking the backdoor pass down low, I have his being 6-6 on 2FG's, almost all backdoor layups, plus 2 more assists on the backdoor play into the basket. He is very good.

Travis Carruthers is a very heady 5'10" senior PG. He runs the offense very well.

Mike McKee, a 6'2" junior from Houston, seems to pull the major defensive duties.

Ernie Lowrey, 6'1" sophomore from Spring, TX, seems to be the most athletic player on the team.

Brandon Green, a 6'1" Freshman from Houston, came off the bench for 9 points in 14 minutes.

UTD 78, UT-Arlington 76 (http://utamavs.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/stats/2006-2007/uta11.html)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 30, 2006, 10:08:56 PM

Wooster Mose Hole Classic final results:

Consolation Game: Wooster 98 Calvin 82

Wooster was led by James Cooper with 27 points, Tom Port with 20 points and Marty Bidwell with a career high 20 points (7 of 8 from the floor). Devin Fulk also chipped in 14 points. Scots won the boards 44-32 and shot 53.5% from the floor to control this game.

Wooster improves to 10-2 while Calvin drops to 5-5.

Championship Game: Ohio Northern 73 Wisconsin-LaCrosse 70

Greg Badenhop scored a game-high 26 points and earned Tournament MVP honors as the Ohio Northern Polar Bears defeated Wisconsin-LaCrosse 73-70 in the championship game of the Wooster Mose Hole Classic at Timken Gymnasium.

Polar Bears improve to 10-1, while the Eagles fall to 8-4.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on December 30, 2006, 10:13:48 PM

Alright Pat Greensboro is now 9-1 I think they deserve a vote haha :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 30, 2006, 10:40:41 PM

Top 25 games, 12/25-31 -- LOTS of holiday tournaments (final):

#1 Wooster (10-2) lost to Ohio Northern 91-84 and def. Calvin 98-82
#2 Amherst (9-0) won at Trinity (TX) 66-54
#3 Virginia Wesleyan (8-2) lost at Mary Hardin-Baylor 63-62 and def. Hardin-Simmons 67-61 (OT), both at UMHB
#4 St. Thomas (8-1) def. St. Scholastica 82-76 at River Falls and won at UW-River Falls 87-84
#5 UW-Stevens Point (10-1) lost at Northern Michigan 101-92 and def. #9 Augustana 71-68
#6 Wittenberg (9-2) def. York (NY) 69-62 and def. IU-Southeast 78-47
#7 Ohio Northern (10-1) won at Wooster 91-84 and def. UW-La Crosse 73-70 at Wooster
#8 Whitworth (10-0) is idle
#9 Augustana (9-2) lost at #5 UW-Stevens Point 71-68
#10 William Paterson (9-1) is idle
#11 Mississippi College (9-1) def. Johns Hopkins 75-51 at Westmont (CA) and won at Westmont (CA) 81-77
#12 Averett (9-0) is idle
#13 Johns Hopkins (10-1) lost to Mississippi College 75-51 and def. Thomas More 72-50 at Westmont (CA)
#14 Lawrence (6-3) def. Allegheny 69-57 and def. Ursinus 70-65, both at Daytona Beach
#15 Puget Sound (9-1) is idle (lost exhibition to Simon Fraser 101-93)
#16 Bates (8-0) is idle
#17 Wheaton (IL) (7-3) def. Nazareth 94-89 (OT) and def. Rivier 60-44, both at Staten Island
#18 Carthage (8-2) lost at Lewis 78-60
#19 Hope (8-2) def. Trinity Christian 69-53 and def. Rochester (MI) 76-74
#20 Chicago (8-2) lost to Coe 70-67 and def. Cornell (IA) 76-51
#21 UW-Platteville (7-3) def. Richard Stockton 64-51 at Randolph-Macon and lost at Randolph-Macon 68-64
#22 DePauw (9-2) def. U. of Dallas 104-78 and lost to Hamilton 85-77 (OT) at Tampa
#23 NYU (9-0) def. SUNY-Old Westbury 85-55 and def. Clark 74-64
#24 North Central (IL) (8-3) def. Albion 69-58 and won at Judson (IL) 58-49
#25 Christopher Newport (7-4) def. Fisk 86-74 and def. Oswego St. 87-85

Happy New Year! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 30, 2006, 11:04:36 PM

Quote from: FisherDynasty on December 30, 2006, 04:23:35 PM
How is St. John Fisher getting no votes for top 25. I know they lost a lot from last year and Im okay with them not being in the top 25 yet but they should be one of the border teams. they are about to be 6-1 with wins over UofR, Geneseo, and York Pa. (all possible ncaa tournament teams) and with past years success they should be getting votes. UofR is getting votes (who fisher beat) and Utica who is in Fishers league but havn't beaten fisher in 5 years.

They may all be possible NCAA Tournament teams, but with 58 teams in the tournament that doesn't mean they are part of a Top 25 resume.

If you're going to cling to a home, overtime victory over Rochester as a reason for a few votes, that's fine. But if one game is enough, then we'll have to find some votes for Brockport too, right? At least their win at St. John Fisher is a little more decisive.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FisherDynasty on December 30, 2006, 11:37:47 PM

Pat,

All I'm saying is... from previous years success Fisher should get some of the love all of the other big name schools get (not as much because fisher has not won the tournament) but some of it. And not all of the top 25 teams that have 1,2 or even 3 losses have great wins on their resume either, but still get the votes. You can't tell me the top 25 goes strictly on the current seasons schedule (bases solely on solid wins & tough losses). Fishers only loss is to a solid Bport team that may make the tournament as well and they played their best game they will play all season against Fisher. Again, not saying Fisher is as good as past years and will keep up the win streak because they are young and have squeezed some wins out, but just would like to see the program get more respect, since it is one of the best in the region.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on December 31, 2006, 12:32:27 AM

I find it interesting that so many people would jump Teams over Amherst. Two questions:

What have they done to invalidate the #2 ranking?

Why are they number 2 if there are so many teams that are better than they are?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 31, 2006, 12:47:44 AM

What has Amherst done to validate the No. 2 ranking?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 31, 2006, 12:55:29 AM

Quote from: fpc85 on December 31, 2006, 12:32:27 AM
I find it interesting that so many people would jump Teams over Amherst. Two questions:

What have they done to invalidate the #2 ranking?

Why are they number 2 if there are so many teams that are better than they are?

Check Titan Q's post of yesterday (he is one, though only one, of Pat's voters). "What have they done to invalidate the #2 ranking?" - nothing, but, then again, what have they done to validate it? "Why are they number 2 if there are so many teams that are better than they are?" - even by the end of the season, there are SO many teams playing so few games against each other that true confidence in any rankings are pretty much impossible; by THIS point of the season, it inevitably entails a fair amount of speculation on who would beat whom if only they would meet. Obviously some (many) voters do not think 'so many teams' are better (they had 3 #1 votes, and overall finished 2nd!), but, given their schedule so far, I do not find it at all improper to wonder if the would still be 8-0 against several other teams' schedules.

My answer would be 'probably not', but that is just MY speculation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 31, 2006, 12:56:00 AM

Amherst
Nov 17   N   N   New York City Tech (1-9)   101-66   W   H
Nov 18   N   N   Thomas (2-6)   98-64   W   H
Nov 28   N   Y   Emmanuel (1-6)   45-84   W   A
Dec 01   N   Y   Western New England (5-4)   92-56   W   H
Dec 02   N   Y   Springfield (3-7)   91-52   W   H
Dec 07   N   Y   MIT (5-5)   47-79   W   A
Dec 09   N   Y   Brandeis (9-1)   84-74   W   H
Dec 12   N   Y   Worcester State (3-5)   42-70   W   A

UW-Stevens Point
Nov 18   N   Y   Carroll (4-5)   75-93   W   A
Nov 21   N   Y   Lawrence (6-3)   67-70   W   A
Nov 24   N   Y   Ripon (4-4)   90-76   W   H
Nov 29   Y   Y   UW-Oshkosh (7-2)   76-89   W   A
Dec 02   Y   Y   UW-River Falls (5-7)   73-81   W   A
Dec 06   Y   Y   UW-Whitewater (6-4)   75-73   W   H
Dec 09   Y   Y   UW-La Crosse (8-4)   67-64   W   H
Dec 11   N   Y   Edgewood (5-5)   69-47   W   H
Dec 13   N   N   Viterbo   49-75   W   A
Dec 28   N   N   Northern Michigan (D-II)   101-92   L   A
Dec 30   N   Y   Augustana (9-2)   71-68   W   H

Ohio Northern
Nov 17   N   N   DeSales (8-2)   57-74   W   Elizabethtown
Nov 18   N   N   Elizabethtown (4-5)   60-76   W   A
Nov 25   N   N   College of the Bahamas (non-Div III)   45-113   W   Northwood
Nov 26   N   N   Johnson & Wales (Fla.) (non-Div III)   60-74   W   Northwood
Dec 02   Y   Y   Marietta (4-7)   80-50   W   H
Dec 06   Y   Y   Heidelberg (6-4)   70-75   W   A
Dec 09   Y   Y   Baldwin-Wallace (8-3)   77-94   L   H
Dec 16   Y   Y   Mount Union (6-5)   51-64   W   A
Dec 19   N   Y   Wittenberg (9-2)   68-51   W   H
Dec 29   N   Y   Wooster (10-2)   84-91   W   A
Dec 30   N   N   UW-La Crosse (8-4)   73-70   W   Wooster

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on December 31, 2006, 12:57:26 AM

They are # 2 in many voters minds......I guess that is a question for them.......I would think that having a team springboard over them and Amherst hasn't lost reinforces my thought that the poll (all polls btw) is nice to have but lacks merit.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 31, 2006, 01:02:28 AM

Quote from: fpc85 on December 31, 2006, 12:57:26 AM
They are # 2 in many voters minds......I guess that is a question for them.......I would think that having a team springboard over them and Amherst hasn't lost reinforces my thought that the poll (all polls btw) is nice to have but lacks merit.

You are confusing ratings with standings. A team can very logically slide in ratings without losing if other teams just below them do some very impressive winning, just as a team could rise despite not playing if teams just above them lose.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on December 31, 2006, 01:03:56 AM

So I guess the "ratings" are unsettled. Doesn't reallly matter.....The best team is always the last team standing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 31, 2006, 01:05:30 AM

A ranking that merely moves a team up automatically for managing to not lose -- that would lack merit.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on December 31, 2006, 01:06:37 AM

I guess as much as ranking a team #2 for no reason.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on December 31, 2006, 01:10:57 AM

Seriously, I dont know if Amherst is #2 or not but how can a fan trust the rankings if the experts feel the way some of the post indicate. I don't follow any other team. You guys do....is this potential change typical at this time of the year?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pg04 on December 31, 2006, 01:14:30 AM

They are actually number 2. They are receiving 3 number 1 votes as well. They seem to be strong in that position for now anyway, at least how I read it...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 31, 2006, 01:15:55 AM

This change is possible any time No. 1 comes into play. It's a time at which every No. 1 candidate gets re-evaluated and singled out for extra scrutiny.

Ohio Northern, since the last poll, has beaten the standing No. 1 team on its own floor. Is that not worthy of consideration of a large jump? UW-Stevens Point played a Top 10 team and won.

When you look at the whole of Amherst's resume, it might not exactly stand up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 31, 2006, 01:21:32 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 31, 2006, 12:56:00 AM
Amherst
Nov 17   N   N   New York City Tech (1-9)   101-66   W   H
Nov 18   N   N   Thomas (2-6)   98-64   W   H
Nov 28   N   Y   Emmanuel (1-6)   45-84   W   A
Dec 01   N   Y   Western New England (5-4)   92-56   W   H
Dec 02   N   Y   Springfield (3-7)   91-52   W   H
Dec 07   N   Y   MIT (5-5)   47-79   W   A
Dec 09   N   Y   Brandeis (9-1)   84-74   W   H
Dec 12   N   Y   Worcester State (3-5)   42-70   W   A

UW-Stevens Point
Nov 18   N   Y   Carroll (4-5)   75-93   W   A
Nov 21   N   Y   Lawrence (6-3)   67-70   W   A
Nov 24   N   Y   Ripon (4-4)   90-76   W   H
Nov 29   Y   Y   UW-Oshkosh (7-2)   76-89   W   A
Dec 02   Y   Y   UW-River Falls (5-7)   73-81   W   A
Dec 06   Y   Y   UW-Whitewater (6-4)   75-73   W   H
Dec 09   Y   Y   UW-La Crosse (8-4)   67-64   W   H
Dec 11   N   Y   Edgewood (5-5)   69-47   W   H
Dec 13   N   N   Viterbo   49-75   W   A
Dec 28   N   N   Northern Michigan (D-II)   101-92   L   A
Dec 30   N   Y   Augustana (9-2)   71-68   W   H

Ohio Northern
Nov 17   N   N   DeSales (8-2)   57-74   W   Elizabethtown
Nov 18   N   N   Elizabethtown (4-5)   60-76   W   A
Nov 25   N   N   College of the Bahamas (non-Div III)   45-113   W   Northwood
Nov 26   N   N   Johnson & Wales (Fla.) (non-Div III)   60-74   W   Northwood
Dec 02   Y   Y   Marietta (4-7)   80-50   W   H
Dec 06   Y   Y   Heidelberg (6-4)   70-75   W   A
Dec 09   Y   Y   Baldwin-Wallace (8-3)   77-94   L   H
Dec 16   Y   Y   Mount Union (6-5)   51-64   W   A
Dec 19   N   Y   Wittenberg (9-2)   68-51   W   H
Dec 29   N   Y   Wooster (10-2)   84-91   W   A
Dec 30   N   N   UW-La Crosse (8-4)   73-70   W   Wooster

Ah-hah!!! A glimpse into the D3Hoops.com database...

The first Y-N column is in-conference; the second is in-region! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pg04 on December 31, 2006, 01:22:18 AM

Oops, didn't notice the date on the poll, I guess Amherst should probably expect a drop...or then again maybe they stay in the same position having Wooster Drop Below them and one of the other teams above them.... I guess we'll have to wait and see. Will the newest poll be released sometime next week?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on December 31, 2006, 01:26:25 AM

Soooo #1 ranking is the only one that matters? When the #1 team falls we reassess challengers? And the team that is #2 isn't the fav even though they haven't lost? I understand your rationale. I hope you appreciate my view as well. That's why I love the tournament....none of this stuff matters. Just guys showing up and competing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: old_hooper on December 31, 2006, 01:32:33 AM

Perhaps Wooster should not have been ranked #1. They lost to Cal Baptist who is picked to finish in the middle of the GSAC and Mississippi College defeats Westmont College tonight 81-77 who beat Cal Baptist rather convincingly 70-55 earlier in the month. Also, using Titan Q's example of Whitewater probably would be 8-0 with an Amherst schedule. Lets also take into consideration the margin of victory. Would Whitewater have won all those games and as convincingly as Amherst? Let say that Amherst is 8 to 10 points better. They would be 10-0 with a Whitewater schedule. Experts or opinions?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 31, 2006, 03:57:02 AM

Quote from: old_hooper on December 31, 2006, 01:32:33 AM
Perhaps Wooster should not have been ranked #1. They lost to Cal Baptist who is picked to finish in the middle of the GSAC and Mississippi College defeats Westmont College tonight 81-77 who beat Cal Baptist rather convincingly 70-55 earlier in the month.

You can play the 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon until the cows come home and get Cal Baptist beating North Carolina.

Quote from: old_hooper on December 31, 2006, 01:32:33 AM
Also, using Titan Q's example of Whitewater probably would be 8-0 with an Amherst schedule. Lets also take into consideration the margin of victory. Would Whitewater have won all those games and as convincingly as Amherst? Let say that Amherst is 8 to 10 points better. They would be 10-0 with a Whitewater schedule. Experts or opinions?

I doubt that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 31, 2006, 06:25:10 AM

As do I.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 31, 2006, 08:51:09 AM

From the ODAC board, VWC's Brandon Adair may not have been at full speed in Texas. He did not play vs. HSU.

Here is the link (http://www.d3sports.com/post/index.php?topic=4471.4517) to that string of posts. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 31, 2006, 10:47:25 AM

Here's a link (http://www.d3sports.com/post/index.php?topic=4097.1768) back a couple of pages to the list of results for top 25 teams this week, and another link (http://www.d3sports.com/post/index.php?topic=4097.1736) back a couple more pages to last week's results. I'll move it forward when the Amherst game is posted. Here's a quick summary of what the top teams did over the holidays:

#1 Wooster lost at NAIA Cal Baptist by 5, lost at home to #7 Ohio Northern by 7, and beat Calvin by 16
#2 Amherst plays today at Trinity TX
#3 Va. Wesleyan lost at Mary Hardin-Baylor by 1 and beat Hardin-Simmons in OT, both in Texas. Brandon Adair did not play in the HSU game, but did play in the loss to UMHB.
#4 St. Thomas lost at home to UW-La Crosse by 8 and won twice at UW-River Falls (St. Scholastica by 6 and UWRF by 3). Isaac Rosefelt did not play in the LaX game; I don't know about the UWRF tournament.
#5 UW-Stevens Point lost at D2 Northern Michigan by 9 and beat #9 Augustana at home by 3
#6 Wittenberg lost at #7 ONU by 17, and beat Otterbein (7, at Ott), York (NY) (7, home) and IU-Southeast (31, home)
#7 Ohio Northern beat #6 Wittenberg by 17, beat #1 Wooster by 7 at Wooster, and beat UW-La Crosse by 3 at Wooster
#8 Whitworth was idle both weeks
#9 Augustana beat Rockford by 34 and lost at #5 UW-Stevens Point by 3
#10 Wm. Paterson beat CCNY by 12
#11 Mississippi College beat Tex. Lutheran by 24, then won the Westmont tournament, beating #13 JHU by 24 and Westmont by 4
#12 Averett beat Marymount by 16

Based on these results, and assuming an Amherst win today just for the sake of prognostication, I think this how the new top 10 shakes out:

1. Amherst
2. Ohio Northern
3. UW-Stevens Point
4. St. Thomas
5. Wooster
6. Whitworth
7. Mississippi College
8. Va. Wesleyan
9. Wittenberg
10. Wm. Paterson

I'm not advocating for that lineup (I don't engage in that sort of advocacy), just predicting that's how it will look.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Drake Palmer on December 31, 2006, 12:18:20 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 31, 2006, 10:47:25 AM
Here's a link (http://www.d3sports.com/post/index.php?topic=4097.1768) back a couple of pages to the list of results for top 25 teams this week, and another link (http://www.d3sports.com/post/index.php?topic=4097.1736) back a couple more pages to last week's results. I'll move it forward when the Amherst game is posted. Here's a quick summary of what the top teams did over the holidays:

#4 St. Thomas lost at home to UW-La Crosse by 8 and won twice at UW-River Falls (St. Scholastica by 6 and UWRF by 3). Isaac Rosefelt did not play in the LaX game; I don't know about the UWRF tournament.

Based on these results, and assuming an Amherst win today just for the sake of prognostication, I think this how the new to 10 shakes out:

1. Amherst
2. Ohio Northern
3. UW-Stevens Point
4. St. Thomas
5. Wooster
6. Whitworth
7. Mississippi College
8. Va. Wesleyan
9. Wittenberg
10. Wm. Paterson

I'm not advocating for that lineup (I don't engage in that sort of advocacy), just predicting that's how it will look.

Although the boxscore for the UST vs. Scholastica game indicated otherwise, Isaac Rosefelt did not play in either game at the UW-River Falls tourney this weekend.

IMHO, having seen a limited # of the elite, nationally ranked teams over the past few years - '03 nat'l runner up Gustavus team, nat'l champ UW-Stevens Point team, '05 & 06 Lawrence teams, '06 North Central & last year's Tommies, this team is currently not playing like a top 5 team. With Rosefelt back in the lineup, I'd slot them in the #9 - 14 range.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on December 31, 2006, 06:44:19 PM

Amherst beats Trinity (Tx.) 66-54......ugly game but that is to be expected after a 3 week lay off. Olsen and Baskauskas shoulder most of the offensive burden. Babson and Williams coming up this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 31, 2006, 06:46:04 PM

So, does Williams have a shot at beating Amherst?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 31, 2006, 07:10:43 PM

Quote from: fpc85 on December 31, 2006, 06:44:19 PM
Amherst beats Trinity (Tx.) 66-54......ugly game but that is to be expected after a 3 week lay off. Olsen and Baskauskas shoulder most of the offensive burden. Babson and Williams coming up this week.

Re-posted from the SCAC site.

QuoteAmherst 66, Trinity 54.

That is not very impressive for the #2 team in the country. Respectfully, Top 25? Yes. Top 10? Maybe! Top 2? No!

Live Stats (http://www.trinity.edu/departments/athletics/MBasketball/05livestats/xlive.htm)

This is still a 2-possession game until 6:34 when Amherst's Andrew Olson hits a 3FG to extend the lead to 54-45. This very young Trinity team stayed with McMurry ( 3 1/2 weeks ago) until McMurry finally took the lead with 3:45 left on the way to our 75-62 win. (And we are hurting without our starting point guard!)

I like the comment about whether Amherst would be undefeated playing ONU's, Witt's, Wooster's or UW-SP's schedule.

Good job, Trinity! Good luck in SCAC play!

fpc85, thanks for your perspective. You may have a 3-week layoff for Amherst, but Trinity TX is on their 3rd game in 3 days.

The NESCAC is the class of New England, but I don't see much competition until Rhode Island College on Jan 30th.

As we have debated on these boards in previous seasons, I expect Amherst to boost its QOWI on Northeast Region foes, and finally hit some real competition in the Sweet 16. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 31, 2006, 07:18:42 PM

Top 25 games, 12/18-31 -- two weeks of results to consider in the new poll, combined here for your viewing, dining, and dancing pleasure:

#1 Wooster (10-2) lost at Cal Baptist 94-89, lost to #7 Ohio Northern 91-84 and def. Calvin 98-82
#2 Amherst (9-0) won at Trinity (TX) 66-54
#3 Virginia Wesleyan (8-2) lost at Mary Hardin-Baylor 63-62 and def. Hardin-Simmons 67-61 (OT), both at UMHB
#4 St. Thomas (8-1) lost to UW-La Crosse 62-54, def. St. Scholastica 82-76 at River Falls and won at UW-River Falls 87-84
#5 UW-Stevens Point (10-1) lost at Northern Michigan 101-92 and def. #9 Augustana 71-68 (and had a game at Regis [CO] cancelled)
#6 Wittenberg (9-2) lost at #7 Ohio Northern 68-51, won at Otterbein 79-72, def. York (NY) 69-62 and def. IU-Southeast 78-47
#7 Ohio Northern (10-1) def. #6 Wittenberg 68-51, won at #1 Wooster 91-84 and def. UW-La Crosse 73-70 at Wooster
#8 Whitworth (10-0) was idle
#9 Augustana (9-2) def. Rockford 78-44 and lost at #5 UW-Stevens Point 71-68
#10 William Paterson (9-1) won at CCNY 63-51
#11 Mississippi College (9-1) def. Texas Lutheran 77-53, def. Johns Hopkins 75-51 at Westmont (CA) and won at Westmont (CA) 81-77
#12 Averett (9-0) def. Marymount 88-72
#13 Johns Hopkins (10-1) lost to Mississippi College 75-51 and def. Thomas More 72-50 at Westmont (CA)
#14 Lawrence (6-3) lost at UW-Oshkosh 88-75, def. Allegheny 69-57 and def. Ursinus 70-65, both at Daytona Beach
#15 Puget Sound (9-1) won at Chapman 117-111 (OT) (also lost exhibition to Simon Fraser 101-93)
#16 Bates (8-0) was idle
#17 Wheaton (IL) (7-3) def. Nazareth 94-89 (OT) and def. Rivier 60-44, both at Staten Island
#18 Carthage (8-2) def. Olivet 82-63 and Marietta 82-51, both at Las Vegas, and lost at Lewis 78-60
#19 Hope (8-2) def. Purdue-North Central 88-79, def. Trinity Christian 69-53 and def. Rochester (MI) 76-74
#20 Chicago (8-2) lost to Coe 70-67 and def. Cornell (IA) 76-51
#21 UW-Platteville (7-3) def. Richard Stockton 64-51 at Randolph-Macon and lost at Randolph-Macon 68-64
#22 DePauw (9-2) won at Kenyon 53-52, def. U. of Dallas 104-78 and lost to Hamilton 85-77 (OT) at Tampa
#23 NYU (9-0) def. SUNY-Old Westbury 85-55 and def. Clark 74-64
#24 North Central (IL) (8-3) won at Benedictine 74-54, lost to Lincoln 75-53 at Orlando, def. Gwynedd-Mercy 66-44 in Orlando, def. Albion 69-58 and won at Judson (IL) 58-49
#25 Christopher Newport (7-4) lost to John Carroll 92-71 and lost to Fisk 72-71, both in Greensboro NC, def. Fisk 86-74 and def. Oswego St. 87-85

Happy New Year! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on December 31, 2006, 08:16:07 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 31, 2006, 07:10:43 PM
Quote from: fpc85 on December 31, 2006, 06:44:19 PM
Amherst beats Trinity (Tx.) 66-54......ugly game but that is to be expected after a 3 week lay off. Olsen and Baskauskas shoulder most of the offensive burden. Babson and Williams coming up this week.

Re-posted from the SCAC site.

QuoteAmherst 66, Trinity 54.

That is not very impressive for the #2 team in the country. Respectfully, Top 25? Yes. Top 10? Maybe! Top 2? No!

Live Stats (http://www.trinity.edu/departments/athletics/MBasketball/05livestats/xlive.htm)

This is still a 2-possession game until 6:34 when Amherst's Andrew Olson hits a 3FG to extend the lead to 54-45. This very young Trinity team stayed with McMurry ( 3 1/2 weeks ago) until McMurry finally took the lead with 3:45 left on the way to our 75-62 win. (And we are hurting without our starting point guard!)

I like the comment about whether Amherst would be undefeated playing ONU's, Witt's, Wooster's or UW-SP's schedule.

Good job, Trinity! Good luck in SCAC play!

fpc85, thanks for your perspective. You may have a 3-week layoff for Amherst, but Trinity TX is on their 3rd game in 3 days.

The NESCAC is the class of New England, but I don't see much competition until Rhode Island College on Jan 30th.

As we have debated on these boards in previous seasons, I expect Amherst to boost its QOWI on Northeast Region foes, and finally hit some real competition in the Sweet 16. :)

Ralph, you are quite welcome.....yes the Jeffs appeared to be sluggish...no nothing about Trinity so I can't speak on them...three in a row, talk to the coach about that.....RIC will be a challenge and all I hope for is that the Jeffs play high quality of basketball. It's all you can ask for. If we make the NCAAs then I suspect there will be great teams the Jeffs may have an opportunity to play. Last time I checked they seem to do well in the NCAAs. The Jeffs will just keep playing and hopefully winning and let the people comment about who they play. Bottom line is no matter how much win win or how we win there will always be naysyaers b/c we play in the northeast. No control over that stuff.

My only complaint has been that there is something wrong with the top 25 listing if the Jeffs are not #1 in the next poll. It questions the ranking process of the earlier polls.

Old School, any Amherst/Williams game is like Hope/Calvin in this neck of the woods....anyone can win it......although Amherst has had the superior team the last few years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 31, 2006, 08:20:41 PM

Despite receiving zero points in the last poll, it seems almost inconceivable that UT-Dallas (now 11-0 with a win over a d1, and their win over MHB suddenly looking more impressive) will not enter the next poll, perhaps fairly high.

My question to DC, the all-knowing keeper of the poll archives: what is the current record high entry for a team this late in the season who previously received NO votes?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 31, 2006, 08:43:00 PM

fpc, Happy New Year! ;)

I think that the only way that I would consider playing a team after a 3-week break would be to catch the opponent on day 3. I thought that was masterful scheduling...a win-win-win for everyone.

As for San Antonio, I hope that Amherst took in the Missions and the Institute of the Texas Cultures. My favorite Texas historian is T.R. Fehrenbach at UT-San Antonio. His Lone Star is in its 3rd edition. Some critics think that his expertise stops at the 20th Century. If one agrees, then his coverage of the settling of the western hemisphere and the frontier, the contrast of Spanish Colonization with Anglo-Celtic culture, and the impact of modern (European-American) technology on native Americans is sufficiently interesting in and of itself.

IMHO, the chapter on the Alamo is the best I have ever read.

Did you see the Amherst-Trinity game?

(I like the T-shirt. I was going to make the wisecrack as to whether that statement was a "GRE" question at Amherst! ;) )

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 31, 2006, 08:44:08 PM

Quote from: fpc85 on December 31, 2006, 08:16:07 PM
My only complaint has been that there is something wrong with the top 25 listing if the Jeffs are not #1 in the next poll. It questions the ranking process of the earlier polls.

That's not necessarily so. In the most recent poll, 22 voters thought Wooster was the best team, and all twenty-two of those votes are up for grabs. Those voters will most probably decide between whoever was #2 on their ballots the last time, and Ohio Northern, who since the last poll beat the #6 team by 17 points, the #1 team on their home court, and the team that had just beaten the #4 team.

Some of those voters had Amherst as their #2, but not all of them. Amherst had 3 first place votes and 586 points. That means they received 511 points from 22 ballots, an average of just over 23 points per ballot. That's approximately #3 on the average ballot. In other words, probably about half or slightly more of the voters had someone besides Wooster ranked ahead of Amherst. If that "somebody" is ONU or Stevens Point, there's no good reason to move Amherst ahead of them this week. If not, they still might jump ONU over Amherst, based on the last two weeks' results. None of that I would take as an indictment of the poll.

I would, however, take it as an indictment of the poll if such voters were to promote Amherst to #1 solely on the basis of their having been #2 two weeks ago. That would mean they ignored the large amount of data that Pat provides them, instead choosing to rely only on the previous poll (or their previous ballot) and a list of who lost since then.

I don't think either of us has to worry. I believe the voters vote intelligently and not robotically; and I believe that about two-thirds of them will come to the conclusion that Amherst should be #1. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 31, 2006, 08:45:03 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 31, 2006, 08:20:41 PM
Despite receiving zero points in the last poll, it seems almost inconceivable that UT-Dallas (now 11-0 with a win over a d1, and their win over MHB suddenly looking more impressive) will not enter the next poll, perhaps fairly high.

My question to DC, the all-knowing keeper of the poll archives: what is the current record high entry for a team this late in the season who previously received NO votes?

Appearing at #15, with a bullet, on today's Top 25 is UT-Dallas! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 31, 2006, 08:59:18 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 31, 2006, 07:18:42 PM
#5 UW-Stevens Point (10-1) lost at Northern Michigan 101-92 and def. #9 Augustana 71-68 (and had a game at Regis [CO] cancelled)

I heard they were afraid to play Stevens Point! ;D ;)

Actually, on Bob Semling's weekly radio show, he said they tried to work out a game with Winona St that eventually fell through. Would've been cool to play the D2 defending champs. Northern Michigan, though, was hard enough! :-[

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 31, 2006, 09:29:15 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 31, 2006, 08:20:41 PM
Despite receiving zero points in the last poll, it seems almost inconceivable that UT-Dallas (now 11-0 with a win over a d1, and their win over MHB suddenly looking more impressive) will not enter the next poll, perhaps fairly high.

My question to DC, the all-knowing keeper of the poll archives: what is the current record high entry for a team this late in the season who previously received NO votes?

Well, that's a toughie. Vote-points and rankings are separate things, kept in separate places. I can (and shall proceed to) tell you who made the biggest gains in vote-points from a flat zero, and we can assume that those gains resulted in the highest rankings, but it's not necessarily the case. That's particularly true in the early season, when more teams receive votes and therefore a relatively lower point total results in a relatively higher ranking. That is, one team may have gone from 0 in the preseason to 150 in week one, translating to a ranking of, say #15, while another may have gone from 0 in week 7 to 160 in week 8 but only reached, say, #18.

With that caveat, here's the biggest gains from 0, divided into two categories:
Most points in preseason poll after receiving 0 in final poll of previous season:
1. Franklin & Marshall: 303 points (#12) in the preseason poll for 2001-02.
2. Trinity (TX): 261 (#13) in preseason 2003-04
3. Wheaton (IL): 211 (#17) in preseason 2003-04
4. Baldwin-Wallace: 208 (#16) in preseason 2004-05
5. Wilkes: 200 points (#19) in preseason 2000-01

Most points in a mid-season poll after receiving 0 the previous week:
1. Wilmington: 209 (#17) in week 6 2005-06
2. SCAD: 170 (#19) in week 2 2000-01
3. Springfield: 163 (#20) in week 4 2004-05
4. Hanover: 153 (#16) in week 1 2002-03
5. Augustana: 146 (#20) in week 7 2001-02
6. UW-Oshkosh: 136 (#20) in week 6 2001-02
7. UW-Stevens Point: 122 (#21) in week 6 1999-00

I think the answer to your specific question (biggest jump from zero this late in the season) has got to be Wilma last season in week 6. That week they had won at #22 Ohio Northern and at #12 Baldwin-Wallace to move to 12-1. The Quakers then lost their next two games, four of five, five of seven, and finished 20-7, losing in the OAC semifinals (to B-W). They lost 192 of their 209 points in week 7, then lost the other 17 in week 8. They made cameo appearances at the bottom of the ORV category in two later weeks, but were gone by the end of the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 31, 2006, 09:55:07 PM

Thanks, David, I knew you'd come through (at least partially).

If UT-Dallas beats either 209 points or #17 ranking, I'll go through poll-by-poll to see if they indeed have set a new record.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on December 31, 2006, 10:53:12 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 31, 2006, 08:43:00 PM
fpc, Happy New Year! ;)

I think that the only way that I would consider playing a team after a 3-week break would be to catch the opponent on day 3. I thought that was masterful scheduling...a win-win-win for everyone.

As for San Antonio, I hope that Amherst took in the Missions and the Institute of the Texas Cultures. My favorite Texas historian is T.R. Fehrenbach at UT-San Antonio. His Lone Star is in its 3rd edition. Some critics think that his expertise stops at the 20th Century. If one agrees, then his coverage of the settling of the western hemisphere and the frontier, the contrast of Spanish Colonization with Anglo-Celtic culture, and the impact of modern (European-American) technology on native Americans is sufficiently interesting in and of itself.

IMHO, the chapter on the Alamo is the best I have ever read.

Did you see the Amherst-Trinity game?

(I like the T-shirt. I was going to make the wisecrack as to whether that statement was a "GRE" question at Amherst! ;) )

RT,
Thanks and happy new years to you also. Hixon will always do what's best for his team ;D. I didnt see the game. My grandmother told me to never travel to Texas....something bout her watching that "cops" show and a majority of the segements where in Texas. I am more of a science guy...history usually put me to sleep ;D. I much prefer comparative embryology, transcription and translation of proteins. Even better are the bioethical issues people will face in the next 20 years.....fascinating stuff worth discussing with people...I heard the team checked out the sights and seemed to enjoy the city.... All amherst students have a healthy disdain for anything eph....The current jrs. are undefeated against Williams and I am sure they want that streak to continue.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on December 31, 2006, 10:56:39 PM

DC, Thanks for the clarity....you have restored my faith.

Quote from: David Collinge on December 31, 2006, 08:44:08 PM
Quote from: fpc85 on December 31, 2006, 08:16:07 PM
My only complaint has been that there is something wrong with the top 25 listing if the Jeffs are not #1 in the next poll. It questions the ranking process of the earlier polls.

That's not necessarily so. In the most recent poll, 22 voters thought Wooster was the best team, and all twenty-two of those votes are up for grabs. Those voters will most probably decide between whoever was #2 on their ballots the last time, and Ohio Northern, who since the last poll beat the #6 team by 17 points, the #1 team on their home court, and the team that had just beaten the #4 team.

Some of those voters had Amherst as their #2, but not all of them. Amherst had 3 first place votes and 586 points. That means they received 511 points from 22 ballots, an average of just over 23 points per ballot. That's approximately #3 on the average ballot. In other words, probably about half or slightly more of the voters had someone besides Wooster ranked ahead of Amherst. If that "somebody" is ONU or Stevens Point, there's no good reason to move Amherst ahead of them this week. If not, they still might jump ONU over Amherst, based on the last two weeks' results. None of that I would take as an indictment of the poll.

I would, however, take it as an indictment of the poll if such voters were to promote Amherst to #1 solely on the basis of their having been #2 two weeks ago. That would mean they ignored the large amount of data that Pat provides them, instead choosing to rely only on the previous poll (or their previous ballot) and a list of who lost since then.

I don't think either of us has to worry. I believe the voters vote intelligently and not robotically; and I believe that about two-thirds of them will come to the conclusion that Amherst should be #1. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 01, 2007, 12:21:11 AM

fpc85:

I guess I don't see why you think Amherst should be considered immune from weekly re-evaluation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on January 01, 2007, 12:45:10 AM

Pat:
I don't think they should be immune. I don't know if they are the best team in the country....I don't know if any team can make that claim with any certainty at this time. I think that several teams could make a case for the top spot and I am sure if there were another team at the #2 slot they would have the same argument that I have. I would be surprised if Amherst weren't #1. I don't think I have seen anything like it in 30 years of following basketball..... although DC did provide some clarity on the possibility of that occurring. . Nonetheless, my bigggest issue is that there appears to be some anti-Amherst sentiment. Not sure why, I can only surmise that it is a combination of things:
1. NESCAC format
2. Lack of Depth in NE region
3. Some of the best teams in region refuse to play the Jeffs.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 01, 2007, 01:59:00 AM

fpc85, it was about 3 years ago, on another Posting Up server, on which we had a careful analysis as to the convergence of several factors that aided the NESCAC teams.

The single round robin format decreased the number of losses that the NESCAC teams sustained, which in turn gave better Strength of Schedule (SOS) Indices (as it was known then), now known as Quality of Wins Index.

The relative weakness of the neighboring teams and conferences in the Northeast gave the NESCAC lower division teams inflated SOS Indices, e.g., a victory over a Middlebury that might be 1-8 in the NESCAC but ends up 11-11 in the Northeast Region or a Connecticut College ends up 3-6 in the NESCAC but 12-11 in the Northeast Region. By the SOSI, those extra Northeast Region non-conference games raise the SOSI value of a win over Connecticut College from 10/11 points to 12/13 points. The victory over Middlebury raises from 8/9 to 12/13 points. (Please read the Basketball Handbook for the details. 2004 Basketball Handbook (http://www.ncaa.org/library/handbooks/basketball/2004/2004D3MBasketballHandbook.pdf))

The primary beneficiaries were Amhest and Tufts. The strong showing by Williams in 2003 had softened some of the debate that had raged in similar discussions in 2002.

This does not mean that there won't be old smoldering sentiments about the weakness of the Northeast Region in general. I mention this so you will be aware that the NESCAC success vis-a-vis its other Northeast Region opponents is met with skepticism by some posters from the WIAC, the CCIW, the OAC, the NCAC, the MIAA and occasionally the NJAC. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 01, 2007, 02:17:06 AM

Quote from: fpc85 on January 01, 2007, 12:45:10 AM
I don't think I have seen anything like it in 30 years of following basketball..... although DC did provide some clarity on the possibility of that occurring.

Happened in our poll in 2002 after Randolph-Macon leaped from the 11 spot to No. 1 between weeks 6 and 7. The Yellow Jackets beat the reigning No. 2 team and leapfrogged five teams which did not lose on the way to the top spot.

It has probably happened another time but that is the one that sticks out in my mind.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on January 01, 2007, 11:09:47 AM

Interesting......Did Randolph Macon last in the #1 spot for long?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 01, 2007, 11:42:01 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 01, 2007, 01:59:00 AM
fpc85, it was about 3 years ago, on another Posting Up server, on which we had a careful analysis as to the convergence of several factors that aided the NESCAC teams.

The single round robin format decreased the number of losses that the NESCAC teams sustained, which in turn gave better Strength of Schedule (SOS) Indices (as it was known then), now known as Quality of Wins Index.

The relative weakness of the neighboring teams and conferences in the Northeast gave the NESCAC lower division teams inflated SOS Indices, e.g., a victory over a Middlebury that might be 1-8 in the NESCAC but ends up 11-11 in the Northeast Region or a Connecticut College ends up 3-6 in the NESCAC but 12-11 in the Northeast Region. By the SOSI, those extra Northeast Region non-conference games raise the SOSI value of a win over Connecticut College from 10/11 points to 12/13 points. The victory over Middlebury raises from 8/9 to 12/13 points. (Please read the Basketball Handbook for the details. 2004 Basketball Handbook (http://www.ncaa.org/library/handbooks/basketball/2004/2004D3MBasketballHandbook.pdf))

The primary beneficiaries were Amhest and Tufts. The strong showing by Williams in 2003 had softened some of the debate that had raged in similar discussions in 2002.

This does not mean that there won't be old smoldering sentiments about the weakness of the Northeast Region in general. I mention this so you will be aware that the NESCAC success vis-a-vis its other Northeast Region opponents is met with skepticism by some posters from the WIAC, the CCIW, the OAC, the NCAC, the MIAA and occasionally the NJAC. :)

And just to clarify, this CCIW media person and longtime Top 25 voter does not question the NESCAC's top teams at all. I've been to Salem and watched Williams win a national title and Amherst play both Wittenberg and Illinois Wesleyan to final possession type games 9 months ago. I've seen Nogelo and Crotty and Coffin and Bedford play. I understand that the NESCAC's best teams are always national title contenders, just as the CCIW's, WIAC's, NCAC's, OAC's, etc are.

It is the Northeast region that is the problem. I don't think anyone can debate that it is extremely weak outside of the NESCAC. A team like Amherst, scheduling in-region as D3 teams are encouraged to do, is left with terribly weak non-conference schedule. That is where, as a Top 25 voter, I struggle. It is so much easier to evaluate teams who play multiple other good teams. Like UW-Stevens Point, which has played at Lawrence and vs Augustana outside of the WIAC. Or Wooster facing Ohio Northern and an NAIA I powerhouse. 10-0 Whitworth has an impressive win at Wheaton. Lawrence has played Stevens Point, Oshkosh, and Carthage.

I'm not sure this is anyone's fault that Amherst's non-conference schedule is so weak or that there is anything that be can done to fix it. Maybe other "Top 25 caliber" D3 teams outside of the region won't play Amherst...I don't know. But the simple fact is that this voter in Illinois (who doesn't get to see Amherst play) has a hard time evaluating how they stack up vs other Top 10 teams. I saw Amherst play last year and I know they lost a couple very key players (Bedord and Casnocha?) -- coming into the season I assumed they would not be as good as last year. Right now on paper, all I have to judge whether I was right or wrong is a win over Brandeis and a bunch of wins over weak teams. As a voter, I probably look at strength of schedule above everything else...other voters evaluate teams in their own way.

Amherst is a great team and I suspect they'll move into the #1 spot. We'll learn more as the NESCAC plays out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 01, 2007, 11:43:09 AM

Quote from: fpc85 on January 01, 2007, 11:09:47 AM
Interesting......Did Randolph Macon last in the #1 spot for long?

They were there for two weeks, then slipped to #5 after being upset at home by Emory & Henry. The Yellow Jackets stayed in the top 10 for the remainder of the regular season, a season in which they went 23-5 and lost to #12 Hampden-Sydney in the conference finals. They lost in the Sweet Sixteen to eventual national champion Otterbein, and were ranked #12 in the final poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 01, 2007, 11:44:16 AM

Happy New Year to all D3hoops.com readers and contributors. Here is to another year filled with entertaining and intelligent discussion about the purest form of a great sport.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 01, 2007, 12:10:01 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 01, 2007, 02:17:06 AM
Happened in our poll in 2002 after Randolph-Macon leaped from the 11 spot to No. 1 between weeks 6 and 7. The Yellow Jackets beat the reigning No. 2 team and leapfrogged five teams which did not lose on the way to the top spot.

The five teams were Catholic (#5 to #3), Wash U. (#6 to #4), Brockport St. (#7 to #5), Gustavus Adolphus (#10 to #6), and Christopher Newport (#8 to #9). Brockport was unbeaten, the others had one loss apiece. There was a lot of carnage that week: the unanimous #1 team (Carthage) lost, the #2 team (Hampden-Sydney) lost (to R-MC), and the #3 and #4 teams (DePauw and Wheaton [IL]) each lost twice. The competition for #1 was much more wide open that week than it is this week. But Pat's point is still valid, that reevalutations taking into account recent results can change the order of the teams, even when none of them lose.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 01, 2007, 12:20:28 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 01, 2007, 02:17:06 AM
It has probably happened another time but that is the one that sticks out in my mind.

Here's another, less dramatic, example, one that features some of the same teams in play this week, and one that fpc85 may not like so much.

Week 13, 2004-05: Wooster #1, Amherst (23-1) #2, UW-Stevens Point (21-3) #3. Wooster loses to #5-ranked Wittenberg and drops to #5. Amherst won twice (Trinity, Bates) in the NESCAC tournament and remained #2. Point won three games in the WIAC tournament and leapfrogged the Jeffs into the #1 slot. The vote was nearly even: Point had 11 1st place votes and 601 points, Amherst had 9/597. This was the final poll of the regular season.

Were the voters right? Well, Amherst lost at home in the Sweet Sixteen (to national runner-up Rochester), and Point won the "Walnut and Bronze" (smoking Rochester by 24 in the final.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 01, 2007, 12:22:52 PM

Yep, I deliberately picked an extreme example. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on January 01, 2007, 12:49:10 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 01, 2007, 12:20:28 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 01, 2007, 02:17:06 AM
It has probably happened another time but that is the one that sticks out in my mind.

Here's another, less dramatic, example, one that features some of the same teams in play this week, and one that fpc85 may not like so much.

Week 13, 2004-05: Wooster #1, Amherst (23-1) #2, UW-Stevens Point (21-3) #3. Wooster loses to #5-ranked Wittenberg and drops to #5. Amherst won twice (Trinity, Bates) in the NESCAC tournament and remained #2. Point won three games in the WIAC tournament and leapfrogged the Jeffs into the #1 slot. The vote was nearly even: Point had 11 1st place votes and 601 points, Amherst had 9/597. This was the final poll of the regular season.

Were the voters right? Well, Amherst lost at home in the Sweet Sixteen (to national runner-up Rochester), and Point won the "Walnut and Bronze" (smoking Rochester by 24 in the final.)

I could understand such a change in feb. not in Jan.... Lots of time to eveluate and allow the pretenders to be exposed. 04-05 brings back nightmares......Hauben was a beast.....no answer for him that day. Hopefully this years team will have more answers as they continue the season.

This has been great conversation......I still expect the Jeffs to be #1 :).

Quote from: Titan Q on January 01, 2007, 11:42:01 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 01, 2007, 01:59:00 AM
fpc85, it was about 3 years ago, on another Posting Up server, on which we had a careful analysis as to the convergence of several factors that aided the NESCAC teams.

The single round robin format decreased the number of losses that the NESCAC teams sustained, which in turn gave better Strength of Schedule (SOS) Indices (as it was known then), now known as Quality of Wins Index.

The relative weakness of the neighboring teams and conferences in the Northeast gave the NESCAC lower division teams inflated SOS Indices, e.g., a victory over a Middlebury that might be 1-8 in the NESCAC but ends up 11-11 in the Northeast Region or a Connecticut College ends up 3-6 in the NESCAC but 12-11 in the Northeast Region. By the SOSI, those extra Northeast Region non-conference games raise the SOSI value of a win over Connecticut College from 10/11 points to 12/13 points. The victory over Middlebury raises from 8/9 to 12/13 points. (Please read the Basketball Handbook for the details. 2004 Basketball Handbook (http://www.ncaa.org/library/handbooks/basketball/2004/2004D3MBasketballHandbook.pdf))

The primary beneficiaries were Amhest and Tufts. The strong showing by Williams in 2003 had softened some of the debate that had raged in similar discussions in 2002.

This does not mean that there won't be old smoldering sentiments about the weakness of the Northeast Region in general. I mention this so you will be aware that the NESCAC success vis-a-vis its other Northeast Region opponents is met with skepticism by some posters from the WIAC, the CCIW, the OAC, the NCAC, the MIAA and occasionally the NJAC. :)

And just to clarify, this CCIW media person and longtime Top 25 voter does not question the NESCAC's top teams at all. I've been to Salem and watched Williams win a national title and Amherst play both Wittenberg and Illinois Wesleyan to final possession type games 9 months ago. I've seen Nogelo and Crotty and Coffin and Bedford play. I understand that the NESCAC's best teams are always national title contenders, just as the CCIW's, WIAC's, NCAC's, OAC's, etc are.

It is the Northeast region that is the problem. I don't think anyone can debate that it is extremely weak outside of the NESCAC. A team like Amherst, scheduling in-region as D3 teams are encouraged to do, is left with terribly weak non-conference schedule. That is where, as a Top 25 voter, I struggle. It is so much easier to evaluate teams who play multiple other good teams. Like UW-Stevens Point, which has played at Lawrence and vs Augustana outside of the WIAC. Or Wooster facing Ohio Northern and an NAIA I powerhouse. 10-0 Whitworth has an impressive win at Wheaton. Lawrence has played Stevens Point, Oshkosh, and Carthage.

I'm not sure this is anyone's fault that Amherst's non-conference schedule is so weak or that there is anything that be can done to fix it. Maybe other "Top 25 caliber" D3 teams outside of the region won't play Amherst...I don't know. But the simple fact is that this voter in Illinois (who doesn't get to see Amherst play) has a hard time evaluating how they stack up vs other Top 10 teams. I saw Amherst play last year and I know they lost a couple very key players (Bedord and Casnocha?) -- coming into the season I assumed they would not be as good as last year. Right now on paper, all I have to judge whether I was right or wrong is a win over Brandeis and a bunch of wins over weak teams. As a voter, I probably look at strength of schedule above everything else...other voters evaluate teams in their own way.

Amherst is a great team and I suspect they'll move into the #1 spot. We'll learn more as the NESCAC plays out.

All the skepticism makes more sense. That being said, the jeffs are the exception not the rule in the NE...I think they can compete in any conference. I am sure that the would have more losses if they played in some of the other power conferences. But the reality is they aren't and only the NCAA's will change that perspective. i saw Wittenberg and IWU last year and both teams were outstanding. I thought we held our own. Hopefully, we will have more opportunities to represent the NE. Enjoy the afternoon....I gotta go coach my boys (HS team).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 01, 2007, 12:52:38 PM

What? It makes MORE sense in January. If someone plays four games over a holiday break, that's adding more than 50% to their results so far. That's a huge amount of new data.

You're just spinning, bobbing and weaving, trying to find an argument that will help Amherst. Let's try this one -- here's the totals the voters are looking at right now:

Team A: Record of opponents played to date: 35-40, .466
Team B: Record of opponents played to date: 70-32, .686
Team C: Record of opponents played to date: 65-49, .570

That's all the games the opponents have played against teams other than the one we're ranking (you can add nine or ten losses and one or zero wins if you like).

Or this list:
Record of D-III opponents played to date: 54-27, .667
Record of D-III opponents played to date: 63-26, .707
Record of D-III opponents played to date: 35-40, .466

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 01, 2007, 01:09:17 PM

Actually, the totals the voters are looking at right now are Nebraska 14, Auburn 14, and Penn State 10, Tennessee 10. :D

But seriously, I had the same reaction as Pat. This is the assertion that I have been trying to answer in this discussion:

Quote from: fpc85 on December 31, 2006, 08:16:07 PM
My only complaint has been that there is something wrong with the top 25 listing if the Jeffs are not #1 in the next poll. It questions the ranking process of the earlier polls.

Surely a voter changing his mind about Amherst vis-a-vis Ohio Northern in early January is less "questionable" than doing so in late February! Relatively little new information about teams is added in the conference tournament, where as TONS of new information was added these past two weeks. It makes MUCH more sense to re-order your ballot this week than it will later in the season.

Good luck to your boys team. I can't believe you're making them play on New Year's Day, but I guess that's part of being in New England, where there is no football. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 01, 2007, 02:11:06 PM

UT-Dallas is an intriguing team. I saw them last year in the opening game of the season. They gave then #1 Illinois Wesleyan a good game, before losing by 13.

http://www.iwu.edu/~iwunews/sports/mbb2006/miwu1.htm

I believe they went on to have a bad season, which surprised me. I remember thinking that shooting guard Martin Salinas was every bit as good as eventual 2006 CCIW Most Outstanding Player Rick Harrigan (Augustana). They seemed like a pretty good team to me.

The UT-Arlington win is impressive, but having seen UT-Arlington I'm not sure it means quite as much to me as if I hadn't seen them. In early December I saw Arlington play Illinois State, the Missouri Valley Conference D1 team just down the road from IWU. Arlington is a really bad D1 team that probably wouldn't finish in the top 2 of leagues like the WIAC, OAC, and CCIW. They have size and are athletic, but not a lot of basketball skill. Don't get me wrong though...not saying that wasn't a real good win. If UT-Dallas went on the road to, say, UW-Oshkosh or Baldwin-Wallace or Wheaton and won, that would get my attention.

UT-Dallas will be on my ballot, that's for sure.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 01, 2007, 05:35:49 PM

Lots of analyzing for a team whose opponents have averaged 3.8 wins this season. Amherst the NATION'S #1 team? ???
COME ON! :D
Somebody must be kidding. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 01, 2007, 05:38:34 PM

Q, thanks for the assessment of UTA vs. another D1.

Coach Terry Butterfield at UT-D has added some talent his year. You saw Martin Salinas, the point guard Travis Carruthers and then Ernie Lowrey off the bench in the IWU-UTD game. The Comets have added a 6'5" freshman center named Jordan Eppink from the Houston suburb of Spring, TX, who looks like the standard CCIW player (from my having seen Wheaton at UDallas in 2004 and a chance to meet Gregory Sager at a NPU scrimmage in 2005) and a 6'1" freshman guard named Scott Rodgers from The Woodlands, TX, who is very savvy and freshman Brandon Green. Academic standards at UT-D are as high as any private ASC school and may be closer to SCAC schools, so these are no academic slouches.

Conservatively, I can say that you need to watch this team by how poised and disciplined they play. UTD has the Abilene road trip this weekend to HSU on Thursday and McMurry on Saturday, and then open East Division play. They go away and home with MissColl on Jan 11th and then Feb 15th.

The ASC Men's post-season tourney is hosted on the East this year. IF UT-D and MissColl go 19-1 in the conference (and I anticipate they will), I see the pertinent tie-breakers being point differential vs. each other (10-pt max) and then to the coin flip for the right to host the 8-team post-season tourney.

As for Top 25, they are a solid team. How they handle this win in Abilene should set the tone for the season. If it comes down to the MissColl game in February in Dallas, the gym should be rocking. Even as a suburban commuter school, UT-D can still draw a pretty good crowd, and their fans can get into a game.

For you fans on the web, beginning this year, Bill Mercer (http://www.billmercersports.com/), a Dallas broadcasting icon and University of North Texas faculty member, has helped start webcasting, by using University of North Texas Radio/TV students to braodcast the UT-D home games as part of their practicum. Bill Mercer was a minor league announcer before the Rangers (think Bull Durham), announced Sportatorium Wrestling with Kerry Von Erich in the early 1960's, was part of the team covering the Kennedy assassination. Many north Texas sportsfans grew up listening to him. For UNT students to get to learn broadcasting from him is a real experience.

UTD webcast link...

http://cometsports.utdallas.edu/UTDATH/LIVE.htm

I hope the UTD-Miss Coll will be broadcast on Feb 15th.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on January 01, 2007, 05:42:14 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 01, 2007, 12:52:38 PM
What? It makes MORE sense in January. If someone plays four games over a holiday break, that's adding more than 50% to their results so far. That's a huge amount of new data.

You're just spinning, bobbing and weaving, trying to find an argument that will help Amherst. Let's try this one -- here's the totals the voters are looking at right now:

Team A: Record of opponents played to date: 35-40, .466
Team B: Record of opponents played to date: 70-32, .686
Team C: Record of opponents played to date: 65-49, .570

That's all the games the opponents have played against teams other than the one we're ranking (you can add nine or ten losses and one or zero wins if you like).

Or this list:
Record of D-III opponents played to date: 54-27, .667
Record of D-III opponents played to date: 63-26, .707
Record of D-III opponents played to date: 35-40, .466

I admit I'm a fan of the Jeffs and would love to see them #1....big surprise.....I originally posted here to understand the process of the top 25. I get it. It's flawed for b/c of the regional scheduling....no problem....I guess I put too much stock in it...my fault. You guys do a great job... in fact, an almost impossible job....I wish there were something like this available when I was playing, you learn a lot about other teams and various styles of play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 01, 2007, 06:19:07 PM

Quote from: fpc85 on January 01, 2007, 05:42:14 PM
I get it. It's flawed for b/c of the regional scheduling....no problem....I guess I put too much stock in it...my fault.

Honestly, I think what's flawed is your assumptions about how polls work. These kind of adjustments actually do go on all the time. It's just magnified when a new No. 1 is chosen. No. 1 is the most important spot in the poll and it merits the extra attention.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on January 01, 2007, 06:30:25 PM

You are right. My thinking was obviously flawed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 02, 2007, 03:51:33 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 30, 2006, 09:14:39 PM
gccfan, I saw UTD tonight. They played a very disciplined well-controlled game. They move the ball well. Martin Salinas was able to hit some early 3 pointers and put UTD up by 7 (19-12) at the 13:08 mark in the first. UTA led 35-34 at the half. Salinas gave Trinity all it could handle 2 years ago in the first round in Trinity's 66-60 win over UT-D. IMHO, he is All-Region at the least.

Jordan Eppink is a very good freshman cneter (6'5" from Spring, TX Houston suburb). He missed some FT's at the end but did not hurt them.

Scott Rodgers from The Woodlands,TX is a 6'1" freshman who came off the bench for 19 points. Rodgers was expecting looks from D1's, but got none and so was convinced to walk onto UT-D team when he arrived on campus this fall. Rodgers got most of his points by taking the backdoor pass down low, I have his being 6-6 on 2FG's, almost all backdoor layups, plus 2 more assists on the backdoor play into the basket. He is very good.

Travis Carruthers is a very heady 5'10" senior PG. He runs the offense very well.

Mike McKee, a 6'2" junior from Houston, seems to pull the major defensive duties.

Ernie Lowrey, 6'1" sophomore from Spring, TX, seems to be the most athletic player on the team.

Brandon Green, a 6'1" Freshman from Houston, came off the bench for 9 points in 14 minutes.

UTD 78, UT-Arlington 76 (http://utamavs.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/stats/2006-2007/uta11.html)

Ralph, do you find it odd that the bulk of the UT-Dallas roster is from the Houston area? Houston's 240 miles away, and I'm sure that the huge Dallas/Ft. Worth metro area provides a pretty substantial potential talent pool for UTD. Plus, it's not as though UTD is recruiting from Houston because of the coaches; Terry Butterfield's a Florida native who spent eleven years at Virginia Wesleyan before taking over for the Comets, and his assistant is an Austin guy.

Besides, I thought that Houston folks hated Dallas, and vice-versa. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on January 02, 2007, 12:00:48 PM

This was taken from the NE region forum. It was posted by the historian. Comments? (Not sure how to insert quote from different site so I just copied and pasted)

Pat,

To paraphrase a great intellectual, it seems to me that you are "just spinning, bobbing and weaving" trying to find arguments against Amherst. All a team can do is go out and win the games on its schedule. To that end, Amherst has done its job better than any other team in the nation other than Wooster in the 2000s. Granted, as has been well documented, for teams in NE, this means playing (and beating) more less-competitive teams than teams in other regions must.

Perhaps that should invalidate Amherst (or any team from NE) from holding the top spot unless they actually win the title. If you want to make that argument, fine. There's certainly a precedent for it. Take D1 football, for example. Boise State at 12-0 is not in the national title game. In both season-ending polls, they were ranked 9th, lower than seven other teams with more losses than they had. But outside of some folks in Idaho, few people, I'm sure, truly believe that Boise State got jobbed this year. Their conference, schedule, etc isn't as tough as those in the major conferences. Good. Great. I get it. I even agree with it.

Personally, of course, I think Amherst is different. I think over the last few years they (and the top NE schools, in general, have proven their merit on the national stage. While the region as a whole may be weaker than some, the top few teams out of NE can run with any of the other national powers.

But I'm open to those who disagree with this. However, to them I would ask what the ceiling should be for NE schools in the national polls during the regular season. If I understand the arguments against Amherst this year, it seems to me that many people simply do not think a NE team should ever be a mid-season number one, given the region's weakness. If that's the case, then what is the highest an undefeated NE team should be ranked in the national polls? Pat, what do you say? You love numbers, so give me some numbers. In the depths of your "enlightened" mind, how good do you really think the top NE teams are year in and year out? Was Williams an aberration a few years ago, winning a title and setting the national record for consecutive wins? Has Amherst been an aberration the last few years? What about Conn College in the late 90s? It must have really set your teeth on edge when Amherst and Williams both made the Final Four three years ago. How could such an inferior region contribute fully half of the Salem contingent?

Frankly this year, as an Amherst fan, I don't care all that much about the number one ranking. Sure, it's fun to point to and brag about. But honestly I'd be content with a top 4 national ranking and a number 1 regional ranking that would give the Jeffs homecourt through the sectional finals (assuming that they continue their winning ways).

Basically, I'd just love to hear some direct, honest opinions from all those who continue to disparage the NE region. Don't keep taking pot-shots at Amherst or other top NE teams. They are doing all that you can ask of them. If that's not enough in your minds for a number one national ranking, okay, but what is it good enough for in your "enlightened" opinions?

Don't hate the students; hate the classes they take.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 02, 2007, 12:11:39 PM

I suppose we should punish a team with a better resume simply because Amherst has played a poor schedule, then.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2007, 01:20:46 PM

fpc,

Unless I've missed it, no one has taken potshots at Amherst - don't confuse "I just can't tell" with "they are unworthy". I'm sure they are very good - they always are. But whether they are #1, #4, or even #7 just isn't knowable from their resume so far.

And for the school (not the players) it is a cop-out to say 'this is the schedule they face'. They play fewer conference games than any other top team not in the NESCAC (or independent); there is certainly room on the schedule for some top quality opponents, even if not in-region. Schedule some top NJAC, OAC, NCAC, etc., opponents and this conversation will not have to be repeated again next year!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 02, 2007, 01:26:34 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2007, 01:20:46 PM
fpc,

Unless I've missed it, no one has taken potshots at Amherst - don't confuse "I just can't tell" with "they are unworthy". I'm sure they are very good - they always are. But whether they are #1, #4, or even #7 just isn't knowable from their resume so far.

Knowable? LOL ??? ::) ;D :D ;)

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2007, 01:20:46 PM
And for the school (not the players) it is a cop-out to say 'this is the schedule they face'. They play fewer conference games than any other top team not in the NESCAC (or independent); there is certainly room on the schedule for some top quality opponents, even if not in-region. Schedule some top NJAC, OAC, NCAC, etc., opponents and this conversation will not have to be repeated again next year!

I'm too lazy to look at a map right now, but I'm sure there are plenty of quality opponents that Amherst can play that would be considered in-region, especially since they changed the rules that state regions that border "your" region are also considered in-region, no matter how far away they are...am I correct on that?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 02, 2007, 01:29:06 PM

It doesn't help Amherst a whole lot, but it does put the NJAC in play. Some of the Centennial is in play. Catholic is in play. But that area in MBB isn't overly fertile.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 02, 2007, 01:32:13 PM

Why does it matter where they get ranked? I follow the NE as close any anybody and this year's Amherst team isn't quite as good as last year's team, while the Midwest squads have gotten better. Amherst is always overrated in the polls. So even if they come out at #1 today, that doesn't make them the best team in the country. It's just numbers and opinions. Sure they are head and shoulders above the rest of the NE region, but I'm not sure I'd rank them higher than #6 right now (and that's on a good day).

It's not about where the numbers say they should be; it's about how good a team they actually are. They are limited by their region; there's not much they can do about that without a lot of extra traveling. The only recourse they do get is that they will once again have a pretty easy road to Salem and they can prove then if they are the best.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 02, 2007, 01:46:36 PM

All this talk about Amherst not being able to play "quality" opponents, or as quality opponents as the likes of ONU or UWSP leaves out the fact that, because of Amherst's location, they have an easier road to Salem. I don't recall people crying out at the extreme travesty of Amherst's road to the Final Four as much as certain other schools in (specifically two) other regions in the past 3-4 years....

If Amherst is as good as the people who are stating they should be #1 say they are, then they should let their play do the talking for the entire year. Be undefeated after FEBRUARY, not after December. This New Year's poll really starts to create the divide between the contenders and the pretenders... but (and David would be able to tell this more than anyone else) how many #1 teams in January failed to make the Final Four (or Elite 8, Sweet 16, or even the NCAA tournament...?)

My guess is that Amherst probably will reach the #1 spot if they continue to play well, especially if they aren't playing opponents as tough as other would-be #1's. There hasn't been an undefeated champion since Platteville in 1999, chances are there won't be one again this year, so whoever achieves the spot this week probably will falter at least once more this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 02, 2007, 02:20:52 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 02, 2007, 01:46:36 PM... but (and David would be able to tell this more than anyone else) how many #1 teams in January failed to make the Final Four (or Elite 8, Sweet 16, or even the NCAA tournament...?)

Looking at the teams ranked #1 in the first four polls each year that had January results in them:
2005-06: IWU (Week 5) made the final four, finishing 3rd; Wittenberg (Weeks 6-8) made the final four, finishing 2nd
2004-05: UW-Stevens Point (Weeks 6 and 8-9) was the eventual national champ; Wooster (Week 7) lost in the 2nd round at Albion
2003-04: Williams (Week 6) made the final four, finishing 2nd; Hampden-Sydney (Week 7) lost in the 2nd round at F&M; Amherst (Week 8 ) made the final four, finishing 4th; and Rochester (Week 9) lost in the round of 16 to Keene St.
2002-03: Washington U. (Weeks 5-8) lost in the 2nd round to IWU
2001-02: Carthage (Weeks 6 and 9) made the final four, finishing 3rd; Randolph-Macon (Weeks 7-8) lost in the round of 16 to Otterbein
2000-01: Carthage (Weeks 7-10) lost in the regional final at Ohio Northern
1999-00: Hampden-Sydney (Weeks 5-8) lost in the 2nd round to Maryville (TN)

No team ranked #1 in January has failed to make the tournament. Of these 28 polls, 11 (39%) were topped by eventual Final Four teams, while 10 (36%) were headed by teams that failed to make the Sweet 16 (but that was just 3 teams: HSC in 2000, Wash U. in 2002, and Wooster in 2005)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk--UTDallas
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 02, 2007, 02:22:29 PM

Gregory, UT-Dallas started out as an upper level research institution in the late 1960's to serve as the think tank behind the "Silicon Prairie". Some of its founders made their money in Texas Instruments and in geophysical services for the petroleum industry.

UT-D is unique for its high profile academic core and being D3 in this part of the country. I would suspect that UTD is pulling a few students from Trinity and Southwestern. The Houstonians on the UTD roster are from the affluent northern suburbs. They probably were overlooked by those D1's in the southeastern part of the state, and just decided for the good school and D3.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on January 02, 2007, 02:38:14 PM

Ralph -

What can you tell me about Southwestern Assemblies of God?

How about Evergreen State?

Kidding!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on January 02, 2007, 03:04:35 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 02, 2007, 01:46:36 PM
All this talk about Amherst not being able to play "quality" opponents, or as quality opponents as the likes of ONU or UWSP leaves out the fact that, because of Amherst's location, they have an easier road to Salem. I don't recall people crying out at the extreme travesty of Amherst's road to the Final Four as much as certain other schools in (specifically two) other regions in the past 3-4 years....

I think you hit it spot on Point! I went back and looked at each Final Four participant's road to Salem last year and Amherst may have been rivaled by VA Wes for the easiest road to Salem and lo and behold, the 2 easiest brackets to come out of also had byes!

Just going by the final poll before the tournament began last year, IWU had arguably the toughest road to Salem with all but one of thier opponents in the top 15. They opened with #17 Carroll. That was followed with a matchup with #15 UW-Whitewater. Then it was on to face #1 Larry only to get somewhat of a breather in #14 Puget Sound.

Wittenberg's road wasn't much easier, except that they at least got to stay in the friendly confines of their own HPER Center. They opened with Lake Erie who was recieving a vote followed by #6 B-W, #2 Hope and #20 Transy.

Those could be called the brackets of doom or death or whaterver you wish to name them.

And then there's the Amherst and Va Wes brackets which included the always tough 'Bye' in the opening round. I don't recall them being ranked BTW ::)? Amherst followed that up with unranked Hamilton in the 2nd round, Tufts who was recieving votes in the 3rd round and their only ranked opponent they faced on their road to Salem, #16 St. John Fisher in the 4th round. Va Wes' road wasn't much more difficult opening with the always unpredictable 'Bye'. That was followed up by unranked SUNY Farmingdale, #18 Lincoln and unranked William Patterson.

Judging by the difficult paths that both Wittenberg and IWU had to take just to reach Salem, it's not out of the question to wonder just how much was left in the tank compared to the relatively easy paths Amherst and Va Wes took to get there. Not only did they face easier teams, but they had one less game to play?!

Of course it all comes back to the wonderful NCAA Selection Committee and the braintrust behind their whole thought process. One would think that byes would be based on which regions were the most difficult. Obviously that isn't the case since the GL Region, which could be argued was the toughest or at the very least right behind the MW, wasn't rewarded with a bye at all. The ONLY region that didn't receive a bye I might add!

And I know because of the logisitcal problems that exhist in Div III, this is probably not going to change anytime soon, but it would be nice to see some of the wealth of good teams that are continuously crammed into one or 2 regions to be spread out into some of the other regions. How hard would it have been to ship Wooster, for example, out to York (PA) to boost that regions strength instead of making them stay in the GL and travel to Transy. We're talking about a couple of hours difference by bus here! I can't wait to see what 'Group of Death' the NCAA gives us this year for the Tournament?!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 02, 2007, 04:55:40 PM

Not that this is much consolation, but I think if the football committee people, or the women's basketball committee were running these decisions you would see that kind of change made. But this men's basketball committee, even though the appointed people have changed hands every couple of years, has never seemed willing to make that call to improve the tournament.

It's disappointing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 02, 2007, 08:24:04 PM

One thing I really thought stunk about the national tournament last year was that a team which had lost 4 of its last 5 games before the tournament began got to host not one, but two games to begin the tournament. They also hosted the conference tourney prior to the start of the national tourney, and couldn't even win a first round conference tourney game on their own home floor. The 1st round conference tourney loss was their 4th loss in 5 games. As a reward for this stellar finish, the national selection committee rewarded them with the first two games at home, while the team that finished 2nd in the conference regular season and then won the conference tourney was sent on a seven hour bus ride for their 1st round game. Sorry, but this doesn't make sense to me. Makes me think someone at the school had an in with a member of the committee.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 02, 2007, 08:37:18 PM

Quote from: AndOne on January 02, 2007, 08:24:04 PM

One thing I really thought stunk about the national tournament last year was that a team which had lost 4 of its last 5 games before the tournament began got to host not one, but two games to begin the tournament. They also hosted the conference tourney prior to the start of the national tourney, and couldn't even win a first round conference tourney game on their own home floor. The 1st round conference tourney loss was their 4th loss in 5 games. As a reward for this stellar finish, the national selection committee rewarded them with the first two games at home, while the team that finished 2nd in the conference regular season and then won the conference tourney was sent on a seven hour bus ride for their 1st round game. Sorry, but this doesn't make sense to me. Makes me think someone at the school had an in with a member of the committee.

AndOne, suggesting that Augustana was a higher seed than North Central because someone "had an in" with a tournament committee member is silly. Come on.

The Division III Tournament seeding process is spelled out very clearly in the handbook. Timing of losses is not a factor that is weighed at all. On selection day, Augustana's QOWI and in-region winning % were both better than North Central's. See here:

http://www.d3sports.com/post/index.php?topic=2910.180

1-10
Amherst 12.160 24-1
Lawrence 11.682 22-0
Worcester Polytech 11.250 20-3
Mississippi College 11.154 25-1
Tufts 11.000 20-5 Pool C
St. John Fisher 11.000 22-1
Lincoln 10.688 12-4 Pool B
Wittenberg 10.652 20-3
Gordon 10.560 22-3 Pool C
Carnegie Mellon 10.550 16-4

11-20
Virginia Wesleyan 10.481 24-3
Augustana 10.478 19-4 Pool C
Cortland State 10.440 22-3 Pool C
York (Pa.) 10.400 22-3 Pool C
Transylvania 10.370 23-4
Trinity (Texas) 10.316 16-3 Pool C
UW-Whitewater 10.304 18-5
William Paterson 10.240 19-6
Hope 10.211 17-2
North Central 10.095 16-5

That is why Augie was the higher seed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 02, 2007, 08:49:43 PM

In a game that won't be reflected in the top 25 until next week, unbeaten Guilford downs #12 Averett tonight in Danville, 74-69.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 02, 2007, 08:51:54 PM

Yes, despite the ruminations of the Guilford radio guy who predicts the Quakers will be in the Top 25 tomorrow based on their win tonight.

The deadline for the poll was 3 pm so that win won't impact the next poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 02, 2007, 08:53:29 PM

I would have to agree with the poster who mentioned they would seed amherst at 6th. I feel they are a middle of the top 10 type team, after seeing them play Brandeis last month, a game evenly matched with except for a 4-5 minute portion of the first half when brandeis went dry. While watching this game i kept thinking to myself that there was no way amherst could be the 2nd best team in the country, or I have a big misunderstanding of what d3 basketball is all about. Amherst played well that game, do not get me wrong, and they are clearly a good team, but i just expect more from a team coming out with the number 2 ranking in the country, if they are number 2, then some other teams are clearly underrated, but i do believe amherst is simply overrated.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 02, 2007, 11:57:17 PM

Quote from: Coach C on January 02, 2007, 02:38:14 PM
Ralph -

What can you tell me about Southwestern Assemblies of God?
...
Kidding!!!

You were only kidding? :-\

I was going to dazzle you with the fact that SAGU occupies the former campus of Trinity (TX) University, and its most famous former student may be Jerry Lee Lewis!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 03, 2007, 12:43:27 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 02, 2007, 08:37:18 PM
Quote from: AndOne on January 02, 2007, 08:24:04 PM

One thing I really thought stunk about the national tournament last year was that a team which had lost 4 of its last 5 games before the tournament began got to host not one, but two games to begin the tournament. They also hosted the conference tourney prior to the start of the national tourney, and couldn't even win a first round conference tourney game on their own home floor. The 1st round conference tourney loss was their 4th loss in 5 games. As a reward for this stellar finish, the national selection committee rewarded them with the first two games at home, while the team that finished 2nd in the conference regular season and then won the conference tourney was sent on a seven hour bus ride for their 1st round game. Sorry, but this doesn't make sense to me. Makes me think someone at the school had an in with a member of the committee.

AndOne, suggesting that Augustana was a higher seed than North Central because someone "had an in" with a tournament committee member is silly. Come on.

The Division III Tournament seeding process is spelled out very clearly in the handbook. Timing of losses is not a factor that is weighed at all. On selection day, Augustana's QOWI and in-region winning % were both better than North Central's. See here:

http://www.d3sports.com/post/index.php?topic=2910.180

1-10
Amherst 12.160 24-1
Lawrence 11.682 22-0
Worcester Polytech 11.250 20-3
Mississippi College 11.154 25-1
Tufts 11.000 20-5 Pool C
St. John Fisher 11.000 22-1
Lincoln 10.688 12-4 Pool B
Wittenberg 10.652 20-3
Gordon 10.560 22-3 Pool C
Carnegie Mellon 10.550 16-4

11-20
Virginia Wesleyan 10.481 24-3
Augustana 10.478 19-4 Pool C
Cortland State 10.440 22-3 Pool C
York (Pa.) 10.400 22-3 Pool C
Transylvania 10.370 23-4
Trinity (Texas) 10.316 16-3 Pool C
UW-Whitewater 10.304 18-5
William Paterson 10.240 19-6
Hope 10.211 17-2
North Central 10.095 16-5

That is why Augie was the higher seed.

Q, my only problem with the selection committee is they sent the wrong message. By sending NCC 61/2 to 7 hrs. to St. Thomas to play a true road tourney game, the committee basically told NCC "you don't deserve a neutral site game." "While IWU, Carrol, Lacrosse, Stout, and Carleton all do, and I don't care if you have a higher QOWI and won your conference tourny."

That's how I viewed it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 03, 2007, 02:12:23 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 02, 2007, 08:37:18 PM
Quote from: AndOne on January 02, 2007, 08:24:04 PM

One thing I really thought stunk about the national tournament last year was that a team which had lost 4 of its last 5 games before the tournament began got to host not one, but two games to begin the tournament. They also hosted the conference tourney prior to the start of the national tourney, and couldn't even win a first round conference tourney game on their own home floor. The 1st round conference tourney loss was their 4th loss in 5 games. As a reward for this stellar finish, the national selection committee rewarded them with the first two games at home, while the team that finished 2nd in the conference regular season and then won the conference tourney was sent on a seven hour bus ride for their 1st round game. Sorry, but this doesn't make sense to me. Makes me think someone at the school had an in with a member of the committee.

AndOne, suggesting that Augustana was a higher seed than North Central because someone "had an in" with a tournament committee member is silly. Come on.

The Division III Tournament seeding process is spelled out very clearly in the handbook. Timing of losses is not a factor that is weighed at all. On selection day, Augustana's QOWI and in-region winning % were both better than North Central's. See here:

http://www.d3sports.com/post/index.php?topic=2910.180

1-10
Amherst 12.160 24-1
Lawrence 11.682 22-0
Worcester Polytech 11.250 20-3
Mississippi College 11.154 25-1
Tufts 11.000 20-5 Pool C
St. John Fisher 11.000 22-1
Lincoln 10.688 12-4 Pool B
Wittenberg 10.652 20-3
Gordon 10.560 22-3 Pool C
Carnegie Mellon 10.550 16-4

11-20
Virginia Wesleyan 10.481 24-3
Augustana 10.478 19-4 Pool C
Cortland State 10.440 22-3 Pool C
York (Pa.) 10.400 22-3 Pool C
Transylvania 10.370 23-4
Trinity (Texas) 10.316 16-3 Pool C
UW-Whitewater 10.304 18-5
William Paterson 10.240 19-6
Hope 10.211 17-2
North Central 10.095 16-5

That is why Augie was the higher seed.

TQ-----

Of course I was being silly when I mentioned someone having an "in" with the committee! :)

HOWEVER, if QOWI and in-region winning % are the determining factors, North Central's were above those of St. Thomas. Soooooooo----why did NCC get screwed by being the team that had to take the 7 hour bus ride???? It seems St. Thomas should have been the one making the trip! Or am I missing something?

Life is never fair, but by the placement NC rec'd it sure looks like it didn't do them much good to beat conference champ Augie by 25 when Augie beat them by only 6, to beat the team that eventually finished 3rd in the nation 2 out of 3, and to win the conference tourney. For that their reward was a 7 hour bus ride. I know I'm crying in my beer, and we can't change the past. Maybe the core of the problem is the perception that, by its assignment, the NCAA Selection Committee just didn't seem to value NC's accomplishments. Ok--the bitch session is over. :) Sorry.

P.S. I hope no team receives this kind of treatment this year--if thats possible. But, as I think many here would agree, there is no shortage of mental deficiency at the NCAA!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2007, 02:42:21 AM

St. Thomas had a 20-5 in-region winning region, however, which is actually better ... go figure ... than a 16-5 regional record.

Remember that these first-round single games are essentially 8-9 games -- the difference between the two teams is going to be minor. But the differences are usually visible if you get the facts right.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 03, 2007, 06:17:47 AM

Even as a Pointer fan, I'm surprised that the dawgs jumped from #5 to #1 after seeing then #7 Ohio Northern beat then #1 Wooster on their home court, #6 Wittenberg and a "just out of the top 25" La Crosse team.

And obviously the pollsters knew that St. Thomas' All-American didn't play by dropping them only one spot after losing to La Crosse at home.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on January 03, 2007, 07:53:26 AM

The selection speaks volumes. After reading and commenting the last week, I am dissappointed but not surprised.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 03, 2007, 09:39:16 AM

I think that's a really fair poll. While Amherst might complain about dropping, they actually picked up a few points and all three teams at the top are neck and neck.

Whitworth is probably the team that can cry no respect at this point. They've been quite impressive early on and have yet to lose.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 03, 2007, 09:55:59 AM

Quote from: fpc85 on January 03, 2007, 07:53:26 AM
The selection speaks volumes. After reading and commenting the last week, I am dissappointed but not surprised.

Amherst gained 6 more first place votes and 7 votes total, after a very unimpressive win over a team that my alma mater (McMurry) beat by 13 earlier in the month.

I think that Amherst held its ground very nicely.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 03, 2007, 10:04:25 AM

Believe it or not. I won't say much about Greensboro not getting one vote. I think they should, but the pollsters spoke. Although I would say I totally disagree with CNU getting 4 votes after going 2-2. I still don't understand how they got votes in the first place. I think Guilford is very underated team. I am sure since they beat AU that that probably would have pushed Guilford into the polls. Even still I will say I am a little disappointed Greensboro didn't get a vote. I am sure somebody can tell me, because I don't have the time to figure out how many teams with at least 9 wins didn't get votes and how many teams with at least 3 losses got votes.

Of the 3 teams that got #1 votes my number 1 team is Ohio Northern.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 03, 2007, 10:05:42 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 03, 2007, 09:55:59 AM
Amherst gained 6 more first place votes and 7 votes total, [...]

That suggests to me that the Amherst believers (who had them in 2nd last week) are still believers, and the rest are not convinced.

I'm surprised, considering how many times I posted that Amherst would end up as #1 with 15-17 1st place votes. Just goes to show that one can obsess over every detail of the poll for 7+ years and still not have a clue... ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 03, 2007, 10:13:02 AM

My #1 team coming into the season was Ohio Northern and I'll stick with them for a while, but the Point is looking pretty good at times this year. If they can get consistent by February, they could do it again.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on January 03, 2007, 10:23:39 AM

Quote from: fpc85 on January 03, 2007, 07:53:26 AM
The selection speaks volumes. After reading and commenting the last week, I am dissappointed but not surprised.

Yes it does. It speaks volumes for playing some tough competition in the nonconference portion of your schedule which Amherst didn't come close to doing.

Let's look at the opponent's combined winning percentage of the teams in the top 3:

UW-SP's opponents have a combined winning percentage of 0.568. They also have wins over the current #12, #18, #21 and #25 teams in the d3hoops poll and they are undefeated against d3 competition.

ONU's opponents have an even better combined winning percentage of 0.634 and they have wins vs. the current #4, #7 and #25 teams, but they did suffer what now looks like a very uncharacteristic loss to previously ranked B-W.

And then there's Amherst whose opponents have a stellar combined winning percentage of 0.425?! Only 2 of their 9 opponents have above 0.500 records?! Oh and they have beaten the current #21 team in the poll (the only ranked opponent they have faced).

I think it's pretty clear as to why Amherst hasn't gained the confidence of many of the pollsters when you compare those #'s listed above. Besides, why are you complaining? We all know that Amherst will breeze through the rest of their schedule, garner the #1 seed out of the Northeast Region, get one of the byes again, as well as get picked to host another sectional and breeze their way to Salem in one of the easiest brackets in the tournament. Why should you get all worked up about that??? ::) ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 03, 2007, 10:24:13 AM

I copied this from the NESCAC board where I responded to a disheartened Amherst poster.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 02, 2007, 01:32:43 AM
There's been a fair amount of discussion about this in the multi-regional boards, where there's a topic devoted to the Top 25 poll.

Here are some enlightening numbers:

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 01, 2007, 12:52:38 PM
Team A: Record of opponents played to date: 35-40, .466
Team B: Record of opponents played to date: 70-32, .686
Team C: Record of opponents played to date: 65-49, .570

That's all the games the opponents have played against teams other than the one we're ranking (you can add nine or ten losses and one or zero wins if you like).

Or this list:
Record of D-III opponents played to date: 35-40, .466
Record of D-III opponents played to date: 63-26, .707
Record of D-III opponents played to date: 54-27, .667

A is Amherst. B is Ohio Northern. C is UW-Stevens Point.

Walzy, from the other side of the country, let me re-frame this question!

(Can you not analyze the respect that Amherst is getting?)

Donald Trump has just come to you and said, "You are my apprentice. Look at these 3 companies in the "D3widget market". They can all be purchased for the same share price. Here are current performance data showing relative domination in their markets. Now the market is national and it is still early. You can look at the relative performances of their recent competition.

"I want to buy only one. How do you rank them? And why?"

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 03, 2007, 10:30:53 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2007, 02:42:21 AM
St. Thomas had a 20-5 in-region winning region, however, which is actually better ... go figure ... than a 16-5 regional record.

Remember that these first-round single games are essentially 8-9 games -- the difference between the two teams is going to be minor. But the differences are usually visible if you get the facts right.

Pat, wouldn't you agree an 8-9 game should be played on a neutral site? Not have one team travel over 300 miles to play a road game in the 1st round.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 03, 2007, 10:31:50 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 03, 2007, 10:13:02 AM
If they can get consistent by February, they could do it again.

That is my problem sometimes with the poll. I never once thought Virginia Wesleyan was the number #1 team preseason. They had a very good run at the end of last year, winning alot of close games en route to that title. There are a lot of what-if's I know, but that is just my opinion. Sometimes it doesn't matter how well you play until post-season comes along.

I thought Flordia winning the d-1 national championship was a team that put up good games down the stretch. I thought they had better teams in the past that should have won. I know in most peoples office polls Flordia wasn't a team they had winning it all, because they never seem to play consistent enough in March. Losing first round games in the past.

Scotsfan-
thanks for that post. That makes my power rankings for the top 3 look even better.
I will have to share that with my USASouth friends.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 03, 2007, 10:36:47 AM

The President: "Okay D3 fans, let's call this meeting to order. We have a quorum.

"The motion made by ScotsFan reads:

Whereas Amherst fans are getting their feelings hurt, and

Whereas Amherst is undefeated, and

Whereas Amherst really does not like Williams,

We hereby move that Amherst is the unanimous #1 (all 625 votes) for the remaining weeks of the regular season and shall be seeded to defend that ranking by playing their first round games in the NCAA playoffs in Wooster's Timken Gymnasium and then sent to Wisconsin for the Sectionals.

All in favor, say Aye!"

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 03, 2007, 10:54:03 AM

There has been a lot of discussion this week about the poll, records, strength of schedules, etc.. My take is that if strength of schedule is not factored into the D3hoops.com Top 25 equation, we'd end up with a poll that looks like the Quality of Wins Index list.

Here is the final QOWI - with in-region winning % also listed - from last year, heading into the tourney.

Amherst 12.160 24-1
Lawrence 11.682 22-0
Worcester Polytech 11.250 20-3
Mississippi College 11.154 25-1
Tufts 11.000 20-5 Pool C
St. John Fisher 11.000 22-1
Lincoln 10.688 12-4 Pool B
Wittenberg 10.652 20-3
Gordon 10.560 22-3 Pool C
Carnegie Mellon 10.550 16-4
Virginia Wesleyan 10.481 24-3
Augustana 10.478 19-4 Pool C
Cortland State 10.440 22-3 Pool C
York (Pa.) 10.400 22-3 Pool C
Transylvania 10.370 23-4
Trinity (Texas) 10.316 16-3 Pool C
UW-Whitewater 10.304 18-5
William Paterson 10.240 19-6
Hope 10.211 17-2
North Central 10.095 16-5
Bates 10.091 16-6 (not selected)
Carroll 10.087 19-4 Pool C
Ursinus 10.080 20-5
Baldwin-Wallace 10.077 22-4
Washington U. 10.050 14-6 (not selected)
Wooster 10.042 21-3 Pool C
Carleton 10.000 18-5 Pool C
St. Thomas 9.960 20-5
Baruch 9.958 21-3 Pool C
Alvernia 9.958 21-3
Illinois Wesleyan 9.952 15-6 Pool C

----------
Final Four scores:

Wittenberg 64
Amherst 60
http://www4.wittenberg.edu/news/athletics/mbasketball/statistics/05-06statistics/ncaa7.htm

Virginia Wesleyan 81
IWU 79
http://www.iwu.edu/~iwunews/sports/mbb2006/ncaa5.htm

IWU 71
Amherst 68
http://www.iwu.edu/~iwunews/sports/mbb2006/ncaa6.htm

Virginia Wesleyan 59
Wittenberg 56
http://www4.wittenberg.edu/news/athletics/mbasketball/statistics/05-06statistics/ncaa8.htm
----------

Amherst played Wittenberg and IWU tough, but the gap between, say, IWU and Amherst certainly wasn't what the QOWI would indicate. The D3hoops.com voters try their best to factor everything in to create a poll that accurately reflects how teams stack up. It usually ends up being very accurate.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 03, 2007, 11:08:16 AM

Quote from: cardinalpride on January 03, 2007, 10:30:53 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2007, 02:42:21 AM
St. Thomas had a 20-5 in-region winning region, however, which is actually better ... go figure ... than a 16-5 regional record.

Remember that these first-round single games are essentially 8-9 games -- the difference between the two teams is going to be minor. But the differences are usually visible if you get the facts right.
Pat, wouldn't you agree an 8-9 game should be played on a neutral site? Not have one team travel over 300 miles to play a road game in the 1st round.

In the Division III tournament, you have to be prepared to face good teams on the road. I've watched IWU get sent to #1 Wash U in 2003 Round 2, #1 Hanover in 2004 Round 2, and 25-0 Lawrence in 2006 Round 3. You can complain about your draw, or you can go out and win the game...as IWU did in all 3 above. (If you can't get by St. Thomas on the road, you're probably not going to win at Lawrence.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 03, 2007, 11:15:23 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 03, 2007, 11:08:16 AM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 03, 2007, 10:30:53 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2007, 02:42:21 AM
St. Thomas had a 20-5 in-region winning region, however, which is actually better ... go figure ... than a 16-5 regional record.

Remember that these first-round single games are essentially 8-9 games -- the difference between the two teams is going to be minor. But the differences are usually visible if you get the facts right.
Pat, wouldn't you agree an 8-9 game should be played on a neutral site? Not have one team travel over 300 miles to play a road game in the 1st round.

In the Division III tournament, you have to be prepared to face good teams on the road. I've watched IWU get sent to #1 Wash U in 2003 Round 2, #1 Hanover in 2004 Round 2, and 25-0 Lawrence in 2006 Round 3. You can complain about your draw, or you can go out and win the game...as IWU did in all 3 above. (If you can't get by St. Thomas on the road, you're probably not going to win at Lawrence.)

+1 Q, one other thing that NCC didn't do is to uphold the CCIW banner!

NCC got sent "out of region". Their next CCIW game could have been IWU in round 3. They could have given the CCIW 2 more victories, out of conference.

NCC should be grateful that the CCIW had gone to the post-season format and that the NCAA gave D3 the extra Pool C bids. In 2005, there is a good chance that they would have been sitting at home!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 03, 2007, 11:35:06 AM

Aye

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 03, 2007, 12:06:18 PM

Ralph,

And IWU, with a 15-6 in-region record and a QOWI under 10, most certainly would not have had a shot at the Final Four!

Thank God (and the NCAA) for expansion! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 03, 2007, 12:19:01 PM

Q,

Watch out, you may be suffering from the 'Mr. Ypsi Exaggeration Syndrome'! ;D

Wash U and Hanover were each only #2 when we went to their places and beat them (though you left out U Chicago in 2001, who WERE #1 when we beat them in Chicago). I may be misremembering, but I think all three of those teams had won at the Shirk during the regular season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2007, 12:23:58 PM

Quote from: cardinalpride on January 03, 2007, 10:30:53 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2007, 02:42:21 AM
St. Thomas had a 20-5 in-region winning region, however, which is actually better ... go figure ... than a 16-5 regional record.

Remember that these first-round single games are essentially 8-9 games -- the difference between the two teams is going to be minor. But the differences are usually visible if you get the facts right.
Pat, wouldn't you agree an 8-9 game should be played on a neutral site? Not have one team travel over 300 miles to play a road game in the 1st round.

That's not the way the tournament it set up. None of the 8-9 games are currently played on neutral floors.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 03, 2007, 12:28:22 PM

Top 25 News and Notes

...has moved to a new location...the D3 Hoops Daily Dose.

Click here to access the Daily Dose. (http://www.d3hoops.com/dailydose/)

:)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2007, 12:34:17 PM

Thanks, David. And we would like to encourage more Daily Dose discussion across the board. (Because Google and lots of other new media like blogs!)

If you haven't registered to comment on the Daily Dose, there's a link at the bottom that reads "Register to comment" that you can use.

http://www.d3hoops.com/dailydose/wp-register.php

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 03, 2007, 01:48:49 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2007, 12:23:58 PM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 03, 2007, 10:30:53 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2007, 02:42:21 AM
St. Thomas had a 20-5 in-region winning region, however, which is actually better ... go figure ... than a 16-5 regional record.

Remember that these first-round single games are essentially 8-9 games -- the difference between the two teams is going to be minor. But the differences are usually visible if you get the facts right.
Pat, wouldn't you agree an 8-9 game should be played on a neutral site? Not have one team travel over 300 miles to play a road game in the 1st round.

That's not the way the tournament it set up. None of the 8-9 games are currently played on neutral floors.

Maybe thats something that should be looked at. After all the season long hard work involved in qualifying for the tournament, I'm sure you wouldn't your team to be sent over 400 miles away (404 to be exact) for its first round game. Its pretty hard to get many fans/supporters to a location 7 hours away, especially on a weeknight when people would have to miss at least 2 days of work to be reasonably able to attend the game. Its one thing to have to be able to win on the road. Its quite another to have to be able to do it during the 1st round when it sure seems many much more convenient scheduling options are available.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Downtown on January 03, 2007, 02:04:35 PM

Watch out for UW-Oshkosh to climb the polls. Right now they are behind Stevens Point as the best basketball team in Wisconsin.

In my opinion, looking at the polls I don't see a clear cut #1. All three teams are so close to each other in points, I don't think I've ever seen three teams so close to each other fighting for the number 1 spot.

To all the Amherst fans, remember that Stevens Point has to get through the WIAC. Even though so far its been an easy ride, everyone knows that its almost impossible for a team to finish undefeated in conference play.

Point has earned the #1 ranking with how well they've been playing this season, and especially the competition. I don't know how anyone can argue the point against why the Pointers are number 1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2007, 02:08:52 PM

Quote from: AndOne on January 03, 2007, 01:48:49 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2007, 12:23:58 PM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 03, 2007, 10:30:53 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2007, 02:42:21 AM
St. Thomas had a 20-5 in-region winning region, however, which is actually better ... go figure ... than a 16-5 regional record.

Remember that these first-round single games are essentially 8-9 games -- the difference between the two teams is going to be minor. But the differences are usually visible if you get the facts right.
Pat, wouldn't you agree an 8-9 game should be played on a neutral site? Not have one team travel over 300 miles to play a road game in the 1st round.

That's not the way the tournament it set up. None of the 8-9 games are currently played on neutral floors.

Maybe thats something that should be looked at. After all the season long hard work involved in qualifying for the tournament, I'm sure you wouldn't your team to be sent over 400 miles away (404 to be exact) for its first round game. Its pretty hard to get many fans/supporters to a location 7 hours away, especially on a weeknight when people would have to miss at least 2 days of work to be reasonably able to attend the game. Its one thing to have to be able to win on the road. Its quite another to have to be able to do it during the 1st round when it sure seems many much more convenient scheduling options are available.

Why? That would be the way the game has been played for more than a decade. This is Division III, you know, not Division I. As we get fewer and fewer byes we are moving away from that setup but it has been the status quo in Division III for many years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 03, 2007, 03:16:58 PM

Quote from: Mr. Downtown on January 03, 2007, 02:04:35 PM
To all the Amherst fans, remember that Stevens Point has to get through the WIAC. Even though so far its been an easy ride, everyone knows that its almost impossible for a team to finish undefeated in conference play.

You also have to remember that as easy as the rest of Amherst's schedule is in comparison, they do have to travel to Maine for a game with as yet undefeated Bates later this year. Bates has amassed some nice wins thus far and has every remaining meaningful game at home the rest of the year (save a trip to Gordon, but it's yet to be determined if that falls into the meaningful category).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 03, 2007, 03:32:23 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 03, 2007, 10:13:02 AM
If they can get consistent by February, they could do it again.

Where's the inconsistency in a 10-1 record (wins at Lawrence, vs. Augustana, an overrated Carroll and an underrated Ripon) and a 4-0 conference record thus far, with wins vs. Whitewater, La Crosse and Oshkosh? lol :P (it's tongue in cheek, no need to respond!) ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 03, 2007, 04:13:46 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2007, 02:08:52 PM
Quote from: AndOne on January 03, 2007, 01:48:49 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2007, 12:23:58 PM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 03, 2007, 10:30:53 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2007, 02:42:21 AM
St. Thomas had a 20-5 in-region winning region, however, which is actually better ... go figure ... than a 16-5 regional record.

Remember that these first-round single games are essentially 8-9 games -- the difference between the two teams is going to be minor. But the differences are usually visible if you get the facts right.
Pat, wouldn't you agree an 8-9 game should be played on a neutral site? Not have one team travel over 300 miles to play a road game in the 1st round.

That's not the way the tournament it set up. None of the 8-9 games are currently played on neutral floors.

Maybe thats something that should be looked at. After all the season long hard work involved in qualifying for the tournament, I'm sure you wouldn't your team to be sent over 400 miles away (404 to be exact) for its first round game. Its pretty hard to get many fans/supporters to a location 7 hours away, especially on a weeknight when people would have to miss at least 2 days of work to be reasonably able to attend the game. Its one thing to have to be able to win on the road. Its quite another to have to be able to do it during the 1st round when it sure seems many much more convenient scheduling options are available.

Why? That would be the way the game has been played for more than a decade. This is Division III, you know, not Division I. As we get fewer and fewer byes we are moving away from that setup but it has been the status quo in Division III for many years.

Sometimes the "status quo" is exactly what should be looked at as far as making any possible improvements.
I'm not talking about wholesale changes, but how often have you seen the NCAA do something that seems to make little or no sense?
Maybe the product can't be improved, but Division III or not, don't we all want it to be the best it can be. I just don't think with some of the tournament scheduling seen last year that such was the case.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 03, 2007, 04:58:05 PM

Hey its still inconsistent if they play like the #1 team some days and only the #10 on others, right?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 03, 2007, 06:47:12 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 03, 2007, 11:08:16 AM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 03, 2007, 10:30:53 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2007, 02:42:21 AM
St. Thomas had a 20-5 in-region winning region, however, which is actually better ... go figure ... than a 16-5 regional record.

Remember that these first-round single games are essentially 8-9 games -- the difference between the two teams is going to be minor. But the differences are usually visible if you get the facts right.
Pat, wouldn't you agree an 8-9 game should be played on a neutral site? Not have one team travel over 300 miles to play a road game in the 1st round.

In the Division III tournament, you have to be prepared to face good teams on the road. I've watched IWU get sent to #1 Wash U in 2003 Round 2, #1 Hanover in 2004 Round 2, and 25-0 Lawrence in 2006 Round 3. You can complain about your draw, or you can go out and win the game...as IWU did in all 3 above. (If you can't get by St. Thomas on the road, you're probably not going to win at Lawrence.)

Q, All I'm saying is that game could have been played at Lawrence, a neutral site, since the winner had to travel there anyway a day later. Why should any school be put in the position to travel 7hrs to play a road game and have to travel another 4-5hrs to play another road game the next day if they win. Totally unnecessary in my opinion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 03, 2007, 06:52:58 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 03, 2007, 11:15:23 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 03, 2007, 11:08:16 AM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 03, 2007, 10:30:53 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2007, 02:42:21 AM
St. Thomas had a 20-5 in-region winning region, however, which is actually better ... go figure ... than a 16-5 regional record.

Remember that these first-round single games are essentially 8-9 games -- the difference between the two teams is going to be minor. But the differences are usually visible if you get the facts right.
Pat, wouldn't you agree an 8-9 game should be played on a neutral site? Not have one team travel over 300 miles to play a road game in the 1st round.

In the Division III tournament, you have to be prepared to face good teams on the road. I've watched IWU get sent to #1 Wash U in 2003 Round 2, #1 Hanover in 2004 Round 2, and 25-0 Lawrence in 2006 Round 3. You can complain about your draw, or you can go out and win the game...as IWU did in all 3 above. (If you can't get by St. Thomas on the road, you're probably not going to win at Lawrence.)

NCC should be grateful that the CCIW had gone to the post-season format and that the NCAA gave D3 the extra Pool C bids. In 2005, there is a good chance that they would have been sitting at home!

FYI, Mr. Turner, NCC didn't get a pool C bid. They earned an automatic bid by winning the CCIW tournament! IWU would have been sitting at home had it not been for additional pool c bids.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 03, 2007, 06:55:39 PM

Quote from: cardinalpride on January 03, 2007, 06:52:58 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 03, 2007, 11:15:23 AM
NCC should be grateful that the CCIW had gone to the post-season format and that the NCAA gave D3 the extra Pool C bids. In 2005, there is a good chance that they would have been sitting at home!
FYI, Mr. Turner, NCC didn't get a pool C bid. They earned an automatic bid by winning the CCIW tournament! IWU would have been sitting at home had it not been for additional pool c bids.

You missed the first part of Ralph's statement. NCC got a Pool A bid because the CCIW went to a post-season tournament format. Had it not been for that tournament, Augustana would have gotten the Pool A bid, and NCC would have been a Pool C candidate. That's where the extra C bids would have helped NCC's cause.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 03, 2007, 06:57:22 PM

CP,

Ralph was indicating that without the tourney (and therefore the A), NCC would have had to rely on a C, and both NCC and IWU would have been sitting at home without the expansion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 03, 2007, 07:26:00 PM

Quote from: cardinalpride on January 03, 2007, 06:47:12 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 03, 2007, 11:08:16 AM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 03, 2007, 10:30:53 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2007, 02:42:21 AM
St. Thomas had a 20-5 in-region winning region, however, which is actually better ... go figure ... than a 16-5 regional record.

Remember that these first-round single games are essentially 8-9 games -- the difference between the two teams is going to be minor. But the differences are usually visible if you get the facts right.
Pat, wouldn't you agree an 8-9 game should be played on a neutral site? Not have one team travel over 300 miles to play a road game in the 1st round.

In the Division III tournament, you have to be prepared to face good teams on the road. I've watched IWU get sent to #1 Wash U in 2003 Round 2, #1 Hanover in 2004 Round 2, and 25-0 Lawrence in 2006 Round 3. You can complain about your draw, or you can go out and win the game...as IWU did in all 3 above. (If you can't get by St. Thomas on the road, you're probably not going to win at Lawrence.)
Q, All I'm saying is that game could have been played at Lawrence, a neutral site, since the winner had to travel there anyway a day later. Why should any school be put in the position to travel 7hrs to play a road game and have to travel another 4-5hrs to play another road game the next day if they win. Totally unnecessary in my opinion.

And deny the Tommies a home playoff game!!! :D

Cardinalpride, you are providing the chance for the old timers to talk about the way that it was back in the good ol' days of only 48 bids and the "away-home-bye" format, in 2005! The old thinking was:

1) Which 16 teams deserve a bye? Lawrence

2) Of those left, which 16 deserve a Home Game? St Thomas

3) Who should be glad that they are in the tourney? Okay, North Central! Let's send them to St Thomas. They won their conference. :D ;D :D

Thirty-two of the 48 teams got to host a playoff game! That was the "bennie" under the old system.

Last year (2006), St Thomas won their conference. They were a Pool A bid. North Central was a Pool C bid, in the expanded playoffs. It was a no-brainer for everyone else. :)

...

Thanks guys, I got called away. before I could finish...

Cardinal, before the decision to go to CCIW post-season tourney in 2006, we would get "doctoral dissertation quality" essays in Bracketology by the CCIW braintrust (Titan Q, Mr Ypsi, Sager, etc.) on the pros and cons of the CCIW post-season tourney.

I hope that every year, that the CCIW gets 1) its fair shake at hosting a Regional, 2) another team gets its fair shake at playing close before its fans, and that if it gets a third, then that team gets to make noise in another bracket and proudly carry the CCIW standard. Those are my principles for any conference. :)

+1 karma, Cardinal Pride, you are gonna learn a lot about the proud CCIW conference traditions.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2007, 07:50:40 PM

Quote from: cardinalpride on January 03, 2007, 06:47:12 PM
Q, All I'm saying is that game could have been played at Lawrence, a neutral site, since the winner had to travel there anyway a day later. Why should any school be put in the position to travel 7hrs to play a road game and have to travel another 4-5hrs to play another road game the next day if they win. Totally unnecessary in my opinion.

It's not the next day. There was a day off in between.

All I'm saying is that, somehow, D-III teams have managed to survive this format for years. Many teams have managed to win two games on the road in the first two rounds.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 03, 2007, 08:07:23 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 03, 2007, 07:26:00 PM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 03, 2007, 06:47:12 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 03, 2007, 11:08:16 AM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 03, 2007, 10:30:53 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2007, 02:42:21 AM
St. Thomas had a 20-5 in-region winning region, however, which is actually better ... go figure ... than a 16-5 regional record.

Remember that these first-round single games are essentially 8-9 games -- the difference between the two teams is going to be minor. But the differences are usually visible if you get the facts right.
Pat, wouldn't you agree an 8-9 game should be played on a neutral site? Not have one team travel over 300 miles to play a road game in the 1st round.

In the Division III tournament, you have to be prepared to face good teams on the road. I've watched IWU get sent to #1 Wash U in 2003 Round 2, #1 Hanover in 2004 Round 2, and 25-0 Lawrence in 2006 Round 3. You can complain about your draw, or you can go out and win the game...as IWU did in all 3 above. (If you can't get by St. Thomas on the road, you're probably not going to win at Lawrence.)
Q, All I'm saying is that game could have been played at Lawrence, a neutral site, since the winner had to travel there anyway a day later. Why should any school be put in the position to travel 7hrs to play a road game and have to travel another 4-5hrs to play another road game the next day if they win. Totally unnecessary in my opinion.
And deny the Tommies a home playoff game!!! :D

Cardinalpride, you are providing the chance for the old timers to talk about the way that it was back in the good ol' days of only 48 bids and the "away-home-bye" format, in 2005! The old thinking was:

1) Which 16 teams deserve a bye? Lawrence

2) Of those left, which 16 deserve a Home Game? St Thomas

3) Who should be glad that they are in the tourney? Okay, North Central! Let's send them to St Thomas. They won their conference. D ;D :D

Thirty-two of the 48 teams got to host a playoff game! That was the "bennie" under the old system.

Last year (2006), St Thomas won their conference. They were a Pool A bid. North Central was a Pool C bid, in the expanded playoffs. It was a no-brainer for everyone else. :)

...

Thanks guys, I got called away. before I could finish...

Cardinal, before the decision to go to CCIW post-season tourney in 2006, we would get "doctoral dissertation quality" essays in Bracketology by the CCIW braintrust (Titan Q, Mr Ypsi, Sager, etc.) on the pros and cons of the CCIW post-season tourney.

I hope that every year, that the CCIW gets 1) its fair shake at hosting a Regional, 2) another team gets its fair shake at playing close before its fans, and that if it gets a third, then that team gets to make noise in another bracket and proudly carry the CCIW standard. Those are my principles for any conference. :)

+1 karma, Cardinal Pride, you are gonna learn a lot about the proud CCIW conference traditions.

Well, Mr. Turner, they should have sent NCC to Hope and let them play Calvin in the 1st round and sent Lacrosse or Stout to St. Thomas. Or Better yet send NCC to UW-W and let them play Carrol. IWU could have went to St. Thomas since by definition they were the third team to get in, and who has more CCIW tradition to showcase than the mighty Titans. Oh, that's right, the NCAA wouldn't have done that because of the 500 mile rule. I know you remember that rule because it used to be the 400 mile rule. IWU could've flew to the land of 10,000 lakes and got there in 1&1/2 hrs, but we all know the NCAA didn't want to pay for that expense don't we!

Also, Mr. Turner, I already know about the tradition of the CCIW conference. I'm a proud former student-athlete in the CCIW and won a national and numerous CCIW titles while competing in/for this conference. Thanks for the sarcasm as well as the karma point! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 03, 2007, 08:15:31 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2007, 07:50:40 PM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 03, 2007, 06:47:12 PM
Q, All I'm saying is that game could have been played at Lawrence, a neutral site, since the winner had to travel there anyway a day later. Why should any school be put in the position to travel 7hrs to play a road game and have to travel another 4-5hrs to play another road game the next day if they win. Totally unnecessary in my opinion.

It's not the next day. There was a day off in between.

All I'm saying is that, somehow, D-III teams have managed to survive this format for years. Many teams have managed to win two games on the road in the first two rounds.

Sorry for the confusion Pat. By "next day", I meant travel time not actually playing the game. Besides, just because the DIII format has always been this way doesn't make it right or fair to the invited schools. The format is supposed to get better over the years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 03, 2007, 08:55:17 PM

Quote from: cardinalpride on January 03, 2007, 08:15:31 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2007, 07:50:40 PM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 03, 2007, 06:47:12 PM
Q, All I'm saying is that game could have been played at Lawrence, a neutral site, since the winner had to travel there anyway a day later. Why should any school be put in the position to travel 7hrs to play a road game and have to travel another 4-5hrs to play another road game the next day if they win. Totally unnecessary in my opinion.

It's not the next day. There was a day off in between.

All I'm saying is that, somehow, D-III teams have managed to survive this format for years. Many teams have managed to win two games on the road in the first two rounds.
Sorry for the confusion Pat. By "next day", I meant travel time not actually playing the game. Besides, just because the DIII format has always been this way doesn't make it right or fair to the invited schools. The format is supposed to get better over the years.

"The format is supposed to get better over the years."
Isn't that what I said previously? (Not trying to steal your thunder Cardinalpride---just reinforcing it!)

Quote from: Pat Coleman on Today at 02:08:52 pm
Quote from: AndOne on Today at 01:48:49 pm
Quote from: Pat Coleman on Today at 12:23:58 pm
Quote from: cardinalpride on Today at 10:30:53 am
Quote from: Pat Coleman on Today at 02:42:21 am
St. Thomas had a 20-5 in-region winning region, however, which is actually better ... go figure ... than a 16-5 regional record.

Remember that these first-round single games are essentially 8-9 games -- the difference between the two teams is going to be minor. But the differences are usually visible if you get the facts right.
Pat, wouldn't you agree an 8-9 game should be played on a neutral site? Not have one team travel over 300 miles to play a road game in the 1st round.

That's not the way the tournament it set up. None of the 8-9 games are currently played on neutral floors.

Maybe thats something that should be looked at. After all the season long hard work involved in qualifying for the tournament, I'm sure you wouldn't your team to be sent over 400 miles away (404 to be exact) for its first round game. Its pretty hard to get many fans/supporters to a location 7 hours away, especially on a weeknight when people would have to miss at least 2 days of work to be reasonably able to attend the game. Its one thing to have to be able to win on the road. Its quite another to have to be able to do it during the 1st round when it sure seems many much more convenient scheduling options are available.

Why? That would be the way the game has been played for more than a decade. This is Division III, you know, not Division I. As we get fewer and fewer byes we are moving away from that setup but it has been the status quo in Division III for many years.

Sometimes the "status quo" is exactly what should be looked at as far as making any possible improvements.
I'm not talking about wholesale changes, but how often have you seen the NCAA do something that seems to make little or no sense?
Maybe the product can't be improved, but Division III or not, don't we all want it to be the best it can be. I just don't think with some of the tournament scheduling seen last year that such was the case.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 03, 2007, 08:56:41 PM

Cardinal, congratulations on the CCIW and National championships. From the data that I could glean from your posts, I did not know that.

The karma point was to indicate no malice!

I guess that we will agree to disagree.

(Now you can understand how jaded my following ASC football has made me over the past decade. For you occasional fans of D3football, the 2002 post-season saw ASC Champion/ #5 ranked/ #3 South Region ranked UMHB Crusdaers sent to SCAC Champ/ #4 ranked/ #2 South Region Ranked Trinity Tigers in the first round. This year, we saw #3 South Region Ranked HSU sent back to #2 South Region Ranked UMHB for a first round game. Both teams were in the second half of the Top 10 (That board is currently down. Sorry that I cannot be more precise). Therefore a #9 regional seed going to a #8 regional seed just doesn't seem to unusual.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 03, 2007, 09:03:45 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 03, 2007, 07:26:00 PM

Cardinal, before the decision to go to CCIW post-season tourney in 2006, we would get "doctoral dissertation quality" essays in Bracketology by the CCIW braintrust (Titan Q, Mr Ypsi, Sager, etc.) on the pros and cons of the CCIW post-season tourney.

Titan Q, Mr. Ypsi, & Sager-------

Don't you guys feel just super having been appointed as "the CCIW braintrust" by no less than Mr. Turner??????????

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 03, 2007, 09:11:20 PM

Quote from: AndOne on January 03, 2007, 09:03:45 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 03, 2007, 07:26:00 PM

Cardinal, before the decision to go to CCIW post-season tourney in 2006, we would get "doctoral dissertation quality" essays in Bracketology by the CCIW braintrust (Titan Q, Mr Ypsi, Sager, etc.) on the pros and cons of the CCIW post-season tourney.

Titan Q, Mr. Ypsi, & Sager-------

Don't you guys feel just super having been appointed as "the CCIW braintrust" by no less than Mr. Turner??????????

This would wreak havoc on my admiriation for Teddy Roosevelt as the original "Trust Buster"! Fortunately, Q, Greg, and I so rarely agree on anything that we cannot be termed a classic 'trust'! ;D

[Though I am certainly honored to be lumped together with two HoFers!]

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 03, 2007, 09:30:31 PM

Quote from: AndOne on January 03, 2007, 09:03:45 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 03, 2007, 07:26:00 PM

Cardinal, before the decision to go to CCIW post-season tourney in 2006, we would get "doctoral dissertation quality" essays in Bracketology by the CCIW braintrust (Titan Q, Mr Ypsi, Sager, etc.) on the pros and cons of the CCIW post-season tourney.

Titan Q, Mr. Ypsi, & Sager-------

Don't you guys feel just super having been appointed as "the CCIW braintrust" by no less than Mr. Turner??????????

Actually, yeah ... I do. When it comes to the national D3 scene, Ralph really knows his stuff. Plus, he's got mad skills when it comes to text formatting for Posting Up graphs. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 03, 2007, 09:35:41 PM

#7 Wittenberg survives a major scare in Gambier, beating Kenyon 72-67 in OT. Witt's sophomore wing Mark Caraway hit an NBA three with 0:00.5 left just to force the overtime. Kenyon falls to 5-7, Witt moves to 10-2.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on January 03, 2007, 11:39:50 PM

I am generally a supporter of playing tournament games in a 'live' gymnasium. What I mean by that is that I HATE neutral site games. I think that the NCAA should do everything possible to contest the first 2 rounds in the home gym of the higher seeded team. That's not really what happens now, but it's the best case and I thnk we have to keep staing that it's the best case, lest it be lost as a goal.

Right now we have a sytem that has improved, but still does not select the best teams to the tournament and then does even less to properly select seeds the actually indicate the quality of the teams playing. Until the NCAA fixes that porblem, we can argue until the bovines return to the barn about which game should have been where. The plain fact is that the system isn't fair and it isn't just.

Ok - soapbox time over.

DC - nice job on jumping up to the front page. I await your notes eagerly each week.

Best,

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 04, 2007, 12:27:07 AM

Top 25 schedule and results, Jan. 1-7:

#1 UW-Stevens Point (11-1) def. UW-Superior 101-45 and plays at UW-Stout Sat.
#2 Ohio Northern (11-1) won at Muskingum 69-57 and hosts Capital Sat.
#3 Amherst (9-0) def. Babson 89-70 and plays at Williams Sat.
#4 Wooster (10-2) hosts Denison Sat.
#5 St. Thomas (9-1) won at Carleton 64-62 and plays at Bethel Sat.
#6 Whitworth (11-0) won at UC-Santa Cruz 89-44, plays at Linfield Fri. and plays at George Fox Sat.
#7 Wittenberg (10-2) won at Kenyon 72-67 (OT) and hosts Oberlin Sat.
#8 Virginia Wesleyan (9-2) won at Methodist 84-49, hosts Emory & Henry Sat. and hosts Guilford Sun.
#9 William Paterson (9-1) def. Tufts 79-57 and plays at Manhattanville Sat.
#10 Mississippi College (9-1) won at Sul Ross State 69-39 and plays at Howard Payne Sat.
#11 Averett (9-1) lost to Guilford 74-69, plays Richard Stockton Fri. at York (Pa.), and plays York (Pa.)/Hobart Sat. at York (Pa.)
#12 Augustana (10-2) def. North Park 62-48 and plays at Elmhurst Sat.
#13 Puget Sound (9-1) won at Pacific Lutheran 108-96 and plays at Pacific Sat.
#14 Hope (9-2) won at Kalamazoo 87-55 and hosts Olivet Sat.
#15 Bates (8-0) plays Elms Fri. at Union and plays Mt. St. Vincent/Union Sat. at Union
#16 Wheaton (IL) (8-3) won at Baruch 75-66 and hosts North Central Sat.
#17 Carthage (8-2) hosts Northland Fri. and plays at Illinois Wesleyan Sat.
#18 UW-Oshkosh (10-2) def. UW-Platteville 79-58, def. Grinnell 123-105, and hosts UW-Eau Claire Sat.
#19 Johns Hopkins (10-1) hosts Washington Coll. Sat.
#20 NYU (10-0) plays at Carnegie Mellon Fri. and plays at Rochester Sun.
#21 Lawrence (6-3) plays at Ripon Sat.
#22 Texas-Dallas (11-0) lost at Hardin-Simmons 75-56 and plays at McMurry Sat.
#23 Brandeis (10-1) won at Curry 81-73, plays at Rochester Fri., and plays at Carnegie Mellon Sun.
#24 Washington U. (9-1) won at Webster 81-65 and plays at Chicago Sat.
#25 UW-La Crosse (9-4) def. UW-Stout 57-42

Welcome to the wonderful world of conference play!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 04, 2007, 12:41:13 AM

David, the Mississippi College to Sul Ross to HPU trip is brutal.

Mappoint shortest distance, 894 miles, 14 hours 9 minutes to Sul Ross.

Sul Ross to HPU -- Shortest Distance: 323.8 miles or 6 hrs 14 minutes.
Sul Ross to HPU -- Shortest Time: 377.4 miles or 5 hrs 48 minutes.

HPU back home -- Shortest Distance: 552.1 miles or 8 hrs 41 minutes. (Shortest time is less than 0.3 miles and 5 minutes difference.)

(It is 19 miles closer going back, shortest distance, but an hour longer. :-\ Go figure!)

Students will not have returned to HSU or McMurry this weekend for the UT-Dallas games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 04, 2007, 01:22:00 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 04, 2007, 12:27:07 AM
Top 25 schedule and results, Jan. 1-7:

#5 St. Thomas (9-1) won at Carleton 64-62 and plays at Bethel Sat.

How much longer is their all-american center out? That seems like a pretty close score!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 04, 2007, 01:33:44 AM

Quote from: Old School on January 04, 2007, 01:22:00 AM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 04, 2007, 12:27:07 AM
Top 25 schedule and results, Jan. 1-7:

#5 St. Thomas (9-1) won at Carleton 64-62 and plays at Bethel Sat.

How much longer is their all-american center out? That seems like a pretty close score!

Ike Rosefelt returned to action in this game and scored 10 points.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 04, 2007, 01:36:53 AM

Was pretty close -- closer than UW-La Crosse's loss to Carleton.

He played 25 minutes, looks like a good first start back.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 04, 2007, 02:27:31 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 03, 2007, 08:56:41 PM
Cardinal, congratulations on the CCIW and National championships. From the data that I could glean from your posts, I did not know that.

The karma point was to indicate no malice!

I guess that we will agree to disagree.

(Now you can understand how jaded my following ASC football has made me over the past decade. For you occasional fans of D3football, the 2002 post-season saw ASC Champion/ #5 ranked/ #3 South Region ranked UMHB Crusdaers sent to SCAC Champ/ #4 ranked/ #2 South Region Ranked Trinity Tigers in the first round. This year, we saw #3 South Region Ranked HSU sent back to #2 South Region Ranked UMHB for a first round game. Both teams were in the second half of the Top 10 (That board is currently down. Sorry that I cannot be more precise). Therefore a #9 regional seed going to a #8 regional seed just doesn't seem to unusual.)

Thank you Mr. Turner. I know there was no malice intended by the Karma point. I also know you are a long time, well respected, and admired poster on D3, but you're right, we'll have to agree to disagree on this one buddy. By the way, happy New Year! :D :D :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 04, 2007, 06:25:52 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 04, 2007, 01:36:53 AM
Was pretty close -- closer than UW-La Crosse's loss to Carleton.

low blow. lol ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 04, 2007, 09:14:00 AM

Quote from: Old School on January 04, 2007, 06:25:52 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 04, 2007, 01:36:53 AM
Was pretty close -- closer than UW-La Crosse's loss to Carleton.

low blow.

But really funny.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 04, 2007, 11:41:55 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 04, 2007, 12:41:13 AM
David, the Mississippi College to Sul Ross to HPU trip is brutal.

It all depends on your perspective, Ralph. I'd say the trip from Clinton to Alpine is sublime; it's the trip back that sucks! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 04, 2007, 12:08:57 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 04, 2007, 11:41:55 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 04, 2007, 12:41:13 AM
David, the Mississippi College to Sul Ross to HPU trip is brutal.

It all depends on your perspective, Ralph. I'd say the trip from Clinton to Alpine is sublime; it's the trip back that sucks! ;D

You know, I agree with the thought, but only if my basketball legs are working after 900 or 1200 miles on a charter bus! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 04, 2007, 03:30:15 PM

Quote from: Old School on January 04, 2007, 06:25:52 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 04, 2007, 01:36:53 AM
Was pretty close -- closer than UW-La Crosse's loss to Carleton.

low blow.

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 04, 2007, 09:14:00 AM
But really funny.

Yes it was...but La Crosse's win over St. Thomas was bigger than Carleton's win over St...oh, wait a minute! lol ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 04, 2007, 04:56:41 PM

Just for the heck of it, I checked which regions had teams in the Top 25 this week.

Surprisingly all eight had representatives:

West - 6
Midwest - 5
Great Lakes - 4
South - 4
Northeast - 3
Atlantic - 1
Mid-Atlantic - 1
East - 1 (although has anyone ever come up with a good reason why NYU is in the East region when every other NYC school is in the Atlantic?)

Anyway, these numbers seem pretty indicative of the strength of the various regions. The Mid-Atlantic is a bit down this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FisherDynasty on January 04, 2007, 08:44:20 PM

Those numbers are pretty indicative of the strength of the Regions and RESPECT of various regions. Although, the East as a whole is weak, Id take the top teams in the East over the Atlantic and midatlantic anyday, split with the Northeast.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 04, 2007, 10:32:17 PM

Hardin-Simmons has defeated UT-Dallas in Abilene, 75-56.

Box score. (http://hsuathletics.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/stats/2006-2007/hsum11.html)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 04, 2007, 10:34:48 PM

Which is why I wanted to wait until the Comets made this trip. :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 04, 2007, 11:01:42 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 04, 2007, 10:34:48 PM
Which is why I wanted to wait until the Comets made this trip. :-\

Zack Pickelman's wrist must be well.

FG 6-7 3FG 2-2 FT 7-7 for 21 pts and 7 rebs in 32 minutes.

James Peters must be healthy, and Michael Dinkins looks to be part-way back for the Cowboys, too.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: woosterbooster on January 05, 2007, 10:37:31 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 04, 2007, 11:41:55 AMI'd say the trip from Clinton to Alpine is sublime; it's the trip back that sucks! ;D

How about the trip from Clinton to Bush? Somewhat more than sublime, but hopefully we'll get to make that trip back! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 05, 2007, 11:17:04 AM

Quote from: Wooster Booster on January 05, 2007, 10:37:31 AM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 04, 2007, 11:41:55 AMI'd say the trip from Clinton to Alpine is sublime; it's the trip back that sucks! ;D

How about the trip from Clinton to Bush? Somewhat more than sublime, but hopefully we'll get to make that trip back! ;)

Actually, the "back" was "back to Bush"! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 05, 2007, 11:34:38 AM

But it could go back again. Man we really do have an oligarchy in this country, don't we?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 05, 2007, 05:01:18 PM

Where to put this post? ???

Please get the January 8, 2007 Sports Illustrated and read the Pete Maravich article. What we see today is probably most attributable to Press and Pete Maravich.

I wish I could see a copy of the "Homework Drills".

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 05, 2007, 05:10:34 PM

Can't you just find the article online and link to it? We're a lazy generation, Ralph.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 05, 2007, 05:15:34 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 05, 2007, 05:10:34 PM

Can't you just find the article online and link to it? We're a lazy generation, Ralph.

The si.com search does not give an online version of the story.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 05, 2007, 06:02:26 PM

Re: the East Region

I had the chance to see my first E8 team up in Staten Island over the New Year's holiday weekend. In that game I proceeded to watch Nazareth dominate my Wheaton Thunder team for the first 30 minutes of the game.

At the half we were down 15. At the 12 minute mark we were down 18. At the 4:18 minute mark we were down 12. We didn't lead this game until there were 38 seconds left, and after their center had fouled out. If you look at the box score:

http://www.wheaton.edu/Athletics/mbasketball/stats/mwhe9.htm

You'll note that Nazareth shot as well as us, rebounded evenly with us, and their starters averaged over three steals each against us. Granted we didn't have Kent Raymond who has had to miss a couple of games due to injury, but Wheaton also has John Mohan back now, who was our second leading scorer (practically tied for first) last year. John Mohan may not be an All-American shoe-in like Kent, but he's a darn good basketball player.

Nazareth is a mere 4-4 on the year, but has overtime losses to both Rochester, and Wheaton, so could very well be 6-2 with a win over a Top 25 team that almost knocked down DI Northwestern. Obviously there's a pretty good chance they played up for us, but what I saw was definitely good basketball. I don't doubt that the best East Region teams deserve respect one bit.

Rochester still couldn't have made a basket if the hoop had been on the floor in those two games that I saw three years ago. :D

I tried, very unsuccessfully, to convince various people after the game that Nazareth wasn't half bad, and thoroughly failed. I've seen the last three (four?) final fours, and teams from 2/3 of the conferences in the nation, and my opinion still obviously doesn't mean much.

I doubt it's possible to convince people, FischerDynasty.... the way that east teams perpetually lay over and die the way your team did against Amherst last year, or the way Rochester did to Stevens Point two years ago, biases most analytical minds pretty heavily... and for arguably good reason.

On the other hand, Nazareth also has an incredibly young team. Two of the three best players for Nazareth in that game against us are freshman(!!!), and the guy who laid down 27 pts against us is only a junior, so maybe eventually some time in the next year and a half, they"ll play consistantly enough to earn the respect that I believe they deserve. Hmmm.... :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 05, 2007, 07:54:25 PM

Based on one game where a 4-4 team may well have played out of its skull to hang with a Top 20 team that was missing its best player?

I try not to let personal observation of one game outweigh the preponderance of evidence if they are in obvious conflict.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 05, 2007, 08:22:05 PM

Top 25 schedule and results, Jan. 1-7 (UPDATED with some Satuday scores):

#1 UW-Stevens Point (12-1) def. UW-Superior 101-45 and won at UW-Stout 80-50
#2 Ohio Northern (11-2) won at Muskingum 69-57 and lost to Capital 68-57
#3 Amherst (10-0) def. Babson 89-70 and won at Williams 64-45
#4 Wooster (11-2) def. Denison 96-67
#5 St. Thomas (10-1) won at Carleton 64-62 and won at Bethel 91-86 (2 OT)
#6 Whitworth (13-0) won at UC-Santa Cruz 89-44, won at Linfield 77-64, and won at George Fox 83-53
#7 Wittenberg (11-2) won at Kenyon 72-67 (OT) and def. Oberlin 71-41
#8 Virginia Wesleyan (10-2) won at Methodist 84-49, def. Emory & Henry 128-84, and hosts Guilford Sun.
#9 William Paterson (10-2) def. Tufts 79-57 and lost at Manhattanville 67-66
#10 Mississippi College (11-1) won at Sul Ross State 69-39 and won at Howard Payne 76-64
#11 Averett (9-3) lost to Guilford 74-69, lost to Richard Stockton 57-51 at York (Pa.), and lost to Hobart 73-66 at York (Pa.)
#12 Augustana (10-3) def. North Park 62-48 and lost at Elmhurst 82-71
#13 Puget Sound (10-1) won at Pacific Lutheran 108-96 and plays at Pacific Sat.
#14 Hope (10-2) won at Kalamazoo 87-55 and def. Olivet 99-70
#15 Bates (10-0) def. Elms 73-56 at Union and won at Union 81-66
#16 Wheaton (IL) (8-4) won at Baruch 75-66 and lost to North Central 52-47
#17 Carthage (9-3) def. Northland 84-74 and lost at Illinois Wesleyan 79-76
#18 UW-Oshkosh (12-2) def. UW-Platteville 79-58, def. Grinnell 123-105, and def. UW-Eau Claire 80-55
#19 Johns Hopkins (11-1) def. Washington Coll. 77-72
#20 NYU (10-1) lost at Carnegie Mellon 68-64 and plays at Rochester Sun.
#21 Lawrence (6-4) lost at Ripon 60-56
#22 Texas-Dallas (11-2) lost at Hardin-Simmons 75-56 and lost at McMurry 81-57
#23 Brandeis (10-2) won at Curry 81-73, lost at Rochester 83-65, and plays at Carnegie Mellon Sun.
#24 Washington U. (10-1) won at Webster 81-65 and won at Chicago 70-59
#25 UW-La Crosse (9-4) def. UW-Stout 57-42

Welcome to the wonderful world of conference play!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 05, 2007, 10:12:48 PM

Rough night to be an upstart as three ranked teams are upset.

It looks like No. 23 Brandeis' first trip to the Top 25 will be short lived as they were pummeled by Rochester 83-65. UR is now 8-2, 2-0 while Brandeis drops to 10-2, 0-1 UAA. The Judges' star lost a little more luster last night when the best team they've defeated, Tufts, got thrashed by No. 9 William Paterson 79-57.

No. 23 NYU has a reputation for starting the season strong against relatively weak opponents and then fading in UAA play. The Violets didn't get off to a good start tonight, losing to Carnegie Mellon 68-64 in Pittsburgh. NYU trailed 40-30 at the break.

No. 11 Averett dropped its second straight, falling to Richard Stockton 57-51 in the first night of a tournament at York (Pa.). The Ospreys play in a tough conference but were just 7-5 coming into tonight. Even with a win against Hobart, Averett may go from undefeated to unranked in less than seven days.

From the land of not counting your chickens before they hatch, we planned to broadcast tomorrow's York tournament championship, figuring it would give us the chance to see Averett in action. Instead RSCNJ stepped on those proverbial chickens and we'll only see what's left of the Averett/Hobart game while we get ready for the York/RSCNJ broadcast.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 05, 2007, 10:40:19 PM

Quote from: OxyBob on January 05, 2007, 10:25:06 PM
Ralph Turner:

>>The si.com search does not give an online version of the story.<<

From SI.com: "To get immediate access to this complete story you must be a SPORTS ILLUSTRATED magazine subscriber."

OxyBob

Thanks, Bob! I figured that would be the case. We get the SI at my office for the reception area, so I am still read the "dead tree" version! :D

It is a book excerpt, and recalls for us all that Pistol Pete did to change the course of basketball.

And then to have Dr J in the ABA and the red, white and blue ball...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 06, 2007, 12:44:37 AM

Oh, I re-read "Loose Balls" earlier this year, since I was in ABA country. I only wish I could have seen Les Selvage hoisting up 10 threes a game from 30 feet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: woosterbooster on January 06, 2007, 01:48:35 AM

Pluto's Loose Balls is still my favorite sports book, and I've read lots of them. What a piece of work! I pull it out about once a year, reread it cover to cover, and even though I nearly know the anecdotes by heart, I still laugh out loud. Without looking, I can still remember one ABA owner's (Pat Boone?) comments when asked if he remembered Selvage: "Yeah, I remember him taking a lot of threes, I just don't remember a lot of them going in."

From the word go, in what is probably the introduction, where Doug Moe and Doctor J. recall, argue, and laugh about the first ever slam dunk contest, you just know it's going to be a hilarious read. My favorite story is the one about the price on John Brisker's head and how Lenny Chappell KO's him during the opening jump to snag the $500.

If you haven't read this book, do so, you'll love it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 06, 2007, 01:44:48 PM

Good info on the basketball book. I'll have to check that one out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 06, 2007, 03:24:15 PM

Tough week for Averett; after reaching an all-time high ranking of #11, today they dropped their third straight game, losing to Hobart 73-66 in the consolation game of the York (Pa.) tournament.

#9 William Paterson also falls today, 67-66 at Manhattanville.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 06, 2007, 04:41:20 PM

More top 25 carnage as #2 Ohio Northern drops their second OAC game at home, 68-57 to Capital.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Warren Thompson on January 06, 2007, 04:45:36 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 06, 2007, 03:24:15 PM

#9 William Paterson also falls today, 67-66 at Manhattanville.

And just what happened to Willy Pat?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 06, 2007, 05:22:01 PM

#1 will stay intact, as Point is blasting Stout right now 66-39 with about 10 remaining.

Point jumped out to a 10-0 lead and never looked back.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hope1 on January 06, 2007, 07:24:08 PM

Hope beat Olivet 99 to 70 today

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 06, 2007, 09:01:18 PM

Final: #4 Wooster 96 Denison 67

Wooster coasted tonight and won this game easily. Tim Vandervaart did not play tonight for Wooster due to a calf injury but there is a chance that he will play in next Wednesday's game.

Wooster was led by Tom Port with 26 points, Brandon Johnson with 14 points, James Cooper with 13 points, Marty Bidwell with 13 points and Devin Fulk with 11 points.

Wooster is now 11-2, 4-0 NCAC Next game at Allegheny on 1/10

GO SCOTS!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 06, 2007, 10:07:34 PM

So now what do you do with Wooster and Ohio Northern? ONU is #2 but lost at home by 11 to 8-4 Capital (they also won at 6-6 Muskingum); Wooster is #4, 64 points behind the Polar Bears, and playing without perhaps their best player, they wiped out a crummy 1-11 Denison team. There's no reason to drop Wooster in the poll, especially when you consider that #5 is a stumbling St. Thomas. But that means you either drop ONU behind Wooster, despite the fact that ONU beat Wooster on its own court just last week, or you hold ONU as #3 despite their second double-digit home loss. As a voter, what do you do in this situation?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 06, 2007, 10:24:04 PM

you drop wooster, and ONU, you are ranking the team as they are now, not their potential, the fact that their best player is out right now means they are not the team they were when they were at one time ranked first in the country, also one would assume that without their best player they are an even worse team compared to ONU than before. Were there best player not out, you could justify dropping ONU below wooster, because as you said they have 2 double digit loses at home. However in this case i think both teams drop a bit say from 3/4 to somewhere in the 5-8 range.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 06, 2007, 10:32:49 PM

The injured player for Wooster will probably be back on Wednesday, missing only one game; two games at the outside. I don't think you can justify dropping Wooster 2 to 4 places when they won their only game of the week by 29 points and the team immediately behind them in the poll had to go 2 overtimes to beat 6-4 Bethel.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 06, 2007, 10:47:41 PM

Three ranked teams lost in CCIW games tonight:

Elmhurst 82 #12 Augustana 71

North Central 52 #16 Wheaton 47

Illinois Wesleyan 79 #17 Carthage 76

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 06, 2007, 11:01:33 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on January 06, 2007, 10:47:41 PM
Three ranked teams lost in CCIW games tonight:

Elmhurst 82 #12 Augustana 71

North Central 52 #16 Wheaton 47

Illinois Wesleyan 79 #17 Carthage 76

True, but note that two of the winners (NCC and IWU were previously ranked - and may well be again before it's all over), while Elmhurst will almost certainly be ranked this week.

I'm starting to agree with Q - the CCIW may not have a top 5 (or even 10) team this year, but we've got a LOT of top 25 teams! ANY team 'taking a night off' is almost guaranteed a loss.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on January 06, 2007, 11:44:36 PM

Re: ONU/Wooster Polling

They played a pretty even, hard-fought game against each other. Both have played a tougher schedule than #3 Amherst. I think that ONU's signature wins at Wittenberg and at Wooster keep them tighter to the top of the poll. They lose their #1 votes to Amherst and UWSP, and drop at least one spot. I think in vote points, Wooster-ONU will be extremely tight next week, erasing the 64-point gap that is currently seperating them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on January 07, 2007, 12:19:45 AM

UWSP wins big and should increase their #1 votes

1. UWSP
2. Amherst
3. Wooster
4. St. Thomas
5. Whitworth
6. Ohio Northern
7. Wittenberg
8. Virginia Wesleyan
9. Mississippi College
10. Puget Sound

Just an opinion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 07, 2007, 12:57:30 AM

Top 25 schedule and results, Jan. 1-7 (FINAL):

#1 UW-Stevens Point (12-1) def. UW-Superior 101-45 and won at UW-Stout 80-50
#2 Ohio Northern (11-2) won at Muskingum 69-57 and lost to Capital 68-57
#3 Amherst (10-0) def. Babson 89-70 and won at Williams 64-45
#4 Wooster (11-2) def. Denison 96-67
#5 St. Thomas (10-1) won at Carleton 64-62 and won at Bethel 91-86 (2 OT)
#6 Whitworth (13-0) won at UC-Santa Cruz 89-44, won at Linfield 77-64, and won at George Fox 83-53
#7 Wittenberg (11-2) won at Kenyon 72-67 (OT) and def. Oberlin 71-41
#8 Virginia Wesleyan (11-2) won at Methodist 84-49, def. Emory & Henry 128-84, and def. Guilford 75-55
#9 William Paterson (10-2) def. Tufts 79-57 and lost at Manhattanville 67-66
#10 Mississippi College (11-1) won at Sul Ross State 69-39 and won at Howard Payne 76-64
#11 Averett (9-3) lost to Guilford 74-69, lost to Richard Stockton 57-51 at York (Pa.), and lost to Hobart 73-66 at York (Pa.)
#12 Augustana (10-3) def. North Park 62-48 and lost at Elmhurst 82-71
#13 Puget Sound (10-2) won at Pacific Lutheran 108-96 and lost at Pacific 77-71
#14 Hope (10-2) won at Kalamazoo 87-55 and def. Olivet 99-70
#15 Bates (10-0) def. Elms 73-56 at Union and won at Union 81-66
#16 Wheaton (IL) (8-4) won at Baruch 75-66 and lost to North Central 52-47
#17 Carthage (9-3) def. Northland 84-74 and lost at Illinois Wesleyan 79-76
#18 UW-Oshkosh (12-2) def. UW-Platteville 79-58, def. Grinnell 123-105, and def. UW-Eau Claire 80-55
#19 Johns Hopkins (11-1) def. Washington Coll. 77-72
#20 NYU (11-1) lost at Carnegie Mellon 68-64 and won at Rochester 70-61 (OT)
#21 Lawrence (6-4) lost at Ripon 60-56
#22 Texas-Dallas (11-2) lost at Hardin-Simmons 75-56 and lost at McMurry 81-57
#23 Brandeis (10-3) won at Curry 81-73, lost at Rochester 83-65, and lost at Carnegie Mellon 75-68
#24 Washington U. (10-1) won at Webster 81-65 and won at Chicago 70-59
#25 UW-La Crosse (9-4) def. UW-Stout 57-42

Welcome to the wonderful world of conference play!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 07, 2007, 12:59:17 AM

Quote from: frodotwo on January 07, 2007, 12:19:45 AM
UWSP wins big and should increase their #1 votes

1. UWSP
2. Amherst
3. Wooster
4. St. Thomas
5. Whitworth
6. Ohio Northern
7. Wittenberg
8. Virginia Wesleyan
9. Mississippi College
10. Puget Sound

Just an opinion.

You might want to reconsider #10, as homestanding Pacific upset #13 Puget Sound late Saturday, 77-71.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 07, 2007, 01:12:28 AM

By my quick count, the top 25 went a pedestrian 13-9 today. :-\

Losers were #2 ONU, #9 WPU, #11 Averett, #12 Augustana, #13 UPS, #16 Wheaton, #17 Carthage, #21 Lawrence, and #22 Texas-Dallas

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on January 07, 2007, 02:05:23 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 07, 2007, 12:59:17 AM
Quote from: frodotwo on January 07, 2007, 12:19:45 AM
UWSP wins big and should increase their #1 votes

1. UWSP
2. Amherst
3. Wooster
4. St. Thomas
5. Whitworth
6. Ohio Northern
7. Wittenberg
8. Virginia Wesleyan
9. Mississippi College
10. Puget Sound

Just an opinion.

You might want to reconsider #10, as homestanding Pacific upset #13 Puget Sound late Saturday, 77-71.

Well.....how about jumping Oshkosh in there over Hope and Bates. No disrepect to either of those teams, but their oponents don't appear to have been as tough as the Titans'.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 07, 2007, 10:47:10 AM

IMO, the top 10 might look like this:

1. UW Stevens Point
2. Amherst
3. Ohio Northern - they beat Wooster
4. Wooster
5. St. Thomas - 2 narrow wins, should not move up
6. Whitworth
7. Wittenberg
8. Virginia Wesleyan
9. Mississippi College
10. Hope

I suppose that ONU could drop further with their loss to Capital but the OAC is a very tough conference. Baldwin-Wallace at 10-3, 5-1 OAC should be back in the Top 25 soon if they win a couple more.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: woosterbooster on January 07, 2007, 11:21:11 AM

I can't buy Wittenberg in the number 7 slot. Overtime wins at both Denison and Kenyon. At Kenyon, only a buzzer-beating three-pointer saved them from defeat. I really don't see this current version of the Tigers comparing at all to last year's team. I think they're going to be in for real ballgames at OWU and Allegheny, and maybe even also at Earlham and Wabash. Wooster will have no problem with them at Wooster (providing the Scots are healthy again).

By the way, am I the only one who gets this error message at every page of the Wittenberg athletic website?

The Nav/studio unlock code is not valid! -http://www.opencube.com/

I've been getting this since the beginning of the season. Actually, longer, I think it was popping up back during baseball last year. Somebody fix it, maybe?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 07, 2007, 11:26:52 AM

Quote from: Wooster Booster on January 07, 2007, 11:21:11 AM
By the way, am I the only one who gets this error message at every page of the Wittenberg athletic website?

The Nav/studio unlock code is not valid! -http://www.opencube.com/

I think maybe they're on to you in Springfield. Don't open any suspicious-looking packages. ;D

[Error-free Witt Men's Basketball Page (http://www4.wittenberg.edu/news/athletics/mbasketball/index.html)]

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: woosterbooster on January 07, 2007, 11:51:36 AM

Ok, some experimenting explained some things. Your Wittenberg link was indeed error free. Also, going directly to the Witt site was error free. The problem lies, actually, when you go from the Wooster website, their schedule of games, and click on Wittenberg. You then get that error message (at least I do) on the first, and every successive, Witt page that you go to.

So, it turns out that Wooster is on to me (probably Witt is also), and I'd better be keeping my doors locked from now on. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 07, 2007, 02:58:35 PM

Regarding the CCIW and Top 25 implications, it is very possible the CCIW has 6 Top 25 caliber teams. I don't realistically think we will see 6 in the poll at any point, but there legitimately may be 6 that are good enough.

#12 Augustana (10-3) -- The Vikes were drilled last night at Elmhurst. When Augie got to #9, I said they were way too high and at #12, and I still think they're too high. That being said, they have a nice win over a very good Wash U team and lost by just 3 at #1 UW-Stevens Point. What that means about the Pointers I have no idea as I haven't seen them, but Augie is a 15-20 type team.

#16 Wheaton (8-4) -- The Thunder lost at home last night to preseason CCIW favorite North Central. Wheaton has the nice wins over Hope and Calvin (both neutral courts). Losses are to #6 Whitworth, Chicago, Big Ten Northwestern by a basket, and now NCC. Wheaton belongs in the Top 25, but probably a bit lower that #16.

#17 Carthage (9-3) -- Lost at Illinois Wesleyan last night by 3 in a game that was close from start to finish. I finally got to see the Red Men and they impressed the heck out of me. To me, they are without question a Top 25 team. They have nice wins over Calvin, Hope, and Lawrence. After an early loss to Carroll, their only two losses are to NCAA Division II Lewis (coached by former IWU head man Scott Trost), and at IWU. They're talented, very balanced, and well coached. Their head coach has two Division III national championships (with North Park) and a 2002 trip to the Final Four with Carthage.

(RV) Elmhurst (11-1) -- Dominated #12 Augustana at home last night (led by 14 at the half and by as many as 23 in the 2nd half). The Bluejays also have wins over #18 UW-Oshkosh and UW-Whitewater. Elmhurst probably should be the highest ranked CCIW team, all things considered. The Bluejays are huge in the low post with 6-9/250 Brent Ruch and 6-10/235 Nick Michael. Sophomore 2-guard Ryan Burks is averaging 16.6 ppg and senior point-guard Brian Lee is steady.

(RV) North Central (9-3) -- Won at #16 Wheaton last night. NCC had a pretty ugly non-conference season, but they may be ready to play now. The Cardinals lost their starting backcourt from last year's CCIW Pool A team and they've tried a number of different combinations. They've finally settled on their two talented freshman and that duo scored 16 pts last night in their first career CCIW game (which was on the road), making 4 of 6 3's. NCC has one of the best frontcourts in Division III.

(RV) Illinois Wesleyan (8-4) -- The Titans defeated #17 Carthage last night and looked very good in doing it. IWU is finally becoming more than just Zach Freeman as the rest of the cast continues to emerge. Forward Darius Gant led the Titans in scoring last night with 21 and forward Andrew Freeman added 17. I haven't voted for IWU yet this season in the poll but for the first time this year, I'm starting to look closely at it. IWU is dead even with Carthage, that I'm sure of. The Carthage win was IWU's best since the early win at UW-Whitewater.

Carthage coach Bosko Djurickovic told me after the game that he didn't see any separatiion at all between these 6 teams. I haven't seen all of them, but I'd certainly agree that IWU, Carthage, Elmhurst, and Augustana - the teams I've seen - are very even.

Where these 6 stack up nationally, I am really not sure I guess. Some of the non-conference scores suggest these teams can play with anyone, but when I watch them play I don't see national championship contenders...but maybe this is a bit of a down year where there isn't much separation between D3hoops.com #5 and #20?? I don't know.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 07, 2007, 03:53:52 PM

Final top 25 results for the week are in and posted above. Seven of the top 8 teams went unscathed, but of the teams ranked #9-#25, ten of them lost, and three of those lost multiple times. It should be an interesting poll on Tuesday; with all this turmoil, I wouldn't be too surprised if the new poll actually resembles the old poll to a large degree. There should be some dropouts (like Averett, Lawrence, Brandeis) and some newcomers (Elmhurst, at least, maybe Oxy, Aurora, WPI), but the biggest change may just be the increasing gap between #9 and #10.

My prediction of the top 10:
1. UW-SP
2. Amherst
3. ONU
4. Wooster...can't justify sliding ONU behind the Scots
5. Whitworth
6. UST...two more close games erases narrow margin over Pirates
7. Va. Wesleyan...very impressive in smoking previously unbeaten Guilford today
8. Wittenberg
9. Mississippi College...solid road trip to West Texas
10. WPU...Hope can't close 177-point gap, despite WPU loss to Manhattanville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: goscots on January 07, 2007, 05:05:19 PM

Even though ONU has beaten Wooster and Witt, their two double digit home losses should drop them out of the top five. I think Virgina Wesleyan in under rated and the CCIW needs to have a representative. My list will not be close to what comes out Tuesday but it is my opinion:

1) UW - Stevens Point
2) Amherst
3) Wooster
4) Whitworth
5) Virginia Wesleyan
6) ONU
7) St. Thomas - Isaac Rosefelt has been back for a few games but they are still struggling to win against average competition
8) Mississippi College - they have played quite a number of sub-.500 teams so even convincing wins are difficult to guage
9) Wittenberg - too many OT's with weak NCAC teams
10) Elmhurst - I know no one climbs this much but they seems to have the strongest case from the CCIW
10) Hope - 8 wins in a row with no loses outside of CCIW teams. I think they might run the table in the MIAA

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 07, 2007, 05:20:25 PM

Quote from: goscots on January 07, 2007, 05:05:19 PM
Even though ONU has beaten Wooster and Witt, their two double digit home losses should drop them out of the top five. I think Virgina Wesleyan in under rated and the CCIW needs to have a representative.

The CCIW is one of the top 2 conferences again this year (and as posted above there may be 6 poll-worthy teams), but I do not think that automatically means it should have a team in the top 10. I don't think any one CCIW team has earned that distinction yet.

CCIW teams are going to beat each other up pretty badly in league play. We had the 3 "upsets" last night (in quotes as I do not think Elmhurst winning at home over Augustana was an upset at all, or IWU winning at home vs Carthage). This Wednesday Augustana travels to Wheaton and Elmhurst to Carthage. There will be games like this every Wednesday and Saturday through February.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 07, 2007, 05:33:23 PM

I have serious reservations about Hope in the Top 10 at this point. Wins are:

Cornerstone
Calvin
Grace Bible
Goshen
Aquinas
Purdue-North Central
Trinity Christian
Rochester
Kalamazoo
Olivet

Hope lost to the two best Division III teams they've played, Carthage and Wheaton of the CCIW (NAIA II Cornerstone is good I'm sure). What signature D3 wins do the Flying Dutchmen have that make them a Top 10 candidate?

If Hope is being discussed as a Top 10 team, I guess I will start rethinking my position that the CCIW doesn't have a Top 10 team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pg04 on January 07, 2007, 05:36:19 PM

Looking at the bottom of the poll, any chance that Brockport State will start Receiving some votes? They are 8-1 having beaten St. John Fisher by 11 at Fisher, beat Hamilton by 19 on Friday, then blew out previously undefeated St. Lawrence by 30, 102-72 today. Does any of this merit some consideration, considering the weakness of the east?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 07, 2007, 05:43:54 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 07, 2007, 05:33:23 PM
I have serious reservations about Hope in the Top 10 at this point. Wins are:

Cornerstone
Calvin
Grace Bible
Goshen
Aquinas
Purdue-North Central
Trinity Christian
Rochester
Kalamazoo
Olivet

Hope lost to the two best Division III teams they've played, Carthage and Wheaton of the CCIW (NAIA II Cornerstone is good I'm sure). What signature D3 wins do the Flying Dutchmen have that make them a Top 10 candidate?

If Hope is being discussed as a Top 10 team, I guess I will start rethinking my position that the CCIW doesn't have a Top 10 team.

Before anyone not named diehardfan has an apoplectic seizure caused by the inclusion of Rochester in that murderer's row, that's Rochester (MI).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 07, 2007, 05:50:58 PM

Quote from: goscots on January 07, 2007, 05:05:19 PM
Even though ONU has beaten Wooster and Witt, their two double digit home losses should drop them out of the top five. I think Virgina Wesleyan in under rated and the CCIW needs to have a representative. My list will not be close to what comes out Tuesday but it is my opinion:

1) UW - Stevens Point
2) Amherst
3) Wooster
4) Whitworth
5) Virginia Wesleyan
6) ONU
7) St. Thomas - Isaac Rosefelt has been back for a few games but they are still struggling to win against average competition
8 ) Mississippi College - they have played quite a number of sub-.500 teams so even convincing wins are difficult to guage
9) Wittenberg - too many OT's with weak NCAC teams
10) Elmhurst - I know no one climbs this much but they seems to have the strongest case from the CCIW
10) Hope - 8 wins in a row with no loses outside of CCIW teams. I think they might run the table in the MIAA

Goscots,

I am cautiously optimistic about our arch-rival MissColl. If McMurry cannot knock them out in the conference tourney, then I want MissColl finally to do it this year.

Let me refresh your memory about the Choctaws.

You think that VWC is under-rated. The Marlins lost a tough one to UMHB and then took HSU to OT. Well, Miss College beat UMHB by 28. After a tough road trip to McMurry/HSU where you travel 600 miles by bus and then play your arch-rival McMurry on Thursday night in an emotionally charged game, you spend 2 nights in the motel and then beat HSU, the pre-season ASC-West pick, on Saturday afternoon. There are very few conferences (maybe the UAA, the SCAC and NWC) that have road trips like the ASC.

Miss College goes to Westmont CA and beats Johns Hopkins 75-51! That is a Liberty League monkey-stomp! They then defeat Westmont! We D3 fans should learn that a win over Westmont is solid evidence that the team is solid.

Miss College handled the Sul Ross State/ Howard Payne trip (1700 miles if they didn't fly the first 750 miles from Clinton to Midland TX) very well. That proved their battle-toughness to me.

I say that they have made their case. My reluctance to rate them higher is that they have never defeated a Great Lakes region team in the Playoffs. That is why I don't rate them higher. This year may be different. Coach Mike Jones (http://www.d3hoops.com/news.php?date=2006-04-26) has gone back to the bench. He and Coach Lofton are an incredible pair. I hope that MissColl breaks thru this year, if they get past McMurry in the conference tourney. Timothy Broomfield, their 6'8" G/F, is having a great year. He may be the difference.

MissCollege catches UT-Dallas in Clinton this weekend. I think that they take 'em by double-digits.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on January 07, 2007, 06:18:34 PM

Amherst continues to win...despite missing starting 3 man all game and injuries to the 2 man and 5 man... just win baby.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 07, 2007, 06:23:40 PM

Quote from: fpc85 on January 07, 2007, 06:18:34 PM
Amherst continues to win...despite missing starting 3 man all game and injuries to the 2 man and 5 man... just win baby.

+1!
Thanks for the info, fpc85!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 08, 2007, 01:12:49 AM

Great work on the Top 25 results, Dave!

Titan Q, nice job on the CCIW review of things!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 08, 2007, 01:26:12 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 07, 2007, 05:43:54 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 07, 2007, 05:33:23 PM
I have serious reservations about Hope in the Top 10 at this point. Wins are:

Cornerstone
Calvin
Grace Bible
Goshen
Aquinas
Purdue-North Central
Trinity Christian
Rochester
Kalamazoo
Olivet

Hope lost to the two best Division III teams they've played, Carthage and Wheaton of the CCIW (NAIA II Cornerstone is good I'm sure). What signature D3 wins do the Flying Dutchmen have that make them a Top 10 candidate?

If Hope is being discussed as a Top 10 team, I guess I will start rethinking my position that the CCIW doesn't have a Top 10 team.

Before anyone not named diehardfan has an apoplectic seizure caused by the inclusion of Rochester in that murderer's row, that's Rochester (MI).

The locals in Upstate NY refer to UAA's the University of Rochester as the U of R. As the daughter of a Rochester, NY native, and a former scholarship recipiant to the U of R (and someone who was being hit on by a Rochester, MN native as a frosh at Wheaton for that matter), I am aware of the difference, of course. :D Though I do think the idea of anyone beside me including them on a list of bad schools funny!!! I will never forget the email I got from Gabe Perez, former Rochester standout, which contained playful jabs at my continuous ribbing of the NY school....

I don't ever think of the U of R first when people say "Rochester" I always have to consciously think about it when I type or read Rochester who they mean.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 08, 2007, 01:28:58 AM

Must be a sign of age - when someone says 'Rochester', my first thought is "Coming, Mr. Benny."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 08, 2007, 01:32:18 AM

My first thought on "U of R" is Redlands. That used to be the University of Redlands' domain name.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 08, 2007, 01:47:05 AM

I really don't like the idea of Witt or Hope being in the top 10, though I will probably not mind Hope being there at some point later this season.

As far as the CCIW is concerned... I like the idea of Elmhurst being in the Top 10... between Ruch, Michael, Burks, Lee and Bacon... this is one seriously talent loaded team... there's no way any team can stop all their weapons. I'm really not sure NCC deserves to be in the Top 25, and for the same reason, I don't think Wheaton currently deserves their Top 25 spot at this moment either (unless the voters are still determined to rank Hope in the top 10, it's sorta hard to leave Wheaton out of the top 25 all together, and even harder to leave Carthage off a high ranking despite their loss to IWU. I fully believe that Carthage and Elmhurst are the top CCIW contenders this year... I just think the Titan players finally remember that they really REALLY aren't supposed to lose at the Shirk... it just isn't done.)

I think Oxy deserves a Top 25 spot. I really didn't think they were that much worse than St. Thomas when I saw the two schools play at all. The game was neck and neck right to the final seconds until Oxy started to foul and St. Thomas couldn't miss a ft. Oxy still hasn't lost to a d3 opponents aside from them. I'm definitely in favor of them finding at least the bottom of the Top 25 this week... but I've felt that way all season and it hasn't happened yet... maybe because CMS is at least as solid of a contender for the SCIAC crown? And there probably isn't two Top 25 SCIAC teams... St. Thomas is definitely a good team despite their Preseason AA being a little down right now... Schnettler is amazing. But 6-7 might be a little high, and I'm a little wary about them being in the Top 10 if Oxy isn't in the poll at all...

My question is... is it possible that Wash U is going to deserve a Top 10 spot if they keeping winning in the UAA? Their only regular season loss was at Augustana by two. I know they're only 24 right now, but with all the teams losing that did, I wouldn't be surprised if they weren't too far out of the Top 10 this week...

and now it's time for bed. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 08, 2007, 04:10:33 AM

Quote from: diehardfan on January 08, 2007, 01:47:05 AM

As far as the CCIW is concerned... I like the idea of Elmhurst being in the Top 10... between Ruch, Michael, Burks, Lee and Bacon... this is one seriously talent loaded team... there's no way any team can stop all their weapons. I'm really not sure NCC deserves to be in the Top 25

NC is about 45th in the current poll. They barely made it in the "Others Receiving Votes" listing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 08, 2007, 05:30:03 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 07, 2007, 02:58:35 PM(RV) Elmhurst (11-1) -- Dominated #12 Augustana at home last night (led by 14 at the half and by as many as 23 in the 2nd half). The Bluejays also have wins over #18 UW-Oshkosh and UW-Whitewater. Elmhurst probably should be the highest ranked CCIW team, all things considered. The Bluejays are huge in the low post with 6-9/250 Brent Ruch and 6-10/235 Nick Michael. Sophomore 2-guard Ryan Burks is averaging 16.6 ppg and senior point-guard Brian Lee is steady.

Burks is Elmhurst's small forward, not the shooting guard. Senior role player Mike Sayre plays the two spot for the Bluejays, with Pat Bacon, Matt Ryder, and occasionally Chris Childs spelling him and Bacon doubling as PG Brian Lee's backup.

I think it's quite possible that Burks would've been in the backcourt for Elmhurst this year if Robert Strzemp was healthy, given the early indication that Bluejays coach Mark Scherer wanted to play Strzemp at small forward (he's actually more of an undersized PF). However, I think Burks would have trouble guarding some of the quicker twos in the CCIW (e.g., Carthage's Trey Bowens, NPU's Jason Gordon, the Harrington/Brock combo from Millikin, etc.). And Wheaton's Kent Raymond would carve him up. The fact that Strzemp's injury has forced Scherer to work with a somewhat smaller perimeter rotation has, in my opinion, been a blessing in disguise for the Bluejays from a defensive standpoint. Burks can handle guarding most CCIW small forwards; at 6'4, 185 he's big enough and quick enough to do so.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 08, 2007, 05:34:34 AM

Quote from: diehardfan on January 08, 2007, 01:26:12 AMThe locals in Upstate NY refer to UAA's the University of Rochester as the U of R. As the daughter of a Rochester, NY native, and a former scholarship recipiant to the U of R (and someone who was being hit on by a Rochester, MN native as a frosh at Wheaton for that matter),

Yes, but we've previously established that you've never eaten a garbage plate ... and that's a serious hole in your Kodak City bona-fides. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 08, 2007, 08:34:52 AM

Mmm...garbage plate. Good stuff. Well, not healthwise -- but you know what I mean.

To answer the question posed a few posts back, yes, I think Brockport State will garner a few votes. The loss to Potsdam State is questionable but that's the second night of a rough road trip.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 08, 2007, 10:32:05 AM

Top 25 this week:

1. UWSP - beat Superior and Stout, both by big margins.
2. ONU - beat MUskingum, lost to Capital
3. Amherst - beat Babson and Williams easily
4. Wooster - beat Denison
5. St. Thomas - barely beat Carlton and Bethel (2OT)
6. Whitworth - beat Linfield, UC-Santa Cruz and George Fox, all pretty easily
7. Wittenberg - took out Kenyon (OT) and Oberlin
8. VA Wesleyan - beat Methodist, E&H and Guilford
9. WPU - beat Tufts, lost to Manhattanville
10. MS College - beat Sul Ros State and Howard Payne both on the road
11. Averett - lost to Guilford, loss to Stockton, loss to Hobart
12. Augustana - beat North Park, lost to Elmhurst
13. UPS - beat Pac Lutheran, lost to Pacific
14. Hope - beat Kalamazoo and Olivet
15. Bates - beat Elms and Union easily
16. Wheaton - beat Baruch, lost to NCC
17. Carthage - beat Northland, lost to IWU
18. Oshkosh - beat Platteville, Grinnell and Eau Claire
19. Hopkins - beat Washington College
20. NYU - lost to Mellon, beat Rochester
21. Lawrence - lost at Ripon
22. TX-Dallas - lost at Hardin-Simmons, lost at McMurry
23. Brandies - lost at Rochester, lost at Mellon
24. WASHU - beat Webster and Chicago
25. LaCrosse - beat Stout

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pg04 on January 08, 2007, 01:45:50 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on January 08, 2007, 08:34:52 AM
Mmm...garbage plate. Good stuff. Well, not healthwise -- but you know what I mean.

To answer the question posed a few posts back, yes, I think Brockport State will garner a few votes. The loss to Potsdam State is questionable but that's the second night of a rough road trip.

Plus I think that loss may have been a wake up call for them, they have played lights out since....

And stop making me think about garbage plates... I miss them down here in the FLA!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on January 08, 2007, 01:57:37 PM

Quote from: Wooster Booster on January 07, 2007, 11:21:11 AM
I can't buy Wittenberg in the number 7 slot. Overtime wins at both Denison and Kenyon. At Kenyon, only a buzzer-beating three-pointer saved them from defeat. I really don't see this current version of the Tigers comparing at all to last year's team. I think they're going to be in for real ballgames at OWU and Allegheny, and maybe even also at Earlham and Wabash. Wooster will have no problem with them at Wooster (providing the Scots are healthy again).

I have been questioning Witt in the Top 10 all season long. While they did give the Scots all they could handle in Springfield, I look at that as Wittenberg turning it up a notch as soon as they see the Black and Old Gold unis across the gym. They didn't come close to beating ONU. They needed 3 OT's to beat a bad Denison squad and they needed an NBA range prayer at the buzzer to force OT and pull out the eventual win over Kenyon. I just think Top 10 is a bit overrated for Witt.

As for the ONU-Wooster debate, I would probably side on keeping Wooster at #4 for now, although the gap would have to be pretty close given the fact that ONU now has lost twice at home by double digits. While I wouldn't consider the B-W loss as a terrible loss, it's hard to overlook the fact that they lost that game by 18. And from what I've heard about Capital, losing at home by 11 to the Crusaders is pretty bad IMHO. Maybe we should just call it a tie for 3rd this week between Wooster and ONU?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 08, 2007, 02:16:57 PM

See I've had trouble with how high Wittenberg has been ranked the last few years, but I've come to the conclusion that they are just grinders. They have mediocre results and then face a strong team and continue to grind out wins. I think its more about the playing style than anything. That's the conclusion I've come to anyway.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: balls a dunkin on January 08, 2007, 11:33:13 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 07, 2007, 05:50:58 PM
Quote from: goscots on January 07, 2007, 05:05:19 PM
Even though ONU has beaten Wooster and Witt, their two double digit home losses should drop them out of the top five. I think Virgina Wesleyan in under rated and the CCIW needs to have a representative. My list will not be close to what comes out Tuesday but it is my opinion:

1) UW - Stevens Point
2) Amherst
3) Wooster
4) Whitworth
5) Virginia Wesleyan
6) ONU
7) St. Thomas - Isaac Rosefelt has been back for a few games but they are still struggling to win against average competition
8 ) Mississippi College - they have played quite a number of sub-.500 teams so even convincing wins are difficult to guage
9) Wittenberg - too many OT's with weak NCAC teams
10) Elmhurst - I know no one climbs this much but they seems to have the strongest case from the CCIW
10) Hope - 8 wins in a row with no loses outside of CCIW teams. I think they might run the table in the MIAA
Goscots,

I am cautiously optimistic about our arch-rival MissColl. If McMurry cannot knock them out in the conference tourney, then I want MissColl finally to do it this year.

Let me refresh your memory about the Choctaws.

You think that VWC is under-rated. The Marlins lost a tough one to UMHB and then took HSU to OT. Well, Miss College beat UMHB by 28. After a tough road trip to McMurry/HSU where you travel 600 miles by bus and then play your arch-rival McMurry on Thursday night in an emotionally charged game, you spend 2 nights in the motel and then beat HSU, the pre-season ASC-West pick, on Saturday afternoon. There are very few conferences (maybe the UAA, the SCAC and NWC) that have road trips like the ASC.

Miss College goes to Westmont CA and beats Johns Hopkins 75-51! That is a Liberty League monkey-stomp! They then defeat Westmont! We D3 fans should learn that a win over Westmont is solid evidence that the team is solid.

Miss College handled the Sul Ross State/ Howard Payne trip (1700 miles if they didn't fly the first 750 miles from Clinton to Midland TX) very well. That proved their battle-toughness to me.

I say that they have made their case. My reluctance to rate them higher is that they have never defeated a Great Lakes region team in the Playoffs. That is why I don't rate them higher. This year may be different. Coach Mike Jones (http://www.d3hoops.com/news.php?date=2006-04-26) has gone back to the bench. He and Coach Lofton are an incredible pair. I hope that MissColl breaks thru this year, if they get past McMurry in the conference tourney. Timothy Broomfield, their 6'8" G/F, is having a great year. He may be the difference.

MissCollege catches UT-Dallas in Clinton this weekend. I think that they take 'em by double-digits.

It's pretty hard for a team to play alot of the top ranked teams when we only have 4 nonconference games, but how is it hard to guage a big win, I don't understand? I guess to get the respect we deserve we are going to have to make a deeper run in the tourny. ??? ???
Thanks for the props anyway, Ralph. That's pretty classy, even from a McM fan :D :D

GO CHOCS
GO ASC

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 08, 2007, 11:37:41 PM

Quote from: balls a dunkin on January 08, 2007, 11:33:13 PM
I guess to get the respect we deserve we are going to have to make a deeper run in the tourny.

This has always been the case. We keep waiting for MC to do it. And waiting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 09, 2007, 12:06:14 AM

MC needs to play better D if they hope to beat a GL team, thats been the common theme in both tournament losses to Calvin and Transylvania.

.......and I'll stand by my own eyeballs they were the 4th best team at each sectional I saw and I saw teams in rounds 1 and 2 that could have beaten MC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 09, 2007, 12:57:20 AM

Quote from: sac on January 09, 2007, 12:06:14 AM
MC needs to play better D if they hope to beat a GL team, thats been the common theme in both tournament losses to Calvin and Transylvania.

.......and I'll stand by my own eyeballs they were the 4th best team at each sectional I saw and I saw teams in rounds 1 and 2 that could have beaten MC.

Sac, I think that Coach Jones brings the intensity back to the MissCollege defense. The Chocs led D3 in scoring defense in 2001 (?). I agree with your assessment of the 2006 Transy game, my having watched the video feed.

As for the 20 game schedule, it does provide 20 South Region games.

I would like to see Miss College and another ASC-East team (LaCollege) host some Geograhic Region 3 teams (HCAC, OAC, MIAA or NCAC) in the Clinton Farm Bureau Classic. Bring some Great Lakes Region teams to Clinton for in-region games.

Or, if a coach doesn't want to play an in-region game in the first weekend, bring down some CCIW talent for a couple of games. (Ilinois and Wisconsin are not in-region for Mississippi or Louisiana.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on January 09, 2007, 02:53:59 AM

Quote from: sac on January 09, 2007, 12:06:14 AM
MC needs to play better D if they hope to beat a GL team, thats been the common theme in both tournament losses to Calvin and Transylvania.

The common theme in both of those losses was that MC had to travel over 800 miles to both sectionals. It is never mentioned but certainly travel is a huge obstacle for MC that GL teams usually avoid. In their last two tourneys, MC's best chances to advance, they opened the sectionals already behind the 8-ball. Over the last five years, 9 of the 20 Final Four participants hosted sectionals. Of the other eleven who advanced without hosting, only one had to travel further than 325 miles, Stevens Point in 2004, and seven of them were within about two hours of the sectional. Four of the last five National Champions hosted sectionals.

Quote from: sac on January 09, 2007, 12:06:14 AM
.......and I'll stand by my own eyeballs they were the 4th best team at each sectional I saw and I saw teams in rounds 1 and 2 that could have beaten MC.

I was also there and I would not agree with that at all, not even close. I thought Wittenberg was much better than the other seven teams and maybe Calvin also a notch higher. The other six teams were very close in my opinion and MC was the only team to travel more than 325 miles. Calvin and Transylvania, the two MC losses, averaged 130 miles and basically played home games.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 08, 2007, 11:37:41 PM
Quote from: balls a dunkin on January 08, 2007, 11:33:13 PM
I guess to get the respect we deserve we are going to have to make a deeper run in the tourney.
This has always been the case. We keep waiting for MC to do it. And waiting.

They are one of only four teams in the country with back to back Sweet Sixteens so they have had success in the tourney. But I think most would agree it is much harder making a run playing that far away from home. I would like to see this year's team play in front of their own fans but if it is not gonna happen they will have to eventually go halfway across the country and win someone else's sectional. If last year's 27-1 record did not earn one, I doubt they ever get one with the scarcity of DIII teams surrounding us.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 09, 2007, 03:46:22 AM

UW-Stevens Point won it all after playing in a section in Washington State. The 2001 champ had to go nearly 500 miles to play in a sectional on the road. It can be done.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 09, 2007, 09:14:41 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 09, 2007, 03:46:22 AM
UW-Stevens Point won it all after playing in a section in Washington State. The 2001 champ had to go nearly 500 miles to play in a sectional on the road. It can be done.

Pat, I listened to the 2004 Sweet 16 Sul Ross/Lawrence game over the internet, and followed the UW-SP/UPS game and then listened to the Lawrence/UWSP game the next night. The Lawrence/UW-SP was played before a stated attendance of 245, a very quiet house. UW-SP had played before 1809 the night before in their 100-79 win over the Loggers, but UWSP had taken the the home team out of the game. SRSU and Lawrence played before an equally quiet house. (The Lawrence web site does not give an official attendance). Lawrence fans will remember the incredible comeback from 18 points down with 11:55 to take the game to OT, and win 86-79.

My thoughts after those games were that UWSP had the best team, but that UWSP's victory over UPS had given Lawrence and SRSU the best chance to advance by turning the game a "sterile" neutral floor. On that neutral court, Lawrence took the Pointers to OT and lost 82-81.

One other side note, SRSU had traveled to San Antonio to play Trinity on Saturday night using the old "away (UDallas)-home(SRSU)-bye(Trinity)" triad format. There were as many SRSU grads who had either driven the 450 miles to San Antonio or were local alumni who had walked up to purchase tickets. The game reports on the ASC boards were that the SRSU fans were the dominant crowd in the Trinity gym that night.

IMHO, the best chance that the ASC gets to make it to the Final Four is to host a Sectional (Sweet 16/Elite 8 ). UPS was fortunate to have 3 teams fly to Washington, rather than being flown back to Wisconsin with Sul Ross. It can be done, but the ASC is a tough, well-balanced conference that drastically hurts their in-region record. The ASC will face tremendous geographic hurdles in trying to get to the Final Four.

2004 records...
Lawrence 18-4 in-region
SRSU 17-6 in-region (2 wins in the ASC tourney; 15-6 vs ASC regular season foes)
UW-SP 18-5 in-region
UPS 17-1 in-region

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 09, 2007, 09:18:43 AM

New Top 25 is out. It seems these voters are having a tough time picking 3-25 as well. I like Aurora's appearance. They are putting together a solid season thus far. I'm still not sold on Hope (sorry, legions of Dutch fans), they just haven't played anybody yet; early season losses to Wheaton and Carthage just don't equal a #12 ranking to me. Hopkins and WPI seem equally suspect, but it's not like we're crawling in overachieving teams this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on January 09, 2007, 09:21:15 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 09, 2007, 03:46:22 AM
UW-Stevens Point won it all after playing in a section in Washington State. The 2001 champ had to go nearly 500 miles to play in a sectional on the road. It can be done.

Good morning Pat,
Don't get me wrong, I am not suggesting that is the only reason they have had trouble, but it is a huge factor and merits mentioning. And almost 500 miles is still not the 900 MC has been doing where only a handful of fans can make the trip. Your right though, it can be done. But in six years only two of a possible 24 teams have done it and the numbers show what a huge advantage playing near home has been in Division III where very little separates teams.
I have a lot of respect for Virginia Wesleyan and you saw one of the best teams in the country this Christmas struggle when forced to travel to the ASC rather than vice versa. And it is not inconceivable to think MC could have pulled off a similiar run last year playing the entire way in front of home crowds.
MC has taken a lot of heat for not reaching the Final Four but I am just trying to offer a differing opinion of why. We might not do it this year but we have earned our position as a Top Ten program in my opinion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 09, 2007, 09:21:26 AM

I think MC will earn it this year if they can make it through unscathed. They seem to be doing really well in the ASC thus far and a lot of the top teams in the MW/GL are losing games. Hopefully MC can demand the sectional with their stellar record as UPS did in 2004.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 09, 2007, 04:44:45 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 09, 2007, 09:14:41 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 09, 2007, 03:46:22 AM
UW-Stevens Point won it all after playing in a section in Washington State. The 2001 champ had to go nearly 500 miles to play in a sectional on the road. It can be done.

Pat, I listened to the 2004 Sweet 16 Sul Ross/Lawrence game over the internet, and followed the UW-SP/UPS game and then listened to the Lawrence/UWSP game the next night. The Lawrence/UW-SP was played before a stated attendance of 245, a very quiet house. UW-SP had played before 1809 the night before in their 100-79 win over the Loggers, but UWSP had taken the the home team out of the game.

Uh huh -- and UWSP won the right to have that quiet game by beating the host team.

Not only have those two teams won national titles after playing sectionals far from home, but others have won sectionals, and even other have managed to win one game at a sectional.

MC has to be able to make that next step up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 09, 2007, 04:48:55 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 09, 2007, 09:14:41 AM
Pat, I listened to the 2004 Sweet 16 Sul Ross/Lawrence game over the internet, and followed the UW-SP/UPS game and then listened to the Lawrence/UWSP game the next night. The Lawrence/UW-SP was played before a stated attendance of 245, a very quiet house. UW-SP had played before 1809 the night before in their 100-79 win over the Loggers, but UWSP had taken the the home team out of the game.

Point also went to Gustavus Adolphus, apparently one of the most hostile gyms in the nation from what I hear. 3213 was the attendence and the stands are right on top of you.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 09, 2007, 05:23:19 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 09, 2007, 04:44:45 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 09, 2007, 09:14:41 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 09, 2007, 03:46:22 AM
UW-Stevens Point won it all after playing in a section in Washington State. The 2001 champ had to go nearly 500 miles to play in a sectional on the road. It can be done.

Pat, I listened to the 2004 Sweet 16 Sul Ross/Lawrence game over the internet, and followed the UW-SP/UPS game and then listened to the Lawrence/UWSP game the next night. The Lawrence/UW-SP was played before a stated attendance of 245, a very quiet house. UW-SP had played before 1809 the night before in their 100-79 win over the Loggers, but UWSP had taken the the home team out of the game.

Uh huh -- and UWSP won the right to have that quiet game by beating the host team.

Not only have those two teams won national titles after playing sectionals far from home, but others have won sectionals, and even other have managed to win one game at a sectional.

MC has to be able to make that next step up.

Yes, sorry I did not follow-up on my point. UWSP did what they had to do. I think that SRSU and Lawrence both lost a golden opportunity to neutralize the UWSP crowd and get past the Pointers. They may never be as lucky again. If the ASC doesn't ever get a Sectional, then SRSU's scenario in 2004 is the best chance that I see for us, that is to win on the other side of the bracket, while the home team is losing in the first game of the Sectional.

When McMurry went to Calvin and played before 30 McMurry fans, 70 Hope fans who hate Calvin, and 4400 Calvin fans, I heard a tidal wave of support from the home fans. In fact, skin biopsies of the fans in attendance would have found more melanocytes in the 30 McMurry fans than in the entire Calvin contingent! :D :D :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 09, 2007, 05:45:01 PM

Top 25 Schedules and Results, Jan. 8-14 (UPDATED with some Tuesday scores):

#1 UW-Stevens Point (13-1) def. Lakeland 97-59 and plays at UW-Eau Claire Wed.
#2 Amherst (12-0) won at Wesleyan 76-52, plays at Tufts Fri., and plays at #12 Bates Sat.
#3 St. Thomas (11-1) def. Augsburg 80-63, hosts Gustavus Adolphus Wed., and plays at Concordia-Moorhead Sat.
#4 Ohio Northern (11-2) plays at Wilmington Wed. and plays at John Carroll Sat.
#5 Wooster (11-2) plays at Allegheny Wed. and hosts Wabash Sat.
#6 Whitworth (13-0) hosts #17 Puget Sound Fri. and hosts Pacific Lutheran Sat.
#7 Virginia Wesleyan (11-2) plays at Lynchburg Sat.
#8 Wittenberg (11-2) plays at Earlham Wed. and plays at Hiram Sat.
#9 Mississippi College (11-1) hosts Texas-Dallas Thu. and hosts Texas-Tyler Sat.
#10 UW-Oshkosh (12-2) plays at #20 UW-La Crosse Wed. and plays at UW-River Falls Sat.
#11 Hope (10-2) hosts Albion Wed. and plays at Calvin Sat.
#12 Bates (11-0) def. U. New England 90-46, hosts Trinity (CT) Fri., and hosts #2 Amherst Sat.
#13 William Paterson (10-3) plays at New Jersey City Wed. and hosts Ramapo Sat.
#14 Elmhurst (11-1) plays at #18 Carthage Wed. and hosts Illinois Wesleyan Sat.
#15 Augustana (10-3) plays at #21 Wheaton (IL) Wed. and hosts #18 Carthage Sat.
#16 Washington U. (10-1) plays at Case Western Reserve Fri. and plays at Emory Sun.
#17 Puget Sound (10-2) plays at #6 Whitworth Fri. and at Whitman Sat.
#18 Carthage (9-3) hosts #14 Elmhurst Wed. and plays at #15 Augustana Sat.
#19 Johns Hopkins (11-2) lost to Haverford 64-59, plays at Ursinus Thu., and hosts Muhlenburg Sat.
#20 UW-La Crosse (9-4) hosts #10 UW-Oshkosh Wed. and plays at UW-Superior Sat.
#21 Wheaton (IL) (8-4) hosts #15 Augustana Wed. and plays at North Park Sat.
#22 Occidental (7-3) hosts Caltech Wed. and hosts Claremont-Mudd-Scripps Sat.
#23 Worcester Polytech (10-1) won at Springfield 82-75, hosts Babson Thu., and plays at Clark Sat.
#24 NYU (11-1) plays at Brandeis Sat.
#25 Aurora (10-1) hosts Dominican Wed. and plays at Clarke Fri.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 09, 2007, 05:51:37 PM

I do sincerely think the ASC has a tough situation because of geography, but I think a lot of teams have a tough Sectional situation due to other factors in the tournament process.

Here are the four Sectionals Illinois Wesleyan has been in this decade, with the D3hoops.com ranking of the host school noted:

2006 - @ #1 Lawrence

2004 - @ #4 Wooster

2003 - @ #1 Randolph-Macon

2001 - @ #1 Chicago

(Second round games included @ #2 Wash U in 2003 and @ #2 Hanover in 2004.)

IWU advanced to the Final Four in 2001 and 2006 by defeating the #1-ranked teams in the country on their floors. While I do think the ASC situation is difficult, is it any worse than the above?

If a team is good enough to make it to Salem, it will win on the road in a tough venue. Lawrence's gym may only hold 1500 and not 4000 like Calvin's, but I've never seen a more hostile or more difficult place to play in a Sectional game than what IWU faced last year in Appleton, WI.

Bottom line, the ASC needs to get it done on the floor when it counts, no matter where it is.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on January 09, 2007, 08:50:00 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 09, 2007, 03:46:22 AM

Uh huh -- and UWSP won the right to have that quiet game by beating the host team.

Not only have those two teams won national titles after playing sectionals far from home, but others have won sectionals, and even other have managed to win one game at a sectional.

MC has to be able to make that next step up.

Can't argue with that. Actually, by my count in the last five years 14 teams have been forced to fly into sectionals and eight of them won at least one game though only one advanced to the Final Four, Stevens Point 04. My only point is that teams who reach the Final Four after flying into a sectional join a very elite club and are at a competitive disadvantage by flying.

Quote from: Titan Q on January 09, 2007, 05:51:37 PM
I do sincerely think the ASC has a tough situation because of geography, but I think a lot of teams have a tough Sectional situation due to other factors in the tournament process.

Here are the four Sectionals Illinois Wesleyan has been in this decade, with the D3hoops.com ranking of the host school noted:

2006 - @ #1 Lawrence
2004 - @ #4 Wooster
2003 - @ #1 Randolph-Macon
2001 - @ #1 Chicago
(Second round games included @ #2 Wash U in 2003 and @ #2 Hanover in 2004.)

IWU advanced to the Final Four in 2001 and 2006 by defeating the #1-ranked teams in the country on their floors. While I do think the ASC situation is difficult, is it any worse than the above?

If a team is good enough to make it to Salem, it will win on the road in a tough venue. Lawrence's gym may only hold 1500 and not 4000 like Calvin's, but I've never seen a more hostile or more difficult place to play in a Sectional game than what IWU faced last year in Appleton, WI.

Bottom line, the ASC needs to get it done on the floor when it counts, no matter where it is.

IWU has definitely drawn tough opponents in the tourney and their record in the tourney has to be as good as about anyone. I agree with you that who you play is at least equally important to the travel. But though IWU beat top-ranked teams on the road, the one time they were forced to fly in the last five or six years they lost to Hampden-Sydney in 2003 at the Randolph-Macon sectional. That would prove the argument that extended travel was more important than who they played. But I know one flight is not enough to prove anything, just making a point. IWU has been very impressive in the tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 09, 2007, 10:03:05 PM

The ink is barely dry on the new men's top 25, and already we have a loser:

Haverford 64
#19 Johns Hopkins 59

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 09, 2007, 10:32:09 PM

Re: the travel disadvantage. So far the talk is only of those flying in. Since the NCAA flies only those beyond 500 miles, I can't help wondering how those numbers might compare to those who were bussed 400+ miles. (Though if it is a luxury charter bus (rather than a school bus), I think I'd take the bus over the airport hassles and no-leg-room plane!)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 09, 2007, 10:42:48 PM

Quote from: Chris Brooks on January 09, 2007, 08:50:00 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 09, 2007, 03:46:22 AM

Uh huh -- and UWSP won the right to have that quiet game by beating the host team.

Not only have those two teams won national titles after playing sectionals far from home, but others have won sectionals, and even other have managed to win one game at a sectional.

MC has to be able to make that next step up.

Can't argue with that. Actually, by my count in the last five years 14 teams have been forced to fly into sectionals and eight of them won at least one game though only one advanced to the Final Four, Stevens Point 04. My only point is that teams who reach the Final Four after flying into a sectional join a very elite club and are at a competitive disadvantage by flying.

Quote from: Titan Q on January 09, 2007, 05:51:37 PM
I do sincerely think the ASC has a tough situation because of geography, but I think a lot of teams have a tough Sectional situation due to other factors in the tournament process.

Here are the four Sectionals Illinois Wesleyan has been in this decade, with the D3hoops.com ranking of the host school noted:

2006 - @ #1 Lawrence
2004 - @ #4 Wooster
2003 - @ #1 Randolph-Macon
2001 - @ #1 Chicago
(Second round games included @ #2 Wash U in 2003 and @ #2 Hanover in 2004.)

IWU advanced to the Final Four in 2001 and 2006 by defeating the #1-ranked teams in the country on their floors. While I do think the ASC situation is difficult, is it any worse than the above?

If a team is good enough to make it to Salem, it will win on the road in a tough venue. Lawrence's gym may only hold 1500 and not 4000 like Calvin's, but I've never seen a more hostile or more difficult place to play in a Sectional game than what IWU faced last year in Appleton, WI.

Bottom line, the ASC needs to get it done on the floor when it counts, no matter where it is.

IWU has definitely drawn tough opponents in the tourney and their record in the tourney has to be as good as about anyone. I agree with you that who you play is at least equally important to the travel. But though IWU beat top-ranked teams on the road, the one time they were forced to fly in the last five or six years they lost to Hampden-Sydney in 2003 at the Randolph-Macon sectional. That would prove the argument that extended travel was more important than who they played. But I know one flight is not enough to prove anything, just making a point. IWU has been very impressive in the tournament.

Chris, excellent post.

I think that a bigger issue on travel is how far one team's fans can go. May I assume correctly that IWU has a fan base that travels sufficiently well, and that the team has been conditioned to traveling with that fan base thru a tough CCIW schedule? I gues that IWU is never really underrepresented by their fan base anyplace they play, most of the season. If IWU can get into a car a drive there, 4 or 6 or 8 hours, IWU will get there.

If that be the case, then the only way to "isolate" an IWU team would be to send them to some remote location, such as Abilene, TX. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 09, 2007, 11:06:36 PM

Ralph,

IWU has a very large and active alumni chapter in Abilene - sorry!

(Actually, I just made that up. :P)

They do have a history of turning many opposing gyms into neutral, if not downright home, courts (if I remember right, that tourney game at #2 Wash U was reportedly 75-80% IWU fans). I believe it was reported last season that the tourney games at both Whitewater and Lawrence were effectively neutral-fan games.

Maybe we just couldn't get enough fans to RMC, but I suspect the more likely explanation is that H-S just outplayed us!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 09, 2007, 11:10:24 PM

I believe IWU travels as well as team in Division III, but even IWU fans have trouble pulling off a Friday sectional game in some remote location like Ashland, Virginia. That is a 10 hour drive or a flight. I think IWU only sold about 150 of its allotted 250 tickets for that Friday night Hampden-Sydney game. (Compare that to the approximately 1200 IWU fans that traveled 2 1/2 hours to St. Louis the weekend before when IWU played at #2 Wash U...that was the most impressive road crowd I've ever seen in Division III.) IWU's crowd was a non-factor in that game vs H-S, an ODAC team playing in a familiar gym, and their huge crowd.

The Wooster trip was also tough on fans. That's a 7 hour drive. IWU probably had 200 people there, but the huge Wooster crowd totally neutralized the small IWU group.

Last year's sectional at Lawrence was also difficult. Appleton is a 5 hour drive from Bloomington. IWU had a great crowd for the game vs Lawrence, but the little gym was still 75% Lawrence fans of course.

I do not think IWU's traveling fan base is as big of a factor in it's tournament success as the fact that the Titans play in front of big, hostile road crowds all season long in the CCIW (and about 2500 per home date). I think that is a huge advantage come tournament time. In March, IWU always looks comfortable on the road, whether it be at Wartburg or Chicago or Hanover or Lawrence. Some teams that make the tourney find themselves in unfamiliar territory and with that collective deer in the headlights look.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on January 09, 2007, 11:15:27 PM

Ralph,
That is really what I am getting at. The last two season's we might have had about ten people make the trips to the sectional. Two years ago when we played Calvin at Albion, that place was insane and full to the rafters with Calvin fans. I'm really not blaming the losses on that but it didn't help.
Honestly, I would just like to see our fans, students and community get to experience the environments that I have seen in the northern sectionals, its awesome. We had nearly 2,500 last year for our first two games and would have had over 3,000 with a trip to the Final Four on the line.
Playing at home or nearby obviously increases your chances of winning. It would have been hard for someone to come in and beat us last year in the dome. And I would have liked to see someone try to go into McMurry and beat the 2000 team. I just don't see it. I still think that is the best DIII team I have personally seen and they played out of their mind in that building. A crazy environment with the style of play and the fans right on top of you.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 09, 2007, 11:17:38 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 09, 2007, 11:06:36 PM
Maybe we just couldn't get enough fans to RMC, but I suspect the more likely explanation is that H-S just outplayed us!

And yes, IWU didn't lose to H-S because of the flight...they lost because they just didn't match up well vs them and got out-played.

I'm not one that puts a ton of stock in the theory that air travels take it out of the players in the tournament. I mean, what is the difference between a 7 hour bus ride from Bloomington, IL to Wooster, OH and a long day of air travel? As someone who flies for work regularly (every other week) I do realize how tough air travel can be, but we're talking about 20 year old kids here. By the time the ball gets thrown up, I believe they are fine and ready to play.

Now, the advantage of playing at home vs the road in general...that is another topic. Without question, it is huge advantage to play at home in the tournament. Do I think IWU would have defeated the same Hampden-Sydey team in 2003 at the Shirk Center, in front of 3200 Titan fans? Absolutely.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 09, 2007, 11:19:18 PM

And by the way, I do hope Mississippi College earns a Sectional this year. I predicted they would on Hoopsville this week. As Chris points out, it is a wonderful atmosphere and something every great fan base should get to be part of.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on January 09, 2007, 11:24:27 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 09, 2007, 11:19:18 PM
And by the way, I do hope Mississippi College earns a Sectional this year. I predicted they would on Hoopsville this week. As Chris points out, it is a wonderful atmosphere and something every great fan base should get to be part of.

I really hope we do but there is still a long way to go. Especially this year when it seems like every week ten different Top 25 teams get beat.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 09, 2007, 11:38:19 PM

Chris,

But your guys have done a great job of dodging the bullet ever since the opener. I suspect that is why Elmhurst made such a huge leap this week (I don't think it was just beating Augie!) - I think voters caught up to the fact that losing to Simpson was the FIRST game, and they've reeled off 11 straight since then.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 09, 2007, 11:42:21 PM

Chris, the McMurry-MissCollege games have probably been the best in the ASC over the last decade. We have too many new players this year for them to have the real appreciation of a McMurry-MissCollege game, but I think that the way that Coach Jones got onto his players in the first half of the November 30th game, as described by Pat Coleman, may have given them a glimpse. I think that Coach Holmes probably respects Coach Jones more than any other coach in the league, in the same manner of a Darrell Royal/Frank Broyles or Darrell Royal/Bud Wilkinson respect.

That being said, the way that the Golden Dome would work for us at McMurry would be to have played there in the conference tourney and then go back there the next week. If McMurry won their side of the bracket and MissCollege lost theirs, then the Choctaw fans might make a difference if they jumped on the McMurry/ASC bandwagon!

As for the toughening that a hostile environment will give you, I think that TitanQ is absolutely correct for the advantage that CCIW schools have from their conference experience.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on January 10, 2007, 12:10:44 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 09, 2007, 11:38:19 PM
Chris,

But your guys have done a great job of dodging the bullet ever since the opener. I suspect that is why Elmhurst made such a huge leap this week (I don't think it was just beating Augie!) - I think voters caught up to the fact that losing to Simpson was the FIRST game, and they've reeled off 11 straight since then.

We've played well after that loss. We should never lose that game but the stars all lined up for that one. Wesley is a team we traditionally beat at least 30, they were drastically improved playing their 10th game of the season and we were playing our opener with a new head coach. We had over 30 turnovers and they still needed a wild three-pointer at the buzzer to send it to OT. But they are 15-7 with wins over us and two pretty good NAIA DI teams (Spring Hill and Belhaven).

Looking forward to the UT-Dallas game Thursday night, should be fun.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 10, 2007, 12:32:56 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 09, 2007, 10:03:05 PM
The ink is barely dry on the new men's top 25, and already we have a loser:

Haverford 64
#19 Johns Hopkins 59

Phew. Talk about overrated.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 10, 2007, 12:51:32 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 10, 2007, 12:32:56 AM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 09, 2007, 10:03:05 PM
The ink is barely dry on the new men's top 25, and already we have a loser:

Haverford 64
#19 Johns Hopkins 59

Phew. Talk about overrated.

I had them #24 on my PP ballot ONLY because of the pernicious influence of your week 5 poll! :P :-[

I should have joined two HOFers and stuck in my Titans! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 10, 2007, 02:38:50 AM

Color me happy that I left JHU off of my PP ballot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 10, 2007, 02:58:21 AM

Perhaps the discussion of the posters' poll ballots could be left on the posters' poll page.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 10, 2007, 04:13:47 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 10, 2007, 02:58:21 AM
Perhaps the discussion of the posters' poll ballots could be left on the posters' poll page.

Most of the past thirty posts in this room have revolved around Mississippi College having to travel to sectionals, and the degree to which traveling long distances hampers performance in the D3 tournament. That had squat-all to do with the Top 25, Pat ... and yet I didn't see you asking for that conversation to be moved to one of the Multi-Regional Topics rooms that deal with the D3 tournament. In fact, you even contributed to that tournament-travel discussion in here.

Over the past week, this room has touched upon (among other things) the question of whether or not neutral sites should be used in the D3 tourney in light of North Central's having had to travel to St. Thomas in last year's opening round; Terry Pluto's book Loose Balls about the old ABA; and Rochester, NY and its distinctive local cuisine. None of those digressions from Top 25 discussion seem to have merited any reproaches from you.

So why are you jumping on Chuck and I after only two posts that mentioned the PP? And Chuck's is even pertinent to this room, as he explained that he had based his PP ballot upon last week's D3hoops.com Top 25, and his post followed seamlessly upon the two comments made previous to his about Johns Hopkins losing this evening.

Come on, Pat.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 10, 2007, 10:55:50 AM

There's off-topic, and then there's off-topic.

This is just my opinion, of course, but I've always felt that this site has a perfectly good and well-researched top 25 poll (two, actually), and that a "poster's poll" adds nothing. It may be a fun little diversion but in no way can it be compared to the real thing. This room is supposed to be devoted to discussion of the real poll, and while going off-topic to talk about travel or other things can be annoying, going off-topic to talk about the poster's poll can be misleading and detrimental.

You may have wondered why I don't participate in the poster's poll; well, this is why. As perhaps the #1 fan of the real poll, I can't imagine setting myself up to know more than the actual poll voters, and therefore would just submit the D3Hoops.com poll as my ballot each week. And where's the fun in that? :)

Furthermore, the top 25 polls are (I would guess) the biggest sources of publicity--and therefore hits, and therefore revenue--for this site. I've never been quite comfortable with the idea that those of us who take so much from this (free) site and give so little back would want to go into competition (however minor) with the site's #1 product. Nevertheless, I haven't said or done anything to dampen anyone's enthusiasm for the poster's poll, other than to choose non-participation. But I'd be happier if it stayed out of this room.

As I say, it's just my opinion, and everyone knows I'm just an old curmudgeon. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 10, 2007, 11:47:42 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 10, 2007, 04:13:47 AM
Come on, Pat.

Because I am reading the board tonight -- the entire board as I always do -- and I'm bombarded by Posters Poll This and Posters Poll That. Enough already. Maybe here, on the board for the real poll, it would be nice not to have to read about the Posters Poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 10, 2007, 11:57:54 AM

I agree. As much as I love the chance to dissect more and more numbers (I'd love to have 400 polls just because I love comparing these things), I wholeheartedly agree that mention of that should be kept to the board it's in. It's just, honestly, a bit of humility on our part. When we're posting on other boards, a simple "I'd put them at 20 or I don't think they are worthy of a ranking" is probably sufficient to make our point. In reality the poster's poll is only exciting to those of us who participate in it, frankly because anyone can participate in it. I enjoy it; I think it's good, but it probably doesn't need to show up all over the site. That's a bit excessive.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 10, 2007, 02:37:48 PM

Quote from: Chris Brooks on January 09, 2007, 11:15:27 PM
And I would have liked to see someone try to go into McMurry and beat the 2000 team. I just don't see it. I still think that is the best DIII team I have personally seen and they played out of their mind in that building. A crazy environment with the style of play and the fans right on top of you.

Sorry but home courts do not erase 36 point deficits.

Calvin 115, McMurry, Tex. 79

Not to beat this to death but its D-E-F-E-N-C-E.

MISSISSIPPI COLLEGE
2005 at Albion College vs Calvin........allowed 51% shooting while shooting 39%
http://miaa.org/mbb/stats/0405/0311MCCA.HTM

2006 at Wittenberg vs Transylvania.......allowed 51% shooting while shooting 42%
http://www4.wittenberg.edu/news/athletics/mbasketball/statistics/05-06statistics/ncaa4.htm

I'm also certain I've karma'd my team into a flight to Mississippi come March. ;) :D ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 10, 2007, 02:47:13 PM

I've asked this before but I'll do it again...

Tonight Hope's Glenn Van Wieren and Albion's Mike Turner square off against each other, each has achieved 500 wins in their career.

Are there any other matchups with 500 game winners this year or two coaches playing with more wins?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 10, 2007, 03:15:27 PM

Hixon at Amherst has 500 as does Whitmore at Colby. They play every year. I think they may have just a couple more combined wins than Van Wieren and Turner, but it's probably pretty close.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 10, 2007, 07:06:40 PM

Quote from: sac on January 10, 2007, 02:37:48 PM
Quote from: Chris Brooks on January 09, 2007, 11:15:27 PM
And I would have liked to see someone try to go into McMurry and beat the 2000 team. I just don't see it. I still think that is the best DIII team I have personally seen and they played out of their mind in that building. A crazy environment with the style of play and the fans right on top of you.

Sorry but home courts do not erase 36 point deficits.

Calvin 115, McMurry, Tex. 79

Not to beat this to death but its D-E-F-E-N-C-E.

MISSISSIPPI COLLEGE
2005 at Albion College vs Calvin........allowed 51% shooting while shooting 39%
http://miaa.org/mbb/stats/0405/0311MCCA.HTM

2006 at Wittenberg vs Transylvania.......allowed 51% shooting while shooting 42%
http://www4.wittenberg.edu/news/athletics/mbasketball/statistics/05-06statistics/ncaa4.htm

I'm also certain I've karma'd my team into a flight to Mississippi come March. ;) :D ;D

Sac, if you had the good fortune to see the Calvin Sectional in 2000, I encourage your observations as well.

The Calvin Sectional was created under the Handbook guidelines that sent the South Region to the Great Lakes Region that year. That put #1 Calvin, #2 Hampden-Sydney, #3 Wooster and #4 McMurry (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/00/week13.htm), a cumulative 101-6, in the same Sectional.

(#39t) Maryville knocked off #2 H-SC 76-75 (http://www.d3hoops.com/archives/mncaa00.htm) in the second round of this 48-team tourney, and moved to the Calvin Sectional.

Calvin edged #25 Franklin the nation's leader in FG %-age at 51.6% and 3FG %age at 41.8% (http://www.ncaa.org/stats/m_basketball/3/2000/indv.txt) 92-90 in OT at home in the second round in the bye-home-away format.

Wooster advanced to the Sectional by virtue of the 82-71 win over (#36t) ONU.

McMurry had defeated unranked Pomona-Pitzer 111-76 after the Sagehens had defeated #9 Trinity (25-2) 65-62 in San Antonio in the first round.

Calvin defeated Wooster 82-53 in the Sweet 16 while McMurry was defeating Maryville TN, 112-95.

Respectfully, I think that we are discussing different styles of defensive play. I believe that we have had this discussion before, but for the newer readers, let me elaborate.

Traditionally, fans see a 63-62 game and say "great defense". Dissecting the game film will show that the point guard takes the inbounds pass, moves the ball up the court with some one-on-one pressure. He crosses the half court line after 8 seconds. He stands at the top of the key for 4 seconds and outlines the play. The wings move around with some passes, while the big men have basically stood around as the passes are being attempted, until the ball comes inside with about 5 seconds on the clock. The big men have spent 30 secs running 80-85 feet, with some moving around in the paint and then starting the cycle again after a score. If the offense recovers the offensive rebound, the offense starts the play over again, and may score this time with 2 seconds on the clock when a penetration or a pass or a jumper is made. The big men made one excursion of the length of the floor in 60 secs of playing clock time. As much as 10-15 secs of the possession is spent in down-time.

The 2000 McMurry team incorporated what may be described as an aggressive variation of Nolan Richardson's "40 minutes of hell". They were led by 2000 All-American point guard, Daniel Martinez (#1 in assists 7.9apg and #1 in steals 6.1 spg) (http://www.ncaa.org/stats/m_basketball/3/2000/indv.txt) and 2001 guard Alex Denson, who came off the bench. Only Martinez had 29 mpg. Denson had 22 mpg and 9 others had double digit minutes. The typical cycle would involve a score on offense, intense pressure resulting in a steal or a turnover. This change in possession required the opponent's big men to hurry back on defense. A quick basket in the first 10 secs of the possession would then return McMurry to playing full-court pressure defense. McMurry would sub an entire unit every 3-4 minutes and continue all night. The pressure was incredible, and it was all driven by the turnover or the defensive stop. The full court press would begin off the made basket.

McMurry was #2 in scoring in D3 100.3 ppg (second only to Grinnell's 103.6 ppg),

Quote1.Grinnell ------------------------ 21 ( 6-15) 2175 103.6
2.McMurry ------------------------- 29 (27- 2) 2909 100.3

#2 in scoring margin

Quote1.Hampden-Sydney ------------------------ 88.2 66.4 21.8
2.McMurry ------------------------------- 100.3 82.4 17.9

Their only losses were to NAIA-1 St Gregory OK and to Calvin. The McMurry defensive style was to score and then get back on defense. The average game would involve runs of scoring, but at the 33-35 minute mark, McMurry would pull away from its opponent, by wearing them down with their press and the number of cycles (or trips) up and down the floor. I cannot find the Calvin archive that I remember seeing a few years ago. McMurry's Daniel Martinez holds the Calvin opponent's single game record for 6 steals against Calvin that night. That is great defense. That GameStat archive is not available to me, but I remember that we led by 8-9 (about 43 to 34/35) with about 8 minutes left. Calvin called a timeout.

I believe that the Calvin braintrust in the gym there in Grand Rapids had seen McMurry defeat a solid Maryville TN with this up-style tempo. (Since that time, Maryville TN players have posted they could not figure out that defensive scheme, all night long.) After seeing it for 40 minutes on Friday night, Calvin finally solved the puzzle after about 12 minutes of play in the first half, and their talented athletes, including Aaron Winkle and Jeremy Veenstra, did not let up. Since McMurry's offense played off this defense, there was no other way to get back into the game, and so the rout continued, while the Calvin fans were going "bonkers". As I listened over the internet to the lead melt away and Calvin take total dominance in the second half, I was amazed at the atmosphere of 4500 screaming fans.

Daniel Martinez finished as the #3 D3 in all-time steals for a career (page 110) (http://www.ncaa.org/library/records/basketball/m_basketball_records_book/2007/2007_m_basketball_records.pdf), and his freshman year did not count because McMurry was D3 provisional in 1996-97.

I attribute the Calvin-McMurry game as outstanding talent and astute coaching that was able to solve a defensive scheme that no one else had. Calvin's win over Franklin does not look like traditional great defense. In that respect, it looks like the Calvin offense outscored an outstanding offensive team.

NCAA 2000 Season Statistics (http://www.ncaa.org/stats/m_basketball/3/2000/indv.txt)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 10, 2007, 07:16:00 PM

Sac:

Great question.

I couldn't find any other men's examples that top the Albion/Hope game for coaches' victories. If Otterbein and Rochester ever play, that might do it now that Neer has 500.

At a glance, Franklin & Marshall and Johns Hopkins are the closest I could find on this year's schedule with around 1000 and change. Robinson (F&M) has over 700 wins with Nelson accounting for the rest.

There seems to be a greater chance for this on the women's side with Strong (Scranton), Kahler (St. John Fisher), Kaufman (Elizabethtown) and Fifield (Southern Maine) all relatively close to each other.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 10, 2007, 09:34:57 PM

Final: #5 Wooster 97 Allegheny 87

Wooster gets the road win even though Tom Port sat ~6 minutes in the second half with 4 fouls and Tim Vandervaart did not play tonight due to his calf injury (might return this Saturday). Wooster actually led by 16 points (78-62) before the Gators hit several three pointers to narrow the lead.

Wooster was led by James Cooper with 25 points, Andy Van Horn with 18 points, Evan Will with 12 points (also 12 boards), Brandon Johnson with 15 points and Tom Port with 15 points.

Allegheny was led by Bill Babe with 26 points (6 three pointers), George Raftis with 17 points and Jimmy Savage with 14 points.

Wooster is now 12-2, 5-0 NCAC Next up is Wabash at home on Saturday

GO SCOTS!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 10, 2007, 10:06:12 PM

Final: #4 Ohio Northern 63 Wilmington 62

Polar Bears escape with a very narrow road win tonight. Wilmington actually had the ball with 10 seconds left and a chance to win but turned the ball over as time expired.

ONU is now tied for first in OAC play at 5-2 with both Capital and Baldwin-Wallace because they were both upset tonight on their home floors by Mount Union and Otterbein respectively. Actually, it is a 4 way tie for first place because Heidelberg is also 5-2 after beating John Carroll tonight.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 10, 2007, 10:36:26 PM

Quote from: diehardfan on January 08, 2007, 01:47:05 AM
I'm really not sure NCC deserves to be in the Top 25, and for the same reason, I don't think Wheaton currently deserves their Top 25 spot at this moment either

Oh how I wish I wasn't right. :-\ :'(

All of the home teams (Carthage, Wheaton, NCC, IWU) lost today in CCIW conference action, especially surprising is NCC's loss to NPU (congrats to Greg!) and Millikin's defeat of IWU.... for huge stretches, these games weren't even close!

This conference is absolutely INSANE this year. :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 10, 2007, 10:37:16 PM

Top 25 Schedules and Results, Jan. 8-14 (UPDATED with Wednesday scores):

#1 UW-Stevens Point (14-1) def. Lakeland 97-59 and won at UW-Eau Claire 77-43
#2 Amherst (12-0) won at Wesleyan 76-52, plays at Tufts Fri., and plays at #12 Bates Sat.
#3 St. Thomas (12-1) def. Augsburg 80-63, def. Gustavus Adolphus 74-57, and plays at Concordia-Moorhead Sat.
#4 Ohio Northern (12-2) won at Wilmington 63-62 and plays at John Carroll Sat.
#5 Wooster (12-2) won at Allegheny 97-87 and hosts Wabash Sat.
#6 Whitworth (13-0) hosts #17 Puget Sound Fri. and hosts Pacific Lutheran Sat.
#7 Virginia Wesleyan (11-2) plays at Lynchburg Sat.
#8 Wittenberg (12-2) won at Earlham 71-60 and plays at Hiram Sat.
#9 Mississippi College (11-1) hosts Texas-Dallas Thu. and hosts Texas-Tyler Sat.
#10 UW-Oshkosh (12-3) lost at #20 UW-La Crosse 48-47 and plays at UW-River Falls Sat.
#11 Hope (11-2) def. Albion 94-58 and plays at Calvin Sat.
#12 Bates (11-0) def. U. New England 90-46, hosts Trinity (CT) Fri., and hosts #2 Amherst Sat.
#13 William Paterson (10-4) lost at New Jersey City 56-42 and hosts Ramapo Sat.
#14 Elmhurst (12-1) won at #18 Carthage 72-62 and hosts Illinois Wesleyan Sat.
#15 Augustana (11-3) won at #21 Wheaton (IL) 74-69 and hosts #18 Carthage Sat.
#16 Washington U. (10-1) plays at Case Western Reserve Fri. and plays at Emory Sun.
#17 Puget Sound (10-2) plays at #6 Whitworth Fri. and at Whitman Sat.
#18 Carthage (9-4) lost to #14 Elmhurst 72-62 and plays at #15 Augustana Sat.
#19 Johns Hopkins (11-2) lost to Haverford 64-59, plays at Ursinus Thu., and hosts Muhlenburg Sat.
#20 UW-La Crosse (10-4) def. #10 UW-Oshkosh 48-47 and plays at UW-Superior Sat.
#21 Wheaton (IL) (8-5) lost to #15 Augustana 74-69 and plays at North Park Sat.
#22 Occidental (8-3) def. Caltech 103-40 and hosts Claremont-Mudd-Scripps Sat.
#23 Worcester Polytech (10-1) won at Springfield 82-75, hosts Babson Thu., and plays at Clark Sat.
#24 NYU (11-1) plays at Brandeis Sat.
#25 Aurora (11-1) def. Dominican 90-66 and plays at Clarke Fri.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 10, 2007, 10:42:20 PM

David - thanks for another great job on the Top 25 update! k+

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 10, 2007, 11:11:54 PM

re: CCIW

Take a strong conference and lower the top teams down a notch and you're going to get pure madness, night in and night out. If there are six teams between No. 10 and No. 45 ... yikes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 10, 2007, 11:31:35 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 10, 2007, 11:11:54 PM
re: CCIW

Take a strong conference and lower the top teams down a notch and you're going to get pure madness, night in and night out. If there are six teams between No. 10 and No. 45 ... yikes.

This season I wish I had something other than an ordinal ranking for these teams. I look at the interregional play that has come thru the South, and there is so little distance between these teams. It is as if #11 and #60 are no more than 2 possessions apart on a neutral floor.

I am waiting for Bates to tell me if I believe the Amherst at #2 or the Amherst that came off the break and only led Trinity TX by 2 possessions until 5 minutes left, a Trinity team that became Hendrix' (http://www.d3hoops.com/school_info.php?school=Hendrix&team=m) premier win.

Johns Hopkins finally declared itself to be the team that my McMurry friends saw in Baltimore. Is there any team deserving in the MidAtlantic?

Anyone in the OAC (http://www.d3hoops.com/conference_info.php?year=2007&team=mens&conf=OAC)? Bald-Wally loses to Otterbein and is now tied with ... Heidelburg at 5-2, conference. ???

I feel like a surveyor who is mapping the highest points in New Orleans. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 10, 2007, 11:40:23 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 10, 2007, 11:31:35 PM
I feel like a surveyor who is mapping the highest points in New Orleans. :D

As W. Mark Felt famously said, "follow the money." :)

Anyway, as we have recently seen, knowing where the highest points in NOLA are may be difficult but is crucially important. :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 10, 2007, 11:43:28 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 10, 2007, 11:11:54 PM
re: CCIW

Take a strong conference and lower the top teams down a notch and you're going to get pure madness, night in and night out. If there are six teams between No. 10 and No. 45 ... yikes.

I'm thinking that Elmhurst might be a higher than #10... but yeah, point taken.

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 10, 2007, 11:31:35 PM
I feel like a surveyor who is mapping the highest points in New Orleans. :D

This may be my favorite analogy ever! k+ to the man from Texas. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 10, 2007, 11:49:37 PM

Quote from: diehardfan on January 10, 2007, 11:43:28 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 10, 2007, 11:11:54 PM
re: CCIW

Take a strong conference and lower the top teams down a notch and you're going to get pure madness, night in and night out. If there are six teams between No. 10 and No. 45 ... yikes.
I'm thinking that Elmhurst might be a higher than #10... but yeah, point taken.

Give me a 12-2 Elmhurst in this year's CCIW and they are in my Top 5. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 11, 2007, 12:26:31 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 10, 2007, 10:55:50 AM
There's off-topic, and then there's off-topic.

This is just my opinion, of course, but I've always felt that this site has a perfectly good and well-researched top 25 poll (two, actually), and that a "poster's poll" adds nothing. It may be a fun little diversion but in no way can it be compared to the real thing.

Who's comparing it to the real thing? Sorry, David, but you and Pat are overreacting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 11, 2007, 01:23:53 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 10, 2007, 11:49:37 PM
Quote from: diehardfan on January 10, 2007, 11:43:28 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 10, 2007, 11:11:54 PM
re: CCIW

Take a strong conference and lower the top teams down a notch and you're going to get pure madness, night in and night out. If there are six teams between No. 10 and No. 45 ... yikes.
I'm thinking that Elmhurst might be a higher than #10... but yeah, point taken.
Give me a 12-2 Elmhurst in this year's CCIW and they are in my Top 5. :)

I doubt that any team in the nation has more weapons than Elmhurst... teams that can beat you with 5 different players.... it reminds me of Point in that way.... if one or two players have an off night, there are plenty of people to pick up the slack.

For example, tonight, Elmhurst had four players that scored from 12-15 pts... and two of their bench players posted 7 apiece. On the season, they've had five different people post the high score, all more than once, and five different players posting highs on rebounds. They have five players averaging 10ppg or more. They've beaten Whitewater, Oshkosh, Augustana, and Carthage...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 11, 2007, 01:26:29 AM

And in terms of the poster poll...

1) I don't think it's any where near as legitimate. Pat's poll is obviously better... that goes without saying. It doesn't have as many people, it doesn't have as good national coverage, and the pollsters don't get the good packet of information that Pat makes when making their selections.
2) Having a poster poll doesn't detract from the real one any more than the fact that we discus games on this board despite the fact that there are professional broadcasters and newspaperwriters and SIDs that talk about game results.
2) Greg is probably more knowledgeable about the national basketball scene than several pollsters... the fact that he mentioned that he got one of the picks better than the pollsters as a whole should hardly be surprising... Greg is a HOFer for a reason.
3) They do relate, and it's at least as appropriate to talk about it here as garbage plates.
4) If discussing the poster poll, it should be VERY clearly stated as such. Since there are obviously posters that are voters in the real poll, there needs to be pretty firm differentiation.
5) HoopsFan's option is not a bad idea.

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 10, 2007, 11:57:54 AMWhen we're posting on other boards, a simple "I'd put them at 20 or I don't think they are worthy of a ranking" is probably sufficient to make our point.

I did that in my comments about what I felt was an exaggerated placement of NCC and Wheaton, and I am not a Poster Poll voter.... the point was still made quite adequately.

I really hope the bickering between you guys doesn't get ugly. :-[

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 11, 2007, 02:23:16 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 10, 2007, 11:11:54 PM
re: CCIW

Take a strong conference and lower the top teams down a notch and you're going to get pure madness, night in and night out. If there are six teams between No. 10 and No. 45 ... yikes.

It's more than that. This year the formula is: Take a strong conference and lower the top teams down a notch, and raise the bottom teams up a notch ... or two. Augie, North Central, and Illinois Wesleyan are definitely down a bit this year from last (although Elmhurst seems to be making a bid to buck that trend in spite of losing Chris Martin). But the league's 6-thru-8 teams from last year -- Carthage, North Park, and Millikin -- are all vastly improved. That definitely plays into the equation as well.

People are already talking about 10-4 champs or whatnot, which may be a both premature and presumptuous. One or two teams almost always manage to rise above the rest somewhere along the line in the CCIW season. But this is shaping up to be an unusually parity-oriented year for the CCIW. I'm biased, of course, but I think it's great for the league as a whole. Keeps the interest level up across the league, especially since it could result in a real dogfight for those four CCIW tourney berths.

Quote from: diehardfan on January 11, 2007, 01:26:29 AMI really hope the bickering between you guys doesn't get ugly. :-[

It won't. It's not a big deal. We simply have a difference of opinion, and it's not the first time that Pat and I have disagreed about something. Interestingly, the most heated debate we ever had before was over the Top 25 as well. I guess that we have to air these things out every six or seven years or so. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 11, 2007, 04:54:06 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 11, 2007, 12:26:31 AM
Who's comparing it to the real thing? Sorry, David, but you and Pat are overreacting.

All I'm saying is that I have to read the same few people discussing it all over the board. Maybe on this topic we could steer clear of it.

That was all I asked.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 11, 2007, 05:04:47 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 11, 2007, 04:54:06 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 11, 2007, 12:26:31 AM
Who's comparing it to the real thing? Sorry, David, but you and Pat are overreacting.

All I'm saying is that I have to read the same few people discussing it all over the board. Maybe on this topic we could steer clear of it.

That was all I asked.

I just don't see that at all. What "discussion" of the PP I did see in other rooms consisted almost entirely of Chuck's recruiting efforts to drum up some new pollsters, which I don't consider to be the same thing as actually discussing the PP.

I'm not 100% sure, but I'm pretty sure that I've never mentioned the PP anywhere but in the PP room until my post in here about Johns Hopkins last night, and that was only in response to Chuck's bringing it up. The PP is just not a subject that's very high on my radar. I participate in it for the fun of it, but, quite honestly, I'd completely forgotten that it even existed until Chuck revived it over the past few days. It's just not that big of a deal to me -- certainly not to the point of "discussing it all over the board."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 11, 2007, 10:01:07 AM

"Johns Hopkins finally declared itself to be the team that my McMurry friends saw in Baltimore. Is there any team deserving in the MidAtlantic?"

A good question and I'm not sure the answer isn't "no" if you're talking about deserving Top 25 votes.

Lincoln is on my ballot because I believe they have the capacity to be a better team than last year and the talent Yuille has assembled is impressive. The loss to Penn State-Altoona is befuddling.

DeSales was on my list of teams to watch until they got embarrassed at FDU-Florham last night. The MACC conference leaders (Widener and Messiah) didn't play overwhelmingly well out of conference. The Centennial has a lot of parity and it's been a while since a PnAC team has made noise at the national level (Gwynedd-Mercy a few seasons ago).

Maybe I'll blog on that later tonight.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 11, 2007, 10:26:18 AM

Quote from: gordonmann on January 11, 2007, 10:01:07 AM
"Johns Hopkins finally declared itself to be the team that my McMurry friends saw in Baltimore. Is there any team deserving in the MidAtlantic?"

A good question and I'm not sure the answer isn't "no" if you're talking about deserving Top 25 votes.

Lincoln is on my ballot because I believe they have the capacity to be a better team than last year and the talent Yuille has assembled is impressive. The loss to Penn State-Altoona is befuddling.

DeSales was on my list of teams to watch until they got embarrassed at FDU-Florham last night. The MACC conference leaders (Widener and Messiah) didn't play overwhelmingly well out of conference. The Centennial has a lot of parity and it's been a while since a PnAC team has made noise at the national level (Gwynedd-Mercy a few seasons ago).

Maybe I'll blog on that later tonight.

Gordon, thanks for the response. I will consider your impressions next week on the Posters' Poll.

I will update the Bumblin' B's after games of Jan 20th, unless we have a real string of upsets. Lincoln may have crawled back into the Top 25, but may have ~~has~~* sustained too many early season losses to earn a bid.

*Re-wording--12:40 pm CST Jan 11, 2007 (Sorry.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: notamensa on January 11, 2007, 12:57:09 PM

pat,

just an observation; there is no link to the week 5 top-25. i see this week (week 6), and a link to weeks 4 and prior, but no week 5.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on January 11, 2007, 02:20:54 PM

The poster poll is quite interesting to watch, but then again so is Baywatch. I don't compare Baywatch to actual lifeguarding. I exercise the same caution with the PP.

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 11, 2007, 03:34:44 PM

Quote from: diehardfan on January 11, 2007, 01:26:29 AM
And in terms of the poster poll...

1) I don't think it's any where near as legitimate. Pat's poll is obviously better... that goes without saying. It doesn't have as many people, it doesn't have as good national coverage, and the pollsters don't get the good packet of information that Pat makes when making their selections.

It's not supposed to be legit at all. There aren't any publications out there that have "Stevens Point #1 in the D3hoops.com POSTER'S POLL, WOW." It was simply for fun. I'll take full responsibility for any problems the poll has since it was my idea in the first place. It just gave the posters on this site their own opinion on their Top 25, which basically is similar to Pat's actual poll. If it were just me coming up with my own Top 25, there probably would be 2-5 teams that wouldn't be in my poll because I would have NO IDEA about them (Johns Hopkins, basically any East Coast team not in the ODAC or NJAC and NESCAC).

So, yeah...I don't think it's a sin to be posting comments about the poster's poll in the Top 25 board. No one would ever try to make the poster's poll better or more legit that Pat's poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 11, 2007, 03:53:15 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 11, 2007, 10:26:18 AM
Gordon, thanks for the response. I will consider your impressions next week on the Posters' Poll.

Did anyone else find that terribly funny after the heated discussion? When I read that I laughed out loud!!! :D

Quote from: Old School on January 11, 2007, 03:34:44 PM
Quote from: diehardfan on January 11, 2007, 01:26:29 AM
And in terms of the poster poll...

1) I don't think it's any where near as legitimate. Pat's poll is obviously better... that goes without saying. It doesn't have as many people, it doesn't have as good national coverage, and the pollsters don't get the good packet of information that Pat makes when making their selections.

It's not supposed to be legit at all. There aren't any publications out there that have "Stevens Point #1 in the D3hoops.com POSTER'S POLL, WOW." It was simply for fun. I'll take full responsibility for any problems the poll has since it was my idea in the first place. It just gave the posters on this site their own opinion on their Top 25, which basically is similar to Pat's actual poll. If it were just me coming up with my own Top 25, there probably would be 2-5 teams that wouldn't be in my poll because I would have NO IDEA about them (Johns Hopkins, basically any East Coast team not in the ODAC or NJAC and NESCAC).

So, yeah...I don't think it's a sin to be posting comments about the poster's poll in the Top 25 board. No one would ever try to make the poster's poll better or more legit that Pat's poll.

I don't think it's a good idea to take that post out of context.... my comments on the issue have to stand together... this makes it seem like I'm against discussing the poster poll on this board, which I'm obviously not....

Quote from: diehardfan on January 11, 2007, 01:26:29 AM
3) They do relate, and it's at least as appropriate to talk about it here as garbage plates.

etc.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 11, 2007, 05:06:37 PM

I'm not sure I'd call it a "heated" discussion; at least it's not heated on my end. I just don't like the concept of the posters' poll, and for the reasons I stated above I'd just as soon it not bleed into this room. My opinion is my own, I've kept it to myself for the past year, and I doubt I'll ever have cause to mention it again. I didn't and don't expect anyone to agree with me. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 11, 2007, 06:01:03 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 11, 2007, 05:06:37 PM
I'm not sure I'd call it a "heated" discussion; at least it's not heated on my end. I just don't like the concept of the posters' poll, and for the reasons I stated above I'd just as soon it not bleed into this room. My opinion is my own, I've kept it to myself for the past year, and I doubt I'll ever have cause to mention it again. I didn't and don't expect anyone to agree with me. :)

Okay, thanks! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 11, 2007, 06:40:38 PM

Is it just me or does it seem like no one wants to be ranked in the middle to bottom half of the top 25. We already have 4 losers and its only Thursday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: notamensa on January 11, 2007, 07:18:39 PM

thanks for the week 5 link, pat.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 11, 2007, 07:30:17 PM

Quote from: sac on January 11, 2007, 06:40:38 PM
Is it just me or does it seem like no one wants to be ranked in the middle to bottom half of the top 25. We already have 4 losers and its only Thursday.

It's just you. ;) :) Of the five losses sustained by top 25 teams (four in your "middle to bottom half" sub-category), three were to other teams in the "middle to bottom half:"

Quote from: David Collinge on January 10, 2007, 10:37:16 PM
Top 25 Schedules and Results, Jan. 8-14 (UPDATED with Wednesday scores):

#10 UW-Oshkosh (12-3) lost at #20 UW-La Crosse 48-47 and plays at UW-River Falls Sat.
#13 William Paterson (10-4) lost at New Jersey City 56-42 and hosts Ramapo Sat.
#18 Carthage (9-4) lost to #14 Elmhurst 72-62 and plays at #15 Augustana Sat.
#19 Johns Hopkins (11-2) lost to Haverford 64-59, plays at Ursinus Thu., and hosts Muhlenburg Sat.
#21 Wheaton (IL) (8-5) lost to #15 Augustana 74-69 and plays at North Park Sat.

So far this week, we're just two losses over the minimum. That's a big improvement over last week; I think Averett alone had two losses to unranked teams by midweek.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ecdubb420 on January 11, 2007, 07:53:33 PM

it looks like EC needs some representation in this forum. thus, as long as they are in the top 25 (hopefully for the rest of the season). My best attempt for being that voice will be made.
From reading this board, I'm glad to hear that so many people are taking EC seriously. I have felt that they didn't make it to the NCAA tournament two years ago because they are a school that has historically has had well, no positive history.
Coach Scherer has a great thing working at Elmhurst and though the college (students and alumni) are taking a while to figure out they have had a top notch team for the past three seasons (not to mention 00-01) they will pack the place if this play continues. I never would have dreamed of hearing all this buzz about EC when I started the radio coverage during the 03-04 season, but it is in much thanks to Scherer, Baines and also the institution as a whole (where everything is up, up, up), so in that case I may need to get used to it.
I'm just glad that over the last several years it appears that thanks to Giovanine, Raridon, Scherer and long standing kudos to Harris, that IWU may become just another talented team (instead of being THE TEAM) in the CCIW.
I know my knowledge may not be as vast as many of you out in d3 posting lore (aka, ready for the criticism), but I'll do what I can to represent EC and the CCIW to its fullest.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 11, 2007, 09:25:23 PM

Top 25 update from the ASC in-game update board...

UTD24, Miss College 18 with 4:00 left.

The audiostream is available at

http://www.gochoctaws.com/index.asp?path=mbball

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 11, 2007, 10:39:32 PM

Miss College pulls away in the second half, 66-54. MC has virtually locked up the ASC-tourney. They have a 3 game lead over UT-D.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 11, 2007, 10:45:40 PM

Top 25 Schedules and Results, Jan. 8-14 (UPDATED with some Friday scores):

#1 UW-Stevens Point (14-1) def. Lakeland 97-59 and won at UW-Eau Claire 77-43
#2 Amherst (13-0) won at Wesleyan 76-52, won at Tufts 96-92 (OT), and plays at #12 Bates Sat.
#3 St. Thomas (12-1) def. Augsburg 80-63, def. Gustavus Adolphus 74-57, and plays at Concordia-Moorhead Sat.
#4 Ohio Northern (12-2) won at Wilmington 63-62 and plays at John Carroll Sat.
#5 Wooster (12-2) won at Allegheny 97-87 and hosts Wabash Sat.
#6 Whitworth (13-0) hosts #17 Puget Sound Fri. and hosts Pacific Lutheran Sat.
#7 Virginia Wesleyan (11-2) plays at Lynchburg Sat.
#8 Wittenberg (12-2) won at Earlham 71-60 and plays at Hiram Sat.
#9 Mississippi College (12-1) def. Texas-Dallas 66-54 and hosts Texas-Tyler Sat.
#10 UW-Oshkosh (12-3) lost at #20 UW-La Crosse 48-47 and plays at UW-River Falls Sat.
#11 Hope (11-2) def. Albion 94-58 and plays at Calvin Sat.
#12 Bates (11-1) def. U. New England 90-46, lost to Trinity (CT) 68-63, and hosts #2 Amherst Sat.
#13 William Paterson (10-4) lost at New Jersey City 56-42 and hosts Ramapo Sat.
#14 Elmhurst (12-1) won at #18 Carthage 72-62 and hosts Illinois Wesleyan Sat.
#15 Augustana (11-3) won at #21 Wheaton (IL) 74-69 and hosts #18 Carthage Sat.
#16 Washington U. (11-1) won at Case Western Reserve 73-56 and plays at Emory Sun.
#17 Puget Sound (10-2) plays at #6 Whitworth Fri. and at Whitman Sat.
#18 Carthage (9-4) lost to #14 Elmhurst 72-62 and plays at #15 Augustana Sat.
#19 Johns Hopkins (12-2) lost to Haverford 64-59, won at Ursinus 66-50, and hosts Muhlenburg Sat.
#20 UW-La Crosse (10-4) def. #10 UW-Oshkosh 48-47 and plays at UW-Superior Sat.
#21 Wheaton (IL) (8-5) lost to #15 Augustana 74-69 and plays at North Park Sat.
#22 Occidental (8-3) def. Caltech 103-40 and hosts Claremont-Mudd-Scripps Sat.
#23 Worcester Polytech (11-1) won at Springfield 82-75, def. Babson 59-53, and plays at Clark Sat.
#24 NYU (11-1) plays at Brandeis Sat.
#25 Aurora (11-1) def. Dominican 90-66 and plays at Clarke Fri.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2007, 05:02:32 AM

Quote from: notamensa on January 11, 2007, 07:18:39 PM
thanks for the week 5 link, pat.

Actually, thank you for mentioning it in the first place, notamensa. I too was wondering the other day what had happened to the Week 5 link, but I forgot to send Pat an e-mail about it.

Quote from: diehardfan on January 11, 2007, 03:53:15 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 11, 2007, 10:26:18 AM
Gordon, thanks for the response. I will consider your impressions next week on the Posters' Poll.
Did anyone else find that terribly funny after the heated discussion? When I read that I laughed out loud!!! :D

Ralph must've been watching a Baywatch rerun while he was typing that post. ;)

Quote from: ecdubb420 on January 11, 2007, 07:53:33 PMFrom reading this board, I'm glad to hear that so many people are taking EC seriously. I have felt that they didn't make it to the NCAA tournament two years ago because they are a school that has historically has had well, no positive history.

Actually, the reason why Elmhurst didn't make the 2004-05 tourney was because the Bluejays fell short in the five primary criteria used to determine Pool C berths. One of those criteria is regional winning percentage, and Elmhurst's .739 wasn't even close to being competitive with the regional winning percentages of the seven teams that were actually chosen for Pool C. History had nothing to do with the absence of the Bluejays from the '05 tourney.

Anyway, welcome to the Top 25 board. You're right, Elmhurst is long overdue to have a representative posting in the national rooms rather than just CCIW Chat.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 12, 2007, 08:07:22 AM

Sac and I conducted our discussion of South Region vs Great Lakes Region teams via "Personal Message".

The South Region discussion began about post #1966 (http://www.d3sports.com/post/index.php?topic=4097.1966).

We discussed styles of play and hosting of the sectional as possible distinguishing attributes as to who made the Final Four. MissCollege SID Chris Brooks made the observation that the only "fly-in" team at the Sectionals (UWSP to UPS in 2004) to win the Tourney in the last 5 years was 2004 UW-SP. All other "road teams" at the Sectionals had been bussed and that this might make the difference for crowd following and team distraction.

Sac and I continue from there. (Please re-read the original thread as you wish.)

QuoteRalph, I saw your post about McMurray v Calvin in 2000. I thought I'd send a message since its gotten a little lost in there. I didn't get to see that game but of course I've talked to many who were there. I understand your points.

I guess we can agree to disagree, I've seen 3 sectionals involving 4 South region teams and in all cases they lost the first game and I strongly believe it was because of defense or a lack of. In each case the GL teams were bigger, and more physical and played better overall defense.

1998 JCU over Hampden-Sydney
1998 Hope over Christopher Newport
2005 Calvin over Miss Coll
2006 Transylvania over Miss Coll.

In JCU and Hope's case they completely shut down their southern foes. Hope was ahead 45-17 at halftime. All four opponents vs the Southern team shot the ball very well and got a lot of easy baskets.

I guess until I see a team from the South Region beat a GL team, I'm always going to feel this way.

Despite the good looking records of the GL teams this year I really don't think there is an outstanding team this year so this is as good a year as any. It will be a real battle to get to Salem and I'm sure the Sectional host will have a big advantage.

Here's hoping that its Hope and Miss Coll squaring off for Salem

My response back to sac...

QuoteSac, Respectfully, may I bring this personal message intact to the Top 25 board?

My response would be to contrast the times that South Region teams have only made the Final Four 2 times, only once thru the Great Lakes (Hampden-Sydney in 1999), but can by winning versus the MidAtlantic and Atlantic as VWC did in 2006 and for that matter, Catholic from the Mid-Atlantic in 2001 going thru the Mid-Atlantic and the East.

Every other attempt by Maryville TN, Miss College, McMurry, Trinity 2003 has fallen short. Trinity 2005 loses (tough) to UW-SP. McMurry and CNU lost to WPU and Horace Jenkins in 2001.

Is there something about the physical mismatch that we South Region teams encounter when we hit the Great Lakes, and the only hope to overcome the physical mismatch is thru a style-of-play difference?

Sac's response to my request to post his reply...

QuoteYeah sure why not (post these replies),

all I can tell you is from personal experience the GL teams I've seen beat the southern teams is there has been a physical size and physical play difference.

Just for comparison this year Hope is relatively small on its front line going 6-7, 6-4, 6-5 and will sub with 6-6, 6-5, 6-5 and 6-7, ......can Miss Coll match that? I don't consider Hope a strong inside team from what I've seen. My greatest worry about Hope's team is they will bump up against another GL team with a stronger and bigger inside game.

One thing you can be sure of with GL teams that make it to a sectional.......they've been tested for 2 solid weeks both in their conference tournaments and having to beat other GL teams in the first 2 rounds in typically very physical games.

You won't get any arguments from me about Mid-Atlantic/Atlantic teams, Hope and Calvin have both thrashed teams from that region in the Final Four.

Can anyone else comment on a "size mismatch" that may require an alternate strategy to get past the Great Lakes teams? Thanks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 12, 2007, 09:10:03 AM

I will also add that all four South Region teams I've seen in Sectionals had to fly to their Sectional. 98 at Hope, 05 at Albion, 06 at Wittenberg.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on January 12, 2007, 09:18:17 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 12, 2007, 08:07:22 AM
QuoteRalph, I saw your post about McMurray v Calvin in 2000. I thought I'd send a message since its gotten a little lost in there. I didn't get to see that game but of course I've talked to many who were there. I understand your points.

I guess we can agree to disagree, I've seen 3 sectionals involving 4 South region teams and in all cases they lost the first game and I strongly believe it was because of defense or a lack of. In each case the GL teams were bigger, and more physical and played better overall defense.

1998 JCU over Hampden-Sydney
1998 Hope over Christopher Newport
2005 Calvin over Miss Coll
2006 Transylvania over Miss Coll.

In JCU and Hope's case they completely shut down their southern foes. Hope was ahead 45-17 at halftime. All four opponents vs the Southern team shot the ball very well and got a lot of easy baskets.

I guess until I see a team from the South Region beat a GL team, I'm always going to feel this way.

Despite the good looking records of the GL teams this year I really don't think there is an outstanding team this year so this is as good a year as any. It will be a real battle to get to Salem and I'm sure the Sectional host will have a big advantage.

Here's hoping that its Hope and Miss Coll squaring off for Salem

I just wanted to comment on this so I was not misunderstood before. Although I just don't think I would say it was strictly defense, I definitely do agree about the physical nature of those games. We usually rank among the top 10-15 teams in scoring defense and FG percentage defense but we had problems in those games adjusting to the physical nature of the players and the way the games were officiated, so I guess you could say that was the defense though I would probably say it is more style of play. Games are called closer in the south and there is less banging usually, more up and down the floor msot of the time. I did not think last year's Transy game fit that mold though. Until we beat one of the GL teams there really is not much we can say. I have certainly been impressed with how the GL teams play the game, great fundamentally and they have a high basketball IQ. And its not like they aren't athletic because they are. I would just like a GL team to end up in the south one year to see what would happen. I have had enough cold weather.

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 12, 2007, 08:07:22 AM
QuoteYeah sure why not (post these replies),

all I can tell you is from personal experience the GL teams I've seen beat the southern teams is there has been a physical size and physical play difference.

Just for comparison this year Hope is relatively small on its front line going 6-7, 6-4, 6-5 and will sub with 6-6, 6-5, 6-5 and 6-7, ......can Miss Coll match that? I don't consider Hope a strong inside team from what I've seen. My greatest worry about Hope's team is they will bump up against another GL team with a stronger and bigger inside game.

One thing you can be sure of with GL teams that make it to a sectional.......they've been tested for 2 solid weeks both in their conference tournaments and having to beat other GL teams in the first 2 rounds in typically very physical games.

You won't get any arguments from me about Mid-Atlantic/Atlantic teams, Hope and Calvin have both thrashed teams from that region in the Final Four.

We are bigger this year than we have been. Our two forward spots are filled with 6-6 and 6-5 starters and 6-8, 6-7 off the bench. We are much bigger at guard going 6-8, 6-3 with 6-4, 6-3 off the bench. Tim Broomfield, a 6-8 guard, also goes inside sometimes so he is versatile. But I don't think it is really about length but the style of play. We have the players to play in a physical game and the experiences we have had up North have to help, but I would still like to see us in a less physical game that is more up and down the floor.

In my opinion, the GL teams consistently win because they play a physical style of game that is disciplined with few mistakes. Add to that very skilled players who know how to play the game and it becomes hard to beat them because they will certainly not beat themselves.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 12, 2007, 09:52:18 AM

Quote from: Chris Brooks on January 12, 2007, 09:18:17 AM
...
In my opinion, the GL teams consistently win because they play a physical style of game that is disciplined with few mistakes. Add to that very skilled players who know how to play the game and it becomes hard to beat them because they will certainly not beat themselves.

Well-stated, Chris! :)

I followed the UW-Stout McMurry Women's game (http://www.uwstout.edu/athletics/wbb/stats/2006-07/dec28.htm#GAME.BX1) at the Southwestern TX tourney in December. UW-Stout had about 9 fouls in the second half before McMurry got its 3rd with under 3 minutes left. The game seemed to be officiated very tightly, to which we are accustomed in the ASC. UW-Stout had more size than we do.

I recall a friend of mine discussing the adjustments that "hoops-savvy" Lawrence made in their Sweet 16 game vs. SRSU in 2004, that permitted them to overcome a 18 point deficit.

Thanks to sac and Chris Brooks and ohters for this discussion. Other observations appreciated. We may re-visit this at Tourney time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 12, 2007, 10:18:20 AM

Just so nobody is confused, I'll point out that Transylvania is not a GL team. They are in the Midwest Region. It doesn't change anything in the iscussion, but might keep someone from getting a little lost.

EDIT: The iscussion is unaffected, and so is the discussion. ::) What can I tell you; I'm a Wooster fan, and this year we just don't do 'd'. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on January 12, 2007, 10:41:38 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 12, 2007, 10:18:20 AM
Just so nobody is confused, I'll point out that Transylvania is not a GL team. They are in the Midwest Region. It doesn't change anything in the iscussion, but might keep someone from getting a little lost.

Thanks for posting that David, I should have included it in my post for clarity. Transylvania was a very different style team than the GL teams I've had the opportunity to see and not nearly as physical.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: woosterbooster on January 12, 2007, 08:24:05 PM

The Tufts Jumbos, after blowing a 13-point lead, have pushed back out front of Amherst by a score of 70-64 with 8 minutes to go. Jumbocast available, a really nice picture. See DIII Hoop's front page for the link.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: woosterbooster on January 12, 2007, 08:43:11 PM

Tufts misses two free throws, missing out on the chance to extend a 2-point lead to 4 with about a minute to go. Amherst ties the game. Tufts ball with 19 seconds to go, all even. A jumper from in the key misses, Amherst pushes the ball hard, but time runs out. OVERTIME!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: woosterbooster on January 12, 2007, 09:03:20 PM

Unbelievably, Amherst holds on to win this game 96-92, as numerous Tufts shots roll off the rim. It's the third consecutive defeat of Tufts in overtime.

With about 22 seconds left, Tufts had the ball down by 2. One of the Tufts' color commentary guys says: "I think Tufts should go for the win. Or at least for the tie." :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 12, 2007, 09:06:47 PM

Sweet gym! 8)

My hookup kept bumping me off so I saw 2 fT's made a shot to tie by Tufts that I still have no idea what happened and how Amherst got the ball and the last desperate half court heave.

Did Bates win tonight? If so a couple undefeateds cracks heads tommorrow, Amherst at Bates.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 12, 2007, 09:11:47 PM

Been looking around but no report on this game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mrmike88 on January 12, 2007, 09:26:23 PM

Bates' website says Trinity won, 68-63.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 12, 2007, 09:29:45 PM

Ahh, silly me -- I was looking on the Bates men's basketball page, schedule and results, the stats page and our Scoreboard.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 12, 2007, 10:28:19 PM

Allow me to set aside pretenses of objectivity to say...

WHOOO! GOOOO CLUCKS! WHOOOOO!

Okay, I'm done now. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 12, 2007, 10:36:21 PM

Top 25 Schedules and Results, Jan. 8-14 (UPDATED with some Saturday scores):

#1 UW-Stevens Point (14-1) def. Lakeland 97-59 and won at UW-Eau Claire 77-43
#2 Amherst (14-0) won at Wesleyan 76-52, won at Tufts 96-92 (OT), and won at #12 Bates 79-64
#3 St. Thomas (13-1) def. Augsburg 80-63, def. Gustavus Adolphus 74-57, and won at Concordia-Moorhead 68-65
#4 Ohio Northern (12-3) won at Wilmington 63-62 and lost at John Carroll 63-61
#5 Wooster (13-2) won at Allegheny 97-87 and def. Wabash 96-52
#6 Whitworth (13-1) lost to #17 Puget Sound 77-72 and hosts Pacific Lutheran Sat.
#7 Virginia Wesleyan (11-2) plays at Lynchburg Sat.
#8 Wittenberg (12-2) won at Earlham 71-60 and plays at Hiram Sat.
#9 Mississippi College (12-1) def. Texas-Dallas 66-54 and hosts Texas-Tyler Sat.
#10 UW-Oshkosh (13-3) lost at #20 UW-La Crosse 48-47 and won at UW-River Falls 69-66
#11 Hope (12-2) def. Albion 94-58 and won at Calvin 65-62
#12 Bates (11-2) def. U. New England 90-46, lost to Trinity (CT) 68-63, and lost to #2 Amherst 79-64
#13 William Paterson (10-4) lost at New Jersey City 56-42 and hosts Ramapo Sat.
#14 Elmhurst (12-1) won at #18 Carthage 72-62 and hosts Illinois Wesleyan Sat.
#15 Augustana (11-3) won at #21 Wheaton (IL) 74-69 and hosts #18 Carthage Sat.
#16 Washington U. (11-1) won at Case Western Reserve 73-56 and plays at Emory Sun.
#17 Puget Sound (11-2) won at #6 Whitworth 77-72 and plays at Whitman Sat.
#18 Carthage (9-4) lost to #14 Elmhurst 72-62 and plays at #15 Augustana Sat.
#19 Johns Hopkins (12-2) lost to Haverford 64-59, won at Ursinus 66-50, and hosts Muhlenburg Sat.
#20 UW-La Crosse (11-4) def. #10 UW-Oshkosh 48-47 and won at UW-Superior 77-62
#21 Wheaton (IL) (8-5) lost to #15 Augustana 74-69 and plays at North Park Sat.
#22 Occidental (8-3) def. Caltech 103-40 and hosts Claremont-Mudd-Scripps Sat.
#23 Worcester Polytech (12-1) won at Springfield 82-75, def. Babson 59-53, and won at Clark 77-61
#24 NYU (11-2) lost at Brandeis 52-48
#25 Aurora (12-1) def. Dominican 90-66 and won at Clarke 72-63

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 12, 2007, 11:09:36 PM

#17 Puget Sound @ #6 Whitworth...

http://www.ksbn.net/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 13, 2007, 12:50:23 AM

UPS scores the last five points and wins at Whitworth, 77-72.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on January 13, 2007, 11:57:15 AM

Amherst beats Tufts in OT....Nice gut check for the Jeffs after being down 13 in the 2nd half. The team has shown the abilty to win Ugly....big one today at Bates.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 13, 2007, 03:39:48 PM

Final: #5 Wooster 96 Wabash 52

Wooster jumped out to a 12-0 start and made 13 three pointers to control this game. Wooster was led by James Cooper with 18 points, Brandon Johnson with 16 points and Andy Van Horn with 10 points.

Wooster is now 13-2, 6-0 NCAC :) Next game is at Hiram on 1/17

GO SCOTS!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 13, 2007, 04:56:18 PM

#4 Ohio Northern drops another game in the tough OAC, losing at John Carroll 63-61.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 13, 2007, 05:02:52 PM

From the Concordia-Moorhead website (http://www.cord.edu/dept/sports/winter/mbb/index.php):

QuoteConcordia overcame a 12-point deficit midway through the second half to take a one-point lead at 65-64 with 1:36 remaining but four straight points by Tommie All-American Isaac Rosefelt helped nationally-ranked St. Thomas escape with a 68-65 win.

#3 UST moves to 13-1, but sure is living dangerously. Concordia falls to just 2-11 (or 2-11-0, as their schedule/results page insists. :))

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 13, 2007, 05:39:22 PM

Top 25 Schedules and Results, Jan. 8-14 (UPDATED with Saturday scores):

#1 UW-Stevens Point (14-1) def. Lakeland 97-59 and won at UW-Eau Claire 77-43
#2 Amherst (14-0) won at Wesleyan 76-52, won at Tufts 96-92 (OT), and won at #12 Bates 79-64
#3 St. Thomas (13-1) def. Augsburg 80-63, def. Gustavus Adolphus 74-57, and won at Concordia-Moorhead 68-65
#4 Ohio Northern (12-3) won at Wilmington 63-62 and lost at John Carroll 63-61
#5 Wooster (13-2) won at Allegheny 97-87 and def. Wabash 96-52
#6 Whitworth (14-1) lost to #17 Puget Sound 77-72 and def. Pacific Lutheran 80-56
#7 Virginia Wesleyan (12-2) won at Lynchburg 79-57
#8 Wittenberg (13-2) won at Earlham 71-60 and won at Hiram 72-50
#9 Mississippi College (13-1) def. Texas-Dallas 66-54 and def. Texas-Tyler 66-45
#10 UW-Oshkosh (13-3) lost at #20 UW-La Crosse 48-47 and won at UW-River Falls 69-66
#11 Hope (12-2) def. Albion 94-58 and won at Calvin 65-62
#12 Bates (11-2) def. U. New England 90-46, lost to Trinity (CT) 68-63, and lost to #2 Amherst 79-64
#13 William Paterson (10-5) lost at New Jersey City 56-42 and lost to Ramapo 72-69
#14 Elmhurst (13-1) won at #18 Carthage 72-62 and def. Illinois Wesleyan 76-57
#15 Augustana (12-3) won at #21 Wheaton (IL) 74-69 and def. #18 Carthage 70-54
#16 Washington U. (11-1) won at Case Western Reserve 73-56 and plays at Emory Sun.
#17 Puget Sound (12-2) won at #6 Whitworth 77-72 and won at Whitman 102-88
#18 Carthage (9-5) lost to #14 Elmhurst 72-62 and lost at #15 Augustana 70-54
#19 Johns Hopkins (13-2) lost to Haverford 64-59, won at Ursinus 66-50, and def. Muhlenburg 78-58
#20 UW-La Crosse (11-4) def. #10 UW-Oshkosh 48-47 and won at UW-Superior 77-62
#21 Wheaton (IL) (9-5) lost to #15 Augustana 74-69 and won at North Park 73-60
#22 Occidental (9-3) def. Caltech 103-40 and def. Claremont-Mudd-Scripps 71-56
#23 Worcester Polytech (12-1) won at Springfield 82-75, def. Babson 59-53, and won at Clark 77-61
#24 NYU (11-2) lost at Brandeis 52-48
#25 Aurora (12-1) def. Dominican 90-66 and won at Clarke 72-63

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on January 13, 2007, 09:11:31 PM

Mississippi College beats UT-Tyler 66-45, led 34-14 at half. Senior 6'8" guard Timothy Broomfield 4-5 from three (25-40 this year).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 14, 2007, 10:21:06 AM

Maybe some votes finally coming in Greensboro's way. They gave Averett a good beating yesterday 78-55. Plus earlier in the in the week it was the first time in 7 years they beat Methodist at Methodist.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 14, 2007, 11:31:34 AM

PrideSport -- at 11-3, Greensboro has a decent record but the USAC conference has not been strong in recent years. My guess is that Greensboro may still need to run off another 5 wins in a row, including wins over both North Carolina Wesleyan and Christopher Newport before you will get serious consideration from the Top 25 voters.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 14, 2007, 11:46:06 AM

A post I made on the CCIW board last night...

-----
Before this week I thought the CCIW had 6 pretty even teams and 2 (Millikin and North Park) good and very dangerous teams a notch below the other 6. After this week's games and after seeing Elmhurst tonight, I am beginning to think that the Bluejays are clearly the best team in the CCIW and after that we have 7 fairly even teams. In that pack of 7, there is certainly separation, but maybe the gap between 2 and 8 is smaller than the gap between 1 and 2. In other words, we could see final standings like...

Elmhurst: 12-2
Team 2: 8-6
Team 3: 7-7
Team 4: 7-7
Team 5: 7-7
Team 6: 5-9
Team 7: 5-9
Team 8: 5-9

Elmhurst's size is just simply amazing for a Division III team, and senior point-guard Brian Lee has become a very good player. Lee has become that take charge floor general type that every great team has. Ryan Burks gives them a a nice perimeter threat and should keep getting better.

Elmhurst has pounded Augustana and Illinois Wesleyan at home and won convincingly at Carthage. I may be wrong, but the team I saw tonight looked like one that could get to the Final Four. I don't how how anyone is going to deal with Elmhurst's size and balance.
-----

I could be wrong about the size of that gap between 1 and 2, but I'm confident that Elmhurst is the best team in the CCIW by a good margin. After seeing them last night, I will be moving them way up on my Top 25 ballot. I think they're good enough to get to Salem.

After losing their opener to Simpson, Elmhurst has won 13 a row, including victories over UW-Oshkosh, UW-Whitewater, Augustana in a blowout, @ Carthage comfortably, and Illinois Wesleyan by a bunch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 14, 2007, 11:58:43 AM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on January 14, 2007, 11:31:34 AM
PrideSport -- at 11-3, Greensboro has a decent record but the USAC conference has not been strong in recent years. My guess is that Greensboro may still need to run off another 5 wins in a row, including wins over both North Carolina Wesleyan and Christopher Newport before you will get serious consideration from the Top 25 voters.

Oh I agree USASouth has been weak in recent years. Yet we had two teams ranked at the same time in the top 25 at one point in the season. Plus for the first time in at least a long time we beat (USASouth) the ODAC conference in the season series. 11-9

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sludge on January 14, 2007, 01:21:16 PM

Quote from: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 14, 2007, 11:58:43 AM
Oh I agree USASouth has been weak in recent years. Yet we had two teams ranked at the same time in the top 25 at one point in the season. Plus for the first time in at least a long time we beat (USASouth) the ODAC conference in the season series. 11-9

PrideSport Guy, I agree that Greensboro College is headed in the right direction towards cracking the top 25 soon, but it may take a few more games.

I wonder how people figure Guilford is not top 25 material! They've lost one game, to the defending champs, a team that is arguably #1 in the land (until proven otherwise!), or easilly #6 in the land. How does that keep Guilford out of anything?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 14, 2007, 03:10:41 PM

Quote from: sludge on January 14, 2007, 01:21:16 PM
I wonder how people figure Guilford is not top 25 material! They've lost one game, to the defending champs, a team that is arguably #1 in the land (until proven otherwise!), or easilly #6 in the land. How does that keep Guilford out of anything?

What's the big win on that schedule that makes them a Top 25 lock?

Remember, Guilford has the 26th-most votes on the board. It's not like they have no support whatsoever. Your complaint seems a little odd given that placement.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sludge on January 14, 2007, 03:58:06 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 14, 2007, 03:10:41 PM
Quote from: sludge on January 14, 2007, 01:21:16 PM
I wonder how people figure Guilford is not top 25 material! They've lost one game, to the defending champs, a team that is arguably #1 in the land (until proven otherwise!), or easilly #6 in the land. How does that keep Guilford out of anything?

What's the big win on that schedule that makes them a Top 25 lock?

Remember, Guilford has the 26th-most votes on the board. It's not like they have no support whatsoever. Your complaint seems a little odd given that placement.

Ouch! Busted and humbled on both counts. :D

Maybe more later on this topic, then.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 14, 2007, 04:13:06 PM

Quote from: sludge on January 14, 2007, 03:58:06 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 14, 2007, 03:10:41 PM
Quote from: sludge on January 14, 2007, 01:21:16 PM
I wonder how people figure Guilford is not top 25 material! They've lost one game, to the defending champs, a team that is arguably #1 in the land (until proven otherwise!), or easilly #6 in the land. How does that keep Guilford out of anything?

What's the big win on that schedule that makes them a Top 25 lock?

Remember, Guilford has the 26th-most votes on the board. It's not like they have no support whatsoever. Your complaint seems a little odd given that placement.

Ouch! Busted and humbled on both counts. :D

Maybe more later on this topic, then.

Sludge, you are getting lots of respect! You have the third highest vote total of the South Region teams. I think that you are basking in the "love" that the ODAC is getting for having the defending champ and 3 Final Four appearances in the last 8 seasons. Pat pointed out that there was no big win (like Mississippi College's Westmont win). ;)

For a very average region among the 8, the South should not expect much more love. I see Guilford contending for the Conference championship, or trying to get one of the 19 Pool C bids, if they only lose to VWC, here on out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 14, 2007, 04:29:57 PM

Quote from: sludge on January 14, 2007, 01:21:16 PM
Quote from: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 14, 2007, 11:58:43 AM
Oh I agree USASouth has been weak in recent years. Yet we had two teams ranked at the same time in the top 25 at one point in the season. Plus for the first time in at least a long time we beat (USASouth) the ODAC conference in the season series. 11-9

PrideSport Guy, I agree that Greensboro College is headed in the right direction towards cracking the top 25 soon, but it may take a few more games.

I wonder how people figure Guilford is not top 25 material! They've lost one game, to the defending champs, a team that is arguably #1 in the land (until proven otherwise!), or easilly #6 in the land. How does that keep Guilford out of anything?

I have seen Guilford play, they are starting to get some respect and I think they should already be in the poll. I mean in the actual top 25 not just votes.

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 14, 2007, 04:13:06 PM

For a very average region among the 8, the South should not expect much more love. I see Guilford contending for the Conference championship, or trying to get one of the 19 Pool C bids, if they only lose to VWC, here on out.

Thats the problem though, the region is average. How do teams that are great in the south supposed to schedule great teams in the south if the south is so average. They have to schedule out of region games. Luckily for Greensboro they had some out of region teams in the south. aka John Carroll (a quality win) Oswego State (5-1 at the time and 7-6 now) at CNU. I couldn't imagine the traveling costs for those games and it would be bad for Greensboro too. I am not too sure how much weight there is on games out of region for NCAA's, but from what I hear in region games are highly weighted. Someone correct me if I am wrong.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 14, 2007, 04:50:18 PM

Other schools manage to do it. Guilford now can claim in-region games against a rather wide swath of the USA that includes top-notch competition in Ohio and Michigan.

Lack of opportunity is not an excuse. We're not going to punish a team that played a more challenging slate in order to elevate someone who hasn't challenged itself.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 14, 2007, 05:37:20 PM

Quote from: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 14, 2007, 04:29:57 PM
...

Thats the problem though, the region is average. How do teams that are great in the south supposed to schedule great teams in the south if the south is so average. They have to schedule out of region games. Luckily for Greensboro they had some out of region teams in the south. aka John Carroll (a quality win) Oswego State (5-1 at the time and 7-6 now) at CNU. I couldn't imagine the traveling costs for those games and it would be bad for Greensboro too. I am not too sure how much weight there is on games out of region for NCAA's, but from what I hear in region games are highly weighted. Someone correct me if I am wrong.

Pride, your JCU win counted. The Oswego did not.

The Handbook (http://www.ncaa.org/library/handbooks/basketball/2007/2007_d3_m_basketball_handbook.pdf) outlines the states that are in the Geographic Adminstrative Region (#3) that GC is. Pat is right about the quality of teams that you can schedule as in-region, the OAC, the HCAC, the MIAA, especially.

If you think just numbers, the South should only expect 3-4 teams in the Top 25 anyway, especially when the consensus is that the WIAC, the CCIW, the MIAA, the OAC and the NCAC (especially Woo and Witt) are considered the best conferences.

And Top 25 doesn't mean playoff bids. (The Top 25, absolutely, emphatically, has no bearing, whatsoever, with the selection process.) There are 19 at-large bids for Pool C, if Greensboro doesn't earn the Pool A bid for the tourney. I encourage you to read the handbook, cover-to-cover, and then follow the discussion on the Daily Dose and on the Pool C Message Board. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on January 14, 2007, 05:54:21 PM

Quote from: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 14, 2007, 04:29:57 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 14, 2007, 04:13:06 PM

For a very average region among the 8, the South should not expect much more love. I see Guilford contending for the Conference championship, or trying to get one of the 19 Pool C bids, if they only lose to VWC, here on out.

Thats the problem though, the region is average. How do teams that are great in the south supposed to schedule great teams in the south if the south is so average. They have to schedule out of region games. Luckily for Greensboro they had some out of region teams in the south. aka John Carroll (a quality win) Oswego State (5-1 at the time and 7-6 now) at CNU. I couldn't imagine the traveling costs for those games and it would be bad for Greensboro too. I am not too sure how much weight there is on games out of region for NCAA's, but from what I hear in region games are highly weighted. Someone correct me if I am wrong.

The NCAA definitely pays little to no attention to out of region games when it comes to regional rankings and tournament selection. All primary criteria used for those selections are in region led by the regional won/loss records and the QOWI. I doubt there are many times selection goes beyond those two factors and even fewer times when secondary criteria comes into play where out of region games can be looked at.

I don't think we can blame the Top 25 voters for penalizing teams in weaker regions if those teams don't venture out to find quality out of region teams but I am sure they understand it is a catch 22 for us. Many teams will take advantage of the expanded regional opponents but expense will probably prohibit many teams from doing it.

Just FYI Region 3 consists of Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, North Carolina, Ohio, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 14, 2007, 05:58:03 PM

Maybe I am biased because I despise AU and CNU with a passion. I don't know and maybe know more then I think, because I never thought AU should have been ranked as high as they were and CNU should have never gotten any votes after having 4 losses. Look what both teams are doing now.

I understand out in the midwest there is some better competition. (Although it was a team from the south that won it all last year.) I also didn't think John Hopkins should have been ranked as high as they were. They aren't in a strong conference and they haven't played many strong teams. They have played some, but most not good teams. I know talk alot about what-if's and I know that I am not one that lucky few that get to vote on the poll, so maybe I don't have the right to say anything, but once the regional rankings come out I will be sure to voice my opinion and throw out my very own top 25 poll. (Let the debate begin then)

I just don't have the time right now to look at all the teams and make a poll yet.

Mr. Turner-
I know the top 25 poll as nothing to do with selection, (I am sure the d3hoops top 25 had many teams left out in years past when the tournament was much smaller.)

I am a very forward thinking person if you can say that. I don't think anybody should be ranked in any poll during the season if I don't think they can make it to postseason play. Which is why I won't do a "poll" until regional rankings come out. (I am a fan of GC and this is d3hoops poll not mine. My poll probably wouldn't have them in it because I don't know what future brings for them.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 14, 2007, 06:00:25 PM

So since this is d3hoops poll. Get me a vote for greensboro in the next poll ;D :D ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 14, 2007, 06:02:01 PM

I don't know why regional rankings are relevant to a Top 25 poll. They ignore games between regions, which are only the best games for national comparison.

PSBBG, you can't ignore the fact that Averett beat VWC then had a rash of injuries. The team that played VWC is not the same lineup that you are asking us to "look what (they) are doing now."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 14, 2007, 06:07:07 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 14, 2007, 06:02:01 PM
I don't know why regional rankings are relevant to a Top 25 poll. They ignore games between regions, which are only the best games for national comparison.

PSBBG, you can't ignore the fact that Averett beat VWC then had a rash of injuries. The team that played VWC is not the same lineup that you are asking us to "look what (they) are doing now."

I am just using that to narrow my field down. i can't sit here and crunch the numbers for the 300 or so (What is the number?) teams. NCAA thinks they are good then they probably will be the ones more likely to get into the tournament. example on the women's side with greensboro last year they weren't among the ones listed in the top of the region despite they had a very good record in the region, and hence they were not in the top 25. You get what I am trying to say. I am only using it to narrow my field of teams.

That way I can crunch my numbers to create my poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 14, 2007, 06:13:14 PM

Pat-

If I could get last years regional rankings. The last one before selection sunday. I can give you what my top 25 would have looked like coming into the tournament.

It will take me an hour or so to crunch my numbers and I will share it all with you.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 14, 2007, 06:23:06 PM

Check the Daily Dose for last February.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 14, 2007, 06:33:55 PM

Quote from: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 14, 2007, 05:58:03 PM

Mr. Turner-
I know the top 25 poll as nothing to do with selection, (I am sure the d3hoops top 25 had many teams left out in years past when the tournament was much smaller.)

Good. For the sake of new posters, I wonder if that fact can ever be emphasized enough.

The Regional Rankings will include 58 teams so we can find the Top 25 out of those, and with some degree of consensus.

(I am always interested in anyone's statisitical power rankings.) ;)

Feburary Daily Dose Link (http://www.d3hoops.com/dailydose/?m=200602)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 14, 2007, 06:49:50 PM

Its going to take me a little longer. Unless anyone can get me the statistics right before the tournament started of all the regional ranked teams. Otherwise I have to go in and hand and sort the games that were tournament games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 14, 2007, 07:21:24 PM

This is the last rankings the NCAA released:
http://www.d3hoops.com/dailydose/?p=141

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 14, 2007, 09:48:40 PM

Top 25 Schedules and Results, Jan. 8-14 (FINAL):

#1 UW-Stevens Point (14-1) def. Lakeland 97-59 and won at UW-Eau Claire 77-43
#2 Amherst (14-0) won at Wesleyan 76-52, won at Tufts 96-92 (OT), and won at #12 Bates 79-64
#3 St. Thomas (13-1) def. Augsburg 80-63, def. Gustavus Adolphus 74-57, and won at Concordia-Moorhead 68-65
#4 Ohio Northern (12-3) won at Wilmington 63-62 and lost at John Carroll 63-61
#5 Wooster (13-2) won at Allegheny 97-87 and def. Wabash 96-52
#6 Whitworth (14-1) lost to #17 Puget Sound 77-72 and def. Pacific Lutheran 80-56
#7 Virginia Wesleyan (12-2) won at Lynchburg 79-57
#8 Wittenberg (13-2) won at Earlham 71-60 and won at Hiram 72-50
#9 Mississippi College (13-1) def. Texas-Dallas 66-54 and def. Texas-Tyler 66-45
#10 UW-Oshkosh (13-3) lost at #20 UW-La Crosse 48-47 and won at UW-River Falls 69-66
#11 Hope (12-2) def. Albion 94-58 and won at Calvin 65-62
#12 Bates (11-2) def. U. New England 90-46, lost to Trinity (CT) 68-63, and lost to #2 Amherst 79-64
#13 William Paterson (10-5) lost at New Jersey City 56-42 and lost to Ramapo 72-69
#14 Elmhurst (13-1) won at #18 Carthage 72-62 and def. Illinois Wesleyan 76-57
#15 Augustana (12-3) won at #21 Wheaton (IL) 74-69 and def. #18 Carthage 70-54
#16 Washington U. (12-1) won at Case Western Reserve 73-56 and won at Emory 78-73
#17 Puget Sound (12-2) won at #6 Whitworth 77-72 and won at Whitman 102-88
#18 Carthage (9-5) lost to #14 Elmhurst 72-62 and lost at #15 Augustana 70-54
#19 Johns Hopkins (13-2) lost to Haverford 64-59, won at Ursinus 66-50, and def. Muhlenburg 78-58
#20 UW-La Crosse (11-4) def. #10 UW-Oshkosh 48-47 and won at UW-Superior 77-62
#21 Wheaton (IL) (9-5) lost to #15 Augustana 74-69 and won at North Park 73-60
#22 Occidental (9-3) def. Caltech 103-40 and def. Claremont-Mudd-Scripps 71-56
#23 Worcester Polytech (12-1) won at Springfield 82-75, def. Babson 59-53, and won at Clark 77-61
#24 NYU (11-2) lost at Brandeis 52-48
#25 Aurora (12-1) def. Dominican 90-66 and won at Clarke 72-63

As a group, 41-12 (.774), but 6 of those losses (and wins) were against other top 25 teams. Otherwise, 35-6 (.854).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 14, 2007, 09:52:47 PM

Like Averett, William Paterson is struggling with injuries. They are missing two starters.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 14, 2007, 10:11:05 PM

For those that are looking for this poll leading up until the tournament of last year. It is taking longer then expected. Ralph my statistical formula is 25 spots long on a excel spreadsheet. I have gotten through about half of the teams right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sludge on January 14, 2007, 10:34:52 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 14, 2007, 04:13:06 PM
For a very average region among the 8, the South should not expect much more love. I see Guilford contending for the Conference championship, or trying to get one of the 19 Pool C bids, if they only lose to VWC, here on out.

Grasshopper say, funny very average region produce national champion in tournament, not beauty contest winner.

Grasshopper say, maybe heavy weight on past reputation in past years, big factor?

Grasshopper say, maybe if Averett or Randolph-Macon or Hampden-Sydney be 11-1 with loss only to VWC, they be in top 25. Neh?

Grasshopper say good thing fate still in hands of players if they make big effort, chop-chop.

Grasshopper say maybe better team is out of top 25, young men work hard, lift eyes towards Heaven.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 14, 2007, 10:53:37 PM

Not Averett. Averett never did anything in D-III before this year. And hey, if Macon and Sydney went 11-1 with their only loss to VWC, well, that would've meant they'd beaten Guilford, giving them a quality win.

If your theory of those two teams (Averett excluded because that's such a misinformed assumption that it's not even funny) were accurate, then wouldn't Guilford be in the Top 25 for beating such august teams?

Fact is, the Top 25 is based on the current season only, especially halfway through the season. Once we get about five games into the season, there's no real reason to look at previous years.

I can tell you're obviously a Guilford fan, but step back and look at this from the perspective of history. Your region has one national champion every 30 years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 15, 2007, 12:07:07 AM

Quote from: diehardfan on January 08, 2007, 01:47:05 AM
As far as the CCIW is concerned... I like the idea of Elmhurst being in the Top 10... between Ruch, Michael, Burks, Lee and Bacon... this is one seriously talent loaded team... there's no way any team can stop all their weapons.

Quote from: diehardfan on January 11, 2007, 01:23:53 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 10, 2007, 11:49:37 PM
Quote from: diehardfan on January 10, 2007, 11:43:28 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 10, 2007, 11:11:54 PM
re: CCIW

Take a strong conference and lower the top teams down a notch and you're going to get pure madness, night in and night out. If there are six teams between No. 10 and No. 45 ... yikes.
I'm thinking that Elmhurst might be a higher than #10... but yeah, point taken.
Give me a 12-2 Elmhurst in this year's CCIW and they are in my Top 5. :)
I doubt that any team in the nation has more weapons than Elmhurst... teams that can beat you with 5 different players.... it reminds me of Point in that way.... if one or two players have an off night, there are plenty of people to pick up the slack.

For example, tonight, Elmhurst had four players that scored from 12-15 pts... and two of their bench players posted 7 apiece. On the season, they've had five different people post the high score, all more than once, and five different players posting highs on rebounds. They have five players averaging 10ppg or more. They've beaten Whitewater, Oshkosh, Augustana, and Carthage...

Quote from: diehardfan on January 10, 2007, 10:41:10 PM
Hey Scott, Carthage lost at home tonight to Elmhurst... want to jump on the Elmhurst bandwagon with me? :P ;)

Quote from: Titan Q on January 14, 2007, 11:46:06 AM
A post I made on the CCIW board last night...

-----
Before this week I thought the CCIW had 6 pretty even teams and 2 (Millikin and North Park) good and very dangerous teams a notch below the other 6. After this week's games and after seeing Elmhurst tonight, I am beginning to think that the Bluejays are clearly the best team in the CCIW and after that we have 7 fairly even teams. In that pack of 7, there is certainly separation, but maybe the gap between 2 and 8 is smaller than the gap between 1 and 2. In other words, we could see final standings like...

Elmhurst: 12-2
Team 2: 8-6
Team 3: 7-7
Team 4: 7-7
Team 5: 7-7
Team 6: 5-9
Team 7: 5-9
Team 8: 5-9

Elmhurst's size is just simply amazing for a Division III team, and senior point-guard Brian Lee has become a very good player. Lee has become that take charge floor general type that every great team has. Ryan Burks gives them a a nice perimeter threat and should keep getting better.

Elmhurst has pounded Augustana and Illinois Wesleyan at home and won convincingly at Carthage. I may be wrong, but the team I saw tonight looked like one that could get to the Final Four. I don't how how anyone is going to deal with Elmhurst's size and balance.
-----

I could be wrong about the size of that gap between 1 and 2, but I'm confident that Elmhurst is the best team in the CCIW by a good margin. After seeing them last night, I will be moving them way up on my Top 25 ballot. I think they're good enough to get to Salem.

After losing their opener to Simpson, Elmhurst has won 13 a row, including victories over UW-Oshkosh, UW-Whitewater, Augustana in a blowout, @ Carthage comfortably, and Illinois Wesleyan by a bunch.

Thanks for joining the bandwagon. Better late then never, I guess. At least on the plus side...

1) we won't have to hear you say that there are no CCIW teams in the Top 15, a statement which has been driving me absolutely batty all season. Given how the MIAA, Witt, and many others are decidedly down, this assertion always seemed ridiculous to me. Who exactly belongs in the Top 25 if at least one team from a conference that went .750ish in the non-conference season doesn't?
2) Most importantly, Elmhurst will finally get the credit they deserve. It made me genuinely happy to see you make the same basic post (albiet longer) that I made over a week ago, because people listen to you.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 15, 2007, 12:26:22 AM

I already responded privately to your request. I feel it's ridiculous and will say no more on the matter.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 15, 2007, 01:59:39 AM

Quote from: diehardfan on January 15, 2007, 12:10:36 AM
I'm honestly sick of my opinion meaning so little. Obviously everyone has the right to their opinion, but some people can say things, and their word is taken as gold, whether or not they are always right. I'm not anywhere near that point.

Some can say that about our President, but he's still the President whether we like it or not. He earned the Presidency and you earned your HOF status, IMO

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 15, 2007, 04:40:59 AM

Quote from: diehardfan on January 15, 2007, 12:10:36 AM
On a somewhat related note, but posted seperately because I have no desire to detract from the acolades that Elmhurst deserves, I'm honestly sick of my opinion meaning so little. Obviously everyone has the right to their opinion, but some people can say things, and their word is taken as gold, whether or not they are always right. I'm not anywhere near that point. Thus, I hereby formally request in public that Pat remove my title until I earn the respect that a HOFer deserves. Being that I am young, and female, I'm not entirely sure that will ever happen. But I would rather earn all of your respect someday long into the future than to have everyone have to pretend that they think well of me just because they like me.

I saw two very interesting and important games on Saturday, and I have had absolutely no desire to post about either of them because anything I say won't be heard. It still makes me sick that the best DIII player that I have ever seen, got a meager third team nod in the All American honors last year despite insanely good stats, and me talking about him constantly for 2-3 years straight. I'm not going to try to force people to believe me any more. It's just not worth the effort.

C'mon, April. That's a slap in the collective face of us HOFers, because we're the ones who voted to have you join the club. We didn't do so in order to make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside (although we figured that that would be a nice bonus, because we all like you so much ... also, there's probably a HOFer or two who is jonesing for a batch of your cookies ;)). We voted you in because we all thought (and think) you deserve it, strictly upon basketball merit.

I'd venture to say that for a two- or three-year period you saw more D3 games than any fan in the entire country, including people like Bob and Pat and Rhodes and I that are well-known for darkening the doors of dozens of D3 gyms every winter. Heck, your peripatetic tendency to hop in your car and drive four hours to a game in spite of the fact that you knew no one in the gym and had no contact whatsoever with either school, just because you were genuinely curious and wanted to see some good D3 basketball, is the stuff of Posting Up legend. Beyond that, you do provide good basketball insight ... and we respect that. We wouldn't have had you join the club otherwise.

People take your opinions more seriously than you think. Heck, OxyBob threw you a big compliment with regard to your D3 hoops savvy in the SCIAC room this weekend ... and he throws around compliments like manhole covers. ;) And, remember, I was right there beside you in the Chris Martin Fan Club, and I, too, thought that he was underappreciated in terms of postseason honors. If people were ignoring your opinion with regard to the Elmhurst star -- and I really don't think that they were -- then they were ignoring mine as well.

The problem with your comments re: this year's Elmhurst squad isn't because your word is discounted out of hand; it's probably because there are people out there who are unaware that you've seen the Bluejays play this year. Everyone on CCIW Chat and in the national rooms knows that Bob and I (remember, like Bob I've also been saying early in the year that the CCIW doesn't seem to have a Final Four caliber team) see an awful lot of CCIW games over the course of the season. I'm sure that people figure that you're simply out of the loop with regard to CCIW teams now that you're based in SoCal.

I'd love to hear what you have to say about Oxy vs. CMS. That's a big game on the West Coast, and you're really the only one who can tie that game into a national perspective. As for Hope and Calvin, it may be less necessary for you to give your observations based upon the telecast, but that's only because every person in western Michigan with a Dutch surname has already analyzed that game to death in the MIAA room. :D

I wouldn't make a big thing out of it. Then again, I've already reached my personal quota of "making a big thing out of it" incidents already this weekend on Posting Up. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 15, 2007, 10:29:41 AM

For what it's worth, I wasn't holding Elmhurst out of the Top 10 because DHF's opinion means so little. I was holding Elmhurst out of the Top 10 because I wanted to see if the Jays would continue their run through the minefield that is CCIW play.

They did and now they are in the Top 10 on my ballot. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 15, 2007, 10:58:15 AM

Mr. Ralph Turner-

This post is for you. I took a combination of last year's regional rankings and the Week 13 poll. This would have been my top 25 coming into the tournament. St. John Fisher probably would have made it. I couldn't get the statistics from last year for them. I could have gone through every box score, and well I wasn't doing that. This top 25 is based solely on statistics. Again thats a problem because I ran several times where a team would have 10+ steals but the other team would have less than that in TO's. So here you go. (My scores are listed with it.)

PrideSportBBallGuy Top 25 Poll (Leading into the NCAA Tournament)

Wooster     14.77815
Hope     14.43053
Mississppi College   14.26934
Amherst     13.97922
Virginia Wesleyan   13.61874
Wittenberg   13.39632
Lincoln(Pa)   13.38123
York(Pa.)     12.63350
Lawrence     12.59352
Hamilton     12.56408
Baruch     12.00251
Courtland State   11.99211
Farmingdale   11.80102
Transylvania   11.73551
Gordon     11.14998
Baldwin-Wallace   10.89713
Pudget Sound   10.82324
UW-Whitewater   10.82134
Carroll(Wis)   10.70550
Calvin     10.67348
North Central (ILL)   10.40596
Bates     10.38379
Ohio Northern   10.30282
Ursinus     9.98555
Maryville(TN)     9.77903

What I mean by using the week 13 top 25, ie Ohio Northern wasn't a regional ranked team, yet made it in the d3hoops top 25, including them put them into my poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 15, 2007, 11:10:41 AM

Pat-

Something you could have said about Greensboro and Averett, and how you pointed out that Greensboro didn't play them at full strength. Well Greensboro does lead the lifetime series against AU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 15, 2007, 11:53:43 AM

Quote from: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 15, 2007, 10:58:15 AM
Mr. Ralph Turner-

This post is for you. I took a combination of last year's regional rankings and the Week 13 poll. This would have been my top 25 coming into the tournament. St. John Fisher probably would have made it. I couldn't get the statistics from last year for them. I could have gone through every box score, and well I wasn't doing that. This top 25 is based solely on statistics. Again thats a problem because I ran several times where a team would have 10+ steals but the other team would have less than that in TO's. So here you go. (My scores are listed with it.)

PrideSportBBallGuy Top 25 Poll (Leading into the NCAA Tournament)

Wooster     14.77815
Hope     14.43053
Mississppi College   14.26934
Amherst     13.97922
Virginia Wesleyan   13.61874
Wittenberg   13.39632
Lincoln(Pa)   13.38123
York(Pa.)     12.63350
Lawrence     12.59352
Hamilton     12.56408
Baruch     12.00251
Courtland State   11.99211
Farmingdale   11.80102
Transylvania   11.73551
Gordon     11.14998
Baldwin-Wallace   10.89713
Pudget Sound   10.82324
UW-Whitewater   10.82134
Carroll(Wis)   10.70550
Calvin     10.67348
North Central (ILL)   10.40596
Bates     10.38379
Ohio Northern   10.30282
Ursinus     9.98555
Maryville(TN)     9.77903

What I mean by using the week 13 top 25, ie Ohio Northern wasn't a regional ranked team, yet made it in the d3hoops top 25, including them put them into my poll.

OK, now, back to what we were saying about how the regional rankings are not translatable to a national poll ... tell us how Baruch and Hamilton and Cortland State, for example, did in the NCAA Tournament.

The coaches association used to do a Top 20 poll that was tied directly to teams' performance in the regional rankings. However, they stopped conducting a poll several years ago. Why? It's a joke to use the regional rankings to create a national poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 15, 2007, 11:58:20 AM

I did note the total absense of the team that finished #3 nationally, though four of their tourney victims were included! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 15, 2007, 12:30:48 PM

Baruch did not make the tournament, but Courtland St, and Hamilton both made it to the second round. Courtland St loses to #4 Ameherst and Hamilton loses to Tufts who makes it play Amherst. What's to say those two teams in a different region would fair better. The BCS is a joke, so are Massey ratings, too I assume. There is always going to be thoughts that a computer can't generate a poll. If you have a problem with where teams are, blame some of the stat trackers at the schools. I don't know how a team can steal the ball from another team 10 times and the other team have only 3 TO's. That makes no sense to me at all.

Mr. Ypsi
Illionis Wesleyan was just outside of the poll. That's probably because their stats are more accuarate then other's ;)

I am sure some of you memebers in the top 25 didn't make the tournament. At least most of my teams did. They are supposed to be the best teams because they are in the tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 15, 2007, 12:39:34 PM

Quote from: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 15, 2007, 12:30:48 PM
I am sure some of you memebers in the top 25 didn't make the tournament. At least most of my teams did. They are supposed to be the best teams because they are in the tournament.

That's pretty chicken and egg, there. Your teams made the tournament because you used the regional rankings, which is what determines what teams make the tournament. All we're trying to do is rank the BEST teams. The NCAA doesn't use the same criteria and never has.

And who's to say Cortland (note spelling) and Hamilton make it to the second round at all in another bracket? Each of them beat 18-10 teams who got automatic bids from weak leagues.

By the way, yes, a computer cannot generate a poll. A poll requires ballots and thus, voters. A computer, or one individual person, can generate a ranking, not a poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sludge on January 15, 2007, 12:45:10 PM

Grasshopper say, responses from Coleman pretty wise, not too surprising.

Grasshopper say, self second stringer for a reason.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 15, 2007, 12:45:36 PM

Pat-

I have always been this way, I don't think a team should be ranked at all unless they are going to make the tournament. I think you and I both know that CNU and AU both can't make the tournament. Even at the point when they were both ranked because of the lack of strength in the USASouth. I just don't see a point in a poll where not every team there will make the tournament. I use them just like everybody else, I think ya'll do a good job with the poll, but then some of those teams won't make it. If they are among the 25 best then they should be the 25 that get in the tournament. Thats how I have always seen it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 15, 2007, 12:49:20 PM

Quote from: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 15, 2007, 12:45:36 PM
Pat-

I have always been this way, I don't think a team should be ranked at all unless they are going to make the tournament. I think you and I both know that CNU and AU both can't make the tournament. Even at the point when they were both ranked because of the lack of strength in the USASouth. I just don't see a point in a poll where not every team there will make the tournament. I use them just like everybody else, I think ya'll do a good job with the poll, but then some of those teams won't make it. If they are among the 25 best then they should be the 25 that get in the tournament. Thats how I have always seen it.

I don't know why CNU and AU couldn't have both made the tournament if they'd continued at the pace that got them both ranked. There are plenty of Pool C bids to go around.

Just because the NCAA gets the selection criteria wrong, we should bend our poll to match?? Give me a break. That's ridiculous.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 15, 2007, 01:37:50 PM

I don't remember where Albion was at the end of season poll going into the tournament, but I'm quite certain from seeing them in person and seeing 7 other tournament teams that Albion could have done very well in the tournament and were probably among the best 60 teams in the country.

However because of the way the selection process works with regard to Pool C's, Albion was never even discussed as a candidate.

In the case of a stronger than average region (historically the GL, MW, and West) its perfectly reasonable to see one of those schools ranked and not make the tournament, because the tournament does not select THE 60 or so best teams it selects automatic qualifiers some who make it by winning their conference tournament and at large schools that are then selected using regional criteria not national.

I'm not sure what the beef is about the top 25 poll,

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 15, 2007, 01:53:07 PM

Quote from: sac on January 15, 2007, 01:37:50 PM
I don't remember where Albion was at the end of season poll going into the tournament, but I'm quite certain from seeing them in person and seeing 7 other tournament teams that Albion could have done very well in the tournament and were probably among the best 60 teams in the country.

Albion was #21 in the final regular season poll. They went 2-2 in their last 4 games, dropping from 8th to 11th to 21st. In the final GL Regional Rankings, Albion was not ranked. The last GL rankings were as follows, with their final reg. season D3hoops.com top 25 rankings for illustrative purposes:
1. Wooster (5)
2. Calvin (12)
3. Hope (2)
4. Wittenberg (3)
5. Baldwin-Wallace (6)
6. Carnegie Mellon (23)
All six made the tournament; Wooster and Calvin via Pool C, the other four as conference champions.

Sac is correct that Albion was a victim of the geographic squeeze the selection process routinely causes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 15, 2007, 01:59:16 PM

As Dave pointed out, Albion wasn't ranked in the final regional poll. To be considered for a Pool C slot I believe you have to be ranked in your region.

There are regions who get to rank 10 teams, 8 teams and 7 teams. This system alone will breed situations where teams that should make the tournament won't because the regions are imbalanced in # of schools ranked.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on January 15, 2007, 02:53:10 PM

Quote from: sac on January 15, 2007, 01:59:16 PM
As Dave pointed out, Albion wasn't ranked in the final regional poll. To be considered for a Pool C slot I believe you have to be ranked in your region.

There are regions who get to rank 10 teams, 8 teams and 7 teams. This system alone will breed situations where teams that should make the tournament won't because the regions are imbalanced in # of schools ranked.

I don't think you have to be ranked to receive a Pool C. I am pretty sure I remember ranked teams from certain regions passed over for unranked teams from others. Here is what I found in the NCAA manual.

3. Pool C will be reserved for institutions from automatic-qualifying conferences that are not their conference champion and the remaining teams in Pool B.
4. Berths from Pools B and C will be selected on a national basis, using regional selection criteria. There will be no predetermined regional allocations for Pools B and C.
5. There will be no maximum or minimum number of berths from one region.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 15, 2007, 05:28:16 PM

Pat-

First of all, tell me who CNU beat to get that 25th spot one week. I know they went ahead and lost two games right after that week. They then beat Fisk (now 2-10) and Oswego St. (now 7-6). I am not to sure what pace CNU was on.

Anyone else-

I applied my "formula" to the USASouth standings (last year) and the first 5 were in the exact order as they finished 6 and 7 were flipped-flopped, I believe it was because the 7th place team did get more out of conference wins then the 6th place win. I have been using it all year as my weekly power ranking for the conference. I have applied it and I think it works.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 15, 2007, 05:33:42 PM

Applying a formula to seven or eight teams who play fairly similar schedules is one thing.

Applying it to a nation of teams and ignoring strength of schedule leaves you with a final four team not in your ranking.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 15, 2007, 06:06:22 PM

Quote from: Chris Brooks on January 15, 2007, 02:53:10 PM
Quote from: sac on January 15, 2007, 01:59:16 PM
As Dave pointed out, Albion wasn't ranked in the final regional poll. To be considered for a Pool C slot I believe you have to be ranked in your region.

There are regions who get to rank 10 teams, 8 teams and 7 teams. This system alone will breed situations where teams that should make the tournament won't because the regions are imbalanced in # of schools ranked.

I don't think you have to be ranked to receive a Pool C. I am pretty sure I remember ranked teams from certain regions passed over for unranked teams from others. Here is what I found in the NCAA manual.

3. Pool C will be reserved for institutions from automatic-qualifying conferences that are not their conference champion and the remaining teams in Pool B.
4. Berths from Pools B and C will be selected on a national basis, using regional selection criteria. There will be no predetermined regional allocations for Pools B and C.
5. There will be no maximum or minimum number of berths from one region.

Chris, the Great Lakes gets crunched in that the evaluation formula only evaluates at a ratio of 1:6.5. For the 41 teams in the Great Lakes region, that permits 6 to be regionally ranked.

Let's run a sample regional ranking on the team records as of this minute. For discussion sake, let's rank the Great Lakes Region.

1) Ohio Northern OAC
2) Wooster NCAC
3) Wittenberg NCAC
4) Hope MIAA
5) Baldwin Wallace OAC
6) Bethany Pres AC is likely to have the criteria by the stats.

We have a very good region and not much room for the talented 2nd and 3rd place teams that we haven't listed. The talent in basketball in this part of the country is such that there are more teams that fit into the measure of quality that the 1:6.5 ratio implies. When it comes time for Pool C bids, those other Great Lakes teams are just "off the table". The assertion is that the 6th best team in the Great lakes might be the 3rd best team in the South. When the bids are doled out, the committee assumes that the #6 in the Great Lakes is better than the #3 in the South and should have gotten the bid.

We are going to see it when the Pool system extends to Golf (I think in 2007. We ASC schmucks will see Pool A bids going to northern schools and our better ASC squads will be sitting home! ;) :D :D :)

Golfstat (http://www.golfstat.com/2006-2007/men/mncaahth.htm#DivIII) thru 12-13-2006.

Most of the southern and western schools have not had their formal season (the spring) yet. The rankings in the Golfstat reflect the non-traditional season for those schools.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on January 15, 2007, 06:19:07 PM

I could be missing something here, but I have never understood why the different regions have different numbers of regionally ranked teams. I know it is based on the 1:6.5 formula but it really does not matter when NCAA selection comes around because loaded regions like the Great Lakes will get more than the six that are ranked.

It would be interesting to be a fly on the wall when they put the bracket together since the manual already states they will arrange it to have the fewest flights possible. I would like to know exactly how much the rankings do mean in determining home games, particularly in the GL where teams are already in close proximity. After travel, do they look at possible revenue first or the merit of each team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 15, 2007, 07:18:41 PM

The reason that is important is because games against regionally ranked teams is part of the selection criteria. With that in mind it seems reasonable that only a certain percentage of each region should be ranked.

I think there are three main things: is the facility up to standards, travel, and seeding.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 15, 2007, 07:37:06 PM

Travel/pairings and selection are separate subjects (at least in theory, and I believe in practice as well.) The #7 GL team is not going to be selected over the #3 South team for reasons of flight avoidance.

The way the selection process works is that the Pool A teams are determined, then the Pool B berths are allocated according to the criteria, and then everyone left is lumped into Pool C, separated by region. The region rankings are re-calculated in a "secret poll" not released to the public. Then the top-ranked un-selected team in each of the eight regions are presented, and one is selected according to the criteria and awarded a Pool C bid. The next-highest-ranked team in that team's region then moves up to the "table," and is compared with the top team in the other seven regions, and another team is selected. This process continues until all of the Pool C bids are allocated. At no time are there any more or any fewer than eight teams, one per region, under active consideration.

I don't believe there is anything in the Handbook, or in practice, that says that once a region's publishable ranking list is exhausted, that region sends forth no more candidates. I'd be very surprised if that were the case. In any case, I don't think the "secret" final rankings are limited to the 1:6.5 ratio.

We don't have the "secret" final regional rankings from last year, but using the last published one (Feb. 22), we see that Hope, Wittenberg, Baldwin-Wallace, and Carnegie Mellon all received GL Pool A bids (as did Lake Erie, who would have been either the #7 or #8 GL team according to the criteria). So when the Pool C process began, the GL team on the table was Wooster. They were probably selected pretty quickly, to be replaced at the table by Hope. They too were an easy pick, and the next-highest ranked GL team moved up into the discussion. That was almost certainly Albion, at #7 or #8 in the "secret" ranking. There was a substantial gap between Hope and Albion in terms of the criteria, as is evidenced by the 4 or 5 teams that were between them in the GL rankings. Albion sat there as team after team from other regions were selected, filling out the tournament field. We'll never know how close they came to being selected; maybe they would have been the next team, maybe not. But the fact that they were a relatively low-ranked team (in the regional rankings, not the top 25 poll) had to work against them, at least in terms of when they reached the table, and they were a relatively low-ranked team because they were in such a strong region.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 15, 2007, 07:50:17 PM

Nicely explained DC

In the middle of your PoolC selection process

They were probably selected pretty quickly, to be replaced at the table by Hope.

I believe you meant Calvin. My conversation with someone last spring led me to believe Albion never made the table. But we'll never know.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 15, 2007, 08:03:16 PM

Quote from: sac on January 15, 2007, 07:50:17 PM
Nicely explained DC

In the middle of your PoolC selection process

They were probably selected pretty quickly, to be replaced at the table by Hope.

I believe you meant Calvin. My conversation with someone last spring led me to believe Albion never made the table. But we'll never know.

I did mean Calvin; sorry. Hope, Calvin, what's the difference? ;D

If Albion "never made the table," that means one of two things:
1) There was some other GL team with better credentials than Albion, not including Wooster, Calvin, Hope, Witt, B-W, CMU, Lake Erie, or Bethany (Pool B)--if so, it would have been whoever was 2nd in the OAC last season (memory fails.) EDIT: would have been Ohio Northern
OR
2) There really is a cap on pool C by region, limited by the 1:6.5 ratio, and after Wooster and Calvin got picked, no other GL teams were considered. I don't believe that's the case, but it's just a belief on my part.

FWIW, in the D3Hoops.com mock selection meeting (http://www.d3hoops.com/salem/06/projected.htm), Albion was on the table when the last Pool C bid was made (to UW-La Crosse.) Nine non-GL teams were selected while Albion sat and watched (i.e., after Calvin was taken).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 15, 2007, 08:08:40 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 15, 2007, 07:37:06 PM
Travel/pairings and selection are separate subjects (at least in theory, and I believe in practice as well.) The #7 GL team is not going to be selected over the #3 South team for reasons of flight avoidance.

The way the selection process works is that the Pool A teams are determined, then the Pool B berths are allocated according to the criteria, and then everyone left is lumped into Pool C, separated by region. The region rankings are re-calculated in a "secret poll" not released to the public. Then the top-ranked un-selected team in each of the eight regions are presented, and one is selected according to the criteria and awarded a Pool C bid. The next-highest-ranked team in that team's region then moves up to the "table," and is compared with the top team in the other seven regions, and another team is selected. This process continues until all of the Pool C bids are allocated. At no time are there any more or any fewer than eight teams, one per region, under active consideration.

I don't believe there is anything in the Handbook, or in practice, that says that once a region's publishable ranking list is exhausted, that region sends forth no more candidates. I'd be very surprised if that were the case. In any case, I don't think the "secret" final rankings are limited to the 1:6.5 ratio.

We don't have the "secret" final regional rankings from last year, but using the last published one (Feb. 22), we see that Hope, Wittenberg, Baldwin-Wallace, and Carnegie Mellon all received GL Pool A bids (as did Lake Erie, who would have been either the #7 or #8 GL team according to the criteria). So when the Pool C process began, the GL team on the table was Wooster. They were probably selected pretty quickly, to be replaced at the table by Hope. They too were an easy pick, and the next-highest ranked GL team moved up into the discussion. That was almost certainly Albion, at #7 or #8 in the "secret" ranking. There was a substantial gap between Hope and Albion in terms of the criteria, as is evidenced by the 4 or 5 teams that were between them in the GL rankings. Albion sat there as team after team from other regions were selected, filling out the tournament field. We'll never know how close they came to being selected; maybe they would have been the next team, maybe not. But the fact that they were a relatively low-ranked team (in the regional rankings, not the top 25 poll) had to work against them, at least in terms of when they reached the table, and they were a relatively low-ranked team because they were in such a strong region.

+1 David,

Here is Pat's Daily Dose (http://www.d3hoops.com/dailydose/?p=146) from last February,

and the Pool C Message Board (http://www.d3sports.com/post/index.php?topic=4232.600) conversation from that time as well. Please scroll back a few posts as you need to read the best guesses that we were making last year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 15, 2007, 08:32:09 PM

I have refreshed my memory on Albion. They did not play enough Great Lakes region games (only 16), they lost too many (4), and their QOWI was too weak (9.125).

Had they won 1 more In-Region game (13-3), they would have picked up 8 more Index points and their QOWI would have been 9.625. That makes a stronger case. Or, if Albion had found just 4 more games against Great Lakes region teams that were .500 winning percentage, and won all four, 2 on the road, 2 at home they would have finished with QOWI of 9.8 and a regional record of 16-4. The UDallas and LaGrange wins probably knocked them out, because they weren't in-region. And, playing NAIA's such as Concordia-Michigan, Spring Arbor and Michigan-Dearborn serve not purpose towards the tourney.

This year, the DePauw game would be in-region, and Tri-State games count.

The Handbook has been the same for several years now with only minor tweaking. This year's handbook with its in-region additions and the Tri-State progression thru Provisional status really helps.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 15, 2007, 10:14:09 PM

I guess I should mention here when the poll is out.

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 15, 2007, 10:22:02 PM

Top 25 Scores and Schedules, Jan. 15-21 (UPDATED with some Tuesday scores):

#1 UW-Stevens Point (14-1) plays at UW-Platteville Wed. and hosts UW-River Falls Sat.
#2 Amherst (15-0) def. Elms 103-69, hosts Middlebury Fri., and hosts Williams Sat.
#3 St. Thomas (13-1) plays at St. John's Wed. and plays at St. Mary's (MN) Sat.
#4 Wooster (13-2) plays at Hiram Wed. and plays at Ohio Wesleyan Sat.
#5 Virginia Wesleyan (12-2) plays at Eastern Mennonite Wed. and hosts Randolph-Macon Sat.
#6 Wittenberg (13-2) plays at Ohio Wesleyan Wed. and hosts Allegheny Sat.
#7 Mississippi College (14-1) won at Louisiana College 63-43 and plays at U. of the Ozarks Sat.
#8 Ohio Northern (12-3) hosts Otterbein Wed. and plays at Marietta Sat.
#9 Elmhurst (13-1) plays at North Park Wed. and plays at Wheaton (IL) Sat.
#10 Whitworth (14-1) hosts Whitman Tue. and plays at Willamette Fri.
#11 Hope (12-2) plays at Adrian Wed. and hosts Alma Sat.
#12 UW-Oshkosh (13-3) hosts UW-Whitewater Wed. and plays at UW-Superior Sat.
#13 Washington U. (12-1) hosts Rochester Fri. and hosts Carnegie Mellon Sun.
#14 Puget Sound (12-2) hosts Lewis and Clark Fri. and hosts Linfield Sat.
#15 Augustana (12-3) plays at Millikin Wed. and plays at North Central Sat.
#16 UW-La Crosse (11-4) plays at UW-River Falls Wed. and plays at UW-Eau Claire Sat.
#17 Occidental (9-3) plays at Pomona-Pitzer Wed. and plays at Cal Lutheran Sat.
#18 Worcester Polytech (12-1) plays at MIT Wed. and hosts Springfield Sat.
#19 Aurora (12-1) plays at Concordia (IL) Tue., plays at Concordia (WI) Thu., and hosts Rockford Sat.
#20 Guilford (11-1) plays at Roanoke Wed., hosts Bridgewater (VA) Sat., and hosts Eastern Mennonite Sun.
#21 Bates (12-2) won at St. Joseph's (ME) 89-80, hosts Husson Thu., and hosts Tufts Sat.
#22 Rhode Island College (14-1) def. Western Connecticut 85-61 and plays at #24 Keene St. Sat.
#23 Carthage (9-5) plays at North Central Wed. and hosts Millikin Sat.
#24 Keene St. (13-21) lost to Eastern Connecticut 73-71 and hosts #22 Rhode Island College Sat.
#25 Johns Hopkins (13-2) plays at Franklin and Marshall Wed. and plays at Dickinson Sat.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 15, 2007, 10:31:42 PM

Anone else more than a little surprised to see Carthage still ranked after 3 straight losses, 2 last week. Granted they were to ranked Augustana and Elmhurst. Personally I think they're a good team but 3 straight losses usualy means your out of the poll.

To me the toughest team to rank might have been Ohio Northern, considering their wins over Witt and Woo.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mrmike88 on January 15, 2007, 10:45:27 PM

Looks like either Keene State or RIC will enjoy a one-week stay in the poll, since they play each other this week and are both ranked at the bottom of the poll...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 16, 2007, 12:17:43 AM

[applause] One vote. Don't you think GC should be listed before AU ;) (I know it is in alphabetical order)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 16, 2007, 02:59:58 AM

Quote from: sac on January 15, 2007, 10:31:42 PM
Anone else more than a little surprised to see Carthage still ranked after 3 straight losses, 2 last week. Granted they were to ranked Augustana and Elmhurst. Personally I think they're a good team but 3 straight losses usualy means your out of the poll.

Perhaps all of your Posting Up politicking for les hommes de rouge paid off for Bosko & Co. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 16, 2007, 09:20:51 AM

Quote from: mrmike88 on January 15, 2007, 10:45:27 PM
Looks like either Keene State or RIC will enjoy a one-week stay in the poll, since they play each other this week and are both ranked at the bottom of the poll...

I don't understand the big vote disparity here. Their schedules are very similar. RIC beat Tufts by 9 and KSC lost to Tufts in 3OT. Keene won the first head-to-head and has played consistently strong in all of their games. To me it seems like Keene is the better club and at worst they are even, but RIC has 50% more points in the poll that Keene. Very odd to me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 16, 2007, 09:26:55 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 16, 2007, 09:20:51 AM
Quote from: mrmike88 on January 15, 2007, 10:45:27 PM
Looks like either Keene State or RIC will enjoy a one-week stay in the poll, since they play each other this week and are both ranked at the bottom of the poll...

I don't understand the big vote disparity here. Their schedules are very similar. RIC beat Tufts by 9 and KSC lost to Tufts in 3OT. Keene won the first head-to-head and has played consistently strong in all of their games. To me it seems like Keene is the better club and at worst they are even, but RIC has 50% more points in the poll that Keene. Very odd to me.

I attribute that to "early season unfamiliarity". The voters are giving the Northeast some "props" and may think more of the Iona win or may like the Tufts outcome better than the head-to-head. The differences in 33 (1 and 1/3rd places) votes are magnified at the bottom of the poll. I look at votes totals in big groups as to where the team fits on the Perfect top 25. RIC is a solid #22. KSC is a strong "#23.5".

The vote break in this poll is really after #16. The top 16 are believable in the eyes of the voters. They just don't know who are the best #17 thru #19. There are a lot of votes for #17-19 that are not settled yet. (#16 - 250 votes in the Perfect Top 25; #17 - 225 votes, etc.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 16, 2007, 08:26:34 PM

David,

I tried to respond this on your Daily Dose, but it won't accept me! (Never had trouble before; even switched passwords due to the error message, nothing worked.)

While I think Carthage is very good (certainly top 40, maybe top 30), I too am mystified how they could still be ranked after losing 3 in a row and 4 of 5, especially since their highest ranking this season was 17th. I realize you work only with the final numbers (and are not into psychoanalyzing voters!), but I wonder if any team has ever had such staying power from a not-so-lofty perch?

By mid-season, if a top 5 team loses 3 of 3 and 4 of 5, they probably won't drop out completely (though probably about Carthage's current 23). But a team that never rose above 17??

I hope this is not too 'gnarly' a question (and feel free to psychoanalyze the voters if you wish)! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 16, 2007, 08:45:19 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 16, 2007, 08:26:34 PM
David,

I tried to respond this on your Daily Dose, but it won't accept me! (Never had trouble before; even switched passwords due to the error message, nothing worked.)

While I think Carthage is very good (certainly top 40, maybe top 30), I too am mystified how they could still be ranked after losing 3 in a row and 4 of 5, especially since their highest ranking this season was 17th. I realize you work only with the final numbers (and are not into psychoanalyzing voters!), but I wonder if any team has ever had such staying power from a not-so-lofty perch?

By mid-season, if a top 5 team loses 3 of 3 and 4 of 5, they probably won't drop out completely (though probably about Carthage's current 23). But a team that never rose above 17??

I hope this is not too 'gnarly' a question (and feel free to psychoanalyze the voters if you wish)! ;)

The "4 of 5" thing is misleading -- that first loss of the 4 was to Lewis U., a member of the best NCAA Division II league in the country, and a team stocked with scholarship players. That loss shouldn't hurt a D3 team at all.

Carthage was ranked #17 when they lost at Illinois Wesleyan in a barn-burner. The Red Men dropped to #18 in the Week 6 poll. Last week Carthage lost at home to the team the voters just slotted #9 (Elmhurst) and on the road to #15 (Augustana). If the poll is right, which game last week was Carthage supposed to win?

Carthage still has wins @ Gustavus Adolphus, @ Carroll, vs #11 Hope, vs Calvin, and @ Lawrence. Those wins don't just get wiped away because they played a nasty three-game stretch in one of the nation's best conferences.

Wednesday Carthage plays @ North Central -- it doesn't get any easier. I believe the 23rd best team in the country - whoever that actually is - would be an underdog in all 4 of Carthage's first games (@IWU, Elmhurst, @Augustana, @North Central). IWU isn't a Top 25 team this year, but a "favorite" over #23 at home...yes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 16, 2007, 09:03:13 PM

Q,

Point taken (and agreed).

But I still wonder if it is unprecedented for a team NEVER higher than 17th to fall only to 23rd after 3 straight losses? I'm betting it is.

Teams in the top 5 (or 10) get some benefit of the doubt; teams in the bottom 5 (or 10) are usually gone after even two losses, much less three.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 16, 2007, 09:13:36 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 16, 2007, 09:03:13 PM
Q,

Point taken (and agreed).

But I still wonder if it is unprecedented for a team NEVER higher than 17th to fall only to 23rd after 3 straight losses? I'm betting it is.

Teams in the top 5 (or 10) get some benefit of the doubt; teams in the bottom 5 (or 10) are usually gone after even two losses, much less three.

I don't know if it has happened before or not. Keep in mind though, by this time of year most voters look at things one week at a time. Carthage was dropped in the poll for the loss @ IWU. That game was filed away and done with. On the ballot submitted this Monday the voters looked at the results from last week only (the games vs Elmhurst and @Augustana), and dropped Carthage from #18 to #23.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 16, 2007, 09:48:03 PM

Week 4: Carthage is #18 with 192 points
Carthage thumps Olivet and Marietta, then loses to D2 Lewis
Week 5: Carthage is #17 with 194 points (in other words, unchanged)
Carthage beats Northland, then loses by 3 at Illinois Wesleyan
Week 6: Carthage is #18 with 198 points (in other words, unchanged)
Carthage loses to Elmhurst by 10 and at Augustana by 16
Week 7: Carthage is #23 with 89 points...less than half of the points of the previous weeks
(Elmhurst moves from #14 to #9, Augie stays at #15)

You can't look at these things in isolation. What happened to those who were below Carthage in last week's poll?
#19 Johns Hopkins went 2-1, losing to 6-8 Haverford at home
#20 UW-La Crosse beat #10 UW-Oshkosh and moved up
#21 Wheaton lost at home to Augustana and beat North Park
#22 Oxy beat CMS and moved up
#23 Worcester Poly went 3-0 and moved up
#24 NYU lost at Brandeis and beat Hunter College
#25 Aurora went 2-0 and moved up
[#26] Guilford beat E&H and moved up
[#27] Averett lost by 24 to Greensboro, their 4th loss in 5 games
[#28] RIC went 3-0 and moved up
[#29] North Central beat Millikin but lost to North Park
...and NCC was 164 points behind Carthage, roughly 6 1/2 ballot positions. It seems to me that everyone within 164 points of Carthage that could have passed them did so, with the possible exceptions of Wheaton and NYU. But, Wheaton was 76 points behind Carthage and NYU was 123 points in arrears, and they both gained substantially on the Red Men (Wheaton +35, NYU +82). (Plus, bear in mind that Wm. Paterson had a bad week and dropped past Carthage.) Maybe if that group between #19 and [#29] had done a bit better, Carthage would have dropped out. But you've got to put somebody's name in those last 5 slots on your ballot, and Carthage has as good or better case than most of the rest.

As to whether anyone has lost 3 straight games and remained in the bottom third of the poll, your guess would be as good as mine, as I don't track wins and losses of ranked teams in my database.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 16, 2007, 09:53:17 PM

Looks like #24 Keene State's stay in the top 25 may be short-lived, as they lost at home tonight to Eastern Connecticut, 73-71.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 16, 2007, 10:00:36 PM

Their conference mates RIC fared better, demolishing 10-win WCSU 85-61.

Anchors away.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mrmike88 on January 16, 2007, 10:10:27 PM

RIC also has Amherst at home coming up in a few weeks. As a Jeffs fan, it's one I'm worried about.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 16, 2007, 11:01:00 PM

Top 25 Scores and Schedules, Jan. 15-21 (UPDATED with Tuesday scores excl. West Coast):

#1 UW-Stevens Point (14-1) plays at UW-Platteville Wed. and hosts UW-River Falls Sat.
#2 Amherst (15-0) def. Elms 103-69, hosts Middlebury Fri., and hosts Williams Sat.
#3 St. Thomas (13-1) plays at St. John's Wed. and plays at St. Mary's (MN) Sat.
#4 Wooster (13-2) plays at Hiram Wed. and plays at Ohio Wesleyan Sat.
#5 Virginia Wesleyan (12-2) plays at Eastern Mennonite Wed. and hosts Randolph-Macon Sat.
#6 Wittenberg (13-2) plays at Ohio Wesleyan Wed. and hosts Allegheny Sat.
#7 Mississippi College (14-1) won at Louisiana College 63-43 and plays at U. of the Ozarks Sat.
#8 Ohio Northern (12-3) hosts Otterbein Wed. and plays at Marietta Sat.
#9 Elmhurst (13-1) plays at North Park Wed. and plays at Wheaton (IL) Sat.
#10 Whitworth (14-1) hosts Whitman Tue. and plays at Willamette Fri.
#11 Hope (12-2) plays at Adrian Wed. and hosts Alma Sat.
#12 UW-Oshkosh (13-3) hosts UW-Whitewater Wed. and plays at UW-Superior Sat.
#13 Washington U. (12-1) hosts Rochester Fri. and hosts Carnegie Mellon Sun.
#14 Puget Sound (12-2) hosts Lewis and Clark Fri. and hosts Linfield Sat.
#15 Augustana (12-3) plays at Millikin Wed. and plays at North Central Sat.
#16 UW-La Crosse (11-4) plays at UW-River Falls Wed. and plays at UW-Eau Claire Sat.
#17 Occidental (9-3) plays at Pomona-Pitzer Wed. and plays at Cal Lutheran Sat.
#18 Worcester Polytech (12-1) plays at MIT Wed. and hosts Springfield Sat.
#19 Aurora (13-1) won at Concordia (IL) 77-71, plays at Concordia (WI) Thu., and hosts Rockford Sat.
#20 Guilford (11-1) plays at Roanoke Wed., hosts Bridgewater (VA) Sat., and hosts Eastern Mennonite Sun.
#21 Bates (12-2) won at St. Joseph's (ME) 89-80, hosts Husson Thu., and hosts Tufts Sat.
#22 Rhode Island College (14-1) def. Western Connecticut 85-61 and plays at #24 Keene St. Sat.
#23 Carthage (9-5) plays at North Central Wed. and hosts Millikin Sat.
#24 Keene St. (13-21) lost to Eastern Connecticut 73-71 and hosts #22 Rhode Island College Sat.
#25 Johns Hopkins (13-2) plays at Franklin and Marshall Wed. and plays at Dickinson Sat.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 16, 2007, 11:02:22 PM

Hmm ... a self-fulfilling prophecy in the poll, then. Not very odd to me, Hoops Fan.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 16, 2007, 11:17:25 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 16, 2007, 09:13:36 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 16, 2007, 09:03:13 PM
Q,

Point taken (and agreed).

But I still wonder if it is unprecedented for a team NEVER higher than 17th to fall only to 23rd after 3 straight losses? I'm betting it is.

Teams in the top 5 (or 10) get some benefit of the doubt; teams in the bottom 5 (or 10) are usually gone after even two losses, much less three.

I don't know if it has happened before or not. Keep in mind though, by this time of year most voters look at things one week at a time. Carthage was dropped in the poll for the loss @ IWU. That game was filed away and done with. On the ballot submitted this Monday the voters looked at the results from last week only (the games vs Elmhurst and @Augustana), and dropped Carthage from #18 to #23.

+1, Great analysis!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 17, 2007, 08:53:44 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 16, 2007, 11:02:22 PM
Hmm ... a self-fulfilling prophecy in the poll, then. Not very odd to me, Hoops Fan.

Eh, everytime I get my hopes up about the LEC they cannibalize themselves during conference play. This means Keene will win on Saturday and they'll both be out. It's just how these things work.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 17, 2007, 11:28:41 AM

My top 25 "ranking" games are through Monday. Not too bad, I have 15 of d3hoops top 25 represented, some close or in actual spot of the d3hoops one. This is based on statistics alone.

1   Amherst
2   UW-Stevens Point
3   Lincoln
4   Wooster
5   Whitworth
6   Virginia Wesleyan
7   Mississippi College
8   Keene St
9   Scranton
10   Elmhurst
11   Middlebury
12   Washington U.
13   Hope
14   Puget Sound
15   Wittenberg
16   St. Thomas
17   William Patterson
18   Maryville(TN)
19   Trinity(Conn)
20   Lake Erie
21   Worchester Polytech
22   Messiah
23   Utica
24   Rhode Island College
25   Centre

Thanks to pabegg for his "regional ranking" post in pool C.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 17, 2007, 11:35:14 AM

Quote from: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 17, 2007, 11:28:41 AM
My top 25 "ranking" games are through Monday. Not too bad, I have 15 of d3hoops top 25 represented, some close or in actual spot of the d3hoops one. This is based on statistics alone.

1   Amherst
2   UW-Stevens Point
3   Lincoln
4   Wooster
5   Whitworth
6   Virginia Wesleyan
7   Mississippi College
8   Keene St
9   Scranton
10   Elmhurst
11   Middlebury
12   Washington U.
13   Hope
14   Puget Sound
15   Wittenberg
16   St. Thomas
17   William Patterson
18   Maryville(TN)
19   Trinity(Conn)
20   Lake Erie
21   Worchester Polytech
22   Messiah
23   Utica
24   Rhode Island College
25   Centre

Thanks to pabegg for his "regional ranking" post in pool C.

Pride, Lincoln is interesting. How much is OSU-Marion contributing to their total? How much are the D2's that played they contributing?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 17, 2007, 12:07:39 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 17, 2007, 11:35:14 AM
Quote from: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 17, 2007, 11:28:41 AM
My top 25 "ranking" games are through Monday. Not too bad, I have 15 of d3hoops top 25 represented, some close or in actual spot of the d3hoops one. This is based on statistics alone.

1   Amherst
2   UW-Stevens Point
3   Lincoln
4   Wooster
5   Whitworth
6   Virginia Wesleyan
7   Mississippi College
8   Keene St
9   Scranton
10   Elmhurst
11   Middlebury
12   Washington U.
13   Hope
14   Puget Sound
15   Wittenberg
16   St. Thomas
17   William Patterson
18   Maryville(TN)
19   Trinity(Conn)
20   Lake Erie
21   Worchester Polytech
22   Messiah
23   Utica
24   Rhode Island College
25   Centre

Thanks to pabegg for his "regional ranking" post in pool C.

Pride, Lincoln is interesting. How much is OSU-Marion contributing to their total? How much are the D2's that they contributing?

As for the OSU-Marion game taking out that game still keeps them in the top 25 but drops them down to 17. So that game contributed a bit more, but again they are still in the top 25. But that is just that game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 17, 2007, 12:13:12 PM

Quote from: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 17, 2007, 12:07:39 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 17, 2007, 11:35:14 AM
Quote from: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 17, 2007, 11:28:41 AM
My top 25 "ranking" games are through Monday. Not too bad, I have 15 of d3hoops top 25 represented, some close or in actual spot of the d3hoops one. This is based on statistics alone.

1   Amherst
2   UW-Stevens Point
3   Lincoln
4   Wooster
5   Whitworth
6   Virginia Wesleyan
7   Mississippi College
8   Keene St
9   Scranton
10   Elmhurst
11   Middlebury
12   Washington U.
13   Hope
14   Puget Sound
15   Wittenberg
16   St. Thomas
17   William Patterson
18   Maryville(TN)
19   Trinity(Conn)
20   Lake Erie
21   Worchester Polytech
22   Messiah
23   Utica
24   Rhode Island College
25   Centre

Thanks to pabegg for his "regional ranking" post in pool C.

Pride, Lincoln is interesting. How much is OSU-Marion contributing to their total? How much are the D2's that they contributing?

As for the OSU-Marion game taking out that game still keeps them in the top 25 but drops them down to 17. So that game contributed a bit more, but again they are still in the top 25. But that is just that game.

If we look at the sample and determine that we need to exclude OSU-Marion because it is not representative of the usual D3 schedule, then I think that your #17 throws Lincoln back into the acceptable realm of statistical probability. :)

On their good nights with all players on the bench and healthy, then I can believe that they are the 17th best team in the country.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 17, 2007, 12:16:15 PM

Quote from: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 17, 2007, 11:28:41 AM
My top 25 "ranking" games are through Monday. Not too bad, I have 15 of d3hoops top 25 represented, some close or in actual spot of the d3hoops one. This is based on statistics alone.

1   Amherst
2   UW-Stevens Point
3   Lincoln
4   Wooster
5   Whitworth
6   Virginia Wesleyan
7   Mississippi College
8   Keene St
9   Scranton
10   Elmhurst
11   Middlebury
12   Washington U.
13   Hope
14   Puget Sound
15   Wittenberg
16   St. Thomas
17   William Patterson
18   Maryville(TN)
19   Trinity(Conn)
20   Lake Erie
21   Worchester Polytech
22   Messiah
23   Utica
24   Rhode Island College
25   Centre

"This is based on statistics alone."

What statistics????

As any mathematician, including the one I live with, will tell you, you can make statistics do anything you want them to!

Statistics can be especially deceiving when the sample, such as the number of games a basketball team has played, is small. Also, because of the small number of variables to begin with, one player, or one game, can skew the analysis disproportionately.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 17, 2007, 01:07:49 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 17, 2007, 12:13:12 PM
On their good nights with all players on the bench and healthy, then I can believe that they are the 17th best team in the country.

Yes, but can you believe Middlebury is 11th or that Lake Erie is 20th?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 17, 2007, 01:16:26 PM

AndOne-
As I covered earlier and as we have found out. Statsistics are very misleading. These statistics are based upon how teams have played. It is completely taken from the schools season statistics. I have already said, I couldn't understand how Team A can play Team B, where Team A steals the ball 10 times from Team B, but Team B only has 3 TO's :o

Hoops Fan-
Well we will see how well Middlebury is once they play Amherst on Friday. :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on January 17, 2007, 08:45:09 PM

NCAC update:

While #4 Wooster is handling Hiram easily tonight, Ohio Wesleyan is handing #6 Wittenberg everything they can handle at Ohio Wesleyan. Here's Wittenberg's broadcast page, if you wanted to listen in.

http://www4.wittenberg.edu/news/athletics/sportsnetwork/index.html

Ohio Wesleyan leads by 20 points with about 11 minutes left in the game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 17, 2007, 09:10:26 PM

Final: Ohio Wesleyan 70 #6 Wittenberg 48

Wittenberg takes a bad road loss tonight as the Bishops dominate this game with a strong shooting performance.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hope1 on January 17, 2007, 09:11:02 PM

hope won tonight 81 to 42 over adrian

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 17, 2007, 09:32:10 PM

Final: #4 Wooster 111 Hiram 57

Wooster emptied the bench with over 8 minutes remaining as they totally dominated this road game. 14 players saw playing time for the Scots tonight.

Wooster was led tonight by James Cooper with 21 points, Devin Fulk with 14 points, Marty Bidwell with 12 points, Jake Johnson with 11 points, Tim Vandervaart with 10 points and Brandon Johnson with 10 points.

Wooster is now 14-2, 7-0 NCAC Big game at Ohio Wesleyan on Saturday!

GO SCOTS!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 17, 2007, 10:45:24 PM

NPU puts a scare on #9 Elmhurst. According to the Wheaton webcast, Elmhurst wins 79-76 on the road. Elmhurst was actually down six at the half.

Wheaton beat NPU solidly by 13 on Saturday... My guess is that has a lot more to do with the fact that NPU was hungry after the Wheaton loss rather than Elmhurst being 10 pts worse than Wheaton.

It does set up an interesting game this weekend though, as Elmhurst takes on Wheaton @ Wheaton.

In other CCIW Top 25 action, #15 Augie wins at Millikin, 80-65.

#23 Carthage wins @ ORV North Central, 80-69

ORV Wheaton wins vs IWU, 79-65

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 17, 2007, 10:52:13 PM

Quick review of the scoreboard shows that four Top 25 teams dropped games tonight.

#3 St. Thomas, #6 Wittenberg, #16 UW-LaCrosse and #20 Guilford all lost road games this evening.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 17, 2007, 11:00:15 PM

Top 25 Scores and Schedules, Jan. 15-21 (UPDATED with some FRIDAY scores):

#1 UW-Stevens Point (15-1) won at UW-Platteville 73-68 and hosts UW-River Falls Sat.
#2 Amherst (16-0) def. Elms 103-69, def. Middlebury 79-73, and hosts Williams Sat.
#3 St. Thomas (13-2) lost at St. John's 64-59 and plays at St. Mary's (MN) Sat.
#4 Wooster (14-2) won at Hiram 111-57 and plays at Ohio Wesleyan Sat.
#5 Virginia Wesleyan (13-2) won at Eastern Mennonite 85-56 and hosts Randolph-Macon Sat.
#6 Wittenberg (13-3) lost at Ohio Wesleyan 70-48 and hosts Allegheny Sat.
#7 Mississippi College (14-1) won at Louisiana College 63-43 and plays at U. of the Ozarks Sat.
#8 Ohio Northern (13-3) def. Otterbein 79-70 and plays at Marietta Sat.
#9 Elmhurst (14-1) won at North Park 79-76 and plays at Wheaton (IL) Sat.
#10 Whitworth (15-1) def. Whitman 62-59 and plays at Willamette Fri.
#11 Hope (13-2) won at Adrian 81-42 and hosts Alma Sat.
#12 UW-Oshkosh (14-3) def. UW-Whitewater 65-60 and plays at UW-Superior Sat.
#13 Washington U. (12-1) hosts Rochester Fri. and hosts Carnegie Mellon Sun.
#14 Puget Sound (12-2) hosts Lewis and Clark Fri. and hosts Linfield Sat.
#15 Augustana (13-3) won at Millikin 80-65 and plays at North Central Sat.
#16 UW-La Crosse (11-5) lost at UW-River Falls 81-72 and plays at UW-Eau Claire Sat.
#17 Occidental (10-3) won at Pomona-Pitzer 70-54 and plays at Cal Lutheran Sat.
#18 Worcester Polytech (13-1) won at MIT 64-43 and hosts Springfield Sat.
#19 Aurora (14-1) won at Concordia (IL) 77-71, won at Concordia (WI) 95-71, and hosts Rockford Sat.
#20 Guilford (11-2) lost at Roanoke 72-68, hosts Bridgewater (VA) Sat., and hosts Eastern Mennonite Sun.
#21 Bates (13-2) won at St. Joseph's (ME) 89-80, def. Husson 70-55, and hosts Tufts Sat.
#22 Rhode Island College (14-1) def. Western Connecticut 85-61 and plays at #24 Keene St. Sat.
#23 Carthage (10-5) won at North Central 80-69 and hosts Millikin Sat.
#24 Keene St. (13-2) lost to Eastern Connecticut 73-71 and hosts #22 Rhode Island College Sat.
#25 Johns Hopkins (14-2) won at Franklin and Marshall 69-66 and plays at Dickinson Sat.

Four games on tap for Friday from the NESCAC, UAA, and NWC (2).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 18, 2007, 01:25:58 AM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on January 17, 2007, 09:10:26 PM
Final: Ohio Wesleyan 70 #6 Wittenberg 48

Wittenberg takes a bad road loss tonight as the Bishops dominate this game with a strong shooting performance.

The Ohio Wesleyan team I saw in November looked like a Top 25 candidate to me...I'm not sure I'd call this a "bad road loss." OWU is a very well-coached team with a great player leading the way (Chojnacki, sp?).

That said, I've felt that we've been rating Wittenberg too high this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 18, 2007, 01:31:01 AM

Having seen OWU, they are a very solid team....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 18, 2007, 02:47:50 AM

Q,

I'm sure if you saw them in December you'd think differently. They were under .500 for the month:

Sat., Dec 2   3:00 pm   vs. Hiram • *   W, 90-49
Sat., Dec 9   2:00 pm   at Allegheny • *   L, 70-73   (OT)
Thu., Dec 21   7:30 pm   vs. Wilmington •   L, 60-63
Thu., Dec 28   6:00 pm   vs. Aquinas   L, 79-80   (OT)
Fri., Dec 29   6:00 pm   vs. Notre Dame (Ohio)   W, 86-76

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 18, 2007, 03:44:05 AM

More recently, OWU lost this past Saturday at 5-11 Earlham. OWU is a very tough team to figure out this year, and most years. They get another bite at the apple this coming Saturday when Wooster comes to town.

Wittenberg, on the other hand, has long looked like a disaster waiting to happen. This is a team that got taken to triple OT by Denison (3-13), who was in the midst of a 10-game losing streak, and needed a running three by Mark Caraway at the buzzer to force OT at Kenyon (7-9). Caraway tore his ACL Saturday; his absence may have been pivotal in the loss at Delaware.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 18, 2007, 01:12:31 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on January 17, 2007, 10:52:13 PM
Quick review of the scoreboard shows that four Top 25 teams dropped games tonight.

#3 St. Thomas, #6 Wittenberg, #16 UW-LaCrosse and #20 Guilford all lost road games this evening.

Not to toot my own horn, but my ranking didn't have UW-LaCrosse or Guilford ranked. Plus I had Wittenberg and St. Thomas much lower in the rankings so I don't feel so bad that they lost. I know I am going to get smited for saying that, so It would be nice if you wouldn't ;) :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 18, 2007, 03:23:14 PM

Uh, yeah but how'd that Lincoln ranking work out?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on January 18, 2007, 06:17:54 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 18, 2007, 01:25:58 AM
That said, I've felt that we've been rating Wittenberg too high this year.

Quote from: David Collinge on January 18, 2007, 03:44:05 AM
Wittenberg, on the other hand, has long looked like a disaster waiting to happen. This is a team that got taken to triple OT by Denison (3-13), who was in the midst of a 10-game losing streak, and needed a running three by Mark Caraway at the buzzer to force OT at Kenyon (7-9). Caraway tore his ACL Saturday; his absence may have been pivotal in the loss at Delaware.

I totally agree about Wittenberg. I have felt all season long that Witt was a bit overrated. Even with the scare they gave Wooster, I attribute that to more of Witt playing out of their trees anytime they see the Black and Old Gold. They got beat pretty soundly up in Ada earlier in the season. And, as David noted, they needed 3 OT's to get by a pretty poor Denison team and a 3 point prayer to send them to OT and eventually beat Kenyon. I think they have been walking the tight rope too long and maybe Caraway's injury was enough for that tight rope to snap in a big way last night.

As for OWU, I don't think anyone will question them as having the capabilities of a 'Top 25' caliber team (well, maybe some would ;) ). The problem I have with them is that they have their moments when they just forget to show up. They are very Jekyll and Hyde IMO. Those December losses really stick out as Hyde moments for them. And then Jekyll comes back but, just when you think they've put all that Hyde behaviour behind them, they go and lay an egg at Earlham??? And Jekyll returned last night. So what team can Wooster expect on Saturday? It's anybody's guess as far as I'm concerned?!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on January 19, 2007, 04:49:24 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 15, 2007, 08:03:16 PM
I did mean Calvin; sorry. Hope, Calvin, what's the difference? ;D

just catching up on reading some posts, and though this was written a couple days ago, it was still painful to read :'(

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 19, 2007, 04:53:50 PM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on January 19, 2007, 04:49:24 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 15, 2007, 08:03:16 PM
I did mean Calvin; sorry. Hope, Calvin, what's the difference?

just catching up on reading some posts, and though this was written a couple days ago, it was still painful to read

What? I don't see anything wrong with that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 19, 2007, 08:43:07 PM

So doesn't anyone know what that Amherst - Middlebury game was like. It looks like it was a good game. 6pt win is that what everyone expected out of tonight's game or was Amherst really supposed to blow them out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 19, 2007, 08:49:24 PM

If you're going to keep gloating about your ranking then we're going to have to point out what happened to that alma mater of yours, for which you kept lobbying for a vote.

You might get more info on a NESCAC game on the NESCAC board.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 19, 2007, 08:59:36 PM

I am not gloating I really wanted to know what happened. I did lobby for a vote because I thought they should have gotten in the poll. I mean they didn't even get in mine. I even said I thought they wouldn't get in mine. I posted it right on here.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 20, 2007, 10:03:45 AM

Top 25 Scores and Schedules, Jan. 15-21 (UPDATED with SATURDAY scores):

#1 UW-Stevens Point (16-1) won at UW-Platteville 73-68 and def. UW-River Falls 106-61
#2 Amherst (17-0) def. Elms 103-69, def. Middlebury 79-73, and def. Williams 72-51
#3 St. Thomas (14-2) lost at St. John's 64-59 and won at St. Mary's (MN) 73-46
#4 Wooster (15-2) won at Hiram 111-57 and won at Ohio Wesleyan 61-54
#5 Virginia Wesleyan (14-2) won at Eastern Mennonite 85-56 and def. Randolph-Macon 65-60
#6 Wittenberg (14-3) lost at Ohio Wesleyan 70-48 and def. Allegheny 83-51
#7 Mississippi College (15-1) won at Louisiana College 63-43 and won at U. of the Ozarks 65-47
#8 Ohio Northern (13-4) def. Otterbein 79-70 and lost at Marietta 72-68
#9 Elmhurst (14-2) won at North Park 79-76 and lost at Wheaton (IL) 77-74
#10 Whitworth (16-1) def. Whitman 62-59 and won at Willamette 79-66
#11 Hope (14-2) won at Adrian 81-42 and def. Alma 86-53
#12 UW-Oshkosh (15-3) def. UW-Whitewater 65-60 and won at UW-Superior 79-53
#13 Washington U. (13-1) def. Rochester 68-59 and hosts Carnegie Mellon Sun.
#14 Puget Sound (14-2) def. Lewis and Clark 94-88 and def. Linfield 70-64
#15 Augustana (14-3) won at Millikin 80-65 and won at North Central 60-59
#16 UW-La Crosse (11-6) lost at UW-River Falls 81-72 and lost at UW-Eau Claire 65-47
#17 Occidental (11-3) won at Pomona-Pitzer 70-54 and won at Cal Lutheran 68-56
#18 Worcester Polytech (14-1) won at MIT 64-43 and def. Springfield 76-56
#19 Aurora (15-1) won at Concordia (IL) 77-71, won at Concordia (WI) 95-71, and def. Rockford 90-47
#20 Guilford (12-2) lost at Roanoke 72-68, def. Bridgewater (VA) 70-66, and hosts Eastern Mennonite Sun.
#21 Bates (14-2) won at St. Joseph's (ME) 89-80, def. Husson 70-55, and def. Tufts 72-44
#22 Rhode Island College (14-2) def. Western Connecticut 85-61 and lost at #24 Keene St. 92-81
#23 Carthage (11-5) won at North Central 80-69 and def. Millikin 64-60
#24 Keene St. (14-2) lost to Eastern Connecticut 73-71 and def. #22 Rhode Island College 92-81
#25 Johns Hopkins (15-2) won at Franklin and Marshall 69-66 and won at Dickinson 77-40

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 20, 2007, 04:59:11 PM

ONU loses again, this time to Marietta who was winless (0-9) in the OAC.

Time to re-evaluate ONU along with Wittenberg.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 20, 2007, 05:15:25 PM

Final: #4 Wooster 61 Ohio Wesleyan 54

Great road win for Wooster as they take control of the NCAC race with now a 2 game lead over Wittenberg. :)

Wooster won this game with their defense...as they held OWU to a low shooting percentage and contained the Bishops top two scorers (Chojnacki-11, Rudegair-9) on the offensive end.

Wooster was led by Tom Port with 18 points, Brandon Johnson with 11 points and James Cooper with 10 points.

Wooster is now 15-2, 8-0 NCAC Next game vs Kenyon at home on 1/24

GO SCOTS!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hope1 on January 20, 2007, 06:34:30 PM

hope won today 86 to 53 over alma today

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on January 20, 2007, 06:37:39 PM

Stevens Point dominated from start to finish in a 106-61 victory over a River Falls team that had been playing very well of late (beat #16 La Crosse on Wed). They hit 16-36 3's and the end of the bench was in the game for about the last 10 minutes of the game. Oshkosh comes into town on Wednesday in second place in the WIAC after beating Superior on the road. Get there early for the best seats!

Title: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 20, 2007, 09:30:35 PM

#9 Elmhurst is down three at Wheaton at the half. You can watch the video or listen in at www.wetn.org

# 15 Augustana is down three at North Central at the half. You can listen in at www.wonc.org

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 20, 2007, 10:40:27 PM

Augie prevails by 1. Elmhurst falls by 3.

If Carthage wins over Millikin, the CCIW will likely have 4 teams in the top 25 this week (since Wheaton was only 7 points shy of 25th last week).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 20, 2007, 10:45:00 PM

Quote from: diehardfan on January 20, 2007, 09:30:35 PM
#9 Elmhurst is down three at Wheaton at the half. You can watch the video or listen in at www.wetn.org

Elmhurst lost.

Quote from: diehardfan on January 20, 2007, 09:30:35 PM# 15 Augustana is down three at North Central at the half. You can listen in at www.wonc.org

Augie won.

See above for scores. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on January 20, 2007, 11:15:12 PM

Mississippi College (15-1) runs their ASC winning streak to 32 games with wins at Louisiana College (63-43) and Ozarks (65-47). The Choctaws are allowing just 48 points in six games this semester with four coming on the road. The three top scorers all shooting over 60 percent this season including guards D. J. Jones and Timothy Broomfield.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on January 21, 2007, 08:51:55 AM

Quote from: gordonmann on January 20, 2007, 04:59:11 PM
ONU loses again, this time to Marietta who was winless (0-9) in the OAC.

Time to re-evaluate ONU along with Wittenberg.

I just can't figure ONU out. I saw them beat Wooster and I came away very impressed with their team. Combine that with how impressive a win they had over Wittenberg and I would have never guessed that they would be this inconsistent. It's one thing to be losing OAC games. That happens in that league. But to be losing to teams like Marietta shouldn't be happening to a team with the talent that ONU brings to the floor every night. Heck, they were fortunate to beat Otterbein the other night as well as Ott had an 11 point lead in the 1st half and ONU didn't take the lead until less than 10 minutes in that game. Right now, it's looking like the only way they get into the tournament is if they win the OAC tournament and the way they have been playing lately, I wouldn't count on that happening. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 21, 2007, 12:48:44 PM

Sounds a lot like UW La Crosse! They've had some really big wins, but dropped two straight against questionable opponents...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 21, 2007, 02:05:40 PM

Maybe ONU and UW-LaX infected each other when they played that excllent game for the championship of the "Mose" Hole Classic in Wooster. (Game recap (http://www.d3hoops.com/releases.php?release=5778&scoreboard))

Since that game, ONU has gone 3-3 and La Crosse has gone 3-2.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 21, 2007, 04:43:31 PM

Top 25 Scores and Schedules, Jan. 15-21 (FINAL):

#1 UW-Stevens Point (16-1) won at UW-Platteville 73-68 and def. UW-River Falls 106-61
#2 Amherst (17-0) def. Elms 103-69, def. Middlebury 79-73, and def. Williams 72-51
#3 St. Thomas (14-2) lost at St. John's 64-59 and won at St. Mary's (MN) 73-46
#4 Wooster (15-2) won at Hiram 111-57 and won at Ohio Wesleyan 61-54
#5 Virginia Wesleyan (14-2) won at Eastern Mennonite 85-56 and def. Randolph-Macon 65-60
#6 Wittenberg (14-3) lost at Ohio Wesleyan 70-48 and def. Allegheny 83-51
#7 Mississippi College (15-1) won at Louisiana College 63-43 and won at U. of the Ozarks 65-47
#8 Ohio Northern (13-4) def. Otterbein 79-70 and lost at Marietta 72-68
#9 Elmhurst (14-2) won at North Park 79-76 and lost at Wheaton (IL) 77-74
#10 Whitworth (16-1) def. Whitman 62-59 and won at Willamette 79-66
#11 Hope (14-2) won at Adrian 81-42 and def. Alma 86-53
#12 UW-Oshkosh (15-3) def. UW-Whitewater 65-60 and won at UW-Superior 79-53
#13 Washington U. (14-1) def. Rochester 68-59 and def. Carnegie Mellon 73-49
#14 Puget Sound (14-2) def. Lewis and Clark 94-88 and def. Linfield 70-64
#15 Augustana (14-3) won at Millikin 80-65 and won at North Central 60-59
#16 UW-La Crosse (11-6) lost at UW-River Falls 81-72 and lost at UW-Eau Claire 65-47
#17 Occidental (11-3) won at Pomona-Pitzer 70-54 and won at Cal Lutheran 68-56
#18 Worcester Polytech (14-1) won at MIT 64-43 and def. Springfield 76-56
#19 Aurora (15-1) won at Concordia (IL) 77-71, won at Concordia (WI) 95-71, and def. Rockford 90-47
#20 Guilford (13-2) lost at Roanoke 72-68, def. Bridgewater (VA) 70-66, and def. Eastern Mennonite 79-69
#21 Bates (14-2) won at St. Joseph's (ME) 89-80, def. Husson 70-55, and def. Tufts 72-44
#22 Rhode Island College (14-2) def. Western Connecticut 85-61 and lost at #24 Keene St. 92-81
#23 Carthage (11-5) won at North Central 80-69 and def. Millikin 64-60
#24 Keene St. (14-2) lost to Eastern Connecticut 73-71 and def. #22 Rhode Island College 92-81
#25 Johns Hopkins (15-2) won at Franklin and Marshall 69-66 and won at Dickinson 77-40

Top 25 teams went a composite 45-9; not too bad.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: balls a dunkin on January 21, 2007, 05:23:43 PM

Could Mississippi College possibly break into the top 5?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 21, 2007, 05:39:46 PM

Quote from: balls a dunkin on January 21, 2007, 05:23:43 PM
Could Mississippi College possibly break into the top 5?

Possibly? Sure; it all depends on how the voters feel about St. Thomas' loss to 13-3 St. John's. UST was 81 points (= 3.25 placements) ahead of MC last week, and the Choctaws didn't do anything special in beating Louisiana Coll. and U. Ozarks. I think they'll be close at #5/#6.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Marty Peretz on January 21, 2007, 05:47:50 PM

Can someone honestly attempt to justify St. Thomas' number 3 ranking? Their best win comes against a quality but not great Occidental club. It baffles me that WashU (admittedly a team I've followed closely) is ranked 13th despite wins over Colby (neutral site half way across the country for WU, 2 hours from Colby), Illinois Weselyan (on the road), double figures victory over Chicago on the road..and a 2 point loss on the road to a good Augustana club (a game in which WU lost its then second leading scorer). Certainly after wins this weekend against a very solid Rochester club and a respectable Carnegie squad, the Bears will likely climb into the top ten. But let's say they check in at 8 or 9. Will St. Thomas, with more losses and a considerably weaker schedule than WashU, remain in the top 10? I suspect they will because the voters won't be inclined to demote them more than maybe 5 spots. That to me is absurd. I don't mean to pick on St.Thomas in particular. I'm sure they are a fine club and I admittedly haven't seen them play. I'm more frustrated with the rankings system in general. Because WashU (and other clubs too for that matter--this isn't just about my team) didn't get much, if any national hype entering the season, they are automatically at a disadvantage. It just takes so damn long to climb the rankings. I understand there's nothing you can do about this at the beginning of the year. This is, after all, Division III basketball and there's no such thing as national exposure. But one thing that close followers of D3 hoops (read: the voters) should know is that certain teams play in tougher conferences and play perenially more difficult nonconference schedules: WashU has done both. And now that we're two months into the season, it seems pretty clear that they deserve to be in the top 10, maybe top 5 in the country come Monday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: balls a dunkin on January 21, 2007, 06:05:18 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 21, 2007, 05:39:46 PM
Quote from: balls a dunkin on January 21, 2007, 05:23:43 PM
Could Mississippi College possibly break into the top 5?

Possibly? Sure; it all depends on how the voters feel about St. Thomas' loss to 13-3 St. John's. UST was 81 points (= 3.25 placements) ahead of MC last week, and the Choctaws didn't do anything special in beating Louisiana Coll. and U. Ozarks. I think they'll be close at #5/#6.

They are on a 15 game win streak. Amherst is the only team that has more. True LC and the Ozarks aren't the best teams in the world, but there is not at team anywhere that plays a top 25 team every game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 21, 2007, 06:21:20 PM

Quote from: balls a dunkin on January 21, 2007, 06:05:18 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 21, 2007, 05:39:46 PM
Quote from: balls a dunkin on January 21, 2007, 05:23:43 PM
Could Mississippi College possibly break into the top 5?

Possibly? Sure; it all depends on how the voters feel about St. Thomas' loss to 13-3 St. John's. UST was 81 points (= 3.25 placements) ahead of MC last week, and the Choctaws didn't do anything special in beating Louisiana Coll. and U. Ozarks. I think they'll be close at #5/#6.
They are on a 15 game win streak. Amherst is the only team that has more. True LC and the Ozarks aren't the best teams in the world, but there is not at team anywhere that plays a top 25 team every game.

The first 13 of those fifteen wins are already accounted for in MC's #7 ranking.

Quote from: Marty Peretz on January 21, 2007, 05:47:50 PM
Can someone honestly attempt to justify St. Thomas' number 3 ranking? Their best win comes against a quality but not great Occidental club. It baffles me that WashU (admittedly a team I've followed closely) is ranked 13th despite wins over Colby (neutral site half way across the country for WU, 2 hours from Colby), Illinois Weselyan (on the road), double figures victory over Chicago on the road..and a 2 point loss on the road to a good Augustana club (a game in which WU lost its then second leading scorer). Certainly after wins this weekend against a very solid Rochester club and a respectable Carnegie squad, the Bears will likely climb into the top ten. But let's say they check in at 8 or 9. Will St. Thomas, with more losses and a considerably weaker schedule than WashU, remain in the top 10?

Colby is 10-8. Illinois Wesleyan is 8-8. Carnegie Mellon is 9-6. Rochester is 11-5, but played a pretty weak non-UAA schedule and are just 2-3 in the UAA. Wash U. is a very good team that has done well against a pretty good but by no means great schedule, and they've been rewarded with a very high national ranking that will get higher this week. I can't see how you can complain about that.

And BTW, St. Thomas' win over Occidental was also at a neutral site halfway across the country, 2 hours (in traffic) from Oxy, and is Oxy's only loss to a D3 team so far this season. Good but not great? Maybe, but they look better to me than any wins on WUSTL's schedule so far.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 21, 2007, 06:27:34 PM

Quote from: balls a dunkin on January 21, 2007, 06:05:18 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 21, 2007, 05:39:46 PM
Quote from: balls a dunkin on January 21, 2007, 05:23:43 PM
Could Mississippi College possibly break into the top 5?

Possibly? Sure; it all depends on how the voters feel about St. Thomas' loss to 13-3 St. John's. UST was 81 points (= 3.25 placements) ahead of MC last week, and the Choctaws didn't do anything special in beating Louisiana Coll. and U. Ozarks. I think they'll be close at #5/#6.
They are on a 15 game win streak. Amherst is the only team that has more. True LC and the Ozarks aren't the best teams in the world, but there is not at team anywhere that plays a top 25 team every game.

Balls, I would say that MC has played six quality games this year.

They caught UMHB early in the season in the Golden Dome. The road trip to Abilene was a solid road trip, 2 more games. The Westmont Tourney was 2 more, altho' the JHU team that you beat was not much better than McMurry by my friends' assessments who saw both in Baltimore in November. They meet the challenge of a UT-Dallas team still in the shadow of their D1 win. That is 6.

I will give you 7 for the win at HPU, the 4th game of an 11-day road trip to California and on the way back from Sul Ross St.

The highest ranking that I have seen for a Men's ASC team is McMurry in 2000 at #4 in week #13 (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/00/week13.htm). And those Top 4 were in the Calvin Sectional that year. :-\

I would take it easy. McMurry fan Finnman thought the 2000 and 2001 versions of the Choctaws were better. I recommend that you lie low until you have gotten thru the Great Lakes, where you have never won a post-season game before! I would love for the Chocs to go to the Final Four. We need the props for the ASC. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 21, 2007, 07:06:28 PM

There's no disgrace in being ranked #5 or #6, as MC will be this week, or #10 or thereabouts like Wash U. It always puzzles me when a ranking at such an elite level can be seen as a sign of disrespect.

And I agree with Ralph about wishing for deep tournament runs in lieu of high rankings. After all, Wooster has been in the top 10 since I was in junior high school (well, almost ;)) and they have one measly disappointing third-place banner to show for it. :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: balls a dunkin on January 21, 2007, 08:27:39 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 21, 2007, 07:06:28 PM
There's no disgrace in being ranked #5 or #6, as MC will be this week, or #10 or thereabouts like Wash U. It always puzzles me when a ranking at such an elite level can be seen as a sign of disrespect.

And I agree with Ralph about wishing for deep tournament runs in lieu of high rankings. After all, Wooster has been in the top 10 since I was in junior high school (well, almost ;)) and they have one measly disappointing third-place banner to show for it. :-\

I wasn't trying to cause a stink. You are exactly right that there is no disgrace being a #5/#6. That is what I am asking. With St. Thomas and Whittenberg losing I just wondered if we could break into the top 5. I really figured we would move to #6.

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 21, 2007, 06:27:34 PM
Quote from: balls a dunkin on January 21, 2007, 06:05:18 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 21, 2007, 05:39:46 PM
Quote from: balls a dunkin on January 21, 2007, 05:23:43 PM
Could Mississippi College possibly break into the top 5?

Possibly? Sure; it all depends on how the voters feel about St. Thomas' loss to 13-3 St. John's. UST was 81 points (= 3.25 placements) ahead of MC last week, and the Choctaws didn't do anything special in beating Louisiana Coll. and U. Ozarks. I think they'll be close at #5/#6.
They are on a 15 game win streak. Amherst is the only team that has more. True LC and the Ozarks aren't the best teams in the world, but there is not at team anywhere that plays a top 25 team every game.

Balls, I would say that MC has played six quality games this year.

They caught UMHB early in the season in the Golden Dome. The road trip to Abilene was a solid road trip, 2 more games. The Westmont Tourney was 2 more, altho' the JHU team that you beat was not much better than McMurry by my friends' assessments who saw both in Baltimore in November. They meet the challenge of a UT-Dallas team still in the shadow of their D1 win. That is 6.

I will give you 7 for the win at HPU, the 4th game of an 11-day road trip to California and on the way back from Sul Ross St.

The highest ranking that I have seen for a Men's ASC team is McMurry in 2000 at #4 in week #13 (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/00/week13.htm). And those Top 4 were in the Calvin Sectional that year. :-\

I would take it easy. McMurry fan Finnman thought the 2000 and 2001 versions of the Choctaws were better. I recommend that you lie low until you have gotten thru the Great Lakes, where you have never won a post-season game before! I would love for the Chocs to go to the Final Four. We need the props for the ASC. ;)

Or what, the McMurry D3 Mafia gonna take a karma point from me! :o :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on January 21, 2007, 08:55:43 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 21, 2007, 07:06:28 PM
There's no disgrace in being ranked #5 or #6, as MC will be this week, or #10 or thereabouts like Wash U. It always puzzles me when a ranking at such an elite level can be seen as a sign of disrespect.

And I agree with Ralph about wishing for deep tournament runs in lieu of high rankings. After all, Wooster has been in the top 10 since I was in junior high school (well, almost ;)) and they have one measly disappointing third-place banner to show for it. :-\

David,
I agree with you there. There is very little that separates the top ten teams and I don't think anyone can say with certainty that one is better than the other just because we don't have the opportunity to see everyone play. It is an honor just to get your name up there with so many good DIII teams and utimately the tournament separates everyone anyway.

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 21, 2007, 06:27:34 PM

Balls, I would say that MC has played six quality games this year.

They caught UMHB early in the season in the Golden Dome. The road trip to Abilene was a solid road trip, 2 more games. The Westmont Tourney was 2 more, altho' the JHU team that you beat was not much better than McMurry by my friends' assessments who saw both in Baltimore in November. They meet the challenge of a UT-Dallas team still in the shadow of their D1 win. That is 6.

I will give you 7 for the win at HPU, the 4th game of an 11-day road trip to California and on the way back from Sul Ross St.

The highest ranking that I have seen for a Men's ASC team is McMurry in 2000 at #4 in week #13 (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/00/week13.htm). And those Top 4 were in the Calvin Sectional that year. :-\

I would take it easy. McMurry fan Finnman thought the 2000 and 2001 versions of the Choctaws were better. I recommend that you lie low until you have gotten thru the Great Lakes, where you have never won a post-season game before! I would love for the Chocs to go to the Final Four. We need the props for the ASC. ;)

Ralph,
I would agree with the six good wins but I think that is a good thing, few teams have that many right now. I share the same opinion of Johns Hopkins being similiar to McMurry after seeing them but they are still a Top 25 team right now. I have seen more quality teams in the league this year than ever with 5 or 6 capable of winning the ASC tournament.

I saw Finnman's post on the ASC board but I just don't agree with him. I watched both teams and think this is the best team we have ever had but the players still have to prove it on the court. I am thinking way to far ahead here but I hope we don't have to go to a GL sectional, it would be nice to host one. But if we do win a GL game we would be the first ASC team to do so and would certainly raise the conference a notch or two. I hope our guys can make it happen.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 21, 2007, 08:58:24 PM

Quote from: balls a dunkin on January 21, 2007, 08:27:39 PM
...
Or what, the McMurry D3 Mafia gonna take a karma point from me! :o :o

No, balls, I won't smite your karma for that. I am glad to present my perspective on how good we are.

I want us (the ASC) to be credible. I would love for MC to go undefeated until McMurry beats them in the Tourney Finals. GiveMC a Pool C. Send McMurry west. Let the 23-1 South Region Chocs host a first round series. That would be my hopes. ;)

In the NCAA's, I bleed ASC!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hasanova on January 22, 2007, 04:27:49 PM

Guilford (13-2, 7-2 ODAC) went 2-1 this week since debuting at #20 in the rankings. Wednesday night's 72-68 loss was to a very hot Roanoke team on the road and then the Quakers rebounded with weekend wins over Bridgewater (VA) and Eastern Mennonite. How do you think the January 17 loss will affect Guilford's spot in the Top 25?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 22, 2007, 04:56:17 PM

The loss to Roanoke will unquestionably hurt the Quakers.

There are very few situations where a loss does not impact Top 25 rankings (loss to a higher ranked team, loss on the road in the WIAC) and this isn't any of those situations. Roanoke had been playing better before they lost to Hampden-Sydney, but is still just 8-8 and 4-5 in the ODAC.

The other thing that hurts Guilford is that one of their best wins (Averett) has lost 5 of 7. The fact that it took the Quakers so long to get into the Top 25 despite the red hot start suggests voters were in a "wait and see" mode with Guilford. If that was the case, the voters may not have much patience for losing a game to a .500 conference opponent.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 22, 2007, 04:59:10 PM

My opinion isn't very good on this sort of thing, but it seems to me that Guilford's fate is up in the air. A loss so near the bottom of the rankings can be trouble for a team, but at the same time, voters often take into account these games. It will all depend on who voted for Guilford and how well the other teams below them have performed in the eyes of the voters. There are some teams that were not yet on the poll, but getting votes who did very well this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 22, 2007, 06:45:58 PM

It may have been done before, but I am just wondering is too much to ask to get links for teams that recieved votes for the top 25, not just the ones in the top 25. Just curious. I would just find it easier to use the site if I could easily access teams that are in the "26th" spot and find out why. Instead of clicking a region then clicking a team. It would be easier for a user. Its probably not easier on the d3hoops side.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hasanova on January 22, 2007, 09:11:28 PM

gordonmann and Hoops Fan - thanks for your input. I understand your logic and had thought along the same lines myself. We'll see, but I personally hope (and believe) the Quakers should still be in the Top 25 after today's poll. Peace

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 22, 2007, 09:16:31 PM

Quote from: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 22, 2007, 06:45:58 PM
It may have been done before, but I am just wondering is too much to ask to get links for teams that recieved votes for the top 25, not just the ones in the top 25. Just curious. I would just find it easier to use the site if I could easily access teams that are in the "26th" spot and find out why. Instead of clicking a region then clicking a team. It would be easier for a user. Its probably not easier on the d3hoops side.

Wheaton is incidentally 26th cause we are awesome. We might end up being higher this week though, so you can find out why then. ;) :D :-X

On a more serious note, I would really like that too... I have that thought all the time. But there's all sorts of functionality that I'd like to see added into the schedules that I would use and probably no one else would... because I am really, really weird. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 22, 2007, 09:46:40 PM

DHF, throw me some ideas via e-mail. Our new partnership may give us a little more flexibility here.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sludge on January 22, 2007, 10:26:31 PM

Quote from: hasanova on January 22, 2007, 09:11:28 PM
gordonmann and Hoops Fan - thanks for your input. I understand your logic and had thought along the same lines myself. We'll see, but I personally hope (and believe) the Quakers should still be in the Top 25 after today's poll. Peace

I'm with you, has, but I figure even if they go out, they can get back.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Marty Peretz on January 23, 2007, 12:19:39 AM

Why hasn't the poll come out yet?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 23, 2007, 12:20:07 AM

It requires 25 votes. One voter holds it up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 23, 2007, 09:21:13 AM

Top 25 Scores and Schedule, January 22-28 (UPDATED with Wednesday scores as I get them)

#   1   UW-Stevens Point (16-2) lost to#8 UW-Oskosh 72-55
#   2   Amherst (18-0) def. So. Vermont 111-67, plays at Colby Fri., and plays at Bowdoin Sat.
#   3   Wooster (16-2) def. Kenyon 89-54 and plays at Earlham Sat.
#   4   Virginia Wesleyan (15-2) def. Hampden-Sydney 75-49, plays at Emory & Henry Sat., and plays at #25 Guilford Sun.
#   5   Mississippi College (15-1) hosts LeTorneau Thu. and hosts East Texas Baptist Sat.
#   6   St. Thomas (15-2) won at St. Olaf 78-53, def. Hamline 90-71, and plays at Macalester Sat.
#   7   Whitworth (16-1) plays at Pacific Fri. and plays at Lewis & Clark Sat.
#   8   UW-Oshkosh (16-3) won at #1 UW-Stevens Point 72-55 and hosts UW-River Falls Sat.
#   9   Hope (15-2) def. Tri-State 101-57 and hosts Kalamazoo Sat.
#   10   Washington U. (14-1) hosts Brandeis Fri. and hosts #24 NYU Sun.
#   11   Elmhurst (15-2) def. North Central Wed. and plays at #12 Augustana Sat.
#   12   Augustana (15-3) def. Illinois Wesleyan 64-62 and hosts #11 Elmhurst Sat.
#   13   Puget Sound (14-2) plays at Willamette Fri. and plays at George Fox Sat.
#   14   Ohio Northern (14-4) def. Heidelberg 83-80 and plays at Baldwin-Wallace Sat.
#   15   Occidental (11-3) hosts Redlands Wed. and plays at La Verne Sat.
#   16   Wittenberg (15-3) won at Wabash 64-51 and hosts Denison Sat.
#   17   Worcester Polytech (15-1) def. Coast Guard 76-68 and plays at Wheaton (Mass.) Sat.
#   18   Aurora (16-1) def. Lakeland 94-76 and hosts Benedictine Sat.
#   19   Bates (15-2) def. Emmanuel 75-57, plays at Wesleyan Fri., and plays at Conn. College Sat.
#   20   Carthage (12-5) won at North Park 64-62 and hosts Illinois Wesleyan Sat.
#   21   Wheaton (Ill.) (12-5) won at Millikin 71-57 and plays at North Central Sat.
#   22   Johns Hopkins (12-2) def. Gettysburg 83-67 and plays at Washington Coll. Sat.
#   23   Keene St. (15-2) won at Plymouth St. 58-57, plays at Mitchell Thu., and plays at Mass.-Dartmouth Sat.
#   24   NYU (14-2) plays at Chicago Fri. and plays at #10 Washington U. Sat.
#   25   Guilford (13-2) hosts Randolph-Macon Sat. and hosts #4 Virginia Wesleyan Sun.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 23, 2007, 11:09:31 PM

PrideSportBBallGuy Rankings through Monday's games

1   Amherst
2   UW-Stevens Point
3   Wooster
4   Whitworth
5   Virginia Wesleyan
6   Mississippi College
7   Scranton
8   Hope
9   Maryville(TN)
10   Washington U.
11   Aurora
12   Lake Erie
13   UW-Oshkosh
14   DePauw
15   Worchester Polytech
16   Trinity(Conn)
17   Utica
18   St. Thomas
19   Keene St
20   Messiah
21   NYU
22   John Hopkins
23   *Lincoln(7/23)
24   Puget Sound
25   Elmhurst

Dropped out: # 11 Middlebury #17 William Patterson, #24 Rhode Island College, #25 Centre

*Ranking excludes the 201-78 game. As it was determined by posters as an outlier.

Thanks again to formerban. Utica does not drop out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: formerbant10 on January 23, 2007, 11:36:45 PM

Not to be a jerk, but you have Utica @ #17....not dropping out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 23, 2007, 11:40:19 PM

formerban-

A mistake on my part. Thanks for the correction. Not dropping out. I will take care of it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 23, 2007, 11:49:44 PM

Quote1 Amherst
2 UW-Stevens Point
3 Wooster
4 Whitworth
5 Virginia Wesleyan
6 Mississippi College
7 Scranton**
8 Hope
9 Maryville(TN)**
10 Washington U.
11 Aurora
12 Lake Erie**
13 UW-Oshkosh
14 DePauw
15 Worchester Polytech
16 Trinity(Conn)
17 Utica**
18 St. Thomas
19 Keene St
20 Messiah**
21 NYU
22 John Hopkins
23 *Lincoln(7/23)
24 Puget Sound
25 Elmhurst

I see those 5 teams as earning their rankings in isolation. We should see some "sanity" as you get more games, and a few losses by these teams that tie your model into the "real" world occur.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 23, 2007, 11:54:29 PM

Ralph-

I have said somewhere, I think on the USASouth Board, more games will put it into "real" world.

Last week I had 15 of 25 (d3hoops top 25)

This week I have 17 of 25.

Another 4 of d3hoops top 25 are within 10 of getting into the my top 25 ranking.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 24, 2007, 09:04:04 PM

Final: #3 Wooster 89 Kenyon 54

Wooster was led tonight by James Cooper with 20 points, Tom Port with 15 points, Brandon Johnson with 14 points and Devin Fulk with 10 points. The Scots made 14 three pointers tonight.

Wooster is now 16-2, 9-0 NCAC Next game at Earlham on Saturday.

GO SCOTS!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: OshDude on January 24, 2007, 09:09:24 PM

No. 1 team is on the ropes. Oshkosh is up on Stevens Point by 16 with 12:50 left...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Just Bill on January 24, 2007, 09:38:01 PM

Point is going to fall hard. They trail Oshkosh 69-49 with 1 minute to play. Can't wait for the rubber game in the WIAC Tournament!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hoopstar on January 24, 2007, 10:07:32 PM

If Miss. College hadnt lost to Wesley college the first game of the year what would they be ranked now?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 24, 2007, 10:27:40 PM

Top 25 Scores and Schedule, January 22-28 (UPDATED with one Thursday score)

#   1   UW-Stevens Point (16-2) lost to#8 UW-Oskosh 72-55
#   2   Amherst (18-0) def. So. Vermont 111-67, plays at Colby Fri., and plays at Bowdoin Sat.
#   3   Wooster (16-2) def. Kenyon 89-54 and plays at Earlham Sat.
#   4   Virginia Wesleyan (15-2) def. Hampden-Sydney 75-49, plays at Emory & Henry Sat., and plays at #25 Guilford Sun.
#   5   Mississippi College (15-1) hosts LeTorneau Thu. and hosts East Texas Baptist Sat.
#   6   St. Thomas (15-2) won at St. Olaf 78-53, def. Hamline 90-71, and plays at Macalester Sat.
#   7   Whitworth (16-1) plays at Pacific Fri. and plays at Lewis & Clark Sat.
#   8   UW-Oshkosh (16-3) won at #1 UW-Stevens Point 72-55 and hosts UW-River Falls Sat.
#   9   Hope (15-2) def. Tri-State 101-57 and hosts Kalamazoo Sat.
#   10   Washington U. (14-1) hosts Brandeis Fri. and hosts #24 NYU Sun.
#   11   Elmhurst (15-2) def. North Central 98-84 and plays at #12 Augustana Sat.
#   12   Augustana (15-3) def. Illinois Wesleyan 64-62 and hosts #11 Elmhurst Sat.
#   13   Puget Sound (14-2) plays at Willamette Fri. and plays at George Fox Sat.
#   14   Ohio Northern (14-4) def. Heidelberg 83-80 and plays at Baldwin-Wallace Sat.
#   15   Occidental (11-4) lost to Redlands 109-106 and plays at La Verne Sat.
#   16   Wittenberg (15-3) won at Wabash 64-51 and hosts Denison Sat.
#   17   Worcester Polytech (15-1) def. Coast Guard 76-68 and plays at Wheaton (Mass.) Sat.
#   18   Aurora (16-1) def. Lakeland 94-76 and hosts Benedictine Sat.
#   19   Bates (15-2) def. Emmanuel 75-57, plays at Wesleyan Fri., and plays at Conn. College Sat.
#   20   Carthage (12-5) won at North Park 64-62 and hosts Illinois Wesleyan Sat.
#   21   Wheaton (Ill.) (12-5) won at Millikin 71-57 and plays at North Central Sat.
#   22   Johns Hopkins (12-2) def. Gettysburg 83-67 and plays at Washington Coll. Sat.
#   23   Keene St. (16-2) won at Plymouth St. 58-57, won at Mitchell 79-69, and plays at Mass.-Dartmouth Sat.
#   24   NYU (14-2) plays at Chicago Fri. and plays at #10 Washington U. Sat.
#   25   Guilford (13-2) hosts Randolph-Macon Sat. and hosts #4 Virginia Wesleyan Sun.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 24, 2007, 11:09:16 PM

At the Oxy game and Redlands is up on oxy by 8 with 4 mins left in the half. Oxy looks a little tired already... this could get ugly.

www.tigersports.com (i believe) has the call. The poster with that name should have his website linked in his profile.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 24, 2007, 11:10:23 PM

Quote from: diehardfan on January 24, 2007, 11:09:16 PM
www.tigersports.com (i believe) has the call. The poster with that name should have his website linked in his profile.

Yes, I can confirm that tigersports.com is on the air. Maybe you can be his halftime guest! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 24, 2007, 11:13:49 PM

www.oxybroadcast.com

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 24, 2007, 11:16:34 PM

Thanks.... it's 44 Oxy, 51 Redlands at the half.... this is a great game!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 24, 2007, 11:17:37 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 24, 2007, 11:13:49 PM
www.oxybroadcast.com

Oops. :-[ I get confused, chasing so many games around the web. Oxybroadcast is the site, tigersports is the poster.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 25, 2007, 08:45:09 AM

Redlands has been seeing better results than usual this year, but they hadn't really played anyone highly regarded yet. I wonder what this will do for them?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on January 25, 2007, 10:59:12 AM

Who are the early favorites for #1?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 25, 2007, 11:08:35 AM

Quote from: fpc85 on January 25, 2007, 10:59:12 AM
Who are the early favorites for #1?

Amherst and Wooster, most likely. I think Amherst will get it on the basis that they're undefeated and playing well in a stretch where they're missing/missed two starters.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 25, 2007, 11:12:48 AM

Amherst (in Maine), Wooster (at Earlham without their starting center), and #4 VWC (at Guilford) all have non-trivial weekends. It wouldn't shock me to see Mississippi College atop the poll next Tuesday. But #1 is Amherst's to lose.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Downtown on January 25, 2007, 11:17:31 AM

What do you guys think about having two WIAC teams in the top 5?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 25, 2007, 11:40:22 AM

Quote from: Mr. Downtown on January 25, 2007, 11:17:31 AM
What do you guys think about having two WIAC teams in the top 5?

Not out of the question, but I'm still suspect at least for this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 25, 2007, 06:46:47 PM

Quote from: Mr. Downtown on January 25, 2007, 11:17:31 AM
What do you guys think about having two WIAC teams in the top 5?

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 25, 2007, 11:40:22 AM
Not out of the question, but I'm still suspect at least for this week.

Oshkosh has won 14 of the last 15 games. They have three losses, one to "going to be previously #1" Stevens Point (now 16-2) at the beginning of the year (a 13-pt loss at home), a 3-pt loss to Elmhurst (now 15-2), so far the class of the CCIW, and a one point loss at La Crosse (12-6, just dropped out of the top 25). And they just beat Point in Quandt by 17. Not bad.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 25, 2007, 07:05:22 PM

Just for clarification, I meant that I didn't think they'd be able to move up so far in just one week. I think it would be fine, but unless there are more losses, I don't see them jumping up there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 25, 2007, 07:42:52 PM

#23 Keene St. is getting all they can handle from the Mitchell Pequots, with Mitchell (7-8) leading by nine late in the first half. Listen in to Keene's coverage on SportsJuice; you can access the broadcast from the Scoreboard (http://www.d3hoops.com/schedule.php?date=2007-01-25&team=mens).

UPDATE: Keene St. was leading by 5 fairly late in the 2nd (like, 5:00 left or so) when my connection died. >:(

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 25, 2007, 09:26:26 PM

With 2:25 remaining in the 1st, Mississippi College is leading LeTourneau University 40-18, and yet the two highest scorers in the game both play for LeTourneau! Just three Yellow Jackets have scored, including 9 from Evers and 8 from D. Smith, but 9 Choctaws have already scored, led by a trio with 7 apiece. :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 25, 2007, 09:29:42 PM

Keene St. survived Mitchell, 79-69.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 25, 2007, 10:45:12 PM

Top 25 Scores and Schedule, January 22-28 (UPDATED with Saturday afternoon scores)

#   1   UW-Stevens Point (16-2) lost to#8 UW-Oskosh 72-55
#   2   Amherst (20-0) def. So. Vermont 111-67, won at Colby 69-58, and won at Bowdoin 73-55
#   3   Wooster (17-2) def. Kenyon 89-54 and won at Earlham 64-51
#   4   Virginia Wesleyan (15-3) def. Hampden-Sydney 75-49, lost at Emory & Henry 124-101, and plays at #25 Guilford Sun.
#   5   Mississippi College (17-1) def. LeTorneau 72-51 and def. East Texas Baptist 66-46
#   6   St. Thomas (16-2) won at St. Olaf 78-53, def. Hamline 90-71, and won at Macalester 87-55
#   7   Whitworth (17-1) won at Pacific 77-69 and plays at Lewis & Clark Sat.
#   8   UW-Oshkosh (17-3) won at #1 UW-Stevens Point 72-55 and def. UW-River Falls 90-67
#   9   Hope (15-2) def. Tri-State 101-57 and hosts Kalamazoo Sat.
#   10   Washington U. (15-1) def. Brandeis 68-64 and hosts #24 NYU Sun.
#   11   Elmhurst (15-2) def. North Central 98-84 and plays at #12 Augustana Sat.
#   12   Augustana (15-3) def. Illinois Wesleyan 64-62 and hosts #11 Elmhurst Sat.
#   13   Puget Sound (14-3) lost at Willamette 119-108 and plays at George Fox Sat.
#   14   Ohio Northern (15-4) def. Heidelberg 83-80 and won at Baldwin-Wallace 83-74
#   15   Occidental (11-4) lost to Redlands 109-106 and plays at La Verne Sat.
#   16   Wittenberg (16-3) won at Wabash 64-51 and def. Denison 87-65
#   17   Worcester Polytech (16-1) def. Coast Guard 76-68 and won at Wheaton (Mass.) 67-64
#   18   Aurora (17-1) def. Lakeland 94-76 and def. Benedictine 83-79
#   19   Bates (16-3) def. Emmanuel 75-57, won at Wesleyan 59-56 (OT), and lost at Conn. College 82-65
#   20   Carthage (12-5) won at North Park 64-62 and hosts Illinois Wesleyan Sat.
#   21   Wheaton (Ill.) (12-5) won at Millikin 71-57 and plays at North Central Sat.
#   22   Johns Hopkins (13-2) def. Gettysburg 83-67 and won at Washington Coll. 72-54
#   23   Keene St. (16-3) won at Plymouth St. 58-57, won at Mitchell 79-69, and lost at Mass.-Dartmouth 97-74
#   24   NYU (14-3) lost at Chicago 62-60 and plays at #10 Washington U. Sat.
#   25   Guilford (14-2) def. Randolph-Macon 76-65 and hosts #4 Virginia Wesleyan Sun.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 27, 2007, 10:12:23 AM

Willamette shot a ridiculous 69.8% (35-53) in the win over UPS.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on January 27, 2007, 04:04:58 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 25, 2007, 11:12:48 AM
Amherst (in Maine), Wooster (at Earlham without their starting center), and #4 VWC (at Guilford) all have non-trivial weekends. It wouldn't shock me to see Mississippi College atop the poll next Tuesday. But #1 is Amherst's to lose.

Well, Wooster is currently down 2 at the half in Richmond and VA Wes was just shocked by Emory & Henry 124-101. So maybe the Marlins were guilty of looking a little past E&H towards their game with Guilford tomorrow.

Also, #1 Amherst passed it's first Maine test downing Bowdoin 73-55.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 27, 2007, 04:15:32 PM

Quote from: ScotsFan on January 27, 2007, 04:04:58 PM
Also, #1 Amherst passed it's first Maine test downing Bowdoin 73-55.

Actually, that was the second Maine test; they also passed the first, beating Colby Friday, and Amherst figures to be the new #1 come Tuesday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2007, 04:21:48 PM

I am sure Amherst will be the #1 on Tuesday... but will it be unanimous?

They are the only team remaining without a loss on the season... but Mississippi Colelge is playing very good basketball and Wooster is always good.

Who else could get #1 votes? VWU killed thier chances... and it would be tough to go with Whitowrth since they did lose to Puget Sound... but that is their only loss.

Good luck voters! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 27, 2007, 04:33:25 PM

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on January 27, 2007, 04:21:48 PM
I am sure Amherst will be the #1 on Tuesday... but will it be unanimous?

They are the only team remaining without a loss on the season... but Mississippi Colelge is playing very good basketball and Wooster is always good.

Who else could get #1 votes? VWU killed thier chances... and it would be tough to go with Whitworth since they did lose to Puget Sound... but that is their only loss.

Good luck voters! :)

Dave, Amherst's situation is that they may have a first place ranking that is 25 votes wide and one inch deep.

I think that the voters will concede the Lord Jeffs #1, because they have done everything that their schedule has demanded. Of course, we are looking to their emerging from the Sectionals to give the final opinion. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 27, 2007, 04:42:07 PM

Final: #3 Wooster 64 Earlham 51

Wooster played solid defense in this game to pick up a nice road win. :)
Wooster was led in scoring by Devin Fulk with 16 points, Tom Port with 15 points (11 boards) and Evan Will added 10 points.

Wooster is now 17-2, 10-0 NCAC Next game at home vs Allegheny on 1/31

GO SCOTS!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2007, 04:42:18 PM

Ralph - completely agree. Lord Jeff's deserve their votes... but really... who else does.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 27, 2007, 04:54:30 PM

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on January 27, 2007, 04:42:18 PM
Ralph - completely agree. Lord Jeff's deserve their votes... but really... who else does.

Dave, the breadth of the quality of this field is outstanding. Becasue we don't have a stellar team that is running away with this season, we may not recognize how balanced D3 is this season.

The tourney should be wide open with several mid-seeds progressing deep into the tourney.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 27, 2007, 05:36:05 PM

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on January 27, 2007, 04:42:18 PM
Ralph - completely agree. Lord Jeff's deserve their votes... but really... who else does.

How about Point? They've lost two games, yes, one to a D-2 team, the other to one of the hotter teams in the country, top 10 foe UW Oshkosh. I really don't think that Point should automatically lose all of their credibility due to one game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 27, 2007, 05:39:44 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 27, 2007, 05:36:05 PM
Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on January 27, 2007, 04:42:18 PM
Ralph - completely agree. Lord Jeff's deserve their votes... but really... who else does.

How about Point? They've lost two games, yes, one to a D-2 team, the other to one of the hotter teams in the country, top 10 foe UW Oshkosh. I really don't think that Point should automatically lose all of their credibility due to one game.

I am not saying that UW-SP will lose crediblity. The narrow aspect of this debate is "first place" votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 27, 2007, 06:06:23 PM

I was talking about credibility as a team deserving of #1 votes ;)

#8 Oshkosh dispenses with River Falls 90-67

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FisherDynasty on January 27, 2007, 06:57:36 PM

Don't ask me how Amherst wasn't already ranked #1 if they don't get the 1 spot this week i'll that would be ludacris.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 27, 2007, 07:04:43 PM

Quote from: FisherDynasty on January 27, 2007, 06:57:36 PM
Don't ask me how Amherst wasn't already ranked #1 if they don't get the 1 spot this week i'll that would be ludacris.

:D :D :D :D :D :D

Amherst is the Lord Jeffs. Ludacris (aka, Christopher Brian Bridges) is a rapper!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2007, 07:17:47 PM

Quote from: FisherDynasty on January 27, 2007, 06:57:36 PM
Don't ask me how Amherst wasn't already ranked #1 if they don't get the 1 spot this week i'll that would be ludacris.

Yeah, because that win against Bates looks better every day. Brandeis too. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on January 27, 2007, 07:32:24 PM

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on January 27, 2007, 04:42:18 PM
Ralph - completely agree. Lord Jeff's deserve their votes... but really... who else does.

Ahh #1 by default.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on January 27, 2007, 07:49:30 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2007, 07:17:47 PM
Quote from: FisherDynasty on January 27, 2007, 06:57:36 PM
Don't ask me how Amherst wasn't already ranked #1 if they don't get the 1 spot this week i'll that would be ludacris.

Yeah, because that win against Bates looks better every day. Brandeis too. :)

Good one. Just win baby :). That's all they can do. AC has a tough one on Tuesday....hopefully they can beat them and hear more about who they play. Next time don't rank them so high to begin with...that way you can feel better about the polls. You know the NE is weak and Amherst is just gaming the system. How dare they?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on January 27, 2007, 07:54:51 PM

oops... amhert's opponent on tuesday is Rhode Island College. Nice test but definitely not any of the 5 teams that might leapfrog the Jeffs this week. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 27, 2007, 08:02:08 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 27, 2007, 07:04:43 PM
Quote from: FisherDynasty on January 27, 2007, 06:57:36 PM
Don't ask me how Amherst wasn't already ranked #1 if they don't get the 1 spot this week i'll that would be ludacris.

:D :D :D :D :D :D

Amherst is the Lord Jeffs. Ludacris (aka, Christopher Brian Bridges) is a rapper!

And to say otherwise would be ludicrous. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 27, 2007, 08:31:41 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 27, 2007, 07:04:43 PM
Quote from: FisherDynasty on January 27, 2007, 06:57:36 PM
Don't ask me how Amherst wasn't already ranked #1 if they don't get the 1 spot this week i'll that would be ludacris.

:D :D :D :D :D :D

Amherst is the Lord Jeffs. Ludacris (aka, Christopher Brian Bridges) is a rapper!

I'm really impressed Ralph knew this. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 27, 2007, 08:58:22 PM

#4 Virginia Wesleyan had a bad loss this afternoon as they got beat at Emory & Henry by a 124-101 score.

The Wasps are obviously an up tempo system team but the score margin is still amazing when you consider that Va. Wesleyan is the defending national champ

Two key stats from the boxscore seem to explain the outcome of this game:

Emory & Henry shot 20 of 40 on three pointers while Va. Wes was 1 of 8
Va. Wes had 26 turnovers in this game; can't win with that many!

...and it doesn't get any easier for Va. Wesleyan as they play AT #25 Guilford tomorrow afternoon.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 27, 2007, 09:11:43 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on January 27, 2007, 08:58:22 PM
#4 Virginia Wesleyan had a bad loss this afternoon as they got beat at Emory & Henry by a 124-101 score.

The Wasps are obviously an up tempo system team but the score margin is still amazing when you consider that Va. Wesleyan is the defending national champ

Two key stats from the boxscore seem to explain the outcome of this game:

Emory & Henry shot 20 of 40 on three pointers while Va. Wes was 1 of 8
Va. Wes had 26 turnovers in this game; can't win with that many!

...and it doesn't get any easier for Va. Wesleyan as they play AT #25 Guilford tomorrow afternoon.

I believe but am not certain Emory and Henry plays "system" ball

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 27, 2007, 09:36:01 PM

Top 25 Scores and Schedule, January 22-28 (UPDATED with Saturday scores)

#   1   UW-Stevens Point (16-2) lost to#8 UW-Oskosh 72-55
#   2   Amherst (20-0) def. So. Vermont 111-67, won at Colby 69-58, and won at Bowdoin 73-55
#   3   Wooster (17-2) def. Kenyon 89-54 and won at Earlham 64-51
#   4   Virginia Wesleyan (15-3) def. Hampden-Sydney 75-49, lost at Emory & Henry 124-101, and plays at #25 Guilford Sun.
#   5   Mississippi College (17-1) def. LeTorneau 72-51 and def. East Texas Baptist 66-46
#   6   St. Thomas (16-2) won at St. Olaf 78-53, def. Hamline 90-71, and won at Macalester 87-55
#   7   Whitworth (17-2) won at Pacific 77-69 and lost at Lewis & Clark 66-60
#   8   UW-Oshkosh (17-3) won at #1 UW-Stevens Point 72-55 and def. UW-River Falls 90-67
#   9   Hope (16-2) def. Tri-State 101-57 and def. Kalamazoo 86-48
#   10   Washington U. (15-1) def. Brandeis 68-64 and hosts #24 NYU Sun.
#   11   Elmhurst (15-3) def. North Central 98-84 and lost at #12 Augustana 86-74
#   12   Augustana (16-3) def. Illinois Wesleyan 64-62 and def. #11 Elmhurst 86-74
#   13   Puget Sound (14-4) lost at Willamette 119-108 and lost at George Fox 75-63
#   14   Ohio Northern (15-4) def. Heidelberg 83-80 and won at Baldwin-Wallace 83-74
#   15   Occidental (12-4) lost to Redlands 109-106 and won at La Verne 70-49
#   16   Wittenberg (16-3) won at Wabash 64-51 and def. Denison 87-65
#   17   Worcester Polytech (16-1) def. Coast Guard 76-68 and won at Wheaton (Mass.) 67-64
#   18   Aurora (17-1) def. Lakeland 94-76 and def. Benedictine 83-79
#   19   Bates (16-3) def. Emmanuel 75-57, won at Wesleyan 59-56 (OT), and lost at Conn. College 82-65
#   20   Carthage (13-5) won at North Park 64-62 and def. Illinois Wesleyan 94-83
#   21   Wheaton (Ill.) (12-6) won at Millikin 71-57 and lost at North Central 79-68
#   22   Johns Hopkins (13-2) def. Gettysburg 83-67 and won at Washington Coll. 72-54
#   23   Keene St. (16-3) won at Plymouth St. 58-57, won at Mitchell 79-69, and lost at Mass.-Dartmouth 97-74
#   24   NYU (14-3) lost at Chicago 62-60 and plays at #10 Washington U. Sun.
#   25   Guilford (14-2) def. Randolph-Macon 76-65 and hosts #4 Virginia Wesleyan Sun.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on January 27, 2007, 10:21:25 PM

Mississippi College won their 17th straight today 66-46 over ETBU and led 54-27 with eight minutes remaining. Timothy Broomfield finishes with 7 points, 10 boards and 8 blocks. 6'8" center Ryan Hudson filled in for injured Tyler Winford with 9 points and 8 rebounds. Winford is out a couple of weeks with a knee sprain.

MC is allowing just 48.6 points in their last eight games.

This is kind of off topic but will Depauw receive any votes in the Top 25 this week? They are 15-1 in region play and 16-3 overall. I plan on watching them tomorrow at Millsaps.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 27, 2007, 10:23:43 PM

Quote from: Chris Brooks on January 27, 2007, 10:21:25 PM
Mississippi College won their 17th straight today 66-46 over ETBU and led 54-27 midway through second half. Timothy Broomfield finishes with 7 points, 10 boards and 8 blocks. 6'8" center Ryan Hudson filled in for injured Tyler Winford with 9 points and 8 rebounds. Winford is out a couple of weeks with a knee sprain.

MC is allowing just 48.6 points in their last eight games.

This is kind of off topic but will Depauw receive any votes in the Top 25 this week? They are 15-1 in region play and 16-3 overall. I plan on watching them tomorrow at Millsaps.

Chris, please bring us a report on DePauw!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2007, 10:30:42 AM

Quote from: sac on January 27, 2007, 09:11:43 PM
Quote from: wooscotsfan on January 27, 2007, 08:58:22 PM
#4 Virginia Wesleyan had a bad loss this afternoon as they got beat at Emory & Henry by a 124-101 score.

The Wasps are obviously an up tempo system team but the score margin is still amazing when you consider that Va. Wesleyan is the defending national champ

Two key stats from the boxscore seem to explain the outcome of this game:

Emory & Henry shot 20 of 40 on three pointers while Va. Wes was 1 of 8
Va. Wes had 26 turnovers in this game; can't win with that many!

...and it doesn't get any easier for Va. Wesleyan as they play AT #25 Guilford tomorrow afternoon.

I believe but am not certain Emory and Henry plays "system" ball

From what I have been told... they are playing a version of "system" ball. That has allowed them to get some eyebrow raising wins like over VA Wesleyan... but also contributed to a few tough losses. I would be interested to see how they do in the rest of the ODAC and in the ODAC tournament... after all they are #3 in the conference right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 28, 2007, 11:50:12 AM

I don't believe it's "a version" -- it's just plain System there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2007, 12:58:15 PM

The only reason I say "version" is because every coach takes the basis of the "system" and then tweaks it to how they want to run it. At least, that is what coaches are telling me. Muhlenberg's women took the system and made it work for them. Redlands runs slightly different than Grinnel... etc. I don't think every team runs the system exactly the same... that's all.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 28, 2007, 02:53:17 PM

Well, in that case every school runs a version of something. But it kinda sounds like you were meaning to put E&H into a class like Puget Sound, which runs and guns but is not System.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 28, 2007, 03:20:10 PM

Top 25 Scores and Schedule, January 22-28 (FINAL)

#   1   UW-Stevens Point (16-2) lost to #8 UW-Oskosh 72-55
#   2   Amherst (20-0) def. So. Vermont 111-67, won at Colby 69-58, and won at Bowdoin 73-55
#   3   Wooster (17-2) def. Kenyon 89-54 and won at Earlham 64-51
#   4   Virginia Wesleyan (16-3) def. Hampden-Sydney 75-49, lost at Emory & Henry 124-101, and won at #25 Guilford 72-69
#   5   Mississippi College (17-1) def. LeTorneau 72-51 and def. East Texas Baptist 66-46
#   6   St. Thomas (17-2) won at St. Olaf 78-53, def. Hamline 90-71, and won at Macalester 87-55
#   7   Whitworth (17-2) won at Pacific 77-69 and lost at Lewis & Clark 66-60
#   8   UW-Oshkosh (17-3) won at #1 UW-Stevens Point 72-55 and def. UW-River Falls 90-67
#   9   Hope (16-2) def. Tri-State 101-57 and def. Kalamazoo 86-48
#   10   Washington U. (16-1) def. Brandeis 68-64 and def. #24 NYU 79-78 (OT)
#   11   Elmhurst (15-3) def. North Central 98-84 and lost at #12 Augustana 86-74
#   12   Augustana (16-3) def. Illinois Wesleyan 64-62 and def. #11 Elmhurst 86-74
#   13   Puget Sound (14-4) lost at Willamette 119-108 and lost at George Fox 75-63
#   14   Ohio Northern (15-4) def. Heidelberg 83-80 and won at Baldwin-Wallace 83-74
#   15   Occidental (12-4) lost to Redlands 109-106 and won at La Verne 70-49
#   16   Wittenberg (16-3) won at Wabash 64-51 and def. Denison 87-65
#   17   Worcester Polytech (16-1) def. Coast Guard 76-68 and won at Wheaton (Mass.) 67-64
#   18   Aurora (17-1) def. Lakeland 94-76 and def. Benedictine 83-79
#   19   Bates (16-3) def. Emmanuel 75-57, won at Wesleyan 59-56 (OT), and lost at Conn. College 82-65
#   20   Carthage (13-5) won at North Park 64-62 and def. Illinois Wesleyan 94-83
#   21   Wheaton (Ill.) (12-6) won at Millikin 71-57 and lost at North Central 79-68
#   22   Johns Hopkins (17-2) def. Gettysburg 83-67 and won at Washington Coll. 72-54
#   23   Keene St. (16-3) won at Plymouth St. 58-57, won at Mitchell 79-69, and lost at Mass.-Dartmouth 97-74
#   24   NYU (14-4) lost at Chicago 62-60 and lost at #10 Washington U. 79-78 (OT)
#   25   Guilford (14-3) def. Randolph-Macon 76-65 and lost to #4 Virginia Wesleyan 72-69

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: keith45 on January 29, 2007, 09:37:37 AM

Can anyone provide insight as to why Aurora is still ranked outside of the top 15? They have lost 1 game (a tough, in conference road loss), they have an all american as well as one of the regions best PG's (D. Leonard), 3 solid shooters and a style that is hard to guard.
Is it because of the perceived weakness of the new conference (NAC). This team could win out, and host at home..am I missing something?
Kep an eye on this team, as they return everyone but Leonard next year, and have a few freshman on the bench that are looking to shine...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 29, 2007, 09:43:01 AM

Got a similar question via e-mail about a week and a half ago. Here was my response:

QuoteSubject: D3 Strength Assessments
Notes: Just an observation. With the CCIW struggling through much carnage, it appears this conference has always been given credence and praise as the toughest. Looking at the NAC though, it hasn't been given the same type of respect as the CCIW, but with teams like Aurora University, granted they are on the Top 25 but, maybe there should be a better assessment as to the strength of this conference.

Well, first of all, it's a brand-new conference, but secondly, look at the "success" rate in the NCAA Tournament of teams in the NATHC. (The NAC is the North Atlantic Conference. They beat you guys to the acronym by several years.)

The league is 27-40 in non-conference play. The CCIW went 66-22.

These two conference overlap geographically quite a bit. There are many common opponents. I think the league has been assessed fairly.

Pat Coleman
D3hoops.com

... Keith, if you can show me the win that screams that Aurora should be in the Top 15, I'd be quite grateful. Who did they beat that was so good?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 29, 2007, 11:33:53 AM

Only because Bob Quillman and I talked about Aurora last night on Hoopsville, I thought I would add this:

- They do have a very impressive win over North Central from earlier this year (85-69). And while North Central is certainly not at the top of the CCIW, they are still in the battle for fourth in the conference and did just beat Wheaton this past weekend. That would probably be Aurora's biggest win this season.

- Unfortunetly, Aurora's record is full of easy wins over weaker conference opponents and Aurora's one loss is to Edgewood... second in the NATHC and not much of a record to stand on either.

Aurora may be a pretty good team... but their schedule doesn't scream respect and again, North Central is their biggest win so far.

However, if they win out... it might be very hard for the NCAA not to give Aurora a rather high seed/Sectional host.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: keith45 on January 29, 2007, 12:58:48 PM

16 point win at then 14th ranked North Central and a 29 point win versus Loras who was just featured on the site. That was North Central's worst home loss of the year, they have beaten Wheaton there and only loss to Augie by one.

I'm surprised that with 1 loss, they have stayed at the 20-18 range....They beat the teams they played, which is all you can ask..
The Edgewood game was a bad loss, but Edgewood game out on fire and got a small dose of home cooking....Can you rememeber a team ranked 15-20 who had 1-2 losses and hosted in the NCAA? Maybe I'm looking at this wrong,a nd their SOS is a bigger indicator than I thought

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 29, 2007, 01:27:35 PM

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on January 29, 2007, 11:33:53 AM
However, if they win out... it might be very hard for the NCAA not to give Aurora a rather high seed/Sectional host.

Since Oxy lost to Redlands last wednesday and now has two regional losses and the SCIAC essentially has zero chance at a sectionals hosting bid, I have been contemplating buying a plane ticket to the midwest and just renting a car and driving to wherever the sectionals happen to be... since plane tickets bought at the last second are ridiculously expensive, and I figured there would probably be one within 5 hrs between Wooster and Point... but this is an interesting factor to throw in the mix. The idea that there may be at least three potential tournament hosts "in the area" is a fun thought.

I was just thinking a few hours ago about the fact that I am concerned about how a team like Hope and Wooster could fare in the tournament after playing such a weak conference schedule, as, abnormally, both teams don't even have one team that is vaguely comparative to their abilities this year. I have no way of knowing if Aurora is at that level (since I don't have the luxury of being able to hop in the car and drive 20 minutes to see them anymore, and as everyone has already stated, it's hard to gauge a team that hasn't played the top local competition). However, I think Aurora could potentially be added to that list.

It might also be tough for them to get to the sectionals, unless they did something like BYE, SLIAC A Bid, Sectionals Host. (Please excuse me if this was already stated on Hoopsville, haven't had a chance to listen to it yet.) If they hosted a CCIW or WIAC school or something on that level, my point above might make it difficult, no matter how much ability/potential they have, to make a strong tourney run against a completely different level of competition.

Though Aurora's Larry Welton is a stud, and let's not forget that even with Larry, Aurora was an 11 loss team. The fact that they have an awesome player doesn't make them have an awesome team in a vaccuum without having proven it on the court under the best conditions.

NCC is an interesting team. They have a complete stud of a player in Daniel Walton. I have been on the Daniel Walton bandwagon since he was a frosh (though to be honest, at the time I thought he was an upperclassman because be played like one)! I really hope this guy gets some serious All-American looks. He had already gotten 10 double-doubles this season, and has posted a season avg of 18.6ppg and 9.9rpg on a team that has a very strong group of big guys. Freshman Brandon Smith developing has probably been the key to NCCs success.... the kid posted 23 pts on Saturday's huge margin victory at home against Wheaton. Though the other guard position is very much up for grabs this late in the season, which I imagine makes it very rough to play a consistant game, NCC may have some good pieces in there... enough to make that 16pt win by Aurora look good... if NCC happened to have showed up for that game. Like Wheaton, they have been incredibly inconsistant thus far this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 29, 2007, 01:29:57 PM

Quote from: keith45 on January 29, 2007, 12:58:48 PMThey beat the teams they played, which is all you can ask.

This, of course, is Amherst's argument as well. However, being ranked is a privilege, not a right. The voters aren't asking anything of anyone. They are objectively trying to determine which teams are the best in the country, and in what order. How a team does against their schedule is evidence they can use, but so is the quality of that schedule. Based on who Aurora has beaten, they must decide how Aurora stacks up against, for example, Carthage, a team with five losses but has played a much tougher schedule, or Worcester Polytech, who has also lost just once against a schedule similar in difficulty to Aurora's. Ohio Northern has beaten Wooster, Wittenberg, UW-La Crosse, and Baldwin-Wallace, but they've lost four times. Should we "ask" more of them? Should they be ranked ahead or behind Aurora? Who would win on a neutral court? These are the types of questions that the voters must ask.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: keith45 on January 29, 2007, 01:46:58 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 29, 2007, 01:29:57 PM
Quote from: keith45 on January 29, 2007, 12:58:48 PMThey beat the teams they played, which is all you can ask.

This, of course, is Amherst's argument as well. However, being ranked is a privilege, not a right. The voters aren't asking anything of anyone. They are objectively trying to determine which teams are the best in the country, and in what order. How a team does against their schedule is evidence they can use, but so is the quality of that schedule. Based on who Aurora has beaten, they must decide how Aurora stacks up against, for example, Carthage, a team with five losses but has played a much tougher schedule, or Worcester Polytech, who has also lost just once against a schedule similar in difficulty to Aurora's. Ohio Northern has beaten Wooster, Wittenberg, UW-La Crosse, and Baldwin-Wallace, but they've lost four times. Should we "ask" more of them? Should they be ranked ahead or behind Aurora? Who would win on a neutral court? These are the types of questions that the voters must ask.

Understood...and imho, Aurora could play with the WIAC on a nuetral court. I think they have shown they can play with the CCIW (although I think Elmhurst would give them fits). I think would easily handle the IIAC and would hang with the SLIAC, if not beat them easily. But that is neither here nor there. What I am hearing is, due to the non conference schedule and the weakness of the new conference, Aurora may not rise too much higher, no matter what (unless there are some upsets in the top 10). And while I understand that, is there precedent for a team ranked this low to host a sectional?
Does this boil down to scheduling? My one issue with this new conference is the amount of conference games. I think AU got 6 out of conference games (I think 5 were in region, including 2 CCIW schools)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 29, 2007, 01:52:20 PM

Keith, the D3hoops.com Top 25 poll has no impact on the NCAA tournament seedings or hosting opportunities. The only ranking you need to look at in terms of tournament implications is the NCAA regional ranking (and the first ranking is not out yet).

Right now, I think 5 Midwest teams have a chance to make a run at a #1 seed in the next 3 weeks...

Aurora (15-1 in-region)
(@ Wisc Lutheran, vs Maranatha Baptist, vs Marian, vs Edgewood, @ Dominican, vs Concordia-IL, @ Rockford)

Washington U. (14-1 in-region)
(@ NYU, @ Brandeis, vs Emory, vs Case Western Reserve, @ Carnegie Mellon, @ Rochester, vs Chicago)

Augustana (16-2 in-region)
(@ North Park, @ Carthage, vs Wheaton, vs Millikin, @ Illinois Wesleyan, vs North Central)

Chicago (13-3 in-region)
(@ Brandeis, @ NYU, vs Case Western Reserve, vs Emory, @ Rochester, @ Carnegie Mellon, @ Wash U)

Elmhurst (11-3 in-region)
(vs Millikin, @ Illinois Wesleyan, vs Carthage, vs North Park, @ North Central, vs Wheaton, @ Millikin)

Of the five, Aurora obviously has the easiest schedule remaining...by a huge margin. Wash U, Chicago, Augie, and Elmhurst have a bunch of tough games remaining in strong conferences. Aurora will not play another ranked team -- or even one that has received votes this season -- the rest of the way. While the Quality of Wins Index rewards victories over the likes of NYU, Brandeis, Carthage, and Wheaton for the UAA and CCIW teams, the simple fact is that a loss - any loss - hurts much more in the QOWI than a win over a weak team. Aurora has a great chance to be the #1 seed in the Midwest and be in position to host a regional and sectional.

(Note, unlike the "old days", more than one Midwest region team can host a Sectional.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 29, 2007, 02:03:12 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 29, 2007, 01:52:20 PM
(Note, unlike the "old days", more than one Midwest region team can host a Sectional.)

And, for that matter, it can also be fewer than one team. I wouldn't want anyone to come away with the false impression that being #1 in a region means you get to host a sectional. After all, there are eight regions and just four sectionals, and one of them will be somewhere in the northeast (most likely Amherst, barring a huge upset.)

Also, as I believe I pointed out in reference to Miss. College last week, and as diehardfan emphasizes above regarding Aurora, the first prerequisite for the Spartans to host a sectional is for them to reach the sectionals, and that figure to be no small task. I doubt they'd get a bye no matter how good their bona fides turn out to be, as the five byes seem to be used to solve travel problems which Aurora hasn't got. They may draw an easy round one opponent, but round two may well give them a tough Pool C team from the CCIW, WIAC, or UAA.

Quote from: Titan Q on January 29, 2007, 01:52:20 PMThe only ranking you need to look at in terms of tournament implications is the NCAA regional ranking (and the first ranking is not out yet).

Feb. 7 (a week from Weds.) is the date for the first regional ranking.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on January 29, 2007, 02:04:39 PM

Quote from: keith45 on January 29, 2007, 01:46:58 PM
And while I understand that, is there precedent for a team ranked this low to host a sectional?

The Top 25 poll has nothing to do with hosting a sectional but I think you were saying it should be a good indicator of possible teams. But if you look at the NCAA manual travel is the first concern of the committee when they award the sectionals, they don't pick the highest ranked teams or the most deserving.

If you win out this year you will probably be in the top 10 which definitely fits into the range of past sectional hosts.

Last year's sectionals went to #1 Lawrence, #3 Wittenberg, #4 Amherst and #7 Virginia Wesleyan.

The 2005 sectionals went to #1 Stevens Point, #2 Amherst, #9 Albion and #16 Ramapo.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gccfan on January 29, 2007, 02:10:14 PM

I know that Amherst is undefeated, but is there a chance that Miss. College starts to pick up a few #1 votes? Going the other way, is there a chance that UW-OshKosh jumps over them after beating the #1 team by 17 points?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 29, 2007, 02:11:40 PM

Quote from: Chris Brooks on January 29, 2007, 02:04:39 PM
Quote from: keith45 on January 29, 2007, 01:46:58 PM
And while I understand that, is there precedent for a team ranked this low to host a sectional?

The Top 25 poll has nothing to do with hosting a sectional but I think you were saying it should be a good indicator of possible teams. But if you look at the NCAA manual travel is the first concern of the committee when they award the sectionals, they don't pick the highest ranked teams or the most deserving.

If you win out this year you will probably be in the top 10 which definitely fits into the range of past sectional hosts.

Last year's sectionals went to #3 Wittenberg, #4 Amherst, #7 Virginia Wesleyan and #11 Illinois Wesleyan.

The 2005 sectionals went to #1 Stevens Point, #2 Amherst, #9 Albion and #16 Ramapo.

IWU did not host a sectional last year...the Midwest/West was hosted by Lawrence.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on January 29, 2007, 02:20:23 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 29, 2007, 02:11:40 PM
IWU did not host a sectional last year...the Midwest/West was hosted by Lawrence.

Thanks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 29, 2007, 02:28:10 PM

Quote from: keith45 on January 29, 2007, 01:46:58 PM
I think they have shown they can play with the CCIW (although I think Elmhurst would give them fits). I think would easily handle the IIAC and would hang with the SLIAC, if not beat them easily. But that is neither here nor there. What I am hearing is, due to the non conference schedule and the weakness of the new conference, Aurora may not rise too much higher, no matter what (unless there are some upsets in the top 10). And while I understand that, is there precedent for a team ranked this low to host a sectional?
Does this boil down to scheduling? My one issue with this new conference is the amount of conference games. I think AU got 6 out of conference games (I think 5 were in region, including 2 CCIW schools)

While Aurora has obviously shown that they can play with both Millikin and NCC, those teams are North Central (3-4 in conference) and Millikin (1-6 in conference), currently making them teams 6-of-8 and 8-of-8 respectively. Whether Aurora can play with any of the teams that have a good shot at beating any of the teams in the CCIW that actually have a vague shot of being in the tourney still definitely remains to be seen.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 29, 2007, 03:46:41 PM

Quote from: diehardfan on January 29, 2007, 02:28:10 PM
Whether Aurora can play with any of the teams that have a good shot at beating any of the teams in the CCIW that actually have a vague shot of being in the tourney still definitely remains to be seen.

What the....????????? LOL ;D :D ;)

In English...??

Whether Aurora can play with North Central or North Park that have a good shot at beating Carthage or Wheaton in the CCIW that actually have a vague shot of being in the tourney still definitely remains to be seen...

Assuming Elmhurst and Augustana have more than a vague shot at being in the tourney. So, technically, they've already proven that beating North Central, right?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 29, 2007, 04:00:58 PM

Quote from: Old School on January 29, 2007, 03:46:41 PM
Quote from: diehardfan on January 29, 2007, 02:28:10 PM
Whether Aurora can play with any of the teams that have a good shot at beating any of the teams in the CCIW that actually have a vague shot of being in the tourney still definitely remains to be seen.

What the....????????? LOL ;D :D ;)

In English...??

Whether Aurora can play with North Central or North Park that have a good shot at beating Carthage or Wheaton in the CCIW that actually have a vague shot of being in the tourney still definitely remains to be seen...

Assuming Elmhurst and Augustana have more than a vague shot at being in the tourney. So, technically, they've already proven that beating North Central, right?

Oh wow, your post is confusing too! ??? I suppose that's my fault though. :D My apologies for posting in stream of consciousness while doing other things. :-[ :-X What I meant was...

"Whether Aurora can play with any of the teams from the CCIW that have a good shot of actually being in the tourney still definitely remains to be seen."

That's definitely not good grammar either, but that's about as good as you're going to get from me during the work day. :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 29, 2007, 04:13:22 PM

I'm planning on seeing Aurora tomorrow down in Milwaukee against Wisconsin Lutheran. Not that I am all-knowing, but I might get an idea of how good they are since I just saw Carthage/IWU and of course the MWC teams and WIAC games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 29, 2007, 04:24:07 PM

Quote from: Old School on January 29, 2007, 04:13:22 PMNot that I am all-knowing...

Eh, who are you kidding? We look forward to hearing your thoughts, oh great and powerful Oz! :)

Seriously, I am so jealous of you! I miss being able to solve my questions about the Top 25 by just hopping into my car and seeing for myself. We will all definitely look forward to your analysis. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 29, 2007, 04:35:31 PM

Pay no attention to the man behind the Ranger's jacket.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 29, 2007, 04:46:17 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 29, 2007, 04:35:31 PM
Pay no attention to the man behind the Ranger's jacket.

LOL ;D :D ;) :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 29, 2007, 05:00:52 PM

Quote from: diehardfan on January 29, 2007, 04:24:07 PM
Quote from: Old School on January 29, 2007, 04:13:22 PMNot that I am all-knowing...
Eh, who are you kidding? We look forward to hearing your thoughts, oh great and powerful Oz! :)

... We will all definitely look forward to your analysis. :)

Ditto OS! :) +1 in advance!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 29, 2007, 05:29:04 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 29, 2007, 04:35:31 PM
Pay no attention to the man behind the Ranger's jacket.

Nice, do I at least get an assist on that one? :D ??? ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 29, 2007, 05:34:34 PM

Quote from: gccfan on January 29, 2007, 02:10:14 PM
I know that Amherst is undefeated, but is there a chance that Miss. College starts to pick up a few #1 votes? Going the other way, is there a chance that UW-OshKosh jumps over them after beating the #1 team by 17 points?

Yes there's a chance, and no Oshkosh won't jump over Miss Col IMO.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 29, 2007, 05:56:25 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 29, 2007, 02:11:40 PM
Quote from: Chris Brooks on January 29, 2007, 02:04:39 PM
Quote from: keith45 on January 29, 2007, 01:46:58 PM
And while I understand that, is there precedent for a team ranked this low to host a sectional?

The Top 25 poll has nothing to do with hosting a sectional but I think you were saying it should be a good indicator of possible teams. But if you look at the NCAA manual travel is the first concern of the committee when they award the sectionals, they don't pick the highest ranked teams or the most deserving.

If you win out this year you will probably be in the top 10 which definitely fits into the range of past sectional hosts.

Last year's sectionals went to Week 13's #1 Lawrence , #3 Wittenberg, #4 Amherst, #7 Virginia Wesleyan and #~~11 Illinois Wesleyan~~.

The 2005 sectionals went to #1 Stevens Point, #2 Amherst, #9 Albion and #16 Ramapo.

IWU did not host a sectional last year...the Midwest/West was hosted by Lawrence.

Correct 2006 Sectionals as above.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 29, 2007, 06:17:09 PM

Just to complete the list:

2004: #1 Williams, #4 Wooster, #8 Puget Sound, #9 Franklin & Marshall
2003: #1 Randolph-Macon, #3 Williams, #6 Wooster, #14 Buena Vista
2002: #1 Carthage, #3 Catholic, #6 Otterbein, #8 Brockport St.
2001: #1 Chicago, #3 Ohio Northern, #10 Christopher Newport, unranked [#26] Clark
2000: #1 Calvin, #5 William Paterson, #16 Buena Vista, #20 Cortland State

It sucks to be #2. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WLCALUM83 on January 29, 2007, 06:26:19 PM

OS, Aurora's Welton gets most of the print, but against Lakeland, all 5 starters scored in double figures, and the Spartans have been hitting on their 3's big time over the last several games. WLC's going to have to be hitting on all cylinders to have a chance, IMHO.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 29, 2007, 07:04:20 PM

Top 25 Schedule and Scores, Jan. 29-Feb. 4

#   1   Amherst (20-0) plays at Rhode Island Coll. Tue., hosts Conn. College Fri., and hosts Wesleyan Sat.
#   2   Wooster (17-2) hosts Allegheny Wed. and hosts #11 Wittenberg Sat.
#   3   UW-Stevens Point (16-2) hosts UW-Eau Claire Wed. and plays at #22 UW-La Crosse Sat.
#   4   Mississippi College (17-1) plays at LeTourneau Thu. and plays at East Texas Baptist Sat.
#   5   UW-Oshkosh (17-3) hosts #22 UW-La Crosse Wed. and hosts UW-Stout Sat.
#   6   St. Thomas (17-2) hosts Carleton Wed. and hosts Bethel Sat.
#   7   Washington U. (16-1) plays at #25 NYU Fri. and plays at Brandeis Sun.
#   8   Virginia Wesleyan (16-3) hosts Bridgewater (VA) Wed., plays at Roanoke Sat., and plays at Washington and Lee Sun.
#   9   Hope (16-2) plays at Olivet Wed. and plays at Albion Sat.
#   10   Augustana (16-3) plays at North Park Wed. and plays at #17 Carthage Sat.
#   11   Wittenberg (16-3) hosts Earlham Wed. and plays at #2 Wooster Sat.
#   12   Elmhurst (15-3) hosts Millikin Wed. and plays at Illinois Wesleyan Sat.
#   13   Whitworth (17-2) hosts Linfield Fri. and hosts George Fox Sat.
#   14   Ohio Northern (15-4) plays at Otterbein Wed. and hosts John Carroll Sat.
#   15   Worcester Polytech (16-1) hosts Clark Wed. and plays at Babson Sat.
#   16   Aurora (17-1) plays at Wisconsin Lutheran Tue., hosts Maranatha Baptist Thu., and hosts Marian Sat.
#   17   Carthage (13-5) plays at Wheaton (IL) Wed. and hosts #10 Augustana Sat.
#   18   Occidental (12-4) hosts Whittier Wed. and plays at Cal Tech Sat.
#   19   Chicago (15-3) plays at Brandeis Fri. and plays at #25 NYU Sun.
#   20   Johns Hopkins (17-2) plays at Swarthmore Wed. and plays at Haverford Sat.
#   21   Puget Sound (14-4) hosts Pacific Lutheran Tue. and hosts Pacific Sat.
#   22   La Crosse (13-6) plays at #5 UW-Oshkosh Wed. and hosts #3 UW-Stevens Point Sat.
#   23   Bates (16-3) plays at Williams Fri. and plays at Middlebury Sat.
#   24   Guilford (14-3) plays at Washington and Lee Wed. and plays at Lynchburg Sat.
#   25   NYU (14-4) hosts #7 Washington U. Fri. and hosts #19 Chicago Sat.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 29, 2007, 07:08:44 PM

Obviously, the new poll (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/) is out. Not too many surprises, but that stray #1 vote to Wash U. is a real head-scratcher in my book. I'm also surprised to see Bates hang on to #23, and NYU go 0-2 for the week and only drop 1 spot. UW-La Crosse rejoins the top 25 and gets rewarded by facing two top-5 teams this week. And congratulations to Amherst for reaching the top spot, although not unanimously.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 29, 2007, 07:12:59 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 29, 2007, 07:08:44 PM
Obviously, the new poll (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/) is out. Not too many surprises, but that stray #1 vote to Wash U. is a real head-scratcher in my book.

David - listen to the first 20 minute of Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville) last night (click here (http://www.d3hoops.com/audio/07/hoopsville12807a.mp3)). You will understand were that vote came from.

I am also surprised NYU barely dropped... and I just can't get a head around ONU. They didn't move (because they didn't lose), but those four losses makes me think they are somewhat high!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 29, 2007, 07:40:10 PM

Here's something I did not know: despite having been in the top ten 62 times (52.5% of all polls, topped only by Wooster-88 and UW-Stevens Point-64), this is just the second week that Amherst has reached the #1 spot (the first being week 8 of the 2003-04 season.) Congratulations to the Lord Jeffs! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on January 29, 2007, 08:02:37 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 29, 2007, 07:40:10 PM
Here's something I did not know: despite having been in the top ten 62 times (52.5% of all polls, topped only by Wooster-88 and UW-Stevens Point-64), this is just the second week that Amherst has reached the #1 spot (the first being week 8 of the 2003-04 season.) Congratulations to the Lord Jeffs! :)

Surprised but happy to see the Jeffs in the top spot. I thought Wooster might get more votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 29, 2007, 08:07:59 PM

Quote from: keith45 on January 29, 2007, 12:58:48 PM
16 point win at then 14th ranked North Central and a 29 point win versus Loras who was just featured on the site.

Keith -- that was then, emphasis added. Where is NCC now? That's all that matters.

And congrats on beating a team we featured. Meaningless. I mean, we featured Millsaps and FDU-Florham too. That doesn't mean that a win against them makes them Top 25 material.

Come on now. Gotta have a stronger take than that, man.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 29, 2007, 08:10:50 PM

Quote from: fpc85 on January 29, 2007, 08:02:37 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 29, 2007, 07:40:10 PM
Here's something I did not know: despite having been in the top ten 62 times (52.5% of all polls, topped only by Wooster-88 and UW-Stevens Point-64), this is just the second week that Amherst has reached the #1 spot (the first being week 8 of the 2003-04 season.) Congratulations to the Lord Jeffs! :)
Surprised but happy to see the Jeffs in the top spot. I thought Wooster might get more votes.

:D :D :D ;D ;)

Pride goeth before the destruction and an haughty spirit before a fall.

Proverbs 16:18 as quoted by some guy named RIC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: keith45 on January 29, 2007, 09:16:58 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 29, 2007, 08:07:59 PM
Quote from: keith45 on January 29, 2007, 12:58:48 PM
16 point win at then 14th ranked North Central and a 29 point win versus Loras who was just featured on the site.

Keith -- that was then, emphasis added. Where is NCC now? That's all that matters.

And congrats on beating a team we featured. Meaningless. I mean, we featured Millsaps and FDU-Florham too. That doesn't mean that a win against them makes them Top 25 material.

Come on now. Gotta have a stronger take than that, man.

Understood...my point was simply this...why does it seem like AU is getting less respect than most 1 loss teams. I guess the only way we'll know is when the NCAA's roll around.
So Pat, if AU wins out, are they a top 10 team, or not? Let's assume no upsets happen...just for giggles

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 29, 2007, 09:19:52 PM

What game left on their schedule would make them Top 10-worthy?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: keith45 on January 29, 2007, 09:29:38 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 29, 2007, 09:19:52 PM
What game left on their schedule would make them Top 10-worthy?

probably none...which is why I was wondering IF they win out, are they a top 10 team...is 26-1 or whatever they would be, make them a top 10 team?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 29, 2007, 09:38:13 PM

As you say, they don't prove anything with their remaining games. So I don't know why they would automatically rise to the Top 10.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 29, 2007, 09:54:11 PM

Keith45,

The conference is weak. The NIIC wasn't that good when they were around and the LMC was even worse. Combined, they still aren't very good. Of the 11 teams in the conference, 1/2 have .500 or better records. Marian is 9-8 and their nonconference wins are Cornell (7-11), Northland (4-12) and Finlandia (3-14). They had a close loss to Whitewater. Dominican is 3-3 out of conference, Benedictine 2-5, Edgewood 2-4 and Aurora is 7-0. As far as I know, "hanging with" the teams in the SLIAC is hardly anything to get excited about either. I think a lot has to do with their conference and Aurora's weak nonconference schedule, IMO.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 29, 2007, 09:58:04 PM

Quote from: fpc85 on January 29, 2007, 08:02:37 PM
Surprised but happy to see the Jeffs in the top spot. I thought Wooster might get more votes.

What did Wooster do that Amherst didn't that would make them jump the Jeffs?

Edited

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on January 29, 2007, 10:17:11 PM

Quote from: Old School on January 29, 2007, 09:58:04 PM
Quote from: fpc85 on January 29, 2007, 08:02:37 PM
Surprised but happy to see the Jeffs in the top spot. I thought Wooster might get more votes.

What did Wooster do that Amherst didn't that would make them just the Jeffs?

Nothing, but I am an Amherst fan and after reading the posts when the Jeffs were previously a choice for #1; I had my doubts. The schedule appears to be the issue. I think it is a backhanded way of saying the Jeffs are not #1 worthy. Would the Jeffs be perceived differently if they had 1- 2 losses and played in the WIAC? How would they fare in the WIAC? I
Some doubt the Jeffs are top 5 material.....maybe even top 10. For those who have seen the Jeffs play and some of the other top 10 teams what are your thoughts? How do the Jeffs stack up to the best in the country.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 29, 2007, 10:51:11 PM

Quote from: fpc85 on January 29, 2007, 10:17:11 PM
Quote from: Old School on January 29, 2007, 09:58:04 PM
Quote from: fpc85 on January 29, 2007, 08:02:37 PM
Surprised but happy to see the Jeffs in the top spot. I thought Wooster might get more votes.

What did Wooster do that Amherst didn't that would make them just the Jeffs?
Nothing, but I am an Amherst fan and after reading the posts when the Jeffs were previously a choice for #1; I had my doubts. The schedule appears to be the issue. I think it is a backhanded way of saying the Jeffs are not #1 worthy. Would the Jeffs be perceived differently if they had 1- 2 losses and played in the WIAC? How would they fare in the WIAC? I
Some doubt the Jeffs are top 5 material.....maybe even top 10. For those who have seen the Jeffs play and some of the other top 10 teams what are your thoughts? How do the Jeffs stack up to the best in the country.

fpc85, the case for Amherst is simple. They have played their schedule and have won every game. If and/or when they lose, (proverbial "we") can drop them to whatever ranking "we" choose.

I say that the Lord Jeffs should enjoy the ride. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on January 29, 2007, 11:16:39 PM

I am somewhat surprised that Mary Hardin-Baylor has not cracked the Top 25 yet. In my opinion their body of work so far this year is more impressive than some of the teams in the back of the Top 25.

UMHB is 14-3, riding a 10-game winning streak and have a win over #8 Virginia Wesleyan. They are the 2nd best team in the ASC with a win over the top team from the ODAC. They also have a 14-point win over Midwest Confence leader Ripon and are 4-0 out of conference (Trinity, Southwestern).

What is the biggest problem everyone has with them as a Top 25 team? I would probably vote them somewhere from 20-22.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 29, 2007, 11:39:01 PM

Quote from: Chris Brooks on January 29, 2007, 11:16:39 PM
They are the 2nd best team in the ASC with a win over the top team from the ODAC. They also have a 14-point win over Midwest Confence leader Ripon...

Thanks to the graduation of All-American Chris Braier from Lawrence, and the decline of Carroll College as well (both were ranked last year and were pre-season Top 25 teams), the MWC is back to being an average conference at best, IMO. In the midwest area, the WIAC is more than a good barometer for the MWC and this year, at least, that conference really doesn't have any signature wins vs. the WIAC. Ripon got beat by Point (well, who hasn't?) and La Crosse, and also blew a huge lead and lost in overtime to a good IIAC Buena Vista team (12-5). So, I guess I wouldn't hang your Top 25 hopes on beating Ripon!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on January 30, 2007, 12:03:31 AM

Quote from: Old School on January 29, 2007, 11:39:01 PM
So, I guess I wouldn't hang your Top 25 hopes on beating Ripon!

I wouldn't either and I don't think they have to, but it is still a good win against a team from another area of the country. They would hang their hat on the win over defending National Champion Virginia Wesleyan, a team Guilford failed to beat twice. I am not saying it is an injustice but I do think they are deserving thus far.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 30, 2007, 12:27:54 AM

Quote from: Chris Brooks on January 30, 2007, 12:03:31 AM
They would hang their hat on the win over defending National Champion Virginia Wesleyan, a team Guilford failed to beat twice. I am not saying it is an injustice but I do think they are deserving thus far.

That's a good point. They did beat VWU. MHB did start the year just 4-3 and they have gone on a very nice win streak. But, they dug themselves a deep hole with that start...

There are six teams with four or more losses (more than MHB's 3 losses). I don't know much about the ASC, but most might argue that the OAC (Ohio Northern at 15-4), CCIW (Carthage at 13-5), WIAC (La Crosse at 13-6) and the UAA (NYU at 14-4) are tougher to get through than the ASC. Occidental (12-4, member of the SCIAC) has two losses against non-D3 opponents, and Puget Sound (14-4, member of the NWC) just dropped 8 spots after consecutive conference losses. Not sure if it's the conference strength that is holding them down. I'm not one to determine that. But, on the conference note, against the other "big dogs" in the conference, they got blown out at Mississippi College and also lost to Texas-Dallas (along with the loss to LeTourneau).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on January 30, 2007, 12:50:05 AM

Quote from: Old School on January 30, 2007, 12:27:54 AM
There are six teams with four or more losses (more than MHB's 3 losses). I don't know much about the ASC, but most might argue that the OAC (Ohio Northern at 15-4), CCIW (Carthage at 13-5), WIAC (La Crosse at 13-6) and the UAA (NYU at 14-4) are tougher to get through than the ASC. Occidental (12-4, member of the SCIAC) has two losses against non-D3 opponents, and Puget Sound (14-4, member of the NWC) just dropped 8 spots after consecutive conference losses. Not sure if it's the conference strength that is holding them down. I'm not one to determine that. But, on the conference note, against the other "big dogs" in the conference, they got blown out at Mississippi College and also lost to Texas-Dallas (along with the loss to LeTourneau).

I would definitely agree about the OAC, CCIW, WIAC and UAA being premiere leagues right now, but the ASC is getting better. To be fair, I saw UMHB at MC and they were very bad that night but I thought at the time it was just an awful night for them and not a bad team. They are talented.

I would probably vote them ahead of Puget Sound, UW-Lacrosse, Bates, Guilford and New York. UMHB's three losses are at least to teams with winning records.

Lacrosse has six losses with three coming against teams with losing records. Puget Sound is coming off back to back losses to .500 teams. Bates, Guilford and New York all lost last week and don't have any really big wins between them.

I realize these are all very good teams and I don't want to take anything away from them. This season there seems to be very little separation between the best DIII teams and even less among teams from 15-35, but I think UMHB has had a better season to date than some who are ranked.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 30, 2007, 12:50:33 AM

I think that UMHB deserves a Top 25 when they have run the table of the ASC West. Their victories over McMurry and HSU occurred in Belton, which is a very "Cru-friendly" venue! ;D UMHB is 9-1 at home; 5-2 on the road.

If UMHB can win the Abilene trip on the last weekend, then they are about the 20th-25th best team in the country, IMHO.

McMurry saw JHU in Baltimore in their opening weekend. McMurry lost its starting point guard in the first 20 seconds of the Rowan game! (JHU beat Immaculata by 13; the next night McMurry beat Immaculata by 14.) Rowan edged McM by 5 and then Rowan lost to JHU by two. JHU did not impress anyone. A friend of mine predicted that Mississippi College would defeat JHU by double digits after seeing the two teams within 2 weeks of each other. In this part of the country, that is part of the impetus to put UMHB in the Top 25.

That McMurry starting point guard, Robert Moreno, came back to start the Sul Ross game last Thursday. He is working himself back into shape.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on January 30, 2007, 01:00:05 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 30, 2007, 12:50:33 AM
I think that UMHB deserves a Top 25 when they have run the table of the ASC West. Their victories over McMurry and HSU occurred in Belton, which is a very "Cru-friendly" venue! ;D UMHB is 9-1 at home; 5-2 on the road.

If UMHB can win the Abilene trip on the last weekend, then they are about the 20th-25th best team in the country, IMHO.

If they can win out there is no question they should be ranked in my mind. But like I said, I know the teams at the bottom of the Top 25 and those receiving votes are very close. And I am not sure there is much difference in the Top Ten teams and everyone else. I just would have expected the win over VWU to carry a bit more weight than it did.

I am not sure but I can't remember UMHB being ranked in the Top 25. I know it is harder for voters to rank teams when there is not a history there for fear of being duped.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 30, 2007, 01:02:55 AM

Quote from: Chris Brooks on January 30, 2007, 01:00:05 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 30, 2007, 12:50:33 AM
I think that UMHB deserves a Top 25 when they have run the table of the ASC West. Their victories over McMurry and HSU occurred in Belton, which is a very "Cru-friendly" venue! ;D UMHB is 9-1 at home; 5-2 on the road.

If UMHB can win the Abilene trip on the last weekend, then they are about the 20th-25th best team in the country, IMHO.

If they can win out there is no question they should be ranked in my mind. But like I said, I know the teams at the bottom of the Top 25 and those receiving votes are very close. And I am not sure there is much difference in the Top Ten teams and everyone else. I just would have expected the win over VWU to carry a bit more weight than it did.

I am not sure but I can't remember UMHB being ranked in the Top 25. I know it is harder for voters to rank teams when there is not a history there for fear of being duped.

Remember, VWC's All-American Brandon Adair was sick for the UMHB (http://www2.umhb.edu/sportsinfo/cbasketball/122906-m.htm) game!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2007, 01:12:12 AM

Would've been nice if UMHB would've saved us from having to rank UT-Dallas. They had their shot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 30, 2007, 01:20:22 AM

Quote from: Chris Brooks link=topic=4097.msg663716#msg663716I just would have expected the win over VWU to carry a bit more weight than it did.

It did...for VWU. They dropped 5 spots and 124 points! lol ;D You also have to remember that MHB went into that game just 4-3 and they weren't going to jump into the Top 25 with a 5-3 record.

True, La Crosse has three losses against sub .500 teams. They choked and blew a double-digit second half lead to Carleton, and those losses to WIAC foes River Falls (who actually had been playing pretty well at the time) and Eau Claire are head scratchers. But, you also have to look at who they have BEATEN. Oshkosh (12th at the time), St. Thomas (top 5 at the time, though without All-American Rosefelts), Whitewater (when they were actually ranked in the top 10), and Platteville (13th? at the time). So, you can't look at just the losses. I know Whitewater and Platteville have fallen off the map, but St. Thomas is still up there and Oshkosh is actually better.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 30, 2007, 01:34:50 AM

Quote from: Chris Brooks on January 30, 2007, 01:00:05 AM
I am not sure but I can't remember UMHB being ranked in the Top 25. I know it is harder for voters to rank teams when there is not a history there for fear of being duped.

UMHB as not cracked the top 25 in the eight year history of the men's poll. They have appeared in the "others receiving votes" category four times, all of them this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on January 30, 2007, 08:49:06 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2007, 01:12:12 AM
Would've been nice if UMHB would've saved us from having to rank UT-Dallas. They had their shot.

That we can agree on. They are in the Top 25 right now with a win in that game I think.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 30, 2007, 09:25:55 AM

Without passing judgment on either side, but it seems to me that those who are giving Amherst's schedule the benefit of the doubt should be giving MHB the same consideration. And 16 votes means that maybe some of them are.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on January 30, 2007, 10:18:34 AM

Quote from: Old School on January 30, 2007, 01:20:22 AM
True, La Crosse has three losses against sub .500 teams. They choked and blew a double-digit second half lead to Carleton, and those losses to WIAC foes River Falls (who actually had been playing pretty well at the time) and Eau Claire are head scratchers. But, you also have to look at who they have BEATEN. Oshkosh (12th at the time), St. Thomas (top 5 at the time, though without All-American Rosefelts), Whitewater (when they were actually ranked in the top 10), and Platteville (13th? at the time). So, you can't look at just the losses. I know Whitewater and Platteville have fallen off the map, but St. Thomas is still up there and Oshkosh is actually better.

They have two wins over Top Ten teams which is impressive, but they have three terrible losses and six total. They have also lost two of their last four. I can't consider Platteville and Whitewater because they are not receiving votes anymore. Like Pat said in reference to Aurora's win over then #14 North Central,

QuoteKeith -- that was then, emphasis added. Where is NCC now? That's all that matters.

I think you can say UMHB had their chance at the Top 25 when they lost to UTD, but did LaCrosse have their chance when they lost to Carleton, River Falls and Eau Claire? UTD is still 14-5 and I think they are still the only DIII men's team with a DI win.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on January 30, 2007, 10:33:09 AM

Discussing the merits of UMHB made me think of a question I had earlier this week for Top 25 voters. I can't remember if I read it here or heard it on hoopsville, but someone said they considered who would win on a neutral court when ranking teams.

Do most voters give that a lot of consideration? In my opinion that should be considered after more measurable criteria like won/loss record, strength of schedule, quality wins and bad losses. Although I think it is necessary sometimes to separate close teams, I would be hesitant because that brings in bias, particularly in DIII when it is hard to see all the top teams play. Then you are voting on what you think rather what you see on paper.

Just my opinion but I was interested in what voters used to come up with their rankings?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: old_hooper on January 30, 2007, 10:34:46 AM

Rhode Island College has a D1 victory over Iona, so UTD is not the only one this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: plattbacker on January 30, 2007, 10:41:21 AM

Quote from: keith45 on January 29, 2007, 01:46:58 PM

and imho, Aurora could play with the WIAC on a nuetral court

Keith, how many times have you seen Aurora and WIAC teams play? Exactly. It sounds like you are watching the stat sheets because I saw the Aurora/Edgewood game, and Aurora got beat by the better team. Edgewood is playing more and more like a WIAC team (which shouldn't be a surprise because their coach coached in the WIAC), but they just don't have the overall talent right now to compete on a nightly basis with WIAC teams, neather does Aurora.

Over the past few years, I've seen all the teams in both conferences, and there is no comparison. Aurora would be lucky to be in the middle of the WIAC.

Maybe Aurora should play the WIAC teams like other NathCon teams to really see how they match up. I guess we'll never know because I don't see them scheduling WIAC competition. Get over it, Aurora is lucky to even be in the top 20, and they certainly do not deserve to be in the top 10 until they start playing some tougher teams. The voters are doing a good job, so quit complaining about their ranking.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on January 30, 2007, 10:45:51 AM

Quote from: old_hooper on January 30, 2007, 10:34:46 AM
Rhode Island College has a D1 victory over Iona, so UTD is not the only one this year.

I did not see that. Rhode Island gets a shot at home against Amherst tonight? Does anyone know if that game will have a video feed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 30, 2007, 10:48:55 AM

No, that's not correct. Iona lost to the University of Rhode Island.

http://www.iona.edu/gaels/mbasketball/0607/ion1128.htm

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: keith45 on January 30, 2007, 10:53:38 AM

Quote from: plattbacker on January 30, 2007, 10:41:21 AM
Quote from: keith45 on January 29, 2007, 01:46:58 PM

and imho, Aurora could play with the WIAC on a nuetral court

Keith, how many times have you seen Aurora and WIAC teams play? Exactly. It sounds like you are watching the stat sheets because I saw the Aurora/Edgewood game, and Aurora got beat by the better team. Edgewood is playing more and more like a WIAC team (which shouldn't be a surprise because their coach coached in the WIAC), but they just don't have the overall talent right now to compete on a nightly basis with WIAC teams, neather does Aurora.

Over the past few years, I've seen all the teams in both conferences, and there is no comparison. Aurora would be lucky to be in the middle of the WIAC.

Maybe Aurora should play the WIAC teams like other NathCon teams to really see how they match up. I guess we'll never know because I don't see them scheduling WIAC competition. Get over it, Aurora is lucky to even be in the top 20, and they certainly do not deserve to be in the top 10 until they start playing some tougher teams. The voters are doing a good job, so quit complaining about their ranking.

Plattbacker....
Was I supposed to answer that question, or accept your answer to the question? I'll try answering it first. I have seen almost every WIAC team play in the past few years. Additionally, I have played against a few of them, both in my college years and after, as a member of a traveling squad. I know a few of the coaches personally, and some assistants both still in the WIAC and a few who left the WIAC. I am VERY familiar with both Edgewoods program and Auroras. I've seen about 80% of Aurora's games this year.
And I agree with you that AU should schedule some WIAC schools..but please note that the majority of the NATHCON schools that do schedule WIAC schools are in Wisconsin and had these games scheduled for a while. Check back in 1-2 seasons, when the grind of a 22 game (or whatever it is) conference schedule sets in, and the home and homes have been satisfied.
This topic has been talked about enough, in my opinion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 30, 2007, 11:01:31 AM

RIC beat Iona in the preseason, so it's not an official d1 victory, but they were good enough in the preseason to beat the team that turns out to be the crappiest one in d1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: plattbacker on January 30, 2007, 11:21:35 AM

Keith,

This is a Top 25 board, and you think Aurora is getting the shaft. I'm just throwing in my 2 cents. BTW: I apologize for assuming you have not watched Aurora.

Since I have been watching WIAC b-ball for a couple decades, I still think your claim that Aurora could play with these teams is absurd. I've seen every team in the NathCon this year, and Aurora is beating mediocre talent, plain and simple. I agree with the pollsters regarding their ranking.

If Aurora does well in the tourney, I will eat the dessert of choice around here (humble pie) ;).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2007, 12:53:30 PM

Quote from: Chris Brooks on January 30, 2007, 10:33:09 AM
Discussing the merits of UMHB made me think of a question I had earlier this week for Top 25 voters. I can't remember if I read it here or heard it on hoopsville, but someone said they considered who would win on a neutral court when ranking teams.

Do most voters give that a lot of consideration? In my opinion that should be considered after more measurable criteria like won/loss record, strength of schedule, quality wins and bad losses. Although I think it is necessary sometimes to separate close teams, I would be hesitant because that brings in bias, particularly in DIII when it is hard to see all the top teams play. Then you are voting on what you think rather what you see on paper.

Just my opinion but I was interested in what voters used to come up with their rankings?

I don't think win/loss record is a be-all and end-all for two teams halfway across the country from each other with no common opponents. There are far too many teams in Division III and competition is far too localized for that to be instructive. Your 14-3 may not be better than someone else's 12-6 or it may be better than someone else's 17-1. That's what the human voters are here to filter.

I think our track record is excellent. I'm just fine with whatever method each of the 25 voters uses to come up with their ballot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on January 30, 2007, 01:29:56 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2007, 12:53:30 PM
I don't think win/loss record is a be-all and end-all for two teams halfway across the country from each other with no common opponents. There are far too many teams in Division III and competition is far too localized for that to be instructive. Your 14-3 may not be better than someone else's 12-6 or it may be better than someone else's 17-1. That's what the human voters are here to filter.

I think our track record is excellent. I'm just fine with whatever method each of the 25 voters uses to come up with their ballot.

I'm not trying to suggest the poll is flawed, on the contrary I think you guys do a great job with it. Ranking DIII teams that rarely play outside of their region is a dificult task and your Top 25 usually produces the teams that perform best in the NCAA tourney. Won/loss record is not be-all and end-all, but I do think it has to be looked at if a team has a big out of conference win to validate it like UMHB's over VWU.

I was just curious if you gave the voters certain rules or criteria to use when they vote and you answered that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2007, 01:43:33 PM

Yes. Indeed, no, there are no set criteria. I want the voters to rank which teams they think are the best in Division III, from 1-25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 30, 2007, 01:48:04 PM

Quote from: plattbacker on January 30, 2007, 11:21:35 AM
If Aurora does well in the tourney, I will eat the dessert of choice around here (humble pie) ;).

Heeey, I thought the dessert of choice around here was cookies. :P

Some really great discussion going on this board in the last few days! Please allow me to weigh in on a few things.

I basically never found the LMC board worth stopping by even when I was mostly interested in the regional scene. This is both cause their posters were inflammatory :D , and because generally (with a few exceptions) even the best teams in that conference were relatively irrelevant come playoff team. A great in-conference record in the NAthCon just isn't going to be inspiring to me (or most other people) the way a flawless NIIC showing would have. I personally think it's really a shame for those better schools that they ALL had to combine into one conference... especially since if they continue to play a home and away series with every conference member, it will leave very little room for the better teams to get out and play the top local teams in other conferences.

The top of the NIIC teams were always pretty good though, IMHO. Aurora and Benedictine were always great early non-conference gauges for the CCIW teams (and other teams like Clarke have also been fairly good in recent years). Both of those squads have been a little down in the last couple of years, but it would be nice to see them back up, so I am definitely rooting for Aurora to do well - makes all the local games between the West Suburb Chicagoland schools a whole lot more fun. They never had a ton of playoff success, but that's more due to getting paired with the CCIW in early rounds than being a bad conference in the national perspective. I'm not sure they've earned a higher ranking yet, but that doesn't mean I am not rooting for them... just have some healthy questions like probably a lot of voters at this point. A lack of a high ranking does NOT mean everyone is out to get them. Can we please calm down and let them earn their ranking on the court? ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 30, 2007, 01:52:01 PM

St. Thomas's ranking is a little uncomfortably high, IMHO. I'm pretty sure no MIAC team has gotten past the Elite Eight in the last decade (correct me of I'm wrong though!). That means that unless St. Thomas is consistently playing like they are the best MIAC team since D3hoops.com was founded (or the entire rest of the top of the league is a notch down, I suppose, since I have been feeling like that a little), their ranking makes me a little nervous... especially when they hit #3. If I was lucky enough (or deserving enough for that matter) to be a voter, I would probably put them more in an 8-11 range, just from when I got to seem them out here in Cali and their results thus far. In my mind they would be on the lower end of that when they and their Preseason AA are playing inconsistently, as they have at times this season. Don't get me wrong, I think they're a very good team, and their 05-06 D3hoops.com All West Region guard Bryan Schnettler is very good, good enough that he will make teams pay every single time they overcompensate on defense to try to contain Rosefelt. On the season he's shooting 47% from behind the arc. Last week he was 14-of-24 (58.3%) from 3-point land! What do you do against a team that has that much of an inside and outside threat? It's hard to not rank a team high that has two legitimate AA contenders. The problem is that I haven't been around long enough to compare this St. Thomas team to the GA team that was so strong. Maybe I can enlist a MIAC poster to come over and do that. Hmm...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2007, 01:54:10 PM

Gustavus played in the title game in 2003. Nearly won. Kind of an unfortunate call at the end didn't help.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 30, 2007, 02:02:57 PM

Thanks. That lessens my point a little. :D And obviously proves that I wasn't at the Final Four till 2004. :D But there's probably still some merit to what I said somewhere. Anyhow, I asked the MIAC board to do some comparing and contrasting to that GA team, so I guess we'll see if anyone bites. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 30, 2007, 02:03:50 PM

Incidentally, based on the above discussion about the opposing team in their most important game this season, I would subsequently have put Oxy much more in the range that Oxy now is than they were last week. Even last week before I saw them lose to Redlands, I was a little squeamish about Oxy's #15 ranking. Since few SCIAC teams have ever made playoff runs, it's hard to justify a #15 poll ranking just from a close loss to a St. Thomas school that I think is ranked a little high. I'm much more comfortable with where they are this week. Oxy also has a great frontcourt-backcourt duo in Sam Beatty and Connor Whitman. Not quite at the Rosefelt-Schnettler level, but pretty close, and Whitman is only a Jr.

As the resident SCIAC poster on this board, I'll just add that I'm not sure that Redlands has earned Top 25 votes yet, but I do think it's a great thing that they're on people's radar screens. If they can play consistently like they did against Oxy last week they are a legitimate playoff team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: piperinsider on January 30, 2007, 02:18:52 PM

I might get some flack from other MIAC posters but I just don't see this team going far come post-season. Yes, they have Ike, Schnettler and Mike Keating, but their point guard isn't one that does many things great. He doesn't turnover the ball often, which is his greatest achievement. I know the Tommies don't need him to score (he averages 4 ppg), but I think when it comes down to a big game a team needs a solid PG and I feel UST has a slight above average one.

The bench is another question mark. The bench averages only 14 points a game, and they are very young and inexperienced at the varsity level.

Personally I think St. John's has a better chance of advancing farther in the tournament if they are selected. They are a more balanced team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Willy Wonka on January 30, 2007, 02:41:12 PM

As another MIAC poster (and player on the '03 GAC team) who stills gets to games twice a week, I have no reservations in saying that those Gustie team would have beaten this UST squad. In fact, I said recently on the MIAC board that I thought this particular UST team would be the worst conference champion in the last 10 years - assuming they beat out the SJU team who already beat them once, obviously. Plus, the MIAC is way down this year, which further sways their ranking.

The Tommies are basically a 3-pronged attack, as PI mentioned. If any of them gets hurt/in foul trouble/plays poorly, there's a very good chance another good team will beat them, making for a short tourney run. The Tommie bench is stocked full of solid role players, but doesn't have a player who will come in and make an impact offensively - or at least no one has emerged in that role, yet.

I'm clearly biased when comparing them to the '02/03, '03/04 GAC teams, but it isn't close IMO. Those GAC teams had multiple players off the bench capable of scoring 15+ on a particular night, including future league MVP and '03 Final Four MVP Dougie Fresh (to say nothing of the starters), while UST relies purely on its three studs. While the Tommies are solid at defense, the latter of the two GAC teams set the MIAC record for points against, allowing just 54 a game in league play on 38% shooting. UST is allowing a league-best 61 and 40%.

Myself and nearly every non-Tommie poster on the MIAC boards agreed UST was overrated at #3 about three weeks ago...but you don't want to get me started on the validity of Pat's rankings :-X

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bethelguy on January 30, 2007, 02:47:40 PM

I'll share my thoughts on UST. If they were playing a 3 on 3 tournament I would pick them to beat absolutely anybody (accounting for 52.4 ppg). The rest of their team are pieces that fit nicely into the overall puzzle.

As compared to recent MIAC teams that have been successful UST is not as deep but as stated their top 3 are better than any of the recent GAC teams or even Augsburg when they had Devean George playing. Their offense compliments their stars very well and everyone plays solid team D. Comparing them to the GAC team that lost to Williams in the Final several years ago is tough. UST's top 3 is certainly better but 4-10 would heavily favor GAC.

C - Isaac Rosefelt - D1 transfer who was MIAC MVP last season. Rosefelt is lanky 6'9" who averages 17 ppg, almost 10 rpg and 2 blocks per game. I'd wager that he is All-American material.
PF - Mike Keating - another D1 transfer who was rather average last season but has emerged this year to be a force (16.4 ppg and 9 rpg).
SG - Bryan Schnettler - is the school's and probably will be the MIAC's all time leader in 3 pointers. Bryan is quick with an even quicker shot. When he is on he does not miss regardless of your defensive positioning. 19 ppg including 4 3's per game.

After that it gets thinner but these guys know their roles.

Lonnie Robinson is a JR who hardly played last season. But is averaging 8 ppg this year.
PG - Andy Dwyer -
PG - Brett Tuma - talented soph

If they have a weakness it is at the PG spot. The Tommies graduated a talented PG and their floor leader from last season, along with a starting F and their 6 and 7 guys off bench. Depth is always talked about as an issued for the Tommies but it rarely seems to actually matter (as witnessed as UST outlasted Bethel 2 OT a couple weeks ago).

Outside of their big 3, they don't have anybody who can beat you on their own (as Wonka mentioned). But so far nobody has been able to slow down more than 1 at a time and that has made the very tough to beat. GAC holds Keating to 7 but Schnettler/Rosefelt combine for 44, that is a familiar story for this team.

They will be a matchup problem for anybody they face in the tournament. River Falls took them to OT and LAX beat them, but remember that Rosefelt did not play in those games. No doubt in my mind that Rosefelt is playing and they dominate RF and do not lose to LAX.

I hope this paints some sort of a picture...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 30, 2007, 03:46:25 PM

I say this as someone who's been guilty of stereotyping conferences, but...

I recommend not getting too caught up in trying to evaluate a team based on how its league has faired in past tournaments. A few years back, I was surprised when Lawrence nearly knocked off UW-Stevens Point @ the Puget Sound sectional. I guess I just assumed the Pointers were better because they were from the WIAC and Lawrence was from a league that hadn't done anything in the tournament (the MWC).

Based on past Final Four results, the NESCAC hadn't given us much reason to think Williams was the favorite in 2003, but the Ephs got it done.....Virginia Wesleyan beat two Division III powerhouses last year in Salem after many years of ODAC struggles.....Catholic surprised a lot of people in 2001. I think surprises not only happen like this in Salem, they also happen up and down the Top 25. Programs we don't think of as "Top 10" have a couple great recruiting classes and all the sudden are excellent. I think the Illinois Wesleyan women are in this boat right now, for example.

While factoring in strength of schedule is key to any discussion of top teams - and strength of conference is a central part of that discussion - I just encourage everyone to not assume that a team like Aurora is a couple notches below the WIAC or CCIW's best (just as I'd say we shouldn't assume they are better simply because their record is so gaudy). In basketball, it just takes 1 or 2 great players to go along with the solid role player types, and I know Aurora has a great player in Larry Welton...he is one of the best big guys in Division III.

I follow a "power conference" (D1 term) and have a natural bias towards leagues like the CCIW, WIAC, and OAC, but from following D3hoops.com and watching teams from a lot of different leagues play the last decade or so, I have a much different perspective than I did before this site was around....or even 5 years ago. I've worked pretty hard the last few years to get to know leagues like the MWC, NWC and SCIAC, for example. While it is hard to argue the overall strength of the leagues generally regarded as the best in D3, teams from all kinds of conferences can "come out of nowhere" and be great.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 30, 2007, 04:12:09 PM

Yeah, there is definitely a bias towards strong conferences like the WIAC, CCIW, OAC and all...but I think we have to remember that, though conferences like the MWC, MIAC and such, may not appear to be as strong, the TOP of those conferences can be VERY good. The MWC, from top to bottom, IMO, isn't that good, but the last few years, no one can argue that Lawrence was in a class of their own and could contend with ANYONE in ANY conference, just ask Point. The same thing can be said for the MIAC. They have two, maybe three, solid teams and the rest aren't really that good. Sure, a mid-level MIAC team may upset a mid-level WIAC team, but over the course of a season, they probably couldn't contend for a WIAC title. But, take Gusto or Lawrence from a few years ago and throw them in the WIAC, CCIW or OAC, and they'll contend...they were that good and the rest of the conference probably was that bad.

The year Gusto went to the finals, they came to Point and shocked us in Quandt...and Point was ranked and seeded really high. The following year, the reverse happened. Point walked in and beat Gusto on their way to the championship. Tough games on both accounts. So, depth-wise, the WIAC, CCIW, OAC and others are stronger than the MWC and MIACs of the world, but the top teams in those conferences could contend or at least do well in "our" conferences.

The "big" conferences can have as many as 5 or 6 different teams ranked in the Top 25, while those other conferences may only get one, or possibly two, but that one or two teams are probably legit.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 30, 2007, 04:20:01 PM

If you recall, in the past I have run a power rating amalgamation for fun and giggles, taking power ratings, adding in the SOS element and another calculation that I do (which is easy) and here it is.

Using this formula, which over time gets more accurate, right now I have a surprise #1 thanks to their power ranking and SOS.

1. Wash U.
2 WI - Stevens Point
3. Wooster
4. WI - Oshkosh
5. Augustana
6. Elmhurst
7. Amherst (SOS is low)
8. St. Thomas
9. Chicago
10. Hope
11. Mississippi College (SOS)
12. Wittenberg
13. Ohio Northern
14. Whitworth
15. Virginia Wesleyan
16. Guilford
17. WPI
18. Occidental
19. Aurora
20. Carthage
21. Messiah (!)
22. NYU
23. Maryville (TN)
24. Rochester
25. Trinity (CT)

Others in the top 25 and receiving votes:

26. Loras
27. Rhode Island College
29. Lake Erie
30. Brandeis
31. DePauw
32. Wisc - LaCrosse
33. St. John's
35. Hood
37. Mary Hardin-Baylor
39. Puget Sound
40. Ramapo
42. Bates
43. Wheaton (IL)
44. Keene State
46. Salem State
50. Utica
52. John's Hopkins (HORRID SOS!)
66. Redlands
86. North Central
87. Lincoln

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 30, 2007, 04:21:29 PM

The Bottom 10.

403. D'Youville
402. Green Mountain
401. Eastern Nazarene
400. Becker
399. Mt. St. Vincent
398. Bard
397. Maine - Presque Isle
396. Crown
395. Cal Tech
394. Albertus Magnus

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 30, 2007, 05:13:04 PM

Messiah was on my list of teams to watch this week as I was looking at who might move into the poll. They certainly make a similar case to Scranton, which I believe got a couple of votes this week, right?

I wouldn't say having WashU #1 is all that far-fetched. They've got a very impressive resume and they appear to be the class of what I think might be the top conference this year when all is said and done.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 30, 2007, 06:29:28 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 30, 2007, 05:13:04 PM

I wouldn't say having WashU #1 is all that far-fetched. They've got a very impressive resume and they appear to be the class of what I think might be the top conference this year when all is said and done.

I have seen Wash U, Elmhurst, and Augustana 3 times each this year, and I'd say they are all very even. Augustana's 2-pt win over Wash U (at Augie) would seem to support that, as well as the two games played between Elmhurst and Augustana. Wash U is certainly not better than the CCIW's top two, but they are neck and neck.

If I had to rank the CCIW 1-8 right now, I'd go:

1. Augustana
2. Elmhurst
3. Carthage
4. North Central
5. Wheaton
6. North Park
7. Millikin
8. Illinois Wesleyan

I think if you stack the UAA up 1-8, the CCIW would come out on top by a pretty good margin.

The only other UAA team I have seen is Chicago (currently 6-1 and in 2nd place), and Chicago is not as good as Augustana, Elmhurst, and Wash U -- they are not balanced enough. Chicago's home blowout to Wash U indicates the separation there. Also, Chicago beat Wheaton in a barn-burner at Chicago...and Wheaton is the CCIW's 5th best team. Chicago also played a very close game vs Illinois Wesleyan...the worst team in the CCIW.

http://athletics.uchicago.edu/mensbasketball/WHT-UCM.HTM

http://athletics.uchicago.edu/mensbasketball/UCM-IWU.HTM

If Chicago is the UAA's second best team, there is not a debate here. If someone can make a case for about 3 UAA teams (besides Wash U) being better than Chicago and Chicago being about the 5th best team, we certainly have a good discussion. But even then, do Emory and Case Western Reserve stack up with Millikin and Illinois Wesleyan?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on January 30, 2007, 08:18:08 PM

At the half
Amherst-26
RIC-24

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2007, 08:23:41 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 30, 2007, 05:13:04 PM

Messiah was on my list of teams to watch this week as I was looking at who might move into the poll. They certainly make a similar case to Scranton, which I believe got a couple of votes this week, right?

No, Ypsi, Scranton did not get votes this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on January 30, 2007, 09:10:08 PM

PrideSportBBallGuy Rankings through Monday's games

1 Amherst
2 Wooster
3 Lake Erie
4 Hope
5 Mississippi College
6 Virginia Wesleyan
7 Scranton
8 St. Thomas
9 UW-Stevens Point
10 Utica
11 UW-Oshkosh
12 Whitworth
13 Maryville(TN)
14 Washington U.
15 Worchester Polytech
16 DePauw
17 John Hopkins
18 Trinity(Conn)
19 Messiah
20 Bates
21 Aurora
22 Augustana
23 Salem St.
24 Wittenberg
25 Chicago

Dropped Out #19 Keene St, #21 NYU, #23 Lincoln, #24 Puget Sound, and #25 Elmhurst.

Here it is for this week. Now if you would excuse me House is on Fox. I won't be back until the show is over

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on January 30, 2007, 09:12:26 PM

Final Amherst-62 RIC-48

RIC shoots 27% from the field and 18% from behind the arc.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 30, 2007, 09:49:19 PM

WLC 87 No. 16 Aurora 82 - Final

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 30, 2007, 10:12:04 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on January 30, 2007, 09:49:19 PM
WLC 87 No. 16 Aurora 82 - Final

Did this make anyone else laugh? :D :-X

I have a feeling Aurora wont be in the Top 10 this week... how ironic.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 30, 2007, 10:18:39 PM

Top 25 Schedule and Scores, Jan. 29-Feb. 4 (UPDATED with Tuesday scores):

#   1   Amherst (21-0) won at Rhode Island Coll. 62-48, hosts Conn. College Fri., and hosts Wesleyan Sat.
#   2   Wooster (17-2) hosts Allegheny Wed. and hosts #11 Wittenberg Sat.
#   3   UW-Stevens Point (16-2) hosts UW-Eau Claire Wed. and plays at #22 UW-La Crosse Sat.
#   4   Mississippi College (17-1) plays at LeTourneau Thu. and plays at East Texas Baptist Sat.
#   5   UW-Oshkosh (17-3) hosts #22 UW-La Crosse Wed. and hosts UW-Stout Sat.
#   6   St. Thomas (17-2) hosts Carleton Wed. and hosts Bethel Sat.
#   7   Washington U. (16-1) plays at #25 NYU Fri. and plays at Brandeis Sun.
#   8   Virginia Wesleyan (16-3) hosts Bridgewater (VA) Wed., plays at Roanoke Sat., and plays at Washington and Lee Sun.
#   9   Hope (16-2) plays at Olivet Wed. and plays at Albion Sat.
#   10   Augustana (16-3) plays at North Park Wed. and plays at #17 Carthage Sat.
#   11   Wittenberg (16-3) hosts Earlham Wed. and plays at #2 Wooster Sat.
#   12   Elmhurst (15-3) hosts Millikin Wed. and plays at Illinois Wesleyan Sat.
#   13   Whitworth (17-2) hosts Linfield Fri. and hosts George Fox Sat.
#   14   Ohio Northern (15-4) plays at Otterbein Wed. and hosts John Carroll Sat.
#   15   Worcester Polytech (16-1) hosts Clark Wed. and plays at Babson Sat.
#   16   Aurora (17-2) lost at Wisconsin Lutheran 87-82, hosts Maranatha Baptist Thu., and hosts Marian Sat.
#   17   Carthage (13-5) plays at Wheaton (IL) Wed. and hosts #10 Augustana Sat.
#   18   Occidental (12-4) hosts Whittier Wed. and plays at Cal Tech Sat.
#   19   Chicago (15-3) plays at Brandeis Fri. and plays at #25 NYU Sun.
#   20   Johns Hopkins (17-2) plays at Swarthmore Wed. and plays at Haverford Sat.
#   21   Puget Sound (15-4) def. Pacific Lutheran 89-86 and hosts Pacific Sat.
#   22   La Crosse (13-6) plays at #5 UW-Oshkosh Wed. and hosts #3 UW-Stevens Point Sat.
#   23   Bates (16-3) plays at Williams Fri. and plays at Middlebury Sat.
#   24   Guilford (14-3) plays at Washington and Lee Wed. and plays at Lynchburg Sat.
#   25   NYU (14-4) hosts #7 Washington U. Fri. and hosts #19 Chicago Sat.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 30, 2007, 10:44:22 PM

Somehow I think the Maranatha / Marian duo isn't going to help Aurora save face.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 30, 2007, 11:01:05 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on January 30, 2007, 09:49:19 PM
WLC 87 No. 16 Aurora 82 - Final

Wisconsin Lutheran lost in the first round of last years NCAA by 42.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WLCALUM83 on January 30, 2007, 11:31:15 PM

Quote from: diehardfan on January 30, 2007, 10:12:04 PM
Quote from: gordonmann on January 30, 2007, 09:49:19 PM
WLC 87 No. 16 Aurora 82 - Final

Did this make anyone else laugh? :D :-X

I have a feeling Aurora wont be in the Top 10 this week... how ironic.

I had to pinch myself to make sure I wasn't dreaming!

My questions:

1 Was it something Coach Noon said in the locker room prior to the game?
2 How loud was WLC's "6th Man" crowd?
3 Other (from what I read off WLC's box score, Aurora had 2 starters foul out).

While it may be good for WLC, with Edgewood having lost as well this evening, if no NAthCon men's team makes Nationals, this night's developments will be one reason why.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 30, 2007, 11:32:27 PM

#21 Puget Sound is flirting with a third consecutive loss; they trail 7-10 Pacific Lutheran 37-31 with 5:38 left in the first half. Live stats (http://www2.ups.edu/athletics/xlive.htm)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 30, 2007, 11:54:20 PM

WLC upsets Aurora 87-82 (http://www.wlc.edu/uploadedFiles/athletics/m_basketball/2006-2007/0130wlau.htm)

Wow. I wish I could say I was impressed with both teams and WLC dug in deep and came out with an impressive win against a solid conference foe...but, I'd be lying.

What a mess. Now, before I go on my rant, remember this...this is the first time I've seen Aurora play, and the first time this year I've seen WLC play. Not to be too bias, I'll try not to compare or reference Stevens Point or Oshkosh in my opinion of this game. For all I know, this could've been the best game WLC has ever played or the worst game Aurora has ever played.

This site and the Aurora site had the game scheduled for 7:30, while the WLC site had the game set for 7:00. I got there about 10 after and the game had already started. Apparently, Aurora missed the TPS Report memo and didn't show up until 7:30 as well. ;D

Going in, I didn't think I was going to be impressed with WLC, considering I saw them last year against a horrible Eau Claire team...and they lost that one. I think the first half, WLC basically played on adrenaline. To paraphrase Swampgoon, "They didn't know where they were going, but they were getting there pretty damn quick." They were all over the place, usually doubling the ball-handler on defense and launching shots left and right on offense. They went up 33-22 and it looked all over for Aurora. But, to their credit, they fought back were down just 40-39 at the break. After the break, Aurora seemed to slow things down a little bit (or WLC ran out of gas) and they actually took a brief lead before going on a cold spell that they would never recover from.

WLC wanted this game a lot more and they showed it with emotion and hustle. On the other hand, Aurora must have been reading too much D3hoops because it seemed like they didn't want to be there and WLC should just give them the win. I wasn't impressed with Aurora at all. They played literally no defense at times and you could tell coach Lancaster wasn't too happy about it. There were several ocassions when he would yell, "Watch the back door" and guess what, back door cut = easy lay up. The defenders rarely had their hands up or in the face of the ball handlers, making easy passing lanes. They were slow on help defense, lacking team defense and just overall forgot to play defense most of the time. There were a couple of times when Aurora turned the ball over and some of the players were walking back on defense with their heads down not even looking at the ball as it flew past them! Seriously. Not very disciplined at all, IMO.

I think Aurora would get eaten alive by any team with a disciplined offense like Lawrence. Any opponent with a big guy in the middle, Aurora would also have problems. Aurora is not very big with Mike Leonard (6'6" but thin) and Larry Welton (about the same size) their only "inside" players. They are very guard oriented and I'm surprised WLC didn't try to pound it inside more with the likes of Nate Sorum (6'7) or Brian Hagel (6'8"), both with more meat than Leonard or Welton. I know their only other loss was to Edgewood and they have a nice post presence in Averkamp, and a solid forward in De Marco. Looking at that boxscore, those two ate them up, Averkamp and De Marco combining for 44 of Edgewood's 68 points. Averkamp also had 19 rebounds! To compare, nearly any team in the WIAC, even the mid-level ones like Stout (Jacob Nonemacher & Heisler), Platteville (Gossens & when Skemp was healthy) and even La Crosse (Werner is probably WIAC POTY) would just destroy Aurora inside.

I think Aurora would be better suited against a more up tempo team like IWU, Carthage or Carroll, rather than trying to defend a team like Lawrence or Platteville. But, with that said, Carthage has a stud in Schlemm...at least from what I saw on Saturday. IWU does have Freeman, but I don't think he's a "back to the basket" post presence. He plays more like Leonard or Welton, facing the basket, using their quickness etc, IMO.

I wasn't impressed with Aurora's guards either. They had trouble facing in-your-face pressure, shown by their 16 first half TOs (20 total, so they improved drastically) and Darrick Leonard tried to hard to do it all...usually running with his head down and trying to make something out of nothing. Even without looking at the boxscore, Mike Leonard (#31) was by far the best player Aurora had tonight. IMO, Larry Welton was nonexistent.

Apparently trying to keep my eye on Welton and watching Mike Leonard do well underneath, I missed the fact that guard Chad Trudo had a quiet 16 points, 4 asts and only 1 TO. 5-7 FGs including 4-5 from 3. I guess when Lambert is coughing the ball up four times (seemed like more) and Leonard and Leonard launching 26 shots combined, I missed those 7 Lambert took! My apologies.

Anyway....that's neither here or there. Hardly an impressive showing by Aurora. Since nearly every WIAC team has a good to great post presence and most actually play some sort of defense, I don't think Aurora would have any shot in the WIAC. Carthage (with Schlemm and quick guards) and IWU (with Freeman in the post) would beat Aurora, from what I saw Saturday and Lawrence (because of their style) and Carroll (with Drury and some good inside players) would also take care of Aurora. I think Aurora would have a shot at Grinnell, simply because of the up and down pace they play, though their ball-handling skills would come into question against Grinnell's pressure defense.

Well, this was WAY TOO LONG and I apologize. I was probably just rambling. Sorry.

On a side note, the famous "6th Man" was very entertaining and loud the entire game. They had some funny moments. There were about 50-75 of them and stood the whole game. The boxscore said 232, but I swear, they were the only ones there. I don't even remember the "general public" clapping or cheering, even after WLC upset the #16 team in the nation!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 31, 2007, 12:23:18 AM

Quote from: Old School on January 30, 2007, 11:54:20 PM
IWU does have Freeman, but I don't think he's a "back to the basket" post presence.

OS, Andrew Freeman is the face-the-basket twin. Zach (the preseason All-American) has become primarily a back-to-the-basket player. While he is a very good jump shooter out to about 17 feet, most of his points come from right around the basket.

Nice recap of the game, by the way...thanks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 31, 2007, 12:27:31 AM

Really, that didn't seem that way on Saturday. Sure, he gets a lot of looks around the basket, but I didn't have the impression that they "threw it down in the block" to Zach all the time! ::) ??? ;D Maybe he just ended up facing the basket all the time! lol. You'd obviously know more than me about that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 31, 2007, 12:34:45 AM

Quote from: Old School on January 31, 2007, 12:27:31 AM
Really, that didn't seem that way on Saturday. Sure, he gets a lot of looks around the basket, but I didn't have the impression that they "threw it down in the block" to Zach all the time! ::) ??? ;D Maybe he just ended up facing the basket all the time! lol. You'd obviously know more than me about that.

It depends on matchups, of course. Against a big, strong, physical post player like Brian Schlemm, they like to face Zach up at the FT line where he can shoot the 15 footer, or use his quickness and athleticism to drive to the basket and finish. But against most opposing post defenders, Zach sets up on the blocks and the ball is dumped down to him.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 31, 2007, 12:41:34 AM

#21 UPS, down 15 with 6:42 left, outscores Pac Lute 23-5 down the stretch to pull out an 89-86 victory.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 31, 2007, 04:53:57 AM

Quote from: Old School on January 30, 2007, 11:54:20 PMWow. I wish I could say I was impressed with both teams and WLC dug in deep and came out with an impressive win against a solid conference foe...but, I'd be lying.

OS, I addressed your post at length in the NAthC room (where you had also posted it), and in that post I made the same point as Bob about Zach Freeman. But I also think that you might've drawn some conclusions about Aurora that don't really do justice to the Spartans, based upon seeing them only once in what was almost certainly a very atypical performance by them. I made particular mention of your point about Aurora having problems handling teams with big players, since their trouncing of North Central (an extremely inside-oriented team that has two outstanding big men plus a very capable role-playing big man) earlier this year belies your conclusion about the Spartans.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 31, 2007, 06:26:38 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 31, 2007, 04:53:57 AM
But I also think that you might've drawn some conclusions about Aurora that don't really do justice to the Spartans, based upon seeing them only once...

And that was the key...I'll read up on it. Thanks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 31, 2007, 06:27:46 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 31, 2007, 12:34:45 AM
depends on matchups, of course. Against a big, strong, physical post player like Brian Schlemm, they like to face Zach up at the FT line where he can shoot the 15 footer, or use his quickness and athleticism to drive to the basket and finish. But against most opposing post defenders, Zach sets up on the blocks and the ball is dumped down to him.

Thanks, that explains Saturday...and I think Freeman wouldn't have had any problem setting up in the blocks, as long as the rest of the IWU team helped out in terms of moving around.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 31, 2007, 07:13:28 AM

Quote from: Old School on January 31, 2007, 06:27:46 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 31, 2007, 12:34:45 AM
depends on matchups, of course. Against a big, strong, physical post player like Brian Schlemm, they like to face Zach up at the FT line where he can shoot the 15 footer, or use his quickness and athleticism to drive to the basket and finish. But against most opposing post defenders, Zach sets up on the blocks and the ball is dumped down to him.

Thanks, that explains Saturday...and I think Freeman wouldn't have had any problem setting up in the blocks, as long as the rest of the IWU team helped out in terms of moving around.

FWIW, this is standard operating procedure against a powerful big man who is a lot less mobile than whichever big man you have on the floor at the moment, as long as your big man can handle the ball a bit and shoot the midrange shot. When North Park played Carthage last week and Schlemm was guarding NPU's Stephano Jones (a traditional back-to-the-basket center), Jones exclusively posted down low to take advantage of his strengths. But when Jones was out of the game and Schlemm was put on Anthony Lenoir -- a big man who is much quicker than Jones, has good handles, and can hit the midrange shot -- NPU coach Paul Brenegan did with Lenoir what Illinois Wesleyan coach Ron Rose did with Zach Freeman in terms of having him face up against Schlemm farther from the basket.

That doesn't mean that Lenoir can't back people in, because he's very good at that aspect of the game. But he has the skills that allow for other options offensively, and in this instance facing up from midrange was a better option with that particular player (Schlemm) guarding him. I suspect that when other quick-footed big men who can handle the ball and have a good midrange J face Schlemm (e.g., NCC's Anthony Simmons), the strategy employed is the same.

(It also helps that Schlemm is foul-prone and doesn't always move his feet well on defense, as refs are more likely to call a hack or reach-in on a drive to the basket than on a back-in in the low post.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: keith45 on January 31, 2007, 09:11:31 AM

Is there a D3HOOPS front page curse?? ???

I deserve all the abuse you give..OS and others have been very polite...go ahead, let it out

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 31, 2007, 09:22:11 AM

Quote from: keith45 on January 31, 2007, 09:11:31 AM
Is there a D3HOOPS front page curse?? ???

I deserve all the abuse you give..OS and others have been very polite...go ahead, let it out

I don't think you're going to get abuse here, Keith. Your passion for AU is appreciated.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dman on January 31, 2007, 09:28:00 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2007, 01:54:10 PM
Gustavus played in the title game in 2003. Nearly won. Kind of an unfortunate call at the end didn't help.

Pat,
i will be the first person to state that williams was incredibly lucky to win the national championship and had some major breaks go their way. but to insinuate that the refs had something to do with the outcome of the national championship that year comes across as pretty cheesy. from my perspective it looked like williams played with poise down the stretch, while ga forgot some of the fundamentals- such as drew demuth stripping their center from outside the 3pt. line so folan could score on a breakaway; tim brown short-arming a put-back; chris tebrake,an 80% freethrow shooter missing 2 with 1:10 to go; failing to box out on a missed free throw with the score tied and 4 seconds left; folan got that rebound and scored both ft's to win; ga had 2 timeouts left- why didn't they call timeout to ice coffin and then folan?? both fouls that were called were legit, and i actually replayed the tape to refresh my memory. it is clear that both were good calls and the refs had to call it the way they saw it. i think the look of disbelief on the ga players is just as much shock at their lead slipping away as it was questioning whether the calls were fortunate or unfortunate.....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 31, 2007, 01:06:36 PM

Quote from: keith45 on January 31, 2007, 09:11:31 AM
Is there a D3HOOPS front page curse?? ???

I deserve all the abuse you give..OS and others have been very polite...go ahead, let it out

I concur with Bob, we're not vindictive people, you're not going to get mean spirited comments. I couldn't help but laugh at the irony, and posted as such, but that's just cause I am one of those weird people who are basically always open about what I feel and think. Because of the nice gesture of Larry Welton last season at our opening weekend tourney (if you don't know what I'm talking about, I'll be happy to elaborate), it would be pretty much impossible for me not to have anything but the best wishes for the Aurora program. Besides, DIII needs more committed fans. Those of us who love this sport would be fools to scare those who also love it away. :)

A bad night doesn't necessarily mean that Aurora is the worst team in the world either. Yes, it sucks when you team loses, and/or they're not playing to potential (I know that feeling this year, I'm a Wheaton fan!) but that doesn't mean that the team deserves to be berated. Aurora is still in pretty good position based on in-region record alone to host a playoff game, and i doubt their loss drops them out of the Top 25 completely... and being a Top 25 team in the nation is nothing to scoff at.

Have confidence in the voters, that's all we were saying. They're obviously human and can't do things perfectly or magically know how everything's going to shake down in advance, but they do know what they are doing. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 31, 2007, 02:00:24 PM

dman,

I was seated about 20 feet from the play. I feel confident in what I saw.

All I said was it didn't help. Can you really argue that point? I specifically did NOT say it was the sole cause, or the cause at all, of the loss.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: titansrus on January 31, 2007, 03:42:19 PM

For those interested:

You can watch the #5 UW-Oshkosh Titans face the #22 La Crosse Eagles tonight at the Kolf Sports Center. Here's the link:

http://www.titans.uwosh.edu/MBasketball/

The unfortunate part is it costs $8 to watch-but as the article says includes the play by play and camera work done by Titan TV sports. The money is needed to offset the costs of Stretch Internet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 31, 2007, 04:14:43 PM

I got ripped pretty good by Sager in the NathCon room (really? no, but it sounded good)...As I said at the beginning of my post about the Aurora/WLC game, it was the first time I've seen Aurora and it could've been the worst game they played all year, for all I know...So, it was important to know that my post was based ONLY on that game. Is Aurora that bad, I doubt it. Are they #16 in the nation? I have no idea really. I guess I would have to see them 2 or 3 more times to get an "average" opinion on them.

With that said, even on "bad" nights, the attitude of the team and the defensive efforts can still be there, they weren't last night. I realize I based Aurora on that game alone....so, that would be like someone coming to Quandt to see Point lose at home to Oshkosh by 17 and I'm sure someone would say, "Wow, that's supposed to be the #1 team in the nation, I think not!" There you have it.

There really wasn't that much that impressed me with Aurora, and it's not like WLC is a highly talented team either (though their heart, hustle and will was a lot more intense that Aurora's, and that's what won them the game, IMO).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 31, 2007, 09:05:41 PM

Final: #2 Wooster 109 Allegheny 71

Wooster jumped out to a 14-0 start, led by 23 points at the half and cleared the bench with about 7 minutes remaining.

Wooster was led tonight by James Cooper with 31 points (7 of 9 on three pointers), Tom Port with 15 points (3 three pointers, one dunk) and Brandon Johnson with 14 points. Scots played good defense and shot well to secure this lopsided win. Wooster made 14 three pointers and shot over 58% from behind the arc.

Wooster is now 18-2, 11-0 NCAC. :) Big game vs Wittenberg on Saturday!

GO SCOTS!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 31, 2007, 09:29:01 PM

In CCIW action,

Elmhurst is only up 4 at the half to Millikin, 38-34.

Carthage is up two @ Wheaton at the half.

IWU is destroying NCC at home thus far 39-23. It sounded like Walton got in foul trouble early... a big uh oh to that... there go NCC's other receiving votes if they can't catch up

wheatonhoops.googlepages.com/broadcasts is where you can find the links to the various schools broadcasts... sorry, I'm too lazy to type them all in :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 31, 2007, 09:46:36 PM

Top 25 Schedule and Scores, Jan. 29-Feb. 4 (UPDATED with Thursday scores):

#   1   Amherst (21-0) won at Rhode Island Coll. 62-48, hosts Conn. College Fri., and hosts Wesleyan Sat.
#   2   Wooster (18-2) def. Allegheny 109-71 and hosts #11 Wittenberg Sat.
#   3   UW-Stevens Point (17-2) def. UW-Eau Claire 90-61 and plays at #22 UW-La Crosse Sat.
#   4   Mississippi College (17-2) lost at LeTourneau 64-62 and plays at East Texas Baptist Sat.
#   5   UW-Oshkosh (17-4) lost to #22 UW-La Crosse 73-62 and hosts UW-Stout Sat.
#   6   St. Thomas (18-2) def. Carleton 51-41 and hosts Bethel Sat.
#   7   Washington U. (16-1) plays at #25 NYU Fri. and plays at Brandeis Sun.
#   8   Virginia Wesleyan (17-3) def. Bridgewater (VA) 85-46, plays at Roanoke Sat., and plays at Washington and Lee Sun.
#   9   Hope (17-2) won at Olivet 79-57 and plays at Albion Sat.
#   10   Augustana (17-3) won at North Park 71-56 and plays at #17 Carthage Sat.
#   11   Wittenberg (17-3) def. Earlham 87-40 and plays at #2 Wooster Sat.
#   12   Elmhurst (15-4) lost to Millikin 89-85 and plays at Illinois Wesleyan Sat.
#   13   Whitworth (17-2) hosts Linfield Fri. and hosts George Fox Sat.
#   14   Ohio Northern (16-4) won at Otterbein 66-63 (OT) and hosts John Carroll Sat.
#   15   Worcester Polytech (17-1) def. Clark 73-52 and plays at Babson Sat.
#   16   Aurora (18-2) lost at Wisconsin Lutheran 87-82, def. Maranatha Baptist 100-49, and hosts Marian Sat.
#   17   Carthage (13-6) lost at Wheaton (IL) 71-67 and hosts #10 Augustana Sat.
#   18   Occidental (13-4) def. Whittier 82-60 and plays at Cal Tech Sat.
#   19   Chicago (15-3) plays at Brandeis Fri. and plays at #25 NYU Sun.
#   20   Johns Hopkins (18-2) won at Swarthmore 63-59 and plays at Haverford Sat.
#   21   Puget Sound (15-4) def. Pacific Lutheran 89-86 and hosts Pacific Sat.
#   22   UW-La Crosse (14-6) won at #5 UW-Oshkosh 73-62 and hosts #3 UW-Stevens Point Sat.
#   23   Bates (16-3) plays at Williams Fri. and plays at Middlebury Sat.
#   24   Guilford (15-3) won at Washington and Lee 62-61 and plays at Lynchburg Sat.
#   25   NYU (14-4) hosts #7 Washington U. Fri. and hosts #19 Chicago Sat.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hope1 on January 31, 2007, 09:51:41 PM

HOPE 79 OLIVET 57

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on January 31, 2007, 10:34:54 PM

Craziness in the CCIW.

ORV Wheaton knocks off #17 Carthage at Wheaton's King Arena in their first matchup of the season. Wheaton was down by two at half, and then got further down as the game progressed.... grabbed the lead in the last few minutes and then stayed off a Carthage comeback attempt. The game ended with Wheaton hitting their fts down the stretch.

Right now I think Wheaton is about right in terms of Top 25 (on the radar, but off the list.... though if they keep playing like they did in the last 8 minutes of Carthage they will earn their ranking back later). Carthage is probably too high... but I guess we'll know know more as the season moves forward...

Millikin takes down Elmhurst 89-85.

ORV NCC loses big @ IWU

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 01, 2007, 10:26:39 PM

LeTourneau upends #4 Mississippi College tonight, 64-62, snapping MC's 17-game winning streak.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on February 01, 2007, 11:04:03 PM

Not a good night for Mississippi College. I was not there but the boxscore shows MC just 1-10 from the three point line while LeTourneau hit 9-21.
boxscore at http://www.gochoctaws.com/sports/mbball/2006-07Stats/letvsmc.htm (http://www.gochoctaws.com/sports/mbball/2006-07Stats/letvsmc.htm)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Rhodes Scholar on February 01, 2007, 11:22:39 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 01, 2007, 10:26:39 PM
LeTourneau upends #4 Mississippi College tonight, 64-62, snapping MC's 17-game winning streak.

Mississippi College opened the season with a rather puzzling loss to Wesley, MS and then won their next 17 in a row. It should be noted that 16 of those 17 wins were double-digit victories. Even though they faced a less-than-demanding schedule, that's still a nice accomplishment.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gccfan on February 01, 2007, 11:55:45 PM

I saw the LETU-Miss Coll. game tonight and it was an amazing finish. MC led by 5 with under two minutes to play thanks to DJ Jones who was 10-of-14 from the field and had 23 points. The Jackets scored on a nice back door with 1:22 left and then got a steal on the other end. After missing three shots on the ensuing possession the Jackets got another chance and Jayme Bradley hit a three to tie the game with 32 seconds. No time out called. Jonathan Collins cleared out and went one-on-one missing a shot with 9 seconds left, Bradley grabbed the rebound and threw it the length of the court thinking time was about to run out. The ball hits the backboard, LETU rebounds the ball near half court, miss one chance and get a tip-in at the buzzer to win. Craziness!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 02, 2007, 12:05:39 AM

Quote from: Rhodes Scholar on February 01, 2007, 11:22:39 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on February 01, 2007, 10:26:39 PM
LeTourneau upends #4 Mississippi College tonight, 64-62, snapping MC's 17-game winning streak.

Mississippi College opened the season with a rather puzzling loss to Wesley, MS and then won their next 17 in a row. It should be noted that 16 of those 17 wins were double-digit victories. Even though they faced a less-than-demanding schedule, that's still a nice accomplishment.

My take on the MissColl schedule is that they had their off-night at their worst venue on the East. LeTU is having a great season, and has more athleticism than they have had in years. Also, I think that their match-up gives MC the hardest time. It is very hard to defeat someone by 21 at home and then go their place a week later, as this series was. Altho' MC goes to UT-Dallas two weeks from tonight, I think that the Chocs match up very well with UT-Dallas.

The Chocs have a 4-game lead on UT-D with 5 to play and a 5-game lead on LeTU. The conference tourney is where all of the shuffling is going. Dollars to donuts that the tourney goes back to the Golden Dome. Everyone is jockeying for position.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 02, 2007, 09:00:42 AM

As the story on the front page mentions, MC has been without their best player since last week. That might be the grain of salt for this loss. Taking nothing away from LeTourneau, because it's still a great win, but that should be mentioned.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 02, 2007, 09:19:32 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 02, 2007, 09:00:42 AM

As the story on the front page mentions, MC has been without their best player since last week. That might be the grain of salt for this loss. Taking nothing away from LeTourneau, because it's still a great win, but that should be mentioned.

I think that the more accurate assessment of Winford's contributions to the team relate to his leadership ability.

Looking at the stat sheets (http://www.gochoctaws.com/sports/mbball/2006-07Stats/teamcume.htm), thru last Thursday, he was 5th in minutes, 4th in scoring and 5th in rebounds on the team. His replacement, Ryan Hudson, was 6th in minutes, 5th in scoring and 4th in rebounds. That is not much drop-off on a team that has 9 players getting double-digit minutes and 11 players getting 8 minutes per game.

He is scheduled to return for the conference tourney. From MissCollege's perspective, this may the "adversity" episode that the team needed to take their game to the next level for the ASC tourney and the playoffs. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 02, 2007, 09:23:04 AM

Let's hope, it's time for the players to step up and earn the respect MC's worked so hard for over the last few years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on February 02, 2007, 10:02:24 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 02, 2007, 09:00:42 AM

As the story on the front page mentions, MC has been without their best player since last week. That might be the grain of salt for this loss. Taking nothing away from LeTourneau, because it's still a great win, but that should be mentioned.

I really did not want to mention that because I remember reading of a couple of teams in the Top 25 this year who had to play games without a top player. But it certainly hurts with Tyler not in there.

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 02, 2007, 09:19:32 AM
Looking at the stat sheets (http://www.gochoctaws.com/sports/mbball/2006-07Stats/teamcume.htm), thru last Thursday, he was 5th in minutes, 4th in scoring and 5th in rebounds on the team. His replacement, Ryan Hudson, was 6th in minutes, 5th in scoring and 4th in rebounds. That is not much drop-off on a team that has 9 players getting double-digit minutes and 11 players getting 8 minutes per game.

Ralph,
I know what the stat sheet shows, his numbers have been down this year but he is much more valuable than the numbers and has played great since the New Year after struggling in the Fall. He would be the first to tell you he was terrible the first month and has been digging himself out of a deep hole on the stat sheet. Teams gave him a ton of attention early which helped other players get off to great starts. He is preparing for medical school and takes a very demanding schedule of labs and classes, plus this is our most talented starting five we have ever had. I could argue that D. J. Jones and Timothy Broomfield are the best guard duo in the country and that certainly takes away some numbers.

He is the best post defender on the team and gives them versatility because at 6'6" he can post up or step out and consistently hit 16-18 footers. Luckily for us he is scheduled to return next Saturday so hopefully we can be full strength by tournament time.

Hats off to LeTourneau though, they have made major improvements since last year and got a huge win for their program. I hope they continue to improve, it is good for the conference.

Title: Wash U
Post by: mgoblue on February 02, 2007, 11:14:01 AM

I go to Wash U and had the chance to watch them play against Rochester a couple of weeks ago. Although I admit I have not watched another game this season, this has to be one of the worst top ten teams that I remember watching. No size to speak of, no speed to speak of and no amazing shooters. Just wondering if I'm missing a big part of what makes them so special. Obviously their coach has a great reputation, but I just don't see this team making it past the first or second round, should they make the playoffs.

Title: Re: Wash U
Post by: Titan Q on February 02, 2007, 12:25:19 PM

Quote from: mgoblue on February 02, 2007, 11:14:01 AM
I go to Wash U and had the chance to watch them play against Rochester a couple of weeks ago. Although I admit I have not watched another game this season, this has to be one of the worst top ten teams that I remember watching. No size to speak of, no speed to speak of and no amazing shooters. Just wondering if I'm missing a big part of what makes them so special. Obviously their coach has a great reputation, but I just don't see this team making it past the first or second round, should they make the playoffs.

I'm confused. Rochester isn't in the Top 10, so you can't be talking about them. Yet Wash U has one of the best low post players in Division III in 6-6 Troy Ruths (19.6 ppg, 7.2 rpg)...guard Sean Wallis is 31-70 (.443) from 3 and Tyler Nading and Aaron Thompson shoot it real well too...so when you say "No size to speak of, no speed to speak of and no amazing shooters", I'm lost.

Title: Re: Wash U
Post by: David Collinge on February 02, 2007, 12:28:40 PM

I'm reasonably certain that mgoblue is talking about the women's team and just found the wrong page. Here's the clue:

Quote from: mgoblue on February 02, 2007, 11:14:01 AMObviously their coach has a great reputation, [...]

Title: Re: Wash U
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 02, 2007, 12:41:15 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 02, 2007, 12:28:40 PM
I'm reasonably certain that mgoblue is talking about the women's team and just found the wrong page. Here's the clue:

Quote from: mgoblue on February 02, 2007, 11:14:01 AMObviously their coach has a great reputation, [...]

Perhaps. But their women aren't in the Top 10 either. :)

Title: Re: Wash U
Post by: David Collinge on February 02, 2007, 12:44:02 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 02, 2007, 12:41:15 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on February 02, 2007, 12:28:40 PM
I'm reasonably certain that mgoblue is talking about the women's team and just found the wrong page. Here's the clue:

Quote from: mgoblue on February 02, 2007, 11:14:01 AMObviously their coach has a great reputation, [...]

Perhaps. But their women aren't in the Top 10 either. :)

Almost. And Rochester's are. In any case, it's a confusing post at best.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 02, 2007, 12:51:23 PM

Ahh. Well THAT crew might be untalented or whatever but it beat full-strength Scranton and beat NYU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 02, 2007, 01:01:44 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 02, 2007, 12:51:23 PM
Ahh. Well THAT crew might be untalented or whatever but it beat full-strength Scranton and beat NYU.

Scranton has gotten too caught up in the glitzy celebrity scene since Scranton became a hot vacation spot after its publicity on The Office. They're just not focused on the game anymore.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 02, 2007, 01:07:42 PM

I think the whole team is just waiting for pretzel day.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 02, 2007, 01:25:17 PM

Quote from: Chris Brooks on February 02, 2007, 10:02:24 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 02, 2007, 09:00:42 AM

As the story on the front page mentions, MC has been without their best player since last week. That might be the grain of salt for this loss. Taking nothing away from LeTourneau, because it's still a great win, but that should be mentioned.
I really did not want to mention that because I remember reading of a couple of teams in the Top 25 this year who had to play games without a top player. But it certainly hurts with Tyler not in there.

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 02, 2007, 09:19:32 AM
Looking at the stat sheets (http://www.gochoctaws.com/sports/mbball/2006-07Stats/teamcume.htm), thru last Thursday, he was 5th in minutes, 4th in scoring and 5th in rebounds on the team. His replacement, Ryan Hudson, was 6th in minutes, 5th in scoring and 4th in rebounds. That is not much drop-off on a team that has 9 players getting double-digit minutes and 11 players getting 8 minutes per game.
Ralph,
I know what the stat sheet shows, his numbers have been down this year but he is much more valuable than the numbers and has played great since the New Year after struggling in the Fall. He would be the first to tell you he was terrible the first month and has been digging himself out of a deep hole on the stat sheet. Teams gave him a ton of attention early which helped other players get off to great starts. He is preparing for medical school and takes a very demanding schedule of labs and classes, plus this is our most talented starting five we have ever had. I could argue that D. J. Jones and Timothy Broomfield are the best guard duo in the country and that certainly takes away some numbers.

He is the best post defender on the team and gives them versatility because at 6'6" he can post up or step out and consistently hit 16-18 footers. Luckily for us he is scheduled to return next Saturday so hopefully we can be full strength by tournament time.
...

Chris, thanks. My sources said that MissColl would be hurting without Tyler. I just could not speak more specifically.

Defense must be seen over several games and may not show up on the stat sheet. I do think that this is the "adversity" episode needed to take the team chemistry to the next level. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 02, 2007, 02:18:22 PM

Wooster is missing its senior co-captain and starting center Tim Vandervaart (14.3 ppg, 8.6 rpg), who broke his left wrist against Ohio Wesleyan last week and is out for at least the rest of the regular season. Wittenberg is missing sophomore wing Mark Caraway, who had recently become a starter and was averaging 7 ppg when he injured his knee a couple of weeks ago; he's done for the season.

One of these two teams will lose tomorrow, and the absent player will be a big reason why.

Everyone has injury problems, or so it seems. Amherst, Wooster, Va. Wesleyan, St. Thomas, Wittenberg, now Mississippi College, and the list goes on and on.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: goscots on February 02, 2007, 05:51:48 PM

Add to that list U. of Chicago who has had their starting center out with a foot injury for several weeks now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 02, 2007, 05:58:53 PM

So how long before someone makes an "All Injured" Team?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 02, 2007, 06:02:24 PM

Here is the hyperlink to the LETU-MissCollege finish.

LETU-MissCollege Final Minute Video Clip (http://www.letu.edu/opencms/export/download/athletics/LETU-MC.zip)

Requires Windows Media Player

Thanks to gccfan! (+1 ;) )

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on February 02, 2007, 06:05:31 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 02, 2007, 06:02:24 PM
Here is the hyperlink to the LETU-MissCollege finish.

LETU-MissCollege Final Minute Video Clip (http://www.letu.edu/opencms/export/download/athletics/LETU-MC.zip)

Requires Windows Media Player

Thanks to gccfan! (+1 ;) )

If you have a second, check out the MC/LeTourneau ending. I have never seen a game end like that and probably never will again. That has to be a Sportscenter Play of the Week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 02, 2007, 10:25:14 PM

Top 25 Schedule and Scores, Jan. 29-Feb. 4 (UPDATED with Friday scores):

#   1   Amherst (22-0) won at Rhode Island Coll. 62-48, def. Conn. College 91-49, and hosts Wesleyan Sat.
#   2   Wooster (18-2) def. Allegheny 109-71 and hosts #11 Wittenberg Sat.
#   3   UW-Stevens Point (17-2) def. UW-Eau Claire 90-61 and plays at #22 UW-La Crosse Sat.
#   4   Mississippi College (17-2) lost at LeTourneau 64-62 and plays at East Texas Baptist Sat.
#   5   UW-Oshkosh (17-4) lost to #22 UW-La Crosse 73-62 and hosts UW-Stout Sat.
#   6   St. Thomas (18-2) def. Carleton 51-41 and hosts Bethel Sat.
#   7   Washington U. (16-2) lost at #25 NYU 73-57 and plays at Brandeis Sun.
#   8   Virginia Wesleyan (17-3) def. Bridgewater (VA) 85-46, plays at Roanoke Sat., and plays at Washington and Lee Sun.
#   9   Hope (17-2) won at Olivet 79-57 and plays at Albion Sat.
#   10   Augustana (17-3) won at North Park 71-56 and plays at #17 Carthage Sat.
#   11   Wittenberg (17-3) def. Earlham 87-40 and plays at #2 Wooster Sat.
#   12   Elmhurst (15-4) lost to Millikin 89-85 and plays at Illinois Wesleyan Sat.
#   13   Whitworth (18-2) def. Linfield 71-58 and hosts George Fox Sat.
#   14   Ohio Northern (16-4) won at Otterbein 66-63 (OT) and hosts John Carroll Sat.
#   15   Worcester Polytech (17-1) def. Clark 73-52 and plays at Babson Sat.
#   16   Aurora (18-2) lost at Wisconsin Lutheran 87-82, def. Maranatha Baptist 100-49, and hosts Marian Sat.
#   17   Carthage (13-6) lost at Wheaton (IL) 71-67 and hosts #10 Augustana Sat.
#   18   Occidental (13-4) def. Whittier 82-60 and plays at Cal Tech Sat.
#   19   Chicago (16-3) won at Brandeis 74-69 and plays at #25 NYU Sun.
#   20   Johns Hopkins (18-2) won at Swarthmore 63-59 and plays at Haverford Sat.
#   21   Puget Sound (15-4) def. Pacific Lutheran 89-86 and hosts Pacific Sat.
#   22   UW-La Crosse (14-6) won at #5 UW-Oshkosh 73-62 and hosts #3 UW-Stevens Point Sat.
#   23   Bates (16-4) lost at Williams 67-54 and plays at Middlebury Sat.
#   24   Guilford (15-3) won at Washington and Lee 62-61 and plays at Lynchburg Sat.
#   25   NYU (15-4) def. #7 Washington U. 73-57 and hosts #19 Chicago Sat.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 03, 2007, 08:35:04 AM

The game between IWU and #12 Elmhurst (7:30pm CST) will be video streamed on IWU.edu...

http://www2.iwu.edu/news/live/index.shtml

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on February 03, 2007, 11:51:57 AM

Wow.

Awesome work to whomever posted that LeTu/MissColl video.

Can't say I've ever seen a game end that way. Had to watch it twice because I didn't believe my eyes the first time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 03, 2007, 12:23:36 PM

Tonight at 7:30 eastern, #11 Wittenberg at #2 Wooster:

Click here for information on free, live video feed from Wooster
(http://athletics.wooster.edu/mb/news/2006-07/teamline.php)
Click here for information on Wooster's audio broadcast and live stats
(http://www.wooster.edu/interactive/)
Click here for information on Wittenberg's audio broadcast (http://www4.wittenberg.edu/news/athletics/mbasketball/audioschedule06-07.html)

Both Witt and Woo provide professional radio broadcasts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mgoblue on February 03, 2007, 01:12:56 PM

In regards to my Wash U post, I was talking about Wash U and not Rochester. Although I don't know a lot about the program (its my first year of grad school), its my understanding that Wash U has a good coach that wins a lot of games. Despite having Ruth and other players you mentioned, I just don't see them as a top 10 team. I'm not even sure they belong in the top 25. I think my point was proved last night where, by the way, Ruth was 4-12 from the floor with 4 turnovers. Not a performance a top center in the country might have. Like I said before, second round at best.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Rhodes Scholar on February 03, 2007, 01:42:29 PM

Quote from: mgoblue on February 03, 2007, 01:12:56 PM
In regards to my Wash U post, I was talking about Wash U and not Rochester. Although I don't know a lot about the program (its my first year of grad school), its my understanding that Wash U has a good coach that wins a lot of games. Despite having Ruth and other players you mentioned, I just don't see them as a top 10 team. I'm not even sure they belong in the top 25. I think my point was proved last night where, by the way, Ruth was 4-12 from the floor with 4 turnovers. Not a performance a top center in the country might have. Like I said before, second round at best.

Are you talking about Babe Ruth or Troy Ruths?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 03, 2007, 04:14:18 PM

On now, live video of #3 UW-Stevens Point @ #22 UW-La Crosse...

http://www.ifan.tv/

UW-Stevens Point 10-1
UW-Oshkosh 9-3
UW-La Crosse 9-3

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 03, 2007, 05:45:21 PM

Final: UWSP 68, UWLaX 65.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on February 03, 2007, 09:34:08 PM

Final from Timken Gym:

#11 Wittenberg 74, #2 Wooster 71

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 03, 2007, 10:41:52 PM

Top 25 Schedule and Scores, Jan. 29-Feb. 4 (FINAL):

#   1   Amherst (23-0) won at Rhode Island Coll. 62-48, def. Conn. College 91-49, and def. Wesleyan 81-56
#   2   Wooster (18-3) def. Allegheny 109-71 and lost to #11 Wittenberg 74-71
#   3   UW-Stevens Point (18-2) def. UW-Eau Claire 90-61 and won at #22 UW-La Crosse 68-65
#   4   Mississippi College (18-2) lost at LeTourneau 64-62 and won at East Texas Baptist 61-32
#   5   UW-Oshkosh (18-4) lost to #22 UW-La Crosse 73-62 and def. UW-Stout 79-61
#   6   St. Thomas (19-2) def. Carleton 51-41 and def. Bethel 89-67
#   7   Washington U. (16-3) lost at #25 NYU 73-57 and lost at Brandeis 81-75 (3 OT)
#   8   Virginia Wesleyan (19-3) def. Bridgewater (VA) 85-46, won at Roanoke 62-48, and won at Washington and Lee 61-49
#   9   Hope (17-2) won at Olivet 79-57 and had their game at Albion postponed until Monday
#   10   Augustana (17-4) won at North Park 71-56 and lost at #17 Carthage 66-56
#   11   Wittenberg (18-3) def. Earlham 87-40 and won at #2 Wooster 74-71
#   12   Elmhurst (16-4) lost to Millikin 89-85 and won at Illinois Wesleyan 84-69
#   13   Whitworth (19-2) def. Linfield 71-58 and def. George Fox 90-64
#   14   Ohio Northern (16-5) won at Otterbein 66-63 (OT) and lost to John Carroll 79-67
#   15   Worcester Polytech (17-2) def. Clark 73-52 and lost at Babson 79-69
#   16   Aurora (19-2) lost at Wisconsin Lutheran 87-82, def. Maranatha Baptist 100-49, and def. Marian 81-53
#   17   Carthage (14-6) lost at Wheaton (IL) 71-67 and def. #10 Augustana 66-56
#   18   Occidental (14-4) def. Whittier 82-60 and won at Cal Tech 108-31
#   19   Chicago (16-4) won at Brandeis 74-69 and lost at #25 NYU 79-76
#   20   Johns Hopkins (19-2) won at Swarthmore 63-59 and won at Haverford 72-68 (2 OT)
#   21   Puget Sound (16-4) def. Pacific Lutheran 89-86 and def. Pacific 85-79
#   22   UW-La Crosse (14-7) won at #5 UW-Oshkosh 73-62 and lost to #3 UW-Stevens Point 68-65
#   23   Bates (17-4) lost at Williams 67-54 and won at Middlebury 81-48
#   24   Guilford (16-3) won at Washington and Lee 62-61 and won at Lynchburg 95-70
#   25   NYU (16-4) def. #7 Washington U. 73-57 and def. #19 Chicago 79-76

Collectively, 38-14 (.731) for the week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hoopstar on February 03, 2007, 11:31:52 PM

From the looks of the MC-ETBU score(61-32) MC took out some anger on the tigers. The end to the Let. game was definetly crazy. If I am thinking right, this was the first time Let. ever beat MC(that would have had MC like 20-0 verse Let, so they were due). I think MC doesnt have enough close game finishes with 16 of their games being double digits and just 4 not. But they still shot 60% verse Let. the first half and went into halftime down 37-31. But like ralph said it wasnt the right night to be off. 18-2 is very good and all, but this team has no excuse for not being 20-0 as good as they are.

Bring ya A game EVERY game

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 03, 2007, 11:33:09 PM

Almost half (12) of the top 25 teams have lost, including exactly half (five) of the top 10. But, nearly half (5) of the 12 losing teams lost to other teams in the top 25... and for sure 1 more top 25 team will fall, as NYU and Chicago battle on Sunday. I wonder how this will shake up next week's poll?

What does this do to a team like La Crosse, who defeats #5 Oshkosh, and battles down to the last possession (for the second time this year) against #3 Stevens Point? All three top 25 CCIW teams fell this week, and two of the three ranked UAA teams will have fallen after the top 25 bout in NY tomorrow.

Very exciting time to be a basketball fan... this is when teams really have the opportunity to get some REAL NCAA tournament-type experience, playing big games in February before the conference tourney and NCAA's begin.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: walzy31 on February 04, 2007, 02:47:38 PM

With Chicago losing to NYU and WashU losing twice (NYU and Brandeis), will NYU rise to be the top-ranked UAA team in the 10-15 range?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 04, 2007, 02:54:46 PM

Quote from: walzy31 on February 04, 2007, 02:47:38 PM
With Chicago losing to NYU and WashU losing twice (NYU and Brandeis), will NYU rise to be the top-ranked UAA team in the 10-15 range?

I realize NINE teams from the 10th to NYU group lost, but I still don't see NYU jumping 10-15 spots.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 04, 2007, 03:35:11 PM

Despite their two wins against higher ranked teams in conference, they're still just 5-4 in conference. However, their 4 losses by are a TOTAL of 11 points. If a couple of balls bounce a different way, then maybe NYU is good enough to be in the top 15 or 10... but they hardly played challenging teams in the non-conference... I think when the QOWI comes out (and the regional rankings) then it may show where they are nationally...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: balls a dunkin on February 04, 2007, 05:59:51 PM

David,
How far does MC fall after that wild and exciting attempt at LETU?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Marty Peretz on February 04, 2007, 06:14:59 PM

With regards to WashU, it's pretty absurd to say they're not a top 25 team. Sure, they caught lighting in a bottle and overachieved for a nice stretch, but 2 road losses in UAA play (one of which was in triple overtime on a Sunday against a good Brandeis team) does not drop you out of the top 25. This is a team that is a little tired right now because its bench isn't very deep. That said, it comfortably beat Chicago on the road, comfortably beat Illinois Wesleyan at home, held Rochester under 60, nearly held Brandeis under 60 if it weren't for a late foul shot and three at the buzzer, losy by 2 to Augustana in a game in which the Bears' second leadign scorer was lost to the season due to injury. The team's resume is extremely impressive, but the team is extremely young. A pair of road losses against top 25 caliber opponents in February is far from the end of the world. The Bears simply played such terrific basketball early that these losses raise eyebrows. WashU should not fall past 15, 16. NYU lost twice on the road last week and fell only 2 spots.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 04, 2007, 07:19:52 PM

Quote from: balls a dunkin on February 04, 2007, 05:59:51 PM
David,
How far does MC fall after that wild and exciting attempt at LETU?

You'd think that all the hours I spend poring over the Top 25 that I'd have some sort of insight, but I haven't. My track record of predicting the next poll is abysmal, almost as bad as my various Pick 'Em records. :) That said, I wouldn't be surprised if the top of the Week 10 poll looks a lot like the top of the Week 7 poll:

Week 7:
1. UW-Stevens Point
2. Amherst
3. St. Thomas
4. Wooster
5. Va. Wesleyan
6. Wittenberg
7. Mississippi College
then a 50-point gap

Week 10 wild guess:
1. Amherst
2. UW-Stevens Point
3. St. Thomas
4. Wooster
5. Va. Wesleyan
6. Mississippi College
7. Wittenberg

I guess 5-7 could come in any order, although Witt was so far behind MC (209 pts.) and VWC (131) in week 9 that one superb win may not be enough to bridge the gap.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 04, 2007, 07:25:12 PM

Quote from: Marty Peretz on February 04, 2007, 06:14:59 PM
With regards to WashU, it's pretty absurd to say they're not a top 25 team. Sure, they caught lighting in a bottle and overachieved for a nice stretch, but 2 road losses in UAA play (one of which was in triple overtime on a Sunday against a good Brandeis team) does not drop you out of the top 25. This is a team that is a little tired right now because its bench isn't very deep. That said, it comfortably beat Chicago on the road, comfortably beat Illinois Wesleyan at home, held Rochester under 60, nearly held Brandeis under 60 if it weren't for a late foul shot and three at the buzzer, losy by 2 to Augustana in a game in which the Bears' second leadign scorer was lost to the season due to injury. The team's resume is extremely impressive, but the team is extremely young. A pair of road losses against top 25 caliber opponents in February is far from the end of the world. The Bears simply played such terrific basketball early that these losses raise eyebrows. WashU should not fall past 15, 16. NYU lost twice on the road last week and fell only 2 spots.

I don't think anyone (except, perhaps, mgoblue) really expects Wash U. to drop out of the top 25. But you're not doing them any favors trotting out wins over opponents like Illinois Wesleyan (9-11) and calling them "extremely impressive."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 04, 2007, 07:48:59 PM

So far, the Sprint "Connectile Dysfunction" is my choice for #1. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mgoblue on February 04, 2007, 08:57:26 PM

Quote from: Marty Peretz on February 04, 2007, 06:14:59 PM
With regards to WashU, it's pretty absurd to say they're not a top 25 team. Sure, they caught lighting in a bottle and overachieved for a nice stretch, but 2 road losses in UAA play (one of which was in triple overtime on a Sunday against a good Brandeis team) does not drop you out of the top 25. This is a team that is a little tired right now because its bench isn't very deep. That said, it comfortably beat Chicago on the road, comfortably beat Illinois Wesleyan at home, held Rochester under 60, nearly held Brandeis under 60 if it weren't for a late foul shot and three at the buzzer, losy by 2 to Augustana in a game in which the Bears' second leadign scorer was lost to the season due to injury. The team's resume is extremely impressive, but the team is extremely young. A pair of road losses against top 25 caliber opponents in February is far from the end of the world. The Bears simply played such terrific basketball early that these losses raise eyebrows. WashU should not fall past 15, 16. NYU lost twice on the road last week and fell only 2 spots.

Sounds like a lot of excuses for a team that is decent, but should not be considered one of the elite teams in the country. I go to Wash U, have seen them play, and to say their resume is "extremely impressive" is a major stretch. If you ask me the UAA as a whole is miles behind the power conferences in the country.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 04, 2007, 09:09:48 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 04, 2007, 07:48:59 PM
So far, the Sprint "Connectile Dysfunction" is my choice for #1. :D

???
Is that some Super Bowl commercial?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 04, 2007, 09:25:17 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 04, 2007, 09:09:48 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 04, 2007, 07:48:59 PM
So far, the Sprint "Connectile Dysfunction" is my choice for #1. :D

???
Is that some Super Bowl commercial?

:D Yes! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 04, 2007, 09:53:37 PM

Oh, Ralph, Ralph, Ralph...Super Bowl commercials in Posting Up Top 25 Talk? *shakes head sadly*
I'm afraid I'm going to have to be the first person ever to smite you. :(
;) :D ;D

EDIT: I just can't bring myself to do it...:D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on February 04, 2007, 09:55:58 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 04, 2007, 09:53:37 PM
Oh, Ralph, Ralph, Ralph...Super Bowl commercials in Posting Up Top 25 Talk? *shakes head sadly*
I'm afraid I'm going to have to be the first person ever to smite you. :(
;) :D ;D

Lol... and I'll be the second. Ironic since I'll probably be taking back my karma point for the 11111 post yesterday too. The talk of the actual games is bad enough. :P

But don't worry, we still love you. ;D ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 04, 2007, 10:17:19 PM

Super Bowl commercials are OK, as long as you promise not to watch the game!

(You know, like "I only get Playboy for the articles"! ;D)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on February 04, 2007, 10:18:47 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 04, 2007, 10:17:19 PM
Super Bowl commercials are OK, as long as you promise not to watch the game!

(You know, like "I only get Playboy for the articles"! ;D)

Not really, it's like wasting hours of your life to purpose to be brainwashed. :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 04, 2007, 11:10:15 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 04, 2007, 10:17:19 PM
Super Bowl commercials are OK, as long as you promise not to watch the game!

(You know, like "I only get Playboy for the articles"! ;D)

Personal interest in a couple of the players. I saw Cedric Benson (Midland Lee HS) and Dominic Rhodes (Abilene Cooper HS) (and Drew Brees, Austin Westlake HS, for that matter) in the Texas High School Football Playoffs against my kids' high school.

I remember those Big Sandy (TX) High School championship teams including Lovie Smith and the late David Overstreet (Oklahoma U. and Miami Dolphins).

Besides, it was background noise while I was working on another project. I was watching it for the commericals, tho'. Keep your eyes open for D3 Baseball. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 05, 2007, 07:26:49 PM

Top 25 Schedule and Scores, Feb. 5-11 (UPDATED with Monday's scores):

#   1   Amherst (23-0) plays at Trinity (CT) Sat.
#   2   UW-Stevens Point (18-2) plays at UW-Whitewater Wed. and hosts UW-Stout Sat.
#   3   St. Thomas (20-2) won at Augsburg 80-75 (2 OT), plays at Gustavus Adolphus Wed., and hosts Concordia-Moorhead Sat.
#   4   Virginia Wesleyan (19-3) hosts Eastern Mennonite Wed. and plays at Randolph-Macon Sat.
#   5   Wooster (18-3) hosts Hiram Wed. and plays at Wabash Sat.
#   6   Hope (18-2) won at Albion 78-71, hosts Calvin Wed., and hosts Adrian Sat.
#   7   Wittenberg (18-3) hosts Ohio Wesleyan Wed. and hosts Hiram Sat.
#   8   UW-Oshkosh (18-4) plays at UW-Eau Claire Sat.
#   9   Mississippi College (18-2) hosts Louisiana College Tue. and hosts U. of the Ozarks Sat.
#   10   Augustana (17-4) hosts #25 Wheaton (IL) Wed. and hosts Millikin Sat.
#   11   Washington U. (16-3) hosts Emory Fri. and hosts Case Western Reserve Sun.
#   12   Elmhurst (16-4) hosts #15 Carthage Wed. and hosts North Park Sat.
#   13   Whitworth (19-2) plays at #18 Puget Sound Fri. and plays at Pacific Lutheran Sat.
#   14   Occidental (14-4) plays at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps Wed. and hosts Pomona-Pitzer Sat.
#   15   Carthage (14-6) plays at #12 Elmhurst Wed. and hosts North Central Sat.
#   16   NYU (16-4) hosts Rochester Fri. and hosts Carnegie Mellon Sun.
#   17   Johns Hopkins (19-2) hosts McDaniel Wed. and hosts Ursinus Sat.
#   18   Puget Sound (16-4) hosts #13 Whitworth Fri. and hosts Whitman Sat.
#   19   Ohio Northern (16-5) hosts Wilmington Wed. and plays at Capital Sat.
#   20   Worcester Polytech (17-2) hosts Mass.-Boston Thu. and hosts MIT Sat.
#   21   Aurora (19-2) hosts Edgewood Wed. and plays at Dominican Sat.
#   22   UW-La Crosse (14-7) hosts UW-Platteville Wed.
#   23   Chicago (16-4) hosts Case Western Reserve Fri. and hosts Emory Sun.
#   24   Guilford (16-3) hosts Hampden-Sydney Wed., plays at Bridgewater (VA) Sat., and plays at Eastern Mennonite Sun.
#   25   Wheaton (IL) (14-6) plays at #10 Augustana Wed. and plays at Illinois Wesleyan Sat.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 05, 2007, 08:04:29 PM

DC,

Your work is always appreciated! ;D :D ;) :P

Quote from: David Collinge on February 05, 2007, 07:26:49 PM
# 2 UW-Stevens Point (18-2) plays at UW-Whitewater Wed. and hosts UW-Stout Sat.

Though the record may not look like it, this is going to be a huge game for Point down in Whitewater (14-7, 7-5). Point needed a 3-pt shot at the buzzer to beat the Warhawks in Quandt near the beginning of the season. Whitewater has been playing pretty well lately and I'm sure they'll be pumped up for it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: systemfan86 on February 06, 2007, 08:52:42 AM

Haven't been here all year - mostly because none of the MWC teams deserved consideration - but thought I'd raise a question.

Grinnell has a chance to win out and finish the regular season at 17-6 including winning their last 13 in a row (they are currently at 10 in row, and their last three can be considered 'winnable'). If they finish with three wins, do they get a sniff at the 'Others receiving votes' list? Their 6 losses include 3 conference road games, a loss at home to #15 Carthage in the first game of the year, a loss at #8 Oshkosh, and a loss at a neutral court to 14-7 Whitewater.

I know the MWC is 'off' this year, but I would think that if Grinnell can continue to win, they at least merit some consideration. Any response from those in the know?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 06, 2007, 08:55:10 AM

I had Grinnell somewhere around #43 this week. I think if they win out, there is certainly a possibility that they creep up into a potential vote getting slot, if other teams lose a few. However, I think "winning out" would probably have to include the two games in the MWC tournament.

They've been on an impressive streak in terms of road wins and all that, but the MWC is just getting less impressive with every week as competition.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: systemfan86 on February 06, 2007, 09:04:10 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 06, 2007, 08:55:10 AM

I had Grinnell somewhere around #43 this week. I think if they win out, there is certainly a possibility that they creep up into a potential vote getting slot, if other teams lose a few. However, I think "winning out" would probably have to include the two games in the MWC tournament.

They've been on an impressive streak in terms of road wins and all that, but the MWC is just getting less impressive with every week as competition.

No doubt that this is a down year in the MWC. We were spoiled by Larry's performance over the last couple of years. No one on the MWC board has any delusions we get more than our A bid. Likewise, I have no delusions that that they actually make the top 25; I just think that they might merit 'consideration' given that they have two losses to top 25 teams, and three early conference losses on the road. The full body of work may be a bit lacking, but since January 1, they've been playing very well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on February 06, 2007, 01:03:48 PM

As a south region poster and for debate sake, I do not understand why UMHB has not cracked the Top 25 when compared to other teams.

I use Hope as an example only because I think the schedules are similiar and I think UMHB has a better body of work this year if we don't consider years previous. But I do understand Hope is arguably one of the top few DIII programs traditionally and they have certainly earned it.

Hope is 6th and on a 16-game winning streak

No big wins against ranked teams or out of region teams, only two wins all season against winning DIII teams
Eight of their last ten wins against losing teams in what is a weak MIAA this season
Two losses to Wheaton and Carthage, middle of the CCIW this year. Honestly their biggest argument for their ranking are these losses
Eight of their last ten wins against losing teams in what is a weak MIAA this season

UMHB is not ranked riding a 13-game winning streak

Beat #4 Virginia Wesleyan, defending national champion
Beat Ripon, leader of the MWC. I know the MWC is down this year, but at least it is a win against someone outside their conference as a gauge.
Five wins against winning DIII teams
Last seven wins against Losing teams

I don't know anything about the Christian Colleges and NAIA schools that Hope plays, but I am assuming they are like the ones here in the south. UMHB has good wins over #4 Virginia Wesleyan, Ripon and McMurry and decent wins against Trinity and Hardin-Simmons. Hope has beaten Calvin and Tri-State.

I am not saying UMHB is better then Hope, I have no idea because I have not seen Hope play. But if someone looked at the numbers this year and not the name of the school most would swap them in the rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 06, 2007, 01:12:04 PM

I don't know where Hope belongs (I haven't seen them), but on paper they seem too high at #6 based on merit...

http://www.d3hoops.com/school_info.php?school=Hope&team=mens

What would Hope's record be - and what would they be ranked - with #10 Augustana's, #11 Wash U's, or #12 Elmhurst's schedule?

http://www.d3hoops.com/school_info.php?school=Augustana&team=mens

http://www.d3hoops.com/school_info.php?school=Washington%20U.&team=mens

http://www.d3hoops.com/school_info.php?school=Elmhurst&team=mens

Massey has the MIAA as the #23 conference this year (CCIW 1, WIAC 2, UAA 3)...

http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&sub=III&mid=1#conf

With losses to Wheaton and Carthage, and considering schedules, should there be that much separation between #6 Hope, #15 Carthage, and #25 Wheaton?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 06, 2007, 01:26:55 PM

Massey's formula must really like those NAIA teams, for what it's worth, because it has Hope fourth. I'm not a big fan of Hope's schedule either, though.

http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&sub=III&mid=1

It has UMHB 30th.

Computers don't look at the name of the school when ranking teams either.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on February 06, 2007, 01:44:16 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 06, 2007, 01:26:55 PM
Massey's formula must really like those NAIA teams, for what it's worth, because it has Hope fourth. I'm not a big fan of Hope's schedule either, though.

http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&sub=III&mid=1

It has UMHB 30th.

Computers don't look at the name of the school when ranking teams either.

Pat,
That would make sense. Like I said I don't know anything about those six non-DIII teams they play. I was not sure if they were NCCAA teams or all NAIA or what. I know for voters it has to make a hard voting process that much harder.

In the south and in the ASC in particular, we often have to schedule non-DIII teams due to the scarcity of DIII teams within reasonable travel distance. I am not sure why Hope would have to do that though. I would think they are surrounded by quality DIII opponents.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on February 06, 2007, 01:45:41 PM

While I think that Grinnell's current streak is strong work, one would have to say that the losses on the road in a 'down' conference are troubling at best.

I can't see them getting much consideration at 6 losses.

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 06, 2007, 01:46:26 PM

On paper, I would certainly share Q's concerns (especially as I am a CCIW partisan :D!), but I have seen Hope play - they're legit. Whether or not they are #6 legit I can't say - the game was at then co-leader Adrian, but the Bulldogs absolutely stunk up the gym that night (some of it due to a swarming Hope defense, but a lot of it unforced). [I actually saw only half the game - I caved to family pressure to leave with Hope up 39-12. Since it went to 57-14 before the benches cleared, my family may have had a good idea!]

In such a blow-out it was impossible to tell HOW good Hope is, but they ARE good.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 06, 2007, 01:57:19 PM

I agree that Hope is probably too high and that MHB is probably a bit too low. That does come from, among other things, name recognition. There's just not much you can do about it. However, it remains that it's easier to be wrong about a team with a solid past versus being wrong about a team with an unknown past.

The poll voters as a whole have been reluctant to change their thinking based on short term results and factors such as a traditionally strong squad in the midst of a poor schedule. I don't necessarily think there's anything wrong with it either.

I do wonder, in the case of Hope, whether there is a little bit of the "they haven't lost, so we have to move them up" malarkey sneaking in. There's generally very little of that in Pat's poll, but I tend to think Hope is creeping a bit high.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 06, 2007, 02:29:58 PM

Hope started in the top 25, MHB did not, Hope has "creeped" up the poll for sure, they've been passed in the poll many times. Last week's carnage in the top 25 tipped the scale to move Hope higher in my opinion, whether justified or not.

While they did lose to both Carthage and Wheaton, both were winnable games, and Hope was missing a key reserve gaurd and leading with 5 minutes to go. They probably shouldn't be ranked ahead of Wheaton or Carthage but at some point when wins pile up and the other two keep losing its inevitable they pass them.

Also they not only won their MIAA games up to last week, they completely dismantled, destroyed, dominated 6 or their 7 conference foes. They've been impressive in those wins.

.....and for what its worth, I do think #6 is to high.

Quote from: Chris Brooks on February 06, 2007, 01:44:16 PM
I would think they are surrounded by quality DIII opponents.

Negative.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 06, 2007, 02:33:43 PM

Texas standards for travel are different than Michigan's. In Texas you would drive five or six hours at the drop of a hate. In Michigan, though, .... well, there's a lot of whining about how isolated they are. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 06, 2007, 02:35:35 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 06, 2007, 02:33:43 PM
Texas standards for travel are different than Michigan's. In Texas you would drive five or six hours at the drop of a hate. In Michigan, though, .... well, there's a lot of whining about how isolated they are. :)

mapquest.com (http://mapquest.com)

Your free to point out all those quality D3's within 5 hours of Holland, Michigan ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 06, 2007, 02:36:09 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 06, 2007, 02:33:43 PM
Texas standards for travel are different than Michigan's. In Texas you would drive five or six hours at the drop of a hate.

This is one of the very best Freudian slips I have ever seen. :D ;D :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 06, 2007, 02:40:33 PM

sac beat me to it, but it does bear noting that Hope has not just been beating a weak schedule, many games have been effectively over after the first ten minutes!

There are no other Michigan d3 teams than the MIAA - well, Finlandia, but a) they're not 'quality' and b) they're almost 500 miles away! It's a lo-o-o-ng drive to any Indiana 'quality' d3s unless I've overlooked someone (I think Wabash would be closest, but still several hours away), and even farther to Ohio. It is true that they could beef up the in-region schedule with some additional Chicagoland schools.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 06, 2007, 02:43:50 PM

Quote from: sac on February 06, 2007, 02:35:35 PM
Your free to point out all those quality D3's within 5 hours of Holland, Michigan ;)

Let's see:

North Central, DePauw, Ohio Northern, John Carroll (4:57 from Holland to University Heights), Illinois Wesleyan, UW-Whitewater, Wabash, Carthage, Wheaton, Aurora ... shall I go on?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: systemfan86 on February 06, 2007, 02:46:25 PM

Quote from: Coach C on February 06, 2007, 01:45:41 PM
While I think that Grinnell's current streak is strong work, one would have to say that the losses on the road in a 'down' conference are troubling at best.

I can't see them getting much consideration at 6 losses.

C

Thanks for the input.

I understand the weak conference impact; when coupled with the conference, the 6 losses could be an issue, but in and of itself, 6 losses shouldn't be a problem. Both Carthage and Wheaton are in the top 25 with 6 losses, and others receiving consideration have >4 losses.

I look at a 15-5 team like Loras who is receiving votes, and they have a similar footprint as Grinnell: early losses - they were 4-5 at the beginning on the season - and then an extended winning streak. If Grinnell wins out, they will have beaten every team in their conference.

Again, I'm not saying they should be ranked. I'm just trying to figure out whether the current winning streak that they are on changes the national impression of this team and whether that might be reflected in their receiving votes. I looked at the Massey rankings that Pat linked to, and they were 21st.

Ultimately, it matters very little. The rankings don't impact the NCAA tournament bids, and the only way that Grinnell makes it in the tournament is to win the conference's A bid. Once they're there, who knows?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 06, 2007, 02:48:34 PM

What I like about the current Top 25 is that the six teams I have seen are all basically in the order I'd place them:

#10 Augustana
#11 Wash U
#12 Elmhurst

#15 Carthage

#23 Chicago
#25 Wheaton

I feel that Augustana, Wash U, and Elmhurst, while very different teams, are extremely even all things considered. On a neutral court, I'd call all of the matchups "pick 'ems." I love that 10-12 cluster.

I like that Carthage is a few notches down from that group. And I like that Wheaton and Chicago are in a different tier than Carthage, and very close to each other (they played a one possession type game in the non-conference). Chicago and Wheaton just are not balanced enough to be ranked much higher -- both have great perimeter play but very little low post presence.

My best guess is that Hope belongs between that 10-12 group and Carthage.

What am I still struggling with...where does Amherst really fit?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 06, 2007, 02:51:04 PM

Yes thats true, but is Aurora quality? Hope's played all those Chicagoland D3 schools in the past. Been awhile since we played North Park for obvious competitive reasons. You simply can't play all of them every year.

Hope's not going to give up the NAIA rivalries with Cornerstone and Aquinas, Hope's been playing AQ since the early 60's. Both Hope and Calvin are guilty of helping out struggling or new programs like Andrews, Grace Bible, Rochester. By the way Rochester is better than 5 MIAA teams I've seen. Grace Bible is their defending national champion in their division.

Hope also had an early season game cancelled and had to add Purdue North Central at the last moment. I don't know who cancelled but there were few options available for that replacement game.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 06, 2007, 02:43:50 PM
Quote from: sac on February 06, 2007, 02:35:35 PM
Your free to point out all those quality D3's within 5 hours of Holland, Michigan ;)

Let's see:

North Central, DePauw, Ohio Northern, John Carroll (4:57 from Holland to University Heights), Illinois Wesleyan, UW-Whitewater, Wabash, Carthage, Wheaton, Aurora ... shall I go on?

Hope's played 6 of those within the past 5 seasons.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 06, 2007, 02:55:34 PM

Their division is Division II of the NCCAA -- please don't try to spin us. We're talking at a higher level than that.

Is Aurora quality? Well, compared to Hope, we'll never get to find out, I guess. If Hope played them it would mean something, unlike most of the non-conference schedule. If you need to keep those two local rivalries, that's fine. But the old-school scheduling theories need to go out the window, and that needed to start about five years ago.

Six games in five seasons? Gosh. That's almost one and a half per year. If you have two non-conferene games to schedule, that's a great ratio.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 06, 2007, 02:58:49 PM

Q -- I wish I had the same confidence in the ranking of the teams I've seen:

No. 1 Amherst

No. 5 Wooster

No. 9 Mississippi College
No. 11 Washington U.

No. 16 NYU

No. 19 Ohio Northern
No. 20 WPI
No. 22 UW-La Crosse

Aside from Amherst and MC, these teams haven't performed with anywhere near the consistency of your group. The ONU I saw is better than that, but hasn't gotten the job done. Even in that league you shouldn't lose to Marietta.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 06, 2007, 03:21:19 PM

Hope's D3 non-con opponents

2006
--Elmhurst
--Wheaton
--Carthage
--Lakeland
--John Carroll

2005
--Elmhurst
--Wheaton
--Carthage
--UW Whitewater
--Augustana

2004
--Central
--Defiance

2003
--North Central
--Chicago

2002
--Manchester
--North Central
--Mount Union

2001
--Chicago
--Manchester
--North Central
--Concordia, WI

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 06, 2007, 03:32:00 PM

And 2007, the Top 25 we're talking about right now?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ChicagoHopeNut on February 06, 2007, 03:47:05 PM

Carthage and Wheaton (and a non-conference game against a conference opponent, Calvin). I have to agree with Pat on Hope's scheduling, it leaves me wanting every year. Although as sac points out it was better in 2005 and 2006 than it was this year or years prior. Hopefully, next year will be better. I would love to see an IWU-Hope or Witt/Woo-Hope matchup in the future.

The problem is that the NCAA committee only counts in-region games. Hope might as well play an easy NAIA game that is a guaranteed win and always a home game than do a home and home series with Witt, Woo, IWU, Wash U. etc. (same argument for those schools in reverse) because you don't gain nearly as much winning those games since they are not in region.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 06, 2007, 03:54:27 PM

Quote from: DCHopeNut on February 06, 2007, 03:47:05 PM
Carthage and Wheaton (and a non-conference game against a conference opponent, Calvin). I have to agree with Pat on Hope's scheduling, it leaves me wanting every year. Although as sac points out it was better in 2005 and 2006 than it was this year or years prior. Hopefully, next year will be better. I would love to see an IWU-Hope or Witt/Woo-Hope matchup in the future.

The problem is that the NCAA committee only counts in-region games. Hope might as well play an easy NAIA game that is a guaranteed win and always a home game than do a home and home series with Witt, Woo, IWU, Wash U. etc. (same argument for those schools in reverse) because you don't gain nearly as much winning those games since they are not in region.

Hope vs. Witt or Woo would be in-region. Also Wabash, Ohio Northern, John Carroll, Capital, DePauw, Wheaton, North Central, Aurora, Baldwin-Wallace, Hanover, Transylvania, Centre, Mississippi College, Virginia Wesleyan, Hampden-Sydney, etc. etc. etc.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ChicagoHopeNut on February 06, 2007, 03:58:15 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 06, 2007, 03:54:27 PM
Quote from: DCHopeNut on February 06, 2007, 03:47:05 PM
Carthage and Wheaton (and a non-conference game against a conference opponent, Calvin). I have to agree with Pat on Hope's scheduling, it leaves me wanting every year. Although as sac points out it was better in 2005 and 2006 than it was this year or years prior. Hopefully, next year will be better. I would love to see an IWU-Hope or Witt/Woo-Hope matchup in the future.

The problem is that the NCAA committee only counts in-region games. Hope might as well play an easy NAIA game that is a guaranteed win and always a home game than do a home and home series with Witt, Woo, IWU, Wash U. etc. (same argument for those schools in reverse) because you don't gain nearly as much winning those games since they are not in region.

Hope vs. Witt or Woo would be in-region. Also Wabash, Ohio Northern, John Carroll, Capital, DePauw, Wheaton, North Central, Aurora, Baldwin-Wallace, Hanover, Transylvania, Centre, Mississippi College, etc. etc. etc.

I wasn't sure on Witt or Woo and I didn't check out mapquest like I should have. Well in that case the games should happen. Now its on the coaches and ADs to see that it does. One great thing about D-1 is the early season matchups through the Big 10-ACC challenge and the Thanksgiving time tourneys.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 06, 2007, 04:03:11 PM

Quote from: DCHopeNut on February 06, 2007, 03:58:15 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on February 06, 2007, 03:54:27 PM
Quote from: DCHopeNut on February 06, 2007, 03:47:05 PM
Carthage and Wheaton (and a non-conference game against a conference opponent, Calvin). I have to agree with Pat on Hope's scheduling, it leaves me wanting every year. Although as sac points out it was better in 2005 and 2006 than it was this year or years prior. Hopefully, next year will be better. I would love to see an IWU-Hope or Witt/Woo-Hope matchup in the future.

The problem is that the NCAA committee only counts in-region games. Hope might as well play an easy NAIA game that is a guaranteed win and always a home game than do a home and home series with Witt, Woo, IWU, Wash U. etc. (same argument for those schools in reverse) because you don't gain nearly as much winning those games since they are not in region.

Hope vs. Witt or Woo would be in-region. Also Wabash, Ohio Northern, John Carroll, Capital, DePauw, Wheaton, North Central, Aurora, Baldwin-Wallace, Hanover, Transylvania, Centre, Mississippi College, etc. etc. etc.

I wasn't sure on Witt or Woo and I didn't check out mapquest like I should have. Well in that case the games should happen. Now its on the coaches and ADs to see that it does. One great thing about D-1 is the early season matchups through the Big 10-ACC challenge and the Thanksgiving time tourneys.

It's not a question of mapquest; Wittenberg, Wooster, and Hope are all in the Great Lakes Region (so are Wabash, ONU, JCU, Capital, and B-W from above.) DePauw, Hanover, Transylvania, Centre, MC, VWC, and H-SC are in the same Administrative Region as Hope, making those games count as in-region. Only Wheaton, Aurora, and NCC from my list involve the 200-mile limit.

FAQ: What is a regional game? (http://www.d3hoops.com/faq.php?question=44)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 06, 2007, 04:22:04 PM

3) The teams are within the same NCAA administrative region. Those regions are defined below.

Region 3: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, North Carolina, Ohio, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia.

Quote from: systemfan86 on February 06, 2007, 08:52:42 AM
Haven't been here all year - mostly because none of the MWC teams deserved consideration - but thought I'd raise a question.

Grinnell has a chance to win out and finish the regular season at 17-6 including winning their last 13 in a row (they are currently at 10 in row, and their last three can be considered 'winnable'). If they finish with three wins, do they get a sniff at the 'Others receiving votes' list? Their 6 losses include 3 conference road games, a loss at home to #15 Carthage in the first game of the year, a loss at #8 Oshkosh, and a loss at a neutral court to 14-7 Whitewater.

Yes, the TOP of the MWC is down this year, thanks to graduation of the premiere LU and CC players. But, overall, I think they are about where they have been in the past. Off hand, I don't know who Grinnell lost to in their conference, but losing all three of those nonconference games to Carthage, Oshkosh and Whitewater doesn't cry out, "give us respect!" I think they have to learn how to win those tough games before they get recognized. I remember several years ago when Grinnell started out 13-0 or something like that, got ranked and then rewarded the voters by losing two in a row, or two of three or something like that.

Quote from: Chris Brooks on February 06, 2007, 01:03:48 PM
As a south region poster and for debate sake, I do not understand why UMHB has not cracked the Top 25 when compared to other teams.

I use Hope as an example only because I think the schedules are similiar and I think UMHB has a better body of work this year if we don't consider years previous. But I do understand Hope is arguably one of the top few DIII programs traditionally and they have certainly earned it.

Hope is 6th and on a 16-game winning streak

No big wins against ranked teams or out of region teams, only two wins all season against winning DIII teams
Eight of their last ten wins against losing teams in what is a weak MIAA this season
Two losses to Wheaton and Carthage, middle of the CCIW this year. Honestly their biggest argument for their ranking are these losses
Eight of their last ten wins against losing teams in what is a weak MIAA this season

Too funny! Anyway, a lot has been discussed about losing to Wheaton and Carthage, MIDDLE OF THE CCIW this year. You have to remember that the CCIW is a very strong conference year in and year out, and very even this year, IMO. So, being in the middle of a conference like that isn't something to be ashamed of.

What MHB does have is a big win over Virg. Wesleyan, but unlike Hope, they haven't gone unbeaten in their OWN conference. Like everyone else, I think Hope isn't as good as the #6 team and MHB isn't has bad as ORV. But, if you're in the Top 25 and other teams in the Top 25 lose, it's easier to move up and stay in than it is to move into the Top 25.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 06, 2007, 02:55:34 PM
But the old-school scheduling theories need to go out the window,.

I like my scheduling theories though! :'(

Quote from: DCHopeNut on February 06, 2007, 03:47:05 PM
The problem is that the NCAA committee only counts in-region games. Hope might as well play an easy NAIA game that is a guaranteed win and always a home game than do a home and home series with Witt, Woo, IWU, Wash U. etc. (same argument for those schools in reverse) because you don't gain nearly as much winning those games since they are not in region.

I was just curious...isn't one of the critiera head-to-head competition or something like record against currently ranked opponents (the NCAA regional rankings)? So, even if you play a team not considered in-region, could you count that as a win against a ranked opponent, or is that regionally ranked opponent? Guess I have to check the handbook on that! lol

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 06, 2007, 04:33:09 PM

Quote from: Old School on February 06, 2007, 04:22:04 PM

I was just curious...isn't one of the critiera head-to-head competition or something like record against currently ranked opponents (the NCAA regional rankings)? So, even if you play a team not considered in-region, could you count that as a win against a ranked opponent, or is that regionally ranked opponent? Guess I have to check the handbook on that! lol

What the handbook says, page 16:

Quote• In-region results vs. regionally ranked teams
Ranked opponents are defined as those teams ranked at the time of the ranking/selection process only.

A team ranked in the East can't count a win over a team ranked in the West as a regional game solely by virtue of the rankings (I don't think that's what you meant, but your comment could be read that way), but that win can be factored into the ranking process. I think most folks consider this to be a "tie-breaker" type of criterion, with the basic ranking established by region win % and QoWI, then adjusted using the other three primary criteria (head-to-head, record vs. common regional opponent, and record vs. other ranked team.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 06, 2007, 04:34:07 PM

Titan Q answered my question! ...from the Pool C board.

Quote from: Titan Q on February 06, 2007, 12:59:11 PM
Remember, there is ranking criteria beyond QOWI and in-region winning %...

* In-region head-to-head
* In-region results vs common opponents
* In-region results vs regionally ranked teams

For example, I'd expect Augustana to be ranked ahead of Wash U since Augie has a head-to-head win, and all other measures are very close.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 06, 2007, 04:57:37 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 06, 2007, 01:26:55 PM
Massey's formula must really like those NAIA teams, for what it's worth, because it has Hope fourth. I'm not a big fan of Hope's schedule either, though.

I have to wonder about the accuracy of this, since it seems to include a Hope victory over Albion this past Saturday by a score of 32-20.
http://www.mratings.com/team.php?tm=328047
This caught my eye as it is reported by Massey as the lowest total in a game this year.
http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&sub=III&mid=1 (scroll to the bottom of the page)
There was no such score; in fact, there was no such game--it was snowed out. The game was played yesterday, with Hope winning 78-71.
http://www.d3hoops.com/school_info.php?school=Hope&team=mens

That might not change the rankings much, but it does at least cast some doubt.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Superfoot Wallace on February 06, 2007, 05:00:29 PM

Couldnt that thrid cirteria be read as ranked in any region?

best regards,
Johnny Cochran

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 06, 2007, 05:09:10 PM

Quote from: MacLeod on February 06, 2007, 05:00:29 PM
Couldnt that thrid cirteria be read as ranked in any region?

best regards,
Johnny Cochran

IN-REGION results...is the key.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pabegg on February 06, 2007, 05:14:44 PM

Only games against your own region count.

As a practical matter, I'm wondering how this is used for the UAA. After all, the conference games are defined as regional. This means that the Northeast Region committee should be using the games by Brandeis against WashU, Chicago, New York, Carnegie Mellon, and Rochester, all of whom could be ranked in other regions.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: systemfan86 on February 06, 2007, 05:29:21 PM

Quote from: Old School on February 06, 2007, 04:22:04 PM

Yes, the TOP of the MWC is down this year, thanks to graduation of the premiere LU and CC players. But, overall, I think they are about where they have been in the past. Off hand, I don't know who Grinnell lost to in their conference, but losing all three of those nonconference games to Carthage, Oshkosh and Whitewater doesn't cry out, "give us respect!" I think they have to learn how to win those tough games before they get recognized. I remember several years ago when Grinnell started out 13-0 or something like that, got ranked and then rewarded the voters by losing two in a row, or two of three or something like that.

I can see the argument that they don't have a win to point to rather than 'good losses'; lots of teams, good and bad, lose to good teams, so Grinnell losing to them too doesn't tell the voters anything.

How apt is the Loras comparison? The IIAC ranks 8 in Massey and the Midwest is 10. So neither conference is 'powerful'. They have two losses to top 25 teams (Aurora and LaCrosse) and no signature win. But they are getting some consideration.

I would hope that the performance (or lack there of) of a team from 3 years wouldn't have an influence on the voting this year. Very few of the contributing players are the same!

BTW, Grinnell conference road losses were to Carroll by 2, Lake Forest by 1, and St. Norbert by 25. That last one was a bad loss, but it was also over 2 months ago.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 06, 2007, 06:08:52 PM

I would point out this, too -- I believe the secondary criteria come into play fairly frequently in Pool C discussions. Any game against a D-III is going to be more helpful than a game agianst an NAIA school. Games against D-III schools help you in overall D-III QOWI and they help you in head-to-head and common opponents.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Superfoot Wallace on February 06, 2007, 06:19:52 PM

Quote from: Old School on February 06, 2007, 05:09:10 PM
Quote from: MacLeod on February 06, 2007, 05:00:29 PM
Couldnt that thrid cirteria be read as ranked in any region?

best regards,
Johnny Cochran

IN-REGION results...is the key.

Please pardon the misunderstanding. When reading DCs post, thought he was paraphrasing and then posting actual crtieria and you were simply summarizing. Brains a little bent at the moment, (no - not drinking, just threw some protein at the gullet after a nasty session of squats) Been wrestling with a piece of foreign legislation defining international. Issue is whether international is subject matter as opposed to party nationality and my mental processes are a bit tweaked. Damn there goes another synapse.

Anyway, thanks for sorta getting my back pabegg. Practice was the difference between policy and law in my mornings research as well. ;)

signed,
The Prime Minister of Thailand

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TeeDub on February 06, 2007, 06:20:15 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 06, 2007, 04:57:37 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 06, 2007, 01:26:55 PM
Massey's formula must really like those NAIA teams, for what it's worth, because it has Hope fourth. I'm not a big fan of Hope's schedule either, though.

I have to wonder about the accuracy of this, since it seems to include a Hope victory over Albion this past Saturday by a score of 32-20.
http://www.mratings.com/team.php?tm=328047
This caught my eye as it is reported by Massey as the lowest total in a game this year.
http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&sub=III&mid=1 (scroll to the bottom of the page)
There was no such score; in fact, there was no such game--it was snowed out. The game was played yesterday, with Hope winning 78-71.
http://www.d3hoops.com/school_info.php?school=Hope&team=mens

That might not change the rankings much, but it does at least cast some doubt.

I'm sure there are other issues with the Massey system as well. For example, Massey includes the exhibition game between Division I CSU Northridge vs. Division III Redlands when Redlands doesn't include it in their official record. According to Massey, CSUN does include it in their record and if one team counts it, there is no way to exclude the team that doesn't.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 06, 2007, 07:01:17 PM

Quote from: MacLeod on February 06, 2007, 06:19:52 PM
Quote from: Old School on February 06, 2007, 05:09:10 PM
Quote from: MacLeod on February 06, 2007, 05:00:29 PM
Couldnt that thrid cirteria be read as ranked in any region?

best regards,
Johnny Cochran

IN-REGION results...is the key.

Please pardon the misunderstanding. When reading DCs post, thought he was paraphrasing and then posting actual crtieria and you were simply summarizing. Brains a little bent at the moment, (no - not drinking, just threw some protein at the gullet after a nasty session of squats) Been wrestling with a piece of foreign legislation defining international. Issue is whether international is subject matter as opposed to party nationality and my mental processes are a bit tweaked. Damn there goes another synapse.

Anyway, thanks for sorta getting my back pabegg. Practice was the difference between policy and law in my mornings research as well. ;)

signed,
The Prime Minister of Thailand

No, my post is poorly worded. It suggests that a game between a team ranked in the East and a team ranked in the West would count under the "results vs. regionally ranked teams" criterion, but I believe Old School is correct that for it to count it would have to be an in-region game, which would be very unlikely for my mythical game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 06, 2007, 08:00:46 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 06, 2007, 04:57:37 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 06, 2007, 01:26:55 PM
Massey's formula must really like those NAIA teams, for what it's worth, because it has Hope fourth. I'm not a big fan of Hope's schedule either, though.

I have to wonder about the accuracy of this, since it seems to include a Hope victory over Albion this past Saturday by a score of 32-20.
http://www.mratings.com/team.php?tm=328047
This caught my eye as it is reported by Massey as the lowest total in a game this year.
http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&sub=III&mid=1 (scroll to the bottom of the page)
There was no such score; in fact, there was no such game--it was snowed out. The game was played yesterday, with Hope winning 78-71.
http://www.d3hoops.com/school_info.php?school=Hope&team=mens

That might not change the rankings much, but it does at least cast some doubt.

Odd......that was the halftime score from last nights Albion game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 06, 2007, 08:45:55 PM

Massey uses our database on occasion. Perhaps he made the mistake of downloading scores during game action. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 06, 2007, 10:46:23 PM

Top 25 Schedule and Scores, Feb. 5-11 (UPDATED through Tuesday):

#   1   Amherst (23-0) plays at Trinity (CT) Sat.
#   2   UW-Stevens Point (18-2) plays at UW-Whitewater Wed. and hosts UW-Stout Sat.
#   3   St. Thomas (20-2) won at Augsburg 80-75 (2 OT), plays at Gustavus Adolphus Wed., and hosts Concordia-Moorhead Sat.
#   4   Virginia Wesleyan (19-3) hosts Eastern Mennonite Wed. and plays at Randolph-Macon Sat.
#   5   Wooster (18-3) hosts Hiram Wed. and plays at Wabash Sat.
#   6   Hope (18-2) won at Albion 78-71, hosts Calvin Wed., and hosts Adrian Sat.
#   7   Wittenberg (18-3) hosts Ohio Wesleyan Wed. and hosts Hiram Sat.
#   8   UW-Oshkosh (18-4) plays at UW-Eau Claire Sat.
#   9   Mississippi College (19-2) def. Louisiana College 88-52 and hosts U. of the Ozarks Sat.
#   10   Augustana (17-4) hosts #25 Wheaton (IL) Wed. and hosts Millikin Sat.
#   11   Washington U. (16-3) hosts Emory Fri. and hosts Case Western Reserve Sun.
#   12   Elmhurst (16-4) hosts #15 Carthage Wed. and hosts North Park Sat.
#   13   Whitworth (19-2) plays at #18 Puget Sound Fri. and plays at Pacific Lutheran Sat.
#   14   Occidental (14-4) plays at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps Wed. and hosts Pomona-Pitzer Sat.
#   15   Carthage (14-6) plays at #12 Elmhurst Wed. and hosts North Central Sat.
#   16   NYU (16-4) hosts Rochester Fri. and hosts Carnegie Mellon Sun.
#   17   Johns Hopkins (19-2) hosts McDaniel Wed. and hosts Ursinus Sat.
#   18   Puget Sound (16-4) hosts #13 Whitworth Fri. and hosts Whitman Sat.
#   19   Ohio Northern (16-5) hosts Wilmington Wed. and plays at Capital Sat.
#   20   Worcester Polytech (17-2) hosts Mass.-Boston Thu. and hosts MIT Sat.
#   21   Aurora (19-2) hosts Edgewood Wed. and plays at Dominican Sat.
#   22   UW-La Crosse (14-7) hosts UW-Platteville Wed.
#   23   Chicago (16-4) hosts Case Western Reserve Fri. and hosts Emory Sun.
#   24   Guilford (16-3) hosts Hampden-Sydney Wed., plays at Bridgewater (VA) Sat., and plays at Eastern Mennonite Sun.
#   25   Wheaton (IL) (14-6) plays at #10 Augustana Wed. and plays at Illinois Wesleyan Sat.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on February 07, 2007, 01:15:29 AM

Mississippi College beat Louisiana College 88-52 tonight, led 72-27 with about 12 minutes left in the game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on February 07, 2007, 06:14:16 AM

Quote from: pabegg on February 06, 2007, 05:14:44 PM
Only games against your own region count.

As a practical matter, I'm wondering how this is used for the UAA. After all, the conference games are defined as regional. This means that the Northeast Region committee should be using the games by Brandeis against WashU, Chicago, New York, Carnegie Mellon, and Rochester, all of whom could be ranked in other regions.

Short rule: All conference games count in the primary criteria no matter where the conference opponent is located.

The UAA conference games are countable in the regional records in all respects for UAA teams-- therefore, as a prectical matter, a Brandeis men's win over Wash U does count as an in-region win over a regionally ranked opponent, and the respecitve regional committees should and would take that into account in the regional rankings.

Also, a win by a team in one "defined evaluation" region over a regionaly ranked opponent in another "defined evaluation" region in non-conference play is countable in all respects if:

(1) the regionally ranked opponent is within 200 miles of the other team's campus, or

(2) New rule adopted this season-- the regionallly rnaked opponent is in-region by virtue of being in the same NCAA "geogratphic" or "administrative" region as the other team.

Example: If Brandeis (MA) had played a team ranked in the Atlantic or Mid-Atlantic region in non-conference play this season, and that regionally ranked team was located in New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, or Washington, D.C. (those areas being in NCAA Administrative Region 1, the same administrative region as Brandeis)-- that game would also count as "in-region" for Brandeis, and if that opponent is currently regionally ranked, then Brandeis would also count that as a win over a regionally ranked opponent.

As a practical matter, though, the regional percentage and QowI are considered first, and the other factors used in the primary criteria are used to adjust the teams for the regional rankings. A team's final regional percentage probably has to be .725 or greater to be considered for 1 of the 19 Pool C men's bids this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 07, 2007, 06:15:14 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 06, 2007, 01:57:19 PM

I agree that Hope is probably too high and that MHB is probably a bit too low. That does come from, among other things, name recognition. There's just not much you can do about it. However, it remains that it's easier to be wrong about a team with a solid past versus being wrong about a team with an unknown past.

The poll voters as a whole have been reluctant to change their thinking based on short term results and factors such as a traditionally strong squad in the midst of a poor schedule. I don't necessarily think there's anything wrong with it either.

I do. This deep into the season, program reputation shouldn't enter into anyone's thinking at all. Both teams have a clearly-established body of work this season by which they need to be judged.

I think that you can make a very good case for Hope being higher than UMHB on this season's merits (e.g., Pat's Massey citation), but I think it's the height of injustice if a pollster is giving Hope extra credit for being a familiar brand, and penalizing UMHB for lack of the same.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 07, 2007, 06:20:47 AM

Quote from: sac on February 06, 2007, 02:51:04 PM
Yes thats true, but is Aurora quality? Hope's played all those Chicagoland D3 schools in the past. Been awhile since we played North Park for obvious competitive reasons.

Will NPU be on the Hope radar after this season, or will the Vikings need to cross some higher threshold first? If they are, I'm pretty sure that Paul Brenegan would love to get a look at the new DeVos Fieldhouse. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pabegg on February 07, 2007, 06:27:38 AM

Quote from: deiscanton on February 07, 2007, 06:14:16 AM
Quote from: pabegg on February 06, 2007, 05:14:44 PM
Only games against your own region count.

As a practical matter, I'm wondering how this is used for the UAA. After all, the conference games are defined as regional. This means that the Northeast Region committee should be using the games by Brandeis against WashU, Chicago, New York, Carnegie Mellon, and Rochester, all of whom could be ranked in other regions.

Example: If Brandeis (MA) had played a team ranked in the Atlantic or Mid-Atlantic region in non-conference play this season, and that regionally ranked team was located in New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, or Washington, D.C. (those areas being in NCAA Administrative Region 1, the same administrative region as Brandeis)-- that game would also count as "in-region" for Brandeis, and if that opponent is currently regionally ranked, then Brandeis would also count that as a win over a regionally ranked opponent.

Thanks for posting this, which is a great description of the regional situation (which I already knew).

My real question is how the Northeast committee would know that Washington University was going to be regionally ranked in the Midwest in order to count the Brandeis win as a win over a regionally ranked team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 07, 2007, 06:28:56 AM

Quote from: systemfan86 on February 06, 2007, 05:29:21 PMHow apt is the Loras comparison? The IIAC ranks 8 in Massey and the Midwest is 10. So neither conference is 'powerful'. They have two losses to top 25 teams (Aurora and LaCrosse) and no signature win.

Loras didn't lose to UW-LaCrosse, systemfan. The Duhawks beat UWL, 82-74, in Dubuque during the season's opening weekend. Since UWL is currently #22, there's your signature win for Loras right there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 07, 2007, 08:35:27 AM

Quote from: Chris Brooks on February 07, 2007, 01:15:29 AM
Mississippi College beat Louisiana College 88-52 tonight, led 72-27 with about 12 minutes left in the game.

I guess they've bounced back.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 07, 2007, 08:36:17 AM

The "record verses ranked opponents" won't factor in until after the first ranking comes out today.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 07, 2007, 08:48:18 AM

Quote from: pabegg on February 07, 2007, 06:27:38 AM
Quote from: deiscanton on February 07, 2007, 06:14:16 AM
Quote from: pabegg on February 06, 2007, 05:14:44 PM
Only games against your own region count.

As a practical matter, I'm wondering how this is used for the UAA. After all, the conference games are defined as regional. This means that the Northeast Region committee should be using the games by Brandeis against WashU, Chicago, New York, Carnegie Mellon, and Rochester, all of whom could be ranked in other regions.

Example: If Brandeis (MA) had played a team ranked in the Atlantic or Mid-Atlantic region in non-conference play this season, and that regionally ranked team was located in New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, or Washington, D.C. (those areas being in NCAA Administrative Region 1, the same administrative region as Brandeis)-- that game would also count as "in-region" for Brandeis, and if that opponent is currently regionally ranked, then Brandeis would also count that as a win over a regionally ranked opponent.

Thanks for posting this, which is a great description of the regional situation (which I already knew).

My real question is how the Northeast committee would know that Washington University was going to be regionally ranked in the Midwest in order to count the Brandeis win as a win over a regionally ranked team.

I am counting on the adminstrative assistant responsible for accumulating the data to make sure that the committee members receive this information.

I am also counting on the committee members to receive information that is at least as timely and accurate as thru official channels as what Pat has compiled on his own.

As for ranked opponents, please remember that only the final ranking (which we will not see in its published form) will be used for seeding the tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 07, 2007, 10:54:00 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 07, 2007, 08:36:17 AM

The "record verses ranked opponents" won't factor in until after the first ranking comes out today.

No, according to my understanding, that's incorrect. The regional committees used to use a rule that a win over any team that has been (regionally) ranked in any of the weeks counted as a win over a regionally ranked team, but that rule has changed. Now the Handbook reads as follows:

Quote from: NCAA 2007 Division III Men's Basketball Championship Handbook, page 16• In-region results vs. regionally ranked teams
Ranked opponents are defined as those teams ranked at the time of the ranking/selection process only.

That explanatory sentence was added to indicate that only the current ranking counts in this category, necessitating that each committee have a way to collaborate with the other seven when doing their rankings. This is not a problem during the selection meeting, since everyone is looking at the same information at that meeting.

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 07, 2007, 08:48:18 AM
As for ranked opponents, please remember that only the final ranking (which we will not see in its published form) will be used for seeding the tournament.

This is correct, but it also applies to each of the three weekly rankings, which will be published.

How much each of the committees will rely on this criterion in doing their rankings is an open question. I would imagine that it becomes much more important in the selection meeting than in the four ranking meetings (three weekly rankings, then the fourth, private, ranking provided for the selection meeting.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: systemfan86 on February 07, 2007, 11:55:11 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 07, 2007, 06:28:56 AM
Quote from: systemfan86 on February 06, 2007, 05:29:21 PMHow apt is the Loras comparison? The IIAC ranks 8 in Massey and the Midwest is 10. So neither conference is 'powerful'. They have two losses to top 25 teams (Aurora and LaCrosse) and no signature win.

Loras didn't lose to UW-LaCrosse, systemfan. The Duhawks beat UWL, 82-74, in Dubuque during the season's opening weekend. Since UWL is currently #22, there's your signature win for Loras right there.

Thanks. I misread that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 07, 2007, 02:14:43 PM

Wait, so how are the eight committees going to tell each other which teams are ranked, if they're using the rankings to determine rankings? That seems like a catch-22 to me.

I just assumed that it meant that the second ranking will use record versus teams ranked the first time and so on until the final. I just don't see how it's feasable to share that information.

What if a win over the #10 team in NE gave the #8 team in the Mid-Atlantic it's spot over a team that #10 in NE beat, which would then drop #10 from the list and begin a vicious cycle of changes before anything is released. That may not be likely, but it's how my mind works. I just don't see how they can coordinate all of this.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 07, 2007, 02:42:33 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 07, 2007, 10:54:00 AM
No, according to my understanding, that's incorrect. The regional committees used to use a rule that a win over any team that has been (regionally) ranked in any of the weeks counted as a win over a regionally ranked team, but that rule has changed. Now the Handbook reads as follows:
Quote from: NCAA 2007 Division III Men's Basketball Championship Handbook, page 16• In-region results vs. regionally ranked teams
Ranked opponents are defined as those teams ranked at the time of the ranking/selection process only.
That explanatory sentence was added to indicate that only the current ranking counts in this category, necessitating that each committee have a way to collaborate with the other seven when doing their rankings.

My guess is that they use the "regionally ranked teams" from the previous week. Hearing from committee members how tedious that conference call process can be for each region, somehow I cannot see the Midwest having to talk to the West and the Great Lakes, etc.

A week from today when each region goes back to work for ranking #2, the 2/7 teams are the "teams ranked at the time of the ranking." The final poll (Selection day) would necessitate collaboration.

Again, just my guess.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 07, 2007, 02:53:35 PM

And my guess, which I hinted at in the last paragraph of my post, is that they don't use this criterion much if at all. I expect it is only rarely relevant, with few teams playing in-region games against rankable teams from another region, and with regional win % and QoWI establishing the great majority of the rankings and head-to-head results, results vs. common opponents, and results vs. rankable teams within the region clearing up any ambiguities. I think the language of the rule itself is pretty clear, and even if that makes the rule practically unworkable.

We may have this all wrong. One of the secondary criteria is

Quote from: Handbook page 17• Results versus Division III teams ranked in other regions.

It may be that a victory by NYU over Wash U. may fall under this secondary criterion rather than the promary criterion we are debating, even though it is an in-region game for both teams. It certainly would make life easier for the committee if they only had to consult their own list of ranked and rankable teams.

But unless and until we hear from a committee member or his/her mouthpiece, we'll probably never know for sure.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 07, 2007, 02:57:29 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 07, 2007, 02:53:35 PM
And my guess, which I hinted at in the last paragraph of my post, is that they don't use this criterion much if at all. I expect it is only rarely relevant, with few teams playing in-region games against rankable teams from another region, and with regional win % and QoWI establishing the great majority of the rankings and head-to-head results, results vs. common opponents, and results vs. rankable teams within the region clearing up any ambiguities. I think the language of the rule itself is pretty clear, and even if that makes the rule practically unworkable.

We may have this all wrong. One of the secondary criteria is
Quote from: Handbook page 17• Results versus Division III teams ranked in other regions.
It may be that a victory by NYU over Wash U. may fall under this secondary criterion rather than the promary criterion we are debating, even though it is an in-region game for both teams. It certainly would make life easier for the committee if they only had to consult their own list of ranked and rankable teams.

But unless and until we hear from a committee member or his/her mouthpiece, we'll probably never know for sure.

Maybe I am not following, but the primary criterion we are talking about --

Wouldn't that be where the Midwest region would evaluate Augustana's games played vs the likes of Wash U, Carthage, and Elmhurst? Or Elmhurst's games vs Augustana, Carthage, and UW-Oshkosh? (assuming all are ranked)?

And then that secondary criterion where the Great Lakes would look at Wooster's game vs UW-La Crosse (again, just assuming La Crosse was ranked), let's say?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 07, 2007, 03:00:47 PM

I also think that the criteria is much more closely followed for selection than it is in the earlier rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 07, 2007, 03:02:25 PM

Anyone know what time we're supposed to expect these rankings?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on February 07, 2007, 03:05:55 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 07, 2007, 08:48:18 AM
I am counting on the adminstrative assistant responsible for accumulating the data to make sure that the committee members receive this information.

I am also counting on the committee members to receive information that is at least as timely and accurate as thru official channels as what Pat has compiled on his own.

As for ranked opponents, please remember that only the final ranking (which we will not see in its published form) will be used for seeding the tournament.

Ralph,
The entire process is automated now so that committee members have up to date information. Schools are responsible for online score reporting which provides committee members with all of the info needed online. The record vs ranked opponents is from the previous week but I doubt that comes into play very often. I would guess an overwhelming majority of decisions are made on the regional record and QOWI.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 07, 2007, 03:53:24 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on February 07, 2007, 02:57:29 PM
Maybe I am not following, but the primary criterion we are talking about --

Wouldn't that be where the Midwest region would evaluate Augustana's games played vs the likes of Wash U, Carthage, and Elmhurst? Or Elmhurst's games vs Augustana, Carthage, and UW-Oshkosh? (assuming all are ranked)?

And then that secondary criterion where the Great Lakes would look at Wooster's game vs UW-La Crosse (again, just assuming La Crosse was ranked), let's say?

Primary criterion (one of five):

Quote from: Handbook page 16• In-region results vs. regionally ranked teams
Ranked opponents are defined as those teams ranked at the time of the ranking/selection process only.

Secondary criterion (one of seven):

Quote from: Handbook page 17• Results versus Division III teams ranked in other regions.

Augustana vs. Wash U. clearly fits under the primary criterion; Wooster vs. UW-La Crosse would be under the secondary criterion, assuming LaX is ranked. But take as an example NYU and Wash U. They have played each other (twice, split). They both very probably will be ranked in their respective regions (East, Midwest), regardless of the criteria under discussion. As members of the UAA, their games are in-region games.

Question 1: Do their head to head results count as an "in-region region results vs. regionally ranked teams" (primary criterion) or "results versus Division III teams ranked in other regions" (secondary criterion)?
Obviously these games qualify under the secondary criterion. Whether they qualify under the primary criterion turns on how you interpret the phrase "regionally ranked teams." If that means "ranked in any region," then these games would count, but it would require close coordination between the East and Midwest regions (depending on the answer to Question 2, below.) If it means "teams ranked in the region in question" (e.g., ranked Midwest Region teams when evaluating Wash U.), then Wash U./NYU does not qualify under the primary criterion. The more I think about it, the presence of the secondary criterion and wording of both criteria suggest to me the latter. Anyway, this makes more sense; if NYU played not only Wash U. but also Augustana, also ranked in the Midwest, shouldn't either both or neither count under the primary criterion? Under my preferred interpretation, only NYU's games against other East Region ranked teams count under the primary criterion, whereas the "ranked-in-any-region" interpretation would count the NYU/Wash U. game (because it is an in-region game) but not the NYU/Augustana game.

Question 2: When considering whether a team is regionally ranked, do you look at the rankings being formulated or those from the previous week?
To me, it seems clear that it is the former. That's the only way the explanatory sentence "[r]anked opponents are defined as those teams ranked at the time of the ranking/selection process only" makes sense to me. I believe that if it meant "ranked last week," it would say that. Otherwise, it would be impossible to use this criterion in the first ranking, which is such a departure that I think it would have to be mentioned specifically in the rules ("Except in the first weekly ranking,....") There's still a Catch-22 aspect to it, that whether a team is ranked depends on whether another team is ranked, which in turn may depend on whether the first team is ranked, but to me that's still a more palatable result than basing one team's ranking on whether another team was ranked a week ago.

If I am correct about Question 1, then little cross-regional coordination is required. The committee would only have to consult its own rankings under formulation to resolve the primary criterion of results vs. regionally ranked teams, and only would need to consult other regional committees in the very unlikely case that they are undecided after evaluating the primary criteria, and have a team or teams with in-region games against extra-regional ranked teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 07, 2007, 03:53:55 PM

They're up on the dose.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 07, 2007, 03:57:01 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on February 07, 2007, 02:57:29 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on February 07, 2007, 02:53:35 PM
And my guess, which I hinted at in the last paragraph of my post, is that they don't use this criterion much if at all. I expect it is only rarely relevant, with few teams playing in-region games against rankable teams from another region, and with regional win % and QoWI establishing the great majority of the rankings and head-to-head results, results vs. common opponents, and results vs. rankable teams within the region clearing up any ambiguities. I think the language of the rule itself is pretty clear, and even if that makes the rule practically unworkable.

We may have this all wrong. One of the secondary criteria is
Quote from: Handbook page 17• Results versus Division III teams ranked in other regions.
It may be that a victory by NYU over Wash U. may fall under this secondary criterion rather than the promary criterion we are debating, even though it is an in-region game for both teams. It certainly would make life easier for the committee if they only had to consult their own list of ranked and rankable teams.

But unless and until we hear from a committee member or his/her mouthpiece, we'll probably never know for sure.

Maybe I am not following, but the primary criterion we are talking about --

Wouldn't that be where the Midwest region would evaluate Augustana's games played vs the likes of Wash U, Carthage, and Elmhurst? Or Elmhurst's games vs Augustana, Carthage, and UW-Oshkosh? (assuming all are ranked)?

And then that secondary criterion where the Great Lakes would look at Wooster's game vs UW-La Crosse (again, just assuming La Crosse was ranked), let's say?

Q,

I'm sure David will correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe he is suggesting that NYU over WashU (or vice versa the weekend before), while an in-region game may none-the-less count as a secondary rather than primary criterion in terms of wins over regionally ranked opponents (since they would be RANKED in different regions).

I don't find the quoted rules at all clear on this point, but agree that it is probably rarely relevant.

EDIT: I see David has already beaten me to the reply, but I'll leave my $.02 anyway.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 07, 2007, 04:02:58 PM

Chris,

As Hoops Fan noted, they're on our site. Let's keep people here, where at least we know how to spell Centre's name. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 07, 2007, 04:03:57 PM

Here's the good link (http://www.d3hoops.com/dailydose/?p=248), if you want it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 07, 2007, 04:04:25 PM

Hey Pat, do they give them to you early so you can format them? If not, you're awfully quick.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on February 07, 2007, 04:06:39 PM

Sorry Pat. Didn't see his post above.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on February 07, 2007, 04:06:57 PM

Quote from: Chris Brooks on February 07, 2007, 03:59:49 PM
First rankings are out.
http://www.ncaasports.com/basketball/mens/polls/rankings/diviii (http://www.ncaasports.com/basketball/mens/polls/rankings/diviii)

I'm confused. Everything I've read would indicate that Hope should be 10-1 in region, yet the NCAA has them listed as 10-2. Is Carthage now an in-region game for Hope?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 07, 2007, 04:09:32 PM

There's a few they get wrong. I was going to post and ask Pat if he ever informs them of their errors.

I see Babson is listed at 12-8, when it seems like they should be 11-8 in region.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 07, 2007, 04:10:18 PM

Good catch, fdf - Hope-Carthage is not in-region by ANY of the criteria. Hope should be 10-1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 07, 2007, 04:15:46 PM

I do inform them, in fact. And it goes both ways.

Last year we were still fixing their in-region games up until Selection Sunday. We had a couple games wrong, too ... but then again, we're not the ones selecting the teams. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 07, 2007, 04:16:31 PM

I am pretty confident that the intent is for a game betwen NYU (East) and Wash U (Midwest) to be considered under the primary criterion, just as Elmhurst (Midwest) vs UW-Oshkosh (West) is. The key being that those are "in-region" games.

I believe the secondary criterion applies to, say, Amherst (Northeast) vs Occidental (West)...an "out-of-region" game. An Amherst win over Oxy would not be looked at in the primary, but could be looked at under secondary if they wanted to factor in more information.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 07, 2007, 04:17:03 PM

We do not get them early. We used to get them early but we were beating NCAASports.com every time so they stopped doing that. NCAASports.com is apparently contractually obliged to get them first.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 07, 2007, 04:17:36 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 07, 2007, 04:09:32 PM

There's a few they get wrong. I was going to post and ask Pat if he ever informs them of their errors.

I see Babson is listed at 12-8, when it seems like they should be 11-8 in region.

You're right, Pat. I took your list for granted on this one. Babson is indeed less than 200 miles (http://mappoint.msn.com/(t0ozfq45jkizhynbaiiwgy45)/directions.aspx?&EndName=124+Raymond+Ave%2c+Poughkeepsie%2c+NY+12604-0001&EndLocation=41.68534%2c-73.89780&StartName=02457&StartLocation=42.29997%2c-71.26383&DataSetLangID=USA&RouteType=Shortest&RouteUnit=Miles) from Vassar. That game should be in-region.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pabegg on February 07, 2007, 04:23:30 PM

I agree that Hope-Carthage should be out of region, Babson-Vassar in region.

WashU has an extra loss. Are they counting the D1 exhibition?

I'm also checking discrepancies in wins for Manhattanville, NYU, Lincoln, Kings, St. Thomas, and Whitworth.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on February 07, 2007, 04:39:16 PM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on February 07, 2007, 04:06:57 PM
I'm confused. Everything I've read would indicate that Hope should be 10-1 in region, yet the NCAA has them listed as 10-2. Is Carthage now an in-region game for Hope?

Are they not within 200 miles of each other.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 07, 2007, 04:39:47 PM

I bet Manhattanville/Washington College is not 200 miles.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 07, 2007, 04:41:16 PM

Scratch that, we got 196 miles on that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 07, 2007, 04:42:33 PM

Quote from: Chris Brooks on February 07, 2007, 04:39:16 PM
Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on February 07, 2007, 04:06:57 PM
I'm confused. Everything I've read would indicate that Hope should be 10-1 in region, yet the NCAA has them listed as 10-2. Is Carthage now an in-region game for Hope?

Are they not within 200 miles of each other.

Holland to Kenosha is about 215 miles; I'm not sure what the NCAA's official software says, but I doubt is says 199.9 or less.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pabegg on February 07, 2007, 04:46:22 PM

Quote from: pabegg on February 07, 2007, 04:23:30 PM
I agree that Hope-Carthage should be out of region, Babson-Vassar in region.

WashU has an extra loss. Are they counting the D1 exhibition?

I'm also checking discrepancies in wins for Manhattanville, NYU, Lincoln, Kings, St. Thomas, and Whitworth.

The first four I still think I've got right (Manhattanville-Washington College, NYU-Clark, no guess on Lincoln and Kings). In those I've got an extra regional win.

St. Thomas and Whitworth: I have one more game (regional and overall) than the NCAA, and I can't guess what they left out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 07, 2007, 05:06:04 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 07, 2007, 04:42:33 PM
Quote from: Chris Brooks on February 07, 2007, 04:39:16 PM
Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on February 07, 2007, 04:06:57 PM
I'm confused. Everything I've read would indicate that Hope should be 10-1 in region, yet the NCAA has them listed as 10-2. Is Carthage now an in-region game for Hope?

Are they not within 200 miles of each other.

Holland to Kenosha is about 215 miles; I'm not sure what the NCAA's official software says, but I doubt is says 199.9 or less.

Seriously -- one year the software automatically spit out the ferry distance and that was obviously not what the rule was meant to cover.

I have just started my work shift at NBCSports.com -- if you guys compile differences I will definitely take this up with them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pabegg on February 07, 2007, 05:15:40 PM

My thoughts on the regional rankings:

Northeast: this is actually straight QOWI order, except for 9 & 10 where Babson beat Tufts.
East: I think they're missing one NYU win, which would tie NYU and Brockport (same RWP, same QOWI). But given what they've got, this is expected. (Note that the #6 here is likely St. John Fisher, which has a better Pool C chance than some of the ranked teams).
Atlantic: I'm a little surprised by NJCU at #5, as I'm not sure how they edge out Rutgers-Newark.
Mid-Atlantic: I'm not sure how Messiah is behind Catholic (better RWP and QOWI) unless it's based on their loss to Hood (Hood and Catholic split). Otherwise, exact match to mine.
South: 3 to 6 are basically tied, so it's all a matter of how they broke the ties.
Great Lakes: right on, except for the Hope situation.
Midwest: I'm not sure about the bottom 2 - must have given Carthage credit for all their losses to teams above them.
West: I'm not sure why Redlands is out. Assuming that Redlands is 9 and Coe is 10, both schools would be on the Pool C bubble today.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 07, 2007, 05:32:54 PM

Well, the criteria does say in-region results against regionally ranked teams. It doesn't say 'winning percentage' or 'wins.'

It was suggested to me ... I think last year ... that this could refer to having played ranked teams, regardless of the wins and losses.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pabegg on February 07, 2007, 05:44:08 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 07, 2007, 05:32:54 PM
Well, the criteria does say in-region results against regionally ranked teams. It doesn't say 'winning percentage' or 'wins.'

It was suggested to me ... I think last year ... that this could refer to having played ranked teams, regardless of the wins and losses.

Pat,

I'm not sure if you're referring to Catholic or Carthage.

Carthage looks like a clear example of what you described, as they're 1-3 against the three CCIW teams above them, while Bluffton hasn't played a ranked team.

Catholic is 2-1 vs. ranked teams (1-1 Hood, 1-0 Scranton) while Messiah is 1-1 (0-1 Hood, 1-0 Richard Stockton from Atlantic). This doesn't look like enough to reverse Messiah's lead on RWP and QOWI, but this must have been what they did.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 07, 2007, 06:12:00 PM

Was referring to Carthage, sorry.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 07, 2007, 06:16:35 PM

There's no ferry service in winter! ;) :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 07, 2007, 06:18:46 PM

Quote from: sac on February 07, 2007, 06:16:35 PM
There's no ferry service in winter! ;) :D

Exactly. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 07, 2007, 06:34:25 PM

I count 10-5 for Carthage to without Hope, NCAA has them listed at 11-5, so apparently they're counting Hope as an in-region game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pabegg on February 07, 2007, 06:41:45 PM

Quote from: sac on February 07, 2007, 06:34:25 PM
I count 10-5 for Carthage to without Hope, NCAA has them listed at 11-5, so apparently they're counting Hope as an in-region game.

I missed that - I also have Carthage at 10-5 (which would explain why I think they should be behind Bluffton).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 07, 2007, 06:42:43 PM

Quote from: sac on February 07, 2007, 06:34:25 PM
I count 10-5 for Carthage to without Hope, NCAA has them listed at 11-5, so apparently they're counting Hope as an in-region game.

Over on the Men's South Region Ranking Board,I detailed how I was able manually to load (Greencastle to Lafayette = 56 miles) + (Lafayette to Chicago = 110 miles) = 166 miles. DPU versus UChciago apparently was considered in-region.

When I loaded Greencastle to Chicago, it routed the shortest distance trip via Indianapolis to give 215 miles.

That may be what has happened here.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 07, 2007, 06:49:21 PM

I found it!!! :) ;D 8)

Olivet to Carthage by "msn.mappoint.com shortest distance" takes the ferry! :D :)

162 miles! 9 hrs 47 minutes!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 07, 2007, 07:00:25 PM

what ferry? Muskegon? So I guess they don't cover the miles over water since its 100 miles + from Olivet to Muskegon.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 07, 2007, 07:05:27 PM

Quote from: sac on February 07, 2007, 07:00:25 PM
what ferry? Muskegon? So I guess they don't cover the miles over water since its 100 miles + from Olivet to Muskegon.

Yes, "Lake Express Ferry (West) Check Timetable"

:D ;D 8)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on February 07, 2007, 07:21:18 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 07, 2007, 07:05:27 PM
Quote from: sac on February 07, 2007, 07:00:25 PM
what ferry? Muskegon? So I guess they don't cover the miles over water since its 100 miles + from Olivet to Muskegon.

Yes, "Lake Express Ferry (West) Check Timetable"

:D ;D 8)

oh my goodness... is Wheaton Calvin in Region Now???!?!?!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 07, 2007, 07:31:33 PM

Quote from: diehardfan on February 07, 2007, 07:21:18 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 07, 2007, 07:05:27 PM
Quote from: sac on February 07, 2007, 07:00:25 PM
what ferry? Muskegon? So I guess they don't cover the miles over water since its 100 miles + from Olivet to Muskegon.

Yes, "Lake Express Ferry (West) Check Timetable"

:D ;D 8)
oh my goodness... is Wheaton Calvin in Region Now???!?!?!!

Apparently, they don't want to drive northwest to Muskegon to ferry to Milwaukee only to drive so far south to Wheaton. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 07, 2007, 07:33:02 PM

April, sorry! Driving down from Milwaukee would be longer than just going south of the lake!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 07, 2007, 07:38:19 PM

So does this make Hope and Carthage the only 2 schools in D3 that have to drive more than 200 miles for an in-region game that qualifies as under 200 miles? :D

Funniest thing is Hope/Carthage was not in-region for the last 2 years. The Muskegon ferry has been in service at least that long.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 07, 2007, 08:28:00 PM

Quote from: sac on February 07, 2007, 07:38:19 PM
...

Funniest thing is Hope/Carthage was not in-region for the last 2 years. The Muskegon ferry has been in service at least that long.

Change of software! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 07, 2007, 09:35:29 PM

Final: #5 Wooster 90 Hiram 73

Wooster actually led by 30 points until they cleared the bench and Hiram's starters narrowed the final margin.

Wooster was led tonight by Evan Will with 15 points (12 boards), James Cooper with 14 points, Tom Port with 13 points (8 boards), Marty Bidwell with 10 points and freshman Robert Melick also with 10 points.

Wooster is now 19-3, 12-1 NCAC :)

GO SCOTS!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 07, 2007, 10:19:54 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 07, 2007, 08:28:00 PM
Quote from: sac on February 07, 2007, 07:38:19 PM
...

Funniest thing is Hope/Carthage was not in-region for the last 2 years. The Muskegon ferry has been in service at least that long.
Change of software! ;)

and common sense! :)

Calvin 77 #6 Hope 71

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 07, 2007, 10:25:59 PM

Quote from: sac on February 07, 2007, 07:38:19 PM
So does this make Hope and Carthage the only 2 schools in D3 that have to drive more than 200 miles for an in-region game that qualifies as under 200 miles? :D

As I said before, they screwed this up in the past. I am sure that once I bring it to their attention, it will get fixed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 07, 2007, 10:29:05 PM

Top 25 Schedule and Scores, Feb. 5-11 (UPDATED with Friday scores excl. WW/UPS):

#   1   Amherst (23-0) plays at Trinity (CT) Sat.
#   2   UW-Stevens Point (19-2) won at UW-Whitewater 83-80 and hosts UW-Stout Sat.
#   3   St. Thomas (20-3) won at Augsburg 80-75 (2 OT), lost at Gustavus Adolphus 80-74 (OT), and hosts Concordia-Moorhead Sat.
#   4   Virginia Wesleyan (20-3) def. Eastern Mennonite 87-60 and plays at Randolph-Macon Sat.
#   5   Wooster (19-3) def. Hiram 90-73 and plays at Wabash Sat.
#   6   Hope (18-3) won at Albion 78-71, lost to Calvin 77-71, and hosts Adrian Sat.
#   7   Wittenberg (19-3) def. Ohio Wesleyan 71-64 and hosts Hiram Sat.
#   8   UW-Oshkosh (18-4) plays at UW-Eau Claire Sat.
#   9   Mississippi College (19-2) def. Louisiana College 88-52 and hosts U. of the Ozarks Sat.
#   10   Augustana (18-4) def. #25 Wheaton (IL) 63-60 and hosts Millikin Sat.
#   11   Washington U. (17-3) def. Emory 74-62 and hosts Case Western Reserve Sun.
#   12   Elmhurst (17-4) def. #15 Carthage 81-59 and hosts North Park Sat.
#   13   Whitworth (19-2) plays at #18 Puget Sound Fri. and plays at Pacific Lutheran Sat.
#   14   Occidental (14-5) lost at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps 68-51 and hosts Pomona-Pitzer Sat.
#   15   Carthage (14-7) lost at #12 Elmhurst 81-59 and hosts North Central Sat.
#   16   NYU (16-5) lost to Rochester 58-53 and hosts Carnegie Mellon Sun.
#   17   Johns Hopkins (19-3) lost to McDaniel 70-68 and hosts Ursinus Sat.
#   18   Puget Sound (16-4) hosts #13 Whitworth Fri. and hosts Whitman Sat.
#   19   Ohio Northern (17-5) def. Wilmington 75-53 and plays at Capital Sat.
#   20   Worcester Polytech (18-2) def. Mass.-Boston 89-67 and hosts MIT Sat.
#   21   Aurora (20-2) def. Edgewood 90-62 and plays at Dominican Sat.
#   22   UW-La Crosse (15-7) def. UW-Platteville 54-32
#   23   Chicago (17-4) def. Case Western Reserve 77-73 and hosts Emory Sun.
#   24   Guilford (17-3) def. Hampden-Sydney 86-72, plays at Bridgewater (VA) Sat., and plays at Eastern Mennonite Sun.
#   25   Wheaton (IL) (14-7) lost at #10 Augustana 63-60 and plays at Illinois Wesleyan Sat.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 07, 2007, 11:17:57 PM

The JHU loss does not surprise me. The game vs. Ursinus is for the regular season title.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on February 08, 2007, 09:27:34 AM

Quote from: sac on February 07, 2007, 10:19:54 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 07, 2007, 08:28:00 PM
Quote from: sac on February 07, 2007, 07:38:19 PM
...

Funniest thing is Hope/Carthage was not in-region for the last 2 years. The Muskegon ferry has been in service at least that long.
Change of software! ;)

and common sense! :)

Calvin 77 #6 Hope 71

And I'm blaming the NCAA committee for that - seeing as how they gave Hope the in-region loss prior to the game being played :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sludge on February 09, 2007, 10:35:38 PM

I always see about a zillion UW-* teams in the top 25. Are these teams really that good? It seems improbable, but it could be true.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 09, 2007, 10:58:23 PM

Yeah, the UW branches are pretty good - most of them normally dust their non-conference opponents regularly before beating up on each other during the conference season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on February 09, 2007, 11:20:51 PM

No. 13 Whitworth vs. No. 18 Puget Sound on the air right now.

http://www.klay1180.com/live_radio.htm

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 10, 2007, 01:11:51 AM

UPS leads in OT, UPS 93-84, 1:06.

UPS trailed by 5 with under a minute.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 10, 2007, 01:15:51 AM

Top 25 Schedule and Scores, Feb. 5-11 (UPDATED through Saturday):

#   1   Amherst (23-1) lost at Trinity (CT) 62-59
#   2   UW-Stevens Point (20-2) won at UW-Whitewater 83-80 and def. UW-Stout 73-72
#   3   St. Thomas (21-3) won at Augsburg 80-75 (2 OT), lost at Gustavus Adolphus 80-74 (OT), and def. Concordia-Moorhead 77-57
#   4   Virginia Wesleyan (21-3) def. Eastern Mennonite 87-60 and won at Randolph-Macon 77-69
#   5   Wooster (20-3) def. Hiram 90-73 and won at Wabash 68-63
#   6   Hope (19-3) won at Albion 78-71, lost to Calvin 77-71, and def. Adrian 84-71
#   7   Wittenberg (20-3) def. Ohio Wesleyan 71-64 and def. Hiram 78-41
#   8   UW-Oshkosh (19-4) won at UW-Eau Claire 77-54
#   9   Mississippi College (20-2) def. Louisiana College 88-52 and def. U. of the Ozarks 89-63
#   10   Augustana (19-4) def. #25 Wheaton (IL) 63-60 and def. Millikin 71-59
#   11   Washington U. (17-3) def. Emory 74-62 and hosts Case Western Reserve Sun.
#   12   Elmhurst (18-4) def. #15 Carthage 81-59 and def. North Park 83-80
#   13   Whitworth (20-3) lost at #18 Puget Sound 95-90 (OT) and won at Pacific Lutheran 65-63
#   14   Occidental (15-5) lost at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps 68-51 and def. Pomona-Pitzer 76-59
#   15   Carthage (14-8) lost at #12 Elmhurst 81-59 and lost to North Central 62-60
#   16   NYU (16-5) lost to Rochester 58-53 and hosts Carnegie Mellon Sun.
#   17   Johns Hopkins (20-3) lost to McDaniel 70-68 and def. Ursinus 74-68
#   18   Puget Sound (17-5) def. #13 Whitworth 95-90 (OT) and lost to Whitman 106-99
#   19   Ohio Northern (17-6) def. Wilmington 75-53 and lost at Capital 74-70
#   20   Worcester Polytech (19-2) def. Mass.-Boston 89-67 and def. MIT 68-47
#   21   Aurora (21-2) def. Edgewood 90-62 and won at Dominican 83-80 (OT)
#   22   UW-La Crosse (15-7) def. UW-Platteville 54-32
#   23   Chicago (17-4) def. Case Western Reserve 77-73 and hosts Emory Sun.
#   24   Guilford (17-3) def. Hampden-Sydney 86-72, won at Bridgewater (VA) 74-52, and plays at Eastern Mennonite Sun.
#   25   Wheaton (IL) (15-7) lost at #10 Augustana 63-60 and won at Illinois Wesleyan 93-84

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 10, 2007, 12:48:43 PM

Quote from: sludge on February 09, 2007, 10:35:38 PM
I always see about a zillion UW-* teams in the top 25. Are these teams really that good? It seems improbable, but it could be true.

Smedindy is right, but the CCIW and UAA can be the same way. The CCIW has FOUR teams in; Carthage, Wheaton, Elmhurst and Augustana and the UAA has three as well, NYU, Chicago and Wash. U. You might see Rochester in there next week depending on their result on Sunday, and we know diehardfan would love to see that happen!

The WIAC at this time has three, Oshkosh, La Crosse and Point. Whitewater and Platteville were also in the Top 25 earlier in the year (with UW-W ranked 2nd in the preseason). I believe North Central was previously in the Top 25 on the CCIW side as well, as was Ill. Wesleyan. So, that makes 5 of 9 for the WIAC and an amazing six of 8 for the CCIW.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 10, 2007, 03:52:51 PM

Final: #5 Wooster 68 Wabash 63

Wooster escapes Crawfordsville, IN with the road win. Scots won this game with their defense as they held Wabash to only 27 points in the 2nd half. :)

Wooster was led today by Tom Port with 23 points, James Cooper with 17 points and Marty Bidwell with 14 points.

Wooster is now 20-3, 13-1 NCAC :)

GO SCOTS!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 10, 2007, 04:59:32 PM

Trinity CT 62, Amherst 59 (from the scoreboard!)

Congratulations, formerbant! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hope1 on February 10, 2007, 05:55:18 PM

hope 84 adrian 71 final

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 10, 2007, 08:28:38 PM

With #5 Wooster's record now at 20-3, it is time to offer.....

Congratulations to Wooster Coach Steve Moore on his 11th Consecutive Season of 20 Wins or More! :)

This is an impressive streak and the last time Wooster failed to win 20 games was in 1995-1996 when the Scots finished 19-7.

GO SCOTS!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: formerbant10 on February 10, 2007, 09:30:35 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 10, 2007, 04:59:32 PM
Trinity CT 62, Amherst 59 (from the scoreboard!)

Congratulations, formerbant! :)

Thanks Ralph. I heard it was quite a battle and a great crowd. 1800+ is the most I've heard of at Oosting gym.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on February 11, 2007, 12:48:14 AM

Formerbant:

I told Pat this story and thought you'd enjoy it.

I was with my girlfriend today and couldn't follow the Trinity/Amherst game. About 9 PM I couldn't take it any more and sent a text message to Pat asking how the Bants did. He responded back, "Your boys won."

So I have these happy thoughts running through my head the rest of the night. I'm very glad my girlfriend never asked the dreaded "What are you thinking about?" question. Because I'm a bad liar and the answer would've been "I'm thinking about the Bants taking down the No. 1 team in the country! THE BANTS ARE IN THE DANCE, BABY!!!!"

And that really would've spoiled the moment. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 11, 2007, 01:02:24 AM

Quote from: gordonmann on February 11, 2007, 12:48:14 AM
Formerbant:

I told Pat this story and thought you'd enjoy it.

I was with my girlfriend today and couldn't follow the Trinity/Amherst game. About 9 PM I couldn't take it any more and sent a text message to Pat asking how the Bants did. He responded back, "Your boys won."

So I have these happy thoughts running through my head the rest of the night. I'm very glad my girlfriend never asked the dreaded "What are you thinking about?" question. Because I'm a bad liar and the answer would've been "I'm thinking about the Bants taking down the No. 1 team in the country! THE BANTS ARE IN THE DANCE, BABY!!!!"

And that really would've spoiled the moment. :)

Oh Gordon! ::) You have a lot to learn.

She knows the difference between that "I am so happy to be spending quality time with you" look and your "I'm thinking about the Bants taking down the No. 1 team in the country! THE BANTS ARE IN THE DANCE, BABY!!!!" look. :P

Who do you think you are fooling? :D

(And I think that my wife and I have been married long enough to be your parents. ;) Trust me...She knows!)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on February 11, 2007, 01:58:34 AM

LOL... awesome story gordon.... I had a funny night as I thought the Oxy-Pomona game was at Pomna and showed up at a very empty rush gym.... unfazed, I hopped over to next door CMS's gym to catch the redlands game... door locked. Drove to Oxy and watched a close game quickky become a blowout.... so a half a game and a beat down was my reward for 4hrs of driving tonight.... but I am in a great mood cause wheaton won... hah!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on February 11, 2007, 02:06:23 AM

And Ralph is right, we're all knowing. :D But since she loves you she'd just be happy for you, I'm sure. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 11, 2007, 01:41:05 PM

Top 25 Schedule and Scores, Feb. 5-11 (UPDATED with Sunday scores as I get them):

#   1   Amherst (23-1) lost at Trinity (CT) 62-59
#   2   UW-Stevens Point (20-2) won at UW-Whitewater 83-80 and def. UW-Stout 73-72
#   3   St. Thomas (21-3) won at Augsburg 80-75 (2 OT), lost at Gustavus Adolphus 80-74 (OT), and def. Concordia-Moorhead 77-57
#   4   Virginia Wesleyan (21-3) def. Eastern Mennonite 87-60 and won at Randolph-Macon 77-69
#   5   Wooster (20-3) def. Hiram 90-73 and won at Wabash 68-63
#   6   Hope (19-3) won at Albion 78-71, lost to Calvin 77-71, and def. Adrian 84-71
#   7   Wittenberg (20-3) def. Ohio Wesleyan 71-64 and def. Hiram 78-41
#   8   UW-Oshkosh (19-4) won at UW-Eau Claire 77-54
#   9   Mississippi College (20-2) def. Louisiana College 88-52 and def. U. of the Ozarks 89-63
#   10   Augustana (19-4) def. #25 Wheaton (IL) 63-60 and def. Millikin 71-59
#   11   Washington U. (18-3) def. Emory 74-62 and def. Case Western Reserve 86-65
#   12   Elmhurst (18-4) def. #15 Carthage 81-59 and def. North Park 83-80
#   13   Whitworth (20-3) lost at #18 Puget Sound 95-90 (OT) and won at Pacific Lutheran 65-63
#   14   Occidental (15-5) lost at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps 68-51 and def. Pomona-Pitzer 76-59
#   15   Carthage (14-8) lost at #12 Elmhurst 81-59 and lost to North Central 62-60
#   16   NYU (17-5) lost to Rochester 58-53 and def. Carnegie Mellon 78-57
#   17   Johns Hopkins (20-3) lost to McDaniel 70-68 and def. Ursinus 74-68
#   18   Puget Sound (17-5) def. #13 Whitworth 95-90 (OT) and lost to Whitman 106-99
#   19   Ohio Northern (17-6) def. Wilmington 75-53 and lost at Capital 74-70
#   20   Worcester Polytech (19-2) def. Mass.-Boston 89-67 and def. MIT 68-47
#   21   Aurora (21-2) def. Edgewood 90-62 and won at Dominican 83-80 (OT)
#   22   UW-La Crosse (15-7) def. UW-Platteville 54-32
#   23   Chicago (18-4) def. Case Western Reserve 77-73 and def. Emory 89-71
#   24   Guilford (17-3) def. Hampden-Sydney 86-72, won at Bridgewater (VA) 74-52, and plays at Eastern Mennonite Sun.
#   25   Wheaton (IL) (15-7) lost at #10 Augustana 63-60 and won at Illinois Wesleyan 93-84

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: balls a dunkin on February 11, 2007, 02:36:13 PM

I really feel sorry for the voters of the top 25. it seems like there are more upsets in DIII than any other division. Maybe I am wrong, But David's work on the top 25 really shows it alot better than the newspaper. Thanks alot David! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 11, 2007, 02:58:06 PM

As the season has played out, I've become convinced that, a) there is not one dominant team this year (a team as good as, say, the 2004 and 2005 UW-Stevens Point teams), and b) there is tremendous parity in Division III up and down the top 25. I think #25 Wheaton and superstar Kent Raymond would give #1 Amherst all they could handle.

I think there are 10-12 teams with a legitimate chance to win the 2007 title. At this stage of most seasons, that list is probably much smaller.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on February 11, 2007, 03:26:06 PM

You heard it here first... Wheaton for #1 in the next poll! Just kidding!!!! :D

I agree though, I have no idea who's going to be in the final four, and its been a bit of a demotivator to buy my tickets to Salem thus far. Odd, but true. For some reason the event's more exciting when I think there is likely to be a certain set of matchups that will be really good, or that there's going to be a team you really enjoy the style of or who has that great humble star player its more interesting. Oh well, I suppose I should get on that before tickets become too expensive!

I've been of the opinion that Point should be #1 for a while now. I'm not really sure what people have expected them to do differently with their sched. Is it supposed to surprise us that they lost a few conference games? I wouldn't want to pick 2-25 though! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 11, 2007, 04:06:10 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on February 11, 2007, 02:58:06 PM
As the season has played out, I've become convinced that, a) there is not one dominant team this year (a team as good as, say, the 2004 and 2005 UW-Stevens Point teams), and b) there is tremendous parity in Division III up and down the top 25. I think #25 Wheaton and superstar Kent Raymond would give #1 Amherst all they could handle.

I think there are 10-12 teams with a legitimate chance to win the 2007 title. At this stage of most seasons, that list is probably much smaller.

I don't know anything about Amherst and I haven't seen them play. I know there is an East-Coast bias about those teams not being as strong as the midwest area teams. In 2004, Amherst barely lost to Williams, who lost to Point in the National Championship game. I don't want to compare that year to this year, but maybe the cream of the crop teams "out east" can compete with the teams in this area. I mean, everyone seemed to give IWU the championship last year and they lost to "lowly" VWU and Amherst beat Wittenberg! lol. ;D :D ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 11, 2007, 04:06:59 PM

Wittenberg beat Amherst.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 11, 2007, 04:19:35 PM

Quote from: Old School on February 11, 2007, 04:06:10 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on February 11, 2007, 02:58:06 PM
As the season has played out, I've become convinced that, a) there is not one dominant team this year (a team as good as, say, the 2004 and 2005 UW-Stevens Point teams), and b) there is tremendous parity in Division III up and down the top 25. I think #25 Wheaton and superstar Kent Raymond would give #1 Amherst all they could handle.

I think there are 10-12 teams with a legitimate chance to win the 2007 title. At this stage of most seasons, that list is probably much smaller.

I don't know anything about Amherst and I haven't seen them play. I know there is an East-Coast bias about those teams not being as strong as the midwest area teams. In 2004, Amherst barely lost to Williams, who lost to Point in the National Championship game. I don't want to compare that year to this year, but maybe the cream of the crop teams "out east" can compete with the teams in this area. I mean, everyone seemed to give IWU the championship last year and they lost to "lowly" VWU and Amherst beat Wittenberg! lol. ;D :D ;)

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 11, 2007, 04:06:59 PM
Wittenberg beat Amherst.

As did IWU.

I'm curious to see whether Amherst will fall below #2. My impression is they made it to #1 more by the attrition of others than by any strong support, and will no doubt be replaced by UWSP this week. But the other close pursuers all have at least 3 losses, while Amherst still has but 1.

Likewise, I wonder if #25 Wheaton will remain in the top 25 with another loss, since (#26) Lake Erie and (#27) MHB just keep winning, and Trinity CT is bound to get some strong consideration. But on the other hand, Wheaton lost AWAY to the #10 team by only 3 points, and beat IWU on the road (hardly the achievement of past years, but still not chopped liver). If anything, Wheaton should probably move up slightly, except the next five above them all were undefeated this week. Hmmm...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 11, 2007, 04:29:59 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 11, 2007, 04:19:35 PM
I'm curious to see whether Amherst will fall below #2. My impression is they made it to #1 more by the attrition of others than by any strong support, and will no doubt be replaced by UWSP this week. But the other close pursuers all have at least 3 losses, while Amherst still has but 1.

The pack following Amherst didn't exactly have stellar weeks either, as my Week-at-a-Glance shows. Point won at home by 1 point, Wooster eked out 17- and 5-point wins over a teams they beat by 54 and 44 just last month; VWC had a good but not great week; Hope lost; and St. Thomas...well, they're the team that I think has been overrated all year due to the attrition around them. I don't have anything against the Tommies, but I hope the voters' patience has finally run out and they take a serious tumble this week. I'd guess that Amherst is either #2 or #3 (behind VWC) this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 11, 2007, 04:32:47 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 11, 2007, 04:06:59 PM
Wittenberg beat Amherst.

That's actually what I meant. Not sure how I typed that the other way, my argument wouldn't have made any sense then! ??? Oops.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 11, 2007, 04:34:32 PM

Quote from: Old School on February 11, 2007, 04:06:10 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on February 11, 2007, 02:58:06 PM
As the season has played out, I've become convinced that, a) there is not one dominant team this year (a team as good as, say, the 2004 and 2005 UW-Stevens Point teams), and b) there is tremendous parity in Division III up and down the top 25. I think #25 Wheaton and superstar Kent Raymond would give #1 Amherst all they could handle.

I think there are 10-12 teams with a legitimate chance to win the 2007 title. At this stage of most seasons, that list is probably much smaller.

I don't know anything about Amherst and I haven't seen them play. I know there is an East-Coast bias about those teams not being as strong as the midwest area teams. In 2004, Amherst barely lost to Williams, who lost to Point in the National Championship game. I don't want to compare that year to this year, but maybe the cream of the crop teams "out east" can compete with the teams in this area. I mean, everyone seemed to give IWU the championship last year and they lost to "lowly" VWU and Amherst beat Wittenberg! lol. ;D :D ;)

The "cream of the crop" in almost every region can compete with the best in the Midwest, West, and Great Lakes. The national championships won by Catholic (2001), Williams (2003), and Virginia Wesleyan (2006) illustrate that as do most of the game results from Salem.

The "bias" against the east coast (and South region for that matter) has more to do with the depth. There just are not as many Final Four caliber squads as there are in the top 3 regions.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 11, 2007, 04:54:00 PM

Top 25 Schedule and Scores, Feb. 5-11 (FINAL):

#   1   Amherst (23-1) lost at Trinity (CT) 62-59
#   2   UW-Stevens Point (20-2) won at UW-Whitewater 83-80 and def. UW-Stout 73-72
#   3   St. Thomas (21-3) won at Augsburg 80-75 (2 OT), lost at Gustavus Adolphus 80-74 (OT), and def. Concordia-Moorhead 77-57
#   4   Virginia Wesleyan (21-3) def. Eastern Mennonite 87-60 and won at Randolph-Macon 77-69
#   5   Wooster (20-3) def. Hiram 90-73 and won at Wabash 68-63
#   6   Hope (19-3) won at Albion 78-71, lost to Calvin 77-71, and def. Adrian 84-71
#   7   Wittenberg (20-3) def. Ohio Wesleyan 71-64 and def. Hiram 78-41
#   8   UW-Oshkosh (19-4) won at UW-Eau Claire 77-54
#   9   Mississippi College (20-2) def. Louisiana College 88-52 and def. U. of the Ozarks 89-63
#   10   Augustana (19-4) def. #25 Wheaton (IL) 63-60 and def. Millikin 71-59
#   11   Washington U. (18-3) def. Emory 74-62 and def. Case Western Reserve 86-65
#   12   Elmhurst (18-4) def. #15 Carthage 81-59 and def. North Park 83-80
#   13   Whitworth (20-3) lost at #18 Puget Sound 95-90 (OT) and won at Pacific Lutheran 65-63
#   14   Occidental (15-5) lost at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps 68-51 and def. Pomona-Pitzer 76-59
#   15   Carthage (14-8) lost at #12 Elmhurst 81-59 and lost to North Central 62-60
#   16   NYU (17-5) lost to Rochester 58-53 and def. Carnegie Mellon 78-57
#   17   Johns Hopkins (20-3) lost to McDaniel 70-68 and def. Ursinus 74-68
#   18   Puget Sound (17-5) def. #13 Whitworth 95-90 (OT) and lost to Whitman 106-99
#   19   Ohio Northern (17-6) def. Wilmington 75-53 and lost at Capital 74-70
#   20   Worcester Polytech (19-2) def. Mass.-Boston 89-67 and def. MIT 68-47
#   21   Aurora (21-2) def. Edgewood 90-62 and won at Dominican 83-80 (OT)
#   22   UW-La Crosse (15-7) def. UW-Platteville 54-32
#   23   Chicago (18-4) def. Case Western Reserve 77-73 and def. Emory 89-71
#   24   Guilford (19-3) def. Hampden-Sydney 86-72, won at Bridgewater (VA) 74-52, and won at Eastern Mennonite 84-75
#   25   Wheaton (IL) (15-7) lost at #10 Augustana 63-60 and won at Illinois Wesleyan 93-84

Collectively 38-12 overall and 35-9 against unranked teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 11, 2007, 06:00:03 PM

Tough week for 13-19...and (almost) for the entire top 3!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on February 11, 2007, 06:34:19 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 11, 2007, 04:19:35 PM
Likewise, I wonder if #25 Wheaton will remain in the top 25 with another loss, since (#26) Lake Erie and (#27) MHB just keep winning, and Trinity CT is bound to get some strong consideration. But on the other hand, Wheaton lost AWAY to the #10 team by only 3 points, and beat IWU on the road (hardly the achievement of past years, but still not chopped liver). If anything, Wheaton should probably move up slightly, except the next five above them all were undefeated this week. Hmmm...

I don't see what they did this week that would merit moving up in the polls. A loss against #10 Augustana and close win at a 10-12 Illinois Wesleyan team that has lost eight of their last ten.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on February 11, 2007, 06:38:47 PM

Will Stevens Point be a unanimous #1 this week. Based on voters reluctance to vote Amherst #1 this season, I would not be completely shocked to see them fall to #3 behind Virginia Wesleyan or Wooster.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 11, 2007, 06:53:29 PM

Quote from: Chris Brooks on February 11, 2007, 06:34:19 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 11, 2007, 04:19:35 PM
Likewise, I wonder if #25 Wheaton will remain in the top 25 with another loss, since (#26) Lake Erie and (#27) MHB just keep winning, and Trinity CT is bound to get some strong consideration. But on the other hand, Wheaton lost AWAY to the #10 team by only 3 points, and beat IWU on the road (hardly the achievement of past years, but still not chopped liver). If anything, Wheaton should probably move up slightly, except the next five above them all were undefeated this week. Hmmm...

I don't see what they did this week that would merit moving up in the polls. A loss against #10 Augustana and close win at a 10-12 Illinois Wesleyan team that has lost eight of their last ten.

Lost to a higher-ranked team, so that's usually not something a team gets punished for. Probably status quo here.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Marty Peretz on February 11, 2007, 11:23:25 PM

Two easy WashU wins over the weekend. Do they move up at all in the poll? I say maybe to 9.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 11, 2007, 11:55:32 PM

Neither Emory nor Case Western is worth writing home about -- if they move up I would guess it would only be because someone fell below them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 12, 2007, 12:17:14 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 11, 2007, 01:41:05 PM
Top 25 Schedule and Scores, Feb. 5-11 (UPDATED with Sunday scores as I get them):

#   1   Amherst (23-1) lost at Trinity (CT) 62-59
#   2   UW-Stevens Point (20-2) won at UW-Whitewater 83-80 and def. UW-Stout 73-72
#   3   St. Thomas (21-3) won at Augsburg 80-75 (2 OT), lost at Gustavus Adolphus 80-74 (OT), and def. Concordia-Moorhead 77-57
#   4   Virginia Wesleyan (21-3) def. Eastern Mennonite 87-60 and won at Randolph-Macon 77-69
#   5   Wooster (20-3) def. Hiram 90-73 and won at Wabash 68-63
#   6   Hope (19-3) won at Albion 78-71, lost to Calvin 77-71, and def. Adrian 84-71
#   7   Wittenberg (20-3) def. Ohio Wesleyan 71-64 and def. Hiram 78-41
#   8   UW-Oshkosh (19-4) won at UW-Eau Claire 77-54
#   9   Mississippi College (20-2) def. Louisiana College 88-52 and def. U. of the Ozarks 89-63
#   10   Augustana (19-4) def. #25 Wheaton (IL) 63-60 and def. Millikin 71-59
#   11   Washington U. (18-3) def. Emory 74-62 and def. Case Western Reserve 86-65
#   12   Elmhurst (18-4) def. #15 Carthage 81-59 and def. North Park 83-80

Quote from: Marty Peretz on February 11, 2007, 11:23:25 PM
Two easy WashU wins over the weekend. Do they move up at all in the poll? I say maybe to 9.

I'm not sure how much they would move up if they did at all. Amherst and St. Thomas lost, but I don't see that effecting Washington U's status. #6 Hope lost to Calvin, but I think the voters have enough respect for that rivalry that they may not drop 5 spots. #s 7, 8, 9, and 10 all won, so how could Washington U jump them. In fact, some may see #12 Elhmurst smoking #15 Carthage on the road, more impressive and may actually JUMP Washington U. So, they may even drop a spot!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bluejaybacker1 on February 12, 2007, 11:05:55 AM

Elmhurst's win was at home not on the road. It was a solid win though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 12, 2007, 11:18:12 AM

Quote from: bluejaybacker1 on February 12, 2007, 11:05:55 AM
Elmhurst's win was at home not on the road. It was a solid win though.

I try to use consistent terminology in the score updates:
"lost at" and "won at" indicate road games
"lost to" and "def." indicate home games, unless followed by "at [elsewhere]" which indicates neutral site.

"Elmhurst (18-4) def. #15 Carthage" indicates that the game was at Elmhurst.

HTH. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on February 12, 2007, 01:04:24 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 12, 2007, 11:18:12 AM
I try to use consistent terminology in the score updates:
"lost at" and "won at" indicate road games
"lost to" and "def." indicate home games, unless followed by "at [elsewhere]" which indicates neutral site.

"Elmhurst (18-4) def. #15 Carthage" indicates that the game was at Elmhurst.

At least no one drove to Carthage by accident!!! Those schools are NOT close enough to catch the second half of a game if you drive to the wrong location. :D :-X

Carthage will probably fall like a brick after losing two games this week, even though one of them was against Elmhurst. This is because they're now tied for 4th with NCC in the CCIW, two games behind Wheaton (and only a half a game ahead of #6 NPU). I wouldn't be surprised if they were ranked behind us now, and if Wheaton picked up a few of those points as well as other colleges like Lake Erie (who will probably announce the building of a new gym in the offseason! :D ), MHB, Trinity Conn (who is probably going to have to get SOMETHING after knocking off #1), etc. Let me note that while I am comfortable with us deserving a ranking at this point, I'd also much rather not have us ranked! :)

Quote from: Chris Brooks on February 11, 2007, 06:38:47 PM
Will Stevens Point be a unanimous #1 this week. Based on voters reluctance to vote Amherst #1 this season, I would not be completely shocked to see them fall to #3 behind Virginia Wesleyan or Wooster.

I agree. But I think that VA Wes at the very least will garner some #1 votes. Wouldn't be surprised if Wooster did too.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 12, 2007, 01:12:54 PM

I think Amherst could fall to #4, easily.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 12, 2007, 04:01:14 PM

Quote from: bluejaybacker1 on February 12, 2007, 11:05:55 AM
Elmhurst's win was at home not on the road. It was a solid win though.

I looked at the NCC win AT Carthage and also was looking at Elmhurst's win vs. Carthage and mashed those two together. My apologies. :'( :P ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 12, 2007, 04:13:02 PM

Quote from: smedindy on February 12, 2007, 01:12:54 PM
I think Amherst could fall to #4, easily.

You really think they could fall to #4? #2 Point didn't have the most rousing week ever with close wins over not so great opponents. #3 St. Thomas lost to a team that is probably not as good as Trinity. #4 VA Wes did well, they should move up. Then you would also have to bump #5 Wooster up (assuming St. Thomas falls just as far as Amherst) and Wooster hasn't exactly been tearing he lights out lately (how's that for a mixed metaphor).

I certainly think they'll drop (although I can see why people might continue to vote them #1), but four seems a stretch and "easily" seems a bit hasty.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bluejaybacker1 on February 12, 2007, 05:04:51 PM

David C.-

I was not replying to your post with all the top 25 teams and how they fared. It was to Old School's post when he mentioned that EC smoked Carthage on the road, that's all. I know I appreciate all the work you do to update the top 25 and how they fared every week and I am sure most of the other posters do to.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 12, 2007, 05:54:50 PM

Quote from: bluejaybacker1 on February 12, 2007, 05:04:51 PM
David C.-

I was not replying to your post with all the top 25 teams and how they fared. It was to Old School's post when he mentioned that EC smoked Carthage on the road, that's all.

I know that; I was amplifying your response. It's something I've wanted to say for a while, since I could see how someone relying on my posts could be confused about home and away games. Thanks for the compliments. :)

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 12, 2007, 04:13:02 PM
Quote from: smedindy on February 12, 2007, 01:12:54 PM
I think Amherst could fall to #4, easily.

You really think they could fall to #4? #2 Point didn't have the most rousing week ever with close wins over not so great opponents. #3 St. Thomas lost to a team that is probably not as good as Trinity. #4 VA Wes did well, they should move up. Then you would also have to bump #5 Wooster up (assuming St. Thomas falls just as far as Amherst) and Wooster hasn't exactly been tearing he lights out lately (how's that for a mixed metaphor).

I certainly think they'll drop (although I can see why people might continue to vote them #1), but four seems a stretch and "easily" seems a bit hasty.

Support for Amherst in the polls this year has always been thin, whereas support for Wooster has been deep and steady for many years. It's well within the realm of possibilities that the voters will once again don their McLeod Tartan sunglasses and promote Wooster to #3 ahead of the Lord Jeffs (and behind UW-SP and VWC.) I just hope it doesn't happen.

(And for those of may not know, I am a Wooster fan and alumnus.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 12, 2007, 06:22:44 PM

It didn't happen.

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 12, 2007, 06:42:32 PM

Top 25 At-a-Glance, Week of Feb. 12-18

#   1   UW-Stevens Point (20-2) hosts UW-Platteville Wed. and plays at UW-Superior Sat.
#   2   Virginia Wesleyan (21-3) hosts Lynchburg Sat.
#   3   Amherst (23-1) hosts Bates Sat. (NESCAC tournament)
#   4   Wooster (20-3) plays at Kenyon Wed. and hosts Ohio Wesleyan Sat.
#   5   UW-Oshkosh (19-4) plays at UW-Whitewater Wed. and plays at UW-Platteville Sat.
#   6   Wittenberg (20-3) hosts Wabash ~~Wed.~~Thu. and plays at Allegheny Sat.
#   7   Mississippi College (20-2) plays at UT-Dallas Thu. and plays at UT-Tyler Sat.
#   8   St. Thomas (21-3) hosts St. John's Sat.
#   9   Augustana (19-4) plays at Illinois Wesleyan Wed. and hosts North Central Sat.
#   10   Hope (19-3) plays at Alma Wed. and plays at Tri-State Sat.
#   11   Washington U. (18-3) plays at Carnegie Mellon Fri. and plays at Rochester Sun.
#   12   Elmhurst (18-4) plays at North Central Wed. and hosts #25 Wheaton (IL) Sat.
#   13   Worcester Polytech (19-2) hosts Wheaton (MA) Wed. and plays at Coast Guard Sat.
#   14   Chicago (18-4) plays at Rochester Fri. and plays at Carnegie Mellon Sun.
#   15   Aurora (21-2) hosts Concordia (IL) Thu. and plays at Rockford Sat.
#   16   Whitworth (21-3) won at Whitman 84-72 and hosts Willamette Fri.
#   17   Guilford (19-3) hosts Washington & Lee Wed. and plays at Emory & Henry Sat.
#   18   UW-La Crosse (15-7) hosts UW-River Falls Wed. and plays at UW-Stout Sat.
#   19   Occidental (15-5) hosts Cal Lutheran Wed. and plays at Redlands Sat.
#   20   NYU (17-5) plays at Case Western Reserve Fri. and plays at Emory Sun.
#   21   Puget Sound (17-5) plays at Lewis & Clark Fri. and plays at Linfield Sat.
#   22   Trinity (CT) (20-3) hosts Bowdoin Sat. (NESCAC tournament)
#   23   Mary Hardin-Baylor (20-3) plays at McMurry Thu. and plays at Hardin-Simmons Sat.
#   24   Johns Hopkins (20-3) plays at Gettysburg Wed. and hosts Franklin & Marshall Sat.
#   25   Wheaton (IL) (15-7) hosts Millikin Wed. and plays at #12 Elmhurst Sat.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: systemfan86 on February 13, 2007, 08:30:41 AM

Quote from: systemfan86 on February 06, 2007, 02:46:25 PM
Quote from: Coach C on February 06, 2007, 01:45:41 PM
While I think that Grinnell's current streak is strong work, one would have to say that the losses on the road in a 'down' conference are troubling at best.

I can't see them getting much consideration at 6 losses.

C
Thanks for the input.

I understand the weak conference impact; when coupled with the conference, the 6 losses could be an issue, but in and of itself, 6 losses shouldn't be a problem. Both Carthage and Wheaton are in the top 25 with 6 losses, and others receiving consideration have >4 losses.

I look at a 15-5 team like Loras who is receiving votes, and they have a similar footprint as Grinnell: early losses - they were 4-5 at the beginning on the season - and then an extended winning streak. If Grinnell wins out, they will have beaten every team in their conference.

Again, I'm not saying they should be ranked. I'm just trying to figure out whether the current winning streak that they are on changes the national impression of this team and whether that might be reflected in their receiving votes. I looked at the Massey rankings that Pat linked to, and they were 21st.

Ultimately, it matters very little. The rankings don't impact the NCAA tournament bids, and the only way that Grinnell makes it in the tournament is to win the conference's A bid. Once they're there, who knows?

Well, waddya know. Someone took a look at the Pioneers. Thanks for the 1 GC vote/point. That's probably all they get or deserve, but the recognition of a good season is appreciated by this fan. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 13, 2007, 04:09:49 PM

NCAA D-III Coaches Poll (http://www.ncaasports.com/basketball/mens/polls/rankings/diviii-coaches) Grinnell got ONE vote from them too! lol ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 13, 2007, 05:13:54 PM

Ah... Old School... that is the D3hoops.com poll! The NABC teamed with D3hoops.com for their poll. Look at the top of that NCAA page and you will also see... D3hoops.com.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 13, 2007, 11:11:05 PM

I'm an idiot. lol ::) That kind of looked familiar.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 14, 2007, 03:47:26 PM

Top 25 At-a-Glance, Week of Feb. 12-18 (UPDATED with Wednesday scores and postponements)

#   1   UW-Stevens Point (21-2) def. UW-Platteville 69-58 and plays at UW-Superior Sat.
#   2   Virginia Wesleyan (21-3) hosts Lynchburg Sat.
#   3   Amherst (23-1) hosts Bates Sat. (NESCAC tournament)
#   4   Wooster (20-3) plays at Kenyon ~~Wed.~~Thu. and hosts Ohio Wesleyan Sat.
#   5   UW-Oshkosh (19-5) lost at UW-Whitewater 88-71 and plays at UW-Platteville Sat.
#   6   Wittenberg (20-3) hosts Wabash ~~Wed.~~Thu. and plays at Allegheny Sat.
#   7   Mississippi College (20-2) plays at UT-Dallas Thu. and plays at UT-Tyler Sat.
#   8   St. Thomas (21-3) hosts St. John's Sat.
#   9   Augustana (20-4) won at Illinois Wesleyan 80-77 and hosts North Central Sat.
#   10   Hope (20-3) won at Alma 88-62 and plays at Tri-State Sat.
#   11   Washington U. (18-3) plays at Carnegie Mellon Fri. and plays at Rochester Sun.
#   12   Elmhurst (18-5) lost at North Central 89-74 and hosts #25 Wheaton (IL) Sat.
#   13   Worcester Polytech (19-2) hosts Wheaton (MA) ~~Wed.~~Thu. and plays at Coast Guard Sat.
#   14   Chicago (18-4) plays at Rochester Fri. and plays at Carnegie Mellon Sun.
#   15   Aurora (21-2) hosts Concordia (IL) Thu. and plays at Rockford Sat.
#   16   Whitworth (21-3) won at Whitman 84-72 and hosts Willamette Fri.
#   17   Guilford (20-3) def. Washington & Lee 95-77 and plays at Emory & Henry Sat.
#   18   UW-La Crosse (16-7) def. UW-River Falls 80-63 and plays at UW-Stout Sat.
#   19   Occidental (16-5) def. Cal Lutheran 41-40 and plays at Redlands Sat.
#   20   NYU (17-5) plays at Case Western Reserve Fri. and plays at Emory Sun.
#   21   Puget Sound (17-5) plays at Lewis & Clark Fri. and plays at Linfield Sat.
#   22   Trinity (CT) (20-3) hosts Bowdoin Sat. (NESCAC tournament)
#   23   Mary Hardin-Baylor (20-3) plays at McMurry Thu. and plays at Hardin-Simmons Sat.
#   24   Johns Hopkins (20-4) lost at Gettysburg 65-58 and hosts Franklin & Marshall Sat.
#   25   Wheaton (IL) (15-7) hosts Millikin ~~Wed.~~Thu. and plays at #12 Elmhurst Sat.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PrideSportBBallGuy on February 14, 2007, 05:40:36 PM

Pat-

You know why the new regional rankings haven't come out yet. I know its not your fault. NCAA rankings say they will be released again today.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 14, 2007, 05:44:42 PM

Well... the NCAA offices are apparently closed today... and they can't figure out how to work from home when everyone is relying on them... so I am betting we won't see the regional rankings until Thursday!

PRIORITIES!!! I busted my ass to get to work in some horrible conditions in the Mid-Atlantic... just to make sure people had a safe and smooth day (ok, that's out of my system now!).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 14, 2007, 05:50:03 PM

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on February 14, 2007, 05:44:42 PM
Well... the NCAA offices are apparently closed today... and they can't figure out how to work from home when everyone is relying on them... so I am betting we won't see the regional rankings until Thursday!

The NCAA's Commodore 64's don't work so well with the acoustic couplers and party lines the company provides to its key employees, so it's hard for them to work from home. ::) ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 14, 2007, 06:03:34 PM

Well... the last they could have done was upgrade to 386's!!!

Where in the world is those billions of dollars from CBS Sports going anyway???

(Pretty sure that will get some very interesting responses!)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 14, 2007, 06:55:28 PM

d-mac,

You mean you didn't know they devote all the money to d3 tournament travel expenses. :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 14, 2007, 08:51:39 PM

Ypsi - thanks for reminding me... I had completely forgot the NCAA paid for all those LONG airline trips for the teams. I'm sorry... thanks for the reminder... which actually reminds me I need to submit my expense report for covering Division III to the NCAA... which includes that five-star hotel and limo in Chicago when I plan to get out there for a weekend of basketball. They did say it would be no big deal... or did they say just no... hmm, can't remember! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 14, 2007, 11:37:16 PM

Oshkosh falls at Whitewater 88-71. With a La Crosse victory on Saturday at Stout, the Eagles will seal up the #2 seed in next week's WIAC tourney.

Point beats Platteville 69-58. Already clinching at least a share of the WIAC championship with Saturday's victory over Stout, Point the victory bring's Point's 6 conference championship in 8 years. The 14-1 Pointers now travel to Superior Saturday to take on the 2-13 Yellowjackets, who Point destroyed 101-45, Point's largest margin of victory in a WIAC game in 24 years in the first matchup in January.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 15, 2007, 08:58:08 PM

Final: #4 Wooster 87 Kenyon 62

Wooster gets the road win and clinches at least a tie for the NCAC regular season title as they move to 14-1 NCAC, 21-3 overall. :) ;D

Wooster was led tonight by Tom Port with 22 points, Devin Fulk with 15 points (5 three pointers), Brandon Johnson with 14 points and James Cooper with 13 points.

GO SCOTS!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 15, 2007, 09:57:26 PM

Top 25 At-a-Glance, Week of Feb. 12-18 (UPDATED through Thursday)

#   1   UW-Stevens Point (21-2) def. UW-Platteville 69-58 and plays at UW-Superior Sat.
#   2   Virginia Wesleyan (21-3) hosts Lynchburg Sat.
#   3   Amherst (23-1) hosts Bates Sat. (NESCAC tournament)
#   4   Wooster (21-3) won at Kenyon 87-62 and hosts Ohio Wesleyan Sat.
#   5   UW-Oshkosh (19-5) lost at UW-Whitewater 88-71 and plays at UW-Platteville Sat.
#   6   Wittenberg (21-3) def. Wabash 82-59 and plays at Allegheny Sat.
#   7   Mississippi College (21-2) won at UT-Dallas 70-67 and plays at UT-Tyler Sat.
#   8   St. Thomas (21-3) hosts St. John's Sat.
#   9   Augustana (20-4) won at Illinois Wesleyan 80-77 and hosts North Central Sat.
#   10   Hope (20-3) won at Alma 88-62 and plays at Tri-State Sat.
#   11   Washington U. (18-3) plays at Carnegie Mellon Fri. and plays at Rochester Sun.
#   12   Elmhurst (18-5) lost at North Central 89-74 and hosts #25 Wheaton (IL) Sat.
#   13   Worcester Polytech (20-2) def. Wheaton (MA) 73-57 and plays at Coast Guard Sat.
#   14   Chicago (18-4) plays at Rochester Fri. and plays at Carnegie Mellon Sun.
#   15   Aurora (22-2) def. Concordia (IL) 109-86 and plays at Rockford Sat.
#   16   Whitworth (21-3) won at Whitman 84-72 and hosts Willamette Fri.
#   17   Guilford (20-3) def. Washington & Lee 95-77 and plays at Emory & Henry Sat.
#   18   UW-La Crosse (16-7) def. UW-River Falls 80-63 and plays at UW-Stout Sat.
#   19   Occidental (16-5) def. Cal Lutheran 41-40 and plays at Redlands Sat.
#   20   NYU (17-5) plays at Case Western Reserve Fri. and plays at Emory Sun.
#   21   Puget Sound (17-5) plays at Lewis & Clark Fri. and plays at Linfield Sat.
#   22   Trinity (CT) (20-3) hosts Bowdoin Sat. (NESCAC tournament)
#   23   Mary Hardin-Baylor (20-4) lost at McMurry 80-76 (OT) and plays at Hardin-Simmons Sat.
#   24   Johns Hopkins (20-4) lost at Gettysburg 65-58 and hosts Franklin & Marshall Sat.
#   25   Wheaton (IL) (16-7) def. Millikin 83-72 and plays at #12 Elmhurst Sat.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 15, 2007, 10:02:32 PM

UW-Oshkosh is now 16-5 (.762) in-region with a game @ UW-Platteville Saturday. Elmhurst is 14-5 (.737) with a home game vs Wheaton and a road game at Millikin (a team that beat them at home). The two best leagues per Massey - the CCIW and WIAC - are getting dangerously close to sending just one team a piece to the tournament. If Augustana and UW-Stevens Point protect their respective homecourts in conference tournament play, Elmhurst and Oshkosh will both pick up another loss. Last year the worst 5 in-region winning percentages of the 17 Pool C teams were:

Illinois Wesleyan .714 (15-6)
UW-La Crosse .720 (18-7)
Occidental .750 (12-6)
Randolph-Macon .760 (19-6)
Utica .769 (20-6)

I don't have the update QOWI figures, but I suspect Elmhurst and Oshkosh don't look great there either after last night's losses.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 15, 2007, 10:49:29 PM

McMurry and UMHB are going to OT, tied at 72.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 15, 2007, 11:10:01 PM

Final: McMurry 80, UMHB 76 (OT)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 15, 2007, 11:20:09 PM

McMurry 80, UMHB 76 in OT. McMurry extends its winning streak to 11 and ends UMHB's 16 game streak.

This doesn't surprise me. McMurry lost its starting point guard, Robert Moreno, to a broken ankle in the first 20 secs of the Rowan game, the first game of the season, at the Johns Hopkins Tourney.

Without our starting point guard, we lost to Rowan by 68-63. Rowan lost to JHU the next night by 70-68. The McMurry partisans who saw what McM had done without their starting point guard just thought what it could have been. That assessment from the JHU tourney was what prompted me to predict the Mississippi College blowout of JHU.

Moreno returned to the starting lineup on Jan 25th, 7 games ago. That is the difference in this team. They have tied UMHB for the ASC-West. A win over Concordia on Saturday and Coach Holmes gets his 6th ASC-West title in the last 9 years.

I don't consider this an upset. Moreno has made the difference. The 2 one-point losses in December (without Moreno) really hurt our Pool C chances. Otherwise, we would have an in-region record of 18-2, and playing those 2 games without Moreno as well.

McMurry (and probably UMHB) must win the ASC tourney to make the NCAA's. We definitely put a very talented UMHB farther onto the Pool C bubble.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Iron Mike on February 17, 2007, 05:25:28 PM

Final: Amherst 72, Bates 68

Amherst wins with help of an eight-point possession. Trailing 37-35 early in the second half, Olson sets a screen for Wheeler. Wheeler drains a three and the Bates player is called for a foul for running into Olson. The officials allow the three and give Amherst the ball out-of-bounds. The inbounds pass goes to Wheeler who drills another three. Reilly the Bates coach is called for a technical for protesting the officials' calls and Olson hits two free throws. Bates finally gets the ball trailing 43-37. Amherst didn't trail the rest of the game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hope1 on February 17, 2007, 07:57:02 PM

hope beat tri state today 78 to 59 at tri state

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on February 18, 2007, 12:01:35 AM

Mississippi College ended their regular season today with a 61-37 road win at UT-Tyler after beating UT-Dallas on the road Thursday 70-67.

With one day left in the season this is not official, but MC should end the regular season tops in the nation in scoring defense (55.9) and field goal percentage (.533). They are second in field goal percentage defense (.363).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 18, 2007, 02:19:03 PM

Top 25 At-a-Glance, Week of Feb. 12-18 (FINAL)

#   1   UW-Stevens Point (22-2) def. UW-Platteville 69-58 and won at UW-Superior 103-64
#   2   Virginia Wesleyan (22-3) def. Lynchburg 90-73
#   3   Amherst (24-1) def. Bates 72-68 (NESCAC quarterfinal)
#   4   Wooster (22-3) won at Kenyon 87-62 and def. Ohio Wesleyan 95-89
#   5   UW-Oshkosh (20-5) lost at UW-Whitewater 88-71 and won at UW-Platteville 67-51
#   6   Wittenberg (21-4) def. Wabash 82-59 and lost at Allegheny 62-57
#   7   Mississippi College (22-2) won at UT-Dallas 70-67 and won at UT-Tyler 61-37
#   8   St. Thomas (22-3) def. St. John's 74-59
#   9   Augustana (20-5) won at Illinois Wesleyan 80-77 and lost to North Central 85-81
#   10   Hope (21-3) won at Alma 88-62 and won at Tri-State 78-59
#   11   Washington U. (19-4) won at Carnegie Mellon 94-73 and lost at Rochester 66-61
#   12   Elmhurst (19-5) lost at North Central 89-74 and def. #25 Wheaton (IL) 80-74
#   13   Worcester Polytech (21-2) def. Wheaton (MA) 73-57 and won at Coast Guard 67-57
#   14   Chicago (20-4) won at Rochester 76-73 and won at Carnegie Mellon 82-75
#   15   Aurora (23-2) def. Concordia (IL) 109-86 and won at Rockford 97-77
#   16   Whitworth (22-3) won at Whitman 84-72 and def. Willamette 81-66
#   17   Guilford (21-3) def. Washington & Lee 95-77 and won at Emory & Henry 108-107
#   18   UW-La Crosse (17-7) def. UW-River Falls 80-63 and won at UW-Stout 69-58
#   19   Occidental (17-5) def. Cal Lutheran 41-40 and won at Redlands 116-106
#   20   NYU (19-5) won at Case Western Reserve 65-47 and won at Emory 69-66
#   21   Puget Sound (18-6) lost at Lewis & Clark 98-86 and won at Linfield 83-76
#   22   Trinity (CT) (21-3) def. Bowdoin 77-67 (NESCAC quarterfinal)
#   23   Mary Hardin-Baylor (21-4) lost at McMurry 80-76 (OT) and won at Hardin-Simmons 75-72
#   24   Johns Hopkins (21-4) lost at Gettysburg 65-58 and def. Franklin & Marshall 84-68
#   25   Wheaton (IL) (16-8) def. Millikin 83-72 and lost at #12 Elmhurst 80-74

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mrmike88 on February 18, 2007, 02:43:21 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 18, 2007, 02:19:03 PM

# 19 Occidental (17-5) def. Cal Lutheran 41-40 and won at Redlands 116-106

Talk about versatility. Could you win in two more distinct fashions?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 19, 2007, 07:13:08 PM

Top 25 At-a-Glance, Week of Feb. 19-25 (UPDATED with Monday's score)

#   1   UW-Stevens Point (22-2) hosts UW-Eau Claire Tue. (WIAC quarterfinal); semifinals Thu., finals Sat.
#   2   Virginia Wesleyan (22-3) plays Washington & Lee Thu. at Salem, VA (ODAC qtr.); semis Sat., finals Sun
#   3   Amherst (24-1) hosts Colby Sat. (NESCAC semifinal); finals Sun.
#   4   Wooster (22-3) hosts Earlham Tue. (NCAC quarterfinal); semifinals Fri., finals Sat.
#   5   Mississippi College (22-2) hosts Concordia-Austin Fri. (ASC quarterfinal); semifinals Sat., finals Sun.
#   6   St. Thomas (22-3) hosts St. Olaf Wed. (MIAC semifinal); finals Sat.
#   7   UW-Oshkosh (20-5) hosts UW-River Falls Tue. (WIAC quarterfinal); semifinals Thu., finals Sat.
#   8   Hope (21-3) hosts Alma Wed. (MIAA quarterfinal); semifinals Fri., finals Sat.
#   9   Augustana (20-5) hosts TBD Fri. (CCIW semifinal); finals Sat.
#   10   Wittenberg (21-4) hosts Hiram Tue. (NCAC quarterfinal); semifinals Fri., finals Sat.
#   11   Chicago (20-4) plays at #12 Washington U. Sat.
#   12   Washington U. (19-4) hosts #11 Chicago Sat.
#   13   Worcester Polytech (21-2) hosts TBD Sat. (NEWMAC semifinal); finals Sun.
#   14   Elmhurst (19-5) plays at Millikin Wed. and plays TBD Fri. at Rock Island, IL (CCIW semifinal); finals Sat.
#   15   Aurora (23-2) hosts TBD Fri. (NATHCON semifinal); finals Sat.
#   16   Whitworth (22-3) hosts TBD Sat. (NWC championship)
#   17   Guilford (21-3) plays Bridgewater (VA) Thu. at Salem, VA (ODAC qtr.); semis Sat., finals Sun
#   18   UW-La Crosse (17-7) hosts UW-Stout Tue. (WIAC quarterfinal); semifinals Thu., finals Sat.
#   19   Occidental (18-5) def. La Verne 85-54 and plays at Whittier Thu.
#   20   Trinity (CT) (21-3) plays Williams Sat. at Amherst (NESCAC semifinal); finals Sun.
#   21   NYU (19-5) hosts Brandeis Sat.
#   22   DePauw (21-4) plays Sewanee Fri. at Memphis (SCAC qtr.); semifinals Sat., finals Sun.
#   23   Puget Sound (18-6) plays at Lewis & Clark Wed. (MWC semifinal); finals Sat.
#   24   Ohio Northern (19-6) hosts Otterbein Wed. (OAC quarterfinals); semifinals Fri., finals Sat.
#   25   Mary Hardin-Baylor (21-4) plays Louisiana Coll. Fri. in Clinton, MS (ASC qtr.); semis Sat., finals Sun.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njlincolnlion on February 19, 2007, 10:32:43 PM

Lincoln defeats NJCU in Jersey City (and for the 2nd time this season) and receives no votes, and NJCU picks up a vote (from the previous poll) ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pg04 on February 19, 2007, 10:43:04 PM

Quote from: njlincolnlion on February 19, 2007, 10:32:43 PM
Lincoln defeats NJCU in Jersey City (and for the 2nd time this season) and receives no votes, and NJCU picks up a vote (from the previous poll) ???

Step in line of those who think their team deserves to be at least receiving votes...lol.

I won't however say anything at the risk of contradicting myself on another board... :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pg04 on February 19, 2007, 10:44:56 PM

Quote from: mrmike88 on February 18, 2007, 02:43:21 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on February 18, 2007, 02:19:03 PM

# 19 Occidental (17-5) def. Cal Lutheran 41-40 and won at Redlands 116-106

Talk about versatility. Could you win in two more distinct fashions?

From what I know about Redlands, isn't it impossible not to play a high scoring game like that with them?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njlincolnlion on February 19, 2007, 10:52:28 PM

pg04:

I'm lining up now ;D .

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 20, 2007, 12:24:30 AM

Quote from: njlincolnlion on February 19, 2007, 10:32:43 PM
Lincoln defeats NJCU in Jersey City (and for the 2nd time this season) and receives no votes, and NJCU picks up a vote (from the previous poll) ???

Apparently that win against Ramapo was more impressive than their loss to Lincoln! lol :-)

Quote from: pg04 on February 19, 2007, 10:44:56 PM
From what I know about Redlands, isn't it impossible not to play a high scoring game like that with them?

Grinnell, from the Midwest Conference, plays a "system" style like Redlands. They recently beat Carroll 113-104 and then the next night beat St. Norbert 90-66. Not as extreme, but...

I've seen Grinnell play several times this year and at the end of the game, they basically run a "normal" offense to slow things down, and press a little less on defense.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 20, 2007, 12:29:18 AM

Quote from: Old School on February 20, 2007, 12:24:30 AM
Quote from: njlincolnlion on February 19, 2007, 10:32:43 PM
Lincoln defeats NJCU in Jersey City (and for the 2nd time this season) and receives no votes, and NJCU picks up a vote (from the previous poll) ???

Apparently that win against Ramapo was more impressive than their loss to Lincoln! lol :-)

Quote from: pg04 on February 19, 2007, 10:44:56 PM
From what I know about Redlands, isn't it impossible not to play a high scoring game like that with them?

Grinnell, from the Midwest Conference, plays a "system" style like Redlands. They recently beat Carroll 113-104 and then the next night beat St. Norbert 90-66. Not as extreme, but...

I've seen Grinnell play several times this year and at the end of the game, they basically run a "normal" offense to slow things down, and press a little less on defense.

Just like football, if you think that you can outscore a team, then you push the game (and especially the amount of time that you hold onto the ball) to provide you with more possessions. If you think that you need to have fewer possessions and score with greater efficiency, then slow down the game. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 20, 2007, 12:36:16 AM

It's usually when Grinnell has the lead, so they basically stall to prevent the opposing team from scoring at all. ::) And unlike past years, Grinnell does a good job of "looking for" twos, instead of just launching threes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njlincolnlion on February 20, 2007, 04:56:22 PM

Old School/ Ralph:

Lincoln came back from a 20 point deficit aganist NJCU on their home court to win. Lincoln swept NJCU posting their only two wins aganist the Gothic Knights in the series between the two schools. Granted NJCU beat Ramapo the next day at Ramapo, I still thought Lincoln would have gotten a point or two.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 20, 2007, 06:02:27 PM

Quote from: njlincolnlion on February 20, 2007, 04:56:22 PM
Old School/ Ralph:

Lincoln came back from a 20 point deficit aganist NJCU on their home court to win. Lincoln swept NJCU posting theire only two wins aganist the Gothic Knights in the series between the two schools. Granted NJCU beat Ramapo the next day at Ramapo, I still thought Lincoln would have gotten a point or two.

Lincoln, I think that Lincoln has fallen into the "26-35 no-man's-land" of teams that have been there (the Top 25) but have fallen out of favor. :-\

I think that Lincoln may have a very good chance of making the Sweet 16, if they can stay away from VWC or an OAC team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njlincolnlion on February 20, 2007, 06:27:04 PM

Ralph:

If Lincoln makes the postseason, I don't think they will be hosting any games like last year. I have painful memories of the "Fish Tank" from last years sweet 16 loss to VWC. Lincoln's road record this year is not what is was last year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 20, 2007, 10:17:40 PM

Top 25 At-a-Glance, Week of Feb. 19-25 (UPDATED with Tuesday scores and relevant tournament results)

#   1   UW-Stevens Point (23-2) def. UW-Eau Claire 89-55 (WIAC quarterfinal); hosts UW-Whitewater Thu. (WIAC semifinal), finals Sat.
#   2   Virginia Wesleyan (22-3) plays Washington & Lee Thu. at Salem, VA (ODAC qtr.); semis Sat., finals Sun
#   3   Amherst (24-1) hosts Colby Sat. (NESCAC semifinal); finals Sun.
#   4   Wooster (23-3) def. Earlham 94-76 (NCAC quarterfinal); hosts Wabash Fri. (NCAC semifinal), finals Sat.
#   5   Mississippi College (22-2) hosts Concordia-Austin Fri. (ASC quarterfinal); semifinals Sat., finals Sun.
#   6   St. Thomas (22-3) hosts St. Olaf Wed. (MIAC semifinal); finals Sat.
#   7   UW-Oshkosh (21-5) def. UW-River Falls 83-65 (WIAC quarterfinal); plays at #18 UW-Stout Thu. (WIAC semifinal), finals Sat.
#   8   Hope (21-3) hosts Alma Wed. (MIAA quarterfinal); semifinals Fri., finals Sat.
#   9   Augustana (20-5) hosts TBD Fri. (CCIW semifinal); finals Sat.
#   10   Wittenberg (22-4) def. Hiram 72-49 (NCAC quarterfinal); plays Ohio Wesleyan Fri. at Wooster, OH (NCAC semifinal), finals Sat.
#   11   Chicago (20-4) plays at #12 Washington U. Sat.
#   12   Washington U. (19-4) hosts #11 Chicago Sat.
#   13   Worcester Polytech (21-2) hosts TBD Sat. (NEWMAC semifinal); finals Sun.
#   14   Elmhurst (19-5) plays at Millikin Wed. and plays TBD Fri. at Rock Island, IL (CCIW semifinal); finals Sat.
#   15   Aurora (23-2) hosts Lakeland Fri. (NATHCON semifinal); finals Sat.
#   16   Whitworth (22-3) hosts TBD Sat. (NWC championship)
#   17   Guilford (21-3) plays Bridgewater (VA) Thu. at Salem, VA (ODAC qtr.); semis Sat., finals Sun
#   18   UW-La Crosse (18-7) def. UW-Stout 63-58 (WIAC quarterfinal); hosts UW-Oshkosh Thu. (WIAC semifinal), finals Sat.
#   19   Occidental (18-5) def. La Verne 85-54 and plays at Whittier Thu.
#   20   Trinity (CT) (21-3) plays Williams Sat. at Amherst (NESCAC semifinal); finals Sun.
#   21   NYU (19-5) hosts Brandeis Sat.
#   22   DePauw (21-4) plays Sewanee Fri. at Memphis (SCAC qtr.); semifinals Sat., finals Sun.
#   23   Puget Sound (18-6) plays at Lewis & Clark Wed. (MWC semifinal); finals Sat.
#   24   Ohio Northern (19-6) hosts Otterbein Wed. (OAC quarterfinals); semifinals Fri., finals Sat.
#   25   Mary Hardin-Baylor (21-4) plays Louisiana Coll. Fri. in Clinton, MS (ASC qtr.); semis Sat., finals Sun.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on February 20, 2007, 10:44:39 PM

I know its just a typo DC, but LaCrosse beat Stout and will host Oshkosh on Thursday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 20, 2007, 10:51:26 PM

Quote from: frodotwo on February 20, 2007, 10:44:39 PM
I know its just a typo DC, but LaCrosse beat Stout and will host Oshkosh on Thursday.

Thanks; fixed. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 21, 2007, 12:26:25 PM

I finally (FINALLY) got the data to do my Smed amalgamation as we pretty well conclude the regular season.

Some interesting results here:

1. WI - Stevens Point
2. Wooster
3. Amherst
4. Augustana
5. Chicago
6. Wash U.
7. Guilford
8. WI - Oshkosh
9. Virginia Wesleyan
10. Whitworth
11. Elmhurst
12. Wittenberg
13. Rhode Island College
14. Occidental
15. Trinity (CT)
16. Ohio Northern
17. NYU
18. St. Thomas (MN)
19. Lewis & Clark
20. WPI
21. Mississippi College (SOS kills 'em)
22. Brandeis
23. Hope (A weak MIAA hurt 'em)
24. Rochester
25. Loras

Others of note (in Top 25 or receiving votes)

26. Centre
27. Aurora (SOS bugaboo)
28. A School That I Cannot Name (heh)
29. WI - LaCrosse
30. Keene State
31. Grinnell
32. Mary Hardin-Baylor
33. Lake Erie
35. John Carroll
36. Salem State
37. Messiah
38. Wheaton (IL)
41. Puget Sound
42. Carthage
43. WI - Whitewater
48. Baldwin Wallace
49. Capital
50. Averett
57. Johns Hopkins
67. North Central
80. NJ City

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 21, 2007, 12:27:43 PM

For yuks (or is it yucks) here's the bottom 10:

403. Green Mountain
402. Principia
401. Bard
400. Crown
399. D' Youville
398. Mt. St. Vincent
397. Centenary
396. Maine - Presque Isle
395. Albertus Magnus
394. Maranatha Baptist

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 21, 2007, 12:37:45 PM

Guilford being ahead of Va. Wesleyan is extremely interesting to me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 21, 2007, 02:01:20 PM

Guilford - Massey 11, Wolfe 6, SOS 57

Va. Wesleyan - Massey 10, Wolfe 11, SOS 73.

i think the loss to Emory & Henry (a team with a profile lower than Roanoke) and the fact that Guilford beat Averett while Va. Wesleyan lost, plays into the computer rankings for some level.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 21, 2007, 03:27:36 PM

Ahh, see, and the computers don't know that the Averett that VWC lost to was at full strength while the Averett that Guilford beat was missing at least one starter to injury.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 21, 2007, 03:58:11 PM

Its all right the selection committee won't take that into account either. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 21, 2007, 04:20:20 PM

That's true, but still the big difference is the total strength of schedule. If the SOS was even, by my system, Va. Wesleyan would be ahead of them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 21, 2007, 04:21:04 PM

That's true, too, at least not officially. But I would be surprised if it doesn't get at least talked about somewhere.

And on the topic of "Top 25 talk" it's very relevant.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on February 21, 2007, 05:05:07 PM

Augustana who was #9 last week, looses to North Central, and still retains the #9 ranking this week.
North Central beats the #15, #12, and #9 teams in the country in a row and receives all of 10 votes? ???
Seems like if a team looses to a team not in the top 25, it should drop at least a little in the rankings. Also, that consecutive wins against #s 15, 12, and 9 should be worth more than 10 votes, especially since all three wins were against fellow CCIW teams and the CCIW is alledgedly the toughest overall conference in the country.
Evidently, some of the voters haven't gotten that message yet! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 21, 2007, 05:29:20 PM

You can't erase the entire rest of the season and take those three games, though. Four wins in a row means they have gone 6-5 in their past 11 games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 21, 2007, 07:33:00 PM

North Central is a good team, but no where near the top 25.

I still don't know how a team "looses" to someone! :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on February 21, 2007, 08:28:13 PM

Quote from: smedindy on February 21, 2007, 07:33:00 PM
North Central is a good team, but no where near the top 25.

I still don't know how a team "looses" to someone! :-\

Its easy---You just hold down the 'o' a little too long. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hope1 on February 21, 2007, 09:59:24 PM

hope beat alma tonight 89 to 49 tonight

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 21, 2007, 10:31:06 PM

Quote from: smedindy on February 21, 2007, 07:33:00 PM
North Central is a good team, but no where near the top 25.

'...no where near...' might be an overstatement. For their full season's work, I couldn't vote them in the top 25 (though 30-35, probably). But if I were a betting man, right now I'd take them over a majority of top 25 teams. Their front-court was always among the best in the country, but they had tremendous problems at guard. Either they have solved the problem or learned to work around it. I doubt that anyone in the CCIW tourney is eager to face them, and IF they should win the AQ (their C chances are nil), I doubt there is anyone anywhere who wouldn't prefer to meet almost anyone else!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 21, 2007, 11:50:02 PM

Quote from: smedindy on February 21, 2007, 07:33:00 PM
North Central is a good team, but no where near the top 25.

North Central is as good as several teams in the top 25 and others receiving votes. The CCIW preseason favorite is playing well right now.

I saw NCC last night, #9 Elmhurst tonight, and #14 Augustana one week ago...there isn't much separation there at all. Maybe none at all -- and the results the last week demonstrate that (NCC won @ Augie and over Elmhurst convincingly). And on a neutral court, a game between NCC and #11 Chicago would be a pick 'em. There is no way there is as much separation between Chicago and NCC as the poll would indicate. Wheaton is the top team "receiving votes" -- NCC swept Wheaton this year.

North Central struggled through January and it has been a pretty tough season for them as they've tried to find a decent backcourt to replace the two seniors they lost, but they're a good team right now. NCC's frontcourt of 6-5 Daniel Walton (17.8 ppg, 9.3 rpg), 6-6 Anthony Simmons (15.1 ppg, 6.3 rpg), and 6-7 Adam Krumtinger (8.6 ppg, 6.3 rpg) is about as good of a trio around the basket as you will find in Division III this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 21, 2007, 11:52:53 PM

Top 25 At-a-Glance, Week of Feb. 19-25 (UPDATED with Thursday scores and relevant tournament results as available)

#   1   UW-Stevens Point (23-2) def. UW-Eau Claire 89-55 (WIAC quarterfinal); hosts UW-Whitewater Thu. (WIAC semifinal), finals Sat.
#   2   Virginia Wesleyan (23-3) def. Washington & Lee 82-48 (ODAC qtr.); plays Hampden-Sydney Sat. (ODAC semifinal), finals Sun (all games at Salem, VA)
#   3   Amherst (24-1) hosts Colby Sat. (NESCAC semifinal); finals Sun.
#   4   Wooster (23-3) def. Earlham 94-76 (NCAC quarterfinal); hosts Wabash Fri. (NCAC semifinal), finals Sat.
#   5   Mississippi College (22-2) hosts Concordia-Austin Fri. (ASC quarterfinal); semifinals Sat., finals Sun.
#   6   St. Thomas (23-3) def. St. Olaf 77-61 (MIAC semifinal); hosts St. John's Sat (MIAC final)
#   7   UW-Oshkosh (21-5) def. UW-River Falls 83-65 (WIAC quarterfinal); plays at #18 UW-Stout Thu. (WIAC semifinal), finals Sat.
#   8   Hope (22-3) def. Alma 89-49 (MIAA quarterfinal); hosts Adrian Fri. (MIAA semifinal), finals Sat.
#   9   Augustana (20-5) hosts North Central Fri. (CCIW semifinal); finals Sat.
#   10   Wittenberg (22-4) def. Hiram 72-49 (NCAC quarterfinal); plays Ohio Wesleyan Fri. at Wooster, OH (NCAC semifinal), finals Sat.
#   11   Chicago (20-4) plays at #12 Washington U. Sat.
#   12   Washington U. (19-4) hosts #11 Chicago Sat.
#   13   Worcester Polytech (21-2) hosts TBD Sat. (NEWMAC semifinal); finals Sun.
#   14   Elmhurst (20-5) won at Millikin 79-63 and plays Wheaton (IL) Fri. at Rock Island, IL (CCIW semifinal); finals Sat.
#   15   Aurora (23-2) hosts Lakeland Fri. (NATHCON semifinal); finals Sat.
#   16   Whitworth (22-3) hosts Lewis & Clark Sat. (NWC championship)
#   17   Guilford (21-4) lost to Bridgewater (VA) 88-78 at Salem, VA (ODAC quarterfinal)
#   18   UW-La Crosse (18-7) def. UW-Stout 63-58 (WIAC quarterfinal); hosts UW-Oshkosh Thu. (WIAC semifinal), finals Sat.
#   19   Occidental (18-5) def. La Verne 85-54 and plays at Whittier Thu.
#   20   Trinity (CT) (21-3) plays Williams Sat. at Amherst (NESCAC semifinal); finals Sun.
#   21   NYU (19-5) hosts Brandeis Sat.
#   22   DePauw (21-4) plays Sewanee Fri. at Memphis (SCAC qtr.); semifinals Sat., finals Sun.
#   23   Puget Sound (18-7) lost at Lewis & Clark 66-60 (NWC semifinal)
#   24   Ohio Northern (19-7) lost to Otterbein 52-51 (OAC quarterfinals)
#   25   Mary Hardin-Baylor (21-4) plays Louisiana Coll. Fri. in Clinton, MS (ASC qtr.); semis Sat., finals Sun.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 22, 2007, 06:33:19 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on February 21, 2007, 11:50:02 PM
Quote from: smedindy on February 21, 2007, 07:33:00 PM
North Central is a good team, but no where near the top 25.

North Central is as good as several teams in the top 25 and others receiving votes. The CCIW preseason favorite is playing well right now.

I saw NCC last night, #9 Elmhurst tonight, and #14 Augustana one week ago...there isn't much separation there at all. Maybe none at all -- and the results the last week demonstrate that (NCC won @ Augie and over Elmhurst convincingly). And on a neutral court, a game between NCC and #11 Chicago would be a pick 'em. There is no way there is as much separation between Chicago and NCC as the poll would indicate. Wheaton is the top team "receiving votes" -- NCC swept Wheaton this year.

North Central struggled through January and it has been a pretty tough season for them as they've tried to find a decent backcourt to replace the two seniors they lost, but they're a good team right now. NCC's frontcourt of 6-5 Daniel Walton (17.8 ppg, 9.3 rpg), 6-6 Anthony Simmons (15.1 ppg, 6.3 rpg), and 6-7 Adam Krumtinger (8.6 ppg, 6.3 rpg) is about as good of a trio around the basket as you will find in Division III this year.

Plus, NCC has finally found a guard who can keep defenses honest in freshman Brandon Smith (13.0 ppg, .458 trey%).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 22, 2007, 09:14:53 AM

That's now. taking the whole body of work into account, which I do, I have them at #67. That's no where near the top 25. It's great to peak at the right time, but the season is the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 22, 2007, 12:09:52 PM

Quote from: smedindy on February 22, 2007, 09:14:53 AM
That's now. taking the whole body of work into account, which I do, I have them at #67. That's no where near the top 25. It's great to peak at the right time, but the season is the season.

And that is the biggest disadvantage of a computer ranking. In a poll that is voted on, like the D3hoops.com Top 25, you can factor in "human elements." Maybe a key injury hurt a team for a long stretch (like the injury preseason All-American Anthony Simmons played through)...or maybe a team struggled to sort out its personnel after a couple key losses to graduation...maybe it is the first year under a new coach...or maybe a team just didn't play well at the beginning of the season but turns it on late. In your ranking (and Massey, etc), a team like North Central is stuck with its losses, no matter how well they are playing now...at least the D3hoops.com voters can look at "human elements", like recent play, and factor that in.

I'm not suggesting that North Central should be rated in the D3hoops.com poll, but I know that Pat's voters would have them a lot higher than #67 right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 22, 2007, 12:12:26 PM

Actually, when I vote, as a human (mind you in the posters poll) I also take the entire body of work into account. A loss in January is still a loss in my eyes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 22, 2007, 12:32:40 PM

Quote from: smedindy on February 22, 2007, 12:12:26 PM
Actually, when I vote, as a human (mind you in the posters poll) I also take the entire body of work into account. A loss in January is still a loss in my eyes.

As do I, but there are also "human elements" I factor in. For example, North Central lost to Lincoln on December 20 without preseason All-American Anthony Simmons. His injury seemed to really impact him for a long stretch this season after his return (he wasn't the same player he was last year), but the last 5-6 games he has been outstanding in wins vs some of the top teams in the country.

St. Thomas lost to UW-La Crosse without Isaac Rosefelt...Whitworth has played a good chunk of the NWC season without leading scorer James Jones...Calvin wins at Hope and Wittenberg at Wooster in rivalry games so intense that you really can't look at like any other game. These are things I can factor in and consider as I vote in the D3hoops.com poll...a computer poll has no way to do that. And since the real purpose of a poll is to give an accurate reflection of the top teams in the country at that given moment - not simply to reward or penalize teams for past performance - I prefer the ones that factor in the human element.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 22, 2007, 02:04:02 PM

I disagree. The real purpose of a poll is to recognize the teams that have played well over the long haul - the season to date counting all games - not just the last week or month. It should be a reflection on the total body of work. Injuries are a part of it, but they're a part of it for everyone and if a team has injuries then that has to factor into their body of work.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gray Fox on February 22, 2007, 05:35:15 PM

Quote from: smedindy on February 22, 2007, 02:04:02 PM
I disagree. The real purpose of a poll is to recognize the teams that have played well over the long haul - the season to date counting all games - not just the last week or month. It should be a reflection on the total body of work. Injuries are a part of it, but they're a part of it for everyone and if a team has injuries then that has to factor into their body of work.

The exact reason I don't like most conference tournaments.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 22, 2007, 06:57:10 PM

Quote from: Gray Fox on February 22, 2007, 05:35:15 PM
Quote from: smedindy on February 22, 2007, 02:04:02 PM
I disagree. The real purpose of a poll is to recognize the teams that have played well over the long haul - the season to date counting all games - not just the last week or month. It should be a reflection on the total body of work. Injuries are a part of it, but they're a part of it for everyone and if a team has injuries then that has to factor into their body of work.
The exact reason I don't like most conference tournaments.

Do you not like the NCAA Tournament to decide the #1 team in the nation either? ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 22, 2007, 07:25:55 PM

The NCAA tourney determines the CHAMPION, not necessarily the best team in the nation over the long haul. The nature of the knockout elimination makes it so that sometimes the best team gets bounced.

I hate conference tourneys, too. Every conference should play a double round robin (yes the ASC has some issues with that, but hey) and the winner comes from that grind.

Ah, well...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 22, 2007, 08:13:42 PM

Bridgewater 88 #17 Guilford 79

Upset in the ODAC, Guilford now joins the bubble.....I think ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 22, 2007, 10:12:17 PM

Quote from: smedindy on February 22, 2007, 07:25:55 PM
The NCAA tourney determines the CHAMPION, not necessarily the best team in the nation over the long haul. The nature of the knockout elimination makes it so that sometimes the best team gets bounced.

I hate conference tourneys, too. Every conference should play a double round robin (yes the ASC has some issues with that, but hey) and the winner comes from that grind.

Ah, well...

Smed, actually many of us ASC fans believe that we function more like 2 separate conferences that are linked together for the Pool A bid. We are double round robin intra-divisional and single round robin inter-divisional.

I think that large divisional championships (at least 6 members) are like conference championships. We are just playing the play-in games to the NCAA! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on February 22, 2007, 11:47:49 PM

Quote from: sac on February 22, 2007, 08:13:42 PM
Bridgewater 88 #17 Guilford 79

Upset in the ODAC, Guilford now joins the bubble.....I think ???

You never know for sure, but I would think that knocks Guilford out. They lost to Bridgewater who is 7-15 in the region and drops their QOWI from 10.0 to 9.625. As of right now that would place their QOWI 9th in the South behind McMurry depending on how other teams ahead of them do in their tournaments and if Bridgewater can pick up one more win for additional QOWI points.

That just shows how hard it is to get a Pool C bid and how close everyone is. If Bridgewater can beat Roanoke tomorrow they would bump up to the .333 -.500 winning percentage bracket and give Guilford six more QOWI points since they played three times and Guilford's QOWI could go from 9.625 to 9.875. Crazy.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 22, 2007, 11:53:19 PM

Quote from: Chris Brooks on February 22, 2007, 11:47:49 PM
Quote from: sac on February 22, 2007, 08:13:42 PM
Bridgewater 88 #17 Guilford 79

Upset in the ODAC, Guilford now joins the bubble.....I think ???

You never know for sure, but I would think that knocks Guilford out. They lost to Bridgewater who is 7-15 in the region and drops their QOWI from 10.0 to 9.625. As of right now that would place their QOWI 9th in the South behind McMurry depending on how other teams ahead of them do in their tournaments and if Bridgewater can pick up one more win for additional QOWI points.

That just shows how hard it is to get a Pool C bid and how close everyone is. If Bridgewater can beat Roanoke tomorrow they would bump up to the .333 -.500 winning percentage bracket and give Guilford six more QOWI points since they played three times and Guilford's QOWI could go from 9.625 to 9.875. Crazy.

Is there anymore reason for this Maroon and White fan to root for the Maroons? :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 23, 2007, 09:13:33 PM

Final: #4 Wooster 92 Wabash 80

Wooster gets the win and advances to the NCAC tourney final game. :) Scots were led tonight by James Cooper with 18 points, Tim Vandervaart with 16 points and Brandon Johnson with 13 points.

Wooster led by 32 points in the 2nd half and then Wabash hit several three pointers down the stretch to narrow the final margin.

Wooster is now 24-3. ;D Next up is Ohio Wesleyan tomorrow night. OWU knocked off #10 Wittenberg 57-52 in the first NCAC semi-final game tonight.

GO SCOTS!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 23, 2007, 11:08:39 PM

Top 25 At-a-Glance, Week of Feb. 19-25 (UPDATED through Friday's results)

#   1   UW-Stevens Point (24-2) def. UW-Eau Claire 89-55 (WIAC quarterfinal); def. UW-Whitewater 94-69 (WIAC semifinal); hosts #18 UW-La Crosse Sat. (WIAC final)
#   2   Virginia Wesleyan (23-3) def. Washington & Lee 82-48 (ODAC qtr.); plays Hampden-Sydney Sat. (ODAC semifinal), finals Sun (all games at Salem, VA)
#   3   Amherst (24-1) hosts Colby Sat. (NESCAC semifinal); finals Sun.
#   4   Wooster (24-3) def. Earlham 94-76 (NCAC quarterfinal); def. Wabash 92-80 (NCAC semifinal); hosts Ohio Wesleyan Sat. (NCAC final)
#   5   Mississippi College (23-2) def. Concordia-Austin 86-62 (ASC quarterfinal); hosts McMurry Sat. (ASC semifinal); finals Sun.
#   6   St. Thomas (23-3) def. St. Olaf 77-61 (MIAC semifinal); hosts St. John's Sat (MIAC final)
#   7   UW-Oshkosh (21-6) def. UW-River Falls 83-65 (WIAC quarterfinal); lost at #18 UW-La Crosse 66-61 (WIAC semifinal)
#   8   Hope (23-3) def. Alma 89-49 (MIAA quarterfinal); def. Adrian 77-61 (MIAA semifinal); hosts Calvin Sat. (MIAA final)
#   9   Augustana (21-5) def. North Central 74-67 (CCIW semifinal); hosts #14 Elmhurst Sat. (CCIW final)
#   10   Wittenberg (22-5) def. Hiram 72-49 (NCAC quarterfinal); lost to Ohio Wesleyan 57-52 at Wooster, OH (NCAC semifinal)
#   11   Chicago (20-4) plays at #12 Washington U. Sat.
#   12   Washington U. (19-4) hosts #11 Chicago Sat.
#   13   Worcester Polytech (21-2) hosts MIT Sat. (NEWMAC semifinal); finals Sun.
#   14   Elmhurst (21-5) won at Millikin 79-63; def. Wheaton (IL) 85-82 at Rock Island, IL (CCIW semifinal); plays at #9 Augustana Sat. (CCIW final)
#   15   Aurora (24-2) def. Lakeland 86-72 (NATHCON semifinal); hosts Edgewood Sat. (NATHCON final)
#   16   Whitworth (22-3) hosts Lewis & Clark Sat. (NWC championship)
#   17   Guilford (21-4) lost to Bridgewater (VA) 88-78 at Salem, VA (ODAC quarterfinal)
#   18   UW-La Crosse (19-7) def. UW-Stout 63-58 (WIAC quarterfinal); def #7 UW-Oshkosh 66-61 (WIAC semifinal); plays at #1 UW-Stevens Point Sat. (WIAC final)
#   19   Occidental (19-5) def. La Verne 85-54 and won at Whittier 63-61 (2 OT)
#   20   Trinity (CT) (21-3) plays Williams Sat. at Amherst (NESCAC semifinal); finals Sun.
#   21   NYU (19-5) hosts Brandeis Sat.
#   22   DePauw (22-4) def. Sewanee 84-72 at Memphis (SCAC qtr.); plays Trinity (TX) Sat. at Memphis (SCAC semifinal), finals Sun.
#   23   Puget Sound (18-7) lost at Lewis & Clark 66-60 (NWC semifinal)
#   24   Ohio Northern (19-7) lost to Otterbein 52-51 (OAC quarterfinals)
#   25   Mary Hardin-Baylor (22-4) def. Louisiana Coll. 96-86 in Clinton, MS (ASC qtr.); plays Hardin-Simmons Sat. in Clinton, MS (ASC semifinal), finals Sun.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 24, 2007, 12:24:27 AM

OK, Witt probably won't be #10 next week, but they will still be ranked, and speculation is that they won't get a "C" because of the QoWI (the rest of the NCAC, meh aside from Woo and OWU...meh...)

What's the highest ranked team to get excluded from the tourney? Anyone?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 24, 2007, 12:35:43 AM

I think three or four years ago there was a top 15 team or two from a balanced league that missed out. The chances of this happening aren't as high, due to there being more Pool C bids, but with teams like Wittenberg and Oshkosh being so firmly on the bubble at the moment, it could happen this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 24, 2007, 01:46:27 AM

Quote from: smedindy on February 24, 2007, 12:24:27 AM
What's the highest ranked team to get excluded from the tourney? Anyone?

Wheaton in 04 finished #11 in the final poll, I don't know if thats the best but its the one I recall the most.

During the 5 team Pool C years there were a number of good teams left home that probably ended up in the D3hoops.com top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 24, 2007, 03:32:43 AM

In 2002 Capital was No. 14 when the tournament began and was left out. Capital finished the season at No. 8. The Crusaders went 23-5, losing three close games to Otterbein, which, of course, went on to win the national title.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 24, 2007, 11:56:06 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 24, 2007, 03:32:43 AM
In 2002 Capital was No. 14 when the tournament began and was left out. Capital finished the season at No. 8. The Crusaders went 23-5, losing three close games to Otterbein, which, of course, went on to win the national title.

Forgot about that one. Capital definately should have been in the tournament that year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on February 24, 2007, 01:36:54 PM

The ASC men's semifinal and championship games will have live video this weekend. I tested the image quality and it is excellent. I know our conference has a release on site about it but I though I would post it here as well.

Official Tournament Website
http://www.gochoctaws.com/Sports/mbball/2007/MBSKASCTourney07.asp (http://www.gochoctaws.com/Sports/mbball/2007/MBSKASCTourney07.asp)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 24, 2007, 07:11:13 PM

Brandeis beat NYU

Williams upset Trinity CT

Washington MO ousted Chicago

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 24, 2007, 08:33:02 PM

Wooster crushed OWU

Aurora appears to be cruising at home against Edgewood

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 24, 2007, 08:52:28 PM

Whitworth fended off L&C to win the NWC tourney title

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 24, 2007, 09:24:20 PM

Top 25 At-a-Glance, Week of Feb. 19-25 (FINAL)

#   1   UW-Stevens Point (25-2) def. UW-Eau Claire 89-55 (WIAC quarterfinal); def. UW-Whitewater 94-69 (WIAC semifinal); def. #18 UW-La Crosse 83-68 (WIAC final)
#   2   Virginia Wesleyan (23-4) def. Washington & Lee 82-48 (ODAC qtr.); lost to Hampden-Sydney 70-67 (ODAC semifinal) (both games at Salem, VA)
#   3   Amherst (25-2) def. Colby 82-55 (NESCAC semifinal); lost to Williams 70-69 (NESCAC final)
#   4   Wooster (25-3) def. Earlham 94-76 (NCAC quarterfinal); def. Wabash 92-80 (NCAC semifinal); def. Ohio Wesleyan 86-51 (NCAC final)
#   5   Mississippi College (25-2) def. Concordia-Austin 86-62 (ASC quarterfinal); def. McMurry 66-56 (ASC semifinal); de. Hardin-Simmons 77-64 (ASC final)
#   6   St. Thomas (24-3) def. St. Olaf 77-61 (MIAC semifinal); def. St. John's 75-49 (MIAC final)
#   7   UW-Oshkosh (21-6) def. UW-River Falls 83-65 (WIAC quarterfinal); lost at #18 UW-La Crosse 66-61 (WIAC semifinal)
#   8   Hope (23-4) def. Alma 89-49 (MIAA quarterfinal); def. Adrian 77-61 (MIAA semifinal); lost to Calvin 78-76 (MIAA final)
#   9   Augustana (22-5) def. North Central 74-67 (CCIW semifinal); def. #14 Elmhurst 78-70 (CCIW final)
#   10   Wittenberg (22-5) def. Hiram 72-49 (NCAC quarterfinal); lost to Ohio Wesleyan 57-52 at Wooster, OH (NCAC semifinal)
#   11   Chicago (20-5) lost at #12 Washington U. 79-74
#   12   Washington U. (20-4) def. #11 Chicago 79-74
#   13   Worcester Polytech (22-3) def. MIT 66-49 (NEWMAC semifinal); lost to Coast Guard 71-66 (MEWMAC final)
#   14   Elmhurst (21-6) won at Millikin 79-63; def. Wheaton (IL) 85-82 at Rock Island, IL (CCIW semifinal); lost at #9 Augustana 78-70 (CCIW final)
#   15   Aurora (25-2) def. Lakeland 86-72 (NATHCON semifinal); def. Edgewood 85-69 (NATHCON final)
#   16   Whitworth (23-3) def. Lewis & Clark 69-62 (NWC championship)
#   17   Guilford (21-4) lost to Bridgewater (VA) 88-78 at Salem, VA (ODAC quarterfinal)
#   18   UW-La Crosse (19-8) def. UW-Stout 63-58 (WIAC quarterfinal); def #7 UW-Oshkosh 66-61 (WIAC semifinal); lost at #1 UW-Stevens Point 83-68 (WIAC final)
#   19   Occidental (19-5) def. La Verne 85-54 and won at Whittier 63-61 (2 OT)
#   20   Trinity (CT) (21-4) lost to Williams 91-89 at Amherst (NESCAC semifinal)
#   21   NYU (19-6) lost to Brandeis 76-67
#   22   DePauw (22-5) def. Sewanee 84-72 at Memphis (SCAC qtr.); lost to Trinity (TX) 77-72 at Memphis (SCAC semifinal)
#   23   Puget Sound (18-7) lost at Lewis & Clark 66-60 (NWC semifinal)
#   24   Ohio Northern (19-7) lost to Otterbein 52-51 (OAC quarterfinals)
#   25   Mary Hardin-Baylor (22-5) def. Louisiana Coll. 96-86 in Clinton, MS (ASC qtr.); lost Hardin-Simmons 71-67 in Clinton, MS (ASC semifinal)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 25, 2007, 02:29:28 PM

This is looking more and more to be the year of the upsets... I don't know if anyone has looked at the number of regular season champs who have been beaten in the conference tournament, but it seems like this year there are even more than usual.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 25, 2007, 09:14:11 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 25, 2007, 02:29:28 PM
This is looking more and more to be the year of the upsets... I don't know if anyone has looked at the number of regular season champs who have been beaten in the conference tournament, but it seems like this year there are even more than usual.

16 conference upsets...I counted, in bold. Tourney winner's reg. season place in ()

Conference	Region	Regular season	Tourney
GNAC	NE	Western New England	Rivier (3rd)
NESCAC	NE	Amherst	Williams (3rd)
CCC	NE	(N) Gordon (S) Curry	Wentworth Tech (N3)
NEWMAC	NE	Worcester Polytech	Coast Guard (7)
NAC	NE	(E) Husson (W) Elms	Elms
UAA	multiple	Washington U	N/A
MASCAC	NE	Salem State	Salem State
LEC	NE	Rhode Island College	Rhode Island College
Empire 8	East	St. John Fisher	St. John Fisher
NEAC	East	(N) Baptist Bible (S) Villa Julie	Villa Julie
SUNYAC	East	Brockport State	Plattsburgh State (2)
LL	East	Hamilton	St. Lawrence (2)
AMCC	GL	Lake Erie	Lake Erie
CUNYAC	Atl	York (NY)	York (NY)
Skyline	Atl	Manhattanville	Manhattanville
NJAC	Atl	(N) New Jersey City (S) Rowan	Ramapo (N2)
MAC-C	M-A	Messiah	Widener (4)
PnAC	M-A	Alvernia	Alvernia
CAC	M-A	Hood	Catholic (2)
MAC-F	M-A	King's	King's
Centennial	M-A	Johns Hopkins	John Hopkins
SCAC	South	Centre	Centre
USA-South	South	Averett	Averett
ODAC	South	Virginia Wesleyan	Hampden-Sydney (4)
ASC	South	(E) Mississippi C. (W) MHB	Mississippi College
GSAC	South	Maryville (Tenn.)	Maryville (Tenn.)
MIAA	GL	Hope	Calvin (2)
NCAC	GL	Wooster	Wooster
OAC	GL	Capital	Capital
PrAC	GL	Westminster (Pa.)	Grove City (4)
HCAC	MW	Franklin	Transylvania (2)
CCIW	MW	Augustana	Augustana
NathCon	MW	Aurora	Aurora
Midwest	MW	Grinnell	Carroll (2)
SLIAC	MW	MacMurray	Fontbonne (4)
MIAC	West	St. Thomas	St. Thomas
UMAC	West	Northwestern (Minn.)	St. Scholastica (3)
IIAC	West	Loras	Loras
SCIAC	West	Occidental	N/A
NWC	West	Whitworth	Whitworth
WIAC	West	Stevens Point	Stevens Point

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: diehardfan on February 25, 2007, 09:17:24 PM

oooh.... Bravo! You and your tables... ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 25, 2007, 09:18:45 PM

Makes me cringe to see 4 upsets in the NE.

should we just pencil in Amherst and Williams in the sweet 16.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on February 25, 2007, 09:24:36 PM

Centre wins the SCAC and is now rated 17. What is the possibility of hosting the first round for this team?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 25, 2007, 10:06:39 PM

16/41. That's 39%. That sure SEEMS a higher percentage than last year....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 25, 2007, 11:27:33 PM

The UMAC and the Great South are not officially recognized conferences.

The Presidents AC is a Pool B contender moving to Pool A next year.
The NAthCon moves to Pool A in 2008-09.

I count 14 out of 37 or 38%.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 25, 2007, 11:29:08 PM

Quote from: sac on February 25, 2007, 09:18:45 PM
Makes me cringe to see 4 upsets in the NE.

should we just pencil in Amherst and Williams in the sweet 16.

Knowing the NCAA, I'm sure they'll try to make that happen and put them on opposite sides of the bracket...so they can meet in the Final Four! lol :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 26, 2007, 12:10:44 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 25, 2007, 11:27:33 PM
The UMAC and the Great South are not officially recognized conferences.

The Presidents AC is a Pool B contender moving to Pool A next year.
The NAthCon moves to Pool A in 2008-09.

I count 14 out of 37 or 38%.

I figured there were some Pool B's or provisional conferences in the list. Still though...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on February 26, 2007, 11:14:17 PM

Just wondering how a team like NYU with a loss at home does not drop at all in the poll, and Lake Erie which i believe has a bye and hosts in the second round does not get onto the poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 26, 2007, 11:16:21 PM

Lake Erie being granted a bye by the NCAA is really unrelated to a Top 25 vote, isn't it?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on February 27, 2007, 12:45:28 AM

Again you are correct, otherwise UW-osh would be in the tournament as the d3hoops voters see them as the 8th best team in the country.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 27, 2007, 08:25:19 AM

Quote from: ILive4This on February 27, 2007, 12:45:28 AM
Again you are correct, otherwise UW-osh would be in the tournament as the d3hoops voters see them as the 8th best team in the country.

I wish that Oshkosh had beaten LaCrosse at least once so we would not have this much wailing and gnashing of teeth.

We are approaching unanimity on that point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 27, 2007, 08:34:19 PM

Top 25 Tournament Glance, Rounds 1-2

#   1   UW-Stevens Point (25-2) received a bye; hosts St. John's (21-7) Sat.
#   2   Wooster (26-3) def. Transylvania 92-66; hosts #23 Centre (24-4) Sat.
#   3   Mississippi College (26-2) def. #15 Occidental 68-51; hosts Maryville (TN) (22-6) Sat.
#   4   Virginia Wesleyan (24-4) def. Averett 63-60; hosts Hampden-Sydney (19-10) Sat.
#   5   St. Thomas (24-3) received a bye; hosts Carroll (17-8) Sat.
#   6   Amherst (25-2) received a bye; hosts Widener (15-12) Sat.
#   7   Augustana (22-6) lost to Carroll in NCAA 1st round; season complete
#   8   Washington U. (21-4) def. Fontbonne 77-58; hosts #11 Whitworth (24-3) Sat.
#   9   UW-Oshkosh (21-6) season complete
#   10   Hope (24-4) def. #12 Chicago 76-54 at Aurora; plays Calvin (19-9) Sat. at Aurora
#   11   Whitworth (24-3) def. DePauw 62-59 (OT) at Washington U.; plays at Wash. U. (21-4) Sat.
#   12   Chicago (20-6) lost to #10 Hope 76-54 at Aurora; season complete
#   13   Elmhurst (21-6) season complete
#   14   Aurora (25-3) lost to Calvin 69-68; season complete
#   15   Occidental (19-6) lost at #3 Mississippi College 68-51; season complete
#   16   UW-La Crosse (19-8) season complete
#   17   Wittenberg (22-5) season complete
#   18   Worcester Polytech (22-4) lost to Stevens 68-57 at Ramapo; season complete
#   19   Guilford (22-4) def. Manhattanville 101-81 at Johns Hopkins; plays at Johns Hopkins (24-4) Sat.
#   20   Trinity (CT) (21-5) lost to Brandeis 77-70 (OT) at Rhode Island Coll.; season complete
#   21   Rhode Island College (25-3) def. Coast Guard 64-60; hosts Brandeis (20-6) Sat.
#   22   Salem St. (24-2) received a bye; hosts Keene St. (24-5) Sat.
#   23   Centre (24-4) def. Capital 69-55 at Wooster; plays at #2 Wooster (26-3) Sat.
#   24   NYU (20-6) def. St. Joseph's (NY) 87-68; hosts Rutgers-Newark (18-10) Fri. (ECAC Metro tournament)
#   25   John Carroll (20-9) def. Westminster (PA) 87-83; plays at Lake Erie (25-2) Sat.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on February 27, 2007, 08:45:43 PM

Quote from: Old School on February 25, 2007, 11:29:08 PM
Quote from: sac on February 25, 2007, 09:18:45 PM
Makes me cringe to see 4 upsets in the NE.

should we just pencil in Amherst and Williams in the sweet 16.

Knowing the NCAA, I'm sure they'll try to make that happen and put them on opposite sides of the bracket...so they can meet in the Final Four! lol :D

Such haters! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 27, 2007, 08:52:00 PM

Quote from: fpc85 on February 27, 2007, 08:45:43 PM
Such haters! :D

Play a round robin conference schedule and I may not dislike as much! lol ::) ;D ;) :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on February 27, 2007, 10:09:06 PM

DC, although NYU did not make the NCAA tournament their season is not complete. The Violets are the top seed in the ECAC Metro tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 27, 2007, 11:16:01 PM

Pat, would the top 25 voters take performance in the ECAC tournament into account in the final poll, or will NYU still be considered 19-6 three weeks from now? Since my little weekly compendium of scores is intended to give readers a quick look at how the top 25 teams did with an eye to the next poll, if the ECAC games are not factors in the next poll, my preference would be to leave them out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 28, 2007, 12:40:37 AM

David,

I send them the scores but I'm not sure too many voters take them into account.

Usually a good team in the ECAC tournament has maybe one more decent team as an opponent in the eight-team field.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 28, 2007, 09:09:31 AM

I'm surprised NYU even accepted a bid. Up in New England the NESCAC and the MASCAC stay out entirely and Husson, Gordon, and Babson all turned them down.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 28, 2007, 10:25:40 AM

Why even hold the tourney if semi-decent teams turn down invites?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 28, 2007, 10:46:03 AM

It's barely a tournament. Schools have to pay their own expenses to go to it. The ECAC had a purpose back when some of the smaller conferences had little or no shot at an NCAA invite. It was the consolation prize for the small schools. However, with everybody now having a chance to get in (save for maybe St. Joe's of Maine) it's just a pointless exhibition.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 28, 2007, 10:49:45 AM

Although, looking at the full bracket, it seems like the ECAC Metro tournament is pretty legit. You've got some strong NJAC teams in there with NYU.

I wonder how NYU managed to get in the NCAA's East Region, when the ECAC clearly has them in the appropriate Metro Division?

Could even the ECAC be smarter than the NCAA?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 01, 2007, 06:59:23 AM

I've trapped mice that were smarter than the NCAA.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on March 01, 2007, 11:33:36 AM

NYU used to be in the Atlantic region and got moved to the east several years ago. I believe it was done to partner the two NY UAA teams in the same region.

The ECAC metro tournament is usually a pretty good tournament. The second round games tomorrow night should be good games. NYU v RU Newark and NJCU v Richard Stockton. All four teams have appeared in their respective regional rankings at least once I believe.

The ECAC Metro always has at least two strong NJAC teams every year and the NJAC coaches and players seem to take it seriously.

I hope RUN beats NYU so NJCU can host if they beat Stockton, otherwise I have to take that PATH train ride across the river to NYU and be forced to eat hot dogs from Grays Papaya on 4th St.

I still find it funny that NYU is within a three to four mile radius of at least 9 or 10 other D3 Atlantic Region teams and they are in the Eastern Region.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ChicagoHopeNut on March 01, 2007, 06:40:58 PM

The other reason for a team to play in the ECAC is the extra week of organized practice and games. For a young team that was close to the NCAA's that extra time could prove very valuable. Many coaches would jump at the opportunity to get that extra few days of practice and game to help prepare for next year. It also provides another team the shot to finish the season on a high note, granted its not the same as winning the NCAA but it provides some closure for teams I think.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 03, 2007, 11:49:25 PM

Top 25 Tournament Glance

#   1   UW-Stevens Point (26-2) received a bye; def. St. John's (21-7) 93-76; hosts #8 Washington U. (22-4) Fri.
#   2   Wooster (27-3) def. Transylvania 92-66; def. #23 Centre 73-56; plays #25 John Carroll (21-9) Fri. at St. John Fisher
#   3   Mississippi College (27-2) def. #15 Occidental 68-51; def. Maryville (TN) 76-56; plays at #4 Virginia Wesleyan (25-4) Fri.
#   4   Virginia Wesleyan (25-4) def. Averett 63-60; def. Hampden-Sydney 61-51; hosts #3 Miss. College (27-2) Fri.
#   5   St. Thomas (24-4) received a bye; lost to Carroll 86-80; season complete
#   6   Amherst (26-2) received a bye; def. Widener 87-70; hosts Stevens (23-6) Fri.
#   7   Augustana (22-6) lost to Carroll in NCAA 1st round; season complete
#   8   Washington U. (22-4) def. Fontbonne 77-58; def. #11 Whitworth 63-61; plays at #1 UW-Stevens Point (26-2) Fri.
#   9   UW-Oshkosh (21-6) season complete
#   10   Hope (25-4) def. #12 Chicago 76-54 at Aurora; def. Calvin 80-64 at Aurora; plays Carroll (18-8) Fri. at UW-Stevens Point
#   11   Whitworth (24-4) def. DePauw 62-59 (OT) at Washington U.; lost at #8 Wash. U. 63-61; season complete
#   12   Chicago (20-6) lost to #10 Hope 76-54 at Aurora; season complete
#   13   Elmhurst (21-6) season complete
#   14   Aurora (25-3) lost to Calvin 69-68; season complete
#   15   Occidental (19-6) lost at #3 Mississippi College 68-51; season complete
#   16   UW-La Crosse (19-8) season complete
#   17   Wittenberg (22-5) season complete
#   18   Worcester Polytech (22-4) lost to Stevens 68-57 at Ramapo; season complete
#   19   Guilford (23-4) def. Manhattanville 101-81 at Johns Hopkins; won at Johns Hopkins 80-73; plays Lincoln (20-8) Fri. at Virginia Wesleyan
#   20   Trinity (CT) (21-5) lost to Brandeis 77-70 (OT) at Rhode Island Coll.; season complete
#   21   Rhode Island College (26-3) def. Coast Guard 64-60; def. Brandeis 70-67; plays Keene St. (25-5) Fri. at Amherst
#   22   Salem St. (24-3) received a bye; lost to Keene St. 76-75; season complete
#   23   Centre (24-5) def. Capital 69-55 at Wooster; lost at #2 Wooster 73-56; season complete
#   24   NYU (22-6) def. St. Joseph's (NY) 87-68; def. Rutgers-Newark 82-72; def. Richard Stockton 58-55 (ECAC Metro tournament); season complete
#   25   John Carroll (21-9) def. Westminster (PA) 87-83; won at Lake Erie 79-77; plays #2 Wooster (27-3) Fri. at St. John Fisher

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: MR. PAC on March 05, 2007, 08:45:17 PM

Does Alvernia have any shot next year at being considered in the top 25?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 05, 2007, 09:09:19 PM

Everyone has a shot at being considered in the Top 25.

Ok... maybe not everyone!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 05, 2007, 09:20:41 PM

Quote from: MR. PAC on March 05, 2007, 08:45:17 PM
Does Alvernia have any shot next year at being considered in the top 25?

Sure.

If you can tell me who they're playing next year, I can give you a better answer.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 06, 2007, 08:48:42 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 05, 2007, 09:20:41 PM
Quote from: MR. PAC on March 05, 2007, 08:45:17 PM
Does Alvernia have any shot next year at being considered in the top 25?

Sure.

If you can tell me who they're playing next year, I can give you a better answer.

Doesn't that require someone at Alvernia knowing who they're playing next year?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 09, 2007, 09:47:28 PM

Top 25 Tournament Glance (UPDATED throough the Sweet Sixteen games)

#   1   UW-Stevens Point (26-3) received a bye; def. St. John's (21-7) 93-76; lost to #8 Washington U. 78-66; season complete
#   2   Wooster (28-3) def. Transylvania 92-66; def. #23 Centre 73-56; def. #25 John Carroll 83-73 at St. John Fisher; plays Brockport St. (26-5) Sat. at St. John Fisher
#   3   Mississippi College (27-3) def. #15 Occidental 68-51; def. Maryville (TN) 76-56; lostat #4 Virginia Wesleyan 81-55; season complete
#   4   Virginia Wesleyan (26-4) def. Averett 63-60; def. Hampden-Sydney 61-51; def. #3 Miss. College 81-55; hosts #19 Guilford (24-4) Sat.
#   5   St. Thomas (24-4) received a bye; lost to Carroll 86-80; season complete
#   6   Amherst (27-2) received a bye; def. Widener 87-70; def. Stevens 97-74; hosts #21 Rhode Island Coll. (27-3) Sat.
#   7   Augustana (22-6) lost to Carroll in NCAA 1st round; season complete
#   8   Washington U. (23-4) def. Fontbonne 77-58; def. #11 Whitworth 63-61; won at #1 UW-Stevens Point 78-66; plays #10 Hope (26-4) Sat. at UW-Stevens Point
#   9   UW-Oshkosh (21-6) season complete
#   10   Hope (26-4) def. #12 Chicago 76-54 at Aurora; def. Calvin 80-64 at Aurora; def. Carroll 89-77 at UW-Stevens Point; plays #8 Washington U. (23-4) Sat. at UW-Stevens Point
#   11   Whitworth (24-4) def. DePauw 62-59 (OT) at Washington U.; lost at #8 Wash. U. 63-61; season complete
#   12   Chicago (20-6) lost to #10 Hope 76-54 at Aurora; season complete
#   13   Elmhurst (21-6) season complete
#   14   Aurora (25-3) lost to Calvin 69-68; season complete
#   15   Occidental (19-6) lost at #3 Mississippi College 68-51; season complete
#   16   UW-La Crosse (19-8) season complete
#   17   Wittenberg (22-5) season complete
#   18   Worcester Polytech (22-4) lost to Stevens 68-57 at Ramapo; season complete
#   19   Guilford (24-4) def. Manhattanville 101-81 at Johns Hopkins; won at Johns Hopkins 80-73; def. Lincoln 129-128 (3 OT) at Virginia Wesleyan; plays at #4 Virginia Wesleyan (26-4) Sat.
#   20   Trinity (CT) (21-5) lost to Brandeis 77-70 (OT) at Rhode Island Coll.; season complete
#   21   Rhode Island College (27-3) def. Coast Guard 64-60; def. Brandeis 70-67; def. Keene St. 75-73 at Amherst; plays at #6 Amherst (27-2) Sat.
#   22   Salem St. (24-3) received a bye; lost to Keene St. 76-75; season complete
#   23   Centre (24-5) def. Capital 69-55 at Wooster; lost at #2 Wooster 73-56; season complete
#   24   NYU (22-6) def. St. Joseph's (NY) 87-68; def. Rutgers-Newark 82-72; def. Richard Stockton 58-55 (ECAC Metro tournament); season complete
#   25   John Carroll (21-10) def. Westminster (PA) 87-83; won at Lake Erie 79-77; lost to #2 Wooster 83-73 at St. John Fisher; season complete

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on March 09, 2007, 10:36:18 PM

I think it's a pretty good credit to the Top 25 poll that 5 of the final 8 teams in the NCAA tournament will come from the pre-tournament Top 10. Only one of the final 8, Brockport State, came into the tournament unranked nationally. Just speaks to the knowledge of Pat's voters.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pg04 on March 09, 2007, 10:38:41 PM

Quote from: scotsbrod on March 09, 2007, 10:36:18 PM
I think it's a pretty good credit to the Top 25 poll that 5 of the final 8 teams in the NCAA tournament will come from the pre-tournament Top 10. Only one of the final 8, Brockport State, came into the tournament unranked nationally. Just speaks to the knowledge of Pat's voters.

And Brockport has played no one in the top 25 yet, so it was pretty much an inevitability that there would be a non ranked team as the 8th team....

I agree that the poll does do a good job of gauging the strengths of the teams. I do however hope this means that Brockport will sneak into the top 25 at the end of the season. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 10, 2007, 01:58:12 AM

This seems reasonable.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 10, 2007, 07:28:05 AM

I'm pretty sure Brockport's been getting voted sporadically throughout the year anyway. It's not like they came out of nowhere, but they are more one of those isolated teams that no one is really too sure about.

They're solid. No real surprises for me at least. Now if Hope hangs with WashU, I'm really going to have to start eating some crow. Luckily, it's such a popular dish on this website that they really know how to prepare it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 10, 2007, 10:42:03 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 10, 2007, 07:28:05 AM

I'm pretty sure Brockport's been getting voted sporadically throughout the year anyway. It's not like they came out of nowhere, but they are more one of those isolated teams that no one is really too sure about.

They're solid. No real surprises for me at least. Now if Hope hangs with WashU, I'm really going to have to start eating some crow. Luckily, it's such a popular dish on this website that they really know how to prepare it.

Brockport has been mostly disregarded by the pollsters this season. They made only one appearance in the voting, getting 20 votes in week 6. The Golden Eagles were in the top 25 every week of the 2001-02 season, reaching as high as #4, but otherwise have made just one top 25 appearance in the 8 year history of the poll (preseason 02-03).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 10, 2007, 11:51:57 AM

Five of the top 10 teams in the final pre-tournament D3Hoops.com top 25 poll (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/) have reached the sectional finals, and it is interesting to note that this is the maximum. The five who didn't get that far were all blocked by another top 10 team that did (except, of course, for #9 UW-Oshkosh, who didn't get a bid): #1 UW-Stevens Point's bracket was won by #8 Wash. U.; #5 St. Thomas and #7 Augustana were all in #10 Hope's octet; and #3 Mississippi College fell to #4 Virginia Wesleyan. While the poll might not have necessarily favored these five teams, it did max out on top 10 teams advancing.

In fact, with one exception, it maxed out on top 20 teams advancing, with teams ranked #20 or higher occupying six of seven possible sectional final slots. The only top 20 team that was edged out by a non-top 20 team was #20 Trinity (CT), whose octet was won by #21 Rhode Island College.

Seven of the eight sectional finalists are ranked #21 or higher, and the eighth (unranked Brockport St.) won a grouping wherein all 8 teams were unranked.

Looking back a little further, it is worthy of mention that the teams ranked #1, #2, and #3 in the preseason poll (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/07/index.html) are all sectional finalists. In all, four of the eight sectional finalists were ranked in the preseason top 25, and four other teams from that poll lost in sectional semifinals last night.

Not too shabby, voters.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 10, 2007, 10:16:27 PM

Kudos to the d3hoops.com voters - the Final Four teams were the #2, 4, 6, and 8 teams in the final regular-season poll (and directly eliminated #1 and 3). Hard to do any better than that!

Furthermore, 3 of the 4 were ranked 1, 2, and 3 in the preseason poll! (Only Wash U was mostly overlooked early on, receiving only 3 points.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 10, 2007, 10:30:42 PM

Top 25 Tournament Glance (UPDATED through the Sectionals)

#   1   UW-Stevens Point (26-3) received a bye; def. St. John's (21-7) 93-76; lost to #8 Washington U. 78-66; season complete
#   2   Wooster (29-3) def. Transylvania 92-66; def. #23 Centre 73-56; def. #25 John Carroll 83-73 at St. John Fisher; def. Brockport St. 94-87 (OT) at St. John Fisher; plays #6 Amherst (28-2) Fri. at Salem, VA
#   3   Mississippi College (27-3) def. #15 Occidental 68-51; def. Maryville (TN) 76-56; lostat #4 Virginia Wesleyan 81-55; season complete
#   4   Virginia Wesleyan (27-4) def. Averett 63-60; def. Hampden-Sydney 61-51; def. #3 Miss. College 81-55; def. #19 Guilford 81-71; plays #8 Washington U. (24-4) Fri. at Salem, VA
#   5   St. Thomas (24-4) received a bye; lost to Carroll 86-80; season complete
#   6   Amherst (28-2) received a bye; def. Widener 87-70; def. Stevens 97-74; def. #21 Rhode Island Coll. 81-69; plays #2 Wooster (29-3) Fri. at Salem, VA
#   7   Augustana (22-6) lost to Carroll in NCAA 1st round; season complete
#   8   Washington U. (24-4) def. Fontbonne 77-58; def. #11 Whitworth 63-61; won at #1 UW-Stevens Point 78-66; def. #10 Hope 58-55 at UW-Stevens Point; plays #4 Virginia Wesleyan (27-4) Fri. at Salem, VA
#   9   UW-Oshkosh (21-6) season complete
#   10   Hope (26-5) def. #12 Chicago 76-54 at Aurora; def. Calvin 80-64 at Aurora; def. Carroll 89-77 at UW-Stevens Point; lost to #8 Washington U. 58-55 at UW-Stevens Point; season complete
#   11   Whitworth (24-4) def. DePauw 62-59 (OT) at Washington U.; lost at #8 Wash. U. 63-61; season complete
#   12   Chicago (20-6) lost to #10 Hope 76-54 at Aurora; season complete
#   13   Elmhurst (21-6) season complete
#   14   Aurora (25-3) lost to Calvin 69-68; season complete
#   15   Occidental (19-6) lost at #3 Mississippi College 68-51; season complete
#   16   UW-La Crosse (19-8) season complete
#   17   Wittenberg (22-5) season complete
#   18   Worcester Polytech (22-4) lost to Stevens 68-57 at Ramapo; season complete
#   19   Guilford (24-5) def. Manhattanville 101-81 at Johns Hopkins; won at Johns Hopkins 80-73; def. Lincoln 129-128 (3 OT) at Virginia Wesleyan; lost at #4 Virginia Wesleyan 81-71; season complete
#   20   Trinity (CT) (21-5) lost to Brandeis 77-70 (OT) at Rhode Island Coll.; season complete
#   21   Rhode Island College (27-4) def. Coast Guard 64-60; def. Brandeis 70-67; def. Keene St. 75-73 at Amherst; lost at #6 Amherst 81-69; season complete
#   22   Salem St. (24-3) received a bye; lost to Keene St. 76-75; season complete
#   23   Centre (24-5) def. Capital 69-55 at Wooster; lost at #2 Wooster 73-56; season complete
#   24   NYU (22-6) def. St. Joseph's (NY) 87-68; def. Rutgers-Newark 82-72; def. Richard Stockton 58-55 (ECAC Metro tournament); season complete
#   25   John Carroll (21-10) def. Westminster (PA) 87-83; won at Lake Erie 79-77; lost to #2 Wooster 83-73 at St. John Fisher; season complete

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 10, 2007, 10:32:05 PM

It was a bad year to be odd, even with all of the upsets and wild games that we have had! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mark_reichert on March 10, 2007, 10:52:45 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on March 10, 2007, 11:51:57 AM
Not too shabby, voters.

Other than giving the WashU men all of 3 votes in the preseason, perhaps. Somebody suggested they may be ranked #1 in the 2007-2008 preseason pool. Would that be the greatest jump preseason poll to preseason poll?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 10, 2007, 10:54:06 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 10, 2007, 10:32:05 PM
It was a bad year to be odd, even with all of the upsets and wild games that we have had! :)

Quote from: David Collinge on March 10, 2007, 10:30:42 PM
Top 25 Tournament Glance (UPDATED through the Sectionals)

#   2   Wooster (29-3) def. Transylvania 92-66; def. #23 Centre 73-56; def. #25 John Carroll 83-73 at St. John Fisher; def. Brockport St. 94-87 (OT) at St. John Fisher; plays #6 Amherst (28-2) Fri. at Salem, VA
#   4   Virginia Wesleyan (27-4) def. Averett 63-60; def. Hampden-Sydney 61-51; def. #3 Miss. College 81-55; def. #19 Guilford 81-71; plays #8 Washington U. (24-4) Fri. at Salem, VA
#   6   Amherst (28-2) received a bye; def. Widener 87-70; def. Stevens 97-74; def. #21 Rhode Island Coll. 81-69; plays #2 Wooster (29-3) Fri. at Salem, VA
#   8   Washington U. (24-4) def. Fontbonne 77-58; def. #11 Whitworth 63-61; won at #1 UW-Stevens Point 78-66; def. #10 Hope 58-55 at UW-Stevens Point; plays #4 Virginia Wesleyan (27-4) Fri. at Salem, VA

Two--Four--Six--Eight--Who do we appreciate? Voters! Voters! Voters!!! ;D 8) :D

By the way, the women's voters didn't do too badly either; the Women's Final Four is #6 vs. #11 and #9 vs. #10; and three of these teams were in the preseason top 12 (#3, #8, #12). ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 10, 2007, 11:04:07 PM

I was the only voter to give Wash U a preseason vote (#23).......and had to have been the only voter to not vote for Amherst in the preseason poll. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 11, 2007, 10:53:22 AM

Well, in looking at how things have shaken out this year, I feel good about my season long theory that there is a) tremendous parity in Division III basketball, and b) not a dominant team, ala UW-Stevens Point in 2004 and 2005. I think the four teams in Salem are extremely even and I think these teams are right on par with several that didn't make it. The games last night indicate a lot of parity among the Elite 8 teams and I think there are many that didn't make it that far that are right there. In my neck of the woods, for example, Elmhurst (not even in the field) is every bit as good as Wash U, as is Augustana (lost to Carroll in Round 1), which beat Wash U in the non-conference. My only question was whether or not UW-Stevens Point was a tier above Wash U, Augie, and Elmhurst (since I did not see UW-SP this year) - and I suspected they were not since Augie only lost by 3 at Stevens Point - and Wash U answered that question Friday night. Just a bunch of even teams out my way this year and having seen Amherst and Virginia Wesleyan in the Final Four last year, I think this cluster of top Midwest/West teams is dead even with everybody else.

I no longer feel bad for having such a tough time voting this year. I think there were about 10 really even top teams this year and then several others in a tier right behind. The four teams that played the best at the right time earned the right to go to Salem, and that's how it should be. Should be a great Final Four.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 11, 2007, 01:23:06 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on March 11, 2007, 10:53:22 AM
My only question was whether or not UW-Stevens Point was a tier above Wash U, Augie, and Elmhurst (since I did not see UW-SP this year) - and I suspected they were not since Augie only lost by 3 at Stevens Point - and Wash U answered that question Friday night.

That's not necessarily true. I remember seeing Aurora for the first time when they lost to WLC and they looked horrible. I basically ripped them pretty good for that in a Top 25 board post and later, Sager, I think, kind of said that I shouldn't be too critical of just that ONE performance and they were much better than that. Sager saw them against Dominican and they looked pretty good. If you ask any Pointer fan, and getting their 100% truthful, though a little bias, opinion, I'm sure they will tell you that Friday night's game was thee worst shooting performance of the year. So, I definitely wouldn't say that Point was that bad. Going into the game, they actually had a better record (loss-wise) than the two national championship games. Does that mean they were better? No. But, to say that Point wasn't at or above that Elmhurst, Augie, Washington U. tier based on what Washington U. did on Friday, doesn't really give justice to Point. It was by far their worst game, but credit does go to Washington U. for their efforts. I don't want to take anything away from them. Not many teams are going to win when one of your stars go 1-11 from the field and the team coughs the ball up 12 times when you average just 8 and shoot 37% when you average 50+% and shoot some 22% from 3 when you average 42% or whatever.

Anyway, it was a bad game played at the worst time...unfortunately, it happens. There is always talk throughout the year when a premiere team loses to a team they aren't supposed to and posters say, "Oops, that was a real bad game, oh well...move on." Well, Point just happened to do that in the tourney and they can't move on! OK, I'm done ranting! lol >:( ;D :D ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 11, 2007, 02:33:57 PM

Quote from: Old School on March 11, 2007, 01:23:06 PM
But, to say that Point wasn't at or above that Elmhurst, Augie, Washington U. tier based on what Washington U. did on Friday, doesn't really give justice to Point.

What I said was that Stevens Point was not in a tier above Wash U, Augie, and Elmhurst...they were dead even. I base this off of the entire season, not just one game. Augustana plays the Pointers to 3 points at Stevens Point, leading for 30 minutes...Elmhurst beats UW-Oshkosh...UW-Oshkosh splits with Stevens Point...Augustana beats Wash U...Wash U beats Stevens Point...Elmhurst drills Augustana once and lose two tight ones vs AC.

Plenty of evidence to lead us to believe that those teams were all very even and that Stevens Point was no better than Wash U or Augustana or Elmhurst.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 11, 2007, 02:39:25 PM

I did not see Stevens Point this year, but from what I understand, they did not have a big horse down low. Usually the great WIAC teams have a 6-6 or 6-7 stud (usually multiple) that can dominate in the low post.

It is just very hard to get to Salem without that low post presence. Lack of post presence is the reason I never really considered U. of Chicago and Wheaton more than top 15-20 teams, despite how good their perimeter game was. I believe all four teams heading to the Final Four have a good big guy, correct? Very few teams have ever won a national championship without a solid low post guy(s).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 11, 2007, 04:22:08 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on March 11, 2007, 02:39:25 PM
I did not see Stevens Point this year, but from what I understand, they did not have a big horse down low. Usually the great WIAC teams have a 6-6 or 6-7 stud (usually multiple) that can dominate in the low post.

It is just very hard to get to Salem without that low post presence. Lack of post presence is the reason I never really considered U. of Chicago and Wheaton more than top 15-20 teams, despite how good their perimeter game was. I believe all four teams heading to the Final Four have a good big guy, correct? Very few teams have ever won a national championship without a solid low post guy(s).

Which is why we don't make it there from Texas/ASC. We just don't grow them that big down here.

Bob, I think that D3hoops.com has had a big leveling effect and that it will continue to "level" as we get routine video-streaming of numerous games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 11, 2007, 06:16:13 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 11, 2007, 04:22:08 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on March 11, 2007, 02:39:25 PM
I did not see Stevens Point this year, but from what I understand, they did not have a big horse down low. Usually the great WIAC teams have a 6-6 or 6-7 stud (usually multiple) that can dominate in the low post.

It is just very hard to get to Salem without that low post presence. Lack of post presence is the reason I never really considered U. of Chicago and Wheaton more than top 15-20 teams, despite how good their perimeter game was. I believe all four teams heading to the Final Four have a good big guy, correct? Very few teams have ever won a national championship without a solid low post guy(s).

Which is why we don't make it there from Texas/ASC. We just don't grow them that big down here.

Bob, I think that D3hoops.com has had a big leveling effect and that it will continue to "level" as we get routine video-streaming of numerous games.

Ralph, you would know better than I, but is it more that the Texas teams just prefer a different style -- a more guard-oriented, up-tempo type style? Certainly there are plenty of 6-6/6-7 kids to go around down there, right?

IWU has played Trinity (Tx) twice in the last 3 years and Trinity is a very "Midwestern" team -- good post players, solid halfcourt offense, strong defense, etc. Head coach Pat Cunningham is a Midwestern guy of course (former assistant as Illinois State, head coach at Manchester and U. of Chicago), so I guess that it should be no surprise that his Tigers play just like a CCIW or WIAC team. Do the ASC and other D3 Texas teams just prefer to play a different style of basketball??

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 11, 2007, 06:47:59 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 11, 2007, 04:22:08 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on March 11, 2007, 02:39:25 PM
I did not see Stevens Point this year, but from what I understand, they did not have a big horse down low. Usually the great WIAC teams have a 6-6 or 6-7 stud (usually multiple) that can dominate in the low post.

It is just very hard to get to Salem without that low post presence. Lack of post presence is the reason I never really considered U. of Chicago and Wheaton more than top 15-20 teams, despite how good their perimeter game was. I believe all four teams heading to the Final Four have a good big guy, correct? Very few teams have ever won a national championship without a solid low post guy(s).

Which is why we don't make it there from Texas/ASC. We just don't grow them that big down here.

Bob, I think that D3hoops.com has had a big leveling effect and that it will continue to "level" as we get routine video-streaming of numerous games.

That has got to be an all-time first - a Texan claiming they DON'T grow them big!! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mark_reichert on March 11, 2007, 06:59:34 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 11, 2007, 04:22:08 PM
Which is why we don't make it there from Texas/ASC. We just don't grow them that big down here.

Or is it that any that big don't play Division III ball?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 11, 2007, 07:14:30 PM

Greetings Titan, I think the best typical midwestern style big man that we had this year was Ryan Burgart from UMHB (http://www.umhb.edu/athletics/cbasketball/roster.html).

I think that the two previous Midwestern style big men in our conference were Tommy Stolhandske from Texas Lutheran and Travis Tennison from McMurry.

Stolhandske (http://www.d3hoops.com/notables.php?item=155) was a Jostens finalist in 2005.

Tennison (http://www.d3hoops.com/features/05/tennison.htm) played at D2 Incarnate Word in San Antonio, where he and his family moved when his wife got a great job in San Antonio. (We have a lot of non-traditional students who are getting their education at McMurry.)

Tennison's stats in D2 this year.
## Player GP-GS Min--Avg FG-FGA Pct 3FG-FGA Pct FT-FTA Pct Off Def Tot Avg PF FO A TO Blk Stl Pts Avg
42 Travis Tennison.... 21-2 304 14.5 50-81 .617 0-0 .000 23-40 .575 35 54 89 4.2 58 2 6 23 2 8 123 5.9

On the ASC board, MissColl SID Chris Brooks helped Dave McHugh with the Lincoln-Guilford game. Chris said that the refs in the VWC-MissColl game were letting 6'0" guards push 6'8" Timothy Broomfield 5-10 feet off the block when he had established position. That is unheard of in ASC-style officiating.

As for Trinity, Coach Cunningham can recruit midwestern style players to Trinity. My thoughts are that Coach Cunningham uses Trinity's academic reputation to find national players who have "weak D1 to D2 talent" players who have 1400 SAT's. These players look at playing in D1 or D2 at "somewhere local university" or getting an education at the #1 West Region ranked Master's Level University and play D3 ball.

Perhaps, when we can get several years of videostreaming, then we can get some exposure for our referees to permit that style of play. Other than that, to that response on the ASC board, Gray Fox (a SCIAC expatriate living in Dallas) said that this was the "perfect storm".

Mr Ypsi, of course, "big"! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 11, 2007, 07:22:29 PM

Quote from: mark_reichert on March 11, 2007, 06:59:34 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 11, 2007, 04:22:08 PM
Which is why we don't make it there from Texas/ASC. We just don't grow them that big down here.

Or is it that any that big don't play Division III ball?

Mark, I honestly think that we don't have the 6'6" gym rats that we see across the Midwest. We do have a lot of 6'1" gym rats.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on March 11, 2007, 07:24:47 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on March 11, 2007, 06:16:13 PM
Ralph, you would know better than I, but is it more that the Texas teams just prefer a different style -- a more guard-oriented, up-tempo type style? Certainly there are plenty of 6-6/6-7 kids to go around down there, right?

IWU has played Trinity (Tx) twice in the last 3 years and Trinity is a very "Midwestern" team -- good post players, solid halfcourt offense, strong defense, etc. Head coach Pat Cunningham is a Midwestern guy of course (former assistant as Illinois State, head coach at Manchester and U. of Chicago), so I guess that it should be no surprise that his Tigers play just like a CCIW or WIAC team. Do the ASC and other D3 Texas teams just prefer to play a different style of basketball??

Titan,
I really don't think it is as much about the players as it is the style of play which tends to be far less physical. I'm not saying we never get those kind of games because every game is different, but it is definitely not the norm.

To put in perspective, that was the most physical game I have seen MC play in all season but there were just five combined free throws shot in the first half and nine in the first 30 minutes for both teams. 13 of the game's 22 total free throw attempts came in the final ten minutes. The officials let pretty much anything go.

For a reference, in the ASC's seven tournament games held at Mississippi College, teams combined to shoot 52 free throws each game. It's just a different brand of basketball.

We do have big kids down here, but they play in games all season where officials don't let near as much go. In my opinion it is very hard to just play more physical when you have been conditioned all season that certain things are fouls.

Ralph mentioned 6'8" guard Timothy Broomfield. The kid is a great talent but he is not a banger. The VWC smaller and more physical guards got up under him all night and just walked him off the block. That is just not allowed down here.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 11, 2007, 07:56:42 PM

Regarding how the officials call the game, in the CCIW (and I suspect in other leagues too), that tends to be different from game to game. One night they let a ton of banging go and 3 nights later both teams are in the double bonus with 10:00 to play in each half.

That said, every night out in the CCIW - no matter who is playing - it is extremely physical. It's like that with most of the top West/Midwest/Great Lakes teams. From this conversation and the one on the ASC board, it sounds like ASC games are much more "finesse." I don't think it is the officiating that has to be adjusted to come tournament time, but rather the style (I think we agree Chris?). When you are used to opposing teams playing a finesse style and then you get that tough, physical matchup it is just very hard to adjust.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Stout survivor on March 11, 2007, 08:02:05 PM

UWSP has everything but a dominate post. Krull is good but will settle for outside shots, if Point has a Joe Werner, Kerry Gibson, Jeff Skemp or one of any of the 6'8" to 7' guys that the rest have it would help take some pressure of the outside shooting. They have some bigger post on the bench but they are role players (maybe due to the system and not the player)

I have enjoyed playing at Point for the past 4 years and the difference between this years team and the national champ teams is when the shoots are not falling they stall. Kaslow would get them through those shooting droughts a couple years ago, I am sure it is something they are working on for next year.

Look out for Wooster, shoot as well as the other teams and have that inside game to PLUS a solid point guard to run the show which is so important which any big man can tell you, it is not just throwing the post pass but how you throw it and solid guards can do that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 11, 2007, 08:05:42 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 11, 2007, 07:22:29 PM
Quote from: mark_reichert on March 11, 2007, 06:59:34 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 11, 2007, 04:22:08 PM
Which is why we don't make it there from Texas/ASC. We just don't grow them that big down here.

Or is it that any that big don't play Division III ball?

Mark, I honestly think that we don't have the 6'6" gym rats that we see across the Midwest. We do have a lot of 6'1" gym rats.

Can't afford to let the good ones get away to Midwest schools...

50 •• Troy Ruths F 6-6 235 Jr. Sugar Land, Texas (Stephen F. Austin)

(Wash U's center -- one of the best low post players in Division III.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on March 11, 2007, 08:08:47 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on March 11, 2007, 07:56:42 PM
Regarding how the officials call the game, in the CCIW (and I suspect in other leagues too), that tends to be different from game to game. One night they let a ton of banging go and 3 nights later both teams are in the double bonus with 10:00 to play in each half.

That said, every night out in the CCIW - no matter who is playing - it is extremely physical. It's like that with most of the top West/Midwest/Great Lakes teams. From this conversation and the one on the ASC board, it sounds like ASC games are much more "finesse." I don't think it is the officiating that has to be adjusted to come tournament time, but rather the style (I think we agree Chris?). When you are used to opposing teams playing a finesse style and then you get that tough, physical matchup it is just very hard to adjust.

I definitely agree in respect to officiating. There's not anything wrong with it but it is different. In MC's three ASC tournament games there were nearly 60 free throws shot each game. In the two regional games against Occidental and Maryville, there were about 45 total free throws each game. Against Virginia Wesleyan there were just nine in the first 30 minutes and 22 total, and that is in a game I thought was much more physical that MC's previous tournament games this year. That is a huge difference.

I would say it is more about speed and quickness in this part of the country but we do have big, physical kids in the ASC. But in a very physical game with lots of banging around in the post, you can count on about 50 total trips to the free throw line.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Stout survivor on March 11, 2007, 08:14:33 PM

The refs are inconsistant from game to game but this is MENS basketball and there should be so contact. Strength should be a factor as long as the player is fighting for a spot. I was told that a knee or forarm was coll till the player caught the ball then defend the basket and give up the spot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 11, 2007, 08:19:12 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on March 11, 2007, 08:05:42 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 11, 2007, 07:22:29 PM
Quote from: mark_reichert on March 11, 2007, 06:59:34 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 11, 2007, 04:22:08 PM
Which is why we don't make it there from Texas/ASC. We just don't grow them that big down here.

Or is it that any that big don't play Division III ball?

Mark, I honestly think that we don't have the 6'6" gym rats that we see across the Midwest. We do have a lot of 6'1" gym rats.

Can't afford to let the good ones get away to Midwest schools...

50 •• Troy Ruths F 6-6 235 Jr. Sugar Land, Texas (Stephen F. Austin)

(Wash U's center -- one of the best low post players in Division III.)

With all due respect to my alma mater or to the quality program at Trinity or any other program in this part of the country, let me paraphrase Wash U's Coach Mark Edwards on Hoopsville tonight as he discussed where he recruited and who were the competition to his recruiting efforts.

I would say that Mr Ruths probably considered the offers from the "low-majors", the "Ivies" or Wash U. UAA Academics and D3 won.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 11, 2007, 08:45:57 PM

Quote from: Stout survivor on March 11, 2007, 08:14:33 PM
The refs are inconsistant from game to game but this is MENS basketball and there should be so contact. Strength should be a factor as long as the player is fighting for a spot. I was told that a knee or forarm was coll till the player caught the ball then defend the basket and give up the spot.

Stout survivor, here is the reference at the KU website about Naismith's thoughts on physical play (http://www.kusports.com/news/mens_basketball/story/105191).

QuoteFurther, check out Rule No. 5 and its anti-football connotation: No shouldering, holding, pushing, tripping or striking in any way the person of an opponent shall be allowed.

What Naismith seemed to be saying was that physical exertion transcended physical destruction in competitive sport.

And Naismith was the inventor of the football helmet. No patsy there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 11, 2007, 09:14:46 PM

Ralph,

As has been discussed before, the game today bears but passing resemblance to the game invented by Mr. Naismith - if refs actually called the game the way he envisioned, I dare say most teams would be reduced to their cheerleaders and pep band by halftime! :P This may be more true in the midwest, etc., than in the ASC, but I suspect it is true there as well (maybe it would take to midway through the second half? :-\).

BTW, his invention of 'the football helmet' was obviously to 'soften' the game - wimp! ;) ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 11, 2007, 09:39:11 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 11, 2007, 09:14:46 PM
Ralph,

As has been discussed before, the game today bears but passing resemblance to the game invented by Mr. Naismith - if refs actually called the game the way he envisioned, I dare say most teams would be reduced to their cheerleaders and pep band by halftime! :P This may be more true in the midwest, etc., than in the ASC, but I suspect it is true there as well (maybe it would take to midway through the second half? :-\).

BTW, his invention of 'the football helmet' was obviously to 'soften' the game - wimp! ;) ;D

Or might we end up with more movement, more passing and more emphasis on the team game? :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: The Observation Deck on March 11, 2007, 11:04:42 PM

Regardless of the officiating, why would a 6-0 guard even be physically *able* to push a 6-8 player that far off of position?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 11, 2007, 11:07:46 PM

Note that I didn't say I approved of the current game versus the original!

IMO it has gotten much TOO physical (but maybe that's just because I'm a little guy who had a great shot 30 years ago, but would never even get it off today).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 11, 2007, 11:21:05 PM

Quote from: The Observation Deck on March 11, 2007, 11:04:42 PM
Regardless of the officiating, why would a 6-0 guard even be physically *able* to push a 6-8 player that far off of position?

If you have played 30 games in the season so far, and that force to push you that far does not earn a foul, you have fewer than 3 "mistakes or miscalculations" (out of 5 total fouls) to give to figure out what will be "legal" for the first time this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on March 11, 2007, 11:35:45 PM

Quote from: The Observation Deck on March 11, 2007, 11:04:42 PM
Regardless of the officiating, why would a 6-0 guard even be physically *able* to push a 6-8 player that far off of position?

It is not a case of height but strength. Like I said in an earlier post, Timothy Broomfield is a very skilled and talented player and one of a handful of DIII players with a chance to attend the upcoming small college combine (sorry but the name of it escapes me right now), but he is not a banger. A shorter guard actually has the leverage advantage, just get underneath the taller player and walk him out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 11, 2007, 11:38:11 PM

Chris - after thinking about it... I would call him a D1 6-6 player. Size-wise in D3, he should be inside banging. But he has a D1 brain and body, where a 6-6 player is a small forward or guard on the outside.

I am not saying he isn't talented - he certainly is. I am not saying he can't come inside, he does have more than 100 blocks. But he has an odd combination that sometimes gets him in trouble physically in D3 (just ask Cilk McSweeney at Villa Julie :)).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 11, 2007, 11:41:17 PM

Quote from: Chris Brooks on March 11, 2007, 11:35:45 PMTimothy Broomfield is a very skilled and talented player and one of a handful of DIII players with a chance to attend the upcoming small college combine (sorry but the name of it escapes me right now), [...]

Is this the event you are thinking of? ==> http://www.mccarthysports.com/cbi.html

It looks like a fun event, if you can ignore the incredibly shameless self-promotion that seems to surround it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on March 12, 2007, 12:04:00 AM

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on March 11, 2007, 11:38:11 PM
Chris - after thinking about it... I would call him a D1 6-6 player. Size-wise in D3, he should be inside banging. But he has a D1 brain and body, where a 6-6 player is a small forward or guard on the outside.

I am not saying he isn't talented - he certainly is. I am not saying he can't come inside, he does have more than 100 blocks. But he has an odd combination that sometimes gets him in trouble physically in D3 (just ask Cilk McSweeney at Villa Julie :)).

Dave,
He definitely has a guard mentality, believe it or not last year was the first time in his career he had ever played inside. He's always been a guard. I wish you had gotten to see him play on another day, he is a game-changer.

I think you perfectly hit on what happened to him Friday. With VWC's small lineup, he was guarding a faster 6-0 guard on the perimeter which was a matchup problem. Then on the offensive end, I thought he was caught up in a situation where an official was not gonna call a foul on a 6-0 guard pushing a 6-8 guard off the post. You see very few calls on little guys guarding bigs in that situation.

Quote from: David Collinge on March 11, 2007, 11:41:17 PM
Quote from: Chris Brooks on March 11, 2007, 11:35:45 PMTimothy Broomfield is a very skilled and talented player and one of a handful of DIII players with a chance to attend the upcoming small college combine (sorry but the name of it escapes me right now), [...]

Is this the event you are thinking of? ==> http://www.mccarthysports.com/cbi.html

It looks like a fun event, if you can ignore the incredibly shameless self-promotion that seems to surround it.

Thanks, that's what I was thinking of.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Stout survivor on March 12, 2007, 12:26:54 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 11, 2007, 08:45:57 PM
Quote from: Stout survivor on March 11, 2007, 08:14:33 PM
The refs are inconsistant from game to game but this is MENS basketball and there should be so contact. Strength should be a factor as long as the player is fighting for a spot. I was told that a knee or forarm was coll till the player caught the ball then defend the basket and give up the spot.

Stout survivor, here is the reference at the KU website about Naismith's thoughts on physical play (http://www.kusports.com/news/mens_basketball/story/105191).

Great article.... I guess things have changed a little since then but I will have to say ... you got me on that one :D ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 12, 2007, 06:43:40 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 11, 2007, 08:19:12 PMWith all due respect to my alma mater or to the quality program at Trinity or any other program in this part of the country, let me paraphrase Wash U's Coach Mark Edwards on Hoopsville tonight as he discussed where he recruited and who were the competition to his recruiting efforts.

I would say that Mr Ruths probably considered the offers from the "low-majors", the "Ivies" or Wash U. UAA Academics and D3 won.

I've been wondering for a couple of years now if Pat Cunningham at Trinity (TX) made a strong pitch to Ruths.

It varies from team to team and from league to league -- and even from year to year -- but, yeah, the D3 teams in the midwestern part of the country do tend to play a more physical style of ball. I have often said that that helps them when they play teams from other parts of the country, because it's easier for a physical team to take the pulse of the officials early in a game and back off a little than it is for a finesse team to read the reffing style and adjust accordingly by pushing, shoving, hand-checking, and arm-barring more than they're used to doing. I think that this is behind some of what Chris is saying, although Virginia Wesleyan and the ODAC are, of course, not in the West, Midwest, or Great Lakes regions.

Most of the games I see that pit the northeast against the midwest (note the lowercase letters, as I'm referring to geographical areas of the country rather than D3's eight regions), or the south against the midwest, are in early-season tournaments (e.g., Wheaton's Lee Pfund Tourney and Chicago's Midway Classic) that tend to bring in teams from different areas of the country. This is instructive, because it really lets a fan see what the rank-and-file of other areas of the country look like, as opposed to just the cream of the crop that you see in March. The midwestern teams inevitably look as though they've spent more time in the weight room, and that they're prepared for the paint area to turn into a rugby field if the officiating crew demonstrates a slow whistle. The trend doesn't hold as much in UAA play, because the players involved tend to come from all over and the league itself tends to create a sui generis style of play. In fact, the program that's usually the most bruise-inflicting is Rochester.

This isn't to say that midwestern basketball is a hotbed of goonery, of course. As anyone who has seen Hoosiers is aware, high school basketball is a religion in the heartland (especially in Indiana and Illinois) in the same way that high school football rules local life in Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. The skills level in this part of the country is very high on average among D3 players, no matter the league. Nor am I saying that the rougher, less Naismithesque ;) halfcourt style of play is preferable from an aesthetic point of view to the more finesse or up-and-down-the-court styles. It is what it is. But, as I said, I do think that the more physical teams enjoy an advantage in March in terms of adjusting on the fly to the officiating.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mark_reichert on March 12, 2007, 01:07:09 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 11, 2007, 07:22:29 PM
Mark, I honestly think that we don't have the 6'6" gym rats that we see across the Midwest. We do have a lot of 6'1" gym rats.

Maybe because football is the religion in Texas, not basketball. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 12, 2007, 01:52:53 PM

Quote from: mark_reichert on March 12, 2007, 01:07:09 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 11, 2007, 07:22:29 PM
Mark, I honestly think that we don't have the 6'6" gym rats that we see across the Midwest. We do have a lot of 6'1" gym rats.

Maybe because football is the religion in Texas, not basketball. ;)

Yep! ;) Teams are preparing for off-season 7-on-7 flag football as we speak!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 12, 2007, 08:11:13 PM

Quote from: Stout survivor on March 11, 2007, 08:02:05 PM
UWSP has everything but a dominate post. Krull is good but will settle for outside shots, if Point has a Joe Werner, Kerry Gibson, Jeff Skemp or one of any of the 6'8" to 7' guys that the rest have it would help take some pressure of the outside shooting. They have some bigger post on the bench but they are role players (maybe due to the system and not the player)

Maybe if you weren't lame and followed your brother to Stout, you could've been that low post presence we've missed the last two years! OK, obviously I'm joking and I'm in no position to question Point's recruiting practices or YOUR decision making, but you get the idea! lol. ;D :D ;) I'm sure you might have even started. :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 12, 2007, 10:12:27 PM

Titan Q,

I've been offline for a day or two, so I didn't really get to respond to your response. No big deal. I might've posted that message out of frustration! lol. :D I thought I had heard you were going to make the trip up North to Quandt. Guess that didn't materialize. No problem. I'm rooting for Washington U to beat Virginia Wesleyan and then lose in the Final...or historical reasons. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 20, 2007, 03:40:11 PM

The final poll is out now. http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/ (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njlincolnlion on March 21, 2007, 05:41:39 PM

Lincoln closes out it d3 Basketball affiliation ranked #19.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: MR. PAC on August 15, 2007, 06:25:30 PM

When does the new top 25 teams come out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on August 16, 2007, 11:41:07 AM

Quote from: PrideSportBBallGuy on October 18, 2006, 11:57:19 PM
Instead of bugging Pat with an e-mail, I will just ask it here. When does d3hoops usually release the real and only preseason poll that matters?

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 19, 2006, 02:06:35 AM
Around Nov. 1.

Street & Smith's basketball preview issue (which includes a page on D3 with a top 10, "possible breakthroughs," and preseason All-Americans) should be out in early October.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 08, 2007, 07:00:32 PM

Sporting News/Street & Smith's 2007-08 Division III preseason top 10:

1. Wash U.
2. UW-Stevens Point
3. Brockport St
4. Amherst
5. Augustana
6. Brandeis
7. Virginia Wesleyan
8. Guilford
9. Rochester
10. Williams

"Possible Breakthroughs":

Alvernia, Aurora, Averett, Calvin, Capital, Defiance, Elmhurst, Hampden-Sydney, Heidelberg, Hope, Keene St, Lewis & Clark, Loras, Mississippi College, Plattsburgh St, Puget Sound, Rhode Island Coll, Rowan, Stevens Institute, Ursinus, Wheaton, Whitworth, William Paterson, UW-Platteville, UW-Whitewater, Wittenberg, Wooster, Worcester Poly, York

Preseason All-American Team...

1st Team

James Cooper, Wooster
Andrew Olson, Amherst
Troy Ruths, Wash U
Ben Strong, Guilford
Larry Welton, Aurora

2nd Team

Sherod Harris, Brockport St
Chad McGowan, York (Pa)
Kent Raymond, Wheaton (IL)
Nick Shattuck, Ursinus
Anthony Williams, Plattsburgh St

Honorable Mention:

Ton Ton Balenga, VA Wesleyan
Damien Brown, Averett
Matt Brynes, Rowan
Steve DeLuca, Brandeis
Jason Foster, Puget Sound
Travis Gorham, Plattsburgh St
Nate Hainje, Chicago
Steve Hicklin, UW-Stevens Point
Craig Johnson, Coast Guard
Tyler Kathan, Keene St
Kyle Kuenstling, Coe
Jeremiah Lawrence, Shenandoah
Russell Martin, Trinity (Ct)
Onyie Onunaku, Shenandoah
Jonathan Onyiriuka, Rochester
Anthony Pettaway, Defiance
Pete Rortvedt, UW-Stevens Point
Chris Rose, Williams
Chris Shalvoy, Williams
Jeff Skemp, UW-Platteville
Nate Stahl, Capital
Ryan Symes, Whitworth
Brandon Todd, Muskingum
Derek Van Solkema, Hope
Caleb Veldhouse, Calvin
Sean Wallis, Wash U
Kyle White, Loras
Brandon Williams, Brockport St
Andrew Zimmer, Wabash

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 08, 2007, 07:27:42 PM

Their NAIA top 10, for anyone interested...

1. Oklahoma City
2. Concordia (Ca)
3. Robert Morris (Chicago)
4. Campbellsville (Ky)
5. Mountain St (W Va)
6. Faulkner (Ala)
7. Crichton (Tn)
8. Georgetown (Ky)
9. Azusa Pacific (Ca)
10. Louisiana St - Shreveport

They don't break out into NAIA I and II...all lumped together.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 08, 2007, 09:53:04 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 08, 2007, 07:27:42 PM
Their NAIA top 10, for anyone interested...

1. Oklahoma City D-I
2. Concordia (Ca) D-I
3. Robert Morris (Chicago) D-I
4. Campbellsville (Ky) D-I
5. Mountain St (W Va) D-I
6. Faulkner (Ala) D-I
7. Crichton (Tn) D-I
8. Georgetown (Ky) D-I
9. Azusa Pacific (Ca) D-I
10. Louisiana St - Shreveport D-I

They don't break out into NAIA I and II...all lumped together.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 10, 2007, 08:47:00 PM

My initial thoughts to Street & Smith's attempt at a pre-season Top 10... not quite!

There are a few teams I think they have just a BIT high.

- Virginia Wesleyan has lost a lot from their past two seasons of success to be ranked that high.
- Brockport State seems a bit high too me... after losing three seniors and making a coaching change. But they did make a deep run in the NCAA Tourney last season and the new coach is an eight-year assistant at Brockport.
- Rochester - huh? Finished unofficially 38th in the final D3hoops.com Top 25 last season... but do bring back a lot of players... but still play in the tough UAA. That pre-season ranking seems REALLY high!
- And Williams. Sure, they finished on a great run last season with some big upsets... but they were 16-12 last year. Why should anyone have confidence that the squad is a Top 10 team this year... especially in pre-season?

That being sain... I am sure someone or team will prove me wrong!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 11, 2007, 08:27:24 AM

Williams was surprisingly bad last year, especially at the beginning of the year. They were a much better team than their record indicated, which explained the late season success. Their younger players are a year older. Top ten might be too high, but not for those reasons. It might be too high because Williams always seems to have an inflated ranking.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on October 11, 2007, 12:07:47 PM

Just to expand on what Hoops Fan said, Williams returns its entire starting five. Two of those guys were frosh last year and took some time to get acclimated. And Williams' top player, Chris Rose, had a broken hand that kept him out of action for the start of the year, and then really limited his production for the first half of the season. Williams had a very strong frosh class last year, who should really blossom as sophomores. Top ten might be a little high, only because New England has some other really stellar squads returning: Amherst and Brandeis of course, Trinity who is always strong, and Keene State who returns all but one guy.

I think Amherst belongs above Brockport, but otherwise they look about right ... I believe Brockport returns their entire starting line-up from last year, and they barely lost to Wooster in the elite 8. I do agree that VWA and Rochester are a little high, I might put the pre-season top 20 ranking as something like:

Amherst, Wash U, Stevens Point, Brockport, Guilford, Brandeis, Wheaton (IL) / Elmhurst / Augustana (a CCIW person would know better but all three seem to return a lot), UW-Plattesville, Wooster, Williams, Capital, Keene State, Calvin, VWA, Rochester, Trinity (Conn), Hope, Aurora

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 11, 2007, 02:23:00 PM

As long as the Brockport starters spent the summer running, they'll be ok. They're not going to get the breathers they did last year, so their stamina better be top-notch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 11, 2007, 03:27:23 PM

Stevens Point is too high. Their only resemblence of a post game, offensively or defensively, Jon Krull, graduated. It won't be too hard to defend a team without a post presence. At the tail end of the season, teams learned how to guard Rortvedt and his barrage of 3-pters. Guard him well and without Krull, Point is in trouble.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 12, 2007, 12:30:44 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on October 11, 2007, 12:07:47 PMAmherst, Wash U, Stevens Point, Brockport, Guilford, Brandeis, Wheaton (IL) / Elmhurst / Augustana (a CCIW person would know better but all three seem to return a lot), UW-Plattesville, Wooster, Williams, Capital, Keene State, Calvin, VWA, Rochester, Trinity (Conn), Hope, Aurora

The CCIW preseason coaches poll will almost certainly slot the top three teams as Augustana, Elmhurst, and then Wheaton, and I think that most of the league's observers would agree with that.

I'm not sure that UW-Platteville will be the WIAC's second-rated team coming into the season. UW-Whitewater really loaded up on transfer talent this past off-season. Of course, UWW frequently has chemistry issues, and with all those new transfers those problems might arise again. But the Warhawks may be the most talented team in the WIAC going into 2007-08.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on October 12, 2007, 12:49:37 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 12, 2007, 12:30:44 AM
But the Warhawks may be the most talented team in the WIAC going into 2007-08.

... as they have been for umteen years in a row...! You pegged UWW there pretty well GS.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 12, 2007, 04:27:41 PM

It does seem like Whitewater is always the most talented, but then they falter at the end...seemingly the complete opposite of what a team with new players should do! lol

It will be very interesting on what the WIAC brass have to say going into the season. Point has four starters back, but lose the all important post game of Jon Krull. Whitewater, with all their transfers will be there and I think River Falls will be tough as well. Platteville has Lohoff and their big man Skemp back and that will be big with the graduations of the other big guys Gibson, Nonemachers, Krull and Werner, among others.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on October 12, 2007, 11:58:03 PM

I am going to be perfectly honest, I am a bit surprised by Brandeis' preseason ranking....I am not saying it is not deserved, but i figured they would be somewhere between 15-20 and work their way up. I am also a bit surprised that Amherst is not given the number 1 ranking, or at least by their fall to 4. They are national champs and return most of their team including pre-season AA poing gard Olsen. I think you need to give them #1 until the prove otherwise, that is normally how it works.

Whether Rochester should be where they are or not, The UAA is stacked this year. 3 teams in the top 10 is going to lead to an interesting year for many of these teams. especially because these 3 schools in general have presented themselves as difficult places to play at least in recent years (and this is aside from the foul advantage in St. Louis).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: abominable_snowman on October 15, 2007, 03:49:10 PM

I'm going to post it here, because I'm not sure where else. But here's the question.

Have there been any noteworthy teams that have had success despite a smaller than average roster? (8-11 man)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on October 15, 2007, 08:02:40 PM

As in total roster, or in rotation?

There may have been successful teams with 10 or 11 man rosters, but a lot of teams have a whole bundle of freshmen to mix and match. Even the dregs of the NCAC usually have a good number of freshmen (except some of the Oberlin teams...)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 15, 2007, 08:33:34 PM

He's talking total roster. Apparently Carleton (MIAC) is now down to 10 players, with rumors they may shrink to 9.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on October 15, 2007, 09:40:09 PM

Hmmm...issues afoot in Northfield?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 16, 2007, 02:17:53 AM

Quote from: abominable_snowman on October 15, 2007, 03:49:10 PM
I'm going to post it here, because I'm not sure where else. But here's the question.

Have there been any noteworthy teams that have had success despite a smaller than average roster? (8-11 man)

Recently? It's hard to think of one. When you get down to 11 or so players, the ability to run an effective practice becomes problematic. There's just too much stuff in practice that has to be done in a 5-on-5 context, and when you're down to 10 or 11 guys you run the risk of a player's absence from a practice (for whatever reason) disrupting your ability to rehearse your offensive and defensive sets in a proper game-condition context. And when you get below ten guys on the team, you're really hampered in that regard. I don't know how Norman Dale managed to do it at Hickory. ;)

I don't think that you necessarily lose anything in terms of talent with that small of a roster, provided that your top eight or so have the requisite amount of talent, because there are plenty of teams out there that don't play a rotation bigger than seven or eight guys. But I can see where the inability to fill out a full set of ten players for practice purposes can really hamper a team's progress ... to say nothing of attrition issues (injuries, illnesses, academic concerns, etc.).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on October 24, 2007, 11:10:59 PM

I am unsure if this has been asked or answered or both yet, but I was wondering when the d3 hoops preseaon top 25 will be released.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on October 25, 2007, 11:23:01 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on August 16, 2007, 11:41:07 AM
Quote from: PrideSportBBallGuy on October 18, 2006, 11:57:19 PM
Instead of bugging Pat with an e-mail, I will just ask it here. When does d3hoops usually release the real and only preseason poll that matters?

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 19, 2006, 02:06:35 AM
Around Nov. 1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on October 26, 2007, 12:23:49 AM

do we think we could possibly put together a posters top 25, if everyone give their personal top 25, and we assign points as normal 25 down to 1, and then add it all together I think it would be pretty interesting to compare to the official poll when it comes out....id be happy to add it all up, if someone else gets the ball rolling with their picks...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 26, 2007, 12:37:19 AM

Quote from: ILive4This on October 26, 2007, 12:23:49 AM
do we think we could possibly put together a posters top 25, if everyone give their personal top 25, and we assign points as normal 25 down to 1, and then add it all together I think it would be pretty interesting to compare to the official poll when it comes out....id be happy to add it all up, if someone else gets the ball rolling with their picks...

Sounds like another premium feature to me! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 26, 2007, 08:27:44 AM

Quote from: ILive4This on October 26, 2007, 12:23:49 AM
do we think we could possibly put together a posters top 25, if everyone give their personal top 25, and we assign points as normal 25 down to 1, and then add it all together I think it would be pretty interesting to compare to the official poll when it comes out....id be happy to add it all up, if someone else gets the ball rolling with their picks...

We already have one, but we wait until January to put it out since most of us lack the wide-ranging knowledge to vote intelligently before games are actually played.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 26, 2007, 08:30:07 AM

Quote from: ILive4This on October 26, 2007, 12:23:49 AM
do we think we could possibly put together a posters top 25, if everyone give their personal top 25, and we assign points as normal 25 down to 1, and then add it all together I think it would be pretty interesting to compare to the official poll when it comes out....id be happy to add it all up, if someone else gets the ball rolling with their picks...

http://www.d3sports.com/post/index.php?topic=4188.0

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 26, 2007, 01:19:33 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on October 26, 2007, 08:27:44 AM
Quote from: ILive4This on October 26, 2007, 12:23:49 AM
do we think we could possibly put together a posters top 25, if everyone give their personal top 25, and we assign points as normal 25 down to 1, and then add it all together I think it would be pretty interesting to compare to the official poll when it comes out....id be happy to add it all up, if someone else gets the ball rolling with their picks...

We already have one, but we wait until January to put it out since most of us lack the wide-ranging knowledge to vote intelligently before games are actually played.

Don't worry guys - I'm on it like white on rice! Already recruited ILive4This (by PM) as a new voter come January!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on October 26, 2007, 07:59:46 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on October 26, 2007, 08:27:44 AM
We already have one, but we wait until January to put it out since most of us lack the wide-ranging knowledge to vote intelligently before games are actually played.

I don't think the lacking knowledge ends once the season starts. ;) :D

I'll give a preseason poll a shot, might be fun.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 26, 2007, 10:17:08 PM

Of course, all this would be on the poster's poll link! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 26, 2007, 10:17:29 PM

I am moving my comments to the Posters' Poll link. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 26, 2007, 11:48:39 PM

Thanks, Ralph. I would have done the same, but...

a) wasn't sure anyone would see it before late December, and

b) anyone reading only the last couple of pages on that thread might never come back! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ChicagoHopeNut on October 29, 2007, 01:28:56 PM

Well we are two weeks into practices for most teams and I wonder if anyone out there has experienced a significant injury. Of course I do not wish this on anyone or team but as a Hope fan I know someone always seems to get hurt before the first game. >:( :( Are there any serious long term injuries out there that may affect some of the potential Top-25 teams?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 29, 2007, 01:33:38 PM

Well, I submitted my preseason ballot for the D3Hoops.com Top 25 poll today. This is always the toughest ballot by far. I'm interested to see how the poll comes out.

1 Washington U.
2 Amherst
3 Brockport State
4 Capital
5 Brandeis
6 Guilford
7 UW-Stevens Point
8 Lewis and Clark
9 Williams
10 Virginia Wesleyan
11 Augustana
12 Aurora
13 Elmhurst
14 Calvin
15 Rochester
16 Puget Sound
17 Baldwin-Wallace
18 Wooster
19 UW-Whitewater
20 Hope
21 Worcester Polytech
22 Mary Hardin-Baylor
23 Loras
24 Keene State
25 Grinnell

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on October 29, 2007, 01:34:35 PM

Will post this question in several areas where I know the data freaks lurk...

An interesting come-on on the Franklin and Marshall site:

"2nd in Division III wins over the last 25 years" - NEAT concept, but I wonder where the source of records is, who's in the top 10, top 20 - Who's Number 1?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 29, 2007, 02:05:19 PM

Quote from: hopefan on October 29, 2007, 01:34:35 PM
Will post this question in several areas where I know the data freaks lurk...

An interesting come-on on the Franklin and Marshall site:

"2nd in Division III wins over the last 25 years" - NEAT concept, but I wonder where the source of records is, who's in the top 10, top 20 - Who's Number 1?

Hopefan, this thread came to mind...

http://www.d3sports.com/post/index.php?topic=4297.0

It is not exactly what you are looking for, but you'll find some helpful information there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 29, 2007, 03:14:04 PM

From the thread that Q linked to (Reference: All-time records since the inception of d3, on p. 2 of Multiregion Topics), top records from 1974-75 thru 2005-06 (more than 25 years) seemed to be Witt at 751-177 (.809) followed by F&M at 679-216 (.759). To get precisely the last 25 years, you'd need to chop off the first 8 years, then add last year, but it's a start!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: d3bballfollower on October 29, 2007, 03:41:12 PM

Brockport State at 3? They return some boys who can ball, but the real question will be can they carry over their progress from last year with the departure of Coach Whitmore to Hamline University in St. Paul, MN...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FisherDynasty on October 29, 2007, 05:12:48 PM

Titan Q, I like the rankings. I think Bport will disappoint, they are very good but play the type of game where they can be beaten if a team plays undercontrol. Expect them to lose a few early and drop lower in the top 25. However, if they play up to their talent the #3 spot is not far fetched. and if get hot at the end of the season, could make a serious run at the final 4/championship. I like Rochester at 15, I believe they will have a very good year and actually come out of the east over bport. disagree with some of the NE teams in there like WPI and keene state, Fisher will beat WPI in December and knock them out of the top 25. Also disagree with Grinnell and Williams at #9, they aren't there yet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 29, 2007, 05:46:26 PM

Quote from: d3bballfollower on October 29, 2007, 03:41:12 PM
Brockport State at 3? They return some boys who can ball, but the real question will be can they carry over their progress from last year with the departure of Coach Whitmore to Hamline University in St. Paul, MN...

The toughest thing about being a D3 voter is that there are so many teams you don't get to see play. I have never seen Brockport St, for example.

On paper, they look great though. 26-6 last year and 14-2 in the SUNYAC...lost in OT to Wooster in the tournament...return all 5 starters, return 92% of scoring and 92% of rebounding (although Sherod Harris will not play the 1st semester). Despite the coaching change, they look very good to me at this very early stage.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 29, 2007, 05:57:08 PM

Quote from: FisherDynasty on October 29, 2007, 05:12:48 PM
Titan Q, I like the rankings. I think Bport will disappoint, they are very good but play the type of game where they can be beaten if a team plays undercontrol. Expect them to lose a few early and drop lower in the top 25. However, if they play up to their talent the #3 spot is not far fetched. and if get hot at the end of the season, could make a serious run at the final 4/championship. I like Rochester at 15, I believe they will have a very good year and actually come out of the east over bport. disagree with some of the NE teams in there like WPI and keene state, Fisher will beat WPI in December and knock them out of the top 25. Also disagree with Grinnell and Williams at #9, they aren't there yet.

I did not have Grinnell in my original 25, but I reconsidered. They were 17-7 last year and won the MWC with a 13-3 record. The MWC (Lawrence, Carroll, Ripon, etc) has become a pretty solid league and I have a lot of respect for its champion -- I have seen MWC tournament teams Carroll and Lawrence play in recent years and those were good teams.

Grinnell returns all 5 starters, including John Grotberg (28.1 ppg) and point-guard David Arseneault, who are good players from all unbiased accounts I have heard.

I felt like Grinnell belonged in my preseason ballot...I will bump them if they prove me wrong.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FisherDynasty on October 29, 2007, 06:34:18 PM

Reasonable enough. how about throwing Fisher in there, they went to the elite 8 last year and lost two a #3 ranked bport team very closely and beat them once during the year and also beat a #15 UofR team and also advanced further in the ncaa beating the team that knocked UofR out. Lost 2 contributers but nothing that cannot be replaced. Not saying they should be top 15 or even top 20 but should get consideration in top 25. I think they are around a 21-25 ranking. Should be a solid but not great year competing with uofR and bport out of the east. Also watch out for Plattsburgh state who was mostly jr's and very talented last year. Hope it doesnt come off as me pitching Fisher, just stating my opinion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 29, 2007, 07:12:44 PM

FisherDynasty:

Teams that end up in the 21-25 range aren't usually on every ballot, so that makes sense.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 29, 2007, 07:23:04 PM

Quote from: FisherDynasty on October 29, 2007, 06:34:18 PM
Reasonable enough. how about throwing Fisher in there, they went to the elite 8 last year and lost two a #3 ranked bport team very closely and beat them once during the year and also beat a #15 UofR team and also advanced further in the ncaa beating the team that knocked UofR out. Lost 2 contributers but nothing that cannot be replaced. Not saying they should be top 15 or even top 20 but should get consideration in top 25. I think they are around a 21-25 ranking. Should be a solid but not great year competing with uofR and bport out of the east. Also watch out for Plattsburgh state who was mostly jr's and very talented last year. Hope it doesnt come off as me pitching Fisher, just stating my opinion.

I posted my ballot to generate conversation about teams and to learn a few relevant facts that I might not be aware of for future ballots, so pitch away.

Plattsburgh State, returning 4 starters from a 21-9 team, was the team I bumped from #25 to add Grinnell. I did give St. John Fisher a good look but I viewed the losses of top two scorers Dan Mueller and Dan McSweeney to be much more significant that it sounds like you do. I'll keep an eye on them in the early going, as I will on all of my near miss teams, like Plattsburgh St, Wheaton (IL), UW-Platteville, and others.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 29, 2007, 07:29:56 PM

Titan Q, thanks for posting the Ballot.

I think that UMHB may be the "best" team in the ASC, if for no other reason that they catch Miss College in Belton on December 1st.

If UMHB is playing an "away" playoff game that weekend (Football/ Round three/"Quarterfinals"/ Regional Finals), then that might lessen UMHB's Home Court Advantage (not having the football team courtside leading cheers).

Miss College hosts the other 2007 ASC-West Co-Champ, McMurry, three weeks later, on December 19th, during Christmas break. McMurry returns 8 players who had quality minutes last year.

I also think that the position of the "best team" in the ASC in the 16-25 range is about right for this time of the season.

We get no other proxies for ASC quality, e.g., UMHB playing a VWC or a Miss College going to Westwood, early in the season. McMurry does open with George Fox* in the Colorado College tourney 2 weeks from now. One other program that has scheduled affirmatively in the ASC is LeTourneau which has five D-III South Region games, to go with the 20 ASC games (single round robin for 8 games versus the ASC-West and double round robin versus the 6 opponents in the ASC-East.)

Mississippi College reports that they have had another successful recruiting season out of the well-stocked Mississippi JUCO leagues.

*GFU is picked to finish 7th in the NWC (http://www.nwcsports.com/sports/basketball_men/MBKBpoll.htm). L&C is picked to win!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 29, 2007, 07:53:55 PM

Q, thanks for your ballot (I challenge more voters to do the same - it would be fascinating)!

I have no real quibbles, but my guess is you have Wooster too low at 18. You may well be right about how much they will miss Tom Port, but my gut says James Cooper will carry them quickly into the top 10 (and may even challenge for national POY, though Ben Strong, barring injury or other misfortune, may have a lock on that).

But I know that the Scots are certainly NOT a team any Titan is likely to overlook, so if they earn it I'm sure you'll grant it! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 29, 2007, 08:15:44 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 29, 2007, 07:53:55 PM
Q, thanks for your ballot (I challenge more voters to do the same - it would be fascinating)!

I have no real quibbles, but my guess is you have Wooster too low at 18. You may well be right about how much they will miss Tom Port, but my gut says James Cooper will carry them quickly into the top 10 (and may even challenge for national POY, though Ben Strong, barring injury or other misfortune, may have a lock on that).

But I know that the Scots are certainly NOT a team any Titan is likely to overlook, so if they earn it I'm sure you'll grant it! ;)

Chuck, Wooster didn't just lose Tom Port...they also lost Tim Vandervaart and Andy Van Horn. I believe Wooster fans would tell us that the Scots really lost a lot to graduation. And not just in on-the-court production -- they also lost some solid leaders.

I think #18 is a nice safe place to start Wooster. Cooper is certainly a superstar, but I want to see the rest of the cast perform before I starting moving the Scots up. I am not sure there is a Division III player better than Wheaton's Kent Raymond, and the Thunder aren't on my ballot at all because I have big questions about his supporting cast. Cooper seems to be surrounded by good talent, but again, I want to see it click first.

It was strange to not have Wittenberg in a ballot. Usually Wooster and Wittenberg end up right next to each other on my ballot...just a matter if 1/2, 9/10, or 13/14.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on October 29, 2007, 09:14:11 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 29, 2007, 03:14:04 PM
From the thread that Q linked to (Reference: All-time records since the inception of d3, on p. 2 of Multiregion Topics), top records from 1974-75 thru 2005-06 (more than 25 years) seemed to be Witt at 751-177 (.809) followed by F&M at 679-216 (.759). To get precisely the last 25 years, you'd need to chop off the first 8 years, then add last year, but it's a start!

I pulled together the Hope & Calvin numbers for the last 25 years.

Calvin - 499-179 - .740
Hope - 525-152 - .775

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on October 29, 2007, 09:22:14 PM

Good call on excluding Witt. The NCAC may be Wooster and then a gaggle of five or six teams with 8-11 conference wins each. With Wooster and Witt both having to reload a bit, it may be time for an experienced team like Wabash, or a cinderella like Kenyon (don't laugh...) or the always pesky OWU to emerge.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 29, 2007, 09:28:49 PM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on October 29, 2007, 09:14:11 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 29, 2007, 03:14:04 PM
From the thread that Q linked to (Reference: All-time records since the inception of d3, on p. 2 of Multiregion Topics), top records from 1974-75 thru 2005-06 (more than 25 years) seemed to be Witt at 751-177 (.809) followed by F&M at 679-216 (.759). To get precisely the last 25 years, you'd need to chop off the first 8 years, then add last year, but it's a start!

I pulled together the Hope & Calvin numbers for the last 25 years.

Calvin - 499-179 - .740
Hope - 525-152 - .775

Yeah, I would have expected that illustrative post to have come from a Hope fan. :D ;D 8)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 29, 2007, 09:32:04 PM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on October 29, 2007, 09:14:11 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 29, 2007, 03:14:04 PM
From the thread that Q linked to (Reference: All-time records since the inception of d3, on p. 2 of Multiregion Topics), top records from 1974-75 thru 2005-06 (more than 25 years) seemed to be Witt at 751-177 (.809) followed by F&M at 679-216 (.759). To get precisely the last 25 years, you'd need to chop off the first 8 years, then add last year, but it's a start!

I pulled together the Hope & Calvin numbers for the last 25 years.

Calvin - 499-179 - .740
Hope - 525-152 - .775

1982-83 through 2006-07...

Illinois Wesleyan 486-209 (.699)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 29, 2007, 10:07:50 PM

Stevens Point

82-83 through 06-07

525-178 (.747)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 29, 2007, 10:39:24 PM

The F&M compilation for all of d3's existence (by "r.w.mcnickels") included the comment that their best years were at the beginning of the division; if so, their record for the last 25 years (beginning 1982-83 rather than 1974-75) would probably be somewhat lower than .759. I'm beginning to strongly doubt their claim to having the second best record for that time span! They are nearly certainly below Witt and Hope, quite likely below Stevens Point and Calvin, and quite possibly below IWU, Wooster, and who else have I forgotten?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 29, 2007, 11:15:29 PM

I must have missed that D3 part...Point obviously hasn't been in D3 for that long, I think they came into D3 around 96. I would guess a smarter poster will come up with the actual year (Point Special?) or some smarter lurker will email me and tell me!

If I go from the 95-96 season, it's 260-77, good for (.7715)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 30, 2007, 01:32:04 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 29, 2007, 05:57:08 PMI did not have Grinnell in my original 25, but I reconsidered. They were 17-7 last year and won the MWC with a 13-3 record. The MWC (Lawrence, Carroll, Ripon, etc) has become a pretty solid league and I have a lot of respect for its champion -- I have seen MWC tournament teams Carroll and Lawrence play in recent years and those were good teams.

Grinnell returns all 5 starters, including John Grotberg (28.1 ppg) and point-guard David Arseneault, who are good players from all unbiased accounts I have heard.

I felt like Grinnell belonged in my preseason ballot...I will bump them if they prove me wrong.

The word in the MWC room is that Arseneault dislocated his kneecap this summer. Take that tidbit for what it's worth, which may not be much.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on October 30, 2007, 11:08:34 AM

1982-83 thru 2006-07:

Wittenberg 590-135, .814
Wooster 523-181, .743

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: r.w. mcnickels on October 30, 2007, 11:19:39 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 29, 2007, 10:39:24 PM
The F&M compilation for all of d3's existence (by "r.w.mcnickels") included the comment that their best years were at the beginning of the division; if so, their record for the last 25 years (beginning 1982-83 rather than 1974-75) would probably be somewhat lower than .759. I'm beginning to strongly doubt their claim to having the second best record for that time span! They are nearly certainly below Witt and Hope, quite likely below Stevens Point and Calvin, and quite possibly below IWU, Wooster, and who else have I forgotten?

Mr. Y-

F&M's record over the last 25 years is 529-174, a .752 winning percentage (1982-83 through 2006-07).

I think I said the Dips entered their best years around 1975, not necessarily that the best years were limited to that time. They were a run-of-the-mill program until the mid-70s, then took off. The late '80s through mid '90s were probably their best years.

I'm not sure where F&M's SID got the information that they're No. 2 in that time. NCAA record book? But it does look like they're higher than the programs mentioned above, except Witt.

Here's a link from F&M's old site with yearly records through '05 (I included the last two years in the stat). Looking forward to tipoff!

http://server1.fandm.edu/departments/Athletics/mbasket/rec_year.html

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FisherDynasty on October 30, 2007, 11:38:48 AM

Titan Q, makes sense, we will see. Fisher has a big man who has been the 6th man behind Mcsweeney the past 3 seasons, so finally gets the starting job, has the talent we'll see if he produces. As far as Mueller, that will be a little tougher, but the growth of the other players should make up for the loss if not add something extra. Should be an interesting year and thanks for posting the ballet, definitely will help spark conversation and get an idea of how teams should be this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 30, 2007, 12:12:31 PM

r.w.,

Thanks for the clarification - I misunderstood you to mean that their MOST glorious years were in the 70s.

But, if the numbers that have so far been offered are accurate, it appears that F&M trails Hope as well as Witt. (Still, mighty impressive!)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on October 30, 2007, 12:18:15 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 29, 2007, 09:32:04 PM
Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on October 29, 2007, 09:14:11 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 29, 2007, 03:14:04 PM
From the thread that Q linked to (Reference: All-time records since the inception of d3, on p. 2 of Multiregion Topics), top records from 1974-75 thru 2005-06 (more than 25 years) seemed to be Witt at 751-177 (.809) followed by F&M at 679-216 (.759). To get precisely the last 25 years, you'd need to chop off the first 8 years, then add last year, but it's a start!

I pulled together the Hope & Calvin numbers for the last 25 years.

Calvin - 499-179 - .740
Hope - 525-152 - .775

1982-83 through 2006-07...

Illinois Wesleyan 486-209 (.699)

NJCU for the same period 483-218 .689, right behind IWU. This is also the span of Charles Browns career at NJCU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on October 30, 2007, 12:40:55 PM

OS,

Per the WIAC website, here's their history page. (http://www.uwsa.edu/wiac/history/index.html) It states that the WIAC came into being during the 96-97 season. UWSP got to the Elite 8 that first season with a 22-7 record (one of the last with a full 64 team D-III tourney), and WIAC counterparts Platteville, Whitewater, and Oshkosh made the NCAA's that year as well.

So, from the '96-'97 season through '06-'07:

1996-97 22-7
1997-98 17-8
1998-99 15-10
1999-2000 25-5
2000-01 18-7
2001-02 21-6
2002-03 24-4
2003-04 29-5
2004-05 29-3
2005-06 17-10
2006-07 26-3

So, that totals 243-68 for a winning percentage of 78.1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on October 30, 2007, 03:59:29 PM

For Williams, going back to 1996 (the earliest that the website includes):

1996: 24-3
1997: 27-3
1998: 26-4
1999: 20-6
2000: 20-4
2001: 21-7
2002: 22-6
2003: 31-1
2004: 30-2
2005: 16-9
2006: 17-8
2007: 16-12

Total: 270-65, 80.6 %.

The last few years have been relatively down, but with a very deep reservoir of young talent, the Ephs are expected to return to past form of regularly posting 20 win seasons, starting with this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jbergman on October 30, 2007, 04:18:02 PM

Amherst's record is similar to Williams for the same 12-year period:

276 - 61, an 81.9% winning percentage

And their team also has a decent future ahead of them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on October 30, 2007, 09:41:58 PM

Mississippi College joined the American Southwest Conference and Division III for the 1996-97 season. It's just eleven years but they have put together a good run with a winning percentage of 83%. Hopefully, this year will be another great one.

1996-97 21-4 .840 Mike Jones
1997-98 24-3 .889 Mike Jones
1998-99 25-3 .893 Mike Jones
1999-00 19-8 .704 Mike Jones
2000-01 23-5 .821 Mike Jones
2001-02 22-3 .879 Mike Jones
2002-03 20-8 .714 Don Lofton
2003-04 19-8 .704 Don Lofton
2004-05 24-5 .841 Don Lofton
2005-06 29-2 .935 Don Lofton
2006-07 27-3 .900 Mike Jones

253-52 (.830)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on October 30, 2007, 10:37:43 PM

If we are talking about recent winning percentages, Wooster probably claims the top spot.

Wooster is the winningest Div. III team of the 2000's with a record of 209-33 for a win percentage of .864 :)

That high win percentage over the past 8 seasons can be attributed to excellent recruiting and coaching which is exemplified by Wooster's Coach Steve Moore and his staff.

Given Wooster's recent results, I think that they should be in the preseason top 10 for this season. Moore has a strong track record of reloading and he returns 3 starters from last year's Final Four squad (All-American James Cooper, PG Brandon Johnson and F Evan Will) plus 4 other bench players that logged playing time last season. 2 of the returning bench players are Devin Fulk and Marty Bidwell who each averaged over 20 minutes a game last year and both shot over 50% from the floor (#5 and #7 scorers).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on October 30, 2007, 10:49:09 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on October 30, 2007, 10:37:43 PM
If we are talking about recent winning percentages, Wooster probably claims the top spot.

Wooster is the winningest Div. III team of the 2000's with a record of 209-33 for a win percentage of .864 :)

That sounds right. I can't recall the web address, but there is a site with a listing of Division III team records for the past ten years and standings showing where each team stood. MC was 4th and if I remember correctly Wooster was #1. I can't remember the name of the site though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on October 30, 2007, 11:03:12 PM

Quote from: Chris Brooks on October 30, 2007, 10:49:09 PM
Quote from: wooscotsfan on October 30, 2007, 10:37:43 PM
If we are talking about recent winning percentages, Wooster probably claims the top spot.

Wooster is the winningest Div. III team of the 2000's with a record of 209-33 for a win percentage of .864 :)

That sounds right. I can't recall the web address, but there is a site with a listing of Division III team records for the past ten years and standings showing where each team stood. MC was 4th and if I remember correctly Wooster was #1. I can't remember the name of the site though.

It's in the NCAA records book, which is online.

http://www.ncaa.org/library/records/basketball/m_basketball_records_book/2007/2007_m_basketball_records.pdf

It's last years version so you'll have to update it but on page 115 you'll find this......

Winningest Teams of the 2000s
BY PERCENTAGE
(Minimum four seasons as NCAA member)
Team Yrs. Won Lost Pct.
1. Wooster............................................................. 7- 180- 28 .865
2. Amherst ............................................................. 7 -168- 35 .828
3. Wittenberg......................................................... 7 -167 -35 .827
4. Williams ............................................................ 7 -157- 37 .809
5. Wis.-Stevens Point............................................... 7 -163- 40 .803
6. Catholic ............................................................. 7 -167- 41 .803
7. Hanover............................................................. 7 -154- 38 .802
8. Hampden-Sydney................................................ 7 161 -40 .801
9. Buena Vista ........................................................ 7 163- 41 .799
10. Mississippi Col.................................................... 7 154- 39 .798
11. Salem St............................................................. 7 160 -41 .796
12. Maryville (Tenn.) ................................................. 7 159 -41 .795
13. Washington-St. Louis ........................................... 7 141 -39 .783
14. Chris. Newport................................................... 7 150 -44 .773
15. Calvin ................................................................ 7 158 -48 .767
16. Frank. & Marsh................................................... 7 154 -47 .766
17. Rochester............................................................ 7 143- 46 .757
18. Gust. Adolphus ................................................... 7 149 -48 .756
19. St. John Fisher..................................................... 7 145 -47 .755
19. Trinity (Tex.)........................................................ 7 145 -47 .755
21. McMurry ............................................................ 7 139 -49 .739
22. Wartburg ........................................................... 7 141 -50 .738
23. Randolph-Macon................................................. 7 143- 52 .733
24. Albion................................................................ 7 137 -50 .733
25. Ill. Wesleyan ...................................................... 7 142 -52 .732
26. Chapman........................................................... 7 128 -48 .727
27. Trinity (Conn.) ..................................................... 7 125- 47 .727
28. St. Thomas (Minn.) .............................................. 7 137- 52 .725
29. Colby-Sawyer ..................................................... 7 139 -53 .724
30. Penn St.-Behrend ................................................. 7 139 -54 .720

again thats through 2006.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 30, 2007, 11:09:28 PM

While figuring IWU's record over the last 25 years, I also totalled the NCAA tournament record. The Titans are...

39-18 (.684)
18 appearances (24 years in D3)

IWU's tournament winning % seems very good. I'm wondering what some of the great tournament records are. UW-Platteville and UW-Stevens Point must have crazy numbers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on October 30, 2007, 11:18:19 PM

Quote from: sac on October 30, 2007, 11:03:12 PM
It's in the NCAA records book, which is online.

There's also another site that has overall Division III standings for the past decade. I'll see if I can't track it down tomorrow, I had it in an email but must have trashed it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on October 31, 2007, 12:39:24 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 30, 2007, 11:09:28 PM
While figuring IWU's record over the last 25 years, I also totalled the NCAA tournament record. The Titans are...

39-18 (.684)
18 appearances (24 years in D3)

IWU's tournament winning % seems very good. I'm wondering what some of the great tournament records are. UW-Platteville and UW-Stevens Point must have crazy numbers.

I thought Sager was keeping track of those.

Those numbers are difficut to make out of since prior to 1988 you could lose a game and still play another. For example in 1987 both Hope and Calvin lost in round one, but played each other in a consolation game in the Regional the next night.

Here's the MIAA's 4 reps.

Albion 7-4 (.636) 4 appearances
Defiance 0-1 1 appearance as MIAA member
Calvin 30-18.......(.625) 17 appearances
Hope 22-20 (.524) 18 appearances

MIAA schools did not compete untill 1978.

After years of struggling to advance I bet Woosters records are looking pretty good now too.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 31, 2007, 03:20:15 AM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on October 30, 2007, 10:37:43 PM
If we are talking about recent winning percentages, Wooster probably claims the top spot.

Wooster is the winningest Div. III team of the 2000's with a record of 209-33 for a win percentage of .864 :)

That high win percentage over the past 8 seasons can be attributed to excellent recruiting and coaching

... and also by the fact that Wooster is a member of the NCAC.

I'm not taking anything away from Wooster or from Steve Moore and his staff. The program's recent postseason success, and the fact that the Scots more than hold their own against perennially tough competition in non-conference play, indicate that Wooster is deservedly considered among the elite programs in D3. However, if you're talking about overall winning percentages, you can't evade the fact that the Scots play in a conference that's notorious for being loaded with bowsers ... and I'm not just speaking of the Hiram Terriers. ;)

Just look at how the non-Woo/Witt portion of the NCAC has performed overall and in non-conference play over the past five seasons:

team	overall	non-conference
Allegheny	58-71 (.450)	21-27 (.438)
Denison	44-83 (.346)	12-35 (.255)
Earlham	55-77 (.417)	17-35 (.327)
Hiram	26-101 (.205)	8-39 (.170)
Kenyon	34-95 (.264)	11-39 (.220)
Oberlin	20-114 (.149)	7-37 (.159)
Ohio Wesleyan	79-55 (.590)	29-25 (.537)
Wabash	69-64 (.519)	24-29 (.453)
TOTALS	385-660 (.368)	129-266 (.327)

Out of the forty campaigns racked up by those eight programs since the 2002-03 season, inclusive, only five times has a non-Woo/Witt NCAC team registered a winning non-conference record: Ohio Wesleyan in 2003-04 (7-4), 2005-06 (6-5), and 2006-07 (8-4), and Wabash in 2002-03 (7-3) and 2005-06 (6-4). Allegheny and Earlham each had a .500 non-conference season as well (Allegheny went 6-6 in 2002-03, while Earlham went 5-5 that same season).

That's a lot of bad basketball teams upon which your Scots got to feast twice a year, WSF.

Just last week you touted in the NCAC room that only three times over the past decade has Wooster lost an NCAC game to a team other than Wittenberg. What you might not have realized is that that's a factoid that cuts both ways: It makes Wooster look great, sure, but it also plays up the shortcomings of your conference as a whole.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 31, 2007, 03:38:19 AM

Quote from: sac on October 31, 2007, 12:39:24 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on October 30, 2007, 11:09:28 PM
While figuring IWU's record over the last 25 years, I also totalled the NCAA tournament record. The Titans are...

39-18 (.684)
18 appearances (24 years in D3)

IWU's tournament winning % seems very good. I'm wondering what some of the great tournament records are. UW-Platteville and UW-Stevens Point must have crazy numbers.

I thought Sager was keeping track of those.

I am. I have the numbers at home, and I'll post them here tomorrow. I can tell you off of the top of my head that the tournament winning percentage leaders currently are: 1) Ohio Wesleyan; 2) UW-Platteville; 3) NPU; 4) Oneonta State; and 5) UW-Stevens Point. I'll post the top ten, as well as the top ten that have at least ten wins (to weed out the one-timers such as Ohio Wesleyan and Oneonta State).

Quote from: sac on October 31, 2007, 12:39:24 AMThose numbers are difficut to make out of since prior to 1988 you could lose a game and still play another. For example in 1987 both Hope and Calvin lost in round one, but played each other in a consolation game in the Regional the next night.

They're not difficult to make out at all. Regional third-place games are listed in this site's playoff section as well. They were official tournament games, and they count towards a program's overall tournament W-L record, as does the national third-place game that is still played in Salem every year.

Quote from: sac on October 31, 2007, 12:39:24 AMHere's the MIAA's 4 reps.

Albion 7-4 (.636)    4 appearances
Defiance 0-1    1 appearance as MIAA member
Calvin 30-18.......(.625)   17 appearances
Hope 22-20    (.524)   18 appearances

You forgot Kalamazoo. In 1996 the Hornets made the D3 tourney field, only to get bumped off in the first round by your Dutch, 65-62.

Quote from: sac on October 31, 2007, 12:39:24 AMAfter years of struggling to advance I bet Woosters records are looking pretty good now too.

Wooster's in the same boat as Hope, which is to say that after many years of early exits and essentially treading water around .500 the Scots are now starting to inch their way up the all-time winning percentage standings ... but they still have a way to go just to get up to the .600 level.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on October 31, 2007, 10:18:16 AM

Folks, this discussion of "who has the best record since XXX" (accompanied by Greg's annual bashing of the NCAC ;)) is fascinating, but I think this is not the best place to have it. We have a preseason Top 25 coming out in the very near future which will merit a lot of discussion. In the meantime, we have a room assigned to discuss "Schools' all-time Division III record," (http://www.d3sports.com/post/index.php?topic=4297.0) and I think it would be wise to continue this conversation in that room so that it doesn't get lost in discussion of the new poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on October 31, 2007, 09:25:17 PM

david -

Thanks!

i had just sighed and wondered when this was ever going to end.

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 01, 2007, 02:17:12 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on October 31, 2007, 10:18:16 AM
Folks, this discussion of "who has the best record since XXX" (accompanied by Greg's annual bashing of the NCAC ;))

But ... but ... but ... this year I did a chart! :D

Quote from: David Collinge on October 31, 2007, 10:18:16 AMbut I think this is not the best place to have it.

Amen!

I will post the all-time tournament winning % lists in the "Schools' all-time Division III record" room.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on November 01, 2007, 10:44:18 AM

So there has been much speculation, discussion, and even an official (non d3 hoops poll) stating that Amherst is not the number 1 team in the country, most replacing them with Wash U. I saw both teams play last year, and both return large numbers of starters and reserves. However, although i do not attend either school, if I were a member of the lord Jeffs squad I might take this as a bit of an insult. THEY are the national champs, and while I understand that Wash U has one heck of a squad, until Amherst faulters, they should be the number 1 team in the country, thats just usually how it works, and should work.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on November 01, 2007, 03:20:25 PM

Poll's out. It's official. They are not the #1 team in the country anymore. Wash U has a lot more coming back than Amherst does. The national championship gets you The Walnut and Bronze, but not a pre-season #1.

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 01, 2007, 03:40:47 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 29, 2007, 08:15:44 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 29, 2007, 07:53:55 PM
Q, thanks for your ballot (I challenge more voters to do the same - it would be fascinating)!

I have no real quibbles, but my guess is you have Wooster too low at 18. You may well be right about how much they will miss Tom Port, but my gut says James Cooper will carry them quickly into the top 10 (and may even challenge for national POY, though Ben Strong, barring injury or other misfortune, may have a lock on that).

But I know that the Scots are certainly NOT a team any Titan is likely to overlook, so if they earn it I'm sure you'll grant it! ;)

Chuck, Wooster didn't just lose Tom Port...they also lost Tim Vandervaart and Andy Van Horn. I believe Wooster fans would tell us that the Scots really lost a lot to graduation. And not just in on-the-court production -- they also lost some solid leaders.

I think #18 is a nice safe place to start Wooster. Cooper is certainly a superstar, but I want to see the rest of the cast perform before I starting moving the Scots up. I am not sure there is a Division III player better than Wheaton's Kent Raymond, and the Thunder aren't on my ballot at all because I have big questions about his supporting cast. Cooper seems to be surrounded by good talent, but again, I want to see it click first.

It was strange to not have Wittenberg in a ballot. Usually Wooster and Wittenberg end up right next to each other on my ballot...just a matter if 1/2, 9/10, or 13/14.

Bob, you had me convinced - and then the rest of the voters go and install Woo at #8! ::)

Preseason polls are fun, but that's why I don't take much seriously until (at least) January!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 01, 2007, 04:03:56 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 01, 2007, 03:40:47 PMBob, you had me convinced - and then the rest of the voters go and install Woo at #8!

Well we can't have Wooster start lower; then they might drop out of the Top 25 and we can't have that!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 01, 2007, 04:35:54 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 01, 2007, 04:03:56 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 01, 2007, 03:40:47 PMBob, you had me convinced - and then the rest of the voters go and install Woo at #8!

Well we can't have Wooster start lower; then they might drop out of the Top 25 and we can't have that!

Top 25? Heck, Wooster hasn't even been out of the top 10 since Week 8 of the 2003-04 season. This is the 54th straight top 10 week for the Scots, which is (needless to say) a poll record.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 01, 2007, 07:07:47 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on November 01, 2007, 04:35:54 PM

Top 25? Heck, Wooster hasn't even been out of the top 10 since Week 8 of the 2003-04 season. This is the 54th straight top 10 week for the Scots, which is (needless to say) a poll record.

......and a very impressive one, pre-season poll or not.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: old_hooper on November 01, 2007, 07:19:38 PM

Amherst is loaded. They will be bigger and faster then last year. They lost 4 players off of last years team, 3 that were starters but most people that are familar with the Herst know that their big man 6'10 Hopkins (Sr this year) was the key post player on the team last year. This year he will have his opportunity to shine. The other players (last yr Sr) Wheeler was the leading scorer but will be replaced with someone who is 3" bigger and probably 25 or 30 pounds bigger in Goldsmith, 6'3 McLaughlin was the stable defensive player for them last year and then Salerno who surprised everyone with his ability to come in off the bench as defensive stopper. Goldsmith would have been a starter last year but broke his leg and spent the year recovering from the injury. Coulibaly is 6'5 and the likely player to replace McLaughlin in the lineup and is very athletic player that was starting last year and when he had the family tragedy with only 10 games into the season, Amherst new star (Baskauskas Jr.) proved he was too good to keep out of the line-up. With Goldsmith and Coulibaly who were or would have started last year it does not look like there will be a big drop off in talent for the Jeffs. Not to mention they have 6'8 Walters who could start and the 6'7 Jones that will also get significant minutes this year to backup Hopkins. Look for Wheeler's little bro to be a big contributor this year too, he is 6'5 or 6'6 and has range. If Wash U and Amherst have years that most think they will it could be the match up of the year in Salem.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on November 01, 2007, 07:30:47 PM

Quote from: old_hooper on November 01, 2007, 07:19:38 PM
If Wash U and Amherst have years that most think they will it could be the match up of the year in Salem.

Oh, man. I thought for sure the matchup of the year was Green Mountain / Maine - Presque Isle in December. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: formerD3er on November 01, 2007, 11:33:07 PM

Well WU sweeps all the preseason polls (at least the four I've seen). And if I may say so, it means someone had to see something big in them if a NESCAC school is the defending champ, bringing pack the POY and overtaken by a Midwestern school who has never won the whole thing.

They certainly do seem to have all the pieces. Everyone knows about All-Americans Ruths and Wallace, but Nading might be their MVP. I will go on record as saying he is the BEST DEFENDER IN DIII, as well as a go-to guy on offense. Solid bench, great shooters - but they won't be overlooked to start this year like last.

Not many teams who start at number one end up there, but I know I'll be routing for the Bears to do it. Potentially an unbelievable championship matchup in WU v Amherst. I'd say we have two classes to start this year: Wash U/Amherst - and everybody else. Not to say someone else couldn't win it, but they will be the heavy favorites and garner all the attention to start the year.

Good luck to both teams (but especially the Bears! ;))

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 02, 2007, 12:35:04 AM

Wow, are people getting ahead of themselves with the Wash U/Amherst title match! ;D

Just ask undefeated #1 Lawrence (2006) or #1 Stevens Point (2007) how hard it is to even reach Salem. And those were end-of-regular-season #1s, not pre-season - if you're feeling daring, you might even ask last year's pre-season #2 (UW-Oshkosh) how their season went. :P

I know the temptation of anticipation (veterans will recall my slowly-rising odds of IWU running the table in 2005-06 - they didn't even win the CCIW, though at least they did bounce back and reach Salem); by February Wash U/Amherst may (or may not) even be the game we are hoping to see in the Finals.

Nonetheless, carry on! I plan to speculate too! ;) [It helps to pass the winter - but, jeez, with the temps we had in October, it's barely fall yet!]

(Modified to correct the years.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 02, 2007, 05:12:29 AM

Quote from: sac on November 01, 2007, 07:07:47 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on November 01, 2007, 04:35:54 PM

Top 25? Heck, Wooster hasn't even been out of the top 10 since Week 8 of the 2003-04 season. This is the 54th straight top 10 week for the Scots, which is (needless to say) a poll record.

......and a very impressive one, pre-season poll or not.

I agree. And yet it just doesn't seem quite right to measure poll appearance streaks in this manner, since by their very nature they put equal weight upon end-of-season polls (for which the pollsters have plenty of performance data upon which to place their rankings) and preseason polls (for which they have absolutely none). The Others Receving Votes category in particular seems to be the repository of a lot of stab-in-the-dark guesses in this year's preseason poll (as it often is). See my commentary about Chicago (whom I saw scrimmage this evening) in CCIW Chat for more details.

I recognize the utility of a preseason poll; also, while I dislike them, I can understand why Pat has early-season polls as well. However, they simply don't have the same value as late-season polls, and as Chuck points out they really shouldn't be taken as seriously.

I think that if you really wanted to chart streaks that have substantive value, you'd make the categories, "Most consecutive weeks receiving votes in January/February/March polls", "Most consecutive weeks receiving Top 10 rankings in January/February/March polls", etc. Then again, I don't want to presume upon David's gracious efforts by forcing him to create an entirely new database. :D

Quote from: ILive4This on November 01, 2007, 10:44:18 AMTHEY are the national champs, and while I understand that Wash U has one heck of a squad, until Amherst faulters, they should be the number 1 team in the country, thats just usually how it works, and should work.

That's not the methodology behind the d3hoops.com poll, IL4T. It's not a performance-based poll. It's a strength-based poll. In other words, the pollsters are not voting strictly upon wins and losses per se; their rankings are based upon what they perceive to actually be the best teams in the country. If it were a performance-based poll, then, yes, Amherst would by default begin the year at #1. However, a performance-based poll would mean that a comparatively mediocre team that mops up in a subpar league should be ranked ahead of a better team that doesn't do quite as well in terms of wins and losses because it's in a better league.

If you want a performance-based poll, here it is:

http://web1.ncaa.org/stats/StatsSrv/rankings

That's not what this website's poll is all about.

Quote from: formerD3er on November 01, 2007, 11:33:07 PMEveryone knows about All-Americans Ruths and Wallace, but Nading might be their MVP. I will go on record as saying he is the BEST DEFENDER IN DIII

And I will go on record as saying that I'D LIKE TO SEE YOU PROVE THAT. :D

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 02, 2007, 12:35:04 AM
Wow, are people getting ahead of themselves with the Wash U/Amherst title match! ;D

You can tell that this room has definitely veered off into the Twilight Zone when Chuck is the one who is trying to rein in others from getting carried away with overspeculating. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on November 02, 2007, 07:38:45 AM

The others receiving votes; AKA the Usual Suspects. It seems every year many of the same teams are receiving some votes but not enough to break into the top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on November 02, 2007, 10:22:26 AM

Quote from: formerD3er on November 01, 2007, 11:33:07 PM
Everyone knows about All-Americans Ruths and Wallace, but Nading might be their MVP. I will go on record as saying he is the BEST DEFENDER IN DIII, as well as a go-to guy on offense.

Would that be the same Nadig that Cramer dropped 25 on in the elite eight last year? ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gccfan on November 02, 2007, 08:57:12 PM

Any thoughts on teams that are too high or too low? Just from my perspective, Mary Hardin-Baylor is probably a bit high at 14. There stud point guard (Guyden) graduated and while the rest of their squad was very solid, he was the difference maker in a lot of games. I'll get a chance to see them early though as they play an up and coming LeTourneau squad in Longview on Nov. 24 in a non-conference game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on November 03, 2007, 10:51:33 AM

From a new england perspective, Brandeis is definitely on the low side, bringing everyone back and adding some great recruits ... no way they should rank below Rochester. Amherst and Williams are both about right. I bet if the poll was taken again today, RIC would switch with Keene. Not only did RIC beat a solid Div-I squad in Holy Cross, but they did it with a slew of new players ... three transfers (two from Div-II programs) and a frosh as four of their top eight guys. Once they mesh together, could be scary good. And considering they have no seniors, if this group stays together, RIC could be a legit national contender next year. Keene was supposed to graduate only one key guy, but in fact it appears they also lost their starting center (who is no longer on the roster). It appears that Keene brought in far less talent in the off season than RIC, so RIC should be the pre-season favorite in the little east.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on November 03, 2007, 08:49:19 PM

Quote from: gccfan on November 02, 2007, 08:57:12 PM
Any thoughts on teams that are too high or too low?

Haven't posted on the multi-region topics yet, but I thought I would give a bit a west coast perspective...I was pretty suprised that UPS was ranked 19th, I was worried that they might not even be in the Top 25. Don't get me wrong I will definately take the national respect. I am interested to hear what your guys opinions on UPS (I thnk they are going to have a big bounce back year). Also, what about the NWC in general? Lewis & Clarck is in the poll and Whitworth is "getting votes" is the conference starting to head in the right direction nationally? Thanks for the input

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on November 04, 2007, 03:01:08 PM

Nescac1 brings up a good point, I do not know whether or not Brandeis is too low, I figured them to be 10-15 preseason and move their way up, so this seems accurate. However bases on teams surrounding them, such as the afforementioned yellow jackets of Rochester, I think that perhaps these two UAA squads should be fliped. The Judges split home and home with UR last year, but placed one spot higher in the UAA and ended the season ranked higher nationally. With everyone returning plus the addition of new recruits, and some decently substantial losses for Rochester, it is puzzling why they two are in the order they are versus one another.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FisherDynasty on November 04, 2007, 07:11:00 PM

Who were Rochester's substantial losses? they are bringing everyone back as well and also went as far or further than brandies last year. Wow i can't believe I posted about UofR.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 04, 2007, 09:26:11 PM

Shooting guard Tim Brackney is the only starter lost for U of R.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on November 08, 2007, 02:13:38 AM

I had an opportunity to see Mississippi College play an exhibition tonight at Arkansas-Monticello, a Division II Gulf South Conference member.

MC lost 77-72, but I came away impressed. Particularly considering that Coach Lofton played 16 players and is still experimenting with lineups while UAM looked like they already had their regular season rotation figured out with nine players playing.

Prince Trotter hit 8-8 shots to score 19 points and also grabbed eight rebounds for the Choctaws. Kiki Christmas finished with 15 as eleven players scored. Good early game for MC against a pretty good team. UAM is usually a middle of the pack GSC team. They were down a bit last year after a Sweet Sixteen run in 2006.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 08, 2007, 03:07:41 PM

Quote from: Chris Brooks on November 08, 2007, 02:13:38 AM
Kiki Christmas finished with 15 .........

Looks like the best name in D3 debate will be very short this year. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on November 08, 2007, 09:33:29 PM

Quote from: Chris Brooks on November 08, 2007, 02:13:38 AM
Prince Trotter hit 8-8 shots to score 19 points and also grabbed eight rebounds for the Choctaws. Kiki Christmas finished with 15 as eleven players scored. Good early game for MC against a pretty good team. UAM is usually a middle of the pack GSC team. They were down a bit last year after a Sweet Sixteen run in 2006.

Did you put those through the 'random funny name generator'??? :D ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 08, 2007, 09:43:31 PM

Quote from: Chris Brooks on November 08, 2007, 02:13:38 AM
I had an opportunity to see Mississippi College play an exhibition tonight at Arkansas-Monticello, a Division II Gulf South Conference member.

MC lost 77-72, but I came away impressed. Particularly considering that Coach Lofton played 16 players and is still experimenting with lineups while UAM looked like they already had their regular season rotation figured out with nine players playing.

Prince Trotter hit 8-8 shots to score 19 points and also grabbed eight rebounds for the Choctaws. Kiki Christmas finished with 15 as eleven players scored. Good early game for MC against a pretty good team. UAM is usually a middle of the pack GSC team. They were down a bit last year after a Sweet Sixteen run in 2006.

The name that captures my attention is "Coach Lofton." I have since learned that MC's head coach and AD, Mike Jones, has undergone triple bypass surgery, thankfully successfully, and will be out of action for 4-6 weeks. (See article in Notables (http://www.d3hoops.com/notables.php?item=1836).) My best wishes for a full and speedy recovery to Coach Jones.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on November 08, 2007, 10:45:20 PM

Quote from: smedindy on November 08, 2007, 09:33:29 PM
Quote from: Chris Brooks on November 08, 2007, 02:13:38 AM
Prince Trotter hit 8-8 shots to score 19 points and also grabbed eight rebounds for the Choctaws. Kiki Christmas finished with 15 as eleven players scored. Good early game for MC against a pretty good team. UAM is usually a middle of the pack GSC team. They were down a bit last year after a Sweet Sixteen run in 2006.

Did you put those through the 'random funny name generator'??? :D ;)

I thought that would catch people's attention. I think we will definitely fill two positions on the all-name team this year. Plus, they are both very good players so their names will be thrown around.

Quote from: David Collinge on November 08, 2007, 09:43:31 PM
The name that captures my attention is "Coach Lofton." I have since learned that MC's head coach and AD, Mike Jones, has undergone triple bypass surgery, thankfully successfully, and will be out of action for 4-6 weeks. (See article in Notables (http://www.d3hoops.com/notables.php?item=1836).) My best wishes for a full and speedy recovery to Coach Jones.

Thanks David. His doctors said everything looked great and he is expected to make a full recovery. We have a rare circumstance where we are fortunate to have two coaches on the staff with experience running the team. It will come in handy this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on November 08, 2007, 11:00:00 PM

Mary Hardin-Baylor had an exhibition game at UT San Antonio last Saturday night and lost 76-58. Looking at the boxscore, UMHB played very well with Ryan Burgart scoring 18 points with nine rebounds. UTSA is a DI member of the Southland Conference and returns four starters from last year's 7-22 team.

Here's the game story
http://www.goutsa.com/ViewArticle.dbml?SPSID=55680&SPID=5988&DB_OEM_ID=13100&ATCLID=1301742 (http://www.goutsa.com/ViewArticle.dbml?SPSID=55680&SPID=5988&DB_OEM_ID=13100&ATCLID=1301742)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 09, 2007, 03:24:09 AM

Quote from: sac on November 08, 2007, 03:07:41 PM
Quote from: Chris Brooks on November 08, 2007, 02:13:38 AM
Kiki Christmas finished with 15 .........

Looks like the best name in D3 debate will be very short this year. :D

Great minds think alike! I said the same thing about Kiki Christmas in the ASC room last nght.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 16, 2007, 08:33:43 PM

Looks like WashU did alright in their first game as #1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on November 16, 2007, 10:11:06 PM

Final: #8 Wooster 106 Farmingdale State 81

Wooster was led by All-American James Cooper with 19 points, Marty Bidwell with 19 points, Brandon Johnson with 18 points, freshman Bryan Wicklliffe with 11 points, Devin Fulk with 10 points and Evan Will also with 10 points.

Wooster shot 50% from the floor tonight, made 14 three pointers and outrebounded Farmingdale 49 to 29. :)

Wooster will face St. Thomas (MN) tomorrow night in the Championship game of the Al Van Wie Tourney.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on November 17, 2007, 09:40:50 PM

Final: #8 Wooster 85 St. Thomas 79

Wooster was led by All-American James Cooper with 20 points, Marty Bidwell with 19 points, Devin Fulk with 19 points and Brandon Johnson with 12 points. Scots win the championship game of the Al Van Wie Tourney. :)

Leading St. Thomas in scoring was Joe Scott with 15 points, Lonnie Robinson with 15 points, David Baker with 14 pts and BJ Viau with 11 pts.

Wooster shot 55% from the floor and outrebounded the Tommies 30 to 25 to get the victory.

Wooster is now 2-0. Scots next play at Lake Erie on 11/25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on November 17, 2007, 10:51:50 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 16, 2007, 08:33:43 PM

Looks like WashU did alright in their first game as #1.

Yeah but the #1 was short lived as they lose to Calvin today 87-82

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 18, 2007, 11:29:09 AM

HOW THEY FARED...

#1 Washington U. (1-1) def. Ohio Northern 74-58 at Calvin and lost at #17 Calvin 87-82
#2 Amherst (2-0) def. Hunter 103-79 and def. So. Vermont 99-54
#3 UW-Stevens Point (1-0) def. Carroll 105-72
#4 Guilford (1-0) def. Villa Julie 87-52
#5 Augustana (0-0) was idle
#6 Virginia Wesleyan (2-0) def. Newport News Apprentice 74-70 and def. N.C. Wesleyan 83-60
#7 Brockport St. (0-1) lost to Rowan 97-93 at Lebanon Valley
#8 Wooster (2-0) def. Farmington St. 106-81 and def. St. Thomas 85-79
#9 Rochester (2-0) def. New Paltz St. 73-43 and def. Oneonta St. 72-53
#10 Capital (1-1) def. Illinois Coll. 76-53 at Mt. St. Joseph and lost at Mt. St. Joseph 94-80
#11 Hope (0-0) was idle
#12 Brandeis (2-0) def. Kenyon 70-61 and def. Bridgewater St. 84-79
#13 Aurora (1-1) lost at Wartburg 63-54 and def. UW-Eau Claire 63-54 at Wartburg
#14 Mary Hardin-Baylor (0-0) was idle
#15 Williams (2-0) def. Ursinus 88-73 at Drew and won at Drew 74-58
#16 Plattsburgh St. (2-0) def. Greensboro 92-59 at Old Westbury and won at Old Westbury 77-65
#17 Calvin (2-0) def. Grace Bible 92-65 and def. #1 Washington U. 87-82
#18 Elmhurst (1-0) def. Simpson 85-71
#19 Puget Sound (2-0) def. Corban Coll. 124-95 and def. La Verne 106-61
#20 Baldwin-Wallace (1-1) def. Fredonia St. 94-76 at Penn St.-Behrend and lost at Penn St.-Behrend 73-68
#21 Lewis and Clark (1-1) def. Northwest 75-67 and lost at the University of the the Pacific 92-47
#22 Keene St. (2-0) def. Lesley 106-70 and def. Lasell 83-73
#23 Mississippi Coll. (1-0) def. Pensacola Christian 83-57
#24 Stevens (2-0) def. Skidmore 72-55 and def. Middlebury 73-63
#25 UW-Whitewater (2-0) def. Eureka 79-45 and def. MSOE 87-56

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on November 21, 2007, 12:21:55 PM

Will the new poll come out next tuesday, after more games have played? If so, where does Wash U drop to? Does Amherst move into the #1 spot that some say should have been theirs all along. How high does Calvin climb? Top 15? Top 10?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 21, 2007, 01:15:03 PM

How far up Calvin goes up, will depend on what happens this weekend when they could face Hope #11 in a weekend tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 21, 2007, 11:06:06 PM

Quote from: sac on November 21, 2007, 01:15:03 PM
How far up Calvin goes up, will depend on what happens this weekend when they could face Hope #11 in a weekend tournament.

Are Calvin and Hope playing best 3 out of 5 this year? :D ;D ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dark Knight on November 22, 2007, 06:41:29 AM

Quote from: ILive4This on November 21, 2007, 12:21:55 PM
Will the new poll come out next tuesday, after more games have played? If so, where does Wash U drop to?

I don't think Wash U needs to drop much based on that game. They were at Calvin, a quality team with low-post presence to match Ruths. Calvin has been focusing on this game for months. And Wash U had just come off a tiring win against a physical ONU team the night before; Calvin had an easier game against Grace Bible.

Of course, the upcoming game against Augie will add lots of information.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gccfan on November 24, 2007, 04:45:40 PM

Looks like there is an upset brewing in Longview, TX... LeTourneau is up 37-22 at the half against Mary hardin-Baylor. LETU quickness forced 14 first half turnovers. UMHB is missing Neiman Ford, a starter from last year. He's on the roster, but evidently didn't make the trip.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 24, 2007, 05:23:49 PM

From the CCIW page... it looks like #5 Augie beat #1 Wash U @ Wash U 66-62 RECAP (http://www.d3hoops.com/releases.php?release=jatjw3qpxc9ajvgd)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on November 24, 2007, 09:07:03 PM

Wash U did lose, but the score was actually 66-60. Two early tough loses for the Bears, and now one of their top players is out for the season it looks like.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 25, 2007, 07:39:50 PM

HOW THEY FARED (week of Nov. 19-25)

#   1   Washington U. (3-2) won at Maryville (MO) 85-59, lost to #5 Augustana 66-60 at Webster, and def. UW-Platteville 87-76 at Webster
#   2   Amherst (2-0) is idle
#   3   UW-Stevens Point (3-0) def. Northern Michigan 77-52 and def. Lakeland 76-38
#   4   Guilford (1-0) is idle
#   5   Augustana (3-0) def. Simpson 80-65, def. #1 Wash. U. 66-60 at Webster, and won at Webster 84-65
#   6   Virginia Wesleyan (3-0) won at Christopher Newport 88-79
#   7   Brockport St. (1-1) is idle
#   8   Wooster (2-1) lost at Lake Erie 86-84
#   9   Rochester (5-0) won at Nazareth 68-51, def. Cortland St. 72-50, and def. Ohio Wesleyan 76-69
#   10   Capital (4-1) won at Wittenberg 79-75, def. Denison 71-53, and won at Kenyon 95-85 (OT)
#   11   Hope (1-1) lost to Aquinas (MI) 78-69 (OT) and def. Cornerstone (MI) 87-68, both at Cornerstone
#   12   Brandeis (4-0) won at Suffolk 89-59 and won at Tufts 89-87
#   13   Aurora (1-2) lost to North Central (IL) 78-70
#   14   Mary Hardin-Baylor (1-0) won at LeTourneau 69-64
#   15   Williams (4-0) won at Wesleyan 61-51 and won at RPI 75-65
#   16   Plattsburgh St. (2-0) is idle
#   17   Calvin (3-1) won at Cornerstone (MI) 82-77 and lost to Aquinas (MI) 90-88 (2OT) at Cornerstone
#   18   Elmhurst (3-0) def. MacMurray 74-51 and def. Eureka 64-51
#   19   Puget Sound (5-0) won at Northwest (WA) 97-82, def. Bemidji St. 91-68 at UW-Stout, and won at UW-Stout 85-70
#   20   Baldwin-Wallace (1-3) lost to Ohio Wesleyan 98-68 and lost to Cortland St. 87-84, both games at Rochester
#   21   Lewis & Clark (2-1) won at Corban Coll. 77-70
#   22   Keene St. (3-0) won at Western New England Coll. 90-71
#   23   Mississippi College (1-0) is idle
#   24   Stevens (3-0) def. FDU-Florham 82-48
#   25   UW-Whitewater (3-0) won at Carroll 70-51

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 25, 2007, 11:33:48 PM

That Wooster loss is a bit of a surprise!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on November 26, 2007, 01:01:03 AM

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on November 25, 2007, 11:33:48 PM
That Wooster loss is a bit of a surprise!

I'll say! That officially puts me out of the survivor pool... :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on November 28, 2007, 08:19:31 PM

If Wash U plays Babson it will be intersting to see how their game now sans Wallis compares to the Brandeis game from last night. Not always a great indicator, but could be helpful to see how the "new" Bears compare to the rest of the UAA

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 28, 2007, 11:46:40 PM

1 day old poll, already 2 losses in the top 4.

Puget Sound has the right idea.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on November 29, 2007, 12:31:27 AM

Nothing wrong with being idle...just ask Ohio State football!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 29, 2007, 11:11:58 AM

Greensboro knocked off crosstown rival Guilford. Front page (http://www.d3hoops.com/)

Those rivalry games are big!

Guilford now must re-focus, but we South Region teams appreciate the extra in-region loss on Guilford's record!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on November 29, 2007, 12:36:32 PM

as far as the voting goes is there any difference in the voters eyes if a team loses to a D1 as opposed to a D2? Lewis and Clark (lost to D1 Pacific and won their other 2 games against D3 comp) dropped 4 slots in the polls

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ChicagoHopeNut on November 30, 2007, 07:35:27 PM

#22 Wheaton 53
#16 Hope 83
Final

It really wasn't that close even. Wheaton had 21 first half turnovers and 33 overall that kept them from having any chance in the game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 01, 2007, 06:38:17 PM

Miss College lost to UMHB at UMHB 90-81 today. UMHB had control of this game entirely. UMHB is in the driver's seat at least until McMurry in late January. UMHB plays at (beatable) D-2 University of Incarnate Word (D-2 in San Antonio) on Dec 12th.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on December 01, 2007, 08:39:33 PM

I put this post on the ASC board about the MC-UMHB game so I thought I would drag it over here.

Ralph, thanks for putting up the score. I told you this was going to be a tough trip playing at tough venues and with so many new players having played just one game. I was actually encouraged we made it a game having shot the ball so poorly. We were #2 nationally in FG % defense last year, so letting UMHB shoot 56% doesn't make me feel good, but I think we can fix that.

QuoteJust a few notes from the MC-UMHB game. Biggest early season game I can remember in the league in quite a while with UMHB ranked #9 and MC #23.

Long night for MC shooting as they just couldn't buy a shot and UMHB shot over 50 percent both halves. MC trailed 41-24 at the half after hitting 10-36 shots (27%). MC got back in the game and trailed 69-64 with four minutes remaining, but still shot bad in the second half and hit 28-83 for the game (33%). UMHB was 29-52 from the field (56%).

The Cru were 27-37 from the foul line, MC was 17-24. UMHB sealed the game with 12-13 free throws in the final 3:30. MC outrebounded UMHB 49-40 with 28 offensive boards and actually only had 13 turnovers to 17 for UMHB, but just couldn't score.

Tyler Winford had 20 points and 14 rebounds for the Choctaws. UMHB was led by Tillman Gaddy (23) and Tim Lytle (21). Several new players played well for UMHB, they have another very good team.

I thought MC would have a hard time this week having played just one game entering this week and playing in two tough venues, particularly at UMHB where everyone has trouble. MC actually suffered their only regular season loss two years ago at UMHB when they went 29-2 so losing there is nothing to be ashamed of, especially considering this could be the best team they have had.

I'm really excited about the ASC this year with a some good nonconference wins already. MC has very good players again but with 9 new players in the 12 man rotation, it might be after Christmas when they start to play well together. UMHB is getting a lot of national attention and LeTourneu looks like they picked up where they left off. McMurry, UTD, and Sul Ross also have good teams so far. I wouldn't be surprised if Concordia surprises some people this year, very good athletes on that team.

MC has one game next week, Wesley College, and then hosts McMurry and HSU the next week.

Clarification for those unfamiliar with colleges in Mississippi...

The Wesley College to which Chris refers is the same Wesley College (Mississippi) that upset Miss College in OT in the early season in 2006-07. -- Ralph Turner

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 01, 2007, 11:54:35 PM

Wow! With #2-5 all taking a loss, suppose Amherst will be unanimous #1? And might the UAA get 3 in the top 5?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: atn alum on December 02, 2007, 12:52:32 AM

2 thru 5 losing....oy vey, starting to look like d1 football

As a voter, I'm prob not gonna punish UWSP too much for a close loss at another ranked wiac. Certainly will keep them top 5, but as for who the heck my other 3 within top 5 are gonna be...it's anyone's guess.

And by the way: Amherst-Brandeis next saturday in potential #1 vs # something good matchup.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 02, 2007, 10:37:21 AM

As for Guilford losing... that too was on the road against a very good Greensboro team (despite their battle Friday against Goucher). I don't think Guilford should be punished too harshly - Strong did have 29 points in that game.

As for Virginia Wesleyan, though... I think their loss to a good Roanoke team maybe hurts more and reveals they are not as good a team as many thought.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 02, 2007, 11:48:38 AM

Speaking from a Midwest/"near West" perspective (excluding SCIAC/NWC)...

Coming into the season, I was 100% sold on Wash U being the best team in this part of the country by far. With their 3 All-American candidates at different positions - 6-3 point-guard Sean Wallis, 6-7 wing Tyler Nading, and 6-6 center Troy Ruths - and impressive depth, I viewed them as clearly the best team in the region and as the national preseason #1.

The injury to Wallis has really shaken things up though. Now I think we have a number of pretty even teams and no single clear dominant team. My D3Hoops.com Top 25 ballot tomorrow will probably include the following teams, in this order:

UW-Stevens Point (WIAC) - I had Stevens Point #7 on my preseason ballot and #4 last week. Losing on the road in a close game to the team picked #2 in the WIAC isn't much of a negative for me at all. That game does, however, make me think the Pointers are not a #1/#2 caliber team yet though. I think this is a very good team, but not as complete as the 2004, 2005 national championship Pointers - this team doesn't seem to have that inside horse. I'll probably have them near #5 and watch them closely.

UW-Whitewater (WIAC) - the Warhawks have been on my radar...#19 in the preseason and #17 last week. This has been a hard team to read the last few years, as Whitewater has disappointed with a lot of talent. Their home win over Stevens Point yesterday is a sign that they're legit in 2007-08. I'll probably move them up to the #10 range.

Augustana (CCIW) - I had Augie #11 in my preseason ballot (where I felt good about them) and then due to upsets at the top of the poll in Weeks 1-2, I uncomfortably moved the Vikings up to #7 last week. I felt I was putting them too high, but this is where they fell for me relative to the teams around them. Augustana is a solid team that plays tremendous defense, but I believe they're closer to #10 than #5. Their home loss to UW-La Crosse this week, like their 1st Round NCAA tournament loss to Carroll at home last year, shows how vulnerable they can be. Again, I'm probably looking at them near #10. They're clearly the CCIW favorite right now, but I don't think the CCIW has a real national championship contender this year.

Wash U (UAA) - I dropped the Bears to #8 in the last ballot and am trying to evaluate them post-Wallis injury. This is still a very talented team -- Ruths and Nading are a ton and they have several other very good players as well. The problem, however, is that Wallis really made this team tick. They're now starting two pure 2-guards (Aaron Thompson, Danny O'Boyle) and that is always a concern for me...and a 2-pt win over Babson indicates they're clearly not the team they were. When evaluating Augusutana vs Wash U, keep in mind that Augie beat the Bears by 6 on a neutral court on Nov. 24 (with Wallis out). I will not rank Wash U ahead of Augustana at this point, so will keep them about one spot below the Vikes on my ballot.

Elmhurst (CCIW) - I moved the Bluejays up from #13 preseason to #12 last week I and feel pretty good about them somewhere in this range, despite their 2-pt loss @ UW-Oshkosh this week. Elmhurst has one of the best inside/outside combos in the country in 6-9 Brent Ruch and 6-4 Ryan Burks but they're struggling with guard play right now. Actually, Elmhurst looks a lot like Wash U right now -- great center and great wing with some solid role players, but no true point-guard. I'll keep them near #15 for now on the strength of Ruch and Burks. If they don't sort out the ball-handling problems soon though, I'll drop them.

St. Thomas (MIAC) - the Tommies are now 5-1 with wins @ NCAA DII #1 Winona St and @ UW-La Crosse (the team that won at Augustana). Their only loss is at Wooster, by six. St. Thomas was picked 3rd in the MIAC preseason poll behind Bethel and Gustavus Adolphus but appears poised to contend for the title. I had the Tommies #23 last week and may move them up to about #19.

Wheaton (CCIW) - I had the Thunder #20 last week after not including them in my preseason ballot. This week they won by 2 at home Wednesday over a Chicago team playing without its best player...then got their doors blown off Friday by Hope on a neutral court in a game they played without their 6-8 star center Andy Wiele...and then defeated #15 Calvin at Calvin the next day with Wiele returning and grabbing 17 rebounds. The Thunder have possibly the best perimeter player in Division III (Kent Raymond), 6-8 Wiele who has become a force, and 2-guard Ben Panner, who was 7-7 from 3 at Calvin...but very little depth after that. Wheaton is probably right where they should be at #22 and could go either way - need to keep an eye on them.

For now, these are the teams from the Midwest and West (excluding the NWC and SLIAC) that I view as Top 25 teams. I had Aurora #25 last week, but after seeing them Wednesday @ Millikin I'm confident they're not a Top 25 team right now (they have 2 key players out). I'm keeping a close eye on several teams, like Grinnell, Lawrence, and Hanover.

We will discuss tonight on Hoopsville.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 02, 2007, 01:44:15 PM

Great post TQ. I agree with lots of what you said there.

One of the tough things so early on in the season is this: Which teams really DO deserve to be in the top 5-10? With so many teams losing that had sat in these spots, it almost has to be a kind of wait and see about who shuffles to the top.

I had been planning on going to the SP/WW game, but ended up not because of the weather. It will be very interesting to see what happens with the Warhawks this season. I'm not sure that they will be able to shoot as well as they did consistently, but from listening to the broadcast, they seemed to have a much more conventional type game, which allows them to use the added athleticism that they always have versus a more conventional team like Stevens Point.

Perry was huge for the Warhawks, and in a league this year with scant few dominant big men, he just may be able to carry the Warhawks this year. And if the guys around him can take advantage of open shots like they did last night, it could mean trouble for the rest of the WIAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on December 02, 2007, 03:47:20 PM

looks like there should be some moving and shaking in the next poll

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 02, 2007, 06:01:38 PM

HOW THEY FARED (week of Nov. 26-Dec. 2) (complete)

#   1   Amherst (5-0) def. Emmanuel 99-49, def. Westfield St. 98-49 (at Springfield), and def. WNEC 63-51 (at Springfield)
#   2   UW-Stevens Point (3-1) lost at #20 UW-Whitewater 83-77
#   3   Guilford (2-1) lost at Greensboro 71-66 and won at Lynchburg 101-55
#   4   Augustana (4-1) lost to UW-La Crosse 66-64 and won at Coe 58-45
#   5   Virginia Wesleyan (4-1) lost at Roanoke 68-67 and won at Washington & Lee 68-53
#   6   Rochester (6-0) def. Carnegie Mellon 64-50
#   7   Brandeis (6-0) def. Babson 72-57 and won at Framingham St. 63-59
#   8   Washington U. (5-2) def. Earlham 94-64 and def. Babson 68-66
#   9   Mary Hardin-Baylor (3-0) def. Louisiana College 82-59 and def. #23 Mississippi College 90-81
#   10   Williams (6-0) def. Framingham St. 60-56 and def. So. Vermont 87-38
#   11   Plattsburgh St. (4-0) def. St. Lawrence 84-70 and won at Morrisville St. 111-69
#   12   Puget Sound (5-0) is idle
#   13   Elmhurst (3-1) lost at UW-Oshkosh 88-86 (game vs. Alma PPD. until Jan. 6)
#   14   Wooster (2-2) lost at Cedarville 65-61
#   15   Calvin (4-2) def. Carthage 75-63 and lost to #22 Wheaton (IL) 68-67
#   16   Hope (3-1) def. #22 Wheaton (IL) 83-53 (at Calvin) and def. Carthage 85-75 (at Calvin)
#   17   Brockport St. (2-1) def. New Paltz St. 74-59
#   18   Capital (5-1) won at Ohio Wesleyan 70-68
#   19   Keene St. (5-0) def. Colby-Sawyer 76-60 (at RHIT/Concord, NH) and def. Southern Maine 106-83
#   20   UW-Whitewater (4-0) def. #2 UW-Stevens Point 83-77
#   21   Stevens (6-0) won at CCNY 70-57, def. Alfred 78-53, and def. St. John Fisher 80-65
#   22   Wheaton (IL) (5-1) def. Chicago 75-73, lost to #16 Hope 83-53 (at Calvin), and won at #15 Calvin 68-67
#   23   Mississippi College (2-1) won at Concordia-Austin 99-89 and lost at #9 Mary Hardin-Baylor 90-81
#   24   Rhode Island Coll. (4-1) lost at Fitchburg St. 64-62 and def. Mass.-Boston 81-70
#   25   Lewis & Clark (3-1) def. Walla Walla 95-66

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 02, 2007, 08:25:19 PM

Interim version of 'How They Fared'...
None of the current top 25 plays on Monday. Of those on the cusp who may end up in the rankings, St. Thomas has a Monday game, hosting Hamline.

***UPDATE***
St. Thomas 72, Hamline 64

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on December 03, 2007, 08:33:54 PM

Not sure what this new poll will bring but next saturday should pit two top 5 teams against one another, if not a 1 v 3 match up

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 04, 2007, 12:53:04 PM

HOW THEY FARED (week of Dec. 3-9)

#   1   Amherst (5-0) hosts MIT Thu. and plays at #3 Brandeis Sat.
#   2   Rochester (6-0) plays at Hobart Wed.
#   3   Brandeis (6-0) plays at Clark Tue., plays at Mass.-Dartmouth Thu., and hosts #1 Amherst Sat.
#   4   UW-Stevens Point (3-1) plays at UW-La Crosse Wed. and hosts Lawrence Sat.
#   5   Mary Hardin-Baylor (3-0) is idle
#   6   UW-Whitewater (4-0) plays at UW-Oshkosh Wed. and hosts UW-Superior Sat.
#   7   Guilford (2-1) hosts Methodist Wed. and plays at N.C. Wesleyan Sat.
#   8   Williams (6-0) hosts Springfield Sat.
#   9   Virginia Wesleyan (4-1) hosts Newport News Apprentice Sat.
#   10   Augustana (4-1) hosts St. Ambrose Wed. and plays at St. Norbert Sat.
#   11   Hope (3-1) hosts Marygrove Fri. and hosts Aquinas/Trinity Int'l Sat.
#   12   Washington U. (5-2) hosts Illinois Wesleyan Sat.
#   13   Plattsburgh St. (4-0) plays at Clarkson Tue. and hosts Oswego St. Fri.
#   14   Puget Sound (5-0) plays at Warner Pacific TBD* and hosts Cal St.-Stanislaus Sat.
#   15   Capital (5-1) hosts Wilmington Wed. and plays at John Carroll Sat.
#   16   Keene St. (5-0) hosts Tufts Tue. and hosts Rhode Island College Sat.
#   17   Stevens (6-0) hosts Elmira Fri. and hosts Ithaca Sun.
#   18   Calvin (4-2) plays at Aquinas Tue.
#   19   Brockport St. (2-1) hosts Roberts Wesleyan Tue. and plays at Oneonta St. Fri.
#   20   Lewis & Clark (3-1) plays at Portland St. Wed.
#   21   Trinity (CT) (6-0) hosts Springfield Tue. and hosts Rhode Island College Fri.
#   22   St. Thomas (6-1) def. Hamline 72-64, plays at Macalester Wed., and plays at St. Olaf Sat.
#   23   Elmhurst (3-1) is idle
#   24   Wheaton (IL) (5-1) plays at Illinois Tech. Wed. and plays at Wartburg Sat.
#   25   Wooster (2-2) plays at Oberlin Wed. and plays at Ohio Wesleyan Sat.

* Puget Sound's game at Warner Pacific, scheduled for Tue., has been postponed; makeup date TBD

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 04, 2007, 02:29:02 PM

Wow, could Wooster be in danger of dropping from the top 25 next week?

OWU host the Scots on Saturday. Big early matchup for the NCAC race.

#1 v #3 Saturday Amherst and Brandeis

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 04, 2007, 04:20:40 PM

Whitewater tops #2 Point at home and jumps 14 spots. Oshkosh beats #13 Elmhurst and gets 12 points. Wow. Anyway, back to your normal routine. How do you get to the Week 1 Top 25 poll...?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ChicagoHopeNut on December 04, 2007, 04:28:12 PM

UWSP still has a first place vote? ??? They very well may be the best team at the end of the year but I believe the poll is supposed to rank the teams today and when a team loses while other very solid teams are undefeated I find it hard to understand UWSP getting a first place vote.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on December 04, 2007, 04:36:00 PM

Plattsburg State and Puget Sound each drop 2 spots without losing last week. Not sure if they actually lost points or not, interesting poll...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 04, 2007, 04:36:23 PM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on December 04, 2007, 04:20:40 PMHow do you get to the Week 1 Top 25 poll...?

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/08/week1.htm

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 04, 2007, 04:38:34 PM

Quote from: LogShow on December 04, 2007, 04:36:00 PM
Plattsburg State and Puget Sound each drop 2 spots without losing last week. Not sure if they actually lost points or not, interesting poll...

Plattsburgh gained 49 points and Puget Sound 43. They were both lapped by Whitewater (+212) and Hope (+100), plus nobody ahead of them dropped significantly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 04, 2007, 07:01:05 PM

I guess I was just a year behind on the MHB bandwagon. Does that mean I hve my pick of the seats this year?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gccfan on December 04, 2007, 09:51:01 PM

Look for UMHB to keep rolling, One of their best players, Neiman Ford, is ineligible this semester, but will be back with the team in the second semester. They play a DII, Incarnate Word, on the 12th so hopefully they won't get dropped too much if they lose to them

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on December 04, 2007, 10:06:34 PM

Amherst/Brandeis Game to be televised on ESPN as Game of the Week....

okay so no its not, but after the college game day at Williams earlier this year, its possible..

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 04, 2007, 10:09:22 PM

HOW THEY FARED (week of Dec. 3-9)

#   1   Amherst (5-0) hosts MIT Thu. and plays at #3 Brandeis Sat.
#   2   Rochester (6-0) plays at Hobart Wed.
#   3   Brandeis (7-0) won at Clark 82-71, plays at Mass.-Dartmouth Thu., and hosts #1 Amherst Sat.
#   4   UW-Stevens Point (3-1) plays at UW-La Crosse Wed. and hosts Lawrence Sat.
#   5   Mary Hardin-Baylor (3-0) is idle
#   6   UW-Whitewater (4-0) plays at UW-Oshkosh Wed. and hosts UW-Superior Sat.
#   7   Guilford (2-1) hosts Methodist Wed. and plays at N.C. Wesleyan Sat.
#   8   Williams (6-0) hosts Springfield Sat.
#   9   Virginia Wesleyan (4-1) hosts Newport News Apprentice Sat.
#   10   Augustana (4-1) hosts St. Ambrose Wed. and plays at St. Norbert Sat.
#   11   Hope (3-1) hosts Marygrove Fri. and hosts Aquinas/Trinity Int'l Sat.
#   12   Washington U. (5-2) hosts Illinois Wesleyan Sat.
#   13   Plattsburgh St. (5-0) won at Clarkson 77-63 and hosts Oswego St. Fri.
#   14   Puget Sound (5-0) ~~plays at Warner Pacific Tue.~~* and hosts Cal St.-Stanislaus Sat.
#   15   Capital (5-1) hosts Wilmington Wed. and plays at John Carroll Sat.
#   16   Keene St. (5-1) lost to Tufts 81-67 and hosts Rhode Island College Sat.
#   17   Stevens (6-0) hosts Elmira Fri. and hosts Ithaca Sun.
#   18   Calvin (4-3) lost at Aquinas 78-62
#   19   Brockport St. (3-1) def. Roberts Wesleyan 91-77 and plays at Oneonta St. Fri.
#   20   Lewis & Clark (3-1) plays Portland St. Wed. at the Rose Garden in Portland
#   21   Trinity (CT) (6-1) lost to Springfield 62-57 and hosts Rhode Island College Fri.
#   22   St. Thomas (6-1) def. Hamline 72-64, plays at Macalester Wed., and plays at St. Olaf Sat.
#   23   Elmhurst (3-1) is idle
#   24   Wheaton (IL) (5-1) plays at Illinois Tech. Wed. and plays at Wartburg Sat.
#   25   Wooster (2-2) plays at Oberlin Wed. and plays at Ohio Wesleyan Sat.

* Puget Sound's game at Warner Pacific, scheduled for Tue., has been postponed until Mon. 12/10.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on December 05, 2007, 10:14:10 AM

It would be fun to see the front page poll divided up by state like ESPN does. Although maybe not since both schools are in Mass

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dblock on December 05, 2007, 12:37:49 PM

Quote from: ILive4This on December 04, 2007, 10:06:34 PM
Amherst/Brandeis Game to be televised on ESPN as Game of the Week....

okay so no its not, but after the college game day at Williams earlier this year, its possible..

hahahaha that would be so sick

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on December 05, 2007, 01:09:49 PM

Quote from: ILive4This on December 04, 2007, 10:06:34 PM
Amherst/Brandeis Game to be televised on ESPN as Game of the Week....

okay so no its not, but after the college game day at Williams earlier this year, its possible..

I know its not really a basketball topic, but how do you think they managed to gameday there? Very rare for D3 to get that much love from ESPN. Maybe some of the producers are alumi of Williams or Amherst?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 05, 2007, 01:19:49 PM

Quote from: LogShow on December 05, 2007, 01:09:49 PM
Quote from: ILive4This on December 04, 2007, 10:06:34 PM
Amherst/Brandeis Game to be televised on ESPN as Game of the Week....

okay so no its not, but after the college game day at Williams earlier this year, its possible..

I know its not really a basketball topic, but how do you think they managed to gameday there? Very rare for D3 to get that much love from ESPN. Maybe some of the producers are alumi of Williams or Amherst?

I don't doubt that there are a lot of NESCAC alums in good positions at ESPN.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on December 05, 2007, 01:29:22 PM

Interesting that UST finds it's way into the polls this week ranked ahead of the team that gave them their only blemish on the season...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on December 05, 2007, 01:36:23 PM

Quote from: ScotsFan on December 05, 2007, 01:29:22 PM
Interesting that UST finds it's way into the polls this week ranked ahead of the team that gave them their only blemish on the season...

I guess two blemishes are not better than one ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on December 05, 2007, 01:50:33 PM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on December 05, 2007, 01:36:23 PM
Quote from: ScotsFan on December 05, 2007, 01:29:22 PM
Interesting that UST finds it's way into the polls this week ranked ahead of the team that gave them their only blemish on the season...

I guess two blemishes are not better than one ;D

Interesting, maybe, but deserved, too. UST is 6-1, which looks a whole lot better than 2-2 even with the Scots' win over UST.

The Wooster-UST game was a pretty evenly matched game, which Wooster had to fight back to take the lead late. For UST is was a loss on the road to a Top 25 team. Also, the win over Winona State definitely registers in the voters' eyes, even if the NCAA won't ever look at it (just like the Cedarville loss hurts Wooster, not that the NCAA will care).

Besides, the voters still see UST and Wooster as roughly evenly matched - only 26 vote points separate the two in this week's poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 05, 2007, 01:52:07 PM

Quote from: ScotsFan on December 05, 2007, 01:29:22 PM
Interesting that UST finds it's way into the polls this week ranked ahead of the team that gave them their only blemish on the season...

Complete body of work, ScotsFan.

Wooster lost on the road to a good NAIA II team...St. Thomas won on the road vs the then #1-ranked team in NCAA Division II (Winona St).

Wooster lost at Lake Erie...St. Thomas won at UW-La Crosse, a team fresh off a win @ highly-regarded Augustana.

And while head-to-head results are big, that game was @ Wooster and St. Thomas led for most of the game...

http://athletics.wooster.edu/mb/boxes/2007-08/stthomas.php

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 05, 2007, 04:11:32 PM

The whole "I should be ranked above the team I beat" thing is nonsense, especially in the years where a team like Denison beats Wittenberg.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 05, 2007, 04:44:36 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 05, 2007, 04:11:32 PM
The whole "I should be ranked above the team I beat" thing is nonsense, especially in the years where a team like Denison beats Wittenberg.

Are you trying to tell me USC deserved to finish higher in the BCS than Stanford??!! :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on December 05, 2007, 06:36:15 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 05, 2007, 04:44:36 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 05, 2007, 04:11:32 PM
The whole "I should be ranked above the team I beat" thing is nonsense, especially in the years where a team like Denison beats Wittenberg.

Are you trying to tell me USC deserved to finish higher in the BCS than Stanford??!! :o

You're also basing your assumptions on the extremes. I wasn't trying to cause such a stir when I made my point. Just as your extreme examples justify your argument, I would believe there are also circumstances where you really could question why team a is ranked ahead of team b when team b beat team a. Confusing enough??? ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 05, 2007, 07:11:37 PM

Just toyin' with ya, SF. ;)

Of course h-to-h will be a major factor if the teams are otherwise quite close, but 6-1 vs. 2-2 (especially when one of the six is over d2's #1-ranked team) is not my idea of a close call! I still suspect that Woo will eventually rise to the top 15, perhaps even top 10, but right now I'd say even #25 is probably generous.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on December 05, 2007, 08:49:36 PM

Touching on the Game Day question. Amherst/Williams is one of the biggest/oldest rivalries in college sports even though it does not get much press. This is one reason that it was chosen as the game day site, especially since there were not VERY big games in FCS that day. That being said Amherst football has been terrible the last few years so it was expected that they would get run all over by a Williams team which also frankly was not that good this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on December 05, 2007, 08:56:33 PM

Quote from: ILive4This on December 05, 2007, 08:49:36 PM
Touching on the Game Day question. Amherst/Williams is one of the biggest/oldest rivalries in college sports even though it does not get much press. This is one reason that it was chosen as the game day site, especially since there were not VERY big games in FCS that day. That being said Amherst football has been terrible the last few years so it was expected that they would get run all over by a Williams team which also frankly was not that good this year.

Good point. I just remember turning on Gameday and looking at the helmets on the display, I am thinking...who the heck do those helmets belong to!? I am glad that it was on cause an love from ESPN is a good thing, whether its Football, basketball or any sport. Sort of like when the Grinnell basketball game was televised.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on December 05, 2007, 09:58:39 PM

#15 Capital (6-1) solidly defeats Wilmington (6-1) at Capital, 89-68. Box (http://www.capital.edu/16648/)

#25 Wooster (3-2) rolls past hapless Oberlin (0-7) at Oberlin 94-54. Box (http://www.oberlin.edu/athletic/varsity/m_basketball/statistics/2007-2008/obem1205.htm)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on December 06, 2007, 03:29:17 AM

so now that UW-WW lost to Oshkosh are they going to drop 14 spots???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cubs on December 06, 2007, 09:37:56 AM

If UW Oshkosh can win again on Saturday against UW Stout, where do you you think we may see the Titans in the poll next week? I was thinking maybe somewhere in the 12-15 range.....

Title: #7 Guilford gets destroyed
Post by: woolax on December 06, 2007, 10:33:15 AM

Since this was an exhibition it doesnt count officially, however on 12/4 Guilford got handled severly by Prep power Hargrave Military Academy(VA) on thier home court 88-49. While it is likely that all of Hargraves players will be Frosh next year at Division I programs it is still disconserting to see a top D3 program dismantled by a group of PG players. http://www.hargrave.edu/athletics/sport_index.php?category_id=19 (http://www.hargrave.edu/athletics/sport_index.php?category_id=19)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on December 06, 2007, 10:58:44 AM

While i understand your point, it is possible that not only will they be d1 players, but in the case of some PG programs, would be NBAers next year had they not changed the rules. Losing to a team with a starting lineup that includes 2 future NBA players 2-4 years down the road and another 3 top d1 team players I would be okay with that. Take Oak Hill in VA, I would have been content with having Carmello drop 30+ on my team.

Title: Re: #7 Guilford gets destroyed
Post by: Titan Q on December 06, 2007, 11:10:09 AM

Quote from: woolax on December 06, 2007, 10:33:15 AM
Since this was an exhibition it doesnt count officially, however on 12/4 Guilford got handled severly by Prep power Hargrave Military Academy(VA) on thier home court 88-49. While it is likely that all of Hargraves players will be Frosh next year at Division I programs it is still disconserting to see a top D3 program dismantled by a group of PG players. http://www.hargrave.edu/athletics/sport_index.php?category_id=19 (http://www.hargrave.edu/athletics/sport_index.php?category_id=19)

This wasn't Guilford's varsity team, was it??

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 06, 2007, 12:02:56 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 06, 2007, 11:10:09 AM

This wasn't Guilford's varsity team, was it??

No, it was a JV team.

Guilford beat Methodist last night, 74-48 (http://www.d3hoops.com/school/GUIL/mens/2008). :)

Title: Re: #7 Guilford JV gets destroyed
Post by: sludge on December 06, 2007, 12:38:43 PM

Quote from: woolax on December 06, 2007, 10:33:15 AM
Since this was an exhibition it doesnt count officially, however on 12/4 Guilford got handled severly by Prep power Hargrave Military Academy(VA) on thier home court 88-49. While it is likely that all of Hargraves players will be Frosh next year at Division I programs it is still disconserting to see a top D3 program dismantled by a group of PG players. http://www.hargrave.edu/athletics/sport_index.php?category_id=19 (http://www.hargrave.edu/athletics/sport_index.php?category_id=19)

I suggest you Modify your post, and change the name to "Guilford JV got destroyed" so as not to mislead. It is really an off-topic post.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 06, 2007, 02:11:30 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 06, 2007, 12:02:56 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 06, 2007, 11:10:09 AM

This wasn't Guilford's varsity team, was it??
No, it was a JV team.

Guilford beat Methodist last night, 74-48 (http://www.d3hoops.com/school/GUIL/mens/2008). :)

Actually the first game with Hargrave was on Monday, Dec 4, so its still inquestion who exactly played for Guilford.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on December 06, 2007, 02:13:56 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 05, 2007, 10:33:04 PM
# 22 St. Thomas (6-2) def. Hamline 72-64, lost at Macalester 72-70, and plays at St. Olaf Sat.

Apparently UST has an ongoing problem with teams nicknamed the Scots. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 06, 2007, 02:28:09 PM

Quote from: sac on December 06, 2007, 02:11:30 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 06, 2007, 12:02:56 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 06, 2007, 11:10:09 AM

This wasn't Guilford's varsity team, was it??
No, it was a JV team.

Guilford beat Methodist last night, 74-48 (http://www.d3hoops.com/school/GUIL/mens/2008). :)

Actually the first game with Hargrave was on Monday, Dec 4, so its still inquestion who exactly played for Guilford.

With a full 25-game schedule in place though, I think it's safe to assume the Guilford varsity did not go play an unscheduled exhibition game on 12/4 (which would put them over the allowed limit of games).

http://www.d3hoops.com/school/GUIL/mens/2008

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on December 06, 2007, 07:27:59 PM

Quote from: kiltedbryan on December 06, 2007, 02:13:56 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on December 05, 2007, 10:33:04 PM
# 22 St. Thomas (6-2) def. Hamline 72-64, lost at Macalester 72-70, and plays at St. Olaf Sat.

Apparently UST has an ongoing problem with teams nicknamed the Scots. ;)

The Tommies must have an aversion to kilts! Or maybe it's just tartan plaid! Or maybe a bit of both!!! ;D ;)

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heritageofscotland.com%2Fpictures%2Fcategory43072a0a186b4.jpg&hash=8e5907ee51fbd371abcaf2e5b9448e4037d8573f)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 07, 2007, 01:41:30 AM

Quote from: ScotsFan on December 06, 2007, 07:27:59 PM
Quote from: kiltedbryan on December 06, 2007, 02:13:56 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on December 05, 2007, 10:33:04 PM
# 22 St. Thomas (6-2) def. Hamline 72-64, lost at Macalester 72-70, and plays at St. Olaf Sat.

Apparently UST has an ongoing problem with teams nicknamed the Scots. ;)
The Tommies must have an aversion to kilts! Or maybe it's just tartan plaid! Or maybe a bit of both!!! ;D ;)

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heritageofscotland.com%2Fpictures%2Fcategory43072a0a186b4.jpg&hash=8e5907ee51fbd371abcaf2e5b9448e4037d8573f)

If the Tommies were to schedule Alma (0-5), Monmouth (0-5), or MacMurray (1-5), I bet that they'd get their Scotophobia out of their system with a minimum of fuss.

However, I'd avoid Maryville TN (5-0) or Gordon (6-1) if I was UST head coach Steve Fritz.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 07, 2007, 09:45:12 AM

Doesn't anyone want to be ranked? Yeesh. More carnage!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on December 07, 2007, 09:52:54 AM

Quote from: smedindy on December 07, 2007, 09:45:12 AM
Doesn't anyone want to be ranked? Yeesh. More carnage!

It's reminding me of the CFB season?!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on December 07, 2007, 11:04:49 AM

As posted on another thread, one of the Judges leading scorers left the game with a back injury, although I am unsure at what point, judging by his normal minutes and the box score from last nights game I would say he left with roughly 10 minutes to go in regulation but that is simply a guess.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on December 07, 2007, 02:54:41 PM

"Puget Sound's game at Warner Pacific, scheduled for Tue., has been postponed until Mon. 12/10"

the lastest update is that their game against Warner Pac is now indefinately postponed...to bad for the Loggers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 08, 2007, 05:51:43 PM

Brandies beats Amherst 72-62... and the Judges' radio guys are lobbying for #1 from the pollsters... asking for the UMass-Dartmouth game to be basically ignored, since they say the losse was against an undefeated team on the road...

The problem is... Brandies still lost to a team they probably should have beat... not sure if that will garner first-place votes... but it could!

By the way, if Brandies gets #1 votes... then those who vote probably need to consider giving UMass-Dartmouth some love :) - just my opinion :).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: old_hooper on December 08, 2007, 06:11:34 PM

I can understand how the announers from Brandeis feel right now with the big win. But it would be hard to give them the #1 position over Rochester from all the voters and I am not sure that the voters will support that. I think that this win gets them the #2 position had they lost they may have fallen below the top 10. UMass Dartmonth needs to get some love with their win. If DeLuca gets healthy and can get back to last year level, this could be Brandeis year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 08, 2007, 06:47:01 PM

A few other top 25 results, gleaned from various boards:

In the ODAC, Guilford wins, but Va Wes narrowly falls. Hope avenges their only loss with a fairly confortable win over NAIA Aquinas. Woo wins an early NCAC showdown with OWU. WashU, still regrouping after the loss of Sean Wallis, barely edges a VERY young IWU team at home.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 08, 2007, 10:51:49 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 08, 2007, 06:47:01 PMHope avenges their only loss with a fairly confortable win over NAIA Aquinas.

Glad you thought it was comfortable, I saw 3000+ today who would disagree. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 08, 2007, 11:12:26 PM

I think its possible both Amherst and Brandeis may not be in the top 5, although unlikely. We'll see if the voters have the guts to put 7-0 Williams ahead of both.

Hope may(or should) crack the top 10 this week

I'm thinking Capital might be underrated at #15.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 08, 2007, 11:59:32 PM

I think Oshkosh is underrated at not being rated. They should be coming into this week after taking care of Whitewater.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 08, 2007, 11:59:58 PM

Quote from: sac on December 08, 2007, 10:51:49 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 08, 2007, 06:47:01 PMHope avenges their only loss with a fairly confortable win over NAIA Aquinas.

Glad you thought it was comfortable, I saw 3000+ today who would disagree. ;)

At the time, all I had was the score, and a 9-point gap seemed fairly comfortable. I have since read that few Hope fans were apt to be toasting victory early! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on December 09, 2007, 06:52:00 AM

Here is my feeling, Brandeis had they not lost to UMD would be Number 1, perhaps even unanimously. However I think with the loss, and the win over Amherst, Rochester gets the number one spot, with a good majority of the number 1 votes. I am shocked that Rochester is not included in the front page poll. The fact that the loss to UMD was in overtime, should not hurt the judges as much had it been in regulation, especially with it being on the road, without deluca and followed up by double digit win over amherst. So a few questions,

With a loss to an unranked team, could Brandeis possibly be ranked below Amherst after beating them. Could they be outside the top 10? My guess...
1. Rochester
2. Stevens Point
3. Brandeis
4. Amherst
5. MHB
6. Williams
....
UMD falls in around 20.

It is also very possible the williams could be as high as 3, but i think that would be a shame as I think they would be handled by Brandeis and Amherst with relative ease.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 09, 2007, 10:20:31 AM

In DC's How They Faired post, I saw that Rochester was #2. Then I was trying to remember if they were on the front page poll...apparently not. Ummm. Naturally, I would guess they would be #1. I do think, and I'm sure I'll sound like a homer here, that Point has a slight shot at getting the #1 spot back. They traveled to La Crosse and won by double-digits (though the Eagles aren't nearly as good as last year IMO-did beat Augie on the road this year) and then handled a solid and previously undefeated Lawrence team (a team that is the only challenger to Grinnell in the MWC).

Brandeis, though losing this week, probably won't drop too much since they just beat the #1 team in the nation. Amherst and Brandeis should still be in the top 5. Honestly, I would prefer Stevens Point NOT be in #1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 09, 2007, 11:22:23 AM

Quote from: ILive4This on December 09, 2007, 06:52:00 AM
Here is my feeling, Brandeis had they not lost to UMD would be Number 1, perhaps even unanimously.

Amherst itself was not the unanimous #1 this week, despite being the only team in the preseason top 8 still to be unbeaten. I'm quite sure that Brandeis would not be unanimous, either, had they won that game. My guess is that the new poll will be close at the top, with the #1 votes split closely between Brandeis, Point, and Rochester, but that Rochester will be #1, and would have been #1 even if the Judges were still unbeaten.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 09, 2007, 12:06:38 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 09, 2007, 11:22:23 AM
Quote from: ILive4This on December 09, 2007, 06:52:00 AM
Here is my feeling, Brandeis had they not lost to UMD would be Number 1, perhaps even unanimously.

...my guess is that the new poll will be close at the top, with the #1 votes split closely between Brandeis, Point, and Rochester, but that Rochester will be #1, and would have been #1 even if the Judges were still unbeaten.

I disagree with that, David. If #3 Brandeis was undefeated with a win over #1, I'm almost positive they'd leapfrog #2 Rochester and be the new #1. It'd be different if Rochester had a "signature win" of some sort, but I don't think any of these Rochester wins mean that much...

New Paltz State
Oneonta State
Nazareth
Cortland State
Ohio Wesleyan
Carnegie Mellon
Hobart

My 12/4 ballot top five was:

1 Amherst
2 Brandeis
3 Guilford
4 Lewis and Clark
5 UW-Stevens Point

I have no idea what I'll do at this point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 09, 2007, 12:13:16 PM

Throw darts! Thankfully, there's a tournament at the end of the season!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 09, 2007, 12:51:16 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 09, 2007, 12:06:38 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on December 09, 2007, 11:22:23 AM
Quote from: ILive4This on December 09, 2007, 06:52:00 AM
Here is my feeling, Brandeis had they not lost to UMD would be Number 1, perhaps even unanimously.

...my guess is that the new poll will be close at the top, with the #1 votes split closely between Brandeis, Point, and Rochester, but that Rochester will be #1, and would have been #1 even if the Judges were still unbeaten.

I disagree with that, David. If #3 Brandeis was undefeated with a win over #1, I'm almost positive they'd leapfrog #2 Rochester and be the new #1. It'd be different if Rochester had a "signature win" of some sort, but I don't think any of these Rochester wins mean that much...

New Paltz State
Oneonta State
Nazareth
Cortland State
Ohio Wesleyan
Carnegie Mellon
Hobart

My 12/4 ballot top five was:

1 Amherst
2 Brandeis
3 Guilford
4 Lewis and Clark
5 UW-Stevens Point

I have no idea what I'll do at this point.

Rochester had 556 points and 1 first place vote last week. That translates to an average ballot position of slightly better than #4, even if you disregard the #1 vote. That's approximately the same as Brandeis (551, without the #1 vote), so you're probably right that Brandeis would have passed them after beating the team that was #1 or #2 on every ballot. Although your reasoning about where to slot Rochester is sound, it's not clear that the other voters go along with you. Your #4 vote for L&C, which provided 14% of the Pioneers' support this week (the other 24 voters gave them 134 points, an average ballot position of 20-21) suggests that you think somewhat differently from at least some of the other voters.

Regardless, it's sure to be an interesting poll!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 09, 2007, 01:00:59 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 09, 2007, 12:51:16 PM
[Rochester had 556 points and 1 first place vote last week. That translates to an average ballot position of slightly better than #4, even if you disregard the #1 vote. That's approximately the same as Brandeis (551, without the #1 vote), so you're probably right that Brandeis would have passed them after beating the team that was #1 or #2 on every ballot. Although your reasoning about where to slot Rochester is sound, it's not clear that the other voters go along with you. Your #4 vote for L&C, which provided 14% of the Pioneers' support this week (the other 24 voters gave them 134 points, an average ballot position of 20-21) suggests that you think somewhat differently from at least some of the other voters.

Regardless, it's sure to be an interesting poll!

Well hopefully there are 25 pretty different opinions and ways of thinking...that's kind of the point. If you were to dig into all 25 ballots, you'd find all kinds of examples like the Lewis & Clark situation.

And regarding Lewis & Clark, the fact they played Division I Portland State (6-3) to a 1-point game this week makes me feel pretty good about where I have them. I hope the voters don't just see a "L" there and drop them. Both of their losses now are to Division I teams (Pacific being the other, also 6-3)...I thought it was a little unfair the Pioneers dropped after losing to Pacific.

PS I read Undaunted Courage this fall...I hope this isn't affecting my placement of Lewis & Clark!! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 09, 2007, 01:38:07 PM

Titan Q, thank you for your perspective of L&C.

I think that we can get "6 degrees of Kevin Bacon" with the NWC teams as they play thru the Christmas Holidays tourneys.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 09, 2007, 02:16:40 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 09, 2007, 01:00:59 PM
PS I read Undaunted Courage this fall...I hope this isn't affecting my placement of Lewis & Clark!! :)

I'm sending you some P.G. Wodehouse (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertie_Wooster) for Christmas. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on December 09, 2007, 02:43:28 PM

While I am not sure exactly what was said on WBRS and how, but being at the game, my guess is that it was a mix of excitement, and just letting the listeners know what was being chanted on the court by the 1700+ crowd that rushed the court. Most of these people don't know much about d3 ball, and may not have even known about the OT loss on thursday. I am not sure Brandeis will/or should be number 1, but I know the game yesterday was exciting and it shows that with or without deluca, Brandeis is a real title threat.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 09, 2007, 02:44:20 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 09, 2007, 02:16:40 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 09, 2007, 01:00:59 PM
PS I read Undaunted Courage this fall...I hope this isn't affecting my placement of Lewis & Clark!! :)

I'm sending you some P.G. Wodehouse (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertie_Wooster) for Christmas. ;D

David, I'm not quite sure how to take this - that the Scots are lovable bumblers in constant need of rescue from their own foibles? :o [Would anyone really place Bertie in their top 25 of something that generally requires competence? ;D]

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 09, 2007, 03:14:47 PM

An injury that will probably affect a Top 25 team pretty significantly...

#10 Augustana's starting 2-guard, and leading scorer, Jordan Delp (15.2 ppg) suffered a ruptured achilles tendon yesterday vs St. Norbert. Last season as a junior, Delp made the 2nd Team All-CCIW. On the year he made 53 of 118 3-pt attempts (.449) and led the CCIW champion Vikings in scoring (13.1 ppg). Augie has a lot of depth, but this will hurt them a lot.

As far as the poll, I'm a firm believer a team should not drop after a key injury until their play merits it. But in terms of the CCIW race, I certainly look at things differently now. Augustana is still very much a contender for the league title, but they're probably right on par with Elmhurst and Wheaton now, or maybe even a notch behind those two teams. Before the injury to Delp I had some questions about Augustana as a Top 10 team (they recently lost at home to UW-La Crosse), and those questions just doubled for me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on December 09, 2007, 04:31:00 PM

Quote from: sac on December 08, 2007, 11:12:26 PM
I'm thinking Capital might be underrated at #15.

Capital finally seems to be playing up to their expectations over their last 3 games. Starting with a hard-fought win on the road at OWU, the Crusaders have opened the OAC campaign in impressive fashion. Starting with an easy win over a Wilmington team that had been playing some good basketball and then following that up with a nice win over JCU on the road.

However, Cap had not been playing up to expectations prior to these last 3 games. Starting with a loss to an average at best Mt. St. Joseph team. Then the Crusaders struggled to put away a struggling Wittenberg. And then it took overtime for Cap to defeat Kenyon and while the Lords are showing signs of improvement, I still didn't expect them to take Cap to OT.

So, I guess I wouldn't say that Cap might be underrated based on their early season struggles. If they keep playing like they have in their last 2 games especially, it won't take them long to get back into the top 10.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 09, 2007, 06:01:51 PM

HOW THEY FARED (week of Dec. 3-9) (final)

#   1   Amherst (6-1) def. MIT 66-60 and lost at #3 Brandeis 72-62
#   2   Rochester (7-0) won at Hobart 70-57
#   3   Brandeis (8-1) won at Clark 82-71, lost at Mass.-Dartmouth 71-64 (OT), and def. #1 Amherst 72-62
#   4   UW-Stevens Point (5-1) won at UW-La Crosse 76-61 and def. Lawrence 75-56
#   5   Mary Hardin-Baylor (3-0) is idle
#   6   UW-Whitewater (5-1) lost at UW-Oshkosh 80-74 and def. UW-Superior 92-85
#   7   Guilford (4-1) def. Methodist 74-48 and won at N.C. Wesleyan 91-80
#   8   Williams (7-0) def. Springfield 71-66
#   9   Virginia Wesleyan (4-2) lost to Newport News Apprentice 76-75
#   10   Augustana (6-1) def. St. Ambrose 85-68 and won at St. Norbert 77-70 (2 OT)
#   11   Hope (5-1) def. Marygrove 100-52 and def. Aquinas 68-59
#   12   Washington U. (6-2) def. Illinois Wesleyan 69-66
#   13   Plattsburgh St. (6-0) won at Clarkson 77-63 and def. Oswego St. 86-81
#   14   Puget Sound (6-0) ~~plays at Warner Pacific Tue.~~* and def. Cal St.-Stanislaus 121-101
#   15   Capital (7-1) def. Wilmington 89-68 and won at John Carroll 87-72
#   16   Keene St. (5-2) lost to Tufts 81-67 and lost to Rhode Island College 96-91 (OT)
#   17   Stevens (8-0) def. Elmira 62-59 and def. Ithaca 83-74
#   18   Calvin (4-3) lost at Aquinas 78-62
#   19   Brockport St. (4-1) def. Roberts Wesleyan 91-77 and won at Oneonta St. 79-74
#   20   Lewis & Clark (3-2) lost to Portland St. 61-60 at the Rose Garden in Portland
#   21   Trinity (CT) (6-1) lost to Springfield 62-57
#   22   St. Thomas (7-2) def. Hamline 72-64, lost at Macalester 72-70, and won at St. Olaf 85-78
#   23   Elmhurst (3-1) is idle
#   24   Wheaton (IL) (7-1) won at Illinois Tech. 66-47 and won at Wartburg 69-66
#   25   Wooster (4-2) won at Oberlin 94-54 and won at Ohio Wesleyan 80-77

* Puget Sound's game at Warner Pacific, scheduled for Tue., has been postponed indefinitely (thanks, LogShow!)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Marty Peretz on December 09, 2007, 06:07:31 PM

Does Wash.U. move up, stay the same, or again fall down in the poll after this week's three point win over IWU. IWU, by the way, is MUCH better than advertised. Don't be fooled by their youth. Particularly with Augie's early struggles and now devestating injury, IWU should make a lot of noise in the CCIW. I would say Wash.U. could move up, but their losses to Augi and more specifically, Calvin (who now has 3 losses), aren't nearly as quality as I initially suspected. Still, beating IWU, UW-Platteville, and Ohio Northern, I believe qualify them for top ten consideration.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fcnews on December 09, 2007, 06:35:59 PM

For underrated how about Puget Sound? Just by looking at their sechedule and results it appears they are pretty tough. They should be competitive in the West picture.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on December 09, 2007, 07:06:42 PM

Quote from: Marty Peretz on December 09, 2007, 06:07:31 PM
Does Wash.U. move up, stay the same, or again fall down in the poll after this week's three point win over IWU. IWU, by the way, is MUCH better than advertised. Don't be fooled by their youth. Particularly with Augie's early struggles and now devestating injury, IWU should make a lot of noise in the CCIW. I would say Wash.U. could move up, but their losses to Augi and more specifically, Calvin (who now has 3 losses), aren't nearly as quality as I initially suspected. Still, beating IWU, UW-Platteville, and Ohio Northern, I believe qualify them for top ten consideration.

I don't see them moving down. Wash U was #12 last week with the same losses you cite. Yes, IWU did win most of the measurable statistic battles, but Wash U got the "W". Experienced teams defend their home court even when faced with adversity. With four teams above Wash U last week posting an "L", I think voters culd very easily move Wash U up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 09, 2007, 09:45:01 PM

Quote from: Marty Peretz on December 09, 2007, 06:07:31 PM
Calvin (who now has 3 losses), aren't nearly as quality as I initially suspected.

2 losses to NAIA II Aquinas who is 10-1, once in double overtime, the other by 1 point to Wheaton (7-1)

(By the way the only team to beat AQ and Wheaton was Hope)

They beat pre-season #1 Washington U with Sean Wallis.

Calvin's the best 4-3 team in the country, I wouldn't poo poo them so quickly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on December 09, 2007, 10:27:21 PM

Quote from: fcnews on December 09, 2007, 06:35:59 PM
For underrated how about Puget Sound? Just by looking at their sechedule and results it appears they are pretty tough. They should be competitive in the West picture.

Giving Puget Sound some love :)

They are 2-0 aginst D2 and also beat UW-Stout in Stout's own tournament...guess we will see with the new poll on tuesday

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 09, 2007, 11:49:36 PM

Quote from: LogShow on December 09, 2007, 10:27:21 PM

Giving Puget Sound some love :)

They are 2-0 aginst D2 and also beat UW-Stout in Stout's own tournament...guess we will see with the new poll on tuesday

I may give Puget Sound some love, but it won't be because they beat Stout. The Blue Devils suck and their own posters will agree. They almost lost to Finlandia before winning in OT. They have a couple of D1 transfers that think they are God's gift to D3 basketball and jack up shots like they're going out of style. One Stout poster said they didn't even need a shot clock and another suggested tearing up the hardwood and putting down blacktop because they play like their on the playground. It was painful to watch them get smoked by Oshkosh on Saturday...just ask the Blue Devil alumnus (who played) I was sitting next to!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on December 10, 2007, 12:20:15 AM

Quote from: sac on December 09, 2007, 09:45:01 PM
Calvin's the best 4-3 team in the country, I wouldn't poo poo them so quickly.

Speaking of that, after watching Ohio Wesleyan suffer another tough loss to a ranked opponent this weekend, I think OWU might be the best 3-4 team in the country. OWU's last two games have seen them lose to #15 Capital and #25 Wooster by a combined 5 pts. in games that could easily have gone the other way.

OWU also led (soon-to-be?) #1 Rochester for the wrong 3/4 of the game in a seven point loss on the road at Rochester.

Its other loss? To 6-0 Trinity (TX) in the season-opening lid-lifter on a neutral floor.

Combined record of the teams that defeated them: 24-3.

I'm not arguing that OWU should be in the poll somewhere at 3-4 (they needed to beat a few of those teams to earn serious voting support), but this team is probably Wooster's primary competition for the NCAC crown, and, like Wooster, should be able to amass numerous victories against a very lackluster conference. That 3-4 record is likely to improve.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 10, 2007, 04:47:25 AM

I thought Ohio Wesleyan was decent when I saw the Bishops on opening weekend, but I wouldn't say that I was bowled over by them. They have nice balance, but they seem awfully streaky as far as shooting is concerned. I've seen a number of other teams this season that I think are better.

Still, I do have a liking for balanced teams. OWU could be one of those teams that gets better as the year goes on just by virtue of keeping everyone involved in the scoring; I've seen teams like that from time to time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on December 10, 2007, 10:33:34 AM

Greg,

I'd say your description of OWU is pretty spot on. The balance in scoring they bring is definately their strength. Against Wooster on Saturday, they put 5 players in double figures and they have 4 averaging double figures in scoring on the season.

However, they do seem to be a very streaky shooting team, especially from beyond the arc. In their game vs. Wooster, they managed to shoot a respectable 47% from the floor, but they were only 7-28 from downtown. Compare that to Wooster going 9-14 from downtown!

If OWU starts to dial it in from the outside, they could become quite good as the season progresses.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: theBroadcaster on December 10, 2007, 07:56:38 PM

Quote from: ILive4This on December 09, 2007, 02:43:28 PM
While I am not sure exactly what was said on WBRS and how, but being at the game, my guess is that it was a mix of excitement, and just letting the listeners know what was being chanted on the court by the 1700+ crowd that rushed the court. Most of these people don't know much about d3 ball, and may not have even known about the OT loss on thursday. I am not sure Brandeis will/or should be number 1, but I know the game yesterday was exciting and it shows that with or without deluca, Brandeis is a real title threat.

ILive, I am the one who made those comments on WBRS, and your guess is basically dead on. Objectively, Brandeis still did lose to an unranked team this week, so for them to jump and undefeated Rochester whose already ahead of them in the polls probably isn't logical. However, when you take into account where the Brandeis program used to be, and then look at where it is now, I was simply trying to show just how much the win meant to the Brandeis faithful. I know on paper it was only #3 beating #1, but in the eyes of people who follow the team it did still feel like a david beating a goliath. Brandeis isnt acustomed to things like this happening, so for us it really felt like winning the super bowl. There were a good 4 times as many people than average at the game, and if Brandeis had lost most of them probably would never have gone to a game again. Most of the student body just isn't educated about school sports, and there isn't much pride in the school. But with the win, it really did feel like Brandeis was #1, and in my 4 years as a student I've never seen or felt students being that proud of their school. I guess in the end that was what I was trying to express at the end of the game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on December 10, 2007, 11:38:51 PM

Top Vote Getting Movers
+21 UW Oshkosh
+13 Emerson
+6 Rowan
+5 Trinity (Texas)
+5 Rhode Island Col
+4 Wheaton
+4 Hope
-6 Calvin
-6 St. Thomas
-7 UW LaCrosse
-7 Centre
-9 Virginia Wesleyan
-9 Trinity (Conn)
-10 Widener
-13 Keene State

This ignores teams that went from zero votes to some votes (Mass Dartmouth), and those that went from some votes to zero votes (DePauw).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on December 10, 2007, 11:54:20 PM

I wonder if the voters that gave votes to Rowan actually looked at who Rowan has beaten since losing to NJCU. Two of the games are a Junior college and Valley Forge Christian and another was Neuman. To gain points after beating up on St Agnes sisters of the blind, someone is not looking.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 11, 2007, 12:34:49 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 09, 2007, 11:22:23 AMMy guess is that the new poll will be close at the top, ...

Check. 27 points divide #1 from #3, with Amherst just 18 points further back.

Quote from: David Collinge on December 09, 2007, 11:22:23 AM... with the #1 votes split closely between Brandeis, Point, and Rochester, ...

Uh, nope. Rochester pulled in half of them (13), with Point getting 5 and 'Deis 2, and the other 5 votes scattered to the four winds.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on December 11, 2007, 01:48:44 AM

I do not get one thing, Oshkosh, beats a top 10 team and goes from nothing to 13th, UMD beats the number 3, now number 2 team, and they are still off the poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 11, 2007, 02:03:00 AM

Quote from: ILive4This on December 11, 2007, 01:48:44 AM
I do not get one thing, Oshkosh, beats a top 10 team and goes from nothing to 13th, UMD beats the number 3, now number 2 team, and they are still off the poll.

UW-Oshkosh also owns a win over #21 Elmhurst in addition to its win over UW-Whitewater. Mass-Dartmouth hasn't beaten anyone else who is receiving votes in the poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on December 11, 2007, 02:23:43 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 11, 2007, 02:03:00 AM
Quote from: ILive4This on December 11, 2007, 01:48:44 AM
I do not get one thing, Oshkosh, beats a top 10 team and goes from nothing to 13th, UMD beats the number 3, now number 2 team, and they are still off the poll.

UW-Oshkosh also owns a win over #21 Elmhurst in addition to its win over UW-Whitewater. Mass-Dartmouth hasn't beaten anyone else who is receiving votes in the poll.

UMD has a couple other solid wins, although they are not against ranked teams. Western Conn's only other loss is to Trinity and Worcester State's only other loss is to WPI. I agree with ILive4This, I dont like that people use this trap game excuse to justify a win (in the case of UMD over Brandeis). The fact is that Brandeis lost to an undefeated team and then beat the then ranked #1 team in the country. UMD deserves some respect for what they have accomplished so far. Nobody is saying to put them in the top 5, but they definitely deserve some consideration to be in the top 25. Calvin, for example, has 3 losses and their only win over a vote receiving team is WashU, who is not ranked as high as Brandeis currently.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 11, 2007, 02:31:45 AM

I'm not saying that I agree with the pollsters about UWO and UMD. I'm simply offering what is their most likely explanation. I'm on record as not putting much stock in early polls, anyway.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on December 11, 2007, 08:29:29 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 11, 2007, 02:31:45 AM
I'm not saying that I agree with the pollsters about UWO and UMD. I'm simply offering what is their most likely explanation. I'm on record as not putting much stock in early polls, anyway.

Early polls are for giving us something to bitch about.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on December 11, 2007, 10:27:49 AM

Quote from: Knightstalker on December 11, 2007, 08:29:29 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 11, 2007, 02:31:45 AM
I'm not saying that I agree with the pollsters about UWO and UMD. I'm simply offering what is their most likely explanation. I'm on record as not putting much stock in early polls, anyway.

Early polls are for giving us something to bitch about.

I think it means more to the players, however, and that is who it is most unfair to. At the end of the season, the week 3 poll isnt going to mean much, but right now I am sure the guys at UMD feel like they deserve some respect.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2007, 11:01:51 AM

So... a win over Brandeis isn't good enough in their minds? They need to receive some Top 25 votes to feel better about themselves and feel like they are getting respect?

Jeez... give me a break. They've been the talk of D3 for most of the last week, that should be cool enough for a program that is showing some improvement. It's a good thing most of the voters probably don't consider the feelings of the players before putting together their ballots.

If they did or should, maybe they have kept Amherst #1 because it was a hard-fought game in a hostile enviroment... and we don't want to hurt the player's feelings with lost confidence.

And maybe Wash U should have stayed #1 despite the game losses and the loss of their leader. That drop in the polls and subtraction of #1 votes must have been an ego killer. I can't imagine they can continue playing this season.

And finally, Greensboro must be devestated for not getting any votes in the Top 25, despite their big win over then #3 Guilford - and while we are at it, give Goucher (2-5) some love because they nearly beat Greensboro in double-OT two days later.

Yep... the first thing voters should think about when voting is how the players would feel to get some love in the Top 25.

Ok... sarcastic moment over... on with the season!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Golden Norver on December 11, 2007, 11:43:16 AM

How about some top 25 love for Buena Vista? They are 6-1 and heavy laden with juniors and seniors. They are off to a 2-0 start in the Iowa Conference. They have scored an impressive road victory over Augustana (S.D.), a division 2 team sitting at 8-1. But they aren't getting a single vote! I think that they are worth a look.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2007, 11:51:45 AM

"Vista hasn't proven me anything! Until they prove me something, I'm not going to jump on the bandwagon!"

HA! Sorry, had a Hoopsville (http://"http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville") flash-back there when Buena Vista was brought up in conversation.

I'm now back to the present... phew!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on December 11, 2007, 01:17:49 PM

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on December 11, 2007, 11:01:51 AM
So... a win over Brandeis isn't good enough in their minds? They need to receive some Top 25 votes to feel better about themselves and feel like they are getting respect?

Jeez... give me a break. They've been the talk of D3 for most of the last week, that should be cool enough for a program that is showing some improvement. It's a good thing most of the voters probably don't consider the feelings of the players before putting together their ballots.

If they did or should, maybe they have kept Amherst #1 because it was a hard-fought game in a hostile enviroment... and we don't want to hurt the player's feelings with lost confidence.

And maybe Wash U should have stayed #1 despite the game losses and the loss of their leader. That drop in the polls and subtraction of #1 votes must have been an ego killer. I can't imagine they can continue playing this season.

And finally, Greensboro must be devestated for not getting any votes in the Top 25, despite their big win over then #3 Guilford - and while we are at it, give Goucher (2-5) some love because they nearly beat Greensboro in double-OT two days later.

Yep... the first thing voters should think about when voting is how the players would feel to get some love in the Top 25.

Ok... sarcastic moment over... on with the season!

Why stop there? Just like with the peewee leagues, we should just stop keeping score so the losing team doesn't feel bad ??? :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on December 11, 2007, 07:00:26 PM

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on December 11, 2007, 11:01:51 AM
So... a win over Brandeis isn't good enough in their minds? They need to receive some Top 25 votes to feel better about themselves and feel like they are getting respect?

Jeez... give me a break. They've been the talk of D3 for most of the last week, that should be cool enough for a program that is showing some improvement. It's a good thing most of the voters probably don't consider the feelings of the players before putting together their ballots.

If they did or should, maybe they have kept Amherst #1 because it was a hard-fought game in a hostile enviroment... and we don't want to hurt the player's feelings with lost confidence.

And maybe Wash U should have stayed #1 despite the game losses and the loss of their leader. That drop in the polls and subtraction of #1 votes must have been an ego killer. I can't imagine they can continue playing this season.

And finally, Greensboro must be devestated for not getting any votes in the Top 25, despite their big win over then #3 Guilford - and while we are at it, give Goucher (2-5) some love because they nearly beat Greensboro in double-OT two days later.

Yep... the first thing voters should think about when voting is how the players would feel to get some love in the Top 25.

Ok... sarcastic moment over... on with the season!

There is one difference. All the teams you listed lost and they deserved to lose votes. UMD did not. And I did not say anything about caring about the players feelings. Someone said why does a week 3 ranking matter. I said it doesnt matter to anybody besides the guys who are undefeated and not getting any respect. So although you interpreted what I said in some extreme manner and somehow got from that I was trying to be touchy feely or something, that is pretty far from the truth.

I can make an analogy to college football. In week 7 of this year, Hawaii was 7-0 and had beaten two crappy teams (LA Tech and San Jose State, who finished they year 5-7 in crappy conferences) by 1 and 7 points. Yet, although they had no respectable wins in 7 games and nearly lost to two crappy teams, they were still ranked 18th in the country without a win over any quality opponent (let alone the 2nd ranked team in the country).

In summation, UMD not getting more votes is BS and your response to my comment is also BS.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 11, 2007, 07:09:24 PM

UMD went from zero votes in poll 2, to 27 in poll 3 a theorhetical ranking of #31......and are only 19 poll points from being ranked. In week two there were 47 teams that received poll votes.........UMD moved from a minimum of #48 to #31 in one week based on one win really, but realisticly probably moved up many more spots.

Not really worth getting upset about, if they deserve to be ranked they'll get there soon.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frank uible on December 11, 2007, 07:16:18 PM

If UMD is truly good and if it is self- confident as a truly good team should be, then it should not care about what others think of it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on December 11, 2007, 07:35:46 PM

I was not upset with them not being ranked. I was upset by McHugh's interpretation of my post (Dutchman). I merely was sharing my opinion on a topic relevant to this board. I have no connection to UMD, I actually attend a school that barely lost to Amherst last week, but my opinion is still that UMD should be ranked currently. Down the line they may lose some games to some bad teams and not deserve to, but right now I think they have earned it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hugenerd on December 11, 2007, 07:38:33 PM

Quote from: frank uible on December 11, 2007, 07:16:18 PM
If UMD is truly good and if it is self- confident as a truly good team should be, then it should not care about what others think of it.

You must live in a fantasy world. I am pretty sure evreyone cares what others think to some level. Do you not want a promotion at work? If you played basketball, would you not want a player of the year or all-conference award? There are a lot of things that depend on what other people think that we would all want to have. I am not saying being ranked in the week 3 rankings is at the top of that list, but that argument is not a good one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 11, 2007, 07:55:22 PM

For whatever it may be worth, UMD did receive 27 points from the voters (as sac points out.) That means that at least some (and perhaps all) of the poll voters agree that the Corsairs should be among the top 25--that's the only way to receive points. Twenty-seven points is the equivalent of being #25 on 23 ballots and #24 on the other two. Since it's not likely that they appeared on all 25 ballots (there's no way I could know this), it follows that there probably were at least some voters who had them in the teens or low twenties. In my book, that's respect.

(I don't mean to be pedantic, especially when regards hugenerd and his huge calculator ;), since I know he understands this process. I'm just not always certain that everyone does, so I apologize to anyone who feels like I'm talking down to them.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frank uible on December 11, 2007, 09:01:04 PM

I may live in a fantasy world, but nonetheless I don't care what most others think of me - certainly not those who might vote in some poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 11, 2007, 09:12:26 PM

HOW THEY FARED (week of Dec. 10-16)

#   1   Rochester (8-0) won at Rochester Tech. 80-70 and hosts St. John Fisher Fri.
#   2   Brandeis (9-1) def. Curry 78-67
#   3   UW-Stevens Point (6-1) won at Viterbo 91-83, plays at Edgewood Wed., and plays at Ripon Sat.
#   4   Amherst (6-1) plays at Lasell Wed.
#   5   Mary Hardin-Baylor (3-0) plays at Incarnate Word Wed. and plays at Texas-Tyler Sat.
#   6   Guilford (4-1) is idle
#   7   Williams (7-0) is idle (until Dec. 29)
#   8   Hope (5-1) is idle
#   9   Augustana (6-1) hosts Cornell Wed. and plays at #13 UW-Oshkosh Sat.
#   10   Puget Sound (6-0) is idle (until Dec. 28)
#   11   UW-Whitewater (5-1) is idle
#   12   Washington U. (7-2) won at Fontbonne 73-57 and hosts Coe Sat.
#   13   UW-Oshkosh (7-0) hosts #9 Augustana Sat.
#   14   Plattsburgh St. (6-0) is idle
#   15   Capital (7-1) plays at Muskingum Sat.
#   16   Stevens (8-0) is idle (until Jan. 4)
#   17   Brockport St. (4-1) is idle (until Jan. 2)
#   18   Virginia Wesleyan (4-2) is idle
#   19   Lewis & Clark (3-2) is idle
#   20   Wheaton (IL) (7-1) is idle (until Dec. 29)
#   21   Elmhurst (3-1) hosts Mt. St. Joseph Sat.
#   22   Trinity (TX) (6-0) is idle
#   23   Wooster (4-2) hosts Walsh Sat.
#   24   Calvin (4-3) hosts Trinity Christian Sat.
#   25   Rhode Island Coll. (7-1) won at Trinity (CT) 70-68 and plays at Springfield Fri.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 11, 2007, 10:58:25 PM

Well, 4-0 so far, and 13 teams now idle for at least the rest of the week. Will the voters get a chance to just write 'ditto' on last week's ballots, or will all hell break loose later? ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 11, 2007, 11:05:19 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 11, 2007, 10:58:25 PM
Well, 4-0 so far, and 13 teams now idle for at least the rest of the week. Will the voters get a chance to just write 'ditto' on last week's ballots, or will all hell break loose later? ;)

5-0. Stevens Point played and won last night, and tonight's winners were Rochester, Brandeis, Wash. U., and RIC, who won a thriller over Trinity. I love video webcasting! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 11, 2007, 11:09:21 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 11, 2007, 11:05:19 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 11, 2007, 10:58:25 PM
Well, 4-0 so far, and 13 teams now idle for at least the rest of the week. Will the voters get a chance to just write 'ditto' on last week's ballots, or will all hell break loose later? ;)

5-0. Stevens Point played and won last night, and tonight's winners were Rochester, Brandeis, Wash. U., and RIC, who won a thriller over Trinity. I love video webcasting! ;D

It is making the world of D-III that much smaller! :)

Isn't it great!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 11, 2007, 11:12:27 PM

David,

You must forgive me - I taught statistics, not counting. :-[ 4-0 is probably within the margin of error of 5-0. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 11, 2007, 11:24:41 PM

You're forgiven; and anyway the fault is as much mine as yours. I need to come up with an alternate formatting technique so one can more easily pick out the few scores from the sea of "idle"s. I knew there were five results in there (since I put them in there), and still had trouble picking them out. :D

EDIT: There--is that better?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on December 11, 2007, 11:32:35 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 11, 2007, 10:58:25 PM
Well, 4-0 so far, and 13 teams now idle for at least the rest of the week. Will the voters get a chance to just write 'ditto' on last week's ballots, or will all hell break loose later? ;)

This down time in the season really kills the basketball buzz. There is nothing to watch, nothing to read about, my team is idle till the 28th. Even College Football, is idle. Just get me to Jan, league play starts and thats when things get interesting. Until till then I will just have to watch NBA games, pause not!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 11, 2007, 11:38:21 PM

David,

Definitely better for now (even I might have counted 5!), but I wonder if it will get cluttered in a 'normal' week? You may be better off leaving it as before. (If my kids were 10 years younger I could probably still count, though I might never have the time to come online!)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 12, 2007, 01:42:52 AM

Quote from: LogShow on December 11, 2007, 11:32:35 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 11, 2007, 10:58:25 PM
Well, 4-0 so far, and 13 teams now idle for at least the rest of the week. Will the voters get a chance to just write 'ditto' on last week's ballots, or will all hell break loose later? ;)

This down time in the season really kills the basketball buzz. There is nothing to watch, nothing to read about, my team is idle till the 28th. Even College Football, is idle. Just get me to Jan, league play starts and thats when things get interesting. Until till then I will just have to watch NBA games, pause not!

You officially qualify as a hoops junkie, LogShow. The vast majority of Americans are anxiously awaiting the joys of Christmas ... while you're anxiously awaiting the first weekend in January. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 12, 2007, 07:32:58 AM

Quote from: hugenerd on December 11, 2007, 10:27:49 AM
I think it means more to the players, however, and that is who it is most unfair to. At the end of the season, the week 3 poll isnt going to mean much, but right now I am sure the guys at UMD feel like they deserve some respect.

Hmm... from what I have re-read... I still stand behind my comment.
"...but right now I am sure the guys at UMD feel like they deserve some respect."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Peddler on December 12, 2007, 11:02:19 AM

Emerson College at 7-0 after a big win against MIT last night. They should be in the top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 12, 2007, 12:29:51 PM

I don't think Emerson's body of work is all that, though they have handed the only loss to three teams (William Patterson, Vassar, Wheaton (MA)). They're currently 32nd, and if they keep it up they will be ranked. But are they better than the two and three loss teams in the Top 25? I don't think so.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 12, 2007, 09:38:07 PM

David, the color is an excellent touch [if, as I assume you already planned, the losses are in red (or some other color), even someone as brain-damaged as I should have no trouble keeping proper count]! ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 12, 2007, 09:43:32 PM

No, the color is just a temporary measure for these two weeks with all of the "idle"s, to help the actual games stand out. No color coding, and I'll go back to the regular format after the holidays, as this is a pain in the kiester. Losses are always easy to spot, since I bold the word lost.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 12, 2007, 09:56:40 PM

Understood.

Thanks for doing this, especially since scoreboard has not (yet?) been linked up with the poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 12, 2007, 10:15:57 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 12, 2007, 09:43:32 PM
No, the color is just a temporary measure for these two weeks with all of the "idle"s, to help the actual games stand out. No color coding, and I'll go back to the regular format after the holidays, as this is a pain in the kiester. Losses are always easy to spot, since I bold the word lost.

When you color code, bold or whatever...if you take your mouse and hold the left button down, as if you were to copy, cut or paste, and then click on the bold, color code or whatever, it puts the [ b ] and [ /b ] around those words without actually having to type them. It works a lot faster!

I am the greatest!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 12, 2007, 10:27:27 PM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on December 12, 2007, 10:15:57 PM
I am the greatest!

You are the greatest formatter, at any rate. :)

I can add formatting in a week like this, when there's only a handful of games per night and I'm bored. When it gets to be 50-60 scores that I'm chasing (including NCAC games), my main goal is not to screw up my tables too badly, formatting be damned! :D

But I like to try to please my devoted readers ::) as much as possible, so we'll see what life is like in January.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 12, 2007, 10:57:14 PM

Your work is much appreciated. It's easy to come here and look how the Top 25 did. Thanks for your time!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on December 13, 2007, 02:47:39 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 12, 2007, 01:42:52 AM
You officially qualify as a hoops junkie, LogShow. The vast majority of Americans are anxiously awaiting the joys of Christmas ... while you're anxiously awaiting the first weekend in January. :D

True, but are you not the same way?...don't get me wrong I love Christmas season too!

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on December 12, 2007, 10:57:14 PM
Your work is much appreciated. It's easy to come here and look how the Top 25 did. Thanks for your time!

I second that comment

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 14, 2007, 01:14:21 AM

Quote from: LogShow on December 13, 2007, 02:47:39 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 12, 2007, 01:42:52 AM
You officially qualify as a hoops junkie, LogShow. The vast majority of Americans are anxiously awaiting the joys of Christmas ... while you're anxiously awaiting the first weekend in January. :D

True, but are you not the same way?

I actually have four more D3 men's basketball games penciled into my calendar between now and the first weekend in January -- and that's in spite of the fact that I have to miss out on attending any games this coming Saturday because I have to attend a wedding.

I'm pretty shameless. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 14, 2007, 12:28:34 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 14, 2007, 01:14:21 AM
Quote from: LogShow on December 13, 2007, 02:47:39 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 12, 2007, 01:42:52 AM
You officially qualify as a hoops junkie, LogShow. The vast majority of Americans are anxiously awaiting the joys of Christmas ... while you're anxiously awaiting the first weekend in January. :D

True, but are you not the same way?

I actually have four more D3 men's basketball games penciled into my calendar between now and the first weekend in January -- and that's in spite of the fact that I have to miss out on attending any games this coming Saturday because I have to attend a wedding.

I'm pretty shameless. :D

I have 8 men's, 4 women's, and 3 high school games on my schedule in that period, then three more D3 games during that first January weekend. That will bring my season totals to 22 men's and 16 women's (and 3 HS) games.

Slacker! :P :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on December 14, 2007, 12:31:56 PM

You guys must single without young children, right?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 14, 2007, 12:32:54 PM

I have to chaperone a birthday party herding 15 kindergarten classmates of my daughter's at Chuckie Cheese's tomorrow. I think that trumps all.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on December 14, 2007, 12:40:17 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 14, 2007, 12:32:54 PM
I have to chaperone a birthday party herding 15 kindergarten classmates of my daughter's at Chuckie Cheese's tomorrow. I think that trumps all.

Better you than me. No big parties for the Stalkerette. The wife and kid are meeting me here in NYC this evening and we are taking her to Macys to see the windows and to see Santa on her birthday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on December 14, 2007, 06:48:49 PM

You guys are quite impressive. I don't really get out to many games besides Puget Sound ones. I try to catch a few of the other local colleges around the area. Love watching Seattle Pacific play, also like to try to catch some of the NWC teams in action before conference.

I do enjoy keeping up to date on whats going on in the D3 world on this site too!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 14, 2007, 09:18:05 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 14, 2007, 12:28:34 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 14, 2007, 01:14:21 AM
Quote from: LogShow on December 13, 2007, 02:47:39 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 12, 2007, 01:42:52 AM
You officially qualify as a hoops junkie, LogShow. The vast majority of Americans are anxiously awaiting the joys of Christmas ... while you're anxiously awaiting the first weekend in January. :D

True, but are you not the same way?

I actually have four more D3 men's basketball games penciled into my calendar between now and the first weekend in January -- and that's in spite of the fact that I have to miss out on attending any games this coming Saturday because I have to attend a wedding.

I'm pretty shameless. :D

I have 8 men's, 4 women's, and 3 high school games on my schedule in that period, then three more D3 games during that first January weekend. That will bring my season totals to 22 men's and 16 women's (and 3 HS) games.

Slacker! :P :D

Hey, for someone confined to attending games within the reach of public transportation -- assuming that said public transportation is still up and running in the near future in the City That Used To Work -- I think I'm doing alright in the games-attended department.

Quote from: smedindy on December 14, 2007, 12:32:54 PM
I have to chaperone a birthday party herding 15 kindergarten classmates of my daughter's at Chuckie Cheese's tomorrow. I think that trumps all.

I don't know if you're Catholic or not, but if you are I can guarantee you that chaperoning 15 five-year-olds for an afternoon at Chuck E. Cheese puts you on the short list for canonization.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 14, 2007, 11:51:23 PM

I am officially the biggest dork of them all, I was one of the 89 who saw Oberlin/Alma.........thank goodness it was free. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 14, 2007, 11:54:57 PM

I was the only guy in the theater when I saw the movie Lambs for Lions a couple of weeks ago.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on December 15, 2007, 12:20:22 PM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on December 14, 2007, 11:54:57 PM
I was the only guy in the theater when I saw the movie Lambs for Lions a couple of weeks ago.

You mean they Reserved the entire theater for you 8)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: old_hooper on December 15, 2007, 01:31:45 PM

Interesting #25 RIC falls to Springfield last night and are now 8-2. Their first win (exhibition game) of the year was against D1 Holy Cross who is now 7-1. Congrats to Coach Brock and springfield (3-5) for its second win against a ranked team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frank uible on December 15, 2007, 03:09:52 PM

Log: Personally I believe Paul Reubens was also in the theatre - hiding in the back row.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on December 15, 2007, 03:29:28 PM

Quote from: frank uible on December 15, 2007, 03:09:52 PM
Log: Personally I believe Paul Reubens was also in the theatre - hiding in the back row.

Now thats just dirty toliet humor

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 15, 2007, 04:00:18 PM

As opposed to clean toilet humor...?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 15, 2007, 06:26:01 PM

Question: what's worse than a game with 87 free throws?
Answer: one with 42 missed free throws.
That's what happened in #5 Mary Hardin-Baylor's 58-46 victory over Texas-Tyler this afternoon. Egad. Tyler was just 22.6% from the field, 13.3% from the arc, and 48.8% from the stripe, negating a +12 on the boards and +18 on FGA.
UMHB: 30 personal fouls, 2 technical fouls, 1 disqualification, 25/46 from the line (54.3%)
UTT: 29 personal fouls, 2 technical fouls, 1 disqualification, 20/41 from the line (48.8%)
The technicals were a pair of double-technicals in a 31-second span of the second half. Seems like the Christmas spirit was a little lacking at the Patriot center this afternoon. When's the rematch? :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 15, 2007, 09:22:51 PM

UT-Tyler is in the ASC-East, UMHB the ASC-West. The new UT-Tyler head coach is a former Miss College assistant. He may be wanting to take the UT-Tyler program to the next level now that it is in its first season of regular D-III membership (and never having been eligible for any championship.)

Right now, the best chance at a re-match is the first round of the ASC Tourney at UMHB, if UMHB wins the West and UT-Tyler comes in 4th in the East.

Those are my early projections.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on December 15, 2007, 11:05:48 PM

I'm guessing that Wooster should extend their streak in top 25 for at least one more week with a good win over NAIA II #3 ranked Walsh tonight.

Now the Scots are off to the Bahamas to try and keep their streak alive vs. St. Mary's and another NAIA foe in Benedictine (IL). Hopefully, Wooster doesn't let the warm weather and sandy beaches of the Bahamas distract them from getting the job done on the court in what should be 2 winnable games for the Scots.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 15, 2007, 11:14:19 PM

Benedictine is D3

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on December 16, 2007, 12:16:28 AM

DC- minor correction- Wooster's record moved to 5-2 with the win.

Thanks...fixed! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on December 16, 2007, 09:08:06 AM

Quote from: sac on December 15, 2007, 11:14:19 PM
Benedictine is D3

oops, I must've been thinking of the wrong Benedictine.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: OC_SID on December 16, 2007, 06:20:39 PM

#11 Whitewater defeated Olivet, 74-53, this afternoon in Olivet. When I was inputting the result on D3hoops.com after the game, I noticed that neither myself or UWW's SID had forgotten to update the schedule with the new game date. It was originally scheduled for this Thursday, but was changed to today a month ago.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 16, 2007, 06:41:58 PM

Quote from: OC_SID on December 16, 2007, 06:20:39 PM
#11 Whitewater defeated Olivet, 74-53, this afternoon in Olivet. When I was inputting the result on D3hoops.com after the game, I noticed that neither myself or UWW's SID had forgotten to update the schedule with the new game date. It was originally scheduled for this Thursday, but was changed to today a month ago.

Thanks, Geoff! I've updated the Top 25 scoreboard, below.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 16, 2007, 06:42:27 PM

HOW THEY FARED (week of Dec. 10-16) (COMPLETE)

#   1   Rochester (9-0) won at Rochester Tech. 80-70 and def. St. John Fisher 75-58
#   2   Brandeis (9-1) def. Curry 78-67
#   3   UW-Stevens Point (8-1) won at Viterbo 91-83, won at Edgewood 77-59, and won at Ripon 71-67
#   4   Amherst (7-1) won at Lasell 73-66.
#   5   Mary Hardin-Baylor (4-1) lost at Incarnate Word 81-69 and won at Texas-Tyler 58-46
#   6   Guilford (4-1) is idle
#   7   Williams (7-0) is idle (until Dec. 29)
#   8   Hope (5-1) is idle
#   9   Augustana (8-1) def. Cornell 69-56 and won at #13 UW-Oshkosh 59-54
#   10   Puget Sound (6-0) is idle (until Dec. 28)
#   11   UW-Whitewater (6-1) won at Olivet 74-53
#   12   Washington U. (8-2) won at Fontbonne 73-57 and def. Coe 68-63
#   13   UW-Oshkosh (7-1) lost to #9 Augustana 59-54
#   14   Plattsburgh St. (6-0) is idle
#   15   Capital (8-1) won at Muskingum 72-68
#   16   Stevens (8-0) is idle (until Jan. 4)
#   17   Brockport St. (4-1) is idle (until Jan. 2)
#   18   Virginia Wesleyan (4-2) is idle
#   19   Lewis & Clark (3-2) is idle
#   20   Wheaton (IL) (7-1) is idle (until Dec. 29)
#   21   Elmhurst (4-1) def. Mt. St. Joseph 86-74
#   22   Trinity (TX) (6-0) is idle
#   23   Wooster (5-2) def. Walsh 89-88
#   24   Calvin (5-3) def. Trinity Christian 80-47
#   25   Rhode Island Coll. (7-2) won at Trinity (CT) 70-68 and lost at Springfield 79-77

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 17, 2007, 02:38:10 AM

Quote from: ScotsFan on December 16, 2007, 09:08:06 AM
Quote from: sac on December 15, 2007, 11:14:19 PM
Benedictine is D3
oops, I must've been thinking of the wrong Benedictine.

Benedictine College in Atchison, Kansas is NAIA-2. Benedictine University in Lisle, Illinois is D3 ... and has been for decades.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 17, 2007, 10:16:57 PM

HOW THEY FARED, interim edition:

Monday games for current and prospective Top 25 teams:
#5 Mary Hardin-Baylor (5-1) won at Texas-Dallas 63-56
#6 Guilford (4-2) lost at Shenandoah 64-62
#18 Virginia Wesleyan (5-2) won at Averett 68-56
#22 Trinity (TX) (6-1) lost to Carthage 56-49 at Southwestern (Georgetown, TX)
Mississippi College (4-1) def. Hardin-Simmons 92-71

UT-Dallas led the Crusaders 54-49 with 5:44 left in the game, but could only manage two free throws down the stretch as UMHB caught and passed them on a game-ending 14-2 run.

Guilford played from behind the whole game, finally catching the Hornets inside the final two minutes. Clutch shooting gave Shenandoah the lead back, and the Quakers missed two game-tying chances in the final fourteen seconds.

Trinity missed their first 11 three-point attempts as the Red Men built a 14-point advantage. Then the Tigers got hot, specifically B.J. Moon who hit 4 straight treys, but Carthage was able to hold off the Tigers and secure the win.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on December 18, 2007, 02:19:25 AM

Interesting to note, that again there are low totals and close totals in the week four poll. 1. Rochester 580, 2 Brandeis 577, each work out to an average just over 23 pts (or 3rd place votes). However Rochester has 14 first place votes (over half) and Brandeis has only 2. This means that the majority of voters have Brandeis in the 2-4 range, while Rochester has a few votes outside of the top 5. Even with Brandeis' OT loss at UMD, it seems the victory over Amherst has made them a much more consistent top 3 vote getter than Rochester's undefeated record over a fairly uneventful schedule.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 18, 2007, 03:51:33 PM

Oh, we're all 'haters', eh?

Considering that Brandeis was a tournament team last year and Mass Dartmouth was a mid pack team of a decent, but not overpowering, conference, I think it can be chalked up to a 'fluke' or 'one of those things'. Personally, it was a trap game for Brandeis since they played Amherst right after (and beat them).

Congrats on Mass-Dartmouth being undefeated, but the rest of their wins aren't that impressive. (A 7-2 W. Connecticut only beat perennial punching bag Albertus Magnus by 2!)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 18, 2007, 04:05:07 PM

Ah, yes, you take it one day at a time, allegedly, but I can almost guarantee that some part of Brandeis' thinking that game was on Amherst, and they paid for it.

And yes, the Little East had a good tourney run, but a .500 team in that conference still doesn't quake the boots of many teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 18, 2007, 04:06:45 PM

UMASS-Dartmouth

Preseason--unranked
Week 1--unranked
Week 2--#48 or lower
Week 3-- #31
Week 4-- #27

UMD moved up 4 spots this week with only a win over Johnson and Wales, they're progressing fine for a team that started nowhere on anyone's radar.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on December 18, 2007, 05:56:32 PM

Quote from: sac on December 18, 2007, 04:06:45 PM
UMASS-Dartmouth

Preseason--unranked
Week 1--unranked
Week 2--#48 or lower
Week 3-- #31
Week 4-- #27

UMD moved up 4 spots this week with only a win over Johnson and Wales, they're progressing fine for a team that started nowhere on anyone's radar.

Is that a super sleeper pick for the national tourney?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on December 18, 2007, 06:04:26 PM

No suprise there wasn't much movement in the top 25 poll. Pretty much only Augustana. So was the rest of the poll a cut and paste job from week 3? :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 18, 2007, 06:30:11 PM

Quote from: LogShow on December 18, 2007, 06:04:26 PM
No suprise there wasn't much movement in the top 25 poll. Pretty much only Augustana. So was the rest of the poll a cut and paste job from week 3? :)

Neither the men's nor women's poll changed much from last week, but they both changed a little. I humbly suggest you check out my Daily Dose (http://www.d3hoops.com/dailydose/) column (http://www.d3hoops.com/dailydose/2007/12/18/top-25-news-and-notes-week-4/)on the Top 25; it sounds like you might be one of the lucky few to find it interesting. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 18, 2007, 06:37:45 PM

Defiance 53 #13 UW-Oshkosh 46

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on December 18, 2007, 06:42:54 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 18, 2007, 06:30:11 PM
Neither the men's nor women's poll changed much from last week, but they both changed a little. I humbly suggest you check out my Daily Dose (http://www.d3hoops.com/dailydose/) column (http://www.d3hoops.com/dailydose/2007/12/18/top-25-news-and-notes-week-4/)on the Top 25; it sounds like you might be one of the lucky few to find it interesting. :)

I acutally do read/enjoy it, I didn't know you were the author behind it! I like the idea of pointing out milestones, streakers, ect (which no doubt takes quite a time comittment). I always look to see Puget Sound makes it on there for milestones

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ChicagoHopeNut on December 18, 2007, 06:44:40 PM

Quote from: sac on December 18, 2007, 06:37:45 PM
Defiance 53 #13 UW-Oshkosh 46

Wow, I am really rather surprised by that score.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on December 18, 2007, 09:23:49 PM

Ok lets look at a few things, going back to that UMD game. Maybe a trap game...actually probably. UMD was missing a good player...I am not so sure he would have caused a smoking, since well UMD had four or 5 players in double figures...doubtful he would have made number 6, would have most likely taken someone else's minutes and points. Now onto another note. UMD had 1300 fans at the game on a thursday night, in what I am sure the Judges had hoped would be a low key game. Also of note Coach Meehan has only won ONCE at UMD with either Salem State or Brandeis, at least I believe that is what he said on hoopsville, or maybe it was never won, either way that says something. AND FINALLY, one of the Judges leading scorers, Joe Coppens suffered injury during that game and played only a fraction of his normal minutes and when he was in, played hurt. I am not making excuses, just putting it out there.

However I did get into an argument today with a friend of mine, who was making a case based on math and logic that UMD should be ahead or Brandeis in the polls. In terms of true math logic, he is correct, but with other things taken into account, he is not exactly on point.

His argument was: UMD is undefeated, and Beat Brandeis, therefore with no other losses to discredit them, they should be ahead of Brandeis, until they lose. Also while he did not bring this up, Brandeis' opponent win/loss is under 500, while UMD's is actually a bit above, even though I am sure the opponent opponent win/loss record should be a bit stronger for the Judges, having played teams such as Babson who have lost to Brandeis, Tufts, Emerson etc. Also the only common opponent so far is Bridgewater State, who the Judges beat by 5, and UMD beat by 8, so not much to take from that.

Still I think most would agree that the rankings reflect not just team A v. team B, but rather each team, vs every other team in the country, and if this is the case, then Brandeis deserves to be ranked where they are, or at the very least, above UMD.

If you do not agree with this, then perhaps you agree that I must get back to studying for my final exam.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 18, 2007, 11:54:19 PM

The fact is the UM-D (and Maryville to answer the stray post in this topic area)) will get their due if they keep winning and have a chance to prove it at the end of the year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 19, 2007, 12:29:40 AM

Moved that topic home. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 19, 2007, 12:57:51 PM

Quote from: ILive4This on December 18, 2007, 09:23:49 PM
In terms of true math logic, he is correct, but with other things taken into account, he is not exactly on point.

The transitive theory and score comparisons don't work in terms of rankings, though. There isn't a quantitative value that can be placed on wins and losses, and there are so many other factors that are taken into account. For one, though the pollsters try to be as objective as possible, the polls is, at its core, subjective. The merit in the poll comes from the fact that the pollsters are very informed and because of that, we accept their subjectivity as being MORE objective than if, say, you pulled 25 fans out of the crowd at any hometown game (hmm... I wonder who THEY would put #1...)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on December 19, 2007, 02:06:48 PM

Top Vote Getting Movers
+12 Elizabethtown
+9 Wilmington
+4 Augustana
+4 Mass Dartmouth
+4 Rowan
+3 Capital
+3 St. Thomas
+3 Centre
+3 Heidelberg
-4 Mary Hardin Baylor
-4 UW Whitewater
-4 Albion
-5 Emerson
-6 Roanoke
-9 Rhode Island Col
-9 Trinity (Conn)

This ignores teams that went from zero votes to some votes (Carleton, UW Platteville, William Patterson), and those that went from some votes to zero votes (Grinnell, Shenandoah, UW LaCrosse).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 22, 2007, 09:15:02 PM

Point leading Augie 31-25 at the half. The Point broadcast is found HERE (http://www.b1049.com) and LIVE STATS HERE (http://www.augustana.edu/athletics/livestats/xteams.htm)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 23, 2007, 11:34:09 AM

I'm guessing no official Top 25 until after the holidays? With New Year's on a Tuesday, is Pat going to wait until the following week?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on December 23, 2007, 02:41:24 PM

Quote from: chubbyboybaby on December 23, 2007, 09:20:50 AM
Quote from: ILive4This on December 18, 2007, 09:23:49 PM
Now onto another note. UMD had 1300 fans at the game on a thursday night, in what I am sure the Judges had hoped would be a low key game.

Why the hell would they expect a low key game? They were the number 3 team in the country. You don't think that every student at UMass Amherst would be at the basketball game if they were playing Duke??

Not if they all went home for Chistmas Break

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 23, 2007, 03:01:03 PM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on December 23, 2007, 11:34:09 AM
I'm guessing no official Top 25 until after the holidays? With New Year's on a Tuesday, is Pat going to wait until the following week?

There won't be a poll release this week (there never is for the "Christmas-Tuesday," partly because of the paucity of games that week), but there will be one on or about New Year's Day, which will take into account all of the games played in the two weeks since the Week 4 poll. As you can see in the 'How They Fared' post, most of the candidates will have played multiple times in that two-week stretch. Because of the holiday, I wouldn't expect to see a new poll until Weds. Jan. 2 at the earliest.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 23, 2007, 08:55:22 PM

Just for fun...what does everyone think of the possibility of Point jumping up a spot (or two??) after their road win against #5 Augustana. Point will of course need to beat a 5-1 Cal. Lutheran team on the road as well before the next poll.

Point is 15 votes behind #2 Brandeis and 18 behind #1 Rochester, both idle.

I'm sure Point will take some of Augustana's votes from them. Just a thought.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on December 24, 2007, 12:59:16 PM

I wouldn't be suprised if point did move up...they did get a first place vote after losing earlier this year.

As for the game against Cal Lu. They may be 5-1 but their schedule includes wins over Chapman, Whitman, and La Serria. Along with a loss to Chapman. Point will probably have a 20 point win even one Cal Lu's floor.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on December 25, 2007, 07:07:52 PM

Merry Christmas to everyone in the D3 world!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on December 25, 2007, 09:43:17 PM

Interesting to note, I came home for break and found an old USA today from November, with a small very small article on D3 basketball, and their pre season favorite was Point. They did not have rankings just mentioned various teams. Amherst and Williams were the mentions from the Northeast. Brief mention of Wash U and Tyler Nading. They also mentioned players to watch, Strong from Guilford was clearly a mention there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TeeDub on December 26, 2007, 01:13:23 PM

Quote from: LogShow on December 24, 2007, 12:59:16 PM
I wouldn't be suprised if point did move up...they did get a first place vote after losing earlier this year.

As for the game against Cal Lu. They may be 5-1 but their schedule includes wins over Chapman, Whitman, and La Serria. Along with a loss to Chapman. Point will probably have a 20 point win even one Cal Lu's floor.

And that is being conservative!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on December 27, 2007, 01:55:18 AM

Maybe, Point is very tough. I am interested to see how Cal Lu fairs against them. Good luck to Cal Lu...they will need it

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 27, 2007, 11:09:27 PM

Quote from: LogShow on December 27, 2007, 01:55:18 AM
Maybe, Point is very tough. I am interested to see how Cal Lu fairs against them. Good luck to Cal Lu...they will need it

Point has had subpar performances on the road this year. A lot of posters will see them knocking off Augustana on the road just recently. Prior to that, though, they've had troubles with so-called lesser opponents. They blew a big half time lead against NAIA opponent Viterbo and won by 8. They held just a four point lead against NathCon foe Edgewood before winning going away thanks to a couple of big runs in the 2nd half and were behind at half against MWC member Ripon before winning by just four against them.

So, don't give up on Cal. Lutheran yet...that's why they play the games!

*to be fair, leading scorer and top 3-pt. threat Pete Rortvedt missed all three of those games. He was back for the Augustana game...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 30, 2007, 07:14:36 PM

Whitewater won by a million. OK, just 100-47 over Rockford. After the Packer game, I stopped by and saw about the last 10 minutes of the first half...got bored and left at half time. I didn't even bother sticking around for the championship game of St. J's v St. N's.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 30, 2007, 08:51:05 PM

HOW THEY FARED (two weeks of Dec. 17-30) FINAL....at last!

#   1   Rochester (9-0) is idle (until Jan. 9)
#   2   Brandeis (9-1) is idle (until Jan. 7)
#   3   UW-Stevens Point (9-1) won at #5 Augustana 73-63
#   4   Amherst (7-2) lost at Florida Memorial 86-79
#   5   Augustana (9-2) won at Wartburg 75-61 and lost to #3 UW-Stevens Point 73-63
#   6   Guilford (4-2) lost at Shenandoah 64-62
#   7   Williams (9-0) won at Lehman 73-70 and won at CCNY 84-51
#   8   Hope (8-2) def. Roanoke 75-62 and lost to #21 Elmhurst 74-71, both at Orlando, FL; def. Grace Bible 97-48, and def. Mt. Vernon Nazarene 96-77
#   9   Mary Hardin-Baylor (7-1) won at Texas-Dallas 63-56, def. Worcester St. 83-68, and def. Penn St.-Behrend 71-65
#   10   Puget Sound (7-1) def. Edgewood 93-80 and lost to Westmont 78-75, both at Westmont College (CA)
#   11   Washington U. (8-2) is idle (until Jan. 7)
#   12   Capital (8-1) is idle
#   13   UW-Oshkosh (8-2) lost to Defiance 53-46 and def. Tri-State 81-72, both at Orlando, FL
#   14   Plattsburgh St. (7-1) won at Chapman 65-63 and lost to Occidental 69-64 at Chapman
#   15   UW-Whitewater (8-2) def. Cardinal Stritch 94-50, lost to St. John's 79-71 at St. Norbert, and def. Rockford 100-47 at St. Norbert
#   16   Stevens (8-0) is idle
#   17   Brockport St. (4-1) is idle
#   18   Wheaton (IL) (8-1) won at LaVerne 60-45
#   19   Lewis & Clark (6-2) ~~plays Golden State Baptist~~* def. UC-Santa Cruz 113-65 at Burlingame, CA, def. Villa Julie 111-63 at Phoenix, and def. Westminster (PA) 85-73 at Phoenix
#   20   Virginia Wesleyan (5-2) won at Averett 68-56
#   21   Elmhurst (6-1) def. Tri-State 75-65 and def. #8 Hope 74-71, both at Orlando, FL
#   22   Trinity (TX) (9-1) lost to Carthage 56-49 and def. Cal St. East Bay 59-47, both at Georgetown, TX; def. Wabash 72-66 and def. Ohio Northern 75-58
#   23   Wooster (9-2) def. Benedictine 91-62 and def. St. Mary's (MD) 85-70, both at Nassau, Bahamas; def. Wesley 94-61 and def. Notre Dame (OH) 87-71
#   24   Calvin (5-5) lost to Keene St. 73-67 and lost to Montclair St. 72-69, both at Montclair St.
#   25   St. Thomas (7-2) is idle

*According to the Lewis & Clark website (http://www.lcpioneers.com/sports/mbkb/2007-08/news/mbx1221), "The opening game in this weekend's tournament in Burlingame, Calif. against Golden State Baptist has been canceled. [...] Golden State Baptist pulled out of the tournament [...and n]o replacement opponent could be found[.]"

Thanks to MrMike88 for tipping me off about the Amherst game I was unaware of. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 30, 2007, 09:58:06 PM

HOW THEY FARED New Year's edition:

Games involving top 25 teams Monday and Tuesday of this week:

#12 Capital hosts Carnegie Mellon Monday 12/31
#18 Wheaton (IL) plays Dickinson at Caltech Monday 12/31
#21 Elmhurst hosts Anderson Monday 12/31
#3 UW-Stevens Point plays at Cal Lutheran Tuesday 1/1

There's a bunch of games Wednesday, but maybe there'll be a new poll before then.

Happy New Year, one and all! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on December 30, 2007, 10:46:17 PM

Why would anyone schedule a college game, or frankly any game high school and above on new years day. This may upset some people, but frankly I think this is completely unfair to the Athlete. Playing over break is one thing, that is the difference between the student-athletes and the regular students at the school, however not being able to enjoy the festivities of New Years eve while in your precious college years is just wrong. Shame on these schools for scheduling this game when they did.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on December 30, 2007, 11:14:21 PM

Quote from: ILive4This on December 30, 2007, 10:46:17 PM
Why would anyone schedule a college game, or frankly any game high school and above on new years day.

I think a few moderately important college football games are regularly scheduled on New Year's Day for a simple purpose: to make the NCAA a ton of money...oh, and to showcase athleticism and football and all that, too. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 30, 2007, 11:19:58 PM

Hampden-Sydney is leaving Virginia to play a basketball game.

New Year's or not, that is significant. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 31, 2007, 01:14:16 AM

Quote from: ILive4This on December 30, 2007, 10:46:17 PM
Why would anyone schedule a college game, or frankly any game high school and above on new years day. This may upset some people, but frankly I think this is completely unfair to the Athlete. Playing over break is one thing, that is the difference between the student-athletes and the regular students at the school, however not being able to enjoy the festivities of New Years eve while in your precious college years is just wrong. Shame on these schools for scheduling this game when they did.

I don't know, you have a whole lifetime for New Years Eve parties. College students only have four years to play hoops. May as well play a game when you can.

Besides, playing a game on New Years Day means that you probably didn't stay out too late the night before - and not gotten into trouble or done something stupid.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 31, 2007, 12:43:06 PM

I think the Point players will pass up an opportunity to stay home and do whatever they normally do on any other New Year's Eve and instead fly to sunny California to play a basketball game. It beats last year's potential trip to Regis College in Colorado! lol ;). A snow storm canceled that trip.

I'm still curious if the men went out early to watch the women play and win their California tourney.

By your post, ILive4This, I'm guessing you assume that every college student goes out and gets wasted on New Year's Eve and runs down Main St. streaking to the gym and wondering if KFC is still open (Old School-movie reference). Believe it or not, that's not the case...Obviously, I'm not saying that's wrong or not, but to think every college student needs a beer in his/her hand come the New Year would be inaccurate, IMO.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 31, 2007, 12:58:38 PM

Do we have a new poll this week?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 31, 2007, 02:26:33 PM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on December 23, 2007, 11:34:09 AM
I'm guessing no official Top 25 until after the holidays? With New Year's on a Tuesday, is Pat going to wait until the following week?

Quote from: David Collinge on December 23, 2007, 03:01:03 PM
There won't be a poll release this week (there never is for the "Christmas-Tuesday," partly because of the paucity of games that week), but there will be one on or about New Year's Day, which will take into account all of the games played in the two weeks since the Week 4 poll. As you can see in the 'How They Fared' post, most of the candidates will have played multiple times in that two-week stretch. Because of the holiday, I wouldn't expect to see a new poll until Weds. Jan. 2 at the earliest.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on December 31, 2007, 02:52:44 PM

#12 Capital trailed by as much as 10 in the first half, and trails Carnegie Mellon 38-32 at half time at the Capital Center.

Mellon shot 55% for the first half.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on December 31, 2007, 05:31:00 PM

Can someone point me to the information on regional rankings? Specifically what teams are in the northeast region and how the rankings are calculated?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 31, 2007, 05:56:22 PM

Quote from: fpc85 on December 31, 2007, 05:31:00 PM
Can someone point me to the information on regional rankings? Specifically what teams are in the northeast region and how the rankings are calculated?

There are links to lists of the teams in each region (men and women) on the front page of this site (http://www.d3hoops.com/). As for the rankings, you might want to consult the FAQ for this site (http://www.d3hoops.com/faq.php). HTH.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 01, 2008, 11:24:06 AM

And as expected Carnegie is going to be mixing things up this year, they are going to be the team that will cause the most impact in the UAA. They will NOT win the conference, but they will determine who wins, because the team who does NOT get beat by carnegie in the "upset" is the team that WILL win the conference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: April on January 01, 2008, 12:16:45 PM

Dudes (calispeak),

I leave for 10 mos and come back to find Rochester #1 again? What gives??? :D

j/k Obviously all the players are new.... so :-* and good luck. As long as the team we lose too in the playoffs doesnt lose to them in the Final Four using some jr high basketball lack-of-skills I think I am good.... and since we will finish #1, that will not be a problem. :P

Incidentally, thanks to OS who felt the need to text me and tell me its going to happen. :D

Also, no SCIAC teams in the Top 25? Anti West Coast Bias much? :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 01, 2008, 03:09:38 PM

will be interesting to see how the Cal Lu-Point game turns out. Is there a webcast?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 01, 2008, 08:54:32 PM

Quote from: April on January 01, 2008, 12:16:45 PM
Also, no SCIAC teams in the Top 25? Anti West Coast Bias much? :P

Welcome back. Who, through Dec. 16 games, which is our last poll, would you have had us put in the Top 25? Occidental was 3-1 with two wins against La Sierra and one against West Coast Baptist. Cal Lutheran was 3-1 with a split against Chapman.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: April on January 01, 2008, 11:10:25 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 01, 2008, 08:54:32 PM
Quote from: April on January 01, 2008, 12:16:45 PM
Also, no SCIAC teams in the Top 25? Anti West Coast Bias much? :P

Welcome back. Who, through Dec. 16 games, which is our last poll, would you have had us put in the Top 25? Occidental was 3-1 with two wins against La Sierra and one against West Coast Baptist. Cal Lutheran was 3-1 with a split against Chapman.

Pat.... I am so sad to know that I've only been gone for 10mos and you no longer recognize a joke. :P

Quote from: LogShow on January 01, 2008, 03:09:38 PM
will be interesting to see how the Cal Lu-Point game turns out. Is there a webcast?

http://www.b1049.com/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 02, 2008, 12:05:24 AM

Ah April - it is good to see you return. But... even if it was a joke, he did ask a legit question. You brought it up - joke or not - and it was answered :)!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 02, 2008, 12:11:07 AM

HOW THEY FARED New Year's edition:

Games involving top 25 teams Monday and Tuesday of this week:

#3 UW-Stevens Point lost at Cal Lutheran 72-70 (OT)
#12 Capital lost to Carnegie Mellon 71-65
#18 Wheaton (IL) def. Dickinson 78-52 at Caltech
#21 Elmhurst def. Anderson 81-65

There's a bunch of games Wednesday, but maybe there'll be a new poll before then.

Happy New Year, one and all! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 02, 2008, 12:17:14 AM

Well, that sucked. 72-70 to Cal. Lutheran in OT. Cal. Luth. misses both free throws with 7 seconds left, so Point has a chance to tie or win. Jerome Wotachek misses at the buzzer. Point really struggled. Give up 50 points in the 2nd half after having a 37-22 lead at the break. Yuck.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 02, 2008, 12:19:50 AM

6 of top 10 drop games over the holidays and 9 of top 15.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 02, 2008, 01:27:19 AM

Quote from: April on January 01, 2008, 11:10:25 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 01, 2008, 08:54:32 PM
Quote from: April on January 01, 2008, 12:16:45 PM
Also, no SCIAC teams in the Top 25? Anti West Coast Bias much? :P

Welcome back. Who, through Dec. 16 games, which is our last poll, would you have had us put in the Top 25? Occidental was 3-1 with two wins against La Sierra and one against West Coast Baptist. Cal Lutheran was 3-1 with a split against Chapman.
Pat.... I am so sad to know that I've only been gone for 10mos and you no longer recognize a joke. :P

Quote from: LogShow on January 01, 2008, 03:09:38 PM
will be interesting to see how the Cal Lu-Point game turns out. Is there a webcast?
http://www.b1049.com/

And in your 10 months I guess you forgot that other people read this board and take joking questions seriously; therefore, I answer them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 02, 2008, 10:11:19 AM

Hey, let's all play nice...group hug??? :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 02, 2008, 11:47:54 AM

Was there supposed to be a new poll this week, or was I mistaken?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: April on January 02, 2008, 12:42:59 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 02, 2008, 01:27:19 AM
Quote from: April on January 01, 2008, 11:10:25 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 01, 2008, 08:54:32 PM
Quote from: April on January 01, 2008, 12:16:45 PM
Also, no SCIAC teams in the Top 25? Anti West Coast Bias much? :P

Welcome back. Who, through Dec. 16 games, which is our last poll, would you have had us put in the Top 25? Occidental was 3-1 with two wins against La Sierra and one against West Coast Baptist. Cal Lutheran was 3-1 with a split against Chapman.
Pat.... I am so sad to know that I've only been gone for 10mos and you no longer recognize a joke. :P

Quote from: LogShow on January 01, 2008, 03:09:38 PM
will be interesting to see how the Cal Lu-Point game turns out. Is there a webcast?
http://www.b1049.com/

And in your 10 months I guess you forgot that other people read this board and take joking questions seriously; therefore, I answer them.

Not at all.... I am just mean. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 02, 2008, 01:21:58 PM

Quote from: ILive4This on January 02, 2008, 11:47:54 AM
Was there supposed to be a new poll this week, or was I mistaken?

Look a few pages back, I think they said not till next week because of New Years

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 02, 2008, 01:24:19 PM

Quote from: sac on January 02, 2008, 12:19:50 AM
6 of top 10 drop games over the holidays and 9 of top 15.

There will be some moving and shaking, thats for sure. Hopefully Puget Sound doesn't shake to far down the poll

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 02, 2008, 01:36:40 PM

Quote from: LogShow on January 02, 2008, 01:21:58 PM
Quote from: ILive4This on January 02, 2008, 11:47:54 AM
Was there supposed to be a new poll this week, or was I mistaken?

Look a few pages back, I think they said not till next week because of New Years

There will be a new Top 25 I think later today!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 02, 2008, 06:16:14 PM

It's posted now for games through December 31, 2007.

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2008, 06:27:56 PM

And, just for April ;), Oxy enters at #25; too bad CalLu's win over UWSP came after the deadline!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 02, 2008, 06:38:56 PM

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on January 02, 2008, 01:36:40 PM
Quote from: LogShow on January 02, 2008, 01:21:58 PM
Quote from: ILive4This on January 02, 2008, 11:47:54 AM
Was there supposed to be a new poll this week, or was I mistaken?

Look a few pages back, I think they said not till next week because of New Years

There will be a new Top 25 I think later today!

I stand corrected :). The one next week will be a lot more telling

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 02, 2008, 06:56:48 PM

Every poll moving forward is always more telling, since there are more games played.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 02, 2008, 07:16:14 PM

Were people aware of the Amherst Loss to the NAIA school in florida, I do not remember it ever being mentioned on here.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 02, 2008, 07:37:49 PM

QuoteRe: Top 25 talk
« Reply #3020 on: December 30, 2007, 07:51:05 pm »

HOW THEY FARED (two weeks of Dec. 17-30) FINAL....at last!

# 1 Rochester (9-0) is idle (until Jan. 9)
# 2 Brandeis (9-1) is idle (until Jan. 7)
# 3 UW-Stevens Point (9-1) won at #5 Augustana 73-63
# 4 Amherst (7-2) lost at Florida Memorial 86-79
...

Thanks to MrMike88 for tipping me off about the Amherst game I was unaware of. Smiley
« Last Edit: December 30, 2007, 08:54:26 pm by David Collinge »

Quote from: ILive4This on January 02, 2008, 07:16:14 PM
Were people aware of the Amherst Loss to the NAIA school in florida, I do not remember it ever being mentioned on here.

David kept his tabulations up to date thru Sunday pm.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 02, 2008, 09:39:09 PM

Top Vote Getting Movers
+10 Widener
+8 Roanoke
+7 Elmhurst
+7 Tufts
+6 Brockport State
+6 Centre
+4 Mass Dartmouth
+4 Elizabethtown
-5 UW Oshkosh
-5 Plattsburgh St.
-5 Mississippi College
-5 Carleton
-6 Guilford
-8 Capital
-10 Rhode Island Col
-11 Wilmington

This ignores teams that went from zero votes to some votes (Occidental, Salem St, Shenandoah, Cal Lutheran, Defiance, Milsaps, etc), and those that went from some votes to zero votes (Calvin, Albion, Keene St, Heidelberg, Aurora, etc).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 02, 2008, 09:44:08 PM

AVG Poll Spot through 6 Polls
1. Amherst 3.2
2. UWSP 3.6
3. Rochester 4.0
4. Brandeis 5.6
5. Guilford 7.6
6. Augustana 7.8
7. Mary Hardin Baylor 9.8
8. Williams 10.4
9. Wash U 10.4
10. Hope 12.6

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: chubbyboybaby on January 04, 2008, 12:30:52 AM

i think elms is going to take down brandeis.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave84 on January 04, 2008, 10:30:29 AM

i've noticed that a 9-1 trinity (tx) team has fallen out of the top 25. i guess i can't complain too much, texas still has one team holding strong in Mary Hardin-Baylor. has anyone seen this MHBU team play this season? they seemed to be a terrific defensive team last year when I saw them play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 04, 2008, 12:16:26 PM

Any basis for why Brandeis will fall to Elms? Last year Brandeis won by 15

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: April on January 04, 2008, 04:01:54 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2008, 06:27:56 PM
And, just for April ;), Oxy enters at #25; too bad CalLu's win over UWSP came after the deadline!

lol.... uh.... I'm not going to ACTUALLY say that any SCIAC teams should be in the poll until I see them. :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 04, 2008, 10:43:48 PM

Please remember that Clarion PA is D-2. (Brockport State)

(But Hamilton isn't! OUCH! )

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 04, 2008, 11:00:47 PM

Did I read correctly that UR has a loss?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 04, 2008, 11:05:14 PM

Quote from: ILive4This on January 04, 2008, 11:00:47 PM
Did I read correctly that UR has a loss?

No.

Quote from: David Collinge on January 04, 2008, 10:21:03 PM
# 1 Rochester (9-0) is idle

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 04, 2008, 11:05:31 PM

I knew it could not be correct

It was rochester college in Michigan who lost, although the loss was given to UR on those Massey (sp?) rankings

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 04, 2008, 11:41:24 PM

Stevens took its first loss of the season... as David pointed out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 05, 2008, 03:30:45 AM

Bad week to be a SUNY :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 05, 2008, 03:01:51 PM

Babson is presently giving Amherst all they care to handle; the Beavers lead by 1 and have possession with 14:28 remaining. Live stats. (http://www3.babson.edu/livestats//mens_basketball/main.html)

UPDATE: Amherst responds with a 15-4 run, including back-to-back-to-back 3's, and leads by 10 with 10:18 left.

UPDATE: Babson on a 9-0 run, is within 3 and has the ball with 0:42 left.

UPDATE: Amherst (8-2) holds on to defeat Babson (3-8), 60-55.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 05, 2008, 04:02:38 PM

Babson has traveled quite a bit this season, and in my opinion (which does not mean much) has the toughest non-conference schedule in the country, or certainly in the northeast.

They are 3-8 BUT....

they hung closer to undefeated Emerson, then just about anyone has this season (away)
They hung close to Trinity which was an may end up being one of the top teams in the northeast (away)
Lost AT Brandeis (#2 in the country, I believe number 7 when they played)
Lost AT Wash U by 2
Lost AT Tufts another, tough northeast team
Lost AT Chicago, a tough UAA team (thats three non-conference games against the UAA the toughest conference in D3 this season thus far)
And now loosing against Amherst (#4 in the country)

Their schedule included two teams that were at one point ranked first in the country this season, three top 2 teams, 4 top 25 teams, and one team unranked but is undefeated. They are battle tested even if they did not win, for when NEWMAC play starts against Clark on Wednesday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: old_hooper on January 05, 2008, 04:16:19 PM

This was Babson's only 3rd game at home this year. They were there for the opening season tournament against Conn College and Bates. The 3-8 record does not do justice to the competition that they have faced thus far. They have not played a team with a losing record this year and the the combined record of their opponents 73-29. I don't think that to many teams in the country can boost of anything close to that. I don't think Babson will lose to many games at home this year and it will be very interesting to see hoe they do it conference because that will be their only chance in the tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 05, 2008, 06:14:45 PM

According to massey, Babson's schedule is ranked #5, so they're definately in the conversation.

1. Ohio Wesleyan
2. UT- Tyler
3. Hardon Simmons
4. John Carroll
5. Babson

My personal favorite would be Augustana, who comes in at #8, but with only CCIW games remaining they're sure to climb the charts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: old_hooper on January 05, 2008, 06:47:14 PM

Interesting Sac! Looking at the other teams mentioned, Ohio Wes has had a difficult schedule with good teams Trinity TX, Rochester, Wooster & Capital. Texas Tyler and Hardon Simmons have a couple D1 schools on their schedules and maybe 1 strong D3 team thus far. John Carroll has had Capital, Ohio Northern and D1 Cleve State. Babson's schedule has been as tough as anyone and they have done most of it on the road. You can dispute the record of 3-8 but they deserve a lot of credit for the aggressive schedule and with the exception of maybe one game they have been really competitive. I would not be surprised to see them go on a run here in the last couple months of the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 05, 2008, 08:47:12 PM

Elizabethtown loses tonight to York (Pa.) 80-74... the Blue Jays first loss of the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 05, 2008, 11:15:56 PM

David, you've got a game missing for Elmhurst - they host winless Alma tomorrow (barring the upset of the year, I think you can change them to 10-1 right away ;D). EDIT: thanks; changed!

Rough week for Brockport - in five days from #11 to probably 0 votes! And I wonder how far UWSP will fall? Neither loss is particularly embarassing, but #3 is not supposed to lose 2 in one week (I'll guess around 13th).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 05, 2008, 11:22:16 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 05, 2008, 11:15:56 PM
Rough week for Brockport - in five days from #11 to probably 0 votes!

The odd thing is that all three of Brockport's losses were with All-American Sherod Harris, who sat out the entire first semester for eligibility reasons.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 05, 2008, 11:30:36 PM

With loses above them, UMD should move up nicely they beat Framingham State by a much larger margin then either Brandeis or Williams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 06, 2008, 12:48:31 AM

Yes, UMD would probably move up, but comparing scores for games against Framingham would only be part of the equation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 06, 2008, 12:50:50 AM

I don't see how UMD moves up more than 2 or 3 places.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Cyclone0205 on January 06, 2008, 10:41:32 AM

How far does Stevens drop in the poll? I figure to see them around 15-17

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 06, 2008, 12:28:57 PM

Not sure about Stevens, but it was a tough week for Stevens Point. With two losses since the last poll, Point will probably drop out of the top 10 with Oshkosh most likely jumping fellow WIACer Whitwater, possibly as high at 10. Whitewater will probably still hover around the 15 mark.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 06, 2008, 01:31:50 PM

I think one would assume Brockport would have to fall off the poll completely at 4-4

Stevens should drop a few sports

Point out of the top 10 is a good guess, but perhaps right around 10th is fair

L&C either bottom 5 or out of the poll, same for Plattsburgh

UMD should be a top 20 team by next week, maybe higher.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 06, 2008, 01:55:42 PM

Conference play always starts to shake things up in the polls. Old School, when was the last time Point lost back to back games?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 06, 2008, 02:37:06 PM

LogShow,

It happened twice two years ago (05-06) when Point went 17-10, and in the first National Championship year (03-04). Point actually lost 3/4 that year.

It doesn't happen very often!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 06, 2008, 03:52:33 PM

Quote from: LogShow on January 06, 2008, 01:55:42 PM
Conference play always starts to shake things up in the polls. Old School, when was the last time Point lost back to back games?

It definitely will. Prior to the holiday season, some WIAC teams were 3 games into the conference season and with some team having played a four going into next week's poll, Point, Oshkosh and Whitewater are all in the Top 25. The NESCAC has yet to start league play and they have Amherst and Williams in the poll. They play each other coming up and though that conference only plays each other once, it's still CONFERENCE rivalries that bring out the best of some teams. Same goes for the UAA, with Rochester, Brandeis, Washington U and the CCIW with Augustana, Elmhurst and Wheaton (IL) all yet to start conference play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 06, 2008, 04:11:13 PM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on January 06, 2008, 03:52:33 PM
Quote from: LogShow on January 06, 2008, 01:55:42 PM
Conference play always starts to shake things up in the polls. Old School, when was the last time Point lost back to back games?

It definitely will. Prior to the holiday season, some WIAC teams were 3 games into the conference season and with some team having played a four going into next week's poll, Point, Oshkosh and Whitewater are all in the Top 25. The NESCAC has yet to start league play and they have Amherst and Williams in the poll. They play each other coming up and though that conference only plays each other once, it's still CONFERENCE rivalries that bring out the best of some teams. Same goes for the UAA, with Rochester, Brandeis, Washington U and the CCIW with Augustana, Elmhurst and Wheaton (IL) all yet to start conference play.

I completely agree...and thats why conference is so exciting!

In the NWC Lewis and Clark (the favorite to win the NWC had to force overtime to win their first conference game and then dropped their second against Pacific Lutheran, a middle of the road team)...every game is crucial

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Jacketfan2011 on January 06, 2008, 04:18:47 PM

Not to nit-pick, but Rochester is 1-0 in UAA play having beaten CMU back in December. OK, it's nit-picking....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 06, 2008, 09:01:13 PM

HOW THEY FARED (week of Jan. 1-Jan. 6) (FINAL; games of Dec. 31 already accounted for in current poll)

#   1   Rochester (9-0) is idle
#   2   Brandeis (9-1) is idle
#   3   UW-Stevens Point (9-3) lost at Cal. Lutheran 72-70 (OT) and lost to #18 UW-Oshkosh 73-62
#   4   Amherst (8-2) won at Babson 60-55
#   5   Williams (12-0) def. Keene St. 86-66, def. Mitchell 71-46, and def. Nichols 83-66
#   6   Augustana (9-2) is idle
#   7   Mary Hardin-Baylor (9-1) def. LeTourneau 74-73 and def. East Texas Baptist 83-55
#   8   Washington U. (8-2) is idle
#   9   Hope (8-2) is idle
#   10   Puget Sound (9-1) won at Pacific 82-61 and won at George Fox 90-78
#   11   Brockport St. (4-4) lost at Clarion 92-84, lost at Hamilton 72-62, and lost at St. Lawrence 86-78
#   12   Guilford (6-2) def. Averett 82-63 and won at Emory 82-67
#   13   Stevens (9-1) lost at Rochester Tech. 91-85 and won at Nazareth 100-97 (2OT)
#   14   Elmhurst (10-1) def. Manchester 76-62, won at Benedictine 82-72, and def. Alma 79-65 (game rescheduled from Dec. 1)
#   15   Wheaton (IL) (10-1) def. Rivier 72-65 (OT) at Caltech
#   16   Lewis & Clark (7-3) won at Pacific 80-75 (OT) and lost to Pacific Lutheran 108-95
#   17   UW-Whitewater (10-2) def. North Central (IL) 88-78 and won at UW-River Falls 88-82 (OT)
#   18   UW-Oshkosh (10-2) def. Finlandia 82-58 and won at #3 UW-Stevens Point 73-62
#   19   Plattsburgh St. (8-2) lost to Gordon 80-62 and def. SUNY-Purchase 98-61, both at Union
#   20   Capital (9-2) def. Baldwin-Wallace 103-76
#   21   Virginia Wesleyan (7-2) def. Methodist 79-51 and won at Salisbury 87-69
#   22   Wooster (10-2) def. Kenyon 81-63
#   23   Mass.-Dartmouth (10-0) def. Curry 87-80 and won at Framingham St. 79-63
#   24   St. Thomas (8-2) def. Carleton 81-71
#   25   Occidental (10-1) def. Chapman 69-45 and def. St. Scholastica 76-69

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 06, 2008, 11:29:23 PM

I have a predicament, at 12-0 I would in my personal rankings put Williams ahead of Amherst, ever so slightly, however, I think Amherst will win on their home court. Can you rank Williams ahead of Amherst if you think Amherst would win in a head to head match up even if the only variable is the home court?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 07, 2008, 08:55:37 PM

Brandeis in some trouble against elms, Down by 1 with 4 seconds left

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2008, 08:59:36 PM

... and?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 07, 2008, 09:04:49 PM

And I am waiting for the scoreboard to update...

I was supposed to attend this game, but then schedule changed. I had a bad feeling about this game. The last game I was supposed to go to but could not make.... was yeah you guessed it UMD.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 07, 2008, 09:07:39 PM

81-81 end of regulation

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2008, 09:13:04 PM

Quote from: ILive4This on January 07, 2008, 09:04:49 PM
And I am waiting for the scoreboard to update...

I was supposed to attend this game, but then schedule changed. I had a bad feeling about this game. The last game I was supposed to go to but could not make.... was yeah you guessed it UMD.

Unless you're normally in the starting lineup I don't think it's your fault. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 07, 2008, 09:19:38 PM

Well to put it this way, i don't miss many, however my uniform does not get returned to the equipment room after the game. I am a bit superstitious what can I say.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 07, 2008, 09:21:30 PM

Brandeis defeats Elms 96-94 in Overtime

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 07, 2008, 10:16:01 PM

Since the box score is still to come, some things of note from the Brandeis side of tonights overtime nail-biter at Elms:

Sr Guard Joe Coppens scores a career high 37 points w/ 6 from behind the arc
So Forward Terrell Hollins added 20 and 12 boards for I believe his fourth double-double of the season

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 07, 2008, 10:59:25 PM

Also to add, a game winning three pointer by Andre Roberson with 3 seconds left in the game. He had 12 points for the game.

Seems like a solid "homecoming" for the duo from Springfield MA (Hollins and Roberson combine for 32 points)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 07, 2008, 11:17:19 PM

Brandeis wasn't the only Top 25 team forced into OT tonight; see below.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 08, 2008, 12:05:44 AM

Top Vote Getting Movers

+16 Cal Lutheran
+16 Milsaps
+15 Carnegie Mellon
+13 UW Platteville
+6 UW Oshkosh
+6 Rhode Island Coll
+6 Coast Guard
-5 Wilmington
-5 Stevens
-6 Lewis and Clark
-6 Plattsburgh St
-9 Trinity (Tx)
-11 UW Stevens Point
-28 Brockport State

This ignores teams that went from zero votes to some votes (DeSales and Geneseo State), and those that went from some votes to zero votes (Mississippi Coll, Shenandoah, Tufts, Carleton, Grinnell, and Rowan).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 08, 2008, 12:33:32 AM

Puget Sound moved up to 9th in the polls but has 2 tough games this week...hopefully they can keep it rolling!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 08, 2008, 01:27:00 AM

I know this is the wrong place to post this, but so many people come threw this thread that I am sure someone will know the answer.

Just for fun I was browsing the open dates threads and the tournament openings. Many promise a Cash Guarantee, I was wondering if someone could explain this guarantee further...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Cards7580 on January 08, 2008, 03:13:47 AM

We could, but then we would have to kill you ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 08, 2008, 09:25:59 AM

Quote from: ILive4This on January 08, 2008, 01:27:00 AM
I know this is the wrong place to post this, but so many people come threw this thread that I am sure someone will know the answer.

Just for fun I was browsing the open dates threads and the tournament openings. Many promise a Cash Guarantee, I was wondering if someone could explain this guarantee further...

When teams agree to play non-conference games, they enter into a contract. Many times that contract involves the home team promising to pay a certain amount of money to the visiting team. These "guarantees" are much more relevant in Division I, where, say, North Carolina might pay Kansas $50,000 to come play at the Dean Dome. In essence, it is a cut of the gate (ticket sales revenue). When Illinois Wesleyan played an exhibition vs U. of Illinois in 2005-06, IWU was paid $15,000 since the game was sold out as part of U of I's season ticket package...

http://www.iwuhoops.com/tip.jpg

In Division III, ticket sales are obviously not a huge factor. What is average D3 attendance...maybe 500? (And a large % of D3 fans don't have to pay to get in.) So D3 guarantees are simply about helping the visiting team with travel/meal expenses, etc.. Typical D3 guarantees are probably about $250. Schools like Hope, Calvin, Illinois Wesleyan, and Wooster (regular attendance leaders) probably guarantee more.

One final note, the money is guaranteed. If the home team backs out of the game (it definitely happens), the other school still gets the money.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 08, 2008, 02:08:30 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 08, 2008, 09:25:59 AM
Quote from: ILive4This on January 08, 2008, 01:27:00 AM
I know this is the wrong place to post this, but so many people come threw this thread that I am sure someone will know the answer.

Just for fun I was browsing the open dates threads and the tournament openings. Many promise a Cash Guarantee, I was wondering if someone could explain this guarantee further...

When teams agree to play non-conference games, they enter into a contract. Many times that contract involves the home team promising to pay a certain amount of money to the visiting team. These "guarantees" are much more relevant in Division I, where, say, North Carolina might pay Kansas $50,000 to come play at the Dean Dome. In essence, it is a cut of the gate (ticket sales revenue). When Illinois Wesleyan played an exhibition vs U. of Illinois in 2005-06, IWU was paid $15,000 since the game was sold out as part of U of I's season ticket package...

http://www.iwuhoops.com/tip.jpg

In Division III, ticket sales are obviously not a huge factor. What is average D3 attendance...maybe 500? (And a large % of D3 fans don't have to pay to get in.) So D3 guarantees are simply about helping the visiting team with travel/meal expenses, etc.. Typical D3 guarantees are probably about $250. Schools like Hope, Calvin, Illinois Wesleyan, and Wooster (regular attendance leaders) probably guarantee more.

One final note, the money is guaranteed. If the home team backs out of the game (it definitely happens), the other school still gets the money.

Q, I was all set to play 'gotcha' (a couple year's ago I was chastised for being 'spoiled' by IWU's crowds when I was shocked at the low attendance reported at some other games), but you're actually not far off - the 'official' NCAA average for d3 men's bball in 2006-07 was 430.

Of course, this number is of highly dubious accuracy. As you note, at many venues few if any people pay to get in, so a count is both unverifiable and of low priority. Fairly often, no attendance figure is given in a box score, so (presumably) it is 'officially' zero. On the flip side, a former SCIAC scorekeeper recently noted that he deliberately inflated the attendance for particularly pathetic crowds, in hopes of improving future attendance. Bottom line, I suspect we will never know 'real' average attendance to better than +/- 50%. :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 08, 2008, 02:54:17 PM

You obviously haven't heard to the patented Amidon / Harris / Fendley attendance generation algorithm that's in use at Wabash for basketball and football.

"Smed, how many?"
"Sparse crowd for Oberlin. Looks like our side is 2/3 full..."
"OK..."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 08, 2008, 03:29:43 PM

I always admired Adrian's remarkable ability to stop selling tickets at nice round numbers

2007 Adrian attendance figures

12-09-06 ROCHESTER 225
12-23-06 MANCHESTER 100
12-30-06 OBERLIN 100
01-06-07 * KAZOO-M 150
01-10-07 * CALVIN-M 600
01-17-07 * HOPE-M 750
01-20-07 * TSU-M 250
01-27-07 * ALBION-M 200
02-07-07 * OLIVET-M 200
02-17-06 * ALMA-M 450
2-21-07 ALBION-M 500

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TeeDub on January 08, 2008, 05:04:52 PM

The west seems exceptionally well represented in the current poll. It never hurts having the Wisconsin contingent represent the region, but it appears that the West is boasting other strong showings as well. David C. seems to be a good historian on the poll. David, is this the strongest showing the west has made in recent history?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 08, 2008, 05:09:22 PM

Maybe with the FAR western teams from Califonia and the Pacific Northwest, but the WIAC, MIAC and even the IIAC have frequently graced the poll with multiple teams.

It wasn't to long ago St. Thomas was in the top 5........or was it?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 08, 2008, 05:37:23 PM

Quote from: Jordis Rocks on January 08, 2008, 05:04:52 PM
The west seems exceptionally well represented in the current poll. It never hurts having the Wisconsin contingent represent the region, but it appears that the West is boasting other strong showings as well. David C. seems to be a good historian on the poll. David, is this the strongest showing the west has made in recent history?

There are 8 West Region teams ranked this week, led by Puget Sound at #9. That ties a best-ever for the West, which also had 8 ranked teams in Weeks 3 & 4 of 2002-03 and in Week 11 of 2001-02. This week there's a bit better balance than those weeks; the other times, 4 of the 8 West teams were from the WIAC, while this week there's just 3. In each case there've been 4 conferences represented; this week's poll is the first time that three West Region conferences have had multiple ranked teams (WIAC-3, NWC-2, SCIAC-2.) Relative to the other three weeks, this week's poll is a little bottom-heavy for the West, with four teams in the 21-24 slots. But it was still a strong week for the West overall.

In terms of points, however, this week's total of 1768 is nowhere near the record West total of 2588, set last season in Week 8. That week there were only 6 teams ranked, but four of them were in the top 10, all four of them higher than this week's highest team (#9 UPS). In fact, the West's total vote this week was only the third-best for this season, eclipsed in Weeks 3 (1827) and 4 (1786).

Quote from: sac on January 08, 2008, 05:09:22 PM
It wasn't to long ago St. Thomas was in the top 5........or was it?

St. Thomas was in the Top 10 last season from wire to wire, and in the top 5 in 8 of those polls.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 08, 2008, 05:45:30 PM

A number of teams do not sell tickets for their games, and therefore attendance figures are rough estimates done by some eyeballing by the SID.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 08, 2008, 07:46:22 PM

So I am a little unsure about the Amherst/Williams show down coming up, as Amherst is only leading by 6 at the half against NESCAC bottom-dweller Wesleyan AT HOME.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 08, 2008, 11:36:19 PM

Concordia-Austin (TX) (http://www.d3hoops.com/school/C-A/mens/2008) defeated #8 NAIA-2 Hastings NE in Austin in late December. (Aquinas (http://www.aquinas.edu/athletics/mens_bball.html) MI is #9 and Walsh (http://www.walsh.edu/200708schedule.htm) OH is #3 in the same poll. (http://naia.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl-div2/spec-rel/121207aaa.html))

CUA is a very good "unknown".

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pio20 on January 08, 2008, 11:48:37 PM

Pacific Lutheran beating #9 Puget Sound 57-50 at the half...PLU took down then #16 Lewis & Clark last week and is trying to do the same to UPS tonight.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pio20 on January 09, 2008, 01:00:32 AM

PLU and #9 UPS tied at 98 with a minute to go!

Update: OT!!!

Update: Looked like UPS had it, up by four with the ball but PLU battled back...going to double OT!! This one is a classic!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pio20 on January 09, 2008, 01:17:27 AM

Appears to be over as UPS has scored the first nine points in the second OT and is now up 123-114 with 27 seconds left. UPS wins 125-116.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 09, 2008, 10:59:23 AM

Not sure what board would be appropriate for this. UPS had THREE players score 30+ points last night. Anyone know just how rare that was? (I doubt that is any official category for records, and have no clue how to research it.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 09, 2008, 11:45:08 AM

I think the first place to check would be the box score from last years 200+ game for lincoln

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 09, 2008, 02:02:07 PM

Anyone know how Lincoln has fared thus far in Division II?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 09, 2008, 02:04:45 PM

I will answer my own question, they are 1-11 and only two of those games were at Home

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Rhodes Scholar on January 09, 2008, 03:05:48 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 09, 2008, 10:59:23 AM
Not sure what board would be appropriate for this. UPS had THREE players score 30+ points last night. Anyone know just how rare that was? (I doubt that is any official category for records, and have no clue how to research it.)

That's a very interesting question, and I'd have to imagine it's extremely rare. I have no idea if it ever happened before in D3.

I'm sure it happened in the ABA with high-scoring teams like the Pittsburgh Condors. They had two players (John Brisker and George Thompson) who averaged close to 30 a game and two others (George Carter and Bob Verga) who averaged around 20 a game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 09, 2008, 04:35:32 PM

Quote from: OxyBob on January 09, 2008, 01:33:23 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 09, 2008, 10:59:23 AM
Not sure what board would be appropriate for this. UPS had THREE players score 30+ points last night. Anyone know just how rare that was? (I doubt that is any official category for records, and have no clue how to research it.)

Quote from: ILive4This on January 09, 2008, 11:45:08 AM
I think the first place to check would be the box score from last years 200+ game for lincoln

In that game Sami Wylie had 69 pts, Dwight Dean had 33, and Darryl White had 28. Two players scored 10, and two others had 11.

OxyBob

Thanks for checking, OB; I had immediately thought of Lincoln, but they were so focused on getting Wylie the record, I doubted it (though #3 was closer to 30 than I would have guessed).

Grinnell gives minutes to so many players that they seem unlikely, but perhaps a Grinnell opponent? Any 'system' scholars in the audience? (Knowing your feelings about the system, you're excused, Bob.;))

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 09, 2008, 07:10:07 PM

Well, the only hunch I had didn't pan out: IWU scored their highest-ever total in blowing out Grinnell in the 2001 tourney, and they were a well-balanced team (as opposed to relying on one or two scorers). TOO well-balanced, as it turns out - NO one scored 30, but 6 players had 13 or more!

Until proven otherwise, I'm gonna take three players at 30+ as a d3 first.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on January 09, 2008, 09:46:33 PM

Looked through some Wooster box scores, especially from its 05-06 season (where Woo scored over 100 in 12 games) and didn't see any time that Woo got close to having 3 players with 30 or more points.

In Wooster's scoring record game from that season (a 150-101 win against system team Emory & Henry), only Tom Port scored over 30 for Woo.

I didn't expect to find a situation where Woo would have done this, because usually its scoring is too balanced. That night by UPS sounds like quite a feat by those players.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 09, 2008, 09:55:15 PM

Shoot! I had a hunch about a game where 3 guys scored more then 30 points. A redlands game from a few years ago against Cal Baptist. 2 guys had over 40 points but not 3 over 30.

http://www.redlands.edu/prebuilt/pdf/athletics/2005basketball_mens/cbu-ur.htm

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 09, 2008, 09:56:34 PM

By the way that score cracks me up...I didn't think it was possible to lose by 30 when you score 150+ points. Lol, OxyBob must have loved reading about that game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 11, 2008, 06:34:31 PM

This is going to be a great weekend!

Amherst vs. Williams
Augustana at #10 Elmhurst...could they drop 2 in a row?

Not to mention the numerous other big games this weekend. I will be keeping my eye on the scoreboard to see what happens.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 11, 2008, 09:36:11 PM

I encourage everyone to turn on the audio to the UR/Brockport Chase Semi-final, this is one heck of a game.
Does anyone know if the webstream is working, I do not know if I just do not have something needed since I am on a Mac, or if it is just not working tonight.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 11, 2008, 09:47:50 PM

Quote from: ILive4This on January 11, 2008, 09:36:11 PM
I encourage everyone to turn on the audio to the UR/Brockport Chase Semi-final, this is one heck of a game.
Does anyone know if the webstream is working, I do not know if I just do not have something needed since I am on a Mac, or if it is just not working tonight.

I can't get it either, and I'm in Windows. If you can't get the stream, how do you know it's a heck of a game? All I know is the score when posted in the scoreboard (http://www.d3hoops.com/schedule/mens/2008-01-11)--presently 51-50 B'port, 10:00 2nd.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on January 11, 2008, 09:48:36 PM

Quote from: ILive4This on January 11, 2008, 09:36:11 PM
I encourage everyone to turn on the audio to the UR/Brockport Chase Semi-final, this is one heck of a game.
Does anyone know if the webstream is working, I do not know if I just do not have something needed since I am on a Mac, or if it is just not working tonight.

ILive4This,

The webstream is working for me on a mac. You need the Windows Media Player components for quicktime. (Download here. (http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/player/wmcomponents.mspx))

David,

The link from the scoreboard page didn't work for you? Right now 60-57 Brockport, under 6 minutes left.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on January 11, 2008, 09:53:50 PM

Some play-by-play for those who can't get the download:

UR hit a big three to tie, 60-60.

Now gets the ball back after a miss, and scores. 62-60 Rochester. Five straight points for UR.

Rochester fouls, but B'Port not in the bonus yet. Williams scores as teh time clock runs down...bucket and the foul for B'port. Brandon Williams to the line for a chance at the lead again, and...it's good. 63-62 B'port, 3:30 or so left.

Announcers: "This game just keeps going back and forth." B'port fouls, UofR is now in the double bonus. Actually 3:45 left in game. Dominiac for Rochester nails both FTs. 64-63 Rochester.

Big block by Rochester...and then they drain a huge 3! 67-63. B'port shoots a quick 3, misses and Rochester rebound.

Timeout with 2:48 left. Sorry that I can't get all the players' names, I'm not familiar with them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 11, 2008, 09:54:06 PM

I have the audio going, I was referring to the video webstream that UR usually does, without sound. I remember watching a game last season with the audio from the radio station, and the video from UR

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 11, 2008, 09:56:12 PM

Block by Onyiruka (sp), and then subsequent 3-pointer by UR.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 11, 2008, 09:57:35 PM

67-63 UR, sorry I forgot to add that in. 2:48 to go

Both teams shooting well over 40%, Rochester over 50% for the game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on January 11, 2008, 09:58:16 PM

Quote from: ILive4This on January 11, 2008, 09:54:06 PM
I have the audio going, I was referring to the video webstream that UR usually does, without sound. I remember watching a game last season with the audio from the radio station, and the video from UR

Yeah, no idea on if the video stream is working for a mac. It's not working for me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 11, 2008, 09:59:20 PM

Quote from: kiltedbryan on January 11, 2008, 09:48:36 PM
The link from the scoreboard page didn't work for you?

No, it doesn't, so I appreciate the updates.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on January 11, 2008, 10:03:53 PM

1:51 to play, 69-65 Rochester. B'port ball.

Harris will shoot a 1-1 for B'port. First is...good. Second is...good. 69-67 Rochester.

B'port is in full-court pressure as they have been for a few minutes. Rochester hasn't had too much trouble breaking it. Rochester misses a 3, on the rebound a foul called on Rochester. B'port has a 1-1 with the chance to tie.

Williams for B'port to shoot them. First is missed but rebound is picked out by Sherrod Harris, who drains a three, except the play was whistled dead because a Rochester player was injured (not serious.)

It remains 69-67 and B'port has the ball. B'port will go to the line again. It's Foulds on the line, misses first, makes the second. 69-68 Rochester leads with the ball. Can't get a time of game...has to be under 1 minute or so.

HUGE three pointer for Dominac of Rochester. This is the second big three he's hit since I started listening (about 10 min. left in second half) 4 point lead, and then they regain possession with a jump ball.

Time out Brockport. 47 seconds left, Rochester has the ball and a 72-68 lead. Brockport will now have to foul. Rochester can't get the ball in and calls timeout.
After the timeout, Rochester gets it in, but tipped out of bounds by B'port. Rochester has to try to inbound again. Gets it in, gets across mid-court, and the foul comes with 36 seconds left.

Two shots for Gerard (sp?) and he's 50% odd percent....misses the first, makes the second. Rochester by 5.
Quick layout for Harris in reply, then a time out B'port. 73-70.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 11, 2008, 10:04:45 PM

I assume they just are not doing the video stream tonight, although it was linked from the UAA page www.uaa.rochester.edu

BPort was shooting .900 from the stripe, but then just missed the front end of the 1 and 1 to tie the game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 11, 2008, 10:07:26 PM

Quote from: ILive4This on January 11, 2008, 10:04:45 PM
I assume they just are not doing the video stream tonight, although it was linked from the UAA page www.uaa.rochester.edu

I think the bandwidth for the video has been exceeded, at least that's what it appears to be telling me. That's probably why my audio is silent too. :-\
+1 for each of you.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 11, 2008, 10:14:15 PM

75-70 Rochester with 4 seconds left.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 11, 2008, 10:14:37 PM

Rochester Wins, same score as above.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on January 11, 2008, 10:15:33 PM

Rochester is fouled after the time out.

Lamonowski (again, no idea how to spell these names, sorry), shoots the FTs. Good then no good. Brockport misses a shot, Rochester rebound..BUT a jump ball is called- ball back to Brockport.

And Brockport misses a 3, Rochester rebound and they'll go to the line. It's 74-70. Misses first FT, hits the second. 75-70 Rochester. Only 13 seconds left.

Harris almost loses control of the ball, dishes for a three...missed. Ball bounces out of bounds off Rochester, but now only 6 seconds left.

Brockport misses another 3, and that's the game.

Rochester wins, 75-70 and advances to the championship of the Chase Tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on January 11, 2008, 10:20:25 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 11, 2008, 10:07:26 PM
Quote from: ILive4This on January 11, 2008, 10:04:45 PM
I assume they just are not doing the video stream tonight, although it was linked from the UAA page www.uaa.rochester.edu

I think the bandwidth for the video has been exceeded, at least that's what it appears to be telling me. That's probably why my audio is silent too. :-\
+1 for each of you.

Thanks David. Sorry to be stealing your bandwidth!

This really was a tight game for the final ten minutes, and probably throughout. It must be tough to be Brockport right now, after losing those games last week and then playing well enough to win but facing a tough, top-flight opponent in the Yellow Jackets to take another loss.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 11, 2008, 10:36:19 PM

I had no problem with the video.

Then again, we didn't have the video link on the scoreboard when the night started. I didn't post it until after I got in. (We count on the schools to be the first line of ... offense ... when posting audio, video and live stats links.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 12, 2008, 12:33:46 AM

Double upset alert from the NWC:
#9 Puget Sound is being tested at home by Linfield, tied at 80, 2:11 left. Live stats (http://www2.ups.edu/athletics/live/basketball/xlive.htm).
#22 Lewis & Clark is being annihilated at Whitworth, 47-24, 10:15 left. Live stats (http://www.whitworth.edu/Athletics/Teams/Basketball/livestats/xlive.htm); audio (http://www.whitworth.edu/athletics/Information/Radio.htm).

UPDATE 1: UPS survives, 89-82.
UPDATE 2: Whitworth 64, L&C 33. Final. Not an error.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2008, 12:46:20 AM

UPS dodges the bullet, 89-82. But it looks like L&C is going down - trailing by 28 with 6 to go.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 12, 2008, 02:53:38 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2008, 12:46:20 AM
UPS dodges the bullet, 89-82. But it looks like L&C is going down - trailing by 28 with 6 to go.

UPS really did dodge a bullet...not their best effort, but just good enough for a win

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Rhodes Scholar on January 12, 2008, 11:21:09 AM

I would imagine that Lewis and Clark scoring only 33 points in their 64-33 loss to Whitworth would constitute the lowest point total ever by a Top 25 team since the inception of the poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 12, 2008, 03:16:01 PM

Quote from: Rhodes Scholar on January 12, 2008, 11:21:09 AM
I would imagine that Lewis and Clark scoring only 33 points in their 64-33 loss to Whitworth would constitute the lowest point total ever by a Top 25 team since the inception of the poll.

Whitworth must have been playing great D. Lewis and Clark can put up a lot of points, but LC only made 12 field goals the entire game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 12, 2008, 06:43:11 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2008, 12:46:20 AM
UPS dodges the bullet, 89-82. But it looks like L&C is going down - trailing by 28 with 6 to go.

If UPS dodged a bullet, the L&C took an IED. :-\

Some nights, it is just bad!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pio20 on January 12, 2008, 07:24:39 PM

The 33 points scored by the Pioneers was just two points off the lowest offensive totals in Pioneer history, a 40-31 loss to Pacific in 1949. That is worse than bad.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pio20 on January 12, 2008, 11:05:58 PM

Lewis & Clark rebounds with a 76-68 win over Whitman after last night's poor performance.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 12, 2008, 11:30:11 PM

I think Rochester will actually pick up close to all of the first place votes, as Williams is no longer undefeated, and they finally showed they can beat some quality teams in BPort (hold the jokes) and Nazareth, especially coming from behind at the half today shows real poise.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 13, 2008, 01:59:42 AM

Or maybe they'll lose some to Amherst.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pio20 on January 13, 2008, 03:06:47 AM

Interesting night in the SCIAC, as #21 Oxy lost to Claremont-Mudd-Scripps 55-42 AND #24 Cal Lutheran lost to Whittier 69-58. Whittier was up 40-25 at the half after shooting an astounding 68% from the field and 57% from three. Add 26 Cal Lutheran turnovers to that and the result is a Whittier victory.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 13, 2008, 02:07:17 PM

so much for all that 2 teams from the SCIAC in the top 25...it was fun while it lasted

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 13, 2008, 02:33:37 PM

I do not foresee Rochester loosing first place votes to Amherst...Why? because they beat williams which was only earning one first place vote, and lost to Brandeis earlier this season which is ranked ahead of them, so if anyone gains this vote its the Judges. However, I do think that Rochester became a stronger number 1 with the wins at the Chase, while Amherst just prevented a perhaps sizable slide in the rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 13, 2008, 02:35:15 PM

Another side note, will UMD crack the top 15 in this week's poll?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 13, 2008, 02:57:39 PM

Look for Oxy, L&C, St. Thomas and Cal. Lutheran all to drop out of the Top 25. Who takes their spots?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 13, 2008, 05:50:51 PM

HOW THEY FARED (week of Jan. 7-13) (COMPLETE)

#   1   Rochester (12-0) def. Keuka 81-37 at Geneseo, def. Brockport St 75-70 and def. Nazareth 87-75 (Chase tournament, Rochester NY)
#   2   Brandeis (11-1) won at Elms 96-94 (OT) and won at NYU 66-56
#   3   Amherst (10-2) def. Wesleyan 85-63 and def. #4 Williams 87-80
#   4   Williams (11-1) lost at #3 Amherst 87-80
#   5   Augustana (10-3) lost at North Park 67-58 and def. #10 Elmhurst 74-72
#   6   Mary Hardin-Baylor (11-1) def. Concordia-Austin 104-102 (2OT) and won at U. of the Ozarks 76-72
#   7   Washington U. (10-2) def. Webster 74-60 and def. Chicago 76-50
#   8   Hope (10-2) def. Albion 64-49 and won at Olivet 80-71
#   9   Puget Sound (11-1) def. Pacific Lutheran 125-116 (2OT) and def. Linfield 89-82
#   10   Elmhurst (10-2) def. Millikin 98-78 and lost at #5 Augustana 74-72
#   11   Guilford (8-3) def. Hampden-Sydney 93-79, lost to Randolph-Macon 69-60, and def. #17 Virginia Wesleyan 85-69
#   12   UW-Oshkosh (11-3) lost to UW-Platteville 72-53 and won at UW-Superior 87-72
#   13   Wheaton (IL) (11-2) def. Carthage 70-64 and lost at North Central (IL) 73-72
#   14   UW-Stevens Point (11-3) def. UW-River Falls 87-44 and def. UW-Platteville 70-67
#   15   UW-Whitewater (12-2) won at UW-La Crosse 65-62 and won at UW-Eau Claire 69-63
#   16   Capital (11-2) def. Mount Union 83-67 and won at Ohio Northern 69-67
#   17   Virginia Wesleyan (9-3) def. Bridgewater (VA) 76-53, won at Emory & Henry 119-89, and lost at #11 Guilford 85-69
#   18   Stevens (12-1) def. Staten Island 71-56, def. Hartwick 64-43, and def. Utica 60-59
#   19   Mass.-Dartmouth (13-0) won at Salem St. 97-88, won at Roger Williams 67-60, and def. Keene St. 100-97 (OT)
#   20   Wooster (11-2) won at Wabash 72-70
#   21   Occidental (10-2) lost at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps 55-42
#   22   Lewis & Clark (8-4) lost at Whitworth 64-33 and won at Whitman 76-68
#   23   St. Thomas (10-3) def. Bethel 83-77 (OT), won at Augsburg 80-72, and lost at Gustavus Adolphus 59-58
#   24   Cal Lutheran (10-2) lost at Whittier 69-58
#   25   Plattsburgh St. (10-2) won at Fredonia St. 74-65 and won at Buffalo St. 79-70

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bouttime on January 14, 2008, 12:04:18 AM

look for the UAA to get its 4th team in the top 25. CMU has recieved votes in the last 2 polls and with 2 more wins this weekend moving them 10-2, I would be shocked if they weren't included in the top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 14, 2008, 12:06:35 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 13, 2008, 06:17:26 PM
HOW THEY FARED, interim edition

No Monday games for current Top 25 teams
One game involving a team that's on my "maybe" radar:

Millsaps at U. of Dallas

IMHO, Millsaps by 15, even on the road in the 3rd game in four days including two plane fights.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 14, 2008, 12:12:13 AM

Quote from: bouttime on January 14, 2008, 12:04:18 AM
look for the UAA to get its 4th team in the top 25. CMU has recieved votes in the last 2 polls and with 2 more wins this weekend moving them 10-2, I would be shocked if they weren't included in the top 25.

Be ready to be shocked... just a gut feeling.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 14, 2008, 12:16:31 AM

I have no idea what is happening in the western side of the South. For Millsaps to be on "radars" is not logical, because the ASC is not thought of as a "power conference", and they have a better post-season record over the last decade than the SCAC! (13-13 with 5 byes versus 7-13 and 2 byes).

Millsaps has a 2-point home win over Louisiana College (3-5 ASC-East/ 4-9 overall) their only ASC opponent. However, as Titan Q said on Hoopsville tonight, scores seem to mean less this year than previous years!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 14, 2008, 12:22:07 AM

Don't know if I'll vote for CMU but it looks like there's some room at the bottom of the poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 14, 2008, 12:37:58 AM

Well if we look at how they #21-30 vote getters fared, we see:

# 21 Occidental (10-2) lost at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps 55-42
# 22 Lewis & Clark (8-4) lost at Whitworth 64-33 and won at Whitman 76-68
# 23 St. Thomas (10-3) def. Bethel 83-77 (OT), won at Augsburg 80-72, and lost at Gustavus Adolphus 59-58
# 24 Cal Lutheran (10-2) lost at Whittier 69-58
# 25 Plattsburgh St. (10-2) won at Fredonia St. 74-65 and won at Buffalo St. 79-70

#26 Centre (12-1) won at Birmingham-Southern 77-53 and won at Rhodes 84-77
#27 Milsaps (12-1) won at Colorado College 94-83 and won at Austin 85-54
#28 Nazareth (10-3) won at Rochester Tech 88-82, won at Geneseo St. 70-68, and lost at Rochester 87-75
#29 Salem State (9-2) lost to UMD 97-88
#30 CMU (10-2) def. Averett 70-62 and def. Lycoming 81-59

21-24 all lost games against unranked opponents and will probably lose some votes, how much is not clear. The interesting teams, in my view, are #28 and #29. Nazareth got two solids wins in the Chase tournament before losing to #1 Rochester by double digits. I think they will gain votes, but then again you never know. Salem State lost to UMD at home, who is undefeated and is ranked in the top 20, I dont know if they will lose any votes but I dont see how they can gain any by losing their only game this week.

25-27 and 30 won all of their games this past week. So the real question, at the bottom of the rankings, is how much the #21-24 teams will slip due to their losses to unranked teams. My guess is that Centre and Milsaps will probably get enough votes to be ranked (based on last weeks voting), and that Nazareth or CMU could also get in if the voters drop each of the #21-24 teams 2-3 spots in their rankings, on average, and increase the position of Naz or CMU 1-2 spots.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 14, 2008, 01:01:47 AM

Thats a lot of red at the bottom of the poll...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Downtown on January 14, 2008, 12:24:18 PM

I know a lot of people are looking at teams 26-30 to be in the new top 25 tomorrow, but one team outside of that range that I think should be in is UW-Platteville. They beat a very good Oshkosh team on the road (by 19 nonetheless) and it took a 3 pointer with seconds left for Stevens Point to knock them off.

They had the toughest road stretch for any team in the WIAC this season, and passed with flying colors. They are truly one of the toughest teams in the WIAC, and will be battling for that conference championship the rest of the season.

I also expect Oshkosh to drop a few spots, Point to gain a spot or two, and Whitewater to make a jump, they also played some tough games on the road and won.

I think 4 teams in the WIAC should be in the top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 14, 2008, 03:03:35 PM

6+ places is a long way to move up with a fresh loss.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 14, 2008, 03:50:59 PM

I agree Mr DT. From my perspective, there are a number of midwestern teams who all fit in about the same range: UWSP, UW Oshkosh, UW Whitewater, UW Platteville, Augustana, Elmhurst, Wash U, Wheaton... they're all showing the ability to beat each other up, and none of them is really rising to the top.

I'm not sure how they fit in with the teams from the East and east coast. I guess we'll get a bit of a barometer when Wash U plays their UAA foes. Not really sure how the teams from the Northeast fit in there either... By schedule design (and due to regions that tend to not be as tough) they've beaten most comers (Amherst dropped a game to Brandeis, who's ahead of them in the polls currently).

Rochester, who hasn't lost yet, has only left the city of Rochester once (3 away games, but one each against Rochester Tech and Nazareth, right across town). I don't see evidence that they're geared up for their grueling UAA schedule.

Brandeis has beaten everybody but UMass Dartmouth, but have they been tested?

This is the difficult part of a national poll in a regional system, and especially with lower budget teams. We get a small handful of inter-region games but not enough to really be a meaningful sample.

I think it's going to be a very intersting rest of the season and tournament. Whereas in other seasons there appeared teams who early on separated themselved, it looks like it may take a bit longer

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Jacketfan2011 on January 14, 2008, 05:08:49 PM

Or...maybe the Midwestern teams are weak and beating up each other is as good as it gets ;D

And while it is true undefeated UR (gosh, that has a nice ring to it) has not strayed far from home, it was very strange to see them be virtual underdogs on their own court during the Chase this weekend. At best the crowd was 50/50 and I suspect more along the lines of 60/40.

I guess the beauty of the UAA is that teams from across the country do play each other. It was nice to see Ohio Wesleyan at UR earlier this year as sort of a preview

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 14, 2008, 09:32:49 PM

I believe this new poll means we get a #1 vs #2 game next Sunday. Cool 8)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 14, 2008, 10:20:51 PM

Quote from: sac on January 14, 2008, 09:32:49 PM
I believe this new poll means we get a #1 vs #2 game next Sunday. Cool 8)

Indeed, although they were 1/2 in the old poll, too.

I've inquired and U of R is attempting to add capacity to its video stream to handle the demand.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 15, 2008, 12:29:18 AM

I sure hope they do. I am going to inquire as to the possibility of putting the stream on a projection screen somewhere at Brandeis, which may help reduce the number of streamers by high double digits or even triple digits.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 15, 2008, 02:16:07 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 14, 2008, 10:20:51 PM
Quote from: sac on January 14, 2008, 09:32:49 PM
I believe this new poll means we get a #1 vs #2 game next Sunday. Cool 8)

Indeed, although they were 1/2 in the old poll, too.

I've inquired and U of R is attempting to add capacity to its video stream to handle the demand.

Thanks for working on that Pat...thats a game I would like to see!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 15, 2008, 09:00:23 AM

Margin of victory isn't that relevant, based on circumstances of each individual game.

Also, UM-D is no longer a 'bum' team so that loss looks better and better all of the time.

If they beat every team by 4 points or less, the body of work shows that they won.

And as Herm Edwards said, "You play to win the game!"

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 15, 2008, 10:18:16 AM

You are right, there is the argument for UMD to be ahead of Brandeis, but if the Judges beat Rochester and CMU this weekend, then I am almost positive the strength of schedule and all other indexes would be better.

It is a known fact in this world of college hoops you climb your way up the rankings so a number 20 beats a number 3, the number 20 does not automatically become number 3. However if 1 beats 2 at 1's home court, they will become number 1, it really does not matter so much what has happened before.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 15, 2008, 12:25:20 PM

Against the same 2 teams last season Hope won by 29 and 36, this year 15 and 7, yet I feel much better about the wins this year because they were more difficult to achieve.

Sometimes winning close games says more about your team than winning by 20 every night.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bouttime on January 15, 2008, 01:19:45 PM

Quote from: chubbyboybaby on January 15, 2008, 08:56:01 AM
Even if Brandeis beats Rochester this Sunday, I do not think they should get the number 1 ranking. If you compare Rochester and Brandeis's schedule you can see how many close games Brandeis had to teams they should have blown out. They lost to Umass Dartmouth who at the time was considered a bum team, they hardly beat elms, they beat Framingham state by 4, and they beat Bridgewater state by 5. Their only "real" test this year so far was Amherst in which they won (which is a HUGE win... but still). Rochester on the other beat Nazareth twice, beat Carnegie Mellon by double digit numbers, and beat Brockport state. Their schedule thus far has been harder and their victory margins have been better than Brandeis. If both Rochester and Brandeis has one loss, I think Rochester should keep the #1 ranking. If you are going to give it to Brandeis, you might as well give it to Umass Dartmouth should they stay undefeated that long.

I'm not following the logic here. Forget all the margin of victory and strength of schedule stuff. If the #2 team in the country beats the #1 team, there is no reason that they shouldn't take over the #1 spot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 15, 2008, 01:56:41 PM

Quote from: bouttime on January 15, 2008, 01:19:45 PM
Quote from: chubbyboybaby on January 15, 2008, 08:56:01 AM
Even if Brandeis beats Rochester this Sunday, I do not think they should get the number 1 ranking. If you compare Rochester and Brandeis's schedule you can see how many close games Brandeis had to teams they should have blown out. They lost to Umass Dartmouth who at the time was considered a bum team, they hardly beat elms, they beat Framingham state by 4, and they beat Bridgewater state by 5. Their only "real" test this year so far was Amherst in which they won (which is a HUGE win... but still). Rochester on the other beat Nazareth twice, beat Carnegie Mellon by double digit numbers, and beat Brockport state. Their schedule thus far has been harder and their victory margins have been better than Brandeis. If both Rochester and Brandeis has one loss, I think Rochester should keep the #1 ranking. If you are going to give it to Brandeis, you might as well give it to Umass Dartmouth should they stay undefeated that long.

I'm not following the logic here. Forget all the margin of victory and strength of schedule stuff. If the #2 team in the country beats the #1 team, there is no reason that they shouldn't take over the #1 spot.

Unless, of course, the #24 beats the #2 team two days earlier...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 15, 2008, 02:38:20 PM

Quote from: bouttime on January 15, 2008, 01:19:45 PM
Quote from: chubbyboybaby on January 15, 2008, 08:56:01 AM
Even if Brandeis beats Rochester this Sunday, I do not think they should get the number 1 ranking. If you compare Rochester and Brandeis's schedule you can see how many close games Brandeis had to teams they should have blown out. They lost to Umass Dartmouth who at the time was considered a bum team, they hardly beat elms, they beat Framingham state by 4, and they beat Bridgewater state by 5. Their only "real" test this year so far was Amherst in which they won (which is a HUGE win... but still). Rochester on the other beat Nazareth twice, beat Carnegie Mellon by double digit numbers, and beat Brockport state. Their schedule thus far has been harder and their victory margins have been better than Brandeis. If both Rochester and Brandeis has one loss, I think Rochester should keep the #1 ranking. If you are going to give it to Brandeis, you might as well give it to Umass Dartmouth should they stay undefeated that long.

I'm not following the logic here. Forget all the margin of victory and strength of schedule stuff. If the #2 team in the country beats the #1 team, there is no reason that they shouldn't take over the #1 spot.

Especially if it's on No. 1's home floor. If No. 2 is at home and it's a tight game I would expect a split decision.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 15, 2008, 04:01:48 PM

Top Vote Getting Movers

+8 UW Platteville
+6 Centre
+6 Carnegie Mellon
+5 UW Whitewater
+5 Mass Dartmouth
+5 DeSales
+4 Plattsburgh St.
+4 Milsaps
+4 Defiance
-5 Wheaton
-5 Virginia Wesleyan
-6 Guilford
-6 Occidental
-6 Nazareth
-9 St. Thomas
-11 Salem State
-11 Lewis & Clark

This ignores teams that went from zero votes to some votes (Randolph Macon, Ursinus, Bowdoin, Middlebury, Aurora), and those that went from some votes to zero votes (Trinity Conn, Emerson, Brockport St, Rowan, Coast Guard, Wilimington, Geneseo State).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 15, 2008, 04:18:00 PM

Most, if not all, of the teams you mentioned received votes, they just didn't crack the top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 15, 2008, 05:15:37 PM

Here are the rankings by conference.

RNK	TEAM	CONFERENCE
#4	Mary Hardin-Baylor	ASC
#18	Wheaton (IL)	CCIW
#12	Elmhurst	CCIW
#9	Augustana	CCIW
#15	Stevens	E8
#14	Mass-Dartmouth	LEC
#6	Hope	MIAA
#19	Wooster	NCAC
#8	Williams	NESCAC
#3	Amherst	NESCAC
#7	Puget Sound	NWC
#13	Capital	OAC
#22	Virginia Wesleyan	ODAC
#25	Randolph-Macon	ODAC
#17	Guilford	ODAC
#23	Millsaps	SCAC
#20	Centre	SCAC
#21	Plattsburgh State	SUNYAC
#5	Washington U	UAA
#1	Rochester	UAA
#24	Carnegie Mellon	UAA
#2	Brandeis	UAA
#10	UW-Whitewater	WIAC
#11	UW-Stevens Point	WIAC
#16	UW-Oshkosh	WIAC

The SCIAC (Oxy and Cal. Lutheran), MIAC (St. Thomas) and another NWC team (Lewis & Clark) just dropped out.

A 4th WIAC team (Platteville) comes in at #26, followed by the aforementioned Oxy and Cal. Lutheran. A 4th ODAC team (Roanoke) and Widener (MACC) also getting votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bouttime on January 15, 2008, 07:23:17 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 15, 2008, 01:56:41 PM
Quote from: bouttime on January 15, 2008, 01:19:45 PM
Quote from: chubbyboybaby on January 15, 2008, 08:56:01 AM
Even if Brandeis beats Rochester this Sunday, I do not think they should get the number 1 ranking. If you compare Rochester and Brandeis's schedule you can see how many close games Brandeis had to teams they should have blown out. They lost to Umass Dartmouth who at the time was considered a bum team, they hardly beat elms, they beat Framingham state by 4, and they beat Bridgewater state by 5. Their only "real" test this year so far was Amherst in which they won (which is a HUGE win... but still). Rochester on the other beat Nazareth twice, beat Carnegie Mellon by double digit numbers, and beat Brockport state. Their schedule thus far has been harder and their victory margins have been better than Brandeis. If both Rochester and Brandeis has one loss, I think Rochester should keep the #1 ranking. If you are going to give it to Brandeis, you might as well give it to Umass Dartmouth should they stay undefeated that long.

I'm not following the logic here. Forget all the margin of victory and strength of schedule stuff. If the #2 team in the country beats the #1 team, there is no reason that they shouldn't take over the #1 spot.

Unless, of course, the #24 beats the #2 team two days earlier...

I can only hope that this is the case.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 15, 2008, 08:24:02 PM

Amherst/Elms a three-point game with four minutes left:

http://www.d3hoops.com/audio/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 16, 2008, 03:17:56 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 15, 2008, 04:18:00 PM
Most, if not all, of the teams you mentioned received votes, they just didn't crack the top 25.

And I aptly titled the post "Top Vote Getting Movers." Perhaps the "Top 25 Talk" board is not the perfectly appropriate board, but it is the most appropriate.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 16, 2008, 05:38:50 PM

I was referring to the teams that you labelled as moving from some votes to zero votes - they all were still receiving votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 16, 2008, 10:03:03 PM

POINT won at Stout and Eau Claire upset OSHKOSH.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 16, 2008, 10:16:23 PM

Augie over Wheaton, 66-61.

Elmhurst falls to Carthage (livestats froze w/ 42 seconds left, Carthage up 77-65).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 16, 2008, 10:39:12 PM

David - despite what the scoreboard indicated earlier (it has been fixed)... Guilford LOST to Roanoke tonight... 68-56.

One more to add to the carnage.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 16, 2008, 11:12:11 PM

Thanks...I usually try to double-check the scoreboard (preferring two independent sources for scores, like a good journalist), but didn't tonight. :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 17, 2008, 02:03:41 PM

Looks like Brandeis will have their hands full this weekend...hopefully they can make it through Friday first.

Does anyone smell any upsets this weekend?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bouttime on January 17, 2008, 02:29:11 PM

Quote from: LogShow on January 17, 2008, 02:03:41 PM
Looks like Brandeis will have their hands full this weekend...hopefully they can make it through Friday first.

Does anyone smell any upsets this weekend?

I think the Tartans are going to come up with a HUGE win on Friday night.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 17, 2008, 05:35:44 PM

If they do then I have a strong suspicion that Brandeis will have a strong bounce back game and hand Rochester its first loss of the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 17, 2008, 08:03:47 PM

I know its on the front page but here is the link to the story on the front page headlines of ESPN.com http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=3201198

Puget Sound gets a little bit of love in the article! It's nice to get the Puget Sound name out there in the national setting! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 17, 2008, 09:48:24 PM

#4 Mary Hardin-Baylor, which has been dancing on the knife's edge lately, is doing it again. They're behind 5-7 Hardin-Simmons at the half, either by a score of 41-30 (D3hoops.com scoreboard (http://www.d3hoops.com/schedule/mens/2008-01-17)) or 41-28 (Gametracker).

Gametracker (i.e. LiveStats on steroids) can be accessed from HSU's website here. (http://hsuathletics.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/sched/hsim-m-baskbl-sched.html)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 18, 2008, 02:58:33 AM

If Puget Sound wins both of their games this weekend they should be knocking on the door of the top 5...that would be sweeeeeet! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 18, 2008, 08:37:36 PM

#2 Brandeis 35, #24 Carnegie Mellon 20 at the half,

Brandeis is shooting 55% compared to the Tartans 28%.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 18, 2008, 08:43:42 PM

#1 Rochester seems to be having an easy outing tonight, up 40-23 against the visiting Violets of NYU

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 18, 2008, 08:52:47 PM

Amherst leads Tufts 78-68 with 0:34 left...and the LiveStats has been stuck there for about 10 minutes. >:(

Grrrrr...the Amherst game never goes final, and then the Williams game shows FINAL while it is still in progress...

NESCAC students are smart; so LiveStats must be hard to use.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: martin on January 18, 2008, 11:41:47 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 18, 2008, 11:06:04 PM
HOW THEY FARED (week of Jan. 14-20)

#   24   Carnegie Mellon (10-3) lost to #2 Brandeis 60-48 and plays at NYU Sun.

CMU hosts NYU on Sunday. Thanks! Correction made...dc

Eight losses in the top 25 with one more to come when Rochester and Brandeis meet on Sunday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 19, 2008, 01:04:49 PM

Brandeis and Rochester both took care of business...Sunday's game should be great! 8)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 19, 2008, 07:12:42 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 09, 2008, 10:59:23 AM
Not sure what board would be appropriate for this. UPS had THREE players score 30+ points last night. Anyone know just how rare that was? (I doubt that is any official category for records, and have no clue how to research it.)

We pursued this for a bit, and no one could find a topper - I'll consider it a d3 (trivia) record unless I hear otherwise.

Belatedly, here's another trivia record for your perusal: last Saturday (1-12-08) the CCIW's four games were decided by a total of SIX points (and since one of the 2-pointers went to OT, in regulation they were divided by FOUR points). Can anyone match or beat that? (Apocryphally, the National Enquirer reports that CCIW coaches aged an average of 2.8 years, 36 fans suffered heart attacks, but it was a helluva fun night! ;D)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Marty Peretz on January 19, 2008, 08:25:17 PM

If Brandeis beats Rochester, how far does Rochester fall in the poll? Provided, they keep it close, I can't justify bumping them down anywhere below 3 (I'd keep them at 2, since Amherst didn't win easilly this weekend). If Deis loses, can you justify dropping them below third either? Is it possible that at the end of the weekend, the UAA could have the nation's top 3 teams? I realize it's unlikely, but it's not terribly far fetched and likely would have been the case if Amherst hadn't eeked out that win against Bates.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 19, 2008, 08:51:11 PM

Rochester could fall below Amherst, theoretically. Less easy to put Brandeis below Amherst.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 19, 2008, 09:24:57 PM

"#4" UMHB had a tough trip to Abilene (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abilene_paradox). UMHB's recent football romps thru the ASC set up revenge time amongst opponents when they get a chance to even the score in another sport.

HSU beat "arch-rival" (http://www.d3hoops.com/game-releases/2008/Jan/17/Hardin-Simmons-vs.-Mary+Hardin-Baylor/lhopqw9rdvcm84yu/23615) UMHB on Thursday night. Saturday afternoon, UMHB went across town to play McMurry with South Regional Rankings and hosting the ASC Tourney foremost. For McMurry (6-8/3-7), the game was a chance for McM to bounce back in a season that has seen 6 conference losses that were 7-point games (or less) in the last 30 secs and 5 losses by only 20 total points. McMurry held out for 79-76 win.

I think that this weekend's games have shown the parity that is the current ASC. D-III is finally making a penetration into the minds of the players in the state. Recent improvements (HPU's floor), new webcasts and video feeds (UT-Dallas, UT-Tyler, ETBU, LeTU, Miss College, Concordia-Austin) and new facilities (Schreiner's proposed gym, SRSU's new gym, UT-Tyler's new gym and campus construction, Concordia's entirely new campus in 2008-09!) have raised the profile of the other schools to the level of interest seen at McMurry and Hardin-Simmons in the early part of the decade.

I submit to my readers that the parity of the conference, the isolation and the "newcomer" status have made it hard for many fans to know how strong that this conference is. Doing well on a national stage at playoff time is tough when one is shipped 1000 miles away.

The best men's team that I have seen was the 2000 McMurry men's team. The committee set up the bracket from Hades when they put #1 (Calvin), #2 (Hampden-Sydney), #3 (Wooster) and #4 (McMurry) (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/00/week13.htm) in the country in the same bracket at Calvin (http://www.d3hoops.com/archives/mncaa00.htm). HSC lost to Maryville TN in the second round. McMurry beat Pomona-Pitzer in the second round 111-76, after the Sagehens had beaten #9 Trinity in the first round. In that year, the Great Lakes and South Regions were paired. (Rather than the regional aligments, I would have preferred the committee to send teams from the Midwest, West and near South to Abilene.)

The next best ASC team that I saw was the 2001 McMurry team that lost to Horace Jenkins' (finalist) William Paterson team the Sweet 16 at CNU, but the 2004 Sul Ross State team that beat UDallas and then beat #12 Trinity TX in San Antonio in the 2nd round had the most potential to advance. The Lobos were shipped with Champion UW-SP and #23 Lawrence to #8 Puget Sound (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/04/week14.htm) for the sectional. On the neutral floor, SRSU lost to the Larrys in OT, who in turn lost to UWSP in OT. SRSU (21-9/10-4 ASC-West) finished at #25, but was one of 5 excellent teams in the conference.)

In 2007 Mississippi College is one case where a good team is flown 984 miles to Norfolk, where they get behind the home team and get blown away by the frenzied crowd of the eventual finalist!

On the women's side, Trinity was the 2003 champion and defeated HSU on HSU's home floor, where Trinity had played in the regular season and in the previous years. Trinity got to catch Wash StL Lady Bears at HSU for the sectional finals (http://www.d3hoops.com/terrehaute/03/pairings.htm). I would submit that HSU's Mabee Complex in front of the Texas crowd was a friendly neutral floor. The Lady Tigers took it from Abilene to Terre Haute, another "friendly" neutral court, home of SCAC-member Rose-Hulman.

In 2006, Hardin-Simmons Cowgirls finished 3rd in the ASC-West behind McMurry and Howard Payne. Cinderella went dancing in her cowgirl boots to the Final Four, leaving behind two teams that felt like they were just as good. The First Round bracket of Trinity, Howard Payne, Hardin-Simmons and McMurry was one of the best assembled in this decade. HSU beat #18 McMurry, #22 Howard Payne, and then #12 Pacific Lutheran and host #8 Randolph-Macon, who had eliminated #14 UW-Stout (2006 Final Top 25 (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/06/final.htm)).

The ASC should be tough for the men. The Women have three national powers now that HSU Cowgirls, with their 10 new players, are getting their act together. If we can use the word parity for the CCIW and the WIAC, then I believe that it applies to the ASC, just one tier below.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: theBroadcaster on January 19, 2008, 11:42:47 PM

Just to let everyone know, WBRS Sports has made the 6 hr trip from Waltham to Rochester to broadcast the big game tomorrow at noon. Log on to www.wbrs.org or tune your radios to 100.1FM in the Waltham area to hear all the action as #2 Brandeis battles #1 Rochester.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 20, 2008, 12:12:42 PM

Feel free to join the blog discussion on this game:

http://www.d3hoops.com/dailydose/2008/01/20/game-day-no-2-brandeis-at-no-1-rochester/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LU 05 on January 20, 2008, 05:53:12 PM

Isn't it anout time Lawrence is at least receiving some votes? Does one season (last) of mediocrity completely erase the national reputation they have built in the last 5 years?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 20, 2008, 06:11:02 PM

HOW THEY FARED (week of Jan. 14-20)(COMPLETE)

#   1   Rochester (14-0) def. NYU 70-54 and def. #2 Brandeis 74-68
#   2   Brandeis (12-2) won at #24 Carnegie Mellon 60-48 and lost at #1 Rochester 74-68
#   3   Amherst (13-2) won at Elms 73-67, def. Tufts 79-68, and def. Bates 77-76
#   4   Mary Hardin-Baylor (11-3) lost at Hardin-Simmons 76-66 and lost at McMurry 79-76
#   5   Washington U. (12-2) def. Emory 85-63 and def. Case Western Reserve 85-57
#   6   Hope (12-2) def. Kalamazoo 88-60 and def. Adrian 74-70
#   7   Puget Sound (12-2) def. Whitman 106-86 and lost to Whitworth 83-78
#   8   Williams (14-2) def. Lasell 75-65, lost at Bowdoin 78-73, and won at Colby 67-61
#   9   Augustana (11-4) def. #18 Wheaton (IL) 66-61 and lost at Carthage 74-68
#   10   UW-Whitewater (13-2) def. UW-Stout 92-64
#   11   UW-Stevens Point (13-3) won at UW-Stout 83-77 and def. UW-Superior 78-57
#   12   Elmhurst (12-3) lost to Carthage 79-68 and def. Illinois Wesleyan 90-77
#   13   Capital (13-2) won at Heidelberg 99-90 and def. Otterbein 86-57
#   14   Mass.-Dartmouth (15-0) def. Eastern Conn. 97-92 and won at Plymouth State 84-80
#   15   Stevens (12-2) lost at St. John Fisher 71-59 and won at Alfred 60-49
#   16   UW-Oshkosh (12-4) lost at UW-Eau Claire 57-54 and won at UW-La Crosse 81-68
#   17   Guilford (9-4) lost at Roanoke 68-56 and won at Emory & Henry at 120-112
#   18   Wheaton (IL) (12-3) lost at #9 Augustana 66-61 and def. North Park 70-63
#   19   Wooster (12-3) won at Hiram 117-87 and lost at Wittenberg 87-86 (OT)
#   20   Centre (14-1) won at Austin 68-62 and won at Colorado Coll. 70-55
#   21   Plattsburgh St. (12-2) def. SUNYIT 81-69 and def. Cortland St. 74-69
#   22   Virginia Wesleyan (11-3) def. Hampden-Sydney 73-58 and won at Lynchburg 92-64
#   23   Millsaps (15-1) won at U. of Dallas 66-55, def. Oglethorpe 103-76 and def. Sewanee 76-75
#   24   Carnegie Mellon (10-4) lost to #2 Brandeis 60-48 and lost to NYU 63-58
#   25   Randolph-Macon (13-2) def. Eastern Mennonite 94-68 and won at Hampden-Sydney 72-59

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 20, 2008, 07:23:22 PM

Puget Sound will definately drop...Does Whitworth have a chance to get some votes for knocking off Puget Sound.

Lewis & Clarck lost again...they are one preseason top 25 team that has really struggled this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on January 20, 2008, 07:27:03 PM

Where do Centre (#20 & 14-1) and Millsaps (#23 & 15-1) stack up in the next poll? These 2 teams that lead their respective divisions of the SCAC at this point play each other on Friday night (Jan 25) at Centre.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 20, 2008, 08:04:40 PM

Quote from: pbrooks3 on January 20, 2008, 07:27:03 PM
Where do Centre (#20 & 14-1) and Millsaps (#23 & 15-1) stack up in the next poll? These 2 teams that lead their respective divisions of the SCAC at this point play each other on Friday night (Jan 25) at Centre.

I will guess that they "float up" 2-4 places each, just because they won and plenty of teams above them lost.

Millsaps' home game versus Sewanee was not re-assuring.

But, a conference win is a conference win!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on January 20, 2008, 08:20:21 PM

Millsaps has a way of doing this from time to time, but they are experienced and talented. They had a nice game Friday night against Oglethorpe, and it often happens that they follow-up an outstanding game with a poor one. They'll be ready when they go to Danville Friday. Thanks for the insight.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on January 20, 2008, 11:12:38 PM

Whitworth is playing some very nice defense and just won both weekend games on the road against 2 of the top teams in the NWC. Winning at UPS is a very difficult challenge and I would hope to see the Pirates get some attention from voters. A young team, 1 returning starter, Whitworth is putting together a nice season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 21, 2008, 06:43:59 AM

Quote from: LU 05 on January 20, 2008, 05:53:12 PM
Isn't it anout time Lawrence is at least receiving some votes? Does one season (last) of mediocrity completely erase the national reputation they have built in the last 5 years?

You know that I'm hardly a Lawrence U. follower, but I'm somewhat familiar with them over the years since I have seen them play "a lot" for a team that isn't in the WIAC. They are a pretty good team, I will give you that and they've had a good recent history, and argue it or not, I think that plays into current polls.

Lawrence is currently 10-1 and 6-0 in the MWC. Unfortunately, they don't have any impressive wins and their lone loss, at Stevens Point (13-3, 5-2 WIAC), was by 19. I think if they would've even kept it remotely close, they would've been considered for some votes. But their schedule right now isn't doing them any favors. At the beginning of the year, I'm sure that Dominican (7-9, 4-5 NathCon) win looked a lot better than it does now. The Stars were picked to finish near the top of the NathCon, but they are under .500 in conference, while Concordia (IL) (2-13, 2-8 NathCon)is just plain bad. The Lake Forest (7-6. 3-3 MWC) and Monmouth (4-10, 4-4 MWC) wins aren't going to open any eyes, though I think the Foresters aren't horrible. Not sure about their opponents they played down in Florida, but they were both non-D3 schools, I gather. Ripon (6-7, 1-5 MWC) played well against Point, but LU's win over them isn't going to win you votes since Ripon has 1 more win in the MWC than I do, and I don't even play. Big win over Grinnell (9-4, 4-2 MWC), who started off well, but most in the D3 world kind of discount the Pioneers' success. I do remember it took Grinnell to go 13-0 or something like that a few years ago before breaking into the Top 25 and then rewarded the voters by tanking. lol.

The conference isn't helping much...and neither is the schedule at this time. The Vikings have a big matchup on Tuesday with ranked Oshkosh (12-4, 6-2 WIAC) and they do head to Grinnell this weekend for the return match. At the beginning of February, they play Carroll College (9-3, 5-1 MWC), really the only other MWC team with NCAA tourney history/success. Those Pioneers have 3 losses, blowout losses to Point and Whitewater and a tough loss to the other Pioneers of Grinnell.

The only way the Vikings will open up some eyes is if they knock off the Titans on Tuesday, otherwise, I could see a senario where they run the table in the MWC, end up 23-2 (losses to Point and Oshkosh) and not even break the Top 25 because the MWC isn't really perceived as a real strong conference and to add the fact that it's probably down this year (Carroll lost Drury and Colomy, Grinnell is down and LU had a tough year last year and a new coach this year).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 21, 2008, 09:08:02 AM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on January 21, 2008, 06:43:59 AM
Ripon (6-7, 1-5 MWC) played well against Point, but LU's win over them isn't going to win you votes since Ripon has 1 more win in the MWC than I do, and I don't even play.

This one made me chuckle Tom... funny stuff!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 21, 2008, 09:31:28 AM

It will be interesting to see if Brandeis stays put, or drops directly below Amherst a team they beat, and have an equal amount of losses as. Also I would expect UMD to break into the top 10 this week, perhaps convincingly so. One would think after the win against Brandeis that is where the deserved to be, but in this world you have to slowly climb your way up the ladder, as other teams drop, and that is what they have done.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LU 05 on January 21, 2008, 02:56:50 PM

beating a 500. d2 at their place will never count in regional rankings granted, but why cant that count as a GOOD win for the purposes of the top 25 poll?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 21, 2008, 03:09:23 PM

Massey ranks Nova Southeatern as 185th out of 279 in Division II. Nova's .201 rating is the same as Coe's and is just behind University of Chicago.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 21, 2008, 03:26:47 PM

Quote from: LU 05 on January 21, 2008, 02:56:50 PM
beating a 500. d2 at their place will never count in regional rankings granted, but why cant that count as a GOOD win for the purposes of the top 25 poll?

I didn't comment on those teams they played down there because I don't know anything about them and I was too lazy to look up their records! lol...

I do think results that don't count in regional rankings (or non d3 games for that matter) do "count" in terms of the Top 25 poll. If a team loses to a very good D2 team, it's not really taken into account as a bad loss simply because it was a loss.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 21, 2008, 08:06:55 PM

Top Vote Getting Movers

+7 Middlebury
+6 Mass Darmouth
+6 Centre
+6 Virginia Wesleyan
+6 Randolph Macon
+6 Roanoke
+6 Elizabethtown
+5 Milsaps
+5 Aurora
-4 Puget Sound
-4 UW Oshkosh
-4 Wheaton
-4 Wooster
-6 Stevens
-6 Nazareth
-9 Guilford
-11 Mary Hardin Baylor

This ignores teams that went from zero votes to some votes (Whitworth, Lawerence, Carthage, Gustavus Adolphus, NYU, Trinity Conn), and those that went from some votes to zero votes (Carnegie Mellon, Lewis and Clark, Trinity TX, DeSales, Salem St., Defiance).

And thanks to Mr. Ypsi for keeping me on the straight and narrow after some errors last week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: MR. PAC on January 21, 2008, 09:46:42 PM

Elizabethtown isn't that good.They won't be in the top 25 that long.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 21, 2008, 10:32:59 PM

Exactly, how do you figure? 13-1 and just crushed DeSales. Their only lost coming on York's (Pa.) home court - not a great loss, but their only one.

So... why do you say they aren't that good? Pretty straight forward comment with no backing, it seems.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 21, 2008, 11:14:14 PM

Puget Sound did drop and they deserved it, nothing suprising about that. Glad that they didn't slide farther then 11th. Hopefully they will get back on the winning track this weekend and continue to climb back up the polls.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 21, 2008, 11:16:05 PM

Also, I like that Brandeis did not drop. They lost to #1 on their home court, I think the voters definately got that one right.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LU 05 on January 21, 2008, 11:35:20 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 21, 2008, 03:09:23 PM
Massey ranks Nova Southeatern as 185th out of 279 in Division II. Nova's .201 rating is the same as Coe's and is just behind University of Chicago.

If we are going to use Massey as a meaningful barometer of teams, Does Lawrence's rank of 10 legitamize it for the top 25 poll?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 21, 2008, 11:43:21 PM

Quote from: LU 05 on January 21, 2008, 11:35:20 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 21, 2008, 03:09:23 PM
Massey ranks Nova Southeatern as 185th out of 279 in Division II. Nova's .201 rating is the same as Coe's and is just behind University of Chicago.

If we are going to use Massey as a meaningful barometer of teams, Does Lawrence's rank of 10 legitimize it for the top 25 poll?

Massey MOV (http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&sub=III&mid=1) has the Larrys at #7. ;) :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 21, 2008, 11:54:04 PM

It would appear the ODAC schools may be underrated.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 22, 2008, 12:23:13 AM

It's a lot easier to be 20 spots off on Lawrence than to be 100 spots off and make Nova a strong opponent. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 22, 2008, 12:35:51 AM

Quote from: LU 05 on January 21, 2008, 11:35:20 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 21, 2008, 03:09:23 PM
Massey ranks Nova Southeatern as 185th out of 279 in Division II. Nova's .201 rating is the same as Coe's and is just behind University of Chicago.
If we are going to use Massey as a meaningful barometer of teams, Does Lawrence's rank of 10 legitamize it for the top 25 poll?

The Larrys play Oshkosh on Tuesday.

I calculate by Massey that the Larrys should win by (69.92-67.35=) 2.57 points at home.

We can see. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on January 22, 2008, 01:04:43 AM

I apologize for not knowing but do the voters look at Massey MOV or non MOV primarily?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 22, 2008, 01:16:57 AM

Neither but MOV is generally seen as more accurate.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on January 22, 2008, 01:20:45 AM

Thanks Pat. Neither Huh? Sure gets mentioned alot. I hope the previous poll isn't the strongest guide. I am curious if adding more voters would be good or bad.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 22, 2008, 01:48:54 AM

I think it gets mentioned b/c it ranks all 400 teams and gives strength of schedule. It's useful in generalities.

We've done well for nine years with 25 voters -- three per region plus me. If the MWC's own voter wasn't voting for Lawrence before this week, for example, I'm not losing sleep over it.

Speaking of sleep...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 22, 2008, 09:25:57 AM

I use Massey in preparing my poster's poll just to see if there are teams that I should be considering based on the power rankings. As more games are played, the more accurate it is.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 22, 2008, 08:50:54 PM

Rhode Island College leads unbeaten #8 UMass-Dartmouth, 57-50 with 11:26 left. Check the front page (http://www.d3hoops.com/) for a (free) video link.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 22, 2008, 10:14:59 PM

Quote from: MR. PAC on January 21, 2008, 09:46:42 PM
Elizabethtown isn't that good.They won't be in the top 25 that long.

Didn't take long.........didn't take long at all.

Nice comeback for UMass Dartmouth, the dream season marches on. Looks like Larry will be getting more attention next week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on January 22, 2008, 10:21:45 PM

Massey is simply not accurate enough for use as a voting mechanism. It seems like it sould be more accurate, as it is at the D1 level, but the missing scores and the variation in quality of play is too great I guess.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 22, 2008, 10:22:50 PM

Agreed -- I just think it's good as a general indication only.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 22, 2008, 10:33:05 PM

Good call by Mr. Pac as E-town loses the day after they crack the poll.

Also Ralph T. correctly predicts UW-Oshkosh 3 pt. loss to Lawrence. Now if you could only give me the correct spread on the Patriots-Giants game. (Parlayed with the over/under of course)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 22, 2008, 10:46:17 PM

Quote from: Coach C on January 22, 2008, 10:21:45 PM
Massey is simply not accurate enough for use as a voting mechanism. It seems like it sould be more accurate, as it is at the D1 level, but the missing scores and the variation in quality of play is too great I guess.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 22, 2008, 10:22:50 PM
Agreed -- I just think it's good as a general indication only.

Through the summer they had a halftime score of a Hope/Albion game counted as a final score from last season, along with the actual final score. Not good for a score based ratings system.

So needless to say it isn't always 100% accurate, if ever.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 23, 2008, 10:34:38 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 22, 2008, 10:33:05 PM
Good call by Mr. Pac as E-town loses the day after they crack the poll.

Also Ralph T. correctly predicts UW-Oshkosh 3 pt. loss to Lawrence. Now if you could only give me the correct spread on the Patriots-Giants game. (Parlayed with the over/under of course)

Not me, Massey! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on January 24, 2008, 02:33:05 AM

4 losses already this week from the bottom 6. Magic 8-ball says "New teams make first appearance."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 24, 2008, 11:18:53 AM

or former drop outs reappear

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 24, 2008, 01:07:52 PM

Of course, Massey predicted the UW-Oshkosh loss to the Larrys! ;)

IMHO, that is a good win for the Larrys!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Marty Peretz on January 24, 2008, 02:53:37 PM

Wash.U.'s win over Platteville (sans Wallis) is looking better and better every day...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 24, 2008, 03:38:04 PM

Wash U is definately looking good...they have bounced back well since though early season losses.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 24, 2008, 03:39:45 PM

Not that I just realized it but...the UAA is pretty dang good

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 24, 2008, 04:00:21 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 24, 2008, 01:07:52 PM
IMHO, that is a good win for the Larrys!

Going out on a limb, are we? lol...yeah, very good win for LU, possibly puts them in the Top 25, if only they get two conference wins this weekend.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 24, 2008, 04:41:14 PM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on January 24, 2008, 04:00:21 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 24, 2008, 01:07:52 PM
IMHO, that is a good win for the Larrys!

Going out on a limb, are we? lol...yeah, very good win for LU, possibly puts them in the Top 25, if only they get two conference wins this weekend.

In the average year, I think that the best team in the Midwest Conference is probably a Top 25 team. I believe that we have seen that out of that conference, in that tough region, over the past several years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 24, 2008, 04:51:35 PM

I agree. Sometimes we just want to get some clarification on who the best team is in the league, first.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 24, 2008, 09:27:19 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 24, 2008, 04:51:35 PM
I agree. Sometimes we just want to get some clarification on who the best team is in the league, first.

That's very true, but it might be until the conference tournament before Grinnell is back to full strength.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 25, 2008, 09:14:51 PM

Two TIGHT games in the UAA... Emory and #1 Rochester tied at 53 with 9:45 to go

Brandeis leading Chicago 62-56 with 7:18 to go

EDIT:

Chicago goes on a 6 point run with a 4 point play and a steal and layup to take a 72-67 lead. Now 72-69, under 3 to go

Emory now up 60-56 under 6:00 to go

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 25, 2008, 09:30:57 PM

"watching" these two games on livestats is just cool. Beats thumbing through the papers looking for scores like I used to 15 years ago.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 25, 2008, 09:34:13 PM

Heck yeah! It's better than just listening on the radio too... especially when the live stats are AHEAD of the broadcast! Makes me feel like I can predict the future 'cause I know what's going to happen before I hear it!

UC still up 3 less than a minute, but Brandeis is making it interesting... 21 seconds... I hope they actually END the live stats when the game is over, 'cause I'm not listening to that one!

Emory up 4 less than 1:30

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 25, 2008, 09:36:40 PM

I just hope that when they go final, they go final in LiveStats. It can be frustrating waiting for ten minutes and then deciding that those last 8 seconds really ticked off long ago...

But I love it. I've got 4 LiveStats open now, plus the D3hoopscast of the 'Saps/Centre game. Kinda confusing!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 25, 2008, 09:39:39 PM

Last 8 seconds.. or last two seconds, like in the UC/Brandeis game... Looks like it MAY be over...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 25, 2008, 09:39:52 PM

What do you think, should we go with Chicago winning?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 25, 2008, 09:41:10 PM

Quote from: sac on January 25, 2008, 09:39:52 PM
What do you think, should we go with Chicago winning?

YEP, just went final, Chicago 79 Brandeis 77 #2 just lost

:20 to go, Emory leads by 2 69-67

.8 to go... Rochester ball...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 25, 2008, 09:44:17 PM

Looks like OT in Atlanta...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 25, 2008, 09:45:08 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 25, 2008, 09:44:17 PM
Looks like OT in Atlanta...

Emory must just be sick to their stomachs.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 25, 2008, 09:46:05 PM

WOW 69-69, going to OT.

re: the other game... I'm not a UAA historian, but I seem to remember reading that no visiting team has won both games of the Chicago-Wash U series... that doesn't seem likely to me, but maybe it is... And it makes for a tough game Saturday in St. Louis!

Emory wins 81-76 #1 goes down too!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 25, 2008, 09:47:37 PM

Wes Anderson is having a coronary because a Centre guy (Thomas Britt) just hit a big shot to tie the game with 0:00.3 left. He's losing his voice, too. :)

OT in Danville, too.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: OC_SID on January 25, 2008, 09:52:45 PM

Emory up four with 2:49 left in OT.

EDIT:

It's a final -- Emory 81, Rochester 76

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 25, 2008, 09:56:07 PM

It's all Centre in the OT, leading by 8 inside 2:00 left now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 25, 2008, 10:00:14 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 25, 2008, 09:36:40 PM
I just hope that when they go final, they go final in LiveStats. It can be frustrating waiting for ten minutes and then deciding that those last 8 seconds really ticked off long ago...

Exhibit A: Wash U./NYU LiveStats died at 3:05 remaining, and I only just discovered that it ended (Wash U. 57-50.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 25, 2008, 10:06:38 PM

#1 Rochester loses
#2 Brandeis loses
#3 Amherst plays at its biggest rival Willams Saturday
#4 Washington plays at #2 Brandeis
#5 Hope plays at its biggest rival Calvin Saturday
#6 UW Whitewater has already lost this week
#7 UW Stevens Point plays at #20 UW Oshkosh, whose already lost this week

Wild stuff!

I didn't think Emory was going to hold on, they missed 8 FT's in the final 2 min of regulation and OT, including 5 in OT.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: atn alum on January 25, 2008, 10:12:50 PM

OK, so if 1-7 all lose this week, perhaps Mass-Dartmouth makes the climb from 8 to 1.

David Collinge...get ready to do some research on that kind of jump to the top (in reg season)

Yikes!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 25, 2008, 10:16:46 PM

And if by scheduling, UMHB had hosted Hardin-Simmons and McMurry instead of going on the road last week, UMHB might have been #1. :o

Another first! ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 25, 2008, 10:23:12 PM

Quote from: atnwriter on January 25, 2008, 10:12:50 PM
OK, so if 1-7 all lose this week, perhaps Mass-Dartmouth makes the climb from 8 to 1.

David Collinge...get ready to do some research on that kind of jump to the top (in reg season)

Yikes!

::) Gimme something hard once in a while, wuddya...

2001-02, Week 7 (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/02/week7.htm), Randolph-Macon goes from #11 to #1.

Technically, this is second to #14 Catholic's rise to #1 (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/01/final.htm) after winning the 2001 title, but that's kind of a special case...

;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Marty Peretz on January 25, 2008, 10:25:08 PM

As a follower of the UAA, I can not stress how stunning the Chicago and Rochester losses are. These are complete shockers. Chicago lost to Wash.U. by 26 and Wash.U. had its bench in for the last 7 plus minutes. Emory was losing to Wash.U. by 37 with just under ten minutes to play, before the Bears' starters were pulled. Emory ended up losing by 23, I believe. Chicago couldn't buy a bucket when they came to St. Louis. They are a streaky team which is capable of catching a better team on an off day and upsetting them. So even though I am stunned that they beat Deis AT Deis, their victory isn't utterly unfathomable. Deis, it seems, has been prone to taking nights off, if you will. Plus, this was a classic trap game for them, sandwiched between Rochester last weekend and Wash.U. sunday.

But Emory, with all due respect, is NOT a good basketball team. Not to mention, Emory probably has the weakest big men in the league, with Rochester clearly having the strongest. Wash.U. is without arguably its best player and was winning by nearly 40 with close to a quarter of that game still to be played. If Edwards wanted to, he could have beaten them by 45 or 50, no problem. The magnitude of Emory's upset of Rochester is on par with Chaminade over UVA, I kid you not. Unless Emory was without a few of its key players last weekend (someone please let us know if this was the case), I simply can not understand how they upset Rochester. Sure, they played at home, but Emory is known as one of the easier places to play in the UAA. This is an Emory team which lost to Chicago last weekend by 26. Obviously, I give them all the credit in the world on their win; I'm merely stunned as to how they could have pulled it off...

To put how strange this league is into perspective, consider the following scores.
-Wash.U. beat NYU at NYU by 7.
-Deis beat NYU at NYU by 10, I believe.
-Wash.U. beat Chicago by 26 at home.
-Deis lost to Chicago at home by 2.

It's 100 percent OK to lost on the road in the UAA, but my impression of the league this year was that it was very top-heavy. Perhaps I was wrong... or perhaps we just saw historic upsets tonight...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on January 25, 2008, 11:02:36 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 25, 2008, 10:23:12 PM
Quote from: atnwriter on January 25, 2008, 10:12:50 PM
OK, so if 1-7 all lose this week, perhaps Mass-Dartmouth makes the climb from 8 to 1.

David Collinge...get ready to do some research on that kind of jump to the top (in reg season)

Yikes!

::) Gimme something hard once in a while, wuddya...

2001-02, Week 7 (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/02/week7.htm), Randolph-Macon goes from #11 to #1.

Technically, this is second to #14 Catholic's rise to #1 (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/01/final.htm) after winning the 2001 title, but that's kind of a special case...

;D

DC, so I clicked your link and looked at those polls and noticed that when RMC was #11, they had jumped there from #25 the week before, and then weren't even in the poll the week before that!

I researched on RMC's website, and it looks like the rapid ascension was due to twice beating previously unbeaten teams that were ranked #2 (Christopher-Newport and then Hampden-Sydney).

I'm guessing that in addition to the largest jump to #1, RMC that year set the mark for the fastest to ever go from unranked to #1 (only 3 polls).

One other thing, that week 7 poll had 6 teams (nearly 1/4 of the entire poll) all drawing between 500 and 600 voting points of support- with no one over 600. It seems that poll voters were particularly ambivalent about who the best teams in the country were at that time...which may be exactly where poll voters find ourselves come Sunday!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Marty Peretz on January 25, 2008, 11:17:47 PM

Question of the weekend (follow carefully)

If Wash.U. wins at Deis on Sunday, Hope beats Calvin Saturday, Rochester beats Case Sunday, and Amherst beats Williams Saturday, who is your number one team in the nation come Monday?

Consider:

Of Wash.U's two losses this year, one is to Calvin. Amherst's lone loss to a D3 opponent was at Brandeis. Rochester was stunned by a weak Emory team on the road Friday night, giving the Yellow Jackets their first loss of the year. Rochester sits atop the rankings, with Deis 2nd, Amherst 3rd, Wash.U. 4th, and Hope fifth. The seemingly obvious choice if the above scenarios occurred would be to make Wash.U. your number one team. They would have gone half way across the country to beat the number two team, of course. But that would give Deis three straight losses and take away from their credibility, thereby perhaps making it less of a terrific win for Wash.U. If Amherst beat #10 Williams, they'd obviously jump Deis, but would voters give them the nod over Wash.U.? The two teams' most significant common opponent would be Deis and Wash.U. would have beaten them and Amherst still won't have. I think that Rochester has to drop, even if Hope were to lose. Emory lost to Wash.U. by 25 a mere week ago.

If Hope beats Calvin, they might deserve #1, but Wash.U. has still played a toucher schedule and I would give the nod to the Bears. Needless to say the voting would be extremely tight.

If Wash.U wins, they should go back to number one. If Amherst wins, they should be a solid 2. If Hope wins, give them third. Put Rochester fourth and Deis fifth. Or, maybe move UMD all the way to number one (hey, number 6 lost also).

In truth, I think Wash.U. will fall narrowly at Deis in which case I'd put Amherst back at number one. But Amherst could easily lose at Williams and anything could happen in Calvin/Hope. Imagine, if Amherst, Wash.U. and Hope all lose. Deis lost Friday, so they can't be number one. It's radical to say so, but I could justify UMD going from 8 to 1...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 25, 2008, 11:26:10 PM

Jeez Marty - you don't make it easy, do you?!

Going to have to really think that over before I could even possibly answer it, in my opinion!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frank uible on January 25, 2008, 11:30:59 PM

Wait until Tuesday; it will be a lot clearer.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 25, 2008, 11:57:04 PM

Sure... as clear as mud! ;D

Title: Reality, What a concept
Post by: Cards7580 on January 26, 2008, 12:44:07 AM

"...As a follower of the UAA, I can not stress how stunning the Chicago and Rochester losses are. These are complete shockers. Chicago lost to Wash.U. by 26 and Wash.U. had its bench in for the last 7 plus minutes. Emory was losing to Wash.U. by 37..."

That's why they play the games....

That "on paper... they should win " theory is not always correct. Believe me, I know that from experience.

Nobody gave Plattsburgh a chance in the 1st round NCAA game last March either.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 26, 2008, 01:04:24 AM

DC
Brandeis record is 12-3 not 12-2. Losses to UMass-Dartmouth, UR, and Chicago.

Fixed, thanks. Merely forgot to update the record in all the frenzy at that time! ;D ...dc

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 26, 2008, 08:47:31 AM

Quote from: sac on January 25, 2008, 10:06:38 PM
#6 UW Whitewater has already lost this week
#7 UW Stevens Point plays at #20 UW Oshkosh, whose already lost this week

Whitewater lost their best player and most reliable big man in Rob Perry to a broken foot (could make a comeback in early to mid-March). He didn't play in this week's loss vs. Platteville (a team that beat Oshkosh on the road and lost to Point by three in the same week). Stevens Point has already lost to Oshkosh AT HOME, so it's a real tough game today.

Going into today's conference games, the WIAC has FOUR teams in 1st place, all at 6-2.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ChicagoHopeNut on January 26, 2008, 11:32:14 AM

Even if Hope beats Calvin I don't think they are the number one team unless everyone in front of them loses again this weekend. If Wash U beats Brandies I think they may have the best case for being number 1 but a good showing by Rochester on Sunday may allow them to stay right where they are.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HopeConvert on January 26, 2008, 11:51:27 AM

I don't think Rochester will drop too far. I'll be interested to see how far up the pollsters move UMD. If Hope wins, I see them moving up a spot or two at most, in large part because the MIAA isn't the UAA, the CCIW, or the WIAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 26, 2008, 02:37:24 PM

Quote from: DCHopeNut on January 26, 2008, 11:32:14 AM
...but a good showing by Rochester on Sunday may allow them to stay right where they are.

What would be a "good showing"?? ;) Case Western Reserve is 7-8, 0-4 in the UAA and they have lost their last 6 games. Rochester should win by 30 points? ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hope1 on January 26, 2008, 04:12:00 PM

#5 beat calvin to 79 to 76 at calvin maybe move up to number 3

*edit--corrected score

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Marty Peretz on January 26, 2008, 06:09:23 PM

If Wash.U. beats Deis, they should be number one. If Wash.U. loses, Amherst should be number one. No matter what happens Sunday, Hope should be number 2 or 3. If Deis beats Wash.U., Deis shouldn't fall lower than 3, with Wash.U. falling to 5 or 6 and Rochester falling to four or five.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 26, 2008, 06:13:47 PM

Quote from: Marty Peretz on January 26, 2008, 06:09:23 PM
If Wash.U. beats Deis, they should be number one. If Wash.U. loses, Amherst should be number one. No matter what happens Sunday, Hope should be number 2 or 3. If Deis beats Wash.U., Deis shouldn't fall lower than 3, with Wash.U. falling to 5 or 6 and Rochester falling to four or five.

Curious - how can you keep Brandeis above Rochester in the Top 25... when Brandeis has suffered its third loss - first to a non-undefeated team and Rochester lost its first game of the season.

I can't imagine voters are going to punish Rochester more for their loss than Brandeis with their third loss (including one to Rochester) - even with a win over Wash U.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 26, 2008, 06:15:18 PM

Agreed, and with Rochester losing on the road, a thousand miles away, while Brandeis loses at home.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 26, 2008, 06:56:31 PM

#20 UW Oshkosh beats #7 UWSP 73-61

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 26, 2008, 07:05:49 PM

Hope has a nice team, but even #5 is a bit lofty in my opinion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 26, 2008, 07:39:31 PM

Plattsburgh State 81-78 over Brockport State in Overtime

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ChicagoHopeNut on January 26, 2008, 07:40:18 PM

Quote from: sac on January 26, 2008, 07:05:49 PM
Hope has a nice team, but even #5 is a bit lofty in my opinion.

Despite wearing my best blue and orange tinted glasses I can't help but agree with sac. Hope is talented but I think even #5 might be higher than they ought to sit.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 26, 2008, 08:09:56 PM

As for Hope, if not them who? If not now when? Or something. Or other...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Downtown on January 26, 2008, 09:01:36 PM

Is it time for UW-Platteville, the #1 seed if the season ended today for the WIAC, be ranked?

It's funny, Oshkosh and Platteville, who would be seeds #1 and 2, are on the higher end of the poll, with Whitewater (who lost their best player for the season) and Stevens Point (who also lost their best player for who knows when) are on the lower end.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Marty Peretz on January 26, 2008, 09:56:07 PM

Pat and Dave, you're both right in principle, but having seen Emory play, I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you. I really don't mean any disrespect to Emory, but they simply are not a very good basketball game. That game against Rochester was as stunning an upset as I've ever heard in D3, or really at any level. Considering that Chicago beat Emory by 26 one week ago, yet only lost to Deis by 2, how can you think that Rochester is markedly better than Deis, especially if Deis beats Wash.U? Basically, I'm saying that a Brandeis loss at home against Chicago and a Brandeis win at home against Wash.U., is still better than a Rochester loss to Emory on the road. If Deis beats Wash.U., they will have beaten Amherst and Wash.U. and have just one bad loss (Chicago). Their other two losses--close one at Rochester and close one at UMD--are MUCH more impressive to me than some of Rochester's wins...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Jacketfan2011 on January 26, 2008, 10:07:20 PM

"how can you think that Rochester is markedly better than Deis"

I'll go out on a limb and say.......because Rochester beat them.

Are you inferring that UMD has more quality wins than UR? In your oppinion, which?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on January 26, 2008, 10:22:20 PM

Elmhurst is on the ropes in overtime to Wheaton (IL) with 14 seconds left 79-73.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on January 26, 2008, 10:23:13 PM

#13 Elmhurst goes down to #22 Wheaton 79-75 in OT.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2008, 12:41:42 AM

Quote from: Marty Peretz on January 26, 2008, 09:56:07 PM
Pat and Dave, you're both right in principle, but having seen Emory play, I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you.

Ahh yes, but I have seen Emory too, and I have seen Emory at home. You have seen Emory after a flight of how many miles?

You should know full well what the difference is between home and road in the UAA.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2008, 12:45:26 AM

It is dangerous to base your entire opinion of a team on one viewing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2008, 12:52:18 AM

Quote from: Marty Peretz on January 26, 2008, 09:56:07 PM
Pat and Dave, you're both right in principle, but having seen Emory play, I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you. I really don't mean any disrespect to Emory, but they simply are not a very good basketball game. That game against Rochester was as stunning an upset as I've ever heard in D3, or really at any level. Considering that Chicago beat Emory by 26 one week ago, yet only lost to Deis by 2, how can you think that Rochester is markedly better than Deis, especially if Deis beats Wash.U? Basically, I'm saying that a Brandeis loss at home against Chicago and a Brandeis win at home against Wash.U., is still better than a Rochester loss to Emory on the road. If Deis beats Wash.U., they will have beaten Amherst and Wash.U. and have just one bad loss (Chicago). Their other two losses--close one at Rochester and close one at UMD--are MUCH more impressive to me than some of Rochester's wins...

OK... let me try and explain this with a tale of the tape:
- Rochester has lost ONE game... Brandeis has lost THREE games - advantage Rochester
- Rochester BEAT Brandeis - advantage Rochester
- Rochester's loss was on the road... Brandeis at home - advantage Rochester
- Rochester lost to an bigger underdog in Emory... Brandeis lost to Chicago - push (since Rochester was on the road, and everyone says it is tough to win on the road in the UAA)

With your comparison... it is too narrow for a national Top 25 poll. It doesn't matter if you think Brandeis has had two good losses and one bad one... they have three - period. Sure, the UMD loss now looks more impressive, so based on your arguement, I would put UMD #1.

That being said, Rochester beat Brandies and has one loss. They have also taken everyone's best shot - being as highly ranked as they have - and only tripped once. Brandeis has tripped three times with everyone's best shot and lost three times.

Now... if Rochester losses a few more in the conference and Brandeis continues to win out, I may start to overlook the Rochester win over Brandeis. But right now... I would be shocked if most voters would put Rochester behind Brandeis.

Heck... Rochester came back to tie the game at the buzzer and force overtime on the road.
Brandeis played sloppy basketball and even with help from a friendly home-clock, couldn't tie or win the game at the buzzer against Chicago at home!
(For the record, with that kind of time on the clock - three seconds - I am not a fan of the baseball pass. I have seen two games won with LESS time on the clock with a 1/3 court pass and the attempt to dribble to a better position. Much better chance to get the ball into your team's hands that way!)

Oh... and I can come up with a few other shocking upsets in D3 that are bigger than Emory over Rochester... off the top of my head - Goucher over Lebanon Valley in the 1st round of the NCAA tournament in 1995 (many will understand why I throw that out there) and there have been others!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2008, 01:03:36 AM

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on January 27, 2008, 12:52:18 AM
Oh... and I can come up with a few other shocking upsets in D3 that are bigger than Emory over Rochester... off the top of my head - Goucher over Lebanon Valley in the 1st round of the NCAA tournament in 1995 (many will understand why I throw that out there) and there have been others!

Let's not go overboard. Goucher wasn't a 9-8 team. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2008, 01:08:01 AM

I know... was just trying to have fun :)... though it was a big upset! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 27, 2008, 01:20:29 AM

Sounds like maybe DaveC has a new project.

Oh Dave, can you find the biggest upset of a ranked team in the poll era. Thank you.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 27, 2008, 01:30:06 AM

I have a contender! Denison beating Wittenberg on December 11, 2004.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2008, 01:31:07 AM

*SMACK*

The sound of Dave C hitting himself up-side the head for his abilities of finding almost any kind of information a poster may need!

Keep up the good work, Dave! :-)

Denison beating Wittenberg - that could be a contender!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 27, 2008, 01:36:54 AM

There may be one larger, but in our area there was not one more surprising. Denison was 6-20 in 2004, they stood at 2-5 and had just lost to HIRAM (who wound up 4-21) of all teams before beating Witt.

The Big Red later won 8 out of 10 late in the year and wound up 13-12 on the season. But Witt beat them in the rematch 87-49.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 27, 2008, 04:43:52 AM

I have to agree with Dave. He pretty well summed it up point by point. Dave, just not sure if you meant you would put UMD #1 because you believe they should be or based on what Marty said HE would have to put UMD #1 instead of Brandeis. I believe Rochester should remain #1 despite the upset at Emory. Amherst #2, followed by Hope and Washington at #4 if they beat Brandeis on Sunday. UMD moves up to #5 but their weak schedule makes me feel as if that's a gift. And of their remaining 8 games they will only face 2 teams that might spoil that perfect record. They could go 28-0 and lose big in the 1st round of the NCAA's. I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt. in part because last year's Conference champion Rhode Island College did make it to the great 8 losing to eventual champion Amherst. On another note (and I'm beating the drums for my hometown team) the Plattsburgh State Cardinals have won 7 in a row and now stand at 14-2. Their last three games have been against the top contenders for the conference crown with last night's win coming against Brockport State, a team that came close to making the final four last year and returned just about everybody from that squad. The Cardinals only 2 losses were against a couple of decent teams 1 of them being Occidental after the Cards made that "short" road trip from Northern N.Y. State to Calif. Hopefully they'll continue to climb up the rankings from their current #17 spot. They were the last team to beat Rochester, before the upset by Emory, taking out the Yellowjackets in the 1st round of the NCAA's last year in the Rochester area. Both UR and the Cards have returned basically the same teams as last year and we might very well have to duke it out again. But I sure wish we could play UMass-Dartmouth in the 1st round.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on January 27, 2008, 10:14:47 AM

There is no way you can keep rochester number 1 IF Wash U wins at Brandeis. If they win tonight I think they move into the number 1 spot, simply because I do not believe that Amherst can hop over Brandeis having lost convincingly. The Brandeis loss to chicago was surprising and disappointing, especially as it was the Judges only home loss last season when the Maroon was a much better squad. If the Judges lose todays game they drop somewhere around where Williams dropped to, so 8-10 range. If they beat Wash U then the pollsters will have some fun tonight. If Brandeis wins, it is possibly UMD could hop into the #1 spot, or equally as interesting Hope could hold the top spot in both polls.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on January 27, 2008, 10:47:19 AM

Quote from: ILive4This on January 27, 2008, 10:14:47 AM
There is no way you can keep rochester number 1 IF Wash U wins at Brandeis. If they win tonight I think they move into the number 1 spot, simply because I do not believe that Amherst can hop over Brandeis having lost convincingly. The Brandeis loss to chicago was surprising and disappointing, especially as it was the Judges only home loss last season when the Maroon was a much better squad. If the Judges lose todays game they drop somewhere around where Williams dropped to, so 8-10 range. If they beat Wash U then the pollsters will have some fun tonight. If Brandeis wins, it is possibly UMD could hop into the #1 spot, or equally as interesting Hope could hold the top spot in both polls.

Brandeis hs three losses i think some may have a legitmate argument for the jeffs being #1. Though a wash u. win over judges is a stronger argument for #1. Is Deluca going to play this year? They really need him.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2008, 11:01:10 AM

Quote from: ILive4This on January 27, 2008, 10:14:47 AM
There is no way you can keep rochester number 1 IF Wash U wins at Brandeis. If they win tonight I think they move into the number 1 spot, simply because I do not believe that Amherst can hop over Brandeis having lost convincingly. The Brandeis loss to chicago was surprising and disappointing, especially as it was the Judges only home loss last season when the Maroon was a much better squad. If the Judges lose todays game they drop somewhere around where Williams dropped to, so 8-10 range. If they beat Wash U then the pollsters will have some fun tonight. If Brandeis wins, it is possibly UMD could hop into the #1 spot, or equally as interesting Hope could hold the top spot in both polls.

I find it surprising that nearly no one wants to put Rochester #1 after they lost. They have less losses than nearly every team being mentioned for the number one slot, except UMD. No one has given any reason any of the voters should vote any other team beside Rochester or UMD #1.

Quote from: ILive4This on January 27, 2008, 10:14:47 AM
There is no way you can keep rochester number 1 IF Wash U wins at Brandeis.

Why? What's the reason? There is no way??? You don't give a reason to why Rochester should drop! And no arguement for why Wash U should be #1.

Could someone give an arguement instead of just saying something that should happen or better happen?I am open to thoughts that have a solid backing to them, not just blanket statements with no supporting arguement.

Quote from: ILive4This on January 27, 2008, 10:14:47 AM
If they (Brandeis) beat Wash U then the pollsters will have some fun tonight.

I think the pollsters are going to have "fun", as it where, no matter what. This has been an interesting season!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2008, 11:10:13 AM

Yeah, there's a lot of conjecture and not a lot of logic being thrown out here. But I'll give a reason why we could consider Wash U for No. 1 with a win today.

1. Wash U would have beaten Brandeis on the road, while Rochester's win against them was at home.
2. Common opponent of Emory, who Wash U beat and Rochester lost to.

Those are simply possible justifications. Not saying they're bulletproof or that I would use them.

I'll also break down the schedule and opponents winning percentage and OOWP for the voters, hopefully.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 27, 2008, 02:32:01 PM

Rochester holding on to #1 despite losing would not be unprecedented in the poll, I believe Stevens Point hung on to the #1 ranking after losing a game a couple years ago.

The fact that WashU is where they are despite losing their terrific point gaurd to injury is really a great story. I don't think most thought they'd have just 2 losses right now with that schedule.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 27, 2008, 02:34:07 PM

I wouldn't think Rochester will maintain #1. There were lots of losses from top 25 teams this weekend...I am really interested to see how this new poll shakes out

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ChicagoHopeNut on January 27, 2008, 04:06:09 PM

Quote from: LogShow on January 27, 2008, 02:34:07 PM
I wouldn't think Rochester will maintain #1. There were lots of losses from top 25 teams this weekend...I am really interested to see how this new poll shakes out

While its a matter of opinion. I think Rochester should drop after losing this week, especially since Emory would not be considered a high quality opponent in the UAA. I think Wash U. should move up. I think they have some of the most impressive victories.

And either way, Rochester and Wash U. meet on Friday so next week one will have a real strong claim on first.

I view the top 5 as follows.

1. Wash U.
2. Amherst (I think these two spots are absolutely interchangeable and think either team should be there.)
3. Rochester
4. Hope
5. U-Mass Dartmouth

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on January 27, 2008, 04:08:48 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2008, 11:10:13 AM
Yeah, there's a lot of conjecture and not a lot of logic being thrown out here. But I'll give a reason why we could consider Wash U for No. 1 with a win today.

1. Wash U would have beaten Brandeis on the road, while Rochester's win against them was at home.
2. Common opponent of Emory, who Wash U beat and Rochester lost to.

Those are simply possible justifications. Not saying they're bulletproof or that I would use them.

I'll also break down the schedule and opponents winning percentage and OOWP for the voters, hopefully.

OOWP?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 27, 2008, 04:10:05 PM

OOWP = Opponents' opponents' winning percentage.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on January 27, 2008, 04:24:21 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 27, 2008, 04:10:05 PM
OOWP = Opponents' opponents' winning percentage.

interesting..thanks

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Jacketfan2011 on January 27, 2008, 04:33:45 PM

UAA scheduler must be a sadistic bastich. Wash U and Chicago make the NYU/'deis trip and the next weekend they have to go to Rochester? That's some serious travel

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on January 27, 2008, 04:50:17 PM

anyone think the jeffs will get any serious consideration for the top slot. If not, what is the rationale?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2008, 04:52:52 PM

I think they'll get serious consideration. But the other two teams beat Brandeis, where Amherst did not, including a team that beat Brandeis on the road, where Amherst played them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 27, 2008, 04:57:15 PM

My prediction for the top 5:
1. WashU
2. Rochester
3. Amherst
4. Hope
5. UMD

That's my prediction - while it will probably be the top 5 on my Posters' Poll ballot, I still haven't decided on the order! :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sayitaintso99 on January 27, 2008, 05:04:55 PM

Honestly, I do not get how UMD is hardly ever brought up in the talk about the number 1 spot. You can say whatever you want about their schedule. Any team they play are capable of beating them every night and that's all you can ask for. All these other teams have lost already and that being said UMD deserves a legit shot at the number 1 spot and respect from everyone else. You play to win the game and a loss is a loss, bringing up the fact that these other teams have lost on the road and whatever else is said are excuses. Especially since if they lose 1 game they will be penalized worse than any of these other teams who already have lost and most lost more than once. I really just don't get how people continue to look over them, just my opinion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on January 27, 2008, 05:25:02 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2008, 04:52:52 PM
I think they'll get serious consideration. But the other two teams beat Brandeis, where Amherst did not, including a team that beat Brandeis on the road, where Amherst played them.

makes sense...the jeffs have really improved in the last week but i think wash u. deserves it...they got it done on the road..quality stuff.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 27, 2008, 06:04:20 PM

HOW THEY FARED (week of Jan. 21-27) (COMPLETE)

#   1   Rochester (15-1) lost at Emory 81-76 (OT) and won at Case Western Reserve 85-74
#   2   Brandeis (12-4) lost to Chicago 79-77 and lost #4 Washington U. 71-69
#   3   Amherst (16-2) won at So. Vermont 113-87, won at Middlebury 83-66, and won at #10 Williams 86-70
#   4   Washington U. (14-2) won at NYU 57-50 and won at #2 Brandeis 71-69
#   5   Hope (14-2) won at Alma 81-55 and won at Calvin 79-76
#   6   UW-Whitewater (14-3) lost to UW-Platteville 79-73 and won at UW-Superior 86-55
#   7   UW-Stevens Point (14-4) def. UW-Eau Claire 57-44 and lost at #20 UW-Oshkosh 73-61
#   8   Mass.-Dartmouth (17-0) won at Rhode Island Coll. 77-70 and def. Western Conn. 72-67
#   9   Capital (15-2) def. Marietta 79-53 and won at Baldwin-Wallace 77-71
#   10   Williams (15-3) def. Trinity (CT) 65-48 and lost to #3 Amherst 86-70
#   11   Puget Sound (14-2) won at Lewis & Clark 92-87 (OT) and won at Willamette 90-75
#   12   Augustana (13-4) def. Millikin 71-63 and def. North Central (IL) 70-60
#   13   Elmhurst (13-4) won at North Park 66-39 and lost to #22 Wheaton (IL) 79-75 (OT)
#   14   Centre (15-1) def. #18 Millsaps 90-80 (OT) and def. Hendrix 69-59
#   15   Mary Hardin-Baylor (13-3) def. Howard Payne 86-65 and def. Sul Ross St. 88-76
#   16   Virginia Wesleyan (13-3) def. Eastern Mennonite 97-92 and def. #19 Randolph-Macon 56-38
#   17   Plattsburgh St. (14-2) def. Geneseo St. 66-44 and def. Brockport St. 81-78 (OT)
#   18   Millsaps (14-3) lost at #14 Centre 90-80 (OT) and lost at DePauw 90-83
#   19   Randolph-Macon (14-3) def. Bridgewater (VA) 70-55 and lost at #16 Virginia Wesleyan 56-38
#   20   UW-Oshkosh (13-5) lost at Lawrence 81-78 and def. #7 UW-Stevens Point 73-61
#   21   Stevens (14-2) def. Drew 77-64 and won at Elmira 50-46
#   22   Wheaton (IL) (13-4) lost at Illinois Wesleyan 63-60 and won at #13 Elmhurst 79-75 (OT)
#   23   Wooster (14-3) def. Denison 97-57 and def. Earlham 89-68
#   24   Roanoke (13-3) lost at Guilford 92-56, won at Hampden-Sydney 67-65, and def. Lynchburg 90-64
#   25   Elizabethtown (14-2) lost at Lycoming 79-78 (OT) and def. Messiah 84-68

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Marty Peretz on January 27, 2008, 06:09:23 PM

My Top 5:
Wash.U.
Amherst
Hope
Rochester
UMass Dartmouth

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: golden_dome on January 27, 2008, 06:14:12 PM

Just an update to keep Mississippi College on the Top 25 radar. The Choctaws are 13-3 having won their last six in a row. MC has had a unique season with Coach Jones out a couple months after open heart surgery and some early losses, but things have gotten more back to normal. After allowing a nation-best 56 points per game last year, the Choctaws were allowing almost 70 through the first ten games. During their six-game winning streak, MC has outscored opponents 20 per game and is allowing just 56 points per game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 27, 2008, 07:04:50 PM

Quote from: sayitaintso99 on January 27, 2008, 05:04:55 PM
Honestly, I do not get how UMD is hardly ever brought up in the talk about the number 1 spot. You can say whatever you want about their schedule. Any team they play are capable of beating them every night and that's all you can ask for. All these other teams have lost already and that being said UMD deserves a legit shot at the number 1 spot and respect from everyone else. You play to win the game and a loss is a loss, bringing up the fact that these other teams have lost on the road and whatever else is said are excuses. Especially since if they lose 1 game they will be penalized worse than any of these other teams who already have lost and most lost more than once. I really just don't get how people continue to look over them, just my opinion.

Even though they are undefeated - many think that Rochester, Amherst and Hope are better, along with UW - Wherever.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 27, 2008, 07:41:37 PM

Could we have a "How They Fared" for 26-30?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2008, 08:14:21 PM

Quote from: chubbyboybaby on January 27, 2008, 07:55:36 PM
I can understand why people think that rochester, washu, hope, and uw-whatever could be better than UMD. BUT, I seriously do not understand how anyone could think that Brandeis is better than UMD. Brandeis has 4 losses. At this rate, they won't even make the ncaa tourny.

That is a leap of faith that says Brandeis doesn't make the tournament with their record right now.
How about we wait until Regional Rankings and other far more important information comes out before taking that leap!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pabegg on January 27, 2008, 09:47:41 PM

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on January 27, 2008, 08:14:21 PM
Quote from: chubbyboybaby on January 27, 2008, 07:55:36 PM
I can understand why people think that rochester, washu, hope, and uw-whatever could be better than UMD. BUT, I seriously do not understand how anyone could think that Brandeis is better than UMD. Brandeis has 4 losses. At this rate, they won't even make the ncaa tourny.
That is a leap of faith that says Brandeis doesn't make the tournament with their record right now.
How about we wait until Regional Rankings and other far more important information comes out before taking that leap!

By my estimates of the Regional Rankings, Brandeis is 6th in the NE (after UMD, Amherst, Trinity, Middlebury, and Bowdoin) and would have the 11th Pool C bid. So at the moment, Brandeis would be in.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Marty Peretz on January 27, 2008, 11:52:25 PM

Brandeis had a tough weekend. Big deal. They are still a very, very good basketball team and they will recover. Three of their losses were to top 5-caliber teams and they have a win over a probably top 2 team. They lost to Rochester by 6 on the road and to UMD in OT, if I'm not mistaken. Their loss to Wash.U. was at home, but they easily could have won and lost by only two. The team's only bad loss was the home Chicago loss and U of C is proving that they may be a whole lot better than some people thought. They're 4-1 in the UAA, with two of those wins coming on the road. For what it's worth, I'm fairly confident that Deis is the best four-loss team in the country and in my opinion they are still a top ten caliber team even with their losses.

As for the D3 scene in general, has anyone ever seen this much parity nation-wide? The only undefeated team remaining is a traditional non-player on the national level and I think that's great. If asked to pick a final four today, I'd be incredibly hard pressed to come up with an answer...and this from a guy who was a perfect 4-4 last season...of course, that was when the bracket had already been released...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 28, 2008, 01:26:38 AM

Hey chubbyboybaby

Apparently I'm not the only person on this board and on the pollsters poll who thinks UMass-Dartmouth ranks no higher than #5. You shouldn't come on these boards and throw insults around just because someone disagrees with you. I wasn't trying to diss your team when I said I wish we could play them in the 1st round. Just think UR is better and we had them in the 1st round last year. As Pat C. mentioned earlier about OOWP and possibly working up those stats, I don't think UMD will look very good in that category. That's what I based my opinion on after looking at UMD's OOWP last night before I posted my remarks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 28, 2008, 08:37:28 AM

Brandeis probably will be in. Still a lot of season left and four losses is a lot better than most teams anyway!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 28, 2008, 08:47:02 AM

Quote from: smedindy on January 28, 2008, 08:37:28 AM
Brandeis probably will be in. Still a lot of season left and four losses is a lot better than most teams anyway!

Deis' OOWP will be very good because of the way that the UAA can get good schedules in their respective local areas that give good OWP's.

This is the first season for the OWP/OOWP, but I project that it helps the UAA the most of any conference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: theBroadcaster on January 28, 2008, 01:56:17 PM

Quote from: chubbyboybaby on January 27, 2008, 07:55:36 PM
Brandeis has 4 losses. At this rate, they won't even make the ncaa tourny.

Quote from: smedindy on January 28, 2008, 08:37:28 AM
Brandeis probably will be in. Still a lot of season left and four losses is a lot better than most teams anyway!

I know that Brandeis had an awful weekend, but I don't understand how whether or not they are a tournament team at this point could even be in question. Yes they have lost 4 games already, but look at the teams they lost to. Rochester and WashU were both #1 at one point this year, and UMD could be #1 this week. Losing to Chicago at home is inexcusable. Regardless though, take a look at the teams on the poll on the front page, Brandeis has played 4 of those 5! Yes, they're 1-3 in those 4 games, but I don't see how you can just say that since they have 4 losses already their stock should be in question. Their strength of schedule has been ridiculously high, and will only continue to get tougher in the UAA. Now though if the way Brandeis played this weekend continues.....well then thats a whole other story...........

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 28, 2008, 02:02:46 PM

And thats why there is a second round of league games...so the best teams can rise to the top. The tourney worthy teams will prove they belong by continuing to win games

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 28, 2008, 02:10:18 PM

Quote from: LogShow on January 28, 2008, 02:02:46 PM
And thats why there is a second round of league games...so the best teams can rise to the top. The tourney worthy teams will prove they belong by continuing to win games

Well, for MOST conferences anyway....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 28, 2008, 03:18:15 PM

Quote from: theBroadcaster on January 28, 2008, 01:56:17 PM
Quote from: chubbyboybaby on January 27, 2008, 07:55:36 PM
Brandeis has 4 losses. At this rate, they won't even make the ncaa tourny.
Quote from: smedindy on January 28, 2008, 08:37:28 AM
Brandeis probably will be in. Still a lot of season left and four losses is a lot better than most teams anyway!
I know that Brandeis had an awful weekend, but I don't understand how whether or not they are a tournament team at this point could even be in question. Yes they have lost 4 games already, but look at the teams they lost to. Rochester and WashU were both #1 at one point this year, and UMD could be #1 this week. Losing to Chicago at home is inexcusable. Regardless though, take a look at the teams on the poll on the front page, Brandeis has played 4 of those 5! Yes, they're 1-3 in those 4 games, but I don't see how you can just say that since they have 4 losses already their stock should be in question. Their strength of schedule has been ridiculously high, and will only continue to get tougher in the UAA. Now though if the way Brandeis played this weekend continues.....well then thats a whole other story...........

Note that the d3hoops.com poll has NOTHING to do with pool C selection (there are top 25 teams omitted every year), but their strength of schedule does probably allow them 1 or 2 more losses than nearly any other team. With no conference tourney for pool A redemption, I'd say they should be mildly concerned with a 6th loss; very nervous with a 7th.

And don't pile on to the 'chubby' one - he didn't define 'at this rate'. Maybe he meant 'the last 3 games'! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 28, 2008, 03:28:45 PM

Quote from: LogShow on January 28, 2008, 02:02:46 PM
And thats why there is a second round of league games...so the best teams can rise to the top. The tourney worthy teams will prove they belong by continuing to win games

Except in the NESCAC. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on January 28, 2008, 07:28:34 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 28, 2008, 02:10:18 PM
Quote from: LogShow on January 28, 2008, 02:02:46 PM
And thats why there is a second round of league games...so the best teams can rise to the top. The tourney worthy teams will prove they belong by continuing to win games

Well, for MOST conferences anyway....

hmm....the nescac champion has been a proven winner in the ncaa tourney.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on January 28, 2008, 07:29:18 PM

Quote from: sac on January 28, 2008, 03:28:45 PM
Quote from: LogShow on January 28, 2008, 02:02:46 PM
And thats why there is a second round of league games...so the best teams can rise to the top. The tourney worthy teams will prove they belong by continuing to win games

Except in the NESCAC. ::)

obviously the other conferences should follow suit :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 28, 2008, 07:53:45 PM

New No. 1 team named. (http://www.d3hoops.com/)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 28, 2008, 08:07:59 PM

Will the rest of the poll be released soon?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 28, 2008, 08:29:14 PM

Top Vote Getting Movers

+7 UW Platteville
+5 Wooster
+5 St Thomas
+5 Ursinus
-7 Brandeis
-8 Elmhurst
-8 Randolph Macon
-16 Milsaps

This ignores teams that went from zero votes to some votes (Lawerence, Albright, Carleton, Richard Stockton), and those that went from some votes to zero votes (Middlebury, Rhode Is Col, Gustavus Adolphus, etc).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 28, 2008, 08:54:30 PM

Quote from: LogShow on January 28, 2008, 08:07:59 PM
Will the rest of the poll be released soon?

No.

Oh wait, yes. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 28, 2008, 08:55:59 PM

This is about as much parity as I can recall in Division III. I have seen #1 Wash U, #10 Augustana, #21 Elmhurst, #24 Wheaton, and top "ORV" Occidental, and there just isn't a heck of a lot of separation there at all.

What makes Wash U the best of the group is their depth in the starting five. In addition to their superstars (Troy Ruths and Tyler Nading) the Bears start 3 other good players who can beat you. Those teams I listed above all have a weak spot or two...on a neutral floor though, these would all be close games.

Unless I'm missing something, I don't see anything close to a dominant team this year. I see a whole bunch of pretty evenly matched teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on January 28, 2008, 09:15:16 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 28, 2008, 08:55:59 PM
This is about as much parity as I can recall in Division III. I have seen #1 Wash U, #10 Augustana, #21 Elmhurst, #24 Wheaton, and top "ORV" Occidental, and there just isn't a heck of a lot of separation there at all.

What makes Wash U the best of the group is their depth in the starting five. In addition to their superstars (Troy Ruths and Tyler Nading) the Bears start 3 other good players who can beat you. Those teams I listed above all have a weak spot or two...on a neutral floor though, these would all be close games.

Unless I'm missing something, I don't see anything close to a dominant team this year. I see a whole bunch of pretty evenly matched teams.

wash u. was very impressive at the final four and i thought would only improve....i haven't seen the other teams but the starting 5 for wash is impressive...only amherst has a more impresive starting 5 ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 28, 2008, 09:18:01 PM

Quote from: fpc85 on January 28, 2008, 09:15:16 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 28, 2008, 08:55:59 PM
This is about as much parity as I can recall in Division III. I have seen #1 Wash U, #10 Augustana, #21 Elmhurst, #24 Wheaton, and top "ORV" Occidental, and there just isn't a heck of a lot of separation there at all.

What makes Wash U the best of the group is their depth in the starting five. In addition to their superstars (Troy Ruths and Tyler Nading) the Bears start 3 other good players who can beat you. Those teams I listed above all have a weak spot or two...on a neutral floor though, these would all be close games.

Unless I'm missing something, I don't see anything close to a dominant team this year. I see a whole bunch of pretty evenly matched teams.
wash u. was very impressive at the final four and i thought would only improve....i haven't seen the other teams but the starting 5 for wash is impressive...only amherst has a more impresive starting 5 ;D

Wash U is playing without their point-guard from last year, Sean Wallis (knee). Wallis was probably their MVP...the Bears aren't the same team without him.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on January 28, 2008, 10:03:35 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 28, 2008, 09:18:01 PM
Quote from: fpc85 on January 28, 2008, 09:15:16 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 28, 2008, 08:55:59 PM
This is about as much parity as I can recall in Division III. I have seen #1 Wash U, #10 Augustana, #21 Elmhurst, #24 Wheaton, and top "ORV" Occidental, and there just isn't a heck of a lot of separation there at all.

What makes Wash U the best of the group is their depth in the starting five. In addition to their superstars (Troy Ruths and Tyler Nading) the Bears start 3 other good players who can beat you. Those teams I listed above all have a weak spot or two...on a neutral floor though, these would all be close games.

Unless I'm missing something, I don't see anything close to a dominant team this year. I see a whole bunch of pretty evenly matched teams.
they seem to be functioning at a very high level w/o him.
wash u. was very impressive at the final four and i thought would only improve....i haven't seen the other teams but the starting 5 for wash is impressive...only amherst has a more impresive starting 5 ;D

Wash U is playing without their point-guard from last year, Sean Wallis (knee). Wallis was probably their MVP...the Bears aren't the same team without him.

they seem to be doing very well without him.....scary to think how they would be with him.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wc2viking on January 28, 2008, 10:29:37 PM

I just want to chime in to say that I think the poll has Lawrence ranked in the right spot. Good work to the voters.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 28, 2008, 10:42:15 PM

Someone from Lawrence is satisfied -- my work here is done. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 29, 2008, 02:49:00 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 28, 2008, 08:54:30 PM
Quote from: LogShow on January 28, 2008, 08:07:59 PM
Will the rest of the poll be released soon?

No.

Oh wait, yes. :)

I knew it would eventually. But this is the age of instant gratification, I didn't want just a teaser :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on January 29, 2008, 02:59:45 AM

NWC update for all:

Whitworth Pirates (#18 Massey) climb a bit to 29th place. They should continue to climb for the next 3 weeks. Also glad to see Puget Sound (#12 Massey) climb to #7 overall. NWC has 2 clear frontrunners and hopefully things will setup for a big rematch when Whitworth (won at UPS) and Puget Sound meet at Whitworth Feb 16. NWC plays conf. tourney (top3) for auto berth and might feature this matchup yet again on Feb 30. NWC has 4 teams playing for third place and spoiler status.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 29, 2008, 10:58:12 AM

Quote from: LogShow on January 29, 2008, 02:49:00 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 28, 2008, 08:54:30 PM
Quote from: LogShow on January 28, 2008, 08:07:59 PM
Will the rest of the poll be released soon?

No.

Oh wait, yes. :)

I knew it would eventually. But this is the age of instant gratification, I didn't want just a teaser :)

Ahh, see, and I didn't want to hold the news until I could get the poll page built. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 29, 2008, 04:03:08 PM

David, interesting bolg there for the Top 25 news and notes, nice job!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Marty Peretz on January 29, 2008, 07:33:57 PM

TitanQ,

For the record, you did not catch Wash.U. on one of its better days. The Wash.U. team now is a completely different squad than it was 6 weeks ago. In fact, their current starting pg, Ross Kelly, was credited with playing 0+ minutes against the Titans. That's the same Ross Kelly who scored 12 points and dished out 6 assists in 36 minutes of action against a Brandeis team with exceptionally quick guards. He turned the ball over just twice...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 29, 2008, 08:26:48 PM

Quote from: Marty Peretz on January 29, 2008, 07:33:57 PM
TitanQ,

For the record, you did not catch Wash.U. on one of its better days. The Wash.U. team now is a completely different squad than it was 6 weeks ago. In fact, their current starting pg, Ross Kelly, was credited with playing 0+ minutes against the Titans. That's the same Ross Kelly who scored 12 points and dished out 6 assists in 36 minutes of action against a Brandeis team with exceptionally quick guards. He turned the ball over just twice...

You would certainly know better than I Marty, but here is what you said after that game...

Quote from: Marty Peretz on December 08, 2007, 07:07:06 PM
IWU played very well today. I was very impressed by their disciplined style and clutch shooting. Whereas last week, we (Wash.U). played poorly and were lucky to escape with a 2 point win over a weak Babson team, today we played quite well in the second half and couldn't afford to make mistakes against the Titans. That team will give squads fits this year and will compete nationally by next year. If things turn out according to plan, they will be in the running to get back to Salem by 2010, 2011.

I had the impression then you felt the Bears played pretty well. But I do understand your point about the Bears being a different team now, as Illinois Wesleyan certainly is too.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Marty Peretz on January 29, 2008, 09:48:23 PM

Good memory, Titan Q. And indeed, at the time, I did consider it one of the team's better performances, but that's also when I was udner the assumption we'd never find a point guard. So, I suppose I was pleased with how we played considering our lack of an individual who could solidly run an offense. Now that such an individual has emerged, we are a completely different basketball team. Thanks for keeping me honest.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 29, 2008, 11:28:17 PM

The ink just dried and already two top 25's go down.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 30, 2008, 12:28:22 AM

And at least 7 more will fall by weeks end.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: atn alum on January 30, 2008, 01:09:18 AM

It's not a record. Muhlenberg beat Philly Bible by 70 earlier this season.

These things happen.

Farmingdale is hot (9 wins in a row) but doesn't have any wins that would make me jump up and say "WOW." (70 point wins don't get that kind of reax from me). At least not yet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2008, 01:11:55 AM

With losses to Old Westbury and Staten Island there's basically nothing that will put Farmingdale in the Top 25 now short of a couple of NCAA Tournament wins against teams that are getting votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 30, 2008, 01:13:35 AM

Most team's 2nd string could beat SUNY-Purchase by 50 points.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NYBB on January 30, 2008, 01:22:36 AM

maybe right now, that's true. that team will be better eventually

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Cards7580 on January 30, 2008, 11:17:17 AM

"..maybe right now, that's true. that team will be better eventually..."

When you have a record of 2-14 that's probably the better direction to go ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 30, 2008, 11:23:51 AM

Quote from: magicman on January 30, 2008, 01:13:35 AM
Most team's 2nd string could beat SUNY-Purchase by 50 points.

I think Purchase could take Unity, though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NYBB on January 30, 2008, 01:08:34 PM

is Unity really bad? Purchase just doesn't have any bench. They've got 2 players right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 30, 2008, 01:12:25 PM

Quote from: NYBB on January 30, 2008, 01:08:34 PM
is Unity really bad? Purchase just doesn't have any bench. They've got 2 players right now.

Maine-Presque Isle 93, Unity 63. 'Nuff said!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 30, 2008, 01:27:42 PM

Unity is the lowest rated team in the USCAA, per Massey. They're outscored by 47 points per game.

But they know how to hug those trees!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 30, 2008, 02:30:17 PM

UMPI is much improved this season; the games with Unity were nail-biters not too long ago.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 30, 2008, 03:19:18 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 30, 2008, 02:30:17 PM

UMPI is much improved this season; the games with Unity were nail-biters not too long ago.

True, but UMPI is still winless against d3 - may be Unity is even worse this season?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 30, 2008, 03:27:43 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 30, 2008, 02:30:17 PM

UMPI is much improved this season; the games with Unity were nail-biters not too long ago.

I'm not sure being the 2nd lowest D3 according to massey means they're much improved over last season.

UMPI 83 Unity 79 from just one year ago. I'm going with Unity has gotten worse.

I really just want to see one of these games to see if anyone wears sandals. :D

Oh and to visit this http://www.umpi.maine.edu/info/nmms/solar/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 30, 2008, 03:34:48 PM

sac, nice link. My interpretation of it is that UMPI is the center of the solar system. And I always thought they were located somewhere in the Van Kuiper belt! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 30, 2008, 04:24:54 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2008, 01:11:55 AM
With losses to Old Westbury and Staten Island there's basically nothing that will put Farmingdale in the Top 25 now short of a couple of NCAA Tournament wins against teams that are getting votes.

...and here is a supporting score to reinforce Pat's point. Farmingdale has only played one team in the current Top 25 and it was Farmingdale's worst loss (biggest margin) of the season.

Wooster 106 Farmingdale 81

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 30, 2008, 05:21:57 PM

Quote from: sac on January 30, 2008, 03:27:43 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 30, 2008, 02:30:17 PM

UMPI is much improved this season; the games with Unity were nail-biters not too long ago.

I'm not sure being the 2nd lowest D3 according to massey means they're much improved over last season.

UMPI 83 Unity 79 from just one year ago. I'm going with Unity has gotten worse.

I really just want to see one of these games to see if anyone wears sandals. :D

Oh and to visit this http://www.umpi.maine.edu/info/nmms/solar/

Avid readers will recall that we had this discussion about Pluto (http://www.d3sports.com/post/index.php?topic=4602.30) in August 2006!

Apparently Presque Isle is so far into the boonies that they haven't heard about Pluto's demotion! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 30, 2008, 05:31:48 PM

I took that as a sly demurral to Pluto getting 'dissed'.

Of course, you may be right that the postal sled-dogs have not yet delivered the news. ;)

EDIT: One other interpretation just occurred to me: an appeal for d3 sympathy, since Presque Isle is apparently as far beyond Houlton as the distance from the sun to Pluto!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 30, 2008, 06:21:07 PM

UMPI's playing the other schools a lot closer this year, too. I'm not judging simply by their games against Unity.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on January 30, 2008, 08:18:52 PM

#6 Capital falls on the road at Wilmington and loses its first OAC game of the year.

Capital 55
Wilmington 72
Final

Wilmington had 18 point leads in both halves, though the game got closer than the final score indicates in the second half. The Quakers only ran away with it in the last 3-4 minutes; before than Capital had trimmed the 18 point lead down to 3 a couple times.

Stat of the night is Wilmington's 18 offensive rebounds.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 30, 2008, 10:09:23 PM

Very tough to win when you give up 18 O-boards. Wonder how many top 10 teams will make it through the weekend unscathed

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 30, 2008, 10:38:50 PM

Quote from: sac on January 30, 2008, 03:27:43 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 30, 2008, 02:30:17 PM

UMPI is much improved this season; the games with Unity were nail-biters not too long ago.

I'm not sure being the 2nd lowest D3 according to massey means they're much improved over last season.

UMPI 83 Unity 79 from just one year ago. I'm going with Unity has gotten worse.

I really just want to see one of these games to see if anyone wears sandals. :D

Oh and to visit this http://www.umpi.maine.edu/info/nmms/solar/

Considering I have lived in Maine, played basketball in Houlton on several occasions, and traveled to PI more times than I would care to remember, I would say that is a great example of distances in Maine. And I think my town - which is a "bit" further "down" and "east" on Route 1 - would be considered the nearest star to the Sun! HA!

Oh... and Aroostock County is basically just called, "The County" in Maine. And the county I lived in was smaller, but still the size of Connecticut!

Quote from: LogShow on January 30, 2008, 10:09:23 PM
Very tough to win when you give up 18 O-boards. Wonder how many top 10 teams will make it through the weekend unscathed

If back-to-back 14 loss Top 25 scoreboards are any sign... the Top 10 will NOT be unscathed!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 30, 2008, 10:57:51 PM

Dave, I've climbed Mt. Katahdin several times, and canoed the West Branch of the Penobscot, then up to Lake Caucomogomoc on my honeymoon (30+ years ago), but have otherwise not seen 'northern' Maine. Do I recall correctly that "The County" is larger than any of the other New England states? Distances there may not impress Ralph, but they don't have to bus in a Maine January!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 30, 2008, 11:02:24 PM

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on January 30, 2008, 10:38:50 PM
If back-to-back 14 loss Top 25 scoreboards are any sign... the Top 10 will NOT be unscathed!

Considering #1 plays #3, I'm nominating this for post of the year! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 30, 2008, 11:07:45 PM

Yep... Katahdin several times, canoed the lakes of the Allagash, white watered the Kennebec, and nothing beats Down East and Bar Harbor... but only to visit! :-)

The entire state is the bigger than the rest of the states in New England... combined!

Quote from: sac on January 30, 2008, 11:02:24 PM
Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on January 30, 2008, 10:38:50 PM
If back-to-back 14 loss Top 25 scoreboards are any sign... the Top 10 will NOT be unscathed!

Considering #1 plays #3, I'm nominating this for post of the year! ;)

Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!
I will be here all season! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 30, 2008, 11:36:19 PM

Quote from: sac on January 30, 2008, 11:02:24 PM
Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on January 30, 2008, 10:38:50 PM
If back-to-back 14 loss Top 25 scoreboards are any sign... the Top 10 will NOT be unscathed!

Considering #1 plays #3, I'm nominating this for post of the year! ;)

I wonder what will happen it both teams hold home court? They play eachother twice in 9 days. If UR wins this weekend do they go to #1? And then if WashU wins 9 days later, do they flip flop again?

Should be interesting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 30, 2008, 11:49:41 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 30, 2008, 11:36:19 PM
Quote from: sac on January 30, 2008, 11:02:24 PM
Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on January 30, 2008, 10:38:50 PM
If back-to-back 14 loss Top 25 scoreboards are any sign... the Top 10 will NOT be unscathed!

Considering #1 plays #3, I'm nominating this for post of the year! ;)

I wonder what will happen it both teams hold home court? They play eachother twice in 9 days. If UR wins this weekend do they go to #1? And then if WashU wins 9 days later, do they flip flop again?

Should be interesting.

Interesting speculation, but unless #2 stumbles (not to mention #4 and #5), I can't see either as #1 after a split.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 30, 2008, 11:52:43 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 30, 2008, 10:57:51 PM
Dave, I've climbed Mt. Katahdin several times, and canoed the West Branch of the Penobscot, then up to Lake Caucomogomoc on my honeymoon (30+ years ago), but have otherwise not seen 'northern' Maine. Do I recall correctly that "The County" is larger than any of the other New England states? Distances there may not impress Ralph, but they don't have to bus in a Maine January!

I have been to Maine once...a medical meeting one summer on the Colby campus, and had a lobster dinner on Golden Pond.

Distances in Maine do impress me, and depress me, too!

So when Maine-Fort Kent joins the NCAA, will they be a travel partner?

Why Sul Ross State's nearest travel partner (Howard Payne) is 330 miles away!

One other thing about Maine...

You have Mexico, Peru, China, Stockholm, New Sweden, Lisbon, Moscow and Denmark, Maine.

South Paris is south of Paris, but West Paris is more north of Paris than westerly!

West Surplus, Maine, is southeast of North Surplus, Maine!

Limington is north of South Limington, but almost due west of North Limington!

North Berwick is east of Berwick, and South Berwick is more like southwest of North Berwick and southeast of Berwick!

East Brownfield is north of Brownfield!

You go due south of North Fryeberg to get to West Fryeberg!

Lovell in south of Center Lovell, of course, which is south of North Lovell, and you go thru Number Four, Maine, on route 5 to get to North Lovell! ???

Let's talk about the Rumfords. You have Rumford, South Rumford, Rumford, Center, Rumford Corner and Rumford Point! I could not find a Rumford Peachtree Rd.

::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 31, 2008, 12:12:53 AM

Ralph - curious... how are you on Colby's campus but having a dinner at a New Hampshire lake? Because, I believe Golden Pond was filmed at a lake in New Hampshire. Past it every summer on my way to summer camp... in New Hampshire.

But... ready for this? My town in Maine is "Woodland" located near "Calais", which is named after the french city, but said like what working men have on their hands! A while back, while getting ready to install the state-wide 911 system (which hasn't been installed), the town was forced to change its name to its actual legal name - "Baileyville" - because there was another "Woodland" in "the county". But that town was barely on the map and didn't have a post office. We were on the map and did have a post office... but we had to change our name. Maine is BACKWARDS.

As for Fort Kent... can you have a travel partner if you are them or PI. They may be close in distance, but those trips will be tough! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 31, 2008, 12:25:25 AM

I was given the understanding that the lake outside of Waterville was the lake where the movie Golden Pond was filmed.

Thanks for the clarification! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 31, 2008, 12:29:24 AM

Ralph, in that case... I have a bridge to sell you! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 31, 2008, 11:48:41 AM

There have been 133 men's polls in D3hoops.com's history, which means that there have been 3,325 Top 25 slots altogether (133 * 25). Of those, ten have been awarded to teams from Maine. Ten out of 3,325, or three-tenths of one percent. A bit less than two-tenths of one percent of all vote-points ever cast were accorded to Down Easters.

Just thought you might like to know. :)

Of course, Maine has produced two of the more dominant women's programs during the D3hoops.com era. And there's lots of tables, no waiting, in the women's Top 25 room (http://www.d3sports.com/post/index.php?topic=2890.750). ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 31, 2008, 12:50:57 PM

I thought this might be interesting to figure out...

who has accumulated the most total points in history of the poll?

How about the the past 5 year?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 31, 2008, 01:01:00 PM

Quote from: LogShow on January 31, 2008, 12:50:57 PM
I thought this might be interesting to figure out...

who has accumulated the most total points in history of the poll?

How about the the past 5 year?

The answer to the first question should be obvious to anyone who pays more than cursory attention to the men's Top 25 (and it's even more obvious on the women's side.) The second one is perhaps a little less obvious. Let's see who can provide the correct answers first. For purposes of this contest, we'll define "past 5 year" as since the beginning of the 2003-04 season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 31, 2008, 01:05:37 PM

I'd guess Wooster for the most ever. They've been ranked in every poll, right?

The past five years: I'll guess Amherst or Stevens Point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 31, 2008, 01:14:54 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 31, 2008, 01:05:37 PM
The past five years: I'll guess Amherst or Stevens Point.

One guess to a customer. Ya pays yer money, ya gits yer cherce.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on January 31, 2008, 01:36:49 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 31, 2008, 01:05:37 PM

I'd guess Wooster for the most ever. They've been ranked in every poll, right?

Wooster's received votes in every poll, but hasn't been ranked every time.

Women's most ever should be Wash. U, I would think.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 31, 2008, 01:56:56 PM

I'll try:

All-time, Wooster for the men, WashU for the women.

Last 5 years, Amherst for the men, Hope for the women.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 31, 2008, 02:05:34 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 31, 2008, 01:56:56 PM
I'll try:

All-time, Wooster for the men, WashU for the women.

Last 5 years, Amherst for the men, Hope for the women.

I wasn't really thinking of the women as part of this contest (just threw that comment in as an aside), but since you want to go that way...

wrong.
:)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 31, 2008, 02:10:03 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 31, 2008, 02:05:34 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 31, 2008, 01:56:56 PM
I'll try:

All-time, Wooster for the men, WashU for the women.

Last 5 years, Amherst for the men, Hope for the women.

I wasn't really thinking of the women as part of this contest (just threw that comment in as an aside), but since you want to go that way...

wrong.
:)

Hopefully not on all four! :-[ Are you willing to be more specific?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ChicagoHopeNut on January 31, 2008, 02:12:07 PM

Last 5 Years:
Women: DePauw
Men: UWSP

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on January 31, 2008, 02:19:09 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 31, 2008, 02:10:03 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 31, 2008, 02:05:34 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 31, 2008, 01:56:56 PM
I'll try:

All-time, Wooster for the men, WashU for the women.

Last 5 years, Amherst for the men, Hope for the women.

I wasn't really thinking of the women as part of this contest (just threw that comment in as an aside), but since you want to go that way...

wrong.
:)

Hopefully not on all four! :-[ Are you willing to be more specific?

Can't be wrong on all four, Ypsi. (Unless DC was pulling our leg earlier this year.)

In a comment David made on a "News & Notes" blog for week 3 of this season, he noted the top 5 all time vote getters for both men and women. (Sorry David if I'm stealing your thunder...but I knew I had read this somewhere.) Gaps are large enough that this season's polls probably haven't changed much in this ranking.

Don't know about the last five years though.

Men (127 polls):
1. Wooster 55,717
2. UW-Stevens Point 46,925
3. Amherst 40,213
4. Hampden-Sydney 36,698
5. Wittenberg 30,301

Women (128 polls):
1. Washington U. 62,516
2. Scranton 52,965
3. Bowdoin 51,152
4. Southern Maine 43,284
5. Hope 40,698

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 31, 2008, 02:28:27 PM

I had forgotten I'd published that. While waiting to see one post with all four correct answers in it, I'll suggest that it's difficult to close gaps of 9,000 and 10,000 points, respectively, in 6 weeks when you can't get more that 625 points in any one week. You might want to concentrate your guessing skills on the "last 5 years" part.

Winner is the first post with all four correct answers.

As for being more specific, I can't imagine a bigger hint than this one:

Quote from: David Collinge on January 31, 2008, 02:05:34 PM
I wasn't really thinking of the women as part of this contest (just threw that comment in as an aside), but since you want to go that way...

wrong.
:)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ChicagoHopeNut on January 31, 2008, 02:42:06 PM

All Time:
Men: Wooster
Women: Wash U.

Last 5 Years:
Men: UWSP
Women: Southern Maine (Yes, I changed my guess for women from like 15 minutes ago, I'm fickle)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 31, 2008, 02:48:59 PM

Sorry. If it's any consolation, your change of heart took you in the right direction, just not far enough. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ChicagoHopeNut on January 31, 2008, 02:51:39 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 31, 2008, 02:48:59 PM
Sorry. If it's any consolation, your change of heart took you in the right direction, just not far enough. :)

Bummer! I think have 3 out of 4 and now how I would change the fourth but I'll wait awhile to propose that so I don't take all the guesses.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 31, 2008, 03:04:28 PM

Quote from: DCHopeNut on January 31, 2008, 02:51:39 PMI think have 3 out of 4 [...]

For the record, I neither confirm nor deny this supposition.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ChicagoHopeNut on January 31, 2008, 03:14:32 PM

I have to leave my computer for the next few hours so I am taking my final stab at this based on my previous, unconfirmed, supposition.

All Time:
Men: Wooster
Women: Wash U

Last 5 Years:
Men: Amherst
Women: Southern Maine

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 31, 2008, 03:16:13 PM

The contest is still open. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 31, 2008, 03:19:52 PM

Amherst and Bowdoin? (Wooster and WashU already confirmed for all-time.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 31, 2008, 03:26:30 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 31, 2008, 03:19:52 PM
Amherst and Bowdoin? (Wooster and WashU already confirmed for all-time.)

The contest is now closed. :) Congratulations, Chuck!

Men, all-time:
1. Wooster 56,549
2. Stevens Point 49,529
3. Amherst 43,518
4. Hampden-Sydney 36,698
5. Wash. U. 30,994

Men, since 2003-04 preseason:
1. Amherst 36,983
2. Wooster 34,365
3. Stevens Point 30,203
4. Wittenberg 21,504
5. Puget Sound 21,192

Women, all-time:
1. Wash U. 62,635
2. Scranton 52,987
3. Bowdoin 51,153
4. Southern Maine 44,945
5. Hope 44,343

Women, since 2003-04 preseason:
1. Bowdoin 36,651
2. Southern Maine 34,725
3. Scranton 31,252
4. Messiah 27,284
5. Wash. U. 25,214

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 31, 2008, 03:39:09 PM

Thanks for the hint! (And thanks for eliminating Southern Maine - that left a coin-flip betwen Scranton and Bowdoin.) Out of curiosity, how bad was my initial 5-year women's guess of Hope? (Please tell me they were #6, not #13! ;))

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 31, 2008, 03:43:44 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 31, 2008, 03:39:09 PM
Thanks for the hint! (And thanks for eliminating Southern Maine - that left a coin-flip betwen Scranton and Bowdoin.) Out of curiosity, how bad was my initial 5-year women's guess of Hope? (Please tell me they were #6, not #13! ;))

6th, and DCHopeNut's guess, DePauw, is 7th.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 31, 2008, 03:45:48 PM

Pretty interesting results...no surpirse that Wooster, Amherst, and Point are on both lists.

Looks like Wash U takes the prize for most all-time points Men & Women combined

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 31, 2008, 03:47:32 PM

Thanks!

BTW, my contest winnings may be deposited in my PayPal account, but I'd prefer unmarked bills - nosy IRS you understand. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 31, 2008, 03:54:19 PM

Quote from: LogShow on January 31, 2008, 03:45:48 PM
Pretty interesting results...no surpirse that Wooster, Amherst, and Point are on both lists.

Looks like Wash U takes the prize for most all-time points Men & Women combined

The Dutchmen are creeping up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 31, 2008, 04:23:33 PM

Any teams on either poll with just one point all time? (I'm sick like that...)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 31, 2008, 04:25:43 PM

Quote from: sac on January 31, 2008, 03:54:19 PM
Quote from: LogShow on January 31, 2008, 03:45:48 PM
Pretty interesting results...no surpirse that Wooster, Amherst, and Point are on both lists.

Looks like Wash U takes the prize for most all-time points Men & Women combined

The Dutchmen are creeping up.

The 50,000 Point Club:
1. Washington U. 93,629 (men 30,994; women 62,635)
2. UW-Stevens Point 73,607 (men 49,529; women 24,078)
3. Hope 69,874 (men 25,531; women 44,343)
4. Wooster 56,549 (men 56,549; women 0)
5. Scranton 53,245 (men 258; women 52,987)
6. Bowdoin 51,398 (men 245; women 51,153)
7. Rochester 50,848 (men 26,525; women 24,323)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 31, 2008, 04:27:13 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 31, 2008, 04:23:33 PM
Any teams on either poll with just one point all time? (I'm sick like that...)

Lots: 6 women, 7 men.

Women: Bridgewater St., Curry, Hanover, Manchester, Penn St.-Behrend, Rockford
Men: Beloit, Concordia-Moorhead, Dominican, Edgewood, Ferrum, Messiah, and Olivet

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 31, 2008, 04:44:20 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 31, 2008, 04:25:43 PM
Quote from: sac on January 31, 2008, 03:54:19 PM
Quote from: LogShow on January 31, 2008, 03:45:48 PM
Pretty interesting results...no surpirse that Wooster, Amherst, and Point are on both lists.

Looks like Wash U takes the prize for most all-time points Men & Women combined

The Dutchmen are creeping up.

The 50,000 Point Club:
1. Washington U. 93,629 (men 30,994; women 62,635)
2. UW-Stevens Point 73,607 (men 49,529; women 24,078)
3. Hope 69,874 (men 25,531; women 44,343)
4. Wooster 56,549 (men 56,549; women 0)
5. Scranton 53,245 (men 258; women 52,987)
6. Bowdoin 51,398 (men 245; women 51,153)
7. Rochester 50,848 (men 26,525; women 24,323)

Huh! guess we've been creeps for awhile.

Hope's picking up about 800 points on both Washington and UW Stevens Point each week for now. Should things hold near their current status Hope might slip ahead of UW-SP

Good stuff DC, thanks or sharing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 31, 2008, 05:54:33 PM

sac,

And note that Hope is already one of only two schools with 25,000+ votes for each gender (though Rochester and perhaps UWSP should join the club before the season is over). It looks like at least next year before the male Dutch can have Hope join WashU in the even more exclusive 30-30 club.

I also noted that Bowdoin and Scranton could kick the men out of school, and their standing would be unchanged. And, David, Wooster could go the way of Wabash and their vote total wouldn't be affected - light a fire under those Lady Scots! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 31, 2008, 07:05:36 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 31, 2008, 05:54:33 PMAnd, David, Wooster could go the way of Wabash and their vote total wouldn't be affected - light a fire under those Lady Scots! ;)

If Wooster, co-educational since its founding in 1866, "went the way of Wabash" I'd light a fire all right, but it would be a lot closer to the Administration building than the gymnasium.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 31, 2008, 07:09:37 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 31, 2008, 04:27:13 PM
Quote from: smedindy on January 31, 2008, 04:23:33 PM
Any teams on either poll with just one point all time? (I'm sick like that...)

Lots: 6 women, 7 men.

Women: Bridgewater St., Curry, Hanover, Manchester, Penn St.-Behrend, Rockford
Men: Beloit, Concordia-Moorhead, Dominican, Edgewood, Ferrum, Messiah, and Olivet

haha well its a little bit sick...but atleast they got their name on the board once. Its better then never getting any love.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 31, 2008, 08:25:19 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 31, 2008, 07:05:36 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 31, 2008, 05:54:33 PMAnd, David, Wooster could go the way of Wabash and their vote total wouldn't be affected - light a fire under those Lady Scots! ;)

If Wooster, co-educational since its founding in 1866, "went the way of Wabash" I'd light a fire all right, but it would be a lot closer to the Administration building than the gymnasium.

And vice versa, as it were.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 31, 2008, 08:36:53 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 31, 2008, 05:54:33 PM
sac,

It looks like at least next year before the male Dutch can have Hope join WashU in the even more exclusive 30-30 club.

Hope will probably be starting 4 Soph's and a 1 Sr. next year, with a bunch of Soph's or current JV's Jr's off the bench with little varsity experience.

I wouldn't expect Hope to spend a lot of time in the top 25 on the men's side. The women however may just be pitching a tent in the top 10 for awhile.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 01, 2008, 02:33:11 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 31, 2008, 05:54:33 PMI also noted that Bowdoin and Scranton could kick the men out of school, and their standing would be unchanged.

Seeing as how the University of Scranton has two national championships, four Final Fours, and over thirty tournament wins courtesy of the male version of Royals basketball, I'd think that the school administrators would want to think twice about kicking the men out of school over something as comparatively trivial as Top 25 poll totals. ;)

Quote from: LogShow on January 31, 2008, 07:09:37 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 31, 2008, 04:27:13 PM
Quote from: smedindy on January 31, 2008, 04:23:33 PM
Any teams on either poll with just one point all time? (I'm sick like that...)

Lots: 6 women, 7 men.

Women: Bridgewater St., Curry, Hanover, Manchester, Penn St.-Behrend, Rockford
Men: Beloit, Concordia-Moorhead, Dominican, Edgewood, Ferrum, Messiah, and Olivet

haha well its a little bit sick...but atleast they got their name on the board once. Its better then never getting any love.

Given how Beloit performed during the Cecil Youngblood era (and its aftermath this season, although MWC people I know think that Brian Vraney has a chance to turn the Bucs program around), I'm nonplussed that Beloit mustered even one lone #25 vote at some point over the past decade.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on February 01, 2008, 09:54:49 AM

I realize this one may be tough, given schools moving between divisions and all, but how many current DIII schools have never received a vote?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 01, 2008, 10:11:58 AM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on February 01, 2008, 09:54:49 AM
I realize this one may be tough, given schools moving between divisions and all, but how many current DIII schools have never received a vote?

Since I can only recall Lincoln PA, William Penn IA, Clarke IA, Upper Iowa (UIU), Chowan, Stillman and leaving D-III in the last 8 years, it might not be as hard.

My good friend "sac" reminded me of SCAD (Savannah College of Art and Design)!

Thanks and +1! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 01, 2008, 10:13:44 AM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on February 01, 2008, 09:54:49 AM
I realize this one may be tough, given schools moving between divisions and all, but how many current DIII schools have never received a vote?

I have to believe the majority of Division III schools have never received a vote. Interested to hear the number though if David has it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 01, 2008, 10:53:20 AM

FDF,

Based on research already performed... I'll repost it here from DC's "news and notes" from week 7:

Quote
Top 25 News and Notes–Week 7
Tuesday, January 15th, 2008
This week, I decided to do some number-crunching to see what the historical Top 25 polls might have to say about which regions are the strongest. Be prepared to be bored, and don't say you weren't warned!

The first thing that leaps off the page at me is the balance in the men's polls, relative to the women. At present, there are 386 non-provisional D3 men's teams; of those, over one in three (138, 35.8%) have been ranked in at least one of the 131 polls taken since 1999. There are 23 more women's programs, but 16 fewer teams (122, 29.8%) have cracked the poll (and there's even been one extra women's poll!) The same pattern holds when you look at voting patterns rather than rankings: nearly 60% of the men's teams (229) have received votes, while less than half of the women's programs (195) have earned voting support. What these data suggest to me is that the women's game tends to be more concentrated at the top, with the best programs sticking in the poll, while the men's teams have a slightly stronger tendency to come and go. This is perhaps underscored by the fact that there are now eight women's programs that have been ranked in at least 100 polls, vs. just two for the men.

Looking at the men's regions, it seems to be the conventional wisdom that the "strongest" regions have generally been the three westernmost–the West, Midwest, and Great Lakes—but the data doesn't necessarily support this. The Midwest (48%) and West (44.4%) have each produced 24 ranked teams, but third on this list is not the Great Lakes (17) but the South (20 teams). These two regions are roughly equal on percentage terms, as the south is a larger region (33 to 26), meaning that about 40% of each region has been ranked. The four eastern regions lag far behind, with 17 teams each from the large Northeast (24%) and smaller Mid-Atlantic (33%), and less than 30% of the East (10) and Atlantic (9), having been ranked. The voting patterns are somewhat more balanced, with each of the West, Midwest, and South regions having two-thirds of their current members receiving votes, leading the Great Lakes (62%), East (57%), Atlantic (56%), and Northeast (49%).

The women's polling has been much more balanced. The Central Region (20 ranked teams out of 52 non-provisionals, 38.5%) is on top, but only the Atlantic (11/46, 24%) is more than 12 percentage points behind. The voting show a greater discrepancy, with the Great Lakes a clear leader at 61%, 9 percentage points ahead of the second-place Central. Perhaps this suggests that the Great Lakes has a number of good-but-not-great programs (15 that have received votes but never enough to reach #25), while the Central is filled with haves (20 ranked teams) and have-nots (25 programs that have yet to receive their first vote) with little (7 schools) in between.

On a somewhat related note, by virtue of the three points earned by Middlebury this week, the NESCAC becomes the seventh men's conference to have every team receive votes at one time or another. (The other six are the HCAC, NJAC, OAC, UAA, USA-South, and WIAC.) Of these, the WIAC stands alone as the only conference in which each team has been ranked. There are four other men's conferences that are one program short of 100% participation (CCIW, Empire 8, LEC, and NEWMAC), and one conference that is one team away from joining the WIAC with every team ranked: the CCIW (and that team is Millikin.) This is all in sharp contrast to the women, where the only conference to have every team receive votes is the UAA (and all but Emory have been ranked), and just two conferences (HCAC and NESCAC) are one team short.

Now, this research is from 3 weeks ago, and I don't have the database to see if there have been any newbies since then (though David's notes would duly note this!)

Hope that helps!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 01, 2008, 11:18:37 AM

As of Week 9, there have been 233 men's teams and 197 women's teams that have received votes at one time or another. Overall, 280 schools have received a vote on one poll or the other, counting Hobart/William Smith and St. John's/St. Benedict each as one "school." Thus, 150 schools appear on both lists. Four schools on the lists (Lincoln [men only], Savannah Art & Design [both], UC San Diego [both], and Upper Iowa [men only]) are no longer in D3. Excluding those, the totals are

On both lists: 148
Men's list only: 81
Women's list only: 47
Either list: 276
Neither list: you tell me :)

PointSpecial quotes me as saying that there are 386 non-provisional men's programs, and 409 non-provisional women's programs, but I haven't merged the lists to get an overall total. It could be 410 (i.e., the women's total plus Wabash), but that assumes that every co-ed school has both teams, and I doubt that's true.

EDITED to treat SJU/CSB the same way I treated Hobart/Wm. Smith

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: OC_SID on February 01, 2008, 02:18:05 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 01, 2008, 11:18:37 AM
PointSpecial quotes me as saying that there are 386 non-provisional men's programs, and 409 non-provisional women's programs, but I haven't merged the lists to get an overall total. It could be 410 (i.e., the women's total plus Wabash), but that assumes that every co-ed school has both teams, and I doubt that's true.

or it could just be 409 since Saint Mary's (Ind.) in the MIAA is a women's only school. Interesting side note on this fact, in swimming competition tonight: The Kalamazoo men are swimming against Wabash, while Saint Mary's women are competing against Kalamazoo. The meet is being held at Notre Dame.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 01, 2008, 02:33:32 PM

Quote from: OC_SID on February 01, 2008, 02:18:05 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on February 01, 2008, 11:18:37 AM
PointSpecial quotes me as saying that there are 386 non-provisional men's programs, and 409 non-provisional women's programs, but I haven't merged the lists to get an overall total. It could be 410 (i.e., the women's total plus Wabash), but that assumes that every co-ed school has both teams, and I doubt that's true.

or it could just be 409 since Saint Mary's (Ind.) in the MIAA is a women's only school. Interesting side note on this fact, in swimming competition tonight: The Kalamazoo men are swimming against Wabash, while Saint Mary's women are competing against Kalamazoo. The meet is being held at Notre Dame.

St. Mary's is far from being the only women's school in D3. Wabash is, to the best of my knowledge, the only D3 men's school. That's the main reason, if not the entire reason, why there are 23 more women's programs than men's in D3.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 01, 2008, 04:00:17 PM

From our good friends at Wikipedia.........

However, Hampden-Sydney College and Wabash College are the only two true all male colleges left because they do not combine classes with females.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Jacketfan2011 on February 01, 2008, 04:20:24 PM

How does Hobart/William SMith fit into this. If at all. I believe, and I could be way off, they are separate colleges that share certain if not all facilities

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 01, 2008, 04:32:51 PM

There are several colleges that are "all male" that share facilities or classes with a neighboring "all female" school. Here's the link that provides more detail, learned some things I didn't know.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men%27s_colleges_in_the_United_States

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 01, 2008, 04:37:02 PM

If I am reading this page correctly (http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/!ut/p/kcxml/04_Sj9SPykssy0xPLMnMz0vM0Y_QjzKLN4g38nYBSYGYxqb6kWhCjggRX4_83FSgeKQ5UMA0NFQ_Kic1PTG5Uj9Y31s_QL8gNzSiPN9REQD6aqlp/delta/base64xml/L0lDU0lKTTd1aUNTWS9vQW9RQUFJUWdTQUFZeGpHTVl4U21BISEvNEpGaUNvMERyRTVST2dxTkM3OVlRZyEhLzdfMF81VVYvMzQ1OQ!!?WCM_PORTLET=PC_7_0_5UV_WCM&WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/wps/wcm/connect/NCAA/About%20The%20NCAA/Membership/Our%20Members/membership_breakdown.html), there are 422 active D3 members, and 22 provisional members. Of these 444 institutions, 433 sponsor women's basketball and 407 sponsor men's. (Then again, these numbers may include conferences as well. I am fairly confused by the NCAAs method here, not for the first or last time!)

My hand count of programs from this website's regional lists (e.g., NE Region men here (http://www.d3hoops.com/region/northeast/mens)) is 386 men and 409 women, excluding provisionals. Now, this is not apples to apples with the NCAA's list; for example, I assume (but could be wrong) that the NCAA counts the Claremont Colleges (http://www.claremont.edu/) as 5 members (Pomona, Pitzer, Claremont McKenna, Harvey Mudd, and Scripps) while we count them as 2 (Pomona-Pitzer and CMS). Whether Hobart/William Smith is one or two members or one or two programs is another potential discrepancy, as is the St. John's/St. Benedict pairing (thanks to sac for the link, I didn't know about that one).

But in round numbers, one-third of the active D3 membership has not yet received its first vote in either D3hoops.com poll. There are something in the neighborhood of 410-420 eligible schools (active D3 members that sponsor hoops either alone or in a group like CMS), and of those, 276 have appeared in the voting at one time or another.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 01, 2008, 04:40:15 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 31, 2008, 10:31:25 PM
HOW THEY FARED (week of Jan. 28 - Feb. 3)
# 12 UW-Stevens Point (15-4) won at UW-River Falls 71-40 and hosts UW-Stout Sat.

Not that it matters much, but Point is off this weekend. Oshkosh is at Stout, you have that listed correctly below. Point hosts Stout on Wednesday, Feb. 6.

Thanks, fixed! Nine-team leagues really test my schedule-reading-comprehesions skills, and I frequently fail the test. :)...dc

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 01, 2008, 04:40:32 PM

Also from Wikipedia...and my research. Here are the D-3 women's colleges (unless I missed some).

Agnes Scott • Alverno • Bay Path • Bryn Mawr • Cedar Crest • Chatham • College of Notre Dame (MD) • Hollins • Mary Baldwin • Meredith • Mount Holyoke • Mt. Mary • Peace • Pine Manor • Rosemont • Russell Sage • St. Benedict • St. Catherine • St. Elizabeth • Saint Joseph (CT) • Saint Mary-of-the-Woods College • St. Mary's (Indiana) • Salem • Simmons • Smith • Spelman • Trinity (DC) • Wellesley • Wesleyan (GA) • Wilson

They also had Stern listed, but that's under the Yeshiva blanket as far as I could tell...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 01, 2008, 04:44:42 PM

Quote from: Jacketfan2011 on February 01, 2008, 04:20:24 PM
How does Hobart/William SMith fit into this. If at all. I believe, and I could be way off, they are separate colleges that share certain if not all facilities

To answer your question, listen (http://"http://www.d3hoops.com/audio/08/drury011308.mp3") to William Smith's Coach Lindsay Drury who joined me on Hoopsville (http://"http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville") a few weeks back. She explained how the school works early on in the segment.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 02, 2008, 04:53:59 AM

Sounds like the Rochester Wash U was one heck of a game...would have been a great one to watch!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hope1 on February 02, 2008, 06:59:17 PM

number 4 lost to albion today at albion 56 to 52

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 03, 2008, 03:38:30 AM

sad sad day for Puget Sound. They didn't play like the 7th best team in the country tonight...not even the 70th.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 03, 2008, 03:40:50 AM

The worst part is, there is no way I can rationalize the loss. I can't say the other team banked in a half court 3 to win, or the refs sent the other team to the freethrow line way more the Puget Sound did. UPS just flat out lost that game, and the finger points right at us.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 03, 2008, 12:50:00 PM

DC

Get the red ink out for Williams and Lawrence when you do your updates.

I knew I was making a mistake when I started this color thing...:(

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 03, 2008, 01:47:34 PM

There is going to be red ink all over the place

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 03, 2008, 03:13:59 PM

David, I'm pretty sure it is not completely unprecedented, but how rare is it for #1 to lose two games the same week?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fcnews on February 03, 2008, 03:18:40 PM

#1 Amhearst , #2 UM-D, #3 Augustana, #4 UW-Whitewater and #5 Rochester. 6-11, Brandies, Wash U, Centre, Hope, Puget and Capital (pick an order for these 5). UW-Stevens Point and V. Wesleyan (?)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on February 03, 2008, 03:22:08 PM

My opinion, top 8

1. UMD
2. Rochester
3. Amherst
4. Hope
5. UWSP
6. Brandeis
7. WashU
8. Augustana

UMD should get to #1, undefeated, have a win over Brandeis, even though they have played a weak schedule

Rochester-still only has two losses, two very quality wins over Brandeis and WashU

Amherst-easily could be #2, also two losses, less quality wins, better quality losses than UR

Hope-only three losses in spite of a weaker schedule

UWSP, Brandeis, WashU, Augustana-all with four losses, very strong schedules, and quality wins; any could easily be picked above Hope

I would love some expert opinion, since I am new to all of this.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on February 03, 2008, 03:25:06 PM

Quote from: fcnews on February 03, 2008, 03:18:40 PM
#1 Amhearst , #2 UM-D, #3 Augustana, #4 UW-Whitewater and #5 Rochester. 6-11, Brandies, Wash U, Centre, Hope, Puget and Capital (pick an order for these 5). UW-Stevens Point and V. Wesleyan (?)

Whitewater, Centre, and Capital have played very weak schedules

and VWC is about to lose to Guilford

Another big shakeup weeks, this poll is beginning to look like the BCS ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 03, 2008, 03:57:16 PM

Quote from: scottiedawg on February 03, 2008, 03:22:08 PM
My opinion, top 8

1. UMD
2. Rochester
3. Amherst
4. Hope
5. UWSP
6. Brandeis
7. WashU
8. Augustana

UMD should get to #1, undefeated, have a win over Brandeis, even though they have played a weak schedule

Rochester-still only has two losses, two very quality wins over Brandeis and WashU

Amherst-easily could be #2, also two losses, less quality wins, better quality losses than UR

Hope-only three losses in spite of a weaker schedule

UWSP, Brandeis, WashU, Augustana-all with four losses, very strong schedules, and quality wins; any could easily be picked above Hope

I would love some expert opinion, since I am new to all of this.

Coming into this week, the schedule rankings according to Massey

UMD-#126
Rochester--#65
Amherst--#34
Hope---#62
UWSP--#12
Brandeis--#10
WashU--#21
Augustana--#4

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 03, 2008, 05:50:34 PM

Quote from: scottiedawg on February 03, 2008, 03:25:06 PM
Quote from: fcnews on February 03, 2008, 03:18:40 PM
#1 Amhearst , #2 UM-D, #3 Augustana, #4 UW-Whitewater and #5 Rochester. 6-11, Brandies, Wash U, Centre, Hope, Puget and Capital (pick an order for these 5). UW-Stevens Point and V. Wesleyan (?)

Whitewater, Centre, and Capital have played very weak schedules

and VWC is about to lose to Guilford

Another big shakeup weeks, this poll is beginning to look like the BCS ;)

Whitewater is in the freakin' WIAC! :o

A WIAC team could do their entire non-con schedule against the Little Sisters of the Blind and their schedule (by February) could not be called weak.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 03, 2008, 05:57:44 PM

HOW THEY FARED (week of Jan. 28 - Feb. 3)(COMPLETE)

#   1   Washington U. (14-4) lost at #3 Rochester 73-70 (OT) and lost at Carnegie Mellon 86-55
#   2   Amherst (18-2) def. Colby 72-66 and def. Bowdoin 85-79
#   3   Rochester (16-2) def. #1 Washington U. 73-70 (OT) and lost to Chicago 74-65
#   4   Hope (15-3) def. Tri-State 93-60 and lost at Albion 56-52
#   5   Mass.-Dartmouth (19-0) def. Mass.-Boston 102-73 and def. So. Maine 88-69
#   6   Capital (16-3) lost at Wilmington 72-55 and def. John Carroll 113-78
#   7   Puget Sound (15-3) def. Pacific 90-65 and lost to George Fox 78-77
#   8   UW-Whitewater (16-3) def. UW-La Crosse 80-67 and def. UW-Eau Claire 85-65
#   9   Brandeis (14-4) won at Case Western Reserve 90-75 and won at Emory 89-81
#   10   Augustana (15-4) won at Illinois Wesleyan 65-61 and won at #21 Elmhurst 72-63
#   11   Centre (18-1) won at Trinity (TX) 78-69 (OT) and won at Southwestern 59-49
#   12   UW-Stevens Point (15-4) won at UW-River Falls 71-40
#   13   Williams (15-5) lost at Hamilton 60-56 and lost to Middlebury 63-60
#   14   Virginia Wesleyan (15-4) won at Hampden-Sydney 81-62, def. Emory & Henry 111-98, and lost to #23 Guilford 75-67
#   15   Mary Hardin-Baylor (15-3) won at Schreiner 77-67 and def. Texas Lutheran 75-54
#   16   Plattsburgh St. (17-2) won at Potsdam St. 87-70, won at Oneonta St. 70-56, and won at New Paltz St. 78-65
#   17   Stevens (17-3) lost at Baruch 75-71 (OT), def. Nazareth 76-73, and def. RIT 84-70
#   18   Wooster (16-3) won at Allegheny 78-61 and def. Ohio Wesleyan 73-65
#   19   Lawrence (14-2) won at St. Norbert 65-56 and lost to Carroll 115-113 (2 OT)
#   20   UW-Oshkosh (14-6) lost at #22 UW-Platteville 71-55 and won at UW-Stout 78-61
#   21   Elmhurst (14-5) won at North Central (IL) 78-72 and lost to #10 Augustana 72-63
#   22   UW-Platteville (15-4) def. #20 UW-Oshkosh 71-55 and won at UW-River Falls 71-60
#   23   Guilford (14-4) won at Randolph-Macon 69-51 and won at #14 Virginia Wesleyan 75-67
#   24   Wheaton (IL) (14-5) def. Millikin 67-51 and lost to North Central (IL) 80-73
#   25   St. Thomas (16-3) won at Hamline 92-75 and won at Carleton 71-64

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 03, 2008, 11:05:19 PM

Quote from: scottiedawg on February 03, 2008, 03:25:06 PM

Whitewater, Centre, and Capital have played very weak schedules

Eh, what? Whitewater is in the WIAC and Capital is in the OAC. Those aren't easy. Both are in the top 60 of Massey SOS. The only two down teams Capital played were Illinois College and Denison. Those who think Kenyon is a patsy have not seen them this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 03, 2008, 11:57:16 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 31, 2008, 10:31:25 PM
Thanks, fixed! Nine-team leagues really test my schedule-reading-comprehesions skills, and I frequently fail the test. :)...dc

Actually, I think it's the easiest league to follow. Wednesday and Saturday games. That's it with one team with a bye. Some leagues have one game on one night, two games on another night and then all the teams (even ones that played earlier in the week) all on Saturday...CRAZY I SAY! lol

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on February 04, 2008, 12:07:44 AM

I think Amherst moves up to #1, with UMD #2 (Although I have a feeling if they are going to lose in the regular season, the corsairs will pick up that loss this week, with two tough games on the road, and the toughest conference opponent at home all in a short span). As for the UAA, I think Rochester sits at 3, Wash U is at 4 and Brandeis at 7/8. I also think Chicago should get into the poll this week, after not even picking up a vote with a win At Brandeis last week. Now they have defeated Brandeis AND Rochester on the Road, and are in a three-way tie for the UAA lead at 5-2 with Rochester and Wash U.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 04, 2008, 12:31:30 AM

Interesting point with Chicago that I have been mulling over. But I am having trouble with their six overall loses with one being to Loras and the other to Carnegie Mellon (yes, I am very aware CM just beat Rochester!).

With such parity in the Top 25 and much of the rest of the nation... it might be tough to get the Maroons in the Top 25 this week. There are just SO many choices and arguements for teams in the Top 25!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 04, 2008, 12:34:19 AM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on February 03, 2008, 11:57:16 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 31, 2008, 10:31:25 PM
Thanks, fixed! Nine-team leagues really test my schedule-reading-comprehesions skills, and I frequently fail the test. :)...dc

Actually, I think it's the easiest league to follow. Wednesday and Saturday games. That's it with one team with a bye. Some leagues have one game on one night, two games on another night and then all the teams (even ones that played earlier in the week) all on Saturday...CRAZY I SAY! lol

ONE of the easier - CCIW also has only W and Sa games (barring weather!), but ALL the teams are on tap!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 04, 2008, 12:37:02 AM

Dave, I'd agree. No way (IMO) does UC jump all the way from no votes to top 25, but we will probably see a reappearance of CM.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Jacketfan2011 on February 04, 2008, 06:14:02 AM

"and the other to Carnegie Mellon (yes, I am very aware CM just beat Rochester!)."

Minor point - CMU beat Wash U and Chicago this weekend, not UR. UR beat CMU back in December. What a league....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 04, 2008, 06:44:45 AM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on February 03, 2008, 11:57:16 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 31, 2008, 10:31:25 PM
Thanks, fixed! Nine-team leagues really test my schedule-reading-comprehesions skills, and I frequently fail the test. :)...dc

Actually, I think it's the easiest league to follow. Wednesday and Saturday games. That's it with one team with a bye. Some leagues have one game on one night, two games on another night and then all the teams (even ones that played earlier in the week) all on Saturday...CRAZY I SAY! lol

"Easiest league to follow"? How can it be the easiest league to follow when it's an odd-numbered league that by necessity has a bye every game night?

The UAA has eight teams. Everybody plays Friday night at 8 pm local time and Sunday afternoon at noon local time. Eight teams, four games, twice a week on the same days and at the same times.

The CCIW has eight teams. Everybody plays Wednesday night at 7:30 pm, and everybody plays Saturday night at 7:30 pm. Eight teams, four games, twice a week on the same days and at the same times. And, unlike the UAA, you don't even have to mess with two different time zones when you're looking at the league's master schedule. Tell me it can get any easier than that!

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on February 04, 2008, 12:31:30 AM
Interesting point with Chicago that I have been mulling over. But I am having trouble with their six overall loses with one being to Loras and the other to Carnegie Mellon (yes, I am very aware CM just beat Rochester!).

??? Loras is 15-5, a game out of first in the IIAC. The Duhawks are not a bad team by any stretch of the imagination. Carnegie Mellon is 13-5, and the Tartans not only beat Wash U on Sunday, they gut-stomped 'em by 31 points. Chicago lost to the Duhawks in the Loras gym and to the Tartans in Pittsburgh. No loss is a good loss, but I'm having trouble figuring why these two losses in particular are supposed to be so odious.

I don't think that the Maroons ought to vault directly into the Top 25, either, but I'll be surprised if they don't pick up some stray votes in tomorrow's poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Jacketfan2011 on February 04, 2008, 08:23:04 AM

Having seen Chicago yesterday for the first time, they strike me as a team that nobody would look forward to playing in a one and done situation. Everybody can shoot from pretty much anywhere and if the D is less than stellar I would imagine they could beat just about anybody. Not much inside, but they seem to play to their strength.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 04, 2008, 10:18:04 AM

Quote from: Jacketfan2011 on February 04, 2008, 06:14:02 AM
"and the other to Carnegie Mellon (yes, I am very aware CM just beat Rochester!)."

Minor point - CMU beat Wash U and Chicago this weekend, not UR. UR beat CMU back in December. What a league....

Thanks for the correction... it was a bit late and I simply switched the games in my head. I appreciate the help.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on February 04, 2008, 10:20:46 AM

Quote from: ILive4This on February 04, 2008, 12:07:44 AM
I think Amherst moves up to #1, with UMD #2 .

I would put Amherst #1 above UMD as well. As you said IL4T, UMD has a tough stretch this week and if they can win all of their games this week, then maybe they should garner more consideration for that #1 spot. I just feel that Amhert's overall schedule has been tougher than UMD's and even though Amherst has 2 losses overall, they only have one loss vs. DIII opponents.

Quote from: ILive4This on February 04, 2008, 12:07:44 AM
As for the UAA, I think Rochester sits at 3, Wash U is at 4 and Brandeis at 7/8.

I really don't think WashU should stay in the top 5 after losing 2 games over the weekend and especially when one of those 2 losses was a 31 point drubbing at the hands of CMU. I would also say that Rochester and Hope should also drop out of the top 5 with their losses. Personally, seeing as how #'s 8-12 in the rankings finished the week unscathed, I feel they should be slotted just ahead of the 5 teams in the top 7 that took a loss over the week. That's how I would vote anyways...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Jacketfan2011 on February 04, 2008, 10:27:08 AM

Maybe I'm biased (OK I AM biased) but I can't see punishing UR too much for a 9 point loss to a decent team. A game that was a 2-6 point game for about 38 minutes. Unless you are going to reward them for an emotional win over the #1 team in a dogfight the previous game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 04, 2008, 11:13:48 AM

Quote from: ScotsFan on February 04, 2008, 10:20:46 AM
I just feel that Amhert's overall schedule has been tougher than UMD's and even though Amherst has 2 losses overall, they only have one loss vs. DIII opponents.

So... they do have two losses then. Remember, the Top 25 poll voters look at everything. They aren't the NCAA who would ignore the non-D3 loss. Also, that non-D3 loss should have been a win for Amherst. Florida Memorial is ranked 36th in the NAIA II... that is a team a #1 hopeful in D3 should be beating.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 04, 2008, 11:25:41 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 04, 2008, 06:44:45 AM
Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on February 03, 2008, 11:57:16 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 31, 2008, 10:31:25 PM
Thanks, fixed! Nine-team leagues really test my schedule-reading-comprehesions skills, and I frequently fail the test. :)...dc

Actually, I think it's the easiest league to follow. Wednesday and Saturday games. That's it with one team with a bye. Some leagues have one game on one night, two games on another night and then all the teams (even ones that played earlier in the week) all on Saturday...CRAZY I SAY! lol

"Easiest league to follow"? How can it be the easiest league to follow when it's an odd-numbered league that by necessity has a bye every game night?
[...]
The CCIW has eight teams. Everybody plays Wednesday night at 7:30 pm, and everybody plays Saturday night at 7:30 pm. Eight teams, four games, twice a week on the same days and at the same times. And, unlike the UAA, you don't even have to mess with two different time zones when you're looking at the league's master schedule. Tell me it can get any easier than that!

Actually, Illinois Wesleyan's women have a disruptive tendency to play Tuesdays, which throws my rhythm off a bit.

It's the combination of the predictable Weds/Sat rotation and the byes that throw me off with the WIAC (as well as the MIAA and NCAC women, off the top of my head). There's lots of Weds/Sat leagues (OAC, MIAA, NCAC, CCIW, WIAC, SCIAC, among others), and when going through the schedules I get hypnotized into thinking that the next two games for each team in these leagues are Weds and Sat. I try to remind myself to watch out for those byes, but sometimes (like this week) they slip past me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on February 04, 2008, 11:57:22 AM

Brandeis only fell 7 spots after loosing to Chicago and Wash U at home. Rochester defeated wash U and lost to Chicago at home. Keeping consistent, they should fall less than 7 spots. Once again, Chicago is a giant killer right now, i think they should be ranked in the top 25 if not top 20 this week after wins AT UR and Deis.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 04, 2008, 12:13:27 PM

Quote from: ILive4This on February 04, 2008, 11:57:22 AM
Brandeis only fell 7 spots after loosing to Chicago and Wash U at home. Rochester defeated wash U and lost to Chicago at home. Keeping consistent, they should fall less than 7 spots. Once again, Chicago is a giant killer right now, i think they should be ranked in the top 25 if not top 20 this week after wins AT UR and Deis.

Apparently my math must be different.
You are saying that since Brandeis lost BOTH games at HOME against Chicago and Wash U and lost seven spots, the fact tha Rochester WON against Wash U at HOM and LOST to Chicago at HOME (1-1) they should also lose seven spots????? How in the world does that make sense?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on February 04, 2008, 12:26:01 PM

Dave, I think he was implying that they should fall less than the seven spots that Brandeis fell:

Quote from: ILive4This on February 04, 2008, 11:57:22 AM
Brandeis only fell 7 spots after loosing to Chicago and Wash U at home. Rochester defeated wash U and lost to Chicago at home. Keeping consistent, they should fall less than 7 spots.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 04, 2008, 12:47:47 PM

ScotsFan - thanks for that clear up. I some how missed the word "less" SEVERAL times while reading the post. Terribly sorry. May need to get the glasses prescription double-checked! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 04, 2008, 01:15:24 PM

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on February 04, 2008, 11:13:48 AM
Quote from: ScotsFan on February 04, 2008, 10:20:46 AM
I just feel that Amhert's overall schedule has been tougher than UMD's and even though Amherst has 2 losses overall, they only have one loss vs. DIII opponents.

So... they do have two losses then. Remember, the Top 25 poll voters look at everything. They aren't the NCAA who would ignore the non-D3 loss. Also, that non-D3 loss should have been a win for Amherst. Florida Memorial is ranked 36th in the NAIA II... that is a team a #1 hopeful in D3 should be beating.

I agree, Dave.

#36 in the 151-member NAIA-2 is not even receiving votes in the D3hoops.com Top 25, surveying the 380+ men's D3 programs.

Also, Rhodes Scholar's tabulations shows D3 holding a 116-88 advantage in games versus NAIA-2 in 2007-08.

Most of us would consider Florida Memorial a bad loss for a Top 10 team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 04, 2008, 02:09:24 PM

What are peoples thoughts on CMU? They have 4 conference losses (two of those are to highly ranked Rochester and Brandeis), but they just beat WashU by 31 (previously ranked #1) and also handily beat Chicago, who beat Rochester yesterday. Do think CMU gets some votes or are they writen off for winning a game against a WashU team that barely lost to Rochester two days before?

CMU also has a road win versus #6 ranked Capital earlier in the season (Capitals only home loss of the season).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: old_hooper on February 04, 2008, 02:15:40 PM

Florida Memorial is not a bad team. A week earlier, they took Concordia Irvine the #3 NAIA DI team to the wire in a game. CUI is a very talented team this year with a couple All Americans on the team and the National runner up last year. Perhaps Fl. Mem is not a consistent team but to stay with CUI and defeat Amherst would indicate that they do have talent.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 04, 2008, 02:32:49 PM

I am willing to cut Amherst some slack, though. That game was after a long layoff and it was a long road trip. And I'm sure a road trip to Florida in December can provide some distractions. It's not like they lost to a team that lost to Sewanee by 19.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 04, 2008, 02:44:40 PM

Any thoughts on how far Puget Sound will fall? I was thinking they would end up around 14th or 15th.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 04, 2008, 02:50:37 PM

Quote from: LogShow on February 04, 2008, 02:44:40 PM
Any thoughts on how far Puget Sound will fall? I was thinking they would end up around 14th or 15th.

Timmm-berrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:D ;D ;) 8)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 04, 2008, 03:24:32 PM

was that an intentional pun?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Cards7580 on February 04, 2008, 03:39:47 PM

"...Timmm-berrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!...."

Damn, that's a rather CUTTING remark to make ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 04, 2008, 03:53:15 PM

IP logged.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 04, 2008, 06:15:01 PM

Quote from: LogShow on February 04, 2008, 03:24:32 PM
Was that an intentional pun?

Man, I don't get a straight line that good too often! ;)

:D :D :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NYBB on February 04, 2008, 07:14:32 PM

How is UMASS-Dart not ranked #1? What else do they need to prove?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 04, 2008, 07:45:48 PM

Quote from: NYBB on February 04, 2008, 07:14:32 PM
How is UMASS-Dart not ranked #1? What else do they need to prove?

Alas for the UMD players, there may be nothing more they CAN prove (until tournament time). I suspect the nagging suspicion of voters is that as many as a dozen teams might be undefeated with their schedule. They have beaten some solid teams, but their only 'signature' win (which got them a huge boost in the poll) was Brandeis, and after the Judges recent 3-game losing streak even that lost some of its luster.

But I suspect they will move to #2 this week (given all the other losses), so if they stay perfect they would likely inherit #1 with Amherst's next stumble (if it happens).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 04, 2008, 07:50:00 PM

Quote from: NYBB on February 04, 2008, 07:14:32 PM
How is UMASS-Dart not ranked #1? What else do they need to prove?

I struggle with their schedule...

Albertus Magnus • W, 102-51
Husson • W, 77-59
at Worcester State • W, 78-65
Bridgewater State • W, 92-84
at Western Connecticut * • W, 74-71
Brandeis • W, 71-64 OT
at Southern Maine * • W, 58-50
Johnson and Wales • W, 87-68
Curry • W, 87-80
Framingham State • W, 79-63
at Salem State • W, 97-88
at Roger Williams • W, 67-60
Keene State * • W, 100-97 OT
Eastern Connecticut * • W, 97-92
at Plymouth State * • W, 84-80
at Rhode Island College * • W, 77-70
Western Connecticut * • W, 72-67
Mass-Boston * • W, 102-73
Southern Maine * • W, 88-69

Massey has the UMD scheduled ranked #126 in Division III through 1/27...

http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&sub=III&mid=1

I guess the question I ask myself is, what would their record be with, say, Augustana's schedule...

Simpson • W, 80-65
at Washington U. • W, 66-60
at Webster • W, 84-65
UW-La Crosse • L, 66-64
at Coe • W, 58-45
St. Ambrose W, 85-68
at St. Norbert • W, 77-70 2OT
Cornell • W, 69-56
at UW-Oshkosh • W, 59-54
at Wartburg • W, 75-61
UW-Stevens Point • L, 73-63
at North Park * • L, 67-58
Elmhurst * • W, 74-72
Wheaton (Ill.) * • W, 66-61
at Carthage * • L, 74-68
Millikin * • W, 71-63
North Central (Ill.) * • W, 70-60
at Illinois Wesleyan * • W, 65-61
at Elmhurst * • W, 72-63

I suspect not 19-0.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on February 04, 2008, 08:41:16 PM

I do not get how Rochester stays put with a loss at home to an unranked opponent, and Brandeis which goes 2-0 on the week falls.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 04, 2008, 08:46:20 PM

Quote from: ILive4This on February 04, 2008, 08:41:16 PM
I do not get how Rochester stays put with a loss at home to an unranked opponent, and Brandeis which goes 2-0 on the week falls.

Rochester lost 46 ballot points (i.e., about two spots on the average ballot), while Brandeis gained 39. It was the movement of the other teams around them that determined their final positioning. Don't blame Rochester, blame Augustana and Centre, both of which passed Brandeis.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on February 04, 2008, 08:47:37 PM

I suppose there will be those in the midwest wondering how Centre moved ahead of Augustana in the poll?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 04, 2008, 08:53:57 PM

Hmm... maybe one loss for Centre would be the easy answer!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 04, 2008, 09:00:42 PM

Well I was thinking Puget Sound would be atleast a few spots lower. But I will take 13th!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on February 04, 2008, 09:10:04 PM

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on February 04, 2008, 08:53:57 PM
Hmm... maybe one loss for Centre would be the easy answer!

Agreed, but in one week neither team lost another game. Augustana was ranked one spot ahead of Centre last week. Was Centre rewarded for their road wins in Texas?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 04, 2008, 09:14:48 PM

Quote from: ILive4This on February 04, 2008, 08:41:16 PM
I do not get how Rochester stays put with a loss at home to an unranked opponent, and Brandeis which goes 2-0 on the week falls.

I do not get how people insist on looking at the poll in just one small slice instead of the big picture.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 04, 2008, 09:16:43 PM

Quote from: pbrooks3 on February 04, 2008, 09:10:04 PM
Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on February 04, 2008, 08:53:57 PM
Hmm... maybe one loss for Centre would be the easy answer!
Agreed, but in one week neither team lost another game. Augustana was ranked one spot ahead of Centre last week. Was Centre rewarded for their road wins in Texas?

Augie also won twice on the road, once at a ranked team (Elmhurst) and the other at an historically tough venue (Ill. Wesleyan). Centre gained 110 points to Augie's 81. Kind of a head-scratcher to me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 04, 2008, 09:30:16 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 04, 2008, 09:16:43 PM
Quote from: pbrooks3 on February 04, 2008, 09:10:04 PM
Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on February 04, 2008, 08:53:57 PM
Hmm... maybe one loss for Centre would be the easy answer!
Agreed, but in one week neither team lost another game. Augustana was ranked one spot ahead of Centre last week. Was Centre rewarded for their road wins in Texas?

Augie also won twice on the road, once at a ranked team (Elmhurst) and the other at an historically tough venue (Ill. Wesleyan). Centre gained 110 points to Augie's 81. Kind of a head-scratcher to me.

On a week-to-week thing, I does make little sense. My hypothesis:

There was sufficient carnage in the top 25 that a number of voters, rather than adjusting their previous ballots, went back to square-one. Considering the recent carnage (and the number of highly-ranked 3 and 4 loss teams), said voters may have decided that they had highly underranked any team who could manage but one loss, regardless of schedule. Would Pat be willing to reveal whether or not there was a major jump by Centre on a few ballots?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 04, 2008, 09:31:51 PM

Not as easy to do given the tools I have at my disposal but I think that now that there's a lack of not only unbeaten teams, but one-loss teams, the rise of the remaining ones of each isn't overly outlandish.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on February 04, 2008, 09:34:59 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 04, 2008, 09:30:16 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on February 04, 2008, 09:16:43 PM
Quote from: pbrooks3 on February 04, 2008, 09:10:04 PM
Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on February 04, 2008, 08:53:57 PM
Hmm... maybe one loss for Centre would be the easy answer!
Agreed, but in one week neither team lost another game. Augustana was ranked one spot ahead of Centre last week. Was Centre rewarded for their road wins in Texas?
This indeed makes some sense. Thanks.
Augie also won twice on the road, once at a ranked team (Elmhurst) and the other at an historically tough venue (Ill. Wesleyan). Centre gained 110 points to Augie's 81. Kind of a head-scratcher to me.

On a week-to-week thing, I does make little sense. My hypothesis:

There was sufficient carnage in the top 25 that a number of voters, rather than adjusting their previous ballots, went back to square-one. Considering the recent carnage (and the number of highly-ranked 3 and 4 loss teams), said voters may have decided that they had highly underranked any team who could manage but one loss, regardless of schedule. Would Pat be willing to reveal whether or not there was a major jump by Centre on a few ballots?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 04, 2008, 09:36:42 PM

Only 51 poll points separates #6 from #10. If votes were distrubuted exactly evenly you would expect that difference to be 125 poll points.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 04, 2008, 09:45:31 PM

My guess, and it is strictly a guess (for those who don't know and may suspect otherwise, I have nothing whatsoever to do with the compilation of this poll), is that Centre moved up because some of the down-ballot carnage. Augie has an established reputation and has been highly ranked all year (in fact, 40 straight weeks in the Top 25). Good road wins are more or less expected of this program, and as they were probably already in the top 10 of everyone's ballot, there's not a lot of room for upward mobility. Centre, on the other hand, probably had a cadre of "believers" and a cadre of "skeptics" among the voters. The "believers" are why they were #11 in the first place, while the "skeptics" were won over by the combination of two good road wins in Texas and losses by most of the teams near them on the average "skeptic's" ballot of a week ago. So while the average voter may have nosed Augie up by 3-4 positions, the won-over Centre "skeptics" may have pushed the Colonels up 6-7 spots.

But that's just a guess, and I'm usually wrong about these things. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 04, 2008, 10:01:43 PM

Quote from: sac on February 04, 2008, 09:36:42 PM
Only 51 poll points separates #6 from #10. If votes were distrubuted exactly evenly you would expect that difference to be 125 poll points.

Actually, only 100 points (all 6s = 500; all 10s = 400), but good point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fcnews on February 04, 2008, 10:41:29 PM

Quote from: fcnews on February 03, 2008, 03:18:40 PM
#1 Amhearst , #2 UM-D, #3 Augustana, #4 UW-Whitewater and #5 Rochester. 6-11, Brandies, Wash U, Centre, Hope, Puget and Capital (pick an order for these 5). UW-Stevens Point and V. Wesleyan (?)

Not way off?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 04, 2008, 10:59:26 PM

Something important to note... Centre has won 18 games in a row. Only undefeated UMD has a longer streak... and Centre lost by just one, in the first game of the year. The same reason why UMD has risen, Centre has risen.

Just a thought...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 04, 2008, 11:27:41 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 04, 2008, 10:59:26 PM
Something important to note... Centre has won 18 games in a row. Only undefeated UMD has a longer streak... and Centre lost by just one, in the first game of the year. The same reason why UMD has risen, Centre has risen.

Just a thought...

Noted, and I agree (and do not disagree with their ranking). I was just speculating as to why they suddenly jumped Augie this week, when the Vikings had probably the more impressive single week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 04, 2008, 11:51:24 PM

One thing to remember is that the voters reevaluate the complete resume of each team every Monday. Sometimes, results from earlier in the season become "worth" more or less as time goes on.

For example, Centre beat DePauw way back on December 1. At the time, that win may not have meant all that much to the D3Hoops.com Top 25 voters. Here in early February, however, DePauw is 16-4 and 8-2 in the SCAC. You look at that as a real good win now.

Or take Augustana's loss at North Park on January 9 in Augie's CCIW opener. At the time I sure didn't think the Vikings should be penalized too much for that one -- NPU was picked 4th in the preseason CCIW coaches poll. Just a tough road game against a good team. Well, now you look at it, and NPU has lost 3 home games in the CCIW -- to Elmhurst (by 27), to IWU, and to last place Millikin. As a voter, you might look at the game a little differently now.

I think many assume the voters just look at the 1 or 2 games played since the last poll and adjust their ballot accordingly. In reality, I think all 25 of us do our best to look at the whole picture every Monday morning, and sometimes the picture changes a little.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on February 04, 2008, 11:55:53 PM

UMD's massey mov SOS drops to 145
Centre's is 202
Mary Hardin Baylor's is 156

It's tough to assess these teams, because although their record speaks volumes, their schedules do not. However, just because they have played lax schedules does not mean they are not worthy of a high ranking. We just won't know till the tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: daoustian on February 05, 2008, 12:03:18 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 04, 2008, 09:45:31 PM
Augie has an established reputation and has been highly ranked all year (in fact, 40 straight weeks in the Top 25).

David,

Sorry for the hijack, but since this is the top 25 poll thread and since you seem likely to know the answer off the top of your head without spending several hours clicking through archived poll results, I was curious as to which men's team has the longest active weekly streak of consecutive top 25 appearances? I did a quick scan on the Amherst end and it's something like 80 straight weeks (plus or minus 2 weeks, number could be adjusted downward if you don't want to count preseason and final season polls) -- otherwise, in every week since Week 13 in the 2001-02 season. Not bad.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 05, 2008, 12:09:44 AM

I bet the answer is Wooster! ;D ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 05, 2008, 12:10:41 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 04, 2008, 10:01:43 PM
Quote from: sac on February 04, 2008, 09:36:42 PM
Only 51 poll points separates #6 from #10. If votes were distrubuted exactly evenly you would expect that difference to be 125 poll points.

Actually, only 100 points (all 6s = 500; all 10s = 400), but good point.

I misstyped it, it should have been #5 to #10 are separated by 51 poll votes. That does equal 125.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 05, 2008, 01:56:32 AM

Quote from: scottiedawg on February 04, 2008, 11:55:53 PM
UMD's massey mov SOS drops to 145
Centre's is 202
Mary Hardin Baylor's is 156

It's tough to assess these teams, because although their record speaks volumes, their schedules do not. However, just because they have played lax schedules does not mean they are not worthy of a high ranking. We just won't know till the tournament.

One other factor about which I wish I had the statistical understanding is the isolation effect that the ASC has with its 20/21 game conference schedule and the paucity of D3 teams that it can play.

Do all of the D-1's that ASC teams play for money games really reflect the quality of play? (Why does the ASC play some many D-1's? A road trip from ASC-West to Mississippi College and Louisiana College can cost $6000 dollars. Outside the UAA, the SCAC and the NWC, what conference has those expenses for conference games?)

If UMHB is 156, then they are a strong #156. (The loss that McMurry put on UMHB in Abilene was due to the presence of Travis Tennison in the post. Travis came in at semester and was responsible for the up-tick. He has been medically sidelined since the UMHB game. UMHB takes a bullet in the one month window that Travis was there.)

(Man, here I am defending UMHB...ughhh. :P Sometimes it is tough defending your principles! :D )

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 05, 2008, 02:08:15 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 04, 2008, 11:25:41 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 04, 2008, 06:44:45 AM
Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on February 03, 2008, 11:57:16 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 31, 2008, 10:31:25 PM
Thanks, fixed! Nine-team leagues really test my schedule-reading-comprehesions skills, and I frequently fail the test. :)...dc

Actually, I think it's the easiest league to follow. Wednesday and Saturday games. That's it with one team with a bye. Some leagues have one game on one night, two games on another night and then all the teams (even ones that played earlier in the week) all on Saturday...CRAZY I SAY! lol

"Easiest league to follow"? How can it be the easiest league to follow when it's an odd-numbered league that by necessity has a bye every game night?
[...]
The CCIW has eight teams. Everybody plays Wednesday night at 7:30 pm, and everybody plays Saturday night at 7:30 pm. Eight teams, four games, twice a week on the same days and at the same times. And, unlike the UAA, you don't even have to mess with two different time zones when you're looking at the league's master schedule. Tell me it can get any easier than that!

Actually, Illinois Wesleyan's women have a disruptive tendency to play Tuesdays, which throws my rhythm off a bit.

I'm only talking about men's basketball in the CCIW.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 05, 2008, 02:09:21 AM

QuoteMan, here I am defending UMHB...ughhh

If you are actually defending them...they must really deserve the credit :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sumander on February 05, 2008, 08:59:08 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 04, 2008, 11:36:20 PM
HOW THEY FARED (week of Feb. 4-10)

#   19   St. Thomas (17-3) def. Macalester 68-53, plays at Bethel Wed., and hosts Gustavus Adolphus Sat.

Score actually was 100-48

Fixed, thanks...in my defense, the scoreboard was wrong when I went to bed, I didn't just make that score up! :D ...dc

Not a problem, you have got a lot to follow any way!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 05, 2008, 09:31:55 AM

Quote from: daoustian on February 05, 2008, 12:03:18 AM
Quote from: David Collinge on February 04, 2008, 09:45:31 PM
Augie has an established reputation and has been highly ranked all year (in fact, 40 straight weeks in the Top 25).
David,

Sorry for the hijack, but since this is the top 25 poll thread and since you seem likely to know the answer off the top of your head without spending several hours clicking through archived poll results, I was curious as to which men's team has the longest active weekly streak of consecutive top 25 appearances? I did a quick scan on the Amherst end and it's something like 80 straight weeks (plus or minus 2 weeks, number could be adjusted downward if you don't want to count preseason and final season polls) -- otherwise, in every week since Week 13 in the 2001-02 season. Not bad.

I talk about this kind of stuff in my weekly blog post (part of the Daily Dose (http://www.d3hoops.com/dailydose/)); if you find it interesting, I suggest you tune in later this afternoon. :) In the meantime, the answer to your question is Amherst, whose current streak of Top 25 appearance is at 89, a men's poll record. (D-mac, Wooster is right behind at 87.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on February 05, 2008, 12:56:46 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 04, 2008, 09:14:48 PM
Quote from: ILive4This on February 04, 2008, 08:41:16 PM
I do not get how Rochester stays put with a loss at home to an unranked opponent, and Brandeis which goes 2-0 on the week falls.

I do not get how people insist on looking at the poll in just one small slice instead of the big picture.

Fans

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 05, 2008, 02:12:11 PM

Quote from: scottiedawg on February 04, 2008, 11:55:53 PM
UMD's massey mov SOS drops to 145
Centre's is 202
Mary Hardin Baylor's is 156

It's tough to assess these teams, because although their record speaks volumes, their schedules do not. However, just because they have played lax schedules does not mean they are not worthy of a high ranking. We just won't know till the tournament.

...and last year in the 2nd round of the NCAA tournament (March 2007).
Wooster 73 Centre 56

Moreover, Centre's top 5 scorers this season (Britt, Thomason, Nestheide, Noll, Crowdis) all played in that tournament game vs. Wooster. Yes, Wooster graduated some of their top players but Centre did as well (John Patterson and Matt Jacobson were senior starters for Centre last season). My guess is that #15 Wooster would probably beat them (again) on a neutral court this year.

Centre wins games with tough defense (against a fairly weak schedule as scottiedawg noted) but that is less of a factor in the NCAA tournament when most teams are playing solid D. Centre also appears to have limited depth on their frontline this year. They start 6'5" Noll and 6'6" Herman but no other players over 6'4" are playing any significant minutes.

My point? Centre is not the #5 team in the nation. Not even close.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 05, 2008, 02:45:57 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on February 05, 2008, 02:12:11 PM
Quote from: scottiedawg on February 04, 2008, 11:55:53 PM
UMD's massey mov SOS drops to 145
Centre's is 202
Mary Hardin Baylor's is 156

It's tough to assess these teams, because although their record speaks volumes, their schedules do not. However, just because they have played lax schedules does not mean they are not worthy of a high ranking. We just won't know till the tournament.

...and last year in the 2nd round of the NCAA tournament (March 2007).
Wooster 73 Centre 56

Moreover, Centre's top 5 scorers this season (Britt, Thomason, Nestheide, Noll, Crowdis) all played in that tournament game vs. Wooster. Yes, Wooster graduated some of their top players but Centre did as well (John Patterson and Matt Jacobson were senior starters for Centre last season). My guess is that #15 Wooster would probably beat them (again) on a neutral court this year.

Centre wins games with tough defense (against a fairly weak schedule as scottiedawg noted) but that is less of a factor in the NCAA tournament when most teams are playing solid D. Centre also appears to have limited depth on their frontline this year. They start 6'5" Noll and 6'6" Herman but no other players over 6'4" are playing any significant minutes.

My point? Centre is not the #5 team in the nation. Not even close.

But every one else that I have voted in the Posters Poll has blown their opportunity to be the 5th best team in the nation.

As an outsider from the "power circles of D3 basketball" down in the ASC, I surmise that there is a very small gap between the schools in the Top 50 this year. I think that there are about 20 schools that should be ranked about 12th and 10 schools that are solid #8's. We have incredible parity, and no "Top 5's".

I took a flyer on Titan Q's bold assessment that the Carthage team that we were seeing prior to a week ago was not the representation that came to Texas in the first half of the season. I placed them #9 in my poster's poll ballot. They promptly lost 2 more CCIW games last week.

If the net effect of the D3Hoops.com has been to level the "playing fields" by making us fans more knowledgeable about D3 basketball, then we are going to have a great tourney. We may see dueling Cinderellas coming from conferences that we have not seen in this decade.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on February 05, 2008, 02:54:32 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on February 05, 2008, 02:12:11 PM
Quote from: scottiedawg on February 04, 2008, 11:55:53 PM
UMD's massey mov SOS drops to 145
Centre's is 202
Mary Hardin Baylor's is 156

It's tough to assess these teams, because although their record speaks volumes, their schedules do not. However, just because they have played lax schedules does not mean they are not worthy of a high ranking. We just won't know till the tournament.

...and last year in the 2nd round of the NCAA tournament (March 2007).
Wooster 73 Centre 56

Moreover, Centre's top 5 scorers this season (Britt, Thomason, Nestheide, Noll, Crowdis) all played in that tournament game vs. Wooster. Yes, Wooster graduated some of their top players but Centre did as well (John Patterson and Matt Jacobson were senior starters for Centre last season). My guess is that #15 Wooster would probably beat them (again) on a neutral court this year.

My point? Centre is not the #5 team in the nation. Not even close.

WSF, I'm having a little trouble following your logic here. First, that tournament game was @ Wooster- they certainly weren't playing on a "neutral" floor. Perhaps you mean to use a neutral floor just as a comparison technique...but then don't present the score from last year's NCAAs like it was on a neutral floor- it was in fact an emotional final home game for Wooster's seniors.

Also, Centre convincingly beat Capital in round 1 of that tourney last year, 69-55. That Capital squad is essentially the same one that is currently ranked #8 in the country (Cap graduated only one player, and he was about the 3rd guy off the bench).

So, I read Centre's performance in last year's NCAAs as a good one: they beat a good team in Capital, who was both the regular season and tournament champion of the respected OAC...then they lost to a Wooster team that clearly had the talent and the drive to make a run at Salem. My impression from watching Centre last year in those two tournament games was that they could easily have been a sweet sixteen team if they hadn't drawn a Wooster team hell-bent on Salem (and playing its last home game of the year).

I talked to several Centre fans during those games, and they almost universally noted that it was next year (ie. this season) that they were really looking forward too. I think they clearly expected to be better this year.

Much more to the point, though, for the current Top 25, is that I sincerely doubt the voters look back at all at last season's tournament results, for the very reasons you indicated: players change, teams change, and schedules change. They have to evaluate the teams as they have played this season, with the players they have this season...and by that evaluation, 18-1 with an 18-game winning streak looks pretty strong in a year of tight parity at the top.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 05, 2008, 03:11:14 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 05, 2008, 02:45:57 PM

I took a flyer on Titan Q's bold assessment that the Carthage team that we were seeing prior to a week ago was not the representation that came to Texas in the first half of the season. I placed them #9 in my poster's poll ballot. They promptly lost 2 more CCIW games last week.

I sure wouldn't have slotted Carthage #9, Ralph. That is quite a flyer.

Quote from: Titan Q on January 29, 2008, 11:35:58 PM
Carthage is a different team than they were back mid-December, when they faced Trinity and Southwestern. Sharp-shooting sophomore Sean Fendley made his season debut in the Trinity game, going 1-4 from 3 in 18 minutes off the bench. Against Southwestern he was 1-8 in 21 minutes.

Bosko Djurickovic inserted Fendley, a 2-guard, into the starting lineup for the Red Men's first CCIW game, at Wheaton. It really changed their lineup as it moved freshman sensation Steve Djurickovic (23.4 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 3.7 apg) from the 3 to the point, and former PG Joe Higgins went to the bench. Higgins is a good ball-handler and passer, but he just is not a scoring threat at all (1.9 ppg in 29 min/game this year). So with Fendley, Carthage now has one more serious scoring threat on the floor.

In CCIW play, Fendley is 13th in scoring (13.7 ppg) and is a very impressive 18-35 (.514) from 3-point range. His impact has been enormous for the Red Men in a lot of ways, including the fact that his presence has allowed Djurickovic to shift to the point, where he's been outstanding.

Carthage played Hope and Calvin without Fendley, back when non-scoring threat Joe Higgins was the point-guard and Djurickovic was the 3. They played Trinity and Southwestern with a Fendley that was just settling in after missing a lot of time with injury. I am not 100% sold on Carthage myself, but they are a much, much better basketball team than they were in December. That I'm sure of.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 05, 2008, 03:13:31 PM

QuoteIf the net effect of the D3Hoops.com has been to level the "playing fields" by making us fans more knowledgeable about D3 basketball, then we are going to have a great tourney. We may see dueling Cinderellas coming from conferences that we have not seen in this decade.

This event seems to becoming more and more likely

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 05, 2008, 03:53:41 PM

QuoteI talk about this kind of stuff in my weekly blog post (part of the Daily Dose); if you find it interesting, I suggest you tune in later this afternoon. In the meantime, the answer to your question is Amherst, whose current streak of Top 25 appearance is at 89, a men's poll record. (D-mac, Wooster is right behind at 87.)

Nice write up David, always enjoy them!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 05, 2008, 08:16:13 PM

Puget Sound squares off against Pacific Lutheran tonight. Quick turn around from their disappointing loss on Saturday. Hopefully they can stop the bleeding and get back on the right track.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 05, 2008, 09:12:09 PM

Plattsburgh State defeats Middlebury 78-74 at Middlebury.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 05, 2008, 09:26:55 PM

Plattsburgh St. comes storming back from a 22 pt deficit in the second half to catch Middlebury in the final few minutes. Finally take the lead on a 3 pointer with about a minute left and hit key FT's to win 78-74. Cardinals now !8-2 on the year with only 6 games being played on their home court. Road record now 12-2 with only losses coming against Occidental in Calif. and Gordon after a 2 week layoff. It was the Cardinals 11th straight win.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 05, 2008, 11:46:25 PM

Maybe just a tease, but maybe an upset brewing: PLU 46, UPS 41 at the half. I'm going to bed, but others may want to keep track.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Cards7580 on February 05, 2008, 11:54:11 PM

"...PLU 46, UPS 41 ..."

Wow and I thought UPS only had problems with FedEx and USPS ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 06, 2008, 02:29:42 AM

Puget Sound hits a buzzer beater to survive a scare in OT...what a game!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 07, 2008, 12:32:47 AM

It has been upset-city for anyone in the Top 25 this year...I love the craziness!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 07, 2008, 02:48:14 AM

I don't think we'll see nearly as many upsets in the top 25 this week. My guess would be only 4 or 5 teams might taste defeat. Virginia Wesleyan already lost and either UR or Washington is going down. Augustana has to be wary of Carthage and UMD faces quite possibly their biggest hurdle to an unbeaten regular season in a game at Keene St. on Sat. UMD beat them at home 1st time around 100-97 in OT. I think Keene St." Kleenes" their clock this time around, 87-81. St. Thomas looking to avoid being swept by the Gusties on Sat. I think they win the rematch. Elmhurst will be hard pressed by Illinois Wesleyan on Sat. Titans win a close one at home. Lots of mismatches in this week's action keep the turmoil to a minimum.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 07, 2008, 09:46:24 AM

They may be mismatches but it is also conference season, so there's a lot of contempt there...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: abominable_snowman on February 07, 2008, 11:04:02 AM

Quote from: magicman on February 07, 2008, 02:48:14 AM
I don't think we'll see nearly as many upsets in the top 25 this week. My guess would be only 4 or 5 teams might taste defeat. Virginia Wesleyan already lost and either UR or Washington is going down. Augustana has to be wary of Carthage and UMD faces quite possibly their biggest hurdle to an unbeaten regular season in a game at Keene St. on Sat. UMD beat them at home 1st time around 100-97 in OT. I think Keene St." Kleenes" their clock this time around, 87-81. St. Thomas looking to avoid being swept by the Gusties on Sat. I think they win the rematch. Elmhurst will be hard pressed by Illinois Wesleyan on Sat. Titans win a close one at home. Lots of mismatches in this week's action keep the turmoil to a minimum.

-plug alert-

The gustavus/st. thomas game, in my humble opinion will be the one to keep your eye on. These are two of the most dominate schools in recent MIAC history, and each time they matchup it is a clash of the Titans.

It is a great competition, and being on a Saturday, the atmosphere at UST will be heated as plenty of Gustavus fans will make the trip.

So if you get a chance, check it out if there is a webcast.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 07, 2008, 01:40:39 PM

Big game for UMD...if they can top Keene St. then they will most likely finish their season perfect. It will be interesting to see how they do in the tournament. Undefeated doesn't dictate success in the playoffs...sort of like another team from New England just experienced.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 07, 2008, 04:04:54 PM

Quote from: magicman on February 07, 2008, 02:48:14 AM
I don't think we'll see nearly as many upsets in the top 25 this week. My guess would be only 4 or 5 teams might taste defeat. Virginia Wesleyan already lost and either UR or Washington is going down. Augustana has to be wary of Carthage and UMD faces quite possibly their biggest hurdle to an unbeaten regular season in a game at Keene St. on Sat. UMD beat them at home 1st time around 100-97 in OT. I think Keene St." Kleenes" their clock this time around, 87-81. St. Thomas looking to avoid being swept by the Gusties on Sat. I think they win the rematch. Elmhurst will be hard pressed by Illinois Wesleyan on Sat. Titans win a close one at home. Lots of mismatches in this week's action keep the turmoil to a minimum.

Maybe, ..........not sure if everyone knows this but we've seen at least one loss from a Top 5 team in the poll since the very first week of the season..........and 6-10 have only escaped twice, both during the holiday period. In fact we've had multiple losses from the top 5 in 8 of 11 polls.

The last 4 weeks we've had 38-14 records among the top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 07, 2008, 04:44:45 PM

Good point, sac. This pretty much started with LogShow's comment, which was correct but had strange timing since the top 25 were then 16-1! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 07, 2008, 06:53:23 PM

You can just call me Log-stradomos :D. Okay sorry bad joke, bad joke.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 07, 2008, 09:24:56 PM

La Crosse giving Platteville what's for again (the Eagles beat the Pios at Platte in the first meeting).

LaX leads 49-47 with 7:51 to go

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 07, 2008, 09:34:51 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 07, 2008, 09:24:56 PM
La Crosse giving Platteville what's for again (the Eagles beat the Pios at Platte in the first meeting).

LaX leads 49-47 with 7:51 to go

What year? ??? PL 74, LX 65 (http://www.uwsa.edu/wiac/mbasket/HTML/LCPLT.HTM)

I knew they only had two conference losses...one to Point and I was pretty sure the other was at Eau Claire, so I checked. ::) ;D :D ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 07, 2008, 09:36:29 PM

... They lost to some team... northish of them...

Kindly disregard my last comment... but just the same, Go Eagles!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 07, 2008, 09:44:53 PM

MORE FREE BASKETBALL! La Crosse and Platteville going to a second OT! 68 apiece.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 07, 2008, 10:06:12 PM

Double OT in La Crosse!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Cards7580 on February 08, 2008, 12:33:39 AM

Lots of BLUE scores on that list so far this week :)

Maybe Friday and Saturday are upset days.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 08, 2008, 04:57:00 AM

Maybe its a new trend...I like blue, those are pretty much the teams that are "favored" to win. But if the past weeks have been any indication, a few upsets will surface this weekend.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on February 08, 2008, 02:07:55 PM

Quote from: kiltedbryan on February 05, 2008, 02:54:32 PM
Quote from: wooscotsfan on February 05, 2008, 02:12:11 PM
Quote from: scottiedawg on February 04, 2008, 11:55:53 PM
UMD's massey mov SOS drops to 145
Centre's is 202
Mary Hardin Baylor's is 156

It's tough to assess these teams, because although their record speaks volumes, their schedules do not. However, just because they have played lax schedules does not mean they are not worthy of a high ranking. We just won't know till the tournament.

...and last year in the 2nd round of the NCAA tournament (March 2007).
Wooster 73 Centre 56

Moreover, Centre's top 5 scorers this season (Britt, Thomason, Nestheide, Noll, Crowdis) all played in that tournament game vs. Wooster. Yes, Wooster graduated some of their top players but Centre did as well (John Patterson and Matt Jacobson were senior starters for Centre last season). My guess is that #15 Wooster would probably beat them (again) on a neutral court this year.

My point? Centre is not the #5 team in the nation. Not even close.

WSF, I'm having a little trouble following your logic here. First, that tournament game was @ Wooster- they certainly weren't playing on a "neutral" floor. Perhaps you mean to use a neutral floor just as a comparison technique...but then don't present the score from last year's NCAAs like it was on a neutral floor- it was in fact an emotional final home game for Wooster's seniors.

Also, Centre convincingly beat Capital in round 1 of that tourney last year, 69-55. That Capital squad is essentially the same one that is currently ranked #8 in the country (Cap graduated only one player, and he was about the 3rd guy off the bench).

So, I read Centre's performance in last year's NCAAs as a good one: they beat a good team in Capital, who was both the regular season and tournament champion of the respected OAC...then they lost to a Wooster team that clearly had the talent and the drive to make a run at Salem. My impression from watching Centre last year in those two tournament games was that they could easily have been a sweet sixteen team if they hadn't drawn a Wooster team hell-bent on Salem (and playing its last home game of the year).

I talked to several Centre fans during those games, and they almost universally noted that it was next year (ie. this season) that they were really looking forward too. I think they clearly expected to be better this year.

Much more to the point, though, for the current Top 25, is that I sincerely doubt the voters look back at all at last season's tournament results, for the very reasons you indicated: players change, teams change, and schedules change. They have to evaluate the teams as they have played this season, with the players they have this season...and by that evaluation, 18-1 with an 18-game winning streak looks pretty strong in a year of tight parity at the top.

Didn't have a chance to weigh in on these posts from earlier in the week, kiltedbryan. I'm a Centre partisan and I pretty much concur with your comments. Clearly the game at Wooster in the tournament last year was no neutral site game. I will also concede that Wooster has played a tougher schedule than Centre this year and normally does every season. Centre truly does miss the post presence this season of the 6'10" John Patterson, but they've compensated on the offensive end with stellar senior guard play in Nestheide and Britt. Nestheide won Player of the Year in the SCAC last season, and Britt is a strong contender for this award in 2008. These two guys have willed the team through two tough games against good opponents in Millsaps and Trinity (TX) the past 2 weekends. In the first one at Millsaps, Britt hit a 28 footer to tie the game at the end of regulation & send it to OT for a victory by 10 points. A week later in San Antonio, Nestheide carried the squad from 16 down in the 2nd half to force OT with an old fashioned 3 point play that led to a 9-point win. These guys absolutely thrive on pressure and it's hard to measure their determination and grit when looking at stats. The Colonels are well-coached and have heady players that stick together when the chips are down. I'm hoping they have a shot at hosting this season rather than having to travel as we did last year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on February 08, 2008, 10:02:13 PM

#5 Centre (of the SCAC) beats Birmingham Southern tonight 63-46 to extend their winning streak to 19 games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 08, 2008, 10:39:05 PM

Rochester avenges last Sundays loss with a 1 point win at Chicago only a layup by Ndubizu with 3 seconds left.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 08, 2008, 10:50:23 PM

WashU also avenges their 31 point loss to CMU, with an 11 point win at home.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 08, 2008, 11:11:24 PM

Geez, 26-1 so far; the women's top-25 already has four red scores. Better have some upsets tomorrow or this 'parity differential' is gonna look bad! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 08, 2008, 11:16:37 PM

If it's is a quite week... what in the world am I going to talk about on Hoopsville (http://"http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville")???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 08, 2008, 11:43:25 PM

Might we be getting some separation between teams who are going to step up and those that will fall away...?

Four OT games so far this week... with the top 25 gittin' 'er done. Also, another 3 games won by 4 or less.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on February 08, 2008, 11:51:23 PM

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on February 08, 2008, 11:16:37 PM
If it's is a quite week... what in the world am I going to talk about on Hoopsville (http://"http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville")???

Maybe the theme could be "One of these weeks isn't like the others." ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 09, 2008, 12:21:06 AM

Quote from: kiltedbryan on February 08, 2008, 11:51:23 PM
Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on February 08, 2008, 11:16:37 PM
If it's is a quite week... what in the world am I going to talk about on Hoopsville (http://"http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville")???

Maybe the theme could be "One of these weeks isn't like the others." ;)

Good point. d-mac, this year NOT having upsets is an 'upset'! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 09, 2008, 01:31:16 AM

LogShow

Ouch! That one must have hurt. Only the 2nd red # put up this week. I said only 4 or 5 but I didn't think that would be one of them. Sorry.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 09, 2008, 01:46:33 PM

Quote from: magicman on February 09, 2008, 01:31:16 AM
LogShow

Ouch! That one must have hurt. Only the 2nd red # put up this week. I said only 4 or 5 but I didn't think that would be one of them. Sorry.

Ouch is right! I don't know what to say. The Puget Sound had a 14 point lead at halftime, and completely fell apart the second half. We have contributed to the red scores twice in the past weeks :-[

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 09, 2008, 03:42:46 PM

Final: #15 Wooster 83 Wabash 71

Wooster was led by their All American James Cooper with 20 points, Evan Will with 16 points, Brandon Johnson with 14 points, Marty Bidwell with 9 points and freshman Bryan Wickliffe with 8 points (8 boards).

Wooster is now 18-3, 11-1 NCAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 09, 2008, 03:45:50 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on February 09, 2008, 03:42:46 PM
Final: #15 Wooster 83 Wabash 71

Wooster was led by their All American James Cooper with 20 points, Evan Will with 16 points, Brandon Johnson with 14 points, Marty Bidwell with 9 points and freshman Bryan Wickliffe with 8 points (8 boards).

Wooster is now 18-3, 11-1 NCAC.

Wooster has been the definition of consistancy

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pabegg on February 09, 2008, 03:52:41 PM

Mass-Dartmouth down 12 at the half at Keene State

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 09, 2008, 04:40:49 PM

Quote from: pabegg on February 09, 2008, 03:52:41 PM
Mass-Dartmouth down 12 at the half at Keene State

uh-oh break out the red marker Collinge! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 09, 2008, 04:43:20 PM

Okay should have looked at the scoreboard update before the last post :-[

UMD 72 Keene St 69 with 1:27 to go

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 09, 2008, 04:44:33 PM

Is anyone else listening to this game!?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 09, 2008, 04:50:56 PM

The radio feed went down with 15 seconds to play...ahh

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 09, 2008, 04:52:58 PM

Quote from: LogShow on February 09, 2008, 04:50:56 PM
The radio feed went down with 15 seconds to play...ahh

Going to OT at 74. UMD's Tavares missed too many FT's down the stretch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 09, 2008, 04:54:32 PM

I know this page isn't for in-game updates but this game is really exciting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 09, 2008, 05:00:21 PM

The radio is back! Keene up 4 with 2 to go

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 09, 2008, 05:07:10 PM

Its a final the last undefeated goes down. Keene St fans were rocking...would have been awesome to watch the game live!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on February 09, 2008, 05:07:52 PM

keene st. beat Umass

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 09, 2008, 05:25:55 PM

Quote from: LogShow on February 09, 2008, 04:50:56 PM
The radio feed went down with 15 seconds to play...ahh

You should have watched the live video feed... it was free!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on February 09, 2008, 05:28:26 PM

Alright, how far does UMass-Dartmouth fall in the poll after this loss to Keene State?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 09, 2008, 05:30:57 PM

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on February 09, 2008, 05:25:55 PM
Quote from: LogShow on February 09, 2008, 04:50:56 PM
The radio feed went down with 15 seconds to play...ahh
You should have watched the live video feed... it was free!

That pretty sweet they have video feeds!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 09, 2008, 05:44:14 PM

And it was a pretty good video feed with audio!

I don't think UMass-Dartmouth will fall that far... remember they got this far in the seaon with only one loss. That says a lot.

The real question is, the #1 votes they had will probably go some where... but to who?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hope1 on February 09, 2008, 06:04:18 PM

hope won today 74 to 58 over kzoo

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 09, 2008, 07:22:35 PM

They may fall one or two spots, but I doubt if UMD will drop past 5.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 09, 2008, 07:40:20 PM

Quote from: smedindy on February 09, 2008, 07:22:35 PM
They may fall one or two spots, but I doubt if UMD will drop past 5.

Didn't Pat Coleman take in a couple of games at Keene State's Spaulding Gym last winter on one of his New England trips? (I see his photo credit on the front page.)

I thought he had favorable things to say about that environment.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 09, 2008, 09:07:09 PM

Yep, Keene State was part of my New England meanderings. :)

Indeed -- it's a '60s-era type of building, concrete/cinder block and it gets very loud in there. Plus, the community really comes out and supports the team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on February 09, 2008, 10:34:22 PM

# 25 Elmhurst (15-6) won at Millikin 87-72 and lost at Illinois Wesleyan 75-71

Where's the red ink - please ::) ;) :D

Thanks Dave!! :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 09, 2008, 10:47:50 PM

Quote
...
# 24 UW-Oshkosh (16-6) def. UW-Eau Claire 89-87 (OT) and def. UW-La Crosse 78-63
# 25 Elmhurst (15-6) won at Millikin 87-72 and lost at Illinois Wesleyan 75-71
« Last Edit: Today at 09:34:59 pm by David Collinge »

Quote from: iwumichigander on February 09, 2008, 10:34:22 PM
# 25 Elmhurst (15-6) won at Millikin 87-72 and lost at Illinois Wesleyan 75-71

Where's the red ink - please ::) ;) :D

He made the edit in 37 seconds! I actually think that he was reading your mind! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Cards7580 on February 09, 2008, 10:48:07 PM

#14 Plattsburgh wins again 87 to 78 at home vs Potsdam 19-2 0verall 12-0 conference

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 10, 2008, 02:20:32 AM

This week was smooth sailing for most of the teams...just not Puget Sound :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 10, 2008, 10:39:39 AM

Quote from: magicman on February 07, 2008, 02:48:14 AMUMD faces quite possibly their biggest hurdle to an unbeaten regular season in a game at Keene St. on Sat. UMD beat them at home 1st time around 100-97 in OT. I think Keene St." Kleenes" their clock this time around, 87-81. St. Thomas looking to avoid being swept by the Gusties on Sat. I think they win the rematch. Elmhurst will be hard pressed by Illinois Wesleyan on Sat. Titans win a close one at home. Lots of mismatches in this week's action keep the turmoil to a minimum.

Not bad.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fpc85 on February 10, 2008, 12:31:26 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on February 10, 2008, 10:39:39 AM
Quote from: magicman on February 07, 2008, 02:48:14 AMUMD faces quite possibly their biggest hurdle to an unbeaten regular season in a game at Keene St. on Sat. UMD beat them at home 1st time around 100-97 in OT. I think Keene St." Kleenes" their clock this time around, 87-81. St. Thomas looking to avoid being swept by the Gusties on Sat. I think they win the rematch. Elmhurst will be hard pressed by Illinois Wesleyan on Sat. Titans win a close one at home. Lots of mismatches in this week's action keep the turmoil to a minimum.

Not bad.

mm, let's go to vegas.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 10, 2008, 01:54:34 PM

Washington U. up 50-49 over UR with 4:25 remaining

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 10, 2008, 02:03:03 PM

Washington U. up 54-53 with the ball and 25 secs. left

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 10, 2008, 02:06:52 PM

Washington U wins 54-53. UR with a 3 pt. attempt at the buzzer in and out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 10, 2008, 03:08:43 PM

That was a quick turn around for Wash U and Rochester to meet again...they just played last weekend.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 10, 2008, 05:08:32 PM

Quote from: LogShow on February 10, 2008, 03:08:43 PM
That was a quick turn around for Wash U and Rochester to meet again...they just played last weekend.

Not as quick as Rochester against Chicago. They played each other in back to back games on Feb. 3rd and Feb 8th. Each winning on the other's home court.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 10, 2008, 05:45:32 PM

HOW THEY FARED (week of Feb. 4-10) (COMPLETE)

#   1   Amherst (21-2) def. Rhode Island Coll. 97-63, won at Connecticut Coll. 80-62, and won at Wesleyan 78-67
#   2   Mass.-Dartmouth (20-1) won at Tufts 86-74 and lost at Keene St. 92-85 (OT)
#   3   Rochester (17-3) won at Chicago 64-63 and lost at #9 Washington U. 54-53
#   4   UW-Whitewater (18-3) won at Luther 68-55 and won at UW-Stout 83-61
#   5   Centre (20-1) def. Birmingham-Southern 63-46 and def. Rhodes 85-63
#   6   Hope (17-3) def. Olivet 86-58 and won at Kalamazoo 74-58
#   7   Augustana (17-4) def. North Park 72-61 and def. Carthage 76-69
#   8   Capital (18-3) won at Marietta 82-48 and def. Muskingum 72-66
#   9   Washington U. (16-4) def. Carnegie Mellon 79-68 and def. #3 Rochester 54-53
#   10   Brandeis (16-4) def. Emory 90-85 (OT) and def. Case Western Reserve 88-57
#   11   UW-Stevens Point (17-4) def. UW-Stout 86-58 and won at UW-Superior 95-65
#   12   Mary Hardin-Baylor (18-3) won at Concordia-Austin 97-83, def. Schreiner 72-41, and won at Texas Lutheran 62-60 (OT)
#   13   Puget Sound (16-4) won at Pacific Lutheran 98-97 (OT) and lost at Linfield 93-82
#   14   Plattsburgh St. (19-2) won at Middlebury 78-74 and def. Potsdam St. 87-78
#   15   Wooster (18-3) def. Hiram 104-61 and def. Wabash 83-71
#   16   Guilford (16-4) def. Washington & Lee 64-60 and def. Lynchburg 103-53
#   17   UW-Platteville (17-4) won at UW-La Crosse 78-77 (2 OT) and def. Robert Morris-Springfield 80-56
#   18   Virginia Wesleyan (17-5) lost at Bridgewater (VA) 70-60, def. Roanoke 75-55, and def. Washington & Lee 70-44
#   19   St. Thomas (19-3) def. Macalester 100-48, won at Bethel 84-68, and def. Gustavus Adolphus 76-68
#   20   Occidental (18-2) def. Claremont-Mudd-Scripps 59-41 and won at Caltech 81-37
#   21   Ursinus (19-2) def. Washington Coll. 92-45 and def. McDaniel 68-66
#   22   Stevens (19-3) won at New Jersey 63-52 and won at Hartwick 75-64
#   23   Lawrence (16-2) def. Monmouth 105-68 and def. Lake Forest 84-69
#   24   UW-Oshkosh (16-6) def. UW-Eau Claire 89-87 (OT) and def. UW-La Crosse 78-63
#   25   Elmhurst (15-6) won at Millikin 87-72 and lost at Illinois Wesleyan 75-71

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 10, 2008, 10:17:59 PM

Quote from: magicman on February 10, 2008, 05:08:32 PM
Quote from: LogShow on February 10, 2008, 03:08:43 PM
That was a quick turn around for Wash U and Rochester to meet again...they just played last weekend.

Not as quick as Rochester against Chicago. They played each other in back to back games on Feb. 3rd and Feb 8th. Each winning on the other's home court.

The conference schedule is like that every year in the UAA. You play each of the 7 other teams once (teams are paired in 2s according to geography, Brandeis & NYU, Washu & UC, CMU and UR, and Emory and CWRU) and then play the teams in the inverse order the final 7 games. Therefore, each team will play one other team home and away within 6 days of eachother (matchups can change from year to year).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 10, 2008, 10:55:48 PM

Quote from: LogShow on February 10, 2008, 02:20:32 AM
This week was smooth sailing for most of the teams...

It probably depends on the definition of smooth sailing :)

#12 Mary Hardin-Baylor 62 Texas Lutheran 60 in Overtime

Are they really #12 nationally when they have to go to overtime to beat a 1-18 team? :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 10, 2008, 10:56:37 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on February 10, 2008, 10:55:48 PM
Quote from: LogShow on February 10, 2008, 02:20:32 AM
This week was smooth sailing for most of the teams...

It probably depends on the definition of smooth sailing :)

#12 Mary Hardin-Baylor 62 Texas Lutheran 60 in Overtime

Are they really #12 nationally when they have to go to overtime to beat a 1-18 team? :o

TLU has some of the most challenging officiating that you have ever seen. Wooster might need double overtime in Seguin. (Dang Yankees!) :D :D :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 10, 2008, 10:59:38 PM

A hard fought win still counts. Maybe smooth sailing was the wrong term...but they can still chalk up another tally in the win column :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 10, 2008, 11:01:43 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 10, 2008, 10:56:37 PM
Quote from: wooscotsfan on February 10, 2008, 10:55:48 PM
Quote from: LogShow on February 10, 2008, 02:20:32 AM
This week was smooth sailing for most of the teams...

It probably depends on the definition of smooth sailing :)

#12 Mary Hardin-Baylor 62 Texas Lutheran 60 in Overtime

Are they really #12 nationally when they have to go to overtime to beat a 1-18 team? :o
TLU has some of the most challenging officiating that you have ever seen. Wooster might need double overtime in Seguin. (Dang Yankees!) :D :D :D

Besides, TLU is the best-danged 1-18 team in the country! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 10, 2008, 11:08:41 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 10, 2008, 11:01:43 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 10, 2008, 10:56:37 PM
Quote from: wooscotsfan on February 10, 2008, 10:55:48 PM
Quote from: LogShow on February 10, 2008, 02:20:32 AM
This week was smooth sailing for most of the teams...

It probably depends on the definition of smooth sailing :)

#12 Mary Hardin-Baylor 62 Texas Lutheran 60 in Overtime

Are they really #12 nationally when they have to go to overtime to beat a 1-18 team? :o
TLU has some of the most challenging officiating that you have ever seen. Wooster might need double overtime in Seguin. (Dang Yankees!) :D :D :D

Besides, TLU is the best-danged 1-18 team in the country! ;D

Overtime vs. a 1-18 team = "Ugliest" Win Ever? ;D ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 10, 2008, 11:12:14 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 10, 2008, 11:01:43 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 10, 2008, 10:56:37 PM
Quote from: wooscotsfan on February 10, 2008, 10:55:48 PM
Quote from: LogShow on February 10, 2008, 02:20:32 AM
This week was smooth sailing for most of the teams...

It probably depends on the definition of smooth sailing :)

#12 Mary Hardin-Baylor 62 Texas Lutheran 60 in Overtime

Are they really #12 nationally when they have to go to overtime to beat a 1-18 team? :o
TLU has some of the most challenging officiating that you have ever seen. Wooster might need double overtime in Seguin. (Dang Yankees!) :D :D :D

Besides, TLU is the best-danged 1-18 team in the country! ;D

You bet it is! That same Texas Lutheran team lost at Trinity TX by two points a couple of days after Trinity easily dispatched an Ohio Wesleyan team, 64-53, on a neutral floor at University of Chicago. Yeah, it is comparative scores, but I can then wonder about the quality of the basketball played in the NCAC. Lots of Hiram's, Earlham's, Denison's and Oberlin's around there! :D :D :D

And remember, the president at Earlham needs the athletes to finish their sports so that they will be around to be residence hall counselors and star in the school's dramatical productions* (http://www.d3sports.com/post/index.php?topic=3880.1330). :) ;)

*Please see the citation in post #1330.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 10, 2008, 11:12:46 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on February 10, 2008, 10:55:48 PM
Are they really #12 nationally when they have to go to overtime to beat a 1-18 team? :o

It's conference play. And everyone guns for the leaders.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 10, 2008, 11:16:53 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 10, 2008, 11:12:14 PM

. Yeah, it is comparative scores, but I can then wonder about the quality of the basketball played in the NCAC. Lots of Hiram's, Earlham's, Denison's and Oberlin's around there! :D :D :D

And remember, the president at Earlham needs the athletes to finish their sports so that they will be around to be residence hall counselors and star in the school's dramatical productions (http://www.d3sports.com/post/index.php?topic=3880.1330). :) ;)

Now, Ralph. Earlham had a winning NCAC record in 06 and 05. And Hiram has a chance to win 10 games this year for the first time in, like, a LONG time.

I think this year the Quakers are demonstrating the principles of peace and friendship to their opponents, by allowing them to trample over them mercilessly! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 10, 2008, 11:17:06 PM

Quote from: smedindy on February 10, 2008, 11:12:46 PM
Quote from: wooscotsfan on February 10, 2008, 10:55:48 PM
Are they really #12 nationally when they have to go to overtime to beat a 1-18 team? :o

It's conference play. And everyone guns for the leaders.

+1 Smed!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 11, 2008, 03:38:00 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 10, 2008, 10:56:37 PMTLU has some of the most challenging officiating that you have ever seen. Wooster might need double overtime in Seguin. (Dang Yankees!) :D :D :D

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 10, 2008, 11:01:43 PMBesides, TLU is the best-danged 1-18 team in the country! ;D

Dang?

When TLU walked off the floor after that overtime loss, did they say, "Consarn them Crusaders!"

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 11, 2008, 03:41:51 AM

Quote from: fpc85 on February 10, 2008, 12:31:26 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on February 10, 2008, 10:39:39 AM
Quote from: magicman on February 07, 2008, 02:48:14 AMUMD faces quite possibly their biggest hurdle to an unbeaten regular season in a game at Keene St. on Sat. UMD beat them at home 1st time around 100-97 in OT. I think Keene St." Kleenes" their clock this time around, 87-81. St. Thomas looking to avoid being swept by the Gusties on Sat. I think they win the rematch. Elmhurst will be hard pressed by Illinois Wesleyan on Sat. Titans win a close one at home. Lots of mismatches in this week's action keep the turmoil to a minimum.

Not bad.
mm, let's go to vegas.

I did have a pretty good week with my selections. Thought my guess of only 4 or 5 top 25 losses was the best though, in light of what's happened in the past.

fpc85
I don't think they take D3 bets in Vegas. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on February 12, 2008, 11:28:49 AM

Curious how Capital loses by 17 to Wilmington two weeks ago and they drop only 2 spots in the poll, yet they win both of their games this week and drop 3 spots?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 12, 2008, 12:27:37 PM

Quote from: ScotsFan on February 12, 2008, 11:28:49 AM
Curious how Capital loses by 17 to Wilmington two weeks ago and they drop only 2 spots in the poll, yet they win both of their games this week and drop 3 spots?

Good morning wooscotfan,

Please look at the number of votes that everyone is receiving. When Capital took their third loss, they took the hit. At the same time, there was incredible turmoil in the poll around them.

This week, they are 8 votes out of ninth place. I analyze a poll comparing it to the Perfect Top 25. The Perfect Top 25 means there are no other "receiving votes". #25 received 25 votes total, one vote for 25th on each of the 25 ballots. #1 received all 25 first place votes equaling 625.

In this week's vote, #3 Centre received 508 votes. The "Perfect #3" should have received 575 votes. More voters think that Centre is strong #6, or 500 votes in the Perfect Top 25. Only 107 votes separate #3 Centre and #11 Capital. The perfect #11 should 375 votes. You can see from this way of looking at the voting that there is much uncertainty at this level of the poll. The voters don't think that there is a good choice for #3, #4 or even #5, but they seem to like 9 teams in the range of a solid "#6-#11"!

As seen in the Posters Poll, there is a huge difference in opinion as to the strength of Capital as #11 and Plattsburgh at #12 (325 votes which is a "perfect #13").

This poll is giving us a good understanding that the experts see this season as wide open!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 12, 2008, 12:35:51 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 12, 2008, 10:26:48 AM# 2 UW-Whitewater (18-3) plays at #16 UW-Platteville Wed. and plays at #9 UW-Stevens Point Sat.

Safe to say its a big week for Whitewater and the WIAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 12, 2008, 12:47:47 PM

Quote from: sac on February 12, 2008, 12:35:51 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on February 12, 2008, 10:26:48 AM# 2 UW-Whitewater (18-3) plays at #16 UW-Platteville Wed. and plays at #9 UW-Stevens Point Sat.

Safe to say its a big week for Whitewater and the WIAC.

So I would be safe to say that there is going to be some red this week! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 12, 2008, 01:33:19 PM

Quote from: ScotsFan on February 12, 2008, 11:28:49 AM
Curious how Capital loses by 17 to Wilmington two weeks ago and they drop only 2 spots in the poll, yet they win both of their games this week and drop 3 spots?

I agree with the esteemed Ralph Turner... you can't look at just the week to week poll position changes. Look at the point totals and what else is happening around a team.

Teams can drop after winning three games, simply because voters may be changing their Top 25. The team that dropped a spot... may have earned MORE total points, but so did everyone else!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: old_hooper on February 12, 2008, 08:50:53 PM

David, that was the women's score. The game is still in progress. The game is dead even with 13 minutes to go.

(Referring to the UMD-RIC game). Really? Then the scoreboard (http://www.d3hoops.com/schedule/mens/2008-02-12) is wrong. Thanks!...d

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 12, 2008, 09:07:34 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 12, 2008, 10:26:48 AM# 2 UW-Whitewater (18-3) plays at #16 UW-Platteville Wed. and plays at #9 UW-Stevens Point Sat.

Quote from: sac on February 12, 2008, 12:35:51 PM
Safe to say its a big week for Whitewater and the WIAC.

To top it off, Whitewater hosts #24 Oshkosh the following Wednesday.

WIAC Standings
Whitewater and Platteville are 10-2
Oshkosh 10-3
Stevens Point 9-3

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: old_hooper on February 12, 2008, 09:30:24 PM

UMD fall to RIC 79-70. Huge win for RIC as they apparently are in the drivers seat now for conference home court advantage.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on February 12, 2008, 09:38:48 PM

You took the words right out of my fingers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 12, 2008, 09:39:07 PM

Quote from: old_hooper on February 12, 2008, 09:30:24 PM
UMD fall to RIC 79-70. Huge win for RIC as they apparently are in the drivers seat now for conference home court advantage.

UMD radio guy said 79-72 a couple of times, as a UMD player hit a buzzer-beater. Was it later waved off?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on February 13, 2008, 08:55:25 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 12, 2008, 12:27:37 PM
Quote from: ScotsFan on February 12, 2008, 11:28:49 AM
Curious how Capital loses by 17 to Wilmington two weeks ago and they drop only 2 spots in the poll, yet they win both of their games this week and drop 3 spots?
Good morning wooscotfan,

Um, I'm not wooscotsfan but thanks for the lesson anyways...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 13, 2008, 09:10:08 AM

Quote from: ScotsFan on February 13, 2008, 08:55:25 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 12, 2008, 12:27:37 PM
Quote from: ScotsFan on February 12, 2008, 11:28:49 AM
Curious how Capital loses by 17 to Wilmington two weeks ago and they drop only 2 spots in the poll, yet they win both of their games this week and drop 3 spots?
Good morning wooscotfan,
Um, I'm not wooscotsfan but thanks for the lesson anyways...

My bad! :-[

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 13, 2008, 11:41:45 AM

For anyone interested in watching a good game online tonight, #8 Augustana (17-4, 8-2) plays @ Wheaton (16-5, 6-4) at 7:30pm CST. It's a huge game in the CCIW race. The quality of WETN's stream is generally very good.

http://www.wheaton.edu/wetn/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hope1 on February 13, 2008, 09:15:37 PM

hope won tonight 70 to 48 over adrian

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 13, 2008, 09:59:54 PM

Final: #14 Wooster 82 Denison 64

Wooster was paced by All American James Cooper with 16 points, Evan Will with 13 points, freshman Bryan Wickliffe with 12 and Devin Fulk with 10. With this road win, Scots are now 19-3 and they host Wittenberg this Saturday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 14, 2008, 01:09:13 PM

It always seems that after an undefeated losses their first game there are always a few more losses that happen soon after. Hopefully UMD can recover, it would be too bad if they fall apart now after such a great season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on February 15, 2008, 10:18:10 PM

Successful season yes. Great season....debatable. Their marquee win was Brandeis at Home in OT, then they struggled through wins against sub par ball clubs, some blow outs along the way too, but with that schedule getting through Brandeis was really the only really tough game on their schedule. Not to take anything away from them, but had a team like Rochester or Amherst run the table it would have been much much more impressive given their schedules.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 15, 2008, 10:22:12 PM

WashU wins in ridiculous fashion (see UAA board) and Brandeis beats Rochester by 3 at home. Chicago and CMU also won.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on February 16, 2008, 12:14:58 AM

Actually brandeis won by 4 68-64

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 16, 2008, 12:22:40 AM

Quote from: ILive4This on February 16, 2008, 12:14:58 AM
Actually brandeis won by 4 68-64

Sorry, i missed the FT with 1 second left.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Downtown on February 16, 2008, 01:15:34 AM

So far 3 Top 10 team's have lost this week.

With Whitewater going to Stevens Point tomorrow, it will be 4.

What a crazy year in the polls.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 16, 2008, 04:13:13 AM

Plattsburgh State keeps rolling along with an 87-68 win over New Paltz St. They remain unbeaten in conference play at 13-0 and looking to become the 1st SUNYAC team to run the table since 1988 I believe. Pre-Season All American Anthony Williams led the Cardinals with 30 pts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Jacketfan2011 on February 16, 2008, 08:00:04 AM

Quote from: hugenerd on February 16, 2008, 12:22:40 AM
Quote from: ILive4This on February 16, 2008, 12:14:58 AM
Actually brandeis won by 4 68-64

Sorry, i missed the FT with 1 second left.

You should play for UR

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BoomerIL on February 16, 2008, 11:42:41 AM

When Rochester gets back to campus, the coach needs to have all of his players practice shooting 100 free throws everyday before, during, or after practice. I DON'T CARE WHEN, BUT IT NEEDS TO IMPROVE. THEY HAVE BEEN HORRIBLE THE LAST FOUR GAMES FROM THE FREE-THROW LINE!!!!!!!!!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 16, 2008, 12:31:19 PM

Quote from: BoomerIL on February 16, 2008, 11:42:41 AM
When Rochester gets back to campus, the coach needs to have all of his players practice shooting 100 free throws everyday before, during, or after practice. I DON'T CARE WHEN, BUT IT NEEDS TO IMPROVE. THEY HAVE BEEN HORRIBLE THE LAST FOUR GAMES FROM THE FREE-THROW LINE!!!!!!!!!!!

12-23 is horrible............6-8, 5-7 and 6-10 is debatable.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BoomerIL on February 16, 2008, 12:42:35 PM

sac.....

I probably should have been more specific as to who needs free-throw practice, and this doesn't include last nights game.

25-71, 58-96, 9-21 is not very good for some of your key players, especially when they can get to the line more so than some others.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on February 16, 2008, 04:50:44 PM

#3 Centre beat DePauw on the road for its 21st in a row: 69-66.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on February 16, 2008, 06:43:04 PM

In the Brandeis at Rochester game, brandeis used the tactic of sending Nbizu? to the line with like 3 minutes left in the game, because they were confident they would not score more than 1 point on that possession if any at all. That is how they clawed back to within like 3 points that game before eventually falling by 6.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 16, 2008, 07:10:05 PM

UW Superior 70 #16 UW Platteville 59

#9 UW Stevens 76 #2 UW Whitewater 47 OUCH!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 16, 2008, 08:17:57 PM

Plattsburgh St. beats Oneonta St. 83-59 to go to 21-2. Pre-season All American Anthony Williams has 29 pts to set the schools all time scoring record with a 3 year career total of 1562 pts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on February 16, 2008, 08:20:48 PM

Looked at live stats and #9 UWSP has beat #2 UW Whitewater by 29.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on February 16, 2008, 09:30:39 PM

Quote from: Jacketfan2011 on February 16, 2008, 08:00:04 AM
Quote from: hugenerd on February 16, 2008, 12:22:40 AM
Quote from: ILive4This on February 16, 2008, 12:14:58 AM
Actually brandeis won by 4 68-64

Sorry, i missed the FT with 1 second left.

You should play for UR

Seriously one of the funniest things I have read in ages. If I could give you more than 1 karma point I would.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Jacketfan2011 on February 16, 2008, 10:11:03 PM

Quote from: ILive4This on February 16, 2008, 09:30:39 PM
Quote from: Jacketfan2011 on February 16, 2008, 08:00:04 AM
Quote from: hugenerd on February 16, 2008, 12:22:40 AM
Quote from: ILive4This on February 16, 2008, 12:14:58 AM
Actually brandeis won by 4 68-64

Sorry, i missed the FT with 1 second left.

You should play for UR

Seriously one of the funniest things I have read in ages. If I could give you more than 1 karma point I would.

Thank you....I'll be here all week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Cards7580 on February 17, 2008, 12:02:04 AM

It's good to have a sense of humor :o even about foul shooting ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 17, 2008, 01:01:55 AM

Quote from: BoomerIL on February 16, 2008, 12:42:35 PM
sac.....

I probably should have been more specific as to who needs free-throw practice, and this doesn't include last nights game.

25-71, 58-96, 9-21 is not very good for some of your key players, especially when they can get to the line more so than some others.

So the guy shooting 9-21 gets to the line once a game? He's a key player? ??? ;D

Quote from: sac on February 16, 2008, 07:10:05 PM
UW Superior 70 #16 UW Platteville 59

#9 UW Stevens 76 #2 UW Whitewater 47 OUCH!

Game Story and Boxscore link (http://athletics.uwsp.edu/News/mbball/2008/2/16/mbbwhitewater021608.asp?path=mbball)

I'm not sure what is more of a surprise, that Point beat Whitewater by that much or that Superior simply beat Platteville.

Great game at Point tonight with 2400+ there to see it. It was a tight game throughout the first half with Whitewater taking a slim 30-29 lead into the break. With the score 34-32 Whitewater, Point went on a ridiculous 23-2 run in about an 8-minute span. Great hustle and defense along with Whitewater's poor shooting contributed to it.

With Platteville's loss, Oshkosh, Point and Whitewater all sit at 11-3 with two games to go. Platteville sits a further game back. This week's schedule includes Oshkosh at Whitewater and Point at Platteville.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 17, 2008, 01:05:29 AM

Quote from: Cards7580 on February 17, 2008, 12:02:04 AM
It's good to have a sense of humor :o even about foul shooting ;D

I know, I love hunting quail..................<crickets>

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 17, 2008, 01:10:11 AM

Platteville WI to Superior WI -- 363 miles, 6 hrs 18 minutes on a good day!

Nuff said...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 17, 2008, 01:29:37 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 17, 2008, 01:10:11 AM
Platteville WI to Superior WI -- 363 miles, 6 hrs 18 minutes on a good day!

Nuff said...

Whitewater to Superior -- 361 miles, 5 hrs 54 minutes also on a good day

Whitewater 86 Superior 55

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 17, 2008, 02:02:47 AM

To Pat Coleman and the D3Hoops team:

Nice to see the change to the daily scoreboard listing the top 25 teams as the first scores on the page. Good decision.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 17, 2008, 02:04:41 AM

Yeah -- about time PrestoSports replicated something D3Scoreboard did for us almost all of last season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Jacketfan2011 on February 17, 2008, 06:42:20 AM

Quote from: Cards7580 on February 17, 2008, 12:02:04 AM
It's good to have a sense of humor :o even about foul shooting ;D

I laugh to hide my tears....

In the oft-referenced UR/Plattsburgh game of last year, a look at the stats reveals that it was foul shooting that doomed UR, not a 40 foot jump shot. While UR did not have a stellar shooting day overall, their 29.4% from 3 and 41.1% overall were better than Plattsburghs 25% and 37.3% respectively. The difference was Plattsburgh was 12-14 from the line and UR only managed 9-15. Repsectable but championship caliber. It is obviously a weekness that teams can and do gameplan around.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 17, 2008, 08:39:19 AM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on February 17, 2008, 01:01:55 AM

So the guy shooting 9-21 gets to the line once a game? He's a key player? ??? ;D

Some players avoid the line like the plague. Kim Hughes played 490 minutes one season in the NBA and shot TWO free throws. One year, he started almost every game and shot just 69. And he was the center. So it happens!

The player in question averages 16 minutes a game. Not like he's just a garbage man.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Rhodes Scholar on February 17, 2008, 09:20:56 AM

I remember Kim Hughes. He was reluctant to shoot uncontested layups. Another player like that was Gerald Govan of the Utah Stars. Both of these guys could rebound and defend, but neither one had any offensive skills.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 17, 2008, 12:15:48 PM

Quote from: smedindy on February 17, 2008, 08:39:19 AM
The player in question averages 16 minutes a game. Not like he's just a garbage man.

That's fine, but it's not like the guy is going to the line 105 times and making only 45 of them! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 17, 2008, 01:53:18 PM

Quote from: Marty Peretz on January 26, 2008, 09:56:07 PM
Pat and Dave, you're both right in principle, but having seen Emory play, I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you. I really don't mean any disrespect to Emory, but they simply are not a very good basketball game.

You ready to believe yet?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 17, 2008, 02:13:22 PM

NYU 92
Rochester 85 (2 OT)

Rochester couldn't close it out in regulation or in the first OT. They missed some key FT's. NYU hit a bit 3 to send it to double OT, where they jumped on Rochester.

Exciting broadcast to listen to - I tuned in with 2:00 to play in regulation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 17, 2008, 02:15:07 PM

Titan Q - you and I tuned in at about the same point. Great game... but Rochester lost this game. Bad free-throw shooting and NYU was very solid from the line.

Believe it or not, but Rochester is putting themselves in a situation where they may not make the tournament!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 17, 2008, 02:15:33 PM

The UAA and CCIW seem very similar this year with all of the parity and close games between top half teams and bottom half teams. Really fun leagues to follow.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 17, 2008, 02:22:46 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on February 17, 2008, 02:15:33 PM
The UAA and CCIW seem very similar this year with all of the parity and close games between top half teams and bottom half teams. Really fun leagues to follow.

Don't forget the WIAC! lol...

Eau Claire (5-9 in WIAC), beat Platteville (10-4) and Oshkosh (11-3). Superior (5-10) just beat Platteville. And there have been a lot of games where bottom half teams put in big scares against those top half teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BoomerIL on February 17, 2008, 02:54:55 PM

I am a Rochester "homer" but as I mentioned in a previous post, their free-throw shooting has really hurt them. I even think it has gotten into their heads that they can't make free-throws. I also mentioned like Dave "d-mac" Mchugh said, this loss could have possibly kept them from the tournament if not close to it.

There is no excuse for this to happen as they have a very good team!! I hope there is time to re-group.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 17, 2008, 03:19:27 PM

Why #14 Wooster (20-3) should be ranked in the #6 to #10 range?

1. Five Players back who played significant minutes on last year's Final 4 Team (Evan Will, Brandon Johnson, Marty Bidwell, Devin Fulk, James Cooper).

2. All-American James Cooper is shooting 54% from the floor (52% on three pointers, 57 of 110). He delivers this season when Wooster needs points.

3. Three Losses were all on the road to above .500 teams by a combined 7 points. Wooster avenged one of the losses by beating Wittenberg last night (Cooper had 24 points).

4. Quality Wins (St. Thomas 20-3, Walsh 22-4, Farmingdale 19-4, others)

5. Freshman Bryan Wickliffe 6'5" is starting and shooting 56% (10+ ppg). Wooster has 5 players averaging double figures and the 6th at 9.7 ppg.

6. Team Stats are very similar to Last Year (shooting higher 45.5 % on three pointers)

Several ranked teams currently above Wooster have either lost at home (Brandeis & Augustana twice, Capital, Rochester, Stevens Point), lost to teams with records now below .500 (Mary Hardin-Baylor twice, Capital, Augustana, Rochester) or now have a total of 4 or 5 losses on the season.

Acknowledging my obvious bias, it is still hard to understand why Wooster is ranked below them?? :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 17, 2008, 03:37:02 PM

I think that last year's performance tends to lose its relevance somewhere in early December. You make some other valid points, aside from Farmingdale being a quality win. :)

However, not all schedules are created equal. I don't think Wooster would be 20-3 playing some of those other schedules.

I'll agree on UMHB but not entirely sure I'd agree about anyone else as of last week's poll. After today is done, however, it may be a different story.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on February 17, 2008, 03:38:27 PM

When we are talking quality wins, Brandeis has defeated both Amherst and Rochester both have been number 1 teams, they have losses to a team that climbed to #1 and another that climbed to #2, that means that the only questionable loss no matter where it was played was the loss to Chicago (who also defeated Rochester).

Scoring in double figures really does not mean anything. If your team plays a system (which I know Wooster doesnt) then you are going to score more points per game. How is their Points Against Average? How many players score in double figures against the scots?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: goscots on February 17, 2008, 03:54:00 PM

This is the first time all season I have seen a post lobbying for Wooster to be higher in the poll then they are. I think the position where they are is fine considering the 'body of work' they have done this season. Looking at DC's latest Top 25 update it doesn't look like Wooster will move much, if at all, this week. But in my heart I believe they have improved quite a bit throughout the season and have in fact become a top 10 team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 17, 2008, 04:04:11 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on February 17, 2008, 03:19:27 PMSeveral ranked teams currently above Wooster have either lost at home (Brandeis & Augustana twice, Capital, Rochester, Stevens Point), lost to teams with records now below .500 (Mary Hardin-Baylor twice, Capital, Augustana, Rochester) or now have a total of 4 or 5 losses on the season.

Acknowledging my obvious bias, it is still hard to understand why Wooster is ranked below them?? :)

Here is a fair question -- what do you think Wooster's record would be with, say, Augustana's schedule?

http://www.d3hoops.com/school/AUGU/m/2008

Massey has Wooster's strength of schedule as #100...Augustana is #5.

http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&sub=III&mid=1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 17, 2008, 04:04:59 PM

Quote from: ILive4This on February 17, 2008, 03:38:27 PM
Scoring in double figures really does not mean anything. If your team plays a system (which I know Wooster doesnt) then you are going to score more points per game. How is their Points Against Average? How many players score in double figures against the scots?

Wooster is giving up 70.0 ppg (Brandeis opponents are at 69.4). Wooster averages 86.3 ppg on offense so their scoring differential is +16.3. Wooster also holds their opponents to only 32.4% on three pointers while they shoot 45.5% themselves. Wooster is also +7 on their rebounding margin this year.

My only point about 5 players in double figures was that Wooster has good scoring balance and James Cooper is not their only offensive threat.

I know that comparative scores are not completely reliable but Brandeis and Wooster both played a common opponent at home this year.

Brandeis 70 Kenyon 61
Wooster 81 Kenyon 63

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 17, 2008, 04:11:03 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on February 17, 2008, 03:19:27 PM
...
Several ranked teams currently above Wooster have either lost at home (Brandeis & Augustana twice, Capital, Rochester, Stevens Point), lost to teams with records now below .500 (Mary Hardin-Baylor twice, Capital, Augustana, Rochester) or now have a total of 4 or 5 losses on the season.

Acknowledging my obvious bias, it is still hard to understand why Wooster is ranked below them?? :)

Point of clarification, wooscotfan.

UMHB has only one loss to a sub .500 team. That was a road loss to McMurry at the end of a tough road trip. UMHB had made the 3.5 hour bus ride to Abilene for the Thursday game. They spent the night in Abilene Thursday and Friday night and then played on Saturday.

IMHO, the toughest conferences for travel in D3 are the UAA, (the plane flights), the SCAC (long flights or bus rides), the ASC (3-8 hour bus rides and 2-3 nights on the road, 4-6 times per year in the conference), and the NWC.

UMHB caught McMurry at the absolute best that McMurry was this year. McMurry had gotten 2005 All-Conference center Travis Tennison back at semester, and he had gotten "up to speed". Tennison was able to neutralize UMHB big men, including Ryan Burgart. (Tennison has since been on medical leave for the last 6 games.) UMHB also had trouble with (possible ASC-West POTY) HSU Center Mardochee Jean. A dominating post will give UMHB trouble.

If UMHB beats HSU this week at home, then I believe that they have answered the challenge to remain in the Top 20.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 17, 2008, 04:11:59 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on February 17, 2008, 04:04:59 PM
Quote from: ILive4This on February 17, 2008, 03:38:27 PM
Scoring in double figures really does not mean anything. If your team plays a system (which I know Wooster doesnt) then you are going to score more points per game. How is their Points Against Average? How many players score in double figures against the scots?

Wooster is giving up 70.0 ppg (Brandeis opponents are at 69.4). Wooster averages 86.3 ppg on offense so their scoring differential is +16.3. Wooster also holds their opponents to only 32.4% on three pointers while they shoot 45.5% themselves. Wooster is also +7 on their rebounding margin this year.

My only point about 5 players in double figures was that Wooster has good scoring balance and James Cooper is not their only offensive threat.

I know that comparative scores are not completely reliable but Brandeis and Wooster both played a common opponent at home this year.

Brandeis 70 Kenyon 61
Wooster 81 Kenyon 63

Again, very hard - maybe even misleading - to compare stats from a team with the 9th toughest schedule (Brandeis, per Massey) vs the 100th toughest.

The bottom half of the NCAC makes it very hard every season to accurately gauge Wooster and Wittenberg.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 17, 2008, 04:21:15 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on February 17, 2008, 04:04:11 PM
Quote from: wooscotsfan on February 17, 2008, 03:19:27 PMSeveral ranked teams currently above Wooster have either lost at home (Brandeis & Augustana twice, Capital, Rochester, Stevens Point), lost to teams with records now below .500 (Mary Hardin-Baylor twice, Capital, Augustana, Rochester) or now have a total of 4 or 5 losses on the season.

Acknowledging my obvious bias, it is still hard to understand why Wooster is ranked below them?? :)

Here is a fair question -- what do you think Wooster's record would be with, say, Augustana's schedule?

http://www.d3hoops.com/school/AUGU/m/2008

Massey has Wooster's strength of schedule as #100...Augustana is #5.

http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&sub=III&mid=1

Good point that Augustana has a tougher schedule than Wooster.:) I still question Augustana's top 10 ranking though when they have lost at home to UW La Crosse (now 11-13) and on the road at North Park (now 12-11). It will be interesting to see if the Vikings drop in the next poll now that they have picked up their 5th loss.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on February 17, 2008, 04:34:43 PM

Also Brandeis played Kenyon in the second game of the season... and a win is a win, especially a 9 point victory in the start of the season when your trying to figure out how your lineup will work for the year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 17, 2008, 04:37:26 PM

I watched the Wooster/Witt game online........I think they might be a little underrated. They have a lot of good looking players, and Cooper's as good of a guard as you will find at the D3 level.

My only concern was defensive intensity, which wasn't quite up to what I see in the MIAA every week, but then the MIAA is currently beating the crap out of each other on defense. Wooster played well enough on D to hold Witt to 61 points, and it would have been a blow out if Witt wasn't playing PlayStation3 from 3 for a half of the game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 17, 2008, 04:46:50 PM

Quote from: ILive4This on February 17, 2008, 04:34:43 PM
Also Brandeis played Kenyon in the second game of the season... and a win is a win, especially a 9 point victory in the start of the season when your trying to figure out how your lineup will work for the year.

A win is a win...True Dat! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 17, 2008, 06:32:46 PM

HOW THEY FARED (week of Feb. 11-17) (COMPLETE)

#   1   Amherst (22-2) def. Trinity (CT) 69-58
#   2   UW-Whitewater (19-4) won at #16 UW-Platteville 70-66 and lost at #9 UW-Stevens Point 76-47
#   3   Centre (21-1) won at DePauw 69-66
#   4   Hope (19-3) won at Adrian 70-48 and def. Alma 92-43
#   5   Mass.-Dartmouth (21-2) lost to Rhode Island Coll. 79-72 and won at Eastern Conn. 80-76
#   6   Rochester (17-5) lost at #10 Brandeis 68-64 and lost at NYU 92-85 (2 OT)
#   7   Washington U. (18-4) won at Case Western Reserve 71-68 and won at Emory 78-71 (OT)
#   8   Augustana (18-5) lost at Wheaton (IL) 73-60 and won at Millikin 59-56
#   9   UW-Stevens Point (19-4) won at UW-Eau Claire 89-68 and def. #2 UW-Whitewater 76-47
#   10   Brandeis (18-4) def. #6 Rochester 68-64 and def. Carnegie Mellon 84-81
#   11   Capital (20-3) won at Mt. Union 80-68 and def. Ohio Northern 83-75
#   12   Plattsburgh St. (21-2) def. New Paltz St. 87-68 and def. Oneonta St. 83-59
#   13   Mary Hardin-Baylor (20-3) won at Howard Payne 71-68 and won at Sul Ross St. 78-58
#   14   Wooster (20-3) won at Denison 82-64 and def. Wittenberg 66-61
#   15   Guilford (19-4) won at Hampden-Sydney 78-71, def. Bridgewater (VA) 77-69, and def. Eastern Mennonite 100-93
#   16   UW-Platteville (17-6) lost to #2 UW-Whitewater 70-66 and lost at UW-Superior 70-59
#   17   St. Thomas (20-3) def. Augsburg 72-60
#   18   Occidental (19-3) won at Redlands 83-80 (OT) and lost to Pomona-Pitzer 62-47
#   19   Ursinus (21-2) won at Franklin & Marshall 77-60 and won at Dickinson 88-62
#   20   Stevens (20-4) def. Hunter 69-55 and lost at Utica 65-59
#   21   Puget Sound (17-5) won at Whitman 104-67 and lost at Whitworth 80-78
#   22   Lawrence (18-2) won at Ripon 87-83 and def. Beloit 72-48
#   23   Virginia Wesleyan (19-5) won at Eastern Mennonite 78-68 and won at Randolph-Macon 69-66
#   24   UW-Oshkosh (17-6) won at UW-River Falls 80-63
#   25   Maryville (TN) (21-2) won at Huntingdon 69-61

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: OLD STUDENT/ATHLETE on February 17, 2008, 07:19:48 PM

As a Centre fan, I consider it an honor to be ranked ahead of Wooster. I agree that they should be ranked higher. Our trip to Wooster in the NCAA
tournament last year was like a trip to Duke or North Carolina. The gym, the fans, the size of the school, campus, were very impressive. If they still have the post player who had the cast on his arm last year, they will have to be reckoned with. Also, they had a very deep bench, and have a lot of experience in post season play. One of my favorite teams outside of Centre. A great academic school also!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 17, 2008, 07:26:21 PM

Quote from: OLD STUDENT/ATHLETE on February 17, 2008, 07:19:48 PM
As a Centre fan, I consider it an honor to be ranked ahead of Wooster. I agree that they should be ranked higher. Our trip to Wooster in the NCAA
tournament last year was like a trip to Duke or North Carolina. The gym, the fans, the size of the school, campus, were very impressive. If they still have the post player who had the cast on his arm last year, they will have to be reckoned with. Also, they had a very deep bench, and have a lot of experience in post season play. One of my favorite teams outside of Centre. A great academic school also!

That was Tim Vandervaart, and he's been graduated. But thanks for the well-wishes. I know that Centre gained a lot of fans in northeast Ohio that weekend as well. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on February 17, 2008, 07:54:55 PM

Quote from: OLD STUDENT/ATHLETE on February 17, 2008, 07:19:48 PM
As a Centre fan, I consider it an honor to be ranked ahead of Wooster. I agree that they should be ranked higher. Our trip to Wooster in the NCAA
tournament last year was like a trip to Duke or North Carolina. The gym, the fans, the size of the school, campus, were very impressive. If they still have the post player who had the cast on his arm last year, they will have to be reckoned with. Also, they had a very deep bench, and have a lot of experience in post season play. One of my favorite teams outside of Centre. A great academic school also!

Agree with OLD STUDENT/ATHLETE. Wooster was one heck of a program last year, and they're apparently repeating it this year even without Tom Port. I was there last March for the D3 tournament also pulling for Centre and the fan support in their gym for the Scots was pretty amazing. Many townspeople come out for the games, and they weren't real pleased when some of the Centre fans were taking their "season ticket" seats for the game between Centre & Wooster. Other than that, they were true basketball fans. Definitely a bigtime D3 basketball venue and program.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 17, 2008, 09:34:34 PM

Quote from: OxyBob on February 17, 2008, 09:23:00 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 17, 2008, 04:11:03 PM
UMHB has only one loss to a sub .500 team. That was a road loss to McMurry at the end of a tough road trip. UMHB had made the 3.5 hour bus ride to Abilene for the Thursday game. They spent the night in Abilene Thursday and Friday night and then played on Saturday.

God almighty, there is no limit to the extent shameless homers will go to explain away, justify or excuse a loss by a team from their favorite school or conference.

OxyBob

And on the SCIAC board you made no attempt to 'spin' Oxy's inexplicable stomping at home by a mediocre Pomona team. +k for both wit and consistency! ;)

[PS, Oxy was still in my PP top 25, though barely.]

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on February 17, 2008, 09:40:18 PM

So with a "losing streak" how far does UMD spiral down. It was always just a matter of time, until a loss or especially two hurt them hard in the polls with their weak schedule.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on February 17, 2008, 09:52:47 PM

OXY BOB how did you accumulate such a high karma rating?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 17, 2008, 10:00:17 PM

Circle of friends who give a round of applause every 24 hours, no doubt.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 17, 2008, 10:07:50 PM

Quote from: ILive4This on February 17, 2008, 09:40:18 PM
So with a "losing streak" how far does UMD spiral down. It was always just a matter of time, until a loss or especially two hurt them hard in the polls with their weak schedule.

Hmm... last time I checked they beat Eastern Connecticut St. yesterday. So I am guessing the losing streak is over. Though I am quite sure they will lose that remaining first place vote and fall a little bit. But, that being said, they are still 21-2!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 17, 2008, 10:27:53 PM

Quote from: OxyBob on February 17, 2008, 10:01:30 PM
Quote from: ILive4This on February 17, 2008, 09:52:47 PM
OXY BOB how did you accumulate such a high karma rating?

Through excellence, perseverance and really good grammar. Also, by having that certain joie de vivre, and by calling out all shameless homers.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 17, 2008, 10:00:17 PM
Circle of friends who give a round of applause every 24 hours, no doubt.

There's that, too.

OxyBob

As an outsider that often reads the SCIAC boad, I always enjoy reading OxyBob's posts because they are insightful, filled with substance, and witty. I feel he often raises good points and finds very witty ways to argue other's reasoning. At the very worst it adds a bit of comedy to the boards, but he seems to be catching a bit of a bad rap.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 17, 2008, 10:35:49 PM

Quote from: OxyBob on February 17, 2008, 09:45:53 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 17, 2008, 09:34:34 PM
Quote from: OxyBob on February 17, 2008, 09:23:00 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 17, 2008, 04:11:03 PM
UMHB has only one loss to a sub .500 team. That was a road loss to McMurry at the end of a tough road trip. UMHB had made the 3.5 hour bus ride to Abilene for the Thursday game. They spent the night in Abilene Thursday and Friday night and then played on Saturday.
God almighty, there is no limit to the extent shameless homers will go to explain away, justify or excuse a loss by a team from their favorite school or conference.
And on the SCIAC board you made no attempt to 'spin' Oxy's inexplicable stomping at home by a mediocre Pomona team.

And speaking of shameless homers, here's the World Renowned IWU/CCIW Apologist and Excuse Maker, Mr. Ypsi, on hand to back Ralph Turner.

I offered no excuses for Oxy's loss to Pomona; the Tigers got beat.

Quote
Eyewitness report from Eagle Rock:

Pomona 62, Oxy 47

The Sagehens were red-hot in the first half and handily defeated the Tigers, snapping Oxy's 9-game winning streak. Pomona took a 14-4 lead, then hit 4 straight 3s to break the game open, and led 34-14 at the half. Pomona shot 59% on 13-for-22 (6-for-8 3s). Oxy made a little run in the second half, cutting the lead to 13 at 50-37, but that was as close as the Tigers would get.

Quote[PS, Oxy was still in my PP top 25, though barely.]

And to top it off, there's the "Who Cares?" capper to your post.

OxyBob

Well, the high karma obviously did not come from accurately reading posts! OB, I clearly stated that you did NOT 'spin' the Oxy loss - some of us are not as cynical or snarky as you, and actually mean what we say.

There's also the little matter of the part of my post you conveniently did NOT quote: "+k for both wit and consistency". I doubt even you are snarky enough to award karma when you "actually" are accusing another of INconsistency and hypocrisy.

Oh well, no good deed goes unpunished. :(

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on February 17, 2008, 11:40:58 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on February 17, 2008, 03:19:27 PM
Why #14 Wooster (20-3) should be ranked in the #6 to #10 range?

Five Players back who played significant minutes on last year's Final 4 Team (Evan Will, Brandon Johnson, Marty Bidwell, Devin Fulk, James Cooper).

All-American James Cooper is shooting 54% from the floor (52% on three pointers, 57 of 110). He delivers this season when Wooster needs points.

I agree with most of your points WSF (the two above in particular), and while I am interested with where my alma mater gets ranked, I'm not too troubled by it so long as Woo continues to win and secures an NCAA bid. Then they can just prove or disprove the rating on the gym floor in March.

I do think the Wooster team I'm watching play now is significantly improved over the one I saw in November- and maybe even January...but I don't doubt that this is true of plenty of teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 18, 2008, 12:33:45 AM

Quote from: LogShow on February 17, 2008, 10:27:53 PM
Quote from: OxyBob on February 17, 2008, 10:01:30 PM
Quote from: ILive4This on February 17, 2008, 09:52:47 PM
OXY BOB how did you accumulate such a high karma rating?

Through excellence, perseverance and really good grammar. Also, by having that certain joie de vivre, and by calling out all shameless homers.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 17, 2008, 10:00:17 PM
Circle of friends who give a round of applause every 24 hours, no doubt.

There's that, too.

OxyBob

As an outsider that often reads the SCIAC boad, I always enjoy reading OxyBob's posts because they are insightful, filled with substance, and witty. I feel he often raises good points and finds very witty ways to argue other's reasoning. At the very worst it adds a bit of comedy to the boards, but he seems to be catching a bit of a bad rap.

As a fellow outsider and reader of the SCIAC board, I agree. Perhaps the 'bad rap' comes from attacking even those who are supporting him? While I readily admit to being a 'homer', to the best of my recollection (OB will probably dig up a contrary post) my only 'excuse' for Oxy's rout of my Titans was that they were heavily dependent on freshmen (and are NOW much improved over December) and (obviously tongue-in-cheek) "how can you expect a bunch of Illinois teenagers, suddenly transported to what passes for summer, to concentrate on basketball".

Or perhaps the 'bad rap' comes from offering gratuitous insults to those who say they are supporting his team?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 18, 2008, 02:16:04 AM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on February 17, 2008, 04:21:15 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on February 17, 2008, 04:04:11 PM
Quote from: wooscotsfan on February 17, 2008, 03:19:27 PMSeveral ranked teams currently above Wooster have either lost at home (Brandeis & Augustana twice, Capital, Rochester, Stevens Point), lost to teams with records now below .500 (Mary Hardin-Baylor twice, Capital, Augustana, Rochester) or now have a total of 4 or 5 losses on the season.

Acknowledging my obvious bias, it is still hard to understand why Wooster is ranked below them?? :)

Here is a fair question -- what do you think Wooster's record would be with, say, Augustana's schedule?

http://www.d3hoops.com/school/AUGU/m/2008

Massey has Wooster's strength of schedule as #100...Augustana is #5.

http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&sub=III&mid=1

Good point that Augustana has a tougher schedule than Wooster.:) I still question Augustana's top 10 ranking though when they have lost at home to UW La Crosse (now 11-13) and on the road at North Park (now 12-11).

Why single out NPU for your secondhand opprobrium? Augie also lost at Carthage, which is also now 12-11 ... and NPU beat Carthage at Carthage. ;)

The point is that the CCIW is a very tough, very top-to-bottom competitive conference. I think that the pollsters realize that, which is why they're much more apt to cut some slack to a ranked CCIW team that loses on the road to a team of lesser record (albeit a winning lesser record) within the circuit than they would for a ranked team from a less-respected league. Same goes for ranked teams from the WIAC, the NESCAC, and the UAA.

The gap between the also-rans in the CCIW and the also-rans in the NCAC is so wide that if you're going to cast aspersions about Augie's CCIW losses in an effort to bolster Wooster's case, then your arguments will amount to what my MIAC friend Columbian Maffia refers to as "weak sauce". :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on February 18, 2008, 09:17:51 AM

I am in the Wooster camp in that I moved them up in my Posters Poll ballot this week. That was a big win Saturday against Wittenberg at Timken. That rivalry has produced some good games over the years with the road team sometimes winning. Having watched Wooster play twice in the tournament last year, I'd reviewed their 2006-07 statistics pretty thoroughly. What struck me about them was the average margin of victory, high shooting percentage in all facets - FG, 3FG, FT - and balanced scoring. 2007-08 doesn't look much different statistically. Shooting better than 50% from the field and 45% on 3's is mightly impressive given the strength of their conference and overall schedule. Wooster may have the horses to again make a final four. One thing I know is my team of choice - Centre - would prefer to not have to go through Wooster to advance in the tourney. Wooster's home court is a big advantage for them. If Wooster wins out, look for them to crack the top 10.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 18, 2008, 10:13:38 AM

Is there anyone on this board who is deep down not a homer about some team or league? Even the poobahs of the site have their schools which they root for, deep down.

So let's just chillllllll...and all agree that the NCAC rules! (Hah...not!)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on February 18, 2008, 12:47:38 PM

I understand that UMD is still 21-2 but how would they have faired in Amherst's schedule? or Rochester's schedule (who I am sure will drop a bit this week)? Or the other way around, would rochester be 23-0 with UMD's schedule? I really wish there were an RPI system to look at.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 18, 2008, 12:58:45 PM

Quote from: ILive4This on February 18, 2008, 12:47:38 PM
I understand that UMD is still 21-2 but how would they have faired in Amherst's schedule? or Rochester's schedule (who I am sure will drop a bit this week)? Or the other way around, would rochester be 23-0 with UMD's schedule? I really wish there were an RPI system to look at.

As a purely objective poll, Massey is pretty good.

http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&sub=III&mid=1

UMD is #33 (through Wed 2/13)

Strength of schedule leaders:

1. Chicago - UAA
2. Babson - NEWMAC
3. Emory - UAA
4. Washington MO - UAA
5. Augustana IL - CCIW
6. WI Oshkosh - WIAC
7. Rochester NY - UAA
8. WI Stout - WIAC
9. Brandeis - UAA
10. WI Platteville - WIAC
11. IL Wesleyan - CCIW
12. N Central IL - CCIW
13. Carnegie Mellon - UAA
14. WI Stevens Pt - WIAC
15. Roanoke - ODAC
16. WI LaCrosse - WIAC
17. Wheaton IL - CCIW
18. Willamette - NWC
19. Guilford - ODAC
20. Wartburg - IIAC
21. Amherst - NESCAC
22. Carthage - CCIW
23. Springfield - NEWMAC
24. Trinity CT - NESCAC
25. Monmouth IL - MWC

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 18, 2008, 01:33:34 PM

I was surprised at Babson being so high, but man, they loaded their schedule up with UAA and NESCAC teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 18, 2008, 04:02:46 PM

I think #18 Willamette played a lot of D2's and NAIA 1's

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 18, 2008, 05:25:02 PM

Quote from: LogShow on February 18, 2008, 04:02:46 PM
I think #18 Willamette played a lot of D2's and NAIA 1's

That and $5.00 buys you a "vente". ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on February 18, 2008, 09:34:43 PM

As a Centre supporter, I thank whomever gave us the single #1 vote in the poll this week!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 18, 2008, 09:38:25 PM

Quote from: pbrooks3 on February 18, 2008, 09:34:43 PM
As a Centre supporter, I thank whomever gave us the single #1 vote in the poll this week!

Now maybe they'll be the .............centre of attention.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 18, 2008, 09:47:10 PM

Quote from: pbrooks3 on February 18, 2008, 09:34:43 PM
As a Centre supporter, I thank whomever gave us the single #1 vote in the poll this week!

I am guessing the same person that voted for UMD last week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 18, 2008, 09:49:52 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on February 18, 2008, 12:58:45 PM
Quote from: ILive4This on February 18, 2008, 12:47:38 PM
I understand that UMD is still 21-2 but how would they have faired in Amherst's schedule? or Rochester's schedule (who I am sure will drop a bit this week)? Or the other way around, would rochester be 23-0 with UMD's schedule? I really wish there were an RPI system to look at.

As a purely objective poll, Massey is pretty good.

http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&sub=III&mid=1

UMD is #33 (through Wed 2/13)

Strength of schedule leaders:

1. Chicago - UAA
2. Babson - NEWMAC
3. Emory - UAA
4. Washington MO - UAA
5. Augustana IL - CCIW
6. WI Oshkosh - WIAC
7. Rochester NY - UAA
8. WI Stout - WIAC
9. Brandeis - UAA
10. WI Platteville - WIAC
11. IL Wesleyan - CCIW
12. N Central IL - CCIW
13. Carnegie Mellon - UAA
14. WI Stevens Pt - WIAC
15. Roanoke - ODAC
16. WI LaCrosse - WIAC
17. Wheaton IL - CCIW
18. Willamette - NWC
19. Guilford - ODAC
20. Wartburg - IIAC
21. Amherst - NESCAC
22. Carthage - CCIW
23. Springfield - NEWMAC
24. Trinity CT - NESCAC
25. Monmouth IL - MWC

For the Massey Ratings that came out today (without MOV), the UAA has the top 5 teams in terms of strength of schedule and 6 of the top 7.

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&sub=III&mid=6

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: OLD STUDENT/ATHLETE on February 18, 2008, 11:07:48 PM

Why wasn't Centre Number 1?

Amherst lost to Brandeis by 10
Brandeis lost to Chicago by 2
Chicago lost to Trinity(Texas) by 5
Trinity(Texas) lost to Centre by 9

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on February 18, 2008, 11:11:45 PM

Quote from: OLD STUDENT/ATHLETE on February 18, 2008, 11:07:48 PM
Why wasn't Centre Number 1?

Amherst lost to Brandeis by 10
Brandeis lost to Chicago by 2
Chicago lost to Trinity(Texas) by 5
Trinity(Texas) lost to Centre by 9

syllogism 301!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 18, 2008, 11:14:19 PM

Quote from: OLD STUDENT/ATHLETE on February 18, 2008, 11:07:48 PM
Why wasn't Centre Number 1?

Amherst lost to Brandeis by 10
Brandeis lost to Chicago by 2
Chicago lost to Trinity(Texas) by 5
Trinity(Texas) lost to Centre by 9

Why isnt East Texas Baptist #1?

Amherst lost to Brandeis by 10
Brandeis lost to Rochester by 4
Rochester lost to Emory by 5
Emory lost to Texas-Tyler by 8
Texas-Tyler lost to East Texas Baptist by 5

It seems pretty obvious

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 18, 2008, 11:19:45 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on February 18, 2008, 11:14:19 PM
Quote from: OLD STUDENT/ATHLETE on February 18, 2008, 11:07:48 PM
Why wasn't Centre Number 1?

Amherst lost to Brandeis by 10
Brandeis lost to Chicago by 2
Chicago lost to Trinity(Texas) by 5
Trinity(Texas) lost to Centre by 9

Why isnt East Texas Baptist #1?

Amherst lost to Brandeis by 10
Brandeis lost to Rochester by 4
Rochester lost to Emory by 5
Emory lost to Texas-Tyler by 8
Texas-Tyler lost to East Texas Baptist by 5

It seems pretty obvious

Damn midwest bias.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 18, 2008, 11:21:27 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on February 18, 2008, 11:14:19 PM
Quote from: OLD STUDENT/ATHLETE on February 18, 2008, 11:07:48 PM
Why wasn't Centre Number 1?

Amherst lost to Brandeis by 10
Brandeis lost to Chicago by 2
Chicago lost to Trinity(Texas) by 5
Trinity(Texas) lost to Centre by 9

Why isnt East Texas Baptist #1?

Amherst lost to Brandeis by 10
Brandeis lost to Rochester by 4
Rochester lost to Emory by 5
Emory lost to Texas-Tyler by 8
Texas-Tyler lost to East Texas Baptist by 5

It seems pretty obvious

hugenerd - that is hilarious! ;):D k+ ROTFLMAO! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 18, 2008, 11:21:47 PM

Quote from: sac on February 18, 2008, 11:19:45 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on February 18, 2008, 11:14:19 PM
Quote from: OLD STUDENT/ATHLETE on February 18, 2008, 11:07:48 PM
Why wasn't Centre Number 1?

Amherst lost to Brandeis by 10
Brandeis lost to Chicago by 2
Chicago lost to Trinity(Texas) by 5
Trinity(Texas) lost to Centre by 9

Why isnt East Texas Baptist #1?

Amherst lost to Brandeis by 10
Brandeis lost to Rochester by 4
Rochester lost to Emory by 5
Emory lost to Texas-Tyler by 8
Texas-Tyler lost to East Texas Baptist by 5

It seems pretty obvious

Damn midwest bias.

and a couple years ago (05-06) Cal Tech was linked to being able to beat Duke by the same process :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on February 18, 2008, 11:22:23 PM

hugenerd - good karma.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 18, 2008, 11:25:46 PM

With Puget Sound dropping out of the Top 25 I now can't look at David's how they fared anymore...bummer. But they have been giving the Top 25 lots of red. David maybe you could just put UPS at the bottom with an *...just for old time's sake?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on February 18, 2008, 11:44:33 PM

Quote from: sac on February 18, 2008, 11:19:45 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on February 18, 2008, 11:14:19 PM
Quote from: OLD STUDENT/ATHLETE on February 18, 2008, 11:07:48 PM
Why wasn't Centre Number 1?

Amherst lost to Brandeis by 10
Brandeis lost to Chicago by 2
Chicago lost to Trinity(Texas) by 5
Trinity(Texas) lost to Centre by 9

Why isnt East Texas Baptist #1?

Amherst lost to Brandeis by 10
Brandeis lost to Rochester by 4
Rochester lost to Emory by 5
Emory lost to Texas-Tyler by 8
Texas-Tyler lost to East Texas Baptist by 5

It seems pretty obvious

Damn midwest bias.

Maybe some voters were a little off centre

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 18, 2008, 11:54:22 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on February 18, 2008, 09:47:10 PM
Quote from: pbrooks3 on February 18, 2008, 09:34:43 PM
As a Centre supporter, I thank whomever gave us the single #1 vote in the poll this week!

I am guessing the same person that voted for UMD last week.

Nope!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 19, 2008, 12:04:21 AM

Quote from: hugenerd on February 18, 2008, 11:14:19 PM
Quote from: OLD STUDENT/ATHLETE on February 18, 2008, 11:07:48 PM
Why wasn't Centre Number 1?

Amherst lost to Brandeis by 10
Brandeis lost to Chicago by 2
Chicago lost to Trinity(Texas) by 5
Trinity(Texas) lost to Centre by 9

Why isnt East Texas Baptist #1?

Amherst lost to Brandeis by 10
Brandeis lost to Rochester by 4
Rochester lost to Emory by 5
Emory lost to Texas-Tyler by 8
Texas-Tyler lost to East Texas Baptist by 5

It seems pretty obvious

Yeah, this will incur OxyBob's wrath about being a homer, but McMurry beat ETBU!
:D :D :D

except ETBU came back the next week and beat McMurry to re-capture the B*lt!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sciacguru on February 19, 2008, 12:53:19 AM

Quote from: LogShow on February 18, 2008, 11:21:47 PM
and a couple years ago (05-06) Cal Tech was linked to being able to beat Duke by the same process :)

How about Cal Tech getting votes for #1?!?!?!?

Brandeis over Amherst
Chicago over Brandeis
Trinity(TX) over Chicago
Oglethorpe over Trinity
Trinity (CT) over Oglethorpe
Rhode Island over Trinity
Mass-Boston over Rhode Island
Suffolk over Mass-Boston
Mount Ida over Suffolk
Polytechnic over Mount Ida
Washington College over Poly
Randolph over Wash. College
Marymount over Randolph
Villa Jullie over Marymount
Galluadet over Villa Jullie
and...............ta dah..............Cal Tech over Galluadet

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 19, 2008, 01:00:42 AM

That must've taken some work to compile, sciacguru. Huzzah!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 19, 2008, 03:02:25 AM

Quote from: sciacguru on February 19, 2008, 12:53:19 AM
Quote from: LogShow on February 18, 2008, 11:21:47 PM
and a couple years ago (05-06) Cal Tech was linked to being able to beat Duke by the same process :)

How about Cal Tech getting votes for #1?!?!?!?

Brandeis over Amherst
Chicago over Brandeis
Trinity(TX) over Chicago
Oglethorpe over Trinity
Trinity (CT) over Oglethorpe
Rhode Island over Trinity
Mass-Boston over Rhode Island
Suffolk over Mass-Boston
Mount Ida over Suffolk
Polytechnic over Mount Ida
Washington College over Poly
Randolph over Wash. College
Marymount over Randolph
Villa Jullie over Marymount
Galluadet over Villa Jullie
and...............ta dah..............Cal Tech over Galluadet

Nice work! +1

Most things can be connected by six degrees of separation...

We will just call this the Cal Tech 2⁴ degrees of deparation :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 19, 2008, 09:23:47 AM

Two cubed is eight. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 19, 2008, 10:45:57 AM

There its fixed...gotta proofread

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 20, 2008, 03:32:04 PM

Regional rankings are out:
http://ncaasports.com/basketball/mens/polls/rankings/diviii

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 20, 2008, 09:04:21 PM

Final: #12 Wooster 84 Allegheny 74

Wooster was led by freshman Bryan Wickliffe with a season high 25 points (7 boards), Devin Fulk with 19 points, James Cooper with 13 points and Brandon Johnson with 10.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 20, 2008, 09:41:08 PM

#8 Capital loses to Heidelberg 80-74

Ursinus scores with 5 seconds left to tie the game at 69 and force OT against Haverford . Both teams miss foul shots in the last 5 seconds to win it in regulation.
Ursinus now up 77-75 with 1 min left.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 20, 2008, 09:50:53 PM

Ursinus ekes out a tight one 82-75. Tied at 75 Ursinus hits a lay up with 1:03 remaining, and take control hitting 5 FT's down the stretch while Haverford goes scoreless, missing their last 5 Field goal attempts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hope1 on February 20, 2008, 10:25:31 PM

# 3 beat calvin tonight 76 to 59 tonight

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 21, 2008, 12:11:40 AM

With UW-Oshkosh losing tonight you got to figure their run in the Top 25, and the west regional rankings is done. They have 7 losses on the season and 6 in the west region.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NW Hope Fan on February 21, 2008, 01:08:43 PM

Quote from: LogShow on February 21, 2008, 12:11:40 AM
With UW-Oshkosh losing tonight you got to figure their run in the Top 25, and the west regional rankings is done. They have 7 losses on the season and 6 in the west region.

I've wondered about Oshkosh since their early losses to Defiance and Eau Claire, and have been surprised they have stayed in the top 25 for as long as they have, but... They redeemed their loss to Eau Claire, have split with Whitewater and beat Point twice. Augustana and Lawrence are ranked, and Defiance and Elmhurst are getting votes.

The most interesting thing to me without looking at their body of work, is seeing Platteville behind them in the poll when they have spanked Oshkosh twice!

Crazy ol' WIAC

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 21, 2008, 01:12:26 PM

QuoteCrazy ol' WIAC

Well said! It will be interesting to see which of their teams get at-large bids

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on February 22, 2008, 09:13:06 PM

I will do my best to update everyone on the WASH U/BRANDEIS match up as it appears the live stats in st louis is down.

Currently 9-9, as Rich Magee cant hold on to a quick pass in transition for the Judges roughly 15 minutes left in the first half

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 22, 2008, 09:19:58 PM

Quote from: ILive4This on February 22, 2008, 09:13:06 PM
I will do my best to update everyone on the WASH U/BRANDEIS match up as it appears the live stats in st louis is down.

Currently 9-9, as Rich Magee cant hold on to a quick pass in transition for the Judges roughly 15 minutes left in the first half

Thanks, I will follow your postings on the UAA board!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on February 22, 2008, 09:44:24 PM

Centre records their 22nd straight win tonight on the road in Atlanta against a good Oglethorpe team - 65-59.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 22, 2008, 09:48:21 PM

Rochester wins 75-56.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 22, 2008, 10:15:20 PM

Plattsburgh State wins their 14th straight game and stretches their perfect SUNYAC record to 15-0 with a hard fought 56-53 win over Cortland State in Cortland. Their overall record now stands at 22-2. Their attempt to sweep the regular season SUNYAC conference is Sat. night at SUNYIT. A perfect SUNYAC conference record hasn't been accomplished in over 20 years, I believe.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on February 22, 2008, 10:17:58 PM

51-51 in St Louis with 7 minutes to go, Ruths with 4 fouls.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Jacketfan2011 on February 22, 2008, 10:27:11 PM

Quote from: magicman on February 22, 2008, 10:15:20 PM
Plattsburgh State wins their 14th straight game and stretches their perfect SUNYAC record to 15-0 with a hard fought 56-53 win over Cortland State in Cortland. Their overall record now stands at 22-2. Their attempt to sweep the regular season SUNYAC conference is Sat. night at SUNYIT. A perfect SUNYAC conference record hasn't been accomplished in over 20 years, I believe.

Hey they better not overlook SUNYIT. Cuz...well....nevermind ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on February 22, 2008, 10:44:55 PM

Brandeis Wins 68-66

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 22, 2008, 10:46:34 PM

Brandeis 68 Washington U. 66 Final

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 22, 2008, 11:10:41 PM

Chicago also wins. WashU and Chicago still control their own fate for the UAA AQ. Brandeis needs to winout and help from Chicago.

If Chicago wins the UAA, the UAA has a very realistic shot at 4 teams in the NCAAs.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 22, 2008, 11:44:52 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on February 22, 2008, 11:10:41 PM
Chicago also wins. WashU and Chicago still control their own fate for the UAA AQ. Brandeis needs to winout and help from Chicago.

If Chicago wins the UAA, the UAA has a very realistic shot at 4 teams in the NCAAs.

Precisely, hugenerd, because the UAA gets to put a contender into the Pool C calculations in each region in which they have a contender.

Possibly the statistically weakest team, Chicago enters as the Pool A bid. Let's assume that Chicago is the Pool A bid.

Rochester's chance at a Pool C bid comes out of the East Region. Rochester is most likely the East Region leading Pool C bid.

Wash StL is in the Midwest Region. If Augie wins the CCIW tourney, they have inflicted another loss on Wheaton, Elmhurst and IWU. Lawrence probably wins the MWC. Thus, WUSTL is the leading Pool C candidate from the Midwest Region.

Brandeis is in the Northeast Region. They are currently regionally ranked #3, trailing Amherst and UMass-Dartmouth. Losing to Chicago, but beating NYU probably doesn't hurt their New England Regional Ranking too badly, especially if Amherst, UMass-Dartmouth and WPI inflict losses in their conference tourneys.

Voila, 4 UAA's in the tourney.

The challenge for a "mono-region" conference, e.g., the CCIW, is that the CCIW can only bring one team to the table at a time from the Midwest Region.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 23, 2008, 12:11:35 AM

Just clarify, the Pool C bids don't have predetermined numbers from each region. The NCAA got rid of that years ago! I have read a few posts that make it seem that the Pool C's are regionally split. Every team in the nation is lumped into the Pool C equation - which is very much why the regional scheduling and comparisons by the NCAA contradicts the fact the teams are graded nationally. (Something Coach Rick Ferry (http://"http://www.d3hoops.com/audio/08/ferry021008.mp3") aluded to on his interview on Hoopsville a few weeks back, even going on to say he thinks the regional focus will soon disappear.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 23, 2008, 12:22:01 AM

d-mac,

Good reminder, but to reinforce what Ralph said, the selections ARE still regional in the sense that each region has only one team at the table at a time. If you can't GET to the table, you can't get selected!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 23, 2008, 12:23:49 AM

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on February 23, 2008, 12:11:35 AM
Just clarify, the Pool C bids don't have predetermined numbers from each region. The NCAA got rid of that years ago! I have read a few posts that make it seem that the Pool C's are regionally split. Every team in the nation is lumped into the Pool C equation - which is very much why the regional scheduling and comparisons by the NCAA contradicts the fact the teams are graded nationally. (Something Coach Rick Ferry (http://"http://www.d3hoops.com/audio/08/ferry021008.mp3") aluded to on his interview on Hoopsville a few weeks back, even going on to say he thinks the regional focus will soon disappear.)

Dave, thanks for the response. From the football boards, especially, I was under the impression that the national committee sits at the table and looks at the teams that are left after Pool A and B have been selected.

There is one team from each region at the table. For example,

Atlantic: Wm Paterson
East: Rochester
Great Lakes: Albion
Mid-Atlantic: Gettysburg
Midwest: WashStL
Northeast: Brandeis
South: VWC
West: UWW

The committee looks at these eight and picks Brandeis. The new 8 become

Atlantic: Wm Paterson
East: Rochester
Great Lakes: Albion
Mid-Atlantic: Gettysburg
Midwest: WashStL
Northeast: RIC
South: VWC
West: UWW

The committee looks at these 8 and picks UWW. UW-Platteville is moved up.

Atlantic: Wm Paterson
East: Rochester
Great Lakes: Albion
Mid-Atlantic: Gettysburg
Midwest: WashStL
Northeast: RIC
South: VWC
West: UWP

The committee looks at these 8 and picks WashStL and IWU moves up.

Atlantic: Wm Paterson
East: Rochester
Great Lakes: Albion
Mid-Atlantic: Gettysburg
Midwest: IWU
Northeast: RIC
South: VWC
West: UWP

The committee looks at these 8 and selects Rochester, and Brockport moves up.

Atlantic: Wm Paterson
East: Brockport
Great Lakes: Albion
Mid-Atlantic: Gettysburg
Midwest: IWU
Northeast: RIC
South: VWC
West: UWP

This process goes on until all 17 Pool C bids have been awarded.

Please comment (anyone in the know!) Thanks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 23, 2008, 12:24:35 AM

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on February 23, 2008, 12:11:35 AM
Just clarify, the Pool C bids don't have predetermined numbers from each region. The NCAA got rid of that years ago! I have read a few posts that make it seem that the Pool C's are regionally split. Every team in the nation is lumped into the Pool C equation - which is very much why the regional scheduling and comparisons by the NCAA contradicts the fact the teams are graded nationally. (Something Coach Rick Ferry (http://"http://www.d3hoops.com/audio/08/ferry021008.mp3") aluded to on his interview on Hoopsville a few weeks back, even going on to say he thinks the regional focus will soon disappear.)

I agree with the previous posts, but I had already wrote this:

I thought Ralph made it clear by saying "on the table", meaning that there is one team from each region being considered at any given time for a pool C spot. The best team from that consideration list is then picked for a pool C spot, and another is added in its place from the region where the last team was selected. Therefore, by having 3 teams on the table from the time of the first pool C selection, those teams would have to be passed up 17 times to not get in. I am not saying that this is impossible, it is just that they have a better shot at being selected than if they were being considered with only one or two spots left (it doesnt hurt that they each have pretty good resumes as well).

So Ralph's argument makes perfect sense when you consider that only one CCIW team can be considered for a pool C spot at a time, whereas there could be as many as 3 UAA teams up for consideration. The end results may not change, but I think that the more times that you are considered, the better your chances.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 23, 2008, 12:25:45 AM

Great minds on the same channel! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 23, 2008, 12:30:52 AM

Yes... you guys are correct... the list is for "who is the next best in that region" line ups on the table. Just wanted to make sure we were on the same page!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 23, 2008, 12:37:00 AM

Maybe I've forgotten this answer but the question I've always had is what happens in the regions which rank fewer teams.

ie Great Lakes.

Lets say all 6 ranked teams make the tournament either through A, B or C does the #7 team come up for discussion if there are still C spots open?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 23, 2008, 12:39:23 AM

Yeah -- the list actually goes deeper than what is published to us, at least on Selection Sunday. They rank a bunch of at-large teams just in case.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on February 23, 2008, 12:45:23 AM

Pat,
any response yet from the ncaa on the regionalness of the women's Scranton-Catholic game as expressed on the discussion under pool c on the women's side?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 23, 2008, 02:27:41 AM

Quote from: Jacketfan2011 on February 22, 2008, 10:27:11 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 22, 2008, 10:15:20 PM
Plattsburgh State wins their 14th straight game and stretches their perfect SUNYAC record to 15-0 with a hard fought 56-53 win over Cortland State in Cortland. Their overall record now stands at 22-2. Their attempt to sweep the regular season SUNYAC conference is Sat. night at SUNYIT. A perfect SUNYAC conference record hasn't been accomplished in over 20 years, I believe.

Hey they better not overlook SUNYIT. Cuz...well....nevermind ;D

Jacketfan
You're right they better not. It's the last time the SUNYIT Wildcats will suit up for a SUNYAC game, as they're leaving the conference after this year. I'm sure they'd like nothing better than to go out with a W. That being said, it would be the upset of the year in the SUNY conference, should they pull it off.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 23, 2008, 03:04:26 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 22, 2008, 11:44:52 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on February 22, 2008, 11:10:41 PM
Chicago also wins. WashU and Chicago still control their own fate for the UAA AQ. Brandeis needs to winout and help from Chicago.

If Chicago wins the UAA, the UAA has a very realistic shot at 4 teams in the NCAAs.
Precisely, hugenerd, because the UAA gets to put a contender into the Pool C calculations in each region in which they have a contender.

Possibly the statistically weakest team, Chicago enters as the Pool A bid. Let's assume that Chicago is the Pool A bid.

Rochester's chance at a Pool C bid comes out of the East Region. Rochester is most likely the East Region leading Pool C bid.

Wash StL is in the Midwest Region. If Augie wins the CCIW tourney, they have inflicted another loss on Wheaton, Elmhurst and IWU. Lawrence probably wins the MWC. Thus, WUSTL is the leading Pool C candidate from the Midwest Region.

Brandeis is in the Northeast Region. They are currently regionally ranked #3, trailing Amherst and UMass-Dartmouth. Losing to Chicago, but beating NYU probably doesn't hurt their New England Regional Ranking too badly, especially if Amherst, UMass-Dartmouth and WPI inflict losses in their conference tourneys.

Voila, 4 UAA's in the tourney.

The challenge for a "mono-region" conference, e.g., the CCIW, is that the CCIW can only bring one team to the table at a time from the Midwest Region.

Great possibilities guys but I don't think Chicago wins the Pool A bid. That will go to Washington or Brandeis, making Chicago a bubble Pool C bid. I could be wrong but I think the UAA only get three teams and Chicago is the odd man out, especially if any of the region's top seeds get bumped off in their conference tournament. If all the current conference leaders get the Pool A bids then they might have a shot at a Pool C.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Cards7580 on February 23, 2008, 03:08:15 AM

"...
Hey they better not overlook SUNYIT. Cuz...well....nevermind ....."

The post Cortland game team meeting gives me an indication that the SENIORS will not allow for a let down to occur. They understand the Historical significance to SUNYAC and Plattsburgh and how much they are playing for themselves, and all those that came before.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Jacketfan2011 on February 23, 2008, 08:46:22 AM

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 23, 2008, 10:22:37 AM

Quote from: magicman on February 23, 2008, 03:04:26 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 22, 2008, 11:44:52 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on February 22, 2008, 11:10:41 PM
Chicago also wins. WashU and Chicago still control their own fate for the UAA AQ. Brandeis needs to winout and help from Chicago.

If Chicago wins the UAA, the UAA has a very realistic shot at 4 teams in the NCAAs.
Precisely, hugenerd, because the UAA gets to put a contender into the Pool C calculations in each region in which they have a contender.

Possibly the statistically weakest team, Chicago enters as the Pool A bid. Let's assume that Chicago is the Pool A bid.

Rochester's chance at a Pool C bid comes out of the East Region. Rochester is most likely the East Region leading Pool C bid.

Wash StL is in the Midwest Region. If Augie wins the CCIW tourney, they have inflicted another loss on Wheaton, Elmhurst and IWU. Lawrence probably wins the MWC. Thus, WUSTL is the leading Pool C candidate from the Midwest Region.

Brandeis is in the Northeast Region. They are currently regionally ranked #3, trailing Amherst and UMass-Dartmouth. Losing to Chicago, but beating NYU probably doesn't hurt their New England Regional Ranking too badly, especially if Amherst, UMass-Dartmouth and WPI inflict losses in their conference tourneys.

Voila, 4 UAA's in the tourney.

The challenge for a "mono-region" conference, e.g., the CCIW, is that the CCIW can only bring one team to the table at a time from the Midwest Region.

Great possibilities guys but I don't think Chicago wins the Pool A bid. That will go to Washington or Brandeis, making Chicago a bubble Pool C bid. I could be wrong but I think the UAA only get three teams and Chicago is the odd man out, especially if any of the region's top seeds get bumped off in their conference tournament. If all the current conference leaders get the Pool A bids then they might have a shot at a Pool C.

I dont see how you think Brandeis has a better chance at winning the AQ than Chicago. Chicago just has to win out, Brandeis needs to win out AND for Chicago to beat Washu. Any other realistic scenario and someone else, besides Brandeis gets the AQ. That said, Chicago still has to play Brandeis and WashU to complete their run to the AQ, which wont be easy, but they at least have both games at home.

The reason I think it will be even harder for Brandeis is that if they beat Chicago tomorrow, Chicago really wont have much to play for next weekend and, for Brandeis to get the AQ, Chicago has to win. So in my opinion, the most probably scenario is still for WashU to get AQ, with the second most likely being Chicago getting the AQ, and the least probably (due to tiebreakers and needing help from other teams) is Brandeis getting the AQ.

Chicago's Pool C chances are slim at best if they get another loss. That said, if they win out, they get the AQ, so it doesnt matter what their Pool C resume would be.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 23, 2008, 12:38:28 PM

Quote from: magicman on February 23, 2008, 03:04:26 AM
Great possibilities guys but I don't think Chicago wins the Pool A bid. That will go to Washington or Brandeis, making Chicago a bubble Pool C bid.

If the Maroons play Brandeis on Sunday and Wash U next Saturday the way that they played NYU last night (I was at the game), then Chicago will definitely win the Pool A bid from the UAA. Given the fact that the Maroons will play those two games in their own building, it's quite feasible.

Quote from: hugenerd on February 23, 2008, 10:22:37 AMThe reason I think it will be even harder for Brandeis is that if they beat Chicago tomorrow, Chicago really wont have much to play for next weekend and, for Brandeis to get the AQ, Chicago has to win.

Even if Brandeis beats Chicago on Sunday, I don't look for a letdown from the Maroons next weekend. They'll have plenty to play for -- for two senior starters and two senior reserves it'll be their last game ever (because Chicago's already a wobbly Pool C possibility at best, and a loss to the Judges will completely wipe the Maroons out of Pool C consideration). Plus, Wash U is Chicago's archrival, and the presence of several Chicagolanders on the Wash U roster will fire up the Maroons even more. You never lay down for an archrival, especially when you're playing them on your home floor in your final game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 23, 2008, 02:06:48 PM

I didnt mean the would lay down, I was just saying that it could make a slight difference in the players attitudes towards the game, regardless of what they would admit. Of course they would still want to win, but they may not have the same urgency as if they were playing for the UAA championship.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 23, 2008, 04:08:23 PM

Injury update -- UMHB's 6'7" forward Matt Dickey (and starter of 12 of 19 games) is out for the season with a broken hand. He is a versatile player in their rotation. He has a big vertical leap and can move outside. In 19 games he had 6 points and 5 rebounds in 20 minutes per game.

Another UMHB starter, Jason Wagner a 5'10" guard, has also been injured for the last few weeks. Wagner had started 15 games (of 20) and averaged 11 points and 3 steals in 21 minutes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 23, 2008, 04:41:57 PM

Final: #12 Wooster 92 Earlham 65

Wooster gets the road win led by James Cooper with 29 points. Scots are 22-3, 15-1 NCAC. Next game is NCAC tourney first round at home.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 23, 2008, 10:02:56 PM

Plattsburgh State goes to 23-2 with an 86-75 win over SUNYIT. It was the Cardinal's 16th straight victory and also gave them a perfect season in the SUNYAC conference at 16-0. It marked the first time since the 1986 Potsdam St. Bears that a team has run the table in the always tough SUNY league.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 23, 2008, 11:26:27 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on February 23, 2008, 02:06:48 PM
I didnt mean the would lay down, I was just saying that it could make a slight difference in the players attitudes towards the game, regardless of what they would admit. Of course they would still want to win, but they may not have the same urgency as if they were playing for the UAA championship.

I think that the idea of playing spoiler to their most hated rival would give them all the urgency that they need.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 24, 2008, 01:50:12 AM

Greg and hugenerd,

I'm not saying that Chicago can't win the UAA as they've certainly proven they can play with the best. I just think they have a tougher road than Brandeis or Washington U. and the odds are against them. Both those teams finish with NYU and Chicago. I think 1 of them will win both games and that will be your champion. That will leave Chicago with a 17-8 record if they split their last 2 and I don't think that will get them in with a Pool C bid. Kind of strange because they could finish better than UR in the conference and UR will get a Pool C because of their ranking in the East region. Lots of good teams with better records than 17-8 will be staying home. Our SUNYAC conference in NY will probably have 3 teams with 20 or more wins and 2 more with 18 or 19 wins but at best we'll get 2 teams into the NCAA's. Just the way I see it with Chicago. On the flip side of that, just saw Ithaca College beat Stevens and Nazareth the 4th and 5th ranked teams in the East region on back to back days to claim the Empire 8 regular season crown. So Chicago, facing the top 2 teams in the UAA a week apart could pull it off and claim the AQ.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 24, 2008, 01:42:51 PM

Thats quite a bit of red I see...typical weekend ;D ;) :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on February 24, 2008, 02:04:24 PM

The Terrell Hollins show is back as Brandeis leads at Chicago 43-38 with 19 remaining in the game

Interesting statistic, Brandeis has not lost a game it led at the break all season, and they led 39-36 at half time in this game

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on February 24, 2008, 02:06:21 PM

Also WASH U was down by 4 to NYU at the half but have since taken the lead by 5 with 14 minutes to go.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 24, 2008, 02:48:25 PM

Wash U just lost its first game when leading at the break... Chicago 74 - Brandies 66

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 24, 2008, 04:14:12 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 23, 2008, 12:38:28 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 23, 2008, 03:04:26 AM
Great possibilities guys but I don't think Chicago wins the Pool A bid. That will go to Washington or Brandeis, making Chicago a bubble Pool C bid.

If the Maroons play Brandeis on Sunday and Wash U next Saturday the way that they played NYU last night (I was at the game), then Chicago will definitely win the Pool A bid from the UAA. Given the fact that the Maroons will play those two games in their own building, it's quite feasible.

Quote from: hugenerd on February 23, 2008, 10:22:37 AMThe reason I think it will be even harder for Brandeis is that if they beat Chicago tomorrow, Chicago really wont have much to play for next weekend and, for Brandeis to get the AQ, Chicago has to win.

Even if Brandeis beats Chicago on Sunday, I don't look for a letdown from the Maroons next weekend. They'll have plenty to play for -- for two senior starters and two senior reserves it'll be their last game ever (because Chicago's already a wobbly Pool C possibility at best, and a loss to the Judges will completely wipe the Maroons out of Pool C consideration). Plus, Wash U is Chicago's archrival, and the presence of several Chicagolanders on the Wash U roster will fire up the Maroons even more. You never lay down for an archrival, especially when you're playing them on your home floor in your final game.

Chicago beats Brandeis today so I guess we have a championship game to look forward to in the UAA, as Chicago hosts WashU next weekend. Chicago could make it (potentially) four UAA teams in the NCAAs by winning at home against the Bears. We also wont have to worry about any tiebreakers as the winner will be the outright champion. Chicago has only lost once at home in conference this year, by one (64-63) to Rochester. Should be a good matchup.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 24, 2008, 05:38:34 PM

HOW THEY FARED (week of Feb. 18-24) (COMPLETE)

#   1   Amherst (23-2) def. Colby 86-69
#   2   Centre (23-1) won at Oglethorpe 65-59 and won at Sewanee 82-50
#   3   Hope (21-3) def. Calvin 76-59 and won at Tri-State 74-57
#   4   Washington U. (19-5) lost to #6 Brandeis 68-66 and def. NYU 61-52
#   5   UW-Stevens Point (20-5) def. UW-La Crosse 89-62 and lost at #23 UW-Platteville 84-65
#   6   Brandeis (19-5) won at #4 Washington U. 68-66 and lost at Chicago 74-66
#   7   UW-Whitewater (21-4) def. #20 UW-Oshkosh 66-51 and def. UW-River Falls 80-75
#   8   Capital (21-4) lost to Heidelberg 80-74 and won at Otterbein 87-77
#   9   Mass.-Dartmouth (23-2) won at Mass.-Boston 92-72 and def. Plymouth State 80-67
#   10   Augustana (20-5) def. Illinois Wesleyan 83-68 and won at North Central 63-59
#   11   Plattsburgh St. (23-2) won at Cortland St. 56-53 and won at SUNYIT 86-75
#   12   Wooster (22-3) def. Allegheny 84-74 and won at Earlham 92-65
#   13   Guilford (21-4) won at Washington & Lee 65-52 and def. Emory & Henry 122-104
#   14   Rochester (19-5) def. Case Western Reserve 75-56 and def. Emory 76-63
#   15   Mary Hardin-Baylor (22-3) def. Hardin-Simmons 82-76 and def. McMurry 70-59
#   16   St. Thomas (21-4) lost at Concordia-Moorhead 67-57 and won at St. John's 82-63
#   17   Ursinus (23-2) def. Haverford 82-75 (OT) and won at Muhlenberg 72-69
#   18   Lawrence (20-2) def. St. Norbert 69-61 and won at Carroll 92-80
#   19   Virginia Wesleyan (20-5) def. Lynchburg 86-52
#   20   UW-Oshkosh (17-8) lost at #7 UW-Whitewater 66-51 and lost to UW-Superior 77-67
#   21   Maryville (TN) (22-2) def. Piedmont 98-70
#   22   Occidental (20-4) def. Cal Lutheran 67-63 and lost at Whittier 69-65
#   23   UW-Platteville (19-6) def. UW-Eau Claire 75-58 and def. #5 UW-Stevens Point 84-65
#   24   Millsaps (22-3) def. Hendrix 78-55
#   25   Stevens (20-5) lost at Ithaca 93-82

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 24, 2008, 05:47:33 PM

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on February 24, 2008, 02:48:25 PM
Wash U just lost its first game when leading at the break... Chicago 74 - Brandies 66

Did I miss something?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 24, 2008, 06:06:46 PM

Quote from: magicman on February 24, 2008, 05:47:33 PM
Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on February 24, 2008, 02:48:25 PM
Wash U just lost its first game when leading at the break... Chicago 74 - Brandies 66

Did I miss something?

Yeah, something is not right there. WashU won today AND Brandeis's loss today was their second loss this season after leading at the half (the have lost both matchups against Chicago after leading at the half). Also, WashU has not lost this season when leading at the half (4 of their losses came when trailing at the half and they were tied at the half against Brandeis on Friday).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 24, 2008, 06:16:35 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on February 24, 2008, 06:06:46 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 24, 2008, 05:47:33 PM
Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on February 24, 2008, 02:48:25 PM
Wash U just lost its first game when leading at the break... Chicago 74 - Brandies 66

Did I miss something?

Yeah, something is not right there. WashU won today AND Brandeis's loss today was their second loss this season after leading at the half (the have lost both matchups against Chicago after leading at the half). Also, WashU has not lost this season when leading at the half (4 of their losses came when trailing at the half and they were tied at the half against Brandeis on Friday).

I think what Dave was trying to tell us was that Brandeis lost for the 1st time when leading at the break. But guess that wasn't true either according to hugenerd.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 24, 2008, 06:51:39 PM

Perhaps Wash U lost for the first time when Brandeis was leading at the break. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 24, 2008, 08:08:56 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 24, 2008, 06:51:39 PM
Perhaps Wash U lost for the first time when Brandeis was leading at the break. :)

I think you just stole D-Mac's excuse right out from under him.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on February 24, 2008, 08:30:47 PM

On the way home from the Centre victory against Sewanee 82-50. Centre established another SCAC league record by being the 1st team to go through the regular season undefeated in league play at 14-0. Today's victory also extended the Colonels winning streak to 23.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 24, 2008, 08:51:47 PM

Quote from: magicman on February 24, 2008, 08:08:56 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 24, 2008, 06:51:39 PM
Perhaps Wash U lost for the first time when Brandeis was leading at the break. :)

I think you just stole D-Mac's excuse right out from under him.

DUH!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 24, 2008, 10:20:29 PM

HOW THEY FARED, interim edition:

The WIAC men's tournament begins Monday, including the following games:
UW-La Crosse at #5 UW-Stevens Point
UW-Stout at #7 UW-Whitewater
UW-Superior at #20 UW-Oshkosh
UW-Eau Claire at #23 UW-Platteville

The four ranked teams are the four top seeds, but not in the above order:
#1: Whitewater
#2: Platteville
#3: Stevens Point
#4: Oshkosh

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 24, 2008, 10:24:47 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 24, 2008, 10:20:29 PM
HOW THEY FARED, interim edition:

The WIAC men's tournament begins Monday, including the following games:
UW-La Crosse at #5 UW-Stevens Point
UW-Stout at #7 UW-Whitewater
UW-Superior at #20 UW-Oshkosh
UW-Eau Claire at #23 UW-Platteville

The four ranked teams are the four top seeds, but not in the above order:
#1: Whitewater
#2: Platteville
#3: Stevens Point
#4: Oshkosh

Let the carnage begin!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 24, 2008, 10:45:46 PM

Haven't we already been seeing carnage? Whitewater getting crushed by Stevens Point... who got crushed by Platteville in the last week or so!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 24, 2008, 11:41:25 PM

True...but no second chances now

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 24, 2008, 11:44:12 PM

Looks like former UPS head coach Bridgeland won't get the interm tag lifted.
http://www.pepperdinesports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?SPSID=90183&SPID=10851&DB_OEM_ID=18500&ATCLID=1392807

This link was posted in the Northwest Conference Board thanks to nwhoops1903

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 24, 2008, 11:48:05 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 24, 2008, 10:20:29 PM
HOW THEY FARED, interim edition:

The WIAC men's tournament begins Monday, including the following games:
UW-La Crosse at #5 UW-Stevens Point
UW-Stout at #7 UW-Whitewater
UW-Superior at #20 UW-Oshkosh
UW-Eau Claire at #23 UW-Platteville

The four ranked teams are the four top seeds, but not in the above order:
#1: Whitewater
#2: Platteville
#3: Stevens Point
#4: Oshkosh

Superior just beat Oshkosh on Saturday.

Eau Claire beat Platteville IN Eau Claire earlier this year.

If it's chalk, Point goes to Platteville on Wednesday, this after just getting hammered there on Saturday.

Oshkosh and Whitewater split during the season with the home team prevailing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 25, 2008, 12:39:40 AM

I know that most people dont put too much stock in Massey, but I found it amazing that Chicago is ranked #4 in massey's ratings with MOV (which is generally considered to be a better metric than the regular massey ratings) and that ranking was before this weekend, in which they went 2-0 with a win over Brandeis.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 25, 2008, 10:15:40 AM

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on February 24, 2008, 10:45:46 PM
Haven't we already been seeing carnage? Whitewater getting crushed by Stevens Point... who got crushed by Platteville in the last week or so!

So, with comparitive scores...

Platte beat SP 84-69

SP beat WW 76-47

So... Platteville would beat Whitewater by about 48

... but Whitewater beat Platteville by 4 a week and a half ago!

Oh well!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 25, 2008, 10:22:21 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 24, 2008, 10:20:29 PM
HOW THEY FARED, interim edition:

The WIAC men's tournament begins Monday, including the following games:
UW-La Crosse at #5 UW-Stevens Point
UW-Stout at #7 UW-Whitewater
UW-Superior at #20 UW-Oshkosh
UW-Eau Claire at #23 UW-Platteville

The four ranked teams are the four top seeds, but not in the above order:
#1: Whitewater
#2: Platteville
#3: Stevens Point
#4: Oshkosh

I predict one of the big four gets beat in the first round, although I have no clue which one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on February 25, 2008, 11:34:14 AM

Take massey with a grain of salt, but in all honesty Chicago should be ranked and perhaps even in the top 20. They are the only team to have defeated Brandeis home and home eliminating them from the conference race (this is the second year in a row that they have been the only team to hand the Judges 2 losses). They also boast a win at Rochester, I think the only team to do so this year. they have 3 losses in the tough UAA, and host Wash U for the conference pool A bid next saturday.

Interesting, if even though wash u won earlier this season, Brandeis' win at Wash U, means that if Chicago wins at home on saturday they are the conference champs.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 25, 2008, 12:13:12 PM

There are a handful of ballots left out but it seems clear Chicago will be in the Top 25, at least.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 25, 2008, 10:12:22 PM

They're not in the Top 25, but I called Superior over Oshkosh. Platteville losing also is a bit of a surprise.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 26, 2008, 05:45:49 PM

Is that a stretch considering Superior beat Oshkosh on Saturday, too?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 26, 2008, 07:02:53 PM

I don't think it's a stretch for anyone in the WIAC to beat anyone else.

Now, if Oberlin beats Wooster, then THAT'S a stretch! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 26, 2008, 07:42:45 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 26, 2008, 05:45:49 PM
Is that a stretch considering Superior beat Oshkosh on Saturday, too?

I didn't say it was impressive; I just said I called it. You're just doing your job exposing my baseless boasts. Keep up the good work.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 26, 2008, 09:00:46 PM

Final: #11 Wooster 104 Oberlin 71

Wooster was led by All American James Cooper with 28 points, Marty Bidwell with 14 points and Robert Melick with 12 pts. Wooster outrebounded Oberlin 40 to 18.

With his 28 points tonight, James Cooper has now scored 2,000 points in his Wooster career :) Congratulations to Cooper!

Wooster is now 23-3 ;D Next game at home Friday vs. Wabash (NCAC Tourney Semi-Final)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on February 26, 2008, 09:03:09 PM

Quote from: smedindy on February 26, 2008, 07:02:53 PM
Now, if Oberlin beats Wooster, then THAT'S a stretch! ;)

Quote from: wooscotsfan on February 26, 2008, 09:00:46 PM
Final: #11 Wooster 104 Oberlin 71

No stretching necessary. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 26, 2008, 11:35:32 PM

Quote from: kiltedbryan on February 26, 2008, 09:03:09 PM
Quote from: smedindy on February 26, 2008, 07:02:53 PM
Now, if Oberlin beats Wooster, then THAT'S a stretch! ;)
Quote from: wooscotsfan on February 26, 2008, 09:00:46 PM
Final: #11 Wooster 104 Oberlin 71

No stretching necessary. ;D

Only to warm up! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 27, 2008, 09:14:54 PM

#3 Hope beats Alma 75-51

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 27, 2008, 09:51:55 PM

#8 UW-Stevens Point beat UW-Eau Claire 88-65 to advance to the Championship game on Sat.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 27, 2008, 09:58:46 PM

#4 UW-Whitewater beats UW-Superior 77-73 in OT

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 27, 2008, 10:03:29 PM

#25 Albion beats Kalamazoo 64-56

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 28, 2008, 12:19:59 AM

Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2008, 09:51:55 PM
#8 UW-Stevens Point beat UW-Eau Claire 88-65 to advance to the Championship game on Sat.

The not-so-wacky WIAC tonight

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 29, 2008, 10:37:12 PM

Plattsburgh State 65 Geneseo State 57 in the SUNYAC semi-finals'

Plattsburgh will face Oswego St. for the SUNYAC championship on Sat. afternoon

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on March 01, 2008, 06:43:37 PM

Plattsburgh State completes a perfect SUNYAC conference run with an 89-75 win over Oswego State to win the SUNYAC Conference Championship and gain the automatic NCAA bid.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 01, 2008, 10:05:14 PM

Augie beats IWU 71-60.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on March 01, 2008, 10:19:17 PM

I know that the 11 first round pods are hosted by the highest seed in the pod. For the third and fourth round games, does the highest remaining seed host, or is proximity an issue?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2008, 10:24:12 PM

Quote from: scottiedawg on March 01, 2008, 10:19:17 PM
I know that the 11 first round pods are hosted by the highest seed in the pod. For the third and fourth round games, does the highest remaining seed host, or is proximity an issue?

For us in the South, it is. Geographic proximity seems to trump us in the deep South.

A very good Puget Sound hosted in 2004 when there was a scheduling conflict with the UWSP women and there were two geographic orphans, UPS and Sul Ross State. Lawrence and UWSP were also shipped to Washington state.

IMHO, the ODAC is strategically located to pick up Mid-Atlantic and some Great Lakes and Atlantic teams in addition to the first round champ from the deep South.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 01, 2008, 10:30:57 PM

Do we have a "who's in" link yet?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: OC_SID on March 01, 2008, 10:38:28 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2008, 10:30:57 PM

Do we have a "who's in" link yet?

Visit the front page of d3hoops.com, and you can see that Gordon is updating his blog entry with the AQ's. The link is: http://www.d3hoops.com/dailydose/2008/03/01/9-days-our-gift-to-you (http://www.d3hoops.com/dailydose/2008/03/01/9-days-our-gift-to-you)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 02, 2008, 01:57:34 PM

At the half, #22 Millsaps is smokin' potential #1 Centre 35-21. Centre made just 5 baskets in the first period, shooting 19%. Pressure? Of course, the Colonels have nothing to worry about, NCAA-bid-wise.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 02, 2008, 02:04:04 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on March 02, 2008, 01:57:34 PM
At the half, #22 Millsaps is smokin' potential #1 Centre 35-21. Centre made just 5 baskets in the first period, shooting 19%. Pressure? Of course, the Colonels have nothing to worry about, NCAA-bid-wise.

<sigh>

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on March 02, 2008, 02:06:21 PM

Millsaps is thrashing Centre with 12 minutes to play (46-25). Colonels are 6-37 from the field. Ouch!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 02, 2008, 02:34:34 PM

It may be too little, too late, but Centre finally came alive when the live stats went dead. They've now cut the deficit to nine; 60-51 Majors with 1:41 left.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on March 02, 2008, 02:47:40 PM

Millsaps takes care of Centre 69-60 to win the automatic bid from the SCAC conference

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on March 02, 2008, 03:07:35 PM

Quote from: fcnews on March 02, 2008, 02:49:16 PM
It looks like nobody wants to host. A lot of the likely suspects have lost this weekend. Who is going to get byes?

With the best record in all of D3Hoops at 26-2, the longest winning streak in Div. III at 19 straight games, an unblemished conference record of 19-0 and winners of 3 straight SUNYAC Championships, my vote goes to Plattsburgh State to get a 1st round bye.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on March 02, 2008, 03:15:43 PM

Now that Centre's 25 streak is history, where do the Colonels stand in the D3 tournament? Will they get a crack at hosting? This is still a top 10 team in my biased opinion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on March 02, 2008, 03:38:06 PM

Quote from: pbrooks3 on March 02, 2008, 03:15:43 PM
Now that Centre's 25 streak is history, where do the Colonels stand in the D3 tournament? Will they get a crack at hosting? This is still a top 10 team in my biased opinion.

That loss today shouldn't make them fall too far. I would think they still would host and probably fall a few spots to 5th or 6th at worst. 25-2 still leaves them with the 2nd best record in DIII.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 02, 2008, 03:38:33 PM

Ursinius over Gettysburg 85-78 to win the AQ.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on March 02, 2008, 03:47:35 PM

Conference tournaments are great...you never know what's going to happen!

Pool C is looking pretty tight with the upsets rolling in.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Cards7580 on March 02, 2008, 04:41:13 PM

"...With the best record in all of D3Hoops at 26-2, the longest winning streak in Div. III at 19 straight games, an unblemished conference record of 19-0 and winners of 3 straight SUNYAC Championships, my vote goes to Plattsburgh State to get a 1st round bye...."

I second that motion . ( ::) with absolutely no bias being applied to my decision :o) )

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on March 02, 2008, 05:00:10 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on March 02, 2008, 03:39:26 PM
HOW THEY FARED (week of Feb. 25-Mar. 2)

#   1   Amherst (23-3) lost to Bowdoin 65-64 (NESCAC semifinal)
#   2   Centre (25-2) def. Austin 67-53, def. Trinity (TX) 70-57, and lost to #22 Millsaps 69-60 (SCAC final), all games at Hendrix
#   3   Hope (24-3) def. Alma 75-51, def. Adrian 83-64, and def. Calvin 88-72 (MIAA final)
#   4   UW-Whitewater (24-4) def. UW-Stout 78-67, def. UW-Superior 77-73 (OT), and def. #8 UW-Stevens Point 75-71 (WIAC final)
#   5   Mass.-Dartmouth (25-3) def. Mass.-Boston 131-63, def. Southern Maine 75-69, and lost to Rhode Island Coll. 55-52 (LEC final)
#   6   Brandeis (20-5) def. NYU 56-44
#   7   Washington U. (19-6) lost at #23 Chicago 74-66
#   8   UW-Stevens Point (22-6) def. UW-La Crosse 74-66 (OT), def. UW-Eau Claire 88-65, and lost at #4 UW-Whitewater 75-71 (WIAC final)
#   9   Augustana (22-5) def. Elmhurst 69-68 (OT) and def. Ill. Wesleyan 71-60 (CCIW final)
#   10   Plattsburgh St. (26-2) def. Fredonia St. 72-62, def. Geneseo St. 65-57, and def. Oswego St. 89-75 (SUNYAC final)
#   11   Wooster (23-4) def. Oberlin 104-71 and lost to Wabash 87-63 (NCAC semifinal)
#   12   Guilford (23-4) def. Eastern Mennonite 81-66, def. Roanoke 67-57, and plays #18 Virginia Wesleyan Sun. (ODAC final), all games at Salem, VA
#   13   Capital (23-5) def. Mt. Union 67-54, def. Ohio Northern 81-76 (OT), and lost to Heidelberg 83-75 (OAC final)
#   14   Mary Hardin-Baylor (24-3) def. East Texas Baptist 66-50, def. Hardin-Simmons 60-55, and hosts Concordia-Austin Sun. (ASC final)
#   15   Rochester (20-5) won at Carnegie-Mellon 74-67
#   16   Lawrence (22-2) def. St. Norbert 59-58 and def. Carroll 98-95 (OT) (MWC final)
#   17   Ursinus (25-2) def. Dickinson 93-79 and def. Gettysburg 85-78 (Centennial final)
#   18   Virginia Wesleyan (22-5) def. Bridgewater (VA) 78-69, def. Hampden-Sydney 68-55, and plays #12 Guilford Sun. (ODAC final), all games at Salem, VA
#   19   UW-Platteville (19-7) lost to UW-Eau Claire 84-80 (WIAC quarterfinal)
#   20   Maryville (TN) (24-2) def. Huntingdon 84-65 and won at Piedmont 90-79 (GSAC final)
#   21   St. Thomas (23-4) def. Bethel 69-68 and def. Gustavus Adolphus 76-73 (MIAC final)
#   22   Millsaps (25-3) def. Rhodes 86-57, def. Hendrix 73-68, and def. #2 Centre 69-60 (SCAC final), all games at Hendrix
#   23   Chicago (18-7) def. #7 Washington U. 74-66
#   24   Occidental (21-5) won at La Verne 67-57 and lost to Claremont-Mudd-Scripps 66-62 (SCIAC semifinal)
#   25   Albion (19-5) def. Kalamazoo 64-56 and lost to Calvin 75-58 at Hope (MIAA semifinal)

Yikes.... #1, #2, #5, #7, #8, #11, #13, #19, #23, and #24 all go down... been that kind of year though! We'll get one more with the Guilford/Va Wesleyan game goes final as well. And all of these but once (SP losing at WW) should be considered upsets, as the ranked team was beaten by the unranked or lower ranked (Possibly the Wash U/Chicago may not have been an upset... game was @ Chi)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dutch_Man on March 02, 2008, 05:25:51 PM

Is there going to be another poll that comes out this week before the big dance starts? The past 2 seasons there were only 13 polls and then the FINAL poll. Does anyone know for sure?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 02, 2008, 05:26:20 PM

HOW THEY FARED (week of Feb. 25-Mar. 2) (COMPLETE)

#   1   Amherst (23-3) lost to Bowdoin 65-64 (NESCAC semifinal)
#   2   Centre (25-2) def. Austin 67-53, def. Trinity (TX) 70-57, and lost to #22 Millsaps 69-60 (SCAC final), all games at Hendrix
#   3   Hope (24-3) def. Alma 75-51, def. Adrian 83-64, and def. Calvin 88-72 (MIAA final)
#   4   UW-Whitewater (24-4) def. UW-Stout 78-67, def. UW-Superior 77-73 (OT), and def. #8 UW-Stevens Point 75-71 (WIAC final)
#   5   Mass.-Dartmouth (25-3) def. Mass.-Boston 131-63, def. Southern Maine 75-69, and lost to Rhode Island Coll. 55-52 (LEC final)
#   6   Brandeis (20-5) def. NYU 56-44
#   7   Washington U. (19-6) lost at #23 Chicago 74-66
#   8   UW-Stevens Point (22-6) def. UW-La Crosse 74-66 (OT), def. UW-Eau Claire 88-65, and lost at #4 UW-Whitewater 75-71 (WIAC final)
#   9   Augustana (22-5) def. Elmhurst 69-68 (OT) and def. Ill. Wesleyan 71-60 (CCIW final)
#   10   Plattsburgh St. (26-2) def. Fredonia St. 72-62, def. Geneseo St. 65-57, and def. Oswego St. 89-75 (SUNYAC final)
#   11   Wooster (23-4) def. Oberlin 104-71 and lost to Wabash 87-63 (NCAC semifinal)
#   12   Guilford (24-4) def. Eastern Mennonite 81-66, def. Roanoke 67-57, and def. #18 Virginia Wesleyan 91-80 (OT) (ODAC final), all games at Salem, VA
#   13   Capital (23-5) def. Mt. Union 67-54, def. Ohio Northern 81-76 (OT), and lost to Heidelberg 83-75 (OAC final)
#   14   Mary Hardin-Baylor (25-3) def. East Texas Baptist 66-50, def. Hardin-Simmons 60-55, and def. Concordia-Austin 82-73 (ASC final)
#   15   Rochester (20-5) won at Carnegie-Mellon 74-67
#   16   Lawrence (22-2) def. St. Norbert 59-58 and def. Carroll 98-95 (OT) (MWC final)
#   17   Ursinus (25-2) def. Dickinson 93-79 and def. Gettysburg 85-78 (Centennial final)
#   18   Virginia Wesleyan (22-6) def. Bridgewater (VA) 78-69, def. Hampden-Sydney 68-55, and lost to #12 Guilford 91-80 (OT) (ODAC final), all games at Salem, VA
#   19   UW-Platteville (19-7) lost to UW-Eau Claire 84-80 (WIAC quarterfinal)
#   20   Maryville (TN) (24-2) def. Huntingdon 84-65 and won at Piedmont 90-79 (GSAC final)
#   21   St. Thomas (23-4) def. Bethel 69-68 and def. Gustavus Adolphus 76-73 (MIAC final)
#   22   Millsaps (25-3) def. Rhodes 86-57, def. Hendrix 73-68, and def. #2 Centre 69-60 (SCAC final), all games at Hendrix
#   23   Chicago (18-7) def. #7 Washington U. 74-66
#   24   Occidental (21-5) won at La Verne 67-57 and lost to Claremont-Mudd-Scripps 66-62 (SCIAC semifinal)
#   25   Albion (19-5) def. Kalamazoo 64-56 and lost to Calvin 75-58 at Hope (MIAA semifinal)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 02, 2008, 05:33:28 PM

Quote from: Dutch_Man on March 02, 2008, 05:25:51 PM
Is there going to be another pole that comes out this week before the big dance starts? The past 2 seasons there were only 13 poles and then the FINAL pole. Does anyone know for sure?

There is always a final poll published before the NCAA tournament begins.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on March 02, 2008, 05:56:57 PM

Quote from: Dutch_Man on March 02, 2008, 05:25:51 PM
Is there going to be another pole that comes out this week before the big dance starts? The past 2 seasons there were only 13 poles and then the FINAL pole. Does anyone know for sure?

You know, there can never be a FINAL pole. You can always fit another pole between two poles.

I also don't think the North and South pole will ever fight to the death - never mind magnetic north.

And can you really wipe out a nation of 38.6 million?

;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Cards7580 on March 02, 2008, 08:16:20 PM

hmmm a geo POLE itical posting ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dutch_Man on March 02, 2008, 09:13:40 PM

It seems to me that all of you are having trouble with your spelling! It is POLL not POLE! ;D (thanks modifier) ;D ;)

Any ways now that english class is over lets get back to basketball! ::) ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frank uible on March 02, 2008, 11:38:13 PM

There are polls and poles and Poles.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Cards7580 on March 03, 2008, 12:10:23 AM

;D Great, you get an A in English class or how about two lips >----)-----

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on March 03, 2008, 01:31:08 AM

Quote from: smedindy on March 02, 2008, 05:56:57 PM
Quote from: Dutch_Man on March 02, 2008, 05:25:51 PM
Is there going to be another pole that comes out this week before the big dance starts? The past 2 seasons there were only 13 poles and then the FINAL pole. Does anyone know for sure?

You know, there can never be a FINAL pole. You can always fit another pole between two poles.

I also don't think the North and South pole will ever fight to the death - never mind magnetic north.

And can you really wipe out a nation of 38.6 million?

;)

Lech Walesa will be soon be releasing his Pole as soon as his new pacemaker kicks in. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/5582103.html

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on March 03, 2008, 02:39:28 AM

lol...this is the best time of the year! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: martin on March 03, 2008, 02:51:47 AM

Quote from: smedindy on March 02, 2008, 05:56:57 PM
And can you really wipe out a nation of 38.6 million?

;)

The Germans and the Russians have been trying to for most of their history - it is almost their national sport.

Andrzej Wajda's film Katyn was nominated for a best foreign film Oscar. It tells about a Russian effort to wipe out Poland by eliminating the intelligentsia. You can see the trailer here. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1RmYD3OOik)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HopeConvert on March 03, 2008, 01:39:09 PM

Quote from: martin on March 03, 2008, 02:51:47 AM
Quote from: smedindy on March 02, 2008, 05:56:57 PM
And can you really wipe out a nation of 38.6 million?

;)

The Germans and the Russians have been trying to for most of their history - it is almost their national sport.

Andrzej Wajda's film Katyn was nominated for a best foreign film Oscar. It tells about a Russian effort to wipe out Poland by eliminating the intelligentsia. You can see the trailer here. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1RmYD3OOik)

It reminds me of a joke a person from Warsaw once told me. "If the Germans are advancing from the West, and the Russians from the East, which way do you shoot first? West: business before pleasure."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Downtown on March 04, 2008, 11:25:44 AM

I'm surprised Platteville stayed in the Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on March 04, 2008, 12:26:20 PM

It's a sign of respect for the WIAC.

Also, with the crazy week, it was hard to gauge who was worthy of the bottom part of the poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on March 04, 2008, 12:58:02 PM

PAT if you are out there...

If the NCAA allowed D3 Hoops.com to do the bracketing for the mens tournament, and you were to do seedings 1-i guess 15 with the odd number, in each bracket with no restirctions on travel, how would your bracket look?

Also for fun lets assume all games are at a neutral site, although some might be closer than others. Amherst perhaps plays its regional in springfield etc...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 04, 2008, 02:46:19 PM

9 of the top 10 are hosting games this weekend. Thats pretty good.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on March 04, 2008, 03:09:31 PM

Quote from: sac on March 04, 2008, 02:46:19 PM
9 of the top 10 are hosting games this weekend. Thats pretty good.

Bah... Of course the ONE team that isn't hosting is my team... and they're not close enough to even get to the games this weekend. Well, maybe Saturday... :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on March 04, 2008, 04:20:10 PM

Hey, at least you're IN...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 04, 2008, 04:21:32 PM

PS,

Too far for you? Have another 2 hours on top of that! I may head down to Whitewater instead to see what this Kent Raymond guy is all about! lol...also to see if Lawrence can knock of Wheaton. I'm guessing Whitewater should get past Loras (know nothing about them, they beat Chicago!) and then see a great LU v WW game on Saturday...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 05, 2008, 02:58:27 AM

So you're already assuming that Lawrence will beat Wheaton, Tom? ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on March 06, 2008, 09:06:50 PM

Thanks David, I was actaully pretty interested to see how many of the Top 25 got in (+K). Looks like overall the Top 25 was very successful in getting bids to the NCAAs.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 06, 2008, 10:16:36 PM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on March 04, 2008, 04:21:32 PM
PS,

Too far for you? Have another 2 hours on top of that! I may head down to Whitewater instead to see what this Kent Raymond guy is all about! lol...also to see if Lawrence can knock of Wheaton. I'm guessing Whitewater should get past Loras (know nothing about them, they beat Chicago!) and then see a great LU v WW game on Saturday...

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 05, 2008, 02:58:27 AM
So you're already assuming that Lawrence will beat Wheaton, Tom? ;)

Not at all, Greg! ;D However, I think that's what the people in Wisconsin want to see. If LU and WW both win on Friday, I almost want LU to win on Saturday just so I don't have to hear some of the LU fans complain for another season for not hosting and once again getting screwed by the NCAA. lol >:( :D ;)

In the end, I want the WIAC to succeed. I'm sure I'll see two good games with the LU v Wheaton game being the preferred of the two first rounders in Whitewater.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 08, 2008, 12:16:32 AM

There is a real possibility that there are only 9 Top 25's going to the Sweet 16 after tomorrow night! :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Cards7580 on March 08, 2008, 12:16:45 AM

Wow 9 so far, 5 more will go for sure tomorrow because there are 4 games with top 25 teams going head to head. So almost half the top 25 will be finished before the sweet 16.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 08, 2008, 01:14:43 AM

Quote from: Cards7580 on March 08, 2008, 12:16:45 AM
Wow 9 so far, 5 more will go for sure tomorrow because there are 4 games with top 25 teams going head to head. So almost half the top 25 will be finished before the sweet 16.

Actually, with 1 not selected, 8 already losing, and 4 guaranteed to lose tomorrow (top 25s playing each other), the most the top 25 can muster is 12 teams.

Ralph, I'm curious where you came up with the precise number of 9. For which three others do you forecast doom and gloom?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on March 08, 2008, 10:59:38 AM

Wacky season rolls on.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 08, 2008, 11:29:46 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 08, 2008, 01:14:43 AM
Quote from: Cards7580 on March 08, 2008, 12:16:45 AM
Wow 9 so far, 5 more will go for sure tomorrow because there are 4 games with top 25 teams going head to head. So almost half the top 25 will be finished before the sweet 16.

Actually, with 1 not selected, 8 already losing, and 4 guaranteed to lose tomorrow (top 25s playing each other), the most the top 25 can muster is 12 teams.

Ralph, I'm curious where you came up with the precise number of 9. For which three others do you forecast doom and gloom?

I am not there yet. I will stick with the prediction of the number; I am not ready to say who loses.

I just believe that there are too many good teams who are "below the Top 25 Radar".

#3 Amherst hosts John Jay -- Not likely Lord Jeffs 96-74.
#4 Centre hosts NCAC OWU -- Maybe Sure enough! OWU 83-65
#5 Deis hosts NESCAC Bowdoin -- Gotta respect the NESCAC. Deis, 68-53.
#7 Plattsburg hosts Kings -- Not likely. Close, but Platts 83-77 OT
#9 UWSP vs IIAC Buena Vista neutral floor -- a great place to pick up an upset. BVC 53 UWSP 52. That is two!
#10 UMass-Dartmouth hosts Coast Guard -- After 20 straight wins, UMD has been beatable CGA 50-47; that is one.
#13 Rochester hosts PSU-Behrend. A game worth following on the front page live stats. Click over when desired. Rochester, 65-56.
#25 Oxy at Whitworth -- Home court advantage in Spokane. Whitworth 83-75. #4

I looked at those 8 games and thought there could be three "upsets".

Actually there were four. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on March 08, 2008, 01:48:12 PM

I know it's not the traditional top 25... but the Massey ratings (http://mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&sub=III&mid=1) #'s 1,3,4,6, and 9 all lost. Amherst (2) and Hope (8) had byes... only two of the top 10 teams actually won, in Brandeis and Bowdoin!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 08, 2008, 01:53:01 PM

Many of us have been talking all season long about the parity in Division III this year, and the fact there does not seem to be anything remotely resembling a dominant team. I believe that more than ever after Round 1 of the tournament.

There are about 15 teams with a legitimate shot to win this thing. There isn't anything close to those Kalsow/Bennett Stevens Point teams out there this year.

I know as a D3hoops.com Top 25 voter, this has been my toughest season. I have yet to figure out who the top teams are and which teams are in the "next tier." I'm just not sure the Top 25 means all that much this year. I'll bet unranked Loras and Wheaton (and many other unranked teams, like IWU, which beat Wheaton 3 times) are as good as many teams in the poll. That makes it a really fun year to be a D3 fan. We're in for a great tournament!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 08, 2008, 02:52:45 PM

I don't care what the brackets looks like Coast Guard over UMASS-D will not be an upset. CGA is a better team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on March 08, 2008, 03:33:32 PM

UM- Dartmouth. 43rd in Massey using MOV and SOS of 157
Coast Guard. 24th in Massey using MOV and SOS of 115.

Hoops Fan may be onto somethin'....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: eclinchy on March 08, 2008, 03:41:37 PM

Also, with three common opponents, CGA beat two of the three by greater margins than UMD did.

Roger Williams -- CGA by 9 (63-54), UMD by 7 (67-60)
Johnson and Wales -- CGA by 26 (86-60), UMD by 19 (87-68)

Albertus Magnus -- UMD by 51 (102-51), CGA by 27 (96-69)

On the other hand, the power rankings favor UMD, which has quality wins over teams like Brandeis and RIC, while CGA's schedule was ridiculously soft up until they beat Trinity.

It's a tossup. I'd lean UMD, but I'm definitely biased because I've seen UMD's talent firsthand and I haven't gotten a chance to watch CGA in person this year. I just have this hunch that Reece Freeman, the UMD point guard, will be too quick for the Bears.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on March 08, 2008, 03:43:21 PM

Well, Massey has Coast Guard's schedule tougher than UM-D, though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 08, 2008, 05:45:14 PM

You have to look at when they played the common opponents though. Coast Guard came into the season highly respected in New England because they were bringing back so many key players. They struggled mightily at the beginning of the season, only really turning it on in the second half of conference play.

UMASS-Dartmouth had the big win over Brandeis early on, but seems to have peaked in that game. Deis was their only high-quality opponent outside their own conference (which is second tier to begin with). They surprised me being better than Keene, but they haven't looked better than RIC all season.

I think this is one case where the record fools a lot of people. They're better than they were supposed to be, but not as good as the voters have had them. Plus they've been falling off of late.

I may be grasping at straws when I make random statements about teams in the rest of the country, but I'm confident on this one. No LEC is worthy of a Top 25 spot this season, even though a couple of teams are right in the 26-40 zone.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on March 08, 2008, 08:41:43 PM

Upset or not, CGA wins 50-47, even though they missed about half a dozen FTs down the stretch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on March 08, 2008, 09:37:38 PM

Buena Vista tops UWSP 54-53

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on March 08, 2008, 09:39:09 PM

WashU-Augie going to OT. Tyler Nading fouled out for WashU with 0.9 seconds left in the game, Augie made the two resulting free throws to tie it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HopeConvert on March 08, 2008, 09:59:02 PM

#1, #3, #5, #7, #11, #13, #14, #16, and #25 are still alive from the top 25. All others have seen their seasons end. It is quite a tournament so far.

EDIT: Forgot Rochester

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on March 08, 2008, 10:21:04 PM

3 of those 8 ranked teams are from the UAA.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HopeConvert on March 08, 2008, 10:26:34 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on March 08, 2008, 10:21:04 PM
3 of those 8 ranked teams are from the UAA.

No question they were the best league this year. The tournament only confirms that. Who'd have guessed, though, that only Wheaton would be left from the CCIW and no WIAC team left. Amazing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: daoustian on March 08, 2008, 10:59:40 PM

Who'd have guessed that 16 of the top 25 would be out after weekend 1? That doesn't happen every year -- does it?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on March 08, 2008, 11:36:24 PM

Quote from: daoustian on March 08, 2008, 10:59:40 PM
Who'd have guessed that 16 of the top 25 would be out after weekend 1? That doesn't happen every year -- does it?

That will likely be 17, Oxy is about to lose to Whitworth. Down 9 with 24 seconds to go.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on March 08, 2008, 11:37:38 PM

OK, now everyone in unison,

PARITY

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on March 08, 2008, 11:50:18 PM

I dont know the exact numbers for past years, but I dont think 8/16 isnt all that much a deviation. The Gettysburg regional had no ranked teams, neither did the Richard Stockton regional. So there were 6 regional "upsets". If you consider that Whitworth hosted Oxy (#25), that leaves 5. I also dont think CGA over UMD was that big an upset. I dont think 5 upsets is that huge a number.

The big upsets were UWSP, UWW, Centre and Guilford (all top 10 teams, Augie and UMD are also top 10 teams that lost).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 09, 2008, 12:03:59 AM

Quote from: hugenerd on March 08, 2008, 11:50:18 PM
I dont know the exact numbers for past years, but I dont think 8/16 isnt all that much a deviation. The Gettysburg regional had no ranked teams, neither did the Richard Stockton regional. So there were 6 regional "upsets". If you consider that Whitworth hosted Oxy (#25), that leaves 5. I also dont think CGA over UMD was that big an upset. I dont think 5 upsets is that huge a number.

The big upsets were UWSP, UWW, Centre and Guilford.

It is very easy to compare the Week 14 Top 25 with the brackets.

In 2007, there were 10 ranked teams in the Sweet 16.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on March 09, 2008, 12:11:39 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 09, 2008, 12:03:59 AM
Quote from: hugenerd on March 08, 2008, 11:50:18 PM
I dont know the exact numbers for past years, but I dont think 8/16 isnt all that much a deviation. The Gettysburg regional had no ranked teams, neither did the Richard Stockton regional. So there were 6 regional "upsets". If you consider that Whitworth hosted Oxy (#25), that leaves 5. I also dont think CGA over UMD was that big an upset. I dont think 5 upsets is that huge a number.

The big upsets were UWSP, UWW, Centre and Guilford.
It is very easy to compare the Week 14 Top 25 with the brackets.

In 2007, there were 10 ranked teams in the Sweet 16.

Thanks for the info. So 8 isnt that big a difference than 10. Taking into account what I said in my earlier post, there really isnt any difference at all (given that I dont know the distribution of ranked teams in last years tournament).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 09, 2008, 12:21:44 AM

Quote from: hugenerd on March 09, 2008, 12:11:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 09, 2008, 12:03:59 AM
Quote from: hugenerd on March 08, 2008, 11:50:18 PM
I dont know the exact numbers for past years, but I dont think 8/16 isnt all that much a deviation. The Gettysburg regional had no ranked teams, neither did the Richard Stockton regional. So there were 6 regional "upsets". If you consider that Whitworth hosted Oxy (#25), that leaves 5. I also dont think CGA over UMD was that big an upset. I dont think 5 upsets is that huge a number.

The big upsets were UWSP, UWW, Centre and Guilford.
It is very easy to compare the Week 14 Top 25 with the brackets.

In 2007, there were 10 ranked teams in the Sweet 16.
Thanks for the info. So 8 isnt that big a difference than 10. Taking into account what I said in my earlier post, there really isnt any difference at all (given that I dont know the distribution of ranked teams in last years tournament).

2007 Men's Bracket (http://www.d3hoops.com/salem/07/mbbbracket07.pdf).

Week #13 2007 Men's Top 25 (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/07/week13.htm).

Here they are. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on March 09, 2008, 12:51:08 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 09, 2008, 12:21:44 AM
Quote from: hugenerd on March 09, 2008, 12:11:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 09, 2008, 12:03:59 AM
Quote from: hugenerd on March 08, 2008, 11:50:18 PM
I dont know the exact numbers for past years, but I dont think 8/16 isnt all that much a deviation. The Gettysburg regional had no ranked teams, neither did the Richard Stockton regional. So there were 6 regional "upsets". If you consider that Whitworth hosted Oxy (#25), that leaves 5. I also dont think CGA over UMD was that big an upset. I dont think 5 upsets is that huge a number.

The big upsets were UWSP, UWW, Centre and Guilford.
It is very easy to compare the Week 14 Top 25 with the brackets.

In 2007, there were 10 ranked teams in the Sweet 16.
Thanks for the info. So 8 isnt that big a difference than 10. Taking into account what I said in my earlier post, there really isnt any difference at all (given that I dont know the distribution of ranked teams in last years tournament).
2007 Men's Bracket (http://www.d3hoops.com/salem/07/mbbbracket07.pdf).

Week #13 2007 Men's Top 25 (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/07/week13.htm).

Here they are. ;)

With Ralph's urging, I looked it up and 5/16 regionals had no ranked teams last year. So there were only 3 regionals in which a ranked team participated and didnt make it to the sweet 16. I guess the breakup of the brackets has a lot to do with the reason that so few ranked teams make it to the sweet 16. Some regions just dont have as many ranked teams and therefore there may be 0 or 1 ranked team in that 4 team pod. Other regions have as many as 3 ranked teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on March 09, 2008, 01:10:41 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 09, 2008, 12:03:59 AM
Quote from: hugenerd on March 08, 2008, 11:50:18 PM
I dont know the exact numbers for past years, but I dont think 8/16 isnt all that much a deviation. The Gettysburg regional had no ranked teams, neither did the Richard Stockton regional. So there were 6 regional "upsets". If you consider that Whitworth hosted Oxy (#25), that leaves 5. I also dont think CGA over UMD was that big an upset. I dont think 5 upsets is that huge a number.

The big upsets were UWSP, UWW, Centre and Guilford.
It is very easy to compare the Week 14 Top 25 with the brackets.

In 2007, there were 10 ranked teams in the Sweet 16.

10 appears to be a low--and 8 still lower-- for the d3hoops era. I went through and compared the pre-tournament poll to the teams that made the sweet sixteen. Here are the number of ranked teams that have made it each year:

2008: 8 teams/16
2007: 10/16
2006: 12/16
2005: 12/16
2004: 12/16
2003: 12/16
2002: 12/16
2001: 13/16
2000: 13/16

So in the past 9 tournaments, only in the most recent two has the Sweet Sixteen not consisted of at least 75% d3hoops Top 25 teams.

I didn't spend the time to analyze exactly how bracket dynamics came into play--ie. how often Top 25 teams eliminated each other in early rounds vs. how often a Top 25 lost in an upset to an unranked team--but there you are. Exact numbers on how many Top 25 teams are usually still dancing at this point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on March 09, 2008, 01:21:36 AM

It is interesting that between 2000-2006 there were at least 12 ranked teams that made it to the final 16. I dont know if the representation in the top 25 was more diverse by region previous to last year, but the maximum number of ranked teams that could have made it to the sweet 16 last year was 11 (5 pods had no ranked teams). This year, on the other hand, may just be an anomoly in that there are a large number of upsets.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 09, 2008, 01:29:35 AM

The tourney added 11 teams with the new TV money kicking in 2006. That means that there were eleven fewer byes to give, and 11 fewer home courts on which the tourney was played.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on March 09, 2008, 10:37:17 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 09, 2008, 01:29:35 AM
The tourney added 11 teams with the new TV money kicking in 2006. That means that there were eleven fewer byes to give, and 11 fewer home courts on which the tourney was played.

Makes sense then, so I guess you really cant compare before and after the expansion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 09, 2008, 10:54:03 AM

Quote from: hugenerd on March 09, 2008, 10:37:17 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 09, 2008, 01:29:35 AM
The tourney added 11 teams with the new TV money kicking in 2006. That means that there were eleven fewer byes to give, and 11 fewer home courts on which the tourney was played.
Makes sense then, so I guess you really cant compare before and after the expansion.

I wonder the same thing myself. If we see similar numbers next season, then that may be the case.

I wonder if it is the shrinking world of D3. How many webcasts and videocasts did we catch this weekend as we surfed the tourney! I know that I followed McMurry women Wednesday and Saturday night and UMHB men on Friday night, and caught portions of 6 other games, even when most of the starting times were identical, 7 pm local!

The fun thing is to catch the West Coast games at the end of the night! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HopeConvert on March 09, 2008, 11:51:24 AM

Another way to see how things have changed is to compare the total number of losses among top 10 teams since 2000. I come up with (from the penultimate poll):

2008 - 34
2007 - 35
2006 - 26
2005 - 28
2004 - 27
2003 - 22
2002 - 27
2001 - 31
2000 - 23

With the exception of 2001 (a year when the 14th ranked team won) there's a significant gap between 2007 and 2008, where it's been noted there's a drop in the number of top-ranked teams in the Sweet 16, and prior years. This would make sense, as more losses among top 10 teams would indicate a lack of dominant teams, and thus less of them would make the sweet 16. Why the jump in the number of losses between '06 and '07? I don't know, but I'm interested in any hypotheses.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 09, 2008, 11:55:56 AM

Fewer home games being played in rounds 1 and 2 now with the pod format.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HopeConvert on March 09, 2008, 12:04:15 PM

But that wouldn't affect why they have more losses over the course of the year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 09, 2008, 12:09:44 PM

Quote from: HopeConvert on March 09, 2008, 12:04:15 PM
But that wouldn't affect why they have more losses over the course of the year.

Ok now I get what you were talking about.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on March 09, 2008, 12:31:06 PM

Hosting Sites are posted:

http://www.ncaa.com/uploadedFiles/Sports/Basketball_(M)/BR-08D3MBB.pdf

Hope, Ursinus, WashU, and Plattsburgh.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on March 09, 2008, 01:45:59 PM

Quote from: HopeConvert on March 09, 2008, 11:51:24 AM
Why the jump in the number of losses between '06 and '07? I don't know, but I'm interested in any hypotheses.

Well, there are more bids, thus there are more teams playing who have more losses. These teams then have an opportunity to win against a team with fewer losses, and apparently they have done so.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HopeConvert on March 09, 2008, 01:54:07 PM

Again, I'm not referring to tournament losses. I'm referring to regular season losses. There are still only 10 teams in the top 10, and they've suffered more aggregate in-season losses over the past two years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on March 09, 2008, 02:12:34 PM

Ah, I understand now... I think there's just more parity in D3. There isn't a dominant team this year, that's for sure, and there wasn't last year either. There are (or were) about 20 teams at roughly the same level, so these teams beat each other. In a conference like the WIAC, the top teams beat each other up, which is normal, but they also each lost to teams out of conference too. I haven't done substantial research into this, but I would imaging this is the same for other teams in the top 10. I mean, you've got 5 and 6 loss teams in the top 10. When you look at the REST of the top 25, there are others with 5 and 6 losses, and fewer with only 3 and 4. It's just much more even the last couple of years, I think.

now, if you're inquiring about the reason for this, I think it has to do with how teams and players are preparing... they say the world is getting smaller, I think the same is true in the US, with athletics. Players are able to compete against each other in summer camps and AAU, etc.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 09, 2008, 02:30:06 PM

I've posted this before, but I continue to feel strongly that the WIAC has come back to the pack in a big way now that redshirting has been banned. Former UW-Stevens Point head man Dick Bennett pointed to this as well in a radio interview he did early in the year. The feasibility of redshirting (for non-medical reasons) was a huge advantage for the WIAC.

For a number of years, I think the WIAC was by far the best league in Division III. The last three years or so, I believe there have been better leagues - the CCIW in 2005-06 (Illinois Wesleyan, Augustana, Elmhurst, and North Central were powers), and the UAA the last two.

The WIAC is still right in the middle of the "best conference" conversation with its depth and parity, but the league isn't producing dominant teams ala Bo Ryan's Platteville squads, the Eau Claire team that got to Salem in 2000 and lost without their best player (injury), or the back-to-back Stevens Point teams of 2004 and 2005. This year, the WIAC tournament teams were eliminated by two IIAC teams - Loras won @ Whitewater and Buena Vista beat Stevens Point on a neutral court. A few years ago, that just would not have happened.

The WIAC coming back to the pack is one factor I'd point to in the recent parity in Division III.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 09, 2008, 04:30:15 PM

HOW THEY FARED (postseason edition)

#   1   Hope (25-3) received a bye, def. #20 Capital 92-72, and hosts Ohio Wesleyan Fri.
#   2   ~~UW-Whitewater (24-5)~~ lost to Loras 71-70 season complete
#   3   Amherst (24-3) received a bye, def. John Jay 96-74, and plays Richard Stockton Fri. at Plattsburgh St.
#   4   ~~Centre (26-3)~~ def. Franklin 75-61 and lost to Ohio Wesleyan 82-65 season complete
#   5   Brandeis (22-5) def. Lasell 80-59, def. Bowdoin 68-53, and plays at #7 Plattsburgh St. Fri.
#   6   ~~Augustana (23-6)~~ def. Aurora 72-61 and lost to #11 Washington U. 70-67 (OT) season complete
#   7   Plattsburgh St. (27-2) received a bye, def. King's 83-77 (OT), and hosts #5 Brandeis Fri.
#   8   ~~Guilford (24-5)~~ lost to St. Mary's (MD) 89-77 season complete
#   9   ~~UW-Stevens Point (23-7)~~ def. #22 Chicago 67-53 and lost to Buena Vista 54-53, both at St. Thomas; season complete
#   10   ~~Mass.-Dartmouth (25-4)~~ received a bye and lost to Coast Guard 50-47 season complete
#   11   Washington U. (21-6) def. #17 Wooster 79-74 at Augustana, won at #6 Augustana 70-67 (OT), and hosts Buena Vista Fri.
#   12   ~~Mary Hardin-Baylor (26-4)~~ def. Fontbonne 65-62 at Millsaps and lost at #14 Millsaps 57-56 season complete
#   13   Rochester (22-5) def. Middlebury 56-43, def. Penn St.-Behrend 65-56, and plays Coast Guard Fri. at Ursinus
#   14   Millsaps (27-3) def. #19 Maryville (TN) 80-72, def. #12 Mary Hardin-Baylor 57-56, and plays St. Mary's (MD) Fri. at Washington U. (St. Louis)
#   15   ~~Lawrence (22-3)~~ lost to Wheaton (IL) 93-83 (OT) at UW-Whitewater; season complete
#   16   Ursinus (27-2) def. Baptist Bible 94-76, def. #21 Virginia Wesleyan 70-64, and hosts Gettysburg Fri.
#   17   ~~Wooster (23-5)~~ lost to #11 Washington U. 79-74 at Augustana; season complete
#   18   ~~St. Thomas (23-5)~~ lost to Buena Vista 72-70 season complete
#   19   ~~Maryville (TN) (24-3)~~ lost at #14 Millsaps 80-72 season complete
#   20   ~~Capital (24-6)~~ def. Bethany 92-70 and lost at #1 Hope 92-72 season complete
#   21   ~~Virginia Wesleyan (23-7)~~ def. Worcester Polytech 80-75 at Ursinus and lost at #16 Ursinus 70-64 season complete
#   22   ~~Chicago (18-8)~~ lost to #9 UW-Stevens Point 67-53 at St. Thomas; season complete
#   23   ~~UW-Platteville (19-7)~~ season complete
#   25   ~~Occidental (22-6)~~ def. Pomona-Pitzer 52-51 and lost at Whitworth 83-75 season complete
#   25   ~~Trinity (CT) (21-7)~~ lost to Coast Guard 70-65 season complete

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on March 09, 2008, 05:23:58 PM

8 of the Top 25 remain...should be a exciting sweet 16 and elite 8 weekend!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 09, 2008, 11:36:06 PM

Quote from: LogShow on March 09, 2008, 05:23:58 PM
8 of the Top 25 remain...should be a exciting sweet 16 and elite 8 weekend!

Well, unless your team isn't in it! lol... :'( :-\ :-[

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on March 10, 2008, 01:53:46 AM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on March 09, 2008, 11:36:06 PM
Quote from: LogShow on March 09, 2008, 05:23:58 PM
8 of the Top 25 remain...should be a exciting sweet 16 and elite 8 weekend!

Well, unless your team isn't in it! lol... :'( :-\ :-[

Well my team lost in the conference championship game and didn't deserve an at-large...so I have been making due for 2 weeks now! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bbaddict on March 10, 2008, 03:14:00 AM

My team lost in the game before that (right Logs?) :) so, I've been living vicariously through Whitworth's success! It's great that they made it to the Sweet 16, I'm thinking they can beat Wheaton and then, who knows?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 10, 2008, 06:57:37 AM

Quote from: HopeConvert on March 08, 2008, 10:26:34 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on March 08, 2008, 10:21:04 PM
3 of those 8 ranked teams are from the UAA.

No question they were the best league this year. The tournament only confirms that. Who'd have guessed, though, that only Wheaton would be left from the CCIW and no WIAC team left. Amazing.

There were only two CCIW teams in the tourney field, as opposed to four UAA teams, so it's not that hard to believe that the CCIW would be down to one team after the first weekend. The bigger story is that that one team is Wheaton, which tied for second in the CCIW and lost three times to the other #2 team.

I'm still not convinced that the UAA was better than the CCIW this season. I'm lucky enough to live in the same city as a UAA school, so I get to see both leagues every year. The UAA did not look any better, top to bottom, than the CCIW. Yes, Wash U beat Augie on Augie's home floor this weekend ... but, remember, Augie beat Wash U in St. Louis earlier in the year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on March 10, 2008, 11:44:32 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on March 09, 2008, 02:30:06 PM
I've posted this before, but I continue to feel strongly that the WIAC has come back to the pack in a big way now that redshirting has been banned. Former UW-Stevens Point head man Dick Bennett pointed to this as well in a radio interview he did early in the year. The feasibility of redshirting (for non-medical reasons) was a huge advantage for the WIAC.

A level playing field is a must at the D3 level. When did the redshirt ban start?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on March 10, 2008, 12:17:22 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 10, 2008, 06:57:37 AM
Quote from: HopeConvert on March 08, 2008, 10:26:34 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on March 08, 2008, 10:21:04 PM
3 of those 8 ranked teams are from the UAA.

No question they were the best league this year. The tournament only confirms that. Who'd have guessed, though, that only Wheaton would be left from the CCIW and no WIAC team left. Amazing.

There were only two CCIW teams in the tourney field, as opposed to four UAA teams, so it's not that hard to believe that the CCIW would be down to one team after the first weekend. The bigger story is that that one team is Wheaton, which tied for second in the CCIW and lost three times to the other #2 team.

I'm still not convinced that the UAA was better than the CCIW this season. I'm lucky enough to live in the same city as a UAA school, so I get to see both leagues every year. The UAA did not look any better, top to bottom, than the CCIW. Yes, Wash U beat Augie on Augie's home floor this weekend ... but, remember, Augie beat Wash U in St. Louis earlier in the year.

Also remember that back when Augie beat WashU (in November), WashU had just lost their starting point guard to a season ending injury. You have to win them when they count, a win on November 24th against a top caliber team is great, but, when it comes to gauging the top few teams in the country, only the wins in March count.

And when it comes to depth, I think the UAA still has the most impressive resume. 6 of 8 UAA teams have at least 16 wins, and 5 have at least 18 wins. Only 4 (of 8.) CCIW schools have 16 wins, and 3 have at least 18 wins. Same goes for the WIAC, Only 4 (of 9) have 16 wins, and 3 have at least 18 wins. Both the UAA and CCIW had 2 teams with overall losing records, and the WIAC had 5. If you want to talk about parity within the conference, #5 CMU beat #1 and #2 (Chicago and WashU), #6 NYU and #7 Emory beat Rochester, #8 Case Western was 1 turnover away from beating WashU, and the top 4 were all 1-1 against eachother (except Chicago was 2-0 against Brandeis).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 10, 2008, 12:49:10 PM

Wash U beat Augustana in overtime Saturday. As I have said all season long, there is no separation there. Those are two very different but dead-even basketball teams.

Looking at the UAA vs CCIW team-by-team as the standings finished...

1. Chicago (11-3) vs Augustana (11-3)
2. Wash U (10-4) vs IWU (9-5)
2. Brandeis (10-4) vs Wheaton (9-5)
4. Rochester (9-5) vs Elmhurst (8-6)
5. Carnegie Mellon (6-8) vs Carthage (7-7)
6. NYU (6-8) vs North Park (6-8)
7. Emory (3-11) vs North Central (4-10)
8. Case (1-13) vs Millikin (2-12)

I know a couple things:

1) Augustana is better than Chicago.
2) Wash U is better than IWU.

After that, I haven't seen enough of the UAA to know where the advantage goes. However, I suspect Brandeis vs Wheaton is a push, and I suspect Rochester vs Elmhurst is as well. (Remember, Elmhurst beat #1 Hope on a neutral floor.) I'm guessing 5-8 are toss-ups as well.

When you get right down to it, is there really any separation here?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 10, 2008, 12:54:49 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on March 10, 2008, 12:17:22 PMIf you want to talk about parity within the conference, #5 CMU beat #1 and #2 (Chicago and WashU), #6 NYU and #7 Emory beat Rochester, #8 Case Western was 1 turnover away from beating WashU, and the top 4 were all 1-1 against eachother (except Chicago was 2-0 against Brandeis).

And basically the same can be said in the CCIW...

#5 Carthage beat #1 Augustana and #2 IWU

#6 North Park beat #1 Augustana

#7 North Central swept #2 Wheaton

#8 Millikin lost to #1 Augie by 3

Same kind of parity.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: atn alum on March 10, 2008, 01:01:10 PM

interesting to note

16 teams left in each gender

only 8 ranked men's teams left
15 ranked women's teams left

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Jacketfan2011 on March 10, 2008, 01:11:02 PM

Is it just me or is determining a conference's strength by comparing teams to each other a bit of a red herring ? Not even sure that is the right term, but I like saying it. There are two conclusions I can draw when conference teams beat up on each other. 1 - the conference sucks top to bottom. 2 - the conference is great top to bottom. Isn't the true measure of a conferences strength their record against good teams outside their conference? In that regard, I believe the UAA has 6 of the top 7 strength's of schedule, led by Emory at #1. Granted some of that must be due to confernce play but part must also come from outside teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 10, 2008, 01:14:06 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on March 10, 2008, 11:44:32 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on March 09, 2008, 02:30:06 PM
I've posted this before, but I continue to feel strongly that the WIAC has come back to the pack in a big way now that redshirting has been banned. Former UW-Stevens Point head man Dick Bennett pointed to this as well in a radio interview he did early in the year. The feasibility of redshirting (for non-medical reasons) was a huge advantage for the WIAC.
A level playing field is a must at the D3 level. When did the redshirt ban start?

Before the 2004-05 season. The Northwest Conference and American Southwest Conference also frequently used the so-called "routine redshirt."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 10, 2008, 01:20:09 PM

Quote from: atnwriter on March 10, 2008, 01:01:10 PM
interesting to note

16 teams left in each gender

only 8 ranked men's teams left
15 ranked women's teams left

This has been discussed a bit on the women's top 25 board (and elsewhere). IMO there just isn't the depth of women's talent (yet!) that there is with the men. Girl's basketball is still very young in terms of quality coaching, parity in attention and facilities, etc. The men go at least 50 deep in high quality teams (and even #70 has a decent chance of an 'upset' against a top 10 team on a given night); such is simply not (yet!) the case with the women (or another way of saying it: the gap between #10 and #50 is far smaller for the men than for the women).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 10, 2008, 01:33:08 PM

The women's National Tournament committee's have been 1000% better at moving teams around Mr. Y. I don't believe the women had any first and second round pods with an Augustana/WashingtonU/Wooster in it.

Take the Great Lakes Region for example on the women's side where Thomas More, DePauw and Hope were ranked 1, 2, 3 pretty much all season with DePauw having the only loss.

The only way any of the 3 teams could have met was in the Final Four or Championship game.

The men's tournament has been better at moving teams the last 3 years, but they could still be better in seeding teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 10, 2008, 01:42:38 PM

sac, you're absolutely correct, but if I counted right there were only 3 men's pods without a top 25 team, so the men could have still sent 13 ranked teams to the Sweet Sixteen. The main difference, IMO, is that unranked men's teams are far more likely to pull 'upsets' than unranked women's teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on March 10, 2008, 02:18:46 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on March 10, 2008, 12:49:10 PM
Wash U beat Augustana in overtime Saturday. As I have said all season long, there is no separation there. Those are two very different but dead-even basketball teams.

Looking at the UAA vs CCIW team-by-team as the standings finished...

1. Chicago (11-3) vs Augustana (11-3)
2. Wash U (10-4) vs IWU (9-5)
2. Brandeis (10-4) vs Wheaton (9-5)
4. Rochester (9-5) vs Elmhurst (8-6)
5. Carnegie Mellon (6-8) vs Carthage (7-7)
6. NYU (6-8) vs North Park (6-8)
7. Emory (3-11) vs North Central (4-10)
8. Case (1-13) vs Millikin (2-12)

I know a couple things:

1) Augustana is better than Chicago.
2) Wash U is better than IWU.

After that, I haven't seen enough of the UAA to know where the advantage goes. However, I suspect Brandeis vs Wheaton is a push, and I suspect Rochester vs Elmhurst is as well. (Remember, Elmhurst beat #1 Hope on a neutral floor.) I'm guessing 5-8 are toss-ups as well.

When you get right down to it, is there really any separation here?

How do you "know" those things? Chicago beat WashU a week ago by 8 and Augustana lost to WashU by 3 two days ago. These types of objective arguments dont prove anything. Also, if you want to bring up Elmhurst beating #1 Hope: remember that Rochester was ranked #1 for most of the weeks this season, WashU was ranked #1 a few times, and Brandeis was ranked #2 for most of the season. They lost these high rankings by losing in conference, not by losses to teams in other conferences.

The fact is that the UAA is 80-20 this year out of conference, the best out-of-conference win% of anyone (CCIW is 68-23, WIAC is 55-29, for fairness to these two leagues I have not counted the conference tourneys since this adds 7 wins and 7 losses). Additionally, the UAA is ranked 1st in the regular Massey Ratings (by alot, UAA: 0.48, NESCAC: 0.277, CCIW: 0.249, WIAC: 0.195), they are first in Massey with MOV (UAA: 0.506, NESCAC: 0.373, WIAC: 0.336, CCIW: 0.323), and they have 3 teams in the sweet 16. I dont believe anyone has a stronger resume.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 10, 2008, 02:44:24 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on March 10, 2008, 02:18:46 PM
How do you "know" those things? Chicago beat WashU a week ago by 8 and Augustana lost to WashU by 3 two days ago. These types of objective arguments dont prove anything. Also, if you want to bring up Elmhurst beating #1 Hope: remember that Rochester was ranked #1 for most of the weeks this season, WashU was ranked #1 a few times, and Brandeis was ranked #2 for most of the season. They lost these high rankings by losing in conference, not by losses to teams in other conferences.

The fact is that the UAA is 80-20 this year out of conference, the best out-of-conference win% of anyone (CCIW is 68-23, WIAC is 55-29, for fairness to these two leagues I have not counted the conference tourneys since this adds 7 wins and 7 losses). Additionally, the UAA is ranked 1st in the regular Massey Ratings (by alot, UAA: 0.48, NESCAC: 0.277, CCIW: 0.249, WIAC: 0.195), they are first in Massey with MOV (UAA: 0.506, NESCAC: 0.373, WIAC: 0.336, CCIW: 0.323), and they have 3 teams in the sweet 16. I dont believe anyone has a stronger resume.

From seeing all four teams play. I feel confident that Augie is better than Chicago and Wash U is better than IWU. I trust my ability to evaluate teams and that is how I see it.

I do think the UAA was the best league this year, but I guess I am just saying I don't see a ton of real separation. I'm guessing you play those games (1 vs 1, 2 vs 2, etc) and you get 8 barn-burners, just like we got in real life when #2 Wash U played #2 IWU in St. Louis...

http://www.iwu.edu/~iwunews/sports/mbb2008/IWUMBB7.HTM

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 10, 2008, 04:27:47 PM

In my latest blog post (http://www.d3hoops.com/dailydose/2008/03/04/top-25-news-and-notes-week-14/), I mentioned that I would submit pick'em entries based on how the Week 14 Top 25 polls told me to pick the games.

After the first weekend, as you may have guessed, my men's pick'em is getting thrashed. I have scored 35 points, ranking a distant 108th overall. I have just eight teams still alive, and two of my final four selections lost the first chance they could. In the lower left of the bracket, I got just six first-round games correct, and missed on every second-round game. I think it is safe to assume that this entry will not win.

The women's pick-em is doing substantially better, and even appears among the leaders (barely) in the standings email. This bracket sits in 17th place with 49 points, a mere six points out of the lead. I still have 11 teams alive, including three of my final four.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fcnews on March 10, 2008, 04:40:29 PM

Quote from: sac on March 10, 2008, 01:33:08 PM
The women's National Tournament committee's have been 1000% better at moving teams around Mr. Y. I don't believe the women had any first and second round pods with an Augustana/WashingtonU/Wooster in it.

I thought I'd warn you sac, we're not suppose use this term on this site.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 10, 2008, 04:54:54 PM

Agreed -- let's not use the NAIA terms here in talking about the NCAA Tournament!

We don't have a regional tournament; there's only one NCAA Tournament.

However, Sac is referring to the committee, not the tournament. Kind of an important detail.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fcnews on March 10, 2008, 05:05:02 PM

You mean the Women's NCAA Tournament committee?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 10, 2008, 05:39:46 PM

Nope. I mean the NCAA Women's Division III Basketball Committee. Thanks for inquiring.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 10, 2008, 05:45:24 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 10, 2008, 05:39:46 PM
Nope. I mean the NCAA Women's Division III Basketball Committee. Thanks for inquiring.

However, sac's wording can be useful to distinguish the National Committee from the various Regional Committees.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 10, 2008, 06:37:31 PM

::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 10, 2008, 10:43:45 PM

Yeah, well, some people just like to hear themselves complain. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on March 11, 2008, 03:00:00 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 10, 2008, 10:43:45 PM
Yeah, well, some people just like to hear themselves complain. :)

How can you not when you have that great of a voice?

Which makes me wonder...do you think the guy who does the voices for the movie previews in the theater always talk like that? Its a gift and a curse

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 11, 2008, 03:06:38 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on March 10, 2008, 02:44:24 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on March 10, 2008, 02:18:46 PM
How do you "know" those things? Chicago beat WashU a week ago by 8 and Augustana lost to WashU by 3 two days ago. These types of objective arguments dont prove anything. Also, if you want to bring up Elmhurst beating #1 Hope: remember that Rochester was ranked #1 for most of the weeks this season, WashU was ranked #1 a few times, and Brandeis was ranked #2 for most of the season. They lost these high rankings by losing in conference, not by losses to teams in other conferences.

The fact is that the UAA is 80-20 this year out of conference, the best out-of-conference win% of anyone (CCIW is 68-23, WIAC is 55-29, for fairness to these two leagues I have not counted the conference tourneys since this adds 7 wins and 7 losses). Additionally, the UAA is ranked 1st in the regular Massey Ratings (by alot, UAA: 0.48, NESCAC: 0.277, CCIW: 0.249, WIAC: 0.195), they are first in Massey with MOV (UAA: 0.506, NESCAC: 0.373, WIAC: 0.336, CCIW: 0.323), and they have 3 teams in the sweet 16. I dont believe anyone has a stronger resume.

From seeing all four teams play. I feel confident that Augie is better than Chicago and Wash U is better than IWU. I trust my ability to evaluate teams and that is how I see it.

Precisely. I saw all eight CCIW teams this season (half of them multiple times), and I saw all eight UAA teams as well. The two conferences are roughly equal in terms of their overall caliber. Just like Bob, I trust my ability to evaluate teams.

If you had a conference vs. conference ladder series (#1 vs. #1, #2 vs. #2, #3 vs. #3, etc.) this year between the CCIW and the UAA, you'd probably get a 4-4 split most nights, with an occasional 5-3 in one direction or the other. I first started thinking about this when I saw Rochester face Chicago and I found myself thinking, "Wow, Rochester could almost be a clone of Elmhurst." The more I watched, the more I realized that Rochester really wasn't any better than Elmhurst, either ... and the Yellowjackets were #3 at the time, while the Bluejays were only #25. Put those two teams on a neutral court, and the game would be a push.

A resume is one thing; no one's disputing that the UAA's got the goods this year over every other league in the nation in just about every category (although the UAA has the great advantage of having some of its teams located in weaker regions where the competition does not stack up to what the CCIW faces out of conference). But what Bob and I are talking about is something else entirely, and it doesn't necessarily condense to raw numbers. I know what I saw this year as I spent all those Fridays and Sundays in the Ratner Center. What I saw was outstanding, top-notch D3 basketball that, nevertheless, was no better than the brand of basketball I watched in CCIW gyms.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ddahl44 on March 11, 2008, 01:07:34 PM

Not sure if this has been touched on, but who made out the tournament bracket?
Alums for Whitworth and Ursinius? How do the number 1, 2 and 4 teams in the country end up in one region? Whitworth, in the same region, not even in the top 16 gets a bye and then plays at home in round two? In another region the three best teams are only ranked 10, 13, and 16. #16 Ursinus doesn't even have to face another top 16 team until round 4 the regional finals after playing two games at home. Meanwhile, #6 Augustana, albeit at home, has to face #11 Wash U. in round 2.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on March 11, 2008, 01:15:44 PM

Quote from: ddahl44 on March 11, 2008, 01:07:34 PM
Not sure if this has been touched on, but who made out the tournament bracket?
Alums for Whitworth and Ursinius? How do the number 1, 2 and 4 teams in the country end up in one region? Whitworth, in the same region, not even in the top 16 gets a bye and then plays at home in round two? In another region the three best teams are only ranked 10, 13, and 16. #16 Ursinus doesn't even have to face another top 16 team until round 4 the regional finals after playing two games at home. Meanwhile, #6 Augustana, albeit at home, has to face #11 Wash U. in round 2.

Come on, everyone knows how the brackets are put together! The NCAA puts monkeys on typewritters and has them hammer out the brackets...NCAA does notify them of the stipulation that while money is an issue, fairness and logical-ness trumps all

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on March 11, 2008, 01:19:51 PM

I mean that is the nature of d3, brackets are geographic, and they do not do seedings, if they did and used some sort of RPI system, I think it would be safe to say that Amherst, Hope, Brandeis, (maybe centre and white water) would have had byes. I would actually like to sit down some day with those power rankings that were put up and then put out a bracket.

The worst thing because of no seeding, is that Amherst (a 1 seed) gets a bye instead of playing a 16 seed and then SHOULD play a 8/9 seed, but instead the committee treats it like a first round game for amherst and gives them the winner of the 13/14 teams in its bracket.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on March 11, 2008, 02:56:54 PM

Quote from: ILive4This on March 11, 2008, 01:19:51 PM
I mean that is the nature of d3, brackets are geographic, and they do not do seedings, if they did and used some sort of RPI system, I think it would be safe to say that Amherst, Hope, Brandeis, (maybe centre and white water) would have had byes. I would actually like to sit down some day with those power rankings that were put up and then put out a bracket.

If you want an RPI type rating (which takes into account strength of schedule etc.), you could just use the Massey Ratings. According to Massey the top 5 teams are (without MOV): Millsaps, Ursinus, Brandeis, Rochester, and WashU; with MOV: Brandeis, Hope, Ohio Wes., Amherst, Chicago. Although the MOV ratings include the 3 teams you listed, they also include Ohio Wesl and Chicago and I dont think anyone would argue that they deserve byes. Therefore, a purely mathematical bracket really wouldnt work either, some common sense also needs to be used. However, I think it is hard to judge the records of all the teams in the country, through all of the regions, because a given record in one region doesnt mean the same as in another region. It is also too much to expect that all of the committee members will see each of the tournament candidates play. This isnt DI where it is easy to watch each NCAA tourney candidate on TV at some time during the season. Sometimes they just have to go by these regional factors, primary criteria, and secondary criteria to make assignments without knowing anything about the team or their opponents. The OWP or OOWP is not a good measure for comparing teams between regions, so there is really no good metric to compare how teams stack up from region to region when both teams have similar records.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 11, 2008, 04:51:11 PM

I think the Massey ratings you cite include the first two tournament games, so that's probably why OWU is so high.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 11, 2008, 05:32:11 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on March 11, 2008, 02:56:54 PM
The OWP or OOWP is not a good measure for comparing teams between regions, so there is really no good metric to compare how teams stack up from region to region when both teams have similar records.

OWP & OOWP = pooh, it doesn't measure anything and should be dropped as a primary criteria. Secondary maybe.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 11, 2008, 05:39:50 PM

Quote from: sac on March 11, 2008, 05:32:11 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on March 11, 2008, 02:56:54 PM
The OWP or OOWP is not a good measure for comparing teams between regions, so there is really no good metric to compare how teams stack up from region to region when both teams have similar records.

OWP & OOWP = pooh, it doesn't measure anything and should be dropped as a primary criteria. Secondary maybe.

OWP and OOWP still beat the hell out of QOWI.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 11, 2008, 05:40:40 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 11, 2008, 05:39:50 PM
Quote from: sac on March 11, 2008, 05:32:11 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on March 11, 2008, 02:56:54 PM
The OWP or OOWP is not a good measure for comparing teams between regions, so there is really no good metric to compare how teams stack up from region to region when both teams have similar records.

OWP & OOWP = pooh, it doesn't measure anything and should be dropped as a primary criteria. Secondary maybe.

OWP and OOWP still beat the hell out of QOWI.

I'm less convinced

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 11, 2008, 05:44:00 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 11, 2008, 05:39:50 PM
OWP and OOWP still beat the hell out of QOWI.

I could figure out QOWI on my own at least!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 11, 2008, 05:55:16 PM

The big problem to me, is not counting every D3 game (OWP might make more sense then, but I doubt it), and the imbalance in using a "record vs ranked opponents" as a criteria for national selection when some regions have as many as 5 more ranked teams than others.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Cards7580 on March 11, 2008, 06:05:41 PM

"...the imbalance in using a "record vs ranked opponents" as a criteria for national selection when some regions have as many as 5 more ranked teams than others...."

Does that record versus RANKED teams count when the RANKED team was RANKED only or games after it fell out of the rankings? For instance Brockport was RANKED early but dropped out, so was Greensboro.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on March 11, 2008, 06:13:16 PM

I don't think, (could be worng), that it carries weight relative to the past. It is reajusted to the teams latest preformance.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 11, 2008, 06:16:25 PM

'Ranked opponents' refers only to those teams ranked in the FINAL regional rankings (which, alas, we never see). It has nothing to do with poll rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on March 11, 2008, 07:09:57 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on March 11, 2008, 02:56:54 PM
Quote from: ILive4This on March 11, 2008, 01:19:51 PM
I mean that is the nature of d3, brackets are geographic, and they do not do seedings, if they did and used some sort of RPI system, I think it would be safe to say that Amherst, Hope, Brandeis, (maybe centre and white water) would have had byes. I would actually like to sit down some day with those power rankings that were put up and then put out a bracket.

If you want an RPI type rating (which takes into account strength of schedule etc.), you could just use the Massey Ratings. According to Massey the top 5 teams are (without MOV): Millsaps, Ursinus, Brandeis, Rochester, and WashU; with MOV: Brandeis, Hope, Ohio Wes., Amherst, Chicago. Although the MOV ratings include the 3 teams you listed, they also include Ohio Wesl and Chicago and I dont think anyone would argue that they deserve byes. Therefore, a purely mathematical bracket really wouldnt work either, some common sense also needs to be used. However, I think it is hard to judge the records of all the teams in the country, through all of the regions, because a given record in one region doesnt mean the same as in another region. It is also too much to expect that all of the committee members will see each of the tournament candidates play. This isnt DI where it is easy to watch each NCAA tourney candidate on TV at some time during the season. Sometimes they just have to go by these regional factors, primary criteria, and secondary criteria to make assignments without knowing anything about the team or their opponents. The OWP or OOWP is not a good measure for comparing teams between regions, so there is really no good metric to compare how teams stack up from region to region when both teams have similar records.

I got to be honest, its nice to see Brandeis in the top 5 of both massey ratings, and yes clearly you use the math as a guide then some common sense, i mean polls should be considered as well, quality wins and losses etc..

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on March 12, 2008, 12:46:33 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 11, 2008, 04:51:11 PM
I think the Massey ratings you cite include the first two tournament games, so that's probably why OWU is so high.

That is correct, the massey ratings were updated and I didnt feel like looking for last weeks. Regardless, Chicago is still in there with their loss, which still illustrates my point that you cant go just by the RPI numbers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on March 13, 2008, 01:13:35 PM

So where should/will UW-WW end up in the final Top 25?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 13, 2008, 11:56:20 PM

Any chance we can wait to see how the rest of the teams complete the season?
It has a lot to do with teams above and below them!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on March 14, 2008, 01:41:42 AM

well, there was only one team above them, and I do not see white water passing them. My guess as of right now is top 15 somewhere, they are helped since only 7 ranked teams made the sweet 16

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on March 14, 2008, 02:31:16 PM

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on March 13, 2008, 11:56:20 PM
Any chance we can wait to see how the rest of the teams complete the season?
It has a lot to do with teams above and below them!

Of course! I was just interested...and very suprised by UW-WW early exit, I mean they were 2nd in the nation and had a home game. But historically they have seemed to struggle in the NCAA

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on March 15, 2008, 09:59:14 AM

Pretty impressive performance by the ranked teams last night, as 6 of the 8 advance to the elite eight.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on March 15, 2008, 10:44:00 AM

Quote from: sac on March 11, 2008, 05:32:11 PM
OWP & OOWP = pooh, it doesn't measure anything and should be dropped as a primary criteria. Secondary maybe.

It measures quite a bit more than QOWI, of course the regionality thing waters it down big time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fcnews on March 15, 2008, 11:12:57 AM

After watching the two games in the STL last night, three teams really impressed me. 1.) of course Wash U. and their ability to never be out of a game. 2.) Millsaps is a very well coached squad and extremely athletic. 3.) BV, I think this squad has been underrated the last month. Size galore and great speed at the guards. Just my thoughts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 15, 2008, 11:15:47 AM

Quote from: smedindy on March 15, 2008, 10:44:00 AM
Quote from: sac on March 11, 2008, 05:32:11 PM
OWP & OOWP = pooh, it doesn't measure anything and should be dropped as a primary criteria. Secondary maybe.

It measures quite a bit more than QOWI, of course the regionality thing waters it down big time.

It doesn't measure anything

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 15, 2008, 12:08:40 PM

Sac -- you have to be kidding me. Heck, even Division I uses this as a metric.

It only measures in-region games, that's for sure, but by now the NCAA's philosophy should be clear to schools about what games "count" and which are ignored.

Without a strength of schedule component, Green Mountain looks better than Hope. Simply using regional record isn't enough. And using QOWI, which measured regional record twice, ignored the basic question as to how your opponents got the record they got, giving a team the same credit for playing Green Mountain or Amherst.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fcnews on March 15, 2008, 12:24:05 PM

Excuse me for my ignorance, but I don't understand the DIII philosphy of forcing "in region games" on the schools. If a school can do the fundraising and schedule a few trips that don't take away from classes, why should this count against them. Isn't part of being a student-athlete a chance to experience the most out of their playing days.

Also, strength of schedule penalizes teams for their conference teams down falls. These are games that are musts on their schedules.

I think it is fairly easy to tell who has a tough non-conference schedule and who doesn't.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 15, 2008, 12:27:30 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 15, 2008, 12:08:40 PM
Sac -- you have to be kidding me. Heck, even Division I uses this as a metric.

It only measures in-region games, that's for sure, but by now the NCAA's philosophy should be clear to schools about what games "count" and which are ignored.

Without a strength of schedule component, Green Mountain looks better than Hope. Simply using regional record isn't enough. And using QOWI, which measured regional record twice, ignored the basic question as to how your opponents got the record they got, giving a team the same credit for playing Green Mountain or Amherst.

No they don't use OWP, they use RPI which has OWP, OOWP and your winning % combined in a formula.

Up to 90% of a D3 schedule is going to come from conference games, for most teams all OWP is going to tell is how well the conference did.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fcnews on March 15, 2008, 12:31:33 PM

well said sac +1 K

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 15, 2008, 01:08:50 PM

Except the math is wrong. It's only 90% if you don't bother to play non-conference in-region games. Otherwise if you're in an eight-team conference, playing 14 conference games plus let's say the high of three in the conference tournament, that's 17 out of 28 games that are against conference teams. It gets a bit higher in the SCAC and if you're the ASC, which weighs ease of scheduling over national competition, then that's a different story.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 15, 2008, 01:17:45 PM

"Up to"

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fcnews on March 15, 2008, 01:45:30 PM

If Fontbonne has two games on their schedule next year, DI SIU-E and DII Chaminade, why should this not count towards their SOS. They are both NCAA opponents. I understand it's not what the DIII wants. But, it doesn't make any sense. These two games are much tougher then adding a couple of mid level "in region" DIII contests. Plus these two games help the programs bottom line and allows for them to do some traveling.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 16, 2008, 12:26:53 AM

fc - this one is easy... how do we compare a team that plays a couple of non-D3 games with teams that play in the division? We can't! There is no comparison. So, smartly, we throw those games out. If we go to pick teams based on games outside of the division for an in-division championship tournament, how is that fair to anyone? I hope the NCAA Committee doesn't sit on a conference-call saying, "sheesh, we better get that team in for beating Chaminade, since they were the only team to do so and I can't compare them to the other at-large team who didn't play Chaminade."

This is Division III... play teams out of division if you want to, but when we compare the teams in this division and pick those worthly of playing in the national championship, understand if those games out of division shouldn't be considered. If you want those games to count, change divisions.

Realize that might be harsh, but it just doesn't make any sense to me - award a team for playing OUT of the division! Or heck, out of the NCAA (NAIA)!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fcnews on March 16, 2008, 01:06:54 AM

Dave - I think your explanation took things alittle to extremes. No one said the committee needed to use these games as comparisons to anyones games. I said that they could be figured into OWPI or SOS pretty easily. As for strength of schedule it's easy to give a value for a game played against either of the teams mentioned. Games played for guarantees have been part of scheduling, in all divisions, for years.

I can handle harsh. Just look at the question with an open mind. Do these games have value to SOS.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 16, 2008, 01:23:29 AM

Understand your point... I just don't think games outside of the division should count for comparision sakes in SOS or anything. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Marty Peretz on March 16, 2008, 01:40:54 AM

Give credit to the voters. Three of the final four teams have held the number one spot this year. That ain't too bad.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on March 16, 2008, 11:20:18 AM

Quote from: Marty Peretz on March 16, 2008, 01:40:54 AM
Give credit to the voters. Three of the final four teams have held the number one spot this year. That ain't too bad.

I totally agree... ESPECIALLY this year, where so many top 25 teams were beaten. I'm not really even sure "upset" is the right word, because there were so many teams playing at roughly the same level.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 16, 2008, 01:20:26 PM

I think everyone has a team or two they'd rather see in Salem but its hard to be disappointed with a tournament that produces a Final Four with #1, #3, #11 and #16.

Three of them having spent time at #1, the pre-season #1, and 3 of the 4 being presumebly the top seed in their Section, the 4th having beaten that sectionals top seed.

D1 will be hard pressed to do better.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 16, 2008, 01:43:30 PM

Quote from: fcnews on March 16, 2008, 01:06:54 AM
Dave - I think your explanation took things alittle to extremes. No one said the committee needed to use these games as comparisons to anyones games. I said that they could be figured into OWPI or SOS pretty easily. As for strength of schedule it's easy to give a value for a game played against either of the teams mentioned. Games played for guarantees have been part of scheduling, in all divisions, for years.

I can handle harsh. Just look at the question with an open mind. Do these games have value to SOS.

fc, thanks for the discussion.

I will weigh in on Fontbonne's non-conference schedule. Within a five-hour drive of St Louis, you have so many more teams from which to choose non-conference, in-region games.

I will concede a D-1 "money game" that helps fund the program. If you have one nearby NAIA or D-II school whom you can schedule around "dead week", then I can justify that for your student-athletes. (You know, play a game to keep the skills up, but not an "in-region" game that counts against you.)

D-III needs to promote D-III.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 16, 2008, 02:18:19 PM

Other former #1s...ONE!

Rochester: WK 3, WK 4, WK 5, WK 6, WK 7, WK 8

Washington U.: Preseason, WK 9
Amherst: WK 1, WK 2, WK 10, WK 11, WK 12, WK 13
Hope: WK 14

Rochester was in the other bracket, so we could've had all former and current (Hope) #1s in the Final Four.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 16, 2008, 03:39:39 PM

Well, the way Rochester played on Friday... they didn't deserve to move on. I was disappointed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ILive4This on March 16, 2008, 11:33:30 PM

Another response to FCnews, my feeling is it would work both ways. If they got the advantage of a higher SOS, then you also would have to face their OWP which would most likely be fairly low as it would be a d1 team that gets beat up on in the regular season. Chaminade is a d2 with some history, but since they face 7 tough d1 teams during the EA sports tourney, and have not had a big impact in d2 as of late, i think this would hurt FC more than it would help.

to help the bottom line and promote travel more, than perhaps look for a big d3 tourney over the holidays with a decent guarantee and some strong d3 teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on March 17, 2008, 12:29:50 AM

Quote from: fcnews on March 15, 2008, 01:45:30 PM
If Fontbonne has two games on their schedule next year, DI SIU-E and DII Chaminade, why should this not count towards their SOS. They are both NCAA opponents. I understand it's not what the DIII wants. But, it doesn't make any sense. These two games are much tougher then adding a couple of mid level "in region" DIII contests. Plus these two games help the programs bottom line and allows for them to do some traveling.

Maybe they can get a game against the Boston Red Sox or the Miami Dolphins, too. Would that help their SOS or OWPI? Stick to the benefits these games provide (you mention) and leave it at that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 17, 2008, 04:10:13 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 16, 2008, 01:43:30 PM
Quote from: fcnews on March 16, 2008, 01:06:54 AM
Dave - I think your explanation took things alittle to extremes. No one said the committee needed to use these games as comparisons to anyones games. I said that they could be figured into OWPI or SOS pretty easily. As for strength of schedule it's easy to give a value for a game played against either of the teams mentioned. Games played for guarantees have been part of scheduling, in all divisions, for years.

I can handle harsh. Just look at the question with an open mind. Do these games have value to SOS.
fc, thanks for the discussion.

I will weigh in on Fontbonne's non-conference schedule. Within a five-hour drive of St Louis, you have so many more teams from which to choose non-conference, in-region games.

I will concede a D-1 "money game" that helps fund the program. If you have one nearby NAIA or D-II school whom you can schedule around "dead week", then I can justify that for your student-athletes. (You know, play a game to keep the skills up, but not an "in-region" game that counts against you.)

D-III needs to promote D-III.

I agree with you, Ralph, but it should be mentioned that games against D2 teams are also "money games". NCAA rules stipulate that when a team from one of the two scholarship divisions hosts a game against a lower-division team (D2 @ D1, D3 @ D1, or D3 @ D2), the host has to pay out a guarantee to the visitor.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 21, 2008, 08:57:11 PM

Even though they were 'only' #3 and #11 in the final regular season poll, hats off to d3hoops.com for pre-season #1 facing pre-season #2 in the title game! 8)

Now we'll see if they got the order right? :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 21, 2008, 09:13:34 PM

Props to WashU for rebounding from the loss of an incredibly talented point guard to make the final. They have a great team all-around, but losing the PG is a tough one to adjust to; they've done well.

A shame we won't get to see Olson and Wallis going head to head, but I expect a good game anyway.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 22, 2008, 11:53:29 AM

I think the D3hoops.com heirarchy have every right to toot their own horn on the front page as preseason #1 and #2 go head to head for the title tonight. I think everyone can agree, going into the tourney, that it was very wide open. Amherst may not be too much of a suprise, but to see Washington U. come out on the other side of the bracket shocked many. It was a tough year and it's quite amazing that those two teams, picked at the beginning of the year as the best, will prove it tonight. Congrats to Pat Coleman and the boys.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 22, 2008, 12:47:23 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 29, 2007, 01:33:38 PM
Well, I submitted my preseason ballot for the D3Hoops.com Top 25 poll today. This is always the toughest ballot by far. I'm interested to see how the poll comes out.

1 Washington U.
2 Amherst
3 Brockport State
4 Capital
5 Brandeis
6 Guilford
7 UW-Stevens Point
8 Lewis and Clark
9 Williams
10 Virginia Wesleyan
11 Augustana
12 Aurora
13 Elmhurst
14 Calvin
15 Rochester
16 Puget Sound
17 Baldwin-Wallace
18 Wooster
19 UW-Whitewater
20 Hope
21 Worcester Polytech
22 Mary Hardin-Baylor
23 Loras
24 Keene State
25 Grinnell

Well, this was my first ballot from way back in late October. Some good, some bad...but at least I agreed with my peers on #1 and #2! :)

- Q, from courtside at the Salem Civic Center

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: atn alum on March 22, 2008, 02:57:02 PM

by the way...last yr's final was a preseason no. 1 (V Wes) vs preseason No. 3 (Amherst)

We know what we're doing :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 22, 2008, 06:36:38 PM

HOW THEY FARED (postseason edition)

#   1   Hope (28-4) received a bye, def. #20 Capital 92-72, def. Ohio Wesleyan 71-63, def. Wheaton (IL) 83-70, lost to #11 Washington U. 89-74 at Salem, VA, and def. #16 Ursinus 100-86 at Salem, VA
#   2   ~~UW-Whitewater (24-5)~~ lost to Loras 71-70 season complete
#   3   Amherst (27-4) received a bye, def. John Jay 96-74, def. Richard Stockton 85-77 at Plattsburgh St., def. #5 Brandeis 65-55 at Plattsburgh St., def. #16 Ursinus 84-58 at Salem, VA, and lost to #11 Washington U. 90-68 at Salem, VA
#   4   ~~Centre (26-3)~~ def. Franklin 75-61 and lost to Ohio Wesleyan 82-65 season complete
#   5   ~~Brandeis (23-6)~~ def. Lasell 80-59, def. Bowdoin 68-53, won at #7 Plattsburgh St. 74-63, and lost to #3 Amherst 65-55 at Plattsburgh St.; season complete
#   6   ~~Augustana (23-6)~~ def. Aurora 72-61 and lost to #11 Washington U. 70-67 (OT) season complete
#   7   ~~Plattsburgh St. (27-3)~~ received a bye, def. King's 83-77 (OT), and lost to #5 Brandeis 74-63 season complete
#   8   ~~Guilford (24-5)~~ lost to St. Mary's (MD) 89-77 season complete
#   9   ~~UW-Stevens Point (23-7)~~ def. #22 Chicago 67-53 and lost to Buena Vista 54-53, both at St. Thomas; season complete
#   10   ~~Mass.-Dartmouth (25-4)~~ received a bye and lost to Coast Guard 50-47 season complete
#   11   Washington U. (25-6) def. #17 Wooster 79-74 at Augustana, won at #6 Augustana 70-67 (OT), def. Buena Vista 85-77 (OT), def. #14 Millsaps 57-46, def. #1 Hope 89-74 at Salem, VA, and def. #3 Amherst 90-68 at Salem, VA
#   12   ~~Mary Hardin-Baylor (26-4)~~ def. Fontbonne 65-62 at Millsaps and lost at #14 Millsaps 57-56 season complete
#   13   ~~Rochester (22-6)~~ def. Middlebury 56-43, def. Penn St.-Behrend 65-56, and lost to Coast Guard 57-48 at Ursinus; season complete
#   14   ~~Millsaps (28-4)~~ def. #19 Maryville (TN) 80-72, def. #12 Mary Hardin-Baylor 57-56, def. St. Mary's (MD) 82-73 at Washington U. (St. Louis), and lost at #11 Washington U. 57-46 season complete
#   15   ~~Lawrence (22-3)~~ lost to Wheaton (IL) 93-83 (OT) at UW-Whitewater; season complete
#   16   Ursinus (29-4) def. Baptist Bible 94-76, def. #21 Virginia Wesleyan 70-64, def. Gettysburg 79-55, def. Coast Guard 82-76 (OT), lost to #3 Amherst 84-58 at Salem, VA, and lost to #1 Hope 100-86 at Salem, VA
#   17   ~~Wooster (23-5)~~ lost to #11 Washington U. 79-74 at Augustana; season complete
#   18   ~~St. Thomas (23-5)~~ lost to Buena Vista 72-70 season complete
#   19   ~~Maryville (TN) (24-3)~~ lost at #14 Millsaps 80-72 season complete
#   20   ~~Capital (24-6)~~ def. Bethany 92-70 and lost at #1 Hope 92-72 season complete
#   21   ~~Virginia Wesleyan (23-7)~~ def. Worcester Polytech 80-75 at Ursinus and lost at #16 Ursinus 70-64 season complete
#   22   ~~Chicago (18-8)~~ lost to #9 UW-Stevens Point 67-53 at St. Thomas; season complete
#   23   ~~UW-Platteville (19-7)~~ season complete
#   25   ~~Occidental (22-6)~~ def. Pomona-Pitzer 52-51 and lost at Whitworth 83-75 season complete
#   25   ~~Trinity (CT) (21-7)~~ lost to Coast Guard 70-65 season complete

Congratulations to the Washington U. Bears!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 22, 2008, 06:37:00 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 21, 2008, 08:57:11 PM
Even though they were 'only' #3 and #11 in the final regular season poll, hats off to d3hoops.com for pre-season #1 facing pre-season #2 in the title game! 8)

Now we'll see if they got the order right? :D

My hat is off - even the order was right! :)

How scary would Wash U have been if Sean Wallis stayed healthy? (On the other hand, they lost to Calvin before he was hurt - is it possible the other players rallied in ways that they were even better without their All American? :o)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 22, 2008, 06:42:44 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 22, 2008, 06:37:00 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 21, 2008, 08:57:11 PM
Even though they were 'only' #3 and #11 in the final regular season poll, hats off to d3hoops.com for pre-season #1 facing pre-season #2 in the title game! 8)

Now we'll see if they got the order right? :D

My hat is off - even the order was right! :)

How scary would Wash U have been if Sean Wallis stayed healthy? (On the other hand, they lost to Calvin before he was hurt - is it possible the other players rallied in ways that they were even better without their All American? :o)

The point's moot, Chuck. Wash U couldn't have done any better with Wallis than it did without him. The only difference is that the Bears might've won the UAA as well, and they might not have been taken to overtime in two of their tournament games. Without him the Bears walked the razor's edge, but they still prevailed -- and, in a very real sense, made his absence on the floor ultimately irrelevant.

I've said this before, and I know that it was reiterated by others in today's postgame show, but sometimes a team finds a way to compensate and persevere when an important player goes down. People change roles a bit, the coaches make adjustments, and the team succeeds in spite of the loss.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on March 22, 2008, 10:29:38 PM

Curious to hear what people think about who gets ranked #2 in the final poll - Hope or Amherst?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 22, 2008, 11:41:29 PM

Good question. I fear that too many voters will go with the easy "Amherst finished #2, Hope finished #3" answer, but that is merely a factor of scheduling. HOPEfully, they'll look at two factors:

Amherst was hammered even worse than Hope. (And both hammered Ursinus beyond any reasonable comparative scores analysis.)

Hope was higher ranked than Amherst going in. I didn't see any reason to change that ranking in the tourney.

I made a similar analysis for the women's tourney - I believe that Hope should finish with two #2s. (And for the women, perhaps even a 1a.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 22, 2008, 11:54:17 PM

I didn't know what to make of Hope as I was assuming Amherst would take care of WashU. After the game today, it's been an easier decision. I think Hope is a solid #2, although I would be surprised if they got enough votes to actually get that spot in the poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 24, 2008, 10:10:24 AM

I submitted my final ballot this morning. My top 5 was:

1 Washington U.
2 Amherst
3 Brandeis
4 Augustana
5 Hope

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HopeConvert on March 24, 2008, 11:02:39 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 22, 2008, 06:42:44 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 22, 2008, 06:37:00 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 21, 2008, 08:57:11 PM
Even though they were 'only' #3 and #11 in the final regular season poll, hats off to d3hoops.com for pre-season #1 facing pre-season #2 in the title game! 8)

Now we'll see if they got the order right? :D

My hat is off - even the order was right! :)

How scary would Wash U have been if Sean Wallis stayed healthy? (On the other hand, they lost to Calvin before he was hurt - is it possible the other players rallied in ways that they were even better without their All American? :o)

The point's moot, Chuck. Wash U couldn't have done any better with Wallis than it did without him. The only difference is that the Bears might've won the UAA as well, and they might not have been taken to overtime in two of their tournament games. Without him the Bears walked the razor's edge, but they still prevailed -- and, in a very real sense, made his absence on the floor ultimately irrelevant.

I've said this before, and I know that it was reiterated by others in today's postgame show, but sometimes a team finds a way to compensate and persevere when an important player goes down. People change roles a bit, the coaches make adjustments, and the team succeeds in spite of the loss.

Not only in the sense that they couldn't have finished any higher, but I'm not sure they could have played any better than they did. They did, after all, have 5 guys on the floor, and Ross Kelley was very solid at the point in both games. He protected the ball well, while also breaking down the defense off the dribble. I thought he played really superb defense, doing a good job staying in front of a very quick Andrew Olson (who had double his average turnovers per game). Additionally, it's hard to imagine that WashU could have shot any better than the 70% they shot in the second half against Amherst, or the 65% in the second half against Hope. Would they have scored more than 57 points in the half against Hope with Wallis in the lineup rather than Kelley? I kind of doubt it. A team that shoots 48% on the season shoots 58% on the weekend. Simply stated: they played great.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on March 24, 2008, 06:22:09 PM

Percentage of offense graduating

Millsaps 73%
Rochester 72%
Occidental 70%
Amherst 67%
Heidelberg 65%
Hope 65%
Plattsburgh St. 63%
Trinity (Conn) 62%
Ohio Wesleyan 62%
Coast Guard 61%
Brockport St. 60%
Guilford 56%
Bowdoin 55%
Brandeis 51%
UMD 49%
VA Wesleyan 49%-2
Wooster 48%
Albion 47%
Richard Stockton 45%
St. Mary's (Md) 45%
Loras 44%
Whitworth 44%
WashU 42%
Nazareth 41%
Ursinus 41%
Wheaton 39%
Augustana 38%
Maryville 37%
Chicago 36%
Centre 35%
Middlebury 34%
Lawrence 34%
UW Whitewater 29%
Mary Hardin Baylor 29%
Buena Vista 28%
Capital 26%
Ill Wesleyan 25%
Puget Sound 22%
Calvin 20%
Elms 19%
UW Stevens Point 16%
Randolph Macon 16%
St. Thomas 14%
Elmhurst 14%
Gettysburg 10%
UW Platteville 2%
Rhode Is College 0%

The teams in bold graduated a player who contributed 20% or more of his team's offense. VA Wesleyan graduated two. I included Kent Raymond and Rob Perry as graduating (I realize there are questions surrounding each).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 24, 2008, 07:01:19 PM

Quote from: scottiedawg on March 24, 2008, 06:22:09 PM
Augustana 38%

Note that Augustana senior Jordan Delp, their leading scorer through the 7 games he played (16.1 ppg), will return as a medical redshirt. Delp suffered a ruptured achilles on Dec. 8.

Augie will be one of the candidates for preseason #1 next season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on March 24, 2008, 09:26:38 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on March 24, 2008, 10:10:24 AM
I submitted my final ballot this morning. My top 5 was:

1 Washington U.
2 Amherst
3 Brandeis
4 Augustana
5 Hope

Good thing you're not the only one voting. After watching four games in Salem, I have no doubt in my mind that Hope would take Amherst 8 out of 10

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 24, 2008, 09:38:42 PM

Sorry, I was not convinced Hope would have beaten Amherst.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 24, 2008, 10:22:42 PM

Scottiedawg,

What is this list from? Did you just pick some "random" teams? Just curious. At first, I was thinking it was tournament teams. Obviously that's not the case.

Loras loses White (Conference POTY?) and Slater, combined average of 29.1 of 72.6 pts/gm. They were #1 and #4 in scoring, and two of four scoring in double digits. White (#1 rebounder) and Slater (#3) combined for 12.7 of 37.3 reb./gm.

Buena Vista loses 26.4 of 75.7 pts/gm. BV is hard to figure out because they were so balanced, playing a ton of guys each game. 10 players averaged 14 minutes or more. They do return 4 of 5 starters and and the top 5 scorers also return, all juniors. Only one player averaged double digits, while two players averaged in the 9 pt-category.

The only reason I mention these two teams is because both impressed and pulled off upsets in the tourney. Of course, BV lost to Washington U in OT.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on March 25, 2008, 12:16:26 AM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on March 24, 2008, 10:22:42 PM
What is this list from? Did you just pick some "random" teams? Just curious. At first, I was thinking it was tournament teams. Obviously that's not the case.

I used the Week 14 D3Hoops.com pool and included all those who received votes. As a Hope fan, I threw Calvin in there. It's an interesting, primary, very surface look at who may be strong next year. Obviously, I have little knowledge of injuries, recruits, transfers, and kids who didn't amass much stats this year, but are primed for breakout years. Perhaps as we get close to the beginning of next year, some local posters can chime in on their own teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SLP-O-8 on March 25, 2008, 04:02:33 AM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on March 24, 2008, 10:22:42 PM
Scottiedawg,

What is this list from? Did you just pick some "random" teams? Just curious. At first, I was thinking it was tournament teams. Obviously that's not the case.

Loras loses White (Conference POTY?) and Slater, combined average of 29.1 of 72.6 pts/gm. They were #1 and #4 in scoring, and two of four scoring in double digits. White (#1 rebounder) and Slater (#3) combined for 12.7 of 37.3 reb./gm.

Buena Vista loses 26.4 of 75.7 pts/gm. BV is hard to figure out because they were so balanced, playing a ton of guys each game. 10 players averaged 14 minutes or more. They do return 4 of 5 starters and and the top 5 scorers also return, all juniors. Only one player averaged double digits, while two players averaged in the 9 pt-category.

The only reason I mention these two teams is because both impressed and pulled off upsets in the tourney. Of course, BV lost to Washington U in OT.

Personally i think BV will be an even better team next year. They lose some very good players to graduation this year that added depth but only one started and the rest were good enough to give the starters minutes off in a hockey rotation style. I think BV will be very tough next year if all their players are in top shape. The posts in Fogelman and Cleveland will have great season years and put up some very big numbers. Wagner might have to switch roles to point so Stribe can move into the starting lineup at 2. Wagner has some very good handles and could possibly run the team. The starting 5 with Pearson also is very talented and shots the 3 ball lights out and you will have the big men to deal with down low. Things to improve on in the offseason would be free shooting. It seemed to kill us this year and has room for improvement.

BV has a JV team so these younger guys have been playing i believe 18 games this year as well. There is some serious talent down there as well in Mosher at the 2, who this year probably could have seen some time this year if it werent for such a talented team and him being only a freshman. How many teams in D3 have a 7 footer who rides the pine. Gute is very skinny i believe around 210 but if he gets some weight on him could provide backup minutes next year and do some good things if he develops better post moves. He has a very good mid range game from what i have seen of him. Osbourne a sophomore, is a pretty good floor general with a good shot. Probably have a role similar to Holton the backup PG this year. There are a few other players that will see minutes in Millea, Parker, Leinen, and Madyun. Overall i think there is some serious talent next year on this team and hopefully our sweet sixteen birth helps our recruiting for next year and bring in some top seniors.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 25, 2008, 07:43:09 AM

Quote from: HopeConvert on March 24, 2008, 11:02:39 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 22, 2008, 06:42:44 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 22, 2008, 06:37:00 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 21, 2008, 08:57:11 PM
Even though they were 'only' #3 and #11 in the final regular season poll, hats off to d3hoops.com for pre-season #1 facing pre-season #2 in the title game! 8)

Now we'll see if they got the order right? :D

My hat is off - even the order was right! :)

How scary would Wash U have been if Sean Wallis stayed healthy? (On the other hand, they lost to Calvin before he was hurt - is it possible the other players rallied in ways that they were even better without their All American? :o)

The point's moot, Chuck. Wash U couldn't have done any better with Wallis than it did without him. The only difference is that the Bears might've won the UAA as well, and they might not have been taken to overtime in two of their tournament games. Without him the Bears walked the razor's edge, but they still prevailed -- and, in a very real sense, made his absence on the floor ultimately irrelevant.

I've said this before, and I know that it was reiterated by others in today's postgame show, but sometimes a team finds a way to compensate and persevere when an important player goes down. People change roles a bit, the coaches make adjustments, and the team succeeds in spite of the loss.

Not only in the sense that they couldn't have finished any higher, but I'm not sure they could have played any better than they did. They did, after all, have 5 guys on the floor, and Ross Kelley was very solid at the point in both games. He protected the ball well, while also breaking down the defense off the dribble. I thought he played really superb defense, doing a good job staying in front of a very quick Andrew Olson (who had double his average turnovers per game). Additionally, it's hard to imagine that WashU could have shot any better than the 70% they shot in the second half against Amherst, or the 65% in the second half against Hope. Would they have scored more than 57 points in the half against Hope with Wallis in the lineup rather than Kelley? I kind of doubt it. A team that shoots 48% on the season shoots 58% on the weekend. Simply stated: they played great.

In the postgame interviews, Wallis mentioned Kelley's defense as one of the keys for Wash U. He more or less said that while he is the better offensive player at the PG position for the Bears, Kelley is the better defender -- and it sounded as though Kelley's work against Olson bears that out (no pun intended).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 25, 2008, 01:26:32 PM

Final poll is out.

Bob couldn't possibly have ranked IWU any higher than 21st, from the point total.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pabegg on March 25, 2008, 01:36:44 PM

Looking at the final Top 25 highlights WashU's accomplishment this year:

They beat each of #2 to #6 (Amherst, Hope, Brandeis, Augustana, and Millsaps), and were responsible for 5 of the 24 losses that those schools had this year.

They also beat #14 Buena Vista, #16 Rochester, #19 Wooster, and #25 Chicago, so they were 9-4 against the Top 25 this year. Add in wins against Platteville and Illinois Wesleyan (who received votes) and they were 11-4 against the best teams.

Their only other losses came at Calvin and at Carnegie Mellon.

They eliminated 6 of the Top 25 from the tournament or a full quarter of the Top 25. Has anyone else ever gone 6-0 against Top 25 teams in the tournament? (Or even gone unbeaten with fewer games played?)

Could this be the most impressive tournament run in the history of the NCAA at any level, men's or women's?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on March 25, 2008, 02:07:43 PM

Quote from: pabegg on March 25, 2008, 01:36:44 PM
Could this be the most impressive tournament run in the history of the NCAA at any level, men's or women's?

If you're going to talk about impressive tournament runs, don't forget what the Hope women did in 05-06. They won 6 straight road games to claim the walnut & bronze. Their first round game was against an unranked Dennison team, but the next 5 games were wins over #10 Capital (at Capital), #3 WashU, #4 DePauw (at DePauw), #2 Scranton, and #1 Southern Maine. Pretty hard to top that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on March 25, 2008, 02:46:04 PM

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frank_ezelle on March 26, 2008, 07:32:05 AM

Go Millsaps--we're #1, we're #1, we're #1.

As a Mississippi native, I come to realize that any time Mississippi is ranked first on a list, it is usually a list about something negative. Unfortunately, this is not a list where you want to see your team at the top.

The good news is that this group of seniors took the program to the Elite 8, something that will definitely make it easier to recruit the players that are needed to return to such a high level. Coach Wise and Coach LeBlanc at Millsaps don't get enough credit for the work they are doing, but I believe this year's proof that Millsaps can be a national contender will go a long way to buiding the Millsaps program into a consistent winner.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HopeConvert on March 27, 2008, 08:31:57 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 25, 2008, 07:43:09 AM
Quote from: HopeConvert on March 24, 2008, 11:02:39 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 22, 2008, 06:42:44 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 22, 2008, 06:37:00 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 21, 2008, 08:57:11 PM
Even though they were 'only' #3 and #11 in the final regular season poll, hats off to d3hoops.com for pre-season #1 facing pre-season #2 in the title game! 8)

Now we'll see if they got the order right? :D

My hat is off - even the order was right! :)

How scary would Wash U have been if Sean Wallis stayed healthy? (On the other hand, they lost to Calvin before he was hurt - is it possible the other players rallied in ways that they were even better without their All American? :o)

The point's moot, Chuck. Wash U couldn't have done any better with Wallis than it did without him. The only difference is that the Bears might've won the UAA as well, and they might not have been taken to overtime in two of their tournament games. Without him the Bears walked the razor's edge, but they still prevailed -- and, in a very real sense, made his absence on the floor ultimately irrelevant.

I've said this before, and I know that it was reiterated by others in today's postgame show, but sometimes a team finds a way to compensate and persevere when an important player goes down. People change roles a bit, the coaches make adjustments, and the team succeeds in spite of the loss.

Not only in the sense that they couldn't have finished any higher, but I'm not sure they could have played any better than they did. They did, after all, have 5 guys on the floor, and Ross Kelley was very solid at the point in both games. He protected the ball well, while also breaking down the defense off the dribble. I thought he played really superb defense, doing a good job staying in front of a very quick Andrew Olson (who had double his average turnovers per game). Additionally, it's hard to imagine that WashU could have shot any better than the 70% they shot in the second half against Amherst, or the 65% in the second half against Hope. Would they have scored more than 57 points in the half against Hope with Wallis in the lineup rather than Kelley? I kind of doubt it. A team that shoots 48% on the season shoots 58% on the weekend. Simply stated: they played great.

In the postgame interviews, Wallis mentioned Kelley's defense as one of the keys for Wash U. He more or less said that while he is the better offensive player at the PG position for the Bears, Kelley is the better defender -- and it sounded as though Kelley's work against Olson bears that out (no pun intended).

Having already praised Kelly's defense as well as Olson's obvious skills, I'd like to suggest there was another issue at play as well. Watching Olson against Ursinus on Friday, I was reminded of the words of Count Orsini-Rosenberg in Amadeus: "A young man trying to impress beyond his abilities. Too much spice. Too many notes." Mind you, he was saying it of Mozart. Nonetheless, I thought Olson often tried to make the flashy play when a simpler one would have sufficed. Some of his turnovers in the WashU games resulted from attempting to make very difficult passes, in one case a bounce pass through the legs, inside the lane. Olson did a lot of fancy dribbling, but it wasn't always clear he was actually accomplishing anything in the process. He had remarkable skills, but I wasn't convinced they were as purposeful and disciplined as they ought to be. The deeper the hole Amherst found for itself, the more undisciplined his game became.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 27, 2008, 09:28:05 AM

I definitely felt he came out trying to do too much against Ursinus. Did not get that impression against Wash U -- thought he came out much more in control.

Of course, I've seen Olson play at least a half-dozen times, so I know what he's capable of.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ac08 on March 27, 2008, 12:00:16 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 27, 2008, 09:28:05 AM
I definitely felt he came out trying to do too much against Ursinus. Did not get that impression against Wash U -- thought he came out much more in control.

Of course, I've seen Olson play at least a half-dozen times, so I know what he's capable of.

Do you have any particular plays that come to mind during the Ursinus game? I don't remember getting that vibe. I can't speak for everyone, but I know I am accustomed to the apotheosis of Olson's game as being the standard. You know, the half court alley-oop as the norm...that being said, I credit the defenses this past weekend for making him feel more uncomfortable than he usually does and cite that as the primary reason he committed the turnovers- not him playing above his means.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 27, 2008, 12:27:34 PM

I would have to go back to the tape but I know there were at least two possessions in the first half where he tried to make a pass in transition through too many people. Not much to credit the defense for in those other than simply having feet on the floor.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ac08 on March 27, 2008, 03:07:23 PM

Fair enough. But I must testify that it's amazing how many laws of physics are broken on his great days...

his sophomore year during the pioneer valley tournament, he threw a full court, double bounce pass to casanocha with some crazy english through a forest of feet... that remains one of the most spectacular throws i've seen him make

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 27, 2008, 06:09:47 PM

Olson threw one pass from the top of the key to the baseline... past several bodies that was unreal in the game against Ursinus. I know he is capable of that.

But there was one pass in the first half where he took a dribble to the baseline and then made a behind the back bounce pass to a teammate sitting about ten feet from him for the 3 pointer. It was a nice pass... it looked pretty... it resulted in three points... but it was completely unnecessary. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 27, 2008, 06:16:09 PM

Yeah but it was fun to watch. :)

He's one of the few PG's out there where you have to be alert at all times because you never know when or how the ball might be coming your way. I enjoyed watching him play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: La Verdad on March 27, 2008, 09:02:46 PM

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on March 27, 2008, 06:09:47 PM
But there was one pass in the first half where he took a dribble to the baseline and then made a behind the back bounce pass to a teammate sitting about ten feet from him for the 3 pointer. It was a nice pass... it looked pretty... it resulted in three points... but it was completely unnecessary. :)

I could be thinking of a different pass, but I believe you are referring to a pass he made directly in front of the Ursinus crowd, possibly to Baskauskas. If that is in fact the pass you are talking about, then I think saying it was completely unnecessary is a little off. The dribble creates a little more space for the shooter, and the behind the back pass was the most efficient way to get him the ball (based off my recollection of their spacing at the time).
Passing is a subtle art, to master it one must have (among other things) spectacular vision and a knack for creating the necessary angle to deliver the pass. Olson's vision is second to none, but what really separates him from the pack is his ability to create angles (I've never seen anyone use their eyes better than him).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 27, 2008, 09:10:13 PM

That was the pass I was refering to... and it happened directly in front of me (I could have reached out and... never mind :)). I did "smile" after the comment, though. I do realize it created space, which I commented on during the broadcast. I also know that it certainly looked like it was the easiest way to get the ball to Baskauskas, but at the same time its a bit cavalier (sp?). You can still make that pass with a two hand bounce pass or chest pass. I have played this game and no matter how good you are, going behind the back with a bounce pass is a gutsy way to make a simple pass.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: La Verdad on March 27, 2008, 09:20:09 PM

Fair enough. For a player of Olson's skill and experience that type of pass is pretty simple. Perhaps more cavalier than his passes were his shots. I swear he pulled up from the Salem logo located somewhere by the scorers table.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 27, 2008, 09:30:05 PM

In the semi-final game I do remember a shot about that deep! I also remember him stopping on a fast break and hitting a three-pointer early in the second half of the championship game. Maybe not the best choices... but he did hit a few! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: walzy31 on March 28, 2008, 07:23:03 PM

Quote from: La Verdad on March 27, 2008, 09:20:09 PM
Fair enough. For a player of Olson's skill and experience that type of pass is pretty simple. Perhaps more cavalier than his passes were his shots. I swear he pulled up from the Salem logo located somewhere by the scorers table.

That bounce pass was the most memorable pass for me that weekend. I've already told anyone who wasn't in Salem but is an Amherst fan about it (and the triple-double...and ruths and thompson). There are numerous other gem passes in Olson's career I got to see and hopefully will not forget anytime soon.

Pat,

Two trivia questions arose late Saturday night when the Jets and Sharks met up in the foot bridge and a game of checkers almost broke out...

1) How many triple-doubles have there been in the history of the D3 final four? (how about all divisions?)
2) If you aggregate all four margins for the weekend (15, 15, 22 and 26), was it the most lopsided four games in D3 final four history? If not, where does it rank?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 28, 2008, 07:32:14 PM

Quote from: walzy31 on March 28, 2008, 07:23:03 PM
...
Pat,

2) If you aggregate all four margins for the weekend (15, 15, 22 and 26), was it the most lopsided four games in D3 final four history? If not, where does it rank?

The archives (http://www.d3hoops.com/archives/) have all of those playoffs for your research. (This is a great website!) ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 28, 2008, 08:04:08 PM

I wouldn't put the third-place game in any real comparison -- depending on how the teams treat it it can be just a brutal mismatch.

But if you include it, this is probably the worst combo. Hard to beat a 53 and a 29, no matter how close the other two are. (1991)

Championship
Wisconsin-Platteville 81, Franklin & Marshall 74

Third Place
Otterbein 113, Ramapo 84

National Semifinals
Franklin & Marshall 109, Ramapo 56
Wisconsin-Platteville 96, Otterbein 94

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 28, 2008, 08:05:50 PM

Next year is fairly uncompetitive as well:

Championship
Calvin 62, Rochester 49

Third Place
Wisconsin-Platteville 72, Jersey City State 61

National Semifinals
Rochester 61, Wisconsin-Platteville 48
Calvin 81, Jersey City State 40

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: walzy31 on March 28, 2008, 11:32:31 PM

Thanks.
Wow. 41 and 53 point losses in the final four.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 29, 2008, 12:21:16 AM

Its not being suggested that this final four was "uncompetitive" is it?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 29, 2008, 12:21:58 AM

walzy31,

Not a FF game, but in 1996 IWU led Roanoke (the #1 seed in the sectional, held at Roanoke) by 70-20 with 1 second left in the first half (a buzzer-beater from half-court cut it to a 47 point lead). The starters didn't play a minute of the second half, cutting the final margin to 116-88.

Strange things can happen, even against worthy opponents! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 29, 2008, 12:25:39 AM

Quote from: sac on March 29, 2008, 12:21:16 AM
Its not being suggested that this final four was "uncompetitive" is it?

The games against Ursinus - probably yes (but missing an AA can mess up a team!)

The other games were quite competitive most of the way, despite what the final scores would suggest.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 29, 2008, 01:35:28 PM

This first-round gem from 2002 is the first and last word on lopsided tournament games:

Williams 121, Cazenovia 49

In 1985, North Park faced Monmouth in the tournament's opening round. The Vikings scored something like the first 21 points in the game, or thereabouts, and went on to win by a score of 95-55. North Park had a very small roster that season, usually only playing an eight-man rotation, and when one of the starters broke his leg in midseason the roster got even smaller. Desperate for warm bodies to fill out practices, first-year head coach Bosko Djurickovic, who was also the head baseball coach at North Park, asked two of his senior baseball players who had played basketball in high school, Bob Kohlendorfer and Tim Saltess, to join the team so that he'd have enough guys for practice (they boosted the roster number from eleven healthy players to thirteen). Neither of the baseball players had played any hoops aside from intramurals in four years, and neither of them suited up for any games after they'd joined the team for practices in midseason. They were strictly on the team for the purpose of allowing Bosko's actual players to get a breather during practice, or to fill in for one of them if he had to miss practice for an academic reason or for illness or injury.

Bosko had Saltess and Kohlendorfer suit up for the Monmouth game, figuring that, since the NCAA allowed fifteen players to dress for tournament games, it wouldn't do any harm to let them sit on the bench in uniform as a reward for chipping in and helping with practices. As it turned out, both Saltess and Kohlendorfer ended up playing about seven or eight minutes apiece in that laugher over Monmouth in what was to be the only college basketball game either of them ever played. Bosko clearly went above and beyond the call in trying to do the sportsmanlike thing by holding down the score -- and the Vikings still won by forty points.

Ironically, the Vikings won their next four games by a grand total of ten points en route to winning the national championship.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 30, 2008, 10:10:55 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 29, 2008, 01:35:28 PM
In 1985, North Park faced Monmouth in the tournament's opening round. The Vikings scored something like the first 21 points in the game, or thereabouts, and went on to win by a score of 95-55.

As you know, U of Chicago scored the first 17 points in the first round of this year's NCAA tourney and lost. lol... ;D :D ;) ::) :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 31, 2008, 01:27:18 AM

Your point being ...?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on March 31, 2008, 08:21:58 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 28, 2008, 08:05:50 PM
Next year is fairly uncompetitive as well:

Championship
Calvin 62, Rochester 49

Third Place
Wisconsin-Platteville 72, Jersey City State 61

National Semifinals
Rochester 61, Wisconsin-Platteville 48
Calvin 81, Jersey City State 40

Coach Brown has said several times that the 92 Calvin team is one of the best teams he has ever seen. He didn't think anyone could have stopped them that weekend.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: OshDude on October 26, 2008, 01:49:13 AM

Interesting that the top eight teams – and 12 of the preseason Top 25 – are from either the West or Midwest regions.

Without looking, I'd think the former is unprecedented; the latter could just be the way it goes this year.

And take this for what it's worth given my name, but I have no doubt UW-Oshkosh is one of the top 53 teams (that many received preseason votes) in the country.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 26, 2008, 02:57:03 AM

This is one voter who's been fooled too many times by UW-Oshkosh. They'll have to prove it too me on the floor this year, not just on paper.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: OshDude on October 26, 2008, 08:15:57 AM

There's a chance Oshkosh could be off voter's minds for a long time after the Titans' first 33 days that includes Lawrence (home), Augustana (road) and Whitewater (road). Then again a win or two validates my hunch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on October 31, 2008, 01:51:37 PM

Please don't take me as a Fontbonne fanatic or an unreasonable SLIAC supporter - but after all the years of being one of the weakest conferences in the country (not to say the SLIAC still doesn't rate that way), last year's effort by Fontbonne down in Mississippi in the TOURNEY was admirable.

Reasonably and Logically:

In the NCAAs, Fontbonne loses in Mississippi, an area totally foreign to the team, to MH Baylor by 3, who loses to home standing Milsaps by 1. Fontbonne returns 4 starters this year, and recruits a pretty decent transfer and at least one notable freshman. MH BAYLOR is preseason top 25, Milsaps just out of it - Fontbonne nary a vote. Yes, Fontbonne needs to prove itself this year, but hopefully voters will take note if things go well and start to give this program recognition for what it is, and nevermind what the conference has been historicallly. It's tough to break through the barrier, but this group may deserve it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 31, 2008, 02:15:47 PM

Quote from: hopefan on October 31, 2008, 01:51:37 PM
Please don't take me as a Fontbonne fanatic or an unreasonable SLIAC supporter - but after all the years of being one of the weakest conferences in the country (not to say the SLIAC still doesn't rate that way), last year's effort by Fontbonne down in Mississippi in the TOURNEY was admirable.

Reasonably and Logically:

In the NCAAs, Fontbonne loses in Mississippi, an area totally foreign to the team, to MH Baylor by 3, who loses to home standing Milsaps by 1. Fontbonne returns 4 starters this year, and recruits a pretty decent transfer and at least one notable freshman. MH BAYLOR is preseason top 25, Milsaps just out of it - Fontbonne nary a vote. Yes, Fontbonne needs to prove itself this year, but hopefully voters will take note if things go well and start to give this program recognition for what it is, and nevermind what the conference has been historicallly. It's tough to break through the barrier, but this group may deserve it.

Workin' the refs already, eh? ;D

Beat (or even seriously scare) WashU and/or Elmhurst in December, and I guarantee the voters will notice you.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on October 31, 2008, 02:27:59 PM

Two good opportunities, eh....... :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 31, 2008, 04:14:12 PM

Well, with the rest of FU's schedule, if you drop those two you might have to reach about 18-2 before the votes arrive. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on November 05, 2008, 07:14:09 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 26, 2008, 02:57:03 AM
This is one voter who's been fooled too many times by UW-Oshkosh. They'll have to prove it too me on the floor this year, not just on paper.

ha very true...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: OshDude on November 15, 2008, 06:28:31 PM

Forgive me if this was posted somewhere. Didn't see it.
Copies of College Hoops Illustrated: The Preview Issue were given away in Oshkosh today in which Brett Mauser's D-III predictions for good, better and best teams (in that order below) in each region were:

NE – Coast Guard/Mass-Dartmouth, Amherst/Salem St., Brandeis
E – Oswego St./Hamilton, Stevens/St. Lawrence, Cortland
A – Richard Stockton/St. Joseph's, Brooklyn/Farmingdale St, Ramapo
MA – DeSales/Scranton, Ursinus/Mary Washington, Gettysburg
S – Centre/Methodist, Randolph-Macon/Mary Hardin-Baylor, Virginia Wesleyan
GL – Hope/Calvin, Wittenberg/Wooster, Capital
MW – Wash U/Defiance, Lawrence/Augustana, Wheaton
W – Cal Lutheran/Buena Vista, Puget Sound/Whitewater, St. Thomas

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fcnews on November 15, 2008, 10:30:34 PM

#22 Chicago falls to Edgewwod in opener. This has to be a shocker.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 16, 2008, 12:05:34 AM

Quote from: fcnews on November 15, 2008, 10:30:34 PM
#22 Chicago falls to Edgewwod in opener. This has to be a shocker.

Wow... Chicago missed SIXTEEN free throws, outrebounded Edgewood by 11... but Edgewood shot 60% from the field, including 52.9% from 3 and scored 101 points. There were some other pretty close games in the top 25 tonight... but either Edgewood was absolutely on fire tonight, or Chicago wasn't defending very well.

Oh, and there were 51 fouls in the game. Yikes...

Other close top 25 games...

#2 Augie 82 Simpson 79 (Per CCIW page, Simpson leading much of the second half, tied at halftime)
#4 UW Whitewater 87 Wisconsin Lutheran 78 (Warhawks were down 4 @ the half)
#8 Buena Vista 68 UW Stout 61 (OT) (Stout was up 5 with under 2 mins, BV ties it then wins in OT)
#13 Centre 67 Franklin 65
D-1 Richmond 81 #14 Randolf Macon 57
#23 Widener 60 Montclair St 56

#1 Wash U (22), #6 UWSP (27), #7 UW Platte (31), and #24 Va Wesleyan (11) all won by double digits. (EDIT: missed one... #25 Elms won by 17 too)

No score yet for #17 Elmhurst and MacMurry.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 16, 2008, 05:01:28 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on November 16, 2008, 12:05:34 AM

No score yet for #17 Elmhurst and McMurry.

;)

MacMurray (SLIAC) (McMurry, ASC, opens at D-1 UT-San Antonio on Tuesday Nov 25th)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KorsairKILLAH on November 16, 2008, 05:48:21 PM

coast guard got crushed at umass dartmouth in the hamton inn classic.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 16, 2008, 06:22:02 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on November 16, 2008, 05:01:28 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on November 16, 2008, 12:05:34 AM

No score yet for #17 Elmhurst and McMurry.

;)

MacMurray (SLIAC) (McMurry, ASC, opens at D-1 UT-San Antonio on Tuesday Nov 25th)

Guess I should have looked at the scoreboard a little closer, "A"?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on November 16, 2008, 09:20:35 PM

Anyone voting for Chicago next week?

You thought it was bad losing to Edgewood, but that was nothing. Today they lost to Illinois Tech (5-25 last year), who is 1-3 on the young season with losses to Waldorf College and Grace College. This is shocking coming from a team that was picked to finish 2nd behind national champ WashU in the UAA preaseason coaches poll. Is Chicago really that bad?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 17, 2008, 04:44:34 AM

Quote from: hugenerd on November 16, 2008, 09:20:35 PM
Anyone voting for Chicago next week?

You thought it was bad losing to Edgewood, but that was nothing. Today they lost to Illinois Tech (5-25 last year), who is 1-3 on the young season with losses to Waldorf College and Grace College. This is shocking coming from a team that was picked to finish 2nd behind national champ WashU in the UAA preaseason coaches poll. Is Chicago really that bad?

See my post in the UAA room for my take on the Maroons. I witnessed Saturday's debacle at the Ratner Center, although I spent Sunday on the couch watching the other Monsters of the Midway post a debacle of their own at Lambeau Field.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 23, 2008, 09:06:35 PM

I can't recall from past seasons. Will the frst in-season polls be this week or not 'til next?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 23, 2008, 09:49:59 PM

Well, this is an unusual year with the early start. We are waiting until after Thanksgiving, however, so we end up with the same number of polls as previous years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 23, 2008, 09:58:50 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 23, 2008, 09:49:59 PM
Well, this is an unusual year with the early start. We are waiting until after Thanksgiving, however, so we end up with the same number of polls as previous years.

I think that the same number of polls is more important as a feature over the course of a decade. The slack times around holidays don't have too many games that impact the changes in the polls, especially early in the season. We may look back at Wash U/ Augie in OT as exactly what #1 vs #2 should have looked like! :)

Thanks for the info.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 27, 2008, 02:48:06 AM

I did some legwork over on the MWC board comparing last year's preseason top 25 with this year's, responding to the following post:

Quote from: petemcb on November 26, 2008, 10:49:07 PM

Nonetheless, it feels like there have been more of these "upsets" than usual at this time of year. It will be interesting to see whether this is a harbinger of things to come for the rest of the season, or will order be restored to the D3 universe. These upsets are making for some intriguing speculative possibilites for the rest of the season.

I dunno... it seems to me like the upsets have been about like normal. Buena Vista and Gustavus Adolphus have been tying 'em up early on since '02-03... ORV GAC beat ORV BV that year, #8 BV beat #2 GAC in 03-04, #19 BV beat #20 GAC in 04-05, #19 GAC beat ORV BV in 05-06, ORV BV beat ORV GAC in 06-07, and this year, GAC beat BC last year (both unranked), and unranked GAC beat #8 BV this year. There have been a number of close games between these two squads... and this looks like a pretty good rivalry, so that's a game you can toss out, even though it is a high profile "upset" this year.

Chicago isn't as good as their #22 ranking... after 4 losses, this is fairly clear. They may BECOME the #22 best team in the country by the end of the year... but they're not there yet.

Most years a top 5 team loses pretty early on... This year, #2 Augie lost to #1 Wash U (for once actually not an upset).

Last year, #1 Wash U lost at Calvin in the second game of the year and #5 Augustana in game 4 and #2 UWSP lost to #20 UW Whitewater on Dec 1st (rankings after poll #1... they started preseason #3 and #25)

In 06-07, #1 Virginia Wesleyan lost to unranked Averett in game #2 and #4 UW Whitewater lost game #2 to unranked Illinois Wesleyan (and then dropped their first two conference games by Dec 6th)

In 05-06, #2 UW Oshkosh lost games #1 and #3 to ORV Lawrence and ORV UWSP and #4 Puget Sound lost game #2 to NAIA DII Warner Pacific

In 04-05, #3 Hanover lost game #5 to non-D-III Brescia and #5 Rochester lost game #5 and #7 to UW Superior and Carnegie Mellon

In 03-04, #2 Gustavus Adolphus lost games #1 and #2 to Luther and Buena Vista

These are the top 5 teams, preseason. It doesn't say anything for what happened in the first few polls for #'s 6-25. Truthfully, the toughest poll to put out is the preseason, because the only info to go off of is coach's reports (can be over- or under-inflated), last year's results and projections on this year based on players who might have been injured last year, etc.

Right now, here are the standings for the top 25 teams:

#25 Elms 5-0
#24 Va Wes 3-2
#23 Widener 4-2
#22 Chicago 0-4
#21 Wooster 1-3
#20 Hope 2-0
#19 Lawrence 2-2
#18 IWU 2-0
#17 Elmhurst 4-0
#16 RIC 2-1
#15 Amherst 3-0
#14 Randolph Macon 1-2
#13 Centre 2-1
#12 Ursinus 3-0
#11 Gettysburg 3-0
#10 Mary Hardin-Baylor 0-3
#9 Brandeis 0-3
#8 Buena Vista 3-1
#7 UW Platteville 5-0
#6 UW Stevens Point 4-0
#5 St Thomas 3-0
#4 UW Whitewater 4-0
#3 Wheaton 3-0
#2 Augie 3-1
#1 Wash U 3-0

The top 8 are a combined 28-2... that's a 93% win percentage... pretty darn good, especially because one of the losses (and wins) is to another top 8 team. So, really, in games not involving 2 top 8 teams, they're 27-1 (96%).

65-24 is how the top 25 has done thusfar... 73% Not terrible... but the supposed top 25 have only beaten their opponents fewer than 3 out of every 4 times. If you take away the 3 winless teams though, it gives you 65-14 it jumps up to 82%.

Contrast this year's top 8 above with last year's... at the first regular season poll, the preseason top 8 18-4 (82%). One win (Augie) and loss (Wash U) was to another top 8 team, so that jumps to 17-3 (85%). I'm not going to figure out last year's entire top 25... but one thing that jumps out is that there were no teams from the preseason top 25 that went winless in the first few weeks and only 3 lost 2 or more games (#1 Wash U 3-2, #20 Bald Wally 1-3, #13 Aurora 1-3). It's pretty easy to surmise that last year's preseason top 25 did better in the first few weeks... eh, what the heck, I'll figure it out:

#25 Whitewater 3-0
#24 Stevens 3-0
#23 Mississippi College 1-0
#22 Keene St 3-0
#21 Lewis and Clark 2-1
#20 Bald Wally 1-3
#19 UPS 5-0
#18 Elmhurst 3-0
#17 Calvin 3-1
#16 Plattsburgh St 2-0
#15 Williams 4-0
#14 Mary Hardin-Baylor 1-0
#13 Aurora 1-3
#12 Brandeis 4-0
#11 Hope 1-1
#10 Capital 4-1
#9 Rochester 5-0
#8 Wooster 2-1
#7 Brockport St 1-1
#6 Va Wes 3-0
#5 Augie 3-0
#4 Guilford 1-0
#3 UWSP 3-0
#2 Amherst 2-0
#1 Wash U 3-2

So the top 25 last year at the first reg season poll was 64-14. So this year's top 25 has played 11 more games... and lost 10 of them. WOW.

I think there's going to be a lot of shake-up for the next top 25!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ausid on November 28, 2008, 09:28:56 PM

No. 1 Wash U (4-0) defeated Aurora (0-4) 97-89 (OT) at the Anderson University Tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on November 30, 2008, 01:23:55 PM

Does anyone think Puget Sound has done enough to get back into the Top 25...or do they need a few more wins under their belt?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on November 30, 2008, 03:04:25 PM

I definitely think they have a chance. We'll see how voters treat three-loss Brandeis and MHB, as well as two-loss Lawrence, Widener, and VWC. I think all five should fall out of the top 25, with the possible exception of Lawrence. Hope, Maryville, Puget Sound, Whitworth, St. Mary's, Lawrence, and UMD should all be hovering around the end of the top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 30, 2008, 06:02:41 PM

Ouch!

1. Washington U. 5-0
2. Augustana 3-1 (lost to Washington U, plays St. Ambrose Monday)
3. Wheaton (Ill) 3-0
4. Whitewater 5-0
5. St. Thomas 3-0
6. Stevens Point 4-0
7. Platteville 6-0
8. Buena Vista 4-1
9. Brandeis 1-3
10. Mary Hardin-Baylor 0-3 (plays Univ. of Ozarks on Monday)
11. Gettysburg 3-0
12. Ursinus 3-1
13. Centre 2-1 (plays Berea on Monday)
14. Randolph-Macon 1-3
15. Amherst 3-0
16. Rhode Island College 2-1
17. Elmhurst 5-0
18. Illinois Wesleyan 2-0 (playing Maryville (Mo.) today)
19. Lawrence 2-2
20. Hope 3-1
21. Wooster 2-3
22. U. of Chicago 0-5
23. Widener 4-2
24. Virginia Wesleyan 3-3
25. Elms 5-0

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on November 30, 2008, 06:57:56 PM

Quote from: scottiedawg on November 30, 2008, 03:04:25 PM
I definitely think they have a chance. We'll see how voters treat three-loss Brandeis and MHB, as well as two-loss Lawrence, Widener, and VWC. I think all five should fall out of the top 25, with the possible exception of Lawrence. Hope, Maryville, Puget Sound, Whitworth, St. Mary's, Lawrence, and UMD should all be hovering around the end of the top 25.

Thanks for the input!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on November 30, 2008, 06:59:05 PM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on November 30, 2008, 06:02:41 PM
Ouch!

1. Washington U. 5-0
2. Augustana 3-1 (lost to Washington U, plays St. Ambrose Monday)
3. Wheaton (Ill) 3-0
4. Whitewater 5-0
5. St. Thomas 3-0
6. Stevens Point 4-0
7. Platteville 6-0
8. Buena Vista 4-1
9. Brandeis 1-3
10. Mary Hardin-Baylor 0-3 (plays Univ. of Ozarks on Monday)
11. Gettysburg 3-0
12. Ursinus 3-1
13. Centre 2-1 (plays Berea on Monday)
14. Randolph-Macon 1-3
15. Amherst 3-0
16. Rhode Island College 2-1
17. Elmhurst 5-0
18. Illinois Wesleyan 2-0 (playing Maryville (Mo.) today)
19. Lawrence 2-2
20. Hope 3-1
21. Wooster 2-3
22. U. of Chicago 0-5
23. Widener 4-2
24. Virginia Wesleyan 3-3
25. Elms 5-0

Ouch is right...looks like there will be some moving and shaking 8)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 30, 2008, 07:02:39 PM

75-30... Worst "week" ever*? .71% winning percentage.

*The season started earlier, so it's longer than a week... but still, the length of time shouldn't determine to winning percentage!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 30, 2008, 09:30:25 PM

Except that some of these teams wouldn't be in the Top 25 and wouldn't count against this percentage if we'd had a vote last week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scout on December 01, 2008, 09:57:37 AM

so, who do we think will drop out? and, subsequently, who do we think will make appearances in the next poll?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on December 01, 2008, 11:48:06 AM

I think Brandeis and MHB will drop out, though it could be close.

Wooster, Chicago, Widener, Virgina Wesleyan, and possibly Lawrence could drop out.

Capital, St. Mary's, Puget Sound, Whitworth, and UMD are all possibilities to jump into the top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 01, 2008, 12:04:17 PM

Could Scranton get in? They're posting solid numbers with a little bit of name recognition.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: with age came? on December 01, 2008, 06:55:42 PM

Great posts! Quite a week!! Further consideration for a top 25 nod - Ithaca. Undefeated with convincing wins, although the east region is not known as the strongest.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 01, 2008, 11:16:24 PM

From this part of the country, I like that Trinity TX and UT-Dallas are receiving votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on December 02, 2008, 10:36:34 AM

Biggest Risers and Fallers

+22 Transylvania, 44th to 22nd
+19 Whitworth, 34th to 15th
+17 Puget Sound, 31st to 14th
+16 Capital, 28th to 12th

-23 Widener, 23rd to 46th
-25 MHB, 10th t0 35th
-30 Brandeis, 9th to 39th
-30 Lawrence, 19th to 49th

WPI, UR to 17th
Carnegie Mellon, UR to 19th
NC Wesleyan, UR to 24th
Gordon, UR to 27th

Milsaps, 27th to UR
VA Wesleyan, 24th to UR
Chicago, 22nd to UR
Wooster, 21st to UR
Randolph Macon, 14th to UR

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 02, 2008, 11:26:47 AM

Nice work, dawg...

That was by spots, now do it by votes! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on December 02, 2008, 01:26:51 PM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on December 02, 2008, 11:26:47 AM
Nice work, dawg...

That was by spots, now do it by votes! ;D

+232 Elmhurst
+224 Capital
+185 Whitworth
+182 WPI
+162 Puget Sound
+156 CM
+153 Amherst
+141 UW Platteville
+111 UMD
+110 Transylvania
+110 St. Mary's
+99 NC Wesleyan
+96 St. Thomas
+95 Elms
+91 UW Whitewater
+87 Gettysburg
+86 IWU
-71 Maryville
-81 Hope
-83 Milsaps
-104 RIC
-134 Ursinus
-150 Widener
-151 VWC
-160 Chicago
-162 Wooster
-165 Centre
-179 Lawrence
-215 Randolph Macon
-285 MHB
-327 Brandeis

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on December 02, 2008, 08:38:32 PM

Scottiedawg is putting in work! +1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on December 02, 2008, 08:40:22 PM

Congrats to Puget Sound...back in the Top 25! And quite a jump (thanks to all the losses)

I suppose I should give Whitworth a little love too :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 02, 2008, 10:49:34 PM

I'm amazed Gordon got up so high so quickly. Granted 40 points is not a lot, but they did have an uncharacteristically strong start to the season.

There's a lot of talent, but a good amount of inexperience as well. We'll see how they do the rest of the way.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scout on December 02, 2008, 11:01:46 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 02, 2008, 10:49:34 PM

I'm amazed Gordon got up so high so quickly. Granted 40 points is not a lot, but they did have an uncharacteristically strong start to the season.

There's a lot of talent, but a good amount of inexperience as well. We'll see how they do the rest of the way.

They did beat William Patterson, MIT, and Oneonta State in the span of a single week. Granted, these teams weren't ranked, but considering the mixed results of the teams at the bottom of the preseason Top 25, and a solid 5-0 start, getting some votes was warranted, I would think.

Still, I'm about as surprised as you are that it happened so quickly.

They have a rivarly non-con matchup at Endicott on Thursday followed by another early season test as they host Salem State on Saturday. Two wins and they should crack the rankings. A loss, and they'll lose what votes they had.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 03, 2008, 02:28:54 AM

Quote from: scout on December 02, 2008, 11:01:46 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 02, 2008, 10:49:34 PM

I'm amazed Gordon got up so high so quickly. Granted 40 points is not a lot, but they did have an uncharacteristically strong start to the season.

There's a lot of talent, but a good amount of inexperience as well. We'll see how they do the rest of the way.

They did beat William Patterson, MIT, and Oneonta State in the span of a single week. Granted, these teams weren't ranked, but considering the mixed results of the teams at the bottom of the preseason Top 25, and a solid 5-0 start, getting some votes was warranted, I would think.

Still, I'm about as surprised as you are that it happened so quickly.

They have a rivarly non-con matchup at Endicott on Thursday followed by another early season test as they host Salem State on Saturday. Two wins and they should crack the rankings. A loss, and they'll lose what votes they had.

They arent going to jump over anyone based on just the merits of those two wins (if they win both) this coming week. They would additionally need a couple of teams in the 20-25 range to lose, then they may break the rankings. This may have been what you meant but I just wanted to clarify. It looks like they would need about 50 points to get into the rankings and that would require each voter, on average, to rank them 2 spots higher. This may not sound like much but considering that most of the voters never see them play, dont know much about the team, and dont know much about the teams they play, it becomes a bit more difficult.

Looking at Gordon's schedule, they dont really play any teams that would be eye-opening wins on the national stage (like against a ranked team). Therefore, if they want to get ranked they need to (obviously) continue to win but they also need to have people ahead of them lose. If they break into the rankings, it will be due to a cumalative effect of winning a lot of games in a row, compared to a team with a stronger record or reputation who may sustain their ranking, even with some losses. For example, WPI beat 2 ranked teams over the past couple of weeks, showing that they are one of the best teams in the northeast (arguably top 2 with Amherst). None of the teams Gordon plays carries that distinction, so you will always be able to make an argument against them (strength of schedule) and for them (potentially their record) and it will be up to the individual voter to decide which factor weighs more in their mind. It will be difficult to post a signature win with their schedule.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scout on December 03, 2008, 02:36:53 PM

Hugenard, I was indeed assuming some losses at the bottom of the pack. Whether that train of thought is warranted or not, we'll see as the week develops.

Nevertheless, there's an argument to be made that we've all heard before. A team can only play the games it has scheduled. With that said, there does need to be accountability for strength of schedule, and I think it plays a significant factor with those who vote.

Still, clearly Gordon has made some sort of an impression thus far to garner any votes at all, let alone 40 from none in the first poll. A win over Endicott should not play a part in accumulating any additional votes, whereas a loss would almost certainly lose Gordon a bunch of those it had. However, two additional wins including Endicott and Salem State (a solid program, though perhaps down this year) combined with losses from those at the bottom of the Top 25 (even if it's only one) can do nothing but boon Gordon at least one additional vote, etc.

I'm just approaching the issue from a logic perspective. And, as always, I respect your point of view and relative seniority on the boards.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Walter17 on December 03, 2008, 03:17:12 PM

It is nice to see Trinity, TX (4-1) get some votes this year. Had a buzzer beater fallen for them against #6 Stevens Point, I think they would be placed in the top 25 for sure!

To touch on the topic of accountability for strength of schedule, I think you have to take into consideration that when a school schedules their games, they are not taking D3hoops polls into consideration. Many schools want to rack up as good of a regional record as they can, because that is what will get them an at-large bid if they don't win their conference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 03, 2008, 03:25:35 PM

Quote from: Walter17 on December 03, 2008, 03:17:12 PM
It is nice to see Trinity, TX (4-1) get some votes this year. Had a buzzer beater fallen for them against #6 Stevens Point, I think they would be placed in the top 25 for sure!

To touch on the topic of accountability for strength of schedule, I think you have to take into consideration that when a school schedules their games, they are not taking D3hoops polls into consideration. Many schools want to rack up as good of a regional record as they can, because that is what will get them an at-large bid if they don't win their conference.

Good points, but the regional record needs to balance the impact seen in the OWP/OOWP.

Beating the "Weak Sisters of the Poor" doesn't help the OWP.

I have always admired the schedule that Coach Cunningham puts together. He knows what he wants to do with the slot in his schedule, and he can accomplish that very frequently.

I have mentioned this before. Trinity TX and UT-Dallas are the teams to watch now from this part of the South Region. The team with the most talent that needs to "gel" is Mississippi College. And, the ASC West will come down to HSU, UMHB and McMurry.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 03, 2008, 10:04:22 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on December 03, 2008, 02:28:54 AM
Quote from: scout on December 02, 2008, 11:01:46 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 02, 2008, 10:49:34 PM

I'm amazed Gordon got up so high so quickly. Granted 40 points is not a lot, but they did have an uncharacteristically strong start to the season.

There's a lot of talent, but a good amount of inexperience as well. We'll see how they do the rest of the way.

They did beat William Patterson, MIT, and Oneonta State in the span of a single week. Granted, these teams weren't ranked, but considering the mixed results of the teams at the bottom of the preseason Top 25, and a solid 5-0 start, getting some votes was warranted, I would think.

Still, I'm about as surprised as you are that it happened so quickly.

They have a rivarly non-con matchup at Endicott on Thursday followed by another early season test as they host Salem State on Saturday. Two wins and they should crack the rankings. A loss, and they'll lose what votes they had.

They arent going to jump over anyone based on just the merits of those two wins (if they win both) this coming week. They would additionally need a couple of teams in the 20-25 range to lose, then they may break the rankings. This may have been what you meant but I just wanted to clarify. It looks like they would need about 50 points to get into the rankings and that would require each voter, on average, to rank them 2 spots higher. This may not sound like much but considering that most of the voters never see them play, dont know much about the team, and dont know much about the teams they play, it becomes a bit more difficult.

Looking at Gordon's schedule, they dont really play any teams that would be eye-opening wins on the national stage (like against a ranked team). Therefore, if they want to get ranked they need to (obviously) continue to win but they also need to have people ahead of them lose. If they break into the rankings, it will be due to a cumalative effect of winning a lot of games in a row, compared to a team with a stronger record or reputation who may sustain their ranking, even with some losses. For example, WPI beat 2 ranked teams over the past couple of weeks, showing that they are one of the best teams in the northeast (arguably top 2 with Amherst). None of the teams Gordon plays carries that distinction, so you will always be able to make an argument against them (strength of schedule) and for them (potentially their record) and it will be up to the individual voter to decide which factor weighs more in their mind. It will be difficult to post a signature win with their schedule.

Their only hope for some decent notice is beating Salem State and having Salem continue to win their non-con games. I think Salem State plays WPI this weekend.

Gordon does have the advantage of live online video for their games, so voters could check them out if they so desired.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 03, 2008, 11:54:07 PM

Some interesting results in that 20-25 range we were discussing earlier.

#20 UMD loses to Bridgewater State, which should hurt them and help #25 RIC. RIC has already beaten Bridgewater and their only loss is to undefeated (#17) WPI. That result would probably put RIC back ahead of UMD in voters mind and push them up a little bit in the rankings (they obviously wont be ranked any higher than WPI).

*22 Transylvania loses to a previously 1-4 Hanover squad. This will likely drop both them and (possibly) #23 Centre from the rankings, because Translvania beat Centre (on Centre's court) less than 2 weeks ago. Centre went from #13 to #23 with the loss, pulling Transylvania up one spot ahead of them. But with Transylvania's loss to a seemingly weak opponent, there may not be much justification for either team to be ranked in the top 25.

This may open the door for some of the other teams receiving votes in this weeks poll to crack the top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 04, 2008, 12:02:28 AM

If Centre keeps winning, I wouldn't put too much weight on what the team that beat them did. There are far too many variables in one game to another to give comparative scoring tons of merit. If Center does not lose this week, I think they stay put or move up, depending on what others do ahead of them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 04, 2008, 03:26:16 AM

Quote from: hugenerd on December 03, 2008, 11:54:07 PM
Some interesting results in that 20-25 range we were discussing earlier.

#20 UMD loses to Bridgewater State, which should hurt them and help #25 RIC. RIC has already beaten Bridgewater and their only loss is to undefeated (#17) WPI. That result would probably put RIC back ahead of UMD in voters mind and push them up a little bit in the rankings (they obviously wont be ranked any higher than WPI).

That won't happen, however, unless the Anchormen are able to take care of their own business by traveling up to Waltham, MA tomorrow night and beating a highly-touted (preseason #9) Brandeis team that looks like it is bouncing back from a rough start.

If the Anchormen lose, we might see both Little East teams get bounced from the next rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on December 04, 2008, 10:31:37 PM

Is David Collinge planning on continuing his wonderful "How They Fared" posting?

In the meantime:
#7 UW Stevens Point loses to #49 Lawrence
#13 Illinois Wesleyan loses to Olivet Nazarene
#17 WPI loses to Salem State
#20 UMD loses to Bridgewater State
#22 Transylvania loses to Hanover
#25 RIC loses to #39 Brandeis
#31 Bethel loses to St. Johns College
#40 Guilford loses to #24 NC Wesleyan

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 04, 2008, 10:34:35 PM

Quote from: scottiedawg on December 04, 2008, 10:31:37 PM
Is David Collinge planning on continuing his wonderful "How They Fared" posting?

No, he is not. Feel free to take over.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 04, 2008, 10:55:13 PM

If the last couple of nights tells us anything, it is about the parity of the northeast. WPI (who has beat Lasell, Brandeis and RIC) had their first loss tonight to Salem State, who's only loss is to Wheaton (MA), who's only loss is to Emerson, who's only loss is to Babson, who has only lost to Trinity (CT) and Brandeis.

Brandeis beat RIC tonight (RIC's only losses are to WPI and Brandeis). Brandeis has lost to WPI, Lasell and UMD. UMD had their first loss last night to Bridgewater State, who's only loss is to RIC. Lasell has lost to Western Conn, WPI and Amherst. Amherst is the only team of those listed above that are undefeated.

Some other teams of significance, although none of these teams have played the top teams listed above (except Bowdoin):
Elms (7-0)
Gordon (6-0),
Springfield, only loss to Elms.
Bowdoin, who's only loss is to Salem State.
Westfield State, only loss to Elms.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 04, 2008, 11:23:23 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 04, 2008, 10:34:35 PM
Quote from: scottiedawg on December 04, 2008, 10:31:37 PM
Is David Collinge planning on continuing his wonderful "How They Fared" posting?
No, he is not. Feel free to take over.

Please do, scottiedawg! It's worth lots of karma points from grateful readers. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on December 04, 2008, 11:27:19 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 04, 2008, 11:23:23 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on December 04, 2008, 10:34:35 PM
Quote from: scottiedawg on December 04, 2008, 10:31:37 PM
Is David Collinge planning on continuing his wonderful "How They Fared" posting?
No, he is not. Feel free to take over.
Please do, scottiedawg! It's worth lots of karma points from grateful readers. ;D

I'll do my best.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 05, 2008, 12:14:03 AM

Thanks, scottiedawg! +1! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 05, 2008, 10:34:01 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 04, 2008, 10:34:35 PM
Quote from: scottiedawg on December 04, 2008, 10:31:37 PM
Is David Collinge planning on continuing his wonderful "How They Fared" posting?
No, he is not. Feel free to take over.

Why not?! I loved that stuff!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on December 06, 2008, 01:11:30 PM

As did I. But as long as someone does it, I will be happy ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 06, 2008, 06:06:40 PM

#7 Stevens Point gets back in the W column in a big way, upsetting #2 UW Whitewater 67-64 in OT after trailing by 12 at halftime WITHOUT preseason 3rd team All-American Pete Rortvedt and much of the first half with 4 year starter Brian Beamish on the bench with an injury.

RV La Crosse also knocks off #3 Augustana 61-54

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 06, 2008, 11:50:43 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on December 04, 2008, 10:55:13 PM
If the last couple of nights tells us anything, it is about the parity of the northeast. WPI (who has beat Lasell, Brandeis and RIC) had their first loss tonight to Salem State, who's only loss is to Wheaton (MA), who's only loss is to Emerson, who's only loss is to Babson, who has only lost to Trinity (CT) and Brandeis.

Brandeis beat RIC tonight (RIC's only losses are to WPI and Brandeis). Brandeis has lost to WPI, Lasell and UMD. UMD had their first loss last night to Bridgewater State, who's only loss is to RIC. Lasell has lost to Western Conn, WPI and Amherst. Amherst is the only team of those listed above that are undefeated.

Some other teams of significance, although none of these teams have played the top teams listed above (except Bowdoin):
Elms (7-0)
Gordon (6-0),
Springfield, only loss to Elms.
Bowdoin, who's only loss is to Salem State.
Westfield State, only loss to Elms.

Just to give a brief update on the Northeast again:

Elms and Amherst are the only remaining undefeated teams in the northeast. Amherst destroyed previous 1 loss teams Westfield State and Springfield in the last couple of days. Elms has a big test at WPI next week, Amherst doesnt play anyone until mid-January.

Gordon (6-1) loses in their first real challenge of the year (55-68, at home), to Salem State a team that is now 6-1 with 3 solid wins this week that include previously unbeaten Gordon and WPI. WPI won today improving to 7-1.

Bowdoin improves to 6-1 with their only loss to Salem State.

Bridgewater State (5-1, only loss to RIC), handed Wheaton (MA) their second loss. UMD (5-1, only loss to Bridgewater State), also won.

RIC (4-2) won today, with their only losses against WPI and Brandeis.

After a really rocky 0-3 start, with losses to Lasell, UMD, and WPI, Brandeis has rebounded with 4 really solid wins, including RIC and today's destruction of Emerson (97-70), a game in which they were able to turn over Emerson's best player, Shannon, 7 times, and hold him to 15 points, on 5-14 shooting. Terrell Hollins had 27 points and 14 rebounds in the contest, while Steve Deluca chipped in with 11 on 5-8 shooting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on December 07, 2008, 02:23:12 PM

HOW THEY FARED (week of Dec . 1-7) COMPLETE

#01 Washington U (7-0) def. Hamilton 85-57, def. #13 Illinois Wesleyan 93-86
#02 UW Whitewater (6-1) won at North Central 62-54, lost at #7 UW Stevens Point 67-64
#03 Augustana (4-2) won at St. Ambrose 89-61, lost at UW LaCrosse 61-54
#04 Wheaton (6-0) won at Chicago 84-52, def. Calvin 68-56, def. Hope 91-79
#05 UW Platteville (7-0) won at UW Superior 76-69
#06 St. Thomas (4-0) def. Concordia-Moorehead 74-63, def. St. Olaf 60-52
#07 UW Stevens Point (5-1) lost to Lawrence 75-59, def. #2 UW Whitewater 67-64
#08 Elmhurst (6-0) def. UW La-Crosse 67-54,
#09 Gettysburg (4-1) def. Dickinson 67-50, lost at #21 Ursinus 82-53
#10 Amherst (6-0) def. Lasell 104-77, won at Springfield 84-57, won at Westfield State 90-59
#11 Buena Vista (6-1) won at Simpson 91-66, def. Coe 81-65
#12 Capital (6-0) def. Ohio Wesleyan 82-70, won at Baldwin Wallace 92-87
#13 Illinois Wesleyan (4-2) lost at Olivet Nazarene 76-63, lost at #1 Washington U 93-86, def. Hamilton 70-55
#14 Puget Sound (5-2) lost at Warner Pacific 98-85, lost at St. Martin's 83-78
#15 Whitworth (6-1) won at Cal St. Easy Bay 85-80, lost to Claremont Mudd Scripps 73-68, won at UC Santa Cruz 90-58
#16 Elms (8-0) def. W. New England. 82-66, def. Fitchburg St. 90-55, def. Trinity (Conn) 71-62
#17 Worcester Polytech (7-1) won at Curry 67-51, lost at Salem St. 73-69, won at Fitchburg State 84-74
#18 St. Mary's (7-0) won at Stevenson 80-71, def. Marymount 76-67
#19 Carnegie Mellon (7-0) def. Juanita 75-56, def. Rochester 58-55
#20 Mass Dartmouth (5-1) lost at Bridgewater St. 89-87, def. W Connecticut 87-74
#21 Ursinus (5-1) def. Washington Col. 81-61, def. #9 Gettysburg 82-53
#22 Transylvania (3-1) lost at Hanover 55-53, won at Manchester 63-55
#23 Centre (5-1) def. Berea 74-44, won at Sewanee 60-39, won at Oglethorpe 64-59
#24 NC Wesleyan (8-1) won at Guilford 76-55, def. Lancaster Bible 81-58, lost to St. Vincent 96-87
#25 Rhode Is. College (4-2) won at Johnson and Wales 72-63, lost at Brandeis 75-61, won at Mass Boston 83-58
#26 Hope (3-3) lost to Carthage 89-68, lost at #4 Wheaton 91-79
#27 Gordon (6-1) won at Endicott 67-66, lost to Salem State 68-55
#28 Richard Stockton (8-1) def. Penn St. Abington 100-51, def. Kean 71-42, won at Ramapo 86-73
#29 Calvin (3-3) lost at #4 Wheaton 68-56, lost to Carthage 95-82
#30 Ithaca (6-0) Idle
#31 Bethel (5-1) lost to St. John's 81-73, def. St. Mary's 78-62
#32 Bowdoin (6-1) def. Southern Maine 68-52, def. Bates 71-62
#33 Loras (5-2) won at Clarke 70-65, won at Coe 66-57, def. Luther 64-47
#34 Carleton (3-1) def. Chaminade 74-69, lost to St. John's 81-70
#35 Mary Hardin Baylor (2-3) def. U of the Ozarks 83-69, won at E Texas Baptist 75-66

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 07, 2008, 02:35:58 PM

+1, scottiedawg! :)

Thanks for the extra work to include #26 - #35.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on December 07, 2008, 05:27:15 PM

#14 Puget Sound drops 2 games this week to Warner Pacific (#15 in NAIA 2, I think) and Saint Martins (#25 D2)...even though the games were against good competition, I am not sure if it will be enough to keep us in the Top 25...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 07, 2008, 05:31:10 PM

Quote from: scottiedawg on December 07, 2008, 02:23:12 PM
HOW THEY FARED (week of Dec . 1-7) COMPLETE
...
#31 Bethel (11-0) def. Indiana Wesleyan 84-81, def. Goshen 88-64

I'm pretty sure that the Bethel in question is the one in Minnesota (http://www.d3hoops.com/school/BTHL/mens/2009), which

lost to St. John's 81-73 and def. St. Mary's (Minn.) 78-62

The 11-0 Bethel (Indiana) Pilots belong to the NAIA.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on December 07, 2008, 05:41:01 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 07, 2008, 05:31:10 PM
Quote from: scottiedawg on December 07, 2008, 02:23:12 PM
HOW THEY FARED (week of Dec . 1-7) COMPLETE
...
#31 Bethel (11-0) def. Indiana Wesleyan 84-81, def. Goshen 88-64

I'm pretty sure that the Bethel in question is the one in Minnesota (http://www.d3hoops.com/school/BTHL/mens/2009), which

lost to St. John's 81-73 and def. St. Mary's (Minn.) 78-62
The 11-0 Bethel (Indiana) Pilots belong to the NAIA.

Correction made. Thank you.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 08, 2008, 02:27:20 AM

scottiedawg
#13 Illinois Wesleyan rebounds from their loss to WashU with a 70-55 win over Hamilton on Sunday afternoon.

Glad to see you're taking up this time consuming chore. As Ralph said, lots of karma will be coming your way. Plus 1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on December 08, 2008, 10:21:00 AM

Quote from: magicman on December 08, 2008, 02:27:20 AM
Glad to see you're taking up this time consuming chore. As Ralph said, lots of karma will be coming your way. Plus 1

He's just doing it for the karma! :P

Just kidding, of course! ;) ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 08, 2008, 06:59:17 PM

Salem State is looking pretty good this year. They're not winning pretty, but they are winning. For my count, they are now the '1' for three different 1 loss teams in the region, while playing an uncharacteristically challenging non-conference schedule.

They also have the added boost of being in a much improved conference.

I think they should get some consideration this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on December 08, 2008, 10:00:03 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 08, 2008, 06:59:17 PM

Salem State is looking pretty good this year. They're not winning pretty, but they are winning. For my count, they are now the '1' for three different 1 loss teams in the region, while playing an uncharacteristically challenging non-conference schedule.

They also have the added boost of being in a much improved conference.

I think they should get some consideration this week.

Agreed. Salem State and Carthage are two teams who received no votes in last week's poll, but should she quite a few in the new one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 08, 2008, 11:12:10 PM

Quote from: ScotsFan on December 08, 2008, 10:21:00 AM
Quote from: magicman on December 08, 2008, 02:27:20 AM
Glad to see you're taking up this time consuming chore. As Ralph said, lots of karma will be coming your way. Plus 1
He's just doing it for the karma! :P

Just kidding, of course! ;) ;D

Hey! We are the beneficiaries! Fan-driven content by the finest fans in all of sportsdom! ;) +1, scottiedawg!

Karma (http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/karma.htm)

QuoteThe Buddha's reply was:

"All living beings have actions (Karma) as their own, their inheritance, their congenital cause, their kinsman, their refuge. It is Karma that differentiates beings into low and high states."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on December 09, 2008, 12:37:44 PM

Movers

+198 Ursinus
+135 Carnegie Mellon
+100 St. Mary's
+71 Capital
+69 Amherst
+68 Elms
+68 Ithaca
+57 Trinity Tx
+52 UW Platteville
+49 Wheaton
+44 Richard Stockton
+43 Salem State
+40 Centre
+40 Texas-Dallas
-31 Gordon
-37 Calvin
-43 RIC
-46 NC Wesleyan
-64 WPI
-65 UMass Dartmouth
-84 Hope
-100 UW Whitewater
-101 Transylvania
-103 Gettysburg
-113 Whitworth
-124 Illinois Wesleyan
-125 Puget Sound
-157 Augustana

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on December 09, 2008, 03:34:32 PM

I am happy to see that Puget Sound still remains in the Top 25, even after a few losses to tough teams last week. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on December 09, 2008, 04:42:00 PM

Quote from: LogShow on December 09, 2008, 03:34:32 PM
I am happy to see that Puget Sound still remains in the Top 25, even after a few losses to tough teams last week. :)

I've realized that it's pretty useless to show the top movers by ranking, and not by votes. On the surface, one would wonder how Puget Sound could lose two games, albeit against good competition, and stay ranked. But looking at the votes, they were the second most penalized team by voters. The large amount of attrition around them allowed them to stay in the Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mactitan on December 09, 2008, 06:03:07 PM

Very interesting post, Scottiedawg. I, too, was wondering about IWU's ranking after losing two games - even though they were to Wash U and a pretty good NAIA school.

One thing that amazes me about this list is that 6 of the top 10 teams are from two conferences, and a fourth CCIW team isn't too far out. How is this possible? Is it legit, or is there some midwest bias in the voting?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on December 09, 2008, 06:19:09 PM

Quote from: mactitan on December 09, 2008, 06:03:07 PM
One thing that amazes me about this list is that 6 of the top 10 teams are from two conferences, and a fourth CCIW team isn't too far out. How is this possible? Is it legit, or is there some midwest bias in the voting?

The WIAC and the CCIW are just very strong this year. Top to bottom, the CCIW is probably the strongest conference in the nation. It isn't out of character for one of the power conferences to have three teams in the top 10. Last year, Brandeis, Rochester, and WashU of the UAA were all ranked very highly for most of the season. I do think it is harder for teams from the South and way out West to get recognition, just because they either play late because of the time zone change, or because of the lack of news. I for one know very little about Trinity TX, Texas Dallas, MHB, Millsaps, Hardin Simmons, etc.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 09, 2008, 06:35:12 PM

Key games in the Southwest include UWW coming to the UMHB tourney after Christmas where they will play LeTourneau from the ASC-East.

Mississippi College has as fine an assemblage of talent as one will see in the D3. Fortunately, they have the season to come together in time for the ASC tourney.

UT-Dallas is my other pick for the ASC-East. They easily handled a Guilford team 64-48 over Thanksgiving!

The ASC-West is still up for grabs. McMurry and HSU look to be the leaders, but it is still too early to check for a front runner. If one or the other goes 18-3 in region by late February, then they should be cracking the regional rankings.

Trinity TX looks solid again as they were in 2005. #25 is a good place for them now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 10, 2008, 09:53:10 AM

Good work you guys. Much appreciated!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on December 10, 2008, 12:08:31 PM

Quote from: mactitan on December 09, 2008, 06:03:07 PM
One thing that amazes me about this list is that 6 of the top 10 teams are from two conferences, and a fourth CCIW team isn't too far out. How is this possible? Is it legit, or is there some midwest bias in the voting?

I wouldn't call it bias. I agree with scottie about the CCIW and the WIAC. Both conferences are always at or near the top as far as quality and depth goes and this year both conferences seem even stronger and deeper than ever. Combine that with the fact that the traditional powers from the GL Region like Witt, Wooster, Hope, Calvin, etc are all nowhere to be found on the poll opening up more spots for the CCIW and WIAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 10, 2008, 01:25:33 PM

Quote from: mactitan on December 09, 2008, 06:03:07 PM
One thing that amazes me about this list is that 6 of the top 10 teams are from two conferences, and a fourth CCIW team isn't too far out. How is this possible? Is it legit, or is there some midwest bias in the voting?

Well, the WIAC and CCIW have both one the most and second most number of NCAA championships and are accepted to be the top two conferences in the country. This year, especially, they are very deep and by-and-large have senior-laden teams. They also have had good runs as underclassmen (in most cases), so their high rankings make sense

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 10, 2008, 10:48:10 PM

The midwest is good, but it isn't that good. I'm usually one that beats the "midwest is best" (the broader region not the d3 region) drum. This cup of kool-aid tastes funny.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 10, 2008, 10:50:07 PM

I agree, but until we know a little more it's a lot easier to believe Elmhurst is good than Ithaca, you know?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 10, 2008, 11:32:12 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 10, 2008, 10:50:07 PM
I agree, but until we know a little more it's a lot easier to believe Elmhurst is good than Ithaca, you know?

Oh the reasoning makes perfect sense given the landscape. No one knows what any of the Northeast schools really have, the Great Lakes appear down etc.

I certainly don't think anyone should be chastised for keeping, say, Amherst out of the top 10 to start the season given their losses to graduation.

I just look at the poll and don't feel real comfortable with it. It will sort itself out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 10, 2008, 11:50:40 PM

Speaking of Ithaca, they just improved to 7-0(barely!) squeaking by Oneonta St. on the road 79-77 in OT. Oneonta player scored a layup at the buzzer of regulation to tie the game at 71 and was fouled, but missed the free throw that would have won it. Oneonta scores the 1st 6 points in overtime, but Ithaca closes with an 8-0 run to remain undefeated. Real test for Ithaca will come this Saturday when they take on St. Lawrence on the road. The Saints are 4-1 with a wins over Middlebury, Plattsburgh State, and Potsdam State. Only blemish a tough 6 pt. loss to Ursinus to open their season back on Nov. 21st. Ithaca coming off a 10 day layoff heading into the Oneonta game almost got caught looking ahead to that matchup with the Saints.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 12, 2008, 09:18:23 PM

Scottiedawg, I'm not trying to steal your karma, but I needed a distraction from grading this week, so I thought I would try to write a program to automate the process of posting "How they fared".
Here is how things have gone since the last poll (I've got information for all 51 teams receiving votes, but it's probably not worth going any further than #35 or so). If you spot any inaccuracies in this list, please point them out so I can fix my program. Also feel free to make any suggestions to improve readability.

#1 Washington U. (7-0): 12/13 vs. Fontbonne
#2 Wheaton (Ill.) (7-0): def. Webster, 78-59; 12/13 vs. Wartburg
#3 UW-Platteville (8-0): def. UW-Eau Claire, 83-54; 12/13 at UW-River Falls
#4 St. Thomas (7-0): def. Augsburg, 86-58; def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 102-64
#5 UW-Whitewater (6-1): 12/13 at UW-Superior
#6 UW-Stevens Point (6-1): def. #31 UW-La Crosse, 82-69; 12/13 at #7 Elmhurst
#7 Elmhurst (6-0): 12/13 vs. #6 UW-Stevens Point
#8 Amherst (7-0): def. Emmanuel, 63-61
#9 Augustana (5-2): def. Cornell, 76-54; 12/13 vs. Knox
#10 Capital (6-1): LOST at Wilmington, 53-82; 12/13 vs. John Carroll
#11 Buena Vista (6-1): 12/13 vs. Grand View
#12 Ursinus (5-1): IDLE
#13 Carnegie Mellon (7-0): IDLE
#14 St. Mary's (Md.) (7-0): 12/13 at Baruch
#15 Gettysburg (4-1): 12/13 at T#48 Widener
#16 Elms (8-0): 12/14 at #19 Worcester Polytech
#17 Illinois Wesleyan (4-2): IDLE
#18 Centre (5-1): IDLE
#19 Worcester Polytech (8-1): def. Mass-Boston, 84-52; 12/14 vs. #16 Elms
#20 Whitworth (6-1): IDLE
#21 Puget Sound (5-2): IDLE
#22 Ithaca (7-0): def. Oneonta State, 79-77 OT; 12/13 at St. Lawrence
#23 Richard Stockton (8-1): 12/13 at Brooklyn
#24 Mass-Dartmouth (6-1): def. Johnson and Wales, 99-77; 12/13 vs. Southern Maine
#25 Trinity (Texas) (6-1): IDLE
T#26 North Carolina Wesleyan (8-1): 12/13 at Virginia Wesleyan
T#26 Rhode Island College (5-2): def. Springfield, 68-60; 12/13 vs. Keene State
#28 Texas-Dallas (8-0): def. S'western Assemblies, 79-53
#29 Salem State (7-2): LOST at Springfield, 68-69; def. Mass-Boston, 85-67
#30 Lawrence (5-2): IDLE
#31 UW-La Crosse (4-3): LOST at #6 UW-Stevens Point, 69-82; 12/13 at UW-Eau Claire
#32 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps (6-1): 12/13 at La Sierra
#33 Transylvania (4-1): IDLE
#34 DeSales (7-0): def. Centenary, 82-80; 12/13 vs. Elizabethtown
T#35 Bowdoin (7-2): def. Maine Maritime, 74-50; LOST at Colby-Sawyer, 57-63
T#35 Loras (5-2): 12/13 at North Park

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 12, 2008, 09:45:40 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 12, 2008, 09:18:23 PM
Scottiedawg, I'm not trying to steal your karma, but I needed a distraction from grading this week, so I thought I would try to write a program to automate the process of posting "How they fared".

:o Where were you when I needed you?!? ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 13, 2008, 12:04:51 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 12, 2008, 09:45:40 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 12, 2008, 09:18:23 PM
Scottiedawg, I'm not trying to steal your karma, but I needed a distraction from grading this week, so I thought I would try to write a program to automate the process of posting "How they fared".
:o Where were you when I needed you?!? ;)

Maybe he'd been trying to get ahold of MemphisDave. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 13, 2008, 02:15:52 AM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 12, 2008, 09:18:23 PM
Scottiedawg, I'm not trying to steal your karma, but I needed a distraction from grading this week, so I thought I would try to write a program to automate the process of posting "How they fared".
Here is how things have gone since the last poll (I've got information for all 51 teams receiving votes, but it's probably not worth going any further than #35 or so). If you spot any inaccuracies in this list, please point them out so I can fix my program. Also feel free to make any suggestions to improve readability.

If you've got 50 teams, it would be nice to see how they fared.(If it's not to much work)
Any team that's getting votes at this early point of the season has the possibility of moving into the Top 25, if they get on a roll. I can think of two teams that aren't even mentioned that I feel might crack the poll before the end of the season. It's so much easier to have the entire week's scores for all those teams on 1 page. A number of posters will help give updates and check for errors. Just a thought.(Or wish) ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 13, 2008, 07:51:44 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 12, 2008, 09:45:40 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 12, 2008, 09:18:23 PM
Scottiedawg, I'm not trying to steal your karma, but I needed a distraction from grading this week, so I thought I would try to write a program to automate the process of posting "How they fared".
:o Where were you when I needed you?!? ;)

David, you always made it seem so effortless ...
Please accept +k as penance for taking you for granted...

Quote from: magicman on December 13, 2008, 02:15:52 AM
If you've got 50 teams, it would be nice to see how they fared.(If it's not to much work)

It's no additional work (for me ... the computer program does the work). Once all the games are finished this weekend, I'll re-run my program and post the whole list.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 13, 2008, 08:25:34 AM

+1! Darryl!

David did a great job of reviewing past top 25's, too.

I hope that you can automate his database.

I look forward to your work every Sunday!

(Can you really spoil us and give us updates more frequently than once-a-week? ;) )

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 13, 2008, 09:21:04 AM

I'm one of the 25 voters in the D3hoops.com Top 25 poll. As long as David C was doing the weekly breakdown here, this is where I'd come every Monday morning to prepare my ballot. I found the layout to be picture for that process.

Thanks to David for all the past work and for getting this started, and thanks to Darryl for keeping it going! Again, it's a huge help.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 13, 2008, 07:12:56 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 13, 2008, 07:51:44 AM
Quote from: David Collinge on December 12, 2008, 09:45:40 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 12, 2008, 09:18:23 PM
Scottiedawg, I'm not trying to steal your karma, but I needed a distraction from grading this week, so I thought I would try to write a program to automate the process of posting "How they fared".
:o Where were you when I needed you?!? ;)
David, you always made it seem so effortless ...
Please accept +k as penance for taking you for granted...

Quote from: magicman on December 13, 2008, 02:15:52 AM
If you've got 50 teams, it would be nice to see how they fared.(If it's not to much work)
It's no additional work (for me ... the computer program does the work). Once all the games are finished this weekend, I'll re-run my program and post the whole list.

Darryl, I was hoping you would say that. Thanks, + k

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 13, 2008, 07:28:30 PM

#22 Ithaca passes their biggest test so far with a 95-89 win on the road against St. Lawrence, to up their record to 8-0. Bombers opened up a 20 pt lead in the 1st half before settling for a 56-39 halftime advantage. The Saints come roaring back to cut the lead to 73-69 with 10 min. left and eventually pull to within 1 at 87-86 at the 3 min. mark. Ithaca off until Jan. 2nd when they open Empire 8 league play against Elmira, the 1st of 5 league games in 10 days.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hoosier Titan on December 14, 2008, 12:33:57 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 13, 2008, 07:51:44 AM
David, you always made it seem so effortless ...
Please accept +k as penance for taking you for granted...

Amen to that, after doing it by hand for one week!
+k to both of you!

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 13, 2008, 07:51:44 AM
It's no additional work (for me ... the computer program does the work). Once all the games are finished this weekend, I'll re-run my program and post the whole list.

And for the women's side, too, please, Darryl? Thanks! :)
And now for the grading....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 14, 2008, 07:56:48 PM

How they fared -- complete (includes three scores not yet in the d3sports database, in italics)

#1 Washington U. (8-0): def. Fontbonne, 89-78
#2 Wheaton (Ill.) (8-0): def. Webster, 78-59; def. Wartburg, 88-76
#3 UW-Platteville (9-0): def. UW-Eau Claire, 83-54; def. UW-River Falls, 69-62
#4 St. Thomas (7-0): def. Augsburg, 86-58; def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 102-64
#5 UW-Whitewater (7-1): def. UW-Superior, 82-72
#6 UW-Stevens Point (7-1): def. #31 UW-La Crosse, 82-69; def. #7 Elmhurst, 62-53
#7 Elmhurst (6-1): LOST (at home) to #6 UW-Stevens Point, 53-62
#8 Amherst (7-0): def. Emmanuel, 63-61
#9 Augustana (6-2): def. Cornell, 76-54; def. Knox, 72-54
#10 Capital (7-1): LOST at Wilmington, 53-82; def. John Carroll, 81-75
#11 Buena Vista (7-1): def. Grand View, 66-59
#12 Ursinus (5-1): IDLE
#13 Carnegie Mellon (7-0): IDLE
#14 St. Mary's (Md.) (7-1): LOST at Baruch, 54-73
#15 Gettysburg (4-2): LOST at T#48 Widener, 75-80
#16 Elms (9-0): def. #19 Worcester Polytech, 77-61
#17 Illinois Wesleyan (4-2): IDLE
#18 Centre (5-1): IDLE
#19 Worcester Polytech (8-2): def. Mass-Boston, 84-52; LOST (at home) to #16 Elms, 61-77
#20 Whitworth (6-1): IDLE
#21 Puget Sound (5-2): IDLE
#22 Ithaca (8-0): def. Oneonta State, 79-77 OT; def. St. Lawrence, 95-89
#23 Richard Stockton (9-1): def. Brooklyn, 92-74
#24 Mass-Dartmouth (7-1): def. Johnson and Wales, 99-77; def. Southern Maine, 65-46
#25 Trinity (Texas) (6-1): IDLE
T#26 North Carolina Wesleyan (8-2): LOST at Virginia Wesleyan, 59-84
T#26 Rhode Island College (5-3): def. Springfield, 68-60; LOST (at home) to Keene State, 81-85 OT
#28 Texas-Dallas (8-0): def. S'western Assemblies, 79-53
#29 Salem State (7-2): LOST at Springfield, 68-69; def. Mass-Boston, 85-67
#30 Lawrence (5-2): IDLE
#31 UW-La Crosse (4-4): LOST at #6 UW-Stevens Point, 69-82; LOST at UW-Eau Claire, 66-71
#32 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps (7-1): def. La Sierra, 78-45
#33 Transylvania (4-1): IDLE
#34 DeSales (8-0): def. Centenary, 82-80; def. Elizabethtown, 71-65
T#35 Bowdoin (7-2): def. Maine Maritime, 74-50; LOST at Colby-Sawyer, 57-63
T#35 Loras (5-3): LOST at North Park, 66-78
#37 Middlebury (7-2): IDLE
T#38 Brandeis (5-4): def. Clark, 72-63; LOST (at home) to Framingham State, 61-70
T#38 Roanoke (8-1): def. Goucher, 64-61
#40 Bluffton (6-2): LOST (at home) to Franklin, 81-92
#41 Gordon (7-1): def. Wheelock, 72-53
T#42 Carthage (4-2): LOST at Olivet Nazarene, 73-87
T#42 Mary Hardin-Baylor (2-4): LOST at LeTourneau, 47-60
T#42 William Paterson (7-1): def. York (N.Y.), 71-66; def. SUNY-Old Westbury, 71-54
#45 Coast Guard (7-3): LOST (at home) to Becker, 68-78
T#46 Bethel (6-1): def. Macalester, 73-50; def. North Central (Minn.), 80-52
T#46 Carleton (5-1): def. Concordia-Moorhead, 60-54; def. St. Olaf, 65-47
T#48 Millikin (8-0): def. Blackburn, 81-56; def. Eureka, 77-49
T#48 Widener (7-3): LOST (at home) to Gwynedd-Mercy, 76-86; def. Rowan, 73-60; def. #15 Gettysburg, 80-75
T#50 Maryville (Tenn.) (4-3): LOST at Rust, 74-92
T#50 Potsdam State (5-2): LOST (at home) to St. Lawrence, 84-90

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on December 15, 2008, 12:22:53 PM

The new and improved D3 Hoops...more and more user friendly. lol ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 15, 2008, 01:38:12 PM

So St Lawrence beat Potsdam in Potsdam and then lost a close one at Ithaca. Do they get some looks this week? That Upstate New York area might be pretty strong this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 15, 2008, 09:13:24 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 15, 2008, 01:38:12 PM

So St Lawrence beat Potsdam in Potsdam and then lost a close one at Ithaca. Do they get some looks this week? That Upstate New York area might be pretty strong this season.

St. Lawrence did lose a close one but it wasn't at Ithaca. It was a home game for the Saints. Don't think they'll get much support this week but wouldn't rule out an appearance down the road. Ithaca appears to be the class of the East region this year, with NYU, Hamilton, St. Lawrence, Geneseo, Univ. of Rochester, Oneonta, Stevens, and Potsdam, also in the mix.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on December 15, 2008, 09:38:04 PM

+101 Elms
+79 Carnegie Mellon
+58 Illinois Wesleyan
+57 Centre
+52 UWSP
+52 Ithaca
+50 Richard Stockton
+48 Texas Dallas
+47 Trinity Texas
+44 Whitworth
+44 DeSales
-27 Salem State
-29 UW La Crosse
-31 Ursinus
-53 NC Wesleyan
-70 Elmhurst
-74 WPI
-82 St. Mary's
-105 Capital
-229 Gettysburg

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 15, 2008, 09:41:34 PM

Quote from: scottiedawg on December 15, 2008, 09:38:04 PM
+101 Elms
+79 Carnegie Mellon
+58 Illinois Wesleyan
+57 Centre
+52 UWSP
+52 Ithaca
+50 Richard Stockton
+48 Texas Dallas
+47 Trinity Texas
+44 Whitworth
+44 DeSales
-27 Salem State
-29 UW La Crosse
-31 Ursinus
-53 NC Wesleyan
-70 Elmhurst
-74 WPI
-82 St. Mary's
-105 Capital
-229 Gettysburg

A good illustration of "poll dynamics." Carnegie Mellon and Illinois Wesleyan are the 2nd and 3rd biggest movers this week....and neither played a game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 15, 2008, 09:43:02 PM

Also note, a Wash U defector! I am finally not the only voter on Platteville! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 15, 2008, 09:45:03 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 15, 2008, 09:43:02 PM
Also note, a Wash U defector! I am finally not the only voter on Platteville! :)

What are you, a Wheaton hater!?!?!? :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bouttime on December 16, 2008, 06:03:56 AM

The Dec. 20th match up between CMU and Richard Stockton keeps getting more interesting as both teams rise in the polls. Should be a good test for both squads.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on December 16, 2008, 01:04:07 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 15, 2008, 09:41:34 PM
Quote from: scottiedawg on December 15, 2008, 09:38:04 PM
+101 Elms
+79 Carnegie Mellon
+58 Illinois Wesleyan
+57 Centre
+52 UWSP
+52 Ithaca
+50 Richard Stockton
+48 Texas Dallas
+47 Trinity Texas
+44 Whitworth
+44 DeSales
-27 Salem State
-29 UW La Crosse
-31 Ursinus
-53 NC Wesleyan
-70 Elmhurst
-74 WPI
-82 St. Mary's
-105 Capital
-229 Gettysburg

A good illustration of "poll dynamics." Carnegie Mellon and Illinois Wesleyan are the 2nd and 3rd biggest movers this week....and neither played a game.

Perhaps a good indicator of OWP and OOWP beginning to take shape?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 18, 2008, 08:28:31 AM

How They Fared (so far)

#1 Washington U. (8-0): 12/19 vs. Eureka (neutral site); 12/20 vs. TBA @ Elmhurst (neutral site)
#2 Wheaton (Ill.) (8-0): IDLE
#3 UW-Platteville (9-0): 12/20 vs. Dubuque
#4 St. Thomas (7-0): 12/20 vs. UW-La Crosse
#5 UW-Stevens Point (7-1): 12/20 vs. Edgewood
#6 UW-Whitewater (8-1): def. UW-Oshkosh, 75-66; 12/18 vs. Cardinal Stritch
#7 Amherst (7-0): IDLE
#8 Augustana (7-2): def. MacMurray, 98-71; 12/19 at Beloit
#9 Buena Vista (8-1): def. Clarke, 82-71
#10 Elmhurst (7-1): def. #41 Fontbonne, 74-61; 12/19 vs. Benedictine; 12/20 vs. TBA
#11 Carnegie Mellon (8-0): def. La Roche, 79-64; 12/20 at #20 Richard Stockton
#12 Elms (9-0): IDLE
#13 Ursinus (5-1): IDLE
#14 Capital (7-1): 12/18 at Ohio Dominican; 12/20 vs. Muskingum
#15 Illinois Wesleyan (5-2): def. Hanover, 76-75 OT; 12/19 vs. Chicago
#16 Centre (7-1): def. Cincinnati-Clermont, 71-54; def. Thomas More, 76-53
#17 St. Mary's (Md.) (7-1): IDLE
#18 Whitworth (6-1): def. Red Deer, 89-53
#19 Ithaca (8-0): IDLE
#20 Richard Stockton (9-1): 12/20 vs. #11 Carnegie Mellon
#21 Puget Sound (5-2): IDLE
#22 Trinity (Texas) (6-1): 12/18 vs. Lakeland (neutral site); 12/19 vs. Marian (neutral site)
#23 Mass-Dartmouth (7-1): IDLE
#24 Texas-Dallas (8-0): 12/18 at Austin
#25 DeSales (8-0): IDLE
#26 Gettysburg (4-2): IDLE
#27 Worcester Polytech (8-2): IDLE
#28 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps (7-1): 12/20 at Concordia (Cal.)
#29 Rhode Island College (5-3): IDLE
#30 Roanoke (8-1): IDLE
#31 Millikin (8-0): 12/18 at Knox
#32 Lawrence (6-2): def. Caltech, 96-55; 12/19 at Cal Lutheran
#33 Transylvania (4-1): 12/18 vs. Maryville (Tenn.)
#34 Salem State (7-2): IDLE
T#35 Gordon (7-1): IDLE
T#35 Middlebury (7-2): IDLE
#37 William Paterson (7-1): 12/19 at Lehman
#38 Carleton (6-1): def. Chicago, 62-61
T#39 Bethel (6-1): IDLE
T#39 Loras (5-4): LOST (neutral site) to T#42 Carthage, 70-72; 12/18 vs. Keene State (neutral site)
#41 Fontbonne (6-2): LOST (at home) to #10 Elmhurst, 61-74; 12/18 at Rose-Hulman
T#42 Carthage (6-2): def. Keene State, 84-69; def. T#39 Loras, 72-70
T#42 Franklin and Marshall (7-0): IDLE
T#42 Wooster (5-3): 12/19 at Hawai'i Hilo

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 18, 2008, 10:00:14 AM

Thanks and +1! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 18, 2008, 11:44:46 AM

Related to the "How They Fared" postings, I need to use the collective wisdom of those who read these boards: Are there any D3 schools where the men's and women's teams belong to different conferences? (If the answer is yes, I need to make a slight change in my program.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pabegg on December 18, 2008, 12:41:05 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 18, 2008, 11:44:46 AM
Related to the "How They Fared" postings, I need to use the collective wisdom of those who read these boards: Are there any D3 schools where the men's and women's teams belong to different conferences? (If the answer is yes, I need to make a slight change in my program.)

As far as I know, conference alignments are the same for men and women now.

As recently as last year, Randolph College competed as an independent for the men (as the program was just starting up), but I don't think there are any cases of that in 2008-09.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 18, 2008, 03:48:18 PM

Not sure about basketball, but other sports do. In the WIAC, I know that they have some Minnesota schools in the gymnastics conference...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 18, 2008, 03:58:53 PM

Quote from: pabegg on December 18, 2008, 12:41:05 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 18, 2008, 11:44:46 AM
Related to the "How They Fared" postings, I need to use the collective wisdom of those who read these boards: Are there any D3 schools where the men's and women's teams belong to different conferences? (If the answer is yes, I need to make a slight change in my program.)

As far as I know, conference alignments are the same for men and women now.

As recently as last year, Randolph College competed as an independent for the men (as the program was just starting up), but I don't think there are any cases of that in 2008-09.

Football -- Rochester competes in the LL. Basketball in the UAA.
Football -- Hamilton in the NESCAC. Basketball in the LL.

Basektball -- UChicago in Basketball and an independent in Baseball.

UDallas -- men's soccer competed in the NEAC and women's soccer as an independent.
Colorado College -- men's soccer compete in the SCAC and the women in D-1.

There are several affiliates in football, e.g., Catholic from the Landmark in basketball and ODAC in football. Maryville in the USA South in Football and GSAC in basketball.

I hope that that helps you in writing your program.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 18, 2008, 05:41:08 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on December 16, 2008, 01:04:07 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 15, 2008, 09:41:34 PM
Quote from: scottiedawg on December 15, 2008, 09:38:04 PM
+101 Elms
+79 Carnegie Mellon
+58 Illinois Wesleyan
+57 Centre
+52 UWSP
+52 Ithaca
+50 Richard Stockton
+48 Texas Dallas
+47 Trinity Texas
+44 Whitworth
+44 DeSales
-27 Salem State
-29 UW La Crosse
-31 Ursinus
-53 NC Wesleyan
-70 Elmhurst
-74 WPI
-82 St. Mary's
-105 Capital
-229 Gettysburg

A good illustration of "poll dynamics." Carnegie Mellon and Illinois Wesleyan are the 2nd and 3rd biggest movers this week....and neither played a game.

Perhaps a good indicator of OWP and OOWP beginning to take shape?

I think it is more regional voting than OWP or OOWP at this point. For example, CMU was idle, but the top ranked Great lakes team, Capital, lost. Therefore, I would guess some voters moved CMU up even more because they are now the top ranked Great Lakes team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 20, 2008, 06:53:31 PM

Final:

(#10) Elmhurst 82
(#1) Wash U 75

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 20, 2008, 07:40:00 PM

#20 Richard Stockton 82 #11 Carnegie Mellon 70

#3 UW-Platteville 71 Dubuque 50

#4 St Thomas 94 UW-LaCrosse 87 OT

#14 Capital 72 Muskingum 61

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 21, 2008, 02:23:46 AM

Nice win for Elmhurst. It looks like Ryan Burks really came alive tonight, something that he wasn't able to do in the game that I saw last Saturday night against UWSP.

I wonder how this will shake up the top 25. There have been quite a few games between common opponents in the top 10. #5 UWSP has beaten #6 UW Whitewater ans #10 Elmhurst. #10 Elmhurst lost to Point and beat #1 Wash U. #1 Wash U lost to #10 Elmhurst and beat #8 Augustana. Augie lost to UW La Crosse, whom both Elmhurst and St. Thomas have beaten.

I wonder what will happen to Wash U's 23 1st place votes. They likely will retain some... but probably not all. Wheaton will likely be a beneficiary, as will Platteville. Will St. Thomas or Amherst get any, as they're both still undefeated? And what about top 10 teams that have a loss (Point, WW, Elmhurst, Buena Vista)?

I think this game kind of brings Wash U back down to earth... they're still the defending champs, but they have a little less of that aura...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 21, 2008, 07:53:10 AM

How They Fared -- Complete

#1 Washington U. (9-1): def. Eureka, 95-72; LOST at #10 Elmhurst, 75-82
#2 Wheaton (Ill.) (8-0): IDLE
#3 UW-Platteville (10-0): def. Dubuque, 71-50
#4 St. Thomas (8-0): def. UW-La Crosse, 94-87 OT
#5 UW-Stevens Point (8-1): def. Edgewood, 93-63
#6 UW-Whitewater (9-1): def. UW-Oshkosh, 75-66; def. Cardinal Stritch, 90-68
#7 Amherst (7-0): IDLE
#8 Augustana (8-2): def. MacMurray, 98-71; def. Beloit, 87-65
#9 Buena Vista (8-1): def. Clarke, 82-71
#10 Elmhurst (9-1): def. #41 Fontbonne, 74-61; def. Benedictine, 89-83; def. #1 Washington U., 82-75
#11 Carnegie Mellon (8-1): def. La Roche, 79-64; LOST at #20 Richard Stockton, 70-82
#12 Elms (9-0): IDLE
#13 Ursinus (5-1): IDLE
#14 Capital (9-1): def. Ohio Dominican, 77-63; def. Muskingum, 72-61
#15 Illinois Wesleyan (6-2): def. Hanover, 76-75 OT; def. Chicago, 70-55
#16 Centre (7-1): def. Cincinnati-Clermont, 71-54; def. Thomas More, 76-53
#17 St. Mary's (Md.) (7-1): IDLE
#18 Whitworth (6-1): def. Red Deer, 89-53
#19 Ithaca (8-0): IDLE
#20 Richard Stockton (10-1): def. #11 Carnegie Mellon, 82-70
#21 Puget Sound (5-2): IDLE
#22 Trinity (Texas) (8-1): def. Lakeland, 83-52; def. Marian, 62-49
#23 Mass-Dartmouth (7-1): IDLE
#24 Texas-Dallas (9-0): def. Austin, 72-63
#25 DeSales (8-0): IDLE

#26 Gettysburg (4-2): IDLE
#27 Worcester Polytech (8-2): IDLE
#28 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps (7-2): LOST at Concordia (Cal.), 74-95
#29 Rhode Island College (5-3): IDLE
#30 Roanoke (8-1): IDLE
#31 Millikin (8-0): IDLE
#32 Lawrence (6-3): def. Caltech, 96-55; LOST at Cal Lutheran, 65-85
#33 Transylvania (5-1): def. Maryville (Tenn.), 85-79
#34 Salem State (7-2): IDLE
T#35 Gordon (7-1): IDLE
T#35 Middlebury (7-2): IDLE
#37 William Paterson (7-1): 12/19 at Lehman -- postponed
#38 Carleton (6-1): def. Chicago, 62-61
T#39 Bethel (6-1): IDLE
T#39 Loras (6-4): LOST (neutral site) to T#42 Carthage, 70-72; def. Keene State, 80-65
#41 Fontbonne (6-3): LOST (at home) to #10 Elmhurst, 61-74; LOST at Rose-Hulman, 62-73
T#42 Carthage (6-2): def. Keene State, 84-69; def. T#39 Loras, 72-70
T#42 Franklin and Marshall (7-0): IDLE
T#42 Wooster (5-4): LOST at Hawai'i Hilo, 77-90

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Marty Peretz on December 22, 2008, 09:19:17 PM

So when does the poll finally come out?

I like Platteville at 1, Wheaton at 2, WU dropping to three, Stevens Point coming in at 4, and St.Thomas coming in at 5. Whitewater and Amherst stay where they are, with Elmhurst checking in at 8, Augie falling to 9 and Buena Vista rounding out the top 10. It's a tough poll since the only top 15 team that lost was the number 1 squad and they lost on the road at no.10, so you can't drop them too far (now would I since I am a WU alum and die hard fan).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 23, 2008, 11:44:54 AM

We're still chasing a couple of votes. :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on December 23, 2008, 03:21:51 PM

+94 Elmhurst
+85 Richard Stockton
+59 Ithaca
+50 Capital
+33 UW Platteville
+20 Roanoke
+14 Wheaton
+14 UW Stevens Point
-11 Salem State
-12 Buena Vista
-18 Amherst
-18 Lawrence
-19 Rhode Island Col
-28 Claremont Mudd Scripps
-61 St. Mary's
-86 Washington U
-161 Carnegie Mellon

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: OxyBob on December 23, 2008, 03:32:54 PM

Lawrence received 6 points in the new poll and Carthage received 3. Cal Lutheran, which is 6-1 and handily defeated both Lawrence and Carthage, doesn't appear in the poll.

What a joke.

OxyBob

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 23, 2008, 03:34:48 PM

Perhaps its time to introduce the pollsters to the 8-1 Ohio Northern Polar Bears.

http://www.d3hoops.com/school/ONU/mens/2009

http://www-new.onu.edu/athletics/mbasketball/roster

ONU has a win over 6-3 and holder of 8 poll points Defiance. ONU also beat Heidelberg, one of Defiance's other losses.

While we're discussing 6-3 teams, how about Anderson with two losses to #1 Platteville by 2 and # 4 Washington by 2.

There is basketball outside the upper Mississippi Valley. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 23, 2008, 03:38:58 PM

Here's another 8-1 team, Mount Union, they play more than football I guess.

http://www.d3hoops.com/school/MTU/mens/2009

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 23, 2008, 03:55:59 PM

Quote from: OxyBob on December 23, 2008, 03:32:54 PM
Lawrence received 6 points in the new poll and Carthage received 3. Cal Lutheran, which is 6-1 and handily defeated both Lawrence and Carthage, doesn't appear in the poll.

What a joke.

OxyBob

I'm not going to lose sleep over Cal Lutheran if the SCIAC voter wasn't even impressed enough to include them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: April on December 23, 2008, 04:38:03 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 23, 2008, 03:55:59 PM
Quote from: OxyBob on December 23, 2008, 03:32:54 PM
Lawrence received 6 points in the new poll and Carthage received 3. Cal Lutheran, which is 6-1 and handily defeated both Lawrence and Carthage, doesn't appear in the poll.

What a joke.

OxyBob

I'm not going to lose sleep over Cal Lutheran if the SCIAC voter wasn't even impressed enough to include them.

My response would be... did that SCIAC voter also vote for Lawrence? My guess would be no.

I get that some voters would be uncomfortable with putting Point so high without putting Lawrence on their poll since they beat Point. I just don't know how you can justify ranking Lawrence above Cal Lu if you're a voter. Lawrence lost to Cal Lu by TWENTY POINTS. That's a lot more than a home court advantage spread, I don't care how far you flew! Cal Lu looked like they existed on an entire different speed than Lawrence.

They have two losses:

The first one was an exihibition game against Cal State - Northridge ( I get that the Big West isn't really a major conference, but it's still a DI school, and they only lost by 11.)

While Cal Lu's loss to Pacific is obviously bad, and it's one of the few votes than anyone has to compare with in terms of competition against D3 teams, I am chalking it up to the fact that CLU is a very young team. Check out their roster. http://www.clusports.com/mens_basketball/roster/ They don't have a single senior player, and literally half of their measley 12 person roster is freshmen. Their six biggest impact players are 2 jrs, 2 sophs, and 2 frosh. IMHO, they're going to be quite good in the future, the future very likely being even this season... and have several solid D3 wins under their belt that counteract this one blemish.

I am giving OxyBob leave to be miffed on this one, sorry. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 23, 2008, 06:15:22 PM

I'll preface this post by saying I did not vote for Lawrence, Carthage, Cal Lutheran, Ohio Northern, or Mount Union on this ballot. I considered Ohio Northern, Cal Lu, and Mt Union but just wasn't quite ready to pull the trigger on any of them.

Just a couple general thoughts here...

1) Lawrence has just 6 poll points - 6 voters had them #25 or 3 had them #24 or something like that. Carthage has just 3 poll points. Both are a long, long way from being in the Top 25 (72 pts needed this week).

2) The poll is a collection of opinions of 25 individuals spread out pretty evenly across Division III. You might have a couple voters who are real high on Stevens Point who value that Lawrence win quite a bit, or others who have Grodon on their ballot, a few who are big on Defiance, etc. The "others receiving votes" category will always be a mixed bag of sorts because of the number of opinions that go into the poll.

3) This is just the Week 4 poll. We're not even to January yet. I have no idea who the best 25 teams in NCAA Division III are and, as hard as I work to make sure my ballot is as accurate as possible each week (by getting to games, following scores, talking to others around the country, or even watching games online now, which I've done for Carthage @ Cal Lutheran and Chicago @ Carleton so far this year), the reality is that there just is not enough data yet. Right now the poll is more about preseason assumptions (which are based on 2007-08 results and returning talent) than it is about actual 2008-09 data. Sure there are plenty of '08-09 scores factored in, but not enough yet. As we get into mid to late January, the poll will sort itself out. Teams like Ohio Northern, Cal Lutheran, and Mount Union will have a chance to prove themselves.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NWCer on December 23, 2008, 06:58:54 PM

April, just curious on why you say Cal Lu's loss to Pacifc is "obviously bad"? Is it because it ruined their top 25 chances or do you think, regardless of the fact that they were dominated from start to finish by my Boxers, you think they are a better team than Pacific?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: OxyBob on December 23, 2008, 07:22:54 PM

Quote from: April on December 23, 2008, 04:38:03 PM
While Cal Lu's loss to Pacific is obviously bad...

Quote from: NWCer on December 23, 2008, 06:58:54 PM
April, just curious on why you say Cal Lu's loss to Pacifc is "obviously bad"? Is it because it ruined their top 25 chances or do you think, regardless of the fact that they were dominated from start to finish by my Boxers, you think they are a better team than Pacific?

I don't agree that CLU's loss to Pacific is "obviously bad," whatever that means. Pacific lost a road game to D-II Hawaii Pacific, and road games to NAIA-2 Northwest Christian U and Northwest U of the Cascade Collegiate Conference, home of the undefeated, unanimously No. 1 ranked, and defending NAIA-2 champion Oregon Institute of Technology. The CCC is a pretty good conference.

Still, I don't think a loss to Pacific is as bad as a loss to Olivet Nazarene, another team to which Carthage lost besides Cal Lutheran. I seem to recall reading somewhere that "Olivet Nazarene is a pretty good team that would fit into the CCIW mix at about the #5 slot...but no better than that." I think another CCIW team lost to Olivet, too, but something tells me that Titan Q didn't leave that team off his ballot.

Quote from: April on December 23, 2008, 04:38:03 PM
I am giving OxyBob leave to be miffed on this one, sorry.

Thanks, but I'm not miffed. Like I said once before, I always keep a copy of the D3hoops Top 25 poll with me at all times when I go backpacking in the Sierras. The poll makes an excellent makeshift compass because it always points east.

OxyBob

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 24, 2008, 12:10:32 AM

OxyBob - you may feel the poll shifts East and you would be right for one reason, most schools are in the East!

However, as a voter who is in the East, I work very hard to see the whole picture and not have the fact that Ursinus (a team I am not putting in by ballot) sway me because they are less than two hours from me over a team like Claremont-Mudd-Scripps (who is in my ballot). Now, if we can just get thier coach to call us back to be on Hoopsville, we will be all set (one no two weeks ago, no answer last week to repeated emails from my producer).

Also, Pat has a point, if the SCIAC voter isn't putting Cal Luteran in his ballot, why should that convince a voter from Baltimore to do the same? That would be like convincing that SCIAC voter to put Ursinus on his ballot (not sure if he has) when I can't do the same myself!

I have been mulling over Cal Luteran. They were one of about 12 teams I considered putting into my Top 25, but there was only two teams I took out, I believe, so there wasn't a lot of room. That being said, the next time we vote - two weeks - things could be completely different and I may add them. Heck, If the voters knew who the top 25 teams were at this time in the season and they were right about it? What would be the point in playing the NCAA Tournament in March, just play it now and have the fun right after New Years! :)

Now, back to enjoying what will be a very White Christmas here in Maine. And I think I am going to start a new hobby, taking pictures of all the D3 school stickers I see on the back of cars during my travels. Wish I had time or the schedule this year to catch a game or two on my way up and back from Down East! Oh well!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 24, 2008, 12:29:41 AM

Ya know, this is pretty amazing... 8 of the top 10 teams in the preseason are still in the top 10, and the other two (Amherst and Elmhurst) were in the top 17.

Regarding Lawrence (and their opponents)...

LU has beaten Point. And I don't want to take away from that victory, because it is a big one... but Point was very shorthanded in that game. They didn't have Pete Rortvedt or Louis Hurd. Now, the same players did beat Whitewater... but they'd had longer to get everything figured out, being shorthanded. Thus, I don't think that the Lawrence loss really hurts Point all that much, in the long run. They've still beaten Whitewater and Elmhurst... and both those teams just have 1 loss (and EC just knocked off Wash U, of course).

You've gotta look at LU's full slate of games. LU is 6-3 (no one else in the top 25 has more than 2), and those losses were to UW Oshkosh (4-5), Marian (4-6), and Cal Lutheran (6-1). Two of the wins are against Cal Tech (0-8) and Knox (0-9). The one win against Point doesn't outweigh the rest of the games. The Cornell win looks good... 'cept that, in their 8 wins, they've beaten Knox (0-9), Ripon (3-2), Simpson (4-5), Webster (2-6), Maryville (3-5), and Concordia (3-5). And you've gotta remember that LU was #19 in the preseason. The voters had pretty high hopes for them... and they haven't lived up. They've gotta build their credibility back up, which is something they might be able to do in the MWC... but they're just two games in.

CLU might be a different story... but I don't think that they have enough credibility yet. They don't get a lot of exposure, due largely to their remote location, which really isn't their fault, but much in the same way that the IIAC hadn't gotten much love because they hadn't done much in March, I think the SCIAC teams are in a bit of the same boat. Yes, they passed the tests against Lawrence and Carthage. But LU's credibility is a bit cracked... so maybe that doesn't mean quite as much as it initially looked like. And Carthage looks good... only two losses... but we'll see what they'll be able to sustain against the rigors of the CCIW schedule... and against #1 UW Platteville on the 29th.

And really, other than the top 10 I was talking about, what do we really know about the rest of the top 25 teams? They've had successful seasons so far... like I said above, all have two losses or less. That certainly counts for something. But what sets CLU or LU ahead of, say, Millikin or Gordon? I just don't think that they have enough positives going for them.

If they can knock off Buena Vista, then I think they might have enough to garner more votes. Or push hard in their conference and win the thing. 'Cause truly, the top 25 really doesn't mean anything, in the grand scheme. And the top 25 is not as good a symbolic tool at week 4 as it is at week 12.

And even if it DID have true meaning other than symbolic value, it only shows the top of the top. This is the top 25 teams out of 360 some odd teams. That's the top 7%, roughly. It's ok if your team isn't there... heck, it's great that they're getting votes! And if a team is ticked because they're not on the top 25, they either are putting too much value on the poll... or it is going to inspire them to get better and win more games and thus end up there anyway.

I'm not saying any of this to discredit the poll... I like it and I think the pollsters to a great job. But a team can only control what they can control. And those are the things that they need to focus on. And I understand that we're all the fans and we CAN'T control even what the teams can... and we want our teams on top merely because they're our team, and of course we want them on top. But there are hundreds... HUNDREDS of teams that aren't getting votes. And if a team deserves to get votes, then their play will prove this, and they will rise to the top.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: OxyBob on December 24, 2008, 12:41:40 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 23, 2008, 03:55:59 PM
I'm not going to lose sleep over Cal Lutheran if the SCIAC voter wasn't even impressed enough to include them.

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on December 24, 2008, 12:10:32 AM
Also, Pat has a point, if the SCIAC voter isn't putting Cal Luteran in his ballot, why should that convince a voter from Baltimore to do the same?

As I said to Gregory Sager in another post, I won't engage in that kind of sophistry. How am I supposed to know why someone whose identity I don't know voted or didn't vote a certain way? Go ask them.

OxyBob

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: thebear on December 24, 2008, 12:53:41 PM

Not quite sure why Middlebury is receiving votes and SLU is not. SLU beat Middlebury by double digits, and their only losses are close to ranked teams - Ursinus & Ithaca. Could there be a NESCAC bias in the poll?

Title: Ohio Northern gets no votes at all?
Post by: Maxamillion3030 on December 24, 2008, 02:35:38 PM

That is terrible.. But a 6-3 Defiance team gets votes? A team that Northern already beat, mind you. Just give them motivation, thats fine!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ethelred the Unready on December 24, 2008, 03:57:38 PM

Quote from: thebear on December 24, 2008, 12:53:41 PM
Not quite sure why Middlebury is receiving votes and SLU is not. SLU beat Middlebury by double digits, and their only losses are close to ranked teams - Ursinus & Ithaca. Could there be a NESCAC bias in the poll?

I think it may be 1 of 2 things. First they have only played 6 games and are 4-2. Second their other wins are against Platts, Pots and S. Vt. Not terrible but not great. I think if they continue to play well they may get some love.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 24, 2008, 07:37:33 PM

Quote from: OxyBob on December 24, 2008, 12:41:40 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 23, 2008, 03:55:59 PM
I'm not going to lose sleep over Cal Lutheran if the SCIAC voter wasn't even impressed enough to include them.

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on December 24, 2008, 12:10:32 AM
Also, Pat has a point, if the SCIAC voter isn't putting Cal Luteran in his ballot, why should that convince a voter from Baltimore to do the same?

As I said to Gregory Sager in another post, I won't engage in that kind of sophistry. How am I supposed to know why someone whose identity I don't know voted or didn't vote a certain way? Go ask them.

OxyBob

Bob - how do you know other voters haven't ask them? If I were to ask Bob Quillman about a team he is not voting in his ballot from the Midwest, there may be a good chance I won't vote them, too. Why not? He is going to give me a reason to vote for that team! :)

While I understand you feel CLU is not getting the respect voters should give them, but I wish you would also take the time and see other teams in other parts of the country that may be in the same boat. If CLU continues to play well, I assure you they will get votes, they will always do.

Though, let me give you something else to ponder. I know some voters consider how a team is doing and how they think they will do in a tournament for the national title. Name me the last time a good SCIAC team that had a good record through-out the season actually got anywhere worth a headline in the NCAA Tournament. I know that the NCAA has lined up SCIAC teams to eliminate themselves or tough competition early due to travel restrictions, but if I as a voter should take any SCIAC team seriously, they need to prove that their record is more than just a good record - that they are a team that warrants a place in the Top 25. If CLU is for real, they will get those votes and they will be in the tournament. When that happens, then I will look forward to see what they do.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: OxyBob on December 26, 2008, 08:36:06 AM

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on December 24, 2008, 07:37:33 PM
Name me the last time a good SCIAC team that had a good record through-out the season actually got anywhere worth a headline in the NCAA Tournament.

More sophistry. Change the subject. Nice tactic.

Back to the subject, in case you missed it, last season Cal Lutheran was 21-5 and was co-SCIAC champs with Oxy, which made the playoffs. The Kingsmen also beat UW-Stevens Point, which made the playoffs, Gettysburg, which made the Sweet 16, and twice beat Pomona, which made the playoffs. For someone who has a weekly basketball talk show, CLU should have already been on your radar. (Didn't you do a puff piece interview with Rich Rider? I think you asked him hard-hitting questions about playing Caltech.) Maybe once in awhile you should talk to someone other than the CCIW honk.

OxyBob

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 26, 2008, 12:09:29 PM

Quote from: OxyBob on December 23, 2008, 07:22:54 PM
Still, I don't think a loss to Pacific is as bad as a loss to Olivet Nazarene, another team to which Carthage lost besides Cal Lutheran. I seem to recall reading somewhere that "Olivet Nazarene is a pretty good team that would fit into the CCIW mix at about the #5 slot...but no better than that." I think another CCIW team lost to Olivet, too, but something tells me that Titan Q didn't leave that team off his ballot.

I have no way to credibly compare Pacific to Olivet Nazarene (and neither does anyone else here), but ONU is a pretty solid NAIA Division I team. In December Olivet Nazarene...

(12/18) @ Lewis (NCAA D2) - lost by 7
(12/16) vs Rochester, MI - won by 9
(12/12) vs Carthage - won by 14
(12/9) vs McKendree (NAIA D1 #12) - lost in OT
(12/6) vs Trinity Christian (NAIA D2, 9-3) - lost by 2
(12/4) @ Illinois-Springfield (NAIA D1 #21) - won by 10
(12/2) vs Illinois Wesleyan - won by 13

http://www2.olivet.edu/athletics/schedule.php?sid=2

I'll stick by my statement you quoted above (which I made in reference to IWU's game vs Olivet Nazarene a few weeks ago) that Olivet Nazarene would finish 5th in the CCIW this season after a full double round robin:

Quote from: Titan Q on December 02, 2008, 10:18:14 PM
Final:

Olivet Nazarene 76
IWU 63

After leading 31-25 at halftime, it sounded like IWU just played terribly on both ends in the 2nd half. ONU took the lead for good with about 11:00 to play but the game was still very close until the Tigers went on a 9-0 run with about 5:00 to play to separate for good and secure the win.

IWU couldn't throw it in the ocean tonight from beyond the arc or from the free throw line. I haven't heard the final shooting stats yet, but they must be really ugly.

I'm pretty sure Olivet Nazarene is a pretty good team that would fit into the CCIW mix at about the #5 slot...but no better than that. Even with a young team on the road, this was a disappointing loss for the Titans in my eyes.

Fortunately, since this was not a D3 in-region game, the loss doesn't hurt the Titans at all.

I'll say they might even finish 4th. But whether #4 or #5 ends up being Illinois Wesleyan or Carthage or North Central or North Park or Millikin (I believe Wheaton, Augustana, and Elmhurst will safely finish 1-3 in some order), I'm confident in saying those teams will be pretty good. I think non-conferece results to date have already demonstrated that. I think most around the CCIW still feel that Millikin will finish last, for example, but the Big Blue are 8-0 right now with D3's only win over a D1 team. So please don't get me wrong - I don't think losing to Olivet Nazarene is a "bad loss" by any stretch. As an IWU fan, I was disappointed in that result and thought it was a game the Titans should have won, but I don't think anyone who has seen ONU play would call that a bad loss.

As to your statement about the IWU/Carthage results @ Olivet Nazarene and how they impacted my ballot, while I really don't understand your point, I'll just say that I factored those results in the same as I factor the rest of the resume in deciding whether or not to vote for a team and where to slot them. I've been very careful of my handling of the team I support (IWU) over the years in my D3hoops.com Top 25 ballots, just as I'm sure all of the coaches, SID's, and media members who vote have been with their teams. I have never slotted the Titans higher than I felt they deserved to be or the resume indicated, or given them a free pass on any loss. If that is what you are trying to say (by saying somehow I treated Carthage's loss @ Olivet Nazarene differently than IWU's), I really don't appreciate it, Bob. Having a chip on your shoulder about SCIAC positioning in the poll is one thing, and to some extent I understand that as a SCIAC fan...but questioning someone's integrity is another. There are much more effective ways to make your point than doing that or calling the D3hoops.com Top 25 poll a "joke."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 26, 2008, 10:15:15 PM

OxyBob,

With all due respect (and the amount due is rapidly declining), it is you that keeps changing the subject. You have now attacked Q's integrity, d-mac's competence, and the objectivity of every d3hoops.com voter. Any more ad hominems you wish to add (beyond the obvious rant that Mr. Ypsi is a 'shameless homer' [sometimes guilty as charged :P])?

I salute your knowledge and love of d3 sports, but your paranoia and victimization rants are getting VERY old. Since you are obviously capable of wit, please unleash your writers to show the other half of your wit. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 26, 2008, 10:35:38 PM

In an attempt to address concerns about teams not receiving the respect they deserve ... and because I had to make a few tweaks in my program anyway ... I added an option to specify a list of additional teams which had not received votes, but might deserve attention from the voters.

So far that list includes Cal Lutheran, Ohio Northern, and Mount Union. Any other nominees (for either the men's or women's lists)?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on December 26, 2008, 11:07:45 PM

Quote from: OxyBob on December 23, 2008, 03:32:54 PM
Lawrence received 6 points in the new poll and Carthage received 3. Cal Lutheran, which is 6-1 and handily defeated both Lawrence and Carthage, doesn't appear in the poll.

What a joke.

OxyBob

I'm trying to decide which are Cal Lutheran's next two significant wins - the win over 5-7 Cal State Northridge, the two wins over 1-10 La Sierra or the win over the Afganistan National Team?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ethelred the Unready on December 27, 2008, 07:44:29 AM

Quote from: OxyBob on December 23, 2008, 03:32:54 PM
Lawrence received 6 points in the new poll and Carthage received 3. Cal Lutheran, which is 6-1 and handily defeated both Lawrence and Carthage, doesn't appear in the poll.

What a joke.

OxyBob

Hardly seems like the Lutheran way to be demanding attention. I'm certain it would be frowned upon by the Lutherans of Lake Wobegon. Maybe the California Lutherans are more worldly

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on December 28, 2008, 02:10:01 AM

Quote from: OxyBob on December 23, 2008, 03:32:54 PM
Lawrence received 6 points in the new poll and Carthage received 3. Cal Lutheran, which is 6-1 and handily defeated both Lawrence and Carthage, doesn't appear in the poll.

What a joke.

OxyBob

If you can possible set aside the "what a joke" comment, I think OxyBob has a valid point. Instead of defending your balloting or engaging is accusations of sophistry and defamation, how about all the All Americans take a higher road and look at the facts OxyBob presents and responding to those, not the emotion. Anyone who voted for Lawrence or Carthage most likely did not look at Cal Lu before casting there ballot. Had Lawrence or Carthage received 0 votes, Bob and his quick wit would probably had remained silent to Cal Lu's ommision from the voting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 28, 2008, 07:56:47 AM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on December 28, 2008, 02:10:01 AM
If you can possible set aside the "what a joke" comment, I think OxyBob has a valid point. Instead of defending your balloting or engaging is accusations of sophistry and defamation, how about all the All Americans take a higher road and look at the facts OxyBob presents and responding to those, not the emotion.

That is where I tried to start with OxyBob...

Quote from: Titan Q on December 23, 2008, 06:15:22 PM
I'll preface this post by saying I did not vote for Lawrence, Carthage, Cal Lutheran, Ohio Northern, or Mount Union on this ballot. I considered Ohio Northern, Cal Lu, and Mt Union but just wasn't quite ready to pull the trigger on any of them.

Just a couple general thoughts here...

1) Lawrence has just 6 poll points - 6 voters had them #25 or 3 had them #24 or something like that. Carthage has just 3 poll points. Both are a long, long way from being in the Top 25 (72 pts needed this week).

2) The poll is a collection of opinions of 25 individuals spread out pretty evenly across Division III. You might have a couple voters who are real high on Stevens Point who value that Lawrence win quite a bit, or others who have Grodon on their ballot, a few who are big on Defiance, etc. The "others receiving votes" category will always be a mixed bag of sorts because of the number of opinions that go into the poll.

3) This is just the Week 4 poll. We're not even to January yet. I have no idea who the best 25 teams in NCAA Division III are and, as hard as I work to make sure my ballot is as accurate as possible each week (by getting to games, following scores, talking to others around the country, or even watching games online now, which I've done for Carthage @ Cal Lutheran and Chicago @ Carleton so far this year), the reality is that there just is not enough data yet. Right now the poll is more about preseason assumptions (which are based on 2007-08 results and returning talent) than it is about actual 2008-09 data. Sure there are plenty of '08-09 scores factored in, but not enough yet. As we get into mid to late January, the poll will sort itself out. Teams like Ohio Northern, Cal Lutheran, and Mount Union will have a chance to prove themselves.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 28, 2008, 11:46:32 PM

How They Fared (so far): Hardly worth posting with only 6 games played in the last week, but at least it serves as a list of upcoming games ... (plus I had to test my revised program).

#1 UW-Platteville (10-0): 12/29 vs. #40 Carthage (neutral site); 12/30 at TBA; 01/03 vs. UW-Stout
#2 Wheaton (Ill.) (8-0): 12/29 vs. Mount St. Joseph (neutral site); 12/30 vs. TBA @ Wittenberg (neutral site); 01/03 at Grinnell
#3 St. Thomas (8-0): 12/30 at Concordia-St. Paul; 01/03 vs. Macalester
#4 Washington U. (9-1): IDLE
#5 UW-Stevens Point (8-1): 12/30 vs. Carroll; 01/03 at UW-Oshkosh
#6 UW-Whitewater (9-1): 12/29 vs. LeTourneau (neutral site); 12/30 vs. TBA @ Mary Hardin-Baylor (neutral site); 01/03 vs. UW-River Falls
#7 Elmhurst (9-1): 01/03 at Anderson
#8 Amherst (7-0): 12/31 at Caltech; 01/02 vs. Pomona-Pitzer (neutral site)
#9 Augustana (8-2): 12/30 vs. Coe; 01/03 vs. North Park
#10 Buena Vista (8-1): 12/29 vs. Pacific Lutheran (neutral site); 12/30 at Cal Lutheran
#11 Elms (9-0): 01/03 vs. Hobart (neutral site); 01/04 at TBA
#12 Capital (10-1): def. Kenyon, 89-84
#13 Ursinus (5-1): 12/29 vs. Lebanon Valley (neutral site); 12/30 vs. TBA @ Randolph-Macon (neutral site); 01/03 at Cornell
#14 Richard Stockton (10-1): 01/03 vs. Shenandoah (neutral site); 01/04 vs. TBA @ Scranton (neutral site)
#15 Carnegie Mellon (8-1): 01/02 at Averett; 01/03 vs. Ferrum (neutral site)
#16 Illinois Wesleyan (6-2): 12/29 vs. St. Xavier @ Northwood (neutral site); 12/30 vs. TBA @ Northwood (neutral site); 01/03 vs. Illinois College
#17 Ithaca (8-0): 01/02 at Elmira; 01/04 at Alfred
#18 Centre (7-1): 12/29 vs. Piedmont; 12/30 vs. Maryville (Tenn.); 01/04 at DePauw
#19 Whitworth (7-1): def. Simpson, 77-56; 12/29 vs. Gustavus Adolphus (neutral site); 01/02 vs. George Fox; 01/03 vs. Pacific
#20 St. Mary's (Md.) (7-1): 12/29 at St. John Fisher; 12/30 vs. Alfred (neutral site); 01/03 vs. Arcadia
#21 Trinity (Texas) (8-1): 12/31 vs. SUNYIT; 01/02 vs. Millsaps; 01/03 vs. Hendrix
#22 Puget Sound (6-2): def. Gustavus Adolphus, 102-79; 12/29 vs. Simpson (neutral site); 01/02 vs. Lewis and Clark; 01/03 vs. Linfield
#23 Texas-Dallas (9-0): 01/03 at McMurry
#24 Mass-Dartmouth (7-1): 12/31 at Pomona-Pitzer; 01/02 at Occidental
#25 DeSales (8-0): 01/03 vs. John Jay; 01/04 vs. TBA

#26 Roanoke (8-1): 01/02 vs. Penn St.-Abington; 01/03 vs. TBA @ Roanoke, Va. (neutral site)
#27 Worcester Polytech (8-2): 12/31 at Concordia-Austin
#28 Gettysburg (4-2): 01/02 vs. Juniata (neutral site); 01/03 at TBA
#29 Millikin (8-0): 01/03 vs. York (N.Y.) (neutral site)
#30 William Paterson (7-1): 12/30 at CCNY
T#31 Middlebury (7-2): 12/30 vs. RPI; 01/03 at Hamilton
T#31 Rhode Island College (5-3): IDLE
T#31 Transylvania (5-3): LOST (at home) to Berea, 80-85 OT; LOST (neutral site) to UW-Superior, 64-81; 12/29 vs. Cazenovia (neutral site); 12/30 vs. TBA @ Phoenix College (neutral site); 01/03 at #36 Defiance
#34 Gordon (7-1): 01/03 at Northwestern (Minn.)
#35 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps (7-2): 12/30 vs. Pt. Loma Nazarene
#36 Defiance (6-3): 12/29 vs. Rockford; 12/30 vs. TBA; 01/03 vs. T#31 Transylvania
#37 Lawrence (6-3): IDLE
T#38 Bethel (6-1): 01/03 at Concordia-Moorhead
T#38 Salem State (7-2): 12/29 vs. Denison; 12/30 vs. Williams; 01/03 at Curry
#40 Carthage (6-2): 12/29 vs. #1 UW-Platteville (neutral site); 12/30 vs. TBA @ St. Norbert (neutral site)
#41 Franklin and Marshall (7-0): 01/02 vs. New Jersey; 01/03 vs. TBA
#42 Carleton (6-1): 12/30 vs. UW-La Crosse; 01/03 vs. Hamline

--- Ohio Northern (9-1): def. Linfield, 67-57; 12/29 vs. TBA @ San Diego, Calif. (neutral site); 01/03 at Otterbein
--- Cal Lutheran (6-1): 12/29 vs. Luther; 12/30 vs. #10 Buena Vista; 01/02 vs. UC Santa Cruz (neutral site); 01/03 vs. Tufts (neutral site)
--- Mount Union (8-1): 12/29 vs. Kean (neutral site); 01/03 at John Carroll

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 29, 2008, 02:19:27 AM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 28, 2008, 11:46:32 PM
How They Fared (so far): Hardly worth posting with only 6 games played in the last week, but at least it serves as a list of upcoming games ...

....but that's a worthy goal, trying to draw the reader's attention to key games coming up during the week. When I did this, I considered the schedule and the results to be of equal merit. Plus the schedule has the added benefit of only having to be updated once a week! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 29, 2008, 11:28:20 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 29, 2008, 02:19:27 AM
When I did this, I considered the schedule and the results to be of equal merit.

I couldn't agree more. Having the schedule available is great.

Thanks again for doing this Darryl.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 29, 2008, 12:22:54 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 29, 2008, 11:28:20 AM
Quote from: David Collinge on December 29, 2008, 02:19:27 AM
When I did this, I considered the schedule and the results to be of equal merit.

I couldn't agree more. Having the schedule available is great.

Thanks again for doing this Darryl.

+1, Darryl! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 29, 2008, 12:35:48 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 29, 2008, 02:19:27 AM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 28, 2008, 11:46:32 PM
How They Fared (so far): Hardly worth posting with only 6 games played in the last week, but at least it serves as a list of upcoming games ...
....but that's a worthy goal, trying to draw the reader's attention to key games coming up during the week. When I did this, I considered the schedule and the results to be of equal merit. Plus the schedule has the added benefit of only having to be updated once a week! ;)

Yes, and thanks again for doing this, Darryl. It's greatly appreciated.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 30, 2008, 09:38:20 PM

UMHB 73, UWW 67

Boxscore (http://www.uwwsports.com/sports/mbball/2008-2009/UMHB.HTM)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 30, 2008, 10:34:02 PM

Wow! They're dropping like flies.

St Norbert 70 #1 UW-Platteville 68

Carroll 85 #5 UW-Stevens Point 71

Mary Hardin-Baylor 73 #6 UW-Whitewater 67

Randolph-Macon 75 #13 Ursinus 63

St. Xavier 74 #16 Illinois Wesleyan 72 on 12-29

Maryville (Tenn) 78 #18 Centre 72 (2nd loss in a row after dropping 82-75 decision
to Peidmont last night)

St. John Fisher 97 #20 St. Mary's (MD) 80 on 12 -29

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 30, 2008, 10:40:33 PM

Live video...

#10 Buena Vista (9-1) @ Cal Lutheran (7-1)

http://www.kadytv.com/SportsCLU.asp

8:00pm PST

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on December 30, 2008, 10:47:35 PM

Darryl:

Wow. That is awesome, very impressive.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 31, 2008, 10:24:10 PM

How They Fared: Special New Year's Eve edition

Hoosier Titan will handle the final posting on Sunday.

#1 UW-Platteville (11-1): def. #40 Carthage, 74-48; LOST at St. Norbert, 68-70; 01/03 vs. UW-Stout
#2 Wheaton (Ill.) (10-0): def. Mount St. Joseph, 80-59; def. Taylor (Ind.) @ Wittenberg, 62-46; 01/03 at Grinnell
#3 St. Thomas (9-0): def. Concordia-St. Paul, 72-69 OT; 01/03 vs. Macalester
#4 Washington U. (9-1): IDLE
#5 UW-Stevens Point (8-2): LOST (at home) to Carroll, 71-85; 01/03 at UW-Oshkosh
#6 UW-Whitewater (10-2): def. LeTourneau, 69-58; LOST at Mary Hardin-Baylor, 67-73; 01/03 vs. UW-River Falls
#7 Elmhurst (9-1): 01/03 at Anderson
#8 Amherst (8-0): def. Caltech, 106-56; 01/02 vs. Pomona-Pitzer (neutral site)
#9 Augustana (9-2): def. Coe, 68-41; 01/03 vs. North Park
#10 Buena Vista (10-1): def. Pacific Lutheran, 108-100 OT; def. Cal Lutheran, 68-65
#11 Elms (9-0): 01/03 vs. Hobart (neutral site); 01/04 at TBA
#12 Capital (10-1): def. Kenyon, 89-84
#13 Ursinus (6-2): def. Lebanon Valley, 75-64; LOST at Randolph-Macon, 63-75; 01/03 at Cornell
#14 Richard Stockton (10-1): 01/03 vs. Shenandoah (neutral site); 01/04 vs. TBA @ Scranton (neutral site)
#15 Carnegie Mellon (8-1): 01/02 at Averett; 01/03 vs. Ferrum (neutral site)
#16 Illinois Wesleyan (7-3): LOST (neutral site) to St. Xavier @ Northwood, 72-74; def. Mo. Baptist @ Northwood, 82-73; 01/03 vs. Illinois College
#17 Ithaca (8-0): 01/02 at Elmira; 01/04 at Alfred
#18 Centre (8-2): LOST (at home) to Piedmont, 75-82; def. Maryville (Tenn.), 78-72; 01/04 at DePauw
#19 Whitworth (8-1): def. Simpson, 77-56; def. Gustavus Adolphus, 79-58; 01/02 vs. George Fox; 01/03 vs. Pacific
#20 St. Mary's (Md.) (8-2): LOST at St. John Fisher, 80-97; def. Alfred, 90-76; 01/03 vs. Arcadia
#21 Trinity (Texas) (9-1): def. SUNYIT, 95-85; 01/02 vs. Millsaps; 01/03 vs. Hendrix
#22 Puget Sound (7-2): def. Gustavus Adolphus, 102-79; def. Simpson, 118-88; 01/02 vs. Lewis and Clark; 01/03 vs. Linfield
#23 Texas-Dallas (9-0): 01/03 at McMurry
#24 Mass-Dartmouth (8-1): def. Pomona-Pitzer, 71-66; 01/02 at Occidental
#25 DeSales (8-0): 01/03 vs. John Jay; 01/04 vs. TBA

#26 Roanoke (8-1): 01/02 vs. Penn St.-Abington; 01/03 vs. TBA @ Roanoke, Va. (neutral site)
#27 Worcester Polytech (8-3): LOST at Concordia-Austin, 85-86
#28 Gettysburg (4-2): 01/02 vs. Juniata (neutral site); 01/03 at TBA
#29 Millikin (8-0): 01/03 vs. York (N.Y.) (neutral site)
#30 William Paterson (9-1): def. Lehman, 65-64; def. CCNY, 62-34
T#31 Middlebury (8-2): def. RPI, 62-46; 01/03 at Hamilton
T#31 Rhode Island College (5-3): IDLE
T#31 Transylvania (7-3): LOST (at home) to Berea, 80-85 OT; LOST (neutral site) to UW-Superior, 64-81; def. Cazenovia, 99-71; def. Bridgewater State, 74-66; 01/03 at #36 Defiance
#34 Gordon (7-1): 01/03 at Northwestern (Minn.)
#35 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps (7-3): LOST (at home) to Pt. Loma Nazarene, 74-81
#36 Defiance (7-4): LOST (at home) to Rockford, 89-95; def. Geneva, 93-79; 01/03 vs. T#31 Transylvania
#37 Lawrence (6-3): IDLE
T#38 Bethel (6-1): 01/03 at Concordia-Moorhead
T#38 Salem State (9-2): def. Denison, 95-85; def. Williams, 76-65; 01/03 at Curry
#40 Carthage (7-3): LOST (neutral site) to #1 UW-Platteville, 48-74; def. St. Scholastica, 73-63
#41 Franklin and Marshall (7-0): 01/02 vs. New Jersey; 01/03 vs. TBA
#42 Carleton (6-2): LOST (at home) to UW-La Crosse, 49-66; 01/03 vs. Hamline

--- Ohio Northern (9-2): def. Linfield, 67-57; LOST (neutral site) to Ramapo, 71-79; 01/03 at Otterbein
--- Cal Lutheran (7-2): def. Luther, 57-51; LOST (at home) to #10 Buena Vista, 65-68; 01/02 vs. UC Santa Cruz (neutral site); 01/03 vs. Tufts (neutral site)
--- Mount Union (9-2): def. Kean, 78-70; LOST at Wooster, 61-80; 01/03 at John Carroll

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 01, 2009, 12:54:35 AM

Nice work, Darryl!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 02, 2009, 11:34:39 AM

Darryl, can you add St. Norbert, NYU, Wooster, St. John Fisher, and Randolph-Macon to the "watch list"? Just trying to identify a few more teams we need to start keeping an eye on. Thanks!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 02, 2009, 04:33:16 PM

Titan Q:

I'll add St. John Fisher to the list for this weekend's report -- or rather, I'll ask Hoosier Titan to do so. The other four teams don't play any more games until next week, so I'll post their results since the last poll, and add them on the watch list (if necessary) after the next poll.

Wooster (7-4, 2-0 NCAC)

Dec. 29	Thiel	W, 82-63
Dec. 30	Mount Union	W, 80-61

NYU (8-0, 0-0 UAA)

Dec. 29	Rivier	W, 76-62
Dec. 30	New Paltz State	W, 73-68

Randolph-Macon (7-3, 2-0 ODAC)

Dec. 29	Frostburg State	W, 86-41
Dec. 30	Ursinus	W, 75-63

St. Norbert (8-1, 2-0 MWC)

Dec. 29	St. Scholastica	W, 70-42
Dec. 30	UW-Platteville	W, 70-68

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 02, 2009, 09:16:09 PM

Interesting match-up tonight in Tacoma, Washington where No. 22 Puget Sound hosts Lewis & Clark (6-3). It's always tough to gauge these teams with their non-conference schedules understandably filled with non-divisional opponents. Lewis & Clark has played No. 6 UW-Whitewater and Division I Portland State respectably in two of its three loses. The third is a one-point defeat versus UW-Oshkosh.

Starts at 11 pm EST
Live audio (http://www2.ups.edu/athletics/live/broadcast.htm)
Live Stats (http://www2.ups.edu/athletics/live/basketball/xlive.htm)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 02, 2009, 09:29:47 PM

If St. Joseph's (L.I.) wins a couple more games, you may want to add them to the list. The Golden Eagles are 8-0 but let's see how they do with Montclair State (winners of seven straight) and Farmingdale State (Skyline Champs) this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on January 03, 2009, 03:36:02 AM

Quote from: gordonmann on January 02, 2009, 09:16:09 PM
Interesting match-up tonight in Tacoma, Washington where No. 22 Puget Sound hosts Lewis & Clark (6-3). It's always tough to gauge these teams with their non-conference schedules understandably filled with non-divisional opponents. Lewis & Clark has played No. 6 UW-Whitewater and Division I Portland State respectably in two of its three loses. The third is a one-point defeat versus UW-Oshkosh.

Starts at 11 pm EST
Live audio (http://www2.ups.edu/athletics/live/broadcast.htm)
Live Stats (http://www2.ups.edu/athletics/live/basketball/xlive.htm)

UPS won at home with a very impressive second half. Just pulled away and thoroughly "outeverythinged" LC.

The other NWC conference ranked team, Whitworth, routed George Fox with F Calvin Jurich having a very impressive triple double in 25 minutes of playing time as well as the team shooting 16-25 from 3pt.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 03, 2009, 05:00:07 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 02, 2009, 04:33:16 PM
Titan Q:

I'll add St. John Fisher to the list for this weekend's report -- or rather, I'll ask Hoosier Titan to do so. The other four teams don't play any more games until next week, so I'll post their results since the last poll, and add them on the watch list (if necessary) after the next poll.

Wooster (7-4, 2-0 NCAC)
Dec. 29 Thiel W, 82-63
Dec. 30 Mount Union W, 80-61

NYU (8-0, 0-0 UAA)
Dec. 29 Rivier W, 76-62
Dec. 30 New Paltz State W, 73-68

Randolph-Macon (7-3, 2-0 ODAC)
Dec. 29 Frostburg State W, 86-41
Dec. 30 Ursinus W, 75-63

St. Norbert (8-1, 2-0 MWC)
Dec. 29 St. Scholastica W, 70-42
Dec. 30 UW-Platteville W, 70-68

Thanks. Anderson is another to add.

Final:

Anderson 83
#7 Elmhurst 77

http://www.d3hoops.com/school/AND/mens/2009

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 03, 2009, 05:34:19 PM

What happened to Ursinus at Cornell today?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 04, 2009, 12:44:29 AM

They lost big, but Division I teams have a way of doing that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 04, 2009, 12:59:57 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 04, 2009, 12:44:29 AM
They lost big, but Division I teams have a way of doing that.

I see, I just assumed that the Cornell was the one in Iowa.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 04, 2009, 01:05:59 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 04, 2009, 12:44:29 AM
They lost big, but Division I teams have a way of doing that.

Unless they are truly bad D1 teams like SIU-E! :D

Still, Millikin's win over SIU-E, combined with Millikin's loss to 10-loss York (NY) and SIU-E's win over a WMU team that will win some games, should give a whole lot of d3 teams quick access to 'chain' wins over a whole lot of d1 teams! ;D

Do you know of any basketball equivalent of that 'chain of wins' football site? IF Caltech ever wins a game (and UMPI or Finlandia, as a backup), I want to 'prove' they are better than UNC (or whoever). ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 04, 2009, 01:38:12 AM

Massey has had them in the past, I think ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 04, 2009, 02:05:23 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 04, 2009, 01:05:59 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 04, 2009, 12:44:29 AM
They lost big, but Division I teams have a way of doing that.

Unless they are truly bad D1 teams like SIU-E! :D

Still, Millikin's win over SIU-E, combined with Millikin's loss to 10-loss York (NY) and SIU-E's win over a WMU team that will win some games, should give a whole lot of d3 teams quick access to 'chain' wins over a whole lot of d1 teams! ;D

Do you know of any basketball equivalent of that 'chain of wins' football site? IF Caltech ever wins a game (and UMPI or Finlandia, as a backup), I want to 'prove' they are better than UNC (or whoever). ;)

So far I can get Millikin to Duke........and by default York(NY)

Millikin > SIU-Edwardsville > Western Michigan > Detroit Mercy > Central Michigan > Cleveland State > Syracuse > Kansas > Tennessee > Georgetown > Maryland > Michigan State > Texas > Wisconsin > Michigan > Duke

Obviously if Duke beats North Carolina this year.............you probably most of the CCIW better than North Carolina.

Duke is currently the highest ranked team with a loss at #4.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 04, 2009, 02:29:05 AM

pffffftttttt...........not hard at all to get Finlandia to Duke.

Finlandia > St. Scholastica > UW-River Falls > UW-Oshkosh > Lawrence > UW Stevens Point > Trinity, Tx > Olivet > Franklin > Wilmington > Capital > John Carroll > York, NY > Millikin > SIU-Edwardsville > Western Michigan > Detroit Mercy > Central Michigan > Cleveland State > Syracuse > Kansas > Tennessee > Georgetown > Maryland > Michigan State > Texas > Wisconsin > Michigan > Duke

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 04, 2009, 02:28:54 PM

Easier than driving it. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 04, 2009, 02:39:38 PM

ah the old 29 degrees of separation game

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hoosier Titan on January 04, 2009, 03:44:41 PM

How They Fared through January 4. Complete.

"---" before a team means that team is one of the unranked ones we are tracking by request. Post or send me the names of any other teams to be watched.

#1 UW-Platteville (12-1): def. #40 Carthage, 74-48; LOST at St. Norbert, 68-70; def. UW-Stout, 71-57
#2 Wheaton (Ill.) (11-0): def. Mount St. Joseph, 80-59; def. Taylor (Ind.) @ Wittenberg, 62-46; def. Grinnell, 130-109
#3 St. Thomas (10-0): def. Concordia-St. Paul, 72-69 OT; def. Macalester, 95-55
#4 Washington U. (9-1): IDLE
#5 UW-Stevens Point (9-2): LOST (at home) to Carroll, 71-85; def. UW-Oshkosh, 74-65
#6 UW-Whitewater (11-2): def. LeTourneau, 69-58; LOST at Mary Hardin-Baylor, 67-73; def. UW-River Falls, 90-68
#7 Elmhurst (9-2): LOST at --- Anderson, 77-83
#8 Amherst (9-0): def. Caltech, 106-56; def. Pomona-Pitzer, 74-52
#9 Augustana (10-2): def. Coe, 68-41; def. North Park, 70-53
#10 Buena Vista (10-1): def. Pacific Lutheran, 108-100 OT; def. --- Cal Lutheran, 68-65
#11 Elms (10-1): def. Hobart, 83-63; LOST at Regis (Mass.), 63-66
#12 Capital (10-1): def. Kenyon, 89-84
#13 Ursinus (6-3): def. Lebanon Valley, 75-64; LOST at --- Randolph-Macon, 63-75; LOST at Cornell, 45-99
#14 Richard Stockton (12-1): def. Shenandoah, 74-57; def. Scranton, 77-62
#15 Carnegie Mellon (10-1): def. Averett, 69-59; def. Ferrum, 76-67
#16 Illinois Wesleyan (8-3): LOST (neutral site) to St. Xavier @ Northwood, 72-74; def. Mo. Baptist @ Northwood, 82-73; def. Illinois College, 82-59
#17 Ithaca (10-0): def. Elmira, 112-72; def. Alfred, 75-64
#18 Centre (8-3): LOST (at home) to Piedmont, 75-82; def. Maryville (Tenn.), 78-72; LOST at DePauw, 74-78
#19 Whitworth (10-1): def. Simpson, 77-56; def. Gustavus Adolphus, 79-58; def. George Fox, 94-60; def. Pacific, 82-51
#20 St. Mary's (Md.) (9-2): LOST at --- St. John Fisher, 80-97; def. Alfred, 90-76; def. Arcadia, 74-62
#21 Trinity (Texas) (11-1): def. SUNYIT, 95-85; def. Millsaps, 55-50; def. Hendrix, 69-53
#22 Puget Sound (9-2): def. Gustavus Adolphus, 102-79; def. Simpson, 118-88; def. Lewis and Clark, 81-57; def. Linfield, 70-48
#23 Texas-Dallas (9-1): LOST at McMurry, 61-64
#24 Mass-Dartmouth (9-1): def. Pomona-Pitzer, 71-66; def. Occidental, 78-59
#25 DeSales (9-1): def. John Jay, 86-53; LOST (at home) to Brockport State, 49-61

#26 Roanoke (10-1): def. Penn St.-Abington, 106-55; def. Cortland State, 84-82 2OT
#27 Worcester Polytech (8-3): LOST at Concordia-Austin, 85-86
#28 Gettysburg (6-2): def. Juniata, 70-53; def. Albright, 62-60
#29 Millikin (9-1): LOST (neutral site) to York (N.Y.), 68-88; def. Maryland Bible @ Newport News, Va.7, 55-54
#30 William Paterson (9-1): def. Lehman, 65-64; def. CCNY, 62-34
T#31 Middlebury (9-2): def. RPI, 62-46; def. Hamilton, 73-49
T#31 Rhode Island College (5-3): IDLE
T#31 Transylvania (8-3): LOST (at home) to Berea, 80-85 OT; LOST (neutral site) to UW-Superior, 64-81; def. Cazenovia, 99-71; def. Bridgewater State, 74-66; def. #36 Defiance, 81-79
#34 Gordon (7-2): LOST at Northwestern (Minn.), 62-69
#35 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps (7-3): LOST (at home) to Pt. Loma Nazarene, 74-81
#36 Defiance (7-5): LOST (at home) to Rockford, 89-95; def. Geneva, 93-79; LOST (at home) to T#31 Transylvania, 79-81
#37 Lawrence (6-3): IDLE
T#38 Bethel (6-1): 01/03 at Concordia-Moorhead
T#38 Salem State (10-2): def. Denison, 95-85; def. Williams, 76-65; def. Curry, 83-70
#40 Carthage (7-3): LOST (neutral site) to #1 UW-Platteville, 48-74; def. St. Scholastica, 73-63
#41 Franklin and Marshall (9-0): def. New Jersey, 78-74; def. Susquehanna, 81-79
#42 Carleton (7-2): LOST (at home) to UW-La Crosse, 49-66; def. Hamline, 82-66
--- Ohio Northern (10-2): def. Linfield, 67-57; LOST (neutral site) to Ramapo, 71-79; def. Otterbein, 82-61
--- Cal Lutheran (8-3): def. Luther, 57-51; LOST (at home) to #10 Buena Vista, 65-68; def. UC Santa Cruz, 85-72; LOST (neutral site) to Tufts, 69-74
--- Mount Union (9-3): def. Kean, 78-70; LOST at --- Wooster, 61-80; LOST at John Carroll, 88-94 OT
--- Wooster (7-4): def. Thiel, 82-63; def. --- Mount Union, 80-61
--- New York University (8-0): def. Rivier, 76-62; def. New Paltz State, 73-68
--- Randolph-Macon (7-3): def. Frostburg State, 86-41; def. #13 Ursinus, 75-63
--- Anderson (9-3): def. Texas Lutheran, 84-79; def. Howard Payne, 93-78; def. #7 Elmhurst, 83-77
--- St. John Fisher (7-1): def. #20 St. Mary's (Md.), 97-80; def. Muskingum, 60-57; def. Hartwick, 63-52; def. Stevens, 60-52

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 04, 2009, 05:17:52 PM

#17 Ithaca win at Alfred 75-64 to move to 10-0.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 04, 2009, 06:02:28 PM

#14 Richard Stockton defeats host Scranton 77-62 to win the Radisson Invitational Tournament.

#25 Desales falls to visiting Brockport State in the finals of Desales Tourney, 61-49. Desales is now 9-1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 04, 2009, 07:54:56 PM

#11 Elms falls from the unbeaten ranks losing on the road to Regis(Mass) 66-63.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 04, 2009, 09:45:46 PM

Quote from: sac on January 04, 2009, 02:29:05 AM
pffffftttttt...........not hard at all to get Finlandia to Duke.

Finlandia > St. Scholastica > UW-River Falls > UW-Oshkosh > Lawrence > UW Stevens Point > Trinity, Tx > Olivet > Franklin > Wilmington > Capital > John Carroll > York, NY > Millikin > SIU-Edwardsville > Western Michigan > Detroit Mercy > Central Michigan > Cleveland State > Syracuse > Kansas > Tennessee > Georgetown > Maryland > Michigan State > Texas > Wisconsin > Michigan > Duke

Thanks to Boston College..........

Finlandia > St. Scholastica > UW-River Falls > UW-Oshkosh > Lawrence > UW Stevens Point > Trinity, Tx > Olivet > Franklin > Wilmington > Capital > John Carroll > York, NY > Millikin > SIU-Edwardsville > Western Michigan > Detroit Mercy > Central Michigan > Cleveland State > Syracuse > Kansas > Tennessee > Georgetown > Maryland > Michigan State > Texas > Wisconsin > Michigan > Duke > Purdue > Boston College > North Carolina

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 05, 2009, 06:50:57 PM

+115 Ithaca
+90 Puget Sound
+85 Trinity Tx
+82 Richard Stockton
+77 St. Nortbert
+72 Amherst
+71 Whitworth
+64 Carnegie Mellon
+59 UMass Dartmouth
+54 Capital
+50 Buena Vista
-33 WPI
-35 Texas-Dallas
-51 DeSales
-53 UW Platteville
-77 UWSP
-80 Elmhurst
-86 UW Whitewater
-112 St. Mary's
-168 Elms
-168 Centre
-215 Ursinus

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 05, 2009, 10:59:39 PM

Big gain by Puget Sound...good work boys, keep moving up!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: April on January 06, 2009, 12:45:30 AM

I am pretty sure this is a first time ever for #1 in the polls for Wheaton... good times. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 06, 2009, 12:56:42 AM

Quote from: April on January 06, 2009, 12:45:30 AM
I am pretty sure this is a first time ever for #1 in the polls for Wheaton... good times. :D

Your karma had momentarily fallen below your post count. I've fixed it for now, but can't guarantee I can always do that! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 06, 2009, 02:50:10 AM

Quote from: sac on January 04, 2009, 09:45:46 PM
Quote from: sac on January 04, 2009, 02:29:05 AM
pffffftttttt...........not hard at all to get Finlandia to Duke.

Finlandia > St. Scholastica > UW-River Falls > UW-Oshkosh > Lawrence > UW Stevens Point > Trinity, Tx > Olivet > Franklin > Wilmington > Capital > John Carroll > York, NY > Millikin > SIU-Edwardsville > Western Michigan > Detroit Mercy > Central Michigan > Cleveland State > Syracuse > Kansas > Tennessee > Georgetown > Maryland > Michigan State > Texas > Wisconsin > Michigan > Duke

Thanks to Boston College..........

Finlandia > St. Scholastica > UW-River Falls > UW-Oshkosh > Lawrence > UW Stevens Point > Trinity, Tx > Olivet > Franklin > Wilmington > Capital > John Carroll > York, NY > Millikin > SIU-Edwardsville > Western Michigan > Detroit Mercy > Central Michigan > Cleveland State > Syracuse > Kansas > Tennessee > Georgetown > Maryland > Michigan State > Texas > Wisconsin > Michigan > Duke > Purdue > Boston College > North Carolina

sac

That was beautiful. And all Mr. Y had to do was ask and his wish was granted in less than 24 hours.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Walter17 on January 06, 2009, 10:41:05 AM

Trinity, TX at #16! That's great. Do NCAA regional rankings start coming out in February?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 06, 2009, 10:57:00 AM

Quote from: Walter17 on January 06, 2009, 10:41:05 AM
Trinity, TX at #16! That's great. Do NCAA regional rankings start coming out in February?

I think, February 4th.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on January 06, 2009, 02:40:00 PM

Just glanced through the Top 25 and saw Millikin receiving votes. That must be a case of looking at the record and not knowing the team. I saw them play twice this weekend. They were blown out by 20 pts by 2-10 York and then barely got by Maryland Bible 55-54 with Maryland Bible missing a shot at the buzzer. Anyway - just an observation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2009, 03:25:14 PM

Probably, but someone apparently is still impressed with the win against a provisional D-I team and no losses anywhere else on the schedule.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HopeConvert on January 06, 2009, 05:11:03 PM

Quote from: sac on January 04, 2009, 09:45:46 PM
Quote from: sac on January 04, 2009, 02:29:05 AM
pffffftttttt...........not hard at all to get Finlandia to Duke.

Finlandia > St. Scholastica > UW-River Falls > UW-Oshkosh > Lawrence > UW Stevens Point > Trinity, Tx > Olivet > Franklin > Wilmington > Capital > John Carroll > York, NY > Millikin > SIU-Edwardsville > Western Michigan > Detroit Mercy > Central Michigan > Cleveland State > Syracuse > Kansas > Tennessee > Georgetown > Maryland > Michigan State > Texas > Wisconsin > Michigan > Duke

Thanks to Boston College..........

Finlandia > St. Scholastica > UW-River Falls > UW-Oshkosh > Lawrence > UW Stevens Point > Trinity, Tx > Olivet > Franklin > Wilmington > Capital > John Carroll > York, NY > Millikin > SIU-Edwardsville > Western Michigan > Detroit Mercy > Central Michigan > Cleveland State > Syracuse > Kansas > Tennessee > Georgetown > Maryland > Michigan State > Texas > Wisconsin > Michigan > Duke > Purdue > Boston College > North Carolina

Almost as easy as getting from earth to Planet X. Go to the 2:23 mark:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5j1TiW-KwM

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 06, 2009, 05:47:41 PM

Quote from: HopeConvert on January 06, 2009, 05:11:03 PM
Almost as easy as getting from earth to Planet X. Go to the 2:23 mark:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5j1TiW-KwM

Ok how many watched the whole thing?

.....and how many of you watched more than one. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 06, 2009, 09:34:10 PM

Huge shocker out of New England as Wesleyan beats Amherst on a last second 3. Upset of the decade in the region for certain -- Wesleyan has some awful losses this year. No explaining that one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 06, 2009, 10:11:37 PM

Quote from: sac on January 06, 2009, 05:47:41 PM
Quote from: HopeConvert on January 06, 2009, 05:11:03 PM
Almost as easy as getting from earth to Planet X. Go to the 2:23 mark:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5j1TiW-KwM

Ok how many watched the whole thing?

.....and how many of you watched more than one. :D

Ehhhhh, it was re-run! ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 06, 2009, 10:35:20 PM

#30th ranked Middlebury wins a tight one on the road at Plattsburgh St. 68-64.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 06, 2009, 10:58:15 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 06, 2009, 09:34:10 PM
Huge shocker out of New England as Wesleyan beats Amherst on a last second 3. Upset of the decade in the region for certain -- Wesleyan has some awful losses this year. No explaining that one.

I agree, a really bad loss. Amherst has seemed a bit shaky all year though, only beating emmaneul by 2 and skidmore by 3. They have really taken advantage of their extremely weak schedule to this point. 10 games into the season (through tonights game), their opponents combined record is 37-67 (0.355 winning percentage) and only 3 of those teams have a winning record (no team however is more than 2 games over 0.500, Lasell 5-4, Springfield 7-5, Westfield St. 7-5). I know they are Amherst and they are "always" a good team, but after tonights loss coupled with the facts that they have no signature wins and have played a bunch of really bad teams (5 of the 9 teams they beat have 3 wins or less, including 1-10 Caltech, 1-10 Mass College, 2-8 Curry, and 2-8 Pomona-Pitzer).

I guess the Williams game on saturday will give us a better assesment of Amherst but I expect Williams to win that game. In my opinion, Williams is playing like the best team in the northeast at this point (there are a couple other teams that you could make arguments for), despite their 3 early losses (they lost to a top 25 team in Ursinus by 3, to Salem State on the road who are 10-2, and they split two road games with a solid Framingham State squad who also upset Brandeis this season), they appear to be putting things together now and I look for them to play well on Saturday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 06, 2009, 11:16:34 PM

Hugenerd or someone else,

Help me here...

How much of a rivalry game is Wesleyan-Amherst in men's basketball?

Thanks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2009, 12:16:31 AM

Not enough of one that we should throw out the record books. I mean, Wesleyan hadn't won a game from Amherst since 2001.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 07, 2009, 12:48:08 AM

Im no NESCAC expert, but from what I hear (as Pat mentioned) it has been very one sided for almost the last decade so I wouldnt call it a rivalry. Wesleyan won only 3 NESCAC games the last three seasons combined. Wesleyan's win against Amherst was their first victory of the season against a team with a winning record (it is actually their first win against an opponent with a winning record since Jan 5 of last year).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 07, 2009, 07:32:18 AM

Ralph, not much of one. Williams, Amherst and Wesleyan are the little three and coaches try to play that up, but folks at Williams and Amherst rarely get fired up about Wesleyan games. In fact, in most sports, Wesleyan is at best the third biggest game on the schedule (for example, in football, Williams gets much more excited to play Trinity). Part of it is that W and A hate each other so much that there is not really room for a third wheel (sort of like Harvard / Yale, with Princeton as third wheel, although I think more extreme than that). A big part of it is that Wesleyan is usually awful in sports, especially the highest profile sports, football and basketball. Wesleyan students also don't get all that fired up for sports, it is not exactly known as a place with a big athletic culture. They are kind of the cool, hippy younger brother to both W and A, while to each other, they are the hated evil step brother. I am sure Wes was very fired up for that game, but no doubt Amherst was looking ahead to Williams on Saturday. Even a relatively down Amherst squad should have killed this year's Wesleyan team, which has probably four guys who could even make the Amherst roster.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 07, 2009, 05:14:20 PM

Nescac1 found video of Wesleyan's buzzer beater.

It's posted off the front page: www.d3hoops.com

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 07, 2009, 05:33:14 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on January 07, 2009, 05:14:20 PM
Nescac1 found video of Wesleyan's buzzer beater.

It's posted off the front page: www.d3hoops.com

On that last play, it is literally throwing up a prayer!

Amherst cannot guard him any more effectively!

(Thanks, nescac1! +1!) :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 08, 2009, 10:08:01 AM

How They Fared -- Midweek edition
Please let me know if I missed anything ...

Top 25
#1 Wheaton (Ill.) (12-0): def. #19 Illinois Wesleyan, 74-70; 01/10 at North Park
#2 St. Thomas (11-0): def. #36 Bethel, 73-64; 01/10 vs. Carleton
#3 Washington U. (10-1): def. Webster, 68-55; 01/10 at Chicago
#4 UW-Platteville (13-1): def. UW-Oshkosh, 81-59; 01/10 vs. #6 UW-Stevens Point
#5 Amherst (9-1): LOST at Wesleyan, 69-72; 01/10 at Williams
#6 UW-Stevens Point (10-2): def. UW-River Falls, 95-87 OT; 01/10 at #4 UW-Platteville
#7 Augustana (11-2): def. #10 Elmhurst, 56-55; 01/10 at Carthage
#8 Buena Vista (11-1): def. Cornell, 71-68; 01/10 vs. Central
#9 UW-Whitewater (12-2): def. UW-La Crosse, 92-86; 01/10 vs. UW-Eau Claire
#10 Elmhurst (9-3): LOST at #7 Augustana, 55-56; 01/10 vs. #40 Millikin
#11 Capital (11-1): def. Mount Union, 89-79; 01/10 vs. #41 Ohio Northern
#12 Ithaca (11-0): def. Utica, 87-64; 01/09 vs. Nazareth; 01/11 at Rochester Tech
#13 Richard Stockton (12-2): LOST at New Jersey, 73-79; 01/10 vs. T#29 William Paterson
#14 Carnegie Mellon (10-1): 01/09 at #32 New York University; 01/11 at Brandeis
#15 Whitworth (10-1): 01/09 at Willamette; 01/10 at Linfield
#16 Trinity (Texas) (11-1): 01/09 at Southwestern
#17 Puget Sound (10-2): def. Pacific Lutheran, 77-60; 01/10 at George Fox
#18 Elms (10-1): 01/10 at Becker
#19 Illinois Wesleyan (8-4): LOST at #1 Wheaton (Ill.), 70-74; 01/10 vs. North Central (Ill.)
#20 Mass-Dartmouth (10-1): def. Roger Williams, 69-68 OT; 01/10 at Keene State
#21 Ursinus (6-4): LOST at Johns Hopkins, 70-73; 01/10 vs. McDaniel
#22 Roanoke (11-1): def. Emory and Henry, 101-86; 01/10 vs. Eastern Mennonite
#23 St. Norbert (9-1): def. Beloit, 77-44; 01/10 vs. Ripon
#24 Texas-Dallas (10-1): def. Hardin-Simmons, 79-62; 01/08 vs. Texas Lutheran; 01/10 vs. Schreiner
#25 Anderson (10-3): def. Earlham, 81-74; 01/10 vs. Defiance

Others receiving votes
#26 Franklin and Marshall (10-0): def. Swarthmore, 92-67; 01/10 at Washington College
#27 Gettysburg (7-2): def. Washington College, 77-69; 01/10 at Muhlenberg
#28 Centre (8-3): 01/09 vs. Rhodes; 01/11 vs. Birmingham-Southern
T#29 St. Mary's (Md.) (10-2): def. Salisbury, 63-52; 01/10 at Hood
T#29 William Paterson (9-2): LOST at New Jersey City, 52-62; 01/10 at #13 Richard Stockton
#31 Middlebury (10-2): def. Plattsburgh State, 68-64; 01/08 at Colby-Sawyer; 01/10 vs. Skidmore
#32 New York University (9-0): def. Oneonta State, 62-55; 01/09 vs. #14 Carnegie Mellon; 01/11 vs. Rochester
#33 DeSales (10-1): def. Eastern, 73-64; 01/10 vs. Alvernia
T#34 Mary Hardin-Baylor (5-5): def. Concordia-Austin, 92-77; 01/08 at Louisiana College; 01/10 at Mississippi College
T#34 St. John Fisher (7-2): LOST at Rochester Tech, 36-56; 01/09 at Utica; 01/11 at Elmira
#36 Bethel (8-2): def. Hamline, 90-75; LOST (at home) to #2 St. Thomas, 64-73; 01/10 vs. St. Olaf
#37 Salem State (10-2): IDLE
#38 Worcester Polytech (9-3): def. Coast Guard, 59-55; 01/10 vs. Springfield
#39 Randolph-Macon (9-3): def. Bridgewater (Va.), 78-61; def. Hampden-Sydney, 79-59; 01/10 at Christopher Newport
#40 Millikin (9-2): LOST (at home) to Carthage, 55-63; 01/10 at #10 Elmhurst
#41 Ohio Northern (10-3): LOST (at home) to Wilmington, 71-78; 01/10 at #11 Capital
#42 Wooster (8-4): def. Kenyon, 74-64; 01/10 at Wabash

Other teams to watch (as suggested by posters on this board)
--- Cal Lutheran (8-3): 01/10 at Occidental
--- Mount Union (9-4): LOST (at home) to #11 Capital, 79-89; 01/10 at Wilmington
--- St. Norbert (9-1): def. Beloit, 77-44; 01/10 vs. Ripon
--- St. Joseph's (L.I.) (8-1): 01/08 vs. Farmingdale State; 01/10 at SUNY-Purchase

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: T990 on January 09, 2009, 09:27:07 AM

Does anyone have a link that works for the Massey Ratings this season for D3 Mens Basketball?

I've used www.masseyratings.com in the past, but it does not come up with anything this season for me. Thanks in advance.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 09, 2009, 09:48:47 AM

Quote from: T990 on January 09, 2009, 09:27:07 AM
Does anyone have a link that works for the Massey Ratings this season for D3 Mens Basketball?

I've used www.masseyratings.com in the past, but it does not come up with anything this season for me. Thanks in advance.

Thats the right link, if you notice the football rankings are up but the basketball are not yet. Im guessing it will be up sometime this month, I dont remember when it has been in the past though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: T990 on January 09, 2009, 09:51:31 AM

In lieu of Massey, I did find this on the web.

Division III Men's College Basketball
Computer Ratings and Conference Standings

"These ratings are calculated using the computer rating system developed by David Wilson."

http://talismanred.com/ratings/hoops/divisioniii.shtml

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 09, 2009, 09:56:04 AM

T990: A related discussion (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=2890.msg1013624#msg1013624) came up in the women's Top 25 board.

I did a little more poking around this morning, and found that this is an issue with Massey's web pages. The link on the front page at masseyratings.com is to
http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb
which, as you found, leads to a page that simply reports "Rating not available for cb2009." However,
http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb2009 (http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb2009)
leads to a page with complete rankings ... but for D1 only. By contrast, last season's results are here:
http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb2008 (http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb2008)
and include all NCAA divisions, as well as NAIA, etc.

I'll drop Massey a note to point out the faulty link, and ask about why they're only listing D1 this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 09, 2009, 10:57:46 AM

Good news on the Massey rankings; hugenerd was correct in his speculation that they would be up soon. Here is my message to Ken Massey:

Quote from: Darryl Nester
I noticed this morning that the front-page link to college men's basketball is
http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb
but it should be
http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb2009
Likewise, the women's link should be http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cbw2009. (At present, the links bring up a page that says "Rating not available for cb[w]2009.")

I would also like to ask, are there any plans to add rankings for other divisions (D2, D3, NAIA)? This has come up as a topic of discussion on the chat boards at d3boards.com.

Thanks!

His response:

Quote from: Kenneth Massey
Ha! yes that is supposed to be hidden, but you found it. I was waiting until I can collect the lower division scores to post the ratings publicly. Should be this weekend. (emphasis added)

(Unfortunately, it appears that women's rankings are still limited to D1...at least, last year's rankings only included D1.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 09, 2009, 11:32:49 AM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 09, 2009, 10:57:46 AM
Good news on the Massey rankings; hugenerd was correct in his speculation that they would be up soon. Here is my message to Ken Massey:
Quote from: Darryl Nester
I noticed this morning that the front-page link to college men's basketball is
http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb
but it should be
http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb2009
Likewise, the women's link should be http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cbw2009. (At present, the links bring up a page that says "Rating not available for cb[w]2009.")

I would also like to ask, are there any plans to add rankings for other divisions (D2, D3, NAIA)? This has come up as a topic of discussion on the chat boards at d3boards.com.

Thanks!
His response:
Quote from: Kenneth Massey
Ha! yes that is supposed to be hidden, but you found it. I was waiting until I can collect the lower division scores to post the ratings publicly. Should be this weekend. (emphasis added)

(Unfortunately, it appears that women's rankings are still limited to D1...at least, last year's rankings only included D1.)

Unfortunately, this is what usually end up happening with the non-commercial divisions. On a positive note, the NCAA rankings are now up for d3 through 1/4 (they started a bit later than for d1 as well):

http://web1.ncaa.org/stats/StatsSrv/ranksummary

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 09, 2009, 01:40:50 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 09, 2009, 11:32:49 AM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 09, 2009, 10:57:46 AM
Good news on the Massey rankings; hugenerd was correct in his speculation that they would be up soon. Here is my message to Ken Massey:
Quote from: Darryl Nester
I noticed this morning that the front-page link to college men's basketball is
http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb
but it should be
http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb2009
Likewise, the women's link should be http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cbw2009. (At present, the links bring up a page that says "Rating not available for cb[w]2009.")

I would also like to ask, are there any plans to add rankings for other divisions (D2, D3, NAIA)? This has come up as a topic of discussion on the chat boards at d3boards.com.

Thanks!
His response:
Quote from: Kenneth Massey
Ha! yes that is supposed to be hidden, but you found it. I was waiting until I can collect the lower division scores to post the ratings publicly. Should be this weekend. (emphasis added)

(Unfortunately, it appears that women's rankings are still limited to D1...at least, last year's rankings only included D1.)

Unfortunately, this is what usually end up happening with the non-commercial divisions. On a positive note, the NCAA rankings are now up for d3 through 1/4 (they started a bit later than for d1 as well):

http://web1.ncaa.org/stats/StatsSrv/ranksummary

I would be happy with stats if they began after 1/3 of the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 09, 2009, 03:46:22 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 09, 2009, 01:40:50 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 09, 2009, 11:32:49 AM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 09, 2009, 10:57:46 AM
Good news on the Massey rankings; hugenerd was correct in his speculation that they would be up soon. Here is my message to Ken Massey:
Quote from: Darryl Nester
I noticed this morning that the front-page link to college men's basketball is
http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb
but it should be
http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb2009
Likewise, the women's link should be http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cbw2009. (At present, the links bring up a page that says "Rating not available for cb[w]2009.")

I would also like to ask, are there any plans to add rankings for other divisions (D2, D3, NAIA)? This has come up as a topic of discussion on the chat boards at d3boards.com.

Thanks!
His response:
Quote from: Kenneth Massey
Ha! yes that is supposed to be hidden, but you found it. I was waiting until I can collect the lower division scores to post the ratings publicly. Should be this weekend. (emphasis added)

(Unfortunately, it appears that women's rankings are still limited to D1...at least, last year's rankings only included D1.)

Unfortunately, this is what usually end up happening with the non-commercial divisions. On a positive note, the NCAA rankings are now up for d3 through 1/4 (they started a bit later than for d1 as well):

http://web1.ncaa.org/stats/StatsSrv/ranksummary
I would be happy with stats if they began after 1/3 of the season.

Ralph, by 1/4 I meant January 4th (not 1/4 of the season). If this is what you meant with your response.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 09, 2009, 03:48:30 PM

Quote from: T990 on January 09, 2009, 09:51:31 AM
In lieu of Massey, I did find this on the web.

Division III Men's College Basketball
Computer Ratings and Conference Standings

"These ratings are calculated using the computer rating system developed by David Wilson."

http://talismanred.com/ratings/hoops/divisioniii.shtml

I checked these last night and they have a major flaw. They only rate NAIA or non-NCAA teams if they play an NCAA team. So their numbers are incomplete.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 09, 2009, 04:01:06 PM

Yes, hugenerd. I agree! ;)

Jan 4th. 1/4. One-quarter of the season. 1/3. Third of January. A third of the season. Yep! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 09, 2009, 09:51:25 PM

Ithaca 122 -90 over Nazareth. Ithaca never in trouble. Up by 22 at the break they coast to their 12 straight win.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 09, 2009, 10:31:24 PM

This seems an obvious place for a shameless plug - the first Posters' Poll for this season covers games thru Jan. 11. Many of the regulars here are already voters, but we invite anyone with a genuine interest in ALL of d3.

The Posters' Poll is in no way in competition with the d3hoops.com poll (the gold standard for d3 polls), but can raise very interesting conversations - WHY do you think team X is under (or over) rated?

If interested, check out the Posters' Poll thread, and send ballots by PM to Mr. Ypsi by about 6pm 1-13 (and each Tuesday thereafter). I'm hoping to be worked much harder than last year, when we usually had only 8-10 voters - c'mon, see if I can cope with 20-25 ballots! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 10, 2009, 06:51:30 PM

#13 Richard Stockton goes to 13-2 with a 77-76 win over #29 William Paterson in a barnburning Quadruple (that's right 4) overtime victory. Haven't heard of one of those in any division this year. William Paterson drops to 10-2.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 10, 2009, 07:25:52 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 10, 2009, 06:51:30 PM
#13 Richard Stockton goes to 13-2 with a 77-76 win over #29 William Paterson in a barnburning Quadruple (that's right 4) overtime victory. Haven't heard of one of those in any division this year. William Paterson drops to 10-2.

Stevenson and York (PA) played a 4 OT game on December 6.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 10, 2009, 10:25:02 PM

Was there no shot clock in the overtimes? lol... ??? ;D

Score by Periods 1st 2nd OT OT2 OT3 OT4 Total
William Paterson.............. 22 32 8 7 2 5 - 76
Richard Stockton.............. 21 33 8 7 2 6 - 77

Stevens Point and River Falls comined for 31 in ONE overtime on Wednesday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 10, 2009, 10:34:05 PM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on January 10, 2009, 10:25:02 PM
Was there no shot clock in the overtimes? lol... ??? ;D

Score by Periods 1st 2nd OT OT2 OT3 OT4 - Total
William Paterson.............. 22 32 8 7 2 5 - 76
Richard Stockton.............. 21 33 8 7 2 6 - 77

Stevens Point and River Falls combined for 31 in ONE overtime on Wednesday.

Were there no fouls committed?

That is anohter question!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 10, 2009, 10:55:56 PM

In the 2nd OT, the last team scored with 4:13 left on the clock.

In the four OTs, RS was 5-8 and WP was 6-9.

boxscore (http://intraweb.stockton.edu/eyos/athletics/content/docs/2008-09%20boxscores/mb0110.htm)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 10, 2009, 11:08:40 PM

"Typical" night of carnage in the CCIW, as #7 Augie, #10 Elmhurst, and #19 IWU all fall. "Oddly", #1 Wheaton survived! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: April on January 10, 2009, 11:13:27 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 10, 2009, 11:08:40 PM
"Typical" night of carnage in the CCIW, as #7 Augie, #10 Elmhurst, and #19 IWU all fall. "Oddly", #1 Wheaton survived! ;D

So a 19pt win on the road classifies as "surviving"? ??? :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 10, 2009, 11:27:32 PM

Quote from: April on January 10, 2009, 11:13:27 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 10, 2009, 11:08:40 PM
"Typical" night of carnage in the CCIW, as #7 Augie, #10 Elmhurst, and #19 IWU all fall. "Oddly", #1 Wheaton survived! ;D
So a 19pt win on the road classifies as "surviving"? ??? :P

Probably not, but ANY win by a 'favorite' in the CCIW is "surviving"! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 11, 2009, 12:03:54 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 10, 2009, 11:08:40 PM
"Typical" night of carnage in the CCIW, as #7 Augie, #10 Elmhurst, and #19 IWU all fall. "Oddly", #1 Wheaton survived! ;D

Would it be less typical if fewer CCIW teams were ranked?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2009, 12:49:17 AM

Quote from: sac on January 11, 2009, 12:03:54 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 10, 2009, 11:08:40 PM
"Typical" night of carnage in the CCIW, as #7 Augie, #10 Elmhurst, and #19 IWU all fall. "Oddly", #1 Wheaton survived! ;D

Would it be less typical if fewer CCIW teams were ranked?

Alas, I fear there will be one less (IWU) this coming week. :(

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on January 11, 2009, 03:17:40 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2009, 12:49:17 AM
Quote from: sac on January 11, 2009, 12:03:54 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 10, 2009, 11:08:40 PM
"Typical" night of carnage in the CCIW, as #7 Augie, #10 Elmhurst, and #19 IWU all fall. "Oddly", #1 Wheaton survived! ;D
Would it be less typical if fewer CCIW teams were ranked?
Alas, I fear there will be one less (IWU) this coming week. :(

You're likely correct Mr Ypsi. And no, SAC, ranked or not, a single night of carnage not usual in the CCIW. Only one 'home' team winning was not typical; nor, was a 2 OT loss by another home team to a projected dead last in the coaches' pre-season poll typical.

On a seperate note, Wheaton's All American Kent Raymond has now strung three consecutive 30+ PPG together. He has simply taken his game to an entirely new and even higher level than last season, if that's possible.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 11, 2009, 03:26:21 PM

A word about the South region...

I have started a South Region Rankings and Playoff thread to tide us over until the Regional Rankings are released on February 4th. South Region Rankings and Playoffs (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=6203.15)

As I researched the rankings, I found these "criteria" gems. (W/L Records are listed by overall/ in-region/ conference.)

1) RMC (ODAC 10-3/9-0/4-0) undefeated in-region but non-region losses to W&J and DeSales. Has most of the "meat" of the ODAC schedule ahead of it, but RMC only plays Guilford, Roanoke and EMU once in conference play...easier than expected!

2) Trinity (SCAC-West 12-1/10-1/5-0) beat rival Southwestern on the road on Friday night; must go to Centre and DePauw but catches Oglethorpe at home (crossover single round robin). OT loss at home to UWSP in November, but has home win over ASC-West foe UMHB. TU might easily go 23-2 overall/20-2 in-region!

3) UTD (ASC-East 12-1/10-1/7-1) destroyed Guilford 64-48. That was the lowest Guilford offensive output that I could find this decade (corrections appreciated). The Comets play a beautiful brand of half-court ball. Very smart, mature players. They do not beat themselves. Have a crossover win over UMHB and a road loss to McMurry. The ASC-East is very tough and balanced this season. (ASC-East perennial power Mississippi College is tied for 4th this morning after crossover play!) I think that UTD will lose two road games in the East and go 10-2. The ASC-East winner hosts the 8-team post-season tourney! In-region record might go 20-3 and 22-3 overall.

4) Roanoke (ODAC 12-1/8-1/4-0) has an in-region split with Muskingum (OAC). Plays Guilford tomorrow night at home and goes to the Quakers on Jan 28th. Other ODAC games include hosting VWC and going to EMU whom they beat last night. Currently 12-1 overall /8-1 in-region /4-0 conference with 12 conference games remaining. ODAC fans...any prognostications on Roanoke in their next 12 games?

5) Guilford (ODAC 10-2/ 9-2/ 3-0 ) has an in-region win over UT-Tyler (neutral floor) and the loss at UT-Dallas. They also have a loss in December to NCWC, but wins over Averett, Greensboro and Methodist. The Quakers have a non-region win over McDaniel. The ODAC schedule includes the Roanoke game tomorrow night, the Roanoke road trip on Jan 28th, and at EMU on February 11th. Comments ODAC fans.

6T) NCWC (USAC 9-3/4-1/0-0) has 12 conference games to play. Their non-region losses include home loss 87-96 to St Vincent, and at mediocre Neumann, 71-73. NCWC lost to the Marlins at Virginia Wesleyan 59-84. The in-region wins include HSC, E&H, Guilford and Mary Washington. Who gets into the rankings from the USA South is still up for grabs, as USAC play begins on Tuesday.

6T) LeTourneau (ASC-E 9-4/8-2/7-1) is in a 3-way tie in the ASC-East. LETU has a very athletic team with in-region losses to UWW 58-69 and McMurry 63-65. The LeTU in-region (non-conference) win was over Lake Forest. The ASC-East is so strong that Mississippi College, who has an exhibition win over D-1 Alcorn State, is tied for fourth. ASC-East double round robin play begins this week. The one (UT-Dallas, LeTourneau, UT-Tyler or Mississippi College or even UOzarks) who earns the conference post-season tourney by winning the division will have been battle-tested.

8 ) McMurry (ASC-West 8-4/7-2/7-1) has a 3 game lead on UMHB (which beat UWW 73-67 in December) and Concordia-Austin in the ASC-West. Non-conference games were at D-1 UTSA and at D-1 Texas State and then in Las Vegas with a 66-69 in-region loss to CCIW's North Central and a win over St Vincent PA 82-78 (common opponent with NCWC). After a 3-3 start, McMurry has gone 5-1 (loss to D-1 Texas State). The in-region loss was at UT-Tyler in the 4th game of the season. McMurry has in-region wins over LeTU, UT-Dallas and Mississippi College. They have thirteen regular season games remaining. In the conference tourney, West #1 will open against East #4, which could be anyone of five strong teams.

Comments are appreciated.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 11, 2009, 03:32:30 PM

Quote from: iwumichigander on January 11, 2009, 03:17:40 PM
On a seperate note, Wheaton's All American Kent Raymond has now strung three consecutive 30+ PPG together. He has simply taken his game to an entirely new and even higher level than last season, if that's possible.

higher.........or is he just continueing where he left off?

ELMHURST COLLEGE 2/23/08 78-69 W 37-Raymond, Kent
vs Illinois Wesleyan 02/29/08 78-81 L 34-Raymond,
vs Loras College 3/8/08 76-73 W 36-Raymond, Kent
WHTW 03-14-08 76-67 W 47-Raymond, Kent

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 11, 2009, 04:54:22 PM

that kid sure can flat out score

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 11, 2009, 06:21:04 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25
#1 Wheaton (Ill.) (13-0): def. #19 Illinois Wesleyan, 74-70; def. North Park, 93-74
#2 St. Thomas (12-0): def. #36 Bethel, 73-64; def. Carleton, 83-72
#3 Washington U. (11-1): def. Webster, 68-55; def. Chicago, 74-62
#4 UW-Platteville (13-2): def. UW-Oshkosh, 81-59; LOST (at home) to #6 UW-Stevens Point, 66-73 OT
#5 Amherst (10-1): LOST at Wesleyan, 69-72; def. Williams, 65-60
#6 UW-Stevens Point (11-2): def. UW-River Falls, 94-87 OT; def. #4 UW-Platteville, 73-66 OT
#7 Augustana (11-3): def. #10 Elmhurst, 56-55; LOST at Carthage, 57-66
#8 Buena Vista (12-1): def. Cornell, 71-68; def. Central, 77-76 OT
#9 UW-Whitewater (13-2): def. UW-La Crosse, 92-86; def. UW-Eau Claire, 96-88
#10 Elmhurst (9-4): LOST at #7 Augustana, 55-56; LOST (at home) to #40 Millikin, 84-91 2OT
#11 Capital (12-1): def. Mount Union, 89-79; def. #41 Ohio Northern, 96-88 OT
#12 Ithaca (12-1): def. Utica, 87-64; def. Nazareth, 122-90; LOST at Rochester Tech, 84-87
#13 Richard Stockton (13-2): LOST at New Jersey, 73-79; def. T#29 William Paterson, 77-76 4OT
#14 Carnegie Mellon (11-2): def. #32 New York University, 78-57; LOST at Brandeis, 57-69
#15 Whitworth (11-2): def. Willamette, 69-68; LOST at Linfield, 79-88
#16 Trinity (Texas) (12-1): def. Southwestern, 75-73
#17 Puget Sound (11-2): def. Pacific Lutheran, 77-60; def. George Fox, 87-60
#18 Elms (11-1): def. Becker, 77-62
#19 Illinois Wesleyan (8-5): LOST at #1 Wheaton (Ill.), 70-74; LOST (at home) to North Central (Ill.), 70-77
#20 Mass-Dartmouth (11-1): def. Roger Williams, 69-68 OT; def. Keene State, 85-73
#21 Ursinus (6-5): LOST at Johns Hopkins, 70-73; LOST (at home) to McDaniel, 72-84
#22 Roanoke (12-1): def. Emory and Henry, 101-86; def. Eastern Mennonite, 80-77
#23 St. Norbert (10-1): def. Beloit, 77-44; def. Ripon, 74-62
#24 Texas-Dallas (12-1): def. Hardin-Simmons, 79-62; def. Texas Lutheran, 83-69; def. Schreiner, 78-48
#25 Anderson (11-3): def. Earlham, 81-74; def. Defiance, 75-68

Others receiving votes
#26 Franklin and Marshall (11-0): def. Swarthmore, 92-67; def. Washington College, 75-68
#27 Gettysburg (8-2): def. Washington College, 77-69; def. Muhlenberg, 51-49
#28 Centre (10-3): def. Rhodes, 87-50; def. Birmingham-Southern, 69-59
T#29 St. Mary's (Md.) (11-2): def. Salisbury, 63-52; def. Hood, 92-72
T#29 William Paterson (10-2): def. New Jersey City, 62-52; LOST at #13 Richard Stockton, 76-77 4OT
#31 Middlebury (12-2): def. Plattsburgh State, 68-64; def. Colby-Sawyer, 65-55; def. Skidmore, 72-62
#32 New York University (9-2): def. Oneonta State, 62-55; LOST (at home) to #14 Carnegie Mellon, 57-78; LOST (at home) to Rochester, 68-79
#33 DeSales (11-1): def. Eastern, 73-64; def. Alvernia, 65-44
T#34 Mary Hardin-Baylor (6-6): def. Concordia-Austin, 92-77; def. Louisiana College, 74-53; LOST at Mississippi College, 85-89 OT
T#34 St. John Fisher (9-2): LOST at Rochester Tech, 36-56; def. Utica, 48-46; def. Elmira, 70-58
#36 Bethel (9-2): def. Hamline, 90-75; LOST (at home) to #2 St. Thomas, 64-73; def. St. Olaf, 81-72
#37 Salem State (10-2): IDLE
#38 Worcester Polytech (10-3): def. Coast Guard, 59-55; def. Springfield, 76-55
#39 Randolph-Macon (10-3): def. Bridgewater (Va.), 78-61; def. Hampden-Sydney, 79-59; def. Christopher Newport, 76-64
#40 Millikin (10-2): LOST (at home) to Carthage, 55-63; def. #10 Elmhurst, 91-84 2OT
#41 Ohio Northern (10-4): LOST (at home) to Wilmington, 71-78; LOST at #11 Capital, 88-96 OT
#42 Wooster (8-5): def. Kenyon, 74-64; LOST at Wabash, 58-75

Other teams to watch (as suggested by posters on this board)
--- Cal Lutheran (9-3): def. Occidental, 53-46
--- Mount Union (9-5): LOST (at home) to #11 Capital, 79-89; LOST at Wilmington, 76-79
--- St. Joseph's (L.I.) (9-2): LOST (at home) to Farmingdale State, 67-84; def. SUNY-Purchase, 72-71

Note: The "Other teams" list will be reset after tonight. That is, if you want to see a report on any team(s) not receiving votes in tomorrow's poll, you'll need to let me know.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 11, 2009, 06:43:40 PM

Maybe time to start tracking Hiram just 9-4 but in first place in the NCAC, and Wilmington 10-4, tied for 1st in the OAC

Is St. Vincent still provisional? They're 12-2.

Milwaukee Engineering is 9-3

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 11, 2009, 06:51:52 PM

Quote from: sac on January 11, 2009, 06:43:40 PM
Maybe time to start tracking Hiram just 9-4 but in first place in the NCAC, and Wilmington 10-4, tied for 1st in the OAC

Is St. Vincent still provisional? They're 12-2.

Milwaukee Engineering is 9-3

St Vincent is 3rd-year provisional.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: old ends on January 11, 2009, 09:39:20 PM

I think Ursinus has lived on last years run long enough and should, more than likely, drop from the top 25. Other teams have played better. One of Ursinus's hot shooters is out for the season and it has shown it's effects.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 11, 2009, 09:40:30 PM

Absolutely. Kind of a no-brainer at this point, though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 11, 2009, 09:42:32 PM

Add 10-3 Carthage to the ones to watch list.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 11, 2009, 09:52:51 PM

I would suggest RIT should be added to that "ones to watch" as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 11, 2009, 11:13:17 PM

Perhaps, but Rochester has similar credentials with a H2H win against RIT.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 12, 2009, 01:02:00 AM

yeah, definitely add Rochester to the watch list at 9-2

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 12, 2009, 01:11:56 AM

Darryl,

St. John Fisher did not lose to Elmira 70-58. SJF won 70-58. D3 Hoops had the score posted backwards on the Scoreboard, as the reporting school entered the wrong info. Write up from SJF web site:

The St. John Fisher College men's basketball team improved to 9-2 on the year with a 70-58 win at Elmira College on Sunday. The Cardinals went on a 9-1 run over the closing moments of the first half to take a 34-24 lead into the locker room and never gave up the lead.

D3 Hoops Scoreboard has also made the correction.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2009, 01:38:13 AM

Quote from: sac on January 11, 2009, 09:42:32 PM
Add 10-3 Carthage to the ones to watch list.

North Central is also 10-3, 2-0 in CCIW (though right now I'd say Carthage has slightly the higher resume).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 12, 2009, 07:14:23 AM

Quote from: magicman on January 12, 2009, 01:11:56 AM
Darryl,

St. John Fisher did not lose to Elmira 70-58. SJF won 70-58. D3 Hoops had the score posted backwards on the Scoreboard, as the reporting school entered the wrong info. ...

Magicman -- thanks for pointing this out; I corrected the report. (I don't check the accuracy of scores posted to d3hoops, so my program is at the mercy of such mistakes.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 12, 2009, 07:16:32 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2009, 01:38:13 AM
Quote from: sac on January 11, 2009, 09:42:32 PM
Add 10-3 Carthage to the ones to watch list.

North Central is also 10-3, 2-0 in CCIW (though right now I'd say Carthage has slightly the higher resume).

Quote
Carthage
Nov. 22     2:00 PM      at Redlands •      W, 72-60

Nov. 24    7:30 PM    at Cal Lutheran •    L, 84-78

Nov. 26    7:00 PM    at Silver Lake    W, 82-60

Dec. 5    6:00 PM    at Hope @ Wheaton (Ill.)    W, 89-68

Dec. 6    1:00 PM    Calvin @ Wheaton (Ill.)    W, 95-82

Dec. 12    7:00 PM    at Olivet Nazarene    L, 87-73

Dec. 16    6:00 PM    Keene State @ Ft. Lauderdale, FL    W, 84-69

Dec. 17    4:00 PM    Loras @ Fort Lauderdale •    W, 72-70

Dec. 29    5:00 PM    UW-Platteville @ St. Norbert •    L, 74-48

Dec. 30    5:00 PM    St. Scholastica @ De Pere, Wis. •    W, 73-63

Jan. 5    7:30 PM    Trinity Int'l    W, 71-67

Jan. 7    7:30 PM    at Millikin * •    W, 63-55

Jan. 10    7:30 PM    Augustana * •    W, 66-57

Quote
North Central

Nov. 21     8:00 PM      MacMurray •      W, 107-68

Nov. 22    8:00 PM    Mt. Vernon Naz. •    L, 91-75

Nov. 25    7:30 PM    Aurora •    W, 83-65

Nov. 29    7:30 PM    Franklin •    W, 76-62

Dec. 3    7:30 PM    UW-Whitewater •    L, 62-54

Dec. 9    7:00 PM    Lake Forest •    W, 76-40

Dec. 15    7:30 PM    at Benedictine •    W, 71-63

Dec. 19    2:00 PM    at McMurry @ Las Vegas •    W, 69-66

Dec. 20    4:00 PM    at Mary Washington @ Las Vegas    W, 70-61

Dec. 27    6:00 PM    at Otterbein    W, 73-56

Dec. 28    8:00 PM    Baldwin-Wallace @ Otterbein    L, 72-67

Jan. 7    7:30 PM    North Park * •    W, 81-66

Jan. 10    7:30 PM    at Illinois Wesleyan * •    W, 77-70

Trying to gauge what is happening in the CCIW this year...

What about the 2 schedules leads you to believe that Carthage is slightly stronger than NCC to this point? If a game-by-game quick assessment, up-or-down, helps then good.

Thanking you in advance...
:)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ethelred the Unready on January 12, 2009, 08:34:56 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 11, 2009, 11:13:17 PM
Perhaps, but Rochester has similar credentials with a H2H win against RIT.

No, Pat. Nothing to see here. Let's just move along.....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2009, 12:17:40 PM

Ralph, I haven't checked out ALL the opponents, but Carthage wins over Hope, Calvin, Keene St., Loras in non-con seem more impressive than Aurora, Franklin, Ott (though NCC had a close loss to UWW, while Carthage was blown out by UWP). IN the CCIW, wins over Millikin and Augie seem more impressive than wins over NPU and IWU (though you can imagine how that last assessment saddens me!).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 12, 2009, 03:08:53 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2009, 12:17:40 PM
Ralph, I haven't checked out ALL the opponents, but Carthage wins over Hope, Calvin, Keene St., Loras in non-con seem more impressive than Aurora, Franklin, Ott (though NCC had a close loss to UWW, while Carthage was blown out by UWP). IN the CCIW, wins over Millikin and Augie seem more impressive than wins over NPU and IWU (though you can imagine how that last assessment saddens me!).

Thanks! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 12, 2009, 05:08:27 PM

We're just picking teams "to watch", not whether they should be in the top25 or not.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 12, 2009, 06:14:17 PM

#19 Elmhurst

I'm sorry man, but any other team from any other conference that loses 3 in a row drops out of the poll. This is quite ridiculous imo. That isn't even taking into account being ranked ahead of Anderson, who just beat them 10 days ago.

6 teams from one conference receiving top 25 votes. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 12, 2009, 06:20:57 PM

Maybe so, but other than:
-285 MHB
-327 Brandeis

in the Week Two poll, no team has lost more votes.

Also, we'll have to see just how strong the CCIW is once the Massey ratings come out. Six teams from the CCIW received votes in the latest poll. I view that as a strong conference, not the result of poor voters (not that you implied that, I never know what emoticons mean). I don't think any other conference boasts more than three.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2009, 06:28:27 PM

Hate to break it to you guys, but actually SEVEN CCIW teams got votes. :o

NPU is looking to find a voter with a weak spot. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 06:30:33 PM

Quote from: sac on January 12, 2009, 06:14:17 PM6 teams from one conference receiving top 25 votes. ::)

Quote from: scottiedawg on January 12, 2009, 06:20:57 PM
Also, we'll have to see just how strong the CCIW is once the Massey ratings come out. Six teams from the CCIW received votes in the latest poll.

Seven. ;)

On the other hand, my alma mater is the lone CCIW team that didn't get votes, so this is not exactly gloating territory for me.

Quote from: scottiedawg on January 12, 2009, 06:20:57 PMI don't think any other conference boasts more than three.

True, but the WIAC has three of the top seven teams. That's pretty darned impressive, too.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 12, 2009, 06:39:23 PM

I have a particular problem with North Central and Illinois Wesleyan getting any votes. I won't even touch Millikin.

IWU has lost two in a row and 3 of 5, and now has FIVE losses, look at the top 25, its all 0, 1, or 2 loss teams.

North Central didn't receive any votes last week, this week they beat North Park and the struggling Illinois Wesleyan.........the week before they lost to Baldwin-Wallace (who's also struggling and has a loss to Grace Bible.)

What the heck did NCC do this week to merit a vote or two in the top 25?

This love affair with the CCIW on this site has just gotten out of hand guys, and I don't mind saying that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 12, 2009, 06:40:48 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 06:30:33 PM
Seven. ;)

Even worse, I didn't even look for Millikin thinking the voters were smarter than that. Silly me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 06:45:21 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2009, 06:28:27 PM
NPU is looking to find a voter with a weak spot. ::)

NPU isn't looking for pity, or pollster whimsy, or anything of the sort.

NPU is looking for a win.

Quote from: sac on January 12, 2009, 06:39:23 PM
I have a particular problem with North Central and Illinois Wesleyan getting any votes. I won't even touch Millikin.

IWU has lost two in a row and 3 of 5, and now has FIVE losses, look at the top 25, its all 0, 1, or 2 loss teams.

North Central didn't receive any votes last week, this week they beat North Park and the struggling Illinois Wesleyan.........the week before they lost to Baldwin-Wallace (who's also struggling and has a loss to Grace Bible.)

What the heck did NCC do this week to merit a vote or two in the top 25?

This love affair with the CCIW on this site has just gotten out of hand guys, and I don't mind saying that.

I understand your frustration, and I agree that there appears to be unmerited votes for certain CCIW teams cast on this week's pollster ballots. But I don't think that this is an example of pro-CCIW bias; I think that this can be explained by Dave McHugh's theory that the pollsters will keep slotting multiple CCIW teams at the bottom of their ballots until the league starts to sort itself out and they can commit themselves to two or three specific CCIW teams.

Moreover, I'd argue that the three WIAC teams in the top seven also appears to be a case of the pollsters giving excessive love to one particular circuit.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 12, 2009, 06:53:15 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 06:45:21 PM

Moreover, I'd argue that the three WIAC teams in the top seven also appears to be a case of the pollsters giving excessive love to one particular circuit.

Except only 3 WIAC teams are receiving votes, and the WIAC has typically had 3 in the top 20 for years. Yes, they're at the high end right now, I don't ever recall the WIAC having 7 teams receiving votes and I think a very strong argument could be made that over time that has been a stronger conference.

There is just no reason for a 5 loss team to be receiving votes right now, and I believe that holds true for a 4 loss team. You can't justify it. The kool-aid has been spiked my friend.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 12, 2009, 06:55:00 PM

The next time I'm listening to hoopsville I think we should play a drinking game.........every time the CCIW is mentioned you take a drink. We'll be plastered before Bob even gets on the air.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 07:07:21 PM

Quote from: sac on January 12, 2009, 06:53:15 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 06:45:21 PM

Moreover, I'd argue that the three WIAC teams in the top seven also appears to be a case of the pollsters giving excessive love to one particular circuit.

Except only 3 WIAC teams are receiving votes, and the WIAC has typically had 3 in the top 20 for years.

There's a very big difference between getting three teams in the top twenty, and getting three teams in the top seven.

Quote from: sac on January 12, 2009, 06:53:15 PMThere is just no reason for a 5 loss team to be receiving votes right now, and I believe that holds true for a 4 loss team. You can't justify it. The kool-aid has been spiked my friend.

I'm not trying to justify it. I (or, rather D-Mac, whose theory I espouse because it seems to be a sound explanation of pollster behavior) am simply trying to explain it.

Quote from: sac on January 12, 2009, 06:55:00 PM
The next time I'm listening to hoopsville I think we should play a drinking game.........every time the CCIW is mentioned you take a drink. We'll be plastered before Bob even gets on the air.

LOL! The ultimate D3 variation of "Hi, Bob"!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 12, 2009, 07:13:48 PM

Quote from: sac on January 12, 2009, 06:55:00 PM
The next time I'm listening to hoopsville I think we should play a drinking game.........every time the CCIW is mentioned you take a drink. We'll be plastered before Bob even gets on the air.

+1! ROTFLMAO!!! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 12, 2009, 07:17:51 PM

Buena Vista makes D3hoops.com Top 25 Poll HISTORY!!!

They have less votes, but rank higher! LOL

5 Buena Vista 12-1 482 8
6 UW-Platteville 13-2 487 4

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: April on January 12, 2009, 07:19:07 PM

Quote from: sac on January 12, 2009, 06:14:17 PM
#19 Elmhurst

I'm sorry man, but any other team from any other conference that loses 3 in a row drops out of the poll. This is quite ridiculous imo. That isn't even taking into account being ranked ahead of Anderson, who just beat them 10 days ago.

6 teams from one conference receiving top 25 votes. ::)

I am guessing voters still don't know what to do with the fact that Elmhurst is the only team to beat Wash U, and Wash U is ranked #3 and are the defending national champs who should theoretically be at least as good this year.

I don't know if it's so much about the fact that they are in the CCIW, but that their last two games were really close. A double overtime loss against a team that beat a provisional DI team, and a 1pt away loss to a higher ranked team isn't going to hurt them that much in people's minds... at least not enough to push them out of the polls.

Anderson looks like a very legit team, however. It must be frustrating not to get more credit. They beat Elmhurst, lost to Wash U and Platteville by only 2, and are ranked #23? Hmm...

The same could be said for St. Norbert probably since they beat Platteville.

Quote from: sac on January 12, 2009, 06:39:23 PM
I have a particular problem with North Central and Illinois Wesleyan getting any votes. I won't even touch Millikin.

IWU has lost two in a row and 3 of 5, and now has FIVE losses, look at the top 25, its all 0, 1, or 2 loss teams.

North Central didn't receive any votes last week, this week they beat North Park and the struggling Illinois Wesleyan.........the week before they lost to Baldwin-Wallace (who's also struggling and has a loss to Grace Bible.)

What the heck did NCC do this week to merit a vote or two in the top 25?

This love affair with the CCIW on this site has just gotten out of hand guys, and I don't mind saying that.

You're totally right. I'm far enough away from it that I can see it too. Though I don't think you should be stressing too much about 8, 7, and 5 pts of votes either.

I hate seeing the Carthage score against Cal U quoted as a part of having a good resume, especially since Carthage has 30votes and Cal U has none. :-\

I feel like what's happening is that this is a confusing year with the NCAC and the MIAA so down. Usually we have very clear measuring sticks. And those have changed hands this year and people are still trying to figure out where the measuring sticks are. People just have no clue what to do with those spots that are normally taken by perennial powers, and they're running to familiar teams who have a weight of history rather than looking at actual results.

Anyhow, on a more positive note, I am loving seeing F&M in the polls. Now that's a school with a great history that is having a great year. Congrats to their fans and team for earning a ranking!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 12, 2009, 07:23:10 PM

There's very good talent in the WIAC this year, but despite that, at this time, the WIAC is very top heavy.

Point 5-0
Platteville 5-1
Whitewater 5-1

Point has played WW at home and PL on the road while WW and PL have yet to play each other.

Eau Claire 2-3
La Crosse 2-3
UW-River Falls 2-3
UW-Oshkosh 2-4
UW-Superior 1-4
UW-Stout 0-5

La Crosse is a young up and coming team getting stronger. They have quality wins against Carroll (who beat Point) and Augustana (lost to Elmhurst). They lost in OT to St. Thomas on the road and two of their three conference losses were to Point and Whitewater, both on the road as well. They are improving and will pull some upsets, especially at home. They do host Platteville on Wednesday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 12, 2009, 07:24:39 PM

How about RIT.............last week no votes, this weekend make a last second 30 footer that may have been after the buzzer.........voila, Top 25 team. ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 07:25:18 PM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on January 12, 2009, 07:17:51 PM
Buena Vista makes D3hoops.com Top 25 Poll HISTORY!!!

They have less votes, but rank higher! LOL

5 Buena Vista 12-1 482 8
6 UW-Platteville 13-2 487 4

Great catch, Tom!

Good thing that UW-Platteville isn't a SCIAC team. If you guys think that sac's raising a stink, just imagine how OxyBob would react to seeing a SCIAC team ranked below a team that had received fewer ballot points than the SCIAC team. I think we'd be able to hear his head exploding all the way out here in the midwest. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 07:29:27 PM

Quote from: sac on January 12, 2009, 07:24:39 PM
How about RIT.............last week no votes, this weekend make a last second 30 footer that may have been after the buzzer.........voila, Top 25 team. ???

I'm more bothered by the fact that the pollsters penalized Ithaca for that dubious outcome. The Bombers dropped 34 points and one slot in the poll for losing a game on a buzzer-beater that didn't actually beat the buzzer.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 12, 2009, 07:37:34 PM

Teams like St. Norb's and Anderson; I think it's a lot harder to start the year with no votes and off everyone's radarand then get into the top 25, as opposed to some team that is ranked real high and loses to some quality opponents.

Quote from: April on January 12, 2009, 07:19:07 PM
I am guessing voters still don't know what to do with the fact that Elmhurst is the only team to beat Wash U, and Wash U is ranked #3 and are the defending national champs who should theoretically be at least as good this year.

I don't know if it's so much about the fact that they are in the CCIW, but that their last two games were really close. A double overtime loss against a team that beat a provisional DI team, and a 1pt away loss to a higher ranked team isn't going to hurt them that much in people's minds... at least not enough to push them out of the polls.

I think this argument only goes so far. Over in the MWC board, some were whining about Carroll and LU not getting some love and there was already talk about 2 or more teams getting in the NCAAs. They noted LU's win against Point and Carroll's win against Point as the key factor. Yeah, Elmhurst beat Washington, but looking at Carroll's and LU's cases, I stated that their losses to teams such as Oshkosh, La Crosse, Marian hurt a lot more than their win against Stevens Point. Granted, Elmhurst's losses aren't that bad, but you can't use the argument that they lost to a team that beat a provisional D1 team

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 07:29:27 PM
I'm more bothered by the fact that the pollsters penalized Ithaca for that dubious outcome. The Bombers dropped 34 points and one slot in the poll for losing a game on a buzzer-beater that didn't actually beat the buzzer.

I imagine a lot of voters don't know the details of that game and just see a score, saw that they lost and then drop them! :'(

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 07:44:32 PM

Quote from: April on January 12, 2009, 07:19:07 PM
I hate seeing the Carthage score against Cal U quoted as a part of having a good resume, especially since Carthage has 30votes and Cal U has none. :-\

??? Who is doing that? I must've missed it. The only resume tally that I've seen taken up on Carthage's behalf was Chuck's comparison between Carthage and North Central that he posted in here around noon today, and Chuck didn't even mention the Red Men's contest with Cal Lutheran.

Quote from: April on January 12, 2009, 07:19:07 PMI feel like what's happening is that this is a confusing year with the NCAC and the MIAA so down.

You mean, "this is a confusing year with Wittenberg and Wooster, and Hope and Calvin, so down." Those four programs are not synonymous with their respective leagues, and for all we know the leagues themselves may be just as good, or better, than they have been in previous years. In fact, sac's tracked the MIAA's non-conference record this year, and it appears to be roughly equivalent to what the league has done over the past few seasons. Let's not mistake greater balance within normally top-heavy leagues for overall slumps of those leagues.

Quote from: April on January 12, 2009, 07:19:07 PMPeople just have no clue what to do with those spots that are normally taken by perennial powers, and they're running to familiar teams who have a weight of history rather than looking at actual results.

You may be right, but I sure hope that you aren't. I really dislike the injection of brand-name bias into the Top 25 poll, especially when it appears as late as the Week Six poll. It's an unmerited reward for certain teams; the poll is supposed to be about this season, not previous seasons. I'm sure that there are people out there who feel that Illinois Wesleyan, to cite one obvious example, is getting votes that it shouldn't be getting, and brand-name bias looks like an easy way to explain it. On the other hand, Franklin & Marshall, which is another D3 brand name (albeit one that's been through a three-year slump) is only now cracking the Top 25 in spite of the fact that the Dips are one of three undefeated teams left in the entire division.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 12, 2009, 07:56:38 PM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on January 12, 2009, 07:37:34 PM
Teams like St. Norb's and Anderson; I think it's a lot harder to start the year with no votes and off everyone's radarand then get into the top 25, as opposed to some team that is ranked real high and loses to some quality opponents.

Absolutely, which is why untill this week I'm willing to give a little leeway on some teams having more losses than the general poll. However at some point the number of losses accumulated has to start trumping perceived talent or expectations and reality has to kick in.

Elmhurst may very well be one the 25 most talented teams in D3, but their W's and L's doesn't back that up compared to many other programs who haven't lost as much. IWU's record most certainly does not.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 12, 2009, 08:00:37 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 07:44:32 PM

You may be right, but I sure hope that you aren't. I really dislike the injection of brand-name bias into the Top 25 poll, especially when it appears as late as the Week Six poll. It's an unmerited reward for certain teams; the poll is supposed to be about this season, not previous seasons.

The name brand bias/over-reliance on last year's conclusion was pretty evident in this year's preseason poll. Preseason polls are fickle however, and usually sort themselves out quite well and quite quickly. I do agree that it should be gone by the week six poll. It would be great to see some type of strength-of-schedule numbers. 5 losses doesn't automatically mean that IWU isn't one of the top 25 teams in the country (Sac, I realize that record was not all you're basing your argument on). For example, Chapman has only two losses (one of which was to Whitworth) and a few quality wins over Oxy and Claremont. But no one is complaining about their lack of votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 12, 2009, 08:09:26 PM

Oxy Bob made a post on the SCIAC board and sent me a pm about Claremont. He has very good points.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 08:16:23 PM

Quote from: scottiedawg on January 12, 2009, 08:00:37 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 07:44:32 PM

You may be right, but I sure hope that you aren't. I really dislike the injection of brand-name bias into the Top 25 poll, especially when it appears as late as the Week Six poll. It's an unmerited reward for certain teams; the poll is supposed to be about this season, not previous seasons.

The name brand bias/over-reliance on last year's conclusion was pretty evident in this year's preseason poll. Preseason polls are fickle however, and usually sort themselves out quite well and quite quickly. I do agree that it should be gone by the week six poll. It would be great to see some type of strength-of-schedule numbers. 5 losses doesn't automatically mean that IWU isn't one of the top 25 teams in the country (Sac, I realize that record was not all you're basing your argument on). For example, Chapman has only two losses (one of which was to Whitworth) and a few quality wins over Oxy and Claremont. But no one is complaining about their lack of votes.

You raise an important point. The methodology I always see cited by pollsters such as Pat and Q is that the d3hoops.com poll is supposed to be a power poll, not a results poll. In other words, pollsters supposedly rank what they surmise are the 25 best teams in the country, ranked best to 25th best, rather than ranking teams based strictly upon record. That means that a 10-3 team could easily outrank a 13-0 team, if enough pollsters are convinced that the 10-3 team has played a tough schedule while the 13-0 team has raided the pantry and stuffed itself on cupcakes. Does that mean that the pollsters are accurately weighing strength of schedule vs. actual results? Not necessarily. The pollsters are fallible. But they're not operating with firsthand information, either, for the most part; they're reduced to conjecture when it comes to comparing the relative strength of that 10-3 team versus the relative strength of that 13-0 team if they haven't actually seen either team play.

I'd love to see some measuring stick for strength of schedule at this point of the season as well, but, alas, I think that we're going to have to wait until we get deeper into the season for that -- and even then, it'll be a strength-of-schedule database that only reflects games that are germane to the NCAA's regional ranking process (games played in region). The Top 25 poll, of course, reflects all games played, not just the ones in which the D3 selection committee is interested.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 12, 2009, 08:25:18 PM

Quote from: sac on January 12, 2009, 06:39:23 PM
I have a particular problem with North Central and Illinois Wesleyan getting any votes. I won't even touch Millikin.

IWU has lost two in a row and 3 of 5, and now has FIVE losses, look at the top 25, its all 0, 1, or 2 loss teams.

North Central didn't receive any votes last week, this week they beat North Park and the struggling Illinois Wesleyan.........the week before they lost to Baldwin-Wallace (who's also struggling and has a loss to Grace Bible.)

What the heck did NCC do this week to merit a vote or two in the top 25?

This love affair with the CCIW on this site has just gotten out of hand guys, and I don't mind saying that.

Sac,
It's just one of those years that's tough to explain! However, IWU only has 3 Division III losses! Two of them on the road to the #1 team in the country and the other to NCC at home! All three were close games for the most part. So, if you have a problem with IWU receiving votes now, you probably should have voiced this opinion when they were in the top twenty! ;)

NCC has only two Division III losses! The first was to UWW at home (a 3pt game inside 30sec. before a bad call backed up by a bad technical was whistled that pretty much cost NCC any chance they had at victory. UWW was #2 in the county at the time). The second lost was to B-W! Another close game to a team that you called "struggling" but has won 4 straight! Now, I may not know much, but I don't know any team in any sport that anyone would call "struggling" that have won 4 consecutive games! You ask what NCC has done to merit any votes this week. Well, anytime a team can get a win at the Shirk Center against a good IWU team that was ranked #19 in the country, I think some eyes will be opened! ;)

Millikin has only two Division III losses as well! While I can't begin to explain the twenty point loss to York(NY), I do know it was after a 3 week period of no game activity. Not to mention, if the Big Blue are following the NCAA rules(I have no reason to believe other wise), then they probably took a full week off during the holidays meaning no practice at all (many teams must take a week off that start on 10/15 if they play in conferences that offer post season tournaments-not unusual) just before they headed east! The other lost is to Carthage at home in a close game. By the way, Carthage just beat the #7 team in the county! Millikin turns around and defeats the #10 team in the country ON THE ROAD three nights later! Like I said earlier just one of those years thats tough to explain! ;) So Sac, all I can say is "don't hate the playa hate the game"! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: OxyBob on January 12, 2009, 08:42:55 PM

Quote from: cardinalpride on January 12, 2009, 08:25:18 PM
By the way, Carthage just beat the #7 team in the county!

I saw Carthage play. Cal Lutheran manhandled them and won easily. Carthage was wholly ordinary. If the Red Men beat the so-called "#7 team in the county!" then the CCIW is even more overrated than I already knew.

OxyBob

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 12, 2009, 08:43:58 PM

Quote from: cardinalpride on January 12, 2009, 08:25:18 PM
The second lost was to B-W! Another close game to a team that you called "struggling" but has won 4 straight! Now, I may not know much, but I don't know any team in any sport that anyone would call "struggling" that have won 4 consecutive games!

At the time BW beat NCC they were 3-7 and just coming off a win over Thomas More, BW's first in a month..........so yeah saying they were struggling is completely accurate.

Since beating NCC they've won 2 more games over 2 more OAC teams with losing records.

You all keep quoting all these fancy rankings of CCIW teams beating others, but the question should be how great would these wins look if there weren't so many of them ranked?

Telling me NCC beat a #19 team means nothing when the question should be asked why was that team even ranked #19 in the first place.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 12, 2009, 08:52:15 PM

Quote from: OxyBob on January 12, 2009, 08:42:55 PM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 12, 2009, 08:25:18 PM
By the way, Carthage just beat the #7 team in the county!

I saw Carthage play. Cal Lutheran manhandled them and won easily. Carthage was wholly ordinary. If the Red Men beat the so-called "#7 team in the county!" then the CCIW is even more overrated than I already knew.

OxyBob

OB,
Let me know the next time Cal Lutheran comes to the midwest and manhandles a CCIW team! From looking at this year's roster, that's the same CLU team minus its leading scorer from a year ago that beat my 10-15 cardinals last year in overtime. It took a game tying three pointer to force the overtime by the way! Did I mention NCC was without its best player at the time. So, spare me the overrated comments!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 12, 2009, 09:01:58 PM

Quote from: sac on January 12, 2009, 08:43:58 PM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 12, 2009, 08:25:18 PM
The second lost was to B-W! Another close game to a team that you called "struggling" but has won 4 straight! Now, I may not know much, but I don't know any team in any sport that anyone would call "struggling" that have won 4 consecutive games!

At the time BW beat NCC they were 3-7 and just coming off a win over Thomas More, BW's first in a month..........so yeah saying they were struggling is completely accurate.

Since beating NCC they've won 2 more games over 2 more OAC teams with losing records.

You all keep quoting all these fancy rankings of CCIW teams beating others, but the question should be how great would these wins look if there weren't so many of them ranked?

Telling me NCC beat a #19 team means nothing when the question should be asked why was that team even ranked #19 in the first place.

So, the two close road losses to Wash U. and Wheaton mean nothing as well? Are Wheaton and Wash U. overrated also?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: OxyBob on January 12, 2009, 09:04:54 PM

Quote from: cardinalpride on January 12, 2009, 08:52:15 PM
Quote from: OxyBob on January 12, 2009, 08:42:55 PM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 12, 2009, 08:25:18 PM
By the way, Carthage just beat the #7 team in the county!
I saw Carthage play. Cal Lutheran manhandled them and won easily. Carthage was wholly ordinary. If the Red Men beat the so-called "#7 team in the county!" then the CCIW is even more overrated than I already knew.
Let me know the next time Cal Lutheran comes to the midwest and manhandles a CCIW team! From looking at this year's roster, that's the same CLU team minus its leading scorer from a year ago that beat my 10-15 cardinals last year in overtime. It took a game tying three pointer to force the overtime by the way! Did I mention NCC was without its best player at the time. So, spare me the overrated comments!

Ah, the oh so typical twisted logic and hubris of the CCIW fan. Let's see, I posted about a game I saw this season between Carthage and Cal Lutheran in which CLU easily beat the Red Men. Except for Press Maravich's son, Carthage had nothing. Andy Meier ran roughshod over Adam Tolo, Richard Williams, Adam Stuart and anyone else Carthage trotted out there. Your reply? To bring up the result of a game from last season between CLU and a completely different team, which Cal Lutheran also won. Brilliant argument.

OxyBob

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 09:07:51 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 08:16:23 PM
I'd love to see some measuring stick for strength of schedule at this point of the season as well, but, alas, I think that we're going to have to wait until we get deeper into the season for that -- and even then, it'll be a strength-of-schedule database that only reflects games that are germane to the NCAA's regional ranking process (games played in region). The Top 25 poll, of course, reflects all games played, not just the ones in which the D3 selection committee is interested.

I should explain further that at this point I'm not fully convinced that Massey is actually going to step up and do a computer ranking for D3. I'd love to see him do it, of course, but we're in the middle of January already.

Quote from: cardinalpride on January 12, 2009, 08:25:18 PM
Sac,
It's just one of those years that's tough to explain! However, IWU only has 3 Division III losses! Two of them on the road to the #1 team in the country and the other to NCC at home! All three were close games for the most part. So, if you have a problem with IWU receiving votes now, you probably should have voiced this opinion when they were in the top twenty! ;)

NCC has only two Division III losses! The first was to UWW at home (a 3pt game inside 30sec. before a bad call backed up by a bad technical was whistled that pretty much cost NCC any chance they had at victory. UWW was #2 in the county at the time). The second lost was to B-W! Another close game to a team that you called "struggling" but has won 4 straight! Now, I may not know much, but I don't know any team in any sport that anyone would call "struggling" that have won 4 consecutive games! You ask what NCC has done to merit any votes this week. Well, anytime a team can get a win at the Shirk Center against a good IWU team that was ranked #19 in the country, I think some eyes will be opened! ;)

Millikin has only two Division III losses as well! While I can't begin to explain the twenty point loss to York(NY), I do know it was after a 3 week period of no game activity. Not to mention, if the Big Blue are following the NCAA rules(I have no reason to believe other wise), then they probably took a full week off during the holidays which means no practice (many teams must take a week off that start on 10/15 if they play in conferences that offer post season tournaments-not unusual) just before they headed east! The other lost is to Carthage at home in a close game. By the way, Carthage just beat the #7 team in the county! Millikin turns around and defeats the #10 team in the country ON THE ROAD three nights later! Like I said earlier just one of those years thats tough to explain! ;) So Sac all I can say is don't hate the playa hate the game! ;)

These are good points, except that:

1) All games are supposed to be reflected in the d3hoops.com Top 25 poll, not just D3 games. Therefore, IWU doesn't get a free pass for its losses to Olivet Nazarene (7-9) and St. Xavier (10-9). If it did, then you likewise couldn't reward Millikin for beating a D1 team. So the "only x number of D3 losses" argument doesn't have merit.

2) Yes, Baldwin-Wallace has won four straight, but the Yellowjackets are nevertheless only 6-7 and in seventh place in the OAC. That loss to Bald Wally was a bad one for NCC, and unless the Yellowjackets continue on their winning streak for a couple more weeks it can't really be spun otherwise.

3) Your NCC/IWU argument is circular. You can't really build your case for the Cardinals upon a win over IWU while at the same time you're trying to build a case for the Titans. Somebody has to pay a price for that game in the poll; either it's a bad loss for a good Titans team, or it's not quite an earth-shaking win for a good Cardinals team because it was over an IWU team that has been overrated.

4) Your explanations for Millikin's loss to York (NY) are valid -- I've raised them myself -- but at the same time, there aren't enough explanations in the world that can erase that debacle. In my mind, it wiped out whatever goodwill that the Big Blue had earned for their upset win over SIUE.

I'm pleased that the CCIW has seven teams that are receiving votes, but I just don't see the merit in it. On the other hand, I don't see it as a conspiracy, or as some sort of sign that the pollsters are in utter awe of the CCIW. I think that it's a combination of one or more of the following possibilities:

a) Scattershot conclusions on the part of the pollsters. Some think that IWU is overrated and unworthy of recognition, but that NCC is an up-and-comer worthy of a #24 or #25 slot. Some like what Carthage has done thus far in January, and they're banking on a resurgence by the two MIAA powers to buttress Carthage's case, but they think that it's ridiculous to keep giving Millikin any love, especially with Elmhurst crashing; some are still sold on IWU but not yet on Carthage; some figure that they can slip NCC and Millikin onto their ballots while at the same time balancing things out by drastically dropping Elmhurst, IWU, and Augie; etc.

b) The McHugh theory. As I've cited it before, it basically means that pollsters are loading the bottoms of their ballots with CCIW teams, because they're unsure of which ones are the good ones and they're just waiting for league play to sort it all out for them.

c) Name-brand bias. As April alluded, there may be pollsters out there who are just incapable of keeping historically strong programs off of their ballots. This is a charge that would seem to be particularly applicable to IWU (8-5, 0-2); it might reflect upon Elmhurst (9-4, 0-2) a bit as well, but the Bluejays have that great win over Wash U on their resume that is hard for pollsters to forget.

d) That intimidating non-con record. The CCIW as a whole is going to break its all-time record this season for winning percentage outside of the circuit; it's currently an eye-popping 70-17 (.805) with one game left (next Monday's Millikin @ Knox contest). It's obviously a league loaded with great teams this season; who wants to guess wrong as to which of them is nationally legit and which one of them is as hollow as a chocolate soldier? Or, indeed, if any of them at all are hollow?

I think that what we're seeing is a cautious group of pollsters who haven't really received enough information yet to sort out who is a contender and who is a pretender in the CCIW.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 09:14:14 PM

Quote from: OxyBob on January 12, 2009, 09:04:54 PM
Ah, the oh so typical twisted logic and hubris of the CCIW fan.

Sure, because all of us CCIW fans think exactly alike. Right? Nevermind the fact that I just ate up a sizeable portion of Pat's bandwidth arguing that the CCIW really doesn't deserve to have seven teams receiving votes in the latest poll.

Doesn't your head ever get hot wearing that tinfoil hat in the southern California sun? ;) :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 12, 2009, 09:21:44 PM

Quote from: OxyBob on January 12, 2009, 09:04:54 PM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 12, 2009, 08:52:15 PM
Quote from: OxyBob on January 12, 2009, 08:42:55 PM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 12, 2009, 08:25:18 PM
By the way, Carthage just beat the #7 team in the county!
I saw Carthage play. Cal Lutheran manhandled them and won easily. Carthage was wholly ordinary. If the Red Men beat the so-called "#7 team in the county!" then the CCIW is even more overrated than I already knew.
Let me know the next time Cal Lutheran comes to the midwest and manhandles a CCIW team! From looking at this year's roster, that's the same CLU team minus its leading scorer from a year ago that beat my 10-15 cardinals last year in overtime. It took a game tying three pointer to force the overtime by the way! Did I mention NCC was without its best player at the time. So, spare me the overrated comments!

Ah, the oh so typical twisted logic and hubris of the CCIW fan. Let's see, I posted about a game I saw this season between Carthage and Cal Lutheran in which CLU easily beat the Red Men. Except for Press Maravich's son, Carthage had nothing. Andy Meier ran roughshod over Adam Tolo, Richard Williams, Adam Stuart and anyone else Carthage trotted out there. Your reply? To bring up the result of a game from last season between CLU and a completely different team, which Cal Lutheran also won. Brilliant argument.

OxyBob

Bob,
I watched the Cal LU/Carthage game online. Maybe if Cal Lu came east of vegas the rest of the country would see how good they are or aren't!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 12, 2009, 09:45:00 PM

1) There is a huge difference between 7 CCIW teams being ranked and 7 CCIW teams getting votes. Right now there are 3 CCIW teams in the D3hoops.com Top 25.

2) Conference play will sort all of this out.

(Illinois Wesleyan was not on my ballot this week, by the way.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 12, 2009, 09:45:48 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 09:07:51 PM
b) The McHugh theory. As I've cited it before, it basically means that pollsters are loading the bottoms of their ballots with CCIW teams, because they're unsure of which ones are the good ones and they're just waiting for league play to sort it all out for them.

Doesn't this theory contradict the idea that there is no CCIW bias then?. That pollsters feel the need to slot in a 3rd or 4th CCIW team into the top 25 just because they are from the CCIW? I've fallen into this trap myself on my fan polls and it never feels genuine. By the way, I have no conclusion myself that there is a CCIW bias, only a slant and this opinion has been expressed by others privately. There are reasons for that, an argument for another day.

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 09:07:51 PM

d) That intimidating non-con record. The CCIW as a whole is going to break its all-time record this season for winning percentage outside of the circuit; it's currently an eye-popping 70-17 (.805) with one game left (next Monday's Millikin @ Knox contest). It's obviously a league loaded with great teams this season; who wants to guess wrong as to which of them is nationally legit and which one of them is as hollow as a chocolate soldier? Or, indeed, if any of them at all are hollow?

I think that what we're seeing is a cautious group of pollsters who haven't really received enough information yet to sort out who is a contender and who is a pretender in the CCIW.

That record might look impressive but I believe 6 CCIW teams played a non-conference record vs collectively sub .500 teams. (at least thats true for D3 opponents). I don't know whether thats good or bad or average for the rest of D3. I tend to think its probably the average. Yes, there have been some great matchups with WashU and WIAC foes, but those are out numbered by some pretty downrite weak D3 teams.

I do think that in most years the CCIW gets the large box of cupcakes to feast on and this year is no different.

.......as for cautionary pollsters, if they were really cautionary I don't think we'd see so many CCIW teams getting votes.

Quote from: cardinalpride on January 12, 2009, 09:01:58 PM

So, the two close road losses to Wash U. and Wheaton mean nothing as well? Are Wheaton and Wash U. overrated also?

Possibly, Washington's resume to date isn't eye popping http://www.d3hoops.com/school/WSHU/mens/2009 , its probably enough to keep the defending National Champion hovering around the top 5 though.

Wheaton's isn't overwhelming either http://www.d3hoops.com/school/WTIL/mens/2009 . But they are unbeaten. I do wonder where they'd be ranked if they hadn't made the NCAA's last year though.

Illinois Wesleayn http://www.d3hoops.com/school/IWU/mens/2009 where is the quality win that justifies voting a 5 loss team in the top 25? They were on the edge last week and I suppose I can see why, at some point you can't keep voting for a team just because they've lost a bunch of close one's.

Take a look at the differences between how IWU/Elmhurst and Anderson (also w/close losses) have been handled in the poll this year and you'll see what I mean about there being a slant toward CCIW teams.
-------------------------------------------------------

Lastly, I like debates like this guys, this boards been pretty quiet for a long time. Some very good well thought out posts today. I'm just trying to get a handle on what the pollsters are thinking. I just see alot that doesn't make alot of sense.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 12, 2009, 09:55:23 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 12, 2009, 09:45:00 PM
1) There is a huge difference between 7 CCIW teams being ranked and 7 CCIW teams getting votes. Right now there are 3 CCIW teams in the D3hoops.com Top 25.

I think its fair to ask why, or to wonder what the rationale was when 3 of the 7 don't appear to merit a vote.

I'd like to think I'd be asking the same questions if it were the WIAC, the UAA (infact I know I've questioned that before) or the MIAA.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 12, 2009, 09:59:38 PM

Anderson 84 Texas Lutheran 79 (http://www.tlu.edu/i/athletics/mbasketball/stats/2008_09/tluandm.htm) did not impress me at all. (I listened to that game! I thought Anderson had been stung by the Seguin, TX referees! 24 Personal Fouls in Seguin TX (versus 29 for TLU) is not bad! :D )

Anderson 93 HPU 78 (http://www.heartlandconf.org/m_basketball/2008/2008-09%20Stats/au1230.htm) was more appropriate. However, Anderson only went 7 deep in the game? Ty Riddle killed HPU (9-14 on 3FG's)!

Parity! There is so little difference between #20 and #80 that I am glad that we have a playoff! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 12, 2009, 10:00:27 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 09:07:51 PM
b) The McHugh theory. As I've cited it before, it basically means that pollsters are loading the bottoms of their ballots with CCIW teams, because they're unsure of which ones are the good ones and they're just waiting for league play to sort it all out for them.

Greg, I think you mean the Gordan Mann theory...

http://d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2009/01/01/happy-new-season/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 12, 2009, 10:07:43 PM

Quote from: sac on January 12, 2009, 09:55:23 PMI think its fair to ask why, or to wonder what the rationale was when 3 of the 7 don't appear to merit a vote.

Absolutely it's fair. It makes for good discussion. I guess I'm just reminding everyone to keep in perspective how few voting points Illinois Wesleyan - 8, Millikin - 7, and North Central - 5 really have. They are nowhere near the Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HopeConvert on January 12, 2009, 10:18:16 PM

Quote from: April on January 12, 2009, 07:19:07 PM
Quote from: sac on January 12, 2009, 06:14:17 PM
#19 Elmhurst

I'm sorry man, but any other team from any other conference that loses 3 in a row drops out of the poll. This is quite ridiculous imo. That isn't even taking into account being ranked ahead of Anderson, who just beat them 10 days ago.

6 teams from one conference receiving top 25 votes. ::)
I am guessing voters still don't know what to do with the fact that Elmhurst is the only team to beat Wash U, and Wash U is ranked #3 and are the defending national champs who should theoretically be at least as good this year.

Not without Ruths they're not. I still think they are a dangerous team, but he was something special.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 12, 2009, 10:18:59 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 12, 2009, 10:07:43 PM
I guess I'm just reminding everyone to keep in perspective how few voting points Illinois Wesleyan - 8, Millikin - 7, and North Central - 5 really have. They are nowhere near the Top 25.

7 of the top 41 is still alot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 12, 2009, 10:19:22 PM

Quote from: sac on January 12, 2009, 06:14:17 PM
#19 Elmhurst

I'm sorry man, but any other team from any other conference that loses 3 in a row drops out of the poll. This is quite ridiculous imo.

I do not agree with this logic.

Elmhurst was ranked #10 in Week 5 collectively by the voters. And the Wash U win and the Anderson loss had been factored in by this time. This week the voters had two pieces of data to base their new Elmhurst decision on:

1) A 1-point loss @ #7 Augustana .

2) A double overtime loss to 10-2 Millikin.

If you have Elmhurst #10, you cannot "penalize" them for losing by 1 @ #7. If anything, that is game that justifies where they are ranked relative to Augustana. It was a "good loss" - I sure hope the voters don't automatically penalize a team when they see an "L."

So then you're left to deal with the "bad loss" at home to Millikin. Elmhurst dropped 10 spots, to #20. That seems very fair to me.

Each week as a voter you deal with the new data you have.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sciacguru on January 12, 2009, 10:19:45 PM

Quote from: cardinalpride on January 12, 2009, 09:21:44 PM
Quote from: OxyBob on January 12, 2009, 09:04:54 PM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 12, 2009, 08:52:15 PM
Quote from: OxyBob on January 12, 2009, 08:42:55 PM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 12, 2009, 08:25:18 PM
By the way, Carthage just beat the #7 team in the county!
I saw Carthage play. Cal Lutheran manhandled them and won easily. Carthage was wholly ordinary. If the Red Men beat the so-called "#7 team in the county!" then the CCIW is even more overrated than I already knew.
Let me know the next time Cal Lutheran comes to the midwest and manhandles a CCIW team! From looking at this year's roster, that's the same CLU team minus its leading scorer from a year ago that beat my 10-15 cardinals last year in overtime. It took a game tying three pointer to force the overtime by the way! Did I mention NCC was without its best player at the time. So, spare me the overrated comments!
Bob,
I watched the Cal LU/Carthage game online. Maybe if Cal Lu came east of vegas the rest of the country would see how good they are or aren't!

Same roster???
Looks like CLU's roster had quite the turnaround, with 6 freshmen on the team, 2 which start. Only 2 starters returning (Meier, Knudsen), only 3 with significant playing experience.....with Fisher. Meier was the leading scorer last year...he has returned. CLU lost 3 Seniors (2, 3yr starters and solid utility player), another starter (6-6 manchild Owens), and backup PG (Gums) as well as 4 or 5 others.
This year's stats:
http://www.clusports.com/stats/mens_basketball/2008_2009/teamcume.htm

Last year's stats and team:
http://www.clusports.com/stats/mens_basketball/2007_2008/teamcume.htm#TEAM.IND

If you saw the game online....pass it on to your fellow CCIW'ers...or is there no internet in Illinois? Here is the link:
http://kadytv.com/CLU/clu_ibn.htm

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HopeConvert on January 12, 2009, 10:19:52 PM

Quote from: sac on January 12, 2009, 09:55:23 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 12, 2009, 09:45:00 PM
1) There is a huge difference between 7 CCIW teams being ranked and 7 CCIW teams getting votes. Right now there are 3 CCIW teams in the D3hoops.com Top 25.

I think its fair to ask why, or to wonder what the rationale was when 3 of the 7 don't appear to merit a vote.

I'd like to think I'd be asking the same questions if it were the WIAC, the UAA (infact I know I've questioned that before) or the MIAA.

Given the CCIW's non-conference record I think some deference is due to the conference. Obviously they are going to be beating up on each other quite a bit. I can't say I was too troubled by the votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 10:23:53 PM

Quote from: sac on January 12, 2009, 09:45:48 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 09:07:51 PM
b) The McHugh theory. As I've cited it before, it basically means that pollsters are loading the bottoms of their ballots with CCIW teams, because they're unsure of which ones are the good ones and they're just waiting for league play to sort it all out for them.

Doesn't this theory contradict the idea that there is no CCIW bias then?. That pollsters feel the need to slot in a 3rd or 4th CCIW team into the top 25 just because they are from the CCIW?

No, the pollsters feel the need to slot in a third or fourth CCIW team because the league has a 70-17 non-con record this season, not because the league is inherently better than every other league in the nation. I think it's a universally-accepted axiom that the WIAC is at least as good, if not better, than the CCIW, and that the UAA has been at peer level with the CCIW over the past few seasons. In other words, teams get a nod because their league happens to have a supersized non-con record, not because their league happens to be the CCIW.

Quote from: sac on January 12, 2009, 09:45:48 PMThat record might look impressive but I believe 6 CCIW teams played a non-conference record vs collectively sub .500 teams. (at least thats true for D3 opponents). I don't know whether thats good or bad or average for the rest of D3. I tend to think its probably the average. Yes, there have been some great matchups with WashU and WIAC foes, but those are out numbered by some pretty downrite weak D3 teams.

I do think that in most years the CCIW gets the large box of cupcakes to feast on and this year is no different.

I haven't crunched the numbers to look at the strength of schedule of the eight CCIW teams. Perhaps that 70-17 was achieved against a collective sub-.500 opponent base, perhaps it wasn't. But are you taking the games against the CCIW teams out of those opponent's records? It's customary to do so when you measure strength of schedule. And, yeah, the CCIW has played lots of weak teams. It's also played lots of strong teams. That's true every year, and it's true of every league. What's remarkable about this season's success is that the CCIW really hasn't played a non-con schedule that's drastically different from past years.

Also, I disagree with your assertion that "most years the CCIW gets the large box of cupcakes to feast on and this year is no different." The Midwest Region is generally acknowledged to be one of the two or three best regions in D3, and the best element of the West Region by far -- the WIAC -- is right on the CCIW's doorstep and plays a number of games against the CCIW each season. The two UAA programs that have been the strongest throughout this decade, Chicago and Wash U, are in close proximity to the CCIW and play a bunch of games against CCIW teams every season. The MWC is generally acknowledged as one of the up-and-coming leagues within D3. And it's not as though the CCIW is annually scheduling games with the bottom-feeders in your league; the four games that the CCIW are guaranteed to play each year against the MIAA are all against Hope and Calvin. And so on, and so forth.

Quote from: sac on January 12, 2009, 09:45:48 PM.......as for cautionary pollsters, if they were really cautionary I don't think we'd see so many CCIW teams getting votes.

I think that the opposite is true. Who wants to be the pollster who gets blind-sided by not seeing the team that emerges as the CCIW kingpin at the same time that his pollster peers have spotted it?

Quote from: sac on January 12, 2009, 09:45:48 PM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 12, 2009, 09:01:58 PM

So, the two close road losses to Wash U. and Wheaton mean nothing as well? Are Wheaton and Wash U. overrated also?

Possibly, Washington's resume to date isn't eye popping http://www.d3hoops.com/school/WSHU/mens/2009 , its probably enough to keep the defending National Champion hovering around the top 5 though.

Wheaton's isn't overwhelming either http://www.d3hoops.com/school/WTIL/mens/2009 . But they are unbeaten. I do wonder where they'd be ranked if they hadn't made the NCAA's last year though.

Illinois Wesleayn http://www.d3hoops.com/school/IWU/mens/2009 where is the quality win that justifies voting a 5 loss team in the top 25? They were on the edge last week and I suppose I can see why, at some point you can't keep voting for a team just because they've lost a bunch of close one's.

I think that if you try hard enough you can find something to dislike about every D3 team's resume. ;) If I had to single out one CCIW team that I really think is getting too much of the benefit of the doubt, though, it would probably be IWU -- although I think that Millikin and North Central have fairly dubious cases as well.

Quote from: Titan Q on January 12, 2009, 10:00:27 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 09:07:51 PM
b) The McHugh theory. As I've cited it before, it basically means that pollsters are loading the bottoms of their ballots with CCIW teams, because they're unsure of which ones are the good ones and they're just waiting for league play to sort it all out for them.

Greg, I think you mean the Gordan Mann theory...

http://d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2009/01/01/happy-new-season/

Could be, although I don't remember reading that blog piece. Perhaps D-Mac picked up the gist of it and recited it somewhere where I remember reading it.

At any rate, sorry for the lack of attribution, Gordo. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 10:27:30 PM

Quote from: sciacguru on January 12, 2009, 10:19:45 PM
If you saw the game online....pass it on to your fellow CCIW'ers...or is there no internet in Illinois?

No, there isn't. Somebody in another state is reading all of this to me over the phone, and then typing away furiously while I dictate my voluminous responses to him. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sciacguru on January 12, 2009, 10:28:36 PM

But I had mentioned something along these lines last year:
Sorry my quote inserts are still amateurish!!!

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 04, 2008, 11:10:21 pm
Quote from: OxyBob on February 04, 2008, 10:13:28 pm
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 04, 2008, 10:06:06 pm
Oxy re-enters the poll (at #20!), and OB is still bitchin'!

Yeah, and Oxy only had to win 15 out of 16 to do it.

OxyBob

Also known as six out of seven.

Oxy has to win 15 of 16, or 6 of 7, or 6 in a row to break Top 20. When they were top 25 before, they lose one game 3 wks ago, the conference opener, at a tough venue in CMS, and cant seem to get back in til now. Doesnt seem to be the norm when you lose....................

Wheaton loses 4 of last 7 - Now out of Top 25
Elmhurst loses 4 of last 7 - Just hanging on to 25
UW-Oshkosh loses 4 of last 8 - Sitting at 24 (now they did lose to Top 25 teams)

except.......
Williams loses 3 in a row - Out from #13 (only one I 100% agree with)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 12, 2009, 10:36:18 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 10:27:30 PM
Quote from: sciacguru on January 12, 2009, 10:19:45 PM
If you saw the game online....pass it on to your fellow CCIW'ers...or is there no internet in Illinois?

No, there isn't. Somebody in another state is reading all of this to me over the phone, and then typing away furiously while I dictate my voluminous responses to him. ;)

Yeah, there is internet in Illinois. I have used it there.

I actually think that Gregory has access to an out-of-work medical transcriptionist sitting at a word processor in India, and he is using her to do the typing! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 10:39:03 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 12, 2009, 10:36:18 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 10:27:30 PM
Quote from: sciacguru on January 12, 2009, 10:19:45 PM
If you saw the game online....pass it on to your fellow CCIW'ers...or is there no internet in Illinois?

No, there isn't. Somebody in another state is reading all of this to me over the phone, and then typing away furiously while I dictate my voluminous responses to him. ;)
Yeah, there is internet in Illinois. I have used it there.

I actually think that Gregory has access to an out-of-work medical transcriptionist sitting at a word processor in India, and he is using her to do the typing! :D

By the four arms of Ganesha, I swear that this is not true!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ethelred the Unready on January 12, 2009, 10:48:34 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 10:23:53 PM
Quote from: sac on January 12, 2009, 09:45:48 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 09:07:51 PM
b) The McHugh theory. As I've cited it before, it basically means that pollsters are loading the bottoms of their ballots with CCIW teams, because they're unsure of which ones are the good ones and they're just waiting for league play to sort it all out for them.

Doesn't this theory contradict the idea that there is no CCIW bias then?. That pollsters feel the need to slot in a 3rd or 4th CCIW team into the top 25 just because they are from the CCIW?

No, the pollsters feel the need to slot in a third or fourth CCIW team because the league has a 70-17 non-con record this season, not because the league is inherently better than every other league in the nation. I think it's a universally-accepted axiom that the WIAC is at least as good, if not better, than the CCIW, and that the UAA has been at peer level with the CCIW over the past few seasons. In other words, teams get a nod because their league happens to have a supersized non-con record, not because their league happens to be the CCIW.

Quote from: sac on January 12, 2009, 09:45:48 PMThat record might look impressive but I believe 6 CCIW teams played a non-conference record vs collectively sub .500 teams. (at least thats true for D3 opponents). I don't know whether thats good or bad or average for the rest of D3. I tend to think its probably the average. Yes, there have been some great matchups with WashU and WIAC foes, but those are out numbered by some pretty downrite weak D3 teams.

I do think that in most years the CCIW gets the large box of cupcakes to feast on and this year is no different.

I haven't crunched the numbers to look at the strength of schedule of the eight CCIW teams. Perhaps that 70-17 was achieved against a collective sub-.500 opponent base, perhaps it wasn't. But are you taking the games against the CCIW teams out of those opponent's records? It's customary to do so when you measure strength of schedule. And, yeah, the CCIW has played lots of weak teams. It's also played lots of strong teams. That's true every year, and it's true of every league. What's remarkable about this season's success is that the CCIW really hasn't played a non-con schedule that's drastically different from past years.

Also, I disagree with your assertion that "most years the CCIW gets the large box of cupcakes to feast on and this year is no different." The Midwest Region is generally acknowledged to be one of the two or three best regions in D3, and the best element of the West Region by far -- the WIAC -- is right on the CCIW's doorstep and plays a number of games against the CCIW each season. The two UAA programs that have been the strongest throughout this decade, Chicago and Wash U, are in close proximity to the CCIW and play a bunch of games against CCIW teams every season. The MWC is generally acknowledged as one of the up-and-coming leagues within D3. And it's not as though the CCIW is annually scheduling games with the bottom-feeders in your league; the four games that the CCIW are guaranteed to play each year against the MIAA are all against Hope and Calvin. And so on, and so forth.

Quote from: sac on January 12, 2009, 09:45:48 PM.......as for cautionary pollsters, if they were really cautionary I don't think we'd see so many CCIW teams getting votes.

I think that the opposite is true. Who wants to be the pollster who gets blind-sided by not seeing the team that emerges as the CCIW kingpin at the same time that his pollster peers have spotted it?

Quote from: sac on January 12, 2009, 09:45:48 PM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 12, 2009, 09:01:58 PM

So, the two close road losses to Wash U. and Wheaton mean nothing as well? Are Wheaton and Wash U. overrated also?

Possibly, Washington's resume to date isn't eye popping http://www.d3hoops.com/school/WSHU/mens/2009 , its probably enough to keep the defending National Champion hovering around the top 5 though.

Wheaton's isn't overwhelming either http://www.d3hoops.com/school/WTIL/mens/2009 . But they are unbeaten. I do wonder where they'd be ranked if they hadn't made the NCAA's last year though.

Illinois Wesleayn http://www.d3hoops.com/school/IWU/mens/2009 where is the quality win that justifies voting a 5 loss team in the top 25? They were on the edge last week and I suppose I can see why, at some point you can't keep voting for a team just because they've lost a bunch of close one's.

I think that if you try hard enough you can find something to dislike about every D3 team's resume. ;) If I had to single out one CCIW team that I really think is getting too much of the benefit of the doubt, though, it would probably be IWU -- although I think that Millikin and North Central have fairly dubious cases as well.

Quote from: Titan Q on January 12, 2009, 10:00:27 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 09:07:51 PM
b) The McHugh theory. As I've cited it before, it basically means that pollsters are loading the bottoms of their ballots with CCIW teams, because they're unsure of which ones are the good ones and they're just waiting for league play to sort it all out for them.

Greg, I think you mean the Gordan Mann theory...

http://d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2009/01/01/happy-new-season/

Could be, although I don't remember reading that blog piece. Perhaps D-Mac picked up the gist of it and recited it somewhere where I remember reading it.

At any rate, sorry for the lack of attribution, Gordo. ;)

This may be nitpicking, but I don't think the numbers support that particular statement. I would argue UR would be one of the two, not Chicago.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 11:09:29 PM

Quote from: Ethelred the Unready on January 12, 2009, 10:48:34 PM
This may be nitpicking, but I don't think the numbers support that particular statement. I would argue UR would be one of the two, not Chicago.

Chicago's won four UAA titles over the past decade, while Rochester's won two. Go back a dozen years, and Chicago's won six UAA titles to Rochester's two.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 12, 2009, 11:17:42 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 07:44:32 PM
Quote from: April on January 12, 2009, 07:19:07 PMI feel like what's happening is that this is a confusing year with the NCAC and the MIAA so down.

You mean, "this is a confusing year with Wittenberg and Wooster, and Hope and Calvin, so down." Those four programs are not synonymous with their respective leagues, and for all we know the leagues themselves may be just as good, or better, than they have been in previous years. [...] Let's not mistake greater balance within normally top-heavy leagues for overall slumps of those leagues.

With the singular exception of Hiram, the entire NCAC is down this year, as April appears to understand.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2009, 11:23:11 PM

WOW - over four pages in a single day - in the FIRST HALF OF JANUARY! ;D

Alas, primarily on a red herring. There are at least 2-3 teams even a CCIW fanatic like myself would not have voted for (one of which is, alas, IWU :'(), but I can't see any of the seven that are obviously off-the-wall votes.

C'mon folks - just 2 polls ago the CCIW had 3 teams in the top 9; now #3 is 20th! How much public flagellation must poor, abused CCIW supporters undergo? ::) :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 12, 2009, 11:39:15 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 12, 2009, 10:19:22 PM
Quote from: sac on January 12, 2009, 06:14:17 PM
#19 Elmhurst

I'm sorry man, but any other team from any other conference that loses 3 in a row drops out of the poll. This is quite ridiculous imo.

I do not agree with this logic.

Elmhurst was ranked #10 in Week 5 collectively by the voters. And the Wash U win and the Anderson loss had been factored in by this time. This week the voters had two pieces of data to base their new Elmhurst decision on:

1) A 1-point loss @ #7 Augustana .

2) A double overtime loss to 10-2 Millikin.

If you have Elmhurst #10, you cannot "penalize" them for losing by 1 @ #7. If anything, that is game that justifies where they are ranked relative to Augustana. It was a "good loss" - I sure hope the voters don't automatically penalize a team when they see an "L."

So then you're left to deal with the "bad loss" at home to Millikin. Elmhurst dropped 10 spots, to #20. That seems very fair to me.

Each week as a voter you deal with the new data you have.

I guess the difference is how we perceive the Millikin loss..........I don't perceive that as a good one, double overtime or not. Its hard for me to justify 3 straight losses keeping anyone in the poll, and I think the history of the poll has that to be the case.

I think the SIUE win for Millikin is getting way to much love, no one's updated SIUE since the Milliken game but they've been getting thrashed by everyone except Missouri-Kansas City (5-13) and Southeast Missouri State(5-14), I think they're 4-14 now. http://www.siue.edu/ATHLETIC/MBB/20082009/sked.html

Millikins schedule doesn't really inspire either. http://www.d3hoops.com/school/MLKN/mens/2009

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 11:42:03 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 12, 2009, 11:17:42 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 07:44:32 PM
Quote from: April on January 12, 2009, 07:19:07 PMI feel like what's happening is that this is a confusing year with the NCAC and the MIAA so down.

You mean, "this is a confusing year with Wittenberg and Wooster, and Hope and Calvin, so down." Those four programs are not synonymous with their respective leagues, and for all we know the leagues themselves may be just as good, or better, than they have been in previous years. [...] Let's not mistake greater balance within normally top-heavy leagues for overall slumps of those leagues.
With the singular exception of Hiram, the entire NCAC is down this year, as April appears to understand.

The NCAC is the league you watch, DC, so I trust your judgement of it. However, the numbers indicate otherwise. Last season the non-Woo/Witt part of the league went 24-48 (.333) in non-con play. This year it's gone 30-39 (.435), a significant uptick. And Hiram isn't the biggest improvement outside of the circuit; that would be Kenyon, which has gone from 2-7 in non-con play to 6-3 this season. Denison and Oberlin have also, like Hiram, significantly improved in non-con play from 2007-08 to 2008-09.

What I can't speak to without a more thorough study is how the NCAC's strength of schedule might've changed from last season to this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 11:47:13 PM

Quote from: sac on January 12, 2009, 11:39:15 PM
I think the SIUE win for Millikin is getting way to much love, no one's updated SIUE since the Milliken game but they've been getting thrashed by everyone except Missouri-Kansas City (5-13) and Southeast Missouri State(5-14), I think they're 4-14 now. http://www.siue.edu/ATHLETIC/MBB/20082009/sked.html

SIUE is 5-13. The Cougars beat St. Xavier last Thursday by eight, although that doesn't do the CCIW as a whole much good; St. Xavier beat Illinois Wesleyan in December.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 12, 2009, 11:56:13 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 11:42:03 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 12, 2009, 11:17:42 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 07:44:32 PM
Quote from: April on January 12, 2009, 07:19:07 PMI feel like what's happening is that this is a confusing year with the NCAC and the MIAA so down.

You mean, "this is a confusing year with Wittenberg and Wooster, and Hope and Calvin, so down." Those four programs are not synonymous with their respective leagues, and for all we know the leagues themselves may be just as good, or better, than they have been in previous years. [...] Let's not mistake greater balance within normally top-heavy leagues for overall slumps of those leagues.
With the singular exception of Hiram, the entire NCAC is down this year, as April appears to understand.
The NCAC is the league you watch, DC, so I trust your judgement of it. However, the numbers indicate otherwise. Last season the non-Woo/Witt part of the league went 24-48 (.333) in non-con play. This year it's gone 30-39 (.435), a significant uptick. And Hiram isn't the biggest improvement outside of the circuit; that would be Kenyon, which has gone from 2-7 in non-con play to 6-3 this season. Denison and Oberlin have also, like Hiram, significantly improved in non-con play from 2007-08 to 2008-09.

What I can't speak to without a more thorough study is how the NCAC's strength of schedule might've changed from last season to this season.

Thanks for trusting my judgment, if that's what you've done here. Denison and Oberlin combined to win one non-conference game last year; nowhere to go but up. And I recall some well-placed D3 fan calling Kenyon "egregiously bad" earlier this season; it wasn't true, but if they're better than they were last season, it's only marginal at this point. I base that on the 12 games I saw them play last year and the five I've seen this year, not an analysis of their strength of schedule.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 13, 2009, 12:40:33 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 12, 2009, 11:56:13 PM
Thanks for trusting my judgment, if that's what you've done here.

David, I'm simply trying to reconcile what you said in April's defense with what the W-L records appear to indicate.

Quote from: David Collinge on January 12, 2009, 11:56:13 PMDenison and Oberlin combined to win one non-conference game last year; nowhere to go but up.

... and how does this fit in with your assertion that nobody but Hiram was on the upswing this year? The awfulness of Denison and Oberlin in 2007-08 doesn't really seem to be at issue, only whether or not the two teams had improved in 2008-09.

Quote from: David Collinge on January 12, 2009, 11:56:13 PMAnd I recall some well-placed D3 fan calling Kenyon "egregiously bad" earlier this season; it wasn't true,

No, David, what isn't true is the way that you have used this quote. It's obviously been a burr under your saddle all season long, since you've referred to it a couple of times since, so I'm surprised to see you misrepresent me with that statement.

This is what I said on opening weekend after watching the Kenyon vs. Illinois Tech game:

Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 17, 2008, 04:18:29 AM
Quote from: David Collinge on November 15, 2008, 11:29:07 PM
Kenyon holds off Illinois Tech in Chicago, 71-59, to record the first NCAC win of the season. It was all Bryan Yelvington, all the time in his hometown--well, home metro-area. The senior POTY candidate put up 30 points--24 in the second half--while taking better than 40% of his team's shots and logging 38 minutes. Bryan hit 11 of 22 from the floor and grabbed a game-high 9 rebounds to boot. Sophomore J.T. Knight chipped in 16 mostly second-half points. Overall the Lords shot 42%, hitting 39% of their 18 treys, and shot 20/27 from the line (4 of the missed free throws were in the final 5:05), while holding IIT to 39% from the field, 29% from the arc. The Scarlet Hawks missed ten free throws, many of them in key second half situations which helped the Lords take control of the game. Tied at the half 25-25, the Lords built a 17-point lead with 6:18 left, then held on as both Allen Bediako and Dave Knapke fouled out. Kenyon played basically a seven-man rotation, with a significant contribution from rookie guard Anthony Chun (8 points, 6 assists.) Kenyon moves on to the championship round of the Midway Classic, where they will face Edgewood, upset winners over host Chicago, 101-93. Box; (http://athletics.uchicago.edu/mensbasketball/iit-ken.htm) recap. (http://athletics.kenyon.edu/x28206.xml)

... and what an ugly game it was to watch. Although it picked up a little in the second half, mostly thanks to Yelvington, the first half was a missed-shot festival. Layups, treys, midrange jumpers, hook shots, free throws, you name it -- IIT and Kenyon missed 'em in all flavors, and leavened the mess with a lot of turnovers as well. And it isn't as though either team was even close to playing the sort of defense that was good enough to explain it all. One has to expect a lot of rust on opening weekend, but that was egregiously bad basketball even by opening-weekend standards.

I said that the game was egregiously bad, not the teams themselves. That's obvious by the context of the quote, which is all about that particular game's performance and not a bit about ability or talent. Frankly, David, I'm surprised to see you twist my meaning around like that. That's just not your style.

Quote from: David Collinge on January 12, 2009, 11:56:13 PMbut if they're better than they were last season, it's only marginal at this point.

Marginally better is still better, n'est-ce pas?

Quote from: David Collinge on January 12, 2009, 11:56:13 PMI base that on the 12 games I saw them play last year and the five I've seen this year, not an analysis of their strength of schedule.

That's why I said that I defer to you based upon your observation of these teams. As I said, I'm simply trying to make a good-faith effort to reconcile what you're saying about the NCAC being down with what the W-L records appear to indicate, which is the opposite conclusion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 13, 2009, 12:43:14 AM

Wow, lots of stuff going on here. Where to begin?

I think what you're looking at with the three single-digit vote-getting CCIW teams is simply a lack of consensus among the voters as to who the third- or fourth-best CCIW team is. If you added up 8, 7 and 5 to get 20 points and assigned them all to one team I doubt we would be having this part of the discussion. The only problem is there is some difference of opinion as to who should be getting those votes and different voters have different opinions.

Cal Lutheran-Carthage. Played Nov. 24, about 10 games ago for each. What have the teams done since? Recently, Cal Lu lost to Tufts and Carthage beat Augustana. (Also, our SCIAC voter tells me CMS is the best team in the league, so I am voting for CMS instead of Cal Lu, who I voted for the previous week.)

Lots of talk about York (N.Y.). York picked up three transfers at the semester break (averaging 31 points per game, if my math is right) and has won three out of four. If Millikin hadn't won at Elmhurst I am sure they wouldn't be getting votes either, but it was enough for a couple voters to take a flier.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 13, 2009, 01:10:54 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 09:07:51 PM
These are good points, except that:

1) All games are supposed to be reflected in the d3hoops.com Top 25 poll, not just D3 games. Therefore, IWU doesn't get a free pass for its losses to Olivet Nazarene (7-9) and St. Xavier (10-9). If it did, then you likewise couldn't reward Millikin for beating a D1 team. So the "only x number of D3 losses" argument doesn't have merit.

2) Yes, Baldwin-Wallace has won four straight, but the Yellowjackets are nevertheless only 6-7 and in seventh place in the OAC. That loss to Bald Wally was a bad one for NCC, and unless the Yellowjackets continue on their winning streak for a couple more weeks it can't really be spun otherwise.

3) Your NCC/IWU argument is circular. You can't really build your case for the Cardinals upon a win over IWU while at the same time you're trying to build a case for the Titans. Somebody has to pay a price for that game in the poll; either it's a bad loss for a good Titans team, or it's not quite an earth-shaking win for a good Cardinals team because it was over an IWU team that has been overrated.

4) Your explanations for Millikin's loss to York (NY) are valid -- I've raised them myself -- but at the same time, there aren't enough explanations in the world that can erase that debacle. In my mind, it wiped out whatever goodwill that the Big Blue had earned for their upset win over SIUE.

I'm pleased that the CCIW has seven teams that are receiving votes, but I just don't see the merit in it. On the other hand, I don't see it as a conspiracy, or as some sort of sign that the pollsters are in utter awe of the CCIW. I think that it's a combination of one or more of the following possibilities:

a) Scattershot conclusions on the part of the pollsters. Some think that IWU is overrated and unworthy of recognition, but that NCC is an up-and-comer worthy of a #24 or #25 slot. Some like what Carthage has done thus far in January, and they're banking on a resurgence by the two MIAA powers to buttress Carthage's case, but they think that it's ridiculous to keep giving Millikin any love, especially with Elmhurst crashing; some are still sold on IWU but not yet on Carthage; some figure that they can slip NCC and Millikin onto their ballots while at the same time balancing things out by drastically dropping Elmhurst, IWU, and Augie; etc.

b) The McHugh theory. As I've cited it before, it basically means that pollsters are loading the bottoms of their ballots with CCIW teams, because they're unsure of which ones are the good ones and they're just waiting for league play to sort it all out for them.

c) Name-brand bias. As April alluded, there may be pollsters out there who are just incapable of keeping historically strong programs off of their ballots. This is a charge that would seem to be particularly applicable to IWU (8-5, 0-2); it might reflect upon Elmhurst (9-4, 0-2) a bit as well, but the Bluejays have that great win over Wash U on their resume that is hard for pollsters to forget.

d) That intimidating non-con record. The CCIW as a whole is going to break its all-time record this season for winning percentage outside of the circuit; it's currently an eye-popping 70-17 (.805) with one game left (next Monday's Millikin @ Knox contest). It's obviously a league loaded with great teams this season; who wants to guess wrong as to which of them is nationally legit and which one of them is as hollow as a chocolate soldier? Or, indeed, if any of them at all are hollow?

I think that what we're seeing is a cautious group of pollsters who haven't really received enough information yet to sort out who is a contender and who is a pretender in the CCIW.

Greg,
I don't know if the CCIW deserves 7 teams receiving votes! By the same token, I don't believe anyone else knows either. While I respect Sac and OB's opinion, I was merely making a case for why the voters may think so. Also, I didn't hear Sac and OB complaining about IWU when they were in the top twenty. All of a sudden they're not worthy of a single vote. That's ridiculous!

The league obviously has some strength this year or it wouldn't have won 80% of its non-conference games!

Also, if wash u. was the measuring stick of all Division III b-ball at the beginning of the year (23 of the 25 1st placed votes in the preseason), then the CCIW may be ranked appropriately. Here are some score comparisons between the near unanimous preseason #1 Wash U and the CCIW. I'll start with North Park the only CCIW team to not receive a top 25 vote this week. I'm using Wash U. because they played half the league this year. Here we go:

North Park loses by a 24pt margin to Wash U. in a tournament season opener (most D3 followers expected that outcome). A week ago, NP minus two of their best players(3 if you include Jones), loses to #7 Augie at Augie by 17. Three nights later NP, after regaining those two players, loses to NCC by 15 at NCC (The margin might have raised some eyebrows amongst CCIW followers but the outcome of the game wasn't a big surprise). I have seen NP this year. They have a quality young team that's still learning how to win consistently!

Augie #2 at the time loses in ot to Wash U by 5 (not a surprise to most d3 followers). The same Augie team that just beat NP by 17 with out NP's best player lost on the road to Carthage by 9 (That was a bit of a shocker by most CCIW followers or was it). Afterall, Carthage had just won 4 straight including an 8pt victory at Millikin.

IWU, the #13 ranked team at the time, loses a close game to Wash U. by 7 in St. Lou (that outcome did more to validate IWU's ranking than hurt it and I did not hear anyone screaming IWU is overrated on December 6th). Just last week, the same IWU team lost a close game to #1 ranked Wheaton by 4 in Wheaton (Once again did this road lost hurt IWU or was it expected?). Three nights later, this same IWU team lost at home to NCC by 7 and NCC missed 14 free throws in the game(This had to open some eyes not only in the CCIW but around the nation).

On Dec 20th, #10 Elmhurst beats #1 Wash U by 7 at home(Did this send shock waves throughout the country? I think not! Was anyone screaming Elmhurst was overrated then? No!). Elmhurst is the only team keeping Wash U. from being a unanimous #1 ranked team right now! Two weeks later #7 Elmhurst loses on the road to a hot Anderson team by 6 (a bit of a downer if you're a CCIW fan, but definitely not eyepopping if you're a d3 follower around the country). Besides, Anderson had won 5 in a row going in to that game and now their streak is up to 8! Most likely they would have been receiving votes had it not been for the holiday break. Afterall, that was the same Anderson team that lost at home to preseason ranked #7 Platteville by 2 and preseason #1 Wash U. by 2 (# 23 ranked Anderson's other lost is to Franklin by 10 on the road) I mention this because NCC had Franklin by 20 at home before the JV checked into the game. Now, after #10 Elmhurst loses a heart breaker to #7 Augie on the road and three nights later lose at home to Millikin in DOT all of sudden they're overrated(many CCIW observers felt EC should have won the game by the way. EC had a 9pt lead with 3min remaining at Augie only to succomb to a furious late game rally by the vikings! Was EC overrated Jan 7th? I didn't hear anything from the peanut gallery that night!)!

Are the North Carolina Tar heels not worthy of a top ten ranking because they've dropped two straight? Are they not one of the best teams in the ACC and/or nation because they are at the bottom of their league right now? Are the Boston Celtics no longer a favorite to win the NBA title because they've lost 7 out of 10? Good/Great teams do lose on a occasion! It happens!

Now I know that the scoring comparisons doesn't mean anything but it is what it is. Does the CCIW have 7 top 43 teams? Maybe, maybe not! I don't know! Sac and OxyBob don't know either and for them to suggest otherwise without a whole lot of merit doesn't sit well with me!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 13, 2009, 01:26:12 AM

Quote from: sciacguru on January 12, 2009, 10:19:45 PM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 12, 2009, 09:21:44 PM
Quote from: OxyBob on January 12, 2009, 09:04:54 PM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 12, 2009, 08:52:15 PM
Quote from: OxyBob on January 12, 2009, 08:42:55 PM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 12, 2009, 08:25:18 PM
By the way, Carthage just beat the #7 team in the county!
I saw Carthage play. Cal Lutheran manhandled them and won easily. Carthage was wholly ordinary. If the Red Men beat the so-called "#7 team in the county!" then the CCIW is even more overrated than I already knew.
Let me know the next time Cal Lutheran comes to the midwest and manhandles a CCIW team! From looking at this year's roster, that's the same CLU team minus its leading scorer from a year ago that beat my 10-15 cardinals last year in overtime. It took a game tying three pointer to force the overtime by the way! Did I mention NCC was without its best player at the time. So, spare me the overrated comments!
Bob,
I watched the Cal LU/Carthage game online. Maybe if Cal Lu came east of vegas the rest of the country would see how good they are or aren't!
Same roster???
Looks like CLU's roster had quite the turnaround, with 6 freshmen on the team, 2 which start. Only 2 starters returning (Meier, Knudsen), only 3 with significant playing experience.....with Fisher. Meier was the leading scorer last year...he has returned. CLU lost 3 Seniors (2, 3yr starters and solid utility player), another starter (6-6 manchild Owens), and backup PG (Gums) as well as 4 or 5 others.
This year's stats:
http://www.clusports.com/stats/mens_basketball/2008_2009/teamcume.htm

Last year's stats and team:
http://www.clusports.com/stats/mens_basketball/2007_2008/teamcume.htm#TEAM.IND

If you saw the game online....pass it on to your fellow CCIW'ers...or is there no internet in Illinois? Here is the link:
http://kadytv.com/CLU/clu_ibn.htm

I stand corrected with the roster. It was a guess! However, is CLU better this year?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 13, 2009, 02:26:40 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 07:29:27 PM
Quote from: sac on January 12, 2009, 07:24:39 PM
How about RIT.............last week no votes, this weekend make a last second 30 footer that may have been after the buzzer.........voila, Top 25 team. ???

I'm more bothered by the fact that the pollsters penalized Ithaca for that dubious outcome. The Bombers dropped 34 points and one slot in the poll for losing a game on a buzzer-beater that didn't actually beat the buzzer.

Greg,
I have to agree. Also thought Amherst losing to 3-6 Wesleyan(now 4-7) was much worse and would send them below Ithaca. Amherst's lofty ranking was gained by beating 6 teams with a combined 18-51 record. Talk about cupcake schedules and they barely beat 2 of those teams(2 pt. and 3 pt wins).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: OxyBob on January 13, 2009, 02:39:00 AM

Quote from: cardinalpride on January 13, 2009, 01:10:54 AM
Does the CCIW have 7 top 43 teams? Maybe, maybe not! I don't know! Sac and OxyBob don't know either and for them to suggest otherwise without a whole lot of merit doesn't sit well with me!

In addition to SCIAC teams Oxy, Cal Lutheran, Caltech, Pomona, and Claremont, so far here are the D-III teams I have seen play this season: Carthage, Lawrence, Buena Vista, Luther, Pacific Lutheran, Ripon, Messiah, Amherst, UMass-Dartmouth, Chapman, UC Santa Cruz and NYU-Poly, not a bad cross-section, I'd say. I base my opinion on what I see. You don't like what I have to say because it doesn't jive with your preconceived notion that the CCIW is the be-all and end-all of D-III basketball.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 13, 2009, 12:43:14 AM
Cal Lutheran-Carthage. Played Nov. 24, about 10 games ago for each. What have the teams done since? Recently, Cal Lu lost to Tufts and Carthage beat Augustana.

The old "We played you early in the season but now we'd beat you" excuse. You must be a Redlands football fan; that's also one of their favorites.

OxyBob

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 13, 2009, 02:48:40 AM

cardinalpride-- I didn't really look in depth at the Week 5 poll so thats why there is no criticism from me or comments. I have however made notes and comments throughout the year about teams that were ranked and others that weren't.

Such as Defiance being ranked with 3 losses, while Anderson not ranked......also had 3 losses 2 by 2pts to two of the best teams in D3, a win over Defiance and another win over a team that beat Defiance. ~~~ rankings like this make no sense to me

I've pointed out lots of teams that the pollsters might think about tracking, such as Ohio Northern who was 8-1 at the time, but there were 3 loss teams in the poll.

In the past I've been critical of the UAA having so many teams ranked, also been critical of how many Midwest/West teams are in the poll.........I like to believe that D3 is deeper than 20% of a polls teams being from one conference or worse 40% from one region, which has happened

I don't think its unfair to ask for explinations or reasoning behind how some people have voted. I do think 7 teams from one conference is in the extreme and deserves some debate.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 13, 2009, 02:55:56 AM

OB -- I noticed you didn't bother to refute the possibility that teams changed, merely name-called it.

Sorry you don't like it but yes, over the course of 10 games teams change. Ask Oxy -- they trailed La Sierra for much of the second half, never led by more than five (at 13-8) and won by three at home in their opener. Then they go on the road a month later and lead almost the entire game (last trailed at 17:36 of the first half) and lead by two possessions or more for almost the entire second half, putting it away at the end. Who's to say that two teams that played in November can't have a different result later in the season?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 13, 2009, 03:54:49 AM

Quote from: OxyBob on January 13, 2009, 02:39:00 AM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 13, 2009, 01:10:54 AM
Does the CCIW have 7 top 43 teams? Maybe, maybe not! I don't know! Sac and OxyBob don't know either and for them to suggest otherwise without a whole lot of merit doesn't sit well with me!

In addition to SCIAC teams Oxy, Cal Lutheran, Caltech, Pomona, and Claremont, so far here are the D-III teams I have seen play this season: Carthage, Lawrence, Buena Vista, Luther, Pacific Lutheran, Ripon, Messiah, Amherst, UMass-Dartmouth, Chapman, UC Santa Cruz and NYU-Poly, not a bad cross-section, I'd say. I base my opinion on what I see. You don't like what I have to say because it doesn't jive with your preconceived notion that the CCIW is the be-all and end-all of D-III basketball.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 13, 2009, 12:43:14 AM
Cal Lutheran-Carthage. Played Nov. 24, about 10 games ago for each. What have the teams done since? Recently, Cal Lu lost to Tufts and Carthage beat Augustana.

The old "We played you early in the season but now we'd beat you" excuse. You must be a Redlands football fan; that's also one of their favorites.

OxyBob

You know what OB, You win the CCIW probably doesn't deserve the recognition it gets. For all I know, you could be the President-Elect too. Afterall, he did attend Occidental for a couple of years! The Bob in your name could really mean Barack Obama! I wouldn't want to piss you off! Goodnight my friend! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ethelred the Unready on January 13, 2009, 05:38:34 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 11:09:29 PM
Quote from: Ethelred the Unready on January 12, 2009, 10:48:34 PM
This may be nitpicking, but I don't think the numbers support that particular statement. I would argue UR would be one of the two, not Chicago.

Chicago's won four UAA titles over the past decade, while Rochester's won two. Go back a dozen years, and Chicago's won six UAA titles to Rochester's two.

In this decade, UR is +17 over Chicago in conference wins, has an 11-3 lead in NCAA toournament wins and 2 appearances in the Final 4 to Chicago's 0.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 13, 2009, 10:53:47 AM

The last two items are partly because of the region Rochester plays in. It's easier to make the Final Four from the East than from the Midwest.

However, that first item is pretty much apples to apples.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 13, 2009, 11:20:33 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 12, 2009, 10:00:27 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 09:07:51 PM
b) The McHugh theory. As I've cited it before, it basically means that pollsters are loading the bottoms of their ballots with CCIW teams, because they're unsure of which ones are the good ones and they're just waiting for league play to sort it all out for them.

Greg, I think you mean the Gordan Mann theory...

http://d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2009/01/01/happy-new-season/

Damn - I was enjoying the fact I was getting credited with the theory - even though I knew I had read it some where else! :)

That being said, I think the "theory" is partially covered by what Pat said as well, most voters have two top CCIW teams in their ballots, but then debate about a third and everyone picks different teams. I bet Pat, Bob, and myself all have different #3's in the CCIW. The result: more than three are getting "votes."

As for the fact that Cal Lu isn't getting any respect, except for ONE win, I can't hang my hat on any other thing they have done this season. This isn't because I am dissing the team, but for the simple fact that on my recent ballots I have had at least 35 teams I am trying to squeeze into 25 slots. Obviously, that is 10 slots more than allowed, so I need to find reasons to eliminate or keep teams in my Top 25 - the reason I can't hang my hat on anything but one win back at the beginning of the season is keeping me from putting Cal Lu in my ballot.

Now, I can tell you that each season I get to a point with my ballot I pretty much "blow it up" and start over. The reason, I just need to start over with where I have teams positioned and why I have certain teams in certain places. Sometimes I think pollsters need to erase their previous polls from their heads and start over - it helps to reevaluate where teams should be.

By the way, I was on the verge of blowing my poll up this week, but didn't. But I see it happening in the next week or two.

Final note - major changes coming to Hoopsville. Announcement due in the next few days!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 13, 2009, 12:35:25 PM

After I read through the last three pages of posts, I realized that I hadn't paid sufficient attention to suggestions for "other teams to watch." I took OxyBob's comments as an implicit request to put Cal Lu back on the list, so if I am caught up, there are three teams on the list:

Hiram NCAC m
Milwaukee Engineering NATHC m
Cal Lutheran SCIAC m

Let me know if I missed anything.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 13, 2009, 01:06:12 PM

Quote from: Ethelred the Unready on January 13, 2009, 05:38:34 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2009, 11:09:29 PM
Quote from: Ethelred the Unready on January 12, 2009, 10:48:34 PM
This may be nitpicking, but I don't think the numbers support that particular statement. I would argue UR would be one of the two, not Chicago.

Chicago's won four UAA titles over the past decade, while Rochester's won two. Go back a dozen years, and Chicago's won six UAA titles to Rochester's two.

In this decade, UR is +17 over Chicago in conference wins, has an 11-3 lead in NCAA toournament wins and 2 appearances in the Final 4 to Chicago's 0.

True, but if you go back a dozen years then the advantage in conference wins is Chicago by a +5 margin. I should've used a dozen years as my original reference rather than a decade, since the dozen years encompasses the Derek Reich era.

As Pat said, the categories of D3 tourney wins and Final Four appearances are apples to oranges, given the drastically easier road to Salem that Rochester annually enjoys over either Wash U or Chicago.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: usee on January 13, 2009, 01:56:22 PM

Quote from: OxyBob on January 12, 2009, 08:42:55 PM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 12, 2009, 08:25:18 PM
By the way, Carthage just beat the #7 team in the county!

I saw Carthage play. Cal Lutheran manhandled them and won easily. Carthage was wholly ordinary. If the Red Men beat the so-called "#7 team in the county!" then the CCIW is even more overrated than I already knew.

OxyBob

Not that I want to get involved in this discussion for any reason other than enteratinment value but out of curiosity I watched the link to the Carthage/Cal Lu game today and I would say "manhandled" and "won easily" is at best an exaggeration of the game from what I could see. Cal Lu got out to a 10 pt lead in the first 6 minutes, played even the rest of the half to lead by11 at the break, led by 17 with about 11 min left and then Carthage came back (due largely to CLU inability to handle the press--21 turnovers) and with 4.22 to play it was a 5 pt game when Carthage lost Fendley (ejected) and Tolo (fouled out). Without 2 of their starters they they made Cal LU earn it but got hammered on the boards down the stretch without Tolo. I was impressed with Cal Lu as a team but from what I could tell I don't see them as significantly better than Carthage. Steve D. scored 38 pts and Cal Lu had no answer for him. I would bet if these two teams played 10 times they would be pretty close to a 5-5 split.

If Carthage, IWU, and NCC are "getting votes" I don't see why Cal Lu wouldn't be in that group as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 13, 2009, 04:48:20 PM

Quote from: cardinalpride on January 13, 2009, 01:10:54 AM
I don't know if the CCIW deserves 7 teams receiving votes!

I think something is lost in most of this discussion... it is simply the fact that 7 CCIW teams DON'T deserve to receive votes, probably, but the league is in a bit of an upheaval currently.

Wheaton was the top ranked team, preseason, based largely off of their NCAA run last year and the fact that they had so many guys back. Other teams were ranked comparatively. Augie has won 3 league titles in a row and has lots back. Elmhurst returned lots from last year. IWU is really young... but is largely intact from last year in a year that they beat Wheaton three times.

Carthage, Millikin, and North Central were not ranked preseason. They have earned their current votes by their performance this season.

Compare that with what has happened to the preseason-ranked CCIW teams:

#1 Wheaton (began year: #3) 13-0, gained 126 points. Combined opponents records are eight games below .500, but if you take away Staten Island and Chicago (combined 2-23) they'd be above .500, 13 games above (those may be a few games off... I'm trying to go off of this weekend's results that I had compiled and don't have the time to do it again).

#11 Augustana (began year: #2) 11-3, lost 257 points.

#20 Elmhurst (began year # 17, got at high as #7 twice), 9-4 lost 31 points.

ORV IWU (began year #18, got as high as #13) 8-5, lost 175 points (currently 8 votes)

ORV Carthage (30 votes) 10-3

ORV Millikin (7 votes) 10-2

ORV North Central (5 votes) 10-3

As can be seen here, Augie, Elmhurst, and IWU have slid compared to where they were preseason and to the spot they attained early in the year. They got to those places because there was so much turmoil in the top 25 early.

Carthage, Millikin, and North Central have risen to the ranks of the votees by their play. All three teams have 10 wins, and they've won some early CCIW games (Carthage is 2-0 over Augie and Millikin, Millikin is 1-1, beat Elmhurst and lost to Carthage, North Central is 2-0 over North Park and IWU). So we have a potential changing of the guards... 3 of the top 4 teams started off "on the radar" and they've slipped... 3 other teams started off "off the radar" and have gained prominence. And for the first time, we've got some interaction between these two groups of 3. The "off the radar" group has done better in head-to-head against the "on the radar" group... so it would make sense that they are getting some looks. The "on the radar group" may well be on their way off the top 25... but they were all pretty highly ranked... they likely would slip before disappearing completely.

I think it certainly is important to note that these are just votes on ballots... not the compilation of the ballots. A few posters may still have more faith in the "on the radar" group than the "off the radar" group. Conversely, a few posters may have more faith in the "off the radar" group now than the teams they ranked higher early on.

It's really tough for the voters... especially because so many teams that were initially thought to be in the top 25 fell from grace early on. That caused turmoil and caused some teams to rise and rise quickly... when they probably were more appropriate at their lower ranking in terms of placement on the top 25 (ex. Elmhurst... were they the #7 team in the country, or were they always just around #17... and they got to that ranking because others around them lost?)

There are some difficult things to factor in. There's been lots of interaction between top teams and common opponents... so much so that it's difficult to really make heads or tails of it. Elmhurst beat Wash U but lost to Point, who beat La Crosse, who beat Augustana (who also beat Elmhurst). Point lost to Carroll and Lawrence who have beaten and lost to a bunch of other teams. Throw in Platteville and Whitewater, who Point has beaten and who have beaten everybody else, except for St. Norberts and Mary Hardin Baylor, respectively...

And then you've got Wheaton and St. Thomas. Wheaton hasn't really been tested yet... but they will be in conference. But how good is the conference? The confidence that some people had in them early seems now to be unfounded due to recent results. And St. Thomas is relatively isolated... they've passed the tests they've had, but who have they really beaten?

I think the answer to all of these questions is... wait and see. We'll find out lots over the next 3-4 weeks and the last few regular season polls will be more accurate than these. And no matter how accurate they appear, upsets will still occur! But that's why we love this game, isn't it?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: OxyBob on January 13, 2009, 05:40:25 PM

Quote from: USee on January 13, 2009, 01:56:22 PM
Quote from: OxyBob on January 12, 2009, 08:42:55 PM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 12, 2009, 08:25:18 PM
By the way, Carthage just beat the #7 team in the county!
I saw Carthage play. Cal Lutheran manhandled them and won easily. Carthage was wholly ordinary. If the Red Men beat the so-called "#7 team in the county!" then the CCIW is even more overrated than I already knew.
I watched the link to the Carthage/Cal Lu game today and I would say "manhandled" and "won easily" is at best an exaggeration of the game from what I could see. Cal Lu got out to a 10 pt lead in the first 6 minutes, played even the rest of the half to lead by11 at the break, led by 17 with about 11 min left and then Carthage came back (due largely to CLU inability to handle the press--21 turnovers) and with 4.22 to play it was a 5 pt game when Carthage lost Fendley (ejected) and Tolo (fouled out). Without 2 of their starters they they made Cal LU earn it but got hammered on the boards down the stretch without Tolo. I was impressed with Cal Lu as a team but from what I could tell I don't see them as significantly better than Carthage. Steve D. scored 38 pts and Cal Lu had no answer for him.

Nothing like looking at a game through CCIW-colored glasses, I guess. Just so I'm clear, we are talking about the Carthage-Cal Lutheran game that was played on November 24, 2008, right? In that game, which I attended, Carthage led 7-5 after 2 minutes and never led again. CLU led by 13 at 10:00 of the first half and by 11 at the break. This is what you term "play[ing] even the rest of the half." In the second half, CLU had a 17 point lead at 11:00. Carthage made a run and got it down to 7. At 4:22 a double technical foul was called. Djurickovic made 2 FTs for Carthage, and Knudsen made 2 FTs for CLU, so CLU's lead remained at 7. This is what you term "a 5 pt game." A minute-forty and 4-0 later it was 11 and game over, never in doubt. Carthage's front line got hammered by Andy Meier & Co.: Adam Tolo was bageled and fouled out, Adam Stuart scored 6 and fouled out, and Richard Williams scored 4 and fouled out. Lucky for Eric Moore he only played 3 minutes and picked up 1 foul or he'd have been well on his way to fouling out, too. No "answer" for Djurickovic was necessary since there was no question as to the result. He is a mighty fine FT shooter, however.

OxyBob

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on January 13, 2009, 08:14:59 PM

Not a Top 25 topic, but I figured some of you smart guys can help. I read the front page of d3hoops about top scorers....where can I find all time D3 stats? I can find recent stats and seasons, but not an all-time....say top 20 in scoring, rebounds, blocks......and if someone can point me in the right direction I'd be curious to see the same stats for women.

It is probably right in front of my face....but I am too tired from The Eagles concert last night.....what a band!! Joe Walsh has more energy than me....

I digress....can anyone post a link for me?

Thanks!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 13, 2009, 08:53:55 PM

CNU85:

They are very large files, but you'll find them here.

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/ncaa?ContentID=36413

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: usee on January 13, 2009, 09:12:38 PM

Quote from: OxyBob on January 13, 2009, 05:40:25 PM
Quote from: USee on January 13, 2009, 01:56:22 PM
Quote from: OxyBob on January 12, 2009, 08:42:55 PM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 12, 2009, 08:25:18 PM
By the way, Carthage just beat the #7 team in the county!
I saw Carthage play. Cal Lutheran manhandled them and won easily. Carthage was wholly ordinary. If the Red Men beat the so-called "#7 team in the county!" then the CCIW is even more overrated than I already knew.
I watched the link to the Carthage/Cal Lu game today and I would say "manhandled" and "won easily" is at best an exaggeration of the game from what I could see. Cal Lu got out to a 10 pt lead in the first 6 minutes, played even the rest of the half to lead by11 at the break, led by 17 with about 11 min left and then Carthage came back (due largely to CLU inability to handle the press--21 turnovers) and with 4.22 to play it was a 5 pt game when Carthage lost Fendley (ejected) and Tolo (fouled out). Without 2 of their starters they they made Cal LU earn it but got hammered on the boards down the stretch without Tolo. I was impressed with Cal Lu as a team but from what I could tell I don't see them as significantly better than Carthage. Steve D. scored 38 pts and Cal Lu had no answer for him.

Nothing like looking at a game through CCIW-colored glasses, I guess. Just so I'm clear, we are talking about the Carthage-Cal Lutheran game that was played on November 24, 2008, right? In that game, which I attended, Carthage led 7-5 after 2 minutes and never led again. CLU led by 13 at 10:00 of the first half and by 11 at the break. This is what you term "play[ing] even the rest of the half." In the second half, CLU had a 17 point lead at 11:00. Carthage made a run and got it down to 7. At 4:22 a double technical foul was called. Djurickovic made 2 FTs for Carthage, and Knudsen made 2 FTs for CLU, so CLU's lead remained at 7. This is what you term "a 5 pt game." A minute-forty and 4-0 later it was 11 and game over, never in doubt. Carthage's front line got hammered by Andy Meier & Co.: Adam Tolo was bageled and fouled out, Adam Stuart scored 6 and fouled out, and Richard Williams scored 4 and fouled out. Lucky for Eric Moore he only played 3 minutes and picked up 1 foul or he'd have been well on his way to fouling out, too. No "answer" for Djurickovic was necessary since there was no question as to the result. He is a mighty fine FT shooter, however.

OxyBob

ToxicBob,

What's with the attitude? I can certainly tell you if you think I have CCIW colored glasses you haven't read many of my posts. I wouldn't have minded if Cal Lu beat Carthage by 100, let alone 6. I also wouldn't mind if Carthage didn't win another game as I am 21 turnovers and losing a 17 pt lead isn't exactly manhandling anybody. Carthage shot 38% and it wasn't because of the contested looks from what I could see. Cal Lu shot 52% in their own gym and won a game by 6. According to CLU's own broadcast team the game was certainly in doubt down the stretch and they both said multiple times that CLU couldn't guard Steve D.

You can keep your battered poster syndrome all you want. All I did was give a viewpoint that I thought Cal Lu and Carthage are pretty even at worst. You want to slant that as CCIW Bias when in fact I am promoting Cal LU. IF the voters think Carthage is top 40 then CLU certainly should be....I think that's what I said. CLU was certainly the better team that night but if they were so dominant they wouldn't have turned it over so much and let Carthage back in the game at the end. But if you don't think a 5 or 7 pt game with 4min left is still in doubt then you keep going to embellishment school and I'm sure everyone will believe CLU "waxed" the Redmen like you keep promoting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 13, 2009, 09:28:33 PM

Ithaca, victimized by "the buzzer beater that wasn't" on Sunday to ruin their perfect record, comes storming back at home to rip Potsdam St. 116-94. Bombers move to 13-1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 13, 2009, 09:51:08 PM

Quote from: CNU85 on January 13, 2009, 08:14:59 PM
Not a Top 25 topic, but I figured some of you smart guys can help. I read the front page of d3hoops about top scorers....where can I find all time D3 stats? I can find recent stats and seasons, but not an all-time....say top 20 in scoring, rebounds, blocks......and if someone can point me in the right direction I'd be curious to see the same stats for women.

It is probably right in front of my face....but I am too tired from The Eagles concert last night.....what a band!! Joe Walsh has more energy than me....

I digress....can anyone post a link for me?

Thanks!!!

The record book (which I assume is what was linked for you) is the best source. I guess we could copy and paste that stuff onto the site somewhere, and probably should, into our archives. But it's not something I really want to maintain, even as often as once a year, you know? :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 14, 2009, 08:36:15 PM

Augustana @ Wheaton, live video...

http://www.wheaton.edu/wetn/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 14, 2009, 09:40:06 PM

Wooster 79, Hiram 63 (http://athletics.wooster.edu/mb/boxes/2008-09/live/xlive.htm)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: April on January 14, 2009, 10:26:28 PM

Wheaton tops Augie by 8, holding on to an 8pt lead with Kent Raymond going down with 6.5mins to play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 15, 2009, 06:44:15 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25
#1 Wheaton (Ill.) (14-0): def. #11 Augustana, 79-71; 01/17 at #38 Millikin
#2 St. Thomas (13-0): def. St. John's, 86-55; 01/17 vs. Gustavus Adolphus
#3 Washington U. (11-1): 01/16 vs. Case Western Reserve; 01/18 vs. Emory
#4 UW-Stevens Point (12-2): def. UW-Stout, 78-58; 01/17 at UW-Superior
#5 Buena Vista (13-1): def. Dubuque, 66-62; 01/17 vs. Loras
#6 UW-Platteville (14-2): def. UW-La Crosse, 71-61
#7 UW-Whitewater (13-2): 01/17 at UW-Stout
#8 Capital (13-1): def. Heidelberg, 85-53; 01/17 at Otterbein
#9 Amherst (11-1): def. Babson, 62-55; 01/16 vs. Wesleyan; 01/17 vs. Connecticut College
#10 Trinity (Texas) (12-1): 01/16 at Birmingham-Southern; 01/17 at Rhodes
#11 Augustana (11-4): LOST at #1 Wheaton (Ill.), 71-79; 01/17 vs. T#39 North Central (Ill.)
#12 Puget Sound (11-2): 01/16 at #24 Whitworth; 01/17 at Whitman
#13 Ithaca (13-1): def. Potsdam State, 116-94; 01/16 at Hartwick
#14 Richard Stockton (14-2): def. Hunter, 100-60; 01/17 at Montclair State
#15 Mass-Dartmouth (12-1): def. Eastern Connecticut, 81-64; 01/17 vs. Plymouth State
#16 Elms (12-1): def. Wheelock, 96-68; 01/17 vs. Southern Vermont
#17 St. Norbert (10-1): 01/16 at Knox; 01/17 at Grinnell
#18 Roanoke (14-1): def. Guilford, 80-76; def. Bridgewater (Va.), 79-66; 01/17 vs. Washington and Lee
#19 Carnegie Mellon (11-2): IDLE
#20 Elmhurst (10-4): def. North Park, 88-76; 01/17 at #37 Illinois Wesleyan
#21 Franklin and Marshall (11-1): LOST at McDaniel, 57-66; 01/15 at Haverford; 01/17 at Muhlenberg
#22 Texas-Dallas (12-1): 01/15 vs. East Texas Baptist; 01/17 vs. LeTourneau
#23 Anderson (12-3): def. Bluffton, 81-73 OT; 01/17 at Transylvania
#24 Whitworth (11-2): 01/16 vs. #12 Puget Sound; 01/17 vs. Pacific Lutheran
#25 William Paterson (11-2): def. Ramapo, 67-53; 01/17 at Rutgers-Camden

Others receiving votes
#26 Gettysburg (9-2): def. Haverford, 71-62; 01/15 vs. Swarthmore; 01/17 vs. Ursinus
#27 St. Mary's (Md.) (11-3): LOST at York (Pa.), 97-101; 01/17 vs. Mary Washington
#28 Carthage (10-3): 01/15 vs. #37 Illinois Wesleyan; 01/17 at North Park
#29 Middlebury (12-2): 01/16 vs. Bates; 01/17 vs. Tufts
#30 Rochester (10-2): def. Keuka, 65-54; 01/16 vs. T#33 St. John Fisher (neutral site)
#31 DeSales (12-2): def. Manhattanville, 63-59; LOST at Delaware Valley, 70-72
#32 Centre (10-3): 01/16 vs. Colorado College; 01/17 vs. Austin
T#33 Salem State (11-2): def. Massachusetts College, 105-66; 01/17 vs. Westfield State
T#33 St. John Fisher (10-2): def. Roberts Wesleyan @ Nazareth, 72-55; 01/16 vs. #30 Rochester (neutral site); 01/17 at TBA
#35 Randolph-Macon (11-3): def. Eastern Mennonite, 82-73; 01/17 at Emory and Henry
#36 Carroll (9-3): def. Ripon, 99-95; 01/16 at Grinnell; 01/17 at Monmouth
#37 Illinois Wesleyan (8-5): 01/15 at #28 Carthage; 01/17 vs. #20 Elmhurst
#38 Millikin (10-2): 01/15 at T#39 North Central (Ill.); 01/17 vs. #1 Wheaton (Ill.)
T#39 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps (10-3): def. Cal Lutheran, 59-55; 01/17 vs. Occidental
T#39 North Central (Ill.) (10-3): 01/15 vs. #38 Millikin; 01/17 at #11 Augustana
T#39 Wilmington (11-4): def. Otterbein, 71-62; 01/17 at John Carroll
T#39 Worcester Polytech (11-3): def. Trinity (Conn.), 62-54; 01/17 vs. Clark
#43 Rochester Tech (8-4): LOST at Nazareth, 73-87; 01/16 vs. Brockport State; 01/17 vs. TBA @ TBD (neutral site)

Other teams to watch (as suggested by posters on this board)
--- Cal Lutheran (9-4): LOST at T#39 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 55-59; 01/17 vs. La Verne
--- Hiram (9-5): LOST at Wooster, 63-79; 01/17 vs. Denison
--- Milwaukee Engineering (10-3): def. Concordia (Wis.), 77-59; 01/15 at Concordia (Ill.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 15, 2009, 09:54:44 AM

no idea what link I hit on this page, but it went to this: http://break.com/classic-clips/sexy-french-game-show.html?ref=track54

honestly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 15, 2009, 10:16:22 AM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on January 15, 2009, 09:54:44 AM
no idea what link I hit on this page, but it went to this: http://break.com/classic-clips/sexy-french-game-show.html?ref=track54

honestly.

Gee, I wonder if that is one of Pat's new Google ads.

Do we need to report this to the moderator some time in the next 4-6 months?
:D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: usee on January 15, 2009, 11:35:34 AM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on January 15, 2009, 09:54:44 AM
no idea what link I hit on this page, but it went to this: http://break.com/classic-clips/sexy-french-game-show.html?ref=track54

honestly.

You must have hit Ralph's "Wooster Hiram" score link. That is really just a video clip of the Wooster chearleaders warming up before the game.

Honestly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 15, 2009, 12:52:08 PM

:o Wow--that video is totally NSFW (Not Students From Wooster (http://athletics.wooster.edu/cheerleaders/default.php), that is.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 15, 2009, 12:58:52 PM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on January 15, 2009, 09:54:44 AM
no idea what link I hit on this page, but it went to this: http://break.com/classic-clips/sexy-french-game-show.html?ref=track54

honestly.

I think what may have happened is that you accidentally hit the backspace key and your browser went back to the previous page you had been "researching."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 15, 2009, 01:24:41 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 14, 2009, 09:40:06 PM
Wooster 79, Hiram 63 (http://athletics.wooster.edu/mb/boxes/2008-09/live/xlive.htm)

http://athletics.wooster.edu/mb/boxes/2008-09/live/xlive.htm
Nope, not my Hiram-Wooster link! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 15, 2009, 01:26:19 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 15, 2009, 12:58:52 PM
Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on January 15, 2009, 09:54:44 AM
no idea what link I hit on this page, but it went to this: http://break.com/classic-clips/sexy-french-game-show.html?ref=track54

honestly.

I think what may have happened is that you accidentally hit the backspace key and your browser went back to the previous page you had been "researching."

+1! I believe he's got it!

Brilliant deduction, sir! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 15, 2009, 05:58:46 PM

I can honestly say I wasn't researching that... ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 15, 2009, 06:28:56 PM

Love the new poll. Do not love the exclusion of "The Air Up There."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 15, 2009, 06:47:22 PM

I didn't want the poll to have 25 options, though, this being the Top 25 board, it would've been appropriate! I also didn't have Air Bud...

Added, just for you

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 15, 2009, 06:56:45 PM

Hoosiers is my personal favorite of the bunch, but White Men Can't Jump is set in sunny Southern California. Perfect for a cold winters night.

4 degrees, windchill -16

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 15, 2009, 08:39:08 PM

I guarantee that Hell (MI - a hamlet about 25 miles from Ann Arbor) has frozen over! :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 16, 2009, 02:57:31 PM

Big match up out west tonight...

#12 Puget Sound travels to #24 Whitworth

Lets go Puget Sound

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: April on January 17, 2009, 09:20:03 PM

In the latest "OMG WHEATON LOST ANOTHER ALL AMERICAN" saga, Wheaton is currently up at Millikin by 12 at the half. Millikin is in foul trouble early, Wheaton shot 67% from the field in the first half. You can listen at www.wetn.org or watch live stats here (http://www.millikin.edu/athletics/livestats/xlive.htm)

Millikin is, of course, one of the 37 CCIW teams receiving votes. My guess/hope would be that they aren't after they lose this one. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ephoops on January 17, 2009, 11:25:34 PM

Hoosiers is my personal favorite....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 18, 2009, 03:18:33 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

The men's games ended early (only one game today), so here is the final report, in a slightly revised--and I hope improved--layout.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	618	Wheaton (Ill.)	15-0	def. #11 Augustana, 79-71; def. #38 Millikin, 61-47
#2	601	St. Thomas	14-0	def. St. John's, 86-55; def. Gustavus Adolphus, 70-49
#3	578	Washington U.	13-1	def. Case Western Reserve, 87-77; def. Emory, 79-58
#4	557	UW-Stevens Point	13-2	def. UW-Stout, 78-58; def. UW-Superior, 104-60
#5	487	Buena Vista	14-1	def. Dubuque, 66-62; def. Loras, 86-75
#6	482	UW-Platteville	14-2	def. UW-La Crosse, 71-61
#7	472	UW-Whitewater	14-2	def. UW-Stout, 99-71
#8	448	Capital	14-1	def. Heidelberg, 85-53; def. Otterbein, 79-60
#9	435	Amherst	13-1	def. Babson, 62-55; def. Wesleyan, 76-46; def. Connecticut College, 74-49
#10	347	Trinity (Texas)	14-1	def. Birmingham-Southern, 65-56; def. Rhodes, 83-77
#11	319	Augustana	12-4	LOST at #1 Wheaton (Ill.), 71-79; def. T#39 North Central (Ill.), 80-63
#12	301	Puget Sound	13-2	def. #24 Whitworth, 89-77; def. Whitman, 75-60
#13	283	Ithaca	14-1	def. Potsdam State, 116-94; def. Hartwick, 56-49
#14	244	Richard Stockton	15-2	def. Hunter, 100-60; def. Montclair State, 69-63
#15	227	Mass-Dartmouth	13-1	def. Eastern Connecticut, 81-64; def. Plymouth State, 94-61
#16	217	Elms	13-1	def. Wheelock, 96-68; def. Southern Vermont, 123-88
#17	208	St. Norbert	12-1	def. Knox, 64-53; def. Grinnell, 107-96
#18	180	Roanoke	14-2	def. Guilford, 80-76; def. Bridgewater (Va.), 79-66; LOST (at home) to Washington and Lee, 66-68
#19	175	Carnegie Mellon	11-2	IDLE
#20	156	Elmhurst	11-4	def. North Park, 88-76; def. #37 Illinois Wesleyan, 90-72
#21	137	Franklin and Marshall	13-1	LOST at McDaniel, 57-66; def. Haverford, 70-56; def. Muhlenberg, 60-59
#22	133	Texas-Dallas	14-1	def. East Texas Baptist, 76-61; def. LeTourneau, 60-59
#23	122	Anderson	12-4	def. Bluffton, 81-73 OT; LOST at Transylvania, 69-80
#24	113	Whitworth	12-3	LOST (at home) to #12 Puget Sound, 77-89; def. Pacific Lutheran, 88-60
#25	45	William Paterson	12-2	def. Ramapo, 67-53; def. Rutgers-Camden, 70-34

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	36	Gettysburg	11-2	def. Haverford, 71-62; def. Swarthmore, 66-51; def. Ursinus, 73-68
#27	32	St. Mary's (Md.)	12-3	LOST at York (Pa.), 97-101 OT; def. Mary Washington, 81-77 OT
#28	30	Carthage	11-4	LOST (at home) to #37 Illinois Wesleyan, 70-73; def. North Park, 73-65
#29	29	Middlebury	14-2	def. Bates, 73-65 OT; def. Tufts, 108-64
#30	26	Rochester	11-3	def. Keuka, 65-54; LOST (neutral site) to T#33 St. John Fisher, 66-71; def. Geneseo State, 81-63
#31	22	DeSales	12-2	def. Manhattanville, 63-59; LOST at Delaware Valley, 70-72
#32	15	Centre	12-3	def. Colorado College, 66-51; def. Austin, 77-59
T#33	14	Salem State	12-2	def. Massachusetts College, 105-66; def. Westfield State, 69-47
T#33	14	St. John Fisher	12-2	def. Roberts Wesleyan @ Nazareth, 72-55; def. #30 Rochester, 71-66; def. Nazareth, 76-71
#35	13	Randolph-Macon	12-3	def. Eastern Mennonite, 82-73; def. Emory and Henry, 93-76
#36	12	Carroll	11-3	def. Ripon, 99-95; def. Grinnell, 108-102; def. Monmouth, 79-66
#37	8	Illinois Wesleyan	9-6	def. #28 Carthage, 73-70; LOST (at home) to #20 Elmhurst, 72-90
#38	7	Millikin	10-4	LOST at T#39 North Central (Ill.), 55-66; LOST (at home) to #1 Wheaton (Ill.), 47-61
T#39	5	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	10-4	def. Cal Lutheran, 59-55; LOST (at home) to Occidental, 51-52
T#39	5	North Central (Ill.)	11-4	def. #38 Millikin, 66-55; LOST at #11 Augustana, 63-80
T#39	5	Wilmington	11-5	def. Otterbein, 71-62; LOST at John Carroll, 66-92
T#39	5	Worcester Polytech	12-3	def. Trinity (Conn.), 62-54; def. Clark, 91-82
#43	2	Rochester Tech	10-4	LOST at Nazareth, 73-87; def. Brockport State, 62-61; def. Roberts Wesleyan, 68-53

Other teams to watch (as suggested by posters on this board)

Rank	Team	W-L	Results
---	Cal Lutheran	10-4	LOST at T#39 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 55-59; def. La Verne, 73-61
---	Hiram	10-5	LOST at Wooster, 63-79; def. Denison, 74-46
---	Milwaukee Engineering	11-3	def. Concordia (Wis.), 77-59; def. Concordia (Ill.), 81-61

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 18, 2009, 03:22:43 PM

After seeing this nicely produced table by DarylNester, somewhere I'm sure a man in the heart of Ohio Amish country is banging his head on a table. ;) :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 18, 2009, 04:30:05 PM

Quote from: sac on January 18, 2009, 03:22:43 PM
After seeing this nicely produced table by DarylNester, somewhere I'm sure a man in the heart of Ohio Amish country is banging his head on a table. ;) :D

My close association with the Amish notwithstanding, I have never been opposed to progress. Darryl and Hoosier Titan (I'm not sure how the labor is distributed between them) are doing a wonderful job on this project. +k to both.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sciacguru on January 18, 2009, 09:26:16 PM

Quote from: USee on January 13, 2009, 09:12:38 PM
Quote from: OxyBob on January 13, 2009, 05:40:25 PM
Quote from: USee on January 13, 2009, 01:56:22 PM
Quote from: OxyBob on January 12, 2009, 08:42:55 PM
Quote from: cardinalpride on January 12, 2009, 08:25:18 PM
By the way, Carthage just beat the #7 team in the county!
I saw Carthage play. Cal Lutheran manhandled them and won easily. Carthage was wholly ordinary. If the Red Men beat the so-called "#7 team in the county!" then the CCIW is even more overrated than I already knew.
I watched the link to the Carthage/Cal Lu game today and I would say "manhandled" and "won easily" is at best an exaggeration of the game from what I could see. Cal Lu got out to a 10 pt lead in the first 6 minutes, played even the rest of the half to lead by11 at the break, led by 17 with about 11 min left and then Carthage came back (due largely to CLU inability to handle the press--21 turnovers) and with 4.22 to play it was a 5 pt game when Carthage lost Fendley (ejected) and Tolo (fouled out). Without 2 of their starters they they made Cal LU earn it but got hammered on the boards down the stretch without Tolo. I was impressed with Cal Lu as a team but from what I could tell I don't see them as significantly better than Carthage. Steve D. scored 38 pts and Cal Lu had no answer for him.

Nothing like looking at a game through CCIW-colored glasses, I guess. Just so I'm clear, we are talking about the Carthage-Cal Lutheran game that was played on November 24, 2008, right? In that game, which I attended, Carthage led 7-5 after 2 minutes and never led again. CLU led by 13 at 10:00 of the first half and by 11 at the break. This is what you term "play[ing] even the rest of the half." In the second half, CLU had a 17 point lead at 11:00. Carthage made a run and got it down to 7. At 4:22 a double technical foul was called. Djurickovic made 2 FTs for Carthage, and Knudsen made 2 FTs for CLU, so CLU's lead remained at 7. This is what you term "a 5 pt game." A minute-forty and 4-0 later it was 11 and game over, never in doubt. Carthage's front line got hammered by Andy Meier & Co.: Adam Tolo was bageled and fouled out, Adam Stuart scored 6 and fouled out, and Richard Williams scored 4 and fouled out. Lucky for Eric Moore he only played 3 minutes and picked up 1 foul or he'd have been well on his way to fouling out, too. No "answer" for Djurickovic was necessary since there was no question as to the result. He is a mighty fine FT shooter, however.

OxyBob

ToxicBob,

What's with the attitude? I can certainly tell you if you think I have CCIW colored glasses you haven't read many of my posts. I wouldn't have minded if Cal Lu beat Carthage by 100, let alone 6. I also wouldn't mind if Carthage didn't win another game as I am 21 turnovers and losing a 17 pt lead isn't exactly manhandling anybody. Carthage shot 38% and it wasn't because of the contested looks from what I could see. Cal Lu shot 52% in their own gym and won a game by 6. According to CLU's own broadcast team the game was certainly in doubt down the stretch and they both said multiple times that CLU couldn't guard Steve D.

You can keep your battered poster syndrome all you want. All I did was give a viewpoint that I thought Cal Lu and Carthage are pretty even at worst. You want to slant that as CCIW Bias when in fact I am promoting Cal LU. IF the voters think Carthage is top 40 then CLU certainly should be....I think that's what I said. CLU was certainly the better team that night but if they were so dominant they wouldn't have turned it over so much and let Carthage back in the game at the end. But if you don't think a 5 or 7 pt game with 4min left is still in doubt then you keep going to embellishment school and I'm sure everyone will believe CLU "waxed" the Redmen like you keep promoting.

I have been out and about and havent been able to respond/write at my normal rate, but I have to stick up for my Kingsmen. Sure "waxed" may not be the proper term, but they were the better and more dominant team. Granted 21 turnovers doesnt warrant a stellar evaluation but with the 21 turnovers they still beat a good Carthage team. And if some no name bench player doesnt come in and hit 3 3's and get a career high of 10 pts, then maybe "waxed" would be appropriate. As for not stopping Steve D, well who does??? His season low is 23 against the then #1 team in the country. How about them holding Fendley 10 pts below his average, holding Tolo scoreless and fouling him out? I think that is a pretty good performance defensively. And lets be honest, the way Steve D gets to the foul line, Carthage will be in every game. Let it be clear, I am not suggesting that CLU be in the top 25 or even get votes, but maybe some people should rethink the top 25 and their votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 18, 2009, 09:30:03 PM

A voter asked for DePauw to be added to the tracking report that I send out to them. Just FYI.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hoosier Titan on January 18, 2009, 11:28:55 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 18, 2009, 04:30:05 PM
Quote from: sac on January 18, 2009, 03:22:43 PM
After seeing this nicely produced table by DarylNester, somewhere I'm sure a man in the heart of Ohio Amish country is banging his head on a table. ;) :D
My close association with the Amish notwithstanding, I have never been opposed to progress. Darryl and Hoosier Titan (I'm not sure how the labor is distributed between them) are doing a wonderful job on this project. +k to both.

Darryl has done most of the "labor"--he wrote (and continues to refine) the program to generate these updates. I fill in when he's busy. I do think they're a wonderful way to keep up, and I thank David for showing us the example. It was interesting that Darryl and I started the project up again within a day of each other completely independently.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: April on January 19, 2009, 03:55:45 AM

Personally I just hope the CCIW results this week solidify what CCIW teams should be getting votes so we can get back down to a reasonable number like 3. :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: thundermike11 on January 19, 2009, 05:12:06 PM

I'm curious as to how Wheaton will be treated in the poll. Is it possible that the injury to Kent Raymond could cause Wheaton to drop even though to this point they are still undefeated. Any thoughts?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 19, 2009, 05:28:57 PM

+56 Gettysburg
+50 UMass Dartmouth
+48 Richard Stockton
+38 Puget Sound
+33 William Patterson
-22 DeSales
-23 Elms
-24 Rochester
-26 Carthage
-27 St. Mary's
-45 Roanoke
-55 Augustana
-63 Whitworth
-72 Franklin & Marshall
-85 Anderson

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 19, 2009, 05:31:00 PM

Number of teams that received votes by poll
Pre-53
1-51
2-51
3-44
4-42
5-42
6-43
7-39

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 19, 2009, 05:34:23 PM

Quote from: thundermike on January 19, 2009, 05:12:06 PM
I'm curious as to how Wheaton will be treated in the poll. Is it possible that the injury to Kent Raymond could cause Wheaton to drop even though to this point they are still undefeated. Any thoughts?

Well I'm posting this after the poll came out, but I couldn't see the voters dropping Wheaton because of Raymond's injury. Losses by Wheaton because of the injury will take care of their ranking. However, the selection committee could drop Wheaton, much like Cincinnati was hurt by Kenyon Martin's injury in 1999.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 19, 2009, 06:34:02 PM

Injuries aren't part of the selection committee's criteria in any fashion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 19, 2009, 06:55:26 PM

Quote from: sac on January 19, 2009, 06:34:02 PM
Injuries aren't part of the selection committee's criteria in any fashion.

And thank heaven for that! I'm STILL p!ssed off about the 1973 vote that sent OSU to the Rose Bowl when Michigan had out-played them but 'suffered' a 10-10 tie (leaving both undefeated). The excuse was the injury to qb Dennis Franklin, but he was healthy by the Rose Bowl. (And, of course, the Big Ten allowed no bowls other than the Rose in those days, so one of the best teams UM ever had stayed home entirely.)

It seems highly unlikely that Wheaton can long remain #1 without Raymond, but there is no way it should happen before they lose.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 19, 2009, 08:00:57 PM

Quote from: sac on January 19, 2009, 06:34:02 PM
Injuries aren't part of the selection committee's criteria in any fashion.

In the d3hoops subjective poll, injuries do, right? Not the NCAAs though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 19, 2009, 08:30:12 PM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on January 19, 2009, 08:00:57 PM
Quote from: sac on January 19, 2009, 06:34:02 PM
Injuries aren't part of the selection committee's criteria in any fashion.

In the d3hoops subjective poll, injuries do, right? Not the NCAAs though.

I'd expect the answer is probably yes, but it is to the voters' credit that Wheaton has not been 'punished' prematurely. My understanding of human nature tells me that if and when they lose, they may fall further than they would have if they still had Raymond.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 20, 2009, 12:16:44 AM

University of Ozarks beat UT-Dallas tonight in Dallas, 68-66.

Ozarks is a mature athletic team, that matches well with a disciplined half-court team like UT-Dallas.

UOzarks has two close non-region losses (Webster and Maryville MO) on a road trip to St Louis in November. (438 miles from Clarksville AR, on I-40, to St Louis). Ozarks also had a home win over Hendrix 64-61 to open the season. Ozarks also had the misfortune to catch to two tougher (ASC-West) travel pairs on the road in crossover play. They went 1-3 versus McM, UMHB Concordia-Austin and HSU whom they beat. Those road trips are both 500 miles from Clarksville, one way. (Ozarks to Texas-Dallas is 321 miles.)

This win re-affirms that the ASC-East is a five team race this year. The winner hosts the 8-team post-season tourney!

Parity! Just let the ASC settle out! :-\

It doesn't do much for Top 25 rankings, but the races are very competitive!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 20, 2009, 01:36:20 PM

Quote from: thundermike on January 19, 2009, 05:12:06 PM
I'm curious as to how Wheaton will be treated in the poll. Is it possible that the injury to Kent Raymond could cause Wheaton to drop even though to this point they are still undefeated. Any thoughts?

Wheaton won't drop until they actually lose. And should they lose sans Raymond, they might not actually fall as far as they would have, with him.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 20, 2009, 02:27:57 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 20, 2009, 01:36:20 PM
Quote from: thundermike on January 19, 2009, 05:12:06 PM
I'm curious as to how Wheaton will be treated in the poll. Is it possible that the injury to Kent Raymond could cause Wheaton to drop even though to this point they are still undefeated. Any thoughts?

Wheaton won't drop until they actually lose. And should they lose sans Raymond, they might not actually fall as far as they would have, with him.

Might depend on who they lose to and in what light the voters hold whatever CCIW team it turns out to be.

Next four, Carthage, Elmhurst @ North Central, @ Augustana, ...........2 are ranked, a third receiving votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 20, 2009, 02:59:21 PM

Or, they might drop and start edging back upward if Kent Raymond comes back and demonstrates that he's back to normal, or at least in the ballpark.

I know a couple of voters were pondering switching their No. 1 vote, but neither of them did.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 20, 2009, 06:00:11 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 20, 2009, 02:59:21 PM
or at least in the ballpark.

Ballpark? It ain't in no ballpark; It ain't in the same league; Heck, it ain't even in the same sport!

That's my Pulp Fiction quote for the day.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 20, 2009, 06:51:04 PM

Who voted for 13 Days in the poll? Twice the boom mic made a lengthy appearance in shots, but was less conspicuous than Costner's magical disappearing accent.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 20, 2009, 06:58:05 PM

Kenneth Massey just notified me that the rankings are now posted for all divisions at his site:

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb (http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb) (for men)
http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cbw (http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cbw) (for women)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 20, 2009, 07:39:11 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 20, 2009, 06:58:05 PM
Kenneth Massey just notified me that the rankings are now posted for all divisions at his site:

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb (http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb) (for men)
http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cbw (http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cbw) (for women)

Thanks for the link

One caution, they have Calvin 9-6 and are counting a game vs Ferris State as a loss. That was an exhibition game. So I have some questions about how accurate some things are.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 20, 2009, 08:40:34 PM

#9 Amherst falls to visiting Brandeis 73-58. Tied at 44 at the 10:20 mark, the Judges go on a 19-6 run to grab a 13 pt lead at 63-50 with 3:24 to play. The foul parade started soon after to account for the final score

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 20, 2009, 08:53:41 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 20, 2009, 08:40:34 PM
#9 Amherst falls to visiting Brandeis 73-58. Tied at 44 at the 10:20 the Judges go on a 19-6 run to grab a 13 pt lead at 63-50 with 3:24 to play. The foul parade started soon after to account for the final score

This was Amherst's chance to get a significant out of conference win (they do still have RIC near the end of the season on the road), but instead they ended up losing badly at home because of their poor play over the final 10 minutes. Their only out of conference wins against teams with winning records are now Lasell (9-4), Westfield State (9-6), and Babson (8-7), not exactly a who's who of top New England teams. With the NESCAC seemingly down this year (Massey has them ranked as the #15 conference in the country, behind #14 NEWMAC in NE), will their very subpar out of conference schedule come to haunt them come tournament time for seeding (or selection, if it comes to that). With two losses, it is obviously not time to panic, but if they drop a couple more games in conference and then lose to RIC, they could quickly find themselves with 5 or 6 losses and on the bubble.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 20, 2009, 09:05:16 PM

CMU finishes its out of conference schedule 10-1 with a 71-56 victory over Lycoming on the road. CMU hosts Chicago and WashU this weekend.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 20, 2009, 11:41:10 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 20, 2009, 08:53:41 PM
Quote from: magicman on January 20, 2009, 08:40:34 PM
#9 Amherst falls to visiting Brandeis 73-58. Tied at 44 at the 10:20 the Judges go on a 19-6 run to grab a 13 pt lead at 63-50 with 3:24 to play. The foul parade started soon after to account for the final score

This was Amherst's chance to get a significant out of conference win (they do still have RIC near the end of the season on the road), but instead they ended up losing badly at home because of their poor play over the final 10 minutes. Their only out of conference wins against teams with winning records are now Lasell (9-4), Westfield State (9-6), and Babson (8-7), not exactly a who's who of top New England teams. With the NESCAC seemingly down this year (Massey has them ranked as the #15 conference in the country, behind #14 NEWMAC in NE), will their very subpar out of conference schedule come to haunt them come tournament time for seeding (or selection, if it comes to that). With two losses, it is obviously not time to panic, but if they drop a couple more games in conference and then lose to RIC, they could quickly find themselves with 5 or 6 losses and on the bubble.

RIC is not having the best year so far and it doesn't look to improve with more conference games. Amherst could have a very weak non-con schedule this year, even for them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 21, 2009, 01:21:21 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 20, 2009, 11:41:10 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 20, 2009, 08:53:41 PM
Quote from: magicman on January 20, 2009, 08:40:34 PM
#9 Amherst falls to visiting Brandeis 73-58. Tied at 44 at the 10:20 the Judges go on a 19-6 run to grab a 13 pt lead at 63-50 with 3:24 to play. The foul parade started soon after to account for the final score

This was Amherst's chance to get a significant out of conference win (they do still have RIC near the end of the season on the road), but instead they ended up losing badly at home because of their poor play over the final 10 minutes. Their only out of conference wins against teams with winning records are now Lasell (9-4), Westfield State (9-6), and Babson (8-7), not exactly a who's who of top New England teams. With the NESCAC seemingly down this year (Massey has them ranked as the #15 conference in the country, behind #14 NEWMAC in NE), will their very subpar out of conference schedule come to haunt them come tournament time for seeding (or selection, if it comes to that). With two losses, it is obviously not time to panic, but if they drop a couple more games in conference and then lose to RIC, they could quickly find themselves with 5 or 6 losses and on the bubble.

RIC is not having the best year so far and it doesn't look to improve with more conference games. Amherst could have a very weak non-con schedule this year, even for them.

Well, RIC's year just got a little better as they went on the road to beat conference rival #14 Mass-Dartmouth Tuesday night 69-66. RIC is now 11-4 and tied for 1st in the LEC.
But I agree Amherst DOES have a very weak non-conference schedule. 8 teams with losing records in their 13 non-con games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: April on January 21, 2009, 03:16:11 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 20, 2009, 06:51:04 PM

Who voted for 13 Days in the poll? Twice the boom mic made a lengthy appearance in shots, but was less conspicuous than Costner's magical disappearing accent.

That would be me.

I really don't like any president movies much, though I do love the TV drama "West Wing" with a passion. I almost wanted to vote for "An American President" just cause it has Martin Sheen in it. However, Martin sheen looks so ridiculously out of place as Michael Douglas's mere Chief of Staff rather than holding his rightful place as the leader of the free world.

So why Thirteen Days?

#1 It's critically acclaimed, I am not the only one who thinks it's a good movie (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/thirteen_days/?critic=creamcrop).
#2 It portrays a very important period in US history. It adequately captures the humanity of the people in power, and yet is idealistic enough to inspire.
#3 I actually didn't even remember it had Kevin Costner in it. However it does have the house majority(minority?) leader from the West Wing on it, playing Robert Kennedy. He's a great actor. :D

I like Will Smith and all, but seriously? That is not an important film. It was a fun summer block buster, but it doesn't make you contemplate humanity years after you watch it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: OshDude on January 21, 2009, 04:11:13 AM

President poll ... Other: The War Room.
Don't remember what board had the basketball movie poll, but to not include Hoop Dreams and The Heart of the Game must have been an oversight. See those if you have not. Hoop Dreams is in my top five movies of all time. Then again I like documentaries.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 21, 2009, 10:37:59 AM

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi182.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fx174%2Ffollowfocus%2FTony%2520Nigro%2F2007%2FFail-Safe--09-01-2007.jpg&hash=e51c65544d02410cfb4f6ae9fc039d69426b1791) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fail-Safe_(1964_film))

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 21, 2009, 10:55:25 AM

Should I be concerned I've only seen 2 1/2 of those movies?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 21, 2009, 11:11:03 AM

Quote from: sac on January 21, 2009, 10:55:25 AM
Should I be concerned I've only seen 2 1/2 of those movies?

I've only seen one of them, as far as I can recall.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on January 21, 2009, 01:09:35 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 21, 2009, 11:11:03 AM
Quote from: sac on January 21, 2009, 10:55:25 AM
Should I be concerned I've only seen 2 1/2 of those movies?
I've only seen one of them, as far as I can recall.

I hope its JFK!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 21, 2009, 01:13:41 PM

I've only seen three (Independence Day, Airforce 1 and An American President) but I was moderately surprised that All the Presidents Men didn't make the cut.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: OxyBob on January 21, 2009, 01:21:46 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 21, 2009, 11:11:03 AM
Quote from: sac on January 21, 2009, 10:55:25 AM
Should I be concerned I've only seen 2 1/2 of those movies?
I've only seen one of them, as far as I can recall.

Best "President" movie: Duck Soup.

http://www.earthstation1.com/Marx_BrosFiles/dsbadoff.wav

OxyBob

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dennis_Prikkel on January 21, 2009, 01:25:27 PM

Quote from: OxyBob on January 21, 2009, 01:21:46 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 21, 2009, 11:11:03 AM
Quote from: sac on January 21, 2009, 10:55:25 AM
Should I be concerned I've only seen 2 1/2 of those movies?
I've only seen one of them, as far as I can recall.

Best "President" movie: Duck Soup.

http://www.earthstation1.com/Marx_BrosFiles/dsbadoff.wav

OxyBob

Hail, Hail Fredonia

(I almost went there).

DGP

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dennis_Prikkel on January 21, 2009, 01:27:11 PM

Presidential movies:

Seven Days in May
All the President's Men
Clear and Present Danger

dgp

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on January 21, 2009, 03:21:11 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 20, 2009, 01:36:20 PM
Quote from: thundermike on January 19, 2009, 05:12:06 PM
I'm curious as to how Wheaton will be treated in the poll. Is it possible that the injury to Kent Raymond could cause Wheaton to drop even though to this point they are still undefeated. Any thoughts?

Wheaton won't drop until they actually lose. And should they lose sans Raymond, they might not actually fall as far as they would have, with him.

Completely agree. A loss without Raymond likely drops Wheaton 3-5 spots at most. I would think the voters would be looking for a trend to develop first prior to any significant change.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 21, 2009, 03:48:07 PM

Quote from: iwumichigander on January 21, 2009, 03:21:11 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 20, 2009, 01:36:20 PM
Quote from: thundermike on January 19, 2009, 05:12:06 PM
I'm curious as to how Wheaton will be treated in the poll. Is it possible that the injury to Kent Raymond could cause Wheaton to drop even though to this point they are still undefeated. Any thoughts?

Wheaton won't drop until they actually lose. And should they lose sans Raymond, they might not actually fall as far as they would have, with him.
Completely agree. A loss without Raymond likely drops Wheaton 3-5 spots at most. I would think the voters would be looking for a trend to develop first prior to any significant change.

IMO, voters and fans usually put way too much emphasis on wins and loses in selecting the order of the Top 25. Without Kent Raymond, Wheaton is still a very good team but are they still the best in the country? Would you expect Wheaton to beat all of the other teams in the top 5 without Raymond? If you can answer "Yes" to both of these questions then Wheaton is still your #1 team. These are questions that should be asked on a weekly basis in addition to the usual W/L comparison.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HopeConvert on January 21, 2009, 04:14:59 PM

I clicked "other" in favor of John Ford's Young Mr. Lincoln. While it examines Lincoln's life prior to his presidency, Ford highlights the qualities in Lincoln's character that arguably made him a good President. It's a terrific piece of film-making.

That's right: I'm choosing a combination of Ford and Lincoln. Part of my plan to get the auto-industry up and running.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 21, 2009, 04:24:05 PM

Quote from: HopeConvert on January 21, 2009, 04:14:59 PM
That's right: I'm choosing a combination of Ford and Lincoln. Part of my plan to get the auto-industry up and running.

How mercurial of you.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HopeConvert on January 21, 2009, 04:26:19 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 21, 2009, 04:24:05 PM
Quote from: HopeConvert on January 21, 2009, 04:14:59 PM
That's right: I'm choosing a combination of Ford and Lincoln. Part of my plan to get the auto-industry up and running.
How mercurial of you.

Just trying to keep my Focus.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 21, 2009, 04:29:04 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 21, 2009, 03:48:07 PM
IMO, voters and fans usually put way too much emphasis on wins and loses in selecting the order of the Top 25. Without Kent Raymond, Wheaton is still a very good team but are they still the best in the country? Would you expect Wheaton to beat all of the other teams in the top 5 without Raymond? If you can answer "Yes" to both of these questions then Wheaton is still your #1 team. These are questions that should be asked on a weekly basis in addition to the usual W/L comparison.

KnightSlappy - you raise a good point, but the wins and loses still come into play. I certainly debated about moving Wheaton to a new spot on my ballot this week, but I ultimately decided that I wasn't going to punish let alone assume the team was worse then in the position I had them until it was proven to me otherwise. Sure, my thought is that Wheaton probably isn't as good without Raymond, but many teams have sometimes proven they are just as good when a major contributor has gone down. So to decided in advance that they should be moved downward in my poll before they had a chance to really prove one way or another.

I realize this may not be the best comparison, but remember last year when Wash U lost Sean Wallis to a season-ending injury just a few games into the season? No one knew what to expect from them and while they certainly lost a couple of games (moving them down in the rankings), they ultimately won the national title. Who says that without Raymond for a few weeks or the season Wheaton can't find a way to do the same thing. So until they start showing they are a different team essentially (besides on paper), I wasn't able to convince myself to make the move on Wheaton.

I hope that made sense!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 21, 2009, 04:38:04 PM

I am not afraid to move teams down on my ballot who haven't lost, but I won't move a team down solely based on an injury.

If Wheaton had struggled to win at Millikin, though, without Raymond, then the Thunder would have moved down my ballot.

A team that moved down my ballot without losing was Buena Vista.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 21, 2009, 04:58:38 PM

Yeah - that is a good point. I have moved teams down who haven't lost or played, but that usually means I had another team I wanted to put in their place, not solely because I wanted to just move a team down. However, moving a team due to injury alone is what I was trying to get at.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 21, 2009, 06:18:14 PM

Best presidential movie: Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 21, 2009, 06:20:49 PM

d-mac and Pat,
Your methods aren't wrong, my point was that there are other ways to look at the situation as well. Some people seem to say that you can't move a team down without losing (I especially hear this with college football). IMO, a ranking isn't a prize to be won or lost necessarily. It is more of a measure of the voters confidence in the team. If my confidence in Wheaton goes down without Kent, I may move them down. That being said, if they lose without him I may move them back up when/if he returns to his usual effectiveness.

It's certainly not wrong to keep Wheaton #1, I am just trying to say that it isn't wrong for a voter to drop them a place or two.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: April on January 21, 2009, 09:15:20 PM

I hope we never have an unrelated poll at the top of this board ever again. The pedestrian comments are kinda frustrating even though I am partially to blame. :-\

Wheaton is up by 12 at home vs Carthage at the half.

They're holding Carthage's star player to a miraculous 2 pts through the first half (thus far this season Steve D has averaged 30.2ppg).

Carthage is shooting a mere 25% from the field to Wheaton's 50% (60% from 3pt range).

Live Stats: http://livestats.internetconsult.com/wheaton/mbball/
TV Broadcast: http://www.wetn.org

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 21, 2009, 10:12:40 PM

Carthage comes from 14 down at the half to knock of #1 Wheaton 55-54.

...Now it might be appropriate to talk about what to do with Wheaton...

Up north, Platteville knocks off WW 86-78

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 21, 2009, 10:45:45 PM

Quote from: April on January 21, 2009, 09:15:20 PM
I hope we never have an unrelated poll at the top of this board ever again. The pedestrian comments are kinda frustrating even though I am partially to blame. :-\

Wheaton is up by 12 at home vs Carthage at the half.

They're holding Carthage's star player to a miraculous 2 pts through the first half (thus far this season Steve D has averaged 30.2ppg).

Carthage is shooting a mere 25% from the field to Wheaton's 50% (60% from 3pt range).

Live Stats: http://livestats.internetconsult.com/wheaton/mbball/
TV Broadcast: http://www.wetn.org

Steve D's previous low on the season was 23, but he was held to 17 on the night (15 in the 2nd half). It didnt matter though, Wheaton just couldnt make their FTs tonight, finishing 11-24 from the line...they had been 79.6% on the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HopeConvert on January 21, 2009, 11:45:11 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 21, 2009, 06:18:14 PM
Best presidential movie: Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb

Great movie, but I'm not sure about the genre classification.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 22, 2009, 12:05:00 AM

Quote from: HopeConvert on January 21, 2009, 11:45:11 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 21, 2009, 06:18:14 PM
Best presidential movie: Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb

Great movie, but I'm not sure about the genre classification.

Why wouldn't it be a "president" movie? Just because amusingly-named Pres. Merkin Muffley wasn't exactly an inspiring leader shouldn't disqualify the whole movie. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 22, 2009, 12:25:50 AM

Quote from: HopeConvert on January 21, 2009, 11:45:11 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 21, 2009, 06:18:14 PM
Best presidential movie: Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb

Great movie, but I'm not sure about the genre classification.

It's got far more presidential screen time than All the President's Men. Plus fighting in the war room! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 22, 2009, 06:53:39 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	618	Wheaton (Ill.)	15-1	LOST (at home) to #36 Carthage, 54-55; 01/24 vs. #19 Elmhurst
#2	602	St. Thomas	16-0	def. Hamline, 64-59; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 83-61; 01/24 at St. Olaf
#3	578	Washington U.	13-1	01/23 at T#37 Rochester; 01/25 at #18 Carnegie Mellon
#4	540	UW-Stevens Point	14-2	def. UW-Eau Claire, 80-60; 01/24 vs. UW-Oshkosh
#5	483	UW-Platteville	15-2	def. #7 UW-Whitewater, 86-78; 01/24 at UW-Stout
#6	478	Buena Vista	15-2	LOST at Wartburg, 66-80; def. Luther, 66-51; 01/24 vs. Simpson
#7	461	UW-Whitewater	14-3	LOST at #5 UW-Platteville, 78-86; 01/24 vs. UW-Superior
#8	444	Capital	15-1	def. Marietta, 84-75; 01/24 vs. Baldwin-Wallace
#9	436	Amherst	13-2	LOST (at home) to Brandeis, 58-73; 01/24 at Trinity (Conn.)
#10	372	Trinity (Texas)	14-1	01/23 vs. Sewanee; 01/25 vs. Oglethorpe
#11	339	Puget Sound	13-2	01/23 vs. Pacific; 01/24 vs. Willamette
#12	305	Ithaca	14-1	01/25 at Stevens
#13	292	Richard Stockton	16-2	def. Rowan, 83-62; 01/24 at New Jersey City
#14	277	Mass-Dartmouth	13-2	LOST (at home) to Rhode Island College, 66-69; 01/24 at Western Connecticut
#15	264	Augustana	13-4	def. Millikin, 51-43; 01/24 vs. Illinois Wesleyan
#16	260	Elms	14-1	def. Lesley, 72-37; 01/24 at Wheelock
#17	240	St. Norbert	12-1	01/23 vs. Illinois College; 01/24 vs. Knox
#18	178	Carnegie Mellon	12-2	def. Lycoming, 71-56; 01/23 vs. Chicago; 01/25 vs. #3 Washington U.
#19	162	Elmhurst	12-4	def. North Central (Ill.), 72-66; 01/24 at #1 Wheaton (Ill.)
#20	147	Texas-Dallas	14-2	LOST (at home) to University of the Ozarks, 66-68; 01/22 at Texas-Tyler
#21	135	Roanoke	15-2	def. Randolph, 76-66; 01/24 vs. Virginia Wesleyan
#22	92	Gettysburg	12-2	def. #24 Franklin and Marshall, 73-66; 01/24 at Haverford
#23	78	William Paterson	14-2	def. Baruch, 70-65; def. Rutgers-Newark, 71-54; 01/24 at New Jersey
#24	65	Franklin and Marshall	13-2	LOST (at home) to #22 Gettysburg, 66-73; 01/24 vs. McDaniel
#25	51	Middlebury	14-2	01/23 at Connecticut College; 01/24 at Wesleyan

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	50	Whitworth	13-3	def. Whitman, 101-70; 01/23 at Lewis and Clark
#27	37	Anderson	13-4	def. Manchester, 100-62; 01/24 vs. Franklin
#28	35	St. John Fisher	12-2	01/23 at Alfred; 01/24 vs. Nazareth
#29	25	Salem State	13-2	def. Framingham State, 97-75; 01/22 vs. Fitchburg State; 01/24 vs. Bridgewater State
#30	21	Randolph-Macon	12-4	LOST at Virginia Wesleyan, 76-82; 01/24 vs. Randolph
#31	20	Centre	12-3	01/23 at Hendrix; 01/25 at Millsaps
#32	10	Carroll	11-3	01/23 vs. Knox; 01/24 vs. Grinnell
T#33	7	DePauw	12-4	01/23 at Millsaps; 01/25 at Hendrix
T#33	7	Worcester Polytech	13-3	def. Babson, 69-65; 01/24 at Wheaton (Mass.)
#35	5	St. Mary's (Md.)	13-3	def. Gallaudet, 84-59; 01/24 at Wesley
#36	4	Carthage	12-4	def. #1 Wheaton (Ill.), 55-54; 01/24 at North Central (Ill.)
T#37	2	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	10-5	LOST at Pomona-Pitzer, 51-66; 01/24 at La Verne
T#37	2	Rochester	11-3	01/23 vs. #3 Washington U.; 01/25 vs. Chicago
#39	1	Chapman	13-2	01/23 at La Sierra; 01/24 vs. University of Dallas (neutral site); 01/25 at UC Santa Cruz

Other teams to watch (as suggested by posters on this board)

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
---	---	Cal Lutheran	11-4	def. Caltech, 77-52; 01/24 vs. Redlands
---	---	Hiram	11-5	def. Allegheny, 65-61; 01/24 at Oberlin
---	---	Milwaukee Engineering	12-3	def. Wisconsin Lutheran, 88-76; 01/22 vs. Dominican; 01/24 vs. Lakeland

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: oldchap on January 22, 2009, 05:31:12 PM

I would seriously recommend Pomona as a team to watch. Their record doesn't show it, simply because 3 of their best players were studying abroad during the first semester. As a consequence,their pre-season was mediocre at best. They have since won 5 straight and beat Claremont, which is currently ranked #37, and are undefeated in the Conference so far. It remains to be seen, but they could be the runaway team in the SCIAC this year and win it all.

On a side note, I am glad that Chapman is finally getting some recognition. I know that their Strength of Schedule could be better, but this year I believe that they deserve to make it to the playoff, and maybe, who knows, have a nice run...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 22, 2009, 07:55:38 PM

Nice work Darryl!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 22, 2009, 09:15:26 PM

Quote from: oldchap on January 22, 2009, 05:31:12 PM
I would seriously recommend Pomona as a team to watch. Their record doesn't show it, simply because 3 of their best players were studying abroad during the first semester. As a consequence,their pre-season was mediocre at best. They have since won 5 straight and beat Claremont, which is currently ranked #37, and are undefeated in the Conference so far. It remains to be seen, but they could be the runaway team in the SCIAC this year and win it all.

On a side note, I am glad that Chapman is finally getting some recognition. I know that their Strength of Schedule could be better, but this year I believe that they deserve to make it to the playoff, and maybe, who knows, have a nice run...

Oldchap,

Does Pomona's coaches really let their players go study abroad and miss the first part of the season? I am pretty suprised by that. Not only would not be midseason form or rusty. But it seems like it could really throw a wrench in the chemistry of the team. If I was a guy on the team that was now going to lose mins because some guy went abroad and now is back and ready to play I would be upset. You have already put all the time and effort in.

I am pretty familar with the teams in the NWC, especially Puget Sound, and I don't think I have heard of a player doing that.

Anyone else have thoughts on this?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 22, 2009, 09:27:44 PM

Sometimes education and experience is more important than sports...especially if you only miss a semester of it. As much as I loved playing my college sport, if I had a chance/money to do it, I wouldn't hesitate to go abroad.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ephoops on January 22, 2009, 10:09:50 PM

How far does Amhesrt drop with its loss to Branseis?

It looks like the Northeast is wide open this year...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 22, 2009, 10:13:20 PM

Quote from: LogShow on January 22, 2009, 09:15:26 PM
Quote from: oldchap on January 22, 2009, 05:31:12 PM
I would seriously recommend Pomona as a team to watch. Their record doesn't show it, simply because 3 of their best players were studying abroad during the first semester. As a consequence,their pre-season was mediocre at best. They have since won 5 straight and beat Claremont, which is currently ranked #37, and are undefeated in the Conference so far. It remains to be seen, but they could be the runaway team in the SCIAC this year and win it all.

On a side note, I am glad that Chapman is finally getting some recognition. I know that their Strength of Schedule could be better, but this year I believe that they deserve to make it to the playoff, and maybe, who knows, have a nice run...

Oldchap,

Does Pomona's coaches really let their players go study abroad and miss the first part of the season? I am pretty suprised by that. Not only would not be midseason form or rusty. But it seems like it could really throw a wrench in the chemistry of the team. If I was a guy on the team that was now going to lose mins because some guy went abroad and now is back and ready to play I would be upset. You have already put all the time and effort in.

I am pretty familar with the teams in the NWC, especially Puget Sound, and I don't think I have heard of a player doing that.

Anyone else have thoughts on this?

I have heard of players taking an entire season off for study abroad, but not returning in the middle of the season (for the reasons you outlined). There was also a case a couple of years back at MIT, where a player took 1 month off in the middle of the season (January) to do an internship and he was not allowed to return to the team that season (and a player vote had to be taken to allow him to return the following season). I agree with you, something like that could really mess with team chemistry unless everyone on the team are very good friends, including the players coming back.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: oldchap on January 23, 2009, 01:42:09 AM

Quote from: LogShow on January 22, 2009, 09:15:26 PM
Does Pomona's coaches really let their players go study abroad and miss the first part of the season? I am pretty suprised by that. Not only would not be midseason form or rusty. But it seems like it could really throw a wrench in the chemistry of the team. If I was a guy on the team that was now going to lose mins because some guy went abroad and now is back and ready to play I would be upset. You have already put all the time and effort in.

I am pretty familar with the teams in the NWC, especially Puget Sound, and I don't think I have heard of a player doing that.

Anyone else have thoughts on this?

I don't know the Pomona coach very well, but it seems that Pomona being a top 10 College Nationwide (according to World and News Report), high achievement in academics is at least as important (if not more) as excelling in basketball. In the case of the 3 returning players, first they were probably juniors or seniors, therefore well adapted to the team already, and they were also key players (starters) in the Pomona team. Pomona's playing style is not so based on set plays or a very rigid system. It's a more fluid, more "spontaneous" basketball and the outside shooters are generally very good. So, they probably got back into it pretty quickly. The fact that they beat Claremont this year is no small feat, in my opinion. They wouldn't have been able to do it without these 3 returning players.

As for Chapman, I know for a fact that the coach allows for occasionally missing a practice because of a class, but would not allow any players going away for any length of time during the season. That would be the end of their basketball career at Chapman for sure!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 23, 2009, 04:06:39 PM

Quote from: oldchap on January 22, 2009, 05:31:12 PM
I would seriously recommend Pomona as a team to watch. Their record doesn't show it, simply because 3 of their best players were studying abroad during the first semester. As a consequence,their pre-season was mediocre at best.

You mean "non-conference", not preseason.

(Hey, this is the first time that I've had to post this notice in about two months. My campaign to nag and nitpick over this point must be having an effect. ;) :D)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 23, 2009, 08:42:39 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 23, 2009, 04:06:39 PM
Quote from: oldchap on January 22, 2009, 05:31:12 PM
I would seriously recommend Pomona as a team to watch. Their record doesn't show it, simply because 3 of their best players were studying abroad during the first semester. As a consequence,their pre-season was mediocre at best.

You mean "non-conference", not preseason.

(Hey, this is the first time that I've had to post this notice in about two months. My campaign to nag and nitpick over this point must be having an effect. ;) :D)

affect or effect? jk :D ;)

af⋅fect1 /v. əˈfɛkt; n. ˈæfɛkt/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [v. uh-fekt; n. af-ekt] Show IPA Pronunciation

–verb (used with object) 1. to act on; produce an effect or change in

I really can't believe they use the word effect to define affect. ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 23, 2009, 10:49:08 PM

Quote from: sac on January 23, 2009, 08:42:39 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 23, 2009, 04:06:39 PM
Quote from: oldchap on January 22, 2009, 05:31:12 PM
I would seriously recommend Pomona as a team to watch. Their record doesn't show it, simply because 3 of their best players were studying abroad during the first semester. As a consequence,their pre-season was mediocre at best.

You mean "non-conference", not preseason.

(Hey, this is the first time that I've had to post this notice in about two months. My campaign to nag and nitpick over this point must be having an effect. ;) :D)

affect or effect? jk :D ;)

af⋅fect1 /v. əˈfɛkt; n. ˈæfɛkt/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [v. uh-fekt; n. af-ekt] Show IPA Pronunciation

–verb (used with object) 1. to act on; produce an effect or change in

I really can't believe they use the word effect to define affect. ???

http://ancienthistory.about.com/od/glossaries/f/082108AffectEff.htm

It's all Latin. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 24, 2009, 12:38:33 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 23, 2009, 04:06:39 PM
Quote from: oldchap on January 22, 2009, 05:31:12 PM
I would seriously recommend Pomona as a team to watch. Their record doesn't show it, simply because 3 of their best players were studying abroad during the first semester. As a consequence,their pre-season was mediocre at best.

You mean "non-conference", not preseason.

(Hey, this is the first time that I've had to post this notice in about two months. My campaign to nag and nitpick over this point must be having an effect. ;) :D)

Sager, do you have a computer program the picks out when a poster mixes up preseason and noncoference? I don't know if you have ever missed one on any of the boards...lol. You could have been an editor :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 24, 2009, 05:48:57 PM

Big UAA and Top 25 game tomorrow as #18 CMU hosts #3 WashU. The game is at noon and will be webcast live at:

http://www.cmu.edu/athletics/video/webcast.html

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 24, 2009, 11:45:25 PM

Quote from: LogShow on January 24, 2009, 12:38:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 23, 2009, 04:06:39 PM
Quote from: oldchap on January 22, 2009, 05:31:12 PM
I would seriously recommend Pomona as a team to watch. Their record doesn't show it, simply because 3 of their best players were studying abroad during the first semester. As a consequence,their pre-season was mediocre at best.

You mean "non-conference", not preseason.

(Hey, this is the first time that I've had to post this notice in about two months. My campaign to nag and nitpick over this point must be having an effect. ;) :D)

Sager, do you have a computer program the picks out when a poster mixes up preseason and noncoference?

No, but if some ambitious software writer would like to construct one ... ;)

Quote from: LogShow on January 24, 2009, 12:38:33 PMYou could have been an editor :D

I was an editor, and if my job search is successful I might become one again. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on January 25, 2009, 03:00:44 PM

lol, so that explains it :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 25, 2009, 05:54:16 PM

How They Fared (Nearly Complete)

~~I cannot find the Chapman/La Sierra score from Friday~~ (provided by magicman), ~~and the Chapman/UC-Santa Cruz is still pending,~~ but everything else is (I believe) up to date.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	618	Wheaton (Ill.)	15-2	LOST to #36 Carthage, 54-55; LOST to #19 Elmhurst, 57-70
#2	602	St. Thomas	17-0	def. Hamline, 64-59; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 83-61; def. St. Olaf, 73-61
#3	578	Washington U.	15-1	def. T#37 Rochester, 73-42; def. #18 Carnegie Mellon, 90-70
#4	540	UW-Stevens Point	15-2	def. UW-Eau Claire, 80-60; def. UW-Oshkosh, 80-70
#5	483	UW-Platteville	16-2	def. #7 UW-Whitewater, 86-78; def. UW-Stout, 55-51
#6	478	Buena Vista	16-2	LOST at Wartburg, 66-80; def. Luther, 66-51; def. Simpson, 83-56
#7	461	UW-Whitewater	15-3	LOST at #5 UW-Platteville, 78-86; def. UW-Superior, 88-73
#8	444	Capital	16-1	def. Marietta, 84-75; def. Baldwin-Wallace, 93-64
#9	436	Amherst	14-2	LOST to Brandeis, 58-73; def. Trinity (Conn.), 65-48
#10	372	Trinity (Texas)	16-1	def. Sewanee, 55-40; def. Oglethorpe, 77-74
#11	339	Puget Sound	15-2	def. Pacific, 93-59; def. Willamette, 100-62
#12	305	Ithaca	15-1	def. Stevens, 84-80
#13	292	Richard Stockton	17-2	def. Rowan, 83-62; def. New Jersey City, 65-57
#14	277	Mass-Dartmouth	14-2	LOST to Rhode Island College, 66-69; def. Western Connecticut, 84-78
#15	264	Augustana	14-4	def. Millikin, 51-43; def. Illinois Wesleyan, 82-66
#16	260	Elms	15-1	def. Lesley, 72-37; def. Wheelock, 89-51
#17	240	St. Norbert	14-1	def. Illinois College, 71-54; def. Knox, 78-52
#18	178	Carnegie Mellon	13-3	def. Lycoming, 71-56; def. Chicago, 64-58; LOST to #3 Washington U., 70-90
#19	162	Elmhurst	13-4	def. North Central (Ill.), 72-66; def. #1 Wheaton (Ill.), 70-57
#20	147	Texas-Dallas	15-2	LOST to University of the Ozarks, 66-68; def. Texas-Tyler, 60-54
#21	135	Roanoke	15-3	def. Randolph, 76-66; LOST to Virginia Wesleyan, 64-82
#22	92	Gettysburg	12-3	def. #24 Franklin and Marshall, 73-66; LOST at Haverford, 45-56
#23	78	William Paterson	14-3	def. Baruch, 70-65; def. Rutgers-Newark, 71-54; LOST at New Jersey, 65-70
#24	65	Franklin and Marshall	14-2	LOST to #22 Gettysburg, 66-73; def. McDaniel, 71-65
#25	51	Middlebury	16-2	def. Connecticut College, 69-50; def. Wesleyan, 67-60

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	50	Whitworth	13-4	def. Whitman, 101-70; LOST at Lewis and Clark, 62-74
#27	37	Anderson	13-5	def. Manchester, 100-62; LOST to Franklin, 67-74
#28	35	St. John Fisher	14-2	def. Alfred, 77-46; def. Nazareth, 83-77
#29	25	Salem State	14-3	def. Framingham State, 97-75; def. Fitchburg State, 63-59; LOST to Bridgewater State, 75-78
#30	21	Randolph-Macon	13-4	LOST at Virginia Wesleyan, 76-82; def. Randolph, 78-45
#31	20	Centre	14-3	def. Hendrix, 65-59; def. Millsaps, 59-56
#32	10	Carroll	13-3	def. Knox, 85-62; def. Grinnell, 132-83
T#33	7	DePauw	13-5	def. Millsaps, 85-83 OT; LOST at Hendrix, 67-78
T#33	7	Worcester Polytech	14-3	def. Babson, 69-65; def. Wheaton (Mass.), 84-69
#35	5	St. Mary's (Md.)	13-4	def. Gallaudet, 84-59; LOST at Wesley, 93-97
#36	4	Carthage	12-5	def. #1 Wheaton (Ill.), 55-54; LOST at North Central (Ill.), 64-76
T#37	2	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	11-5	LOST at Pomona-Pitzer, 51-66; def. La Verne, 71-54
T#37	2	Rochester	12-4	LOST to #3 Washington U., 42-73; def. Chicago, 70-60
#39	1	Chapman	15-3	def. La Sierra, 69-59; LOST (n) to University of Dallas, 59-62; def. UC Santa Cruz, 81-71

Other teams to watch (as suggested by posters on this board)

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
---	---	Cal Lutheran	12-4	def. Caltech, 77-52; def. Redlands, 69-52
---	---	Hiram	12-5	def. Allegheny, 65-61; def. Oberlin, 74-59
---	---	Milwaukee Engineering	14-3	def. Wisconsin Lutheran, 88-76; def. Dominican, 65-56; def. Lakeland, 54-46

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 25, 2009, 06:21:53 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 24, 2009, 11:45:25 PM
Quote from: LogShow on January 24, 2009, 12:38:33 PM
Sager, do you have a computer program the picks out when a poster mixes up preseason and noncoference?
No, but if some ambitious software writer would like to construct one ... ;)

Sorry, Greg, but I do better with computer programs that manipulate numbers, not words. As an old Speed Bump comic strip put it:

Quote
There are two kinds of people in the world: Those who are good with numbers, those who are good with words, and those who ain't good with neither.

(I'm quoting from memory, but that's pretty close.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Marty Peretz on January 25, 2009, 06:52:43 PM

I think Wash.U. should regain the top spot in the poll. Two convincing road wins over top 40 opponents, I believe, is worthy of them jumping the two spots. It will be interesting to see how the voters respond. I can't say I know anything about St. Thomas, so I don't want to cast judgement on their abilities. I'm sure they're quite good, but they haven't played nearly as quality a schedule as Wash.U and that's why I'd give the nod to the Bears.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 25, 2009, 07:36:18 PM

Personally, I jumped them over St. Thomas on my Posters' Poll ballot, but I predict that St. Thomas will narrowly take #1 on the d3 poll, with UWP and UWSP (in whichever order) as #3 and #4. (How far to drop Wheaton was my toughest call - I ended up slotting them 8th.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 25, 2009, 10:31:39 PM

A no-report on a score is a sure way to lose your Top 25 votes. Nobody is going to vote for a borderline team that you can't get a result on.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 26, 2009, 12:22:25 AM

Just to help you out a little...I don't think you need to type the extra (at home) in your results..

Simply saying LOST TO...tells us that they lost at home. When you say, "LOST AT" that tells us it was on the road. We're smart guys, we can figure it out! lol...just trying to make it a little easier for you. Appreciate the efforts for sure.

Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 25, 2009, 05:54:16 PM
Top 25

Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#1 618 Wheaton (Ill.) 15-2 LOST (at home) to #36 Carthage, 54-55;

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 26, 2009, 12:25:54 AM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on January 26, 2009, 12:22:25 AM
Just to help you out a little...I don't think you need to type the extra (at home) in your results..

Simply saying LOST TO...tells us that they lost at home. When you say, "LOST AT" that tells us it was on the road. We're smart guys, we can figure it out! lol...just trying to make it a little easier for you. Appreciate the efforts for sure.

Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 25, 2009, 05:54:16 PM
Top 25

Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#1 618 Wheaton (Ill.) 15-2 LOST (at home) to #36 Carthage, 54-55;

For the sake of convention on these boards, I am comfortable with a poster using lost, or lost at, or lost at (n) to signify where the game was played. Thanks for all that you do. +1! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 26, 2009, 01:40:39 AM

Chapman beats UC Santa Cruz on Sunday 81-71.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 26, 2009, 07:23:19 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 26, 2009, 12:25:54 AM
Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on January 26, 2009, 12:22:25 AM
Just to help you out a little...I don't think you need to type the extra (at home) in your results. ...
For the sake of convention on these boards, I am comfortable with a poster using lost, or lost at, or lost at (n) to signify where the game was played. Thanks for all that you do. +1! :)

Thanks for the feedback, Tom and Ralph. I changed my program to follow this convention.

For any programming geeks, the relevant part of the program now reads:

Code Select


	fprintf(reportfile, "[b]LOST[/b] ");
	switch (g.location) {
	    case 'H': fprintf(reportfile, "to "); break;
	    case 'A': fprintf(reportfile, "at "); break;
	    case 'N': fprintf(reportfile, "to (n) ");
	}

(Sorry, I really just wanted an excuse the try out the "code" tag.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 26, 2009, 02:01:43 PM

Add Transylvania to the "ones to watch list" 13-4.... 1st tie HCAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: OxyBob on January 26, 2009, 02:25:40 PM

Last night on "Hoopsville," also known as "The CCIW Hour(s)," Titan Q was in shameless homer mode while applying the CCIW Theory of Perpetual Greatness, by which "greatness begets greater greatness," in explaining Wheaton's losses to Carthage and Elmhurst:

Quote
Without Kent Raymond, Wheaton really is not a dominant team. I'm not sure they're a Top 25 team even without Kent Raymond. I thought they would beat Carthage at home but they ended up losing of course to Carthage and then they just got drilled by Elmhurst last night, so I would say not a huge surprise. I just don't think they're a Top 25 team without Kent Raymond.
...

I think their resume still dictates that they're a highly ranked team, and he'll be back. It's not like he's going to be gone. I think he might miss another game or two, but they're not a one-man team by any stretch. They're a great team but that one man makes them a great team ... without him I don't think they're a Top 25 team without him.

So without Kent Raymond, Wheaton is not a Top 25 team but they're still a great team though not a one-man team even though it's the one man who makes them great. Pure, unadulterated, unabashed shameless homerism at its shameless best.

The show's host's reply to Titan Q: "I'm with you there!"

OxyBob

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ethelred the Unready on January 26, 2009, 02:52:39 PM

Quote from: sac on January 26, 2009, 02:01:43 PM
Add Transylvania to the "ones to watch list" 13-4.... 1st tie HCAC.

I don't know....I hear they suck. Get it? Probably the FIRST time anyone has ever referenced vampires and the Tranny's. OK, maybe I shouldn't refer to them as Tranny's.....damn I'm tired.....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 26, 2009, 03:28:12 PM

Quote from: OxyBob on January 26, 2009, 02:25:40 PM
Last night on "Hoopsville," also known as "The CCIW Hour(s)," Titan Q was in shameless homer mode while applying the CCIW Theory of Perpetual Greatness, by which "greatness begets greater greatness," in explaining Wheaton's losses to Carthage and Elmhurst:

Quote
Without Kent Raymond, Wheaton really is not a dominant team. I'm not sure they're a Top 25 team even without Kent Raymond. I thought they would beat Carthage at home but they ended up losing of course to Carthage and then they just got drilled by Elmhurst last night, so I would say not a huge surprise. I just don't think they're a Top 25 team without Kent Raymond.
...

I think their resume still dictates that they're a highly ranked team, and he'll be back. It's not like he's going to be gone. I think he might miss another game or two, but they're not a one-man team by any stretch. They're a great team but that one man makes them a great team ... without him I don't think they're a Top 25 team without him.

So without Kent Raymond, Wheaton is not a Top 25 team but they're still a great team though not a one-man team even though it's the one man who makes them great. Pure, unadulterated, unabashed shameless homerism at its shameless best.

The show's host's reply to Titan Q: "I'm with you there!"

OxyBob

So you missed me say "are you going to remove them from your Top 25 if they were Number 1?" Bob's reply corrected his point, that he wasn't going to completely punish them when their resume of the season, along with the fact that Raymond is NOT out for the season (could be back as early as Wednesday and probably Saturday for sure) makes them a team that is in the Top 25.

If Raymond was not on the team at all this season or was out for the season due to injury, they probably aren't a Top 25 team. Since Raymond has been on the team except for two games and is coming back, that entire resume is considered and many voters (including myself) aren't going to drop the former #1 team completely out of their polls. Should they go 0-2 this week and Raymond is back in the line-up for one or both of those games, this discussion takes on a much more serious tone.

The show's host (WHO IS ME, PAL!), stated "I'm with you there (without the exclemation point, since it was a comment not filled with excitement)" because I understood the point and agreed. Since I am in Baltimore, not sure that bias you keep throwing around plays out here.

OB, I am so tired of your constant BS when it comes to other people's opinions and the fact that you are convinced there are 25 voters out there all of like-mind. By the way, Bob talked a lot about the WIAC and even the HCAC last night, not just the CCIW. And if you heard the show, did you hear the comments by others about Wash U, St. Thomas, UW-Platteville, and even Wheaton? Just curious. At least you listened to part of the show... so I thank you for that!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: April on January 26, 2009, 03:47:50 PM

That is admittedly a terrible quote. :-X I think it's interesting that Bob is still apparently the Midwest reporter despite not getting to see most of these teams in person this season... it kinda shows in that vague backpedaled answer he doesn't know enough about what he's talking about to speak as an authority on any of this stuff. Greg, are you available to be the Midwest Reporter... since, you know, I have so much right to decide who the reporters are when I don't even listen to the show anymore? :P

My personal guess is that Wheaton is probably a 15-25 team without Raymond... IF Wiele had never been injured. There are two seperate factors affecting Wheaton's performance right now... one is the fact that Wiele is still not 100%, the other is the loss of Raymond.

Let's not forget that we only had to shoot very slightly better from the line last Wednesday vs. Carthage and we would have won. We were a ridiculous 11-24 and lost by 1 point. We could have shot 54% from the line and won. Yes, we should have won; no, I am not really making excuses.... I am pissed as heck about a stupid loss like that (as annoyed as I am at CLU for that silly loss earlier this season, OxyBob). I don't think that this loss disproves we are Top 25 quality, however, just like I don't think that the CLU crazy loss to Buena Vista necessarily disproved their worthiness to be in the ORV category (though other things later have... they're just too young... this year!) However, Wiele is definitely an All-American caliber player, and it's fairly normal in DIII for a team to be a 15-25 team when they have just one higher team AA and a good supporting cast.

Elmhurst has the talent to be a much higher ranked team than they are. However they have been extremely talented AND extremely streaky this season... as they have been for as long as I have been following DIII basketball, come to think of it. Against us (after the 10 minutes delay that flattened a strong Wheaton open to the game) they happened to be on fire, which is logical since they were playing the #1 team.

With all that out of the way... I would be surprised if Wash U was not #1 this week, hopping over St. Thomas. They have been the #1 team since day one to me, and that view only very briefly changed during the short stint when Elmhurst looked like a more solid and stable team than they clearly are, and their defeat of Wash U seemed like more than a fluke. As a Wheaton fan, I think this is as much "our year" as it has ever been... however, I am not foolish to think we had earned the #1 based on our schedule and results.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 26, 2009, 04:01:44 PM

Quote from: April on January 26, 2009, 03:47:50 PM
That is admittedly a terrible quote. :-X I think it's interesting that Bob is still apparently the Midwest reporter despite not getting to see most of these teams in person this season... it kinda shows in that vague backpedaled answer he doesn't know enough about what he's talking about to speak as an authority on any of this stuff. Greg, are you available to be the Midwest Reporter... since, you know, I have so much right to decide who the reporters are when I don't even listen to the show anymore? :P

Bob is doing just fine and I appreciate his contributions to the show. For the record, not many people get out and see tons of games each season... traveling is tough not only on teams but also on us "reporters." Thanks to the internet for radio and video (I watched two games at the same time on Sunday) and banter in the chat-rooms, someone who knows the area can still give a good breakdown on what is going on.

At the same time, no one said any of the reports or myself are experts. Bob's opinion is just that... his opinion. Just as Mark's opinion about the Northeast is just that as well. However, I value those opinions and they give the show and those listening some insight on what is going on. We also bring along other guests to add to the conversation. Last night we chatted with Anderson Head Coach Tom Slyder who gave his two-cents on the topic of who is the better team (Wash U., Elmhurst, UW-Platteville), along with JC DeLass' opinion on the Bears and Pat Coleman who called the Wheaton-Elmhurst game. I also talk to my fair share of individuals off the air to get thoughts and opinions. So it isn't just one person's side we are taking.

Also, I forgot to mention in the "CCIW Hour" side of OB's comments... did you notice we have split the show up... so tuning in on Sunday is going to be a lot about the Midwest - though Bob's conversation lasted maybe 15 minutes due to technical problems.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 26, 2009, 04:15:47 PM

Quote from: OxyBob on January 26, 2009, 02:25:40 PM
Last night on "Hoopsville," also known as "The CCIW Hour(s)," Titan Q was in shameless homer mode while applying the CCIW Theory of Perpetual Greatness, by which "greatness begets greater greatness," in explaining Wheaton's losses to Carthage and Elmhurst:

Quote
Without Kent Raymond, Wheaton really is not a dominant team. I'm not sure they're a Top 25 team even without Kent Raymond. I thought they would beat Carthage at home but they ended up losing of course to Carthage and then they just got drilled by Elmhurst last night, so I would say not a huge surprise. I just don't think they're a Top 25 team without Kent Raymond.
...

I think their resume still dictates that they're a highly ranked team, and he'll be back. It's not like he's going to be gone. I think he might miss another game or two, but they're not a one-man team by any stretch. They're a great team but that one man makes them a great team ... without him I don't think they're a Top 25 team without him.

So without Kent Raymond, Wheaton is not a Top 25 team but they're still a great team though not a one-man team even though it's the one man who makes them great. Pure, unadulterated, unabashed shameless homerism at its shameless best.

The show's host's reply to Titan Q: "I'm with you there!"

OxyBob

Come on, Bob. My points were simply that,

1) Without Kent Raymond, possibly the best player in Division III, Wheaton may not be a Top 25-caliber team. I have watched every Wheaton CCIW home game this season via video stream and while I think Wheaton is a legitimate #1 candidate with Raymond, I think they may fall somewhere below #25 without him. Their losses to Carthage and Elmhurst were not huge surprises.

2) When I said Wheaton's "resume still dictates them being a highly ranked team", I was simply referring to the fact that they are 15-2 with some very impressive wins. They deserve to be ranked high based on results. Wheaton should not penalized before they actually lose games (they will fall today based on the 2 losses, and then we will see what happens moving forward). And as I said, Raymond is pretty close to returning.

3) Wheaton is not a one-man team, but that one man (Kent Raymond) is who creates the opportunities for Ben Panner, Andy Wiele, Jake Carlwell, Tim McCrary, etc...without Raymond, those players have a much harder time carrying the load. The championship Chicago Bulls were by no stretch a one-man team, but take #23 away, and Pippin, Grant, & Co. struggle to fill their roles the same.

I don't get paid a dime for working on Hoopsville as the Midwest reporter. With my job, I am typically on the road every Sunday and have to rearrange a lot things and make sacrifices to make it work. I do it to support a) D3hoops.com and b) Dave McHugh, who puts in countless hours providing a show dedicated to Division III basketball. I take my role seriously - I've driven to St. Louis 5 times this year to watch Wash U, twice to see Fontbonne (once to watch Elmhurst as well), traveled to Fulton, Mo. last weekend to watch Westminster play Maryville in a big SLIAC game. As I said above, I have watched every single one of Wheaton's league home games via video stream. I do my best to evaluate the Midwest region (and the WIAC as best I can).

If you want to pick apart every quote of mine and twist it around using your "CCIW homer" line over and over again, that's fine. I do my best.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 26, 2009, 04:22:48 PM

By the way, I suppose somehow I have influenced Massey's computer too?

http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&yr=2009&sub=III&mid=6

#6 Wheaton
#10 Augustana
#11 Elmhurst
#17 Carthage
#23 North Central
#33 Millikin
#43 Illinois Wesleyan
#82 North Park

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 26, 2009, 04:25:08 PM

OB just trolls to get a rise out of people, people.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: usee on January 26, 2009, 04:32:32 PM

ToxicBob is on the loose again. >:(

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 26, 2009, 04:48:57 PM

Quote from: April on January 26, 2009, 03:47:50 PM
That is admittedly a terrible quote. :-X I think it's interesting that Bob is still apparently the Midwest reporter despite not getting to see most of these teams in person this season... it kinda shows in that vague backpedaled answer he doesn't know enough about what he's talking about to speak as an authority on any of this stuff. Greg, are you available to be the Midwest Reporter... since, you know, I have so much right to decide who the reporters are when I don't even listen to the show anymore? :P

Actually, I think that Bob explained himself very well in his last post, and given the time that he's putting into catching games both in person and online I'm satisfied that he's doing a good job of covering the Midwest Region beat. In fact, I agree with his assessment of Wheaton with and without Raymond.

Quote from: April on January 26, 2009, 03:47:50 PMLet's not forget that we only had to shoot very slightly better from the line last Wednesday vs. Carthage and we would have won. We were a ridiculous 11-24 and lost by 1 point. We could have shot 54% from the line and won. Yes, we should have won; no, I am not really making excuses.... I am pissed as heck about a stupid loss like that (as annoyed as I am at CLU for that silly loss earlier this season, OxyBob). I don't think that this loss disproves we are Top 25 quality, however, just like I don't think that the CLU crazy loss to Buena Vista necessarily disproved their worthiness to be in the ORV category (though other things later have... they're just too young... this year!) However, Wiele is definitely an All-American caliber player, and it's fairly normal in DIII for a team to be a 15-25 team when they have just one higher team AA and a good supporting cast.

Free-throw shooting isn't some sort of stand-alone category that has no bearing upon a team's competence, April, just because it takes place in a defensive vacuum. It is an integral part of the game. If your team is making its free throws, then your team is performing well in one of the phases of the game that enables us to call it a good team. If your team is clanking 'em off the iron with regularity, and it costs you wins, then it is fair to use that as part of a critique to downgrade your team.

Yes, Wheaton has gone 17-44 (.386) from the charity stripe in its last two games, both of which were home losses. And, yes, if Wheaton shot them halfway-competently it would've gone 1-1 last week instead of 0-2. But that poor free throw shooting has to be counted against Wheaton's overall competence. You don't get a flier from the pollsters in terms of downgrading your team just because your team happens to be screwing up at the line rather than, say, with its ballhandling or its rebounding.

Andy Wiele has gone 3-12 from the line over those two games -- and I strongly doubt that his foot injury is affecting his free throws. Part of what makes Wiele an All-American candidate is his ability to dominate inside on offense, and part of that ability includes knocking down free throws when he gets fouled. If he's not making them, then he's going to be subject to what one Wheaton poster on CCIW Chat called a "Hack-a-Wiele" strategy that will limit his effectiveness by forcing him to score most of his points via a method in which he has difficulty scoring consistently. In other words, his FT woes are adversely affecting his All-American candidacy as well as his team's fortunes.

Quote from: April on January 26, 2009, 03:47:50 PMElmhurst has the talent to be a much higher ranked team than they are. However they have been extremely talented AND extremely streaky this season... as they have been for as long as I have been following DIII basketball, come to think of it. Against us (after the 10 minutes delay that flattened a strong Wheaton open to the game) they happened to be on fire, which is logical since they were playing the #1 team.

Elmhurst is doing just about what I had expected it to do thus far. The 'jays have won some big games, and they've lost at least one total head-scratcher (at home to Millikin), and I figured that their season would involve those kinds of swings. I think that a rank somewhere between, say, #12 and #20 is pretty accurate for EC. The Bluejays have what may be one of the best front lines in all of D3, but their backcourt is suspect and has not played consistently all season long. When their backcourt does come through in the big games (McCurdy and Bainter against Wash U, Childs against Wheaton), EC can beat anybody.

(I'm not sure that the Elmhurst-was-on-fire-because-Wheaton-was-#1 theory is valid. Wheaton clearly wasn't going to be #1 anymore after Wednesday's loss to Carthage, and the 'jays were well aware that Wheaton's really not a #1 caliber team without Raymond.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 26, 2009, 05:02:32 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 26, 2009, 04:25:08 PM
OB just trolls to get a rise out of people, people.

Thing is, though, he doesn't really follow the modus operandi of a troll most of the time on his home board. He gives exhaustive and highly-regarded game capsules for SCIAC contests, and his observations regarding SCIAC teams and Chapman seem to be highly valued by the rest of the room's denizens. Since I take it that they're watching SCIAC games, too, and not simply following the season vicariously through OB's eyes, this tells me that he: a) has credibility on the SoCal D3 beat; and b) isn't trying to troll at all on non-Top-25-related topics.

I suppose that he could just be trolling us in this room, but the fact that he has also soiled his nest (and thereby risked his reputation) in the SCIAC room with these goofy "CCIWers think that their dung smells like roses" rants -- and the vehemence and repetition of those rants -- leads me to believe that he's more likely a sincerely agitated observer with a specific ongoing grievance than a madcap troublemaker who's only interested in starting a ruckus for its own sake.

And more's the pity, actually.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 26, 2009, 05:04:28 PM

Thanks for expanding my single-sentence post into something that makes more sense. Yes, that's true. But when he posts about Hoopsville and the Top 25 and anything else where he uses that kind of rhetoric, it is clearly only to see what the reaction is.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 26, 2009, 05:27:02 PM

Quote from: April on January 26, 2009, 03:47:50 PM
That is admittedly a terrible quote. :-X I think it's interesting that Bob is still apparently the Midwest reporter despite not getting to see most of these teams in person this season... it kinda shows in that vague backpedaled answer he doesn't know enough about what he's talking about to speak as an authority on any of this stuff. Greg, are you available to be the Midwest Reporter... since, you know, I have so much right to decide who the reporters are when I don't even listen to the show anymore? :P

Actually, living away from Bloomington, IL now and no longer having my IWU radio duties has allowed me to see more teams. In the past, I would basically see the 8 CCIW teams and the 7-8 D3 teams IWU would face in the non-conference. As I mentioned above, this year I've had the chance to get to several Wash U games and a few SLIAC games. I've also been able to watch all the CCIW teams come through Wheaton via WETN as well as watching video streams, such as Cal Lutheran twice (vs Carthage, vs Buena Vista) and 5 MWC games. In the next few weeks, I will get to see several UAA teams come through St. Louis.

I am actually in a much better position now to evaluate both the Midwest region and the national picture.

But thanks for the kind words April.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 26, 2009, 05:43:12 PM

Great points about FT shooting, Greg!

One cringes when your own Free Throw clanger goes to the line and when your opponent's ace Free Throw shooter goes to the line!

When evaluating awards at the national level, having a good FT percentage should speak for something.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 26, 2009, 06:15:36 PM

Individual game FT percentage is to often looked upon to seriously.

#1) Its always a product of who gets to the line, you can have 4 outstanding FT shooters but if #5 ends up getting twice as many FT's as the rest your team FT percentage might not look very good

#2) Individual games produce small number differences. What I mean is if you go 8-10 it looks great every raves about the great FT shooting. If you go 6-10, people start whining about the awfull ft shooting............when in both cases you were 1 shot from being average.

If I'm not mistaken Raymond is an excellent FT shooter (only 92% on the year ;)) who gets to the line frequently. Wheaton's FT% will almost assuredly go up the minute Raymond steps back on the court.

Its much more important to focus on the whole season. Wheaton is still a 74.8% FT shooting team which is excellent by most measures. Yes they've struggled recently, but haven't they struggled because the best FT shooter isn't on the floor?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 26, 2009, 06:38:10 PM

Quote from: sac on January 26, 2009, 06:15:36 PM
Individual game FT percentage is to often looked upon to seriously.

#1) Its always a product of who gets to the line, you can have 4 outstanding FT shooters but if #5 ends up getting twice as many FT's as the rest your team FT percentage might not look very good

#2) Individual games produce small number differences. What I mean is if you go 8-10 it looks great every raves about the great FT shooting. If you go 6-10, people start whining about the awfull ft shooting............when in both cases you were 1 shot from being average.

If I'm not mistaken Raymond is an excellent FT shooter (only 92% on the year ;)) who gets to the line frequently. Wheaton's FT% will almost assuredly go up the minute Raymond steps back on the court.

Its much more important to focus on the whole season. Wheaton is still a 74.8% FT shooting team which is excellent by most measures. Yes they've struggled recently, but haven't they struggled because the best FT shooter isn't on the floor?

I don't think that you can blame their struggles on the absence of Kent Raymond. Even if you take away all of Raymond's makes and attempts the Wheaties were a sparkling 171-231 (.740) from the line this season prior to the frigid spell of the past two games. I find it hard to believe that the boys in orange can only make their free throws if they can look out of the corners of their eyes and see Kent Raymond standing there occupying a lane space.

As for what Wheaton has done from the line over the past two game, it's what stat freaks refer to as "small sample size". Taken as a whole, one game's worth of bad FT shooting really doesn't say much about a team. Two bad FT games are still subject to small-sample-size arguments. But when the two games are back-to-back, and they also happen to be the team's most recent performances, it makes you go "Hmmmm ...".

Still, I wouldn't say that Wheaton is destined for whichever circle of Dante's hell is designated for basketball teams that can't shoot free throws, for the simple reason that the team as a whole (not just Raymond) had shot them so well in the previous fifteen games. We'll have to wait and see if that clank-'em-all trend continues before we pronounce it as something other than an anomaly. All I was saying to April is that team FT shooting has to be taken into account when gauging how pollworthy a team happens to be. Perhaps Wheaton is just, on balance, an above-average FT shooting team rather than a great one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 26, 2009, 06:39:55 PM

sac makes good points about FT's, but we have our own thresholds for which we think that a player should hit for basic competence.

In big men (and maybe 3-5% higher for women), I want to see these FT percentages...

67-70% for 4's and 5's...

70-75% for 2's and 3's

75-80% and higher for 2's and 1's.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 26, 2009, 06:48:16 PM

Those FT thresholds look right to me, too, Ralph.

Incidentally, here's Andy Wiele's career FT performance:

yr	FTM	FTA	FT%
2005-06	33	39	.846
2006-07	37	53	.698
2007-08	75	107	.701
2008-09	26	51	.510

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 26, 2009, 06:53:52 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 26, 2009, 06:38:10 PM

I don't think that you can blame their struggles on the absence of Kent Raymond. Even if you take away all of Raymond's makes and attempts the Wheaties were a sparkling 171-231 (.740) from the line this season prior to the frigid spell of the past two games.

I come up with 68.4%.

282-377 as a team, Raymond 94-102, team without Raymond 188-275

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 26, 2009, 07:07:29 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 26, 2009, 06:48:16 PM
Those FT thresholds look right to me, too, Ralph.

Incidentally, here's Andy Wiele's career FT performance:

yr FTM FTA FT%
2005-06 33 39 .846
2006-07 37 53 .698
2007-08 75 107 .701
2008-09 26 51 .510

I wonder if the decrease is due to all the bulk he's added since his freshman year?

As a freshman, when he was listed at 6-8/215...
http://www.iwuhoops.com/wc2.jpg

As a junior, listed at 6-8/230 (this year he is listed at 6-8/235)...
http://athletics.wheaton.edu/images/mbball/2007/11/28/wiele2.jpg

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 26, 2009, 07:27:02 PM

New polls out

http://d3hoops.com/top25/

Whitewater lost and moved up 1. Thats odd.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 26, 2009, 08:55:06 PM

Quote from: sac on January 26, 2009, 07:27:02 PM
New polls out

http://d3hoops.com/top25/

Whitewater lost and moved up 1. Thats odd.

I interpret the new poll to show confidence that the top 4 in week 7 and week 8 have roughly the same support, 2338 votes in week #7 versus 2330 and in week #8.

In week #7, #5-#11 got 3013 votes. In week #8, #5-#11 got 2935 votes.

In the "carnage" of Jan 19-25, the losses destabilized the upper mid-range of the Top 25. In Week #8, #12 - #16 are only 23 votes apart.

In Week #7, places #12-16 got 1388 votes. In week #8, places #12-16 got 1533 votes.

I believe that the voters now have a solid core of the upper-mid range and the middle range of schools.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 26, 2009, 11:24:30 PM

It looks like the NE voters are not at all in consensus on that 5th best team in the region (or also 6th): there are 5 teams that received between 7-23 votes (places 29-34 in the poll). The top 4 NE teams seem to be pretty unanimous with Elms, Amherst, UMD, and Middlebury (although I dont agree with the order).

By the way, look for Amherst to have a potential fall on saturday as they play the second leg of a back-to-back road conference double-header against a Colby team that seems to be putting it together (with recent wins over RIC and three conference foes). You never know with Amherst though, they lose to Wesleyan one day and then 10 days later they blow them out by 30.

Congrats to MIT for receiving their first ever top 25 votes in the d3hoops.com poll. Big game on Wednesday as they play at WPI (who also received votes in this weeks poll). Also, does anyone know why this site abbreviates MIT but not Worcester Polytech (or any other school for that matter)? Is it just that the name of the school is so long (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) or is it that the name is so recognizable (or a combo of both)? Not that it matters, but I am just curious.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2009, 12:19:38 AM

Quote from: sac on January 26, 2009, 07:27:02 PM
New polls out

http://d3hoops.com/top25/

Whitewater lost and moved up 1. Thats odd.

Not if you look at who they lost to, which our voters always do. They lost on the road to a team ranked ahead of them. They wouldn't have moved up a spot if Wheaton and BVU hadn't lost, but they wouldn't have moved very far either, and that's deserved.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 27, 2009, 12:21:53 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2009, 12:19:38 AM
Quote from: sac on January 26, 2009, 07:27:02 PM
New polls out

http://d3hoops.com/top25/

Whitewater lost and moved up 1. Thats odd.

Not if you look at who they lost to, which our voters always do. They lost on the road to a team ranked ahead of them. They wouldn't have moved up a spot if Wheaton and BVU hadn't lost, but they wouldn't have moved very far either, and that's deserved.

I know the why's. I just think its odd a team lost and moved up, particularly a top 10 team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 27, 2009, 12:45:47 AM

Darryl,

Chapman beat La Sierra 69-59 on Jan. 23rd.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sciacguru on January 27, 2009, 01:12:48 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2009, 12:19:38 AM
Quote from: sac on January 26, 2009, 07:27:02 PM
New polls out

http://d3hoops.com/top25/

Whitewater lost and moved up 1. Thats odd.

Not if you look at who they lost to, which our voters always do. They lost on the road to a team ranked ahead of them. They wouldn't have moved up a spot if Wheaton and BVU hadn't lost, but they wouldn't have moved very far either, and that's deserved.

Wow that is great thinking! "They lost on the road to a team ranked higher than them," so let's reward them by moving them up a spot, despite there being 8 other teams with fewer losses immediately behind them. Why can't Trinity move up to 6th? They are 1st in their conference at 8-0, on a 15 game win streak, and their only loss is to UWSP by one in OT!

Compare it to the D1 polls. Wake was at #1, loses, drops to 6th. #2-#5 all move up one. The other teams behind Wake all have more losses other than Butler#13 and St Mary's#22...they have 1 as well. Syracuse (then #8) loses at home to then #9 Louisville and they drop SEVEN spots to a field that has similar records....4 losses.

So please tell me how a team moves UP with a loss?? Can we please not vote on potential, or history, but on reality?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: usee on January 27, 2009, 01:14:34 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 26, 2009, 07:07:29 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 26, 2009, 06:48:16 PM
Those FT thresholds look right to me, too, Ralph.

Incidentally, here's Andy Wiele's career FT performance:

yr FTM FTA FT%
2005-06 33 39 .846
2006-07 37 53 .698
2007-08 75 107 .701
2008-09 26 51 .510

I wonder if the decrease is due to all the bulk he's added since his freshman year?

As a freshman, when he was listed at 6-8/215...
http://www.iwuhoops.com/wc2.jpg

As a junior, listed at 6-8/230 (this year he is listed at 6-8/235)...
http://athletics.wheaton.edu/images/mbball/2007/11/28/wiele2.jpg

I think that's definitely part of it Q, but his role has changed as his bulk has. As a freshman he attempted 56 3pt FG's (hitting 37%) and only 39 FT's (84%). As a sophomore he attempted 55 3pters (hitting 25%) and 53 FT (70%). Last year as a Junior he was 2-7 from 3pt land and 75-107 from the line. This year he has yet to take a 3 and has been to the line 51x through 17 games (51%). I think as he bulked up he has become an inside presence. It seems to have affected his shooting touch to some degree. If you remember in fall of 2006 Wiele was the one who attempted the game winning 3pt FG against Northwestern that rimmed out and would have given the Thunder a win against a Big 10 Team so Bill Harris thought something of him as a shooter back then.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 27, 2009, 01:28:14 AM

Quote from: sciacguru on January 27, 2009, 01:12:48 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2009, 12:19:38 AM
Quote from: sac on January 26, 2009, 07:27:02 PM
New polls out

http://d3hoops.com/top25/

Whitewater lost and moved up 1. Thats odd.

Not if you look at who they lost to, which our voters always do. They lost on the road to a team ranked ahead of them. They wouldn't have moved up a spot if Wheaton and BVU hadn't lost, but they wouldn't have moved very far either, and that's deserved.

Wow that is great thinking! "They lost on the road to a team ranked higher than them," so let's reward them by moving them up a spot, despite there being 8 other teams with fewer losses immediately behind them. Why can't Trinity move up to 6th? They are 1st in their conference at 8-0, on a 15 game win streak, and their only loss is to UWSP by one in OT!

Compare it to the D1 polls. Wake was at #1, loses, drops to 6th. #2-#5 all move up one. The other teams behind Wake all have more losses other than Butler#13 and St Mary's#22...they have 1 as well. Syracuse (then #8) loses at home to then #9 Louisville and they drop SEVEN spots to a field that has similar records....4 losses.

So please tell me how a team moves UP with a loss?? Can we please not vote on potential, or history, but on reality?

I would like for Trinity TX to have a strong ranking, because maybe that brings more recognition to the ASC. Trinity beat Schreiner (3-12 overall/3-9 conference on the season in the ASC-West) by 11 at home. That is a very common margin of defeat for this Schreiner team this season.

UWW dropped from 461 votes to 433 votes on the ballots between weeks 7 and 8. The voters tried to drop UWW. The floor just raised beneath them when Wheaton and BVU seemed to show even more weaknesses in their losses, as Pat pointed out! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 27, 2009, 01:41:02 AM

Quote from: sciacguru on January 27, 2009, 01:12:48 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2009, 12:19:38 AM
Quote from: sac on January 26, 2009, 07:27:02 PM
New polls out

http://d3hoops.com/top25/

Whitewater lost and moved up 1. Thats odd.

Not if you look at who they lost to, which our voters always do. They lost on the road to a team ranked ahead of them. They wouldn't have moved up a spot if Wheaton and BVU hadn't lost, but they wouldn't have moved very far either, and that's deserved.

Wow that is great thinking! "They lost on the road to a team ranked higher than them," so let's reward them by moving them up a spot, despite there being 8 other teams with fewer losses immediately behind them. Why can't Trinity move up to 6th? They are 1st in their conference at 8-0, on a 15 game win streak, and their only loss is to UWSP by one in OT!

Compare it to the D1 polls. Wake was at #1, loses, drops to 6th. #2-#5 all move up one. The other teams behind Wake all have more losses other than Butler#13 and St Mary's#22...they have 1 as well. Syracuse (then #8) loses at home to then #9 Louisville and they drop SEVEN spots to a field that has similar records....4 losses.

So please tell me how a team moves UP with a loss?? Can we please not vote on potential, or history, but on reality?

Teams are not ranked in a vacuum; they are ranked against other teams.

[For the record: on my Posters' Poll ballot I had Trinity #5, UWW #9.]

Capital DID jump UWW. BV (a worse loss and a weaker schedule) and Wheaton (two losses) both fell below UWW. I don't find it at all surprising that UWW (in context) went up a spot despite losing on the road to a higher ranked team.

[Hint: comparisons to d1 are NOT gonna get you many 'brownie points' on these boards! :P]

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 27, 2009, 02:36:35 AM

Quote from: sciacguru on January 27, 2009, 01:12:48 AM
So please tell me how a team moves UP with a loss?? Can we please not vote on potential, or history, but on reality?

Why bring up Trinity's loss by 1 in OT to Stevens Point then...that's history? lol ??? ::) :P ;D :D ;)

Team	WK7 Pts	WK8 Pts	Pt Diff
Wheaton	618	424	-194
St. Thomas	602	618	16
Wash U.	578	606	28
Stevens Point	540	570	30
Platteville	483	536	53
Buena Vista	478	387	-91
Whitewater	461	433	-28
Capital	444	502	58
Amherst	436	295	-141
Trinity	372	422	50
Puget Sound	339	399	60
Ithaca	305	378	73

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sciacguru on January 27, 2009, 03:03:18 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 27, 2009, 01:41:02 AM
Quote from: sciacguru on January 27, 2009, 01:12:48 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2009, 12:19:38 AM
Quote from: sac on January 26, 2009, 07:27:02 PM
New polls out

http://d3hoops.com/top25/

Whitewater lost and moved up 1. Thats odd.

Not if you look at who they lost to, which our voters always do. They lost on the road to a team ranked ahead of them. They wouldn't have moved up a spot if Wheaton and BVU hadn't lost, but they wouldn't have moved very far either, and that's deserved.

Wow that is great thinking! "They lost on the road to a team ranked higher than them," so let's reward them by moving them up a spot, despite there being 8 other teams with fewer losses immediately behind them. Why can't Trinity move up to 6th? They are 1st in their conference at 8-0, on a 15 game win streak, and their only loss is to UWSP by one in OT!

Compare it to the D1 polls. Wake was at #1, loses, drops to 6th. #2-#5 all move up one. The other teams behind Wake all have more losses other than Butler#13 and St Mary's#22...they have 1 as well. Syracuse (then #8) loses at home to then #9 Louisville and they drop SEVEN spots to a field that has similar records....4 losses.

So please tell me how a team moves UP with a loss?? Can we please not vote on potential, or history, but on reality?

Teams are not ranked in a vacuum; they are ranked against other teams.

[For the record: on my Posters' Poll ballot I had Trinity #5, UWW #9.]

Capital DID jump UWW. BV (a worse loss and a weaker schedule) and Wheaton (two losses) both fell below UWW. I don't find it at all surprising that UWW (in context) went up a spot despite losing on the road to a higher ranked team.

[Hint: comparisons to d1 are NOT gonna get you many 'brownie points' on these boards! :P]

Well, first off, I am not trying for any brownie pts. But let's be realistic, NO TEAM should ever move up after losing.....that's just common sense. You do not get rewarded for losing, unless you are in YOUTH BASKETBALL, or the Special Olympics. Your Posters Poll supports my opinion. And for the teams that do win, well, they should be rewarded, because THEY DIDNT LOSE. UWW is a good team and is deserving of a Top 10 ranking, but UPS and Trinity should not be behind them, especially when they have better records. They win the games on their schedule and that is what really matters. This is why I believe people talk of bias and favortism on this board, because common sense doesnt unfold.

Quote from: Titan Q on January 26, 2009, 04:22:48 PM
By the way, I suppose somehow I have influenced Massey's computer too?

http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&yr=2009&sub=III&mid=6

#6 Wheaton
#10 Augustana
#11 Elmhurst
#17 Carthage
#23 North Central
#33 Millikin
#43 Illinois Wesleyan
#82 North Park

And Titan, I respect your comments for the most part, but I wouldnt put to much weight in the Massey ratings, especially to support your post. The same Massey rankings have PLU at 93 with an 8-8 record (last place in the NWC) while the former TOP 25 team, Wm Patterson sits at 98. In fact there are several teams at or below .500 that are ranked higher than the former TOP 25 team Wm Patterson.

Granted Massey supports the CCIW arguments, but as a whole, does it really match the TOP 25 voters?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 27, 2009, 07:37:36 AM

Quote from: magicman on January 27, 2009, 12:45:47 AM
Darryl,

Chapman beat La Sierra 69-59 on Jan. 23rd.

Thanks, magicman. I edited this information into the "final" report (way back on page 292). It's notable that neither this nor Chapman's score vs. UC-Santa Cruz is posted on the d3hoops scoreboard as of this morning.

In an amusing sidebar, I happened to look at the box score for last Saturday's UCSC-La Sierra game (http://www.goslugs.com/teams/basketball/men/stats/2008-2009/ucsc-lsu.htm). It lists 28 fouls on UCSC and 29 fouls on La Sierra ... including one La Sierra player with 7 fouls.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 27, 2009, 09:21:15 AM

Quote from: sciacguru on January 27, 2009, 03:03:18 AM
And Titan, I respect your comments for the most part, but I wouldnt put to much weight in the Massey ratings, especially to support your post. The same Massey rankings have PLU at 93 with an 8-8 record (last place in the NWC) while the former TOP 25 team, Wm Patterson sits at 98. In fact there are several teams at or below .500 that are ranked higher than the former TOP 25 team Wm Patterson.

Granted Massey supports the CCIW arguments, but as a whole, does it really match the TOP 25 voters?

OxyBob continues to claim over and over again that there is a bias towards the CCIW in the D3hoops.com poll (a poll that obviously is subjective). Yet a completely objective poll, Massey Index, that simply takes data regarding wins, losses, and strength of schedule, and then puts it through a formula and produces a ranking, has 5 CCIW teams in its top 25 and 7 in its top 43.

As far as if it matches the D3hoops.com Top 25 voters, I guess my point is that it does not. The D3hoops.com poll includes 3 CCIW teams:

#7 Wheaton (Massey #6)
#15 Augustana (Massey #10)
#17 Elmhurst (Massey #11)

Two more are receiving a tiny amount of votes:

North Central, 5 poll votes (Massey #17)
Carthage, 2 poll votes (Massey #23)

Is the D3hoops.com really biased towards the CCIW? Or is it possible this is just a season where the CCIW, which has numerous senior-led squads (like Augustana, Wheaton, Elmhurst, and North Central), has a few Top 25-caliber teams and several others that are pretty good?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 27, 2009, 09:25:33 AM

Another computer poll...

http://talismanred.com/ratings/hoops/divisioniii.shtml

6 Wheaton
T9 Augustana
T9 Elmhurst
13 Carthage
14 North Central
27 Illinois Wesleyan
28 Millikin
62 North Park

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: usee on January 27, 2009, 10:18:29 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 27, 2009, 09:25:33 AM
Another computer poll...

http://talismanred.com/ratings/hoops/divisioniii.shtml

6 Wheaton
T9 Augustana
T9 Elmhurst
13 Carthage
14 North Central
27 Illinois Wesleyan
28 Millikin
62 North Park

For all you conspiracy theorists, this poll is also known as "the poll in the grassy knoll". :) 8)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: OxyBob on January 27, 2009, 10:40:24 AM

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on January 26, 2009, 03:28:12 PM
OB, I am so tired of your constant BS when it comes to other people's opinions and the fact that you are convinced there are 25 voters out there all of like-mind. By the way, Bob talked a lot about the WIAC and even the HCAC last night, not just the CCIW. And if you heard the show, did you hear the comments by others about Wash U, St. Thomas, UW-Platteville, and even Wheaton? Just curious. At least you listened to part of the show... so I thank you for that!

I listened to the show. I heard the comments about St. Thomas, et al. in between all the CCIW talk. You even mentioned Trinity, which pleased me because it was refreshing to hear you talk about a team west of Minneapolis for a change.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 26, 2009, 04:25:08 PM
OB just trolls to get a rise out of people, people.
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 26, 2009, 05:02:32 PM
Thing is, though, he doesn't really follow the modus operandi of a troll most of the time on his home board.

If having strong opinions and not always agreeing with PC and you and the other guys with the little green names makes me a "troll," then I'll keep stating my opinions and not always agree with you.

Quote from: magicman on January 27, 2009, 12:45:47 AM
In an amusing sidebar, I happened to look at the box score for last Saturday's UCSC-La Sierra game (http://www.goslugs.com/teams/basketball/men/stats/2008-2009/ucsc-lsu.htm). It lists 28 fouls on UCSC and 29 fouls on La Sierra ... including one La Sierra player with 7 fouls.

Have you ever seen La Sierra play? The Golden Eagles need all the help they can get.

Quote from: Titan Q on January 27, 2009, 09:21:15 AM
Quote from: sciacguru on January 27, 2009, 03:03:18 AM
And Titan, I respect your comments for the most part, but I wouldnt put to much weight in the Massey ratings, especially to support your post. The same Massey rankings have PLU at 93 with an 8-8 record (last place in the NWC) while the former TOP 25 team, Wm Patterson sits at 98. In fact there are several teams at or below .500 that are ranked higher than the former TOP 25 team Wm Patterson.
OxyBob continues to claim over and over again that there is a bias towards the CCIW in the D3hoops.com poll (a poll that obviously is subjective). Yet a completely objective poll, Massey Index, that simply takes data regarding wins, losses, and strength of schedule, and then puts it through a formula and produces a ranking, has 5 CCIW teams in its top 25 and 7 in its top 43.

http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=1144.msg1022587#msg1022587

OxyBob

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2009, 12:04:18 PM

Quote from: sciacguru on January 27, 2009, 01:12:48 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2009, 12:19:38 AM
Quote from: sac on January 26, 2009, 07:27:02 PM
New polls out

http://d3hoops.com/top25/

Whitewater lost and moved up 1. Thats odd.

Not if you look at who they lost to, which our voters always do. They lost on the road to a team ranked ahead of them. They wouldn't have moved up a spot if Wheaton and BVU hadn't lost, but they wouldn't have moved very far either, and that's deserved.

Wow that is great thinking! "They lost on the road to a team ranked higher than them," so let's reward them by moving them up a spot, despite there being 8 other teams with fewer losses immediately behind them. Why can't Trinity move up to 6th? They are 1st in their conference at 8-0, on a 15 game win streak, and their only loss is to UWSP by one in OT!

Compare it to the D1 polls. Wake was at #1, loses, drops to 6th. #2-#5 all move up one. The other teams behind Wake all have more losses other than Butler#13 and St Mary's#22...they have 1 as well. Syracuse (then #8) loses at home to then #9 Louisville and they drop SEVEN spots to a field that has similar records....4 losses.

So please tell me how a team moves UP with a loss?? Can we please not vote on potential, or history, but on reality?

This is reality. Apparently we don't see it the same way as you do.

Your example cites a team losing a game it should not lose, a home game against a lower-ranked team.

The example sac cites is a team losing a game that the poll expects it to lose -- on the road against a higher-ranked team. In this case the poll was right. It ain't broke. Why would we fix it?

And I will reiterate that UWW would have fallen if BVU and Wheaton hadn't also lost. Remember it's tough to really get a good read on the poll if you look at a team or two in isolation. The table of vote total changes (thanks, Old School) show much better what happened.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 27, 2009, 12:34:27 PM

Quote from: sciacguru on January 27, 2009, 03:03:18 AM
NO TEAM should ever move up after losing.....that's just common sense.

A Top 25 ranking isn't a reward, it is an indication of relative power. Since these rankings can never be perfect (if they were the preseason ranks would be the same as the final because all teams would win and lose as expected and therefore never change position) they must be considered individually. Voters shouldn't decide who "moves up" or "moves down" (although this is how it probably happens) they should consider each week new and determine, from scratch, who are the top teams. Otherwise, you would be considering a previous poll to be inherently correct and official.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 27, 2009, 02:44:58 PM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on January 27, 2009, 02:36:35 AM

   Team       WK7 Pts       WK8 Pts       Pt Diff
   Whitewater       461       433       -28
   Trinity       372       422       50
   Puget Sound       339       399       60

Quote from: sciacguru on January 27, 2009, 03:03:18 AM
But let's be realistic, NO TEAM should ever move up after losing.....that's just common sense. You do not get rewarded for losing And for the teams that do win, well, they should be rewarded, because THEY DIDNT LOSE. UWW is a good team and is deserving of a Top 10 ranking, but UPS and Trinity should not be behind them, especially when they have better records. They win the games on their schedule and that is what really matters. This is why I believe people talk of bias and favortism on this board, because common sense doesnt unfold.

Look at Old School's post again... Whitewater WASN'T rewarded for their loss. They lost 28 points in the poll, equal to a little bit more than one poll position per ballot.

TU (Tx) and UPS gained 50 and 60 points respectively. That is equal to 2 poll positions and more than 2 poll positions, respectively. Trinity and UPS WERE rewarded for their wins.

You can look at the single week and determine that the poll should be rocked because of the results... but I say that the poll WAS rocked because of these results. Teams that won gained poll points. Teams that lost lost poll points. The rankings shifted. It just so happened that two teams above WW lost (and lost more of a percentage of their total previous points) AND some teams below lost too. There was a shake-up, and it ended up with WW losing points in the poll.

Whatever ranking number is associated with that number of points this week is purely coincidence... 433 poll points would have gotten WW a #10 ranking last week, but this week, 433 poll points is "good enough" for 6th. That's just the nature of the poll. Preseason that number of points would have been good enough for 5th. It is what it is.

You can't control what happens with other teams in the poll. All you can do is control what your team does. Keep winning and your lot in the poll will get better.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 27, 2009, 02:49:11 PM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on January 27, 2009, 02:36:35 AM
Quote from: sciacguru on January 27, 2009, 01:12:48 AM
So please tell me how a team moves UP with a loss?? Can we please not vote on potential, or history, but on reality?

   Team       WK7 Pts       WK8 Pts       Pt Diff    Net drop in poll position
   Wheaton       618       424       -194    -7.76
   St. Thomas       602       618       16    +0.64
   Wash U.       578       606       28    +1.12
   Stevens Point       540       570       30    +1.20
   Platteville       483       536       53    +2.12
   Buena Vista       478       387       -91    -3.64
   Whitewater       461       433       -28    -1.12
   Capital       444       502       58    +2.32
   Amherst       436       295       -141    -5.64
   Trinity       372       422       50    +2.00
   Puget Sound       339       399       60    +2.40
   Ithaca       305       378       73    +2.92

I like to view the number of votes that a team receives to the number the team if there were a "Perfect Top 25", e.g., #1 gets all 625 votes from 25 first place votes (kinda like Mount Union in football), #10 gets all 400 votes, #25 gets only 25 votes.

With that in mind, the column in the far right shows the median change on the Perfect Top 25 for each team.

Point Special and I were on the same page. I am confident that the voters know which teams are playing like a "#14". Look at the cluster from #12 to #16.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2009, 07:37:49 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 27, 2009, 01:28:14 AM
UWW dropped from 461 votes to 433 votes on the ballots between weeks 7 and 8. The voters tried to drop UWW. The floor just raised beneath them when Wheaton and BVU seemed to show even more weaknesses in their losses, as Pat pointed out! :)

sciacguru - did you read this great point from Ralph Turner? It shows you that in reality, UWW LOST points from the voters, meaning on average they were moved DOWN in voters' ballots. However, the fact they moved UP a slot in the Top 25 is a simple fact that other teams around them, and especially ahead of them, took bigger hits and moved further down (probably past them, as both BVU and Wheaton did in my poll). It is simple math... the team may lose points, but if some teams ahead of them lost MORE points, then where exactly is UWW supposed to be put. In the same spot they were and leave the spot above them empty just to make sure they didn't move up in the poll? Give me a break and use some common sense - not some bias-ladden attempt at logic.

Quote from: OxyBob on January 27, 2009, 10:40:24 AM
I listened to the show. I heard the comments about St. Thomas, et al. in between all the CCIW talk. You even mentioned Trinity, which pleased me because it was refreshing to hear you talk about a team west of Minneapolis for a change.

Hmm... I will try and mention Trinity at least once a show for you then... oh wait... I already do! And I would love to chat about more teams west of "Minneapolis", but there has been a lot of trouble getting coaches (especially on the West Coast) booked this season.

That being said: Buena Vista, Whitman, and Texas-Dallas' (along with the previously mentioned Trinity-TX) coaches have all been on the show this season. Does that count for teams west of Minneapolis? Oh wait... I don't care if you are critical of the show - it doesn't affect how I try and put it together. There is too much work to do catering to just your disappointments, OB.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2009, 07:48:15 PM

Quote from: OxyBob on January 27, 2009, 10:40:24 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 26, 2009, 04:25:08 PM
OB just trolls to get a rise out of people, people.
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 26, 2009, 05:02:32 PM
Thing is, though, he doesn't really follow the modus operandi of a troll most of the time on his home board.

If having strong opinions and not always agreeing with PC and you and the other guys with the little green names makes me a "troll," then I'll keep stating my opinions and not always agree with you.

I don't think anyone has a problem with you disagreeing with people. Everyone disagrees with everyone all the time! It is the tactic you take. The name-calling, rude pop-shots, and all and all disrespect you show for posters and their opinions is unwelcome, IMHO.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 27, 2009, 08:54:49 PM

I'd just like to point out that using the NCAA D1 polls in any sport as a good example to follow is beyond logical. They're based entirely upon what happened the previous week, rather than using the previous week to re-analyze the whole season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 29, 2009, 12:42:30 AM

#25 Gettysburg loses at McDaniel 56-53.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 29, 2009, 07:11:31 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	618	St. Thomas	18-0	def. Augsburg, 87-57; 01/31 at Macalester
#2	606	Washington U.	15-1	01/30 at #31 Brandeis; 02/01 at New York University
#3	570	UW-Stevens Point	17-2	def. Viterbo, 92-40; def. UW-River Falls, 86-64
#4	536	UW-Platteville	17-2	def. UW-Oshkosh, 74-50; 01/31 vs. UW-River Falls
#5	502	Capital	16-1	01/29 vs. Wilmington; 01/31 at John Carroll
#6	433	UW-Whitewater	16-3	def. UW-La Crosse, 64-61; 01/31 at UW-Eau Claire
#7	424	Wheaton (Ill.)	15-3	LOST at #36 North Central (Ill.), 66-81; 01/31 at #15 Augustana
#8	422	Trinity (Texas)	16-1	01/30 at T#39 DePauw; 01/31 at #23 Centre
#9	399	Puget Sound	15-2	01/30 at Lewis and Clark; 01/31 at Linfield
#10	387	Buena Vista	17-2	def. Coe, 80-65; 01/31 at Central
#11	378	Ithaca	15-1	01/30 vs. Elmira; 01/31 at Utica
#12	318	Richard Stockton	18-2	def. Rutgers-Camden, 60-58; 01/31 vs. Rutgers-Newark
#13	315	Elms	15-1	01/29 vs. Mitchell; 01/31 vs. Daniel Webster
#14	305	St. Norbert	15-1	def. #24 Carroll, 76-63; 01/31 vs. Beloit
#15	300	Augustana	15-4	def. North Park, 70-48; 01/31 vs. #7 Wheaton (Ill.)
#16	295	Amherst	15-2	def. Western New England, 70-44; 01/30 at Bowdoin; 01/31 at Colby
#17	233	Elmhurst	14-4	def. T#39 Carthage, 86-66; 01/31 vs. Illinois Wesleyan
#18	185	Mass-Dartmouth	15-2	def. Mass-Boston, 73-44; 01/29 vs. T#34 Salem State; 01/31 at Southern Maine
#19	159	Middlebury	17-2	def. Southern Vermont, 92-47; 01/31 vs. Williams
#20	131	Carnegie Mellon	13-3	01/30 at Emory; 02/01 at Case Western Reserve
#21	126	St. John Fisher	14-2	01/30 at Hartwick; 02/01 at Stevens
#22	109	Texas-Dallas	15-2	01/29 at Louisiana College; 01/31 at Mississippi College
#23	73	Centre	14-3	01/30 vs. Southwestern; 01/31 vs. #8 Trinity (Texas)
#24	55	Carroll	13-4	LOST to #14 St. Norbert, 63-76; 01/31 vs. Lawrence
#25	42	Gettysburg	13-4	def. Johns Hopkins, 71-62; LOST at McDaniel, 56-53; 01/31 vs. Washington College

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	40	Roanoke	15-4	LOST at Guilford, 72-77; 01/31 vs. Lynchburg
#27	31	Franklin and Marshall	16-2	def. Ursinus, 83-80; def. Dickinson, 81-61; 01/31 at Swarthmore
#28	29	William Paterson	14-4	LOST at Montclair State, 66-76; 01/31 vs. Kean
#29	23	Worcester Polytech	15-3	def. T#34 MIT, 68-55; 01/31 vs. Coast Guard
#30	18	Anderson	13-5	01/29 at Mount St. Joseph; 01/31 at Hanover
#31	12	Brandeis	11-5	01/30 vs. #2 Washington U.; 02/01 vs. Chicago
T#32	9	Rhode Island College	13-4	def. Western Connecticut, 84-73; 01/31 at Keene State
T#32	9	Whitworth	13-4	01/30 at George Fox; 01/31 at Pacific
T#34	7	MIT	13-5	LOST at #29 Worcester Polytech, 55-68; 01/31 vs. Wheaton (Mass.)
T#34	7	Salem State	15-3	def. Worcester State, 87-69; 01/29 at #18 Mass-Dartmouth
#36	5	North Central (Ill.)	13-5	def. #7 Wheaton (Ill.), 81-66; 01/31 at Millikin
T#37	3	Randolph-Macon	14-4	def. T#37 Washington and Lee, 79-66; 01/31 at Guilford
T#37	3	Washington and Lee	12-5	LOST to T#37 Randolph-Macon, 66-79; 01/31 vs. Randolph
T#39	2	Cal Lutheran	12-5	LOST to Pomona-Pitzer, 65-69; 01/31 at Whittier
T#39	2	Carthage	12-6	LOST to #17 Elmhurst, 66-86; 01/31 vs. North Park
T#39	2	DePauw	13-5	01/30 vs. #8 Trinity (Texas); 02/01 vs. Southwestern
T#42	1	DeSales	15-2	01/29 at Manhattanville; 01/31 vs. FDU-Florham
T#42	1	Virginia Wesleyan	12-7	def. Lynchburg, 69-49; 01/31 at Emory and Henry

Other teams to watch (as suggested by posters on this board)

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
---	---	Hiram	12-5	01/29 vs. Kenyon; 01/31 at Wittenberg
---	---	Milwaukee Engineering	14-4	LOST at Benedictine, 75-80 OT; 01/31 at Edgewood
---	---	Transylvania	13-4	01/29 vs. Hanover; ~~01/30 at Wittenberg~~ cancelled

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on January 29, 2009, 11:19:36 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 21, 2009, 06:18:14 PM
Best presidential movie: Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb

+K agree 100% with GS on this.

They'll see the Big Board!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 31, 2009, 07:27:12 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 26, 2009, 11:24:30 PM
By the way, look for Amherst to have a potential fall on saturday as they play the second leg of a back-to-back road conference double-header against a Colby team that seems to be putting it together (with recent wins over RIC and three conference foes). You never know with Amherst though, they lose to Wesleyan one day and then 10 days later they blow them out by 30.

Called it earlier in the week. Amherst falls at Colby today.

They better watch out, if they lose at RIC, they have a very real chance of losing their final two to Middlebury and Williams at the end of the season. That coupled with their extremely weak out of conference schedule could hurt them (especially if they drop to third, or fourth, in the NESCAC). Amherst is now tied for second with Colby and Williams, with Middlebury first at 5-0.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 01, 2009, 05:13:25 PM

Two more wins, Puget Sound should be moving up ;D :) 8)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 01, 2009, 05:40:09 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	618	St. Thomas	19-0	def. Augsburg, 87-57; def. Macalester, 86-41
#2	606	Washington U.	17-1	def. #31 Brandeis, 80-75; def. New York University, 67-56
#3	570	UW-Stevens Point	17-2	def. Viterbo, 92-40; def. UW-River Falls, 86-64
#4	536	UW-Platteville	18-2	def. UW-Oshkosh, 74-50; def. UW-River Falls, 72-51
#5	502	Capital	17-2	def. Wilmington, 77-74; LOST at John Carroll, 75-83
#6	433	UW-Whitewater	17-3	def. UW-La Crosse, 64-61; def. UW-Eau Claire, 79-60
#7	424	Wheaton (Ill.)	16-3	LOST at #36 North Central (Ill.), 66-81; def. #15 Augustana, 64-55
#8	422	Trinity (Texas)	17-2	LOST at T#39 DePauw, 54-61; def. #23 Centre, 58-56
#9	399	Puget Sound	17-2	def. Lewis and Clark, 74-60; def. Linfield, 87-78
#10	387	Buena Vista	18-2	def. Coe, 80-65; def. Central, 66-51
#11	378	Ithaca	17-1	def. Elmira, 106-84; def. Utica, 86-73
#12	318	Richard Stockton	19-2	def. Rutgers-Camden, 60-58; def. Rutgers-Newark, 73-67
#13	315	Elms	17-1	def. Mitchell, 108-66; def. Daniel Webster, 90-60
#14	305	St. Norbert	16-1	def. #24 Carroll, 76-63; def. Beloit, 84-63
#15	300	Augustana	15-5	def. North Park, 70-48; LOST to #7 Wheaton (Ill.), 55-64
#16	295	Amherst	16-3	def. Western New England, 70-44; def. Bowdoin, 73-52; LOST at Colby, 76-81
#17	233	Elmhurst	15-4	def. T#39 Carthage, 86-66; def. Illinois Wesleyan, 98-92
#18	185	Mass-Dartmouth	17-2	def. Mass-Boston, 73-44; def. T#34 Salem State, 95-77; def. Southern Maine, 81-56
#19	159	Middlebury	18-2	def. Southern Vermont, 92-47; def. Williams, 67-62
#20	131	Carnegie Mellon	14-4	def. Emory, 60-51; LOST at Case Western Reserve, 67-75
#21	126	St. John Fisher	14-4	LOST at Hartwick, 51-52; LOST at Stevens, 61-64 OT
#22	109	Texas-Dallas	17-2	def. Louisiana College, 56-40; def. Mississippi College, 72-63
#23	73	Centre	15-4	def. Southwestern, 73-63; LOST to #8 Trinity (Texas), 56-58
#24	55	Carroll	13-5	LOST to #14 St. Norbert, 63-76; LOST to Lawrence, 67-94
#25	42	Gettysburg	13-5	def. Johns Hopkins, 71-62; LOST at McDaniel, 53-56; LOST to Washington College, 62-64

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	40	Roanoke	16-4	LOST at Guilford, 72-77; def. Lynchburg, 86-75
#27	31	Franklin and Marshall	17-2	def. Ursinus, 83-80; def. Dickinson, 81-61; def. Swarthmore, 70-60
#28	29	William Paterson	15-4	LOST at Montclair State, 66-76; def. Kean, 62-49
#29	23	Worcester Polytech	16-3	def. T#34 MIT, 68-55; def. Coast Guard, 66-57
#30	18	Anderson	14-6	def. Mount St. Joseph, 89-87; LOST at Hanover, 78-83
#31	12	Brandeis	12-6	LOST to #2 Washington U., 75-80; def. Chicago, 67-36
T#32	9	Rhode Island College	14-4	def. Western Connecticut, 84-73; def. Keene State, 93-72
T#32	9	Whitworth	15-4	def. George Fox, 83-67; def. Pacific, 83-74
T#34	7	MIT	14-5	LOST at #29 Worcester Polytech, 55-68; def. Wheaton (Mass.), 85-60
T#34	7	Salem State	15-4	def. Worcester State, 87-69; LOST at #18 Mass-Dartmouth, 77-95
#36	5	North Central (Ill.)	13-6	def. #7 Wheaton (Ill.), 81-66; LOST at Millikin, 73-80
T#37	3	Randolph-Macon	14-5	def. T#37 Washington and Lee, 79-66; LOST at Guilford, 66-71
T#37	3	Washington and Lee	12-6	LOST to T#37 Randolph-Macon, 66-79; LOST to Randolph, 60-63 OT
T#39	2	Cal Lutheran	12-6	LOST to Pomona-Pitzer, 65-69; LOST at Whittier, 65-80
T#39	2	Carthage	13-6	LOST to #17 Elmhurst, 66-86; def. North Park, 87-69
T#39	2	DePauw	15-5	def. #8 Trinity (Texas), 61-54; def. Southwestern, 81-54
T#42	1	DeSales	16-3	LOST at Manhattanville, 55-60; def. FDU-Florham, 84-52
T#42	1	Virginia Wesleyan	12-8	def. Lynchburg, 69-49; LOST at Emory and Henry, 85-88

Other teams to watch (as suggested by posters on this board)

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
---	---	Hiram	14-5	def. Kenyon, 66-55; def. Wittenberg, 79-75
---	---	Milwaukee Engineering	14-5	LOST at Benedictine, 75-80 OT; LOST at Edgewood, 81-83 OT
---	---	Transylvania	14-4	def. Hanover, 74-69 OT

Note: Once again, I'm "resetting" the list of additional teams. That is, if you want reports about any team not receiving votes, send me a note or post the team's name. (Please wait until AFTER tomorrow's poll is released to do so.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 01, 2009, 07:19:51 PM

Comment on Trinity TX...

Trinity played at DePauw (Greencastle IN) in Friday night. TU took to Saturday option that the SCAC has for road trips. That means that they bussed the 236 miles to Danville KY (#23 Centre) on Saturday and played the women's and men's games Saturday night.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on February 03, 2009, 08:47:28 AM

+78 Franklin & Marshall
+73 Middlebury
+64 Puget Sound
+63 UW Whitewater
+58 Texas Dallas
+56 St. Norbert
+56 Worcester Polytech
+56 John Carroll
+55 Elmhurst
-55 Carroll
-65 Trinity Tx
-74 Carnegie Mellon
-89 Wheaton
-90 Capital
-92 Augustana
-117 St. John Fisher
-130 Amherst

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 03, 2009, 02:29:00 PM

Way to go Puget Sound, keep up the good work!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 03, 2009, 02:47:17 PM

With the losses that we saw in the bottom half of the Top 25, and WPI's proximity to #25 coming into the week, and WPI being about 3rd to 5th (http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&sub=III&mid=1) in the Northeast, the amount of parity that we have in the #20-#60 is amazing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 03, 2009, 08:50:30 PM

at RIC 72, Amherst 61

Ithaca 75 at SJF 66; Ithaca began to pull away about the 8 minute mark in the game.

Lawrence is beating SNC by 18 (58-40) with 6:38 left.
Larrys 61 SNC 47 3:45 left
Larrys 67 SNC 49 3:02 left (playing at SNC)
Larrys 75 SNC 52 Final!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 03, 2009, 09:50:27 PM

WPI also lost to Clark tonight 68-56.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ziggy on February 04, 2009, 02:10:48 PM

You can find regional rankings at:
http://www.ncaa.com/auto_pdf/p_hotos/s_chools/ncaa/sports/m-baskbl/auto_pdf/DIIIMBBRANKING2-4-09

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 05, 2009, 07:07:18 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	618	St. Thomas	20-0	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 99-44; 02/07 at Carleton
#2	607	Washington U.	17-1	02/06 vs. New York University; 02/08 vs. Brandeis
#3	569	UW-Stevens Point	18-2	def. UW-Stout, 73-64; 02/07 vs. UW-Superior
#4	546	UW-Platteville	19-2	def. UW-La Crosse, 77-63
#5	496	UW-Whitewater	17-3	02/07 vs. UW-Stout
#6	463	Puget Sound	18-2	def. Pacific Lutheran, 84-59; 02/07 vs. George Fox
#7	420	Buena Vista	19-2	def. Wartburg, 89-79; 02/07 vs. Cornell
#8	412	Capital	18-2	def. Marietta, 85-70; 02/07 at Muskingum
#9	396	Ithaca	18-1	def. T#33 St. John Fisher, 75-66; 02/06 vs. Hartwick; 02/08 vs. Alfred
#10	363	Richard Stockton	20-2	def. Kean, 70-66 OT; 02/07 vs. New Jersey
#11	361	St. Norbert	16-2	LOST to Lawrence, 52-75; 02/06 at Monmouth; 02/07 at Lake Forest
#12	357	Trinity (Texas)	18-2	def. University of Dallas, 73-58; 02/07 vs. Southwestern
#13	350	Elms	17-1	02/07 at Mitchell
#14	335	Wheaton (Ill.)	17-3	def. Millikin, 72-55; 02/07 vs. North Park
#15	288	Elmhurst	16-4	def. #18 Augustana, 65-63; 02/07 at Millikin
#16	232	Middlebury	18-2	02/06 vs. Bowdoin; 02/07 vs. Colby
#17	225	Mass-Dartmouth	18-2	def. Tufts, 91-76; 02/07 vs. Keene State
#18	208	Augustana	15-6	LOST at #15 Elmhurst, 63-65; 02/07 vs. Carthage
#19	167	Texas-Dallas	17-2	02/05 vs. Louisiana College; 02/07 vs. Mississippi College
#20	165	Amherst	16-4	LOST at #27 Rhode Island College, 61-72; 02/06 at Bates; 02/07 at Tufts
#21	109	Franklin and Marshall	18-2	def. Johns Hopkins, 71-60; 02/07 vs. Washington College
#22	79	Worcester Polytech	16-4	LOST at Clark, 56-68
#23	57	Carnegie Mellon	14-4	02/06 vs. Case Western Reserve; 02/08 vs. Emory
#24	56	John Carroll	15-4	def. Mount Union, 96-72; 02/07 vs. Ohio Northern
#25	43	DePauw	15-5	02/06 at Birmingham-Southern; 02/08 at Rhodes

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	41	Centre	15-4	02/06 at Rhodes; 02/08 at Birmingham-Southern
#27	34	Rhode Island College	15-4	def. #20 Amherst, 72-61; 02/07 at Plymouth State
#28	27	Guilford	16-4	def. Hampden-Sydney, 62-56; 02/07 vs. Washington and Lee
#29	24	William Paterson	17-4	def. John Jay, 61-45; def. Manhattanville, 57-56 OT; 02/07 vs. New Jersey City
#30	22	Whitworth	15-4	02/06 vs. Willamette; 02/07 vs. Linfield
#31	14	Roanoke	16-5	LOST at #35 Randolph-Macon, 80-85
#32	13	Transylvania	15-4	def. Defiance, 53-48; 02/07 at Rose-Hulman
T#33	9	Anderson	14-7	LOST to Rose-Hulman, 77-83 OT; 02/07 at Defiance
T#33	9	St. John Fisher	14-5	LOST to #9 Ithaca, 66-75; 02/07 at Nazareth
#35	3	Randolph-Macon	15-5	def. #31 Roanoke, 85-80; 02/07 at Lynchburg
T#36	2	DeSales	17-3	def. Wilkes, 65-50
T#36	2	Hope	14-6	LOST at Albion, 68-70; 02/07 vs. Kalamazoo
T#38	1	Chapman	16-3	02/05 at West Coast Baptist; 02/08 at UC Santa Cruz
T#38	1	Rochester Tech	15-4	def. Alfred, 75-58; 02/06 vs. SUNY-Cobleskill
T#38	1	Salem State	16-4	def. Massachusetts College, 90-52; 02/07 at Westfield State

Other teams to watch (as suggested by posters on this board)

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
---	---	Calvin	13-6	def. Alma, 66-55; 02/07 vs. Adrian

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 07, 2009, 05:25:22 AM

Darryl,
Here's Friday's Top 25 and beyond scores so you don't have to look them up.

New York University 55 at No. 2 Washington U. 73
Hartwick 59 at No. 9 Ithaca 78
No. 11 St. Norbert 51 at Monmouth 60
Bowdoin 50 at No. 16 Middlebury 62
No. 20 Amherst 71 at Bates 66
Case Western Reserve 60 at No. 23 Carnegie Mellon 81
No. 25 DePauw 75 at Birmingham-Southern 61
No. 26 Centre 73 at Rhodes 69
Willamette 65 at No. 30 Whitworth 77
SUNY-Cobleskill 52 at T No. 38 Rochester Tech 80

On Thurs. 2-5 T#38 Chapman won at West Coast Baptist 64-40

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 07, 2009, 10:31:05 AM

magicman -- very kind of you, but I must confess, I never manually look up a score unless it has not been reported to the d3sports.com scoreboard. My computer program reads the scoreboard from the Web, and compiles the results into the report automatically.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 07, 2009, 12:00:22 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on February 07, 2009, 10:31:05 AM
magicman -- very kind of you, but I must confess, I never manually look up a score unless it has not been reported to the d3sports.com scoreboard. My computer program reads the scoreboard from the Web, and compiles the results into the report automatically.

Ahh technology :) 8)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 08, 2009, 02:13:58 AM

St. Lawrence University 16-4, leader of the Liberty League should be added to the watch list. Current win streak of 6, 12-1 last 13 games, owns a win over #16 Middlebury 84-71 and close loss to # 9 Ithaca

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 08, 2009, 02:27:23 AM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on February 07, 2009, 10:31:05 AM
magicman -- very kind of you, but I must confess, I never manually look up a score unless it has not been reported to the d3sports.com scoreboard. My computer program reads the scoreboard from the Web, and compiles the results into the report automatically.

I think I've just been terminated. 8)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 08, 2009, 06:46:58 PM

Darryl, per the Ithaca website they defeated Alfred 72-70. Since it hasn't yet been posted on d3hoops, thought I'd offer that if that is holding you up on "How They Fared" (or did you need the Chapman score also?).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 08, 2009, 06:49:05 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	618	St. Thomas	21-0	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 99-44; def. Carleton, 68-59
#2	607	Washington U.	19-1	def. New York University, 73-55; def. Brandeis, 82-57
#3	569	UW-Stevens Point	19-2	def. UW-Stout, 73-64; def. UW-Superior, 69-50
#4	546	UW-Platteville	19-2	def. UW-La Crosse, 77-63
#5	496	UW-Whitewater	18-3	def. UW-Stout, 66-54
#6	463	Puget Sound	19-2	def. Pacific Lutheran, 84-59; def. George Fox, 100-79
#7	420	Buena Vista	20-2	def. Wartburg, 89-79; def. Cornell, 79-74
#8	412	Capital	18-3	def. Marietta, 85-70; LOST at Muskingum, 60-72
#9	396	Ithaca	20-1	def. T#33 St. John Fisher, 75-66; def. Hartwick, 78-59; def. Alfred, 73-71
#10	363	Richard Stockton	21-2	def. Kean, 70-66 OT; def. New Jersey, 77-61
#11	361	St. Norbert	17-3	LOST to Lawrence, 52-75; LOST at Monmouth, 51-60; def. Lake Forest, 73-64 OT
#12	357	Trinity (Texas)	19-2	def. University of Dallas, 73-58; def. Southwestern, 86-78
#13	350	Elms	18-1	def. Mitchell, 92-62
#14	335	Wheaton (Ill.)	18-3	def. Millikin, 72-55; def. North Park, 85-62
#15	288	Elmhurst	16-5	def. #18 Augustana, 65-63; LOST at Millikin, 64-74
#16	232	Middlebury	20-2	def. Bowdoin, 62-50; def. Colby, 78-73
#17	225	Mass-Dartmouth	19-2	def. Tufts, 91-76; def. Keene State, 89-66
#18	208	Augustana	16-6	LOST at #15 Elmhurst, 63-65; def. Carthage, 85-67
#19	167	Texas-Dallas	18-3	def. Louisiana College, 82-43; LOST to Mississippi College, 66-76
#20	165	Amherst	18-4	LOST at #27 Rhode Island College, 61-72; def. Bates, 71-66; def. Tufts, 84-70
#21	109	Franklin and Marshall	19-2	def. Johns Hopkins, 71-60; def. Washington College, 95-64
#22	79	Worcester Polytech	16-4	LOST at Clark, 56-68
#23	57	Carnegie Mellon	16-4	def. Case Western Reserve, 81-60; def. Emory, 88-61
#24	56	John Carroll	16-4	def. Mount Union, 96-72; def. Ohio Northern, 84-77
#25	43	DePauw	17-5	def. Birmingham-Southern, 75-61; def. Rhodes, 82-63

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	41	Centre	17-4	def. Rhodes, 73-69; def. Birmingham-Southern, 56-44
#27	34	Rhode Island College	16-4	def. #20 Amherst, 72-61; def. Plymouth State, 62-46
#28	27	Guilford	17-4	def. Hampden-Sydney, 62-56; def. Washington and Lee, 75-61
#29	24	William Paterson	18-4	def. John Jay, 61-45; def. Manhattanville, 57-56 OT; def. New Jersey City, 72-60
#30	22	Whitworth	17-4	def. Willamette, 77-65; def. Linfield, 82-70
#31	14	Roanoke	16-5	LOST at #35 Randolph-Macon, 80-85
#32	13	Transylvania	16-4	def. Defiance, 53-48; def. Rose-Hulman, 60-47
T#33	9	Anderson	14-8	LOST to Rose-Hulman, 77-83 OT; LOST at Defiance, 59-64
T#33	9	St. John Fisher	14-6	LOST to #9 Ithaca, 66-75; LOST at Nazareth, 70-79
#35	3	Randolph-Macon	16-5	def. #31 Roanoke, 85-80; def. Lynchburg, 62-58
T#36	2	DeSales	17-3	def. Wilkes, 65-50
T#36	2	Hope	15-6	LOST at Albion, 68-70; def. Kalamazoo, 68-58
T#38	1	Chapman	18-3	def. West Coast Baptist, 64-40; def. UC Santa Cruz, 55-51 (as reported by oldchap; ~~confirmation pending~~ confirmed at UCSC Web page)
T#38	1	Rochester Tech	16-4	def. Alfred, 75-58; def. SUNY-Cobleskill, 80-52
T#38	1	Salem State	17-4	def. Massachusetts College, 90-52; def. Westfield State, 75-71 OT

Other teams to watch (as suggested by posters on this board)

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
---	---	Franklin	13-8	def. Manchester, 78-64
---	---	Calvin	14-6	def. Alma, 66-55; def. Adrian, 63-59
---	---	St. Lawrence	16-4	def. Clarkson, 82-75; def. Union, 99-80; def. Skidmore, 83-68

Quote from: magicman on February 08, 2009, 02:27:23 AM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on February 07, 2009, 10:31:05 AM
magicman -- very kind of you, but I must confess, I never manually look up a score unless it has not been reported to the d3sports.com scoreboard. My computer program reads the scoreboard from the Web, and compiles the results into the report automatically.

I think I've just been terminated. 8)

magicman: My computer program, which recently told me it preferred to be called "Skynet," assures me that there will be room for a few humans in the coming new world order. So there's still a chance for you ...

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 08, 2009, 06:46:58 PM
Darryl, per the Ithaca website they defeated Alfred 72-70. Since it hasn't yet been posted on d3hoops, thought I'd offer that if that is holding you up on "How They Fared" (or did you need the Chapman score also?).

Thanks, Mr. Ypsi -- I'd tracked that one down, too. (How tedious to have to look up scores myself ...)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: oldchap on February 08, 2009, 08:33:03 PM

I know that Chapman won at Santa Cruz, ~~however the score of 55 to 51 needs to be confirmed~~.

Chapman 55 - UCSC 51 Confirmed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 09, 2009, 06:54:17 PM

FYI - the newest Top 25 is out. Not a lot of movement in the top half, but plenty of changes in the bottom half.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 09, 2009, 07:58:38 PM

Elmhurst loses for the 2nd time this season to unranked Millikin and drops 2 spots.

Augustana loses to Elmhurst and drops 2 spots.

Contrasted with

Capital loses to unranked Muskingum, and drops 6 spots

St. Norbert loses to unranked Monmouth and drops 8 spots.

UT-Dallas loses to Miss College and drops out from #19

Amherst loses to Rhode Island College and drops out from #20

WPI loses to Clark and drops out from #22

Just the facts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 09, 2009, 08:09:10 PM

Apparently their win against ranked Augustana helped? No clue. ??? ??? ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 09, 2009, 08:14:16 PM

Quote from: sac on February 09, 2009, 07:58:38 PM
Elmhurst loses for the 2nd time this season to unranked Millikin and drops 2 spots.

Augustana loses to Elmhurst and drops 2 spots.

Contrasted with

Capital loses to unranked Muskingum, and drops 6 spots

St. Norbert loses to unranked Monmouth and drops 8 spots.

UT-Dallas loses to Miss College and drops out from #19

Amherst loses to Rhode Island College and drops out from #20

WPI loses to Clark and drops out from #22

Just the facts.

CCIW bias!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 09, 2009, 08:20:09 PM

sac - first off, St. Norbert lost TWO games and nearly lost a third - all in a week. One loss was at home against Lawrence and the other two games (which they split) were to subpar teams. That resulted in the loss of 234 points.

Secondly, did you look at the number of points lost by the teams you point at?

Capital lost 122 points - a Top 10 team shouldn't be losing to 9-11 (at the time) team by 12.

UT-Dallas lost 102 points - this team has been on the edge of dropping out for some time - and lost by ten at home to Mississippi College. Obviously enough voters had enough of keeping them in their ballots.

Elmhurst lost 99 points - Millikin has four CCIW wins this season, two thanks to Elmhurst. Hard to gain confidence in a team that not only can't beat another CCIW team that doesn't have a lot of success against other common opponents and can't play any consistent basketball.

Augustana lost 89 points - was going to take a hit for barely losing to a team (Elmhurst) who lost later in the week to a team they should have beaten (see above).

Amherst lost 93 points - I think the voters have given up on the hot start Amherst had and maybe realized this team is still very young and inexperienced compared to Amherst teams of the past. Their point loss is similiar to the two teams above for a conference loss.

WPI lost 73 points - they just got back into the poll last week and then lost. You had to expect the voters who put them on their ballots last week were going to feel burned and would remove them.

Now, we all know you are alluding to the fact that maybe the CCIW teams weren't punished enough. I would say they were punished about the same as other teams that took losses this wwek. However, to point out they slide only two slots versus other teams that dropped out of the poll is not a complete arguement.

The top of the poll is getting most of the Top 25 voters' points. Heck, my ballot has 22 of the 25 teams on it, which tells me a lot of voters are in agreement with the top 10 or 15 teams. The result: when the middle-of-the-poll teams take a hit, there isn't a ton of downward movement; when the bottom-of-the-poll teams take a hit, they will drop out. Just a couple of voters could switch their bottom ten around or move one or two teams out and you would have a different result on the bottom.

Look at the big picture and the entire story than just a narrow version of it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 09, 2009, 08:26:58 PM

Quote from: sac on February 09, 2009, 07:58:38 PM
...

UT-Dallas loses to Miss College and drops out from #19

WPI loses to Clark and drops out from #22

Mississippi College scares me more than any other ASC team.

WPI lost Concordia-Austin over the break. I don't doubt that they aren't good. I just think that the pabegg index at #13 is much too high! I would like to see a WPI-UNE game to give me a better understanding. (WPI is "indexed" above Elms and Salem State, both of whom have defeated the Engineers.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 09, 2009, 08:29:46 PM

Massey is now updated through the weekend's games. It's top conferences are: #1 WIAC, #2 CCIW, #3 NWC, #4 MIAC, #5 UAA.

WIAC and CCIW teams in the Massey Top 25 are:

CCIW (6)
#7 Wheaton
#8 Elmhurst
#11 Augustana
#16 Carthage
#20 North Central
#25 Millikin

WIAC (5)
#2 UW-Platteville
#3 UW-Stevens Point
#6 UW-Whitewater
#21 UW-Oshkosh
#24 UW-Eau Claire

Carthage head coach Bosko Djurickovic said the following to the Milwaukee Journal Star last week:

"The league, right now, is better than it has ever been in all the years I've been around, and that is close to 40 now as a player and a coach," said Bosko Djurickovic, in his 13th season as Carthage coach. "The league has never been as good top to bottom."

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/statecolleges/39182127.html

It's been a fun league to follow from afar this year...but it would be more fun if my team was not starting 3 sophomores and 2 freshmen. Not the right year to try to get away with that! I may try to attend as many CCIW commencements as possible this May, personally seeing to it that the CCIW Class of 2009 takes a hike.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 09, 2009, 08:34:16 PM

Good post, D-Mac!

Hmmm...

I had 23 teams on my poster poll that are on the Top 25, including my Top 22 , so I am not that incongruous with the national guys!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 09, 2009, 08:34:31 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on February 09, 2009, 08:29:46 PM

It's been fun league to follow from afar this year.

I agree Q, I've enjoyed following it and even had all 4 CCIW livestat games up on the monitor Saturday night.

But the 'bigger picture' and Dave puts it is, this is not the first time the CCIW teams have been dealt with differently in the poll this year, nor will it probably be the last.

Like I said, just the facts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 09, 2009, 09:19:42 PM

Quote from: sac on February 09, 2009, 07:58:38 PM
Elmhurst loses for the 2nd time this season to unranked Millikin and drops 2 spots.

Augustana loses to Elmhurst and drops 2 spots.

Contrasted with

Capital loses to unranked Muskingum, and drops 6 spots

St. Norbert loses to unranked Monmouth and drops 8 spots.

UT-Dallas loses to Miss College and drops out from #19

Amherst loses to Rhode Island College and drops out from #20

WPI loses to Clark and drops out from #22

Just the facts.

Since the front page is highlighting the SOS rankings, today might not have been the most opportune time for this post! ;)

While Augie is listed as only the 131st toughest schedule (which will rise with further conference play), Elmhurst is 18th (which puts them SIXTH among CCIW teams).

By contrast, Capital is 46th, WPI 49th, UT-Dallas 139th, Amherst 224th, and St. Norbert is 336th.

[But I'll toss ya a bone - Calvin is 357th! ;)]

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 09, 2009, 10:54:36 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 09, 2009, 09:19:42 PM

[But I'll toss ya a bone - Calvin is 357th! ;)]

Only because through the second half of the round-robin they've played the bottom 3 teams in the MIAA.

Their next 3 are Hope 8-3, Olivet 6-5, Albion 9-6

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 09, 2009, 11:10:04 PM

Quote from: sac on February 09, 2009, 10:54:36 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 09, 2009, 09:19:42 PM

[But I'll toss ya a bone - Calvin is 357th! ;)]

Only because through the second half of the round-robin they've played the bottom 3 teams in the MIAA.

Their next 3 are Hope 8-3, Olivet 6-5, Albion 9-6

True, but I don't think they'll catch Hope's 96th.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 09, 2009, 11:11:42 PM

Probably not, but the only real difference between the two's SOS is going to be Wheaton (for Hope) and the difference in each others in-region record.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 09, 2009, 11:19:45 PM

Quote from: sac on February 09, 2009, 11:11:42 PM
Probably not, but the only real difference between the two's SOS is going to be Wheaton (for Hope) and the difference in each others in-region record.

True, again. And while there has to be somewhere an arbitrary cut-off point, it sucks for Calvin to miss by 2 miles (especially since I could definitely drive from Calvin to Wheaton in under 200 miles - I wouldn't, but I could).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 10, 2009, 12:15:43 AM

Quote from: sac on February 09, 2009, 07:58:38 PM
Just (some of) the facts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 10, 2009, 01:29:41 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 10, 2009, 12:15:43 AM
Quote from: sac on February 09, 2009, 07:58:38 PM
Just (some of) the facts.

Please don't quote me and then change the words Pat..........I think I've seen you admonish others for doing that to you. Thanks. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 10, 2009, 05:11:46 AM

Quote from: sac on February 09, 2009, 08:34:31 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on February 09, 2009, 08:29:46 PM

It's been fun league to follow from afar this year.

I agree Q, I've enjoyed following it and even had all 4 CCIW livestat games up on the monitor Saturday night.

But the 'bigger picture' and Dave puts it is, this is not the first time the CCIW teams have been dealt with differently in the poll this year, nor will it probably be the last.

Like I said, just the facts.

sac - I believe what I showed was that the CCIW teams are not being dealth with differently in the poll. They got the same treatment as Amherst and WPI who both lost considerable number of points after a week with a loss. Now, they certainly got treated better than St. Norbert who had a horrid week, but that had to be expected.

Your example doesn't make that point since you chose to ignore how many points the teams were docked and instead concentrated only on the number of slots they fell. Again... look at the entire picture and not just the "facts" you chose to look at.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 10, 2009, 11:00:06 AM

Quote from: Dave "d-mac" McHugh on February 10, 2009, 05:11:46 AM
Quote from: sac on February 09, 2009, 08:34:31 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on February 09, 2009, 08:29:46 PM

It's been fun league to follow from afar this year.

I agree Q, I've enjoyed following it and even had all 4 CCIW livestat games up on the monitor Saturday night.

But the 'bigger picture' and Dave puts it is, this is not the first time the CCIW teams have been dealt with differently in the poll this year, nor will it probably be the last.

Like I said, just the facts.
sac - I believe what I showed was that the CCIW teams are not being dealth with differently in the poll. They got the same treatment as Amherst and WPI who both lost considerable number of points after a week with a loss. Now, they certainly got treated better than St. Norbert who had a horrid week, but that had to be expected.

Your example doesn't make that point since you chose to ignore how many points the teams were docked and instead concentrated only on the number of slots they fell. Again... look at the entire picture and not just the "facts" you chose to look at.

Bigger picture Dave.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 10, 2009, 11:54:04 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on February 09, 2009, 08:29:46 PM
It's been a fun league to follow from afar this year...but it would be more fun if my team was not starting 3 sophomores and 2 freshmen. Not the right year to try to get away with that! I may try to attend as many CCIW commencements as possible this May, personally seeing to it that the CCIW Class of 2009 takes a hike.

I echo Bob, especially since my team is just as young, and is injury-plagued to boot. But the flip side of the CCIW's standout class of 2009 is the fact that the CCIW class of 2010 is exceptionally weak. Next season the CCIW will be dominated by juniors and sophomores, which means that in 2009-10 the CCIW won't have that gaudy collective 71-17 non-conference record and we'll be less likely to get a weekly manifesto from sac or OxyBob about Top 25 pollsters making excessive allowances for CCIW teams that lose.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 10, 2009, 12:03:01 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 10, 2009, 11:54:04 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on February 09, 2009, 08:29:46 PM
It's been a fun league to follow from afar this year...but it would be more fun if my team was not starting 3 sophomores and 2 freshmen. Not the right year to try to get away with that! I may try to attend as many CCIW commencements as possible this May, personally seeing to it that the CCIW Class of 2009 takes a hike.

I echo Bob, especially since my team is just as young, and is injury-plagued to boot. But the flip side of the CCIW's standout class of 2009 is the fact that the CCIW class of 2010 is exceptionally weak. Next season the CCIW will be dominated by juniors and sophomores, which means that in 2009-10 the CCIW won't have that gaudy collective 71-17 non-conference record and we'll be less likely to get a weekly manifesto from sac or OxyBob about Top 25 pollsters making excessive allowances for CCIW teams that lose.

Yeah, but 2010-11 may drive them completely over the edge! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 10, 2009, 12:07:53 PM

Quote from: sac on February 10, 2009, 01:29:41 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 10, 2009, 12:15:43 AM
Quote from: sac on February 09, 2009, 07:58:38 PM
Just (some of) the facts.

Please don't quote me and then change the words Pat..........I think I've seen you admonish others for doing that to you. Thanks. :)

I bolded my changes just like others do.

I can see you're trying to be funny but honestly, you presented such a slanted view of the "facts" that it can't go unchallenged.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 10, 2009, 12:16:56 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 10, 2009, 12:07:53 PM
Quote from: sac on February 10, 2009, 01:29:41 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 10, 2009, 12:15:43 AM
Quote from: sac on February 09, 2009, 07:58:38 PM
Just (some of) the facts.

Please don't quote me and then change the words Pat..........I think I've seen you admonish others for doing that to you. Thanks. :)

I bolded my changes just like others do.

I can see you're trying to be funny but honestly, you presented such a slanted view of the "facts" that it can't go unchallenged.

actually I wasn't trying to be funny, just polite.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 10, 2009, 12:07:53 PM
you presented such a slanted view of the "facts" that it can't go unchallenged.

there's some irony there hope you can see it. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 10, 2009, 12:56:17 PM

All conferences go through cycles -- cycles that are directly related to the quality of the players from season to season. The really good years are typically the ones with talented and deep senior classes, or with incredible young talent. The "down" years usually come when the league, collectively, is young.

The CCIW is regarded as one of D3's top 3 leagues. Like other top leagues, when the CCIW goes through one of those really good seasons, it can have 3-4 legitimate Top 25-caliber teams.

For example, 2005-06:

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/06/final.htm

#3 Illinois Wesleyan (9-5 CCIW, went to Final Four)
#11 Augustana (11-3, won CCIW regular season title)
#19 North Central (9-5, won conference tournament)
RV Elmhurst (9-5 CCIW)

The games played between these 4 teams, except I believe one, all came down to the final seconds. They were dead-even. IWU "validated" the strength of this group by getting to Salem. The league featured some outstanding talent that season, led by seniors Rick Harrigan, M.O.P. (Augustana), Adam Dauksas (IWU), Keelan Amelianovich (IWU), Chris Martin (Elmhurst). Junior Anthony Simmons (North Central) was oustanding as well.

http://www.cciw.org/winter_bball_m/05_06_MBBallconf.htm

2000-01 also comes to mind...

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/01/final.htm

#3 Illinois Wesleyan (10-4 CCIW, Final Four)
#5 Carthage (11-3 CCIW, Elite Eight)
#9 Elmhurst (12-2 CCIW, won regular season title, Sweet 16)
RV Augustana (9-5 CCIW)

Again, some big-time players leading the way on these teams: senior Ryan Knuppel, M.O.P. (Elmhurst), junior Jason Wiertel (Carthage), soph. Rob Garnes (Carthage), soph Antoine McDaniel (Carthage), and soph. Luke Kasten (IWU). Several young guys who were special talents.

http://www.cciw.org/winter_bball_m/2001allconference.php

After two seasons where the CCIW really only had 2 Top 25-caliber teams (2006-07 final poll - Augustana #11, Elmhurst #16...2007-08 final poll - Augustana #5, Wheaton #11), 2008-09 is one those very strong years at the top again (and this year strong top to bottom). Wheaton, Augustana, and Elmhurst are legitimate Top-25 caliber teams, and in my opinion, any of the 3 have the talent to get to Salem. Augustana starts 4 seniors...Elmhurst has seniors Brent Ruch and Ryan Burks...Wheaton has seniors Kent Raymond and Andy Wiele.

Next year those guys graduate and the cycle will continue.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 10, 2009, 02:46:56 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on February 10, 2009, 12:56:17 PM
The CCIW is regarded as one of D3's top 3 leagues. Like other top leagues, when the CCIW goes through one of those really good seasons, it can have 3-4 legitimate Top 25-caliber teams.

For example, 2005-06

That wasn't a "really good" CCIW season, though, at least not in the sense that 2000-01 and this season are really good CCIW seasons. In 2005-06, the CCIW was an extremely top-heavy circuit. As Bob said, the top four teams were outstanding. But the bottom four was quite poor by CCIW second-division standards. Wheaton (11-14) and Carthage (10-15) were significantly below par in terms of typical fifth- and sixth-place CCIW finishers. Millikin (10-15) was about as good as you'd expect a normal CCIW seventh-place team to be, but NPU (4-21) was absolutely wretched.

What makes a conference strong or not strong is how it measures from top to bottom.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 10, 2009, 02:57:35 PM

Confusion on the new poll..........are we talking this year or all time? Are we including old gyms no longer used?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ziggy on February 10, 2009, 03:00:10 PM

Quote from: sac on February 10, 2009, 02:57:35 PM
Confusion on the new poll..........are we talking this year or all time? Are we including old gyms no longer used?

I included hope and calvin old and new, as well as the salem civic center. I apologize if this was cheating.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 10, 2009, 05:03:57 PM

all-time, and I guess you can use the old and new gyms of a school.

Scrimmages and exibitions don't count. Salem Civic Center works fine.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 10, 2009, 05:05:59 PM

How about D3 vs. non-D3 at a non-D3 site?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 10, 2009, 05:14:09 PM

Any gym to see a D3 men's game...at least one D3 team had to be playing...yeah.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 10, 2009, 05:29:10 PM

I'm interested in what the top score in this game will be. I know it won't be mine, but it's a respectable figure that can serve as a good start for Can You Top This?

To the best of my recollection, I make my count 28, which excludes exhibitions and venues where I've only seen women's games.
Albion -- Augustana -- Baldwin-Wallace -- Caltech -- Calvin (old) -- Capital -- Case Western Reserve (old) -- Case Western Reserve (new) -- Denison -- Hanover -- Hiram -- Illinois Wesleyan -- Kenyon (old) -- Kenyon (new) -- Mt. Vernon Nazarene -- Muskingum -- Oberlin -- Occidental -- Ohio Northern -- Ohio Wesleyan -- Otterbein -- Salem Civic Center -- Savannah Civic Center -- St. John Fisher -- Washington U. in St. Louis -- Westmont -- Wittenberg -- Wooster

P.S. For those with long institutional memories: yes, it is no mistake, I've never been to Rhodes. :-[

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dansand on February 10, 2009, 06:10:14 PM

Well, I can't top David. I think I'm at 23. All but seven have come in the last two years, so with the exception of Grinnell & Bradley, I think they are each of the school's current gyms:

Augustana               Robertson Field House (Peoria, IL)
Beloit                  Simpson
Carthage                St. Ambrose
Chicago                 St. Norbert
Coe                     UW-LaCrosse
Cornell (IA)            UW-Oshkosh
Elmhurst                UW-Platteville
Grinnell (old gym)      Wartburg
Illinois Wesleyan       Webster
Millikin                Wharton Field House (Moline, IL)
North Central           Wheaton
North Park

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 10, 2009, 07:41:59 PM

I totally muffed up the poll then, 24 if you count Baldwin-Wallace and VanAndel

Adrian--Albion--Alma--Calvin(old)--Calvin(new tommorrow)--Hope(Civic)--Hope(Dow)--Hope(DeVos)--Kzoo--Olivet(old)--Olivet(new)--Trine--Wittenberg--Wooster--Capital--Baldwin-Wallace(women)--Aurora--Wheaton--Carthage--UWStevens Pt.--Aquinas--Cornerstone--Chicago(old)--VanAndel Arena--Salem

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Marty Peretz on February 10, 2009, 07:45:41 PM

Amherst, Williams, Wash.U., NYU, Salem Civic Center, Smith, Union, . Thought there would have been more. I'm still thinking.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 10, 2009, 07:49:16 PM

This one certainly had me thinking:
Goucher... Catholic... Gallaudet... Marymount... Mary Washington... St. Mary's (MD)... Salisbury... York... Hood... Frostburg... Johns Hopkins... Stevenson... F&M... Messiah... Ursinus... Gettysburg... Washington Col... Ramapo... Randolph-Macon... Virginia Wesleyan... Roanoke... Centre... Allegheny... Salem Civic Center...

That is 24... and I know I am forgetting a couple from awhile back.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 10, 2009, 08:47:58 PM

If you were on a d3 team (as a player or coach), do you get to count all those gyms?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on February 10, 2009, 08:59:47 PM

13 D3 venues where I've attended games:

Rhodes
Centre
Hendrix (old & new)
Millsaps
Wooster
Trinity (TX)
Sewanee
Wittenberg
LaGrange
Southwestern
Oglethorpe
Adrian
Olivet

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 10, 2009, 09:20:13 PM

My total would be a shamefully low dozen or so. When a student I'm reasonably certain I went to all nine CCIW venues (Carroll was still a member at the time), and MAY have gone to a nearby non-con venue or two, but can't think who it would be.

Since those Jurassic days (which technically may not even count, since I believe my student days pre-date d3 :(), I can claim only three: Wheaton and IWU are both in new facilities since then, plus Adrian. I've toured DeVos (Hope) and hope to see games there in March, but that will be if IWU makes the WOMEN's final four.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Wolfpac on February 10, 2009, 09:38:42 PM

Here is my list of visits:

Catholic Elizabethtown Rosemont
Arcadia Scranton Salem (finals)
Eastern Wilkes(Kings) Ursinus
Goucher Marywood Waynesburg (pa)
Messiah Misericordia
Franklin/Marshall Wesley
Widener William Patterson
Immaculata Rutgers
Neuman Gettysburg

Did not get up to Centenary, Baptist Bible, or Philly Bible yet. If you count the Palestra, and Madison Square Garden I have seen UMMA and NotreDame Mryland women vs Cabrini there....... oh and I live at Cabrini.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D.B. Cooper on February 10, 2009, 09:58:10 PM

My list since I saw my 1st game at Mayser Center in 1978 is:

Southern Maine, Trinity (CT), Rochester, Elmira, William Patterson, FDU Madison (Florhem), Rowan, Wittenberg (1991 Final Four), Albright, Alvernia, Dickinson (Both old tiny Gym & Kline), Elizabethtown, F&M, Gettysburg, Haverford, Johns Hopkins, Kings, LVC (Old & New Gyms), Marywood, Western Maryland (old tin roof) & McDaniel (Gill), Moravian, Muhlenberg, Scranton, Susquehanna, Swarthmore, Ursinus, Washington College (MD), Widener, Wilkes, York (PA).

Other venues I've seen D3 games at include:

Princeton, Hofstra (Saw F&M lose to Manhattan & beat Colgate) & Philadelphia Textile.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 10, 2009, 10:46:21 PM

Gyms I have d3 games at (that I can remember):

UAA gyms (11): Brandeis, Brandeis when they played in a high school gym due to blackout (2002), Carnegie Mellon, Case Western, Chicago (new), Chicago (old), Emory, NYU, Rochester, WashU, Hopkins (no longer member)

NEWMAC (7): Babson, Clark, CGA, MIT, Springfield, Wheaton, WPI

Misc. Northeast (5): Emerson, Emmanuel, Lesley, Mass-Boston, Newbury

Other Misc. (10): Allegheny (PA), Grove City (PA), Hiram (OH), Hood (MD), La Roche (PA), Oberlin, Penn State- Altoona, Penn State - Behrend, Robert Morris (PA), Washington and Jefferson (PA)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 10, 2009, 11:22:31 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on February 10, 2009, 10:46:21 PM
Gyms I have d3 games at (that I can remember):

...

The classic rock station that I listen to has a saying...

Songs you can't forget from times you can't remember. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 10, 2009, 11:31:26 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 10, 2009, 11:22:31 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on February 10, 2009, 10:46:21 PM
Gyms I have d3 games at (that I can remember):

...
The classic rock station that I listen to has a saying...

Songs you can't forget from times you can't remember. :D

Or, as the saying goes, "those who remember the sixties weren't IN the sixties"! :D

[With it hopefully understood that 'the sixties' actually ran roughly 1965-74. I have vague recollections of some of that time. ;D]

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BJ - DSU SID on February 10, 2009, 11:48:56 PM

Interesting question, so I re-searched it.

Men's Game in 24 different gyms (Lincoln, Lebanon Valley, Moravian, Scranton, Hampden-Sydney, Va. Wesleyan, King's (Pa.), Del. Valley, Lycoming, Drew, Albright, FDU-Florham, Wilkes, Misericordia, Arcadia, Muhlenberg, Cabrini, F&M, Goucher, Elizabethtown, Manhattanville, Alvernia, Gwynedd-Mercy, DeSales).

Women's Game in 38 different gyms (Goucher, Haverford, Johns Hopkins, Embry-Riddle (Fl.), NYU, Washington (Md.), Case Western, Chicago, Dickinson, Gettysburg, Muhlenberg, McDaniel, F&M, Susquehanna, Kean, Gwynedd-Mercy, Scranton, King's, Del. Valley, Lycoming, Drew, Widener, FDU-Florham, Misericordia, Wilkes, Messiah, Moravian, Albright, Cabrini, DeSales, Alvernia, Richard Stockton, Wesley, Manhattanville, Arcadia, Howard Payne, Eastern, and last but not least UNLV (aux.)...the gym that Tarkanian was filmed doing illegal practices).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 11, 2009, 12:42:44 AM

Augustana
Aurora
Benedictine
Calvin (pre-remodel)
Carroll
Carthage (pre-remodel)
Chicago (Crown Field House)
Chicago (Ratner Center)
Concordia IL
Dominican
Elmhurst
Illinois Tech (I've seen IIT host NPU and NCC)
Illinois Wesleyan (Fred Young Fieldhouse)
Illinois Wesleyan (Shirk Center)
Lake Forest
Loras (old)
Millikin
North Central
North Park
St. Xavier (saw SXU host Carthage)
Wheaton IL (the old venue, Centennial Gym, and the new venue, King Arena, occupy the same space but the latter is oriented E-W whereas the former was oriented N-S; therefore, I'm only counting it once)
UW-Whitewater

And here's the weirdest one: Manley Field House at Syracuse University, the home of the Orange prior to the opening of the Carrier Dome. I saw them play Westminster (PA) there once, back when the Titans were NAIA.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 11, 2009, 01:06:52 AM

Greg, don't do this to me! :o If Centennial and King are only counted as one, my pathetic total drops even further!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: OxyBob on February 11, 2009, 01:11:43 AM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on February 10, 2009, 05:14:09 PM
Any gym to see a D3 men's game...at least one D3 team had to be playing...yeah.

Azusa Pacific
Biola
Buena Vista
Cal Baptist
Cal Lutheran
Cal Poly San Luis Obispo
Cal State Dominguez Hills
Cal State Fullerton
Cal State Northridge
Caltech
Chapman
Claremont
Concordia-Irvine
Hope International
La Sierra
La Verne
Occidental
Pomona
Puget Sound
The Master's
Redlands
San Diego
UC Riverside
UC Santa Cruz
UNLV
USC
Westmont
Whittier

28 total

OxyBob

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 11, 2009, 02:49:30 AM

Here goes nothing...

Men
Stevens Point (Quandt)
Stevens Point (Berg)
Whitewater
Oshkosh
Platteville
Superior
Stout
Eau Claire
River Falls
La Crosse
Wheaton (Centennial Gym)
Elmhurst
North Central
Coe
Viterbo
St. Francis U
Carroll
Lawrence
Marian
Edgewood
Carnegie Mellon
La Roche
McDermott Center (Las Vegas, NV)
Gustavus Adolphus
Puget Sound
Salem Civic Center
Lakeland
Finlandia University (was Suomi College at the time)

Women
IWU (I stepped in the gym when the women were playing when I was pretty young... it was the Shirk though, so it was post '94)
Rose Hulman

I also watched Point's women in both the Quandt and the Berg... and at each of the other WIAC schools, but those aren't distinct gyms.

So I think that's 30 gyms.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on February 11, 2009, 08:37:43 AM

I voted totally wrong on the poll. :-[ I guess it's 13 for me, not 9.

Calvin (old), Calvin (new), Hope, Olivet, Albion, Trine, Kalamazoo, Defiance, Wheaton, Aurora, Salem Civic Center, Grand Rapids Christian HS (while Calvin was under construction), Aquinas (NAIA vs. D3)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BUBeaverFan on February 11, 2009, 09:02:17 AM

Bluffton, Defiance, Mt. St. Joe, Manchester, Anderson, Franklin, Hanover, Transylvania, Heidelberg, ONU, Wilmington, B-W, Witt, Denison, Capital, Otterbein, John Carrol, Hiram, Case, Calvin (old), Tiffin U, Albion, Adrian, Tri-State (now Trine), Chicago, Carnegie-Mellon, North Central, Illinois Wesleyan, Salem Civic Center. (28 + Salem = 29) Might have missed a few I'm sure.

Believe it or not I haven't seen Wash U play at home, yet. I guess I have another year to try and make that happen (or maybe I can sneek in one of the last 3 home games this year).

Man if I could count NAIA schools the list would be a bit longer. I traveled with the Tiffin University men's team for about 7 years when they were NAIA including a couple of NAIA tourney runs. Several teams I watched when they were NAIA and now they are D3, I need to go see them again so I can count them. Total college basketball gyms (non-DI) might be around 60 or so.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hoosier Titan on February 11, 2009, 09:17:21 AM

Augustana
Benedictine
Carthage (old gym)
Chicago
DePauw
Elmhurst
Hanover
Illinois College
Illinois Wesleyan
Lawrence
Millikin
North Central
North Park
Salem Civic Center
Wabash
UW-Whitewater
Wooster

I think that's 16; not too bad for not having seen a D3 game until 2003.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 11, 2009, 03:04:35 PM

I'm around a (shameful) 25. :-[ >:( ;D Not nearly as many as I thought.

WIAC-Stevens Point, Platteville, River Falls, Eau Claire, Stout, Oshkosh, La Crosse (haven't made it to Superior yet)

MWC-Carroll, Lawrence, Ripon, St. Norbert

NATHCON (old LMC)-Edgewood, Lakeland, Wisconsin Lutheran, Marian, Aurora, MSOE

Others-Northern Michigan, U of Chicago, Clarke College, Carthage, and of course, Salem Civic Center.

*Kemper Arena to see the NAIA Nationals

Most interesting gym-Northern Michigan-played inside an ice rink.
Smallest-Edgewood-it's a high school too, and it looks like a YMCA gym.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 11, 2009, 03:56:39 PM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on February 11, 2009, 03:04:35 PM
I'm around a (shameful) 25. :-[ >:( ;D Not nearly as many as I thought.

I agree... I thought I would have more than 30. We just played a whole bunch of obscure schools at home!

...I wonder what the number of teams that people have seen... or the number of DIII gyms, even if not for a game... guess those are lists for next week!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 11, 2009, 08:47:19 PM

Yeah, I screwed up my vote in the poll as well. I think I'm only at 13 (I voted 15-20).

For Men's Basketball:

Eastern Nazarene, Gordon, Anna Maria, Endicott, Colby-Sawyer, Elms, Emerson (although it was before the construction of their current gym so the game was in a Rec Center in Roxbury), Becker, Curry, Newbury (Hellenic College's gym; I saw another team there as well, but I forget who), Nichols, Salve Regina, and Grinnell.

I attended a women's playoff game at Rowan in 2000 and I've been in Johnson State's gym, although not for a game.

I have been in a number of additional gyms used for basketball while attending volleyball matches - UMass-Dartmouth, Salem State, UNE, Babson, Bridgewater State, Johnson & Wales, RIC, and Regis.

College was a while ago, I guess some of them have run together.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on February 11, 2009, 11:23:26 PM

Men's:
played (10)@ Scranton(CYC), Kings'(Scanlon), Wilkes, Moravian, Upsala, Lafayette, Muhlenberg, Lycoming, Susquehanna, and, the ultimate for a Pennsy guy, the Penn Palestra;
viewed (10) Scranton(Long), Kings'(new one), Catholic(old gym and Dufour), Gettysburg, Albright, Goucher, DeSales, Mt.St. Mary(Md), F&M(1976 championship);
women(5) Dickinson, Messiah, Salisbury, Johns Hopkins, Va. Wesleyan(2005 final 4)
dances (2) Misericordia, Marywood(Bo Diddley-sorry Bo, all the songs sounded the same)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D.B. Cooper on February 11, 2009, 11:45:01 PM

Ronk

What championship was at F&M in 1976? I thought Albright hosted perhaps one of the 1st Men's Final Fours at that time frame. I'm pretty sure F&M never hosted anything more than a few Elite Eights with the initial one being against Jersey City State in 1979.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on February 12, 2009, 12:24:59 AM

Yes, it was Albright in '76(there's a pic in Scranton's media guide from the championship game); I confused it with a 1st round game against Montclair St. that I saw in '84 @ F&M. The years are running together.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 12, 2009, 07:57:03 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	617	St. Thomas	22-0	def. Bethel, 75-72; 02/14 at Gustavus Adolphus
#2	608	Washington U.	19-1	02/13 at Emory; 02/15 at Case Western Reserve
#3	571	UW-Stevens Point	20-2	def. UW-Eau Claire, 61-58; 02/14 at #5 UW-Whitewater
#4	547	UW-Platteville	19-3	LOST at #5 UW-Whitewater, 62-75; 02/14 vs. UW-Superior
#5	501	UW-Whitewater	19-3	def. #4 UW-Platteville, 75-62; 02/14 vs. #3 UW-Stevens Point
#6	488	Puget Sound	19-2	02/13 vs. #30 Whitworth; 02/14 vs. Whitman
#7	454	Buena Vista	21-2	def. Dubuque, 74-70; 02/14 at Loras
#8	431	Ithaca	21-1	def. Stevens, 81-68; 02/14 vs. St. John Fisher
#9	396	Richard Stockton	22-2	def. Rowan, 65-55
#10	392	Wheaton (Ill.)	19-3	def. #17 Elmhurst, 79-64; 02/14 at Illinois Wesleyan
#11	378	Trinity (Texas)	19-2	02/13 at Millsaps; 02/14 at Hendrix
#12	352	Elms	19-1	def. Becker, 102-80; 02/12 at Daniel Webster; 02/14 at Newbury
#13	324	Middlebury	20-2	02/13 at Trinity (Conn.); 02/14 at #26 Amherst
#14	290	Capital	19-3	def. Mount Union, 77-65; 02/14 at Ohio Northern
#15	282	Mass-Dartmouth	19-3	LOST at #25 Rhode Island College, 71-82; 02/14 vs. Eastern Connecticut
#16	221	Franklin and Marshall	20-2	def. Ursinus, 87-81; 02/14 vs. Haverford
#17	189	Elmhurst	16-6	LOST to #10 Wheaton (Ill.), 64-79; 02/14 at North Park
#18	139	John Carroll	17-4	def. Heidelberg, 105-84; 02/14 vs. Marietta
#19	127	St. Norbert	18-3	def. Ripon, 77-72; 02/14 at Lawrence
#20	119	Augustana	17-6	def. Millikin, 65-55; 02/14 at North Central (Ill.)
#21	108	Carnegie Mellon	16-4	02/13 vs. Brandeis; 02/15 vs. New York University
#22	84	DePauw	17-5	02/14 at #23 Centre
#23	82	Centre	17-4	02/14 vs. #22 DePauw
#24	79	Guilford	18-4	def. Eastern Mennonite, 82-71; 02/14 at Lynchburg
#25	75	Rhode Island College	17-4	def. #15 Mass-Dartmouth, 82-71; 02/12 at Roger Williams; 02/14 at Southern Maine

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	72	Amherst	18-4	02/13 vs. Williams; 02/14 vs. #13 Middlebury
#27	65	Texas-Dallas	19-3	def. University of the Ozarks, 69-54; 02/12 vs. Texas-Tyler
#28	31	Transylvania	16-5	LOST at Franklin, 76-88; 02/14 vs. Bluffton
#29	28	William Paterson	18-5	LOST at Rutgers-Newark, 43-51; 02/14 at Ramapo
#30	26	Whitworth	17-4	02/13 at #6 Puget Sound; 02/14 at Pacific Lutheran
#31	21	Chapman	18-3	02/09 at Golden St. Baptist; 02/12 vs. Hope Int'l
#32	8	Rochester Tech	16-5	LOST at St. John Fisher, 51-72; 02/13 vs. Stevens; 02/15 vs. Hartwick
#33	6	Worcester Polytech	17-4	def. Springfield, 66-62; 02/14 at MIT
T#34	4	DeSales	18-4	def. Muhlenberg, 59-57; LOST at King's, 64-69 OT; 02/14 at Eastern
T#34	4	St. Lawrence	16-4	02/13 at Hobart; 02/14 at Hamilton
T#36	2	McDaniel	17-5	def. Dickinson, 69-55; 02/14 at Washington College
T#36	2	Randolph-Macon	18-5	def. Washington and Lee, 74-66; def. Bridgewater (Va.), 71-38; 02/14 vs. Virginia Wesleyan
T#38	1	Roanoke	16-6	LOST at Hampden-Sydney, 63-67; 02/14 at Eastern Mennonite
T#38	1	Salem State	17-5	LOST to Framingham State, 80-84; 02/14 at Fitchburg State

Other teams to watch (as suggested by posters on this board)

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
---	---	Franklin	14-8	def. #28 Transylvania, 88-76; 02/14 at Mount St. Joseph
---	---	Calvin	15-6	def. Hope, 63-62; 02/14 at Olivet

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: monsoon on February 12, 2009, 04:39:38 PM

Adrian
Albion
Alma
Aquinas
Aurora
Calvin
Carthage
Chicago
Cornerstone - old
Cornerstone - new
Defiance
Elmhurst
Hope (Civic)
Hope (Dow)
Hope (DeVos)
Kalamazoo
North Park
Olivet
Spring Arbor
St. Norbert
Trinity Christian
UW-Stevens Point
Wheaton
Wittenberg
Wooster

TOTAL: 25

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 12, 2009, 10:40:49 PM

I believe I've seen IWU play in exactly 50 gyms. I've seen non-IWU D3 games in two additional venues.

Albion
Augustana
Aurora
Beloit
Benedictine
Bradley*
BYU-Hawaii*
Cal Lutheran
Carthage
Chaminade*
Chicago
Claremont-Mudd-Scripps
DePauw
Eastern Illinois* #
Eckerd*
Elmhurst
Florida Gulf Coast*
Florida Southern*
Fontbonne
Hanover
Hawaii Pacific*
Illinois College
Illinois Wesleyan
Johnson & Wales (FL)*
Kaimuki High School (Honolulu)*
Lawrence
Manchester
Maryville (Tn)
Millikin
North Central
North Park
Northern Illinois*
Northwestern (IL)*
Occidental
Olivet Nazarene*
Randolph-Macon
Ripon
Roanoke
Salem Civic Center*
Southwestern
St. Xavier*
U. of Illinois*
UW-Platteville
UW-Whitewater
Wabash
Wartburg
Wash U
Westminster (Mo.) #
Westmont College*
Wheaton
Wittenberg
Wooster

* non-D3 gym
# non-IWU game

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: oldchap on February 13, 2009, 01:44:17 AM

Number 31 of the "Top 25" ;D Chapman University posted a big win today (2/12) against Hope International, 68-61. Hope is NAIA Division I, considered to be generally more competitive than NCAA Division III and even though Hope's overall record and Conference records are pretty bleak, it nonetheless shows that Chapman is a very competitive team. Chapman's overall record now stands at 20-3.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 13, 2009, 02:21:15 AM

Quote from: oldchap on February 13, 2009, 01:44:17 AM
Number 31 of the "Top 25" ;D Chapman University posted a big win today (2/12) against Hope International, 68-61. Hope is NAIA Division I, considered to be generally more competitive than NCAA Division III and even though Hope's overall record and Conference records are pretty bleak, it nonetheless shows that Chapman is a very competitive team. Chapman's overall record now stands at 20-3.

Translation: HIU is now 4-18 overall, 1-13 in conference.

Not intended as a 'knock' on Chapman, but just because HIU's conference or division are good, that doesn't automatically make it a 'big' win. Millikin beat d1 SIU-E, but MU is hardly a top 25 team just because of that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 13, 2009, 03:45:52 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 13, 2009, 02:21:15 AM
Quote from: oldchap on February 13, 2009, 01:44:17 AM
Number 31 of the "Top 25" ;D Chapman University posted a big win today (2/12) against Hope International, 68-61. Hope is NAIA Division I, considered to be generally more competitive than NCAA Division III and even though Hope's overall record and Conference records are pretty bleak, it nonetheless shows that Chapman is a very competitive team. Chapman's overall record now stands at 20-3.

Translation: HIU is now 4-18 overall, 1-13 in conference.

Not intended as a 'knock' on Chapman, but just because HIU's conference or division are good, that doesn't automatically make it a 'big' win. Millikin beat d1 SIU-E, but MU is hardly a top 25 team just because of that.

Week 2 men's poll: Millikin 0 votes
Dec. 4 Millikin 70 SIUE 59
Week 3 men's poll: Millikin 26 votes

.......and no I don't sleep. :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on February 13, 2009, 09:57:23 AM

I've seen Hope play at 35 different venues:

Adrian
Albion
Alma
Aquinas *
Aurora
Baldwin-Wallace
Calvin (Knollcrest)
Calvin (Van Noord)
Carthage
Central
Chicago
Cornerstone *
Defiance
DePauw
Elmhurst
Ferris State *
Grand Valley *
Hope (Civic Center)
Hope (DeVos)
Hope (Dow)
Kalamazoo
MVP Sports (Orlando Magic Practice facility) *
Northwestern, IA *
Olivet (Cutler)
Olivet (Upton)
Salem Civic Center *
St. Norbert
Trine
Trinity Christian *
University of Detroit *
UW Stevens Point
Van Andel Arena *
Warner Southern *
Wheaton
Wittenberg

* - non D3 facility

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: oldchap on February 13, 2009, 12:55:52 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 13, 2009, 02:21:15 AM
Not intended as a 'knock' on Chapman, but just because HIU's conference or division are good, that doesn't automatically make it a 'big' win. Millikin beat d1 SIU-E, but MU is hardly a top 25 team just because of that.

I didn't imply that Chapman should be a Top 25 team. In fact, I don't think they are, at least not this year. I do believe though that they are good enough to at least make it to the playoffs and I hope that the NCAA "Gods" look at it this way. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on February 13, 2009, 01:44:11 PM

Quote from: oldchap on February 13, 2009, 12:55:52 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 13, 2009, 02:21:15 AM
Not intended as a 'knock' on Chapman, but just because HIU's conference or division are good, that doesn't automatically make it a 'big' win. Millikin beat d1 SIU-E, but MU is hardly a top 25 team just because of that.

I didn't imply that Chapman should be a Top 25 team. In fact, I don't think they are, at least not this year. I do believe though that they are good enough to at least make it to the playoffs and I hope that the NCAA "Gods" look at it this way. :)

Chapman didn't have a very good outcome against U of Dallas a few weeks ago. Dallas currently is 6-16.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: oldchap on February 13, 2009, 04:20:29 PM

Quote from: pbrooks3 on February 13, 2009, 01:44:11 PM
Chapman didn't have a very good outcome against U of Dallas a few weeks ago. Dallas currently is 6-16.

I can't argue this one and I agree, that was an unfortunate loss. Let's put it this way. You replay this game 10 times and Chapman will win it 8 or 9 times. But, since their margin of error is very slim, they could hardly afford a bad day.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: larry_u on February 14, 2009, 06:37:59 PM

# 19 St. Norbert loses 65-38 at Lawrence.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on February 14, 2009, 09:17:25 PM

Quote from: larry_u on February 14, 2009, 06:37:59 PM
# 19 St. Norbert loses 65-38 at Lawrence.

I believe St Norbert has earned a trip outside the top 25 for the coming week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BoBo on February 14, 2009, 10:20:33 PM

#5 UW-Whitewater has now beaten both #4 UW-Platteville and #3 UW-Stevens Point (80-78 OT today) this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on February 14, 2009, 11:09:01 PM

Whitewater goes to #3 unless Wash U takes a loss tomorrow.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 15, 2009, 04:58:21 AM

Quote from: pbrooks3 on February 14, 2009, 11:09:01 PM
Whitewater goes to #3 unless Wash U takes a loss tomorrow.

Point #3
Platteville #4
Whitewater #5

Whitewater beats both Point and Platteville...

Way to go out on a limb! lol ;D :D ;) :P :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on February 15, 2009, 10:28:00 AM

Actually I'd probably rank the top 3 this way:

Wash U
Whitewater
Point

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on February 15, 2009, 12:52:10 PM

Quote from: pbrooks3 on February 15, 2009, 10:28:00 AM
Actually I'd probably rank the top 3 this way:

Wash U
Whitewater
Point

You mean 2, 3, and 4 after St. Thomas ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on February 15, 2009, 01:51:32 PM

Quote from: frodotwo on February 15, 2009, 12:52:10 PM
Quote from: pbrooks3 on February 15, 2009, 10:28:00 AM
Actually I'd probably rank the top 3 this way:

Wash U
Whitewater
Point

No, I meant what I said. I'll give #4 to St Thomas.
You mean 2, 3, and 4 after St. Thomas ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Thunder Dutch on February 15, 2009, 05:35:31 PM

what about Wheaton? Now that Kent is back, they've been dominating again. In games where Kent plays more than 20 minutes, Wheaton is undefeated. And pretty dominant too. Even with 3 losses, Wheaton has a +14.1 winning margin, and the last 5 games, with Kent completely healthy - wins by 9 and 15 at nationally ranked opponents, another 26 point away win, and two home wins by 23 and 17 points.
I think they're definitely in the top 5 along with Wash U and the three WIAC teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on February 15, 2009, 06:00:56 PM

It's a very tough issue. They were clearly not a top team when Kent Raymond was out. However, you can't simply discount those losses. Ideally, you could rank Wheaton+Kent Raymond and Wheaton-Kent Raymond as different teams. If Raymond IS healthy and STAYS healthy, Wheaton will likely get a worse seed than they should, but will be a team that no one wants to face in the tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 15, 2009, 06:01:20 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Men's games:
Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	617	St. Thomas	23-0	def. Bethel, 75-72; def. Gustavus Adolphus, 72-59
#2	608	Washington U.	21-1	def. Emory, 71-68; def. Case Western Reserve, 71-63
#3	571	UW-Stevens Point	20-3	def. UW-Eau Claire, 61-58; LOST at #5 UW-Whitewater, 78-80 OT
#4	547	UW-Platteville	20-3	LOST at #5 UW-Whitewater, 62-75; def. UW-Superior, 69-53
#5	501	UW-Whitewater	20-3	def. #4 UW-Platteville, 75-62; def. #3 UW-Stevens Point, 80-78 OT
#6	488	Puget Sound	21-2	def. #30 Whitworth, 81-71; def. Whitman, 82-72
#7	454	Buena Vista	22-2	def. Dubuque, 74-70; def. Loras, 69-62
#8	431	Ithaca	22-1	def. Stevens, 81-68; def. St. John Fisher, 77-67
#9	396	Richard Stockton	22-2	def. Rowan, 65-55
#10	392	Wheaton (Ill.)	20-3	def. #17 Elmhurst, 79-64; def. Illinois Wesleyan, 86-60
#11	378	Trinity (Texas)	20-3	LOST at Millsaps, 67-86; def. Hendrix, 71-67 OT
#12	352	Elms	21-1	def. Becker, 102-80; def. Daniel Webster, 95-72; def. Newbury, 78-59
#13	324	Middlebury	21-3	def. Trinity (Conn.), 78-76 2OT; LOST at #26 Amherst, 64-71
#14	290	Capital	20-3	def. Mount Union, 77-65; def. Ohio Northern, 68-64
#15	282	Mass-Dartmouth	20-3	LOST at #25 Rhode Island College, 71-82; def. Eastern Connecticut, 100-88
#16	221	Franklin and Marshall	21-2	def. Ursinus, 87-81; def. Haverford, 74-42
#17	189	Elmhurst	17-6	LOST to #10 Wheaton (Ill.), 64-79; def. North Park, 88-69
#18	139	John Carroll	18-4	def. Heidelberg, 105-84; def. Marietta, 85-76
#19	127	St. Norbert	18-4	def. Ripon, 77-72; LOST at Lawrence, 38-65
#20	119	Augustana	17-7	def. Millikin, 65-55; LOST at North Central (Ill.), 62-65
#21	108	Carnegie Mellon	17-5	LOST to Brandeis, 63-66; def. New York University, 79-73
#22	84	DePauw	17-6	LOST at #23 Centre, 50-75
#23	82	Centre	18-4	def. #22 DePauw, 75-50
#24	79	Guilford	19-4	def. Eastern Mennonite, 82-71; def. Lynchburg, 85-69
#25	75	Rhode Island College	19-4	def. #15 Mass-Dartmouth, 82-71; def. Roger Williams, 66-50; def. Southern Maine, 86-72

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	72	Amherst	19-5	LOST to Williams, 78-89; def. #13 Middlebury, 71-64
#27	65	Texas-Dallas	20-3	def. University of the Ozarks, 69-54; def. Texas-Tyler, 55-48
#28	31	Transylvania	17-5	LOST at Franklin, 76-88; def. Bluffton, 58-53
#29	28	William Paterson	19-5	LOST at Rutgers-Newark, 43-51; def. Ramapo, 81-59
#30	26	Whitworth	18-5	LOST at #6 Puget Sound, 71-81; def. Pacific Lutheran, 83-57
#31	21	Chapman	20-3	def. Golden St. Baptist, 82-37; def. Hope Int'l, 68-61
#32	8	Rochester Tech	17-6	LOST at St. John Fisher, 51-72; def. Stevens, 74-68; LOST to Hartwick, 72-80
#33	6	Worcester Polytech	18-4	def. Springfield, 66-62; def. MIT, 72-55
T#34	4	DeSales	18-5	def. Muhlenberg, 59-57; LOST at King's, 64-69 OT; LOST at Eastern, 42-54
T#34	4	St. Lawrence	18-4	def. Hobart, 70-65; def. Hamilton, 75-62
T#36	2	McDaniel	17-6	def. Dickinson, 69-55; LOST at Washington College, 57-74
T#36	2	Randolph-Macon	19-5	def. Washington and Lee, 74-66; def. Bridgewater (Va.), 71-38; def. Virginia Wesleyan, 70-58
T#38	1	Roanoke	17-6	LOST at Hampden-Sydney, 63-67; def. Eastern Mennonite, 84-63
T#38	1	Salem State	18-5	LOST to Framingham State, 80-84; def. Fitchburg State, 84-55

Other teams to watch (as suggested by posters on this board)

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
---	---	Calvin	16-6	def. Hope, 63-62; def. Olivet, 72-61
---	---	Franklin	15-8	def. #28 Transylvania, 88-76; def. Mount St. Joseph, 91-78
---	---	St. Mary's (Md.)	20-4	def. Mary Washington, 56-53; def. Gallaudet, 84-74

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 16, 2009, 07:40:44 PM

New Top 25 poll just came out. St Thomas and Wash U got the same number of votes as last week and Whitewater moves into the 3rd spot after their 2 big wins last week. Wheaton jumps 3 spots to 7th.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cccc-fanatic on February 16, 2009, 08:42:20 PM

What in the world does UNE (University of New England) have to do to get into the top 25?
Undefeated in conference.
2nd longest winning streak in the nation.
What's going on?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 16, 2009, 08:56:04 PM

Quote from: cccc-fanatic on February 16, 2009, 08:42:20 PM
What in the world does UNE (University of New England) have to do to get into the top 25?
Undefeated in conference.
2nd longest winning streak in the nation.
What's going on?

Massey has U. of New England #161, with a strength of schedule ranked #359.

http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&yr=2009&sub=III&mid=6

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 16, 2009, 09:09:49 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on February 16, 2009, 08:56:04 PM
Quote from: cccc-fanatic on February 16, 2009, 08:42:20 PM
What in the world does UNE (University of New England) have to do to get into the top 25?
Undefeated in conference.
2nd longest winning streak in the nation.
What's going on?

Massey has U. of New England #161, with a strength of schedule ranked #359.

http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&yr=2009&sub=III&mid=6

Or #120 Massey Ratings MOV

http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&sub=III&mid=1

The Bowdoin team to which UNE lost on November 25th is #119.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on February 16, 2009, 09:18:25 PM

I've seen a number of the top 25 play as well as UNE. While UNE has some nice players and a great streak going, the streak comes against one of the worst schedules in the nation.

Their only win of note is over Colby, and their only wins over a +.500 team on the road are Bates and Husson, with a paltry 13 wins each.

Early in the season I watched UNE get positively SMASHED by Bowdoin at home in a game where they could not throw the ball in the nearby ocean.

Enjoy the season you're having. But it's important to note that you own regional rankers put a bunch of teams with worse records in front of the 10th ranked Nor'Easters. If you're only just barely getting love in your own region how do you expect to break into a top 25 where 3 of the top 5 teams come from the Wisconsin Goliath Conference?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 17, 2009, 10:54:23 AM

Sorry for not keeping that contained to the CCC Page. I haven't been posting as much on the home league board to quell expectations.

UNE just has played absolutely no one. Not only are there no decent wins on the schedule, they have barely been winning some of these games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on February 17, 2009, 11:21:43 AM

HF -

I think this is the right place to talk about teams whose fans think they should be getting top 25 votes. It's a national question.

C

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 17, 2009, 09:06:00 PM

Quote from: Coach C on February 17, 2009, 11:21:43 AM
HF -

I think this is the right place to talk about teams whose fans think they should be getting top 25 votes. It's a national question.

Yeah, but I feel like I could have done more to convince UNE fans that they shouldn't be upset. This is one squad, I feel, that shouldn't be in the conversation until they win a couple of NCAA tournament games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 18, 2009, 10:04:33 PM

UW Eau Claire knocks off #4 UWP 65-60, UW Oshkosh knocks off #3 UWW 65-64

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 18, 2009, 10:10:33 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 18, 2009, 10:04:33 PM
UW Eau Claire knocks off #4 UWP 65-60, UW Oshkosh knocks off #3 UWW 65-64

It is the WIAC-ky rearing its head again. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 19, 2009, 08:31:57 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	617	St. Thomas	24-0	def. St. John's, 82-47; 02/21 vs. Hamline
#2	608	Washington U.	21-1	02/20 vs. #25 Carnegie Mellon; 02/22 vs. Rochester
#3	555	UW-Whitewater	20-4	LOST at UW-Oshkosh, 64-65; 02/21 at UW-River Falls
#4	514	UW-Platteville	20-4	LOST at UW-Eau Claire, 60-65; 02/21 at #5 UW-Stevens Point
#5	504	UW-Stevens Point	21-3	def. UW-La Crosse, 78-62; 02/21 vs. #4 UW-Platteville
#6	495	Puget Sound	21-2	02/20 at Pacific; 02/21 at Willamette
#7	466	Wheaton (Ill.)	21-3	def. Carthage, 73-69; 02/21 vs. #39 North Central (Ill.)
#8	450	Buena Vista	22-2	02/21 at Luther
#9	431	Ithaca	22-1	02/20 at Nazareth; 02/22 vs. #38 Rochester Tech
#10	396	Richard Stockton	23-2	def. Rutgers-Camden, 78-63
#11	389	Capital	21-3	def. Heidelberg, 79-76; 02/21 vs. Otterbein
#12	341	Elms	22-1	def. Southern Vermont, 98-73; 02/19 vs. Lesley; 02/21 vs. Newbury
#13	308	Franklin and Marshall	21-3	LOST at Gettysburg, 60-72; 02/21 at Dickinson
#14	271	Trinity (Texas)	20-3	02/20 vs. Colorado College; 02/21 vs. Austin
#15	244	Middlebury	21-3	02/21 vs. Connecticut College
#16	235	John Carroll	19-4	def. Baldwin-Wallace, 86-71; 02/21 at Wilmington
#17	191	Centre	18-4	02/20 vs. Sewanee; 02/22 vs. Oglethorpe
#18	186	Rhode Island College	20-4	def. Western Connecticut, 70-68; 02/21 vs. Eastern Connecticut
#19	185	Mass-Dartmouth	21-3	def. Mass-Boston, 108-68; 02/21 at Plymouth State
#20	160	Guilford	20-4	def. Emory and Henry, 77-68; 02/21 vs. Randolph
#21	129	Elmhurst	18-6	def. #39 North Central (Ill.), 74-63; 02/21 vs. Carthage
#22	97	Texas-Dallas	20-3	02/19 at East Texas Baptist; 02/21 at LeTourneau
#23	48	Amherst	19-5	02/21 vs. Trinity (Conn.)
#24	42	Randolph-Macon	20-5	def. Hampden-Sydney, 69-67
#25	41	Carnegie Mellon	17-5	02/20 at #2 Washington U.; 02/22 at Chicago

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	32	Augustana	17-7	02/21 at Illinois Wesleyan
#27	31	Worcester Polytech	19-4	def. Wheaton (Mass.), 85-68; 02/21 at Babson
#28	23	St. Lawrence	18-4	02/20 vs. Vassar; 02/21 at RPI
T#29	21	William Paterson	19-6	LOST to #40 Montclair State, 57-58
T#29	21	Chapman	20-3	def. West Coast Baptist, 78-62; 02/19 at Vanguard
#31	16	DePauw	17-6	02/20 vs. Oglethorpe; 02/22 vs. Sewanee
T#32	14	St. Norbert	18-4	02/21 vs. Carroll
T#32	14	Transylvania	18-5	def. Mount St. Joseph, 67-49; 02/21 at Anderson
#34	11	Lawrence	15-6	def. Beloit, 92-68
T#35	10	St. Mary's (Md.)	20-4	02/21 vs. Wesley
T#35	10	Whitworth	19-5	def. Whitman, 97-87; 02/22 vs. Lewis and Clark
#37	8	Ohio Wesleyan	17-6	def. Oberlin, 64-61; 02/21 vs. Allegheny
#38	5	Rochester Tech	17-7	LOST to Nazareth, 84-86; 02/22 at #9 Ithaca
#39	4	North Central (Ill.)	16-8	LOST to #21 Elmhurst, 63-74; 02/21 at #7 Wheaton (Ill.)
#40	2	Montclair State	20-5	def. T#29 William Paterson, 58-57

Other teams to watch (as suggested by posters on this board)

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
---	---	Calvin	17-6	def. Albion, 67-62; 02/21 at Kalamazoo
---	---	Franklin	16-8	def. Hanover, 92-84; 02/21 vs. Defiance

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 20, 2009, 01:41:00 AM

#22 UT Dallas falls 74-58 to East Texas Baptist tonight.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 20, 2009, 01:12:53 PM

Today I came across the Sporting News preseason poll (formerly Street & Smith's), release in the first week October...

1. St. Thomas, Minn.
2. Washington-St. Louis (Mo.)
3. Wheaton (Ill.)
4. Augustana (Ill.)
5. UW-Whitewater
6. Gettysburg (Pa)
7. Buena Vista (Iowa)
8. UW-Platteville
9. Brandeis (Mass.)
10. Capital (Ohio)

D3hoops.com had:

1 Washington U
2 Augustana
3 Wheaton (Ill.)
4 UW-Whitewater
5 St. Thomas
6 UW-Stevens Point
7 UW-Platteville
8 Buena Vista
9 Brandeis
10 Mary Hardin-Baylor

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 20, 2009, 04:37:26 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on February 20, 2009, 01:12:53 PM
Today I came across the Sporting News preseason poll (formerly Street & Smith's), release in the first week October...

1. St. Thomas, Minn.
2. Washington-St. Louis (Mo.)
3. Wheaton (Ill.)
4. Augustana (Ill.)
5. UW-Whitewater
6. Gettysburg (Pa)
7. Buena Vista (Iowa)
8. UW-Platteville
9. Brandeis (Mass.)
10. Capital (Ohio)

D3hoops.com had:

1 Washington U
2 Augustana
3 Wheaton (Ill.)
4 UW-Whitewater
5 St. Thomas
6 UW-Stevens Point
7 UW-Platteville
8 Buena Vista
9 Brandeis
10 Mary Hardin-Baylor UMHB is 17-7/ 17-7/ 15-5 this season. The Cru is 3-3 vs regionally-ranked teams. (Wins over UWW, at McMurry and over McMurry and losses at Trinity TX, to UTDallas and at Mississippi College in OT. A UMHB win and a McM loss on Saturday will give UMHB the #1 seed in the West.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 22, 2009, 06:48:39 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Unless someone lets me know that they want to see more reports, this will be my final submission for this season. (There are considerably fewer games to keep track of this week, anyway.)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	617	St. Thomas	25-0	def. St. John's, 82-47; def. Hamline, 71-49
#2	608	Washington U.	22-2	def. #25 Carnegie Mellon, 77-63; LOST to Rochester, 69-70
#3	555	UW-Whitewater	21-4	LOST at UW-Oshkosh, 64-65; def. UW-River Falls, 72-68
#4	514	UW-Platteville	21-4	LOST at UW-Eau Claire, 60-65; def. #5 UW-Stevens Point, 55-52
#5	504	UW-Stevens Point	21-4	def. UW-La Crosse, 78-62; LOST to #4 UW-Platteville, 52-55
#6	495	Puget Sound	23-2	def. Pacific, 76-64; def. Willamette, 75-74
#7	466	Wheaton (Ill.)	22-3	def. Carthage, 73-69; def. #39 North Central (Ill.), 70-60
#8	450	Buena Vista	23-2	def. Luther, 69-61
#9	431	Ithaca	24-1	def. Nazareth, 113-86; def. #38 Rochester Tech, 101-74
#10	396	Richard Stockton	23-2	def. Rutgers-Camden, 78-63
#11	389	Capital	22-3	def. Heidelberg, 79-76; def. Otterbein, 83-78 OT
#12	341	Elms	24-1	def. Southern Vermont, 98-73; def. Lesley, 90-59; def. Newbury, 108-86
#13	308	Franklin and Marshall	21-4	LOST at Gettysburg, 60-72; LOST at Dickinson, 67-74
#14	271	Trinity (Texas)	22-3	def. Colorado College, 75-64; def. Austin, 88-55
#15	244	Middlebury	22-3	def. Connecticut College, 78-62
#16	235	John Carroll	20-4	def. Baldwin-Wallace, 86-71; def. Wilmington, 75-72
#17	191	Centre	20-4	def. Sewanee, 65-35; def. Oglethorpe, 81-71
#18	186	Rhode Island College	21-4	def. Western Connecticut, 70-68; def. Eastern Connecticut, 78-65
#19	185	Mass-Dartmouth	22-3	def. Mass-Boston, 108-68; def. Plymouth State, 86-75
#20	160	Guilford	21-4	def. Emory and Henry, 77-68; def. Randolph, 68-52
#21	129	Elmhurst	19-6	def. #39 North Central (Ill.), 74-63; def. Carthage, 76-53
#22	97	Texas-Dallas	21-4	LOST at East Texas Baptist, 58-72; def. LeTourneau, 66-59
#23	48	Amherst	20-5	def. Trinity (Conn.), 80-66
#24	42	Randolph-Macon	20-5	def. Hampden-Sydney, 69-67
#25	41	Carnegie Mellon	18-6	LOST at #2 Washington U., 63-77; def. Chicago, 68-56

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	32	Augustana	18-7	def. Illinois Wesleyan, 74-65
#27	31	Worcester Polytech	20-4	def. Wheaton (Mass.), 85-68; def. Babson, 72-42
#28	23	St. Lawrence	19-5	LOST to Vassar, 65-76; def. RPI, 82-75
T#29	21	William Paterson	20-6	LOST to #40 Montclair State, 57-58; def. Kean, 53-51
T#29	21	Chapman	22-3	def. West Coast Baptist, 78-62; def. Vanguard, 71-58
#31	16	DePauw	19-6	def. Oglethorpe, 85-58; def. Sewanee, 80-46
T#32	14	St. Norbert	18-5	LOST to Carroll, 51-64
T#32	14	Transylvania	19-5	def. Mount St. Joseph, 67-49; def. Anderson, 78-74
#34	11	Lawrence	17-6	def. Beloit, 92-68; def. Ripon, 97-75
T#35	10	St. Mary's (Md.)	21-4	def. Wesley, 79-73
T#35	10	Whitworth	19-5	def. Whitman, 97-87; 02/22 vs. Lewis and Clark
#37	8	Ohio Wesleyan	17-7	def. Oberlin, 64-61; LOST to Allegheny, 57-59
#38	5	Rochester Tech	17-8	LOST to Nazareth, 84-86; LOST at #9 Ithaca, 74-101
#39	4	North Central (Ill.)	16-9	LOST to #21 Elmhurst, 63-74; LOST at #7 Wheaton (Ill.), 60-70
#40	2	Montclair State	20-5	def. T#29 William Paterson, 58-57

Other teams to watch (as suggested by posters on this board)

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
---	---	Calvin	17-7	def. Albion, 67-62; LOST at Kalamazoo, 66-68
---	---	Franklin	16-9	def. Hanover, 92-84; LOST to Defiance, 89-92

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 22, 2009, 07:05:36 PM

Darryl, I would love to see one more after the conference tourneys are complete.

Thanks (and +k) for doing this.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 22, 2009, 07:17:04 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 22, 2009, 07:05:36 PM
Darryl, I would love to see one more after the conference tourneys are complete.

Thanks (and +k) for doing this.

Darryl,

I think most of us would love to see 1 more poll. Plus k from me as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 22, 2009, 07:18:03 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on February 22, 2009, 06:48:39 PM
How They Fared (Complete)

Unless someone lets me know that they want to see more reports, this will be my final submission for this season. (There are considerably fewer games to keep track of this week, anyway.)

Top 25

Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#1 617 St. Thomas 25-0 def. St. John's, 82-47; def. Hamline, 71-49
#2 608 Washington U. 22-2 def. #25 Carnegie Mellon, 77-63; LOST to Rochester, 69-70
#3 555 UW-Whitewater 21-4 LOST at UW-Oshkosh, 64-65; def. UW-River Falls, 72-68
#4 514 UW-Platteville 21-4 LOST at UW-Eau Claire, 60-65; def. #5 UW-Stevens Point, 55-52
#5 504 UW-Stevens Point 21-4 def. UW-La Crosse, 78-62; LOST to #4 UW-Platteville, 52-55
#6 495 Puget Sound 23-2 def. Pacific, 76-64; def. Willamette, 75-74

I'm thinking Loggers!!! NWC has an important game going right now for 2nd seed in Conf. tourney..Lewis & Clark at Whitworth.

mms://media.whitworth.edu/events

One more week would be fantastic! Thanks

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 22, 2009, 07:37:52 PM

OK - you've convinced me. I'll go one more week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kyballr on February 22, 2009, 10:59:49 PM

D,

I know it is just math but lost I thousands betting on Franklin's 75% chance of winning the HCAC and only 25% on Transylvania U. "Vampires" going into last game yesterday. Glad TU boys went against the numerical probability ..(although I guess since Grizzlies are co-champs the 75% is very accurate)...with a lot of help from Yellowjackets of Defiance. You going to make it to Lex if Beavers take care of Birds from Anderson?

Keep the reports coming!!!...only way I can keep up with the upper echelon teams....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: luvikings on February 23, 2009, 07:20:07 PM

Lawrence University men's team is actually 17-6, not 16-6 as listed in the newest top 25 poll. The game at Ripon this past Saturday, which Lawrence won 97-75, is not included on their team page either.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 23, 2009, 07:38:38 PM

Quote from: luvikings on February 23, 2009, 07:20:07 PM
Lawrence University men's team is actually 17-6, not 16-6 as listed in the newest top 25 poll. The game at Ripon this past Saturday, which Lawrence won 97-75, is not included on their team page either.

luviking: I edited the report above to include this missing game. (Someone else will have to put it on their team page (http://www.d3hoops.com/school/LAWR/m/2009).)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 24, 2009, 04:55:21 PM

Yeah, it's unfortunate, but we've had big dropoff in participation from the MWC this year since the conference SID, Matt Troha, left.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 24, 2009, 07:15:14 PM

"I'm just a sweet transvestite, from transexual transalvania"

It would help the MWC faithful if Transylvania won the Pool A bid from the HCAC.

Midwest Region
1. Washington U. 21-1 20-1
2. Wheaton (Ill.) 20-3 16-3
3. Elmhurst 17-6 17-6
4. Transylvania 17-5 14-3
5. North Central (Ill.) 16-7 14-5
6. Lawrence 15-6 15-6
7. Augustana 17-7 16-7
8. St. Norbert 18-4 17-4

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 24, 2009, 10:01:35 PM

With its win tonight, Wooster is now 20-6. They are 15-2 in their last 17 games with 5 total losses in DIII.

Wooster has now registered 20 or more wins in 13 straight seasons - the longest streak in Division III. :)

Congrats to Wooster Coaches Steve Moore, Doug Cline and the rest of their staff.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 24, 2009, 10:55:00 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on February 24, 2009, 10:01:35 PM

With its win tonight, Wooster is now 20-6. They are 15-2 in their last 17 games with 5 total losses in DIII.

Wooster has now registered 20 or more wins in 13 straight seasons - the longest streak in Division III. :)

Congrats to Wooster Coaches Steve Moore, Doug Cline and the rest of their staff.

Interesting bit about that wooscotsfan, that streak started in 1997. Wooster's season ended at the hands of Hope College in the NCAA Tournament that year. I remember quite a bit about that game. I believe Wooster had a Fr point guard who gave us fits.

At the time the perception around Holland was Hope had a really tough time competing with the Ohio D3's. That year Hope beat Denison and Wooster, following a year where they beat John Carroll and Wittenberg. Since then Hope's had a pretty awesome record vs their Ohio Great Lakes rivals. So in some small part, Woosters streak began around the same time as another little Hope streak.

Hope 69, Denison, Ohio 66 (H)
Hope 67, Wooster, Ohio 56 (H)

That Hope team lost in the Sweet 16 at Nebraska Wesleyan, Wesleyan went on to finish runner-up to Illinois Wesleyan. That was a strectch of four great years of Hope basketball, I still mantain that the 97 team might have actually been the better of the four.

Good memories and an awesome streak for Wooster.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on February 24, 2009, 11:16:18 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on February 24, 2009, 10:01:35 PM

With its win tonight, Wooster is now 20-6. They are 15-2 in their last 17 games with 5 total losses in DIII.

Wooster has now registered 20 or more wins in 13 straight seasons - the longest streak in Division III. :)

Congrats to Wooster Coaches Steve Moore, Doug Cline and the rest of their staff.

That would be men's bball; Scranton's streak is 18 and counting on the women's side.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 26, 2009, 07:18:38 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	624	St. Thomas	26-0	def. Gustavus Adolphus, 90-50; 02/28 vs. Bethel
#2	554	Washington U.	22-2	02/28 vs. Chicago
#3	542	Puget Sound	23-2	02/26 vs. Lewis and Clark
#4	517	Wheaton (Ill.)	22-3	02/27 vs. North Central (Ill.)
#5	491	UW-Platteville	21-4	02/26 vs. #7 UW-Whitewater
#6	487	UW-Stevens Point	21-4	02/26 vs. UW-Oshkosh
#7	486	UW-Whitewater	22-4	def. UW-River Falls, 86-81; 02/26 at #5 UW-Platteville
#8	471	Ithaca	24-1	02/28 vs. Nazareth
#9	462	Buena Vista	23-2	02/26 vs. Wartburg
#10	419	Richard Stockton	24-2	def. #35 William Paterson, 83-67; 02/27 vs. Rutgers-Newark
#11	381	Capital	23-3	def. Mount Union, 95-56; 02/27 vs. Ohio Northern (n)
#12	353	Elms	24-1	02/27 vs. Wheelock
#13	303	Trinity (Texas)	22-3	02/27 vs. Sewanee (n)
#14	276	Middlebury	22-3	02/28 vs. Bowdoin
#15	261	John Carroll	21-4	def. Heidelberg, 78-68; 02/27 vs. Muskingum
#16	221	Centre	20-4	02/27 vs. Austin (n)
#17	216	Rhode Island College	22-4	def. Southern Maine, 73-57; 02/27 vs. Keene State
#18	206	Mass-Dartmouth	23-3	def. Mass-Boston, 79-63; 02/27 vs. Western Connecticut (n)
#19	191	Guilford	21-4	02/27 vs. Washington and Lee (n)
#20	151	Elmhurst	19-6	02/27 vs. #26 Augustana (n)
#21	97	Amherst	20-5	02/28 vs. Williams (n)
#22	93	Randolph-Macon	20-5	02/27 vs. Virginia Wesleyan (n)
#23	67	Franklin and Marshall	21-4	02/28 vs. Muhlenberg
#24	53	Worcester Polytech	20-4	02/28 vs. Springfield
#25	36	Lawrence	17-6	02/27 vs. Carroll (n)

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	29	Augustana	18-7	02/27 vs. #20 Elmhurst (n)
#27	24	Transylvania	19-5	02/27 vs. Anderson
#28	23	Texas-Dallas	21-4	02/27 vs. Sul Ross State
#29	18	Whitworth	20-5	02/26 vs. Linfield
#30	17	Chapman	22-3	02/26 at La Sierra; 02/27 vs. UC Santa Cruz (n)
#31	14	Carnegie Mellon	18-6	02/28 at Rochester
#32	13	DePauw	19-6	02/27 vs. Southwestern (n)
T#33	10	Montclair State	20-6	LOST to Rutgers-Newark, 57-58
T#33	10	St. Mary's (Md.)	21-4	02/26 vs. Marymount
#35	4	William Paterson	20-7	LOST at #10 Richard Stockton, 67-83
T#36	2	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	19-6	def. Caltech, 89-55; 02/27 vs. Cal Lutheran
T#36	2	Widener	21-5	def. Messiah, 76-61; 02/28 vs. Elizabethtown
#38	1	Salem State	20-5	02/26 vs. Framingham State

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: larry_u on February 27, 2009, 07:33:19 PM

# 25 Lawrence 90 Carroll 66

LU advanced to play the winner of Grinnell and St. Norbert tomorrow afternoon.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 27, 2009, 09:11:53 PM

Larry's coming on at the right time. Wow.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM

Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM

Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM

Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM

Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 28, 2009, 01:57:05 AM

Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

Who won the preseason CCIW championship then?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 28, 2009, 02:14:18 AM

I thought it was the pre-conference CCIW Championship

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 28, 2009, 02:22:07 AM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on February 28, 2009, 01:57:05 AM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

Who won the preseason CCIW championship then?

Well, I guess that would also be Wheaton, who narrowly beat out Augie in the coach's poll. :P

And, having just seen sac's post - no, the poll is pre-season! ;) (Though Wheaton was also the only team to go undefeated 'pre-conference'. ;D)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 28, 2009, 09:55:22 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 28, 2009, 02:22:07 AM
Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on February 28, 2009, 01:57:05 AM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

Who won the preseason CCIW championship then?

Well, I guess that would also be Wheaton, who narrowly beat out Augie in the coach's poll. :P

And, having just seen sac's post - no, the poll is pre-season! ;) (Though Wheaton was also the only team to go undefeated 'pre-conference'. ;D)

....and who won the CCIW semantics championship? :P ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 28, 2009, 11:08:40 AM

That's a never ending battle.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on February 28, 2009, 01:06:47 PM

Old School you don't like making the distinction of conference champs and tournament champs?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: larry_u on February 28, 2009, 06:10:27 PM

# 25 Lawrence wins the Midwest Conference Championship over Grinnell 88-69.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM

Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM

Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM

Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.

This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on March 01, 2009, 05:06:17 PM

How They Fared--The Final Report

Men's games:
Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	624	St. Thomas	27-0	def. Gustavus Adolphus, 90-50; def. Bethel, 68-51
#2	554	Washington U.	23-2	def. Chicago, 72-49
#3	542	Puget Sound	24-3	def. Lewis and Clark, 86-74; LOST to #29 Whitworth, 80-90 OT
#4	517	Wheaton (Ill.)	24-3	def. North Central (Ill.), 77-66; def. #20 Elmhurst, 67-63
#5	491	UW-Platteville	22-5	def. #7 UW-Whitewater, 77-74 OT; LOST at #6 UW-Stevens Point, 42-45
#6	487	UW-Stevens Point	23-4	def. UW-Oshkosh, 81-69; def. #5 UW-Platteville, 45-42
#7	486	UW-Whitewater	22-5	def. UW-River Falls, 86-81; LOST at #5 UW-Platteville, 74-77 OT
#8	471	Ithaca	24-2	LOST to Nazareth, 76-82
#9	462	Buena Vista	23-3	LOST to Wartburg, 81-85
#10	419	Richard Stockton	25-2	def. #35 William Paterson, 83-67; def. Rutgers-Newark, 62-54
#11	381	Capital	24-4	def. Mount Union, 95-56; def. Ohio Northern, 63-58; LOST at #15 John Carroll, 87-90
#12	353	Elms	26-1	def. Wheelock, 94-74; def. Becker, 105-76
#13	303	Trinity (Texas)	23-4	def. Sewanee, 53-52 OT; LOST to (n) Southwestern, 63-68
#14	276	Middlebury	24-3	def. Bowdoin, 76-46; def. #21 Amherst, 77-68
#15	261	John Carroll	23-4	def. Heidelberg, 78-68; def. Muskingum, 83-69; def. #11 Capital, 90-87
#16	221	Centre	23-4	def. Austin, 66-41; def. Hendrix, 78-77; def. Southwestern, 72-67
#17	216	Rhode Island College	23-5	def. Southern Maine, 73-57; def. Keene State, 78-50; LOST to #18 Mass-Dartmouth, 53-62
#18	206	Mass-Dartmouth	25-3	def. Mass-Boston, 79-63; def. Western Connecticut, 96-73; def. #17 Rhode Island College, 62-53
#19	191	Guilford	21-5	LOST to (n) Washington and Lee, 76-82 2OT
#20	151	Elmhurst	20-7	def. #26 Augustana, 59-53; LOST at #4 Wheaton (Ill.), 63-67
#21	97	Amherst	21-6	def. Williams, 86-74; LOST at #14 Middlebury, 68-77
#22	93	Randolph-Macon	20-6	LOST to (n) Virginia Wesleyan, 63-76
#23	67	Franklin and Marshall	22-5	def. Muhlenberg, 87-79; LOST to Gettysburg, 65-73
#24	53	Worcester Polytech	20-5	LOST to Springfield, 46-61
#25	36	Lawrence	19-6	def. Carroll, 90-66; def. Grinnell, 88-69

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	29	Augustana	18-8	LOST to (n) #20 Elmhurst, 53-59
#27	24	Transylvania	21-5	def. Anderson, 76-69; def. Franklin, 76-72
#28	23	Texas-Dallas	24-4	def. Sul Ross State, 77-48; def. Mary Hardin-Baylor, 65-60; def. Mississippi College, 85-72
#29	18	Whitworth	22-5	def. Linfield, 74-66; def. #3 Puget Sound, 90-80 OT
#30	17	Chapman	24-3	def. La Sierra, 74-48; def. UC Santa Cruz, 77-58
#31	14	Carnegie Mellon	19-6	def. Rochester, 59-50
#32	13	DePauw	19-7	LOST to (n) Southwestern, 62-69
T#33	10	Montclair State	20-6	LOST to Rutgers-Newark, 57-58
T#33	10	St. Mary's (Md.)	21-5	LOST to Marymount, 81-86 OT
#35	4	William Paterson	20-7	LOST at #10 Richard Stockton, 67-83
T#36	2	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	21-6	def. Caltech, 89-55; def. Cal Lutheran, 60-54; def. Pomona-Pitzer, 56-44
T#36	2	Widener	22-5	def. Messiah, 76-61; def. Elizabethtown, 67-65
#38	1	Salem State	21-6	def. Framingham State, 92-69; LOST to Bridgewater State, 66-77

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM

Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.

LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on March 02, 2009, 03:12:23 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

Well Ralph, 2 1/2 out of 4 ain't bad. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on March 02, 2009, 12:13:54 PM

The bottom left bracket is brutal...Puget Sound has a lot of work to do.

It includes: #1 St. Thomas, #2 Wash U, #3 UPS, #4 Wheaton, #5 UW-Plattleville, #6 UW-Stevens Point, #7 UW-WW

Wow.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 02, 2009, 12:14:36 PM

Is that all?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on March 02, 2009, 12:56:48 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 02, 2009, 12:14:36 PM
Is that all?

lol. Yep! Just your typical day in the west region :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:04:57 PM

Quote from: LogShow on March 02, 2009, 12:13:54 PM
The bottom left bracket is brutal...Puget Sound has a lot of work to do.

It includes: #1 St. Thomas, #2 Wash U, #3 UPS, #4 Wheaton, #5 UW-Plattleville, #6 UW-Stevens Point, #7 UW-WW

Wow.

"YOU COULD MAKE A FINAL FOUR OUT OF THAT BRACKET!"

--- from the Mantras of Hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 02, 2009, 02:39:50 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:04:57 PM
"YOU COULD MAKE A FINAL FOUR OUT OF THAT BRACKET!"

You could make two final fours out of that bracket; it's likely to happen in the second round.

Eleven of Massey's top 13 are in that bracket, including the top 9.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on March 02, 2009, 05:13:51 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 02:39:50 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:04:57 PM
"YOU COULD MAKE A FINAL FOUR OUT OF THAT BRACKET!"

You could make two final fours out of that bracket; it's likely to happen in the second round.

Eleven of Massey's top 13 are in that bracket, including the top 9.

Well maybe if the team out of this bracket wins it's final 2 games by 30+ then the NCAA might consider competition over $$$ in the future but, of course, I doubt it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:26:09 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.

This makes 18 quotes

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 02, 2009, 10:28:53 PM

Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:26:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.
This makes 18 quotes

Now you're just being silly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:49:04 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:28:53 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:26:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.
This makes 18 quotes

Now you're just being silly.

Just now? I somehow don't feel alone. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 10:50:02 PM

Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:49:04 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:28:53 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:26:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.
This makes 18 quotes

Now you're just being silly.
Just now? I somehow don't feel alone. ;)

It's like an overhead shot of a Babylonian ziggurat.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 02, 2009, 10:53:26 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 10:50:02 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:49:04 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:28:53 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:26:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.
This makes 18 quotes

Now you're just being silly.
Just now? I somehow don't feel alone. ;)

It's like an overhead shot of a Babylonian ziggurat.

You know full well they were never this tall.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:05:25 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:53:26 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 10:50:02 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:49:04 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:28:53 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:26:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.
This makes 18 quotes

Now you're just being silly.
Just now? I somehow don't feel alone. ;)

It's like an overhead shot of a Babylonian ziggurat.

You know full well they were never this tall.

OK, then ... an Assyrian ziggurat.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 02, 2009, 11:15:30 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:05:25 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:53:26 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 10:50:02 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:49:04 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:28:53 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:26:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.
This makes 18 quotes

Now you're just being silly.
Just now? I somehow don't feel alone. ;)

It's like an overhead shot of a Babylonian ziggurat.

You know full well they were never this tall.

OK, then ... an Assyrian ziggurat.

While the jagged steps don't fit, the dimensions strike me more as North American 'Mound Builders'.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on March 02, 2009, 11:19:57 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 02, 2009, 11:15:30 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:05:25 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:53:26 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 10:50:02 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:49:04 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:28:53 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:26:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.
This makes 18 quotes

Now you're just being silly.
Just now? I somehow don't feel alone. ;)

It's like an overhead shot of a Babylonian ziggurat.

You know full well they were never this tall.

OK, then ... an Assyrian ziggurat.

While the jagged steps don't fit, the dimensions strike me more as North American 'Mound Builders'.

Perhaps you are all just "Building a Mystery"...Sarah McLachlan, 1997

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:36:20 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on March 02, 2009, 11:19:57 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 02, 2009, 11:15:30 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:05:25 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:53:26 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 10:50:02 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:49:04 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:28:53 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:26:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.
This makes 18 quotes

Now you're just being silly.
Just now? I somehow don't feel alone. ;)

It's like an overhead shot of a Babylonian ziggurat.

You know full well they were never this tall.

OK, then ... an Assyrian ziggurat.

While the jagged steps don't fit, the dimensions strike me more as North American 'Mound Builders'.
Perhaps you are all just "Building a Mystery"...Sarah McLachlan, 1997

Mound Builders? Nah. Mayan pyramid, maybe.

Would that mean that magicman would be our human sacrifice, way up at the very top level?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: larry_u on March 02, 2009, 11:38:50 PM

I don't know if i've ever seen so many layered quotes ever on here. Wow it makes it hard to read... :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on March 02, 2009, 11:39:54 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on March 02, 2009, 11:19:57 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 02, 2009, 11:15:30 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:05:25 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:53:26 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 10:50:02 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:49:04 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:28:53 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:26:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.
This makes 18 quotes

Now you're just being silly.
Just now? I somehow don't feel alone. ;)

It's like an overhead shot of a Babylonian ziggurat.

You know full well they were never this tall.

OK, then ... an Assyrian ziggurat.

While the jagged steps don't fit, the dimensions strike me more as North American 'Mound Builders'.
Perhaps you are all just "Building a Mystery"...Sarah McLachlan, 1997

I 'm being a little "Monkish" here but Greg needs to go back and modify that post of Feb 28th, 6:45 PM. It's destroying the symmetry of the ziggurat.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:43:00 PM

Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 11:39:54 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on March 02, 2009, 11:19:57 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 02, 2009, 11:15:30 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:05:25 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:53:26 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 10:50:02 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:49:04 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:28:53 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:26:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.
This makes 18 quotes

Now you're just being silly.
Just now? I somehow don't feel alone. ;)

It's like an overhead shot of a Babylonian ziggurat.

You know full well they were never this tall.

OK, then ... an Assyrian ziggurat.

While the jagged steps don't fit, the dimensions strike me more as North American 'Mound Builders'.
Perhaps you are all just "Building a Mystery"...Sarah McLachlan, 1997
I 'm being a little "Monkish" here but Greg needs to go back and modify that post of Feb 28th, 6:45 PM. It's destroying the symmetry of the ziggurat.

What's disturbing me is that I agree with you. However, I'm refraining from modifying the post in the hope that I can thereby stave off accusations of having developed full-blown Obsessive Compusive Disorder.

("You down wit' OCD? Yeah, you know me!")

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on March 02, 2009, 11:48:34 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:36:20 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on March 02, 2009, 11:19:57 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 02, 2009, 11:15:30 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:05:25 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:53:26 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 10:50:02 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:49:04 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:28:53 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:26:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.
This makes 18 quotes

Now you're just being silly.
Just now? I somehow don't feel alone. ;)

It's like an overhead shot of a Babylonian ziggurat.

You know full well they were never this tall.

OK, then ... an Assyrian ziggurat.

While the jagged steps don't fit, the dimensions strike me more as North American 'Mound Builders'.
Perhaps you are all just "Building a Mystery"...Sarah McLachlan, 1997

Mound Builders? Nah. Mayan pyramid, maybe.

Would that mean that magicman would be our human sacrifice, way up at the very top level?

Greg, please, This is my 5th reincarnation. I was already sacrificed when Cortez came over in the 16th century. It didn't work then and won't work now. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 11:51:15 PM

Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 11:48:34 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:36:20 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on March 02, 2009, 11:19:57 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 02, 2009, 11:15:30 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:05:25 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:53:26 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 10:50:02 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:49:04 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:28:53 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:26:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.
This makes 18 quotes

Now you're just being silly.
Just now? I somehow don't feel alone. ;)

It's like an overhead shot of a Babylonian ziggurat.

You know full well they were never this tall.

OK, then ... an Assyrian ziggurat.

While the jagged steps don't fit, the dimensions strike me more as North American 'Mound Builders'.
Perhaps you are all just "Building a Mystery"...Sarah McLachlan, 1997

Mound Builders? Nah. Mayan pyramid, maybe.

Would that mean that magicman would be our human sacrifice, way up at the very top level?
Greg, please, This is my 5th reincarnation. I was already sacrificed when Cortez came over in the 16th century. It didn't work then and won't work now. :D

So that is your problem. If you had done it "right", you would have ended up as a CCIW fan in this incarnation! ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 02, 2009, 11:52:05 PM

Quote from: larry_u on March 02, 2009, 11:38:50 PM
I don't know if i've ever seen so many layered quotes ever on here. Wow it makes it hard to read... :D

You're trying to read those posts? I'm just scrolling. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:07:01 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 11:51:15 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 11:48:34 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:36:20 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on March 02, 2009, 11:19:57 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 02, 2009, 11:15:30 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:05:25 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:53:26 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 10:50:02 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:49:04 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:28:53 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:26:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.
This makes 18 quotes

Now you're just being silly.
Just now? I somehow don't feel alone. ;)

It's like an overhead shot of a Babylonian ziggurat.

You know full well they were never this tall.

OK, then ... an Assyrian ziggurat.

While the jagged steps don't fit, the dimensions strike me more as North American 'Mound Builders'.
Perhaps you are all just "Building a Mystery"...Sarah McLachlan, 1997

Mound Builders? Nah. Mayan pyramid, maybe.

Would that mean that magicman would be our human sacrifice, way up at the very top level?
Greg, please, This is my 5th reincarnation. I was already sacrificed when Cortez came over in the 16th century. It didn't work then and won't work now. :D
So that is your problem. If you had done it "right", you would have ended up as a CCIW fan in this incarnation! ::)

I could handle that. But I was the stabbee not the stabber. Not my fault Montezuma II got it wrong.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 03, 2009, 12:08:40 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 02, 2009, 11:52:05 PM
Quote from: larry_u on March 02, 2009, 11:38:50 PM
I don't know if i've ever seen so many layered quotes ever on here. Wow it makes it hard to read... :D

You're trying to read those posts? I'm just scrolling. :)

Word of advice, larry_u: Never read a post with more than one layer of quotes in it. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 03, 2009, 12:11:21 AM

Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:07:01 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 11:51:15 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 11:48:34 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:36:20 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on March 02, 2009, 11:19:57 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 02, 2009, 11:15:30 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:05:25 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:53:26 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 10:50:02 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:49:04 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:28:53 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:26:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.
This makes 18 quotes

Now you're just being silly.
Just now? I somehow don't feel alone. ;)

It's like an overhead shot of a Babylonian ziggurat.

You know full well they were never this tall.

OK, then ... an Assyrian ziggurat.

While the jagged steps don't fit, the dimensions strike me more as North American 'Mound Builders'.
Perhaps you are all just "Building a Mystery"...Sarah McLachlan, 1997

Mound Builders? Nah. Mayan pyramid, maybe.

Would that mean that magicman would be our human sacrifice, way up at the very top level?
Greg, please, This is my 5th reincarnation. I was already sacrificed when Cortez came over in the 16th century. It didn't work then and won't work now. :D
So that is your problem. If you had done it "right", you would have ended up as a CCIW fan in this incarnation! ::)
I could handle that. But I was the stabbee not the stabber. Not my fault Montezuma II got it wrong.

Don't sweat it. In his next reincarnation I'm sure that Montezuma II came back as someone who drank the local water and got violently ill.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 03, 2009, 12:14:00 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 03, 2009, 12:11:21 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:07:01 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 11:51:15 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 11:48:34 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:36:20 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on March 02, 2009, 11:19:57 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 02, 2009, 11:15:30 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:05:25 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:53:26 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 10:50:02 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:49:04 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:28:53 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:26:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.
This makes 18 quotes

Now you're just being silly.
Just now? I somehow don't feel alone. ;)

It's like an overhead shot of a Babylonian ziggurat.

You know full well they were never this tall.

OK, then ... an Assyrian ziggurat.

While the jagged steps don't fit, the dimensions strike me more as North American 'Mound Builders'.
Perhaps you are all just "Building a Mystery"...Sarah McLachlan, 1997

Mound Builders? Nah. Mayan pyramid, maybe.

Would that mean that magicman would be our human sacrifice, way up at the very top level?
Greg, please, This is my 5th reincarnation. I was already sacrificed when Cortez came over in the 16th century. It didn't work then and won't work now. :D
So that is your problem. If you had done it "right", you would have ended up as a CCIW fan in this incarnation! ::)
I could handle that. But I was the stabbee not the stabber. Not my fault Montezuma II got it wrong.

Don't sweat it. In his next reincarnation I'm sure that Montezuma II came back as someone who drank the local water and got violently ill.

Now we're gonna have to continue this. I want to test the theory that if the vertical bars ever meet, the internet will suffer a clot and stroke out. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on March 03, 2009, 12:26:09 AM

the number of actual words written on the previous page were far outweighed by the massive amounts of quotes...whoa.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on March 03, 2009, 12:27:48 AM

Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:17:45 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:07:01 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 11:51:15 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 11:48:34 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:36:20 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on March 02, 2009, 11:19:57 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 02, 2009, 11:15:30 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:05:25 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:53:26 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 10:50:02 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:49:04 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:28:53 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:26:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.
This makes 18 quotes

Now you're just being silly.
Just now? I somehow don't feel alone. ;)

It's like an overhead shot of a Babylonian ziggurat.

You know full well they were never this tall.

OK, then ... an Assyrian ziggurat.

While the jagged steps don't fit, the dimensions strike me more as North American 'Mound Builders'.
Perhaps you are all just "Building a Mystery"...Sarah McLachlan, 1997

Mound Builders? Nah. Mayan pyramid, maybe.

Would that mean that magicman would be our human sacrifice, way up at the very top level?
Greg, please, This is my 5th reincarnation. I was already sacrificed when Cortez came over in the 16th century. It didn't work then and won't work now. :D
So that is your problem. If you had done it "right", you would have ended up as a CCIW fan in this incarnation! ::)
I could handle that. But I was the stabbee not the stabber. Not my fault Montezuma II got it wrong.
And speaking of problems--How does a post in this grouping completely disappear? When Ralph explained what the LLPP was I responded, "2 1/2 out of 4 ain't bad" on page 306 reply #4576. It's nowhere to be found in the quotes. I notice Greg responded right after I did. I think he used his "special powers" to delete it ??? just to mess with my mind. ???

Greg didn't reply to that message... he replied to a previous one, thus your layer is lost in the aether...

I think it's neat to scroll for the whole page... in, out, in, out, in, out...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:32:27 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 03, 2009, 12:14:00 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 03, 2009, 12:11:21 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:07:01 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 11:51:15 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 11:48:34 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:36:20 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on March 02, 2009, 11:19:57 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 02, 2009, 11:15:30 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:05:25 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:53:26 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 10:50:02 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:49:04 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:28:53 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:26:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.
This makes 18 quotes

Now you're just being silly.
Just now? I somehow don't feel alone. ;)

It's like an overhead shot of a Babylonian ziggurat.

You know full well they were never this tall.

OK, then ... an Assyrian ziggurat.

While the jagged steps don't fit, the dimensions strike me more as North American 'Mound Builders'.
Perhaps you are all just "Building a Mystery"...Sarah McLachlan, 1997

Mound Builders? Nah. Mayan pyramid, maybe.

Would that mean that magicman would be our human sacrifice, way up at the very top level?
Greg, please, This is my 5th reincarnation. I was already sacrificed when Cortez came over in the 16th century. It didn't work then and won't work now. :D
So that is your problem. If you had done it "right", you would have ended up as a CCIW fan in this incarnation! ::)
I could handle that. But I was the stabbee not the stabber. Not my fault Montezuma II got it wrong.

Don't sweat it. In his next reincarnation I'm sure that Montezuma II came back as someone who drank the local water and got violently ill.

Now we're gonna have to continue this. I want to test the theory that if the vertical bars ever meet, the internet will suffer a clot and stroke out. ;)

And speaking of problems--How does a post in this grouping completely disappear? When Ralph explained what the LLPP was I responded, "2 1/2 out of 4 ain't bad" on page 306 reply #4576. It's nowhere to be found in the quotes. I notice Greg responded right after I did. I think he used his "special powers" to delete it just to mess with my mind.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:45:51 AM

Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:32:27 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 03, 2009, 12:14:00 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 03, 2009, 12:11:21 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:07:01 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 11:51:15 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 11:48:34 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:36:20 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on March 02, 2009, 11:19:57 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 02, 2009, 11:15:30 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:05:25 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:53:26 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 10:50:02 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:49:04 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:28:53 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:26:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.
This makes 18 quotes

Now you're just being silly.
Just now? I somehow don't feel alone. ;)

It's like an overhead shot of a Babylonian ziggurat.

You know full well they were never this tall.

OK, then ... an Assyrian ziggurat.

While the jagged steps don't fit, the dimensions strike me more as North American 'Mound Builders'.
Perhaps you are all just "Building a Mystery"...Sarah McLachlan, 1997

Mound Builders? Nah. Mayan pyramid, maybe.

Would that mean that magicman would be our human sacrifice, way up at the very top level?
Greg, please, This is my 5th reincarnation. I was already sacrificed when Cortez came over in the 16th century. It didn't work then and won't work now. :D
So that is your problem. If you had done it "right", you would have ended up as a CCIW fan in this incarnation! ::)
I could handle that. But I was the stabbee not the stabber. Not my fault Montezuma II got it wrong.

Don't sweat it. In his next reincarnation I'm sure that Montezuma II came back as someone who drank the local water and got violently ill.

Now we're gonna have to continue this. I want to test the theory that if the vertical bars ever meet, the internet will suffer a clot and stroke out. ;)
And speaking of problems--How does a post in this grouping completely disappear? When Ralph explained what the LLPP was I responded, "2 1/2 out of 4 ain't bad" on page 306 reply #4576. It's nowhere to be found in the quotes. I notice Greg responded right after I did. I think he used his "special powers" to delete it just to mess with my mind.

PointSpecial, I just discovered that fact. When I posted my last post it didn't show a couple of replies so I deleted it and reposted, but you had already replied with your explanation. So now your explanation is before my question. Whew! If you can follow that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 03, 2009, 12:48:30 AM

Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:45:51 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:32:27 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 03, 2009, 12:14:00 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 03, 2009, 12:11:21 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:07:01 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 11:51:15 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 11:48:34 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:36:20 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on March 02, 2009, 11:19:57 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 02, 2009, 11:15:30 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:05:25 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:53:26 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 10:50:02 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:49:04 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:28:53 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:26:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.
This makes 18 quotes

Now you're just being silly.
Just now? I somehow don't feel alone. ;)

It's like an overhead shot of a Babylonian ziggurat.

You know full well they were never this tall.

OK, then ... an Assyrian ziggurat.

While the jagged steps don't fit, the dimensions strike me more as North American 'Mound Builders'.
Perhaps you are all just "Building a Mystery"...Sarah McLachlan, 1997

Mound Builders? Nah. Mayan pyramid, maybe.

Would that mean that magicman would be our human sacrifice, way up at the very top level?
Greg, please, This is my 5th reincarnation. I was already sacrificed when Cortez came over in the 16th century. It didn't work then and won't work now. :D
So that is your problem. If you had done it "right", you would have ended up as a CCIW fan in this incarnation! ::)
I could handle that. But I was the stabbee not the stabber. Not my fault Montezuma II got it wrong.

Don't sweat it. In his next reincarnation I'm sure that Montezuma II came back as someone who drank the local water and got violently ill.

Now we're gonna have to continue this. I want to test the theory that if the vertical bars ever meet, the internet will suffer a clot and stroke out. ;)
And speaking of problems--How does a post in this grouping completely disappear? When Ralph explained what the LLPP was I responded, "2 1/2 out of 4 ain't bad" on page 306 reply #4576. It's nowhere to be found in the quotes. I notice Greg responded right after I did. I think he used his "special powers" to delete it just to mess with my mind.

PointSpecial, I just discovered that fact. When I posted my last post it didn't show a couple of replies so I deleted it and reposted, but you had already replied with your explanation. So now your explanation is before my question. Whew! If you can follow that.

That makes my head hurt even more than looking at the ziggurat does.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on March 03, 2009, 01:24:56 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 03, 2009, 12:48:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:45:51 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:32:27 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 03, 2009, 12:14:00 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 03, 2009, 12:11:21 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:07:01 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 11:51:15 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 11:48:34 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:36:20 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on March 02, 2009, 11:19:57 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 02, 2009, 11:15:30 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:05:25 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:53:26 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 10:50:02 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:49:04 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:28:53 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:26:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.
This makes 18 quotes

Now you're just being silly.
Just now? I somehow don't feel alone. ;)

It's like an overhead shot of a Babylonian ziggurat.

You know full well they were never this tall.

OK, then ... an Assyrian ziggurat.

While the jagged steps don't fit, the dimensions strike me more as North American 'Mound Builders'.
Perhaps you are all just "Building a Mystery"...Sarah McLachlan, 1997

Mound Builders? Nah. Mayan pyramid, maybe.

Would that mean that magicman would be our human sacrifice, way up at the very top level?
Greg, please, This is my 5th reincarnation. I was already sacrificed when Cortez came over in the 16th century. It didn't work then and won't work now. :D
So that is your problem. If you had done it "right", you would have ended up as a CCIW fan in this incarnation! ::)
I could handle that. But I was the stabbee not the stabber. Not my fault Montezuma II got it wrong.

Don't sweat it. In his next reincarnation I'm sure that Montezuma II came back as someone who drank the local water and got violently ill.

Now we're gonna have to continue this. I want to test the theory that if the vertical bars ever meet, the internet will suffer a clot and stroke out. ;)
And speaking of problems--How does a post in this grouping completely disappear? When Ralph explained what the LLPP was I responded, "2 1/2 out of 4 ain't bad" on page 306 reply #4576. It's nowhere to be found in the quotes. I notice Greg responded right after I did. I think he used his "special powers" to delete it just to mess with my mind.

PointSpecial, I just discovered that fact. When I posted my last post it didn't show a couple of replies so I deleted it and reposted, but you had already replied with your explanation. So now your explanation is before my question. Whew! If you can follow that.

That makes my head hurt even more than looking at the ziggurat does.

That was my goal! After all it was your self professed nitpicking that started all this in response to 1 teensy tiny error(uh check that, deliberate error) on my part. And you did leave off a quote that did mess with my mind. :) ;) ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 03, 2009, 10:05:12 AM

Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 01:24:56 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 03, 2009, 12:48:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:45:51 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:32:27 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 03, 2009, 12:14:00 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 03, 2009, 12:11:21 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:07:01 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 11:51:15 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 11:48:34 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:36:20 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on March 02, 2009, 11:19:57 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 02, 2009, 11:15:30 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:05:25 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:53:26 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 10:50:02 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:49:04 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:28:53 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:26:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.
This makes 18 quotes

Now you're just being silly.
Just now? I somehow don't feel alone. ;)

It's like an overhead shot of a Babylonian ziggurat.

You know full well they were never this tall.

OK, then ... an Assyrian ziggurat.

While the jagged steps don't fit, the dimensions strike me more as North American 'Mound Builders'.
Perhaps you are all just "Building a Mystery"...Sarah McLachlan, 1997

Mound Builders? Nah. Mayan pyramid, maybe.

Would that mean that magicman would be our human sacrifice, way up at the very top level?
Greg, please, This is my 5th reincarnation. I was already sacrificed when Cortez came over in the 16th century. It didn't work then and won't work now. :D
So that is your problem. If you had done it "right", you would have ended up as a CCIW fan in this incarnation! ::)
I could handle that. But I was the stabbee not the stabber. Not my fault Montezuma II got it wrong.

Don't sweat it. In his next reincarnation I'm sure that Montezuma II came back as someone who drank the local water and got violently ill.

Now we're gonna have to continue this. I want to test the theory that if the vertical bars ever meet, the internet will suffer a clot and stroke out. ;)
And speaking of problems--How does a post in this grouping completely disappear? When Ralph explained what the LLPP was I responded, "2 1/2 out of 4 ain't bad" on page 306 reply #4576. It's nowhere to be found in the quotes. I notice Greg responded right after I did. I think he used his "special powers" to delete it just to mess with my mind.

PointSpecial, I just discovered that fact. When I posted my last post it didn't show a couple of replies so I deleted it and reposted, but you had already replied with your explanation. So now your explanation is before my question. Whew! If you can follow that.

That makes my head hurt even more than looking at the ziggurat does.
That was my goal! After all it was your self professed nitpicking that started all this in response to 1 teensy tiny error(uh check that, deliberate error) on my part. And you did leave off a quote that did mess with my mind. :) ;) ;D

If we keep this up we can just call it Egyptian.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 03, 2009, 12:45:47 PM

I think I am going to smite all of you! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Just Bill on March 03, 2009, 12:57:12 PM

If you grab the scroll bar on your browser and move it up and down really fast, it makes this cool wave effect. Freaky, man!

WARNING: Do not attempt if you're currently living in 1969, living on Willie Nelson's tour bus or you are Willie Nelson.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on March 03, 2009, 04:06:00 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 03, 2009, 10:05:12 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 01:24:56 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 03, 2009, 12:48:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:45:51 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:32:27 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 03, 2009, 12:14:00 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 03, 2009, 12:11:21 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:07:01 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 11:51:15 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 11:48:34 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:36:20 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on March 02, 2009, 11:19:57 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 02, 2009, 11:15:30 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:05:25 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:53:26 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 10:50:02 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:49:04 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:28:53 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:26:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.
This makes 18 quotes

Now you're just being silly.
Just now? I somehow don't feel alone. ;)

It's like an overhead shot of a Babylonian ziggurat.

You know full well they were never this tall.

OK, then ... an Assyrian ziggurat.

While the jagged steps don't fit, the dimensions strike me more as North American 'Mound Builders'.
Perhaps you are all just "Building a Mystery"...Sarah McLachlan, 1997

Mound Builders? Nah. Mayan pyramid, maybe.

Would that mean that magicman would be our human sacrifice, way up at the very top level?
Greg, please, This is my 5th reincarnation. I was already sacrificed when Cortez came over in the 16th century. It didn't work then and won't work now. :D
So that is your problem. If you had done it "right", you would have ended up as a CCIW fan in this incarnation! ::)
I could handle that. But I was the stabbee not the stabber. Not my fault Montezuma II got it wrong.

Don't sweat it. In his next reincarnation I'm sure that Montezuma II came back as someone who drank the local water and got violently ill.

Now we're gonna have to continue this. I want to test the theory that if the vertical bars ever meet, the internet will suffer a clot and stroke out. ;)
And speaking of problems--How does a post in this grouping completely disappear? When Ralph explained what the LLPP was I responded, "2 1/2 out of 4 ain't bad" on page 306 reply #4576. It's nowhere to be found in the quotes. I notice Greg responded right after I did. I think he used his "special powers" to delete it just to mess with my mind.

PointSpecial, I just discovered that fact. When I posted my last post it didn't show a couple of replies so I deleted it and reposted, but you had already replied with your explanation. So now your explanation is before my question. Whew! If you can follow that.

That makes my head hurt even more than looking at the ziggurat does.
That was my goal! After all it was your self professed nitpicking that started all this in response to 1 teensy tiny error(uh check that, deliberate error) on my part. And you did leave off a quote that did mess with my mind. :) ;) ;D

If we keep this up we can just call it Egyptian.

... hey, I think I got skipped! Oh well.

I'm going to dare to go back on topic... (sorry...) but is there another top 25 before the end of the tournament, or is there just one more, after the NCAA tournament is over?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 03, 2009, 04:06:37 PM

There is the one released last night and one after the tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 03, 2009, 05:17:32 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 03, 2009, 04:06:37 PM
There is the one released last night and one after the tournament.

Will it be in pyramid format?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 03, 2009, 05:18:26 PM

Any truth that to save time you'll just be publishing the top 10.......by printing out the lower left bracket?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on March 03, 2009, 11:55:13 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on March 03, 2009, 04:06:00 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 03, 2009, 10:05:12 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 01:24:56 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 03, 2009, 12:48:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:45:51 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:32:27 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 03, 2009, 12:14:00 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 03, 2009, 12:11:21 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:07:01 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 11:51:15 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 11:48:34 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:36:20 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on March 02, 2009, 11:19:57 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 02, 2009, 11:15:30 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:05:25 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:53:26 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 10:50:02 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:49:04 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:28:53 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:26:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.
This makes 18 quotes

Now you're just being silly.
Just now? I somehow don't feel alone. ;)

It's like an overhead shot of a Babylonian ziggurat.

You know full well they were never this tall.

OK, then ... an Assyrian ziggurat.

While the jagged steps don't fit, the dimensions strike me more as North American 'Mound Builders'.
Perhaps you are all just "Building a Mystery"...Sarah McLachlan, 1997

Mound Builders? Nah. Mayan pyramid, maybe.

Would that mean that magicman would be our human sacrifice, way up at the very top level?
Greg, please, This is my 5th reincarnation. I was already sacrificed when Cortez came over in the 16th century. It didn't work then and won't work now. :D
So that is your problem. If you had done it "right", you would have ended up as a CCIW fan in this incarnation! ::)
I could handle that. But I was the stabbee not the stabber. Not my fault Montezuma II got it wrong.

Don't sweat it. In his next reincarnation I'm sure that Montezuma II came back as someone who drank the local water and got violently ill.

Now we're gonna have to continue this. I want to test the theory that if the vertical bars ever meet, the internet will suffer a clot and stroke out. ;)
And speaking of problems--How does a post in this grouping completely disappear? When Ralph explained what the LLPP was I responded, "2 1/2 out of 4 ain't bad" on page 306 reply #4576. It's nowhere to be found in the quotes. I notice Greg responded right after I did. I think he used his "special powers" to delete it just to mess with my mind.

PointSpecial, I just discovered that fact. When I posted my last post it didn't show a couple of replies so I deleted it and reposted, but you had already replied with your explanation. So now your explanation is before my question. Whew! If you can follow that.

That makes my head hurt even more than looking at the ziggurat does.
That was my goal! After all it was your self professed nitpicking that started all this in response to 1 teensy tiny error(uh check that, deliberate error) on my part. And you did leave off a quote that did mess with my mind. :) ;) ;D

If we keep this up we can just call it Egyptian.
... hey, I think I got skipped! Oh well.

I'm going to dare to go back on topic... (sorry...) but is there another top 25 before the end of the tournament, or is there just one more, after the NCAA tournament is over?

PointSpecial, it's my fault you got skipped. You ended up in the aether :D
And since my post started all this. I'm going to be the one to end it. Sure did make long pages though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on March 04, 2009, 11:44:11 AM

Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 11:55:13 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on March 03, 2009, 04:06:00 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 03, 2009, 10:05:12 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 01:24:56 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 03, 2009, 12:48:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:45:51 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:32:27 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 03, 2009, 12:14:00 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 03, 2009, 12:11:21 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:07:01 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 11:51:15 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 11:48:34 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:36:20 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on March 02, 2009, 11:19:57 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 02, 2009, 11:15:30 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:05:25 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:53:26 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 10:50:02 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:49:04 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:28:53 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:26:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.
This makes 18 quotes

Now you're just being silly.
Just now? I somehow don't feel alone. ;)

It's like an overhead shot of a Babylonian ziggurat.

You know full well they were never this tall.

OK, then ... an Assyrian ziggurat.

While the jagged steps don't fit, the dimensions strike me more as North American 'Mound Builders'.
Perhaps you are all just "Building a Mystery"...Sarah McLachlan, 1997

Mound Builders? Nah. Mayan pyramid, maybe.

Would that mean that magicman would be our human sacrifice, way up at the very top level?
Greg, please, This is my 5th reincarnation. I was already sacrificed when Cortez came over in the 16th century. It didn't work then and won't work now. :D
So that is your problem. If you had done it "right", you would have ended up as a CCIW fan in this incarnation! ::)
I could handle that. But I was the stabbee not the stabber. Not my fault Montezuma II got it wrong.

Don't sweat it. In his next reincarnation I'm sure that Montezuma II came back as someone who drank the local water and got violently ill.

Now we're gonna have to continue this. I want to test the theory that if the vertical bars ever meet, the internet will suffer a clot and stroke out. ;)
And speaking of problems--How does a post in this grouping completely disappear? When Ralph explained what the LLPP was I responded, "2 1/2 out of 4 ain't bad" on page 306 reply #4576. It's nowhere to be found in the quotes. I notice Greg responded right after I did. I think he used his "special powers" to delete it just to mess with my mind.

PointSpecial, I just discovered that fact. When I posted my last post it didn't show a couple of replies so I deleted it and reposted, but you had already replied with your explanation. So now your explanation is before my question. Whew! If you can follow that.

That makes my head hurt even more than looking at the ziggurat does.
That was my goal! After all it was your self professed nitpicking that started all this in response to 1 teensy tiny error(uh check that, deliberate error) on my part. And you did leave off a quote that did mess with my mind. :) ;) ;D

If we keep this up we can just call it Egyptian.
... hey, I think I got skipped! Oh well.

I'm going to dare to go back on topic... (sorry...) but is there another top 25 before the end of the tournament, or is there just one more, after the NCAA tournament is over?

PointSpecial, it's my fault you got skipped. You ended up in the aether :D
And since my post started all this. I'm going to be the one to end it. Sure did make long pages though.

End what?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 04, 2009, 02:01:09 PM

Quote from: iwumichigander on March 04, 2009, 11:44:11 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 11:55:13 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on March 03, 2009, 04:06:00 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 03, 2009, 10:05:12 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 01:24:56 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 03, 2009, 12:48:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:45:51 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:32:27 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 03, 2009, 12:14:00 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 03, 2009, 12:11:21 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:07:01 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 11:51:15 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 11:48:34 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:36:20 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on March 02, 2009, 11:19:57 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 02, 2009, 11:15:30 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:05:25 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:53:26 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 10:50:02 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:49:04 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:28:53 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:26:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.
This makes 18 quotes

Now you're just being silly.
Just now? I somehow don't feel alone. ;)

It's like an overhead shot of a Babylonian ziggurat.

You know full well they were never this tall.

OK, then ... an Assyrian ziggurat.

While the jagged steps don't fit, the dimensions strike me more as North American 'Mound Builders'.
Perhaps you are all just "Building a Mystery"...Sarah McLachlan, 1997

Mound Builders? Nah. Mayan pyramid, maybe.

Would that mean that magicman would be our human sacrifice, way up at the very top level?
Greg, please, This is my 5th reincarnation. I was already sacrificed when Cortez came over in the 16th century. It didn't work then and won't work now. :D
So that is your problem. If you had done it "right", you would have ended up as a CCIW fan in this incarnation! ::)
I could handle that. But I was the stabbee not the stabber. Not my fault Montezuma II got it wrong.

Don't sweat it. In his next reincarnation I'm sure that Montezuma II came back as someone who drank the local water and got violently ill.

Now we're gonna have to continue this. I want to test the theory that if the vertical bars ever meet, the internet will suffer a clot and stroke out. ;)
And speaking of problems--How does a post in this grouping completely disappear? When Ralph explained what the LLPP was I responded, "2 1/2 out of 4 ain't bad" on page 306 reply #4576. It's nowhere to be found in the quotes. I notice Greg responded right after I did. I think he used his "special powers" to delete it just to mess with my mind.

PointSpecial, I just discovered that fact. When I posted my last post it didn't show a couple of replies so I deleted it and reposted, but you had already replied with your explanation. So now your explanation is before my question. Whew! If you can follow that.

That makes my head hurt even more than looking at the ziggurat does.
That was my goal! After all it was your self professed nitpicking that started all this in response to 1 teensy tiny error(uh check that, deliberate error) on my part. And you did leave off a quote that did mess with my mind. :) ;) ;D

If we keep this up we can just call it Egyptian.
... hey, I think I got skipped! Oh well.

I'm going to dare to go back on topic... (sorry...) but is there another top 25 before the end of the tournament, or is there just one more, after the NCAA tournament is over?

PointSpecial, it's my fault you got skipped. You ended up in the aether :D
And since my post started all this. I'm going to be the one to end it. Sure did make long pages though.
End what?

Sorry, I couldn't let it stop at 39 quotes, this makes 40.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on March 04, 2009, 02:55:15 PM

Quote from: sac on March 04, 2009, 02:01:09 PM
Quote from: iwumichigander on March 04, 2009, 11:44:11 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 11:55:13 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on March 03, 2009, 04:06:00 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 03, 2009, 10:05:12 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 01:24:56 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 03, 2009, 12:48:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:45:51 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:32:27 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 03, 2009, 12:14:00 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 03, 2009, 12:11:21 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:07:01 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 11:51:15 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 11:48:34 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:36:20 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on March 02, 2009, 11:19:57 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 02, 2009, 11:15:30 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:05:25 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:53:26 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 10:50:02 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:49:04 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:28:53 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:26:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.
This makes 18 quotes

Now you're just being silly.
Just now? I somehow don't feel alone. ;)

It's like an overhead shot of a Babylonian ziggurat.

You know full well they were never this tall.

OK, then ... an Assyrian ziggurat.

While the jagged steps don't fit, the dimensions strike me more as North American 'Mound Builders'.
Perhaps you are all just "Building a Mystery"...Sarah McLachlan, 1997

Mound Builders? Nah. Mayan pyramid, maybe.

Would that mean that magicman would be our human sacrifice, way up at the very top level?
Greg, please, This is my 5th reincarnation. I was already sacrificed when Cortez came over in the 16th century. It didn't work then and won't work now. :D
So that is your problem. If you had done it "right", you would have ended up as a CCIW fan in this incarnation! ::)
I could handle that. But I was the stabbee not the stabber. Not my fault Montezuma II got it wrong.

Don't sweat it. In his next reincarnation I'm sure that Montezuma II came back as someone who drank the local water and got violently ill.

Now we're gonna have to continue this. I want to test the theory that if the vertical bars ever meet, the internet will suffer a clot and stroke out. ;)
And speaking of problems--How does a post in this grouping completely disappear? When Ralph explained what the LLPP was I responded, "2 1/2 out of 4 ain't bad" on page 306 reply #4576. It's nowhere to be found in the quotes. I notice Greg responded right after I did. I think he used his "special powers" to delete it just to mess with my mind.

PointSpecial, I just discovered that fact. When I posted my last post it didn't show a couple of replies so I deleted it and reposted, but you had already replied with your explanation. So now your explanation is before my question. Whew! If you can follow that.

That makes my head hurt even more than looking at the ziggurat does.
That was my goal! After all it was your self professed nitpicking that started all this in response to 1 teensy tiny error(uh check that, deliberate error) on my part. And you did leave off a quote that did mess with my mind. :) ;) ;D

If we keep this up we can just call it Egyptian.
... hey, I think I got skipped! Oh well.

I'm going to dare to go back on topic... (sorry...) but is there another top 25 before the end of the tournament, or is there just one more, after the NCAA tournament is over?

PointSpecial, it's my fault you got skipped. You ended up in the aether :D
And since my post started all this. I'm going to be the one to end it. Sure did make long pages though.
End what?

Sorry, I couldn't let it stop at 39 quotes, this makes 40.

Do you have something against numbers divisible by 13?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 04, 2009, 02:57:45 PM

This joke just keeps getting funnier and funnier... ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 04, 2009, 06:32:38 PM

Quote from: kiltedbryan on March 04, 2009, 02:55:15 PM
Quote from: sac on March 04, 2009, 02:01:09 PM
Quote from: iwumichigander on March 04, 2009, 11:44:11 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 11:55:13 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on March 03, 2009, 04:06:00 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 03, 2009, 10:05:12 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 01:24:56 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 03, 2009, 12:48:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:45:51 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:32:27 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 03, 2009, 12:14:00 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 03, 2009, 12:11:21 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:07:01 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 11:51:15 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 11:48:34 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:36:20 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on March 02, 2009, 11:19:57 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 02, 2009, 11:15:30 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:05:25 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:53:26 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 10:50:02 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:49:04 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:28:53 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:26:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.
This makes 18 quotes

Now you're just being silly.
Just now? I somehow don't feel alone. ;)

It's like an overhead shot of a Babylonian ziggurat.

You know full well they were never this tall.

OK, then ... an Assyrian ziggurat.

While the jagged steps don't fit, the dimensions strike me more as North American 'Mound Builders'.
Perhaps you are all just "Building a Mystery"...Sarah McLachlan, 1997

Mound Builders? Nah. Mayan pyramid, maybe.

Would that mean that magicman would be our human sacrifice, way up at the very top level?
Greg, please, This is my 5th reincarnation. I was already sacrificed when Cortez came over in the 16th century. It didn't work then and won't work now. :D
So that is your problem. If you had done it "right", you would have ended up as a CCIW fan in this incarnation! ::)
I could handle that. But I was the stabbee not the stabber. Not my fault Montezuma II got it wrong.

Don't sweat it. In his next reincarnation I'm sure that Montezuma II came back as someone who drank the local water and got violently ill.

Now we're gonna have to continue this. I want to test the theory that if the vertical bars ever meet, the internet will suffer a clot and stroke out. ;)
And speaking of problems--How does a post in this grouping completely disappear? When Ralph explained what the LLPP was I responded, "2 1/2 out of 4 ain't bad" on page 306 reply #4576. It's nowhere to be found in the quotes. I notice Greg responded right after I did. I think he used his "special powers" to delete it just to mess with my mind.

PointSpecial, I just discovered that fact. When I posted my last post it didn't show a couple of replies so I deleted it and reposted, but you had already replied with your explanation. So now your explanation is before my question. Whew! If you can follow that.

That makes my head hurt even more than looking at the ziggurat does.
That was my goal! After all it was your self professed nitpicking that started all this in response to 1 teensy tiny error(uh check that, deliberate error) on my part. And you did leave off a quote that did mess with my mind. :) ;) ;D

If we keep this up we can just call it Egyptian.
... hey, I think I got skipped! Oh well.

I'm going to dare to go back on topic... (sorry...) but is there another top 25 before the end of the tournament, or is there just one more, after the NCAA tournament is over?

PointSpecial, it's my fault you got skipped. You ended up in the aether :D
And since my post started all this. I'm going to be the one to end it. Sure did make long pages though.
End what?

Sorry, I couldn't let it stop at 39 quotes, this makes 40.

Do you have something against numbers divisible by 13?

Yeah, I'm petty sure saying you're going to end it will only ensure it's continued life.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 04, 2009, 06:37:19 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 04, 2009, 06:32:38 PM
Quote from: kiltedbryan on March 04, 2009, 02:55:15 PM
Quote from: sac on March 04, 2009, 02:01:09 PM
Quote from: iwumichigander on March 04, 2009, 11:44:11 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 11:55:13 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on March 03, 2009, 04:06:00 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 03, 2009, 10:05:12 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 01:24:56 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 03, 2009, 12:48:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:45:51 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:32:27 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 03, 2009, 12:14:00 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 03, 2009, 12:11:21 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 03, 2009, 12:07:01 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 11:51:15 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 11:48:34 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:36:20 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on March 02, 2009, 11:19:57 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 02, 2009, 11:15:30 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 11:05:25 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:53:26 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 10:50:02 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:49:04 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:28:53 PM
Quote from: sac on March 02, 2009, 10:26:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 10:13:44 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 02, 2009, 09:08:08 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:09:30 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 02, 2009, 01:48:39 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:29:39 PM
Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:27:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 01, 2009, 04:24:00 PM
Quote from: magicman on March 01, 2009, 01:01:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 28, 2009, 06:45:32 PM
Everyone's a smart aleck today. Too much time spent in front of the computer, boys! Go out and get some fresh air! ;) :D

Quote from: magicman on February 28, 2009, 01:03:11 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:29:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2009, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 27, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
Wheaton beats North Central 77-66 behind Kent Raymonds 36 pts.

#4 Wheaton takes on #20 Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW championship.

No ... Wheaton takes on Elmhurst tomorrow night for the CCIW tournament championship.

Wheaton is already the 2008-09 CCIW champion.

I knew soon as I posted that statement that someone would call me on it. Just wanted to see who it would be. ;)

Aw, c'mon - if you've been paying attention at all, you knew it would be Greg! :D

Sager's my name, nitpicking is my game. ;)

Mr. Y,
You're right of course. Greg was high on the list. But you were a close 2nd!! ;D

Greg did recently call me Sancho Panza (for a slam on the "It's tough to beat a team three times" cliche'); I rebuff the role unless I can replace the donkey with a real horse. ::)

If he called you Sancho Panza then he's going to call me the donkey because I used that cliche tonight (actually 12:44 AM this morning) over on the SUNYAC board. I should be granted some leeway though as I was responding to a poster who used it in his post.

The donkey is a noble and intelligent animal that gets a lot of bad press, but where would civilization be without him? He's the distributing point guard of the family Equidae.

Greg, How did you know that I was a point guard? It was over 40 years ago. ;D

I have nothing to say here, I just wanted to get in on what might be a record multi-quote.

I don't think this is near the record

Not yet, but I sense promise.
This is just starting by LLPP standards! :D

Ok Ralph, you got me. Pardon my lack of knowledge but what is LLPP. My best guess would be LIberty League Poster's Poll, but that doesn't exist.
LLPP = Liberty League Post Patterns, the football message board for the Liberty League. You must 18 years of age to go there. ;)

... and absolutely no one will be seated during the shocking final five minutes of whatever video they've linked to last in there. ;)

P.S. Thanks, Darryl, for all of the fine work you've done by picking up the reins from DC and charting the Top 25 this season! It's been greatly appreciated.

Since I'm a one sport poster, I don't count the football boards.
This makes 18 quotes

Now you're just being silly.
Just now? I somehow don't feel alone. ;)

It's like an overhead shot of a Babylonian ziggurat.

You know full well they were never this tall.

OK, then ... an Assyrian ziggurat.

While the jagged steps don't fit, the dimensions strike me more as North American 'Mound Builders'.
Perhaps you are all just "Building a Mystery"...Sarah McLachlan, 1997

Mound Builders? Nah. Mayan pyramid, maybe.

Would that mean that magicman would be our human sacrifice, way up at the very top level?
Greg, please, This is my 5th reincarnation. I was already sacrificed when Cortez came over in the 16th century. It didn't work then and won't work now. :D
So that is your problem. If you had done it "right", you would have ended up as a CCIW fan in this incarnation! ::)
I could handle that. But I was the stabbee not the stabber. Not my fault Montezuma II got it wrong.

Don't sweat it. In his next reincarnation I'm sure that Montezuma II came back as someone who drank the local water and got violently ill.

Now we're gonna have to continue this. I want to test the theory that if the vertical bars ever meet, the internet will suffer a clot and stroke out. ;)
And speaking of problems--How does a post in this grouping completely disappear? When Ralph explained what the LLPP was I responded, "2 1/2 out of 4 ain't bad" on page 306 reply #4576. It's nowhere to be found in the quotes. I notice Greg responded right after I did. I think he used his "special powers" to delete it just to mess with my mind.

PointSpecial, I just discovered that fact. When I posted my last post it didn't show a couple of replies so I deleted it and reposted, but you had already replied with your explanation. So now your explanation is before my question. Whew! If you can follow that.

That makes my head hurt even more than looking at the ziggurat does.
That was my goal! After all it was your self professed nitpicking that started all this in response to 1 teensy tiny error(uh check that, deliberate error) on my part. And you did leave off a quote that did mess with my mind. :) ;) ;D

If we keep this up we can just call it Egyptian.
... hey, I think I got skipped! Oh well.

I'm going to dare to go back on topic... (sorry...) but is there another top 25 before the end of the tournament, or is there just one more, after the NCAA tournament is over?

PointSpecial, it's my fault you got skipped. You ended up in the aether :D
And since my post started all this. I'm going to be the one to end it. Sure did make long pages though.
End what?

Sorry, I couldn't let it stop at 39 quotes, this makes 40.

Do you have something against numbers divisible by 13?

Yeah, I'm petty sure saying you're going to end it will only ensure it's continued life.

Hey, we've come this far - we have GOT to find out what happens when the vertical lines meet in the center! Can they actually cross? Will the internet implode? :o

Enquiring minds want to know! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 04, 2009, 08:00:13 PM

So I've taken the liberty of moving the pyramid so this board can head back to topic.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 04, 2009, 11:03:53 PM

Quote from: sac on March 04, 2009, 08:00:13 PM
So I've taken the liberty of moving the pyramid so this board can head back to topic.

What few people realize is that Hall of Fame status gives us the strength of 10,000 ancient Egyptian peasants.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on March 21, 2009, 04:21:30 AM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on March 02, 2009, 05:13:51 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 02, 2009, 02:39:50 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2009, 02:04:57 PM
"YOU COULD MAKE A FINAL FOUR OUT OF THAT BRACKET!"

You could make two final fours out of that bracket; it's likely to happen in the second round.

Eleven of Massey's top 13 are in that bracket, including the top 9.
Well maybe if the team out of this bracket wins it's final 2 games by 30+ then the NCAA might consider competition over $$$ in the future but, of course, I doubt it.

hmmm...so far so good..kinda

Bracket of Death 2009 shall live in infamy.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 21, 2009, 10:21:50 AM

I am trying to find the recommendation that Pat Coleman made about the brackets to break up the concentration in the midwest. (I think that he made the recommendation in a podcast.)

Which pods did he recommend be flipped?

Thanks

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TheOsprey on March 21, 2009, 10:30:19 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 21, 2009, 10:21:50 AM
I am trying to find the recommendation that Pat Coleman made about the brackets to break up the concentration in the midwest. (I think that he made the recommendation in a podcast.)

Which pods did he recommend be flipped?

Thanks

I remember he said to switch the Centre pod with one of the "Death" pods!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mellymel on March 21, 2009, 12:21:48 PM

Check out this live interactive blog from the championship game:

http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/126/story/435213.html

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on March 22, 2009, 08:19:53 AM

Never too early, right? Without factoring in recruiting and transfers, who on paper look to be the big dogs heading into next year? Seems like all four Final Four teams are all absolutely loaded next year and will go into the season as the favorites. Throw in Wooster, John Carroll (thanks great lakes region guys for correcting me there on an earlier thread), whoever is the WIAC pre-season favorite, maybe Illinois Wesleyan (they have essentially everyone back, right, and the rest of the conference is fairly depleted?) St. Thomas, and maybe UMass Dartmouth from New England squeezing in at number 10. Maybe one of Hope or Calvin as well, not sure what they have bringing back?

I'd say New England (the region I know best) has three in the top 20 range, but probably not higher than 10, unless one of them gets an instant impact transfer: UMass Dartmouth, Williams (who at long last I expect to return to making noise on the national level), and Amherst. Middlebury is a possibility as well but they lose a ton to graduation. WPI will put up, as usual, gaudy win totals but have a tough time advancing far in the tourney. No one else from New England looks particularly menacing on paper at this point, again, absent a major impact transfer or something.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KorsairKILLAH on March 22, 2009, 08:39:22 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on March 22, 2009, 08:19:53 AM
Never too early, right? Without factoring in recruiting and transfers, who on paper look to be the big dogs heading into next year? Seems like all four Final Four teams are all absolutely loaded next year and will go into the season as the favorites. Throw in Wooster, John Carroll (thanks great lakes region guys for correcting me there on an earlier thread), whoever is the WIAC pre-season favorite, maybe Illinois Wesleyan (they have essentially everyone back, right, and the rest of the conference is fairly depleted?) St. Thomas, and maybe UMass Dartmouth from New England squeezing in at number 10. Maybe one of Hope or Calvin as well, not sure what they have bringing back?

I'd say New England (the region I know best) has three in the top 20 range, but probably not higher than 10, unless one of them gets an instant impact transfer: UMass Dartmouth, Williams (who at long last I expect to return to making noise on the national level), and Amherst. Middlebury is a possibility as well but they lose a ton to graduation. WPI will put up, as usual, gaudy win totals but have a tough time advancing far in the tourney. No one else from New England looks particularly menacing on paper at this point, again, absent a major impact transfer or something.

I think mass dartmouth will be in the top ten next year. They have a bigtime player in tom henneberry (transfer from d2 umass lowell).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 22, 2009, 05:41:33 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on March 22, 2009, 08:19:53 AM
Maybe one of Hope or Calvin as well, not sure what they have bringing back?

They both lose enough they should remain out of the poll, each lose 4 year Senior starters, MVP types........both teams have some very good young players returning. Both will probably have similar seasons to this year..............but I expect one of them to be a top 25 team by the midpoint of next season. Could be either really, I have not seen either teams 09-10 schedule yet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: usee on March 24, 2009, 11:29:07 PM

The best team from the CCIW is likely to be Carthage next year. If they are able to add 1 decent big man they will be pretty scary with virtually everyone returning and Steve Durjkovic as the best player in the cciw.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BornBalla on March 25, 2009, 11:02:08 AM

KorsairKILLAH: Wasn't Henneberry there this past season? I thought I saw his name in box from Desales game.What was his role this year? Why mention him like he's some hidden gem ready to burst onto scene next year to put UMD in TOP 10? Was he playing injured?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gray Fox on March 27, 2009, 11:57:41 AM

This will soon all be moot. All schools will be part of March (June) madness. :)

http://www.theonion.com/content/video/ncaa_expands_march_madness_to

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 17, 2009, 01:40:53 PM

Organizing some of the Preseason Top 25 research I've been doing (ballot due Monday 10/19) by listing possible conference "favorites" at this early stage. Also trying to slot into categories of potential Top 10 vs potential Top 11-25.

All thoughts welcome...thanks.

WIAC
T1 UW-Platteville*/UW-Stevens Point*/UW-Whitewater*/UW-Oshkosh*

(no consensus - wide open)

CCIW
T1 Wheaton*/Augustana*/Carthage*/Illinois Wesleyan*

(no consensus - wide open)

UAA
1 Wash U** (clear cut national #1)
2 Brandeis*
3 Carnegie Mellon*

OAC
1 John Carroll**

NESCAC
T1 Williams*/Amherst*

(no consensus)

ODAC
1 Guilford**
T2 Randolph-Macon*/Virginia Wesleyan*

NJAC
1 Richard Stockton**

NWC
1 Whitworth*
2 Linfield
3 Puget Sound

MWC
T1 Carroll*/Lawrence*/St. Norbert*

(no consensus - wide open)

MIAA
T1 Calvin*/Hope*
3 Olivet

Centennial
1 Franklin & Marshall**

HCAC
1 Transylvania*

MIAC
1. ST. Thomas*

NCAC
1 Wooster**
T2 Ohio Wesleyan/Wittenberg/Wabash

SCIAC
1 Cal Lutheran**
2 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps*

IIAC
?

SCAC
1 Oglethorpe*
?

ASC
?

MACF
1 DeSales**

LEC
1 Mass-Dartmouth**

MASCAC
1 Bridgewater State*

Landmark
1 Catholic*

CAC
1 St. Mary's*

USA South
1 Christopher Newport*

IND
Chapman*

** = Top 10 candidate
* = Top 25 candidate (spots 11-25)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on October 17, 2009, 03:54:12 PM

This is a pretty big departure from last year... last year, the midwest (small m) was stacked and some teams were pretty much in a class by themselves. This year, the midwest seems pretty inexperienced (due to the number of great seniors that graduated) and the balance has shifted.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 18, 2009, 09:41:37 AM

Quote from: PointSpecial on October 17, 2009, 03:54:12 PM
This is a pretty big departure from last year... last year, the midwest (small m) was stacked and some teams were pretty much in a class by themselves. This year, the midwest seems pretty inexperienced (due to the number of great seniors that graduated) and the balance has shifted.

Good catch, Point. Last year the preseason poll had 12 of the 25 teams from the Midwest and West regions...

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/09/index.html

While the pollsters were wrong about a few of the teams, and the order of some of the teams, the fact is that the 2008-09 season validated the heavy emphasis on those two regions. Results throughout both the regular season and post-season demonstrated just how many Top 25-caliber teams – even Top 10-caliber teams - the two regions had. The final poll had 10 Midwest/West teams...

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/

As we head into '09-10, the picture looks different. The Midwest has lost guys like Kent Raymond (Wheaton), Brent Ruch (Elmhurst), Ryan Kroeger (Lawrence) and several others. Similarly, the West has lost the likes of Jeff Skemp (Platteville), Myles McKay (Whitewater), etc, etc. The two best leagues in these regions (the WIAC and CCIW) were both oustanding last year, but are now are in "reloading" mode a little bit. I'm confident each will see national powers emerge...but it may be January before we know who those are.

It sure looks to me like the power in Division III in '09-10 is pretty balanced.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 19, 2009, 09:06:37 AM

This is the Preseason Top 25 ballot I submitted this morning. I feel strongly about the top 10...after that, it was llike picking out of a hat.

1 Washington U.
2 John Carroll
3 Wooster
4 Guilford
5 Franklin and Marshall
6 Richard Stockton
7 DeSales
8 Mass-Dartmouth
9 Cal Lutheran
10 St. Thomas
11 Randolph-Macon
12 Bridgewater State
13 Williams
14 UW-Platteville
15 Amherst
16 UW-Stevens Point
17 Brandeis
18 Oglethorpe
19 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps
20 St. Mary's (Md.)
21 Whitworth
22 Transylvania
23 Carthage
24 Ohio Northern
25 Ohio Wesleyan

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on October 19, 2009, 09:41:01 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 19, 2009, 09:06:37 AM
I feel strongly about the top 10...after that, it was llike picking out of a hat.

How big was the hat?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on October 19, 2009, 10:28:40 AM

I think, Titan Q, you have the New England teams placed about right for the most part. UMass Dartmouth has the most returning talent in the region and definitely deseves a top-ten ranking. Williams and Amherst should settle in as top 20 but not-quite-top-ten teams (I do believe Williams has top-ten talent this year, but until they prove it on the court, and find a way to stay healthy, that is all on paper; Amherst loses some strong players but it has a great sophomore class which figures to be much improved from last year). The only questionable one is Bridgewater State. They did have a good NCAA win against Midd, but the two guys who scored over half the points in that game graduated, including their star cetner who led the team in most statistical categories. MASCAC is a weak league so whoever wins the conference generally has a bit of an inflated record, but I would be suprrised if they field a top-25 caliber team this year. Brandeis is a big question mark as they were fairly mercurial last year and do lose their top two players. Overall I think NESCAC is up from last year but the rest of New England is down as, outside of UMD, the bulk of the best non-NESCAC players in the region (Kathan, almost everyone on RIC, Deluca, Salem's key guys, Bartolotta, Millien, etc. etc.) graduate, and several NESCAC schools (especially Wesleyan, Amherst, Williams, Trinity) are reputed to have strong recruits coming in.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 19, 2009, 10:49:12 AM

Yes, I wasn't 100% comfortable with where I have Bridgewater State...but I think I can say that for most of my teams from 11-25 unfortunately.

I have Bridgewater State returning 4 starters from their 22-7/2 NCAA win team (Judah Jackson, Nicholas Motta, Matt McLaughlin, Corey Connor). They have a big void to fill, but on paper, they look poised to be pretty good again.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on October 19, 2009, 11:58:08 AM

It's amazing to me :o :o, who spends so much time on schedules etc, how much effort must go into reviewing makeup of teams, who was good last year, who is coming back etc - on a national level. My sincere appreciation to TQ and the rest of the voters for doing the research to come up with a preseason top 25, giving the rest of us something to chew on during the month before games.....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 19, 2009, 01:57:05 PM

I am looking foward to McMurry's participating in the Lee Pfund Classic.

McMurry (defending champion of the ASC-West) opens with Ohio Northern, and then catches the winner/loser of the Wheaton/Trine game.

That tourney pits the CCIW, the MIAA, the ASC and the OAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 19, 2009, 04:05:34 PM

I don't have a ballot in the d3hoops.com Top 25 poll, but I have been researching the various leagues for the past week or so in order to come up with my own preseason Top 25. This is what I have:

1. Washington MO
2. John Carroll
3. Wooster
4. Guilford
5. Franklin & Marshall
6. Richard Stockton
7. St. Thomas
8. DeSales
9. Mass-Dartmouth
10. UW-Stevens Point
11. Ohio Northern
12. Williams
13. UW-Whitewater
14. St. Mary's
15. Brandeis
16. Cal Lutheran
17. Augustana
18. UW-Platteville
19. UW-Superior
20. Calvin
21. Defiance
22. Wheaton IL
23. Amherst
24. LeTourneau
25. Lawrence

Note that Bob and I have nine of our top ten teams in common; in fact, we picked teams #1 thru #6 in identical order. After the top ten, though, there's a lot of deviation; he and I only agree on seven of the next fifteen teams, and two of the teams that he has at the top of this second group -- #11 Randolph-Macon and #12 Bridgewater State -- I didn't even pick at all.

I wouldn't be surprised if this trend holds for all of the pollsters: General consensus about the top ten, with the top six teams being the same on just about everyone's ballot (although the order might shift after #1 Wash U), but wide disparities regarding who belongs in the #10-#25 range, not to mention where they belong.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 19, 2009, 04:20:53 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 19, 2009, 01:57:05 PM
I am looking foward to McMurry's participating in the Lee Pfund Classic.

McMurry (defending champion of the ASC-West) opens with Ohio Northern, and then catches the winner/loser of the Wheaton/Trine game.

That tourney pits the CCIW, the MIAA, the ASC and the OAC.

I am very sorry that I am going to have to miss the Pfund for the first time in well over a decade. Not only would I enjoy seeing your Ex-Indians again, Ralph, but as you can see from my last post I'm pretty high on Ohio Northern this year, and since Trine is playing North Park on December 12 I'd love to get a sneak peek at Coach Harmon's Thunder. Alas, NPU is going to be playing in the River Forest Classic that weekend, nine stops further east on the Metra's UP-West line.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 19, 2009, 09:03:57 PM

Thanks for the comment, Greg.

I have a meeting in Orlando that weekend, so I cannot slip up to Chicago for the game.

I hope that the tourney is a good one, and that the games continue the proud tradition of a quality tournament.

McMurry Sr point guard Robert Moreno has returned for his last year of eligibility. I will be glad for those knowledgeable fans to watch him perform.

I think that he is an all-American calibre point guard, and I hope that his efforts that weekend will show what I think that he can do.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on October 20, 2009, 08:16:20 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 19, 2009, 09:06:37 AM
25 Ohio Wesleyan

That's one heckuva vote of confidence in Mike DeWitt's program. I don't disagree; at least, I think they have the potential to be a pretty good team, although they might not start out that way. But they did lose their two leading scorers and a pretty important role player, and even with those guys they fell pretty flat down the stretch last season, losing back-to-back home games to an undistinguished Allegheny squad to end their season. They do bring back sophomore Pat Pellerite, a real stud who has the potential to be great, two more starters, another soph in Tim Brady who will be a starter and has a lot of upside, and a few good frosh; and DeWitt is a very good coach both with motivation and X's and O's. So they could be good, and the program is definitely headed in the right direction. But Top 25 might be a little bit of a stretch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 21, 2009, 10:49:55 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on October 20, 2009, 08:16:20 PM
So they could be good, and the program is definitely headed in the right direction. But Top 25 might be a little bit of a stretch.

I agree David...it's just that anyone I slotted in that #25 slot (whether Hope, Augustana, Wheaton, Calvin, whoever) was going to end up being a "stretch" in some way.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on October 21, 2009, 01:38:54 PM

Preseason Top 25 is up:

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/

WashU unanimous #1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Drake Palmer on October 21, 2009, 05:31:02 PM

Greg- UW-Superior?? :)

From my little MIAC corner of the world - I think Titan Q's ranking of St. Thomas at #10 is ok, but still a couple of slots too high. With UST's losses to graduation, IMO, the #4 ranking by the D3 poll is definitely w-a-a-y too high.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 21, 2009, 05:53:26 PM

Quote from: Drake Palmer on October 21, 2009, 05:31:02 PM
Greg- UW-Superior?? :)

The Yellowjackets are my sleeper team, Drake ... or one of them, at least. They return four starters from last season, plus two part-time starters, and they've added a 6'6, 220 junior forward named Marcus Helland who transferred in from Minnesota-Duluth, where he was the eighth man last season on a Bulldogs team that won 20 games on the D2 level. Among the returning starters are three who averaged in double figures in scoring last season: 6'6, 220 junior forward Jake Smith (17.4 ppg), junior shooting guard Dan Culy (13.9 ppg), and senior point guard Dwight Hill (12.4 ppg). The fourth returning starter is a 6'8, 240 center, Dan Roeder, so the Yellowjackets will be very physically formidable on the front line. I think that they have a serious shot at making some noise in the WIAC this season.

Quote from: Drake Palmer on October 21, 2009, 05:31:02 PMFrom my little MIAC corner of the world - I think Titan Q's ranking of St. Thomas at #10 is ok, but still a couple of slots too high. With UST's losses to graduation, IMO, the #4 ranking by the D3 poll is definitely w-a-a-y too high.

I agree. My only quibbles with the top ten (I have plenty of quibbles with the bottom fifteen ;)) are that St. Thomas is too high and Wooster is too low.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Wydown Blvd. on October 21, 2009, 06:35:23 PM

Drake, Remember its a poll not a ranking... Because of the parity in the NCAA this year (as previously discussed on this board) voters may not have ranked St. Thomas #4 (or really any other than WashU) at their specific slot, but they received the 4th ranked amount of points....

This is an aside but basically use a concept behind standard deviation to consider the differences in the ballots. This is not completely mathematically correct because we dont know the actual ballots, but just something I tried my hand at:

Its interesting to compare the average ranking of each team by the voters to its actual ranking in the poll. For example Cal Lutheran averages a 18th ranking by voters, but is the 14th ranked team for a difference of about 4...You can see who benefits from a poll but may not benefit from a ranking. However those differences are less likely in this years pre-season poll than last years, which means most pollsters are getting the clumps of teams about right. Of course with the real standard deviation, a team such as this years Randolph Macon could be ranked about 10th by 10 voters (to get 149 points) and that would make any difference between the average rank and average points void.

2009 Preseason
                   Average Vote   Difference in Average Vote To Ranking
1   Washington U. (25)          1      0
2   John Carroll                4.96      2.96
3   Guilford                5.32      2.32
4   St. Thomas                6      2
5   Richard Stockton         6.08      1.08
6   Franklin and Marshall          6.44      0.44
7   DeSales                10.04   3.04
8   Mass-Dartmouth          10.12   2.12
9   Wooster                10.28   1.28
10   UW-Stevens Point          10.44   0.44
11   Bridgewater State          11.92   0.92
12   Texas-Dallas             14.2      2.2
13   UW-Whitewater             14.44   1.44
14   Cal Lutheran             18.64   4.64
15   Wheaton (Ill.)             19.16   4.16
16   Whitworth                19.24   3.24
17   UW-Platteville             19.36   2.36
18   Puget Sound             19.52   1.52
19   Randolph-Macon          20.04   1.04
20   St. Mary's (Md.)          20.12   0.12
21   Centre                20.8      -0.2
22   Brandeis                21.08   -0.92
23   Hope                21.64   -1.36
24   UW-Oshkosh             21.76   -2.24
25   Amherst                22.2      -2.8

2008 Preseason
1   Washington U. (23)         1.16      0.16
2   Augustana               3.2      1.2
3   Wheaton (Ill.)            6.32      3.32
4   UW-Whitewater (1)         6.48      2.48
5   St. Thomas            9.32      4.32
6   UW-Stevens Point         9.96      3.96
7   UW-Platteville (1)         11      4
8   Buena Vista            11.48   3.48
9   Brandeis               12.48   3.48
10   Mary Hardin-Baylor         14.04   4.04
11   Gettysburg               14.36   3.36
12   Ursinus               14.96   2.96
13   Centre               15.24   2.24
14   Randolph-Macon            17.4      3.4
15   Amherst               17.68   2.68
16   Rhode Island College         18      2
17   Elmhurst               18.52   1.52
18   Illinois Wesleyan            18.68   0.68
19   Lawrence               18.76   -0.24
20   Hope                  19.4      -0.6
21   Wooster               19.52   -1.48
22   Chicago               19.6      -2.4
23   Widener               19.84   -3.16
24   Virginia Wesleyan         19.96   -4.04
25   Elms                  22.24   -2.76

2007 Preseason
1   Washington U. (15)          1.52      0.52
2   Amherst (8)             2.2      0.2
3   UW-Stevens Point (1)          3.24      0.24
4   Guilford                6.96      2.96
5   Augustana             7.64      2.64
6   Virginia Wesleyan          8.96      2.96
7   Brockport State (1)          10.84   3.84
8   Wooster                11.28   3.28
9   Rochester                12.6      3.6
10   Capital                12.64   2.64
11   Hope                13.12   2.12
12   Brandeis                13.92   1.92
13   Aurora                14.48   1.48
14   Mary Hardin-Baylor          16.48   2.48
15   Williams                17.68   2.68
16   Plattsburgh State          19.56   3.56
17   Calvin                19.6      2.6
18   Elmhurst                20      2
19   Puget Sound             20.4      1.4
20   Baldwin-Wallace          20.64   0.64
21   Lewis and Clark             20.68   -0.32
22   Keene State             20.88   -1.12
23   Mississippi College          21.32   -1.68
24   Stevens                21.6      -2.4
25   UW-Whitewater             22.08   -2.92

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on October 21, 2009, 10:08:31 PM

Quote from: Drake Palmer on October 21, 2009, 05:31:02 PM
Greg- UW-Superior?? :)

I thought the same to be honest... They do have quite a bit back... but they have a new coach. 'Course, that might help for all we know, but they likely will have a bit of a learning curve.

Platteville has a ton back too... but they've got a new coach too. Should be interesting (as always) to see what happens in the WIAC!

Quote
From my little MIAC corner of the world - I think Titan Q's ranking of St. Thomas at #10 is ok, but still a couple of slots too high. With UST's losses to graduation, IMO, the #4 ranking by the D3 poll is definitely w-a-a-y too high.

The point was made that they got the 4th highest number of points... but even if it doesn't seem like they should be that high, SOMEBODY needs to be that high. Even if they're not as good as last year, they might be that much better than everyone else.

I'm not necessarily saying this... I don't have a clue who St. Thomas has coming back (though I am very interested to see what happens in the NCAA second round rematch between UST and UWSP)... But they clearly are on many people's radars.

It should be noted that, historically, some very highly (projected) teams have flopped. I don't have the stats in front of me right now... but I seem to remember the #2 team a few years in a row losing their first game, or 2 of 3 to start the year, or something like that. They didn't completely flop, but Augie was slotted #2 last year in the preseason... and they didn't make the NCAA tournament. UW Oshkosh was the same way 3-4 years ago, I think.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on October 22, 2009, 11:56:16 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 19, 2009, 09:06:37 AM
This is the Preseason Top 25 ballot I submitted this morning. I feel strongly about the top 10...after that, it was llike picking out of a hat.

1 Washington U.
2 John Carroll
3 Wooster
4 Guilford
5 Franklin and Marshall
6 Richard Stockton
7 DeSales
8 Mass-Dartmouth
9 Cal Lutheran
10 St. Thomas
11 Randolph-Macon
12 Bridgewater State
13 Williams
14 UW-Platteville
15 Amherst
16 UW-Stevens Point
17 Brandeis
18 Oglethorpe
19 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps
20 St. Mary's (Md.)
21 Whitworth
22 Transylvania
23 Carthage
24 Ohio Northern
25 Ohio Wesleyan

I like your ballot TQ! 8)

According to your ballot, there is a possibility that 5 of Wooster's 8 non-conference opponents are ranked! Wooster's non-conference schedule has the potential to be pretty rugged to say the least!

I also like your positioning of Woo in there at #3 as well! ;)

Lastly, I wanted to throw out my thanks and appreciation to all those with ballots for all of the work you put in to give us fans something to pass the time from now until the season starts! I can't wait for the season to get started! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Wydown Blvd. on October 22, 2009, 12:50:40 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on October 21, 2009, 10:08:31 PM
It should be noted that, historically, some very highly (projected) teams have flopped.

And we all remember UChicago was 22nd in last years preseason poll, and they ended up starting the season 0-12, and finished 6-19. One of the biggest flops I have ever seen since following d3.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on October 22, 2009, 03:55:20 PM

Quote from: Wydown Blvd. on October 22, 2009, 12:50:40 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on October 21, 2009, 10:08:31 PM
It should be noted that, historically, some very highly (projected) teams have flopped.

And we all remember UChicago was 22nd in last years preseason poll, and they ended up starting the season 0-12, and finished 6-19. One of the biggest flops I have ever seen since following d3.

I forgot about them... another good example!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 07, 2009, 07:20:34 PM

UPSET ALERT
It's still early (11:51 1st period), but Wooster, playing without two potential starters, is leading Kent State 18-11. The Scots have hit 70% while holding the Golden Flashes to 33% shooting, and are outrebounding their taller guests 9-6. You can listen to Wooster's student station here (http://www3.wooster.edu/woo91/).

Update: KSU defensive pressure leads to an 18-4 run; just under 4:00 left in the half and Wooster trails by 2.
Update: Kent St. scores the last 6 points of the half to take a 35-30 lead into the locker room. Wooster has committed 14 turnovers to negate advantages in shooting (46% to 28%) and rebounding (+2).
Update: The National Weather Service has canceled the Upset Alert. Kent State has begun to lay the wood and now leads by 17, 15:00 remaining.
Final: Kent St. 76, Wooster 59

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 18, 2009, 07:53:31 PM

#11 Bridgewater State played at Western New England last night - they won 86-83, but it was ugly. Bridgewater hardly used their bench at all and WNEC had 24 turnovers. Not a good start for a ranked team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 19, 2009, 01:15:31 AM

#3 Guilford jumped out to a 28-0 lead over Greensboro in the 1st 6:30 of play Wed. night and coasted to a 54-17 halftime lead. Final score was 76-49 as 12 Quakers got into the scoring column. Tyler Sanborn only saw 11 mins of action and managed 11 pts with 7 rebounds. Clay Henson scored 14 pts in 16 mins of action.
Guilford not in action again until Nov. 24th when they host Averett.

#5 Richard Stockton rebounds from their opening day loss to easily defeat Penn. St.-Abington 77-48.

Maryville (Tenn.) travels to #21 Centre and scores a mild upset 72-70. Game really not as close as the final score would indicate. Maryville up by 16 40-24 at the break and maintained a double digit lead most of 2nd half. Up 15 with 5:00 to go, Centre narrowed the gap when they hit some 3's, did the foul parade, and had an uncontested basket to end the game.

#23 Hope actually played Rochester (MIch) Tuesday night Nov. 17th and came away with a 65-50 win.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: chubbyboybaby on November 19, 2009, 06:12:55 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 18, 2009, 07:53:31 PM

#11 Bridgewater State played at Western New England last night - they won 86-83, but it was ugly. Bridgewater hardly used their bench at all and WNEC had 24 turnovers. Not a good start for a ranked team.

Bridgewater had a great season last year, but for many seasons prior to that they have been only decent in a pretty bad conference. Last year they had good leadership coupled with a nice coach which I believe led to their magical season. I don't expect to see them in the top 25 list for long.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on November 22, 2009, 12:03:02 AM

There's a bit of talk going on over in the NCAC board about tonight's #4 St. Thomas v. #9Wooster tilt, in which the Tommies simply put on a basketball clinic for 40 minutes, treating the Scots defenders as little more than an occasional annoyance on the way to their dominating 84-53 victory on Wooster's home floor.

Wooster was not the #9 team in the country tonight; in fact they didn't (and haven't) looked much like a top 25 team at all in their first three games. The Scots do have the talent, I think, to be in the top half of the d3hoops poll, but they'll need to start playing at the level of their talent, first.

On the other hand, even a "bad" Wooster is still a pretty good team. And that's why I have to say that St. Thomas didn't play like a #4 team in the country—they were much better than that. Being a devoted Wooster fan, I have a sense of what a #1 D3 team looks like, and the Tommies were it, both tonight and last night when they brushed away Heidelberg 92-55. Granting that it will be hard to unseat Wash U at #1, I would not put the Tommies lower than #2.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 22, 2009, 01:18:07 AM

If Anders Halversen plays like that on a regular basis, they well could be.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: elfinley on November 22, 2009, 05:38:04 AM

Chapman beat #14 Cal Lutheran 80-74 on Friday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 22, 2009, 08:59:50 PM

Here is the first "How They Fared" report of the 2009-10 season. After a few more polls, the number of teams will decrease from the nearly-unmanageable 59 on this list. Scores in italics had not yet been posted to the scoreboard; I hope I got all of those correct (and also adjusted the records of those teams).

(Edited to strike out ~~two~~ three exhibition games. Please let me know if there are others in this list.)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Washington U.	3-0	def. MacMurray, 88-53; def. T#57 Ohio Wesleyan, 85-68; def. #26 Illinois Wesleyan, 76-71
#2	526	John Carroll	3-0	LOST at Cleveland St., 75-92; def. Olivet, 90-83; def. Centenary, 120-106; def. Scranton, 96-77
#3	517	Guilford	2-0	def. Methodist, 91-72; def. Greensboro, 76-49
#4	500	St. Thomas	2-0	def. Heidelberg, 92-55; def. #9 Wooster, 84-53
#5	498	Richard Stockton	3-1	LOST to Baruch, 67-68; def. Penn St.-Abington, 77-48; def. Western Connecticut, 88-86; def. Vassar, 91-62
#6	489	Franklin and Marshall	2-0	def. New York City Tech, 102-40; def. #54 Gwynedd-Mercy, 81-70
#7	399	DeSales	2-1	def. Penn State-Berks, 73-35; LOST to (n) New Jersey, 71-76; def. Berkeley @ Albright, 92-47
#8	397	Mass-Dartmouth	2-1	def. Johnson and Wales, 105-77; LOST to University of New England, 84-86; def. Springfield, 76-70
#9	393	Wooster	1-2	LOST at Albion, 55-57; def. #37 Carnegie Mellon, 74-61; LOST to #4 St. Thomas, 53-84
#10	389	UW-Stevens Point	3-0	def. St. John's, 81-57; def. #16 Whitworth, 101-79; def. #18 Puget Sound, 70-55
#11	352	Bridgewater State	2-1	def. Western New England, 86-83; def. Lehman, 68-56; LOST to (n) St. Joseph's (L.I.), 71-78
#12	295	Texas-Dallas	1-1	LOST at Austin, 77-79 OT; def. Howard Payne, 73-60
#13	289	UW-Whitewater	2-0	def. T#55 Carthage, 82-81; def. Aurora, 89-83
#14	184	Cal Lutheran	0-1	~~def. Afghanistan National Team, 83-78;~~ LOST at #29 Chapman, 74-80
#15	171	Wheaton (Ill.)	2-0	def. Trine, 54-39; def. McMurry, 88-72
#16	169	Whitworth	1-1	LOST to (n) #10 UW-Stevens Point, 79-101; def. UC Santa Cruz, 81-75
#17	166	UW-Platteville	2-1	def. Clarke, 73-66; def. Aurora, 86-79; LOST at T#55 Carthage, 65-78
#18	162	Puget Sound	1-2	LOST to Evergreen St., 97-108; def. UC Santa Cruz, 94-79; LOST to #10 UW-Stevens Point, 55-70
#19	149	Randolph-Macon	3-0	def. Marymount, 63-51; def. Rutgers-Newark, 76-60; def. Lebanon Valley, 73-59
#20	147	St. Mary's (Md.)	3-0	def. McDaniel, 83-56; def. Salisbury, 78-76; def. Hood, 89-77
#21	130	Centre	0-2	LOST to Maryville (Tenn.), 70-72; LOST at #28 Transylvania, 60-68
#22	123	Brandeis	2-0	def. Lasell, 90-79; def. Emerson, 69-52
#23	109	Hope	1-0	def. Rochester (Mich.), 65-50
#24	106	UW-Oshkosh	1-1	LOST at St. Norbert, 52-60; def. #50 Lawrence, 66-55
#25	95	Amherst	2-0	def. Maine-Farmington, 76-51; def. #38 Ithaca, 92-67

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	72	Illinois Wesleyan	3-1	def. Benedictine, 89-79; def. Webster, 78-49; def. Johnson and Wales, 101-62; LOST to #1 Washington U., 71-76
#27	69	Middlebury	2-0	def. Swarthmore, 65-57; def. Haverford, 55-42
#28	59	Transylvania	2-1	LOST at T#55 Carthage, 54-76; def. Berea, 77-66; def. #21 Centre, 68-60
#29	49	Chapman	2-0	~~def. MLI Team Afghanistan, 78-52;~~ def. Pomona-Pitzer, 71-53; def. #14 Cal Lutheran, 80-74
#30	47	Calvin	1-1	LOST to Ferris St., 68-88; LOST to Grace Bible (Mich.), 68-83; def. Lake Forest, 85-78
#31	46	Oglethorpe	1-1	LOST to Emory, 81-85 OT; def. Methodist, 87-85 OT
#32	43	St. Lawrence	0-2	LOST to Brockport State, 72-75; LOST to (n) #54 Gwynedd-Mercy, 77-87
#33	38	Elms	3-0	def. Plattsburgh State, 86-72; def. Arcadia, 80-62; def. Brooklyn, 97-89
#34	37	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	1-1	def. George Fox, 76-67; LOST at Willamette, 86-94
#35	35	Catholic	2-2	def. St. Vincent, 70-58; LOST at York (Pa.), 76-82 OT; LOST to (n) Wittenberg, 45-70; def. Gettysburg, 69-48
#36	28	Christopher Newport	0-1	LOST at Roanoke, 72-73
#37	22	Carnegie Mellon	1-2	LOST to T#44 St. John Fisher, 65-70; LOST at #9 Wooster, 61-74; def. Heidelberg, 72-65
#38	19	Ithaca	2-1	def. Hobart, 108-93; def. Endicott, 78-69; LOST at #25 Amherst, 67-92
#39	18	Augustana	3-0	def. Simpson, 58-53; def. Beloit, 66-53; def. MacMurray, 85-65
#40	15	Bethel	1-1	def. Neb. Christian, 93-21; LOST to UW-Stout, 73-78
T#41	13	Capital	0-0	IDLE
T#41	13	Rhode Island College	2-1	LOST at Rhode Island, 76-101; def. Springfield, 62-59; def. Clark, 74-72; LOST to Colby, 62-75
T#41	13	Williams	2-0	def. Southern Vermont, 98-74; def. Cortland State, 72-68
T#44	12	Elmhurst	1-1	def. Hamline, 79-70; LOST to St. Norbert, 61-63
T#44	12	St. John Fisher	1-0	def. #37 Carnegie Mellon, 70-65
T#44	12	Virginia Wesleyan	3-0	def. Averett, 81-66; def. Greensboro, 80-72; def. North Carolina Wesleyan, 78-68
T#44	12	Widener	3-0	def. Immaculata, 75-50; def. St. Joseph's (Bklyn.), 112-58; def. Rowan, 65-60
#48	11	Salem State	0-2	LOST to Springfield, 63-74; LOST at #49 Worcester Polytech, 70-81
#49	10	Worcester Polytech	3-0	def. Becker, 85-80; def. Worcester State, 101-64; def. #48 Salem State, 81-70
#50	8	Lawrence	1-3	def. Marian, 77-68; LOST to #24 UW-Oshkosh, 55-66; LOST at Cornell, 60-65;LOST at Coe, 56-61
#51	6	Farmingdale State	0-1	LOST at Hofstra, 48-87
T#52	5	Buena Vista	2-1	def. Wayne St. (Neb.), 62-61; LOST at Grand View, 65-74; def. Grinnell, 126-85
T#52	5	Trinity (Texas)	1-3	LOST to (n) Midwestern St. @ St. Edwards, 52-63; LOST to (n) Texas A&M-Commerce @ Austin, Texas:, 58-67; LOST at Mary Hardin-Baylor, 52-78; def. Schreiner, 61-52
#54	4	Gwynedd-Mercy	1-2	LOST at Rutgers-Camden, 60-62; def. #32 St. Lawrence, 87-77; LOST at #6 Franklin and Marshall, 70-81
T#55	3	Carthage	2-1	def. #28 Transylvania, 76-54; LOST to #13 UW-Whitewater, 81-82; def. #17 UW-Platteville, 78-65
T#55	3	MIT	3-0	def. Emmanuel, 68-54; def. John Abbott @ RPI, 78-38; def. RPI, 56-55
T#57	2	Carroll	1-1	def. North Park, 87-75; LOST at UW-La Crosse, 64-84
T#57	2	Ohio Northern	1-2	LOST to Hanover, 53-55; LOST to (n) McMurry, 69-72; def. Trine, 71-63
T#57	2	Ohio Wesleyan	1-1	LOST to (n) #1 Washington U., 68-85; def. Johnson and Wales, 73-65

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LogShow on November 22, 2009, 09:34:39 PM

I can hear Puget Sound tumbling down the ranking :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on November 22, 2009, 09:41:10 PM

Great stuff Darryl.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 22, 2009, 10:48:39 PM

So 12 of the top 25 lose (3 teams twice) and 23 of the 34 ORV teams (including 6 of them twice and 2 of them three times). Not placing value on any of the losses, but the 11 ORV teams that didn't lose could skip into the top 25, though it isn't likely that all of the teams that lost will drop out completely. Are there any teams not on the top 25 radar that could jump in to the top 25 after the first couple of weekends?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 22, 2009, 11:24:08 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on November 22, 2009, 08:59:50 PM

#30 47 Calvin 1-1 LOST to Ferris St., 68-88; LOST to Grace Bible (Mich.), 68-83; def. Lake Forest, 85-78

Calvin's loss to Ferris State was an exhibition game and should not count against them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on November 22, 2009, 11:27:19 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on November 22, 2009, 10:48:39 PM
So 12 of the top 25 lose (3 teams twice) and 23 of the 34 ORV teams (including 6 of them twice and 2 of them three times). Not placing value on any of the losses, but the 11 ORV teams that didn't lose could skip into the top 25, though it isn't likely that all of the teams that lost will drop out completely. Are there any teams not on the top 25 radar that could jump in to the top 25 after the first couple of weekends?

The only way, one would think, that a team would jump from not receiving any votes to top 25 would be a big time upset. Of the teams that upset teams ranked in the top 12, only Austin (who uspet UT-Dallas) remains undefeated at the end of the week (all of the other teams had losses prior to or after their upset win). I dont think anyone will jump that high in this weeks rankings.

I think the biggest jump will likely be Carthage from #55 into the top 20, they lost #13 Whitewater by 1, but beat #17 Platteville and #28 Transylvania.

In my biased opinion, I hope MIT picks up some votes as they get 3 wins and a bunch of NE teams ahead of them lost. They were previously tied with Carthage in the poll, but there is no way they pickup as many votes as Carthage. With all the losses in the top 10, Whitewater will likely be a top 7 or 8 team, so you can make an argument for Carthage as high as top 10 or 15 (if you wanted to, I doubt they would jump that high in one poll).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 23, 2009, 01:18:25 AM

Not an undefeated ORV team, but (#26) IWU went 3-1, with the only loss by 5 to #1 WashU (and they led with less than 5 minutes left). I'll also admit that none of their wins was over anyone impressive. Perhaps 20-22?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 23, 2009, 01:43:27 AM

One team that's not on anyone's radar but perhaps should be is an old familiar stripey face, Wittenberg. It's too early to talk Top 25 for this team, but they have a lot of veterans, a fairly easy schedule, and have already experienced both a blowout win (two, actually, but one was against UC-Clermont which practically doesn't count) and a huge come-from-behind last gasp victory; both of these are good momentum-builders. They host Capital this week, then after a ten-day break they travel to a resurgent Hiram in early December. Wins in these games should get people talking about the Tigers again.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 23, 2009, 03:39:05 AM

Darryl,

Glad to see you're back for another year. Plus k.
Ralph Turner says Mississippi College is a team to watch, so maybe they'll move into the ORV list next poll. Plus Ralph's picked them as his team in the Survivor Pool.
Hope I didn't just jinx him :) ;) :D ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 23, 2009, 08:21:51 AM

Quote from: magicman on November 23, 2009, 03:39:05 AM
Darryl,

Glad to see you're back for another year. Plus k.
Ralph Turner says Mississippi College is a team to watch, so maybe they'll move into the ORV list next poll. Plus Ralph's picked them as his team in the Survivor Pool.
Hope I didn't just jinx him :) ;) :D ;D

Actually it would not bother me for McMurry to beat Mississippi College in Clinton MS on Nov 30th. ;)

That will be a tough game. Mississippi College is tough this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 23, 2009, 10:31:49 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on November 23, 2009, 08:21:51 AM
Quote from: magicman on November 23, 2009, 03:39:05 AM
Darryl,

Glad to see you're back for another year. Plus k.
Ralph Turner says Mississippi College is a team to watch, so maybe they'll move into the ORV list next poll. Plus Ralph's picked them as his team in the Survivor Pool.
Hope I didn't just jinx him :) ;) :D ;D
Actually it would not bother me for McMurry to beat Mississippi College in Clinton MS on Nov 30th. ;)

That will be a tough game. Mississippi College is tough this year.

Sounds like that day will be the proverbial win-win situation for you. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on November 24, 2009, 12:08:38 PM

Anyone know if there will be a new top 25 this week?

**Thanks Titan Q for the answer

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 24, 2009, 12:34:01 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on November 24, 2009, 12:08:38 PM
Anyone know if there will be a new top 25 this week?

No poll this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 24, 2009, 09:30:18 PM

#6 Franklin and Marshall falls to Lebanon Valley 62-59. F&M turns the ball over with the scored tied at 59 and 8 seconds to play. Joe Meehan nails a 3 with 1 sec left to provide the margin of victory.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 24, 2009, 11:44:29 PM

#3 Guilford rolls over Averett 81-56. Quakers led by Tyler Sanborn's 19 pts and 18 rebounds.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 29, 2009, 07:30:14 PM

#17 UW-Platteville knocks off Pacific Lutheran 68-61. Platteville's Curt Hanson hits 2 three's in 37 seconds to break a 35 all tie and give the Pioneers a 6 pt lead they would never relinquish. Another three by Hanson extended the lead to 9 a short time later and the Lutes never got closer than 7 pts. Hanson finished with 24 pts and was 5x8 from behind the arc.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 29, 2009, 10:34:53 PM

How They Fared

I assume there is a new poll coming out tomorrow, so next week's report should be a more manageable size ...

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Washington U.	3-0	IDLE
#2	526	John Carroll	4-0	def. #9 Wooster, 71-63
#3	517	Guilford	3-0	def. Averett, 81-56
#4	500	St. Thomas	3-0	def. UW-River Falls, 72-71
#5	498	Richard Stockton	5-1	def. T#44 Widener, 72-53; def. Brooklyn, 78-66
#6	489	Franklin and Marshall	3-1	LOST at Lebanon Valley, 59-62; def. Juniata, 92-53
#7	399	DeSales	3-2	def. Moravian, 71-51; LOST at #19 Randolph-Macon, 63-87
#8	397	Mass-Dartmouth	3-1	def. #22 Brandeis, 92-82
#9	393	Wooster	2-3	def. T#57 Ohio Northern, 70-64; LOST at #2 John Carroll, 63-71
#10	389	UW-Stevens Point	5-0	def. #50 Lawrence, 72-53; def. Edgewood, 75-51
#11	352	Bridgewater State	3-1	def. T#41 Rhode Island College, 95-92
#12	295	Texas-Dallas	3-1	def. Austin, 74-53; def. Mary Hardin-Baylor, 83-79
#13	289	UW-Whitewater	5-0	def. Wisconsin Lutheran, 96-66; def. Loras, 90-54; def. Grinnell, 134-95
#14	184	Cal Lutheran	0-1	IDLE
#15	171	Wheaton (Ill.)	3-0	def. Loras, 82-60
#16	169	Whitworth	1-1	IDLE
#17	166	UW-Platteville	4-2	LOST to Anderson, 62-65; def. Simpson, 75-58; def. Pacific Lutheran, 68-61
#18	162	Puget Sound	2-4	LOST at St. Martin's, 72-74; def. #24 UW-Oshkosh, 90-87; LOST to (n) UW-Eau Claire, 77-91
#19	149	Randolph-Macon	4-0	def. #7 DeSales, 87-63
#20	147	St. Mary's (Md.)	3-0	IDLE
#21	130	Centre	1-2	def. Franklin, 79-51
#22	123	Brandeis	3-1	LOST at #8 Mass-Dartmouth, 82-92; def. Vassar, 79-52
#23	109	Hope	2-1	LOST to (n) Aquinas @ Calvin, 59-71; def. #30 Calvin, 79-76
#24	106	UW-Oshkosh	2-3	def. Finlandia, 78-68; LOST to #18 Puget Sound, 87-90; LOST to St. John's, 71-79
#25	95	Amherst	2-0	IDLE

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	72	Illinois Wesleyan	4-1	def. Manchester, 79-77
#27	69	Middlebury	4-0	def. St. Joseph (Vt.), 87-56; def. Johnson State, 88-60
#28	59	Transylvania	2-3	LOST at Wilmington, 64-83; LOST at Thomas More, 67-82
#29	49	Chapman	4-0	def. La Verne, 78-72; def. T#44 Elmhurst, 81-66
#30	47	Calvin	1-3	LOST to Cornerstone, 65-77; LOST to #23 Hope, 76-79
#31	46	Oglethorpe	2-2	LOST at LaGrange, 51-60; def. Maryville (Tenn.), 79-68
#32	43	St. Lawrence	0-2	IDLE
#33	38	Elms	3-0	IDLE
#34	37	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	2-2	def. UC Santa Cruz, 74-60; LOST to St. Olaf, 62-69
#35	35	Catholic	3-2	def. Haverford, 70-37
#36	28	Christopher Newport	2-2	LOST to T#44 Virginia Wesleyan, 58-69; def. Maine-Presque Isle, 91-69; def. Southern Va., 93-82 OT
#37	22	Carnegie Mellon	2-3	LOST to Heidelberg, 60-74; def. Hood, 77-67
#38	19	Ithaca	2-2	LOST to Oneonta State, 83-85
#39	18	Augustana	4-0	def. Anderson, 79-72
#40	15	Bethel	2-1	def. Bethany Lutheran, 68-61
T#41	13	Capital	0-2	LOST at Wittenberg, 69-79; LOST to Marietta, 71-79
T#41	13	Rhode Island College	3-2	LOST at #11 Bridgewater State, 92-95; def. Roger Williams, 84-59
T#41	13	Williams	4-0	def. Wesleyan, 106-91; def. Massachusetts College, 83-62
T#44	12	Elmhurst	2-2	LOST at #29 Chapman, 66-81; def. Redlands, 94-87
T#44	12	St. John Fisher	2-0	def. Brockport State, 78-61
T#44	12	Virginia Wesleyan	4-1	def. #36 Christopher Newport, 69-58; LOST to Eastern Mennonite, 76-79
T#44	12	Widener	4-1	LOST at #5 Richard Stockton, 53-72; def. Neumann, 85-74
#48	11	Salem State	0-3	LOST to Gordon, 83-95
#49	10	Worcester Polytech	4-0	def. Framingham State, 76-74
#50	8	Lawrence	1-4	LOST at #10 UW-Stevens Point, 53-72
#51	6	Farmingdale State	0-2	LOST to Baruch, 59-71
T#52	5	Buena Vista	2-3	LOST to Gustavus Adolphus, 63-65; LOST at Hamline, 84-107
T#52	5	Trinity (Texas)	1-3	IDLE
#54	4	Gwynedd-Mercy	1-2	IDLE
T#55	3	Carthage	4-1	def. Concordia (Wis.), 85-60; def. Wisconsin Lutheran, 72-59
T#55	3	MIT	5-0	def. Curry, 66-56; def. Suffolk, 85-50
T#57	2	Carroll	3-1	def. Wisconsin Lutheran, 100-83; def. Concordia (Wis.), 78-73
T#57	2	Ohio Northern	1-3	LOST at #9 Wooster, 64-70
T#57	2	Ohio Wesleyan	1-3	LOST at Defiance, 71-74; LOST at Albion, 52-62

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 01, 2009, 05:51:36 AM

Score not shown on the scoreboard. #12 Texas-Dallas defeats Concordia-Austin 81-62.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 01, 2009, 12:38:10 PM

New top 25 is up (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/). St. Thomas hops over Guilford, Point up to #5, Wheaton #6, Whitewater #7. 4 CCIW teams ranked. Wooster, at 2-3, drops to #25.

I think St. John's is a team to watch. They dropped their first two games, but I think they've got potential to make a run at the MIAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 01, 2009, 01:07:31 PM

Is there another conference in the country where a team can lose to the #1 team, then hit a halfcourt shot at the buzzer vs an unranked team and move up 10 spots in the poll?

Or beat 1 unranked WIAC team and 2 teams from the Nathcon and move up 40 spots?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 01, 2009, 02:56:15 PM

Because others fell and the Top 25 went through a major shake-up! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 01, 2009, 03:06:55 PM

Quote from: sac on December 01, 2009, 01:07:31 PM
Is there another conference in the country where a team can lose to the #1 team, then hit a halfcourt shot at the buzzer vs an unranked team and move up 10 spots in the poll?

Or beat 1 unranked WIAC team and 2 teams from the Nathcon and move up 40 spots?

I think it may more be a factor of those teams being on the radar and having others above them lose.

Augie was already getting votes from some people, and they went 5-0. Now, they beat two teams in Simpson and Beloit with 1 win and two teams in MacMurray and Knox with no wins... but they did tag Anderson with their only loss, and Anderson did beat Platteville (who was ranked at the time they were beaten and who is 4-2, with the other loss coming to Carthage).

Speaking of Carthage... they lost to ranked Whitewater by 1 and have beaten everybody else by double digits. You could question how good those wins are... but they look better than Augie's... The teams Carthage beat are 9-12 (vs. 5-19 for Augie), and they beat them more convincingly.

IWU did lose to the #1 team and it took a prayer to beat Manchester, but, in they were the top ORV team in the preseason poll. Their opponents were 11-10.

Those teams above are either undefeated or were beaten by teams they *should* have been beaten by... and they played tough in those games. I don't think it necessarily takes into consideration how they beat the teams they were supposed to beat... The pollsters have their own methods and most do not let those be known.

I would wonder more about Wheaton jumping Whitewater to come in at #5 than anything else. Wheaton beat (handily) 3 opponents with combined 7-7 records, while Whitewater has beaten 5 at 9-16... but there are some common opponents. Thus far, it's been only Loras, which UWW beat by 36 and Wheaton beat by 22. However, UWW beat Carthage and Grinnell (both of whom WC will play in the next month).

With all of this going on, there were 6 top 25 teams that lost at least twice and 9 more that lost once. Now, whether those losses were "good" or "bad" is subjective (for example, Wooster, at 2-3, is still ranked #25, but two of their losses were to #2 John Carroll and #3 St. Thomas. Even at preseason #9, they were supposed to lose those games. The Albion loss is more questionable... but that's probably why they dropped. They started slow last year too (1-4) and ended up 23-7, winning their conference by 3 games. I'm just not sure if that speaks to Wooster becoming a better team by the end of the year or if they just played bad competition (they got beat in the second round of the NCAA tournament).

I think part of it is the regionality of D-III. Voters don't have the ability (or, honestly, the time) to see all the teams in the country and, for better or for worse, there are certain teams and/or conferences that get lots of discussion on the message boards. That very well may be why/how Carthage jumped from just 3 votes in the preseason to 155 in "week 1" and why Cal Lutheran dropped from 184 to 34 and St. Norbert gained just 80 instead of more.

There were 7 teams that dropped from the rankings (and, of course, 7 teams that replaced them). 6 of them had rec'd votes in the preseaon rankings (Middlebury gained 131, an average of a little more than 5 places higher than last week's average, IWU gained 117, up 4.68, Carthage gained 152, up 6.08, Chapman gained 80, up 3.2, Elms gained 75, up 3, Augustana gained 88, up 3.5, and Wittenberg gained 102, up 4). These averages don't mean the same for everybody... Carthage only had 3 points in the first poll, and the average is across all 25 voters, so they could have gone from 25 on 3 ballots (or 22 on one) to an average of just under 19 (over 25). They had to be "on the radar" but that isn't clearly defined. The voters only vote for their top 25... they don't tell us who they have on the radar (unless they separately and explicitly do so).

As an aside... I don't have a vote, so this is just discussion, but St. Norbert and St. John's are both on my list of teams that I think are better than many receiving votes in the top 25. Add UW La Crosse and UW River Falls to that (UWLaX is getting some votes this week and Norbert's is the top ORV team).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 01, 2009, 03:09:15 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 01, 2009, 02:56:15 PM
Because others fell and the Top 25 went through a major shake-up! :)

Chicago's 4-0 and received 2 votes, think they'd be top 25 if they were in the CCIW?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 01, 2009, 03:38:46 PM

Quote from: sac on December 01, 2009, 03:09:15 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 01, 2009, 02:56:15 PM
Because others fell and the Top 25 went through a major shake-up! :)

Chicago's 4-0 and received 2 votes, think they'd be top 25 if they were in the CCIW?

It's going to seem like they are over the next two weeks. 3 of their next 4 games are against CCIW teams.

I think the issue with Chicago is their start last year. To lose your first 12 and 14 of your first 15 is going to put a damper on things. We all talked about it... and it still is a head-scratcher... but they need to redeem themselves on the floor a bit. They're on their way towards doing just that, and they'll improve their place mightily (in the voters' eyes) with a win tomorrow in Wheaton. If they knock off the Green Weanies Saturday, then they'll be well on their way to getting more than just a couple of votes from the voters.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 01, 2009, 05:20:05 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on December 01, 2009, 03:06:55 PMI would wonder more about Wheaton jumping Whitewater to come in at #5 than anything else. Wheaton beat (handily) 3 opponents with combined 7-7 records, while Whitewater has beaten 5 at 9-16... but there are some common opponents. Thus far, it's been only Loras, which UWW beat by 36 and Wheaton beat by 22. However, UWW beat Carthage and Grinnell (both of whom WC will play in the next month).

The rule of thumb for a lot of basketball people is that you don't pay much attention to the final winning margin if it's over 20 (unless it's a rout of ridiculous proportions, a la the Lincoln vs. Ohio State-Marion game of three years ago that had Posting Up in such an uproar). At some point comparing big winning margins becomes a matter of when the winning coaches call off the dogs by putting in the garbage-timers, whether or not the losing coach concedes and puts in his non-rotational subs (and, if so, when), etc., rather than gauging accurate benchmarks of relative talent.

Having said that, I'd probably keep UWW ahead of Wheaton if I had a ballot.

Quote from: PointSpecial on December 01, 2009, 03:06:55 PM(for example, Wooster, at 2-3, is still ranked #25, but two of their losses were to #2 John Carroll and #3 St. Thomas. Even at preseason #9, they were supposed to lose those games. The Albion loss is more questionable... but that's probably why they dropped. They started slow last year too (1-4) and ended up 23-7, winning their conference by 3 games. I'm just not sure if that speaks to Wooster becoming a better team by the end of the year or if they just played bad competition (they got beat in the second round of the NCAA tournament).

That's been Wooster coach Steve Moore's annual m.o. in recent seasons, and I think it's a sound one: Open the year with as difficult of a non-conference slate as you can possibly put together, with an eye towards toughening up your team for March, because you know that your team isn't going to get challenged much in NCAC play by the likes of Oberlin, Kenyon, Earlham, Denison, etc.

Here's Wooster's records prior to the Scots' first NCAC contest over the past three years:

2009-10: 2-3
2008-09: 2-3
2007-08: 2-2

I wouldn't worry about the Scots, #25 or not.

Quote from: PointSpecial on December 01, 2009, 03:06:55 PM
I think part of it is the regionality of D-III. Voters don't have the ability (or, honestly, the time) to see all the teams in the country and, for better or for worse, there are certain teams and/or conferences that get lots of discussion on the message boards. That very well may be why/how Carthage jumped from just 3 votes in the preseason to 155 in "week 1" and why Cal Lutheran dropped from 184 to 34 and St. Norbert gained just 80 instead of more.

It's also a matter of the preseason poll being a glorified case of eeny-meeny-miney-mo, and the Week One poll not being much better in terms of accuracy and reflecting an extensive database of games played.

Quote from: sac on December 01, 2009, 03:09:15 PM
Chicago's 4-0 and received 2 votes, think they'd be top 25 if they were in the CCIW?

Two annual traditions by which you can set your watch: Me correcting people who refer to non-conference games as "preseason," and sac seeing CCIW black helicopters everywhere he looks. ;) :D

Seriously, though, I would've given Chicago a nod at #24 or #25 if I had a ballot, and I'm not just saying that because I root for the Maroons. The win over Carleton was a good one; the Carlies have beaten preseason IIAC favorite Wartburg and preseason NAthC South favorite Benedictine. I suspect that you're right about the pollsters holding last year against Chicago, PS, and I've complained about that sort of thing more than once on Posting Up. Last year was last year; this year is this year.

However, to be fair to the pollsters, Chicago hasn't played any road games yet, and I can certainly understand holding off on them until they prove themselves against quality competition (i.e., Wheaton tomorrow night and Illinois Wesleyan on Saturday).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 01, 2009, 06:20:34 PM

PS,

I like you, but you gotta lay off the 'green weanie' slurs (and, if you must do it, the usual spelling is 'green weenies'! ;)) >:( ;D

Surprisingly, we prefer 'Titans'. (Though 'Big Green Machine' kinda has a ring to it! :D)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 01, 2009, 06:33:57 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 01, 2009, 06:20:34 PM(Though 'Big Green Machine' kinda has a ring to it! :D)

Chuck, Dale Carnegie would say that this is not how you win friends and influence people. He might even say that you can dispose of more unwanted weenies with honey than with vinegar. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 01, 2009, 06:44:18 PM

It is interesting how it all works. I noticed that Whitworth fell out of the rankings even though their only loss was versus UW-Stevens Point. It does seem that if Whitworth had scheduled a few local teams, regardless of the quality, they would have, like Illinois Wesleyan, moved up in the rankings. The problem is that they have only played two games. I am not sure how you reconcile that issue.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 01, 2009, 07:00:28 PM

Quote from: sac on January 12, 2009, 06:14:17 PM
#19 Elmhurst

I'm sorry man, but any other team from any other conference that loses 3 in a row drops out of the poll. This is quite ridiculous imo. That isn't even taking into account being ranked ahead of Anderson, who just beat them 10 days ago.

6 teams from one conference receiving top 25 votes. ::)

I'm early this year Greg ;)

Here's the problem I have, last year the CCIW finished with 2 teams in the final top 25 poll, by all accounts the CCIW was as competitive and as good as ever. This year the CCIW crowd seems to feel the league isn't as good as last year, yet here we are barely 2 weeks into the season and the poll is telling me 4 of the top 17 teams in D3 are from the CCIW.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 01, 2009, 07:22:12 PM

Quote from: sac on December 01, 2009, 07:00:28 PM
Quote from: sac on January 12, 2009, 06:14:17 PM
#19 Elmhurst

I'm sorry man, but any other team from any other conference that loses 3 in a row drops out of the poll. This is quite ridiculous imo. That isn't even taking into account being ranked ahead of Anderson, who just beat them 10 days ago.

6 teams from one conference receiving top 25 votes. ::)

I'm early this year Greg ;)

Here's the problem I have, last year the CCIW finished with 2 teams in the final top 25 poll, by all accounts the CCIW was as competitive and as good as ever. This year the CCIW crowd seems to feel the league isn't as good as last year, yet here we are barely 2 weeks into the season and the poll is telling me 4 of the top 17 teams in D3 are from the CCIW.

Actually, 4 of the top 21 (and only 1 of the top 15).

I, too, think Wheaton is probably over-ranked, and will withhold judgment on the other three. My theory is that many voters not illogically) figure two or more CCIW teams are probably top-25, but it is not yet clear which teams. So once you get down to 15 or so, a CCIW team with a good record, no bad losses, and preferably a good win, is likely to get some points.

Besides, what have Hope or Calvin done yet to deserve top 25 placement? ;) At this point it is still program history and strength, not 2009 results (unless disqualifyingly bad) that propels the poll.

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 01, 2009, 06:33:57 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 01, 2009, 06:20:34 PM(Though 'Big Green Machine' kinda has a ring to it! :D)

Chuck, Dale Carnegie would say that this is not how you win friends and influence people. He might even say that you can dispose of more unwanted weenies with honey than with vinegar. ;)

Did this Carnegie kid have a decent jump shot? Could he rebound?

I thought 'Big Green Machine' was kinda funny (especially as a Sparky Anderson fan, whom the Tigers got when the Big Red Machine foolishly canned him ).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 01, 2009, 07:32:52 PM

I think that there is a real marketing opportunity here for George Foreman.

I can see it now, The Big Green Weenie Grilling Machine!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 01, 2009, 07:44:34 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 01, 2009, 07:32:52 PM
I think that there is a real marketing opportunity here for George Foreman.

I can see it now, The Big Green Weenie Grilling Machine!

You might want to shy away from marketing, Ralph. Somehow grilling Green Weenies doesn't seem like a hit! (Well, might have to make an exception for CardAlum! 8))

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TeeDub on December 01, 2009, 10:18:55 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on December 01, 2009, 12:38:10 PM
Wooster, at 2-3, drops to #25.

Wow...what do you have to do get out of the poll?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 01, 2009, 10:40:45 PM

Quote from: Jordis Rocks on December 01, 2009, 10:18:55 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on December 01, 2009, 12:38:10 PM
Wooster, at 2-3, drops to #25.

Wow...what do you have to do get out of the poll?

Not be the second-winningest school in d3 history? ;)

Two of their three losses are to the #2 and #3 teams in the poll, so they were supposed to lose. It is still so early in the season that program success and history is probably more propelling the poll than 2009 results (unless they are incredibly good or bad).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 01, 2009, 10:43:19 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 01, 2009, 10:40:45 PM
Quote from: Jordis Rocks on December 01, 2009, 10:18:55 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on December 01, 2009, 12:38:10 PM
Wooster, at 2-3, drops to #25.

Wow...what do you have to do get out of the poll?

Not be the second-winningest school in d3 history? ;)

Two of their three losses are to the #2 and #3 teams in the poll, so they were supposed to lose. It is still so early in the season that program success and history is probably more propelling the poll than 2009 results (unless they are incredibly good or bad).

I don't care who you've played, 2-3 teams shouldn't be ranked.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 01, 2009, 10:48:16 PM

Quote from: sac on December 01, 2009, 10:43:19 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 01, 2009, 10:40:45 PM
Quote from: Jordis Rocks on December 01, 2009, 10:18:55 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on December 01, 2009, 12:38:10 PM
Wooster, at 2-3, drops to #25.

Wow...what do you have to do get out of the poll?

Not be the second-winningest school in d3 history? ;)

Two of their three losses are to the #2 and #3 teams in the poll, so they were supposed to lose. It is still so early in the season that program success and history is probably more propelling the poll than 2009 results (unless they are incredibly good or bad).

I don't care who you've played, 2-3 teams shouldn't be ranked.

Personally, I wouldn't have had them on my ballot, but they also started last season 2-3 (and finished 23-7).

Yet another reason I don't start the Posters' Poll until January! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 01, 2009, 10:51:42 PM

Karma for running the Posters' Poll! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 02, 2009, 12:31:58 AM

Quote from: sac on December 01, 2009, 03:09:15 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 01, 2009, 02:56:15 PM
Because others fell and the Top 25 went through a major shake-up! :)

Chicago's 4-0 and received 2 votes, think they'd be top 25 if they were in the CCIW?

Probably a bigger factor is how they turned off the voters with their performance last season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 02, 2009, 12:35:11 AM

Quote from: sac on December 01, 2009, 10:43:19 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 01, 2009, 10:40:45 PM
Quote from: Jordis Rocks on December 01, 2009, 10:18:55 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on December 01, 2009, 12:38:10 PM
Wooster, at 2-3, drops to #25.

Wow...what do you have to do get out of the poll?

Not be the second-winningest school in d3 history? ;)

Two of their three losses are to the #2 and #3 teams in the poll, so they were supposed to lose. It is still so early in the season that program success and history is probably more propelling the poll than 2009 results (unless they are incredibly good or bad).

I don't care who you've played, 2-3 teams shouldn't be ranked.

The voters care. And they always have cared this way. Heck -- four out of the five games Wooster has played proved the poll right. That other one is the reason they fell from No. 9 to No. 25. Big price to pay for one game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 02, 2009, 12:37:55 AM

Quote from: WUH on December 01, 2009, 06:44:18 PM
It is interesting how it all works. I noticed that Whitworth fell out of the rankings even though their only loss was versus UW-Stevens Point. It does seem that if Whitworth had scheduled a few local teams, regardless of the quality, they would have, like Illinois Wesleyan, moved up in the rankings. The problem is that they have only played two games. I am not sure how you reconcile that issue.

Yeah, but Whitworth's loss was of epic proportions. That may explain why the pollsters dropped the Pirates out of the Top 25. If you're ranked in the bottom ten of the Top 25 and you lose by 22 to another D3 team that traveled halfway across the country to play you, a loss in which you were down by 37 points late before the other coach called off the dogs, and your only chance to redeem yourself since that debacle ended up being a six-point win over the UCSC Banana Slugs -- a program that has never put fear into the hearts of anyone besides gastropodophobes -- you're probably likely to get bounced out of the Top 25. To sum up, very bad loss plus no adequate redemption plus beginning of the season equals no ranking.

I wouldn't worry about Whitworth, though, any more than I'd worry about Wooster. The Pirates are a program that always seems to be in contention for either the NWC's Pool A bid or a Pool C at-large bid, and I doubt that this year is any different. In fact, they have a chance this weekend in St. Louis to make the D3 world forget all about that UWSP disaster if they wind up facing Wallis, Thompson & Co. on Saturday in the Lopata title game.

Incidentally, you can apply that bad-loss argument to Wooster, too. It's one thing to start the season 2-3; it's another thing entirely to lose by 31 points in your own gym to another D3 school. Yeah, it was a Top Five team, but even Top Five teams shouldn't be able to smoke a Top 25 team like that in its own gym -- and in that game Wooster was smoked, salted, and hung up in the meat locker.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 01, 2009, 07:44:34 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 01, 2009, 07:32:52 PM
I think that there is a real marketing opportunity here for George Foreman.

I can see it now, The Big Green Weenie Grilling Machine!

You might want to shy away from marketing, Ralph. Somehow grilling Green Weenies doesn't seem like a hit! (Well, might have to make an exception for CardAlum! 8))

I could see them catching on with the Dr. Seuss crowd:

I would eat them in a house,
I would eat them with a mouse.
I would eat them in a box,
I would eat them in my socks.
I do like green weenies and ham,
I do like them, Sam I Am!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 02, 2009, 12:50:31 AM

Greg,

While green eggs doesn't exactly fire up my gastric juices, the mere thought of grilling green weenies makes me want to dial 911. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 02, 2009, 12:54:52 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 02, 2009, 12:37:55 AM
Yeah, but Whitworth's loss was of epic proportions. That may explain why the pollsters dropped the Pirates out of the Top 25. If you're ranked in the bottom ten of the Top 25 and you lose by 22 to another D3 team that traveled halfway across the country to play you, a loss in which you were down by 37 points late before the other coach called off the dogs -- you're probably likely to get bounced out of the Top 25. To sum up, very bad loss plus no adequate redemption plus beginning of the season equals no ranking.

Yeah, when you (Whitworth) outscore a team 22-7 in the last 7:20 and STILL get beat by 22, you know you were getting whipped! I honestly was wondering how many points SP was going to score in that game. They hit 90 with over 8 and a half minutes to go in the game!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 02, 2009, 04:50:26 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 02, 2009, 12:50:31 AM
Greg,

While green eggs doesn't exactly fire up my gastric juices, the mere thought of grilling green weenies makes me want to dial 911. ::)

You obviously never belonged to a fraternity whose colors were green and white and every St Paddy's day went crazy with the green food coloring at the annual keg party. Green eggs, green beer, green clams. You even had to take a pill to get into the party so that when you took a whizz for the next 2 days even that was green ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 02, 2009, 10:02:46 AM

Did this "pill" actually make your urine green, or did it do other things, including making you think your pee was green?

Quote from: magicman on December 02, 2009, 04:50:26 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 02, 2009, 12:50:31 AM
Greg,

While green eggs doesn't exactly fire up my gastric juices, the mere thought of grilling green weenies makes me want to dial 911. ::)

You obviously never belonged to a fraternity whose colors were green and white and every St Paddy's day went crazy with the green food coloring at the annual keg party. Green eggs, green beer, green clams. You even had to take a pill to get into the party so that when you took a whizz for the next 2 days even that was green ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 02, 2009, 01:09:53 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on December 02, 2009, 10:02:46 AM
Did this "pill" actually make your urine green, or did it do other things, including making you think your pee was green?

Quote from: magicman on December 02, 2009, 04:50:26 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 02, 2009, 12:50:31 AM
Greg,

While green eggs doesn't exactly fire up my gastric juices, the mere thought of grilling green weenies makes me want to dial 911. ::)

You obviously never belonged to a fraternity whose colors were green and white and every St Paddy's day went crazy with the green food coloring at the annual keg party. Green eggs, green beer, green clams. You even had to take a pill to get into the party so that when you took a whizz for the next 2 days even that was green ;D

No psychedelics involved. Just a common chlorophyll tablet. But later that night when you went downtown to the college watering holes and took a whizz, the stranger standing at the urinal next to you sure thought he was hallucinating when he saw a stream of green.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 02, 2009, 02:51:45 PM

Quote from: magicman on December 02, 2009, 01:09:53 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on December 02, 2009, 10:02:46 AM
Did this "pill" actually make your urine green, or did it do other things, including making you think your pee was green?

Quote from: magicman on December 02, 2009, 04:50:26 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 02, 2009, 12:50:31 AM
Greg,

While green eggs doesn't exactly fire up my gastric juices, the mere thought of grilling green weenies makes me want to dial 911. ::)

You obviously never belonged to a fraternity whose colors were green and white and every St Paddy's day went crazy with the green food coloring at the annual keg party. Green eggs, green beer, green clams. You even had to take a pill to get into the party so that when you took a whizz for the next 2 days even that was green ;D

No psychedelics involved. Just a common chlorophyll tablet. But later that night when you went downtown to the college watering holes and took a whizz, the stranger standing at the urinal next to you sure thought he was hallucinating when he saw a stream of green.

There's a leprechaun joke in there somewhere, but I'm not sure I want to be the one to think it up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TeeDub on December 02, 2009, 07:24:48 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on December 02, 2009, 12:54:52 AM
... I honestly was wondering how many points SP was going to score in that game. They hit 90 with over 8 and a half minutes to go in the game!

Are they running "The System" at SP now? ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Squasher88 on December 03, 2009, 07:24:10 AM

GO DIPS!! We're going all the way baby! Georgio was on fire against Ursinus last night...great win!

Title: Most Wins since 2002-03
Post by: BJ - DSU SID on December 04, 2009, 11:25:59 AM

To All:

With some help from others...my curiosity led me to compiling a list of teams with the Most Wins since the 2002-03 season. I started at 02-03 because DeSales (in PA) started a string of six 20+ win seasons in that seven year time frame and I wanted to see where it ranked among all Division III Men's basketball teams.

If someone would be so kind as to check my numbers to see if (A) I forgot anyone and (B) my win totals are correct.

Thanks in advance - here is the list

School - Wins (since 02-03 season)
1 - Wooster - 184
2 - Amherst - 183
3 - Stevens Point - 172
4 - Hope - 162
5 - Virginia Wesleyan - 160
6 - Salem St. - 158
7 - Mississippi College - 157
8t - St. John Fisher - 155
8t - Washington U. - 155
8t - Buena Vista - 155
11 - DeSales - 151

Title: Re: Most Wins since 2002-03
Post by: Hugenerd on December 04, 2009, 12:15:35 PM

Quote from: BJ - DSU SID on December 04, 2009, 11:25:59 AM
To All:

With some help from others...my curiosity led me to compiling a list of teams with the Most Wins since the 2002-03 season. I started at 02-03 because DeSales (in PA) started a string of six 20+ win seasons in that seven year time frame and I wanted to see where it ranked among all Division III Men's basketball teams.

If someone would be so kind as to check my numbers to see if (A) I forgot anyone and (B) my win totals are correct.

Thanks in advance - here is the list

School - Wins (since 02-03 season)
1 - Wooster - 184
2 - Amherst - 183
3 - Stevens Point - 172
4 - Hope - 162
5 - Virginia Wesleyan - 160
6 - Salem St. - 158
7 - Mississippi College - 157
8t - St. John Fisher - 155
8t - Washington U. - 155
8t - Buena Vista - 155
11 - DeSales - 151

Does this count postseason?

Title: Re: Most Wins since 2002-03
Post by: John Gleich on December 04, 2009, 12:22:50 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on December 04, 2009, 12:15:35 PM
Quote from: BJ - DSU SID on December 04, 2009, 11:25:59 AM
To All:

With some help from others...my curiosity led me to compiling a list of teams with the Most Wins since the 2002-03 season. I started at 02-03 because DeSales (in PA) started a string of six 20+ win seasons in that seven year time frame and I wanted to see where it ranked among all Division III Men's basketball teams.

If someone would be so kind as to check my numbers to see if (A) I forgot anyone and (B) my win totals are correct.

Thanks in advance - here is the list

School - Wins (since 02-03 season)
1 - Wooster - 184
2 - Amherst - 183
3 - Stevens Point - 172
4 - Hope - 162
5 - Virginia Wesleyan - 160
6 - Salem St. - 158
7 - Mississippi College - 157
8t - St. John Fisher - 155
8t - Washington U. - 155
8t - Buena Vista - 155
11 - DeSales - 151

Does this count postseason?

I'm pretty sure it does. It takes the overall record from the teams' pages here on D3hoops through last year.

Title: Re: Most Wins since 2002-03
Post by: BJ - DSU SID on December 04, 2009, 01:41:45 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on December 04, 2009, 12:15:35 PM
Quote from: BJ - DSU SID on December 04, 2009, 11:25:59 AM
To All:

With some help from others...my curiosity led me to compiling a list of teams with the Most Wins since the 2002-03 season. I started at 02-03 because DeSales (in PA) started a string of six 20+ win seasons in that seven year time frame and I wanted to see where it ranked among all Division III Men's basketball teams.

If someone would be so kind as to check my numbers to see if (A) I forgot anyone and (B) my win totals are correct.

Thanks in advance - here is the list

School - Wins (since 02-03 season)
1 - Wooster - 184
2 - Amherst - 183
3 - Stevens Point - 172
4 - Hope - 162
5 - Virginia Wesleyan - 160
6 - Salem St. - 158
7 - Mississippi College - 157
8t - St. John Fisher - 155
8t - Washington U. - 155
8t - Buena Vista - 155
11 - DeSales - 151

Does this count postseason?

Yes counts all wins regular and post-season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 04, 2009, 02:00:40 PM

One thing you have to consider with these numbers is that WashU's numbers are suppressed compared to the others on the list because the UAA does not have a conference tourney. That is potentially another 21 games they could have played/won.

Also, to give you an idea of how many wins Wooster and Amherst have, Caltech has only lost 168 games over this same period of time. In other words, a lot of teams havent even played 183-184 games in the past 7 years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 04, 2009, 03:33:19 PM

So, we're basically looking for teams with an average of 21 and a half wins or more over this stretch (150 wins/7 years). A number of teams that I checked that I thought might be there were close...

St Thomas 149
Wittenberg 149
UW Whitewater 148
Rochester 145
Puget Sound 143
Lawrence 141
Augustana 140

I can't think of any other traditionally really good teams that we should look at that haven't had a couple of down years in the last 7.

Also, I've got the top 11 like this:

1 - Wooster - 184
2 - Amherst - 183
3 - Stevens Point - 172
4 - Hope - 161
5 - Virginia Wesleyan - 160
6t - Salem St. - 157
6t - Mississippi College - 157
8t - Buena Vista - 155
8t - Washington U. - 155
10 - St. John Fisher - 154
11 - DeSales - 151

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on December 04, 2009, 03:45:32 PM

Hope total is 162

02-03 23-5
03-04 21-5
04-05 15-12
05-06 28-3
06-07 26-5
07-08 28-4
08-09 21-8

Total 162-42

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 04, 2009, 04:03:21 PM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on December 04, 2009, 03:45:32 PM
Hope total is 162

02-03 23-5
03-04 21-5
04-05 15-12
05-06 28-3
06-07 26-5
07-08 28-4
08-09 21-8

Total 162-42

You're correct. I was going off of the accumulated numbers on Hope's page, which are not correct (they have 08-09 at 20-8). I'll check the other two changes as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 04, 2009, 04:05:48 PM

Salem State is 158 like originally reported (08-09 was off by 1 win as well).
St. John Fisher is also like originally reported (08-09 was off by 1 win and 1 loss).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BJ - DSU SID on December 04, 2009, 08:30:42 PM

Thanks gang for the feedback. If any of you or anyone else comes across another team that should be on this list, feel free to let me know.

I might try to put together a top 20 list at some point (maybe over the Christmas break) and I'll try to update it at the end of the year as well and make it an eight-year list.

Good Luck to your respective teams this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on December 05, 2009, 12:31:49 AM

BJ,
If you want to do it for the women also, Scranton has 184.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 05, 2009, 09:41:26 AM

Wondering if we can start posting links anytime live video is available for a Top 25 team?

Today, #16 IWU plays @ U. of Chicago (4:00pm Central)...

http://athletics.uchicago.edu/mensbasketball/mbk.htm

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D.B. Cooper on December 05, 2009, 09:55:08 AM

It seems arbitrary & awkward to do this win count for an eight year stretch of time that suits one programs successful period. It would make a lot more sense to evaluate programs by the decade (like 1980-1989, 1990-1999, 2000-present). Just my opinion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on December 05, 2009, 10:11:59 AM

Quote from: ronk on December 05, 2009, 12:31:49 AM
BJ,
If you want to do it for the women also, Scranton has 184.

And Hope has 192

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 05, 2009, 10:35:00 AM

Quote from: D.B. Cooper on December 05, 2009, 09:55:08 AM
It seems arbitrary & awkward to do this win count for an eight year stretch of time that suits one programs successful period. It would make a lot more sense to evaluate programs by the decade (like 1980-1989, 1990-1999, 2000-present). Just my opinion.

The nice thing about doing it in the time frame proposed is that d3hoops has data for all the teams easily accessible in one place. If you wanted to go back further you would need to go to each individual team's site and find the records for seasons prior to 02-03 (if their teams website provided them). I think it was coincidence that this was the time period that the DeSales AD was interested in, but it works out very well logistically in terms of not having to do a whole lot of research.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BJ - DSU SID on December 05, 2009, 12:53:39 PM

Thanks for the feedback everyone.

DB - It may be arbitrary in your mind but as an SID my job is to promote the school I work for so although arbitrary to pick that year it'd be stupid for me to pick a year that dropped us from the top 11 teams in the country for total wins. I can now use this stat with my local media, recruits, etc...If someone reads that DeSales has the 11th most wins of any Division III team in the country (and the most of any team in the Mid-Atlantic Region) over the last seven years is much nicer than saying we have the 30th or 40th (or whatever that number is) most wins since 2000.

As for the women's numbers...I'd probably start that win total in 1999-00 if I were going to do it cause from that year on DeSales has won 20+ games in all but two years. I'll see if I get the time.

Enjoy the weekend tilt of games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 05, 2009, 01:15:43 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 05, 2009, 09:41:26 AM
Wondering if we can start posting links anytime live video is available for a Top 25 team?

I doubt we could get a comprehensive list, but who knows. Anyway, #22 Wittenberg and #25 Wooster will both be on the air today.
#22 Wittenberg at Hiram, 5:30 EST, video by Hiram (http://www.hiram.edu/athletics/menssports/basketball/newschedule.html)
#25 Wooster at Kenyon, ~3:00 EST (after the Kenyon women vs. Baldwin-Wallace), video by Kenyon (http://athletics.kenyon.edu/x28386.xml)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 05, 2009, 08:15:33 PM

#5 Point beats River Falls 73-61.
#7 WW leads Stout 34-29. Live Video Here (http://athletics.uwstout.edu/sports/2009/7/10/webcasts.aspx?tab=livewebcasts)

Check out the WIAC in game updates (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4057.1215) for updates on this game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 05, 2009, 08:39:49 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on December 05, 2009, 08:15:33 PM
#5 Point beats River Falls 73-61.
#7 WW leads Stout 34-29. Live Video Here (http://athletics.uwstout.edu/sports/2009/7/10/webcasts.aspx?tab=livewebcasts)

Check out the WIAC in game updates (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4057.1215) for updates on this game.

Warhawks getting all they can handle from Stout. 54-49 UWW leads with 8 mins.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 05, 2009, 09:05:53 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on December 05, 2009, 08:39:49 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on December 05, 2009, 08:15:33 PM
#5 Point beats River Falls 73-61.
#7 WW leads Stout 34-29. Live Video Here (http://athletics.uwstout.edu/sports/2009/7/10/webcasts.aspx?tab=livewebcasts)

Check out the WIAC in game updates (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4057.1215) for updates on this game.

Warhawks getting all they can handle from Stout. 54-49 UWW leads with 8 mins.

Whitewater survives 62-57 thanks to some timely rebounding.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 06, 2009, 12:26:00 AM

Posted this (in shorter form) in NESCAC board:

With Elms, Amherst, Bridgewater State (who never had any business in the top 25 to begin with, and certainly doesn't now) and WPI all losing, hopefully Williams can crack the top 25 this week. The Ephs are now 6-0 with an average margin of victory of 22. They have played a weak schedule to date (it does get much tougher starting in late December), but have two decent wins against Wesleyan and Cortland and have blown everyone else out. They really should be ranked above Brandeis, who hasn't looked all that great. Brandeis has one loss and exactly zero impressive wins. It lost the top two scorers from an 18-9 team, and clearly looks worse this year. Brandeis beat Salem by 15 (and were down at halftime), and the Ephs beat them by 30. Brandeis beat Vassar by 27, the Ephs beat them by 37. Brandeis barely eeked out wins over Clark and Framingham. They only really play seven guys, none of whom are exactly all-Americans. Brandeis is a solid team but do they really deserve to be ranked over undefeated Williams, undefeated MIT, and undefeated Colby? I'd say all three clearly belong above Brandeis and Bridgewater State, and arguably above Amherst and Elms as well. I'd say based on early season results along with the rosters on paper, Brandeis should be behind UMD, Midd, Williams, MIT, Colby, Elms, Amherst in New England.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 06, 2009, 12:29:58 AM

Brandeis vs. Salem State, on a neutral floor.
Williams vs. Salem State, at Williams.

Just some other facts to keep in mind.

I don't think anyone is impressed by the difference between a 37-point win and a 27-point win, by the way. They're both blowouts.

Williams has its own claim to Top 25 status. It doesn't have to come by tearing down Brandeis.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 06, 2009, 12:37:50 AM

I just don't think Brandeis belongs in the top 25 regardless of Williams' claim (and it's not just Williams, it's unbeaten MIT and Colby as well, considering there are -- realistically -- only so many spots for New England teams). Brandeis just hasn't looked all that great, putting up unimpressive stats to date against less-than-stellar competition overall. And when you only have seven guys averaging more than one point per game, that is going to be seriously problematic later in the year once guys start to wear down, get nicked up, get into foul trouble, etc. I just think Brandeis' reputation is based on how it played two and three years ago, rather than its current roster, which hasn't really been replenished despite the graduation of two really talented classes and the transfer of a few guys who would have been in this year's rotation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 06, 2009, 08:21:57 PM

How They Fared -- through December 6.

Results in italics were not posted; I looked them up and entered them myself. In those cases, I tried to fix that team's record, but I might have missed something.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Washington U.	5-0	def. McKendree, 82-67; def. Pomona-Pitzer, 76-50
#2	579	John Carroll	6-0	def. Baldwin-Wallace, 96-73; def. Muskingum, 76-66
#3	570	St. Thomas	5-0	def. Concordia-Moorhead, 73-55; def. St. Olaf, 70-61
#4	557	Guilford	4-1	def. North Carolina Wesleyan, 83-66; LOST at T#46 Virginia Wesleyan, 68-71
#5	519	UW-Stevens Point	7-0	def. UW-Stout, 80-59; def. UW-River Falls, 73-61
#6	480	Wheaton (Ill.)	5-1	def. T#46 Chicago, 72-54; LOST at #27 Hope, 54-76; def. Calvin, 74-69
#7	450	UW-Whitewater	7-0	def. T#38 UW-La Crosse, 71-59; def. UW-Stout, 62-57
#8	432	Richard Stockton	5-2	LOST to New Jersey City, 71-76
#9	405	Randolph-Macon	6-0	def. Randolph, 76-64; def. Emory and Henry, 85-60
#10	389	Franklin and Marshall	5-2	def. #12 St. Mary's (Md.), 72-61; def. T#42 Ursinus, 78-74; LOST at McDaniel, 51-60
#11	319	Mass-Dartmouth	5-1	def. #19 Bridgewater State, 81-62; def. Plymouth State, 67-63
#12	310	St. Mary's (Md.)	5-1	LOST at #10 Franklin and Marshall, 61-72; def. Marymount, 63-51; def. Stevenson, 103-71
#13	259	Amherst	4-1	def. Westfield State, 86-68; LOST at #20 Elms, 79-88; def. Springfield, 80-61
#14	225	Texas-Dallas	6-1	def. Concordia-Austin, 81-62; def. Sul Ross State, 75-52; def. Howard Payne, 99-83
#15	200	Middlebury	7-0	def. Castleton State, 88-58; def. St. Lawrence, 79-57; def. Union, 76-56
#16	189	Illinois Wesleyan	5-2	def. Monmouth, 65-55; LOST at T#46 Chicago, 60-68
#17	155	Carthage	6-2	def. Ind.-Northwest, 104-67; LOST to (n) Calvin, 69-72; def. #27 Hope, 83-77 OT
#18	129	Chapman	7-0	def. UC Santa Cruz, 74-44; def. #33 Cal Lutheran, 52-45; def. George Fox, 73-45
#19	118	Bridgewater State	3-3	LOST at #11 Mass-Dartmouth, 62-81; LOST to Wheaton (Mass.), 66-68
#20	113	Elms	5-1	def. Western New England, 84-65; def. #13 Amherst, 88-79; LOST to Westfield State, 69-73
#21	106	Augustana	5-0	def. Knox, 73-56
#22	102	Wittenberg	4-1	LOST at Hiram, 74-92
#23	97	Brandeis	7-1	def. Clark, 51-47; def. Framingham State, 76-73; def. Salem State, 88-73; def. Tufts, 54-41
#24	94	DeSales	5-2	def. Manhattanville, 66-42; def. Delaware Valley, 75-73
#25	92	Wooster	4-3	def. Ohio Wesleyan, 80-72; def. Kenyon, 66-65

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	80	St. Norbert	6-0	def. Lake Forest, 69-58; def. Monmouth, 70-58
#27	74	Hope	4-2	def. Trinity Christian, 97-80; def. #6 Wheaton (Ill.), 76-54; LOST to #17 Carthage, 77-83 OT
#28	72	Whitworth	2-2	LOST to (n) Pomona-Pitzer, 54-55; def. McKendree @ St. Louis,, 72-69
#29	67	Williams	6-0	def. Salem State, 100-71; def. Vassar, 111-74
#30	60	Mississippi College	5-0	def. McMurry, 73-62; def. Schreiner, 85-69
#31	53	UW-Platteville	6-2	def. Viterbo, 62-60; def. UW-Superior, 75-63
#32	37	Worcester Polytech	6-1	def. Curry, 76-62; def. Lasell, 81-67; LOST at Thomas, 82-92
#33	34	Cal Lutheran	1-3	def. Willamette, 83-69; LOST to (n) #18 Chapman, 45-52; LOST at Redlands, 68-95
#34	21	MIT	8-0	def. Emerson, 66-51; def. Newbury, 76-50; def. Gordon, 78-73 OT
#35	20	St. John Fisher	3-1	LOST to Hobart, 83-90; def. Rochester Tech, 60-46
#36	16	Defiance	5-1	LOST at Anderson, 70-88; def. Rose-Hulman, 82-61
#37	15	DePauw	5-1	def. Rhodes, 86-64; LOST at Birmingham-Southern, 68-84
T#38	11	Puget Sound	2-4	IDLE
T#38	11	UW-La Crosse	6-2	LOST to #7 UW-Whitewater, 59-71; def. UW-Eau Claire, 69-64
T#38	11	Widener	5-2	def. Arcadia, 80-67; LOST to Lycoming, 85-91
#41	5	Cabrini	6-0	def. Philadelphia Bible, 84-53; def. Marywood, 65-52; def. Baptist Bible, 76-54
T#42	4	Centre	2-4	LOST at Berea, 59-71; LOST at Birmingham-Southern, 44-53; def. Rhodes, 69-62
T#42	4	Ursinus	3-3	LOST at #10 Franklin and Marshall, 74-78; LOST at Swarthmore, 74-68
T#44	3	Eastern Mennonite	8-0	def. Lynchburg, 89-82; def. Penn St.-Brandywine, 97-44
T#44	3	Whittier	4-0	def. Holy Names, 103-101 OT
T#46	2	Baruch	4-1	def. Medgar Evers, 91-82
T#46	2	Carroll	5-1	def. Illinois College, 80-67; def. Lake Forest, 80-67
T#46	2	Chicago	5-1	LOST at #6 Wheaton (Ill.), 54-72; def. #16 Illinois Wesleyan, 68-60
T#46	2	Transylvania	4-3	def. Hanover, 85-71; def. Bluffton, 54-49
T#46	2	Virginia Wesleyan	7-1	def. Methodist, 83-66; def. Apprentice School, 76-73 OT; def. #4 Guilford, 71-68
#51	1	Rochester	6-1	LOST at Rochester Tech, 58-63; def. Emory, 83-62

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 06, 2009, 08:31:20 PM

MIT and Eastern Mennonite with the most Ws in the country right now!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie77 on December 07, 2009, 08:43:50 PM

http://www.augustana.edu/x17589.xml

Augustana wil be playing at Gonzaga Wednesday night (6:00 Pacific time). Check out this link for information on the game and Augustana team activities in preparation.

After Gonzaga, Augustana will have a breather. Saturday night they will step down in competition and will play at # 1 Washington University in St Louis.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 08, 2009, 12:47:16 AM

Quote from: augie77 on December 07, 2009, 08:43:50 PM
http://www.augustana.edu/x17589.xml

Augustana wil be playing at Gonzaga Wednesday night (6:00 Pacific time). Check out this link for information on the game and Augustana team activities in preparation.

After Gonzaga, Augustana will have a breather. Saturday night they will step down in competition and will play at # 1 Washington University in St Louis.

Can we all agree... most difficult four day stretch for any d3 team this season?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on December 08, 2009, 09:56:50 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 08, 2009, 12:47:16 AM
Quote from: augie77 on December 07, 2009, 08:43:50 PM
http://www.augustana.edu/x17589.xml

Augustana wil be playing at Gonzaga Wednesday night (6:00 Pacific time). Check out this link for information on the game and Augustana team activities in preparation.

After Gonzaga, Augustana will have a breather. Saturday night they will step down in competition and will play at # 1 Washington University in St Louis.

Can we all agree... most difficult four day stretch for any d3 team this season?

Not sure you needed the last 2 words of that sentence

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 08, 2009, 01:37:03 PM

New polls are out:

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on December 08, 2009, 02:49:27 PM

Let's see, Hope starts the week at ORV (27). So what did we accomplish in that week?

- beat a non-D3 opponent on the road that we should beat
- knocked off the #6 team in the nation by 25
- and then lost to #17 in OT (who was coming off a loss to an NR D3 team).

What could possibly happen..... ??? Who wouldn't consider that to be a pretty good week... ???

The number 6 team, well they drop ALL THE WAY to 8 - Are the voters really serious? Wheaton was clearly the 3rd best team in Holland last week.

The number 17 team, well they drop to all the way to 24

And us, well we get 2 more points, which drops us to ORV (28)

I've long thought the d3hoops poll to be a fine representation of the best teams in d3, but this is an absolute joke

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 08, 2009, 02:58:49 PM

What you didn't mention, FDF, was that Hope was home for games #2 and #3 last week, which colors how the outcomes of those games are perceived by the voters. You also didn't mention that Wheaton had an 18-point win earlier in the week over ORV Chicago.

For the record, I have believed all along that Wheaton is most likely not a top ten team -- I still haven't seen the Sonic Atmospheric Disturbance play yet, so I'm holding off on saying anything definitive about them -- and I think that they're still overrated at #8.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on December 08, 2009, 03:13:00 PM

GS - your right, I didn't mention those things. I did however see the S.A.D. play 2 games, and if they are a top 20 team, then D3 hoops (basketball at the D3 level, not this website) have taken a couple of huge steps backwards.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 08, 2009, 05:18:22 PM

FDF - hope you are well.

Just wanted to share something with you about Hope not being in the Top 25.

First off, in my ballot this past week... I had at least 40 teams I was considering for the Top 25. The week before... that number was about the same... and the pre-season poll I must have no less then 50. What I am trying to say is that I - and most voters - just don't have enough space to put the teams we want on the ballot. It requires plenty of debating in your head along with head-scratching plus writing and rewriting my list until I feel as comfortable as I can and time will allow.

Secondly, I can't speak for all voters, but right now I am not voting on a week to week basis. I am still trying to figure out what teams who looked good in the pre-season data are living up to it and who aren't. And who might be surprising me with their start - along with who is disappointing me. So, I am looking at what happened the week before while also looking at how the first few weeks are unfolding. I realize Aquinas is considered a non-D3 school and won't reflect on the schedule to the NCAA Selection Committee, but I do look at the game and consider it.

Finally, I then take a ton of information and do what I can with it. Carthage, not in my Top 25 list this week; Chicago, thought about them for a second, but weren't close to making my Top 25; Hope, hardest debate of my week and only missed my Top 25 ballot by one.

Should they be on mine? Sure. Could I fit them? No... not this week. I did note their win against to Wheaton which why they nearly made my ballot... but they also lost in OT at home against a team that I had decided to eliminate from my Top 25 ballot this week.

Will you agree with my thinking? Probably not. Though, I thought I would share my thoughts - now let those who disagree blast me for my opinion. Just keep in mind, Pat does have 25 voters from around the country to vote to keep this as evenly-keeled as possible. While you might not agree right now, I have not known the poll to really be that badly off. Trust me... there is no conspiracy either... I have only talked to ONE Top 25 voter about teams so far this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 08, 2009, 06:01:21 PM

77-52

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on December 08, 2009, 06:28:35 PM

I'm a Hope fan, and I can say this about the Hope and Wheaton discussion. I can see Wheaton falling very fast, and Hope rising (not quite as fast) if Wheaton loses another game or two, and if Hope keeps winning. Maybe the voters got this poll wrong, but as more data flows in, it'll get better quickly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 08, 2009, 06:40:05 PM

I am having a really hard time deciding who IS good. Anyone have a reasonable, logical Top 15 for me? I have lots of candidates to live in that 16-25 range -- 20 teams or so.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 08, 2009, 07:37:10 PM

Virginia Wesleyan's win over Guilford was definitely a big one, and clearly got a lot of press and resulted in VWU jumping from receiving 2 votes to 90, but why do the voters treat every game in a vacuum? VWU beats somebody so they get more votes, that make sense, but what about the only team that has beat them? Exactly a week earlier Eastern Mennonite (8-0) handed VWU their only loss on VWU's court. It seems to me that that win should look pretty big right now, considering that the previous #4 team in the country could not pull off a similar result. I understand that you cant put too much weight in any single game, but it seems to me that with the results we have so far, if you are going to rank VWU for their win over Guilford, you would need to rank Eastern Mennonite ahead of them for their win at VWU.

I believe the argument above is less convoluted than the one involving Hope, where one team beats a high ranked team and loses to a lower ranked team, so where do you rank them? Eastern Mennonite was receiving 3 votes the previous week and VWU had 2, but VWU pulled an upset so they shot up ahead of Eastern Mennonite? Is Eastern Mennonite's win the week before devalued because VWU was lower ranked at the time? If Eastern Mennonite beat VWU tomorrow would it be somehow a better win than their win 10 days ago? I dont think so, I think people voting need to look at the whole resume for teams, and not just make changes to their previous weeks rankings based on only the 1-3 games played by that team in the previous week (especially since Eastern Mennonites win was only a week prior).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 08, 2009, 07:53:53 PM

Top 25 voting, especially in the dimly-lit world of D3, is one of those things that's easy to criticize but difficult to do. Most of us have our own specialized pools of knowledge, beyond the periphery of which things can be very opaque. For example, I could tell you that in no way, shape, or form is Wooster the 23rd best D3 team in the nation right now, but that doesn't mean I know who is, or whether Wooster is better or worse than #22 Mississippi College or #24 Carthage.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 08, 2009, 07:59:08 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 08, 2009, 07:53:53 PM
Top 25 voting, especially in the dimly-lit world of D3, is one of those things that's easy to criticize but difficult to do. Most of us have our own specialized pools of knowledge, beyond the periphery of which things can be very opaque. For example, I could tell you that in no way, shape, or form is Wooster the 23rd best D3 team in the nation right now, but that doesn't mean I know who is, or whether Wooster is better or worse than #22 Mississippi College or #24 Carthage.

That is why I wasnt trying to make a contention about where VWU and Eastern Mennonite should be ranked, I just think Eastern Mennonite should be ranked ahead of VWU. Whether that be in the top 25 or out of the top 25, I think given the current results, Eastern Mennonite clearly has a better resume. Seriously, this does not seem like a grey area at all. Eastern Mennonite beat VWU at VWU and Eastern Mennonite is undefeated, how do you rank VWU ahead of them?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 08, 2009, 08:27:03 PM

Look at the CCIW board HERE (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4592.msg1147132#msg1147132) for a post regarding Wheaton. They're too high. And the thing is, ALL the voters (or at least, the average of the voters) agrees with you.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 08, 2009, 09:31:52 PM

It's hard to look at this slate of opponents and be blown away by Eastern Mennonite.

Nov 15 HOME Lancaster Bible (1-4, 0-0) W 96-53
Nov 18 HOME Shenandoah (1-6, 0-0) W 87-81
Nov 21 HOME Averett (1-5, 0-0) W 101-81
Nov 22 HOME Wesley (4-3, 1-1) W 95-73
Nov 25 AWAY Ferrum (3-4, 0-0) W 66-81
Dec 02 AWAY Lynchburg (1-6, 0-2) W 82-89
Dec 05 AWAY Penn St.-Brandywine () W 44-97

When you add this, yes, it certainly changes things.

Nov 28 AWAY Virginia Wesleyan (7-1, 1-1) W 76-79

For me, personally, I have to honestly wonder if it was some kind of fluke (aka Witt losing at Hiram) just because of everything else on their schedule.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 08, 2009, 09:48:57 PM

By the same token:

It's hard to look at this slate of opponents and be blown away by VWU:

Nov 18 HOME Averett (1-5) W 81-66
Nov 20 HOME Greensboro (5-3) W 80-72
Nov 21 AWAY North Carolina Wesleyan (2-6) W 78-68
Nov 24 AWAY Christopher Newport (3-2) W 69-58
Nov 28 HOME Eastern Mennonite (8-0) L 76-79
Dec 01 HOME Methodist (0-8) W 83-66
Dec 03 AWAY Apprentice School () W OT 76-73

When you add this, yes, it certainly changes things.

Dec 05 HOME Guilford (4-1) W 71-68

Combined record of opponents in wins minus Guilford win for VWU (for only d3 schools): 11-24
Combined record of opponents in wins minus VWU for Eastern Mennonite: 11-28

Pretty comparable, huh? Big difference Eastern Mennonite beat VWU on the road.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on December 08, 2009, 09:57:13 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 08, 2009, 05:18:22 PM
FDF - hope you are well.

Just wanted to share something with you about Hope not being in the Top 25.

First off, in my ballot this past week... I had at least 40 teams I was considering for the Top 25. The week before... that number was about the same... and the pre-season poll I must have no less then 50. What I am trying to say is that I - and most voters - just don't have enough space to put the teams we want on the ballot. It requires plenty of debating in your head along with head-scratching plus writing and rewriting my list until I feel as comfortable as I can and time will allow.

Secondly, I can't speak for all voters, but right now I am not voting on a week to week basis. I am still trying to figure out what teams who looked good in the pre-season data are living up to it and who aren't. And who might be surprising me with their start - along with who is disappointing me. So, I am looking at what happened the week before while also looking at how the first few weeks are unfolding. I realize Aquinas is considered a non-D3 school and won't reflect on the schedule to the NCAA Selection Committee, but I do look at the game and consider it.

Finally, I then take a ton of information and do what I can with it. Carthage, not in my Top 25 list this week; Chicago, thought about them for a second, but weren't close to making my Top 25; Hope, hardest debate of my week and only missed my Top 25 ballot by one.

Should they be on mine? Sure. Could I fit them? No... not this week. I did note their win against to Wheaton which why they nearly made my ballot... but they also lost in OT at home against a team that I had decided to eliminate from my Top 25 ballot this week.

Will you agree with my thinking? Probably not. Though, I thought I would share my thoughts - now let those who disagree blast me for my opinion. Just keep in mind, Pat does have 25 voters from around the country to vote to keep this as evenly-keeled as possible. While you might not agree right now, I have not known the poll to really be that badly off. Trust me... there is no conspiracy either... I have only talked to ONE Top 25 voter about teams so far this season.

d-mac - I truly appreciate your post, and I also appreciate the tough spot you're in trying to make those tough decisions. And I can't disagree with your thinking on Hope and Carthage. My real concern with the poll is how Wheaton could fall 2 spots, despite an absolute beat down by an unranked (technically an ORV) team. If someone can explain that to me, I'd love to hear it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 08, 2009, 10:18:42 PM

FDF,

In the eclectic nature of D3 fans (especially the 'nationally-minded' ones), Point Special (WIAC) already did so on the CCIW Chat (regardless of the rename for convenience, it will always be 'the Chat' to me ;)). In a nutshell, Wheaton in terms of votes fell from what 'ought' to be 7th to what 'ought' to be 11th, but voters were so undecided on which teams would be higher that their ranking was much higher than their 'average'. I've seen that phenomenon on the Posters' Poll - at an extreme, a team no one ranked higher than 12th once finished 11th because the votes 'above' them were so scattered!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 08, 2009, 10:56:27 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 08, 2009, 09:31:52 PM
For me, personally, I have to honestly wonder if it was some kind of fluke (aka Witt losing at Hiram)...

Hiram has now beaten Wittenberg three straight times. It's not as if Witt's schedule has been crammed with great teams, either.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 08, 2009, 11:01:06 PM

Fair enough, although a win against Wittenberg last year was not exactly rare.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 09, 2009, 01:01:34 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 08, 2009, 11:01:06 PM
Fair enough, although a win against Wittenberg last year was not exactly rare.

Right, and it's essentially the same team this year: not more talented, just more experienced. They should be competitive, likely back to a winning record, but losing at Hiram is not really a surprise. Hiram has a lot of talent, but they're maddeningly inconsistent. Beating Witt is not really a surprise (and they did so with ease), and losing to them by 30 wouldn't have been surprising either.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 09, 2009, 01:05:25 AM

Given the excuse I got from a Witt person for losing the game, I think Witt thinks differently. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 09, 2009, 01:23:21 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 09, 2009, 01:01:34 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 08, 2009, 11:01:06 PM
Fair enough, although a win against Wittenberg last year was not exactly rare.
Right, and it's essentially the same team this year: not more talented, just more experienced. They should be competitive, likely back to a winning record, but losing at Hiram is not really a surprise. Hiram has a lot of talent, but they're maddeningly inconsistent. Beating Witt is not really a surprise (and they did so with ease), and losing to them by 30 wouldn't have been surprising either.

So just to make sure I understand what you are saying, no matter what the outcome of the game you would not have been really surprised?

Touche Mr. Collinge.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 09, 2009, 01:32:37 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 09, 2009, 01:05:25 AM
Given the excuse I got from a Witt person for losing the game, I think Witt thinks differently. :)

I assume you're referring to the endless bus ride, and that likely was a factor as well. As was the fact that two of their better players were still wearing helmets and pads that day.

This all just points up the difficulties of trying to come up with a Top 25 this early in the season. Was Witt really a Top 25 team? I don't think so, but I was prepared to re-evaluate that position if they were to beat Hiram (and posted something to that effect (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4097.msg1138154#msg1138154).) They were unbeaten, they'd had blowout wins and nailbiters, they'd beaten programs that are well-run if not at their high points (Capital, Catholic), and they certainly have the winning tradition and a coach who knows how to win. Plus, in the early going, there's been lots of upsets and confusion around the country, making it hard to evaluate many possible contenders. Maybe with all that Wittenberg on paper looked like a top 25 team. On the other side of the tally is the fact that they're essentially last year's 12-12 model, with one starter gone and another back from injury redshirt, and their schedule is decidedly less strong than it's been in recent years. When you weigh all these factors, are they #22 or #72? Search me; I'm just glad I don't have to do it. :)

Quote from: hugenerd on December 09, 2009, 01:23:21 AM
So just to make sure I understand what you are saying, no matter what the outcome of the [Witt/Hiram] game you would not have been really surprised?

Yes, you got it. Last year, Hiram lost by 8 at Franciscan, then later that month lost at Guilford by 3, in the midst of a 16-win, NCAC 3rd place season. Since then, nothing the Terriers do surprises me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 09, 2009, 07:58:42 AM

#15 Augustana at Gonzaga, 8:00pm Central/6:00pm Pacific

TV: FSN Northwest (Ch. 687 on DirecTV, Ch. 424 on Dish Network, 5426 in HD)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 09, 2009, 02:17:45 PM

Any possibility that's on a FSN on Time Warner or Charter? Usually, you need the sports package, which I have, to get those late night Fox Sports games...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 09, 2009, 05:08:02 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on December 08, 2009, 09:48:57 PM
Dec 03 AWAY Apprentice School () W OT 76-73

The Builders are 4-4, FWIW.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 09, 2009, 05:22:22 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 09, 2009, 05:08:02 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on December 08, 2009, 09:48:57 PM
Dec 03 AWAY Apprentice School () W OT 76-73

The Builders are 4-4, FWIW.

Thanks. I actually looked that up but decided not to include it because Pat did not include the record for Penn St. - Brandywine, because they are not d3, when listing Eastern Mennonite's games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 09, 2009, 05:27:37 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on December 09, 2009, 05:22:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 09, 2009, 05:08:02 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on December 08, 2009, 09:48:57 PM
Dec 03 AWAY Apprentice School () W OT 76-73

The Builders are 4-4, FWIW.

Thanks. I actually looked that up but decided not to include it because Pat did not include the record for Penn St. - Brandywine, because they are not d3, when listing Eastern Mennonite's games.

I tried PSU-Brandywine's site in order to fill in that team's record as well, but it's missing some game results. I don't know if the SID has been into the brandy or into the wine. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 09, 2009, 06:15:42 PM

Good video tonight...

#1 Wash U vs #8 Wheaton

http://bearsports.wustl.edu/mensbball/mensbball.html

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 09, 2009, 08:19:36 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 09, 2009, 06:15:42 PM
Good video tonight...

#1 Wash U vs #8 Wheaton

http://bearsports.wustl.edu/mensbball/mensbball.html

And Wheaton's leading 17-11 after Wash U led early 7-0

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 09, 2009, 08:43:21 PM

Wheaton up 25-22 at the half.

Not exactly an offensive explosion!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scout on December 09, 2009, 08:56:05 PM

Additionally, the Augustana v Gonzaga matchup can be watched online:

http://www.justin.tv/phillyzag

Not sure what the policy is about posting links, but I thought some might be interested.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 09, 2009, 09:36:45 PM

#1 WashU 64, #8 Wheaton 62.

Wheaton led most of the game, but in crunch time, WashU showed why they are #1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 09, 2009, 10:26:29 PM

Well, now that we know that Wheaton can play with the #1 ranked Washington Bears, on the Bears home court no less, doesn't that kind of justify their placement at #8? After all, last year's Kent Raymond led Thunder edition, lost 55-52 to Wash U in the sectional semis on Wheaton's home court. The Thunder were ranked #3 at that time and ended up in the #2 spot in the final rankings. Don't see a lot a difference between then and now except they lost by 2 on the road.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 09, 2009, 10:37:20 PM

Quote from: magicman on December 09, 2009, 10:26:29 PM
Well, now that we know that Wheaton can play with the #1 ranked Washington Bears, on the Bears home court no less, doesn't that kind of justify their placement at #8? After all, last year's Kent Raymond led Thunder edition, lost 55-52 to Wash U in the sectional semis on Wheaton's home court. The Thunder were ranked #3 at that time and ended up in the #2 spot in the final rankings. Don't see a lot a difference between then and now except they lost by 2 on the road.

You could make that justification, OR you could say that this is a one game fluke:

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 08, 2009, 09:31:52 PM
For me, personally, I have to honestly wonder if it was some kind of fluke (aka Witt losing at Hiram) just because of everything else on their schedule.

I guess it depends on how you look at it. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 09, 2009, 10:47:00 PM

#21 DeSales loses to Catholic tonight, for their third loss of the year and the second time to an unranked team. Will this finally drop them from the poll?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 09, 2009, 10:55:09 PM

As fully expected, Augustana is getting destroyed by Gonzaga (last I saw it was 67-35 late in the 2nd half), but Augie is actually looking pretty good. It was 40-14 at the half, but I think much of Augie's problem on scoring was intimidation - they missed a lot of shots that were NOT due to Gonzaga's defense. Augie's positioning, ball-distribution, and defense looked pretty respectable.

It is very difficult to judge when the players are so mismatched, but I don't think very many d3 teams would have beaten Augie tonite. I wasn't sure before, but I think they are a legitimate top 25 team. Saturday at WashU should be a much better indicator.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 09, 2009, 10:56:09 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 09, 2009, 10:55:09 PM
As fully expected, Augustana is getting destroyed by Gonzaga (last I saw it was 67-35 late in the 2nd half), but Augie is actually looking pretty good. It was 40-14 at the half, but I think much of Augie's problem on scoring was intimidation - they missed a lot of shots that were NOT due to Gonzaga's defense. Augie's positioning, ball-distribution, and defense looked pretty respectable.

It is very difficult to judge when the players are so mismatched, but I don't think very many d3 teams would have beaten Augie tonite. I wasn't sure before, but I think they are a legitimate top 25 team. Saturday at WashU should be a much better indicator.

They're currently shooting 22% from the floor, including a whopping 1-20 from three point range. On the other hand, we finally get an answer to what a solid d3 team would do against a solid d1 squad in the regular season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 09, 2009, 11:21:38 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on December 09, 2009, 10:37:20 PM
Quote from: magicman on December 09, 2009, 10:26:29 PM
Well, now that we know that Wheaton can play with the #1 ranked Washington Bears, on the Bears home court no less, doesn't that kind of justify their placement at #8? After all, last year's Kent Raymond led Thunder edition, lost 55-52 to Wash U in the sectional semis on Wheaton's home court. The Thunder were ranked #3 at that time and ended up in the #2 spot in the final rankings. Don't see a lot a difference between then and now except they lost by 2 on the road.

You could make that justification, OR you could say that this is a one game fluke:

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 08, 2009, 09:31:52 PM
For me, personally, I have to honestly wonder if it was some kind of fluke (aka Witt losing at Hiram) just because of everything else on their schedule.

I guess it depends on how you look at it. ;)

I don't believe that *everything* else on the schedule contradicts Wheaton staying close.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: usee on December 09, 2009, 11:44:40 PM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on December 08, 2009, 03:13:00 PM
GS - your right, I didn't mention those things. I did however see the S.A.D. play 2 games, and if they are a top 20 team, then D3 hoops (basketball at the D3 level, not this website) have taken a couple of huge steps backwards.

WashU 64 Wheaton 62 in St Louis. A sad day for D3 hoops. ;) :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 10, 2009, 07:28:51 AM

How They Fared -- Midweek report

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Washington U.	6-0	def. #8 Wheaton (Ill.), 64-62; 12/12 vs. #15 Augustana
#2	586	John Carroll	6-1	LOST at Mount Union, 62-67; 12/12 at T#35 Wilmington
#3	582	St. Thomas	6-0	def. Augsburg, 77-61; vs. St. Mary's (Minn.) ~~cancelled~~ POSTPONED
#4	550	UW-Stevens Point	7-0	12/10 at #5 UW-Whitewater; 12/12 vs. Elmhurst
#5	514	UW-Whitewater	7-0	12/10 vs. #4 UW-Stevens Point; 12/12 at UW-Superior
#6	490	Randolph-Macon	6-0	12/13 vs. Alvernia
#7	448	Guilford	5-1	def. Hampden-Sydney, 77-72
#8	374	Wheaton (Ill.)	5-2	LOST at #1 Washington U., 62-64; 12/12 vs. Grinnell
#9	359	Middlebury	7-0	IDLE
#10	349	Mass-Dartmouth	6-1	def. Worcester State, 90-78; 12/12 at Western Connecticut
#11	324	Texas-Dallas	6-1	IDLE
#12	319	Chapman	7-1	LOST to Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 56-57; 12/12 vs. La Verne
#13	254	Richard Stockton	5-2	12/11 vs. T#43 Albright (n); 12/12 vs. TBA @ King's College (n)
#14	251	St. Mary's (Md.)	6-1	def. Salisbury, 72-60; 12/12 at York (Pa.)
#15	228	Augustana	5-1	LOST at Gonzaga, 40-79; 12/12 at #1 Washington U.
#16	218	Franklin and Marshall	6-2	def. Gettysburg, 61-52
#17	185	Amherst	5-1	def. Emmanuel, 98-76; 12/12 at Lasell
#18	181	Brandeis	7-1	IDLE
#19	154	St. Norbert	6-0	POSTPONED: 12/09 vs. Beloit
#20	120	Williams	7-0	def. Framingham State, 88-50; 12/12 vs. Springfield
#21	113	DeSales	5-3	LOST at Catholic, 66-70; 12/12 vs. St. John Fisher
#22	107	Mississippi College	6-0	def. Texas Lutheran, 79-66; 12/12 vs. Wesley (Miss.)
#23	92	Wooster	4-3	12/13 vs. North Carolina Wesleyan (n)
#24	91	Carthage	6-2	IDLE
#25	90	Virginia Wesleyan	7-1	12/12 vs. Shenandoah

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	87	Elms	5-1	12/10 vs. Wheaton (Mass.); 12/12 at Husson
#27	86	MIT	9-0	def. Mass-Boston, 74-54; 12/10 vs. Salem State; 12/12 vs. Lesley
#28	76	Hope	4-2	12/11 vs. Purdue-North Central; 12/12 vs. TBA
#29	57	UW-Platteville	6-2	12/10 vs. UW-Oshkosh; 12/12 at UW-La Crosse
#30	45	Eastern Mennonite	8-0	12/12 at Southern Va.
#31	42	Chicago	5-1	12/12 vs. Kalamazoo
#32	37	Illinois Wesleyan	5-2	12/12 vs. MacMurray
#33	18	Cabrini	6-0	IDLE
#34	14	Wittenberg	5-1	def. Kenyon, 76-66; 12/12 at #37 Anderson
T#35	12	Wilmington	7-1	12/12 vs. #2 John Carroll
T#35	12	Worcester Polytech	7-1	def. University of New England, 88-70; 12/11 vs. Gwynedd-Mercy (n); 12/12 vs. TBA @ Weston, MA (n)
#37	9	Anderson	6-1	def. Bluffton, 68-47; 12/12 vs. #34 Wittenberg
#38	7	Whittier	4-0	12/10 at Biola
#39	5	Rochester	7-1	def. Hobart, 68-63
T#40	3	DePauw	6-1	def. Purdue-North Cent., 92-70; 12/11 at Wabash
T#40	3	Illinois College	5-1	12/10 vs. Monmouth
#42	2	Manchester	5-3	LOST at Defiance, 82-95; 12/12 at Mount St. Joseph
T#43	1	Albright	6-0	def. Penn State-Berks, 85-62; 12/11 vs. #13 Richard Stockton (n); 12/12 vs. TBA @ King's Ramada Inn/Monarch Classic (n)
#44	3	Maryville (Tenn.)	6-1	12/12 vs. Rust
T#45	1	New Jersey City	5-2	LOST to Brooklyn, 62-77; 12/12 at York (N.Y.)
T#45	1	Scranton	6-2	12/12 at Elizabethtown

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on December 10, 2009, 09:11:04 AM

Quote from: USee on December 09, 2009, 11:44:40 PM
Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on December 08, 2009, 03:13:00 PM
GS - your right, I didn't mention those things. I did however see the S.A.D. play 2 games, and if they are a top 20 team, then D3 hoops (basketball at the D3 level, not this website) have taken a couple of huge steps backwards.

WashU 64 Wheaton 62 in St Louis. A sad day for D3 hoops. ;) :o

I completely agree :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 10, 2009, 10:45:35 AM

I like the mid-week update Darryl!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 10, 2009, 01:21:42 PM

St. Thomas-St. Mary's (Minn.) is postponed until some undetermined date.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 10, 2009, 03:35:34 PM

Quote from: USee on December 09, 2009, 11:44:40 PM
Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on December 08, 2009, 03:13:00 PM
GS - your right, I didn't mention those things. I did however see the S.A.D. play 2 games, and if they are a top 20 team, then D3 hoops (basketball at the D3 level, not this website) have taken a couple of huge steps backwards.

WashU 64 Wheaton 62 in St Louis. A sad day for D3 hoops. ;) :o

Nicely done, USee. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 10, 2009, 09:38:12 PM

#4 Stevens Point @ #5 Whitewater going to OT.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 10, 2009, 09:48:50 PM

MIT first team in the country to 10 wins tonight. They have one more game at home on Saturday before the winter break.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Marty Peretz on December 12, 2009, 03:48:53 PM

What's up with Wooster? I haven't been following them but was told this was their year to make a real run. I was really looking forward to the Wooster-Wash.U game but with 3 L's in the early going, a WUSTL victory would seem to virtually be a foregone conclusion. Anyone have a scoop?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 12, 2009, 04:59:08 PM

Quote from: Marty Peretz on December 12, 2009, 03:48:53 PM
What's up with Wooster? I haven't been following them but was told this was their year to make a real run. I was really looking forward to the Wooster-Wash.U game but with 3 L's in the early going, a WUSTL victory would seem to virtually be a foregone conclusion. Anyone have a scoop?

I hope you don't mind if I attach this post to the bulletin board in Wooster's locker room, Marty. Thanks for the help.

For the record, Wooster and WashU. will only meet if both win (or both lose) in preliminary games on the 29th: WUSTL vs. Transylvania and Wooster vs. Kalamazoo.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Marty Peretz on December 12, 2009, 05:48:38 PM

David,
It wasn't a knock on Wooster or meant as trash talk. I'm genuinely curious how they have lost 3 times because I was expecting them to be excellent. On paper, it would seem a 3 loss team would loset to the undefeated, number 1, and 2 time defending national champs. That's not trash talk; it's just a logical conclusion based on available information. I was asking the question though because I figured their L's might be anomalous and was hoping for some context. Not to mention, I don't think a great program like Wooster needs a message board to get them fired up to play the top team in the land. If they do, they're probably looking at loss number 4...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 12, 2009, 05:50:04 PM

Quote from: Marty Peretz on December 12, 2009, 03:48:53 PM
What's up with Wooster? I haven't been following them but was told this was their year to make a real run. I was really looking forward to the Wooster-Wash.U game but with 3 L's in the early going, a WUSTL victory would seem to virtually be a foregone conclusion. Anyone have a scoop?

This post says something about just how much the good times are rolling with the Wash U men's basketball program! It would seem to take back-to-back national titles, and an undefeated start, for a fan to actually come on here and post that a win @ Wooster "would seem to virtually be a foregone conclusion."

Yikes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 12, 2009, 06:05:09 PM

Quote from: Marty Peretz on December 12, 2009, 05:48:38 PM
David,
It wasn't a knock on Wooster or meant as trash talk. I'm genuinely curious how they have lost 3 times because I was expecting them to be excellent. On paper, it would seem a 3 loss team would loset to the undefeated, number 1, and 2 time defending national champs. That's not trash talk; it's just a logical conclusion based on available information. I was asking the question though because I figured their L's might be anomalous and was hoping for some context. Not to mention, I don't think a great program like Wooster needs a message board to get them fired up to play the top team in the land. If they do, they're probably looking at loss number 4...

Your hubris renders me speechless, something that's admittedly hard to do.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 12, 2009, 06:45:30 PM

Video links:

#1 Wash U vs #15 Augustana (7:00pm Central)

http://bearsports.wustl.edu/mensbball/mensbball.html

#8 Wheaton vs Grinnell (7:30pm Central)

http://www.wheaton.edu/wetn/

I assume the Thunder will handle 1-6 Grinnell fairly easily, but Wheaton is a very thin team...depth is a real problem. Could be interesting to watch for a while, who knows.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on December 12, 2009, 07:08:17 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 12, 2009, 06:05:09 PM
Quote from: Marty Peretz on December 12, 2009, 05:48:38 PM
David,
It wasn't a knock on Wooster or meant as trash talk. I'm genuinely curious how they have lost 3 times because I was expecting them to be excellent. On paper, it would seem a 3 loss team would loset to the undefeated, number 1, and 2 time defending national champs. That's not trash talk; it's just a logical conclusion based on available information. I was asking the question though because I figured their L's might be anomalous and was hoping for some context. Not to mention, I don't think a great program like Wooster needs a message board to get them fired up to play the top team in the land. If they do, they're probably looking at loss number 4...
Your hubris renders me speechless, something that's admittedly hard to do.

Well David, I took your bait you left for us on the NCAC board and I pretty much echo your thoughts above.

Not trying to make excuses, but in case you missed it Marty, two of Wooster's three losses were to the #2 and the #3 team in the country...

BTW, Wooster could also meet up with R-MC in the finals a tournament they are hosting this weekend making it the 3rd top six team Wooster has faced in this young season! And if Wooster and WashU happen to meet up in the finals of Woo's Mose Hole Tournament, that will be the 4th top six team Wooster will have faced before the new year!

Wooster's record may not be all that great now, but part of the reason Coach Moore has assembled such a difficult schedule is to help this team at the end of the season. Wooster may be struggling to win theses games now, but they are also learning a lot about themselves at the same time and that should go a long way to help this team grow and be prepared as they move forward into conference play and hopefully NCAA postseason play...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 12, 2009, 07:26:02 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 12, 2009, 05:50:04 PM
Quote from: Marty Peretz on December 12, 2009, 03:48:53 PM
What's up with Wooster? I haven't been following them but was told this was their year to make a real run. I was really looking forward to the Wooster-Wash.U game but with 3 L's in the early going, a WUSTL victory would seem to virtually be a foregone conclusion. Anyone have a scoop?

This post says something about just how much the good times are rolling with the Wash U men's basketball program! It would seem to take back-to-back national titles, and an undefeated start, for a fan to actually come on here and post that a win @ Wooster "would seem to virtually be a foregone conclusion."

Well, that plus Marty's refusal to click through to the Wooster page on this site to find out who beat the Scots (information later provided by ScotsFan).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 12, 2009, 07:30:16 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 12, 2009, 07:26:02 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 12, 2009, 05:50:04 PM
Quote from: Marty Peretz on December 12, 2009, 03:48:53 PM
What's up with Wooster? I haven't been following them but was told this was their year to make a real run. I was really looking forward to the Wooster-Wash.U game but with 3 L's in the early going, a WUSTL victory would seem to virtually be a foregone conclusion. Anyone have a scoop?

This post says something about just how much the good times are rolling with the Wash U men's basketball program! It would seem to take back-to-back national titles, and an undefeated start, for a fan to actually come on here and post that a win @ Wooster "would seem to virtually be a foregone conclusion."

Well, that plus Marty's refusal to click through to the Wooster page on this site to find out who beat the Scots (information later provided by ScotsFan).

...or to browse the NCAC thread, where the subject of Wooster hoops comes up once in a while.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Marty Peretz on December 12, 2009, 08:18:45 PM

Sorry gang for taking a cursory glance at Wooster's record, asking a few questions, and making a few inferences based on an admittedly very quick glance. I guess I should be tarred and feathered for having the audacity to inquire about Wooster's 3 losses. Thank you for informing me that two of the L's were to top clubs. That helps and explains pretty much everything. That said, there is no need to flip out on me for not spending my time looking at the details; if you have an informational advantage and can answer a question, do so and move on. No need to rip me for asking a question. I didn't have the information and that was, of course, why I asked the question in the first place. Admittedly "foregone conclusion" might have been harsh in tone, but it was not meant as a knock on Wooster. I initially foresaw the Scots game as a likely 'L' for Wash.U and simply wanted to gain information.

TitanQ, thank you for having a sense of humor and keeping me honest in a light hearted way rather than assailing me for my alleged arrogance. You are right that I've been quite spoiled these last few years and while laudatory of my team, I generally try to look at things with some semblance of objectivity. Reality is, objectivity lends itself to an awfully favorable analysis of a team that's won 2 straight titles, been to Salem 3 years in a row, and returns 2 first team all Americans and four starters. If I'd noted those things with any other team, it likely wouldn't have elicited such a hostile reaction from the forum regulars.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 12, 2009, 08:32:41 PM

Quote from: Marty Peretz on December 12, 2009, 08:18:45 PMNo need to rip me for asking a question.

When the question is "why does your sucky team have no chance against my invincible champions?" you should probably expect some degree of intransigence.

Anyway, there's a lot of water to be crossed between then and now, including some very tough games for both of these teams. Let's holster our weapons until the game gets a little closer, okay?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 12, 2009, 08:42:08 PM

I am hoping MIT breaks into the polls for the first time ever this week. They are off to their best start in school history at 11-0 and they were ranked 27th last week, just 4 points out of the top 25. At least two teams ranked 21-26 have lost this week giving them both at least 2 losses(DeSales and Elms), so I am thinking it could be a real possibility. Anyone more familiar with the poll have any thoughts?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 12, 2009, 09:38:19 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on December 12, 2009, 08:42:08 PM
I am hoping MIT breaks into the polls for the first time ever this week. They are off to their best start in school history at 11-0 and they were ranked 27th last week, just 4 points out of the top 25. At least two teams ranked 21-26 have lost this week giving them both at least 2 losses(DeSales and Elms), so I am thinking it could be a real possibility. Anyone more familiar with the poll have any thoughts?

Maybe, doesn't look like more than 1 team will drop out of the top 25 unless Augustana loses to WashU and gets severely punished for losses to Gonzaga and D3's #1 team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 12, 2009, 09:40:48 PM

#2 John Carroll takes its second loss of the week at Wilmington 107-105 in triple OT.

Wilmington is now 8-1, its only loss to D1 Cleveland State. http://d3hoops.com/school/WILM/mens/2010

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 12, 2009, 10:29:46 PM

You Wooster fans are way too sensitive.

Quote
I hope you don't mind if I attach this post to the bulletin board in Wooster's locker room, Marty. Thanks for the help.

Yeah, go post this in the locker room. I have no doubt that the players will be extremely motivated by what an anonymous fan posts (sarcasm). Talk about hubris.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 13, 2009, 01:12:11 AM

I think MIT is in for sure. DeSales is definitely going to drop out. Stockton probably should as well, with three losses already to three mediocre teams ... yes they had a great run last year, but based on this year's results to date, they don't belong anywhere near the Top 25. UMDartmouth is also performing well below how good they looked on paper -- even their wins have been generally unimpressive. Based on THIS year's results, and with 1/3 of the season down, there are enough to no longer need to rely on last year, the top New England teams look something like Williams, Midd, MIT, and Amherst in that order (and probably those four, and only those four, deserve top 25 votes in New England), with a big logjam after the top four between Bowdoin, Colby, Elms, UMD, Western CT, and Brandeis, in some sort of order ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 13, 2009, 09:01:18 PM

How They Fared -- Final report for December 13

As usual, games in italics were not posted to d3sports. Please let me know if you spot any problems.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Washington U.	7-0	def. #8 Wheaton (Ill.), 64-62; def. #15 Augustana, 71-53
#2	586	John Carroll	6-2	LOST at Mount Union, 62-67; LOST at T#35 Wilmington, 105-107 3OT
#3	582	St. Thomas	6-0	def. Augsburg, 77-61
#4	550	UW-Stevens Point	8-1	LOST at #5 UW-Whitewater, 60-67 OT; def. Elmhurst, 81-73
#5	514	UW-Whitewater	9-0	def. #4 UW-Stevens Point, 67-60 OT; def. UW-Superior, 92-73
#6	490	Randolph-Macon	7-0	def. Alvernia, 92-64
#7	448	Guilford	5-1	def. Hampden-Sydney, 77-72
#8	374	Wheaton (Ill.)	6-2	LOST at #1 Washington U., 62-64; def. Grinnell, 127-100
#9	359	Middlebury	7-0	IDLE
#10	349	Mass-Dartmouth	6-2	def. Worcester State, 90-78; LOST at Western Connecticut, 86-90
#11	324	Texas-Dallas	6-1	IDLE
#12	319	Chapman	8-1	LOST to Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 56-57; def. La Verne, 64-63
#13	254	Richard Stockton	6-3	def. T#43 Albright, 72-62; LOST to (n) Susquehanna, 66-69
#14	251	St. Mary's (Md.)	6-2	def. Salisbury, 72-60; LOST at York (Pa.), 61-64
#15	228	Augustana	5-2	LOST at Gonzaga, 40-79; LOST at #1 Washington U., 53-71
#16	218	Franklin and Marshall	6-2	def. Gettysburg, 61-52
#17	185	Amherst	6-1	def. Emmanuel, 98-76; def. Lasell, 94-70
#18	181	Brandeis	7-1	IDLE
#19	154	St. Norbert	6-0	IDLE
#20	120	Williams	8-0	def. Framingham State, 88-50; def. Springfield, 85-61
#21	113	DeSales	6-3	LOST at Catholic, 66-70; def. St. John Fisher, 64-62
#22	107	Mississippi College	7-0	def. Texas Lutheran, 79-66; def. Wesley (Miss.), 89-75
#23	92	Wooster	5-3	def. North Carolina Wesleyan, 87-69
#24	91	Carthage	6-2	IDLE
#25	90	Virginia Wesleyan	8-1	def. Shenandoah, 90-78

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	87	Elms	6-2	def. Wheaton (Mass.), 77-56; LOST at Husson, 82-83
#27	86	MIT	11-0	def. Mass-Boston, 74-54; def. Salem State, 98-93 OT; def. Lesley, 88-61
#28	76	Hope	5-3	def. Purdue-North Cent., 96-73; LOST to Ohio Dominican, 58-65
#29	57	UW-Platteville	7-3	def. UW-Oshkosh, 67-47; LOST at UW-La Crosse, 70-84
#30	45	Eastern Mennonite	8-1	LOST at Southern Va., 79-92
#31	42	Chicago	6-1	def. Kalamazoo, 68-62
#32	37	Illinois Wesleyan	6-2	def. MacMurray, 79-70
#33	18	Cabrini	6-0	IDLE
#34	14	Wittenberg	5-2	def. Kenyon, 76-66; LOST at #37 Anderson, 69-86
T#35	12	Wilmington	8-1	def. #2 John Carroll, 107-105 3OT
T#35	12	Worcester Polytech	9-1	def. University of New England, 88-70; def. Gwynedd-Mercy, 89-84 2OT; def. Regis (Mass.), 64-56
#37	9	Anderson	7-1	def. Bluffton, 68-47; def. #34 Wittenberg, 86-69
#38	7	Whittier	4-1	LOST at Biola, 66-77
#39	5	Rochester	7-1	def. Hobart, 68-63
T#40	3	DePauw	6-2	def. Purdue-North Cent., 92-70; LOST at Wabash, 50-72
T#40	3	Illinois College	6-1	def. Monmouth, 89-88
#42	2	Manchester	5-4	LOST at Defiance, 82-95; LOST at Mount St. Joseph, 64-81
T#43	1	Albright	7-1	def. Penn State-Berks, 85-62; LOST to (n) #13 Richard Stockton, 62-72; def. King's, 71-70
#44	3	Maryville (Tenn.)	7-1	def. Rust, 86-79
T#45	1	New Jersey City	5-3	LOST to Brooklyn, 62-77; LOST at York (N.Y.), 60-68
T#45	1	Scranton	6-3	LOST at Elizabethtown, 52-63

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 14, 2009, 12:34:14 AM

Nice work, Darryl!

Wonder how far Stevens Point will drop after losing at #5 Whitewater in OT. Not sure if Randolph-Macon's and Guilford's wins will vault them above Point. The Pointers were 60 and 102 points ahead of RMC and Guilford.

Whitewater was 68 points behind St. Thomas. It's possible, IMO, that they could actually leapfrog St. Thomas.

I guess it could be possible that Point would stay at #4 with RMC and Guilford gaining a lot of points on them. Or, Point could drop to 6th behind those two.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 14, 2009, 12:41:49 AM

Just to complicate matters, R-MC has a fairly big game tomorrow at 7pm against Wooster. I suppose the poll will not take this game into account until the following week (Pat?). I imagine that Macon would be something like a 10-12 point favorite at home in that game, so either a more handsome win or an upset loss could have a significant impact on the ordering of the top 10. However, for this week's poll, the voters may take a bit of a wait-and-see attitude towards Macon.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 14, 2009, 12:46:17 AM

That's right -- the poll is through Sunday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on December 14, 2009, 11:23:56 AM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on December 14, 2009, 12:34:14 AM

Wonder how far Stevens Point will drop after losing at #5 Whitewater in OT. Not sure if Randolph-Macon's and Guilford's wins will vault them above Point. The Pointers were 60 and 102 points ahead of RMC and Guilford.

Whitewater was 68 points behind St. Thomas. It's possible, IMO, that they could actually leapfrog St. Thomas.

I guess it could be possible that Point would stay at #4 with RMC and Guilford gaining a lot of points on them. Or, Point could drop to 6th behind those two.

If Point were to fall, my guess would be only below Macon. I wouldn't think that a one loss Guilford team would also vault a one loss Stevens Point team with that one loss coming in OT to the then #5 team in the country.

As for Whitewater jumping UST, what have the Tommies done that would lead them to be leapfrogged by anyone? Until UST loses, I don't think they should be leapfrogged by anyone.

The question I have wrt this week's poll is how far will JCU fall in this week's poll after losing twice in conference play last week? IMO, they could very easily drop out of the top 10 altogether. And combine that with the question of when will Wilmington crack the top 25? The only loss for the Quakers this season was to DI Cleveland State. They are 8-0 vs. D3 opponents and are currenly alone in first place in the OAC with a 2 game lead over pre-season conference favorite JCU after their triple OT thriller with JCU on Sat.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 14, 2009, 11:27:06 AM

There are some interesting things to see this week:

1. How far will John Carroll fall with losses to two unranked opponents (as ScotsFan pointed out above)?

2. Will Richard Stockton finally fall? They lost for the third time against an unranked opponent this week.

2. Will Augustana's ranking change at all. They lost to the best team in d3 and a top 25 team in d1, it would be hard to justify dropping them at all or moving them up, for that matter.

3. Chapman loses to an unranked opponent at home, and they only have one win over a team with a winning record, 4-3 Elmhurst, who is probably the 5th or 6th best team in the CCIW.

4. DeSales loses for the third time and for the second time to an unranked team (they lost to top 10 RMC by 24 points). Can their preseason top 10 ranking hold them in the top 25 any longer?

Anyway, I am very curious to see how the new rankings will look. There could be a lot of movement in the top 10 (4 teams lost) and in the bottom part of the rankings as well (5 teams had losses).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: oldchap on December 14, 2009, 12:23:11 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on December 14, 2009, 11:27:06 AM
3. Chapman loses to an unranked opponent at home, and they only have one win over a team with a winning record, 4-3 Elmhurst, who is probably the 5th or 6th best team in the CCIW.

I fully expect Chapman to drop in the ranking. However, they barely lost to CMS by one point which could be considered a fluke, while beating Elmhurst by a comfortable margin of 15 points. Will pollsters go that far into their analysis?

They are currently on top of the Pool B ratings. Here are their latest statistics:

Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 13, 2009, 09:33:05 PM
P   RNK   WP     OWP    OOWP     RPI    NAT   REG   OVR   Team

B   001   0.889   0.571   0.587   .6548   020   8-1   8-1   Chapman

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on December 14, 2009, 12:35:04 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on December 14, 2009, 11:27:06 AM
There are some interesting things to see this week:

1. How far will John Carroll fall with losses to two unranked opponents (as ScotsFan pointed out above)?

2. Will Richard Stockton finally fall? They lost for the third time against an unranked opponent this week.

2. Will Augustana's ranking change at all. They lost to the best team in d3 and a top 25 team in d1, it would be hard to justify dropping them at all or moving them up, for that matter.

3. Chapman loses to an unranked opponent at home, and they only have one win over a team with a winning record, 4-3 Elmhurst, who is probably the 5th or 6th best team in the CCIW.

4. DeSales loses for the third time and for the second time to an unranked team (they lost to top 10 RMC by 24 points). Can their preseason top 10 ranking hold them in the top 25 any longer?

Anyway, I am very curious to see how the new rankings will look. There could be a lot of movement in the top 10 (4 teams lost) and in the bottom part of the rankings as well (5 teams had losses).

I highlighted 2 points I wanted to comment on. First, Augey did play some impressive competition last week, but the fact of the matter is that they didn't just lose to WashU. They got beaten fairly convincingly. That margin of defeat should be enough to move the Vikings down a peg or two.

And wrt Chapman, I definitely think they are a bit over-rated and should be dropped down at least a few spots for taking their first loss of the season. As hungered stated, Chapman only has one win over a team with a winning record! Hardly an impressive body of work if you ask me. Are you going to tell me that Chapman's 8-1 record is decidedly better than Wilmington's 8-1 record? Especially when you consider that Chapman's best win is over an Elmhurst team that is one game over .500, meanwhile, Wilmington has a win over the previously #2 team in the country!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 14, 2009, 01:25:20 PM

Quote from: ScotsFan on December 14, 2009, 11:23:56 AM
As for Whitewater jumping UST, what have the Tommies done that would lead them to be leapfrogged by anyone? Until UST loses, I don't think they should be leapfrogged by anyone.

It's not what the Tommies have done that they would be leapfrogged, it's what others have done. I'm not saying Whitewater SHOULD leapfrog St.Thomas, I'm just saying that I wouldn't be surprised if the Warhawks did.

Whitewater beat a previously undefeated higher ranked team, while St. Thomas beat Augsburg (though unbeaten), a team not on the Top 25 radar. I would think Whitewater's win would pull more weight.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: oldchap on December 14, 2009, 01:34:02 PM

Quote from: ScotsFan on December 14, 2009, 12:35:04 PM
And wrt Chapman, I definitely think they are a bit over-rated and should be dropped down at least a few spots for taking their first loss of the season. As hungered stated, Chapman only has one win over a team with a winning record! Hardly an impressive body of work if you ask me. Are you going to tell me that Chapman's 8-1 record is decidedly better than Wilmington's 8-1 record? Especially when you consider that Chapman's best win is over an Elmhurst team that is one game over .500, meanwhile, Wilmington has a win over the previously #2 team in the country!

While I don't dispute that at #12, Chapman is probably overrated, I would like to point to the fact that looking at the raw record of each team is a bit misleading, especially prior to conference play. Several of Chapman's opponents have played against non D3 teams, some of which they are fully expected to lose against (i.e. DI, DII or NAIA div. I). For instance, La Verne's record of 1-6 contains 4 losses against DI and DII teams. If you look at the opponents "in region" records, then Chapman looks a lot better.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on December 14, 2009, 01:38:27 PM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on December 14, 2009, 01:25:20 PM
Quote from: ScotsFan on December 14, 2009, 11:23:56 AM
As for Whitewater jumping UST, what have the Tommies done that would lead them to be leapfrogged by anyone? Until UST loses, I don't think they should be leapfrogged by anyone.

It's not what the Tommies have done that they would be leapfrogged, it's what others have done. I'm not saying Whitewater SHOULD leapfrog St.Thomas, I'm just saying that I wouldn't be surprised if the Warhawks did.

Whitewater beat a previously undefeated higher ranked team, while St. Thomas beat Augsburg (though unbeaten), a team not on the Top 25 radar. I would think Whitewater's win would pull more weight.

While I agree that Whitewater's win pulls more weight, I still don't think it warrants the Warhawks jumping STU in the polls. And it's not like STU is without any impressive wins on their resume this season. Don't forget their 31 point win over then #9 and current #23 over my beloved Scots at Wooster no less in the opening weekend of the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 14, 2009, 02:47:06 PM

Speaking of Wooster, they have had a really tough schedule to begin the season, but they dont have any wins over any teams with winning records either (they are 0-3 against teams that currently have winning records). I guess they have another shot today at Randolph-Macon, but they are going to need to win some of thesematchups against winning teams if they want to cement themselves up in the rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on December 14, 2009, 03:50:48 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on December 14, 2009, 02:47:06 PM
Speaking of Wooster, they have had a really tough schedule to begin the season, but they dont have any wins over any teams with winning records either (they are 0-3 against teams that currently have winning records). I guess they have another shot today at Randolph-Macon, but they are going to need to win some of thesematchups against winning teams if they want to cement themselves up in the rankings.

Oh. You don't have to remind me of that stat! ;) Wooster has been clinging by a thread to their ranking from the beginning of the season and that thread may get snapped depending on how they fare against Macon tonight. While it's nice to stay in the top 10, I'm more concerned about the psyche of the team at this point. While putting together a tough schedule is always good in getting your team battle tested come post season time, all of this losing starts to get into your heads after a while and I'm afraid that if Wooster loses to yet another ranked opponent, what could that do to their confidence? I think a win for Wooster tonight is far more important from a psychological standpoint than it is for Wooster staying in the top 25!

Also, to be fair, 2 of Wooster's wins are vs. teams that are at least .500 as CMU and ONU both have even records. And also, of the 3 teams Wooster has faced with winning records, one is currently #2 until the new poll comes out and one is #3 in the D3hoops poll. Of course #2 JCU is sure to drop, but #3 STU will probably move up to #2 when the new poll comes out. And now, the 4th team Wooster has faced this year with a winning record comes tonight vs. current #6 R-MC. And, as if to pile on, Wooster faces Wabash this Sunday and if they beat the Lil Giants, they too would not have a winning record. And then, Wooster's next likely opponent with a winning record would be none other than the #1 team in the country and the 2-time defending national champions making 4 of Wooster's 5 opponents with winning records having been ranked in the top 6 at one point in the season! It sure would be nice if the Scots could just face some teams with winning records that aren't ranked in the top 10! :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Moser on December 14, 2009, 04:24:30 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on December 14, 2009, 11:27:06 AM
There are some interesting things to see this week:

1. How far will John Carroll fall with losses to two unranked opponents (as ScotsFan pointed out above)?

2. Will Richard Stockton finally fall? They lost for the third time against an unranked opponent this week.

2. Will Augustana's ranking change at all. They lost to the best team in d3 and a top 25 team in d1, it would be hard to justify dropping them at all or moving them up, for that matter.

3. Chapman loses to an unranked opponent at home, and they only have one win over a team with a winning record, 4-3 Elmhurst, who is probably the 5th or 6th best team in the CCIW.

4. DeSales loses for the third time and for the second time to an unranked team (they lost to top 10 RMC by 24 points). Can their preseason top 10 ranking hold them in the top 25 any longer?

Anyway, I am very curious to see how the new rankings will look. There could be a lot of movement in the top 10 (4 teams lost) and in the bottom part of the rankings as well (5 teams had losses).

Also, what happens to Wheaton's ranking? Do they stay the same, rise, or fall based on their near-upset of Wash U on the road?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 14, 2009, 04:38:48 PM

Quote from: Moser on December 14, 2009, 04:24:30 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on December 14, 2009, 11:27:06 AM
There are some interesting things to see this week:

1. How far will John Carroll fall with losses to two unranked opponents (as ScotsFan pointed out above)?

2. Will Richard Stockton finally fall? They lost for the third time against an unranked opponent this week.

2. Will Augustana's ranking change at all. They lost to the best team in d3 and a top 25 team in d1, it would be hard to justify dropping them at all or moving them up, for that matter.

3. Chapman loses to an unranked opponent at home, and they only have one win over a team with a winning record, 4-3 Elmhurst, who is probably the 5th or 6th best team in the CCIW.

4. DeSales loses for the third time and for the second time to an unranked team (they lost to top 10 RMC by 24 points). Can their preseason top 10 ranking hold them in the top 25 any longer?

Anyway, I am very curious to see how the new rankings will look. There could be a lot of movement in the top 10 (4 teams lost) and in the bottom part of the rankings as well (5 teams had losses).

Also, what happens to Wheaton's ranking? Do they stay the same, rise, or fall based on their near-upset of Wash U on the road?

I'd be surprised if they move up due to a near upset. Teams dont seem to be moved down due to near losses, so I doubt that it would work inversely as well. Then again you never know, CCIW supporters may look at it that way.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 14, 2009, 04:45:41 PM

I don't think St. Thomas' opening weekend win over Wooster will have much bearing on this week's poll since its based largely on last week's results.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 14, 2009, 04:53:54 PM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on December 14, 2009, 04:45:41 PM
I don't think St. Thomas' opening weekend win over Wooster will have much bearing on this week's poll since its based largely on last week's results.

That is true, but I think it would be wise for voters to look back a few weeks to make sure there rankings are consistent with previous results. In a young season, some teams can be overlooked in the rankings early on. For example, there was no reason VWU should have been ranked ahead of Eastern Mennonite last week, but they were because voters seemed to ignores VWU's loss at home to EMU 10 days prior and only looked at VWU's upset of Guilford when submitting their votes (Eastern Mennonite was undefeated at the tme).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 14, 2009, 05:22:39 PM

hungerd - as one voter... I can tell you I didn't "ignore" VWC's loss at home to EMU and only concentrate on the win over Guilford. I weighed their results with Eastern Mennonite's results and felt that VWC's resume was strong - by one spot - ove EM (#24 and #25 respectively on my ballot). This last week... I realized that I wasn't so sure with Eastern Mennonite even if their lose was to a non-D3 team. Thus... I took them off the poll. Though... consider this: I have 40 teams I am trying to push into 25 and I had other reasons to include other teams at this point. However, Eastern Mennonite is on my radar and will be back when they continue to prove they are a team to consider (I have jumped the gun in the past and regretted it... so forgive me if I am being careful).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 14, 2009, 05:30:14 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 14, 2009, 05:22:39 PM
hungerd - as one voter... I can tell you I didn't "ignore" VWC's loss at home to EMU and only concentrate on the win over Guilford. I weighed their results with Eastern Mennonite's results and felt that VWC's resume was strong - by one spot - ove EM (#24 and #25 respectively on my ballot). This last week... I realized that I wasn't so sure with Eastern Mennonite even if their lose was to a non-D3 team. Thus... I took them off the poll. Though... consider this: I have 40 teams I am trying to push into 25 and I had other reasons to include other teams at this point. However, Eastern Mennonite is on my radar and will be back when they continue to prove they are a team to consider (I have jumped the gun in the past and regretted it... so forgive me if I am being careful).

I respect your opinion, but given only results previous to this week, what on VWU's resume popped out compared to Eastern Mennonite? Their opponents records are very similar if you take out the Guilford win for VWU and the VWU for Eastern Mennonite.

From a previous post (as of December 8 ):

Combined record of opponents in wins minus Guilford win for VWU (for only d3 schools): 11-24
Combined record of opponents in wins minus VWU for Eastern Mennonite: 11-28

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 14, 2009, 05:50:55 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on December 12, 2009, 08:42:08 PM
I am hoping MIT breaks into the polls for the first time ever this week. They are off to their best start in school history at 11-0 and they were ranked 27th last week, just 4 points out of the top 25. At least two teams ranked 21-26 have lost this week giving them both at least 2 losses(DeSales and Elms), so I am thinking it could be a real possibility. Anyone more familiar with the poll have any thoughts?

I think MIT could get the #25 spot but wouldn't be surprised to see Wilmington jump over them and into the top 25 with that win over John Carroll. The only team that is likely to drop out of the top 25 is DeSales, leaving a single opening for a new addition. It's possible the voters drop Wooster out because of their 3 losses and Richard Stockton's 3 losses to unranked teams will certainly cause them to tumble, but don't know if they fall into the ORV. MIT might get stuck at #26 for the time being.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 14, 2009, 05:56:20 PM

#4 at #5 and it is an OT loss for the road team?

I might flip #4 and #5 on my ballot (knowing that there is a return game). But what else do you expect?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 14, 2009, 06:07:15 PM

Quote from: magicman on December 14, 2009, 05:50:55 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on December 12, 2009, 08:42:08 PM
I am hoping MIT breaks into the polls for the first time ever this week. They are off to their best start in school history at 11-0 and they were ranked 27th last week, just 4 points out of the top 25. At least two teams ranked 21-26 have lost this week giving them both at least 2 losses(DeSales and Elms), so I am thinking it could be a real possibility. Anyone more familiar with the poll have any thoughts?

I think MIT could get the #25 spot but wouldn't be surprised to see Wilmington jump over them and into the top 25 with that win over John Carroll. The only team that is likely to drop out of the top 25 is DeSales, leaving a single opening for a new addition. It's possible the voters drop Wooster out because of their 3 losses and Richard Stockton's 3 losses to unranked teams will certainly cause them to tumble, but don't know if they fall into the ORV. MIT might get stuck at #26 for the time being.

Also, remember that MIT was only 4 points out of the top 25 and 6 points out of the 23rd spot in last weeks poll (#23 to #27 were seperated by 6 points, or an average of less than .25 poll positions per ballot). Couple that with losses by Elms and UMD, and they may pick up more points from regional voters that they would not get from teams that lost in other regions. To explain further, imagine if last week someone had the NE region ranked: Midd, UMD, Amherst, Brandeis, Williams, Elms, MIT. Elms and MIT were receiving about the same number of votes last week and presumably not everyone was ranking both Elms and MIT. If there is more concensus on MIT being 6th or 5th in the region (depending on how far UMD falls with their second loss to an unranked team), and MIT is definitely ahead of Elms, MIT could get a share of the votes that Elms was getting. Even if a small group of voters were to move MIT into a position that Elms was in last week (+10 points or so), it could mean that MIT could jump into the polls without VWU, Carthage or Wooster losing any votes. Just another way of looking at it, obviously I am not sure of what will happen in reality.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 14, 2009, 06:51:32 PM

hungred - without trying to remember everything I considered in the last few weeks, I took the VWC win over Guilford as an edge over EM's win over VWC - both three spreads. Considering EM's recent history (one winnig record in recent history)... I slotted VWC higher. Remember, we are talkingt one spot on last week's ballot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 14, 2009, 09:26:11 PM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on December 14, 2009, 12:34:14 AM
Nice work, Darryl!

Wonder how far Stevens Point will drop after losing at #5 Whitewater in OT. Not sure if Randolph-Macon's and Guilford's wins will vault them above Point. The Pointers were 60 and 102 points ahead of RMC and Guilford.

Whitewater was 68 points behind St. Thomas. It's possible, IMO, that they could actually leapfrog St. Thomas.

I guess it could be possible that Point would stay at #4 with RMC and Guilford gaining a lot of points on them. Or, Point could drop to 6th behind those two.

I think that UST and UWW will gain points and a position. Point averaged being the #4 ranked team in the country at 550 points. They could stay there...

#1 Wash U
#2 St Thomas
#3 Whitewater

The teams that could "catch" them are Randolph Macon (490) or Guilford (448). #6 Macon averaged #6.4 and #7 Guilford was #8.08. That means Guilford was a couple extra places behind (in terms of their average spot on peoples' polls.

So who is #4? I think we can assume that John Carroll is going to drop out of the top 6 at least, so they're not in the running. Point could stay there... but I think probably that Randolph Macon will get that spot. I think Point will be #5 but won't have 525 points (how many points they would have if they averaged #5 on everybody's ballot). Guilford will probably be #6. From there it's up in the air.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 14, 2009, 10:22:27 PM

Randolph-Macon struggled to a 72-65 TKO over Wooster tonight. Wooster had the ball and just a two-point deficit as the clock entered the final minute, but committed three turnovers (of a holiday-spirited 19 on the night) in that final minute to seal the deal. Macon shot just 30% and was outrebounded for the first time this season (they were +14.4 on average in their first seven games), but trailed only for a few seconds and gutted out the win like great teams do.

I'm not sure what we learned tonight about either of these teams; on the one hand, Wooster's copious turnovers, many of which sounded "unforced," might suggest that they "should have" won, but on the other hand, R-MC refused to be headed and won despite probably not playing their best--it's hard to determine from a radio broadcast how much of R-MC's offensive struggles was due to Wooster defense and how much to just cold shooting. In terms of common opponents, Macon joins John Carroll as teams that, on their home floors, gutted their way past Wooster in the final minute (as opposed to the shellacking UST put on Wooster at Wooster). I guess if I thought that R-MC was a top 5 team before tonight, I'd still think so, and if I thought Wooster was a top 25 team before tonight, I'd still think so.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 15, 2009, 01:42:17 AM

Dan Tillema had a pretty nice dunk this past weekend when Stevens Point hosted Elmhurst.

Dan Tillema's dunk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmzA5Mn1t0k) made it to youtube. Swampgoon gave me the news.

We were sitting behind that basket, so it looked pretty awesome when it was coming right at you, but at this angle, it still doesn't look half bad! :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on December 15, 2009, 08:42:58 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 14, 2009, 10:22:27 PM
I guess if I thought that R-MC was a top 5 team before tonight, I'd still think so, and if I thought Wooster was a top 25 team before tonight, I'd still think so.

I don't see any way that Wooster could stay in the top 25 (for next week). I know UST, JCU, and RMC are all VERY good teams, but you can't lose to all 3 and Albion and hang on to a top 25 spot, especially when none of Woo's wins set my world on fire.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on December 15, 2009, 11:11:43 AM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 15, 2009, 08:42:58 AM
Quote from: David Collinge on December 14, 2009, 10:22:27 PM
I guess if I thought that R-MC was a top 5 team before tonight, I'd still think so, and if I thought Wooster was a top 25 team before tonight, I'd still think so.

I don't see any way that Wooster could stay in the top 25 (for next week). I know UST, JCU, and RMC are all VERY good teams, but you can't lose to all 3 and Albion and hang on to a top 25 spot, especially when none of Woo's wins set my world on fire.

Personally, I don't think David was trying to imply that Wooster deserves to remain in the top 25. I think he was just stating his opinion that he believes Wooster is still a top 25 caliber team. Despite their record, looking through the top 25, there are a lot of teams I would have a hard time believing would beat Wooster. Also, how many teams in the top 25 would have fared any better than Wooster in this gauntlet of a schedule they have faced? The only games that left me scratching my head were the Albion loss at Kresge (which also happens to be a house of horrors for Wooster BTW...) and the margin of defeat in the STU game. That game appeared to be the perfect strom as I don't believe STU could have played much better and I don't believe that the Scots could have played much worse. Outside of that, Wooster has been in both of their other 2 losses. Losses that were on the road vs. top 10 opponents I might add. And in each of those games, Wooster was very much in them until the dreaded turnover monster reared it's ugly head for the Scots.

In any case, David mentioned this on the NCAC board and that is, if Wooster can't find a way to cut down on their exorbitantly high number of turnovers they have been averaging this season, they are going to have trouble beating anyone. R-MC feasted off of Wooster's turnovers last night to the tune of 22 points off of Wooster miscues. And still, the Scots were only down 2 with just over a minute to go. It doesn't matter who you're playing. The bottom line is you're going to have trouble winning games when you basically gift your opponent 22 points off of turnovers. And especially when those opponents are highly ranked... :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 15, 2009, 12:44:04 PM

It does seem unlikely that Wooster will be in the next poll, though I agree they could be a Top 25 quality team.

As a reminder, the current poll does not include Monday's game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 15, 2009, 12:46:42 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 15, 2009, 08:42:58 AM
Quote from: David Collinge on December 14, 2009, 10:22:27 PM
I guess if I thought that R-MC was a top 5 team before tonight, I'd still think so, and if I thought Wooster was a top 25 team before tonight, I'd still think so.

I don't see any way that Wooster could stay in the top 25 (for next week). I know UST, JCU, and RMC are all VERY good teams, but you can't lose to all 3 and Albion and hang on to a top 25 spot, especially when none of Woo's wins set my world on fire.

Note my careful use of the word "if" in the above quoted passage. IF Wooster was a top 25 team before last night, I don't really see why that should change. They played and lost a close game on the court of #6, and that's what #23 is "supposed" to do.

However, just for the sake of clarification of my personal opinion of Wooster's top 25 status:

Quote from: David Collinge on December 08, 2009, 07:53:53 PM
Top 25 voting, especially in the dimly-lit world of D3, is one of those things that's easy to criticize but difficult to do. Most of us have our own specialized pools of knowledge, beyond the periphery of which things can be very opaque. For example, I could tell you that in no way, shape, or form is Wooster the 23rd best D3 team in the nation right now, but that doesn't mean I know who is, or whether Wooster is better or worse than #22 Mississippi College or #24 Carthage.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 15, 2009, 12:48:12 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 15, 2009, 12:44:04 PM
It does seem unlikely that Wooster will be in the next poll, though I agree they could be a Top 25 quality team.

As a reminder, the current poll does not include Monday's game.

As I am sure you know, Pat, the new top 25 is out:

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/

Wooster clinging to the #25 spot. Wilmington makes a huge jump into the top 10. Chicago also enters the top 25 for the first time this year, at #24.

MIT is ranked for the first time ever at #22. I believe the theory I presented earlier is what happened (see below), as MIT gained many of the Elms votes and therefore jumped ahead of a bunch of teams even though those teams did not lose points.

Quote from: hugenerd on December 14, 2009, 06:07:15 PM
Quote from: magicman on December 14, 2009, 05:50:55 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on December 12, 2009, 08:42:08 PM
I am hoping MIT breaks into the polls for the first time ever this week. They are off to their best start in school history at 11-0 and they were ranked 27th last week, just 4 points out of the top 25. At least two teams ranked 21-26 have lost this week giving them both at least 2 losses(DeSales and Elms), so I am thinking it could be a real possibility. Anyone more familiar with the poll have any thoughts?

I think MIT could get the #25 spot but wouldn't be surprised to see Wilmington jump over them and into the top 25 with that win over John Carroll. The only team that is likely to drop out of the top 25 is DeSales, leaving a single opening for a new addition. It's possible the voters drop Wooster out because of their 3 losses and Richard Stockton's 3 losses to unranked teams will certainly cause them to tumble, but don't know if they fall into the ORV. MIT might get stuck at #26 for the time being.

Also, remember that MIT was only 4 points out of the top 25 and 6 points out of the 23rd spot in last weeks poll (#23 to #27 were seperated by 6 points, or an average of less than .25 poll positions per ballot). Couple that with losses by Elms and UMD, and they may pick up more points from regional voters that they would not get from teams that lost in other regions. To explain further, imagine if last week someone had the NE region ranked: Midd, UMD, Amherst, Brandeis, Williams, Elms, MIT. Elms and MIT were receiving about the same number of votes last week and presumably not everyone was ranking both Elms and MIT. If there is more concensus on MIT being 6th or 5th in the region (depending on how far UMD falls with their second loss to an unranked team), and MIT is definitely ahead of Elms, MIT could get a share of the votes that Elms was getting. Even if a small group of voters were to move MIT into a position that Elms was in last week (+10 points or so), it could mean that MIT could jump into the polls without VWU, Carthage or Wooster losing any votes. Just another way of looking at it, obviously I am not sure of what will happen in reality.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 15, 2009, 08:35:52 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on December 15, 2009, 12:48:12 PM
MIT is ranked for the first time ever at #22.

And hugenerd gets an early Christmas present!!! 8)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 15, 2009, 09:25:19 PM

Quote from: magicman on December 15, 2009, 08:35:52 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on December 15, 2009, 12:48:12 PM
MIT is ranked for the first time ever at #22.

And hugenerd gets an early Christmas present!!! 8)

An early Christmas present indeed! Not just me, but for every follower of the program. I know that a lot of people are very proud of this group.

Personally, I am extremely happy for the coaching staff and the team. The upperclassman (all 3 of them), have done a great job in helping the younger guys get adjusted to the college game and it is really showing in how everyone is playing as a unit.

I am especially happy for the coaching staff because I have known most of them for so long. It is not easy winning at a place like MIT (you can ask former Associate Head Coach Oli Eslinger who is now the Head Coach at Caltech about that), but those guys have done a spectacular job at changing the culture and expectations at MIT. Current Associate Head Coach Kevin Byrne was an assistant at CMU when I played there, so I have known him for almost a decade (by the way, he seems to win wherever he goes, CMU won an average of 18 games per year his last 4 years there, not easy in the UAA, and his first year at MIT they tied an Instute record 21 wins and you all know what they are doing this year). I have also known Coach Anderson for about 8 years since I was an undergrad thinking of transferring into his program. I have also gotten to know the younger assistants, Coach Hagstrom (former Clark player) and Coach Phillips (former MCLA player) over the last two years and they are great guys. Lastly, I am sure not many people know this, but MIT has a great asset in that they have former BC and Wisonsin star, and former 1st round NBA draft pick, Paul Grant on their staff. He was a center in the NBA, so I am sure he can really pass along some wisdom and teach the young crop of big men at MIT how to get the most out of their talent.

The best is yet to come! GO MIT!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 15, 2009, 10:17:54 PM

Congratulations, hugenerd!

Aren't those MIT guys smart enough to know that when you graduate the national POY you're supposed to fall a bit! :D (Of course, Wheaton seems to be hanging in there pretty well so far despite graduating Kent Raymond [my preference for POY] AND all-CCIW center Andy Wiele.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 16, 2009, 12:17:56 AM

Quote from: hugenerd on December 15, 2009, 12:48:12 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 15, 2009, 12:44:04 PM
It does seem unlikely that Wooster will be in the next poll, though I agree they could be a Top 25 quality team.

As a reminder, the current poll does not include Monday's game.

As I am sure you know, Pat, the new top 25 is out:

Yes. The next poll I refer to is the next poll, not this one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 16, 2009, 07:13:38 AM

On a random note, this HAS to be the top 25 with the highest academic profile ever: Wash U., Midd, Wheaton, Williams, Amherst, F&M, Brandeis, MIT, Chicago etc. ... revenge of the nerds!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 16, 2009, 12:51:42 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on December 16, 2009, 07:13:38 AM
On a random note, this HAS to be the top 25 with the highest academic profile ever: Wash U., Midd, Wheaton, Williams, Amherst, F&M, Brandeis, MIT, Chicago etc. ... revenge of the nerds!

:)
Or it was that Top 25 that prompted the New York Times to run the article that is discussed on this thread...

http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=6740.0

:D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 17, 2009, 07:10:54 AM

How They Fared -- Midweek report

Lots of idle teams this week, and many others with no games before the weekend, but on the bright side, there were no missing scores by the time I ran my program ....

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Washington U.	7-0	12/19 at Fontbonne
#2	598	St. Thomas	6-0	IDLE
#3	573	UW-Whitewater	10-0	def. Carroll, 88-62
#4	537	UW-Stevens Point	8-1	12/19 vs. Wisconsin Lutheran
#5	527	Randolph-Macon	8-0	def. #25 Wooster, 72-65
#6	484	Guilford	6-1	def. T#40 Maryville (Tenn.), 82-53; 12/18 vs. Huntingdon (n); 12/20 vs. Rust (n)
#7	404	Middlebury	7-0	IDLE
#8	403	Wheaton (Ill.)	6-2	IDLE
#9	369	Texas-Dallas	7-1	12/20 vs. McMurry
#10	317	Wilmington	8-1	12/19 at Otterbein
#11	301	John Carroll	6-2	12/19 vs. Marietta
#12	280	Williams	8-0	IDLE
#13	268	Amherst	6-1	IDLE
#14	259	Franklin and Marshall	6-2	IDLE
#15	236	St. Norbert	6-0	12/19 at Milwaukee Engineering
#16	207	Brandeis	7-1	IDLE
#17	170	Mississippi College	7-0	12/19 vs. Sul Ross State
#18	167	Augustana	6-2	def. #24 Chicago, 59-47; 12/20 vs. Monmouth
#19	165	Chapman	8-1	12/20 vs. Redlands
#20	164	Mass-Dartmouth	6-2	IDLE
#21	149	Virginia Wesleyan	9-1	def. Apprentice School, 69-55
#22	132	MIT	11-0	IDLE
#23	121	Carthage	6-2	12/19 at Calumet Col.
#24	114	Chicago	6-2	LOST at #18 Augustana, 47-59
#25	96	Wooster	5-4	LOST at #5 Randolph-Macon, 65-72; 12/20 vs. Wabash

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	80	St. Mary's (Md.)	6-2	12/19 vs. Susquehanna (n); 12/20 at Universidad Metropolitana
#27	76	Richard Stockton	6-3	IDLE
#28	54	Hope	5-3	12/19 vs. Spring Arbor
#29	45	Anderson	7-1	12/19 vs. Trine
#30	33	Illinois Wesleyan	7-2	def. T#40 Illinois College, 70-59
#31	27	Elms	6-2	IDLE
#32	23	Cabrini	6-1	LOST at Merchant Marine, 61-73; 12/18 vs. Haverford
T#33	20	Worcester Polytech	9-1	IDLE
T#33	20	York (Pa.)	9-1	def. Wesley, 97-86
#35	19	DeSales	6-3	IDLE
T#36	13	Eastern Mennonite	8-1	12/19 at Averett
T#36	13	UW-La Crosse	8-2	IDLE
#38	12	Rochester	7-1	IDLE
#39	7	Western Connecticut	8-1	IDLE
T#40	5	Illinois College	6-2	LOST to #30 Illinois Wesleyan, 59-70
T#40	5	Maryville (Tenn.)	8-2	def. Averett, 87-71; LOST at #6 Guilford, 53-82
T#40	5	UW-Platteville	7-3	IDLE
T#43	1	Austin	6-1	12/18 vs. East Texas Baptist
T#43	1	Concordia (Ill.)	5-2	LOST at Cornell, 57-92; 12/17 at Blackburn; 12/19 vs. Manchester

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 20, 2009, 02:31:56 PM

By the way, there won't be a new Top 25 this week. We will return the next week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 21, 2009, 07:26:10 AM

How They Fared

Even though there's no new poll coming out, here is the summary of the last week's action ... only one missing score (in italics) on the men's side.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Washington U.	8-0	def. Fontbonne, 82-64
#2	598	St. Thomas	6-0	IDLE
#3	573	UW-Whitewater	10-0	def. Carroll, 88-62
#4	537	UW-Stevens Point	9-1	def. Wisconsin Lutheran, 105-43
#5	527	Randolph-Macon	8-0	def. #25 Wooster, 72-65
#6	484	Guilford	8-1	def. T#40 Maryville (Tenn.), 82-53; def. Huntingdon, 71-58; def. Rust, 96-72
#7	404	Middlebury	7-0	IDLE
#8	403	Wheaton (Ill.)	6-2	IDLE
#9	369	Texas-Dallas	7-2	LOST to McMurry, 68-75
#10	317	Wilmington	9-1	def. Otterbein, 81-66
#11	301	John Carroll	7-2	def. Marietta, 96-57
#12	280	Williams	8-0	IDLE
#13	268	Amherst	6-1	IDLE
#14	259	Franklin and Marshall	6-2	IDLE
#15	236	St. Norbert	7-0	def. Milwaukee Engineering, 69-52
#16	207	Brandeis	7-1	IDLE
#17	170	Mississippi College	8-0	def. Sul Ross State, 89-84
#18	167	Augustana	7-2	def. #24 Chicago, 59-47; def. Monmouth, 87-68
#19	165	Chapman	9-1	def. Redlands, 76-57
#20	164	Mass-Dartmouth	6-2	IDLE
#21	149	Virginia Wesleyan	9-1	def. Apprentice School, 69-55
#22	132	MIT	11-0	IDLE
#23	121	Carthage	7-2	def. Calumet Col., 90-88
#24	114	Chicago	6-2	LOST at #18 Augustana, 47-59
#25	96	Wooster	6-4	LOST at #5 Randolph-Macon, 65-72; def. Wabash, 78-60

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	80	St. Mary's (Md.)	8-2	def. Susquehanna, 72-66; def. Universidad Metropolitana @ SanturcG, 71-51
#27	76	Richard Stockton	6-3	IDLE
#28	54	Hope	5-4	LOST to Spring Arbor, 55-63
#29	45	Anderson	8-1	def. Trine, 65-53
#30	33	Illinois Wesleyan	7-2	def. T#40 Illinois College, 70-59
#31	27	Elms	6-2	IDLE
#32	23	Cabrini	7-1	LOST at Merchant Marine, 61-73; def. Haverford, 71-58
T#33	20	Worcester Polytech	9-1	IDLE
T#33	20	York (Pa.)	9-1	def. Wesley, 97-86
#35	19	DeSales	6-3	IDLE
T#36	13	Eastern Mennonite	8-1	Postponed: 12/19 at Averett
T#36	13	UW-La Crosse	8-2	IDLE
#38	12	Rochester	7-1	IDLE
#39	7	Western Connecticut	8-1	IDLE
T#40	5	Illinois College	6-2	LOST to #30 Illinois Wesleyan, 59-70
T#40	5	Maryville (Tenn.)	8-2	def. Averett, 87-71; LOST at #6 Guilford, 53-82
T#40	5	UW-Platteville	7-3	IDLE
T#43	1	Austin	6-2	LOST to East Texas Baptist, 63-66
T#43	1	Concordia (Ill.)	5-3	LOST at Cornell, 57-92; LOST to Manchester, 85-103

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 29, 2009, 09:43:42 AM

Just FYI, the pollsters did not vote until today (to allow for holiday travel, etc)...so while there is a poll this week, I'd expect it a day later than usual.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 29, 2009, 07:14:55 PM

Transylvania shocks #1 Wash U. at Wooster, 73-69.
#6 Guilford survives a rally by Ohio Wesleyan at Marietta, prevailing 79-72.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 29, 2009, 09:47:43 PM

#4 Point runs away from #2 UST 78-56

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 29, 2009, 10:33:51 PM

#3 Whitewater and Whitworth are playing right now in Spokane

Whitworth leads 34-30. Follow the live stats HERE (http://www.whitworth.edu/Athletics/Teams/Basketball/livestats/xlive.htm) and live Video HERE (http://d3sports.prestosports.com/links/ce763q)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 29, 2009, 10:44:32 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on December 29, 2009, 10:33:51 PM
#3 Whitewater and Whitworth are playing right now in Spokane

Whitworth leads 34-30. Follow the live stats HERE (http://www.whitworth.edu/Athletics/Teams/Basketball/livestats/xlive.htm) and live Video HERE (http://d3sports.prestosports.com/links/ce763q)

Another possible upset alert. Whitewater now trails Whitworth by 7 in Spokane, 44-37

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on December 29, 2009, 11:44:37 PM

Whitworth on their way to upsetting UW-Whitewater up by 12 in the last minute. Total reshuffling of the top 4 next week??

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 29, 2009, 11:47:33 PM

Quote from: frodotwo on December 29, 2009, 11:44:37 PM
Whitworth on their way to upsetting UW-Whitewater up by 12 in the last minute. Total reshuffling of the top 4 next week??

#1 Wash U
#2 St. Thomas
#3 UW Whitewater
#15 St. Norbert

All lose their first game tonight. Not a good night for undefeated midwestern teams!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on December 29, 2009, 11:52:28 PM

Whitworth defeats Whitewater in Spokane 94-84. Pirates lead entire second half and commit only 3 turnovers. NWC games start this weekend on Sat and Sun.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 29, 2009, 11:55:00 PM

Holy moly! Oh, what a night?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: usee on December 29, 2009, 11:59:09 PM

#8 Wheaton is down double digits to Hamline in the second half at Calif Lutheran.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 30, 2009, 12:29:41 AM

Quote from: PointSpecial on December 29, 2009, 11:47:33 PM
Quote from: frodotwo on December 29, 2009, 11:44:37 PM
Whitworth on their way to upsetting UW-Whitewater up by 12 in the last minute. Total reshuffling of the top 4 next week??

#1 Wash U
#2 St. Thomas
#3 UW Whitewater
#15 St. Norbert

All lose their first game tonight. Not a good night for undefeated midwestern teams!

The old saying: It happens "once in a blue moon". Well, tonight just happened to be that blue moon. (If you want to be technical it is actually on Thursday the 31st but tonight was close enough to account for all the undefeateds going down.)The next one will occur on August 31st 2012.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 30, 2009, 12:39:55 AM

Quote from: USee on December 29, 2009, 11:59:09 PM
#8 Wheaton is down double digits to Hamline in the second half at Calif Lutheran.

Wheaton fought back and had a 1 point lead with under 10 seconds on the FT line to seal it and miss two FT's. Hamline hits a hook shot with 1.1 seconds to go and Wheaton throws it away out of a timeout to seal the game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bufordscot on December 30, 2009, 08:33:48 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 12, 2009, 07:26:02 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 12, 2009, 05:50:04 PM
Quote from: Marty Peretz on December 12, 2009, 03:48:53 PM
What's up with Wooster? I haven't been following them but was told this was their year to make a real run. I was really looking forward to the Wooster-Wash.U game but with 3 L's in the early going, a WUSTL victory would seem to virtually be a foregone conclusion. Anyone have a scoop?

This post says something about just how much the good times are rolling with the Wash U men's basketball program! It would seem to take back-to-back national titles, and an undefeated start, for a fan to actually come on here and post that a win @ Wooster "would seem to virtually be a foregone conclusion."

Well, that plus Marty's refusal to click through to the Wooster page on this site to find out who beat the Scots (information later provided by ScotsFan).

Marty, How'd it work out for ya?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 30, 2009, 09:48:39 AM

Stevens Point will probably jump to #1 (assuming they win tonight). I don't see St. Thomas dropping too far, maybe to #5, more likely #4. I guess it depends how the voters look at that 22-point loss. It is to a highly ranked team on the road. Stevens Point didn't lose much after losing to highly ranked Whitewater on the road, but that game was in overtime.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on December 30, 2009, 11:45:37 AM

I think next week's Top 25 vote will actually be very wide open with at least four teams getting a close look - Washington U, UW-Whitewater, UW-Stevens Point and Randolph Macon (provided they handle Williams tonight). I could make a case for each of them. I don't think Middlebury will be in that conversation nor will St. Thomas given the margin of defeat last night.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: usee on December 30, 2009, 11:52:43 AM

I have to believe Wheaton falls considerably given they lost to a 3-4 team (who travelled from the same time zone) on a neutral floor. I am guessing the Thunder will be an enigma all year to voters (losing games as a favorite, blowouts in pickem games and wins as an underdog).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 30, 2009, 11:57:08 AM

Quote from: USee on December 30, 2009, 11:52:43 AM
I have to believe Wheaton falls considerably given they lost to a 3-4 team (who travelled from the same time zone) on a neutral floor. I am guessing the Thunder will be an enigma all year to voters (losing games as a favorite, blowouts in pickem games and wins as an underdog).

Agree. Wheaton's loss to Hamline on a neutral floor can only be considered a "bad loss." (Elmhurst won @ Hamline...and I think most CCIW followers expect Elmhurst to finish in the bottom 4 this year.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 30, 2009, 08:33:43 PM

Not again... #5 Point losing at Viterbo at the half 33-23. A little let down from last night?

Also, Randolph Macon (new #4, hopped over Point) losing to Williams 39-31 at the half.

EDIT: Not at the half... R-M leading 67-66 with 2:34 in the game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 30, 2009, 08:52:17 PM

R-MC is going to hold serve on their home court. Williams led by 16 with 12 minutes to go in the game and R-MC outscored Williams 40-19 over the last 12 minutes.

79-74 Randolph Macon beats Williams. Are they the new #1 after they hopped over Point in this week's top 25 and yesterday's results?

I think it definitely depends on what happens in La Crosse tonight... Point is down 6 now, 33-27 with 17:33 to go.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 30, 2009, 09:40:59 PM

Point recovers and retakes the lead 51-50 with about 4:30 to go in the game and wins going away 75-57. Nailed 17/19 FT's for the game to seal it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 02, 2010, 05:52:29 PM

What are poeples' thoughts on JCU and Wilmington? Wilmington shot into the polls a couple weeks ago, from receiving no votes to #10 in the country, largely in part due to their upset of JCU. Since that time, they have a bad loss and JCU has looked very beatable, losing 4 of 5. Does that win over JCU carry less weight in the eyes of voters after what has transpired with JCU recently? Meanwhile, JCU was still ranked in the top 10 this past week, despite their two losses. How far will they fall with their 0-2 week and four losses overall (remember that Wooster dropped from the rankings after their 4th loss, and it was seemingly against stronger competition)? JCU is 1-4 in the past 4 weeks, including the 22 point trouncing by Bethany today. Will Medaille be the next Wilmington and dart into the polls after a win over JCU, or will this win not carry as much weight as when Wilmington accomplished the same feat due to JCU's recent losses?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 02, 2010, 06:13:01 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 02, 2010, 05:52:29 PM
What are poeples' thoughts on JCU and Wilmington? Wilmington shot into the polls a couple weeks ago, from receiving no votes to #10 in the country, largely in part due to their upset of JCU. Since that time, they have a bad loss and JCU has looked very beatable, losing 4 of 5. Does that win over JCU carry less weight in the eyes of voters after what has transpired with JCU recently? Meanwhile, JCU was still ranked in the top 10 this past week, despite their two losses. How far will they fall with their 0-2 week and four losses overall (remember that Wooster dropped from the rankings after their 4th loss, and it was seemingly against stronger competition)? JCU is 1-4 in the past 4 weeks, including the 22 point trouncing by Bethany today. Will Medaille be the next Wilmington and dart into the polls after a win over JCU, or will this win not carry as much weight as when Wilmington accomplished the same feat due to JCU's recent losses?

I think John Carroll drops out of the top 25 and probably ends up at best in the middle of the ORV's. Medaille gets a few votes but won't benefit nearly as much as Wilmington did because of their weak schedule. I'm guessing they end up around the 33rd spot.
Wilmington with a loss to unranked Thomas More will probably tumble a few spots as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 02, 2010, 06:27:24 PM

Middlebury as expected handled Hamilton today 62-47. Tied at 27 at the half the teams went back and forth until there was 11 minutes left to play when the Panthers broke loose from a 38 all deadlock to outscore Hamilton 12-2 over the next 4 minutes and take control for good. Panthers now 9-0 on the season and next face Plattsburgh State on Tuesday Jan. 5th.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2010, 07:16:03 PM

Since the question has been left hanging on the OAC board (so far this season, the board has little action), I'll pose it here: what's with JCU?! Just a few days ago (2-9) Denison took Bethany to 2 OTs, yet JCU falls by 22! :o Have they had a rash of injuries, or were they just terribly over-rated?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 02, 2010, 07:30:04 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2010, 07:16:03 PM
Since the question has been left hanging on the OAC board (so far this season, the board has little action), I'll pose it here: what's with JCU?! Just a few days ago (2-9) Denison took Bethany to 2 OTs, yet JCU falls by 22! :o Have they had a rash of injuries, or were they just terribly over-rated?

I posed some questions along these lines a few hours ago on this board (look at the previous page).

I dont know much about JCU, but they certainly arent playing very well recently.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 02, 2010, 07:51:35 PM

Unfortunately, the OAC room is very poorly trafficked, so firsthand information about JCU or any of the other teams in that rather prominent league is sparse.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 02, 2010, 08:11:42 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2010, 07:16:03 PM
Since the question has been left hanging on the OAC board (so far this season, the board has little action), I'll pose it here: what's with JCU?! Just a few days ago (2-9) Denison took Bethany to 2 OTs, yet JCU falls by 22! :o Have they had a rash of injuries, or were they just terribly over-rated?

In today's contest against Bethany John Carroll used an 11 man rotation that is basically the same one they have used all year. 10 of these players average double digits in minutes played. They did have 1 player who didn't play today who normally comes off the bench and averages 8.7 ppg and 4.7 rpg. The biggest reason for today's loss was 3 for 23 from 3 point land and getting out rebounded 52-34. No matter who you are you're probably going to get pounded with those stats.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 02, 2010, 08:12:14 PM

Media timeout at Texas Hall on the campus of UT-Arlington,

14:33 UTD 9, UTA 9.
13:19 UTD 10, UTA 9.
12:14 UTD 13, UTA 11
10:18 UTD 13, UTA 15 (UTD gave up 2 quick turnovers).
8:47 UTD 15, UTA 19 UTD stops an 8-0 run by the Mavericks.)
7:58 UTD 15, UTA 22
4:40 UTD 22, UTA 32
1:56 UTD 26, UTA 32
1:41 UTD 32, UTA 35
Half UTD 36, UTA 38 (UTD finishes the last 4:40 outscoring UTA 14-6.)

Stats: UTD: FG 13-25; 3FG 3-10; FT 7-8; Reb O/D 13 (4/9); TO 9; Points off Turnovers 10, 2nd chance points 7, bench points 0.
UTA: FG 13-27; 3FG 5-10; FT 7-10; Rebs O/D 14 (6/8); Turnovers 8; Points off turnovers 6; 2nd chance points 5; Bench points 15.

Texas Hall has to be one of the most unusual places that basketball is played in the country. Texas Hall (http://www.uta.edu/policy/images/depts/ucenter/balcony_map.jpg) is a standard auditorium that seats about 3500 guests. One literally sits in the audience to watch the basketball game on the stage.

16:17 UTD 45, UTA 44
15:45 UTD 45, UTA 47
14:18 UTD 47, UTA 47 tied
13:45 UTD 49, UTA 49 tied
12:25 UTD 49, UTA 54
10:57 UTD 50, UTA 56
7:40 UTD 54, UTA 60
6:00 UTD 54, UTD 65
5:43 UTD 57, UTA 65
3:23 UTD 60, UTA 69
1:19 UTD 60, UTA 70
0:25 UTD 62, UTA 71
0:08 UTD 64, UTA 72
Final UTD 64, UTA 72

UTA is now 6-5; UTD 7-3.

UTD: FG 24-57; 3FG 6-26; FT 10-15; Rebs (O/D) 29 (12/17); TO 16; Points off turnovers 16; Bench points 3.

UTA: FG 24-54; 3FG 6-16; FT's 18-26; Rebs 39 (15/24); TO 18; Points off turnovers 14; Bench points 29.

Prior to this game, UTD was 80-206 (.388) on 3FG's.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 02, 2010, 09:15:11 PM

Medaille beats 4-5 Mt. Aloysius by only 1 today at home. It will be interesting to see how that win over JCU will be seen in the eyes of voters.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2010, 10:26:12 PM

In light of JCU's flop (so far, at least), and well remembering 'skosh in 2005-06 (who started 3-3 and were never heard from again in the poll), I got to wondering if preseason #2 was the 'kiss of death'. Turns out - not really.

While no preseason #2 has so far ever won the 'big doorstop' (I hope Greg never copyrighted the term! :D), 2 of them did also finish the year at #2 (William Paterson, 2001, and Amherst, 2008), and Wooster, 2007, finished 4th. Others have been at worst slight disappointments: Hampden-Sydney, 2000, finished 7th and IWU, 2005, 10th. Carthage (#21 in 2003) and Gustavus Adolphus (#23 in 2004) were probably not pleased, but not totally embarassed. The real flops were Augustana last year (18-8, 10 points in the ORV), UW-Oshkosh (2006, 17-9, no votes), and [greatest egg ever laid in the d3hoops.com poll era :-[ ] my own IWU in 2002 (finished with a 12-13 record).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on January 03, 2010, 02:18:38 AM

Should Whitworth begin their conference schedule 2-0 (on the road) and after the big home win vs Whitewater, would it be conceivable to see a big bounce and I mean BIG bounce back into the poll? This would make 8 straight wins after a horrid first 3 games and sit 9-2. Just wondering if I should get my hopes up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 03, 2010, 02:54:19 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2010, 10:26:12 PM
In light of JCU's flop (so far, at least), and well remembering 'skosh in 2005-06 (who started 3-3 and were never heard from again in the poll), I got to wondering if preseason #2 was the 'kiss of death'. Turns out - not really.

While no preseason #2 has so far ever won the 'big doorstop' (I hope Greg never copyrighted the term! :D), 2 of them did also finish the year at #2 (William Paterson, 2001, and Amherst, 2008), and Wooster, 2007, finished 4th. Others have been at worst slight disappointments: Hampden-Sydney, 2000, finished 7th and IWU, 2005, 10th. Carthage (#21 in 2003) and Gustavus Adolphus (#23 in 2004) were probably not pleased, but not totally embarassed. The real flops were Augustana last year (18-8, 10 points in the ORV), UW-Oshkosh (2006, 17-9, no votes), and [greatest egg ever laid in the d3hoops.com poll era :-[ ] my own IWU in 2002 (finished with a 12-13 record).

You can't fault the 2004 GAC team... they were really, really good and they ran into what would become a juggernaut in UWSP. The final score of that game was 66-55 but it was much closer than that and it was as tough a scratch and claw win as we had all year. There was a little retribution from the year before... but I think they might have ended right back in Salem if they'd beaten us instead of the other way around. And they did have a ton coming back from a team that had the national championship in the bag the year before.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 03, 2010, 09:06:08 PM

How They Fared

~~Two games still in progress -- I will try to fill those in later tonight in edits.~~ Complete
(Monday morning) corrected the Williams/USM score -- thanks, hugenerd.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Washington U.	9-1	LOST to (n) Transylvania, 69-73; def. Kalamazoo, 70-44
#2	597	St. Thomas	8-1	LOST at #5 UW-Stevens Point, 56-78; def. Macalester, 76-52
#3	574	UW-Whitewater	12-1	LOST at Whitworth, 84-94
#4	537	Randolph-Macon	10-0	def. Massachusetts College, 82-52; def. #10 Williams, 79-74
#5	527	UW-Stevens Point	11-1	def. #2 St. Thomas, 78-56; def. Viterbo, 75-57
#6	491	Guilford	10-1	def. Ohio Wesleyan, 79-72; def. Marietta, 82-60
#7	445	Middlebury	9-0	def. RPI, 63-52; def. Hamilton, 62-47
#8	408	Wheaton (Ill.)	8-3	LOST to (n) Hamline, 68-69; def. Monmouth, 84-53; def. Pomona-Pitzer, 102-100 4OT
#9	356	John Carroll	7-4	LOST to Medaille, 91-92; LOST at Bethany, 63-85
#10	333	Williams	10-1	def. Elmira, 85-64; LOST at #4 Randolph-Macon, 74-79; def. Southern Maine, 93-59
#11	303	Amherst	7-1	def. Stevenson, 69-56
#12	296	St. Norbert	8-1	LOST to Northwestern (Minn.), 70-72; def. T#29 Chicago, 71-60
#13	292	Brandeis	7-1	IDLE
#14	276	Wilmington	10-2	LOST to Thomas More, 90-92
#15	249	Mississippi College	9-0	IDLE
#16	242	Texas-Dallas	7-3	LOST at UT-Arlington, 64-72
#17	238	Franklin and Marshall	8-2	def. Susquehanna, 87-80; def. Manhattanville, 63-57
#18	208	Virginia Wesleyan	10-1	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 77-73
#19	183	Chapman	11-2	LOST at Hawai'i Pacific, 58-70; def. BYU-Hawaii, 76-70 OT
#20	160	Augustana	7-4	LOST at Buena Vista, 66-76
#21	144	MIT	11-1	IDLE
#22	128	Mass-Dartmouth	6-4	LOST to (n) Ramapo, 90-92; LOST to (n) Wesley, 72-91
#23	91	Carthage	8-3	LOST to (n) Wilkes, 61-72; def. King's, 69-46
#24	81	Anderson	11-1	def. Oberlin, 84-61; def. Howard Payne, 81-67
#25	50	St. Mary's (Md.)	10-2	def. Averett, 69-64; def. Hampden-Sydney, 70-69

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	36	Wooster	8-4	def. Kalamazoo, 70-41; def. Transylvania, 75-65
#27	33	Richard Stockton	8-3	def. Bridgewater State, 77-68; def. Moravian, 72-71
#28	32	Illinois Wesleyan	9-2	def. Southwestern, 91-75
T#29	26	Chicago	6-5	LOST to (n) Edgewood, 61-67; LOST at #12 St. Norbert, 60-71; LOST to Milwaukee Engineering, 62-64
T#29	26	Worcester Polytech	10-1	def. Fitchburg State, 85-47
#31	24	Elms	6-2	IDLE
#32	21	Western Connecticut	8-1	IDLE
#33	20	Eastern Mennonite	9-1	def. Hampden-Sydney, 88-71
T#34	18	Hope	7-4	def. Madonna, 72-68; def. Davenport, 77-62
T#34	18	UW-La Crosse	11-2	def. Hardin-Simmons, 75-56; def. Mary Hardin-Baylor, 86-78
#36	16	DeSales	7-4	def. Centenary, 101-64; LOST to Alvernia, 68-74
#37	7	York (Pa.)	11-1	def. Rosemont, 67-62; def. Gettysburg, 86-61
#38	5	UW-Platteville	8-4	def. Lewis and Clark, 84-76 OT; LOST to (n) Westminster (Utah), 68-71
T#39	2	Cabrini	7-1	IDLE
T#39	2	Cornell	9-3	LOST at Lakeland, 72-75
T#39	2	Illinois College	7-3	LOST to (n) Goshen, 79-95; def. Bluffton, 65-50
T#39	2	McMurry	7-3	LOST at UTSA, 58-84
#43	1	Rochester	7-1	IDLE

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 03, 2010, 09:14:47 PM

Fourteen of the 22 teams that played in the recent week lost at least one game!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 03, 2010, 09:17:45 PM

So... who's #1? Does Wash U retain it, even though they lost? Point should be ahead of St. Thomas because SP beat UST... Whitewater lost to an unranked team, but they've beaten Point (albeit in OT, at home) and Randolph-Macon beat a previously undefeated Williams team... after having hopped over UWSP in last week's voting.

Wheaton, JCU, and Williams should all drop out of the top 10... and there are plenty of teams (Amherst, Brandeis, Mississippi College) who can jump in. And I don't think any of the top 3 drop any lower than about #6... but I've no idea about the order. I didn't, however, see R-MC hopping over Point last week, so I may be completely off base.

One thing I'm pretty sure of... there are going to be a lot of #1 votes scattered around a lot of teams.

Whadda ya think?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 03, 2010, 09:18:59 PM

RMC has history, an undefeated record, and a decent schedule thus far. I think they deserve the votes at this point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 03, 2010, 09:39:32 PM

For #1, I'll take a stab at:

1. UWSP (destroyed former #2 UST)
2. RMC (beat former #10, undefeated Williams; is undefeated)
3. take your pick - probably WashU, possibly Guilford

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 03, 2010, 11:07:09 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 03, 2010, 09:18:59 PM

RMC has history, an undefeated record, and a decent schedule thus far. I think they deserve the votes at this point.

Pardon my ignorance... but what history does RMC have that, say, Point, Whitewater, and Wash U don't have? Each have two national championships. Wash U's are obvious... Point's are since RMC's great year in 2002-3, and they've got another season (2006-7) atop the polls for much of the year. And even in RMC's great year, Wash U was ranked ahead of them for the majority of the year.

I'm not sure where history really matters here.

What they do have is an undefeated record against a pretty good schedule. But (and these numbers aren't updated since last week), their RPI (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4232.msg1154330#msg1154330) isn't as high as Point, Whitewater, Wash U, or St. Thomas. The OWP isn't as high for RMC as the other 4 either.

But I digress... I think their undefeated record and recent results may get them some votes.

The ODAC should be pretty interesting this year. Between RM-C, Va Wesleyan, and Guilford, I think the conference looks to be pretty up for grabs. Va Wesleyan is back 1 game... and they have to play Guilford again and RM-C twice more. RM-C and Guilford only play each other once this year, which may be beneficial for them in terms of a Pool C, or multiple Pool C bids. But Eastern Mennonite might factor in too... they've already beaten Va Wesleyan and have 1 game left against UVW, RM-C, and Guilford.

In other words... the ODAC seems pretty tough this year and it doesn't seem likely that, unless somebody can top the other good teams, that they'll stay atop the rankings.

I do think that RM-C will get some votes. I think Wash U will get some, and Point will get some. Whitewater might get some. I don't necessarily see UST getting some because of the way that they lost this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 03, 2010, 11:14:05 PM

Darryl, this isnt your fault, but the womens score or something was reported for the Williams game today. The correct score is up now, Williams destroyed Southern Maine.

Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 03, 2010, 09:06:08 PM
How They Fared

~~Two games still in progress -- I will try to fill those in later tonight in edits.~~ Complete.

Top 25

Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#1 625 Washington U. 9-1 LOST to (n) Transylvania, 69-73; def. Kalamazoo, 70-44
#2 597 St. Thomas 8-1 LOST at #5 UW-Stevens Point, 56-78; def. Macalester, 76-52
#3 574 UW-Whitewater 12-1 LOST at Whitworth, 84-94
#4 537 Randolph-Macon 10-0 def. Massachusetts College, 82-52; def. #10 Williams, 79-74
#5 527 UW-Stevens Point 11-1 def. #2 St. Thomas, 78-56; def. Viterbo, 75-57
#6 491 Guilford 10-1 def. Ohio Wesleyan, 79-72; def. Marietta, 82-60
#7 445 Middlebury 9-0 def. RPI, 63-52; def. Hamilton, 62-47
#8 408 Wheaton (Ill.) 8-3 LOST to (n) Hamline, 68-69; def. Monmouth, 84-53; def. Pomona-Pitzer, 102-100 4OT
#9 356 John Carroll 7-4 LOST to Medaille, 91-92; LOST at Bethany, 63-85
#10 333 Williams 9-2 def. Elmira, 85-64; LOST at #4 Randolph-Macon, 74-79; LOST to Southern Maine, 83-89
#11 303 Amherst 7-1 def. Stevenson, 69-56
#12 296 St. Norbert 8-1 LOST to Northwestern (Minn.), 70-72; def. T#29 Chicago, 71-60
#13 292 Brandeis 7-1 IDLE
#14 276 Wilmington 10-2 LOST to Thomas More, 90-92
#15 249 Mississippi College 9-0 IDLE
#16 242 Texas-Dallas 7-3 LOST at UT-Arlington, 64-72
#17 238 Franklin and Marshall 8-2 def. Susquehanna, 87-80; def. Manhattanville, 63-57
#18 208 Virginia Wesleyan 10-1 def. Bridgewater (Va.), 77-73
#19 183 Chapman 11-2 LOST at Hawai'i Pacific, 58-70; def. BYU-Hawaii, 76-70 OT
#20 160 Augustana 7-4 LOST at Buena Vista, 66-76
#21 144 MIT 11-1 IDLE
#22 128 Mass-Dartmouth 6-4 LOST to (n) Ramapo, 90-92; LOST to (n) Wesley, 72-91
#23 91 Carthage 8-3 LOST to (n) Wilkes, 61-72; def. King's, 69-46
#24 81 Anderson 11-1 def. Oberlin, 84-61; def. Howard Payne, 81-67
#25 50 St. Mary's (Md.) 10-2 def. Averett, 69-64; def. Hampden-Sydney, 70-69

Others receiving votes
Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#26 36 Wooster 8-4 def. Kalamazoo, 70-41; def. Transylvania, 75-65
#27 33 Richard Stockton 8-3 def. Bridgewater State, 77-68; def. Moravian, 72-71
#28 32 Illinois Wesleyan 9-2 def. Southwestern, 91-75
T#29 26 Chicago 6-5 LOST to (n) Edgewood, 61-67; LOST at #12 St. Norbert, 60-71; LOST to Milwaukee Engineering, 62-64
T#29 26 Worcester Polytech 10-1 def. Fitchburg State, 85-47
#31 24 Elms 6-2 IDLE
#32 21 Western Connecticut 8-1 IDLE
#33 20 Eastern Mennonite 9-1 def. Hampden-Sydney, 88-71
T#34 18 Hope 7-4 def. Madonna, 72-68; def. Davenport, 77-62
T#34 18 UW-La Crosse 11-2 def. Hardin-Simmons, 75-56; def. Mary Hardin-Baylor, 86-78
#36 16 DeSales 7-4 def. Centenary, 101-64; LOST to Alvernia, 68-74
#37 7 York (Pa.) 11-1 def. Rosemont, 67-62; def. Gettysburg, 86-61
#38 5 UW-Platteville 8-4 def. Lewis and Clark, 84-76 OT; LOST to (n) Westminster (Utah), 68-71
T#39 2 Cabrini 7-1 IDLE
T#39 2 Cornell 9-3 LOST at Lakeland, 72-75
T#39 2 Illinois College 7-3 LOST to (n) Goshen, 79-95; def. Bluffton, 65-50
T#39 2 McMurry 7-3 LOST at UTSA, 58-84
#43 1 Rochester 7-1 IDLE

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Wydown Blvd. on January 03, 2010, 11:23:12 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 03, 2010, 09:18:59 PM

RMC has history, an undefeated record, and a decent schedule thus far. I think they deserve the votes at this point.

When it comes to the #1 team in the nation, my question to pollsters is always simple.... is this the best squad is the nation and does their record stop me from voting them as such? I'm not sure if one loss will stop voters from answering with "WashU is the best team in the nation."

Now, I understand that for the rest of the votes, the other elements (RPI, OWP, etc etc) play a part in leveling the playing field to see who the team is facing (especially because of the regionally diverse layout of d3) and what the team has accomplished during the season , but that #1 spot seems relatively self explanatory IMHO.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 03, 2010, 11:34:36 PM

Quote from: Wydown Blvd. on January 03, 2010, 11:23:12 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 03, 2010, 09:18:59 PM

RMC has history, an undefeated record, and a decent schedule thus far. I think they deserve the votes at this point.

When it comes to the #1 team in the nation, my question to pollsters is always simple.... is this the best squad is the nation and does their record stop me from voting them as such? I'm not sure if one loss will stop voters from answering with "WashU is the best team in the nation."

Now, I understand that for the rest of the votes, the other elements (RPI, OWP, etc etc) play a part in leveling the playing field to see who the team is facing (especially because of the regionally diverse layout of d3) and what the team has accomplished during the season , but that #1 spot seems relatively self explanatory IMHO.

C'mon, man - you lost to a team that was DESTROYED by Carthage, Wilma, Tommy More, and Woo, and you expect no penalty at all?!

It would not surprise me terribly if WashU ends up #1 yet again at the end of the year, but this week - no way! ;) Third or fourth, at best.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 03, 2010, 11:43:51 PM

Let's look at the first 5 teams.

There were great tests for each of them.

RMC and UWSP did what they had to do. I think that it is fair to move them up at this time of the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Wydown Blvd. on January 04, 2010, 12:30:40 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 03, 2010, 11:43:51 PM
Let's look at the first 5 teams.

There were great tests for each of them.

RMC and UWSP did what they had to do. I think that it is fair to move them up at this time of the season.

RMC is the only undefeated team and will definitely collect some confident #1 votes, but Im thinking WashU wont lose all of theirs after being unanimous #1 for every week so far. How did UWSP do "what they had to do" any different then WashU (therefore making it fair to move them up)? Fair will be higher than St. Thomas, and St. Thomas will certainly drop in the next poll.

Nevertheless, its going to be an interesting poll to see how those top 5 fall because of the voting behind a poll (instead of a ranking).

(as an aside I'm not a big fan of the quality of losses theory, but thats a personal opinion. For example, Wheaton put up a better fight than Augie vs Wustl, but honestly thats not telling me too much about the difference between the two teams.)

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 03, 2010, 11:34:36 PM
C'mon, man

btw its c'mon woman ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 04, 2010, 12:41:00 AM

Quote from: Wydown Blvd. on January 04, 2010, 12:30:40 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 03, 2010, 11:34:36 PM
C'mon, man

btw its c'mon woman ;)

Oops, sorry about that. :-[

My defense is that I have a teenager, to whom 'man' and 'dude' are gender-neutral terms! I might accept 'dude', but 'man' IS kinda out there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 04, 2010, 12:44:58 AM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 03, 2010, 11:07:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 03, 2010, 09:18:59 PM

RMC has history, an undefeated record, and a decent schedule thus far. I think they deserve the votes at this point.

Pardon my ignorance... but what history does RMC have that, say, Point, Whitewater, and Wash U don't have? Each have two national championships. Wash U's are obvious... Point's are since RMC's great year in 2002-3, and they've got another season (2006-7) atop the polls for much of the year. And even in RMC's great year, Wash U was ranked ahead of them for the majority of the year.

I'm not sure where history really matters here.

What they do have is an undefeated record against a pretty good schedule. But (and these numbers aren't updated since last week), their RPI (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4232.msg1154330#msg1154330) isn't as high as Point, Whitewater, Wash U, or St. Thomas. The OWP isn't as high for RMC as the other 4 either.

But I digress... I think their undefeated record and recent results may get them some votes.

The ODAC should be pretty interesting this year. Between RM-C, Va Wesleyan, and Guilford, I think the conference looks to be pretty up for grabs. Va Wesleyan is back 1 game... and they have to play Guilford again and RM-C twice more. RM-C and Guilford only play each other once this year, which may be beneficial for them in terms of a Pool C, or multiple Pool C bids. But Eastern Mennonite might factor in too... they've already beaten Va Wesleyan and have 1 game left against UVW, RM-C, and Guilford.

In other words... the ODAC seems pretty tough this year and it doesn't seem likely that, unless somebody can top the other good teams, that they'll stay atop the rankings.

I do think that RM-C will get some votes. I think Wash U will get some, and Point will get some. Whitewater might get some. I don't necessarily see UST getting some because of the way that they lost this week.

Let's not forget Eastern Mennonite, who is currently atop the ODAC standings at 3-0, including a win at VWU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 04, 2010, 12:47:01 AM

Quote from: Wydown Blvd. on January 04, 2010, 12:30:40 AM
...
btw its c'mon woman ;)

I shall remember that I am in the presence of a lady. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 04, 2010, 01:11:32 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 04, 2010, 12:47:01 AM
Quote from: Wydown Blvd. on January 04, 2010, 12:30:40 AM
...
btw its c'mon woman ;)

I shall remember that I am in the presence of a lady. ;)

There you go, stepping into a potential minefield! :D

My wife of 32 years retained her birth-name (didn't faze me in the least). Ironically, HER parents (whom she was seeking to honor) thereafter addressed her as Mrs. Bonney, while MY parents addressed her as Ms. Bare- though only formally on letters, of course (anyone here still remember letters?)

In the 70s and 80s, 'Lady' could be construed as an insult. Hopefully we have moved beyond that, but who knows?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 04, 2010, 01:19:12 AM

The question to me is always a very simple one. The answer may not always be, however.

Question: Who is the best team in the country?

That's where my No. 1 vote goes. It doesn't necessarily have a bearing on who was No. 1 last week or who has the best record. Can the best team in the country lose a game? Absolutely. There haven't been very many unbeaten teams in Division III men's basketball, to be sure.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 04, 2010, 07:11:48 AM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 03, 2010, 11:14:05 PM
Darryl, this isnt your fault, but the womens score or something was reported for the Williams game today. The correct score is up now, Williams destroyed Southern Maine.

Thanks, hugenerd. I fixed it in the original posting, too. (The score that was posted was for the Colby-Sawyer/Worcester State game, which was the earlier game in the Purple & Gold Invitational.)

And here I thought that for the very first time, all scores had been posted correctly....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 04, 2010, 08:04:47 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 04, 2010, 01:19:12 AM
The question to me is always a very simple one. The answer may not always be, however.

Question: Who is the best team in the country?

That's where my No. 1 vote goes. It doesn't necessarily have a bearing on who was No. 1 last week or who has the best record. Can the best team in the country lose a game? Absolutely. There haven't been very many unbeaten teams in Division III men's basketball, to be sure.

I agree. For me, it's not about automatically assessing a "penalty" for a loss - it's about trying to determine who the best team is. Now, most times a loss becomes an important part of the "body of work" that leads me to moving a team down...just as a certain win might lead me to moving a team up.

As the season goes on, I tend to look past a team's best performance, as well as its worst. Almost every season, great teams lose games they shouldn't on paper...and not-so-great teams pull off huge upsets. I'm not automatically going to move Wash U down, just as I am not going to automatically move Transylvania into my Top 25 based on one result.

This is a tough #1 vote. I have not had time to look at it yet in detail, but staying with Wash U is definitely a possibility.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on January 04, 2010, 10:28:33 AM

Not that I have a vote, but I would have a hard time keeping WashU #1 after their loss to Transy. Especially considering that UWSP drilled a VERY good UST squad and R-MC had a solid win over previously 10th ranked Williams.

I wouldn't say that you are punishing WashU for their loss as much as rewarding Macon and Point for their results. And with losses by #2 and #3, I would have a hard time not sliding both Macon and Point ahead of WashU at this point.

This is where I would have a difficult decision. Who would I vote #1 between Point and Macon. At this moment, I would have to favor Point because of how they handeld St. Thomas. I saw UST destroy Wooster and I thought at the time that the Tommies might be the best team in the country. And to see Point come out and lay the wood to UST, leads me to give my nod to UWSP for now with Macon a very close second and WashU slipping to 3rd.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on January 04, 2010, 10:46:40 AM

Quote from: magicman on January 02, 2010, 08:11:42 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2010, 07:16:03 PM
Since the question has been left hanging on the OAC board (so far this season, the board has little action), I'll pose it here: what's with JCU?! Just a few days ago (2-9) Denison took Bethany to 2 OTs, yet JCU falls by 22! :o Have they had a rash of injuries, or were they just terribly over-rated?

In today's contest against Bethany John Carroll used an 11 man rotation that is basically the same one they have used all year. 10 of these players average double digits in minutes played. They did have 1 player who didn't play today who normally comes off the bench and averages 8.7 ppg and 4.7 rpg. The biggest reason for today's loss was 3 for 23 from 3 point land and getting out rebounded 52-34. No matter who you are you're probably going to get pounded with those stats.

I'm not a close follower of JCU, but I try to keep up with the other contenders from around the GL Region and I have to say that JCU is really a hard one to figure out. For as well as they performed last year with their top 11 scoreres returning, I felt they would only be better this year. But, I have to say, I think magicman nailed a big reason why this team is struggling and that is that they really have no inside presence. They have been relying on forcing turnovers and playing at an up-tempo level of play and while they are still forcing over 20 turnovers/game, they have really been struggling to find an inside game. They are a team that appears to live and die by the three-ball. When it's falling for them, they are tough to beat. But when it isn't, they will struggle.

Another red flag surrounding the Blue Streaks is their ft shooting. They missed 14 ft's (31-45) in their loss to Bethany! You get to the line 45 times, you'd better be making more than 31 ft's! And as a team they are shooting just 61% for the season! :o That is just horrible for a guard oriented team like JCU!

JCU appears to be on the precipice for their season. They can either rally and finish the season like they finished last season by rolling through the OAC or they can fold up their tents and pack it in. Right now, I have no idea whether JCU will be able to right the ship and recover from this lull that they're in.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 04, 2010, 10:49:55 AM

Any thoughts on the enigma that is Wheaton (IL)? They are a few miraculous shots away from having 4 losses and even with those shots have 3 losses, with 2 of those being to unranked teams. I know there are a lot of CCIW posters that know more about them than me, so could someone comment on whether they are just being inconsistent or is there something else that I am missing?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on January 04, 2010, 11:39:51 AM

My two cents worth - Stevens Point is #1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 04, 2010, 11:53:02 AM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 04, 2010, 10:49:55 AM
Any thoughts on the enigma that is Wheaton (IL)? They are a few miraculous shots away from having 4 losses and even with those shots have 3 losses, with 2 of those being to unranked teams. I know there are a lot of CCIW posters that know more about them than me, so could someone comment on whether they are just being inconsistent or is there something else that I am missing?

I think it's fair to say that Wheaton has spent the season to date too high in the poll. I did not have Wheaton on my preseason ballot and was surprised to see the Thunder #15. Wheaton got all the way up to #6 in the Week 1 poll, and has been #8 since Week 2 – that is just simply too high. I had Wheaton up to #14 on my Week 4 ballot - due in large part to the performance at Wash U – but honestly, I wasn't very comfortable with it. The Thunder just kind of kept sliding up my ballot based on other carnage around them, and I think that happened on the other 24 ballots as well (it's just that Wheaton started higher on most of the others).

Wheaton ended up #2 in the poll last year, and I think that was very legit. (I felt like I was watching the national championship game when I saw Wheaton and Wash U play in the tournament...unfortunately in Round 3...and nothing about Wash U's next 3 tournament games changed my mind.) But the Thunder lost a ton to graduation – 1st Team All-American Kent Raymond and their 6-8 center, Andy Wiele. Now, don't get me wrong, Wheaton has some very good players this year (senior Ben Panner and sophomore Tim McCrary are 1st Team All-CCIW caliber players this year)...but Raymond made Wheaton go last year. Wheaton lost 3 games in CCIW play last year – 2 with Raymond out with injury and 1 in his first game back, when he came off the bench and played 20 minutes. Wheaton was undefeated in the CCIW with Raymond starting. If Wheaton had played all 14 games in the CCIW last season without Andy Wiele and Kent Raymond, they probably would have been about 6-8.

I don't think Wheaton is an enigma, as much as just a rebuilding team that's been ranked too high. The Thunder have a very solid nucleus, but they have some holes, both in the starting lineup and the bench. Realistically, Wheaton is probably somewhere in the 20-30 range. We'll know more soon as they open the CCIW season @ Carthage Wednesday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 04, 2010, 12:07:52 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 04, 2010, 11:53:02 AM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 04, 2010, 10:49:55 AM
Any thoughts on the enigma that is Wheaton (IL)? They are a few miraculous shots away from having 4 losses and even with those shots have 3 losses, with 2 of those being to unranked teams. I know there are a lot of CCIW posters that know more about them than me, so could someone comment on whether they are just being inconsistent or is there something else that I am missing?

I think it's fair to say that Wheaton has spent the season to date too high in the poll. I did not have Wheaton on my preseason ballot and was surprised to see the Thunder #15. Wheaton got all the way up to #6 in the Week 1 poll, and has been #8 since Week 2 – that is just simply too high. I had Wheaton up to #14 on my Week 4 ballot - due in large part to the performance at Wash U – but honestly, I wasn't very comfortable with it. The Thunder just kind of kept sliding up my ballot based on other carnage around them, and I think that happened on the other 24 ballots as well (it's just that Wheaton started higher on most of the others).

Wheaton ended up #2 in the poll last year, and I think that was very legit. (I felt like I was watching the national championship game when I saw Wheaton and Wash U play in the tournament...unfortunately in Round 3...and nothing about Wash U's next 3 tournament games changed my mind.) But the Thunder lost a ton to graduation – 1st Team All-American Kent Raymond and their 6-8 center, Andy Wiele. Now, don't get me wrong, Wheaton has some very good players this year (senior Ben Panner and sophomore Tim McCrary are 1st Team All-CCIW caliber players this year)...but Raymond made Wheaton go last year. Wheaton lost 3 games in CCIW play last year – 2 with Raymond out with injury and 1 in his first game back, when he came off the bench and played 20 minutes. Wheaton was undefeated in the CCIW with Raymond starting. If Wheaton had played all 14 games in the CCIW last season without Andy Wiele and Kent Raymond, they probably would have been about 6-8.

I don't think Wheaton is an enigma, as much as just a rebuilding team that's been ranked too high. The Thunder have a very solid nucleus, but they have some holes, both in the starting lineup and the bench. Realistically, Wheaton is probably somewhere in the 20-30 range. We'll know more soon as they open the CCIW season @ Carthage Wednesday.

Thanks for your input. By the way, I didnt mean enigma as a knock on them, just that some of their results have been puzzling considering how high they have been ranked so far this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 04, 2010, 01:13:22 PM

Quote from: pbrooks3 on January 04, 2010, 11:39:51 AM
My two cents worth - Stevens Point is #1.

IMHO, tough for me to argue Stevens Point goes above Whitewater when head-to-head Whitewater has the advantage.

As Titan Q and Pat Coleman have both pointed out, this is going to be a tough vote for number 1 (and the slots behind) and guaging it stricktly on one loss isn't fair. Whitewater has the same number of losses, now, as Stevens Point with one of their wins being over UWSP... so overall I think Whitewater goes ahead of UWSP in my poll.

That leaves me the question, does Wash U. lose their #1 slot? Do I put RMC #1? That comes down to whether I think, wins and losses and results considered, Wash U or RMC is the better team. Tough.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 04, 2010, 01:43:22 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 04, 2010, 01:13:22 PM
Quote from: pbrooks3 on January 04, 2010, 11:39:51 AM
My two cents worth - Stevens Point is #1.
IMHO, tough for me to argue Stevens Point goes above Whitewater when head-to-head Whitewater has the advantage.

As Titan Q and Pat Coleman have both pointed out, this is going to be a tough vote for number 1 (and the slots behind) and guaging it stricktly on one loss isn't fair. Whitewater has the same number of losses, now, as Stevens Point with one of their wins being over UWSP... so overall I think Whitewater goes ahead of UWSP in my poll.

That leaves me the question, does Wash U. lose their #1 slot? Do I put RMC #1? That comes down to whether I think, wins and losses and results considered, Wash U or RMC is the better team. Tough.

For me, since the Stevens Point/Whitewater game was @ Whitewater - and it went to overtime - I don't automatically place WW ahead. If, hypothetically, Stevens Point was the #2 team in the country and Whitewater, say, #6, I'd still consider Stevens Point an underdog in a game played at WW. When I submitted my ballot today I had Stevens Point ranked higher.

This is why we like polls I guess - lots to debate.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 04, 2010, 02:02:25 PM

What do you guys think about Medaille? Do they get the Wilmington treatment or has a win over JCU lost its luster?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 04, 2010, 02:07:35 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 04, 2010, 02:02:25 PM
What do you guys think about Medaille? Do they get the Wilmington treatment or has a win over JCU lost its luster?

At the rate JCU is going, the entire top 25 would soon consist of teams that beat them! :o (I say this as the person who selected JCU in the Survivor Pool - but I'm not bitter! :D)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 04, 2010, 02:30:12 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 04, 2010, 10:49:55 AM
Any thoughts on the enigma that is Wheaton (IL)? They are a few miraculous shots away from having 4 losses and even with those shots have 3 losses, with 2 of those being to unranked teams. I know there are a lot of CCIW posters that know more about them than me, so could someone comment on whether they are just being inconsistent or is there something else that I am missing?

Coach Schauer had some trepidation about his team prior to this season in the inaugurual CCIW coaches' chat earlier this year. There was some question on the CCIW board if it was just coachspeak or a motivational tool with his new team...

Wheaton has beaten the teams they should beat (the really bad ones) and unfortunately, they've got several on their schedule. They beat Monmouth and Grinnell. Other teams they've beaten have at least 4 other losses (Trine, Loras, Calvin, Chicago, P-P). That it took 4 OT's to beat P-P is an interesting side note... but that, along with the Hamline loss might be able to be chalked up to a bad road trip. Maybe the warmth was too much for the Thunder?

The other win is against McMurry (TX). Their only other losses are to still-undefeated Mississippi College and a D-I team. That one looks good... but it was very early in the year so might be able to be discounted.

The Wash U loss was a "good" loss... but it's still a 1 in the L column. It shows that they can play at a high level... but maybe it's just proof that they play to the level of their competition (not a good thing if you're playing somebody bad).

The last one is the Hope loss. It was on Hope's home court, and Hope typically plays well at home... though all 4 of their losses have come at home (though 3 were to non-D-III teams). It wasn't close though. It was an out and out drubbing.

All told, I'd agree with Q. Wheaton was (and is) too high and they should drop down to a more appropriate 20-25 spot. I think that other teams have risen to the top.

The next question for the CCIW is this... who should be ranked? Is Wheaton in the 20-25 range, or the 25-30 range? How about Augie and Carthage (both lost since last week's rankings)? How about IWU? Usually there are at least 2 CCIW teams good enough to be ranked... but is that the case this year?

What about a third team for the WIAC? La Crosse is 11-2, with losses to Whitewater and a ranked NAIA-II team. They've been garnering votes for a few weeks and have done what they've needed to do. They also have the two best guards in the conference not named D.J. Marsh.

Is Wash U as good as they seem? They beat bad Fontbonne and Kalamazoo teams on the road... but their only other road games were a close battle at IWU and a loss to Transy @ Wooster. 6 of their first 7 were in the Wash U Field House and the next 4 are too... and then its two weekends on the road to Cleveland and Pittsburgh, then upstate NY and Atlanta (how in the world did Rochester and Emory end up being travel partners?). Through the last decade, they've won the UAA several times... but they've never managed to go undefeated. They've done some pretty gnarly things to some pretty good teams (at home) but they were taken to the brink by Wheaton... who's stock is falling.

Up next, they've got Webster (who's just under .500 but still pretty bad) at home, then they host their travel partner Chicago (6-5), then two more conference home games against NYU (8-2) and Brandeis (7-1). After tonight's matchup with the Gorlocks, they're in full conference swing.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 04, 2010, 01:13:22 PM
Quote from: pbrooks3 on January 04, 2010, 11:39:51 AM
My two cents worth - Stevens Point is #1.
IMHO, tough for me to argue Stevens Point goes above Whitewater when head-to-head Whitewater has the advantage.

But it was in OT, @ Whitewater. If you contrast that with drubbing Point put on St Thomas (who was ranked above the Warhawks), does it still hold as much water?

Quote
As Titan Q and Pat Coleman have both pointed out, this is going to be a tough vote for number 1 (and the slots behind) and guaging it stricktly on one loss isn't fair. Whitewater has the same number of losses, now, as Stevens Point with one of their wins being over UWSP... so overall I think Whitewater goes ahead of UWSP in my poll.

That leaves me the question, does Wash U. lose their #1 slot? Do I put RMC #1? That comes down to whether I think, wins and losses and results considered, Wash U or RMC is the better team. Tough.

Do you put RMC above Point or Whitewater? They "flipped" with UWSP from last week to this week, even though SP won all of their games...

I think the ODAC is pretty tough this year. They seem to have a lot of teams that did well in their non-conference schedules. It should be interesting to see how it all shakes out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 04, 2010, 02:44:08 PM

First off, I have had RMC ahead of UWSP for several polls... last week wasn't the first. So my mind has been that RMC has been the better team since maybe early December? (I forgot to write down the dates on my sheets).

Secondly, I do understand the game between Whitewater and UWSP was at Whitewater and I do understand that it was an OT game... but they still beat UWSP, especially when they had to. If we have the exact opposite happen on UWSP's court (close, OT, etc.) then this comparison will be washed out in my eyes and I will concentrate on other criteria. However... right now I feel UWW is the better team, probably by one slot on my poll... because they have a win over UWSP. Again... we are talking about one slot... not five or more.

As for Wheaton... I have been uncomfortable with their positioning on my ballot recently... glad to hear that my gut feeling may be right.

And as for #1... I still haven't decided.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 04, 2010, 02:49:25 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 04, 2010, 02:30:12 PMWheaton has beaten the teams they should beat (the really bad ones) and unfortunately, they've got several on their schedule. They beat Monmouth and Grinnell. Other teams they've beaten have at least 4 other losses (Trine, Loras, Calvin, Chicago, P-P). That it took 4 OT's to beat P-P is an interesting side note... but that, along with the Hamline loss might be able to be chalked up to a bad road trip. Maybe the warmth was too much for the Thunder?

I think that the win over P-P was a good one, actually. Not that the Sagehens are all that and a bag of chips -- they're only 4-4 against D3 competition -- but the game was in their gym, and it was a classic case of Wheaton potentially being exposed in terms of its biggest weakness, depth. How do you win a game that goes to four overtimes if you have no depth, especially when your star player (Tim McCrary) fouls out halfway thru the first overtime? It seems to me that this game confirmed what I've been suspecting, which is that Wheaton has at least a couple of bench players who are solid contributors: Spencer Schultze (9.7 ppg, 7.4 rpg) and John Shackelford (7.0 ppg, .527 FG%, .469 3FG%). That answers some (although probably not all) of the depth questions we CCIW observers have been asking about the Sonic Atmospheric Disturbance this season.

Having said that, I don't think that the CCIW has a Top 20 team at this point -- Wheaton included -- and I'm not 100% convinced that it has a Top 25 team, either.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 04, 2010, 03:44:46 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 04, 2010, 02:30:12 PM
(how in the world did Rochester and Emory end up being travel partners?)

This is actually an improvement. Previously it was CMU/Rochester and CWRU/Emory. In the case of CWRU/Emory OR Rochester/Emory, you still need to take a flight to reach each of those locations. However, with CMU/CWRU as travel partners instead of CMU/Rochester, you cut out a very long bus trip (Pittsburgh -> Rochester, ~5 hours in good weather) and replace it with a much more reasonable one (Pittsburgh -> Cleveland, ~2 hours). In each case you still need to fly between two of the cities (Atlanta-Rochester instead of Atlanta-Cleveland), but you have the added advantage of 2-3 hours less driving time in the dead of winter (you dont want to drive from Pittsburgh to Rochester in a blizzard, trust me).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 04, 2010, 05:00:38 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 04, 2010, 03:44:46 PM
(you dont want to drive from Pittsburgh to Rochester in a blizzard, trust me).

I'm not sure I want to drive from Pittsburgh to Rochester... ever...

As an aside, I'm now trying to figure out how I'd get to Rochester from Chicago... would I drive through Canada or go through south of Lake Erie?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 04, 2010, 05:18:19 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 04, 2010, 05:00:38 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 04, 2010, 03:44:46 PM
(you dont want to drive from Pittsburgh to Rochester in a blizzard, trust me).

I'm not sure I want to drive from Pittsburgh to Rochester... ever...

As an aside, I'm now trying to figure out how I'd get to Rochester from Chicago... would I drive through Canada or go through south of Lake Erie?

As someone who has traveled by car from Chicago to upstate New York and back more times than he can count and who has taken both routes, this question would have been open to debate ten years ago. Now, however, it's a no-brainer. The U.S./Canadian border is no longer the quick pass-through it once was. It's a downright time-consuming hassle. You're much better off taking I-90 through Ohio and Pennsylvania.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 04, 2010, 06:02:40 PM

Agreed. I used to go from Michigan to Maine via Canada (better roads, less traffic), but the border crossings no longer make it worth the hassle.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 04, 2010, 10:46:29 PM

Polls are week to week, for the most part. The reason Whitewater is ahead of Point in the most recent poll is mostly based on the fact that they beat Stevens Point in Whitewater in overtime when Point was ranked ahead of them at the time. Since then, Whitewater lost to an unranked opponent while Point ~~beat~~ destroyed the #2 team in the nation in St. Thomas. Honestly, I don't see how you don't put Point ahead of Whitewater despite the fact the Warhawks beat Point three weeks ago. Sometimes you can compare common opponents as well. Point beat Whitworth on a neutral court by a 22 when they were up by 37. So, if you take into account that Whitewater did beat Point head to head at home in overtime, you have to take into account that Point beat Whitworth by 22, while Whitewater lost to them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 05, 2010, 12:33:42 AM

New poll out

#1 Randolph Macon (12) 597
#2 Stevens Point (9) 587
#3 Wash U (4) 577

Close. I can't remember one that had 1st and 3rd separated by just 20 points, but I'm also not much of a top 25 historian.

#4 Whitewater 539
#5 St. Thomas 518
#6 Guilford 510

Or, for that matter, 1st and 4th separated by 58, 1st and 5th separated by 79, or 1st and 6th separated by 87. Wow!

What I also find interesting is that the margin between RMC and UWSP remained the same from last week to this week... 10 points, which means they each gained the same number of points, 60!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 05, 2010, 05:29:16 AM

A few thoughts ...

after having seen RMC beat Williams (in a game Williams really fell apart down the stretch, but controlled for 3/4 of the game), I do think they are a very legit top-five or at worst top-ten team, but while they deserve the top ranking at this point based on results to date, I don't think they will hold onto it for that long. They play well as a team, are very tough defensively, and are very well balanced, but they lack the superstar top players like some of the other top five squads. Given how tough their conference appears to be this year, I imagine they will suffer a few losses fairly soon. Their junior class is, however, incredibly deep and complement each other perfectly (one shooter, one athletic penetrator, one big guy who can shoot, one glue guy, two long true centers who are athletic enough), add in a solid sophomore point guard, and as those guys continue to grow together, I'd imagine RMC would have a good shot at pre-season number one next year. Then again, given that Wash U. hasn't been as dominant as expected, this may be a season where there is no one or two dominant teams (unlike the last 7-8 years at least) and a squad like RMC, which is sort of a D-3 version of the recent Detroit Pistons champion with its depth, versatility, balance and D, could go very far. Probably any of the top ten could beat anyone else in that group on any given night ...

New England ratings look pretty good EXCEPT for Brandeis (I don't see them beating anyone else in the top ten the way they have played, so they'd be the exception). Way, way, way too high. They have played one good team and they lost that game, and even that loss doesn't look so great now that UMD appears to be only mediocre. And the bad teams they've played they've BARELY beaten in many cases (like Curry last night). Compare to Amherst and Williams, both below them, also with one loss each, who have blown out the same types of teams repeatedly. Brandeis has only seven guys who contribute at all, if one get injured or gets in foul trouble, they are in BIG trouble. Coasting on past reputation not this year's roster or results (and really, they were only OK last year and then graduated their top two scorers, plus lost several potential contributors who transferred out or quit). I'd say New England rankings right now should be Midd, then Amherst/Williams/MIT closely bunched (MIT essentially displacing Brandeis) right around the 10 mark, then Western Conn, then MAYBE Brandeis or WPI at the very edge of the top 25. How can Brandeis be ranked above Williams or MIT when all have one loss, Williams and MIT have more wins, and Brandeis' loss came to a team outside the top 25 while MIT and Williams lost to Harvard and by five on the road to the number one team in the country, respectively?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 05, 2010, 10:27:26 AM

I've heard you don't like Brandeis.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 05, 2010, 10:58:23 AM

I realize I did this spiel once before, I just can't believe they keep rising in the poll despite a not-terribly-impressive body of work to date (I had similar thoughts on Bridgewater State's inflated pre-season ranking, but now they are no longer ranked, so it's not an issue). I actually have nothing against Brandeis in particular, just offering a different perspective. I think the Brandeis teams of two-three years ago were absolutely loaded, and deserved all the accolades they received ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 05, 2010, 11:18:11 AM

I would have to agree that Brandeis is vulnerable this season. They really only have a 7 man rotation (maybe 8, an 8th guy usually plays about 5 minutes versus good competition, obviously more in blowouts). If one player has an off night, especially a ball-handling guard, they really have no backups outside of their starting lineup (the two subs that play big minutes are 6-5 and 6-6 forwards). If you have a guard who can post up and get one of Brandeis' guards into foul trouble, they will either have to play someone they would prefer not to or change their defense. For example, in their only loss this season against UMD, their point guard, Andre Roberson, was off and they had no one to bring in to provide a boost and lost despite 38 points from Kenny Small. They have also been playing close with some bad teams, and you cant make the argument that they are young and still figuring it out. They have 4 seniors and 1 junior in their primary 7 man rotation (the 8th guy who plays a few minutes is also a senior). If they want to win anytime in the near future, it is going to have to be this year, but they are still vulnerable this year in my opinion. I honestly dont think they can beat a very deep team likely Amherst or Williams (I havent seen Middlebury, so I cant comment there). Luckily, we will soon find out if Brandeis is a legit top 10 team, they have their final two out-of-conference games coming up against NESCAC teams (Bates next week and Amherst in a month) and they start their UAA play this weekend (NYU (8-2), who beat a good Lebanon Valley team recently, Lebanon Valley beat 13th ranked F&M earlier in the year), including a matchup with #3 WashU a week from Friday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on January 05, 2010, 11:47:05 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 05, 2010, 05:29:16 AM
New England ratings look pretty good EXCEPT for Brandeis (I don't see them beating anyone else in the top ten the way they have played, so they'd be the exception). Way, way, way too high. They have played one good team and they lost that game, and even that loss doesn't look so great now that UMD appears to be only mediocre. And the bad teams they've played they've BARELY beaten in many cases (like Curry last night). Compare to Amherst and Williams, both below them, also with one loss each, who have blown out the same types of teams repeatedly. Brandeis has only seven guys who contribute at all, if one get injured or gets in foul trouble, they are in BIG trouble. Coasting on past reputation not this year's roster or results (and really, they were only OK last year and then graduated their top two scorers, plus lost several potential contributors who transferred out or quit). I'd say New England rankings right now should be Midd, then Amherst/Williams/MIT closely bunched (MIT essentially displacing Brandeis) right around the 10 mark, then Western Conn, then MAYBE Brandeis or WPI at the very edge of the top 25. How can Brandeis be ranked above Williams or MIT when all have one loss, Williams and MIT have more wins, and Brandeis' loss came to a team outside the top 25 while MIT and Williams lost to Harvard and by five on the road to the number one team in the country, respectively?

Couldn't one make the same argument about Middlebury? Have they even played one good team? The combined record of DIII opponents that Middlebury has faced is an abysmal 29-42! And only 2 of the 8 DIII teams they have faced have a winning record. RPI is 6-2 and Castleton St. is 5-4. Not exactly a convincing body of evidence if you ask me... (https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.scout.com%2Fmedia%2Fforums%2Femoticons%2Fnoidea.gif&hash=d0853e7250ffe0f662a746329d301aa06dd4ee9f)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 05, 2010, 12:03:44 PM

I agree -- I'm far more concerned about Middlebury's ranking than Brandeis'.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 05, 2010, 12:20:03 PM

Midd may be a bit overranked, but I think they are far more worthy of their ranking than Brandeis. First, they are coming off a great NESCAC championship year. Second, although like Brandeis they lost some star players, unlike Brandeis they added several strong frosh who are already making a huge impact, in addition to a star sophomore who has made the leap. Midd is MUCH bigger and MUCH deeper (a legit 10 deep) than Brandeis. Third, Midd had generally had more impressive results against its (admittedly weak) schedule than Brandeis has had against its equally weak schedule (Brandeis has three wins by five or less, Midd hasn't really been challenged, and all but one win has been double digits). Fourth and most importantly, Brandeis has lost (and lost convincingly to a team that is not currently ranked and is clearly not as good as expected), Middlebury has not. All of that being said, Midd should be ranked WAY more than one spot above Brandeis. Until Midd loses, I think it deserves a high ranking. Do I think Midd has top ten talent? Probably not this year, although maybe next year as the team is very young ... but hard to punish them when they haven't lost and are easily beating all opponents. Midd plays its best opponent to date tonight. If they win that game, I don't see them losing for a LONG time, as the schedule is very back-loaded with a tough five game stretch starting January 30. Midd only has one tough road game all year, vs. Amherst late in the season. I could easily see them losing two games or less when all is said and done. And yes, the schedule definitely helps, but how can a NESCAC team with a strong recent history that is undefeated not be ranked highly at this juncture?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 05, 2010, 02:04:31 PM

I agree with nescac1 and hugenerd concerning the Middlebury-Brandeis debate. Middlebury just seems a lot deeper and with the addition of the 2 freshmen who are both making big contributions, I think they are the team to beat in the NESCAC.
Both freshmen have been starters for most of the season. Nolan Thompson is a 6'3" guard who has started every game and averages 9.8 ppg. He's shooting 48% from the field, 44% from beyond the arc and 87.5% from the line. The other frosh, Jake Wolfin is a 6'2" guard who started the 1st 7 games but now that regular point guard 6'4" Tim Edwards(9.0ppg, 6.0rpg, 4.0apg) is back (he missed 6 games) Wolfin comes in off the bench. He is the 2nd leading scorer on the team averaging 11.6 ppg and is shooting 45% from the field, 44% (24x54) from 3 pt land and 87.5% from the stripe. The Panthers starting lineup has gotten bigger the past 2 games as 6'10" Andrew Locke, (7.7ppg, 4.9rpg) last years starting center was coming in off the bench but 6'5" forward Jamal Davis, who started the 1st 7 games is now the 1st big man off the bench. Last year's 6th man, 6'8" Soph forward Ryan Sharry, is this year's leading scorer averaging 13.8 pg and 8.2 rpg. Sharry is shooting a super 59.8% from the field, 50% on his 3 point attempts (6x12) and 87% from the line. The 5th starter is 6'4" junior forward Ryan Wholey and he averages10.0ppg, 5.0rpg and is shooting 91.3% (21x23). from the free throw line. Davis leads 4 other returning lettermen who all average double digit minutes off the bench. This team is big, deep, can shoot from the field and from the line and has 4 guys shooting 3's at better than 40%. They can hurt you in a lot of ways.

I know they haven't played a lot of teams with winning records but, as others have stated they won convincingly. Tonight's game against Plattsburgh State should be a good game. The only common opponent these teams have is St. Lawrence. Plattsburgh hosted the Saints on 12-1 and won 90-86, while the Panthers hosted the Saints on 12-3 and won 79-57. Both St Lawrence and Hamilton, despite their current records are decent teams and I think will end up with winning records for the season.

I plan on attending tonight's game in Middlebury and hope to see a repeat of the the past 2 meetings when Plattsburgh won 78-74 in Middlebury 2 years ago and last year when the Panthers won 68-64 in Plattsburgh. Cardinals are coming off a 31 day layoff and the Panthers warmed up for this game with a weekend sweep of Liberty League teams. (Actually have won their last 4 games against LL teams) I'm guessing the Panthers win the rubber match tonight 74-68. But I hope I'm wrong and that score is reversed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on January 05, 2010, 02:13:25 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 05, 2010, 12:20:03 PM
Midd may be a bit overranked, but I think they are far more worthy of their ranking than Brandeis. First, they are coming off a great NESCAC championship year. Second, although like Brandeis they lost some star players, unlike Brandeis they added several strong frosh who are already making a huge impact, in addition to a star sophomore who has made the leap. Midd is MUCH bigger and MUCH deeper (a legit 10 deep) than Brandeis. Third, Midd had generally had more impressive results against its (admittedly weak) schedule than Brandeis has had against its equally weak schedule (Brandeis has three wins by five or less, Midd hasn't really been challenged, and all but one win has been double digits). Fourth and most importantly, Brandeis has lost (and lost convincingly to a team that is not currently ranked and is clearly not as good as expected), Middlebury has not. All of that being said, Midd should be ranked WAY more than one spot above Brandeis. Until Midd loses, I think it deserves a high ranking. Do I think Midd has top ten talent? Probably not this year, although maybe next year as the team is very young ... but hard to punish them when they haven't lost and are easily beating all opponents. Midd plays its best opponent to date tonight. If they win that game, I don't see them losing for a LONG time, as the schedule is very back-loaded with a tough five game stretch starting January 30. Midd only has one tough road game all year, vs. Amherst late in the season. I could easily see them losing two games or less when all is said and done. And yes, the schedule definitely helps, but how can a NESCAC team with a strong recent history that is undefeated not be ranked highly at this juncture?

I'm not trying to argue that Brandeis deserves their lofty ranking. Personally, I think they are both overrated. My point was, that you are acting as if it is a crime that Brandeis is so highly ranked when they haven't played anyone and all's I'm saying the same could easily be said about Middlebury! I could care less how convingly Middlebury is beating people. When the combined record of your opponents is 13 games under .500, I would hope that would be the case!

At least Brandeis will have the opportunity to at least legitimize their ranking once UAA play starts. The same can't be said for Middlebury for almost a month at least... ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 05, 2010, 02:16:31 PM

Quote from: ScotsFan on January 05, 2010, 02:13:25 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on January 05, 2010, 12:20:03 PM
Midd may be a bit overranked, but I think they are far more worthy of their ranking than Brandeis. First, they are coming off a great NESCAC championship year. Second, although like Brandeis they lost some star players, unlike Brandeis they added several strong frosh who are already making a huge impact, in addition to a star sophomore who has made the leap. Midd is MUCH bigger and MUCH deeper (a legit 10 deep) than Brandeis. Third, Midd had generally had more impressive results against its (admittedly weak) schedule than Brandeis has had against its equally weak schedule (Brandeis has three wins by five or less, Midd hasn't really been challenged, and all but one win has been double digits). Fourth and most importantly, Brandeis has lost (and lost convincingly to a team that is not currently ranked and is clearly not as good as expected), Middlebury has not. All of that being said, Midd should be ranked WAY more than one spot above Brandeis. Until Midd loses, I think it deserves a high ranking. Do I think Midd has top ten talent? Probably not this year, although maybe next year as the team is very young ... but hard to punish them when they haven't lost and are easily beating all opponents. Midd plays its best opponent to date tonight. If they win that game, I don't see them losing for a LONG time, as the schedule is very back-loaded with a tough five game stretch starting January 30. Midd only has one tough road game all year, vs. Amherst late in the season. I could easily see them losing two games or less when all is said and done. And yes, the schedule definitely helps, but how can a NESCAC team with a strong recent history that is undefeated not be ranked highly at this juncture?
I'm not trying to argue that Brandeis deserves their lofty ranking. Personally, I think they are both overrated. My point was, that you are acting as if it is a crime that Brandeis is so highly ranked when they haven't played anyone and all's I'm saying the same could easily be said about Middlebury! I could care less how convingly Middlebury is beating people. When the combined record of your opponents is 13 games under .500, I would hope that would be the case!

At least Brandeis will have the opportunity to at least legitimize their ranking once UAA play starts. The same can't be said for Middlebury for almost a month at least... ::)

Actually, Brandeis did play one team that was ranked at the time (UMD) and they lost. Since that point, UMD has obviously lost some games, but that is really the only time Brandeis has played a quality deep team. At least in the case of Middlebury, you can still argue that they have not lost so they well may be a top 10 team, we just dont know yet. With Brandeis, they have already shown some weaknesses and I think they will lose 5+ games in the UAA this year as teams learn those weaknesses and exploit them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on January 05, 2010, 02:46:25 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 05, 2010, 02:16:31 PM
With Brandeis, they have already shown some weaknesses and I think they will lose 5+ games in the UAA this year as teams learn those weaknesses and exploit them.

I don't dispute this at all. As a matter of fact, I agree. That is why I posted above that I felt BOTH Brandeis and Middlebury are overrated. The only difference is, Brandeis will either prove me wrong by winning against some quality UAA foes, or they will prove me right by losing to some quality UAA foes. Middlebury, on the other hand will continue to feast on the weaker NESCAC opponents for another month or so before they have the opportunity to prove me wrong in my thoughts of them being overrated.

The bottom line is, at this point, neither team has done anything to make me sit back and think, yeah, they're a proven top 10 team. But that's just me... (https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.scout.com%2Fmedia%2Fforums%2Femoticons%2Fnoidea.gif&hash=d0853e7250ffe0f662a746329d301aa06dd4ee9f)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 05, 2010, 02:58:45 PM

Two questions I'm throwing out here for discussion:

1. Does this ranking prove that there is a rift within the body of d3hoops.com voters with regard to methodology? In other words, are there voters who hold to Pat's and Bob's thesis that the top team should be the best team:

Quote from: Titan Q on January 04, 2010, 08:04:47 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 04, 2010, 01:19:12 AM
The question to me is always a very simple one. The answer may not always be, however.

Question: Who is the best team in the country?

That's where my No. 1 vote goes. It doesn't necessarily have a bearing on who was No. 1 last week or who has the best record. Can the best team in the country lose a game? Absolutely. There haven't been very many unbeaten teams in Division III men's basketball, to be sure.

I agree. For me, it's not about automatically assessing a "penalty" for a loss - it's about trying to determine who the best team is.

... and voters who view the poll more as a ranking (i.e., a sliding scale of W-L records with strength of schedule factored in)? Or are there really 21 voters who don't think that Washington (MO) is still the best team in the country?

2. No comments have been posted on this yet, but is this poll a stamp of confirmation upon the ODAC as a fully-fledged power conference? The ODAC is the only league in D3 that has four teams in the current poll: #1 Randy Mac, #6 Guilford, #12 Virginia Wesleyan, and #24 Eastern Mennonite. Because it's a big league in terms of membership (11 teams), it's possible that the ODAC will be less vulnerable to cannibalization than smaller leagues and can thus retain four teams in the Top 25 throughout January and February.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 05, 2010, 03:02:50 PM

I don't think that it's any different than usual. The voter pool has always had a mixture of both schools of thought, as far back as I can remember at least.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 05, 2010, 03:29:43 PM

If that's true, then I don't really remember this methodological rift among the voters being a topic of discussion before. It seems to me to be an interesting subject for debate.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 05, 2010, 04:44:58 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 05, 2010, 03:29:43 PM
If that's true, then I don't really remember this methodological rift among the voters being a topic of discussion before. It seems to me to be an interesting subject for debate.

Wow - I can't let an opening like that go by! :o ;D

The whole point of the Posters' Poll is debating WHY we rank the way we rank (sometimes vs. one another; often why we think college X is overrated or team Y is underrated on the real poll). While I haven't yet tallied the confirmations on that thread, I think we only have 7 or 8 so far confirmed to participate - I invite one and all who DO take a national interest in d3 hoops. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 05, 2010, 05:03:51 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 05, 2010, 04:44:58 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 05, 2010, 03:29:43 PM
If that's true, then I don't really remember this methodological rift among the voters being a topic of discussion before. It seems to me to be an interesting subject for debate.

Wow - I can't let an opening like that go by! :o ;D

The whole point of the Posters' Poll is debating WHY we rank the way we rank (sometimes vs. one another; often why we think college X is overrated or team Y is underrated on the real poll).

That's a good point, Chuck. While I know that Pat isn't thrilled about the Posters' Poll, Chuck is right that one of the benefits of it is that participants openly discuss their picks, both defending their own choices and challenging the choices of others. It really opens up the whole methodology question in a way that doesn't take place here in the official Top 25 room, since Pat, Bob, and D-Mac are the only voters who've publicly identified themselves.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 05, 2010, 05:08:28 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 05, 2010, 03:29:43 PM
If that's true, then I don't really remember this methodological rift among the voters being a topic of discussion before. It seems to me to be an interesting subject for debate.

I think a healthy top 25 poll will have several methodologies represented by the voters.

There's the "who I feel is best" method that tends to overrate "big name" teams based on tradition. (Wooster, Hope, Calvin, WashU, Wheaton) This method is good at preventing the week-to-week overreactions that may otherwise drop a strong team (Wash U) too far for a fluke (seemingly) loss.

There's the W-L method where W-L record, especially for undefeated teams, weighs very very heavily.

There's the SOS method that takes schedule difficulty and number crunching very seriously.

There's the head-to-head or common opponent method that weighs direct results against each other.

There's the margin of vicory method that rewards big wins and doesn't trust slim margins.

But most people probably combine these methods (and other methods that I didn't immediately think of) to form their own method (one that can justify almost any team at almost any ranking).

It would be boring if every voter used the same method. There would be very little splitting of the first place votes and very few ORV teams. Why would you have a poll if everyone knew (and agreed with) the placement of the teams?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 05, 2010, 05:21:32 PM

I think that most voters use the sliding scale, but it appears their sliding scale is even simpler than just W/Ls, I think they only look at previous week's results (one week of W/Ls) and the previous week's rankings when making their decision.

Let me use Wheaton (IL) as an example (and remember, this is only an example, I probably could have done the same analysis with other teams). Wheaton has lost 3 games yet are still ranked tied for#13. With 3 losses at this point in the season and being ranked so high, you would expext those losses to be to highly ranked teams. Yet, only one of their losses is to a ranked team (WashU) while another is to ORV 33 (Hope, who crushed them by 22) and the third is to a team that has not received a vote all season. With these losses, you would expect some big time wins to justify their ranking, so lets look at that. Of their wins, only Trine, Chicago, and McMurry currently have winning records. Chicago may have looked good at the time, resulting in a bump up of their ranking at the time, but Chicago has now lost 4 in a row and 5 of 7, so is that win really impressive looking back now? The Trine win isnt impressive either, so that leaves us only with the McMurry win. McMurry may be a great win, but right now they are tied for ORV 38. By the way, the Pomona-Pitzer team that Wheaton beat in 4 OTs this weekend was crushed by WashU by 26 points. So what exactly is keeping Wheaton (IL) ranked so highly? In my opinion the only factor is ptheir preseason ranking. If voters would look at each game result each week of all teams considered, instead of only one week of results + their previous opinion of the team, I think the rankings would be different than they are. How much, Im not sure, but I definitely feel some teams are still hanging on based on their preseason rankings while others are too low based on not being on anyone's radar early in the season.

For that reason, I think a team like Eastern Mennonite is ranked too low. They haven't lost to a single d3 opponent, and have a win over a current top 12 team on the road, yet only broke into the rankings this week. This happened for two reasons: 1) they beat the current top 12 team when they were not ranked top 12 at the time, and 2) they were not ranked in the preseason. I have no problem with either of these points, but you would think that as time goes on and you gain more knowledge about each team, you could apply that knowledge to change your opinion of that team. You would think that when VWU keeps moving up someone would say to themselves: "Geez, this Eastern Mennonite team hasnt lost to anyone in our division and they beat a top 12 team on the road, they probably deserve a higher ranking right now until proven otherwise," rather than discounting their good win by saying, "I didnt think they were good at the beginning of the season, and I am still skeptical now, they probably just got lucky on the road so I will leave them off my ballot." I mean, is a win over VWU really more impressive now than a few weeks ago, just because they are ranked higher now and were presumably underranked at the time? Similarly, now that JCU clearly isnt as good as everyone thought, was Wilmington's jump from no votes to #10 in the country justified. I dont think so, but everyone has a right to their opinion.

We are far enough a long in the season that one can vote on teams based not only on personal opinion. Take a case in the northeast that has recently been discussed: Middlebury and Brandeis. Middlebury has destroyed everyone they have played, but played a relatively weak schedule. I can say, based on opinion (just for the sake of argument), Middlebury is ranked too high, but how would I prove that? In my opinion, Middlebury is justifiably a top 10 team at this point, because they havent lost and won convincingly. Even if someone ranked them first, I would not agree with it, but I dont think I could come up with a solid argument as to why that choice was not justified. Brandeis on the other hand has played a relatively weak schedule also, yet lost a game to a previously highly ranked UMD team (who is no longer receiving any votes in the poll). Well I would argue that that loss is now a "bad" loss for a top 10 team, but where are the good wins to offset that loss? Brandeis really doesnt have any. Well in response, one could say, "It's only one game, they may have had a bad day, even WashU has one "bad" loss". My response to that would be that although WashU and Brandeis only have a bad loss. I think that the one loss means more with respect to my opinion of Brandeis because they have not played nearly as many quality opponents. WashU has played several games against top 25 teams this year and won all of them, Brandeis has only played one such game and lost it.

Clearly, regardless of how you fill out your poll, there will be a lot of personal opinion involved, especially in d3 where there is a relative disconnect between regions. However, the things I dont understand are why some head-to-head results are discounted while others are weighed heavily and how significant the time-value of wins are. What I mean by this is how much emphasis is put on when a win occurred with respect to the ranking of the team at that time. If we know a team is not as good now as was thought or a team is better now than what we thought, the value of a win against that team should be adjusted to account for what we currently know and not just ignored as something that happened in the past and is out of the time frame of relavence.

I honestly dont care that much which method voters use. My main disappointment is that it seems like a lot of voters only look at a single week at a time when voting, when I think they should look at the whole body of work each week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 05, 2010, 06:25:11 PM

Are the voters provided with a more detailed look at the Division III schools prior to the vote each week or are the voters expected to do research in the same way the average fan would?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 05, 2010, 06:30:12 PM

Quote from: WUH on January 05, 2010, 06:25:11 PM
Are the voters provided with a more detailed look at the Division III schools prior to the vote each week or are the voters expected to do research in the same way the average fan would?

They get an extensive look at the top 50 or so schools. Pat was kind enough to share such a release with me once.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on January 05, 2010, 06:37:43 PM

Interesting that Wooster has only one more loss than Wheaton and of Wooster's 4 losses, only one wasn't highly ranked at the time Wooster lost the game. And you can't really say that Wheaton has a signature win on their resume to warrant their lofty ranking either just like Wooster which seems to be the reason why the Scots have dropped out of the poll altogether. I guess I just don't get what is so special about Wheaton that they can continue to hover around the top 10 with 3 losses and teams like Eastern Mennonite struggle to make it into the poll period? :-\

That said, these are just but a few of the reasons I don't envy those who put in the time and the effort to make the D3hoops.com top 25 poll the most accurate poll we have going. The top 5 are hard enough to figure out. It's far more fun to sit back as a fan and debate why team x is way overrtated and team y should be ranked higher.

BTW, this is the same reason why I haven't thrown my hat into the pollsters' poll. I like to keep an eye on the national D3 scene, but I'm not even close to being well versed enough on each and every team out there I feel should be ranked higher than they are and those others I feel are a bit overrated.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 05, 2010, 06:41:42 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 05, 2010, 05:08:28 PM
There's the "who I feel is best" method that tends to overrate "big name" teams based on tradition. (Wooster, Hope, Calvin, WashU, Wheaton) This method is good at preventing the week-to-week overreactions that may otherwise drop a strong team (Wash U) too far for a fluke (seemingly) loss.

I don't think that is necessarily a fair assumption. I can only speak for myself - I'm on record as being in the "who I feel is best" camp - and this week I switched my #1 vote from Wash U to Randolph-Macon. Obviously, Wash U would have been the "big name" pick.

For me, this approach simply means taking all available information and trying to sort out the teams in order, 1 through 25. When I finalize my ballot, I believe my #1 is a better team than my #2, #2 better than #3, etc (who would win a neutral court game kind of thing).

I think you are referring to another dynamic - "big name bias." That certainly exists...most often in November and December (even early January), when there may not be enough current-season data to really evaluate a "surprise" team...so you end up going with a more known commodity. But I honestly think this is something entirely separate from the voting philosophy of trying to determine who is best, in order.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 05, 2010, 06:45:27 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 05, 2010, 06:30:12 PM
Quote from: WUH on January 05, 2010, 06:25:11 PM
Are the voters provided with a more detailed look at the Division III schools prior to the vote each week or are the voters expected to do research in the same way the average fan would?

They get an extensive look at the top 50 or so schools. Pat was kind enough to share such a release with me once.

The voters also talk. For example, this week I contacted a head coach (who votes) who faced Illinois Wesleyan. I basically just asked, "Where do you see IWU?" He shared his thoughts on the Titans and how he sees them stacking up relative to the Top 25 poll.

So there is a lot of that that goes on behind the scenes as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 05, 2010, 07:00:51 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 05, 2010, 05:21:32 PM
I honestly dont care that much which method voters use. My main disappointment is that it seems like a lot of voters only look at a single week at a time when voting, when I think they should look at the whole body of work each week.

I know a lot of the voters pretty well, and talk to several of them regularly. I honestly can't think of any that seem to just look at things week to week. Everyone I talk to works very hard to look at the big picture.

That doesn't mean voters don't fall asleep at the wheel or make mistakes. I was extremely disappointed this season in the preseason poll to see votes for Elmhurst, for example. It didn't take much research to learn that Elmhurst would be in complete rebuilding mode this year. I know I have made a lot of mistakes in my 11 years as a voter...not intentional, but there is just a lot to process.

The panel that votes in the D3hoops.com poll knows and loves Division III basketball, and cares a lot about creating an accurate Top 25 poll. You'd be surprised how much thought goes into it collectively week- to-week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 05, 2010, 07:28:21 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 05, 2010, 07:00:51 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 05, 2010, 05:21:32 PM
I honestly dont care that much which method voters use. My main disappointment is that it seems like a lot of voters only look at a single week at a time when voting, when I think they should look at the whole body of work each week.

I know a lot of the voters pretty well, and talk to several of them regularly. I honestly can't think of any that seem to just look at things week to week. Everyone I talk to works very hard to look at the big picture.

That doesn't mean voters don't fall asleep at the wheel or make mistakes. I was extremely disappointed this season in the preseason poll to see votes for Elmhurst, for example. It didn't take much research to learn that Elmhurst would be in complete rebuilding mode this year. I know I have made a lot of mistakes in my 11 years as a voter...not intentional, but there is just a lot to process.

The panel that votes in the D3hoops.com poll knows and loves Division III basketball, and cares a lot about creating an accurate Top 25 poll. You'd be surprised how much thought goes into it collectively week- to-week.

Well in that case, I stand corrected, but sometimes it just doesnt seem that previous weeks results are weighed at all. I appreciate the effort that voters put into the voting process, it is undoubtedly a difficult task. But as scotsfan stated, it is hard to understand the positioning of some teams compared to other teams sometimes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 05, 2010, 08:01:08 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 05, 2010, 07:28:21 PM
But as scotsfan stated, it is hard to understand the positioning of some teams compared to other teams sometimes.

And that will probably always be the case with any poll voted on by people. Until next year...

Word is, starting in 2010-11 Pat will fly each voter to a neutral site each Tuesday for a press conference. There will be a really long table, with 25 voters stretched across, each having a microphone. A big D3hoops.com logo will serve as the backdrop. D3 fans will be invited and a copy of all 25 ballots will be distributed (with names attached)...the voters will be thoroughly grilled.

(We're just trying to get the location pinned down. Pat wants us to come to Minnesota...I'm holding out for Vegas.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 05, 2010, 08:12:13 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 05, 2010, 08:01:08 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 05, 2010, 07:28:21 PM
But as scotsfan stated, it is hard to understand the positioning of some teams compared to other teams sometimes.

And that will probably always be the case with any poll voted on by people. Until next year...

Word is, starting in 2010-11 Pat will fly each voter to a neutral site each Tuesday for a press conference. There will be a really long table, with 25 voters stretched across, each having a microphone. A big D3hoops.com logo will serve as the backdrop. D3 fans will be invited and a copy of all 25 ballots will be distributed (with names attached)...the voters will be thoroughly grilled.

(We're just trying to get the location pinned down. Pat wants us to come to Minnesota...I'm holding out for Vegas.)

I wasnt trying to say that all 25 voters needed to debate each spot in the poll, I just find a few of the teams rankings illogical given their results and given the results of similar teams.

To follow up with the example of Wheaton, they currently have 259 points, meaning on average they are ranked 14.5 on ballots. I am sure that this average represents some distribution, with some people voting them in the 20s, some in the teens, some in the top 10. I am just curious, with their 3 losses, who would put them in the top 10 or close to that number, when there are teams, even from "power" conferences, with less losses and losses to stronger opponents? That is all I am trying to say. (Again, not trying to pick on Wheaton, but they just seem like the best example currently.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 05, 2010, 08:21:20 PM

Voters gets sent about three weeks worth of info on each team each week, plus are reminded of each loss. Here's Wheaton's emailed resume, for example:

No. 8 Wheaton (Ill.) (8-3, 0-0):
Dec 09 AWAY Washington U. (9-1, 0-0) L 64-62
Dec 12 HOME Grinnell (1-7, 0-2) W 127-100
Dec 29 AWAY Hamline (6-4, 2-3) L 69-68
Dec 30 HOME Monmouth (1-9, 0-3) W 84-53
Jan 02 AWAY Pomona-Pitzer (4-6, 0-0) W 100-102 4OT
Jan 06 AWAY Carthage (8-3, 0-0) -
Losses: Hope,Washington U.,Hamline,

Of course, if you take the entire break off, you may not have much of a resume to work from:

No. 13 Brandeis (7-1, 0-0):
Jan 04 AWAY Curry (3-6, 0-0) -
Losses: Mass-Dartmouth,

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 05, 2010, 08:24:56 PM

That is interesting to know. Thanks Pat.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 05, 2010, 08:41:17 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 05, 2010, 08:12:13 PM
I wasnt trying to say that all 25 voters needed to debate each spot in the poll,

And I wasn't trying to say that either.

Quote from: hugenerd on January 05, 2010, 08:12:13 PM
To follow up with the example of Wheaton, they currently have 259 points, meaning on average they are ranked 14.5 on ballots. I am sure that this average represents some distribution, with some people voting them in the 20s, some in the teens, some in the top 10. I am just curious, with their 3 losses, who would put them in the top 10 or close to that number, when there are teams, even from "power" conferences, with less losses and losses to stronger opponents? That is all I am trying to say. (Again, not trying to pick on Wheaton, but they just seem like the best example currently.)

I agree. Wheaton was not on my Week 5 ballot at all...I think they are too high. I know that many who are voting for Wheaton, though, have seen the Thunder play and think they belong. I respect their opinion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 06, 2010, 01:12:13 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 05, 2010, 05:03:51 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 05, 2010, 04:44:58 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 05, 2010, 03:29:43 PM
If that's true, then I don't really remember this methodological rift among the voters being a topic of discussion before. It seems to me to be an interesting subject for debate.

Wow - I can't let an opening like that go by! :o ;D

The whole point of the Posters' Poll is debating WHY we rank the way we rank (sometimes vs. one another; often why we think college X is overrated or team Y is underrated on the real poll).

That's a good point, Chuck. While I know that Pat isn't thrilled about the Posters' Poll, Chuck is right that one of the benefits of it is that participants openly discuss their picks, both defending their own choices and challenging the choices of others. It really opens up the whole methodology question in a way that doesn't take place here in the official Top 25 room, since Pat, Bob, and D-Mac are the only voters who've publicly identified themselves.

I guess that I had not given any thought as to whether Pat Coleman liked the Posters' Poll.

I appreciate the fact the Mr Ypsi has done the poll all these many years. I thought that we were providing some insight and discussion to some of the arguments that were being addressed in the minds of the voters in the official Top 25, all the while protecting the confidentiality of those voters.

Having run the South Region Fan (Football) Poll since Bridgewater Kid left for D-1, I know that the people who have contributed have tried to get the poll "right".

They appreciate the honor to contribute, and take the job seriously.

I hope that a few more fans will participate in the Posters Poll. It will help you understand D-III even better.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 06, 2010, 01:20:25 AM

For all of you numbers people out there, Massey ratings are out:

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb

or with the "BCS" formula:

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&yr=&mid=6

Stevens Point and Whitewater are 1-2 in both rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Wydown Blvd. on January 06, 2010, 01:32:18 AM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 05, 2010, 08:12:13 PM
I am sure that this average represents some distribution, with some people voting them in the 20s, some in the teens, some in the top 10. I am just curious, with their 3 losses, who would put them in the top 10 or close to that number

You shouldn't use just an average to assume a standard deviation (or a distribution). No one may have put Wheaton in the top 10 or close to that number.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2010, 01:37:36 AM

I'm neutral toward the Posters Poll ... and the Belt ... if you guys have fun with it, go for it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: oldchap on January 06, 2010, 01:38:21 AM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 06, 2010, 01:20:25 AM
For all of you numbers people out there, Massey ratings are out:

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb

You stole my scoop!

I did a quick analysis to find the most blatant differences between the D3Hoops' Top 25 and Massey and here are my findings:

* Whitworth is #5, (36 in the Top 25)
* Brandeis is #64 (8 in the Top 25): this appears to be the biggest discrepancy
* Augsburg is #8 (not ranked): as big a difference as Brandeis, in reverse
* Franklin Marshall is #81 (13 in the Top 25): that's also a huge difference
* Texas-Dallas is #53 (22 in the Top 25)
* St John MN is #12 (not ranked)
* Gust. Adolphus is #19 (not ranked)
* Central is #20 (not ranked)

I think that Whitworth is going to quickly rise in future polls as someone suggested earlier and so will Augsburg. Brandeis is likely to sink and so will Franklin Marshall.

(Note: I used the regular rankings, not the BCS ones)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2010, 01:44:24 AM

Massey ratings do seem to have this "proximity to the WIAC" thing going -- anyone connected to a WIAC team does really well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 06, 2010, 05:29:03 AM

Quote from: magicman on January 05, 2010, 02:04:31 PM
I agree with nescac1 and hugenerd concerning the Middlebury-Brandeis debate. Middlebury just seems a lot deeper and with the addition of the 2 freshmen who are both making big contributions, I think they are the team to beat in the NESCAC.
Both freshmen have been starters for most of the season. Nolan Thompson is a 6'3" guard who has started every game and averages 9.8 ppg. He's shooting 48% from the field, 44% from beyond the arc and 87.5% from the line. The other frosh, Jake Wolfin is a 6'2" guard who started the 1st 7 games but now that regular point guard 6'4" Tim Edwards(9.0ppg, 6.0rpg, 4.0apg) is back (he missed 6 games) Wolfin comes in off the bench. He is the 2nd leading scorer on the team averaging 11.6 ppg and is shooting 45% from the field, 44% (24x54) from 3 pt land and 87.5% from the stripe. The Panthers starting lineup has gotten bigger the past 2 games as 6'10" Andrew Locke, (7.7ppg, 4.9rpg) last years starting center was coming in off the bench but 6'5" forward Jamal Davis, who started the 1st 7 games is now the 1st big man off the bench. Last year's 6th man, 6'8" Soph forward Ryan Sharry, is this year's leading scorer averaging 13.8 pg and 8.2 rpg. Sharry is shooting a super 59.8% from the field, 50% on his 3 point attempts (6x12) and 87% from the line. The 5th starter is 6'4" junior forward Ryan Wholey and he averages10.0ppg, 5.0rpg and is shooting 91.3% (21x23). from the free throw line. Davis leads 4 other returning lettermen who all average double digit minutes off the bench. This team is big, deep, can shoot from the field and from the line and has 4 guys shooting 3's at better than 40%. They can hurt you in a lot of ways.

I know they haven't played a lot of teams with winning records but, as others have stated they won convincingly. Tonight's game against Plattsburgh State should be a good game. The only common opponent these teams have is St. Lawrence. Plattsburgh hosted the Saints on 12-1 and won 90-86, while the Panthers hosted the Saints on 12-3 and won 79-57. Both St Lawrence and Hamilton, despite their current records are decent teams and I think will end up with winning records for the season.

I plan on attending tonight's game in Middlebury and hope to see a repeat of the the past 2 meetings when Plattsburgh won 78-74 in Middlebury 2 years ago and last year when the Panthers won 68-64 in Plattsburgh. Cardinals are coming off a 31 day layoff and the Panthers warmed up for this game with a weekend sweep of Liberty League teams. (Actually have won their last 4 games against LL teams) I'm guessing the Panthers win the rubber match tonight 74-68. But I hope I'm wrong and that score is reversed.

Here's an update on my previous post as I just returned from the Middlebury-Plattsburgh State game. I didn't get the outcome I wanted as the Panthers won the game 81-75. I did get the margin of victory correct but the score was higher than I guessed due in part to the large number of fouls that were called in the 2nd half. Both of these teams are solid clubs and I'll go out on a limb and predict that Middlebury will win the NESCAC regular season crown and Plattsburgh will win the SUNYAC regular season title. They may get upset in their respective conference tournaments but both should be in the running for Pool C bids in their regions if that happens.

Not many teams in D3, if any, are going to field a bigger lineup than the one that the Panthers put on the floor. (See above post) These guys aren't just big, they're mobile, they play solid D, run the floor well, and help each other out on defense. Offensively they have a ton of weapons and rotate the ball to find the open shooter or find the mismatches inside. All of their bigs have decent post moves and a smooth shooting touch around the basket. The 3 guard rotation of Edwards, Thompson, and Wolfin scored 10, 15, and 7 pts in that order. They teamed up for 11 assists, 8 rebounds, 4 steals, and only turned the ball over 5 times in 86 minutes of play. This team reminds me of the Amherst team of 2 years ago that went to the Final Four. I saw that Lord Jeff team play twice when they defeated Richard Stockton in the round of 16 and Brandeis in the quarterfinals and there is a lot of similarity. Ryan Sharry had a great game tonight leading the Panthers with 18 points and 12 rebounds. This kid has potential All American written all over him. Should be fun to watch for the next 2 1/2 years. Small forward Ryan Wholey also had a solid game with 13 points and 6 boards. The really big guy, Locke, scored 7 points, 6 rebounds, 5 blocks and 2 steals. The one negative about Locke is his poor free throw shooting. He's only averaging 36% from the line and tonight he continued that trend hitting just 3 of 8 attempts. The Panthers bench was a little shorter tonight due to the closeness of the game as they couldn't really put the Cardinals away. Normally Middlebury has had 10 guys get double minutes in playing time but tonight other than the above 6 only Jamal Davis had meaningful minutes, scoring 8 points and grabbing 4 boards before fouling out in 17 minutes of action.

Plattsburgh State starting lineup was Jr. F 6'6" Errol Daniyan, Sr. F 6'4" Danny Tangney, Jr. G 6'4" Chris Ruiz, Jr. G 6'2" Steve Thomas and So. G 5'10" Ketema Brooks. Despite the size differential the Cardinals were only outrebounded 42-39. The 1st half of this game started slowly as both teams missed a number of chances but the Panthers were up by 5, 11-6 after 6 1/2 minutes of play. The Cardinals came back with a 13-3 run to grab a 19-14 advantage with 6:57 to play in the half and maintained the lead until the 3:53 mark when the Panthers retook the lead and with the score 35-34 the Panthers hit a big 3 right before the buzzer to go into the break up 38-34.
Cardinals scored the 1st 4 pts of the 2nd period to tie it up at 38 but then went cold and couldn't buy a bucket. They went scoreless over the next 6:30 while the Panthers reeled off 16 unanswered points. Middlebury extended their advantage to the games largest lead of 17 points at 57-40 with 11:11 left to play. Plattsburgh went to its' trapping full court press and gradually climbed back into the game and twice cut it to 7 pts only to have the Panthers build it back to 11 with 4:07 remaining. One last surge got the Cardinals within 5 at 74-69 with 1:44 to go but a turnover on their next possession and a Middlebury bucket made it 76-69 and the Panthers hit 5 of 8 free throws down the stretch to close out the game.
Plattsburgh's Daniyan led all scorers with 23 pts and 12 rebounds(Last year against the Panthers he scored 29). Chris Ruiz was the only other Cardinal to hit double figures with 19 pts and 6 boards. Steve Thomas added 9 pts and 7 rebounds. Plattsburgh showed a lot of heart to get back into this game. They expended an enormous amount of energy with their trap press in the last quarter of play and came up a little short on a highly ranked team's home court. If there is such a thing as a good loss, this was one. In speaking with Plattsburgh's Coach Curle earlier he stated, "I know the ramifications of the Middlebury game can have an impact on the national scene, but also want the team to know the real season starts next weekend when we travel to Buffalo for the first of 16 remaining conference games."

Regarding earlier discussion about Middlebury's lofty ranking. I can't say it's too high or too low because I haven't seen any of the other ranked teams, but this is a good basketball team and based on the quality of highly ranked teams I've seen in past years I have to believe they deserve their place in the top 10. And Plattsburgh despite the loss tonight has shown they can play with a team at this level and perhaps should merit some consideration in the national poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 06, 2010, 07:45:13 AM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 06, 2010, 01:20:25 AM
For all of you numbers people out there, Massey ratings are out:

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb

or with the "BCS" formula:

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&yr=&mid=6

Stevens Point and Whitewater are 1-2 in both rankings.

Does Massey count exhibition games in his rankings? He seems to be including Calvin's 11/10 exhibition with Ferris State.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 06, 2010, 09:13:56 AM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 06, 2010, 07:45:13 AM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 06, 2010, 01:20:25 AM
For all of you numbers people out there, Massey ratings are out:

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb

or with the "BCS" formula:

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&yr=&mid=6

Stevens Point and Whitewater are 1-2 in both rankings.

Does Massey count exhibition games in his rankings? He seems to be including Calvin's 11/10 exhibition with Ferris State.

Unfortunately yes, which makes most of the D3 ratings completely useless. The game is clearly marked as an exhibition on Ferris State's website.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 06, 2010, 10:56:43 AM

I dont think Massey has the time to check all the d3 ratings closely, I am sure if you email him errors you find he will update them, he has been responsive in the past.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2010, 10:57:44 AM

Quote from: oldchap on January 06, 2010, 01:38:21 AM
I think that Whitworth is going to quickly rise in future polls as someone suggested earlier and so will Augsburg. Brandeis is likely to sink and so will Franklin Marshall.

oldchap - I am assuming you are saying you expect Frankling & Marshall to sink in the Top 25... to be honest, they are fine where they are. I actually have them higher. They are a very well coached team which has certainly had a couple bumps in the road, but I believe will be able to make another fun to the Final Four. Could they suffer from a "sophomore slump" per se, sure... but I doubt it. We will have a better idea in a matter of a few weeks as they work through conference play... but to be honest, I don't see anyone in the CC that is strong enough to battle them for the conference title and I think they are set-up to have home-court advantage in the NCAA Tournament which is a major factor to success for them.

I am not sure if you have seen the team, but I have seen my fair share in the last 12 months and I feel very secure with their #13 ranking.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 06, 2010, 11:04:13 AM

Quote from: Wydown Blvd. on January 06, 2010, 01:32:18 AM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 05, 2010, 08:12:13 PM
I am sure that this average represents some distribution, with some people voting them in the 20s, some in the teens, some in the top 10. I am just curious, with their 3 losses, who would put them in the top 10 or close to that number

You shouldn't use just an average to assume a standard deviation (or a distribution). No one may have put Wheaton in the top 10 or close to that number.

First of all, there is definitely some distribution, how wide that distribution is the question (like you said, standard deviation). Secondly, I knew that Titan Q had stated he had not ranked them at all, so I knew there was at least one pollster who had them out of the top 25 (meaning they got 259 points from 24 voters, or an averaging ranking of nearly exactly 14 from the other 24). Given what Titan Q stated, I think it is a fair assumption that some other voters share his view, or a view close to his and have Wheaton ranked in the bottom 5 or 10 of the poll, if not out of the poll. Since Wheaton is tied for the #13 ranking in the country (which is pretty close to 10 to begin with), some voters must have put them at rankings higher than that to offset those that had them unranked or lower in the rankings (i.e. Titan Q). My statement was not complete conjecture, there is some direct and inferred data to support it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 06, 2010, 11:24:45 AM

Hugenerd, you are really living up to your monicker on this thread. Well done.

Last night's win over a very solid opponent should bolster Middlebury's top-ten credentials. They still haven't played a ranked team and won't until at least January 30, but they seem to be legit. And with three frosh in the rotation, several strong recruits already purportedly in the fold, and only one senior who gets playing time, Midd seems to have emerged alongside Amherst and Williams as a consistent NESCAC power (supplanting Trinity, which filled that role until its coach departed for Wesleyan -- another school which may itself emerge as a conference contender as early as next season).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2010, 12:32:25 PM

Not sure that makes most of the D-III rankings useless. Were we expecting Calvin to beat Ferris State? If we think Calvin is better than Ferris State in real life but lost because it was an exhibition, then yes, that would invalidate the ranking. But I suspect Ferris State was going to be better than Calvin in the rankings regardless of whether that game counted or not.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 06, 2010, 12:49:23 PM

I agree that there does seem to be some definite bias towards the WIAC, which calls into question the validity of the entire ratings. I think that is shown when you look at the conference ratings and then look at the conference winning percentages. I know that strength of schedule factors in... but that takes the rating into account... which, again, seems to have a WIAC skew. Thus, 7-6 River Falls is #28 and the lowest rated WIAC team, Superior, is #72. The entire conference is rated above Franklin and Marshall (#81). And, as such, this has an effect, like Pat said, on conferences that the WIAC plays. For instance, the MIAC went 4-6 against the WIAC... St. Johns beat Eau Claire and Oshkosh, St. Thomas and Augsburg beat River Falls. Because of the higher rating of each WIAC team, each win against them "counts" for more... and thus the MIAC is the #2 ranked conference, even though their win% is 7th (not taking vs. in-region D-III... purely wins and losses).

Win% rank	Massey	Conference	Win%
1	(1)	WIAC	76.9%
2	(4)	UAA	72.2%
3	(10)	NJAC	68.9%
4	(5)	ODAC	68.5%
5	(9)	NESCAC	67.4%
6	(2)	MIAC	64.8%
7	(12)	MAC	63.6%
8	(3)	CCIW	62.5%
9	(22)	SCAC	60.9%
10	(23)	NEWMAC	59.2%
11	(17)	Empire 8	58.2%
12	(11)	SUNY AC	58.2%
13	(28)	Little East	56.7%
14	(21)	Capital	56.5%
15	(6)	IIAC	56.3%
16	(7)	OAC	53.7%
17	(30)	Liberty League	52.2%
18	(27)	Great South	52.1%
19	(16)	HCAC	51.3%
20	(38)	Great Northeast	50.0%
21	(39)	Allegheny Mtn	50.0%

It seems pretty obvious to me that something is amiss... Now, again, this is purely win%, it doesn't take into account OWP or OOWP... but Massey doesn't seem to, really either (in the same way that the D-III selection committee would).

I think the most obvious skews here are the CCIW and the IIAC... Both conferences are bolstered by games with the WIAC, seemingly... I kind of calls into question which is the cause and which is the effect... The IIAC and MIAC have matched up too, so that might bring the IIAC up a bit... But then take a look at the NWC. Oh wait, you can't... they're not even on the list. Let me include a few more on the list, including the NWC and the SCIAC:

Win% rank	Massey	Conference	Win%
22	(31)	Landmark	48.7%
23	(44)	North Atlantic	44.6%
24	(32)	Centennial	44.3%
25	(26)	Northern Athletic	44.0%
26	(34)	Presidents' AC	44.0%
27	(29)	Southern Cal IAC	43.9%
28	(43)	New England CC	42.6%
29	(15)	Michigan IAA	42.5%
30	(8)	Northwest	42.3%
31	(18)	Midwest	41.2%

Wow... the SCIAC has a better win %... but they're 21 slots lower in Massey. And even though the NWC played 10 games vs. the WIAC while the SCIAC played 0, the NWC only won 3 of those games (though one was against Whitewater, who likely was the previous #1... undefeated, win over Stevens Point).

Some results are curious though... the NathCon didn't get any WIAC boost even though they played 'em 9 times (1-9). Much like the UMAC. I don't know how the MWC and NathCon did against each other this year... but this is a switch from years past. The MWC actually HAD been one of the top 10 conferences (in terms of winning percentage). This year... not so much (1-5 vs. the WIAC).

What's interesting is that there doesn't seem to be much affecton playing bad conferences on the top rated ones... The WIAC (9-1) and MIAC (14-1) obliterated the UMAC and played 35 of their combined 157 games against the D-III bottom feeder... but that didn't seem to drag either conference down at all. Maybe these are the "projected results" so there's no drop... I dunno.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 06, 2010, 01:22:37 PM

One other factor that has not been discussed in depth on this board yet is that Massey takes into account all games. That means every game, D1, D2, NAIA, etc. is taken into account (which is probably not the case for the d3hoops pollsters and definitely not the NCAA committee). A lot of the conferences and teams that have "inflated" massey ratings are those that play a lot of games against solid out of division opponenets (west coast teams, MIAC teams, etc.). A lot (obviously not all) of these non-division teams have high ratings compared to your average d3 team and therefore they provide a boost in the massey ratings that you would not get from just playing a slate of purely d3 schools. I am not sure how significant this factor plays, but it seems like it is having an effect.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 06, 2010, 01:59:51 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 06, 2010, 10:56:43 AM
I dont think Massey has the time to check all the d3 ratings closely, I am sure if you email him errors you find he will update them, he has been responsive in the past.

hugenerd,
You are correct. I found an exhibition listing in Plattsburgh State's record and e-mailed him about it. He responded a few hours later that he would fix it. As with anything of this magnitude (The Massey Ratings) there's bound to be a few glitches.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 06, 2010, 02:14:11 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 06, 2010, 01:22:37 PM
One other factor that has not been discussed in depth on this board yet is that Massey takes into account all games. That means every game, D1, D2, NAIA, etc. is taken into account (which is probably not the case for the d3hoops pollsters and definitely not the NCAA committee). A lot of the conferences and teams that have "inflated" massey ratings are those that play a lot of games against solid out of division opponenets (west coast teams, MIAC teams, etc.). A lot (obviously not all) of these non-division teams have high ratings compared to your average d3 team and therefore they provide a boost in the massey ratings that you would not get from just playing a slate of purely d3 schools. I am not sure how significant this factor plays, but it seems like it is having an effect.

I agree... but I wonder what the effect really is. If you look at the "conference" ratings, the subcategories of NCAA-I, II, NAIA I, II, NCCAA, etc are there, but they don't have the ranking one would think they should have. Per the D-III vs. DI, DII... etc thread, the rankings should be

D I
D II
NAIA I

And then NAIA II would likely be mixed in somewhere in the middle, with NCCAA towards the bottom.

Again, I'm not sure if the conference rankings are just pulling data from above, or if they're calculated separately... but the subgroups are not ranked in the seemingly obvious way.

It should be noted that there appears to be some kind of constant in affect. NCAA-II and CCAA (A D-II conference in California for some reason listed here) have the same Power rating, offense, defense, etc. Both have a parity of 1 (complete parity, top to bottom). Similarly, two other "conferences" are listed as NCAA-III and NCAA. These have all of the same numbers except for parity. I'm wondering if these are factors that are used somewhere in the math... but it isn't obvious why they're listed here.

Great Plains AC (NAIA except for dual member Neb Wesleyan), NAIA-I and NAIA-II are all the same, with a parity of 1 as well.

The parity number is interesting... (again, I'm not sure how much of this data we can really use because of the obvious skew). The two conferences with the highest (i.e. closest-to-one) parity number are the USA South and the UAA. I'm wondering how that will shake out as the conference schedules play themselves out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 06, 2010, 02:17:37 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 06, 2010, 01:22:37 PM
One other factor that has not been discussed in depth on this board yet is that Massey takes into account all games. That means every game, D1, D2, NAIA, etc. is taken into account (which is probably not the case for the d3hoops pollsters and definitely not the NCAA committee).

Actually, I'm pretty sure all of the D3hoops.com Top 25 voters factor in all games. That said, I'm not sure we always do a perfect job of recognizing a really good NAIA opponent (say, a team from the GSAC - Westmont, Concordia, Biola, etc)...I've seen us penalize a D3 team too severly for a loss to a strong NAIA. Games vs NCAA I and II are easier to quickly identify.

But overall, the pollsters do count all games. I try to keep an eye on the NAIA I and II ratings and watch for games vs these teams, just to gain a little perspective.

http://naia.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/121409aab.html

http://naia.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl-div2/spec-rel/121409aab.html

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 06, 2010, 02:41:15 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 06, 2010, 10:56:43 AM
I dont think Massey has the time to check all the d3 ratings closely, I am sure if you email him errors you find he will update them, he has been responsive in the past.

Since I emailed him about the exact same error last year.......and it was never fixed, I have a different view of his responsiveness.

Calvin's 2009 exhibition with Ferris State still appears on their schedule.
http://www.masseyratings.com/team.php?t=1126&s=87798

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2010, 12:32:25 PM
Not sure that makes most of the D-III rankings useless. Were we expecting Calvin to beat Ferris State? If we think Calvin is better than Ferris State in real life but lost because it was an exhibition, then yes, that would invalidate the ranking. But I suspect Ferris State was going to be better than Calvin in the rankings regardless of whether that game counted or not.

Any team who has played Calvin or will play Calvin will have corrupted data, thereby rendering their ranking inaccurate. The same would go for any other exhibition games counted for other teams and every opponent they face.

Massey has had this problem for more than a couple years now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 06, 2010, 03:11:24 PM

Quote from: sac on January 06, 2010, 02:41:15 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 06, 2010, 10:56:43 AM
I dont think Massey has the time to check all the d3 ratings closely, I am sure if you email him errors you find he will update them, he has been responsive in the past.

Since I emailed him about the exact same error last year.......and it was never fixed, I have a different view of his responsiveness.

Calvin's 2009 exhibition with Ferris State still appears on their schedule.
http://www.masseyratings.com/team.php?t=1126&s=87798

Maybe you didnt ask nicely enough?

Quote from: sac on January 06, 2010, 02:41:15 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2010, 12:32:25 PM
Not sure that makes most of the D-III rankings useless. Were we expecting Calvin to beat Ferris State? If we think Calvin is better than Ferris State in real life but lost because it was an exhibition, then yes, that would invalidate the ranking. But I suspect Ferris State was going to be better than Calvin in the rankings regardless of whether that game counted or not.

Any team who has played Calvin or will play Calvin will have corrupted data, thereby rendering their ranking inaccurate. The same would go for any other exhibition games counted for other teams and every opponent they face.

Massey has had this problem for more than a couple years now.

I think Pat's point is that the Ferris State result likely will have minimal effect on Calvin's ranking. Since Ferris State is ranked higher and therefore the favorite (they are ranked 351 compared to Calvin's 865), it will likely not hurt their rating much at all. In fact, it may help their SOS and actually increase their numbers. It will obviously have some small effect, but I doubt without that one loss they would move very much in terms of their absolute ranking.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 06, 2010, 03:18:32 PM

Data integrity is data integrity. Suppose there were an election, and Candidate A wins with 55% of the vote. It later turns out that one precinct admits that they didn't bother to check voter registration, and as a result allowed unregistered, invalid, and possibly even duplicate voters to cast ballots. There were not enough voters in that precinct to sway the outcome of the election. Is the election still valid?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 06, 2010, 03:44:46 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 06, 2010, 03:18:32 PM
Data integrity is data integrity. Suppose there were an election, and Candidate A wins with 55% of the vote. It later turns out that one precinct admits that they didn't bother to check voter registration, and as a result allowed unregistered, invalid, and possibly even duplicate voters to cast ballots. There were not enough voters in that precinct to sway the outcome of the election. Is the election still valid?

I think you would be hard-pressed to persuade them to have a re-vote in the scenario you described. Maybe they would throw out the votes from that precinct, but as long as it was not possible to sway the entire election, I think the election would still stand. However, the situation with Calvin is not as simple as your election analogy. In the election analogy, each vote is presumably independent; in the case of Calvin's Massey rating, however, all the numbers are dependent because they take into account opponents record, etc.

You may be thinking to yourself, "Well, he is just proving our point further," but even though the numbers will be slightly off and you could see small "ripples" of this error throughout other teams rankings as well, I dont think that error is large enough to invalidate the entire set of rankings and data. Remember that this is one game out of thousands. What if an AD reported a score wrong and a 6 point game was actually a 9 point game or there were other slight errors that were out of the control of Massey? These would all change the rankings slightly also. Remember that Massey essentially downloads results and schedules from other sources where large amounts of data are available in one place, it does not download from individual university sites. He is not plugging these things in by hand and checking each of the tens of thousands of game each year. In all likelihood, he downloaded the data from d3hoops.com or the NCAA which doesnt list this game as exhibition either (if you look at Calvin's page on d3hoops.com, the Ferris state game is not shown as an exhibition with the symbol designated in the key, a #; however, it is not counted in the total record at the top, which could be easy for a computer program to miss that is not programmed to do so; technically, d3hoops.com is at the same fault in terms of data integrity as Massey because they are not using their own designation for exhibition games). I dont think the fault is any more Massey's than it is the source he downloaded from. If you email him and he fixes it, then that is great. If he doesnt, I still think the Massey ratings are a nice additional set of information to have. They are the only national RPI index that rates all divisions, including d3, so maybe we should go a little easier on Mr. Massey.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 06, 2010, 04:08:44 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 06, 2010, 03:44:46 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 06, 2010, 03:18:32 PM
Data integrity is data integrity. Suppose there were an election, and Candidate A wins with 55% of the vote. It later turns out that one precinct admits that they didn't bother to check voter registration, and as a result allowed unregistered, invalid, and possibly even duplicate voters to cast ballots. There were not enough voters in that precinct to sway the outcome of the election. Is the election still valid?

I think you would be hard-pressed to persuade them to have a re-vote in the scenario you described. Maybe they would throw out the votes from that precinct, but as long as it was not possible to sway the entire election, I think the election would still stand. However, the situation with Calvin is not as simple as your election analogy. In the election analogy, each vote is presumably independent; in the case of Calvin's Massey rating, however, all the numbers are dependent because they take into account opponents record, etc.

You may be thinking to yourself, "Well, he is just proving our point further," but even though the numbers will be slightly off and you could see small "ripples" of this error throughout other teams rankings as well, I dont think that error is large enough to invalidate the entire set of rankings and data. Remember that this is one game out of thousands. What if an AD reported a score wrong and a 6 point game was actually a 9 point game or there were other slight errors that were out of the control of Massey? These would all change the rankings slightly also. Remember that Massey essentially downloads results and schedules from other sources where large amounts of data are available in one place, it does not download from individual university sites. He is not plugging these things in by hand and checking each of the tens of thousands of game each year. In all likelihood, he downloaded the data from d3hoops.com or the NCAA which doesnt list this game as exhibition either (if you look at Calvin's page on d3hoops.com, the Ferris state game is not shown as an exhibition with the symbol designated in the key, a #; however, it is not counted in the total record at the top, which could be easy for a computer program to miss that is not programmed to do so; technically, d3hoops.com is at the same fault in terms of data integrity as Massey because they are not using their own designation for exhibition games). I dont think the fault is any more Massey's than it is the source he downloaded from. If you email him and he fixes it, then that is great. If he doesnt, I still think the Massey ratings are a nice additional set of information to have. They are the only national RPI index that rates all divisions, including d3, so maybe we should go a little easier on Mr. Massey.

You're probably dead on here. I get all my data for the regional rankings (posted on the Pool C board) from d3hoops.com so when a game is incorrectly listed as in-region, my data suffers. I don't want (or have the time) to look through all of my d3 teams data every time, and I doubt Massey does so for ALL of college basketball. A game here or a game there does affect that specific team's data integrity, but for the entirety of division 3, it means little.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 06, 2010, 06:02:03 PM

I don't necessarily think anyone is giving Mr. Massey a hard time... I think it's laudible to try to project and fully rank teams... but I think there's a problem somewhere (more than just in the incorrect data from one or two games).

It appears (at least to me) there's too much weight being placed on the top teams. It's having a trickle down effect and affecting the teams that are playing WIAC schools, and not effecting others.

But I might be wrong. Knightslappy, do you have the ability to compile conference OWP/OOWP? I realize that, because some teams have started conference play and other have not, they won't be perfect (in a perfect world, we'd be able to just look at the non-con schedules)... but that might shed more light on the results.

And yes, I realize I'm talking about something completely different than Sac... it's more along the lines of what Pat mentioned:

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2010, 01:44:24 AM
Massey ratings do seem to have this "proximity to the WIAC" thing going -- anyone connected to a WIAC team does really well.

I mean, I guess there's a chance that the WIAC's results are just breaking the system... but I don't think so. In DI, the Big 12 is the top conference... with a non-con record of 132-28 (win% of 82.5%). As I look at the DI numbers, I don't see anything as agregious as the WIAC in terms of an entire conference being ranked in the top 72 teams... or for a 5-7 Stout team to be #57, directly ahead of two one-loss teams (Western Connecticutt and Birmingham Southern)... and 354 other teams, especially when they haven't been better than 58% of the teams they've played. I'm not hating on Stout... they've played (and been beaten) by the three top 25 teams in the WIAC... who just happen to be 1, 2, and 6 in the Mratings, plus Whitworth, who's #5. That likely has lots to do with their current slot... but they've still been beaten by everybody in conference they've played. Tonight's matchup with River Falls should tell us a lot about Stout... but RF is astronomically high too.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2010, 06:04:49 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 06, 2010, 03:44:46 PM
in the case of Calvin's Massey rating, however, all the numbers are dependent because they take into account opponents record, etc.

Does it take the record into account, or the rating? I maintain the rating probably isn't that much affected by counting a loss to Ferris State, since it's a result that fits with other Calvin results and would be expected anyway.

BTW, on the designation for exhibition games, I have long asked for Presto to fix that glitch. I can certainly ask again.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2010, 06:09:08 PM

By the way, he doesn't download from us. He used to, but when we moved to Presto we were no longer in complete control of the data.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2010, 06:11:21 PM

Quote from: sac on January 06, 2010, 02:41:15 PM

Any team who has played Calvin or will play Calvin will have corrupted data, thereby rendering their ranking inaccurate. The same would go for any other exhibition games counted for other teams and every opponent they face.

Massey has had this problem for more than a couple years now.

Yeah, see, but what I'm saying is that adding an expected result -- Calvin losing to Ferris State -- isn't likely to have a big impact on the data. It will have some, yes, but on paper, Calvin was going to lose to Ferris State anyway, and counting that game doesn't change that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 06, 2010, 06:42:45 PM

Regarding the Calvin exhibition game error, we might be wise to listen to William James (the philosopher, not the baseball stats guy, though Bill James might agree): "A difference which makes no difference is no difference."*

While imperfect data IS a problem, the key question is whether or not it has any significance as a problem. While incorrectly entered games WILL create errors, we need to ask "is being #398 instead of #395 something to worry about?"

IF the consistent skew towards the WIAC is real, that might be a more significant flaw in the basic methodology than data-entry errors (which will never be completely eliminated).

[*Good thing I wrote a stat book (never published, but used in my classes) - I couldn't recall the source of the advice, but there it was, in the chapter of 'testing statistical significance', in a note about not confusing statistical significance with 'real world' significance!]

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2010, 08:38:17 PM

#1 RMC on the brink against Hampden-Sydney...

RMC was down 15 in the second half... has rallied... but down four with 1:27 left in the game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2010, 08:47:39 PM

RMC hits a three pointer with 4.9 seconds left to take the lead 69-68... HSC had led 68-64 with over a minute left. RMC actually hit a layup with 20 seconds left, but their coach had called timeout before the shot - so the basket was called off.

From the radio call... Voelker apparently hit Jessee at the end, but there was no call. RMC survives!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 06, 2010, 10:20:48 PM

Carthage beating Wheaton (IL) right now, lead stands at 19 with under 3 to go.

Final Carthage 75 - 62 Wheaton. Djurickovic is pretty good, he had 29, 5, and 7. McCrary had a similar stat line of 29, 7, and 4.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 06, 2010, 11:12:43 PM

I'm not sure I want to be a top ranked team... Both Randolph-Macon and UW-Stevens Point survive scares from a couple of their biggest conference rivals.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 06, 2010, 11:21:19 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 06, 2010, 06:02:03 PM
Tonight's matchup with River Falls should tell us a lot about Stout... but RF is astronomically high too.

Stout is up 22 on River Falls... wow...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 07, 2010, 07:12:33 AM

How They Fared -- Midweek report

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	597	Randolph-Macon	12-0	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 74-53; def. Hampden-Sydney, 69-68; 01/09 vs. Christopher Newport
#2	587	UW-Stevens Point	12-1	def. UW-Oshkosh, 73-67; 01/09 vs. T#22 UW-La Crosse
#3	577	Washington U.	10-1	def. Webster, 69-60; 01/09 vs. Chicago
#4	539	UW-Whitewater	12-1	01/09 vs. UW-River Falls
#5	518	St. Thomas	9-1	def. Bethel, 61-50; 01/09 at Carleton
#6	510	Guilford	11-1	def. Lynchburg, 89-82; 01/09 vs. Randolph
#7	488	Middlebury	10-0	def. T#42 Plattsburgh State, 81-75; 01/07 vs. Colby-Sawyer; 01/09 at Skidmore; 01/10 at Lyndon State
#8	361	Brandeis	8-1	def. Curry, 74-69; 01/09 at New York University
#9	356	Amherst	8-1	def. Wesleyan, 81-72; 01/09 at #11 Williams
#10	346	Mississippi College	10-0	def. Belhaven, 89-79; 01/07 at Concordia-Austin; 01/09 at Mary Hardin-Baylor
#11	333	Williams	11-1	def. Colby-Sawyer, 101-88; 01/09 vs. #9 Amherst
#12	309	Virginia Wesleyan	12-1	def. Salisbury, 79-69; def. Randolph, 62-48; 01/09 at Washington and Lee
T#13	259	Franklin and Marshall	9-2	def. Haverford, 58-44 ~~53-48~~; 01/09 at Swarthmore
T#13	259	Wheaton (Ill.)	8-4	LOST at #35 Carthage, 62-75; 01/09 vs. North Central (Ill.)
#15	236	MIT	12-1	def. Tufts, 71-59; 01/09 at Babson
#16	228	St. Norbert	9-1	def. Beloit, 73-46; 01/09 at Ripon
#17	195	Chapman	12-2	def. Caltech, 60-42
#18	176	Anderson	12-1	def. Franklin, 72-59; 01/09 at Transylvania
#19	172	Wilmington	11-2	def. Ohio Northern, 73-62; 01/09 at Heidelberg
#20	158	St. Mary's (Md.)	10-2	01/09 at Wesley
#21	123	Medaille	12-0	01/09 at Frostburg State
T#22	103	Texas-Dallas	8-3	def. Hardin-Simmons, 86-64; 01/07 at Texas Lutheran; 01/09 at Schreiner
T#22	103	UW-La Crosse	12-2	def. UW-Superior, 61-57; 01/09 at #2 UW-Stevens Point
#24	102	Eastern Mennonite	10-1	def. Washington and Lee, 83-48; 01/09 vs. Roanoke
#25	91	Illinois Wesleyan	10-2	def. North Central (Ill.), 84-79; 01/09 vs. #35 Carthage

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	59	Wooster	8-4	01/09 vs. Kenyon
#27	53	Worcester Polytech	10-2	LOST at Wheaton (Mass.), 79-91; 01/09 vs. Trinity (Conn.)
#28	48	Richard Stockton	9-3	def. Rutgers-Camden, 68-56; 01/09 vs. Montclair State
T#29	35	John Carroll	8-4	def. Otterbein, 88-64; 01/09 vs. Capital (n)
T#29	35	Western Connecticut	9-1	def. Regis (Mass.), 92-73; 01/09 at Plymouth State
#31	31	York (Pa.)	11-2	LOST at Marymount, 88-90 OT; 01/09 at Hood
#32	27	Augustana	8-4	def. North Park, 77-63; 01/09 at Elmhurst
#33	22	Hope	7-5	LOST at Calvin, 75-84; 01/09 vs. Alma
#34	21	Elms	6-4	LOST to (n) Montclair State, 63-65; LOST at Union, 68-74; 01/09 vs. Newbury
#35	18	Carthage	9-3	def. T#13 Wheaton (Ill.), 75-62; 01/09 at #25 Illinois Wesleyan
#36	14	Whitworth	9-2	01/08 vs. Pacific; 01/09 vs. George Fox
#37	9	DeSales	8-4	def. Widener, 92-87 2OT; 01/09 vs. Eastern
T#38	7	Defiance	11-3	LOST at Transylvania, 56-58; 01/09 at Mount St. Joseph
T#38	7	McMurry	7-3	01/07 vs. LeTourneau; 01/09 vs. East Texas Baptist
#40	5	William Paterson	12-1	def. Manhattanville, 58-46; 01/09 at Kean
#41	3	Rochester	7-2	LOST to Clarkson, 63-66 OT; 01/08 vs. Case Western Reserve; 01/10 vs. Carnegie Mellon
T#42	2	Plattsburgh State	7-2	LOST at #7 Middlebury, 75-81; 01/08 at Buffalo State; 01/09 at Fredonia State
T#42	2	UW-Platteville	9-4	def. UW-Eau Claire, 74-67; 01/09 at UW-Stout
#44	1	Cabrini	9-1	def. Keystone, 93-85; def. Lancaster Bible, 92-74

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 07, 2010, 07:44:56 AM

IMHO, if Mississippi College is truly a #10, then they beat UMHB in the second game of a road trip 500 miles away from home. Belton TX is a hard place to play, and this is a game where UMHB can "pick up" a win over a conference foe. Losing to Mississippi College would put UMHB down 2 games in the loss column to McMurry as the ASC teams finish "crossover" play.

(UMHB has two conference losses in the ASC-West, McMurry only has one. The winner of the ASC-West hosts the conference tourney this year. This is a must game for UMHB if they want to host the ASC tourney.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on January 07, 2010, 09:47:51 AM

Will the love for Wheaton finally end with yet another loss? I think it's time that the rest of the voters started listening to Bob...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 07, 2010, 10:32:24 AM

Quote from: ScotsFan on January 07, 2010, 09:47:51 AM
Will the love for Wheaton finally end with yet another loss? I think it's time that the rest of the voters started listening to Bob...

A loss to Hamline dropped them 5 spots in the poll, what makes you think a loss to Carthage will drop them out (another 12 spots)?

Carthage, on the other hand, has a real chance to make a statement. If they can win at IWU this weekend, they will have knocked off both ranked CCIW teams in a single week, which would probably vault them into the rankings (probably somewhere in the teens). However, if IWU wins, they will likely pick up a lot of the votes that Wheaton (IL) will lose and cause their ranking to spike. I would expect that the winner of the game between Carthage and IWU this saturday would be the highest ranked CCIW team in next week's poll, but sometimes common logic (at least my logic) does not seem to apply to CCIW rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D.B. Cooper on January 07, 2010, 11:41:13 AM

The correct score of F&M-Haverford was 58-44. I am not sure if this initially incorrect score on the F&M website has been corrected anywhere. It may or may not be important to this topic, but accuracy should be a positive thing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 07, 2010, 11:49:43 AM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 06, 2010, 06:02:03 PM
Knightslappy, do you have the ability to compile conference OWP/OOWP? I realize that, because some teams have started conference play and other have not, they won't be perfect (in a perfect world, we'd be able to just look at the non-con schedules)... but that might shed more light on the results.

I averaged each conference members OWP and OOWP and then calculated a SOS number for each conference. I know the averaging method isn't exact, but I'm not set up to calculate an exact conference OWP and OOWP. I hope this gets us close enough for discussion purposes. Sorted by Strength of Schedule using the handbook's defined 2/3 and 1/3 rule:

CONF    OWP     OOWP     SOS
WIAC    0.5987   0.5432   0.5802
MACC    0.5875   0.5312   0.5688
UAA     0.5773   0.5248   0.5598
CCIW    0.5515   0.5317   0.5449
SUNYAC   0.5557   0.5151   0.5422
USAC    0.5717   0.4827   0.5420
MASCAC   0.5735   0.4687   0.5386
MIAC    0.5446   0.5222   0.5372
NWC     0.5438   0.5227   0.5367
E8    0.5376   0.5282   0.5344
NJAC    0.5319   0.5279   0.5306
OAC     0.5348   0.5178   0.5292
MIAA    0.5302   0.5117   0.5240
ODAC    0.5173   0.5266   0.5204
MWC     0.5223   0.5149   0.5198
CC    0.5184   0.5189   0.5185
NESCAC   0.5161   0.5207   0.5176
LAND    0.5208   0.5105   0.5173
LL    0.5152   0.5075   0.5126
MACF    0.5057   0.5249   0.5121
LEC     0.5080   0.5165   0.5109
CAC     0.5069   0.5172   0.5103
CUNYAC   0.5046   0.5091   0.5061
GNAC    0.5193   0.4791   0.5059
CCC     0.5108   0.4857   0.5024
NAC     0.4939   0.5087   0.4988
NATHC    0.4899   0.4993   0.4930
IIAC    0.4801   0.5040   0.4880
HCAC    0.4845   0.4909   0.4866
GSAC    0.4569   0.5402   0.4847
SCAC    0.4835   0.4821   0.4831
PrAC    0.4763   0.4953   0.4827
NCAC    0.4750   0.4929   0.4810
ASC     0.4654   0.4942   0.4750
NEWMAC   0.4428   0.5386   0.4747
NECC    0.4611   0.4966   0.4729
SKY     0.4614   0.4894   0.4707
AMCC    0.4531   0.5009   0.4690
CSAC    0.4551   0.4843   0.4648
SCIAC    0.4061   0.4994   0.4372
UMAC    0.4018   0.4638   0.4224
IND     0.3921   0.4285   0.4042
NEAC    0.3820   0.4467   0.4036
SLIAC    0.3635   0.4344   0.3871

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 07, 2010, 12:07:33 PM

Quote from: D.B. Cooper on January 07, 2010, 11:41:13 AM
The correct score of F&M-Haverford was 58-44. I am not sure if this initially incorrect score on the F&M website has been corrected anywhere. It may or may not be important to this topic, but accuracy should be a positive thing.

I corrected it in the report, but it was submitted as 53-48 to the d3sports scoreboard (and is still incorrect at this point): F&M team page at d3hoops.com (http://www.d3hoops.com/school/FM/m/2010)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2010, 12:18:10 PM

F&M uses the same scoreboard provider we do, so anything on their site is going to appear on ours.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 07, 2010, 01:07:30 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 07, 2010, 11:49:43 AM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 06, 2010, 06:02:03 PM
Knightslappy, do you have the ability to compile conference OWP/OOWP? I realize that, because some teams have started conference play and other have not, they won't be perfect (in a perfect world, we'd be able to just look at the non-con schedules)... but that might shed more light on the results.

I averaged each conference members OWP and OOWP and then calculated a SOS number for each conference. I know the averaging method isn't exact, but I'm not set up to calculate an exact conference OWP and OOWP. I hope this gets us close enough for discussion purposes. Sorted by Strength of Schedule using the handbook's defined 2/3 and 1/3 rule:

Thanks, +1, great work!

Even if it isn't 100% exact, it is likely pretty close... and it should help to shed some light on how good the conferences really are.

Would you think that SOS*Winning percentage would be a good way to come up with a composite number?

Oh, and it doesn't matter either way (just interested to know), but are these OWP and OOWP for all opponents, just D-III or just in-region D-III?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 07, 2010, 01:09:38 PM

F&M's site has it incorrect also, as Pat mentioned it would, but the boxscore linked on the site has the score 58-44. If this error were to be picked up by Massey, it could compromise the integrity of his entire rating system. I just hope, for the sake of all of us, that this error is picked up before it can do some real damage to someone's Massey rating.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 07, 2010, 01:10:48 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 07, 2010, 01:07:30 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 07, 2010, 11:49:43 AM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 06, 2010, 06:02:03 PM
Knightslappy, do you have the ability to compile conference OWP/OOWP? I realize that, because some teams have started conference play and other have not, they won't be perfect (in a perfect world, we'd be able to just look at the non-con schedules)... but that might shed more light on the results.

I averaged each conference members OWP and OOWP and then calculated a SOS number for each conference. I know the averaging method isn't exact, but I'm not set up to calculate an exact conference OWP and OOWP. I hope this gets us close enough for discussion purposes. Sorted by Strength of Schedule using the handbook's defined 2/3 and 1/3 rule:

Thanks, +1, great work!

Even if it isn't 100% exact, it is likely pretty close... and it should help to shed some light on how good the conferences really are.

Would you think that SOS*Winning percentage would be a good way to come up with a composite number?

Oh, and it doesn't matter either way (just interested to know), but are these OWP and OOWP for all opponents, just D-III or just in-region D-III?

RPI is usually calculated 0.25*winning percentage + 0.75*SOS

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 07, 2010, 01:15:21 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 07, 2010, 01:07:30 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 07, 2010, 11:49:43 AM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 06, 2010, 06:02:03 PM
Knightslappy, do you have the ability to compile conference OWP/OOWP? I realize that, because some teams have started conference play and other have not, they won't be perfect (in a perfect world, we'd be able to just look at the non-con schedules)... but that might shed more light on the results.

I averaged each conference members OWP and OOWP and then calculated a SOS number for each conference. I know the averaging method isn't exact, but I'm not set up to calculate an exact conference OWP and OOWP. I hope this gets us close enough for discussion purposes. Sorted by Strength of Schedule using the handbook's defined 2/3 and 1/3 rule:

Thanks, +1, great work!

Even if it isn't 100% exact, it is likely pretty close... and it should help to shed some light on how good the conferences really are.

Would you think that SOS*Winning percentage would be a good way to come up with a composite number?

Oh, and it doesn't matter either way (just interested to know), but are these OWP and OOWP for all opponents, just D-III or just in-region D-III?

These numbers are in-region only, same data I use for regional rankings.

The RPI calculation is 0.25 x WP + 0.75 x SOS. I could do that for each conference as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2010, 01:16:04 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 07, 2010, 01:09:38 PM
F&M's site has it incorrect also, as Pat mentioned it would, but the boxscore linked on the site has the score 58-44. If this error were to be picked up by Massey, it could compromise the integrity of his entire rating system. I just hope, for the sake of all of us, that this error is picked up before it can do some real damage to someone's Massey rating.

Thanks -- I needed the laugh. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 07, 2010, 01:16:24 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 07, 2010, 11:49:43 AM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 06, 2010, 06:02:03 PM
Knightslappy, do you have the ability to compile conference OWP/OOWP? I realize that, because some teams have started conference play and other have not, they won't be perfect (in a perfect world, we'd be able to just look at the non-con schedules)... but that might shed more light on the results.

I averaged each conference members OWP and OOWP and then calculated a SOS number for each conference. I know the averaging method isn't exact, but I'm not set up to calculate an exact conference OWP and OOWP. I hope this gets us close enough for discussion purposes. Sorted by Strength of Schedule using the handbook's defined 2/3 and 1/3 rule:

CONF     OWP    OOWP    SOS
WIAC     0.5987   0.5432   0.5802
MACC     0.5875   0.5312   0.5688
UAA    0.5773   0.5248   0.5598
CCIW     0.5515   0.5317   0.5449
SUNYAC   0.5557   0.5151   0.5422
USAC     0.5717   0.4827   0.5420
MASCAC   0.5735   0.4687   0.5386
MIAC     0.5446   0.5222   0.5372
NWC    0.5438   0.5227   0.5367
E8     0.5376   0.5282   0.5344
NJAC     0.5319   0.5279   0.5306
OAC    0.5348   0.5178   0.5292
MIAA     0.5302   0.5117   0.5240
ODAC     0.5173   0.5266   0.5204
MWC    0.5223   0.5149   0.5198
CC     0.5184   0.5189   0.5185
NESCAC   0.5161   0.5207   0.5176
LAND     0.5208   0.5105   0.5173
LL     0.5152   0.5075   0.5126
MACF     0.5057   0.5249   0.5121
LEC    0.5080   0.5165   0.5109
CAC    0.5069   0.5172   0.5103
CUNYAC   0.5046   0.5091   0.5061
GNAC     0.5193   0.4791   0.5059
CCC    0.5108   0.4857   0.5024
NAC    0.4939   0.5087   0.4988
NATHC    0.4899   0.4993   0.4930
IIAC     0.4801   0.5040   0.4880
HCAC     0.4845   0.4909   0.4866
GSAC     0.4569   0.5402   0.4847
SCAC     0.4835   0.4821   0.4831
PrAC     0.4763   0.4953   0.4827
NCAC     0.4750   0.4929   0.4810
ASC    0.4654   0.4942   0.4750
NEWMAC   0.4428   0.5386   0.4747
NECC     0.4611   0.4966   0.4729
SKY    0.4614   0.4894   0.4707
AMCC     0.4531   0.5009   0.4690
CSAC     0.4551   0.4843   0.4648
SCIAC    0.4061   0.4994   0.4372
UMAC     0.4018   0.4638   0.4224
IND    0.3921   0.4285   0.4042
NEAC     0.3820   0.4467   0.4036
SLIAC    0.3635   0.4344   0.3871

This does shed a lot of light on the Massey ratings. The only reason it seems there is a WIAC "bias" in the Massey ratings is because the WIAC not only has the highest winning percentage in d3, but also the highest SOS. Therefore, there really isnt any bias at all, the WIAC has just done the best against the best competition in d3. Therefore, any team that plays a WIAC opponent has their OWP and OOWP numbers bumped up. I am assuming you would see the same thing with any conference so long as they played they toughest schedule and won 80%+ of their games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 07, 2010, 06:49:27 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2010, 01:16:04 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 07, 2010, 01:09:38 PM
F&M's site has it incorrect also, as Pat mentioned it would, but the boxscore linked on the site has the score 58-44. If this error were to be picked up by Massey, it could compromise the integrity of his entire rating system. I just hope, for the sake of all of us, that this error is picked up before it can do some real damage to someone's Massey rating.

Thanks -- I needed the laugh. :)

You can laugh it off all you want but it doesn't change the fact that its an inaccurate rating because its full of mistakes.

You've posted D3 OWP and OOWP on your site for several years now and I would think you would understand how one error can string through a lot of data to create multiple inaccuracies. Massey's counting an exhibition in its rating would be similar to you calculating someone's OWP or OOWP using a game thats out of region or using an NAIA opponent. Regardless of the error, its an error and corrupts the data set your looking at and trying to compare with other data that is accurate.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2010, 07:10:41 PM

I do know that one extra result that fits within the data sample doesn't make most of the D-III ratings completely useless.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 07, 2010, 07:52:31 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2010, 07:10:41 PM
I do know that one extra result that fits within the data sample doesn't make most of the D-III ratings completely useless.

Um yes it would, how is that hard to understand........and its not just one error, its several. I'm sure Ferris State/Calvin isn't the only exhibition being counted and based on past history many NAIA results go completely unreported.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 07, 2010, 07:57:07 PM

Quote from: sac on January 07, 2010, 07:52:31 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2010, 07:10:41 PM
I do know that one extra result that fits within the data sample doesn't make most of the D-III ratings completely useless.

Um yes it would, how is that hard to understand........and its not just one error, its several. I'm sure Ferris State/Calvin isn't the only exhibition being counted and based on past history many NAIA results go completely unreported.

I would like to see the calculations done with both results to give me an idea of the scope of the error and its imapct on Calvin's numbers.

The fact that 25 games will dilute the impact is also to be considered.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 07, 2010, 08:13:27 PM

Quote from: sac on January 07, 2010, 06:49:27 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2010, 01:16:04 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 07, 2010, 01:09:38 PM
F&M's site has it incorrect also, as Pat mentioned it would, but the boxscore linked on the site has the score 58-44. If this error were to be picked up by Massey, it could compromise the integrity of his entire rating system. I just hope, for the sake of all of us, that this error is picked up before it can do some real damage to someone's Massey rating.

Thanks -- I needed the laugh. :)

You can laugh it off all you want but it doesn't change the fact that its an inaccurate rating because its full of mistakes.

You've posted D3 OWP and OOWP on your site for several years now and I would think you would understand how one error can string through a lot of data to create multiple inaccuracies. Massey's counting an exhibition in its rating would be similar to you calculating someone's OWP or OOWP using a game thats out of region or using an NAIA opponent. Regardless of the error, its an error and corrupts the data set your looking at and trying to compare with other data that is accurate.

I would argue that the ratings are perfectly accurate, the sources that provide Massey the ratings are where the inaccuracies are. Massey explicitly states all his data sources and calculates his ratings based on the assumption that those are accurate. I think your real beef should be with Presto or the NCAA or wherever the source of these reporting errors are. If I buy an HP laptop in a factory sealed box from Walmart and when I open the box there are 3 keys missing from the keyboard, I could go back and yell at the Walmart employees until I am blue in the face but the real fault is HP's, not Walmart's for trusting HP to provide a product with no errors.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 07, 2010, 08:15:22 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 07, 2010, 08:13:27 PM
Quote from: sac on January 07, 2010, 06:49:27 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2010, 01:16:04 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 07, 2010, 01:09:38 PM
F&M's site has it incorrect also, as Pat mentioned it would, but the boxscore linked on the site has the score 58-44. If this error were to be picked up by Massey, it could compromise the integrity of his entire rating system. I just hope, for the sake of all of us, that this error is picked up before it can do some real damage to someone's Massey rating.

Thanks -- I needed the laugh. :)

You can laugh it off all you want but it doesn't change the fact that its an inaccurate rating because its full of mistakes.

You've posted D3 OWP and OOWP on your site for several years now and I would think you would understand how one error can string through a lot of data to create multiple inaccuracies. Massey's counting an exhibition in its rating would be similar to you calculating someone's OWP or OOWP using a game thats out of region or using an NAIA opponent. Regardless of the error, its an error and corrupts the data set your looking at and trying to compare with other data that is accurate.

I would argue that the ratings are perfectly accurate, the sources that provide Massey the ratings are where the inaccuracies are. Massey explicitly states all his data sources and calculates his ratings based on the assumption that those are accurate. I think your real beef should be with Presto or the NCAA or wherever the source of these reporting errors are. If I buy an HP laptop in a factory sealed box from Walmart and when I open the box there are 3 keys missing from the keyboard, I could go back and yell at the Walmart employees until I am blue in the face but the real fault is HP's, not Walmart's for trusting HP to provide a product with no errors.

Oh my god.......whoever.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 07, 2010, 08:26:23 PM

Quote from: sac on January 07, 2010, 08:15:22 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 07, 2010, 08:13:27 PM
Quote from: sac on January 07, 2010, 06:49:27 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2010, 01:16:04 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 07, 2010, 01:09:38 PM
F&M's site has it incorrect also, as Pat mentioned it would, but the boxscore linked on the site has the score 58-44. If this error were to be picked up by Massey, it could compromise the integrity of his entire rating system. I just hope, for the sake of all of us, that this error is picked up before it can do some real damage to someone's Massey rating.

Thanks -- I needed the laugh. :)

You can laugh it off all you want but it doesn't change the fact that its an inaccurate rating because its full of mistakes.

You've posted D3 OWP and OOWP on your site for several years now and I would think you would understand how one error can string through a lot of data to create multiple inaccuracies. Massey's counting an exhibition in its rating would be similar to you calculating someone's OWP or OOWP using a game thats out of region or using an NAIA opponent. Regardless of the error, its an error and corrupts the data set your looking at and trying to compare with other data that is accurate.

I would argue that the ratings are perfectly accurate, the sources that provide Massey the ratings are where the inaccuracies are. Massey explicitly states all his data sources and calculates his ratings based on the assumption that those are accurate. I think your real beef should be with Presto or the NCAA or wherever the source of these reporting errors are. If I buy an HP laptop in a factory sealed box from Walmart and when I open the box there are 3 keys missing from the keyboard, I could go back and yell at the Walmart employees until I am blue in the face but the real fault is HP's, not Walmart's for trusting HP to provide a product with no errors.

Oh my god.......whoever.

My point is that if these errors are just random due to random reporting errors there is nothing we can do about it. It is impractical to think that Massey or any other source can independently verify each game score. You do the calculations based on the data you have, it doesnt invalidate the whole set of rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 07, 2010, 09:04:22 PM

Middlebury down by 18 with 9 minutes to go against Colby Sawyer.

68-58 Colby Sawyer on top, 5 minutes to play.

72-63 CSC, under 4.

77-68 CSC, 1:45 to play.

80-70 CSC, 1:06 left.

84-75 CSC, :37 left.

FINAL: 86-76 CSC

Middlebury picks up their first loss. Big win for Colby Sawyer.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 07, 2010, 09:32:24 PM

Another top 25 team in trouble:

Concordia Texas leads Mississippi College 49-38 at the half.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 07, 2010, 09:40:55 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 07, 2010, 09:32:24 PM
Another top 25 team in trouble:

Concordia Texas leads Mississippi College 49-38 at the half.

CTX has probably the best set of athletes in the ASC to run with Mississippi College.

CTX head coach Stan Bonewitz loves the run-and-gun.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 07, 2010, 10:10:15 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 07, 2010, 09:32:24 PM
Another top 25 team in trouble:

Concordia Texas leads Mississippi College 49-38 at the half.

Concordia still leading, 63-56, under 10 minutes to play.

Concordia opening up a double digit lead, 74-64 with 4 to play.

Concordia now up 74-68 with under 2 to play.

FINAL: 81-72 Concordia.

2 undefeateds and top 10 teams go down tonight.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 08, 2010, 01:34:59 AM

Quote from: sac on January 07, 2010, 07:52:31 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2010, 07:10:41 PM
I do know that one extra result that fits within the data sample doesn't make most of the D-III ratings completely useless.

Um yes it would, how is that hard to understand........and its not just one error, its several.

most of the D-III ratings completely useless.

It's this hyperbole that I'm disputing. How is it hard to understand that a couple results out of 5,500 or so D-III men's basketball games do not render most of the D-III ratings completely useless?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 08, 2010, 04:08:20 AM

Middlebury 76 Colby-Sawyer 86

According to the newly released Massey ratings the defeat of Middlebury by Colby Sawyer Thursday night will be the biggset upset in D3 hoops so far this season. The current Massey ratings (games through Jan. 4th) show UW-Superior losing to Martin Luther(MN) as the #1 upset. The difference in their ranking was 505 places. Colby-Sawyer is ranked 523 places lower than Middlebury and will be listed as the #1 least likely result when the next update comes out.

Climbing into the D3hoops top 10 is getting to be like the SI cover jinx. Only #1 Randy-Macon and #21 Medaille left standing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 08, 2010, 09:17:51 AM

It appears Mr. Massey has updated Plattsburgh's schedule to reflect the correction magicman pointed out. The York (ON) result is now designated as exhibition.

http://www.masseyratings.com/team.php?t=6257&s=97288

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on January 08, 2010, 09:45:29 AM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 07, 2010, 09:04:22 PM
FINAL: 86-76 CSC

Middlebury picks up their first loss. Big win for Colby Sawyer.

I guess we didn't have to wait a month after all to see whether or not Middlebury was a tad overrated thanks to Colby Sawyer!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 08, 2010, 11:48:54 AM

That is no worse a loss than the one recently suffered by Wash U., ScotsFan. Other than RMC, I believe every or just about every top ten team has a loss (either based on opponent, or score) that doesn't look so great ... any team can have a bad day, and Midd, while not a tremendous three point or foul shooting team to begin with, had a REALLY awful day on both fronts. And CSC seems to play up to their opponents, this year. Not to say that I thought, even before this loss, that Midd was the seventh most talented team in the country -- just that, based on their body of work to date, they were deserving of that ranking.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 08, 2010, 12:09:25 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 08, 2010, 11:48:54 AM
That is no worse a loss than the one recently suffered by Wash U., ScotsFan. Other than RMC, I believe every or just about every top ten team has a loss (either based on opponent, or score) that doesn't look so great ... any team can have a bad day, and Midd, while not a tremendous three point or foul shooting team to begin with, had a REALLY awful day on both fronts. And CSC seems to play up to their opponents, this year. Not to say that I thought, even before this loss, that Midd was the seventh most talented team in the country -- just that, based on their body of work to date, they were deserving of that ranking.

I think the exception to that is Stevens Point. Their loss was in overtime, at Whitewater.

Arguably, Whitewater's loss (to Whitworth in Spokane) really isn't a bad loss either. Whitworth isn't in the top 25, but they should be. They're sitting at #11 in the ORV category after a preseason #16 ranking. They're 9-2 and fell from the rankings after the drubbing they took by Stevens Point which was worse than the 22 point final spread (UWSP was up 37 in the second half) and after the 1 point loss to Pomona-Pitzer. The reports on the NWC board are that they've got a new rotation that is working quite well for them.

They do have a couple of marquee wins... Whitewater and McKendree (who stormed back from a big deficit and had Wash U on the ropes at home and who is ranked #14 in NAIA-I, akin to a W over a top 10 D-III team). I think they belong in the top 25, if not the top 20. They appear to be the class of their league, and more than just a good record (against unknown teams or lesser foes in a top-heavy league) they have some quality wins to boot.

I know most coaches probably won't admit this... but getting that first loss can often times be a good thing. There's added pressure about staying undefeated and teams almost play more tight and I don't want to say scared... but maybe afraid to lose? I dunno if that makes sense, but it's tough enough playing the game without extra expectations (exterior or from yourself).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 08, 2010, 12:22:27 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 08, 2010, 12:09:25 PM
They do have a couple of marquee wins... Whitewater and McKendree (who stormed back from a big deficit and had Wash U on the ropes at home and who is ranked #14 in NAIA-II, akin to a W over a top 10 D-III team). I think they belong in the top 25, if not the top 20. They appear to be the class of their league, and more than just a good record (against unknown teams or lesser foes in a top-heavy league) they have some quality wins to boot.

I'm not sure that I agree that #14 NAIA II is top 10 DIII.

It seems that the two divisions are pretty even, and if anything, DIII is slightly better. I would say a #14 NAIA II would be akin to a top 20 or so DIII team, though it's nearly impossible to say where they would rank.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 08, 2010, 12:28:19 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 08, 2010, 12:22:27 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 08, 2010, 12:09:25 PM
They do have a couple of marquee wins... Whitewater and McKendree (who stormed back from a big deficit and had Wash U on the ropes at home and who is ranked #14 in NAIA-II, akin to a W over a top 10 D-III team). I think they belong in the top 25, if not the top 20. They appear to be the class of their league, and more than just a good record (against unknown teams or lesser foes in a top-heavy league) they have some quality wins to boot.

I'm not sure that I agree that #14 NAIA II is top 10 DIII.

It seems that the two divisions are pretty even, and if anything, DIII is slightly better. I would say a #14 NAIA II would be akin to a top 20 or so DIII team, though it's nearly impossible to say where they would rank.

McKendree is NAIA I actually. I'm pretty familiar with McKendree's personnel and I'm confident they'd be a Top 10 NCAA D3 team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 08, 2010, 12:38:51 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 08, 2010, 12:28:19 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 08, 2010, 12:22:27 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 08, 2010, 12:09:25 PM
They do have a couple of marquee wins... Whitewater and McKendree (who stormed back from a big deficit and had Wash U on the ropes at home and who is ranked #14 in NAIA-II, akin to a W over a top 10 D-III team). I think they belong in the top 25, if not the top 20. They appear to be the class of their league, and more than just a good record (against unknown teams or lesser foes in a top-heavy league) they have some quality wins to boot.

I'm not sure that I agree that #14 NAIA II is top 10 DIII.

It seems that the two divisions are pretty even, and if anything, DIII is slightly better. I would say a #14 NAIA II would be akin to a top 20 or so DIII team, though it's nearly impossible to say where they would rank.

McKendree is NAIA I actually. I'm pretty familiar with McKendree's personnel and I'm confident they'd be a Top 10 NCAA D3 team.

Well, bust my buttons. Why didn't you say so in the first place? That's a horse of a different color!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on January 08, 2010, 12:48:19 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 08, 2010, 11:48:54 AM
That is no worse a loss than the one recently suffered by Wash U., ScotsFan. Other than RMC, I believe every or just about every top ten team has a loss (either based on opponent, or score) that doesn't look so great ... any team can have a bad day, and Midd, while not a tremendous three point or foul shooting team to begin with, had a REALLY awful day on both fronts. And CSC seems to play up to their opponents, this year. Not to say that I thought, even before this loss, that Midd was the seventh most talented team in the country -- just that, based on their body of work to date, they were deserving of that ranking.

Maybe not, but at least WashU has some pretty decent wins on their resume (IWU, Augey, Wheaton) to fall back on. Middelbury on the other hand... Not so much.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 08, 2010, 12:58:29 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 08, 2010, 12:38:51 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 08, 2010, 12:28:19 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 08, 2010, 12:22:27 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 08, 2010, 12:09:25 PM
yada, yada... beat Whitewater and McKendree... who is ranked #14 in NAIA-I, akin to a W over a top 10 D-III team).

I'm not sure that I agree that #14 NAIA II is top 10 DIII.

It seems that the two divisions are pretty even, and if anything, DIII is slightly better. I would say a #14 NAIA II would be akin to a top 20 or so DIII team, though it's nearly impossible to say where they would rank.

McKendree is NAIA I actually. I'm pretty familiar with McKendree's personnel and I'm confident they'd be a Top 10 NCAA D3 team.

Well, bust my buttons....

Sorry, I actually went to the NAIA page to check and just plain typed it wrong. I meant NAIA-I.

Amazing how one little letter can change so much!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 08, 2010, 01:19:59 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 08, 2010, 11:48:54 AM
That is no worse a loss than the one recently suffered by Wash U., ScotsFan. Other than RMC, I believe every or just about every top ten team has a loss (either based on opponent, or score) that doesn't look so great ... any team can have a bad day, and Midd, while not a tremendous three point or foul shooting team to begin with, had a REALLY awful day on both fronts. And CSC seems to play up to their opponents, this year. Not to say that I thought, even before this loss, that Midd was the seventh most talented team in the country -- just that, based on their body of work to date, they were deserving of that ranking.

Just looking at how Massey has the teams, it does look like a "bigger upset" than the other Top 10 losses...

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb

With that game included, Middlebury is Massey #49...Colby-Sawyer is Massey #181. (Heading into the game yesterday, the differential in rankings would have been much larger...I'm sure the result sent Middlebury tumbling and C-S way up.)

#2 Stevens Point is Massey #1...Whitewater is Massey #2 (at Whitewater, I don't even think an upset)

#3 Wash U is Massey #10...Translyvania is Massey #105 (definitely a big upset, but I suspect Transy is better than Colby-Sawyer)

#4 Whitewater is Massey #2...Whitworth is Massey #6 (Whitworth the most underrated team in D3hoops.com poll?)

#5 St. Thomas is Massey #3...Stevens Point is Massey #1 (an expected loss...margin shocking, but loss not)

#6 Guilford is Massey #7...Virginia Wesleyan is Massey #14 (at VWC, no biggie)

#8 Bradeis is Massey #64...Mass-Dartmouth is Massey #117 (an upset, but game was at Mass-D...Massey says Brandeis too high)

#9 Amherst is Massey #26...Elms is Massey #109 (definitely a big upset)

#10 Mississippi College is #36...Concorida-Austin is Massey #139 (definitely a big upset)

Don't get me wrong - I'm not saying Massey is the end-all, be-all. It's just the only way to try to quantify stuff like this.

Also note, I am a firm believer that even great teams play terrible every now and then and lose.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 08, 2010, 02:24:56 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 08, 2010, 01:19:59 PM
With that game included, Middlebury is Massey #49...Colby-Sawyer is Massey #181. (Heading into the game yesterday, the differential in rankings would have been much larger...I'm sure the result sent Middlebury tumbling and C-S way up.)

Indeed. It appears Middlebury was No. 16 and Colby-Sawyer was No. 232. The number in the first column, under "Ch," reflects the most recent change in ranking.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 08, 2010, 02:51:14 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 08, 2010, 12:22:27 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 08, 2010, 12:09:25 PM
They do have a couple of marquee wins... Whitewater and McKendree (who stormed back from a big deficit and had Wash U on the ropes at home and who is ranked #14 in NAIA-II, akin to a W over a top 10 D-III team). I think they belong in the top 25, if not the top 20. They appear to be the class of their league, and more than just a good record (against unknown teams or lesser foes in a top-heavy league) they have some quality wins to boot.

I'm not sure that I agree that #14 NAIA II is top 10 DIII.

It seems that the two divisions are pretty even, and if anything, DIII is slightly better. I would say a #14 NAIA II would be akin to a top 20 or so DIII team, though it's nearly impossible to say where they would rank.

I think this is generally true, the problem is teams in NAIA can jump from one division to the other with relative ease. So while NAIA-II is, as a whole, slightly below D3, they could very well have a good number of very good teams.

The bottom line, we'll all be better off when the NAIA inevitably folds.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 08, 2010, 02:52:46 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 08, 2010, 02:51:14 PMThe bottom line, we'll all be better off when the NAIA inevitably folds.

Just curious...why?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 08, 2010, 03:37:34 PM

Agreed -- I don't know where all those schools are going to go, and there should be a place for schools that don't want to or can't afford to offer the large number of sports the NCAA requires.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 08, 2010, 03:50:39 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 08, 2010, 02:51:14 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 08, 2010, 12:22:27 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 08, 2010, 12:09:25 PM
They do have a couple of marquee wins... Whitewater and McKendree (who stormed back from a big deficit and had Wash U on the ropes at home and who is ranked #14 in NAIA-II, akin to a W over a top 10 D-III team). I think they belong in the top 25, if not the top 20. They appear to be the class of their league, and more than just a good record (against unknown teams or lesser foes in a top-heavy league) they have some quality wins to boot.

I'm not sure that I agree that #14 NAIA II is top 10 DIII.

It seems that the two divisions are pretty even, and if anything, DIII is slightly better. I would say a #14 NAIA II would be akin to a top 20 or so DIII team, though it's nearly impossible to say where they would rank.

I think this is generally true, the problem is teams in NAIA can jump from one division to the other with relative ease. So while NAIA-II is, as a whole, slightly below D3, they could very well have a good number of very good teams.

The bottom line, we'll all be better off when the NAIA inevitably folds.

I would say the emboldened statement is generally false..........first of all basketball is the only NAIA sport with divisions, second the difference between divisions is 11 scholarships for D1 schools and 6 for D2 schools.......it would be very difficult to suddenly go from D1 to D2..........the whole reason there is a 2nd division in NAIA basketball is because of money or lack thereof.

In all the years I've passively followed NAIA I cannot recall a single institution that has changed from NAIA I to NAIA II or vice versa

Furthermore, NAIA tournament qualification is based on conference affiliation, because of the scholarship difference NAIA I and NAIA II teams don't mix well within the same conference(there are a couple NAIA I and NAIA II combined conferences such as the Chicagoland).........ie if you are going to change divisions you are likely going to have to change conferences or division within your conference. Not an easy thing to do.

Unless you can give us frequent examples of schools changing divisions, I have no reason to believe its any easier than changing divisions within the NCAA. I'm hardly an NAIA expert.

The NAIA isn't going to fold, it will constantly change like all divisions of college athletics have over the years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 08, 2010, 03:55:06 PM

Quote from: sac on January 08, 2010, 03:50:39 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 08, 2010, 02:51:14 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 08, 2010, 12:22:27 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 08, 2010, 12:09:25 PM
They do have a couple of marquee wins... Whitewater and McKendree (who stormed back from a big deficit and had Wash U on the ropes at home and who is ranked #14 in NAIA-II, akin to a W over a top 10 D-III team). I think they belong in the top 25, if not the top 20. They appear to be the class of their league, and more than just a good record (against unknown teams or lesser foes in a top-heavy league) they have some quality wins to boot.

I'm not sure that I agree that #14 NAIA II is top 10 DIII.

It seems that the two divisions are pretty even, and if anything, DIII is slightly better. I would say a #14 NAIA II would be akin to a top 20 or so DIII team, though it's nearly impossible to say where they would rank.

I think this is generally true, the problem is teams in NAIA can jump from one division to the other with relative ease. So while NAIA-II is, as a whole, slightly below D3, they could very well have a good number of very good teams.

The bottom line, we'll all be better off when the NAIA inevitably folds.

I would say the emboldened statement is generally false..........first of all basketball is the only NAIA sport with divisions, second the difference between divisions is 11 scholarships for D1 schools and 6 for D2 schools.......it would be very difficult to suddenly go from D1 to D2..........the whole reason there is a 2nd division in NAIA basketball is because of money or lack thereof.

Maybe it's not as easy as I made it out to be, but it can be done quickly. They have the NAIA tournament out here and last year, the talk of the weekend was how the local conference changed divisions because they got a guarantee of getting one of their schools into the tournament every year (thus boosting ticket sales).

I mentioned we'd all be better off simply because its so difficult to figure the NAIA out, it was more of a silly comment than something to be taken seriously.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 08, 2010, 04:00:57 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 08, 2010, 02:51:14 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 08, 2010, 12:22:27 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 08, 2010, 12:09:25 PM
They do have a couple of marquee wins... Whitewater and McKendree (who stormed back from a big deficit and had Wash U on the ropes at home and who is ranked #14 in NAIA-II, akin to a W over a top 10 D-III team). I think they belong in the top 25, if not the top 20. They appear to be the class of their league, and more than just a good record (against unknown teams or lesser foes in a top-heavy league) they have some quality wins to boot.

I'm not sure that I agree that #14 NAIA II is top 10 DIII.

It seems that the two divisions are pretty even, and if anything, DIII is slightly better. I would say a #14 NAIA II would be akin to a top 20 or so DIII team, though it's nearly impossible to say where they would rank.

I think this is generally true, the problem is teams in NAIA can jump from one division to the other with relative ease. So while NAIA-II is, as a whole, slightly below D3, they could very well have a good number of very good teams.

The bottom line, we'll all be better off when the NAIA inevitably folds.

Respectfully, it were not there, they would just create it.

NAIA-1 in Texas is a completely different creature.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 08, 2010, 04:02:45 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 08, 2010, 03:37:34 PM
Agreed -- I don't know where all those schools are going to go, and there should be a place for schools that don't want to or can't afford to offer the large number of sports the NCAA requires.

Exactly. College sports needs the NAIA, or something like it, for all of the schools that can't or won't field teams in a minimum number of sports. Each of the three NCAA divisions requires member schools to field teams in a minimum number of sports for both men and women. For D3, it's five men's sports and five women's sports (soon to go up to six and six). The NAIA has no such requirement. Some NAIA schools only field teams in three or four sports, total.

Yes, the NAIA has been hemorrhaging schools for the past forty years that the NCAA has picked up, but that outflow has largely been stanched. There's now only a trickle of NAIA schools that are in the process of migrating to the NCAA, largely because the transition is now a lengthy and expensive proposition. I'm sure that more would like to do so -- witness the handful of Nebraska Wesleyan's peers in the Great Plains Athletic Conference that are exploring the move to D3 -- but wanting to do so and actually doing so are two different things.

If the NAIA folded, all of its schools would simply go to the USCAA, or they'd set up a new organization that wouldn't be fundamentally different than the NAIA.

Quote from: sac on January 08, 2010, 03:50:39 PMFurthermore, NAIA tournament qualification is based on conference affiliation, because of the scholarship difference NAIA I and NAIA II teams don't mix well within the same conference(there are a couple NAIA I and NAIA II combined conferences such as the Chicagoland).........ie if you are going to change divisions you are likely going to have to change conferences or division within your conference. Not an easy thing to do.

In both men's and women's basketball the Chicagoland Collegiate Athletic Conference has two divisions, NAIA-1 and NAIA-2. There's a lot of crossover play between the two divisions in November and December, but it doesn't count in the standings. Only games within the divisions count in the CCAC standings.

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 08, 2010, 03:55:06 PM
I mentioned we'd all be better off simply because its so difficult to figure the NAIA out, it was more of a silly comment than something to be taken seriously.

I figured that you were posting that tongue-in-cheek, but it's still worthwhile to look at the whole "Wither the NAIA?" question. Not everyone is aware of the differences in philosophy and requirements between the two national organizations.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Warren Thompson on January 08, 2010, 05:18:34 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 08, 2010, 04:00:57 PM
NAIA-1 in Texas is a completely different creature.

Indeed, it is ....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 08, 2010, 05:22:21 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 08, 2010, 04:02:45 PM
I figured that you were posting that tongue-in-cheek, but it's still worthwhile to look at the whole "Wither the NAIA?" question.

I should've said, "Whither the NAIA?", but in the process I inadvertently made a terrific pun.

(Sometimes I crack myself up. :D)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 08, 2010, 06:35:47 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 08, 2010, 05:22:21 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 08, 2010, 04:02:45 PM
I figured that you were posting that tongue-in-cheek, but it's still worthwhile to look at the whole "Wither the NAIA?" question.

I should've said, "Whither the NAIA?", but in the process I inadvertently made a terrific pun.

(Sometimes I crack myself up. :D)

I caught that, and was going to give you credit for a 'Sagerism'. How disappointing to learn it was only a typo! :o ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 08, 2010, 10:10:51 PM

Big day in the Top 25 tomoorw...24 of the 25 teams are in action, including two matchups between Top 25 teams.

#23 La Crosse visits #2 Stevens Point
#9 Amherst visits #11 Williams

Additionally, big matchup for early supremacy in the CCIW as Carthage visits #25 IWU.

Only #17 Chapman is not in action.

Additionally, good early test for #8 Brandeis in the UAA. They travel to NYC to face an NYU team that has played well recently. NYU is 8-2 with both their losses coming in their first 5 games. They are on a five game win streak, with their latestwin coming against Lebanon Valley, who beat #13 F&M earlier in the year. The game will be the first ever webcast for NYU, so for all of you Brandeis skeptics out there, check it out:

http://www.gonyuathletics.com/news/2010/1/8/MBB_0108105736.aspx

NYU will also have a size advantage, as they have 3 players in their rotation at 6'8", meanwhile Brandeis has no player in their rotation that tall (their F/C is 6'7"). If NYU can control the tempo they could take this game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on January 09, 2010, 05:14:17 AM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 08, 2010, 12:09:25 PM
Arguably, Whitewater's loss (to Whitworth in Spokane) really isn't a bad loss either. Whitworth isn't in the top 25, but they should be. They're sitting at #11 in the ORV category after a preseason #16 ranking. They're 9-2 and fell from the rankings after the drubbing they took by Stevens Point which was worse than the 22 point final spread (UWSP was up 37 in the second half) and after the 1 point loss to Pomona-Pitzer. The reports on the NWC board are that they've got a new rotation that is working quite well for them.

They do have a couple of marquee wins... Whitewater and McKendree (who stormed back from a big deficit and had Wash U on the ropes at home and who is ranked #14 in NAIA-I, akin to a W over a top 10 D-III team). I think they belong in the top 25, if not the top 20. They appear to be the class of their league, and more than just a good record (against unknown teams or lesser foes in a top-heavy league) they have some quality wins to boot.

Agree and agree. Whitworth has a track record of success over the past few seasons. I think they took a much larger fall in the voting than was deserved. Rebounding with the McKendree win, the Wisc-WW and now a solid winning streak. The Pirates deserved more than 14 votes last week. Thanks PointSpecial for the nod!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 09, 2010, 08:56:13 AM

Another computer poll that does D3...

http://talismanred.com/ratings/hoops/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 09, 2010, 09:31:47 AM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 08, 2010, 12:09:25 PM
They do have a couple of marquee wins... Whitewater and McKendree (who stormed back from a big deficit and had Wash U on the ropes at home and who is ranked #14 in NAIA-I, akin to a W over a top 10 D-III team).

Are you referring to the McKendree that lost to Washington University 82-67?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 09, 2010, 02:06:37 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 09, 2010, 08:56:13 AM
Another computer poll that does D3...

http://talismanred.com/ratings/hoops/

Rankings look similar to Massey. It also has the same problems as Massey, though. Just at first glance, they have Medaille with a loss because of their exhibition game against Colgate.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 09, 2010, 02:27:07 PM

Quote from: WUH on January 09, 2010, 09:31:47 AM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 08, 2010, 12:09:25 PM
They do have a couple of marquee wins... Whitewater and McKendree (who stormed back from a big deficit and had Wash U on the ropes at home and who is ranked #14 in NAIA-I, akin to a W over a top 10 D-III team).

Are you referring to the McKendree that lost to Washington University 82-67?

That would be the one. Wash U shot absolutely lights out in the first half (61% from the field, even better from 3) to a 25 point halftime lead. McKendree fought back and cut the lead to 4 but ran out of gas. Wash U recovered and did win by 15... but it took a concerted effort in the last part of the second half to pull out the win.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 09, 2010, 05:04:34 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 08, 2010, 10:10:51 PM
#23 La Crosse visits #2 Stevens Point

This should be a heck of a ballgame. La Crosse has two of the best guards in the conference. The Eagles also bring the conference's longest winning streak (7 games). They just squeaked by Superior on Wednesday, and Point just squeaked by Oshkosh.

The question from La Crosse is where is additional scoring going to come from... they have just one other guy averaging more than 8 points. The Eagles compensate by having the second best defense in the conference (67 ppg) to Point (59 ppg) so this may be another grind-it-out type of game, like the Point/Oshkosh game was Wed. Those types of games fall right into LaX and Oshkosh's hands because Point likes to push it and score. Because they've got the best defense, they have the ability to shut teams down and work for the scores...

I think at #23, LaX is under-rated. Massey has them at #5 and the other ratings TitanQ just posted does too. Definitely check this one out if you have the chance!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 09, 2010, 06:14:59 PM

Phew, Ephs hold on after nearly blowing an 11 point lead with three minutes left. Some crazy three's by Amherst, two straight front-end-of-1-and-1 misses, and some crazy calls (if you foul the same guy, TWICE in a row, prior to an inbounds pass, one time running him over, you'd THINK that would be called intentional ...) almost brought Amherst a miracle comeback. As is, the Ephs should move up to around 7, displacing the three New England teams that all lost. Ephs were fortunate as Amherst was just abominable from the foul line, shooting 27 percent.

Since I had to hear from the I told you so brigade after Midd's lost, I guess turnabout is fair play after Brandeis loses by double-digits to an unranked team, right :)?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 09, 2010, 08:40:25 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 09, 2010, 06:14:59 PM
Since I had to hear from the I told you so brigade after Midd's lost, I guess turnabout is fair play after Brandeis loses by double-digits to an unranked team, right :)?

I kind-of called this one. Brandeis will have trouble with big teams, as they lack size and depth. The three 6'8" guys for NYU had a combined 32 points (11-18 FG) and 21 rebounds (Brandeis was outrebounded 39-32). Add to that that Roberson and Small were both off (combined 3-25 from the field) and Brandeis has no good guards to substitute, and they really had no chance. NYU lead by 10 +-3 for essentially the final 32 minutes of the game. All this despite Brandeis being being +12 on turnover margin, +24 on FGAs, and NYU missing 10 FTs. This game could have been a lot uglier in terms of the final score, but Brandeis scrapped to keep it relatively close.

By the way, a night after handling #7 Mddlebury on the road, Colby Sawyer lost by 20 to Regis (MA) who is 5-7 with the win. That loss isnt looking too stellar.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 09, 2010, 08:48:27 PM

I don't think anyone argued that Brandeis was not overrated at No. 8.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 09, 2010, 10:14:56 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 09, 2010, 08:48:27 PM
I don't think anyone argued that Brandeis was not overrated at No. 8.

Obviously some of your voters would have argued that! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 09, 2010, 10:42:27 PM

I said this on Hoopsville Thursday... I will paraphase that thought... I think we might be in a situtation where a lot of voters are comfortable with who the top five or six teams are... but after that they are not thrilled with where to put the rest.

Let me put it this way... I am happy with my Top 6... BUT who to put in 7-15 and then 15-25 is tough... mainly because who I want to put in 7-15 is really who I want, say, in 12-25. In other words... the team I wam putting #7... I don't feel comfortable with at #7... but I don't have anyone else I want to put in over that #7 team. So... instead of leaving the #7-12 slots empty... I have to fill them in... so some teams are a bit higher on ballots then the voters may want... but there aren't any other teams to put there.

That all being said... I have said I think Amherst is way too high... and feel Brandeis has been too high... but I can't blame voters who don't know who deserves to be above teams when after #6... no one has really stepped up and indicated they belong in the Top 10 or 15.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 09, 2010, 10:51:40 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 09, 2010, 10:42:27 PM
I said this on Hoopsville Thursday... I will paraphase that thought... I think we might be in a situtation where a lot of voters are comfortable with who the top five or six teams are... but after that they are thrilled with where to put the rest.

Let me put it this way... I am happy with my Top 6... BUT who to put in 7-15 and then 15-25 is tough... mainly because who I want to put in 7-15 is really who I want, say, in 12-25. In other words... the team I wam putting #7... I don't feel comfortable at #7... but I don't have anyone else I want to put in over that #7 team. So... instead of leaving the #7-12 slots empty... I have to fill them in so some teams are a bit higher on ballots then the voters may want... but there aren't any other teams to put there.

That all being said... I have said I think Amherst is way too high... and feel Brandeis has been too high... but I can't blame voters who don't know who deserves to be above teams when after #6... no one has really stepped up and indicated they belong in the Top 10 or 15.

I liked the argument that you made at the end of Hoopsville on Thursday. I agree, there seems to be a bunch of teams in that "second tier" that you could make an argument for all of them to be anywhere between #7 and #20 (or lower in the case of some teams)

I would just go with your gut and vote for MIT at #7 ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 09, 2010, 10:54:51 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 09, 2010, 10:14:56 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 09, 2010, 08:48:27 PM
I don't think anyone argued that Brandeis was not overrated at No. 8.

Obviously some of your voters would have argued that! ;D

Touche. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 09, 2010, 10:56:17 PM

MIT #7 - just might happen if these losses keep happening! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 09, 2010, 10:59:20 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 09, 2010, 10:56:17 PM
MIT #7 - just might happen if these losses keep happening! :)

That would be nice, but they are going to have to beat WPI next Wednesday first (they arent getting up to #7 this week). I mentioned this on the Pick Em board, but MIT has not beaten WPI in 7 years. It would be a big win for them in conference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: toooldtoplay on January 10, 2010, 12:17:58 AM

I give MIT a +3 at home. Thoughts??

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 10, 2010, 12:57:35 AM

Quote from: toooldtoplay on January 10, 2010, 12:17:58 AM
I give MIT a +3 at home. Thoughts??

It is really going to be a clash of styles, WPI really only plays one player taller than 6'4" while MIT only really plays 2 players shorter than 6'5" (they play a 3rd when the starting PG gets into foul trouble, but usually no more than 5-8 minutes). WPI is going to try to push the ball, they may try to press, and do whatever they can to quicken the pace. MIT will be methodical and work the ball through the post (they play 4 players 6'8"+) and run their offense. I would expect the game to be similar on Wednesday to today's game. It will probably be a close game around half time and MITs size will eventually wear down WPI and they will pull it out in the end because they get a lot of easy buckets in the post. I am not too concerned with a press by WPI because at the beginning of the second half today, Babson tried a press and it was successful until MIT figured it out after about 2 or 3 posessions and went on a huge run to blow them out. I dont know how WPI is going to keep Noel Hollingsworth from getting to the spots he wants in the post. It will be interesting to see how things unfold on Wednesday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on January 10, 2010, 08:56:37 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 09, 2010, 06:14:59 PM

Since I had to hear from the I told you so brigade after Midd's lost, I guess turnabout is fair play after Brandeis loses by double-digits to an unranked team, right :)?

Personally, I wasn't arguing that Midd was alone in being overrated. I just felt as though you couldn't really make an argument that Brandeis was over-rated without looking in the mirror if you were a Midd fan.

IMO, they were both overrated as I stated earlier.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 10, 2010, 09:31:16 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 09, 2010, 10:42:27 PM
I said this on Hoopsville Thursday... I will paraphase that thought... I think we might be in a situtation where a lot of voters are comfortable with who the top five or six teams are... but after that they are not thrilled with where to put the rest.

Let me put it this way... I am happy with my Top 6... BUT who to put in 7-15 and then 15-25 is tough... mainly because who I want to put in 7-15 is really who I want, say, in 12-25. In other words... the team I wam putting #7... I don't feel comfortable with at #7... but I don't have anyone else I want to put in over that #7 team. So... instead of leaving the #7-12 slots empty... I have to fill them in... so some teams are a bit higher on ballots then the voters may want... but there aren't any other teams to put there.

That all being said... I have said I think Amherst is way too high... and feel Brandeis has been too high... but I can't blame voters who don't know who deserves to be above teams when after #6... no one has really stepped up and indicated they belong in the Top 10 or 15.

I definitely agree with this. A lot of years, my "voting comfort level" extends to about #15. Heading into the vote tomorrow, however, I have just 7 teams I feel really confident about:

Randolph-Macon
UW-Stevens
Wash U
UW-Whitewater
Virginia Wesleyan
Guilford
St. Thomas

After that small group, I have plenty of good teams to choose from, but I honestly don't have any confidence that my #8 team (and I have no idea who that will be right now) is any better than my #25.

At the top, I also struggle to create any separation between R-M, UW-Stevens Point, Wash U.

This is a really fun year to vote...I'll take a year of parity anytime!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 10, 2010, 09:32:34 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 09, 2010, 10:14:56 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 09, 2010, 08:48:27 PM
I don't think anyone argued that Brandeis was not overrated at No. 8.

Obviously some of your voters would have argued that! ;D

Guilty as charged. I let Brandeis get up to #8 on my Week 5 ballot. See above though - it's a struggle for me after #7...I know there is a legit #8 for me, but have no idea who that is.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 10, 2010, 12:27:10 PM

I think Williams at this point is a legit number eight, but of course I'm biased. They now have a very good win over Amherst. They've blown out all the bad teams they've played. Their only loss was a very close game, on the road, to the number one team, and if you ask RMC fans, I'm sure they'll tell you the two teams were basically even in terms of talent level, RMC just played a little tougher / more together down the stretch. Yes, the schedule has been on the weak side (not totally the Ephs' fault as several usually solid programs like Salem State are having down years), but 12-1 is 12-1. I wouldn't say that is a top-5 resume, but it is a very legit top-10 one. I think the Ephs suffer because they were a bit underrated coming into the year -- yes, their record was pedestrian last year, but that was in the first season with a new coach who installed a totally new system that was difficult to learn quickly, without (until very late in the year) a true point guard running the team (now they have two top-flight point guards), and most importantly, with their star center missing most of the year due to injury. Toss in one other current player who made a big leap (Whittington) and their talent level alone should have landed them in the top 20 pre-season. Now, that being said, they still need to play with more consistency, especially on the defensive end, but the team is definitely coming together as the season progresses.

I'd say Eastern Mennonite (way underranked as hugenerd has argued based on performance to date, they also can make a very credible argument for number eight, certainly if VWU is a sure top-seven team, then EM should be a sure top-ten at the very least) and MIT also deserve to round out a pretty solid top ten, with F&M, St. Norbert, Anderson and Wilmington the other potential top ten contenders. That would be my top 14, personally. Probably Medaille 15 because undefeated is undefeated ... then maybe Midd 16, where, I think, it would be hard to then argue they are overranked.

Wash U. seems to be struggling a bit of late, which surprises me given how stacked they seem to be. Hard to say that, over their last four games, they are playing like a top three team, but they get a pass due to their impressive start to the season, undeniable talent level, and most importantly, recent history.

It seems like most (if not every) year since 2003, 1-2 teams have looked dominant through much of the year and ended up in the title game. This year is pretty wide open, especially since most of the top six or so seem to be grouped from only two conferences, which will be a big disadvantage come tourney time. Usually being in the south region is a plus come tourney time, but not this year, for sure. Speaking of conferences, seems like a no-brainer that ODAC and WIAC are the top two this year, probably in that order (49-3 for the top four in ODAC, all of whom are or soon will be in the top ten? wow), but that is arguable. Afterwards, once again, pretty wide open. I think NESCAC has an argument for third based on the top five teams in the conference (38-9), but the bottom half has not been as improved as I would have though, and are right now dragging the league as a whole down. Still, with CCIW and OAC a bit down from usual standards, and UAA top-heavy, hard to say who is number three right now ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 10, 2010, 12:31:45 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 10, 2010, 09:32:34 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 09, 2010, 10:14:56 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 09, 2010, 08:48:27 PM
I don't think anyone argued that Brandeis was not overrated at No. 8.

Obviously some of your voters would have argued that! ;D

Guilty as charged. I let Brandeis get up to #8 on my Week 5 ballot. See above though - it's a struggle for me after #7...I know there is a legit #8 for me, but have no idea who that is.

de facto "float-up" is a big component of teams getting ratings that they don't deserve. Brandeis kept winning and teams above them kept losing in ugly fachions.

Rather than looking at the ordinal number that a certain number of votes will assign a team to ranking, the real value is looking at the vote total as to where it would land a team on the "Perfect Top 25". Brandeis' 361 votes would be a strong "12th" on a perfect Top 25. That would be a consensus of what 25 voters thought about Brandeis.

And, for every voter who reluctantly put Brandeis at #8, another voter put them at #15-16, and reluctantly penciled-in some other team at #8.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 10, 2010, 02:17:33 PM

A stratified Top 25

Rating	Perfect Ranking	Teams with Votes
1	625	*
2	600	*
3	575	#1 RMC 597, #2 UWSP 587, #3 WUStL 577
4	550
5	525	#4 UWW 539
6	500	#5 Tommies 518, #6 Guilford 510
7	475	#7 M'bury 488
8	450	*
9	425	*
10	400	*
11	375	*
12	350	#8 'Deis 361, #9 Amherst 356
13	325	#10 MissColl 346, #11 Williams 333
14	300	#12 VWC 309
15	275	*
16	250	#13 Tie F&M, Wheaton IL 259
17	225	#15 MIT 236, #16 St Norbert 228
18	200	*
19	175	#17 Chapman 195, #18 Anderson 176
20	150	#19 Wilmingotn 172, #20 St Mary's MD 158
21	125	*
22	100	#21 Medaille 123, Tie #22 UT-Dallas, UW-Lacrosse 103, #24 EMennonite 102
23	75	#25 IWU 91
24	50	RV26 Wooster 59, RV27 WPI 53
25	25	RV28 RStockton 48, RV29T JCU & WConn 35, RV31 York PA 31, RV32 Augustana 27

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 10, 2010, 02:19:29 PM

Titan Q's comment about a solid Top 7 in the Top 25 was borne out by the numbers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 10, 2010, 02:35:03 PM

So how do things change now that 5 teams ranked #7-#14 lost? Middlebury was one of those consensus top 7 teams, what happens to them?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 10, 2010, 05:04:16 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 10, 2010, 02:35:03 PM
So how do things change now that 5 teams ranked #7-#14 lost? Middlebury was one of those consensus top 7 teams, what happens to them?

I will let some Northeast Region fan explain the games in the NE.

A breakdown shows that:

#7 M'Bury lost an ugly game to CSC
#8 'Deis lost a conference road game. Is that a rivalry game against NYU?
#9 Amherst lost a rivalry game on the road to Williams. No surprise there
#10 Mississippi College lost two games on this 1000-mile road trip. I thought that they would do well to go 1-1. The CTX game was an upset.
#14 Wheaton IL lost a CCIW road game at Carthage.

I think that we have always had much parity in D-III. We are now just more aware of it. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 10, 2010, 05:24:51 PM

Middlebury was too high and I'm not even sure Brandeis should have been ranked at all.

Williams is the cream of the crop. Amherst is pretty good. MIT may be good (certainly better than expected), but we'll have to see how they hold up through conference play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 10, 2010, 05:26:48 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 10, 2010, 05:24:51 PM

Middlebury was too high and I'm not even sure Brandeis should have been ranked at all.

Williams is the cream of the crop. Amherst is pretty good. MIT may be good (certainly better than expected), but we'll have to see how they hold up through conference play.

Okay, so we have another case of "East Coast Bias"! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 10, 2010, 05:45:56 PM

How They Fared

Every score posted already (a new record?)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	597	Randolph-Macon	13-0	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 74-53; def. Hampden-Sydney, 69-68; def. Christopher Newport, 80-68
#2	587	UW-Stevens Point	13-1	def. UW-Oshkosh, 73-67; def. T#22 UW-La Crosse, 73-57
#3	577	Washington U.	11-1	def. Webster, 69-60; def. Chicago, 64-60
#4	539	UW-Whitewater	13-1	def. UW-River Falls, 70-57
#5	518	St. Thomas	10-1	def. Bethel, 61-50; def. Carleton, 60-51
#6	510	Guilford	12-1	def. Lynchburg, 89-82; def. Randolph, 78-42
#7	488	Middlebury	12-1	def. T#42 Plattsburgh State, 81-75; LOST to Colby-Sawyer, 76-86; def. Skidmore, 80-67; def. Lyndon State, 97-69
#8	361	Brandeis	8-2	def. Curry, 74-69; LOST at New York University, 50-62
#9	356	Amherst	8-2	def. Wesleyan, 81-72; LOST at #11 Williams, 69-72
#10	346	Mississippi College	10-2	def. Belhaven, 89-79; LOST at Concordia-Austin, 72-81; LOST at Mary Hardin-Baylor, 64-83
#11	333	Williams	12-1	def. Colby-Sawyer, 101-88; def. #9 Amherst, 72-69
#12	309	Virginia Wesleyan	13-1	def. Salisbury, 79-69; def. Randolph, 62-48; def. Washington and Lee, 69-64
T#13	259	Franklin and Marshall	10-2	def. Haverford, 58-44; def. Swarthmore, 75-51
T#13	259	Wheaton (Ill.)	9-4	LOST at #35 Carthage, 62-75; def. North Central (Ill.), 67-64
#15	236	MIT	13-1	def. Tufts, 71-59; def. Babson, 72-45
#16	228	St. Norbert	10-1	def. Beloit, 73-46; def. Ripon, 66-52
#17	195	Chapman	12-2	def. Caltech, 60-42
#18	176	Anderson	13-1	def. Franklin, 72-59; def. Transylvania, 91-72
#19	172	Wilmington	12-2	def. Ohio Northern, 73-62; def. Heidelberg, 79-66
#20	158	St. Mary's (Md.)	11-2	def. Wesley, 81-74
#21	123	Medaille	13-0	def. Frostburg State, 74-70
T#22	103	Texas-Dallas	10-3	def. Hardin-Simmons, 86-64; def. Texas Lutheran, 80-53; def. Schreiner, 79-64
T#22	103	UW-La Crosse	12-3	def. UW-Superior, 61-57; LOST at #2 UW-Stevens Point, 57-73
#24	102	Eastern Mennonite	11-1	def. Washington and Lee, 83-48; def. Roanoke, 119-91
#25	91	Illinois Wesleyan	11-2	def. North Central (Ill.), 84-79; def. #35 Carthage, 79-69

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	59	Wooster	9-4	def. Kenyon, 71-59
#27	53	Worcester Polytech	11-2	LOST at Wheaton (Mass.), 79-91; def. Trinity (Conn.), 90-75
#28	48	Richard Stockton	10-3	def. Rutgers-Camden, 68-56; def. Montclair State, 77-54
T#29	35	John Carroll	9-4	def. Otterbein, 88-64; def. Capital, 99-93 OT
T#29	35	Western Connecticut	9-2	def. Regis (Mass.), 92-73; LOST at Plymouth State, 73-78
#31	31	York (Pa.)	12-2	LOST at Marymount, 88-90 OT; def. Hood, 70-64
#32	27	Augustana	9-4	def. North Park, 77-63; def. Elmhurst, 64-50
#33	22	Hope	8-5	LOST at Calvin, 75-84; def. Alma, 87-74
#34	21	Elms	7-4	LOST to (n) Montclair State, 63-65; LOST at Union, 68-74; def. Newbury, 97-75
#35	18	Carthage	9-4	def. T#13 Wheaton (Ill.), 75-62; LOST at #25 Illinois Wesleyan, 69-79
#36	14	Whitworth	11-2	def. Pacific, 86-62; def. George Fox, 75-70
#37	9	DeSales	9-4	def. Widener, 92-87 2OT; def. Eastern, 66-56
T#38	7	Defiance	12-3	LOST at Transylvania, 56-58; def. Mount St. Joseph, 81-72
T#38	7	McMurry	8-4	LOST to LeTourneau, 71-72; def. East Texas Baptist, 71-64
#40	5	William Paterson	13-1	def. Manhattanville, 58-46; def. Kean, 56-41
#41	3	Rochester	9-2	LOST to Clarkson, 63-66 OT; def. Case Western Reserve, 76-60; def. Carnegie Mellon, 76-57
T#42	2	Plattsburgh State	7-4	LOST at #7 Middlebury, 75-81; LOST at Buffalo State, 87-90 OT; LOST at Fredonia State, 54-64
T#42	2	UW-Platteville	9-5	def. UW-Eau Claire, 74-67; LOST at UW-Stout, 81-87
#44	1	Cabrini	9-1	def. Keystone, 93-85; def. Lancaster Bible, 92-74

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 10, 2010, 05:47:37 PM

I would not call NYU/Brandeis a rivalry, they have never really been good at the same time so there have been very few big time matchups between the two schools. In the early days of the UAA, NYU was good and Brandeis was bad. Then for a bunch of years both teams were pretty bad. Recently, Brandeis has been good and NYU hasnt. I think the only real "rivalry" in the UAA is Chicago and WashU, because both teams have been at the top of the conference so many times and they are travel partners so they play eachother in the last game each season (which usually has postseason implications).

NYU also has not had a much of a home court advantage this year. Their only two losses have been at home to teams they probably shouldnt have lost to (Skidomore and Mt. St. Vincent). I think this is just the second time Brandeis has played a solid team (the other being UMD) and they have not played well against either.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 10, 2010, 08:25:20 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 10, 2010, 05:47:37 PM
I would not call NYU/Brandeis a rivalry, they have never really been good at the same time so there have been very few big time matchups between the two schools. In the early days of the UAA, NYU was good and Brandeis was bad. Then for a bunch of years both teams were pretty bad. Recently, Brandeis has been good and NYU hasnt. I think the only real "rivalry" in the UAA is Chicago and WashU, because both teams have been at the top of the conference so many times and they are travel partners so they play eachother in the last game each season (which usually has postseason implications).

NYU also has not had a much of a home court advantage this year. Their only two losses have been at home to teams they probably shouldnt have lost to (Skidomore and Mt. St. Vincent). I think this is just the second time Brandeis has played a solid team (the other being UMD) and they have not played well against either.

Brandeis has only played 3 teams with a winning record and they lost to 2 of them (as you mentioned, UMD and NYU). The only other team was Clark and that was a narrow 51-47 win. Certainly not the stuff of a Top 25 team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 10, 2010, 08:32:26 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 10, 2010, 08:25:20 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 10, 2010, 05:47:37 PM
I would not call NYU/Brandeis a rivalry, they have never really been good at the same time so there have been very few big time matchups between the two schools. In the early days of the UAA, NYU was good and Brandeis was bad. Then for a bunch of years both teams were pretty bad. Recently, Brandeis has been good and NYU hasnt. I think the only real "rivalry" in the UAA is Chicago and WashU, because both teams have been at the top of the conference so many times and they are travel partners so they play eachother in the last game each season (which usually has postseason implications).

NYU also has not had a much of a home court advantage this year. Their only two losses have been at home to teams they probably shouldnt have lost to (Skidomore and Mt. St. Vincent). I think this is just the second time Brandeis has played a solid team (the other being UMD) and they have not played well against either.

Brandeis has only played 3 teams with a winning record and they lost to 2 of them (as you mentioned, UMD and NYU). The only other team was Clark and that was a narrow 51-47 win. Certainly not the stuff of a Top 25 team.

You are right, I must have looked over that score. Clark is a good team, they are in that group of teams right behind MIT and WPI in the NEWMAC, but certainly a win that would not get you top 25 consideration by itself.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: oldchap on January 10, 2010, 09:05:50 PM

Quote from: oldchap on January 06, 2010, 01:38:21 AM
I think that Whitworth is going to quickly rise in future polls as someone suggested earlier and so will Augsburg. Brandeis is likely to sink and so will Franklin Marshall.

Remember what I said a few days ago, following my quick analysis of comparing the Top 25 with the Massey Ratings. Well, it looks like I may get at least one right....

In my opinion, and this is only an opinion of course, the Massey Ratings are a pretty good measure of a team strength, because it takes all games into consideration, including games against non-D3 teams. Because there is such a huge number being played in College basketball, the combined results can be statistically significant. Of course, following a team and watching it play night after night is the best measure, but no one in D3 does that because of the non existent TV coverage.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 11, 2010, 11:25:05 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 10, 2010, 12:31:45 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 10, 2010, 09:32:34 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 09, 2010, 10:14:56 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 09, 2010, 08:48:27 PM
I don't think anyone argued that Brandeis was not overrated at No. 8.

Obviously some of your voters would have argued that! ;D

Guilty as charged. I let Brandeis get up to #8 on my Week 5 ballot. See above though - it's a struggle for me after #7...I know there is a legit #8 for me, but have no idea who that is.
de facto "float-up" is a big component of teams getting ratings that they don't deserve.

One year a while back it was Gustavus Adolphus who was in the same position as Brandeis has been this year -- floating up to an undeservedly high rating based upon better teams rated above the Gusties losing and subsequently dropping below GAC in the next poll. I referred to it as "the St. Peter Principle" ... the deafening silence that ensued told me that either nobody got it or it was not as good of a pun as I thought. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 11, 2010, 11:56:18 AM

In the newest Massey ratings, Stevens Point is ranked a spot ahead of College of Charleston, who beat UNC last week.

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 11, 2010, 12:20:56 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 11, 2010, 11:56:18 AM
In the newest Massey ratings, Stevens Point is ranked a spot ahead of College of Charleston, who beat UNC last week.

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb

So, by the transitive property, UC Santa Cruz is better than UNC!

(Point is ahead of Col of Charleston... SP lost to Whitewater who lost to Whitworth who lost to Pomona-Pizter who lost to 5-11 UC Santa Cruz!)

It may certainly be possible to go farther than that... this just took me about 30 seconds.

Point is listed as the 133rd best team in the country and 4th best in Wisconsin, after UW, Marquette, and Wisconsin Green Bay (just one spot behind UWGB, where, incidentally, former UWSP, WIAC, and D-III POY Jason Kalsow is an assistant coach).

Another interesting tidbit... All 9 WIAC teams are ahead of Wisconsin's lone D-II school, UW Parkside. Parkside's at 801, and the lowest WIAC school Oshkosh, is at 710.

Just 7 D-II schools are slotted ahead of Point, one NAIA-I team, and 125 D-I teams.

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 11, 2010, 11:25:05 AM
One year a while back it was Gustavus Adolphus who was in the same position as Brandeis has been this year -- floating up to an undeservedly high rating based upon better teams rated above the Gusties losing and subsequently dropping below GAC in the next poll. I referred to it as "the St. Peter Principle" ... the deafening silence that ensued told me that either nobody got it or it was not as good of a pun as I thought. ;)

I don't remember seeing that, otherwise I would have affirmed you! That's pretty funny and a pretty accurate description!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 11, 2010, 06:50:06 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 11, 2010, 12:20:56 PM
...
Point is listed as the 133rd best team in the country and 4th best in Wisconsin, after UW, Marquette, and Wisconsin Green Bay (just one spot behind UWGB, where, incidentally, former UWSP, WIAC, and D-III POY Jason Kalsow is an assistant coach).

Another interesting tidbit... All 9 WIAC teams are ahead of Wisconsin's lone D-II school, UW Parkside. Parkside's at 801, and the lowest WIAC school Oshkosh, is at 710.

Just 7 D-II schools are slotted ahead of Point, one NAIA-I team, and 125 D-I teams.

Has there ever been any interest in UW-Parkside moving up to D-III?

Does it really benefit in the D-II model for them?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2010, 07:07:11 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 11, 2010, 06:50:06 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 11, 2010, 12:20:56 PM
...
Point is listed as the 133rd best team in the country and 4th best in Wisconsin, after UW, Marquette, and Wisconsin Green Bay (just one spot behind UWGB, where, incidentally, former UWSP, WIAC, and D-III POY Jason Kalsow is an assistant coach).

Another interesting tidbit... All 9 WIAC teams are ahead of Wisconsin's lone D-II school, UW Parkside. Parkside's at 801, and the lowest WIAC school Oshkosh, is at 710.

Just 7 D-II schools are slotted ahead of Point, one NAIA-I team, and 125 D-I teams.

Has there ever been any interest in UW-Parkside moving up to D-III?

Does it really benefit in the D-II model for them?

Assuming Parkside already has scholarships, why would they want to give them up and be even more clearly DOA? ;)

[I know nothing about their other sports.]

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 11, 2010, 08:50:32 PM

Babson beats #9 Amherst 65-59 at home, two days after falling to #15 MIT by 27 (72-45) in the same gym.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 11, 2010, 09:04:15 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 11, 2010, 08:50:32 PM
Babson beats #9 Amherst 65-59 at home, two days after falling to #15 MIT by 27 (72-45) in the same gym.

I really hate Monday upsets. They make me feel like my ballot is all screwed up for another 7 days!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: OxyBob on January 11, 2010, 09:31:56 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 11, 2010, 12:20:56 PM
Another interesting tidbit... All 9 WIAC teams are ahead of Wisconsin's lone D-II school, UW Parkside. Parkside's at 801, and the lowest WIAC school Oshkosh, is at 710.

Here's an article about teaching at UW-Parkside:

http://hnn.us/articles/1019.html

OxyBob

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 11, 2010, 09:52:46 PM

Quote from: OxyBob on January 11, 2010, 09:31:56 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 11, 2010, 12:20:56 PM
Another interesting tidbit... All 9 WIAC teams are ahead of Wisconsin's lone D-II school, UW Parkside. Parkside's at 801, and the lowest WIAC school Oshkosh, is at 710.

Here's an article about teaching at UW-Parkside:

http://hnn.us/articles/1019.html

OxyBob

Wow! Having read the article, I am glad that UW-Parkside "chose D-II"!

Thanks for finding the link. +1! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 11, 2010, 09:55:35 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2010, 07:07:11 PM
Assuming Parkside already has scholarships, why would they want to give them up and be even more clearly DOA? ;)

[I know nothing about their other sports.]

UW-Parkside is in the Great Lakes Valley Conference, a soccer school in a soccer conference. They also field competitive volleyball teams, if I remember correctly.

It is interesting thinking about what motivates athletic directors. Truman State, my alma mater, regularly fields competitive soccer, volleyball, and swim teams, and usually does well in the Director's Cup, but their basketball teams regularly finish with 5 or 6 wins and football wins 1 or 2 in a good year. UW-Parkside Basketball is extremely competitive by comparison.

The article from Professor Reeves describes apathetic students. It seems to me that he is describing a host of regional state colleges, including a host of Division III schools.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2010, 10:27:22 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 11, 2010, 09:52:46 PM
Quote from: OxyBob on January 11, 2010, 09:31:56 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 11, 2010, 12:20:56 PM
Another interesting tidbit... All 9 WIAC teams are ahead of Wisconsin's lone D-II school, UW Parkside. Parkside's at 801, and the lowest WIAC school Oshkosh, is at 710.

Here's an article about teaching at UW-Parkside:

http://hnn.us/articles/1019.html

OxyBob

Wow! Having read the article, I am glad that UW-Parkside "chose D-II"!

Thanks for finding the link. +1! :)

Not so fast.

I applaud Parkside for trying to reach underachieving students. Many will flounder (some of whom will get it together later, and succeed). Some, who would NEVER have been admitted to Occidental or McMurry, will discover the wonders of a real education (perhaps not an option at their high school) and blossom.

I taught at several totally 'open enrollment' schools (and most of my career at Eastern Michigan, which is virtually open enrollment: admitting something like 80% of applicants). It is a tremendous challenge, but also a tremendous opportunity. While I had plenty of students who were majoring in 'beer', and plenty who were (at least for then) hopelessly behind, I also had students who could have gotten a 4.0 at Harvard but were monetarily challenged, and those who simply had the guts to thrive. (I'll never forget one student, totally beaten down by her family then her abusive husband, that I finally approached about 9:30 one December evening: "Diane, if you had not even shown up for the final, you had an A! Everyone else left at least 20 minutes ago, please go home!")

Another tale, about the 'finally got it': I had a student, a marvelous jazz singer, but with NO educational background. She had flunked statistics twice, once from someone else, once from me. Even though I had failed her, she apparently saw something. She tried me for her third (and last) attempt. She got an A (which would have been an A+ if EMU allowed it). She didn't give up; I didn't give up; 'something' finally 'clicked'. She, of course, would never have been admitted at 'most' schools. [She is now a social services administrator (and still a marvelous jazz singer).]

At schools like Parkside, there will be lots of students who are 'not college material' (and, realistically, many will forever be not college material), but I would not want to live in a country where second chances (or, in the case of truly failing high schools, first chances) are not available. Occidental and McMurry are not obligated to take them, but I'm glad there are places like Parkside.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 11, 2010, 10:32:35 PM

Fair enough!

Thanks for the input, and I stand corrected. :)

My response was too hasty.

McMurry is definitely not Oxy, and we have a tremendous number of borderline kids coming from rural and lower middle class America. (There are no BMW's on the McMurry campus. We are definitely pulling from a different social strata than Southwestern or Southern Methodist, two other United Methodist affiliated colleges in the state. Likewise Hendrix, Centenary and Millsaps as well.)

I had my first "rejection" this last week. A kid that I recommended apply to McMurry, with several "take a chance on him" letters in the admissions packet, needs 12 credit hours more work before he will be accepted. (He awakened too late in his high school career to the fact that grades mean things.)

That article pushed the wrong button. I value education and the quest for learning too much to see it disdained.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 11, 2010, 10:37:24 PM

Education in America really is unique compared to other countries. Anyone who wants to can get a college education. I know in many European countries, only the top 1/3 or so (fraction will vary by country) are admitted to college through standardized testing, so others must just find a job or retake the exams over each year until they score high enough.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 11, 2010, 11:07:16 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2010, 07:07:11 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 11, 2010, 06:50:06 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 11, 2010, 12:20:56 PM
...
Point is listed as the 133rd best team in the country and 4th best in Wisconsin, after UW, Marquette, and Wisconsin Green Bay (just one spot behind UWGB, where, incidentally, former UWSP, WIAC, and D-III POY Jason Kalsow is an assistant coach).

Another interesting tidbit... All 9 WIAC teams are ahead of Wisconsin's lone D-II school, UW Parkside. Parkside's at 801, and the lowest WIAC school Oshkosh, is at 710.

Just 7 D-II schools are slotted ahead of Point, one NAIA-I team, and 125 D-I teams.

Has there ever been any interest in UW-Parkside moving up to D-III?

Does it really benefit in the D-II model for them?

Assuming Parkside already has scholarships, why would they want to give them up and be even more clearly DOA? ;)

[I know nothing about their other sports.]

To be true, I don't really think that Parkside is worse than all of the WIAC teams... but I checked the Sears Cup rankings and Parkside hasn't gotten a point yet, though they do appear to have a top 10 wrestling team.

I know the conference they're in is a very good one in many sports... This is the same conference as Southern Indiana and Kentucky Wesleyan who have historically been good in basketball, and Parkside has had ranked D-II teams in the last 3 or 4 years if my memory serves me correctly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2010, 11:23:14 PM

Yeah, that is why occasional outbreaks of d3 'elitism' drive me crazy. Diane had absolutely zero self-esteem after her childhood and abusive marriage, and would (at thirty) NEVER have made it into most schools - she is probably in my top ten of most brilliant students in 32 years. The 'jazz singer' (so talented that some of you may know of her, so I'll leave it at that) had NO education throughout high school (when I taught her the first time, she didn't know arithmetic things that my 8 year old knew)); she had the native intelligence and drive to overcome all that.

Neither they nor dozens of other successful students I taught over the years would have had any chance of getting into most colleges. (Not picking on anyone - they probably wouldn't have gotten into IWU either.) And make no mistake - many of the students I taught had no business being in ANY college (and I proudly did my job of sending many of them packing); though I'm also proud to say that a handful of those 'sent packing' returned a few years later and did very well.

College may be currently oversold - not everyone will benefit, and we will always need workers that college will not (directly, at least) benefit - but I'm proud to live in a country where everyone has that opportunity to blossom. OxyBob MAY have just been providing information, but considering his frequent potshots at the WIAC I have my doubts on motive.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 11, 2010, 11:42:27 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 11, 2010, 11:07:16 PM
This is the same conference as Southern Indiana and Kentucky Wesleyan who have historically been good in basketball,

this might be an understatement ;)

Kentucky Wesleyan 8 National Championships, 5 runner-ups
Southern Indiana 1 National Championship, 2 runner-ups

NKU and SIU have combined to win 24 of the 31 GLVC basketball championships

56 combined appearances in the NCAA tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 12, 2010, 12:09:10 AM

New poll is out:

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 12, 2010, 12:10:12 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2010, 10:27:22 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 11, 2010, 09:52:46 PM
Quote from: OxyBob on January 11, 2010, 09:31:56 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 11, 2010, 12:20:56 PM
Another interesting tidbit... All 9 WIAC teams are ahead of Wisconsin's lone D-II school, UW Parkside. Parkside's at 801, and the lowest WIAC school Oshkosh, is at 710.

Here's an article about teaching at UW-Parkside:

http://hnn.us/articles/1019.html

OxyBob

Wow! Having read the article, I am glad that UW-Parkside "chose D-II"!

Thanks for finding the link. +1! :)

Not so fast.

I applaud Parkside for trying to reach underachieving students. Many will flounder (some of whom will get it together later, and succeed). Some, who would NEVER have been admitted to Occidental or McMurry, will discover the wonders of a real education (perhaps not an option at their high school) and blossom.

I taught at several totally 'open enrollment' schools (and most of my career at Eastern Michigan, which is virtually open enrollment: admitting something like 80% of applicants). It is a tremendous challenge, but also a tremendous opportunity. While I had plenty of students who were majoring in 'beer', and plenty who were (at least for then) hopelessly behind, I also had students who could have gotten a 4.0 at Harvard but were monetarily challenged, and those who simply had the guts to thrive. (I'll never forget one student, totally beaten down by her family then her abusive husband, that I finally approached about 9:30 one December evening: "Diane, if you had not even shown up for the final, you had an A! Everyone else left at least 20 minutes ago, please go home!")

Another tale, about the 'finally got it': I had a student, a marvelous jazz singer, but with NO educational background. She had flunked statistics twice, once from someone else, once from me. Even though I had failed her, she apparently saw something. She tried me for her third (and last) attempt. She got an A (which would have been an A+ if EMU allowed it). She didn't give up; I didn't give up; 'something' finally 'clicked'. She, of course, would never have been admitted at 'most' schools. [She is now a social services administrator (and still a marvelous jazz singer).]

At schools like Parkside, there will be lots of students who are 'not college material' (and, realistically, many will forever be not college material), but I would not want to live in a country where second chances (or, in the case of truly failing high schools, first chances) are not available. Occidental and McMurry are not obligated to take them, but I'm glad there are places like Parkside.

Well said Mr Yipsi. I completely agree with your statement. It's teachers like you that make a difference!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: OxyBob on January 12, 2010, 10:35:19 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 11, 2010, 09:52:46 PM
Quote from: OxyBob on January 11, 2010, 09:31:56 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 11, 2010, 12:20:56 PM
Another interesting tidbit... All 9 WIAC teams are ahead of Wisconsin's lone D-II school, UW Parkside. Parkside's at 801, and the lowest WIAC school Oshkosh, is at 710.
Here's an article about teaching at UW-Parkside:

http://hnn.us/articles/1019.html
Wow! Having read the article, I am glad that UW-Parkside "chose D-II"!

And the results prove Thomas Reeves's point:

UW-Parkside wants better graduation rate: Ranked last in UW System (http://www.journaltimes.com/news/local/education/article_0e17b70c-a00f-11de-a406-001cc4c002e0.html)

OxyBob

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2010, 11:26:07 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2010, 10:27:22 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 11, 2010, 09:52:46 PM
Quote from: OxyBob on January 11, 2010, 09:31:56 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 11, 2010, 12:20:56 PM
Another interesting tidbit... All 9 WIAC teams are ahead of Wisconsin's lone D-II school, UW Parkside. Parkside's at 801, and the lowest WIAC school Oshkosh, is at 710.

Here's an article about teaching at UW-Parkside:

http://hnn.us/articles/1019.html

OxyBob

Wow! Having read the article, I am glad that UW-Parkside "chose D-II"!

Thanks for finding the link. +1! :)

Not so fast.

I applaud Parkside for trying to reach underachieving students. Many will flounder (some of whom will get it together later, and succeed). Some, who would NEVER have been admitted to Occidental or McMurry, will discover the wonders of a real education (perhaps not an option at their high school) and blossom.

I taught at several totally 'open enrollment' schools (and most of my career at Eastern Michigan, which is virtually open enrollment: admitting something like 80% of applicants). It is a tremendous challenge, but also a tremendous opportunity. While I had plenty of students who were majoring in 'beer', and plenty who were (at least for then) hopelessly behind, I also had students who could have gotten a 4.0 at Harvard but were monetarily challenged, and those who simply had the guts to thrive. (I'll never forget one student, totally beaten down by her family then her abusive husband, that I finally approached about 9:30 one December evening: "Diane, if you had not even shown up for the final, you had an A! Everyone else left at least 20 minutes ago, please go home!")

Another tale, about the 'finally got it': I had a student, a marvelous jazz singer, but with NO educational background. She had flunked statistics twice, once from someone else, once from me. Even though I had failed her, she apparently saw something. She tried me for her third (and last) attempt. She got an A (which would have been an A+ if EMU allowed it). She didn't give up; I didn't give up; 'something' finally 'clicked'. She, of course, would never have been admitted at 'most' schools. [She is now a social services administrator (and still a marvelous jazz singer).]

At schools like Parkside, there will be lots of students who are 'not college material' (and, realistically, many will forever be not college material), but I would not want to live in a country where second chances (or, in the case of truly failing high schools, first chances) are not available. Occidental and McMurry are not obligated to take them, but I'm glad there are places like Parkside.

Also, take another look at that article about UW-Parkside -- specifically, the comments section at the bottom. There's a lot of (admittedly anecdotal) testimony that Professor Reeves is that brand of academician with which many of us are, unfortunately, all-too-familiar: The sanctimonious crank.

I have no doubt that there's a lot of truth in the article. I do think that American higher education has been in steep decline for a long time, that phrases such as "diploma mill," "grade inflation," "student apathy," and "education without learning" are valid to varying degrees on various college campuses. But a lot of what goes on in the classroom has to do with the instructor's attitude, demeanor, approachability, care, and concern. There's evidence that Prof. Reeves cooked his own goose by being a haughty, insulting, and intimidating teacher who rightly earned his fate as a frustrated time-server.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: OxyBob on January 12, 2010, 11:43:33 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2010, 11:26:07 AM
Also, take another look at that article about UW-Parkside -- specifically, the comments section at the bottom. There's a lot of (admittedly anecdotal) testimony that Professor Reeves is that brand of academician with which many of us are, unfortunately, all-too-familiar: The sanctimonious crank.

Then again, maybe he knows what he's talking about...

http://www.nas.org/polArticles.cfm?doc_id=708

OxyBob

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2010, 11:51:36 AM

Which parts of these two sentences:

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2010, 11:26:07 AMI have no doubt that there's a lot of truth in the article. I do think that American higher education has been in steep decline for a long time, that phrases such as "diploma mill," "grade inflation," "student apathy," and "education without learning" are valid to varying degrees on various college campuses.

... did you not understand, O-Bob?

I didn't disagree with Reeves's overall diagnosis, nor do I disagree with the content of the article you just posted. What I said was that there is evidence from several former students and from faculty colleagues of Reeves that to some degree he poisoned the atmosphere of his classes with his bad attitude and thus exacerbated the apathy, distance, and desertion he experienced from his students.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dahlby on January 12, 2010, 12:12:24 PM

I have a brother that teaches at a state school in the midwest. The article could have been written by him. The no text book, don't attend classes, didn't study, slept through classes are only a few of the comments I receive from him when I ask about how things are going at...... The best though are, I was late for class because my girlfriend and I partied really late last night and she wanted to sleep in, so she turned off the alarm clock. This excuse was not solicited by my brother, the student came up after class and offered it. The other prime was that I don't have a book because I went to a frat party and spent all my money.

My brother has generous office hours and offers to tutor those having problems in class. He is dedicated to his profession, and never gives up hope. OUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK!!!

Thanks for finding the article.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 12, 2010, 02:00:21 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 12, 2010, 12:09:10 AM
New poll is out:

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/

Any surprises? Point picked up a #1 vote from Wash U, I noticed that...

What's interesting is that, even though Point picked up an extra #1 vote, they lost 2 points on Randolph Macon. And even though Wash U lost a #1 vote, they stayed right where they were points-wise (which, technically, is losing votes compared to the other 5 teams in the top 6).

I have to say, that is a pretty darn good looking top 6... with all of the losses coming within the group or from other top 25 teams.

Here's the top 6 voting from last week to this week:

Place	School	Record	Wk 6	Wk 5	Change
1	Randolph-Macon (12)	13-0	606	597	9
2	UW-Stevens Point (10)	13-1	594	587	7
3	Washington U. (3)	11-1	577	577	0
4	UW-Whitewater	13-1	555	539	16
5	St. Thomas	10-1	526	518	8
6	Guilford	12-1	512	510	2

The top 6 all won and so it was more codified. Randolph Macon increased its lead on the rest of the top 6 except for Whitewater, who probably picked up more of Middlebury's inflated votes than the other 6. Whitewater was likely helped by the re-ranking of Whitworth who comes in at #22. I honestly still think that's too low... they're probably a top 15 team IMO.

The #7 position drifted farther away. Middlebury had been 22 points away and Williams is now 74 points away from #6. That's an average drop of over 3 poll positions and it really shows a separation between the top 6 and everybody else.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 12, 2010, 02:13:19 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 12, 2010, 02:00:21 PM
I have to say, that is a pretty darn good looking top 6... with all of the losses coming within the group or from other top 25 teams.

I agree with your analysis, but with respect to bad losses, none of the top 9 teams have a bad loss. I understand there is a gap in points between 6 and 7, but just thought I would point that out.

Also, big ODAC game between undefeated #1 Randolph Macon and undefeated vs. D3 #18 Eastern Mennonite this Wednesday. If Eastern Mennonite wins that game, do they jump into the top 7? They already beat #8 VWU on the road this year and a win like that would validate that it was not a fluke.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 12, 2010, 02:49:08 PM

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb

D3hoops.com Top 25, with current Massey rating (through Jan. 10) in parenthesis:

1 Randolph-Macon (4)
2 UW-Stevens Point (1)
3 Washington U (12)
4 UW-Whitewater (2)
5 St. Thomas (3)
6 Guilford (7)
7 Williams (15)
8 Virginia Wesleyan (13)
9 MIT (27)
10 Middlebury (54)
11 Franklin & Marshall (67)
12 St. Norbert (14)
13 Amherst (38)
14 Anderson (20)
15 Wilmington (11)
16 Chapman (17)
17 St. Mary's (23)
18 Eastern Mennonite (9)
19 Medaille (40)
20 Brandeis (93)
21 Illinois Wesleyan (19)
22 Whitworth (6)
23 Texas-Dallas (41)
24 UW-La Crosse (5)
25 Mississippi College (52)

D3hoops.com Top 25 teams overrated by more 10 spots or more per Massey (8):

#20 Brandeis, +73
#11 Franklin & Marshall, +56
#10 Middlebury, +44
#13 Amherst, +35
#25 Mississippi College, +27
#19 Medaille, +21
#9 MIT, +18
#23 Texas-Dallas, +18

D3hoops.com Top 25 teams underrated by 10 spots or more per Massey (2):

#24 UW-La Crosse, -19
#22 Whitworth, -16

D3hoops.com Top 25 teams within 10 spots of their Massey rating (15):

#1 Randolph-Macon, +3
#2 UW-Stevens Point, -1
#3 Washington U, +9
#4 UW-Whitewater, -2
#5 St. Thomas, -2
#6 Guilford, +1
#7 Williams, +8
#8 Virginia Wesleyan, +5
#12 St. Norbert, +2
#14 Anderson, +6
#15 Wilmington, -4
#16 Chapman, +1
#17 St. Mary's, +6
#18 Eastern Mennonite, -9
#21 Illinois Wesleyan -2

Teams in Massey top 25 that do not appear in D3hoops.com Top 25:

St. John's (#8)
Augsburg (#10)
Gustavus Adolphus (#16)*
William Paterson (#18)*
Augustana (#21)*
Central (#22)
UW-Stout (#24)
UW-Eau Claire (#25)

* receiving votes D3hoops.com

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 12, 2010, 03:18:37 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 12, 2010, 02:00:21 PMI have to say, that is a pretty darn good looking top 6... with all of the losses coming within the group or from other top 25 teams.

Except Wash U. Transylvania (now 8-6 after losing by 19 at home to Anderson) is not even receiving votes..Massey #128.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 12, 2010, 05:58:08 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 12, 2010, 02:13:19 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 12, 2010, 02:00:21 PM
I have to say, that is a pretty darn good looking top 6... with all of the losses coming within the group or from other top 25 teams.

I agree with your analysis, but with respect to bad losses, none of the top 9 teams have a bad loss. I understand there is a gap in points between 6 and 7, but just thought I would point that out.

Also, big ODAC game between undefeated #1 Randolph Macon and undefeated vs. D3 #18 Eastern Mennonite this Wednesday. If Eastern Mennonite wins that game, do they jump into the top 7? They already beat #8 VWU on the road this year and a win like that would validate that it was not a fluke.

I agree. I wasn't trying to downplay the rest of the top 10... it seems like our top 10 is very solid finally and that the teams in those spots really should be. They haven't percolated up because other teams have lost (though that is certainly true)... It's on their own merit. 'Course, now that I say that, they'll all lose two bad games this week and make us all look silly!

Quote from: Titan Q on January 12, 2010, 03:18:37 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 12, 2010, 02:00:21 PMI have to say, that is a pretty darn good looking top 6... with all of the losses coming within the group or from other top 25 teams.

Except Wash U. Transylvania (now 8-6 after losing by 19 at home to Anderson) is not even receiving votes..Massey #128.

True, I did forget about Wash U and Transy... is that still considered a bad loss because of who Wash U was missing? (I don't remember who it was... Kelley? Is he back yet?)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 12, 2010, 06:05:55 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 12, 2010, 05:58:08 PM
True, I did forget about Wash U and Transy... is that still considered a bad loss because of who Wash U was missing? (I don't remember who it was... Kelley? Is he back yet?)

Yes, indeed, Zach Kelley was out and Caleb Knepper had missed a game and, I believe, a number of practices, though you would not know that based on the way he played a day later.

Kelley returned on Saturday for 16 minutes and seemed to play well against the Chicago big men.

All things considered, I am not sure how you could call it anything other than a bad loss.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 12, 2010, 06:23:34 PM

The excitement over Whitworth is a mystery to me. I understand that early season games do not always provide good predictors on how well a team will play as the season rolls on, but take out the win over UW-Whitewater and what do you have?

I was not impressed with Whitworth in St. Louis versus Pomona-Pitzer and equally unimpressed by the win over McKendree (that was the perfect example of McKendree having a team on the ropes). Seriously, McKendree is not that good.

What else do they have? A huge loss to UW-Stevens Point and an equally huge win over UW-Whitewater. Two wins over the Banana Slugs.

I defended this team in the thread early on (in part, because I did not see the margin of loss in the first game). I am an amateur fan at best. I admit it. So, what am I missing here?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 12, 2010, 06:25:04 PM

And, can someone tell me why my karma went down? What did I do?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 12, 2010, 06:38:04 PM

Quote from: WUH on January 12, 2010, 06:23:34 PM
The excitement over Whitworth is a mystery to me. I understand that early season games do not always provide good predictors on how well a team will play as the season rolls on, but take out the win over UW-Whitewater and what do you have?

I was not impressed with Whitworth in St. Louis versus Pomona-Pitzer and equally unimpressed by the win over McKendree (that was the perfect example of McKendree having a team on the ropes). Seriously, McKendree is not that good.

What else do they have? A huge loss to UW-Stevens Point and an equally huge win over UW-Whitewater. Two wins over the Banana Slugs.

I defended this team in the thread early on (in part, because I did not see the margin of loss in the first game). I am an amateur fan at best. I admit it. So, what am I missing here?

Note that Stevens Point has beaten a few good teams handily...

UW-SP 101 Whitworth 79
UW-SP 78 St. Thomas 56
UW-SP 73 UW-La Crosse 57

Early on I was holding that margin of defeat against Whitworth, but I no longer am. The Pointers appear to be the real deal.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 12, 2010, 08:04:07 PM

Quote from: WUH on January 12, 2010, 06:23:34 PM
The excitement over Whitworth is a mystery to me. I understand that early season games do not always provide good predictors on how well a team will play as the season rolls on, but take out the win over UW-Whitewater and what do you have?

I was not impressed with Whitworth in St. Louis versus Pomona-Pitzer and equally unimpressed by the win over McKendree (that was the perfect example of McKendree having a team on the ropes). Seriously, McKendree is not that good.

What else do they have? A huge loss to UW-Stevens Point and an equally huge win over UW-Whitewater. Two wins over the Banana Slugs.

I defended this team in the thread early on (in part, because I did not see the margin of loss in the first game). I am an amateur fan at best. I admit it. So, what am I missing here?

At this point I think it has more to do with the fact that they've played some top teams and gotten results. Granted, some of their games have been against weak opponents, but no more so than 2/3rds of the Top 25 at this point.

It seems like there are fewer teams with strong early season schedules this year. I believe conference play will give us a better picture of where teams really are in the weeks to come.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 12, 2010, 09:22:44 PM

OK, thanks guys for your thoughts.

It does seem to me as well that there are fewer teams with strong early season schedules, especially compared to last year.

Well, I think I am going to go watch the latest buzzer beaters again. That Wheaton/WPI might be my favorite so far.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 12, 2010, 11:47:47 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 12, 2010, 06:38:04 PM
Note that Stevens Point has beaten a few good teams handily...

UW-SP 101 Whitworth 79
UW-SP 78 St. Thomas 56
UW-SP 73 UW-La Crosse 57

Early on I was holding that margin of defeat against Whitworth, but I no longer am. The Pointers appear to be the real deal.

I agree, Q. No other team in the poll has 3 wins over a currently ranked Top 25 team, much less 3 double digit whippings. Washington U comes close with 3 wins over teams that were ranked at the time the games took place(IWU, Wheaton, and Augustana) and Randoph-Macon has done the same.(DeSales, Wooster, and Williams) But the dominance by the Pointers has been unmatched. They're #1 in my book.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on January 13, 2010, 03:07:59 AM

Quote from: WUH on January 12, 2010, 06:23:34 PM
The excitement over Whitworth is a mystery to me. I understand that early season games do not always provide good predictors on how well a team will play as the season rolls on, but take out the win over UW-Whitewater and what do you have?

I was not impressed with Whitworth in St. Louis versus Pomona-Pitzer and equally unimpressed by the win over McKendree (that was the perfect example of McKendree having a team on the ropes). Seriously, McKendree is not that good.

What else do they have? A huge loss to UW-Stevens Point and an equally huge win over UW-Whitewater. Two wins over the Banana Slugs.

I defended this team in the thread early on (in part, because I did not see the margin of loss in the first game). I am an amateur fan at best. I admit it. So, what am I missing here?

In the what have you done for me lately department. Whitworth has not been defeated since the loss to PP and has led every minute of their 4 conference games except for 30 seconds in the opening minute vs LC. Add the last 23:43 of Wisc-WW and thats every minute but :30 for their last 183 minutes of basketball. 10 game winning streak, take away the PP loss (by 1) and Point Special is correct, WW would be a top 10 today. Clearly one of the hottest teams in D3. The win over Whitewater validates their accomplishments and improvement after the poor opening night showing against a very good #2 team in Stevens Point. Finally, the Massey info lends even more credence to their reinstatement in the poll as a big mover.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 13, 2010, 10:11:10 AM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on January 13, 2010, 03:07:59 AM
In the what have you done for me lately department. Whitworth has not been defeated since the loss to PP and has led every minute of their 4 conference games except for 30 seconds in the opening minute vs LC. Add the last 23:43 of Wisc-WW and thats every minute but :30 for their last 183 minutes of basketball. 10 game winning streak, take away the PP loss (by 1) and Point Special is correct, WW would be a top 10 today. Clearly one of the hottest teams in D3. The win over Whitewater validates their accomplishments and improvement after the poor opening night showing against a very good #2 team in Stevens Point. Finally, the Massey info lends even more credence to their reinstatement in the poll as a big mover.

Thanks for the response. I ask about Whitworth because it is one of the few teams I watched play this year. I realize that both games were early season, but I was not particuarly impressed with either game. And, if you take a cursory glance at the schedule, practically every team they played has a losing record.

So, huge win, huge loss, good wins against McKendree (13-5) and UW-Stout (7-7) and the rest, well I will take you word on it. I trust the experts here.

(modified by GS for formatting)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 13, 2010, 07:03:27 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 12, 2010, 11:47:47 PM
I agree, Q. No other team in the poll has 3 wins over a currently ranked Top 25 team, much less 3 double digit whippings. Washington U comes close with 3 wins over teams that were ranked at the time the games took place(IWU, Wheaton, and Augustana) and Randoph-Macon has done the same.(DeSales, Wooster, and Williams) But the dominance by the Pointers has been unmatched. They're #1 in my book.

Point also beat Puget Sound by double digits when they were ranked at the beginning of the year as well...a day after taking care of Whitworth.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 13, 2010, 07:11:25 PM

Quote from: WUH on January 13, 2010, 10:11:10 AM
So, huge win, huge loss, good wins against McKendree (13-5) and UW-Stout (7-7) and the rest, well I will take you word on it. I trust the experts here.

I wouldn't get too excited about that "good" win over Stout just yet. Though they've won two in a row, including an upset win over Platteville, they've only beaten one team above .500, and that was Platteville.

Some say in the WIAC board that they are starting to improve and could pull an upset or two more before the conference season ends, but all because they are a WIAC team doesn't automatically mean it's a good win.

edit: Lewis and Clark State is currently 10-6

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 13, 2010, 07:42:21 PM

OK, I promise that this is the last post I will ever make regarding Whitworth, because obviously I do not know a lot about basketball outside of my Washington University bubble.

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on January 13, 2010, 07:11:25 PM
I wouldn't get too excited about that "good" win over Stout just yet. Though they've won two in a row, including an upset win over Platteville, they've only beaten one team above .500, and that was Platteville.

I referred to the win over Stout as a good win because, after a very quick glance at the records and Massey Ratings, they are the next best win after Whitewater and McKendree. And, this is really why I brought this up in the first place. Whitworth has eight wins over teams with losing records. Even if you looked at Whitworth as a one loss team...OK, nevermind.

Thanks again for everyone that addressed my question.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 13, 2010, 08:10:08 PM

Quote
I referred to the win over Stout as a good win because, after a very quick glance at the records and Massey Ratings, they are the next best win after Whitewater and McKendree. And, this is really why I brought this up in the first place. Whitworth has eight wins over teams with losing records. Even if you looked at Whitworth as a one loss team...OK, nevermind.

Thanks again for everyone that addressed my question.

... I dunno that this:

Quote from: WUH on January 13, 2010, 07:42:21 PM
OK, I promise that this is the last post I will ever make regarding Whitworth, because obviously I do not know a lot about basketball outside of my Washington University bubble.

I've read your posts and I think you've got great insight that extends beyond one school in St. Louis.

I think OS's comment...

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on January 13, 2010, 07:11:25 PM
I wouldn't get too excited about that "good" win over Stout just yet. Though they've won two in a row, including an upset win over Platteville, they've only beaten one team above .500, and that was Platteville.

... is merely tempering any great excitement over the Blue Devils. They are again a .500 team, and they're not the bottom-most team in the conference. In fact, as OS said, they've won two straight, including a win over a pretty good Platteville team. And if you look at Stout's 4 conference losses, three of them are to the top three (and ranked) conference teams. I think that this win will look better for Whitworth... and I was the one who was saying that Whitworth was too low. I watched Stout/Whitewater, and they (Stout) had Whitewater on the ropes. As it turns out, I also watched Whitworth/Whitewater... and I could see the type of team they appeared to be and the team they seemed like they could become.

And though they haven't beaten a ton of top teams, they have beaten the teams that they've played (except for P-P) that they were supposed to beat. And one they weren't. What else do they need to do?

I think at this point of the season, there are teams that fall in one of several categories.

1. They started strong, and they continue strong
2. They started strong, and they have declined
3. They started slowly and have gotten better
4. They started slowly and haven't gotten better
5. ? (in other words, you can't ever really tell where they are or where they're going)

I think Whitworth is in category 1. Stout is in category 3.

As an aside, EMU has extended a 6 point halftime lead on R-MC to 15 about 4 minutes into the second half.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 13, 2010, 08:18:31 PM

Eastern Mennonite's lead on Randoph-Macon is now 20, 71-51 with 12:28 in the half.

R-MC is going to need another monumental comeback to win this one!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 13, 2010, 08:39:04 PM

Eastern Mennonite is up 89-67 on RMC with just 3:00 to play now. Pointers will be the new #1 if they don't lose this week

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 13, 2010, 08:42:24 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 13, 2010, 08:39:04 PM
Eastern Mennonite is up 89-67 on RMC with just 3:00 to play now. Pointers will be the new #1 if they don't lose this week

They're up 38-10 on UW Platteville with under 2 minutes left in the first half. They've held the Pios to 3 first half field goals.

Now 40-14... Platteville's on a tear, two straight buckets.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 13, 2010, 08:48:02 PM

Final: Eastern Mennonite 90 Randy-Macon 67

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 13, 2010, 09:06:59 PM

Wheaton up on Augustana 29-22 with 2:30 left in the 1st half

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 13, 2010, 09:16:04 PM

MIT trounces WPI 76-53. WPI was held to 11 points below their lowest scoring output of the year (and that was in a win) and 30 points below their scoring average. Mitch Kates controlled the tempo of the entire game, but there were a lot of contributors. Noel Hollingsworth had another impressive perfomance with 16 points and 10 rebounds (9th double-double of year) on 7-10 shooting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 13, 2010, 09:19:35 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 13, 2010, 08:48:02 PM
Final: Eastern Mennonite 90 Randy-Macon 67

That deserves a :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 13, 2010, 09:26:24 PM

If Randolph-Macon was the #1 team last weak, than what does that make Eastern Mennonite?

Do you think any voter will have the guts to put them at #1? I bet you if they started in the top 10 preseason they would be getting some votes there after this result (with the VWU result). They still have no d3 losses.

They should at least join MIT in the top 10 next week as the only two teams to have no d3 losses this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 13, 2010, 09:29:40 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 13, 2010, 09:26:24 PM
They should at least join MIT in the top 10 next week as the only two teams to have no d3 losses this year.

Medaille.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 13, 2010, 09:34:41 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 13, 2010, 09:29:40 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 13, 2010, 09:26:24 PM
They should at least join MIT in the top 10 next week as the only two teams to have no d3 losses this year.
Medaille.

You beat me to it! :P

Also, though they have 9 total losses between them, Linfield and Occidental are both undefeated against d3.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 13, 2010, 09:40:41 PM

Imagine if Vegas had odds on which D3 team would be the last undefeated team. Then try to imagine what the odds would have been that Medaille would be that team. A $10.00 wager would have won you some serious money.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 13, 2010, 09:44:45 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 13, 2010, 09:40:41 PM
Imagine if Vegas had odds on which D3 team would be the last undefeated team. Then try to imagine what the odds would have been that Medaille would be that team. A $10.00 wager would have won you some serious money.

Oh, man, on a $10 bet I could retire!

[Oh, wait, I already did! ;D]

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 13, 2010, 09:55:12 PM

Oshkosh giving another top 5 team a scare... Whitewater and Oshkosh are in OT in WW. :30 seconds left and WW has the ball and a 2 point lead 58-56.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 13, 2010, 09:58:53 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 13, 2010, 09:34:41 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 13, 2010, 09:29:40 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 13, 2010, 09:26:24 PM
They should at least join MIT in the top 10 next week as the only two teams to have no d3 losses this year.
Medaille.

You beat me to it! :P

Also, though they have 9 total losses between them, Linfield and Occidental are both undefeated against d3.

I misworded my comment. I meant to say:

"They should at least join MIT in the top 10 next week as the only two teams to have no d3 losses this year in the top 10."

I remember Medaille, but I dont think they will get into the top 10 next week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 13, 2010, 10:06:09 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 13, 2010, 09:55:12 PM
Oshkosh giving another top 5 team a scare... Whitewater and Oshkosh are in OT in WW. :30 seconds left and WW has the ball and a 2 point lead 58-56.

#4 WW survived 62-58. ~~#23~~ #24 La Crosse wasn't so lucky, they lost to River Falls 83-75. #2 Point beat Platteville 74-53

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 13, 2010, 10:11:42 PM

In St. Peter MN, Gustavus Adolphus leads #5 St. Thomas 53-51 with 1:23. Tommie's ball.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 13, 2010, 10:19:23 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 13, 2010, 10:11:42 PM
In St. Peter MN, Gustavus Adolphus leads #5 St. Thomas 53-51 with 1:23. Tommie's ball.

GAC beats #5 UST 56-51

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on January 13, 2010, 10:20:33 PM

St. Thomas falls to Gustavus 56-51. 19 TO by the Tommies.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hasanova on January 13, 2010, 10:56:46 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 13, 2010, 09:34:41 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 13, 2010, 09:29:40 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 13, 2010, 09:26:24 PM
They should at least join MIT in the top 10 next week as the only two teams to have no d3 losses this year.
Medaille.

You beat me to it! :P

Also, though they have 9 total losses between them, Linfield and Occidental are both undefeated against d3.

Medaille lost to d3 Pitt-Bradford tonight, 68-65.

formatting fixed

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 14, 2010, 12:05:13 AM

Quote from: hasanova on January 13, 2010, 10:56:46 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 13, 2010, 09:34:41 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 13, 2010, 09:29:40 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 13, 2010, 09:26:24 PM
They should at least join MIT in the top 10 next week as the only two teams to have no d3 losses this year.
Medaille.
Medaille lost to d3 Pitt-Bradford tonight, 68-65.

You beat me to it! :P

Also, though they have 9 total losses between them, Linfield and Occidental are both undefeated against d3.

They are definitely not getting into the top 10 now. They may be lucky to stay in the Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 14, 2010, 06:45:09 AM

How They Fared -- Midweek report

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	606	Randolph-Macon	13-1	LOST at #18 Eastern Mennonite, 67-90; 01/16 vs. Emory and Henry
#2	594	UW-Stevens Point	14-1	def. UW-Platteville, 74-53; 01/16 at UW-Superior
#3	577	Washington U.	11-1	01/15 vs. #20 Brandeis; 01/17 vs. New York University
#4	555	UW-Whitewater	14-1	def. UW-Oshkosh, 62-58 OT; 01/16 at UW-Eau Claire
#5	526	St. Thomas	11-2	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 77-68; LOST at #39 Gustavus Adolphus, 51-56; 01/16 vs. St. John's
#6	512	Guilford	13-1	def. Emory and Henry, 99-57; 01/16 vs. #8 Virginia Wesleyan
#7	438	Williams	12-1	01/15 vs. Tufts; 01/16 vs. Bates
#8	418	Virginia Wesleyan	14-1	def. Hampden-Sydney, 69-67; 01/16 at #6 Guilford
#9	329	MIT	14-1	def. #36 Worcester Polytech, 76-53; 01/16 at Clark
#10	328	Middlebury	12-1	01/15 vs. Bates; 01/16 vs. Tufts
#11	322	Franklin and Marshall	11-2	def. Muhlenberg, 80-58; 01/14 vs. Washington College; 01/16 vs. McDaniel
#12	318	St. Norbert	10-1	01/15 vs. Knox; 01/16 vs. Grinnell
#13	302	Amherst	8-3	LOST at Babson, 59-65; 01/15 vs. Wesleyan; 01/16 vs. Connecticut College
#14	272	Anderson	14-1	def. Rose-Hulman, 68-65; 01/16 vs. Hanover
#15	255	Wilmington	12-3	LOST to Capital, 73-78; 01/16 at Marietta
#16	233	Chapman	14-2	def. West Coast Baptist, 77-59; def. La Sierra, 77-48
#17	212	St. Mary's (Md.)	12-2	def. Mary Washington, 91-86; 01/16 vs. Gallaudet
#18	192	Eastern Mennonite	12-1	def. #1 Randolph-Macon, 90-67; 01/16 at Randolph
#19	177	Medaille	13-1	LOST at Pitt-Bradford, 65-68; 01/16 vs. Pitt-Greensburg
#20	150	Brandeis	9-2	def. Bates, 81-57; 01/15 at #3 Washington U.; 01/17 at Chicago
#21	138	Illinois Wesleyan	12-2	def. Millikin, 75-71; 01/17 at Elmhurst
#22	126	Whitworth	11-2	01/15 at Puget Sound; 01/16 at Pacific Lutheran
#23	92	Texas-Dallas	10-3	01/14 at East Texas Baptist; 01/16 at LeTourneau
#24	81	UW-La Crosse	12-4	LOST to UW-River Falls, 75-83
#25	68	Mississippi College	11-2	def. Louisiana College, 76-63; 01/16 vs. Texas-Tyler

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	60	Wheaton (Ill.)	10-4	def. #30 Augustana, 69-63; 01/16 at North Park
#27	59	Wooster	10-4	def. Allegheny, 69-68; 01/16 vs. Earlham
#28	51	Richard Stockton	12-3	def. Hunter, 99-90; def. Kean, 82-68; 01/16 at #31 William Paterson
#29	29	John Carroll	9-5	LOST to Heidelberg, 81-85; 01/16 at Ohio Northern
#30	23	Augustana	9-5	LOST at #26 Wheaton (Ill.), 63-69; 01/16 vs. #38 Carthage
#31	19	William Paterson	14-1	def. Rutgers-Newark, 61-57; 01/16 vs. #28 Richard Stockton
#32	14	McMurry	8-4	01/14 at Texas Lutheran; 01/16 at Schreiner
#33	11	Western Connecticut	9-3	LOST at Keene State, 90-96; 01/16 at Mass-Boston
#34	10	DeSales	10-4	def. Misericordia, 74-60; 01/16 at FDU-Florham
#35	8	Hope	8-6	LOST to Olivet, 64-67; 01/16 vs. Kalamazoo
#36	7	Worcester Polytech	11-3	LOST at #9 MIT, 53-76; 01/16 vs. Coast Guard
#37	5	York (Pa.)	12-3	LOST at Salisbury, 71-78; 01/16 vs. Stevenson
#38	3	Carthage	10-4	def. Elmhurst, 79-52; 01/16 at #30 Augustana
#39	2	Gustavus Adolphus	10-3	def. #5 St. Thomas, 56-51; 01/16 at Bethel
T#40	1	Cabrini	10-1	def. Gwynedd-Mercy, 83-68; 01/14 vs. Keystone; 01/16 vs. Rosemont
T#40	1	Defiance	12-3	01/16 vs. Franklin
T#40	1	St. John Fisher	11-2	def. Keuka, 69-45; 01/15 vs. TBA; 01/16 vs. TBA

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 14, 2010, 07:20:13 AM

If EMU doesn't lose again until the next poll, I don't see how they can possibly be any lower than fourth, but really, it seems like, at this point, there is a clear top two, in some order, with EMU and Stevens Point, followed by Wash U., the Guilford-VWC winner, UWW, and RMC, in some order. If you didn't base anything on the name of the school, EMU would be number one -- blowing out a number one team, a road win over another top ten team, destroying almost every other team on the schedule, no D-3 losses? Impressive. Stevens Point is really the only team with an argument, based on results to date, maybe Wash U. since you have to give some credit to two straight national titles.

If Williams takes care of business this weekend at home, I would think they move into sixth after that group, with MIT right behind in seventh. If they don't, they deserve a serious drop, as these are the last easy games before a very tough stretch with 7/9 on the road (including at Midd) and two loseable home games against top-half NESCAC squads (Bowdoin and Colby).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BUBeaverFan on January 14, 2010, 08:03:07 AM

One Mennonite school at or the near the top of the mountain, Eastern Mennonite, and one at or the near the bottom, Bluffton University.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 14, 2010, 11:31:55 AM

nescac1 - interesting points... but to your Williams... I for one am not completely convinced they are really great. I have seen Amherst in action... and with just a three point win over Amherst (who I have 22 in my last poll)... I can't push Williams higher then the #16 slot I have them in now. (Though, should we punish them for the $15 a game internet/video charge? :)). Though... I am just one voter.

As for RMC/EMU... WOW! I thought it would be a battle, but that is an impressive win my EMU. Certainly makes some things easier and tougher at the same time for voters.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 14, 2010, 02:39:45 PM

I won't claim that Williams is truly great yet, which is why I wouldn't rank them in the top five. But to punish them for a close margin (and they were up 11 with three minutes left, a lot of weird things happened to close the gap including some odd calls, a few missed fron-end of one-and-one's which is not the Williams norm, and two ridiculous 3's by Amherst) over a very talented team who also happens to be their arch rival (for example, in 2007 a 16-12 Williams teams managed to beat eventual national champion Amherst in the NESCAC final on its home court ... weird things happen in rivalry games) seems a bit unfair. Really, outside of Wash U. and the top-tier WIAC and ODAC teams, no one has looked ALL that great this year. For all of the squads which, I imagine, you rank between 7-16 or so, I could easily point to a few losses and/or narrow wins that make you say hmmmmm. At least Williams is 12-1, their loss was a very close road loss to a top-tier squad, and they've blown out every bad team they've played.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 14, 2010, 02:49:22 PM

nescac1 - my point is... if I have Williams #16 on my ballot... they still haven't given me a reason to move them into #10 or higher. I have seen Amherst play and while I agree it was a rivalry game, if Williams is going to move into #10 on my ballot... they had to do more then squeak that game out. I understand rivalry games, but I also understand that if a team is good enough to be #10 on my ballot... beating a team I barely have on my ballot by a couple points isn't good enough.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dc_has_been on January 14, 2010, 02:58:45 PM

My queston to Dave 'd-mac' McHugh, is what do you do with a team who is a dominate team and is in the top 25, but drops one to a team that is near .500? I'm trying to get a clear picture to see how people rank teams, especially when there are sooooooooo many teams in college basketball, all divisions.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 14, 2010, 03:28:12 PM

Jeez - that isn't easy. Who is the team near .500? Who have they beaten or lost to? The team that is dominating? Who have they really beaten?

All I am saying is I am not going to vault Williams into my Top 10 for a win over Amherst. They are #16... Amherst is #22 (my ballot) so I expected that win.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 14, 2010, 03:50:40 PM

I understand what you are saying. But here's the thing -- from around 8 through 15 (I would guess) on your ballot, I don't think there are going to be many teams with wins BETTER than Williams' win vs. Amherst, and if a team does have such a win, they almost certainly have at least one loss, possibly more than one loss, WORSE than Williams' only loss, by five at RMC. There really aren't more than 5-6 teams at this point who have a few quality wins without a few questionable losses ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dc_has_been on January 14, 2010, 04:02:21 PM

Dave, I'm refering to WashingtonU's loss to Transy. The rest of the top 25 have losses to teams in the top 25 except St. Thomas, but even their losses are to teams in the top 25 or receiving votes category. So I guess I'm wondering where you would put WashU in your poll?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 14, 2010, 04:38:51 PM

Quote from: dc_has_been on January 14, 2010, 04:02:21 PM
Dave, I'm refering to WashingtonU's loss to Transy. The rest of the top 25 have losses to teams in the top 25 except St. Thomas, but even their losses are to teams in the top 25 or receiving votes category. So I guess I'm wondering where you would put WashU in your poll?

Correction, Eastern Mennonite and MIT have not lost to any D3 teams yet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 14, 2010, 04:41:30 PM

Wash U is #1 on my poll (shocking, I know). I just didn't have the mindset to put them below RMC (though, thought about it a second again this week) and while UWSP certainly looks strong, they lost to UWW, which I have above UWSP in my poll... and I couldn't put UWW above Wash U simply because I think Wash U is the better team.

That being said, it has concerned me with the games Wash U has had against teams I think they should dominate. My top 5 or 6 teams are all close together in my mind and I have spent plenty of time putting them in different slots over and over again until I was at least some what comfortable. The last two weeks it has been Wash U, RMC, UWW, UWSP, St. Thomas, Guilford. That will certainly undergo some changes this week... and I will once again debate if Wash U deserves that #1 vote from be (baring a loss).

And to answer nescac1's question... I don't think Williams better then the teams I have in the 8-15 slots.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ECSUalum on January 14, 2010, 04:54:15 PM

Congrats to the Engineers with their win over Conference rival, WPI, the other Engineers!

Although MIT's focus still as to be on reg season and Conference Championship, they will soon need to start to scout out other top New England teams to prepare for NCAA tourney 8-).

Good luck for rest of season.

PS, Would love to see MIT dump Haarvud next year, as next year should be unbelievable!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dc_has_been on January 14, 2010, 04:55:24 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 14, 2010, 04:38:51 PM
Quote from: dc_has_been on January 14, 2010, 04:02:21 PM
Dave, I'm refering to WashingtonU's loss to Transy. The rest of the top 25 have losses to teams in the top 25 except St. Thomas, but even their losses are to teams in the top 25 or receiving votes category. So I guess I'm wondering where you would put WashU in your poll?

Correction, Eastern Mennonite and MIT have not lost to any D3 teams yet.

hugenerd, my bad, I meant to put the top 5. I'm not sure about the rest of the 20 teams and who their losses are to.

Dave, thanks for letting me in on the info.
IMO, I would have UWSP at the #1 considering their loss did come to UWW, but still it was at UWW place and a game that went to OT. Since then they've pretty much dominated their competition having the smallest margin of victory being 6 points. I would put UWW at the #2, Guilford 3 only losing to Virginia Wesleyan at VW's place by 3, Wash U 4 and Virginia 5 to make thing interesting for Saturday. And that would be my top 5 and two cents! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Rhodes Scholar on January 14, 2010, 05:12:24 PM

Here's a little info on Southern Virginia University, the only team to defeat Eastern Mennonite this year:

They're an NAIA 2 independent, with a 10-4 record. Two of those losses were to NCAA D1 opponents (Liberty and Campbell). SVU is 5-1 against D3 teams this year:

Bridgewater, VA (4-8) W, 91-65
vs. Wesley (7-6) @ CNU W, 76-71
at CNU (6-7) L, 93-82 (OT)
@ Shenandoah (4-11) W, 82-79
EMU (12-1) W, 92-79
Shenandoah (4-11) W, 93-79

EMU has a return game at home with SVU on January 28.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 14, 2010, 05:18:39 PM

Good to see you back in the national rooms, Rhodes!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Rhodes Scholar on January 14, 2010, 05:56:04 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 14, 2010, 05:18:39 PM
Good to see you back in the national rooms, Rhodes!

Thanks, Greg. However I'm doing more lurking now than posting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dc_has_been on January 14, 2010, 06:04:01 PM

Quote from: Rhodes Scholar on January 14, 2010, 05:12:24 PM
Here's a little info on Southern Virginia University, the only team to defeat Eastern Mennonite this year:

They're an NAIA 2 independent, with a 10-4 record. Two of those losses were to NCAA D1 opponents (Liberty and Campbell). SVU is 5-1 against D3 teams this year:

Bridgewater, VA (4-8) W, 91-65
vs. Wesley (7-6) @ CNU W, 76-71
at CNU (6-7) L, 93-82 (OT)
@ Shenandoah (4-11) W, 82-79
EMU (12-1) W, 92-79
Shenandoah (4-11) W, 93-79

EMU has a return game at home with SVU on January 28.

What were the scores to their losses to Liberty and Campbell, and is CNU Christopher Newport(think that's the schools name)?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 14, 2010, 06:49:34 PM

I believe that I once read a suggestion that people post live video feeds for Top 25 teams or maybe it was conference specific.

And, this may have already been posted here, but I was searching around on the Washington University website and discovered that Stretch Internet, the video provider for a host of schools, posts a list of all Stretch audio and video feeds on a daily basis. This may help feed your basketball addition: http://secure.stretchinternet.com/broadcasts.php?time=1264060800

Of course, a lot of the video feeds to come with a charge. :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hasanova on January 14, 2010, 07:14:44 PM

Quote from: dc_has_been on January 14, 2010, 06:04:01 PM
Quote from: Rhodes Scholar on January 14, 2010, 05:12:24 PM
Here's a little info on Southern Virginia University, the only team to defeat Eastern Mennonite this year:

They're an NAIA 2 independent, with a 10-4 record. Two of those losses were to NCAA D1 opponents (Liberty and Campbell). SVU is 5-1 against D3 teams this year:

Bridgewater, VA (4-8) W, 91-65
vs. Wesley (7-6) @ CNU W, 76-71
at CNU (6-7) L, 93-82 (OT)
@ Shenandoah (4-11) W, 82-79
EMU (12-1) W, 92-79
Shenandoah (4-11) W, 93-79

EMU has a return game at home with SVU on January 28.
What were the scores to their losses to Liberty and Campbell, and is CNU Christopher Newport(think that's the schools name)?

Yes, CNU is Christopher Newport from the USA South Conference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 14, 2010, 08:15:32 PM

Quote from: dc_has_been on January 14, 2010, 04:55:24 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 14, 2010, 04:38:51 PM
Quote from: dc_has_been on January 14, 2010, 04:02:21 PM
Dave, I'm refering to WashingtonU's loss to Transy. The rest of the top 25 have losses to teams in the top 25 except St. Thomas, but even their losses are to teams in the top 25 or receiving votes category. So I guess I'm wondering where you would put WashU in your poll?

Correction, Eastern Mennonite and MIT have not lost to any D3 teams yet.
hugenerd, my bad, I meant to put the top 5. I'm not sure about the rest of the 20 teams and who their losses are to.

Dave, thanks for letting me in on the info.
IMO, I would have UWSP at the #1 considering their loss did come to UWW, but still it was at UWW place and a game that went to OT. Since then they've pretty much dominated their competition having the smallest margin of victory being 6 points. I would put UWW at the #2, Guilford 3 only losing to Virginia Wesleyan at VW's place by 3, Wash U 4 and Virginia 5 to make thing interesting for Saturday. And that would be my top 5 and two cents! ;)

No big deal. I believe there are only 3 teams left that are undefeated against D3 (no undefeated overall with the two losses yesterday, according to the undefeated board). Eastern Mennonite only has the loss to Southern Virginia listed previously on this board and MIT has only lost to D1 Harvard. Linfield has only played 4 D3 games and is 6-6 overall (and therefore unranked). Eastern Mennonite and MIT are the only ranked undefeated vs. D3 teams left.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 14, 2010, 10:07:48 PM

F&M falls to previously 5-5 Washington College on their own court, 68-63 (in OT). This is F&M's 3rd loss to an unranked opponent.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hasanova on January 14, 2010, 10:15:32 PM

Quote from: dc_has_been on January 14, 2010, 06:04:01 PM
Quote from: Rhodes Scholar on January 14, 2010, 05:12:24 PM
Here's a little info on Southern Virginia University, the only team to defeat Eastern Mennonite this year:

They're an NAIA 2 independent, with a 10-4 record. Two of those losses were to NCAA D1 opponents (Liberty and Campbell). SVU is 5-1 against D3 teams this year:

Bridgewater, VA (4-8) W, 91-65
vs. Wesley (7-6) @ CNU W, 76-71
at CNU (6-7) L, 93-82 (OT)
@ Shenandoah (4-11) W, 82-79
EMU (12-1) W, 92-79
Shenandoah (4-11) W, 93-79

EMU has a return game at home with SVU on January 28.
What were the scores to their losses to Liberty and Campbell, and is CNU Christopher Newport(think that's the schools name)?

http://athletics.svu.edu/sports/mbkb/2009-10/schedule

Southern Virginia lost to Liberty, 89-53, and to Campbell, 86-58.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 14, 2010, 10:33:23 PM

Texas-Dallas edges East Texas Baptist 73-70 to hang on to their spot in the Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 14, 2010, 11:58:41 PM

With 7 losses already this week in the Top 25 and at least 2 more to come because of ranked teams matched up against each other there will be some significant changes once again in next week's poll. #24 LaCrosse, #19 Medaille, #15 Wilmington, #13 Amherst and #11 Franklin & Marshall will all take a tumble, the question is how far will they fall. There is a possibility that all 5 could drop into the ORV category. And with another loss, Brandeis (next up Wash U), Mississippi College (next up Texas-Tyler), and Texas-Dallas (next up LeTourneau) could join them. Texas-Dallas almost punched their ticket into the ORV tonight but hit 3 straight 3 pointers to break loose from a 57 all tie with East Texas Baptist and hold on for the victory.

Bubbling under the Top 25 are a bunch of teams looking to either move back in or crack the poll for the 1st time this year. Best chance for firsters if they win out for the week could be William Patterson currently 14-1 but a big game upcoming on Sat. against Richard Stockton. If they beat the Ospreys I think they move into the poll with a 15-1 record. Their only loss was to a pretty good Oneonta State team that Massey has ranked at #49, better than 10 other teams that are ranked or recieving votes. Massey has William Patterson currently ranked #18. St John Fisher would be another 1st timer that could make the leap if they win the Wendy's Classic in Rochester (formerly known as the Chase Classic) this weekend. They would end the week with a 13-2 record if that happens. Massey currently has them ranked at #26. Wheaton (Ill.), and Wooster, with 1 win for the week and Richard Stockton with 2 wins for the week all have 1 game remaining on Saturday. A win then, by any of these 3 teams, could vault them back up into the rankings.

Assuming they win their weekend games it looks like the top spot will be Stevens Point, followed by Washington U, Whitewater and probably Guilford. If Eastern Mennonite hadn't been so far down in the rankings their signature win on Wednesday night might have boosted them into the top 3 or 4 but I think the 5 spot is as high as they'll climb, if they get lucky. Not a lot of tradition there and we all know about the name recognition factor and the importance it plays. It'll be interesting to see their placement in next week's poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 15, 2010, 12:12:58 AM

Quote from: magicman on January 14, 2010, 11:58:41 PM
With 7 losses already this week in the Top 25 and at least 2 more to come because of ranked teams matched up against each other there will be some significant changes once again in next week's poll. #24 LaCrosse, #19 Medaille, #15 Wilmington, #13 Amherst and #11 Franklin & Marshall will all take a tumble, the question is how far will they fall. There is a possibility that all 5 could drop into the ORV category. And with another loss, Brandeis (next up Wash U), Mississippi College (next up Texas-Tyler), and Texas-Dallas (next up LeTourneau) could join them. Texas-Dallas almost punched their ticket into the ORV tonight but hit 3 straight 3 pointers to break loose from a 57 all tie with East Texas Baptist and hold on for the victory.

Bubbling under the Top 25 are a bunch of teams looking to either move back in or crack the poll for the 1st time this year. Best chance for firsters if they win out for the week could be William Patterson currently 14-1 but a big game upcoming on Sat. against Richard Stockton. If they beat the Ospreys I think they move into the poll with a 15-1 record. Their only loss was to a pretty good Oneonta State team that Massey has ranked at #49, better than 10 other teams that are ranked or recieving votes. Massey has William Patterson currently ranked #18. St John Fisher would be another 1st timer that could make the leap if they win the Wendy's Classic in Rochester (formerly known as the Chase Classic) this weekend. They would end the week with a 13-2 record if that happens. Massey currently has them ranked at #26. Wheaton (Ill.), and Wooster, with 1 win for the week and Richard Stockton with 2 wins for the week all have 1 game remaining on Saturday. A win then, by any of these 3 teams, could vault them back up into the rankings.

Assuming they win their weekend games it looks like the top spot will be Stevens Point, followed by Wasington U, Whitewater and probably Guilford. If Eastern Mennonite hadn't been so far down in the rankings their signature win on Wednesday night might have boosted them into the top 3 or 4 but I think the 5 spot is as high as they'll climb, if they get lucky. Not a lot of tradition there and we all know about the name recognition factor and the importance it plays. It'll be interesting to see their placement in next week's poll.

What about Gustavus?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 15, 2010, 12:45:52 AM

Quote from: magicman on January 14, 2010, 11:58:41 PMWheaton (Ill.), and Wooster, with 1 win for the week and Richard Stockton with 2 wins for the week all have 1 game remaining on Saturday. A win then, by any of these 3 teams, could vault them back up into the rankings.

Wooster could well slide back into the bottom of the Top 25 this week, but if they do, it'll be through attrition, and not because they managed to beat Earlham (3-11) Saturday. The last time Earlham beat Wooster was in January 1986, two seasons before Steve Moore took over the Fighting Scot program; since then, Wooster has racked up 44 consecutive wins over the Quakers.

Anyway, it seems that the voters are getting comfortable with holding Wooster just under the Top 25, as they've been in would-be slots #26 or #27 for three straight weeks as other schools slide up and down past them. With a trip to Wittenberg looming for the Scots in just over a week (and before the Week 8 poll is taken), I'd expect Wooster to stay right about where they are for Week 7.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 15, 2010, 01:13:08 AM

UT-Dallas' Brandon Green (Sr- 3VL 10.6 ppg) is reported to have a broken hand. The website has him inactive.

He has only started in the first 9 games and have not played in the last five. His last game was 35 minutes against McMurry on Dec 20th. He did not play in the 72-64 loss to UT-Arlington on Jan 2nd.

If UT-Dallas is doing that without Brandon Green (http://cometsports.utdallas.edu/roster.aspx?rp_id=505&path=mbball), then keep UT-Dallas on the radar.

Green and UT-D Scott Rodgers are 2 of my starters on my All-ASC opponent team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 15, 2010, 01:26:00 AM

hugenerd,
Yes , the Gusties should be in the mix as well. I knew I left out someone. As discussed on the Poster's Poll board no really bad losses and now a signature win. Massey has them at #16 which is a little high I think, but there's certainly no reason not to move them up in the poll. They need to get by Bethal on Saturday but shouldn't have a problem doing that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 15, 2010, 01:46:50 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 15, 2010, 12:45:52 AM
Quote from: magicman on January 14, 2010, 11:58:41 PMWheaton (Ill.), and Wooster, with 1 win for the week and Richard Stockton with 2 wins for the week all have 1 game remaining on Saturday. A win then, by any of these 3 teams, could vault them back up into the rankings.
Wooster could well slide back into the bottom of the Top 25 this week, but if they do, it'll be through attrition, and not because they managed to beat Earlham (3-11) Saturday. The last time Earlham beat Wooster was in January 1986, two seasons before Steve Moore took over the Fighting Scot program; since then, Wooster has racked up 44 consecutive wins over the Quakers.

DC,
All the more reason they had better win Saturday. Another loss and their chances of getting back in are pretty slim, but a loss to 3-11 Earlham is the kiss of death. The re-entrance by attrition part has likely already happened, because of all of the teams that have lost this week. But the winning on Saturday has yet to occur. But I have no doubt the Scots will keep that streak alive.

Wow!! 44 straight over the same team. Is that a current "longest win streak against a single opponent" record?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 15, 2010, 01:05:19 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 15, 2010, 01:46:50 AM
Wow!! 44 straight over the same team. Is that a current "longest win streak against a single opponent" record?

I can think of seven team in the SCIAC that probably have longer streaks going...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on January 15, 2010, 01:13:01 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 15, 2010, 01:46:50 AM

Wow!! 44 straight over the same team. Is that a current "longest win streak against a single opponent" record?

Wooster also owns a 26 game win streak over Allegheny which nearly went by the wayside on Wednesday.

The problem for The EC is that they are leaving the NCAC after this year, so they have at the very least 2 more shots at knocking off the Scots and ending the streak in the regular season and the possiblity of getting one more crack at it in the NCAC tournament if they can finish in the top 8. Otherwise, who knows when the EC will fall onto Wooster's schedule again after this year?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 15, 2010, 01:28:26 PM

Even Case Western has beaten WashU at least once over the past decade. I guess that speaks to the consistency of both teams involved in that streak (Wooster in the positive sense and the team that has been beat X number of times in a row in the negative sense).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: stag44 on January 15, 2010, 02:05:48 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 15, 2010, 01:05:19 PM
Quote from: magicman on January 15, 2010, 01:46:50 AM
Wow!! 44 straight over the same team. Is that a current "longest win streak against a single opponent" record?
I can think of seven team in the SCIAC that probably have longer streaks going...

well played.. I think CalTech may surprise someone this year.

On a Top25 note though, I would love to see CMS get some consideration for votes. While they have had 2 BAD losses now (Willamette and St. Olaf), they have since defeated an NAIA-1 team and only lost to Concordia (CA, #2 in NAIA-1). They have a quality win over then #12 Chapman, and are getting better.

Just wanted to get some exposure for the Stags as they are playing well now and improving to end the SCIACs troubles in the NCAAs

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 15, 2010, 02:18:02 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 15, 2010, 01:05:19 PM
Quote from: magicman on January 15, 2010, 01:46:50 AM
Wow!! 44 straight over the same team. Is that a current "longest win streak against a single opponent" record?
I can think of seven team in the SCIAC that probably have longer streaks going...

I understand the joke, but if CalTech has played each team an equal number of times, the streak probably is not at 44 yet. Last figure I heard is that Caltech has lost 287 in a row in conference, which is 41 losses in a row per team, on average (287/7 other teams in the SCIAC). Unless some seasons the schedule was played asymmetrically, that means that the streak is not at 44 yet against any opponent in the SCIAC, but close.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 15, 2010, 02:27:37 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 15, 2010, 02:18:02 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 15, 2010, 01:05:19 PM
Quote from: magicman on January 15, 2010, 01:46:50 AM
Wow!! 44 straight over the same team. Is that a current "longest win streak against a single opponent" record?
I can think of seven team in the SCIAC that probably have longer streaks going...

I understand the joke, but if CalTech has played each team an equal number of times, the streak probably is not at 44 yet. Last figure I heard is that Caltech has lost 287 in a row in conference, which is 41 losses in a row per team, on average (287/7 other teams in the SCIAC). Unless some seasons the schedule was played asymmetrically, that means that the streak is not at 44 yet against any opponent in the SCIAC, but close.

No, it would mean that it's not at 44 yet against one SCIAC opponent, unless you think Caltech was on a winning streak when the losing streak began.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 15, 2010, 02:38:23 PM

Quote from: ScotsFan on January 15, 2010, 01:13:01 PM
The problem for The EC is that they are leaving the NCAC after this year, so they have at the very least 2 more shots at knocking off the Scots and ending the streak in the regular season and the possiblity of getting one more crack at it in the NCAC tournament if they can finish in the top 8. Otherwise, who knows when the EC will fall onto Wooster's schedule again after this year?

I'm not sure that Earlham sees this as a "problem" so much as a "solution." :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 15, 2010, 03:42:54 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 15, 2010, 02:27:37 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 15, 2010, 02:18:02 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 15, 2010, 01:05:19 PM
Quote from: magicman on January 15, 2010, 01:46:50 AM
Wow!! 44 straight over the same team. Is that a current "longest win streak against a single opponent" record?
I can think of seven team in the SCIAC that probably have longer streaks going...

I understand the joke, but if CalTech has played each team an equal number of times, the streak probably is not at 44 yet. Last figure I heard is that Caltech has lost 287 in a row in conference, which is 41 losses in a row per team, on average (287/7 other teams in the SCIAC). Unless some seasons the schedule was played asymmetrically, that means that the streak is not at 44 yet against any opponent in the SCIAC, but close.
No, it would mean that it's not at 44 yet against one SCIAC opponent, unless you think Caltech was on a winning streak when the losing streak began.

I thought they used to a powerhouse before the losing streak.;) I understand what you mean. So it may not be 7, but it could be up to 6.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 15, 2010, 06:42:41 PM

If anyone is interested in getting a look at the NYU/Chicago game tonight, there is a link on this page to live video and live stats (which is not linked on the schedule page):

http://athletics.uchicago.edu/mensbasketball/mbk.htm

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 15, 2010, 10:36:24 PM

OT for WashU and Brandeis. I'm enjoying actually watching this game.

A couple of notes:

Sean Wallis is really not playing well on defense tonight. It looks like he wasn't even on the bench for the final play in regulation when WashU went full court pressure and needed a stop.

Also, this is not so much about Brandeis being underrated as WashU being overrated. They're not looking too solid.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 15, 2010, 11:01:09 PM

Brandeis over WashU by 3 in OT.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hasanova on January 15, 2010, 11:02:25 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 15, 2010, 10:36:24 PM

OT for WashU and Brandeis. I'm enjoying actually watching this game.

A couple of notes:

Sean Wallis is really not playing well on defense tonight. It looks like he wasn't even on the bench for the final play in regulation when WashU went full court pressure and needed a stop.

Also, this is not so much about Brandeis being underrated as WashU being overrated. They're not looking too solid.

The Brandeis Judges just beat Wash U, 58-55, in St. Louis. No return to #1 for the Bears next week!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 15, 2010, 11:02:36 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 15, 2010, 10:36:24 PM
Also, this is not so much about Brandeis being underrated as WashU being overrated. They're not looking too solid.

Boy, when's the last time that Wash U turned the ball over 21 times in a game?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 15, 2010, 11:40:55 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 15, 2010, 11:02:36 PM
Boy, when's the last time that Wash U turned the ball over 21 times in a game?

When was the last time Washington University scored so many baskets two points at a time? 3-14 from beyond the arc.

Keep in mind that this was a Bears squad missing one of its best offensive weapons in Caleb Knepper. For whatever reason he did not suit up tonight even though he had been listed as a probable starter. Not sure if he will be back on Sunday.

Maybe another question would be when was the last time Washington University had so many players on the floor? Of course, I could keep asking the questions, but unfortunately, it does not change the score.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 16, 2010, 12:36:27 AM

IF EMU and RMC win tomorrow (likely) and the Guilford/VaWes game is not such a blow-out that the loser falls too far (we'll see), the ODAC could have four teams in the top ten. Has any conference ever had FOUR top ten teams in the history of the d3hoops.com poll?

While I am a CCIW partisan, and often genuflect at the WIAC altar (and acknowledge some amazing seasons recently by the UAA and NESCAC), has any conference ever has a season like what seems to be shaping up for the ODAC? :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 16, 2010, 01:00:19 AM

Quote from: WUH on January 15, 2010, 11:40:55 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 15, 2010, 11:02:36 PM
Boy, when's the last time that Wash U turned the ball over 21 times in a game?

When was the last time Washington University scored so many baskets two points at a time? 3-14 from beyond the arc.

Keep in mind that this was a Bears squad missing one of its best offensive weapons in Caleb Knepper. For whatever reason he did not suit up tonight even though he had been listed as a probable starter. Not sure if he will be back on Sunday.

Maybe another question would be when was the last time Washington University had so many players on the floor? Of course, I could keep asking the questions, but unfortunately, it does not change the score.

The announcer said that he had an injury earlier in the week during practice and he was having back spasms as a result.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 16, 2010, 05:35:09 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 16, 2010, 12:36:27 AM
IF EMU and RMC win tomorrow (likely) and the Guilford/VaWes game is not such a blow-out that the loser falls too far (we'll see), the ODAC could have four teams in the top ten. Has any conference ever had FOUR top ten teams in the history of the d3hoops.com poll?

While I am a CCIW partisan, and often genuflect at the WIAC altar (and acknowledge some amazing seasons recently by the UAA and NESCAC), has any conference ever has a season like what seems to be shaping up for the ODAC? :o

Best I could find was week #2 last year. Three CCIW teams in the top ten. #2 Wheaton, #8 Augie, #10 Elmhurst and #15 IWU. Same week had three WIAC teams in the top ten, giving 6 of the 10 spots to 2 conferences. I didn't spend a lot of time looking. I just remembered that last year there was a lot of discussion about the CCIW when that happened.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ethelred the Unready on January 16, 2010, 08:18:14 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 16, 2010, 12:36:27 AM
IF EMU and RMC win tomorrow (likely) and the Guilford/VaWes game is not such a blow-out that the loser falls too far (we'll see), the ODAC could have four teams in the top ten. Has any conference ever had FOUR top ten teams in the history of the d3hoops.com poll?

While I am a CCIW partisan, and often genuflect at the WIAC altar (and acknowledge some amazing seasons recently by the UAA and NESCAC), has any conference ever has a season like what seems to be shaping up for the ODAC? :o

The UAA had three in the Top 10 for 7 weeks straight (5-11) in 2007/08, with Rochester and Brandies holding 1 & 2 for six consecutive weeks (3-8)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 16, 2010, 09:44:42 AM

#2 UW Stevens Point is playing at UW Superior today at 5:00 Central. Superior doesn't have live stats, but they do have live video (http://www.ifan.tv/home.php?cat1=6&cat2=16&cat3=94&navsubmit=Go). Just click the "live" link on the left-hand side to watch the game!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 16, 2010, 04:13:40 PM

From the ODAC big guns:

RMC 94, E&H 73.
EMU 86, Randolph 74.
Guilford 71, VaWes 56.

I'd say the ODAC will be the first to have four teams simultaneously in the top ten, unless VaWes lost by a few too many to escape falling to 11 or 12. With their only two losses being to members of the top ten (assuming EMU makes a big jump after Wednesday's result), I'll guess the fish remain at 9th or 10th.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 16, 2010, 05:10:12 PM

Mr. Yipsi... I am affraid VWC could fall out of the Top 10 with a bit of a lop-sided loss... especially with all the number of losses in the Top 10 so far.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 16, 2010, 06:33:27 PM

Perhaps a little let down, may have top 25 implications... Per the MIAC board, Gustavus Adolphus lost to Bethel 54-52

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 16, 2010, 06:48:12 PM

Point leading Superior 25-23, had previously led by 8.
Whitewater trailing Eau Claire 20-11 with about 10 mins.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 16, 2010, 06:55:23 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 16, 2010, 05:10:12 PM
Mr. Yipsi... I am affraid VWC could fall out of the Top 10 with a bit of a lop-sided loss... especially with all the number of losses in the Top 10 so far.

Perhaps the voters will note that the game was dead-even midway through the second half - the final score was a bit misleading.

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 16, 2010, 06:33:27 PM
Perhaps a little let down, may have top 25 implications... Per the MIAC board, Gustavus Adolphus lost to Bethel 54-52

And just as the Gusties were poised to make the big jump from two points to the top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 16, 2010, 07:01:31 PM

Possible upset alert... 4:21 to go in Eau Claire, UWEC Blugolds lead UWW Warhawks 35-17. LIVE STATS (http://www.uwecblugolds.com/live/bb/index.php?game=59)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on January 16, 2010, 07:48:14 PM

Point leads by only 1 with about a minute to play!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 16, 2010, 07:50:46 PM

UWEC leads Whitewater 62-53 with 6:43.

Point up 54-53 with :33.3, Superior ball

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 16, 2010, 07:54:03 PM

Jenkins gets another steal (he got a steal and a dunk in the last possession) and Sweeney gets fouled and makes 2 FT's. 11.3 seconds, Superior ball.

5:16 in Eau Claire, UWEC leads 65-56 with 4:43

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on January 16, 2010, 07:55:07 PM

Point survives the upset bids 56-53

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 16, 2010, 07:56:38 PM

Eau Claire has Whitewater on the ropes... 69-59 UWEC leads with 3:38 to go.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on January 16, 2010, 08:14:39 PM

No WIAC 1-2 as UW-WW falls to UW-EC 80-67

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 16, 2010, 08:14:55 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 16, 2010, 07:56:38 PM
Eau Claire has Whitewater on the ropes... 69-59 UWEC leads with 3:38 to go.

Eau Claire beats #4 UW Whitewater 80-67

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 16, 2010, 08:17:10 PM

5 of the top 8 teams have lost this week (#1, #3, #4, #5, and #8) and 6 of the top 11.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 16, 2010, 09:38:58 PM

Any word on the St. Thomas game?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 16, 2010, 09:54:15 PM

St. Thomas up 37-31 at the half. The start time is listed wrong on d3hoops. It was an 8:00 (C) tip.

Webcast: http://www.mnsportsnetwork.com/

Find the channel 2 link near the middle of the page.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 17, 2010, 12:23:23 AM

The Tommies survived the Johnnies by one in OT.

With St. John's having lost on Wednesday, and GAC losing today, NOT an impressive week for St. Thomas. :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 17, 2010, 09:39:42 PM

How They Fared

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	606	Randolph-Macon	14-1	LOST at #18 Eastern Mennonite, 67-90; def. Emory and Henry, 94-73
#2	594	UW-Stevens Point	15-1	def. UW-Platteville, 74-53; def. UW-Superior, 56-53
#3	577	Washington U.	12-2	LOST to #20 Brandeis, 55-58 OT; def. New York University, 60-57
#4	555	UW-Whitewater	14-2	def. UW-Oshkosh, 62-58 OT; LOST at UW-Eau Claire, 67-80
#5	526	St. Thomas	12-2	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 77-68; LOST at #39 Gustavus Adolphus, 51-56; def. St. John's, 70-69 OT
#6	512	Guilford	14-1	def. Emory and Henry, 99-57; def. #8 Virginia Wesleyan, 71-56
#7	438	Williams	14-1	def. Tufts, 91-55; def. Bates, 92-62
#8	418	Virginia Wesleyan	14-2	def. Hampden-Sydney, 69-67; LOST at #6 Guilford, 56-71
#9	329	MIT	15-1	def. #36 Worcester Polytech, 76-53; def. Clark, 54-51
#10	328	Middlebury	14-1	def. Bates, 71-62; def. Tufts, 66-53
#11	322	Franklin and Marshall	12-3	def. Muhlenberg, 80-58; LOST to Washington College, 63-68 OT; def. McDaniel, 67-49
#12	318	St. Norbert	12-1	def. Knox, 60-47; def. Grinnell, 109-72
#13	302	Amherst	10-3	LOST at Babson, 59-65; def. Wesleyan, 87-71; def. Connecticut College, 89-82
#14	272	Anderson	15-1	def. Rose-Hulman, 68-65; def. Hanover, 74-70
#15	255	Wilmington	12-4	LOST to Capital, 73-78; LOST at Marietta, 57-74
#16	233	Chapman	14-2	def. West Coast Baptist, 77-59; def. La Sierra, 77-48
#17	212	St. Mary's (Md.)	13-2	def. Mary Washington, 91-86; def. Gallaudet, 83-52
#18	192	Eastern Mennonite	13-1	def. #1 Randolph-Macon, 90-67; def. Randolph, 86-74
#19	177	Medaille	14-1	LOST at Pitt-Bradford, 65-68; def. Pitt-Greensburg, 83-62
#20	150	Brandeis	11-2	def. Bates, 81-57; def. #3 Washington U., 58-55 OT; def. Chicago, 75-69
#21	138	Illinois Wesleyan	13-2	def. Millikin, 75-71; def. Elmhurst, 77-67
#22	126	Whitworth	13-2	def. Puget Sound, 78-70; def. Pacific Lutheran, 75-52
#23	92	Texas-Dallas	12-3	def. East Texas Baptist, 73-70; def. LeTourneau, 78-61
#24	81	UW-La Crosse	12-4	LOST to UW-River Falls, 75-83
#25	68	Mississippi College	12-2	def. Louisiana College, 76-63; def. Texas-Tyler, 73-58

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	60	Wheaton (Ill.)	10-5	def. #30 Augustana, 69-63; LOST at North Park, 73-75 OT
#27	59	Wooster	11-4	def. Allegheny, 69-68; def. Earlham, 63-54
#28	51	Richard Stockton	12-4	def. Hunter, 99-90; def. Kean, 82-68; LOST at #31 William Paterson, 57-63
#29	29	John Carroll	10-5	LOST to Heidelberg, 81-85; def. Ohio Northern, 92-59
#30	23	Augustana	9-6	LOST at #26 Wheaton (Ill.), 63-69; LOST to #38 Carthage, 64-69
#31	19	William Paterson	15-1	def. Rutgers-Newark, 61-57; def. #28 Richard Stockton, 63-57
#32	14	McMurry	9-5	LOST at Texas Lutheran, 61-65; def. Schreiner, 74-64
#33	11	Western Connecticut	10-3	LOST at Keene State, 90-96; def. Mass-Boston, 87-79
#34	10	DeSales	11-4	def. Misericordia, 74-60; def. FDU-Florham, 64-48
#35	8	Hope	9-6	LOST to Olivet, 64-67; def. Kalamazoo, 79-63
#36	7	Worcester Polytech	12-3	LOST at #9 MIT, 53-76; def. Coast Guard, 68-55
#37	5	York (Pa.)	13-3	LOST at Salisbury, 71-78; def. Stevenson, 88-58
#38	3	Carthage	11-4	def. Elmhurst, 79-52; def. #30 Augustana, 69-64
#39	2	Gustavus Adolphus	10-4	def. #5 St. Thomas, 56-51; LOST at Bethel, 52-54
T#40	1	Cabrini	12-1	def. Gwynedd-Mercy, 83-68; def. Keystone, 100-98; def. Rosemont, 74-63
T#40	1	Defiance	13-3	def. Franklin, 99-83
T#40	1	St. John Fisher	12-3	def. Keuka, 69-45; def. Rochester Tech, 77-57; LOST to (n) Rochester, 54-60

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 17, 2010, 10:34:45 PM

On Hoopsville tonight, a listener posted this top 10:

#1 Stevens Point
#2 Guilford
#3 Williams
#4 Randy Mac
#5 Whitewater
#6 Wash U
#7 MIT
#8 Middlebury
#9 St. Norbert
#10 Eastern Mennonite

Dave McHugh thought Randolph Macon and Williams should be swapped by virtue of R-MC's victory over the Ephs. I like that better myself.

But I've got a huge problem with St. Norbert at #9. Who have they beaten? Well, everybody they've played except for Northwestern. Now, if this was the Big T1E1N squad we're talking about, then that's respectable... but it's the UMAC team. And it was at home. Yes, they're the best UMAC team, but that isn't saying a whole lot. The UMAC is on the bottom at Massey. And Northwestern is rated # 121 in Massey. Now, SNC is #15, and I guess I'm OK with that to a point... (I mean, they HAVE beaten everybody else they've played...) But really, who is that? Per KnightSlappy's RPI rankings (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4232.msg1162187#msg1162187), they've got the 74th highest rated RPI... but their OWP is .414 and their OOWP is .540. Now, more cannot be asked of them than to beat the teams they play... but if they keep playing teams that aren't good, and the teams above them who ARE playing tough teams lose, then the old St. Peter Principle is in action again (I'm going to use it til it gets old GS!). It is absolutely possible that they very well may be the #15 team in the country... but how do we know unless they are tested by other top teams? There should be a way to kind of cap them.

I think part of the problem is that, unless you really take a look at a team like St. Norbert, it's hard to compare them to other teams that more may be more about in terms of who they've played. The victories against Oshkosh, Elmhurst, and Chicago would have looked great last year or two years ago... But these three teams are .500 at best this year thus far. They really don't have an impressive victory.

I think the same could be said about Anderson, but in many respects, they deserve a higher vote. Their RPI is actually below that of St. Norbert at #80, with an OWP of .424 (a little better) and an OOWP of .497 (a little worse). Anderson beat Wittenberg, giving them one of their two losses, and they've beaten conference rival Defiance and UW Platteville, who's a middle of the road team from a pretty stacked WIAC conference. Their loss to Augustana is looking a little worse (Augie is 9-6) but that loss is better than SNC's to Northwestern (also 9-6 against much worse competition). Anderson is #20 in Massey.

I'm still pretty high on Whitworth.... their loss to Pomona-Pitzer withstanding, they've beaten everybody but the soon-to-be #1 team in the country. Their RPI is #17 with an OWP of .553 and an OOWP of .572, Massey #6. And the Massey ratings are though last Sunday (probably will be updated tomorrow or Tuesday, I'd imagine). I don't necessarily think Whitworth is a top 10 team... but they could be in the top 15.

Another interesting thing is the separation that had come together in last week's voting. The top 8 had pretty well separated itself (and the top 6, too, for that matter). But 4 of the top 6 (and 5/8) lost... albeit to 3 ranked or vote-getting teams. Maybe the separation we thought we had really wasn't there.

Or, perhaps, the stars aligned just right and it was the time for teams to lose. I dunno. There are so many variables that come into these games on a given night (the least of which is home court advantage). One has to wonder if Randy Mac really would have been favored in that game with EMU, or Wash U vs. Brandeis. They're playing ranked opponents, on the other team's floor.

I don't think it's as pronounced as, say, Stevens Point/Whitewater was a month ago... and even then, that game took overtime to figure itself out, but (and I don't have the stats on this... does anybody have some?) more often than not, home teams win.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 17, 2010, 11:57:15 PM

Couple issues with your comments.

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 17, 2010, 10:34:45 PM
I think part of the problem is that, unless you really take a look at a team like St. Norbert, it's hard to compare them to other teams that more may be more about in terms of who they've played. The victories against Oshkosh, Elmhurst, and Chicago would have looked great last year or two years ago... But these three teams are .500 at best this year thus far. They really don't have an impressive victory.

I hope that the two years ago is in reference to Chicago...they were dreadful last year, starting 0-12 before finishing 6-19.

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 17, 2010, 10:34:45 PM

Or, perhaps, the stars aligned just right and it was the time for teams to lose. I dunno. There are so many variables that come into these games on a given night (the least of which is home court advantage). One has to wonder if Randy Mac really would have been favored in that game with EMU, or Wash U vs. Brandeis. They're playing ranked opponents, on the other team's floor.

WashU lost at home to Brandeis and it was on 6 days rest. I would consider that a pretty bad loss, especially if you watched the game. Brandeis didnt even play all that well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 18, 2010, 12:13:39 AM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 17, 2010, 11:57:15 PM
Couple issues with your comments.

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 17, 2010, 10:34:45 PM
I think part of the problem is that, unless you really take a look at a team like St. Norbert, it's hard to compare them to other teams that more may be more about in terms of who they've played. The victories against Oshkosh, Elmhurst, and Chicago would have looked great last year or two years ago... But these three teams are .500 at best this year thus far. They really don't have an impressive victory.

I hope that the two years ago is in reference to Chicago...they were dreadful last year, starting 0-12 before finishing 6-19.

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 17, 2010, 10:34:45 PM

Or, perhaps, the stars aligned just right and it was the time for teams to lose. I dunno. There are so many variables that come into these games on a given night (the least of which is home court advantage). One has to wonder if Randy Mac really would have been favored in that game with EMU, or Wash U vs. Brandeis. They're playing ranked opponents, on the other team's floor.

WashU lost at home to Brandeis and it was on 6 days rest. I would consider that a pretty bad loss, especially if you watched the game. Brandeis didnt even play all that well.

I did mean Chicago two years ago (or farther back). And I didn't watch Wash U/Brandeis. I didn't realize it was in St. Louis.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on January 18, 2010, 06:47:45 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 17, 2010, 10:34:45 PM
I'm still pretty high on Whitworth.... their loss to Pomona-Pitzer withstanding, they've beaten everybody but the soon-to-be #1 team in the country. Their RPI is #17 with an OWP of .553 and an OOWP of .572, Massey #6. And the Massey ratings are though last Sunday (probably will be updated tomorrow or Tuesday, I'd imagine). I don't necessarily think Whitworth is a top 10 team... but they could be in the top 15.

Pretty soon, pretty soon. If we played PP today AT PP, I'd give up 15 points and still cover.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 18, 2010, 11:30:55 PM

St. Thomas beats Hamline 80-63 to improve to 13-2.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 19, 2010, 12:40:51 AM

New Top 25 Poll is out: http://d3hoops.com/top25/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 19, 2010, 12:47:42 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 16, 2010, 12:36:27 AM
IF EMU and RMC win tomorrow (likely) and the Guilford/VaWes game is not such a blow-out that the loser falls too far (we'll see), the ODAC could have four teams in the top ten. Has any conference ever had FOUR top ten teams in the history of the d3hoops.com poll?

While I am a CCIW partisan, and often genuflect at the WIAC altar (and acknowledge some amazing seasons recently by the UAA and NESCAC), has any conference ever has a season like what seems to be shaping up for the ODAC? :o

ODAC #2,#3,#7,and #12. I guess the 15 point loss to Guilford was too much for Va. Wesleyan to overcome.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 19, 2010, 01:32:40 AM

I think, too, you're going to have some voters who just won't put four teams from the same conference up that high.

The ODAC will sort itself out a little bit, though not everyone plays home and home, so it may not completely work itself out before the conference tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 19, 2010, 01:57:51 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 19, 2010, 01:32:40 AM
I think, too, you're going to have some voters who just won't put four teams from the same conference up that high.

The ODAC will sort itself out a little bit, though not everyone plays home and home, so it may not completely work itself out before the conference tournament.

I agree with that. In our poster's poll I had them #2, #3, #5 and #11. I would expect that with 6 more matchups between the 4 teams, before the conference tournament, several of them will probably not end up in the Top 10. My guess is that Guilford and Eastern Mennonite will.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 19, 2010, 08:13:15 AM

Congrats to MIT for the #8 ranking. I believe that this is the highest ranking ever for a NEWMAC team in the d3hoops.com rankings (Clark was as high as #10 in the early 2000s and WPI was as high as #9 in the 05-06 season).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 19, 2010, 09:52:24 AM

Still don't see how EMU, a team with no D-3 losses, and two big-time wins, including a blow-out win over RMC, is ranked below RMC and Wash U., the latter of which has looked VERY shaky the last few weeks and seems to be coasting on reputation / past years' successes alone at this point. Not saying that Wash U. shouldn't be a top ten team, but four seems a little high for a team that hasn't looked really good since 2009. Really, though, how can EMU not be in the top three after destroying RMC?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 19, 2010, 10:10:25 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 19, 2010, 09:52:24 AM
Still don't see how EMU, a team with no D-3 losses, and two big-time wins, including a blow-out win over RMC, is ranked below RMC and Wash U., the latter of which has looked VERY shaky the last few weeks and seems to be coasting on reputation / past years' successes alone at this point. Not saying that Wash U. shouldn't be a top ten team, but four seems a little high for a team that hasn't looked really good since 2009. Really, though, how can EMU not be in the top three after destroying RMC?

For that matter, how is EMU ranked below Whitewater. Whitewater has two d3 losses, one to the current #18 ranked team and the other to an unranked team (this is essentially the same thing WashU has done). Meanwhile, EMU has no d3 losses and has wins over the current #3 and #12 teams. The current order of EMU vs. Williams also doesnt make sense: EMU beat RMU by 23 and Williams lost to them (albeit on the road). EMU is a legit #3 in the country right now, until they prove otherwise.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dc_has_been on January 19, 2010, 12:05:47 PM

I didn't realize how difficult it is to really rank the top 25 out of 400 teams!!! There are a lot of teams out there with 1-2 losses and are only getting few a votes. You really have no other choice to give some teams the benefit of the doubt based upon their past seasons. An example would be Amherst. They have 3 losses which 2 come from teams with records of 8-5 & 7-8, but since 2003 (what d3hoops shows) they have been fairly dominant. Same goes for Wooster except two losses come from teams 10-5 & two against ranked opponents.
EMU is currently ranked 7th & started not even receiving votes. I know a lot would like to see them higher because of who've they beat, but they have made remarkable movement up the chart. If they continue to take care of business they will be a top 5 in no time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 19, 2010, 12:12:57 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 19, 2010, 09:52:24 AM
Still don't see how EMU, a team with no D-3 losses, and two big-time wins, including a blow-out win over RMC, is ranked below RMC and Wash U., the latter of which has looked VERY shaky the last few weeks and seems to be coasting on reputation / past years' successes alone at this point. Not saying that Wash U. shouldn't be a top ten team, but four seems a little high for a team that hasn't looked really good since 2009. Really, though, how can EMU not be in the top three after destroying RMC?

I agree with you that EMU should be higher. I do see where the voters are coming from. They take the poll pretty seriously and don't like to bump teams until they're positive its no fluke. Moving up so far from #18 is a big deal and the result of the drubbing of RMC.

EMU didn't play anyone of note in the non-conference season, they also have only one good road win (over a VWC team they're also not sure about).

The d3hoops.com voters also seem to treat the poll as a season long process - they understand that only the final poll really matters and are willing to make a team (especially one bursting on the scene from no where) build a case for a high ranking. Frankly I appreciate that more than the d1 polls which vault teams unnecessarily high on one good performance.

We know that deserving teams almost always make it to their rightful place in due time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 19, 2010, 12:36:47 PM

Quote from: dc_has_been on January 19, 2010, 12:05:47 PM
I didn't realize how difficult it is to really rank the top 25 out of 400 teams!!! There are a lot of teams out there with 1-2 losses and are only getting few a votes. You really have no other choice to give some teams the benefit of the doubt based upon their past seasons. An example would be Amherst. They have 3 losses which 2 come from teams with records of 8-5 & 7-8, but since 2003 (what d3hoops shows) they have been fairly dominant. Same goes for Wooster except two losses come from teams 10-5 & two against ranked opponents.
EMU is currently ranked 7th & started not even receiving votes. I know a lot would like to see them higher because of who've they beat, but they have made remarkable movement up the chart. If they continue to take care of business they will be a top 5 in no time.

Let me extend a personal invitation to join us on the Posters' Poll, if you are not already participating. :)

I think that the Posters' Poll allows us to discuss most of the same questions that are facing the voters in a less formal fashion. It takes about 30 minutes of review to sit down and compile something and 60-90 minutes to agonize over the last 2-3 places. :D

The responses definitely make for interesting reading.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dc_has_been on January 19, 2010, 01:27:45 PM

Thanks Ralph will do!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 19, 2010, 02:18:30 PM

QuoteMeanwhile, EMU has no d3 losses and has wins over the current #3 and #12 teams. The current order of EMU vs. Williams also doesnt make sense: EMU beat RMU by 23 and Williams lost to them (albeit on the road). EMU is a legit #3 in the country right now, until they prove otherwise.

I came to the same conclusion yesterday in filling out my ballot. It looks weird to have EMU slotted No. 3 but that's where I have them for now given the wins over Va Wes and RMC.

That being said, I'm not completely discounting the Southern Virginia loss. Southern Virginia is 5-1 against Division III teams with an overtime loss at Christopher Newport. CNU may not be an easy place to play but Lynchburg (7-8), York (NY) (12-5) and Wesley (9-6) all managed to win there. Southern Virginia beat Wesley, which is okay but not in the Top 50, by five on a neutral court. And Southern Virginia's margin of victory at home against EMU (13) is almost the same as it was against 6-11 Shenandoah (14).

Sometimes there isn't enough information to evaluate a loss to a non-D3 team. In this case, I feel comfortable treating the SVA loss as if EMU lost to someone in the 20-40 range of Division III.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 19, 2010, 02:41:45 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on January 19, 2010, 02:18:30 PM
QuoteMeanwhile, EMU has no d3 losses and has wins over the current #3 and #12 teams. The current order of EMU vs. Williams also doesnt make sense: EMU beat RMU by 23 and Williams lost to them (albeit on the road). EMU is a legit #3 in the country right now, until they prove otherwise.

I came to the same conclusion yesterday in filling out my ballot. It looks weird to have EMU slotted No. 3 but that's where I have them for now given the wins over Va Wes and RMC.

That being said, I'm not completely discounting the Southern Virginia loss. Southern Virginia is 5-1 against Division III teams with an overtime loss at Christopher Newport. CNU may not be an easy place to play but Lynchburg (7-8), York (NY) (12-5) and Wesley (9-6) all managed to win there. Southern Virginia beat Wesley, which is okay but not in the Top 50, by five on a neutral court. And Southern Virginia's margin of victory at home against EMU (13) is almost the same as it was against 6-11 Shenandoah (14).

Sometimes there isn't enough information to evaluate a loss to a non-D3 team. In this case, I feel comfortable treating the SVA loss as if EMU lost to someone in the 20-40 range of Division III.

I cant argue witht that analysis. On the other hand, point differentials can be misleading sometimes also, with fouling at the end of a close game sometimes pushing one or two posession games into double digits and conversely a 20+ point lead can sometimes be cut into the teens in garbage time.

As a non-NE region voter, what are your thoughts on Williams, MIT, and Middlebury?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 19, 2010, 08:41:13 PM

Here is another interesting development in the Top 25 this season.

I have listed the number of votes that were not given to the 25 teams in the Top 25 for Week #7 for the last 5 seasons.

Year	Votes not given to the 25 in the Top 25
2009-10	138
2008-09	226
2007-08	258
2006-07	318
2005-06	271

I think that the voters don't think that there are 25 teams that deserve to be in the Top 25.

(Corrections to the back-of-the-napkin math are appreciated.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 19, 2010, 09:02:11 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 19, 2010, 08:41:13 PM
Here is another interesting development in the Top 25 this season.

I have listed the number of votes that were not given to the 25 teams in the Top 25 for Week #7 for the last 5 seasons.

Year Votes not given to the 25 in the Top 25
2009-10 138
2008-09 226
2007-08 258
2006-07 318
2005-06 271

I think that the voters don't think that there are 25 teams that deserve to be in the Top 25.

(Corrections to the back-of-the-napkin math are appreciated.)

I'd interpret it just the reverse - that the voters have reached a rough consensus on who the top 25 are.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 19, 2010, 09:02:42 PM

Hugenerd:

I don't represent the NE in the Top 25, but I have roots there. I graduated from Trinity (Conn.) in 2000 and follow that conference closely even though I can't get to the games there. When I first started working with this site directly after graduation, I would've told you the top 3 teams in the region were whomever the top three teams in the NESCAC were (with Brandies considered as a different category). I don't think that's the case any more, though clearly Amherst and Williams have at times during this decade distinguished themselves at a higher level than any other teams.

Now that I've disclosed my roots, here's my take on those three teams:

* Williams is 5th in the Top 25 and I have them 7th. I like their margins of victory against teams they "should've beaten." I like the showing at Randolph-Macon which is a tough place to play. The Amherst win is meaningful, but it was on their own home court and I don't have Amherst on my ballot anymore.

* MIT is 8th in the Top 25 and 13th on my ballot. I held out on adding them to my ballot until a couple weeks ago and didn't have them in the Top 20 until this week. The win over WPI was nice but WPI also lost to Thomas (yes, I know they are 9-2) and Wheaton (Mass.). There isn't a win on MIT's schedule that makes me say, "Yep. This is a legit Top 15 team." But they've done everything I could expect so I have slotted there any way for now.

* Middlebury is 10th in the Top 25 and 16th on my ballot. I've had the Panthers lower than the poll all year. Like MIT, I don't see a win on their schedule that validates a Top 10 ranking to me. Beating Plattsburgh impressed me but then the Cardinals lost two more right after that and Middlebury lost to Colby-Sawyer. Last year I had Middlebury pretty high all year, which may have been the product of a NESCAC bias. Maybe I'm overcompensating for that this year, but I'm just not sold on the Panthers yet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 19, 2010, 09:07:55 PM

Ypsi and Ralph:

Only speaking for myself, I haven't had any problem picking 25 teams that seem worthy of that ranking. The biggest problem is picking the teams who are 7-10. My personal interpretation is that those are teams who should challenge the Top 5 on the road, potentially beat them at home, usually beat teams ranked 15-25 at home or away and handle all teams outside the poll without more than one or two slip ups all year. Williams falls in that category so they are No. 7 on my ballot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 19, 2010, 09:12:11 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 19, 2010, 09:02:11 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 19, 2010, 08:41:13 PM
Here is another interesting development in the Top 25 this season.

I have listed the number of votes that were not given to the 25 teams in the Top 25 for Week #7 for the last 5 seasons.

Year Votes not given to the 25 in the Top 25
2009-10 138
2008-09 226
2007-08 258
2006-07 318
2005-06 271

I think that the voters don't think that there are 25 teams that deserve to be in the Top 25.

(Corrections to the back-of-the-napkin math are appreciated.)

I'd interpret it just the reverse - that the voters have reached a rough consensus on who the top 25 are.

+1! (I gave you the Karma upon your posting of the Posters' Poll) :) Thanks for running it.

Valid point.

The previous low "non-25" ballot total was in week #13 of 2009 when there were 151 votes given to 15 teams beyond the Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 19, 2010, 09:19:29 PM

Gordon:

I am sure you have looked at these numbers, and I agree with your analysis, but the Massey and OWP/OOWP numbers show that MIT has had a tougher schedule than either Williams or Middlebury. I know that that is in part because Williams has played some really bad teams (and blown them out accordingly), which is out weighing the top of their schedule, but I thought it was worth pointing out.

Thanks for your input, it is insightful to learn how the voters rank teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 19, 2010, 09:23:35 PM

Ralph, more ORV votes clearly indicates less consensus on top teams, but that number alone can't tell whether voters think there are 15 or 40 worthy teams. If only 15, than the bottom ten are virtually random, and there would be lots of ORVs beyond whichever teams happened to take the last ten spots. If 40, then again the bottom ten who actually make the poll would be virtually random, with lots of votes for the other 15.

(And, of course, saying the bottom ten is purely arbitrary for example purposes only. I find on the posters' poll that generally there are 15-18 teams named on all ballots, and 3-4 more named on all but one or two, but I generally only have about 40% of the number of voters as the real poll.))

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 19, 2010, 09:59:33 PM

A stratified Top 25

Rating	Perfect Ranking	Teams with Votes
1	625	#1 UWSP
2	600
3	575	#2 Guilford 588
4	550
5	525	#3 RMC 534
6	500	#4 Wash StL 510 #5 Williams 508
7	475
8	450	#6 UW-Whitewater 457
9	425	#7 EMU 430, #8 MIT 428
10	400	#9 Tommies 418, #10 M'bury 412
11	375
12	350	#11 Anderson 373, #12 VWC 350
13	325	#13 St Norbert 326
14	300
15	275	#14 Chapman 280
16	250	#15 Brandeis 272
17	225	#16 St Mary's MD 248
18	200	#17 IWU 220
19	175	#18 Whitworth 190, #19 F&M 181
20	150	#20 Amherst 165
21	125
22	100	#21 Willy Pat 124, #22 UT-Dallas 122
23	75	#23 Miss College 92, #24 Medaille 84
24	50	#25 Wooster 50
25	25	RV 26 Cabrini 32

[EDIT] Thanks to magicman for proofreading the table. +1!
I have added the vote total to St Mary's MD.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 19, 2010, 10:43:50 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 19, 2010, 09:19:29 PM
I am sure you have looked at these numbers, and I agree with your analysis, but the Massey and OWP/OOWP numbers show that MIT has had a tougher schedule than either Williams or Middlebury.

I've brought this up before, but maybe not for a few seasons now. The NE region (I think) has an advantage in the OWP/OOWP category simply because of the density of d3 schools in the area. It creates, in essence, an extra tier for these teams. What OWP/OOWP represents for other regions might be similar to a formula in the NE including OOOWP. If that makes any sense.

The top teams in the region can get inflated numbers by beating good teams in the NESCAC, NEWMAC, LEC, etc, who have inflated numbers because they beat top teams in the CCC, MASCAC, etc, who have inflated numbers because they beat the top teams in the weakest conferences.

I'm not saying its an unfair advantage, but a natural one unique to the east because of the sheer volume of teams. Granted, I haven't done the math to back this up, but it seems to play itself out in practice every year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on January 19, 2010, 11:38:28 PM

Whitworth leading Whitman 47-13, 6:55 to go 1st half

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 19, 2010, 11:45:25 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 19, 2010, 10:43:50 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 19, 2010, 09:19:29 PM
I am sure you have looked at these numbers, and I agree with your analysis, but the Massey and OWP/OOWP numbers show that MIT has had a tougher schedule than either Williams or Middlebury.

I've brought this up before, but maybe not for a few seasons now. The NE region (I think) has an advantage in the OWP/OOWP category simply because of the density of d3 schools in the area. It creates, in essence, an extra tier for these teams. What OWP/OOWP represents for other regions might be similar to a formula in the NE including OOOWP. If that makes any sense.

The top teams in the region can get inflated numbers by beating good teams in the NESCAC, NEWMAC, LEC, etc, who have inflated numbers because they beat top teams in the CCC, MASCAC, etc, who have inflated numbers because they beat the top teams in the weakest conferences.

I'm not saying its an unfair advantage, but a natural one unique to the east because of the sheer volume of teams. Granted, I haven't done the math to back this up, but it seems to play itself out in practice every year.

I am not sure how this applies to my comment, as all 3 teams are in the NE so they are at the same advantage. I would contend that the NESCAC schools are at an even higher advantage (compared to MIT), because those schools play in the NESCAC that has a higher out-of-conference winning percentage as a whole. Therefore, on average, the OWP and OOWP of all NESCAC schools will increase as they go through their conference slate while the increase will not be as dramatic for the NEWMAC schools.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 19, 2010, 11:52:43 PM

Wow, Williams beats New Paltz State (7-7) by only 2 points. New Paltz actually led until with12 seconds left, before Williams made some FTs at the end of the game. Looking at the box score it looks like the game was really evenly matched. Nothing that pops out at you that says, "Williams had a bad shooting night" or "they committed too many turnovers", etc. Anyone who was there have any insight?

http://www.newpaltz.edu/athletics/mbasketball/statistics/mb11910.htm

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 19, 2010, 11:55:16 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 19, 2010, 11:45:25 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 19, 2010, 10:43:50 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 19, 2010, 09:19:29 PM
I am sure you have looked at these numbers, and I agree with your analysis, but the Massey and OWP/OOWP numbers show that MIT has had a tougher schedule than either Williams or Middlebury.

I've brought this up before, but maybe not for a few seasons now. The NE region (I think) has an advantage in the OWP/OOWP category simply because of the density of d3 schools in the area. It creates, in essence, an extra tier for these teams. What OWP/OOWP represents for other regions might be similar to a formula in the NE including OOOWP. If that makes any sense.

The top teams in the region can get inflated numbers by beating good teams in the NESCAC, NEWMAC, LEC, etc, who have inflated numbers because they beat top teams in the CCC, MASCAC, etc, who have inflated numbers because they beat the top teams in the weakest conferences.

I'm not saying its an unfair advantage, but a natural one unique to the east because of the sheer volume of teams. Granted, I haven't done the math to back this up, but it seems to play itself out in practice every year.

I am not sure how this applies to my comment, as all 3 teams are in the NE so they are at the same advantage. I would contend that the NESCAC schools are at an even higher advantage (compared to MIT), because those schools play in the NESCAC that has a higher out-of-conference winning percentage as a whole. Therefore, on average, the OWP and OOWP of all NESCAC schools will increase as they go through their conference slate while the increase will not be as dramatic for the NEWMAC schools.

Yes, several of us have discussed that in previous seasons.

I took the NESCAC race back in the QOWI days (2004 or 2005 -- on the old message board) and substituted the last "n" scheduled games from the regular season that were played against non-NESCAC teams and put in the record and outcome of the NESCAC team which they had not played against a second time (Little 3, CBB games, etc.) to create a de facto double round robin NESCAC conference standings. The impact on the QOWI was about the equivalent of 0.5 points on the QOWI 0-15 point system.

Instead of Amherst beating a (NESCAC) 0-9 Connecticut College that went 12-11 in-region, the Camels put a 4-17 record into the QOWI of Amherst in the double round robin scenario. Put those numbers up-and down the NESCAC into OOWP/OWP and the impact is huge.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 20, 2010, 02:04:06 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 19, 2010, 11:45:25 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 19, 2010, 10:43:50 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 19, 2010, 09:19:29 PM
I am sure you have looked at these numbers, and I agree with your analysis, but the Massey and OWP/OOWP numbers show that MIT has had a tougher schedule than either Williams or Middlebury.

I've brought this up before, but maybe not for a few seasons now. The NE region (I think) has an advantage in the OWP/OOWP category simply because of the density of d3 schools in the area. It creates, in essence, an extra tier for these teams. What OWP/OOWP represents for other regions might be similar to a formula in the NE including OOOWP. If that makes any sense.

The top teams in the region can get inflated numbers by beating good teams in the NESCAC, NEWMAC, LEC, etc, who have inflated numbers because they beat top teams in the CCC, MASCAC, etc, who have inflated numbers because they beat the top teams in the weakest conferences.

I'm not saying its an unfair advantage, but a natural one unique to the east because of the sheer volume of teams. Granted, I haven't done the math to back this up, but it seems to play itself out in practice every year.

I am not sure how this applies to my comment, as all 3 teams are in the NE so they are at the same advantage. I would contend that the NESCAC schools are at an even higher advantage (compared to MIT), because those schools play in the NESCAC that has a higher out-of-conference winning percentage as a whole. Therefore, on average, the OWP and OOWP of all NESCAC schools will increase as they go through their conference slate while the increase will not be as dramatic for the NEWMAC schools.

I was trying to say that, with NE region teams, you have to look at the actual schedule rather than the OWP/OOWP numbers. Amherst hasn't played a better schedule than MIT, that's for sure; I just wouldn't use those particular numbers to prove it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 20, 2010, 05:20:42 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 20, 2010, 02:04:06 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 19, 2010, 11:45:25 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 19, 2010, 10:43:50 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 19, 2010, 09:19:29 PM
I am sure you have looked at these numbers, and I agree with your analysis, but the Massey and OWP/OOWP numbers show that MIT has had a tougher schedule than either Williams or Middlebury.

I've brought this up before, but maybe not for a few seasons now. The NE region (I think) has an advantage in the OWP/OOWP category simply because of the density of d3 schools in the area. It creates, in essence, an extra tier for these teams. What OWP/OOWP represents for other regions might be similar to a formula in the NE including OOOWP. If that makes any sense.

The top teams in the region can get inflated numbers by beating good teams in the NESCAC, NEWMAC, LEC, etc, who have inflated numbers because they beat top teams in the CCC, MASCAC, etc, who have inflated numbers because they beat the top teams in the weakest conferences.

I'm not saying its an unfair advantage, but a natural one unique to the east because of the sheer volume of teams. Granted, I haven't done the math to back this up, but it seems to play itself out in practice every year.

I am not sure how this applies to my comment, as all 3 teams are in the NE so they are at the same advantage. I would contend that the NESCAC schools are at an even higher advantage (compared to MIT), because those schools play in the NESCAC that has a higher out-of-conference winning percentage as a whole. Therefore, on average, the OWP and OOWP of all NESCAC schools will increase as they go through their conference slate while the increase will not be as dramatic for the NEWMAC schools.

I was trying to say that, with NE region teams, you have to look at the actual schedule rather than the OWP/OOWP numbers. Amherst hasn't played a better schedule than MIT, that's for sure; I just wouldn't use those particular numbers to prove it.

The OWP/OOWP isn't perfect... but it is pretty good.

Look at MIT vs. Amherst (numbers borrowed from KnightSlappy on the Pool C board):

REG	#	WP	OWP	OOWP	SOS	RPI	NAT	Pool		REG	OVR	CONF	Team
NE	02	1.000	0.480	0.530	0.497	0.6224	017	A	C	14-0	15-1	NEWMAC	MIT
NE	20	.7500	0.4467	0.5299	0.474	0.5433	119	C	078	9-3	10-3	NESCAC	Amherst

The numbers do work out in MIT's favor. It sounds like you're saying that MIT should be considerably higher than Amherst... What rubric would you use to prove that, other than the tools we have like the numbers above?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 20, 2010, 06:50:20 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 20, 2010, 05:20:42 PM
It sounds like you're saying that MIT should be considerably higher than Amherst...

Not at all. Outside of the game against Williams, they are remarkably similar. Clearly MIT has played the schedule better than has Amherst.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 20, 2010, 08:00:41 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 20, 2010, 06:50:20 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 20, 2010, 05:20:42 PM
It sounds like you're saying that MIT should be considerably higher than Amherst...

Not at all. Outside of the game against Williams, they are remarkably similar. Clearly MIT has played the schedule better than has Amherst.

I meant higher SOS number, not ranking number... I guess I don't exactly understand what you're saying, though...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 20, 2010, 08:02:40 PM

ODAC ranked teams playing out as expected at the end of the 1st half:

Eastern Mennonite up big 50-22 over Emory and Henry.

Guilford up 42-32 over Bridgewater (Va).

Randolph-Macon up 31-30 at Virginia Wesleyan.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 20, 2010, 08:53:22 PM

If VWU beats RMC, it seems very possible that 4 ODAC teams will be ranked come next week (if the teams win out this weekend).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 20, 2010, 09:01:05 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 20, 2010, 08:53:22 PM
If VWU beats RMC, it seems very possible that 4 ODAC teams will be ranked come next week (if the teams win out this weekend).

4 teams are ranked right now. ;) I assume you meant "ranked in the Top Ten".

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 20, 2010, 09:01:54 PM

#3 Randolph-Macon loses to visiting #12 Virginia Wesleyan 71-69

#2 Guiford wins 79-67 over Bridgewater

#7 Eastern Mennonite wins 101-69 over Emory and Henry

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 20, 2010, 09:28:39 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 20, 2010, 09:01:05 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 20, 2010, 08:53:22 PM
If VWU beats RMC, it seems very possible that 4 ODAC teams will be ranked come next week (if the teams win out this weekend).

4 teams are ranked right now. ;) I assume you meant "ranked in the Top Ten".

You are correct, sir.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 20, 2010, 09:51:40 PM

#1 Point beats Eau Claire 74-68
#6 Whitewater beats Platteville 73-63

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 20, 2010, 10:42:27 PM

Wittenberg loses to Wabash tonight, 57-64. They had picked up votes in the Top 25 poll this week, for the first time since week 2. This result also takes some of the shine off the matchup with Wooster this weekend.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 20, 2010, 10:49:12 PM

Is it possible that RMC is the fourth best team in the ODAC and the fifth best team in the country?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 20, 2010, 10:55:23 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 20, 2010, 10:49:12 PM

Is it possible that RMC is the fourth best team in the ODAC and the fifth best team in the country?

I dont think so.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mugsy on January 20, 2010, 11:14:37 PM

#17 Illinois Wesleyan loses to Wheaton, 66-65 on a last second put back.

Wheaton was up by 6 with 53 seconds left and IWU took the lead with 12 seconds remaining.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 21, 2010, 12:04:52 AM

Quote from: Mugsy on January 20, 2010, 11:14:37 PM
#17 Illinois Wesleyan loses to Wheaton, 66-65 on a last second put back.

Wheaton was up by 6 with 53 seconds left and IWU took the lead with 12 seconds remaining.

Wheaton is pretty good at home, not so much on the road.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2010, 12:12:18 AM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 20, 2010, 10:42:27 PM
Wittenberg loses to Wabash tonight, 57-64. They had picked up votes in the Top 25 poll this week, for the first time since week 2. This result also takes some of the shine off the matchup with Wooster this weekend.

Perhaps some of the shine, but Witt/Woo is right up there with Amherst/Williams or (top dog) Hope/Calvin. There is ALWAYS plenty of shine left. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 21, 2010, 05:33:45 AM

Quote from: Mugsy on January 20, 2010, 11:14:37 PM
#17 Illinois Wesleyan loses to Wheaton, 66-65 on a last second put back.

Wheaton was up by 6 with 53 seconds left and IWU took the lead with 12 seconds remaining.

7 points in 41 seconds? (assuming Wheaton didn't score). Wow.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 21, 2010, 07:17:19 AM

How They Fared -- Midweek report

Apologies for the spurious smiley inserted toward the end. The Beavers had a long wait for their first W.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	UW-Stevens Point	16-1	def. UW-Eau Claire, 74-68; 01/23 at UW-Oshkosh
#2	588	Guilford	16-1	def. Roanoke, 96-62; def. Bridgewater (Va.), 79-67
#3	534	Randolph-Macon	14-2	LOST to #12 Virginia Wesleyan, 69-72; 01/23 at Randolph
#4	510	Washington U.	12-2	01/22 at Case Western Reserve; 01/24 at Carnegie Mellon
#5	508	Williams	15-1	def. New Paltz State, 70-68; 01/22 at Wesleyan; 01/23 at Connecticut College
#6	457	UW-Whitewater	15-2	def. UW-Platteville, 73-63
#7	430	Eastern Mennonite	14-1	def. Emory and Henry, 101-69; 01/23 at Bridgewater (Va.)
#8	428	MIT	16-1	def. Springfield, 67-56; 01/23 vs. Wheaton (Mass.)
#9	418	St. Thomas	14-2	def. Hamline, 80-63; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 71-63; 01/23 at St. Olaf
#10	412	Middlebury	14-1	01/22 at Connecticut College; 01/23 at Wesleyan
#11	373	Anderson	16-1	def. #40 Manchester, 77-75; 01/23 at Mount St. Joseph
#12	350	Virginia Wesleyan	15-2	def. #3 Randolph-Macon, 72-69; 01/23 vs. Roanoke
#13	326	St. Norbert	12-1	01/22 at Illinois College; 01/23 at Knox
#14	280	Chapman	14-2	01/22 vs. UC Santa Cruz (n); 01/23 vs. University of Dallas (n); 01/24 at La Sierra
#15	272	Brandeis	11-2	01/22 vs. #27 Rochester; 01/24 vs. Emory
#16	248	St. Mary's (Md.)	14-2	def. Hood, 65-54; 01/23 at Salisbury
#17	220	Illinois Wesleyan	13-3	LOST at T#36 Wheaton (Ill.), 65-66; 01/24 vs. North Park
#18	190	Whitworth	14-2	def. Whitman, 110-83; 01/22 vs. Linfield
#19	181	Franklin and Marshall	13-3	def. Dickinson, 71-49; 01/23 at Haverford
#20	165	Amherst	10-3	01/21 at Curry; 01/23 at Trinity (Conn.)
#21	124	William Paterson	17-1	def. Baruch, 87-81 2OT; def. Montclair State, 54-43; 01/23 vs. Rutgers-Camden
#22	122	Texas-Dallas	13-3	def. University of the Ozarks, 92-76; 01/21 vs. Texas-Tyler
#23	92	Mississippi College	12-2	01/21 at LeTourneau; 01/23 at East Texas Baptist
#24	84	Medaille	16-1	def. La Roche, 66-56; def. D'Youville, 76-60; 01/23 at Penn State-Altoona
#25	50	Wooster	12-4	def. Oberlin, 66-58; 01/23 at T#38 Wittenberg

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	32	Cabrini	12-1	01/21 vs. Neumann; 01/23 at Immaculata
#27	23	Rochester	12-2	01/22 at #15 Brandeis; 01/24 at New York University
#28	19	Wilmington	12-4	01/23 at Baldwin-Wallace
#29	9	Carthage	12-4	def. North Central (Ill.), 85-71; 01/23 vs. Millikin
T#30	7	Defiance	13-4	LOST at Bluffton :), 83-91; 01/23 at Rose-Hulman
T#30	7	Gustavus Adolphus	11-5	def. St. John's, 76-65; LOST to Carleton, 55-60; 01/23 vs. Concordia-Moorhead
T#30	7	Richard Stockton	14-4	def. Eastern, 82-74; def. Rowan, 85-72; 01/23 vs. Ramapo
T#30	7	UW-La Crosse	13-4	def. UW-Oshkosh, 61-55; 01/23 vs. UW-Eau Claire
T#34	5	Lycoming	14-2	def. Elizabethtown, 89-74; 01/23 at Alvernia
T#34	5	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	12-3	def. La Verne, 76-61; 01/23 vs. Whittier
T#36	4	Maryville (Tenn.)	15-2	def. Transylvania, 75-69 OT; 01/23 vs. Huntingdon
T#36	4	Wheaton (Ill.)	11-5	def. #17 Illinois Wesleyan, 66-65; 01/23 vs. Elmhurst
T#38	3	Wittenberg	13-3	LOST at Wabash, 57-64; 01/23 vs. #25 Wooster
T#38	3	Worcester Polytech	13-3	def. Clark, 67-57; 01/23 at Springfield
#40	2	Manchester	11-6	LOST to #11 Anderson, 75-77; 01/23 at Hanover
#41	1	Central	13-3	01/21 at Loras; 01/23 at Simpson

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on January 21, 2010, 09:56:48 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2010, 12:12:18 AM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 20, 2010, 10:42:27 PM
Wittenberg loses to Wabash tonight, 57-64. They had picked up votes in the Top 25 poll this week, for the first time since week 2. This result also takes some of the shine off the matchup with Wooster this weekend.

Perhaps some of the shine, but Witt/Woo is right up there with Amherst/Williams or (top dog) Hope/Calvin. There is ALWAYS plenty of shine left. ;)

I would say that some of the shine is gone, but as Mr. Y said, there is definitely still plenty left.

The rivalry lost some shine last year with Witt going through one of their worst seasons that I can remember. But there is still no love loss between these schools. Witt's loss to Wabash took away this game being for first place in the NCAC, but the Tigers are still going to come out ready to play vs. the Scots.

Wooster may have a 2 game lead in the conference standings, but this has to be the most uncomfortable 2 game lead at this stage of the season that I can remember the Scots having. With as poorly as Wooster has been playing since the start of the new year, and unless they find a way to start making some of their shots fall, the race for the NCAC is far from over. Not only is Witt still in it, but Wabash is very much a player in this race and OWU just might have something to say before it's all said and done as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mugsy on January 21, 2010, 09:59:07 AM

Video of the last 21 seconds from the IWU/Wheaton game.

Includes Sean Johnson's 3-pointer to give IWU their first lead of the second half and Ben Panner's pull up jumper to set up Andrew Jahn's put back layup as time expires.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsw28ZxBoH4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsw28ZxBoH4)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: toooldtoplay on January 21, 2010, 10:30:19 AM

Mugsy, Great video. What a great atmosphere for a D3 hoops game. The fans went crazy. Is that a big rivalry game?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: usee on January 21, 2010, 10:48:21 AM

Wheaton is 7-0 at home and 4-5 away from King Arena this year. 3 of their 5 losses are by a combined point total of 5 pts. Their other 2 losses were by 13 @ Carthage and by 25 @Hope.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mugsy on January 21, 2010, 11:34:14 AM

Quote from: toooldtoplay on January 21, 2010, 10:30:19 AM
Mugsy, Great video. What a great atmosphere for a D3 hoops game. The fans went crazy. Is that a big rivalry game?

If you were to ask basketball players from Wheaton who their top rival is in the CCIW, they'd say IWU. Over the past 15 years, it seems as if almost every game between these two teams goes down the the wire - several with the CCIW championship on the line.

Football would be North Central and Augustana.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 21, 2010, 05:16:44 PM

Quote from: Mugsy on January 21, 2010, 11:34:14 AM
Quote from: toooldtoplay on January 21, 2010, 10:30:19 AM
Mugsy, Great video. What a great atmosphere for a D3 hoops game. The fans went crazy. Is that a big rivalry game?

If you were to ask basketball players from Wheaton who their top rival is in the CCIW, they'd say IWU. Over the past 15 years, it seems as if almost every game between these two teams goes down the the wire - several with the CCIW championship on the line.

Football would be North Central and Augustana.

Ask Mugsy's wife who the big rival is. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2010, 05:27:11 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 21, 2010, 05:16:44 PM
Quote from: Mugsy on January 21, 2010, 11:34:14 AM
Quote from: toooldtoplay on January 21, 2010, 10:30:19 AM
Mugsy, Great video. What a great atmosphere for a D3 hoops game. The fans went crazy. Is that a big rivalry game?

If you were to ask basketball players from Wheaton who their top rival is in the CCIW, they'd say IWU. Over the past 15 years, it seems as if almost every game between these two teams goes down the the wire - several with the CCIW championship on the line.

Football would be North Central and Augustana.

Ask Mugsy's wife who the big rival is. ;)

To NPU, but that wasn't the question. Doesn't a rivalry require that the 'rival' occasionally wins a game? ;D

(And, yeah, since NPU beat Wheaton just 5 days ago, bad timing. :-[ But how many consecutive losses preceded that game? ;))

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 21, 2010, 05:36:35 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2010, 05:27:11 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 21, 2010, 05:16:44 PM
Quote from: Mugsy on January 21, 2010, 11:34:14 AM
Quote from: toooldtoplay on January 21, 2010, 10:30:19 AM
Mugsy, Great video. What a great atmosphere for a D3 hoops game. The fans went crazy. Is that a big rivalry game?

If you were to ask basketball players from Wheaton who their top rival is in the CCIW, they'd say IWU. Over the past 15 years, it seems as if almost every game between these two teams goes down the the wire - several with the CCIW championship on the line.

Football would be North Central and Augustana.

Ask Mugsy's wife who the big rival is. ;)

To NPU, but that wasn't the question. Doesn't a rivalry require that the 'rival' occasionally wins a game? ;D

(And, yeah, since NPU beat Wheaton just 5 days ago, bad timing. :-[ But how many consecutive losses preceded that game? ;))

Is a rivalry a true rivalry if it isn't... hmm... equally yoked?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 21, 2010, 05:55:16 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2010, 05:27:11 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 21, 2010, 05:16:44 PM
Quote from: Mugsy on January 21, 2010, 11:34:14 AM
Quote from: toooldtoplay on January 21, 2010, 10:30:19 AM
Mugsy, Great video. What a great atmosphere for a D3 hoops game. The fans went crazy. Is that a big rivalry game?

If you were to ask basketball players from Wheaton who their top rival is in the CCIW, they'd say IWU. Over the past 15 years, it seems as if almost every game between these two teams goes down the the wire - several with the CCIW championship on the line.

Football would be North Central and Augustana.

Ask Mugsy's wife who the big rival is. ;)

To NPU, but that wasn't the question. Doesn't a rivalry require that the 'rival' occasionally wins a game? ;D

(And, yeah, since NPU beat Wheaton just 5 days ago, bad timing. :-[ But how many consecutive losses preceded that game? ;))

Doesn't matter. We're on a one-game winning streak, and that's all that counts.

Besides, when's the last time that Wheaton brought in the local cops because of the visiting fans? You don't bring in cops when the Titans come to your gym -- you bring in EMTs who have specialized training in gerontological emergencies.

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 21, 2010, 05:36:35 PM
Is a rivalry a true rivalry if it isn't... hmm... equally yoked?

Nicely-played biblical reference, PS. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 21, 2010, 06:01:39 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2010, 05:27:11 PM

To NPU, but that wasn't the question. Doesn't a rivalry require that the 'rival' occasionally wins a game? ;D

Kalamazoo hasn't beaten Hope in basketball since 1998 or football since 1994.......ask them if they still consider Hope a rival.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2010, 06:12:46 PM

Quote from: sac on January 21, 2010, 06:01:39 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2010, 05:27:11 PM

To NPU, but that wasn't the question. Doesn't a rivalry require that the 'rival' occasionally wins a game? ;D

Kalamazoo hasn't beaten Hope in basketball since 1998 or football since 1994.......ask them if they still consider Hope a rival.

I acknowledged that NPU considers it a rivalry despite the one-sided outcomes. So the K'zoo/Hope comparison works ONLY if Hope considers it a rivalry, not K'zoo.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 21, 2010, 06:20:35 PM

Oh, I freely concede that the NPU/Wheaton rivalry is mostly one-sided in terms of the intensity of the feelings at stake. I always have; it's common knowledge that NPU gets worked up about Wheaton a whole lot more than Wheaton gets worked up about NPU. But, as Mugsy would be the first to tell you, if the intensity of feelings within a campus community as a whole was the only barometer of whether a rivalry exists or not, Wheaton would have no rivals -- because it's not a sports hotbed as colleges go. The history of Wheaton postings on these boards has been one long complaint from Wheaton supporters about how hard it is to get their students, faculty, staff, etc., fired up about their teams, even though Wheaton is very successful in numerous sports.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2010, 06:21:18 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 21, 2010, 05:55:16 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2010, 05:27:11 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 21, 2010, 05:16:44 PM
Quote from: Mugsy on January 21, 2010, 11:34:14 AM
Quote from: toooldtoplay on January 21, 2010, 10:30:19 AM
Mugsy, Great video. What a great atmosphere for a D3 hoops game. The fans went crazy. Is that a big rivalry game?

If you were to ask basketball players from Wheaton who their top rival is in the CCIW, they'd say IWU. Over the past 15 years, it seems as if almost every game between these two teams goes down the the wire - several with the CCIW championship on the line.

Football would be North Central and Augustana.

Ask Mugsy's wife who the big rival is. ;)

To NPU, but that wasn't the question. Doesn't a rivalry require that the 'rival' occasionally wins a game? ;D

(And, yeah, since NPU beat Wheaton just 5 days ago, bad timing. :-[ But how many consecutive losses preceded that game? ;))

Doesn't matter. We're on a one-game winning streak, and that's all that counts.

Besides, when's the last time that Wheaton brought in the local cops because of the visiting fans? You don't bring in cops when the Titans come to your gym -- you bring in EMTs who have specialized training in gerontological emergencies.

Well played, oh mighty one! ;D

[For those in the dark, IWU has a reputation for just about the best traveling fan base around, but also for the average traveling fan being 80+. ;) Don't know about now, but when I attended, IWU always sent at least 100 students, even if we did have to go by mastodon-drawn sleighs. :P]

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 21, 2010, 06:27:35 PM

McMurry has not beaten Hardin-Simmons in football since Grant Teaff was coach in the 1963 season, during the JFK administration! (That includes the 26-season football hiatus at HSU from 1964-1989.)

However, HSU needs to win at least one game later this month to keep McMurry from sweeping them in Hoops (both men and women) for what may be the first time ever.

It should be a good one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mugsy on January 21, 2010, 06:32:18 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 21, 2010, 06:20:35 PM
Oh, I freely concede that the NPU/Wheaton rivalry is mostly one-sided in terms of the intensity of the feelings at stake. I always have; it's common knowledge that NPU gets worked up about Wheaton a whole lot more than Wheaton gets worked up about NPU. But, as Mugsy would be the first to tell you, if the intensity of feelings within a campus community as a whole was the only barometer of whether a rivalry exists or not, Wheaton would have no rivals -- because it's not a sports hotbed as colleges go. The history of Wheaton postings on these boards has been one long complaint from Wheaton supporters about how hard it is to get their students, faculty, staff, etc., fired up about their teams, even though Wheaton is very successful in numerous sports.

Yup... I was speaking about rivals purely from a players perspective (both basketball and football). An extremely large portion of the student body would not know how to answer such a question.

During my years at Wheaton we often joked that the attendence at home football games would double if they closed the library between 1 and 5pm on Saturdays.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 21, 2010, 07:02:03 PM

Quote from: sac on January 21, 2010, 06:01:39 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2010, 05:27:11 PM

To NPU, but that wasn't the question. Doesn't a rivalry require that the 'rival' occasionally wins a game? ;D

Kalamazoo hasn't beaten Hope in basketball since 1998 or football since 1994.......ask them if they still consider Hope a rival.

Not much doubt about it

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2010, 07:42:39 PM

Quote from: sac on January 21, 2010, 07:02:03 PM
Quote from: sac on January 21, 2010, 06:01:39 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2010, 05:27:11 PM

To NPU, but that wasn't the question. Doesn't a rivalry require that the 'rival' occasionally wins a game? ;D

Kalamazoo hasn't beaten Hope in basketball since 1998 or football since 1994.......ask them if they still consider Hope a rival.

Not much doubt about it

My question was whether HOPE still considers K'zoo a rival? I thought Calvin pretty much absorbed all rivalry feelings!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 21, 2010, 09:03:11 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2010, 07:42:39 PM
Quote from: sac on January 21, 2010, 07:02:03 PM
Quote from: sac on January 21, 2010, 06:01:39 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2010, 05:27:11 PM

To NPU, but that wasn't the question. Doesn't a rivalry require that the 'rival' occasionally wins a game? ;D

Kalamazoo hasn't beaten Hope in basketball since 1998 or football since 1994.......ask them if they still consider Hope a rival.

Not much doubt about it

My question was whether HOPE still considers K'zoo a rival? I thought Calvin pretty much absorbed all rivalry feelings!

.......and my answer was not much doubt about it. ............. Not all of them, Kzoo actually plays football. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2010, 10:19:07 PM

Quote from: sac on January 21, 2010, 09:03:11 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2010, 07:42:39 PM
Quote from: sac on January 21, 2010, 07:02:03 PM
Quote from: sac on January 21, 2010, 06:01:39 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2010, 05:27:11 PM

To NPU, but that wasn't the question. Doesn't a rivalry require that the 'rival' occasionally wins a game? ;D

Kalamazoo hasn't beaten Hope in basketball since 1998 or football since 1994.......ask them if they still consider Hope a rival.

Not much doubt about it

My question was whether HOPE still considers K'zoo a rival? I thought Calvin pretty much absorbed all rivalry feelings!

.......and my answer was not much doubt about it. ............. Not all of them, Kzoo actually plays football. ;)

Sorry. By quoting this earlier post, I thought you had misunderstood and were reiterating that K'zoo definitely saw it as a rivalry.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: toooldtoplay on January 22, 2010, 09:43:16 AM

Rivalry games can be one way. I remember a high school situation where many players left the home town and went to a nearby parochial power school - perennially one of the top teams in the state. The local high school always considered that the biggest 2 games of the year, had the biggest student turnout etc. I don't think the parochial school ever had the games high on their list.

I guess rivalry has many definitions. If MIT and Harvard play every year I am sure it is a far bigger deal for the MIT team and always circled on their calendar first than vice versa. If they should win one......................?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 22, 2010, 05:00:32 PM

Eau Claire and Stevens Point used to be big rivals, especially in their NAIA days. Wednesday, Point beat Eau Claire for the 19th straight time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 22, 2010, 05:48:58 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2010, 06:21:18 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 21, 2010, 05:55:16 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2010, 05:27:11 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 21, 2010, 05:16:44 PM
Quote from: Mugsy on January 21, 2010, 11:34:14 AM
Quote from: toooldtoplay on January 21, 2010, 10:30:19 AM
Mugsy, Great video. What a great atmosphere for a D3 hoops game. The fans went crazy. Is that a big rivalry game?

If you were to ask basketball players from Wheaton who their top rival is in the CCIW, they'd say IWU. Over the past 15 years, it seems as if almost every game between these two teams goes down the the wire - several with the CCIW championship on the line.

Football would be North Central and Augustana.

Ask Mugsy's wife who the big rival is. ;)

To NPU, but that wasn't the question. Doesn't a rivalry require that the 'rival' occasionally wins a game? ;D

(And, yeah, since NPU beat Wheaton just 5 days ago, bad timing. :-[ But how many consecutive losses preceded that game? ;))

Doesn't matter. We're on a one-game winning streak, and that's all that counts.

Besides, when's the last time that Wheaton brought in the local cops because of the visiting fans? You don't bring in cops when the Titans come to your gym -- you bring in EMTs who have specialized training in gerontological emergencies.

Well played, oh mighty one! ;D

[For those in the dark, IWU has a reputation for just about the best traveling fan base around, but also for the average traveling fan being 80+. ;) Don't know about now, but when I attended, IWU always sent at least 100 students, even if we did have to go by mastodon-drawn sleighs. :P]

Former IWU center and occasional CCIW Chat poster titanhammer had the all-time best line about the age level of the Titans' traveling fan contingent: "At other schools, the back of the fan bus to away games has a keg. On the back of the IWU fan bus, they have a defibrillator."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 22, 2010, 05:49:33 PM

Unless teams can both keep a solid level of play from year to year, rivalries will fluctuate, especially with the turnover of students every four years.

I went to Eastern Nazarene, whose main rival was Gordon College since they are the only two Protestant schools in New England. It's a long rivalry; they used to play in the old Boston Garden before Celtics games in the 70's.

Even when I was there in the late 90's early 2000's both teams were decent and the games were real rivalries. ENC played in the conference championship game one year, which had half as many in attendance as either ENC-Gordon game during the regular season.

The past 5-6 years have been a bit unkind to the ENC basketball team (I think ENC's 1-8 since 2004). At the same time Endicott (about 2 miles from Gordon's campus) has been very good. If you ask a Gordon student today who their biggest rival is, they say Endicott.

I'm not sure even a resurrgence from ENC basketball could save what has become a very one-sided rivalry; geographic proximity is a hard thing to overcome.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 22, 2010, 05:53:03 PM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on January 22, 2010, 05:00:32 PM
Eau Claire and Stevens Point used to be big rivals, especially in their NAIA days. Wednesday, Point beat Eau Claire for the 19th straight time.

I still think there's plenty of rivalry between Point and Eau Claire... I remember when this streak started, back in 01-02. It was actually Coach Bennett's first victory at the Zorn (it was his 6th try). Since that year, though, it's been all Point, and EC hasn't finished higher than 5th and hasn't had a winning record in the league.

01-02 T 8th (missed conference tournament)
02-03 6th
03-04 8th
04-05 6th
05-06 8th
06-07 8th
07-08 7th
08-09 5th

I've got no love for the Blugolds... I can find it in my heart to root for just about every other WIAC team (even Platteville, which has been a stretch), but I haven't shed a tear for the recent plight of Eau Claire!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 23, 2010, 02:41:24 PM

#8 MIT loses to Wheaton (Mass) 60-57.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 23, 2010, 02:58:59 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 23, 2010, 02:41:24 PM
#8 MIT loses to Wheaton (Mass) 60-57.

As Wheaton was 5-10 entering the game, and it was AT MIT, that is a VERY bad loss. :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: toooldtoplay on January 23, 2010, 03:13:07 PM

Yes, bad loss. They shot 4-20 from 3 vs. 10-19 for Wheaton. That was the difference. Kates (point) hurt ankle in Springfield game and did not practice all week although played well in second half. Two other starters in hospital getting fluids for stomach flu. No excuse though, should have still pulled it out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Jeremybozz on January 23, 2010, 08:51:19 PM

Bridgewater up 72-62 on #7 E. Mennonite with 4:16 left in regulation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Jeremybozz on January 23, 2010, 09:39:20 PM

Bridgewater 89,#7 EMU 83 Final

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 23, 2010, 09:46:05 PM

Ugly game in Virginia. EMU shot less than 20% from deep (and took a lot of shots) and there were 68 combined fouls between the two teams with seven guys at 4 or more (five fouled out).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deanslist on January 23, 2010, 10:51:11 PM

I was at the EMU-BC game. What a difficult and disappointing game to watch. With 68 fouls and a combined 94 free throws the game had very little rhythm. For such a big rivalry (these schools only separated by about 10 miles), sold out crowd (they stopped allowing people in the gym ) it was really disappointing the game was called so tight. Unfortunately, EMU was cold from beyond the arc tonight. Thursday night the Runnin' Royals have a rematch against the other opponent that handed them there first loss, Southern Virginia University. Keep up the good work Royals! Go EMU!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 24, 2010, 12:53:58 AM

Quote from: deanslist on January 23, 2010, 10:51:11 PM
I was at the EMU-BC game. What a difficult and disappointing game to watch. With 68 fouls and a combined 94 free throws the game had very little rhythm. For such a big rivalry (these schools only separated by about 10 miles), sold out crowd (they stopped allowing people in the gym ) it was really disappointing the game was called so tight. Unfortunately, EMU was cold from beyond the arc tonight. Thursday night the Runnin' Royals have a rematch against the other opponent that handed them there first loss, Southern Virginia University. Keep up the good work Royals! Go EMU!

deanslist,
How long did that game last? The play by play statistics page was the longest one I think I've ever seen for a game of regulation length. The double overtime game last night between Brockport St and Plattsburgh was 3 screens shorter than this one. I'm surprised the refs eyes weren't bugging out of their heads when they finally walked off the court, from all the whistle blowing that went on in that game. Game had to be a minimum of two and a half hours long.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 24, 2010, 01:28:55 AM

It's only one game, but note the Chapman win over U of Dallas: they coasted to a 61-29 win after leading 38-3 at the half! :o While Dallas is no powerhouse, they were 8-8 entering the game. I can't recall the last time a men's college team scored three points in a half.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 24, 2010, 01:59:32 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 24, 2010, 01:28:55 AM
It's only one game, but note the Chapman win over U of Dallas: they coasted to a 61-29 win after leading 38-3 at the half! :o While Dallas is no powerhouse, they were 8-8 entering the game. I can't recall the last time a men's college team scored three points in a half.

Massey had UDallas at #263 coming into the game.

Teams that were in that Massey range included LaVerne, Keene St, Scranton, Kean and Otterbein.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 24, 2010, 08:37:46 AM

#25 Wooster registered a nice road win last night at Wittenberg, knocking off the Tigers by a 66-56 score.

Wooster is now 13-4 overall and with a 8-0 record in their conference, they have a two game lead in the standings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on January 24, 2010, 09:50:45 AM

Ralph - and I though my alma mater RPI's 13 points at half vs Hamilton was sad... GEESH!!! That's an explosion compared to U Dallas....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dahlby on January 24, 2010, 11:36:13 AM

I haven't seen the final stats yet, but U Dallas had many open looks at the basket, especially close in. Not to be a comedian, but they should change their nickname to "DRUMERS" with all the rim shots.
But, to be fair, CU missed several shots as well. Some of the fans were commenting about how dark the gym lights were. Energy saving tube lighting I think. Both of the Chapman games I saw featured many missed shots.

I really felt for the U Dallas team and its coach. They ran their plays well, but the ball just would not go through the hoop. Dallas did score a lot of points the night before in their win over La Sierra.

Does anyone know the record for fewest points in a half?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deanslist on January 24, 2010, 01:06:08 PM

Magicman,

To answer your question about the length of the EMU-BC game last night at Bridgewater College. I happened to look at my cell phone to see what time it was and I remember it being 9:16 and the game wasn't over yet! You could sense the frustration from both supporters as even in the 1st half the crowd began chanting, "Let them play, let them play!" I was curious to see how the refs would approach the 2nd half, but they called the exact number of fouls in the 2nd as they did in the 1st, which was 34 fouls in each. Anyways, I know the EMU coaching staff will do a good job in getting the team refocused for a tough non conference game on Thursday in Harrisonburg. Go EMU!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 24, 2010, 01:30:19 PM

Quote from: dahlby on January 24, 2010, 11:36:13 AM
I haven't seen the final stats yet, but U Dallas had many open looks at the basket, especially close in. Not to be a comedian, but they should change their nickname to "DRUMERS" with all the rim shots.
But, to be fair, CU missed several shots as well. Some of the fans were commenting about how dark the gym lights were. Energy saving tube lighting I think. Both of the Chapman games I saw featured many missed shots.

I really felt for the U Dallas team and its coach. They ran their plays well, but the ball just would not go through the hoop. Dallas did score a lot of points the night before in their win over La Sierra.

Does anyone know the record for fewest points in a half?

Probably zero if you include before the shot clock. ;)

But I would think this just might be a new low since the shot clock began.

(I have seen women's scores even lower, but rarely.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 24, 2010, 01:44:33 PM

There are no gimme's in conference games it appears.

After MIT, EMU, and St. Mary's went down yesterday. Brandeis falls to Emory today at home today.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 24, 2010, 02:08:34 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 24, 2010, 01:44:33 PM
There are no gimme's in conference games it appears.

After MIT, EMU, and St. Mary's went down yesterday. Brandeis falls to Emory today at home today.

Emory 77 at Brandeis 64.

Now I have a game with a frame of reference!

Brandeis went 1-17 on 3FG's. That is ugly!

If that was the "ugly" game for Brandeis, and the Judges are better than that, then we will see later in the season. But, you gotta defend home court.

That outcome makes me think that Brandeis is overrated at #15. Emory split a pair of OT games with a good but not great Oglethorpe team. The Eagles lost to Maryville on a neutral floor, and they have a road loss to W&L.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 24, 2010, 02:29:33 PM

Brandeis is indeed an enigma. They recently won AT WashU! Is Brandeis just SO inconsistent that their games need to be discounted, or does today's result reflect negatively on WashU?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 24, 2010, 02:35:59 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 24, 2010, 02:29:33 PM
Brandeis is indeed an enigma. They recently won AT WashU! Is Brandeis just SO inconsistent that their games need to be discounted, or does today's result reflect negatively on WashU?

I think that that we are seeing a huge "upper middle class" of teams that don't deserve to be in the Top 25, but they will be contending for the conference AQ's.

The problem that I will have tonight, as I fill out my Posters' Poll, is finding 25 teams that I can vote for! :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Marty Peretz on January 24, 2010, 04:48:38 PM

For the record, I have not seen a more uncharacteristically Wash.U. performance than that of the Deis game. The Bears went 10-22 from the foul line, 3-14 from three, and commit 21 turnovers (If I'm not mistaken, the Bears have led the nation in Assist to turnover ratio the last two years). Deis wasn't even that good; Wash.U. was just absolutely awful and still almost won (took it to OT and had a chance to win but couldn't hit a free throw whatsoever down the stretch). I wouldn't put much stock in the Deis win over Wash.U.. Even in this up and down year for the Bears, Deis stands out as a notably woeful performance.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 24, 2010, 08:39:26 PM

Quote from: Marty Peretz on January 24, 2010, 04:48:38 PM
For the record, I have not seen a more uncharacteristically Wash.U. performance than that of the Deis game. The Bears went 10-22 from the foul line, 3-14 from three, and commit 21 turnovers (If I'm not mistaken, the Bears have led the nation in Assist to turnover ratio the last two years). Deis wasn't even that good; Wash.U. was just absolutely awful and still almost won (took it to OT and had a chance to win but couldn't hit a free throw whatsoever down the stretch). I wouldn't put much stock in the Deis win over Wash.U.. Even in this up and down year for the Bears, Deis stands out as a notably woeful performance.

Then what games should we put stock in?

I could tell you that MIT had two starters in the hospital the day before their loss to Wheaton, and two other of their top 6 players were game time decisions because they are playing with ankle/knee injuries and therefore to disregard the loss, but I dont think people care that much about excuses.

The Brandeis game wasnt the first or last game WashU has played bad. They were almost beat by NYU at home, they were losing to and barely beat Case Western, not to mention their loss to Transylvania. They havent been that impressive in any of the webcasts of them I have seen this season (Brandeis, NYU, Case). I think you have to go by the results and not so much with subjective criteria. There is plenty of time to prove who is the best team in the country later in the season, but, in my opinion, the important question is where do a teams results suggest they should be ranked, not what I think they could be ranked.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 24, 2010, 09:14:25 PM

How They Fared

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	UW-Stevens Point	17-1	def. UW-Eau Claire, 74-68; def. UW-Oshkosh, 73-54
#2	588	Guilford	16-1	def. Roanoke, 96-62; def. Bridgewater (Va.), 79-67
#3	534	Randolph-Macon	15-2	LOST to #12 Virginia Wesleyan, 69-72; def. Randolph, 54-48
#4	510	Washington U.	14-2	def. Case Western Reserve, 66-61; def. Carnegie Mellon, 81-60
#5	508	Williams	17-1	def. New Paltz State, 70-68; def. Wesleyan, 79-63; def. Connecticut College, 69-57
#6	457	UW-Whitewater	15-2	def. UW-Platteville, 73-63
#7	430	Eastern Mennonite	14-2	def. Emory and Henry, 101-69; LOST at Bridgewater (Va.), 83-89
#8	428	MIT	16-2	def. Springfield, 67-56; LOST to Wheaton (Mass.), 57-60
#9	418	St. Thomas	15-2	def. Hamline, 80-63; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 71-63; def. St. Olaf, 75-47
#10	412	Middlebury	16-1	def. Connecticut College, 74-55; def. Wesleyan, 77-69
#11	373	Anderson	17-1	def. #40 Manchester, 77-75; def. Mount St. Joseph, 66-63
#12	350	Virginia Wesleyan	16-2	def. #3 Randolph-Macon, 72-69; def. Roanoke, 77-63
#13	326	St. Norbert	14-1	def. Illinois College, 74-68 OT; def. Knox, 56-45
#14	280	Chapman	17-2	def. UC Santa Cruz, 79-60; def. University of Dallas, 61-29; def. La Sierra, 76-49
#15	272	Brandeis	12-3	def. #27 Rochester, 70-63; LOST to Emory, 64-77
#16	248	St. Mary's (Md.)	14-3	def. Hood, 65-54; LOST at Salisbury, 66-76
#17	220	Illinois Wesleyan	14-3	LOST at T#36 Wheaton (Ill.), 65-66; def. North Park, 83-77
#18	190	Whitworth	15-2	def. Whitman, 110-83; def. Linfield, 79-62
#19	181	Franklin and Marshall	14-3	def. Dickinson, 71-49; def. Haverford, 58-42
#20	165	Amherst	12-3	def. Curry, 87-69; def. Trinity (Conn.), 67-65
#21	124	William Paterson	18-1	def. Baruch, 87-81 2OT; def. Montclair State, 54-43; def. Rutgers-Camden, 57-44
#22	122	Texas-Dallas	14-3	def. University of the Ozarks, 92-76; def. Texas-Tyler, 70-56
#23	92	Mississippi College	14-2	def. LeTourneau, 64-59; def. East Texas Baptist, 72-63
#24	84	Medaille	17-1	def. La Roche, 66-56; def. D'Youville, 76-60; def. Penn State-Altoona, 75-69
#25	50	Wooster	13-4	def. Oberlin, 66-58; def. T#38 Wittenberg, 66-56

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	32	Cabrini	14-1	def. Neumann, 88-79; def. Immaculata, 78-71
#27	23	Rochester	12-4	LOST at #15 Brandeis, 63-70; LOST at New York University, 75-78
#28	19	Wilmington	13-4	def. Baldwin-Wallace, 67-62
#29	9	Carthage	13-4	def. North Central (Ill.), 85-71; def. Millikin, 68-55
T#30	7	Defiance	14-4	LOST at Bluffton, 83-91; def. Rose-Hulman, 61-57
T#30	7	Gustavus Adolphus	12-5	def. St. John's, 76-65; LOST to Carleton, 55-60; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 79-72
T#30	7	Richard Stockton	14-5	def. Eastern, 82-74; def. Rowan, 85-72; LOST to Ramapo, 84-85
T#30	7	UW-La Crosse	13-5	def. UW-Oshkosh, 61-55; LOST to UW-Eau Claire, 51-72
T#34	5	Lycoming	15-2	def. Elizabethtown, 89-74; def. Alvernia, 83-73
T#34	5	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	13-3	def. La Verne, 76-61; def. Whittier, 81-68
T#36	4	Maryville (Tenn.)	16-2	def. Transylvania, 75-69 OT; def. Huntingdon, 102-65
T#36	4	Wheaton (Ill.)	12-5	def. #17 Illinois Wesleyan, 66-65; def. Elmhurst, 70-43
T#38	3	Wittenberg	13-4	LOST at Wabash, 57-64; LOST to #25 Wooster, 56-66
T#38	3	Worcester Polytech	14-3	def. Clark, 67-57; def. Springfield, 86-68
#40	2	Manchester	11-7	LOST to #11 Anderson, 75-77; LOST at Hanover, 63-81
#41	1	Central	14-4	LOST at Loras, 77-86; def. Simpson, 84-80

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 24, 2010, 09:22:28 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 24, 2010, 08:39:26 PM
I could tell you that MIT had two starters in the hospital the day before their loss to Wheaton, and two other of their top 6 players were game time decisions because they are playing with ankle/knee injuries and therefore to disregard the loss, but I dont think people care that much about excuses.

You could, but then you would have to acknowledge that Washington University was without a key starter against Brandeis and bringing in another key starter who had been out for a few weeks with mono (an illness that often affects people for several weeks) and only able to play limited minutes. And, faced a similar situation against Transylvania.

But I agree with you on this one--no excuses.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: oldchap on January 24, 2010, 11:35:09 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 24, 2010, 01:28:55 AM
It's only one game, but note the Chapman win over U of Dallas: they coasted to a 61-29 win after leading 38-3 at the half! :o While Dallas is no powerhouse, they were 8-8 entering the game. I can't recall the last time a men's college team scored three points in a half.

I was at the game and here is my opinion:
Chapman played one of the best half defensively that I have ever seen them play. Their defensive pressure forced a lot of contested shots from U Dallas. Sure, a better team would have made some of these shots, but Chapman was so relentless and focused on stopping every single Dallas play that it resulted in this lopsided score. If Chapman were to consistently play this kind of defense night in and night out, few teams except for the top ones, would resist.

For the record, Dallas shot 1-22 in the first half of this game, 0-6 from 3 point range, 1-4 FT (OK, so they could have scored 3 more points...) and had 10 turnovers. They got the ball stolen 7 times, were outrebounded 6-25 and only had 1 offensive rebound. If this doesn't point to Chapman's excellent defense, then what would it be?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 24, 2010, 11:52:05 PM

Quote from: oldchap on January 24, 2010, 11:35:09 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 24, 2010, 01:28:55 AM
It's only one game, but note the Chapman win over U of Dallas: they coasted to a 61-29 win after leading 38-3 at the half! :o While Dallas is no powerhouse, they were 8-8 entering the game. I can't recall the last time a men's college team scored three points in a half.

I was at the game and here is my opinion:
Chapman played one of the best half defensively that I have ever seen them play. Their defensive pressure forced a lot of contested shots from U Dallas. Sure, a better team would have made some of these shots, but Chapman was so relentless and focused on stopping every single Dallas play that it resulted in this lopsided score. If Chapman were to consistently play this kind of defense night in and night out, few teams except for the top ones, would resist.

For the record, Dallas shot 1-22 in the first half of this game, 0-6 from 3 point range, 1-4 FT (OK, so they could have scored 3 more points...) and had 10 turnovers. They got the ball stolen 7 times, were outrebounded 6-25 and only had 1 offensive rebound. If this doesn't point to Chapman's excellent defense, then what would it be?

Hey, don't down play your free throw defense! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 25, 2010, 12:03:57 AM

Let's see how UDallas does in the NEAC tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 25, 2010, 12:30:24 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 25, 2010, 12:03:57 AM
Let's see how UDallas does in the NEAC tournament.

Ralph,
I think the winner of the NEAC tournament will be the same team that won it last year, SUNYIT. And if they do get upset, it will probably be Wells College that does it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 25, 2010, 02:38:45 PM

QuoteIs Brandeis just SO inconsistent that their games need to be discounted, or does today's result reflect negatively on WashU?

I've been wondering the same thing about Wash U. They've had some results that raised eyebrows for the wrong reasons including smaller-than-expected margins of victory over Case, Chicago and NYU. I know they have injury problems. I know the Bears are winning despite them. I know I wouldn't want to play them in the tournament.

But I don't know if they are the No. 4 team in the country at this moment.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: toooldtoplay on January 25, 2010, 05:30:22 PM

Common thread among good (not great) teams with losses to average or poor teams is the 3 point shot. Many of the middle of the road teams don't have the dominant inside players that can carry a team when shots aren't going. It looks like highly ranked teams seem to have the poor shooting night (mental) against a mediocre teams and lose. I see numbers like 3-17, 1-14, 0-6, 4-20 and it is tough to overcome. Once you get behind those shots are harder to hit at any level. The inside game is more consistent and therefore needs to be considered a bit more importantly when evaluating teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on January 25, 2010, 06:40:01 PM

Topic: Win Streak

Whitworth and Anderson both on 14 game roll. For Whitworth that's a school record. Anyway, are these the longest amongst D3's this year (oh lookie there, William Paterson on a 16 gamer)? Does a win streak have a bearing in voters minds? Go Pirates!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 25, 2010, 07:52:05 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on January 25, 2010, 06:40:01 PM
Topic: Win Streak

Whitworth and Anderson both on 14 game roll. For Whitworth that's a school record. Anyway, are these the longest amongst D3's this year (oh lookie there, William Paterson on a 16 gamer)? Does a win streak have a bearing in voters minds? Go Pirates!!

While winning streaks are impressive, I think just as important are the teams included in that win streak.

As an aside, I see WW's as being the best, by virtue of their strength of schedule (http://www.d3hoops.com/salem/10/sos.htm).

Team	SOS
Whitworth	.530
William Paterson	.511
Anderson	.455

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 26, 2010, 12:06:40 AM

New poll is out, no big surprises:

www.d3hoops.com/top25

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 26, 2010, 12:19:53 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 19, 2010, 09:02:11 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 19, 2010, 08:41:13 PM
Here is another interesting development in the Top 25 this season.

I have listed the number of votes that were not given to the 25 teams in the Top 25 for Week #7 for the last 5 seasons.

Year Votes not given to the 25 in the Top 25
2009-10 138
2008-09 226
2007-08 258
2006-07 318
2005-06 271

I think that the voters don't think that there are 25 teams that deserve to be in the Top 25.

(Corrections to the back-of-the-napkin math are appreciated.)

I'd interpret it just the reverse - that the voters have reached a rough consensus on who the top 25 are.

Week #8 has all but 125 points allocated to the Top 25 teams in the poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: toooldtoplay on January 26, 2010, 10:13:33 AM

It may come down to the amount of information available. If everyone is using the same info to select teams then the votes will tend to be more consolidated. The only difference would be regional or league bias and relative importance given to different criteria.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 26, 2010, 12:34:51 PM

Quote from: toooldtoplay on January 26, 2010, 10:13:33 AM
It may come down to the amount of information available. If everyone is using the same info to select teams then the votes will tend to be more consolidated. The only difference would be regional or league bias and relative importance given to different criteria.

I think, also, in a year like this with a large pool of teams people are unsure about, the confidence of other voters may play into it.

If I'm choosing between Team A and Team B, but not excited about either one. The fact that Team A received 65 votes the previous week and Team B received 3 might be a deciding factor - if I have been unable to choose based on other available data.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: toooldtoplay on January 26, 2010, 03:36:43 PM

Are you saying you are still subject to a bit of "peer pressure"??

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 26, 2010, 06:43:15 PM

Quote from: toooldtoplay on January 26, 2010, 03:36:43 PM
Are you saying you are still subject to a bit of "peer pressure"??

I don't tend to be subject to it, hence the fact that my poster's poll nickname has become "captain outlier." I do think it makes some sense for a poster to trust the judgment of others as a legitimate factor. If a voter really feels Team A is better than Team B, they'll vote for Team A. If they can't tell the difference, trusting their peers makes some sense.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 27, 2010, 03:15:15 PM

15 of the top 25 in action this evening.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 27, 2010, 08:43:05 PM

#9 Randolph-Macon drops a 65-57 decision to Washington & Lee.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 27, 2010, 08:44:23 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 27, 2010, 08:43:05 PM
#9 Randolph-Macon drops a 65-57 decision to Washington & Lee.

The game was at RMC, that is their 3rd loss in 5 games, their second at home (and the other was at EMU by 23).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 27, 2010, 08:51:59 PM

Stevens Point up by 15 36-21 over Whitewater at the half.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 27, 2010, 08:53:12 PM

#14 MIT defeats Coast Guard, 78-58.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 27, 2010, 08:56:05 PM

Anderson in trouble against Defiance, down by 10 with 6 to play.

Defiance now blowing out Anderson, 85-66, with under 3 to play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 27, 2010, 09:13:20 PM

Defiance downs Anderson, 91-75.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 27, 2010, 09:19:09 PM

Whitewater coming back only down 4, 39-35 with 12:06 to go.

Whitewater now within 1 at 41-40 with 10:34 remaining. Warhawks have outscored the Pointers 19-5 in thre 2nd half.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 27, 2010, 09:27:03 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 27, 2010, 09:19:09 PM
Whitewater coming back only down 4, 39-35 with 12:06 to go.

Whitewater now within 1 at 41-40 with 10:34 remaining. Warhawks have outscored the Pointers 19-5 in thre 2nd half.

WW now leads 47-41 with 8:05 in the half. Point has the ball and gets a timeout. Now outscoring Point 26-5 in the half. Point can't hit a shot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 27, 2010, 09:31:24 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 27, 2010, 09:27:03 PM
Quote from: magicman on January 27, 2010, 09:19:09 PM
Whitewater coming back only down 4, 39-35 with 12:06 to go.

Whitewater now within 1 at 41-40 with 10:34 remaining. Warhawks have outscored the Pointers 19-5 in thre 2nd half.

WW now leads 47-41 with 8:05 in the half. Point has the ball and gets a timeout. Now outscoring Point 26-5 in the half. Point can't hit a shot.

Whitewater now leads 53-43 with 6:19 to go. WW has held Point to just 7 points in 14 minutes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 27, 2010, 09:40:58 PM

Whitewater now only up 1 55-54 as Point comes back I smell another OT game

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 27, 2010, 09:43:20 PM

Whitewater up 57-56 with 27 secs to play.
Pointers Forman fouled and goes to the line and hits 2 Pointers up 58-57

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 27, 2010, 09:51:33 PM

Fletcher Dupree hit a bucket for Whitewater with 18 seconds to play. Moses turns the ball over with 9 secs to play and Stevens Point has to foul. Point has to give up two more fouls to get Whitewater to the line. Mitchell hits 2 free throw to push the lead to 61-58, Pointers miss at the buzzer and lose.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 27, 2010, 09:56:15 PM

Point goes down. 61-58.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 27, 2010, 09:57:20 PM

Unbelievable

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 27, 2010, 10:02:15 PM

Has Point played a worse half of basketball thiis season than tonight's 2nd half?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 27, 2010, 10:09:55 PM

Carthage over North Park 76-61.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 27, 2010, 10:10:00 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 27, 2010, 10:02:15 PM
Has Point played a worse half of basketball thiis season than tonight's 2nd half?

Point hasn't played a worse half in 2 decades. And that time period includes two games where Point was down 17-0 and 20-0 to start a game (won one of those games by 15 a few years ago in the NCAA tournament and barely lost the other after taking a second half lead).

But you do have to give Point credit... they retook the lead with :27 and had been outscored 34-7 and were down 12 at the 6:07 mark in the half.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on January 27, 2010, 11:29:43 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 27, 2010, 10:02:15 PM
Has Point played a worse half of basketball thiis season than tonight's 2nd half?

They were certainly slow out of the blocks. In the irst half the defense was tenacious, in the second, it was a step or two slow until the last 6 minutes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 28, 2010, 12:08:55 AM

PP leads CMS 21-13 at the half. I bet that game has been fabulously enjoyable to watch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 28, 2010, 12:11:00 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 28, 2010, 12:08:55 AM

PP leads CMS 21-13 at the half. I bet that game has been fabulously enjoyable to watch.

How many shots on goal have been taken?

Final PP 47 CMS 36.

Well, so much for CMS breaking strongly into the Top 25 this week.

Parity in the SCIAC strikes again.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 28, 2010, 12:13:27 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 28, 2010, 12:08:55 AM

PP leads CMS 21-13 at the half. I bet that game has been fabulously enjoyable to watch.

4 TD's and 2 FG's that's an exciting football game. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 28, 2010, 12:14:06 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 28, 2010, 12:11:00 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 28, 2010, 12:08:55 AM

PP leads CMS 21-13 at the half. I bet that game has been fabulously enjoyable to watch.
How many shots on goal have been taken?

Final score is 47-36, PP. They lost a game this year in which they scored twice as much. There's no boxscore yet (and hopefully never, eww).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 28, 2010, 12:29:38 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 28, 2010, 12:11:00 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 28, 2010, 12:08:55 AM

PP leads CMS 21-13 at the half. I bet that game has been fabulously enjoyable to watch.
How many shots on goal have been taken?

Final PP 47 CMS 36.

Well, so much for CMS breaking strongly into the Top 25 this week.

Parity in the SCIAC strikes again.

Ralph,
I told you the other day I was going to jinx them by putting them in my Poster's Poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 28, 2010, 06:31:01 AM

How They Fared -- Midweek Report

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	UW-Stevens Point	17-2	LOST to #5 UW-Whitewater, 58-61; 01/30 vs. UW-Superior
#2	598	Guilford	17-1	def. Roanoke, 86-70; 01/30 at #9 Randolph-Macon
#3	547	Washington U.	14-2	01/29 at Rochester; 01/31 at #32 Emory
#4	532	Williams	18-1	def. Hamilton, 96-61; 01/30 at #8 Middlebury
#5	516	UW-Whitewater	16-2	def. #1 UW-Stevens Point, 61-58; 01/30 vs. UW-Stout
#6	473	St. Thomas	16-2	def. Augsburg, 77-66; 01/30 vs. Macalester
#7	441	Virginia Wesleyan	17-2	def. Lynchburg, 88-78; 01/30 vs. Emory and Henry
#8	432	Middlebury	17-1	def. Southern Vermont, 94-68; 01/30 vs. #4 Williams
#9	425	Randolph-Macon	15-3	LOST to Washington and Lee, 57-65; 01/30 vs. #2 Guilford
#10	394	Anderson	17-2	LOST at Defiance, 75-91
#11	353	Eastern Mennonite	14-2	01/28 vs. Southern Va.; 01/30 at Hampden-Sydney
#12	346	St. Norbert	15-1	def. Carroll, 76-58; 01/30 at Beloit
#13	311	Chapman	17-2	01/28 at S'western (Ariz.)
#14	303	MIT	17-2	def. Coast Guard, 78-58; 01/30 at T#33 Worcester Polytech
#15	275	Whitworth	15-2	01/29 vs. Willamette; 01/30 vs. Lewis and Clark
#16	214	William Paterson	19-1	def. New Jersey City, 58-39; 01/30 at Rowan
#17	208	Franklin and Marshall	15-3	def. Johns Hopkins, 53-50; 01/30 vs. Swarthmore
#18	183	Amherst	13-3	def. Vassar, 88-55; 01/29 at Bowdoin; 01/30 at Colby
#19	150	Texas-Dallas	14-3	01/28 vs. Louisiana College; 01/30 vs. #22 Mississippi College
#20	141	Brandeis	12-3	01/29 vs. Case Western Reserve; 01/31 vs. Carnegie Mellon
#21	132	Illinois Wesleyan	15-3	def. Augustana, 71-64; 01/30 at #27 Carthage
#22	120	Mississippi College	14-2	01/28 at University of the Ozarks; 01/30 at #19 Texas-Dallas
#23	114	St. Mary's (Md.)	15-3	def. Marymount, 84-61; 01/30 at Stevenson
#24	85	Wooster	14-4	def. Hiram, 67-43; 01/30 vs. Denison
#25	82	Medaille	18-1	def. Hilbert, 89-62; 01/30 vs. Franciscan (Ohio)

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	38	Cabrini	16-1	def. Philadelphia Bible, 73-53; def. Eastern, 80-71; 01/30 at Centenary
#27	25	Carthage	14-4	def. North Park, 76-61; 01/30 vs. #21 Illinois Wesleyan
#28	16	Lycoming	16-2	def. Penn College, 113-89; 01/30 vs. T#35 Albright
#29	13	Maryville (Tenn.)	16-3	LOST at Milligan, 74-76; 01/30 at Piedmont
#30	11	Wheaton (Ill.)	13-5	def. Millikin, 50-45; 01/30 at North Central (Ill.)
#31	9	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	13-4	LOST at Pomona-Pitzer, 36-47; 01/30 vs. Cal Lutheran
#32	6	Emory	12-4	01/29 vs. Chicago; 01/31 vs. #3 Washington U.
T#33	2	St. John Fisher	16-3	def. Nazareth, 80-75; 01/29 vs. Stevens
T#33	2	Worcester Polytech	14-4	LOST at Babson, 58-72; 01/30 vs. #14 MIT
T#35	1	Albright	15-2	01/30 at #28 Lycoming
T#35	1	Brockport State	12-4	def. Buffalo State, 74-68; 01/29 vs. Cortland State; 01/30 vs. Oswego State
T#35	1	DeSales	14-4	def. Muhlenberg, 67-59; 01/30 at Eastern

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 28, 2010, 06:31:21 AM

Quote from: magicman on January 28, 2010, 12:29:38 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 28, 2010, 12:11:00 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 28, 2010, 12:08:55 AM

PP leads CMS 21-13 at the half. I bet that game has been fabulously enjoyable to watch.
How many shots on goal have been taken?

Final PP 47 CMS 36.

Well, so much for CMS breaking strongly into the Top 25 this week.

Parity in the SCIAC strikes again.

Ralph,
I told you the other day I was going to jinx them by putting them in my Poster's Poll.

Magicman has spoken ... from the heights of Mount Olympus! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 28, 2010, 08:50:36 PM

EMU avenged one of their losses tonite, stomping S. Va. by 21 (in a game that was MORE lopsided than that!). Bridgewater had better bring their A+++++ game on Feb. 17th. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on January 28, 2010, 09:59:40 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on January 25, 2010, 06:40:01 PM
Topic: Win Streak

Whitworth and Anderson both on 14 game roll. For Whitworth that's a school record. Anyway, are these the longest amongst D3's this year (oh lookie there, William Paterson on a 16 gamer)? Does a win streak have a bearing in voters minds? Go Pirates!!

Two years ago, my team of choice - Centre (SCAC) catapulted from relative obscurity to win 25 straight and move as high as #2 in the rankings. They would eventually bow out in the 2nd round of the D3 tournament to a very balanced, hot Ohio Wesleyan team. Centre was a great shooting team that relied on the 3-ball. Not having a good balance between low block scoring and downtown shooting was Centre's undoing in the end. Centre was a fine team that season, but never deserved to be ranked as high they got.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 28, 2010, 11:51:41 PM

If this boxscore for the Chapman game is correct: wow.

http://www.dakstats.com/WebSync/Pages/BoxScores/BoxScores.aspx?association=10&sg=MBB&sea=NAIMBB_2009&team=14969&compID=100013

The outrebounded their NAIA opponent 40-10. How do you only get 10 rebounds as a team? That doesnt even make any sense. And the game wasnt a blowout, it was just about a 10 point game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 29, 2010, 12:01:52 AM

Don't know, but it's clearly fudged. Would be difficult for Southwestern to get so many dead ball rebounds with no missed free throws.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: oldchap on January 29, 2010, 01:07:58 AM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 28, 2010, 11:51:41 PM
If this boxscore for the Chapman game is correct: wow.

http://www.dakstats.com/WebSync/Pages/BoxScores/BoxScores.aspx?association=10&sg=MBB&sea=NAIMBB_2009&team=14969&compID=100013

The outrebounded their NAIA opponent 40-10. How do you only get 10 rebounds as a team? That doesnt even make any sense. And the game wasnt a blowout, it was just about a 10 point game.

It wasn't a blowout because the bench played more than half of the game. It was a blowout when the starters were on the court. Chapman is a very good rebounding team, with their star player, Justin Riley averaging close to 10 rebounds per game. In one of their best games of the season, they outrebounded a much taller and more athletic BYU Hawaii, a Division II team to win in overtime 76-70.

In the game against Southwestern, notice that they didn't take care of the ball because they had 22 turnovers despite shooting over 60% from the field. With less turnovers it would have really been a blowout.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: OC_SID on January 29, 2010, 08:06:25 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 28, 2010, 11:51:41 PM
If this boxscore for the Chapman game is correct: wow.

http://www.dakstats.com/WebSync/Pages/BoxScores/BoxScores.aspx?association=10&sg=MBB&sea=NAIMBB_2009&team=14969&compID=100013

The outrebounded their NAIA opponent 40-10. How do you only get 10 rebounds as a team? That doesnt even make any sense. And the game wasnt a blowout, it was just about a 10 point game.

It's not even a balanced box score ... 56 missed shots and 57 rebounds ... with no team rebounds for Southwestern ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on January 30, 2010, 02:48:03 PM

Wow. In a game eerily similar to UWSP-UWWW from Wednesday, E. Mennonite led HSC by 12 points 6 minutes into the game (16-4) and at the end of the 1st half now trail by 12, 38-26, a 34-10 run by HSC. Second half to come.

And it ends with the same 12 point margin, 80-68 win for Hampden-Sydney.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 30, 2010, 06:39:31 PM

Seems like Guilford will be unanimous number one in the next poll, and deservedly so ... but I think Williams has made a credible case for number two, after a signature road win over Midd: 19-1 from a power conference, no bad losses, leading or close to leading the nation in FG percentage, 3 pt. FG percentage, and scoring differential, with three of the top offensive guys, statistically, in the country in Wang, Schultz, and Whittington. They just finished a 5-0 road trip, including three conference games, with 4/5 wins by double digits. With each of the WIAC teams and Wash U with two losses, and Wash U looking not-terribly-impressive in most of the their recent wins, I'd say the Ephs have made their case for number two ... I would think a top five of Guildford, Williams, Whitewater, Stevens Point, Wash U would be about right ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Marty Peretz on January 30, 2010, 07:54:18 PM

Rank Williams whatever you want, but come tournament time, I don't see them making a run to Salem. I've seen them play and am just not terribly impressed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 30, 2010, 08:08:09 PM

We shall see, I guess. Ask Midd tonight how impressed they were when Williams shot over 50 percent, on the road, vs. the top FG % defense in the country ... not that Williams is a sure thing to make a deep tourney run, they certainly have some flaws that can be exploited, but who this year is a sure thing? Seems to be a year sans juggernauts, one of the more wide open years in recent memory, I would think ... 12-15 teams with a legit shot, and I think the Ephs have to be among that group. Williams certainly had a heck of a week this week and seem to be improving, especially on defense, as the season progresses, which is what you want to see.

Maybe Guilford goes in as the favorite, but there are some teams in their own conference that could give them trouble ... otherwise, everyone else has had their very questionable performances. Who would you favor vs. Williams out of the Northeast, East, or Atlantic regions (the teams they generally play in the tourney) at this point?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 30, 2010, 08:13:23 PM

Quote from: Marty Peretz on January 30, 2010, 07:54:18 PM
Rank Williams whatever you want, but come tournament time, I don't see them making a run to Salem. I've seen them play and am just not terribly impressed.

The northeastern part of the country is wide, but not so deep this year. I think we'll have a newcomer emerge (assuming they send William Patterson south).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 30, 2010, 08:14:17 PM

Live video of Illinois Wesleyan @ Carthage. Open the following URL in QuickTime...

rtsp://wolfgang.carthage.edu:554/carthagelivestream2.sdp

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 30, 2010, 08:24:34 PM

Possible upset alert: fresh off beating #1 UWSP, UWW is trailing UW-Stout, 46-36, at the half!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 30, 2010, 09:01:17 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 30, 2010, 08:24:34 PM
Possible upset alert: fresh off beating #1 UWSP, UWW is trailing UW-Stout, 46-36, at the half!

Stout now up 20 with 7 minutes to play.

Carthage also up 20+ 15 minutes into the game vs. IWU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 30, 2010, 09:12:33 PM

Quote from: Marty Peretz on January 30, 2010, 07:54:18 PM
Rank Williams whatever you want, but come tournament time, I don't see them making a run to Salem. I've seen them play and am just not terribly impressed.

Really? WashU has been the least impressive "top" team I have seen recently. I watched them play vs. Brandeis, NYU, and Case Western, and came away disappointed. They nearly lost all those games (and obviously lost to Brandeis). I thought they would be the team to beat this year, but they really are not. They started out beating some "good" teams early in the season, but where are those teams now? They have not beat a team that is currently ranked in the top 20 (they lost to #20 Brandeis). Their best win is over #21 IWU, but they will drop (they are getting drubbed by Carthage tonight, they are down 44-24 at the half). So given that WashU has struggled with mediocre teams and is not playing well recently, I think they are the most-overated team right now. If they get sent out west, I dont think they make Salem either. They may make it out of the midwest, because that region is way down and they have already shown they can beat the CCIW schools.

Do not discount the northeast, I think a lot of people will be surprised come tourney time, there are a lot of good teams up there. I think the South, West and Northeast are the three top regions this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on January 30, 2010, 09:39:16 PM

Stout travels to Whitewater and pounds out a 95-77 victory. Another wow game ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on January 31, 2010, 09:26:36 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 30, 2010, 06:39:31 PM
Seems like Guilford will be unanimous number one in the next poll, and deservedly so ... but I think Williams has made a credible case for number two, after a signature road win over Midd: 19-1 from a power conference, no bad losses, leading or close to leading the nation in FG percentage, 3 pt. FG percentage, and scoring differential, with three of the top offensive guys, statistically, in the country in Wang, Schultz, and Whittington. They just finished a 5-0 road trip, including three conference games, with 4/5 wins by double digits. With each of the WIAC teams and Wash U with two losses, and Wash U looking not-terribly-impressive in most of the their recent wins, I'd say the Ephs have made their case for number two ... I would think a top five of Guildford, Williams, Whitewater, Stevens Point, Wash U would be about right ...

I'm sorry, but I'm still not convinced that Middlebury isn't still a bit overrated which would cause me to be hesitant about proclaiming a win over them as a signature win.

We had this debate wrt Midd being overrated a few weeks ago and since then, they have had a terrible loss to Colby-Sawyer kind of validate my opinion. Sure, the Panthers have put together a modest win streak, but the only team over .500 they've beaten during their win streak was Skidmore. And then, Midd finally plays a team with a pulse and they promptly lose by 15 points on their home floor?

I'm not trying to take anything away from Williams' win, but I just have a hard time looking at a win over what I consider to be an overrated team as a signature win... (https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.scout.com%2Fmedia%2Fforums%2Femoticons%2Fnoidea.gif&hash=d0853e7250ffe0f662a746329d301aa06dd4ee9f)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 31, 2010, 12:01:16 PM

That's fine. As hugenerd says, the midwest and west folks on here often tend to discount the records of the top New England teams (notwithstanding two New England titlists and two more New England finalists in the last seven years), until they actually have to play them, that is ...

Midd is a very strong team. Everyone is entitled to one off day, and Midd's came against CSC ... if any team that lost to a mediocre team was worthless, then there would only be 2-3 teams that you could beat and have that victory considered a "signature win." I'd say anytime you convincingly beat a top 20 team (which Midd undoubtedly is) on the road, or top 10 team at home, that in my mind is a signature win. Hard to do much better.

Again, I'm not saying Williams has looked like a dominant team at the level of the recent juggernauts that have won titles from 2003 on, or anything ... I'm just saying that, outside of MAYBE Guilford, no one else in the top ten has, either. I don't think Williams is a 50-50 bet to make the Final Four ... but who is right now?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 31, 2010, 06:43:36 PM

How They Fared

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	UW-Stevens Point	18-2	LOST to #5 UW-Whitewater, 58-61; def. UW-Superior, 74-43
#2	598	Guilford	18-1	def. Roanoke, 86-70; def. #9 Randolph-Macon, 82-73
#3	547	Washington U.	16-2	def. Rochester, 82-78; def. #32 Emory, 65-56
#4	532	Williams	19-1	def. Hamilton, 96-61; def. #8 Middlebury, 79-64
#5	516	UW-Whitewater	16-3	def. #1 UW-Stevens Point, 61-58; LOST to UW-Stout, 77-95
#6	473	St. Thomas	17-2	def. Augsburg, 77-66; def. Macalester, 86-51
#7	441	Virginia Wesleyan	17-2	def. Lynchburg, 88-78; 01/30 vs. Emory and Henry (postponed)
#8	432	Middlebury	17-2	def. Southern Vermont, 94-68; LOST to #4 Williams, 64-79
#9	425	Randolph-Macon	15-4	LOST to Washington and Lee, 57-65; LOST to #2 Guilford, 73-82
#10	394	Anderson	17-2	LOST at Defiance, 75-91
#11	353	Eastern Mennonite	15-3	def. Southern Va., 89-68; LOST at Hampden-Sydney, 68-80
#12	346	St. Norbert	16-1	def. Carroll, 76-58; def. Beloit, 77-69 OT
#13	311	Chapman	18-2	def. S'western (Ariz.), 79-66
#14	303	MIT	18-2	def. Coast Guard, 78-58; def. T#33 Worcester Polytech, 74-66
#15	275	Whitworth	17-2	def. Willamette, 101-83; def. Lewis and Clark, 85-63
#16	214	William Paterson	20-1	def. New Jersey City, 58-39; def. Rowan, 85-61
#17	208	Franklin and Marshall	16-3	def. Johns Hopkins, 53-50; def. Swarthmore, 77-47
#18	183	Amherst	13-5	def. Vassar, 88-55; LOST at Bowdoin, 68-69; LOST at Colby, 68-72
#19	150	Texas-Dallas	16-3	def. Louisiana College, 94-66; def. #22 Mississippi College, 80-66
#20	141	Brandeis	14-3	def. Case Western Reserve, 70-52; def. Carnegie Mellon, 72-59
#21	132	Illinois Wesleyan	15-4	def. Augustana, 71-64; LOST at #27 Carthage, 55-80
#22	120	Mississippi College	15-3	def. University of the Ozarks, 74-70; LOST at #19 Texas-Dallas, 66-80
#23	114	St. Mary's (Md.)	16-3	def. Marymount, 84-61; def. Stevenson, 78-54
#24	85	Wooster	15-4	def. Hiram, 67-43; def. Denison, 97-73
#25	82	Medaille	19-1	def. Hilbert, 89-62; def. Franciscan (Ohio), 96-72

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	38	Cabrini	16-2	def. Philadelphia Bible, 73-53; def. Eastern, 80-71; LOST at Centenary, 80-81
#27	25	Carthage	15-4	def. North Park, 76-61; def. #21 Illinois Wesleyan, 80-55
#28	16	Lycoming	16-3	def. Penn College, 113-89; LOST to T#35 Albright, 80-84
#29	13	Maryville (Tenn.)	16-4	LOST at Milligan, 74-76; LOST at Piedmont, 78-80 OT
#30	11	Wheaton (Ill.)	13-6	def. Millikin, 50-45; LOST at North Central (Ill.), 58-60
#31	9	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	14-4	LOST at Pomona-Pitzer, 36-47; def. Cal Lutheran, 70-60
#32	6	Emory	13-5	def. Chicago, 71-44; LOST to #3 Washington U., 56-65
T#33	2	St. John Fisher	16-4	def. Nazareth, 80-75; LOST to Stevens, 58-66
T#33	2	Worcester Polytech	14-5	LOST at Babson, 58-72; LOST to #14 MIT, 66-74
T#35	1	Albright	16-2	def. #28 Lycoming, 84-80
T#35	1	Brockport State	13-5	def. Buffalo State, 74-68; LOST to Cortland State, 68-76; def. Oswego State, 76-61
T#35	1	DeSales	14-5	def. Muhlenberg, 67-59; LOST at Eastern, 56-61

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 31, 2010, 07:50:02 PM

Thats crazy, every ORV except Carthage lost.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 31, 2010, 08:16:31 PM

(and Albright) ... but still crazy. It's looks like 2-3 teams will drop from the top 25; could Colby make the rare (this late in the season) leap from not having a single vote to a Top 25 team? In light of their record, the likelihood of stealing many of Amherst's votes, and the struggles of the ORV teams (only Carthage seems likely to crack the top 25), it seems very possible ...

Speaking of Carthage, I am guessing CCIW folks expect them to be a big-time contender next year, considering that their all-American will be a senior, and two of their other big-time players are both frosh big men, who generally make a big leap forward as sophomores?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mugsy on January 31, 2010, 08:25:13 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 31, 2010, 08:16:31 PM
(Speaking of Carthage, I am guessing CCIW folks expect them to be a big-time contender next year, considering that their all-American will be a senior, and two of their other big-time players are both frosh big men, who generally make a big leap forward as sophomores?

At this point Carthage is in the drivers seat to win the CCIW this year. They are currently 7-1 in conference after beating IWU handily last night.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 31, 2010, 08:30:24 PM

So, what holds more weight for the voters involving Whitewater?

They came from 15 down at halftime to top #1 ranked Stevens Point on the road or they were down by 28 at one point in the 2nd half against a Stout team that was 9-9 going into the game and just 4-6 in conference...and that was in Whitewater.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 31, 2010, 11:15:44 PM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on January 31, 2010, 08:30:24 PM
So, what holds more weight for the voters involving Whitewater?

They came from 15 down at halftime to top #1 ranked Stevens Point on the road or they were down by 28 at one point in the 2nd half against a Stout team that was 9-9 going into the game and just 4-6 in conference...and that was in Whitewater.

Thats almost a wash.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 31, 2010, 11:38:45 PM

Dunno, man -- tough call. Losing to Stout at home, losing at Eau Claire. That's two clunkers for UWW in the past 15 days.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 01, 2010, 09:59:21 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 31, 2010, 11:38:45 PM
Dunno, man -- tough call. Losing to Stout at home, losing at Eau Claire. That's two clunkers for UWW in the past 15 days.

But both are immediately after the Stevens Point game though...

I'm currently researching the results following a victory against Stevens Point for the opponents. It hasn't been every single time, but very frequently, in recent history, after a team beats Stevens Point, they lose the next game, and it's often an upset.

Last year, Point had 2 conference losses. Right after Whitewater beat them last February, they lost the next game to Oshkosh (an upset). Platteville beat Point in the final game of the regular season and didn't lose the next one (they beat WW in OT), but Point got them in the conference tournament final.

It starts to really get uncanny... Two years ago, Whitewater beat Point in the conference tournament final, and WW lost at home in the first round of the NCAA tournament (in a decided upset). Platteville beat Point in the regular season finale, and lost at home to Eau Claire in first round of the conference tournament (an upset). Oshkosh beat Point on Jan 26th, and they lost their next game against Platteville. Jan 5th Oshkosh beat Point, and they lost to Platteville in their next game.

It may just be a coincidence... but it almost looks like a "Grinnell affect" type of thing, but different... a team has to get up SO much that they don't have enough left to do it the next night, even though the "next night" is 3 or 4 nights later.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 01, 2010, 11:26:50 AM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 01, 2010, 09:59:21 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 31, 2010, 11:38:45 PM
Dunno, man -- tough call. Losing to Stout at home, losing at Eau Claire. That's two clunkers for UWW in the past 15 days.

But both are immediately after the Stevens Point game though...

I'm currently researching the results following a victory against Stevens Point for the opponents. It hasn't been every single time, but very frequently, in recent history, after a team beats Stevens Point, they lose the next game, and it's often an upset.

Last year, Point had 2 conference losses. Right after Whitewater beat them last February, they lost the next game to Oshkosh (an upset). Platteville beat Point in the final game of the regular season and didn't lose the next one (they beat WW in OT), but Point got them in the conference tournament final.

It starts to really get uncanny... Two years ago, Whitewater beat Point in the conference tournament final, and WW lost at home in the first round of the NCAA tournament (in a decided upset). Platteville beat Point in the regular season finale, and lost at home to Eau Claire in first round of the conference tournament (an upset). Oshkosh beat Point on Jan 26th, and they lost their next game against Platteville. Jan 5th Oshkosh beat Point, and they lost to Platteville in their next game.

It may just be a coincidence... but it almost looks like a "Grinnell affect" type of thing, but different... a team has to get up SO much that they don't have enough left to do it the next night, even though the "next night" is 3 or 4 nights later.

I factor a lot of stuff in when I vote, but I don't think I can bring myself to consider the "game after Stevens Point" factor. If a team can't get up for its next opponent (good team or bad) 3-4 nights after a big one vs UW-SP, that has to be a knock against that team in my opinion. Even if recent history shows there is something to this theory, I just can't bring myself to consider it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 01, 2010, 11:35:10 AM

I haven't seen either play this year, but I nonetheless am going to employ occam's razor and guess that Whitewater is a very good (but maybe not top-five) team that happens to match up particularly well with Stevens-Point this year ... it is not unheard for a team to fare better against certain opponents than others, even if the opponent they fare better against is, generally speaking, better than a team they might struggle with.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 01, 2010, 11:36:06 AM

PS, the Eau Claire loss was not right after UWSP (It WAS right after an OT win against 'skosh). Right after the first win over Point, UWW blew out Superior.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 01, 2010, 11:42:03 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on February 01, 2010, 11:35:10 AM
I haven't seen either play this year, but I nonetheless am going to employ occam's razor and guess that Whitewater is a very good (but maybe not top-five) team that happens to match up particularly well with Stevens-Point this year ... it is not unheard for a team to fare better against certain opponents than others, even if the opponent they fare better against is, generally speaking, better than a team they might struggle with.

That certainly seems to be the feeling of Posters' Poll voters - with 7 ballots in so far, SP leads WW by 15 points (just over 2 slots per ballot). While WW seems to have the particular matchups, in all other games this season SP is undefeated while WW has lost to three teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 01, 2010, 12:12:30 PM

... two of them unranked.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 01, 2010, 12:29:16 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 01, 2010, 12:12:30 PM
... two of them unranked.

Yeah, I didn't want to be accused of piling on! :D

It sometimes happens that a 'better' team is 'owned' by a 'lesser' team. I recall a few years ago two WIAC teams (Oshkosh and LaX?) had a situation where one team had the better C credentials but had been swept by the other - the committee apparently decided they couldn't very well take the team that had been swept without taking the other, so took neither.

Though two years ago, IWU swept Wheaton all three times and was (deservedly) not selected, while Wheaton 'snuck in' and went all the way to the Elite 8!

I think it is 'fairly' clear that this year UWSP (based on total performance) is better than UWW, even if they can't manage to beat them head-to-head.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 01, 2010, 01:48:21 PM

There is also the case where the inverse has happened. Carnegie Mellon was swept by Brandeis in the regular season last year, although CMU had the better C credentials, so both teams ended up making the tourney. I think if Brandeis had lost either of those games, they would not have made it in (they made the tourney at 17-8). Brandeis' Pool C bid was in large part because I believe CMU and Brandeis were on the table at the same time and it was hard putting a Brandeis below CMU in the head-to-head because of those wins (CMU was 19-6, with 2 of those losses to Brandeis, 2 to WashU, and 1 to Richard Stockton). So because CMU stacked up so well against everyone else in terms of Pool C, and because Brandeis stacked up well in the head-to-head versus CMU, I think CMU essentially pushed Brandeis into the tourney.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 01, 2010, 02:00:00 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 01, 2010, 11:36:06 AM
PS, the Eau Claire loss was not right after UWSP (It WAS right after an OT win against 'skosh). Right after the first win over Point, UWW blew out Superior.

You're right, I think I was looking at a different year.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 01, 2010, 11:42:03 AM
Quote from: nescac1 on February 01, 2010, 11:35:10 AM
I haven't seen either play this year, but I nonetheless am going to employ occam's razor and guess that Whitewater is a very good (but maybe not top-five) team that happens to match up particularly well with Stevens-Point this year ... it is not unheard for a team to fare better against certain opponents than others, even if the opponent they fare better against is, generally speaking, better than a team they might struggle with.

That certainly seems to be the feeling of Posters' Poll voters - with 7 ballots in so far, SP leads WW by 15 points (just over 2 slots per ballot). While WW seems to have the particular matchups, in all other games this season SP is undefeated while WW has lost to three teams.

If you look at both Point/Whitewater games, they were very, very close. Yes, in the last one, Point got a big lead early (and then went down pretty big late) but they came back and retook the lead. The first matchup went to overtime.

Both of the games could have easily gone the other way, and if they did, we'd be talking about 20-0 Stevens Point... but I think they'd be vulnerable. Point's been able to correct some things that went wrong in their losses.

SP is also getting healthy again. After the flu bug swept through (4 guys sick for the Oshkosh game) and injury (Dan Tillema is back and starting to play well again, his bro Tyler Tillema is still out). I just have a feeling that Whitewater is going to lose another game and I'm not sure that Point will, including another possible matchup (or two) with Whitewater later this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on February 01, 2010, 08:58:40 PM

New poll posted.

http://www.d3hoops.com/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 01, 2010, 09:07:42 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 26, 2010, 12:19:53 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 19, 2010, 09:02:11 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 19, 2010, 08:41:13 PM
Here is another interesting development in the Top 25 this season.

I have listed the number of votes that were not given to the 25 teams in the Top 25 for Week #7 for the last 5 seasons.

Year Votes not given to the 25 in the Top 25
2009-10 138
2008-09 226
2007-08 258
2006-07 318
2005-06 271

I think that the voters don't think that there are 25 teams that deserve to be in the Top 25.

(Corrections to the back-of-the-napkin math are appreciated.)

I'd interpret it just the reverse - that the voters have reached a rough consensus on who the top 25 are.

Week #8 has all but 125 points allocated to the Top 25 teams in the poll.

Week #9 has all but 111 points allocated to the Top 25 teams in the poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 01, 2010, 09:21:23 PM

Wow. Only 33 total teams get votes for the Top 25 in the whole nation. Is that a record for least number of teams getting any consideration for the Top 25? 8 teams in the ORV category.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 01, 2010, 09:23:35 PM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on February 01, 2010, 09:21:23 PM
Wow. Only 33 total teams get votes for the Top 25 in the whole nation. Is that a record for least number of teams getting any consideration for the Top 25? 8 teams in the ORV category.

I was going to ask the same thing

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 01, 2010, 09:28:23 PM

Quote from: sac on February 01, 2010, 09:23:35 PM
Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on February 01, 2010, 09:21:23 PM
Wow. Only 33 total teams get votes for the Top 25 in the whole nation. Is that a record for least number of teams getting any consideration for the Top 25? 8 teams in the ORV category.

I was going to ask the same thing

Didn't there used to be some nutjob who tracked stuff like that? Whatever happened to him, I wonder? :P ;D

Through the end of the 07-08 season, the lowest number of teams to receive votes (in the men's poll) was 38, a few times. I'll leave it to someone else to see if 33 was reached last season or this season (I'm too lazy to do it myself), but I'd doubt it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on February 01, 2010, 09:55:07 PM

I've been trying to expand the number of teams receiving votes but the teams I pick (Central, DeSales) keep losing. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 02, 2010, 01:14:04 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 01, 2010, 09:28:23 PM
Quote from: sac on February 01, 2010, 09:23:35 PM
Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on February 01, 2010, 09:21:23 PM
Wow. Only 33 total teams get votes for the Top 25 in the whole nation. Is that a record for least number of teams getting any consideration for the Top 25? 8 teams in the ORV category.

I was going to ask the same thing
Didn't there used to be some nutjob who tracked stuff like that? Whatever happened to him, I wonder? :P ;D

Through the end of the 07-08 season, the lowest number of teams to receive votes (in the men's poll) was 38, a few times. I'll leave it to someone else to see if 33 was reached last season or this season (I'm too lazy to do it myself), but I'd doubt it.

During the 08-09 season, the lowest number of teams to receive votes was week 12 with 38 teams. This year was last week, which set a record with 37 and of course this week with 33, which is the new record.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gizmo on February 02, 2010, 12:43:30 PM

"But I've got a huge problem with St. Norbert at #9. Who have they beaten? Well, everybody they've played except for Northwestern. Now, if this was the Big T1E1N squad we're talking about, then that's respectable... but it's the UMAC team. And it was at home. Yes, they're the best UMAC team, but that isn't saying a whole lot. The UMAC is on the bottom at Massey. And Northwestern is rated # 121 in Massey. Now, SNC is #15, and I guess I'm OK with that to a point... (I mean, they HAVE beaten everybody else they've played...) But really, who is that? Per KnightSlappy's RPI rankings (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4232.msg1162187#msg1162187), they've got the 74th highest rated RPI... but their OWP is .414 and their OOWP is .540. Now, more cannot be asked of them than to beat the teams they play... but if they keep playing teams that aren't good, and the teams above them who ARE playing tough teams lose, then the old St. Peter Principle is in action again (I'm going to use it til it gets old GS!). It is absolutely possible that they very well may be the #15 team in the country... but how do we know unless they are tested by other top teams? There should be a way to kind of cap them.

I think part of the problem is that, unless you really take a look at a team like St. Norbert, it's hard to compare them to other teams that more may be more about in terms of who they've played. The victories against Oshkosh, Elmhurst, and Chicago would have looked great last year or two years ago... But these three teams are .500 at best this year thus far. They really don't have an impressive victory."

I think that you do have to look at St. Norbert a little closer. They are 16-1 with a few things to keep in mind. They have won games with their leading scorer out against Illinois College, which beat a D1 team in SIU Edwardsville this year, and other games. Granted thats a pretty weak team but its D1. IC also gave Illinois Wesleyan a game earlier this year. Thier PG battled an injury and they made major lineup changes mid-way through the year. When you have as good a defense as anyone in the country, you can play with anyone in the country.

Your right they don't play the best teams, but I'm confident they could give even the Pointers a game

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AO on February 02, 2010, 01:29:04 PM

Quote from: gizmo on February 02, 2010, 12:43:30 PM
"But I've got a huge problem with St. Norbert at #9. Who have they beaten? Well, everybody they've played except for Northwestern. Now, if this was the Big T1E1N squad we're talking about, then that's respectable... but it's the UMAC team. And it was at home. Yes, they're the best UMAC team, but that isn't saying a whole lot. The UMAC is on the bottom at Massey. And Northwestern is rated # 121 in Massey. Now, SNC is #15, and I guess I'm OK with that to a point... (I mean, they HAVE beaten everybody else they've played...) But really, who is that? Per KnightSlappy's RPI rankings (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4232.msg1162187#msg1162187), they've got the 74th highest rated RPI... but their OWP is .414 and their OOWP is .540. Now, more cannot be asked of them than to beat the teams they play... but if they keep playing teams that aren't good, and the teams above them who ARE playing tough teams lose, then the old St. Peter Principle is in action again (I'm going to use it til it gets old GS!). It is absolutely possible that they very well may be the #15 team in the country... but how do we know unless they are tested by other top teams? There should be a way to kind of cap them.

I think part of the problem is that, unless you really take a look at a team like St. Norbert, it's hard to compare them to other teams that more may be more about in terms of who they've played. The victories against Oshkosh, Elmhurst, and Chicago would have looked great last year or two years ago... But these three teams are .500 at best this year thus far. They really don't have an impressive victory."

I think that you do have to look at St. Norbert a little closer. They are 16-1 with a few things to keep in mind. They have won games with their leading scorer out against Illinois College, which beat a D1 team in SIU Edwardsville this year, and other games. Granted thats a pretty weak team but its D1. IC also gave Illinois Wesleyan a game earlier this year. Thier PG battled an injury and they made major lineup changes mid-way through the year. When you have as good a defense as anyone in the country, you can play with anyone in the country.

Your right they don't play the best teams, but I'm confident they could give even the Pointers a game

I'm a believer that in-season rankings should reflect the results of games that have already been played, not hypothetical games. St. Norberts has one loss, so they should be easily be ahead of a team like 4 loss Randolph Macon. They didn't duck anybody with their schedule and deserve to be rewarded.

In defense of the loss to my squad (Northwestern), I would say there's not a team in d3 that Northwestern wouldn't be able to beat on a good night. D3 hoops doesn't have the unstoppable forces that d3 football has in Mount Union and Whitewater.

If St. Norbert's wins out, they are certainly deserving of hosting a few playoff games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 02, 2010, 01:48:49 PM

Quote from: gizmo on February 02, 2010, 12:43:30 PM
"But I've got a huge problem with St. Norbert at #9. Who have they beaten? Well, everybody they've played except for Northwestern. Now, if this was the Big T1E1N squad we're talking about, then that's respectable... but it's the UMAC team. And it was at home. Yes, they're the best UMAC team, but that isn't saying a whole lot. The UMAC is on the bottom at Massey. And Northwestern is rated # 121 in Massey. Now, SNC is #15, and I guess I'm OK with that to a point... (I mean, they HAVE beaten everybody else they've played...) But really, who is that? Per KnightSlappy's RPI rankings (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4232.msg1162187#msg1162187), they've got the 74th highest rated RPI... but their OWP is .414 and their OOWP is .540. Now, more cannot be asked of them than to beat the teams they play... but if they keep playing teams that aren't good, and the teams above them who ARE playing tough teams lose, then the old St. Peter Principle is in action again (I'm going to use it til it gets old GS!). It is absolutely possible that they very well may be the #15 team in the country... but how do we know unless they are tested by other top teams? There should be a way to kind of cap them.

I think part of the problem is that, unless you really take a look at a team like St. Norbert, it's hard to compare them to other teams that more may be more about in terms of who they've played. The victories against Oshkosh, Elmhurst, and Chicago would have looked great last year or two years ago... But these three teams are .500 at best this year thus far. They really don't have an impressive victory."

I think that you do have to look at St. Norbert a little closer. They are 16-1 with a few things to keep in mind. They have won games with their leading scorer out against Illinois College, which beat a D1 team in SIU Edwardsville this year, and other games. Granted thats a pretty weak team but its D1. IC also gave Illinois Wesleyan a game earlier this year. Thier PG battled an injury and they made major lineup changes mid-way through the year. When you have as good a defense as anyone in the country, you can play with anyone in the country.

Your right they don't play the best teams, but I'm confident they could give even the Pointers a game

No D3 team has beaten a D1 team this year in a game that counted. See the D3 vs. board.

Also, giving a team a game doesnt mean a thing, let alone losing by 11. Also, the last time I checked IWU isnt ranked anymore and IC is 9-7. I doubt any voters consider IC a signature win when voting St. Norbert in the top 10. I am not saying that St. Norbert shouldnt be ranked where they are, just that the argument you are presenting is not a strong one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 02, 2010, 02:05:46 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on February 02, 2010, 01:48:49 PM
Also, giving a team a game doesnt mean a thing, let alone losing by 11.

IWU @ Illinois College wasn't all that close really...

http://www.iwusports.com/custompages/MBB/MBB2010/HTML/1215iwu.htm

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 02, 2010, 02:29:09 PM

Quote from: gizmo on February 02, 2010, 12:43:30 PM
"But I've got a huge problem with St. Norbert at #9. Who have they beaten? Well, everybody they've played except for Northwestern. Now, if this was the Big T1E1N squad we're talking about, then that's respectable... but it's the UMAC team. And it was at home. Yes, they're the best UMAC team, but that isn't saying a whole lot. The UMAC is on the bottom at Massey. And Northwestern is rated # 121 in Massey. Now, SNC is #15, and I guess I'm OK with that to a point... (I mean, they HAVE beaten everybody else they've played...) But really, who is that? Per KnightSlappy's RPI rankings (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4232.msg1162187#msg1162187), they've got the 74th highest rated RPI... but their OWP is .414 and their OOWP is .540. Now, more cannot be asked of them than to beat the teams they play... but if they keep playing teams that aren't good, and the teams above them who ARE playing tough teams lose, then the old St. Peter Principle is in action again (I'm going to use it til it gets old GS!). It is absolutely possible that they very well may be the #15 team in the country... but how do we know unless they are tested by other top teams? There should be a way to kind of cap them.

#121 in Massey is in the top 30% of D3 teams............#126 Transylvania beat #8 Washington-St. Louis............it happens.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dc_has_been on February 02, 2010, 03:24:02 PM

Quote from: sac on February 02, 2010, 02:29:09 PM
Quote from: gizmo on February 02, 2010, 12:43:30 PM
"But I've got a huge problem with St. Norbert at #9. Who have they beaten? Well, everybody they've played except for Northwestern. Now, if this was the Big T1E1N squad we're talking about, then that's respectable... but it's the UMAC team. And it was at home. Yes, they're the best UMAC team, but that isn't saying a whole lot. The UMAC is on the bottom at Massey. And Northwestern is rated # 121 in Massey. Now, SNC is #15, and I guess I'm OK with that to a point... (I mean, they HAVE beaten everybody else they've played...) But really, who is that? Per KnightSlappy's RPI rankings (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4232.msg1162187#msg1162187), they've got the 74th highest rated RPI... but their OWP is .414 and their OOWP is .540. Now, more cannot be asked of them than to beat the teams they play... but if they keep playing teams that aren't good, and the teams above them who ARE playing tough teams lose, then the old St. Peter Principle is in action again (I'm going to use it til it gets old GS!). It is absolutely possible that they very well may be the #15 team in the country... but how do we know unless they are tested by other top teams? There should be a way to kind of cap them.

#121 in Massey is in the top 30% of D3 teams............#126 Transylvania beat #8 Washington-St. Louis............it happens.

That's why it is hard to gauge teams b/c in bball they play so many games that anything can happen on any given night.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 02, 2010, 04:19:49 PM

Quote from: gizmo on February 02, 2010, 12:43:30 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 17, 2010, 10:34:45 PM"But I've got a huge problem with St. Norbert at #9. Who have they beaten? Well, everybody they've played except for Northwestern. Now, if this was the Big T1E1N squad we're talking about, then that's respectable... but it's the UMAC team. And it was at home. Yes, they're the best UMAC team, but that isn't saying a whole lot. The UMAC is on the bottom at Massey. And Northwestern is rated # 121 in Massey. Now, SNC is #15, and I guess I'm OK with that to a point... (I mean, they HAVE beaten everybody else they've played...) But really, who is that? Per KnightSlappy's RPI rankings (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4232.msg1162187#msg1162187), they've got the 74th highest rated RPI... but their OWP is .414 and their OOWP is .540. Now, more cannot be asked of them than to beat the teams they play... but if they keep playing teams that aren't good, and the teams above them who ARE playing tough teams lose, then the old St. Peter Principle is in action again (I'm going to use it til it gets old GS!). It is absolutely possible that they very well may be the #15 team in the country... but how do we know unless they are tested by other top teams? There should be a way to kind of cap them.

I think part of the problem is that, unless you really take a look at a team like St. Norbert, it's hard to compare them to other teams that more may be more about in terms of who they've played. The victories against Oshkosh, Elmhurst, and Chicago would have looked great last year or two years ago... But these three teams are .500 at best this year thus far. They really don't have an impressive victory."

I think that you do have to look at St. Norbert a little closer. They are 16-1 with a few things to keep in mind. They have won games with their leading scorer out against Illinois College, which beat a D1 team in SIU Edwardsville this year, and other games. Granted thats a pretty weak team but its D1. IC also gave Illinois Wesleyan a game earlier this year. Thier PG battled an injury and they made major lineup changes mid-way through the year. When you have as good a defense as anyone in the country, you can play with anyone in the country.

Your right they don't play the best teams, but I'm confident they could give even the Pointers a game

Sac, that original quote was from me from a over two weeks ago. Those numbers aren't accurate.

Northwestern is now #107 and SNC is now #11.

SNC now has the 47th highest RPI (largely by virtue of the fact that their win% has continued to go up. Also, their OWP and OOWP have slid closer to .500 as they've gotten further into conference play (which I think will happen for everybody that plays a double round robin).

Gizmo, my assessment still stands, though. SNC may ??? have gotten their marquee victory... over Ripon... so now they're 1-1 against teams that have a .680 win %... but is that really all that impressive? Their OWP is .435, which means they've played teams that average less than a .500 record. They certainly aren't helped by having to play Knox twice, I'll give you that, but their schedule wasn't helped by average-at-best years by Oshkosh, Chicago, and Elmhurst. Normally, those would be pretty good wins, and it isn't to say that they've beaten bad teams in those three... but these teams are shadows of past teams who really WERE

As I said before, St. Norbert can't do anything but beat the teams they've played... and they should be rewarded for that (in so much as a ranking is a reward... which is questionable). But I'm not sure that "not ducking who they've scheduled" is really valid here... and I don't think they've proved themselves to be a top 10 team by beating who they've beaten, especially in the way they've beaten them. To be sure, they're a bounce or two away from being undefeated... but they also could be 13-4. How do you differentiate between 1 loss Norberts, Medaille, Guilford, Williams, or William Patterson? I think we need to look at who they've beaten and other measurables like OWP/OOWP/SOS and Knightslappy's RPI.

It may be that St Norberts is the best team of those 5. They may even be the best team in the country. But we don't have enough evidence against other top teams to say this with any certainty because they've played exactly zero top 25 teams. In my honest opinion, when you compare them to Whitworth, our West Coast friends have more of a stake at being in the top 10 than St. Norbert. WW has a win over a top 6 team and a higher OWP/OOWP. Yes, they've lost one more game, but their 2 losses were in their first 3 games... they've rattled off 16 straight, and only 3 of those W's were by fewer than 10 points. Margin isn't everything, but it is a rubric in terms of how a team is able to finish out games... and a 20 point victory says a lot more than a win in overtime.

I don't think St. Norbert is a bad team. I think they're a good team. I just don't think that they're a really great team yet. I don't know that they'll play a team who they could prove that to me until the NCAA tournament. With that being said, though, SNC has their toughest conference challenges coming up... 5 of their last 6 games are against teams in the top half of the conference, though they are helped out by the schedule in that 4 of those games are at home. They need to protect against a meltdown like last year. Ironically, at this point last year, they were in the same spot... 16-1, with 6 games remaining. They lost 4/6 and then in the conference tournament and were done. I DID think they had good wins last year, against Oshkosh (#4 WIAC) and Platteville (#2 WIAC) and I said as much too... but they self destructed last year. I hope the same doesn't happen this year because I think they are a good team and should finish strong to make it to the NCAA tournament. Then your questions about if they're top 10 can really be answered.

Sac, your point about Transy's Massey rating brings up another one for me... Wash U has lost to 126 Transylvania and 36 Brandeis... but now they're ranked ahead of Point, who's only losses are to Whitewater, who's been in the top 7 since week 1 voting and in the top 3 of Massey since those ratings came out. I don't understand the rationale of punishing a team for a loss to a top 5 team, especially when the games are incredibly close.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on February 02, 2010, 04:29:40 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 02, 2010, 04:19:49 PM
Sac, your point about Transy's Massey rating brings up another one for me... Wash U has lost to 126 Transylvania and 36 Brandeis... but now they're ranked ahead of Point, who's only losses are to Whitewater, who's been in the top 7 since week 1 voting and in the top 3 of Massey since those ratings came out. I don't understand the rationale of punishing a team for a loss to a top 5 team, especially when the games are incredibly close.

At the same time it's difficult (at least it was for me in the Poster's Poll) to rank Point ahead of Whitewater when they are 0-2 head to head.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 02, 2010, 05:00:37 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 02, 2010, 04:29:40 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on February 02, 2010, 04:19:49 PM
Sac, your point about Transy's Massey rating brings up another one for me... Wash U has lost to 126 Transylvania and 36 Brandeis... but now they're ranked ahead of Point, who's only losses are to Whitewater, who's been in the top 7 since week 1 voting and in the top 3 of Massey since those ratings came out. I don't understand the rationale of punishing a team for a loss to a top 5 team, especially when the games are incredibly close.

At the same time it's difficult (at least it was for me in the Poster's Poll) to rank Point ahead of Whitewater when they are 0-2 head to head.

It may be difficult, but 8 of 10 voters have done so.

As I posted yesterday, sometimes a 'lesser' team owns a 'better' team, for whatever reason. (And as tight as both games were, to use 'owns' for WW over SP would clearly be hyperbole.)

One example I used: two years ago, IWU went 3-0 against Wheaton. Despite that, Wheaton got into the tourney and went to the Elite 8; IWU (deservedly) was not even selected. Would you have trouble ranking Wheaton over IWU? (I wouldn't, and I have Green blood! ;))

Head-to-head is obviously important, but it can't be the only factor.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 02, 2010, 06:00:19 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 02, 2010, 05:00:37 PM
As I posted yesterday, sometimes a 'lesser' team owns a 'better' team, for whatever reason. (And as tight as both games were, to use 'owns' for WW over SP would clearly be hyperbole.)

Yeah, I don't think "owns" is the right word here...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 02, 2010, 06:35:21 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 02, 2010, 06:00:19 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 02, 2010, 05:00:37 PM
As I posted yesterday, sometimes a 'lesser' team owns a 'better' team, for whatever reason. (And as tight as both games were, to use 'owns' for WW over SP would clearly be hyperbole.)

Yeah, I don't think "owns" is the right word here...

Point will be happy if they always win the last meeting of the season with UWW. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 02, 2010, 09:52:00 PM

Though Whitewater has a 2-0 record against Point, Whitewater has lost to ranked Whitworth, unranked Eau Claire and unranked Stout at home. They beat two top-5 ranked teams, one as a #1 (Stevens Point). Then you can look at Point, lost to two top-5 ranked teams (Whitewater) as their only losses... they also beat #2 at the time St. Thomas.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 03, 2010, 07:48:53 PM

#4 UWSP should be on live video tonight at UW Stout (vid hasn't started yet even though the Point radio feed (http://radio.securenetsystems.net//radio_player_large.cfm?stationCallSign=WKQH) has. Video Link (http://www.uwstout.edu/lts/multimedia/streams/sports/uwstoutsports2.wvx)

Game starts at 7:00 Central

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 03, 2010, 07:52:44 PM

Live video of #23 Carthage @ Wheaton...

http://www.wheaton.edu/wetn/

(7:30pm Central)

All-American PG Steve Djurickovic is worth checking out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 03, 2010, 08:49:26 PM

#1 Guilford scores with 5 seconds left to play and squeaks by Hampden-Sydney 76-74.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 03, 2010, 08:51:26 PM

MIT beats Babson 67-49. The were led by Noel Hollingsworth who scored 21 with 8 rebounds.

Congrats to senior Billy Johnson for scoring his 1000th career point tonight.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 03, 2010, 08:59:14 PM

#16 Eastern Mennonite with an easy 85-67 win over Lynchburg College.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 03, 2010, 09:11:39 PM

Point and Stout were tied at 34 at halftime... and Point hasn't scored, 5:10 in to the half, Stout leads 45-34. Eerily similar to the Whitewater game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 03, 2010, 09:14:46 PM

#15 Franklin and Marshall never headed or tied as they down Ursinus 70-62.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 03, 2010, 09:23:30 PM

Looks like Stout could pull off the improbable. They topped Whitewater on the road on Saturday and they are ahead of Point at home by 11 with 11 to go.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 03, 2010, 09:32:34 PM

#23 Carthage in a battle with Wheaton as the Redmen and Thunder are all tied at 46 with 14 minutes to play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 03, 2010, 09:38:53 PM

#6 UW-Whitewater handles UW-Lacrosse 67-52.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 03, 2010, 09:42:51 PM

Stout knocks off Point 69-67.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 03, 2010, 09:45:52 PM

William Paterson was up by 20 points over Ramapo 62-42 with 5:55 left to play. Score is now 62-58 with 2:36 to play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 03, 2010, 09:49:43 PM

Djurickovic is having a pretty good night: 39 pts on 13-21 FGs so far, about 5 to play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 03, 2010, 10:00:09 PM

Willie Paterson wins 72-65 over Ramapo.

Carthage now leading Wheaton 65-60 with 58 seconds to play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 03, 2010, 10:06:36 PM

Steve Djurickovic with 44 points on 15x25 fg, 4x5 3's and 10x10 ft leads Carthage over Wheaton 68-63. Sounds like a D3Hoops Team of the Week candidate.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 03, 2010, 10:17:02 PM

With an 11-9 record, Stout is obviously not going to get any top 25 votes, but I've gotta wonder who else in the country could beat UWW and UWSP back to back! :o

(Since they ARE 11-9, I suppose lots of teams, if lightning happened to strike twice! ;))

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 03, 2010, 10:27:10 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 03, 2010, 10:17:02 PM
With an 11-9 record, Stout is obviously not going to get any top 25 votes, but I've gotta wonder who else in the country could beat UWW and UWSP back to back! :o

(Since they ARE 11-9, I suppose lots of teams, if lightning happened to strike twice! ;))

Stout has won 8 of their last 11 and one of those losses is to Whitworth.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 03, 2010, 10:45:39 PM

#22 Medaille knocks down 2 foul shots with 3 seconds remaining to edge host Penn State-Behrend 76-74. The Mavericks place 5 players in double figures and improve to 20-1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 03, 2010, 10:58:48 PM

I know Caltech hasn't had much luck in the SCIAC in the past 20+ years but the score that is currently posted on the Wednesday night scoreboard is kind of ridiculous, Cal Lutheran 108 Caltech 3.

The score has now been corrected: Cal Lutheran 20 Caltech 7 in the 1st half. That's a little better.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 04, 2010, 12:50:22 AM

Redlands hits a 3 pointer with 14 seconds to play to tie Claremont-Mudd-Scripps at 81 all and send the game into overtime.
CMS opens the extra session with a 3 pointer of their own and is never headed as they grab a hard fought 97-89 victory

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 04, 2010, 06:55:43 AM

How They Fared--Midweek Report

Three narrow losses, and lots of wins ...

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	624	Guilford	19-1	def. Hampden-Sydney, 76-74; 02/06 at Washington and Lee
#2	571	Williams	19-1	02/05 vs. #25 Colby; 02/06 vs. Bowdoin
#3	567	Washington U.	16-2	02/05 vs. Rochester; 02/07 vs. #31 Emory
#4	544	UW-Stevens Point	18-3	LOST at UW-Stout, 67-69
#5	525	St. Thomas	18-2	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 82-70; 02/06 vs. Carleton
#6	487	UW-Whitewater	17-3	def. UW-La Crosse, 67-52; 02/06 at UW-River Falls
#7	468	Virginia Wesleyan	18-2	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 66-51; 02/06 at #16 Eastern Mennonite
#8	391	Middlebury	17-2	02/05 vs. Bowdoin; 02/06 vs. #25 Colby
#9	388	St. Norbert	17-1	def. Lawrence, 66-48; 02/05 vs. Monmouth; 02/06 vs. Lake Forest
#10	357	Whitworth	17-2	02/05 at Pacific; 02/06 at George Fox
#11	350	Chapman	19-2	def. S'western (Ariz.), 78-44; 02/06 vs. La Sierra
#12	348	MIT	19-2	def. Babson, 67-49
#13	345	William Paterson	21-1	def. Ramapo, 72-65
#14	281	Anderson	18-2	def. Bluffton, 72-66; 02/06 at Franklin
#15	254	Franklin and Marshall	17-3	def. Ursinus, 70-62; 02/06 vs. Muhlenberg
#16	250	Eastern Mennonite	16-3	def. Lynchburg, 85-67; 02/06 vs. #7 Virginia Wesleyan
#17	219	Texas-Dallas	16-3	02/04 at Louisiana College; 02/06 at #24 Mississippi College
#18	215	Randolph-Macon	16-4	def. Roanoke, 87-54; 02/05 vs. Lynchburg
#19	196	Brandeis	14-3	02/05 at Case Western Reserve; 02/07 at Carnegie Mellon
#20	177	St. Mary's (Md.)	17-3	def. Christopher Newport, 91-82 OT; 02/06 at Mary Washington
#21	131	Wooster	16-4	def. Allegheny, 85-72; 02/07 at Wabash
#22	130	Medaille	20-1	def. Penn State-Behrend, 76-74; 02/06 at Mount Aloysius
#23	92	Carthage	16-4	def. Wheaton (Ill.), 68-63; 02/06 vs. Augustana
#24	60	Mississippi College	15-3	02/04 vs. University of the Ozarks; 02/06 vs. #17 Texas-Dallas
#25	44	Colby	16-2	def. Southern Maine, 74-60; 02/05 at #2 Williams; 02/06 at #8 Middlebury

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	40	Albright	16-3	LOST to Widener, 48-49; 02/06 at Elizabethtown
#27	34	Illinois Wesleyan	16-4	def. North Central (Ill.), 92-85; 02/06 vs. Elmhurst
#28	14	Amherst	14-5	def. Rhode Island College, 105-84; 02/05 at Bates; 02/06 at Tufts
#29	12	Cabrini	17-2	def. Baptist Bible, 79-50; 02/04 at Rosemont; 02/06 at Neumann
#30	4	Lycoming	16-4	LOST at Lebanon Valley, 72-75; 02/06 vs. Arcadia
#31	3	Emory	13-5	02/05 at Chicago; 02/07 at #3 Washington U.
T#32	2	St. John Fisher	17-4	def. Rochester Tech, 74-57; 02/05 at Elmira
T#32	2	Stevens	15-4	02/05 vs. Utica

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 04, 2010, 11:34:57 PM

A week after beating them by 28, Texas-Dallas loses at 8-11 Louisiana College by 1. Does this Cajun luck bode well for the Saints on Sunday?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 04, 2010, 11:41:55 PM

#24 Mississippi College defeats University of the Ozarks 80-74

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 04, 2010, 11:44:10 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 04, 2010, 11:34:57 PM

A week after beating them by 28, Texas-Dallas loses at 8-11 Louisiana College by 1. Does this Cajun luck bode well for the Saints on Sunday?

From the ASC board...

Upset! LaCollege 69 UT-Dallas 68.

Tonight was Think Pink night at LaCollege.

The LaCollege women's coach (former Fresno State head coach Janice Joseph-Richard) is a breast cancer survivor so I wonder if a big crowd showed up and stayed for the Double header.

LaCollege women move ahead in the East.

LaCollege women beat UTD, 58-47, too.

Now UTD has to travel to Mississippi College for a game on Saturday.

ASC teams are too balanced and they beat up on themselves.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on February 05, 2010, 05:55:03 PM

I am smelling upset tomorrow at W & L if the game is played (given the weather).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 05, 2010, 06:38:03 PM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on February 03, 2010, 09:42:51 PM
Stout knocks off Point 69-67.

Does anyone think Point is still 30 points better than Whitworth?

Whitworth has led in its games for 578:22 out of the last 640 minutes (16 games) since losing to Pomona. That's better than 90% including wins over Whitewater, Stout and McKendree (now #8 NAIA). Pirates have perhaps their toughest conference road trip this weekend as they face an improved Pacific and a strong George Fox (not the womens) team. Go Pirates!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 05, 2010, 07:04:34 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 05, 2010, 06:38:03 PM
Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on February 03, 2010, 09:42:51 PM
Stout knocks off Point 69-67.
Does anyone think Point is still 30 points better than Whitworth?

Whitworth has led in its games for 578:22 out of the last 640 minutes (16 games) since losing to Pomona. That's better than 90% including wins over Whitewater, Stout and McKendree (now #8 NAIA). Pirates have perhaps their toughest conference road trip this weekend as they face an improved Pacific and a strong George Fox (not the womens) team. Go Pirates!!

I don't necessarily think that Point was 30 points better than Whitworth when they played the first time... WW just got steamrolled and tried to adjust, which didn't work.

The final margin wasn't 30 either... Point was up 94-57 with 7:20 to go and Whitworth outscored them 22-7 over the final minutes. Point did hit the century mark, but just barely. They were on pace for 115 points and the scoring slowed down quite a bit.

Look at the stats... Point shot 79% in the first half and 68% for the game. Point has only had 3 other games where they shot over 60% (though they have shot over 50% in 12/21 games this season).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 05, 2010, 07:40:23 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 05, 2010, 07:04:34 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 05, 2010, 06:38:03 PM
Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on February 03, 2010, 09:42:51 PM
Stout knocks off Point 69-67.
Does anyone think Point is still 30 points better than Whitworth?

Whitworth has led in its games for 578:22 out of the last 640 minutes (16 games) since losing to Pomona. That's better than 90% including wins over Whitewater, Stout and McKendree (now #8 NAIA). Pirates have perhaps their toughest conference road trip this weekend as they face an improved Pacific and a strong George Fox (not the womens) team. Go Pirates!!

I don't necessarily think that Point was 30 points better than Whitworth when they played the first time... WW just got steamrolled and tried to adjust, which didn't work.

The final margin wasn't 30 either... Point was up 94-57 with 7:20 to go and Whitworth outscored them 22-7 over the final minutes. Point did hit the century mark, but just barely. They were on pace for 115 points and the scoring slowed down quite a bit.

Look at the stats... Point shot 79% in the first half and 68% for the game. Point has only had 3 other games where they shot over 60% (though they have shot over 50% in 12/21 games this season).

You are missing the point Point! But since you throw it out there, I think WW playing better and Point not shooting lights out would make for an excellent rematch. Hopefully not in the 3rd round.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 05, 2010, 08:32:24 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 05, 2010, 07:40:23 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on February 05, 2010, 07:04:34 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 05, 2010, 06:38:03 PM
Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on February 03, 2010, 09:42:51 PM
Stout knocks off Point 69-67.
Does anyone think Point is still 30 points better than Whitworth?

Whitworth has led in its games for 578:22 out of the last 640 minutes (16 games) since losing to Pomona. That's better than 90% including wins over Whitewater, Stout and McKendree (now #8 NAIA). Pirates have perhaps their toughest conference road trip this weekend as they face an improved Pacific and a strong George Fox (not the womens) team. Go Pirates!!

I don't necessarily think that Point was 30 points better than Whitworth when they played the first time... WW just got steamrolled and tried to adjust, which didn't work.

The final margin wasn't 30 either... Point was up 94-57 with 7:20 to go and Whitworth outscored them 22-7 over the final minutes. Point did hit the century mark, but just barely. They were on pace for 115 points and the scoring slowed down quite a bit.

Look at the stats... Point shot 79% in the first half and 68% for the game. Point has only had 3 other games where they shot over 60% (though they have shot over 50% in 12/21 games this season).
You are missing the point Point! But since you throw it out there, I think WW playing better and Point not shooting lights out would make for an excellent rematch. Hopefully not in the 3rd round.

Perhaps I am... I was referring just to the "30 points better" note. What was your point? (not meaning this question as being rude.. I just want to understand!)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 05, 2010, 09:26:04 PM

I'm still taking Point over Whitworth. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 05, 2010, 09:42:05 PM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on February 05, 2010, 09:26:04 PM
I'm still taking Point over Whitworth. ;D

We have a winner!!! TD scores a TD...give the man 6 points. Although, I think Whitworth would win the rematch because I know they have improved in so many ways over the course of the season and Point appears to have a weakness. Point made.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on February 06, 2010, 12:50:04 AM

Washington University takes down regionally ranked Rochester (68-59) for the second time this season. All American Aaron Thompson scores 29 points, including seven from three point range.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on February 06, 2010, 12:54:34 AM

At this point, comparing schedules for Stevens Point and Whitworth is like comparing apples and oranges; we can make comparisons, but they are clearly not the same. I would take Stevens Point every day of the week, neutral, home or away.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 06, 2010, 12:14:35 PM

Quote from: WUH on February 06, 2010, 12:54:34 AM
At this point, comparing schedules for Stevens Point and Whitworth is like comparing apples and oranges; we can make comparisons, but they are clearly not the same. I would take Stevens Point every day of the week, neutral, home or away.

Whitworth has a top 25 SOS and this is not fruit salad. I don't see the clear in clearly. Whitworth"s pre-conference schedule was as formidable as it could have been. I think it was intended to prepare the team for postseason competition and way down the list hopefully to prevent condescending remarks like this from elite program's fans.

Point shot .678 FG, .500 3pt, .632 in game vs WW. Their averages over the season are now .506, .308, .757. Replay that game on the computer and they score about 75pts.
WW shot .467, .407, .750. Now .481, .382, .734. WW reduces by 4-5 points from 79. Close game in overtime, every day of the week, neutral, home or away. Overall stats don't have a fan bias.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 06, 2010, 04:15:12 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 06, 2010, 12:14:35 PM
Quote from: WUH on February 06, 2010, 12:54:34 AM
At this point, comparing schedules for Stevens Point and Whitworth is like comparing apples and oranges; we can make comparisons, but they are clearly not the same. I would take Stevens Point every day of the week, neutral, home or away.
Whitworth has a top 25 SOS and this is not fruit salad. I don't see the clear in clearly. Whitworth"s pre-conference schedule was as formidable as it could have been. I think it was intended to prepare the team for postseason competition and way down the list hopefully to prevent condescending remarks like this from elite programs fans.

Point shot .678 FG, .500 3pt, .632 in game vs WW. Their averages over the season are now .506, .308, .757. Replay that game on the computer and they score about 75pts.
WW shot .467, .407, .750. Now .481, .382, .734. WW reduces by 4-5 points from 79. Close game in overtime, every day of the week, neutral, home or away. Overall stats don't have a fan bias.

A couple things... Point is 38% from 3, not 30% (this isn't a a huge part of their game so it doesn't matter too much, but that's a big difference). The other thing is that, if you look at their styles, they are quite different. Whitworth is going to try to outscore you. They've only had 2 games where they scored less than 75 points, and they lost one of them. They also have scored over 100 3 times, and over 90, 6 times.

They have held their opponents under 60 6 times, which is pretty good. They average an 11th-in-D-III 85.5 points per game.

Point, on the other hand, has scored over 100 twice and those are the only games where they've scored more than 90 too. But they've held their opponents under 60 13 times and under 50 twice. They actually average giving up a 5th-in-D-III 58 points per game.

Because of the contrasting styles, you can't simply look at the statistics... they don't match up. Point is going to make it difficult to score, so WW won't score what they normally do. WW is going to push the ball, so there will be more possessions and Point will let up more than they normally do.

It's the same kind of thing as when Point played Puget Sound back in 03-04 in Tacoma. UPS was the third highest scoring team and Point was the second best defensive team. The result? Point won 100-79. That 79 points was the fewest UPS had scored all year and the most Point had let up all year (2 of the last 3 games that season broke that highest-score-against mark... but I digress).

Look at other stats... turnovers, for instance, or free throws. WW turns it over just over 12 times, but Point just over 10. In those two extra possessions, Point, shooting a better shooting percentage, would get the upper hand. In FT's, Point has the edge there, too.

Now, this might be negated by 3 point shooting... Whitworth shoots 40% of their shots from 3 and makes a 13th-best-in-D-III 8.9 per game, but UPS was the same way. They were hampered by Point's size, and while this Point team isn't as big, they ARE still pretty big, and they're more athletic, so they get to shooters pretty well.

I'm not going to say that it would be a blow out again... I, too, think Point would win (but there honestly isn't a game that UWSP plays that I don't think they'll win, or at least should), but I think Whitworth has a very, very good team this year. I've thought that way for a long time... even before I watched the vid of them beating Whitewater.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 06, 2010, 04:27:34 PM

All your points are valid Point Special. Great to be a fan and I hope we rematch in Salem...not a prediction just saying. Cheers!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on February 06, 2010, 05:12:40 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 06, 2010, 12:14:35 PM
Overall stats don't have a fan bias.

Statistics do not have a fan bias, but as subsequently stated, and agreed upon by you, stats do not tell the whole story. My post was a little condescending, but that had nothing to do with my allegiance to an elite program.

I appreciate your passion for the team, but I found your posts to be a little condescending as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 06, 2010, 05:59:44 PM

Quote from: WUH on February 06, 2010, 05:12:40 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 06, 2010, 12:14:35 PM
Overall stats don't have a fan bias.

Statistics do not have a fan bias, but as subsequently stated, and agreed upon by you, stats do not tell the whole story. My post was a little condescending, but that had nothing to do with my allegiance to an elite program.

I appreciate your passion for the team, but I found your posts to be a little condescending as well.

Elite program is a compliment, well deserved by Wash U. Great coach and fantastic players, supportive school and MUCH success. Good luck and I hope we get the opportunity to see the game that was suppose to happen in Dec. (our fault).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on February 06, 2010, 06:28:50 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 06, 2010, 05:59:44 PM
Elite program is a compliment...

I figured as much. You have to forgive me. I added the emphasis because I am riding high after the win last night.

Whitworth should have had a chance at Washington University and they should have had a chance at Wooster. Its been an interesting season and should be a very interesting post-season. Only a few weeks away.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 06, 2010, 09:24:25 PM

Unbelievable... possibly another upset brewing in the WIAC. River Falls leads Whitewater 39-26 with 14 minutes to go in the game.

Live Stats (http://www.uwrf.edu/sports/BBLive/xlive.htm)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 06, 2010, 09:38:02 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 06, 2010, 09:24:25 PM
Unbelievable... possibly another upset brewing in the WIAC. River Falls leads Whitewater 39-26 with 14 minutes to go in the game.

Live Stats (http://www.uwrf.edu/sports/BBLive/xlive.htm)

Or maybe not. All tied with 7:17 to go.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 06, 2010, 09:42:40 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 06, 2010, 09:38:02 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on February 06, 2010, 09:24:25 PM
Unbelievable... possibly another upset brewing in the WIAC. River Falls leads Whitewater 39-26 with 14 minutes to go in the game.

Live Stats (http://www.uwrf.edu/sports/BBLive/xlive.htm)

Or maybe not. All tied with 7:17 to go.

WW retook the lead with about 10 mins and it's been back and forth... with 6 mins, RF retook the lead and WW hit a 3. RF was called for a charge.

And WW just missed and RF got a layup, all tied at 51.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 06, 2010, 09:52:07 PM

WW now with a 5 point lead with 2:32. RF with the ball

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on February 06, 2010, 09:59:46 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 06, 2010, 09:24:25 PM
Unbelievable... possibly another upset brewing in the WIAC. River Falls leads Whitewater 39-26 with 14 minutes to go in the game.

Live Stats (http://www.uwrf.edu/sports/BBLive/xlive.htm)

Would WW losing to another WIAC also-ran still be considered an upset? :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 06, 2010, 10:02:39 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 06, 2010, 09:59:46 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on February 06, 2010, 09:24:25 PM
Unbelievable... possibly another upset brewing in the WIAC. River Falls leads Whitewater 39-26 with 14 minutes to go in the game.

Live Stats (http://www.uwrf.edu/sports/BBLive/xlive.htm)

Would WW losing to another WIAC also-ran still be considered an upset? :D

Good question... Going to overtime in River Falls.

The WIAC is really showing their depth right now... and proving that the 80% win percentage in the non-conference isn't just Point and Whitewater mopping up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 06, 2010, 10:09:42 PM

RF with a 66-63 lead with 2:41 in OT, Whitewater ball.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 06, 2010, 10:20:41 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 06, 2010, 10:09:42 PM
RF with a 66-63 lead with 2:41 in OT, Whitewater ball.

Whitewater took a 67-66 lead but RF responds, timeout RF with a 68-67 lead. WW has missed at least 4 or 5 FT's in OT. 3/7 in OT, there ya go.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 06, 2010, 10:29:06 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 06, 2010, 10:20:41 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on February 06, 2010, 10:09:42 PM
RF with a 66-63 lead with 2:41 in OT, Whitewater ball.

Whitewater took a 67-66 lead but RF responds, timeout RF with a 68-67 lead. WW has missed at least 4 or 5 FT's in OT. 3/7 in OT, there ya go.

River Falls pulls out the upset of Whitewater 69-68 as Dantzler missed a 3 with :04. A RF player rebounded and just threw it down the floor to run out the clock.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 06, 2010, 10:32:18 PM

... Re: the toss down the floor, you may recall that in 2001-2002 a pretty wacky WIAC season...

In the conference tournament, the 1, 2, and 3 seeds all lost... and in that 3/6 game, River Falls was hosting Oshkosh. After an Oshkosh miss with the clock running down, an RF player got the ball and threw it in the air to run out the clock. The ball hit the ceiling and Oshkosh nailed a 3 to tie and send the game to overtime.

Oshkosh won in OT 95-87.

First thing I thought of when I heard that Danny Johnson lobbed the ball down the court like that!

Oh, and RF goes to Stevens Point on Wednesday. Can they pull a Stout and upset the Pointers too?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 06, 2010, 10:48:03 PM

#9 St. Norbert goes down to Lake Forest 66-59

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 07, 2010, 03:50:50 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 03, 2010, 10:17:02 PM
With an 11-9 record, Stout is obviously not going to get any top 25 votes, but I've gotta wonder who else in the country could beat UWW and UWSP back to back! :o

(Since they ARE 11-9, I suppose lots of teams, if lightning happened to strike twice! ;))

And this Wednesday when River Falls travels to Stevens Point we just may get to see that occur!!! :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 07, 2010, 12:32:21 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 05, 2010, 06:38:03 PM

Whitworth has led in its games for 578:22 out of the last 640 minutes (16 games) since losing to Pomona. That's better than 90% including wins over Whitewater, Stout and McKendree (now #8 NAIA). Pirates have perhaps their toughest conference road trip this weekend as they face an improved Pacific and a strong George Fox (not the womens) team. Go Pirates!!

Add another 80 minutes to the total. On the road and never trailed.

Whitworth won its 18th consecutive game to improve to 19-2 overall and 12-0 in the NWC. The Bucs clinched at least a share of the Conference title after second-place Linfield fell to 8-4 following a home loss to Willamette tonight. 4 games still to play, It's possible we might win one of em. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 07, 2010, 12:55:34 PM

Quote from: magicman on February 07, 2010, 03:50:50 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 03, 2010, 10:17:02 PM
With an 11-9 record, Stout is obviously not going to get any top 25 votes, but I've gotta wonder who else in the country could beat UWW and UWSP back to back! :o

(Since they ARE 11-9, I suppose lots of teams, if lightning happened to strike twice! ;))
And this Wednesday when River Falls travels to Stevens Point we just may get to see that occur!!! :o

I actually was wrong on the schedule... RF goes to SP on Saturday... it's RF's next game but they have the bye on Wed. SP hosts Eau Claire, I think, on Wed. ...and we know what they did to Whitewater earlier too!

I think this season's recent results are just a combination of schedule grind on WW and SP, as well as the overall strength of the WIAC showing itself. Look at the standings... RF is in 9th and Oshkosh (who took both WW and SP to the brink earlier in the year is in 8th. RF also only lost to St Thomas by 1 in Nov or Dec too.

Remember... the WIAC as a conference won its games at an 80% clip this year. We hadn't seen non-con numbers that good since the early aughts... back when the WIAC was the Wacky WIAC... there are no nights off.

I hope the voters really think about that before simply knocking SP and WW down... both schools did pretty much dominate the first half of the conference schedule and there was a ton of parity in the bottom seven, so the W/L numbers for those teams aren't gaudy... but it doesn't mean those teams aren't good. right about now, I'd take Stout against anybody in the country.

That's another dynamic... if you look at the results, La Crosse had a solid hold on 3rd place... and Platteville was a pretty strong 4th. Since then, both teams have lost a bundle of games to the point that LAX is sitting in 7th, out of the conference tournament below .500 and Pville is tied for 4th at .500.

Somebody on the WIAC page figured out that the bottom 7 could end up the year all at 6-10. I don't think its likely, but it is possibe.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 07, 2010, 01:24:36 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 07, 2010, 12:55:34 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 07, 2010, 03:50:50 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 03, 2010, 10:17:02 PM
With an 11-9 record, Stout is obviously not going to get any top 25 votes, but I've gotta wonder who else in the country could beat UWW and UWSP back to back! :o

(Since they ARE 11-9, I suppose lots of teams, if lightning happened to strike twice! ;))
And this Wednesday when River Falls travels to Stevens Point we just may get to see that occur!!! :o

...

Somebody on the WIAC page figured out that the bottom 7 could end up the year all at 6-10. I don't think its likely, but it is possibe.

We had a year like that in ASC football a few seasons back. If one were to change the outcome in two games that were competitive late in the fourth quarter, then there would have been a 7-way tie for 3rd at 3-5.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 07, 2010, 01:34:33 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 07, 2010, 01:24:36 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on February 07, 2010, 12:55:34 PM
Quote from: magicman on February 07, 2010, 03:50:50 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 03, 2010, 10:17:02 PM
With an 11-9 record, Stout is obviously not going to get any top 25 votes, but I've gotta wonder who else in the country could beat UWW and UWSP back to back! :o

(Since they ARE 11-9, I suppose lots of teams, if lightning happened to strike twice! ;))
And this Wednesday when River Falls travels to Stevens Point we just may get to see that occur!!! :o

...

Somebody on the WIAC page figured out that the bottom 7 could end up the year all at 6-10. I don't think its likely, but it is possibe.
We had a year like that in ASC football a few seasons back. If one were to change the outcome in two games that were competitive late in the fourth quarter, then there would have been a 7-way tie for 3rd at 3-5.

I've seen it referred to (but it was before my time here) that back in 2000-01 when there was a tie for the WIAC title at 10-6, 2 teams in 3rd at 9-7 and 2 in 5th at 8-8, also the year of the upset in the conference tournament), but somebody also figured out with about 5 games left how all 9 teams could have ended up at 8-8!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 07, 2010, 06:00:31 PM

How They Fared

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	624	Guilford	19-1	def. Hampden-Sydney, 76-74
#2	571	Williams	21-1	def. #25 Colby, 82-58; def. Bowdoin, 97-54
#3	567	Washington U.	18-2	def. Rochester, 68-59; def. #31 Emory, 83-69
#4	544	UW-Stevens Point	18-3	LOST at UW-Stout, 67-69
#5	525	St. Thomas	19-2	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 82-70; def. Carleton, 58-55
#6	487	UW-Whitewater	17-4	def. UW-La Crosse, 67-52; LOST at UW-River Falls, 68-69 OT
#7	468	Virginia Wesleyan	18-2	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 66-51
#8	391	Middlebury	19-2	def. Bowdoin, 76-65; def. #25 Colby, 72-57
#9	388	St. Norbert	18-2	def. Lawrence, 66-48; def. Monmouth, 78-52; LOST to Lake Forest, 59-66
#10	357	Whitworth	19-2	def. Pacific, 87-68; def. George Fox, 98-88
#11	350	Chapman	20-2	def. S'western (Ariz.), 78-44; def. La Sierra, 86-57
#12	348	MIT	19-2	def. Babson, 67-49
#13	345	William Paterson	21-1	def. Ramapo, 72-65
#14	281	Anderson	18-2	def. Bluffton, 72-66
#15	254	Franklin and Marshall	17-3	def. Ursinus, 70-62
#16	250	Eastern Mennonite	16-3	def. Lynchburg, 85-67
#17	219	Texas-Dallas	17-4	LOST at Louisiana College, 68-69; def. #24 Mississippi College, 84-81
#18	215	Randolph-Macon	16-4	def. Roanoke, 87-54
#19	196	Brandeis	15-4	LOST at Case Western Reserve, 61-63; def. Carnegie Mellon, 62-43
#20	177	St. Mary's (Md.)	17-3	def. Christopher Newport, 91-82 OT
#21	131	Wooster	17-4	def. Allegheny, 85-72; def. Wabash, 64-61
#22	130	Medaille	20-2	def. Penn State-Behrend, 76-74; LOST at Mount Aloysius, 64-65
#23	92	Carthage	16-5	def. Wheaton (Ill.), 68-63; LOST to Augustana, 59-70
#24	60	Mississippi College	16-4	def. University of the Ozarks, 80-74; LOST to #17 Texas-Dallas, 81-84
#25	44	Colby	16-4	def. Southern Maine, 74-60; LOST at #2 Williams, 58-82; LOST at #8 Middlebury, 57-72

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	40	Albright	16-4	LOST to Widener, 48-49; LOST at Elizabethtown, 67-74
#27	34	Illinois Wesleyan	17-4	def. North Central (Ill.), 92-85; def. Elmhurst, 73-59
#28	14	Amherst	14-7	def. Rhode Island College, 105-84; LOST at Bates, 47-76; LOST at Tufts, 68-69
#29	12	Cabrini	18-2	def. Baptist Bible, 79-50; def. Rosemont, 81-58
#30	4	Lycoming	17-4	LOST at Lebanon Valley, 72-75 OT; def. Arcadia, 69-68
#31	3	Emory	13-7	LOST at Chicago, 68-73; LOST at #3 Washington U., 69-83
T#32	2	St. John Fisher	18-4	def. Rochester Tech, 74-57; def. Elmira, 72-65 OT
T#32	2	Stevens	16-4	def. Utica, 68-53

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: r-buddy on February 07, 2010, 11:17:19 PM

A good weekend for the Wash U Bears, with decisive wins over Emory and Rochester. Defense was tough as usual, and the offense was as effective as any time this year. One amazing stat in the Emory game: 29 goals scored and 29 assists. That must be rare--anyone seen a game in which a team scored an assist for every one of its goals?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 08, 2010, 02:41:59 PM

I would not be surprised to see Whitewater drop to below 10th. Any case for them staying top 10? Would any voters still place them higher than say...Whitworth? ;) Head to head win plus WW easily beat Stout.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 10, 2010, 02:34:39 PM

Anyone think Eastern Mennonite can win at Guilford tonight? What would it take for EM to upset?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deanslist on February 10, 2010, 07:06:00 PM

EMU def has the talent and athletes to win tonight at #1 Guilford. I think it will be important for them to get off to a good start, so their confidence grows as the game progresses especially being on the road. I also believe it will be really important for EMU to limit second chance points for Guilford. If you EMU can do a solid job on the defensive end of the boards, expect the Runnin' Royals to give the Quakers a tough game. Go EMU!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 10, 2010, 07:56:57 PM

EMU up by 10 at the half @Guilford.

EMU blitzes Guilford out of the break, they are up by 17 with 15 minutes to play. Could this be EMU's second 20+ point win over the #1 team in the country this season?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deanslist on February 10, 2010, 08:31:31 PM

EMU Runnin' Royals up by 30 points over #1 Guilford!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 10, 2010, 08:37:03 PM

Quote from: deanslist on February 10, 2010, 08:31:31 PM
EMU Runnin' Royals up by 30 points over #1 Guilford!

Watching this and it isn't even close. Based on recent results...hello Williams!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Jeremybozz on February 10, 2010, 08:47:22 PM

#16 EMU wins 90-63 over #1 Guilford.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 10, 2010, 08:59:58 PM

nwhoops1903, don't jinx the Ephs! Still have a tough back-to-back on the road against Amherst (who has been playing poorly, but will certainly raise its game against the Ephs, and Amherst's star MAY be back from injury) and a decent Trinity team before they can ascend to the top spot. Never easy to sweep a NESCAC road weekend, especially with a bullseye on your back as a potential number one ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 10, 2010, 10:01:37 PM

#6 Point wins 80-61 over Eau Claire
#9 WW beat Platteville by about 10 (not sure of the final)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on February 11, 2010, 01:05:24 AM

I'm sure I'm not the first person to think this - and maybe not the first to say it on these boards - but what if all four ranked ODAC teams are good but none are really great? What if they all should be rated closer to where EMU and RMC are?

EMU dismantling Guilford tonight raises that concern anew and even stronger than before. I know (or I think know) EMU is good. But losing by 30 on your home floor? As the No. 1 team in the country?

I look at the schedules for RMC, GC, EMU and VWC, hoping to find validation in how I've assessed these teams. And I don't find very much. There are lots of wins against the USAC which has one team with a winning record. I'd feel a little better if at least one of RMC's wins over Wooster or Williams happened away from home.

Maybe this is a little buyer's remorse since I'm one of the 23 people who voted Guilford No. 1 in the Top 25. And I don't have a good answer to the inevitable follow up, "Who should be ranked in front of the ODAC teams?" But I'm starting to wonder if I should look harder for teams who fit that bill.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 11, 2010, 07:07:10 AM

How They Fared--Midweek Report

Other than the EMU/Guilford upset, the only losses occurred in the ORV group -- for those with 4 or fewer poll points.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	623	Guilford	19-2	LOST to #16 Eastern Mennonite, 63-90; 02/13 vs. Lynchburg
#2	586	Williams	21-1	02/12 at Amherst; 02/13 at Trinity (Conn.)
#3	576	Washington U.	18-2	02/12 at #21 Brandeis; 02/14 at New York University
#4	542	St. Thomas	20-2	def. Bethel, 78-55; 02/13 at St. John's
#5	492	Virginia Wesleyan	20-2	def. Emory and Henry, 101-61; def. Randolph, 73-50; 02/13 vs. #17 Randolph-Macon
#6	469	UW-Stevens Point	19-3	def. UW-Eau Claire, 80-61; 02/13 vs. UW-River Falls
#7	432	Middlebury	19-2	02/12 at Trinity (Conn.); 02/13 at Amherst
#8	420	Whitworth	19-2	02/12 vs. Puget Sound; 02/13 vs. Pacific Lutheran
#9	411	UW-Whitewater	18-4	def. UW-Platteville, 83-73; 02/13 vs. UW-Eau Claire
#10	382	William Paterson	21-1	02/13 vs. Montclair State
#11	370	MIT	19-2	02/11 vs. Clark; 02/13 vs. Coast Guard
#12	368	Chapman	20-2	02/11 at Hope Int'l; 02/13 vs. UC Santa Cruz
#13	315	Anderson	20-2	def. Franklin, 80-58; def. Rose-Hulman, 76-69; 02/13 vs. Transylvania
#14	286	St. Norbert	19-2	def. Ripon, 77-72; 02/13 vs. Lawrence
#15	269	Franklin and Marshall	18-3	def. Muhlenberg, 69-63; 02/11 at Gettysburg; 02/13 at Washington College
#16	262	Eastern Mennonite	17-3	def. #1 Guilford, 90-63; 02/13 at Roanoke
#17	218	Randolph-Macon	18-4	def. Washington and Lee, 56-53; def. Bridgewater (Va.), 77-69; 02/13 at #5 Virginia Wesleyan
#18	212	St. Mary's (Md.)	17-3	02/11 vs. Wesley; 02/13 vs. Hood
#19	199	Wooster	18-4	def. Hiram, 69-50; 02/13 vs. Wittenberg
#20	155	Texas-Dallas	18-4	def. University of the Ozarks, 83-82; 02/11 at Texas-Tyler
#21	98	Brandeis	16-4	def. Amherst, 71-55; 02/12 vs. #3 Washington U.; 02/14 vs. Chicago
#22	95	Carthage	17-5	def. Elmhurst, 82-68; 02/13 vs. North Central (Ill.)
#23	76	Illinois Wesleyan	18-4	def. Millikin, 75-66; 02/13 vs. Wheaton (Ill.)
#24	58	Cabrini	18-2	02/11 vs. Immaculata; 02/13 vs. Marywood
#25	49	St. John Fisher	19-4	def. Alfred, 80-53

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	43	Medaille	20-2	02/13 vs. Frostburg State
#27	37	Mississippi College	16-4	02/11 vs. LeTourneau; 02/13 vs. East Texas Baptist
#28	17	John Carroll	16-5	def. Otterbein, 103-93; 02/13 vs. Capital
#29	12	Stevens	17-4	def. Rutgers-Camden, 86-57; 02/14 at Hartwick
#30	11	Central	19-4	def. Loras, 69-59
#31	8	Merchant Marine	18-4	02/12 vs. Goucher; 02/13 vs. T#40 Catholic
T#32	6	Colby	17-4	def. Thomas, 71-69; 02/12 vs. Connecticut College; 02/13 vs. Wesleyan
T#32	6	Defiance	17-5	02/13 vs. Mount St. Joseph
T#34	4	Augustana	14-8	LOST to Wheaton (Ill.), 53-56; 02/13 vs. Millikin
T#34	4	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	17-4	def. Caltech, 96-28; 02/13 at La Verne
T#34	4	Hope	16-6	def. Kalamazoo, 85-63; 02/13 vs. Albion
#37	3	Bridgewater State	15-5	LOST at Bowdoin, 57-68; 02/13 vs. Worcester State
T#38	2	Gordon	17-4	LOST at Colby-Sawyer, 63-74; 02/11 at Bates; 02/13 at Western New England
T#38	2	Western Connecticut	16-5	LOST at Rhode Island College, 70-96; 02/13 vs. Keene State
T#40	1	Catholic	15-5	02/12 at Drew; 02/13 at #31 Merchant Marine
T#40	1	SUNY-Old Westbury	15-6	LOST at St. Joseph's (L.I.), 48-49; 02/11 at Farmingdale State; 02/13 at Mount St. Mary
T#40	1	UW-Stout	13-9	def. UW-Superior, 85-77; 02/13 at UW-Platteville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on February 11, 2010, 07:20:18 AM

I'm not sure the ODAC isn't more like the WIAC where the breadth & strength of the conference is such that you'll have nights like the one Guilford experienced last night. Think it's getting more difficult to carve out a top 10 let alone a top 25 this season with the relative balance that I observe across conferences and regions. Who knows - when it's all said & done, Wash U may emerge the victor yet again.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on February 11, 2010, 09:53:27 AM

I like how the headline on the front page did a complete 180^o turn last night. First, it was questioning whether or not EMU was running out of gas. I guess the Runnin' Royals didn't like being questioned about how good they really are? ;)

And now after their 30 point beat-down of another #1 ranked team, they are 'Off and running again'... :D

Hopefully, the Runnin' Royals didn't use too much gas running all over Guilford last night. :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 11, 2010, 10:25:16 AM

Perhaps, but with the headline only going up an hour before game time, I am not sure they read it before tipoff. :)

Eastern Mennonite, in particular, seems to be a team that either has it or doesn't on any given night. If they aren't hitting from 3, they're in trouble, from what it seems.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Jeremybozz on February 11, 2010, 10:27:51 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 11, 2010, 10:25:16 AM
Perhaps, but with the headline only going up an hour before game time, I am not sure they read it before tipoff. :)

Eastern Mennonite, in particular, seems to be a team that either has it or doesn't on any given night. If they aren't hitting from 3, they're in trouble, from what it seems.

Having seen them play, you are correct about this.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 11, 2010, 03:31:54 PM

Dunno how many people caught this but 13-9 (11-7 in-region) UW Stout picked up a #25 vote this week. I don't think it's unwarranted either... they've gone 9-2 in their last 11 and beaten the #1 and #2 ranked West Region teams. Sure they started off the year 4-7, but there has to be some latitude for teams who have improved immensely during the year. Right now, more than anyone else in the WIAC (and maybe eveb the country) Stout is who I don't want to play.

They won't get an NCAA bid without winning the tourney, but they're hot right now. They right now are on track to host a conference tournament game and if they win their last two, they'll have 10 wins in the WIAC this year after being picked 9th in the preseason poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Marty Peretz on February 11, 2010, 04:35:43 PM

Quietly, Wash.U. has begun to make its annual run. The chattering classes who cast doubt on the Bears' chances of a 3-peat just a couple of weeks ago have begun to die down and a pair of wins this weekend, you'd think, would have to get the Bears back into the conversation for number 1. Avenging their lone home and lone conference loss on the road at Deis could go a long way in convincing people that the champs from the Arch City haven't lost their mojo just yet. Aaron Thompson's break-out performance against Rochester last weekend will hopefully be the start of something special in leading WUSTL back to the promised land of Salem come mid March.

And the best part is, I get to witness WU hoops in action live for the first time this year on Sunday at NYU. With an alumni event planned for the huge throng of WU alums in NYC, this should be a de facto neutral court game for the UAA leader.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 11, 2010, 04:39:47 PM

Quote from: Marty Peretz on February 11, 2010, 04:35:43 PM
Quietly, Wash.U. has begun to make its annual run. The chattering classes who cast doubt on the Bears' chances of a 3-peat just a couple of weeks ago have begun to die down and a pair of wins this weekend, you'd think, would have to get the Bears back into the conversation for number 1. Avenging their lone home and lone conference loss on the road at Deis could go a long way in convincing people that the champs from the Arch City haven't lost their mojo just yet. Aaron Thompson's break-out performance against Rochester last weekend will hopefully be the start of something special in leading WUSTL back to the promised land of Salem come mid March.

And the best part is, I get to witness WU hoops in action live for the first time this year on Sunday at NYU. With an alumni event planned for the huge throng of WU alums in NYC, this should be a de facto neutral court game for the UAA leader.

I am still not convinced about WashU. Are they a top 10 team? Probably, but I think a 3-peat is highly unlikely with their inconsistent post play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 11, 2010, 08:05:40 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on February 11, 2010, 04:39:47 PM
I am still not convinced about WashU. Are they a top 10 team? Probably, but I think a 3-peat is highly unlikely with their inconsistent post play.

That's a pretty strong statement considering there does not seem to be any team out there that's a clear favorite to win it all. If I'm making odds right now for the 2010 national championship, I don't think I'd have any team as more of a favorite than Wash U. (I'd probably have Wash U in a group of 3 or 4 teams tied as "favorites.")

Wash U is not a "perfect team", and they've played a bit inconsistently throughout the year. But 1) they're still 18-2 overall and 8-1 in the UAA, and 2) what team this year doesn't have a question mark or two? I don't see anything out there that resembles the 2004 & 2005 UW-Stevens Point teams, or other powerhouses of the last decade.

I honestly don't think I'd make the "highly unlikely" comment about any current Top 10 team...let alone #3 Wash U, with a starting lineup full of kids who have been part of 3 Final Four trips in a row and 2 national titles.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 11, 2010, 08:17:57 PM

Well I disagree with you, I do not think they are going to win it all this year. I didn't make any absolute comments, my usage of "I think" clearly suggests that this is my opinion. Whether they are the favorite in your eyes, the 3rd favorite, the 10th favorite, or whatever, I don't think they will win it this year. They last couple years they have been very balanced teams with both solid play from their guards and a dominant post player. They do have an 18-2 record, but they have looked really shaky getting there (as many other teams have also, as you suggested). The UAA is down this year, they may not even get a single at-large bid depending on what happens with Brandeis. WashU has no dominant inside presence, they don't get as many easy baskets as they have in the past, and even their all-american backcourt has looked inconsistent this season. The way they are playing I think they will get exposed at some point in the tourney, but again, that is only my opinion. They may make it all the way to Salem, because they have shown they are the top of the midwest, but the last time checked WashU is the only team in the top 20 right now in that region. For the record, I do think they are a top 5 team in the country, but I stand behind my opinion that they do not have the complete team that has what it takes to win it all.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 11, 2010, 08:20:28 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on February 11, 2010, 08:05:40 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on February 11, 2010, 04:39:47 PM
I am still not convinced about WashU. Are they a top 10 team? Probably, but I think a 3-peat is highly unlikely with their inconsistent post play.

That's a pretty strong statement considering there does not seem to be any team out there that's a clear favorite to win it all. If I'm making odds right now for the 2010 national championship, I don't think I'd have any team as more of a favorite than Wash U. (I'd probably have Wash U in a group of 3 or 4 teams tied as "favorites.")

Wash U is not a "perfect team", and they've played a bit inconsistently throughout the year. But 1) they're still 18-2 overall and 8-1 in the UAA, and 2) what team this year doesn't have a question mark or two? I don't see anything out there that resembles the 2004 & 2005 UW-Stevens Point teams, or other powerhouses of the last decade.

I honestly don't think I'd make the "highly unlikely" comment about any current Top 10 team...let alone #3 Wash U, with a starting lineup full of kids who have been part of 3 Final Four trips in a row and 2 national titles.

In defense of hugenerd (who is fully capable of defending himself*, I'm sure! ;)), for most of January WashU looked highly beatable. While they won every match except Brandeis, nearly all were very close.

And except for rare years, ANY specific team is 'highly unlikely' to win it all. I'm sure you remember 2006. :o :(

[Of course, I suppose it depends on your definition of 'highly unlikely'.]

And before I even hit 'post', I see that he has! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 11, 2010, 08:25:10 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on February 11, 2010, 08:17:57 PM
WashU has no dominant inside presence

They have the same two 4 & 5 players they had last year - Cam Smith and Zach Kelly. (6-7 Tyler Nading was a small forward who did most of his damage from 15 feet.) They won it last year without a "dominant inside presence"..after winning it the year before with possibly the best inside presence in D3 (Troy Ruths).

Wash U is ranked #1 in the Midwest Region and will most likely host a Sectional. If they host, the Bears will be heavy favorite to get to Salem...and if they get to Salem, I sure wouldn't bet against them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 11, 2010, 08:35:07 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on February 11, 2010, 08:25:10 PM
They have the same two 4 & 5 players they had last year - Cam Smith and Zach Kelly. (6-7 Tyler Nading was a small forward who did most of his damage from 15 feet.) They won it last year without a "dominant inside presence"..after winning it the year before with possibly the best inside presence in D3 (Troy Ruths).

I understand what you mean about the post men, but you clearly knew I was talking about Nading. He gave them a third real scoring option along with Thompson and Wallis.

Quote from: Titan Q on February 11, 2010, 08:25:10 PM
Wash U is ranked #1 in the Midwest Region and will most likely host a Sectional. If they host, the Bears will be heavy favorite to get to Salem...and if they get to Salem, I sure wouldn't bet against them.

Again, I would disagree with you here, I would bet against them in Salem (I already suggested they could get to Salem). I am not saying they are a bad team, I just dont think they will win it all this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on February 11, 2010, 08:37:53 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 11, 2010, 08:20:28 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on February 11, 2010, 08:05:40 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on February 11, 2010, 04:39:47 PM
I am still not convinced about WashU. Are they a top 10 team? Probably, but I think a 3-peat is highly unlikely with their inconsistent post play.

That's a pretty strong statement considering there does not seem to be any team out there that's a clear favorite to win it all. If I'm making odds right now for the 2010 national championship, I don't think I'd have any team as more of a favorite than Wash U. (I'd probably have Wash U in a group of 3 or 4 teams tied as "favorites.")

Wash U is not a "perfect team", and they've played a bit inconsistently throughout the year. But 1) they're still 18-2 overall and 8-1 in the UAA, and 2) what team this year doesn't have a question mark or two? I don't see anything out there that resembles the 2004 & 2005 UW-Stevens Point teams, or other powerhouses of the last decade.

I honestly don't think I'd make the "highly unlikely" comment about any current Top 10 team...let alone #3 Wash U, with a starting lineup full of kids who have been part of 3 Final Four trips in a row and 2 national titles.

In defense of hugenerd (who is fully capable of defending himself*, I'm sure! ;)), for most of January WashU looked highly beatable. While they won every match except Brandeis, nearly all were very close.

And except for rare years, ANY specific team is 'highly unlikely' to win it all. I'm sure you remember 2006. :o :(

[Of course, I suppose it depends on your definition of 'highly unlikely'.]

And before I even hit 'post', I see that he has! ;D

I agree with the Mr. Y here. Even if you give them good odds to win each individual tournament game, they still face comparatively long odds at winning all of their games. In normal years, even a heavy favorite may only have 15-20% chance at winning them all.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 11, 2010, 08:41:26 PM

Remind me not to get in a debate involving odds again with a college Statistics professor, a guy who runs D3 RPI calculations, and an self-proclaimed "hugenerd"! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on February 11, 2010, 08:44:24 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on February 11, 2010, 08:17:57 PM
Well I disagree with you, I do not think they are going to win it all this year.

You also didn't think Washington University would win on the road against Emory, but we know how that turned out.

The team struggled in January, in part because of injuries, but have played well enough since mid-January. If you have not watched them play lately, it is time to check them out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 11, 2010, 08:45:18 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on February 11, 2010, 08:41:26 PM
Remind me not to get in a debate involving odds again with a college Statistics professor, a guy who runs D3 RPI calculations, and an self-proclaimed "hugenerd"! :)

It's the remake of Revenge of the Nerds! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 11, 2010, 09:05:30 PM

Quote from: WUH on February 11, 2010, 08:44:24 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on February 11, 2010, 08:17:57 PM
Well I disagree with you, I do not think they are going to win it all this year.

You also didn't think Washington University would win on the road against Emory, but we know how that turned out.

The team struggled in January, in part because of injuries, but have played well enough since mid-January. If you have not watched them play lately, it is time to check them out.

That was more a function of me being too high on Emory after they destroyed Chicago by 25+, but Emory is always a pretty tough place to play so that was a good win. I actually watched them play against Rochester this past weekend. AT played the best game he has in quite a while(possibly the entire season) and carried them, if he begins to play like that consistently, they would obviously be a much better team (although no one else played particularly well in that game). However, that is the only time he has shot over 50% from the field since early December and only the 4th time this season. I dont think they are going to get that much production from their backcourt consistently because teams will try to take that away. Until someone else can step up and show they are a legit 3rd option that can carry the team for a game or two, I stick to my position that they won't win it all.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 11, 2010, 10:06:11 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on February 11, 2010, 08:25:10 PM
Wash U is ranked #1 in the Midwest Region and will most likely host a Sectional. If they host, the Bears will be heavy favorite to get to Salem...and if they get to Salem, I sure wouldn't bet against them.

VERY true. No smart person would want to play WU there in March.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 11, 2010, 10:08:52 PM

MIT pulls out a tough conference game tonight, 59-52, over Clark. Noel Hollingsworth scored 20 points on 8-10 shooting and 11 rebounds for MIT. Mitchell Kates had a big game at the point, scoring 13 (4-4 shooting) and really did a good job dictating play for MIT.

Congrats to Coach Larry Anderson for his 200th career win (all at MIT), he is the first 200 win coach in the history of the program.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pbrooks3 on February 11, 2010, 11:43:53 PM

Having chimed in that Wash U might have enough to get over the hump again for a 3-peat, I still am high on Guilford despite their blowout home loss last night. They had a bad night from behind the arc and Eastern Mennonite had a good one. When Guilford is able to have their normal balance from the perimeter and the post, they are capable of doing a number similar to their post-season run of 2009. I won't be surprised if Sanborn and the Quakers win it all.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 12, 2010, 12:22:54 AM

ODAC has a lot of good teams this year, I wouldnt be surprised to see one of those four teams make a run at the title either.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: r-buddy on February 12, 2010, 12:27:44 AM

Interesting discussion about Wash U's chances in March. It is probably true that the guys playing in Tyler Nading's position are not his equal in all around skills--neither have the experience he did as a senior--but they do contribute significantly to this year's team, and both are capable of scoring in double digits. What Wash U does have over last year's team is 5 players who have been at this for 4 years and know what it takes to win it all. They have always been able to maintain their poise, they are patient, they are unselfish, and they play good defense. Those are important ingredients in a tournament. No team is likely to dominate this year, in my opinion. Wash U has a good shot at it, but so do several others, and any of them could stumble with a bad game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on February 12, 2010, 03:41:47 PM

QuoteThe ODAC has a lot of good teams this year, I wouldnt be surprised to see one of those four teams make a run at the title either.

Unless the selection committee only puts one ODAC team in the tournament, one of them better make a run at the title given where we've had them ranked all year. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 12, 2010, 03:46:49 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on February 12, 2010, 03:41:47 PM
QuoteThe ODAC has a lot of good teams this year, I wouldnt be surprised to see one of those four teams make a run at the title either.

Unless the selection committee only puts one ODAC team in the tournament, one of them better make a run at the title given where we've had them ranked all year. :)

I figured that was a statement that wouldn't draw too many arguments.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 12, 2010, 08:31:37 PM

What the heck, I think Williams and Wash U go down tonight. 37-37 right now at Amherst and WASH U up 12, first half.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 12, 2010, 09:02:15 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 12, 2010, 08:31:37 PM
What the heck, I think Williams and Wash U go down tonight. 37-37 right now at Amherst and WASH U up 12, first half.

Wash U up 10 49-39 with 16 mins to go and Williams up 10 as well 54-44 with 13:00 mins.

Might be more worried about Whitworth... It's still early, 7 mins in the half, but they're down 27-20 against 8-13 Puget Sound.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 12, 2010, 09:05:40 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 12, 2010, 09:02:15 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 12, 2010, 08:31:37 PM
What the heck, I think Williams and Wash U go down tonight. 37-37 right now at Amherst and WASH U up 12, first half.

Wash U up 10 49-39 with 16 mins to go and Williams up 10 as well 54-44 with 13:00 mins.

Might be more worried about Whitworth... It's still early, 7 mins in the half, but they're down 27-20 against 8-13 Puget Sound.

True dat..Loggers are playing pretty good. Whitworth?, not so much.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BUBeaverFan on February 12, 2010, 09:08:24 PM

Wash U up five 13+ to go. Bears in serious foul trouble.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 12, 2010, 09:16:28 PM

Williams is running away with it. 66-45 with about 7

Wash U has hit 4 straight 3's and knocked down some FT's, up 72-60.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BUBeaverFan on February 12, 2010, 09:21:54 PM

Wash U 73-68 5:19

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 12, 2010, 09:22:19 PM

Now Wash U has missed 4 straight 3's and Brandeis has made 3/4... and we're back to 5 73-68.

And Whitworth has cut UPS's lead to 5 too, 39-34 at the half.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 12, 2010, 09:32:12 PM

Williams plays strong and wins 81-60. Shoots 61% from the field. One more win to #1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 12, 2010, 09:43:36 PM

Wash U will pull it out, they're up 90-82 with :14 left.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 12, 2010, 09:48:27 PM

Whitworth pulling it together and has their first lead 49-47. Bo Gregg 6-8 from 3pt...20 pts to lead Pirates.

UPS hanging with Whitworth. WW up 5, 2:21 to go.

Whitworth makes the FT's and wins 82-71. Go Bucs!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 13, 2010, 02:40:19 PM

Virginia Wesleyan leads Randolph-Macon 33-32 at the half.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 13, 2010, 02:59:26 PM

I've been tracking Points per Possession and Opponent Points per Possession on the CCIW board this season. I decided to run for the Week 10 Top 25 teams. Results are in the posts below. Obviously this is not a great measure of one team vs another because strength of schedules vary so much, but I do think it paints a helpful picture. It shows who the great offensive teams are, the great defensive teams, etc.

Possessions, which are obviously not in a boxscore, are estimated using:

Possessions = FGA – Off Reb + T.O. + (.475 * FTA)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 13, 2010, 03:00:00 PM

Points per 100 Possessions (Offensive Efficiency)
1   Williams (2)   122.4
2   Carthage (22)   118.0
3   Whitworth (8)   118.0
4   Texas-Dallas (20)   116.5
5   UW-Stevens Point (6)   115.6
6   Anderson (13)   115.0
7   Guilford (1)   114.5
8   UW-Whitewater (9)   114.4
9   Ill. Wesleyan (23)   113.5
10   St. Thomas (4)   113.4
11   Wash U (3)   112.8
12   Chapman (12)   110.3
13   Eastern Mennonite (16)   109.8
14   St. Norbert (14)   109.0
15   St. John Fisher (25)   107.9
16   Cabrini (24)   107.9
17   Wooster (19)   107.7
18   Middlebury (7)   105.5
19   William Paterson (10)   105.1
20   Randolph-Macon (17)   104.9
21   Brandeis (21)   104.9
22   MIT (11)   104.3
23   Virginia Wesleyan (5)   104.2
24   Franklin & Marshall (15)   102.3
25   St. Mary's (18)   100.8

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 13, 2010, 03:00:30 PM

Opponents Points per 100 Possessions (Defensive Efficiency)
1   William Paterson (10)   81.4
2   Franklin & Marshall (15)   82.1
3   MIT (11)   84.6
4   Chapman (12)   84.6
5   Middlebury (7)   85.8
6   St. John Fisher (25)   86.9
7   St. Mary's (18)   87.0
8   Eastern Mennonite (16)   88.4
9   St. Norbert (14)   89.3
10   Randolph-Macon (17)   90.1
11   Cabrini (24)   90.3
12   UW-Stevens Point (6)   90.7
13   Virginia Wesleyan (5)   90.8
14   Williams (2)   92.5
15   St. Thomas (4)   93.5
16   Guilford (1)   93.9
17   Brandeis (21)   93.9
18   Wash U (3)   94.6
19   Wooster (19)   95.1
20   Texas-Dallas (20)   97.4
21   Whitworth (8)   97.9
22   Ill. Wesleyan (23)   99.8
23   Carthage (22)   100.9
24   UW-Whitewater (9)   101.2
25   Anderson (13)   102.0

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 13, 2010, 03:01:07 PM

Differential (Points per 100 possessions – Opponent Points per 100 possessions)
1   Williams (2)   30.0
2   Chapman (12)   25.6
3   UW-Stevens Point (6)   24.9
4   William Paterson (10)   23.7
5   Eastern Mennonite (16)   21.4
6   St. John Fisher (25)   21.1
7   Guilford (1)   20.6
8   Whitworth (8)   20.1
9   Franklin & Marshall (15)   20.1
10   St. Thomas (4)   19.8
11   Middlebury (7)   19.7
12   MIT (11)   19.7
13   St. Norbert (14)   19.7
14   Texas-Dallas (20)   19.1
15   Wash U (3)   18.2
16   Cabrini (24)   17.6
17   Carthage (22)   17.1
18   Randolph-Macon (17)   14.9
19   St. Mary's (18)   13.8
20   Ill. Wesleyan (23)   13.7
21   Virginia Wesleyan (5)   13.4
22   UW-Whitewater (9)   13.2
23   Anderson (13)   13.0
24   Wooster (19)   12.6
25   Brandeis (21)   11.0

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 13, 2010, 03:01:44 PM

Average Total Possessions per game (team + opponent)

1   Eastern Mennonite (16)   162.4
2   St. Mary's (18)   151.6
3   Cabrini (24)   146.2
4   Virginia Wesleyan (5)   144.9
5   Whitworth (8)   143.6
6   Middlebury (7)   143.0
7   Williams (2)   142.2
8   Randolph-Macon (17)   142.1
9   Guilford (1)   140.6
10   UW-Whitewater (9)   138.8
11   Franklin & Marshall (15)   138.7
12   Texas-Dallas (20)   137.8
13   Ill. Wesleyan (23)   137.6
14   MIT (11)   136.8
15   Brandeis (21)   134.3
16   St. John Fisher (25)   133.9
17   St. Norbert (14)   133.6
18   William Paterson (10)   132.3
19   Chapman (12)   131.4
20   Wooster (19)   131.2
21   Anderson (13)   130.4
22   UW-Stevens Point (6)   130.0
23   Carthage (22)   129.6
24   Wash U (3)   129.2
25   St. Thomas (4)   128.9

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 13, 2010, 03:40:35 PM

#5 Virginia Wesleyan falls to #17 Randolph-Macon 64-62 on a basket by Danny Jones with .01 second left to play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 13, 2010, 06:05:54 PM

Congrats to Williams who should (deservedly) be the new number one in the country. I know the Ephs have had some doubters here, but they have really improved throughout the course of the year, especially on the defensive end; as the schedule has gotten tougher, they have performed better and better. They have two guys (Schultz and Wang) playing at an all-American level right now, and five other very solid players at the top of the rotation, any of whom are capable of having big nights on any given day. The Ephs' shooting has been off the charts of late, and today they hit 15-22 threes on the road against a team that supposedly defends the three well.

Craziness continues in ODAC ... at this point I don't see how they CAN'T get four into the NCAA's ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 13, 2010, 06:11:28 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on February 13, 2010, 06:05:54 PM
Congrats to Williams who should (deservedly) be the new number one in the country. I know the Ephs have had some doubters here, but they have really improved throughout the course of the year, especially on the defensive end; as the schedule has gotten tougher, they have performed better and better. They have two guys (Schultz and Wang) playing at an all-American level right now, and five other very solid players at the top of the rotation, any of whom are capable of having big nights on any given day. The Ephs' shooting has been off the charts of late, and today they hit 15-22 threes on the road against a team that supposedly defends the three well.

Craziness continues in ODAC ... at this point I don't see how they CAN'T get four into the NCAA's ...

Unless they "WIAC" themselves out of the tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deanslist on February 13, 2010, 07:47:12 PM

EMU up 63-45 at the half! Both teams shooting lights out. EMU is 9 for 15 from 3 point range. George Johnson with 18 at the half!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 13, 2010, 08:06:29 PM

Woo trailing Witt (IN Wooster) at the half, 37-23.

Perhaps it's true about rivalry games - 'throw out the records'! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 13, 2010, 08:22:49 PM

Live video of #23 IWU vs Wheaton, from Bloomington, IL...

http://www.ustream.tv/channel/iwu_basketball

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 13, 2010, 08:24:14 PM

Whitworth in control 71-39. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 13, 2010, 09:01:55 PM

Woo falls to Witt, 67-56.

I guess that old cliche is true! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 13, 2010, 09:07:32 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 13, 2010, 06:11:28 PM
Unless they "WIAC" themselves out of the tournament.

The WIAC hasn't WIAC'd themselves out of the tournament since expansion...

In the four seasons from 2006-2009, the WIAC has had:

2006: 3 teams
2007: 1 teams
2008: 2 teams
2009: 3 teams

They're on pace to get two this year and possibly 3 if Point and Whitewater both get upset in the conference tournament. In 2007, Point won the league by a full 3 games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on February 13, 2010, 09:45:31 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 13, 2010, 09:07:32 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 13, 2010, 06:11:28 PM
Unless they "WIAC" themselves out of the tournament.

The WIAC hasn't WIAC'd themselves out of the tournament since expansion...

In the four seasons from 2006-2009, the WIAC has had:

2006: 3 teams
2007: 1 teams
2008: 2 teams
2009: 3 teams

They're on pace to get two this year and possibly 3 if Point and Whitewater both get upset in the conference tournament. In 2007, Point won the league by a full 3 games.

I'm guessing he meant 2007, which was the year that Oshkosh got "snubbed" at 21-6 because of the 3 losses to La Crosse, who also didn't get in at 19-8

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 13, 2010, 09:55:33 PM

Quote from: frodotwo on February 13, 2010, 09:45:31 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on February 13, 2010, 09:07:32 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 13, 2010, 06:11:28 PM
Unless they "WIAC" themselves out of the tournament.

The WIAC hasn't WIAC'd themselves out of the tournament since expansion...

In the four seasons from 2006-2009, the WIAC has had:

2006: 3 teams
2007: 1 teams
2008: 2 teams
2009: 3 teams

They're on pace to get two this year and possibly 3 if Point and Whitewater both get upset in the conference tournament. In 2007, Point won the league by a full 3 games.

I'm guessing he meant 2007, which was the year that Oshkosh got "snubbed" at 21-6 because of the 3 losses to La Crosse, who also didn't get in at 19-8

+1! Yes. Increasing the Pool C bids according to the 1:6.5 ratio has made a big difference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 13, 2010, 09:56:09 PM

Quote from: frodotwo on February 13, 2010, 09:45:31 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on February 13, 2010, 09:07:32 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 13, 2010, 06:11:28 PM
Unless they "WIAC" themselves out of the tournament.

The WIAC hasn't WIAC'd themselves out of the tournament since expansion...

In the four seasons from 2006-2009, the WIAC has had:

2006: 3 teams
2007: 1 teams
2008: 2 teams
2009: 3 teams

They're on pace to get two this year and possibly 3 if Point and Whitewater both get upset in the conference tournament. In 2007, Point won the league by a full 3 games.

I'm guessing he meant 2007, which was the year that Oshkosh got "snubbed" at 21-6 because of the 3 losses to La Crosse, who also didn't get in at 19-8

I'm thinking he meant years before expansion...

2005 Co-champ Platteville didn't get a bid
2004 Champ River Falls didn't get a bid, Whitewater 20-6 tied second place didn't get a bid
2002 Tri-champs Point and Whitewater didn't get bids
2001 Co-champs Point and Whitewater didn't get bids

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 13, 2010, 09:57:52 PM

I don't think a 6 or 7 loss team should EVER expect to make the tournament via a Pool C bid. With expansion, it HAS happened, but only a few times that I can remember and there are certainly many, many more 6 or 7 loss teams that don't get bids than do.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 14, 2010, 01:00:22 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on February 13, 2010, 06:05:54 PMCraziness continues in ODAC ... at this point I don't see how they CAN'T get four into the NCAA's ...

If HSC wins the ODAC tournament, there's no way they get four.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dahlby on February 14, 2010, 01:30:29 AM

#12 Chapman University closed out its D3 season on Saturday night with an 80-63 win over
UC Santa Cruz.

Stats at chapmanathletics.com

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 14, 2010, 12:45:50 PM

Quote from: dahlby on February 14, 2010, 01:30:29 AM
#12 Chapman University closed out its D3 season on Saturday night with an 80-63 win over
UC Santa Cruz.

Stats at chapmanathletics.com

Are they really "closing". Declining a B spot would probably help maintain their season winning %. :o ;) Actually, I hope to see them come to Spokane for a Sat game on the 6th of March.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dahlby on February 14, 2010, 01:21:16 PM

NWHOOPS;

I meant to say their regular D3 season. CU is at WC Baptist on Friday night to conclude their overall regular season. I hope they make the playoffs, but who knows.

P.S. Did Oxybob advise you to write that comment? It reads like something he would write. Now I have another one to watch out for.

Good luck, and maybe I will see you up north. Cheers!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 14, 2010, 02:31:03 PM

Pretty sure that was sarcasm. Hence the :o ;). We know what you meant!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 14, 2010, 06:16:35 PM

How They Fared

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	623	Guilford	20-2	LOST to #16 Eastern Mennonite, 63-90; def. Lynchburg, 91-74
#2	586	Williams	23-1	def. Amherst, 81-60; def. Trinity (Conn.), 83-66
#3	576	Washington U.	20-2	def. #21 Brandeis, 92-82; def. New York University, 71-63
#4	542	St. Thomas	21-2	def. Bethel, 78-55; def. St. John's, 67-62
#5	492	Virginia Wesleyan	20-3	def. Emory and Henry, 101-61; def. Randolph, 73-50; LOST to #17 Randolph-Macon, 62-64
#6	469	UW-Stevens Point	20-3	def. UW-Eau Claire, 80-61; def. UW-River Falls, 68-47
#7	432	Middlebury	21-2	def. Trinity (Conn.), 71-57; def. Amherst, 85-72
#8	420	Whitworth	21-2	def. Puget Sound, 82-71; def. Pacific Lutheran, 97-55
#9	411	UW-Whitewater	19-4	def. UW-Platteville, 83-73; def. UW-Eau Claire, 81-69
#10	382	William Paterson	22-1	def. Montclair State, 77-51
#11	370	MIT	21-2	def. Clark, 59-52; def. Coast Guard, 64-53
#12	368	Chapman	22-2	def. Hope Int'l, 72-35; def. UC Santa Cruz, 80-63
#13	315	Anderson	20-3	def. Franklin, 80-58; def. Rose-Hulman, 76-69; LOST to Transylvania, 72-76
#14	286	St. Norbert	20-2	def. Ripon, 77-72; def. Lawrence, 68-50
#15	269	Franklin and Marshall	20-3	def. Muhlenberg, 69-63; def. Gettysburg, 76-58; def. Washington College, 74-58
#16	262	Eastern Mennonite	18-3	def. #1 Guilford, 90-63; def. Roanoke, 123-73
#17	218	Randolph-Macon	19-4	def. Washington and Lee, 56-53; def. Bridgewater (Va.), 77-69; def. #5 Virginia Wesleyan, 64-62
#18	212	St. Mary's (Md.)	18-3	def. Hood, 63-48
#19	199	Wooster	18-5	def. Hiram, 69-50; LOST to Wittenberg, 56-67
#20	155	Texas-Dallas	18-4	def. University of the Ozarks, 83-82
#21	98	Brandeis	17-5	def. Amherst, 71-55; LOST to #3 Washington U., 82-92; def. Chicago, 83-71
#22	95	Carthage	18-5	def. Elmhurst, 82-68; def. North Central (Ill.), 75-72
#23	76	Illinois Wesleyan	18-5	def. Millikin, 75-66; LOST to Wheaton (Ill.), 59-65
#24	58	Cabrini	20-2	def. Immaculata, 73-70; def. Marywood, 91-77
#25	49	St. John Fisher	19-4	def. Alfred, 80-53

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	43	Medaille	21-2	def. Frostburg State, 81-77
#27	37	Mississippi College	17-5	def. LeTourneau, 78-68; LOST to East Texas Baptist, 57-78
#28	17	John Carroll	17-5	def. Otterbein, 103-93; def. Capital, 69-68
#29	12	Stevens	17-5	def. Rutgers-Camden, 86-57; LOST at Hartwick, 61-65
#30	11	Central	19-4	def. Loras, 69-59
#31	8	Merchant Marine	20-4	def. Goucher, 78-47; def. T#40 Catholic, 57-49
T#32	6	Colby	18-5	def. Thomas, 71-69; LOST to Connecticut College, 60-65; def. Wesleyan, 61-45
T#32	6	Defiance	18-5	def. Mount St. Joseph, 83-64
T#34	4	Augustana	15-8	LOST to Wheaton (Ill.), 53-56; def. Millikin, 55-46
T#34	4	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	18-4	def. Caltech, 96-28; def. La Verne, 76-67
T#34	4	Hope	17-6	def. Kalamazoo, 85-63; def. Albion, 98-90
#37	3	Bridgewater State	16-6	LOST at Bowdoin, 57-68; def. Worcester State, 74-70
T#38	2	Gordon	19-4	LOST at Colby-Sawyer, 63-74; def. Bates, 78-64; def. Western New England, 83-79
T#38	2	Western Connecticut	16-6	LOST at Rhode Island College, 70-96; LOST to Keene State, 95-100
T#40	1	Catholic	16-6	def. Drew, 70-46; LOST at #31 Merchant Marine, 49-57
T#40	1	SUNY-Old Westbury	17-6	LOST at St. Joseph's (L.I.), 48-49; def. Farmingdale State, 60-56; def. Mount St. Mary, 58-53
T#40	1	UW-Stout	13-10	def. UW-Superior, 85-77; LOST at UW-Platteville, 73-75

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jekelish on February 15, 2010, 04:07:07 PM

I'm just curious, any chance Austin College gets in the discussion for a top 25 ranking this week? 18-5, just clinched the SCAC West, they beat UT-Dallas earlier this season, and they're just getting better as the season goes on, having beaten Birmingham-Southern, Southwestern, DePauw, Centre, and Trinity twice. Plus, in the last regional ranking they were #5 in the South and should probably move up.

I'm hopeful they'll at least get "also receiving votes" if nothing else.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 15, 2010, 05:32:25 PM

Quote from: jekelish on February 15, 2010, 04:07:07 PM
I'm just curious, any chance Austin College gets in the discussion for a top 25 ranking this week? 18-5, just clinched the SCAC West, they beat UT-Dallas earlier this season, and they're just getting better as the season goes on, having beaten Birmingham-Southern, Southwestern, DePauw, Centre, and Trinity twice. Plus, in the last regional ranking they were #5 in the South and should probably move up.

I'm hopeful they'll at least get "also receiving votes" if nothing else.

Big shout out to Coach Rodney Wecker!! Way to go with the Kangaroos in just his 3rd year. He was a great coach at Whitworth for 15 seasons and a terrific person.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 15, 2010, 07:34:04 PM

Ephs get a bit shafted, getting leap-frogged by Wash U. after a very solid week for them (double-digit wins on the road vs. credible rival teams in Trinity and Amherst) ... I think their resume is easily number-one worthy (best record in the country out of a strong conference, leading nation in scoring margin, FG %, 3 pt fg % -- an insane 46 percent, among national leaders in defensive FG %, only loss occurring back in December, by five points on the road to a top-25 team, and a double-digit road win over the number six team in the country ... I mean, what more can they do?). But I guess the only ranking that matters comes at the end of the season ... the Ephs have several more tough games ahead in the NESCAC tourney, so they still have plenty of work to do before tournament time; if they win out, they certainly deserve the top ranking. (Could end up facing a healthy Amherst and Midd back-to-back, which NOT be easy).

I realize Wash U. deserves extra consideration because of their performance the past two years, but this year the team seems a small notch down (still great, of course), and Wash U. has two non-top-25 losses and zero wins over a top 25 team, as opposed to Williams; Wash U. has no win as impressive as at Midd, certainly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 15, 2010, 07:57:07 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on February 15, 2010, 07:34:04 PM
Wash U. has no win as impressive as at Midd, certainly.

Assuming Middlebury is properly ranked.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 15, 2010, 07:57:41 PM

It is also interesting that Brandeis was dropped out of the polls after losing to the new #1 WashU. What do you expect in a ~#20 vs. #1 matchup?

My guess is that Brandeis beating Amherst by about the same margin as Williams only 3 days apart helped some voters on the fence choose a team they felt more "comfortable" in. Nothing like a vote for WashU that makes you feel warm and fuzzy inside.

I personally, feel that Williams has been more consistent this year as well. Their only loss is after a really long road trip to RMC (who has been ranked all year), in a game they appeared to have in hand until the final 10 minutes. WashU, on the other hand, has two losses to unranked teams. I guess you get the benefit of the doubt when you are the two-time defending champ.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 15, 2010, 08:00:33 PM

I think Middlebury is, Hoops Fan. They are legit ... especially on the defensive end. And even if they are 10 spots too high (which I'd say is ridiculous), that is still better than any win by Wash U. Although I agree that Brandeis didn't deserve to drop out of the poll based on that loss ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 15, 2010, 08:30:11 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on February 15, 2010, 07:34:04 PM
Ephs get a bit shafted, getting leap-frogged by Wash U. after a very solid week for them (double-digit wins on the road vs. credible rival teams in Trinity and Amherst) ... I think their resume is easily number-one worthy (best record in the country out of a strong conference, leading nation in scoring margin, FG %, 3 pt fg % -- an insane 46 percent, among national leaders in defensive FG %, only loss occurring back in December, by five points on the road to a top-25 team, and a double-digit road win over the number six team in the country ... I mean, what more can they do?). But I guess the only ranking that matters comes at the end of the season ... the Ephs have several more tough games ahead in the NESCAC tourney, so they still have plenty of work to do before tournament time; if they win out, they certainly deserve the top ranking. (Could end up facing a healthy Amherst and Midd back-to-back, which NOT be easy).

I realize Wash U. deserves extra consideration because of their performance the past two years, but this year the team seems a small notch down (still great, of course), and Wash U. has two non-top-25 losses and zero wins over a top 25 team, as opposed to Williams; Wash U. has no win as impressive as at Midd, certainly.

If you consider strength of schedule (SOS), Wash U has an SOS of .587 and Williams has an SOS of .506. The SOS is comprised of a 2/3-1/3 ratio of Opponents win % and opponents-opponents win %. Wash U's numbers are .605/.551 while William's numbers are .488/.541.

Now, Williams can't do anything other than beat the teams they play... but look at the Opponent's win %. It's below .500. Wash U's is over .600. And Wash U's opponents have played teams with better records...

So, Wash U appears to have played against better teams. That may have factored in to the voters' minds. It might also be that they're the two-time defending champs and appear to be playing really well again.

Now, in terms of the SOS, this isn't airtight... there can be discrepancies between regions, and it is true that Williams has only lost one game while Wash U has lost two... so Williams may be a better team. But we really wouldn't know until they matched up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 15, 2010, 09:26:21 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 15, 2010, 08:30:11 PM
Now, in terms of the SOS, this isn't airtight... there can be discrepancies between regions, and it is true that Williams has only lost one game while Wash U has lost two... so Williams may be a better team. But we really wouldn't know until they matched up.

I dont think nescac1's argument is based on 1 loss vs. 2, I think it based on who those losses are against, consistency throughout the season, and the fact that Williams has blown out nearly every team they have played (and their only loss was to a very highly ranked team). Also, WashU has not beaten a team ranked in this week's poll, while Williams beat #6 Middlebury on the road by 15. I just dont see the rationale behind jumping one team past the other when all Williams did was destroy two pretty good teams on the road.

You are also forgetting the fact that WashU is in the UAA and therefore the SOS numbers are going to be inflated for those teams because of how the league is setup geographically. The UAA is 64 - 24 out of conference according to Massey (73% winning percentage), while the NESCAC is 88-46 (65% winning percentage). That will make a big difference right there. Also, this year, the UAA only has 2 teams with overall winning percentages below 0.550, while the NESCAC has 6. The SOS is great regionally, but for a conference like the UAA the numbers are always going to be higher because they usually have strong teams and therefore can beat up on teams in other regions, thereby decreasing the "inbreading" of their schedules that drive SOS numbers toward 0.500. Although the NESCAC has less conference games, there are quite a bit of common oppoents. SOS is a primary criteria, so I guess it is a legitimate argument, but I bet you that Williams numbers would come up a bit (with the Cortland State (14-8) and the RMC (20-4) game) and WashUs would come down a bit (Kalamazoo (5-18)and OWU (11-12)) if you calculated a national SOS. The SOS may be a better metric than QOWI, but, again, it is really not intended to be used when comparing teams inter-regionally.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 15, 2010, 09:31:06 PM

Massey has the Williams' schedule as #197 in Division III...that is lower than Chapman's (158). Wash U's schedule is rated #40.

Massey has Williams #6 and Wash U #7.

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 15, 2010, 09:38:26 PM

Also for what it's worth, Massey has Wash U with 3 better wins than any by Williams...

#24 Illinois Wesleyan
#25 Wheaton
#27 Augustana

(Massey has Middlebury #31.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on February 15, 2010, 10:11:03 PM

William Patterson 20 game win streak is broken by Rutgers-Newark 55-46 http://www2.sidearmstats.com/rutgers/mbball/ (http://www2.sidearmstats.com/rutgers/mbball/)

EMU all over Va Wes 88-68
and Guilford wins as well 91-80

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 15, 2010, 10:11:20 PM

All in all, it is a close call.

What is also interesting, given the #1 votes, is that WashU only received 4 points less than the maximum possible (since they have 13 first place votes), meaning either 4 voters have them ranked 3rd, one has them ranked 6th, or some combination in between. On the other hand, Williams received 10 points less than the maximum (with 12 first place votes). That means, if you take out their first place votes (12*25 =300), their average position among other voters is just better than 3rd (303/13 = 23.3, or an average position of 2.7), while WashU's is (13*25=325, 284/12 = 23.7, or an average position of 2.3). So the 13 voters that did not vote Williams #1 not only feel they are not the #1 team in the country, but, on average, they feel they are not the #2 team in the country either (closer to #3). I also dont think it is likely that 10 voters put St. Thomas 2nd and Williams 3rd (given St. Thomas' vote total), and therefore it is likely that Williams is at #4 or #5 on a few voters ballots (meaning some voters likely put, in addition to St. Thomas, Guilford, Stevens Point, or maybe even Whitworth ahead of Williams). Maybe a stats professor can provide some more insight into this, but you wouldnt expect Williams vote counts to be bimodal in this case, such as #1-12 votes, #2-3, #3-10, usually you have some declining distribution (like a half normal distribution with maybe an outlier), so it is more likely that the distribution of votes looks something like #1-12 votes, #2-6, #3-4, #4-3 or #1-12 votes, #2-7, #3-3, #4-2, #5-1. Anyway, that was interesting to me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 15, 2010, 10:16:55 PM

Eastern Mennonite also pounds their third top 10 team by 20+ points. They have beaten RMC, Guilford, and VWC, by a combined 70 points (23.3 ppg).

Also, as their is no matchups between RMC, VWC, Guilford, and EMU left this season, I think it is very possible that all 4 make the tourney given none of them have more than 4 losses at this point. Guilford and EMU have two regular season games left while EMC and VWC only have one left. I think if RMC or VWC win the tourney, it is quite possible all 4 make the tourney. I am not sure who is most vulnerable out of those two, any thoughts?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on February 15, 2010, 10:23:52 PM

Texas-Tyler leading UT-Dallas by 3 w/30 sec left

now tied w/12

and UTD w/chance to win with 2 FT to go w/.09

up by 1 w/.09

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 15, 2010, 10:36:30 PM

Quote from: frodotwo on February 15, 2010, 10:23:52 PM
Texas-Tyler leading UT-Dallas by 3 w/30 sec left

now tied w/12

and UTD w/chance to win with 2 FT to go w/.09

up by 1 w/.09

Final UTD 63, UT-Tyler 62

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 16, 2010, 06:14:40 AM

By the way... the win over Amherst by Williams shouldn't look as solid as one would argue. Amherst is 14-10 and in a tailspin. I indicated earlier this season that Amherst wasn't as good as they were being ranked, and I for one barely kept them in my Top 25 in January before I had no good reason to keep them there. I probably should have taken them off my ballot shortly after watching them play in January.

I tend to agree that Wash U has a tougher schedule and has been winning with that schedule. And saying the UAA only inflates the OWP and OOWP isn't necessarily true. The big difference is UAA teams actually make their schedules challenging... they don't have to. Emory could pick the easiest teams out of conference... and NYU and Brandeis certainly could, etc... but they don't usually. Williams has more out of conference games to schedule and there can admittedly only schedule so many challenging teams... but they still take on the good teams in the Northeast.

Since many know I vote, I will share with you the basics my #1 debate. I voted for Williams this week... but it was something I debated for a while (especially thanks to a hungry baby). However, the concerns I had for the Ephs were that while they had a strong W/L... their OWP is lower then I would like to see and makes me nervous their record is a bit inflated. Also, their wins over Amherst and others... that in years past would have looked great... only look good due to teams being down. Though wins over Middlebury (who I think is ranked just fine and is better then many appreciate) and others due give me some confidence.

That being said, my concern about Wash U is that they are a very good team, but they show signs on occasion of inconsistency. However, their recent results make me think they are hitting their stride just in time so it made the debate much more difficult. I ultimately went with the team with less losses and seemingly stronger results.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 16, 2010, 07:37:24 AM

I agree that Wash U. seems to be on a roll right now, and that makes the debate a close one. At the same time, Williams is on a bigger roll, and they have been blowing out some teams that, while not great, are solid teams (like Bowdoin and Colby, which was itself on a major roll until Williams took them apart). It is more than fair to look at strength of schedule -- but if you do, you should also adjust based on winning margins, and Williams' stats on the season, in terms of offensive efficiency, margin of victory, etc. have FAR exceeded Wash U.'s, and neither has played a lot of world-beaters. I think Wash U gets more credit than it deserves for beating a few CCIW teams in what is undoubtedly the low point for the CCIW in recent memory (and probably will remain that way given the number of teams from the conference that will likely be much-improved next year); otherwise, they split with Brandeis and beat no one else of any note, and lost to a team far worse than the one loss Williams sustained. My biggest issue, really, is that Williams could not have done anything more than it did last week, as winning back-to-back on the road by more than 15 points each game against talented NESCAC rivals (even if both are relatively down this year) is not easy, and I don't see anything Wash U. did this week as impressive enough to warrant leaping over Williams.

In the end, it won't really matter, but makes for a fun debate. I still think this is the most wide-open tourney in recent memory, and there is no team that is anything close to a sure thing to make the final four. there will be some big upsets along the way, I expect ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 16, 2010, 08:29:08 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 16, 2010, 06:14:40 AM
By the way... the win over Amherst by Williams shouldn't look as solid as one would argue. Amherst is 14-10 and in a tailspin. I indicated earlier this season that Amherst wasn't as good as they were being ranked, and I for one barely kept them in my Top 25 in January before I had no good reason to keep them there. I probably should have taken them off my ballot shortly after watching them play in January.

I tend to agree that Wash U has a tougher schedule and has been winning with that schedule. And saying the UAA only inflates the OWP and OOWP isn't necessarily true. The big difference is UAA teams actually make their schedules challenging... they don't have to. Emory could pick the easiest teams out of conference... and NYU and Brandeis certainly could, etc... but they don't usually. Williams has more out of conference games to schedule and there can admittedly only schedule so many challenging teams... but they still take on the good teams in the Northeast.

Since many know I vote, I will share with you the basics my #1 debate. I voted for Williams this week... but it was something I debated for a while (especially thanks to a hungry baby). However, the concerns I had for the Ephs were that while they had a strong W/L... their OWP is lower then I would like to see and makes me nervous their record is a bit inflated. Also, their wins over Amherst and others... that in years past would have looked great... only look good due to teams being down. Though wins over Middlebury (who I think is ranked just fine and is better then many appreciate) and others due give me some confidence.

That being said, my concern about Wash U is that they are a very good team, but they show signs on occasion of inconsistency. However, their recent results make me think they are hitting their stride just in time so it made the debate much more difficult. I ultimately went with the team with less losses and seemingly stronger results.

I generally agree with your statements, but I would never use NYU as a good example of a team that historically schedules tough teams. Over the past 10 years they have been notorious for scheduling cupcake out of conference teams, starting out 11-0 or 10-1, and then losing most of their games in the UAA.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BUBeaverFan on February 16, 2010, 08:33:53 AM

I thought it would be a close poll with Williams getting the edge so I was a little surprised. Wash U needs to take care of business at home this weekend with Case and Carnegie. Case is on a four game UAA streak and is playing among the best ball in the league. Go Bears!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 16, 2010, 09:59:20 AM

It is incredibly difficult to get meaningful info from margin of victory (MOV) because tthere are so many factors. some of of it is philosophical from the coach... they call off the dogs a bit and sub liberally a bit earlier than other coaches, and it's often a crapshoot when the subs get in. A 30 point lead can dwindle to less than 20. Conversely, a coach may keep his starters in and push the lead from 20 to 28. The MOV is greater in the second example, but the winning team actually had a better result during crunch time against the opponent.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: All-around on February 16, 2010, 10:32:35 AM

Can someone explain how Wash U's Sean Wallis is still in school. It seems like he's been there for 6 or 7 years now...I remember he was hurt one year...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 16, 2010, 10:45:15 AM

All-around:

Sean Wallis is in his fifth year of school (actually a Grad student) and his fourth year of eligibility. He injured himself during his "Junior" year of college. Last year was his senior year of academics and he spent quite a bit of time in the off-season deciding whether to come back and go to grad school at Wash U... or doing something else like head overseas and play... he chose to stay one more year.

So... not 6 or 7 years... more like his fifth year - not uncommon for athletes who have suffered injuries or took more time academically.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BUBeaverFan on February 16, 2010, 10:49:25 AM

Sean Wallis - 2005-06 1st year, 2006-07 2nd year, 2007-08 (medical waiver) after injury, 2008-09 3rd year, 2009-10 4th year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hasanova on February 16, 2010, 11:49:00 AM

Speaking of Sean Wallis, I was privileged to see him play in Salem last March. He's a great player. Doesn't this scenario give Washington University (and other DIII schools that offer postgraduate degrees) a bit of an advantage over fellow institutions that only offer a Bachelor's degree?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 16, 2010, 11:52:58 AM

Quote from: hasanova on February 16, 2010, 11:49:00 AM
Speaking of Sean Wallis, I was privileged to see him play in Salem last March. He's a great player. Doesn't this scenario give Washington University (and other DIII schools that offer postgraduate degrees) a bit of an advantage over fellow institutions that only offer a Bachelor's degree?

There is a 5th year senior at MIT this year that is in the same boat as Wallis (he has a medical redshirt year). However, instead of doing a 1 year grad degree, he came back to finish up a second undergrad major. Obviously MIT offers grad degrees, but this is just an example that you can come back for a 5th year without having to go to grad school.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 16, 2010, 12:02:56 PM

And that happens all the time too.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: All-around on February 16, 2010, 12:08:22 PM

Thanks for clarifying.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 16, 2010, 01:06:20 PM

Quote from: frodotwo on February 15, 2010, 10:11:03 PM
William Patterson 20 game win streak is broken by Rutgers-Newark 55-46 http://www2.sidearmstats.com/rutgers/mbball/ (http://www2.sidearmstats.com/rutgers/mbball/)

EMU all over Va Wes 88-68
and Guilford wins as well 91-80

This result provides me with my weekly Whitworth promotion. Longest current winning streak and tied with WP for longest of the season at 20 wins. WW moves up to 7th, thank you voters, after 2 home wins. WW plays tonight and then closes out conference schedule Sat at Linfield. WW has won the NWC and has clinched the #1 seed in the 4 team tournament on the 25th and 27th.

I agree with those who feel Williams should be #1. Winning 2 games on the road convincingly is all they COULD do and they did. I don't think a player getting hot or a team on a roll should be so influential. If it was, I would expect to see my team getting some #1 votes! Wash U is a very good team and no one would argue against them being #2. A spot they deserve.

Conference play really makes OWP and OOWP brutal for some teams. I don't know how it could be adjusted to not penalize parity in a conference.

As for MOV I only look at "largest lead" and and then make sure it wasn't in the last 5 minutes. When I see a LL of 31 at the 12 minute mark, I pretty much know right then, how much better a team was on that night than their opponent. Same goes for a team with a LL of 15 in the first half but loses by 15. That team has some problems.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 16, 2010, 01:34:04 PM

Everyone who throws out the fact that Williams made two short road trips and won games might want to look at what Wash U did last week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 16, 2010, 01:53:35 PM

Sorry, but I don't see wins at Trinity and at Amherst by a combined 38 points (and the Amherst margin was 30 before the last two minutes of garbage time) as less impressive than wins at NYU and at Brandeis by a combined 18 points. And again, Wash U. was behind Williams and leapfrogged then based on that week. But I do agree the two have pretty even resumes, I just think folks have discounted Williams a bit all year, even in the preseason, and aren't aware that they are far more talented, healthy, familiar / on board with the system, and cohesive than they were the preceeding few years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BUBeaverFan on February 16, 2010, 02:41:37 PM

Looking at history maybe it is not in anyone's best interest to be ranked #1 going into the DIII tourney.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 16, 2010, 03:03:50 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on February 16, 2010, 01:53:35 PM
Sorry, but I don't see wins at Trinity and at Amherst by a combined 38 points (and the Amherst margin was 30 before the last two minutes of garbage time) as less impressive than wins at NYU and at Brandeis by a combined 18 points. And again, Wash U. was behind Williams and leapfrogged then based on that week. But I do agree the two have pretty even resumes, I just think folks have discounted Williams a bit all year, even in the preseason, and aren't aware that they are far more talented, healthy, familiar / on board with the system, and cohesive than they were the preceeding few years.

The "we don't get no respect" argument does not wear well on Williams.

They were very quickly recognized as being better than a 17-9 team that they were in 2009.

By 6 games (week #2), they were in the top 25 at #20. The next week they were at #12, and #10 by week #4. When you are in the Top 10 by that point, you are just waiting for attrition.

Massey Ratings has their schedule at #197. That is worse than Chapman's schedule rating at #158.

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb

That makes me think that the voters are giving them considerable respect.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ephoops on February 16, 2010, 03:53:00 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 16, 2010, 01:34:04 PM
Everyone who throws out the fact that Williams made two short road trips and won games might want to look at what Wash U did last week.

Pat

The Ephs victory at Amherst on Friday should not be discounted because they only traveled 90 minutes by bus.

You can throw respective records out the window when these two teams play. Friday's game had a lot of significance for both teams. Williams was going for its first sweep of Amherst since 1996. It was also trying to repeat as outright Little Three champs with a 4-0 record for the first time in a long time. The Williams game at Amherst is always a battle and very emotionally charged for both teams.

Moreover, playing at Trinity less than 24 hours after the Amherst game is always tough as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ephoops on February 16, 2010, 04:01:56 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 16, 2010, 03:03:50 PM

They were very quickly recognized as being better than a 17-9 team that they were in 2009.

You need to take into account that last year's team was learning an entirely new system with the arrival of Mike Maker. There were some growing pains last year... Given the talent level, they arguably underperformed a bit...

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 16, 2010, 03:03:50 PM

Massey Ratings has their schedule at #197. That is worse than Chapman's schedule rating at #158.

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb

We don't need no stinkin' Masssey ratings... ;D ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 16, 2010, 04:18:16 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 16, 2010, 01:06:20 PM
Quote from: frodotwo on February 15, 2010, 10:11:03 PM
William Patterson 20 game win streak is broken by Rutgers-Newark 55-46 http://www2.sidearmstats.com/rutgers/mbball/ (http://www2.sidearmstats.com/rutgers/mbball/)

EMU all over Va Wes 88-68
and Guilford wins as well 91-80
This result provides me with my weekly Whitworth promotion. Longest current winning streak and tied with WP for longest of the season at 20 wins. WW moves up to 7th, thank you voters, after 2 home wins. WW plays tonight and then closes out conference schedule Sat at Linfield. WW has won the NWC and has clinched the #1 seed in the 4 team tournament on the 25th and 27th.

I agree with those who feel Williams should be #1. Winning 2 games on the road convincingly is all they COULD do and they did. I don't think a player getting hot or a team on a roll should be so influential. If it was, I would expect to see my team getting some #1 votes! Wash U is a very good team and no one would argue against them being #2. A spot they deserve.

Conference play really makes OWP and OOWP brutal for some teams. I don't know how it could be adjusted to not penalize parity in a conference.

As for MOV I only look at "largest lead" and and then make sure it wasn't in the last 5 minutes. When I see a LL of 31 at the 12 minute mark, I pretty much know right then, how much better a team was on that night than their opponent. Same goes for a team with a LL of 15 in the first half but loses by 15. That team has some problems.

I'm doing this on my phone so I can't format like I would normally... but I wanted to address the separate points you made.

1. I'm going to be very interested to see the success that WW has in the NCAA tournament. I've been pretty high on them this year, especially since they handled Whitewater, but they have played a ton of their games close to home. One of their two losses was to Pomona Pitzer, on a long "road" trip and though they rebounded against a good McKendree team the next night and haven't lost since (after making some changes as our NWC friends have told us), they're going to have some very long trips ahead of them against very good competition. Even if they would host the Sectional, they have to fly all the way across the country and win 2 games in Salem. Point did it in 03-04, but they're the only team that has... and they really only flew from WI west and back, then east. not sure how different it would be, and there's definitely time to reacclimate, but Neb Wesleyan is the team from the farthest West that's made it to Salem, and they didn't win (lots of other possible factors there, they weren't necessarily the best team, etc).

2. I think when your defending champion (2x in this case) puts themselves in a position for another championship based on their play, then there comes a point to where they should have the top spot until they're unseated. B/c Wash U is in a position to snag the UAA bid (if they haven't already) then they've earned the top spot. It's up to another team to take it from them on the court.

3. All teams' OWP and OOWP will matriculate closer to .500 as they play more conference games. This will be magnified in a conference like the MIAC and have less of a factor in conferences like the NESCAC by virtue of there being more or less conference games respectively. The MIAC plays 20 games, so they only have 5 non-con opportunities. Unless your conference is dominant (like the WIAC this year) you have a better chance of improving your OWP by playing tough out-of-conference games. you then will be rewarded when those teams do well in their own conferences (ex, Stevens Point playing St. Thomas and Whitworth... as those teams win, it has a positive impact on Point's SOS). Having your conference do really well is the best way to improve your OWP though... if the baseline of the teams you'll play the majority of your games against is high, then the SOS # starts high even before those inevitable conference losses rear their normalizing effects.

Interestingly, parity won't matter in terms of the OWP at all... it can only affect the team's winning percentage. I say this because there are a set number of conference wins ans losses that will occur each year. For example, each WIAC team plays 16 games and there are 9 WIAC schools. so there are 9*16/2=72 wins and 72 losses that will be added to the OWP. Only the team that we're looking at will be affected by their losses... if a team goes 16-0 and everyone else goes 7-9, it would have the same effect as a team going 16-0 and there being a perfect distribution (16-0,14-2,...,0-16). the average is still 8 opponents going 7-9.

Now, if your team doesn't go 16-0, then every loss you get will equate to a win for a conference opponent... but the effect that this one win will have on the OWP is exceedingly small compared to the affect that the loss would have on a team's win %.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on February 16, 2010, 04:18:44 PM

Quote from: ephoops on February 16, 2010, 03:53:00 PM
The Ephs victory at Amherst on Friday should not be discounted because they only traveled 90 minutes by bus.

I think what he is saying is that you should look at what Washington University did over the weekend which was travel from St. Louis to Boston on Friday afternoon, play a 17-4 team that was one win away from being ranked for the rest of the year, spend Saturday traveling from Boston to New York, practicing, and studying in a hotel, and then get up for a Sunday morning game against a 15-6 regionally ranked conference opponent.

Rivalry game or no, the two schedules over the last week are not equal.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 16, 2010, 04:23:09 PM

PointSpecial,

I actually do not think head-to-head counts in OWP calculations. I think those are eliminated before the OWP numbers are calculated. Meaning if Team A is 3-0 against Team B, and Team Bis 22-3, for purposes of OWP calculation of Team A, Team B is 22-0. I think that is right but can Pat or someone verify this?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on February 16, 2010, 04:27:47 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 16, 2010, 04:18:16 PM
2. I think when your defending champion (2x in this case) puts themselves in a position for another championship based on their play, then there comes a point to where they should have the top spot until they're unseated. B/c Wash U is in a position to snag the UAA bid (if they haven't already) then they've earned the top spot. It's up to another team to take it from them on the court.

Washington University needs only one more win, with two home games and one away game remaining, to wrap up another UAA conference championship.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on February 16, 2010, 04:29:35 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on February 16, 2010, 04:23:09 PM
PointSpecial,

I actually do not think head-to-head counts in OWP calculations. I think those are eliminated before the OWP numbers are calculated. Meaning if Team A is 3-0 against Team B, and Team Bis 22-3, for purposes of OWP calculation of Team A, Team B is 22-0. I think that is right but can Pat or someone verify this?

You are correct. OWP does not include results against yourself (you don't hurt your SOS by winning games).

OOWP, on the other hand, does include results against yourself.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 16, 2010, 04:35:22 PM

Quote from: ephoops on February 16, 2010, 03:53:00 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 16, 2010, 01:34:04 PM
Everyone who throws out the fact that Williams made two short road trips and won games might want to look at what Wash U did last week.

Pat

The Ephs victory at Amherst on Friday should not be discounted because they only traveled 90 minutes by bus.

Wash U's victory at Brandeis on Friday should not be discounted because Williams traveled only 90 minutes by bus.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 16, 2010, 05:26:57 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 16, 2010, 04:29:35 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on February 16, 2010, 04:23:09 PM
PointSpecial,

I actually do not think head-to-head counts in OWP calculations. I think those are eliminated before the OWP numbers are calculated. Meaning if Team A is 3-0 against Team B, and Team Bis 22-3, for purposes of OWP calculation of Team A, Team B is 22-0. I think that is right but can Pat or someone verify this?

You are correct. OWP does not include results against yourself (you don't hurt your SOS by winning games).

OOWP, on the other hand, does include results against yourself.

Well, the fact still remains that if you go 16-0 against the other 8 teams in a 9 team league, on average, they will still go just 56-56 as "rest of the conference," and even if your loss doesn't "help" your OWP, it will hurt your win% and OOWP (Win % affected by a remarkably greater factor).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Marty Peretz on February 16, 2010, 07:29:17 PM

People who harp on Wash.U. not having a win over a ranked opponent are omitting key facts. First of all, two of Wash.U's best wins came against teams that are currently 26th and 27th and were both ranked last week (Deis and IWU). So, sure the Bears don't have a win against a currently ranked team, but leaving out that point proves a tad deceiving. Secondly, Wash.U. beat Wheaton at a time when both squads were ranked (8th and 15th, I believe). The reason IWU, Augie, and Wheaton are no longer ranked are because they are playing in a highly competitive CCIW in which teams beat up on each other every single night.

Williams, meanwhile, played an absolute joke of a non conference schedule. Williams fans say their win over Middlebury is reason enough that they should be ranked number 1, but look at the Panthers' schedule. Their best non conference win is against a Plattsburgh team that has seven losses. I'm not here to say that Williams or Midd are weaker teams than Wheaton or IWU, BUT I think there is something to be said for the nonconference schedules played by Wash.U. as opposed to those played by Williams and Midd. I'm not knocking the Nescac, but I've seen a good deal of Nescac basketball this year and I can tell you it's considerably weaker than what we're witnessing in the WIAC, CCIW, and ODAC.

So, in short, Wash.U has at least three top 30 out of conference wins, while Williams has none. Williams does have a nice win against Middlebury, but again, that Middlebury squad has A LOT to prove to people, seeing as how they've effectively beaten no one (and no, I'm not at all sold on Colby) and based on their NCAA choke last March. I will gladly eat my words if both Nescac squads make serious noise against quality opponents in the tourney, but right now I am reasonably convinced that outside of Deis, Williams, and Midd, there isn't a team in that region that could compete night in night out with any of the top three of four teams in the three conferences mentioned earlier.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 16, 2010, 07:35:25 PM

It's a big-time down year for the NESCAC, although I'm not sure that makes it a down year for Williams.

Despite the arguments over scheduling, my guess is that WashU's jump over Williams to #1 has more to do with the fact that WashU (the pre-season #1 and two time defending champ) has actually been healthy and productive for a couple of consecutive weeks.

It's a team the voters thought was better before and is now beginning to restore confidence. This just makes sense to me, given the way the polls have worked for all the years I've been watching them.

Every one of these teams will get to prove themselves in the tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 16, 2010, 08:40:30 PM

Quote from: Marty Peretz on February 16, 2010, 07:29:17 PM
I'm not knocking the Nescac, but I've seen a good deal of Nescac basketball this year and I can tell you it's considerably weaker than what we're witnessing in the WIAC, CCIW, and ODAC.

You are absolutely "knocking the NESCAC". That is a highly subjective statement. I have seen a bunch of CCIW games online and could make the inverse statement (but I would not, because it is a ridiculous statement). I feel the CCIW and UAA are down this year, but would not say they are "considerably" weaker than any conference in the country. . And how would you define "considerably weaker". Are the teams at the top of the conference much better than those in the NESCAC (rankings say no), are the teams at the bottom much better than those in the NESCAC (I highly doubt that). Maybe those conferences are a team or two deeper in terms of top teams, but that is also highly debateable.

By the way, what does a good deal entail? Have you seen 1 game? Did you buy the Williams pay per view package? How much ODAC and CCIW basketball have you seen? Have you seen every team on multiple occasions to form a true opinion about these teams to make such a concrete statement.

Quote from: Marty Peretz on February 16, 2010, 07:29:17 PM
So, in short, Wash.U has at least three top 30 out of conference wins, while Williams has none.

A) Since when is Brandeis out of conference?

B) Wheaton isnt ranked in the top 30.

Quote from: Marty Peretz on February 16, 2010, 07:29:17 PM
So, in short, Wash.U has at least three top 30 out of conference wins, while Williams has none. Williams does have a nice win against Middlebury, but again, that Middlebury squad has A LOT to prove to people, seeing as how they've effectively beaten no one (and no, I'm not at all sold on Colby) and based on their NCAA choke last March. I will gladly eat my words if both Nescac squads make serious noise against quality opponents in the tourney, but right now I am reasonably convinced that outside of Deis, Williams, and Midd, there isn't a team in that region that could compete night in night out with any of the top three of four teams in the three conferences mentioned earlier.

Seriously?

A) WashU isnt in one of the three conferences you mentioned earlier either.

B) That is a ridiculous statement to make about an entire region. What does night in and night out mean? I dont think the top teams in any of those conferences have shown the can bring it "night in and night out". Carthage - lost to 13-9 Wilkes and 15-8 Calvin + a conference home game. IWU lost to 11-11 Chicago. Whitewater (Eau Claire, Stout, River Falls) and Stevens Point (Stout) both have at least one loss to a lesser team in conference. And in the ODAC, the same has happened, EMU lost to Southern VA, Bridgewater (VA), and Hampden-Sydney. I am not trying to say anything bad about any of those team, I think they are all very good teams, but I just think the "night in and night out" argument you are making is very porous.

C) All you make are general statements about your opinion. Even when you try to use "facts" to back up your statements, you stretch the truth (ie, WashU only has 1 win over a top 30 non-conference team, not at least 3). If you are going to make very subjective statements, dont try to support them with "facts" that are not true.

One can skew this argument any way they want. I think all nescac1 was arguing was that it didnt make sense that WashU jumped Williams this week based on what happened last week. Williams won two blowouts, so why would any team jump them. That is the only reason why any NESCAC supporter is upset right now (which I am not). If WashU were 2 and Williams 3 last week, there would be no big argument right now. I think the only thing your post establishes is that you really dont have any good idea what you are talking about (in my opinion of course).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 17, 2010, 09:54:30 AM

I guess if you "knock" on the NESCAC door, it WILL be answered. I fear that huge calculator.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 17, 2010, 12:03:10 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 17, 2010, 09:54:30 AM
I guess if you "knock" on the NESCAC door, it WILL be answered. I fear that huge calculator.

Im not even a NESCAC supporter, but what got me going is that if you are going to try to make an argument in order to make broad sweeping conclusions, you may want to use real facts instead of made up ones.

The argument made a bunch of excuses for facts he did not like (ie "The reason IWU, Augie, and Wheaton are no longer ranked are because ...), but didnt provide any real support to solidify points he was trying make against the NESCAC or the NE (other than anecdotal), except for Williams' SOS (which was brought up in a subjective manner by saying "Williams....played an absolute joke of a non conference schedule"). Also, it is one thing to argue one position place in a poll, but to try to completely dismiss the #6 ranking of a team I dont think is substantiated (Middlebury [has] ...effectively beaten no one).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Marty Peretz on February 17, 2010, 01:36:47 PM

Hugenerd, your analysis would have much more credibility if you didn't style yourself to be an objective observer and acknowledged that you have an anti-Wash.U bent. I am at least candid about my affiliations, so any analysis that touches upon WU-related subject matter admittedly is conducted with Red and Green fogged glasses. Similarly, you should be more forthcoming about your antipathy toward WU. Your knocks are seldom overt, but any reader of these boards knows that you have frequently raised doubts about the Bears despite their success.

If Williams won the 'CAC in a tight contest or if Midd upset them, I'd give the league more credibility, but if you go through conference and no one gets a game under double figures, it probably says something about the lack of parity in your conference as much as it does about the quality of your squad. I've seen Williams play and they are very good. Top 10, probably top 5 team no doubt. But to say they're better than Wash.U. is rather silly.

Also, I never said the UAA was good this year. I just noted that the Bears have played quality opponents out of conference whereas Williams hasn't (save for R and M whom they lost to).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: toad22 on February 17, 2010, 02:00:09 PM

I'm one Eph fan who is happy with Williams at #2. I'm sure that any of the top 15 teams (at least) could beat any of the other top 15 on a given night. Wash U has 2 nat'l champoinships in a row, so if there is any doubt, I would certainly vote for them at #1. The one huge advantage that Williams has over any Williams team of the past (including the 4 that have made it to Salem and the one that won it all) is the fact that they shoot it so well. In my 20 years of watching D3 hoops carefully, I have never seen a better shooting team. That certainly doesn't mean they will go deep into the tournement, but it does mean that no D3 coach wants to play them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 17, 2010, 02:35:02 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 17, 2010, 09:54:30 AM
I guess if you "knock" on the NESCAC door, it WILL be answered. I fear that huge calculator.

It's not the size of the calculator, it's the hugenerd that operates it! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 17, 2010, 03:03:53 PM

An unrelated topic:
Without spoiling it for anyone, I'm watching the Olympic Women's downhill live on a Canadian station since NBC won't be showing it until prime time tonight. About half the field has went down the mountain and the USA has had a couple of good runs so far. Would be worth watching tonight. If you would like to know what's happened so far you can send me a personal message and I'll let you know.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 17, 2010, 03:12:15 PM

Marty,
Not trying to get into the middle of your discussion with hugenerd, but I don't think he has an obvious bias against Wash U. After all he did play ball and graduate from a UAA school.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 17, 2010, 03:59:55 PM

Quote from: Marty Peretz on February 17, 2010, 01:36:47 PM
Hugenerd, your analysis would have much more credibility if you didn't style yourself to be an objective observer and acknowledged that you have an anti-Wash.U bent. I am at least candid about my affiliations, so any analysis that touches upon WU-related subject matter admittedly is conducted with Red and Green fogged glasses. Similarly, you should be more forthcoming about your antipathy toward WU. Your knocks are seldom overt, but any reader of these boards knows that you have frequently raised doubts about the Bears despite their success.

If Williams won the 'CAC in a tight contest or if Midd upset them, I'd give the league more credibility, but if you go through conference and no one gets a game under double figures, it probably says something about the lack of parity in your conference as much as it does about the quality of your squad. I've seen Williams play and they are very good. Top 10, probably top 5 team no doubt. But to say they're better than Wash.U. is rather silly.

Also, I never said the UAA was good this year. I just noted that the Bears have played quality opponents out of conference whereas Williams hasn't (save for R and M whom they lost to).

(As magicman pointed out) Marty, you apparentely havent read the boards long enough. I defended WashU and the UAA this preseason heavily against the CCIW contingent on the "Ranking D3 BBall Conferences" board (you can go there and look if you like). The main argument I was making this preseason was based on WashUs championships and their dominance in the midwest the last few years. You can also go back on the UAA boards the last few years and see that I have been a huge supporter of UAA basketball. I have no anti-WashU bias. I played in the UAA in the 2000s. My argument against WashU this year has only been formed because the 5 times I watched them online, they played not to the level I expected to see and Thompson played very subpar for about 11 games straight from the beginning of December to about the beginning of February. Also, on numerous occasions I have said that WashU is a much better and different team with Thompson playing the way he has 3 of the last 4. So again, please check your facts before drawing conclusions.

You are also missing the main point of all these arguments is not that WashU is ranked ahead of Williams (which is fine by me), it is why they jumped Williams in the polls this week based on the previous rankings and results. As I said in my last post, if WashU was 2 last week and Willliams 3, there would be no argument right now. And by the way, you guys (I am assuming the WashU and midwest contingent) can continue to ding my karma all you want, it is not going to disuade me from responding to these posts (I think I am -5 since this conversation started).

As another example, I have absolutely no affiliation with the ODAC, but have been extremely high on EMU, even back to week 1 when they werent ranked and I made several posts saying they were being undervalued (obviously now they are not). The observations I have made about WashU this season are of the same manner, based on my opinion of what I have seen this season. Don't worry, I am not out to get anyone.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 17, 2010, 04:22:40 PM

The fact of the matter is that we don't know how the voters changed their votes except that 23 of them switched from Guilford to either Wash U or Williams. We can't see how the votes changed on an individual level... we can only look at the sun of the poll points and figure out the average. It's true that Wash U picked up more points than Williams, but it may have been from low voters jumping Wash U an extra place, yet still below Williams.. In the same way, voters who had Wash U higher may not have moved Williams that extra place... and you have the 16 point discrepancy.

This poll is for entertainment purposes. While we hold it in high regard and think it to be more accurate in a subjective way than other "rankings" like the regional rankings (that make a subjective decision based on supposedly objective data), it is just 25 peoples' opinion. It's a very informed opinion and as I said, we think highly of it, but it is just an opinion. The teams would need to play to determine who is better, and we may just get that opportunity. I won't even go near any discussions of if the game result would determine the better team or not... (I'm sure there are detractors out there!)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 17, 2010, 04:55:09 PM

According to the release, Guilford is tied for first and second in the south region. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 17, 2010, 07:40:32 PM

MIT loses their second d3 game of the season, to the same team they lost their first to. Wheaton shot 10-15 from 3 and 24-27 en route to the 84-77 win. It was a 2 point game under a minute left but Wheaton made their FTs to win. I am sure MIT will fall in the polls pretty hard next week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 17, 2010, 07:42:28 PM

Sounds like MIT has the same problems with Wheaton that UWSP has with UWW... sometimes a team just has your number thanks especially to match-ups!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 17, 2010, 07:49:59 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 17, 2010, 07:42:28 PM
Sounds like MIT has the same problems with Wheaton that UWSP has with UWW... sometimes a team just has your number thanks especially to match-ups!

Yeah, except the bubble teams will really have to be worried about MIT losing to Wheaton a third time, whereas both Whitewater and Point are both going to get in anyway.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 17, 2010, 07:59:34 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 17, 2010, 07:42:28 PM
Sounds like MIT has the same problems with Wheaton that UWSP has with UWW... sometimes a team just has your number thanks especially to match-ups!

True, but both Point/WW games went down to the wire... in Whitewater, the game was in overtime, and the lead changed hands in the last 30 seconds of the game in Point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 17, 2010, 08:39:42 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 17, 2010, 07:59:34 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 17, 2010, 07:42:28 PM
Sounds like MIT has the same problems with Wheaton that UWSP has with UWW... sometimes a team just has your number thanks especially to match-ups!

True, but both Point/WW games went down to the wire... in Whitewater, the game was in overtime, and the lead changed hands in the last 30 seconds of the game in Point.

Same thing was true in the Wheaton MIT games. It was a 2 point game with 36 seconds to play tonight and MIT had a shot to tie it in the first meeting (at the buzzer).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 17, 2010, 08:59:35 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on February 17, 2010, 08:39:42 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on February 17, 2010, 07:59:34 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 17, 2010, 07:42:28 PM
Sounds like MIT has the same problems with Wheaton that UWSP has with UWW... sometimes a team just has your number thanks especially to match-ups!

True, but both Point/WW games went down to the wire... in Whitewater, the game was in overtime, and the lead changed hands in the last 30 seconds of the game in Point.

Same thing was true in the Wheaton MIT games. It was a 2 point game with 36 seconds to play tonight and MIT had a shot to tie it in the first meeting (at the buzzer).

I wasn't discounting the fact that Wheaton/MIT went down to the wire... but the phrase "has their number" usually implies that team A beat team B handily... that wasn't the case for UWSP/Whitewater, and it also sounds like it wasn't the case for Wheaton/MIT. I think the difference is that SP is 20-3 and Whitewater is 19-4, and MIT is 21-3 and Wheaton is 9-16. I think the "has their number" line works more in the second case than the first one, 'cause it doesn't seem like MIT and Wheaton are the same caliber of team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 17, 2010, 09:29:13 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 17, 2010, 08:59:35 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on February 17, 2010, 08:39:42 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on February 17, 2010, 07:59:34 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 17, 2010, 07:42:28 PM
Sounds like MIT has the same problems with Wheaton that UWSP has with UWW... sometimes a team just has your number thanks especially to match-ups!

True, but both Point/WW games went down to the wire... in Whitewater, the game was in overtime, and the lead changed hands in the last 30 seconds of the game in Point.

Same thing was true in the Wheaton MIT games. It was a 2 point game with 36 seconds to play tonight and MIT had a shot to tie it in the first meeting (at the buzzer).

I wasn't discounting the fact that Wheaton/MIT went down to the wire... but the phrase "has their number" usually implies that team A beat team B handily... that wasn't the case for UWSP/Whitewater, and it also sounds like it wasn't the case for Wheaton/MIT. I think the difference is that SP is 20-3 and Whitewater is 19-4, and MIT is 21-3 and Wheaton is 9-16. I think the "has their number" line works more in the second case than the first one, 'cause it doesn't seem like MIT and Wheaton are the same caliber of team.

I agree with you that Whitewater is a "better" loss than Wheaton, given their respective records. No argument there.

Wheaton (MA) just seems to shoot unbelievable every time the two teams play. They were 10-19 in the first meeting (scoring half their points behind the arc) and tonight they were 10-16 (and were additionally 24-27 from the line, outscoring MIT by 19 at the line). The two teams could also meet in the semifinals of the NEWMAC tourney, would be interesting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 17, 2010, 10:20:09 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on February 17, 2010, 04:55:09 PM
According to the release, Guilford is tied for first and second in the south region. :D

That's why we don't link out to the NCAA for this stuff.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 17, 2010, 10:39:35 PM

#5 UWSP runs away from UW Platteville 78-56 after overcoming 60% Pioneer shooting in the first half and just a 42-36 halftime lead.

#9 Whitewater leads by as many as 23 and hang on to a 62-50 win over UW Oshkosh.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 18, 2010, 05:26:50 AM

OK - you all took my line way to seriously... I was just indicating that sometimes a team struggles against one other team, no matter show talented they are. MIT seems to struggle or at least not get the job done against Wheaton this year... same goes for UWSP and UWW... no matter the point spread. That's all... nothing more... "has their number" in my mind does not mean dominating... just means they seem to cause the other team to struggle.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 18, 2010, 08:08:38 AM

How They Fared--Midweek Report

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	609	Washington U.	20-2	02/19 vs. Case Western Reserve; 02/21 vs. Carnegie Mellon
#2	603	Williams	23-1	02/20 vs. Wesleyan
#3	563	St. Thomas	22-2	def. Gustavus Adolphus, 75-51; 02/20 at Hamline
#4	528	Guilford	22-2	def. Washington and Lee, 91-80; def. Emory and Henry, 94-65; 02/20 at Randolph
#5	511	UW-Stevens Point	21-3	def. UW-Platteville, 78-56; 02/20 at UW-La Crosse
#6	449	Middlebury	22-2	def. Green Mountain, 76-57; 02/20 vs. Trinity (Conn.)
#7	430	Whitworth	22-2	def. Whitman, 70-57; 02/20 at Linfield
#8	428	William Paterson	23-2	LOST at Rutgers-Newark, 46-55; def. New Jersey City, 66-55
#9	423	UW-Whitewater	20-4	def. UW-Oshkosh, 62-50; 02/20 vs. UW-Superior
#10	404	Virginia Wesleyan	20-4	LOST at #12 Eastern Mennonite, 68-88; 02/20 at Hampden-Sydney
#11	378	MIT	21-3	LOST at Wheaton (Mass.), 77-84; 02/20 at Springfield
#12	345	Eastern Mennonite	20-3	def. #10 Virginia Wesleyan, 88-68; def. Bridgewater (Va.), 86-81; 02/20 vs. Washington and Lee
#13	330	Chapman	22-2	02/19 at West Coast Baptist
#14	296	St. Norbert	20-2	02/20 at Carroll
#15	282	Franklin and Marshall	20-4	LOST to Johns Hopkins, 45-46; 02/20 vs. Dickinson
#16	274	Randolph-Macon	20-5	def. Lynchburg, 84-62; LOST to Hampden-Sydney, 61-66
#17	233	St. Mary's (Md.)	20-3	def. Wesley, 75-73; def. Gallaudet, 92-69; 02/20 vs. York (Pa.); 02/21 at Mary Washington
#18	193	Anderson	21-3	def. Manchester, 83-64; 02/20 at Hanover
#19	183	Texas-Dallas	19-4	def. Texas-Tyler, 63-62; 02/18 vs. East Texas Baptist; 02/20 vs. LeTourneau
#20	129	Carthage	19-5	def. North Park, 61-55; 02/20 at Millikin
#21	101	Wooster	19-5	def. Ohio Wesleyan, 94-78; 02/20 at Earlham
#22	90	Cabrini	21-2	def. Gwynedd-Mercy, 93-86; 02/18 vs. Centenary; 02/20 at Neumann
#23	75	St. John Fisher	20-4	def. Nazareth, 64-58; 02/19 vs. Utica
#24	57	Medaille	21-3	LOST to Pitt-Bradford, 63-79; 02/20 at Pitt-Greensburg
#25	49	John Carroll	18-5	def. Heidelberg, 95-91; 02/20 vs. Ohio Northern

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	45	Brandeis	17-5	02/19 at Rochester; 02/21 at Emory
#27	31	Illinois Wesleyan	19-5	def. Augustana, 62-59; 02/20 at North Park
#28	24	Wittenberg	18-6	LOST to Wabash, 69-72; 02/20 at Oberlin
#29	18	Central	20-4	def. Coe, 74-67; 02/20 vs. Cornell
#30	17	Merchant Marine	20-4	02/20 at Drew
#31	8	Defiance	19-5	def. Bluffton, 70-60; 02/20 at Franklin
#32	5	Hope	17-7	LOST at Adrian, 68-73; 02/20 vs. Trine
T#33	4	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	19-4	def. Whittier, 67-54; 02/20 vs. Pomona-Pitzer
T#33	4	Gordon	20-4	def. University of New England, 64-61; 02/20 vs. Salve Regina
T#33	4	Wheaton (Ill.)	17-7	def. Millikin, 65-61; 02/20 at Elmhurst
#36	2	SUNY-Old Westbury	18-6	def. Polytechnic, 75-66; 02/20 vs. Sage

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 19, 2010, 10:51:51 PM

Wash U wins at home over Case by three points to take the UAA title and Pool A bid. Case had the ball underneath the Wash U basket with 5.6 seconds left, down by two, with a chance to win or tie -- and Bryan Erce threw away an inbounds pass. The Spartans then missed a 35-footer at the buzzer that would've tied it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 20, 2010, 03:16:09 PM

MIT just clinched the NEWMAC regular season crown, taking down Springfield on the road. It was a real ugly (lots of fouls), defensive game, but I guess that is what you would expect with the conference championship on the line. Noel Hollingsworth had 15 points and 15 boards for MIT, while 5th year senior Billy Johnson had 20 points. MIT earns a bye in the first ournd in the NEWMAC tourney and will host the semifinals and finals next weekend. Wheaton secured a top 5 finish with their win, and could face MIT in the semis next Satuday if the fall into that #4/#5 matchup and win (they could finish #3 after tiebreakers if Clark beats WPI today).

Update: #4 Wheaton (MA) will host #5 Clark on Wednesday. The winner will play at MIT next Saturday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 21, 2010, 10:37:46 PM

Waiting on Darryl Nester's wrap-up before I submit my posters' poll. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 21, 2010, 11:32:25 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 21, 2010, 10:37:46 PM
Waiting on Darryl Nester's wrap-up before I submit my posters' poll. ;)

Me too! :D

My M. O. is to do my own my ballot after seeing Darryl's wrap-up - THEN compile whatever other ballots have come in. Darryl, we have become totally dependent on you! :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 22, 2010, 07:02:31 AM

How They Fared

So sorry ... got wrapped up in grading, and watching the Olympics (hockey, not ice dancing).

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	609	Washington U.	22-2	def. Case Western Reserve, 65-62; def. Carnegie Mellon, 95-58
#2	603	Williams	24-1	def. Wesleyan, 77-62
#3	563	St. Thomas	23-2	def. Gustavus Adolphus, 75-51; def. Hamline, 80-69
#4	528	Guilford	23-2	def. Washington and Lee, 91-80; def. Emory and Henry, 94-65; def. Randolph, 71-58
#5	511	UW-Stevens Point	21-4	def. UW-Platteville, 78-56; LOST at UW-La Crosse, 76-88
#6	449	Middlebury	23-2	def. Green Mountain, 76-57; def. Trinity (Conn.), 56-52
#7	430	Whitworth	23-2	def. Whitman, 70-57; def. Linfield, 77-53
#8	428	William Paterson	23-2	LOST at Rutgers-Newark, 46-55; def. New Jersey City, 66-55
#9	423	UW-Whitewater	21-4	def. UW-Oshkosh, 62-50; def. UW-Superior, 70-63
#10	404	Virginia Wesleyan	21-4	LOST at #12 Eastern Mennonite, 68-88; def. Hampden-Sydney, 89-79
#11	378	MIT	22-3	LOST at Wheaton (Mass.), 77-84; def. Springfield, 66-62
#12	345	Eastern Mennonite	21-3	def. #10 Virginia Wesleyan, 88-68; def. Bridgewater (Va.), 86-81; def. Washington and Lee, 83-62
#13	330	Chapman	22-2	02/19 at West Coast Baptist
#14	296	St. Norbert	20-3	LOST at Carroll, 68-77
#15	282	Franklin and Marshall	21-4	LOST to Johns Hopkins, 45-46; def. Dickinson, 90-49
#16	274	Randolph-Macon	20-5	def. Lynchburg, 84-62; LOST to Hampden-Sydney, 61-66
#17	233	St. Mary's (Md.)	22-3	def. Wesley, 75-73; def. Gallaudet, 92-69; def. York (Pa.), 82-63; def. Mary Washington, 76-54
#18	193	Anderson	21-4	def. Manchester, 83-64; LOST at Hanover, 75-78 OT
#19	183	Texas-Dallas	21-4	def. Texas-Tyler, 63-62; def. East Texas Baptist, 72-64; def. LeTourneau, 76-61
#20	129	Carthage	20-5	def. North Park, 61-55; def. Millikin, 70-63
#21	101	Wooster	20-5	def. Ohio Wesleyan, 94-78; def. Earlham, 90-72
#22	90	Cabrini	23-2	def. Gwynedd-Mercy, 93-86; def. Centenary, 79-77; def. Neumann, 89-87 OT
#23	75	St. John Fisher	21-4	def. Nazareth, 64-58; def. Utica, 73-66
#24	57	Medaille	21-4	LOST to Pitt-Bradford, 63-79; LOST at Pitt-Greensburg, 68-72
#25	49	John Carroll	19-5	def. Heidelberg, 95-91; def. Ohio Northern, 109-83

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	45	Brandeis	18-6	def. Rochester, 87-70; LOST at Emory, 63-64
#27	31	Illinois Wesleyan	19-6	def. Augustana, 62-59; LOST at North Park, 67-70
#28	24	Wittenberg	19-6	LOST to Wabash, 69-72; def. Oberlin, 107-74
#29	18	Central	21-4	def. Coe, 74-67; def. Cornell, 74-64
#30	17	Merchant Marine	21-4	def. Drew, 75-62
#31	8	Defiance	20-5	def. Bluffton, 70-60; def. Franklin, 73-60
#32	5	Hope	18-7	LOST at Adrian, 68-73; def. Trine, 58-53
T#33	4	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	19-5	def. Whittier, 67-54; LOST to Pomona-Pitzer, 56-70
T#33	4	Gordon	21-4	def. University of New England, 64-61; def. Salve Regina, 89-62
T#33	4	Wheaton (Ill.)	18-7	def. Millikin, 65-61; def. Elmhurst, 82-61
#36	2	SUNY-Old Westbury	19-6	def. Polytechnic, 75-66; def. Sage, 95-75

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 23, 2010, 10:49:38 AM

Whitworth climbs to #5!! Perfect conference record, complete dominance of Linfield at LF last Saturday, longest winning streak in the country this year (22 games and running), playing their best defense of the season. Go Bucs!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 23, 2010, 01:10:11 PM

Whitworth looking pretty good.

They could jump Point in the West Region rankings. It will probably be Whitewater, St. Thomas, Whitworth and Point, though they make look at Point beating Whitworth at the beginning of the year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ziggy on February 23, 2010, 01:46:26 PM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on February 23, 2010, 01:10:11 PM
Whitworth looking pretty good.

They could jump Point in the West Region rankings. It will probably be Whitewater, St. Thomas, Whitworth and Point, though they make look at Point beating Whitworth at the beginning of the year.

They will also see Whitworth's win over Whitewater. My money is on the Pirates checking in at number 3.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 23, 2010, 02:30:50 PM

Quote from: ziggy on February 23, 2010, 01:46:26 PM
Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on February 23, 2010, 01:10:11 PM
Whitworth looking pretty good.

They could jump Point in the West Region rankings. It will probably be Whitewater, St. Thomas, Whitworth and Point, though they make look at Point beating Whitworth at the beginning of the year.

They will also see Whitworth's win over Whitewater. My money is on the Pirates checking in at number 3.

To further complicate matters though, Point also beat UST... All of these teams are going to get in, so it won't really matter... but it might factor into hosting possibly, which certainly COULD matter

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 23, 2010, 03:13:03 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 23, 2010, 02:30:50 PM
Quote from: ziggy on February 23, 2010, 01:46:26 PM
Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on February 23, 2010, 01:10:11 PM
Whitworth looking pretty good.

They could jump Point in the West Region rankings. It will probably be Whitewater, St. Thomas, Whitworth and Point, though they make look at Point beating Whitworth at the beginning of the year.

They will also see Whitworth's win over Whitewater. My money is on the Pirates checking in at number 3.

To further complicate matters though, Point also beat UST... All of these teams are going to get in, so it won't really matter... but it might factor into hosting possibly, which certainly COULD matter

Hosting beyond the first weekend is not something that we even dream, talk or think about. Not even at an Irish wedding on a Sat night in July.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 23, 2010, 07:01:48 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 23, 2010, 03:13:03 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on February 23, 2010, 02:30:50 PM
Quote from: ziggy on February 23, 2010, 01:46:26 PM
Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on February 23, 2010, 01:10:11 PM
Whitworth looking pretty good.

They could jump Point in the West Region rankings. It will probably be Whitewater, St. Thomas, Whitworth and Point, though they make look at Point beating Whitworth at the beginning of the year.

They will also see Whitworth's win over Whitewater. My money is on the Pirates checking in at number 3.

To further complicate matters though, Point also beat UST... All of these teams are going to get in, so it won't really matter... but it might factor into hosting possibly, which certainly COULD matter
Hosting beyond the first weekend is not something that we even dream, talk or think about. Not even at an Irish wedding on a Sat night in July.

There is a precedence when UPS did it in 03-04, but they were the top seed in the West. There's a chance it could happen again, I guess, depending who the teams are.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 23, 2010, 08:56:30 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 23, 2010, 07:01:48 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 23, 2010, 03:13:03 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on February 23, 2010, 02:30:50 PM
Quote from: ziggy on February 23, 2010, 01:46:26 PM
Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on February 23, 2010, 01:10:11 PM
Whitworth looking pretty good.

They could jump Point in the West Region rankings. It will probably be Whitewater, St. Thomas, Whitworth and Point, though they make look at Point beating Whitworth at the beginning of the year.

They will also see Whitworth's win over Whitewater. My money is on the Pirates checking in at number 3.

To further complicate matters though, Point also beat UST... All of these teams are going to get in, so it won't really matter... but it might factor into hosting possibly, which certainly COULD matter
Hosting beyond the first weekend is not something that we even dream, talk or think about. Not even at an Irish wedding on a Sat night in July.

There is a precedence when UPS did it in 03-04, but they were the top seed in the West. There's a chance it could happen again, I guess, depending who the teams are.

That's not gonna happen.....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 23, 2010, 09:42:50 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 23, 2010, 07:01:48 PM
There is a precedent when UPS did it in 03-04, but they were the top seed in the West. There's a chance it could happen again, I guess, depending who the teams are.

UPS is not in Spokane.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 23, 2010, 10:10:18 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 23, 2010, 09:42:50 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on February 23, 2010, 07:01:48 PM
There is a precedent when UPS did it in 03-04, but they were the top seed in the West. There's a chance it could happen again, I guess, depending who the teams are.
UPS is not in Spokane.

True. But Stevens Point isn't in Milwaukee either, and they hosted the next year (although they were defending champs, had the best record, and only 2 teams had to fly there, I think).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 25, 2010, 03:00:14 AM

I could see Whitworth hosting the winner of Chapman and CMS as Whitworth gets a bye in the 1st round.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: stag44 on February 25, 2010, 08:10:30 AM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on February 25, 2010, 03:00:14 AM
I could see Whitworth hosting the winner of Chapman and CMS as Whitworth gets a bye in the 1st round.

I think that's a no brainer. SCAIC vs Chapman, winner goes up to Spokane and prays for an off night from Beal, Riley, Gregg, and Montgomery. That hangar is a HUGE advantedge.

Would love if the SoCal teams could get to go outside of the NWC to play in the tourney (hasn't happened since 04-05), but this years geography just wont allow otherwise.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on February 25, 2010, 08:29:52 AM

There may be a similar situation with a couple Texas teams playing then flying as well, so maybe that winner goes to Spokane, and the SoCal winner flys to St. Thomas or something?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ziggy on February 25, 2010, 09:28:22 AM

Quote from: stag44 on February 25, 2010, 08:10:30 AM
Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on February 25, 2010, 03:00:14 AM
I could see Whitworth hosting the winner of Chapman and CMS as Whitworth gets a bye in the 1st round.

I think that's a no brainer. SCAIC vs Chapman, winner goes up to Spokane and prays for an off night from Beal, Riley, Gregg, and Montgomery. That hangar is a HUGE advantedge.

Would love if the SoCal teams could get to go outside of the NWC to play in the tourney (hasn't happened since 04-05), but this years geography just wont allow otherwise.

A flight is a flight, whether it is SoCal to Whitworth or Texas to Whitworth. If two teams come out of SoCal and Texas then I would expect the committee may reward Whitworth based on seeding and send them the winner of the weaker pair which is probably the Texas pairing. This was the thinking in putting together the mock bracket.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 25, 2010, 11:35:24 AM

Quote from: ziggy on February 25, 2010, 09:28:22 AM
Quote from: stag44 on February 25, 2010, 08:10:30 AM
Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on February 25, 2010, 03:00:14 AM
I could see Whitworth hosting the winner of Chapman and CMS as Whitworth gets a bye in the 1st round.

I think that's a no brainer. SCAIC vs Chapman, winner goes up to Spokane and prays for an off night from Beal, Riley, Gregg, and Montgomery. That hangar is a HUGE advantedge.

Would love if the SoCal teams could get to go outside of the NWC to play in the tourney (hasn't happened since 04-05), but this years geography just wont allow otherwise.

A flight is a flight, whether it is SoCal to Whitworth or Texas to Whitworth. If two teams come out of SoCal and Texas then I would expect the committee may reward Whitworth based on seeding and send them the winner of the weaker pair which is probably the Texas pairing. This was the thinking in putting together the mock bracket.

Logic tends to be completely lost of late with the NCAA selection committee. I hope to be happily surprised by the brackets when they come out, but I'm not holding my breathe.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 25, 2010, 11:27:25 PM

No problems for Whitworth tonight. Leading 85-64 over Lewis and Clark, late 2nd half.
Whitworth put 3 players on 1st team all NWC, with Nate Montgomery the Player of the Year. Coach Hayford picks up his record 4th COTY.

Carleton win brings up the whole beat em 3x is tough to do arguement. Carleton looks like the are playing real well over the last 5 weeks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 25, 2010, 11:40:19 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 25, 2010, 11:27:25 PM
No problems for Whitworth tonight. Leading 85-64 over Lewis and Clark, late 2nd half.
Whitworth put 3 players on 1st team all NWC, with Nate Montgomery the Player of the Year. Coach Hayford picks up his record 4th COTY.

Carleton win brings up the whole beat em 3x is tough to do arguement. Carleton looks like the are playing real well over the last 5 weeks.

Uh, oh - don't look now, but here comes Sager! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 26, 2010, 12:44:14 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 25, 2010, 11:40:19 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 25, 2010, 11:27:25 PM
No problems for Whitworth tonight. Leading 85-64 over Lewis and Clark, late 2nd half.
Whitworth put 3 players on 1st team all NWC, with Nate Montgomery the Player of the Year. Coach Hayford picks up his record 4th COTY.

Carleton win brings up the whole beat em 3x is tough to do arguement. Carleton looks like the are playing real well over the last 5 weeks.

Uh, oh - don't look now, but here comes Sager! ;D

And out here in the NWC playoffs we have Linfield losing to George Fox. Yep, you guessed it, GF had lost twice to LF before tonight.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 26, 2010, 01:27:42 AM

Didn't bother Whitworth.
Didn't bother St. Mary's.
Didn't bother Central.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 27, 2010, 12:25:41 PM

#9 UW Stevens Point @ #8 UW Whitewater Live video (http://d3sports.prestosports.com/links/31uqi2) at 7:00 tonight

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 27, 2010, 02:52:47 PM

I just received word from Plattsburgh St. that the SUNYAC Championship game between Oneonta St and Plattsburgh St will be a live webcast by PSTV this afternoon at 4:00 PM. Here's the link:

http://primelink1.net/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scout on February 27, 2010, 05:08:03 PM

The Commonwealth Coast Conference championship game between Gordon College and Curry College will have a live video webcast.

The link (http://www.stretchinternet.com/flash/player/gordon.html)

Game is at 7 PM EST.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 27, 2010, 05:11:37 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 27, 2010, 12:25:41 PM
#9 UW Stevens Point @ #8 UW Whitewater Live video (http://d3sports.prestosports.com/links/31uqi2) at 7:00 tonight

That's 7:00 Central

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on March 01, 2010, 12:21:04 AM

Darryl, Darryl. Come out and play....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on March 01, 2010, 10:53:47 AM

Sorry! I'll post these at noon (when I'm home for lunch).

It's hard to remember to do this when you cheer for teams who ended their seasons 1.5 weeks ago.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on March 01, 2010, 11:04:44 AM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on March 01, 2010, 10:53:47 AM
Sorry! I'll post these at noon (when I'm home for lunch).

It's hard to remember to do this when you cheer for teams who ended their seasons 1.5 weeks ago.

Just on the UWSP bandwagon, they'll be playing for 3 more! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on March 01, 2010, 01:21:00 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on March 01, 2010, 10:53:47 AM
Sorry! I'll post these at noon (when I'm home for lunch).

Unfortunately, my program hit a snag halfway through processing the men's list, and I don't have time to track down the source of the error (or to look up the information the old-fashioned way).

~~I'll post what my program produced, but if you want more, you'll have to look for it on your own, or wait until this evening when I can take another look at this.~~ Full table posted below.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on March 01, 2010, 05:56:08 PM

How They Fared

Whatever the source of the problem, it seems to have fixed itself. Apologies again for shirking my duties ...

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	609	Washington U.	23-2	def. Chicago, 64-60
#2	605	Williams	26-1	def. Bates, 71-48; def. #6 Middlebury, 64-56
#3	571	St. Thomas	23-3	LOST to Carleton, 67-73
#4	540	Guilford	26-2	def. Lynchburg, 69-61; def. #11 Virginia Wesleyan, 78-62; def. #18 Randolph-Macon, 81-65
#5	480	Whitworth	25-2	def. Lewis and Clark, 89-65; def. George Fox, 97-75
#6	479	Middlebury	24-3	def. T#37 Colby, 65-48; LOST at #2 Williams, 56-64
#7	471	Eastern Mennonite	22-4	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 87-67; LOST to (n) #18 Randolph-Macon, 80-82
#8	436	UW-Whitewater	22-5	def. UW-Superior, 86-70; LOST to #9 UW-Stevens Point, 57-63
#9	430	UW-Stevens Point	23-4	def. UW-Stout, 87-72; def. #8 UW-Whitewater, 63-57
#10	374	William Paterson	25-2	def. Ramapo, 55-37; def. Richard Stockton, 70-58
#11	344	Virginia Wesleyan	22-5	def. Washington and Lee, 85-80; LOST to (n) #4 Guilford, 62-78
#12	334	Chapman	23-2	IDLE
#13	313	MIT	22-4	LOST to Clark, 59-71
#14	297	St. Mary's (Md.)	24-3	def. Marymount, 95-62; def. Wesley, 80-76
#15	262	Texas-Dallas	23-5	def. Sul Ross State, 82-65; def. East Texas Baptist, 86-54; LOST at Mary Hardin-Baylor, 70-80
#16	216	Carthage	22-5	def. Augustana, 55-52; def. T#29 Illinois Wesleyan, 70-67
#17	210	St. Norbert	22-3	def. Ripon, 78-74; def. Carroll, 85-74
#18	196	Randolph-Macon	22-6	def. Hampden-Sydney, 84-48; def. #7 Eastern Mennonite, 82-80; LOST to (n) #4 Guilford, 65-81
#19	184	Wooster	23-5	def. Kenyon, 73-59; def. Ohio Wesleyan, 87-70; def. T#37 Wittenberg, 88-77
#20	171	Franklin and Marshall	23-4	def. Muhlenberg, 97-72; def. Gettysburg, 66-62
#21	142	Cabrini	25-2	def. Immaculata, 89-68; def. Neumann, 97-73
#22	117	St. John Fisher	22-5	def. Stevens, 81-71; LOST to Nazareth, 64-65
#23	114	Anderson	22-5	def. Manchester, 64-63; LOST to #28 Defiance, 65-70
#24	83	John Carroll	20-6	def. Marietta, 86-75; LOST to Heidelberg, 97-104
#25	32	Central	23-4	def. Dubuque, 81-66; def. Buena Vista, 99-79

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	25	Merchant Marine	23-4	def. Susquehanna, 69-61; def. Scranton, 68-54
#27	15	Maryville (Tenn.)	23-4	def. Huntingdon, 79-71; def. LaGrange, 68-62
#28	13	Defiance	23-5	def. Franklin, 92-78; def. Hanover, 72-59; def. #23 Anderson, 70-65
T#29	11	Illinois Wesleyan	20-7	def. T#29 Wheaton (Ill.), 68-59; LOST at #16 Carthage, 67-70
T#29	11	Wheaton (Ill.)	18-8	LOST to (n) T#29 Illinois Wesleyan, 59-68
#31	10	Gordon	24-4	def. Endicott, 73-52; def. Colby-Sawyer, 77-58; def. Curry, 56-54
#32	8	UW-La Crosse	17-9	LOST to UW-Superior, 77-83
T#33	5	Brandeis	19-6	def. New York University, 69-62
T#33	5	Calvin	19-9	def. Alma, 67-49; def. Olivet, 63-57; LOST to Hope, 74-78
#35	4	SUNY-Old Westbury	20-7	def. SUNY-Maritime, 61-46; LOST to SUNY-Purchase, 62-79
#36	3	Rutgers-Newark	20-7	LOST at Richard Stockton, 73-86
T#37	2	Colby	19-6	LOST to (n) #6 Middlebury, 48-65
T#37	2	Wittenberg	21-7	def. Hiram, 85-63; def. Wabash, 61-60; LOST at #19 Wooster, 77-88
#39	1	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	21-6	LOST at Cal Lutheran, 67-74; def. Occidental, 65-62; def. Pomona-Pitzer, 57-53

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on March 01, 2010, 07:12:19 PM

When is the next poll released?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 01, 2010, 07:14:28 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on March 01, 2010, 07:12:19 PM
When is the next poll released?

Not 'til after Salem. That applies to the real poll and the PP.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on March 01, 2010, 07:16:16 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 01, 2010, 07:14:28 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on March 01, 2010, 07:12:19 PM
When is the next poll released?

Not 'til after Salem. That applies to the real poll and the PP.

WHAT!!!! Why no poll after last week? The HUMANITY!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 01, 2010, 07:16:26 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 01, 2010, 07:14:28 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on March 01, 2010, 07:12:19 PM
When is the next poll released?

Not 'til after Salem. That applies to the real poll and the PP.

Wait, there's one this week, right? Then off until after the tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on March 01, 2010, 07:17:09 PM

Actually we have one more poll this week before the tournament starts. Its release will probably be delayed by the business of the day.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on March 01, 2010, 07:18:08 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on March 01, 2010, 07:17:09 PM
Actually we have one more poll this week before the tournament starts. Its release will probably be delayed by the business of the day.

THANK YOU!!!!

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 01, 2010, 07:14:28 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on March 01, 2010, 07:12:19 PM
When is the next poll released?

Not 'til after Salem. That applies to the real poll and the PP.

Ypsi, put down the pipe!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 01, 2010, 07:20:25 PM

Yeah, I've been tallying the current PP and misspoke. Both the real poll and the PP come out this week, THEN go on hiatus.

Even people far less pressured than Pat get harried this weekend of the year! ;D :-[

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on March 02, 2010, 05:44:29 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 01, 2010, 07:14:28 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on March 01, 2010, 07:12:19 PM
When is the next poll released?

Not 'til after Salem. That applies to the real poll and the PP.

I just want to get this straight for posterity. As you were tallying the Posters' Poll this was your answer? ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on March 02, 2010, 07:00:26 AM

New Top 25 poll is out http://d3hoops.com/top25/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 02, 2010, 10:35:37 PM

A Perfect Top 25 -- an interesting breakout of the votes.
# Team W-L Pts. Last Week
1) 625 votes make a perfect #1

1 Washington U. (14) 23-2 610 1
2 Williams (11) 26-1 609 2
2) 600
3) 575

3 Guilford 26-2 569 4
4) 550
5) 525

4 Whitworth 25-2 522 5
6) 500

5 UW-Stevens Point 23-4 496 9
6 St. Thomas 23-3 486 3
7) 475

7 William Paterson 25-2 467 10
8) 450

8 UW-Whitewater 22-5 435 8
9 Middlebury 24-3 425 6
9) 425
10) 400

10 Eastern Mennonite 22-4 389 7
11) 375

11 Virginia Wesleyan 22-5 355 11
12) 350

12 Chapman 23-2 339 12
13) 325

13 St. Mary's (Md.) 24-3 311 14
14) 300

14 Carthage 22-5 276 16
15) 275

15 St. Norbert 22-3 255 17
16) 250

16 Randolph-Macon 22-6 230 18
17) 225

17 Wooster 23-5 221 19
18 Franklin and Marshall 23-4 213 20
18) 200

19 Texas-Dallas 23-5 188 15
20 Cabrini 25-2 176 21
19) 175

21 MIT 22-4 157 13
20) 150
21) 125
22) 100

22 Central 23-4 93 25
23) 75
24) 50

23 Merchant Marine 23-4 44 —
25) 25

24 Anderson 22-5 42 23
25 St. John Fisher 22-5 41 22

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on March 06, 2010, 02:09:28 PM

I am thinking the Tommies might slide HARD in final. >15th??

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 06, 2010, 03:44:44 PM

Depends on what everyone else does, too, but certainly they will slip.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 06, 2010, 11:30:34 PM

So, where did we leave off in the "Middlebury is overrated" discussion? ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on March 06, 2010, 11:39:32 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on March 06, 2010, 11:30:34 PM
So, where did we leave off in the "Middlebury is overrated" discussion? ;)

Or the WashU is too inconsistent to win another championship discussion? ;)

Or was it just me making that argument?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 06, 2010, 11:46:55 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on March 06, 2010, 11:30:34 PM
So, where did we leave off in the "Middlebury is overrated" discussion?

Tell me about it. I think I had them about 21st in my last poster's poll. Way too high.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 07, 2010, 12:12:20 AM

Through two rounds, the second ten is slightly outperforming the top 10. Five of the top 10 (#2-#5 and #10) are alive, whereas six from the second ten survived, all in a cluster spanning #13-#19 with the lone exception being #15 St. Norbert. The remaining five survivors are unranked, with SUNYIT and RIC not even drawing a single vote in the last poll.

All four teams in the presumably-Guilford sectional are ranked, the lowest being #17 Wooster. Three-fourths of the right side sectionals ("Wisconsin" and "Mid-Atlantic"?) are ranked. Williams is the only ranked team left in the Williams sectional; of course, there were only three to begin with, one wildly overranked and the other at #25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on March 07, 2010, 07:51:25 AM

I guess if Midd was "wildly overranked," so were Wash U., WPU and St. Thomas, right :)? I mean, St. Thomas lost to the last team in in the first round, Wash U. barely survived the first round and lost to an unranked team in the second, both games at home, WPU lost to Albertus at home in round one. How is that much different from Midd's performance? And they are all ranked a lot higher than Midd (I'm not saying they shouldn't be now or at the end of the year, just that if Midd is wildly overranked, so are they). Midd's loss is certainly a LOT more forgiveable than losing to a GNAC team in a first round game -- look what a so-so Desales team did to Albertus in round two. If you are going to use this tourney's results to "confirm" how final rankings look, I'd certainly put Midd above both WPU and St. Thomas at the end of the year. St. Thomas didn't exactly lose to world-beaters in its last two games, both at home ...

I've seen Midd play several times. They are a legit, at worst, top 20 team, and I'd argue that while their rating may have been a TINY bit inflated by a weak schedule, they belong in the at least the top 15 at season's end. Yes, they had a bad loss in the second round of the tourney, but they ran into a hot team (RIC has won nine straight), Midd picked a bad day to be just incredibly off from 3 (2-22), and a slew of guys who rarely ever shoot 3 pointers from RIC were, out of nowhere, knocking them down -- not something you really game plan for. Midd had very real problems all year which killed them in the tourney, spotty three point shooting (though much better than they showed last night), as well as poor foul shooting (also a problem last night). But defensively, they can stop anyone, with two of the best defensive players in the country, and they are extraordinarily big, athletic, and always play very hard. They are a young team and I am sure will be even better next year. This is a year that doesn't have a dominant group of teams at the top. Everyone (except Williams) has at least one head scratching loss (and many top tier teams have several), and lots of teams with gaudy records have played weak schedules. Midd just fits in to a year with a lot of parity, as the tourney has bourne out already ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on March 07, 2010, 10:54:39 AM

Sweet 16 matchups with Top 25 Rankings noted:

Williams #2 vs. SUNYIT
Rhode Island vs. Brandeis

Guilford #3 vs. Wooster #17
Eastern Mennonite #10 vs. Whitworth #4

Texas-Dallas #19 vs. Stevens Point #5
Illinois Wesleyan vs. Carthage #14

St. Mary's (MD) #13 vs. Franklin & Marshall #18
Randolph-Macon #16 vs. DeSales

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 07, 2010, 11:05:57 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on March 07, 2010, 07:51:25 AM
I guess if Midd was "wildly overranked," so were Wash U., WPU and St. Thomas, right :)? I mean, St. Thomas lost to the last team in in the first round, Wash U. barely survived the first round and lost to an unranked team in the second, both games at home, WPU lost to Albertus at home in round one. How is that much different from Midd's performance? And they are all ranked a lot higher than Midd (I'm not saying they shouldn't be now or at the end of the year, just that if Midd is wildly overranked, so are they). Midd's loss is certainly a LOT more forgiveable than losing to a GNAC team in a first round game -- look what a so-so Desales team did to Albertus in round two. If you are going to use this tourney's results to "confirm" how final rankings look, I'd certainly put Midd above both WPU and St. Thomas at the end of the year. St. Thomas didn't exactly lose to world-beaters in its last two games, both at home ...

I've seen Midd play several times. They are a legit, at worst, top 20 team, and I'd argue that while their rating may have been a TINY bit inflated by a weak schedule, they belong in the at least the top 15 at season's end. Yes, they had a bad loss in the second round of the tourney, but they ran into a hot team (RIC has won nine straight), Midd picked a bad day to be just incredibly off from 3 (2-22), and a slew of guys who rarely ever shoot 3 pointers from RIC were, out of nowhere, knocking them down -- not something you really game plan for. Midd had very real problems all year which killed them in the tourney, spotty three point shooting (though much better than they showed last night), as well as poor foul shooting (also a problem last night). But defensively, they can stop anyone, with two of the best defensive players in the country, and they are extraordinarily big, athletic, and always play very hard. They are a young team and I am sure will be even better next year. This is a year that doesn't have a dominant group of teams at the top. Everyone (except Williams) has at least one head scratching loss (and many top tier teams have several), and lots of teams with gaudy records have played weak schedules. Midd just fits in to a year with a lot of parity, as the tourney has bourne out already ...

In my opinion, this is simply a year of incredible parity. I don't have any idea who is overrated and who is underrated.

Last night I watched Illinois Wesleyan play Wash U for the second time. Wash U won the first game 76-71 in November (at IWU) and IWU won the tournament game last night (at Wash U) 75-70. Anyone at both games would probably tell you there isn't a bit of separation between the teams...and if there is, IWU is a slightly better team. Yet Wash U came in #1 and IWU unranked (because IWU lost a few they shouldn't have on paper).

I feel like whoever the best 15 teams in the country are right now (and I do not think those are currently the top 15 from the D3hoops.com poll), the gap between #1 and #15 is as small as we've ever seen.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on March 07, 2010, 11:22:37 AM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on March 07, 2010, 10:54:39 AM

Sweet 16 matchups with Top 25 Rankings noted:

Williams #2 vs. SUNYIT
Rhode Island vs. Brandeis

Guilford #3 vs. Wooster #17
Eastern Mennonite #10 vs. Whitworth #4

Texas-Dallas #19 vs. Stevens Point #5
Illinois Wesleyan vs. Carthage #14

St. Mary's (MD) #13 vs. Franklin & Marshall #18
Randolph-Macon #16 vs. DeSales

Again, I ask, could William's road to Salem be any easier??? They are the only ranked team in their sectional? Meanwhile, all four teams are ranked in the Guilford sectional with 3 of the 4 teams ranked in the top 10?! And Wooster, who is the only non-top 10 team in that sectional just took out #8 Whitewater! :o And the other remaining sectionals each have 3 of the 4 teams being ranked.

Why is it that the northeast always seems to have such a weak section of the bracket compared to the other 3 sections of the bracket?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: howardjp on March 07, 2010, 11:28:41 AM

I guess if Brandeis gets to the final vs Williams, they should just forfeit - :) After all, beating #1 Washington on the road, being ranked most of the year, and beating #25 St John Fisher in Rochester means nothin'

Maybe, but that's why they play the games, as Drew Brees once said.

Quote from: ScotsFan on March 07, 2010, 11:22:37 AM
Sweet 16 matchups with Top 25 Rankings noted:

Williams #2 vs. SUNYIT
Rhode Island vs. Brandeis

Again, I ask, could William's road to Salem be any easier??? They are the only ranked team in their sectional? Meanwhile, all four teams are ranked in the Guilford sectional with 3 of the 4 teams ranked in the top 10?! And Wooster, who is the only non-top 10 team in that sectional just took out #8 Whitewater! :o And the other remaining sectionals each have 3 of the 4 teams being ranked.

Why is it that the northeast always seems to have such a weak section of the bracket compared to the other 3 sections of the bracket?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 07, 2010, 12:34:19 PM

nescac1, as always, you provide an eloquent defense for Middlebury, on paper (or LCD). But the fact remains that for two years running they have gone through a paper-tiger schedule like a blowtorch, only to come up empty in the NCAA tournament, both times at home against opponents that a legitimate top 10 team should beat. I'm afraid they'll actually have to accomplish something before I am persuaded that #9 does not constitute a wild overranking for the Panthers. You say they'll be even better next year; good. Maybe I can get persuaded next March.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 07, 2010, 12:41:12 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on March 07, 2010, 07:51:25 AM
I guess if Midd was "wildly overranked," so were Wash U., WPU and St. Thomas, right :)? I mean, St. Thomas lost to the last team in in the first round, Wash U. barely survived the first round and lost to an unranked team in the second, both games at home, WPU lost to Albertus at home in round one. How is that much different from Midd's performance? And they are all ranked a lot higher than Midd (I'm not saying they shouldn't be now or at the end of the year, just that if Midd is wildly overranked, so are they). Midd's loss is certainly a LOT more forgiveable than losing to a GNAC team in a first round game -- look what a so-so Desales team did to Albertus in round two. If you are going to use this tourney's results to "confirm" how final rankings look, I'd certainly put Midd above both WPU and St. Thomas at the end of the year. St. Thomas didn't exactly lose to world-beaters in its last two games, both at home ...

You have an argument with WPU (which was already ranked behind Middlebury anyway), but not with the other two. St. Thomas lost on a neutral floor by two to a ranked team, while Wash U. lost to a team getting multiple votes as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on March 07, 2010, 12:46:56 PM

Fair enough David. I am not a Midd fan or anything; I feel bad for their fans, in fact, as I do think the team is better than it has represented in the last two tournaments. But obviously, until they step up and get it done when it counts, they won't be able to answer their critics. They only lose one senior (granted a very important player) and they start two frosh on the perimeter, so I do believe this year's tourney experience will toughen them up and I expect bigger things to come, especially if their massive center continues to improve at the rate he has been (he has made leaps and bounds on both ends each year). I will note that Gordon, who they beat in the first round, is not a bad team at all, and Midd really did arrive ahead of schedule this year ...

I agree with Titan Q that this year features just tremendous parity. Looking at the Sweet 16, I think there are at LEAST 10 teams that have legitimate chances to win it all, and of those ten (possibly more like 12), I doubt any would be more than a 5-6 point favorite over any other. I can't recall that level of parity in MOST recent tournaments, when there were often one or two juggernauts like Williams, then Stevens Points, then VWU, then Amherst, then Wash U., plus maybe 2-3 other truly legit contenders.

Williams does have the easiest path to Salem, but if Midd and SUNY-P had won their sectionals, that group of four would look at a lot more impressive. RIC does seem to be hot at the right time -- they've won nine straight -- and Brandeis as we've seen can beat anyone on any given day, although I am amazed they've been able to survive this long playing basically six guys (or exactly six, in their last game). Those guys must be seriously fit ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 07, 2010, 12:53:15 PM

Quote from: ScotsFan on March 07, 2010, 11:22:37 AM

Again, I ask, could William's road to Salem be any easier??? They are the only ranked team in their sectional? Meanwhile, all four teams are ranked in the Guilford sectional with 3 of the 4 teams ranked in the top 10?! And Wooster, who is the only non-top 10 team in that sectional just took out #8 Whitewater! :o And the other remaining sectionals each have 3 of the 4 teams being ranked.

Why is it that the northeast always seems to have such a weak section of the bracket compared to the other 3 sections of the bracket?

This is a post I made on another board back in December...

Quote from: Titan Q on December 04, 2009, 10:10:22 AM
Here are the NCAA tournament roads for the NESCAC teams (pre-Salem) this decade, again with Top 15 opponents in bold...

(Note, since I couldn't figure out the location of all games, I've just listed all as "vs".)

** Middlebury, #9 (2008-09)
Round 1 - bye
Round 2 – vs Bridgewater State (lost 76-78)

** Amherst, #25 (2008-09)
Round 1 – vs Gwynedd-Mercy (lost 62-68)
---------------

** Amherst, #3 (2007-08)
Round 1 – bye
Round 2 – vs John Jay (won 96-74)
Round 3 – vs Richard Stockton (won 78-70)
Round 4 – vs #5 Brandeis (won 65-55)

** Trinity, #24 (2007-08)
Round 1 – vs Coast Guard (lost 65-70)

** Middlebury, not ranked (2007-08)
Round 1 – vs #13 Rochester (lost 43-56)
---------------

** Amherst, #6 (2006-07)
Round 1 – bye
Round 2 – vs Widener (won 76-63)
Round 3 – vs Stevens (won 69-61)
Round 4 – vs #21 Rhode Island (won 75-73)

** Trinity, #20 (2006-07)
Round 1 – vs Brandeis (lost 77-70 OT)
---------------

** Amherst, #4 (2005-06)
Round 1 – bye
Round 2 – vs Hamilton (won 66-65 OT)
Round 3 – vs Tufts (won 83-59)
Round 4 – vs #16 St. John Fisher (won 94-68)

** Tufts, not ranked (2005-06)
Round 1 – vs Endicott (won 83-60)
Round 2 – vs Cortland State (won 68-54)
Round 3 – vs #4 Amherst (lost 59-83)
---------------

** Amherst, #2 (2004-05)
Round 1 – bye
Round 2 – vs Springfield (won 81-68)
Round 3 – vs #21 Rochester (lost 62-69)
---------------

** Williams, #1 (2003-04)
Round 1 – bye
Round 2 – vs Salem State (won 91-77)
Round 3 – vs Brockport State (won 78-50)
Round 4 – vs Keene State (won 79-64)

** Amherst, #5 (2003-04)
Round 1 – bye
Round 2 – vs Plymouth State (won 113-85)
Round 3 – vs New Jersey City (won 92-74)
Round 4 – vs #9 Franklin & Marshall (won 82-70)

** Trinity, #16 (2003-04)
Round 1 – vs Lasell (won 72-66)
Round 2 – vs Brockport State (lost 76-80)

---------------

** Williams, #3 (2002-03)
Round 1 – bye
Round 2 – vs Salem State (won 94-67)
Round 3 - vs Hamilton (won 76-65)
Round 4 – vs #11 Amherst (won 94-75)

** Amherst, not ranked (2002-03)
Round 1 – bye
Round 2 – vs Southern Vermont (won 84-60)
Round 3 – vs #5 Rochester (won 80-74)
Round 4 – vs #3 Williams (lost 75-94)
---------------

** Amherst, not ranked (2001-02)
Round 1 – bye
Round 2 - vs Western Connecticut (won 82-77)
Round 3 – vs #8 Brockport State (lost 64-69)

** Williams, not ranked (2001-02)
Round 1 – vs Cazenovia (won 121-49)
Round 2 – vs #18 Rochester (lost 51-66)

** Trinity, not ranked (2001-02)
Round 1 – vs Colby-Sawyer (won 74-47)
Round 2 – vs #8 Brockport State (lost 61-80)
---------------

** Amherst, not ranked (2000-01)
Round 1 – vs St. John Fisher (won 89-76)
Round 2 – vs Clark (won 89-76)
---------------

** Williams, #11 (1990-00)
Round 1 – bye
Round 2 – vs Springfield (lost 74-75)

** Amherst, not ranked (1999-00)
Round 1 – vs Western New England (won 79-77)
Round 2 – vs #21 Salem State (lost 75-81)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 07, 2010, 12:54:16 PM

And I contrasted with the CCIW's road...

Quote from: Titan Q on December 04, 2009, 08:06:51 AM
The pre-Salem NCAA tournament road of the CCIW entrants this decade...

The rankings noted are from the D3hoops.com Top 25 at the time of the game...in other words, from the poll before the final of the season. I've highlighted the opponents from the Top 15.

** Wheaton, #3 (2008-09)
Round 1 - vs Fontbonne (won 85-58)
Round 2 - vs #5 UW-Platteville (won 74-69, OT)
Round 3 - vs #2 Wash U (lost 52-55) - eventual national champion

** Elmhurst, #19 (2008-09)
Round 1 - vs #8 UW-Whitewater (lost 79-81, OT)
--------------------

** Augustana, #6 (2007-08)
Round 1 – vs Aurora (won, 72-61)
Round 2 – vs #11 Wash U (lost 67-70, OT) – eventual national champion

** Wheaton, not ranked (2007-08)
Round 1 – (n) vs #15 Lawrence (won 93-83, OT)
Round 2 – (n) vs Loras (won 76-73)
Round 3 – (n) vs Whitworth (won 76-67)
Round 4 – @ #1 Hope (lost 70-83)
--------------------

** Augustana, #7 (2006-07)
Round 1 – vs Carroll (lost 69-73)
--------------------

** Illinois Wesleyan, #11 (2005-06)
Round 1 – (n) vs #17 Carroll (won 81-68)
Round 2 - @ #15 UW-Whitewater (won 76-68)
Round 3 - @ #1 Lawrence (won 63-59)
Round 4 – (n) vs #14 Puget Sound (won 89-81)

** Augustana, #13 (2005-06)
Round 1 - vs Buena Vista (won 71-66)
Round 2 - vs #19 UW-Stout (won 66-64)
Round 3 – (n) vs #14 Puget Sound (lost 81-89)

** North Central, #10 (2005-06)
Round 1 - @ #24 St. Thomas (lost 68-76)
--------------------

** Illinois Wesleyan, #6 (2004-05)
Round 1 – bye
Round 2 – vs #12 Hanover (lost 76-81)

** Wheaton, #11 (2004-05)
Round 1 vs #14 Calvin (lost 74-75)
--------------------

** Illinois Wesleyan, #19 (2003-04)
Round 1 – vs Maryville (won 82-73)
Round 2 - @ #2 Hanover (won 67-77)
Round 3 - @ #4 Wooster (lost 53-58)
--------------------

** Illinois Wesleyan, #13 (2002-03)
Round 1 – vs Blackburn (won 79-59)
Round 2 – @ #2 Wash U (won 85-73)
Round 3 – (n) vs #4 Hampden-Sydney (lost 68-76)
--------------------

** Carthage, #1 (2001-02)
Round 1 – bye
Round 2 – vs Hope (won 63-57)
Round 3 – vs #12 Gustavus Adolphus (won 71-65)
Round 4 – vs #22 Lewis & Clark (won 85-70)
--------------------
** Illinois Wesleyan, #17 (2000-01)
Round 1 – vs Grinnell (won 132-91)
Round 2 - @ #12 Wartburg (won 65-60)
Round 3 – (n) vs #9 Elmhurst (won 63-60)
Round 4 - @ #1 Chicago (won 77-68)

** Carthage, #4 (2000-01)
Round 1 – vs Marian (won 83-65)
Round 2 – @ #2 Wooster (won 88-80)
Round 3 – (n) vs UMass-Dartmouth (won 90-41)
Round 4 – @ #3 Ohio Northern (lost 64-66)

** Elmhurst, #9 (2000-01)
Round 1 – bye
Round 2 – vs #8 Wash U (won 78-77)
Round 3 – (n) vs #17 Illinois Wesleyan (lost 60-63)
--------------------

** Carthage, #12 (1999-00)
Round 1 – bye
Round 2 – vs #15 UW-Eau Claire (lost 62-74)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 07, 2010, 12:54:55 PM

Bottom line, the geography of Division III is what it is.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 07, 2010, 01:27:48 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on March 07, 2010, 12:54:55 PM
Bottom line, the geography of Division III is what it is.

I agree.

With the possible exception of the ODAC, and maybe the Capital AC, the premier regions for basketball in D-III are west of the Appalachians. I am sure that there are many fans from "second tier conferences" that wish we could be flown to bracket in MidAtlantic, Atlantic, East or New England regions, just to get a better chance of going deep into the playoffs.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on March 07, 2010, 01:30:31 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on March 07, 2010, 12:54:55 PM
Bottom line, the geography of Division III is what it is.

I don't know what is more frustrating. The fact that the top seed out of the northeast gets a freaking bye every year or the fact that, for the most part, the top seed out of the northeast doesn't face a ranked opponent until the 4th round almost EVERY year?!

And in stark contrast, using your CCIW compairson, you have to go all the way back to the 2001-02 season when Carthage didn't face a ranked opponent until the 3rd round and there has never been an occasion where a CCIW team has gone all the way to the 4th round without facing a ranked opponent.

As you said, I guess this is the nature of the beast when it comes to D3 geography... ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 07, 2010, 01:44:28 PM

As we look at the brackets this morning, I wish that the Whitworth pod had been placed somewhere in the St Mary's (lower right) bracket.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on March 07, 2010, 01:56:04 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 07, 2010, 01:44:28 PM
As we look at the brackets this morning, I wish that the Whitworth pod had been placed somewhere in the St Mary's (lower right) bracket.

Certainly would have helped distribute some strength. Looks to me like after the weekend the power pendulum has shifted lower left.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BBGUY on March 07, 2010, 02:24:51 PM

I would guess that there are many, more private schools in D3 competition than public schools. I would guess also that a large portion of these smaller private schools are in the East so given that situation, one would then have to look at the composition of the selection committee. Are there a lot more representatives from private schools who are making these decisions? Does anyone have information on who and where those people are from on the committee? Are the "best" teams in the sweet 16. Debatable.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 07, 2010, 02:51:00 PM

Quote from: BBGUY on March 07, 2010, 02:24:51 PMDoes anyone have information on who and where those people are from on the committee?

The current composition of the national committee is as follows:
Charlie Brock, chair (head coach, Springfield College)
Terry Small (commissioner, NJAC)
Russell Rogers (AD, Stevens Tech)
Mike DeWitt (head coach, Ohio Wesleyan University)
David Martin (AD, Misericordia University)
Mike Zapolski (AD, Augustana [IL] College)
Pat Cunningham (head coach, Trinity [TX] University)
Ken Schumann (AD, Pacific [OR] University)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on March 07, 2010, 02:56:09 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on March 07, 2010, 11:05:57 AM
Quote from: nescac1 on March 07, 2010, 07:51:25 AM
I guess if Midd was "wildly overranked," so were Wash U., WPU and St. Thomas, right :)? I mean, St. Thomas lost to the last team in in the first round, Wash U. barely survived the first round and lost to an unranked team in the second, both games at home, WPU lost to Albertus at home in round one. How is that much different from Midd's performance? And they are all ranked a lot higher than Midd (I'm not saying they shouldn't be now or at the end of the year, just that if Midd is wildly overranked, so are they). Midd's loss is certainly a LOT more forgiveable than losing to a GNAC team in a first round game -- look what a so-so Desales team did to Albertus in round two. If you are going to use this tourney's results to "confirm" how final rankings look, I'd certainly put Midd above both WPU and St. Thomas at the end of the year. St. Thomas didn't exactly lose to world-beaters in its last two games, both at home ...

I've seen Midd play several times. They are a legit, at worst, top 20 team, and I'd argue that while their rating may have been a TINY bit inflated by a weak schedule, they belong in the at least the top 15 at season's end. Yes, they had a bad loss in the second round of the tourney, but they ran into a hot team (RIC has won nine straight), Midd picked a bad day to be just incredibly off from 3 (2-22), and a slew of guys who rarely ever shoot 3 pointers from RIC were, out of nowhere, knocking them down -- not something you really game plan for. Midd had very real problems all year which killed them in the tourney, spotty three point shooting (though much better than they showed last night), as well as poor foul shooting (also a problem last night). But defensively, they can stop anyone, with two of the best defensive players in the country, and they are extraordinarily big, athletic, and always play very hard. They are a young team and I am sure will be even better next year. This is a year that doesn't have a dominant group of teams at the top. Everyone (except Williams) has at least one head scratching loss (and many top tier teams have several), and lots of teams with gaudy records have played weak schedules. Midd just fits in to a year with a lot of parity, as the tourney has bourne out already ...

In my opinion, this is simply a year of incredible parity. I don't have any idea who is overrated and who is underrated.

Last night I watched Illinois Wesleyan play Wash U for the second time. Wash U won the first game 76-71 in November (at IWU) and IWU won the tournament game last night (at Wash U) 75-70. Anyone at both games would probably tell you there isn't a bit of separation between the teams...and if there is, IWU is a slightly better team. Yet Wash U came in #1 and IWU unranked (because IWU lost a few they shouldn't have on paper).

I feel like whoever the best 15 teams in the country are right now (and I do not think those are currently the top 15 from the D3hoops.com poll), the gap between #1 and #15 is as small as we've ever seen.

And, IMHO, IWU should not have lost those games on the court either!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fritzdis on March 07, 2010, 06:04:15 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 07, 2010, 01:44:28 PM
As we look at the brackets this morning, I wish that the Whitworth pod had been placed somewhere in the St Mary's (lower right) bracket.

It looks to me like the committee was trying to separate the ODAC teams somewhat. There were also teams from the NE in every pod of the lower right bracket. If one of them had won their pod, they'd have to be flown to Guilford.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BJ - DSU SID on March 07, 2010, 06:52:56 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on March 07, 2010, 07:51:25 AM
Midd's loss is certainly a LOT more forgiveable than losing to a GNAC team in a first round game -- look what a so-so Desales team did to Albertus in round two.

I'd argue that a team (remained nameless) that makes the Elite 8 last year and is still alive in the Sweet 16 this year is just slightly better than a "so-so" comment.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 07, 2010, 06:54:59 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 07, 2010, 01:44:28 PM
As we look at the brackets this morning, I wish that the Whitworth pod had been placed somewhere in the St Mary's (lower right) bracket.

I looked at options for the pod when the bracket came out. In the end there were just too many NE teams to make any other placement work (at least without really altering the balance of the brackets).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 20, 2010, 03:42:38 PM

I've watched a lot of D3 games this season (both in person and on video) and I'm confident the best 2 teams in the country faced each other today in the national championship game. I got to see the Pointers last weekend in person...it was great to finally see this Williams team play. The Ephs were loaded with talent and played great basketball.

Stevens Point and Williams were clearly #1 and #2 this year, as I see it at least. I think Guilford was probably #3, and then after that you have a tier with a bunch of teams all extremely even -- teams like Randolph-Macon, Illinois Wesleyan, Carthage, Wash U, Eastern Mennonite, Texas-Dallas, Whitworth, UW-Whitewater, Wooster, and several others.

It was a year of a lot of parity, but there were clearly two teams that stood out from the pack.

(Note, I think Massey Index had Stevens Point #1 almost all year long.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 24, 2010, 12:10:26 AM

Final polls published: http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/
Bob's top 3 is right on (they were each unanimous choices), and his "extremely even" group is arrayed in positions 4-16 (if by "several others," he meant F&M, St. Mary's, Brandeis, and St. Thomas), spanning 261 points (a bit over 10 "average-ballot" positions). Where Bob saw one tightly clustered group, the voters discerned two: one spanning #4 EMU to #7 Whitworth (86 point spread), and another, tighter one from #9 Whitewater through #16 UST (82 point spread). #8 Wooster bridges a fairly sizable gap between these two groups, roughly two "average-ballot" positions behind Whitworth and ahead of Whitewater.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 24, 2010, 01:16:27 AM

Top 25 in clusters, as discussed by David Collinge

# Team W-L Pts. Last Week
1 UW-Stevens Point (25) 29-4 625 5

2 Williams 30-2 600 2

3 Guilford 30-3 575 3

#4 -- 550

4 Eastern Mennonite 25-5 533 10

#5 -- 525

5 Randolph-Macon 26-7 512 16

#6 -- 500
#7 -- 475

6 Washington U. 24-3 466 1
7 Whitworth 26-3 447 4

#8 -- "450"
#9 -- 425

8 Wooster 25-6 405 17

#10 --400
#11 --375

9 UW-Whitewater 23-6 354 8

#12 -- 350

10 Carthage 24-6 334 14

#13 -- 325

11    Franklin and Marshall    26-5    315    18
12    Illinois Wesleyan    23-8    312    —
13    St. Mary's (Md.)    26-4    310    13

#14 -- 300

14    Brandeis    22-7    282    —
15    Texas-Dallas    24-6    275    19
16    St. Thomas    23-4    272    6

#15 -- "275"
#16 -- 250
#17 -- 225

17    Virginia Wesleyan    23-6    223    11
18    William Paterson    25-3    206    7
19    Middlebury    25-4    205    9

#18 -- 200

20 St. Norbert 23-4 177 15
21 Chapman 24-3 175 12

#19 -- "175"
#20 -- 150
#21 -- 125
#22 -- 100

22 Anderson 23-6 99 24

#23 -- 75

23    John Carroll    21-7    74    —
24    DeSales    24-6    65    —
25    Central    23-5    55    22

#24 -- 50
#25 -- 25

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FanJacket on March 24, 2010, 08:41:34 AM

Is it too early to start thinking about a 1-2 ODAC pre-season poll: EMU/RMC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on March 24, 2010, 09:00:20 AM

Quote from: FanJacket on March 24, 2010, 08:41:34 AM
Is it too early to start thinking about a 1-2 ODAC pre-season poll: EMU/RMC.

YES ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on March 24, 2010, 11:36:40 AM

Ummm, I think WSP might have something to say about that ... I do think those two teams are, however, locks for the preseason top five. I'd say something like WSP / EMU / IWU / RMC / Carthage / Williams / F&M / Wooster / Middlebury / and dark horse SUNY-Plattsburgh would make sense as a pre pre-season top ten -- I'm sure I am a forgetting one or two, maybe St. Thomas, who might slide in ahead of Midd or SUNY -- of course news on incoming incoming players could change that. Looking at numbers 6 through 19 in that poll, it seems like everyone except for Wooster, F&M, Carthage, IWU, Midd loses a MAJOR percentage of its production from this year and/or a big time star player, so I imagine there will be plenty of room for surprise teams to leap up the poll, outside of what will be a fairly obvious top eight.

From New England, for example, Amherst, MIT, and Western Conn should all be MUCH improved next year, and could very quickly establish themselves as viable top-20 type teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 24, 2010, 12:01:31 PM

On behalf of preseason #2 John Carroll (21-7), #5 Richard Stockton (20-8), and #8 Mass-Dartmouth (18-9), I'd say yes, it's too early to be discussing this. Of course those three teams had fine seasons, but none lived up to their lofty press releases, and probably could have done without the accompanying pressure of high expectations.

#14 Cal Lutheran (14-11), #17 UW-Platteville (14-12), #24 UW-Oshkosh (11-14), #25 Amherst (14-11) and especially #18 Puget Sound (9-16) all would prefer to discuss preseason football.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on March 24, 2010, 04:12:17 PM

Oh, come on David -- there is a proud tradition of immediate speculation about the next year's contenders following the conclusion of EVERY sport season, fans are always hungry to discuss what's coming next :) ... plus, I seriously doubt that suggesting, a few months earlier than might otherwise be the case, that someone is a contender could possibly affect their performance six months down the line by providingn "extra" pressure. UMD, for example, had a disappointing year due to tons of dissention between coach and star players that led several key players to quit mid-season, not to mention, an injury which limited its star player through much of the season. Amherst started the year great, but fell apart down the stretch once its star point guard (who had no adequate backup) got injured and a few guys tried to overcompensate. I'm sure the others have similar stories to tell, none of which involve random people speculating about how good them might be the previous March! Now, of COURSE, some predictions made here are bound to be way off base, but such is the nature of prediction, generally!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 17, 2010, 03:25:25 PM

In an effort to get as much helpful information out there as possible before the preseason Top 25 ballot comes out in a few weeks, I'd love to get a little conversation going about potential Top 25 teams. Feel free to just throw out one team, or all candidates from a given conference or region. And please state each team's Top 25 case as best as possible.

Thanks!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 17, 2010, 03:51:04 PM

I will take an initial stab at Top 25 candidates from the Midwest...

* Carthage (24-6 overall, 12-2 CCIW 1st)

- Returns all 5 starters, including 2009-10 D3hoops.com P.O.Y./CCIW M.O.P. PG Steve Djurickovic-SR (24.4 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 7.3 apg), 3rd Team all-CCIW C Tyler Pierce-SO (12.5 ppg, 4.8 rpg), and 3rd Team all-CCIW F Mitch Thompson-SO (6.1 ppg, 4.9 rpg)

- 2010 NCAA: Beat Aurora and Anderson at home, lost to Illinois Wesleyan (neutral)

- #10 in final poll last year

* Illinois Wesleyan (23-8 overall, 10-4 CCIW 2nd)

- Returns all 5 starters, including 1st Team all-CCIW F/C Doug Sexauer-SR (15.6 ppg, 5.8 rpg), 2nd Team all-CCIW SG Sean Johnson-SR (17.0 ppg, 3.1 apg), and 3rd Team all-CCIW PG Travis Rosenkranz-SR (8.2 ppg, 4.1 apg)

- 2010 NCAA: Beat Central (neutral), Won @ Wash U, Beat Carthage (neutral), Lost @ UW-Stevens Point

- #12 in final poll last year

* St. Norbert (23-4 overall, 14-2 MWC 1st)

- Returns all 5 starters, including all-MWC 1st Team SG Dave Wipperfurth-SR (15.3 ppg, 3.4 rpg), 2nd Team all-MWC C Chris Peterson-SR (13.7 ppg, 5.4 rpg), and 2nd Team all-MWC SG John Taylor-SR (10.6 ppg, 4.3 apg)

- 2010 NCAA: Beat Hope (neutral), lost @ UW-Stevens Point

- #20 in final poll last year

* Anderson (23-6 overall, 13-3 HCAC 1st)

- Returns all 5 starters, including all-HCAC F Brock Morrison-JR (14.4 ppg, 8.7 rpg), all-HCAC G Ty Riddle-SR (14.8 ppg, 2.0 rpg), and all-HCAC G Gabe Miller-SR (11.0 ppg, 3.3 rpg)

- 2010 NCAA: Beat St. Thomas (neutral), lost @ Carthage

- #22 in final poll last year

I actually think all 4 of these teams are legitimate preseason Top 10 candidates. Looks like a very strong year in the Midwest in 2010-11.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on September 18, 2010, 03:37:33 AM

uh oh, already I'm seeing visions of another 'bracket of death' ::) ::) ::) ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 18, 2010, 01:54:42 PM

Here is the Sporting News preseason Top 10...

1. UW-Stevens Point
2. Franklin & Marshall
3. Randolph-Macon
4. Wooster
5. St. Norbert
6. Eastern Mennonite
7. Williams
8. UW-Whitewater
9. St. Mary's (Md)
10. Virginia Wesleyan

And their "possible breakthroughs" (listed alphabetically)...

Albright
Anderson
Augustana
Baruch
Cabrini
Carthage
Chapman
DeSales
Gettysburg
Hobart
Hope
Illinois Wesleyan
Ithaca
John Carroll
Maryville
MIT
Plattsburgh
Ramapo
Rhode Island
Ripon
Rochester
St. John Fisher
St. Lawrence
St. Thomas
Scranton
SUNYIT
Texas-Dallas
Wash U
Wesley
Wheaton
Whitworth
Wittenberg
York (NY)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on September 19, 2010, 01:29:37 PM

UW River Falls could have a breakout year this year.

They have 3 of the top 7 returning scorers in the WIAC this year, in addition to adding Shane Manor, a transfer from UW Superior who will be eligible this season who averaged 11.5 as a Frosh and 10.5 as a Soph (sat out this last season). I don't necessarily think they're a top 25 team right now, but they might be on the cusp.

They beat Whitewater on Feb 6th last year and took St. Thomas to a 1 point game earlier in the year. I'm trying to remember from last year... but I think RF dealt with some injuries that cased them to be just 3-13 in the WIAC last season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on September 20, 2010, 09:34:04 PM

Top 25 (and likely Top 10 ;)) Profile for the College of Wooster:

Wooster (25-6 overall, 15-1 NCAC 1st)

The Scots return 4 starters and 9 of their top 10 players. Starters include Ian Franks-SR 6'4" point guard who was D3Hoops 4th Team last year, Sporting News Preseason All-America First Team (17.9 ppg on 52% FG, 5.1 rpg, 41% three pointers), All-NCAC Nathan Balch-SR 6'1" guard (11.9 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 67 three pointers on 41% shooting), All-NCAC Bryan Wickliffe-SR 6'5" forward (11.2 ppg on 61% FG, 7.2 rpg) and Justin Hallowell-JR 6'7" wing (9.0 ppg, 5.8 rpg).

This will be the third season that these 4 Wooster starters have played together while having won games in the NCAA tourney the last two seasons. Ian Franks is very tough to defend as evidenced by the 30 points (10 of 16 shooting) that he dropped on Wisconsin-Whitewater in the NCAA tourney last year.

Top returning players from the bench are Matt Fegan-JR 6'1" guard (6.2 ppg, 48 three pointers on 43% shooting), Josh Claytor-SO 6'7" wing (5.4 ppg, 3.7 rpg) and Jake Mays-SO 6'8" post (2.8 ppg, 2.6 rpg).

Top Freshmen recruits include 6'3" guard Jimmy Orie (27 ppg) Pennsylvania Class A All-State Team and 6'7" forward Sam Runner (15.4 ppg) West Virginia All State 2nd Team

In the 2010 NCAA: Beat Grove City (home), Beat Wisconsin Whitewater (home), Lost to Guilford (at Guilford)

Ranked #8 in final D3Hoops poll last year

Title: Re: Landmark Conference
Post by: ronk on September 20, 2010, 10:30:37 PM

NEPA,
It's from the Multi-Regional Topics(top 25 Talk) from 2 days ago by Titan Q. Don't know who their analysts are.

Quote from: Titan Q on September 18, 2010, 01:54:42 PM
Here is the Sporting News preseason Top 10...

1. UW-Stevens Point
2. Franklin & Marshall
3. Randolph-Macon
4. Wooster
5. St. Norbert
6. Eastern Mennonite
7. Williams
8. UW-Whitewater
9. St. Mary's (Md)
10. Virginia Wesleyan

And their "possible breakthroughs" (listed alphabetically)...

Albright
Anderson
Augustana
Baruch
Cabrini
Carthage
Chapman
DeSales
Gettysburg
Hobart
Hope
Illinois Wesleyan
Ithaca
John Carroll
Maryville
MIT
Plattsburgh
Ramapo
Rhode Island
Ripon
Rochester
St. John Fisher
St. Lawrence
St. Thomas
Scranton
SUNYIT
Texas-Dallas
Wash U
Wesley
Wheaton
Whitworth
Wittenberg
York (NY)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on September 21, 2010, 07:35:22 AM

In terms of NESCAC teams, I think both Midd and Amherst warrant potential breakthrough mention. Each graduate only one player who saw P.T. Midd, despite flaming out the last few years in the tourney, always puts up gaudy regular season win totals, and this year's team is a lot more experienced. Probably starts the biggest front court in D-3 (6'10, 6'8, 6'5, all juniors or seniors). Amherst should be back in the top 25 discussion after an uncharacteristically down year. They had a ton of injuries last year, were a very young team (three frosh playing big roles, and three sophomore starters), and add someone who is purported to be a big-time impact frosh (Aaron Toomey). Amherst's Conor Meehan is a potential all-American if he is back at full health.

As for Williams, I'd say somewhere in the 5-10 range is about right considering all they lose (seven seniors, including a first team all-American). Key returning players are all-American candidate 6'0 JR PG James Wang (17 ppg, 4 rpg, 4 apg, .56 / .51 / .86 shooting), all-American candidate 6'5 SR C Troy Whittington, (11 ppg, 6 rpg, 2.5 bpg, .71 FGP in only 18 mpg, averaged 15 ppg, 10 rpg, 4 bpg in the last three games of the tournament vs. very tough opponents), and 6'3 SO PG Nate Robertson (5 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 3 apg, .49 / .31 / .83 shooting, expected to have a big break-out year after deferring as a frosh).

The rest of the rotation is a bit uncertain other than returning starter 6'8 PF SR Harlan Dodson (6 ppg, 2 rpg, .5 bpg, 3 point specialist). 6'3 SO SG James Klemm was highly acclaimed out of HS and I'm guessing will start; he proved to be a capable perimeter scorer in limited minutes last year (8 mpg, 4 ppg, shooing .50 / .46 / .75), as well as starring for the J.V.. The sixth man will likely be JR 6'8 C Brian Emerson, who also shot well in limited minutes (including 6-9 from three) and is expected to be a solid back-up center. The rest of the rotation will probably consist of first years: 6'2 G Hayden Rooke-Ley , 6'4 F Taylor Epley (who played well against tough competition in the KY/IN all-star game), and possibly 6'9 C Michael Mayer if the Ephs needs to go to a third center. Retuning forwards 6'4 Jordan Mickens and 6'5 Parker McClelland could also see spot minutes.

Other than the top three NESCAC squads and MIT, no one in New England looks particularly strong on paper heading into the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 24, 2010, 12:05:50 PM

A look at returning personnel from the top 15 of the final D3hoops.com poll from 2009-10. I'll do teams 16-25 over the weekend...

(Let me know if any mistakes.)

#1 UW-Stevens Point (29-4 overall, 12-4 WIAC, national champion) – West
Starters Returning: (4) F Louis Hurd, 6-5 SR (12.5 ppg, 4.1 rpg),G Jared Jenkins, 6-4 SR (11.4 ppg, 3.7 rpg), F Scott Hoelzel, 6-6 SR (8.2 ppg, 5.7 rpg), F Nick Krull, 6-7 SR (5.5 ppg, 3.6 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) PG Matt Moses, 6-2 (14.7 ppg, 4.3 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: PG Jerel Harris, 5-10 SO (7.7 ppg, 1.8 rpg)

#2 Williams (30-2 overall, 9-0 NESCAC, national 2nd place) – Northeast
Starters Returning: (2) G James Wang, 6-0 JR (17.3 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 4.4 apg), F Harlan Dodson, 6-8 SR (6.2 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) G/F Blake Schultz, 6-3 (19.2 ppg, 4.3 rpg), G Alex Rubin, 6-4 (9.5 ppg, 1.9 rpg), C Joe Geoghegan, 6-8 (7.1 ppg, 8.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: C Troy Whittington, 6-5 SR (11.1 ppg, 6.2 rpg)

#3 Guilford (30-3 overall, 14-2 ODAC, Final 4) – South

Staters Returning: (2) F Martin Stephenson, 6-4 SR (6.6 ppg, 3.9 rpg), G T.C. Anderson, 6-0 SR (4.0 ppg, 3.0 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) C Tyler Sanborn, 6-9 (19.9 ppg, 14.1 rpg), G Clay Henson, 6-2 (17.1 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 3.1 apg), G Rhett Bonner, 6-1 (14.6 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 3.0 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Josh Pittman, 6-1 SO (6.9 ppg, 2.6 rpg)

#4 Eastern Mennonite (25-5 overall, 14-2 ODAC) – South
Starters Returning: (5) G/F Todd Phillips, 6-3 SR (17.4 ppg, 7.3 rpg, 3.1 rpg), G/F D.J. Hinson, 6-4 SR (15.9 ppg, 3.9 rpg), G George Johnson, 5-10 SR (15.0 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 3.2 apg), F Eli Crawford, 6-2 SR (12.2 ppg, 7.1 rpg), F Orie Pancione, 6-5 SR (7.9 ppg, 5.5 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: G/F Andrew Thorne, 6-4 SO (3.5 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

#5 Randolph-Macon (26-7 overall, 11-5 ODAC, Final 4) - South

Starters Returning: (5) F Brandon Braxton, 6-5 SR (11.5 ppg, 5.1 rpg), G Eric Pugh, 6-0 SR (10.6 ppg, 2.1 rpg, 3.2 apg), G/F Jordan Brown, 6-4 SR (10. 2 ppg, 3.4 rpg), G Calvin Croskey, 6-0 JR (8.5 ppg, 3.4 rpg), G/F Kevin Voelkel, 6-5 SR (2.7 ppg, 6.1 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: F Danny Jones, 6-6 SR (13.0 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

#6 Washington U. – St. Louis (24-3 overall, 13-1 UAA) - Midwest

Starters Returning: (1) F Spencer Gay, 6-6 SR (9.5 ppg, 5.8 rpg)

Starters Lost: (4) G Aaron Thompson, 6-4 (17.3 ppg, 4.1 rpg), PG Sean Wallis, 6-3 (12.7 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 7.7 apg), F Cameron Smith, 6-5 (7.5 ppg, 4.3 rpg), C Zach Kelly, 6-7 (5.3 ppg, 5.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Caleb Knepper, 6-6 SR (7.2 ppg, 2.7 rpg)

#7 Whitworth (26-3 overall, 16-0 NWC) – West

Starters Returning: (2) F David Riley, 6-5 SR (13.4 ppg, 3.8 rpg), G Clay Gebbers, 6-1 SR (5.6 ppg, 3.2 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) C Nate Montgomery, 6-8 (16.8 ppg, 8.3 rpg), G Eric Beal, 5-11 (14.3 ppg, 3.9 rpg, 5.7 apg), F Bo Gregg, 6-5 (11.5 ppg, 4.9 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Jack Loofburrow, 6-6 JR (8.0 ppg, 2.7 rpg)

#8 Wooster (25-6 overall, 15-1 NCAC) – Great Lakes

Starters Returning: (4) G Ian Franks, 6-4 SR (17.9 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 3.3 apg), G Nathan Balch, 6-1 SR (11.9 ppg, 3.5 rpg), F/C Bryan Wickliffe, 6-5 SR (11.2 ppg, 7.2 rpg), F Justin Hallowell, 6-7 JR (9.0 ppg, 5.8 rpg)

Starters Lost : (1) G Brandon Johnson, 6-2 (6.1 ppg, 2.4 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Matt Fegan, 6-1 JR (6.2 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

#9 UW-Whitewater (23-6 overall, 13-3 WIAC) – West
Starters Returning: (2) G Phil Negri, 6-3 SR (8.4 ppg, 3.3 rpg), F Alex Edmunds, 6-4 JR (7.2 ppg, 4.7 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) C Dustin Mitchell, 6-9 (18.0 ppg, 8.7 rpg), G Dupree Fletcher, 6-2 (14.0 ppg, 2.7 rpg), F Mike Bendall, 6-6 (10.2 ppg, 5.1 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Nolan Free, 6-1 SO (6.4 ppg, 4.1 rpg)

#10 Carthage (24-6 overall, 12-2 CCIW) - Midwest
Starters Returning: (4) PG Steve Djurickovic, 6-3 SR (24.4 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 7.3 apg), C Tyler Pierce, 6-5 SO (12.5 ppg, 4.8 rpg), G Max Cary, 6-3 JR (10.5 ppg, 3.0 rpg), F Mitch Thompson, 6-6 SO (6.1 ppg, 4.9 rpg),

Starters Lost: (1) G Cody Hilton, 5-11 (3.6 ppg, 1.7 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Malcom Kelly, 6-0 SO (7.6 ppg, 2.8 rpg)

#11 Franklin & Marshall (26-5 overall, 15-3 Centennial) – Mid-Atlantic
Starters Returning: (4) F James McNally, 6-6 SR (18.4 ppg, 8.5 rpg), G Georgio Milligan, 6-2 JR (13.0 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 4.9 apg), F Mike Baker, 6-6 SR (9.0 ppg, 6.7 rpg), G Justin Driver, 6-0 SR (2.5 ppg, 0.8 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Anthony Brooks, 6-2 (12.4 ppg, 4.4 rpg, 3.4 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Steve Tolliver, 6-2 SR (6.4 ppg, 2.8 rpg)

#12 Illinois Wesleyan (23-8 overall, 10-4 CCIW) - Midwest
Starters Returning: (5) G Sean Johnson, 6-1 SR (17.0 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 3.1 apg), C Doug Sexauer, 6-7 SR (15.6 ppg, 5.8 rpg), F Jordan Zimmer, 6-5 JR (9.0 ppg, 3.6 rpg), PG Travis Rosenkranz, 6-0 SR (8.2 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 4.1 apg), F John Koschnitzky, 6-6 JR (5.3 ppg, 3.9 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: C Ryan Connolly (6.4 ppg, 2.7 rpg), 6-9 JR

#13 St. Mary's (26-4 overall, 14-2 CAC) – Mid-Atlantic
Starters Returning: (4) G Alex Franz, 6-1 SR (13.7 ppg, 5.2 rpg), C Sam Brown, 6-8 SR (9.9 ppg, 5.2 rpg), G James Davenport, 6-3 JR (6.6 ppg, 2.7 rpg), F Brian Grashof, 6-7 JR (6.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Camontae Griffin, 5-9 (21.6 ppg, 2.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G/F Mike Fitzpatrick, 6-6 SR (8.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg)

#14 Brandeis (22-7 overall, 9-5 UAA) – Northeast
Starters Returning: (2) G Tyrone Hughes, 5-9 JR (9.0 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 3.0 apg), F Christian Yemga, 6-5 SR (4.9 ppg, 3.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) G Kenny Small, 6-0 (14.3 ppg, 1.7 rpg), F Terrell Hollins, 6-4 (13.7 ppg, 10.4 rpg), G Andre Roberson, 5-9 (10.8 ppg, 5.4 rpg, 3.8 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: G/F Vytus Kriskus, 6-6 JR (12.8 ppg, 3.0 rpg)

#15 Texas-Dallas (24-6 overall, 19-2 ASC) – South
Starters Returning: (2) G/F Chris Barnes, 6-6 JR (11.9 ppg, 3.6 rpg), G/F Curtis Davis, 6-1 SR (11.2 ppg, 4.4 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) G/F Scott Rodgers, 6-1 (15.5 ppg, 5.1 rpg), PG Jared Fleming, 5-10 (11.2 ppg, 2.9 rpg, 3.5 apg, C Jordan Eppink, 6-5 (10.2 ppg, 5.9 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: C Jimmy Witten, 6-6 SR (10.6 ppg, 6.1 rpg)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 24, 2010, 12:20:37 PM

Just from that group of teams above, my initial short-list of Top 5 candidates is:

* UW-Stevens Point
* Eastern Mennonite
* Randolph-Macon
* Wooster
* Carthage
* Illinois Wesleyan

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on September 24, 2010, 02:22:52 PM

Great round-up, Titan Q, thanks. And I think your top six is pretty much dead-on. I'd probably go with Williams 7, F&M 8, with the rest of that group falling back a bit ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: RustCollege on September 24, 2010, 05:25:04 PM

Here is the Sporting News preseason Top 10...

1. UW-Stevens Point
2. Franklin & Marshall
3. Randolph-Macon
4. Wooster
5. St. Norbert
6. Eastern Mennonite
7. Williams
8. UW-Whitewater
9. St. Mary's (Md)
10. Virginia Wesleyan

And their "possible breakthroughs" (listed alphabetically)...

Albright
Anderson
Augustana
Baruch
Cabrini
Carthage
Chapman
DeSales
Gettysburg
Hobart
Hope
Illinois Wesleyan
Ithaca
John Carroll
Maryville
MIT
Plattsburgh
Ramapo
Rhode Island
Ripon
Rochester
Rust
St. John Fisher
St. Lawrence
St. Thomas
Scranton
SUNYIT
Texas-Dallas
Wash U
Wesley
Wheaton
Whitworth
Wittenberg
York (NY)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on September 24, 2010, 09:25:07 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on September 24, 2010, 12:20:37 PM
Just from that group of teams above, my initial short-list of Top 5 candidates is:

* UW-Stevens Point
* Eastern Mennonite
* Randolph-Macon
* Wooster
* Carthage
* Illinois Wesleyan

Titan Q - Excellent analysis of the Top 15 from last year's final poll. k+

Your top 6 looks good to me while acknowledging my slight bias with one of those teams :D ;)

To round out the top 10, my votes would go to Franklin & Marshall, St. Norbert, Anderson and Williams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 25, 2010, 09:37:41 AM

Updated through #25...

#1 UW-Stevens Point (29-4 overall, 12-4 WIAC, national champion) – West
Starters Returning: (4) F Louis Hurd, 6-5 SR (12.5 ppg, 4.1 rpg),G Jared Jenkins, 6-4 SR (11.4 ppg, 3.7 rpg), F Scott Hoelzel, 6-6 SR (8.2 ppg, 5.7 rpg), F Nick Krull, 6-7 SR (5.5 ppg, 3.6 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) PG Matt Moses, 6-2 (14.7 ppg, 4.3 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: PG Jerel Harris, 5-10 SO (7.7 ppg, 1.8 rpg)

#2 Williams (30-2 overall, 9-0 NESCAC, national 2nd place) – Northeast
Starters Returning: (2) G James Wang, 6-0 JR (17.3 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 4.4 apg), F Harlan Dodson, 6-8 SR (6.2 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) G/F Blake Schultz, 6-3 (19.2 ppg, 4.3 rpg), G Alex Rubin, 6-4 (9.5 ppg, 1.9 rpg), C Joe Geoghegan, 6-8 (7.1 ppg, 8.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: C Troy Whittington, 6-5 SR (11.1 ppg, 6.2 rpg)

#3 Guilford (30-3 overall, 14-2 ODAC, Final 4) – South

Staters Returning: (2) F Martin Stephenson, 6-4 SR (6.6 ppg, 3.9 rpg), G T.C. Anderson, 6-0 SR (4.0 ppg, 3.0 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) C Tyler Sanborn, 6-9 (19.9 ppg, 14.1 rpg), G Clay Henson, 6-2 (17.1 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 3.1 apg), G Rhett Bonner, 6-1 (14.6 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 3.0 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Josh Pittman, 6-1 SO (6.9 ppg, 2.6 rpg)

#4 Eastern Mennonite (25-5 overall, 14-2 ODAC) – South
Starters Returning: (5) G/F Todd Phillips, 6-3 SR (17.4 ppg, 7.3 rpg, 3.1 rpg), G/F D.J. Hinson, 6-4 SR (15.9 ppg, 3.9 rpg), G George Johnson, 5-10 SR (15.0 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 3.2 apg), F Eli Crawford, 6-2 SR (12.2 ppg, 7.1 rpg), F Orie Pancione, 6-5 SR (7.9 ppg, 5.5 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: G/F Andrew Thorne, 6-4 SO (3.5 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

#5 Randolph-Macon (26-7 overall, 11-5 ODAC, Final 4) - South

Starters Returning: (5) F Brandon Braxton, 6-5 SR (11.5 ppg, 5.1 rpg), G Eric Pugh, 6-0 SR (10.6 ppg, 2.1 rpg, 3.2 apg), G/F Jordan Brown, 6-4 SR (10. 2 ppg, 3.4 rpg), G Calvin Croskey, 6-0 JR (8.5 ppg, 3.4 rpg), G/F Kevin Voelkel, 6-5 SR (2.7 ppg, 6.1 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: F Danny Jones, 6-6 SR (13.0 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

#6 Washington U. – St. Louis (24-3 overall, 13-1 UAA) - Midwest

Starters Returning: (1) F Spencer Gay, 6-6 SR (9.5 ppg, 5.8 rpg)

Starters Lost: (4) G Aaron Thompson, 6-4 (17.3 ppg, 4.1 rpg), PG Sean Wallis, 6-3 (12.7 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 7.7 apg), F Cameron Smith, 6-5 (7.5 ppg, 4.3 rpg), C Zach Kelly, 6-7 (5.3 ppg, 5.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Caleb Knepper, 6-6 SR (7.2 ppg, 2.7 rpg)

#7 Whitworth (26-3 overall, 16-0 NWC) – West

Starters Returning: (2) F David Riley, 6-5 SR (13.4 ppg, 3.8 rpg), G Clay Gebbers, 6-1 SR (5.6 ppg, 3.2 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) C Nate Montgomery, 6-8 (16.8 ppg, 8.3 rpg), G Eric Beal, 5-11 (14.3 ppg, 3.9 rpg, 5.7 apg), F Bo Gregg, 6-5 (11.5 ppg, 4.9 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Jack Loofburrow, 6-6 JR (8.0 ppg, 2.7 rpg)

#8 Wooster (25-6 overall, 15-1 NCAC) – Great Lakes

Starters Returning: (4) G Ian Franks, 6-4 SR (17.9 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 3.3 apg), G Nathan Balch, 6-1 SR (11.9 ppg, 3.5 rpg), F/C Bryan Wickliffe, 6-5 SR (11.2 ppg, 7.2 rpg), F Justin Hallowell, 6-7 JR (9.0 ppg, 5.8 rpg)

Starters Lost : (1) G Brandon Johnson, 6-2 (6.1 ppg, 2.4 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Matt Fegan, 6-1 JR (6.2 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

#9 UW-Whitewater (23-6 overall, 13-3 WIAC) – West
Starters Returning: (2) G Phil Negri, 6-3 SR (8.4 ppg, 3.3 rpg), F Alex Edmunds, 6-4 JR (7.2 ppg, 4.7 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) C Dustin Mitchell, 6-9 (18.0 ppg, 8.7 rpg), G Dupree Fletcher, 6-2 (14.0 ppg, 2.7 rpg), F Mike Bendall, 6-6 (10.2 ppg, 5.1 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Nolan Free, 6-1 SO (6.4 ppg, 4.1 rpg)

#10 Carthage (24-6 overall, 12-2 CCIW) - Midwest
Starters Returning: (4) PG Steve Djurickovic, 6-3 SR (24.4 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 7.3 apg), C Tyler Pierce, 6-5 SO (12.5 ppg, 4.8 rpg), G Max Cary, 6-3 JR (10.5 ppg, 3.0 rpg), F Mitch Thompson, 6-6 SO (6.1 ppg, 4.9 rpg),

Starters Lost: (1) G Cody Hilton, 5-11 (3.6 ppg, 1.7 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Malcom Kelly, 6-0 SO (7.6 ppg, 2.8 rpg)

#11 Franklin & Marshall (26-5 overall, 15-3 Centennial) – Mid-Atlantic
Starters Returning: (4) F James McNally, 6-6 SR (18.4 ppg, 8.5 rpg), G Georgio Milligan, 6-2 JR (13.0 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 4.9 apg), F Mike Baker, 6-6 SR (9.0 ppg, 6.7 rpg), G Justin Driver, 6-0 SR (2.5 ppg, 0.8 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Anthony Brooks, 6-2 (12.4 ppg, 4.4 rpg, 3.4 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Steve Tolliver, 6-2 SR (6.4 ppg, 2.8 rpg)

#12 Illinois Wesleyan (23-8 overall, 10-4 CCIW) - Midwest
Starters Returning: (5) G Sean Johnson, 6-1 SR (17.0 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 3.1 apg), C Doug Sexauer, 6-7 SR (15.6 ppg, 5.8 rpg), F Jordan Zimmer, 6-5 JR (9.0 ppg, 3.6 rpg), PG Travis Rosenkranz, 6-0 SR (8.2 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 4.1 apg), F John Koschnitzky, 6-6 JR (5.3 ppg, 3.9 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: C Ryan Connolly (6.4 ppg, 2.7 rpg), 6-9 JR

#13 St. Mary's (26-4 overall, 14-2 CAC) – Mid-Atlantic
Starters Returning: (4) G Alex Franz, 6-1 SR (13.7 ppg, 5.2 rpg), C Sam Brown, 6-8 SR (9.9 ppg, 5.2 rpg), G James Davenport, 6-3 JR (6.6 ppg, 2.7 rpg), F Brian Grashof, 6-7 JR (6.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Camontae Griffin, 5-9 (21.6 ppg, 2.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G/F Mike Fitzpatrick, 6-6 SR (8.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg)

#14 Brandeis (22-7 overall, 9-5 UAA) – Northeast
Starters Returning: (2) G Tyrone Hughes, 5-9 JR (9.0 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 3.0 apg), F Christian Yemga, 6-5 SR (4.9 ppg, 3.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) G Kenny Small, 6-0 (14.3 ppg, 1.7 rpg), F Terrell Hollins, 6-4 (13.7 ppg, 10.4 rpg), G Andre Roberson, 5-9 (10.8 ppg, 5.4 rpg, 3.8 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: G/F Vytus Kriskus, 6-6 JR (12.8 ppg, 3.0 rpg)

#15 Texas-Dallas (24-6 overall, 19-2 ASC) – South
Starters Returning: (2) G/F Chris Barnes, 6-6 JR (11.9 ppg, 3.6 rpg), G/F Curtis Davis, 6-1 SR (11.2 ppg, 4.4 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) G/F Scott Rodgers, 6-1 (15.5 ppg, 5.1 rpg), PG Jared Fleming, 5-10 (11.2 ppg, 2.9 rpg, 3.5 apg, C Jordan Eppink, 6-5 (10.2 ppg, 5.9 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: C Jimmy Witten, 6-6 SR (10.6 ppg, 6.1 rpg)

#16 St. Thomas (23-4 overall, 19-1 MIAC) - West
Starters Returning: (2) G Tyler Nicolai, 5-11 SR (14.1 ppg, 2.0 rpg), G Alex Healy, 6-4 SR (12.7 ppg, 3.6 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) G Joe Scott, 6-4 (10.8 ppg, 2.1 rpg), G Teddy Archer, 6-1 (5.0 ppg, 2.9 rpg), C Sam Eicher, 6-6 (4.4 ppg, 2.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: C Tommy Hannon, 6-8 JR (5.3 ppg, 3.8 rpg)

#17 Virginia Wesleyan (22-5 overall, 12-4 ODAC) - South
Starters Returning: (4) F Donald Vaughn, 6-5 JR (15.5 ppg, 8.0 ppg), F Chris Astorga, 6-5 SO (8.9 ppg, 4.9 rpg), G Ed Roberts, 5-10 JR (3.5 ppg, 1.9 rpg), F Trevor Watson, 6-4 JR (1.8 ppg, 1.4 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Stephen Fields, 6-2 (21.0 ppg, 4.6 rpg, 3.2 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Quantrell Simmons, 6-6 SR (8.8 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

#18 William Paterson (25-3 overall, 12-1 NJAC) - Atlantic
Starters Returning: (1) G Gabriel Paul, 6-5 SR (8.0 ppg, 3.7 rpg)

Starters Lost (4) G Joseph Ellis, 6-1 (14.3 ppg, 3.6 rpg), F Abdoulaye Ouedraogo, 6-8 (10.0 ppg, 7.4 rpg), G Bobby Dunn, 6-3 (8.6 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 3.3 apg), G Tim Lucas, 6-3 (8.2 ppg, 4.6 rpg, 3.6 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Shaun Canty, 6-8 SR (3.1 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

#19 Middlebury (25-4 overall, 8-1 NESCAC) - Northeast
Starters Returning: (4) F Ryan Sharry, 6-8 JR (13.7 ppg, 8.1 rpg), G Jake Wolfin, 6-2 SO (10.6 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 3.9 apg), G Nolan Thompson, 6-3 SO (10.2 ppg, 3.0 rpg), C Andrew Locke, 6-10 SR (9.1 ppg, 5.0 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Tim Edwards, 6-4 (8.5 ppg, 7.1 rpg, 5.1 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Ryan Wholey, 6-4 SR (8.5 ppg, 4.0 rpg)

#20 St. Norbert (23-4 overall, 14-2 MWC) - Midwest
Starters Returning: (5) G Dave Wipperfurth, 6-2 SR (15.3 ppg, 3.4 rpg), C Chris Peterson, 6-5 SR (13.7 ppg, 5.4 rpg), G John Taylor, 6-0 SR (10.6 ppg, 4.3 rpg, 4.3 apg), F Steve Papke, 6-4 SR (7.0 ppg, 4.6 rpg), G/F Paul Mallers, 6-3 SR (5.9 ppg, 4.5 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: G Mike Brumm, 5-11 SO (4.6 ppg, 1.0 rpg)

#21 Chapman (24-3 overall, Independent) - West
Starters Returning: (2) F Justin Riley, 6-5 SR (15.0 ppg, 9.0 rpg), G/F Griffin Ramme (13.4 ppg, 3.0 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3): PG Kyle Wood, 6-0 (13.7 ppg, 3.2 rpg), F Jared Kaiser, 6-6 (7.4 ppg, 6.1 rpg), G/F Dan Aguilar, 6-4 (4.9 ppg, 3.9 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F/C Jon Consani, 6-7 SR (5.3 ppg, 3.4 rpg)

#22 Anderson (23-6 overall, 13-3 HCAC) - Midwest
Starters Returning: (4) F Brock Morrison, 6-3 JR (14.4 ppg, 8.7 rpg), C Andrew Jones, 6-6 SR (13.2 ppg, 5.8 rpg), F Andrew Bowman, 6-7 SR (11.8 ppg, 6.5 rpg), G Gabe Miller, 6-3 SR (11.0 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 3.8 apg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Ty Riddle (14.8 ppg, 2.0 rpg) - was a junior last year...had one semester eligility left but decided to enter work world

Top Returning Reserve: G Phil Hogan, 5-11 SO (5.7 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

#23 John Carroll (21-7 overall, 15-3 OAC) - Great Lakes
Starters Returning: (5) G Corey Shontz, 6-1 JR (14.4 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 4.0 apg), F/C Matt Crozier, 6-7 JR (12.6 ppg, 7.4 rpg), G Joey Meyer, 5-11 JR (8.3 ppg, 1.9 rpg), G Michael Hartnett, 6-2 JR (4.9 ppg, 1.4 rpg), F Patrick Sweeney, 6-2 JR (2.8 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: F Maurice Haynes, 6-4 SR (8.6 ppg, 4.3 apg)

#24 DeSales (24-6 overall, 13-1 MACF) - Mid-Atlantic
Starters Returning: (2) G Brian Hunter, 6-3 SR (11.1. ppg, 3.6 rpg, 3.7 apg), C Jamey Bercier, 6-6 JR (3.7 ppg, 2.9 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) G Darnell Braswell, 6-1 (20.9 ppg, 8.4 rpg), G Jimmy Malatesta, 6-1 (6.5 ppg, 3.4 rpg), F Matt Zwetolitz, 6-4 (5.5 ppg, 4.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Bob Zanneo, 6-5 JR (6.6 ppg, 2.1 rpg)

#25 Central (23-5 overall, 14-2 IIAC) - West
Starters Returning: none

Starters Lost: (5) G Miguel Ley, 6-0 (18.2 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 5.0 apg), C Loren Liming, 6-7 (17.4 ppg, 8.7 rpg), F Mark Holan, 6-4 (12.0 ppg, 4.0 rpg), G Justin Madsen, 6-2 (7.8 ppg, 2.4 rpg), F Zach Cooper, 6-4 (5.7 ppg, 7.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Jack Bruns, 6-5 JR (5.8 ppg, 3.6 rpg)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 25, 2010, 09:39:49 AM

I guess my preseason "top tier", just from the final Top 25 last year, would be...

* UW-Stevens Point
* Eastern Mennonite
* Randolph-Macon
* Wooster
* Carthage
* Illinois Wesleyan
* St. Norbert
* Franklin & Marshall
* John Carroll

These teams were all very good in 2009-10 and have very few significant questions to answer heading into 2010-11.

My next tier would include...

* Williams
* Middlebury
* Anderson
* Virginia Wesleyan
* St. Mary's

3rd Tier (not completely sure what to make of these two really)...

* UW-Whitewater
* St. Thomas

And finally, teams that were in the final 2009-10 Top 25 that don't seem to be preseason Top 25 candidates to me are...

* Guilford
* Wash U
* Whitworth
* Brandeis
* Texas-Dallas
* William Paterson
* Chapman
* DeSales
* Central

Several of these teams have good players ready to step in, and may end up in the Top 25 this year (like Wash U, for example - they have all kinds of young talent), but it seems they have lost too much to be in the preseason poll.

So who are the teams that were not ranked in the final 2009-10 poll that belong in the 2010-11 preseason poll? I have 16 teams above that I think are pretty safe bets to be in...that leaves 9 open spots.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 25, 2010, 11:45:19 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on September 25, 2010, 09:39:49 AM
So who are the teams that were not ranked in the final 2009-10 poll that belong in the 2010-11 preseason poll? I have 16 teams above that I think are pretty safe bets to be in...that leaves 9 open spots.

I think Augustana deserves consideration...

2009-10: 16-10 overall, 9-5 CCIW (lost by 3 @ Carthage in CCIW tournament)

The Vikings lost their second leading scorer and top perimeter threat, Matt Pelton (12.3 ppg), but they return 4 starters and 8 of thier top 10. They also get back 6-9 small forward Bryant Voilles who missed last season due to injury.

Augustana has a ridiculous amount of size for a Division III team. In fact, they will be bigger than some mid-major Division I teams. The Vikings will probably start 6-2, 6-4, 6-9, 6-7, 6-9...with a boatload of 6-6 and taller players coming off the bench.

It is yet to be seen if Augustana has enough perimeter firepower to be a great team, but I think they are most likely a Top 25 team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on September 26, 2010, 09:27:31 AM

I think SUNY-Plattsburgh (returns top four players, all of whom will be seniors, from 21 win NCAA team), MIT (very young and thin team made NCAA last year, now much more experienced, and far deeper, with a very solid top three players in Kates, Hollingsworth, and Tashman), and Amherst (noted above, returns all but one rotation player and should have better luck with injuries, rare that they don't finish in top 25) all belong somewhere in the 15-25 range.

One dark horse is Ramapo: SOMEONE from NJAC has to emerge (WPU is decimated by graduation and Stockton also loses its key players), and they return 4/5 top scorers, all of whom were only sophomores. They may still be a year away, but could surprise this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on September 26, 2010, 09:37:51 AM

Oh, one more I'll add, WPI, basically everyone should be back from a 20 win team, and they are always on the fringes of the top 25 it seems. Obviously five from New England is too many, and I'd put them below the top three NESCAC teams and MIT, but I wouldn't be surprised to see them end up in the top 25. The only other potential New England contender is Western Conn, who graduates no players from a 19 win team that missed a conference title by one point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 26, 2010, 09:48:48 AM

I'll throw 2 IIAC teams on the table that were both very young last year...

Buena Vista (15-12/10-6) - returns 3 all-conf players

Loras (15-11/10-6) - returns 3 all-conf players

I wouldn't put both in, but I'd probably take a flyer on whichever is picked to win the league this year.

Hope (21-8/11-3) and Calvin (19-9/12-2) too, of course.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 26, 2010, 09:49:54 AM

So the running list of teams that deserve Top 25 consideration (after the 16 from the final 2009-10 poll I listed above) is...

Amherst
Augustana
Buena Vista
Calvin
Hope
Loras
MIT
Ramapo
SUNY-Plattsburgh
UW-River Falls
WPI

Keep the ideas coming.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on September 27, 2010, 04:36:24 PM

You might take a look at DePauw. 20-8 last season.

http://www.depauw.edu/ath/mbasket/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 27, 2010, 04:37:33 PM

Another team that I think deserves a good look - Manchester (HCAC, Midwest region).

Last year the Spartans were 17-10. Their losses were...

- Grace College (NAIA)--on last second shot
- Illinois Wesleyan (Elite 8)-- on last second 30-footer - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rj4Sd-TFhvM
- Ball State (D1)— 9 point game with 5 minutes to go...ended up losing by 14.
- Anderson (Round of 32) 3 times -- twice at the buzzer
- Defiance (1st round loser to Whitewater) - twice
- Hanover (12-4 in HCAC)
- Mount St. Joe - only "bad" loss?

Manchester returns its top 7 players...maybe a Top 25 sleeper.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 27, 2010, 04:38:13 PM

Thanks sac...good call.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 27, 2010, 04:44:03 PM

Running list of Top 25 candidates (of teams not in final poll of 2009-10)...

Amherst
Augustana
Buena Vista
Calvin
DePauw
Hope
Loras
Manchester
MIT
Ramapo
SUNY-Plattsburgh
UW-River Falls
WPI

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Viking Mike on September 29, 2010, 12:20:42 AM

Titan Q-

Great work on your preseason picks. I do like IWU over Carthage this year for the title. I pick my Vikings for third.

If my Vikes can improve their perimeter shooting, it could be a very good year. We will miss Pelton's leadership and shooting, but we do have some experienced guards returning. The return of Voilles will definately help as he can be deadly from the arc. I expect him to play a lot on the perimeter this year to help with outside shooting. Anderson also has a deadly eye and can really light it up. We do have lots of "BIGS" who will take turns battling down low for any rebounds. We may not be a great shooting percentage team, but we will have lots of possessions and opportunities at the basket. Nelson will be a beast down low and I look for him to have an All American type year. DeSimone is solid at the point.

Augie's schedule HAS to be one of the toughest in the country. Besides atleast 2 games against top 10 teams Carthage and IWU, the Vikes have Wash U, Anderson, Whitewater, Buena Vista, and possibly St Norbert (tourney final?) on their "to do list". I think Titan Q has all of these teams in his top 25!!!

Should be a great year in the CCIW!!! Can't wait!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on October 04, 2010, 09:43:46 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on September 25, 2010, 09:39:49 AM
I guess my preseason "top tier", just from the final Top 25 last year, would be...

* UW-Stevens Point
* Eastern Mennonite
* Randolph-Macon
* Wooster
* Carthage
* Illinois Wesleyan
* St. Norbert
* Franklin & Marshall
* John Carroll

These teams were all very good in 2009-10 and have very few significant questions to answer heading into 2010-11.

I wouldn't put John Carroll (JCU) in the top tier yet because they lost several key players. ;)

John Carroll graduated 5 players from the 11-12 player rotation that Coach Moran runs.

Rudy Kirbus - 12.9 ppg, 4.7 rpg, 22 mins/game D3Hoops Great Lakes 1st Team, All-OAC 1st Team
Chris Zajac - 7.7 ppg, 3.1 apg, 20 mins/game All-OAC honorable mention
Brian Dandrea - 5.0 ppg, 17 mins/game, solid defender
Tyler Kirsch - 4.6 ppg, 4.0 rpg, 17 mins/game
TJ DiSanto - 2.2 ppg

So, JCU graduated over 32 points/game which they will need to replace. Coach Moran does tend to plug new recruits into his rotation system every year. JCU plays at Wooster in December which will be a good indicator to see if the Blue Streaks deserve to be ranked in the Top 10.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 05, 2010, 03:32:36 PM

DIII News preseason Top 25...

http://fwix.com/dallas/share/f94e320ba7/ut_dallas_mens_basketball_ranked_no_17_in_diii_news_preseason_top_25

1. Wisconsin-Stevens Point
2. Illinois Wesleyan
3. Eastern Mennonite
4. Carthage
5. Williams
6. Randolph-Macon
7. Franklin & Marshall
8. Wooster
9. St. Thomas
10. Washington (Mo.)
11. Rhode Island College
12. St. Mary's (Md.)
13. Guilford
14. Hope
15. Whitworth
16. St. Norbert
17. Texas-Dallas
18. MIT
19. SUNYIT
20. John Carroll
21. Plattsburgh State
22. Anderson
23. SUNY Purchase
24. Middlebury
25. Merchant Marine

Others to watch: Wis. Whitewater, Rch. Stockton, Brandeis, Albertus Magnus, St. John Fisher, Cabrini, Maryville, Birmingham Southern, Albright, Occidental, DePauw, Claremont, DeSales, Chapman, Medaille.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 05, 2010, 09:26:32 PM

I think they just took the final poll from last year, threw every team that got a vote into a hat and drew them out one by one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 05, 2010, 10:17:22 PM

Every year the other publications try a preseason prediction for D3 basketball, and every year it's apparent that they're half-assing it. The d3hoops.com preseason poll is the only one really worth taking seriously -- and even that is a stretch, inasmuch as no preseason poll is worth taking seriously once the season is in earnest and there's genuine data available upon which to build a poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on October 06, 2010, 08:33:32 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 05, 2010, 10:17:22 PM
Every year the other publications try a preseason prediction for D3 basketball, and every year it's apparent that they're half-assing it. The d3hoops.com preseason poll is the only one really worth taking seriously -- and even that is a stretch, inasmuch as no preseason poll is worth taking seriously once the season is in earnest and there's genuine data available upon which to build a poll.

You've gotta give them some credit... at least all of the teams on their poll are actually IN Division III!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 10, 2010, 06:22:48 PM

(Bumping this up)

2009-10 final Top 25...

#1 UW-Stevens Point (29-4 overall, 12-4 WIAC, national champion) – West
Starters Returning: (4) F Louis Hurd, 6-5 SR (12.5 ppg, 4.1 rpg),G Jared Jenkins, 6-4 SR (11.4 ppg, 3.7 rpg), F Scott Hoelzel, 6-6 SR (8.2 ppg, 5.7 rpg), F Nick Krull, 6-7 SR (5.5 ppg, 3.6 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) PG Matt Moses, 6-2 (14.7 ppg, 4.3 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: PG Jerel Harris, 5-10 SO (7.7 ppg, 1.8 rpg)

#2 Williams (30-2 overall, 9-0 NESCAC, national 2nd place) – Northeast
Starters Returning: (2) G James Wang, 6-0 JR (17.3 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 4.4 apg), F Harlan Dodson, 6-8 SR (6.2 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) G/F Blake Schultz, 6-3 (19.2 ppg, 4.3 rpg), G Alex Rubin, 6-4 (9.5 ppg, 1.9 rpg), C Joe Geoghegan, 6-8 (7.1 ppg, 8.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: C Troy Whittington, 6-5 SR (11.1 ppg, 6.2 rpg)

#3 Guilford (30-3 overall, 14-2 ODAC, Final 4) – South

Staters Returning: (2) F Martin Stephenson, 6-4 SR (6.6 ppg, 3.9 rpg), G T.C. Anderson, 6-0 SR (4.0 ppg, 3.0 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) C Tyler Sanborn, 6-9 (19.9 ppg, 14.1 rpg), G Clay Henson, 6-2 (17.1 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 3.1 apg), G Rhett Bonner, 6-1 (14.6 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 3.0 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Josh Pittman, 6-1 SO (6.9 ppg, 2.6 rpg)

#4 Eastern Mennonite (25-5 overall, 14-2 ODAC) – South
Starters Returning: (5) G/F Todd Phillips, 6-3 SR (17.4 ppg, 7.3 rpg, 3.1 rpg), G/F D.J. Hinson, 6-4 SR (15.9 ppg, 3.9 rpg), G George Johnson, 5-10 SR (15.0 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 3.2 apg), F Eli Crawford, 6-2 SR (12.2 ppg, 7.1 rpg), F Orie Pancione, 6-5 SR (7.9 ppg, 5.5 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: G/F Andrew Thorne, 6-4 SO (3.5 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

#5 Randolph-Macon (26-7 overall, 11-5 ODAC, Final 4) - South

Starters Returning: (5) F Brandon Braxton, 6-5 SR (11.5 ppg, 5.1 rpg), G Eric Pugh, 6-0 SR (10.6 ppg, 2.1 rpg, 3.2 apg), G/F Jordan Brown, 6-4 SR (10. 2 ppg, 3.4 rpg), G Calvin Croskey, 6-0 JR (8.5 ppg, 3.4 rpg), G/F Kevin Voelkel, 6-5 SR (2.7 ppg, 6.1 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: F Danny Jones, 6-6 SR (13.0 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

#6 Washington U. – St. Louis (24-3 overall, 13-1 UAA) - Midwest

Starters Returning: (1) F Spencer Gay, 6-6 SR (9.5 ppg, 5.8 rpg)

Starters Lost: (4) G Aaron Thompson, 6-4 (17.3 ppg, 4.1 rpg), PG Sean Wallis, 6-3 (12.7 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 7.7 apg), F Cameron Smith, 6-5 (7.5 ppg, 4.3 rpg), C Zach Kelly, 6-7 (5.3 ppg, 5.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Caleb Knepper, 6-6 SR (7.2 ppg, 2.7 rpg)

#7 Whitworth (26-3 overall, 16-0 NWC) – West

Starters Returning: (2) F David Riley, 6-5 SR (13.4 ppg, 3.8 rpg), G Clay Gebbers, 6-1 SR (5.6 ppg, 3.2 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) C Nate Montgomery, 6-8 (16.8 ppg, 8.3 rpg), G Eric Beal, 5-11 (14.3 ppg, 3.9 rpg, 5.7 apg), F Bo Gregg, 6-5 (11.5 ppg, 4.9 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Jack Loofburrow, 6-6 JR (8.0 ppg, 2.7 rpg)

#8 Wooster (25-6 overall, 15-1 NCAC) – Great Lakes

Starters Returning: (4) G Ian Franks, 6-4 SR (17.9 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 3.3 apg), G Nathan Balch, 6-1 SR (11.9 ppg, 3.5 rpg), F/C Bryan Wickliffe, 6-5 SR (11.2 ppg, 7.2 rpg), F Justin Hallowell, 6-7 JR (9.0 ppg, 5.8 rpg)

Starters Lost : (1) G Brandon Johnson, 6-2 (6.1 ppg, 2.4 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Matt Fegan, 6-1 JR (6.2 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

#9 UW-Whitewater (23-6 overall, 13-3 WIAC) – West
Starters Returning: (2) G Phil Negri, 6-3 SR (8.4 ppg, 3.3 rpg), F Alex Edmunds, 6-4 JR (7.2 ppg, 4.7 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) C Dustin Mitchell, 6-9 (18.0 ppg, 8.7 rpg), G Dupree Fletcher, 6-2 (14.0 ppg, 2.7 rpg), F Mike Bendall, 6-6 (10.2 ppg, 5.1 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Nolan Free, 6-1 SO (6.4 ppg, 4.1 rpg)

#10 Carthage (24-6 overall, 12-2 CCIW) - Midwest
Starters Returning: (4) PG Steve Djurickovic, 6-3 SR (24.4 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 7.3 apg), C Tyler Pierce, 6-5 SO (12.5 ppg, 4.8 rpg), G Max Cary, 6-3 JR (10.5 ppg, 3.0 rpg), F Mitch Thompson, 6-6 SO (6.1 ppg, 4.9 rpg),

Starters Lost: (1) G Cody Hilton, 5-11 (3.6 ppg, 1.7 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Malcom Kelly, 6-0 SO (7.6 ppg, 2.8 rpg)

#11 Franklin & Marshall (26-5 overall, 15-3 Centennial) – Mid-Atlantic
Starters Returning: (4) F James McNally, 6-6 SR (18.4 ppg, 8.5 rpg), G Georgio Milligan, 6-2 JR (13.0 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 4.9 apg), F Mike Baker, 6-6 SR (9.0 ppg, 6.7 rpg), G Justin Driver, 6-0 SR (2.5 ppg, 0.8 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Anthony Brooks, 6-2 (12.4 ppg, 4.4 rpg, 3.4 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Steve Tolliver, 6-2 SR (6.4 ppg, 2.8 rpg)

#12 Illinois Wesleyan (23-8 overall, 10-4 CCIW) - Midwest
Starters Returning: (5) G Sean Johnson, 6-1 SR (17.0 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 3.1 apg), C Doug Sexauer, 6-7 SR (15.6 ppg, 5.8 rpg), F Jordan Zimmer, 6-5 JR (9.0 ppg, 3.6 rpg), PG Travis Rosenkranz, 6-0 SR (8.2 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 4.1 apg), F John Koschnitzky, 6-6 JR (5.3 ppg, 3.9 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: C Ryan Connolly (6.4 ppg, 2.7 rpg), 6-9 JR

#13 St. Mary's (26-4 overall, 14-2 CAC) – Mid-Atlantic
Starters Returning: (4) G Alex Franz, 6-1 SR (13.7 ppg, 5.2 rpg), C Sam Brown, 6-8 SR (9.9 ppg, 5.2 rpg), G James Davenport, 6-3 JR (6.6 ppg, 2.7 rpg), F Brian Grashof, 6-7 JR (6.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Camontae Griffin, 5-9 (21.6 ppg, 2.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G/F Mike Fitzpatrick, 6-6 SR (8.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg)

#14 Brandeis (22-7 overall, 9-5 UAA) – Northeast
Starters Returning: (2) G Tyrone Hughes, 5-9 JR (9.0 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 3.0 apg), F Christian Yemga, 6-5 SR (4.9 ppg, 3.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) G Kenny Small, 6-0 (14.3 ppg, 1.7 rpg), F Terrell Hollins, 6-4 (13.7 ppg, 10.4 rpg), G Andre Roberson, 5-9 (10.8 ppg, 5.4 rpg, 3.8 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: G/F Vytus Kriskus, 6-6 JR (12.8 ppg, 3.0 rpg)

#15 Texas-Dallas (24-6 overall, 19-2 ASC) – South
Starters Returning: (2) G/F Chris Barnes, 6-6 JR (11.9 ppg, 3.6 rpg), G/F Curtis Davis, 6-1 SR (11.2 ppg, 4.4 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) G/F Scott Rodgers, 6-1 (15.5 ppg, 5.1 rpg), PG Jared Fleming, 5-10 (11.2 ppg, 2.9 rpg, 3.5 apg, C Jordan Eppink, 6-5 (10.2 ppg, 5.9 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: C Jimmy Witten, 6-6 SR (10.6 ppg, 6.1 rpg)

#16 St. Thomas (23-4 overall, 19-1 MIAC) - West
Starters Returning: (2) G Tyler Nicolai, 5-11 SR (14.1 ppg, 2.0 rpg), G Alex Healy, 6-4 SR (12.7 ppg, 3.6 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) G Joe Scott, 6-4 (10.8 ppg, 2.1 rpg), G Teddy Archer, 6-1 (5.0 ppg, 2.9 rpg), C Sam Eicher, 6-6 (4.4 ppg, 2.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: C Tommy Hannon, 6-8 JR (5.3 ppg, 3.8 rpg)

#17 Virginia Wesleyan (22-5 overall, 12-4 ODAC) - South
Starters Returning: (4) F Donald Vaughn, 6-5 JR (15.5 ppg, 8.0 ppg), F Chris Astorga, 6-5 SO (8.9 ppg, 4.9 rpg), G Ed Roberts, 5-10 JR (3.5 ppg, 1.9 rpg), F Trevor Watson, 6-4 JR (1.8 ppg, 1.4 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Stephen Fields, 6-2 (21.0 ppg, 4.6 rpg, 3.2 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Quantrell Simmons, 6-6 SR (8.8 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

#18 William Paterson (25-3 overall, 12-1 NJAC) - Atlantic
Starters Returning: (1) G Gabriel Paul, 6-5 SR (8.0 ppg, 3.7 rpg)

Starters Lost (4) G Joseph Ellis, 6-1 (14.3 ppg, 3.6 rpg), F Abdoulaye Ouedraogo, 6-8 (10.0 ppg, 7.4 rpg), G Bobby Dunn, 6-3 (8.6 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 3.3 apg), G Tim Lucas, 6-3 (8.2 ppg, 4.6 rpg, 3.6 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Shaun Canty, 6-8 SR (3.1 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

#19 Middlebury (25-4 overall, 8-1 NESCAC) - Northeast
Starters Returning: (4) F Ryan Sharry, 6-8 JR (13.7 ppg, 8.1 rpg), G Jake Wolfin, 6-2 SO (10.6 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 3.9 apg), G Nolan Thompson, 6-3 SO (10.2 ppg, 3.0 rpg), C Andrew Locke, 6-10 SR (9.1 ppg, 5.0 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Tim Edwards, 6-4 (8.5 ppg, 7.1 rpg, 5.1 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Ryan Wholey, 6-4 SR (8.5 ppg, 4.0 rpg)

#20 St. Norbert (23-4 overall, 14-2 MWC) - Midwest
Starters Returning: (5) G Dave Wipperfurth, 6-2 SR (15.3 ppg, 3.4 rpg), C Chris Peterson, 6-5 SR (13.7 ppg, 5.4 rpg), G John Taylor, 6-0 SR (10.6 ppg, 4.3 rpg, 4.3 apg), F Steve Papke, 6-4 SR (7.0 ppg, 4.6 rpg), G/F Paul Mallers, 6-3 SR (5.9 ppg, 4.5 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: G Mike Brumm, 5-11 SO (4.6 ppg, 1.0 rpg)

#21 Chapman (24-3 overall, Independent) - West
Starters Returning: (2) F Justin Riley, 6-5 SR (15.0 ppg, 9.0 rpg), G/F Griffin Ramme (13.4 ppg, 3.0 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3): PG Kyle Wood, 6-0 (13.7 ppg, 3.2 rpg), F Jared Kaiser, 6-6 (7.4 ppg, 6.1 rpg), G/F Dan Aguilar, 6-4 (4.9 ppg, 3.9 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F/C Jon Consani, 6-7 SR (5.3 ppg, 3.4 rpg)

#22 Anderson (23-6 overall, 13-3 HCAC) - Midwest
Starters Returning: (4) F Brock Morrison, 6-3 JR (14.4 ppg, 8.7 rpg), C Andrew Jones, 6-6 SR (13.2 ppg, 5.8 rpg), F Andrew Bowman, 6-7 SR (11.8 ppg, 6.5 rpg), G Gabe Miller, 6-3 SR (11.0 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 3.8 apg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Ty Riddle (14.8 ppg, 2.0 rpg) - was a junior last year...had one semester eligility left but decided to enter work world

Top Returning Reserve: G Phil Hogan, 5-11 SO (5.7 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

#23 John Carroll (21-7 overall, 15-3 OAC) - Great Lakes
Starters Returning: (5) G Corey Shontz, 6-1 JR (14.4 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 4.0 apg), F/C Matt Crozier, 6-7 JR (12.6 ppg, 7.4 rpg), G Joey Meyer, 5-11 JR (8.3 ppg, 1.9 rpg), G Michael Hartnett, 6-2 JR (4.9 ppg, 1.4 rpg), F Patrick Sweeney, 6-2 JR (2.8 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: F Maurice Haynes, 6-4 SR (8.6 ppg, 4.3 apg)

#24 DeSales (24-6 overall, 13-1 MACF) - Mid-Atlantic
Starters Returning: (2) G Brian Hunter, 6-3 SR (11.1. ppg, 3.6 rpg, 3.7 apg), C Jamey Bercier, 6-6 JR (3.7 ppg, 2.9 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) G Darnell Braswell, 6-1 (20.9 ppg, 8.4 rpg), G Jimmy Malatesta, 6-1 (6.5 ppg, 3.4 rpg), F Matt Zwetolitz, 6-4 (5.5 ppg, 4.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Bob Zanneo, 6-5 JR (6.6 ppg, 2.1 rpg)

#25 Central (23-5 overall, 14-2 IIAC) - West
Starters Returning: none

Starters Lost: (5) G Miguel Ley, 6-0 (18.2 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 5.0 apg), C Loren Liming, 6-7 (17.4 ppg, 8.7 rpg), F Mark Holan, 6-4 (12.0 ppg, 4.0 rpg), G Justin Madsen, 6-2 (7.8 ppg, 2.4 rpg), F Zach Cooper, 6-4 (5.7 ppg, 7.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Jack Bruns, 6-5 JR (5.8 ppg, 3.6 rpg)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 10, 2010, 06:26:58 PM

Running list of other 2010-11 preseason Top 25 candidates, as suggested by posters here...

Amherst (14-11 overall, 3-6 NESCAC) – Northeast
Starters Returning: (4) G Conor Meehan, 6-4 SR (14.2 ppg, 5.6 rpg, 6.2 apg), F Jeff Holmes, 6-7 JR (9.8 ppg, 6.2 rpg), G Taylor Barisse, 6-5 JR (8.2 ppg, 4.4 rpg), G/F David Waller, 6-6 JR (7.8 ppg, 4.6 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G/F Steven Wheeler, 6-6 (14.7 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Willy Workman, 6-6 SO (6.2 ppg, 4.0 rpg)

Augustana (16-10 overall, 9-5 CCIW) – Midwest
Starters Returning: (4) F Kyle Nelson, 6-9 SR (14.7 ppg, 7.7 rpg), PG Brian DeSimone, 6-1 JR (6.7 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 3.3 apg), G Troy Rorer, 6-2 JR (6.3 ppg, 4.0 rpg), F Brandon Kunz, 6-7 SO (4.7 ppg, 3.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Matt Pelton, 6-3 (12.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Chris Anderson, 6-4 JR (7.0 ppg, 1.6 rpg)

Buena Vista (15-12 overall, 10-6 IIAC) – West
Starters Returning: (3) G Troy Ticknor, 6-1 SO (12.4 ppg, 2.1 rpg), F/C Doug Bissen, 6-7 JR (11.7 ppg, 6.4 rpg), F Wes Nordquist, 6-7 SO (11.4 ppg, 6.6 rpg)

Starters Lost: (2) G/F Nathan Parker, 6-4 (10.7 ppg, 4.3 rpg), G Kevin Osborn, 6-0 (3.7 ppg, 3.1 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Jeff Janssen, 6-4 JR (8.9 ppg, 1.8 rpg)

Calvin (19-9 overall, 12-2 MIAA) – Great Lakes
Starters Returning: (3) F Danny Rodts, 6-6 SR (9.8 ppg, 4.4 rpg), F Tom Snikkers, 6-4 SO (8.5 ppg, 4.2 rpg), G Trent Salo, 5-9 SR (5.3 ppg, 1.7 rpg)

Starters Lost: (2) C John Mantel, 6-9 (14.5 ppg, 7.5 rpg), F Matt Veltema, 6-6 (12.5 ppg, 3.4 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Brad Schnyders, 6-6 SR (6.0 ppg, 2.1 rpg)

DePauw (20-8 overall, 11-5 SCAC) – South
Starters Returning: (2) G Steve Lemasters, 6-3 SR (12.1 ppg, 3.3 rpg), G Sean Hasely, 6-3 JR (11.1 ppg, 3.5 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) G Tony James, 5-10 (10.3 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 4.3 apg), F Tom Callen, 6-4 (8.5 ppg, 4.7 rpg), F David Gray, 6-6 (4.3 ppg, 6.4 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Drew Wills, 6-3 SR (6.6 ppg, 2.9 rpg)

Hope (21-8 overall, 11-3 MIAA) – Great Lakes
Starters Returning: (4) G Peter Bunn, 6-2 SR (16.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg), F Will Bowser, 6-5 SR (12.1 ppg, 5.8 rpg), F Andy Venema, 6-8 SR (9.4 ppg, 3.2 rpg), G David Krombeen, 6-3 JR (6.8 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 3.8 apg)

Starters Lost: (1) C Chris Nelis, 6-4 (12.4 ppg, 5.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Nate Snuggerud, 6-5 SO (6.1 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

Loras (15-11 overall, 10-6 IIAC) – West
Starters Returning: (4) F Tim Kelly, 6-4 JR (13.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg) G Mike Gleason, 6-2 SR (11.6 ppg, 2.2 rpg), G Connor Mooney, 5-10 SO (11.4 ppg, 1.3 rpg, 4.2 apg), F Jordan Harrelson, 6-4 JR (5.5 ppg, 3.9 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) F Alex Brant (5.3 ppg, 5.4 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: C Dan Pawelski, 6-9 JR (9.6 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

Manchester (17-10 overall, 10-6 HCAC) – Midwest
Starters Returning: (5) G Mitch Schaefer, 6-4 SR (11.3 ppg, 3.4 rpg), G/F Tyler Henn, 6-5 SR (9.9 ppg, 5.0 rpg), G Jordan Moss, 6-4 JR (9.1 ppg, 4.1 rpg), G Nathan Ferch, 6-3 SR (8.1 ppg, 4.3 rpg), C Jason Spindler, 6-10 JR (7.4 ppg, 4.1 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: G Tyler Delauder, 6-1 SR (8.0 ppg, 2.4 rpg)

MIT (22-5 overall, 10-2 NEWMAC) – Northeast
Starters Returning: (4) F Noel Hollingsworth, 6-9 JR (20.4 ppg, 9.0 rpg), G Mitchell Kates, 6-1 SO (13.2 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 4.1 apg), F Will Tashman, 6-8 SO (8.7 ppg, 7.2 rpg), G Eric Zuk, 6-5 SR (1.2 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) Billy Johnson (8.0 ppg, 3.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Jimmy Burke, 5-11 SO (9.2 ppg, 1.3 rpg)

Ramapo (18-9 overall, 7-6 NJAC) – Atlantic
Starters Returning: (4) F/C LaQuan Peterkin, 6-6 JR (15.4 ppg, 7.8 rpg), G Anthony LoRusso, 6-1 JR (9.1 ppg, 1.6 rpg), G Garret Thiel, 6-2 JR (8.9 ppg, 3.2 rpg), F Davian Plunkett, 6-6 JR (8.3 ppg, 8.2 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Andre Kenny, 6-3 (15.8 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 4.1 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Stephon Treadwell, 6-5 SO (4.6 ppg, 3.6 rpg)

Plattsburgh State (21-8 overall, 13-5 SUNYAC) – East
Starters Returning: (4) G Chris Ruiz, 6-4 SR (17.2 ppg, 5.7 rpg), G Steve Thomas, 6-4 SR (17.1 ppg, 6.6 rpg), F Errol Daniyan, 6-6 SR (15.2 ppg, 8.3 rpg), G Carl Munnerlyn, 5-9 SR (11.5 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) F Farris Thomas, 6-5 (4.7 ppg, 4.7 rpg)

Top Returning ReserveL F RJ Ponesse, 6-10 SR (3.6 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

WPI (20-7 overall, 7-5 NEWMAC) – Northeast
Starters Returning: (4) G Jeffrey Robinson, 6-1 SR (19.0 ppg, 3.5 rpg), G Kyle Nadeau, 5-8 SR (9.3 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 3.0 apg), F Ben Etten, 6-4 SR (9.2 ppg, 5.0 rpg), C Matt Carr, 6-7 JR (5.9 ppg, 4.1 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) C Bennett Lessard, 6-8 (3.3 ppg, 5.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Fernando Perez, 6-3 JR (11.1 ppg, 7.0 rpg)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 10, 2010, 06:47:42 PM

Here is how my ballot seems to be sorting out as of today...

#1
* UW-Stevens Point

#2 through #6 (alphabetical order - very little separation)
* Carthage
* Eastern Mennonite
* Illinois Wesleyan
* Randolph-Macon
* Wooster

#7 - #9 (alphabetical order - very little separation)
* Franklin & Marshall
* John Carroll
* St. Norbert

#10 through #14 (alphabetical - very little separation)
* Anderson
* Middlebury
* St. Mary's
* Virginia Wesleyan
* Williams

#15 through #25 (somewhat in order of how I'd rank today)
* Hope
* MIT
* WPI
* Plattsburgh State
* Manchester
* Augustana
* UW-Whitewater
* St. Thomas
* Loras
* Ramapo
* Amherst

If we're missing any legitimate Top 25 candidates, please post.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: RustCollege on October 11, 2010, 02:18:35 AM

Running list of other 2010-11 preseason Top 25 candidates, as suggested by posters here...

Amherst (14-11 overall, 3-6 NESCAC) – Northeast
Starters Returning: (4) G Conor Meehan, 6-4 SR (14.2 ppg, 5.6 rpg, 6.2 apg), F Jeff Holmes, 6-7 JR (9.8 ppg, 6.2 rpg), G Taylor Barisse, 6-5 JR (8.2 ppg, 4.4 rpg), G/F David Waller, 6-6 JR (7.8 ppg, 4.6 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G/F Steven Wheeler, 6-6 (14.7 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Willy Workman, 6-6 SO (6.2 ppg, 4.0 rpg)

Augustana (16-10 overall, 9-5 CCIW) – Midwest
Starters Returning: (4) F Kyle Nelson, 6-9 SR (14.7 ppg, 7.7 rpg), PG Brian DeSimone, 6-1 JR (6.7 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 3.3 apg), G Troy Rorer, 6-2 JR (6.3 ppg, 4.0 rpg), F Brandon Kunz, 6-7 SO (4.7 ppg, 3.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Matt Pelton, 6-3 (12.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Chris Anderson, 6-4 JR (7.0 ppg, 1.6 rpg)

Buena Vista (15-12 overall, 10-6 IIAC) – West
Starters Returning: (3) G Troy Ticknor, 6-1 SO (12.4 ppg, 2.1 rpg), F/C Doug Bissen, 6-7 JR (11.7 ppg, 6.4 rpg), F Wes Nordquist, 6-7 SO (11.4 ppg, 6.6 rpg)

Starters Lost: (2) G/F Nathan Parker, 6-4 (10.7 ppg, 4.3 rpg), G Kevin Osborn, 6-0 (3.7 ppg, 3.1 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Jeff Janssen, 6-4 JR (8.9 ppg, 1.8 rpg)

Calvin (19-9 overall, 12-2 MIAA) – Great Lakes
Starters Returning: (3) F Danny Rodts, 6-6 SR (9.8 ppg, 4.4 rpg), F Tom Snikkers, 6-4 SO (8.5 ppg, 4.2 rpg), G Trent Salo, 5-9 SR (5.3 ppg, 1.7 rpg)

Starters Lost: (2) C John Mantel, 6-9 (14.5 ppg, 7.5 rpg), F Matt Veltema, 6-6 (12.5 ppg, 3.4 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Brad Schnyders, 6-6 SR (6.0 ppg, 2.1 rpg)

DePauw (20-8 overall, 11-5 SCAC) – South
Starters Returning: (2) G Steve Lemasters, 6-3 SR (12.1 ppg, 3.3 rpg), G Sean Hasely, 6-3 JR (11.1 ppg, 3.5 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) G Tony James, 5-10 (10.3 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 4.3 apg), F Tom Callen, 6-4 (8.5 ppg, 4.7 rpg), F David Gray, 6-6 (4.3 ppg, 6.4 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Drew Wills, 6-3 SR (6.6 ppg, 2.9 rpg)

Hope (21-8 overall, 11-3 MIAA) – Great Lakes
Starters Returning: (4) G Peter Bunn, 6-2 SR (16.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg), F Will Bowser, 6-5 SR (12.1 ppg, 5.8 rpg), F Andy Venema, 6-8 SR (9.4 ppg, 3.2 rpg), G David Krombeen, 6-3 JR (6.8 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 3.8 apg)

Starters Lost: (1) C Chris Nelis, 6-4 (12.4 ppg, 5.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Nate Snuggerud, 6-5 SO (6.1 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

Loras (15-11 overall, 10-6 IIAC) – West
Starters Returning: (4) F Tim Kelly, 6-4 JR (13.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg) G Mike Gleason, 6-2 SR (11.6 ppg, 2.2 rpg), G Connor Mooney, 5-10 SO (11.4 ppg, 1.3 rpg, 4.2 apg), F Jordan Harrelson, 6-4 JR (5.5 ppg, 3.9 rpg)

Starters Lost: F Alex Brant (5.3 ppg, 5.4 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: C Dan Pawelski, 6-9 JR (9.6 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

Manchester (17-10 overall, 10-6 HCAC) – Midwest
Starters Returning: (5) G Mitch Schaefer, 6-4 SR (11.3 ppg, 3.4 rpg), G/F Tyler Henn, 6-5 SR (9.9 ppg, 5.0 rpg), G Jordan Moss, 6-4 JR (9.1 ppg, 4.1 rpg), G Nathan Ferch, 6-3 SR (8.1 ppg, 4.3 rpg), C Jason Spindler, 6-10 JR (7.4 ppg, 4.1 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: G Tyler Delauder, 6-1 SR (8.0 ppg, 2.4 rpg)

MIT (22-5 overall, 10-2 NEWMAC) – Northeast
Starters Returning: (4) F Noel Hollingsworth, 6-9 JR (20.4 ppg, 9.0 rpg), G Mitchell Kates, 6-1 SO (13.2 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 4.1 apg), F Will Tashman, 6-8 SO (8.7 ppg, 7.2 rpg), G Eric Zuk, 6-5 SR (1.2 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

Starters Lost: Billy Johnson (8.0 ppg, 3.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Jimmy Burke, 5-11 SO (9.2 ppg, 1.3 rpg)

Ramapo (18-9 overall, 7-6 NJAC) – Atlantic
Starters Returning: (4) F/C LaQuan Peterkin, 6-6 JR (15.4 ppg, 7.8 rpg), G Anthony LoRusso, 6-1 JR (9.1 ppg, 1.6 rpg), G Garret Thiel, 6-2 JR (8.9 ppg, 3.2 rpg), F Davian Plunkett, 6-6 JR (8.3 ppg, 8.2 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Andre Kenny, 6-3 (15.8 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 4.1 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Stephon Treadwell, 6-5 SO (4.6 ppg, 3.6 rpg)

Plattsburgh State (21-8 overall, 13-5 SUNYAC) – East
Starters Returning: (4) G Chris Ruiz, 6-4 SR (17.2 ppg, 5.7 rpg), G Steve Thomas, 6-4 SR (17.1 ppg, 6.6 rpg), F Errol Daniyan, 6-6 SR (15.2 ppg, 8.3 rpg), G Carl Munnerlyn, 5-9 SR (11.5 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) F Farris Thomas, 6-5 (4.7 ppg, 4.7 rpg)

Top Returning ReserveL F RJ Ponesse, 6-10 SR (3.6 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

WPI (20-7 overall, 7-5 NEWMAC) – Northeast
Starters Returning: (4) G Jeffrey Robinson, 6-1 SR (19.0 ppg, 3.5 rpg), G Kyle Nadeau, 5-8 SR (9.3 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 3.0 apg), F Ben Etten, 6-4 SR (9.2 ppg, 5.0 rpg), C Matt Carr, 6-7 JR (5.9 ppg, 4.1 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) C Bennett Lessard, 6-8 (3.3 ppg, 5.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Fernando Perez, 6-3 JR (11.1 ppg, 7.0 rpg)

Rust College (12-12 overall ) - indep
Starters Returning: G William Montgomery 6-1 JR (6.9 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 4.1 apg) G
Markeith Wilson JR 6-4 (15.7 ppg, 1.2 spg) F Larry Veasley SO 6-7 (15.2 ppg, 8.7 rpg)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ethelred the Unready on October 11, 2010, 08:30:27 AM

Quote from: RustCollege on October 11, 2010, 02:18:35 AM

Rust College (12-12 overall ) - indep
Starters Returning: G William Montgomery JR (6.9 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 4.1 apg) G
Markeith Wilson JR (15.7 ppg, 1.2 spg) F Larry Veasley SO (15.2 ppg, 8.7 rpg)

+K for having a sense of humor coach. I suspect you'll need it....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on October 11, 2010, 09:29:38 AM

unfortunately, I fear there was no humor intended..... ;) ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on October 11, 2010, 02:10:12 PM

They have like 14 all-americans on that team. That should qualify them for consideration. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: RustCollege on October 11, 2010, 03:04:02 PM

Quote from: Ethelred the Unready on October 11, 2010, 08:30:27 AM
Quote from: RustCollege on October 11, 2010, 02:18:35 AM

Rust College (12-12 overall ) - indep
Starters Returning: G William Montgomery JR (6.9 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 4.1 apg) G
Markeith Wilson JR (15.7 ppg, 1.2 spg) F Larry Veasley SO (15.2 ppg, 8.7 rpg)

+K for having a sense of humor coach. I suspect you'll need it....

I know you never saw them play but you r n for a shock because G Jahrell Holmes is back from bein hurt an he also avg 15 ppg 2 spg 3 rpg so joke if you want but you will see

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ethelred the Unready on October 11, 2010, 03:30:14 PM

Quote from: RustCollege on October 11, 2010, 03:04:02 PM
Quote from: Ethelred the Unready on October 11, 2010, 08:30:27 AM
Quote from: RustCollege on October 11, 2010, 02:18:35 AM

Rust College (12-12 overall ) - indep
Starters Returning: G William Montgomery JR (6.9 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 4.1 apg) G
Markeith Wilson JR (15.7 ppg, 1.2 spg) F Larry Veasley SO (15.2 ppg, 8.7 rpg)

+K for having a sense of humor coach. I suspect you'll need it....

I know you never saw them play but you r n for a shock because G Jahrell Holmes is back from bein hurt an he also avg 15 ppg 2 spg 3 rpg so joke if you want but you will see

Well, that's about 60 points back for a team that finished 12-13 and ranked 195 according to Massey. And in looking at your first 3 opponents this year, Massey had them ranked 291, 321 and 326 last year. Just saying...seems like at first glance you have a lot of work to do to get to the Top 25. And it looks like you're trying to do it with the guys who got you 12-13 last year. So yeah, shock would be a good word to describe my feelings if Rust found their way into the Top 25. Not saying it couldn't happen, but it is unlikely

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 11, 2010, 03:51:50 PM

Added Rhode Island...

Amherst (14-11 overall, 3-6 NESCAC) – Northeast
Starters Returning: (4) G Conor Meehan, 6-4 SR (14.2 ppg, 5.6 rpg, 6.2 apg), F Jeff Holmes, 6-7 JR (9.8 ppg, 6.2 rpg), G Taylor Barisse, 6-5 JR (8.2 ppg, 4.4 rpg), G/F David Waller, 6-6 JR (7.8 ppg, 4.6 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G/F Steven Wheeler, 6-6 (14.7 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Willy Workman, 6-6 SO (6.2 ppg, 4.0 rpg)

Augustana (16-10 overall, 9-5 CCIW) – Midwest
Starters Returning: (4) F Kyle Nelson, 6-9 SR (14.7 ppg, 7.7 rpg), PG Brian DeSimone, 6-1 JR (6.7 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 3.3 apg), G Troy Rorer, 6-2 JR (6.3 ppg, 4.0 rpg), F Brandon Kunz, 6-7 SO (4.7 ppg, 3.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Matt Pelton, 6-3 (12.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Chris Anderson, 6-4 JR (7.0 ppg, 1.6 rpg)

Buena Vista (15-12 overall, 10-6 IIAC) – West
Starters Returning: (3) G Troy Ticknor, 6-1 SO (12.4 ppg, 2.1 rpg), F/C Doug Bissen, 6-7 JR (11.7 ppg, 6.4 rpg), F Wes Nordquist, 6-7 SO (11.4 ppg, 6.6 rpg)

Starters Lost: (2) G/F Nathan Parker, 6-4 (10.7 ppg, 4.3 rpg), G Kevin Osborn, 6-0 (3.7 ppg, 3.1 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Jeff Janssen, 6-4 JR (8.9 ppg, 1.8 rpg)

Calvin (19-9 overall, 12-2 MIAA) – Great Lakes
Starters Returning: (3) F Danny Rodts, 6-6 SR (9.8 ppg, 4.4 rpg), F Tom Snikkers, 6-4 SO (8.5 ppg, 4.2 rpg), G Trent Salo, 5-9 SR (5.3 ppg, 1.7 rpg)

Starters Lost: (2) C John Mantel, 6-9 (14.5 ppg, 7.5 rpg), F Matt Veltema, 6-6 (12.5 ppg, 3.4 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Brad Schnyders, 6-6 SR (6.0 ppg, 2.1 rpg)

DePauw (20-8 overall, 11-5 SCAC) – South
Starters Returning: (2) G Steve Lemasters, 6-3 SR (12.1 ppg, 3.3 rpg), G Sean Hasely, 6-3 JR (11.1 ppg, 3.5 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) G Tony James, 5-10 (10.3 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 4.3 apg), F Tom Callen, 6-4 (8.5 ppg, 4.7 rpg), F David Gray, 6-6 (4.3 ppg, 6.4 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Drew Wills, 6-3 SR (6.6 ppg, 2.9 rpg)

Hope (21-8 overall, 11-3 MIAA) – Great Lakes
Starters Returning: (4) G Peter Bunn, 6-2 SR (16.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg), F Will Bowser, 6-5 SR (12.1 ppg, 5.8 rpg), F Andy Venema, 6-8 SR (9.4 ppg, 3.2 rpg), G David Krombeen, 6-3 JR (6.8 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 3.8 apg)

Starters Lost: (1) C Chris Nelis, 6-4 (12.4 ppg, 5.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Nate Snuggerud, 6-5 SO (6.1 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

Loras (15-11 overall, 10-6 IIAC) – West
Starters Returning: (4) F Tim Kelly, 6-4 JR (13.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg) G Mike Gleason, 6-2 SR (11.6 ppg, 2.2 rpg), G Connor Mooney, 5-10 SO (11.4 ppg, 1.3 rpg, 4.2 apg), F Jordan Harrelson, 6-4 JR (5.5 ppg, 3.9 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) F Alex Brant (5.3 ppg, 5.4 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: C Dan Pawelski, 6-9 JR (9.6 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

Manchester (17-10 overall, 10-6 HCAC) – Midwest
Starters Returning: (5) G Mitch Schaefer, 6-4 SR (11.3 ppg, 3.4 rpg), G/F Tyler Henn, 6-5 SR (9.9 ppg, 5.0 rpg), G Jordan Moss, 6-4 JR (9.1 ppg, 4.1 rpg), G Nathan Ferch, 6-3 SR (8.1 ppg, 4.3 rpg), C Jason Spindler, 6-10 JR (7.4 ppg, 4.1 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: G Tyler Delauder, 6-1 SR (8.0 ppg, 2.4 rpg)

MIT (22-5 overall, 10-2 NEWMAC) – Northeast
Starters Returning: (4) F Noel Hollingsworth, 6-9 JR (20.4 ppg, 9.0 rpg), G Mitchell Kates, 6-1 SO (13.2 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 4.1 apg), F Will Tashman, 6-8 SO (8.7 ppg, 7.2 rpg), G Eric Zuk, 6-5 SR (1.2 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) Billy Johnson (8.0 ppg, 3.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Jimmy Burke, 5-11 SO (9.2 ppg, 1.3 rpg)

Ramapo (18-9 overall, 7-6 NJAC) – Atlantic
Starters Returning: (4) F/C LaQuan Peterkin, 6-6 JR (15.4 ppg, 7.8 rpg), G Anthony LoRusso, 6-1 JR (9.1 ppg, 1.6 rpg), G Garret Thiel, 6-2 JR (8.9 ppg, 3.2 rpg), F Davian Plunkett, 6-6 JR (8.3 ppg, 8.2 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Andre Kenny, 6-3 (15.8 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 4.1 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Stephon Treadwell, 6-5 SO (4.6 ppg, 3.6 rpg)

Rhode Island (22-8 overall, 12-2 LEC) - Northeast
Starters Returning: (4) G Antone Gray, 5-9 SR (14.2 ppg, 2.4 rpg, 4.8 apg), G/F Mason Choice, 6-4 JR (13.0 ppg, 4.8 rpg), F/C Darius Debnam, 6-4 SR (7.2 ppg, 6.0 rpg), G Nick Manson, 6-0 SR (7.2 ppg, 2.2 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Jake Grimes, 6-3 (14.9 ppg, 5.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Carl Lee, 6-3 SR (9.5 ppg, 5.8 rpg)

Plattsburgh State (21-8 overall, 13-5 SUNYAC) – East
Starters Returning: (4) G Chris Ruiz, 6-4 SR (17.2 ppg, 5.7 rpg), G Steve Thomas, 6-4 SR (17.1 ppg, 6.6 rpg), F Errol Daniyan, 6-6 SR (15.2 ppg, 8.3 rpg), G Carl Munnerlyn, 5-9 SR (11.5 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) F Farris Thomas, 6-5 (4.7 ppg, 4.7 rpg)

Top Returning ReserveL F RJ Ponesse, 6-10 SR (3.6 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

WPI (20-7 overall, 7-5 NEWMAC) – Northeast
Starters Returning: (4) G Jeffrey Robinson, 6-1 SR (19.0 ppg, 3.5 rpg), G Kyle Nadeau, 5-8 SR (9.3 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 3.0 apg), F Ben Etten, 6-4 SR (9.2 ppg, 5.0 rpg), C Matt Carr, 6-7 JR (5.9 ppg, 4.1 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) C Bennett Lessard, 6-8 (3.3 ppg, 5.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Fernando Perez, 6-3 JR (11.1 ppg, 7.0 rpg)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 11, 2010, 06:07:32 PM

Quote from: RustCollege on October 11, 2010, 03:04:02 PM
Quote from: Ethelred the Unready on October 11, 2010, 08:30:27 AM
Quote from: RustCollege on October 11, 2010, 02:18:35 AM

Rust College (12-12 overall ) - indep
Starters Returning: G William Montgomery JR (6.9 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 4.1 apg) G
Markeith Wilson JR (15.7 ppg, 1.2 spg) F Larry Veasley SO (15.2 ppg, 8.7 rpg)

+K for having a sense of humor coach. I suspect you'll need it....

I know you never saw them play but you r n for a shock because G Jahrell Holmes is back from bein hurt an he also avg 15 ppg 2 spg 3 rpg so joke if you want but you will see

I think the point is - we can't see. The whole Rust rep is as the invisible team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: RustCollege on October 11, 2010, 10:58:35 PM

Quote from: Ethelred the Unready on October 11, 2010, 03:30:14 PM
Quote from: RustCollege on October 11, 2010, 03:04:02 PM
Quote from: Ethelred the Unready on October 11, 2010, 08:30:27 AM
Quote from: RustCollege on October 11, 2010, 02:18:35 AM

Rust College (12-12 overall ) - indep
Starters Returning: G William Montgomery JR (6.9 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 4.1 apg) G
Markeith Wilson JR (15.7 ppg, 1.2 spg) F Larry Veasley SO (15.2 ppg, 8.7 rpg)

+K for having a sense of humor coach. I suspect you'll need it....

I know you never saw them play but you r n for a shock because G Jahrell Holmes is back from bein hurt an he also avg 15 ppg 2 spg 3 rpg so joke if you want but you will see

Well, that's about 60 points back for a team that finished 12-13 and ranked 195 according to Massey. And in looking at your first 3 opponents this year, Massey had them ranked 291, 321 and 326 last year. Just saying...seems like at first glance you have a lot of work to do to get to the Top 25. And it looks like you're trying to do it with the guys who got you 12-13 last year. So yeah, shock would be a good word to describe my feelings if Rust found their way into the Top 25. Not saying it couldn't happen, but it is unlikely

You may say that but if you knew anything about the team or watch them play you would know that Rust was missing two players who was hurt the whole yr and both are back and all the post players was freshmen last yr and they went 12-12 and showed improvement the sec half of the season...all im saying is watch and see dont put a team down if you never watch them play that all im sayin and Hoop Fan come watch then you tell me what you think cuz i hav

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 11, 2010, 11:50:28 PM

RustCollege, you have a good schedule as a South Region independent.

We should have a good idea of how good you are. I wish that you could have played Maryville, either home-and-home or at a neutral site tourney.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ethelred the Unready on October 12, 2010, 05:22:54 AM

Quote from: RustCollege on October 11, 2010, 10:58:35 PM
Quote from: Ethelred the Unready on October 11, 2010, 03:30:14 PM
Quote from: RustCollege on October 11, 2010, 03:04:02 PM
Quote from: Ethelred the Unready on October 11, 2010, 08:30:27 AM
Quote from: RustCollege on October 11, 2010, 02:18:35 AM

Rust College (12-12 overall ) - indep
Starters Returning: G William Montgomery JR (6.9 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 4.1 apg) G
Markeith Wilson JR (15.7 ppg, 1.2 spg) F Larry Veasley SO (15.2 ppg, 8.7 rpg)

+K for having a sense of humor coach. I suspect you'll need it....

I know you never saw them play but you r n for a shock because G Jahrell Holmes is back from bein hurt an he also avg 15 ppg 2 spg 3 rpg so joke if you want but you will see

Well, that's about 60 points back for a team that finished 12-13 and ranked 195 according to Massey. And in looking at your first 3 opponents this year, Massey had them ranked 291, 321 and 326 last year. Just saying...seems like at first glance you have a lot of work to do to get to the Top 25. And it looks like you're trying to do it with the guys who got you 12-13 last year. So yeah, shock would be a good word to describe my feelings if Rust found their way into the Top 25. Not saying it couldn't happen, but it is unlikely

You may say that but if you knew anything about the team or watch them play you would know that Rust was missing two players who was hurt the whole yr and both are back and all the post players was freshmen last yr and they went 12-12 and showed improvement the sec half of the season...all im saying is watch and see dont put a team down if you never watch them play that all im sayin and Hoop Fan come watch then you tell me what you think cuz i hav

Nobody is saying your team won't improve from last year coach. They may even win 20 games, which would make for a nice season. But this is a Top 25 discussion. And I personally just think it is close to impossible for a team to be considered one of the top teams in the country when they don't play anyone who is ranked higher than they are. I know Massey isn't the only measurement of a teams ability, but it does provide at least some indication of how teams compare. And based on last years rankings, Rust is ranked in the middle of all DIII teams and plays some of the lowest ranked teams in the country. I just think it will be tough for voters to consider your team as one of the 25 best in the country. Unless, of course, you hold opponents to under 10 points a game. Then you have an argument. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 12, 2010, 06:52:40 AM

Quote from: RustCollege on October 11, 2010, 10:58:35 PM
Quote from: Ethelred the Unready on October 11, 2010, 03:30:14 PM
Quote from: RustCollege on October 11, 2010, 03:04:02 PM
Quote from: Ethelred the Unready on October 11, 2010, 08:30:27 AM
Quote from: RustCollege on October 11, 2010, 02:18:35 AM

Rust College (12-12 overall ) - indep
Starters Returning: G William Montgomery JR (6.9 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 4.1 apg) G
Markeith Wilson JR (15.7 ppg, 1.2 spg) F Larry Veasley SO (15.2 ppg, 8.7 rpg)

+K for having a sense of humor coach. I suspect you'll need it....

I know you never saw them play but you r n for a shock because G Jahrell Holmes is back from bein hurt an he also avg 15 ppg 2 spg 3 rpg so joke if you want but you will see

Well, that's about 60 points back for a team that finished 12-13 and ranked 195 according to Massey. And in looking at your first 3 opponents this year, Massey had them ranked 291, 321 and 326 last year. Just saying...seems like at first glance you have a lot of work to do to get to the Top 25. And it looks like you're trying to do it with the guys who got you 12-13 last year. So yeah, shock would be a good word to describe my feelings if Rust found their way into the Top 25. Not saying it couldn't happen, but it is unlikely

You may say that but if you knew anything about the team or watch them play you would know that Rust was missing two players who was hurt the whole yr and both are back and all the post players was freshmen last yr and they went 12-12 and showed improvement the sec half of the season...all im saying is watch and see dont put a team down if you never watch them play that all im sayin and Hoop Fan come watch then you tell me what you think cuz i hav

Again, you're making my point. People don't know about the team because either the scores never get reported or you're spending the whole season playing teams none of us have ever heard from. It looks like you've got some more d3 schools on the schedule this year, so that's a start. I do recall decent score reporting last season. You're getting there. It's still going to be hard to determine how good the squad is when there's little comparison to the rest of the country.

Good luck, though, I hope the team's good - and I hope we have some way of figuring that out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on October 12, 2010, 08:40:23 AM

Webster plays down at Rust in December.... They will have a pretty good group from a lower level D3 conference (SLIAC) ... it will give me an idea.. and while I highly doubt that I'll make the drive down to Holly Springs, I'll be able to talk to the Webster staff for some opinion..... and by the way, RustCollege really is on the coaching staff....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedoug on October 12, 2010, 11:38:09 AM

I also am sorry Rust and Maryville are not playing...first time in a long time. And I do not know what the reasons are. It would help people evaluate both teams. Incidentally, it is my understanding that a Rust player from last year has transferred to Maryville. Maybe either he wanted to play for a winner or thought he could not make Rust's team this year!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: RustCollege on October 12, 2010, 02:51:14 PM

Hoop Fan if you take a real look you would know some teams just dont want to play rust i dont know y but really i do know y but im not gon get into that maryville will be play next yr i wish dis yr cuz a team like that will let us know how good we r

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedoug on October 12, 2010, 11:39:52 PM

I think many of us know why many schools do not want to play Rust, especially at their gym. It is an unsettling experience for some folks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wilburt on October 13, 2010, 10:50:18 AM

Quote from: scottiedoug on October 12, 2010, 11:39:52 PM
I think many of us know why many schools do not want to play Rust, especially at their gym. It is an unsettling experience for some folks.

Rust College forget NCAA Division III and join the NAIA and its Gulf Coast Athletic Conference!
Rust still plays Fisk twice this season and I understand that one of Rust's players transferred to Fisk this summer.

I wish Rust the best this upcoming season!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedoug on October 13, 2010, 12:06:45 PM

I had Wilburt figured for a NCAA D3 kind of guy, until Fisk went NAIA. Athletic scholarships and fewer requirements for the number and breadth of sports offered do not seem to fit Wilburt's demonstrated belief in the concept of student athletes and liberal arts education.

Do I have it wrong, my friend?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on October 13, 2010, 12:55:46 PM

Scottiedoug... maybe I Should consider that trip down from St Louis to see Webster at Rust.... It sounds like a D3 venue worth experiencing!!!! And I say that in all truthfulness... D3hoops is my favorite thing... I'd really like to see another in the variety of game situations in D3 that a team experiences at Rust....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: RustCollege on October 13, 2010, 03:46:37 PM

Quote from: scottiedoug on October 12, 2010, 11:39:52 PM
I think many of us know why many schools do not want to play Rust, especially at their gym. It is an unsettling experience for some folks.

Now that is not true we a good fan base who r down with rust 100% just ask Maryville an millsap who play rust they act like any other fan base at any other school Like maryville, BSC,and etc so what r you talkin about Scottiedoug tell me what is so unsettling the fans just love rust when rust is winning thats all

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: RustCollege on October 13, 2010, 03:48:19 PM

you should come we will welcome you with open arm

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wilburt on October 13, 2010, 04:04:50 PM

Quote from: scottiedoug on October 13, 2010, 12:06:45 PM
I had Wilburt figured for a NCAA D3 kind of guy, until Fisk went NAIA. Athletic scholarships and fewer requirements for the number and breadth of sports offered do not seem to fit Wilburt's demonstrated belief in the concept of student athletes and liberal arts education.

Do I have it wrong, my friend?

One has to move with the times, my friend. I was a D3 athlete back in the 1980s when there truly was a concept of student-athletes in the d3. Back then, one didn't have schools making strategic moves (sometimes unethical) to position themselves for super conferences like they do now. One didn't dodge opponents or ostracize certain schools like they do now. One didn't have schools circumventing the non-athletic scholarship rules, by giving "leadership scholarships" and the like. One generally didn't have approximately one half of the student body as athletes as some current d3 schools do now. I could go on and on, but this d3 is not your fathers d3!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on October 13, 2010, 04:31:46 PM

Wilburt... just because it happens some places doesn't mean it's the norm..... When I see the Wash U's and Amherst's and Williams's and Hope's and Calvin's and Wheatons and IWUs experiencing success on the national level, and the lower level SLIAC having a blast because the conference is level competition from top to bottom and the games are so much fun to watch, my love of D3 remains as strong as ever.... there are rule benders everywhere, and granted the playing field isn't quite level when the State schools can charge a twentieth of what the private's do, but all in all, it's the best, cleanest, fairest competition in Hoops..... I firmly believe the Student-Athlete concept is still strong....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 13, 2010, 05:23:00 PM

Quote from: wilburt on October 13, 2010, 04:04:50 PM
One didn't have schools circumventing the non-athletic scholarship rules, by giving "leadership scholarships" and the like.

I'm going to have to call bull**** right here. There's no way it was less prevalent in the 1980s, without regulation, than it is now WITH regulation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 13, 2010, 05:32:12 PM

Quote from: wilburt on October 13, 2010, 10:50:18 AM
Quote from: scottiedoug on October 12, 2010, 11:39:52 PM
I think many of us know why many schools do not want to play Rust, especially at their gym. It is an unsettling experience for some folks.

Rust College forget NCAA Division III and join the NAIA and its Gulf Coast Athletic Conference!
Rust still plays Fisk twice this season and I understand that one of Rust's players transferred to Fisk this summer.

I wish Rust the best this upcoming season!

Rust's membership in D3 goes back all the way to the division's origin, or at least very close to it. Clearly, Rust College believes in D3's values and mission.

Quote from: wilburt on October 13, 2010, 04:04:50 PM
Quote from: scottiedoug on October 13, 2010, 12:06:45 PM
I had Wilburt figured for a NCAA D3 kind of guy, until Fisk went NAIA. Athletic scholarships and fewer requirements for the number and breadth of sports offered do not seem to fit Wilburt's demonstrated belief in the concept of student athletes and liberal arts education.

Do I have it wrong, my friend?

One has to move with the times, my friend. I was a D3 athlete back in the 1980s when there truly was a concept of student-athletes in the d3. Back then, one didn't have schools making strategic moves (sometimes unethical) to position themselves for super conferences like they do now.

I think that you're confusing the NCAA's D1 and D3, Wilburt, because nobody's maneuvering to construct any superconferences or angling to get better television deals on this level.

Quote from: wilburt on October 13, 2010, 10:50:18 AMOne didn't dodge opponents or ostracize certain schools like they do now.

Dodging opponents has gone on in every level of college basketball since the days of leather kneepads and silk short-shorts with belts. It doesn't have anything to do with D3, or NAIA, or anything else. Remember, it's the schools themselves that set their schedules, not the NCAA office in Indianapolis or the NAIA office in Kansas City.

As for "ostracizing schools," I have no idea what you mean by that. Yeah, life is tough as an independent -- particularly when you're an independent that isn't in a geographically favorable position to join a league -- but it's hardly the same thing as ostracism, which implies deliberate intent (and malicious intent, at that).

QuoteOne didn't have schools circumventing the non-athletic scholarship rules, by giving "leadership scholarships" and the like.

This is an interesting assertion, since the NAIA is notorious for being more lax in terms of both rules and enforcement than is the NCAA.

QuoteOne generally didn't have approximately one half of the student body as athletes as some current d3 schools do now.

That's the whole point of D3, Wilburt: Student participation. The more students that are participating in intercollegiate sports, the more the school is consonant with D3's stated mission of encouraging widespread student involvement in athletics.

QuoteI could go on and on, but this d3 is not your fathers d3!

Sounds to me like there's some sour grapes at work here, or a need to shine the apple on Fisk's decision to move from D3 to NAIA, or both.

I'm not badmouthing Fisk's decision, as I'm sure that the school's administrators did what they felt was best for the school. But what's good for Fisk isn't necessarily what''s good for Rust.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wilburt on October 14, 2010, 07:29:07 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 13, 2010, 05:23:00 PM
Quote from: wilburt on October 13, 2010, 04:04:50 PM
One didn't have schools circumventing the non-athletic scholarship rules, by giving "leadership scholarships" and the like.

I'm going to have to call bull**** right here. There's no way it was less prevalent in the 1980s, without regulation, than it is now WITH regulation.

Okay whatever Pat!!! I forgot when you were named the President of the NCAA Division III?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wilburt on October 14, 2010, 07:54:24 AM

Reply to Gregory Sager in part:

1. Fisk was an original member of the NCAA Division III back in 1974 along with Rust and LeMoyne Owen.
2. Nobody mentioned any television deals but certain D3 schools in recent years were CLEARLY angling for superconferences in D3 to keep (or acquire) automatic bids. Get your head out of the sand.
3. No sour grapes here and no need to shine the apple on Fisk's move to the NAIA. But what's good for Fisk may more than likely be good for Rust more than anyone else on this board cares to thinks!

Again I wish Rust the best this upcoming season, and I look forward to the games with Fisk this season! I wish you the best as well Gregory Sager! This is very amusing to me. It seems that whenever I post on the d3hoops board I have a following of folks that appear to take a certain amount of glee in taking issue with my opinions and assertions and further glee in knocking down my points. Perhaps this may be done to shine the apple on the glorious Division III ???, or I may be the resident whipping boy, who knows, but I am sure that the GSAC discussions are very dull without my input in recent months!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 14, 2010, 09:37:05 AM

Quote from: wilburt on October 13, 2010, 04:04:50 PM
One didn't have schools circumventing the non-athletic scholarship rules, by giving "leadership scholarships" and the like. One generally didn't have approximately one half of the student body as athletes as some current d3 schools do now.

I can't speak for every school, obviously, but I know of quite a few who did offer those "leadership" scholarships in the 80's and 90's who no longer do. In my experience the move has most definitely been in the other direction.

Again, it could just be my frame of reference. The NAIA schools with which I'm most familiar do horribly unethical things with their athletic departments and scholarship athletes - although I'm not about to make assumptions across the board.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedoug on October 14, 2010, 10:00:47 AM

It is true that the GSAC board is less interesting without Wilburt.

The matter of visitor discomfort playing at Rust arose here in the context of remarks about why certain schools do not choose to play Rust, especially at Rust. Rust fans do a great job of supporting their team and often there are not a whole lot of white people in the gym. For some visitors, this is unusual and, I suspect, some choose not to visit at all.

Mr. Sager...you should go!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 14, 2010, 01:17:25 PM

Quote from: wilburt on October 14, 2010, 07:54:24 AM
Reply to Gregory Sager in part:

1. Fisk was an original member of the NCAA Division III back in 1974 along with Rust and LeMoyne Owen.

There were at least six HBCU institutions that were D3 charter members: Rust, Fisk, LeMoyne-Owen (which won the first D3 men's basketball title in '75), Lane, Miles, and now-defunct Bishop. (I think that Lincoln joined later, although I could be wrong about that.) I wasn't sure if Rust was a charter member or joined a year or two later until someone informed me yesterday that it was, indeed, a charter member.

Quote from: wilburt on October 14, 2010, 07:54:24 AM
2. Nobody mentioned any television deals but certain D3 schools in recent years were CLEARLY angling for superconferences in D3 to keep (or acquire) automatic bids. Get your head out of the sand.

Evidence, please.

Quote from: wilburt on October 14, 2010, 07:54:24 AM
3. No sour grapes here and no need to shine the apple on Fisk's move to the NAIA. But what's good for Fisk may more than likely be good for Rust more than anyone else on this board cares to thinks!

Based upon what? Look around, Wilburt. The past 30-to-35 years have been very unhealthy ones for the NAIA. It has hemorrhaged schools at an alarming rate. And the schools that have joined it over that period have generally not been the equal in terms of numbers, programs, facilities, tradition, resources, and reputation of the schools that have left.

Fisk is now down to six intercollegiate sports. Given the school's economic troubles, contraction in athletics was probably a good move. But it forced Fisk's hand; you can't retain membership in the NCAA on any level (not just D3) with only six intercollegiate sports. Rust, on the other hand, has fourteen intercollegiate sports. It more than qualifies for D3 membership, which requires a minimum of twelve sports.

Yes, there are NAIA schools that offer a wide variety of sports, a la NCAA schools. But they're becoming fewer and fewer; those are the type of schools that have migrated to the NCAA's D2 and D3. The NAIA model is becoming more and more that of a consortium of schools that have Fisk's profile of offering only a handful of sports. Indeed, there's NAIA schools out there that only offer two or three sports, total.

And that's OK. It's great that the NAIA is out there to accommodate those schools. But don't make the mistake of thinking that Rust is in the same boat as Fisk. It clearly isn't.

Quote from: wilburt on October 14, 2010, 07:54:24 AMAgain I wish Rust the best this upcoming season, and I look forward to the games with Fisk this season! I wish you the best as well Gregory Sager!

Thanks, Wilburt. Right back atcha. ;)

Quote from: wilburt on October 14, 2010, 07:54:24 AMThis is very amusing to me. It seems that whenever I post on the d3hoops board I have a following of folks that appear to take a certain amount of glee in taking issue with my opinions and assertions and further glee in knocking down my points. Perhaps this may be done to shine the apple on the glorious Division III ???, or I may be the resident whipping boy, who knows, but I am sure that the GSAC discussions are very dull without my input in recent months!

I don't follow the GSAC board, but I, for one, do miss your presence here in the Multi-Region Topics rooms. We need contrarians, and you're as contrary as they come, Wilburt. :D I'm a bit surprised that you're still here; posters who follow schools that leave D3 tend to vanish from this site when their schools vanish from the D3 rolls. We've had regulars from William Penn, Lincoln, UC-San Diego, and Lake Erie that were never heard from again after their schools left the division. You're the first fan of an ex-D3 school that's stuck around. I guess that that means that you either still have a lingering love-hate relationship with D3 (or this website) or that you need an outlet for disputation. ;)

Quote from: scottiedoug on October 14, 2010, 10:00:47 AM
It is true that the GSAC board is less interesting without Wilburt.

The matter of visitor discomfort playing at Rust arose here in the context of remarks about why certain schools do not choose to play Rust, especially at Rust. Rust fans do a great job of supporting their team and often there are not a whole lot of white people in the gym. For some visitors, this is unusual and, I suspect, some choose not to visit at all.

What a disappointing thing to read. What is this, 1930? For crying out loud, if you're so uncomfortable around people who have a different skin color than yours that you can't even share a gym with them out of fear or disapproval or ill will or whatever, then you ought to take a good long look in the mirror at what kind of a person you really are. (This is not directed at you, scottiedoug; I realize that you're just reporting the phenomenon.) Has the South really changed that little over the past half-century? That's disheartening ... and disgusting.

Quote from: scottiedoug on October 14, 2010, 10:00:47 AMMr. Sager...you should go!

Are you telling me to leave the Top 25 room or to go to a game at Rust? ;)

Holly Springs, MS is a long, long way from Chicago, but I'd love to see a game at Rust sometime. I remember very well the trip that the Bearcats made to the North Park gym back in the 1989-90 season. The frenetic and uptempo style favored by the Bearcats -- they did hockey-line subs of five every other minute or so -- made for a game that was played at a breakneck pace. North Park small forward Dan Hill, a deadeye shooter, got hot and hit thirteen three-pointers. He was so deadly that Rust put a box-and-one on him, which cracked us up to no end, as Hill was easily the slowest person on either team ... and yet he kept getting open shots, mostly because Vikings point guard Danny James (a D1 transfer from Alabama-Birmingham) kept finding ways to get him good looks. James set a school record by dishing out 18 assists that night, most of them to Hill (who scored 43 points). North Park ended up winning, 123-90. Rust brought a large and enthusiastic contingent of fans, and, combined with the usual crowd of vocal Vikings fans, it made for a rockin' house that night.

If Rust ever wants to make another road trip to the Windy City, I'll do whatever I can to help make it possible for the Bearcats to schedule another game with North Park. As NPU's broadcaster, I'd thoroughly enjoy calling a game like the one back in the 1989-90 season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: RustCollege on October 14, 2010, 03:00:07 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 14, 2010, 01:17:25 PM
Quote from: wilburt on October 14, 2010, 07:54:24 AM
Reply to Gregory Sager in part:

The matter of visitor discomfort playing at Rust arose here in the context of remarks about why certain schools do not choose to play Rust, especially at Rust. Rust fans do a great job of supporting their team and often there are not a whole lot of white people in the gym. For some visitors, this is unusual and, I suspect, some choose not to visit at all.

What a disappointing thing to read. What is this, 1930? For crying out loud, if you're so uncomfortable around people who have a different skin color than yours that you can't even share a gym with them out of fear or disapproval or ill will or whatever, then you ought to take a good long look in the mirror at what kind of a person you really are. (This is not directed at you, scottiedoug; I realize that you're just reporting the phenomenon.) Has the South really changed that little over the past half-century? That's disheartening ... and disgusting.

Quote from: scottiedoug on October 14, 2010, 10:00:47 AMMr. Sager...you should go!

Are you telling me to leave the Top 25 room or to go to a game at Rust? ;)

Holly Springs, MS is a long, long way from Chicago, but I'd love to see a game at Rust sometime. I remember very well the trip that the Bearcats made to the North Park gym back in the 1989-90 season. The frenetic and uptempo style favored by the Bearcats -- they did hockey-line subs of five every other minute or so -- made for a game that was played at a breakneck pace. North Park small forward Dan Hill, a deadeye shooter, got hot and hit thirteen three-pointers. He was so deadly that Rust put a box-and-one on him, which cracked us up to no end, as Hill was easily the slowest person on either team ... and yet he kept getting open shots, mostly because Vikings point guard Danny James (a D1 transfer from Alabama-Birmingham) kept finding ways to get him good looks. James set a school record by dishing out 18 assists that night, most of them to Hill (who scored 43 points). North Park ended up winning, 123-90. Rust brought a large and enthusiastic contingent of fans, and, combined with the usual crowd of vocal Vikings fans, it made for a rockin' house that night.

If Rust ever wants to make another road trip to the Windy City, I'll do whatever I can to help make it possible for the Bearcats to schedule another game with North Park. As NPU's broadcaster, I'd thoroughly enjoy calling a game like the one back in the 1989-90 season.

That is sad to read for somebody to be sayin something like that because i know it is not 1930 i am with you a 100% on that this is basketball people.........Wow thats some history never new about rust vs north park i know that game was crazy and i know rust would love to go but the way everything is now it may be hard be we need to see what we can do to make that happen

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 14, 2010, 03:15:28 PM

Quote from: wilburt on October 14, 2010, 07:54:24 AM
It seems that whenever I post on the d3hoops board I have a following of folks that appear to take a certain amount of glee in taking issue with my opinions and assertions and further glee in knocking down my points.

Probably because you really only show up here to run down Division III and you don't have a lot of facts to back up your assertions.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on October 14, 2010, 03:44:34 PM

Sager - you take that train down to St Louis on Friday and we drive on down to Holly Springs on Saturday to see Webster-Rust... a quick 5 hour drive ... RustCollege needs to take us out for some great Southern food to make the day complete though!!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 14, 2010, 04:10:16 PM

As much fun as that sounds, Hopefan, I'm afraid that I'm going to have to say no. The afternoon that NPU is down in St. Louis playing Fontbonne I will be in the crackerbox keeping score for the North Park women as they face Aurora.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 14, 2010, 05:00:43 PM

Not quite set in stone, but my current preseason Top 25...

#1 UW-Stevens Point (29-4 overall, 12-4 WIAC/West) – 2009-10 national champion
Starters Returning: (4) F Louis Hurd, 6-5 SR (12.5 ppg, 4.1 rpg),G Jared Jenkins, 6-4 SR (11.4 ppg, 3.7 rpg), F Scott Hoelzel, 6-6 SR (8.2 ppg, 5.7 rpg), F Nick Krull, 6-7 SR (5.5 ppg, 3.6 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) PG Matt Moses, 6-2 (14.7 ppg, 4.3 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: PG Jerel Harris, 5-10 SO (7.7 ppg, 1.8 rpg)

#2 Eastern Mennonite (25-5 overall, 14-2 ODAC/South) – Elite 8, lost to Guilford
Starters Returning: (5) G/F Todd Phillips, 6-3 SR (17.4 ppg, 7.3 rpg, 3.1 rpg), G/F D.J. Hinson, 6-4 SR (15.9 ppg, 3.9 rpg), G George Johnson, 5-10 SR (15.0 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 3.2 apg), F Eli Crawford, 6-2 SR (12.2 ppg, 7.1 rpg), F Orie Pancione, 6-5 SR (7.9 ppg, 5.5 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: G/F Andrew Thorne, 6-4 SO (3.5 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

#3 Illinois Wesleyan (23-8 overall, 10-4 CCIW/Midwest) - Elite 8, lost to UW-Stevens Point
Starters Returning: (5) G Sean Johnson, 6-1 SR (17.0 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 3.1 apg), C Doug Sexauer, 6-7 SR (15.6 ppg, 5.8 rpg), F Jordan Zimmer, 6-5 JR (9.0 ppg, 3.6 rpg), PG Travis Rosenkranz, 6-0 SR (8.2 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 4.1 apg), F John Koschnitzky, 6-6 JR (5.3 ppg, 3.9 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: C Ryan Connolly (6.4 ppg, 2.7 rpg), 6-9 JR

#4 Carthage (24-6 overall, 12-2 CCIW/Midwest) - Sweet 16, lost to Illinois Wesleyan
Starters Returning: (4) PG Steve Djurickovic, 6-3 SR (24.4 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 7.3 apg), C Tyler Pierce, 6-5 SO (12.5 ppg, 4.8 rpg), G Max Cary, 6-3 JR (10.5 ppg, 3.0 rpg), F Mitch Thompson, 6-6 SO (6.1 ppg, 4.9 rpg),

Starters Lost: (1) G Cody Hilton, 5-11 (3.6 ppg, 1.7 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Malcom Kelly, 6-0 SO (7.6 ppg, 2.8 rpg)

#5 Randolph-Macon (26-7 overall, 11-5 ODAC/South) - Final 4, lost to UW-Stevens Point

Starters Returning: (5) F Brandon Braxton, 6-5 SR (11.5 ppg, 5.1 rpg), G Eric Pugh, 6-0 SR (10.6 ppg, 2.1 rpg, 3.2 apg), G/F Jordan Brown, 6-4 SR (10. 2 ppg, 3.4 rpg), G Calvin Croskey, 6-0 JR (8.5 ppg, 3.4 rpg), G/F Kevin Voelkel, 6-5 SR (2.7 ppg, 6.1 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: F Danny Jones, 6-6 SR (13.0 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

#6 Wooster (25-6 overall, 15-1 NCAC/Great Lakes) – Sweet 16, lost to Guilford

Starters Returning: (4) G Ian Franks, 6-4 SR (17.9 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 3.3 apg), G Nathan Balch, 6-1 SR (11.9 ppg, 3.5 rpg), F/C Bryan Wickliffe, 6-5 SR (11.2 ppg, 7.2 rpg), F Justin Hallowell, 6-7 JR (9.0 ppg, 5.8 rpg)

Starters Lost : (1) G Brandon Johnson, 6-2 (6.1 ppg, 2.4 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Matt Fegan, 6-1 JR (6.2 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

#7 St. Norbert (23-4 overall, 14-2 MWC/Midwest) - Round of 32, lost to UW-Stevens Point
Starters Returning: (5) G Dave Wipperfurth, 6-2 SR (15.3 ppg, 3.4 rpg), C Chris Peterson, 6-5 SR (13.7 ppg, 5.4 rpg), G John Taylor, 6-0 SR (10.6 ppg, 4.3 rpg, 4.3 apg), F Steve Papke, 6-4 SR (7.0 ppg, 4.6 rpg), G/F Paul Mallers, 6-3 SR (5.9 ppg, 4.5 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: G Mike Brumm, 5-11 SO (4.6 ppg, 1.0 rpg)

#8 Franklin & Marshall (26-5 overall, 15-3 Centennial/Mid-Atlantic) – Elite 8, lost to Randolph-Macon
Starters Returning: (4) F James McNally, 6-6 SR (18.4 ppg, 8.5 rpg), G Georgio Milligan, 6-2 JR (13.0 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 4.9 apg), F Mike Baker, 6-6 SR (9.0 ppg, 6.7 rpg), G Justin Driver, 6-0 SR (2.5 ppg, 0.8 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Anthony Brooks, 6-2 (12.4 ppg, 4.4 rpg, 3.4 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Steve Tolliver, 6-2 SR (6.4 ppg, 2.8 rpg)

#9 John Carroll (21-7 overall, 15-3 OAC/Great Lakes) - Round of 32, lost to Guilford
Starters Returning: (5) G Corey Shontz, 6-1 JR (14.4 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 4.0 apg), F/C Matt Crozier, 6-7 JR (12.6 ppg, 7.4 rpg), G Joey Meyer, 5-11 JR (8.3 ppg, 1.9 rpg), G Michael Hartnett, 6-2 JR (4.9 ppg, 1.4 rpg), F Patrick Sweeney, 6-2 JR (2.8 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: F Maurice Haynes, 6-4 SR (8.6 ppg, 4.3 apg)

#10 Rhode Island (22-8 overall, 12-2 LEC/Northeast) - Sweet 16, lost to Brandeis
Starters Returning: (4) G Antone Gray, 5-9 SR (14.2 ppg, 2.4 rpg, 4.8 apg), G/F Mason Choice, 6-4 JR (13.0 ppg, 4.8 rpg), F/C Darius Debnam, 6-4 SR (7.2 ppg, 6.0 rpg), G Nick Manson, 6-0 SR (7.2 ppg, 2.2 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Jake Grimes, 6-3 (14.9 ppg, 5.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Carl Lee, 6-3 SR (9.5 ppg, 5.8 rpg)

#11 Middlebury (25-4 overall, 8-1 NESCAC/Northeast) - Round of 32, lost to Rhode Island
Starters Returning: (4) F Ryan Sharry, 6-8 JR (13.7 ppg, 8.1 rpg), G Jake Wolfin, 6-2 SO (10.6 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 3.9 apg), G Nolan Thompson, 6-3 SO (10.2 ppg, 3.0 rpg), C Andrew Locke, 6-10 SR (9.1 ppg, 5.0 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Tim Edwards, 6-4 (8.5 ppg, 7.1 rpg, 5.1 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Ryan Wholey, 6-4 SR (8.5 ppg, 4.0 rpg)

#12 Williams (30-2 overall, 9-0 NESCAC/Northeast) – lost in national championship game to UW-Stevens Point
Starters Returning: (2) G James Wang, 6-0 JR (17.3 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 4.4 apg), F Harlan Dodson, 6-8 SR (6.2 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) G/F Blake Schultz, 6-3 (19.2 ppg, 4.3 rpg), G Alex Rubin, 6-4 (9.5 ppg, 1.9 rpg), C Joe Geoghegan, 6-8 (7.1 ppg, 8.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: C Troy Whittington, 6-5 SR (11.1 ppg, 6.2 rpg

#13 Anderson (23-6 overall, 13-3 HCAC/Midwest) - Round of 32, lost to Carthage
Starters Returning: (4) F Brock Morrison, 6-3 JR (14.4 ppg, 8.7 rpg), C Andrew Jones, 6-6 SR (13.2 ppg, 5.8 rpg), F Andrew Bowman, 6-7 SR (11.8 ppg, 6.5 rpg), G Gabe Miller, 6-3 SR (11.0 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 3.8 apg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Ty Riddle (14.8 ppg, 2.0 rpg) - was a junior last year...had one semester eligility left but decided to enter work world

Top Returning Reserve: G Phil Hogan, 5-11 SO (5.7 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

#14 St. Mary's (26-4 overall, 14-2 CAC/Mid-Atlantic) – Sweet 16, lost to Franklin & Marshall
Starters Returning: (4) G Alex Franz, 6-1 SR (13.7 ppg, 5.2 rpg), C Sam Brown, 6-8 SR (9.9 ppg, 5.2 rpg), G James Davenport, 6-3 JR (6.6 ppg, 2.7 rpg), F Brian Grashof, 6-7 JR (6.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Camontae Griffin, 5-9 (21.6 ppg, 2.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G/F Mike Fitzpatrick, 6-6 SR (8.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg)

#15 Virginia Wesleyan (22-5 overall, 12-4 ODAC/South) - Round of 32, lost to St. Mary's
Starters Returning: (4) F Donald Vaughn, 6-5 JR (15.5 ppg, 8.0 ppg), F Chris Astorga, 6-5 SO (8.9 ppg, 4.9 rpg), G Ed Roberts, 5-10 JR (3.5 ppg, 1.9 rpg), F Trevor Watson, 6-4 JR (1.8 ppg, 1.4 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Stephen Fields, 6-2 (21.0 ppg, 4.6 rpg, 3.2 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Quantrell Simmons, 6-6 SR (8.8 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

#16 Hope (21-8 overall, 11-3 MIAA/Great Lakes) – lost in 1st Round to St. Norbert
Starters Returning: (4) G Peter Bunn, 6-2 SR (16.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg), F Will Bowser, 6-5 SR (12.1 ppg, 5.8 rpg), F Andy Venema, 6-8 SR (9.4 ppg, 3.2 rpg), G David Krombeen, 6-3 JR (6.8 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 3.8 apg)

Starters Lost: (1) C Chris Nelis, 6-4 (12.4 ppg, 5.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Nate Snuggerud, 6-5 SO (6.1 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

#17 MIT (22-5 overall, 10-2 NEWMAC/Northeast) – lost in 1st Round to DeSales
Starters Returning: (4) F Noel Hollingsworth, 6-9 JR (20.4 ppg, 9.0 rpg), G Mitchell Kates, 6-1 SO (13.2 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 4.1 apg), F Will Tashman, 6-8 SO (8.7 ppg, 7.2 rpg), G Eric Zuk, 6-5 SR (1.2 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) Billy Johnson (8.0 ppg, 3.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Jimmy Burke, 5-11 SO (9.2 ppg, 1.3 rpg)

#18 WPI (20-7 overall, 7-5 NEWMAC/Northeast) – not in 2009-10 tournament
Starters Returning: (4) G Jeffrey Robinson, 6-1 SR (19.0 ppg, 3.5 rpg), G Kyle Nadeau, 5-8 SR (9.3 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 3.0 apg), F Ben Etten, 6-4 SR (9.2 ppg, 5.0 rpg), C Matt Carr, 6-7 JR (5.9 ppg, 4.1 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) C Bennett Lessard, 6-8 (3.3 ppg, 5.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Fernando Perez, 6-3 JR (11.1 ppg, 7.0 rpg)

#19 Plattsburgh State (21-8 overall, 13-5 SUNYAC/East) – lost in 1st Round to SUNYIT
Starters Returning: (4) G Chris Ruiz, 6-4 SR (17.2 ppg, 5.7 rpg), G Steve Thomas, 6-4 SR (17.1 ppg, 6.6 rpg), F Errol Daniyan, 6-6 SR (15.2 ppg, 8.3 rpg), G Carl Munnerlyn, 5-9 SR (11.5 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) F Farris Thomas, 6-5 (4.7 ppg, 4.7 rpg)

Top Returning ReserveL F RJ Ponesse, 6-10 SR (3.6 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

#20 Manchester (17-10 overall, 10-6 HCAC/Midwest) – not in 2009-10 tournament
Starters Returning: (5) G Mitch Schaefer, 6-4 SR (11.3 ppg, 3.4 rpg), G/F Tyler Henn, 6-5 SR (9.9 ppg, 5.0 rpg), G Jordan Moss, 6-4 JR (9.1 ppg, 4.1 rpg), G Nathan Ferch, 6-3 SR (8.1 ppg, 4.3 rpg), C Jason Spindler, 6-10 JR (7.4 ppg, 4.1 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: G Tyler Delauder, 6-1 SR (8.0 ppg, 2.4 rpg)

#21 Augustana (16-10 overall, 9-5 CCIW/Midwest) – not in 2009-10 tournament
Starters Returning: (4) F Kyle Nelson, 6-9 SR (14.7 ppg, 7.7 rpg), PG Brian DeSimone, 6-1 JR (6.7 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 3.3 apg), G Troy Rorer, 6-2 JR (6.3 ppg, 4.0 rpg), F Brandon Kunz, 6-7 SO (4.7 ppg, 3.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Matt Pelton, 6-3 (12.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Chris Anderson, 6-4 JR (7.0 ppg, 1.6 rpg)

#22 UW-Whitewater (23-6 overall, 13-3 WIAC/West) – Round of 32, lost to Wooster
Starters Returning: (2) G Phil Negri, 6-3 SR (8.4 ppg, 3.3 rpg), F Alex Edmunds, 6-4 JR (7.2 ppg, 4.7 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) C Dustin Mitchell, 6-9 (18.0 ppg, 8.7 rpg), G Dupree Fletcher, 6-2 (14.0 ppg, 2.7 rpg), F Mike Bendall, 6-6 (10.2 ppg, 5.1 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Nolan Free, 6-1 SO (6.4 ppg, 4.1 rpg)

#23 St. Thomas (23-4 overall, 19-1 MIAC/West) - lost in 1st round to Anderson
Starters Returning: (2) G Tyler Nicolai, 5-11 SR (14.1 ppg, 2.0 rpg), G Alex Healy, 6-4 SR (12.7 ppg, 3.6 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) G Joe Scott, 6-4 (10.8 ppg, 2.1 rpg), G Teddy Archer, 6-1 (5.0 ppg, 2.9 rpg), C Sam Eicher, 6-6 (4.4 ppg, 2.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: C Tommy Hannon, 6-8 JR (5.3 ppg, 3.8 rpg)

#24 Loras (15-11 overall, 10-6 IIAC/West) – not in 2009-10 tournament
Starters Returning: (4) F Tim Kelly, 6-4 JR (13.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg) G Mike Gleason, 6-2 SR (11.6 ppg, 2.2 rpg), G Connor Mooney, 5-10 SO (11.4 ppg, 1.3 rpg, 4.2 apg), F Jordan Harrelson, 6-4 JR (5.5 ppg, 3.9 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) F Alex Brant (5.3 ppg, 5.4 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: C Dan Pawelski, 6-9 JR (9.6 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

#25 Ramapo (18-9 overall, 7-6 NJAC/Atlantic) – not in 2009-10 tournament
Starters Returning: (4) F/C LaQuan Peterkin, 6-6 JR (15.4 ppg, 7.8 rpg), G Anthony LoRusso, 6-1 JR (9.1 ppg, 1.6 rpg), G Garret Thiel, 6-2 JR (8.9 ppg, 3.2 rpg), F Davian Plunkett, 6-6 JR (8.3 ppg, 8.2 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Andre Kenny, 6-3 (15.8 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 4.1 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Stephon Treadwell, 6-5 SO (4.6 ppg, 3.6 rpg)

Really just a crapshoot, but that's what I got.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 14, 2010, 05:05:36 PM

By region, my current preseason Top 25 goes...

Midwest - 6
Northeast - 5
West - 4
South - 3
Great Lakes - 3
Mid-Atlantic - 2
East - 1
Atlantic - 1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: RustCollege on October 14, 2010, 08:23:01 PM

what about Nov 13 how about yall come on that day.......Hey Pat Coleman how about you come catch a Rust Game this year

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on October 14, 2010, 08:39:23 PM

Quote from: hopefan on October 14, 2010, 03:44:34 PM
Sager - you take that train down to St Louis on Friday and we drive on down to Holly Springs on Saturday to see Webster-Rust... a quick 5 hour drive ... RustCollege needs to take us out for some great Southern food to make the day complete though!!!!

Plus, Holly Springs is a gorgeous little town, well worth a visit, and a mostly beautiful drive from Memphis to boot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 14, 2010, 09:45:29 PM

Quote from: RustCollege on October 14, 2010, 08:23:01 PM
what about Nov 13 how about yall come on that day.......Hey Pat Coleman how about you come catch a Rust Game this year

I can't rule it out but not sure how much money/time I have to travel this year. If I go, it won't be for an exhibition game or anything that takes place before Nov. 15.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cubs on October 14, 2010, 10:03:57 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 14, 2010, 05:00:43 PM
Not quite set in stone, but my current preseason Top 25...

#22 UW-Whitewater (23-6 overall, 13-3 WIAC/West) – Round of 32, lost to Wooster
Starters Returning: (2) G Phil Negri, 6-3 SR (8.4 ppg, 3.3 rpg), F Alex Edmunds, 6-4 JR (7.2 ppg, 4.7 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) C Dustin Mitchell, 6-9 (18.0 ppg, 8.7 rpg), G Dupree Fletcher, 6-2 (14.0 ppg, 2.7 rpg), F Mike Bendall, 6-6 (10.2 ppg, 5.1 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Nolan Free, 6-1 SO (6.4 ppg, 4.1 rpg)

Really just a crapshoot, but that's what I got.

I have a pretty good source that has told me that Free will not be playing this season for Whitewater, and PG Negri is still having back issues that plagued him last season. Take those two out of the rotation, and the Warhawks look "thin" in terms of experience. While Negri may still be on the roster once the season rolls around, one has to wonder just how effective he will be.

River Falls is the team in the WIAC that I would keep an eye on as the season goes along. Just have a hunch that they will be solid this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 14, 2010, 10:11:43 PM

Quote from: cubs on October 14, 2010, 10:03:57 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on October 14, 2010, 05:00:43 PM
Not quite set in stone, but my current preseason Top 25...

#22 UW-Whitewater (23-6 overall, 13-3 WIAC/West) – Round of 32, lost to Wooster
Starters Returning: (2) G Phil Negri, 6-3 SR (8.4 ppg, 3.3 rpg), F Alex Edmunds, 6-4 JR (7.2 ppg, 4.7 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) C Dustin Mitchell, 6-9 (18.0 ppg, 8.7 rpg), G Dupree Fletcher, 6-2 (14.0 ppg, 2.7 rpg), F Mike Bendall, 6-6 (10.2 ppg, 5.1 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Nolan Free, 6-1 SO (6.4 ppg, 4.1 rpg)

Really just a crapshoot, but that's what I got.
I have a pretty good source that has told me that neither Free will not be playing this season for Whitewater, and PG Negri is still having back issues that plagued him last season. Take those two out of the rotation, and the Warhawks look "thin" in terms of experience.

River Falls is the team in the WIAC that I would keep an eye on as the season goes along. Just have a hunch that they will be solid this season.

If that's correct, I won't vote for UWW in the preseason. Even with those guys, I struggled with including the Warhawks to be honest.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on October 15, 2010, 12:00:51 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 14, 2010, 05:00:43 PM
Not quite set in stone, but my current preseason Top 25...

#1 UW-Stevens Point (29-4 overall, 12-4 WIAC/West) – 2009-10 national champion
Starters Returning: (4) F Louis Hurd, 6-5 SR (12.5 ppg, 4.1 rpg),G Jared Jenkins, 6-4 SR (11.4 ppg, 3.7 rpg), F Scott Hoelzel, 6-6 SR (8.2 ppg, 5.7 rpg), F Nick Krull, 6-7 SR (5.5 ppg, 3.6 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) PG Matt Moses, 6-2 (14.7 ppg, 4.3 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: PG Jerel Harris, 5-10 SO (7.7 ppg, 1.8 rpg)

#2 Eastern Mennonite (25-5 overall, 14-2 ODAC/South) – Elite 8, lost to Guilford
Starters Returning: (5) G/F Todd Phillips, 6-3 SR (17.4 ppg, 7.3 rpg, 3.1 rpg), G/F D.J. Hinson, 6-4 SR (15.9 ppg, 3.9 rpg), G George Johnson, 5-10 SR (15.0 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 3.2 apg), F Eli Crawford, 6-2 SR (12.2 ppg, 7.1 rpg), F Orie Pancione, 6-5 SR (7.9 ppg, 5.5 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: G/F Andrew Thorne, 6-4 SO (3.5 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

#3 Illinois Wesleyan (23-8 overall, 10-4 CCIW/Midwest) - Elite 8, lost to UW-Stevens Point
Starters Returning: (5) G Sean Johnson, 6-1 SR (17.0 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 3.1 apg), C Doug Sexauer, 6-7 SR (15.6 ppg, 5.8 rpg), F Jordan Zimmer, 6-5 JR (9.0 ppg, 3.6 rpg), PG Travis Rosenkranz, 6-0 SR (8.2 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 4.1 apg), F John Koschnitzky, 6-6 JR (5.3 ppg, 3.9 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: C Ryan Connolly (6.4 ppg, 2.7 rpg), 6-9 JR

#4 Carthage (24-6 overall, 12-2 CCIW/Midwest) - Sweet 16, lost to Illinois Wesleyan
Starters Returning: (4) PG Steve Djurickovic, 6-3 SR (24.4 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 7.3 apg), C Tyler Pierce, 6-5 SO (12.5 ppg, 4.8 rpg), G Max Cary, 6-3 JR (10.5 ppg, 3.0 rpg), F Mitch Thompson, 6-6 SO (6.1 ppg, 4.9 rpg),

Starters Lost: (1) G Cody Hilton, 5-11 (3.6 ppg, 1.7 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Malcom Kelly, 6-0 SO (7.6 ppg, 2.8 rpg)

#5 Randolph-Macon (26-7 overall, 11-5 ODAC/South) - Final 4, lost to UW-Stevens Point

Starters Returning: (5) F Brandon Braxton, 6-5 SR (11.5 ppg, 5.1 rpg), G Eric Pugh, 6-0 SR (10.6 ppg, 2.1 rpg, 3.2 apg), G/F Jordan Brown, 6-4 SR (10. 2 ppg, 3.4 rpg), G Calvin Croskey, 6-0 JR (8.5 ppg, 3.4 rpg), G/F Kevin Voelkel, 6-5 SR (2.7 ppg, 6.1 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: F Danny Jones, 6-6 SR (13.0 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

#6 Wooster (25-6 overall, 15-1 NCAC/Great Lakes) – Sweet 16, lost to Guilford

Starters Returning: (4) G Ian Franks, 6-4 SR (17.9 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 3.3 apg), G Nathan Balch, 6-1 SR (11.9 ppg, 3.5 rpg), F/C Bryan Wickliffe, 6-5 SR (11.2 ppg, 7.2 rpg), F Justin Hallowell, 6-7 JR (9.0 ppg, 5.8 rpg)

Starters Lost : (1) G Brandon Johnson, 6-2 (6.1 ppg, 2.4 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Matt Fegan, 6-1 JR (6.2 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

#7 St. Norbert (23-4 overall, 14-2 MWC/Midwest) - Round of 32, lost to UW-Stevens Point
Starters Returning: (5) G Dave Wipperfurth, 6-2 SR (15.3 ppg, 3.4 rpg), C Chris Peterson, 6-5 SR (13.7 ppg, 5.4 rpg), G John Taylor, 6-0 SR (10.6 ppg, 4.3 rpg, 4.3 apg), F Steve Papke, 6-4 SR (7.0 ppg, 4.6 rpg), G/F Paul Mallers, 6-3 SR (5.9 ppg, 4.5 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: G Mike Brumm, 5-11 SO (4.6 ppg, 1.0 rpg)

#8 Franklin & Marshall (26-5 overall, 15-3 Centennial/Mid-Atlantic) – Elite 8, lost to Randolph-Macon
Starters Returning: (4) F James McNally, 6-6 SR (18.4 ppg, 8.5 rpg), G Georgio Milligan, 6-2 JR (13.0 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 4.9 apg), F Mike Baker, 6-6 SR (9.0 ppg, 6.7 rpg), G Justin Driver, 6-0 SR (2.5 ppg, 0.8 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Anthony Brooks, 6-2 (12.4 ppg, 4.4 rpg, 3.4 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Steve Tolliver, 6-2 SR (6.4 ppg, 2.8 rpg)

#9 John Carroll (21-7 overall, 15-3 OAC/Great Lakes) - Round of 32, lost to Guilford
Starters Returning: (5) G Corey Shontz, 6-1 JR (14.4 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 4.0 apg), F/C Matt Crozier, 6-7 JR (12.6 ppg, 7.4 rpg), G Joey Meyer, 5-11 JR (8.3 ppg, 1.9 rpg), G Michael Hartnett, 6-2 JR (4.9 ppg, 1.4 rpg), F Patrick Sweeney, 6-2 JR (2.8 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: F Maurice Haynes, 6-4 SR (8.6 ppg, 4.3 apg)

#10 Rhode Island (22-8 overall, 12-2 LEC/Northeast) - Sweet 16, lost to Brandeis
Starters Returning: (4) G Antone Gray, 5-9 SR (14.2 ppg, 2.4 rpg, 4.8 apg), G/F Mason Choice, 6-4 JR (13.0 ppg, 4.8 rpg), F/C Darius Debnam, 6-4 SR (7.2 ppg, 6.0 rpg), G Nick Manson, 6-0 SR (7.2 ppg, 2.2 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Jake Grimes, 6-3 (14.9 ppg, 5.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Carl Lee, 6-3 SR (9.5 ppg, 5.8 rpg)

#11 Middlebury (25-4 overall, 8-1 NESCAC/Northeast) - Round of 32, lost to Rhode Island
Starters Returning: (4) F Ryan Sharry, 6-8 JR (13.7 ppg, 8.1 rpg), G Jake Wolfin, 6-2 SO (10.6 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 3.9 apg), G Nolan Thompson, 6-3 SO (10.2 ppg, 3.0 rpg), C Andrew Locke, 6-10 SR (9.1 ppg, 5.0 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Tim Edwards, 6-4 (8.5 ppg, 7.1 rpg, 5.1 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Ryan Wholey, 6-4 SR (8.5 ppg, 4.0 rpg)

#12 Williams (30-2 overall, 9-0 NESCAC/Northeast) – lost in national championship game to UW-Stevens Point
Starters Returning: (2) G James Wang, 6-0 JR (17.3 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 4.4 apg), F Harlan Dodson, 6-8 SR (6.2 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) G/F Blake Schultz, 6-3 (19.2 ppg, 4.3 rpg), G Alex Rubin, 6-4 (9.5 ppg, 1.9 rpg), C Joe Geoghegan, 6-8 (7.1 ppg, 8.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: C Troy Whittington, 6-5 SR (11.1 ppg, 6.2 rpg

#13 Anderson (23-6 overall, 13-3 HCAC/Midwest) - Round of 32, lost to Carthage
Starters Returning: (4) F Brock Morrison, 6-3 JR (14.4 ppg, 8.7 rpg), C Andrew Jones, 6-6 SR (13.2 ppg, 5.8 rpg), F Andrew Bowman, 6-7 SR (11.8 ppg, 6.5 rpg), G Gabe Miller, 6-3 SR (11.0 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 3.8 apg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Ty Riddle (14.8 ppg, 2.0 rpg) - was a junior last year...had one semester eligility left but decided to enter work world

Top Returning Reserve: G Phil Hogan, 5-11 SO (5.7 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

#14 St. Mary's (26-4 overall, 14-2 CAC/Mid-Atlantic) – Sweet 16, lost to Franklin & Marshall
Starters Returning: (4) G Alex Franz, 6-1 SR (13.7 ppg, 5.2 rpg), C Sam Brown, 6-8 SR (9.9 ppg, 5.2 rpg), G James Davenport, 6-3 JR (6.6 ppg, 2.7 rpg), F Brian Grashof, 6-7 JR (6.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Camontae Griffin, 5-9 (21.6 ppg, 2.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G/F Mike Fitzpatrick, 6-6 SR (8.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg)

#15 Virginia Wesleyan (22-5 overall, 12-4 ODAC/South) - Round of 32, lost to St. Mary's
Starters Returning: (4) F Donald Vaughn, 6-5 JR (15.5 ppg, 8.0 ppg), F Chris Astorga, 6-5 SO (8.9 ppg, 4.9 rpg), G Ed Roberts, 5-10 JR (3.5 ppg, 1.9 rpg), F Trevor Watson, 6-4 JR (1.8 ppg, 1.4 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Stephen Fields, 6-2 (21.0 ppg, 4.6 rpg, 3.2 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Quantrell Simmons, 6-6 SR (8.8 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

#16 Hope (21-8 overall, 11-3 MIAA/Great Lakes) – lost in 1st Round to St. Norbert
Starters Returning: (4) G Peter Bunn, 6-2 SR (16.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg), F Will Bowser, 6-5 SR (12.1 ppg, 5.8 rpg), F Andy Venema, 6-8 SR (9.4 ppg, 3.2 rpg), G David Krombeen, 6-3 JR (6.8 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 3.8 apg)

Starters Lost: (1) C Chris Nelis, 6-4 (12.4 ppg, 5.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Nate Snuggerud, 6-5 SO (6.1 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

#17 MIT (22-5 overall, 10-2 NEWMAC/Northeast) – lost in 1st Round to DeSales
Starters Returning: (4) F Noel Hollingsworth, 6-9 JR (20.4 ppg, 9.0 rpg), G Mitchell Kates, 6-1 SO (13.2 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 4.1 apg), F Will Tashman, 6-8 SO (8.7 ppg, 7.2 rpg), G Eric Zuk, 6-5 SR (1.2 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) Billy Johnson (8.0 ppg, 3.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Jimmy Burke, 5-11 SO (9.2 ppg, 1.3 rpg)

#18 WPI (20-7 overall, 7-5 NEWMAC/Northeast) – not in 2009-10 tournament
Starters Returning: (4) G Jeffrey Robinson, 6-1 SR (19.0 ppg, 3.5 rpg), G Kyle Nadeau, 5-8 SR (9.3 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 3.0 apg), F Ben Etten, 6-4 SR (9.2 ppg, 5.0 rpg), C Matt Carr, 6-7 JR (5.9 ppg, 4.1 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) C Bennett Lessard, 6-8 (3.3 ppg, 5.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Fernando Perez, 6-3 JR (11.1 ppg, 7.0 rpg)

#19 Plattsburgh State (21-8 overall, 13-5 SUNYAC/East) – lost in 1st Round to SUNYIT
Starters Returning: (4) G Chris Ruiz, 6-4 SR (17.2 ppg, 5.7 rpg), G Steve Thomas, 6-4 SR (17.1 ppg, 6.6 rpg), F Errol Daniyan, 6-6 SR (15.2 ppg, 8.3 rpg), G Carl Munnerlyn, 5-9 SR (11.5 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) F Farris Thomas, 6-5 (4.7 ppg, 4.7 rpg)

Top Returning ReserveL F RJ Ponesse, 6-10 SR (3.6 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

#20 Manchester (17-10 overall, 10-6 HCAC/Midwest) – not in 2009-10 tournament
Starters Returning: (5) G Mitch Schaefer, 6-4 SR (11.3 ppg, 3.4 rpg), G/F Tyler Henn, 6-5 SR (9.9 ppg, 5.0 rpg), G Jordan Moss, 6-4 JR (9.1 ppg, 4.1 rpg), G Nathan Ferch, 6-3 SR (8.1 ppg, 4.3 rpg), C Jason Spindler, 6-10 JR (7.4 ppg, 4.1 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: G Tyler Delauder, 6-1 SR (8.0 ppg, 2.4 rpg)

#21 Augustana (16-10 overall, 9-5 CCIW/Midwest) – not in 2009-10 tournament
Starters Returning: (4) F Kyle Nelson, 6-9 SR (14.7 ppg, 7.7 rpg), PG Brian DeSimone, 6-1 JR (6.7 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 3.3 apg), G Troy Rorer, 6-2 JR (6.3 ppg, 4.0 rpg), F Brandon Kunz, 6-7 SO (4.7 ppg, 3.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Matt Pelton, 6-3 (12.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Chris Anderson, 6-4 JR (7.0 ppg, 1.6 rpg)

#22 UW-Whitewater (23-6 overall, 13-3 WIAC/West) – Round of 32, lost to Wooster
Starters Returning: (2) G Phil Negri, 6-3 SR (8.4 ppg, 3.3 rpg), F Alex Edmunds, 6-4 JR (7.2 ppg, 4.7 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) C Dustin Mitchell, 6-9 (18.0 ppg, 8.7 rpg), G Dupree Fletcher, 6-2 (14.0 ppg, 2.7 rpg), F Mike Bendall, 6-6 (10.2 ppg, 5.1 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Nolan Free, 6-1 SO (6.4 ppg, 4.1 rpg)

#23 St. Thomas (23-4 overall, 19-1 MIAC/West) - lost in 1st round to Anderson
Starters Returning: (2) G Tyler Nicolai, 5-11 SR (14.1 ppg, 2.0 rpg), G Alex Healy, 6-4 SR (12.7 ppg, 3.6 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) G Joe Scott, 6-4 (10.8 ppg, 2.1 rpg), G Teddy Archer, 6-1 (5.0 ppg, 2.9 rpg), C Sam Eicher, 6-6 (4.4 ppg, 2.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: C Tommy Hannon, 6-8 JR (5.3 ppg, 3.8 rpg)

#24 Loras (15-11 overall, 10-6 IIAC/West) – not in 2009-10 tournament
Starters Returning: (4) F Tim Kelly, 6-4 JR (13.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg) G Mike Gleason, 6-2 SR (11.6 ppg, 2.2 rpg), G Connor Mooney, 5-10 SO (11.4 ppg, 1.3 rpg, 4.2 apg), F Jordan Harrelson, 6-4 JR (5.5 ppg, 3.9 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) F Alex Brant (5.3 ppg, 5.4 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: C Dan Pawelski, 6-9 JR (9.6 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

#25 Ramapo (18-9 overall, 7-6 NJAC/Atlantic) – not in 2009-10 tournament
Starters Returning: (4) F/C LaQuan Peterkin, 6-6 JR (15.4 ppg, 7.8 rpg), G Anthony LoRusso, 6-1 JR (9.1 ppg, 1.6 rpg), G Garret Thiel, 6-2 JR (8.9 ppg, 3.2 rpg), F Davian Plunkett, 6-6 JR (8.3 ppg, 8.2 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Andre Kenny, 6-3 (15.8 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 4.1 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Stephon Treadwell, 6-5 SO (4.6 ppg, 3.6 rpg)

Really just a crapshoot, but that's what I got.

When do you guys tally these up for the preseason poll?

Also, when is the preseason AA team announced?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: THE U - TD on October 15, 2010, 02:41:02 AM

I think UTD still deserves a Top 25 spot.

They lost in the elite 8 2 years ago in overtime, made it to Sweet 16 last year after losing 2 starters to injuries, putting up one of the better fights UWSP got in the tournament at UWSP. (I will say from what I heard the UWSP fans and players were extremely nice and very complimentary of UTD, and it was a truly great environment to play in. The players said it was a great experience, except for the losing part of course, so kudos to all the UWSP fans.)

UTD lost a few seniors (Fleming, Hillen, Eppink, Rodgers, Maish), but they still have a great returning group with postseason experience in Chris Barnes, Brandon Greene, Jimmy Witten, and Curtis Davis among many others. They also have a great recruiting class coming with a mix of freshmen and transfers. On top of that UTD has an excellent coach in Terry Butterfield who has a great system that has created a successful program over the past few years.

The ASC is a very unique conference and tough to win in and I think is often underrated. I understand that the best way to gain respect for a conference is to win in the national tournament, and I think UTD has helped bring respect for this conference.

With the success UTD has had the last couple years along with a great group of returners and a great incoming group of players, I think UTD is still a top 25 team until someone proves that otherwise.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 15, 2010, 08:02:35 AM

Quote from: hugenerd on October 15, 2010, 12:00:51 AM

When do you guys tally these up for the preseason poll?

Also, when is the preseason AA team announced?

The preseason poll last year was released October 21...Pat will have to confirm if we're on that same schedule this year.

(Not sure when the preseason All-American team typically comes out.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wilburt on October 15, 2010, 08:04:51 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 14, 2010, 03:15:28 PM
Quote from: wilburt on October 14, 2010, 07:54:24 AM
It seems that whenever I post on the d3hoops board I have a following of folks that appear to take a certain amount of glee in taking issue with my opinions and assertions and further glee in knocking down my points.

Probably because you really only show up here to run down Division III and you don't have a lot of facts to back up your assertions.

Thank you Pat for proving my point! I love most of the aspects of NCAA Division III, but d3hoops.com and some of the posters frequently leave a lot to be desired Pat. Your main problem is that you don't seem to realize that there is a difference between the NCAA Division III and d3hoops.com. Mark Emmert is the NCAA President not you! Your word or opinion (as off the mark as it can be at times) is not the final say so even though you may think it is from time to time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 15, 2010, 09:32:59 AM

Who is projected to finish 2nd in the NCAC this year? I remember Ohio Wesleyan had a good young nucleus last year when I saw them at IWU...obviously Wittenberg has been in the Top 25 more weeks than not since the inception of the D3hoops.com poll...anyone else?

Just wondering if there is another NCAC team (besides Wooster) we should be looking at for the preseason poll?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedoug on October 15, 2010, 10:11:50 AM

Mr. Sager I was by no means suggesting you do anything but go on down to Rust for a basketball game!

Nor was I suggesting that it is only "Southern" teams that might decide not to visit Rust to play hoops for reasons having to do with race. Racism is hardly just a southern thing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 15, 2010, 01:07:37 PM

Quote from: scottiedoug on October 15, 2010, 10:11:50 AM
Nor was I suggesting that it is only "Southern" teams that might decide not to visit Rust to play hoops for reasons having to do with race. Racism is hardly just a southern thing.

Very true. But Rust plays a schedule each year that is 100% Dixie-fried, or very close to it. Only twice in the last nine years have the Bearcats left the South to play basketball, and one of those road trips was to a border state (they went to St. Louis to play Webster and Fontbonne two seasons ago). The only time in the past nine seasons that Rust has traveled someplace where they were surrounded by bona-fide Yankees was way back in 2002-03 when the Bearcats went to eastern Indiana to open the season at Earlham. More importantly, the only non-Southern teams that Rust has scheduled (as opposed to meeting on a neutral basis in somebody else's Southern-based tournament) over that nine-year period are Webster, Fontbonne, and Earlham -- none of whom played Rust in Holly Springs.

All of which goes to say that, while you're absolutely correct that racism is not limited to the South, for the purposes of this discussion (white fans not wanting to visit the Rust gym for a game) we're talking about white Southerners.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedoug on October 15, 2010, 04:53:45 PM

Mr. Sager:
Any chance the fact that no "Yankee" team has traveled to Holly Springs helps make my point? And I was not just thinking about what fans want to do but also what coaches want themselves and their players to do. It is not the fans who do the scheduling.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 15, 2010, 06:00:31 PM

Quote from: scottiedoug on October 15, 2010, 04:53:45 PM
Mr. Sager:
Any chance the fact that no "Yankee" team has traveled to Holly Springs helps make my point?

Not really. Rust is a South Region school, and it isn't located within 200 miles of a school in another region. That means that, until D3 changed the rules a couple of years ago to add administrative regions to the criteria that determine an in-region game, it was not possible for even a border-state team to play the Bearcats and have it count as an in-region game, much less a team from up North.

In-region status is not the only incentive to scheduling, of course, but it is a powerful one. The other major consideration in terms of playing a D3 team that's far away is climate. The snowbird phenomenon is well-known within D3; lots of teams from cold-weather latitudes take trips in November and December to warm-weather spots for games. Snowbird games are a common phenomenon in southern California among SCIAC teams and Chapman, and the classic-format tournament co-hosted by Texas schools Trinity (TX) and Southwestern has also been popular among D3 schools that hail from blustery climes. Even places where there are no D3 schools at all (Florida, Las Vegas, Hawaii, Puerto Rico) see their fair share of snowbirds who come down for tournaments.

But Holly Springs is not a warm-weather destination. The average late-November high in Holly Springs is in the high 50s, with a low in the low 40s or high 30s. By the end of December the average high in Holly Springs slumps to below 50 degrees. So climate is not an incentive for the coach of a snowbird team to play a pre-conference road game at Rust. Nor is Holly Springs an amenities-or-attractions type of destination. If you're going there, you're going for one reason only, and that's to play Rust.

The smaller budgets and locally-oriented focus of D3 basketball militates against teams from Kentucky or Missouri coming to northern Mississippi in order to play Rust, let alone teams from states to the north of Missouri and Kentucky. So, no, you can't base the lack of non-Southern teams coming to Holly Springs to play Rust on racial grounds.

Quote from: scottiedoug on October 15, 2010, 04:53:45 PMAnd I was not just thinking about what fans want to do but also what coaches want themselves and their players to do. It is not the fans who do the scheduling.

Good point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on October 15, 2010, 07:28:05 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 15, 2010, 08:02:35 AM
Quote from: hugenerd on October 15, 2010, 12:00:51 AM

When do you guys tally these up for the preseason poll?

Also, when is the preseason AA team announced?

The preseason poll last year was released October 21...Pat will have to confirm if we're on that same schedule this year.

(Not sure when the preseason All-American team typically comes out.)

Thanks

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 15, 2010, 10:06:40 PM

Quote from: wilburt on October 15, 2010, 08:04:51 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 14, 2010, 03:15:28 PM
Quote from: wilburt on October 14, 2010, 07:54:24 AM
It seems that whenever I post on the d3hoops board I have a following of folks that appear to take a certain amount of glee in taking issue with my opinions and assertions and further glee in knocking down my points.

Probably because you really only show up here to run down Division III and you don't have a lot of facts to back up your assertions.

Thank you Pat for proving my point! I love most of the aspects of NCAA Division III, but d3hoops.com and some of the posters frequently leave a lot to be desired Pat. Your main problem is that you don't seem to realize that there is a difference between the NCAA Division III and d3hoops.com. Mark Emmert is the NCAA President not you! Your word or opinion (as off the mark as it can be at times) is not the final say so even though you may think it is from time to time.

Wilburt -- no offense, but I don't think you know me one bit or have any idea what my problems are.

Do feel free to put some facts behind your screed next time you post rather than attacking me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wilburt on October 16, 2010, 12:40:54 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 15, 2010, 10:06:40 PM
Quote from: wilburt on October 15, 2010, 08:04:51 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 14, 2010, 03:15:28 PM
Quote from: wilburt on October 14, 2010, 07:54:24 AM
It seems that whenever I post on the d3hoops board I have a following of folks that appear to take a certain amount of glee in taking issue with my opinions and assertions and further glee in knocking down my points.

Probably because you really only show up here to run down Division III and you don't have a lot of facts to back up your assertions.

Thank you Pat for proving my point! I love most of the aspects of NCAA Division III, but d3hoops.com and some of the posters frequently leave a lot to be desired Pat. Your main problem is that you don't seem to realize that there is a difference between the NCAA Division III and d3hoops.com. Mark Emmert is the NCAA President not you! Your word or opinion (as off the mark as it can be at times) is not the final say so even though you may think it is from time to time.

Wilburt -- no offense, but I don't think you know me one bit or have any idea what my problems are.

Do feel free to put some facts behind your screed next time you post rather than attacking me.

Stop attacking me Pat virtually everytime I post and this vitriolic exchange between us will stop!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ethelred the Unready on October 16, 2010, 01:27:20 PM

Quote from: wilburt on October 16, 2010, 12:40:54 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 15, 2010, 10:06:40 PM
Quote from: wilburt on October 15, 2010, 08:04:51 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 14, 2010, 03:15:28 PM
Quote from: wilburt on October 14, 2010, 07:54:24 AM
It seems that whenever I post on the d3hoops board I have a following of folks that appear to take a certain amount of glee in taking issue with my opinions and assertions and further glee in knocking down my points.

Probably because you really only show up here to run down Division III and you don't have a lot of facts to back up your assertions.

Thank you Pat for proving my point! I love most of the aspects of NCAA Division III, but d3hoops.com and some of the posters frequently leave a lot to be desired Pat. Your main problem is that you don't seem to realize that there is a difference between the NCAA Division III and d3hoops.com. Mark Emmert is the NCAA President not you! Your word or opinion (as off the mark as it can be at times) is not the final say so even though you may think it is from time to time.

Wilburt -- no offense, but I don't think you know me one bit or have any idea what my problems are.

Do feel free to put some facts behind your screed next time you post rather than attacking me.

Stop attacking me Pat virtually everytime I post and this vitriolic exchange between us will stop!

QuoteOne has to move with the times, my friend. I was a D3 athlete back in the 1980s when there truly was a concept of student-athletes in the d3. Back then, one didn't have schools making strategic moves (sometimes unethical) to position themselves for super conferences like they do now. One didn't dodge opponents or ostracize certain schools like they do now. One didn't have schools circumventing the non-athletic scholarship rules, by giving "leadership scholarships" and the like. One generally didn't have approximately one half of the student body as athletes as some current d3 schools do now. I could go on and on, but this d3 is not your fathers d3!

It seems to me that Pat has simply asked that when you post statements like the ones above, you provide some supporting facts. If I may ask, what qualifies you to make such statements? Do/did you have inside knowledge? Just curious.

(modified by GS for formatting)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on October 16, 2010, 04:09:45 PM

Quote from: wilburt on October 16, 2010, 12:40:54 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 15, 2010, 10:06:40 PM
Quote from: wilburt on October 15, 2010, 08:04:51 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 14, 2010, 03:15:28 PM
Quote from: wilburt on October 14, 2010, 07:54:24 AM
It seems that whenever I post on the d3hoops board I have a following of folks that appear to take a certain amount of glee in taking issue with my opinions and assertions and further glee in knocking down my points.

Probably because you really only show up here to run down Division III and you don't have a lot of facts to back up your assertions.

Thank you Pat for proving my point! I love most of the aspects of NCAA Division III, but d3hoops.com and some of the posters frequently leave a lot to be desired Pat. Your main problem is that you don't seem to realize that there is a difference between the NCAA Division III and d3hoops.com. Mark Emmert is the NCAA President not you! Your word or opinion (as off the mark as it can be at times) is not the final say so even though you may think it is from time to time.

Wilburt -- no offense, but I don't think you know me one bit or have any idea what my problems are.

Do feel free to put some facts behind your screed next time you post rather than attacking me.

Stop attacking me Pat virtually everytime I post and this vitriolic exchange between us will stop!

Calling someone out and asking them to present facts isn't an attack on someone. This is all Pat has done. If anything, it's an attack on the ideas presented that have no proof behind them.

If your claims have veracity, then PROVE IT.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 17, 2010, 12:47:50 AM

He doesn't because his claims are unsupportable. At least, I assume he would have posted them since he logged in after you guys responded to him.

Supporting facts would keep Wilburt in compliance with the board's Terms of Service.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wilburt on October 17, 2010, 04:03:02 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 17, 2010, 12:47:50 AM
He doesn't because his claims are unsupportable. At least, I assume he would have posted them since he logged in after you guys responded to him.

Supporting facts would keep Wilburt in compliance with the board's Terms of Service.

Let me put it this way. My claims are supportable based on informal conversations I have had with coaches and athletic department officials from Fisk, Lincoln, Stillman in recent years. In addition I have even more informal discussions with alumni and/or athletic boosters in recent years from other D3 schools. Yet I know that Pat feels that the only verification for him is in a press release or published news article. For example, he did not believe that Fisk was going to the NAIA until the school issued a press release. My word that the school was going to do so was not enough based on a letter from the school to alumni.

1. The verification of NCAA Division III scholarships is a relatively recent development. I am not sure of the timetable. Depending on how you count it could be from 1988, 2004, 2006 or 2008. But there is no denying that until that time some schools circumvented the rules during Fisk tenure in the NCAA Division III from 1974-2008 - unless you want to dispute the NCAA findings. There may be an issue as to the degree but there is no issue that it has occurred.

2. With respect to unethical conduct to referenced, I will talk about that to you in a PM if you would like. I don't want to further inflame anyone else on this board.

3. With respect to "dodging and ostracizing" schools I was somewhat alluding to the GSAC and SCAC. Maryville was shunned from membership in the SCAC on at least one occasion. Rust continues to be shunned by a number of schools who do not want to play them for any number of reasons. The same was true for Fisk while a member of the GSAC. And of course Lincoln was shunned by many D3 eastern schools for a host of reasons. Other schools may have their reasons for doing so (some real and some imagined), but it can get frustrating.

4. With respect to the ratio of student athletes to the general enrollment, I have read on more than a few D3 collegiate websites that this was the case. For example D3 member "Greenville College experienced a 30 percent increase in the number of student-athletes thanks in part to the successful launch of new junior varsity teams. There are 385 athletes on campus this year, and almost 50 percent of new students this fall are athletes." This is from a press release from the college released just this month!

Now the students may not continue to play sports all 4 years of college but other schools certainly fit that profile because it is a growing trend.

That's all for now....

Finally, I will say this to you Pat. We have had an ongoing feud for a few years now. When will it end?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 17, 2010, 10:50:10 PM

I guess it will end when you move on, either literally from the site or metaphorically from this stance of yours that Division III is automatically bad, based on your really narrow view of it.

Quote from: wilburt on October 13, 2010, 04:04:50 PM
One has to move with the times, my friend. I was a D3 athlete back in the 1980s when there truly was a concept of student-athletes in the d3.

This a vague statement that can't be proven one way or the other, gotta be honest. I'm not going to waste my time discussion your concept of "a concept of student-athletes," whatever that is.

Quote from: wilburt on October 13, 2010, 04:04:50 PM
Back then, one didn't have schools making strategic moves (sometimes unethical) to position themselves for super conferences like they do now.

I can't say this happened in the 1980s. Then again, I don't think it's happening now, either, so I would call this a wash.

Quote from: wilburt on October 13, 2010, 04:04:50 PM
One didn't dodge opponents or ostracize certain schools like they do now.

In the 1980s, the North Coast Athletic Conference split away from the Ohio Athletic Conference to create a league of academically elite institutions.

In the 1980s, the entire Centennial Conference split away from the MAC in order to, first, play football with "like-minded schools" and later to expand that to all sports. That's two prominent, concrete examples of groups dodging a whole range of opponents, let alone informal dodging in scheduling.

Just because you weren't aware of it in the 1980s doesn't mean it didn't happen. Division III was a large place then, too, and I doubt you have the wide-angle perspective that I do, no offense.

By the way, wasn't Lincoln shunned years ago as well? What's your definition of "now" -- I know Lincoln was trying to get into a league 15 years ago. I am glad they have found a home, and I'm sorry it wasn't in Division III.

Quote from: wilburt on October 13, 2010, 04:04:50 PM
One didn't have schools circumventing the non-athletic scholarship rules, by giving "leadership scholarships" and the like.

Still calling bull**** here. "Now" all schools must report their financial aid given to athletes and non-athletes. Back then, not required. Any neutral observer knows which situation is more likely to invite abuse. (By the way, the first time I heard about a school giving illegal financial aid was 1994. It's a common cry against a team that beats you.)

This reporting was a pilot program in 2004, activated in 2005 (http://web1.ncaa.org/web_files/NCAANewsArchive/2002/Division+III/iii%2Bceos%2Bsupport%2Bproposed%2Bautomatic-qualification%2Bmodel%2B-%2B8-19-02.html).

Quote from: wilburt on October 17, 2010, 04:03:02 PM
But there is no denying that until that time some schools circumvented the rules during Fisk tenure in the NCAA Division III from 1974-2008 - unless you want to dispute the NCAA findings. There may be an issue as to the degree but there is no issue that it has occurred.

That's correct. During the time you cited as some kind of golden age in Division III, the 1980s, it was *far* more likely to happen than at the end of Fisk's tenure in D-III.

Quote from: wilburt on October 13, 2010, 04:04:50 PM
One generally didn't have approximately one half of the student body as athletes as some current d3 schools do now. I could go on and on, but this d3 is not your fathers d3!

Probably not. I think it's clear that Division III has changed here, and I think that's for the better. Is not Division III about participation? Can we not agree that participating in athletics is a positive thing? Why shouldn't we let more people do so?

Schools have seats to fill and this is a great way to fill them. This is Division III, so kids are still here to get their education, not be an athletics farm team or a diploma mill.

For those who cannot manage to field a broad-based athletic program, there is the NAIA and NCCAA, or fully independent status, such as Trinity Bible in North Dakota.

I am sorry that the three schools you cited did not have positive experiences in Division III. Hey, it's not for everyone. It's especially difficult to be a D-III team in the part of the country that Stillman and Rust are in. But I wouldn't even think of running down an entire group based on 0.7% of its membership.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wilburt on October 18, 2010, 07:19:42 AM

Pat I never said that Division III was automatically bad. But by the same token, Division III is not automatically good either. There are some very good aspects to the Division. However, as with everything in life it is not the perfect eutopia as you and others seem to like to fantasize about. Yes, I tend to point out a few shortcomings with some frequency. Moreover, my view(s) may be or may not be narrow, but they are based upon my experiences and observations. I am not naive to think I would change your mind or any of my rabid followers minds ;) but it is good to challenge the status quo every now and then. Until we meet again Pat on another issue - have a great day!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 18, 2010, 12:55:41 PM

Quote from: wilburt on October 18, 2010, 07:19:42 AM
Pat I never said that Division III was automatically bad. But by the same token, Division III is not automatically good either. There are some very good aspects to the Division. However, as with everything in life it is not the perfect eutopia as you and others seem to like to fantasize about.

Wilburt, you are completely mischaracterizing both Pat and the people who regularly post on this site. "Perfect utopia"? Who has ever characterized D3 with this sentiment, and where?

I know that you have frequented the GSAC board, and you've posted here and on a couple of the other Multi-Regional Topics boards as well. But you've never graced the General Division III Issues section (or if you have, you've only lurked there), where ongoing concerns within the division are aired in an incisive manner by folks such as Ralph Turner. Spend some time in the General Division III Issues section, and it'll become apparent to you that this site's regulars do not consider D3 to be a "perfect utopia." Or log in while we're involved in one of our epic gripe sessions about D3's national-selection-using-regional-criteria methodology for choosing at-large bids to national tournaments (particularly in basketball).

This site's regulars, Pat among them, believe strongly in the mission and principles of NCAA Division III athletics. But that doesn't mean that they believe that the division has achieved anything close to perfection either in theory or in practice. As a matter of fact, the opposite is true; the more that people care about D3, the more likely they are to speak up when they see something about it that needs improvement.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wilburt on October 18, 2010, 01:52:42 PM

Gregory Sager: I'm very much through talking about this matter. (I am sure others would like that as well) I have neither the time nor inclination to continue to discuss this matter any further. My initial response that drove this discussion was to my friend scottiedoug and others took it upon themselves to respond when scottiedoug did not for whatever reason. You made your valid points, Pat made his valid points and I made my valid points. No one's mind is going to change. Let's just agree to disagree! Have a good day!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on October 18, 2010, 03:29:24 PM

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tweak3d.net%2Fforums%2Fimagehosting%2F12254a885fadccc3b.gif&hash=a56d64d7bcacaf49b4a6a45d7a6f2d51c06be30b)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 18, 2010, 04:18:03 PM

Well played, sac!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 18, 2010, 08:46:40 PM

To return to top 25 ...

Memo to Wash U (and why Titan Q has mentioned he doesn't at all rule them out for future top 25, though he can't vote for them now): don't abandon hope! See 1996 and 1997 IWU teams. In 1996 they made the FF (for the first time ever), but graduated SIX of their top 7 players. In 1997, they won it all.

Experience trumps inexperience, but only rarely does it (by itself) trump talent, hard work, and determination. If the bench players, JV, and newcomers are good enough (and determined enough), they'll be fine no matter how much talent graduated.

(Just let them still look like rookies on December 18th! ;))

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 18, 2010, 08:49:15 PM

Oh, and kudos to sac. Since Wilburt was desperately trying to end the conversation, that was MUCH more apropos than the dead horse! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on October 18, 2010, 09:09:14 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 18, 2010, 08:46:40 PM
To return to top 25 ...

Memo to Wash U (and why Titan Q has mentioned he doesn't at all rule them out for future top 25, though he can't vote for them now): don't abandon hope! See 1996 and 1997 IWU teams. In 1996 they made the FF (for the first time ever), but graduated SIX of their top 7 players. In 1997, they won it all.

Experience trumps inexperience, but only rarely does it (by itself) trump talent, hard work, and determination. If the bench players, JV, and newcomers are good enough (and determined enough), they'll be fine no matter how much talent graduated.

(Just let them still look like rookies on December 18th! ;))

Though, when that one is Bryan Crabtree it isn't like the cupboard was bare...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 18, 2010, 09:13:16 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 18, 2010, 08:46:40 PM
To return to top 25 ...

Memo to Wash U (and why Titan Q has mentioned he doesn't at all rule them out for future top 25, though he can't vote for them now): don't abandon hope! See 1996 and 1997 IWU teams. In 1996 they made the FF (for the first time ever), but graduated SIX of their top 7 players. In 1997, they won it all.

But that 1997 IWU team ended up having 3 1st Team All-Americans in the starting lineup (1997 CCIW MOP/D3 POY Bryan Crabtree, 1998 CCIW MOP Brent Niebrugge, and 1999/2000 CCIW MOP Korey Coon). In other words, they had great players in 1997 when they won it all.

For Wash U to remain a national power this season, they will need...

* 6-3 JR G/F Dylan Richter (6.9 ppg, 2.7 rpg in 18 minutes per game last year) to realize his potential. I predicted he would be an All-American someday after seeing him as a freshman but he was a non-factor in most Wash U games I saw last year. I still think he has all the talent to be a great player, but his 2009-10 season kind of confused me.

* 6-6 SR F Spencer Gay (9.5 ppg, 5.8 rpg) to have a much bigger season, and

* At least one of the freshmen, or maybe one of the returnees who did not play last year, to emerge in a big way.

(I think 6-6 SR F Caleb Knepper and 6-7 JR C Alex Toth are very solid, but I don't really see them as huge difference makers.)

It's very possible all three of these things will happen, but I also don't see a Crabtree/Niebrugge/Coon trio on the roster.

It won't surprise me if the 2010-11 Bears end up being a Top 25 team by later in the season (they have a ton of talent), but it would surprise me if they end up a Top 10 or 15 team and make a deep NCAA run.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 18, 2010, 10:38:51 PM

Q, certainly true, but at the beginning of the '96-'97 year Niebrugge was an unknown quantity and Coon was an incoming freshman! I'm by no means predicting that Wash U will be the '97 Titans (heck, I'm hoping this year's Titans will be the '97 Titans! ;)), just pointing out that graduation losses are not ALWAYS the 'kiss of death'.

Though it is certainly reasonable to assume that for pre-season prognostication.

PS, Bryan Crabtree was certainly a great starting point, but him and #8 on down combining for a title??!! :o If there had been a d3hoops.com pre-season Top 25 back then, I doubt the Titans would have been in it. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 18, 2010, 11:42:40 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 18, 2010, 08:49:15 PM
Oh, and kudos to sac. Since Wilburt was desperately trying to end the conversation ...

That's what most people would do when you're losing an argument badly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 19, 2010, 09:59:05 AM

I have no real inside info, but it seems like a school of WashU's calibre with their recent basketball success and the graduation of so many key players makes it a pretty nice destination for incoming freshmen.

I think it's much more a "when" rather than "if" scenario for them to be back near the top.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on October 19, 2010, 01:49:47 PM

Titan Q, I think most of your New England rankings in the top 25 look good, except that RIC is, I think WAY too high at number ten. I realize they beat Midd to make the sweet 16 last year, but that game was a bit flukey in my view as if memory serves, all sort of guys on RIC who were horrible shooters all year were nailing deep contested three's, and Midd just could not buy a shot from outside (even for a poor shooting team, it was unreal). RIC loses its most dynamic individual scorer in Grimes, and they did lose eight games last year against a not-terribly-impressive schedule. Also, RIC often is very unstable and lots of guys come and go from the program unexpectedly. I actually think Western Conn, who lost, barely, to RIC in the LEC championship, will be the LEC favorite, considering they have essentially everybody back from a very young team that was just about equal to RIC last year. I also think that the top three NESCAC teams, and top two NEWMAC squads, all have a bit more talent overall than RIC. I see them as no better than a team in the 20-30 range, and I still think Williams and Midd are the co teams-to-beat in New England, with MIT just a half-step behind.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 19, 2010, 02:22:36 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on October 19, 2010, 01:49:47 PM
Titan Q, I think most of your New England rankings in the top 25 look good, except that RIC is, I think WAY too high at number ten. I realize they beat Midd to make the sweet 16 last year, but that game was a bit flukey in my view as if memory serves, all sort of guys on RIC who were horrible shooters all year were nailing deep contested three's, and Midd just could not buy a shot from outside (even for a poor shooting team, it was unreal). RIC loses its most dynamic individual scorer in Grimes, and they did lose eight games last year against a not-terribly-impressive schedule. Also, RIC often is very unstable and lots of guys come and go from the program unexpectedly. I actually think Western Conn, who lost, barely, to RIC in the LEC championship, will be the LEC favorite, considering they have essentially everybody back from a very young team that was just about equal to RIC last year. I also think that the top three NESCAC teams, and top two NEWMAC squads, all have a bit more talent overall than RIC. I see them as no better than a team in the 20-30 range, and I still think Williams and Midd are the co teams-to-beat in New England, with MIT just a half-step behind.

And I'll admit that as I've been looking over my Top 25, Rhode Island is the team I feel the least comfortable about (in terms of where I have them now). I probably will slide them down a bit, and behind the two NESCAC teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 19, 2010, 02:28:47 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on October 19, 2010, 01:49:47 PMI also think that the top three NESCAC teams, and top two NEWMAC squads, all have a bit more talent overall than RIC. I see them as no better than a team in the 20-30 range

So you see five, maybe six, Northeast Region teams as being among the top 25 teams in the country?

Quote from: Hoops Fan on October 19, 2010, 09:59:05 AM

I have no real inside info, but it seems like a school of WashU's calibre with their recent basketball success and the graduation of so many key players makes it a pretty nice destination for incoming freshmen.

I think it's much more a "when" rather than "if" scenario for them to be back near the top.

No team exists in a vacuum, and Wash U is no exception. The UAA looks to be a bit down this year, at least on paper from a preseason perspective. That could mean that Wash U would sport a better record than it would under normal circumstances, which could affect the team's seeding if it makes the tourney -- but it could likewise mean that the Bears won't be as battle-tested as they have been in previous years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 19, 2010, 02:53:09 PM

My ballot as of today...

#1 UW-Stevens Point (29-4 overall, 12-4 WIAC/West) – 2009-10 national champion
Starters Returning: (4) F Louis Hurd, 6-5 SR (12.5 ppg, 4.1 rpg),G Jared Jenkins, 6-4 SR (11.4 ppg, 3.7 rpg), F Scott Hoelzel, 6-6 SR (8.2 ppg, 5.7 rpg), F Nick Krull, 6-7 SR (5.5 ppg, 3.6 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) PG Matt Moses, 6-2 (14.7 ppg, 4.3 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: PG Jerel Harris, 5-10 SO (7.7 ppg, 1.8 rpg)

#2 Eastern Mennonite (25-5 overall, 14-2 ODAC/South) – Elite 8, lost to Guilford
Starters Returning: (5) G/F Todd Phillips, 6-3 SR (17.4 ppg, 7.3 rpg, 3.1 rpg), G/F D.J. Hinson, 6-4 SR (15.9 ppg, 3.9 rpg), G George Johnson, 5-10 SR (15.0 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 3.2 apg), F Eli Crawford, 6-2 SR (12.2 ppg, 7.1 rpg), F Orie Pancione, 6-5 SR (7.9 ppg, 5.5 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: G/F Andrew Thorne, 6-4 SO (3.5 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

#3 Illinois Wesleyan (23-8 overall, 10-4 CCIW/Midwest) - Elite 8, lost to UW-Stevens Point
Starters Returning: (5) G Sean Johnson, 6-1 SR (17.0 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 3.1 apg), C Doug Sexauer, 6-7 SR (15.6 ppg, 5.8 rpg), F Jordan Zimmer, 6-5 JR (9.0 ppg, 3.6 rpg), PG Travis Rosenkranz, 6-0 SR (8.2 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 4.1 apg), F John Koschnitzky, 6-6 JR (5.3 ppg, 3.9 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: C Ryan Connolly (6.4 ppg, 2.7 rpg), 6-9 JR

#4 Carthage (24-6 overall, 12-2 CCIW/Midwest) - Sweet 16, lost to Illinois Wesleyan
Starters Returning: (4) PG Steve Djurickovic, 6-3 SR (24.4 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 7.3 apg), C Tyler Pierce, 6-5 SO (12.5 ppg, 4.8 rpg), G Max Cary, 6-3 JR (10.5 ppg, 3.0 rpg), F Mitch Thompson, 6-6 SO (6.1 ppg, 4.9 rpg),

Starters Lost: (1) G Cody Hilton, 5-11 (3.6 ppg, 1.7 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Malcom Kelly, 6-0 SO (7.6 ppg, 2.8 rpg)

#5 Randolph-Macon (26-7 overall, 11-5 ODAC/South) - Final 4, lost to UW-Stevens Point

Starters Returning: (5) F Brandon Braxton, 6-5 SR (11.5 ppg, 5.1 rpg), G Eric Pugh, 6-0 SR (10.6 ppg, 2.1 rpg, 3.2 apg), G/F Jordan Brown, 6-4 SR (10. 2 ppg, 3.4 rpg), G Calvin Croskey, 6-0 JR (8.5 ppg, 3.4 rpg), G/F Kevin Voelkel, 6-5 SR (2.7 ppg, 6.1 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: F Danny Jones, 6-6 SR (13.0 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

#6 Wooster (25-6 overall, 15-1 NCAC/Great Lakes) – Sweet 16, lost to Guilford

Starters Returning: (4) G Ian Franks, 6-4 SR (17.9 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 3.3 apg), G Nathan Balch, 6-1 SR (11.9 ppg, 3.5 rpg), F/C Bryan Wickliffe, 6-5 SR (11.2 ppg, 7.2 rpg), F Justin Hallowell, 6-7 JR (9.0 ppg, 5.8 rpg)

Starters Lost : (1) G Brandon Johnson, 6-2 (6.1 ppg, 2.4 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Matt Fegan, 6-1 JR (6.2 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

#7 St. Norbert (23-4 overall, 14-2 MWC/Midwest) - Round of 32, lost to UW-Stevens Point
Starters Returning: (5) G Dave Wipperfurth, 6-2 SR (15.3 ppg, 3.4 rpg), C Chris Peterson, 6-5 SR (13.7 ppg, 5.4 rpg), G John Taylor, 6-0 SR (10.6 ppg, 4.3 rpg, 4.3 apg), F Steve Papke, 6-4 SR (7.0 ppg, 4.6 rpg), G/F Paul Mallers, 6-3 SR (5.9 ppg, 4.5 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: G Mike Brumm, 5-11 SO (4.6 ppg, 1.0 rpg)

#8 Franklin & Marshall (26-5 overall, 15-3 Centennial/Mid-Atlantic) – Elite 8, lost to Randolph-Macon
Starters Returning: (4) F James McNally, 6-6 SR (18.4 ppg, 8.5 rpg), G Georgio Milligan, 6-2 JR (13.0 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 4.9 apg), F Mike Baker, 6-6 SR (9.0 ppg, 6.7 rpg), G Justin Driver, 6-0 SR (2.5 ppg, 0.8 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Anthony Brooks, 6-2 (12.4 ppg, 4.4 rpg, 3.4 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Steve Tolliver, 6-2 SR (6.4 ppg, 2.8 rpg)

#9 John Carroll (21-7 overall, 15-3 OAC/Great Lakes) - Round of 32, lost to Guilford
Starters Returning: (5) G Corey Shontz, 6-1 JR (14.4 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 4.0 apg), F/C Matt Crozier, 6-7 JR (12.6 ppg, 7.4 rpg), G Joey Meyer, 5-11 JR (8.3 ppg, 1.9 rpg), G Michael Hartnett, 6-2 JR (4.9 ppg, 1.4 rpg), F Patrick Sweeney, 6-2 JR (2.8 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: F Maurice Haynes, 6-4 SR (8.6 ppg, 4.3 apg)

#10 Middlebury (25-4 overall, 8-1 NESCAC/Northeast) - Round of 32, lost to Rhode Island
Starters Returning: (4) F Ryan Sharry, 6-8 JR (13.7 ppg, 8.1 rpg), G Jake Wolfin, 6-2 SO (10.6 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 3.9 apg), G Nolan Thompson, 6-3 SO (10.2 ppg, 3.0 rpg), C Andrew Locke, 6-10 SR (9.1 ppg, 5.0 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Tim Edwards, 6-4 (8.5 ppg, 7.1 rpg, 5.1 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Ryan Wholey, 6-4 SR (8.5 ppg, 4.0 rpg)

#11 Williams (30-2 overall, 9-0 NESCAC/Northeast) – lost in national championship game to UW-Stevens Point
Starters Returning: (2) G James Wang, 6-0 JR (17.3 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 4.4 apg), F Harlan Dodson, 6-8 SR (6.2 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) G/F Blake Schultz, 6-3 (19.2 ppg, 4.3 rpg), G Alex Rubin, 6-4 (9.5 ppg, 1.9 rpg), C Joe Geoghegan, 6-8 (7.1 ppg, 8.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: C Troy Whittington, 6-5 SR (11.1 ppg, 6.2 rpg

#12 Anderson (23-6 overall, 13-3 HCAC/Midwest) - Round of 32, lost to Carthage
Starters Returning: (4) F Brock Morrison, 6-3 JR (14.4 ppg, 8.7 rpg), C Andrew Jones, 6-6 SR (13.2 ppg, 5.8 rpg), F Andrew Bowman, 6-7 SR (11.8 ppg, 6.5 rpg), G Gabe Miller, 6-3 SR (11.0 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 3.8 apg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Ty Riddle (14.8 ppg, 2.0 rpg) - was a junior last year...had one semester eligility left but decided to enter work world

Top Returning Reserve: G Phil Hogan, 5-11 SO (5.7 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

#13 Rhode Island (22-8 overall, 12-2 LEC/Northeast) - Sweet 16, lost to Brandeis
Starters Returning: (4) G Antone Gray, 5-9 SR (14.2 ppg, 2.4 rpg, 4.8 apg), G/F Mason Choice, 6-4 JR (13.0 ppg, 4.8 rpg), F/C Darius Debnam, 6-4 SR (7.2 ppg, 6.0 rpg), G Nick Manson, 6-0 SR (7.2 ppg, 2.2 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Jake Grimes, 6-3 (14.9 ppg, 5.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Carl Lee, 6-3 SR (9.5 ppg, 5.8 rpg)

#14 St. Mary's (26-4 overall, 14-2 CAC/Mid-Atlantic) – Sweet 16, lost to Franklin & Marshall
Starters Returning: (4) G Alex Franz, 6-1 SR (13.7 ppg, 5.2 rpg), C Sam Brown, 6-8 SR (9.9 ppg, 5.2 rpg), G James Davenport, 6-3 JR (6.6 ppg, 2.7 rpg), F Brian Grashof, 6-7 JR (6.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Camontae Griffin, 5-9 (21.6 ppg, 2.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G/F Mike Fitzpatrick, 6-6 SR (8.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg)

#15 Virginia Wesleyan (22-5 overall, 12-4 ODAC/South) - Round of 32, lost to St. Mary's
Starters Returning: (4) F Donald Vaughn, 6-5 JR (15.5 ppg, 8.0 ppg), F Chris Astorga, 6-5 SO (8.9 ppg, 4.9 rpg), G Ed Roberts, 5-10 JR (3.5 ppg, 1.9 rpg), F Trevor Watson, 6-4 JR (1.8 ppg, 1.4 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Stephen Fields, 6-2 (21.0 ppg, 4.6 rpg, 3.2 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Quantrell Simmons, 6-6 SR (8.8 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

#16 Hope (21-8 overall, 11-3 MIAA/Great Lakes) – lost in 1st Round to St. Norbert
Starters Returning: (4) G Peter Bunn, 6-2 SR (16.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg), F Will Bowser, 6-5 SR (12.1 ppg, 5.8 rpg), F Andy Venema, 6-8 SR (9.4 ppg, 3.2 rpg), G David Krombeen, 6-3 JR (6.8 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 3.8 apg)

Starters Lost: (1) C Chris Nelis, 6-4 (12.4 ppg, 5.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Nate Snuggerud, 6-5 SO (6.1 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

#17 MIT (22-5 overall, 10-2 NEWMAC/Northeast) – lost in 1st Round to DeSales
Starters Returning: (4) F Noel Hollingsworth, 6-9 JR (20.4 ppg, 9.0 rpg), G Mitchell Kates, 6-1 SO (13.2 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 4.1 apg), F Will Tashman, 6-8 SO (8.7 ppg, 7.2 rpg), G Eric Zuk, 6-5 SR (1.2 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) Billy Johnson (8.0 ppg, 3.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Jimmy Burke, 5-11 SO (9.2 ppg, 1.3 rpg)

#18 WPI (20-7 overall, 7-5 NEWMAC/Northeast) – not in 2009-10 tournament
Starters Returning: (4) G Jeffrey Robinson, 6-1 SR (19.0 ppg, 3.5 rpg), G Kyle Nadeau, 5-8 SR (9.3 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 3.0 apg), F Ben Etten, 6-4 SR (9.2 ppg, 5.0 rpg), C Matt Carr, 6-7 JR (5.9 ppg, 4.1 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) C Bennett Lessard, 6-8 (3.3 ppg, 5.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Fernando Perez, 6-3 JR (11.1 ppg, 7.0 rpg)

#19 Plattsburgh State (21-8 overall, 13-5 SUNYAC/East) – lost in 1st Round to SUNYIT
Starters Returning: (4) G Chris Ruiz, 6-4 SR (17.2 ppg, 5.7 rpg), G Steve Thomas, 6-4 SR (17.1 ppg, 6.6 rpg), F Errol Daniyan, 6-6 SR (15.2 ppg, 8.3 rpg), G Carl Munnerlyn, 5-9 SR (11.5 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) F Farris Thomas, 6-5 (4.7 ppg, 4.7 rpg)

Top Returning ReserveL F RJ Ponesse, 6-10 SR (3.6 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

#20 Manchester (17-10 overall, 10-6 HCAC/Midwest) – not in 2009-10 tournament
Starters Returning: (5) G Mitch Schaefer, 6-4 SR (11.3 ppg, 3.4 rpg), G/F Tyler Henn, 6-5 SR (9.9 ppg, 5.0 rpg), G Jordan Moss, 6-4 JR (9.1 ppg, 4.1 rpg), G Nathan Ferch, 6-3 SR (8.1 ppg, 4.3 rpg), C Jason Spindler, 6-10 JR (7.4 ppg, 4.1 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: G Tyler Delauder, 6-1 SR (8.0 ppg, 2.4 rpg)

#21 Augustana (16-10 overall, 9-5 CCIW/Midwest) – not in 2009-10 tournament
Starters Returning: (4) F Kyle Nelson, 6-9 SR (14.7 ppg, 7.7 rpg), PG Brian DeSimone, 6-1 JR (6.7 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 3.3 apg), G Troy Rorer, 6-2 JR (6.3 ppg, 4.0 rpg), F Brandon Kunz, 6-7 SO (4.7 ppg, 3.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Matt Pelton, 6-3 (12.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Chris Anderson, 6-4 JR (7.0 ppg, 1.6 rpg)

#22 Ramapo (18-9 overall, 7-6 NJAC/Atlantic) – not in 2009-10 tournament
Starters Returning: (4) F/C LaQuan Peterkin, 6-6 JR (15.4 ppg, 7.8 rpg), G Anthony LoRusso, 6-1 JR (9.1 ppg, 1.6 rpg), G Garret Thiel, 6-2 JR (8.9 ppg, 3.2 rpg), F Davian Plunkett, 6-6 JR (8.3 ppg, 8.2 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Andre Kenny, 6-3 (15.8 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 4.1 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Stephon Treadwell, 6-5 SO (4.6 ppg, 3.6 rpg)

#23 Loras (15-11 overall, 10-6 IIAC/West) – not in 2009-10 tournament
Starters Returning: (4) F Tim Kelly, 6-4 JR (13.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg) G Mike Gleason, 6-2 SR (11.6 ppg, 2.2 rpg), G Connor Mooney, 5-10 SO (11.4 ppg, 1.3 rpg, 4.2 apg), F Jordan Harrelson, 6-4 JR (5.5 ppg, 3.9 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) F Alex Brant (5.3 ppg, 5.4 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: C Dan Pawelski, 6-9 JR (9.6 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

#24 St. Thomas (23-4 overall, 19-1 MIAC/West) - lost in 1st round to Anderson
Starters Returning: (2) G Tyler Nicolai, 5-11 SR (14.1 ppg, 2.0 rpg), G Alex Healy, 6-4 SR (12.7 ppg, 3.6 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) G Joe Scott, 6-4 (10.8 ppg, 2.1 rpg), G Teddy Archer, 6-1 (5.0 ppg, 2.9 rpg), C Sam Eicher, 6-6 (4.4 ppg, 2.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: C Tommy Hannon, 6-8 JR (5.3 ppg, 3.8 rpg)

#25 - ?? Any thoughts on who the best candidate not listed above is?

(I bumped UW-Whitewater out...just can't seem to get comfortable with them in at this point. I'd love to put another WIAC team in, but I am not clear at all on which team is picked #2. Sounds like UW-River Falls is a team to watch for but I just can't pull the trigger on a 9-16/3-13 team on the preseason ballot.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 19, 2010, 03:05:11 PM

Here are the remaining teams from that running list we had going a couple weeks ago (candidates among teams that were not in the final 2009-10 poll). I've already included the ones I feel good about in my top 25...not sure I'm thrilled about any of the teams below.

Again, it seems like there should be a second WIAC team in. It also seems like there should be a UAA team, but I just don't see one that belongs in the preseason poll. Second NCAC team? Second OAC team? NWC candidate? SCAC?

Open to any and all suggestions. In the absence of a clear choice, this is where as a voter you sometimes end up falling back on a strong program - Wittenberg, Wash U, Amherst, etc.

Amherst (14-11 overall, 3-6 NESCAC) – Northeast
Starters Returning: (4) G Conor Meehan, 6-4 SR (14.2 ppg, 5.6 rpg, 6.2 apg), F Jeff Holmes, 6-7 JR (9.8 ppg, 6.2 rpg), G Taylor Barisse, 6-5 JR (8.2 ppg, 4.4 rpg), G/F David Waller, 6-6 JR (7.8 ppg, 4.6 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G/F Steven Wheeler, 6-6 (14.7 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Willy Workman, 6-6 SO (6.2 ppg, 4.0 rpg)

Buena Vista (15-12 overall, 10-6 IIAC) – West
Starters Returning: (3) G Troy Ticknor, 6-1 SO (12.4 ppg, 2.1 rpg), F/C Doug Bissen, 6-7 JR (11.7 ppg, 6.4 rpg), F Wes Nordquist, 6-7 SO (11.4 ppg, 6.6 rpg)

Starters Lost: (2) G/F Nathan Parker, 6-4 (10.7 ppg, 4.3 rpg), G Kevin Osborn, 6-0 (3.7 ppg, 3.1 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Jeff Janssen, 6-4 JR (8.9 ppg, 1.8 rpg)

Calvin (19-9 overall, 12-2 MIAA) – Great Lakes
Starters Returning: (3) F Danny Rodts, 6-6 SR (9.8 ppg, 4.4 rpg), F Tom Snikkers, 6-4 SO (8.5 ppg, 4.2 rpg), G Trent Salo, 5-9 SR (5.3 ppg, 1.7 rpg)

Starters Lost: (2) C John Mantel, 6-9 (14.5 ppg, 7.5 rpg), F Matt Veltema, 6-6 (12.5 ppg, 3.4 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Brad Schnyders, 6-6 SR (6.0 ppg, 2.1 rpg)

DePauw (20-8 overall, 11-5 SCAC) – South
Starters Returning: (2) G Steve Lemasters, 6-3 SR (12.1 ppg, 3.3 rpg), G Sean Hasely, 6-3 JR (11.1 ppg, 3.5 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) G Tony James, 5-10 (10.3 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 4.3 apg), F Tom Callen, 6-4 (8.5 ppg, 4.7 rpg), F David Gray, 6-6 (4.3 ppg, 6.4 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Drew Wills, 6-3 SR (6.6 ppg, 2.9 rpg)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ethelred the Unready on October 19, 2010, 03:07:47 PM

Hey, don't sleep on Rust. I hear they're pretty good ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on October 19, 2010, 05:47:56 PM

Quote from: Ethelred the Unready on October 19, 2010, 03:07:47 PM
Hey, don't sleep on Rust. I hear they're pretty good ::)

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ft1.gstatic.com%2Fimages%3Fq%3Dtbn%3AANd9GcSnBD5oL2bHxPmIn_7srcHaSPi1hqOoQVStqC5KHwkJrzt9xvA%26amp%3Bt%3D1%26amp%3Busg%3D__0fOoHcf7pYq_EBqDh7W6z_7vanY%3D&hash=ef987d85963fa19b602efa30f55d7bb8cb9728c6)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: beachcv on October 19, 2010, 10:04:32 PM

Just a simple kudos to Titan Q for a tremendous amount to time and effort with the top teams, including the listing of players with height, year, statistics, etc. Excellent research.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on October 20, 2010, 10:23:26 AM

If it's those four you're pondering, I'd say take Calvin and DePauw and flip a coin. They had the best team resumes last year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on October 20, 2010, 12:22:53 PM

I would put WashU in at the #25 spot. I know they lost a lot, but they are always deep. Many of their backups would start on a lot of good D3 teams. This is a team that was #1 for most of the year last year and ended #6.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 20, 2010, 12:54:10 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on October 20, 2010, 12:22:53 PM
I would put WashU in at the #25 spot. I know they lost a lot, but they are always deep. Many of their backups would start on a lot of good D3 teams. This is a team that was #1 for most of the year last year and ended #6.

To your last sentence...With 4 starters gone -- including two All-American guards (Sean Wallis and Aaron Thompson), their starting center (Zack Kelly), and their best defender (Cam Smith) -- does Wash U's 2009-10 record and rankings even matter in terms of this year's preseason Top 25? I mean, those guys were absolutely instrumental to everthing the Bears accomplished last year.

I think what you are saying more is, "Wash U is a 'Top 25 program'...I assume they have good players ready to step in...I expect them to reload, not rebuild, and be a Top 25 team this year." Now to that, I don't have a big problem. I do think there are numerous programs that have earned the "Top 25 benefit of the doubt", so to speak. I'm sure most D1 pollsters would include a rebuilding Kansas team over a potential Missouri Valley breakthrough on a preseason ballot. I do try my best to avoid voting for teams based simply on name though. Sometimes teams actually do have to rebuild.

I should also add that, having seen Wash U play so many times the last few years, I can confirm that their 2010-11 team will have some really good players (Gay, Richter, Knepper, and Toth for example) -- you are right that many of their reserves last year would have started elsewhere in D3. And I know their freshman class is strong.

I feel like Wash U has so many questions heading into 2010-11 (biggest for me - Who is the point-guard? Do they have enough 3-point shooters? What does the bench look like?) that it's hard to vote for them in the preseason poll. My thinking is that I'd like to get past November 22 -- after Wash U has played two WIAC teams and Augustana -- before looking at them as a Top 25 candidate. But heck, as you see, I'm struggling to find a 25th team that doesn't have a bunch of questions.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on October 20, 2010, 01:42:53 PM

Awesome job, Q.

I like to use my No. 25 spot on a team that is off the radar if I think it can be competitive with those in consideration for that slot. From this neck of the woods, keep an eye on Gettysburg. The Bullets played well down the stretch, have a great player in Andrew Powers and some really nice young pieces (Zurn, Trelease).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 20, 2010, 02:02:58 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on October 20, 2010, 01:42:53 PM
Awesome job, Q.

I like to use my No. 25 spot on a team that is off the radar if I think it can be competitive with those in consideration for that slot. From this neck of the woods, keep an eye on Gettysburg. The Bullets played well down the stretch, have a great player in Andrew Powers and some really nice young pieces (Zurn, Trelease).

Thanks Gordon...Gettysburg looks like a strong candidate!

Gettysburg (15-11 overall, 12-6 Centennial/Mid-Atlantic) - not in 2009-10 NCAA tournament...lost @ F&M by 4 in CC tournament
Starters Returning: (4) C Andrew Powers, 6-6 SR (19.3 ppg, 6.8 rpg), F Kevin Kennedy, 6-5 SR (11.8 ppg, 4.7 rpg), G/F Alex Zurn, 6-4 SO (11.7 ppg, 4.1 rpg), F Tim Lang, 6-7 JR (2.1 ppg, 1.4 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Brendan Hagar, 6-1 (5.2 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 5.5 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Brendan Trelease, 6-3 JR (7.0 ppg, 2.7 rpg)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 20, 2010, 02:07:47 PM

Just noticed that IWU and Gettysburg play December 29 @ Cal Lutheran...one of those interesting cross-region games we don't get enough of in Division III.

http://www.iwusports.com/schedule.aspx?path=mbball

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on October 20, 2010, 05:07:24 PM

Looks like it's going to be an uber-competitive year in D-III this season. Looking at the top group of teams, only two powerhouses from last year (Guilford and Wash U.) were really decimated by graduation / totally senior dominated. This year, on the other hand, almost every projected top team, certainly each team in the top eight, is loaded with key seniors. It seems like this is one of those years where almost everyone is peaking, and next year will be fairly wide open and very difficult to project again.

And the powers that be are gonna have a HECK of a tough time picking the D-III all star game. This has to be one of the best classes of D-III talent in recent history. Other than James Wang and McCrary (locks), and Noel Hollingsworth and Donald Vaughn (possibles), are there even any non-seniors with much of a shot of cracking any of the five pre-season all-American teams?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on October 20, 2010, 06:29:43 PM

QuoteJust noticed that IWU and Gettysburg play December 29 @ Cal Lutheran...one of those interesting cross-region games we don't get enough of in Division III.

Cool! I think Pat and Dave McHugh should spring for us to cover the game in our respective capacities. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on October 20, 2010, 07:26:39 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on October 20, 2010, 05:07:24 PM
Looks like it's going to be an uber-competitive year in D-III this season. Looking at the top group of teams, only two powerhouses from last year (Guilford and Wash U.) were really decimated by graduation / totally senior dominated. This year, on the other hand, almost every projected top team, certainly each team in the top eight, is loaded with key seniors. It seems like this is one of those years where almost everyone is peaking, and next year will be fairly wide open and very difficult to project again.

And the powers that be are gonna have a HECK of a tough time picking the D-III all star game. This has to be one of the best classes of D-III talent in recent history. Other than James Wang and McCrary (locks), and Noel Hollingsworth and Donald Vaughn (possibles), are there even any non-seniors with much of a shot of cracking any of the five pre-season all-American teams?

Take a look at Mitch Kates, Northeast region rookie of the year last year. I am biased, but I think he is as good as any point guard in the Northeast, including the aforementioned Wang. Those of you who have seen him play know what I am talking about.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 20, 2010, 07:46:36 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on October 20, 2010, 05:07:24 PM
are there even any non-seniors with much of a shot of cracking any of the five pre-season all-American teams?

Last year's D3hoops.com national Rookie of the Year Derek Raridon, a 6-6 combo forward from North Central, should have a good chance. His freshman year stats...

21.3 ppg, 5.6 rpg, 43-100 3-pt, 155-189 FT (.820)

Like Steve Djurickovic (Carthage), he is the son of a CCIW head coach (Todd Raridon) and would surely be at a higher level if not for his natural ties to North Central. I've seen Djurickovic enough now to confidently say he is a mid-major D1-caliber player. I'd have to see Raridon more to get a better feel for where he could play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 20, 2010, 09:50:35 PM

Q,

Does Ron Rose have any promising offspring (either sex - I'm a fan of the Titan women as well! ;)). Sheesh, 25% of the CCIW is thriving with coaches' kids - when does IWU join the party??!! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on October 20, 2010, 10:57:50 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 20, 2010, 12:54:10 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on October 20, 2010, 12:22:53 PM
I would put WashU in at the #25 spot. I know they lost a lot, but they are always deep. Many of their backups would start on a lot of good D3 teams. This is a team that was #1 for most of the year last year and ended #6.

To your last sentence...With 4 starters gone -- including two All-American guards (Sean Wallis and Aaron Thompson), their starting center (Zack Kelly), and their best defender (Cam Smith) -- does Wash U's 2009-10 record and rankings even matter in terms of this year's preseason Top 25? I mean, those guys were absolutely instrumental to everthing the Bears accomplished last year.

I think what you are saying more is, "Wash U is a 'Top 25 program'...I assume they have good players ready to step in...I expect them to reload, not rebuild, and be a Top 25 team this year." Now to that, I don't have a big problem. I do think there are numerous programs that have earned the "Top 25 benefit of the doubt", so to speak. I'm sure most D1 pollsters would include a rebuilding Kansas team over a potential Missouri Valley breakthrough on a preseason ballot. I do try my best to avoid voting for teams based simply on name though. Sometimes teams actually do have to rebuild.

I should also add that, having seen Wash U play so many times the last few years, I can confirm that their 2010-11 team will have some really good players (Gay, Richter, Knepper, and Toth for example) -- you are right that many of their reserves last year would have started elsewhere in D3. And I know their freshman class is strong.

I feel like Wash U has so many questions heading into 2010-11 (biggest for me - Who is the point-guard? Do they have enough 3-point shooters? What does the bench look like?) that it's hard to vote for them in the preseason poll. My thinking is that I'd like to get past November 22 -- after Wash U has played two WIAC teams and Augustana -- before looking at them as a Top 25 candidate. But heck, as you see, I'm struggling to find a 25th team that doesn't have a bunch of questions.

I think this year's Wash U team isn't that unlike the UWSP team from 05-06 (after the back-to-back championships). The cupboard wasn't bare and Point still had a decent year (17-10), but there were certainly some adjustments that had to be made because so many of those guys didn't have extensive experience. That's not to say they weren't good... the next year, Point was 26-3, falling in the sweet 16 to the first of Wash U's 4 straight final four teams.

The 05-06 Point team started the year as the first ORV team, right on the cusp of the top 25. They actually swept Stout and La Crosse (NCAA tournament teams) in the regular season and had several pretty good games... but they were a young unexperienced team and played like it and lost quite a few games that they should have won (6/10 losses were 6 or fewer points and only two were by more than 10 points).

The difference may be the league... 3 WIAC teams made the tournament in 05-06. I'm not sure what the UAA is going to be like (other than the usually difficult travel).

I think Q may be right about Wash U... we may know what level they're on fairly.

That said, I honestly don't know that the WIAC teams will be able to give them much of a game... Platteville was 14-12 last year and Eau Claire was 14-11. Platte and EC each had 5 seniors last year. They each both have just 2 seniors coming back too. Granted, Bo Ryan court is a tough place to play... but the Pios (and the WIAC in general) are going to be down this year.

This is one of the first times I've taken a look at what's coming back for WIAC teams... hopefully sometime soon I can look at the rest of them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 20, 2010, 11:11:56 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on October 20, 2010, 10:57:50 PM
I think this year's Wash U team isn't that unlike the UWSP team from 05-06 (after the back-to-back championships). The cupboard wasn't bare and Point still had a decent year (17-10), but there were certainly some adjustments that had to be made because so many of those guys didn't have extensive experience. That's not to say they weren't good... the next year, Point was 26-3, falling in the sweet 16 to the first of Wash U's 4 straight final four teams.

You mean three straight Final Four teams ('07, '08, and '09), not four straight. NPU ain't gonna give up its share of that consecutive-Final-Fours record before it's legitimately taken away, and I'm sure that Amherst feels the same. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on October 20, 2010, 11:30:58 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 20, 2010, 11:11:56 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on October 20, 2010, 10:57:50 PM
I think this year's Wash U team isn't that unlike the UWSP team from 05-06 (after the back-to-back championships). The cupboard wasn't bare and Point still had a decent year (17-10), but there were certainly some adjustments that had to be made because so many of those guys didn't have extensive experience. That's not to say they weren't good... the next year, Point was 26-3, falling in the sweet 16 to the first of Wash U's 4 straight final four teams.

You mean three straight Final Four teams ('07, '08, and '09), not four straight. NPU ain't gonna give up its share of that consecutive-Final-Fours record before it's legitimately taken away, and I'm sure that Amherst feels the same. ;)

You, of course, are quite right... the Final poll from last year hasn't been posted to the typical "Final" location... and so I saw 3rd in 06-07, 1st in 07-08. 1st in 08-09, and 1st in 09-10 (wk 13). Of course, the most recent first was going into the tournament, not coming out of it (hmm... who could THAT be? I feel like I should know this...).

I'll blame my 5 hours of restless sleep last night... I had a not-quite-two-year-old who decided that he couldn't sleep in his own bed at about 1 AM last night and then he decided to get up at 6:00. Yuck. And yawn.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 21, 2010, 04:35:54 PM

I looked in a little closer detail at Wash U's rotation at the end of last season. The following data is from their final 3 games - a 64-60 win @ U. of Chicago, a 79-71 home win vs Westminster in NCAA Round 1, and a 75-70 home loss to IWU in NCAA Round 2.

The rotation was basically:
* = 2010-11 returnee

Starters (153 min)
PG – Sean Wallis, 34 min
SG – Aaron Thompson, 30 min
SF – Cameron Smith, 33 min
PF – Spencer Gay, 28 min*
C – Zach Kelly, 28 min

Bench (47 min)
PG Ross Kelley, 7 min
G/F Dylan Richter, 17 min*
F Caleb Knepper, 14 min*
F/C Alex Toth, 9 min*

From those 3 games, the 4 returnees accounted for...

- Minutes/game = 68 (34%)
- Points/game = 28.3 (40%)
- Rebounds/game = 12.3 (35%)
- Assists/game = 3.3 (18%)
- FGM/game = 10.7 (44%)
- 3-pt FGM/game = 2.7 (35%)

And projecting the 2010-11 rotation as best we can, just based on returnees who were in the rotation...

2010-11 Starters?
PG - ?? (no returning player played PG)
SG – Dylan Richter, 6-3 JR
SF – Caleb Knepper, 6-6 SR
PF – Spencer Gay, 6-6 SR
C – Alex Toth, 6-6 JR

2010-11 Bench?
(no players besides above were in 2009-10 rotation)

Thus my 3 big questions about Wash U heading into the year (as I posted yesterday), and the reason I struggle with them as a preseason Top 25 team:

1) Who is the PG? (They have some talented young players, but none has varsity experience.)

2) Do they have enough 3-point shooters? (Richter can play the 2 and can make a 3, but is certainly not "pure 3-point shooter"...more of an athletic slasher. Knepper is definitely a 3-point shooter, but who else?)

3) What does the bench look like? (Again, lots of young talent to choose from, but no varsity experience. While guards can develop quickly, post players usually have a longer development curve...do they have players ready to backup the 4 and 5 spots?)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 21, 2010, 04:38:08 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on October 20, 2010, 06:29:43 PM
QuoteJust noticed that IWU and Gettysburg play December 29 @ Cal Lutheran...one of those interesting cross-region games we don't get enough of in Division III.

Cool! I think Pat and Dave McHugh should spring for us to cover the game in our respective capacities. :)

If anyone is traveling on Dec. 29, it will be to Las Vegas for the D3hoops.com Classic. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 21, 2010, 04:39:38 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on October 20, 2010, 11:30:58 PM
You, of course, are quite right... the Final poll from last year hasn't been posted to the typical "Final" location..

Yeah -- typically don't until the next preseason poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on October 21, 2010, 07:03:20 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 21, 2010, 04:39:38 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on October 20, 2010, 11:30:58 PM
You, of course, are quite right... the Final poll from last year hasn't been posted to the typical "Final" location..

Yeah -- typically don't until the next preseason poll.

You guys have more than enough to do during Football season. I certainly don't fault you for it!

And I clearly wasn't that coherent when I was posting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 22, 2010, 12:40:58 AM

In all honesty, I am hoping to only have to do that on the new site and not on the old one. We'll see when launch is.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: RustCollege on October 22, 2010, 10:14:31 AM

Quote from: sac on October 19, 2010, 05:47:56 PM
Quote from: Ethelred the Unready on October 19, 2010, 03:07:47 PM
Hey, don't sleep on Rust. I hear they're pretty good ::)

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ft1.gstatic.com%2Fimages%3Fq%3Dtbn%3AANd9GcSnBD5oL2bHxPmIn_7srcHaSPi1hqOoQVStqC5KHwkJrzt9xvA%26amp%3Bt%3D1%26amp%3Busg%3D__0fOoHcf7pYq_EBqDh7W6z_7vanY%3D&hash=ef987d85963fa19b602efa30f55d7bb8cb9728c6)

LOL now thats funny......i see somebody agree with me about not sleeping on Rust they did avg 82.5 pts a game which is rank #15 in D3 and shot 40% from the 3pt line which is rank #11 in D3

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 22, 2010, 03:45:05 PM

I received the official D3hoops.com preseason ballot e-mail today. I'm guessing we'll have a poll by mid-week.

So with a final decision to make by Tuesday, I'm very comfortable with 21 teams and have 9 teams I'm looking at for spots 22-25...

21 Sure Things:

#1 UW-Stevens Point (29-4 overall, 12-4 WIAC/West) – 2009-10 national champion
Starters Returning: (4) F Louis Hurd, 6-5 SR (12.5 ppg, 4.1 rpg),G Jared Jenkins, 6-4 SR (11.4 ppg, 3.7 rpg), F Scott Hoelzel, 6-6 SR (8.2 ppg, 5.7 rpg), F Nick Krull, 6-7 SR (5.5 ppg, 3.6 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) PG Matt Moses, 6-2 (14.7 ppg, 4.3 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: PG Jerel Harris, 5-10 SO (7.7 ppg, 1.8 rpg)

Potential Impact Transfer: G DeVon Jackson, 6-0, Williston State...F Jamie Mauch, 6-4, North Dakota College of Science (2 year starter)

#2 Eastern Mennonite (25-5 overall, 14-2 ODAC/South) – Elite 8, lost to Guilford
Starters Returning: (5) G/F Todd Phillips, 6-3 SR (17.4 ppg, 7.3 rpg, 3.1 rpg), G/F D.J. Hinson, 6-4 SR (15.9 ppg, 3.9 rpg), G George Johnson, 5-10 SR (15.0 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 3.2 apg), F Eli Crawford, 6-2 SR (12.2 ppg, 7.1 rpg), F Orie Pancione, 6-5 SR (7.9 ppg, 5.5 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: G/F Andrew Thorne, 6-4 SO (3.5 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

#3 Illinois Wesleyan (23-8 overall, 10-4 CCIW/Midwest) - Elite 8, lost to UW-Stevens Point
Starters Returning: (5) G Sean Johnson, 6-1 SR (17.0 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 3.1 apg), C Doug Sexauer, 6-7 SR (15.6 ppg, 5.8 rpg), F Jordan Zimmer, 6-5 JR (9.0 ppg, 3.6 rpg), PG Travis Rosenkranz, 6-0 SR (8.2 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 4.1 apg), F John Koschnitzky, 6-6 JR (5.3 ppg, 3.9 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: C Ryan Connolly (6.4 ppg, 2.7 rpg), 6-9 JR

#4 Carthage (24-6 overall, 12-2 CCIW/Midwest) - Sweet 16, lost to Illinois Wesleyan
Starters Returning: (4) PG Steve Djurickovic, 6-3 SR (24.4 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 7.3 apg), C Tyler Pierce, 6-5 SO (12.5 ppg, 4.8 rpg), G Max Cary, 6-3 JR (10.5 ppg, 3.0 rpg), F Mitch Thompson, 6-6 SO (6.1 ppg, 4.9 rpg),

Starters Lost: (1) G Cody Hilton, 5-11 (3.6 ppg, 1.7 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Malcom Kelly, 6-0 SO (7.6 ppg, 2.8 rpg)

#5 Randolph-Macon (26-7 overall, 11-5 ODAC/South) - Final 4, lost to UW-Stevens Point

Starters Returning: (5) F Brandon Braxton, 6-5 SR (11.5 ppg, 5.1 rpg), G Eric Pugh, 6-0 SR (10.6 ppg, 2.1 rpg, 3.2 apg), G/F Jordan Brown, 6-4 SR (10. 2 ppg, 3.4 rpg), G Calvin Croskey, 6-0 JR (8.5 ppg, 3.4 rpg), G/F Kevin Voelkel, 6-5 SR (2.7 ppg, 6.1 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: F Danny Jones, 6-6 SR (13.0 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

#6 Wooster (25-6 overall, 15-1 NCAC/Great Lakes) – Sweet 16, lost to Guilford

Starters Returning: (4) G Ian Franks, 6-4 SR (17.9 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 3.3 apg), G Nathan Balch, 6-1 SR (11.9 ppg, 3.5 rpg), F/C Bryan Wickliffe, 6-5 SR (11.2 ppg, 7.2 rpg), F Justin Hallowell, 6-7 JR (9.0 ppg, 5.8 rpg)

Starters Lost : (1) G Brandon Johnson, 6-2 (6.1 ppg, 2.4 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Matt Fegan, 6-1 JR (6.2 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

#7 St. Norbert (23-4 overall, 14-2 MWC/Midwest) - Round of 32, lost to UW-Stevens Point
Starters Returning: (5) G Dave Wipperfurth, 6-2 SR (15.3 ppg, 3.4 rpg), C Chris Peterson, 6-5 SR (13.7 ppg, 5.4 rpg), G John Taylor, 6-0 SR (10.6 ppg, 4.3 rpg, 4.3 apg), F Steve Papke, 6-4 SR (7.0 ppg, 4.6 rpg), G/F Paul Mallers, 6-3 SR (5.9 ppg, 4.5 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: G Mike Brumm, 5-11 SO (4.6 ppg, 1.0 rpg)

#8 Franklin & Marshall (26-5 overall, 15-3 Centennial/Mid-Atlantic) – Elite 8, lost to Randolph-Macon
Starters Returning: (4) F James McNally, 6-6 SR (18.4 ppg, 8.5 rpg), G Georgio Milligan, 6-2 JR (13.0 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 4.9 apg), F Mike Baker, 6-6 SR (9.0 ppg, 6.7 rpg), G Justin Driver, 6-0 SR (2.5 ppg, 0.8 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Anthony Brooks, 6-2 (12.4 ppg, 4.4 rpg, 3.4 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Steve Tolliver, 6-2 SR (6.4 ppg, 2.8 rpg)

#9 John Carroll (21-7 overall, 15-3 OAC/Great Lakes) - Round of 32, lost to Guilford
Starters Returning: (5) G Corey Shontz, 6-1 JR (14.4 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 4.0 apg), F/C Matt Crozier, 6-7 JR (12.6 ppg, 7.4 rpg), G Joey Meyer, 5-11 JR (8.3 ppg, 1.9 rpg), G Michael Hartnett, 6-2 JR (4.9 ppg, 1.4 rpg), F Patrick Sweeney, 6-2 JR (2.8 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: F Maurice Haynes, 6-4 SR (8.6 ppg, 4.3 apg)

#10 Middlebury (25-4 overall, 8-1 NESCAC/Northeast) - Round of 32, lost to Rhode Island
Starters Returning: (4) F Ryan Sharry, 6-8 JR (13.7 ppg, 8.1 rpg), G Jake Wolfin, 6-2 SO (10.6 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 3.9 apg), G Nolan Thompson, 6-3 SO (10.2 ppg, 3.0 rpg), C Andrew Locke, 6-10 SR (9.1 ppg, 5.0 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Tim Edwards, 6-4 (8.5 ppg, 7.1 rpg, 5.1 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Ryan Wholey, 6-4 SR (8.5 ppg, 4.0 rpg)

#11 Williams (30-2 overall, 9-0 NESCAC/Northeast) – lost in national championship game to UW-Stevens Point
Starters Returning: (2) G James Wang, 6-0 JR (17.3 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 4.4 apg), F Harlan Dodson, 6-8 SR (6.2 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) G/F Blake Schultz, 6-3 (19.2 ppg, 4.3 rpg), G Alex Rubin, 6-4 (9.5 ppg, 1.9 rpg), C Joe Geoghegan, 6-8 (7.1 ppg, 8.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: C Troy Whittington, 6-5 SR (11.1 ppg, 6.2 rpg

#12 Anderson (23-6 overall, 13-3 HCAC/Midwest) - Round of 32, lost to Carthage
Starters Returning: (4) F Brock Morrison, 6-3 JR (14.4 ppg, 8.7 rpg), C Andrew Jones, 6-6 SR (13.2 ppg, 5.8 rpg), F Andrew Bowman, 6-7 SR (11.8 ppg, 6.5 rpg), G Gabe Miller, 6-3 SR (11.0 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 3.8 apg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Ty Riddle (14.8 ppg, 2.0 rpg) - was a junior last year...had one semester eligility left but decided to enter work world

Top Returning Reserve: G Phil Hogan, 5-11 SO (5.7 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

#13 Rhode Island (22-8 overall, 12-2 LEC/Northeast) - Sweet 16, lost to Brandeis
Starters Returning: (4) G Antone Gray, 5-9 SR (14.2 ppg, 2.4 rpg, 4.8 apg), G/F Mason Choice, 6-4 JR (13.0 ppg, 4.8 rpg), F/C Darius Debnam, 6-4 SR (7.2 ppg, 6.0 rpg), G Nick Manson, 6-0 SR (7.2 ppg, 2.2 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Jake Grimes, 6-3 (14.9 ppg, 5.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Carl Lee, 6-3 SR (9.5 ppg, 5.8 rpg)

#14 St. Mary's (26-4 overall, 14-2 CAC/Mid-Atlantic) – Sweet 16, lost to Franklin & Marshall
Starters Returning: (4) G Alex Franz, 6-1 SR (13.7 ppg, 5.2 rpg), C Sam Brown, 6-8 SR (9.9 ppg, 5.2 rpg), G James Davenport, 6-3 JR (6.6 ppg, 2.7 rpg), F Brian Grashof, 6-7 JR (6.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Camontae Griffin, 5-9 (21.6 ppg, 2.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G/F Mike Fitzpatrick, 6-6 SR (8.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg)

#15 Virginia Wesleyan (22-5 overall, 12-4 ODAC/South) - Round of 32, lost to St. Mary's
Starters Returning: (4) F Donald Vaughn, 6-5 JR (15.5 ppg, 8.0 ppg), F Chris Astorga, 6-5 SO (8.9 ppg, 4.9 rpg), G Ed Roberts, 5-10 JR (3.5 ppg, 1.9 rpg), F Trevor Watson, 6-4 JR (1.8 ppg, 1.4 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Stephen Fields, 6-2 (21.0 ppg, 4.6 rpg, 3.2 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Quantrell Simmons, 6-6 SR (8.8 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

#16 Hope (21-8 overall, 11-3 MIAA/Great Lakes) – lost in 1st Round to St. Norbert
Starters Returning: (4) G Peter Bunn, 6-2 SR (16.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg), F Will Bowser, 6-5 SR (12.1 ppg, 5.8 rpg), F Andy Venema, 6-8 SR (9.4 ppg, 3.2 rpg), G David Krombeen, 6-3 JR (6.8 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 3.8 apg)

Starters Lost: (1) C Chris Nelis, 6-4 (12.4 ppg, 5.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Nate Snuggerud, 6-5 SO (6.1 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

#17 MIT (22-5 overall, 10-2 NEWMAC/Northeast) – lost in 1st Round to DeSales
Starters Returning: (4) F Noel Hollingsworth, 6-9 JR (20.4 ppg, 9.0 rpg), G Mitchell Kates, 6-1 SO (13.2 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 4.1 apg), F Will Tashman, 6-8 SO (8.7 ppg, 7.2 rpg), G Eric Zuk, 6-5 SR (1.2 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) Billy Johnson (8.0 ppg, 3.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Jimmy Burke, 5-11 SO (9.2 ppg, 1.3 rpg)

#18 WPI (20-7 overall, 7-5 NEWMAC/Northeast) – not in 2009-10 tournament
Starters Returning: (4) G Jeffrey Robinson, 6-1 SR (19.0 ppg, 3.5 rpg), G Kyle Nadeau, 5-8 SR (9.3 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 3.0 apg), F Ben Etten, 6-4 SR (9.2 ppg, 5.0 rpg), C Matt Carr, 6-7 JR (5.9 ppg, 4.1 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) C Bennett Lessard, 6-8 (3.3 ppg, 5.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Fernando Perez, 6-3 JR (11.1 ppg, 7.0 rpg)

#19 Plattsburgh State (21-8 overall, 13-5 SUNYAC/East) – lost in 1st Round to SUNYIT
Starters Returning: (4) G Chris Ruiz, 6-4 SR (17.2 ppg, 5.7 rpg), G Steve Thomas, 6-4 SR (17.1 ppg, 6.6 rpg), F Errol Daniyan, 6-6 SR (15.2 ppg, 8.3 rpg), G Carl Munnerlyn, 5-9 SR (11.5 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) F Farris Thomas, 6-5 (4.7 ppg, 4.7 rpg)

Top Returning ReserveL F RJ Ponesse, 6-10 SR (3.6 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

#20 Manchester (17-10 overall, 10-6 HCAC/Midwest) – not in 2009-10 tournament
Starters Returning: (5) G Mitch Schaefer, 6-4 SR (11.3 ppg, 3.4 rpg), G/F Tyler Henn, 6-5 SR (9.9 ppg, 5.0 rpg), G Jordan Moss, 6-4 JR (9.1 ppg, 4.1 rpg), G Nathan Ferch, 6-3 SR (8.1 ppg, 4.3 rpg), C Jason Spindler, 6-10 JR (7.4 ppg, 4.1 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: G Tyler Delauder, 6-1 SR (8.0 ppg, 2.4 rpg)

#21 Augustana (16-10 overall, 9-5 CCIW/Midwest) – not in 2009-10 tournament
Starters Returning: (4) F Kyle Nelson, 6-9 SR (14.7 ppg, 7.7 rpg), PG Brian DeSimone, 6-1 JR (6.7 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 3.3 apg), G Troy Rorer, 6-2 JR (6.3 ppg, 4.0 rpg), F Brandon Kunz, 6-7 SO (4.7 ppg, 3.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Matt Pelton, 6-3 (12.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Chris Anderson, 6-4 JR (7.0 ppg, 1.6 rpg)

9 Teams for 4 Spots:

Amherst (14-11 overall, 3-6 NESCAC) – Northeast
Starters Returning: (4) G Conor Meehan, 6-4 SR (14.2 ppg, 5.6 rpg, 6.2 apg), F Jeff Holmes, 6-7 JR (9.8 ppg, 6.2 rpg), G Taylor Barisse, 6-5 JR (8.2 ppg, 4.4 rpg), G/F David Waller, 6-6 JR (7.8 ppg, 4.6 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G/F Steven Wheeler, 6-6 (14.7 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Willy Workman, 6-6 SO (6.2 ppg, 4.0 rpg)

Buena Vista (15-12 overall, 10-6 IIAC) – West - not in 2009-10 tournament
Starters Returning: (3) G Troy Ticknor, 6-1 SO (12.4 ppg, 2.1 rpg), F/C Doug Bissen, 6-7 JR (11.7 ppg, 6.4 rpg), F Wes Nordquist, 6-7 SO (11.4 ppg, 6.6 rpg)

Starters Lost: (2) G/F Nathan Parker, 6-4 (10.7 ppg, 4.3 rpg), G Kevin Osborn, 6-0 (3.7 ppg, 3.1 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Jeff Janssen, 6-4 JR (8.9 ppg, 1.8 rpg)

Carleton (19-10 overall, 12-8 MIAC/West) – lost in 1st Round 1 to UW-Stevens Point by 1
Starters Returning: (4) G Jeremy Sutherland, 6-4 SR (14.6 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 3.6 apg), F Seth Jonker, 6-6 SO (4.7 ppg, 1.8 rpg), G/F Carter Biewen, 6-4 SR (7.7 ppg, 3.3 rpg), G Blaise Davis, 6-1 JR (7.0 ppg, 1.0 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) F Bryan Rosett, 6-6 (11.8 ppg, 7.3 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Scott Theisen, 6-6 SO (4.7 ppg, 1.8 rpg)

Centre (18-9 overall, 11-5 SCAC/South) – lost in 1st Round to Eastern Mennonite
Starters Returning: (4) G Jeff Mullany, 6-2 JR (13.6 ppg, 3.5 rpg), G Bryon Ellis, 5-10 SO (8.8 ppg, 2.2 rpg), F Josh Crawford, 6-5 SO (8.5 ppg, 4.4 rpg), C Alex Lloyd, 6-8 SR (7.3 ppg, 9.7 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) F Danny Noll, 6-6 (14.0 ppg, 7.6 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Dee Smith, 5-6 SR (3.1 ppg, 0.7 rpg)

Gettysburg (15-11 overall, 12-6 Centennial/Mid-Atlantic) - not in 2009-10 tournament
Starters Returning: (4) C Andrew Powers, 6-6 SR (19.3 ppg, 6.8 rpg), F Kevin Kennedy, 6-5 SR (11.8 ppg, 4.7 rpg), G/F Alex Zurn, 6-4 SO (11.7 ppg, 4.1 rpg), F Tim Lang, 6-7 JR (2.1 ppg, 1.4 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Brendan Hagar, 6-1 (5.2 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 5.5 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Brendan Trelease, 6-3 JR (7.0 ppg, 2.7 rpg)

Loras (15-11 overall, 10-6 IIAC/West) – not in 2009-10 tournament
Starters Returning: (4) F Tim Kelly, 6-4 JR (13.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg) G Mike Gleason, 6-2 SR (11.6 ppg, 2.2 rpg), G Connor Mooney, 5-10 SO (11.4 ppg, 1.3 rpg, 4.2 apg), F Jordan Harrelson, 6-4 JR (5.5 ppg, 3.9 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) F Alex Brant (5.3 ppg, 5.4 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: C Dan Pawelski, 6-9 JR (9.6 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

Ramapo (18-9 overall, 7-6 NJAC/Atlantic) – not in 2009-10 tournament
Starters Returning: (4) F/C LaQuan Peterkin, 6-6 JR (15.4 ppg, 7.8 rpg), G Anthony LoRusso, 6-1 JR (9.1 ppg, 1.6 rpg), G Garret Thiel, 6-2 JR (8.9 ppg, 3.2 rpg), F Davian Plunkett, 6-6 JR (8.3 ppg, 8.2 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Andre Kenny, 6-3 (15.8 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 4.1 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Stephon Treadwell, 6-5 SO (4.6 ppg, 3.6 rpg)

St. Thomas (23-4 overall, 19-1 MIAC/West) - lost in 1st round to Anderson
Starters Returning: (3) G Tyler Nicolai, 5-11 SR (14.1 ppg, 2.0 rpg), G Alex Healy, 6-4 SR (12.7 ppg, 3.6 rpg), G Teddy Archer, 6-1 (5.0 ppg, 2.9 rpg)

Starters Lost: (2) G Joe Scott, 6-4 (10.8 ppg, 2.1 rpg), C Sam Eicher, 6-6 (4.4 ppg, 2.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: C Tommy Hannon, 6-8 JR (5.3 ppg, 3.8 rpg)

Potential Impact Transfer: F Eric Clute, 6-5, Southwest Minnesota State

UW-Whitewater (23-6 overall, 13-3 WIAC/West) – Round of 32, lost to Wooster
Starters Returning: (2) G Phil Negri, 6-3 SR (8.4 ppg, 3.3 rpg), F Alex Edmunds, 6-4 JR (7.2 ppg, 4.7 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) C Dustin Mitchell, 6-9 (18.0 ppg, 8.7 rpg), G Dupree Fletcher, 6-2 (14.0 ppg, 2.7 rpg), F Mike Bendall, 6-6 (10.2 ppg, 5.1 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: ~~G Nolan Free, 6-1 SO (6.4 ppg, 4.1 rpg)~~ not returning

Potential Impact Transfer: F Chris Davis, 6-6, Madison Area Technical College (22 ppg, 6 rpg)...G Eric Bryson, 6-3, Winona State

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 22, 2010, 03:48:18 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 22, 2010, 03:45:05 PM

St. Thomas (23-4 overall, 19-1 MIAC/West) - lost in 1st round to Anderson
Starters Returning: (2) G Tyler Nicolai, 5-11 SR (14.1 ppg, 2.0 rpg), G Alex Healy, 6-4 SR (12.7 ppg, 3.6 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) G Joe Scott, 6-4 (10.8 ppg, 2.1 rpg), G Teddy Archer, 6-1 (5.0 ppg, 2.9 rpg), C Sam Eicher, 6-6 (4.4 ppg, 2.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: C Tommy Hannon, 6-8 JR (5.3 ppg, 3.8 rpg)

The St. Thomas roster (still 2009-10 on their site) indicates that Teddy Archer was a SR last year...but the D3hoops.com ballot information lists him as a returning starter. Can anyone confirm that he is back?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 23, 2010, 01:07:28 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 22, 2010, 03:45:05 PM
I received the official D3hoops.com preseason ballot e-mail today. I'm guessing we'll have a poll by mid-week.

Assuming the rest of the voters get their ballots in. Sometimes it takes a few minutes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on October 23, 2010, 08:42:58 AM

Only two top 25 contenders from the Northeast have rosters posted so far, Amherst, where there are no surprises, five frosh including one projected immediate impact guy in Aaron Toomey (runner up for player of the year in North Carolina):

https://www.amherst.edu/athletics/teams/winter/basketball-m/roster

And RIC, don't know much about their frosh and whether any could be impact guys, but their point guard and one of two most productive returning players, Antone Gray, appears to have left the program (which is not unusual at RIC, they have tremendous turnover from year-to-year, and usually bring in a high profile transfer as well, but appears not to have this season):

http://www.goanchormen.com/rosters/ros_mbasketball.html

Without Gray and Grimes, I'd say that Western Conn will now definitely be the LEC pre-season favorite, unless they have a really key defection, and that will likely knock RIC down quite a few notches.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 23, 2010, 08:51:44 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on October 23, 2010, 08:42:58 AM
And RIC, don't know much about their frosh and whether any could be impact guys, but their point guard and one of two most productive returning players, Antone Gray, appears to have left the program (which is not unusual at RIC, they have tremendous turnover from year-to-year, and usually bring in a high profile transfer as well, but appears not to have this season):

http://www.goanchormen.com/rosters/ros_mbasketball.html

Without Gray and Grimes, I'd say that Western Conn will now definitely be the LEC pre-season favorite, unless they have a really key defection, and that will likely knock RIC down quite a few notches.

This certainly impacts my ballot. I'll probably take Rhode Island out, bump everyone else up, and take a 5th from that final list of candidates.

Thanks for catching that. This is why I've tried to stir so much Top 25 discussion up the last few weeks...want to make sure we get as much relevant information on the table as possible before we vote (this coming Tuesday).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 24, 2010, 02:03:04 AM

We tried to get info from RIC but they did not respond to either inquiry.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on October 25, 2010, 09:01:17 PM

Thanks for posting that Q... great research as usual!

How are you differentiating between your 2-5? I know you've mentioned some of the IWU/Carthage and seeing as they split their 4 meetings last year and IWU returns all 5 starters versus Carthage's 5.

I'm kind of wondering, too, between Randy Mac and E. Menn. It may be head to head or record, but Randolph Macon really showed me the type of team they were in the second half of that National Semi-final when it looked like SP was going to run away with it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 25, 2010, 09:41:52 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on October 25, 2010, 09:01:17 PM
Thanks for posting that Q... great research as usual!

How are you differentiating between your 2-5? I know you've mentioned some of the IWU/Carthage and seeing as they split their 4 meetings last year and IWU returns all 5 starters versus Carthage's 5.

I'm kind of wondering, too, between Randy Mac and E. Menn. It may be head to head or record, but Randolph Macon really showed me the type of team they were in the second half of that National Semi-final when it looked like SP was going to run away with it.

Honestly, I could just pull these 4 out of a hat and be comfortable with whatever order comes out. But my thinking was...

IWU vs Carthage considerations
* They split 4 head-to-head games
* Carthage went 12-2 in the CCIW vs IWU's 10-4 (advantage CC)
* IWU won the NCAA tournament neutral court game @ UW-Stevens Point (advantage IWU)
* IWU had another great NCAA win - @ then #1 Wash U in the tournament
* Carthage has the best player in NCAA Division III (advantage CC)
* IWU is much more balanced and much deeper (advantage IWU)
* IWU returns all 5 starters whereas Carthage loses an excellent perimeter defender in Cody Hilton, a guy CC would use on the other team's best perimeter player (advantage IWU)

Just very hard to differentiate at all, so I give the edge to the team with 5 starters back. Also, I like IWU's balance and depth.

Eastern Mennonite vs Randolph-Macon considerations
* They split 2 head-to-head games
* EMU went 14-2 in the ODAC, RMC went 11-5 (advantage EMU)
* Both return all 5 starters
* In the NCAA tournament, EMU beat Centre and Wilmington at home, then beat Whitworth at Guilford, before having to face Guilford at their place in the Elite 8 (and lost)
* RMC had a much easier path in my opinion (vs Cabrini, vs Clark, vs DeSales, vs Franklin & Marshall)

I don't necessarily give RMC a nod for making it to Salem, because I thinking EMU would have made it to with RMC's road. In the end, with really nothing more to use to differentiate, I just went with the ODAC records.

(RMC did make a nice comeback in the national semi-final vs UW-Stevens Point, but at the same time, they trailed by 19 at halftime, and by 24 with 15 minutes to play before cutting it to 8 with 3:00, and losing by 12. That game is kind of a non-factor to me as far as EMU vs RMC goes.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cubs on October 25, 2010, 11:35:08 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 22, 2010, 03:45:05 PM
I received the official D3hoops.com preseason ballot e-mail today. I'm guessing we'll have a poll by mid-week.

So with a final decision to make by Tuesday, I'm very comfortable with 21 teams and have 9 teams I'm looking at for spots 22-25...

UW-Whitewater (23-6 overall, 13-3 WIAC/West) – Round of 32, lost to Wooster
Starters Returning: (2) G Phil Negri, 6-3 SR (8.4 ppg, 3.3 rpg), F Alex Edmunds, 6-4 JR (7.2 ppg, 4.7 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) C Dustin Mitchell, 6-9 (18.0 ppg, 8.7 rpg), G Dupree Fletcher, 6-2 (14.0 ppg, 2.7 rpg), F Mike Bendall, 6-6 (10.2 ppg, 5.1 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: ~~G Nolan Free, 6-1 SO (6.4 ppg, 4.1 rpg)~~ not returning

Potential Impact Transfer: F Chris Davis, 6-6, Madison Area Technical College (22 ppg, 6 rpg)...G Eric Bryson, 6-3, Winona State

You can add in two more possible impact transfers.....

G Rick Bowers-Germantown (WI) High School- In 2008 he was ranked #36 player in the state as a senior

F Josh Williams, a 6'9 transfer from Valdosta st.

Sorry, but I don't have much more for inforamtion than what I posted.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on October 28, 2010, 01:57:10 AM

Whitworth tops NWC preseason poll.

http://www.nwcsports.com/sports/mbkb/2010-11/news/poll

Titan's oversight and insult of leaving WW and for that matter any West Coast team off his list is pathetic. I hope other voters will do some better research. I can argue WW has THE BEST potential impact newcomer in the country.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on October 28, 2010, 03:09:22 AM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on October 28, 2010, 01:57:10 AM
Whitworth tops NWC preseason poll.

http://www.nwcsports.com/sports/mbkb/2010-11/news/poll

Titan's oversight and insult of leaving WW and for that matter any West Coast team off his list is pathetic. I hope other voters will do some better research. I can argue WW has THE BEST potential impact newcomer in the country.

Titan Q's "snub" isn't intended to insult WW... For that matter, 383 teams are not going to show up in the top 25. Only 6% of the teams are in the top 25.

Look, I was almost as ardent a supporter of Whitworth last year as you were... but they lost 3 or their top 4 scorers. Only ONE team in the top 21 listed (Williams, last year's runner up, who had a 10 point lead with 11 minutes to go in the Championship game) lost more than 1 starter.

D3hoops puts out the best ranking there is in D-III... but it's just a (well educated) guess. It doesn't take into account potential injuries or difficulties in the locker room or anything else... but even if it could, the games still have to be played. There isn't an expert out there save the Almighty Himself who knows what will happen this year... but this poll is a projection based on passed results and potential.

It is certainly possible that a team can lose a lot from a great team the year before and be as good or better. A few pages back we discussed the 1997 Illinois Wesleyan team that followed up a Final Four bid in '96 with a National Championship the next year, returning just one starter.

But this is the exception rather than the norm. And though the folks inside the Shirk believed, the prognosticators wouldn't have given the Titans much of a shot in '97 (I don't think there was a poll... was there?) and would they really have deserved one?

And so, though Whitworth looks like they may have reloaded from last year, should they get this "due" in the preseason with several newcomers and with lots of guys who will have to step into new rolls?

I'm confident that UWSP won't care about their #1 preseason ranking. They only care about adding another WIAC banner to the wall of Quandt and putting another trophy in the trophy case. It certainly won't be an easy task... but it isn't easy for anyone. The number in front of the school is great for discussion, but in the end, it is just a number, and the only time that really matters is at the end of the year.

Each season, there are teams that are ranked in the top 25 that don't live up to expectations (See #2, Oshkosh, 2005-06). All you can do, though, is win. If you win, then you'll get ranked.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 28, 2010, 07:45:51 AM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on October 28, 2010, 01:57:10 AM
Whitworth tops NWC preseason poll.

http://www.nwcsports.com/sports/mbkb/2010-11/news/poll

Titan's oversight and insult of leaving WW and for that matter any West Coast team off his list is pathetic. I hope other voters will do some better research. I can argue WW has THE BEST potential impact newcomer in the country.

I waited for two weeks for someone to reply to this post on the NWC board...

Quote from: Titan Q on October 15, 2010, 09:59:00 AM
Who will be the favorite in the NWC this year? Is there an NWC team we should be looking at as a preseason Top 25 candidate? Seems like Whitworth lost a lot from that great team last year...

#7 Whitworth (26-3 overall, 16-0 NWC) – West

Starters Returning: (2) F David Riley, 6-5 SR (13.4 ppg, 3.8 rpg), G Clay Gebbers, 6-1 SR (5.6 ppg, 3.2 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) C Nate Montgomery, 6-8 (16.8 ppg, 8.3 rpg), G Eric Beal, 5-11 (14.3 ppg, 3.9 rpg, 5.7 apg), F Bo Gregg, 6-5 (11.5 ppg, 4.9 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Jack Loofburrow, 6-6 JR (8.0 ppg, 2.7 rpg)

http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4097.5655

Are they expected to reload, or is someone else the favorite?

Crickets.

You'll also see that on September 17 I started a detailed discussion about 2010-11 preseason Top 25 candidates...

http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4097.5625

I posted early in that process (Sept 25) that it seemed like Whitworth lost too much to be considered (in the preseason poll), but asked for other thoughts. No one made a case for Whitworth over the course of 5-6 weeks.

In the meantime I did my own research and just could not make a better preseason case for Whitworth than I did for the 25 teams I put in.

Just like I've said about Wash U (the 2008 and 2009 national champions, and another team I did not vote for due to so much lost), I'll watch Whitworth closely in the early going and vote for them when they make a case.

I'm also curious which other "west coast" team is a legitimate preseason Top 25 candidate? In addition to the NWC, I looked closely at the SCIAC, and at Chapman, and couldn't find a team with a better case than those I listed above.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 28, 2010, 11:23:35 AM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on October 28, 2010, 01:57:10 AM
I can argue WW has THE BEST potential impact newcomer in the country.

This is the Whitworth transfer nwhoops1903 is referring to, by the way:

http://www.missoulajournal.com/grizzlyjournal/2008/01/meet-mens-grizz.html

http://filemanager.montanagrizzlies.com/mtgriz3/schedules_and_stats/files/mbb/htm/2009-10/teamcume.htm

http://filemanager.montanagrizzlies.com/mtgriz3/schedules_and_stats/files/mbb/htm/2008-09/teamcume.htm

Last season Michael Taylor, a 6-4 G/F, played in 29 games for Montana, averaging 16 minutes per. He scored 4.2 ppg and was 29-69 (.420) from 3.

Whitworth will be Taylor's third school. He was the runner-up Big Sky Freshman of the Year in 2006-07 at Eastern Washington, sat out 2007-08 after transferring to Montana, and played in the 2008-09 and 2009-10 seasons for Montana, coming off the bench both years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 28, 2010, 11:28:19 AM

D3hoops.com preseason Top 25...

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on October 28, 2010, 03:51:32 PM

Top ten looks pretty hard to argue with (quibble, yes, but they all basically belong in at least the top 15), D-3 hoops is VERY strong at the top this year with tons of deep, experienced, senior-dominated teams.

Guilford looks to be the biggest stretch in the top 25, after losing their three big guns, two of whom were all-American caliber players, including the best center in the country. Josh Pittman will be a superstar sooner rather than later, but at least two or three other returning guys will have to shift from role players to leading men.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 28, 2010, 03:59:37 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on October 28, 2010, 03:51:32 PM
Top ten looks pretty hard to argue with (quibble, yes, but they all basically belong in at least the top 15), D-3 hoops is VERY strong at the top this year with tons of deep, experienced, senior-dominated teams.

Guilford looks to be the biggest stretch in the top 25, after losing their three big guns, two of whom were all-American caliber players, including the best center in the country. Josh Pittman will be a superstar sooner rather than later, but at least two or three other returning guys will have to shift from role players to leading men.

McMurry at Guilford on Nov 19.

I like the schedule that new McMurry head coach Matt Garnett has put together.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 28, 2010, 04:43:32 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on October 28, 2010, 03:51:32 PMGuilford looks to be the biggest stretch in the top 25

I thought the same thing, nescac1.

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on October 28, 2010, 01:57:10 AMTitan's oversight and insult of leaving WW and for that matter any West Coast team off his list is pathetic.

Q and PS have already done a good job of addressing this complaint, but I'll add to it with this thought: What has the West Coast ever done to merit any respect? The only time a team on the far side of the Continental Divide made it to the Final Four was way back in 1982, when Stanislaus State finished fourth in the nation. Granted, D3 isn't very well represented on the West Coast, but it isn't as though the teams that are located there have ever made much noise in March. The SCIAC, much to the eternal consternation of its fans, is a one-and-done league most years, and it gets a team past the first weekend of the tourney about once every generation. The NWC is a relative newcomer that doesn't have a lot of D3 history, and I've been fairly impressed with the three NWC outfits I've seen firsthand (the L&C team that made the '01 sectionals in Chicago; the Puget Sound team that made the sectionals in Wheaton two years ago; and a Whitworth team that won Wheaton's Lee Pfund Tourney four years ago, a team that came within two points of Wash U on the Bears' home floor in a season in which the Bears won the national title). Nevertheless, it's still a league that has yet to break through in March.

I think that a solid case could be made for taking the NWC preseason favorite into strong consideration when putting together the preseason Top 25. However, the NWC poll came out today, the same day that the preseason Top 25 came out, so you can't indict Q and the other Top 25 pollsters for ignoring the NWC poll. And, as I said, he's already given sufficient reasons as to why he left Whitworth off his ballot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on October 28, 2010, 07:40:47 PM

Quote from: sac on October 19, 2010, 05:47:56 PM
Quote from: Ethelred the Unready on October 19, 2010, 03:07:47 PM
Hey, don't sleep on Rust. I hear they're pretty good ::)

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ft1.gstatic.com%2Fimages%3Fq%3Dtbn%3AANd9GcSnBD5oL2bHxPmIn_7srcHaSPi1hqOoQVStqC5KHwkJrzt9xvA%26amp%3Bt%3D1%26amp%3Busg%3D__0fOoHcf7pYq_EBqDh7W6z_7vanY%3D&hash=ef987d85963fa19b602efa30f55d7bb8cb9728c6)

No votes for Rust?? :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 28, 2010, 09:17:35 PM

Top 25 matchups in November and December...

Nov 22
#20 Washington U @ #24 Augustana

Nov 24
#5 Carthage vs #16 Whitworth (in Honolulu)

Nov 27
#7 Franklin & Marshall @ #11 St. Mary's (Md)
#14 Anderson @ #24 Augustana

Dec 1
#2 Randolph-Macon vs #12 Virginia Wesleyan

Dec 3
#5 Carthage vs #17 Hope

Dec 4
#2 Randolph-Macon @ #3 Eastern Mennonite

Dec 8
#1 UW-Stevens Point vs #21 UW-Whitewater

Dec 11
#2 Randolph-Macon vs #19 Guilford

Dec 15
#21 UW-Whitewater @ #24 Augustana

Dec 18
#4 Illinois Wesleyan @ #20 Washington U.

Dec 20
#6 Wooster @ #14 Anderson

Dec 22
#1 UW-Stevens Point @ #13 St. Thomas

Dec 28
#6 Wooster vs #18 John Carroll

Dec 29
#19 Guilford @ #25 Manchester

Dec 30
#10 St. Norbert vs #24 Augustana (potential tournament matchup)

* 5 Top 25 teams do not face another Top 25 team in November and December -- Williams, Middlebury, MIT, Plattsburgh State, Texas-Dallas.

* Augustana will potentially play 4 games vs Top 25 teams in November and December...Randolph-Macon plays 3.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 28, 2010, 11:09:28 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 28, 2010, 04:43:32 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on October 28, 2010, 03:51:32 PMGuilford looks to be the biggest stretch in the top 25

I thought the same thing, nescac1.

Agreed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on October 28, 2010, 11:17:33 PM

Playing top 25 teams is a bit easier when you have as many as 4 ranked teams in your conference and conference play starts in November or December, but I guess that is both an strength and a weakness of the top conferences (strength if you win those games, weakness if you lose them, but overall a strength). NESCAC teams will start conference play in January and those teams will be tested by years end. They typically ease into the season because their practices dont start until November 1, so they have 2 weeks less preparation than most of their early season opponents. MIT plays Harvard in December, as well as ORV Bridgewater and WPI (#26) in January. Plattsburgh plays Middlebury in January and ORV West Conn in November. I am not certain of this, but at first glance it appears that UTD is the only team in the top 25 to not play any currently ranked or ORV team the entire season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on October 28, 2010, 11:19:55 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 28, 2010, 11:09:28 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 28, 2010, 04:43:32 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on October 28, 2010, 03:51:32 PMGuilford looks to be the biggest stretch in the top 25

I thought the same thing, nescac1.

Agreed.

You could make the same argument about WashU (which Titan already has), but it seems those teams final rankings from last season kept them in the top 25 (when you dont know who to go with, its easy and justifiable to go with a top ranked team from last season).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 29, 2010, 11:31:27 AM

I believe there can be only one biggest stretch, and to me Guilford is a far bigger stretch than Wash U. So I could make the same argument, but I won't. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 29, 2010, 11:53:47 AM

In the ORV category, Wheaton (IL) getting all those votes surprised the heck out of me.

Wheaton has a 1st Team All-American candidate (6-6 F Tim McCrary), but also has some serious questions to answer heading into the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 29, 2010, 01:49:01 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 29, 2010, 11:53:47 AM
In the ORV category, Wheaton (IL) getting all those votes surprised the heck out of me.

Wheaton has a 1st Team All-American candidate (6-6 F Tim McCrary), but also has some serious questions to answer heading into the season.

It seems like there's just not much consensus near the bottom of the poll - so we've got a lot of voters throwing up names of consistent programs. Guilford and WashU have experience, if nothing else, which, I suppose is a safer bet at this point than unexperienced teams you're also not entirely confident about.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 31, 2010, 10:26:34 PM

DePauw beat Evansville 66-62 in exhibition play...

http://www.d3hoops.com/notables

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 01, 2010, 12:52:38 AM

Quote from: sac on September 27, 2010, 04:36:24 PM
You might take a look at DePauw. 20-8 last season.

http://www.depauw.edu/ath/mbasket/

huh, look at that! :)

write up and boxscore
http://gopurpleaces.com/news/2010/10/30/MBB_1030100442.aspx?path=mbball

http://gopurpleaces.com/custompages/Mens%20Basketball/2010-11%20Stats/ex1.htm

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 01, 2010, 11:16:44 AM

Take for what it's worth (which isn't much), but a couple Top 25 scrimmage scores from this weekend...

#5 Carthage 91
#1 UW-Stevens Point 80
(at Carthage)

#4 Illinois Wesleyan 68
#10 St. Norbert 54
(neutral court)

As with all scrimmages, these were played as two separate 20:00 periods, not as a regular 40:00 game. The combined scores are above.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 01, 2010, 11:34:53 AM

Titan Q - first and foremost... great work. I will admit it helped me when putting together my Top 25 simply on the fact that some of the stuff I was looking for was easily found this year... instead of hours pouring through the internet.

As for Guilford, Wash U, etc... I just couldn't put those two in my Top 25's. It seemed harsh to take those squads high finish last year and kill them because of what they lost... but, in my opinion, those squads lost so much they basically look like brand new programs with what is left. How can anyone deem them a Top 25 team as a result. If anything, last year's results/finish can't be used as a barometer simply because those that helped them achieve those lofty levels aren't there anymore.

I was also surprised by some of the ORV's... one in the Mid-Atlantic certainly surprised me, but they only got one vote, so I won't harp on it.

I have said it often, the Pre-season poll is the toughest poll to put together as a pollster. You are trying to balance reputation, previous seasons, losses and returns of players, along with new season's schedule, conference influence, and coaching experience. I would be lying if I said I put my list together and only made minor changes... often I have five or six different drafts that include minor changes in all of them.

The only poll that might be as hard is somewhere in late December or early January when a number of teams have overachieved, underachieved, surprised, disappointed, dealt with injuries, etc. and I realize that my poll needs to be completely redone and comparing anything I put together for that week to any previous poll is useless (I term this as blowing up my ballot - happens usually once a season).

Only other note... west coast teams. Tough to vote for some as their schedules can sometimes be weak (i.e. Chapman) or their conference doesn't provide the competition many of us hope it would (i.e. NWC) or they just don't prove that their success out west translates to the tournament (women certainly have proven otherwise, just not the men). Feels weird leaving a west coast team off my Top 25 as I always think there are teams that deserve to be there... but I will have to wait and see (watching Whitworth).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 01, 2010, 12:46:24 PM

Preseason poll is really difficult.

The first regular-season poll isn't much easier, though, because there are so many results to sift through and you have to try to figure out what percentage perception and what percentage reality to use.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 04, 2010, 06:03:36 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 01, 2010, 11:16:44 AM
Take for what it's worth (which isn't much), but a couple Top 25 scrimmage scores from this weekend...

#5 Carthage 91
#1 UW-Stevens Point 80
(at Carthage)

Looks liks Point's in big trouble this year! lol :o ;D :D ;) ::) Were there chants of "Overrated!" in the stands? ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 04, 2010, 10:04:45 AM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on November 04, 2010, 06:03:36 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on November 01, 2010, 11:16:44 AM
Take for what it's worth (which isn't much), but a couple Top 25 scrimmage scores from this weekend...

#5 Carthage 91
#1 UW-Stevens Point 80
(at Carthage)

Looks liks Point's in big trouble this year! lol :o ;D :D ;) ::) Were there chants of "Overrated!" in the stands? ;D

Does a team really deserve to win when they give up 51 points in the second half?! Check out the CCIW board for some comments on the scrimmage.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 04, 2010, 11:23:08 AM

Quote from: PointSpecial on November 04, 2010, 10:04:45 AM
Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on November 04, 2010, 06:03:36 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on November 01, 2010, 11:16:44 AM
Take for what it's worth (which isn't much), but a couple Top 25 scrimmage scores from this weekend...

#5 Carthage 91
#1 UW-Stevens Point 80
(at Carthage)

Looks liks Point's in big trouble this year! lol :o ;D :D ;) ::) Were there chants of "Overrated!" in the stands? ;D

Does a team really deserve to win when they give up 51 points in the second half?! Check out the CCIW board for some comments on the scrimmage.

Point, there was talk somewhere a while back about a Stevens Point returning starter potentially not coming back this year...I think it's someone who plays football too. (I can't remember who exactly.)

Was that player at the Carthage scrimmage? (And expected to be back on the basketball team this year?)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: tomt4525 on November 04, 2010, 12:20:12 PM

Titan, you'd be thinking of Jared Jenkins. He isn't back yet and it isn't determined yet if he will be coming back, probably won't know until he shows up on the bench for a game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 04, 2010, 12:36:23 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 04, 2010, 07:52:07 AM
Last year Oshkosh was 5-11 in the WIAC and Elmhurst 1-13 in the CCIW.

Norb's only beat Elmhurst by 2 last year. Point by won by 8 and La Crosse won by 10.

Oshkosh was very inconsistent last year. They'd go on the road and lose to Whitewater in OT, but get blown out at home to Eau Claire, play Point tough at Quandt, get destroyed at Kolf by Point. Up and down.

Obviously Jared Jenkins isn't joining the team until after football season. He usually sits out or plays sparingly for the first couple of games to get into basketball mode. If he doesn't play, Point will be knocked down a couple a rungs.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 04, 2010, 01:18:07 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 04, 2010, 11:23:08 AM
Quote from: PointSpecial on November 04, 2010, 10:04:45 AM
Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on November 04, 2010, 06:03:36 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on November 01, 2010, 11:16:44 AM
Take for what it's worth (which isn't much), but a couple Top 25 scrimmage scores from this weekend...

#5 Carthage 91
#1 UW-Stevens Point 80
(at Carthage)

Looks liks Point's in big trouble this year! lol :o ;D :D ;) ::) Were there chants of "Overrated!" in the stands? ;D

Does a team really deserve to win when they give up 51 points in the second half?! Check out the CCIW board for some comments on the scrimmage.

Point, there was talk somewhere a while back about a Stevens Point returning starter potentially not coming back this year...I think it's someone who plays football too. (I can't remember who exactly.)

Was that player at the Carthage scrimmage? (And expected to be back on the basketball team this year?)

Jared Jenkins. And no, he was not there. He's been really busy on the gridiron... He's been the WIAC Special Teams Player of the Week the last two weeks, and the week before that, he was the WIAC Offensive POTW.

In terms of if he's going to play on the hardcourt this year when the football season ends... Only he knows. UWSP's football team is not going to make the playoffs again this year, so a week from Saturday will be his last game. Point's first basketball game is on the 16th at Lawrence.

It should be noted that last season, Point's last game was on Nov. 14. The basketball team had a game on the 15th, but there was an outside chance that Point might have made the playoffs, so Jared obviously wouldn't have gone with the hoops team to Collegeville, MN to play St. John. When the football team didn't make the playoffs, Jared travelled to (and played in) Tacoma against Whitworth and Puget Sound. I think that right there showed his dedication not only to football, but to basketball too.

He was 3rd on the team last year at 11.4 PPG and was first team All-WIAC along with Matt Moses and scored 17 points in the National Semi and Championship games en route to being named on the Final Four All-Tournament team.

I think an important point about Jenkins is that last season, he went from being an amazing athlete who plays basketball to being a very good basketball player. His play, especially down the stretch in the tournament, really helped propel Point to the Championship. If he decides to focus on trying to make an NFL roster (I'm not sure how realistic it is, either way, as a punter or as a receiver), then there's really no way he can play basketball. And Point's team will definitely miss him... but it isn't like the cupboard is bare. It may take a game or two to figure out who is going to fill which role, but the personnel is there for another run to Salem.

Here's (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mf_hFco376o) a play from last year against Stout in the WIAC Tourney Semi-Finals to show you the type of athlete Jenkins is. There aren't too many 6'4" guards out there who are as strong as he is.

And it should be noted that the guy on the back end of that clip, Dan Tillema, is now healthy (see the obligatory clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1K5Oui2d9E8) of his dunk against Elmhurst again). He rose to become Point's go-to-guy by the middle of the season until a knee injury slowed him down. He came around at just the right time for the tournament last year and hit three big 3's in the championship game.

And it should be noted that Louis Hurd appeared to be in mid-season form (2nd on the team in scoring last year at 12.5 ppg). I think Hurd underachieved a little last year a little bit... he was in a shooting funk for quite a while and Point will look for him to be a little more consistent this year.

It may seen strange that a team with so many guys back has to "figure things out" a little bit in terms of personnel... but, like I said before, the guys are there... they just need to wear the right hat on this year's team.

And part of the discussion may be moot... because if Jenkins plays then the roles don't change all that much from last year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 04, 2010, 01:27:26 PM

Thanks guys.

(And yes, I somehow forgot for a second there that he's still playing football...so he wouldn't have played vs Carthage obviously.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dansand on November 04, 2010, 08:58:50 PM

#18 John Carroll down by 60 (!) at Akron.

Final: 111-48 Akron.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 04, 2010, 09:06:37 PM

Quote from: dansand on November 04, 2010, 08:58:50 PM
#18 John Carroll down by 60 (!) at Akron.

Hate to read too much into an exhibition game, but that is embarassing. Is Akron good this year, or is JCU somewhat questionable at #18?

[5 years ago IWU was within one decent run of top 10 Illinois with about 10 minutes left; they eventually lost by a bunch, but a heckuva lot less than 60. :P]

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on November 04, 2010, 09:58:27 PM

I think John Carroll's unusual style of play might lead it to REALLY struggle against a much more athletic team. If you are less athletic / less talented, you can equalize that a bit by slowing down the pace, playing disciplined sets, working for good shots, hitting three's, and so on. A frenetic up-and-down style based on waves of fresh players, I imagine, is just going to get crucified when playing a team full of D-1 level athletes. And it sounds like that is what happened. I am speculating here, of course, but a long way of saying, I wouldn't read THAT much into the result.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on November 07, 2010, 10:27:47 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 04, 2010, 09:06:37 PM
Quote from: dansand on November 04, 2010, 08:58:50 PM
#18 John Carroll down by 60 (!) at Akron.

Hate to read too much into an exhibition game, but that is embarassing. Is Akron good this year, or is JCU somewhat questionable at #18?

I posted this information on JCU earlier when some posters were considering them a Top 10 team for the preseason poll.

I wouldn't put John Carroll (JCU) in the top tier yet because they lost several key players. John Carroll graduated 5 players from the 11-12 player rotation that Coach Moran runs.

Rudy Kirbus - 12.9 ppg, 4.7 rpg, 22 mins/game D3Hoops Great Lakes 1st Team, All-OAC 1st Team
Chris Zajac - 7.7 ppg, 3.1 apg, 20 mins/game All-OAC honorable mention
Brian Dandrea - 5.0 ppg, 17 mins/game, solid defender
Tyler Kirsch - 4.6 ppg, 4.0 rpg, 17 mins/game
TJ DiSanto - 2.2 ppg

So, JCU graduated over 32 points/game which they will need to replace. Coach Moran does tend to plug new recruits into his rotation system every year. JCU plays at Wooster in December which will be a good indicator to see if the Blue Streaks deserve to be ranked in the Top 10.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 07, 2010, 01:39:15 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 04, 2010, 01:27:26 PM
Thanks guys.

(And yes, I somehow forgot for a second there that he's still playing football...so he wouldn't have played vs Carthage obviously.)

Jenkins had another 4 touchdowns yesterday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 07, 2010, 06:36:48 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 04, 2010, 09:06:37 PM
Quote from: dansand on November 04, 2010, 08:58:50 PM
#18 John Carroll down by 60 (!) at Akron.

Hate to read too much into an exhibition game, but that is embarassing. Is Akron good this year, or is JCU somewhat questionable at #18?

[5 years ago IWU was within one decent run of top 10 Illinois with about 10 minutes left; they eventually lost by a bunch, but a heckuva lot less than 60. :P]

fwiw, Akron is picked 3rd in the MAC East.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 07, 2010, 07:30:18 PM

It's just very hard to draw anything from these DI/D3 exhibition games. Most of them end up the same - D3 team gets outrebounded by 15+, turns it over 20+ times, shoots 20 less FT's, and has a miserable FG and 3-pt %. The size, quickness, and athleticism mismatches just distort the entire game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 08, 2010, 06:00:37 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 07, 2010, 07:30:18 PM
It's just very hard to draw anything from these DI/D3 exhibition games. Most of them end up the same - D3 team gets outrebounded by 15+, turns it over 20+ times, shoots 20 less FT's, and has a miserable FG and 3-pt %. The size, quickness, and athleticism mismatches just distort the entire game.

... or, conversely, the D3 team stays right in it to the end, as Webster did last night, but it's against a D1 team that's so horrible (SIUE) that it would struggle in the local D2 league.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on November 08, 2010, 06:56:35 PM

Just a quick comment on the Top 25 poll. The UAA preseason poll came out today, and the coaches have ranked Case Western above Brandeis and NYU (and only one point behind WashU for first). Both Brandeis (55 points, 29th most) and NYU (2 points), each have more points than Case (1 point). NYU was also picked ahead of Brandeis in the UAA poll:

http://www.uaa.rochester.edu/Basketball/2010-11_Preseason_Release.pdf

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 08, 2010, 08:34:36 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on November 08, 2010, 06:56:35 PM
Just a quick comment on the Top 25 poll. The UAA top 25 came out today, and the coaches have ranked Case Western above Brandeis and NYU. Both Brandeis (55 points, 29th most) and NYU (2 points), each have more points than Case (1 point). NYU was also picked ahead of Brandeis. Case was only 1 point behind WashU for preseason #1 in the UAA.

http://www.uaa.rochester.edu/Basketball/2010-11_Preseason_Release.pdf

There was another interesting development in the WIAC too... River Falls (who was the 22nd team receiving votes with 4) was picked 8th out of 9 (http://wiacsports.com/news/2010/11/4/MBB_1104104452.aspx).

Now, coming into this season, I really thought that they would be top 4... with the possibility of being even higher by virtue of the fact that they have almost everybody back from last year... but 6'8" Wade Guerin (13.9 ppg last year) had back surgery in the off-season and isn't playing this year.

River Falls has a bunch of other guys back, plus transfer Shane Manor (10.5 ppg two seasons ago)... but without their big guy, they may struggle.

I just don't see them pulling in 8th, even without Guerin.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on November 14, 2010, 10:17:51 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on November 07, 2010, 10:27:47 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 04, 2010, 09:06:37 PM
Quote from: dansand on November 04, 2010, 08:58:50 PM
#18 John Carroll down by 60 (!) at Akron.

Hate to read too much into an exhibition game, but that is embarassing. Is Akron good this year, or is JCU somewhat questionable at #18?

I posted this information on JCU earlier when some posters were considering them a Top 10 team for the preseason poll.

I wouldn't put John Carroll (JCU) in the top tier yet because they lost several key players. John Carroll graduated 5 players from the 11-12 player rotation that Coach Moran runs.

Rudy Kirbus - 12.9 ppg, 4.7 rpg, 22 mins/game D3Hoops Great Lakes 1st Team, All-OAC 1st Team
Chris Zajac - 7.7 ppg, 3.1 apg, 20 mins/game All-OAC honorable mention
Brian Dandrea - 5.0 ppg, 17 mins/game, solid defender
Tyler Kirsch - 4.6 ppg, 4.0 rpg, 17 mins/game
TJ DiSanto - 2.2 ppg

So, JCU graduated over 32 points/game which they will need to replace. Coach Moran does tend to plug new recruits into his rotation system every year. JCU plays at Wooster in December which will be a good indicator to see if the Blue Streaks deserve to be ranked in the Top 10.

Injuries are also impacting JCU this season and it nows appears that their starting Center 6'7" Matt Crozier will be out of action for a significant period. He did not play in the exhibition vs. Akron and he is listed without an active number on the current roster.

Crozier averaged 12.6 ppg and 7.4 rpg last year as the #3 scorer so JCU is now trying to replace 44 points/game that they have lost to either graduation or injuries.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 15, 2010, 08:09:25 PM

#4 IWU @ Benedictine live video...

http://vidtechsportsvision.com/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 15, 2010, 08:20:46 PM

Being ranked #2 in the preseason has seemed to carry a jinx in certain years...

But not this year.

#2 Randolph Macon is leading Marymount 75-28 with just under 10 minutes left in the game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 15, 2010, 08:44:21 PM

Randolph-Macon opens up with a victory over Marymount 89-46.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Wydown Blvd. on November 15, 2010, 08:47:10 PM

Injury-ridden WashU beats MacMurray 79 to 57

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 15, 2010, 08:52:39 PM

Eastern Mennonite got more of a battle from Shenandoah than Randy-Macon got from Marymount as the #3 Running Royals open their season with an 85-71 win.

#20 Washington U drops MacMurray 79-57 despite all the injuries they've had during the pre-season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 15, 2010, 09:11:20 PM

#22 Plattsburgh State opens up with a road win over Lyndon St 100-81.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 15, 2010, 10:07:18 PM

Greensboro and #19 Guilford going to overtime tied at 62. Guilford just nailed a deep three to send it to OT with under a second left.

Video (http://guilford.nmtvsports.com/(S(szofoxxohyl24tzvtm0bil1j))/sportzcastplayer.aspx)

Stats (http://www.guilford.edu/livestats/xlive.htm)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 15, 2010, 10:13:12 PM

I watched the video-stream of IWU/Benedictine tonight. IWU won 78-64, but I confess, they did NOT strike me as the #4 team in the country. Still, it was the opening game, so I'm not gonna slit my wrists. :P

And they DID have five players in double digits, including a career high 18 for reserve Matt Schick, so their vaunted depth may be for real.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 15, 2010, 10:17:37 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on November 15, 2010, 10:07:18 PM
Greensboro and #19 Guilford going to overtime tied at 62. Guilford just nailed a deep three to send it to OT with under a second left.

Video (http://guilford.nmtvsports.com/(S(szofoxxohyl24tzvtm0bil1j))/sportzcastplayer.aspx)

Stats (http://www.guilford.edu/livestats/xlive.htm)

Tied at 71, Greensboro with the ball with under 1 minute.

EDIT: Greensboro nails a 3, 19 seconds left, 74-71 Greensboro leading #19 Guilford. Do the Quakers have another miracle in their bag?

EDIT 2: Nope, airball, Greensboro boards with 8.1 seconds and get fouled, makes the first, and second.
Guilford scores quickly, 76-73, timeout Guilford, 2.7 seconds remain.

EDIT 3: Wow, 5 second violation on Greensboro, Guilford ball! They inbound it to somebody they didn't want to get it to and he lofts it up but doesn't hit anything.

#19 Guilford loses to Greensboro 76-73

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 15, 2010, 10:30:26 PM

PS, so 5-second violations start counting even if the clock is not going? (There was only 2.7 seconds on the clock, yet there was a 5 second violation afterwards.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mass_d3fan on November 15, 2010, 10:34:16 PM

I assume he means a 5 sec inbounds violation. The clock does not start until the ball is inbounded.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 15, 2010, 10:41:37 PM

Quote from: mass_d3fan on November 15, 2010, 10:34:16 PM
I assume he means a 5 sec inbounds violation. The clock does not start until the ball is inbounded.

Of course. :-[

[My brain is slow in transitioning from football to basketball. ::) Especially when it is STILL about 3/4 football playoffs mode!]

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 15, 2010, 10:59:00 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 15, 2010, 10:30:26 PM
PS, so 5-second violations start counting even if the clock is not going? (There was only 2.7 seconds on the clock, yet there was a 5 second violation afterwards.)

Guilford is SO good they can cause a 5 second violation in under 2.7 seconds!

Yes, it was to inbound the ball...!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 16, 2010, 12:11:27 AM

Quote from: PointSpecial on November 15, 2010, 10:59:00 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 15, 2010, 10:30:26 PM
PS, so 5-second violations start counting even if the clock is not going? (There was only 2.7 seconds on the clock, yet there was a 5 second violation afterwards.)

Guilford is SO good they can cause a 5 second violation in under 2.7 seconds!

Yes, it was to inbound the ball...!

Yep. My brain is still in football mode. I was thinking a lane violation. :-[

3 seconds, 5 seconds, what's the dif when you've got 35 seconds once they spot the ball??!! ;D

I promise to be more on target by mid-December. And will do my best to kick all your butts in the Pickems! :o :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 16, 2010, 07:27:12 AM

Bumping this up since we're underway.

Top 25 matchups in November and December...

Nov 20
#5 Carthage vs #18 John Carroll (potential tournament matchup)

Nov 22
#20 Washington U @ #24 Augustana

Nov 24
#5 Carthage vs #16 Whitworth (in Honolulu)

Nov 27
#7 Franklin & Marshall @ #11 St. Mary's (Md)
#14 Anderson @ #24 Augustana

Dec 1
#2 Randolph-Macon vs #12 Virginia Wesleyan

Dec 3
#5 Carthage vs #17 Hope

Dec 4
#2 Randolph-Macon @ #3 Eastern Mennonite

Dec 8
#1 UW-Stevens Point vs #21 UW-Whitewater

Dec 11
#2 Randolph-Macon vs #19 Guilford

Dec 15
#21 UW-Whitewater @ #24 Augustana

Dec 18
#4 Illinois Wesleyan @ #20 Washington U.

Dec 20
#6 Wooster @ #14 Anderson

Dec 22
#1 UW-Stevens Point @ #13 St. Thomas

Dec 28
#6 Wooster vs #18 John Carroll

Dec 29
#19 Guilford @ #25 Manchester

Dec 30
#10 St. Norbert vs #24 Augustana (potential tournament matchup)

* 5 Top 25 teams do not face another Top 25 team in November and December -- Williams, Middlebury, MIT, Plattsburgh State, Texas-Dallas.

* Augustana will potentially play 4 games vs Top 25 teams in November and December...Randolph-Macon plays 3.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 16, 2010, 01:52:24 PM

St. John's 70
St. Cloud St 65 (#8 in NCAA D2)

http://www.gojohnnies.com/news/2010/11/15/BASKETBALL_1115101735.aspx

Very impressive win!

The Johnnies travel to Stevens Point this Saturday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 16, 2010, 09:23:18 PM

(#25) Manchester 78
(RV) Wheaton 60

(at Manchester)

I watched the live video stream - Manchester is balanced and deep. They have a chance to have a big season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 16, 2010, 10:37:16 PM

#1 UWSP beat Lawrence 79-59

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: stag44 on November 17, 2010, 12:48:52 AM

Great win for the Claremont-Mudd-Scripps Stags:

They beat #1 NAIA D1 Azusa Pacific 81-79 tonight. Really nice win for them, and hopefully will give them some top 25 consideration.

They also play the #5 NAIA Concordia (Irvine) Eagles on Saturday night who have Taylor King (formerly from Duke and 'Nova) on their team. No let up on the schedule. A 2-0 week should put them in the mix for a top 15 look. A 1-1 week should not be penalized at all given their competition

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on November 17, 2010, 01:00:49 AM

Lets all not forget Rust, who beat Howard Payne tonight, 91-90.

Both NEWMAC schools (MIT, WPI) in the top 26 (thats right, 26), won comfortably by double digits also.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 17, 2010, 07:01:43 AM

Quote from: hugenerd on November 17, 2010, 01:00:49 AM
Lets all not forget Rust, who beat Howard Payne tonight, 91-90.

Both NEWMAC schools (MIT, WPI) in the top 26 (thats right, 26), won comfortably by double digits also.

Home game for Rust.

HPU was picked to finish 6th in the 8-team ASC West this season.
That was a long road trip for HPU which beat Rhodes by 2 points the night before. (Brownwood, TX to Holly springs MS is 666.0 miles.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on November 17, 2010, 12:54:19 PM

A win's a win, I am sure they will take it. The comment wasnt supposed to be completely serious either, although I do have a good friend who is an alum.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: RustCollege on November 17, 2010, 02:59:51 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on November 17, 2010, 07:01:43 AM
Quote from: hugenerd on November 17, 2010, 01:00:49 AM
Lets all not forget Rust, who beat Howard Payne tonight, 91-90.

Both NEWMAC schools (MIT, WPI) in the top 26 (thats right, 26), won comfortably by double digits also.
Home game for Rust.

HPU was picked to finish 6th in the 8-team ASC West this season.
That was a long road trip for HPU which beat Rhodes by 2 points the night before. (Brownwood, TX to Holly springs MS is 666.0 miles.

Yea it was a good win and rust won the game without 6'6 Larry Veasley so once he is back from bring hurt it will be very hard to Beat rust

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 17, 2010, 03:14:47 PM

Quote from: RustCollege on November 17, 2010, 02:59:51 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on November 17, 2010, 07:01:43 AM
Quote from: hugenerd on November 17, 2010, 01:00:49 AM
Lets all not forget Rust, who beat Howard Payne tonight, 91-90.

Both NEWMAC schools (MIT, WPI) in the top 26 (thats right, 26), won comfortably by double digits also.
Home game for Rust.

HPU was picked to finish 6th in the 8-team ASC West this season.
That was a long road trip for HPU which beat Rhodes by 2 points the night before. (Brownwood, TX to Holly springs MS is 666.0 miles.
Yea it was a good win and rust won the game without 6'6 Larry Veasley so once he is back from bring hurt it will be very hard to Beat rust

Thanks for the comment about Veasley. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 17, 2010, 08:28:27 PM

Greg Sager on the mic - live North Park video broadcast from the famed Crackerbox on Chicago's north side...

http://www.audiosportsonline.net/Winter/2010Basketball/NorthPark.htm

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on November 17, 2010, 09:30:30 PM

Final: #6 Wooster 103 Cincy Christian 78

Wooster was led tonight by Nathan Balch with 27 points, Matt Fegan 19 points (5 three pointers), Bryan Wickliffe with 14 points (8 boards) and Ian Franks with 12 pts, 6 assists, 5 boards.

Next game is Bethany at home on Saturday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 19, 2010, 08:32:45 PM

Final scores: #22 Plattsburgh State 80 ORV Western Connecticut State 86

#9 Middlebury 63 Baruch 60

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 19, 2010, 10:47:14 PM

#13 St Thomas eeks out a 73-70 win against Pacific Lutheran. They were down by as many as 16 in the first half and went into halftime down 14.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 20, 2010, 12:51:25 AM

We'll have our first Top 25 vs Top 25 matchup tomorrow in Kenosha, WI...

Quote from: Titan Q on November 16, 2010, 07:27:12 AM
Bumping this up since we're underway.

Top 25 matchups in November and December...

Nov 20
#5 Carthage vs #18 John Carroll (potential tournament matchup)

Nov 22
#20 Washington U @ #24 Augustana

Nov 24
#5 Carthage vs #16 Whitworth (in Honolulu)

Nov 27
#7 Franklin & Marshall @ #11 St. Mary's (Md)
#14 Anderson @ #24 Augustana

Dec 1
#2 Randolph-Macon vs #12 Virginia Wesleyan

Dec 3
#5 Carthage vs #17 Hope

Dec 4
#2 Randolph-Macon @ #3 Eastern Mennonite

Dec 8
#1 UW-Stevens Point vs #21 UW-Whitewater

Dec 11
#2 Randolph-Macon vs #19 Guilford

Dec 15
#21 UW-Whitewater @ #24 Augustana

Dec 18
#4 Illinois Wesleyan @ #20 Washington U.

Dec 20
#6 Wooster @ #14 Anderson

Dec 22
#1 UW-Stevens Point @ #13 St. Thomas

Dec 28
#6 Wooster vs #18 John Carroll

Dec 29
#19 Guilford @ #25 Manchester

Dec 30
#10 St. Norbert vs #24 Augustana (potential tournament matchup)

* 5 Top 25 teams do not face another Top 25 team in November and December -- Williams, Middlebury, MIT, Plattsburgh State, Texas-Dallas.

* Augustana will potentially play 4 games vs Top 25 teams in November and December...Randolph-Macon plays 3.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 20, 2010, 08:46:10 AM

A few Top 25 games to keep an eye on today (all times ET)...

#1 UW-Stevens Point vs St. John's (4:00pm)

#2 Randolph-Macon @ RV Gettysburg (4:00pm)

#4 IWU vs Ripon (8:00pm)

#5 Carthage vs #18 John Carroll (4:00pm)

#13 St. Thomas @ Puget Sound (11:00pm)

#16 Whitworth vs RV Loras (11:00pm)

#20 Wash U @ UW-Platteville (8:00pm)

#21 UW-Whitewater @ Wheaton (9:00pm)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 20, 2010, 05:45:09 PM

#1 UWSP beat St Johns 78-51

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 20, 2010, 06:13:02 PM

#18 John Carroll 70
#5 Carthage 69

(at Carthage)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 20, 2010, 07:41:43 PM

Wow, Titan... didn't see that score coming. Surprising win for John Carroll at Carthage.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 20, 2010, 10:00:29 PM

Platteville upsets #20 Wash U 64-49

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 20, 2010, 10:03:00 PM

Amherst almost got beat by ME-Farmington last night. Williams had a tight game with Regis today. At least in the NE, things seem to be much more unpredictable than in the recent past.

It could be an exciting year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 20, 2010, 10:09:27 PM

#21 Whitewater on the ropes against Wheaton. Wheaton leads 65-46 with about 10 mins in the game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 20, 2010, 10:30:30 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on November 20, 2010, 10:00:29 PM
Platteville upsets #20 Wash U 64-49

I guess that is an "upset", but it sure doesn't seem like it should be one. Wash U does not belong in the poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 20, 2010, 10:32:15 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on November 20, 2010, 10:09:27 PM
#21 Whitewater on the ropes against Wheaton. Wheaton leads 65-46 with about 10 mins in the game.

I watched a lot of this one - Whitewater sure did not look like anything close to a Top 25 team.

Nice bounce back by Wheaton after the 18-point loss @ Manchester.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 20, 2010, 10:35:30 PM

Wheaton 92
UW-Whitewater 66

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 20, 2010, 10:36:38 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 20, 2010, 10:30:30 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on November 20, 2010, 10:00:29 PM
Platteville upsets #20 Wash U 64-49

I guess that is an "upset", but it sure doesn't seem like it should be one. Wash U does not belong in the poll.

Yeah, I thought about putting in the quotes myself!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 20, 2010, 10:40:34 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on November 20, 2010, 10:36:38 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on November 20, 2010, 10:30:30 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on November 20, 2010, 10:00:29 PM
Platteville upsets #20 Wash U 64-49

I guess that is an "upset", but it sure doesn't seem like it should be one. Wash U does not belong in the poll.

Yeah, I thought about putting in the quotes myself!

Reputation votes usually don't turn out so good!

Wash U goes to Augustana now...that could be ugly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 20, 2010, 11:24:41 PM

Apparently that goes for Whitewater too.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 20, 2010, 11:33:33 PM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on November 20, 2010, 11:24:41 PM
Apparently that goes for Whitewater too.

And Guilford.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on November 20, 2010, 11:44:19 PM

1st Half in Spokane

Loras 22
Whitworth 41

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on November 20, 2010, 11:48:57 PM

Quote from: stag44 on November 17, 2010, 12:48:52 AM
Great win for the Claremont-Mudd-Scripps Stags:

They beat #1 NAIA D1 Azusa Pacific 81-79 tonight. Really nice win for them, and hopefully will give them some top 25 consideration.

They also play the #5 NAIA Concordia (Irvine) Eagles on Saturday night who have Taylor King (formerly from Duke and 'Nova) on their team. No let up on the schedule. A 2-0 week should put them in the mix for a top 15 look. A 1-1 week should not be penalized at all given their competition

This is a nice win. Whitworth faces Claremont Dec. 19.
Next item: Whitworth faces Colorado College 12/29. Who has the toughest non-conference schedule?
Plus PLU represented our 2nd tier conference fairly well. Nice job Far West!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on November 20, 2010, 11:55:37 PM

Final: #6 Wooster 79 Bethany (WV) 52

Wooster slices up the Bison jumping out to a 24-4 lead and never looking back. Scots were led by Nathan Balch with 21 points and Ian Franks with 18 points. Next game is vs. Ohio Northern in the CMU tourney next Saturday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 21, 2010, 12:09:13 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 20, 2010, 10:40:34 PM
Reputation votes usually don't turn out so good!

But not always. This one puzzles me.

Quote from: Titan Q on November 20, 2010, 06:13:02 PM
#18 John Carroll 70
#5 Carthage 69

(at Carthage)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 21, 2010, 08:51:39 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 21, 2010, 12:09:13 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on November 20, 2010, 10:40:34 PM
Reputation votes usually don't turn out so good!

But not always. This one puzzles me.

Quote from: Titan Q on November 20, 2010, 06:13:02 PM
#18 John Carroll 70
#5 Carthage 69

(at Carthage)

I listened to the Carthage/John Carroll game and was really surprised Carthage lost. Carthage led by 12 at the half and it seemed like the Red Men would run away with it. But in the 2nd, the Streak's full-court pressure gave CC a lot of trouble.

Carthage is a tremendous halfcourt team. PG Steve Djurickovic is just so dangerous with the ball in his hand, where he can penetrate and score or dish, or make jumpshots from anywhere on the floor. But if you can make other Carthage players handle the ball, and speed up the tempo, you change that dynamic. You take away Carthage's strength and make them play a style they are not that comfortable with. Now, not every team has the personnel to play that way vs the Red Men...Carthage would beat Grinnell by 50 probably. But John Carroll has the athletes to apply full-court pressure effectively at a high-level in D3.

This game definitely qualified as an "upset" to me, but I don't think John Carroll's preseason votes can be called "reputation votes", Pat (I think that is what you're saying?)...

----------
John Carroll (21-7 overall, 15-3 OAC/Great Lakes) - Round of 32, lost to Guilford[/b][/u]
Starters Returning: (5) G Corey Shontz, 6-1 JR (14.4 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 4.0 apg), F/C Matt Crozier, 6-7 JR (12.6 ppg, 7.4 rpg), G Joey Meyer, 5-11 JR (8.3 ppg, 1.9 rpg), G Michael Hartnett, 6-2 JR (4.9 ppg, 1.4 rpg), F Patrick Sweeney, 6-2 JR (2.8 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: F Maurice Haynes, 6-4 SR (8.6 ppg, 4.3 apg)
----------

Here is the Carthage/JCU box:

http://www.jcusports.com/custompages/mbball/2011/jcmb1103.htm

The Blue Streaks have a bunch back from 21-win team that came within 3 points of knocking off Guilford in Greensboro last year in the tournament.

I think "reputation votes" are when a perennially strong program gets preseason votes without returning the players to really justify it (like Guilford or Wash U this year). It seems to me the Blue Streaks belonged somewhere in the poll heading in.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 21, 2010, 09:08:22 AM

Thanks Titan Q, +1! :)

Your description of the JCU-Carthage game makes perfect sense.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 21, 2010, 09:12:27 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on November 21, 2010, 09:08:22 AM
Thanks Titan Q, +1! :)

Your description of the JCU-Carthage game makes perfect sense.

Ralph, you can bet the other 7 CCIW teams will be watching the Carthage/JCU video this week, trying to figure out if they have the personnel to try to apply full-court pressure vs the Red Men! (Most really do not.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 21, 2010, 09:21:44 AM

Below is how my preseason ballot looked a month ago. I ended up voting for 2 teams that I think I was very wrong on...

* UW-Whitewater - I watched the Warhawks last night vs Wheaton, and they really looked awful. Maybe it was one bad game, but I just did not see a Top 25 team.

* Loras - 0-2 now, including a blowout loss @ Whitworth. It was a flyer and I got burned.

I probably missed the boat on Whitworth...looks like they've reloaded.

I watched the Manchester/Wheaton game online and feel very good about MC as a Top 25 team...they are very balanced and deep.

Quote from: Titan Q on October 22, 2010, 03:45:05 PM
I received the official D3hoops.com preseason ballot e-mail today. I'm guessing we'll have a poll by mid-week.

So with a final decision to make by Tuesday, I'm very comfortable with 21 teams and have 9 teams I'm looking at for spots 22-25...

21 Sure Things:

#1 UW-Stevens Point (29-4 overall, 12-4 WIAC/West) – 2009-10 national champion
Starters Returning: (4) F Louis Hurd, 6-5 SR (12.5 ppg, 4.1 rpg),G Jared Jenkins, 6-4 SR (11.4 ppg, 3.7 rpg), F Scott Hoelzel, 6-6 SR (8.2 ppg, 5.7 rpg), F Nick Krull, 6-7 SR (5.5 ppg, 3.6 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) PG Matt Moses, 6-2 (14.7 ppg, 4.3 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: PG Jerel Harris, 5-10 SO (7.7 ppg, 1.8 rpg)

Potential Impact Transfer: G DeVon Jackson, 6-0, Williston State...F Jamie Mauch, 6-4, North Dakota College of Science (2 year starter)

#2 Eastern Mennonite (25-5 overall, 14-2 ODAC/South) – Elite 8, lost to Guilford
Starters Returning: (5) G/F Todd Phillips, 6-3 SR (17.4 ppg, 7.3 rpg, 3.1 rpg), G/F D.J. Hinson, 6-4 SR (15.9 ppg, 3.9 rpg), G George Johnson, 5-10 SR (15.0 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 3.2 apg), F Eli Crawford, 6-2 SR (12.2 ppg, 7.1 rpg), F Orie Pancione, 6-5 SR (7.9 ppg, 5.5 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: G/F Andrew Thorne, 6-4 SO (3.5 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

#3 Illinois Wesleyan (23-8 overall, 10-4 CCIW/Midwest) - Elite 8, lost to UW-Stevens Point
Starters Returning: (5) G Sean Johnson, 6-1 SR (17.0 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 3.1 apg), C Doug Sexauer, 6-7 SR (15.6 ppg, 5.8 rpg), F Jordan Zimmer, 6-5 JR (9.0 ppg, 3.6 rpg), PG Travis Rosenkranz, 6-0 SR (8.2 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 4.1 apg), F John Koschnitzky, 6-6 JR (5.3 ppg, 3.9 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: C Ryan Connolly (6.4 ppg, 2.7 rpg), 6-9 JR

#4 Carthage (24-6 overall, 12-2 CCIW/Midwest) - Sweet 16, lost to Illinois Wesleyan
Starters Returning: (4) PG Steve Djurickovic, 6-3 SR (24.4 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 7.3 apg), C Tyler Pierce, 6-5 SO (12.5 ppg, 4.8 rpg), G Max Cary, 6-3 JR (10.5 ppg, 3.0 rpg), F Mitch Thompson, 6-6 SO (6.1 ppg, 4.9 rpg),

Starters Lost: (1) G Cody Hilton, 5-11 (3.6 ppg, 1.7 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Malcom Kelly, 6-0 SO (7.6 ppg, 2.8 rpg)

#5 Randolph-Macon (26-7 overall, 11-5 ODAC/South) - Final 4, lost to UW-Stevens Point

Starters Returning: (5) F Brandon Braxton, 6-5 SR (11.5 ppg, 5.1 rpg), G Eric Pugh, 6-0 SR (10.6 ppg, 2.1 rpg, 3.2 apg), G/F Jordan Brown, 6-4 SR (10. 2 ppg, 3.4 rpg), G Calvin Croskey, 6-0 JR (8.5 ppg, 3.4 rpg), G/F Kevin Voelkel, 6-5 SR (2.7 ppg, 6.1 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: F Danny Jones, 6-6 SR (13.0 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

#6 Wooster (25-6 overall, 15-1 NCAC/Great Lakes) – Sweet 16, lost to Guilford

Starters Returning: (4) G Ian Franks, 6-4 SR (17.9 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 3.3 apg), G Nathan Balch, 6-1 SR (11.9 ppg, 3.5 rpg), F/C Bryan Wickliffe, 6-5 SR (11.2 ppg, 7.2 rpg), F Justin Hallowell, 6-7 JR (9.0 ppg, 5.8 rpg)

Starters Lost : (1) G Brandon Johnson, 6-2 (6.1 ppg, 2.4 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Matt Fegan, 6-1 JR (6.2 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

#7 St. Norbert (23-4 overall, 14-2 MWC/Midwest) - Round of 32, lost to UW-Stevens Point
Starters Returning: (5) G Dave Wipperfurth, 6-2 SR (15.3 ppg, 3.4 rpg), C Chris Peterson, 6-5 SR (13.7 ppg, 5.4 rpg), G John Taylor, 6-0 SR (10.6 ppg, 4.3 rpg, 4.3 apg), F Steve Papke, 6-4 SR (7.0 ppg, 4.6 rpg), G/F Paul Mallers, 6-3 SR (5.9 ppg, 4.5 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: G Mike Brumm, 5-11 SO (4.6 ppg, 1.0 rpg)

#8 Franklin & Marshall (26-5 overall, 15-3 Centennial/Mid-Atlantic) – Elite 8, lost to Randolph-Macon
Starters Returning: (4) F James McNally, 6-6 SR (18.4 ppg, 8.5 rpg), G Georgio Milligan, 6-2 JR (13.0 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 4.9 apg), F Mike Baker, 6-6 SR (9.0 ppg, 6.7 rpg), G Justin Driver, 6-0 SR (2.5 ppg, 0.8 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Anthony Brooks, 6-2 (12.4 ppg, 4.4 rpg, 3.4 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Steve Tolliver, 6-2 SR (6.4 ppg, 2.8 rpg)

#9 John Carroll (21-7 overall, 15-3 OAC/Great Lakes) - Round of 32, lost to Guilford
Starters Returning: (5) G Corey Shontz, 6-1 JR (14.4 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 4.0 apg), F/C Matt Crozier, 6-7 JR (12.6 ppg, 7.4 rpg), G Joey Meyer, 5-11 JR (8.3 ppg, 1.9 rpg), G Michael Hartnett, 6-2 JR (4.9 ppg, 1.4 rpg), F Patrick Sweeney, 6-2 JR (2.8 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: F Maurice Haynes, 6-4 SR (8.6 ppg, 4.3 apg)

#10 Middlebury (25-4 overall, 8-1 NESCAC/Northeast) - Round of 32, lost to Rhode Island
Starters Returning: (4) F Ryan Sharry, 6-8 JR (13.7 ppg, 8.1 rpg), G Jake Wolfin, 6-2 SO (10.6 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 3.9 apg), G Nolan Thompson, 6-3 SO (10.2 ppg, 3.0 rpg), C Andrew Locke, 6-10 SR (9.1 ppg, 5.0 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Tim Edwards, 6-4 (8.5 ppg, 7.1 rpg, 5.1 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Ryan Wholey, 6-4 SR (8.5 ppg, 4.0 rpg)

#11 Williams (30-2 overall, 9-0 NESCAC/Northeast) – lost in national championship game to UW-Stevens Point
Starters Returning: (2) G James Wang, 6-0 JR (17.3 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 4.4 apg), F Harlan Dodson, 6-8 SR (6.2 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) G/F Blake Schultz, 6-3 (19.2 ppg, 4.3 rpg), G Alex Rubin, 6-4 (9.5 ppg, 1.9 rpg), C Joe Geoghegan, 6-8 (7.1 ppg, 8.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: C Troy Whittington, 6-5 SR (11.1 ppg, 6.2 rpg

#12 Anderson (23-6 overall, 13-3 HCAC/Midwest) - Round of 32, lost to Carthage
Starters Returning: (4) F Brock Morrison, 6-3 JR (14.4 ppg, 8.7 rpg), C Andrew Jones, 6-6 SR (13.2 ppg, 5.8 rpg), F Andrew Bowman, 6-7 SR (11.8 ppg, 6.5 rpg), G Gabe Miller, 6-3 SR (11.0 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 3.8 apg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Ty Riddle (14.8 ppg, 2.0 rpg) - was a junior last year...had one semester eligility left but decided to enter work world

Top Returning Reserve: G Phil Hogan, 5-11 SO (5.7 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

#13 Rhode Island (22-8 overall, 12-2 LEC/Northeast) - Sweet 16, lost to Brandeis
Starters Returning: (4) G Antone Gray, 5-9 SR (14.2 ppg, 2.4 rpg, 4.8 apg), G/F Mason Choice, 6-4 JR (13.0 ppg, 4.8 rpg), F/C Darius Debnam, 6-4 SR (7.2 ppg, 6.0 rpg), G Nick Manson, 6-0 SR (7.2 ppg, 2.2 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Jake Grimes, 6-3 (14.9 ppg, 5.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Carl Lee, 6-3 SR (9.5 ppg, 5.8 rpg)

#14 St. Mary's (26-4 overall, 14-2 CAC/Mid-Atlantic) – Sweet 16, lost to Franklin & Marshall
Starters Returning: (4) G Alex Franz, 6-1 SR (13.7 ppg, 5.2 rpg), C Sam Brown, 6-8 SR (9.9 ppg, 5.2 rpg), G James Davenport, 6-3 JR (6.6 ppg, 2.7 rpg), F Brian Grashof, 6-7 JR (6.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Camontae Griffin, 5-9 (21.6 ppg, 2.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G/F Mike Fitzpatrick, 6-6 SR (8.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg)

#15 Virginia Wesleyan (22-5 overall, 12-4 ODAC/South) - Round of 32, lost to St. Mary's
Starters Returning: (4) F Donald Vaughn, 6-5 JR (15.5 ppg, 8.0 ppg), F Chris Astorga, 6-5 SO (8.9 ppg, 4.9 rpg), G Ed Roberts, 5-10 JR (3.5 ppg, 1.9 rpg), F Trevor Watson, 6-4 JR (1.8 ppg, 1.4 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Stephen Fields, 6-2 (21.0 ppg, 4.6 rpg, 3.2 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Quantrell Simmons, 6-6 SR (8.8 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

#16 Hope (21-8 overall, 11-3 MIAA/Great Lakes) – lost in 1st Round to St. Norbert
Starters Returning: (4) G Peter Bunn, 6-2 SR (16.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg), F Will Bowser, 6-5 SR (12.1 ppg, 5.8 rpg), F Andy Venema, 6-8 SR (9.4 ppg, 3.2 rpg), G David Krombeen, 6-3 JR (6.8 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 3.8 apg)

Starters Lost: (1) C Chris Nelis, 6-4 (12.4 ppg, 5.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Nate Snuggerud, 6-5 SO (6.1 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

#17 MIT (22-5 overall, 10-2 NEWMAC/Northeast) – lost in 1st Round to DeSales
Starters Returning: (4) F Noel Hollingsworth, 6-9 JR (20.4 ppg, 9.0 rpg), G Mitchell Kates, 6-1 SO (13.2 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 4.1 apg), F Will Tashman, 6-8 SO (8.7 ppg, 7.2 rpg), G Eric Zuk, 6-5 SR (1.2 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) Billy Johnson (8.0 ppg, 3.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Jimmy Burke, 5-11 SO (9.2 ppg, 1.3 rpg)

#18 WPI (20-7 overall, 7-5 NEWMAC/Northeast) – not in 2009-10 tournament
Starters Returning: (4) G Jeffrey Robinson, 6-1 SR (19.0 ppg, 3.5 rpg), G Kyle Nadeau, 5-8 SR (9.3 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 3.0 apg), F Ben Etten, 6-4 SR (9.2 ppg, 5.0 rpg), C Matt Carr, 6-7 JR (5.9 ppg, 4.1 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) C Bennett Lessard, 6-8 (3.3 ppg, 5.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Fernando Perez, 6-3 JR (11.1 ppg, 7.0 rpg)

#19 Plattsburgh State (21-8 overall, 13-5 SUNYAC/East) – lost in 1st Round to SUNYIT
Starters Returning: (4) G Chris Ruiz, 6-4 SR (17.2 ppg, 5.7 rpg), G Steve Thomas, 6-4 SR (17.1 ppg, 6.6 rpg), F Errol Daniyan, 6-6 SR (15.2 ppg, 8.3 rpg), G Carl Munnerlyn, 5-9 SR (11.5 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) F Farris Thomas, 6-5 (4.7 ppg, 4.7 rpg)

Top Returning ReserveL F RJ Ponesse, 6-10 SR (3.6 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

#20 Manchester (17-10 overall, 10-6 HCAC/Midwest) – not in 2009-10 tournament
Starters Returning: (5) G Mitch Schaefer, 6-4 SR (11.3 ppg, 3.4 rpg), G/F Tyler Henn, 6-5 SR (9.9 ppg, 5.0 rpg), G Jordan Moss, 6-4 JR (9.1 ppg, 4.1 rpg), G Nathan Ferch, 6-3 SR (8.1 ppg, 4.3 rpg), C Jason Spindler, 6-10 JR (7.4 ppg, 4.1 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: G Tyler Delauder, 6-1 SR (8.0 ppg, 2.4 rpg)

#21 Augustana (16-10 overall, 9-5 CCIW/Midwest) – not in 2009-10 tournament
Starters Returning: (4) F Kyle Nelson, 6-9 SR (14.7 ppg, 7.7 rpg), PG Brian DeSimone, 6-1 JR (6.7 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 3.3 apg), G Troy Rorer, 6-2 JR (6.3 ppg, 4.0 rpg), F Brandon Kunz, 6-7 SO (4.7 ppg, 3.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Matt Pelton, 6-3 (12.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Chris Anderson, 6-4 JR (7.0 ppg, 1.6 rpg)

9 Teams for 4 Spots:

Amherst (14-11 overall, 3-6 NESCAC) – Northeast
Starters Returning: (4) G Conor Meehan, 6-4 SR (14.2 ppg, 5.6 rpg, 6.2 apg), F Jeff Holmes, 6-7 JR (9.8 ppg, 6.2 rpg), G Taylor Barisse, 6-5 JR (8.2 ppg, 4.4 rpg), G/F David Waller, 6-6 JR (7.8 ppg, 4.6 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G/F Steven Wheeler, 6-6 (14.7 ppg, 2.0 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Willy Workman, 6-6 SO (6.2 ppg, 4.0 rpg)

Buena Vista (15-12 overall, 10-6 IIAC) – West - not in 2009-10 tournament
Starters Returning: (3) G Troy Ticknor, 6-1 SO (12.4 ppg, 2.1 rpg), F/C Doug Bissen, 6-7 JR (11.7 ppg, 6.4 rpg), F Wes Nordquist, 6-7 SO (11.4 ppg, 6.6 rpg)

Starters Lost: (2) G/F Nathan Parker, 6-4 (10.7 ppg, 4.3 rpg), G Kevin Osborn, 6-0 (3.7 ppg, 3.1 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Jeff Janssen, 6-4 JR (8.9 ppg, 1.8 rpg)

Carleton (19-10 overall, 12-8 MIAC/West) – lost in 1st Round 1 to UW-Stevens Point by 1
Starters Returning: (4) G Jeremy Sutherland, 6-4 SR (14.6 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 3.6 apg), F Seth Jonker, 6-6 SO (4.7 ppg, 1.8 rpg), G/F Carter Biewen, 6-4 SR (7.7 ppg, 3.3 rpg), G Blaise Davis, 6-1 JR (7.0 ppg, 1.0 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) F Bryan Rosett, 6-6 (11.8 ppg, 7.3 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Scott Theisen, 6-6 SO (4.7 ppg, 1.8 rpg)

Centre (18-9 overall, 11-5 SCAC/South) – lost in 1st Round to Eastern Mennonite
Starters Returning: (4) G Jeff Mullany, 6-2 JR (13.6 ppg, 3.5 rpg), G Bryon Ellis, 5-10 SO (8.8 ppg, 2.2 rpg), F Josh Crawford, 6-5 SO (8.5 ppg, 4.4 rpg), C Alex Lloyd, 6-8 SR (7.3 ppg, 9.7 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) F Danny Noll, 6-6 (14.0 ppg, 7.6 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Dee Smith, 5-6 SR (3.1 ppg, 0.7 rpg)

Gettysburg (15-11 overall, 12-6 Centennial/Mid-Atlantic) - not in 2009-10 tournament
Starters Returning: (4) C Andrew Powers, 6-6 SR (19.3 ppg, 6.8 rpg), F Kevin Kennedy, 6-5 SR (11.8 ppg, 4.7 rpg), G/F Alex Zurn, 6-4 SO (11.7 ppg, 4.1 rpg), F Tim Lang, 6-7 JR (2.1 ppg, 1.4 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Brendan Hagar, 6-1 (5.2 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 5.5 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Brendan Trelease, 6-3 JR (7.0 ppg, 2.7 rpg)

Loras (15-11 overall, 10-6 IIAC/West) – not in 2009-10 tournament
Starters Returning: (4) F Tim Kelly, 6-4 JR (13.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg) G Mike Gleason, 6-2 SR (11.6 ppg, 2.2 rpg), G Connor Mooney, 5-10 SO (11.4 ppg, 1.3 rpg, 4.2 apg), F Jordan Harrelson, 6-4 JR (5.5 ppg, 3.9 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) F Alex Brant (5.3 ppg, 5.4 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: C Dan Pawelski, 6-9 JR (9.6 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

Ramapo (18-9 overall, 7-6 NJAC/Atlantic) – not in 2009-10 tournament
Starters Returning: (4) F/C LaQuan Peterkin, 6-6 JR (15.4 ppg, 7.8 rpg), G Anthony LoRusso, 6-1 JR (9.1 ppg, 1.6 rpg), G Garret Thiel, 6-2 JR (8.9 ppg, 3.2 rpg), F Davian Plunkett, 6-6 JR (8.3 ppg, 8.2 rpg)

Starters Lost: (1) G Andre Kenny, 6-3 (15.8 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 4.1 apg)

Top Returning Reserve: F Stephon Treadwell, 6-5 SO (4.6 ppg, 3.6 rpg)

St. Thomas (23-4 overall, 19-1 MIAC/West) - lost in 1st round to Anderson
Starters Returning: (3) G Tyler Nicolai, 5-11 SR (14.1 ppg, 2.0 rpg), G Alex Healy, 6-4 SR (12.7 ppg, 3.6 rpg), G Teddy Archer, 6-1 (5.0 ppg, 2.9 rpg)

Starters Lost: (2) G Joe Scott, 6-4 (10.8 ppg, 2.1 rpg), C Sam Eicher, 6-6 (4.4 ppg, 2.5 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: C Tommy Hannon, 6-8 JR (5.3 ppg, 3.8 rpg)

Potential Impact Transfer: F Eric Clute, 6-5, Southwest Minnesota State

UW-Whitewater (23-6 overall, 13-3 WIAC/West) – Round of 32, lost to Wooster
Starters Returning: (2) G Phil Negri, 6-3 SR (8.4 ppg, 3.3 rpg), F Alex Edmunds, 6-4 JR (7.2 ppg, 4.7 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) C Dustin Mitchell, 6-9 (18.0 ppg, 8.7 rpg), G Dupree Fletcher, 6-2 (14.0 ppg, 2.7 rpg), F Mike Bendall, 6-6 (10.2 ppg, 5.1 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: ~~G Nolan Free, 6-1 SO (6.4 ppg, 4.1 rpg)~~ not returning

Potential Impact Transfer: F Chris Davis, 6-6, Madison Area Technical College (22 ppg, 6 rpg)...G Eric Bryson, 6-3, Winona State

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 21, 2010, 09:41:50 AM

"We didn't do a good enough job in the second half," said coach Bosko Djurickovic. "We made poor decisions after poor decisions handling the basketball. Against a good team, you're going to pay the price for that. It felt like we had 25 turnovers, even though it was only 12. John Carroll took us out of our rhythm, and we just didn't make enough baskets. While we might have played the better 40 minutes, we didn't play well at the right times. There were just too many times that we threw the ball away instead of getting a good look. We have things to work on—we're far from a finished product. I enjoyed playing this team, if not the result. John Carroll is a very good team."

http://athletics.carthage.edu/news/2010/11/20/Mens_Basketball_1120100514.aspx

Very intriguing matchup in Honolulu this Wednesday, by the way - Carthage vs Whitworth.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 21, 2010, 10:09:29 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 21, 2010, 08:51:39 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 21, 2010, 12:09:13 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on November 20, 2010, 10:40:34 PM
Reputation votes usually don't turn out so good!

But not always. This one puzzles me.

Quote from: Titan Q on November 20, 2010, 06:13:02 PM
#18 John Carroll 70
#5 Carthage 69

(at Carthage)

I listened to the Carthage/John Carroll game and was really surprised Carthage lost. Carthage led by 12 at the half and it seemed like the Red Men would run away with it. But in the 2nd, the Streak's full-court pressure gave CC a lot of trouble.

Carthage is a tremendous halfcourt team. PG Steve Djurickovic is just so dangerous with the ball in his hand, where he can penetrate and score or dish, or make jumpshots from anywhere on the floor. But if you can make other Carthage players handle the ball, and speed up the tempo, you change that dynamic. You take away Carthage's strength and make them play a style they are not that comfortable with. Now, not every team has the personnel to play that way vs the Red Men...Carthage would beat Grinnell by 50 probably. But John Carroll has the athletes to apply full-court pressure effectively at a high-level in D3.

This game definitely qualified as an "upset" to me, but I don't think John Carroll's preseason votes can be called "reputation votes", Pat (I think that is what you're saying?)...

----------
John Carroll (21-7 overall, 15-3 OAC/Great Lakes) - Round of 32, lost to Guilford[/b][/u]
Starters Returning: (5) G Corey Shontz, 6-1 JR (14.4 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 4.0 apg), F/C Matt Crozier, 6-7 JR (12.6 ppg, 7.4 rpg), G Joey Meyer, 5-11 JR (8.3 ppg, 1.9 rpg), G Michael Hartnett, 6-2 JR (4.9 ppg, 1.4 rpg), F Patrick Sweeney, 6-2 JR (2.8 ppg, 2.3 rpg)

Starters Lost: none

Top Returning Reserve: F Maurice Haynes, 6-4 SR (8.6 ppg, 4.3 apg)
----------

Here is the Carthage/JCU box:

http://www.jcusports.com/custompages/mbball/2011/jcmb1103.htm

The Blue Streaks have a bunch back from 21-win team that came within 3 points of knocking off Guilford in Greensboro last year in the tournament.

I think "reputation votes" are when a perennially strong program gets preseason votes without returning the players to really justify it (like Guilford or Wash U this year). It seems to me the Blue Streaks belonged somewhere in the poll heading in.

Perhaps JCU filled out our preseason poll info form wrong but I saw 36% of their scoring returning. (After I fixed their typo that made it 17%!) Four of the first five return, yes, but with JCU's platoon system the second five is just as important and clearly there were more losses there.

Or we were just misinformed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 21, 2010, 10:12:20 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 21, 2010, 10:09:29 AM
Perhaps JCU filled out our preseason poll info form wrong but I saw 36% of their scoring returning. (After I fixed their typo that made it 17%!) Four of the first five return, yes, but with JCU's platoon system the second five is just as important and clearly there were more losses there.

Or we were just misinformed.

Looks like vs Carthage they did not really play their typical platoon style...

http://www.jcusports.com/custompages/mbball/2011/jcmb1103.htm

See the minutes played.

In terms of new starters, their top returning reserve from '09-10, Maurice Haynes, had 23 & 10. 6-6 F Conor Tilow (14 pts) is a transfer from NCAA D2 Seton Hill.

Here is the JCU season preview from their site...

http://www.jcusports.com/news/2010/11/14/MBB_1114105224.aspx

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on November 21, 2010, 11:33:40 AM

I'd say Pat's prediction of wondering how JCU would replace the depth they lost is quite warranted. They may have been returning all of their starters but there were big questions about how they could still run their patented platoon style with the number of 'reserves' lost.

Well, I guess that answer was answered last night as, based on the minutes played by the starters, it looks like JCU won't be implementing the platoon system. In fact, it looks as if JCU doesn't have much of a bench at all! Three players logged 35 minutes in last night's game? :o

Last year the Blue Streaks had 10 players averaging between around 15 minutes to just over 20 minutes per game. In three games this season, JCU has 4 players averaging 25+ minutes per game. Quite a contrast.

My take on JCU is I'm wondering if their lack of depth will eventually catch up with them as the season wears on. I mean, having 3 starters logging as many minutes as they have been through 3 games will more than likely catch up with them at some point. Especially considering how grueling the OAC is.

It was a nice upset for JCU last night, but I have to wonder if this is a team that can keep this up for an entire season?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on November 21, 2010, 11:48:09 AM

Quote from: ScotsFan on November 21, 2010, 11:33:40 AM
I'd say Pat's prediction of wondering how JCU would replace the depth they lost is quite warranted. They may have been returning all of their starters but there were big questions about how they could still run their patented platoon style with the number of 'reserves' lost.

Well, I guess that answer was answered last night as, based on the minutes played by the starters, it looks like JCU won't be implementing the platoon system. In fact, it looks as if JCU doesn't have much of a bench at all! Three players logged 35 minutes in last night's game? :o

Last year the Blue Streaks had 10 players averaging between around 15 minutes to just over 20 minutes per game. In three games this season, JCU has 4 players averaging 25+ minutes per game. Quite a contrast.

My take on JCU is I'm wondering if their lack of depth will eventually catch up with them as the season wears on. I mean, having 3 starters logging as many minutes as they have been through 3 games will more than likely catch up with them at some point. Especially considering how grueling the OAC is.

It was a nice upset for JCU last night, but I have to wonder if this is a team that can keep this up for an entire season?

Just thinking about the NCAA tournament too. Could they put out this type of effort against t a team like Hope, and then do it again the very next night against someone like Wooster? I know these kids are young, but "even youths grow tired and weary".

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 21, 2010, 11:52:13 AM

I'm not sure that voting on "reputation" is such a bad thing at the D3 level. For one thing, we have comparatively little hard information to go on in the preseason. On top of that, I think that, at least at the highest level, coaching is more important in D3 than at any other collegiate level. If a school has one of the elite coaches, they're going to prosper even if there's a nearly complete turnover in athletes. (Of course, if a school has a truly elite coach, that doesn't happen, as recruiting and playing time tend to be more balanced out among the classes.) Such a team may struggle in November, trying to put the pieces together, but almost always will be winning in February and a threat in March. Maybe I'm spoiled by getting to follow Wooster, where Steve Moore is at or near the top of the list of such elite coaches, and where the cliche "reloading not rebuilding" is a truism, but I think Moore is far from alone in this regard. For example, I'm not terribly surprised that John Carroll is able to win right off the bat with what appears to be a fairly dramatic reduction in personnel and change in approach, and I'd be very surprised to find Washington U. outside the poll in February.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on November 21, 2010, 12:28:23 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 21, 2010, 10:12:20 AM
Looks like vs Carthage they did not really play their typical platoon style...
http://www.jcusports.com/custompages/mbball/2011/jcmb1103.htm

See the minutes played.

One reason JCU's press with fewer players may have worked is that Carthage played an even shorter bench!

Carthage's star player, Steve Djurickovic, played all 40 minutes and 4 of their 5 starters played 30 minutes or more in this game. JCU's press has the effect of wearing teams down.

When your 6th man plays only 16 minutes and your 7th man plays only 7 minutes, it can be tough to beat a press team unless all your starters are in great shape.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 21, 2010, 12:40:06 PM

Perhaps, early in the season, JCU did not use their up-tempo style, because the new players have not grown into the system.

I would expect the JCU starters to be able to play half-court very easily, this early in the season.

There is plenty of time for JCU to get its depth up to speed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 21, 2010, 01:32:44 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on November 21, 2010, 11:52:13 AM
...and I'd be very surprised to find Washington U. outside the poll in February.

I think it depends on two things, David.

1) How many losses will the Bears rack up in these non-conference games...

* Nov. 22, @ Augustana
* Nov. 28, @ Hanover
* Dec. 4, vs Claremont-Mudd-Scripps
* Dec. 11, @ Wheaton
* Dec. 18, vs Illinois Wesleyan

and,

2) In what appears to be a down year in the UAA, is Wash U (picked as the favorite) truly better than everyone else, or is there some parity near the top? In other words, will the Bears go, say, 12-2 or will they go 9-5?

Wash U does appear to have some very serious questions right now in their rotation...depth maybe being the biggie.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 21, 2010, 01:42:32 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on November 21, 2010, 11:52:13 AM
I'm not sure that voting on "reputation" is such a bad thing at the D3 level.

As long as that "reputation team" has the pieces in place to reload, I do not disagree, David. Sometimes, though, the top programs do have to rebuild a little, as opposed to just reloading. (Over the years, I have voted for a rebuilding Wooster or UW-Stevens Point-type team over an upstart flyer most of the time.)

Below is a post I made here about Wash U a month ago. Wash U, the best program in Division III the last 5 years, definitely entered the 2010-11 with some really big question marks. They just lost so much, and are asking so many guys who did not play last year to step into big spots.

I do think Wash U will be a lot better in February than they are now. Interested to see how this plays out.

Quote from: Titan Q on October 21, 2010, 04:35:54 PM
I looked in a little closer detail at Wash U's rotation at the end of last season. The following data is from their final 3 games - a 64-60 win @ U. of Chicago, a 79-71 home win vs Westminster in NCAA Round 1, and a 75-70 home loss to IWU in NCAA Round 2.

The rotation was basically:
* = 2010-11 returnee

Starters (153 min)
PG – Sean Wallis, 34 min
SG – Aaron Thompson, 30 min
SF – Cameron Smith, 33 min
PF – Spencer Gay, 28 min*
C – Zach Kelly, 28 min

Bench (47 min)
PG Ross Kelley, 7 min
G/F Dylan Richter, 17 min*
F Caleb Knepper, 14 min*
F/C Alex Toth, 9 min*

From those 3 games, the 4 returnees accounted for...

- Minutes/game = 68 (34%)
- Points/game = 28.3 (40%)
- Rebounds/game = 12.3 (35%)
- Assists/game = 3.3 (18%)
- FGM/game = 10.7 (44%)
- 3-pt FGM/game = 2.7 (35%)

And projecting the 2010-11 rotation as best we can, just based on returnees who were in the rotation...

2010-11 Starters?
PG - ?? (no returning player played PG)
SG – Dylan Richter, 6-3 JR
SF – Caleb Knepper, 6-6 SR
PF – Spencer Gay, 6-6 SR
C – Alex Toth, 6-6 JR

2010-11 Bench?
(no players besides above were in 2009-10 rotation)

Thus my 3 big questions about Wash U heading into the year (as I posted yesterday), and the reason I struggle with them as a preseason Top 25 team:

1) Who is the PG? (They have some talented young players, but none has varsity experience.)

2) Do they have enough 3-point shooters? (Richter can play the 2 and can make a 3, but is certainly not "pure 3-point shooter"...more of an athletic slasher. Knepper is definitely a 3-point shooter, but who else?)

3) What does the bench look like? (Again, lots of young talent to choose from, but no varsity experience. While guards can develop quickly, post players usually have a longer development curve...do they have players ready to backup the 4 and 5 spots?)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 21, 2010, 01:59:40 PM

Quote from: ScotsFan on November 21, 2010, 11:33:40 AM
I'd say Pat's prediction of wondering how JCU would replace the depth they lost is quite warranted. They may have been returning all of their starters but there were big questions about how they could still run their patented platoon style with the number of 'reserves' lost.

Well, I guess that answer was answered last night as, based on the minutes played by the starters, it looks like JCU won't be implementing the platoon system. In fact, it looks as if JCU doesn't have much of a bench at all! Three players logged 35 minutes in last night's game? :o

Last year the Blue Streaks had 10 players averaging between around 15 minutes to just over 20 minutes per game. In three games this season, JCU has 4 players averaging 25+ minutes per game. Quite a contrast.

My take on JCU is I'm wondering if their lack of depth will eventually catch up with them as the season wears on. I mean, having 3 starters logging as many minutes as they have been through 3 games will more than likely catch up with them at some point. Especially considering how grueling the OAC is.

It was a nice upset for JCU last night, but I have to wonder if this is a team that can keep this up for an entire season?

I'm wondering, too, if there may just be a larger disparity between the first five and the second five. If the second five can't sustain (either offensively or defensively), it wouldn't make sense for those guys to play equal minutes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 21, 2010, 02:11:27 PM

In elite programs like Wash U., while we may not know much about those bench players that have to step up into key roles, the coach knows all about them; he recruited them, and has been working with them, and he knows what they are capable of. It seems to me that, at the D3 level, those sort of players are more likely to respond to good coaching and to fit into a good system. They don't arrive on campus with a highly-defined skill set, like they might at a program like North Carolina. They may not click in November, since all they really have as background is a few weeks of practice, but by the time February rolls around, top tier coaches like Mark Edwards at top tier programs like Wash U. will have gotten those untested players to a place where they are maximizing their talents, and have them working in a system and gameplan designed to maximize those talents. Add to this that these players are probably pretty talented to begin with, or else Edwards wouln't have brought them in, and you have a situation where even a "down" year isn't likely to be very far down.

Every D3 coach has to deal with new and different sow's ears each year. The best of them seem to be capable of making a lot of silk purses, enough to keep a profitable notions store in business year after year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 21, 2010, 02:11:44 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on November 21, 2010, 12:28:23 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on November 21, 2010, 10:12:20 AM
Looks like vs Carthage they did not really play their typical platoon style...
http://www.jcusports.com/custompages/mbball/2011/jcmb1103.htm

See the minutes played.

One reason JCU's press with fewer players may have worked is that Carthage played an even shorter bench!

Carthage's star player, Steve Djurickovic, played all 40 minutes and 4 of their 5 starters played 30 minutes or more in this game. JCU's press has the effect of wearing teams down.

When your 6th man plays only 16 minutes and your 7th man plays only 7 minutes, it can be tough to beat a press team unless all your starters are in great shape.

Carthage has very little depth.

The teams picked at the top of the CCIW couldn't be more opposite. Carthage has the best player in Division III, some solid role players around him in the starting lineup, and not much of a bench. Illinois Wesleyan really has no true superstar, but has 5 very good starters (when healthy - 2 are out now with injury), and strong backups at all 5 spots, and even beyond.

There is no question Carthage wants to walk the ball up the floor and play a halfcourt game. In an up-and-down game, their lack of depth hurts them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 21, 2010, 02:12:44 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on November 21, 2010, 02:11:27 PM
In elite programs like Wash U., while we may not know much about those bench players that have to step up into key roles, the coach knows all about them; he recruited them, and has been working with them, and he knows what they are capable of. It seems to me that, at the D3 level, those sort of players are more likely to respond to good coaching and to fit into a good system. They don't arrive on campus with a highly-defined skill set, like they might at a program like North Carolina. They may not click in November, since all they really have as background is a few weeks of practice, but by the time February rolls around, top tier coaches like Mark Edwards at top tier programs like Wash U. will have gotten those untested players to a place where they are maximizing their talents, and have them working in a system and gameplan designed to maximize those talents. Add to this that these players are probably pretty talented to begin with, or else Edwards wouln't have brought them in, and you have a situation where even a "down" year isn't likely to be very far down.

Every D3 coach has to deal with new and different sow's ears each year. The best of them seem to be capable of making a lot of silk purses, enough to keep a profitable notions store in business year after year.

Absolutely David.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on November 21, 2010, 03:48:34 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on November 21, 2010, 11:52:13 AM
I'm not sure that voting on "reputation" is such a bad thing at the D3 level. For one thing, we have comparatively little hard information to go on in the preseason. On top of that, I think that, at least at the highest level, coaching is more important in D3 than at any other collegiate level. If a school has one of the elite coaches, they're going to prosper even if there's a nearly complete turnover in athletes. (Of course, if a school has a truly elite coach, that doesn't happen, as recruiting and playing time tend to be more balanced out among the classes.) Such a team may struggle in November, trying to put the pieces together, but almost always will be winning in February and a threat in March. Maybe I'm spoiled by getting to follow Wooster, where Steve Moore is at or near the top of the list of such elite coaches, and where the cliche "reloading not rebuilding" is a truism, but I think Moore is far from alone in this regard. For example, I'm not terribly surprised that John Carroll is able to win right off the bat with what appears to be a fairly dramatic reduction in personnel and change in approach, and I'd be very surprised to find Washington U. outside the poll in February.

and then...

In elite programs like Wash U., while we may not know much about those bench players that have to step up into key roles, the coach knows all about them; he recruited them, and has been working with them, and he knows what they are capable of. It seems to me that, at the D3 level, those sort of players are more likely to respond to good coaching and to fit into a good system. They don't arrive on campus with a highly-defined skill set, like they might at a program like North Carolina. They may not click in November, since all they really have as background is a few weeks of practice, but by the time February rolls around, top tier coaches like Mark Edwards at top tier programs like Wash U. will have gotten those untested players to a place where they are maximizing their talents, and have them working in a system and gameplan designed to maximize those talents. Add to this that these players are probably pretty talented to begin with, or else Edwards wouln't have brought them in, and you have a situation where even a "down" year isn't likely to be very far down.

Every D3 coach has to deal with new and different sow's ears each year. The best of them seem to be capable of making a lot of silk purses, enough to keep a profitable notions store in business year after year.

I agree with David, coaching matters ALOT. What are the top 10 programs by win pct. over the past 8 years without a coaching change? Would these be the "elites" spoken of?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 22, 2010, 10:45:03 AM

While coaching is a major key... sometimes the "reputation" vote is too much of a consideration.

Take for example Guilford. They are basically a brand new team compared to last year's Final Four squad. They lost size, points, leadership, etc. Reputation says we should give them a Top 25 vote (and many did to put them in the Top 25). However, understanding that their experience and depth have been depleated, no matter what a very good coach can do with his talent, has to be taken into account and maybe overshadow the reputation.

Guildford is now 2-2 with a recent lose to Emory. They are NOT the same team from last year. Will the be good, probably thanks many to the fact that their have a very good coach in Palombo. However, they are not a Top 25 team and probably won't be for the season.

I have gotten burned by the "reputation" vote many times (i.e. Wooster a few years ago) and now take it as part of the equation, but no higher then anything else. Wash U. and Guilford were not on my Top 25 ballot in the pre-season because despite the reputation of the program and clearly good coaches who can do a lot with their talent (the growth of Sanborn at Guilford would be the biggest example of that), losing a number of players that helped develop that reputation is something that I could not overlook.

Of course, the reputation vote can go the other direction as well and leave teams that may be deserving off a ballot (or maybe low). John Carroll appeared in the info we were given by Pat (see his comment earlier in this thread) to have lost more scoring then I realized they would, despite the fact they had a number of good players back. That information along with the fact that I have placed John Carroll too high on my ballot on several occasions caused me to have them rather low in the pre-season. The "reputation" that they never stack up to what I expect from them caused me to vote accordingly - and probably wrongly.

The "reputation" vote is a challenge. Yes, it may give the benefit of the doubt to a team that appears to have lost a lot but always seems to rebuild It will also keep people from voting for a team because there isn't a "reputation" to consider.

I personally hate the "reputation" part of voting and actually do as much as I can to not consider that and keep it as level a playing field as I can. That doesn't mean it doesn't become a factor if comparing a team with a reputation and one with not, but that is one of my last resorts and I will still try and find something else to make my decision for me.

Personally, I think some voters consider reputation way too much when they vote.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 22, 2010, 11:01:15 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 22, 2010, 10:45:03 AM
Personally, I think some voters consider reputation way too much when they vote.

I wonder if it isn't so much "reputation" as it is familiarity. When voters are looking for who to vote for, especially in the preseason, if they've been voting for a team in the previous year (or in several previous years), then it might just seem natural to place a team in the poll. Part of it, likely, is coaching as well (we know what type of gameplan they're going to have and what they're going to try to do/try to prevent their opponent from doing) but, for instance, a team like Wash U has been ranked near or at the top for the majority of the last 4 seasons. It almost seems like they deserve the nod and will eventually play into the spot, even if they aren't there right now.

Perhaps it just seems more natural than voting in a relative unknown or a team that brings a lot back but is coming off of a mediocre season, not a string like Wash U has been on.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 22, 2010, 10:07:24 PM

#24 Augustana 78
#20 Wash U 55

(at Augustana)

Augustana led by 15 at the half and Wash U never challenged in the 2nd.

Wash U got out-rebounded by 16...that seems to tell the story of what a physical mismatch this was.

Both of Wash U's previously injured players, Dylan Richter and Caleb Knepper, played in this game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 22, 2010, 10:20:05 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 22, 2010, 10:07:24 PM
#24 Augustana 78
#20 Wash U 55

(at Augustana)

Augustana led by 15 at the half and Wash U never challenged in the 2nd.

Wash U got out-rebounded by 16...that seems to tell the story of what a physical mismatch this was.

Both of Wash U's previously injured players, Dylan Richter and Caleb Knepper, played in this game.

... but highly-touted freshman Chris Klimek, who would probably play a lot of minutes on this team, didn't.

Mark Edwards used 15 players for Wash U tonight. I think that the Bears are firmly in the rebuilding camp this season rather than the reloading camp, preseason UAA #1 pick or not.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 22, 2010, 10:24:25 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 22, 2010, 10:20:05 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on November 22, 2010, 10:07:24 PM
#24 Augustana 78
#20 Wash U 55

(at Augustana)

Augustana led by 15 at the half and Wash U never challenged in the 2nd.

Wash U got out-rebounded by 16...that seems to tell the story of what a physical mismatch this was.

Both of Wash U's previously injured players, Dylan Richter and Caleb Knepper, played in this game.

... but highly-touted freshman Chris Klimek, who would probably play a lot of minutes on this team, didn't.

Mark Edwards used 15 players for Wash U tonight. I think that the Bears are firmly in the rebuilding camp this season rather than the reloading camp, preseason UAA #1 pick or not.

Yeah, it is still awfully early, but I'm becoming convinced they will NOT be re-emerging in the top 25 THIS season. But, with Coach Edwards there, I already have them penciled in for 2011-12! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 22, 2010, 10:52:50 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 22, 2010, 10:24:25 PM
Yeah, it is still awfully early, but I'm becoming convinced they will NOT be re-emerging in the top 25 THIS season. But, with Coach Edwards there, I already have them penciled in for 2011-12! ;)

As far as 2011-12 goes, remember that 6-6 Gay and 6-6 Knepper are seniors...those two may end up 1 and 2 in scoring on this team. Wash U has plenty of young talent on the roster, but it's not like they return all of their good players next year.

It appears to me that Wash U is paying for a lack of good big guy recruits in the current JR and SO classes. It seems like Alex Toth is the only decent low post player in those classes.

The top programs tend to have at least one good big guy in every class. For example, just looking at a couple CCIW schools, Augustana has 6-9 Nelson in the SR class, 6-9 Voilles in the JR class, Scarlata, Kunz, Dexter, and Norton in the sophomore class, and Schlitter in the FR class. Illinois Wesleyan has Sexauer and Lawson in the SR class, Connolly, Koschnitzky, and Schouten in the JR class, Reed in the SO class...Anderson, Davis, and Ziemnik in the FR class.

It's really hard to be a top team without low post depth...I'm surprised Wash U does not have it this season as they are about as "top" as a "top program" gets. I understand that 6-5 freshman Chris Klimek is hurt, but a) he's a freshman - there is no guarantee he was going to make a huge impact this year, and 2) he is a "combo forward", not a back-to-the-basket guy. Wash U is lacking pure low post guys.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 22, 2010, 11:11:53 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 22, 2010, 10:52:50 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 22, 2010, 10:24:25 PM
Yeah, it is still awfully early, but I'm becoming convinced they will NOT be re-emerging in the top 25 THIS season. But, with Coach Edwards there, I already have them penciled in for 2011-12! ;)

As far as 2011-12 goes, remember that 6-6 Gay and 6-6 Knepper are seniors...those two may end up 1 and 2 in scoring on this team. Wash U has plenty of young talent on the roster, but it's not like they return all of their good players next year.

It appears to me that Wash U is paying for a lack of good big guy recruits in the current JR and SO classes. It seems like Alex Toth is the only decent low post player in those classes.

The top programs tend to have at least one good big guy in every class. For example, just looking at a couple CCIW schools, Augustana has 6-9 Nelson in the SR class, 6-9 Voilles in the JR class, Scarlata, Kunz, Dexter, and Norton in the sophomore class, and Schlitter in the FR class. Illinois Wesleyan has Sexauer and Lawson in the SR class, Connolly, Koschnitzky, and Schouten in the JR class, Reed in the SO class...Anderson, Davis, and Ziemnik in the FR class.

It's really hard to be a top team without low post depth...I'm surprised Wash U does not have it this season as they are about as "top" as a "top program" gets. I understand that 6-5 freshman Chris Klimek is hurt, but a) he's a freshman - there is no guarantee he was going to make a huge impact this year, and 2) he is a "combo forward", not a back-to-the-basket guy. Wash U is lacking pure low post guys.

Bob, a whole bunch of Augustana and Wesleyan guys whom you cited as "good big guys" do not fall under the description of a pure low-post guy, just like Klimek.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 22, 2010, 11:18:58 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 22, 2010, 11:11:53 PM
Bob, a whole bunch of Augustana and Wesleyan guys whom you cited as "good big guys" do not fall under the description of a pure low-post guy, just like Klimek.

You are correct, so let me clarify my point.

1) Wash U is lacking depth at the 4 and 5 spots in general...especially in the JR and SO classes. My point above (about Augustana and IWU's depth at the 4 and 5) applies that opinion.

2) While needing multiple players at the 4 and 5 spots, Wash U's biggest need on this team is at least one more guy who can bang and score down low...a F/C-type player. I think it's fair to say a healthy Chris Klimek was not going to fill that role this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 22, 2010, 11:41:49 PM

Washington U had not lost back to back games since Feb. 1st and Feb. 3rd of 2008. And you have to go all the way back to November of 2004 to find back to back losses in double digits like they've suffered in the past 3 days. I have to agree that rebuilding rather than reloading is the probable story of this year's team. But it was a heckuva run the last four years---103-16.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 22, 2010, 11:48:15 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 22, 2010, 10:52:50 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 22, 2010, 10:24:25 PM
Yeah, it is still awfully early, but I'm becoming convinced they will NOT be re-emerging in the top 25 THIS season. But, with Coach Edwards there, I already have them penciled in for 2011-12! ;)

As far as 2011-12 goes, remember that 6-6 Gay and 6-6 Knepper are seniors...those two may end up 1 and 2 in scoring on this team. Wash U has plenty of young talent on the roster, but it's not like they return all of their good players next year.

It appears to me that Wash U is paying for a lack of good big guy recruits in the current JR and SO classes. It seems like Alex Toth is the only decent low post player in those classes.

The top programs tend to have at least one good big guy in every class. For example, just looking at a couple CCIW schools, Augustana has 6-9 Nelson in the SR class, 6-9 Voilles in the JR class, Scarlata, Kunz, Dexter, and Norton in the sophomore class, and Schlitter in the FR class. Illinois Wesleyan has Sexauer and Lawson in the SR class, Connolly, Koschnitzky, and Schouten in the JR class, Reed in the SO class...Anderson, Davis, and Ziemnik in the FR class.

It's really hard to be a top team without low post depth...I'm surprised Wash U does not have it this season as they are about as "top" as a "top program" gets. I understand that 6-5 freshman Chris Klimek is hurt, but a) he's a freshman - there is no guarantee he was going to make a huge impact this year, and 2) he is a "combo forward", not a back-to-the-basket guy. Wash U is lacking pure low post guys.

Notice I did say 'penciled' in - no ink! :D

I just have a hard time believing WashU and Coach Edwards would be down more than one year! (Of course, I NEVER would have believed Michigan football would be down so long, regardless of coach! :P)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 22, 2010, 11:52:15 PM

Quote from: magicman on November 22, 2010, 11:41:49 PM
Washington U had not lost back to back games since Feb. 1st and Feb. 3rd of 2008. And you have to go all the way back to November of 2004 to find back to back losses in double digits like they've suffered in the past 3 days. I have to agree that rebuilding rather than reloading is the probable story of this year's team. But it was a heckuva run the last four years---103-16.

We should also remember that these two losses were to good teams. UW-Platteville might end up being the 2nd best team in the WIAC. Augustana is rated #24 right now and I suspect they may be closer to a #15 team. They are just absolutely enormous, and it looks like this nucleus is starting to knock down perimeter shots.

There is a chance that once UAA play starts, Wash U won't see a single team as good as these two, or future non-conference opponent Illinois Wesleyan. Rebuilding or not, it sounds like they're still the favorite to win the UAA.

And I do feel strongly that the Bears will be a lot better in February than they are right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 23, 2010, 12:05:46 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 22, 2010, 11:48:15 PM
I just have a hard time believing WashU and Coach Edwards would be down more than one year!

"Down" is a pretty relative term though. It's possible that Wash U is not a Top 25 team in 2010-11, but that they'll win 18 or 19 games and be in the NCAA tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 23, 2010, 12:12:44 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 23, 2010, 12:05:46 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 22, 2010, 11:48:15 PM
I just have a hard time believing WashU and Coach Edwards would be down more than one year!

"Down" is a pretty relative term though. It's possible that Wash U is not a Top 25 team in 2010-11, but that they'll win 18 or 19 games and be in the NCAA tournament.

Agreed. But this is the Top 25 board. I'm having doubts they'll make it back to the Top 25 this year (not necessarily miss the tourney), but pretty much expect a re-appearance in 2011-12.

But it is awfully early for such talk - even from me! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 23, 2010, 02:32:22 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 22, 2010, 11:52:15 PM
We should also remember that these two losses were to good teams. UW-Platteville might end up being the 2nd best team in the WIAC. Augustana is rated #24 right now and I suspect they may be closer to a #15 team. They are just absolutely enormous, and it looks like this nucleus is starting to knock down perimeter shots.

There is a chance that once UAA play starts, Wash U won't see a single team as good as these two, or future non-conference opponent Illinois Wesleyan. Rebuilding or not, it sounds like they're still the favorite to win the UAA.

And I do feel strongly that the Bears will be a lot better in February than they are right now.

Platteville was picked 6th in the WIAC, while Eau Claire, whom Washington U. beat by 5(?) was picked 7th. Platteville lost two great guards in Curt Hanson and Mike Shaw. Not sure if Platteville will be the 2nd best team in the WIAC.

Is the UAA down that bad that Platteville will be better than any UAA opponent this year? Wow.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 23, 2010, 07:56:04 AM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on November 23, 2010, 02:32:22 AM
Platteville was picked 6th in the WIAC, while Eau Claire, whom Washington U. beat by 5(?) was picked 7th. Platteville lost two great guards in Curt Hanson and Mike Shaw. Not sure if Platteville will be the 2nd best team in the WIAC.

Is the UAA down that bad that Platteville will be better than any UAA opponent this year? Wow.

But Platteville did add two big pieces in 6-6 Joe Allen (http://uwmpanthers.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/mtt/allen_joe00.html) and 6-9 Chas Cross (Illinois small school 1st Team all-stater).

And as far as that WIAC preseason poll...

It has Whitewater #2, and after watching Whitewater vs Wheaton, I'm pretty sure that isn't going to happen.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 23, 2010, 08:57:34 AM

Just wanted to let everyone know that I am planning to post "How They Fared" again this season. I have to confirm that the d3hoops.com update did not "break" my program; it will probably need a few tweaks because of the new layout, but I think they should be minor. I plan to post a trial run tomorrow, and a final report Sunday night. (I'm assuming there will be a new poll coming out next Monday.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 23, 2010, 12:29:53 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 23, 2010, 07:56:04 AM
Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on November 23, 2010, 02:32:22 AM
Platteville was picked 6th in the WIAC, while Eau Claire, whom Washington U. beat by 5(?) was picked 7th. Platteville lost two great guards in Curt Hanson and Mike Shaw. Not sure if Platteville will be the 2nd best team in the WIAC.

Is the UAA down that bad that Platteville will be better than any UAA opponent this year? Wow.

But Platteville did add two big pieces in 6-6 Joe Allen (http://uwmpanthers.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/mtt/allen_joe00.html) and 6-9 Chas Cross (Illinois small school 1st Team all-stater).

And as far as that WIAC preseason poll...

It has Whitewater #2, and after watching Whitewater vs Wheaton, I'm pretty sure that isn't going to happen.

That Whitewater pick might be one of those "reputation" picks...

But it isn't to say it might not be warranted... Whitewater has won 5 of the last 10 conference titles with an average record of 11.3-4.7. They also have 3 2nd places and 2 4th places. They've gotten to 10 wins every year except one (8-8) and each year after taking 4th, they won the conference the next year.

Coach Miller has found a way, year after year to be competitive. I think this Whitewater team has some growth to go to be there... but I don't doubt that they will be by crunch time at the end of the year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 23, 2010, 12:33:19 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on November 23, 2010, 08:57:34 AM
Just wanted to let everyone know that I am planning to post "How They Fared" again this season. I have to confirm that the d3hoops.com update did not "break" my program; it will probably need a few tweaks because of the new layout, but I think they should be minor. I plan to post a trial run tomorrow, and a final report Sunday night. (I'm assuming there will be a new poll coming out next Monday.)

+1 Darryl! Thanks for doing the "How they fared" board.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 23, 2010, 02:44:02 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on November 23, 2010, 08:57:34 AM
Just wanted to let everyone know that I am planning to post "How They Fared" again this season. I have to confirm that the d3hoops.com update did not "break" my program; it will probably need a few tweaks because of the new layout, but I think they should be minor. I plan to post a trial run tomorrow, and a final report Sunday night. (I'm assuming there will be a new poll coming out next Monday.)

Alright Darryl. 8-) "How They Fared" is one of my favorite places to visit, especially once the Posters' Poll gets going. Glad you're back again.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 23, 2010, 05:13:15 PM

Add me to the chorus of voices who're glad you're doing "How They Fared" again, Darryl.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 23, 2010, 09:30:23 PM

After 3 straight road games #22 Plattsburgh defeats visiting Clarkson College 75-70 in their home opener to improve their season mark to 3-1. It marked Coach Tom Curle's 8th straight year that the Cardinals have won their home opener. Their 4 All- Conference players from last year continue to average double digit point totals. Errol Daniyan who scored his 1000th point last Friday led the Cardinals tonight with a double-double of 18 pts. and 17 boards. With tonight's totals Errol moved into 10th place on Plattsburgh's all-time scoring list(1036) and 10th place on the career rebounding chart (572). Plattsburgh is now off until they go back on the road Tuesday 11-30 and travel to Canton, NY to take on North Country rival St. Lawrence University.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 24, 2010, 08:28:06 AM

#5 Carthage vs #16 Whitworth tonight in Honolulu, 8:00pm HST.

Carthage (2-1)
G – Steve Djurickovic, 6-3 Sr (21.0 ppg, 4.0 rpg, 8.3 apg)
G – Malcolm Kelly, 6-0 So (14.0 ppg, 4.0 rpg)
G – Max Cary, 6-4 Jr (10.3 ppg, 3.0 rpg)
F – Mitch Thompson, 6-6 So (10.3 ppg, 5.3 rpg)
C – Tyler Pierce, 6-5 So (10.7 ppg, 5.0 rpg)

Whitworth (2-0)
G - Wade Gebbers, 5-11 So (9.0 ppg, 3.5 rpg)
G - Clay Gebbers, 6-1 Sr (5.5 ppg, 3.5 rpg)
F - David Riley, 6-5 Sr (16.5 ppg, 4.5 rpg)
F - Mike Taylor, 6-8 Jr (15.0 ppg, 2.5 rpg)
F - Felix Friedt, 6-8 Jr (9.5 ppg, 6.0 rpg)

http://www.clusports.com/pages/tournaments/2010SurfsUpClassicCentral.php

This will be the third Top 25 matchup of the young season (Carthage vs John Carroll, Augustana vs Wash U).

Quote from: Titan Q on November 16, 2010, 07:27:12 AM
Remaining Top 25 matchups in November and December...

Nov 24
#5 Carthage vs #16 Whitworth (in Honolulu)

Nov 27
#7 Franklin & Marshall @ #11 St. Mary's (Md)
#14 Anderson @ #24 Augustana

Dec 1
#2 Randolph-Macon vs #12 Virginia Wesleyan

Dec 3
#5 Carthage vs #17 Hope

Dec 4
#2 Randolph-Macon @ #3 Eastern Mennonite

Dec 8
#1 UW-Stevens Point vs #21 UW-Whitewater

Dec 11
#2 Randolph-Macon vs #19 Guilford

Dec 15
#21 UW-Whitewater @ #24 Augustana

Dec 18
#4 Illinois Wesleyan @ #20 Washington U.

Dec 20
#6 Wooster @ #14 Anderson

Dec 22
#1 UW-Stevens Point @ #13 St. Thomas

Dec 28
#6 Wooster vs #18 John Carroll

Dec 29
#19 Guilford @ #25 Manchester

Dec 30
#10 St. Norbert vs #24 Augustana (potential tournament matchup)

* 5 Top 25 teams do not face another Top 25 team in November and December -- Williams, Middlebury, MIT, Plattsburgh State, Texas-Dallas.

* Augustana will potentially play 4 games vs Top 25 teams in November and December...Randolph-Macon plays 3.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 24, 2010, 01:15:56 PM

Good work TQ

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 24, 2010, 01:45:05 PM

I know these teams aren't Top 25 but just in case you missed it Skidmore defeats Southern Vermont 128-123 in the longest game in Division III history. SEVEN overtime periods before this marathon is decided. They basically played a double header. See my post over on the East Region Liberty League board. One guy from Southern Vermont played the entire 75 minutes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 24, 2010, 01:49:01 PM

Quote from: magicman on November 24, 2010, 01:45:05 PM
I know these teams aren't Top 25 but just in case you missed it Skidmore defeats Southern Vermont 128-123 in the longest game in Division III history. SEVEN overtime periods before this marathon is decided. They basically played a double header. See my post over on the East Region Liberty League board. One guy from Southern Vermont played the entire 75 minutes.

See also the front page (http://www.d3hoops.com/landing/index); in case you missed it, it's the lead story.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 24, 2010, 02:17:33 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on November 24, 2010, 01:49:01 PM
Quote from: magicman on November 24, 2010, 01:45:05 PM
I know these teams aren't Top 25 but just in case you missed it Skidmore defeats Southern Vermont 128-123 in the longest game in Division III history. SEVEN overtime periods before this marathon is decided. They basically played a double header. See my post over on the East Region Liberty League board. One guy from Southern Vermont played the entire 75 minutes.

See also the front page (http://www.d3hoops.com/landing/index); in case you missed it, it's the lead story.

Thanks David,
I did miss it. When to ATN page instead. Still getting the hang of the new D3hoops format. ESPN also has a story about it. Here's the link:

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=5846042&categoryid=2459792

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 25, 2010, 12:13:50 AM

How They Fared

The inaugural report for 2010-11 should be considered a "beta test" (perhaps even alpha); it took a while to make my program read the new d3hoops format, and even then a few things went awry. Washington U.'s team page, which should be at
http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Washington%20U./men/2010-11/index
is missing, so my program could not track down those scores (and I was too lazy to do it on my own). Hopefully that will be sorted out by Sunday. (fixed now - thanks Pat!)

Also note that the current online scoreboard does not make any distinction for games played at neutral sites, so losses in such games will look the same as losses at home.

I removed teams with 3 or fewer votes simply because (after adding this lengthy explanation) I had exceeded the posting length limit.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	621	UW-Stevens Point	2-0	def. Lawrence, 79-59; def. St. John's (Minn.), 78-51; 11/27 vs. Edgewood
#2	575	Randolph-Macon	3-0	def. Marymount, 89-46; def. Shenandoah, 84-62; def. #42 Gettysburg, 56-42; 11/26 at UW-La Crosse; 11/27 at Wabash/Otterbein
#3	556	Eastern Mennonite	4-0	def. Shenandoah, 85-71; def. Penn St.-Brandywine, 124-71; def. Southern Va., 75-72; def. Lancaster Bible, 84-78; 11/27 at Emory and Henry
#4	511	Illinois Wesleyan	4-0	def. Benedictine, 78-64; def. Aurora, 78-76; def. T#48 Ripon, 82-74; def. Monmouth, 81-68; 11/27 vs. Dominican
#5	503	Carthage	2-1	def. Calumet-St. Joseph, 74-33; def. Bethany Lutheran, 108-92; LOST to #18 John Carroll, 69-70; 11/24 at #16 Whitworth; 11/26 vs. Pacific
#6	495	Wooster	2-0	def. Cincinnati Christian, 103-78; def. Bethany, 79-52; 11/27 vs. Ohio Northern; 11/28 vs. TBD
#7	446	Franklin and Marshall	3-0	def. Penn State-Abington, 91-50; def. Elmira, 96-52; def. Washington College, 84-57; 11/27 at #11 St. Mary's (Md.)
#8	384	Williams	3-0	def. Southern Vermont, 97-65; def. Regis (Mass.), 58-48; def. Wesleyan, 80-76; 11/28 vs. Massachusetts College
#9	350	Middlebury	3-0	def. Baruch, 63-60; def. Mass-Dartmouth, 86-62; def. St. Joseph (Vt.), 83-69; 11/28 vs. Johnson State
#10	348	St. Norbert	3-0	def. Marian, 67-55; def. UW-Oshkosh, 59-44; def. Elmhurst, 74-48
#11	341	St. Mary's (Md.)	2-1	def. Johns Hopkins, 73-66; def. Hood, 77-60; LOST to Frostburg State, 54-56; 11/27 vs. #7 Franklin and Marshall
#12	282	Virginia Wesleyan	5-0	def. Salisbury, 67-63; def. Averett, 68-59; def. T#57 Wesley, 96-80; def. Maryland Bible, 80-56; def. T#52 Christopher Newport, 79-57; 11/28 at Methodist
#13	244	St. Thomas	3-0	def. Concordia-St. Paul, 76-72; def. Pacific Lutheran, 73-70; def. Puget Sound, 69-49; 11/23 vs. T#45 UW-River Falls
#14	236	Anderson	2-0	def. Kalamazoo, 78-51; def. Olivet, 83-72; 11/27 at #24 Augustana
#15	202	MIT	2-1	def. Emmanuel, 91-61; LOST at Framingham State, 70-73; def. Curry, 90-63; 11/27 at Suffolk
#16	194	Whitworth	2-0	def. #33 Loras, 74-50; def. Trinity (Texas), 75-54; 11/24 vs. #5 Carthage; 11/27 vs. Luther
#17	177	Hope	0-1	LOST at Davenport, 67-81; 11/26 vs. Cornerstone; 11/27 at TBA
#18	176	John Carroll	3-0	def. Medaille, 82-70; def. Ind.-Northwest, 117-80; def. #5 Carthage, 70-69; 11/27 vs. Bethany; 11/28 vs. TBD
#19	174	Guilford	3-2	LOST to Greensboro, 73-76; def. Methodist, 77-53; def. McMurry, 75-60; LOST to Emory, 61-69; def. Averett, 61-52
#20	152	Washington U.	2-2	def. MacMurray, 79-57; def. UW-Eau Claire, 62-57; lost at UW-Platteville, 49-64; lost at Augustana, 55-78; 11/28 at Hanover (thanks, magicman)
#21	130	UW-Whitewater	2-1	def. Defiance, 95-91; LOST at #28 Wheaton (Ill.), 66-92; def. Wisconsin Lutheran, 82-67
#22	126	Plattsburgh State	3-1	def. Lyndon State, 100-81; LOST at T#48 Western Connecticut, 80-86; def. Wheelock, 86-69; def. Clarkson, 75-70
#23	111	Texas-Dallas	1-1	def. Austin, 98-84; LOST to Schreiner, 65-75; 11/27 vs. Howard Payne
#24	106	Augustana	2-0	def. Simpson, 85-66; def. #20 Washington U., 78-55; 11/27 vs. #14 Anderson
#25	78	Manchester	2-0	def. #28 Wheaton (Ill.), 79-60; def. Kalamazoo, 78-63; 11/28 vs. North Central (Ill.)

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	74	Worcester Polytech	3-1	def. Salem State, 78-62; def. Nichols, 73-45; lost at Becker, 62-61; def. Framingham State, 90-56
#27	67	Rhode Island College	3-1	LOST to Becker, 53-67; def. Clark, 63-49; def. Lasell, 70-47; def. T#52 Bridgewater State, 62-61
#28	66	Wheaton (Ill.)	3-1	LOST at #25 Manchester, 60-79; def. Covenant, 77-40; def. #21 UW-Whitewater, 92-66; def. #33 Loras, 79-63
#29	55	Brandeis	4-0	def. Lasell, 73-51; def. Newbury, 89-60; def. Curry, 81-69; def. Mass-Dartmouth, 71-69
#30	53	Carleton	0-1	LOST at Wartburg, 52-56; 11/26 at Hawaii Pacific; 11/28 at Chaminade
#31	41	Chapman	2-0	def. La Verne, 67-49; def. Redlands, 78-67; 11/26 at Azusa Pacific; 11/27 vs. Puget Sound
#32	32	Cabrini	2-0	def. Haverford, 84-75; def. Drew, 70-62
#33	30	Loras	0-3	LOST at Edgewood, 55-74; LOST at #16 Whitworth, 50-74; LOST at #28 Wheaton (Ill.), 63-79; 11/27 vs. St. Olaf; 11/28 at UW-Platteville
#34	29	William Paterson	3-1	def. FDU-Florham, 58-44; def. Emory and Henry, 55-32; LOST at Stevens, 52-63; def. New York City Tech, 57-42; 11/28 at Manhattanville
#35	27	Centre	3-1	def. Maryville (Tenn.), 76-75; def. LaGrange, 62-48; def. Huntingdon, 64-45; LOST to Transylvania, 51-56
T#36	16	Albright	2-1	LOST at Elmira, 70-77; def. Penn State-Abington, 105-67; def. King's, 57-48
T#36	16	DeSales	4-0	def. Penn State-Berks, 92-77; def. Penn St.-Schuylkill, 72-54; def. Alvernia, 77-74; def. Moravian, 70-64
T#38	11	Amherst	3-0	def. Maine-Farmington, 90-89; def. Castleton State, 56-34; def. Western New England, 93-64
T#38	11	Merchant Marine	2-2	def. Coast Guard, 83-72; LOST at SUNY-Maritime, 65-66; LOST at Carnegie Mellon, 67-70; def. Caltech, 67-59
#40	10	Ramapo	4-0	def. York (N.Y.), 70-60; def. Yeshiva, 76-54; def. Salve Regina, 88-68; def. Manhattanville, 83-74
#41	9	St. John Fisher	1-2	LOST at Mary Washington, 52-73; LOST at T#52 Christopher Newport, 65-69; def. Brockport State, 80-75
#42	8	Gettysburg	2-1	def. Penn State-Altoona, 79-39; LOST to #2 Randolph-Macon, 42-56; def. T#57 Muhlenberg, 74-67; 11/28 vs. York (Pa.)
#43	7	SUNYIT	0-2	LOST to Utica, 63-75; LOST to Medaille, 74-75
#44	6	Wittenberg	0-2	LOST at Ind.-East, 84-90; LOST at Capital, 56-80; 11/27 at Washington and Jefferson; 11/28 at TBD
T#45	4	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	1-0	def. Azusa Pacific, 81-79; 11/20 at Concordia-Irvine; 11/26 vs. Trinity (Texas); 11/27 at UC Santa Cruz
T#45	4	Franklin	2-2	def. Trine, 89-86; LOST at DePauw, 58-64; LOST at Wabash, 55-96; def. Millikin, 74-62; 11/27 vs. Cornell
T#45	4	UW-River Falls	3-0	def. Viterbo, 74-41; def. Simpson, 90-69; def. Northwestern (Minn.), 83-65; 11/23 at #13 St. Thomas; 11/26 at Southwestern

Other teams to watch (as suggested by posters on this board)

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
---	---	Bluffton	3-0	def. North Central (Ill.), 61-56; def. Valley City St., 87-72; def. Hiram, 71-60; 11/27 vs. Kalamazoo

Oh, shucks, how did that last one get on there? (Forgive me ... after a 2-23 campaign last season, our 3-0 start is one of the things I am thankful for this year.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 25, 2010, 01:25:02 AM

Darryl,
Here's the Washington U scores:

11-15 won at MacMurray 79-57

11-19 won vs. UW-Eau Claire 62-57

11-20 lost at UW-Platteville 49-64

11-22 lost at Augustana 55-78

11-28 at Hanover

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on November 25, 2010, 02:36:54 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 24, 2010, 08:28:06 AM
#5 Carthage vs #16 Whitworth tonight in Honolulu, 8:00pm HST.

Carthage (2-1)
G – Steve Djurickovic, 6-3 Sr (21.0 ppg, 4.0 rpg, 8.3 apg)
G – Malcolm Kelly, 6-0 So (14.0 ppg, 4.0 rpg)
G – Max Cary, 6-4 Jr (10.3 ppg, 3.0 rpg)
F – Mitch Thompson, 6-6 So (10.3 ppg, 5.3 rpg)
C – Tyler Pierce, 6-5 So (10.7 ppg, 5.0 rpg)

Whitworth (2-0)
G - Wade Gebbers, 5-11 So (9.0 ppg, 3.5 rpg)
G - Clay Gebbers, 6-1 Sr (5.5 ppg, 3.5 rpg)
F - David Riley, 6-5 Sr (16.5 ppg, 4.5 rpg)
F - Mike Taylor, 6-8 Jr (15.0 ppg, 2.5 rpg) WW has 2 Michael Taylor's. Starter is 6-5 Sr.
F - Felix Friedt, 6-8 Jr (9.5 ppg, 6.0 rpg)

http://www.clusports.com/pages/tournaments/2010SurfsUpClassicCentral.php

This will be the third Top 25 matchup of the young season (Carthage vs John Carroll, Augustana vs Wash U).

Middlebury, MIT, Plattsburgh State, Texas-Dallas.

* Augustana will potentially play 4 games vs Top 25 teams in November and December...Randolph-Macon plays 3.

WW leads 72-64 with 3:30 to play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on November 25, 2010, 02:58:10 AM

#5 Carthage vs #16 Whitworth tonight in Honolulu, 8:00pm HST.
Whitworth wins 81-69.

Michael Taylor leads with 26, David Riley 20 (18 second half). Whitworth out muscles and out rebounds Carthage by 16 and shoots 61% FG for game. Cladis leads CU with 15 and SD has 13.

Redman shoot 14-25 from stripe. WW 17-23 from the line.

Go Pirates!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 25, 2010, 07:12:00 AM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on November 25, 2010, 12:13:50 AM
... Washington U.'s team page, which should be at
http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Washington%20U./men/2010-11/index
is missing, so my program could not track down those scores (and I was too lazy to do it on my own). Hopefully that will be sorted out by Sunday.

15 minutes after I posted that (and less than an hour after I'd emailed him about it), Pat had this fixed.

Thanks for doing the leg work (or mousework?), magicman. I'll edit the posting to include those scores.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 25, 2010, 11:19:51 AM

No problem -- all of the team pages were set up by humans at PrestoSports and some of them I haven't even laid eyes on yet.

About 80 or so teams will have the incomplete schedules note and Gordon Mann and I continue to do the collecting and posting there. Unfortunately, yes, some schools do not participate with D3hoops.com, even ones that, say, have gotten gigantic front-page coverage from us in the past or even this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on November 25, 2010, 06:58:07 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on November 25, 2010, 12:13:50 AM

Also note that the current online scoreboard does not make any distinction for games played at neutral sites, so losses in such games will look the same as losses at home.

I noticed this too. This could be a bummer with the rumored home/neutral/away OWP adjustment. Pat, would it be possible (and not a ton of work) to add a neutral site designation on the team pages?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 26, 2010, 12:43:03 AM

Definitely possible since it was on our old site, which was fueled by the same data.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 27, 2010, 08:59:05 AM

Huge Midwest matchup tonight as #24 Augustana hosts #14 Anderson at 7:30pm.

#24 Augustana (2-0)
G – Brian DeSimone, 6-1 Jr (7.0 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 3.0 apg)
G – Chris Anderson, 6-4 Jr (17.0 ppg, 2.5 rpg)
F – Bryant Voilles, 6-9 Jr (9.5 ppg, 4.0 rpg, 4.5 apg)
F – Brandon Kunz, 6-7 So (7.0 ppg, 5.0 rpg
F – Kyle Nelson, 6-9 Sr (20.0 ppg, 8.5 rpg)

#14 Anderson (2-0)
G - Jarrin Forte, 6-0 Fr (11.5 ppg, 0.5 rpg, 2.0 apg)
G - Gabe Miller, 6-3 Sr (10.0 ppg, 5.0 rpg, 9.5 apg)
F - Brock Morrison, 6-3 Jr (15.0 ppg, 9.5 rpg)
F - Andrew Bowman, 6-7 Sr (14.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg)
C - Andrew Jones, 6-6 Sr (16.5 ppg, 3.5 rpg)

I believe when all is said and done, either Anderson or St. Norbert will be considered the best Augie non-conference opponent (better than UW-Whitewater and Wash U). Last year the Vikings won by 7 at Anderson, so you have to think Augie is a clear favorite tonight.

Listen live (http://www.hearitfromhome.com/)

Live stats (http://www.augustana.edu/athletics/mbasketball/xlive.htm)

Also today, #7 vs #11...

Quote from: Titan Q on November 16, 2010, 07:27:12 AM
Remaining Top 25 matchups in November and December...

Nov 27
#7 Franklin & Marshall @ #11 St. Mary's (Md)
#14 Anderson @ #24 Augustana

Dec 1
#2 Randolph-Macon vs #12 Virginia Wesleyan

Dec 3
#5 Carthage vs #17 Hope

Dec 4
#2 Randolph-Macon @ #3 Eastern Mennonite

Dec 8
#1 UW-Stevens Point vs #21 UW-Whitewater

Dec 11
#2 Randolph-Macon vs #19 Guilford

Dec 15
#21 UW-Whitewater @ #24 Augustana

Dec 18
#4 Illinois Wesleyan @ #20 Washington U.

Dec 20
#6 Wooster @ #14 Anderson

Dec 22
#1 UW-Stevens Point @ #13 St. Thomas

Dec 28
#6 Wooster vs #18 John Carroll

Dec 29
#19 Guilford @ #25 Manchester

Dec 30
#10 St. Norbert vs #24 Augustana (potential tournament matchup)

* 5 Top 25 teams do not face another Top 25 team in November and December -- Williams, Middlebury, MIT, Plattsburgh State, Texas-Dallas.

* Augustana will potentially play 4 games vs Top 25 teams in November and December...Randolph-Macon plays 3.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on November 27, 2010, 02:51:42 PM

Final: #6 Wooster 67 Ohio Northern 53

Wooster wins this neutral site game easily as they are led by Ian Franks with 20 points, Nathan Balch with 15 points and Bryan Wickliffe with 11 points.

Scots are 3-0 and play in the tourney championship game tomorrow vs the Carnegie Mellon/Susquehanna winner.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on November 27, 2010, 04:07:52 PM

Wabash College, off to a solid 5-0 start (against generally light competition), rattled off a 10-0 run to end the half and take a 36-26 lead into the locker room against #2 Randolph-Macon in the championship game of the Pete Thorn Tournament at Wabash.

I was going to post earlier that 'Bash might deserve some voting consideration if they simply managed to stay close to Randy-Mac today, and so far so good.

UPDATE:
(wooscotsfan beat me to the headline!)

Final:
Wabash 60
Randolph-Macon 45

Wabash immediately ran the lead out to about 20 at the start of the second half and never looked back, generally holding the lead between 15-20 the rest of the way. A great game for Wabash's Wes Smith (27pts, 9 boards), who already had 25 pts when RMC only had 28 as a team.

RMC falls to 4-1. Wabash improves to 6-0, and will probably start generating some Top 25 discussion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on November 27, 2010, 05:00:46 PM

Final: Wabash 60 #2 Randolph-Macon 45

Wabash pulls the big upset as the Little Giants win their own tourney. Little Giants are now 6-0 and deserve votes in the next Top 25 poll! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 27, 2010, 09:17:38 PM

#18 John Carroll survives an upset bid at home, outlasting Bethany (2-3), 90-85. JCU figures to be tested again tomorrow as they face Michael McClary and Olivet (3-2).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on November 27, 2010, 11:33:02 PM

WW follows up the victory over Carthage with another win in Hawaii, 86-67 over Luther.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 28, 2010, 06:23:17 AM

Claremont-Mudd-Scripps fresh off its' defeat of Azusa Pacific and Trinity (Texas) gets edged by UC Santa Cruz 62-60 on Sat. night.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 28, 2010, 09:38:50 AM

#24 Augustana 74
#14 Anderson 69

(at Augie)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 28, 2010, 02:38:55 PM

Clicked on the live stats of a game between Manhattenville and William Paterson powered by Sidearm Sports. They are showing Manhattenville playing Ramapo with 6 minutes to go in the 1st half. I was a little confused as it was a game we chose this week in our pick ems contest and was sure we didn't make a mistake. Went to William Paterson's roster to see if the players listed on the live stats page were from Ramapo or Willie Paterson. Sure enough they are William Paterson's players. Apparently Sidearm doesn't know who's playng who. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 28, 2010, 03:41:36 PM

Two Top 25 halftime scores from different parts of the Hoosier state...

Hanover 26
#20 Wash U 20 (Dylan Richter started this game for the Bears)

http://vault.hanover.edu/~lackner/live/

North Central 39
#25 Manchester 28

http://mysite.ncnetwork.net/res1vacp/xlive.htm

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 28, 2010, 04:24:32 PM

Upset alert: Carnegie Mellon leads #6 Wooster by 7 with about 8 minutes left. Audio. (http://www.wkvx.com/)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on November 28, 2010, 04:26:17 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on November 28, 2010, 04:24:32 PM
Upset alert: Carnegie Mellon leads #6 Wooster by 7 with about 8 minutes left. Audio. (http://www.wkvx.com/)

Olivet leads #18 John Carroll 75-68 with 2:42 to play.

Final. Olivet over JCU 86-79.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 28, 2010, 04:40:58 PM

Final...

Hanover 56
#20 Wash U 52

Wash U with its third loss in a row (@ UW-Platteville, @ Augustana, @ Hanover). When is the last time that happened?

And I wonder when the last time Wash U scored just 52 points?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 28, 2010, 04:42:11 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on November 27, 2010, 09:17:38 PMJCU figures to be tested again tomorrow as they face Michael McClary and Olivet (3-2).

Told ya. ;)

Wooster has caught fire on both ends and now leads by 6 with 0:42 left.
UPDATE: Despite playing only about 5 minutes of good basketball, #6 Wooster survives lightly-regarded CMU 71-68.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 28, 2010, 04:56:39 PM

Final...

North Central 84
#25 Manchester 73

Manchester beat Wheaton by 19 on the same floor on Nov. 16...since then Wheaton has blown out UW-Whitewater and Loras.

Coming into this game North Central was 0-4, with home losses to Bluffton, Edgewood, and Aurora, and road loss yesterday to Illinois College.

Go figure.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 28, 2010, 05:05:37 PM

Wash U is 0-2 on the non-conference swing I talked about recently, with 3 tough ones left...

Quote from: Titan Q on November 21, 2010, 01:32:44 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on November 21, 2010, 11:52:13 AM
...and I'd be very surprised to find Washington U. outside the poll in February.

I think it depends on two things, David.

1) How many losses will the Bears rack up in these non-conference games...

* Nov. 22, @ Augustana
* Nov. 28, @ Hanover
* Dec. 4, vs Claremont-Mudd-Scripps
* Dec. 11, @ Wheaton
* Dec. 18, vs Illinois Wesleyan

and,

2) In what appears to be a down year in the UAA, is Wash U (picked as the favorite) truly better than everyone else, or is there some parity near the top? In other words, will the Bears go, say, 12-2 or will they go 9-5?

Wash U does appear to have some very serious questions right now in their rotation...depth maybe being the biggie.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 28, 2010, 05:09:31 PM

Today's scoreboard is showing Middlebury losing to Johnson St. 38-18 at the half. That score should be reversed. Middlebury is now up 45-20 with 16:45 left to play in the game.

http://cat.middlebury.edu/~sports/livestats/basketball/xlive.htm

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 28, 2010, 07:24:43 PM

#9 Middlebury remains unbeaten at 3-0 as they crush Johnson State 86-31.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 28, 2010, 07:36:44 PM

Quote from: magicman on November 28, 2010, 05:09:31 PM
Today's scoreboard is showing Middlebury losing to Johnson St. 38-18 at the half. That score should be reversed. Middlebury is now up 45-20 with 16:45 left to play in the game.

System is only as good as the school punching it in.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 28, 2010, 08:21:07 PM

How They Fared

~~One game missing (Carleton vs. Chaminade), but as Carleton is 0-2 going into that game, I am guessing their results vs. an NCAA D2 school are not needed. (Unless, of course, they win.)~~ (Result edited in below, FWIW.)

The report is split because it ran over the 16000 character limit. Next week's report should have fewer schools.

As noted before, this report does not include any designation for games on neutral sites. If this is added to the d3hoops scoreboard, I will restore that feature to my program as quickly as I can.

Note also that this report does NOT note which games went to overtime (it did last year). This information IS available on the d3hoops scoreboard pages, and I hope to restore that functionality to my program in the next week.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	621	UW-Stevens Point	3-0	def. Lawrence, 79-59; def. St. John's, 78-51; def. Edgewood, 84-49
#2	575	Randolph-Macon	4-1	def. Marymount, 89-46; def. Shenandoah, 84-62; def. #42 Gettysburg, 56-42; def. UW-La Crosse, 71-47; LOST at Wabash, 45-60
#3	556	Eastern Mennonite	5-0	def. Shenandoah, 85-71; def. Penn St.-Brandywine, 124-71; def. Southern Va., 75-72; def. Lancaster Bible, 84-78; def. Emory and Henry, 77-63
#4	511	Illinois Wesleyan	5-0	def. Benedictine, 78-64; def. Aurora, 78-76; def. T#48 Ripon, 82-74; def. Monmouth, 81-68; def. Dominican, 83-70
#5	503	Carthage	3-2	def. Calumet-St. Joseph, 74-33; def. Bethany Lutheran, 108-92; LOST to #18 John Carroll, 69-70; LOST at #16 Whitworth, 69-81; def. Pacific, 82-75
#6	495	Wooster	4-0	def. Cincinnati Christian, 103-78; def. Bethany, 79-52; def. Ohio Northern, 67-53; def. Carnegie Mellon, 71-68
#7	446	Franklin and Marshall	3-1	def. Penn State-Abington, 91-50; def. Elmira, 96-52; def. Washington College, 84-57; LOST at #11 St. Mary's (Md.), 77-96
#8	384	Williams	4-0	def. Southern Vermont, 97-65; def. Regis (Mass.), 58-48; def. Wesleyan, 80-76; def. Massachusetts College, 95-60
#9	350	Middlebury	4-0	def. Baruch, 63-60; def. Mass-Dartmouth, 86-62; def. St. Joseph (Vt.), 83-69; def. Johnson State, 86-31
#10	348	St. Norbert	3-0	def. Marian, 67-55; def. UW-Oshkosh, 59-44; def. Elmhurst, 74-48
#11	341	St. Mary's (Md.)	3-1	def. Johns Hopkins, 73-66; def. Hood, 77-60; LOST to Frostburg State, 54-56; def. #7 Franklin and Marshall, 96-77
#12	282	Virginia Wesleyan	6-0	def. Salisbury, 67-63; def. Averett, 68-59; def. T#57 Wesley, 96-80; def. Maryland Bible, 80-56; def. T#52 Christopher Newport, 79-57; def. Methodist, 81-71
#13	244	St. Thomas	4-0	def. Concordia-St. Paul, 76-72; def. Pacific Lutheran, 73-70; def. Puget Sound, 69-49; def. T#45 UW-River Falls, 65-60
#14	236	Anderson	2-1	def. Kalamazoo, 78-51; def. Olivet, 83-72; LOST at #24 Augustana, 69-74
#15	202	MIT	3-1	def. Emmanuel, 91-61; LOST at Framingham State, 70-73; def. Curry, 90-63; def. Suffolk, 86-47
#16	194	Whitworth	4-0	def. #33 Loras, 74-50; def. Trinity (Texas), 75-54; def. #5 Carthage, 81-69; def. Luther, 86-67
#17	177	Hope	1-2	LOST at Davenport, 67-81; LOST to Cornerstone, 76-85; def. Aquinas, 92-69
#18	176	John Carroll	4-1	def. Medaille, 82-70; def. Ind.-Northwest, 117-80; def. #5 Carthage, 70-69; def. Bethany, 90-85; LOST to Olivet, 79-86
#19	174	Guilford	3-2	LOST to Greensboro, 73-76; def. Methodist, 77-53; def. McMurry, 75-60; LOST to Emory, 61-69; def. Averett, 61-52
#20	152	Washington U.	2-3	def. MacMurray, 79-57; def. UW-Eau Claire, 62-57; LOST at UW-Platteville, 49-64; LOST at #24 Augustana, 55-78; LOST at Hanover, 52-56
#21	130	UW-Whitewater	2-1	def. Defiance, 95-91; LOST at #28 Wheaton (Ill.), 66-92; def. Wisconsin Lutheran, 82-67
#22	126	Plattsburgh State	3-1	def. Lyndon State, 100-81; LOST at T#48 Western Connecticut, 80-86; def. Wheelock, 86-69; def. Clarkson, 75-70
#23	111	Texas-Dallas	2-1	def. Austin, 98-84; LOST to Schreiner, 65-75; def. Howard Payne, 92-50
#24	106	Augustana	3-0	def. Simpson, 85-66; def. #20 Washington U., 78-55; def. #14 Anderson, 74-69
#25	78	Manchester	2-1	def. #28 Wheaton (Ill.), 79-60; def. Kalamazoo, 78-63; LOST to North Central (Ill.), 73-84

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 28, 2010, 08:23:22 PM

How They Fared (cont'd): Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	74	Worcester Polytech	3-1	def. Salem State, 78-62; def. Nichols, 73-45; LOST at Becker, 61-62; def. Framingham State, 90-56
#27	67	Rhode Island College	3-1	LOST to Becker, 53-67; def. Clark, 63-49; def. Lasell,70-47; def. T#52 Bridgewater State, 62-61
#28	66	Wheaton (Ill.)	3-1	LOST at #25 Manchester, 60-79; def. Covenant, 77-40; def. #21 UW-Whitewater, 92-66; def. #33 Loras, 79-63
#29	55	Brandeis	4-0	def. Lasell, 73-51; def. Newbury, 89-60; def. Curry, 81-69; def. Mass-Dartmouth, 71-69
#30	53	Carleton	0-3	LOST at Wartburg, 52-56; LOST at Hawaii Pacific, 60-66; LOST at Chaminade, 50-65
#31	41	Chapman	3-1	def. La Verne, 67-49; def. Redlands, 78-67; LOST to Azusa Pacific, 69-78; def. Puget Sound, 77-70
#32	32	Cabrini	2-0	def. Haverford, 84-75; def. Drew, 70-62
#33	30	Loras	1-4	LOST at Edgewood, 55-74; LOST at #16 Whitworth, 50-74; LOST at #28 Wheaton (Ill.), 63-79; LOST at St. Olaf, 65-79; def. UW-Platteville, 63-61
#34	29	William Paterson	3-2	def. FDU-Florham, 58-44; def. Emory and Henry, 55-32; LOST at Stevens, 52-63; def. New York City Tech, 57-42; LOST at Manhattanville, 54-67
#35	27	Centre	3-1	def. Maryville (Tenn.), 76-75; def. LaGrange, 62-48; def. Huntingdon, 64-45; LOST to Transylvania, 51-56
T#36	16	Albright	2-1	LOST at Elmira, 70-77; def. Penn State-Abington, 105-67; def. King's, 57-48
T#36	16	DeSales	4-0	def. Penn State-Berks, 92-77; def. Penn St.-Schuylkill, 72-54; def. Alvernia, 77-74; def. Moravian, 70-64
T#38	11	Amherst	3-0	def. Maine-Farmington, 90-89; def. Castleton State, 56-34; def. Western New England, 93-64
T#38	11	Merchant Marine	2-2	def. Coast Guard, 83-72; LOST at SUNY-Maritime, 65-66; LOST at Carnegie Mellon, 67-70; def. Caltech, 67-59
#40	10	Ramapo	4-0	def. York (N.Y.), 70-60; def. Yeshiva, 76-54; def. Salve Regina, 88-68; def. Manhattanville, 83-74
#41	9	St. John Fisher	1-2	LOST at Mary Washington, 52-73; LOST at T#52 Christopher Newport, 65-69; def. Brockport State, 80-75
#42	8	Gettysburg	3-1	def. Penn State-Altoona, 79-39; LOST to #2 Randolph-Macon, 42-56; def. T#57 Muhlenberg, 74-67; def. York (Pa.), 67-54
#43	7	SUNYIT	0-2	LOST to Utica, 63-75; LOST to Medaille, 74-75
#44	6	Wittenberg	1-3	LOST at Ind.-East, 84-90; LOST at Capital, 56-80; def. Washington and Jefferson, 67-57; LOST at Rochester, 57-62
T#45	4	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	2-1	def. Azusa Pacific, 81-79; 11/20 at Concordia-Irvine (postponed); def. Trinity (Texas), 76-63; LOST at UC Santa Cruz, 60-62
T#45	4	Franklin	2-3	def. Trine, 89-86; LOST at DePauw, 58-64; LOST at Wabash, 55-96; def. Millikin, 74-62; LOST to Cornell, 69-73
T#45	4	UW-River Falls	4-1	def. Viterbo, 74-41; def. Simpson, 90-69; def. Northwestern (Minn.), 83-65; LOST at #13 St. Thomas, 60-65; def. Southwestern, 76-56
T#48	3	Calvin	3-3	LOST at Davenport, 79-88; LOST to Grace Bible (Mich.), 63-64; def. Ohio Wesleyan, 87-60; def. Aquinas, 61-44; def. Cornerstone, 81-76
T#48	3	Farmingdale State	1-2	LOST at Virginia-Wise, 76-84; def. Methodist, 89-82; LOST at Baruch, 70-77
T#48	3	Ripon	2-1	def. Buena Vista, 85-75; LOST at #4 Illinois Wesleyan, 74-82; def. Marian, 99-66
T#48	3	Western Connecticut	4-1	def. SUNY-Cobleskill, 98-67; def. Mitchell, 89-69; def. #22 Plattsburgh State, 86-80; LOST at Manhattanville, 74-81; def. Colby, 87-66
T#52	2	Bridgewater State	2-2	def. Western New England, 95-64; LOST to King's, 69-75; def. Penn College, 109-78; LOST at #27 Rhode Island College, 61-62
T#52	2	Chicago	1-4	LOST at Dominican, 73-74; def. Hanover, 84-66; LOST to Denison, 65-66; LOST at Lake Forest, 58-76; LOST to St. John's, 87-90
T#52	2	Christopher Newport	4-1	def. Lynchburg, 108-100; def. #41 St. John Fisher, 69-65; LOST at #12 Virginia Wesleyan, 57-79; def. Bridgewater (Va.), 87-73; def. T#57 Wesley, 83-79
T#52	2	Heidelberg	2-2	def. Ohio Wesleyan, 58-57; LOST at Grace Bible (Mich.), 66-76; def. Albion, 66-62; LOST at Trine, 67-72
T#52	2	New York University	3-0	def. Moravian, 84-53; def. Cortland State, 70-61; def. SUNY-Old Westbury, 83-81
T#57	1	Case Western Reserve	1-5	def. Baldwin-Wallace, 85-64; LOST to Washington and Jefferson, 55-57; LOST to Rose-Hulman, 63-71; LOST at Denison, 70-78; LOST to Olivet, 69-86; LOST to Bethany, 55-81
T#57	1	Ferrum	4-0	def. Lynchburg, 74-46; def. Warren Wilson, 72-56; def. Roanoke, 81-73; def. Emory and Henry, 88-81
T#57	1	Muhlenberg	3-1	def. Moravian, 68-60; def. Rosemont, 72-49; def. Gallaudet, 80-51; LOST to #42 Gettysburg, 67-74
T#57	1	Ursinus	2-2	LOST to Staten Island, 64-71; LOST at Anna Maria, 76-91; def. McDaniel, 63-61; def. Eastern, 73-67
T#57	1	Wesley	2-3	def. Washington College, 94-67; LOST to #12 Virginia Wesleyan, 80-96; LOST at North Carolina Wesleyan, 62-71; def. York (N.Y.), 75-66; LOST at T#52 Christopher Newport, 79-83

Other teams to watch (as suggested by posters on this board)

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
---	---	Wabash	6-0	def. Marian (Ind.), 66-51; def. Earlham, 73-58; def. T#45 Franklin, 96-55; def. Hanover, 68-55; def. Otterbein, 71-54; def. #2 Randolph-Macon, 60-45

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 28, 2010, 08:56:48 PM

Darryl, I can't thank you enough for doing "How they fared" again!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 28, 2010, 09:03:57 PM

So in anticipation of a Top 25 ballot tomorrow, I would love for as many posters as possible to submit two simple lists here:

Overrated Teams

Preseason Top 25 teams that are either too high, or don't belong in the Top 25 at all. Since "receiving votes" teams are not rated, they should not be listed here.

Underrated Teams

Teams that are in the preseason Top 25 but too low, or teams not in that should be.

If a team is currently ranked about where they should be, no need to list anywhere. You're just noting the teams you feel strongly about one way or the other (overrated or underrated).

Also, no need to provide commentary on each team if you don't want (if you do, great)...two simple lists is great.

Interested to see what people think. Thanks!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on November 28, 2010, 09:32:36 PM

Titan Q - thanks for the opportunity; here are some thoughts.

Overrated Teams:
Washington University - 3 Losses, Rebuilding and not Top 25 right now
UW Whitewater - Graduated Stars, Thumped by Wheaton, 2 Unimpressive Wins against average/weak teams
Guilford - 2 Losses already, Rebuilding

Underrated Teams:
Wabash 6-0 Impressive Win over #2 Randolph-Macon, will challenge Wooster in NCAC
Capital 4-0 #2 Team in the OAC?
DePauw 4-0 Plays Wabash in next week
Amherst 3-0

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on November 28, 2010, 09:54:47 PM

Here you go Titan.

Overrated Teams

#2 575 Randolph-Macon 4-1 maybe 5-10 high
#5 503 Carthage 3-2 maybe 10 high
#7 446 Franklin and Marshall 3-1 maybe 5 high
#11 341 St. Mary's (Md.) 3-1 maybe 2-3 high
#14 236 Anderson 2-1 maybe 5 high
#17 177 Hope 1-2 probably 20 high
#19 174 Guilford 3-2 maybe 5 high
#20 152 Washington U. 2-3 probably 20 high
#22 126 Plattsburgh State 3-1 maybe 2-3 high
T#38 11 Merchant Marine 2-2 probably 10 high

Underrated Teams

#12 282 Virginia Wesleyan 6-0 maybe 5 low
#16 194 Whitworth 4-0 probably 10 low
#18 176 John Carroll maybe 2-3 low
#24 106 Augustana 3-0 probably 10 low
#28 66 Wheaton (Ill.) 3-1 maybe 5-10 low
#29 55 Brandeis 4-0 maybe 5 low
#31 41 Chapman 3-1 maybe 5 low
T#36 16 DeSales 4-0 probably 10-15 low
T#38 11 Amherst 3-0 maybe 10 low
#40 10 Ramapo 4-0 probably 10-15 low
#42 8 Gettysburg 3-1 maybe 10 low
T#45 4 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps 2-1 maybe 10-20 low
T#45 4 UW-River Falls 4-1 def. maybe 15-20 low
T#48 3 Ripon 2-1 maybe 15 low
T#52 2 Christopher Newport 4-1 maybe 15 low

Wabash 6-0 top20 team
Capital 4-0 top25 team
DePauw 4-0 top25 team
Amherst 3-0 top25 team

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 28, 2010, 10:05:46 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 28, 2010, 08:56:48 PM
Darryl, I can't thank you enough for doing "How they fared" again!

His effort is worthy of generous karma by the readers! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on November 29, 2010, 12:27:24 AM

New England has gone roughly according to form. Williams and Middlebury are both probably about right. Amherst is too low but they really had to start low after a poor season last year. They have top 25 talent, and probably belong in the 20-25 area. MIT and WPI both suffered VERY surprising early season losses, but I still think that at least MIT is a deserved top 20 team and, once their star center returns to health (hopefully), they should go on a major roll. RIC has lost once as well, although they've rebounded well since then. Brandeis is probably the most underrated New England team, no surprise in light of how many players they lost, but their frosh class is clearly legit and ready to make huge contributions right away. Could easily climb into the top 25 soon, especially playing in an uncharacteristically weak UAA.

The one New England sleeper to really watch out for is Keene State. They are 4-0, thumping all four opponents, and without last year's star (and the leading scorer in the LEC) Derek D'Amours. Not sure when he is scheduled to return, or even what the issue is. Keene brought in a D-II transfer second semester last year, and THREE scholarship transfers (including two D-1 transfers) before tihs season, to add to a pretty solid homegrown talent base, including D'Amours as well as last year's LEC rookie of the year. All four transfers are playing substantial roles already. A team that no one talked about before the season, but they could make major waves in New England this year, and even possibly nationally depending on how fast they come together as a team. I can't recall any team in the eastern portion of D-III bringing in so much transfer talent at once since the infamous Rowan teams of yore ... all that being said, probably need to win a few more before they are a top 25 candidate.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on November 29, 2010, 12:51:13 AM

2 cents worth

Over rated

Carleton
Carthage
Case Western
Chicago
Franklin
Guilford
Loras
Wash U
Wittenberg

Under rated

Augustana
Brandeis
Ramapo
UW River Falls
Wabash
Whitworth

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 29, 2010, 01:05:53 AM

Quote from: frodotwo on November 29, 2010, 12:51:13 AM
2 cents worth

Over rated

Carleton
Carthage
Case Western
Chicago
Franklin
Guilford
Loras
Wash U
Wittenberg

Under rated

Augustana
Brandeis
Ramapo
UW River Falls
Wabash
Whitworth

While Carthage will take a big fall in the next poll, I'm not at all sure that they are overrated in the long run. They have incontestably the best player in d3 (coach's son, Steve Djurickovic), and once his teammates adjust to him being TRIPLE-teamed, and score when open, they should be fine. They are still gonna give IWU a heckuva run for the CCIW title (as will Augie and Wheaton).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 29, 2010, 05:33:21 PM

One underrated team to keep an eye on is UW Superior. They're 4-1, with the one loss being to D-II (and quasi-crosstown rival Minnesota Duluth).

I'm not sure if they have proven themselves enough to be in the poll because the best team they've beaten is Gustavus Adolphus at 2-2. They host River Falls (who appears to be great against any team not named St. Thomas... 0-2 vs. schools with that name!) on Wednesday in a game that could show us something about each of these schools.

For both River Falls and Superior, after their head-to-head matchup, they have tough draws on Saturday... Superior has to make their longest conference trip of the year, to Platteville (which, after a 4-0 start, lost to 0-4 Loras last night... hmm...) and River Falls hosts Stevens Point.

Stout may also be a team to watch. They're 3-0 against D-III competition but 0-2 against D-II and NAIA-II comp. They host Stevens Point Wednesday and Whitewater on Saturday. Last year, they beat both of these teams (both ranked in the top 10) in the same week!

All of that is to say... that it's pretty unclear who the top half of the WIAC will be this year (and thus who will be #2 or #3, etc). I can see any number of teams rising to that spot (Whitewater, River Falls, Superior, Stout, Platteville, or ~~La Crosse~~).

Eh, maybe not La Crosse... they've started 2-4, and though they've got the conference's top scorer, they don't have much else. We'll have to see if they have better success in the league than they did outside of it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 29, 2010, 06:04:30 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 28, 2010, 05:05:37 PM
Wash U is 0-2 on the non-conference swing I talked about recently, with 3 tough ones left...

Quote from: Titan Q on November 21, 2010, 01:32:44 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on November 21, 2010, 11:52:13 AM
...and I'd be very surprised to find Washington U. outside the poll in February.

I think it depends on two things, David.

1) How many losses will the Bears rack up in these non-conference games...

* Nov. 22, @ Augustana
* Nov. 28, @ Hanover
* Dec. 4, vs Claremont-Mudd-Scripps
* Dec. 11, @ Wheaton
* Dec. 18, vs Illinois Wesleyan

and,

2) In what appears to be a down year in the UAA, is Wash U (picked as the favorite) truly better than everyone else, or is there some parity near the top? In other words, will the Bears go, say, 12-2 or will they go 9-5?

Wash U does appear to have some very serious questions right now in their rotation...depth maybe being the biggie.

CMS may not be as tough a foe for the Bears as initially thought; according to the SCIAC room, the Stags' star player, All-Region pick Chris Blees, blew out his knee and is done for the year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: stag44 on November 29, 2010, 06:31:01 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 29, 2010, 06:04:30 PM

CMS may not be as tough a foe for the Bears as initially thought; according to the SCIAC room, the Stags' star player, All-Region pick Chris Blees, blew out his knee and is done for the year.

tough break for the stags... hopefully they can come up with their first EVER win against Wash U this weekend. I'll be travelling down for the weekend, so hope to see any of you down there.

The Stags were primed to bust into the top 25 as well, but the unfortunate injury and subsequent loss to UC Santa Cruz will hinder many votes for them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: oldchap on November 29, 2010, 07:15:42 PM

I know I will sound like an inveterate homer, but I'll do it anyway. I also risk having eggs on my face by the end of the season, but I don't care... :D

Chapman for most of last season, except for the very beginning when no one really believed or even realized the true value of the team, hovered at the bottom half of the Top 25 rankings. While I think there is a huge gap between the top half and the bottom half of the rankings, I do believe that Chapman's team this year is every bit as good as last year's and therefore should appear somewhere in the Top 25 (20-25 would be fair). Sure, they lost 3 senior starters this year, but they are also returning 8 players, some of which were getting significant play time in past seasons and are showing huge improvement so far. Most importantly they are returning Riley and Ramme, who in my view, are both contenders for All-Independent First Team, perhaps even MVP's.

So far they lost to LMU, a division I team, in a close exhibition game that was hotly contested and have won against 3 Division III teams. If they stay healthy and don't have an off-night (Indenpendents biggest fear), they could very well qualify as a Pool B contender for their second post-season tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on November 30, 2010, 12:17:19 PM

Top 25 is out:

http://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2010-11/week1

Lots of movement this week, as expected (14 of the previous Top 25 teams lost at least 1 game since the last release, 7 of them dropped out of this weeks rankings).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on November 30, 2010, 12:52:10 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on November 30, 2010, 12:17:19 PM
Top 25 is out:
http://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2010-11/week1
Lots of movement this week, as expected (14 of the previous Top 25 teams lost at least 1 game since the last release, 7 of them dropped out of this weeks rankings).

Top 25's Big Risers:

School

amount

Wabash	+35
Christopher Newport	+23
Ramapo	+18
Amherst	+15
Augustana	+12
DeSales	+12
Brandeis	+10
Wheaton	+7
Whitworth	+6

bold previously ranked

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ethelred the Unready on November 30, 2010, 01:11:00 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on November 30, 2010, 12:52:10 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on November 30, 2010, 12:17:19 PM
Top 25 is out:
http://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2010-11/week1
Lots of movement this week, as expected (14 of the previous Top 25 teams lost at least 1 game since the last release, 7 of them dropped out of this weeks rankings).

Biggest movers up in Top 25:

Wabash +35
Christopher Newport +23
Ramapo +18
Amherst +15
Augustana +12
DeSales +12
Brandeis +10
Wheaton +7
Whitworth +6

bold previously ranked

And still, Rust gets no love.....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 30, 2010, 04:51:32 PM

Quote from: Ethelred the Unready on November 30, 2010, 01:11:00 PM
And still, Rust gets no love.....

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ft0.gstatic.com%2Fimages%3Fq%3Dtbn%3AANd9GcQJgTM4Nwi7VeRekjZogEHHoQL_KMWkz6gg_9P1NVEaDZdqFrskzw&hash=b416d11ef1d309c3fb38841db2e5db59880f8aa6)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 30, 2010, 05:44:46 PM

Quote from: oldchap on November 29, 2010, 07:15:42 PM
I know I will sound like an inveterate homer

That's better than sounding like an invertebrate homer. As we all know from your classic battles with OxyBob, you certainly have a spine! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 30, 2010, 07:23:01 PM

So, with so many teams dropping out this week, it begs the question: what is the record for most amount of teams dropping out in one week? I might guess it could happen during the last poll of the year after the tournament is done. So maybe we should qualify it as regular season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 01, 2010, 12:07:05 AM

#26 Plattsburgh State travels to St. Lawrence and beats the Saints 62-58 to move to 4-1 on the year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on December 01, 2010, 08:17:15 AM

I'm going to put the question out there .... and it's very scarey as I hate to ruffle feathers... but... should TQ's IWU team be on the over rated list.... they've run up a 6-0 record against a group of opponents that could be regarded in the midwest as mediocre at best, not yet playing any of the higher profile Wisconsin schools, or the DePauws, Hopes, Calvins, Wash U's... and each of their wins have either been close, or of the 10-15 point margin... hardly runaways.... Johnson and Sexauer both looked good at Webster, but hardly at the All American Level that TQ has preached.... Great depth, great intensity, well coached, yes.... but top 5 in the nation, right now, I'm not so sure...... I'd say more at the 7-15 level... remember, this team couldn't match Webster's quickness , couldn't defend an athletic 2/3 man when he posted, couldn't defend a thin frosh 6'5" pivot man who could not be described as athletic or a leaper.... and each time I hear that someone was playing sick or the officiating was lopsided, I lose a tad more respect for the objectivity of whomever writes it.....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 01, 2010, 12:06:07 PM

Brandeis needed some late game heroics, and a last second layup in OT, to beat Clark (out of the NEWMAC) at home. Almost a huge night for the NEWMAC, as Springfield beat previously unbeaten Keene St. on the road. MIT and WPI also had blowout wins. MIT is still without injured All-American Noel Hollingsworth, who is out with an ankle injury (but will likely return at some point this month).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 01, 2010, 12:10:11 PM

Quote from: hopefan on December 01, 2010, 08:17:15 AM
I'm going to put the question out there .... and it's very scarey as I hate to ruffle feathers... but... should TQ's IWU team be on the over rated list.... they've run up a 6-0 record against a group of opponents that could be regarded in the midwest as mediocre at best, not yet playing any of the higher profile Wisconsin schools, or the DePauws, Hopes, Calvins, Wash U's... and each of their wins have either been close, or of the 10-15 point margin... hardly runaways.... Johnson and Sexauer both looked good at Webster, but hardly at the All American Level that TQ has preached.... Great depth, great intensity, well coached, yes.... but top 5 in the nation, right now, I'm not so sure...... I'd say more at the 7-15 level... remember, this team couldn't match Webster's quickness , couldn't defend an athletic 2/3 man when he posted, couldn't defend a thin frosh 6'5" pivot man who could not be described as athletic or a leaper.... and each time I hear that someone was playing sick or the officiating was lopsided, I lose a tad more respect for the objectivity of whomever writes it.....

That's certainly possible based on what they've done so far. When I was going through my ballot, I didn't have a viable alternative, and without Jared Jenkins there's even reason to doubt UW-Stevens Point at No. 1.

Who would be a better No. 2?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on December 01, 2010, 12:23:38 PM

Unfortunately, with me not doing my fancy excel sheets this year, I'm not in much of a position to answer that one Pat... Some of the CCIW people certainly are on the Augustana band wagon, but I haven't even seen them in order to give a legitimate comparison.... without the time to review scores , I base my comments strictly on seeing IWU compete against a SLIAC team, and then checking their other scores...... I just don't think they're playing at a level they expected to just yet....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dark Knight on December 01, 2010, 01:03:18 PM

Quote from: hopefan on December 01, 2010, 12:23:38 PM
Unfortunately, with me not doing my fancy excel sheets this year, I'm not in much of a position to answer that one Pat... Some of the CCIW people certainly are on the Augustana band wagon, but I haven't even seen them in order to give a legitimate comparison.... without the time to review scores , I base my comments strictly on seeing IWU compete against a SLIAC team, and then checking their other scores...... I just don't think they're playing at a level they expected to just yet....

You can't expect a lot from the polls or ratings this early in the season. The polls are still based in good part on reputation and last year's results. Then again, many teams are still shaking off the rust.

Massey says
1. Stevens Point
2. Whitworth
3. St Thomas
4. Lewis and Clark
5. Wabash

IL Wesleyan is #15 in terms of power, #9 corrected for won/lost record.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 01, 2010, 01:08:57 PM

There were several teams on my ballot I struggled with because I kept raising them higher due to teams ahead of them having disappointing starts... and I didn't think they deserve to be there, but it is hard to find teams this early... with so many loses... to put in certain places.

An example, I can't remember right now where I put Virginia Wesleyan on my ballot... but I struggled for a long time on the reasons I was moving them up. In my opinion, they really haven't beaten anyone and almost lost to a Salisbury team that while improved... isn't Top 25 or 50 material.

The same arguement could be made for IWU... since their wins haven't been impressive against tough teams.

BUT it is early... and this poll will certainly go through plenty of upheavel in the coming weeks as teams sort themselves out. I would say that was the most number of losses I had seen in my Top 25 poll in the first few weeks since I started polling. So, we are bound to see teams like Wabash jump in and then hope they don't fall out if they turn out to be overrated. We are also going to see teams like maybe Amherst who may be better then the pollsters think... but haven't had the opportunity to sway voters to push them higher.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ethelred the Unready on December 01, 2010, 01:38:00 PM

Quote from: Dark Knight on December 01, 2010, 01:03:18 PM
Quote from: hopefan on December 01, 2010, 12:23:38 PM
Unfortunately, with me not doing my fancy excel sheets this year, I'm not in much of a position to answer that one Pat... Some of the CCIW people certainly are on the Augustana band wagon, but I haven't even seen them in order to give a legitimate comparison.... without the time to review scores , I base my comments strictly on seeing IWU compete against a SLIAC team, and then checking their other scores...... I just don't think they're playing at a level they expected to just yet....

You can't expect a lot from the polls or ratings this early in the season. The polls are still based in good part on reputation and last year's results. Then again, many teams are still shaking off the rust.

You can't shake off Rust. You can only hope to contain them.....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 01, 2010, 01:40:48 PM

Quote from: hopefan on December 01, 2010, 08:17:15 AM
I'm going to put the question out there .... and it's very scarey as I hate to ruffle feathers... but... should TQ's IWU team be on the over rated list.... they've run up a 6-0 record against a group of opponents that could be regarded in the midwest as mediocre at best, not yet playing any of the higher profile Wisconsin schools, or the DePauws, Hopes, Calvins, Wash U's... and each of their wins have either been close, or of the 10-15 point margin... hardly runaways.... Johnson and Sexauer both looked good at Webster, but hardly at the All American Level that TQ has preached.... Great depth, great intensity, well coached, yes.... but top 5 in the nation, right now, I'm not so sure...... I'd say more at the 7-15 level... remember, this team couldn't match Webster's quickness , couldn't defend an athletic 2/3 man when he posted, couldn't defend a thin frosh 6'5" pivot man who could not be described as athletic or a leaper.... and each time I hear that someone was playing sick or the officiating was lopsided, I lose a tad more respect for the objectivity of whomever writes it.....

Until starting forwards Jordan Zimmer (6-5 SF) and John Koschnitzky (6-6 PF) return, I don't think Illinois Wesleyan is a "Top 5 team", at least in terms of how I think of a "Top 5 team." More maybe in the #10 range until the forwards comes back?

IWU (6-0) is working with a new rotation in the early going...they are playing very well for stretches for each game, but also poorly for stretches. Zimmer is the bigger of the two injuries, in my opinion, as it totally changes the way teams can guard the Titans. He is a 6-5 wing player that is an excellent 3-point shooter, and a guy the defense can't leave. Currently, teams can really collapse hard on 6-7 center Doug Sexauer...or at least much more so than when Zimmer is on the floor (along with Sean Johnson, IWU's other 3-point shooter).

Regarding Sean Johnson, I don't understand where you're coming from on that one, hopefan. His last 3 games...

vs Monmouth: 35 pts, 6 reb (10-14 FG, 5-7 3-point)
vs Dominican: 34 pts, 5 reb, 3 assists
vs Webster: 22 pts (8-8 FG)

On the season he is averaging 20.7 ppg, 4.2 rpg, 2.5 apg. He has made 18 of 42 (.429) 3-point attempts.

As far as "preaching", I believe the only thing I have posted here about Sean Johnson as an All-American candidate is (from CCIW board):

Quote from: Titan Q on November 12, 2010, 11:20:43 PM
I think IWU's Sean Johnson is going to make a strong case at one of the All-American guard spots at the end of the season. Here is how his 2009-10 offensive numbers stack up vs the preseason team guards...

Sean Johnson (Illinois Wesleyan) - 17.0 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 3.1 apg, 75-181 3-pt (.414), 103-127 FT (.811) 1.25 A:TO

1st Team
Steve Djurickovic (Carthage) - 24.4 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 7.3 rpg, 41-100 3-pt (.410), 228-260 FT (.877), 2.9 A:TO
Ian Franks (Wooster) - 17.9 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 3.3 apg, 38-93 3-pt (.409), 143-185 FT (.773), 1.4 A:TO

2nd Team
James Wang (Williams) - 17.3 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 4.4 apg, 69-136 3-pt (.507), 105-122 (.861) FT, 1.8 A:TO
Jeffrey Robinson (WPI) - 19.0 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 2.4 apg, 54-133 3-pt (.406), 109-130 FT (.838), 0.80 A:TO

3rd Team
Scott Gillespie (Ripon) - 22.1 ppg, 3.7 rpg, 7.3 ppg, 5-15 3-pt (.333), 114-158 FT (.722), 2.0 A:TO
Jared Jenkins (UW-Stevens Point) - 11.4 ppg, 3.7 rpg, 2.2 apg, 24-62 3-pt (.387), 77-104 (.740), 1.37 A:TO

4th Team
Alex Franz (St. Mary's) - 13.7 ppg, 5.2 rpg, 5.9 apg, 47-102 3-pt (.333), 66-99 FT (.667)
Tony Mane (UW-LaCrosse) - 22.3 ppg, 2.9 rpg, 1.9 apg, 64-160 3-pt (.400), 75-82 FT (.915), 1.1 A:TO

Honorable Mention
Peter Bunn (Hope) - 16.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 2.2 apg, 36-69 3-pt (.522), 127-145 FT (.876), 1.1 A:TO
Tyler White (Wilmington) - 17.2 ppg, 3.9 rpg, 1.2 apg, 13-53 3-pt (.245), 116-181 FT (.641), 0.4 A:TO

I think Johnson is right there relative to some of these guys. I believe it's fair to say that in the NCAA tournament last year, he was as good as any guard in Division III...

vs Central - 24 pts
vs Wash U - 24 pts
vs Carthage - 26 pts, 12 reb
vs UW-Stevens Point - 32 pts

Is that really "preaching"? Is it not acceptable to post an opinion, and support it with some facts?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on December 01, 2010, 02:06:35 PM

Now TQ, I didn't say what you wrote or how you wrote it was unacceptable, only that the level of play I saw on Monday was not at an All American level.... It was a point supporting my premise that IWU was not necessarily a top 5 team... now..

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 01, 2010, 02:38:40 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 01, 2010, 12:10:11 PM
Quote from: hopefan on December 01, 2010, 08:17:15 AM
I'm going to put the question out there .... and it's very scarey as I hate to ruffle feathers... but... should TQ's IWU team be on the over rated list.... they've run up a 6-0 record against a group of opponents that could be regarded in the midwest as mediocre at best, not yet playing any of the higher profile Wisconsin schools, or the DePauws, Hopes, Calvins, Wash U's... and each of their wins have either been close, or of the 10-15 point margin... hardly runaways.... Johnson and Sexauer both looked good at Webster, but hardly at the All American Level that TQ has preached.... Great depth, great intensity, well coached, yes.... but top 5 in the nation, right now, I'm not so sure...... I'd say more at the 7-15 level... remember, this team couldn't match Webster's quickness , couldn't defend an athletic 2/3 man when he posted, couldn't defend a thin frosh 6'5" pivot man who could not be described as athletic or a leaper.... and each time I hear that someone was playing sick or the officiating was lopsided, I lose a tad more respect for the objectivity of whomever writes it.....

That's certainly possible based on what they've done so far. When I was going through my ballot, I didn't have a viable alternative, and without Jared Jenkins there's even reason to doubt UW-Stevens Point at No. 1.

Who would be a better No. 2?

Though there's been no definitive word from Coach Semling (or from Jared himself, that I've heard at least), Jenkins' name is still on the roster (http://athletics.uwsp.edu/roster.aspx?path=mbball&) at Point.

And though UWSP hasn't played any top knotch competition yet, they've summarily dismissed their opponents convincingly thus far. Only St. Norbert and Whitworth have, of the top 10 teams in the lastest poll, not had a game come down to 4 points or less.

I think for Point this year, with a down league, they may find themselves in a favorable position when the NCAA tournament comes around, especially with at least 4 of the perceived contenders coming from more balanced leagues (CCIW and ODAC) where they're likely to take several knocks. Perhaps that will actually hurt them, as they might not be tested as much early, but this is a veteran team who has battled in the trenches in the past. And besides... a down year in the WIAC is still a far better league, from top to bottom, than 75% of the conferences in the country.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 01, 2010, 09:48:16 PM

Final: #4 Wooster 74 Hiram 60

Wooster was led tonight by Ian Franks with 25 points on 10 of 17 shooting from the floor. Wooster shot 51% as a team tonight compared to only 31% for Hiram.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 01, 2010, 10:42:22 PM

Stout led #1 Stevens Point 27-17 midway through the first half but Point cut the lead to 2 at 39-37 at the half. After a 3 pointer from Stout to start the half, Point went on a 10-0 run and never trailed the rest f the game. SP turned up the D in the second half and outscored Stout 42-29 for a 79-68 win on the road.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 02, 2010, 12:40:28 AM

How They Fared -- Midweek report

I think I have most of the bugs ironed out, but let me know if you see any problems ...

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	622	UW-Stevens Point	4-0	def. UW-Stout, 79-68; 12/04 at #41 UW-River Falls
#2	587	Illinois Wesleyan	6-0	12/04 vs. Chicago
#3	585	Eastern Mennonite	6-0	def. Hampden-Sydney, 79-63; 12/04 vs. #7 Randolph-Macon
#4	535	Wooster	5-0	def. Hiram, 74-60; 12/04 vs. Denison
#5	493	Williams	5-0	def. RPI, 89-73; 12/02 vs. St. Joseph's (Vt.); 12/04 at Vassar
#6	467	Middlebury	5-0	def. Castleton State, 66-44; 12/04 at Union
#7	448	Randolph-Macon	4-2	LOST to #9 Virginia Wesleyan, 57-59; 12/04 at #3 Eastern Mennonite
#8	428	St. Norbert	3-0	12/03 vs. Grinnell; 12/04 vs. Monmouth
#9	416	Virginia Wesleyan	7-0	def. #7 Randolph-Macon, 59-57; 12/04 vs. Emory and Henry; 12/06 vs. Apprentice School
#10	380	Whitworth	4-0	12/03 at #47 Lewis and Clark; 12/04 at Linfield
#11	366	St. Thomas	5-0	def. Macalester, 72-63; 12/04 at Bethel; 12/06 at Augsburg
#12	321	Augustana	4-0	def. Monmouth, 66-59
#13	317	Wabash	7-0	def. #32 DePauw, 57-40; 12/04 at Hiram
#14	290	St. Mary's (Md.)	4-1	def. #25 Christopher Newport, 86-67; 12/04 at Stevenson; 12/06 at Citadel
#15	240	Franklin and Marshall	4-1	def. Ursinus, 78-69; 12/03 vs. T#49 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps
#16	195	John Carroll	4-1	12/04 at #36 Capital
#17	181	Anderson	2-2	LOST at Defiance, 67-72; 12/04 at Mount St. Joseph
#18	157	Carthage	3-2	12/03 vs. T#49 Hope; 12/04 vs. Calvin
#19	145	Brandeis	5-0	def. Clark, 67-65; 12/02 vs. Framingham State; 12/04 at Babson; 12/05 vs. Salem State or Tufts
#20	107	MIT	4-1	def. Emerson, 70-56; 12/02 vs. Newbury; 12/04 at Gordon
#21	93	Wheaton (Ill.)	4-1	def. Chicago, 95-67; 12/03 vs. Calvin; 12/04 vs. T#49 Hope
#22	90	Ramapo	5-0	def. Rowan, 89-72; 12/03 vs. Southern Va.; 12/04 at TBA
#23	87	Amherst	4-0	def. Lasell, 108-68; 12/03 vs. Westfield State; 12/04 vs. Elms
#24	65	DeSales	4-1	LOST at #48 Manhattanville, 55-67; 12/04 vs. Delaware Valley
#25	61	Christopher Newport	4-2	LOST at #14 St. Mary's (Md.), 67-86

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	57	Plattsburgh State	4-1	def. St. Lawrence, 62-58; 12/03 vs. New Paltz State; 12/04 vs. Oneonta State
#27	51	Texas-Dallas	3-1	12/02 at Hardin-Simmons; 12/04 at McMurry
#28	45	WPI	4-1	def. Curry, 76-56; 12/02 vs. Lasell
#29	42	Emory	5-0	12/04 vs. Methodist
#30	31	Chapman	3-1	12/02 vs. American Sports Univ; 12/03 at TBA; 12/04 at TBA
#31	28	New York University	4-0	def. Merchant Marine, 56-53; 12/04 vs. Polytechnic
#32	24	DePauw	4-1	LOST to #13 Wabash, 40-57; 12/03 vs. Birmingham-Southern; 12/05 vs. Rhodes
#33	21	Catholic	5-0	def. Carnegie Mellon, 52-50; 12/04 at Goucher
T#34	20	Rhode Island College	4-1	def. Johnson and Wales, 79-70; 12/04 vs. Eastern Connecticut
T#34	20	UW-Whitewater	3-1	def. UW-La Crosse, 73-60; 12/04 at UW-Stout
#36	17	Capital	4-1	LOST to Ohio Wesleyan, 57-67; 12/04 vs. #16 John Carroll
#37	14	Colorado College	3-2	LOST at Regis (Colo.), 57-71; 12/03 at Hendrix; 12/05 at Millsaps
#38	12	Western Connecticut	5-1	def. Trinity (Conn.), 73-62; 12/04 vs. Southern Maine
T#39	9	Guilford	4-2	def. North Carolina Wesleyan, 64-47; 12/04 at Bridgewater (Va.)
T#39	9	Ripon	2-1	12/03 vs. Knox; 12/04 vs. Grinnell
#41	8	UW-River Falls	5-1	def. UW-Superior, 62-58; 12/04 vs. #1 UW-Stevens Point
T#42	7	Ferrum	5-0	12/06 vs. Washington and Lee
T#42	7	Manchester	3-1	def. Earlham, 72-63; 12/04 at Hanover
T#44	6	Cabrini	2-1	12/02 vs. Gwynedd-Mercy; 12/04 at Rosemont
T#44	6	Centre	3-1	12/03 vs. Rhodes; 12/05 vs. Birmingham-Southern
T#44	6	Gettysburg	4-1	def. Johns Hopkins, 73-57; 12/04 at Haverford
#47	3	Lewis and Clark	4-0	12/03 vs. #10 Whitworth; 12/04 vs. Whitman
#48	2	Manhattanville	5-1	def. #24 DeSales, 67-55; 12/04 at King's
T#49	1	Becker	4-1	def. Anna Maria, 81-76; 12/02 vs. Fitchburg State
T#49	1	Bowdoin	3-1	LOST to Southern Maine, 68-70; 12/04 at Bates
T#49	1	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	2-1	12/03 at #15 Franklin and Marshall; 12/04 at Washington U.
T#49	1	Hope	1-2	12/03 at #18 Carthage; 12/04 at #21 Wheaton (Ill.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 02, 2010, 01:24:55 AM

Great work!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 02, 2010, 03:49:41 PM

Per my previous comment about Virginia Wesleyan... they go out and beat Randolph-Macon... I guess I have a better feeling where I put them on my bracket... BUT could the losses for Top 25 teams stop already? It makes it tough on Mondays! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on December 02, 2010, 04:07:22 PM

dmac,
What time is hoopsville on tonite? guests?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 02, 2010, 04:15:51 PM

ronk - won't be hitting the air tonight... we are a bit delayed due to so much going on not only in my life but with the rest of the D3Sports networks... however, stay tuned for some mini-shows between now and the new year and then the live version returning shortly after the new year (unless we change our minds, again!).

Thanks for your patience with us...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: oldchap on December 02, 2010, 06:51:29 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 30, 2010, 05:44:46 PM
That's better than sounding like an invertebrate homer. As we all know from your classic battles with OxyBob, you certainly have a spine! ;)

Yeah... I don't know what it is this year. Oxybob and I haven't sparred yet. We must be getting old... :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 03, 2010, 11:28:13 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 02, 2010, 03:49:41 PM
BUT could the losses for Top 25 teams stop already? It makes it tough on Mondays! :)

Though fun for the fans and stuff, preseason Top 25 polls are ridiculous. How can a committee figure out the Top 25 without any games played? It usually seems like it's just reputation. I think starting the poll at the beginning of the year is the best bet. I know it will never happen, but trying to guess your way through for a semester is what happens! ;D ::) :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 03, 2010, 11:51:12 AM

Ken Pomeroy (noted statistician) would disagree that pre-season polls aren't worth anything... LINK (http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/the_pre-season_ap_poll_is_great/)

The preseason (D-I) AP #1 team has won the National Championship 6 times in the last 21 years, versus just 3 times that the #1 team won going into the tournament.

The archives of past top 25's haven't migrated yet (at least not that I have seen) to see how this plays out in D-III... but it's interesting to think about, none the less.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 03, 2010, 01:32:30 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on December 03, 2010, 11:51:12 AM
Ken Pomeroy (noted statistician) would disagree that pre-season polls aren't worth anything... LINK (http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/the_pre-season_ap_poll_is_great/)

The preseason (D-I) AP #1 team has won the National Championship 6 times in the last 21 years, versus just 3 times that the #1 team won going into the tournament.

The archives of past top 25's haven't migrated yet (at least not that I have seen) to see how this plays out in D-III... but it's interesting to think about, none the less.

Pollsters at the D1 level have a *LOT* more information to go on in the preseason than our pollsters do. They know everything about the players, their injury and academic status, as well as the incoming frosh. They've actually seen all of the teams under consideration play games, in person or on TV, and have a good feel from that how returnees will play together. It's apples and oranges to the information black hole that is D3.

I think I did some kind of analysis some years back about how the preseason poll fared at the end of the year. I don't feel like digging though the 399 back pages of this room to find it (if it's even still there), but I think its conclusion was that it's surprising how well the preseason poll has fared. We all remember the #2 UW-Oshkoshes because errors of that magnitude really stand out against the general level of competence shown in the preseason poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GuyFormerlyPSBBG on December 03, 2010, 02:30:37 PM

I know at times I have voiced my concerns of the D3 top 25 polls. However, I trust the validity of them more than the D1 polls. (I don't understand why UNC was ranked #9 preseason. Often I think the polls at that level are driven by TV ratings. Clearly not the case at the D3 level)

I am glad to see the south represented more in the d3 top 25. I hope the trend continues to migrate to the women's side as well. I think the region is undervalued.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 03, 2010, 02:36:53 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 03, 2010, 01:32:30 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on December 03, 2010, 11:51:12 AM
Ken Pomeroy (noted statistician) would disagree that pre-season polls aren't worth anything... LINK (http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/the_pre-season_ap_poll_is_great/)

The preseason (D-I) AP #1 team has won the National Championship 6 times in the last 21 years, versus just 3 times that the #1 team won going into the tournament.

The archives of past top 25's haven't migrated yet (at least not that I have seen) to see how this plays out in D-III... but it's interesting to think about, none the less.
Pollsters at the D1 level have a *LOT* more information to go on in the preseason than our pollsters do. They know everything about the players, their injury and academic status, as well as the incoming frosh. They've actually seen all of the teams under consideration play games, in person or on TV, and have a good feel from that how returnees will play together. It's apples and oranges to the information black hole that is D3.

I think I did some kind of analysis some years back about how the preseason poll fared at the end of the year. I don't feel like digging though the 399 back pages of this room to find it (if it's even still there), but I think its conclusion was that it's surprising how well the preseason poll has fared. We all remember the #2 UW-Oshkoshes because errors of that magnitude really stand out against the general level of competence shown in the preseason poll.

Yeah, it seemed like we had the curse of the #2 rating there for a few years...

To be honest, I was looking for a situation to share that link when I first saw it a few weeks ago... I was pretty surprised by what it said!

And I wholeheartedly agree with the difficulties that our pollsters have... Not only is there far less exposure, there are more teams!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on December 04, 2010, 11:56:45 AM

10th-ranked Whitworth wins 77-60 at #47 Lewis & Clark in the Northwest Conference men's basketball opener on Friday night at LC.

http://www.whitworth.edu/Athletics/Teams/BasketballMen/Releases/10_11/L&C1.htm

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GuyFormerlyPSBBG on December 04, 2010, 12:23:17 PM

Interesting to know, I think the PG is probably the most important position on the court, How many of these preseason top 25 teams replaced their starting PG this season, and have lost already?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 04, 2010, 01:01:14 PM

Quote from: GuyFormerlyPSBBG on December 04, 2010, 12:23:17 PM
Interesting to know, I think the PG is probably the most important position on the court, How many of these preseason top 25 teams replaced their starting PG this season, and have lost already?

Wooster did, and hasn't.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 04, 2010, 01:03:53 PM

Stevens Point had a freshman point guard last year and they won the National Championship. Of course, they had about 5 other guys that could bring the ball up court as well!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on December 04, 2010, 01:44:00 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 04, 2010, 01:01:14 PM
Quote from: GuyFormerlyPSBBG on December 04, 2010, 12:23:17 PM
Interesting to know, I think the PG is probably the most important position on the court, How many of these preseason top 25 teams replaced their starting PG this season, and have lost already?
Wooster did, and hasn't.

Whitworth did, and hasn't.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 04, 2010, 05:50:36 PM

#1 Stevens Point loses at RV River Falls 73-60.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 04, 2010, 07:23:28 PM

And down goes #2...

Chicago 83
IWU 78

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 04, 2010, 07:54:16 PM

And #3 is trailing at the half:

30-36 to Randolph Macon

Live Stats (http://www.emu.edu/athletics/livestats/basketball-m/xlive.htm)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on December 04, 2010, 07:58:32 PM

TRIPLE OUCH! or 2.5 ouch to be fair.

Upset night in America? Not for Oregon or Auburn.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 04, 2010, 08:12:42 PM

#4 is leading by 17 at the half. I wonder if word of those other scores has filtered into the Wooster locker room.

UPDATE: #4 Wooster positions themselves with an 81-51 win over Denison. I'm sure the Scots are racing to the nearest TV to watch updates of the RMC/EMU game. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 04, 2010, 08:57:38 PM

RMC beats EMU!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cubs on December 04, 2010, 09:23:46 PM

Quote from: cubs on October 14, 2010, 10:03:57 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on October 14, 2010, 05:00:43 PM
Not quite set in stone, but my current preseason Top 25...

#22 UW-Whitewater (23-6 overall, 13-3 WIAC/West) – Round of 32, lost to Wooster
Starters Returning: (2) G Phil Negri, 6-3 SR (8.4 ppg, 3.3 rpg), F Alex Edmunds, 6-4 JR (7.2 ppg, 4.7 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) C Dustin Mitchell, 6-9 (18.0 ppg, 8.7 rpg), G Dupree Fletcher, 6-2 (14.0 ppg, 2.7 rpg), F Mike Bendall, 6-6 (10.2 ppg, 5.1 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Nolan Free, 6-1 SO (6.4 ppg, 4.1 rpg)

Really just a crapshoot, but that's what I got.
I have a pretty good source that has told me that Free will not be playing this season for Whitewater, and PG Negri is still having back issues that plagued him last season. Take those two out of the rotation, and the Warhawks look "thin" in terms of experience. While Negri may still be on the roster once the season rolls around, one has to wonder just how effective he will be.

River Falls is the team in the WIAC that I would keep an eye on as the season goes along. Just have a hunch that they will be solid this season.

This post looks A LOT better after River Falls victory over Stevens Point today!!!! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 04, 2010, 11:08:56 PM

#26 Plattsburgh State improves to 6-1 with 2 victories this weekend to open conference play. The Cardinals are now off until January 4th when they take on currently ranked #6 Middlebury. But who knows, the way the top teams are falling Middlebury may be #1 by then. :D I just hope that Plattsburgh rejoins the top 25 this week so that the Jan. 4th matchup is of 2 ranked teams.

On Friday Plattsburgh defeated New Paltz State 87-73 after leading the Hawks by as much as 26 pts in the 2nd half. All American candidate Chris Ruiz moved into 5th place on the Plattsburgh St. all time scoring list with 1243 career points.

On Saturday Plattsburgh beat last year's regular season co-champs Oneonta 69-60. The Cards led by 22 late in the 2nd half before Plattsburgh's Coach Curle emptied his bench. The Cardinals are shooting for their second straight SUNYAC championship which would make it five out of the last six. They are currently tied with Oswego St for the conference lead, both with 2-0 records.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 04, 2010, 11:12:56 PM

Not only did UWSP lose - they also lost the Belt^TM!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on December 04, 2010, 11:49:44 PM

Whitworth leads Linfield 39-14 at half. No drama here.

Now 71-34 with 9:00 to go

WW wins 90-57.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 05, 2010, 08:52:22 PM

How They Fared

This still does not include information about overtime or neutral-court games, but should be otherwise complete.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	622	UW-Stevens Point	4-1	def. UW-Stout, 79-68; LOST at #41 UW-River Falls, 60-73
#2	587	Illinois Wesleyan	6-1	def. Webster, 84-80; LOST to Chicago, 78-83
#3	585	Eastern Mennonite	6-1	def. Hampden-Sydney, 79-63; LOST to #7 Randolph-Macon, 68-73
#4	535	Wooster	6-0	def. Hiram, 74-60; def. Denison, 81-51
#5	493	Williams	7-0	def. RPI, 89-73; def. St. Joseph's (Vt.), 102-56; def. Vassar, 92-42
#6	467	Middlebury	6-0	def. Castleton State, 66-44; def. Union, 64-52
#7	448	Randolph-Macon	5-2	LOST to #9 Virginia Wesleyan, 57-59; def. #3 Eastern Mennonite, 73-68
#8	428	St. Norbert	5-0	def. Grinnell, 112-85; def. Monmouth, 66-52
#9	416	Virginia Wesleyan	8-0	def. #7 Randolph-Macon, 59-57; def. Emory and Henry, 67-57
#10	380	Whitworth	6-0	def. #47 Lewis and Clark, 77-60; def. Linfield, 90-57
#11	366	St. Thomas	6-0	def. Macalester, 72-63; def. Bethel, 93-65
#12	321	Augustana	4-0	def. Monmouth, 66-59
#13	317	Wabash	8-0	def. #32 DePauw, 57-40; def. Hiram, 59-56
#14	290	St. Mary's (Md.)	5-1	def. #25 Christopher Newport, 86-67; def. Stevenson, 113-88
#15	240	Franklin and Marshall	5-1	def. Ursinus, 78-69; def. T#49 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 64-63
#16	195	John Carroll	5-1	def. #36 Capital, 93-87
#17	181	Anderson	3-2	LOST at Defiance, 67-72; def. Mount St. Joseph, 70-58
#18	157	Carthage	5-2	def. T#49 Hope, 71-70; def. Calvin, 88-80
#19	145	Brandeis	8-0	def. Clark, 67-65; def. Framingham State, 73-47; def. Babson, 59-53; def. Tufts, 60-52
#20	107	MIT	6-1	def. Emerson, 70-56; def. Newbury, 61-53; def. Gordon, 92-73
#21	93	Wheaton (Ill.)	5-2	def. Chicago, 95-67; def. Calvin, 86-64; LOST to T#49 Hope, 74-80
#22	90	Ramapo	6-1	def. Rowan, 89-72; LOST to Southern Va., 71-77; def. Anna Maria, 91-72
#23	87	Amherst	6-0	def. Lasell, 108-68; def. Westfield State, 110-57; def. Elms, 93-60
#24	65	DeSales	4-2	LOST at #48 Manhattanville, 55-67; LOST to Delaware Valley, 79-82
#25	61	Christopher Newport	4-2	LOST at #14 St. Mary's (Md.), 67-86

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	57	Plattsburgh State	6-1	def. St. Lawrence, 62-58; def. New Paltz State, 87-73; def. Oneonta State, 69-60
#27	51	Texas-Dallas	4-2	def. Sul Ross State, 81-52; def. Hardin-Simmons, 58-54; LOST at McMurry, 60-72
#28	45	WPI	5-1	def. Curry, 76-56; def. Lasell, 89-63
#29	42	Emory	6-0	def. Methodist, 88-82
#30	31	Chapman	6-1	def. American Sports Univ, 76-53; def. Whittier, 78-62; def. Redlands, 70-57
#31	28	New York University	5-0	def. Merchant Marine, 56-53; def. Polytechnic, 102-75
#32	24	DePauw	5-2	LOST to #13 Wabash, 40-57; LOST to Birmingham-Southern, 57-65; def. Rhodes, 58-55
#33	21	Catholic	6-0	def. Haverford, 52-40; def. Carnegie Mellon, 52-50; def. Goucher, 73-57
T#34	20	Rhode Island College	5-1	def. Johnson and Wales, 79-70; def. Eastern Connecticut, 52-49
T#34	20	UW-Whitewater	3-2	def. UW-La Crosse, 73-60; LOST at UW-Stout, 80-85
#36	17	Capital	4-2	LOST to Ohio Wesleyan, 57-67; LOST to #16 John Carroll, 87-93
#37	14	Colorado College	5-2	LOST at Regis (Colo.), 57-71; def. Hendrix, 68-48; def. Millsaps, 55-51
#38	12	Western Connecticut	6-1	def. Trinity (Conn.), 73-62; def. Southern Maine, 88-71
T#39	9	Guilford	5-2	def. North Carolina Wesleyan, 64-47; def. Bridgewater (Va.), 78-65
T#39	9	Ripon	4-1	def. Knox, 97-79; def. Grinnell, 125-113
#41	8	UW-River Falls	6-1	def. UW-Superior, 62-58; def. #1 UW-Stevens Point, 73-60
T#42	7	Ferrum	5-0	def. Randolph, 70-68
T#42	7	Manchester	3-2	def. Earlham, 72-63; LOST at Hanover, 72-81
T#44	6	Cabrini	4-1	LOST at Widener, 70-74; def. Gwynedd-Mercy, 86-83; def. Rosemont, 72-51
T#44	6	Centre	5-1	def. Rhodes, 63-60; def. Birmingham-Southern, 62-45
T#44	6	Gettysburg	4-2	def. Johns Hopkins, 73-57; LOST at Haverford, 55-65
#47	3	Lewis and Clark	5-1	LOST to #10 Whitworth, 60-77; def. Whitman, 95-81
#48	2	Manhattanville	6-1	def. #24 DeSales, 67-55; def. King's, 76-75
T#49	1	Becker	5-1	def. Anna Maria, 81-76; def. Fitchburg State, 91-53
T#49	1	Bowdoin	3-2	LOST to Southern Maine, 68-70; LOST at Bates, 65-86
T#49	1	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	2-3	LOST at #15 Franklin and Marshall, 63-64; LOST at Washington U., 57-66
T#49	1	Hope	2-3	LOST at #18 Carthage, 70-71; def. #21 Wheaton (Ill.), 80-74

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on December 06, 2010, 10:45:12 AM

I am a big fan of Massey. 8-) :P

http://masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&yr=2011&sub=NCAA%20III&mid=1

So does anyone think any of the top 3 from last week deserve to fall from the top 10?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 06, 2010, 10:07:57 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on December 06, 2010, 10:45:12 AM
I am a big fan of Massey. 8-) :P

http://masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&yr=2011&sub=NCAA%20III&mid=1

So does anyone think any of the top 3 from last week deserve to fall from the top 10?

If we look at the top three and to whom (and how) they lost, that might shed some light.

Point lost on the road to River Falls, who was receiving votes and is 6-1 on the year, with their lone loss to #11 St. Thomas.

IWU lost at home to Chicago, who is 2-4.

Eastern Mennonite lost at home to #7 Randolph Macon who is 5-2.

Stevens Point and IWU had all of the first place votes (22-3 to Stevens Point). All three ballots that have IWU first had Stevens Point second.

Interestingly, IWU and EMU only differed by two points... Think about it... if IWU's 3 first place votes had gone to Point instead of the Titans, then IWU would have been 3rd instead of second... that's how close #2 and #3 were with the last vote.

And #4 Wooster was two entire positions (50 points) behind EMU on the average ballot.

I think they'll definitely stay in the top 10. They may all stay in the top 5. Heck, Point may even stay #1. Wooster will pick up some first place votes... but I wonder if Williams deserves it more. They had a 10 point lead with 10 minutes in the national championship game last year and appear to be playing really well right now.

Virginia Wesleyan has the best win of the top 10 teams who didn't lose... but how do you stack up the ODAC? Randy Mac lost to Va Wesleyan but beat EMU. Va Wesleyan beat Randy Mac and is unbeaten... but they were the lowest ranked of the three. So do you rank them VWC, RMC, EMU? Or does RMC's loss (giving them 2) keep them behind EMU, even though they just beat them? Does their loss to Wabash factor in, ranking Wabash ahead of RMC? Or does RMC's loss possibly push Wabash back a little bit, because RMC hasn't lived up to their preseason #3 ranking...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 07, 2010, 12:10:25 AM

New rankings out, Wooster #1 and Williams #2.

http://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2010-11/week2

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 07, 2010, 12:16:25 AM

Someone is spoofing URLs. :)

It's about to be posted to the other places, though, no biggie.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 07, 2010, 12:27:42 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 07, 2010, 12:16:25 AM
Someone is spoofing URLs. :)

It's about to be posted to the other places, though, no biggie.

Same trick works for the NCAA site also. Thats how I usually found the NCAA rankings last season before they were officially linked from the rankings page.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 07, 2010, 12:29:06 AM

Same here. :)

But I know from that experience not to create that final URL until I'm ready to post it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 07, 2010, 12:31:25 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 07, 2010, 12:29:06 AM
Same here. :)

But I know from that experience not to create that final URL until I'm ready to post it.

You are safe then, my hacking days are behind me. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on December 07, 2010, 01:12:49 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on December 06, 2010, 10:07:57 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on December 06, 2010, 10:45:12 AM
So does anyone think any of the top 3 from last week deserve to fall from the top 10?
...
Point lost on the road to River Falls, who was receiving votes and is 6-1 on the year, with their lone loss to #11 St. Thomas.
IWU lost at home to Chicago, who is 2-4.
Eastern Mennonite lost at home to #7 Randolph Macon who is 5-2.

I think they'll definitely stay in the top 10. They may all stay in the top 5. Heck, Point may even stay #1.

+1 for the nice reply to my question Point.

I do find it odd that W-SP still recvd 1st place votes. This says to me some voters are willing to ignore a loss because they think, feel, believe that a team is the best. Doesn't seem all that rational or impartial. Had they lost to the #2 team would they still get those votes? Of course not. But then, 1st place votes were all over the place so voters have many opinions about the top spot and early on that seems okay to me, just getting votes after a loss? Don't know about that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 07, 2010, 01:37:27 PM

I'd rather have voters willing to stick with the team they think is best despite a loss than those who automatically choose a new team when the previous one loses.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wally_wabash on December 07, 2010, 01:50:40 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 07, 2010, 01:37:27 PM

I'd rather have voters willing to stick with the team they think is best despite a loss than those who automatically choose a new team when the previous one loses.

That's a pretty boring weekly poll if voters ignore things like wins and losses.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 07, 2010, 01:57:44 PM

I doubt that any of the voters who thought UW-SP was #1 last week expected the Pointers to complete an undefeated season. They were projected at #1 on the strength of their assets, assets which, if they add up to a 22-3 record, would comprise the resume of a #1 team. They lost a tough road game to a good team, and while you can't say it was "expected," and you can't say it was entirely "excusable," I don't think you can say it was "damning." If I were an SP voter, I could easily see sticking with my dog for the time being.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on December 07, 2010, 02:07:52 PM

I can see voters sticking with them... eventually, that is. IMO, it just seems like you are rewarding a team for losing by keeping them #1. Now, if threre wasn't anyone else that truly warranted jumping UW-SP, then by all means keep them #1. But, there were two pretty good teams that are still undefeated on the season waiting in the wings and I think the voters got it right by placing Wooster and Williams ahead of UW-SP for now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 07, 2010, 03:26:43 PM

Quote from: ScotsFan on December 07, 2010, 02:07:52 PM
I can see voters sticking with them... eventually, that is. IMO, it just seems like you are rewarding a team for losing by keeping them #1. Now, if threre wasn't anyone else that truly warranted jumping UW-SP, then by all means keep them #1. But, there were two pretty good teams that are still undefeated on the season waiting in the wings and I think the voters got it right by placing Wooster and Williams ahead of UW-SP for now.

Your argument appears to be a little self-serving, ScotsFan. I'm struck by the counter-argument put forward on the NCAC board by your fellow Wooster fan, kiltedbryan, that perhaps the Scots really aren't worthy of a #1 ranking at the moment:

Quote from: kiltedbryan on December 07, 2010, 03:15:02 PM
Quote from: ScotsFan on December 07, 2010, 02:22:19 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on December 07, 2010, 01:41:57 PM
But only a fool would overlook the Bishops, the way they've been playing of late.

Not to diminish OWU in any way or the challenge that Wooster will face down at the Branch on Saturday, but I'm not ready to proclaim that OWU is all the way back just yet after a modest two game winning streak. Yes, their win at Cap was a nice win, but other than that win, what has OWU done to make me think they are playing up to the expectations we had for them coming into the season? A beatdown of Oberlin? Oberlin is a BAD basketball team. The Yeomen just gave Kzoo their first win of the season and did so losing by 21 freaking points?!

Let me see how the Bishops come out and play tonight in Crawfordsville before I start to buy into the notion that OWU's rough start was just a bump in the road...

SF- I agree with your point that OWU-Wabash is a game to watch. But there's also a big part of me that wants to wait until I see Wooster beat someone like OWU (and obviously, Allegheny) before I start to feel that their heady ranking on paper is justified by their performance on the hardwood.

I'll qualify that by saying that most of the reason I'm not sure I'm ready to buy the idea that the Scots are indisputably a Top 10 (much less #1) team right now is because I don't think the Scots have had a chance in their first six games to prove themselves against any really good competition.

I think Wooster has artificially reached #1 because of losses in front of them rather than results-to-date. Even a "good" (as opposed to a "national championship contending caliber") Wooster team should be 6-0 at this point, based on who it has played. Heck, Wabash has a better claim on #1 than Wooster does based on season activity-to-date, having thoroughly beaten a very good team at home, then also beating its quality arch-rival on the road in the young season. (And I suspect the voter that gave them the #1 vote used some similar logic.)

OWU could even be the best team that the Scots have faced so far this year. And like I said, it's a tough economy and the Scots could use some resume-building. In that sense, I think I'll know far more about how this Wooster squad compares after its next 5 games (Allegheny, OWU, Anderson, John Carroll & Wilmington). Go 5-0 or maybe even 4-1 and I think the Scots will have established a credible Top 10/#1 resume. Even better, go 8-0 or 7-1 over the next 8, which would include games against two more good opponents in Baruch and Wabash (I don't know anything about William Carey).

I'm agnostic on the subject of Wooster and its worthiness to be the current top dog, but I do like the idea of a couple of Scots fans mixing it up with a little point/counterpoint. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 07, 2010, 03:46:46 PM

Quote from: ScotsFan on December 07, 2010, 02:07:52 PM
I can see voters sticking with them... eventually, that is. IMO, it just seems like you are rewarding a team for losing by keeping them #1.

I have never viewed the poll as a reward/punishment thing at all. From reading the boards over the years I know a lot of people do see it that way.

To me, as a voter you are simply asked to list the teams in order, from who you feel is the best to 25th best. You are not asked to "reward" (or "punish"). Great teams lose games...it happens every year. I think one can still make a very strong case for Stevens Point as the #1 team.

(I should add that I moved from UW-SP to Virginia Wesleyan this week. At this point, it is just so hard to evaluate teams based on 2010-11 data...there just is not enough of it yet.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 07, 2010, 04:20:52 PM

I think it kind of begs the question of what the top 25 is really proposing...

Is it saying that the #1 team has a better body of work than the #2 team (and by inference, everybody else)?

If so, then a loss might not drop a team out of the top spot.

Is it saying that the team has had a generally comperable performance to date of teams around it... and has just had a better (or worse) week, so they move up or down in the poll?

UWSP went from 622 poll points to 512. That's 110 points, equivalent to more than 4 places on average. It was good enough for 4th, but in the "perfect" poll (#1 team has all of the first place votes, #2 has all of the second place votes, etc) 512 would be just a smidge closer to 6th than 5th. And because we know that 3 voters kept them at #1, there are voters who dropped them even farther than that.

When you contrast that to EMU and IWU, there are a few different possibilities.

IWU went from 2nd (587 points, avg 2.52) to 10th (415 points, avg 9.4) losing 172 points. They dropped an average of 6.88 slots on each ballot. EMU went from 3rd (585, avg 2.6) to 8th (444, avg 8.24) losing 141 points. They dropped an average of 5.64 slots on each ballot.

What that says is one of two things. The IWU loss to Chicago was "worse" than the EMU loss to Randy Mac, which was "worse" than the SP loss to River Falls.

I think that's to be expected... Chicago was 1-4 coming into the IWU game and it was at the Shirk Center, Randy Mac was a top 10 team, but it was on Royals' home floor, while SP's loss was on the road at River Falls.

**Please note... these comments and any I make are not made with purple colored glasses... New for this season, I got the brand new purple-colored LASIX surgery!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 07, 2010, 07:56:13 PM

I was one of the #1 voters for UWSP because simply I didn't feel I had any other team worthy of taking my number one vote due to strength of schedule, schedule so far, and who they lost to...

I could not give a #1 vote to Wooster simply because I am not even comfortable with them even at #2 on my ballot. I keep looking at their schedule and try and figure out how their results warrant a #1 vote. But they aren't the only ones.

Despite Titan Q's nod to VWC, I can't give them a vote, either. I have seen or know some of the teams they have played against and their start while impressive at unbeaten, isn't impressing me to put them #1 - I even have them uncomfortably high (I think #5).

There is also other teams I have high that I would rather have say around #3-#10 I really wish I could start lower... There just isn't any dominating teams right now in my opinion so I am struggling early on to put the top teams together. Since I am uncomfortable with many of the teams who are unbeaten right now (really, Wabash might be the only one that is impressive, but they have more to prove to me) and I don't think the loss to UWRF was essentially a "bad" one to a team that is playing very well and on the road... I keep my vote with UWSP.

Remember, things change week to week (which is making things very hard this season) and if teams continue to impress and UWSP shows signs of not being a #1 team - I then reserve that right to change my vote.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on December 07, 2010, 08:15:49 PM

Had UWSP lost to a D1 or something big, then no. They could very well remain in a legitimate position to collect #1 votes. Wasn't what happened. Wins and losses matter more than what we believe or feel. I guarantee many WIAC teams will now think they can beat SP more than they did 5 days ago. This loss changes alot of things in that conference, I am sure. It should also change the poll (it did) in ALL voters minds as well. Btw, I am not anti UWSP. This isnt about SP or a power conference.

Not being high on anyone else or impressed with their results this early in season is one way to stick with a dog. Hope it hunts in March.

On another thought, I think early on it is better to have variety in top 10. If 8 conferences are represented in top 10 spots, I think all of D3 gains.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 07, 2010, 08:44:23 PM

#23 WPI is playing Harvard pretty tough. 12 point game with 4 minutes to play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 07, 2010, 10:19:57 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on December 07, 2010, 08:15:49 PM
I guarantee many WIAC teams will now think they can beat SP more than they did 5 days ago. This loss changes alot of things in that conference, I am sure.

This is flat out not true. Just because a team loses a conference game doesn't mean their season is over, especially in the WIAC.

Let's look at a little history at WIAC conference champions...:

00-01	Whitewater and Stevens Point	10-6
01-02	Whitewater Stevens Point and Oshkosh	11-5
02-03	Stevens Point	14-2
03-04	River Falls	12-4
04-05	Platteville and Stevens Point	13-3
05-06	Whitewater	13-3
06-07	Stevens Point	15-1
07-08	Whitewater	13-3
08-09	Stevens Point	14-2
09-10	Whitewater	13-3

Nobody has gone undefeated in the last decade. Only 3 teams have had fewer than 3 losses and each time, that was by UW Stevens Point.

And just so you know, River Falls has 4 seniors and 5 juniors, one of which is Shane Manor, who is an all-conference transfer from UW Superior. Their one loss was on the road to #9 St. Thomas. They're not a D-I team... but nobody in D-III is a D-I team.

Quote
It should also change the poll (it did) in ALL voters minds as well.

Each voter will vote as they see fit. This poll has been going on a long time and they've gotten very, very good at what they do. But there isn't a defined rule about how they should vote. There is a definite human element that makes the poll even better. Dave McHugh came right out and said why SP retained his #1 vote and that's his prerogative as a voter. 19 other voters did change, and apparently they felt there was a reason to change their vote. Two others did not, as well.

The ironic thing is that I'm not really sure that SP is playing like the #1 team right now. They didn't on Saturday. But this team absolutely will get better and that's what's scary.

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on December 07, 2010, 08:15:49 PM
This isnt about SP or a power conference.

...

I think early on it is better to have variety in top 10. If 8 conferences are represented in top 10 spots, I think all of D3 gains.

These two statements contradict themselves. In one breathe, you say that it isn't about Point or the WIAC (or power conferences, in general), but in another, you say that there should be more conferences represented in the top 10.

What that basically says is you would rather have a weaker, less accurate poll than one that is more true to reality. As recent as last year, the ODAC had 3 teams in the top 10 and two years ago, the WIAC had 3 in the top 10. When there are teams that are that good, they should be ranked high, no matter what conference they're from.

And, furthermore, we're two+ weeks into the season. Certain teams have exceeded the initial expectations that were placed upon them and certain teams haven't played to the level that they were expected to. The poll has the most movement in the first few weeks because the teams actually get out on the hardcourt and match up with their opponents on the floor rather than on paper.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 07, 2010, 11:40:47 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on December 07, 2010, 08:15:49 PM
Wins and losses matter more than what we believe or feel.

Honestly, no, not in a Top 25 poll.

Unless we expected UW-Stevens Point to run the table, or they lost to a crappy team, it's not unheard of for them to retain a few votes. River Falls, on the other hand, has just one loss (to a Top 10 team at that), so it's not like they suck right now.

Especially in a week where all of the top three lost.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on December 08, 2010, 02:09:07 AM

Delicious stuff. Point, I guess I worded something poorly cause in no way do I think their season is over. My point was other teams might have a greater hope of beating them in a game than they once did. UWSP is the odds on favorite to win the WIAC, correct? A perfect conference season, obviously and historically (thanks for chart) tough to do. I still do expect SP to win that conference and would be surprised if they don't. They are a really nice team IMO.

As far as voters minds being changed, again I am referring to their thoughts...not their actual votes. I agree, voters have earned the right to vote as they see fit, doesn't mean I have to like their votes. I do think the poll is doing a great job of moving teams around appropriately even this early and with a big weekend of top losses.

"Wins and losses matter more than what we believe or feel." I suppose this statement is more true in March than December. Anyone loses a game in March they are expected to win doesn't get #'1 votes, in fact, they get a trip home.

PS:

This isnt about SP or a power conference.

...

I think early on it is better to have variety in top 10. If 8 conferences are represented in top 10 spots, I think all of D3 gains.

Connecting these two statements is your doing. Certainly not what I was inferring or suggesting or even thinking. I would be asking the question had it been ANYONE being a number 1 and losing and still getting #1's.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 08, 2010, 02:41:34 AM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on December 07, 2010, 08:15:49 PM
I guarantee many WIAC teams will now think they can beat SP more than they did 5 days ago.

I really think you're giving Stevens Point too much credit here. Sure, they are defending National Champs and a WIAC power, but I don't think any team in our conference "fears" Point or doesn't feel they have a shot at beating them. Everyone on the WIAC board knows that River Falls was going to be pretty good this year. We have no idea why the SIDS voted them 8th! Last year, Point had a lot of tough games against lesser foes in the WIAC and I think that proves no one is going to just lie down for us. Superior was 7-9 last year and we only beat them by 3 at their place. Oshkosh was only 5-11 and we held them off by only 6 at Quandt. We lost to Stout and they were 9-7. Trust me, no one in the WIAC thinks Point is this immovable object.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 08, 2010, 06:18:55 AM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on December 07, 2010, 08:15:49 PM
Had UWSP lost to a D1 or something big, then no. They could very well remain in a legitimate position to collect #1 votes. Wasn't what happened. Wins and losses matter more than what we believe or feel. I guarantee many WIAC teams will now think they can beat SP more than they did 5 days ago. This loss changes alot of things in that conference, I am sure. It should also change the poll (it did) in ALL voters minds as well. Btw, I am not anti UWSP. This isnt about SP or a power conference.

Not being high on anyone else or impressed with their results this early in season is one way to stick with a dog. Hope it hunts in March.

On another thought, I think early on it is better to have variety in top 10. If 8 conferences are represented in top 10 spots, I think all of D3 gains.

I just don't understand your point... just because a team losses doesn't warrant removing them from a #1 position especially when so many other teams lost, including all three in the Top 3.

You also have to remember that every pollsters ballot is different. So who I had in line behind UWSP that maybe would have garnered a first-place position should UWSP slip may not be someone that now deserves that nod (maybe they lost as well - and maybe their losses were more significant in a pollsters mind).

And you have to look at more then just one game this week. On a week-by-week basis there are many games to look at and consider. Team A's loss to Team B will also be impacted by Team C's win over Team B. (We are not talking UWSP, here.) As a result, pollsters are moving many teams around on their poll to find the right fit, especially in the first few weeks of the season.

So, while UWSP loss, in my case those I had in position and felt comfortable moving up didn't warrant that movement up and in some cases did deserve to move down. Team I had lower in the poll also moved up, but as I pointed out with Wooster and VWC (among others), while they moved up in my poll, I did not feel comfortable moving them in to the #1 spot.

Also, when I voted for UWSP in the pre-season to be the #1 team in the country... I had no illusions they were going to go undefeated. I also had no illusions any team would go undefeated. I don't vote #1 for a team because they are undefeated and should stay that way to keep a #1 vote.

By January, a lot of this will be a moot point because we will at least start seeing how these teams are faring in more conference action and after holiday tournaments. Who knows who will be #1 at that point...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dark Knight on December 08, 2010, 03:23:55 PM

Especially early in the season it may be useful to see what teams computer ratings systems think are underrated or overrated in the poll. Here's a list of the most underrated and overrated teams according to Massey:

Most Overrated
1. Wooster (#1, should be #9)
2. MIT (#21, should be #91)
3. Williams (#2, should be #11)
4. Virginia Wesleyan (#3, should be #26)
5. Brandeis (#16, should be #52)
6. Franklin & Marshall (#15, should be #43)

Most Underrated
1. Whitworth (#7, should be #1 by a long shot)
2. Wheaton (unranked, should be #14)
3. River Falls (#18, should be #5)
4. Stevens Point (#4, should be #2)
5. Lewis and Clark (unranked, should be #8)
6. Hope (unranked, should be #15)

Whitworth and Stevens Point are head and shoulders above the other teams, and Whitworth is considerably stronger than Stevens Point, according to Massey. In fact, the difference between Whitworth and Stevens point is is 4.5 points, about like the difference between #3 and #16. The difference between Stevens Point and Massey #3 St Thomas is even larger.

Let's compare Wooster's record with that of Whitworth.

Whitworth has defeated these top-50 teams: Carthage (#15), Lewis and Clark (#8), Linfield (#48).

Wooster has defeated these top-25 teams:
These top 50 teams: <none here either>
These top 100 teams: <crickets chirping>
These top 200 teams: Bethany WV (#115), Denison (#159)

Lewis and Clark has one loss, to #1 Whitworth. They have defeated #74 Colorado Col., #101 Whitman, and Warner Pacific, who would be around #50 in D3.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 08, 2010, 04:35:53 PM

Interesting points, DK, but for as illuminating as that appears, I think it just shows the inaccuracy of computer models (especially early in the season).

Don't get me wrong... I think that Whitworth and Stevens Point are both good this year. But the model is only as good as the data that it draws from, and the data pool is limited at this point. It will be better next week than this week and better next month than this month.

The three factors that go into the Massey Ratings are score, venue, and date. So a game with an inflated score can affect the ratings significantly when there are very few games played. It also doesn't take into account who actually plays in the game (i.e. if someone is injured, sick, etc). That can be a huge factor with wins and losses and though it affected what happened in the past, it may not be a good predicter of what will happen in the future (the Power rating).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dark Knight on December 08, 2010, 04:56:15 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on December 08, 2010, 04:35:53 PM
Interesting points, DK, but for as illuminating as that appears, I think it just shows the inaccuracy of computer models (especially early in the season).

Don't get me wrong... I think that Whitworth and Stevens Point are both good this year. But the model is only as good as the data that it draws from, and the data pool is limited at this point. It will be better next week than this week and better next month than this month.

The three factors that go into the Massey Ratings are score, venue, and date. So a game with an inflated score can affect the ratings significantly when there are very few games played. It also doesn't take into account who actually plays in the game (i.e. if someone is injured, sick, etc). That can be a huge factor with wins and losses and though it affected what happened in the past, it may not be a good predicter of what will happen in the future (the Power rating).

It doesn't take into account missing players, but should the poll really bump a team up because it has players missing and might have done better if they had played?

The number of games played -- 6 to 9 for most teams -- is enough for the poll and the ratings to start settling down. The Massey rating is roughly half as accurate (twice the standard deviation) now as it will be at the end of the season.

But the best way to use these ratings is to check them by hand. Do you not agree that Whitworth's resume makes a far better case for #1 than Wooster's?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 08, 2010, 05:23:25 PM

I like Massey, but will mostly agree with PS on this one. I don't put a whole lot of stock in either Massey or the poll this early in the season, but this early I would certainly put MORE stock in the poll than in Massey.

As to injuries, it depends, but yes, sometimes voters definitely should make allowances. A couple of years ago all-world Kent Raymond (Wheaton) went down for what was known to be a short-term injury (twisted ankle, if I remember correctly). Wheaton dropped two of the three games he missed (plus his first game back, when he was among the better players on the court, but clearly not Kent Raymond yet). As I recall (I don't think past records or polls have yet been added to the new site) they dropped only 4-5 slots, and quickly went back up after he was 100%. I wonder how much three losses would have semi-permanently hurt them in Massey?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dark Knight on December 08, 2010, 05:38:45 PM

I'm not suggesting anyone use Massey in any way other than to suggest teams to look at. The way to answer this is not "I like Massey" or "I don't like Massey" but "Massey is wrong about team X for the following reason" or "Massey is right; team Y should be a little higher or lower in the poll."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 08, 2010, 05:47:43 PM

Quote from: Dark Knight on December 08, 2010, 05:38:45 PM
I'm not suggesting anyone use Massey in any way other than to suggest teams to look at. The way to answer this is not "I like Massey" or "I don't like Massey" but "Massey is wrong about team X for the following reason" or "Massey is right; team Y should be a little higher or lower in the poll."

This post I certainly agree with. But that is not what you said (or at least strongly implied) in your original post. You called the teams flat-out overrated or underrated, and said team x "should be" .... To me, at least, you were directly asserting that Massey was right and the poll was wrong.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on December 08, 2010, 06:08:34 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 08, 2010, 05:23:25 PM
I like Massey, but will mostly agree with PS on this one. I don't put a whole lot of stock in either Massey or the poll this early in the season, but this early I would certainly put MORE stock in the poll than in Massey.

As to injuries, it depends, but yes, sometimes voters definitely should make allowances. A couple of years ago all-world Kent Raymond (Wheaton) went down for what was known to be a short-term injury (twisted ankle, if I remember correctly). Wheaton dropped two of the three games he missed (plus his first game back, when he was among the better players on the court, but clearly not Kent Raymond yet). As I recall (I don't think past records or polls have yet been added to the new site) they dropped only 4-5 slots, and quickly went back up after he was 100%. I wonder how much three losses would have semi-permanently hurt them in Massey?

I tend to agree with Mr. Y on this one. Am I going to complain that Wooster is the #1 ranked team in the country according to D3hoops.com? No. Do I think Wooster is truly the best team in the country? Again, my answer would be no. They are clearly an example of attaining their ranking by default. But as Mr. Y said, that's why we shouldn't put too much stock into the polls this early in the season, and that includes Massey's poll as well.

As for an example of why we shouldn't put too much stock into the polls? DK, you mentioned Denison as one of Wooster's less than stellar opponents to date this season. The same Dension that beat Chicago at Chicago. That same Chicago that just beat previous #2 IWU in Bloomington. Oh, and Wooster beat just Denison by 31...

Personally, I don't see one team that stands out to me as far and away the best team in the country this season. Last weekends upheaval among the top 3 teams is a perfect example. Furthermore, when was the last time the top 5 teams in the pre-season poll all sufferred losses this early in the season? Wooster was ranked 6th just a month ago (which I think was still maybe a tad over-rated for the Scots) in the pre-season poll and because they haven't lost, now find themselves atop the poll after 3 weeks of play. I will say, looking ahead, if Wooster can run the table over their next 8 games, I think their #1 ranking would then be legit.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 08, 2010, 06:12:18 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 08, 2010, 05:47:43 PM
Quote from: Dark Knight on December 08, 2010, 05:38:45 PM
I'm not suggesting anyone use Massey in any way other than to suggest teams to look at. The way to answer this is not "I like Massey" or "I don't like Massey" but "Massey is wrong about team X for the following reason" or "Massey is right; team Y should be a little higher or lower in the poll."

This post I certainly agree with. But that is not what you said (or at least strongly implied) in your original post. You called the teams flat-out overrated or underrated, and said team x "should be" .... To me, at least, you were directly asserting that Massey was right and the poll was wrong.

He did more than strongly imply, saying "(#X should be #Y)." "Should be," in my opinion, means that ranking Y is correct (Massey) and ranking X (D3 poll) is wrong. I am not sure what the intent of this wording was, but it came off very strong.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dark Knight on December 08, 2010, 06:20:26 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on December 08, 2010, 06:12:18 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 08, 2010, 05:47:43 PM
Quote from: Dark Knight on December 08, 2010, 05:38:45 PM
I'm not suggesting anyone use Massey in any way other than to suggest teams to look at. The way to answer this is not "I like Massey" or "I don't like Massey" but "Massey is wrong about team X for the following reason" or "Massey is right; team Y should be a little higher or lower in the poll."

This post I certainly agree with. But that is not what you said (or at least strongly implied) in your original post. You called the teams flat-out overrated or underrated, and said team x "should be" .... To me, at least, you were directly asserting that Massey was right and the poll was wrong.

He did more than strongly imply, saying "(#X should be #Y)." "Should be," in my opinion, means that ranking Y is correct (Massey) and ranking X (D3 poll) is wrong. I am not sure what the intent of this wording was, but it came off very strong.

All that came after was subject to the end of the first paragraph, "according to Massey." My apologies if it wasn't clear enough that I was giving Massey's rating and not my own.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 08, 2010, 07:31:53 PM

One thing that Massey, rightly or wrongly, does not take into consideration is projections for success as the year goes forward. These computer models are based strictly on what has happened so far this season. Wooster is not ranked #1 at this moment because of who they have beaten. They are #1 because they finished last season with a very strong showing in the national tournament and returned almost everybody from that team, placing them in position to move up when the teams above them were knocked off. This subjectivity is not something that computers can handle. Whether they should or not, I leave to you to decide. But a team like Wooster, toiling in a relatively weak conference, will generally suffer in computer polls when compared to a school like UW-SP with a strong conference, and there's not a whole heck of a lot they can do about it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 08, 2010, 07:42:34 PM

Quote from: Dark Knight on December 08, 2010, 06:20:26 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on December 08, 2010, 06:12:18 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 08, 2010, 05:47:43 PM
Quote from: Dark Knight on December 08, 2010, 05:38:45 PM
I'm not suggesting anyone use Massey in any way other than to suggest teams to look at. The way to answer this is not "I like Massey" or "I don't like Massey" but "Massey is wrong about team X for the following reason" or "Massey is right; team Y should be a little higher or lower in the poll."

This post I certainly agree with. But that is not what you said (or at least strongly implied) in your original post. You called the teams flat-out overrated or underrated, and said team x "should be" .... To me, at least, you were directly asserting that Massey was right and the poll was wrong.

He did more than strongly imply, saying "(#X should be #Y)." "Should be," in my opinion, means that ranking Y is correct (Massey) and ranking X (D3 poll) is wrong. I am not sure what the intent of this wording was, but it came off very strong.

All that came after was subject to the end of the first paragraph, "according to Massey." My apologies if it wasn't clear enough that I was giving Massey's rating and not my own.

That was clear, but the usage of "should be" does imply the latter is correct. If you were simply comparing you could have used "vs." or "compared to."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 08, 2010, 08:02:47 PM

Quote from: ScotsFan on December 08, 2010, 06:08:34 PM
As for an example of why we shouldn't put too much stock into the polls? DK, you mentioned Denison as one of Wooster's less than stellar opponents to date this season. The same Dension that beat Chicago at Chicago. That same Chicago that just beat previous #2 IWU in Bloomington. Oh, and Wooster beat just Denison by 31...

This is a great example of how polls can be deceiving and how match-ups can vary from team to team. It's possible that a good team may have a particular weakness that can be exploited by a mediocre team or one kid may just have "one of those nights" that causes team #150 to beat team #3. But that doesn't necessarily mean that team #150 should suddenly become team #3 or even that team #3 should automatically drop. In a computer ranking, they would, but there's a human element to a poll like the D3hoops poll that will take into effect other things.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 08, 2010, 08:20:36 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on December 08, 2010, 08:02:47 PM
Quote from: ScotsFan on December 08, 2010, 06:08:34 PM
As for an example of why we shouldn't put too much stock into the polls? DK, you mentioned Denison as one of Wooster's less than stellar opponents to date this season. The same Dension that beat Chicago at Chicago. That same Chicago that just beat previous #2 IWU in Bloomington. Oh, and Wooster beat just Denison by 31...

This is a great example of how polls can be deceiving and how match-ups can vary from team to team. It's possible that a good team may have a particular weakness that can be exploited by a mediocre team or one kid may just have "one of those nights" that causes team #150 to beat team #3. But that doesn't necessarily mean that team #150 should suddenly become team #3 or even that team #3 should automatically drop. In a computer ranking, they would, but there's a human element to a poll like the D3hoops poll that will take into effect other things.

Great point. Conversely, team #3 could lose their best player to injury and therefore lose to team #150. There are a lot of arguments for a human element.

The strength of computer-based polls is that they can pick up on undervalued teams that may be overlooked because they arent on the "radar" of the pollsters.

Also, someone previously stated that 6-8 games was a good sample size, which maybe true in some cases or even at the D1 level(although this is debatable). However, because of the regionality of D3, there are very little cross-over games in D3. Therefore, comparisons between regions with the computer poll can be problematic because of the sample size of games between opponents in each region is small. If you were selecting games randomly from all the teams in d3, 25 games would be more than enough to get good statistics and accurate rankings, but because of how regional this division is, especially in conferences where teams play 16 or even 18 or more conference games, you have only a handful of non-conference games, let alone out-of-region games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 08, 2010, 08:23:22 PM

Wooster down by 2 to Allegheny, 1 minute into the second half.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 08, 2010, 08:38:43 PM

The Wooster/Allegheny game is back-and-forth, now inside 8:00 to play with Wooster up by 2. Audio. (http://wkvx.com/)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 08, 2010, 08:40:25 PM

Live Stats (http://www.sidearmstats.com/allegheny/mbball/index.htm)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on December 08, 2010, 08:42:48 PM

The different philosophies that people hold with respect to top 25 polls really shows through in the early going.

Some view it as "who is the better team." i.e. who would win the most games if every team could play everyone else 100 times. These pollsters tend to stick to their guns and won't move a team too much for a reasonable loss.

Some view it as a "resume poll". You get one shot each game. Simply what have you done so far? These pollsters like to move teams around a lot after each game.

By the end of the season, the resume is equal to team strength (more or less), so there is less debate between the two camps.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 08, 2010, 09:02:50 PM

Ian Franks hits a buzzer-beating three to give Wooster the 76-73 victory.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 08, 2010, 09:03:16 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 08, 2010, 08:42:48 PM
The different philosophies that people hold with respect to top 25 polls really shows through in the early going.

Some view it as "who is the better team." i.e. who would win the most games if every team could play everyone else 100 times. These pollsters tend to stick to their guns and won't move a team too much for a reasonable loss.

Some view it as a "resume poll". You get one shot each game. Simply what have you done so far? These pollsters like to move teams around a lot after each game.

By the end of the season, the resume is equal to team strength (more or less), so there is less debate between the two camps.

I suspect most voters have some of each philosophy in them, though how much will obviously vary. I don't really see two distinct 'camps'.

To me, the 'who is the better team' subjectivity is a plus of polls (if not held TOO stubbornly), even if it leads to occasional disasters like the year Oshkosh started #2 (and dropped entirely out of the poll by week 3 or 4, never to return), or the year Chicago began in the poll, though fairly low, and proceeded to begin the season something like 0-16!

Your point about Massey alerting voters to under-the-radar teams is a good one, but the poll already somewhat accomplishes that by having 3 voters from each region (plus Pat as the 25th vote). A team may be under-the-radar nationally, but the voters within a region are likely to notice a team starting off 8-0 regardless of pedigree or quality of conference!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 08, 2010, 09:07:08 PM

Final: #1 Wooster 76 Allegheny 73

Wooster gets a narrow road win tonight as All American Ian Franks hit a three pointer to win it for the Scots at the buzzer. For Wooster, Franks had 19 points, Justin Hallowell with 18 points, Matt Fegan with 15 points and Nathan Balch with 12 points.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dark Knight on December 08, 2010, 09:07:32 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 08, 2010, 07:31:53 PM
One thing that Massey, rightly or wrongly, does not take into consideration is projections for success as the year goes forward. These computer models are based strictly on what has happened so far this season. Wooster is not ranked #1 at this moment because of who they have beaten. They are #1 because they finished last season with a very strong showing in the national tournament and returned almost everybody from that team, placing them in position to move up when the teams above them were knocked off. This subjectivity is not something that computers can handle. Whether they should or not, I leave to you to decide. But a team like Wooster, toiling in a relatively weak conference, will generally suffer in computer polls when compared to a school like UW-SP with a strong conference, and there's not a whole heck of a lot they can do about it.

This is the right kind of response: that the pollsters are using some information not available to Massey, how Wooster did last year. However, it's not really true in this case -- Massey does use last year's results early in the season. By the end of the season the effects of the previous season's results are entirely gone.

Also, there are two kinds of computer ratings, differing mainly on whether they pay attention to margin of victory. The rating I was quoting does use MOV, so Wooster could be rated #1 simply by winning big against weaker teams. Other ratings, that don't use MOV, are more susceptible to the effect you mention that teams in weaker conferences suffer in the polls.

As an aside, both approaches have flaws. However, Massey has done extensive statistical analysis of the two kinds of ratings (MOV-based and not MOV-based). They are close in predictive power, but the MOV-based rating is slightly better.

But what do you all think of the Massey's implication that Whitworth's results so far are quite a bit stronger than Wooster's? (David's unanswered question about whether polls should reflect only the games played so far or also take into account the history of the programs, etc. remains, of course.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 08, 2010, 09:09:07 PM

Milwaukee Engineering is 6-0 and hasnt received a vote yet! (too bad they lost to Aurora tonight)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dark Knight on December 08, 2010, 09:12:42 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on December 08, 2010, 09:07:08 PM
Final: #1 Wooster 76 Allegheny 73

Wooster gets a narrow road win tonight as All American Ian Franks hit a three pointer to win it for the Scots at the buzzer. For Wooster, Franks had 19 points, Justin Hallowell with 18 points, Matt Fegan with 15 points and Nathan Balch with 12 points.

Not a good result for Wooster's #1 ranking, as Allegheny is a below-average team in D3...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 08, 2010, 09:38:55 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 08, 2010, 09:03:16 PM
To me, the 'who is the better team' subjectivity is a plus of polls (if not held TOO stubbornly), even if it leads to occasional disasters like the year Oshkosh started #2 (and dropped entirely out of the poll by week 3 or 4, never to return), or the year Chicago began in the poll, though fairly low, and proceeded to begin the season something like 0-16!

Chicago went 0-12 I think. And both were major anomalies... Oshkosh was really talented but underachieved a ton and Chicago lost lots of tough games and just lost their confidence and didn't believe they could do it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 08, 2010, 10:38:34 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on December 08, 2010, 09:09:07 PM
Milwaukee Engineering is 6-0 and hasnt received a vote yet! (too bad they lost to Aurora tonight)

I was just about to post that you'd jinxed the Raiders, 'nerd.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 08, 2010, 10:59:14 PM

Quote from: Dark Knight on December 08, 2010, 09:12:42 PM
Quote from: wooscotsfan on December 08, 2010, 09:07:08 PM
Final: #1 Wooster 76 Allegheny 73

Wooster gets a narrow road win tonight as All American Ian Franks hit a three pointer to win it for the Scots at the buzzer. For Wooster, Franks had 19 points, Justin Hallowell with 18 points, Matt Fegan with 15 points and Nathan Balch with 12 points.

Not a good result for Wooster's #1 ranking, as Allegheny is a below-average team in D3...

However,

Wooster is the big dog of the NCAC - the team you want to beat with all of your heart and soul, especially when they are #1 in the nation.

And it was in Meadville - never a fun place to drive to in the winter.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 08, 2010, 11:13:58 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 08, 2010, 10:59:14 PM
Quote from: Dark Knight on December 08, 2010, 09:12:42 PM
Quote from: wooscotsfan on December 08, 2010, 09:07:08 PM
Final: #1 Wooster 76 Allegheny 73

Wooster gets a narrow road win tonight as All American Ian Franks hit a three pointer to win it for the Scots at the buzzer. For Wooster, Franks had 19 points, Justin Hallowell with 18 points, Matt Fegan with 15 points and Nathan Balch with 12 points.

Not a good result for Wooster's #1 ranking, as Allegheny is a below-average team in D3...

However,

Wooster is the big dog of the NCAC - the team you want to beat with all of your heart and soul, especially when they are #1 in the nation.

And it was in Meadville - never a fun place to drive to in the winter.

What time of year does Meadville become a fun place to drive to?

I've been there, and "fun" isn't the adjective that leaps to mind when I think of Meadville.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on December 08, 2010, 11:26:09 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 08, 2010, 10:59:14 PM
Quote from: Dark Knight on December 08, 2010, 09:12:42 PM
Quote from: wooscotsfan on December 08, 2010, 09:07:08 PM
Final: #1 Wooster 76 Allegheny 73

Wooster gets a narrow road win tonight as All American Ian Franks hit a three pointer to win it for the Scots at the buzzer. For Wooster, Franks had 19 points, Justin Hallowell with 18 points, Matt Fegan with 15 points and Nathan Balch with 12 points.

Not a good result for Wooster's #1 ranking, as Allegheny is a below-average team in D3...

However,

Wooster is the big dog of the NCAC - the team you want to beat with all of your heart and soul, especially when they are #1 in the nation.

And it was in Meadville - never a fun place to drive to in the winter.

And it was a win was it not? ::)

Wooster may not have gotten the style points tonight, but the bottom line is that they still have a 0 in the loss column. 8-)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 09, 2010, 12:02:57 AM

Quote from: smedindy on December 08, 2010, 10:59:14 PM
Quote from: Dark Knight on December 08, 2010, 09:12:42 PM
Quote from: wooscotsfan on December 08, 2010, 09:07:08 PM
Final: #1 Wooster 76 Allegheny 73

Wooster gets a narrow road win tonight as All American Ian Franks hit a three pointer to win it for the Scots at the buzzer. For Wooster, Franks had 19 points, Justin Hallowell with 18 points, Matt Fegan with 15 points and Nathan Balch with 12 points.

Not a good result for Wooster's #1 ranking, as Allegheny is a below-average team in D3...

However,

Wooster is the big dog of the NCAC - the team you want to beat with all of your heart and soul, especially when they are #1 in the nation.

...something the Gators have not managed to do in over a decade, although a number of these games have been nailbiters, including last year's game in Mudville (69-68).

This may not be the victory you put on line one of your resume, and who knows, maybe the Scots were preoccupied with their ranking (e.g., they were outrebounded by a team with a negative rebound margin on the season), or maybe it was the long bus ride through treacherous weather. Regardless, a win is a win, and it's good experience to play close games against teams that are executing, experience that Wooster doesn't get a lot of, and which could pay off in February and March.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 09, 2010, 12:08:18 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 08, 2010, 11:13:58 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 08, 2010, 10:59:14 PM
Quote from: Dark Knight on December 08, 2010, 09:12:42 PM
Quote from: wooscotsfan on December 08, 2010, 09:07:08 PM
Final: #1 Wooster 76 Allegheny 73

Wooster gets a narrow road win tonight as All American Ian Franks hit a three pointer to win it for the Scots at the buzzer. For Wooster, Franks had 19 points, Justin Hallowell with 18 points, Matt Fegan with 15 points and Nathan Balch with 12 points.

Not a good result for Wooster's #1 ranking, as Allegheny is a below-average team in D3...

However,

Wooster is the big dog of the NCAC - the team you want to beat with all of your heart and soul, especially when they are #1 in the nation.

And it was in Meadville - never a fun place to drive to in the winter.

What time of year does Meadville become a fun place to drive to?

I've been there, and "fun" isn't the adjective that leaps to mind when I think of Meadville.

Well, the drive through the National Forest to the East is scenic. I kind of like that.

But for most of us, to get to Meadville we spend most of our time in...

Ohio. :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 09, 2010, 12:34:32 AM

Early December conference games can be tricky, seems like you get a few surprising results right out of the gate every year in the OAC, WIAC etc.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 09, 2010, 07:54:52 AM

How They Fared -- Midweek Report

As always, please let me know if anything is missing; I don't proofread my program's output too much, apart from looking up missing scores (there were none on the men's side this time).

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	591	Wooster	7-0	def. Allegheny, 76-73; 12/11 at Ohio Wesleyan
#2	561	Williams	8-0	def. Hamilton, 79-56; 12/11 at Springfield
#3	533	Virginia Wesleyan	9-0	def. Apprentice School, 75-73; 12/11 at Shenandoah
#4	512	UW-Stevens Point	5-1	def. UW-Whitewater, 72-61; 12/11 vs. Macalester
#5	503	Middlebury	6-0	IDLE
#6	473	St. Norbert	5-1	LOST at Beloit, 50-62; 12/11 vs. Knox
#7	448	Whitworth	6-0	12/10 vs. UC Santa Cruz; 12/12 vs. Whittier
#8	444	Eastern Mennonite	6-1	12/11 vs. Averett; 12/12 vs. Bluefield Col.
#9	429	St. Thomas	8-0	def. Augsburg, 65-61; def. St. Olaf, 87-58; 12/11 at Hamline
#10	415	Illinois Wesleyan	6-1	12/11 vs. MacMurray
#11	401	Wabash	9-0	def. Ohio Wesleyan, 62-50; 12/11 at Kenyon
#12	388	Randolph-Macon	6-2	def. Lynchburg, 89-55; 12/11 vs. T#35 Guilford
#13	361	Augustana	5-0	def. St. Ambrose, 80-73; 12/11 vs. Buena Vista
#14	287	St. Mary's (Md.)	6-2	LOST at Citadel, 64-72; def. York (Pa.), 81-77; 12/11 vs. Hood
#15	246	Franklin and Marshall	6-1	def. Gettysburg, 70-62; 12/11 vs. Haverford
#16	224	Brandeis	8-0	IDLE
#17	197	John Carroll	6-1	def. Mount Union, 90-65; 12/11 vs. Ohio Northern
#18	183	UW-River Falls	7-1	def. UW-Eau Claire, 75-51; 12/11 at UW-Oshkosh
#19	167	Carthage	6-2	def. Silver Lake, 86-55; 12/11 vs. Albion; 12/11 vs. Cardinal Stritch
#20	148	Amherst	7-0	def. Emmanuel, 79-52; 12/09 vs. Babson; 12/11 at Anna Maria
#21	141	MIT	7-1	def. Mass-Boston, 92-68; 12/09 at Salem State; 12/11 at Lesley
#22	66	Plattsburgh State	6-1	IDLE
#23	49	WPI	5-2	LOST at Harvard, 54-69; 12/09 vs. #32 Rhode Island College; 12/11 at Fitchburg State
#24	46	Emory	7-0	def. Covenant, 80-67
#25	45	Ramapo	7-1	def. New York City Tech, 85-56; 12/11 vs. Richard Stockton

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	38	Catholic	6-1	LOST at T#43 DeSales, 66-72; 12/11 vs. Gettysburg
#27	33	Chapman	7-1	def. La Verne, 85-74; 12/11 vs. Pomona-Pitzer
#28	32	Anderson	4-2	def. Bluffton, 76-68; 12/11 vs. Earlham
#29	29	New York University	6-0	def. New Jersey, 82-65; 12/11 vs. New York City Tech
T#30	20	Western Connecticut	7-1	def. Norwich, 87-82; 12/11 at Mass-Dartmouth
T#30	20	Wheaton (Ill.)	5-2	12/09 vs. Trinity Int'l; 12/11 vs. Washington U.
#32	15	Rhode Island College	6-1	def. Salve Regina, 78-56; 12/09 at #23 WPI; 12/11 at Mass-Boston
T#33	12	Centre	5-1	IDLE
T#33	12	Ripon	5-1	def. Carroll, 70-65
T#35	9	Guilford	5-3	LOST at Washington and Lee, 67-71; 12/11 at #12 Randolph-Macon
T#35	9	Manhattanville	6-1	12/09 vs. Baruch
#37	8	Ferrum	6-0	def. Washington and Lee, 66-64
#38	7	Christopher Newport	4-2	IDLE
#39	4	East Texas Baptist	5-1	12/11 vs. Hardin-Simmons
T#40	3	Colorado College	5-2	IDLE
T#40	3	Hope	2-3	12/10 vs. Grace Bible (Mich.); 12/11 vs. TBA
T#40	3	Texas-Dallas	5-2	def. Texas Lutheran, 77-63
T#43	2	Becker	6-1	def. Bridgewater State, 78-75; 12/09 vs. Clark; 12/11 at Newbury
T#43	2	DeSales	5-2	def. #26 Catholic, 72-66; 12/11 vs. Penn St.-Wilkes-Barre
T#43	2	Keene State	7-1	def. Massachusetts College, 104-79; 12/11 vs. Southern Maine
T#46	1	Marietta	6-0	12/11 vs. Otterbein
T#46	1	Nazareth	6-1	def. Buffalo State, 86-79; 12/09 at Ithaca
T#46	1	SUNY-Purchase	7-0	IDLE

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 09, 2010, 11:17:52 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 08, 2010, 11:13:58 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 08, 2010, 10:59:14 PM
Quote from: Dark Knight on December 08, 2010, 09:12:42 PM
Quote from: wooscotsfan on December 08, 2010, 09:07:08 PM
Final: #1 Wooster 76 Allegheny 73

Wooster gets a narrow road win tonight as All American Ian Franks hit a three pointer to win it for the Scots at the buzzer. For Wooster, Franks had 19 points, Justin Hallowell with 18 points, Matt Fegan with 15 points and Nathan Balch with 12 points.

Not a good result for Wooster's #1 ranking, as Allegheny is a below-average team in D3...

However,

Wooster is the big dog of the NCAC - the team you want to beat with all of your heart and soul, especially when they are #1 in the nation.

And it was in Meadville - never a fun place to drive to in the winter.

What time of year does Meadville become a fun place to drive to?

I've been there, and "fun" isn't the adjective that leaps to mind when I think of Meadville.

I drove from Alliance to Meadville last year to cover a football doubleheader -- one game at Allegheny, one at Mount Union. In October it was merely a drive, neither fun nor painful.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on December 09, 2010, 12:55:21 PM

Beloit 62, St. Norbert 50. This will hurt St. Norbert's Massey BIGTIME. But will it hurt there 6 spot? ::) ;D

Virginia Wesleyan 9-0 def. Apprentice School, 75-73. Is this a good win? :o

When is the "early" season officially over? 6 games? 8 games? 10??? A month? :-X

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 09, 2010, 01:05:05 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on December 09, 2010, 12:55:21 PM
When is the "early" season officially over? 6 games? 8 games? 10?????? A month?

First week of January.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 09, 2010, 01:12:14 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 09, 2010, 01:05:05 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on December 09, 2010, 12:55:21 PM
When is the "early" season officially over? 6 games? 8 games? 10?????? A month?

First week of January.

You are obviously correct, since that is when the Posters' Poll begins! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 09, 2010, 01:28:08 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on December 09, 2010, 12:55:21 PM
Beloit 62, St. Norbert 50. This will hurt St. Norbert's Massey BIGTIME. But will it hurt there 6 spot? ::) ;D

Virginia Wesleyan 9-0 def. Apprentice School, 75-73. Is this a good win? :o

When is the "early" season officially over? 6 games? 8 games? 10??? A month? :-X

When the NCAA field is determined! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 09, 2010, 02:19:41 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 09, 2010, 01:12:14 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 09, 2010, 01:05:05 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on December 09, 2010, 12:55:21 PM
When is the "early" season officially over? 6 games? 8 games? 10?????? A month?

First week of January.

You are obviously correct, since that is when the Posters' Poll begins! ;D

Did somebody mention the Posters' Poll?

I'm in! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GuyFormerlyPSBBG on December 09, 2010, 02:44:04 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 09, 2010, 02:19:41 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 09, 2010, 01:12:14 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 09, 2010, 01:05:05 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on December 09, 2010, 12:55:21 PM
When is the "early" season officially over? 6 games? 8 games? 10?????? A month?

First week of January.

You are obviously correct, since that is when the Posters' Poll begins! ;D
Did somebody mention the Posters' Poll?

I'm in! ;D

I'm in.....on the women's side though. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on December 10, 2010, 11:18:11 PM

Whitworth 92-61 over UC Santa Cruz. No trouble, subs in with 12 minutes to play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 11, 2010, 04:20:35 PM

Wabash is having its hands full with Kenyon. The LGs are on an 8-0 run with 3 minutes to play, but lead just 58-54.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 11, 2010, 04:39:03 PM

Kenyon hits a three with :02 left, but Wabash gets the ball to half court, calls time, and then Derek Bailey hits a three before the buzzer for a 62-60 win for the Little Giants.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 11, 2010, 04:41:55 PM

Final: #1 Wooster 68 Ohio Wesleyan 42

Wooster gets the easy road win by shooting 50% from the floor. Ian Franks led with 18 points, 12 boards, 6 assists.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on December 12, 2010, 06:28:13 PM

#7 Whitworth defeats Whittier in the Whit Bowl 86-65. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 12, 2010, 07:24:11 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on December 12, 2010, 06:28:13 PM
#7 Whitworth defeats Whittier in the Whit Bowl 86-65. ;D

Does anyone really give a whit?

Just kidding...had to go with the obvious joke, right?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 12, 2010, 07:46:14 PM

How They Fared

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	591	Wooster	8-0	def. Allegheny, 76-73; def. Ohio Wesleyan, 68-42
#2	561	Williams	9-0	def. Hamilton, 79-56; def. Springfield, 83-60
#3	533	Virginia Wesleyan	10-0	def. Apprentice School, 75-73; def. Shenandoah, 76-48
#4	512	UW-Stevens Point	5-1	def. UW-Whitewater, 72-61; 12/11 vs. Macalester-POSTPONED
#5	503	Middlebury	6-0	IDLE
#6	473	St. Norbert	6-1	LOST at Beloit, 50-62; def. Knox, 65-42
#7	448	Whitworth	8-0	def. UC Santa Cruz, 92-61; def. Whittier, 86-65
#8	444	Eastern Mennonite	8-1	def. Averett, 97-89; def. Bluefield Col., 103-68
#9	429	St. Thomas	8-0	def. Augsburg, 65-61; def. St. Olaf, 87-58; 12/11 at Hamline-POSTPONED
#10	415	Illinois Wesleyan	7-1	def. MacMurray, 94-65
#11	401	Wabash	10-0	def. Ohio Wesleyan, 62-50; def. Kenyon, 62-60
#12	388	Randolph-Macon	7-2	def. Lynchburg, 89-55; def. T#35 Guilford, 67-48
#13	361	Augustana	6-0	def. St. Ambrose, 80-73; def. Buena Vista, 71-63
#14	287	St. Mary's (Md.)	7-2	LOST at Citadel, 64-72; def. York (Pa.), 81-77; def. Hood, 87-58
#15	246	Franklin and Marshall	7-1	def. Gettysburg, 70-62; def. Haverford, 78-65
#16	224	Brandeis	8-0	IDLE
#17	197	John Carroll	6-2	def. Mount Union, 90-65; LOST to Ohio Northern, 66-68
#18	183	UW-River Falls	8-1	def. UW-Eau Claire, 75-51; def. UW-Oshkosh, 70-61
#19	167	Carthage	7-3	def. Silver Lake, 86-55; LOST to Albion, 88-93; def. Cardinal Stritch, 90-84
#20	148	Amherst	9-0	def. Emmanuel, 79-52; def. Babson, 104-72; def. Anna Maria, 82-68
#21	141	MIT	9-1	def. Mass-Boston, 92-68; def. Salem State, 76-75; def. Lesley, 82-61
#22	66	Plattsburgh State	6-1	IDLE
#23	49	WPI	7-2	LOST at Harvard, 54-69; def. #32 Rhode Island College, 60-59; def. Fitchburg State, 78-63
#24	46	Emory	7-0	def. Covenant, 80-67
#25	45	Ramapo	8-1	def. New York City Tech, 85-57; def. Richard Stockton, 68-64

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	38	Catholic	7-1	LOST at T#43 DeSales, 66-72; def. Gettysburg, 61-58
#27	33	Chapman	8-1	def. La Verne, 85-74; def. Pomona-Pitzer, 65-54
#28	32	Anderson	5-2	def. Bluffton, 76-68; def. Earlham, 95-50
#29	29	New York University	7-0	def. New Jersey, 82-65; def. New York City Tech, 85-78
T#30	20	Western Connecticut	8-1	def. Norwich, 87-82; def. Mass-Dartmouth, 89-71
T#30	20	Wheaton (Ill.)	7-2	def. Trinity Int'l, 80-78; def. Washington U., 56-55
#32	15	Rhode Island College	7-2	def. Salve Regina, 78-56; LOST at #23 WPI, 59-60; def. Mass-Boston, 76-54
T#33	12	Centre	5-1	IDLE
T#33	12	Ripon	5-1	def. Carroll, 70-65
T#35	9	Guilford	5-4	LOST at Washington and Lee, 67-71; LOST at #12 Randolph-Macon, 48-67
T#35	9	Manhattanville	7-1	def. Baruch, 68-67
#37	8	Ferrum	6-0	def. Washington and Lee, 66-64
#38	7	Christopher Newport	4-2	IDLE
#39	4	East Texas Baptist	5-2	LOST to Hardin-Simmons, 67-71
T#40	3	Colorado College	5-2	IDLE
T#40	3	Hope	3-4	LOST to Grace Bible (Mich.), 90-93; def. Purdue-North Cent., 104-78
T#40	3	Texas-Dallas	5-2	def. Texas Lutheran, 77-63
T#43	2	Becker	8-1	def. Bridgewater State, 78-75; def. Clark, 82-58; def. Newbury, 79-35
T#43	2	DeSales	6-2	def. #26 Catholic, 72-66; def. Penn St.-Wilkes-Barre, 89-47
T#43	2	Keene State	8-1	def. Massachusetts College, 104-79; def. Southern Maine, 79-78
T#46	1	Marietta	7-0	def. Otterbein, 72-54
T#46	1	Nazareth	6-2	def. Buffalo State, 86-79; LOST at Ithaca, 84-94
T#46	1	SUNY-Purchase	7-0	IDLE

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Matt Letourneau on December 12, 2010, 09:20:13 PM

It is worth noting that Catholic's loss at DeSales came in a game without their starting center, Chris Kearney, who had been averaging 5 rebounds a game and has 17 blocks in 7 games. Catholic got outrebounded in that game and outscored in the paint. Kearney's getting healthy again and was back for the win against Gettysburg.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 14, 2010, 09:15:59 AM

New rankings out:

http://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2010-11/week3

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: RustCollege on December 15, 2010, 05:47:07 PM

Hey Pat now it is your turn to come down to Holly Springs to see Rust cause Hoopfan Came down with Webster

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on December 15, 2010, 06:18:30 PM

Hopefan, old buddy Rust.... Hopefan (not Hoopfan) !!!!!! ;) ;) ;) And yes Pat, if you take Rust up on it, you can stay overnight at my place in St.Louis as a halfway point!!! ;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 16, 2010, 09:16:28 AM

How They Fared -- Midweek Report

Not much happening this week, as final exams and Christmas break cut into the basketball schedule. Six games so far, with only 21 more pending through Sunday.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	594	Wooster	8-0	IDLE
#2	574	Williams	9-0	IDLE
#3	566	Virginia Wesleyan	10-0	12/17 vs. North Carolina Wesleyan
#4	525	UW-Stevens Point	5-1	IDLE
#5	499	Middlebury	6-0	IDLE
#6	482	Whitworth	8-0	12/19 at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps
#7	464	St. Thomas	8-0	IDLE
#8	434	Eastern Mennonite	8-1	IDLE
#9	429	Wabash	10-0	12/19 vs. Allegheny
#10	401	Augustana	7-0	def. T#33 UW-Whitewater, 70-64
#11	361	Randolph-Macon	7-2	12/19 at Averett
#12	359	Illinois Wesleyan	7-1	12/18 at Washington U.
#13	293	St. Norbert	6-1	12/18 at Lake Forest
#14	270	St. Mary's (Md.)	7-2	12/17 at Olivet; 12/18 at Lawrence
#15	268	Franklin and Marshall	7-1	IDLE
#16	264	Brandeis	8-0	IDLE
#17	248	UW-River Falls	9-1	def. Hamline, 81-74
#18	237	Amherst	9-0	IDLE
#19	173	MIT	9-1	IDLE
#20	84	Plattsburgh State	6-1	IDLE
#21	77	Ramapo	8-1	IDLE
#22	73	WPI	7-2	IDLE
#23	72	Emory	7-0	12/16 at LaGrange
#24	62	Chapman	8-1	12/18 vs. Oglethorpe
#25	55	John Carroll	6-2	12/18 at Otterbein

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	42	Carthage	7-3	IDLE
#27	30	Western Connecticut	8-1	IDLE
#28	23	Wheaton (Ill.)	7-2	IDLE
#29	21	New York University	7-0	IDLE
#30	20	Catholic	7-2	LOST to Richard Stockton, 53-54; 12/18 vs. Stevenson
T#31	16	Becker	8-1	IDLE
T#31	16	Centre	5-1	12/16 at Asbury
T#33	13	Ferrum	7-0	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 90-77; 12/16 vs. Piedmont; 12/18 vs. Lancaster Bible
T#33	13	Keene State	8-1	IDLE
T#33	13	Manhattanville	7-1	12/19 at #43 SUNY-Purchase
T#33	13	UW-Whitewater	4-4	LOST at #10 Augustana, 64-70; 12/18 vs. Marian
#37	12	Ripon	5-1	12/19 at Monmouth
#38	11	Anderson	5-2	IDLE
#39	8	Rhode Island College	7-2	IDLE
#40	4	Christopher Newport	4-3	LOST at Mary Washington, 75-78; 12/17 at Lynchburg; 12/19 at Frostburg State
#41	3	Marietta	8-0	def. Waynesburg, 80-56; 12/18 at Ohio Northern
#42	2	DeSales	6-2	IDLE
#43	1	SUNY-Purchase	7-0	12/19 vs. T#33 Manhattanville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on December 19, 2010, 08:07:45 PM

#6 Whitworth 79, at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps 64. 51-51 and then an 11-0 run puts Pirates up to stay.

In the numerology dept. my 666 post was a victory for the 6th ranked team. Pass the egg nog....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 19, 2010, 11:39:31 PM

How They Fared

Complete for this week's paltry selection of games. Hope no one was anxiously awaiting this post; I was busy grading precalculus tests.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	594	Wooster	8-0	IDLE
#2	574	Williams	9-0	IDLE
#3	566	Virginia Wesleyan	11-0	def. North Carolina Wesleyan, 76-64
#4	525	UW-Stevens Point	5-1	IDLE
#5	499	Middlebury	6-0	IDLE
#6	482	Whitworth	9-0	def. Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 79-64
#7	464	St. Thomas	8-0	IDLE
#8	434	Eastern Mennonite	8-1	IDLE
#9	429	Wabash	11-0	def. Allegheny, 89-56
#10	401	Augustana	7-0	def. T#33 UW-Whitewater, 70-64
#11	361	Randolph-Macon	8-2	def. Averett, 97-55
#12	359	Illinois Wesleyan	7-2	LOST at Washington U., 75-83
#13	293	St. Norbert	7-1	def. Lake Forest, 65-47
#14	270	St. Mary's (Md.)	9-2	def. Olivet, 82-81; def. Lawrence, 89-80
#15	268	Franklin and Marshall	7-1	IDLE
#16	264	Brandeis	8-0	IDLE
#17	248	UW-River Falls	9-1	def. Hamline, 81-74
#18	237	Amherst	9-0	IDLE
#19	173	MIT	9-1	IDLE
#20	84	Plattsburgh State	6-1	IDLE
#21	77	Ramapo	8-1	IDLE
#22	73	WPI	7-2	IDLE
#23	72	Emory	7-1	LOST at LaGrange, 66-74
#24	62	Chapman	9-1	def. Oglethorpe, 60-57
#25	55	John Carroll	6-3	LOST at Otterbein, 83-86

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	42	Carthage	7-3	IDLE
#27	30	Western Connecticut	8-1	IDLE
#28	23	Wheaton (Ill.)	7-2	IDLE
#29	21	New York University	7-0	IDLE
#30	20	Catholic	8-2	LOST to Richard Stockton, 53-54; def. Stevenson, 79-50
T#31	16	Becker	8-1	IDLE
T#31	16	Centre	6-1	def. Asbury, 66-58
T#33	13	Ferrum	9-0	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 90-77; def. Piedmont, 92-54; def. Lancaster Bible, 90-70
T#33	13	Keene State	8-1	IDLE
T#33	13	Manhattanville	8-1	def. #43 SUNY-Purchase, 66-54
T#33	13	UW-Whitewater	5-4	LOST at #10 Augustana, 64-70; def. Marian, 82-71
#37	12	Ripon	6-1	def. Monmouth, 82-66
#38	11	Anderson	5-2	IDLE
#39	8	Rhode Island College	7-2	IDLE
#40	4	Christopher Newport	5-4	LOST at Mary Washington, 75-78; def. Lynchburg, 82-77; LOST at Frostburg State, 91-95
#41	3	Marietta	9-0	def. Waynesburg, 80-56; def. Ohio Northern, 79-77
#42	2	DeSales	6-2	IDLE
#43	1	SUNY-Purchase	7-1	LOST to T#33 Manhattanville, 54-66

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 20, 2010, 08:20:26 PM

10:00 Left in 2nd Half: #1 Wooster 63 Anderson 31

Wooster is shooting close to 60% and is dissecting Anderson on the Ravens home court. Justin Hallowell and Ian Franks are leading Wooster in scoring.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 20, 2010, 08:37:35 PM

Final: #1 Wooster 89 Anderson 48 :)

Wooster notches a nice road win by overwhelming Anderson on their home floor. Wooster shot 62% from the floor and outrebounded the Ravens by 46 to 30. Wooster scored 61 points in the 2nd half.

Anderson was ranked in the preseason Top 25 and this was their first home loss of the season.

Wooster is now 9-0 and next game is John Carroll at home on 12/28

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: zander on December 21, 2010, 05:40:58 AM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on December 20, 2010, 08:37:35 PM
Final: #1 Wooster 89 Anderson 48 :)

Wooster notches a nice road win by overwhelming Anderson on their home floor. Wooster shot 62% from the floor and outrebounded the Ravens by 46 to 30. Wooster scored 61 points in the 2nd half.

Anderson was ranked in the preseason Top 25 and this was their first home loss of the season.

Wooster is now 9-0 and next game is John Carroll at home on 12/28

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: zander on December 21, 2010, 05:45:11 AM

Anderson did not know what hit them.... Justin H has some serious range as his three's were 3 or 4 feet past the NBA line. Pretty nice weapon to have a 6'7" kid that can step that far out and shoot. If you get up on him he will take you to the hole also. Franks is a leader and a player too. Still trying to figure out if A.U is that bad? or?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on December 21, 2010, 10:14:26 AM

Quote from: zander on December 21, 2010, 05:45:11 AM
Anderson did not know what hit them.... Justin H has some serious range as his three's were 3 or 4 feet past the NBA line. Pretty nice weapon to have a 6'7" kid that can step that far out and shoot. If you get up on him he will take you to the hole also. Franks is a leader and a player too.

Hallowell is indeed a nice weapon to have... when he's shooting well. As a freshmen he was one of the top 3-point shooters in the country in both 3-pointers made and 3-point percentage on his way to being named national newcomer of the year by d3hoops. However, he fell prey to the dreaded sophomore slump last season and really struggled to find his range from deep all season which hurt the Scots. But what his struggles from the outside did last season was force him to work on his inside game and I think this has helped him tremendously this season as he has become a much more well rounded player. No longer can defenders just clamp down on Hallowell and defend him on the perimeter because, as you said zander, if you get up on him he will drive to the basket. And his shooter's touch has seemed to return as well which doesn't hurt! 8-)

Quote from: zander on December 21, 2010, 05:45:11 AM
Still trying to figure out if A.U is that bad? or?

Personally, I would just chalk that loss up as just one of those games. Wooster was just in the zone last night and Anderson found themselves right in the middle of a hornets nest that they couldn't get out of. Although I didn't see the game, I listened to the radio broadcast and you would be hard-pressed to find a better Wooster performance in a half than what they put on in the 2nd half last night. Offensively and defensively, the Scots were just in one of those zones!

Look at it this way. Coach Moore pointed out in his post game interview that his team was motivated by the fact that this Anderson team (which basically had everyone back from last year's NCAA tournament team) beat St. Thomas in the tournament. That same St. Thomas beat Wooster by 31 at Wooster in their 4th game of the season last year! :o UST was in one of those zones vs. Wooster just like the Scots were last night vs. Anderson. I do think Wooster is a better team than Anderson, but not 41 points better as we saw last night. The key for Anderson will be how they respond to this beatdown. Wooster dropped to 1-3 after their drubbing to UST last season but they were able to put that loss behind them and finish 24-4 over the remainder of the season advancing to the 3rd round of the NCAA tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on December 21, 2010, 10:27:43 AM

Quote from: zander on December 21, 2010, 05:45:11 AM
Anderson did not know what hit them.... Justin H has some serious range as his three's were 3 or 4 feet past the NBA line. Pretty nice weapon to have a 6'7" kid that can step that far out and shoot. If you get up on him he will take you to the hole also. Franks is a leader and a player too. Still trying to figure out if A.U is that bad? or?

I see that SF put up a similar post...

I doubt that AU is as bad as they looked yesterday, and I also doubt that Wooster is quite as good as they looked yesterday. Very, very rarely is even a good team like Wooster going to shoot 77% for a full half, and probably just as rarely will Anderson only shoot 25% for a game. Wooster clearly had its best half of the entire season while Anderson had its worst half of the season. Have both of those in the exact same half and it helps explain the outlandish 61-26 second half box score.

SF- I immediately thought of the St. Thomas game from last year, too. Like the Anderson-Wooster game, that one was expected to be close, with UST at #4 and Wooster at #9 in the preseason poll. After that, it seemed like Wooster had a chance of going into free-fall, but instead, as you note, they had a great year, and, ironically enough, ended the season at #8 in the final poll after the trip to the Sweet Sixteen.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WcsuAlum on December 21, 2010, 11:57:37 AM

When will the Top 25 poll be released?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 21, 2010, 06:01:39 PM

It's out now. This week of the year so many voters are either out at holiday tournaments or taking a couple days off that it's hard to round up 25 ballots.

Especially if the guy running the poll forgets to send out the voter info on Sunday night. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 21, 2010, 06:32:17 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 21, 2010, 06:01:39 PM
It's out now. This week of the year so many voters are either out at holiday tournaments or taking a couple days off that it's hard to round up 25 ballots.

Especially if the guy running the poll forgets to send out the voter info on Sunday night. :)

Gee what was that guy doing?

National championship weekend, the Gagliardi, the pre-game show, the tailgating, the game itself and the post-game show, for another sport?

;) :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 21, 2010, 07:58:38 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 21, 2010, 06:32:17 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 21, 2010, 06:01:39 PM
It's out now. This week of the year so many voters are either out at holiday tournaments or taking a couple days off that it's hard to round up 25 ballots.

Especially if the guy running the poll forgets to send out the voter info on Sunday night. :)
Gee what was that guy doing?

National championship weekend, the Gagliardi, the pre-game show, the tailgating, the game itself and the post-game show, for another sport?

;) :D

The aforementioned guy has to get his priorities straight.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 21, 2010, 11:00:17 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 21, 2010, 06:32:17 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 21, 2010, 06:01:39 PM
It's out now. This week of the year so many voters are either out at holiday tournaments or taking a couple days off that it's hard to round up 25 ballots.

Especially if the guy running the poll forgets to send out the voter info on Sunday night. :)
Gee what was that guy doing?

National championship weekend, the Gagliardi, the pre-game show, the tailgating, the game itself and the post-game show, for another sport?

;) :D

...and The Birthday. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 21, 2010, 11:17:51 PM

Actually, I ended up doing that compilation on my birthday because I forgot to do it Sunday night.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Denny McKinney on December 22, 2010, 04:35:37 PM

How can Anderson be receiving votes, and RHIT and Transy not?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 22, 2010, 05:13:01 PM

Quote from: Denny McKinney on December 22, 2010, 04:35:37 PM
How can Anderson be receiving votes, and RHIT and Transy not?

One thing to remember, the Wooster pasting of Anderson (at Anderson) happened after the ballots for this week's Top 25 were in. I did not vote for Anderson this week, but those who did will certainly drop them. (The game got my attention enough to probably move my #1 from Virginia Wesleyan to Wooster...but again, my ballot was already in when the game was played.)

I did not vote for either Rose-Hulman or Transylvania this week. They're both on my radar, but I want to see what Transy does with Carthage on 1/2, and what RHIT does vs Manchester 1/5. I suspect other voters are just looking for a little bit more data too.

We're getting to that point of the season where 2009-10 influence on the poll is quickly dwindling...but it's still there a little. Teams like Rose-Hulman and Transy (not really on the Top 25 radar coming in) are going to fight that a little bit. Whether it is right or wrong, it's a reality.

I thought 9-0 Marietta would get in this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 22, 2010, 08:42:00 PM

Stevens Point leads St. Thomas 25-20 at halftime.

Come on over to the WIAC in game board and join the party!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 22, 2010, 09:47:25 PM

#7 St Thomas takes down #4 Stevens Point 61-54.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 22, 2010, 09:48:00 PM

~~Final from St. Paul, MN #7 St. Thomas beats #4 Stevens Point~~

meh, what he said

Quote from: magicman on December 22, 2010, 09:47:25 PM

#7 St Thomas takes down #4 Stevens Point 61-54.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: zander on December 22, 2010, 10:01:11 PM

Quote from: Denny McKinney on December 22, 2010, 04:35:37 PM
How can Anderson be receiving votes, and RHIT and Transy not?

denny- hanover is winning the league

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 23, 2010, 08:46:33 AM

How They Fared

Not too many games in the rearview mirror yet. I believe that there is no poll next week (is that correct?), so this lists upcoming games through January 2.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	594	Wooster	9-0	def. #37 Anderson, 89-48; 12/28 vs. #38 John Carroll; 12/29 vs. Wilmington; 01/01 vs. William Carey; 01/02 at Baruch
#2	574	Williams	9-0	12/28 at North Park; 12/29 at Salem State; 01/02 vs. Westfield State
#3	561	Virginia Wesleyan	11-0	01/02 at Lynchburg
#4	530	UW-Stevens Point	5-2	LOST at #7 St. Thomas, 54-61; 12/27 at #20 Ramapo; 12/28 at Colorado College; 12/29 at Simpson; 12/30 at Linfield
#5	506	Middlebury	6-0	01/02 vs. RPI
#6	489	Whitworth	9-0	12/28 vs. #33 Ripon; 12/29 at Colorado College
#7	472	St. Thomas	9-0	def. #4 UW-Stevens Point, 61-54
#8	454	Wabash	11-0	12/29 at Franklin
#9	425	Eastern Mennonite	8-1	IDLE
#10	388	Augustana	8-0	def. MacMurray, 53-50; 12/29 at UW-Stout; 12/30 at TBA; 01/02 at Chicago
#11	384	Randolph-Macon	8-2	12/30 vs. Hood; 12/31 vs. Johns Hopkins
#12	306	St. Norbert	7-1	12/29 vs. Lakeland; 12/30 vs. TBA
#13	302	St. Mary's (Md.)	9-2	IDLE
#14	284	Franklin and Marshall	7-1	01/02 vs. SUNY-Old Westbury
#15	270	Brandeis	8-0	IDLE
#16	258	UW-River Falls	9-1	12/29 vs. Macalester; 12/30 vs. Sioux Falls
#17	243	Amherst	9-0	12/30 at Johnson & Wales (Fla.)
#18	203	Illinois Wesleyan	7-2	12/29 vs. Gettysburg; 12/30 vs. TBA
#19	187	MIT	9-1	12/31 at Harvard
#20	116	Ramapo	8-1	12/27 vs. #4 UW-Stevens Point; 12/28 vs. Scranton
#21	113	Plattsburgh State	6-1	IDLE
#22	90	Chapman	10-1	def. Whittier, 78-65; 12/29 at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps; 12/31 vs. George Fox
#23	86	WPI	7-2	12/28 at #25 Western Connecticut; 12/30 vs. #34 Becker; 01/02 at University of New England
#24	42	Carthage	7-3	01/02 at Transylvania
#25	39	Western Connecticut	8-1	12/28 vs. #23 WPI

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	26	Manhattanville	8-1	12/30 at York (N.Y.); 01/02 at Muhlenberg
T#27	25	Marietta	10-0	def. Wilmington, 89-78; 12/29 at Redlands; 12/30 at La Verne
T#27	25	Wheaton (Ill.)	7-2	12/31 at Husson
#29	24	New York University	7-0	12/30 at SUNY-Maritime; 01/02 vs. Drew
#30	20	Ferrum	9-0	12/30 at Covenant; 12/31 at LaGrange
#31	19	Centre	6-1	12/28 vs. Allegheny; 12/29 vs. TBD; 01/02 at DePauw
#32	17	Keene State	8-1	IDLE
#33	14	Ripon	6-1	12/28 at #6 Whitworth; 12/29 vs. Scranton
#34	13	Becker	8-1	12/30 at #23 WPI
#35	10	Rhode Island College	7-2	IDLE
#36	9	Emory	7-1	12/30 vs. Washington and Lee; 01/02 vs. Huntingdon
#37	4	Anderson	5-3	LOST to #1 Wooster, 48-89; 12/28 at Richard Stockton; 12/29 at TBA
#38	2	John Carroll	7-3	def. Baldwin-Wallace, 82-73; 12/28 at #1 Wooster; 12/29 vs. Spalding
#39	1	Catholic	8-2	01/01 vs. CCNY; 01/02 vs. TBD

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 23, 2010, 01:19:47 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 23, 2010, 08:46:33 AM
How They Fared

Top 25

Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#1 594 Wooster 9-0 def. #37 Anderson, 89-48; 12/28 vs. #38 John Carroll; 12/29 vs. Wilmington; 01/01 vs. William Carey; 01/02 at Baruch

FYI, Wooster's games against William Carey and Baruch are both neutral site, in Daytona Beach.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 23, 2010, 01:28:50 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 23, 2010, 08:46:33 AM
I believe that there is no poll next week (is that correct?)

Correct.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 23, 2010, 05:16:51 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 23, 2010, 08:46:33 AM
Top 25

#4 530 UW-Stevens Point 5-2 LOST at #7 St. Thomas, 54-61; 12/27 at #20 Ramapo; 12/28 at Colorado College; 12/29 at Simpson; 12/30 at Linfield

The first two are in Vegas, the 2nd two are in Phoenix. Wow. Four games in four days with a 6 hour bus trip squeezed in there. Hope they have time to go to the Heart Attack Grill outside Phoenix.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 24, 2010, 12:31:07 AM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on December 23, 2010, 05:16:51 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 23, 2010, 08:46:33 AM
Top 25

#4 530 UW-Stevens Point 5-2 LOST at #7 St. Thomas, 54-61; 12/27 at #20 Ramapo; 12/28 at Colorado College; 12/29 at Simpson; 12/30 at Linfield

The first two are in Vegas, the 2nd two are in Phoenix. Wow. Four games in four days with a 6 hour bus trip squeezed in there. Hope they have time to go to the Heart Attack Grill outside Phoenix.

Good thing that Hoover Dam bypass is now open!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 24, 2010, 12:34:45 AM

Reads like a regular barnstorming tour.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 24, 2010, 09:21:35 AM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on December 23, 2010, 05:16:51 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 23, 2010, 08:46:33 AM
Top 25

#4 530 UW-Stevens Point 5-2 LOST at #7 St. Thomas, 54-61; 12/27 at #20 Ramapo; 12/28 at Colorado College; 12/29 at Simpson; 12/30 at Linfield

The first two are in Vegas, the 2nd two are in Phoenix. Wow. Four games in four days with a 6 hour bus trip squeezed in there. Hope they have time to go to the Heart Attack Grill outside Phoenix.

I hope the traffic during the holidays from Vegas to Phoenix isnt like the traffic from LA to Vegas, a few hour drive can turn into a whole day affair.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 26, 2010, 08:25:09 PM

Because of the small numbers of games over this two-week stretch, and an impending trip to visit family in Illinois, I am not going to post a "How They Fared" report tonight, or this Wednesday. The final report will be posted next Sunday night.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 27, 2010, 12:35:40 AM

Enjoy the holidays!

Take the time off.

We'll pester you enough next year! ;D Get your break now!

+1! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ECSUalum on December 27, 2010, 07:41:23 PM

This video is sort of spooky!!!

Did not know were to put this 8-)

http://www.bing.com/videos/watch/video/crazy-basketball-free-throw/1jrvi0zgd?q=College+basketball&rel=msn&from=en-us_msnhp&form=msnhed&gt1=42007

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 27, 2010, 08:43:35 PM

Quote from: ECSUalum on December 27, 2010, 07:41:23 PM
This video is sort of spooky!!!

Did not know were to put this 8-)

http://www.bing.com/videos/watch/video/crazy-basketball-free-throw/1jrvi0zgd?q=College+basketball&rel=msn&from=en-us_msnhp&form=msnhed&gt1=42007

Top 25 video highlights of the season! +1! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ECSUalum on December 27, 2010, 08:51:07 PM

Thanks Ralph,

That video spooked me out, 1 in a billion shot perhaps?

Belated Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.

AGAIN, You guys did a superb job with the D-III web sites this year!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 28, 2010, 11:20:30 PM

Final: #1 Wooster 89 John Carroll 76 :)

Wooster notched a convincing win tonight over a scrappy JCU team. Wooster's depth and scoring balance won this game as they had 4 players in double figures with Ian Franks 28 points, Justin Hallowell 19 points, Nathan Balch 16 points and Josh Claytor 13 points.

Scots outshot JCU 53% to 36%, outrebounded the Blue Streaks 43 to 29, passed well with 18 assists and kept their turnovers to 15 against JCU's press.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on December 29, 2010, 01:05:31 AM

#6 Whitworth easily defeats Ripon 76-65. Played great and led at half by 19 with no turnovers. Probably shot their lowest FG and 3pt %'s all season but never really seemed to care. Sr. Michael Taylor had 36 points/9 reb's to claim top honors for the night.

Ripon played hard and with pride to keep the game from being a blowout. Probably another good team that will be playing for their conference title AQ.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: rmc1982 on December 29, 2010, 02:59:29 PM

Pat-How do you guys like the Southpoint??I have to go to Vegas for business 2-3x a year and I always stay there because that's where they pick us up and drop us off for work.I assume you're either playing in the Equestrian area or in the convention center??As Vegas properties go-its not the ritziest but I do like it alot-especially the Sports Book and the restaurants-Have a Rueben at the Del-Mar deli-Best sandwich in Vegas!!Have fun! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 29, 2010, 11:11:25 PM

Final: #1 Wooster 86 Wilmington 79

Wooster avoids the emotional letdown after the John Carroll win last night and beats a Wilmington team that played well trying to pull a big upset. Quakers shot 47% from the floor. Wooster did not shoot a high % from the floor tonight but they outrebounded the Quakers 43 to 29 and Ian Franks kept driving to the basket which forced Wilmington to foul.

Wooster had 5 players in double figures led by Ian Franks and Nathan Balch with 18 points each. Justin Hallowell and Bryan Wickliffe added 16 points each, Matt Fegan had 10 and the scoring balance secured the victory.

Wooster is playing 4 games in 6 days with their next 2 games in Florida on 1/1 and 1/2 vs William Carey and Baruch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 30, 2010, 09:36:26 PM

Quote from: rmc1982 on December 29, 2010, 02:59:29 PM
Pat-How do you guys like the Southpoint??I have to go to Vegas for business 2-3x a year and I always stay there because that's where they pick us up and drop us off for work.I assume you're either playing in the Equestrian area or in the convention center??As Vegas properties go-its not the ritziest but I do like it alot-especially the Sports Book and the restaurants-Have a Rueben at the Del-Mar deli-Best sandwich in Vegas!!Have fun! ;)

Like it alright -- I mean, obviously, it's not the Bellagio or the MGM Grand but it has a basketball arena. (Indeed, in the equestrian area.)

There are certainly nicer places in Vegas but hey, nobody has to get on a bus to go to the games or their walk-throughs and you can't say that at the Grand Canyon Classic or any of the stuff in Florida.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on December 31, 2010, 08:06:49 PM

Happy New Year everyone!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 01, 2011, 06:42:08 PM

Final: #1 Wooster 72 NAIA 1 William Carey 55 :)

Wooster made 11 three pointers and won the rebound battle 44 to 31 to beat this 8-4 William Carey team.

Wooster had balanced scoring led by Nathan Balch with 13 points, Justin Hallowell with 11 and Bryan Wickliffe with 11. Next game for Wooster is tomorrow vs. Baruch on a neutral court.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 02, 2011, 03:44:00 PM

Final: #1 Wooster 79 Baruch 77

Wooster escapes with a narrow win as All American Ian Franks scores 4 points in the last 2 minutes and Nathan Balch hits 2 clutch free throws in the last 25 seconds for the victory. Ian Franks had 25 points, Justin Hallowell had 25 points (7 three pointers) and Nathan Balch added 11 points to lead Wooster.

Baruch is a veteran team that lost to #5 Middlebury by only 3 points earlier this season.

Wooster is now 13-0. Next game is AT #8 Wabash on January 8th.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 02, 2011, 08:49:05 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on January 02, 2011, 03:44:00 PM
Final: #1 Wooster 79 Baruch 77

Wooster escapes with a narrow win as All American Ian Franks scores 4 points in the last 2 minutes and Nathan Balch hits 2 clutch free throws in the last 25 seconds for the victory. Ian Franks had 25 points, Justin Hallowell had 25 points (7 three pointers) and Nathan Balch added 11 points to lead Wooster.

Baruch is a veteran team that lost to #5 Middlebury by only 3 points earlier this season.

Wooster is now 13-0. Next game is AT #8 Wabash on January 8th.

Looks like Baruch deserves some Top 25 love.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 02, 2011, 08:54:49 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 02, 2011, 08:49:05 PM
Quote from: wooscotsfan on January 02, 2011, 03:44:00 PM
Final: #1 Wooster 79 Baruch 77

Wooster escapes with a narrow win as All American Ian Franks scores 4 points in the last 2 minutes and Nathan Balch hits 2 clutch free throws in the last 25 seconds for the victory. Ian Franks had 25 points, Justin Hallowell had 25 points (7 three pointers) and Nathan Balch added 11 points to lead Wooster.

Baruch is a veteran team that lost to #5 Middlebury by only 3 points earlier this season.

Wooster is now 13-0. Next game is AT #8 Wabash on January 8th.
Looks like Baruch deserves some Top 25 love.

They're 6-5, although all 5 losses look like they were to pretty good teams (Woo, Midd, NAIA-1 power Embry-Riddle, 12-1 Rutgers-Newark, and 9-1 Manhattanville)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 02, 2011, 09:06:41 PM

Greetings, all. I'm back from Illinois, and will (as promised) post the complete "How They Fared" later tonight, after the F&M game ends ... per the live stats, the second half should begin shortly.

In the mean time, I'll enjoy that Avanti's Gondola sandwich we picked up before leaving Normal ....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 02, 2011, 09:48:57 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 02, 2011, 08:54:49 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 02, 2011, 08:49:05 PM
Quote from: wooscotsfan on January 02, 2011, 03:44:00 PM
Final: #1 Wooster 79 Baruch 77

Wooster escapes with a narrow win as All American Ian Franks scores 4 points in the last 2 minutes and Nathan Balch hits 2 clutch free throws in the last 25 seconds for the victory. Ian Franks had 25 points, Justin Hallowell had 25 points (7 three pointers) and Nathan Balch added 11 points to lead Wooster.

Baruch is a veteran team that lost to #5 Middlebury by only 3 points earlier this season.

Wooster is now 13-0. Next game is AT #8 Wabash on January 8th.
Looks like Baruch deserves some Top 25 love.
They're 6-5, although all 5 losses look like they were to pretty good teams (Woo, Midd, NAIA-1 power Embry-Riddle, 12-1 Rutgers-Newark, and 9-1 Manhattanville)

Baruch may waltz through the CUNYAC. If they do, then we have an idea of how good they are.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 02, 2011, 10:15:18 PM

How They Fared--Complete for the Holiday season

Given the large number of tournament results here, I want to remind everyone that this report does not indicate when a game occurred on a neutral court.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	594	Wooster	13-0	def. #37 Anderson, 89-48; def. #38 John Carroll, 89-76; def. Wilmington, 86-79; def. William Carey, 72-55; def. Baruch, 79-77
#2	574	Williams	12-0	def. North Park, 85-54; def. Salem State, 93-60; def. Westfield State, 80-65
#3	561	Virginia Wesleyan	12-0	def. Lynchburg, 65-55
#4	530	UW-Stevens Point	9-2	LOST at #7 St. Thomas, 54-61; def. #20 Ramapo, 85-74; def. Colorado College, 92-50; def. Simpson, 75-42; def. Linfield, 93-60
#5	506	Middlebury	7-0	def. RPI, 77-60
#6	489	Whitworth	11-0	def. #33 Ripon, 76-65; def. Colorado College, 86-59
#7	472	St. Thomas	9-0	def. #4 UW-Stevens Point, 61-54
#8	454	Wabash	12-0	def. Franklin, 77-74
#9	425	Eastern Mennonite	8-1	IDLE
#10	388	Augustana	11-0	def. MacMurray, 53-50; def. UW-Stout, 81-75; def. #12 St. Norbert, 57-56; def. Chicago, 63-56
#11	384	Randolph-Macon	10-2	def. Hood, 56-46; def. Johns Hopkins, 76-42
#12	306	St. Norbert	8-2	def. Lakeland, 69-58; LOST to #10 Augustana, 56-57
#13	302	St. Mary's (Md.)	9-2	IDLE
#14	284	Franklin and Marshall	8-1	def. SUNY-Old Westbury, 96-84
#15	270	Brandeis	8-0	IDLE
#16	258	UW-River Falls	11-2	def. Macalester, 85-58; def. Sioux Falls, 77-67
#17	243	Amherst	10-0	def. Johnson & Wales (Fla.), 82-57
#18	203	Illinois Wesleyan	9-2	def. Gettysburg, 67-53; def. Cal Lutheran, 81-69
#19	187	MIT	9-2	LOST at Harvard, 58-84
#20	116	Ramapo	9-2	LOST to #4 UW-Stevens Point, 74-85; def. #33 Ripon, 92-81
#21	113	Plattsburgh State	6-1	IDLE
#22	90	Chapman	12-1	def. Whittier, 78-65; def. Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 69-65; def. George Fox, 64-60
#23	86	WPI	9-3	LOST at #25 Western Connecticut, 77-92; def. #34 Becker, 82-66; def. University of New England, 83-50
#24	42	Carthage	7-4	LOST at Transylvania, 66-75
#25	39	Western Connecticut	9-1	def. #23 WPI, 92-77

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	26	Manhattanville	10-1	def. York (N.Y.), 53-50; def. Muhlenberg, 58-55
T#27	25	Marietta	12-0	def. Wilmington, 89-78; def. Redlands, 101-67; def. La Verne, 68-66
T#27	25	Wheaton (Ill.)	9-2	def. Messiah, 65-53; def. Husson, 85-54
#29	24	New York University	9-0	def. SUNY-Maritime, 92-79; def. Drew, 77-67
#30	20	Ferrum	11-0	def. Covenant, 73-59; def. LaGrange, 68-66
#31	19	Centre	8-2	def. Allegheny, 70-53; LOST to Hanover, 61-65; def. DePauw, 62-54
#32	17	Keene State	8-1	IDLE
#33	14	Ripon	6-3	LOST at #6 Whitworth, 65-76; LOST at #20 Ramapo, 81-92
#34	13	Becker	8-2	LOST at #23 WPI, 66-82
#35	10	Rhode Island College	7-2	IDLE
#36	9	Emory	8-2	LOST to Washington and Lee, 75-86; def. Huntingdon, 95-71
#37	4	Anderson	7-3	LOST to #1 Wooster, 48-89; def. Richard Stockton, 73-70; def. Staten Island, 70-67
#38	2	John Carroll	8-4	def. Baldwin-Wallace, 82-73; LOST at #1 Wooster, 76-89; def. Spalding, 100-75
#39	1	Catholic	10-2	def. CCNY, 60-42; def. Southern Maine, 79-77

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 03, 2011, 09:54:14 PM

#14 Franklin & Marshall falls to unranked Ithaca in a shootout 107-94.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 03, 2011, 10:02:24 PM

Another unranked east region team topples a Top 25 team tonight as #20 Ramapo falls to the Union College Dutchmen 97-88.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 03, 2011, 10:14:39 PM

#19 MIT also lost to unranked Bridgewater State (not VA), 92-80. MIT led by 11 at the half but apparently decided to stay in the locker room for the second half and work on psets.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 03, 2011, 10:22:49 PM

I hate Monday night upsets (ballot already in)!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 03, 2011, 11:54:53 PM

Yeah. Don't look at the results from Guilford-St. Mary's or Manhattanville-Moravian either. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 04, 2011, 12:16:07 AM

Well, there is always next week. New poll is out now:

http://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2010-11/week5

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 04, 2011, 05:19:58 PM

All these losses and close wins after I was happy shaking up my Top 25 last week... looks like I will have to rethink it AGAIN!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 04, 2011, 11:02:01 PM

#6 Middlebury and #22 Plattsburgh St. battle it out once again as The Panthers come out on top 88-82. Middlebury remains undefeated as they improve to 8-0. The Cardinals fall to 6-2, with both losses coming to Top 25 teams. Definitely think Middlebury will make the NCAA tournament and be at least a sweet 16 team.
Plattsburgh also has a good chance to make the tourney and they showed tonight that they can play with anyone. These 2 teams might even meet again down the road come tournament time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 05, 2011, 04:25:03 AM

This is part of a post that I wrote on the SUNYAC board concerning the Middlebury-Plattsburgh State game that I attended Tuesday evening. I got to see an amazing display toward the end of the game and thought I would share it point by point. The post is from the start of the 2nd half of the game which was tied at 37 at the break. The player in the post, Josh Bruno is a senior for Plattsburgh State, who is averaging a career high 11 minutes a game this year and has a 3.1 ppg average for his career. D3hoops had a small article about the game on the front page but only mentions that Bruno was 6x6 from behind the arc and that he had 24 points.

The teams continued to trade baskets through the first 10 minutes of the 2nd half with Middlebury gaining a slight advantage in that they maintained a 1 or 2 possession lead. The turning point of the game came with about 7 minutes left to play and it was an old nemesis of the Cardinals, foul shooting, which was partly responsible. Plattsburgh had made 6 of 7 free throws in the 1st half but they were down 59-55 when they made three trips to the line for 2 shot fouls over the next 1:56. They missed 5 straight free throws before making 1 and that would have kept the game a 1 or 2 possession contest. Instead the Panthers scored after each of the Cards free throw trips, and quickly had the first double digit lead by either team at 70-59. The Cardinals continued to fall further behind and then with 1:53 remaining, Cardinal Guard Josh Bruno, who had 14 minutes of playing time at that point, re-entered the game. Bruno had taken 3 shots earlier in the game, all from behind the arc and made all 3. He promptly proceeds to hit another triple with 1:43 left, then steals the ball, makes a layup is fouled and hits the free throw at the 1:21 mark for another 3 point play. With 33 seconds left he nails another 3 pointer, is fouled and makes the free throw to complete the 4 point play. With 21 seconds left he is fouled again and makes both foul shots(Damn only 2 pts). The Cards get another steal and Bruno, this time from about 3 feet behind the line nails another 3 pointer with 16 seconds left on the clock, to complete a run of 15 pts in ONE MINUTE AND 37 SECONDS. Josh ended up playing 16 minutes in the game and he tied Ryan Wholey of the Panthers for the game's scoring honors with 24. Bruno was a perfect 7x7 from the field and 6x6 from 3 point land. Strangely enough when the Cards missed those 5 free throws in a row, he missed 2 of them( both spun out) but did make his next 4 attempts. Bruno's heroics did bring the Cardinals back from a double digit deficit and made the final score of 88-82 a bit more respectable. Even Panther coach Jeff Brown got a touch nervous as he watched a 16 pt lead dwindle to 5, forcing him to call a time out with just a few seconds left. It seems to me that 15 points scored by an individual in 97 seconds (and it's not by a player that is on a winning team and is repeatedly being fouled so most of his points are coming as free throws) should be some kind of record. It's probably not, but it sure was fun to watch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 06, 2011, 08:58:40 AM

How They Fared--Midweek Report

Men's games:
Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	601	Wooster	13-0	01/08 at #7 Wabash
#2	582	Williams	13-0	def. Elms, 82-65; 01/08 at #17 Amherst
#3	563	Virginia Wesleyan	13-0	def. Hampden-Sydney, 69-61; 01/08 vs. Washington and Lee
#4	520	Whitworth	11-0	01/07 vs. Pacific Lutheran; 01/08 vs. Puget Sound
#5	515	St. Thomas	11-0	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 90-58; def. Carleton, 62-59; 01/08 vs. Gustavus Adolphus
#6	500	Middlebury	8-0	def. #22 Plattsburgh State, 88-82; 01/06 at Colby-Sawyer; 01/08 vs. Skidmore; 01/09 vs. Lyndon State
#7	474	Wabash	13-0	def. Denison, 73-57; 01/08 vs. #1 Wooster
#8	428	UW-Stevens Point	10-2	def. UW-Oshkosh, 76-47; 01/08 vs. UW-La Crosse
#9	427	Augustana	12-0	def. North Park, 62-49; 01/08 vs. Elmhurst
#10	414	Eastern Mennonite	9-2	def. #27 Ferrum, 85-79; LOST at Washington and Lee, 92-93; 01/07 at Penn St.-Beaver; 01/08 at Berkeley
#11	381	Randolph-Macon	11-2	def. Randolph, 71-64; 01/08 at Bridgewater (Va.)
#12	309	St. Mary's (Md.)	10-3	LOST at Guilford, 57-61; def. Marymount, 74-65; 01/08 at Wesley
#13	288	Franklin and Marshall	8-2	LOST to Ithaca, 97-107; 01/06 vs. Lancaster Bible; 01/08 vs. Swarthmore
#14	277	Brandeis	8-0	01/06 at Emerson; 01/08 vs. #28 New York University
#15	266	UW-River Falls	12-2	def. UW-Stout, 86-71; 01/08 at UW-Whitewater
#16	264	St. Norbert	8-2	01/08 vs. Carroll
#17	260	Amherst	11-0	def. Wesleyan, 87-74; 01/08 vs. #2 Williams
#18	213	Illinois Wesleyan	10-2	def. North Central (Ill.), 72-67; 01/08 at Carthage
#19	180	MIT	10-3	LOST to Bridgewater State, 70-82; def. Tufts, 71-69; 01/08 vs. Babson
#20	126	Chapman	12-2	LOST at Cal Lutheran, 53-58
#21	100	Ramapo	10-3	LOST at Union, 88-97; def. Mass-Dartmouth, 96-88; 01/07 vs. Vassar
#22	94	Plattsburgh State	6-3	LOST to #6 Middlebury, 82-88; LOST to Elms, 58-70; 01/07 vs. Geneseo State; 01/08 vs. Brockport State
#23	86	Western Connecticut	11-1	def. Albertus Magnus, 103-99; def. Regis (Mass.), 71-65; 01/08 vs. Plymouth State
#24	45	Marietta	13-0	def. Mount Union, 64-54; 01/08 at Heidelberg
#25	41	Manhattanville	10-2	LOST at Moravian, 63-74; 01/08 at Wilkes

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	39	Wheaton (Ill.)	10-2	def. Carthage, 62-55; 01/08 at North Central (Ill.)
#27	29	Ferrum	12-1	LOST at #10 Eastern Mennonite, 79-85; def. Averett, 95-68; 01/08 at Methodist
#28	28	New York University	10-0	def. Swarthmore, 73-58; 01/08 at #14 Brandeis
#29	23	WPI	10-3	def. Wheaton (Mass.), 77-58; 01/08 at Trinity (Conn.)
#30	14	Rhode Island College	7-3	LOST at Roger Williams, 80-90; 01/08 vs. Keene State
#31	9	Hanover	9-2	def. Bluffton, 66-55; 01/08 at Earlham
#32	8	Emory	9-2	def. Piedmont, 104-64; 01/08 at Rochester
#33	6	Becker	8-2	01/06 at Western New England; 01/08 at Mitchell
T#34	4	Centre	8-2	01/07 at Sewanee; 01/09 at Oglethorpe
T#34	4	Ripon	6-4	LOST to Illinois College, 64-76
T#34	4	Transylvania	9-3	LOST at Defiance, 68-78; 01/08 at Anderson
#37	2	John Carroll	8-4	01/08 vs. Wilmington
#38	1	Catholic	10-2	01/07 at Juniata; 01/08 at Susquehanna

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on January 08, 2011, 12:42:25 AM

Whitworth defeats Pacific Lutheran 93-58. Pirates shoot 17-30 from 3 land. WOW!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 08, 2011, 04:04:29 PM

Final: #1 Wooster 67 #7 Wabash 65 :)

Huge road win for Wooster. Scots won this game with better shooting than Wabash.

Ian Franks was unstoppable for Wooster with 27 points and Bryan Wickliffe added 15 points inside.

Wooster is now 14-0 and next game is Oberlin at home on 1/12

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 08, 2011, 04:11:12 PM

Wabash shouldn't fall too much in the poll. They showed great resilience in coming back, though it is a home loss.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 10, 2011, 07:17:22 AM

How They Fared

Sorry about not getting this posted last night; I was busy watching The Cape getting ready for the first day of classes and forgot.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	601	Wooster	14-0	def. #7 Wabash, 67-65
#2	582	Williams	13-1	def. Elms, 82-65; LOST at #17 Amherst, 89-92
#3	563	Virginia Wesleyan	14-0	def. Hampden-Sydney, 69-61; def. Washington and Lee, 71-61
#4	520	Whitworth	13-0	def. Pacific Lutheran, 93-58; def. Puget Sound, 72-65
#5	515	St. Thomas	12-0	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 90-58; def. Carleton, 62-59; def. Gustavus Adolphus, 68-64
#6	500	Middlebury	11-0	def. #22 Plattsburgh State, 88-82; def. Colby-Sawyer, 80-54; def. Skidmore, 85-72; def. Lyndon State, 87-50
#7	474	Wabash	13-1	def. Denison, 73-57; LOST to #1 Wooster, 65-67
#8	428	UW-Stevens Point	11-2	def. UW-Oshkosh, 76-47; def. UW-La Crosse, 89-58
#9	427	Augustana	13-0	def. North Park, 62-49; def. Elmhurst, 67-45
#10	414	Eastern Mennonite	11-2	def. #27 Ferrum, 85-79; LOST at Washington and Lee, 92-93; def. Penn St.-Beaver, 98-71; def. Berkeley, 107-60
#11	381	Randolph-Macon	12-2	def. Randolph, 71-64; def. Bridgewater (Va.), 75-49
#12	309	St. Mary's (Md.)	10-3	LOST at Guilford, 57-61; def. Marymount, 74-65; 01/08 at Wesley (postponed)
#13	288	Franklin and Marshall	10-2	LOST to Ithaca, 97-107; def. Lancaster Bible, 109-51; def. Swarthmore, 85-46
#14	277	Brandeis	10-0	def. Emerson, 65-54; def. #28 New York University, 61-59
#15	266	UW-River Falls	13-2	def. UW-Stout, 86-71; def. UW-Whitewater, 85-79
#16	264	St. Norbert	9-2	def. Carroll, 57-55
#17	260	Amherst	12-0	def. Wesleyan, 87-74; def. #2 Williams, 92-89
#18	213	Illinois Wesleyan	10-3	def. North Central (Ill.), 72-67; LOST at Carthage, 52-73
#19	180	MIT	10-4	LOST to Bridgewater State, 70-82; def. Tufts, 71-69; LOST to Babson, 56-73
#20	126	Chapman	12-2	LOST at Cal Lutheran, 53-58
#21	100	Ramapo	11-3	LOST at Union, 88-97; def. Mass-Dartmouth, 96-88; def. Vassar, 94-69
#22	94	Plattsburgh State	7-4	LOST to #6 Middlebury, 82-88; LOST to Elms, 58-70; def. Geneseo State, 73-51; LOST to Brockport State, 65-75
#23	86	Western Connecticut	12-1	def. Albertus Magnus, 103-99; def. Regis (Mass.), 71-65; def. Plymouth State, 109-77
#24	45	Marietta	13-1	def. Mount Union, 64-54; LOST at Heidelberg, 77-81
#25	41	Manhattanville	10-3	LOST at Moravian, 63-74; LOST at Wilkes, 68-74

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	39	Wheaton (Ill.)	10-3	def. Carthage, 62-55; LOST at North Central (Ill.), 75-83
#27	29	Ferrum	13-1	LOST at #10 Eastern Mennonite, 79-85; def. Averett, 95-68; def. Methodist, 79-56
#28	28	New York University	10-1	def. Swarthmore, 73-58; LOST at #14 Brandeis, 59-61
#29	23	WPI	11-3	def. Wheaton (Mass.), 77-58; def. Trinity (Conn.), 69-61
#30	14	Rhode Island College	8-3	LOST at Roger Williams, 80-90; def. Keene State, 96-82
#31	9	Hanover	10-2	def. Bluffton, 66-55; def. Earlham, 79-48
#32	8	Emory	9-3	def. Piedmont, 104-64; LOST at Rochester, 65-81
#33	6	Becker	10-2	def. Western New England, 65-63; def. Mitchell, 85-74
T#34	4	Centre	9-3	def. Sewanee, 65-51; LOST at Oglethorpe, 59-64
T#34	4	Ripon	6-4	LOST to Illinois College, 64-76
T#34	4	Transylvania	9-4	LOST at Defiance, 68-78; LOST at Anderson, 58-69
#37	2	John Carroll	9-4	def. Wilmington, 96-66
#38	1	Catholic	10-4	LOST at Juniata, 54-55; LOST at Susquehanna, 81-83

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 10, 2011, 01:58:12 PM

Not a good week for #18-#25 (and all of the ORV receiving more than 10 votes) this past week. Everyone lost except #23 West Conn and ORV 29 WPI. In fact, #18-#25 went 9-11 on the week! If you add in ORV receiving at least 10 votes, #18-ORV30 went just 16-15. Tough week!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WcsuAlum on January 10, 2011, 03:04:23 PM

Western Connecticut may be a dangerous team come tournament time. They are winning by a considerable margin each game and are 3-0 against tournament teams from last year. They have a good balance of scoring coming from Daquan Brooks, Wilburt Jarrett and Gary Robinson. The point guard play of Addy and Bentil really proves to be a problem for most teams on offense and defense. And with Redding Pelletier and Gates adding points and rebounds, finally the Colonials may be considered elite again. Hopefully they make a favorable jump in the polls with all the losses and upsets this past week. Go Colonials!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 10, 2011, 07:06:27 PM

They did. And welcome to the board, by the way.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 10, 2011, 07:47:49 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 10, 2011, 07:06:27 PM
They did. And welcome to the board, by the way.

That's Pat's way of saying there's a new Top 25 (http://d3hoops.com/top25/index)!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 10, 2011, 08:40:06 PM

Stevens Point slips 1 place to #9 in the poll despite the fact that the team right ahead of them lost and SP beat two conference opponents by 29 and 31 points this past week.

Tonight they won their 6th straight game by 29 or more points as they beat Macalester 82-51.

Concerning the poll...

Nice to see Whitworth getting some votes... I just don't know how good they are compared to teams like St. Thomas, River Falls, or Stevens Point because I don't think they've played competition as tough.

Massey has Whitworth at #1 but playing just the 22nd toughest schedule. On the other hand, St. Thomas is #2, playing the #2 schedule and Stevens Point is #3, playing the #3 schedule. And though the schedule remains tough for UST and UWSP (#3 and #2 projected schedules, respectively), Whitworth's actually gets easier (30th going forward). I think there's a distinct possibility that they may be undefeated come tournament time. I just don't see any proof that they're any better than St. Thomas... who has played a tough schedule and passed the tests.

And I also think that River Falls is too low.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 10, 2011, 10:27:43 PM

#22 Ferrum

Can anyone confirm this is the first appearance by the Panthers in the D3 poll? I don't recall ever seeing them before.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 10, 2011, 10:51:53 PM

Quote from: sac on January 10, 2011, 10:27:43 PM
#22 Ferrum

Can anyone confirm this is the first appearance by the Panthers in the D3 poll? I don't recall ever seeing them before.

Good catch. Back in the day I'd have called them a "Debutant." At least through the end of the 2008 season, when I stopped keeping track, Ferrum had garnered a total of one vote-point: one voter had them at #25 on their ballot in Week 2 of the 2000-01 season.

Ferrum always makes me think of my favorite long-lost offseason thread, where we suggested new nicknames for teams. I recall offering the "Corpus" for Ferrum, so the cheerleaders could yell "Ave! Ferrum Corpus!", but there were an insufficient number of Catholics and/or Mozart fans present and it went over like a lead balloon (like it doubtless will again here.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on January 10, 2011, 11:56:54 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 10, 2011, 10:51:53 PM
Ferrum always makes me think of my favorite long-lost offseason thread, where we suggested new nicknames for teams. I recall offering the "Corpus" for Ferrum, so the cheerleaders could yell "Ave! Ferrum Corpus!", but there were an insufficient number of Catholics and/or Mozart fans present and it went over like a lead balloon (like it doubtless will again here.)

That's brilliant. +k

Five new entrants to the pol this week, but no consensus on who's the best of them. I'm not sure I've ever seen 6 teams within 7 poll points of each other! Curiously, because of all the shakeup, Marietta (who went 1-1 on the week) fell out of the poll, but actually gained 8 overall points.

There seems to be a pretty good consensus on the top 5 right now, then after a small gap, a pretty solid consensus on teams 6-15, with each more or less one "ideal" poll position (ie. 25pts) behind the team above it. Then there's a larger gap before Western Conn., St. Mary's and F&M, which are basically indistinguishable to voters. Illinois Wesleyan stands alone after that, with a gap on either side. And then the end of the poll, with 6 teams within 7 poll points of each other, really reads as "whoever else the voters could find that might be good but we're not really sure yet."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 11, 2011, 12:09:52 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 10, 2011, 10:51:53 PM
Quote from: sac on January 10, 2011, 10:27:43 PM
#22 Ferrum

Can anyone confirm this is the first appearance by the Panthers in the D3 poll? I don't recall ever seeing them before.

Good catch. Back in the day I'd have called them a "Debutant." At least through the end of the 2008 season, when I stopped keeping track, Ferrum had garnered a total of one vote-point: one voter had them at #25 on their ballot in Week 2 of the 2000-01 season.

Ferrum always makes me think of my favorite long-lost offseason thread, where we suggested new nicknames for teams. I recall offering the "Corpus" for Ferrum, so the cheerleaders could yell "Ave! Ferrum Corpus!", but there were an insufficient number of Catholics and/or Mozart fans present and it went over like a lead balloon (like it doubtless will again here.)

Saturday we are singing that with the Minnesota Orchestra. I'll have to resist the urge to pronounce Verum in German. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 11, 2011, 05:46:22 AM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 10, 2011, 08:40:06 PM
Stevens Point slips 1 place to #9 in the poll despite the fact that the team right ahead of them lost and SP beat two conference opponents by 29 and 31 points this past week.

Tonight they won their 6th straight game by 29 or more points as they beat Macalester 82-51.

Concerning the poll...

Nice to see Whitworth getting some votes... I just don't know how good they are compared to teams like St. Thomas, River Falls, or Stevens Point because I don't think they've played competition as tough.

Massey has Whitworth at #1 but playing just the 22nd toughest schedule. On the other hand, St. Thomas is #2, playing the #2 schedule and Stevens Point is #3, playing the #3 schedule. And though the schedule remains tough for UST and UWSP (#3 and #2 projected schedules, respectively), Whitworth's actually gets easier (30th going forward). I think there's a distinct possibility that they may be undefeated come tournament time. I just don't see any proof that they're any better than St. Thomas... who has played a tough schedule and passed the tests.

And I also think that River Falls is too low.

I have actually seen BOTH UWSP and Whitworth this season... at the same tournament... and Whitworth is a better team than UWSP in my opinion. Whitworth is deeper with at least four scoring threats and two shut-down defensive players in the Gebber brothers.

The fact Whitworth had Mike Taylor, a legitamate player on a Univ. of Montana player, transfer in has completely changed their team. He can light it up for 30 one night or just find other guys all night long for points for them. Loofburrow is dangerous as a swing man. Can post up and score from inside and can step outside and drain threes just as easily. David Riley is always a threat for the same reason Loofburrow is, expect that Riley can do more damage from inside the arc. And you have Felix Freidt who can contribute inside as well.

Riley had an off tournament in Vegas and every single player mentioned stepped up at different times - almost like Riley was a role player and not their #1 scoring option.

UWSP would be a much better team and higher in my poll if Jenkins was returning. I know he is still on the roster, but he hasn't played and it doesn't look like he will play (due to NFL aspirations). Hopefully we can find out more when we talk to Coach Sempling on Sunday's Hoopsville (tentative, still have to reach out).

UWSP certainly has plenty of talent, but they aren't as deep. That is going to hurt them. And referencing six straight 29+ point wins isn't telling the whole truth. You comment on Whitworth's weak finish in conference (which I would also disagree with - though certainly not as challenging as the WIAC), but those six wins are against weak squads as well.

So while I appreciate your allegiance to UWSP, the fact of the matter is if those two teams faced off (wish it happened in Vegas), my money would be on Whitworth by about 10.

As for UW-River Falls... they are rising in the polls... but there are still a lot of questions about a team that even the coaches in the league voted to finish 7th (I believe). If no expected them to be that good... is it a case of playing beyond their abilities and eventually they will come back to earth? Or is it a case of people not appreciating what they really had.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 11, 2011, 10:34:56 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 11, 2011, 12:09:52 AM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 10, 2011, 10:51:53 PM
Quote from: sac on January 10, 2011, 10:27:43 PM
#22 Ferrum

Can anyone confirm this is the first appearance by the Panthers in the D3 poll? I don't recall ever seeing them before.

Good catch. Back in the day I'd have called them a "Debutant." At least through the end of the 2008 season, when I stopped keeping track, Ferrum had garnered a total of one vote-point: one voter had them at #25 on their ballot in Week 2 of the 2000-01 season.

Ferrum always makes me think of my favorite long-lost offseason thread, where we suggested new nicknames for teams. I recall offering the "Corpus" for Ferrum, so the cheerleaders could yell "Ave! Ferrum Corpus!", but there were an insufficient number of Catholics and/or Mozart fans present and it went over like a lead balloon (like it doubtless will again here.)

Saturday we are singing that with the Minnesota Orchestra. I'll have to resist the urge to pronounce Verum in German. :)

I never pictured you in a tux...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 11, 2011, 10:55:25 AM

It's also interesting that two of the new Top 25 teams arguably got there on the strength of a loss. Ferrum went 2-1 last week but the wins were over Averett (now 2-13) and Methodist (now 4-9). The loss was by six to ranked Eastern Mennonite. And the Panthers jumped from 29 votes to 73 votes and into the poll.

NYU enters the poll at No. 25 after making a similar jump (28 votes last week, 69 this one). The Violets were 1-1 with a win over Swarthmore (now 4-9) and the well publicized loss to Brandeis at the buzzer.

Who says there's no such thing as a good loss? :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 11, 2011, 11:25:49 AM

Quote from: smedindy on January 11, 2011, 10:34:56 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 11, 2011, 12:09:52 AM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 10, 2011, 10:51:53 PM
Quote from: sac on January 10, 2011, 10:27:43 PM
#22 Ferrum

Can anyone confirm this is the first appearance by the Panthers in the D3 poll? I don't recall ever seeing them before.

Good catch. Back in the day I'd have called them a "Debutant." At least through the end of the 2008 season, when I stopped keeping track, Ferrum had garnered a total of one vote-point: one voter had them at #25 on their ballot in Week 2 of the 2000-01 season.

Ferrum always makes me think of my favorite long-lost offseason thread, where we suggested new nicknames for teams. I recall offering the "Corpus" for Ferrum, so the cheerleaders could yell "Ave! Ferrum Corpus!", but there were an insufficient number of Catholics and/or Mozart fans present and it went over like a lead balloon (like it doubtless will again here.)

Saturday we are singing that with the Minnesota Orchestra. I'll have to resist the urge to pronounce Verum in German. :)

I never pictured you in a tux...

I believe there are tickets available, although it is supposed to be hideously cold here this weekend. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NYCHOOPER on January 11, 2011, 11:47:53 AM

Quote from: gordonmann on January 11, 2011, 10:55:25 AM
It's also interesting that two of the new Top 25 teams arguably got there on the strength of a loss. Ferrum went 2-1 last week but the wins were over Averett (now 2-13) and Methodist (now 4-9). The loss was by six to ranked Eastern Mennonite. And the Panthers jumped from 29 votes to 73 votes and into the poll.

NYU enters the poll at No. 25 after making a similar jump (28 votes last week, 69 this one). The Violets were 1-1 with a win over Swarthmore (now 4-9) and the well publicized loss to Brandeis at the buzzer.

Who says there's no such thing as a good loss? :)

watching that nyu v brandeis game made me think that the violets are 10 to 15 points better then the judges . bad coaching and terrible execution in the 2nd half let Brandeis sneak away with one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 11, 2011, 12:16:38 PM

Strictly looking at the numbers, Stevens Point is pretty deep. 10 players average 13 minutes or more and only one averages more than 25 minutes (Nick Krull). However, this may be a result of all the blowouts recently. Looking at just conference games where they are 4-1 with 2 blowout wins, Point has nine averaging over 15 minutes a game and two averaging over 25, Krull and Hurd. It could also be argued that Point's 9 or 10 deep isn't as good as year's past, which I would agree on. Point definitely missed the two "go to" guys from last year in Matt Moses and Jared Jenkins. From what I've heard and read, it seems like Point has only two guys that can really create and are willing to create their own shot, Dan Tillema and Louis Hurd. I can't really comment on other teams since I haven't even seen Point play, but I think Point is steadily improving. A key to Point's success might be Jordan Brezinski. He's 6'8" and played really well over the break.

As for River Falls, no one on the WIAC board thought they'd finish 7th and we were all shocked when the coach's preseason poll came out with their prediction. They added a stud WIAC transfer in Shane Manor and have 3 legit guys that can go off for 25 at any given time, Voeltz, Manor and Koonkaew.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 11, 2011, 12:19:29 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 10, 2011, 08:40:06 PM
Stevens Point slips 1 place to #9 in the poll despite the fact that the team right ahead of them lost and SP beat two conference opponents by 29 and 31 points this past week.

Tonight they won their 6th straight game by 29 or more points as they beat Macalester 82-51.

They did gain SIX points though! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 11, 2011, 12:30:29 PM

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on January 11, 2011, 12:19:29 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 10, 2011, 08:40:06 PM
Stevens Point slips 1 place to #9 in the poll despite the fact that the team right ahead of them lost and SP beat two conference opponents by 29 and 31 points this past week.

Tonight they won their 6th straight game by 29 or more points as they beat Macalester 82-51.

They did gain SIX points though! ;D

The old subtraction by addition, huh...?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 11, 2011, 12:36:20 PM

Dave -- the WIAC SIDs picked them seventh in their preseason poll, yes, but we had them on the preseason voter info spreadsheet for a reason.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 11, 2011, 01:02:33 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 11, 2011, 12:36:20 PM
Dave -- the WIAC SIDs picked them seventh in their preseason poll, yes, but we had them on the preseason voter info spreadsheet for a reason.

8th, actually. I've been trying to type a reply to him for the better part of the morning, but I've been too busy to finish!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 11, 2011, 03:54:37 PM

I posted this on a couple of boards, and thought I'd post it here. News clip about a 12 year old kid that's pretty amazing. Marques Haynes, Curly Neal, Pistol Pete, and now Jordon McCabe.

http://www.komonews.com/sports/heroes/111892554.html

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 11, 2011, 06:29:30 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 11, 2011, 05:46:22 AM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 10, 2011, 08:40:06 PM
Stevens Point slips 1 place to #9 in the poll despite the fact that the team right ahead of them lost and SP beat two conference opponents by 29 and 31 points this past week.

Tonight they won their 6th straight game by 29 or more points as they beat Macalester 82-51.

Concerning the poll...

Nice to see Whitworth getting some votes... I just don't know how good they are compared to teams like St. Thomas, River Falls, or Stevens Point because I don't think they've played competition as tough.

Massey has Whitworth at #1 but playing just the 22nd toughest schedule. On the other hand, St. Thomas is #2, playing the #2 schedule and Stevens Point is #3, playing the #3 schedule. And though the schedule remains tough for UST and UWSP (#3 and #2 projected schedules, respectively), Whitworth's actually gets easier (30th going forward). I think there's a distinct possibility that they may be undefeated come tournament time. I just don't see any proof that they're any better than St. Thomas... who has played a tough schedule and passed the tests.

And I also think that River Falls is too low.
I have actually seen BOTH UWSP and Whitworth this season... at the same tournament... and Whitworth is a better team than UWSP in my opinion. Whitworth is deeper with at least four scoring threats and two shut-down defensive players in the Gebber brothers.

The fact Whitworth had Mike Taylor, a legitamate player on a Univ. of Montana player, transfer in has completely changed their team. He can light it up for 30 one night or just find other guys all night long for points for them. Loofburrow is dangerous as a swing man. Can post up and score from inside and can step outside and drain threes just as easily. David Riley is always a threat for the same reason Loofburrow is, expect that Riley can do more damage from inside the arc. And you have Felix Freidt who can contribute inside as well.

Riley had an off tournament in Vegas and every single player mentioned stepped up at different times - almost like Riley was a role player and not their #1 scoring option.

UWSP would be a much better team and higher in my poll if Jenkins was returning. I know he is still on the roster, but he hasn't played and it doesn't look like he will play (due to NFL aspirations). Hopefully we can find out more when we talk to Coach Sempling on Sunday's Hoopsville (tentative, still have to reach out).

UWSP certainly has plenty of talent, but they aren't as deep. That is going to hurt them. And referencing six straight 29+ point wins isn't telling the whole truth. You comment on Whitworth's weak finish in conference (which I would also disagree with - though certainly not as challenging as the WIAC), but those six wins are against weak squads as well.

So while I appreciate your allegiance to UWSP, the fact of the matter is if those two teams faced off (wish it happened in Vegas), my money would be on Whitworth by about 10.

I'm actually not comparing Whitworth and Stevens Point... SP has two losses, and they were legit... they got beat (albeit on the road) by St. Thomas and River Falls in close games... but they lost. I think they've taken strides forward since then and I relish the opportunity to get at least one more shot at River Falls (I'm actually planning on making the trek up to SP on Feb 12th for the rematch), but I think SP belongs somewhere in the 5-8 range right now.

I'm comparing Whitworth with St. Thomas. I don't see any genuine tests that Whitworth has had this season, compared to UST.

Last year, Whitworth had some marquee wins... but this year, they have Carthage... and though Carthage just beat IWU, they're not living up to the hype from the preseason. I know that the potential is there... but it just hasn't shown itself yet, and I think Carthage is going to struggle to even make the tournament, let alone contend for the national championship. Of course, lots can change... they can catch fire... but they'll have to catch an unbelievable fire... they're 5-4 in-region right now and still have to play Augie twice, go to IWU, play Wheaton again... and everybody else in the CCIW.

Quote
As for UW-River Falls... they are rising in the polls... but there are still a lot of questions about a team that even the coaches in the league voted to finish 7th (I believe). If no expected them to be that good... is it a case of playing beyond their abilities and eventually they will come back to earth? Or is it a case of people not appreciating what they really had.

The SID's voted RF #8, not the coaches. And I have no idea what they were thinking... I said as much back in September when I said that RF could be a top 25 team on this board. Nobody knew the impact that adding Shane Manor would have on last year's team... but it was evident that even last year's team caught some bad breaks. They played St. Thomas to a 1 point game and BEAT Whitewater. And they were adding a player who had averaged 10+ points in his first two years at Superior and had an effective redshirt year while he was sitting out due to the transfer. And they have about as veteran a team as anyone in the WIAC this season, along with Point and maybe Stout.

I'm not really sold on Middlebury at #5 and Williams at #6. I'd move them down and move the next 6 or so teams up instead.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2011, 06:42:13 PM

PS, wanna make your opinions count? I've gotten only 9 ballots in the PP so far! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 11, 2011, 09:51:18 PM

Three ranked teams go down already tonight.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 11, 2011, 10:06:47 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 11, 2011, 09:51:18 PM

Three ranked teams go down already tonight.

Make that four.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 11, 2011, 10:49:43 PM

For those keeping score at home, who perchance have not committed the Top 25 to memory, and don't want to navigate away from this page to the scoreboard, here's the four:

Ripon 70, #15 St. Norbert 60
Keene St. 81, #16 Western Conn. 76
McDaniel 61, #18 Franklin & Marshall 53
Utica 85, #20 Ithaca 81

#13 Brandeis survives Bates, 53-50. (I love this matchup, it's gotta be the favorite rivalry of the Damon Runyan character Brandy Bottle Bates.)
#25 NYU slips past Hunter, 85-59.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 12, 2011, 01:20:42 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2011, 06:42:13 PM
PS, wanna make your opinions count? I've gotten only 9 ballots in the PP so far! ;D

Are you trying to say that my prognostications count for nothing...?!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2011, 01:31:13 AM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 12, 2011, 01:20:42 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2011, 06:42:13 PM
PS, wanna make your opinions count? I've gotten only 9 ballots in the PP so far! ;D

Are you trying to say that my prognostications count for nothing...?!

Of course not - but by your submitting a ballot they contributed to the second most prestigious rankings on these boards! ;D (And your ballot did single-handedly change several teams' placements!)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 12, 2011, 02:20:53 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2011, 01:31:13 AM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 12, 2011, 01:20:42 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2011, 06:42:13 PM
PS, wanna make your opinions count? I've gotten only 9 ballots in the PP so far! ;D

Are you trying to say that my prognostications count for nothing...?!

Of course not - but by your submitting a ballot they contributed to the second most prestigious rankings on these boards! ;D (And your ballot did single-handedly change several teams' placements!)

I think that 's probably true for just about all 11 of us! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2011, 12:27:02 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 12, 2011, 02:20:53 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2011, 01:31:13 AM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 12, 2011, 01:20:42 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2011, 06:42:13 PM
PS, wanna make your opinions count? I've gotten only 9 ballots in the PP so far! ;D

Are you trying to say that my prognostications count for nothing...?!

Of course not - but by your submitting a ballot they contributed to the second most prestigious rankings on these boards! ;D (And your ballot did single-handedly change several teams' placements!)

I think that 's probably true for just about all 11 of us! :D

Quite possibly true, but since his was the final ballot I tallied, I noticed it more.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WcsuAlum on January 12, 2011, 01:13:36 PM

Westconn needs to get it together fast. Got outrebounded by 30 and still managed to stay in the game and had 3 chances to tie within the last minute. Showed flashes of how good they could be, made costly mistakes down the stretch and couldn't get the big rebounds when it counted.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 12, 2011, 01:56:24 PM

Is Campbell back?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AllStar17 on January 12, 2011, 04:13:14 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 12, 2011, 01:56:24 PM
Is Campbell back?

Yes, I he is back. He returned last Saturday (1/8) in a 109-77 win over Plymouth State. Last night was his second game back.

Glad to see he is feeling better.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on January 12, 2011, 05:07:07 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 11, 2011, 06:29:30 PM
I'm actually not comparing Whitworth and Stevens Point... SP has two losses, and they were legit... they got beat (albeit on the road) by St. Thomas and River Falls in close games... but they lost. I think they've taken strides forward since then and I relish the opportunity to get at least one more shot at River Falls (I'm actually planning on making the trek up to SP on Feb 12th for the rematch), but I think SP belongs somewhere in the 5-8 range right now.

I'm comparing Whitworth with St. Thomas. I don't see any genuine tests that Whitworth has had this season, compared to UST.

On November 19, St Thomas beat PLU by 3, 6 weeks later Whitworth beat PLU 93-58 and was up 70-35 at one point. Granted St. Thomas beat UPS by 20 and WW beat Loggers by only 7. In the common opponent category WW gets the slight nod. WW victories over Carthage and Ripon are quality wins. Both of Tommies quality wins are over the 2 top WIAC teams. No question these 2 teams are close.

These 2 teams could be a final four matchup, ;D but I still think Point will be the team to beat from that section of West region when March comes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 12, 2011, 08:06:10 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on January 12, 2011, 05:07:07 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 11, 2011, 06:29:30 PM
I'm actually not comparing Whitworth and Stevens Point... SP has two losses, and they were legit... they got beat (albeit on the road) by St. Thomas and River Falls in close games... but they lost. I think they've taken strides forward since then and I relish the opportunity to get at least one more shot at River Falls (I'm actually planning on making the trek up to SP on Feb 12th for the rematch), but I think SP belongs somewhere in the 5-8 range right now.

I'm comparing Whitworth with St. Thomas. I don't see any genuine tests that Whitworth has had this season, compared to UST.

On November 19, St Thomas beat PLU by 3, 6 weeks later Whitworth beat PLU 93-58 and was up 70-35 at one point. Granted St. Thomas beat UPS by 20 and WW beat Loggers by only 7. In the common opponent category WW gets the slight nod. WW victories over Carthage and Ripon are quality wins. Both of Tommies quality wins are over the 2 top WIAC teams. No question these 2 teams are close.

These 2 teams could be a final four matchup, ;D but I still think Point will be the team to beat from that section of West region when March comes.

I can't really argue with what Whitworth has done... they've won their games and that's all you can ask of them. I'm just questioning the quality of the wins versus Whitworth, in terms of teams like Point and River Falls... and I don't necessarily think there's a huge disparity across the entire schedule, but there is, at least according to Massey, a compelling case for St. Thomas having played a very tough schedule, and a compelling case for Whitworth having played a tough schedule... just maybe not as tough.

Perhaps that difference (very tough vs. tough) isn't significant... but UST just got the nod by virtue of their pair of victories over the WIAC front runners.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 12, 2011, 08:59:22 PM

Final: #1 Wooster 82 Oberlin 55 :)

Wooster emptied their bench in this game. Nathan Balch shot 9 of 12 with 5 three pointers to lead Wooster with 23 points. Ian Franks added 11 points.

Wooster is now 15-0 which is their best start to a season ever in the history of the program.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 13, 2011, 07:08:22 AM

How They Fared--Midweek Report

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	617	Wooster	15-0	def. Oberlin, 82-55; 01/15 at Denison
#2	585	Virginia Wesleyan	15-0	def. Randolph, 53-50; 01/15 at Roanoke
#3	550	Whitworth	13-0	01/14 at George Fox; 01/15 at Willamette
#4	540	St. Thomas	13-0	def. Concordia-Moorhead, 69-61
#5	527	Middlebury	11-0	01/14 at Tufts; 01/15 at Bates
#6	471	Williams	13-1	01/14 at Bates; 01/15 at Tufts
#7	454	Wabash	13-1	01/15 at Allegheny
#8	443	Augustana	14-0	def. T#32 Wheaton (Ill.), 70-57; 01/15 at T#39 Carthage
#9	434	UW-Stevens Point	12-3	def. Macalester, 82-51; LOST at UW-Platteville, 56-57; 01/15 at UW-Superior
#10	400	Amherst	12-0	01/14 at Connecticut College; 01/15 at Wesleyan
#11	375	Randolph-Macon	13-2	def. #14 Eastern Mennonite, 83-78; 01/15 vs. Emory and Henry
#12	341	UW-River Falls	14-2	def. UW-La Crosse, 89-83; 01/15 vs. UW-Platteville
#13	337	Brandeis	11-0	def. Bates, 53-50; 01/14 at Carnegie Mellon; 01/16 at Case Western Reserve
#14	311	Eastern Mennonite	11-3	LOST at #11 Randolph-Macon, 78-83; 01/15 vs. Guilford
#15	288	St. Norbert	9-3	LOST at Ripon, 60-70; 01/14 at #41 Illinois College; 01/15 at Knox
#16	217	Western Connecticut	12-2	LOST to Keene State, 76-81; 01/15 vs. Mass-Boston
#17	215	St. Mary's (Md.)	11-3	def. Mary Washington, 91-65; 01/15 vs. Frostburg State
#18	212	Franklin and Marshall	10-3	LOST at McDaniel, 53-61; 01/13 at Muhlenberg; 01/15 at Washington College
#19	114	Illinois Wesleyan	11-3	def. Millikin, 75-56; 01/15 vs. Elmhurst
#20	76	Ithaca	11-3	LOST at Utica, 81-85
#21	74	Hanover	11-2	def. Franklin, 82-56; 01/15 vs. T#36 Anderson
#22	73	Ferrum	14-1	def. Greensboro, 69-61; 01/15 at Christopher Newport
#23	71	WPI	11-3	01/13 vs. T#32 MIT; 01/15 at Coast Guard
#24	70	Chapman	12-2	01/13 at UC Santa Cruz; 01/15 at Menlo
#25	69	New York University	11-1	def. Hunter, 85-59; 01/14 at Case Western Reserve; 01/16 at Carnegie Mellon

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	61	Ramapo	12-3	def. Montclair State, 75-66; 01/13 at Rutgers-Newark; 01/15 at Rutgers-Camden
#27	53	Marietta	13-2	LOST to Capital, 74-82; 01/15 vs. #35 John Carroll
#28	35	Becker	11-2	def. Elms, 81-71; 01/13 vs. Newbury; 01/15 at Daniel Webster
T#29	22	Mary Hardin-Baylor	11-2	def. Concordia (Texas), 107-100; 01/13 vs. Schreiner; 01/15 at Texas Lutheran
T#29	22	Washington and Lee	10-4	LOST to Roanoke, 59-73; 01/16 vs. Lynchburg
#31	16	Plattsburgh State	7-4	01/14 at Cortland State; 01/15 at Oswego State
T#32	12	MIT	10-4	01/13 at #23 WPI; 01/15 vs. Clark
T#32	12	Wheaton (Ill.)	10-4	LOST at #8 Augustana, 57-70; 01/15 vs. North Park
#34	6	Manhattanville	10-3	01/13 vs. FDU-Florham; 01/15 at Misericordia
#35	5	John Carroll	10-4	def. Muskingum, 76-62; 01/15 at #27 Marietta
T#36	4	Anderson	10-4	def. Rose-Hulman, 69-54; 01/15 at #21 Hanover
T#36	4	Lewis and Clark	10-3	01/14 at Pacific Lutheran; 01/15 at Pacific
T#36	4	Rhode Island College	8-4	LOST at Southern Maine, 88-95; 01/13 at Colby; 01/15 vs. Plymouth State
T#39	2	Carthage	9-5	def. Elmhurst, 73-63; 01/15 vs. #8 Augustana
T#39	2	Centre	9-3	01/14 vs. Hendrix; 01/16 vs. Millsaps
#41	1	Illinois College	9-2	def. Grinnell, 104-92; 01/14 vs. #15 St. Norbert; 01/15 vs. Ripon

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 14, 2011, 07:48:38 PM

#5 Middlebury remains undefeated with a 79-63 road victory over Tufts.

#6 Williams tops host Bates 66-50. Ephs big guy Troy Whittington returns from injury with a double-double of 14 pts and 10 rebounds in 21 minutes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 14, 2011, 11:51:53 PM

Couple of Top 25 UAA upsets.

#15 Brandeis falls on the road to Carnegie Mellon 53-52.

#25 NYU loses at Case Western Reserve 80-76

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on January 15, 2011, 02:27:53 AM

#3 Whitworth turns it on in second half and cruises to victory over George Fox, 81-57. Tomorrow at Willamette.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 15, 2011, 02:50:25 PM

#7 Wabash gets a nice road win over Allegheny 80-58. Wabash is now 14-1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 15, 2011, 04:57:06 PM

#5 Middlebury defeats Bates 78-65 and remains undefeated at 13-0

#6 Williams beats Tufts 71-52

#10 Amherst defeats Wesleyan 77-61 and they remain unbeaten at 14-0

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dahlby on January 15, 2011, 05:53:47 PM

#24 Chapman over Santa Cruz on 1/13.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on January 15, 2011, 11:36:27 PM

#3 Whitworth wins on the road over Willamette 84-70. Lots of fouls called but Pirates prevail.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: DagarmanSpartan on January 16, 2011, 02:26:51 AM

Unranked CWRU over NYU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 16, 2011, 05:13:39 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 14, 2011, 11:51:53 PM
Couple of Top 25 UAA upsets.

#15 Brandeis falls on the road to Carnegie Mellon 53-52.

#25 NYU loses at Case Western Reserve 80-76

Almost Deja Vu. Couple more Top 25 UAA upsets.

#15 Brandeis falls on the road to Case Western Reserve 66-63

#25 NYU loses at Carnegie Mellon 76-70

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 16, 2011, 05:24:26 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 16, 2011, 05:13:39 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 14, 2011, 11:51:53 PM
Couple of Top 25 UAA upsets.

#15 Brandeis falls on the road to Carnegie Mellon 53-52.

#25 NYU loses at Case Western Reserve 80-76

Almost Deja Vu. Couple more Top 25 UAA upsets.

#15 Brandeis falls on the road to Case Western Reserve 66-63

#25 NYU loses at Carnegie Mellon 76-70

Serious question for my fellow posters...

This was the first trip out of the "northeast" for Brandeis and NYU. When they hit the Great Lakes region, they were beaten by "average" teams from this well-respected part of the country.

Are "'Deis" and the Violets really deserving of Top 25 votes?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 16, 2011, 06:23:43 PM

After a few conversations with some people... I am certainly reconsidering where I have Brandeis. It would seem they may be a bit overrated... and NYU always has a cupcake start of a season that makes them look good until they hit conference action.

The problem is... from about 12 or 15 down... it's a crap shoot as to who deserves to be in there... unlike last year when it as 5-15 we couldn't figure out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dahlby on January 16, 2011, 08:17:33 PM

Chapman falls to NAIA member Menlo on 1/15.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 16, 2011, 09:13:01 PM

How They Fared--Complete

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	617	Wooster	16-0	def. Oberlin, 82-55; def. Denison, 72-64
#2	585	Virginia Wesleyan	16-0	def. Randolph, 53-50; def. Roanoke, 96-82
#3	550	Whitworth	15-0	def. George Fox, 81-57; def. Willamette, 84-70
#4	540	St. Thomas	13-0	def. Concordia-Moorhead, 69-61
#5	527	Middlebury	13-0	def. Tufts, 79-63; def. Bates, 78-65
#6	471	Williams	15-1	def. Bates, 68-50; def. Tufts, 71-52
#7	454	Wabash	14-1	def. Allegheny, 80-58
#8	443	Augustana	15-0	def. T#32 Wheaton (Ill.), 70-57; def. T#39 Carthage, 58-54
#9	434	UW-Stevens Point	13-3	def. Macalester, 82-51; LOST at UW-Platteville, 56-57; def. UW-Superior, 71-56
#10	400	Amherst	14-0	def. Connecticut College, 70-56; def. Wesleyan, 77-61
#11	375	Randolph-Macon	14-2	def. #14 Eastern Mennonite, 83-78; def. Emory and Henry, 75-48
#12	341	UW-River Falls	15-2	def. UW-La Crosse, 89-83; def. UW-Platteville, 56-53
#13	337	Brandeis	11-2	def. Bates, 53-50; LOST at Carnegie Mellon, 52-53; LOST at Case Western Reserve, 63-66
#14	311	Eastern Mennonite	12-3	LOST at #11 Randolph-Macon, 78-83; def. Guilford, 79-67
#15	288	St. Norbert	11-3	LOST at Ripon, 60-70; def. #41 Illinois College, 87-73; def. Knox, 68-59
#16	217	Western Connecticut	13-2	LOST to Keene State, 76-81; def. Mass-Boston, 87-72
#17	215	St. Mary's (Md.)	12-3	def. Mary Washington, 91-65; def. Frostburg State, 88-60
#18	212	Franklin and Marshall	11-4	LOST at McDaniel, 53-61; LOST at Muhlenberg, 67-71; def. Washington College, 84-71
#19	114	Illinois Wesleyan	12-3	def. Millikin, 75-56; def. Elmhurst, 75-55
#20	76	Ithaca	11-3	LOST at Utica, 81-85
#21	74	Hanover	12-2	def. Franklin, 82-56; def. T#36 Anderson, 57-54
#22	73	Ferrum	14-2	def. Greensboro, 69-61; LOST at Christopher Newport, 67-80
#23	71	WPI	13-3	def. T#32 MIT, 68-53; def. Coast Guard, 78-59
#24	70	Chapman	13-3	def. UC Santa Cruz, 69-62; LOST at Menlo, 52-54
#25	69	New York University	11-3	def. Hunter, 85-59; LOST at Case Western Reserve, 76-80; LOST at Carnegie Mellon, 70-76

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	61	Ramapo	14-3	def. Montclair State, 75-66; def. Rutgers-Newark, 80-74; def. Rutgers-Camden, 72-57
#27	53	Marietta	14-2	LOST to Capital, 74-82; def. #35 John Carroll, 101-90
#28	35	Becker	13-2	def. Elms, 81-71; def. Newbury, 82-58; def. Daniel Webster, 61-52
T#29	22	Mary Hardin-Baylor	12-3	def. Concordia (Texas), 107-100; def. Schreiner, 67-57; LOST at Texas Lutheran, 53-56
T#29	22	Washington and Lee	11-4	LOST to Roanoke, 59-73; def. Lynchburg, 80-73
#31	16	Plattsburgh State	8-5	def. Cortland State, 69-57; LOST at Oswego State, 65-72
T#32	12	MIT	11-5	LOST at #23 WPI, 53-68; def. Clark, 77-63
T#32	12	Wheaton (Ill.)	11-4	LOST at #8 Augustana, 57-70; def. North Park, 80-76
#34	6	Manhattanville	11-3	def. FDU-Florham, 61-44; LOST at Misericordia, 58-72
#35	5	John Carroll	10-5	def. Muskingum, 76-62; LOST at #27 Marietta, 90-101
T#36	4	Anderson	10-5	def. Rose-Hulman, 69-54; LOST at #21 Hanover, 54-57
T#36	4	Lewis and Clark	12-3	def. Pacific Lutheran, 77-66; def. Pacific, 73-54
T#36	4	Rhode Island College	9-5	LOST at Southern Maine, 88-95; LOST at Colby, 58-69; def. Plymouth State, 73-56
T#39	2	Carthage	9-6	def. Elmhurst, 73-63; LOST to #8 Augustana, 54-58
T#39	2	Centre	11-3	def. Hendrix, 68-56; def. Millsaps, 77-51
#41	1	Illinois College	10-3	def. Grinnell, 104-92; LOST to #15 St. Norbert, 73-87; def. Ripon, 97-94

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 16, 2011, 09:15:27 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 16, 2011, 05:24:26 PM
Quote from: magicman on January 16, 2011, 05:13:39 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 14, 2011, 11:51:53 PM
Couple of Top 25 UAA upsets.

#15 Brandeis falls on the road to Carnegie Mellon 53-52.

#25 NYU loses at Case Western Reserve 80-76

Almost Deja Vu. Couple more Top 25 UAA upsets.

#15 Brandeis falls on the road to Case Western Reserve 66-63

#25 NYU loses at Carnegie Mellon 76-70
Serious question for my fellow posters...

This was the first trip out of the "northeast" for Brandeis and NYU. When they hit the Great Lakes region, they were beaten by "average" teams from this well-respected part of the country.

Are "'Deis" and the Violets really deserving of Top 25 votes?

Yes and no. But then again, I haven't had NYU on my ballot.

Bad start for Brandeis on the road but I think Ralph understands what it's like to make a thousand mile trip on a weekend to play decent opponents. To suggest that Brandeis doesn't even deserve a vote is a little bit of hyperbole.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Just Bill on January 16, 2011, 09:21:25 PM

Voters may have to consider Concordia (Wis.) very soon. 12-2 in the NathCon which has actually performed really well outside of conference this year. They are 8-0 in league.
http://www.northernac.org/sports/basketball_men/statistics/2010-11/cuw.htm

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 16, 2011, 09:30:22 PM

Yes -- when I look down their schedule and play the "best win/worst loss" game, I come up with UW-La Crosse and Carroll, which is a good combo.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 16, 2011, 09:40:19 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 16, 2011, 09:15:27 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 16, 2011, 05:24:26 PM
Quote from: magicman on January 16, 2011, 05:13:39 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 14, 2011, 11:51:53 PM
Couple of Top 25 UAA upsets.

#15 Brandeis falls on the road to Carnegie Mellon 53-52.

#25 NYU loses at Case Western Reserve 80-76

Almost Deja Vu. Couple more Top 25 UAA upsets.

#15 Brandeis falls on the road to Case Western Reserve 66-63

#25 NYU loses at Carnegie Mellon 76-70
Serious question for my fellow posters...

This was the first trip out of the "northeast" for Brandeis and NYU. When they hit the Great Lakes region, they were beaten by "average" teams from this well-respected part of the country.

Are "'Deis" and the Violets really deserving of Top 25 votes?

Yes and no. But then again, I haven't had NYU on my ballot.

Bad start for Brandeis on the road but I think Ralph understands what it's like to make a thousand mile trip on a weekend to play decent opponents. To suggest that Brandeis doesn't even deserve a vote is a little bit of hyperbole.

Decent may be a bit hyperbole too. I agree that CMU and Case aren't bad teams, but they havent played that well before conference play, going a combined 7-14 out-of-conference (to-date). That includes some really bad losses also. Name me one signature win for Brandeis or NYU. They really dont have one, so its hard to gauge them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 16, 2011, 10:13:39 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 16, 2011, 09:15:27 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 16, 2011, 05:24:26 PM
Quote from: magicman on January 16, 2011, 05:13:39 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 14, 2011, 11:51:53 PM
Couple of Top 25 UAA upsets.

#15 Brandeis falls on the road to Carnegie Mellon 53-52.

#25 NYU loses at Case Western Reserve 80-76

Almost Deja Vu. Couple more Top 25 UAA upsets.

#15 Brandeis falls on the road to Case Western Reserve 66-63

#25 NYU loses at Carnegie Mellon 76-70
Serious question for my fellow posters...

This was the first trip out of the "northeast" for Brandeis and NYU. When they hit the Great Lakes region, they were beaten by "average" teams from this well-respected part of the country.

Are "'Deis" and the Violets really deserving of Top 25 votes?

Yes and no. But then again, I haven't had NYU on my ballot.

Bad start for Brandeis on the road but I think Ralph understands what it's like to make a thousand mile trip on a weekend to play decent opponents. To suggest that Brandeis doesn't even deserve a vote is a little bit of hyperbole.

Yes, thanks. I assume that they flew from Boston to Pittsburgh on Thursday (?), or Friday (?), and bussed to Cleveland on Saturday and then flew home Sunday evening.

561 miles from Boston to Pittsburgh. Those distances are ASC- and SCAC-like, except the Interstates may not be as easy to travel as in the south.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mass_d3fan on January 16, 2011, 10:20:01 PM

Hopefully, WPI gets a bit more love & votes this week. Their only D3 losses are on the road to 2 teams in the polls(Becker & West. Conn).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 16, 2011, 10:41:34 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 16, 2011, 10:13:39 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 16, 2011, 09:15:27 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 16, 2011, 05:24:26 PM
Quote from: magicman on January 16, 2011, 05:13:39 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 14, 2011, 11:51:53 PM
Couple of Top 25 UAA upsets.

#15 Brandeis falls on the road to Carnegie Mellon 53-52.

#25 NYU loses at Case Western Reserve 80-76

Almost Deja Vu. Couple more Top 25 UAA upsets.

#15 Brandeis falls on the road to Case Western Reserve 66-63

#25 NYU loses at Carnegie Mellon 76-70
Serious question for my fellow posters...

This was the first trip out of the "northeast" for Brandeis and NYU. When they hit the Great Lakes region, they were beaten by "average" teams from this well-respected part of the country.

Are "'Deis" and the Violets really deserving of Top 25 votes?

Yes and no. But then again, I haven't had NYU on my ballot.

Bad start for Brandeis on the road but I think Ralph understands what it's like to make a thousand mile trip on a weekend to play decent opponents. To suggest that Brandeis doesn't even deserve a vote is a little bit of hyperbole.
Yes, thanks. I assume that they flew from Boston to Pittsburgh on Thursday (?), or Friday (?), and bussed to Cleveland on Saturday and then flew home Sunday evening.

561 miles from Boston to Pittsburgh. Those distances are ASC- and SCAC-like, except the Interstates may not be as easy to travel as in the south.

When I played, it was travel Thursday afternoon/evening, play Friday night, travel Saturday morning, play Sunday noon, and then travel Sunday night. Pittsburgh - Cleveland is only a couple of hours on a bus. The Emory/Rochester weekend is probably worst in terms of travel (used to be Case/Emory when I played). Brandeis/NYU can also be bad depending on traffic or weather, because you can spend the good part of a day idle on a bus. There shouldnt be exams yet this semester either, so schoolwork isnt a good excuse. Taking an exam in a hotel room or lobby a few hours before a Friday game is never fun, nor does it make it easy to focus on the game or the exam. Its probably a combination of both teams not playing well and being somewhat over-rated.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 16, 2011, 10:48:16 PM

Quote from: mass_d3fan on January 16, 2011, 10:20:01 PM
Hopefully, WPI gets a bit more love & votes this week. Their only D3 losses are on the road to 2 teams in the polls(Becker & West. Conn).

I agree about WPI. They are a solid team, especially with the play of Matt Carr. In my opinion, he should be on peoples' AA radar. With Hollingsworth out, he is one of the top two big men in the conference, if not the top one all by himself. They have already avenged the loss to Becker also. West Conn is a pretty solid team, so a road loss to them should not be too much of a surprise. I think they are a generally better, more experienced team than Brandeis in the NE. If ranking teams in the NE, I would put them right behind the top 3 in the NESCAC, along with West Conn.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 16, 2011, 10:50:28 PM

McMurry went to tablet-based curricula, campus-wide, about 3 years ago. The sports teams carry a wireless router on the busses, so Wi-Fi is available on the road trips.

I wonder how many other schools have done this.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 16, 2011, 10:58:11 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 16, 2011, 10:50:28 PM
McMurry went to tablet-based curricula, campus-wide, about 3 years ago. The sports teams carry a wireless router on the busses, so Wi-Fi is available on the road trips.

I wonder how many other schools have done this.

You dont even need a router nowadays, my 4G phone can turn into a hotspot wherever I want.

By the way, although both are correct, I prefer the single "s" plural spelling of bus. This avoids confusion with the plural of buss (although context will almost always tell you which word is appropriate), as its plural form always contains "ss".

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: zander on January 17, 2011, 10:36:32 AM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 16, 2011, 10:58:11 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 16, 2011, 10:50:28 PM
McMurry went to tablet-based curricula, campus-wide, about 3 years ago. The sports teams carry a wireless router on the busses, so Wi-Fi is available on the road trips.

I wonder how many other schools have done this.

You dont even need a router nowadays, my 4G phone can turn into a hotspot wherever I want.

By the way, although both are correct, I prefer the single "s" plural spelling of bus. This avoids confusion with the plural of buss (although context will almost always tell you which word is appropriate), as its plural form always contains "ss".

the name of the poster says it all.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 17, 2011, 02:59:38 PM

I think Brandeis will cling to a Top 25 spot but, if not, does anyone know if there has ever been a D3hoops poll without a representative from the UAA?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 17, 2011, 11:30:52 PM

Not much action in the Top 25 tonight but that's probably a good thing because the teams that played lost..

#4 St Thomas has their unbeaten string come to an end as host Hamline downs the Tommies 92-79. St Thomas is now 13-1 and Hamline improves to 8-6. The Pipers had 12 made 3 pointers tonight outscoring the Tommies 36-15 from behind the arc.

#17 St Mary's (Md) was also on the road and they come up short against Wesley 95--80. St Mary's led 40-33 at the break but were outscored by the Wolverines 62-40 in the 2nd half.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 18, 2011, 12:09:40 AM

Quote from: magicman on January 17, 2011, 11:30:52 PM
Not much action in the Top 25 tonight but that's probably a good thing because the teams that played lost..

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 18, 2011, 12:36:00 AM

Has there ever been a top 25 with as few as five regions (South, West, Northeast, Midwest, Great Lakes) represented? Because that could, as improbable as it seems, be on the horizon if the East, Atlantic and Mid-Atlantic regions continue to struggle the way they have been ... I think come tourney time a lot of teams are going to be hoping to be sent to regionals with teams from those three areas, as there don't appear to be any really consistent good teams in any of the three ...

Ramapo does seem to be playing well, however, and should move into the top 20 or so (five straight wins, only three losses, two of which came to a non-D-III and Stevens Point). A pretty young team (no senior starters), still, that should keep getting better and probably peak as a contender next year. A good bet to stick in the top 25 for the rest of the year, unlike perhaps anyone else from those three regions.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 18, 2011, 12:43:34 AM

New poll is up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 18, 2011, 07:34:44 AM

Still not a single vote for La Roche. They only have a single loss, and beat the same CMU team that Brandeis and NYU lost to (La Roche won by 15 at CMU earlier in the season).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 18, 2011, 08:35:45 AM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 18, 2011, 07:34:44 AM
Still not a single vote for La Roche. They only have a single loss, and beat the same CMU team that Brandeis and NYU lost to (La Roche won by 15 at CMU earlier in the season).

Their schedule is woefully poor, massey has them #351 out of 411.

Considering CMU was 3-8 overall going into the Brandeis/NYU weekend, thats a pretty tattered banner to be waving as your best win. :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on January 18, 2011, 09:24:25 AM

La Roche's "best win" is over Geneva, a provisional DIII team competing in the President's Conference-- in other words, Geneva is not eligible for their conference title or an NCAA bid this year.

La Roche's "worst loss"-- only loss-- is to Thiel, who is currently leading in the President's Conference title race.

However, the AMCC is a very weak conference, so it is not surprising that La Roche is running the table in that league. Still, the story of how La Roche's head coach passed away last month is very tragic, and it is a very good story of how La Roche, in their first game under interim head coach Harry Jenkins, got a win six days after their previous head coach passed away.

I wouldn't proclaim Carnegie Mellon as the favorite to win the UAA men's title off of two home victories over Brandeis and NYU. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 18, 2011, 10:07:54 AM

I wasn't the one who called CMU a decent team, that was Pat (see last page). All I was saying was that NYU and Brandeis both were swept by CMU and Case this weekend (they are combined 7-14 out of conference so far) and neither of those teams have particularly strong wins. Yet, they are both receiving votes still.

By the way, La Roche is in the same conference as PS-Behrend, who picked up 3 votes this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 18, 2011, 10:10:08 AM

Decent as in not awful -- I didn't proclaim them the next coming of anything either.

Penn State-Behrend got a handful of votes. They've proven more on the floor than La Roche has -- obviously La Roche has other factors as well, but PSB has played a better schedule.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 18, 2011, 10:22:23 AM

I agree, but if you can justify the loss for one team, a comparison with another team that beat them handily I think is also relevant.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 18, 2011, 11:03:34 AM

And these are all things I talked about on Hoopsville, but the fact remains PSB is more worthy of a spot on my ballot (and clearly voters agreed).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 18, 2011, 11:36:16 AM

I didn't say PSB wasn't more deserving, just that La Roche may also be deserving. PSB only got 3 votes also, so neither team is getting much love.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 18, 2011, 11:41:01 AM

Good. Now that we're done talking about the things neither of us actually said, we can move on.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 18, 2011, 05:38:23 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 18, 2011, 11:41:01 AM
Good. Now that we're done talking about the things neither of us actually said, we can move on.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 18, 2011, 06:37:40 PM

Quote from: sac on January 18, 2011, 08:35:45 AM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 18, 2011, 07:34:44 AM
Still not a single vote for La Roche. They only have a single loss, and beat the same CMU team that Brandeis and NYU lost to (La Roche won by 15 at CMU earlier in the season).

Their schedule is woefully poor, massey has them #351 out of 411.

Considering CMU was 3-8 overall going into the Brandeis/NYU weekend, thats a pretty tattered banner to be waving as your best win. :-\

Let's not overlook La Roche's actual Massey Rating: #23 (in the BCS style rankings). Thats much higher than PSU-Behrend (86), Brandeis (84), NYU (145), Emory (73) and Ithaca (64), to name a few, and they are ranked higher in the Massey than at least 15 teams ranked or receiving votes. However, they have not even received 1 vote in the poll. Every other team in the Massey top 25 is receiving votes in the D3hoops.com poll. Thats all I am saying. Where are the Mid-Atlantic voters?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 18, 2011, 07:10:05 PM

Quote from: deiscanton on January 18, 2011, 09:24:25 AM
La Roche's "best win" is over Geneva, a provisional DIII team competing in the President's Conference-- in other words, Geneva is not eligible for their conference title or an NCAA bid this year.

La Roche's "worst loss"-- only loss-- is to Thiel, who is currently leading in the President's Conference title race.

However, the AMCC is a very weak conference, so it is not surprising that La Roche is running the table in that league. Still, the story of how La Roche's head coach passed away last month is very tragic, and it is a very good story of how La Roche, in their first game under interim head coach Harry Jenkins, got a win six days after their previous head coach passed away.

I wouldn't proclaim Carnegie Mellon as the favorite to win the UAA men's title off of two home victories over Brandeis and NYU. :)

I think it's definitely a story to watch... but due to the strength of schedule, I don't think that they necessarily should be ranked at this point.

If they win their next 4 or 5 in a row (and other start to fall), then perhaps...

All they can do is beat the teams they play, but it doesn't automatically mean that they are (or should be) counted as one of the top 25 teams in the land.

You have to think about this... how would other teams have fared with this schedule? How would, say, a middle of the road WIAC or CCIW team? Or a top team, for that matter?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on January 18, 2011, 07:35:54 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 18, 2011, 06:37:40 PM
Quote from: sac on January 18, 2011, 08:35:45 AM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 18, 2011, 07:34:44 AM
Still not a single vote for La Roche. They only have a single loss, and beat the same CMU team that Brandeis and NYU lost to (La Roche won by 15 at CMU earlier in the season).

Their schedule is woefully poor, massey has them #351 out of 411.

Considering CMU was 3-8 overall going into the Brandeis/NYU weekend, thats a pretty tattered banner to be waving as your best win. :-\

Let's not overlook La Roche's actual Massey Rating: #23 (in the BCS style rankings). Thats much higher than PSU-Behrend (86), Brandeis (84), NYU (145), Emory (73) and Ithaca (64), to name a few, and they are ranked higher in the Massey than at least 15 teams ranked or receiving votes. However, they have not even received 1 vote in the poll. Every other team in the Massey top 25 is receiving votes in the D3hoops.com poll. Thats all I am saying. Where are the Mid-Atlantic voters?

Speaking of Massey Ratings, I actually did ask Dave McHugh this question on the Jan. 16 Hoopsville show a few days ago on how these ratings should be taken into account when doing Top 25 rankings. You can listen to his answer-- he answers this question within the first 15 minutes of the show-- it is worth a listen. According to him, in short, the ratings are taken somewhat into account-- but they are to be given a low priority in the evaluating process because there are many other factors to be considered when evaluating a team that the Massey Ratings system does not provide us. He then goes into detail about these other factors.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 18, 2011, 08:01:17 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 18, 2011, 07:10:05 PM
Quote from: deiscanton on January 18, 2011, 09:24:25 AM
La Roche's "best win" is over Geneva, a provisional DIII team competing in the President's Conference-- in other words, Geneva is not eligible for their conference title or an NCAA bid this year.

La Roche's "worst loss"-- only loss-- is to Thiel, who is currently leading in the President's Conference title race.

However, the AMCC is a very weak conference, so it is not surprising that La Roche is running the table in that league. Still, the story of how La Roche's head coach passed away last month is very tragic, and it is a very good story of how La Roche, in their first game under interim head coach Harry Jenkins, got a win six days after their previous head coach passed away.

I wouldn't proclaim Carnegie Mellon as the favorite to win the UAA men's title off of two home victories over Brandeis and NYU. :)

I think it's definitely a story to watch... but due to the strength of schedule, I don't think that they necessarily should be ranked at this point.

If they win their next 4 or 5 in a row (and other start to fall), then perhaps...

All they can do is beat the teams they play, but it doesn't automatically mean that they are (or should be) counted as one of the top 25 teams in the land.

You have to think about this... how would other teams have fared with this schedule? How would, say, a middle of the road WIAC or CCIW team? Or a top team, for that matter?

You can play that game all you want, but how can you know for sure?

The best factual evidence I can think of is common opponent, but when I brought up CMU, everyone dismissed it, despite CMU beating two top 25 teams at home last week (the same site where they lost to La Roche by 15), who also dont have any strong wins (yet are receiving plenty of top 25 attention). How does Brandeis' 291st ranked schedule impress you so much more than La Roche's 321?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 18, 2011, 08:04:59 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 18, 2011, 06:37:40 PM
Quote from: sac on January 18, 2011, 08:35:45 AM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 18, 2011, 07:34:44 AM
Still not a single vote for La Roche. They only have a single loss, and beat the same CMU team that Brandeis and NYU lost to (La Roche won by 15 at CMU earlier in the season).

Their schedule is woefully poor, massey has them #351 out of 411.

Considering CMU was 3-8 overall going into the Brandeis/NYU weekend, thats a pretty tattered banner to be waving as your best win. :-\

Let's not overlook La Roche's actual Massey Rating: #23 (in the BCS style rankings).

69th in the non-dumbed down version of the rankings. There's a reason Massey has non-BCS rankings -- those are the ones he started with.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 18, 2011, 08:07:53 PM

Here's Massey's actual Top 25, as opposed to the one that the BCS would use if, god forbid, the BCS were allowed anywhere near college basketball:

   Whitworth   15   0
   St Thomas MN   13   0
   WI Stevens Pt   13   3
   Wooster   16   0
   WI River Falls   15   2

+2   Williams   15   1
-1   Augustana IL   15   0
-1   Amherst   14   0
+1   Middlebury   13   0
-1   Randolph Macon   14   2

   Wabash   14   1
   VA Wesleyan   16   0
   Lewis & Clark   12   3
+1   Hanover   12   2
+2   WI Whitewater   11   5

+11   Concordia WI   12   2
+4   Worcester Tech   13   3
+13   Gust Adolphus   8   5
+16   St Norbert   11   3
+14   St Mary's MD   12   3

-5   Wheaton IL   11   4
-2   Anderson IN   10   5
-9   Chapman   13   3
+18   WI Platteville   10   6
-7   Marietta   14   2

I've always found Massey to be interesting but a little too Wisconsin-centric for my tastes. I like a good WIAC school as much, if not even a little more than the rest of them, but Massey is too high on Wisconsin and anyone whose schedule touches a WIAC team for my tastes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 18, 2011, 08:19:32 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 18, 2011, 08:04:59 PM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 18, 2011, 06:37:40 PM
Quote from: sac on January 18, 2011, 08:35:45 AM
Quote from: hugenerd on January 18, 2011, 07:34:44 AM
Still not a single vote for La Roche. They only have a single loss, and beat the same CMU team that Brandeis and NYU lost to (La Roche won by 15 at CMU earlier in the season).

Their schedule is woefully poor, massey has them #351 out of 411.

Considering CMU was 3-8 overall going into the Brandeis/NYU weekend, thats a pretty tattered banner to be waving as your best win. :-\

Let's not overlook La Roche's actual Massey Rating: #23 (in the BCS style rankings).

69th in the non-dumbed down version of the rankings. There's a reason Massey has non-BCS rankings -- those are the ones he started with.

Pat, as you know, they aren't dumbed-down, they just dont take into account margin of victory. Should we reward running up the score or how a team's 10-15 players perform in blowouts;)?

I also completely agree with your regional bias comment. I was trying more to focus on the fact that no one seems to be concerned about certain teams SOS, while for others it is a big deal. Therefore the comparison between Brandeis and La Roche. I just dont see much difference between the two schools resumes, except the common opponent which would give the nod to La Roche. By the way, Brandeis is #91 in the non-"dumbed-down" ratings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 18, 2011, 08:27:42 PM

No, but Massey doesn't either. All of the reputable computer rankings cap margin of victory and those items you wink at are not really a factor.

Should a 1-point victory be the same as a 20-point victory? Is that the best possible measure of a team's strength?

I know you are not a fan of Brandeis' position in the poll. That's been clear. You're preaching to the crowd, though. Brandeis spent one week on my ballot -- last week, after the win against NYU, they were my No. 24. So please direct your energies elsewhere.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 18, 2011, 08:38:50 PM

Well I am glad to see we are on the same page.

I would also like to see La Roche get some love (obiously I have no say in the matter), even if it is just a couple of votes. The program has been through a lot this year and they have responded very postiively. Can't help but pull for them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 18, 2011, 08:40:00 PM

Quote from: hugenerd on January 18, 2011, 08:38:50 PM
The program has been through a lot this year and they have responded very postiively. Can't help but pull for them.

I agree with both of these statements. But those aren't factors on my ballot. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 18, 2011, 09:05:14 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 18, 2011, 08:07:53 PM
I've always found Massey to be interesting but a little too Wisconsin-centric for my tastes. I like a good WIAC school as much, if not even a little more than the rest of them, but Massey is too high on Wisconsin and anyone whose schedule touches a WIAC team for my tastes.

I've always thought it was odd how Wisconsin-centric it really is. I mean, part of that likely has to do with the fact that the WIAC, year in and year out, has the highest non-con winning percentage... but I wonder if it's an issue with the algorithm.

I think it's interesting, though, this year, how much higher Whitworth is than everybody else. They haven't touched the WIAC at all... and are one of the most isolated geographically (along with the rest of the NWC).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 18, 2011, 09:08:40 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 18, 2011, 09:05:14 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 18, 2011, 08:07:53 PM
I've always found Massey to be interesting but a little too Wisconsin-centric for my tastes. I like a good WIAC school as much, if not even a little more than the rest of them, but Massey is too high on Wisconsin and anyone whose schedule touches a WIAC team for my tastes.

I've always thought it was odd how Wisconsin-centric it really is. I mean, part of that likely has to do with the fact that the WIAC, year in and year out, has the highest non-con winning percentage... but I wonder if it's an issue with the algorithm.

I think it's interesting, though, this year, how much higher Whitworth is than everybody else. They haven't touched the WIAC at all... and are one of the most isolated geographically (along with the rest of the NWC).

The algorithm has always been my assumption.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 18, 2011, 11:04:11 PM

I apologize in advance for belaboring the point, but I forgot to post this earlier and I think this statistic is telling (and quite amazing for teams receiving Top 25 votes) considering about 60% of the season is done. Brandeis has only 1 win this season over a team with a winning record: NYU. Unfortunately, NYU has exactly 0 wins over teams with winning records. In other words, NYU and Brandeis, combined, do not have a win over a team with a winning record outside of when they played eachother.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on January 18, 2011, 11:30:27 PM

#3 Whitworth starts strong at home vs Whitman. 37-12, 7:16 to go 1st half.

Now 59-30 at half. Here are some sloppy stats:
Wtmn-m Whtw-m
Field goals 9-32 28.1% 20-32 62.5%
3-point FGs 3-15 20.0% 10-16 62.5%
Free throws 9-12 75.0% 9-11 81.8%
Reb (O-D) 18 (8-10) 20 (3-17)
Turnovers 7 2
Last FG 1st-01:22 1st-00:29
Large lead none 32 (1st-02:24)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 18, 2011, 11:42:42 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 18, 2011, 09:05:14 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 18, 2011, 08:07:53 PM
I've always found Massey to be interesting but a little too Wisconsin-centric for my tastes. I like a good WIAC school as much, if not even a little more than the rest of them, but Massey is too high on Wisconsin and anyone whose schedule touches a WIAC team for my tastes.

I've always thought it was odd how Wisconsin-centric it really is. I mean, part of that likely has to do with the fact that the WIAC, year in and year out, has the highest non-con winning percentage... but I wonder if it's an issue with the algorithm.

I think it's interesting, though, this year, how much higher Whitworth is than everybody else. They haven't touched the WIAC at all... and are one of the most isolated geographically (along with the rest of the NWC).

For Whitworth, I think they are ranked so high because of their margin of victory. Their winning on average by 20+ points (if I am not mistaken).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 18, 2011, 11:47:50 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 18, 2011, 09:05:14 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 18, 2011, 08:07:53 PM
I've always found Massey to be interesting but a little too Wisconsin-centric for my tastes. I like a good WIAC school as much, if not even a little more than the rest of them, but Massey is too high on Wisconsin and anyone whose schedule touches a WIAC team for my tastes.

I've always thought it was odd how Wisconsin-centric it really is. I mean, part of that likely has to do with the fact that the WIAC, year in and year out, has the highest non-con winning percentage... but I wonder if it's an issue with the algorithm.

I think it's interesting, though, this year, how much higher Whitworth is than everybody else. They haven't touched the WIAC at all... and are one of the most isolated geographically (along with the rest of the NWC).

But they have played teams who have played WIAC teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on January 19, 2011, 01:04:12 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 18, 2011, 11:47:50 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 18, 2011, 09:05:14 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 18, 2011, 08:07:53 PM
I've always found Massey to be interesting but a little too Wisconsin-centric for my tastes. I like a good WIAC school as much, if not even a little more than the rest of them, but Massey is too high on Wisconsin and anyone whose schedule touches a WIAC team for my tastes.
I've always thought it was odd how Wisconsin-centric it really is. I mean, part of that likely has to do with the fact that the WIAC, year in and year out, has the highest non-con winning percentage... but I wonder if it's an issue with the algorithm.

I think it's interesting, though, this year, how much higher Whitworth is than everybody else. They haven't touched the WIAC at all... and are one of the most isolated geographically (along with the rest of the NWC).

But they have played teams who have played WIAC teams.

I can only find W-SP's thumping of Linfield in NWC vs WIAC this year. Here is some other related games of Whitworth to WIAC.

WW crushed Loras who played Platteville close.
WW defeated Luther who also played Platte close.
WW beat Ripon who defeated an above average St. Norbert who beat Oshkosh
WW beat Col College big and so did W-SP.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2011, 02:28:57 AM

As a Mid-Atlantic voter... first off it's hard to talk about La Roche being in the Mid-Atlantic when Frostburg State is in the Great Lakes and other examples... but that is for another time. Secondly, I have La Roche on my radar, but right now I am not all that pleased with Mid-Atlantic basketball.

SMC and F&M have disappointed me this season... and no one else has really stepped up to impress. Yes, La Roche is 14-1 and is PSB 13-1 and undefeated in conference play. But this is a weak conference and La Roche's opponents are a combined 105-129 (.449) - that includes 10 teams at or below .500. Not bad... but also not something, considering the AMCC, I have been eager to vote in accordance with.

That being said, I do still have Brandeis on my ballot... but maybe reluctantly. They took a real hit on my ballot and barely stayed on - and it was a tough decision. The main thing here is that Brandeis has proven me wrong in the past and I eventually had to raise them up in my poll after dismissing them. My pendulum may have swung to far in the wrong direction this season, but I am still waiting to see if the first two games in UAA play were a fluke or the truth.

As for CMU, as I said on Hoopsville, I expect Rochester and Emory to actually be fighting it out on top of the UAA, not CMU or CWR. Those were good wins this weekend, but they may not have actually beaten legitimate Top 25 teams (I know, Brandeis is still on my ballot, but I am reconsidering nearly every day) - so let's not put too much stock in that just yet. Those wins may look like wins over .500 teams (as NYU nearly always seems to do in conference action or overall every year) at the end of the season.

Will La Roche or PSB get on my Mid-Atlantic ballot in the future... probably, but I am waiting to see if their winning ways continue.

And as for Massey, listen to the beginning of Hoopsville from Sunday, I do explain my thoughts on Massey. The big thing... it's all about numbers. Nothing takes into account rivalries, injuries, outside influences, or anything other then numbers. So it is something I consider, but I am not going to put a ton of stock in it when it doesn't give me that big a picture. Also... that WIAC influence drives me nuts. That alone means teams in the Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, etc. aren't going to be high because they don't have a connection of any sorts to the WIAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 19, 2011, 08:54:20 AM

According to Massey: Williams #6, Amherst #8, Middlebury #9, WPI #17, St. Mary's (Md.) #20, Ramapo #29, W. Conn #32

It's not that much different than the d3hoops poll.

The WIAC was 48-17 versus D3 in non-conference play, so I'm not sure how much is bias and how much is them being really freakin' good.

Frostburg State is in the Mid-Atlantic this season. (and other conference-switcher Earlham is in the Midwest).

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2011, 02:28:57 AM
And as for Massey, listen to the beginning of Hoopsville from Sunday, I do explain my thoughts on Massey. The big thing... it's all about numbers. Nothing takes into account rivalries, injuries, outside influences, or anything other then numbers.

How much, exactly, does a rivalry change the outcome of a game? Is it really more even, or does the better team still usually win?

I looked at the previous 10 years of Calvin/Hope games (an even matchup with usually pretty even teams), and the team with the better overall season record heading into the matchup won at a 0.667 clip (18 of 27). With those numbers, we can find that it's five times (4.5, actually) more likely that the "better team" had a 67% chance of winning than 50% (as we often "say" in a rivalry). Is that significant? I dunno, I guess I had better compare it to a "non-rivalry", but it doesn't appear that the rivalryness makes the game that close to a 50-50 toss-up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 19, 2011, 09:17:36 AM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 19, 2011, 08:54:20 AM
The WIAC was 48-17 versus D3 in non-conference play, so I'm not sure how much is bias and how much is them being really freakin' good.

In terms of Massey being "WIAC-centric" I believe in the simple fact above much more than the possibility of an algorithm problem. Year in and year out, the WIAC dominates in the non-conference and, obviously, this boosts the entire league in any type of mathmatical ranking. (As it should, by the way -- it's the best league in Division III.)

Now, I'll admit that I have never looked at the WIAC-centric issue very closely. If someone has evidence of Massey being WIAC-centric to a degree that just does not make sense, I'm listening.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 19, 2011, 09:50:46 AM

What concerns me is how geographical (and scheduling) proximity to the WIAC affects everyone in the area. Is Gustavus as good as Massey has them listed? I can't imagine. Without having time to dig back into Massey's listing, that was one that jumped out at me as a symptom of the problem this year, and it's been consistently that way in past years. MIAC and MWC schools seem to get floated up by the WIAC's proverbial rising tide.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 19, 2011, 10:19:05 AM

Its been my observation that year in and year out the WIAC has some of the highest offensive and defensive efficiencies in D3. Its simply a higher level of competency.

If Massey has anything in its algorithm that is offensive or defensive efficiency based that is likely the reason WIAC teams seem to be so highly rated so often.

In the MIAC's case, its a big conference that has very few games out of conference compared to others, so the variance just isn't high enough. One game vs the WIAC will affect its conference more than 1 game from say, the CCIW or MWC.

I counted 10 games vs the WIAC, out of 55 for the MIAC. So almost 20% of their non-conference games. Compare that to the CCIW, I counted 4 out of 88 games, or the MWC, 7 out of 70 or 10%.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 19, 2011, 10:19:48 AM

Here is another computer poll FWIW...

http://talismanred.com/ratings/hoops/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 19, 2011, 10:36:44 AM

Quote from: sac on January 19, 2011, 10:19:05 AM
In the MIAC's case, its a big conference that has very few games out of conference compared to others, so the variance just isn't high enough. One game vs the WIAC will affect its conference more than 1 game from say, the CCIW or MWC.

Good point.

I check Massey every Monday morning as I'm working on my D3hoops.com Top 25 ballot...just to catch teams I might be missing, or teams I might be too high or too low on. It seems like there are usually 1 or 2 MIAC teams that float way up Massey that really make me shake my head. I end up digging into their resume and conclude that I can't make a Top 25 case for them. Maybe the WIAC connection is the reason?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2011, 10:47:12 AM

Yes - Frostburg is in the Mid-Atlantic... keep forgetting the NCAA "fixed" that as it were.

As for the rivalries thought... I know teams that are sub-par play up for a game against a rival, especially if they are nationally ranked. As a voter, if I see a win by that sub-par team and understand that it was a rivalry game... I take that into account. Massey just breaks down the numbers and will either push the sub-par team up for that type of win or push the top team down because of the loss. I understand that the loss probably had other things going on then just numbers.

That goes for injuries... Massey doesn't know if a team had a returning star from an injury and is actually better with him back... they also don't know if a team just suffered an injury to a key player and aren't as good without him (i.e. MIT - not sure where Massey ever had them ranked, just using the example).

I agree that looking at Massey allows pollsters to spot what they might be missing, but I am not going to make it a major criteria for me when determining a Top 25 ballot. There are too many other intangiables and opinions and facts that I work with to make that choice.

I am proud to say that usually my Top 25 is reasonably close to what the ultimate Top 25 is which makes me feel I have a good read for teams - of course there are teams in my poll that aren't on the list and visa versa. That being said, I do have Brandeis in my poll... and probably shouldn't. :-)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dark Knight on January 19, 2011, 10:48:06 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 18, 2011, 08:07:53 PM
I've always found Massey to be interesting but a little too Wisconsin-centric for my tastes. I like a good WIAC school as much, if not even a little more than the rest of them, but Massey is too high on Wisconsin and anyone whose schedule touches a WIAC team for my tastes.

I'd be very interested to hear why you think this. Do you have some game results that suggest that Massey is systematically overrating the WIAC teams?

My own theory is that the appearance that Massey is overrating these teams results from a difference in the intent and method of polls like the d3hoops.com poll and Massey's rating.

Pollsters have a hard time handling strength of schedule and as a result are loathe to give a high ranking to a team with several losses and a difficult schedule.

Also, pollsters may be more inclined simply to rate a team highly for having a good record. It seems to me that there is a psychological inclination to treat the rank as a reward for winning more games, not an as an estimate of which team is more likely to win future games.

In any case, it's is easy enough to test whether Massey is overrating WIAC teams -- simply look at how WIAC teams do vs. teams from other conferences compared to how Massey expected them to do.

Checking out Stevens Point, for example, shows that their performance against non-WIAC teams compared to Massey's expectation looks like this: -5 -1 +26 +12 +11 +1. In other words, on average, Stevens Point did better against non-WIAC teams than Massey expected.

If anything Massey's algorithm would seem to underestimate their rating because of the tough conference they play in. Of course, that's only one sample.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dark Knight on January 19, 2011, 11:03:14 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 19, 2011, 10:36:44 AM
Quote from: sac on January 19, 2011, 10:19:05 AM
In the MIAC's case, its a big conference that has very few games out of conference compared to others, so the variance just isn't high enough. One game vs the WIAC will affect its conference more than 1 game from say, the CCIW or MWC.

Good point.

I check Massey every Monday morning as I'm working on my D3hoops.com Top 25 ballot...just to catch teams I might be missing, or teams I might be too high or too low on. It seems like there are usually 1 or 2 MIAC teams that float way up Massey that really make me shake my head. I end up digging into their resume and conclude that I can't make a Top 25 case for them. Maybe the WIAC connection is the reason?

This does make sense to me. Massey computes conference strength only after team powers have been computed, but conference teams get very tightly tied together because of all the games they play against each other. So whatever boosts one team boosts the whole conference, and the behavior is almost like Massey is paying attention to conference strength.

If a conference is very insular and has only a few games against non-conference teams, there will be a lot of variability in Massey's estimate of the strength of the conference as a whole. So the whole conference could be rated too high or too low. (I'd look for something like 20-30 games between conference teams and non-conference teams to have a good estimate of conference strength.)

I've seen this effect during the NCAA tournament. Whatever team wins the national championship gets a boost in Massey power, naturally enough--they just won 5 or 6 games against highly rated teams. But all the other teams in the conference get a boost too, though smaller.

I could imagine that if a team does really well in conference after non-conference games have ended, and other teams in conference get worse, this would give the team an artificially big boost in Massey power.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on January 19, 2011, 11:37:02 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 19, 2011, 10:19:48 AM
Here is another computer poll FWIW...

http://talismanred.com/ratings/hoops/

This poll also lists the WIAC as the top conference. Perhaps they play quality competition and are rewarded for it. Although the lesser teams playing the likes of Silver Lake, St. Scholastica, Northland and Marian seems to indicate they are riding the coattails of the better teams that schedule agressively, and rewards them for playing these better teams twice.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 19, 2011, 11:58:02 AM

Quote from: sac on January 19, 2011, 10:19:05 AM
Its been my observation that year in and year out the WIAC has some of the highest offensive and defensive efficiencies in D3. Its simply a higher level of competency.

If Massey has anything in its algorithm that is offensive or defensive efficiency based that is likely the reason WIAC teams seem to be so highly rated so often.

In the MIAC's case, its a big conference that has very few games out of conference compared to others, so the variance just isn't high enough. One game vs the WIAC will affect its conference more than 1 game from say, the CCIW or MWC.

I counted 10 games vs the WIAC, out of 55 for the MIAC. So almost 20% of their non-conference games. Compare that to the CCIW, I counted 4 out of 88 games, or the MWC, 7 out of 70 or 10%.

Not the case, quoted from the official Massey Ratings website (same rating system is used for basketball, football, etc.): "Only the score, venue, and date of each game are used to calculate the Massey ratings. Stats such as rushing yards, rebounds, or field-goal percentage are not included. Nor are game conditions such as weather, crowd noise, day/night, or grass/artificial turf. Overtime games are not treated any differently. Finally, neither injuries nor psychological factors like motivation are considered. While none of these are analyzed explicitly, they may be implicitly manifested through the game scores. "

Further: "A team's Offense power rating essentially measures the ability to score points. This does not distinguish how points are scored, so good defensive play that leads to scoring will be reflected in the Offense rating. In general, the offensive rating can be interpretted as the number of points a team would be expected to score against an average defense.
Similarly, a team's Defense power rating reflects the ability to prevent its opponent from scoring. An average defense will be rated at zero. Positive or negative defensive ratings would respectively lower or raise the opponent's expected score accordingly."

Home court advantage is taken into account, however: "Each team's home advantage is estimated based on the difference in performance when at home and on the road. Ratings and schedule strength both depend on where the games are played. "

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 19, 2011, 03:11:48 PM

Quote from: frodotwo on January 19, 2011, 11:37:02 AM
This poll also lists the WIAC as the top conference.

That's not surprising, given the non-conference dominance.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dark Knight on January 19, 2011, 03:36:28 PM

Quote from: Dark Knight on January 19, 2011, 10:48:06 AM
Also, pollsters may be more inclined simply to rate a team highly for having a good record. It seems to me that there is a psychological inclination to treat the rank as a reward for winning more games, not an as an estimate of which team is more likely to win future games.

Pollster test:

How would the following two game results affect your ranking of a top-25 team?

A) Lost a game by 5 that they should have won by 5

B) Won a game by 2 that they should have won by 12

They are about equivalent in their effect on Massey power, used to predict future game results...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 19, 2011, 04:24:12 PM

Quote from: Dark Knight on January 19, 2011, 03:36:28 PM
Quote from: Dark Knight on January 19, 2011, 10:48:06 AM
Also, pollsters may be more inclined simply to rate a team highly for having a good record. It seems to me that there is a psychological inclination to treat the rank as a reward for winning more games, not an as an estimate of which team is more likely to win future games.

Pollster test:

How would the following two game results affect your ranking of a top-25 team?

A) Lost a game by 5 that they should have won by 5

B) Won a game by 2 that they should have won by 12

They are about equivalent in their effect on Massey power, used to predict future game results...

I'm not an expert here, but the answer seems obvious. Also, although these numbers wont affect a teams Massey power rating that much, it will affect the overall rating. Again, from the official Massey website: "In contrast to the overall rating, the Power is a better measure of potential and is less concerned with actual wins-losses."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 19, 2011, 09:02:42 PM

Final: #1 Wooster 88 Allegheny 56

Wooster gets the easy home win with balanced scoring. Ian Franks led Wooster with 13 points. Next game is at home vs. Wittenberg on Saturday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 19, 2011, 09:28:02 PM

Final: Wittenberg 55 #7 Wabash 54

Wittenberg gets the home win by upsetting #7 Wabash. Wittenberg is now 12-4, 7-0 NCAC with the big conference showdown on Saturday vs. Wooster (8-0 NCAC). Wabash is now 14-2, 6-2 NCAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 19, 2011, 09:55:19 PM

#12 Stevens Point 92 - Eau Claire 37

This was a laugher from the start... EC only made 2 baskets in the first half in their way to a 45-13 deficit at half time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cubs on January 19, 2011, 11:31:01 PM

Quote from: cubs on October 14, 2010, 10:03:57 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on October 14, 2010, 05:00:43 PM
Not quite set in stone, but my current preseason Top 25...

#22 UW-Whitewater (23-6 overall, 13-3 WIAC/West) – Round of 32, lost to Wooster
Starters Returning: (2) G Phil Negri, 6-3 SR (8.4 ppg, 3.3 rpg), F Alex Edmunds, 6-4 JR (7.2 ppg, 4.7 rpg)

Starters Lost: (3) C Dustin Mitchell, 6-9 (18.0 ppg, 8.7 rpg), G Dupree Fletcher, 6-2 (14.0 ppg, 2.7 rpg), F Mike Bendall, 6-6 (10.2 ppg, 5.1 rpg)

Top Returning Reserve: G Nolan Free, 6-1 SO (6.4 ppg, 4.1 rpg)

Really just a crapshoot, but that's what I got.
I have a pretty good source that has told me that Free will not be playing this season for Whitewater, and PG Negri is still having back issues that plagued him last season. Take those two out of the rotation, and the Warhawks look "thin" in terms of experience. While Negri may still be on the roster once the season rolls around, one has to wonder just how effective he will be.

River Falls is the team in the WIAC that I would keep an eye on as the season goes along. Just have a hunch that they will be solid this season.

So do I get a little credit for this comment back in October now, or is it too early yet? ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 19, 2011, 11:46:37 PM

Hey, I beat you by a good month on that prediction!

Quote from: PointSpecial on September 19, 2010, 01:29:37 PM
UW River Falls could have a breakout year this year.

They have 3 of the top 7 returning scorers in the WIAC this year, in addition to adding Shane Manor, a transfer from UW Superior who will be eligible this season who averaged 11.5 as a Frosh and 10.5 as a Soph (sat out this last season). I don't necessarily think they're a top 25 team right now, but they might be on the cusp.

They beat Whitewater on Feb 6th last year and took St. Thomas to a 1 point game earlier in the year. I'm trying to remember from last year... but I think RF dealt with some injuries that cased them to be just 3-13 in the WIAC last season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 20, 2011, 07:08:35 AM

How They Fared--Midweek Report

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	616	Wooster	17-0	def. Allegheny, 88-56; 01/22 vs. T#42 Wittenberg
#2	586	Virginia Wesleyan	16-0	01/22 at Guilford
#3	555	Whitworth	16-0	def. Whitman, 104-71; 01/21 vs. Pacific
#4	543	St. Thomas	14-1	LOST at Hamline, 79-92; def. Macalester, 75-63; 01/22 vs. St. John's
#5	529	Middlebury	13-0	01/21 vs. Wesleyan; 01/22 vs. Connecticut College
#6	482	Williams	15-1	01/21 vs. Connecticut College; 01/22 vs. Wesleyan
#7	472	Wabash	14-2	LOST at T#42 Wittenberg, 54-55; 01/22 at Oberlin
#8	463	Augustana	16-0	def. Millikin, 72-58; 01/22 vs. North Central (Ill.)
#9	435	Amherst	14-0	01/20 vs. Curry; 01/22 vs. Trinity (Conn.)
#10	411	Randolph-Macon	15-2	def. Lynchburg, 83-44; 01/22 at Hampden-Sydney
#11	390	UW-River Falls	15-2	01/22 at UW-Stout
#12	344	UW-Stevens Point	14-3	def. UW-Eau Claire, 92-37; 01/22 at UW-Oshkosh
#13	292	St. Mary's (Md.)	13-4	LOST at Wesley, 80-95; def. Salisbury, 81-74; 01/22 vs. Stevenson
#14	275	Eastern Mennonite	13-3	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 85-65; 01/22 at Randolph
#15	227	St. Norbert	11-3	01/21 vs. Lake Forest; 01/22 vs. T#40 Illinois College
#16	222	Illinois Wesleyan	13-3	def. #29 Wheaton (Ill.), 82-72; 01/22 at North Park
#17	214	Hanover	12-3	LOST at Rose-Hulman, 64-66; 01/22 at T#42 Manchester
#18	171	WPI	14-3	def. Clark, 60-43; 01/22 vs. Springfield
#19	169	Western Connecticut	14-2	def. Rhode Island College, 82-77; 01/22 at Southern Maine
#20	141	Ramapo	15-3	def. New Jersey City, 77-76; 01/22 at Kean
#21	137	Brandeis	11-2	01/21 vs. Chicago; 01/23 vs. Washington U.
#22	59	Ithaca	12-3	def. Elmira, 101-67; 01/21 vs. Stevens; 01/22 vs. Hartwick
#23	55	Ferrum	15-2	def. Shenandoah, 83-46; 01/23 vs. T#36 North Carolina Wesleyan
#24	48	Centre	11-3	01/21 at Southwestern; 01/22 at Trinity (Texas)
#25	42	Chapman	13-3	01/20 at LeTourneau; 01/22 at UC Santa Cruz; 01/23 at University of Dallas

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	38	Becker	13-2	01/22 vs. Lesley
#27	37	Franklin and Marshall	12-4	def. Dickinson, 69-68; 01/22 vs. McDaniel
#28	34	Marietta	14-2	01/22 at Baldwin-Wallace
#29	22	Wheaton (Ill.)	11-5	LOST at #16 Illinois Wesleyan, 72-82; 01/22 at Elmhurst
#30	21	Lewis and Clark	12-3	01/21 vs. Willamette; 01/22 at Puget Sound
#31	12	Bowdoin	11-2	~~01/18 vs. Babson~~ (canceled); 01/21 vs. Tufts; 01/22 vs. Bates
#32	9	Mary Hardin-Baylor	12-3	01/20 vs. Hardin-Simmons; 01/22 vs. McMurry
#33	8	Concordia (Wis.)	13-2	def. Lakeland, 95-84; 01/20 vs. Edgewood; 01/22 vs. Rockford
T#34	7	Anderson	11-5	def. T#42 Manchester, 59-57; 01/22 vs. Mount St. Joseph
T#34	7	Capital	12-4	def. Denison, 81-58; 01/22 at John Carroll
T#36	4	North Carolina Wesleyan	12-5	def. Methodist, 73-69; 01/22 at Averett; 01/23 at #23 Ferrum
T#36	4	Penn State-Behrend	13-2	LOST to Medaille, 53-60; 01/22 at Penn State-Altoona
T#38	3	MIT	12-5	def. Springfield, 60-50; 01/22 at Wheaton (Mass.)
T#38	3	UW-Whitewater	12-5	def. UW-Platteville, 65-62
T#40	2	Emory	11-3	01/21 vs. Case Western Reserve; 01/23 vs. Carnegie Mellon
T#40	2	Illinois College	10-3	01/21 at Carroll; 01/22 at #15 St. Norbert
T#42	1	Manchester	10-6	LOST at T#34 Anderson, 57-59; 01/22 vs. #17 Hanover
T#42	1	New York University	11-3	01/21 vs. Washington U.; 01/23 vs. Chicago
T#42	1	Wittenberg	12-4	def. #7 Wabash, 55-54; 01/22 at #1 Wooster

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on January 22, 2011, 01:24:21 AM

#3 Whitworth wins big at home over Pacific 94-48, Oh yea, school record 19 3 pointers (19-34). Clay Gebbers the "defensive stopper" scored 17 in the first half.

This is the 5th WW player to have 14 or more points in a half this season. It is the 13th time it has happened amongst the five leading Pirate scorers.

Whitworth is 17-0 and hasn't lost a NWC conference game in forever (2009) 28 straight. Whitworth has now won 42 of the last 43 games it has played.

The latest NCAA Division III statistics report was released on January 18th and Whitworth leads the nation in turnovers per game. The Pirates are giving up only 9.7 turnovers per contest.

Anyone still wondering if WW reloaded? ;) Williams lost Schultz & Whitworth lost Montgomery. Of every team that had a 1st - 5th team Senior All American, those are the only two teams making noise at the top of this years poll.

Question, Is Williams better than last year? Is Whitworth?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 22, 2011, 04:42:24 AM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on January 22, 2011, 01:24:21 AM
Whitworth is 17-0 and hasn't lost a NWC conference game in forever (2009) 28 straight. Whitworth has now won 42 of the last 43 games it has played.

Anyone still wondering if WW reloaded? ;) Williams lost Schultz & Whitworth lost Montgomery. Of every team that had a 1st - 5th team Senior All American, those are the only two teams making noise at the top of this years poll.

Question, Is Williams better than last year? Is Whitworth?

I have to think that Whitworth is better than last year. not only did they return just about everbody except Montgomery, they gained two DI transfers in Jack Loofburrow and Mike Taylor. In the 17 games that the Pirates have played this year either Loofburrow or Taylor has been the leading scorer in 8 of them and the leading rebounder in 10. Taylor leads the team in scoring with 18.4 ppg and Loofburrow leads the team in rebounding with 6.6 rpg. In addition Taylor has a team high 63 assists, is shooting 55% from the field (103x187) 50% from long distance (26x52) and 86% from the foul line (81x94). He is a 6'4" guard that is the third leading rebounder on the team with 4.9 rpg and is 2nd on the team with 13 steals. Loofburrow is also shooting 55% from the field (89x161) and 49.5% from long distance (46x93, an average of 2.7 3's per game, from a 6'7" forward) He also leads the team in blocked shots. Not many teams can bring in 2 new players and have them give you those kinds of numbers. I tried to look up what Montgomery's statistics were last year for Whitworth, but couldn't find a link to last years stats. I'm just wondering, if you compared what Taylor is doing this year, to what Montgomery did last year, which player had the better year? If I was voting for the All American teams I think I would have to find a place for Taylor. And it wouldn't be on the 5th team either. ;D. So Whitworth replaced 1 all american with another all american candidate and added a 6"7" 3 point shooting forward who can rebound and block shots. Yeah, I think they got better. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 22, 2011, 07:56:00 AM

Surprisingly, Williams seems to be playing at roughly the same level as last year (certainly, statistically they are very close), which is amazing considering (1) they lost three very good seniors starters including all-American Schultz, as well as two senior bench players and (2) unlike last year, when they had amazing injury luck (not one rotation guy missed a game), this year, they've already had three starters banged up, missing a total of six games (and playing off the bench in six others while rounding into form). The Ephs are still a very efficient offensive team, although they don't shoot at last year's historically impressive levels. They seem to have improved a bit on defense to compensate for the offense they lost. The Ephs' two best defenders, Troy Whittington and Nate Robertson, are both playing more minutes this year after coming off the bench last season, so that has helped. Middlebury is arguably a bit better than last year, and Amherst is dramatically improved, so I do expect Williams to have a tougher time making the Final Four, but not because they have declined.

The new guys added to the rotation, despite being inexperienced, are very talented, with sophomore James Klemm replacing much of Schultz' perimeter scoring (though not yet his all-around contributions) and two rapidly-improving frosh as the top two players off the bench. The biggest improvement for the Ephs is that Whittington has continued to improve his offensive game (In particular his foul-shooting) while playing a lot more minutes, and he is playing at an all-American level overall. So long as he and James Wang are on the court together, the Ephs will always be difficult to guard, and with how Klemm is shooting, they have an offensive big three just about equally productive as last seasons' Schultz-Wang-Whittington trio. What I like about Williams is that all of its perimeter players are very good creators off the dribble -- and in good news for Eph fans, none of them are seniors.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 22, 2011, 10:15:08 AM

By the way, Whitworth is a very interesting team. I can't imagine any team has more talent 1 through 6, great combination of size, athleticism, and tremendous shooters, and two legit D-1 transfers is hard to top. But, they play only a seven man rotation, and really, only six players seem to contribute much in terms of offensive production. In the tournament, playing tough back-to-back games, that could prove to be an issue, especially if they suffer any injuries or foul trouble -- not much of a margin for error.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on January 22, 2011, 02:37:18 PM

Let me correct a few things magicman has said.

First off, Loofburrow is in his second year at WW.
WW lost all region point guard Beale and all conference player Gregg. Nate was NOT the only loss, not even close.

WW had some untapped depth last year. Taylor is the only key new player.

Loofburrow is a junior that WW found out of basketball and out of school. Injuries had threatened to end a career early. Pirate coaches have done an amazing thing with this young man but calling him a "legit" D1 transfer might be a stretch. What qualifies as legit? He doesn't start, fyi.

Sophmore Wade Gebbers has stepped in at PG and done well. He won't be all region. Freidt is no Montgomery. Taylor has taken up the difference and can do more than Gregg, so really only the true upgrade.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 22, 2011, 04:55:48 PM

Just watched the video feed of Guilford's three point home victory over #2 Virginia Wesleyan. Guilford is a strong squad, despite some tough losses this year. While VWC does have some athletic bigs, their post play was lackluster, especially for a team hoping to contend in March. #2 is definitely high, at least from what I saw today. Still, a road loss to a conference rival is not too much to worry about.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 22, 2011, 05:03:07 PM

#12 Stevens Point beats Oshkosh 74-70 on the road.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 22, 2011, 05:04:46 PM

EMU also fell on the road at Randolph, by an identical 64-61 score.

(Since PS snuck in a post before I posted ;), that score is identical to the Va Wes loss. :D)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 22, 2011, 06:25:21 PM

La Roche now 16-1, with a 15 game winning streak. ORV Penn-State Behrend (also in the AMCC) lost earlier in the week to Medaille, so La Roche is now the only unbeaten team left in AMCC conference play.

Losing in the top 25 (in addition to those mentioned) were:

#17 Hanover (2nd loss this week), today they lost by 15 to Manchester
#20 Ramapo, lost by 5 to Kean
#22 Ithaca, to Hartwich in OT

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 22, 2011, 09:16:28 PM

Trailing most of the game, by as many as 11 in the second half, #1 Wooster closes strong, outscoring Wittenberg 27-9 over the last nine minutes to grab the 65-58 home victory in one of D3's greatest rivalry games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 23, 2011, 12:12:05 AM

#16 Illinois Wesleyan loses to North Park. That's their 3rd loss to a team with a losing record this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 23, 2011, 01:04:09 PM

#21 Brandeis loses at home to Washington University by a lopsided score of 70 to 36.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 23, 2011, 01:29:48 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on January 23, 2011, 01:04:09 PM
#21 Brandeis loses at home to Washington University by a lopsided score of 70 to 36.

We need to get some info on this game. Vytas played only 19 minutes for Brandeis and scored only on FTs. Did WashU just shut him down? Did he get hurt?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 23, 2011, 05:49:48 PM

No, thats pretty much what vytus plays, he probably didn't play at the end of the game because it was a blowout. Last couple of games he played 24 and 22 minutes. He also hasn't played well, shouting 3-12, 1-7, and 0-7 in his last 3. I dont think him playing a bit more makes any difference. Brandeis trailed by double digits the entire second half, they just got out classed today.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 23, 2011, 10:28:51 PM

How They Fared

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	616	Wooster	18-0	def. Allegheny, 88-56; def. T#42 Wittenberg, 65-58
#2	586	Virginia Wesleyan	16-1	LOST at Guilford, 61-64
#3	555	Whitworth	17-0	def. Whitman, 104-71; def. Pacific, 94-48
#4	543	St. Thomas	15-1	LOST at Hamline, 79-92; def. Macalester, 75-63; def. St. John's, 62-59
#5	529	Middlebury	15-0	def. Wesleyan, 64-56; def. Connecticut College, 80-52
#6	482	Williams	17-1	def. Connecticut College, 91-52; def. Wesleyan, 82-63
#7	472	Wabash	15-2	LOST at T#42 Wittenberg, 54-55; def. Oberlin, 83-55
#8	463	Augustana	17-0	def. Millikin, 72-58; def. North Central (Ill.), 66-50
#9	435	Amherst	16-0	def. Curry, 101-45; def. Trinity (Conn.), 88-67
#10	411	Randolph-Macon	16-2	def. Lynchburg, 83-44; def. Hampden-Sydney, 70-68
#11	390	UW-River Falls	16-2	def. UW-Stout, 87-73
#12	344	UW-Stevens Point	15-3	def. UW-Eau Claire, 92-37; def. UW-Oshkosh, 74-70
#13	292	St. Mary's (Md.)	14-4	LOST at Wesley, 80-95; def. Salisbury, 81-74; def. Stevenson, 86-55
#14	275	Eastern Mennonite	13-4	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 85-65; LOST at Randolph, 61-64
#15	227	St. Norbert	13-3	def. Lake Forest, 60-46; def. T#40 Illinois College, 91-82
#16	222	Illinois Wesleyan	13-4	def. #29 Wheaton (Ill.), 82-72; LOST at North Park, 57-65
#17	214	Hanover	12-4	LOST at Rose-Hulman, 64-66; LOST at T#42 Manchester, 52-67
#18	171	WPI	15-3	def. Clark, 60-43; def. Springfield, 89-74
#19	169	Western Connecticut	15-2	def. Rhode Island College, 82-77; def. Southern Maine, 111-78
#20	141	Ramapo	15-4	def. New Jersey City, 77-76; LOST at Kean, 70-75
#21	137	Brandeis	12-3	def. Chicago, 59-53; LOST to Washington U., 36-70
#22	59	Ithaca	13-4	def. Elmira, 101-67; def. Stevens, 73-68; LOST to Hartwick, 96-100
#23	55	Ferrum	16-2	def. Shenandoah, 83-46; def. T#36 North Carolina Wesleyan, 90-84
#24	48	Centre	13-3	def. Southwestern, 72-54; def. Trinity (Texas), 73-61
#25	42	Chapman	16-3	def. LeTourneau, 76-61; def. UC Santa Cruz, 63-52; def. University of Dallas, 66-51

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	38	Becker	14-2	def. Lesley, 86-69
#27	37	Franklin and Marshall	13-4	def. Dickinson, 69-68; def. McDaniel, 71-40
#28	34	Marietta	15-2	def. Baldwin-Wallace, 67-63
#29	22	Wheaton (Ill.)	12-5	LOST at #16 Illinois Wesleyan, 72-82; def. Elmhurst, 68-67
#30	21	Lewis and Clark	14-3	def. Willamette, 99-77; def. Puget Sound, 73-64
#31	12	Bowdoin	11-4	~~01/18 vs. Babson~~ (canceled); LOST to Tufts, 55-64; LOST to Bates, 71-75
#32	9	Mary Hardin-Baylor	14-3	def. Hardin-Simmons, 88-76; def. McMurry, 66-64
#33	8	Concordia (Wis.)	15-2	def. Lakeland, 95-84; def. Edgewood, 81-66; def. Rockford, 96-84
T#34	7	Anderson	12-5	def. T#42 Manchester, 59-57; def. Mount St. Joseph, 81-58
T#34	7	Capital	12-5	def. Denison, 81-58; LOST at John Carroll, 77-82
T#36	4	North Carolina Wesleyan	13-6	def. Methodist, 73-69; def. Averett, 75-58; LOST at #23 Ferrum, 84-90
T#36	4	Penn State-Behrend	14-2	LOST to Medaille, 53-60; def. Penn State-Altoona, 78-55
T#38	3	MIT	13-5	def. Springfield, 60-50; def. Wheaton (Mass.), 79-61
T#38	3	UW-Whitewater	12-5	def. UW-Platteville, 65-62
T#40	2	Emory	13-3	def. Case Western Reserve, 97-75; def. Carnegie Mellon, 88-71
T#40	2	Illinois College	10-5	LOST at Carroll, 78-81; LOST at #15 St. Norbert, 82-91
T#42	1	Manchester	11-6	LOST at T#34 Anderson, 57-59; def. #17 Hanover, 67-52
T#42	1	New York University	12-4	LOST to Washington U., 76-80; def. Chicago, 62-47
T#42	1	Wittenberg	12-5	def. #7 Wabash, 55-54; LOST at #1 Wooster, 58-65

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on January 24, 2011, 10:07:29 AM

Does Witt lose any of the tiny bit of love they were getting in last week's poll? Even with their loss to Wooster, I would still argue they had a pretty good week and seem more deserving of picking up more than the one vote they received in last week's poll.

I mean, they beat then #7 Wabash at home and then they proceeded to make the trek up to Wooster and had an 11 point lead on the #1 team in the country with 10 minutes to go before seeing Wooster make their comeback.

I can't believe I'm actually saying something nice about Witt. I'd better go and check my temperature... :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on January 24, 2011, 10:18:43 AM

Quote from: ScotsFan on January 24, 2011, 10:07:29 AM
Does Witt lose any of the tiny bit of love they were getting in last week's poll? Even with their loss to Wooster, I would still argue they had a pretty good week and seem more deserving of picking up more than the one vote they received in last week's poll.

I mean, they beat then #7 Wabash at home and then they proceeded to make the trek up to Wooster and had an 11 point lead on the #1 team in the country with 10 minutes to go before seeing Wooster make their comeback.

I can't believe I'm actually saying something nice about Witt. I'd better go and check my temperature... :P

I think they will maintain at least their previous massive total. Anyone that watched that game knows they are at least 85% as good as Wooster and +/- 2% than Wabash (at home). :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 24, 2011, 10:19:13 AM

They might lose the love of that one voter but I can assure you they will get more votes from me alone than they got from the 25 total last week. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WcsuAlum on January 24, 2011, 06:38:38 PM

Western Connecticut making a top 10 debut this week? Playing excellent basketball and have proven to be one of the quickest, if not the quickest D3 team in the nation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 24, 2011, 07:32:03 PM

We're three ballots away from a full set but Western Connecticut will not be in the top 10.

Quickness is nice but it's only one part of a team's success, obviously.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 24, 2011, 07:47:15 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 24, 2011, 07:32:03 PM
We're three ballots away from a full set but Western Connecticut will not be in the top 10.

Quickness is nice but it's only one part of a team's success, obviously.

Based on what I'm getting in the PP, I'll bet it is the same top 12, just re-arranged.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mass_d3fan on January 24, 2011, 08:43:54 PM

Quote from: WcsuAlum on January 24, 2011, 06:38:38 PM
Western Connecticut making a top 10 debut this week? Playing excellent basketball and have proven to be one of the quickest, if not the quickest D3 team in the nation.

Hmmm, quite unrealistic to think you going to go from 169 pts to over 400 with wins over RIC & So. Maine and your only a week from losing to Keene St.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 24, 2011, 08:57:45 PM

Quote from: WcsuAlum on January 24, 2011, 06:38:38 PM
Western Connecticut making a top 10 debut this week? Playing excellent basketball and have proven to be one of the quickest, if not the quickest D3 team in the nation.

Wabash (the lowest ranked top 12 team to lose) would have to drop 150 points just to get to #13. I think that top 12 is pretty set for the time being - especially when #13, #14, #16, and #17 all lost this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 24, 2011, 09:21:28 PM

I don't think anyone wants to be ranked outside the top 12.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WcsuAlum on January 24, 2011, 10:09:34 PM

Sorry about the error, meant to say Top 15.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on January 25, 2011, 01:21:32 AM

New poll out:

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2010-11/week8

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on January 25, 2011, 09:52:50 AM

Last week, just after Brandeis had lost at Carnegie Mellon and Case, but before Brandeis split vs Chicago and Wash U, Gordon Mann wrote the following:

Quote from: gordonmann on January 17, 2011, 02:59:38 PM
I think Brandeis will cling to a Top 25 spot but, if not, does anyone know if there has ever been a D3hoops poll without a representative from the UAA?

Gordon, (or anyone else) could you check the D3Hoops.com Top 25 polls for the 2005-2006 season? I just checked the UAA Men's Basketball records for that year, and in that season, Carnegie Mellon won the UAA Men's Basketball title with a 10-4 mark in the UAA and a 20-6 mark overall. All of the other UAA teams had between 7 and 14 losses for each team in their overall record. There may have been some weeks there where no UAA team cracked the Top 25-- although some UAA teams had received votes in those weeks.

When D3Hoops.com updated the site, the archived polls from previous years seem to have vanished and not been put back on the site.

BTW, no UAA team in the Top 25 this week (because of Brandeis's blowout loss against Wash U)-- but 3 UAA teams still receiving votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 25, 2011, 10:32:48 AM

Thanks for the heads-up -- with that as a starting point, indeed, 2005-06 ended without a UAA men's team in the Top 25. That continued through Week 2 of 2007. In Week 3, Chicago entered the poll, NYU entered a week later, then Wash U started its long poll run a week after that.

So it seems like the poll through games of Dec. 3, 2006, was the last D3hoops.com Top 25 without a UAA men's team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 25, 2011, 12:13:13 PM

Nice! La Roche jumps into the ORV this week, at ORV #41. Big week coming up, as they play at Penn State Behrend next Wednesday. As long as they dont overlook Pitt Greensburg, a win at PSB will likely get them much more Top 25 consideration.

Pat, if La Roche gets to 18-1 by beating PSB on the road, with a 17 game win streak, do you think they crack your top 25?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 25, 2011, 01:01:27 PM

It certainly depends on what else happens, but at first glance, they probably wouldn't be on my ballot, no.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 25, 2011, 01:01:55 PM

hugenerd - Sorry... but PSB isn't going to look like a terrific win if La Roche gets it.

PSB has an OWP of .383 (90-145) counting Franciscan but not repeating records of teams records they have played twice with just 2 teams above .500. Their Massey Rating is 146 counting point differential and 127 not counting the points. A win over them, no matter their record, doesn't do much for anyone.

La Roche, by the way, has an OWP of .451 (114-143) counting Franciscan and Cenn Penn and not repeating teams records they have played twice with 5 teams above .500. Their Massey Rating is 91/29.

La Roche can't afford to lose to PSB, but I am not convinced a win over them is a huge deal.

I did put La Roche in my Top 25 - at #23 - because I couldn't ignore that 29 rating... and they have gone through with only one loss. I felt it might have been a bit premature... but I was struggling with teams 15-25 with a lot of contenders but all of them lacked something that made me feel strong about them in the Top 25. We will see if I regret La Roche's inclusion on my ballot... as I have already regretted others this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 25, 2011, 01:42:10 PM

Massey has the UAA rated #9 in D3 conferences, I think this is their lowest rating by several positions that I can recall.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 25, 2011, 03:32:53 PM

Thanks for the responses. I have no ties to La Roche, but I am rooting for them. I hope they keep playing well.

My comment with regards to PSB was because they have received votes in the top 25 poll the last few weeks, and it would be a road win over their main competition in the AMCC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 25, 2011, 03:49:15 PM

Quote from: sac on January 25, 2011, 01:42:10 PM
Massey has the UAA rated #9 in D3 conferences, I think this is their lowest rating by several positions that I can recall.

Somebody quick count the number of WIAC opponents. That has to be it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 25, 2011, 08:55:36 PM

#6 Williams wins on the road at Skidmore 84-61. Whittington for Williams almost perfect on 10x11 from the field and 8x9 from the line, as he finishes with a double-double of 28 points with 10 rebounds.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 26, 2011, 04:07:47 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 25, 2011, 08:55:36 PM
#6 Williams wins on the road at Skidmore 84-61. Whittington for Williams almost perfect on 10x11 from the field and 8x9 from the line, as he finishes with a double-double of 28 points with 10 rebounds.

And he did all that in 19 minutes of action. Imagine if he played a whole game. 56 and 20???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 26, 2011, 09:10:39 PM

Final: #1 Wooster 103 Kenyon 67

Wooster notches an easy road win as they clear the bench. Scots led by Nathan Balch 22 and Ian Franks 20.

Wooster plays Idle on Saturday ;) Next game is at Hiram on 2/2.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 26, 2011, 09:18:36 PM

Final: Ohio Wesleyan 87 #11 Wabash 76

Wabash drops a road game at OWU. Tim Brady led OWU with 36 and Wes Smith had 29 for Wabash.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 26, 2011, 10:16:57 PM

#10 UW River Falls trails for much of the game but comes back to beat UW Superior 62-59.

#12 UW Stevens Point destroys ORV UW Whitewater 85-59. It was 40-20 at the half and SP led by as many as 37.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dahlby on January 26, 2011, 10:22:34 PM

Augie over IWU by 2 in a game that IWU led for most of the time. Wining shot at 2 seconds after IWU had tied it after being down.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 26, 2011, 10:25:10 PM

Augie goes to 18-0 with a Kyle Nelson buzzer-beater nipping IWU, 69-67. The Titans led almost the whole game (by as much as 16 early on), but a 14-0 run by the Vikings put them ahead by 8 late in the game. The Titans went on their own 8-0 run from 2:01 to :09 remaining to tie, but 'twas not to be.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 26, 2011, 11:13:24 PM

An actual buzzer beater? Horn sounds with the ball in the air?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 26, 2011, 11:17:56 PM

The PBP from the IWU @ Augie game indicates that Nelson scored the putback with two seconds left. So I guess that it technically doesn't fall into the category of "buzzer-beater."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 26, 2011, 11:19:22 PM

OK, thanks. Not to bust balls or anything, just wanted to know if I needed to ask for video footage.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 26, 2011, 11:21:01 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 26, 2011, 11:13:24 PM
An actual buzzer beater? Horn sounds with the ball in the air?

That I don't know - I was on livestats. They reported the score as at 0:00 (though I have seen a post elsewhere saying it was at 0:02). Someone who was actually there will have to field this one. ;)

I saw Greg's post just before I hit 'post' - I will yield that it was apparently not literally a 'buzzer-beater' (though it sure was a 'stake in the heart'! :().

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 26, 2011, 11:58:10 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 26, 2011, 11:19:22 PM
OK, thanks. Not to bust balls or anything, just wanted to know if I needed to ask for video footage.

Pat, from livestats it appeared to be a 'buzzer-beater', but I forgot that you now have an on-going segment with such videos! In the future I will try to remember to double-check before using the term and causing you extra work! :-[

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dahlby on January 27, 2011, 12:14:59 AM

From Augustana's web site "...Nelson's put back with 2.8 seconds left...."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 27, 2011, 07:46:45 AM

How They Fared--Midweek Report

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	621	Wooster	19-0	def. Kenyon, 103-67
#2	585	Whitworth	17-0	01/28 vs. Linfield; 01/29 vs. #24 Lewis and Clark
#3	553	Augustana	18-0	def. #20 Illinois Wesleyan, 69-67; 01/29 at Elmhurst
#4	542	Middlebury	15-0	01/25 at Hamilton; 01/27 vs. Southern Vermont; 01/29 at #5 Williams
#5	515	Williams	18-1	def. Skidmore, 84-61; 01/29 vs. #4 Middlebury
#6	482	Amherst	16-0	01/28 vs. Colby; 01/29 vs. Bowdoin
#7	478	Virginia Wesleyan	17-1	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 86-59; 01/26 at #18 Eastern Mennonite POSTPONED; 01/29 at Washington and Lee
#8	451	St. Thomas	16-1	def. Augsburg, 82-66; 01/29 vs. Bethel
#9	443	Randolph-Macon	16-2	01/27 vs. Roanoke; 01/29 at Guilford
#10	416	UW-River Falls	17-2	def. UW-Superior, 62-59; 01/29 vs. UW-Oshkosh
#11	394	Wabash	15-3	LOST at Ohio Wesleyan, 76-87; 01/29 vs. Kenyon
#12	365	UW-Stevens Point	16-3	def. #36 UW-Whitewater, 85-59; 01/29 vs. UW-Superior
#13	299	St. Norbert	14-3	def. Lawrence, 73-52; 01/29 vs. Ripon
#14	273	WPI	16-3	def. Babson, 67-47; 01/29 at #38 MIT
#15	272	Western Connecticut	16-2	def. #40 Eastern Connecticut, 86-78; 01/29 vs. Mass-Dartmouth
#16	196	St. Mary's (Md.)	14-4	01/26 at Hood POSTPONED; 01/29 vs. Mary Washington
#17	173	Centre	13-3	01/28 vs. Austin; 01/30 vs. Colorado College
#18	140	Eastern Mennonite	13-4	01/26 vs. #7 Virginia Wesleyan POSTPONED; 01/29 at Roanoke
#19	127	Ferrum	17-2	def. Averett, 75-54; 01/30 vs. Methodist
#20	115	Illinois Wesleyan	13-5	LOST at #3 Augustana, 67-69; 01/29 vs. Carthage
#21	109	Chapman	16-3	01/29 at Southwestern (AZ)
#22	92	Franklin and Marshall	13-4	01/26 at Johns Hopkins POSTPONED; 01/29 at Haverford
#23	79	Marietta	16-2	def. Muskingum, 67-50; 01/29 at Otterbein
#24	59	Lewis and Clark	14-3	01/28 at Whitman; 01/29 at #2 Whitworth
#25	56	Ramapo	15-4	01/29 at New Jersey

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	53	Becker	15-2	def. Southern Vermont, 73-41; 01/27 at Salem State; 01/29 vs. Daniel Webster
#27	32	Scranton	14-2	01/28 at Merchant Marine; 01/29 at Drew
#28	31	Hanover	12-5	LOST at Transylvania, 67-77; 01/29 vs. Defiance
#29	29	Concordia (Wis.)	16-2	def. Wisconsin Lutheran, 82-65; 01/28 at Concordia (Mich.); 01/29 at TBD
#30	27	Mary Hardin-Baylor	14-3	01/27 at Howard Payne; 01/29 at Sul Ross State
#31	24	Wittenberg	13-5	def. Denison, 82-54; 01/29 at Oberlin
#32	15	Anderson	13-5	def. Defiance, 85-56; 01/29 at Earlham
#33	12	Emory	13-3	01/28 at T#34 Brandeis; 01/30 at New York University
T#34	11	Brandeis	12-3	01/28 vs. #33 Emory; 01/30 vs. T#45 Rochester
T#34	11	Wheaton (Ill.)	13-5	def. Millikin, 69-55; 01/29 vs. North Central (Ill.)
#36	10	UW-Whitewater	12-6	LOST to #12 UW-Stevens Point, 59-85; 01/29 vs. UW-Stout
#37	8	Ithaca	13-4	01/28 at Nazareth; 01/29 at Rochester Tech
#38	6	MIT	13-5	01/27 vs. Coast Guard; 01/29 vs. #14 WPI
#39	5	Manchester	12-6	def. Earlham, 75-57; 01/29 at Mount St. Joseph
#40	4	Eastern Connecticut	12-5	LOST to #15 Western Connecticut, 78-86; 01/29 at Plymouth State
T#41	3	Kean	14-5	01/26 vs. Richard Stockton POSTPONED; 01/29 at William Paterson
T#41	3	La Roche	17-1	def. Pitt-Greensburg, 59-47; 01/29 at T#43 Penn State-Behrend
T#43	2	Hobart	13-3	01/28 vs. St. Lawrence; 01/29 vs. Clarkson
T#43	2	Penn State-Behrend	15-2	def. Hilbert, 70-51; 01/29 vs. T#41 La Roche
T#45	1	Randolph	12-4	01/27 vs. Guilford; 01/29 at Hampden-Sydney
T#45	1	Rochester	12-4	01/28 at New York University; 01/30 at T#34 Brandeis

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2011, 02:50:25 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 26, 2011, 11:58:10 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 26, 2011, 11:19:22 PM
OK, thanks. Not to bust balls or anything, just wanted to know if I needed to ask for video footage.

Pat, from livestats it appeared to be a 'buzzer-beater', but I forgot that you now have an on-going segment with such videos! In the future I will try to remember to double-check before using the term and causing you extra work! :-[

No big deal -- the only extra work I did was to post here. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 27, 2011, 08:48:51 PM

#4 Middlebury moves to 16-0 with an 81-63 win over Southern Vermont. Next up for the Panthers is the much anticipated matchup on the road against #5 Williams on Saturday.

Just found out that Middlebury's leading scorer Ryan Sharry had to undergo laser eye surgery yesterday after getting poked in the eye 3 weeks ago. He's been playing with goggles on but had the surgery to correct retinal problems. He's out this weekend against Williams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 28, 2011, 08:27:18 AM

Not sure where to post this, but the La Roche story is receiving some national attention:

http://www.thepostgame.com/homepage/201101/big-coach-little-gym

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on January 29, 2011, 02:27:31 AM

#2 Whitworth defeats Linfield at home 70-43. Great defense from starters for 30 minutes, then they got the rest of the night off.

http://www.whitworth.edu/Athletics/Teams/BasketballMen/Releases/10_11/Lin2.htm

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 29, 2011, 04:25:43 PM

#5Williams defeats unbeaten #4 Middlebury 69-64.

Middlebury keeps it close but a dunk by Troy Whittington with 1:16 to play gives Ephs a 66-62 lead. Two free throws by Panthers' Joey Kizel make it 66-64 and after Williams' James Wang misses a jumper with 31 seconds left Middlebury looks to tie or win it . Panthers' Andrew Locke is fouled with 14 seconds to go and misses both free throws. Panthers forced to foul as Ephs grab the rebound and Williams' James Klemm makes them both with 13 second left. Middlebury turns it over and another foul sends Whittington to the line for a pair. He makes 1 of 2 for the final margin.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 29, 2011, 04:58:47 PM

#9 RMC loses at Guilford 62-61... final shot bounced on the rim twice before bouncing out at the buzzer.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 29, 2011, 05:37:02 PM

Wow, brutal ending it sounds like for RMC. Is there is a "buzzer non-beater" or "nearly-buzzer-beater" feature on D3hoops :)?

Ephs-Midd was a great game; I posted my full thoughts on the NESCAC board. Middlebury played very tough without their star and are a team to be reckoned with; as usual, their offense is inconsistent, but when they turn it on defensively as they did in the second half, they become very difficult to score against, even for an elite offensive team like Williams. Nolan Thompson, much like Tim Edwards last year, is a lock-down perimeter defender, and he made life very difficult today for all-American James Wang. Likewise, Andrew Locke is an intimidating defensive presence, even though Whittington still had a strong game, he really had a tough time and had to make some very difficult, heavily-contested shots inside, unlike his usual offensive dominance. When Sharry comes back and gives them a go-to guy on offense, they will be capable of beating anyone in the country, and I think they are marginally better than last year's very strong Midd team. Having seen Midd, Williams, and Amherst now, I think they are as even as three teams can be, and all very deserving of a top 6-7 ranking.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 29, 2011, 05:42:56 PM

#12 Stevens Point dominates another WIAC opponent 89-48 against UW Superior.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 29, 2011, 06:58:56 PM

A few updates on the Williams game from the NESCAC board: Wang apparently had the flu and hadn't practiced all week, explaining (in addition to a great defensive effort) not playing at his usual level, and Whittington received ten staples to his head before returning to the game. I'd say Wang with the flu plus Whittington missing time then returning with staples roughly equals, more or less, no Sharry for Midd :). In all events, on a neutral court, I think these two teams, at full strength, are roughly even. And Amherst may be playing the best of anyone in the NESCAC right now -- Toomey has to be the leader for national frosh of the year at this point, he has helped turned Amherst from an also-ran into a title contender in just one year. For a flavor of the atmosphere at the game (the crowd was pretty good considering that Williams is on a break right now):

http://athletics.williams.edu/video/index

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 29, 2011, 09:03:09 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 29, 2011, 05:37:02 PM
Wow, brutal ending it sounds like for RMC. Is there is a "buzzer non-beater" or "nearly-buzzer-beater" feature on D3hoops :)?

nescac1

Here's a link to the Buzzer beaters feature. http://www.d3hoops.com/buzzerbeaters/2010-11/men

You can access it off front page under the drop down menu when you go to the news link. Pat updates it as they come in. He already has the one up that I mentioned to him when Regis beating University of New England on Thursday night. And there might be another one coming as I think Hamilton beat St Lawrence this afternoon with a 3 pointer at the buzzer.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2011, 12:18:32 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 29, 2011, 05:37:02 PM
Wow, brutal ending it sounds like for RMC. Is there is a "buzzer non-beater" or "nearly-buzzer-beater" feature on D3hoops :)?

In-house we refer to those kinds of shots as buzzer bummers. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on January 30, 2011, 12:43:26 AM

#2 Whitworth defeats #24 Lewis and Clark in Spokane, 79-52. Suspenseful game for first half and then a big WW run 3 minutes into 2nd half and its a coaster. LC lost both games this weekend and will likely leave the poll enitirely which is an understandable shame. They are a decent team and play well despite losing 2 starters to injury this year. I am pretty sure they could hang with most of the 15-30 ranked teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on January 30, 2011, 05:01:32 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 29, 2011, 05:42:56 PM
#12 Stevens Point dominates another WIAC opponent 89-48 against UW Superior.

I would be surprised if Point loses any more games except their last. Looking pretty tough.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 30, 2011, 07:11:42 PM

How They Fared

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	621	Wooster	19-0	def. Kenyon, 103-67
#2	585	Whitworth	19-0	def. Linfield, 70-43; def. #24 Lewis and Clark, 79-52
#3	553	Augustana	19-0	def. #20 Illinois Wesleyan, 69-67; def. Elmhurst, 73-49
#4	542	Middlebury	16-1	01/25 at Hamilton POSTPONED; def. Southern Vermont, 81-63; LOST at #5 Williams, 64-69
#5	515	Williams	19-1	def. Skidmore, 84-61; def. #4 Middlebury, 69-64
#6	482	Amherst	18-0	def. Colby, 82-49; def. Bowdoin, 103-85
#7	478	Virginia Wesleyan	18-1	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 86-59; def. Washington and Lee, 89-78
#8	451	St. Thomas	17-1	def. Augsburg, 82-66; def. Bethel, 82-72
#9	443	Randolph-Macon	17-3	def. Roanoke, 90-53; LOST at Guilford, 61-62
#10	416	UW-River Falls	18-2	def. UW-Superior, 62-59; def. UW-Oshkosh, 93-74
#11	394	Wabash	16-3	LOST at Ohio Wesleyan, 76-87; def. Kenyon, 74-65
#12	365	UW-Stevens Point	17-3	def. #36 UW-Whitewater, 85-59; def. UW-Superior, 89-48
#13	299	St. Norbert	15-3	def. Lawrence, 73-52; def. Ripon, 83-64
#14	273	WPI	17-3	def. Babson, 67-47; def. #38 MIT, 62-50
#15	272	Western Connecticut	17-2	def. #40 Eastern Connecticut, 86-78; def. Mass-Dartmouth, 89-88
#16	196	St. Mary's (Md.)	15-4	def. Mary Washington, 69-58
#17	173	Centre	15-3	def. Austin, 87-52; def. Colorado College, 66-54
#18	140	Eastern Mennonite	14-4	def. Roanoke, 116-89
#19	127	Ferrum	18-2	def. Averett, 75-54; def. Methodist, 98-61
#20	115	Illinois Wesleyan	14-5	LOST at #3 Augustana, 67-69; def. Carthage, 103-94
#21	109	Chapman	17-3	def. Southwestern (AZ), 84-75
#22	92	Franklin and Marshall	15-4	def. Johns Hopkins, 86-55; def. Haverford, 71-56
#23	79	Marietta	17-2	def. Muskingum, 67-50; def. Otterbein, 65-63
#24	59	Lewis and Clark	14-5	LOST at Whitman, 70-80; LOST at #2 Whitworth, 52-79
#25	56	Ramapo	16-4	def. New Jersey, 79-59

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	53	Becker	16-3	def. Southern Vermont, 73-41; LOST at Salem State, 76-80; def. Daniel Webster, 75-63
#27	32	Scranton	14-4	LOST at Merchant Marine, 66-86; LOST at Drew, 82-90
#28	31	Hanover	13-5	LOST at Transylvania, 67-77; def. Defiance, 80-68
#29	29	Concordia (Wis.)	17-3	def. Wisconsin Lutheran, 82-65; LOST at Concordia (Mich.), 81-85; def. Concordia (Neb.), 86-66
#30	27	Mary Hardin-Baylor	15-4	LOST at Howard Payne, 65-68; def. Sul Ross State, 68-67
#31	24	Wittenberg	14-5	def. Denison, 82-54; def. Oberlin, 75-47
#32	15	Anderson	14-5	def. Defiance, 85-56; def. Earlham, 72-50
#33	12	Emory	14-4	LOST at T#34 Brandeis, 82-86; def. New York University, 87-78
T#34	11	Brandeis	13-4	def. #33 Emory, 86-82; LOST to T#45 Rochester, 64-77
T#34	11	Wheaton (Ill.)	13-6	def. Millikin, 69-55; LOST to North Central (Ill.), 67-79
#36	10	UW-Whitewater	13-6	LOST to #12 UW-Stevens Point, 59-85; def. UW-Stout, 95-60
#37	8	Ithaca	15-4	def. Nazareth, 88-86; def. Rochester Tech, 81-76
#38	6	MIT	14-6	def. Coast Guard, 85-66; LOST to #14 WPI, 50-62
#39	5	Manchester	13-6	def. Earlham, 75-57; def. Mount St. Joseph, 83-78
#40	4	Eastern Connecticut	13-5	LOST to #15 Western Connecticut, 78-86; def. Plymouth State, 63-56
T#41	3	Kean	14-6	LOST at William Paterson, 61-72
T#41	3	La Roche	17-2	def. Pitt-Greensburg, 59-47; LOST at T#43 Penn State-Behrend, 41-64
T#43	2	Hobart	14-4	LOST to St. Lawrence, 77-80; def. Clarkson, 107-71
T#43	2	Penn State-Behrend	16-2	def. Hilbert, 70-51; def. T#41 La Roche, 64-41
T#45	1	Randolph	13-5	def. Guilford, 55-50; LOST at Hampden-Sydney, 61-71
T#45	1	Rochester	14-4	def. New York University, 67-65; def. T#34 Brandeis, 77-64

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: UWRF on January 30, 2011, 09:44:53 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on January 30, 2011, 05:01:32 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 29, 2011, 05:42:56 PM
#12 Stevens Point dominates another WIAC opponent 89-48 against UW Superior.
I would be surprised if Point loses any more games except their last. Looking pretty tough.

Why their last game?? They should win @ La Crosse. Still have UWRF at home, going to be a great game even though not many people I know are giving the Falcons much of a chance.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on January 31, 2011, 12:33:09 AM

Quote from: UWRF on January 30, 2011, 09:44:53 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on January 30, 2011, 05:01:32 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 29, 2011, 05:42:56 PM
#12 Stevens Point dominates another WIAC opponent 89-48 against UW Superior.
I would be surprised if Point loses any more games except their last. Looking pretty tough.

Why their last game?? They should win @ La Crosse. Still have UWRF at home, going to be a great game even though not many people I know are giving the Falcons much of a chance.

Last game of season....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 31, 2011, 08:48:55 PM

Quote from: UWRF on January 30, 2011, 09:44:53 PM
Why their last game?? They should win @ La Crosse. Still have UWRF at home, going to be a great game even though not many people I know are giving the Falcons much of a chance.

I figured I knew what NWhoops meant... ;)

Though, last year, LaX beat Point in LaX in the last game of the year to prevent SP from winning a share of the conference title and we know what we can get from Mane... any given night, he can carry the Eagles to victory.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dahlby on January 31, 2011, 11:43:04 PM

Does anyone know what happened to week #8 men's top 25 standings? It only shows week #9, then week # 7. Thanks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 31, 2011, 11:44:50 PM

St. Thomas falls to St. Olaf, 73-68.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 01, 2011, 01:26:49 AM

Quote from: dahlby on January 31, 2011, 11:43:04 PM
Does anyone know what happened to week #8 men's top 25 standings? It only shows week #9, then week # 7. Thanks.

Fixed. It's not automatic; the page has to be updated to add the new link. Despite the vast, dedicated D3hoops.com IT department (::)), sometimes updates are less than immediate.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 01, 2011, 12:19:34 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on January 30, 2011, 05:01:32 PM
I would be surprised if Point loses any more games except their last. Looking pretty tough.

I took that as Point losing to Whitworth in the Final Four. ;D ??? ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 01, 2011, 12:32:24 PM

Quote from: UWRF on January 30, 2011, 09:44:53 PM
Why their last game?? They should win @ La Crosse. Still have UWRF at home, going to be a great game even though not many people I know are giving the Falcons much of a chance.

Who do you know? It's obvious River Falls isn't a fluke. They are winning all their close games. Previous to their rout of Oshkosh, they've won by 3, 4, 3, 6, and 6 in OT. They also beat Point by 13 in River Falls. I would definitely give them a chance at Quandt.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 01, 2011, 12:33:48 PM

Quote from: Old School-Greek Tragedy on February 01, 2011, 12:19:34 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on January 30, 2011, 05:01:32 PM
I would be surprised if Point loses any more games except their last. Looking pretty tough.

I took that as Point losing to Whitworth in the Final Four. ;D ??? ::)

HA! The NCAA won't put them in opposite brackets... you should know that! :) My bet... Sweet 16, maybe 2nd Round! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 01, 2011, 12:37:18 PM

I know Dave, but a guy (NWHoops) can dream, right? ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 01, 2011, 12:44:08 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 01, 2011, 12:33:48 PM
HA! The NCAA won't put them in opposite brackets... you should know that! :) My bet... Sweet 16, maybe 2nd Round! :)

Whitworth's second round opponent has already been determined. After a first round bye, they're hosting [Generic Southern California Team]. Their Sweet Sixteen will probably include both Point and River Falls, order TBD.

Quote from: Old School-Greek Tragedy on February 01, 2011, 12:19:34 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on January 30, 2011, 05:01:32 PM
I would be surprised if Point loses any more games except their last. Looking pretty tough.

I took that as Point losing to Whitworth in the Final Four. ;D ??? ::)

I think he's dreaming of a WhitworthPirates title, meaning every tournament team except his loses their last game, whether to Whitworth in Salem or to someone else somewhere else.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 01, 2011, 12:51:37 PM

Yeah, I had already thought about that too! It's always NWC #2 vs. SCIAC #1 and then the winner plays NWC #1. It would be a shame if Point and River Falls are in the same pod come the 2nd weekend. It's a tough area to be in because River Falls and St. Thomas could be in the same quad as well. I'm hoping Point goes East.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 01, 2011, 01:08:31 PM

Quote from: Old School-Greek Tragedy on February 01, 2011, 12:51:37 PM
Yeah, I had already thought about that too! It's always NWC #2 vs. SCIAC #1 and then the winner plays NWC #1.

There's already two SoCal teams in the draw, since Chapman has all but clinched Pool B. They'll play each other in round one, unless Lewis & Clark sneaks in from Pool C and forces a four-team regional in Spokane. (L&C could also get shipped cross-country, leaving Whitworth with their geographic and well-deserved bye.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 89Pirate on February 01, 2011, 01:15:05 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 01, 2011, 01:08:31 PM
Quote from: Old School-Greek Tragedy on February 01, 2011, 12:51:37 PM
Yeah, I had already thought about that too! It's always NWC #2 vs. SCIAC #1 and then the winner plays NWC #1.
There's already two SoCal teams in the draw, since Chapman has all but clinched Pool B. They'll play each other in round one, unless Lewis & Clark sneaks in from Pool C and forces a four-team regional in Spokane. (L&C could also get shipped cross-country, leaving Whitworth with their geographic and well-deserved bye.)

If it has not already been asked, what are the chances of Whitworth hosting round 3/4? assuming they continue their winning ways?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on February 01, 2011, 01:34:05 PM

Quote from: 89Pirate on February 01, 2011, 01:15:05 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on February 01, 2011, 01:08:31 PM
Quote from: Old School-Greek Tragedy on February 01, 2011, 12:51:37 PM
Yeah, I had already thought about that too! It's always NWC #2 vs. SCIAC #1 and then the winner plays NWC #1.
There's already two SoCal teams in the draw, since Chapman has all but clinched Pool B. They'll play each other in round one, unless Lewis & Clark sneaks in from Pool C and forces a four-team regional in Spokane. (L&C could also get shipped cross-country, leaving Whitworth with their geographic and well-deserved bye.)

If it has not already been asked, what are the chances of Whitworth hosting round 3/4? assuming they continue their winning ways?

Somewhere between slim and none. Unfortunately, geography is not a friend to the Pirates. They only way I see it happening is if somehow three other geographically isolated teams were in the same region and all won.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 01, 2011, 01:46:16 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 01, 2011, 01:34:05 PM
Quote from: 89Pirate on February 01, 2011, 01:15:05 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on February 01, 2011, 01:08:31 PM
Quote from: Old School-Greek Tragedy on February 01, 2011, 12:51:37 PM
Yeah, I had already thought about that too! It's always NWC #2 vs. SCIAC #1 and then the winner plays NWC #1.
There's already two SoCal teams in the draw, since Chapman has all but clinched Pool B. They'll play each other in round one, unless Lewis & Clark sneaks in from Pool C and forces a four-team regional in Spokane. (L&C could also get shipped cross-country, leaving Whitworth with their geographic and well-deserved bye.)

If it has not already been asked, what are the chances of Whitworth hosting round 3/4? assuming they continue their winning ways?

Somewhere between slim and none. Unfortunately, geography is not a friend to the Pirates. They only way I see it happening is if somehow three other geographically isolated teams were in the same region and all won.

If you get St. Thomas, Hanover, Whitworth, and a team from Texas, you have like a 60% chance of Whitworth hosting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on February 01, 2011, 02:12:58 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 01, 2011, 01:46:16 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 01, 2011, 01:34:05 PM
Quote from: 89Pirate on February 01, 2011, 01:15:05 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on February 01, 2011, 01:08:31 PM
Quote from: Old School-Greek Tragedy on February 01, 2011, 12:51:37 PM
Yeah, I had already thought about that too! It's always NWC #2 vs. SCIAC #1 and then the winner plays NWC #1.
There's already two SoCal teams in the draw, since Chapman has all but clinched Pool B. They'll play each other in round one, unless Lewis & Clark sneaks in from Pool C and forces a four-team regional in Spokane. (L&C could also get shipped cross-country, leaving Whitworth with their geographic and well-deserved bye.)

If it has not already been asked, what are the chances of Whitworth hosting round 3/4? assuming they continue their winning ways?

Somewhere between slim and none. Unfortunately, geography is not a friend to the Pirates. They only way I see it happening is if somehow three other geographically isolated teams were in the same region and all won.

If you get St. Thomas, Hanover, Whitworth, and a team from Texas, you have like a 60% chance of Whitworth hosting.

Don't forget that in '04 Puget Sound hosted Point, Lawrence and Sul Ross State, so Whitworth could do the same.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 01, 2011, 02:22:11 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 01, 2011, 01:26:49 AM
Quote from: dahlby on January 31, 2011, 11:43:04 PM
Does anyone know what happened to week #8 men's top 25 standings? It only shows week #9, then week # 7. Thanks.
Fixed. It's not automatic; the page has to be updated to add the new link. Despite the vast, dedicated D3hoops.com IT department (::)), sometimes updates are less than immediate.

Agreed. Since the last ballot didn't come in until after 6 last night I had but a few minutes to get polls calculated and posted between my daughter's jazz band performance and my own music rehearsal so I had to cut a couple corners.

One of which was double-checking point totals on the women's poll, as David informed me privately.

Frodotwo: That happened but remember the perfect storm of factors that led to it as well -- Lawrence's gym being deemed too small (the NCAA has since changed its mind), UW-SP hosting the women's sectionals. Now, there has been a lot of noise from island conferences and schools about getting the shaft in hosting postseason events, so perhaps the NCAA will budge a little bit from its pedestal. And it would be deserved by Whitworth. But it would be unlikely.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 89Pirate on February 01, 2011, 02:31:35 PM

Pat - I understand the economics and such, but it would really be an injustice to have a team be potentially 27-0 going into the Tourney, host rounds 1/2, be 29-0 and get shipped elsewhere. Obviously I am biased...ya think?

I am just hoping it happens - I blew alot of my travel budget going to the D3Hoops Classic in Vegas to watch the Pirates (btw - nice meeting you in Vegas) and would like to save the rest for Salem.

BTW - when do NCAA regional rankings come out?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 01, 2011, 02:46:14 PM

Quote from: 89Pirate on February 01, 2011, 02:31:35 PM
Pat - I understand the economics and such, but it would really be an injustice to have a team be potentially 27-0 going into the Tourney, host rounds 1/2, be 29-0 and get shipped elsewhere. Obviously I am biased...ya think?

I am just hoping it happens - I blew alot of my travel budget going to the D3Hoops Classic in Vegas to watch the Pirates (btw - nice meeting you in Vegas) and would like to save the rest for Salem.

BTW - when do NCAA regional rankings come out?

Plenty teams with great records have had to go on the road in the Sweet 16. It's just the way it works.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 01, 2011, 02:55:52 PM

Quote from: frodotwo on February 01, 2011, 02:12:58 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 01, 2011, 01:46:16 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 01, 2011, 01:34:05 PM
Quote from: 89Pirate on February 01, 2011, 01:15:05 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on February 01, 2011, 01:08:31 PM
Quote from: Old School-Greek Tragedy on February 01, 2011, 12:51:37 PM
Yeah, I had already thought about that too! It's always NWC #2 vs. SCIAC #1 and then the winner plays NWC #1.
There's already two SoCal teams in the draw, since Chapman has all but clinched Pool B. They'll play each other in round one, unless Lewis & Clark sneaks in from Pool C and forces a four-team regional in Spokane. (L&C could also get shipped cross-country, leaving Whitworth with their geographic and well-deserved bye.)

If it has not already been asked, what are the chances of Whitworth hosting round 3/4? assuming they continue their winning ways?

Somewhere between slim and none. Unfortunately, geography is not a friend to the Pirates. They only way I see it happening is if somehow three other geographically isolated teams were in the same region and all won.

If you get St. Thomas, Hanover, Whitworth, and a team from Texas, you have like a 60% chance of Whitworth hosting.

Don't forget that in '04 Puget Sound hosted Point, Lawrence and Sul Ross State, so Whitworth could do the same.

But you only got Sul Ross State because of the "53 team" format. (I think that is how many teams were in the men's bracket that year.)

University of Dallas (of Bumblin' B's fame) went to Sully on Thursday night. Sully then played Saturday night in San Antonio at Trinity, who had the bye.)

I will bet that there is a first round geographic orphan out of the ASC, especially if Centre gets the only bid by a SCAC team. The ASC orphan could be flown west to fill a bracket.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 01, 2011, 03:05:49 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 01, 2011, 12:44:08 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 01, 2011, 12:33:48 PM
HA! The NCAA won't put them in opposite brackets... you should know that! :) My bet... Sweet 16, maybe 2nd Round! :)
Whitworth's second round opponent has already been determined. After a first round bye, they're hosting [Generic Southern California Team]. Their Sweet Sixteen will probably include both Point and River Falls, order TBD.

Quote from: Old School-Greek Tragedy on February 01, 2011, 12:19:34 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on January 30, 2011, 05:01:32 PM
I would be surprised if Point loses any more games except their last. Looking pretty tough.

I took that as Point losing to Whitworth in the Final Four. ;D ??? ::)
I think he's dreaming of a WhitworthPirates title, meaning every tournament team except his loses their last game, whether to Whitworth in Salem or to someone else somewhere else.

Yes, this comment is the winner!! +1 D.C. ;D In fact, I very much do not want to see Whitworth have to go through Point, especially at Point, to get to Salem. Someone else take them down or Salem is fine. ;)

I think WW has an outside chance of hosting, If 3 teams in a sweet 16 pod have to fly with travel expenses (not distance) being equal, top team should get the nod. Whitworth will have the top regional ranking barring a 2 game collapse.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 01, 2011, 03:37:30 PM

I noticed in the new poll - http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2010-11/week9 - #25 Wittenberg received just 29 points. That seems like an awfully low number to be in the poll. Is there a low vote record out there somewhere?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 01, 2011, 04:52:17 PM

Quote from: 89Pirate on February 01, 2011, 02:31:35 PM
Pat - I understand the economics and such, but it would really be an injustice to have a team be potentially 27-0 going into the Tourney, host rounds 1/2, be 29-0 and get shipped elsewhere. Obviously I am biased...ya think?

I am just hoping it happens - I blew alot of my travel budget going to the D3Hoops Classic in Vegas to watch the Pirates (btw - nice meeting you in Vegas) and would like to save the rest for Salem.

BTW - when do NCAA regional rankings come out?

Agreed on all counts, nice to meet you as well. Rankings are supposed to come out on Wednesday afternoon, late in the day EST.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 01, 2011, 11:12:52 PM

Can someone tell a west coast guy why St. Mary's is the best 4 loss team in D3?
Truly just curious.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 01, 2011, 11:43:36 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 01, 2011, 11:12:52 PM
Can someone tell a west coast guy why St. Mary's is the best 4 loss team in D3?
Truly just curious.

One of those losses is to D1 The Citadel, also have a win over top 25 Franklin and Marshall

Sweet 16 team a year ago with high expectations this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 02, 2011, 05:49:15 AM

Yeah - that sums it up for St. Mary's! They also have one loss to a team that is surging and did the same thing last year to make the NCAA Tournament (Wesley).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 02, 2011, 03:10:33 PM

First Regional Rankings: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2011/02/02/ncaas-mens-regional-rankings/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 02, 2011, 08:52:03 PM

The #10 Stevens Point onslaught against the WIAC appears to be continuing... They're up 56-21 at the half against UW Stout.

Elsewhere in the WIAC, #9 River Falls is in a tight game at Eau Claire. After trailing much of the first half, the Falcons lead the Blugolds 41-35 going into the half.

See the WIAC in-game board (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4057.2295) for updates.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 02, 2011, 09:48:47 PM

#10 Stevens Point beats Stout 101 to 50
#9 River Falls slips by Eau Claire 76-70. EC had a few chances but couldn't keep up with the Falcons. RF now 12-0 in the league.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 03, 2011, 07:30:38 AM

How They Fared--Midweek Report

Ordinarily when a score is missing, my program prompts me to track it down. I disabled that part of my program this time around; I assumed that missing scores (there were just a couple) were actually postponed games that had not yet been updated in the d3sports database. Let me know if you see a missing score from a game that was actually played.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	620	Wooster	19-0	02/03 at Hiram; 02/05 vs. #15 Wabash
#2	589	Whitworth	19-0	02/04 at Puget Sound; 02/05 at Pacific Lutheran
#3	573	Augustana	19-0	02/03 vs. North Park; 02/05 vs. Carthage
#4	540	Williams	19-1	02/04 at Bowdoin; 02/05 at Colby
#5	509	Amherst	18-0	02/01 at Rhode Island College; 02/04 vs. Tufts; 02/05 vs. Bates
#6	489	Virginia Wesleyan	18-1	02/05 vs. Roanoke
#7	471	St. Thomas	18-2	LOST to St. Olaf, 68-73; def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 75-66
#8	467	Middlebury	16-1	02/04 at Colby; 02/05 at Bowdoin
#9	443	UW-River Falls	19-2	def. UW-Eau Claire, 76-70; 02/05 vs. UW-Whitewater
#10	400	UW-Stevens Point	18-3	def. UW-Stout, 101-50
#11	352	Randolph-Macon	18-3	def. Christopher Newport, 67-49; 02/05 vs. Washington and Lee
#12	341	St. Norbert	15-3	02/04 at Monmouth; 02/05 at Grinnell
#13	314	WPI	17-3	02/05 at Wheaton (Mass.)
#14	305	Western Connecticut	17-2	02/03 at Connecticut College; 02/05 at Plymouth State
#15	290	Wabash	16-3	02/03 at Denison; 02/05 at #1 Wooster
#16	236	St. Mary's (Md.)	17-4	def. Hood, 71-67; def. York (Pa.), 82-75; 02/05 vs. Marymount
#17	190	Centre	15-3	02/05 vs. DePauw
#18	171	Eastern Mennonite	15-4	def. Lynchburg, 88-79; 02/05 vs. T#39 Randolph
#19	150	Ferrum	18-2	02/05 at Greensboro
#20	123	Marietta	18-2	def. Wilmington, 76-70; 02/05 vs. Ohio Northern
#21	119	Chapman	17-3	02/05 vs. La Sierra
#22	112	Franklin and Marshall	16-4	def. Ursinus, 69-61; 02/05 vs. Muhlenberg
#23	81	Ramapo	16-4	02/05 vs. Montclair State
#24	71	Illinois Wesleyan	14-5	02/04 at Elmhurst
#25	29	Wittenberg	14-5	02/03 vs. Kenyon; 02/05 vs. Allegheny

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	24	Rochester	14-4	02/04 vs. New York University; 02/06 vs. Brandeis
T#27	20	Becker	16-3	02/05 at Wheelock
T#27	20	Ithaca	15-4	02/05 vs. Utica
#29	19	Anderson	14-5	02/05 vs. Franklin
#30	11	Concordia (Wis.)	17-3	IDLE
T#31	8	Lewis and Clark	15-5	def. Linfield, 86-71; 02/05 at George Fox
T#31	8	Manchester	13-6	02/03 at Defiance; 02/05 vs. Rose-Hulman
T#31	8	Mary Hardin-Baylor	15-4	02/03 vs. Howard Payne; 02/05 vs. Sul Ross State
#34	7	Emory	14-4	02/04 vs. Brandeis; 02/06 vs. New York University
T#35	3	North Carolina Wesleyan	14-6	02/05 at Christopher Newport
T#35	3	Penn State-Behrend	16-2	02/03 at D'Youville; 02/05 at Pitt-Greensburg
T#37	2	Hope	14-5	02/03 vs. Trine; 02/05 at Alma
T#37	2	Oswego State	15-3	def. Oneonta State, 81-70; 02/04 vs. Cortland State
T#39	1	Elizabethtown	15-3	02/03 vs. Messiah; 02/05 at Albright
T#39	1	Randolph	14-5	def. Washington and Lee, 68-60; 02/03 at Johnson & Wales (NC); 02/05 at #18 Eastern Mennonite

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 03, 2011, 09:49:00 PM

Final: #1 Wooster 70 Hiram 64

Wooster played a sloppy game with 15 turnovers but still got the road win tonight. Nathan Balch with 20 points and Ian Franks with 13 points (9 boards) led Wooster in scoring.

Wooster is now 20-0, 11-0 NCAC

Congratulations to Wooster Coach Steve Moore and his staff on 15 consecutive 20 win seasons!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 04, 2011, 05:15:44 PM

Darryl,
Here are the scores you're missing. These are all games that were played on Feb. 3rd.

Augustana beat North Park 76-66.

Western Connecticut beat Connecticut College 71-66.

Wabash lost to Denison 62-65.

Manchester beat Defiance 72-64.

Mary Hardin-Baylor beat Howard Payne 115-69.

Penn State-Behrend beat D'Youville 57-39.

Hope beat Trine 81-64.

Elizabethtown lost to Messiah 62-66.

EDITED by DC to correct a pervasive misspelling of 'Denison'

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 04, 2011, 07:19:00 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on February 03, 2011, 07:30:38 AM
How They Fared--Midweek Report

Top 25

#25 29 Wittenberg 14-5 02/03 vs. Kenyon; 02/05 vs. Allegheny

Darryl, I'm not sure how your program is going to handle this. The Wittenberg/Kenyon game, scheduled for 2/2, postponed until 2/3, and then re-scheduled for 2/4, has been canceled and (evidently) will not be played. It does not go down as either a win or loss for Wittenberg, just a non-game for purposes of their overall record (they do get credit for the victory from the standpoint of the league's seeding for the conference tournament, since Kenyon was responsible for the cancellation.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on February 04, 2011, 09:45:29 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 04, 2011, 07:19:00 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on February 03, 2011, 07:30:38 AM
How They Fared--Midweek Report

Top 25

#25 29 Wittenberg 14-5 02/03 vs. Kenyon; 02/05 vs. Allegheny

Darryl, I'm not sure how your program is going to handle this. The Wittenberg/Kenyon game, scheduled for 2/2, postponed until 2/3, and then re-scheduled for 2/4, has been canceled and (evidently) will not be played. It does not go down as either a win or loss for Wittenberg, just a non-game for purposes of their overall record (they do get credit for the victory from the standpoint of the league's seeding for the conference tournament, since Kenyon was responsible for the cancellation.)

[/b]

What far-ranging thinker came up with this idea?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 04, 2011, 09:52:08 PM

Quote from: ronk on February 04, 2011, 09:45:29 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on February 04, 2011, 07:19:00 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on February 03, 2011, 07:30:38 AM
How They Fared--Midweek Report

Top 25

#25 29 Wittenberg 14-5 02/03 vs. Kenyon; 02/05 vs. Allegheny

Darryl, I'm not sure how your program is going to handle this. The Wittenberg/Kenyon game, scheduled for 2/2, postponed until 2/3, and then re-scheduled for 2/4, has been canceled and (evidently) will not be played. It does not go down as either a win or loss for Wittenberg, just a non-game for purposes of their overall record (they do get credit for the victory from the standpoint of the league's seeding for the conference tournament, since Kenyon was responsible for the cancellation.)
[/b]

What far-ranging thinker came up with this idea?

The game was scheduled according to conference rules, and Kenyon chose not to play it. Thus it goes down as a 2-0 victory for Wittenberg on the conference books.

If the conference just ignored the game, Oberlin would cite academics and back out of every game, thus finishing 0-0 and about 5th place, qualifying for the conference tournament every year. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on February 04, 2011, 10:02:28 PM

Ah, yes, the infamous Oberlin manuever! I see your point. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 05, 2011, 03:30:59 AM

Final: #2 Whitworth 89 UPS 67

Whitworth shot well and took a 22 point lead early second half at UPS and coasted in to get the road win tonight. Felix Freidt led with a double double 24 points and 14 rebounds.

Whitworth is now 20-0, 11-0 NWC

Congratulations to Whitworth Coach Jim Hayford and his staff on 6 consecutive 20 win seasons!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 05, 2011, 03:44:21 PM

#1 Wooster suffers their first loss of the season, to #15 Wabash, 69-68 in OT.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 05, 2011, 03:58:12 PM

And now it is in Whitworth's hands to take over the top spot. Early game start at 6pm PST. Listen in and hear Bob Castle on KSBN. Go Pirates!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 05, 2011, 10:27:05 PM

Augie falls at home to Carthage, 65-58. Whitworth may be the unanimous #1! (Unless someone sticks in a NESCAC vote.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 06, 2011, 08:49:36 AM

Pretty amazing that Whitworth will be, potentially, a unanimous number one with basically a six, at most seven, guy rotation. As good as their top six players are, you definitely need some depth / bench contributions in back-to-back situations in the tournament, and they could be in big trouble in the event of foul trouble, injuries, etc., when they play against deeper teams come NCAA time. It seems like their starting five can beat any other starting five, but I think they could be a prime upset candidate, especially if they have to play a WIAC team (and Stevens Point's scoring margins have been downright scary of late, crazy to think how good they would be had Jenkins played).

It is hard to put Steven Point at number one with three losses, but I'd bet they would easily rank first in a coach's poll of "who I don't want to play right now or in the tourney." As a Williams fan, I have seen more then enough of them to last a lifetime, certainly!

If Amherst sweeps Midd and Williams next weekend on the road, as much as I hate to say it, I think they deserve to leapfrog Whitworth and move to number one, with three wins over top-ten teams. If Williams can win its next two, including a convincing win over Amherst, I'd say they are deserving as well, considering their only loss came in OT, on the road, against a top-five team, and without their best player. Hard to know just how good Whitworth is when they haven't beaten anyone in the current top 30, and where their signature win over Carthage is a lot less impressive than it seemed at the time. If Amherst loses to Midd but beats Williams, then and only then should, in my view Whitworth hang on by default -- undefeated is, after all, undefeated.

One other thing: I noticed that Birmingham-Southern is receiving no love in either regional rankings or the Top 25 despite a gaudy record ... are then ineligible or something? Because it seems like, after this week certainly, they deserve to be ranked over Centre ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 06, 2011, 12:19:12 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on February 06, 2011, 08:49:36 AM

One other thing: I noticed that Birmingham-Southern is receiving no love in either regional rankings or the Top 25 despite a gaudy record ... are then ineligible or something? Because it seems like, after this week certainly, they deserve to be ranked over Centre ...

Birmingham-Southern is in Year #4 of its move to full member. They shall be eligible for NCAA playoffs in 2011-12.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 06, 2011, 01:54:24 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 06, 2011, 12:19:12 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on February 06, 2011, 08:49:36 AM

One other thing: I noticed that Birmingham-Southern is receiving no love in either regional rankings or the Top 25 despite a gaudy record ... are then ineligible or something? Because it seems like, after this week certainly, they deserve to be ranked over Centre ...

Birmingham-Southern is in Year #4 of its move to full member. They shall be eligible for NCAA playoffs in 2011-12.

Anybody know how good (or not good) they really are? When they're eligible, will they make a splash in their first year?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on February 06, 2011, 02:29:52 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 06, 2011, 01:54:24 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 06, 2011, 12:19:12 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on February 06, 2011, 08:49:36 AM

One other thing: I noticed that Birmingham-Southern is receiving no love in either regional rankings or the Top 25 despite a gaudy record ... are then ineligible or something? Because it seems like, after this week certainly, they deserve to be ranked over Centre ...

Birmingham-Southern is in Year #4 of its move to full member. They shall be eligible for NCAA playoffs in 2011-12.

Anybody know how good (or not good) they really are? When they're eligible, will they make a splash in their first year?

Here's what I have on Birmingham-Southern (in-region games):

WP: 0.9383
SOS: 0.417
versus regionally ranked: 0-1

By RPI they'd be 14th in the south.

By using a convoluted formula that I created last week that matched the NCAA's rankings relatively well, they'd be ranked 5th.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 06, 2011, 02:44:57 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 06, 2011, 02:29:52 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on February 06, 2011, 01:54:24 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 06, 2011, 12:19:12 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on February 06, 2011, 08:49:36 AM

One other thing: I noticed that Birmingham-Southern is receiving no love in either regional rankings or the Top 25 despite a gaudy record ... are then ineligible or something? Because it seems like, after this week certainly, they deserve to be ranked over Centre ...

Birmingham-Southern is in Year #4 of its move to full member. They shall be eligible for NCAA playoffs in 2011-12.

Anybody know how good (or not good) they really are? When they're eligible, will they make a splash in their first year?

Here's what I have on Birmingham-Southern (in-region games):

WP: 0.9383
SOS: 0.417
versus regionally ranked: 0-1

By RPI they'd be 14th in the south.

By using a convoluted formula that I created last week that matched the NCAA's rankings relatively well, they'd be ranked 5th.

5th in the South? or nationally?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on February 06, 2011, 02:51:19 PM

Quote from: sac on February 06, 2011, 02:44:57 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 06, 2011, 02:29:52 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on February 06, 2011, 01:54:24 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 06, 2011, 12:19:12 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on February 06, 2011, 08:49:36 AM

One other thing: I noticed that Birmingham-Southern is receiving no love in either regional rankings or the Top 25 despite a gaudy record ... are then ineligible or something? Because it seems like, after this week certainly, they deserve to be ranked over Centre ...

Birmingham-Southern is in Year #4 of its move to full member. They shall be eligible for NCAA playoffs in 2011-12.

Anybody know how good (or not good) they really are? When they're eligible, will they make a splash in their first year?

Here's what I have on Birmingham-Southern (in-region games):

WP: 0.9383
SOS: 0.417
versus regionally ranked: 0-1

By RPI they'd be 14th in the south.

By using a convoluted formula that I created last week that matched the NCAA's rankings relatively well, they'd be ranked 5th.

5th in the South? or nationally?

South, sorry.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 06, 2011, 05:43:29 PM

How They Fared--Complete

In case you want to get caught up on what happened in the world of D3 Hoops before heading off to that Ronald Reagan Centennial party ...

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	620	Wooster	20-1	def. Hiram, 70-64; LOST to #15 Wabash, 68-69
#2	589	Whitworth	21-0	def. Puget Sound, 89-76; def. Pacific Lutheran, 85-59
#3	573	Augustana	20-1	def. North Park, 76-66; LOST to Carthage, 58-65
#4	540	Williams	21-1	def. Bowdoin, 85-66; def. Colby, 79-50
#5	509	Amherst	20-0	~~02/01 at Rhode Island College~~ postponed; def. Tufts, 96-77; def. Bates, 74-68
#6	489	Virginia Wesleyan	19-1	def. Roanoke, 92-60
#7	471	St. Thomas	18-2	LOST to St. Olaf, 68-73; def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 75-66
#8	467	Middlebury	18-1	def. Colby, 73-52; def. Bowdoin, 74-59
#9	443	UW-River Falls	19-3	def. UW-Eau Claire, 76-70; LOST to UW-Whitewater, 66-70
#10	400	UW-Stevens Point	18-3	def. UW-Stout, 101-50
#11	352	Randolph-Macon	19-3	def. Christopher Newport, 67-49; def. Washington and Lee, 72-41
#12	341	St. Norbert	16-4	def. Monmouth, 62-42; LOST at Grinnell, 65-79
#13	314	WPI	18-3	def. Wheaton (Mass.), 78-46
#14	305	Western Connecticut	19-2	def. Connecticut College, 71-66; def. Plymouth State, 87-69
#15	290	Wabash	17-4	LOST at Denison, 62-65; def. #1 Wooster, 69-68
#16	236	St. Mary's (Md.)	18-4	def. Hood, 71-67; def. York (Pa.), 82-75; def. Marymount, 82-52
#17	190	Centre	15-4	LOST to DePauw, 63-65
#18	171	Eastern Mennonite	16-4	def. Lynchburg, 88-79; def. T#39 Randolph, 85-50
#19	150	Ferrum	19-2	def. Greensboro, 78-67
#20	123	Marietta	19-2	def. Wilmington, 76-70; def. Ohio Northern, 68-58
#21	119	Chapman	18-3	def. La Sierra, 86-64
#22	112	Franklin and Marshall	17-4	def. Ursinus, 69-61; def. Muhlenberg, 80-73
#23	81	Ramapo	17-4	def. Montclair State, 78-68
#24	71	Illinois Wesleyan	15-5	def. Elmhurst, 72-68
#25	29	Wittenberg	15-5	~~02/04 vs. Kenyon~~ canceled (see note below); def. Allegheny, 90-60

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	24	Rochester	16-4	def. New York University, 78-70; def. Brandeis, 77-57
T#27	20	Becker	17-3	def. Wheelock, 72-70
T#27	20	Ithaca	15-5	LOST to Utica, 89-94
#29	19	Anderson	14-6	LOST to Franklin, 91-94
#30	11	Concordia (Wis.)	17-3	IDLE
T#31	8	Lewis and Clark	15-6	def. Linfield, 86-71; LOST at George Fox, 70-71
T#31	8	Manchester	15-6	def. Defiance, 72-64; def. Rose-Hulman, 67-59
T#31	8	Mary Hardin-Baylor	17-4	def. Howard Payne, 115-69; def. Sul Ross State, 75-70
#34	7	Emory	16-4	def. Brandeis, 85-70; def. New York University, 93-85
T#35	3	North Carolina Wesleyan	15-6	def. Christopher Newport, 70-68
T#35	3	Penn State-Behrend	18-2	def. D'Youville, 57-39; def. Pitt-Greensburg, 67-65
T#37	2	Hope	16-5	def. Trine, 81-64; def. Alma, 85-71
T#37	2	Oswego State	16-3	def. Oneonta State, 81-70; def. Cortland State, 69-53
T#39	1	Elizabethtown	16-4	LOST to Messiah, 62-66; def. Albright, 84-82
T#39	1	Randolph	15-6	def. Washington and Lee, 68-60; def. Johnson & Wales (NC), 67-45; LOST at #18 Eastern Mennonite, 50-85

Quote from: David Collinge on February 04, 2011, 09:52:08 PM
The Wittenberg/Kenyon game, scheduled for 2/2, postponed until 2/3, and then re-scheduled for 2/4, has been canceled and (evidently) will not be played. It does not go down as either a win or loss for Wittenberg, just a non-game for purposes of their overall record. Witt did get credit in their conference record for a victory, making them 10-1, but from an NCAA perspective, the game was not a forfeit, it was a "no contest."
...
The game was scheduled according to conference rules, and Kenyon chose not to play it. Thus it goes down as a 2-0 victory for Wittenberg on the conference books.

(italicized portion of above quote restored Monday morning for clarity.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 06, 2011, 09:49:57 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on February 06, 2011, 08:49:36 AM
Pretty amazing that Whitworth will be, potentially, a unanimous number one with basically a six, at most seven, guy rotation. As good as their top six players are, you definitely need some depth / bench contributions in back-to-back situations in the tournament, and they could be in big trouble in the event of foul trouble, injuries, etc., when they play against deeper teams come NCAA time. It seems like their starting five can beat any other starting five, but I think they could be a prime upset candidate, especially if they have to play a WIAC team (and Stevens Point's scoring margins have been downright scary of late, crazy to think how good they would be had Jenkins played).

Whitworth has a demanding conditioning routine so stamina is not an issue outside of a 90+ point trackmeet on back to back games. After the first 6, at least 4 guys have assignments they are prepared for and capable of accomplishing in the event they are needed. Just because they don't play 15+ minutes in a game doesn't mean they aren't there. The next 6 play about 100 minutes a week against the best first 6 in D3.

Quote from: nescac1 on February 06, 2011, 08:49:36 AM
If Amherst sweeps Midd and Williams next weekend on the road, as much as I hate to say it, I think they deserve to leapfrog Whitworth and move to number one, with three wins over top-ten teams. If Williams can win its next two, including a convincing win over Amherst, I'd say they are deserving as well, considering their only loss came in OT, on the road, against a top-five team, and without their best player. Hard to know just how good Whitworth is when they haven't beaten anyone in the current top 30, and where their signature win over Carthage is a lot less impressive than it seemed at the time. If Amherst loses to Midd but beats Williams, then and only then should, in my view Whitworth hang on by default -- undefeated is, after all, undefeated.

I smell something iffy? :D If Amherst goes 3-0 in the next 2 weeks, we can debate if they deserve the #1. Not gonna happen! WW will then be the only undefeated team left and "undefeated is, after all, undefeated."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 06, 2011, 11:52:12 PM

Darryl, Wittenberg is 14-5 (http://www4.wittenberg.edu/news/athletics/mbasketball/), not 15-5. They do not get credit for a victory over Kenyon in their overall record. In the eyes of the NCAA, that game never took place and had no result (which is, in fact, what happened, or didn't happen.) Witt did get credit in their conference record for a victory, making them 10-1, but from an NCAA perspective, the game was not a forfeit, it was a "no contest."

(See my earlier post:

Quote from: David Collinge on February 04, 2011, 07:19:00 PM
Darryl, I'm not sure how your program is going to handle this. The Wittenberg/Kenyon game, scheduled for 2/2, postponed until 2/3, and then re-scheduled for 2/4, has been canceled and (evidently) will not be played. It does not go down as either a win or loss for Wittenberg, just a non-game for purposes of their overall record (they do get credit for the victory from the standpoint of the league's seeding for the conference tournament, since Kenyon was responsible for the cancellation.)

emphasis added.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 07, 2011, 07:33:19 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 06, 2011, 11:52:12 PM
Darryl, Wittenberg is 14-5 (http://www4.wittenberg.edu/news/athletics/mbasketball/), not 15-5. They do not get credit for a victory over Kenyon in their overall record. In the eyes of the NCAA, that game never took place and had no result (which is, in fact, what happened, or didn't happen.) Witt did get credit in their conference record for a victory, making them 10-1, but from an NCAA perspective, the game was not a forfeit, it was a "no contest."

I was going to edit my post to correct for this, and then point out that Witt's page at d3hoops.com (http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Wittenberg/men/2010-11/index) has them at 15-5 (which is where my program got the information). Then I decided to double-check their record and found that they ARE 15-5. Their basketball front page (which you linked to) has them at 14-5, but they are correctly listed at 15-5 on the schedule (http://www4.wittenberg.edu/news/athletics/mbasketball/schedule10-11.html) following their win over Allegheny.

(I did, however, edit the report to restore the portion of your earlier quote that I had removed, since it specifically notes the NCAA's view of the game.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 07, 2011, 11:47:41 AM

That's what I get for having faith in Witt's website. :-[ You're right, they're 15-5, and that does not include a result for the Kenyon anti-game. I've scratched my head so many times over this craziness that I have some gray matter under my fingernails. :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 07, 2011, 11:48:17 AM

NWHoops1903, I don't care how good your starting five is (unless it is WORLDS better than other starting fives, which probably isn't the case for anyone in the top ten), you need substantial production from the bench at some points late in the tourney, and it seems like that could be Whitworth's undoing. I can't think of any National Champion in recent years that didn't have several starter-caliber reserves, could be wrong and most, at least, have been really deep. (The closest counter-example is the first Wash U. title team, but that team had three all-American starters, and while its bench didn't play a ton, the guys who did play were very talented players that showed could step up when needed and several would later start for some very strong Wash U. teams).

Williams last year had a tremendous top seven, but really, only went seven deep, and that was ultimately what hurt them against a really deep Steven Point team when Stevens Point took control in the second half. You could just see the Ephs run out of just a TINY bit of gas, and that was enough to lose a very tight game against an equally talented, but slightly deeper, team.

I guarantee the Ephs have just as demanding a conditioning routine as Whitworth, but when you play intense games against elite compeition back-to-back, especially in the Final Four where it is evening then the next day, I don't care how conditioned you are, you can't play 37-40 minutes at an intense / effective level for both games in less than 20 hours in that climate. And that is what it SEEMS like Whitworth asks of its top 4-5 guys in close games. And of course, if you get into foul trouble, then that becomes an even bigger problem.

Obviously, we'll see what happens come tourney time, but I really do think it is hard to win five or six straight against top tier teams with essentially a seven man rotation where the seventh guy doesn't play much, and scores only 2.4 ppg, and I'm surprised given how many blow-outs it has had that Whitworth hasn't managed to establsih a deeper rotation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 07, 2011, 04:20:12 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on February 07, 2011, 11:48:17 AM
NWHoops1903, I don't care how good your starting five is (unless it is WORLDS better than other starting fives, which probably isn't the case for anyone in the top ten), you need substantial production from the bench at some points late in the tourney, and it seems like that could be Whitworth's undoing. I can't think of any National Champion in recent years that didn't have several starter-caliber reserves, could be wrong and most, at least, have been really deep. (The closest counter-example is the first Wash U. title team, but that team had three all-American starters, and while its bench didn't play a ton, the guys who did play were very talented players that showed could step up when needed and several would later start for some very strong Wash U. teams).

Williams last year had a tremendous top seven, but really, only went seven deep, and that was ultimately what hurt them against a really deep Steven Point team when Stevens Point took control in the second half. You could just see the Ephs run out of just a TINY bit of gas, and that was enough to lose a very tight game against an equally talented, but slightly deeper, team.

I guarantee the Ephs have just as demanding a conditioning routine as Whitworth, but when you play intense games against elite compeition back-to-back, especially in the Final Four where it is evening then the next day, I don't care how conditioned you are, you can't play 37-40 minutes at an intense / effective level for both games in less than 20 hours in that climate. And that is what it SEEMS like Whitworth asks of its top 4-5 guys in close games. And of course, if you get into foul trouble, then that becomes an even bigger problem.

Obviously, we'll see what happens come tourney time, but I really do think it is hard to win five or six straight against top tier teams with essentially a seven man rotation where the seventh guy doesn't play much, and scores only 2.4 ppg, and I'm surprised given how many blow-outs it has had that Whitworth hasn't managed to establsih a deeper rotation.

I am wondering, since this is the top 25 board, if you are suggesting Whitworth shouldn't be #1 because of their depth? Depth ALWAYS plays out in the tournament, no question. Will Whitworth win the tournament? That might be a question for a different board or a later post.

Are voters voting who is #1 to date or as nescac1 might be suggesting, who they feel is most likely to win the Championship?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 07, 2011, 05:26:50 PM

I just felt like this is a good place to discuss relative prospects of elite teams nationally, if this is the wrong place, then apologies!

I think number one is a toss-up right now between Whitworth, Amherst and Williams, even though I am skeptical of Whitworth, as all three have one signature wins (although Amherst and Williams hae much better signature wins). But I think if Amherst and Williams don't lose again before Saturday, I'd put the winner of that game at number one and Whitworth at two.

If I were saying who is most likely to win the tournament, that would have to be Stevens Point -- just dominating lately in the best conference in D-3, defending champs, tons of talent and depth, play killer defense, plenty of big game experience, etc. I'd probably put Whitworth somewhere around sixth or seventh in terms of odds of winning, even though they've earned a higher ranking than that ... I'm just a bit skeptical because of the lack of competition they face, but as one of the few remaining undefeateds, and clearly a very talented team, they've earned their ranking, I don't begrudge them that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 07, 2011, 05:33:47 PM

Who will win?

I think that it is easier for a NESCAC team (the best of the 3?) to make it to the Final Four out of that corner of the bracket than for any specific team to make it thru a bracket involving teams from the NWC, MIAC, WIAC, CCIW and the occasional WashU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 08, 2011, 06:06:13 AM

There is a lot of talk about Whitworth's depth, but as one person who has actually seen them play this year at the same location as UW-Stevens Point, that depth "concern" might be overrated.

Yes, they go about 7 deep in terms of real strength, but they will go deeper on their bench if need be. They are also extremely good in those 7 positions. I watched them still control teams and dominate when their best player was having a bad tournament. They have multiple weapons on the floor at the same time, so the strategy of stopping one and let the rest beat you doesn't work.

Sure, some would argue that teams with little depth don't tend to win championships. However, I remember Otterbein with one major threat no one could stop and I don't remember a lot of other players or depth on their bench (though, it is a bit fuzzy in my memory bank right now).

I am still skeptical about Williams and Amherst since I just am not sure how good they really are, but am looking forward to the next few weeks to have a better look.

Finally, the point about UWSP is interesting. They are not playing with Jared Jenkins this season and that takes a major weapon away from them at the guard/#3 position. I was less impressed with them in Las Vegas, though how they are playing now may certainly be different.

As for depth between Whitworth and UWSP, here are the links worth looking at:
Whitworth: http://www.whitworth.edu/Athletics/Teams/BasketballMen/Statistics/10-11/html/teamcume.htm#TEAM.IND
UWSP: http://athletics.uwsp.edu/custompages/mbball/2010-11/teamcume.htm#TEAM.IND

While UWSP has more players providing more points, Whitworth has more players contributing high point averages. I would say it's like comparing apples and oranges. (Yes, I am aware no one made an actual statement of comparison for these two, but since the discussion was concern for Whitworth's depth and UWSP playing better, I used the two for a comparison.)

As for Amherst: https://www3.amherst.edu/~sports/current/m-bball/teamcume.htm#TEAM.IND
They certainly have a similar look, stats wise, as Whitworth.
And Williams: http://williams.prestosports.com/sports/mbkb/2010-11/files/teamcume.htm#TEAM.IND
Again... looks like Whitworth.

And yes... in some ways it is easier for a NESCAC team to make the Final Four out of their region/bracket then it will be for UWRF, St. Thomas, UWSP, Whitworth, Augustana, etc. to get there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 08, 2011, 08:04:27 AM

I obviously haven't seen Whitworth play, so I am just going on stats, which is of limited value. But it just seems like, based on stats, they have six guys who produce a ton, and a seventh guy who barely produces, and that is it. Maybe there are guys with potential to do good things on the bench, but when none have played more than 10 minutes pg or averaged more than 2 ppg all year, do you feel comfortable relying on them to be major producers in a huge spot?

Amherst has, when healthy, eight guys averaging over 7 points per game, that is a big difference from six. Amherst's issue is that it has rarely had more than six or seven of those eight healthy at the same time this season, but all eight are quality starter-caliber players when playing at 100 percent.

Williams plays a nine man rotation, and of that nine man group, eight are averaging at least five ppg and play substantial minutes night in and night out, and three of the bench guys have all had really big games, in big spots, at times. Williams also has a tenth guy averaging nearly five ppg who only plays in certain situations, but has been in the rotation at times.

Meanwhile, look at the last reasonably close game Whitworth played, which is typical of their competitive games:

http://www.whitworth.edu/Athletics/Teams/BasketballMen/Statistics/10-11/html/m20-ups.htm

4 points, 1 board, no assists in TOTAL from players after number six in the rotation. If one guy gets hurt or into serious foul trouble, suddenly you are looking at five guys playing almost the entire game. Just seems on its face like a big difference. In a conference with, likely, no other NCAA teams, sure, they can still dominate, but against a top-notch WIAC team? Might be a different story. I'll grant that the top six guys, especially with two D-1 transfers, seem to be really impressive.

Similar deal vs. Carthage, two guys played basically the entire game, and only six players scored:

http://www.whitworth.edu/Athletics/Teams/BasketballMen/Statistics/10-11/html/m3-carth.htm

Another fairly close game, one of their stars fouls out, but no one on the bench picks up the slack, as only one bench player even attempted a FG:

http://www.whitworth.edu/Athletics/Teams/BasketballMen/Statistics/10-11/html/m13-ups.htm

I'm just saying, when you are counting on a few guys to really carry the team, and you don't have more than one bench player who is going to be a legit scoring threat in a big game, that has to catch up to you at some point, unless you can just dominate games from the start (as they have most of the year, but, again, not vs. any ranked teams).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 08, 2011, 08:32:52 AM

Oh, and one other point -- while in most years, it is true that New England teams have an easier path to the Final Four, that won't be the case this year if the NCAA keeps the top New England teams together in one quarter. In fact, this year, New England is easily the most top-heavy region, with the number 2, 3, 7, 12, and 14 teams in the country. West is next best, with 1, 8, 9, 10, and no one else is really close.

As noted the West looks brutal as well, but even still, Stevens Point always seems to get it done come tourney time ... I wouldn't bet against them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 08, 2011, 10:37:10 AM

nescac1 - one advantage the NESCAC and New England teams have is that the NCAA can easily shift them other pods/brackets to separate them. That is why Amherst and Williams didn't meet until the Final Four a few years back.

That isn't as easy for the Midwest/West as that would be sending teams to the east coast to get them away from one another - however, the committee does try to shift teams as much as they can (at least season) to allow match-ups to happen as late as possible. However, you still get week brackets like the one RMC came out of last season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LustyLarryintheToilet on February 08, 2011, 10:59:24 AM

i think it'd be unfair to RMC and the NCAAs to call that region weak. The issue in that region was the defacto "top seed" William Paterson lost in the opener in a thriller. You still had 3/top 4 of East, the top 4 Mid Atlantic teams and MIT.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 08, 2011, 11:09:06 AM

William Paterson, the "1 seed" was ranked No. 7 entering the tournament. That wasn't so bad. Losing No. 21 MIT out of the bracket isn't exactly an earth-shattering difference, though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 08, 2011, 11:16:23 AM

I am just going by the fact that I followed that bracket rather well due to the fact I was at SMC for two straight weekends in the tournament... and that RMC was clearly the #4 team at the final four. I don't think SMC, F&M, MIT, or William Patterson would have done well at the final four either.

There is always one bracket that is the easiest/weakest of the four... and last year it was the RMC one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: rmc1982 on February 08, 2011, 12:05:45 PM

On an unrelated note, there's a HUGE inter-regional and Conference game tomorrow night at Virginia Wesleyan with Randolph-Macon coming into the Fish Tank to play the Marlins-should be a GREAT game!!Will any of you be attending D-Mac and Pat?ODAC Regular Season and Region 1st place on the line!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GuyFormerlyPSBBG on February 08, 2011, 12:07:22 PM

Curiosity has me peaked with the cover story of the #1 in the top 25.

Obviously Spokane is the furthest west. What about north, south, and east? Same question for the women's side? (N-S-E-W)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 08, 2011, 12:24:15 PM

Going to go off the cuff here, these are not official.

Suspect in women's the furthest east is Bowdoin, furthest south is Trinity, furthest west is George Fox. I believe George Fox is also the furthest north.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 08, 2011, 12:30:37 PM

Strength of schedule seems to be an issue for some who might question Whitworth's quality.

Massey has:

Whitworth schedule at #24
Amherst schedule at #168
Williams schedule at #70
Middlebury schedule at #137

NWC power conf. at 4th with 4 teams in top 33 of Massey
NE Smalls conf. power at 3rd with 4th team at 99

Conclusion: Other than playing each other, these three teams from NESCAC haven't played against any serious competition. That's 4 very tough games on schedule but not much more (#133 Elms for Williams, ME Farmington #310 took Amherst to OT, #117 Plattsburg battled Middlebury, #123 Skidmore, #164 Bates close win at home... ). WW has 6 tough games plus games won against Massey power 40, 56, & 58.

9 games vs 4 games?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 08, 2011, 12:42:17 PM

Men's: Whitworth west & north, Amherst east, Va. Wesleyan south.
Women's: Pat's guesses are correct: George Fox west & north, Bowdoin east, Trinity south

caveat: I only checked from the end of the 2007-08 season backwards. It's possible there's been some geography busters since then, but none come to mind other than Whitworth.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 08, 2011, 12:52:02 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 08, 2011, 12:34:31 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 08, 2011, 12:24:15 PM
Going to go off the cuff here, these are not official.

Suspect in women's the furthest east is Bowdoin, furthest south is Trinity, furthest west is George Fox. I believe George Fox is also the furthest north.
Whitworth definitely has GF beat on the North category. WA still above OR when I woke up today. ;D Spokane is 80-100 miles south of the border. Any real north Minn schools would be "taller". But I think Pat is talking women.

What was your first clue?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 08, 2011, 12:56:30 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 08, 2011, 12:52:02 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 08, 2011, 12:34:31 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 08, 2011, 12:24:15 PM
Going to go off the cuff here, these are not official.

Suspect in women's the furthest east is Bowdoin, furthest south is Trinity, furthest west is George Fox. I believe George Fox is also the furthest north.
Whitworth definitely has GF beat on the North category. WA still above OR when I woke up today. ;D Spokane is 80-100 miles south of the border. Any real north Minn schools would be "taller". But I think Pat is talking women.
What was your first clue?

No fair, you removed/edited your post which I was referring to... :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 08, 2011, 01:04:12 PM

Forgive me; I assumed the post you quoted was the one you were referring to. My post said "Whitworth is farthest north as well as farthest west;" I deleted rather than editing it when I added the other information about the other men's teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 08, 2011, 01:18:29 PM

Quote from: rmc1982 on February 08, 2011, 12:05:45 PM
On an unrelated note, there's a HUGE inter-regional and Conference game tomorrow night at Virginia Wesleyan with Randolph-Macon coming into the Fish Tank to play the Marlins-should be a GREAT game!!Will any of you be attending D-Mac and Pat?ODAC Regular Season and Region 1st place on the line!!

Considering it is mid-week... not going to even be able to get up to Gettysburg for the possible 800th win in F&M's Glenn Robinson's career. Unfortunately, I have to be at work at 5 AM and can't take time off during the very important sweeps months (February being one of them). Will try and watch some of it online... if I can.

Quote from: David Collinge on February 08, 2011, 12:42:17 PM
Men's: Whitworth west & north, Amherst east, Va. Wesleyan south.
Women's: Pat's guesses are correct: George Fox west & north, Bowdoin east, Trinity south

caveat: I only checked from the end of the 2007-08 season backwards. It's possible there's been some geography busters since then, but none come to mind other than Whitworth.

Well... you need a Mainer to get this right... Husson and Maine Maritime are actually more east then Bowdoin and I think the edge goes to Husson, but barely.
BUT they are not the furthest east... that title goes to the school that is also the furthest north, Maine-Presque Isle.
BUT... I am not taking account any of the Minnesota schools in terms to distance north... Presque Isle is 46-degrees, 40-minutes north, roughly.

By the way - wasn't talking rankings! :) Just having fun with distance and location... so don't bust on me! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 08, 2011, 01:30:18 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 08, 2011, 12:30:37 PM
Strength of schedule seems to be an issue for some who might question Whitworth's quality.

Massey has:

Whitworth schedule at #24
Amherst schedule at #168
Williams schedule at #70
Middlebury schedule at #137

NWC power conf. at 4th with 4 teams in top 33 of Massey
NE Smalls conf. power at 3rd with 4th team at 99

Conclusion: Other than playing each other, these three teams from NESCAC haven't played against any serious competition. That's 4 very tough games on schedule but not much more (#133 Elms for Williams, ME Farmington #310 took Amherst to OT, #117 Plattsburg battled Middlebury, #123 Skidmore, #164 Bates close win at home... ). WW has 6 tough games plus games won against Massey power 40, 56, & 58.

9 games vs 4 games?

This conference seems to be a good example of why massey's rating need to be taken with the proper grain of salt.

Massey count's those D3 v D2/D1 exhibitions where the D1/D2 program gets to count it as a real game. Even though a couple are listed as (ex), they still count in his ratings.

The Northwest Conference has a couple of them

Pacific Lutheran -- Oct 31 loss to Seattle
George Fox --Nov 6 loss to D2 Western Oregon
Pacific -- Nov. 6 loss to D2 NW Nazarene

Then there are these 2 games, which would give the whole conference a pretty big boost in schedule difficulty.
Willamette -- Nov. 16 loss to D2 W. Washinton
George Fox --Dec 9 loss to D1 Portland State

I'm not saying Whitworth hasn't played a good schedule or tough schedule, I'm just saying I'm not sure using massey's ratings is the right way to demonstrate their strength. Factoring out the above 3 games probably changes the schedule strength's enough to place Whitworth closer to #70 Williams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 08, 2011, 01:39:54 PM

Quote from: sac on February 08, 2011, 01:30:18 PM
I'm not saying Whitworth hasn't played a good schedule or tough schedule, I'm just saying I'm not sure using massey's ratings is the right way to demonstrate their strength. Factoring out the above 3 games probably changes the schedule strength's enough to place Whitworth closer to #70 Williams.

Is there a better way? Is there a Massey calculator clone that allows for editing of certain games? Tell me where and I am happy to do the work. Until then, this is all I can go by and still have a life. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on February 08, 2011, 01:45:45 PM

Quote from: sac on February 08, 2011, 01:30:18 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 08, 2011, 12:30:37 PM
Strength of schedule seems to be an issue for some who might question Whitworth's quality.

Massey has:

Whitworth schedule at #24
Amherst schedule at #168
Williams schedule at #70
Middlebury schedule at #137

NWC power conf. at 4th with 4 teams in top 33 of Massey
NE Smalls conf. power at 3rd with 4th team at 99

Conclusion: Other than playing each other, these three teams from NESCAC haven't played against any serious competition. That's 4 very tough games on schedule but not much more (#133 Elms for Williams, ME Farmington #310 took Amherst to OT, #117 Plattsburg battled Middlebury, #123 Skidmore, #164 Bates close win at home... ). WW has 6 tough games plus games won against Massey power 40, 56, & 58.

9 games vs 4 games?

This conference seems to be a good example of why massey's rating need to be taken with the proper grain of salt.

Massey count's those D3 v D2/D1 exhibitions where the D1/D2 program gets to count it as a real game. Even though a couple are listed as (ex), they still count in his ratings.

The Northwest Conference has a couple of them

Pacific Lutheran -- Oct 31 loss to Seattle
George Fox --Nov 6 loss to D2 Western Oregon
Pacific -- Nov. 6 loss to D2 NW Nazarene

Then there are these 2 games, which would give the whole conference a pretty big boost in schedule difficulty.
Willamette -- Nov. 16 loss to D2 W. Washinton
George Fox --Dec 9 loss to D1 Portland State

I'm not saying Whitworth hasn't played a good schedule or tough schedule, I'm just saying I'm not sure using massey's ratings is the right way to demonstrate their strength. Factoring out the above 3 games probably changes the schedule strength's enough to place Whitworth closer to #70 Williams.

I don't know that any of these games would have a positive effect on Whitworth's Massey SOS. Maybe I'm wrong, but the way it was explained to me was that even these losses to D1's and D2's would decrease a team's ranking slightly.

Since Whitworth wasn't the one playing the actual games here. Their SOS is just based on the quality of the teams on their schedule. So since these other NWC teams are seeing a slight ding for losing to D1's and D2's, Whitworth's SOS may actually be showing up as slightly easier than it might if they were treated as exhibition games.

I'm certainly not an expert on how his rankings are composed; all my info is second hand. I'm open to correction if someone knows for sure.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 08, 2011, 02:22:35 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 08, 2011, 01:18:29 PM...the school that is also the furthest north, Maine-Presque Isle.

Furthest north in Maine, perhaps, but I think Whitworth, at about 47*39'N latitude, is the northernmost D3 school. Other schools above the 47th parallel include Pacific Lutheran and UPS in Tacoma, and Finlandia in the UP. Presque Isle, ME is at about 46*40'N, and there are at least 2 Minnesota schools plus UW-Superior at or above that latitude.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 08, 2011, 02:29:46 PM

Yeah, I am pretty skeptical about the Massey ratings, which always seem to overrate the West region teams / anyone who plays anyone who plays the WIAC, and definitely underrates the New England teams. I think the d3hoops.com rankings are far more accurate, for example. I'm just not sold on the strength of Whitworth's conference, at least until I see someone from that conference come close to winning a national title, which I don't think has ever happened, correct me if I'm wrong. I also note that a guy who wouldn't be in Williams' rotation right now transfered to the second-best team in Whitworth's conference (Lewis and Clark) and is among that team's leaders in points and assists.

Also, Williams, Amherst and Middlebury should all have dramatic bumps in their strength of schedule over the next few weeks, when they should all be battling each other (plus fourth place NESCAC team Trinity) multiple times to end the regular season and in the conference tourney. So for all of them, some of their toughest games are yet to be played. And really, Williams has beaten a lot, while not stellar, decent-solid teams this year -- the top two teams in MASCAC, a middling CCIW team, the third place team in NEWMAC (Springfield), a solid Regis team, a few other solid teams, and the Ephs have been blowing them out in almost every case. Add that to a schedule in one of the big five D-3 conferences, and I simply don't think Massey's schedule ratings are fair. I mean, I don't think ANYONE outside of Massey places NWC at 4th, WIAC, CCIW, NESCAC, ODAC, OAC are pretty much the consensus top five most years, maybe UAA too although they are way down from the usual standards this year, and the touranement bears it out as those six conferences tend to dominate the final four year in and year out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 08, 2011, 02:40:13 PM

Quote from: sac on February 08, 2011, 01:30:18 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 08, 2011, 12:30:37 PM
Strength of schedule seems to be an issue for some who might question Whitworth's quality.

Massey has:

Whitworth schedule at #24
Amherst schedule at #168
Williams schedule at #70
Middlebury schedule at #137

NWC power conf. at 4th with 4 teams in top 33 of Massey
NE Smalls conf. power at 3rd with 4th team at 99

Conclusion: Other than playing each other, these three teams from NESCAC haven't played against any serious competition. That's 4 very tough games on schedule but not much more (#133 Elms for Williams, ME Farmington #310 took Amherst to OT, #117 Plattsburg battled Middlebury, #123 Skidmore, #164 Bates close win at home... ). WW has 6 tough games plus games won against Massey power 40, 56, & 58.

9 games vs 4 games?

This conference seems to be a good example of why massey's rating need to be taken with the proper grain of salt.

Massey count's those D3 v D2/D1 exhibitions where the D1/D2 program gets to count it as a real game. Even though a couple are listed as (ex), they still count in his ratings.

The Northwest Conference has a couple of them

Pacific Lutheran -- Oct 31 loss to Seattle
George Fox --Nov 6 loss to D2 Western Oregon
Pacific -- Nov. 6 loss to D2 NW Nazarene

Then there are these 2 games, which would give the whole conference a pretty big boost in schedule difficulty.
Willamette -- Nov. 16 loss to D2 W. Washinton
George Fox --Dec 9 loss to D1 Portland State

I'm not saying Whitworth hasn't played a good schedule or tough schedule, I'm just saying I'm not sure using massey's ratings is the right way to demonstrate their strength. Factoring out the above 3 games probably changes the schedule strength's enough to place Whitworth closer to #70 Williams.

I've emailed Massey (kmassey@masseyratings.com) in the past and let him know when I've seen things... he's changed those games with the following run, to make everything more accurate. Maybe we should come up with a list of things that aren't as they should be (For example, CSU East Bay is listed as D-III, but they're listed as D-II on their own site, play in a D-II conference, etc. That won't affect things much 'cause they don't play any D-III games, but it might affect D-II).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 08, 2011, 02:56:38 PM

The NWC is not as tough as the NESCAC this year. That's a given. But it's not like the gaudy records we've seen from a team like Elms in recent years, one that was won feasting exclusively on bottom-feeders in a weak conference.

Whitworth has earned their wins (only one of which was by less than 10 points). We saw the talent they threw out last year and transferred in a couple really strong players for this season.

All that together leads me to believe they're #1 right now. I've got Williams and Wooster right on their tails. I hope to see all three in Salem.

The biggest kicker for me is simply the consistent domination Whitworth is showing this year. We've seen some undefeated teams in the past (and near undefeated teams), but I can't remember the last time a team has been so seemingly unstoppable. They don't have the advantage of another national power on the schedule to serve as a comparison, but they're not beating slouch squads. The #2, #3, and #4 teams in the NWC are all better than Trinity; its just that the #2 and #3 aren't as good as either Amherst or Middlebury.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 08, 2011, 03:41:56 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 08, 2011, 01:39:54 PM
Quote from: sac on February 08, 2011, 01:30:18 PM
I'm not saying Whitworth hasn't played a good schedule or tough schedule, I'm just saying I'm not sure using massey's ratings is the right way to demonstrate their strength. Factoring out the above 3 games probably changes the schedule strength's enough to place Whitworth closer to #70 Williams.
Is there a better way? Is there a Massey calculator clone that allows for editing of certain games? Tell me where and I am happy to do the work. Until then, this is all I can go by and still have a life. ;)

Its actually not that hard to pull out the D2 and D1 games, it just takes some work.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 08, 2011, 03:58:23 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 08, 2011, 01:45:45 PM
Quote from: sac on February 08, 2011, 01:30:18 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 08, 2011, 12:30:37 PM
Strength of schedule seems to be an issue for some who might question Whitworth's quality.

Massey has:

Whitworth schedule at #24
Amherst schedule at #168
Williams schedule at #70
Middlebury schedule at #137

NWC power conf. at 4th with 4 teams in top 33 of Massey
NE Smalls conf. power at 3rd with 4th team at 99

Conclusion: Other than playing each other, these three teams from NESCAC haven't played against any serious competition. That's 4 very tough games on schedule but not much more (#133 Elms for Williams, ME Farmington #310 took Amherst to OT, #117 Plattsburg battled Middlebury, #123 Skidmore, #164 Bates close win at home... ). WW has 6 tough games plus games won against Massey power 40, 56, & 58.

9 games vs 4 games?

This conference seems to be a good example of why massey's rating need to be taken with the proper grain of salt.

Massey count's those D3 v D2/D1 exhibitions where the D1/D2 program gets to count it as a real game. Even though a couple are listed as (ex), they still count in his ratings.

The Northwest Conference has a couple of them

Pacific Lutheran -- Oct 31 loss to Seattle
George Fox --Nov 6 loss to D2 Western Oregon
Pacific -- Nov. 6 loss to D2 NW Nazarene

Then there are these 2 games, which would give the whole conference a pretty big boost in schedule difficulty.
Willamette -- Nov. 16 loss to D2 W. Washinton
George Fox --Dec 9 loss to D1 Portland State

I'm not saying Whitworth hasn't played a good schedule or tough schedule, I'm just saying I'm not sure using massey's ratings is the right way to demonstrate their strength. Factoring out the above 3 games probably changes the schedule strength's enough to place Whitworth closer to #70 Williams.

I don't know that any of these games would have a positive effect on Whitworth's Massey SOS. Maybe I'm wrong, but the way it was explained to me was that even these losses to D1's and D2's would decrease a team's ranking slightly.

Since Whitworth wasn't the one playing the actual games here. Their SOS is just based on the quality of the teams on their schedule. So since these other NWC teams are seeing a slight ding for losing to D1's and D2's, Whitworth's SOS may actually be showing up as slightly easier than it might if they were treated as exhibition games.

I'm certainly not an expert on how his rankings are composed; all my info is second hand. I'm open to correction if someone knows for sure.

First line from Ratings Overview section of Massey

The ratings are totally interdependent, so that a team's rating is affected by games in which it didn't even play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 08, 2011, 04:18:22 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 08, 2011, 02:56:38 PM

The NWC is not as tough as the NESCAC this year. That's a given. But it's not like the gaudy records we've seen from a team like Elms in recent years, one that was won feasting exclusively on bottom-feeders in a weak conference.

Whitworth has earned their wins (only one of which was by less than 10 points). We saw the talent they threw out last year and transferred in a couple really strong players for this season.

All that together leads me to believe they're #1 right now. I've got Williams and Wooster right on their tails. I hope to see all three in Salem.

The biggest kicker for me is simply the consistent domination Whitworth is showing this year. We've seen some undefeated teams in the past (and near undefeated teams), but I can't remember the last time a team has been so seemingly unstoppable. They don't have the advantage of another national power on the schedule to serve as a comparison, but they're not beating slouch squads. The #2, #3, and #4 teams in the NWC are all better than Trinity; its just that the #2 and #3 aren't as good as either Amherst or Middlebury.

Just to set the record straight, Whitworth has only one, (1), uno, new player to its first 6. Michael Taylor, Sr. transferred from Montana. Jack Loofburrow was on the team last year and was out of basketball the year before that. Not a transfer in the true sense.

The geography of NWC combined with the limited travel budgets of most D3 schools will always keep SCIAC and NWC from having multiple meaningful games vs WIAC, CCIW, ODAC and NESCAC. Until a far west school makes it to Championship game...I hear that every year and who knows if that will actually change perceptions. WW is a school, rare, that will jump on a plane and travel pre conference to Wheaton or Wash U just to overcome the doubt/bias.

Is NWC the 4th toughest conference this year, if you believe Whitworth is as good as some think they are, yes it is. Does anyone doubt that the West is the strongest REGION?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on February 08, 2011, 04:23:32 PM

Quote from: sac on February 08, 2011, 03:58:23 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 08, 2011, 01:45:45 PM
Quote from: sac on February 08, 2011, 01:30:18 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 08, 2011, 12:30:37 PM
Strength of schedule seems to be an issue for some who might question Whitworth's quality.

Massey has:

Whitworth schedule at #24
Amherst schedule at #168
Williams schedule at #70
Middlebury schedule at #137

NWC power conf. at 4th with 4 teams in top 33 of Massey
NE Smalls conf. power at 3rd with 4th team at 99

Conclusion: Other than playing each other, these three teams from NESCAC haven't played against any serious competition. That's 4 very tough games on schedule but not much more (#133 Elms for Williams, ME Farmington #310 took Amherst to OT, #117 Plattsburg battled Middlebury, #123 Skidmore, #164 Bates close win at home... ). WW has 6 tough games plus games won against Massey power 40, 56, & 58.

9 games vs 4 games?

This conference seems to be a good example of why massey's rating need to be taken with the proper grain of salt.

Massey count's those D3 v D2/D1 exhibitions where the D1/D2 program gets to count it as a real game. Even though a couple are listed as (ex), they still count in his ratings.

The Northwest Conference has a couple of them

Pacific Lutheran -- Oct 31 loss to Seattle
George Fox --Nov 6 loss to D2 Western Oregon
Pacific -- Nov. 6 loss to D2 NW Nazarene

Then there are these 2 games, which would give the whole conference a pretty big boost in schedule difficulty.
Willamette -- Nov. 16 loss to D2 W. Washinton
George Fox --Dec 9 loss to D1 Portland State

I'm not saying Whitworth hasn't played a good schedule or tough schedule, I'm just saying I'm not sure using massey's ratings is the right way to demonstrate their strength. Factoring out the above 3 games probably changes the schedule strength's enough to place Whitworth closer to #70 Williams.

I don't know that any of these games would have a positive effect on Whitworth's Massey SOS. Maybe I'm wrong, but the way it was explained to me was that even these losses to D1's and D2's would decrease a team's ranking slightly.

Since Whitworth wasn't the one playing the actual games here. Their SOS is just based on the quality of the teams on their schedule. So since these other NWC teams are seeing a slight ding for losing to D1's and D2's, Whitworth's SOS may actually be showing up as slightly easier than it might if they were treated as exhibition games.

I'm certainly not an expert on how his rankings are composed; all my info is second hand. I'm open to correction if someone knows for sure.

First line from Ratings Overview section of Massey

The ratings are totally interdependent, so that a team's rating is affected by games in which it didn't even play.

Exactly. But in this case the rating of, say, George Fox, is broght down by losing an exhibition game to a D2. So, since George Fox is looks 'artificially' worse than they might otherwise be (if the game was not counted by Massey), Whitworth's SOS is also 'artificially' worse.

George Fox's SOS is boosted by the game, but their overall rating is lower than if it wasn't counted. Whitworth's SOS is based off George Fox's rating, not SOS.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 08, 2011, 04:49:29 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 08, 2011, 02:22:35 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 08, 2011, 01:18:29 PM...the school that is also the furthest north, Maine-Presque Isle.
Furthest north in Maine, perhaps, but I think Whitworth, at about 47*39'N latitude, is the northernmost D3 school. Other schools above the 47th parallel include Pacific Lutheran and UPS in Tacoma, and Finlandia in the UP. Presque Isle, ME is at about 46*40'N, and there are at least 2 Minnesota schools plus UW-Superior at or above that latitude.

Yeah - mentioned I wasn't sure about other teams... and since UMPI is 46*40'N... any school above 47th parallel is higher. But at least you can't be further east!

As for the talk about Whitworth... the point they have been dominating teams and haven't had any close games shows they are that good. I am more impressed in the simple fact that don't seem to have an off night... and I saw them have an off night for one of their players only to have someone else step up in that game to make up for it. Heck, from half to half there were different guys stepping up... they are a real team instead of individuals which makes them interesting to watch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 08, 2011, 05:52:26 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 08, 2011, 04:23:32 PM

Exactly. But in this case the rating of, say, George Fox, is broght down by losing an exhibition game to a D2. So, since George Fox is looks 'artificially' worse than they might otherwise be (if the game was not counted by Massey), Whitworth's SOS is also 'artificially' worse.

George Fox's SOS is boosted by the game, but their overall rating is lower than if it wasn't counted. Whitworth's SOS is based off George Fox's rating, not SOS.

I'm nearly 100% sure that's not the case, look at all the programs who are rated as having played the toughest schedule's....1-24 all the way down to Whitworth have something in common, SOS tied to either their own or an opponents games vs teams in D1 or D2 (some of those exhibitions counted in massey's ratings)

I don't think this is a miraculous coincidence. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on February 08, 2011, 06:03:54 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 08, 2011, 02:56:38 PM
Whitworth has earned their wins (only one of which was by less than 10 points). We saw the talent they threw out last year and transferred in a couple really strong players for this season.

All that together leads me to believe they're #1 right now. I've got Williams and Wooster right on their tails. I hope to see all three in Salem.

Well said Hoops Fan. The one thing we can all count on is that all of these teams get to prove how good they are on the court in the end. We can throw the Massey Ratings out the window as they won't really mean a thing once tournament time is here! 8-)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 08, 2011, 06:12:05 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 08, 2011, 02:40:13 PM
I've emailed Massey (kmassey@masseyratings.com) in the past and let him know when I've seen things... he's changed those games with the following run, to make everything more accurate. Maybe we should come up with a list of things that aren't as they should be (For example, CSU East Bay is listed as D-III, but they're listed as D-II on their own site, play in a D-II conference, etc. That won't affect things much 'cause they don't play any D-III games, but it might affect D-II).

... Not sure if anyone has emailed Massey yet (probably not...) but so as to not have a barrage of emails all about the same thing, we should just list the games/teams we know are wrong so the numbers, on the whole, can be better.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 08, 2011, 07:49:06 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 08, 2011, 12:34:31 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 08, 2011, 12:24:15 PM
Going to go off the cuff here, these are not official.

Suspect in women's the furthest east is Bowdoin, furthest south is Trinity, furthest west is George Fox. I believe George Fox is also the furthest north.
Whitworth definitely has GF beat on the North category. WA still above OR when I woke up today. ;D Spokane is 80-100 miles south of the border. Any real north Minn schools would be "taller". But I think Pat is talking women.

That's why I said in women's. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on February 09, 2011, 09:51:00 AM

Quote from: sac on February 08, 2011, 05:52:26 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 08, 2011, 04:23:32 PM

Exactly. But in this case the rating of, say, George Fox, is broght down by losing an exhibition game to a D2. So, since George Fox is looks 'artificially' worse than they might otherwise be (if the game was not counted by Massey), Whitworth's SOS is also 'artificially' worse.

George Fox's SOS is boosted by the game, but their overall rating is lower than if it wasn't counted. Whitworth's SOS is based off George Fox's rating, not SOS.

I'm nearly 100% sure that's not the case, look at all the programs who are rated as having played the toughest schedule's....1-24 all the way down to Whitworth have something in common, SOS tied to either their own or an opponents games vs teams in D1 or D2 (some of those exhibitions counted in massey's ratings)

I don't think this is a miraculous coincidence. :)

There's also teams like Colorado College, that played an actual game vs. a D1, that have an SOS in the #93 range. Looks like a few SCAC schools have 'exhibition' games counting against D1s according to Massey. They all have poor SOS's.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 09, 2011, 09:58:30 AM

Whitworth (Spokane) – 47.75
Puget Sound (Tacoma) – 47.26
Pacific Lutheran (Tacoma) – 47.15
Finlandia (Hancock, Mich.) – 47.13 N
St. Scholastica (Duluth) – 46.82
UW-Superior – 46.72

From a blog post several years back.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 09, 2011, 10:58:32 AM

We just have to wait for one of those Alaska schools to jump into D3! :) LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 09, 2011, 01:01:18 PM

Concordia-Moorhead is at about 46*50', should also be a bit north of UMPI depending on the exact location of the schools.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 09, 2011, 04:18:40 PM

I would've guessed Superior would be furthest north since I always considered them located in Canada. Of course I also posted that Puget Sound was in Oregon!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 09, 2011, 04:39:05 PM

Quote from: Old School-Greek Tragedy on February 09, 2011, 04:18:40 PM
I would've guessed Superior would be furthest north since I always considered them located in Canada. Of course I also posted that Puget Sound was in Oregon!

Ah, but Canada does not necessarily mean north! ;D You go straight SOUTH from Detroit to get to Windsor, for example! :o

I'm thinking of starting a d3 school in Barrow, Alaska - let's see someone beat that! (Of course, I would need Bill Gates to cover the travel budget. :P)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GuyFormerlyPSBBG on February 09, 2011, 04:43:31 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 09, 2011, 04:39:05 PM
Quote from: Old School-Greek Tragedy on February 09, 2011, 04:18:40 PM
I would've guessed Superior would be furthest north since I always considered them located in Canada. Of course I also posted that Puget Sound was in Oregon!

Ah, but Canada does not necessarily mean north! ;D You go straight SOUTH from Detroit to get to Windsor, for example! :o

I'm thinking of starting a d3 school in Barrow, Alaska - let's see someone beat that! (Of course, I would need Bill Gates to cover the travel budget. :P)

I know we've been talking about Northern most school. I live in FL now, no d3 schools :( Start your school down here. Bill Gates may be more willing to pay for FL travel than AK travel.

I can see it now a new TV series "Ice Road Bus Drivers" ----taking the only d3 school on the road.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 09, 2011, 07:33:36 PM

Quote from: GuyFormerlyPSBBG on February 09, 2011, 04:43:31 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 09, 2011, 04:39:05 PM
Quote from: Old School-Greek Tragedy on February 09, 2011, 04:18:40 PM
I would've guessed Superior would be furthest north since I always considered them located in Canada. Of course I also posted that Puget Sound was in Oregon!

Ah, but Canada does not necessarily mean north! ;D You go straight SOUTH from Detroit to get to Windsor, for example! :o

I'm thinking of starting a d3 school in Barrow, Alaska - let's see someone beat that! (Of course, I would need Bill Gates to cover the travel budget. :P)

I know we've been talking about Northern most school. I live in FL now, no d3 schools :( Start your school down here. Bill Gates may be more willing to pay for FL travel than AK travel.

I can see it now a new TV series "Ice Road Bus Drivers" ----taking the only d3 school on the road.

Palm Beach Atlantic tried to give it a go as a D3 probie, but it couldn't make it all the way through the four-year probationary period before giving up. It went D2 instead. Can't say as I blame PBAU; it's gotta be hard to join this division when the nearest D3 school is a nine-hour busride away.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 09, 2011, 08:19:36 PM

Live video of #5 Augustana @ Wheaton...

http://www.wheaton.edu/wetn/

For anyone interested.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 09, 2011, 08:49:30 PM

VaWes downs Randy Mac, 53-50. Neither team ever led by more than 6. Some game! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 10, 2011, 07:23:41 AM

How They Fared--Midweek Report

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	616	Whitworth	21-0	02/11 vs. Willamette; 02/12 vs. George Fox
#2	573	Williams	21-1	02/11 vs. Trinity (Conn.); 02/12 vs. #3 Amherst
#3	556	Amherst	21-0	def. Brandeis, 79-65; 02/11 at #7 Middlebury; 02/12 at #2 Williams
#4	552	Wooster	21-1	def. Oberlin, 79-62; 02/12 at #25 Wittenberg
#5	522	Augustana	21-1	def. Wheaton (Ill.), 80-77; 02/12 at Millikin
#6	503	Virginia Wesleyan	20-1	def. #11 Randolph-Macon, 53-50; 02/12 at Hampden-Sydney
#7	491	Middlebury	18-1	02/11 vs. #3 Amherst; 02/12 vs. Trinity (Conn.)
#8	432	UW-Stevens Point	19-3	def. UW-Eau Claire, 83-70; 02/12 vs. #10 UW-River Falls
#9	409	St. Thomas	18-3	LOST at Carleton, 61-67; 02/12 at Gustavus Adolphus
#10	391	UW-River Falls	19-3	02/12 at #8 UW-Stevens Point
#11	380	Randolph-Macon	19-4	LOST at #6 Virginia Wesleyan, 50-53; 02/12 at Roanoke
#12	350	WPI	19-3	def. Coast Guard, 60-47; 02/12 at Babson
#13	339	Wabash	17-4	02/12 vs. Hiram
#14	290	Western Connecticut	19-3	LOST to Rhode Island College, 75-86; 02/12 at Keene State
#15	258	St. Mary's (Md.)	18-5	LOST at Salisbury, 58-61; 02/12 vs. T#36 Wesley
#16	223	Eastern Mennonite	17-4	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 81-64; 02/12 vs. Emory and Henry
#17	209	St. Norbert	16-5	LOST to Beloit, 52-57; 02/12 at Carroll
#18	181	Marietta	20-2	def. Mount Union, 81-66; 02/12 vs. Heidelberg
#19	178	Ferrum	19-3	LOST to Hampden-Sydney, 83-87; 02/12 vs. Shenandoah; 02/13 vs. Christopher Newport
#20	138	Chapman	19-3	def. Southwestern (AZ), 85-69
#21	129	Franklin and Marshall	18-4	def. Gettysburg, 68-46; 02/12 at Swarthmore
#22	105	Ramapo	18-4	def. Rutgers-Newark, 70-62; 02/12 at New Jersey City
#23	68	Illinois Wesleyan	16-5	def. Millikin, 78-53; 02/12 at Wheaton (Ill.)
#24	49	Centre	15-4	02/11 vs. Sewanee; 02/13 vs. Oglethorpe
#25	44	Wittenberg	16-5	def. Ohio Wesleyan, 76-70; 02/12 vs. #4 Wooster

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	41	Rochester	16-4	02/11 vs. Chicago; 02/13 vs. Washington U.
T#27	16	Concordia (Wis.)	19-3	def. Marian, 69-64; def. Lakeland, 79-75; 02/12 vs. Maranatha Baptist
T#27	16	Emory	16-4	02/11 vs. Washington U.; 02/13 vs. Chicago
T#29	13	Becker	18-3	def. Elms, 81-74; 02/10 at Lesley; 02/12 vs. Southern Vermont
T#29	13	Manchester	16-6	def. Bluffton, 81-67; 02/12 at Franklin
#31	12	Mary Hardin-Baylor	17-4	02/10 at Hardin-Simmons; 02/12 at McMurry
#32	8	Penn State-Behrend	19-3	LOST at La Roche, 61-67; def. Pitt-Bradford, 82-71; 02/12 vs. Franciscan (Ohio)
#33	7	Hope	17-5	def. Olivet, 65-60; 02/12 at Adrian
#34	6	Lewis and Clark	15-6	02/11 vs. Pacific; 02/12 vs. Pacific Lutheran
#35	4	Oswego State	17-3	def. SUNY-Cobleskill, 63-62; 02/11 at Plattsburgh State; 02/12 at Potsdam State
T#36	1	Hanover	16-5	def. Franklin, 85-72; 02/12 vs. Earlham
T#36	1	North Carolina Wesleyan	16-6	def. Greensboro, 73-70; 02/12 vs. Methodist
T#36	1	Wesley	16-6	def. Marymount, 64-63; 02/12 at #15 St. Mary's (Md.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 10, 2011, 09:28:57 AM

Top 25 decimation last night - well that's underselling it a bit. Is there such thing as a quadrimation?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 12, 2011, 01:09:50 AM

115-69 Whitworth over Willamette. Go Pirates! I

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on February 12, 2011, 12:39:55 PM

Up by 30+ points with 8 minutes to play before subs start to play (looks like the usual sub pattern). I remember UT-Dallas last year played with 6 players dominating minutes played for the year and then one of their rotation goes down in their league championship game. They beat Wheaton at home in the NCAA by a buzzer beater and then lost to UWSP playing with just 5 players. Whitworth could be at risk just the same way. Their starters are playing well, but all it takes is a tweaked ankle or knee (heaven forbid) or foul problems to throw your rotation out of whack.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 12, 2011, 12:58:35 PM

Quote from: frodotwo on February 12, 2011, 12:39:55 PM
Up by 30+ points with 8 minutes to play before subs start to play (looks like the usual sub pattern). I remember UT-Dallas last year played with 6 players dominating minutes played for the year and then one of their rotation goes down in their league championship game. They beat Wheaton at home in the NCAA by a buzzer beater and then lost to UWSP playing with just 5 players. Whitworth could be at risk just the same way. Their starters are playing well, but all it takes is a tweaked ankle or knee (heaven forbid) or foul problems to throw your rotation out of whack.

Yep. All true. I think it is a very calculated risk. Fortunately, they play great defense and fouls have been a rare issue for first 6.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 12, 2011, 04:10:34 PM

#6 VaWes falls by 9 to HSC. #13 Wabash falls by 12 (at home) to Hiram. Amherst drops their second straight (both to top 7 teams), 74-70, at Williams.

Combined with at least 8-9 other top 25 losses this week, there's gonna be some shake-up in the poll!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 12, 2011, 06:06:03 PM

Definitely. I think Williams will earn a few more number one votes with a big weekend including blowing out a pretty solid Trinity team and beating a very talented Amherst squad. But they will probably settle in at number two unless Whitworth suffers a surprising loss tonight. After that, Middlebury, Augustana, Wooster, and even Stevens Point can all stake a claim to the third spot.

Western Conn lost two tough games, but I note that the second (today) was played without their star, not sure what the story is there. But in all events they are sure to drop quite a bit.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 12, 2011, 06:53:14 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on February 12, 2011, 06:06:03 PM
Definitely. I think Williams will earn a few more number one votes with a big weekend including blowing out a pretty solid Trinity team and beating a very talented Amherst squad. But they will probably settle in at number two unless Whitworth suffers a surprising loss tonight. After that, Middlebury, Augustana, Wooster, and even Stevens Point can all stake a claim to the third spot.

Western Conn lost two tough games, but I note that the second (today) was played without their star, not sure what the story is there. But in all events they are sure to drop quite a bit.

I suspect there are only 3 1st place votes in play unless Wooster loses, then 4. Hard to see WW losing ground unless they struggle tonight. George Fox is a well coached team and I always seem to call them the conf. spoiler. Have a knack for big games.

NWC plays a 4 team conf. tourney for the Pool A spot and all 4 teams now know who they are, GF is not one of them. Lewis & Clark, Whitman, and Pacific Lutheran are all close and the 2, 3 and 4 spots are very much undecided.

Whitworth officially won the NWC Men's Basketball Championship last night. There second straight and 4th in the past 5 years. Whitworth has won 47 of their last 48 games played.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 12, 2011, 07:12:30 PM

Another one bites the dust. Wabash loses at home to Hiram (not a pushover, but c'mon...) 70-58.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 12, 2011, 07:19:27 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 12, 2011, 06:53:14 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on February 12, 2011, 06:06:03 PM
Definitely. I think Williams will earn a few more number one votes with a big weekend including blowing out a pretty solid Trinity team and beating a very talented Amherst squad. But they will probably settle in at number two unless Whitworth suffers a surprising loss tonight. After that, Middlebury, Augustana, Wooster, and even Stevens Point can all stake a claim to the third spot.

Western Conn lost two tough games, but I note that the second (today) was played without their star, not sure what the story is there. But in all events they are sure to drop quite a bit.
I suspect there are only 3 1st place votes in play unless Wooster loses, then 4. Hard to see WW losing ground unless they struggle tonight. George Fox is a well coached team and I always seem to call them the conf. spoiler. Have a knack for big games.

NWC plays a 4 team conf. tourney for the Pool A spot and all 4 teams now know who they are, GF is not one of them. Lewis & Clark, Whitman, and Pacific Lutheran are all close and the 2, 3 and 4 spots are very much undecided.

Whitworth officially won the NWC Men's Basketball Championship last night. There second straight and 4th in the past 5 years. Whitworth has won 47 of their last 48 games played.

Hate to break it to a voter on the Posters' Poll, but the unanimity of first place votes for Whitworth there is probably about to be broken. I'm definitely leaning towards jumping Williams over Whitworth. They avenged their only loss (suffered when they were missing their best player) and IMO have an overall better resume than Whitworth (who, like most teams in the 'Siberia' of d3, simply hasn't had much opportunity to show how good they are).

Whitworth is obviously very, very good; whether or not they are #1 good, ....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 12, 2011, 07:44:01 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 12, 2011, 07:19:27 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 12, 2011, 06:53:14 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on February 12, 2011, 06:06:03 PM
Definitely. I think Williams will earn a few more number one votes with a big weekend including blowing out a pretty solid Trinity team and beating a very talented Amherst squad. But they will probably settle in at number two unless Whitworth suffers a surprising loss tonight. After that, Middlebury, Augustana, Wooster, and even Stevens Point can all stake a claim to the third spot.

Western Conn lost two tough games, but I note that the second (today) was played without their star, not sure what the story is there. But in all events they are sure to drop quite a bit.
I suspect there are only 3 1st place votes in play unless Wooster loses, then 4. Hard to see WW losing ground unless they struggle tonight. George Fox is a well coached team and I always seem to call them the conf. spoiler. Have a knack for big games.

Hate to break it to a voter on the Posters' Poll, but the unanimity of first place votes for Whitworth there is probably about to be broken. I'm definitely leaning towards jumping Williams over Whitworth. They avenged their only loss (suffered when they were missing their best player) and IMO have an overall better resume than Whitworth (who, like most teams in the 'Siberia' of d3, simply hasn't had much opportunity to show how good they are).

Whitworth is obviously very, very good; whether or not they are #1 good, ....

Deep breath...So I am curious, who has Williams played other than Mid and Amherst? :-\ Not in Siberia and I don't see much on their resume. :o At least WW jumps on a plane pre conference in an effort to remove the Siberia ::) designation.

The latest NCAA Division III statistics report was released on February 8th and Whitworth is second in the nation in turnovers per game. The Pirates are giving up only 9.7 turnovers per contest, while Wis.-La Crosse now leads (9.6). Even more impressive, Whitworth ranks among the top 25 of more than 400 NCAA Division III schools in ten different statistics:
Turnovers Per Game - 2nd
Scoring Margin - 3rd
Scoring Offense - 16th
Scoring Defense - 23rd
Field Goal Percentage - 8th
Field Goal Percentage Defense - 9th
Three-Point Percentage - 4th
Three-Pointers Per Game - 7th
Free Throw Percentage - 4th
Assists-to-Turnover Ratio - 15th

Massey has the Schedule ranked at 29. Williams at 54. Good day sir. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 12, 2011, 08:03:53 PM

Granted, Williams has not played a schedule truly worthy of #1 either. But Amherst and Middlebury are much better than anyone WW has played (and Trinity, Bowdoin, and Bates may well be the equal of WW's top opponents - Williams blew all of them out). The win that first got WW serious attention (Carthage) has been severely eroded by their current 13-9 record.

I am in no way knocking WW; I just don't see anything in their record that 'screams out' #1. They may be the 2005-06 Lawrence, which went undefeated, yet I had NO doubt IWU would beat them in the tourney (they did, though I admit to some doubts late in the game! :D).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 12, 2011, 08:51:31 PM

The statement that Trinity, ...and Bates is outrageous. Nothing to back that up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 7express on February 12, 2011, 10:14:06 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on February 12, 2011, 06:06:03 PM
Western Conn lost two tough games, but I note that the second (today) was played without their star, not sure what the story is there. But in all events they are sure to drop quite a bit.

According to the WCSU website Brooks was suspended on Thursday for behavior "detrimental to the team." He should return to the team when the team is back at practice on Monday. Either way I'd like them to remain in the top 25 but wouldn't be surprized if they dropped out entirely. We didn't really play well this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 12, 2011, 11:51:42 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 12, 2011, 08:51:31 PM
The statement that Trinity, ...and Bates is outrageous. Nothing to back that up.

Granted. L&C and Whitman both have better records than any of the three I mentioned, though with not only no common opponents, but perhaps not even any opponents' common opponents, who can tell?

I WILL confess that I hadn't recently checked records when I made the statement. For Bates, especially, I admit bias (my family has a cabin, now entering the fourth generation, less than 15 miles from them ;); and only about 20 miles from Bowdoin). Bates, Bowdoin, and Trinity are all doing somewhat worse than I thought they were doing. Being (in typical d3 fashion) in entirely different universes than L&C and Whitman, they may (or may not) be their equal.

But I assume you WILL admit that WW does not have any wins over a Midd or Amherst?!

Heck, maybe I'll settle it all by voting Augie #1! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 13, 2011, 01:44:09 AM

Whilst it's fun to debate, thankfully there's a mechanism to determine the #1 team when all is said and done.

And no, it's not a contest on memorizing each episode of MSNBC's Lockup, complete with bleeps.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 13, 2011, 02:23:01 AM

Quote from: smedindy on February 13, 2011, 01:44:09 AM
Whilst it's fun to debate, thankfully there's a mechanism to determine the #1 team when all is said and done.

And no, it's not a contest on memorizing each episode of MSNBC's Lockup, complete with bleeps.

Yes, that IS the fun of it!

And, of course, we could even indulge in the fun of debating whether or not the winner of a single-elimination tournament is necessarily #1. :D They are obviously and indisputably the champion, but given that upsets can happen on any given night, are they indisputably the 'best' team?

[And I say this as a proud fan of d3 College World Series champion IWU (which isn't even single-elimination)! They won it, they are legitimately the champions. Were the the 'best' team last year? I seriously doubt it (except for the two weeks where it most counted). ;)]

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 13, 2011, 02:31:31 AM

Quote from: smedindy on February 13, 2011, 01:44:09 AM
Whilst it's fun to debate, thankfully there's a mechanism to determine the #1 team when all is said and done.

And no, it's not a contest on memorizing each episode of MSNBC's Lockup, complete with bleeps.

Haha!! Indeed, MOST of the time this is true.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 13, 2011, 02:23:01 AM
Yes, that IS the fun of it!

And, of course, we could even indulge in the fun of debating whether or not the winner of a single-elimination tournament is necessarily #1. :D They are obviously and indisputably the champion, but given that upsets can happen on any given night, are they indisputably the 'best' team?

[And I say this as a proud fan of d3 College World Series champion IWU (which isn't even single-elimination)! They won it, they are legitimately the champions. Were the the 'best' team last year? I seriously doubt it (except for the two weeks where it most counted). ;)]

I enjoy the banter as well and like to keep it fun, friendly and fan based. I think Whitworth IMO has a great resume and of course, an unblemished record. Wins over LC 2x, Whitman, Carthage, Ripon, Luther, Claremont, and PLU are all quality wins over teams with winning records and good schedule rankings.

Is Williams or Whitworth better, we most likely will never know for sure. :( :-* Seeing a final 4 with those 2, WSP and IWU (I mean Auggy ;D) would be a dream come true.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Bucket on February 13, 2011, 12:56:34 PM

I disagree. Seeing a Final Four without at least two of the NESCAC teams would be a travesty.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 13, 2011, 12:58:39 PM

Quote from: Bucket on February 13, 2011, 12:56:34 PM
I disagree. Seeing a Final Four without at least two of the NESCAC teams would be a travesty.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Bucket on February 13, 2011, 01:33:07 PM

[/quote]
Let's see if they can move them to different brackets so any of them may not meet until at least the round of 16. ;)

(Of course, we have heard similar appeals from fans of the WIAC, the UAA, the CCIW and the ODAC in previous seasons.)
[/quote]

Couldn't agree more! :)

And I'll add: I'm an ODAC alum (W&L '93), saw some very good basketball back then--Hal Nunelly's Randy-Mac teams, All-American Russell Turner at Hampden-Sydney--and the big three of Williams, Amherst, and Middlebury this year are as good, if not better, than anything I have seen at this level of play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on February 13, 2011, 02:04:10 PM

Quote from: Bucket on February 13, 2011, 01:33:07 PM

Let's see if they can move them to different brackets so any of them may not meet until at least the round of 16. ;)

(Of course, we have heard similar appeals from fans of the WIAC, the UAA, the CCIW and the ODAC in previous seasons.)
[/quote]

Couldn't agree more! :)

And I'll add: I'm an ODAC alum (W&L '93), saw some very good basketball back then--Hal Nunelly's Randy-Mac teams, All-American Russell Turner at Hampden-Sydney--and the big three of Williams, Amherst, and Middlebury this year are as good, if not better, than anything I have seen at this level of play.
[/quote]

Maybe you should get out more. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CCIWchamps on February 13, 2011, 04:07:07 PM

While I don't check the list very often, it's really strange not to see Wash U on the Top 25 list after so many years of being in the mix.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 13, 2011, 06:27:58 PM

How They Fared--Complete

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	616	Whitworth	23-0	def. Willamette, 115-69; def. George Fox, 89-66
#2	573	Williams	23-1	def. Trinity (Conn.), 86-60; def. #3 Amherst, 74-70
#3	556	Amherst	21-2	def. Brandeis, 79-65; LOST at #7 Middlebury, 61-69; LOST at #2 Williams, 70-74
#4	552	Wooster	21-2	def. Oberlin, 79-62; LOST at #25 Wittenberg, 72-76
#5	522	Augustana	22-1	def. Wheaton (Ill.), 80-77; def. Millikin, 71-51
#6	503	Virginia Wesleyan	20-2	def. #11 Randolph-Macon, 53-50; LOST at Hampden-Sydney, 71-80
#7	491	Middlebury	20-1	def. #3 Amherst, 69-61; def. Trinity (Conn.), 57-56
#8	432	UW-Stevens Point	20-3	def. UW-Eau Claire, 83-70; def. #10 UW-River Falls, 86-70
#9	409	St. Thomas	19-3	LOST at Carleton, 61-67; def. Gustavus Adolphus, 81-70
#10	391	UW-River Falls	19-4	LOST at #8 UW-Stevens Point, 70-86
#11	380	Randolph-Macon	20-4	LOST at #6 Virginia Wesleyan, 50-53; def. Roanoke, 85-52
#12	350	WPI	20-3	def. Coast Guard, 60-47; def. Babson, 69-55
#13	339	Wabash	17-5	LOST to Hiram, 58-70
#14	290	Western Connecticut	19-4	LOST to Rhode Island College, 75-86; LOST at Keene State, 78-82
#15	258	St. Mary's (Md.)	19-5	LOST at Salisbury, 58-61; def. T#36 Wesley, 83-71
#16	223	Eastern Mennonite	18-4	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 81-64; def. Emory and Henry, 82-62
#17	209	St. Norbert	17-5	LOST to Beloit, 52-57; def. Carroll, 60-46
#18	181	Marietta	21-2	def. Mount Union, 81-66; def. Heidelberg, 73-61
#19	178	Ferrum	21-3	LOST to Hampden-Sydney, 83-87; def. Shenandoah, 95-70; def. Christopher Newport, 95-83
#20	138	Chapman	19-3	def. Southwestern (AZ), 85-69
#21	129	Franklin and Marshall	19-4	def. Gettysburg, 68-46; def. Swarthmore, 67-57
#22	105	Ramapo	18-5	def. Rutgers-Newark, 70-62; LOST at New Jersey City, 69-81
#23	68	Illinois Wesleyan	16-6	def. Millikin, 78-53; LOST at Wheaton (Ill.), 76-78
#24	49	Centre	17-4	def. Sewanee, 70-35; def. Oglethorpe, 67-52
#25	44	Wittenberg	17-5	def. Ohio Wesleyan, 76-70; def. #4 Wooster, 76-72

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	41	Rochester	18-4	def. Chicago, 65-53; def. Washington U., 83-78
T#27	16	Concordia (Wis.)	20-3	def. Marian, 69-64; def. Lakeland, 79-75; def. Maranatha Baptist, 73-66
T#27	16	Emory	18-4	def. Washington U., 92-67; def. Chicago, 91-87
T#29	13	Becker	20-3	def. Elms, 81-74; def. Lesley, 86-70; def. Southern Vermont, 89-74
T#29	13	Manchester	17-6	def. Bluffton, 81-67; def. Franklin, 80-67
#31	12	Mary Hardin-Baylor	17-6	LOST at Hardin-Simmons, 59-78; LOST at McMurry, 62-65
#32	8	Penn State-Behrend	20-3	LOST at La Roche, 61-67; def. Pitt-Bradford, 82-71; def. Franciscan (Ohio), 75-46
#33	7	Hope	18-5	def. Olivet, 65-60; def. Adrian, 59-55
#34	6	Lewis and Clark	17-6	def. Pacific, 45-42; def. Pacific Lutheran, 78-67
#35	4	Oswego State	19-3	def. SUNY-Cobleskill, 63-62; def. Plattsburgh State, 79-76; def. Potsdam State, 53-47
T#36	1	Hanover	17-5	def. Franklin, 85-72; def. Earlham, 81-61
T#36	1	North Carolina Wesleyan	17-6	def. Greensboro, 73-70; def. Methodist, 93-84
T#36	1	Wesley	16-7	def. Marymount, 64-63; LOST at #15 St. Mary's (Md.), 71-83

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Bucket on February 13, 2011, 06:53:46 PM

Gotta think that Middlebury moves up to number three, beating the previous number 3 this weekend and with the season's lone loss being @ # 2 Williams. (A five-point battle, played without Middlebury's leading scorer and rebounder.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 7express on February 13, 2011, 07:54:20 PM

Thats a lot of losses for teams in the 9-19 range. If River Falls and Randolph-Macon hadn't lost to top 8 teams I'd say WPI could get a top 10 ranking.

West Conn should have a big drop off, probably down 11, 12, or 13 to either one of the last 2 in the poll, or one of the last 2 out of the poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 14, 2011, 08:31:29 PM

#7 Middlebury defeats Hamilton College tonight 69-56 to go to 21-1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 7express on February 14, 2011, 09:05:24 PM

WOW, West Conn only dropped 6 spots?? I'll take it, but even I admit they should've dropped further.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 14, 2011, 09:10:41 PM

VaWes crushed by EMU, 86-71. EMU jumped out early (19-3, 25-6) and were never seriously challenged the rest of the way.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 14, 2011, 10:36:26 PM

Wonder if there's ever been a team #1 in its Region but not ranked in the D3hoops.com Top 25.

We may find out Wednesday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 14, 2011, 10:45:58 PM

Quote from: sac on February 14, 2011, 10:36:26 PM
Wonder if there's ever been a team #1 in its Region but not ranked in the D3hoops.com Top 25.

We may find out Wednesday.

The Atlantic is not represented in the Top 25, and Rochester (East Region) is not in my Posters' Poll.

+1! Great observation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 14, 2011, 10:47:21 PM

Then I guess it could be two #1's not ranked.

...or how about #1 in your region with 4 teams from your region behind you ranked.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 14, 2011, 10:59:06 PM

Quote from: sac on February 14, 2011, 10:47:21 PM
Then I guess it could be two #1's not ranked.

...or how about #1 in your region with 4 teams from your region behind you ranked.

We have the problem in the South Region in football all of the time.

Now Wesley has been a legitimate non-ASC #1 seed, but before Wesley, all of those South Region teams from the more "northern" South Region conferences with great OWP/OOWP's would get the higher seeds, and the UMHB-HSU winner would go deeper into the playoffs.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 15, 2011, 02:06:09 AM

Quote from: sac on February 14, 2011, 10:47:21 PM
Then I guess it could be two #1's not ranked.

...or how about #1 in your region with 4 teams from your region behind you ranked.

La Roche isn't ranked either.

But then again, I doubt our voters give 1.4 credit for winning road games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 15, 2011, 05:33:02 AM

Actually Pat, I like to give them a 2.5 point bump for road games... just to make it really interesting!

Of course... that would be sad if I was doing all of that math just for my Top 25... I have enough factors and numbers to crunch! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 15, 2011, 10:00:51 AM

For those who don't check in on the NESCAC board, fyi, potential key injury for Middlebury, their 6'11 center Andrew Locke, who is the top defensive player in the conference, went down with a knee injury. No word yet on the severity but it didn't sound great. If he is out for the year it would be a huge blow for the Panthers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 15, 2011, 08:42:35 PM

Quote from: sac on February 14, 2011, 10:47:21 PM
Then I guess it could be two #1's not ranked.

sac.
There is presently three #1 regionally ranked teams that are not ranked.
Ramapo in the Atlantic
Oswego in the East
LaRoche in the Middle Atlantic

I believe they will maintain those ranking when the new rankings come out tomorrow

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 15, 2011, 08:47:45 PM

Quote from: magicman on February 15, 2011, 08:42:35 PM
Quote from: sac on February 14, 2011, 10:47:21 PM
Then I guess it could be two #1's not ranked.

sac.
There is presently three #1 regionally ranked teams that are not ranked.
Ramapo in the Atlantic
Oswego in the East
LaRoche in the Middle Atlantic

I believe they will maintain those ranking when the new rankings come out tomorrow

Then there is the possiblity of 4 if Hope overtakes Wooster in the Great Lakes............maybe, maybe not.

I just thought it was odd. Of the four, Hope has the highest rated schedule by massey by far.

Hope #49
Oswego #259
LaRoche #370
Ramapo #153

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 15, 2011, 09:05:30 PM

Some efficiency ratings for teams receiving votes in the last top 25 poll.

OFFENSE
1. Whitworth 126.5
2. Ithaca 122.1
3. Amherst 121.6
3. Williams 118.9
4. Wooster 118.2
5. Rochester 117.4
6. UWSP 116.1
7. Emory 114.8
8. Hope 112.7
8. St. Thomas 112.7
10. PSU-Behrend 112.0

DEFENSE
1. New Jersey City 81.5
2. Middlebury 81.7
3. Randolph-Macon 82.2
4. WPI 83.3
5. UWSP 85.6
6. Becker 87.7
7. Frank & Marsh 87.8
7. Williams 87.8
9. East. Menn. 88.0
10. Randolph 88.1
10. Centre 88.1

Combined rating~Off+(200-def)
1. Whitworth 234.48
2. Williams 231.09
3. UWSP 230.48
4. Amherst 229.09
5. Randolph-Macon 227.75
6. Middlebury 225.05
7. Wooster 224.88
8. Frank & Marsh 221.70
9. WPI 221.30
10. East. Menn. 220.18

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 15, 2011, 11:29:35 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 12, 2011, 06:53:14 PMI suspect there are only 3 1st place votes in play unless Wooster loses, then 4. Hard to see WW losing ground...

As it turns out 4 the votes split between Whitworth and Williams evenly. ;)

If you are up late..Whitworth playing right now.
http://www.ksbn.net/listen.pls
stats: http://www.whitman.edu/athletics/livestats/xlive.htm

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 16, 2011, 01:04:54 AM

Whitworth loses! Whitman holds Pirates scoreless last 4+ minutes and scores something like the last 15 points in the game?

:-[ :'(

Well at least it isn't March.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 16, 2011, 01:37:22 AM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 16, 2011, 01:04:54 AM
Whitworth loses! Whitman holds Pirates scoreless last 4+ minutes and scores something like the last 15 points in the game?

:-[ :'(

Well at least it isn't March.

Crazy... with like 13 minutes left, Whitworth was up like 18 so I turned it off... guess I missed an exciting ending!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on February 16, 2011, 07:57:27 AM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 16, 2011, 01:04:54 AM
Whitworth loses! Whitman holds Pirates scoreless last 4+ minutes and scores something like the last 15 points in the game?

:-[ :'(

Well at least it isn't March.

Digger Phelps would say that it's a good thing. He somehow believes that it's good to lose before the tournament because "the #1 team has a really low chance of winning the championship."

I can't believe he gets paid for that crap.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ziggy on February 16, 2011, 08:53:50 AM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 16, 2011, 07:57:27 AM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 16, 2011, 01:04:54 AM
Whitworth loses! Whitman holds Pirates scoreless last 4+ minutes and scores something like the last 15 points in the game?

:-[ :'(

Well at least it isn't March.

Digger Phelps would say that it's a good thing. He somehow believes that it's good to lose before the tournament because "the #1 team has a really low chance of winning the championship."

I can't believe he gets paid for that crap.

He just says whatever the highlighter tells him to say, it's not his fault.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Just Bill on February 16, 2011, 10:40:14 AM

Quote from: ziggy on February 16, 2011, 08:53:50 AM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 16, 2011, 07:57:27 AM

Digger Phelps would say that it's a good thing. He somehow believes that it's good to lose before the tournament because "the #1 team has a really low chance of winning the championship."

I can't believe he gets paid for that crap.

He just says whatever the highlighter tells him to say, it's not his fault.

"Good night, San Diego. Go **** yourself." (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_5-idvKTXydY/S5lPNQkokeI/AAAAAAAABWg/f5YbH0KyidA/s1600-h/22814-ron_burgundy.jpg)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 16, 2011, 10:44:57 AM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 16, 2011, 07:57:27 AM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 16, 2011, 01:04:54 AM
Whitworth loses! Whitman holds Pirates scoreless last 4+ minutes and scores something like the last 15 points in the game?

:-[ :'(

Well at least it isn't March.

Digger Phelps would say that it's a good thing. He somehow believes that it's good to lose before the tournament because "the #1 team has a really low chance of winning the championship."

I can't believe he gets paid for that crap.

...I think that depends on your definition of "low chance." I doubt that Digger has done a statistical analysis of the chances of the #1 team versus anybody else in the tournament (specifically the D-I tournament... because that's what he's talking about).

FWIW, Ken Pomeroy has done a post on his blog about the outcome of the preseason poll compared to the poll heading into the tournament. The AP Preseason poll has actually been better at "picking" the #1 team: LINK (http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/the_pre-season_ap_poll_is_great/)

In 21 years, nearly half the teams (10/21) slotted as the #1 in the preseason poll have made it to the championship, with 6 of them winning. The final regular season poll has 6/21, with 3 of them winning.

There wasn't any analysis of other positions in either poll... to see if a any one poll position had performed better than the #1 going into the tournament.

Not extraordinarily enlightening... previous results have absolutely nothing to do with future results in terms of a predictor... but interesting none the less.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 16, 2011, 11:43:18 AM

If I'm not mistaken the #1 overall seed has only won the D1 Championship once since 1996.....or something like that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on February 16, 2011, 02:10:36 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 16, 2011, 10:44:57 AM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 16, 2011, 07:57:27 AM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 16, 2011, 01:04:54 AM
Whitworth loses! Whitman holds Pirates scoreless last 4+ minutes and scores something like the last 15 points in the game?

:-[ :'(

Well at least it isn't March.

Digger Phelps would say that it's a good thing. He somehow believes that it's good to lose before the tournament because "the #1 team has a really low chance of winning the championship."

I can't believe he gets paid for that crap.

...I think that depends on your definition of "low chance." I doubt that Digger has done a statistical analysis of the chances of the #1 team versus anybody else in the tournament (specifically the D-I tournament... because that's what he's talking about).

FWIW, Ken Pomeroy has done a post on his blog about the outcome of the preseason poll compared to the poll heading into the tournament. The AP Preseason poll has actually been better at "picking" the #1 team: LINK (http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/the_pre-season_ap_poll_is_great/)

In 21 years, nearly half the teams (10/21) slotted as the #1 in the preseason poll have made it to the championship, with 6 of them winning. The final regular season poll has 6/21, with 3 of them winning.

There wasn't any analysis of other positions in either poll... to see if a any one poll position had performed better than the #1 going into the tournament.

Not extraordinarily enlightening... previous results have absolutely nothing to do with future results in terms of a predictor... but interesting none the less.

Right. I remember that study from ealier in the year. I love stuff like that.

I think the point Digger was trying to make was that the #1 team [in the poll] has the biggest target on their back. I'm not sure I buy the idea that teams are "gunning for" #1 in the tournament. I think everyone's looking for blood.

My initial reaction to his insistance that the #1 team has a low chance of winning was "Everyone's got a low chance of winning".

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: LustyLarryintheToilet on February 16, 2011, 03:07:18 PM

The D1 mens basketball tournament is the biggest crapshoot in sports. 68 teams, all neutral or semi-neutral matchups in terms of home court, no re-seeding, and no best of 3,5, or 7 series.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 16, 2011, 03:24:33 PM

Week 3 Regional Rankings are out: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2011/02/16/ncaa-2011-regional-rankings-week-3/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on February 16, 2011, 03:37:03 PM

Quote from: LustyLarryintheToilet on February 16, 2011, 03:07:18 PM
The D1 mens basketball tournament is the biggest crapshoot in sports. 68 teams, all neutral or semi-neutral matchups in terms of home court, no re-seeding, and no best of 3,5, or 7 series.

And that's why it's so popular

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ziggy on February 16, 2011, 03:43:46 PM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on February 16, 2011, 03:37:03 PM
Quote from: LustyLarryintheToilet on February 16, 2011, 03:07:18 PM
The D1 mens basketball tournament is the biggest crapshoot in sports. 68 teams, all neutral or semi-neutral matchups in terms of home court, no re-seeding, and no best of 3,5, or 7 series.

And that's why it's so popular

Why wait for the final round? Division III generally has a de facto championship game much earlier than that!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 16, 2011, 03:45:03 PM

The FA Cup in England is a much bigger crapshoot in my opinion. They literally draw names out of hat.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 16, 2011, 04:13:08 PM

Quote from: magicman on February 15, 2011, 08:42:35 PM
Quote from: sac on February 14, 2011, 10:47:21 PM
Then I guess it could be two #1's not ranked.

sac.
There is presently three #1 regionally ranked teams that are not ranked.
Ramapo in the Atlantic
Oswego in the East
LaRoche in the Middle Atlantic

I believe they will maintain those ranking when the new rankings come out tomorrow

Right you are! +1! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 16, 2011, 05:19:57 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 16, 2011, 02:10:36 PM
My initial reaction to his insistance that the #1 team has a low chance of winning was "Everyone's got a low chance of winning".

Exactly... I don't know how telling it would really be to do any sort of an analysis on other teams... other than to just step back and say "Huh, that's interesting," I don't think it would really accomplish much else!

The only "advantage" to being a #1 seed is that you get to play a team that is deemed to be the least skilled (deemed as such by the selection committee, as determined by the season's results). After round 1, you most likely are going to be playing at at-large team who made it to the tournament on their own merits... which means that they most certainly have beaten other good teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 17, 2011, 12:20:26 AM

Carnage in the Top 25 tonight

#10 WPI loses to Springfield 72-60.

#12 UW-River Falls loses to UW-La Crosse 93-78

#13 Marietta falls to Capital 91-82

#17 Wittenberg loses to #18 Wabash 70-59

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 17, 2011, 07:27:03 AM

How They Fared--Midweek Report

(edit: Added SOS numbers from the most recent NCAA reports. This was done manually by the poster gadk on the Women's Top 25 board; I "taught" my program to pull the information out of the published docs so that I could automate the process.)
(7:27pm -- corrected IWU's SOS.)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	SOS	Results
#1	621	Whitworth	23-1	0.487	LOST at Whitman, 79-82; 02/19 at Pacific
#2	602	Williams	23-1	0.579	02/19 vs. Bowdoin
#3	560	Augustana	22-1	0.481	02/19 at North Central (Ill.)
#4	548	Middlebury	21-1	0.573	def. Hamilton, 69-56; 02/17 vs. Green Mountain; 02/19 vs. Connecticut College
#5	498	Wooster	22-2	0.529	def. Kenyon, 73-58; 02/19 vs. Ohio Wesleyan
#6	497	UW-Stevens Point	21-3	0.555	def. UW-Platteville, 82-54; 02/19 at UW-La Crosse
#7	474	Virginia Wesleyan	21-3	0.515	LOST at #14 Eastern Mennonite, 71-86; def. Lynchburg, 60-52; 02/19 at Emory and Henry
#8	443	Amherst	21-2	0.463	02/19 vs. Bates
#9	405	Randolph-Macon	20-4	0.546	02/19 vs. Hampden-Sydney
#10	365	WPI	20-4	0.532	LOST at Springfield, 60-72; 02/19 vs. Clark
#11	362	St. Thomas	21-3	0.548	def. Concordia-Moorhead, 64-51; def. Hamline, 82-60; 02/19 at St. John's
#12	347	UW-River Falls	19-5	0.546	LOST at UW-La Crosse, 78-93; 02/19 at UW-Platteville
#13	312	Marietta	21-3	0.435	LOST at Capital, 82-91; 02/19 at John Carroll
#14	308	Eastern Mennonite	20-4	0.471	def. #7 Virginia Wesleyan, 86-71; def. Washington and Lee, 94-82; 02/19 at Guilford
#15	218	Franklin and Marshall	20-4	0.487	def. Johns Hopkins, 72-60; 02/19 vs. Dickinson
#16	197	Chapman	20-3	0.523	def. West Coast Baptist, 72-39; 02/18 at West Coast Baptist
#17	157	Wittenberg	17-6	0.494	LOST at #18 Wabash, 59-70; 02/19 at Hiram
#18	153	Wabash	18-5	0.532	def. #17 Wittenberg, 70-59; 02/19 vs. Oberlin
#19	148	St. Mary's (Md.)	19-5	0.482	02/19 at Frostburg State
#20	142	Western Connecticut	20-4	0.539	def. Eastern Connecticut, 75-71; 02/19 vs. Mass-Boston
#21	133	Ferrum	21-3	0.432	02/19 at T#38 North Carolina Wesleyan
#22	131	Rochester	18-4	0.487	02/18 at Carnegie Mellon; 02/20 at Case Western Reserve
#23	113	Centre	17-4	0.454	02/18 at Rhodes; 02/20 at Birmingham-Southern
#24	86	St. Norbert	17-5	0.474	02/19 vs. Lawrence
#25	42	Concordia (Wis.)	21-3	0.492	def. Edgewood, 71-66

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	SOS	Results
#26	40	Becker	21-3	0.543	def. Wheelock, 84-70; 02/19 vs. Mitchell
#27	35	Emory	18-4	0.441	02/18 at Case Western Reserve; 02/20 at Carnegie Mellon
#28	31	Hope	18-6	0.525	LOST to Albion, 76-78; 02/19 at Kalamazoo
#29	28	Ramapo	20-5	0.512	def. William Paterson, 62-49; def. William Paterson, 64-59
#30	21	Manchester	18-6	0.513	def. Anderson, 81-71; 02/19 vs. Transylvania
#31	20	Oswego State	20-3	0.527	def. New Paltz State, 68-57; 02/18 vs. Brockport State; 02/19 vs. Geneseo State
#32	19	Lewis and Clark	17-6	0.556	02/18 vs. Puget Sound; 02/19 at Willamette
#33	17	Penn State-Behrend	21-3	0.439	def. Allegheny, 83-73; 02/19 at Mount Aloysius
#34	14	Illinois Wesleyan	16-7	0.519	LOST at North Central (Ill.), 58-64; 02/19 vs. North Park
#35	11	La Roche	22-2	0.488	def. Franciscan (Ohio), 75-60; 02/19 vs. Medaille
#36	10	Hanover	18-5	0.511	def. Rose-Hulman, 69-66; 02/19 at Anderson
#37	9	Texas-Dallas	18-4	0.537	def. Mississippi College, 56-54; 02/17 vs. Texas-Tyler; 02/19 vs. LeTourneau
T#38	4	New Jersey City	16-9	0.513	def. Montclair State, 82-62; LOST at Montclair State, 53-62; 02/19 vs. Rowan
T#38	4	North Carolina Wesleyan	17-6	0.527	02/17 vs. Averett; 02/19 vs. #21 Ferrum
#40	2	Carleton	17-7	0.563	def. Bethel, 72-60; def. Macalester, 72-68; 02/19 vs. St. Olaf
#41	1	Salem State	17-6	0.453	def. Bridgewater State, 88-87; 02/17 vs. Lesley; 02/19 vs. Worcester State

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 17, 2011, 10:38:08 AM

Thanks for the update Darryl. What a morass! There is nothing beyond the Top 11-14 that can solidly claim Top 25 status. I believe that the fans of the next 30 teams that have received votes perilously look at the remaining season and conference tournaments and know how tough it will be.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 17, 2011, 11:32:39 AM

Great job Darryl!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 20, 2011, 02:17:30 AM

Whitworth cleans up the mess from loss Tuesday at Whitman and wins at Pacific 84-55. This is the same team that beat Whitman last night (Friday). Lewis and Clark lose finale at home against Willamette so the NWC tournament seeds are set. #1 Whitworth, #2 Whitman, #3 Lewis and Clark #4 Pacific Lutheran.

With Augustana loss, now 3 teams with 1 loss. I can see Williams and Whitworth switching top spots. Middlebury was 7th 2 weeks ago so I think they only get the 3rd but I am a total homer.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 20, 2011, 07:16:12 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

SOS scores taken from the most recent NCAA report (dated 2/16). For the stat geeks out there, here is information about the distribution of the SOS scores in this list (not ALL SOS scores):

Mean = 0.508, SD = 0.0388
min = 0.432, Q₁ = 0.4815, Med = 0.513, Q₃ = 0.5380, max = 0.579

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	SOS	Results
#1	621	Whitworth	24-1	0.487	LOST at Whitman, 79-82; def. Pacific, 84-45
#2	602	Williams	24-1	0.579	def. Bowdoin, 82-62
#3	560	Augustana	22-2	0.481	LOST at North Central (Ill.), 46-50
#4	548	Middlebury	23-1	0.573	def. Hamilton, 69-56; def. Green Mountain, 74-30; def. Connecticut College, 61-41
#5	498	Wooster	23-2	0.529	def. Kenyon, 73-58; def. Ohio Wesleyan, 81-72
#6	497	UW-Stevens Point	22-3	0.555	def. UW-Platteville, 82-54; def. UW-La Crosse, 79-71
#7	474	Virginia Wesleyan	22-3	0.515	LOST at #14 Eastern Mennonite, 71-86; def. Lynchburg, 60-52; def. Emory and Henry, 82-72
#8	443	Amherst	22-2	0.463	def. Bates, 77-61
#9	405	Randolph-Macon	21-4	0.546	def. Hampden-Sydney, 61-60
#10	365	WPI	21-4	0.532	LOST at Springfield, 60-72; def. Clark, 69-52
#11	362	St. Thomas	22-3	0.548	def. Concordia-Moorhead, 64-51; def. Hamline, 82-60; def. St. John's, 72-61
#12	347	UW-River Falls	19-6	0.546	LOST at UW-La Crosse, 78-93; LOST at UW-Platteville, 58-62
#13	312	Marietta	22-3	0.435	LOST at Capital, 82-91; def. John Carroll, 82-81
#14	308	Eastern Mennonite	21-4	0.471	def. #7 Virginia Wesleyan, 86-71; def. Washington and Lee, 94-82; def. Guilford, 84-82
#15	218	Franklin and Marshall	20-5	0.487	def. Johns Hopkins, 72-60; LOST to Dickinson, 66-77
#16	197	Chapman	21-3	0.523	def. West Coast Baptist, 72-39; def. West Coast Baptist, 75-39
#17	157	Wittenberg	17-7	0.494	LOST at #18 Wabash, 59-70; LOST at Hiram, 65-87
#18	153	Wabash	19-5	0.532	def. #17 Wittenberg, 70-59; def. Oberlin, 72-42
#19	148	St. Mary's (Md.)	20-5	0.482	def. Frostburg State, 75-71
#20	142	Western Connecticut	21-4	0.539	def. Eastern Connecticut, 75-71; def. Mass-Boston, 97-86
#21	133	Ferrum	21-4	0.432	LOST at T#38 North Carolina Wesleyan, 71-74
#22	131	Rochester	20-4	0.487	def. Carnegie Mellon, 63-50; def. Case Western Reserve, 95-85
#23	113	Centre	18-5	0.454	def. Rhodes, 59-51; LOST at Birmingham-Southern, 63-67
#24	86	St. Norbert	18-5	0.474	def. Lawrence, 66-55
#25	42	Concordia (Wis.)	22-3	0.492	def. Edgewood, 71-66; def. Benedictine, 85-83

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	SOS	Results
#26	40	Becker	22-3	0.543	def. Wheelock, 84-70; def. Mitchell, 85-50
#27	35	Emory	19-5	0.441	def. Case Western Reserve, 83-64; LOST at Carnegie Mellon, 70-72
#28	31	Hope	19-6	0.525	LOST to Albion, 76-78; def. Kalamazoo, 80-73
#29	28	Ramapo	20-5	0.512	def. William Paterson, 62-49; def. William Paterson, 64-59
#30	21	Manchester	19-6	0.513	def. Anderson, 81-71; def. Transylvania, 79-62
#31	20	Oswego State	22-3	0.527	def. New Paltz State, 68-57; def. Brockport State, 69-61; def. Geneseo State, 54-50
#32	19	Lewis and Clark	18-7	0.556	def. Puget Sound, 89-85; LOST at Willamette, 73-76
#33	17	Penn State-Behrend	22-3	0.439	def. Allegheny, 83-73; def. Mount Aloysius, 91-66
#34	14	Illinois Wesleyan	17-7	0.519	LOST at North Central (Ill.), 58-64; def. North Park, 73-57
#35	11	La Roche	23-2	0.488	def. Franciscan (Ohio), 75-60; def. Medaille, 68-64
#36	10	Hanover	18-6	0.511	def. Rose-Hulman, 69-66; LOST at Anderson, 63-72
#37	9	Texas-Dallas	20-4	0.537	def. Mississippi College, 56-54; def. Texas-Tyler, 76-74; def. LeTourneau, 83-47
T#38	4	New Jersey City	17-9	0.513	def. Montclair State, 82-62; LOST at Montclair State, 53-62; def. Rowan, 75-72
T#38	4	North Carolina Wesleyan	19-6	0.527	def. Averett, 70-66; def. #21 Ferrum, 74-71
#40	2	Carleton	18-7	0.563	def. Bethel, 72-60; def. Macalester, 72-68; def. St. Olaf, 84-73
#41	1	Salem State	19-6	0.453	def. Bridgewater State, 88-87; def. Lesley, 100-60; def. Worcester State, 91-68

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 23, 2011, 03:51:02 PM

Final Regional Rankings are out before Selection Sunday: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/category/ncaa-stuff/regional-rankings/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 24, 2011, 09:29:22 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

No SOS numbers this time (they're on my other computer). A few team schedules were not updated with conference tournament games, so they show up as blank ... and I did not have time to track those down this morning.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	617	Williams	24-1	02/26 vs. Trinity (Conn.)
#2	576	Whitworth	24-1	02/24 vs. Pacific Lutheran
#3	571	Middlebury	23-1	02/26 vs. #7 Amherst
#4	546	UW-Stevens Point	22-3	02/24 vs. UW-Superior
#5	540	Wooster	24-2	def. Allegheny, 62-57; 02/25 vs. Ohio Wesleyan
#6	490	Augustana	22-3	LOST at Illinois Wesleyan, 68-70; 02/25 vs. Wheaton (Ill.)
#7	475	Amherst	22-2	02/26 at #3 Middlebury
#8	426	Randolph-Macon	21-4	02/25 vs. Roanoke
#9	413	St. Thomas	22-3
#10	403	Virginia Wesleyan	22-3	02/25 vs. Washington and Lee
#11	381	Eastern Mennonite	21-4	02/25 vs. Hampden-Sydney
#12	303	WPI	21-4	02/26 vs. Coast Guard
#13	285	Marietta	23-3	def. Wilmington, 84-73; 02/24 vs. Heidelberg
#14	240	Rochester	20-4	02/26 at #38 Emory
#15	226	Chapman	22-3	def. La Sierra, 61-56; 02/25 vs. University of Dallas; 02/26 at TBA
#16	225	Wabash	20-5	def. Kenyon, 72-61; 02/25 at #33 Wittenberg
#17	224	Western Connecticut	21-4	02/25 vs. Eastern Connecticut
#18	214	St. Mary's (Md.)	20-5	02/24 vs. Mary Washington; 02/26 at CAC Championship
#19	134	Franklin and Marshall	20-5	02/26 vs. Haverford
#20	122	St. Norbert	18-5	02/25 vs. Ripon
#21	115	Concordia (Wis.)	23-3	def. Wisconsin Lutheran, 90-58; 02/25 vs. Edgewood
#22	96	UW-River Falls	19-6	02/24 vs. UW-Platteville
#23	85	Becker	22-3	02/25 vs. Newbury
#24	63	Oswego State	23-3	def. Potsdam State, 64-50; 02/25 vs. Brockport State
#25	59	Ramapo	20-6	LOST to Montclair State, 64-67

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	55	Ferrum	22-4	def. Averett, 70-47; 02/25 vs. Christopher Newport
#27	51	Texas-Dallas	20-4	02/25 vs. Concordia (Texas)
#28	43	Manchester	19-6	02/26 vs. TBA
#29	34	Penn State-Behrend	22-3	02/25 vs. Medaille
#30	23	Centre	18-5	02/25 vs. Hendrix
#31	19	La Roche	23-2	02/25 vs. Hilbert
#32	17	Hope	20-6	def. Alma, 110-77; 02/25 vs. Adrian
#33	16	Wittenberg	18-7	def. Denison, 77-63; 02/25 vs. #16 Wabash
T#34	8	Carleton	18-7
T#34	8	Ithaca	20-5	02/25 vs. St. John Fisher
#36	7	North Carolina Wesleyan	19-6	02/25 vs. Greensboro
#37	5	North Central (Ill.)	15-10	02/25 vs. Illinois Wesleyan
#38	4	Emory	19-5	02/26 vs. #14 Rochester
#39	3	New Jersey City	18-9	def. Kean, 75-61; 02/25 vs. Montclair State
#40	2	UW-Whitewater	17-9	LOST to UW-Superior, 72-78
#41	1	Salem State	19-6	02/24 vs. Westfield State

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 24, 2011, 10:08:39 AM

+1! Darryl!

Thanks for providing this service! It helps tremendously!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 24, 2011, 12:40:42 PM

Great job, Darryl!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 24, 2011, 09:48:49 PM

Darryl - thanks for all your excellent work on the Top 25 updates this season! k+

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 24, 2011, 09:50:35 PM

#4 Stevens Point demolishes Superior 84-52

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 25, 2011, 09:42:00 PM

#2 Whitworth and Whitman both win Thursday night. This sets up a third game with the only team Whitworth lost to this season. Game at 7pm Saturday at Whitworth. Winner gets the Pool A, loser gets thrown in Pool C pool.

Shame Whitman lost last Friday at Pacific. I think without that loss they could have been a serious contender for Pool C even if they lose Sat. Whitworth is a lock for tournament, but a loss Saturday would be a major blow and would probably force yet another Whitman game in round 1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 25, 2011, 10:41:16 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 25, 2011, 09:42:00 PM
#2 Whitworth and Whitman both win Thursday night. This sets up a third game with the only team Whitworth lost to this season. Game at 7pm Saturday at Whitworth. Winner gets the Pool A, loser gets thrown in Pool C pool.

Shame Whitman lost last Friday at Pacific. I think without that loss they could have been a serious contender for Pool C even if they lose Sat. Whitworth is a lock for tournament, but a loss Saturday would be a major blow and would probably force yet another Whitman game in round 1.

I predict either a 3-team or a 4-team bracket of teams from the West Coast.

Not to worry...

The mischief in the East Region (SUNY Oswego and St John Fisher) probably had more effect on Whitman tonight than the Pacific loss.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 27, 2011, 01:51:38 PM

Is there a poll this weekend?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2011, 02:10:38 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 27, 2011, 01:51:38 PM
Is there a poll this weekend?

Both d3hoops.com and the Posters' Poll come out after conference tourneys, then not again 'til after the FF.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 27, 2011, 02:20:01 PM

Middlebury certainly hopes there is after taking down #1 Williams. Now the question for the voters will be: Does Middlebury leap over Whitworth to claim the top spot. Middlebury avenged their only defeat of the season, a 69-64 loss to Williams, in Williamstown, back on January 29th. The Panthers were without the services of leading scorer and rebounder Ryan Sharry in that game. With Sharry today, who had a double-double of 14 points and 12 boards, Middlebury held Williams to 54 points, their lowest output of the season, and 27 points below their season average of 81.8 ppg. And they did it at Williamstown. I know I'll have them #1 in the Posters' Poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 27, 2011, 02:25:26 PM

I think it should go Midd-Williams-Whitworth, but we'll have to see. At full strength, I believe Midd and Williams are very, very even teams (I note that Williams was without a key player today, Nate Robertson, who is second on the team in minutes and assists and is one of two primary ball-handlers, as well as their top perimeter defender). Midd really played tremendously this weekend and deserves the top spot after beating two top-ten teams, including number one, back-to-back on the road.

I really hope Midd and Williams are placed in different quarters of the bracket, the way the NCAA did with Amherst and Williams back in 2004 (with both ultimately making the Final Four).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 27, 2011, 02:26:14 PM

Whitworth did some avenging last night as well. Whitworth should reclaim the top spot by virtue of having wins over stronger non conference opponents. I think we can almost all agree who the top 4 teams are. BTW Point isn't a bad pick either.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 27, 2011, 02:32:35 PM

That's some sweet conference punch you drink NESCAC. Williams will likely fall to 4 but I agree it would be great to get those 2 teams away from each other. One will be playing Amherst early, that much is pretty certain.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 27, 2011, 04:21:34 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on February 27, 2011, 02:25:26 PM
I think it should go Midd-Williams-Whitworth, but we'll have to see. At full strength, I believe Midd and Williams are very, very even teams (I note that Williams was without a key player today, Nate Robertson, who is second on the team in minutes and assists and is one of two primary ball-handlers, as well as their top perimeter defender). Midd really played tremendously this weekend and deserves the top spot after beating two top-ten teams, including number one, back-to-back on the road.

I really hope Midd and Williams are placed in different quarters of the bracket, the way the NCAA did with Amherst and Williams back in 2004 (with both ultimately making the Final Four).

I wonder if Stevens Point will pick up some more #1 votes too... They're the defending national champ, of course, and have won 12 straight and 19/20.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 27, 2011, 04:31:03 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 27, 2011, 04:21:34 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on February 27, 2011, 02:25:26 PM
I think it should go Midd-Williams-Whitworth, but we'll have to see. At full strength, I believe Midd and Williams are very, very even teams (I note that Williams was without a key player today, Nate Robertson, who is second on the team in minutes and assists and is one of two primary ball-handlers, as well as their top perimeter defender). Midd really played tremendously this weekend and deserves the top spot after beating two top-ten teams, including number one, back-to-back on the road.

I really hope Midd and Williams are placed in different quarters of the bracket, the way the NCAA did with Amherst and Williams back in 2004 (with both ultimately making the Final Four).

I wonder if Stevens Point will pick up some more #1 votes too... They're the defending national champ, of course, and have won 12 straight and 19/20.

I think that Pat Coleman will sell you a banner ad to plug your team for #1 amongst the voters. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 27, 2011, 04:40:24 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 27, 2011, 04:31:03 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on February 27, 2011, 04:21:34 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on February 27, 2011, 02:25:26 PM
I think it should go Midd-Williams-Whitworth, but we'll have to see. At full strength, I believe Midd and Williams are very, very even teams (I note that Williams was without a key player today, Nate Robertson, who is second on the team in minutes and assists and is one of two primary ball-handlers, as well as their top perimeter defender). Midd really played tremendously this weekend and deserves the top spot after beating two top-ten teams, including number one, back-to-back on the road.

I really hope Midd and Williams are placed in different quarters of the bracket, the way the NCAA did with Amherst and Williams back in 2004 (with both ultimately making the Final Four).

I wonder if Stevens Point will pick up some more #1 votes too... They're the defending national champ, of course, and have won 12 straight and 19/20.
I think that Pat Coleman will sell you a banner ad to plug your team for #1 amongst the voters. ;)

Tempting... but I'd rather have the #1 nod in about 3 weeks or so... ;D

And I didn't necessarily say that I thought they should be number one (...necessarily...), just wondered if they would get more votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 27, 2011, 05:25:26 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 27, 2011, 04:40:24 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 27, 2011, 04:31:03 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on February 27, 2011, 04:21:34 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on February 27, 2011, 02:25:26 PM
I think it should go Midd-Williams-Whitworth, but we'll have to see. At full strength, I believe Midd and Williams are very, very even teams (I note that Williams was without a key player today, Nate Robertson, who is second on the team in minutes and assists and is one of two primary ball-handlers, as well as their top perimeter defender). Midd really played tremendously this weekend and deserves the top spot after beating two top-ten teams, including number one, back-to-back on the road.

I really hope Midd and Williams are placed in different quarters of the bracket, the way the NCAA did with Amherst and Williams back in 2004 (with both ultimately making the Final Four).

I wonder if Stevens Point will pick up some more #1 votes too... They're the defending national champ, of course, and have won 12 straight and 19/20.
I think that Pat Coleman will sell you a banner ad to plug your team for #1 amongst the voters. ;)

Tempting... but I'd rather have the #1 nod in about 3 weeks or so... ;D

And I didn't necessarily say that I thought they should be number one (...necessarily...), just wondered if they would get more votes.

Just looking for more revenue for the website.

I am sure that Pat will take any thing that he can get. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 27, 2011, 05:38:44 PM

Whitworth: 0 wins over top 25 teams, one loss vs. non-top 25
Williams: 2-2, including one loss, on the road, in OT, without its best player, 0 losses to teams outside the top 25
Middlebury: 3-1, 0 losses to teams outside the top 25

I think Midd is a clear number one, but I also don't think Williams should be seeded below Whitworth (not that it matters since they will be on opposite halves of the bracket). In addition to those four brutal rivalry games, Williams beat another NCAA team (Elms), a solid Bowdoin squad twice, a tough Trinity team twice, and solid Salem State and RPI teams, both of whom made their conference finals. If you look at Williams' top 10 toughest games vs. Whitworth's, it's not even close.

MIdd's non-conference schedule was pretty weak, but what they did over the last weekend was VERY impressive, and going 3-1 vs. Amherst and Williams, with three of those four away from home, is no mean feat.

I really can't imagine that Midd or Williams would have had much trouble with anyone on Whitworth's schedule, including the team Whitworth lost to.

Stevens Point, that is a different story. They have been fairly dominant in the best conference in D-3, and are, after all, the defending champs. Going into the tourney, I'd say they are the odds-on favorite to win the title, especially if Tillema can return at some point. I could see an argument for putting them number one before I'd put Whitworth, who hasn't beaten a single team even receiving VOTES in the last top 25 poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 27, 2011, 07:21:29 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

The final report, in case you missed a score this weekend ...

The distribution of the SOS scores in this list (not ALL SOS scores):

Mean = 0.510, SD = 0.0337
min = 0.448, Q₁ = 0.4825, Med = 0.506, Q₃ = 0.5370, max = 0.583

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	SOS	Results
#1	617	Williams	25-2	0.583	def. Trinity (Conn.), 79-69; LOST to #3 Middlebury, 54-63
#2	576	Whitworth	26-1	0.505	def. Pacific Lutheran, 74-63; def. Whitman, 74-50
#3	571	Middlebury	25-1	0.539	def. #7 Amherst, 67-61; def. #1 Williams, 63-54
#4	546	UW-Stevens Point	24-3	0.554	def. UW-Superior, 84-52; def. #22 UW-River Falls, 79-56
#5	540	Wooster	26-2	0.507	def. Allegheny, 62-57; def. Ohio Wesleyan, 70-62; def. #33 Wittenberg, 82-68
#6	490	Augustana	24-3	0.499	LOST at Illinois Wesleyan, 68-70; def. Wheaton (Ill.), 73-58; def. Illinois Wesleyan, 76-52
#7	475	Amherst	22-3	0.453	LOST at #3 Middlebury, 61-67
#8	426	Randolph-Macon	24-4	0.543	def. Roanoke, 63-56; def. #11 Eastern Mennonite, 90-79; def. Randolph, 68-43
#9	413	St. Thomas	24-3	0.538	def. Hamline, 78-70; def. Gustavus Adolphus, 83-77
#10	403	Virginia Wesleyan	23-4	0.506	def. Washington and Lee, 98-78; LOST to Randolph, 76-80
#11	381	Eastern Mennonite	22-5	0.483	def. Hampden-Sydney, 76-75; LOST at #8 Randolph-Macon, 79-90
#12	303	WPI	22-5	0.535	def. Coast Guard, 62-51; LOST to MIT, 52-63
#13	285	Marietta	25-3	0.474	def. Wilmington, 84-73; def. Heidelberg, 70-55; def. John Carroll, 88-85
#14	240	Rochester	20-5	0.490	LOST at #38 Emory, 72-83
#15	226	Chapman	24-3	0.532	def. La Sierra, 61-56; def. University of Dallas, 73-43; def. UC Santa Cruz, 91-77
#16	225	Wabash	20-6	0.505	def. Kenyon, 72-61; LOST at #33 Wittenberg, 63-65
#17	224	Western Connecticut	21-5	0.531	LOST to Eastern Connecticut, 70-94
#18	214	St. Mary's (Md.)	22-5	0.488	def. Mary Washington, 79-57; def. Wesley, 97-65
#19	134	Franklin and Marshall	22-5	0.473	def. Haverford, 71-62; def. Dickinson, 65-55
#20	122	St. Norbert	20-5	0.470	def. Ripon, 75-52; def. Grinnell, 89-67
#21	115	Concordia (Wis.)	23-4	0.524	def. Wisconsin Lutheran, 90-58; LOST to Edgewood, 89-95
#22	96	UW-River Falls	20-7	0.575	def. UW-Platteville, 69-60; LOST at #4 UW-Stevens Point, 56-79
#23	85	Becker	23-4	0.518	def. Newbury, 84-75; LOST to Elms, 65-79
#24	63	Oswego State	23-4	0.502	def. Potsdam State, 64-50; LOST to Brockport State, 70-74
#25	59	Ramapo	20-6	0.513	LOST to Montclair State, 64-67

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	SOS	Results
#26	55	Ferrum	23-5	0.466	def. Averett, 70-47; def. Christopher Newport, 87-81; LOST at #36 North Carolina Wesleyan, 70-74
#27	51	Texas-Dallas	21-5	0.502	def. Concordia (Texas), 85-70; LOST to Mary Hardin-Baylor, 69-77
#28	43	Manchester	21-6	0.502	def. Transylvania, 68-65; def. Hanover, 79-69
#29	34	Penn State-Behrend	23-4	0.449	def. Medaille, 58-51; LOST at #31 La Roche, 53-55
#30	23	Centre	21-5	0.482	def. Hendrix, 54-46; def. Oglethorpe, 70-57; def. DePauw, 75-63
#31	19	La Roche	25-2	0.477	def. Hilbert, 86-69; def. #29 Penn State-Behrend, 55-53
#32	17	Hope	22-6	0.522	def. Alma, 110-77; def. Adrian, 63-45; def. Calvin, 72-67
#33	16	Wittenberg	19-8	0.536	def. Denison, 77-63; def. #16 Wabash, 65-63; LOST at #5 Wooster, 68-82
T#34	8	Carleton	18-8	0.542	LOST to Gustavus Adolphus, 64-70
T#34	8	Ithaca	20-6	0.559	LOST to St. John Fisher, 75-88
#36	7	North Carolina Wesleyan	21-6	0.503	def. Greensboro, 86-69; def. #26 Ferrum, 74-70
#37	5	North Central (Ill.)	15-11	0.552	LOST to Illinois Wesleyan, 57-69
#38	4	Emory	20-5	0.462	def. #14 Rochester, 83-72
#39	3	New Jersey City	19-9	0.519	def. Kean, 75-61; def. Montclair State, 72-67
#40	2	UW-Whitewater	17-9	0.546	LOST to UW-Superior, 72-78
#41	1	Salem State	20-7	0.448	def. Westfield State, 81-68; LOST to Bridgewater State, 73-91

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 27, 2011, 10:11:54 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on February 27, 2011, 05:38:44 PM
Whitworth: 0 wins over top 25 teams, one loss vs. non-top 25
Williams: 2-2, including one loss, on the road, in OT, without its best player, 0 losses to teams outside the top 25
Middlebury: 3-1, 0 losses to teams outside the top 25

I think Midd is a clear number one, but I also don't think Williams should be seeded below Whitworth (not that it matters since they will be on opposite halves of the bracket). In addition to those four brutal rivalry games, Williams beat another NCAA team (Elms), a solid Bowdoin squad twice, a tough Trinity team twice, and solid Salem State and RPI teams, both of whom made their conference finals. If you look at Williams' top 10 toughest games vs. Whitworth's, it's not even close.

MIdd's non-conference schedule was pretty weak, but what they did over the last weekend was VERY impressive, and going 3-1 vs. Amherst and Williams, with three of those four away from home, is no mean feat.

I really can't imagine that Midd or Williams would have had much trouble with anyone on Whitworth's schedule, including the team Whitworth lost to.

Stevens Point, that is a different story. They have been fairly dominant in the best conference in D-3, and are, after all, the defending champs. Going into the tourney, I'd say they are the odds-on favorite to win the title, especially if Tillema can return at some point. I could see an argument for putting them number one before I'd put Whitworth, who hasn't beaten a single team even receiving VOTES in the last top 25 poll.

Not changing my vote :)
I have seen Middlebury and Williams play in video and Whitworth in person... I think Whitworth is a better team. Too bad they didn't get a chance to play Stevens Point in Las Vegas.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2011, 10:16:43 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 27, 2011, 10:11:54 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on February 27, 2011, 05:38:44 PM
Whitworth: 0 wins over top 25 teams, one loss vs. non-top 25
Williams: 2-2, including one loss, on the road, in OT, without its best player, 0 losses to teams outside the top 25
Middlebury: 3-1, 0 losses to teams outside the top 25

I think Midd is a clear number one, but I also don't think Williams should be seeded below Whitworth (not that it matters since they will be on opposite halves of the bracket). In addition to those four brutal rivalry games, Williams beat another NCAA team (Elms), a solid Bowdoin squad twice, a tough Trinity team twice, and solid Salem State and RPI teams, both of whom made their conference finals. If you look at Williams' top 10 toughest games vs. Whitworth's, it's not even close.

MIdd's non-conference schedule was pretty weak, but what they did over the last weekend was VERY impressive, and going 3-1 vs. Amherst and Williams, with three of those four away from home, is no mean feat.

I really can't imagine that Midd or Williams would have had much trouble with anyone on Whitworth's schedule, including the team Whitworth lost to.

Stevens Point, that is a different story. They have been fairly dominant in the best conference in D-3, and are, after all, the defending champs. Going into the tourney, I'd say they are the odds-on favorite to win the title, especially if Tillema can return at some point. I could see an argument for putting them number one before I'd put Whitworth, who hasn't beaten a single team even receiving VOTES in the last top 25 poll.
Not changing my vote :)
I have seen Middlebury and Williams play in video and Whitworth in person... I think Whitworth is a better team. Too bad they didn't get a chance to play Stevens Point in Las Vegas.

I predict they'll get that opportunity in about two weeks. ;) (And the way UWSP is currently playing, they may not enjoy the opportunity as much as they might have in Vegas. :P)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 28, 2011, 12:54:01 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on March 07, 2010, 12:34:19 PM
nescac1, as always, you provide an eloquent defense for Middlebury, on paper (or LCD). But the fact remains that for two years running they have gone through a paper-tiger schedule like a blowtorch, only to come up empty in the NCAA tournament, both times at home against opponents that a legitimate top 10 team should beat. I'm afraid they'll actually have to accomplish something before I am persuaded that #9 does not constitute a wild overranking for the Panthers. You say they'll be even better next year; good. Maybe I can get persuaded next March.

Just bringing this forward. :o ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on February 28, 2011, 12:58:14 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on October 28, 2010, 01:57:10 AM
Whitworth tops NWC preseason poll.

http://www.nwcsports.com/sports/mbkb/2010-11/news/poll

.... I can argue WW has THE BEST potential impact newcomer in the country.

So after 25+ games, Can anyone top Michael Taylor as best impact newcomer?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 28, 2011, 02:49:13 PM

I don't think it's even close, nwhoops1903, considering he may end up a first team All-American. But considering he was ROY in a D-1 conference and transferred in as a senior, did anyone really have a chance???

In terms of top frosh, for a long time NESCAC folks would have said Aaron Toomey, until around the last three weeks of the season. Now, he may not even be (and probably doesn't deserve to be) rookie of the year in his own conference, after Joey Kizel helped carry Midd to the NESCAC title. Things can change very quickly in D-3 hoops!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 89Pirate on February 28, 2011, 02:51:41 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on February 28, 2011, 12:58:14 PM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on October 28, 2010, 01:57:10 AM
Whitworth tops NWC preseason poll.

http://www.nwcsports.com/sports/mbkb/2010-11/news/poll

.... I can argue WW has THE BEST potential impact newcomer in the country.
So after 25+ games, Can anyone top Michael Taylor as best impact newcomer?

Simple answer is NO !

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on March 01, 2011, 04:49:59 AM

New Top 25 poll is up and Whitworth regains the top spot edging out Middlebury by 1 point, 601-600. The Pirates get 14 first place votes to 8 for the Panthers. Steven Points moves up to #3 and gets 2 first place votes, while Williams falls from #1 down to #4. Wooster remains at #5 and gets the remaining 1st place vote. Same top 10 as last week just reshuffled a bit.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on March 01, 2011, 07:14:19 PM

Hey NESCAC1, close but no cigar baby!!! :P ;) ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on March 07, 2011, 12:42:26 PM

For all the Massey Ratings supporters and skeptics:

Previous to last weekends games, Massey had 14 of its top 16 (EMU and Carleton) in the tourney. All ratings used here are as of 3/2.

Of the 14, 12 advance to round 2. #10 UW-RF and #14 St Norbert lose to #2 UW-SP and #31 IWU.
10 of those advance to round 3. The 2 that fell - #16 Hope to #8 Augustana, #7 Randolph Macon to #18 St. Mary's.

Only 2 "upsets" in 22 games. 20-2 record

Of the other 6 teams still alive: 8-4 record

#18 St. Mary's beat #7 RMU, #211 Medgar Evers
#29 Rochester beat #87 Elms, #92 MIT
#43 MHB beat #28 McMurry, #36 UT Dallas
#60 RI College beat #132 PS-Behrend, #73 Oswego St.
#75 Cabrini beat #90 New Jersey City, #116 SUNY Purchase
#91 Buffalo St. beat #84 Gwynedd-Mercy, #188 Johnson & Wales

Massey Record amongst remaining 16: 28-5 (1 game in both groups StMarys/RM).

This info is not shocking since most of us thought the top 12 teams were pretty clear, even to Massey ;D. Next round will really be the test.

Other info:
Masseys Bracket would have 51 points. Tied for 11th with 14 of 16 in the field.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on March 07, 2011, 03:54:26 PM

It appears that Luther vs. Concordia (WI) was an upset... Luther currently sits at 34 (up 13 spots) and CUW is #28 (down 5 spots), though that may be one of the five losses you noted.

What were the other upsets from the "other 16?"

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 07, 2011, 04:50:52 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on March 07, 2011, 03:54:26 PM
It appears that Luther vs. Concordia (WI) was an upset... Luther currently sits at 34 (up 13 spots) and CUW is #28 (down 5 spots), though that may be one of the five losses you noted.

What were the other upsets from the "other 16?"

Pretty sure Johnson and Wales over Ramapo was one

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on March 07, 2011, 07:31:09 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on March 07, 2011, 03:54:26 PM
It appears that Luther vs. Concordia (WI) was an upset... Luther currently sits at 34 (up 13 spots) and CUW is #28 (down 5 spots), though that may be one of the five losses you noted.

What were the other upsets from the "other 16?"

Massey loses in round 1 were:

#72 FM over #32 NCW (only loss on left side of bracket) UPSET

#43 MHB over #36 UTD
# 47 Luther over #23 Concordia UPSET
# 31 IWU over # 10 UW-RF UPSET
# 188 Johnson and Wales over # 48 Ramapo UPSET
# 92 MIT over # 52 Ithaca UPSET
#91 Buffalo St. over # 84 Gwynedd-Mercy

Round 2:

Left side perfect

#43 MHB over #28 McMurry
# 18 St. Mary's over #7 Randolph Macon UPSET

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on March 12, 2011, 02:02:05 PM

Does anyone feel that the remaining 8 teams all deserve to be in the top 8 of the final ballot? UW-SP #9?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 12, 2011, 02:41:42 PM

Hard to argue... BUT VWC could also be a good #9. UWSP reminded me of what I wasn't impressive with at Las Vegas... so I am not convinced I would move then to #9.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 12, 2011, 04:04:43 PM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on March 12, 2011, 02:02:05 PM
Does anyone feel that the remaining 8 teams all deserve to be in the top 8 of the final ballot? UW-SP #9?

Its possible. One thing I was noticing is that all eight of the remaining teams, if they won the tournament, would likely be unanimous #1.

Usually there's one or two teams that sneak into the final eight where that might not be the case.

Every team here has proven themselves throughout the year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on March 12, 2011, 09:53:52 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 12, 2011, 02:41:42 PM
Hard to argue... BUT VWC could also be a good #9. UWSP reminded me of what I wasn't impressive with at Las Vegas... so I am not convinced I would move then to #9.

I, unfortunately, was unable to do any more this weekend than follow live stats... but if your you look at the result of SP/UST versus Augie/UST, there is a significant case for ranking Point ahead of Augie, let alone anyone else in the sweet 16. It didn't really seem like Augie was in the game very much and SP came back and tied the game after being down double digits.

It may depend on how the Tommies end up... but they just shot better than 50% against two of the best defensive teams in the country... I like their chances.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 13, 2011, 01:38:00 PM

Point - I saw both games... and UWSP didn't impress me over Augustana. I know that Augustana's score and UWSP's score make it look like UWSP was the better team... but it isn't that straight forward.

St. Thomas really controlled both games... both teams would make runs (a lot of them from UWSP but in the end no results). I was more impressed with Augustana's play over the weekend then UWSP - who I have seen several times this season. UWSP looked like the team I saw in Vegas... not completely together on offense and struggling on defense to find a way to stop easy shots.

If I were to rank them now... Augustana is over UWSP in my poll - but I still have 8 days to think about it! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on March 13, 2011, 10:43:53 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 13, 2011, 01:38:00 PM
Point - I saw both games... and UWSP didn't impress me over Augustana. I know that Augustana's score and UWSP's score make it look like UWSP was the better team... but it isn't that straight forward.

St. Thomas really controlled both games... both teams would make runs (a lot of them from UWSP but in the end no results). I was more impressed with Augustana's play over the weekend then UWSP - who I have seen several times this season. UWSP looked like the team I saw in Vegas... not completely together on offense and struggling on defense to find a way to stop easy shots.

If I were to rank them now... Augustana is over UWSP in my poll - but I still have 8 days to think about it! :)

We likely will have to agree to disagree...

But the results don't jive with your impression of the better team. SP tied the game after being down double digits and lost on a play by a great player. Augie couldn't get it under about 10 points.

Would you feel the same way if the bracket had been slated in such a way that SP beaten MHB by 13 and Augie lost to UST by 16 in the Sweet 16 and then UWSP lost by one basket in the Elite 8?

We'll never know, of course... but the fact of the matter is that SP was a stop or couple of previous free throws away from overtime... with the momentum in their court.

They didn't get that opportunity... but that was more due to the relative weakness of the Midwest region versus the West region.

But the West region got no favors... in fact, the flagship program this season got shipped more than halfway across the country and the next two received a sweet 16 match-up.

Yes, we know the tournament that we have, and it is one of equal opportunity, not equality for quality... that St. Thomas had to match up with Point in the Sweet 16 wasn't right for them, either, but that shouldn't penalize teams that are knocked out of the tournament earlier than they should have been based on the brackets.

And there was better national equality for the brackets this year... but they certainly didn't do any favors for the West/Midwest again, as usual, but such is life as the strongest region in the country.

Maybe I'll change my tune when I watch the game, but the final margin speaks for itself.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 14, 2011, 05:51:40 AM

Point - we will disagree... because while I do understand the point differential says one thing and that UWSP may have had a better game in terms of keeping it close... I was more impressed in Augustana simply because of how deep they were and how many players contributed.

If UWSP had played UMHB, it actually might have been surprising by how much they could have struggled. Remember, UMHB didn't roll over... they fought the entire game and nearly made it a contest late after being down 20 or so.

The simple thing I found with UWSP was the same thing I saw in Vegas which I thought they had resolved. There were too many times where they looked lost on offense, not knowing where to go with the ball.. and too many times on defense where they simply left men open with no communication. There just wasn't any confidence in the way they played... and that surprised me considering the 14 game winning streak they had been on.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on March 14, 2011, 05:56:16 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 14, 2011, 05:51:40 AM
Point - we will disagree... because while I do understand the point differential says one thing and that UWSP may have had a better game in terms of keeping it close... I was more impressed in Augustana simply because of how deep they were and how many players contributed.

If UWSP had played UMHB, it actually might have been surprising by how much they could have struggled. Remember, UMHB didn't roll over... they fought the entire game and nearly made it a contest late after being down 20 or so.

The simple thing I found with UWSP was the same thing I saw in Vegas which I thought they had resolved. There were too many times where they looked lost on offense, not knowing where to go with the ball.. and too many times on defense where they simply left men open with no communication. There just wasn't any confidence in the way they played... and that surprised me considering the 14 game winning streak they had been on.

I didn't see much of Augustana's play other than several minutes by video, but their play against the Tommies was statistically awful. 32% shooting, 15% from 3 pt land, 5 assists and 19 to's resulting in 23 pts. Point's line of 52% shooting, 40% from 3 pt, 11 assists and 11 to's looked lost compared to that of Augustana?? Point missed several open looks that had been falling the past couple of months and St Thomas made some unexpected and unbelievable shots. The Tommies played a little better than Point and won. Point played their worst game since losing at Platteville 2 months ago and still had a chance to win at the end. Augie never led and at the end had no chance.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 31, 2011, 04:23:05 PM

When will the preseason polls be released? C'mon already, I'm getting tired of waiting! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on April 03, 2011, 08:46:01 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on March 31, 2011, 04:23:05 PM
When will the preseason polls be released? C'mon already, I'm getting tired of waiting!

If you had to vote now, based solely on the assumption that all returning players will return, who do you vote #1?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: RustCollege on April 04, 2011, 08:28:32 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on April 03, 2011, 08:46:01 AM
Quote from: David Collinge on March 31, 2011, 04:23:05 PM
When will the preseason polls be released? C'mon already, I'm getting tired of waiting!

If you had to vote now, based solely on the assumption that all returning players will return, who do you vote #1?

I don't know who should be #1 but Rust should be 25 with everybody returning

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: toad22 on April 04, 2011, 09:44:31 PM

I really liked Va Wes in the Sweet Sixteen this year. They have no seniors. They should be really good next year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on April 05, 2011, 12:24:46 PM

I like VaWes as well. I was wondering about Williams, though. They're losing a lot, but they're also bringing a lot back. I didn't see them enough to know if the bench guys are capable of filling the holes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ECSUalum on April 05, 2011, 01:14:00 PM

Sorry guys, I have to give a shout out to the University of Connecticut Huskies on their National Championship win, not only because I went to grad school @ Uconn, but also because Storrs CT is 15 miles away from ECSU and Willimantic CT.

again my apologies!!!! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: labart96 on April 05, 2011, 01:41:17 PM

I am originally from CT and my little sister is a UConn grad ('00). Happy to see them win, even if the game was a real dog (pun intended).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: toad22 on April 05, 2011, 03:04:35 PM

Williams should be very good. The big loss is Whittington, but the return all the guards, and two very capable centers. They need a power forward capable of playing in the rotation right away. In some ways I think they will be better than this year, but losing Whittington will leave a big hole. The problems will come when they play big teams. On balance, I rate them about even with this year's team (assuming a good PF in the freshman class).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on April 05, 2011, 06:28:36 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on April 03, 2011, 08:46:01 AM
Quote from: David Collinge on March 31, 2011, 04:23:05 PM
When will the preseason polls be released? C'mon already, I'm getting tired of waiting!

If you had to vote now, based solely on the assumption that all returning players will return, who do you vote #1?

Without doing much research I think Amherst, Virginia Wesleyan, and Middlebury all return quite a bit. I would have them all in my pre-season Top 5.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 24, 2011, 09:50:18 AM

Preseason Poll is out.

Virginia Wesleyan in the safe pick, probably would have been mine as well. Brought back a lot of talent. Interesting that St. Thomas got 2 #1 votes. The defending champs lost quite a bit, but they have yet to be beaten.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on October 24, 2011, 04:39:52 PM

A top 20 without a WIAC school seems both odd and improbable. :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Captain Bob on October 24, 2011, 04:43:10 PM

Glad to see two USAC teams in the "RV" category, hoping they can make it up into the numbered ranks as the season gets underway.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on October 24, 2011, 05:21:20 PM

Quote from: sac on October 24, 2011, 04:39:52 PM
A top 20 without a WIAC school seems both odd and improbable. :-\

I'm sure a couple three will burble their way up there eventually! Or this could be an *interesting* year where up is down, left is right, etc.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ethelred the Unready on October 24, 2011, 05:50:57 PM

I shouldn't even have to say this, but....where the heck is the Rust love?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 24, 2011, 08:22:28 PM

It is good to see UMHB in a #16.

McMurry was the conference pre-season favorite (http://www.mcmurrysports.com/news/2011/10/19/MBB_1019114736.aspx) to win the ASC-West in a 174 to 173 vote over UMHB.

McMurry's Steven Jones is ASC-West Pre-season player of the year.

Gonna be a tight race!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: RustCollege on October 24, 2011, 11:11:02 PM

Sleeper Team with the best player Markeith Wilson and the return of Larry Veasley Rust College is a team to watch going 17-8 last year look for them to make some improvement this year off of last year record

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on October 25, 2011, 05:02:40 AM

Quote from: magicman on April 05, 2011, 06:28:36 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on April 03, 2011, 08:46:01 AM
Quote from: David Collinge on March 31, 2011, 04:23:05 PM
When will the preseason polls be released? C'mon already, I'm getting tired of waiting!

If you had to vote now, based solely on the assumption that all returning players will return, who do you vote #1?

Without doing much research I think Amherst, Virginia Wesleyan, and Middlebury all return quite a bit. I would have them all in my pre-season Top 5.

My post from last April. The voters were listening. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on October 25, 2011, 12:12:44 PM

Quote from: sac on October 24, 2011, 04:39:52 PM
A top 20 without a WIAC school seems both odd and improbable. :-\

I'm not sure how much you've read about what has happened in the WIAC in the offseason, Pat's piece here (http://d3hoops.com/notables/2011/10/inside-the-mens-top25) chronicles it pretty well from UWSP's standpoint...

Even despite losing 4 guys to graduation, Point was poised to be a top team for the next two years, led by point guard Jerrel Harris.

To lose guys from graduation is one thing... but to lose contributors to transferring can be pretty disasterous, especially the way that it happened at Point.

Jerrel Harris and Johnny Johnston were recruited away from the UWSP program by outgoing assistant Lance Randall, who is now the head coach at D-II St. Leo in Florida. Randall decided to build his program by pulling players away from others... He also drew away Marcus Ruh from Eau Claire... though that was much less disconcerting... Eau Claire has a new coach and hasn't had much success in the last decade. But 6 of his 14 players were on different college rosters last year (not counting juco kids).

So that's part of the issue at Point... but in addition, Antone Byrd also transferred from Whitewater to D-II Central State in Ohio.

So you have 3 outgoing sophomores (now-juniors), one first team all-conference (Harris) and two HM all-conference (Ruh and Byrd) that are gone from the conference... each of their teams was depending on them for the upcoming year (none moreso than Stevens Point, who not only lost their leading scorer, but also their point guard and the guy who set the defense).

I think that things will settle down at Point... but the rift caused by Randall will have lasting effects for a few years. In addition to Harris and Johnston who left for St. Leo, two other freshmen, two sophomores, and a junior aren't returning for Point... That's 11 guys from last year's roster who aren't around this year, when you add in the 4 seniors that were lost.

I also think that River Falls is likely the team to beat this year in the WIAC (... they were the team to beat until the last month of the season last year, when they absolutely collapsed... thus why they probably weren't ranked higher), and I think Point will come around... but they may have some growing pains early. As Pat said in his preview, the game at Augustana in early December may tell us more about Point than about Augie... if they can rise up to compete in big games and make a run at another conference title/NCAA run.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: RustCollege on October 25, 2011, 01:39:27 PM

Quote from: Ethelred the Unready on October 24, 2011, 05:50:57 PM
I shouldn't even have to say this, but....where the heck is the Rust love?

I guess when you go 17-8 you still get no love even with the everybody back Markeith Wilson and Larry Veasley

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on October 25, 2011, 08:18:30 PM

I checked their 2011 Massey power ratings. They were 225th in D-3, even at 17-9. Their SOS was 325.

Two games against Fisk, Philander Smith, LaGrange, Covenant and Rhodes doesn't help your power rating or SOS. I know you play the schedule you are given, but with that schedule they probably need to be better than 17-8 to even get consideration.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mass_d3fan on October 25, 2011, 11:02:50 PM

Quote from: RustCollege on October 25, 2011, 01:39:27 PM
Quote from: Ethelred the Unready on October 24, 2011, 05:50:57 PM
I shouldn't even have to say this, but....where the heck is the Rust love?
I guess when you go 17-8 you still get no love even with the everybody back Markeith Wilson and Larry Veasley

Sorry RC, BUT

I believe I counted 65 teams that won 20 or more last year. How many others won 18 or 19? A lot of of those teams did not get the 'love' of the polls either. Seriously man, if you want the 'love' take care of it on the court with more wins.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on October 26, 2011, 10:40:39 AM

Quote from: mass_d3fan on October 25, 2011, 11:02:50 PM
Quote from: RustCollege on October 25, 2011, 01:39:27 PM
Quote from: Ethelred the Unready on October 24, 2011, 05:50:57 PM
I shouldn't even have to say this, but....where the heck is the Rust love?
I guess when you go 17-8 you still get no love even with the everybody back Markeith Wilson and Larry Veasley

Sorry RC, BUT

I believe I counted 65 teams that won 20 or more last year. How many others won 18 or 19? A lot of of those teams did not get the 'love' of the polls either. Seriously man, if you want the 'love' take care of it on the court with more wins.

No kidding. An SOS of 325 and they still couldn't win more than 17 games and lost 8? What exactly am I supposed to be impressed by?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: RustCollege on October 27, 2011, 02:49:39 PM

Quote from: ScotsFan on October 26, 2011, 10:40:39 AM
Quote from: mass_d3fan on October 25, 2011, 11:02:50 PM
Quote from: RustCollege on October 25, 2011, 01:39:27 PM
Quote from: Ethelred the Unready on October 24, 2011, 05:50:57 PM
I shouldn't even have to say this, but....where the heck is the Rust love?
I guess when you go 17-8 you still get no love even with the everybody back Markeith Wilson and Larry Veasley

Sorry RC, BUT

I believe I counted 65 teams that won 20 or more last year. How many others won 18 or 19? A lot of of those teams did not get the 'love' of the polls either. Seriously man, if you want the 'love' take care of it on the court with more wins.

No kidding. An SOS of 325 and they still couldn't win more than 17 games and lost 8? What exactly am I supposed to be impressed by?

I understand what you saying but you never saw us play but if you saw us play you would change your tune

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: RustCollege on October 27, 2011, 02:55:17 PM

Hampden-Sydney went 17-10 and is ranked and its not about our sos for us not to be rank...before y'all talk how about everyone come watch us play and then judge

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on October 27, 2011, 03:05:10 PM

Quote from: ScotsFan on October 26, 2011, 10:40:39 AM
Quote from: mass_d3fan on October 25, 2011, 11:02:50 PM
Quote from: RustCollege on October 25, 2011, 01:39:27 PM
Quote from: Ethelred the Unready on October 24, 2011, 05:50:57 PM
I shouldn't even have to say this, but....where the heck is the Rust love?
I guess when you go 17-8 you still get no love even with the everybody back Markeith Wilson and Larry Veasley

Sorry RC, BUT

I believe I counted 65 teams that won 20 or more last year. How many others won 18 or 19? A lot of of those teams did not get the 'love' of the polls either. Seriously man, if you want the 'love' take care of it on the court with more wins.

No kidding. An SOS of 325 and they still couldn't win more than 17 games and lost 8? What exactly am I supposed to be impressed by?

persistance

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on October 27, 2011, 03:18:31 PM

Quote from: RustCollege on October 27, 2011, 02:55:17 PM
Hampden-Sydney went 17-10 and is ranked and its not about our sos for us not to be rank...before y'all talk how about everyone come watch us play and then judge

You might want to give us another example if you are arguing about SOS not being a factor. H-SC also plays in one of the toughest basketball conferences in DIII...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 27, 2011, 03:37:54 PM

Quote from: sac on October 27, 2011, 03:05:10 PM
Quote from: ScotsFan on October 26, 2011, 10:40:39 AM
Quote from: mass_d3fan on October 25, 2011, 11:02:50 PM
Quote from: RustCollege on October 25, 2011, 01:39:27 PM
Quote from: Ethelred the Unready on October 24, 2011, 05:50:57 PM
I shouldn't even have to say this, but....where the heck is the Rust love?
I guess when you go 17-8 you still get no love even with the everybody back Markeith Wilson and Larry Veasley

Sorry RC, BUT

I believe I counted 65 teams that won 20 or more last year. How many others won 18 or 19? A lot of of those teams did not get the 'love' of the polls either. Seriously man, if you want the 'love' take care of it on the court with more wins.

No kidding. An SOS of 325 and they still couldn't win more than 17 games and lost 8? What exactly am I supposed to be impressed by?

persistance

LOL!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: RustCollege on October 27, 2011, 03:50:55 PM

Quote from: ScotsFan on October 27, 2011, 03:18:31 PM
Quote from: RustCollege on October 27, 2011, 02:55:17 PM
Hampden-Sydney went 17-10 and is ranked and its not about our sos for us not to be rank...before y'all talk how about everyone come watch us play and then judge
You might want to give us another example if you are arguing about SOS not being a factor. H-SC also plays in one of the toughest basketball conferences in DIII...

Rust can beat every last one hands down.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dahlby on October 27, 2011, 03:54:22 PM

Rust College,
Where can one find the box scores and other statistics for your basketball team?
Thanks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on October 27, 2011, 04:07:58 PM

Quote from: RustCollege on October 27, 2011, 03:50:55 PM
Quote from: ScotsFan on October 27, 2011, 03:18:31 PM
Quote from: RustCollege on October 27, 2011, 02:55:17 PM
Hampden-Sydney went 17-10 and is ranked and its not about our sos for us not to be rank...before y'all talk how about everyone come watch us play and then judge
You might want to give us another example if you are arguing about SOS not being a factor. H-SC also plays in one of the toughest basketball conferences in DIII...
Rust can beat every last one hands down.

Or at least 17 out of 25

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on October 27, 2011, 04:14:43 PM

Quote from: RustCollege on October 27, 2011, 03:50:55 PM
Quote from: ScotsFan on October 27, 2011, 03:18:31 PM
Quote from: RustCollege on October 27, 2011, 02:55:17 PM
Hampden-Sydney went 17-10 and is ranked and its not about our sos for us not to be rank...before y'all talk how about everyone come watch us play and then judge
You might want to give us another example if you are arguing about SOS not being a factor. H-SC also plays in one of the toughest basketball conferences in DIII...
Rust can beat every last one hands down.

Only three of Rust's wins came against D-III teams above .500: Webster, and Berry twice. Four of their five D-III losses came to teams with losing records.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on October 27, 2011, 04:47:50 PM

Quote from: ScotsFan on October 27, 2011, 03:18:31 PM
Quote from: RustCollege on October 27, 2011, 02:55:17 PM
Hampden-Sydney went 17-10 and is ranked and its not about our sos for us not to be rank...before y'all talk how about everyone come watch us play and then judge
You might want to give us another example if you are arguing about SOS not being a factor. H-SC also plays in one of the toughest basketball conferences in DIII...

The ODAC tends to feast upon itself. They put four teams in the field in 2010, which doesn't happen in D-3. Five ODAC teams (including H-S) were in the Top 60 of Massey last year. H-SC has four returning starters as well and almost all of their top players back.

For Rust to be ranked you gotta plow through your schedule. Just eviscerate it. Then get a "B" and prove you're worthy there. Otherwise, people will look at Rust with a jaundiced eye.

I am also loath to mention that DePauw was 19-9 in the SCAC last season and is not ranked this season, their first in the NCAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on October 27, 2011, 07:14:42 PM

Anybody who really wants to see Rust, note they are playing in St Louis at Webster Classic Saturday and Sunday Nov 19/20... They will play Bluffton and Maryville (Tn.)

I thoroughly enjoyed my trip to Holly Springs last year to see Webster play at Rust. fun atmosphere, good game... Markeith Wilson had a great shooting game against Webster, and the team had decent depth. Looking at their schedule this year, it's obvious that the game with Maryville (they play each other 2 more times later in the year too), may be critical to get recognition in the small 'B' group.... I wouldn't count them out... however, neither do I rate them quite as highly as Rust College does... incidently, I met Rust College at that game and would ask writers not to think ill of him.. he's simply a very enthusiastic young man regarding his team......

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on October 27, 2011, 10:25:22 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on October 25, 2011, 12:12:44 PM
Quote from: sac on October 24, 2011, 04:39:52 PM
A top 20 without a WIAC school seems both odd and improbable. :-\

Jerrel Harris and Johnny Johnston were recruited away from the UWSP program by outgoing assistant Lance Randall, who is now the head coach at D-II St. Leo in Florida. Randall decided to build his program by pulling players away from others... He also drew away Marcus Ruh from Eau Claire... though that was much less disconcerting... Eau Claire has a new coach and hasn't had much success in the last decade. But 6 of his 14 players were on different college rosters last year (not counting juco kids).

Lance Randall has moved around a lot as a coach. Here's the press release from St Leo: http://cnewspubs.com/wp/?p=5917. Too bad he had to take UWSP players with him.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on October 27, 2011, 10:34:16 PM

With Rust playing as an independent and not playing a full D3 schedule, I think RustCollege doesn't fully understand what it takes to get votes in the early D3 rankings and make the tournament at the end of the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: RustCollege on October 27, 2011, 11:07:29 PM

I understand the sos when it come to making the playoffs and getting ranked its just we get no respect we have one of the best player in D3 and he is not an All American or a all south region player

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: RustCollege on October 27, 2011, 11:08:40 PM

Quote from: dahlby on October 27, 2011, 03:54:22 PM
Rust College,
Where can one find the box scores and other statistics for your basketball team?
Thanks.

go to NCAA.org

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on October 27, 2011, 11:28:45 PM

Quote from: y_jack_lok on October 27, 2011, 10:25:22 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on October 25, 2011, 12:12:44 PM
Quote from: sac on October 24, 2011, 04:39:52 PM
A top 20 without a WIAC school seems both odd and improbable. :-\

Jerrel Harris and Johnny Johnston were recruited away from the UWSP program by outgoing assistant Lance Randall, who is now the head coach at D-II St. Leo in Florida. Randall decided to build his program by pulling players away from others... He also drew away Marcus Ruh from Eau Claire... though that was much less disconcerting... Eau Claire has a new coach and hasn't had much success in the last decade. But 6 of his 14 players were on different college rosters last year (not counting juco kids).

Lance Randall has moved around a lot as a coach. Here's the press release from St Leo: http://cnewspubs.com/wp/?p=5917. Too bad he had to take UWSP players with him.

... Don't we know it. I gave him the benefit for the doubt when he got hired... he said the right things to the paper in terms of wanting to settle down, etc... but then he applied for the UW Superior job after his first season.

It became clear that he was who we thought he was at that point.

But I honestly wonder at what point he started whispering in players' ears about jumping ship with him.

Point had a great year last year... but I wonder what could have been without that division.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on October 27, 2011, 11:34:48 PM

Quote from: RustCollege on October 27, 2011, 11:07:29 PM
I understand the sos when it come to making the playoffs and getting ranked its just we get no respect we have one of the best player in D3 and he is not an All American or a all south region player

Hopefan has seen Markeith Wilson play. I would respect his judgment regarding Wilson's talent and whether he merits being an All-Region player.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on October 28, 2011, 07:59:14 AM

Quote from: RustCollege on October 27, 2011, 11:07:29 PM
I understand the sos when it come to making the playoffs and getting ranked its just we get no respect we have one of the best player in D3 and he is not an All American or a all south region player

Rust, you use the no respect line, but the Athletic Dept needs to line up more D3 schools... I know the situation has improved recently, but... I'm not looking at a map, but why aren't there games with Emory, Ogelthorpe, Spalding, Centre, Louisiana College,or a second game with Milsaps, or a second game with Mississippi, or another trip to St Louis to play Fontbonne or Greenville or Westminster... I know this involves more travel and some fast talking scheduling, but if the program wants recognition in D3, it has to play D3 teams. Why not be in the GSAC and get Maryville, Huntindon, LaGrange, and Covenant twice, or be in the SCAC or the ASC? I'm sure there are reasons related to number of sports sponsered etc, but.....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on October 28, 2011, 10:12:17 AM

Quote from: hopefan on October 28, 2011, 07:59:14 AM
Quote from: RustCollege on October 27, 2011, 11:07:29 PM
I understand the sos when it come to making the playoffs and getting ranked its just we get no respect we have one of the best player in D3 and he is not an All American or a all south region player

Rust, you use the no respect line, but the Athletic Dept needs to line up more D3 schools... I know the situation has improved recently, but... I'm not looking at a map, but why aren't there games with Emory, Ogelthorpe, Spalding, Centre, Louisiana College,or a second game with Milsaps, or a second game with Mississippi, or another trip to St Louis to play Fontbonne or Greenville or Westminster... I know this involves more travel and some fast talking scheduling, but if the program wants recognition in D3, it has to play D3 teams. Why not be in the GSAC and get Maryville, Huntindon, LaGrange, and Covenant twice, or be in the SCAC or the ASC? I'm sure there are reasons related to number of sports sponsered etc, but.....

But not just playing D3 teams, you need to build the reputation of playing and beating GOOD D3 teams.

There are over 400 D3 teams, so the Top 25 represents the top 6% -- 94% of all teams are unranked!. You have to be consistently beating the best of the best to get in there.

My opinion on Rust (admittedly having never seen them play) is that they are to be taken very seriously as a potentially tough opponent (going back to last year, they probably would have made the tournament had there been a second Pool B bid), but they didn't do enough on the floor to just be handed a top 25 spot at the start of this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on October 28, 2011, 10:12:28 AM

RustCollege, just curious, how many of the 25 pre-season all-Americans has Markeith ever played against? How many of those players have YOU ever seen play in person? Or for that matter, on video? I certainly couldn't have appreciated how good, say, Ian Franks of Wooster truly was until I got to see him in person last year. It's really easy to overestimate the excellence of guys you watch every day until you have a chance to watch the best in the country go head-to-head, and until Rust plays SOMEONE with an elite talent, there is no way to compare Markeith to the guys who have played against tougher competition. Remember, the folks who put these teams together have combined to see more D-3 players that probably anyone else in the country.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: RustCollege on October 28, 2011, 03:11:24 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on October 28, 2011, 10:12:28 AM
RustCollege, just curious, how many of the 25 pre-season all-Americans has Markeith ever played against? How many of those players have YOU ever seen play in person? Or for that matter, on video? I certainly couldn't have appreciated how good, say, Ian Franks of Wooster truly was until I got to see him in person last year. It's really easy to overestimate the excellence of guys you watch every day until you have a chance to watch the best in the country go head-to-head, and until Rust plays SOMEONE with an elite talent, there is no way to compare Markeith to the guys who have played against tougher competition. Remember, the folks who put these teams together have combined to see more D-3 players that probably anyone else in the country.

I keep up with alot of them players and no disrespect but he is better then alot of them and at 6'4 he is hard to stop can shoot from deep and post up guard

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: RustCollege on October 28, 2011, 03:31:21 PM

Quote from: hopefan on October 28, 2011, 07:59:14 AM
Quote from: RustCollege on October 27, 2011, 11:07:29 PM
I understand the sos when it come to making the playoffs and getting ranked its just we get no respect we have one of the best player in D3 and he is not an All American or a all south region player

Rust, you use the no respect line, but the Athletic Dept needs to line up more D3 schools... I know the situation has improved recently, but... I'm not looking at a map, but why aren't there games with Emory, Ogelthorpe, Spalding, Centre, Louisiana College,or a second game with Milsaps, or a second game with Mississippi, or another trip to St Louis to play Fontbonne or Greenville or Westminster... I know this involves more travel and some fast talking scheduling, but if the program wants recognition in D3, it has to play D3 teams. Why not be in the GSAC and get Maryville, Huntindon, LaGrange, and Covenant twice, or be in the SCAC or the ASC? I'm sure there are reasons related to number of sports sponsered etc, but.....

what's up my friend...well I'm just gone say some of them won't play us for reason you should ask them

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on October 28, 2011, 04:00:15 PM

Quote from: RustCollege on October 28, 2011, 03:11:24 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on October 28, 2011, 10:12:28 AM
RustCollege, just curious, how many of the 25 pre-season all-Americans has Markeith ever played against? How many of those players have YOU ever seen play in person? Or for that matter, on video? I certainly couldn't have appreciated how good, say, Ian Franks of Wooster truly was until I got to see him in person last year. It's really easy to overestimate the excellence of guys you watch every day until you have a chance to watch the best in the country go head-to-head, and until Rust plays SOMEONE with an elite talent, there is no way to compare Markeith to the guys who have played against tougher competition. Remember, the folks who put these teams together have combined to see more D-3 players that probably anyone else in the country.
I keep up with alot of them players and no disrespect but he is better then alot of them and at 6'4 he is hard to stop can shoot from deep and post up guard

By "...keep up with alot of them players..." do you mean you've seen them play either on film or in person, or you just check out their stats? I will say this for Markeith Wilson, in looking at the box score of Rust's game against Webster last season he scored 31 including 6 of 9 two pointers, 6 of 11 3 pointers (that's 12 of 20 total) and 1 of 2 free throws. And Webster was a good team last year -- beat Wash U, lost to Illinois Wesleyan by 4. I did not see the game against Rust, however. Still looking for hopefan to weigh in on how good he thinks Wilson is. Perhaps he doesn't want to comment for diplomatic reasons, which I would understand.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mass_d3fan on October 29, 2011, 12:32:56 AM

RC

No disrespect, but there are players puting put more impressive numbers....

Did he have any games near what Lamonte Thomas did last year in the GNAC semi-finals?

40 points on 11-15 from the field and 18 of 20 FTs, 6 boards and 20 Assists!

Thomas is a 6'2" guard and he averaged 30 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 6.1 apg, 52% from the field and 42% beyond the arc. Top scorer in the country and led his team to 21 wins, including a 1st round victory in the NCAAs.

GNAC Title game on the road - 33 pts, 6 assists and 7 boards
In the tournament - 43 pts, 9 assists, 7 boards in the 1st round
28 pts, 4 assists, 6 boards in the 2nd round

All that = All-American!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 31, 2011, 09:45:56 AM

Quote from: mass_d3fan on October 29, 2011, 12:32:56 AM
RC

No disrespect, but there are players puting put more impressive numbers....

Did he have any games near what Lamonte Thomas did last year in the GNAC semi-finals?

40 points on 11-15 from the field and 18 of 20 FTs, 6 boards and 20 Assists!

Thomas is a 6'2" guard and he averaged 30 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 6.1 apg, 52% from the field and 42% beyond the arc. Top scorer in the country and led his team to 21 wins, including a 1st round victory in the NCAAs.

GNAC Title game on the road - 33 pts, 6 assists and 7 boards
In the tournament - 43 pts, 9 assists, 7 boards in the 1st round
28 pts, 4 assists, 6 boards in the 2nd round

All that = All-American!

And he's practically triple-teamed through most games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: RustCollege on October 31, 2011, 09:30:33 PM

Quote from: mass_d3fan on October 29, 2011, 12:32:56 AM
RC

No disrespect, but there are players puting put more impressive numbers....

Did he have any games near what Lamonte Thomas did last year in the GNAC semi-finals?

40 points on 11-15 from the field and 18 of 20 FTs, 6 boards and 20 Assists!

Thomas is a 6'2" guard and he averaged 30 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 6.1 apg, 52% from the field and 42% beyond the arc. Top scorer in the country and led his team to 21 wins, including a 1st round victory in the NCAAs.

GNAC Title game on the road - 33 pts, 6 assists and 7 boards
In the tournament - 43 pts, 9 assists, 7 boards in the 1st round
28 pts, 4 assists, 6 boards in the 2nd round

All that = All-American!

OK i will match you vs HENDRIX UNIVERSITY 11/30/10 Markeith Wilson had 20 pts on 7-12 shooting and 4-7 on 3's 10 rebounds all off the bench
vs University of Dallas 12-03-10 25pts 11 rebounds off the bench
vs WEBSTER UNIVERSITY 12/11/10 31 pts 5 rebounds off the bench
vs Piedmont College 01/09/11 30 pts 5 rebounds off the bench
and i can keep going with this so he is just as good as your boy

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 31, 2011, 10:03:02 PM

None of those is against an NCAA Tournament team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on October 31, 2011, 10:10:40 PM

And it's not solely about stats, it's about how his contribution helps his team win. Yes, you can put up gaudy stats. But its how you accumulate those numbers and in what context you do it in. All-Americans get their teammates involved, and take charge at the end of the game on both ends of the court.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 15, 2011, 07:51:02 PM

Time to dust this off again...

Larry U @ #24 UWSP starts at the top of the hour

Live Stats (http://www4.uwsp.edu/athletics/mbb/live/xlive.htm)

UWSP broadcast (http://radio.securenetsystems.net//radio_player_large.cfm?stationCallSign=WSPT)

I'll provide updates on the WIAC update page HERE (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4057.msg1369873#new)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 15, 2011, 08:51:37 PM

Could be the 1st upset of a ranked team this year as #18 Oswego State falls to St. Lawrence on the road 66-62 despite 19 points from All American Chad Burridge.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 15, 2011, 09:43:19 PM

#24 Stevens Point beat Lawrence 80-58

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 15, 2011, 10:07:04 PM

Quote from: magicman on November 15, 2011, 08:51:37 PM
Could be the 1st upset of a ranked team this year as #18 Oswego State falls to St. Lawrence on the road 66-62 despite 19 points from All American Chad Burridge.

... It wasn't to a D-III team, but #21 River Falls loses on the road at NAIA Viterbo 73-63 in a game where the hosts shot 33/39 from the charity stripe

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on November 15, 2011, 10:35:42 PM

Are you saying there's a bit o' home cookin' there?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 15, 2011, 10:48:22 PM

Quote from: smedindy on November 15, 2011, 10:35:42 PM
Are you saying there's a bit o' home cookin' there?

I dunno... but Viterbo is 3-0, with their other wins being of the nail-biter variety over those basketball powerhouses Trinity Christian (71-68) and Silver Lake College (56-54).

The V-hawks were 6-25 last year and lost this game by 33.

Viterbo also has 2 seniors and 3 juniors listed on their roster... none of whom have played a minute thus far this season.

Perhaps they've turned it around? Maybe something strange is going on? Maybe RF got hosed? Or perhaps they're not as good as many of us have been projecting...?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 16, 2011, 12:50:09 AM

#11 Wittenberg gets off on the wrong foot, losing to IU-East (NAIA 2) 92-84.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on November 18, 2011, 09:49:07 PM

Final: #9 Wooster 91 Defiance 67

Wooster was led in scoring by freshman point guard Xavier Brown with 18 points, Ryan Snyder with 15 points, Justin Hallowell with 14 points and freshman wing Kenny Deboer with 11 points.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 18, 2011, 09:59:01 PM

#24 Stevens Point had a 19 point lead early in the second half... but Richard Stockton makes it easy before SP sinks a ton of free throws.

Final: #24 UWSP 86 Richard Stockton 77

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 18, 2011, 10:06:25 PM

#7 Rochester barely survives against Plattsburgh State as the Cardinals held a 68-67 lead with 26 seconds to go. Rochester comes down looking for the lead and Plattsburgh is called for a blocking foul against an out of control John Dibartolomeo. He goes to the line and makes the first one to tie the game. He misses the 2nd one and Rochester gets the rebound and scores. Cards come down and miss a shot and after a scramble for a loose ball a foul is called against the Cards. Coach Curle gets called for a technical, and after Rochester goes to the line Curle gets T'd up again and tossed. Final score 74-68. I think Plattburgh got jobbed. Even the U of R announcers said that Dibartolomeo got bailed out on the blocking foul called against Plattsburgh when the Cardinals had the lead with 20 seconds left.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 19, 2011, 12:35:57 AM

#20 Centre 92 John Carroll 91 OT

http://d3hoops.com/seasons/men/2011-12/boxscores/20111118_t2ig.xml

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on November 19, 2011, 04:14:45 PM

MIT routs RPI 104-75 this afternoon. Noel Hollingsworth had 28 points, on 12-14 shooting, and 15 rebounds. Will Tashman had 23 points and 10 boards, while Mitch Kates dished out 9 assists. MIT moves to 3-0 (they did lose an exhibition game at Harvard last week).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 19, 2011, 05:27:51 PM

#24 Stevens Point moves to 3-0 with a gritty 68-54 win over a balanced, veteran York College team to win the York tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 19, 2011, 09:51:24 PM

#7 Rochester easily beats Keystone 91-77 to win their own tip off tournament. Yellowjackets up by 23 at the break 57-34 and maintained a 20+ lead through most of the 2nd half. Final score was the closest the Giants would get.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on November 19, 2011, 11:58:32 PM

Final: #9 Wooster 70 Anderson (IN) 54

Wooster was led in scoring by freshman point guard Xavier Brown with 22 points and senior guard Matt Fegan with 20 points (6 three pointers). Wooster's next game is at Wilmington on 11/27.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 20, 2011, 05:24:41 PM

#5 Middlebury moves to 2-0 with a victory over host Ramapo 73-62 to claim the championship of the Roadrunners Tip Off Tournament. It was Ramapo's 1st loss of the year after opening the season with 3 wins. Middlebury has played both of their games without preseason All American Ryan Sharry, who is out with a sprained ankle.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 20, 2011, 06:14:42 PM

In case anyone was wondering ... I plan to post "How They Fared" again this year, but probably not tonight. (I am assuming that, as in the past, the next round of voting is still a week away.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 20, 2011, 06:28:24 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on November 20, 2011, 06:14:42 PM
In case anyone was wondering ... I plan to post "How They Fared" again this year, but probably not tonight. (I am assuming that, as in the past, the next round of voting is still a week away.)

Great news for those of us in the Posters' Poll - I'm sure I'm far from the only voter who heavily relies on your work! ;D

[Posters' Poll will kick-off(? - I'm still in football mode!) as of games thru January 8 or 15 - more later.]

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 20, 2011, 08:45:27 PM

#12 Whitworth 88
Wash U 66

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 21, 2011, 12:04:20 AM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on November 20, 2011, 06:14:42 PM
In case anyone was wondering ... I plan to post "How They Fared" again this year, but probably not tonight. (I am assuming that, as in the past, the next round of voting is still a week away.)

That is correct -- one more week for us.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on November 21, 2011, 05:15:49 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 20, 2011, 08:45:27 PM
#12 Whitworth 88
Wash U 66

Whitworth (2-0) scored the first 11 points of the second half to put the game out of reach at 61-29 with 17:14 remaining. Wade Gebbers had nine of the 11 points as he drilled three-consecutive three-pointers in a span of 1:11.

Impressive...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on November 22, 2011, 09:22:07 PM

MIT coasts 79-46 over Emmanuel tonight. They started the game off on 9-11 shooting from the field, including 6 3s, 5 of them from Jamie Karraker. Based on the fact that Hollingsworth only took 5 shots, and MIT scored a high number of 3s at a good percentage, I would venture to guess he drew a lot of double and triple teams near the basket.

BoxScore (http://www.mitathletics.com/sports/m-baskbl/2011-12/boxscores/20111122_37ak.xml)

MIT moves to 4-0. MIT still has a bunch of games to play before then, but potential huge matchup against Salem State on Dec. 8.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 22, 2011, 10:24:52 PM

#24 UWSP goes from a 38-24 halftime lead to a 60-55 loss to St. Johns... SP with just 2 FG's in the second half. First one with about 8 mins left in the half and 2nd with under 1 minute.

SP was 6/8 from 3 in the first half and SJU started 7/10 from 3. ... Kinda makes you wonder about the rim at that end!!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 22, 2011, 10:26:51 PM

After trailing most of the game, #1 VWC falls to Salisbury by 3 with a missed 3 at the buzzer. Inauspicious opening for the pre-season favorite.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on November 22, 2011, 10:59:48 PM

#7, #8, #20, and #23 also fall. Lots of upsets tonight.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ChicagoHopeNut on November 23, 2011, 03:05:15 PM

When does the first Top 25 poll of the year come out? Is it today? Or next week?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on November 23, 2011, 03:21:43 PM

Next week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 25, 2011, 03:38:10 PM

#12 Whitworth moves to 3-0 as they beat Cal Lutheran 67-53 this afternoon.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 27, 2011, 03:26:59 PM

"How They Fared" coming tonight after the final games are complete, barring some unexpected complication with my computer program. (It ran successfully -- after some tweaking -- with the current state of the scoreboard, and I assume will still be OK when the scores are all finalized.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 27, 2011, 06:11:11 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on November 27, 2011, 03:26:59 PM
"How They Fared" coming tonight after the final games are complete, barring some unexpected complication with my computer program. (It ran successfully -- after some tweaking -- with the current state of the scoreboard, and I assume will still be OK when the scores are all finalized.)

Looking forward to it Darryl. Thanks for doing it again this year. Plus k.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on November 27, 2011, 06:43:44 PM

Final: #9 Wooster 83 Wilmington 74

Wooster gets the road win as they are led by freshman Xavier Brown with 20 points, Justin Hallowell with 15 points and Matt Fegan with 13 points.

Wooster is now 3-0 and the Scots play next at Kenyon on Wednesday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 27, 2011, 07:40:59 PM

#24 Stevens Point moved to 4-1 with an 87-70 victory over Buena Vista yesterday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 27, 2011, 08:52:49 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Split into two posts because the list is so long. (Should be shorter next time as fewer teams receive votes.)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	565	Virginia Wesleyan	2-1	LOST at Salisbury, 65-68; def. Trinity (Texas), 84-54; def. Southwestern, 73-58
#2	545	Augustana	3-0	def. Aurora, 102-68; def. St. Norbert, 79-48; def. UW-Oshkosh, 80-72
#3	542	Williams	3-1	def. Southern Vermont, 87-58; LOST to T#40 Salem State, 69-83; def. Wesleyan, 83-68; def. Massachusetts College, 84-59
#4	517	Amherst	3-0	def. Plymouth State, 90-63; def. Washington and Lee, 100-64; def. Western New England, 97-69
#5	490	Middlebury	4-0	def. #60 Gwynedd-Mercy, 76-70; def. #31 Ramapo, 73-62; def. St. Joseph's (VT), 61-48; def. Johnson State, 81-43
#6	482	Marietta	3-0	def. Denison, 64-58; def. Methodist, 92-69; def. Kenyon, 85-74
#7	374	Rochester	4-1	def. Plattsburgh State, 74-68; def. Keystone, 91-77; LOST at Nazareth, 64-82; def. Wells, 106-58; def. Allegheny, 99-75
#8	353	St. Thomas	3-1	def. Occidental, 82-61; def. Pomona-Pitzer, 82-79; LOST at #21 UW-River Falls, 64-79; def. Concordia-St. Paul, 94-88
#9	352	Wooster	3-0	def. Defiance, 91-67; def. Anderson, 70-54; def. Wilmington, 83-74
#10	260	MIT	5-0	def. Curry, 71-66; def. Gordon, 70-38; def. RPI, 104-75; def. Emmanuel, 79-46; def. Suffolk, 81-59
#11	257	Wittenberg	1-1	LOST to Ind.-East, 84-92; def. T#51 Capital, 69-63
#12	255	Whitworth	4-0	def. UC Santa Cruz, 70-54; def. #42 Washington U., 88-66; def. Cal Lutheran, 67-53; def. #45 Chapman, 58-44
#13	251	Emory	5-0	def. Ferrum, 81-67; def. Roanoke, 86-64; def. Berry, 95-63; def. LaGrange, 107-89; def. Maryville (Tenn.), 75-61
#14	246	Cabrini	2-0	def. Haverford, 77-65; def. Widener, 94-87
#15	229	St. Mary's (Md.)	3-2	def. Washington College, 78-74; LOST at Johns Hopkins, 66-67; def. Frostburg State, 62-57; def. Kean, 71-61; LOST at #17 Franklin and Marshall, 68-77
#16	215	Mary Hardin-Baylor	2-0	def. Southwestern, 82-56; def. Centenary (La.), 93-57
#17	173	Franklin and Marshall	4-0	def. Neumann, 69-63; def. Oneonta State, 64-46; def. Washington College, 63-47; def. #15 St. Mary's (Md.), 77-68
#18	168	Oswego State	3-1	LOST at St. Lawrence, 62-66; def. Ithaca, 74-71; def. Wells, 58-55; def. SUNY-Cobleskill, 107-53
#19	161	Buffalo State	2-0	def. D'Youville, 141-93; def. Pitt-Bradford, 94-50
#20	153	Centre	3-2	def. Maryville (Tenn.), 70-50; def. John Carroll, 92-91; LOST at Mount St. Joseph, 49-55; LOST at Transylvania, 62-74; def. Franklin, 78-62
#21	141	UW-River Falls	4-2	LOST at Viterbo, 63-73; def. Loras, 70-60; def. Bethel, 65-62; def. #8 St. Thomas, 79-64; def. Pacific Lutheran, 68-59; LOST at Puget Sound, 64-67
#22	124	Birmingham-Southern	4-0	def. Huntingdon, 81-79; def. University of the Ozarks, 103-80; def. Berry, 103-55; def. LaGrange, 96-65
#23	121	Hampden-Sydney	3-2	def. LaGrange, 99-86; def. Huntingdon, 98-71; LOST at Methodist, 79-81; def. Shenandoah, 89-67; LOST to #27 North Carolina Wesleyan, 70-73
#24	117	UW-Stevens Point	4-1	def. Lawrence, 80-58; def. Richard Stockton, 86-77; def. York (Pa.), 68-54; LOST at St. John's, 55-60; def. Buena Vista, 87-70
#25	113	Wheaton (Ill.)	4-0	def. Loras, 82-67; def. Beloit, 81-44; def. Wilmington, 96-61; def. #37 Manchester, 82-52

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 27, 2011, 08:56:28 PM

Others receiving votes
Note: Scores in italics, for Hope and Calvin, were not yet posted to the d3hoops.com scoreboard, so they were retrieved from the team Web sites. Also note that neutral-site results are not correctly reported.

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	90	Brandeis	2-3	LOST to Lasell, 82-91; def. Emerson, 78-50; def. #34 Becker, 77-76; LOST at Mass-Dartmouth, 54-68; LOST to #38 Rhode Island College, 50-61
#27	81	North Carolina Wesleyan	4-2	def. Roanoke Bible, 90-56; LOST to Maryland Bible, 83-89; def. St. Andrews, 82-77; def. Roanoke Bible, 88-51; LOST at Mary Washington, 66-95; def. #23 Hampden-Sydney, 73-70
#28	53	UW-Whitewater	4-0	def. Concordia (Ill.), 56-37; def. Dominican, 71-44; def. Wisconsin Lutheran, 84-61; def. Hamline, 87-76
#29	51	WPI	4-0	def. Husson, 86-44; def. Castleton State, 100-81; def. Elms, 86-55; def. T#40 Salem State, 105-80
#30	50	Whitman	3-1	LOST to #42 Washington U., 65-68; def. UC Santa Cruz, 68-56; def. #45 Chapman, 77-64; def. Cal Lutheran, 68-62
#31	48	Ramapo	4-1	def. Emerson, 78-31; def. Mass-Boston, 97-69; def. Yeshiva, 82-60; LOST to #5 Middlebury, 62-73; def. Manhattanville, 99-72
#32	47	Hope	4-0	def. Rochester (Mich.), 63-45; def. Spring Arbor, 73-56; def. Aquinas, 67-65; def. Cornerstone, 80-76
#33	45	Texas-Dallas	4-0	def. University of Dallas, 81-54; def. Centenary (La.), 79-66; def. Austin, 82-58; def. Howard Payne, 69-64
#34	44	Becker	0-2	LOST to #38 Rhode Island College, 52-60; LOST at #26 Brandeis, 76-77
#35	42	Hartwick	5-0	def. Wells, 65-63; def. Brooklyn, 60-54; def. Manhattanville, 73-67; def. Union, 62-61; def. T#51 Penn State-Behrend, 57-54
#36	39	Randolph-Macon	4-1	def. #50 Christopher Newport, 90-88; def. Rutgers-Newark, 73-72; LOST at Albright, 58-69; def. Southwestern, 94-65; def. Trinity (Texas), 55-40
#37	38	Manchester	2-4	def. Concordia (Ill.), 63-47; LOST at Illinois College, 43-66; LOST at MacMurray, 73-76; LOST at #25 Wheaton (Ill.), 52-82; def. Kalamazoo, 71-67; LOST at Trine, 61-73
#38	35	Rhode Island College	5-0	def. Clark, 70-52; def. #34 Becker, 60-52; def. Lasell, 72-69; def. Bridgewater State, 64-52; def. #26 Brandeis, 61-50
#39	34	Grinnell	4-0	def. Principia, 145-97; def. Wartburg, 115-97; def. Presentation, 126-98; def. William Penn, 150-137
T#40	30	Concordia (Wis.)	3-1	def. UW-La Crosse, 63-57; def. UW-Platteville, 76-66; LOST at UW-Eau Claire, 63-68; def. Concordia (Ill.), 89-63
T#40	30	Salem State	4-1	def. Mass-Dartmouth, 83-80; def. Potsdam State, 92-63; def. #3 Williams, 83-69; def. Gordon, 76-49; LOST at #29 WPI, 80-105
#42	29	Washington U.	3-2	def. MacMurray, 91-64; def. #30 Whitman, 68-65; LOST at #12 Whitworth, 66-88; LOST at Ohio Wesleyan, 67-70; def. Principia, 83-56
#43	20	Illinois Wesleyan	4-1	def. Benedictine, 99-70; def. MacMurray, 102-62; def. Illinois College, 79-73; def. Monmouth, 77-49; LOST at Ripon, 61-80
#44	19	Western Connecticut	4-1	def. Medgar Evers, 85-72; def. Regis (Mass.), 70-55; LOST at Albertus Magnus, 88-107; def. Richard Stockton, 69-63; def. Johnson and Wales, 91-83
#45	18	Chapman	2-2	def. La Verne, 76-63; def. Redlands, 56-51; LOST at #30 Whitman, 64-77; LOST to #12 Whitworth, 44-58
#46	17	North Central (Ill.)	3-1	def. Blackburn, 91-78; def. Trine, 72-70; LOST at Aurora, 82-94; def. Illinois College, 75-60
#47	12	Wabash	4-0	def. Calumet Col., 63-55; def. St. Francis (IL), 84-59; def. Elmhurst, 67-59; def. DePauw, 62-47
#48	8	New Jersey City	4-0	def. Susquehanna, 68-64; def. Messiah, 72-66; def. Medgar Evers, 99-79; def. Alvernia, 63-49
#49	6	Hanover	3-1	def. Ohio Wesleyan, 70-58; def. Denison, 64-62; def. Oberlin, 74-55; LOST to Ohio Northern, 60-63
#50	5	Christopher Newport	4-2	LOST at #36 Randolph-Macon, 88-90; def. Mary Washington, 74-72; def. York (N.Y.), 65-56; LOST to Mary Washington, 82-86; def. Wesley, 89-80; def. Washington and Lee, 76-66
T#51	4	Capital	2-2	def. Thiel, 76-56; def. Westminster (Pa.), 82-62; LOST at #11 Wittenberg, 63-69; LOST to Denison, 76-90
T#51	4	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	5-0	def. Pacifica, 71-62; def. Southwestern, 66-51; def. Trinity (Texas), 70-41; def. #56 St. Olaf, 82-74; def. Dominican, 81-55
T#51	4	Eastern Mennonite	2-2	def. Shenandoah, 87-61; LOST to Springfield, 81-90; LOST at DeSales, 66-70; def. Emory and Henry, 81-78
T#51	4	Hobart	3-0	def. Ithaca, 92-67; def. Cazenovia, 82-76; def. D'Youville, 86-63
T#51	4	Penn State-Behrend	0-4	LOST to Fredonia State, 50-61; LOST at Carnegie Mellon, 63-68; LOST at Thiel, 47-65; LOST to #35 Hartwick, 54-57
#56	3	St. Olaf	1-3	def. Bethany Lutheran, 71-50; LOST at Luther, 55-65; LOST to T#51 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 74-82; LOST to Pomona-Pitzer, 76-79
T#57	2	Calvin	3-3	LOST at Anderson, 60-73; def. Grace Bible (Mich.), 92-88; def. Willamette, 81-76; def. Finlandia, 78-70; LOST at Cornerstone, 77-94; LOST at Aquinas, 63-69
T#57	2	SUNY-Purchase	1-1	LOST at Stevens, 57-75; def. King's, 72-70
T#57	2	William Paterson	5-0	def. York (N.Y.), 72-61; def. King's, 82-66; def. Stevens, 112-107; def. New Jersey, 75-69; def. FDU-Florham, 67-54
#60	1	Gwynedd-Mercy	2-1	LOST to #5 Middlebury, 70-76; def. Yeshiva, 80-54; def. Rosemont, 79-62

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: stag44 on November 28, 2011, 02:08:48 PM

Great opening 2 weeks from Claremont-Mudd-Scripps. They have opened up at 5-0 with some very impressive wins. They are led by pre-season All-American Chris Blees who is living up to his accolades and dominating games.

They have a tough stretch with 3 NAIA D1 teams over the next 2 weeks as well as an always difficult visit to Chapman.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 28, 2011, 07:06:54 PM

Nice work, as always, Darryl.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 28, 2011, 08:59:15 PM

#31 Ramapo defeats Scranton 86-82 in overtime.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Wabash2011 on November 28, 2011, 10:45:49 PM

When is the first poll? This week?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on November 28, 2011, 11:38:53 PM

New poll is out, lots of movement.

http://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2011-12/week1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 29, 2011, 08:48:06 AM

I guess the best way to express appreciation on these boards is to award karma (for those who have the ability).

+1! Thanks for doing this! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on November 29, 2011, 07:49:30 PM

Williams, at home, trailing at the half by 4 to RPI. Same RPI team that lost to MIT by 29 ten days ago. Williams seems to really be struggling getting back their rhythm following all those early season injuries.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on November 29, 2011, 09:02:42 PM

Quote from: Hugenerd on November 29, 2011, 07:49:30 PM
Williams, at home, trailing at the half by 4 to RPI. Same RPI team that lost to MIT by 29 ten days ago. Williams seems to really be struggling getting back their rhythm following all those early season injuries.

Williams pulls it out, although it was only a 2 point game with 1:03 left.

Interesting matchup on Friday, as NESCAC power Amherst travels to play upstart 5-0 Springfield, who beat ORV Keene State tonight (Springfield also plays Williams next week). NEWMAC, as a whole, has been spectacular this season, with 4 teams currently undefeated (MIT, WPI, and Babson, in addition to Springfield). The conference swept the evening again tonight, with the league a combined 32-4 nearly half-way through their non-conference slates. In contrast to previous seasons, the conference seems to be strong top to bottom, also, with no team currently under 0.600 and the team in last place, Clark, demolished UAA foe and preseason ORV #26, Brandeis, by 19 this evening. Looks like the NEWMAC is up this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: littleeastguy on November 30, 2011, 10:54:48 AM

RIC, just outside the current Top 25, moved to 6-0 with a 89-62 win over JWU. Star center Mike Akinrola again played very limited minutes for RIC, he is nursing bruised ribs.
This is RIC's 3rd win over a 2011 NCAA Tournament team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on November 30, 2011, 03:13:47 PM

I watched the Williams game. The early-season injuries definitely have hindered the offensive rhythm (the top four guards missed virtually the entire pre-season, and two of them missed the first two weeks of the season to boot), and I expect (and certainly hope) that, after (finally) a week of practice together, the team will look a lot more cohesive this weekend. Even so, the Ephs played about as poorly as they possibly could vs. a not-very-talented, but gritty, RPI team. Coach Maker stated that this was one of two times in his three plus years as a coach that the team was not ready to play, and I agree ... many of the turnovers were unforced and incredibly careless (stepping on baseline before receiving a pass, not being aware of defenders' positioning, lazy lofted passes etc.), the team missed many wide-open threes, and worst of all, there was a lack of effort and attention to detail on defense, lots of confusion on switching and so on. They just looked really lethargic, which is atypical for a Maker team to say the least, until they got into a big hole and finally woke up. I'd be surprised if the team played anywhere near that poorly the rest of the year, but of course, the competition gets much tougher with solid Springfield, Keene, and Ohio Northern squads on deck in December, and the NESCAC schedule ahead in January.

The Ephs don't have the star power of the past few years, when they had basically two all-Americans per year who could really carry the team (Schultz/Wang then Whittington/Wang). Whittington is gone, and Wang is hindered by injury and (at least right now) not the same player as the last two years, hopefully by January he will be all the way back, but who knows. On the plus side, the team is much deeper, far more balanced, and features guys who can score at all five positions, plus a really great point guard in Nate Robertson, who is one of the more underrated players in the country and does so much more than box scores indicate. They also added a very strong frosh class, with Dan Wohl in particular looking like a potential all-NESCAC or even all-American player down the line; he's been the team's best all-around player so far this year, which no one would have predicted. I think the Ephs, if they can get healthy and stay that way, should be on par with last year's team. But that may not be enough, as Amherst and Midd are no worse and in Amherst's case probably better, themselves.

Springfield, which really has come out of nowhere this year, plays both Amherst and Williams over the next week or so, which should give a pretty good indication of whether they are for real. I'd be very surprised if the NEWMAC can sustain this pace for long, as Babson, WPI, and Springfield all play some of the tougher New England teams in December.

I wonder what happened to Brandeis ... they returned basically everyone from a frosh-dominated team, and were expected to make big strides, but seem to have totally regressed, very surprising.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on November 30, 2011, 04:11:40 PM

I changed quite a bit between my freshmen and sophomore years. Was less concerned with some things - more concerned with others. Maybe those plucky frosh did the same?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on November 30, 2011, 09:31:02 PM

Final: #6 Wooster 84 Kenyon 68

Wooster gets the road win as they were led tonight by freshman Xavier Brown with 22 points, Justin Hallowell with 15 and Josh Claytor with 13. Justin Warnes and Ryan Snyder both added 11 each.

Wooster is now 4-0 and next plays at Adrian (MI) on Saturday 12/3.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mugsy on November 30, 2011, 10:49:52 PM

Wheaton (Ill.) moves to 5-0 by beating U. of Chicago 76-54.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 01, 2011, 06:58:49 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	610	Augustana	4-0	def. St. Ambrose, 83-75; 12/02 vs. Wisconsin Lutheran; 12/03 at TBD
#2	587	Middlebury	5-0	def. Southern Vermont, 107-51
#3	582	Amherst	4-0	def. Lasell, 94-61; 12/02 at Springfield; 12/03 vs. Westfield State
#4	531	Marietta	4-0	def. #17 Wittenberg, 87-63; 12/03 at Baldwin-Wallace
#5	479	Virginia Wesleyan	3-1	def. #34 Randolph-Macon, 63-60; 12/03 at Emory and Henry; 12/04 at T#48 North Carolina Wesleyan
#6	462	Wooster	4-0	def. Kenyon, 84-68; 12/03 at Adrian
#7	425	Williams	4-1	def. RPI, 91-84; 12/03 vs. SUNY-Purchase; 12/04 at TBA
#8	423	Whitworth	4-0	12/02 vs. Lewis and Clark; 12/03 vs. George Fox
#9	408	MIT	6-0	def. Emerson, 89-57; 12/01 at Newbury; 12/03 vs. Lesley
#10	384	Emory	6-0	def. LaGrange, 89-70; 12/03 vs. Covenant
#11	285	Cabrini	4-0	def. Neumann, 87-77; def. Philadelphia Bible, 82-66; 12/03 vs. Keystone
#12	284	Rochester	5-1	def. Geneseo State, 72-60; 12/02 vs. Nazareth; 12/03 at TBD
#13	276	Wheaton (Ill.)	5-0	def. T#51 Chicago, 76-54; 12/02 vs. T#27 Hope; 12/03 at Calvin
#14	254	Franklin and Marshall	6-0	def. Lancaster Bible, 57-40; def. Ursinus, 70-52; 12/03 vs. McDaniel
#15	237	Mary Hardin-Baylor	3-0	def. East Texas Baptist, 80-71; 12/01 at LeTourneau; 12/03 at Texas-Tyler
#16	226	Buffalo State	3-0	def. Houghton, 89-74; 12/02 at Oneonta State; 12/03 at New Paltz State
#17	196	Wittenberg	1-2	LOST at #4 Marietta, 63-87; 12/03 vs. Oberlin
#18	160	WPI	4-0	12/01 at Lasell; 12/03 at Becker
#19	151	Birmingham-Southern	5-0	def. Huntingdon, 93-75; 12/03 at Oglethorpe
#20	127	Salisbury	4-1	LOST at Hood, 55-67; 12/02 vs. John Jay; 12/03 vs. TBD
#21	109	St. Thomas	4-1	def. St. Olaf, 72-56; 12/03 vs. Gustavus Adolphus
#22	107	Puget Sound	5-0	12/02 at Pacific; 12/03 at Willamette
#23	93	UW-Stevens Point	4-1	12/03 vs. UW-Superior
#24	77	UW-Whitewater	5-0	def. T#38 Illinois Wesleyan, 65-53; 12/03 vs. UW-Stout
#25	75	UW-River Falls	4-2	12/03 at UW-Platteville

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	58	Wabash	5-0	def. Rose-Hulman, 58-44; 12/03 at Denison
T#27	47	Hope	4-1	LOST at Western Mich., 58-80; 12/02 at #13 Wheaton (Ill.); 12/03 at Carthage
T#27	47	Rhode Island College	6-0	def. Johnson and Wales, 89-62; 12/03 at Plymouth State
T#27	47	Ramapo	5-2	def. Scranton, 86-82; LOST at #31 William Paterson, 71-82; 12/03 vs. Kean
#30	44	Texas-Dallas	5-0	def. Sul Ross State, 64-49; 12/01 vs. Hardin-Simmons; 12/03 vs. McMurry
#31	43	William Paterson	6-0	def. T#27 Ramapo, 82-71; 12/03 vs. Skidmore
#32	42	Oswego State	3-1	12/02 vs. Potsdam State; 12/03 vs. Plattsburgh State
#33	36	Salem State	4-1	12/01 at Plymouth State; 12/03 vs. Brandeis; 12/04 vs. TBA
#34	31	Randolph-Macon	4-2	LOST at #5 Virginia Wesleyan, 60-63; 12/03 vs. Eastern Mennonite
#35	25	Edgewood	6-0	def. Marian, 81-72; 12/03 at Concordia (Ill.)
#36	24	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	5-0	12/03 vs. Master's
#37	21	St. Mary's (Md.)	3-2	12/01 at Christopher Newport; 12/03 vs. Stevenson
T#38	12	Concordia (Wis.)	4-1	def. Wisconsin Lutheran, 89-68; 12/01 vs. Silver Lake; 12/03 at Benedictine
T#38	12	Grinnell	4-0	12/02 vs. St. Norbert; 12/03 vs. T#48 Ripon
T#38	12	Hartwick	5-0	12/01 at Keuka; 12/03 at Morrisville State
T#38	12	Illinois Wesleyan	4-2	LOST at #24 UW-Whitewater, 53-65; 12/03 vs. Webster
T#42	11	Mary Washington	5-1	def. Stevenson, 63-53; 12/03 vs. Frostburg State
T#42	11	Western Connecticut	5-1	def. T#51 Trinity (Conn.), 74-68; 12/03 at Mass-Boston
#44	10	New Jersey City	4-0	12/03 vs. Rowan
T#45	6	Transylvania	3-0	def. Thomas More, 85-80; 12/03 vs. Anderson
T#45	6	Washington U.	3-2	12/02 vs. Whittier; 12/03 vs. TBA
#47	5	Centre	3-2	12/02 at Millsaps; 12/04 at Rhodes
T#48	4	North Carolina Wesleyan	5-2	def. Guilford, 65-61; 12/04 vs. #5 Virginia Wesleyan
T#48	4	Ripon	3-0	12/02 at Knox; 12/03 at T#38 Grinnell
#50	3	Albright	3-1	LOST to Lycoming, 82-84; 12/03 at Widener
T#51	1	Chicago	4-2	LOST at #13 Wheaton (Ill.), 54-76; 12/03 vs. Kalamazoo
T#51	1	Hobart	4-0	def. St. John Fisher, 83-58; 12/02 vs. Brockport State; 12/03 at TBD
T#51	1	Keene State	4-1	LOST at Springfield, 79-85; 12/03 vs. Mass-Dartmouth
T#51	1	Trinity (Conn.)	4-2	LOST to T#42 Western Connecticut, 68-74; 12/03 vs. Newbury

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 01, 2011, 07:27:33 AM

I like UT-Dallas as a Top 30 team. However, the "winner" of the series this weekend, UTD hosting Hardin-Simmons and then McMurry should be the holder of that Top 30 slot.

All 3 schools are excellent teams.

McMurry and HSU are favorites (with UMHB) in the ASC West. UT-Dallas is the favorite in the ASC-East.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 02, 2011, 11:00:35 PM

Tonight's scoreboard shows #16 Buffalo State losing to Oneonta by a 65-61 score. That is incorrect as that's a score from the women's game. I'm assuming someone at Oneonta posted it on the wrong board.

The Buffalo State men's team had a nailbiter but managed to win their game over Oneonta 80-76. Buffalo State's All American candidate 6'0" guard Jake Simmons had 27 pts on 9x14 fg, 5x7 3's, 4x4 ft, with 4 steals, 5 rebounds, and 2 blocks. If he puts up stats close to that tomorrow he should be a candidate for the team of the week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 02, 2011, 11:33:10 PM

#12 Rochester loses to Nazareth College for the second time in 11 days this time 66-64. On Nov. 22 they lost 82-64. Maybe the third times a charm. Oh wait, that was the third time as they lost to Nazareth in the final of last year's Wendy's classic 62-60. I think the Yellowjackets have had enough of the Golden Flyers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 03, 2011, 05:23:32 PM

Final: #6 Wooster 75 Adrian (MI) 50

Wooster gets the easy road win with balanced scoring, 10 three pointers and a 50 to 31 rebounding edge. Scots were led by Justin Hallowell with 13 points and Justin Warnes with 11.

Wooster is now 5-0 and plays Wittenberg next on Wednesday 12/7.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 03, 2011, 05:53:37 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 01, 2011, 07:27:33 AM
I like UT-Dallas as a Top 30 team. However, the "winner" of the series this weekend, UTD hosting Hardin-Simmons and then McMurry should be the holder of that Top 30 slot.

All 3 schools are excellent teams.

McMurry and HSU are favorites (with UMHB) in the ASC West. UT-Dallas is the favorite in the ASC-East.

I think that the "winner" this weekend is Hardin-Simmons.

They had a good road trip, first beating UT-Dallas handily on Thursday night and then making the 5-hour road trip from Dallas up to Ozarks to beat the Eagles, 87-79. HSU's pre-season All American Matt Addison had 38 in the game versus UOzarks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 03, 2011, 07:13:33 PM

So Marietta gets crushed by 19 today against Baldwin-Wallace, who improves to 4-1. Who was BW's only loss to? Currently 6-0 Bethany. Maybe the Bison deserve some consideration in the polls, even more than BW?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 03, 2011, 08:11:14 PM

Quote from: Hugenerd on December 03, 2011, 07:13:33 PM
So Marietta gets crushed by 19 today against Baldwin-Wallace, who improves to 4-1. Who was BW's only loss to? Currently 6-0 Bethany. Maybe the Bison deserve some consideration in the polls, even more than BW?

Good old Bald Wally... I originally picked 'em in the... pick 'em... but switched it when I saw the rankings.

Oops!

BTW, #23 Stevens Point dominated Superior 85-47 in WIAC action tonight.

#24 Whitewater has a 37-19 lead against Stout with a couple minutes left in the first half.

#25 River Falls beat Platteville 68-57

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 03, 2011, 08:55:28 PM

#16 Buffalo St. remains undefeated at 5-0 as they defeat New Paltz St. 89-83 for their 2nd conference road win of the weekend. Bengals guard Jake Simmons continues his outstanding play as he scores 21 pts with 5 steals and 3 boards. His 3 game totals for the week were 76 pts (25x49 fg 51%, 11x25 3's 44%, 14x16 ft 87.5%) 10 rebounds, 9 steals, and 2 blocks. I'm lobbying hard for D3 team of the week. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on December 03, 2011, 09:29:34 PM

#11 Cabrini sneaks passed Keystone 95-92 on a last second 3 pointer, to remain undefeated at 5-0.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 03, 2011, 10:39:32 PM

Quote from: Hugenerd on December 03, 2011, 07:13:33 PM
So Marietta gets crushed by 19 today against Baldwin-Wallace, who improves to 4-1. Who was BW's only loss to? Currently 6-0 Bethany. Maybe the Bison deserve some consideration in the polls, even more than BW?

Bethany has only played one team currently with a winning record and that was their win at home vs. BW. Marietta is currently playing without their preseason All-American Trevor Halter who is injured. Baldwin-Wallace was also playing at home today and they shot 57% overall and 48% on three pointers (12 made) which explains their win over the Pioneers. On any given day when the other team shoots lights out..... ;)

The President's Conference is historically weak so I wouldn't pick Bethany as a Top 25 team yet, IMO. It will be interesting to see how Bethany fares the rest of December including a road game at Illinois Wesleyan on 12/29.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 03, 2011, 10:50:47 PM

Well, the king won't get to enjoy his throne for very long. Wash U upset #1 Augie, 71-68.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 03, 2011, 11:00:54 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on December 03, 2011, 10:39:32 PM
Quote from: Hugenerd on December 03, 2011, 07:13:33 PM
So Marietta gets crushed by 19 today against Baldwin-Wallace, who improves to 4-1. Who was BW's only loss to? Currently 6-0 Bethany. Maybe the Bison deserve some consideration in the polls, even more than BW?

Bethany has only played one team currently with a winning record and that was their win at home vs. BW. Marietta is currently playing without their preseason All-American Trevor Halter who is injured. Baldwin-Wallace was also playing at home today and they shot 57% overall and 48% on three pointers (12 made) which explains their win over the Pioneers. On any given day when the other team shoots lights out..... ;)

The President's Conference is historically weak so I wouldn't pick Bethany as a Top 25 team yet, IMO. It will be interesting to see how Bethany fares the rest of December including a road game at Illinois Wesleyan on 12/29.

You play your schedule, and my statement was only meant to say that before BW jumps into the Top 25 because their upset of a Top 5 (eg Salisbury who jumped in this week after lasts week win vs VWU, and then proceeded to lose twice this week), voters may want to look at the fact that their only loss is to an undefeated team. Oh, by the way, Marietta doesn't have a single win over a team that currently has winning record, so that kind of blows that argument.

I'm sure we will know a lot more about all the teams in 4 weeks, but based on the results, I would put Bethany ahead of BW if I had to vote and that's all I was saying.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 03, 2011, 11:06:26 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 03, 2011, 10:50:47 PM
Well, the king won't get to enjoy his throne for very long. Wash U upset #1 Augie, 71-68.

Yeah, I enjoyed watching the 2nd half until the video went out with 27 seconds left. Augie seemed to be settling for a lot of outside shots, especially considering their bigs were killing WashU in the post (Kunz seemed to score at will or get fouled every time he touched it in the 2nd half). Anyway, big win for The Bears, should make up for those early losses on the road.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Bengalsrule on December 04, 2011, 01:33:49 PM

Quote from: magicman on December 03, 2011, 08:55:28 PM
#16 Buffalo St. remains undefeated at 5-0 as they defeat New Paltz St. 89-83 for their 2nd conference road win of the weekend. Bengals guard Jake Simmons continues his outstanding play as he scores 21 pts with 5 steals and 3 boards. His 3 game totals for the week were 76 pts (25x49 fg 51%, 11x25 3's 44%, 14x16 ft 87.5%) 10 rebounds, 9 steals, and 2 blocks. I'm lobbying hard for D3 team of the week. ;D

magicman. I couldn't agree with you more! Hopefully that body of work is worthy of a spot on this weeks team! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 04, 2011, 06:01:19 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	610	Augustana	5-1	def. St. Ambrose, 83-75; def. Wisconsin Lutheran, 74-46; LOST at T#45 Washington U., 68-71
#2	587	Middlebury	5-0	def. Southern Vermont, 107-51
#3	582	Amherst	6-0	def. Lasell, 94-61; def. Springfield, 81-71; def. Westfield State, 79-62
#4	531	Marietta	4-1	def. #17 Wittenberg, 87-63; LOST at Baldwin-Wallace, 74-93
#5	479	Virginia Wesleyan	5-1	def. #34 Randolph-Macon, 63-60; def. Emory and Henry, 73-50; def. T#48 North Carolina Wesleyan, 99-76
#6	462	Wooster	5-0	def. Kenyon, 84-68; def. Adrian, 75-50
#7	425	Williams	6-1	def. RPI, 91-84; def. SUNY-Purchase, 92-56; def. Worcester State, 70-52
#8	423	Whitworth	6-0	def. Lewis and Clark, 77-69; def. George Fox, 75-48
#9	408	MIT	8-0	def. Emerson, 89-57; def. Newbury, 93-50; def. Lesley, 92-52
#10	384	Emory	7-0	def. LaGrange, 89-70; def. Covenant, 79-53
#11	285	Cabrini	5-0	def. Neumann, 87-77; def. Philadelphia Bible, 82-66; def. Keystone, 95-92
#12	284	Rochester	6-2	def. Geneseo State, 72-60; LOST to Nazareth, 64-66; def. Brockport State, 83-70
#13	276	Wheaton (Ill.)	6-1	def. T#51 Chicago, 76-54; LOST to T#27 Hope, 78-79; def. Calvin, 71-66
#14	254	Franklin and Marshall	7-0	def. Lancaster Bible, 57-40; def. Ursinus, 70-52; def. McDaniel, 63-46
#15	237	Mary Hardin-Baylor	5-0	def. East Texas Baptist, 80-71; def. LeTourneau, 68-59; def. Texas-Tyler, 74-52
#16	226	Buffalo State	5-0	def. Houghton, 89-74; def. Oneonta State, 80-76; def. New Paltz State, 89-83
#17	196	Wittenberg	2-2	LOST at #4 Marietta, 63-87; def. Oberlin, 69-57
#18	160	WPI	6-0	def. Lasell, 74-51; def. Becker, 62-57
#19	151	Birmingham-Southern	6-0	def. Huntingdon, 93-75; def. Oglethorpe, 63-62
#20	127	Salisbury	5-2	LOST at Hood, 55-67; LOST to John Jay, 73-76; def. Penn State-Abington, 80-77
#21	109	St. Thomas	5-1	def. St. Olaf, 72-56; def. Gustavus Adolphus, 79-61
#22	107	Puget Sound	7-0	def. Pacific, 67-61; def. Willamette, 73-59
#23	93	UW-Stevens Point	5-1	def. UW-Superior, 85-47
#24	77	UW-Whitewater	6-0	def. T#38 Illinois Wesleyan, 65-53; def. UW-Stout, 84-51
#25	75	UW-River Falls	5-2	def. UW-Platteville, 68-57

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	58	Wabash	6-0	def. Rose-Hulman, 58-44; def. Denison, 71-65
T#27	47	Hope	6-1	LOST at Western Mich., 58-80; def. #13 Wheaton (Ill.), 79-78; def. Carthage, 89-59
T#27	47	Rhode Island College	7-0	def. Johnson and Wales, 89-62; def. Plymouth State, 65-51
T#27	47	Ramapo	6-2	def. Scranton, 86-82; LOST at #31 William Paterson, 71-82; def. Kean, 69-59
#30	44	Texas-Dallas	6-1	def. Sul Ross State, 64-49; LOST to Hardin-Simmons, 58-80; def. McMurry, 94-86
#31	43	William Paterson	7-0	def. T#27 Ramapo, 82-71; def. Skidmore, 75-69
#32	42	Oswego State	5-1	def. Potsdam State, 69-54; def. Plattsburgh State, 70-61
#33	36	Salem State	6-2	def. Plymouth State, 101-82; def. Brandeis, 65-57; LOST to Tufts, 73-85
#34	31	Randolph-Macon	5-2	LOST at #5 Virginia Wesleyan, 60-63; def. Eastern Mennonite, 87-86
#35	25	Edgewood	7-0	def. Marian, 81-72; def. Concordia (Ill.), 60-56
#36	24	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	6-0	def. Master's, 71-65
#37	21	St. Mary's (Md.)	5-2	def. Christopher Newport, 85-77; def. Stevenson, 89-81
T#38	12	Concordia (Wis.)	5-2	def. Wisconsin Lutheran, 89-68; def. Silver Lake, 103-51; LOST at Benedictine, 65-66
T#38	12	Grinnell	6-0	def. St. Norbert, 108-98; def. T#48 Ripon, 125-103
T#38	12	Hartwick	7-0	def. Keuka, 72-60; def. Morrisville State, 89-66
T#38	12	Illinois Wesleyan	5-2	LOST at #24 UW-Whitewater, 53-65; def. Webster, 97-64
T#42	11	Mary Washington	6-1	def. Stevenson, 63-53; def. Frostburg State, 65-57
T#42	11	Western Connecticut	6-1	def. T#51 Trinity (Conn.), 74-68; def. Mass-Boston, 68-65
#44	10	New Jersey City	5-0	def. Rowan, 61-59
T#45	6	Transylvania	4-0	def. Thomas More, 85-80; def. Anderson, 82-67
T#45	6	Washington U.	5-2	def. Whittier, 84-72; def. #1 Augustana, 71-68
#47	5	Centre	4-3	def. Millsaps, 65-50; LOST at Rhodes, 58-72
T#48	4	North Carolina Wesleyan	5-3	def. Guilford, 65-61; LOST to #5 Virginia Wesleyan, 76-99
T#48	4	Ripon	4-1	def. Knox, 78-51; LOST at T#38 Grinnell, 103-125
#50	3	Albright	3-2	LOST to Lycoming, 82-84; LOST at Widener, 66-74
T#51	1	Chicago	5-2	LOST at #13 Wheaton (Ill.), 54-76; def. Kalamazoo, 89-54
T#51	1	Hobart	6-0	def. St. John Fisher, 83-58; def. Brockport State, 71-70; def. Nazareth, 72-63
T#51	1	Keene State	5-1	LOST at Springfield, 79-85; def. Mass-Dartmouth, 92-55
T#51	1	Trinity (Conn.)	5-2	LOST to T#42 Western Connecticut, 68-74; def. Newbury, 84-48

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 06, 2011, 03:17:02 AM

New Poll is out and as expected Middlebury is #1, with Amherst close behind in the 2nd spot. 13 first place votes for the Panthers and 10 for the Lord Jeffs. Whitworth and Virginia Wesleyan got the other 2.

Biggest movers upward were:

UW-Whitewater + 85 pts from 24th to 19th
Franklin & Marshall +81 pts from 14th to 11th
St. Thomas +77 pts from 21st to 16th
Whitworth +72 pts from 8th to 6th
WPI +70 from 18th to 15th
William Paterson +70 pts from ORV 31st to 22nd

Biggest movers downward were:

Rochester -181 pts from 12th down to 24th
Wittenberg -137 pts from 17th to ORV #27
Marietta -130 pts from 4th down to 10th
Salisbury -120 pts from 20th down to ORV tie for 41st
Wheaton -91 pts from 13th down to 17th

Here's the link: http://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2011-12/week2

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: littleeastguy on December 06, 2011, 09:18:28 AM

Surprised that RIC is still not ranked. I feel like this always happens to them, they are never highly ranked but make the tournament every year.
A few years ago them not being ranked early in the season made more since as they were new to being a top team. But 6 straight seasons with over 21 wins and in the sweet 16 the last two years.
This year they are 7-0 and are winning by an average of 16 points a game. This includes road wins over Becker, Brandies and Bridgewater all NCAA tournament teams the past few years.
But saying all that RIC gets a chance to make a statement this week with the game against #15 WPI.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 06, 2011, 09:39:57 AM

Those three -- Becker, Brandeis and Bridgewater State -- are 2-3, 2-4, 3-5.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 06, 2011, 12:19:06 PM

Just carrying over an interesting observation from the WIAC page...

Quote from: frodotwo on December 06, 2011, 11:22:06 AM
Strange voting for the top 25 this week. Superior beats traditionally weak teams Finlandia and Northwestern (MN), then loses by 38 points to UWSP and garners 6 points in the poll. River Falls drops 58 points and 8 slots after beating traditionally strong Platteville on the road. Go figure ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 06, 2011, 12:35:09 PM

Everyone is shifting around at this point. I had a few teams (not related to the WIAC) slide down a few slots, even though they didn't lose. The reasons varied from their wins were not as strong as I had hoped; teams behind them look better now then they did previously, so I jumped them ahead; I am comfortable with where a team is in my poll, so I didn't move them up or down despite what they did, but teams behind them did move.

As for UW-River Falls... I am just waiting to see more on their resume. I can't take the Platteville win too seriously, just yet, because Platteville just doesn't look like the team we are all accustomed too.

As for UW-Superior, they may have gained some points from my placing them in the poll... but I will admit publicly that was a mistake. I am not sure what I was looking at when I put them in my poll, but it was a mistake and I apologize for jacking that up - I am not known for making that kind of mistake (though, the bottom 10 even 15 are harder and harder to determine - I predict a very topsy, turvy year for pollsters).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: littleeastguy on December 06, 2011, 04:20:20 PM

Pat: Yes but who where those schools loses too?
Becker: RIC, the team we are discussing,WPI a team in the top 20, and Brandies
Brandies: Has losses to RIC, @ Salem State who beat Williams in Williams, and @ UMD a team with some good wins
Bridgwater: RIC, @UMD, and a decent Wheaton team

And who has Rochester, who is ranked but has two loses, beat this season?
Geneso: a team that is 1-6
Brockport: 1-5
Allegheny: 2-6
Wells: 2-4
Plattsburg: 2-4
Keystone: 4-2

That means the teams they have beat are a combined 11-21, not a tough group there.

Stills doesn't add up...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 06, 2011, 05:26:45 PM

littleeastguy... first off, there are 25 voters from around the country... so there are many opinions on plenty of teams. Secondly, not every single team with 0 or 1 loss can make the Top 25. Thirdly, this early in the season some of those undefeated teams look better then they really are. Fourtly, there are a number of good teams in the Northeast... but trying to get them all into the Top 25 is challenge.

Yes... their wins are over sub-.500 teams. Yes, other schools have wins over sub-.500 teams. Yes, some teams are in the Top 25 with two losses, but keep in mind they are losing votes.

Give it time... there is always a lot of shake up, pollsters scratching their heads, and rearranging early in the season as teams over-perform, under-perform, surprise, and disappoint. If RIC keeps winning... they will be there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 06, 2011, 05:54:57 PM

This is the same argument every up and coming team has every year. Unfortunately, it's still early in the season and alot of votes are still being gained based on last years results, returning players, and expectations based on that. Give it time and if they continue to win, they will get the recognition they deserve. They have a big opportunity coming up against WPI, if they win that game they will be in.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: littleeastguy on December 06, 2011, 06:07:25 PM

That is exactly what I am talking about, RIC is not an "up and coming team". They have made the NCAA Tournament the last five years, how many other teams in the country have done that? During that time they have made the Sweet 16 three times, how many teams in the nation have done that?
But the impression is still out there that RIC is far from elite.
Dave, on your shows around the Tournament every year you always pick against RIC. You at least always have them going out before they do, and so does Pat.

I am just saying any other team with the recent history of RIC, and a 7-0 record would be top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 06, 2011, 06:21:00 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 06, 2011, 12:35:09 PM
Everyone is shifting around at this point. I had a few teams (not related to the WIAC) slide down a few slots, even though they didn't lose. The reasons varied from their wins were not as strong as I had hoped; teams behind them look better now then they did previously, so I jumped them ahead; I am comfortable with where a team is in my poll, so I didn't move them up or down despite what they did, but teams behind them did move.

As for UW-River Falls... I am just waiting to see more on their resume. I can't take the Platteville win too seriously, just yet, because Platteville just doesn't look like the team we are all accustomed too.

As for UW-Superior, they may have gained some points from my placing them in the poll... but I will admit publicly that was a mistake. I am not sure what I was looking at when I put them in my poll, but it was a mistake and I apologize for jacking that up - I am not known for making that kind of mistake (though, the bottom 10 even 15 are harder and harder to determine - I predict a very topsy, turvy year for pollsters).

What I find strange, in UWRF's case, is that they already took their "hit" from the losses they suffered... they went from 21st in the preseason, with 141 poll points to 25th in Week 1 with 75 points.

It makes sense that they would have gone from 21st to 25th (and not dropped out of the poll at that point because, though they lost their first game, it was their first game, against an NAIA opponent who had already played 2 games... and because they beat then-#8 St. Thomas... providing the Tommies with their only blemish), from an average poll position of just under 20 to 23. But to then win a game and drop an average of 2 spots?

I haven't looked at who "passed" them, but I would say that it is a very rare team that loses 58 poll points (or an average of greater than 2 spots in the poll) in a week when they win.

Now, I acknowledge that teams may drop actual poll positions because other teams gain more points than they do... but I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about the fact that River Falls didn't lose in the last week (and, in fact, one of their two previous losses is looked like a "better" loss, if such a thing exists, as Puget Sound remains undefeated and moves up to #20) but got dropped on the poll none the less.

I understand that I'm looking at RF in a bubble here and that they would openly admit that they haven't played up to even their own expectations, but I (and the poster who I reposted from) find it difficult to understand the drop.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 06, 2011, 06:44:17 PM

Quote from: littleeastguy on December 06, 2011, 06:07:25 PM
That is exactly what I am talking about, RIC is not an "up and coming team". They have made the NCAA Tournament the last five years, how many other teams in the country have done that? During that time they have made the Sweet 16 three times, how many teams in the nation have done that?
But the impression is still out there that RIC is far from elite.
Dave, on your shows around the Tournament every year you always pick against RIC. You at least always have them going out before they do, and so does Pat.

I am just saying any other team with the recent history of RIC, and a 7-0 record would be top 25.

Actually... I hardly pick games in Hoopsville... it's been years. And yes, RIC surprises me in the tournament... but at the same time, they sometimes don't have very hard games. Last year they beat Penn St.-Behrend who certainly looked good, but was maybe in over their head... and then they beat Oswego St. that certainly looks like a good win, but Oswego St. had also started to struggle at the end of the season. Sure, they played Amherst to within four points in the Sweet 16... and for that I top my hat.

Further more, the previous year they beat Rutgers-Newark and then a young Middlebury team... not sure what nod I would give there.

I have also been very high on RIC in the past, but in the last few years, every time I start to look at them more seriously and move them up the poll, they have an unexplained loss and I lose faith they are as good as their record indicates (or their wins over decent teams indicate).

RIC is 7-0 against a 16-27 opponent record with one team being above .500 and several of those games have been somewhat close.

By the way... F&M is undefeated on the season at 7-0... but I don't have them on my ballot either - despite their high ranking from the pollsters. I think their wins are overrated... their opponents maybe overrated... and I know they don't have a team that can actually compete at that high a level right now. If they prove me wrong as the season goes on, as RIC could, then as a voter I will put them in my Top 25 ballot.

And you are arguing about being in the #26 slot!

PointSpecial... not sure about UWRF's point of view of other voters. I haven't had them in my ballot yet this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 06, 2011, 10:10:29 PM

Wabash beats Millikin 58-43 to climb to 7-0 with a game against Wooster coming on Saturday

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 06, 2011, 10:25:17 PM

MIT wins their 3rd straight game by 40+ against UM-Boston tonight. Jamie Karraker hit 9 3s for MIT, which broke the single game mark for the Engineers (he has 40 total so far this season). Hollingsworth chipped in 20 points. Competition will get tougher this week, as they play ORV Salem State Thursday and ORV Tufts on Saturday, then finish off the non-conference slate next week at Wheelock before an extended winter break (over 3 weeks).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 07, 2011, 12:00:28 AM

Quote from: littleeastguy on December 06, 2011, 06:07:25 PM
That is exactly what I am talking about, RIC is not an "up and coming team". They have made the NCAA Tournament the last five years, how many other teams in the country have done that? During that time they have made the Sweet 16 three times, how many teams in the nation have done that?
But the impression is still out there that RIC is far from elite.
Dave, on your shows around the Tournament every year you always pick against RIC. You at least always have them going out before they do, and so does Pat.

I am just saying any other team with the recent history of RIC, and a 7-0 record would be top 25.

I picked RIC as my surprise in their bracket last year, which is a prediction of them advancing to the Sweet 16:
http://www.d3hoops.com/playoffs/men/2011/tournament-preview

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Billy Baller on December 07, 2011, 05:12:03 AM

Whoever decided to put William Paterson at #22 : smart move. Read my post regarding their squad in the Atlantic/NJAC section here: they are a force to be reckoned with right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 07, 2011, 11:31:55 PM

Final: Wittenberg 56 #5 Wooster 55

Wittenberg gets a key road win in a big rivalry game. Wooster committed 19 turnovers (vs. only 10 for Wittenberg) which was the deciding factor in the game as neither team shot the ball well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 08, 2011, 07:48:44 AM

How They Fared (So Far) -- Men games:

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	612	Middlebury	6-0	def. Johnson and Wales, 90-46; 12/09 at Skidmore
#2	599	Amherst	7-0	def. Emmanuel, 100-76; 12/08 at Babson; 12/10 at Brandeis
#3	506	Virginia Wesleyan	6-1	def. Methodist, 94-62
#4	504	Augustana	6-1	def. Fontbonne, 72-50; 12/10 vs. #21 UW-Stevens Point
#5	498	Wooster	5-1	LOST to #27 Wittenberg, 55-56; 12/10 at #25 Wabash
#6	495	Whitworth	6-0	12/10 vs. Montana Tech
#7	452	MIT	9-0	def. Mass-Boston, 90-47; 12/08 vs. T#48 Salem State; 12/10 at T#48 Tufts
#8	428	Williams	7-1	def. Keene State, 103-74; 12/10 vs. Springfield
#9	414	Emory	8-0	def. Oglethorpe, 60-54
#10	401	Marietta	5-1	def. Muskingum, 87-77; 12/10 at Otterbein
#11	335	Franklin and Marshall	8-0	def. Gettysburg, 61-47; 12/10 at Haverford
#12	329	Cabrini	6-0	def. Gwynedd-Mercy, 101-91; 12/10 vs. Baptist Bible
#13	269	Mary Hardin-Baylor	5-0	12/10 at Concordia (Texas)
#14	241	Buffalo State	5-0	12/09 vs. Cortland State; 12/10 vs. #31 Oswego State
#15	230	WPI	7-0	def. Colby-Sawyer, 76-56; 12/08 at #26 Rhode Island College; 12/10 vs. Fitchburg State
#16	186	St. Thomas	7-1	def. Hamline, 94-77; def. Macalester, 86-64
#17	185	Wheaton (Ill.)	6-1	12/08 at Westminster (Mo.); 12/10 at #32 Washington U.
#18	167	Birmingham-Southern	6-0	12/10 vs. Point
#19	162	UW-Whitewater	7-0	def. UW-La Crosse, 60-45; 12/10 at UW-Eau Claire
#20	160	Puget Sound	8-0	def. Evergreen St., 69-59
#21	117	UW-Stevens Point	6-1	def. UW-Oshkosh, 66-52; 12/10 at #4 Augustana
#22	113	William Paterson	8-0	def. Hunter, 71-53; 12/10 vs. Manhattanville
#23	106	Hope	6-1	12/09 vs. Marian (Ind.); 12/10 vs. Mt. Vernon Naz.
#24	103	Rochester	7-2	def. #53 Hamilton, 83-58; 12/10 at #30 Hobart
#25	77	Wabash	7-0	def. Millikin, 58-43; 12/10 vs. #5 Wooster

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	65	Rhode Island College	8-0	def. Salve Regina, 69-55; 12/08 vs. #15 WPI; 12/10 at Eastern Connecticut
#27	59	Wittenberg	3-2	def. #5 Wooster, 56-55; 12/10 at Allegheny
#28	42	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	8-0	def. San Diego Christian, 71-69; def. Chapman, 57-45; 12/10 vs. Pt. Loma Nazarene
#29	35	Edgewood	8-0	def. Lakeland, 86-68; 12/10 vs. Benedictine
#30	34	Hobart	6-0	12/10 vs. #24 Rochester
#31	29	Oswego State	6-1	def. Brockport State, 80-65; 12/09 at Fredonia State; 12/10 at #14 Buffalo State
#32	21	Washington U.	6-2	def. Webster, 74-50; 12/10 vs. #17 Wheaton (Ill.)
#33	17	UW-River Falls	5-2	12/10 at UW-Oshkosh
#34	14	Transylvania	5-0	def. Earlham, 81-57; 12/10 at Manchester
#35	13	St. Mary's (Md.)	6-2	def. York (Pa.), 71-69; 12/10 at Hood
#36	12	Grinnell	7-0	def. Knox, 85-68; 12/10 vs. Carroll
T#37	11	Baldwin-Wallace	5-1	def. Heidelberg, 90-69; 12/10 at Wilmington
T#37	11	Western Connecticut	7-1	def. SUNY-Cobleskill, 65-43; 12/08 at Framingham State; 12/10 vs. Southern Maine
#39	10	New Jersey City	6-0	def. York (N.Y.), 76-70; ~~12/07 at Lehman~~ (moved to 12/14); 12/09 vs. Ithaca
#40	9	Texas-Dallas	6-1	IDLE
T#41	7	Bethany	7-0	def. Carnegie Mellon, 88-75; 12/10 vs. Thomas More
T#41	7	Salisbury	5-3	LOST at Marymount, 57-64; 12/10 vs. Stevenson
T#43	6	Ramapo	6-2	12/09 at Medgar Evers
T#43	6	UW-Superior	6-4	def. UW-Stout, 64-51; 12/10 at UW-La Crosse
T#45	5	Hardin-Simmons	5-0	12/08 vs. Centenary (La.); 12/10 vs. East Texas Baptist
T#45	5	Mary Washington	6-2	LOST at Apprentice School, 74-76; 12/09 at Marymount
#47	4	Hartwick	7-0	12/08 vs. Oneonta State; 12/09 vs. Elms
T#48	3	Ohio Wesleyan	7-1	def. Kenyon, 96-65; 12/10 at DePauw
T#48	3	Randolph-Macon	6-2	def. Lynchburg, 90-87; 12/10 at Guilford
T#48	3	Rose-Hulman	6-1	def. Manchester, 59-29; 12/10 vs. Bluffton
T#48	3	Salem State	6-2	12/08 at #7 MIT
T#48	3	Tufts	6-2	LOST to Plymouth State, 73-79; 12/10 vs. #7 MIT
#53	2	Hamilton	8-1	LOST at #24 Rochester, 58-83; 12/10 vs. Vassar

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 08, 2011, 11:39:15 PM

#7 MIT handled ORV Salem State pretty easily tonight, starting out the game on an 18-5 run and never really looked back. The lead slipped to single figures only briefly after that, as MIT had a double-digit lead the final 28 minutes of the contest, which grew to as many as 28 in the second half. A late run for Salem State to end the game accounted for the the final score of 78-66.

Two nights after hitting 9 three pointers for MIT, Jamie Karraker hit 7 more to pace the Engineers with 28 points (upping his season total to 47 trifectas). 1st team Preseason AA Noel Hollingsworth added 20 points, 6 boards, and 5 blocks, while All-Region big man Will Tashman had a double-double (10 and 10), to go along with 6 assists. The New England Region Newcomer of the Year from 2 seasons ago, point guard Mitch Kates, dished out 8 assists, to go with his 14 points and 6 boards.

MIT, now 10-0, travels to play another ORV team, Tufts, this Saturday at 2 pm.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 10, 2011, 02:01:20 PM

Wow, some big games today.

Point at Augustana
Wooster at Wabash
Wheaton at Wash. U.

Just to name a few.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 10, 2011, 07:37:06 PM

Despite not playing well, MIT was able to edge an ORV Tufts team on the road this afternoon, 60-56, to improve to 11-0. MIT is nearly at the end of a brutal 12 game in 29 day stretch, today being the 11th game in 25 days. Point guard Mitchell Kates was key for the Engineers, scoring the games final 4 points in a 21 second span after the score was tied 56 all. While most of his teammates were off, center Noel Hollingsworth put the team on his back for much of the game, scoring 26 points (10-15 FG) and grabbing 11 board's.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Wabash2011 on December 10, 2011, 08:09:10 PM

Wabash over Wooster 72-58

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 10, 2011, 08:10:40 PM

#19 UW Whitewater spotted Eau Claire a 22-11 lead about 10 minutes into the half and the game was tied at halftime at 33 but hangs on and wins 68-59 to remain undefeated on the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 10, 2011, 08:49:39 PM

Oswego State ranked at #18 in the preseason poll and currently holding down the #31 spot has quietly run off 8 wins in a row after an opening season upset. Today they defeated conference rival #14 Buffalo State in Buffalo by a score of 85-71. The Lakers opened the season with a new coach and after an initial period of adjustment seem to be firing on all cylinders. Preseason All American candidate 6'7" Senior Chad Burridge scored 40 pts on Tuesday, 19 pts on Friday and another 19 pts today. His 3 game totals for the week were 78 points, 28 rebounds and 15 blocks. Could a SUNYAC player make the team of the week for the 3rd week in a row? Probably too much to ask.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on December 11, 2011, 12:23:07 AM

Whitworth loses at HOME (streak snapped at 40) to Montana Tech (NAIA) by 10, 83-73. Had a 2nd half lead and went cold for 5 minutes. A 14-0 run put the Pirates down 9 with 6 minutes to play. Had it within 4 under a minute but MT hit free throws.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: stag44 on December 11, 2011, 04:18:56 PM

Claremont-Mudd-Scripps just finished a 4 game in 7 nights stretch at 4-0 defeating 3 NAIA D-1 schools from the always strong GSAC conference and defeating Chapman as well.

I think we should see them make at top 25 appearance at 9-0. Great wins and now they can focus on finals!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 11, 2011, 04:27:00 PM

Quote from: stag44 on December 11, 2011, 04:18:56 PM
Claremont-Mudd-Scripps just finished a 4 game in 7 nights stretch at 4-0 defeating 3 NAIA D-1 schools from the always strong GSAC conference and defeating Chapman as well.

I think we should see them make at top 25 appearance at 9-0. Great wins and now they can focus on finals!

That is really impressive. The GSAC is a great NAIA I league.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 11, 2011, 04:29:20 PM

I think Ohio Wesleyan and Wash U need to jump in...

http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Ohio_Wesleyan/men/2011-12/index

http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Washington_U./men/2011-12/index

And I think Hope needs to be way higher - I think there is a good chance Hope is a Top 10 team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 11, 2011, 04:53:59 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 11, 2011, 04:29:20 PM
I think Ohio Wesleyan and Wash U need to jump in...

http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Ohio_Wesleyan/men/2011-12/index

http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Washington_U./men/2011-12/index

And I think Hope needs to be way higher - I think there is a good chance Hope is a Top 10 team.

Hope's next game is Dec 29 against Marietta with Trevor Halter back in the lineup for the Pioneers, so we'll find out then.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 11, 2011, 05:30:43 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	612	Middlebury	7-0	def. Johnson and Wales, 90-46; def. Skidmore, 64-59
#2	599	Amherst	8-1	def. Emmanuel, 100-76; def. Babson, 61-50; LOST at Brandeis, 61-76
#3	506	Virginia Wesleyan	6-1	def. Methodist, 94-62
#4	504	Augustana	7-1	def. Fontbonne, 72-50; def. #21 UW-Stevens Point, 69-64
#5	498	Wooster	5-2	LOST to #27 Wittenberg, 55-56; LOST at #25 Wabash, 58-72
#6	495	Whitworth	6-1	LOST to Montana Tech, 73-83
#7	452	MIT	11-0	def. Mass-Boston, 90-47; def. T#48 Salem State, 78-66; def. T#48 Tufts, 60-56
#8	428	Williams	8-1	def. Keene State, 103-74; def. Springfield, 68-57
#9	414	Emory	8-0	def. Oglethorpe, 60-54
#10	401	Marietta	6-1	def. Muskingum, 87-77; def. Otterbein, 77-69
#11	335	Franklin and Marshall	9-0	def. Gettysburg, 61-47; def. Haverford, 71-61
#12	329	Cabrini	7-0	def. Gwynedd-Mercy, 101-91; def. Baptist Bible, 83-49
#13	269	Mary Hardin-Baylor	6-0	def. Concordia (Texas), 99-92
#14	241	Buffalo State	6-1	def. Cortland State, 85-76; LOST to #31 Oswego State, 71-85
#15	230	WPI	8-1	def. Colby-Sawyer, 76-56; LOST at #26 Rhode Island College, 47-57; def. Fitchburg State, 100-80
#16	186	St. Thomas	7-1	def. Hamline, 94-77; def. Macalester, 86-64
#17	185	Wheaton (Ill.)	7-2	def. Westminster (Mo.), 64-49; LOST at #32 Washington U., 68-77
#18	167	Birmingham-Southern	7-0	def. Point, 92-80
#19	162	UW-Whitewater	8-0	def. UW-La Crosse, 60-45; def. UW-Eau Claire, 68-59
#20	160	Puget Sound	8-0	def. Evergreen St., 69-59
#21	117	UW-Stevens Point	6-2	def. UW-Oshkosh, 66-52; LOST at #4 Augustana, 64-69
#22	113	William Paterson	8-1	def. Hunter, 71-53; LOST to Manhattanville, 80-83
#23	106	Hope	8-1	def. Marian (Ind.), 76-60; def. Mt. Vernon Naz., 101-67
#24	103	Rochester	8-2	def. #53 Hamilton, 83-58; def. #30 Hobart, 72-62
#25	77	Wabash	8-0	def. Millikin, 58-43; def. #5 Wooster, 72-58

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	65	Rhode Island College	9-1	def. Salve Regina, 69-55; def. #15 WPI, 57-47; LOST at Eastern Connecticut, 59-70
#27	59	Wittenberg	4-2	def. #5 Wooster, 56-55; def. Allegheny, 65-54
#28	42	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	9-0	def. San Diego Christian, 71-69; def. Chapman, 57-45; def. Pt. Loma Nazarene, 65-49
#29	35	Edgewood	9-0	def. Lakeland, 86-68; def. Benedictine, 84-71
#30	34	Hobart	6-1	LOST to #24 Rochester, 62-72
#31	29	Oswego State	8-1	def. Brockport State, 80-65; def. Fredonia State, 76-71; def. #14 Buffalo State, 85-71
#32	21	Washington U.	7-2	def. Webster, 74-50; def. #17 Wheaton (Ill.), 77-68
#33	17	UW-River Falls	6-2	def. UW-Oshkosh, 105-99
#34	14	Transylvania	6-0	def. Earlham, 81-57; def. Manchester, 68-62
#35	13	St. Mary's (Md.)	7-2	def. York (Pa.), 71-69; def. Hood, 72-70
#36	12	Grinnell	8-0	def. Knox, 85-68; def. Carroll, 103-89
T#37	11	Baldwin-Wallace	5-2	def. Heidelberg, 90-69; LOST at Wilmington, 56-59
T#37	11	Western Connecticut	9-1	def. SUNY-Cobleskill, 65-43; def. Framingham State, 78-73; def. Southern Maine, 88-58
#39	10	New Jersey City	7-1	def. York (N.Y.), 76-70; LOST at Ithaca, 73-78; def. Penn St. Mont Alto, 77-48
#40	9	Texas-Dallas	6-1	IDLE
T#41	7	Bethany	8-0	def. Carnegie Mellon, 88-75; def. Thomas More, 89-74
T#41	7	Salisbury	6-3	LOST at Marymount, 57-64; def. Stevenson, 53-51
T#43	6	Ramapo	6-3	LOST at Medgar Evers, 88-93
T#43	6	UW-Superior	6-5	def. UW-Stout, 64-51; LOST at UW-La Crosse, 56-57
T#45	5	Hardin-Simmons	7-0	def. Centenary (La.), 85-75; def. East Texas Baptist, 95-65
T#45	5	Mary Washington	7-2	LOST at Apprentice School, 74-76; def. Marymount, 89-75
#47	4	Hartwick	9-0	def. Oneonta State, 57-51; def. Elms, 62-49
T#48	3	Ohio Wesleyan	8-1	def. Kenyon, 96-65; def. DePauw, 67-60
T#48	3	Randolph-Macon	6-3	def. Lynchburg, 90-87; LOST at Guilford, 53-66
T#48	3	Rose-Hulman	7-1	def. Manchester, 59-29; def. Bluffton, 66-55
T#48	3	Salem State	6-3	LOST at #7 MIT, 66-78
T#48	3	Tufts	6-3	LOST to Plymouth State, 73-79; LOST to #7 MIT, 56-60
#53	2	Hamilton	9-1	LOST at #24 Rochester, 58-83; def. Vassar, 96-71

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dahlby on December 11, 2011, 06:43:18 PM

stagg44,
Agreed...CMS is well on their way to EARNING a "high" top 25 ratiing......with a balanced atttack! They should do well for themself in conference play, as they continue to improve with each game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on December 11, 2011, 06:56:07 PM

Quote from: sac on December 11, 2011, 04:53:59 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 11, 2011, 04:29:20 PM
I think Ohio Wesleyan and Wash U need to jump in...

http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Ohio_Wesleyan/men/2011-12/index

http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Washington_U./men/2011-12/index

And I think Hope needs to be way higher - I think there is a good chance Hope is a Top 10 team.

Hope's next game is Dec 29 against Marietta with Trevor Halter back in the lineup for the Pioneers, so we'll find out then.

2 6'6 Seniors lead Marietta. Great barometer for Hope.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on December 12, 2011, 01:41:30 PM

Quote from: scottiedawg on December 11, 2011, 06:56:07 PM
Quote from: sac on December 11, 2011, 04:53:59 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 11, 2011, 04:29:20 PM
I think Ohio Wesleyan and Wash U need to jump in...

http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Ohio_Wesleyan/men/2011-12/index

http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Washington_U./men/2011-12/index

And I think Hope needs to be way higher - I think there is a good chance Hope is a Top 10 team.

Hope's next game is Dec 29 against Marietta with Trevor Halter back in the lineup for the Pioneers, so we'll find out then.

2 6'6 Seniors lead Marietta. Great barometer for Hope.

Scariest game on the schedule for Hope (I believe). Facing a good team with their AA back, after a really long lay-off (19 days between games).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on December 12, 2011, 09:27:43 PM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on December 12, 2011, 01:41:30 PM
Quote from: scottiedawg on December 11, 2011, 06:56:07 PM
Quote from: sac on December 11, 2011, 04:53:59 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 11, 2011, 04:29:20 PM
I think Ohio Wesleyan and Wash U need to jump in...

http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Ohio_Wesleyan/men/2011-12/index

http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Washington_U./men/2011-12/index

And I think Hope needs to be way higher - I think there is a good chance Hope is a Top 10 team.

Hope's next game is Dec 29 against Marietta with Trevor Halter back in the lineup for the Pioneers, so we'll find out then.

2 6'6 Seniors lead Marietta. Great barometer for Hope.

Scariest game on the schedule for Hope (I believe). Facing a good team with their AA back, after a really long lay-off (19 days between games).

Three games for Marietta before 12/29. I sure hope they're 9-1 and maybe a top 7 or 6 team going into that matchup. Give Hope some real motivation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 12, 2011, 09:38:10 PM

Quote from: scottiedawg on December 12, 2011, 09:27:43 PM

Three games for Marietta before 12/29. I sure hope they're 9-1 and maybe a top 7 or 6 team going into that matchup. Give Hope some real motivation.

One of those games is vs Ohio, I'm sure they'll drop that one.

The Hope/Marietta game might be the only matchup this year of D3's that played real games vs a MAC opponent.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on December 13, 2011, 01:07:05 AM

Wow...looking at the new Top 25 poll. I guess beating #1 and #17 in the span of a week doesn't buy what it used to.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 13, 2011, 08:55:34 AM

Quote from: jaybird44 on December 13, 2011, 01:07:05 AM
Wow...looking at the new Top 25 poll. I guess beating #1 and #17 in the span of a week doesn't buy what it used to.

Actually Jaybird, they didn't beat those 2 teams in the span of a week, it was an 8 day period. Washington U already received credit for the victory over Augie in last week's poll when they moved up from 46th place and 6 points to the 32nd spot and 21 pts. That victory over Augie improved their record to 5-2 at the time and they were right about where they should be for a team with 2 losses so early in the season. This week the pollsters have again rewarded the Bears by moving them up to the 27th spot and nearly tripled their point total from 21 to 60, after beating Wheaton.

You needn't worry. If the Bears keep winning, the voters will reward them accordingly. After all, it's not like they're from a conference that lacks respect. With 2 other UAA teams already in the Top 25 rankings, the Bears will have ample opportunity to move up the ladder once conference play begins.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dark Knight on December 13, 2011, 11:34:42 AM

Quote from: scottiedawg on December 12, 2011, 09:27:43 PM
Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on December 12, 2011, 01:41:30 PM
Quote from: scottiedawg on December 11, 2011, 06:56:07 PM
Quote from: sac on December 11, 2011, 04:53:59 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 11, 2011, 04:29:20 PM
I think Ohio Wesleyan and Wash U need to jump in...

http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Ohio_Wesleyan/men/2011-12/index

http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Washington_U./men/2011-12/index

And I think Hope needs to be way higher - I think there is a good chance Hope is a Top 10 team.

Hope's next game is Dec 29 against Marietta with Trevor Halter back in the lineup for the Pioneers, so we'll find out then.

2 6'6 Seniors lead Marietta. Great barometer for Hope.

Scariest game on the schedule for Hope (I believe). Facing a good team with their AA back, after a really long lay-off (19 days between games).

Three games for Marietta before 12/29. I sure hope they're 9-1 and maybe a top 7 or 6 team going into that matchup. Give Hope some real motivation.

According to Massey, Hope is underrated and Marietta is overrated. Massey says Hope by 12.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: thebear on December 13, 2011, 06:05:05 PM

Not sure why Hope isn't getting more recognition, their only loss is to a D-I MAC school (W.Mich)
They've played the toughest D-III schedule in the country. Most of their opponents so far are in the top 100.

Amherst meanwhile, loses to a mediocre Brandeis club, and still stays in the top 10.

I think Middlebury, MIT, Williams Emory & Marietta have feasted on a steady diet of early season cupcakes (Since this is Syracuse country, we KNOW about cupcakes), and are overrated.

I also think that Ohio Wesleyan, playing in a very deep conference, may be the best Wesleyan, not sure why Va. Wesleyan is in the #2 spot after a loss to Salisbury, and not the best early schedule.

Food for thought.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ChicagoHopeNut on December 13, 2011, 06:21:31 PM

Quote from: thebear on December 13, 2011, 06:05:05 PM
Not sure why Hope isn't getting more recognition, their only loss is to a D-I MAC school (W.Mich)
They've played the toughest D-III schedule in the country. Most of their opponents so far are in the top 100.

My thoughts:

1) Pre-season expectations for Hope were low (outside Top 25) and there are plenty of 1 loss and undefeated teams to stay in front of them.

2) Hope has played 9 games but a whopping, grand total of 2 of those games were against D3 opponents. Of course, there is talent and challenges from a lot of these NAIA games and W. Michigan but I wouldn't be surprised if some votes subconsciously discounted a team that has only played 2 games against it's own division. I'm a huge Hope fan and I find that stat astounding.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 13, 2011, 07:03:29 PM

For those who have not seen this yet, here is a new computer poll - D3 Basketball Index - created by poster augie_superfan...

https://sites.google.com/site/d3basketballindex/

You will see this has Hope #1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 13, 2011, 07:34:58 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 13, 2011, 07:03:29 PM
For those who have not seen this yet, here is a new computer poll - D3 Basketball Index - created by poster augie_superfan...

https://sites.google.com/site/d3basketballindex/

You will see this has Hope #1.

I'm sure augie superfan himself would agree that with a sample size of 2, the statistical meaning of that ranking is not very high. They are being rewarded because they haven't really played any bad d3 teams (Wheaton only had 1 other d3 loss, and Carthage only has 2). Those rankings don't take into account non-d3 games. What if we ranked every team based on their top 2 d3 results? Probably wouldn't mean a whole lot, right? Hope's computer ranking won't mean more until they have more d3 games. I'm sure some voters are being cautious for this very reason.

You see some other manifestations of this low sample size phenomenon with other teams also, like 1-2 Lewis and Clark at #22 and 1-1 George Fox at #29. If those teams were undefeated they would also likely be in the top 5 of the computer rankings, but would anyone really be arguing for them to be ranked higher in the human poll? Probably not.

Further, Hope's rating is really being pumped up by the 30 point win vs. Carthage. Because they have only played two games, and won both, the computer model is trying to justify the final margins. In other words, and simplified for explanatory purposes, the model needs to account for the final spreads in Hope's games by assigning the team a proper rating. Since it doesn't have a lot of data to go on from Hope, based on the other results from Carthage and IWU, the rating for Carthage is about 7 and for IWU is about 20. Therefore, to reconcile their margins of victory, Hope's rating must be about 30 (the difference in the teams ratings is the expected final margin). If Hope had only beaten Carriage by single-figures, I would expect their ranking to fall to the teens, which goes to show how shaky their current ranking in the computer poll is.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 13, 2011, 07:45:09 PM

Quote from: thebear on December 13, 2011, 06:05:05 PM
I also think that Ohio Wesleyan, playing in a very deep conference, may be the best Wesleyan[...]
Food for thought.

emphasis added

Wow, I must have been asleep a long time. What planet is this?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 13, 2011, 08:08:25 PM

It's the new NCAC with five teams that can win it.

Plus people are buying what I'm selling about other teams. Yeah, that's it!

Seriously, the NCAC is getting deeper. We also removed someone that held the league down, too.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 13, 2011, 08:10:04 PM

Biggest Gainers in this week's Poll:

1. Wabash +135 pts
2. UW-Whitewater +117 pts
3. Hope +83 pts
4. Puget Sound +67 pts
5. MIT +59 pts
6. Franklin & Marshall +57 pts
7. Virginia Wesleyan + 54 pts
8. Augustana +52 pts
9. Williams +49 pts
9. St. Thomas +49 pts
10. Birmingham-So. +47 pts
11. Oswego St. +46 pts

Biggest Losers:

1. Wooster -310 pts
2. Buffalo St -156 pts
3. Wheaton -133 pts
4. Amherst -119 pts
5. WPI -106 pts
6. Whitworth -78 pts
6. William Paterson 78 pts
8. UW-Stevens Point -54 pts
9. Hobart -29 pts
10. Rochester -21 pts (but went from #24 to #23)
11. Baldwin-Wallace -11 pts

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie_superfan on December 13, 2011, 10:02:33 PM

Quote from: Hugenerd on December 13, 2011, 07:34:58 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 13, 2011, 07:03:29 PM
For those who have not seen this yet, here is a new computer poll - D3 Basketball Index - created by poster augie_superfan...

https://sites.google.com/site/d3basketballindex/

You will see this has Hope #1.

I'm sure augie superfan himself would agree that with a sample size of 2, the statistical meaning of that ranking is not very high. They are being rewarded because they haven't really played any bad d3 teams (Wheaton only had 1 other d3 loss, and Carthage only has 2). Those rankings don't take into account non-d3 games. What if we ranked every team based on their top 2 d3 results? Probably wouldn't mean a whole lot, right? Hope's computer ranking won't mean more until they have more d3 games. I'm sure some voters are being cautious for this very reason.

You see some other manifestations of this low sample size phenomenon with other teams also, like 1-2 Lewis and Clark at #22 and 1-1 George Fox at #29. If those teams were undefeated they would also likely be in the top 5 of the computer rankings, but would anyone really be arguing for them to be ranked higher in the human poll? Probably not.

Further, Hope's rating is really being pumped up by the 30 point win vs. Carthage. Because they have only played two games, and won both, the computer model is trying to justify the final margins. In other words, and simplified for explanatory purposes, the model needs to account for the final spreads in Hope's games by assigning the team a proper rating. Since it doesn't have a lot of data to go on from Hope, based on the other results from Carthage and IWU, the rating for Carthage is about 7 and for IWU is about 20. Therefore, to reconcile their margins of victory, Hope's rating must be about 30 (the difference in the teams ratings is the expected final margin). If Hope had only beaten Carriage by single-figures, I would expect their ranking to fall to the teens, which goes to show how shaky their current ranking in the computer poll is.

Leave it to an MIT guy to explain it better than I could have myself. Out of curiosity, I re-ran the rankings by taking out all margin-of-victory information. So all the system used was win/loss and the location of the game. Hopefully this weekend I'll have time to add these rankings to the site for comparison but here are the top 10 for those interested:

#1 Hope
#2 Whitworth
#3 Lycoming
#4 Puget Sound
#5 Wabash
#6 Edgewood
#7 George Fox
#8 UW-Whitewater
#9 Grinnell
#10 UW-River Falls

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 13, 2011, 10:05:13 PM

I will still have to point out that N is equal to 2 for Hope.

Also note that George Fox at 1-1 has moved to #7.

Small samples sizes are a statisticians enemy. Its tough to make strong conclusions.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 13, 2011, 10:10:20 PM

I don't think you need to take out the MOV info. That's quite crucial info, though you may need to put in some diminishing returns. Some teams just need a few more D-3 games in their belt, but I think the premise is sound!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie_superfan on December 13, 2011, 10:13:38 PM

Quote from: Hugenerd on December 13, 2011, 10:05:13 PM
I will still have to point out that N still equals 2 for Hope.

Also note that George Fox at 1-1 has moved to #7.

Small samples sizes are a statisticians enemy. Its tough to make strong conclusions.

It's true that the sample size is small at the moment meaning you can argue that Hope has played above their level and are maybe overranked in the system. But to play devil's advocate, how do we know that's true? Only time will tell but as of this instant, I think it's giving an accurate measure of where Hope should be ranked. I feel a little bit better with the ranking seeing that Massey has them ranked #3 in the power ranking. That includes all their other games against NAIA and D1 teams. Now, they may be getting a decent bump from the D1 game (one reason I left those out of my system). Unfortunately for my system's sake, Hope doesn't play another D3 game until 12/29 vs. Marietta so they should stay near the top of my rankings unless Wheaton and Carthage fall.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie_superfan on December 13, 2011, 10:14:50 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 13, 2011, 10:10:20 PM
I don't think you need to take out the MOV info. That's quite crucial info, though you may need to put in some diminishing returns. Some teams just need a few more D-3 games in their belt, but I think the premise is sound!

Have no fear, the MOV info is going nowhere....was just taking it out to show that Hope's ranking stayed the same in this case

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 13, 2011, 10:22:02 PM

Quote from: augie_superfan on December 13, 2011, 10:14:50 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 13, 2011, 10:10:20 PM
I don't think you need to take out the MOV info. That's quite crucial info, though you may need to put in some diminishing returns. Some teams just need a few more D-3 games in their belt, but I think the premise is sound!

Have no fear, the MOV info is going nowhere....was just taking it out to show that Hope's ranking stayed the same in this case

Unfortunately, the number of games they played against d3 opponents did not change. So if you were to put a confidence interval on that rating, it would be huge (by the way, can you calculate a standard deviation, or uncertainty, in your model in any way?).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 13, 2011, 10:40:24 PM

Also, here are Massey's ratings, for comparison:

http://masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&yr=2012&sub=NCAA%20III&mid=1

Massey does take into account all games, and they still have Hope #2, although their strength of schedule is really getting pushed up by some of their non-d3 opponents (a 20 point loss to a D1 program can be much more impressive than a win vs. A D3 opponent to the computer model).

Also, for those of you hating on MITs SOS, Massey has 2 of the 3 schools ranked ahead of them in the human poll, VA Wesleyan and Middlebury, as having lower SOS' than MIT.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie_superfan on December 13, 2011, 10:45:59 PM

Quote from: Hugenerd on December 13, 2011, 10:22:02 PM
Quote from: augie_superfan on December 13, 2011, 10:14:50 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 13, 2011, 10:10:20 PM
I don't think you need to take out the MOV info. That's quite crucial info, though you may need to put in some diminishing returns. Some teams just need a few more D-3 games in their belt, but I think the premise is sound!

Have no fear, the MOV info is going nowhere....was just taking it out to show that Hope's ranking stayed the same in this case

Unfortunately, the number of games they played against d3 opponents did not change. So if you were to put a confidence interval on that rating, it would be huge (by the way, can you calculate a standard deviation, or uncertainty, in your model in any way?).

Well one thing that I can do is look at each team individually and see for each game what the predicted score would be based on the two teams rankings and then I obviously have the actual result. Now, the whole premise of the system is to even out the "overrankings" and "underrankings" to net out at 0. So I can get a standard deviation for each team based on the distribution for all their games. Obviously you'd have more confidence in a team's ranking is all their games score differences were small versus large. I'm just not sure how to use that standard deviation quantity and relate it to the team's actual ranking...but worth thinking about.

When trying to optimize the system using last year's games, I did look at every game and how far off the predictions were and what the standard deviations were for those distributions and minimized both of those numbers while not predicting my game prediction percentage.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie_superfan on December 13, 2011, 10:50:30 PM

Quote from: Hugenerd on December 13, 2011, 10:40:24 PM

Also, for those of you hating on MITs SOS, Massey has 2 of the 3 schools ranked ahead of them in the human poll, VA Wesleyan and Middlebury, as having lower SOS' than MIT.

One thing that I worry about most in my ranking system is that it over-penalizes for playing weak teams. It's all taken into account automatically so I would have to counteract that with a small multiplier to very weak teams. Unfortunately, this seems completely counterintuitive and did produce worse prediction results so I left it out of this year's system but it may be something to revisit in the future. MIT may be a good team to follow with respects to this but their conference schedule should make up for the currently low SOS.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 13, 2011, 11:09:41 PM

Agreed

Don't worry about variance if its not readily available. Even if standard deviation was identical for all teams, your df would be 1 (n-1) and therefore t-stat would be huge when calculating a CI for N only equal to 2 (not to mention small sqrt(N) term in denominator). Just going back to my old point that there is not a lot of certainty in any quantity when sample size is 2.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie_superfan on December 13, 2011, 11:19:50 PM

Quote from: Hugenerd on December 13, 2011, 11:09:41 PM
Just going back to my old point that there is not a lot of certainty in any quantity when sample size is 2.

Agreed :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 13, 2011, 11:25:26 PM

Quote from: Hugenerd on December 13, 2011, 10:05:13 PM
Small samples sizes are a statisticians enemy. Its tough to make strong conclusions.

Yet ink-stained wretches and announcers will take 10 at-bats or 4 2/3 innings and say 'conclusive proof!"

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 13, 2011, 11:36:55 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 13, 2011, 11:25:26 PM
Quote from: Hugenerd on December 13, 2011, 10:05:13 PM
Small samples sizes are a statisticians enemy. Its tough to make strong conclusions.

Yet ink-stained wretches and announcers will take 10 at-bats or 4 2/3 innings and say 'conclusive proof!"

No one ever accused an announcer of being a statistician.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on December 13, 2011, 11:40:54 PM

Reading these posts, makes me understand why I was a history major. :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: thebear on December 13, 2011, 11:51:51 PM

Quote from: Hugenerd on December 13, 2011, 11:36:55 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 13, 2011, 11:25:26 PM
Quote from: Hugenerd on December 13, 2011, 10:05:13 PM
Small samples sizes are a statisticians enemy. Its tough to make strong conclusions.

Yet ink-stained wretches and announcers will take 10 at-bats or 4 2/3 innings and say 'conclusive proof!"

No one ever accused an announcer of being a statistician.

Actually, for a number of years (71-75), I did both announce and keep stats. Lately tho, I don't multitask as much, although I did call statcrew, keep the book, and work the PA at different times last season, and I am a trained Six Sigma Black Belt.

I love the saying, LIARS, DAMN LIARS & STATISTICS!!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: thebear on December 13, 2011, 11:53:10 PM

P.S. Last I knew, 4 & 2/3 innings is 14 at bats, not 10. I have scored a few baseball games in my career as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 13, 2011, 11:55:58 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 13, 2011, 08:08:25 PM
It's the new NCAC with five teams that can win it.

Plus people are buying what I'm selling about other teams. Yeah, that's it!

Seriously, the NCAC is getting deeper. We also removed someone that held the league down, too.

People like math on this section of the board.

NCAC - Earlham + DePauw = better NCAC

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 14, 2011, 04:21:43 AM

Quote from: thebear on December 13, 2011, 11:53:10 PM
P.S. Last I knew, 4 & 2/3 innings is 14 at bats, not 10. I have scored a few baseball games in my career as well.

bear,
Don't think smed was saying 10 at bats is 4 & 2/3 innings . I believe he was referring to hitters and pitchers. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 14, 2011, 09:09:27 AM

Quote from: thebear on December 13, 2011, 11:53:10 PM
P.S. Last I knew, 4 & 2/3 innings is 14 at bats, not 10. I have scored a few baseball games in my career as well.

Those weren't meant to be take with an equal sign. Just illustrating inanities.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 14, 2011, 08:29:31 PM

Video for #3 Augustana vs Chicago (tipping in a few minutes)...

http://client.stretchinternet.com/client/augustana.portal#

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 14, 2011, 08:58:11 PM

MIT gets a routine 24 point win over Wheelock, 71-47. Jamie Karraker had 7 more 3s for the Engineers, that's 24 3s in the last 4 games alone! Doubling down on Hollingsworth and Tashman is opening things up for the outside shooters, and they are more than happy to kick it back out. Hollingsworth had 18 points (8-14 THe) and 8 boards. MIT moves to 12-0 and are off Jan 4 when they host Springfield.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 14, 2011, 09:19:26 PM

Heckuva game in Stevens Point in the WIAC in-game update. 10 mins left, 5 point game, a 33 point and 26 point night for each team. Check it out

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 14, 2011, 09:50:58 PM

#25 UW Stevens Point's home winning streak is now 26 and WIAC regular season streak is now at 13 as #13 Whitewater misses a 3 pointer at the buzzer to win.

#25 UW Stevens Point 79
#13 UW Whitewater 77

ORV UW River Falls beat UW Stout 72-52

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 15, 2011, 07:11:28 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	624	Middlebury	7-0	IDLE
#2	560	Virginia Wesleyan	6-1	12/17 vs. Shenandoah
#3	556	Augustana	8-1	def. Chicago, 93-52
#4	511	MIT	12-0	def. Wheelock, 71-47
#5	490	Emory	8-0	IDLE
#6	480	Amherst	9-1	def. Anna Maria, 76-57
#7	477	Williams	8-1	IDLE
#8	417	Whitworth	6-1	12/18 vs. Northwestern (Minn.)
#9	396	Marietta	6-2	LOST at Ohio, 54-88; 12/17 vs. Ohio Northern
#10	392	Franklin and Marshall	9-0	IDLE
#11	360	Cabrini	7-0	12/17 vs. Scranton
#12	305	Mary Hardin-Baylor	6-0	12/15 vs. Mississippi College; 12/17 vs. Louisiana College
#13	279	UW-Whitewater	8-1	LOST at #25 UW-Stevens Point, 77-79
#14	235	St. Thomas	7-1	IDLE
#15	227	Puget Sound	8-0	12/17 at New Hope Christian
#16	214	Birmingham-Southern	7-0	12/16 at Centre; 12/18 at Sewanee
#17	212	Wabash	8-0	IDLE
#18	189	Hope	8-1	IDLE
#19	188	Wooster	5-2	IDLE
#20	124	WPI	8-1	IDLE
#21	85	Buffalo State	6-1	12/16 vs. Keuka; 12/17 vs. TBD
#22	84	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	9-0	IDLE
#23	82	Rochester	8-2	IDLE
#24	75	Oswego State	8-1	12/16 vs. Cazenovia
#25	63	UW-Stevens Point	7-2	def. #13 UW-Whitewater, 79-77; 12/18 at T#26 Edgewood

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
T#26	60	Edgewood	9-0	12/18 vs. #25 UW-Stevens Point
T#26	60	Washington U.	7-2	12/17 at Illinois Wesleyan
T#26	60	Wittenberg	4-2	IDLE
#29	53	Rhode Island College	9-1	IDLE
#30	52	Wheaton (Ill.)	7-2	IDLE
#31	35	William Paterson	8-1	12/16 vs. Lehman
T#32	27	Ohio Wesleyan	8-1	IDLE
T#32	27	Western Connecticut	10-1	def. Clark, 77-74
#34	22	Grinnell	8-0	IDLE
#35	21	Bethany	9-0	def. Frostburg State, 74-73; 12/15 at Olivet
#36	18	St. Mary's (Md.)	7-2	12/18 at Sacred Heart (P.R.)
#37	16	Hardin-Simmons	7-0	IDLE
#38	14	Transylvania	6-0	12/17 vs. Bluffton
#39	9	Texas-Dallas	6-1	12/16 at University of the Ozarks
#40	8	UW-River Falls	7-2	def. UW-Stout, 72-52; 12/17 vs. North Central (Minn.)
#41	7	Rose-Hulman	7-1	12/15 vs. Eureka; 12/17 at Hanover
#42	5	Hobart	6-1	IDLE
#43	4	New Jersey City	8-1	def. Lehman, 65-52; 12/17 vs. Nazareth
T#44	1	Hartwick	9-0	IDLE
T#44	1	Salem State	6-3	IDLE

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 16, 2011, 09:41:15 PM

#24 Oswego State improves to 9-1 with a 2nd half surge that carries them over Cazenovia 83-55. Nearly everyone gets into the act as 10 players score and average double minutes.

Lakers now off until their trip to Texas to take on DI Texas-Pan American on January 3rd.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 16, 2011, 09:53:47 PM

#21 Buffalo State called off the dogs and still managed to break the century mark as they down Keuka 108-78. Bengals improve to 7-1 and will take on the Capital Crusaders tomorrow afternoon at 4 PM in the championship game of the Coles Classic. Capital defeated Morrisville State earlier today 77-70.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 17, 2011, 07:15:02 PM

#21 Buffalo State wins their Coles Classic tournament as they defeat Capital in overtime 81-78. Jake Simmons with 24 points to lead the Bengals.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie_superfan on December 18, 2011, 07:39:11 PM

Jimmy (I mean Wade) Chitwood keeping Northwestern (MN) in the game with Whitowrth. NW leads @ Whitworth 36-35 at halftime.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 18, 2011, 08:44:46 PM

#8 Whitworth with a 3 pointer at the buzzer to beat Northwestern (Mn) 78-76.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 18, 2011, 08:54:26 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	624	Middlebury	7-0	IDLE
#2	560	Virginia Wesleyan	7-1	def. Shenandoah, 86-56
#3	556	Augustana	8-1	def. Chicago, 93-52
#4	511	MIT	12-0	def. Wheelock, 71-47
#5	490	Emory	8-0	IDLE
#6	480	Amherst	9-1	def. Anna Maria, 76-57
#7	477	Williams	8-1	IDLE
#8	417	Whitworth	7-1	def. Northwestern (Minn.), 78-76
#9	396	Marietta	6-3	LOST at Ohio, 54-88; LOST to Ohio Northern, 57-59
#10	392	Franklin and Marshall	9-0	IDLE
#11	360	Cabrini	8-0	def. Scranton, 71-68
#12	305	Mary Hardin-Baylor	8-0	def. Mississippi College, 84-70; def. Louisiana College, 84-71
#13	279	UW-Whitewater	8-1	LOST at #25 UW-Stevens Point, 77-79
#14	235	St. Thomas	7-1	IDLE
#15	227	Puget Sound	9-0	def. New Hope Christian, 79-57
#16	214	Birmingham-Southern	8-1	LOST at Centre, 65-72; def. Sewanee, 86-65
#17	212	Wabash	8-0	IDLE
#18	189	Hope	8-1	IDLE
#19	188	Wooster	5-2	IDLE
#20	124	WPI	8-1	IDLE
#21	85	Buffalo State	8-1	def. Keuka, 108-78; def. Capital, 81-78
#22	84	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	9-0	IDLE
#23	82	Rochester	8-2	IDLE
#24	75	Oswego State	9-1	def. Cazenovia, 83-55
#25	63	UW-Stevens Point	8-2	def. #13 UW-Whitewater, 79-77; def. T#26 Edgewood, 81-70

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
T#26	60	Edgewood	9-1	LOST to #25 UW-Stevens Point, 70-81
T#26	60	Washington U.	7-3	LOST at Illinois Wesleyan, 56-71
T#26	60	Wittenberg	4-2	IDLE
#29	53	Rhode Island College	9-1	IDLE
#30	52	Wheaton (Ill.)	7-2	IDLE
#31	35	William Paterson	9-1	def. Lehman, 76-68
T#32	27	Ohio Wesleyan	8-1	IDLE
T#32	27	Western Connecticut	10-1	def. Clark, 77-74
#34	22	Grinnell	8-0	IDLE
#35	21	Bethany	10-0	def. Frostburg State, 74-73; def. Olivet, 68-46
#36	18	St. Mary's (Md.)	8-2	def. Sacred Heart (P.R.), 76-50
#37	16	Hardin-Simmons	7-0	IDLE
#38	14	Transylvania	7-0	def. Bluffton, 76-68
#39	9	Texas-Dallas	7-1	def. University of the Ozarks, 73-62
#40	8	UW-River Falls	8-2	def. UW-Stout, 72-52; def. North Central (Minn.), 98-65
#41	7	Rose-Hulman	8-2	def. Eureka, 92-70; LOST at Hanover, 54-60
#42	5	Hobart	6-1	IDLE
#43	4	New Jersey City	9-1	def. Lehman, 65-52; def. Nazareth, 63-60
T#44	1	Hartwick	9-0	IDLE
T#44	1	Salem State	6-3	IDLE

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 20, 2011, 05:29:44 AM

#3 Augustana barely squeaks by Knox 55-53.

# 19 Wooster also in a close contest as they down St. Mary's (Md.) 63-61

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on December 20, 2011, 09:42:41 AM

Quote from: magicman on December 20, 2011, 05:29:44 AM
#3 Augustana barely squeaks by Knox 55-53.

# 19 Wooster also in a close contest as they down St. Mary's (Md.) 63-61

St. Mary's is a pretty good team. They were in the Elite 8 last year and had only 2 losses heading into yesterday's game with Wooster. Knox, on the other hand, only has 2 wins...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 20, 2011, 09:51:56 AM

New Top 25 is out

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 20, 2011, 12:50:22 PM

Quote from: magicman on December 20, 2011, 05:29:44 AM
#3 Augustana barely squeaks by Knox 55-53.

Augie played without their All-American candidate - 6-9 small forward Bryant Voiles (19.4 ppg, 7.1 rpg). I would have thought they'd still crush Knox without him, but without Voiles they are just really offensively challenged. (I have questions if they have enough scorers even with Voiles to truly be a Top 5 team.)

Without or without Voiles, this score was a head-scratcher.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 20, 2011, 01:39:53 PM

Quote from: ScotsFan on December 20, 2011, 09:42:41 AM
Quote from: magicman on December 20, 2011, 05:29:44 AM
#3 Augustana barely squeaks by Knox 55-53.

# 19 Wooster also in a close contest as they down St. Mary's (Md.) 63-61

St. Mary's is a pretty good team. They were in the Elite 8 last year and had only 2 losses heading into yesterday's game with Wooster. Knox, on the other hand, only has 2 wins...

St. Mary's is good... but not as good as their Elite 8 appearence last year. They lost a lot from that team and have been dealing with a number of injuries including a season-ender to their top returning scorer at the beginning of the season. I am waiting to see if they can actually recover from other injuries and improve as the season progresses.

As for their two losses... one came to Johns Hopkins who shut them down defensively pretty easily... the other came against who I consider an over-rated F&M team. They have also had two-point wins to York (Pa.) and Hood... which doesn't build any confidence they are some one to watch out for right now.

The fact that SMC was up 20 points early in the 2nd half on Wooster is the most interesting part... I am impressed the Seahawks got out to that big a lead and disappointed a team in Wooster I expected a bit more from in this match-up let that happen. Now, Wooster rallied to win... but not sure that is impressive or raises more questions like why Wooster would struggle so much early in a game against a team I would say they should have had an easier time with. Of course... being in Puerto Rico might have been the distraction! :-)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 20, 2011, 09:15:26 PM

Interesting to note that not a single team dropped out of the polls this week. This was no doubt, due to a limited number of games being played by teams in the Top 25, as 11 of the ranked teams were idle. Only 3 ranked teams suffered a loss and while those 3 tumbled a bit they were all fairly high in the standings at the time of their loss. They were #9 Marietta, who fell to #20, #13 UW-Whitewater who dropped to #16, and #16 Birmingham-Southern who slipped to #22. This was only the fourth time in the past six and a half years that no Top 25 team has dropped out of the poll. Only once since November of 2005 has the poll remained stable during the break that takes place at this time of year. That occured for the week ending December 21st, 2008. The other two instances were the weeks ending January 24, 2010 and February 6, 2011.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on December 21, 2011, 11:14:16 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 20, 2011, 01:39:53 PM
Quote from: ScotsFan on December 20, 2011, 09:42:41 AM
Quote from: magicman on December 20, 2011, 05:29:44 AM
#3 Augustana barely squeaks by Knox 55-53.

# 19 Wooster also in a close contest as they down St. Mary's (Md.) 63-61

St. Mary's is a pretty good team. They were in the Elite 8 last year and had only 2 losses heading into yesterday's game with Wooster. Knox, on the other hand, only has 2 wins...

St. Mary's is good... but not as good as their Elite 8 appearence last year. They lost a lot from that team and have been dealing with a number of injuries including a season-ender to their top returning scorer at the beginning of the season. I am waiting to see if they can actually recover from other injuries and improve as the season progresses.

As for their two losses... one came to Johns Hopkins who shut them down defensively pretty easily... the other came against who I consider an over-rated F&M team. They have also had two-point wins to York (Pa.) and Hood... which doesn't build any confidence they are some one to watch out for right now.

The fact that SMC was up 20 points early in the 2nd half on Wooster is the most interesting part... I am impressed the Seahawks got out to that big a lead and disappointed a team in Wooster I expected a bit more from in this match-up let that happen. Now, Wooster rallied to win... but not sure that is impressive or raises more questions like why Wooster would struggle so much early in a game against a team I would say they should have had an easier time with. Of course... being in Puerto Rico might have been the distraction! :-)

Wooster is still struggling to find an identity on the offensive end of the floor. They have a true freshman trying to fill the shoes of departed All American Ian Franks and while Xavier Brown has shown he is on his way to becoming a special player for Wooster, he is still a true freshman and still makes freshman mistakes. As for the game the other day, SMC had the perfect storm of events come together in that first half to help them build their big lead over the Scots. SMC shot the ball incredibly well (around 60%) to Wooster's poor shooting (under 30%) and Wooster had double digits in turnovers as well. As I mentioned, Wooster is struggling to find their identity offensively and I think they started to figure out that they need to start to get the ball inside to open things up for their shooters. Josh Claytor, one of Wooster's bigs, had 2 points in the first half when Wooster seemed to be in disarray on the offensive end and it resulted in Wooster finding themselves down 18 at the half. In the second half, Wooster made a more concerted effort to get the ball inside and, as a result, Claytor scored sixteen 2nd half points and Wooster overcame a 20 point deficit as a result.

Personally, I'm not all that schocked to see the Scots struggling a bit out of the gates. Prior to the start of the season, I felt like this season had a similar feel to be potentially like the '08-'09 season when Wooster was replacing James Cooper and Devin Fulk. That team lost 3 of their first 4 games to start the season, but wound up winning both the conference regular season and tournament as well as a first round NCAA game. Like that year, I had a feeling that there would be some growing pains this year and that was before I knew what an immediate impact Xavier Brown would have on this team. I shudder to think where this team would be right now without Brown. Both of Wooster's losses were to 2 good teams and also 2 senior laden teams. Wooster is fairly young in comparrison to Witt and Wabash and having those games land so early in the season, it's not really that surprising that those teams were able to pull out wins over the Scots. It is still very early in the season and I think Wooster will find their identity in time and I would look for them to be a dangerous team come tournament time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 21, 2011, 01:08:03 PM

Wooster always has more success when they get the ball inside. It has been true year after year... while they have threats outside, I don't remember them having terrific success unless they get the ball inside and have their offense run from the inside. Just my observations over the years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on December 21, 2011, 02:37:21 PM

This is true to an extent. Wooster has been more reliant on their guards and an up-tempo, push the ball up the court as quickly as possible and get off a quick shot over the past several years. Last year, Wooster got back into more of a traditional half-court offense more than they have been really since Bryan Nelson graduated. While the bigs of Wooster have always been a presence, even over the past several years, this program has been heavily guard oriented really up until last year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 21, 2011, 02:52:31 PM

And compare how far they have gotten in the NCAA tournament as a result... last year: championship weekend. :-)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on December 21, 2011, 04:22:57 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 21, 2011, 02:52:31 PM
And compare how far they have gotten in the NCAA tournament as a result... last year: championship weekend. :-)

Touche... :D

But, to be fair, Wooster has made 3 trips to Salem. Two were more traditional half court Wooster offenses, but back in the '06-'07 season Wooster had the fast pace offense that averaged nearly 90 ppg and 4 of their 5 leading scorers were guards including 3 guards with 60+ made 3-pointers. So, Wooster has had success running the run and gun style of offense as well... ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kyballr on December 21, 2011, 05:44:35 PM

Don Lane Classic @ Transylvania 7 pm
Wabash (9-0) vs host Transy (8-0)

live stats
http://www.sidearmstats.com/transy/mbball/index.htm

live video
http://tupioneers.nmtvsports.com/main.php?eventId=21802

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 21, 2011, 08:07:51 PM

Quote from: kyballr on December 21, 2011, 05:44:35 PM
Don Lane Classic @ Transylvania 7 pm
Wabash (9-0) vs host Transy (8-0)

live stats
http://www.sidearmstats.com/transy/mbball/index.htm

live video
http://tupioneers.nmtvsports.com/main.php?eventId=21802

The play-by-play broadcaster is pronouncing "Wabash" as if it rhymes with "lavosh"! How the heck do you screw up "Wabash"??

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 21, 2011, 08:20:59 PM

I've heard it too many times. They try to make both 'a' sounds equivalent for some reason.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 21, 2011, 08:51:06 PM

Wabash falls to ORV Transylvania 66-61. The LGs shoot just 34% from the floor and took 36 three-pointers. They did control the glass by a huge margin but couldn't get the ball in the basket.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 21, 2011, 09:32:50 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 21, 2011, 08:07:51 PM

The play-by-play broadcaster is pronouncing "Wabash" as if it rhymes with "lavosh"! How the heck do you screw up "Wabash"??

I was listening to that broadcast as well and when I first heard their pronunciation I thought they were making a joke. I soon realized the joke was on them. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 21, 2011, 10:06:19 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 21, 2011, 08:20:59 PM
I've heard it too many times. They try to make both 'a' sounds equivalent for some reason.

Obviously not music fans. They should know better from either the river (several songs) or the Wabash Cannonball! :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on December 22, 2011, 08:37:59 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 21, 2011, 10:06:19 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 21, 2011, 08:20:59 PM
I've heard it too many times. They try to make both 'a' sounds equivalent for some reason.

Obviously not music fans. They should know better from either the river (several songs) or the Wabash Cannonball! :P

Maybe they gained their pronunciation skills at "Wee-Ton" ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 23, 2011, 03:41:11 AM

San Antonio wasn't very kind to the Northwest Conference these past 3 days. Their teams went 6-8 in the 14 games they played and when you throw out the 3 wins they had over 1-12 Southwestern they look even worse. #8 Whitworth and #12 Puget Sound both went 1-1 with each beating Southwestern, while both teams were defeated rather handily in their losses. Whitworth by 15 to #16 UW- Whitewater and Puget Sound by 18 to unranked Redlands.

#16 UW-Whitewater and #28 Wheaton were the big winners each going 2-0 in the tourney while host Trinity (Texas) finished 2-1

Here are the results of the Trinity University National Invitational: Had to be one of the best in all of DIII this year.

#16 UW-Whitewater 2-0
Beat Willamette 89-69 Beat #8 Whitworth 76-61

#28 Wheaton 2-0
Beat Whitman 60-50 Beat Pacific Lutheran 70-65

Trinity (Texas) 2-1
Lost to George Fox 57-55 Beat Willamette 77-71 Beat Pacific 70-50

#12 Puget Sound 1-1
Beat Southwestern 93-75 Lost to Redlands 90-72

#8 Whitworth 1-1
Lost to #16 UW-Whitewater 76-61 Beat Southwestern 97-63

Whitman 1-1
Beat Buena Vista 75-38 Lost to #28 Wheaton 60-50

George Fox 1-1
Beat Trinity (Texas) 57-55 Lost to Buena Vista 82-73 OT

Pacific 1-1
Beat Southwestern 76-55 Lost to Trinity (Texas) 70-50

Pacific Lutheran 1-1
Beat Redlands 74-62 Lost to #28 Wheaton 70-65

Redlands 1-1
Lost to Pacific Lutheran 74-62 Beat #12 Puget Sound 90-72

Buena Vista 1-1
Lost to Whitman 75-38 Beat George Fox 82-73 OT

Willamette 0-2
Lost to #16 UW-Whitewater 89-69 Lost to Trinity (Texas) 77-71

Southwestern 0-3
Lost to #12 Puget Sound 93-75 Lost to Pacific 76-55 Lost to #8 Whitworth 97-63

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 23, 2011, 08:09:03 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

There is no new poll until the new year, but here is a look at the games that have been played so far, and those scheduled over the next week and a half. I'll post a complete report on January 1 (and probably nothing else before then).

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	624	Middlebury	7-0	12/29 at Curry; 12/30 at T#44 Salem State
#2	570	Virginia Wesleyan	8-1	def. Wesley, 96-74; 01/01 vs. Lynchburg
#3	568	Augustana	9-1	def. Knox, 55-53; 12/30 vs. MacMurray
#4	523	MIT	12-0	IDLE
#5	499	Emory	8-0	12/29 vs. Rhodes; 12/31 vs. Guilford
#6	495	Amherst	9-1	12/30 at Marymount
#7	493	Williams	8-1	12/28 at Ohio Northern; 12/29 at TBA
#8	436	Whitworth	8-2	LOST at #16 UW-Whitewater, 61-76; def. Southwestern, 97-63; 12/29 vs. Calvin
#9	403	Franklin and Marshall	9-0	IDLE
#10	377	Cabrini	8-0	12/29 at Johns Hopkins; 12/30 at TBD
#11	357	Mary Hardin-Baylor	8-0	12/29 vs. UW-Stout; 12/30 at Concordia (Ill.)
#12	302	Puget Sound	10-1	def. Southwestern, 93-75; LOST at Redlands, 72-90
#13	293	St. Thomas	7-2	LOST at #18 UW-Stevens Point, 66-72
#14	274	Wabash	9-1	def. Baldwin-Wallace, 63-61; LOST at T#34 Transylvania, 61-66; 12/29 vs. Franklin
#15	225	Hope	8-1	12/29 vs. #20 Marietta; 12/30 vs. TBA
#16	190	UW-Whitewater	10-1	def. Willamette, 89-69; def. #8 Whitworth, 76-61; 12/30 at Marian
#17	173	WPI	8-1	12/28 vs. #31 Western Connecticut; 12/31 vs. St. Joseph's (Maine)
#18	167	UW-Stevens Point	9-2	def. #13 St. Thomas, 72-66; 12/30 vs. St. Olaf
#19	136	Wooster	7-2	def. #37 St. Mary's (Md.), 63-61; def. Sacred Heart (P.R.), 78-50; 12/29 vs. Thiel; 12/30 vs. Heidelberg
#20	115	Marietta	7-3	def. Wilmington, 65-63; 12/29 at #15 Hope; 12/30 at TBA
#21	114	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	9-0	12/30 vs. Babson
#22	105	Birmingham-Southern	8-1	12/29 vs. Southern Maine; 12/30 vs. Clark
#23	100	Oswego State	9-1	IDLE
#24	96	Buffalo State	8-1	12/31 at Wesleyan; 01/01 at TBA
#25	78	Rochester	8-2	IDLE

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	73	Rhode Island College	9-1	IDLE
#27	47	William Paterson	9-1	12/30 at SUNY-Purchase
#28	46	Wheaton (Ill.)	9-2	def. Whitman, 60-50; def. Pacific Lutheran, 70-65
#29	37	Wittenberg	5-3	def. Ohio Northern, 75-66; LOST to Otterbein, 61-64; 12/29 vs. Monmouth; 12/30 vs. TBA (Charles B. Zimmerman Memorial Classic)
#30	30	Ohio Wesleyan	8-1	12/28 at Albion; 12/29 at TBA
#31	23	Western Connecticut	10-1	12/28 at #17 WPI
#32	22	Bethany	10-0	12/29 at Illinois Wesleyan; 12/30 at Staten Island or Vaughn
#33	20	Grinnell	8-0	IDLE
T#34	16	Transylvania	9-0	def. Hendrix, 61-44; def. #14 Wabash, 66-61; 12/28 vs. La Verne; 12/29 vs. Gustavus Adolphus
T#34	16	UW-River Falls	8-2	12/29 at Macalester; 12/31 at Sioux Falls
#36	15	Hardin-Simmons	8-0	def. McMurry, 81-78; 12/28 at Gustavus Adolphus; 12/30 at Hanover
#37	14	St. Mary's (Md.)	8-3	LOST to #19 Wooster, 61-63; 12/28 vs. Guilford
#38	13	Edgewood	9-1	12/31 vs. North Park
#39	11	Texas-Dallas	8-2	LOST at Schreiner, 74-80; def. Texas Lutheran, 61-49
#40	9	Washington U.	7-3	12/30 at Elmhurst
#41	7	Catholic	10-0	12/31 vs. Massachusetts College; 01/01 vs. TBA
#42	6	New Jersey City	9-1	IDLE
#43	4	Lake Forest	7-1	IDLE
T#44	1	Hartwick	9-0	12/28 at Delaware Valley; 12/29 at TBD
T#44	1	Hobart	6-1	IDLE
T#44	1	Salem State	6-3	12/29 vs. Colby; 12/30 vs. #1 Middlebury

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 28, 2011, 03:54:39 PM

#31Western Connecticut on the road defeats #17WPI 101-93.
Key stretch in the game occurred with 4:37 left in the game. Up 78-77, WPI turned the ball over 4 times and committed 2 fouls in the next 2:13 enabling WC to grab an 86-80 lead with 2:24 to play. After WPI went to the line and made 2 free throws to cut it to 4 WC came down and buried a three. WPI then missed 3 point attempts on their next 2 possessions, sending WC to the line both times, after each miss. The Colonials made 4 straight foul shots to up their lead to 93-82 and salt the game away. Western Connecticut's Daquon Brook's with 40 points (8x16 fg, 2x6 3's, 22x24 ft) and 9 assists.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 29, 2011, 05:20:42 PM

#1 Middlebury downs Curry 83-54 to improve to 9-0. Next up is #44 Salem State on Friday evening at 7 PM.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Wabash2011 on December 30, 2011, 01:13:18 AM

Wabash over Franklin in OT, 75-68. Wabash goes to 10-1 headed into NCAC "head east" weekend at Hiram and Allegheny...Frankin travels to Translyvania next week for a tough conference game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 30, 2011, 10:53:36 AM

#19 Wooster beats Thiel 78 to 68. Wooster was led by sophomore guard Doug Thorpe with 21 points and Justin Hallowell with 12 points. Next opponent is Heidelberg this evening.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 30, 2011, 09:11:05 PM

Final: #19 Wooster 73 Heidelberg 61

Wooster was led tonight by Josh Claytor with 18 points, Justin Hallowell with 17 points and Jalen Goodwin with 11. Wooster is now 9-2 and plays Geneva College next on 1/4

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 01, 2012, 06:24:47 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Happy New Year!

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	624	Middlebury	9-0	def. Curry, 83-54; def. T#44 Salem State, 66-63
#2	570	Virginia Wesleyan	9-1	def. Wesley, 96-74; def. Lynchburg, 108-80
#3	568	Augustana	10-1	def. Knox, 55-53; def. MacMurray, 96-53
#4	523	MIT	12-0	IDLE
#5	499	Emory	10-0	def. Rhodes, 84-66; def. Guilford, 96-84
#6	495	Amherst	10-1	def. Marymount, 81-66
#7	493	Williams	10-1	def. Ohio Northern, 79-73; def. Thomas More, 66-64
#8	436	Whitworth	9-2	LOST at #16 UW-Whitewater, 61-76; def. Southwestern, 97-63; def. Calvin, 76-51
#9	403	Franklin and Marshall	9-0	IDLE
#10	377	Cabrini	9-1	def. Johns Hopkins, 80-60; LOST at Centre, 67-69
#11	357	Mary Hardin-Baylor	10-0	def. UW-Stout, 70-57; def. Concordia (Ill.), 82-61
#12	302	Puget Sound	10-1	def. Southwestern, 91-77; LOST at Redlands, 72-90
#13	293	St. Thomas	7-2	LOST at #18 UW-Stevens Point, 66-72
#14	274	Wabash	10-1	def. Baldwin-Wallace, 63-61; LOST at T#34 Transylvania, 61-66; def. Franklin, 75-68
#15	225	Hope	10-1	def. #20 Marietta, 84-73; def. Ind. Wesleyan, 70-66
#16	190	UW-Whitewater	11-1	def. Willamette, 89-69; def. #8 Whitworth, 76-61; def. Marian, 74-51
#17	173	WPI	9-2	LOST to #31 Western Connecticut, 93-101; def. St. Joseph's (Maine), 68-58
#18	167	UW-Stevens Point	10-2	def. #13 St. Thomas, 72-66; def. St. Olaf, 83-70
#19	136	Wooster	9-2	def. #37 St. Mary's (Md.), 63-61; def. Sacred Heart (P.R.), 78-50; def. Thiel, 78-68; def. Heidelberg, 73-61
#20	115	Marietta	8-4	def. Wilmington, 65-63; LOST at #15 Hope, 73-84; def. Grace Bible (Mich.), 95-79
#21	114	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	10-0	def. Babson, 73-51
#22	105	Birmingham-Southern	10-1	def. Southern Maine, 85-73; def. Clark, 58-57
#23	100	Oswego State	9-1	IDLE
#24	96	Buffalo State	10-1	def. Wesleyan, 80-77; def. #41 Catholic, 82-81
#25	78	Rochester	8-2	IDLE

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	73	Rhode Island College	9-1	IDLE
#27	47	William Paterson	10-1	def. SUNY-Purchase, 73-50
#28	46	Wheaton (Ill.)	9-2	def. Whitman, 60-50; def. Pacific Lutheran, 70-65
#29	37	Wittenberg	7-3	def. Ohio Northern, 75-66; LOST to Otterbein, 61-64; def. Monmouth, 80-54; def. Marian (Ind.), 70-50
#30	30	Ohio Wesleyan	10-1	def. Albion, 78-66; def. Otterbein, 75-65
#31	23	Western Connecticut	11-1	def. #17 WPI, 101-93
#32	22	Bethany	11-1	LOST at Illinois Wesleyan, 60-63; def. Vaughn, 84-38
#33	20	Grinnell	8-0	IDLE
T#34	16	Transylvania	10-1	def. Hendrix, 61-44; def. #14 Wabash, 66-61; def. La Verne, 73-64; LOST at Gustavus Adolphus, 62-66
T#34	16	UW-River Falls	9-3	def. Macalester, 77-58; LOST at Sioux Falls, 68-71
#36	15	Hardin-Simmons	9-1	def. McMurry, 81-78; LOST to Gustavus Adolphus, 69-71; def. Hanover, 83-74
#37	14	St. Mary's (Md.)	9-3	LOST to #19 Wooster, 61-63; def. Guilford, 70-65
#38	13	Edgewood	10-1	def. North Park, 72-71
#39	11	Texas-Dallas	8-2	LOST at Schreiner, 74-80; def. Texas Lutheran, 61-49
#40	9	Washington U.	8-3	def. Elmhurst, 67-66
#41	7	Catholic	11-1	def. Massachusetts College, 85-71; LOST to #24 Buffalo State, 81-82
#42	6	New Jersey City	9-1	IDLE
#43	4	Lake Forest	7-1	IDLE
T#44	1	Hartwick	11-0	def. Delaware Valley, 82-68; def. Penn State-Abington, 104-90
T#44	1	Hobart	6-1	IDLE
T#44	1	Salem State	7-4	def. Colby, 70-57; LOST to #1 Middlebury, 63-66

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 01, 2012, 07:51:46 PM

Buffalo State with 2 nice wins over Wesleyan and Catholic this weekend. Bengals had to beat Cardinals both days, and they came from behind in both games to do so. Against the 9-1 Cardinals of Wesleyan University they were down 41-33 early in the 2nd half and came back to win a nail biter. Against the 11-0 Catholic University Cardinals the win was even tougher, as the Bengals had to overcome a 12 point halftime deficit on Catholic's homecourt. Bengals never had the lead until 12:34 was left in the game. From that point till the end of the game there were 9 ties and 7 lead changes before the Bengals got a basket with 7 seconds left to win it 82-81. Beating 2 teams that were a combined 20-1 at gametime should move them up a few notches in the poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 03, 2012, 02:30:49 PM

New Top 25 is out. One of Middlebury's #1 votes has evidently switched to MIT. Interesting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 03, 2012, 02:32:14 PM

Maybe someone got a gift basket? :P

That is curious.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 03, 2012, 02:35:30 PM

Middlebury blew out Curry and had a close win at Salem State, whilst MIT was idle.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 03, 2012, 02:57:33 PM

No rule says voters can't change their minds! :-) I am not the voter who switched... but I am about ready to blow-up my ballot and redo the entire thing. There are just too many question marks about teams. Most of the Top 25 is questionable... making this a very challenging year, so far.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Just Bill on January 03, 2012, 03:05:00 PM

Notice how deep the ORV list is on the men's poll compared to the women's poll. That list typically starts big and shrinks in number through the season. This year it seems to be holding mostly steady. That indicates to me there's a lot of uncertainity among voters about who belongs in the bottom half of the poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 03, 2012, 03:16:48 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 03, 2012, 02:57:33 PM
No rule says voters can't change their minds! I am not the voter who switched... but I am about ready to blow-up my ballot and redo the entire thing. There are just too many question marks about teams. Most of the Top 25 is questionable... making this a very challenging year, so far.

I don't begrudge anyone changing their mind. It just seems odd to change this week, given MIT's lack of play and that fact that Middlebury continues to work its best player back into the line-up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 03, 2012, 03:26:03 PM

I will say from experience that sometimes I have seen a team and changed my mind on their placement in my poll. There is a chance a voter saw Middlebury recently and even saw MIT this season and has decided he has his vote misplaced between the two. I have no idea... just giving some insight on how it could have played out.

That is exactly the reason I moved at least one team into this week's poll despite a loss... and am seriously considering starting from scratch soon as I am starting to see more teams... AND there are so many question marks (good point Just Bill).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 03, 2012, 04:48:48 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 03, 2012, 03:26:03 PM
I will say from experience that sometimes I have seen a team and changed my mind on their placement in my poll. There is a chance a voter saw Middlebury recently and even saw MIT this season and has decided he has his vote misplaced between the two. I have no idea... just giving some insight on how it could have played out.

That is exactly the reason I moved at least one team into this week's poll despite a loss... and am seriously considering starting from scratch soon as I am starting to see more teams... AND there are so many question marks (good point Just Bill).

For example, someone may have observed both the Salem State vs. MIT and the Salem State vs. Middlebury games. MIT controlled the entire game vs. Salem, leading by as many as 28 (with the lead never dropping below double-digits in the second half). Conversely, Midd did have some trouble with Salem. I am not saying that these translational comparisons are always accurate, but if a voter saw both games and felt that MIT would beat Midd if they played based on their observations, then I think they are justified in changing their vote.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 03, 2012, 10:19:48 PM

#20 Oswego State battles the D-I Broncos of Texas-Pan American the entire game before losing 59-54.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WAlum on January 04, 2012, 01:40:22 PM

Head scratchers:
Wooster is ranked ahead of Wabash. Wooster has two losses, Wabash one (to one-loss Transylvania) and Wabash beat Wooster head to head.

OVR Section - Wittenberg has 3 losses yet is ranked ahead of Ohio Wesleyan with 1 loss. Both teams had a common opponent during the voting period and different results. Wittenberg lost to Otterbein while Ohio Wesleyan beat Otterbein by 10.

Marietta continues to fall in the rankings. When will Halter be back?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 04, 2012, 03:06:04 PM

Quote from: WAlum on January 04, 2012, 01:40:22 PM
Head scratchers:
Wooster is ranked ahead of Wabash. Wooster has two losses, Wabash one (to one-loss Transylvania) and Wabash beat Wooster head to head.

OVR Section - Wittenberg has 3 losses yet is ranked ahead of Ohio Wesleyan with 1 loss. Both teams had a common opponent during the voting period and different results. Wittenberg lost to Otterbein while Ohio Wesleyan beat Otterbein by 10.

Marietta continues to fall in the rankings. When will Halter be back?

Halter has played in 4 of the last 6 Marietta games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 04, 2012, 04:57:40 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 03, 2012, 02:30:49 PM

New Top 25 is out. One of Middlebury's #1 votes has evidently switched to MIT. Interesting.

The computerized tabulation list probably has MID adjacent to MIT and the voter's finger just slipped to far down the list.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 04, 2012, 08:37:14 PM

In their first game in 3 weeks, MIT defeats Springfield 67-59 in both teams NEWMAC opener. Game was competitive, but MITs experience has really helped them finish out the few close games they have had so far this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 04, 2012, 09:06:00 PM

Final: #15 Wooster 100 Geneva 48
Wooster led this game by 39 points at halftime (57 - 18). Scots were led in scoring tonight by Justin Hallowell with 14 points, freshman Kenny Deboer with 14, Josh Claytor with 13, Jake Mays with 13 and freshman Xavier Brown chipped in 11 points.

Wooster is now 10-2. Next game is Saturday at home vs. Oberlin

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 04, 2012, 10:15:24 PM

#23 Wheaton falls 87-77 in OT at ORV IWU. My guess would be that this will drop Wheaton to ORV status, but not be quite enough to get IWU into the top 25, leaving Augie as the CCIW's sole rep in the top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 04, 2012, 10:50:47 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 04, 2012, 10:15:24 PM
#23 Wheaton falls 87-77 in OT at ORV IWU. My guess would be that this will drop Wheaton to ORV status, but not be quite enough to get IWU into the top 25, leaving Augie as the CCIW's sole rep in the top 25.

I'm pretty confident IWU and Wheaton are both Top 25 teams...maybe somewhere in the 18-24 range.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 04, 2012, 11:00:02 PM

I don't know... there are a TON of teams that could slot into 15-25... if not 10-25... makes it hard to put two from the same conference (CCIW) along with Augustana in there.

I am going to have to seriously reassess my poll this week... too many teams to consider.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 04, 2012, 11:06:29 PM

Here is the IWU/Wheaton OT game from tonight (go to "On Demand") for any that want to assess these two teams.

http://client.stretchinternet.com/client/iwu.portal#

* Game starts at about 8:30 mark on the player
* 2nd half at 57:00
* OT at 1:51:00

Wheaton's Tim McCrary (preseason 1st Team All-American) and Aaron Garriott (D1 transfer) and IWU's Jordan Zimmer (21.3 ppg last 6 games) are outstanding players...and both teams have plenty of supporting cast around these guys.

I don't think these are Top 15 teams, but pretty sure they're Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie_superfan on January 04, 2012, 11:12:54 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 04, 2012, 11:00:02 PM
I don't know... there are a TON of teams that could slot into 15-25... if not 10-25... makes it hard to put two from the same conference (CCIW) along with Augustana in there.

I am going to have to seriously reassess my poll this week... too many teams to consider.

As hard as it is for me to say, I'm not sure that Augustana is the best of the bunch. Their win tonight at Millikin left a lot to be desired. With their starting center leaving the team, it's hard to say how they'll play once they get some tougher games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 05, 2012, 12:27:36 AM

Titan - I hear ya... you know I take this seriously... but there are so many teams that could fit into the 15-25 slot right now. I saw a few pretty good teams in Vegas... I have been watching a few online (I will watch yours tomorrow - have to get to bed - Hoopsville tomorrow night!)... it is just so difficult... I think I am considering up to 35 teams a week for 25 slots.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 05, 2012, 03:35:35 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 05, 2012, 12:27:36 AM
Titan - I hear ya... you know I take this seriously... but there are so many teams that could fit into the 15-25 slot right now. I saw a few pretty good teams in Vegas... I have been watching a few online (I will watch yours tomorrow - have to get to bed - Hoopsville tomorrow night!)... it is just so difficult... I think I am considering up to 35 teams a week for 25 slots.

It's your call, D-Mac, but if you don't want to put either Wheaton or Illinois Wesleyan in your Top 25, this is one CCIW fan who's got your back. For that matter, if you'd like to mark Augie down a bit as well, I'll support that, too.

Wheaton and Illinois Wesleyan are pretty good teams, but they're on the outer margins of the Top 25, at best. The long and short of it is that the CCIW is really down this year, and I'd hate to see any of its teams get promoted on the basis of a league reputation that really isn't deserved this season.

(And now that I've exposed myself as the CCIW's version of Benedict Arnold, I'll just crawl back under my rock. ;))

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 05, 2012, 07:26:11 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 05, 2012, 03:35:35 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 05, 2012, 12:27:36 AM
Titan - I hear ya... you know I take this seriously... but there are so many teams that could fit into the 15-25 slot right now. I saw a few pretty good teams in Vegas... I have been watching a few online (I will watch yours tomorrow - have to get to bed - Hoopsville tomorrow night!)... it is just so difficult... I think I am considering up to 35 teams a week for 25 slots.

It's your call, D-Mac, but if you don't want to put either Wheaton or Illinois Wesleyan in your Top 25, this is one CCIW fan who's got your back. For that matter, if you'd like to mark Augie down a bit as well, I'll support that, too.

Wheaton and Illinois Wesleyan are pretty good teams, but they're on the outer margins of the Top 25, at best. The long and short of it is that the CCIW is really down this year, and I'd hate to see any of its teams get promoted on the basis of a league reputation that really isn't deserved this season.

(And now that I've exposed myself as the CCIW's version of Benedict Arnold, I'll just crawl back under my rock. ;))

A couple thoughts Greg...

First, while I agree with you about the CCIW being down (I don't think anyone would question this), it is down because of what's going on with teams 4-8...not because of anything to do with teams 1-3. Non-conference records:

Teams 1-3
Augustana, 10-1 (loss @ Wash U)
Illinois Wesleyan, 9-2 (losses @ Ripon, @ #10 UW-Whitewater)
Wheaton, 9-2 (losses vs #12 Hope, @ Wash U)

Teams 4-8
North Central 6-5
Elmhurst 6-5
Carthage 6-5
North Park 4-7
Millikin 1-10

You have always supported the position that conference "strength" is based on depth - not really the level of the best 2-3 teams. We both agree that in 2011-12, the CCIW just does not have the depth it has most years. A North Central team that shared the league title last year and was picked #2 in the preseason really struggled in the non-conference...Carthage, Elmhurst, and North Park have been marginal to bad...Matt Nadelhoffer inherited a Millikin basketball program that is in the gutter and will take years to fix.

But I'm not sure what the struggles with teams 4-8, and thus the CCIW's overall strength, has to do with the Top 25 resumes of the Augustana, Illinois Wesleyan, and Wheaton (which was the topic above you responded to). Now, do I currently think Augustana is really the #3 team in Division III, especially after the departure of their 6-9 starting center? No. They look more to me like a #10-12 team. And do I think Illinois Wesleyan and Wheaton are "Top 15 teams"? Not really...but I do think they are Top 25 teams. It's possible that the caliber of the CCIW's top 3 this year is not what it has been in some years (maybe, maybe not...we'll see), but when we're talking rankings, this is also all relative. And right now, I see a lot of very even basketball teams.

For example, I don't really see separation between Hope and IWU/Wheaton (again, Hope beat Wheaton by 1 on a neutral floor), after watching both teams play on video. Hope is now up to #12...and could end up sliding way up the poll if they roll through the MIAA. I have also watched #13 UW-Stevens Point and #17 Wabash and see teams that are dead-even with IWU/Wheaton. These are just a few examples.

Second, I don't think anyone is suggesting that Wheaton and Illinois Wesleyan should get Top 25 consideration because of "league reputation." I certainly didn't, and nowhere above do I read that from d-mac or anyone else. I'm suggesting these are Top 25 teams because of 1) personnel (McCrary, Garriott, Zimmer, supporting casts, etc), 2) execution (for example, both are very strong defensively), and 3) overall body of work relative to the other candidates in the 20-25 range. That is why I posted a link to the video of last night's IWU/Wheaton game -- so people can watch both teams and decide, based on what they see, if they're Top 25 or not. The strengths and weaknesses of both teams are right there on display for people to evaluate. As you would agree I'm sure, in these discussions, it is always very helpful to watch teams play when possible, as opposed to just talking about teams on paper.

And regarding "league reputation", remember, Wheaton fell out of the Top 25 this year after a 1-point loss to Hope, and a loss at Wash U. 9-2 (now 10-2) Illinois Wesleyan has just 4 poll points in the Week 5 Top 25. I don't think we have seen any sign of league reputation having an impact on the placement of CCIW teams in the 2011-12 D3hoops.com Top 25. (If league reputation or even individual "name brand" was a factor for the voters, Wheaton may have stayed in the poll after those losses, and IWU might be getting more votes right now.)

So again, I agree that the CCIW is down. But where Augustana, Illinois Wesleyan, and Wheaton fit in the Top 25 picture should really be a completely separate conversation. These three teams shouldn't get the benefit of being from a league that has been traditionally strong, but they also shouldn't be penalized for the struggles of other teams in the CCIW this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 05, 2012, 08:25:39 AM

As far as where the computers but the CCIW's top 3...

Massey (through January 3)
6. Augustana
7. Illinois Wesleyan
8. Wheaton

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&sub=11620

D3 Basketball Index (through Jan 3)
3. Augustana
4. Wheaton
11. Illinois Wesleyan

https://sites.google.com/site/d3basketballindex/top-75

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 05, 2012, 09:27:32 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	623	Middlebury	10-0	def. RPI, 123-111; 01/06 vs. Bates; 01/07 vs. Tufts
#2	571	Virginia Wesleyan	10-1	def. Hampden-Sydney, 100-80; 01/08 vs. Haverford
#3	563	Augustana	11-1	def. Millikin, 64-39; 01/07 vs. North Central (Ill.)
#4	537	MIT	13-0	def. Springfield, 67-59; 01/07 vs. Wheaton (Mass.)
#5	516	Emory	11-0	def. Piedmont, 95-78; 01/07 vs. #27 Rochester
#6	497	Amherst	10-1	01/06 vs. Wesleyan; 01/07 vs. Connecticut College
#7	493	Williams	11-1	def. Castleton State, 107-82; 01/06 vs. Tufts; 01/07 vs. Bates
#8	418	Franklin and Marshall	11-0	def. Misericordia, 68-55; def. Hobart, 81-71; 01/05 vs. Oneonta State; 01/07 at Swarthmore
#9	410	Mary Hardin-Baylor	10-0	01/05 at University of the Ozarks; 01/07 at #46 Texas-Dallas
#10	357	UW-Whitewater	12-1	def. #40 Edgewood, 79-51; 01/07 vs. UW-River Falls
#11	327	Whitworth	9-2	01/06 at Pacific Lutheran; 01/07 at #16 Puget Sound
#12	317	Hope	11-1	def. Alma, 103-78; 01/07 vs. Adrian
#13	305	UW-Stevens Point	10-3	LOST at UW-River Falls, 70-73; 01/07 vs. UW-Eau Claire
#14	275	Cabrini	10-1	def. York (Pa.), 83-66; 01/07 at Immaculata
#15	202	Wooster	10-2	def. Geneva, 100-48; 01/07 vs. Oberlin
#16	198	Puget Sound	10-1	01/06 vs. Whitman; 01/07 vs. #11 Whitworth
#17	197	Wabash	10-1	01/06 at Hiram; 01/07 at Allegheny
#18	175	St. Thomas	7-3	LOST at St. John's, 66-68; 01/07 vs. Augsburg
#19	151	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	11-0	def. Mount St. Mary, 74-55; 01/07 at Caltech
#20	148	Oswego State	9-2	LOST at Tex.-Pan American, 54-59
#21	120	Buffalo State	10-2	LOST at Buffalo, 59-111
#22	89	Birmingham-Southern	10-1	01/06 vs. Millsaps; 01/08 vs. Rhodes
#23	80	Wheaton (Ill.)	9-3	LOST at #45 Illinois Wesleyan, 77-87; 01/07 at Elmhurst
#24	75	Rhode Island College	9-1	01/05 at Wheaton (Mass.); 01/07 vs. Mass-Boston
#25	66	Transylvania	11-1	def. Franklin, 76-55; 01/07 at Defiance

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	61	WPI	10-2	def. Coast Guard, 64-53; 01/07 at Babson
#27	59	Rochester	9-2	def. Rochester Tech, 76-62; 01/07 at #5 Emory
#28	51	Western Connecticut	11-1	01/07 vs. Mass-Dartmouth
#29	43	William Paterson	10-2	LOST at Montclair State, 79-80; 01/07 vs. Richard Stockton
#30	22	Wittenberg	9-3	def. Huntingdon, 75-62; def. Maryville (Tenn.), 77-70; 01/07 at #33 Ohio Wesleyan
#31	21	Grinnell	8-0	01/05 at Beloit
#32	20	Marietta	8-4	01/07 vs. Heidelberg
#33	17	Ohio Wesleyan	11-1	def. Capital, 76-55; 01/07 vs. #30 Wittenberg
#34	16	Bethany	12-1	def. Washington and Jefferson, 79-60; 01/07 vs. Waynesburg
#35	13	Hardin-Simmons	9-1	01/05 at Louisiana College; 01/07 at Mississippi College
T#36	11	Hartwick	11-0	01/06 at Elmira; 01/07 at Alfred
T#36	11	St. Mary's (Md.)	10-3	def. Marymount, 81-63; 01/07 vs. Wesley
T#36	11	Washington U.	8-3	01/07 vs. Chicago
T#36	11	Catholic	11-1	01/06 at Moravian; 01/07 at Scranton
#40	10	Edgewood	10-2	LOST at #10 UW-Whitewater, 51-79; 01/07 at Milwaukee Engineering
T#41	8	Gustavus Adolphus	7-3	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 62-45; 01/07 vs. UW-Stout
T#41	8	Lycoming	12-0	def. Penn State-Abington, 106-73; def. Mount Union, 91-75; 01/07 at King's
#43	7	New Jersey City	9-2	LOST at Ramapo, 74-78; 01/07 at Rutgers-Camden
#44	5	Lake Forest	8-1	def. St. Francis (IL), 76-51; 01/07 vs. Illinois College
#45	4	Illinois Wesleyan	10-2	def. #23 Wheaton (Ill.), 87-77; 01/07 at North Park
#46	3	Texas-Dallas	9-2	def. Austin, 67-62; 01/05 vs. Concordia (Texas); 01/07 vs. #9 Mary Hardin-Baylor
#47	2	Farmingdale State	7-3	01/07 at Mount St. Vincent
#48	1	Salem State	7-5	LOST at Endicott, 89-93; 01/07 at Westfield State

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie_superfan on January 05, 2012, 12:29:54 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 05, 2012, 08:25:39 AM
As far as where the computers but the CCIW's top 3...

Massey (through January 3)
6. Augustana
7. Illinois Wesleyan
8. Wheaton

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&sub=11620

D3 Basketball Index (through Jan 3)
3. Augustana
4. Wheaton
11. Illinois Wesleyan

https://sites.google.com/site/d3basketballindex/top-75

My system's rankings updated thru last night's games:

3. Augustana
6. Wheaton
8. Illinois Wesleyan

Change up top with UW-Whitewater edging out Hope for # 1.

https://sites.google.com/site/d3basketballindex/top-75

Out of curiosity, I also did a ranking with no margin of victory information so just who you played and if you won or lost with a slight advantage for winning on the road. Here are the top 10 just for fun:

1. Hope
2. UW-Whitewater
3. Wabash
4. Whitworth
5. Ohio Wesleyan
6. Claremont-Mudd-Scripps
7. Lycoming
8. Illinois Wesleyan
9. UW-River Falls
10. Lake Forest
.
.
16. Wheaton
17. Augustana

*Only D3 games included so you'll have to make your personal adjustments for any non-D3 games. OWU, Lycoming, and Lake Forest don't rank in the top 25 when including MOV.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 05, 2012, 03:11:19 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 04, 2012, 04:57:40 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 03, 2012, 02:30:49 PM

New Top 25 is out. One of Middlebury's #1 votes has evidently switched to MIT. Interesting.
The computerized tabulation list probably has MID adjacent to MIT and the voter's finger just slipped to far down the list.

I don't think so. Millikin, Millsaps, Mississippi College are all in between alphabetically and that's just off the top of my head.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: stag44 on January 05, 2012, 04:53:06 PM

interesting to see Claremont-Mudd-Scripps ranked quite high in the computer polls (#3 in Massey and #5 in the D3 Index, as well as #10 in RPI calculated for regional rankings) but still lagging a bit in the D3hoops.com poll.

My guess is that they are an "unknown" team that has muddled along on the west coast and really never made any noise on a national level. Occidental had some national recognition with their Elite 8 run and were rewarded when they beat a top ranked Amherst in 05-06.

Regardless, very excited to see them in the top 25 and climbing!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 05, 2012, 05:18:03 PM

I would say the human poll almost never mirrors the computer rankings. Massey in particular seems to suffer from WIAC-centric problems, where anyone who plays anyone from the WIAC, or plays someone who plays someone in the WIAC, is inflated. That happens to the point of multiple MIAC teams being highly ranked most years, even though the conference hadn't won a title.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 05, 2012, 06:34:04 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 05, 2012, 07:26:11 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 05, 2012, 03:35:35 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 05, 2012, 12:27:36 AM
Titan - I hear ya... you know I take this seriously... but there are so many teams that could fit into the 15-25 slot right now. I saw a few pretty good teams in Vegas... I have been watching a few online (I will watch yours tomorrow - have to get to bed - Hoopsville tomorrow night!)... it is just so difficult... I think I am considering up to 35 teams a week for 25 slots.

It's your call, D-Mac, but if you don't want to put either Wheaton or Illinois Wesleyan in your Top 25, this is one CCIW fan who's got your back. For that matter, if you'd like to mark Augie down a bit as well, I'll support that, too.

Wheaton and Illinois Wesleyan are pretty good teams, but they're on the outer margins of the Top 25, at best. The long and short of it is that the CCIW is really down this year, and I'd hate to see any of its teams get promoted on the basis of a league reputation that really isn't deserved this season.

(And now that I've exposed myself as the CCIW's version of Benedict Arnold, I'll just crawl back under my rock. ;))

A couple thoughts Greg...

First, while I agree with you about the CCIW being down (I don't think anyone would question this), it is down because of what's going on with teams 4-8...not because of anything to do with teams 1-3. Non-conference records:

Teams 1-3
Augustana, 10-1 (loss @ Wash U)
Illinois Wesleyan, 9-2 (losses @ Ripon, @ #10 UW-Whitewater)
Wheaton, 9-2 (losses vs #12 Hope, @ Wash U)

Teams 4-8
North Central 6-5
Elmhurst 6-5
Carthage 6-5
North Park 4-7
Millikin 1-10

You have always supported the position that conference "strength" is based on depth - not really the level of the best 2-3 teams. We both agree that in 2011-12, the CCIW just does not have the depth it has most years. A North Central team that shared the league title last year and was picked #2 in the preseason really struggled in the non-conference...Carthage, Elmhurst, and North Park have been marginal to bad...Matt Nadelhoffer inherited a Millikin basketball program that is in the gutter and will take years to fix.

But I'm not sure what the struggles with teams 4-8, and thus the CCIW's overall strength, has to do with the Top 25 resumes of the Augustana, Illinois Wesleyan, and Wheaton (which was the topic above you responded to). Now, do I currently think Augustana is really the #3 team in Division III, especially after the departure of their 6-9 starting center? No. They look more to me like a #10-12 team. And do I think Illinois Wesleyan and Wheaton are "Top 15 teams"? Not really...but I do think they are Top 25 teams. It's possible that the caliber of the CCIW's top 3 this year is not what it has been in some years (maybe, maybe not...we'll see), but when we're talking rankings, this is also all relative. And right now, I see a lot of very even basketball teams.

For example, I don't really see separation between Hope and IWU/Wheaton (again, Hope beat Wheaton by 1 on a neutral floor), after watching both teams play on video. Hope is now up to #12...and could end up sliding way up the poll if they roll through the MIAA. I have also watched #13 UW-Stevens Point and #17 Wabash and see teams that are dead-even with IWU/Wheaton. These are just a few examples.

Second, I don't think anyone is suggesting that Wheaton and Illinois Wesleyan should get Top 25 consideration because of "league reputation." I certainly didn't, and nowhere above do I read that from d-mac or anyone else. I'm suggesting these are Top 25 teams because of 1) personnel (McCrary, Garriott, Zimmer, supporting casts, etc), 2) execution (for example, both are very strong defensively), and 3) overall body of work relative to the other candidates in the 20-25 range. That is why I posted a link to the video of last night's IWU/Wheaton game -- so people can watch both teams and decide, based on what they see, if they're Top 25 or not. The strengths and weaknesses of both teams are right there on display for people to evaluate. As you would agree I'm sure, in these discussions, it is always very helpful to watch teams play when possible, as opposed to just talking about teams on paper.

And regarding "league reputation", remember, Wheaton fell out of the Top 25 this year after a 1-point loss to Hope, and a loss at Wash U. 9-2 (now 10-2) Illinois Wesleyan has just 4 poll points in the Week 5 Top 25. I don't think we have seen any sign of league reputation having an impact on the placement of CCIW teams in the 2011-12 D3hoops.com Top 25. (If league reputation or even individual "name brand" was a factor for the voters, Wheaton may have stayed in the poll after those losses, and IWU might be getting more votes right now.)

So again, I agree that the CCIW is down. But where Augustana, Illinois Wesleyan, and Wheaton fit in the Top 25 picture should really be a completely separate conversation. These three teams shouldn't get the benefit of being from a league that has been traditionally strong, but they also shouldn't be penalized for the struggles of other teams in the CCIW this year.

Wow, Bob. You were really riding the adrenaline of last night's IWU win when you started typing, weren't you? ;)

From this point on, Augie, Wheaton, and IWU will all be playing CCIW teams exclusively. The pollsters will start moving those three teams up or down based upon how they do against their league brethren, so pointing out that the CCIW is down seems to me to be a fair caveat in terms of gauging those three teams.

I see Wheaton and IWU as being somewhere in the #20 to #25 range. You yourself said that they're somewhere in the #18 to #24 range. If you want to dispute the difference between the two of us on that matter, then I'd suggest that you're stealing my thunder as CCIW Chat's in-house picker of nits. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 05, 2012, 06:48:18 PM

Squibble alert!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 05, 2012, 06:49:00 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 05, 2012, 05:18:03 PM
I would say the human poll almost never mirrors the computer rankings. Massey in particular seems to suffer from WIAC-centric problems, where anyone who plays anyone from the WIAC, or plays someone who plays someone in the WIAC, is inflated. That happens to the point of multiple MIAC teams being highly ranked most years, even though the conference hadn't won a title.

The fact that the MIAC plays so few non-con games exacerbates this... the WIAC has had the best winning percentage in the non-conference so the conference as a whole would be higher.

What I find interesting, though, is that, prior to the conference schedule, WIAC teams are still higher. I'm not 100% sold that it's merely some sort of WIAC bias... I don't know everything that goes into the calculation, but Whitewater has been on top since Massey first published if I recall correctly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 05, 2012, 06:54:27 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 05, 2012, 06:49:00 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 05, 2012, 05:18:03 PM
I would say the human poll almost never mirrors the computer rankings. Massey in particular seems to suffer from WIAC-centric problems, where anyone who plays anyone from the WIAC, or plays someone who plays someone in the WIAC, is inflated. That happens to the point of multiple MIAC teams being highly ranked most years, even though the conference hadn't won a title.

The fact that the MIAC plays so few non-con games exacerbates this... the WIAC has had the best winning percentage in the non-conference so the conference as a whole would be higher.

What I find interesting, though, is that, prior to the conference schedule, WIAC teams are still higher. I'm not 100% sold that it's merely some sort of WIAC bias... I don't know everything that goes into the calculation, but Whitewater has been on top since Massey first published if I recall correctly.

Hope was #1 for a while on the Massey DIII rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 05, 2012, 08:25:14 PM

I think there's something unlucky about being ranked #13...

Stevens Point beat both St. Thomas and Whitewater when they were 13th, and Point lost at River Falls last night... after being ranked #13.

And Wheaton rose to #13 in the first poll of the year... and then promptly lost!

Only Mary Hardin-Baylor (#13 in week 2) and Emory (#13 in the preseason) didn't lose the week that they were #13...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 05, 2012, 08:28:31 PM

Quote from: PointSpecial on January 05, 2012, 08:25:14 PM
I think there's something unlucky about being ranked #13...

Stevens Point beat both St. Thomas and Whitewater when they were 13th, and Point lost at River Falls last night... after being ranked #13.

And Wheaton rose to #13 in the first poll of the year... and then promptly lost!

Only Mary Hardin-Baylor (#13 in week 2) and Emory (#13 in the preseason) didn't lose the week that they were #13...

There's a Friday the 13th this month. If the #13 team this coming week has a game, they'd better watch out for any opponent named Freddy! 8-)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 05, 2012, 09:23:46 PM

I hate to disappoint people but there is no massey WIAC bias, the WIAC just plays good basketball, that's why they always rate so high. :)

I think Whitewater is probably pretty underrated.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 05, 2012, 09:30:36 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 05, 2012, 08:28:31 PM
Quote from: PointSpecial on January 05, 2012, 08:25:14 PM
I think there's something unlucky about being ranked #13...

Stevens Point beat both St. Thomas and Whitewater when they were 13th, and Point lost at River Falls last night... after being ranked #13.

And Wheaton rose to #13 in the first poll of the year... and then promptly lost!

Only Mary Hardin-Baylor (#13 in week 2) and Emory (#13 in the preseason) didn't lose the week that they were #13...

There's a Friday the 13th this month. If the #13 team this coming week has a game, they'd better watch out for any opponent named Freddy! 8-)

Maybe it's me... Point did give WW and UST their losses... and I, of course, went to SP...

I also grew up in Wheaton.

Hmm....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 05, 2012, 09:34:07 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 05, 2012, 06:34:04 PM
From this point on, Augie, Wheaton, and IWU will all be playing CCIW teams exclusively. The pollsters will start moving those three teams up or down based upon how they do against their league brethren, so pointing out that the CCIW is down seems to me to be a fair caveat in terms of gauging those three teams.

I see Wheaton and IWU as being somewhere in the #20 to #25 range. You yourself said that they're somewhere in the #18 to #24 range. If you want to dispute the difference between the two of us on that matter, then I'd suggest that you're stealing my thunder as CCIW Chat's in-house picker of nits. ;)

I just don't think what you posted above really matches what you posted last night at all...

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 05, 2012, 03:35:35 AM
It's your call, D-Mac, but if you don't want to put either Wheaton or Illinois Wesleyan in your Top 25, this is one CCIW fan who's got your back. For that matter, if you'd like to mark Augie down a bit as well, I'll support that, too.

Wheaton and Illinois Wesleyan are pretty good teams, but they're on the outer margins of the Top 25, at best. The long and short of it is that the CCIW is really down this year, and I'd hate to see any of its teams get promoted on the basis of a league reputation that really isn't deserved this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 05, 2012, 09:53:31 PM

Now we have a three-way CCIW squibble!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 05, 2012, 11:47:05 PM

Quote from: sac on January 05, 2012, 09:23:46 PM
I hate to disappoint people but there is no massey WIAC bias, the WIAC just plays good basketball, that's why they always rate so high. :)

I think Whitewater is probably pretty underrated.

Sac - are you running the Massey ratings? ;) Just curious how you know there is no bias... and there is a lot of good basketball being played around the country - though the WIAC is consistent.

Quote from: smedindy on January 05, 2012, 09:53:31 PM
Now we have a three-way CCIW squibble!

There is joke/comment I am resisting very much to say.......... oh.......... Pat would understand... "that's what ..." I CAN'T DO IT!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 05, 2012, 11:49:34 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 05, 2012, 09:34:07 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 05, 2012, 06:34:04 PM
From this point on, Augie, Wheaton, and IWU will all be playing CCIW teams exclusively. The pollsters will start moving those three teams up or down based upon how they do against their league brethren, so pointing out that the CCIW is down seems to me to be a fair caveat in terms of gauging those three teams.

I see Wheaton and IWU as being somewhere in the #20 to #25 range. You yourself said that they're somewhere in the #18 to #24 range. If you want to dispute the difference between the two of us on that matter, then I'd suggest that you're stealing my thunder as CCIW Chat's in-house picker of nits. ;)

I just don't think what you posted above really matches what you posted last night at all...

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 05, 2012, 03:35:35 AM
It's your call, D-Mac, but if you don't want to put either Wheaton or Illinois Wesleyan in your Top 25, this is one CCIW fan who's got your back. For that matter, if you'd like to mark Augie down a bit as well, I'll support that, too.

Wheaton and Illinois Wesleyan are pretty good teams, but they're on the outer margins of the Top 25, at best. The long and short of it is that the CCIW is really down this year, and I'd hate to see any of its teams get promoted on the basis of a league reputation that really isn't deserved this season.

I don't know how you don't think what I posted today matches what I posted yesterday. ;)

Quote from: sac on January 05, 2012, 09:23:46 PM

I hate to disappoint people but there is no massey WIAC bias, the WIAC just plays good basketball, that's why they always rate so high. :)

I think Whitewater is probably pretty underrated.

This is a good object lesson for me. I haven't practiced what I preach with regard to making summary judgments after seeing only one game. I saw UWW the opening weekend of the season, and I was very underwhelmed by the Warhawks. They didn't look anything like the hyperathletic juggernaut that I'm used to seeing in UWW purple, and I said so. A month and a half later, it looks as though the Warhawks are much better than I thought at first. It's hard to argue not only with their record, but with their results in terms of the teams that they've beaten and the margins by which they've done so.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2012, 12:11:17 AM

Quote from: sac on January 05, 2012, 09:23:46 PM
I hate to disappoint people but there is no massey WIAC bias, the WIAC just plays good basketball, that's why they always rate so high. :)

I think Whitewater is probably pretty underrated.

I'm not saying the WIAC shouldn't be rated highly in Massey, don't get me wrong. It's when other conferences get dragged up because they have a couple crossover games that I think doesn't work.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 06, 2012, 12:22:23 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 05, 2012, 09:34:07 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 05, 2012, 06:34:04 PM
From this point on, Augie, Wheaton, and IWU will all be playing CCIW teams exclusively. The pollsters will start moving those three teams up or down based upon how they do against their league brethren, so pointing out that the CCIW is down seems to me to be a fair caveat in terms of gauging those three teams.

I see Wheaton and IWU as being somewhere in the #20 to #25 range. You yourself said that they're somewhere in the #18 to #24 range. If you want to dispute the difference between the two of us on that matter, then I'd suggest that you're stealing my thunder as CCIW Chat's in-house picker of nits. ;)

I just don't think what you posted above really matches what you posted last night at all...

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 05, 2012, 03:35:35 AM
It's your call, D-Mac, but if you don't want to put either Wheaton or Illinois Wesleyan in your Top 25, this is one CCIW fan who's got your back. For that matter, if you'd like to mark Augie down a bit as well, I'll support that, too.

Wheaton and Illinois Wesleyan are pretty good teams, but they're on the outer margins of the Top 25, at best. The long and short of it is that the CCIW is really down this year, and I'd hate to see any of its teams get promoted on the basis of a league reputation that really isn't deserved this season.

Titan Q,
Maybe I'm missing something but I think both of Greg's statements say pretty much the same thing. Wheaton and IWU being in the 20-25 range or Wheaton and IWU being on the outer margins of the Top 25 (which I took to being in the 20-25 range) seems rather similar to me. Maybe you're interpreting "the outer margins" to be something different than what I am. (or Greg is) Now if Mr. Sager means by the "outer margins of the Top 25", well into the "others receiving votes" category, I'd have to agree with you. But he did say the Top 25 and not the ORV.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 06, 2012, 12:31:13 AM

Quote from: smedindy on January 05, 2012, 09:53:31 PM
Now we have a three-way CCIW squibble!

Huh? augie_superfan merely updated his stats (with no commentary), and I'm on a different conversation entirely. Who is CCIW #3?

Oh all right, I'll squibble JUST a bit to make you happy. ;D I'll go more with Q. I think Wheaton and IWU are already shown to be lower top 25. Greg's initial post (admitting to being 'Benedict Arnold') certainly did not sound like he agreed (despite his later disclaimer). And if all other CCIW teams are consigned to the trashheap, how could conference play possibly elevate Wheaton and IWU into the Top 25 (If they are not already deserving)?

I guess I kind of started it all by suggesting Wheaton would drop out of the Top 25 (a loss when one is #23 will usually do that, unless the victor is ranked higher), and IWU would not enter (with only 4 points previously [all by Q?], Top 25 would be quite a jump for beating #23 at home in OT). I was simply predicting voter behavior, not pontificating on where I thought they SHOULD be ranked.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 06, 2012, 12:34:15 AM

magicman, I won't presume to speak for Greg, but I (like Q, apparently) read "outer margins of the Top 25" akin to "outer margins of the bubble" (i.e., you ain't likely to get in).

Greg?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 06, 2012, 12:35:23 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2012, 12:11:17 AM
Quote from: sac on January 05, 2012, 09:23:46 PM
I hate to disappoint people but there is no massey WIAC bias, the WIAC just plays good basketball, that's why they always rate so high. :)

I think Whitewater is probably pretty underrated.

I'm not saying the WIAC shouldn't be rated highly in Massey, don't get me wrong. It's when other conferences get dragged up because they have a couple crossover games that I think doesn't work.

I agree with you Pat, that's exactly the problem with Massey. Especially when those other conferences are playing WIAC teams on the lower end of the totem pole. And the WIAC isn't the only conference that this has happened with. The UAA and NESCAC has had that same effect at times.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 06, 2012, 12:39:20 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 06, 2012, 12:34:15 AM
magicman, I won't presume to speak for Greg, but I (like Q, apparently) read "outer margins of the Top 25" akin to "outer margins of the bubble" (i.e., you ain't likely to get in).

Greg?

Well, that's an entirely different argument isnt it? I didn't think we were discussing Pool C bids. ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 06, 2012, 12:43:26 AM

Quote from: magicman on January 06, 2012, 12:39:20 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 06, 2012, 12:34:15 AM
magicman, I won't presume to speak for Greg, but I (like Q, apparently) read "outer margins of the Top 25" akin to "outer margins of the bubble" (i.e., you ain't likely to get in).

Greg?

Well, that's an entirely different argument isnt it? I didn't think we were discussing Pool C bids. ???

I said 'akin', not the same thing! If read as 'akin', it would mean "you ain't likely to be IN the Top 25".

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 06, 2012, 01:37:33 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 06, 2012, 12:43:26 AM
Quote from: magicman on January 06, 2012, 12:39:20 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 06, 2012, 12:34:15 AM
magicman, I won't presume to speak for Greg, but I (like Q, apparently) read "outer margins of the Top 25" akin to "outer margins of the bubble" (i.e., you ain't likely to get in).

Greg?

Well, that's an entirely different argument isnt it? I didn't think we were discussing Pool C bids. ???

I said 'akin', not the same thing! If read as 'akin', it would mean "you ain't likely to be IN the Top 25".

OK, so now you're saying that you believe what Greg said, really meant "Wheaton and IWU ain't likely to get into the Top 25". I didn't get that impression from his statement. I guess it's a matter of interpretation. That, and which team one roots for. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 06, 2012, 07:57:14 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 05, 2012, 03:11:19 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 04, 2012, 04:57:40 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 03, 2012, 02:30:49 PM

New Top 25 is out. One of Middlebury's #1 votes has evidently switched to MIT. Interesting.
The computerized tabulation list probably has MID adjacent to MIT and the voter's finger just slipped too far down the list.

I don't think so. Millikin, Millsaps, Mississippi College are all in between alphabetically and that's just off the top of my head.

Thanks. It probably was not a mistake then. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 06, 2012, 08:03:21 AM

Quote from: magicman on January 06, 2012, 12:22:23 AM

Titan Q,
Maybe I'm missing something but I think both of Greg's statements say pretty much the same thing. Wheaton and IWU being in the 20-25 range or Wheaton and IWU being on the outer margins of the Top 25 (which I took to being in the 20-25 range) seems rather similar to me. Maybe you're interpreting "the outer margins" to be something different than what I am. (or Greg is) Now if Mr. Sager means by the "outer margins of the Top 25", well into the "others receiving votes" category, I'd have to agree with you. But he did say the Top 25 and not the ORV.

I'm referring to these two comments:

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 05, 2012, 03:35:35 AM
The long and short of it is that the CCIW is really down this year, and I'd hate to see any of its teams get promoted on the basis of a league reputation that really isn't deserved this season.

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 05, 2012, 06:34:04 PM
From this point on, Augie, Wheaton, and IWU will all be playing CCIW teams exclusively. The pollsters will start moving those three teams up or down based upon how they do against their league brethren, so pointing out that the CCIW is down seems to me to be a fair caveat in terms of gauging those three teams.

The first statement was made in response to a conversation about IWU and Wheaton's potential placement in next week's poll....at which point the body of work being evaluated would be 11 non-conference games, a game vs each other (IWU vs Wheaton), and just one other CCIW game (tomorrow). Greg seemed to be suggesting that Top 25 voters should consider that the CCIW is down while evaluating IWU and Wheaton this coming Monday, as they fill out their Week 6 ballots. (Again, I think it is pretty clear that the original conversation was around IWU and Wheaton's potential fit in the Top 25 right now.) As I posted in response, I disagree with this. I don't think how North Central, Carthage, Elmhurst, North Park, and Elmhurst have performed this year to date should have anything to do how IWU and Wheaton (and Augustana for that matter) are evaluated at the present time.

His follow-up statement seems to be to saying something different -- that since CCIW teams 4-8 are down, the voters should factor that in as the conference season plays out. I'm fine with that. I think it is pretty obvious that voters look at the quality of opponents when evaluating a given team, so yes, if your league provides less quality opponents it will impact your standing in voters' eyes. I just don't think that is what he said, or meant, in the first statement.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 06, 2012, 08:04:45 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 06, 2012, 08:03:21 AM
Quote from: magicman on January 06, 2012, 12:22:23 AM

Titan Q,
Maybe I'm missing something but I think both of Greg's statements say pretty much the same thing. Wheaton and IWU being in the 20-25 range or Wheaton and IWU being on the outer margins of the Top 25 (which I took to being in the 20-25 range) seems rather similar to me. Maybe you're interpreting "the outer margins" to be something different than what I am. (or Greg is) Now if Mr. Sager means by the "outer margins of the Top 25", well into the "others receiving votes" category, I'd have to agree with you. But he did say the Top 25 and not the ORV.

I'm referring to these two comments:

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 05, 2012, 03:35:35 AM
The long and short of it is that the CCIW is really down this year, and I'd hate to see any of its teams get promoted on the basis of a league reputation that really isn't deserved this season.

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 05, 2012, 06:34:04 PM
From this point on, Augie, Wheaton, and IWU will all be playing CCIW teams exclusively. The pollsters will start moving those three teams up or down based upon how they do against their league brethren, so pointing out that the CCIW is down seems to me to be a fair caveat in terms of gauging those three teams.

The first statement was made in response to a conversation about IWU and Wheaton's potential placement in next week's poll

Ah, now I see what's got you vexed.

The long and short of it is that what you just said is not true, Bob.

This is what precipitated the conversation:

Quote from: Titan Q on January 04, 2012, 10:50:47 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 04, 2012, 10:15:24 PM
#23 Wheaton falls 87-77 in OT at ORV IWU. My guess would be that this will drop Wheaton to ORV status, but not be quite enough to get IWU into the top 25, leaving Augie as the CCIW's sole rep in the top 25.

I'm pretty confident IWU and Wheaton are both Top 25 teams...maybe somewhere in the 18-24 range.

and

Quote from: Titan Q on January 04, 2012, 11:06:29 PMI don't think these are Top 15 teams, but pretty sure they're Top 25.

You've never demonstrated a penchant, as a Top 25 pollster, for speaking in the moment. When talking about teams in the context of the Top 25, you always speak of them based upon whether they look like what you've come to know over the years as Top 25 material in the long view, rather than speaking of what they happen to look like in a right-this-moment snapshot. That's a valid way to approach the poll, and it's one that I happen to agree with.

At first, D-Mac appeared to be much more concerned than you with what's going on in the moment, specifically with how he's going to fill out his next ballot:

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 04, 2012, 11:00:02 PM
I don't know... there are a TON of teams that could slot into 15-25... if not 10-25... makes it hard to put two from the same conference (CCIW) along with Augustana in there.

I am going to have to seriously reassess my poll this week... too many teams to consider.

But then -- and this is key, because this has been a multiple-person conversation -- augie_superfan responded to D-Mac with a post that, like you, indicated that he's looking at the three CCIW teams in question in terms of ongoing status, rather than where they simply happen to be at this moment in time, just one game deep into the CCIW slate:

Quote from: augie_superfan on January 04, 2012, 11:12:54 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 04, 2012, 11:00:02 PM
I don't know... there are a TON of teams that could slot into 15-25... if not 10-25... makes it hard to put two from the same conference (CCIW) along with Augustana in there.

I am going to have to seriously reassess my poll this week... too many teams to consider.

As hard as it is for me to say, I'm not sure that Augustana is the best of the bunch. Their win tonight at Millikin left a lot to be desired. With their starting center leaving the team, it's hard to say how they'll play once they get some tougher games.

(Emphasis mine)

Then followed the D-Mac post that I quoted, and in parsing it I think I can see the source of your confusion:

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 05, 2012, 12:27:36 AM
Titan - I hear ya... you know I take this seriously... but there are so many teams that could fit into the 15-25 slot right now. I saw a few pretty good teams in Vegas... I have been watching a few online (I will watch yours tomorrow - have to get to bed - Hoopsville tomorrow night!)... it is just so difficult... I think I am considering up to 35 teams a week for 25 slots.

The words "right now" in the first sentence initially seem to be a giveaway that D-Mac is still fixated upon this week's ballot, and I'm guessing that, by my quoting his post, this is why you came away with the impression that my response post was speaking in the moment as well. But I wasn't, because D-Mac really wasn't, either. To get grammatically technical here, D-Mac was speaking in the present perfect progressive tense rather than the present perfect tense. In other words, he was using a present participle ("considering") to describe actions that began at some point in the past and continue through the present. The words "a week" indicate this, because they imply that D-Mac's ballot muddle is not simply restricted to this week's ballot. Furthermore, there are two past tense sentences right before this one ("I saw a few pretty good teams in Vegas" and "I have been watching a few online") that indicate that D-Mac's concerns are of an ongoing nature and are not simply restricted to this present ballot. This is also in keeping with what I know of D-Mac; like you, he is a careful, long-view pollster who isn't likely to take the easy way out by making week-to-week judgments on a snapshot basis.

Now we come to my response post:

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 05, 2012, 03:35:35 AMIt's your call, D-Mac, but if you don't want to put either Wheaton or Illinois Wesleyan in your Top 25, this is one CCIW fan who's got your back. For that matter, if you'd like to mark Augie down a bit as well, I'll support that, too.

Wheaton and Illinois Wesleyan are pretty good teams, but they're on the outer margins of the Top 25, at best. The long and short of it is that the CCIW is really down this year, and I'd hate to see any of its teams get promoted on the basis of a league reputation that really isn't deserved this season.

First of all, I bring Augie back into the conversation. That hearkens back to augie_superfan's post, which, as has been established, is long-view commentary rather than snapshot commentary. Second, what you're stating -- that I said that Wheaton and IWU are marginally Top 25 at best right now based upon the fact that the CCIW is down this year -- isn't logical. I'm not always the most coherent person in the world, but I'm not that incoherent. ;) It's pretty clear to me, upon reading this post for about the hundredth time, that I was using the present tense in a sort of future-indicative style that's a pretty common way of speaking about continuous action: I have lunch every Wednesday at 12:30 pm. I take my final exam tomorrow afternoon. If you don't want to put either Wheaton or IWU in your Top 25, I've got your back. See what I mean? I've never viewed this as a snapshot conversation. The context and the examples that I've used indicate that I've regarded it as a long-term conversation.

I hope that the grammar lesson didn't clear the room. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 06, 2012, 08:16:26 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 06, 2012, 08:04:45 PM
You've never demonstrated a penchant, as a Top 25 pollster, for speaking in the moment. When talking about teams in the context of the Top 25, you always speak of them based upon whether they look like what you've come to know over the years as Top 25 material in the long view, rather than speaking of what they happen to look like in a right-this-moment snapshot. That's a valid way to approach the poll, and it's one that I happen to agree with.

Just FYI, I respectfully turned in my Top 25 voter privileges to Mr. Coleman this past October. I didn't think it was right to continue voting when I no longer fall into the categories of D3 S.I.D. or media member.

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 06, 2012, 08:04:45 PM
The words "right now" in the first sentence initially seem to be a giveaway that D-Mac is still fixated upon this week's ballot, and I'm guessing that, by my quoting his post, this is why you came away with the impression that my response post was speaking in the moment as well.

Correct. That is exactly why I assumed you were speaking in the moment.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 06, 2012, 08:25:15 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 06, 2012, 08:16:26 PMJust FYI, I respectfully turned in my Top 25 voter privileges to Mr. Coleman this past October. I didn't think it was right to continue voting when I no longer fall into the categories of D3 S.I.D. or media member.

Hmm, didn't know that. Can I ask if you're actually seeing more D3 games now via the Internet than you were in the past when you were able to see D3 games live? I realize that streaming video is only a partial substitute for actually parking one's butt in a gymnasium's bleachers, but your comment about turning in your pollster card has piqued my curiosity.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 06, 2012, 09:40:51 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 06, 2012, 08:25:15 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 06, 2012, 08:16:26 PMJust FYI, I respectfully turned in my Top 25 voter privileges to Mr. Coleman this past October. I didn't think it was right to continue voting when I no longer fall into the categories of D3 S.I.D. or media member.

Hmm, didn't know that. Can I ask if you're actually seeing more D3 games now via the Internet than you were in the past when you were able to see D3 games live? I realize that streaming video is only a partial substitute for actually parking one's butt in a gymnasium's bleachers, but your comment about turning in your pollster card has piqued my curiosity.

Without question. With the prevalence if live video streaming, I'm "watching" a lot more games than when I was in Bloomington, IL following IWU and the CCIW in-person.

Time was also a concern when I asked Pat to find a Midwest voter to replace me. I travel a lot with my current job and was concerned that there would be weeks I would not have the time to do the necessary research to turn in a good ballot. It takes a lot of time to do that job the right way, and it deserves to be done the right way.

I was just realizing the other day that this would be a really tough year to be a voter...so much parity. Honestly, I'm not sure there is much separation at all from about #11 down the deep end of ORV. Heck, I might be able to go even higher with that statement, into the Top 10...who knows.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 07, 2012, 08:28:50 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 06, 2012, 08:04:45 PM
To get grammatically technical here, D-Mac was speaking in the present perfect progressive tense rather than the present perfect tense. In other words, he was using a present participle ("considering") to describe actions that began at some point in the past and continue through the present.

I hope that the grammar lesson didn't clear the room. ;)

I don't ever remember the nuns teaching me that one in grade school! ??? Or high school either for that matter. ;D

And the grammar lesson didn't clear the room, but it sure cleared up a lot of the confusion. 8-)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie_superfan on January 07, 2012, 02:38:53 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 05, 2012, 05:18:03 PM
I would say the human poll almost never mirrors the computer rankings. Massey in particular seems to suffer from WIAC-centric problems, where anyone who plays anyone from the WIAC, or plays someone who plays someone in the WIAC, is inflated. That happens to the point of multiple MIAC teams being highly ranked most years, even though the conference hadn't won a title.

Pat, this is one of the reasons why I started looking into ranking systems becaue I always thought this to be true. Actually, it isn't neccesarily true. The basis of Massey's system is that a game score is given for each game that basically equals the opponent's rating(or strength) plus or minus the scoring margin (depending on if you won or lost).

So, half of that equation relies on your opponent which is why I think people thin the WIAC can bring team's rankings up, however, the other part of the equation is the scoring margin. So, even if they are lsing a lot of games but not getting blown out, they deserve to be ranked close to their opponent. (Now, if you don't believe this premise then you should just ignore margin-of-victory ranking systems all together instead of just mentally penalizing the MIAC.)

I went and looked at this year's MIAC-WIAC matchups using my ranking system. Unless I missed one somewhere, I have the WIAC winning 12 of 13 games against the MIAC. So, I wanted to see if it held true that just by playing the WIAC in these 13 games, the MIAC was getting an undeserved inflation of their rankings. To do this, I compared the current rankings which should show what the average margin of victory would be if the teams played today. I then compared what the actual game scores were. For example, if the rankings showed the WIAC would win a matchup today by 5 points but in reality the actual game score had the WIAC win by 15 points, then I would conclude that the rankings were skewed by 10 points and inflating the MIAC rankings by that much.

When I did this for all 13 games, there is obviously a distribution of overranking and underranking the MIAC team, however the average was -0.4 points per game. The negative number actually shows that there is a slight underranking of the MIAC in those games. Another way this can be seen is by taking the average rankings of the WIAC vs. the MIAC teams with weighting for each game so that UW-SP is counted each time for their 3 games vs. the MAIC, etc.

Avg. WIAC ranking = 15.1
Avg. MIAC ranking = 4.7

Avg. Margin = + 10.4
Actual margin = + 10.1

Difference is the MIAC avg ranking being 0.3 points too low....rounding errors lead to the 0.4 or 0.3 numbers.

Now, it is possible for any given season to have inflation/deflation with regards to different opponents. If you only look at a subset of a team's games (like vs. one conference), it is possible for the overrankings to pile up but so far in this year, there seems to be no MIAC inflation due to their games against WIAC opponents.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 07, 2012, 09:15:19 PM

Final: #15 Wooster 70 Oberlin 58

Wooster was led tonight by Josh Claytor with 22 points (10 boards), freshman Xavier Brown with 18 points and freshman Evan Pannell with 16 points. Wooster is now 11-2 and next plays on 1/11 vs. Hiram.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Wabash2011 on January 07, 2012, 09:43:35 PM

Wabash over Allegheny 61-47. Derek Bailey with 32 points for Wabash. Defense a key for Wabash in the second half. Also allegheny shot 15- 18 free throws, Wabash 1-3. Hummmmmmm

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on January 07, 2012, 11:59:34 PM

#11 Whitworth defeats #16 Puget Sound AT UPS 80-67 in NWC action. WW remains undeafeated in NWC at 4-0, UPS now 3-1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 08, 2012, 12:01:49 AM

Quote from: nwhoops1903 on January 07, 2012, 11:59:34 PM
#11 Whitworth defeats #16 Puget Sound AT UPS 80-67 in NWC action. WW remains undeafeated in NWC at 4-0, UPS now 3-1.

The voting masses should know this was one night after a double OT thriller at Pacific Lutheran.

http://www.whitworthpirates.com/sports/mbkb/2011-12/stats/m12-plu.htm

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nwhoops1903 on January 08, 2012, 12:09:31 AM

Quote from: sac on January 08, 2012, 12:01:49 AM
Quote from: nwhoops1903 on January 07, 2012, 11:59:34 PM
#11 Whitworth defeats #16 Puget Sound AT UPS 80-67 in NWC action. WW remains undeafeated in NWC at 4-0, UPS now 3-1.

The voting masses should know this was one night after a double OT thriller at Pacific Lutheran.

http://www.whitworthpirates.com/sports/mbkb/2011-12/stats/m12-plu.htm

True, WW "let" PLU come back late and force the 1st and then missed FT's to "let" PLU force a 2nd. The 2nd OT was not as tense and WW won. Pirates show some resilience in Seattle. Go Bucs!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: littleeastguy on January 08, 2012, 12:37:28 PM

#24 RIC beats Umass Boston 88-51.
The Anchormen had 14 players score in the game. They play again Tuesday at home vs Southern Maine

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 08, 2012, 06:03:12 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	623	Middlebury	12-0	def. RPI, 123-111; def. Bates, 79-57; def. Tufts, 82-69
#2	571	Virginia Wesleyan	11-1	def. Hampden-Sydney, 100-80; def. Haverford, 99-47
#3	563	Augustana	11-2	def. Millikin, 64-39; LOST to North Central (Ill.), 62-67
#4	537	MIT	14-0	def. Springfield, 67-59; def. Wheaton (Mass.), 87-54
#5	516	Emory	12-0	def. Piedmont, 95-78; def. #27 Rochester, 83-81
#6	497	Amherst	12-1	def. Wesleyan, 66-64; def. Connecticut College, 74-62
#7	493	Williams	12-2	def. Castleton State, 107-82; LOST to Tufts, 71-80; def. Bates, 67-47
#8	418	Franklin and Marshall	13-0	def. Misericordia, 68-55; def. Hobart, 81-71; def. Oneonta State, 65-46; def. Swarthmore, 74-50
#9	410	Mary Hardin-Baylor	12-0	def. University of the Ozarks, 90-78; def. #46 Texas-Dallas, 64-56
#10	357	UW-Whitewater	13-1	def. #40 Edgewood, 79-51; def. UW-River Falls, 84-70
#11	327	Whitworth	11-2	def. Pacific Lutheran, 103-94; def. #16 Puget Sound, 80-67
#12	317	Hope	12-1	def. Alma, 103-78; def. Adrian, 69-60
#13	305	UW-Stevens Point	11-3	LOST at UW-River Falls, 70-73; def. UW-Eau Claire, 85-74
#14	275	Cabrini	11-1	def. York (Pa.), 83-66; def. Immaculata, 87-81
#15	202	Wooster	11-2	def. Geneva, 100-48; def. Oberlin, 70-58
#16	198	Puget Sound	11-2	def. Whitman, 68-63; LOST to #11 Whitworth, 67-80
#17	197	Wabash	12-1	def. Hiram, 77-70; def. Allegheny, 61-47
#18	175	St. Thomas	8-3	LOST at St. John's, 66-68; def. Augsburg, 68-53
#19	151	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	12-0	def. Mount St. Mary, 74-55; def. Caltech, 77-42
#20	148	Oswego State	9-2	LOST at Tex.-Pan American, 54-59
#21	120	Buffalo State	10-2	LOST at Buffalo, 59-111
#22	89	Birmingham-Southern	12-1	def. Millsaps, 89-62; def. Rhodes, 70-48
#23	80	Wheaton (Ill.)	10-3	LOST at #45 Illinois Wesleyan, 77-87; def. Elmhurst, 67-55
#24	75	Rhode Island College	11-1	def. Wheaton (Mass.), 71-53; def. Mass-Boston, 88-51
#25	66	Transylvania	11-2	def. Franklin, 76-55; LOST at Defiance, 64-74

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	61	WPI	11-2	def. Coast Guard, 64-53; def. Babson, 70-68
#27	59	Rochester	9-3	def. Rochester Tech, 76-62; LOST at #5 Emory, 81-83
#28	51	Western Connecticut	12-1	def. Mass-Dartmouth, 91-87
#29	43	William Paterson	11-2	LOST at Montclair State, 79-80; def. Richard Stockton, 73-71
#30	22	Wittenberg	10-3	def. Huntingdon, 75-62; def. Maryville (Tenn.), 77-70; def. #33 Ohio Wesleyan, 57-55
#31	21	Grinnell	9-0	def. Beloit, 117-107
#32	20	Marietta	9-4	def. Heidelberg, 99-78
#33	17	Ohio Wesleyan	11-2	def. Capital, 76-55; LOST to #30 Wittenberg, 55-57
#34	16	Bethany	13-1	def. Washington and Jefferson, 79-60; def. Waynesburg, 73-45
#35	13	Hardin-Simmons	11-1	def. Louisiana College, 82-64; def. Mississippi College, 82-75
T#36	11	Hartwick	12-1	def. Elmira, 71-60; LOST at Alfred, 66-72
T#36	11	St. Mary's (Md.)	11-3	def. Marymount, 81-63; def. Wesley, 80-70
T#36	11	Washington U.	9-3	def. Chicago, 79-72
T#36	11	Catholic	11-3	LOST at Moravian, 69-71; LOST at Scranton, 76-80
#40	10	Edgewood	10-3	LOST at #10 UW-Whitewater, 51-79; LOST at Milwaukee Engineering, 59-64
T#41	8	Gustavus Adolphus	7-4	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 62-45; LOST to UW-Stout, 62-64
T#41	8	Lycoming	12-1	def. Penn State-Abington, 106-73; def. Mount Union, 91-75; LOST at King's, 80-82
#43	7	New Jersey City	10-2	LOST at Ramapo, 74-78; def. Rutgers-Camden, 65-54
#44	5	Lake Forest	9-1	def. St. Francis (IL), 76-51; def. Illinois College, 64-46
#45	4	Illinois Wesleyan	11-2	def. #23 Wheaton (Ill.), 87-77; def. North Park, 76-70
#46	3	Texas-Dallas	9-4	def. Austin, 67-62; LOST to Concordia (Texas), 91-92; LOST to #9 Mary Hardin-Baylor, 56-64
#47	2	Farmingdale State	8-3	def. Mount St. Vincent, 101-85
#48	1	Salem State	7-6	LOST at Endicott, 89-93; LOST at Westfield State, 54-85

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 09, 2012, 05:01:35 PM

In the new Top 25: http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2011-12/week6

it seems voters self corrected, perhaps. Wabash now ahead of Wooster after being behind them in the last poll and neither team losing during that time frame.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 11, 2012, 09:20:27 PM

Routine win for MIT over Coast Guard, 83-55. Hollingsworth had 24 points in 27 minutes. Tashman had 21 points and 14 boards in 27 minutes. MIT ties the Institute record for consecutive wins at 15, they look to break the record at Babson on Saturday.

VWU overcomes a halftime deficit to defeat Randolph by 14.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 11, 2012, 09:50:53 PM

Final: #16 Wooster 92 Hiram 64

Wooster was led tonight by Josh Claytor with 18 points (9 of 10 FG's), Justin Hallowell with 14 points (3 three pointers), Matt Fegan with 11 points (3 three pointers), Xavier Brown with 11 points and Ryan Snyder with 10 points.

Wooster is now 12-2 and their next game is at DePauw on Saturday 1/14.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2012, 09:56:05 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on January 11, 2012, 09:50:53 PM
Final: #16 Wooster 92 Hiram 64

Wooster was led tonight by Josh Claytor with 18 points (9 of 10 FG's), Justin Hallowell with 14 points (3 three pointers), Matt Fegan with 11 points (3 three pointers), Xavier Brown with 11 points and Ryan Snyder with 10 points.

Wooster is now 12-2 and their next game is at DePauw on Saturday 1/14.

DePauw appears to be not very good, but they just defeated arch-rival #14 Wabash tonite - can they pull off two upsets in a row, or was Wabash just different?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 11, 2012, 10:01:38 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2012, 09:56:05 PM
Quote from: wooscotsfan on January 11, 2012, 09:50:53 PM
Final: #16 Wooster 92 Hiram 64

Wooster was led tonight by Josh Claytor with 18 points (9 of 10 FG's), Justin Hallowell with 14 points (3 three pointers), Matt Fegan with 11 points (3 three pointers), Xavier Brown with 11 points and Ryan Snyder with 10 points.

Wooster is now 12-2 and their next game is at DePauw on Saturday 1/14.

DePauw appears to be not very good, but they just defeated arch-rival #14 Wabash tonite - can they pull off two upsets in a row, or was Wabash just different?

Impressive win by DePauw as they won AT Wabash tonight 64-55. DePauw shot 52% and made 7 of 14 three pointers compared to 43% shooting and only 1 of 15 on three pointers for the Little Giants.

Wooster has to play AT DePauw on Saturday which should pose a tough test.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2012, 10:12:49 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on January 11, 2012, 10:01:38 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2012, 09:56:05 PM
Quote from: wooscotsfan on January 11, 2012, 09:50:53 PM
Final: #16 Wooster 92 Hiram 64

Wooster was led tonight by Josh Claytor with 18 points (9 of 10 FG's), Justin Hallowell with 14 points (3 three pointers), Matt Fegan with 11 points (3 three pointers), Xavier Brown with 11 points and Ryan Snyder with 10 points.

Wooster is now 12-2 and their next game is at DePauw on Saturday 1/14.

DePauw appears to be not very good, but they just defeated arch-rival #14 Wabash tonite - can they pull off two upsets in a row, or was Wabash just different?

Impressive win by DePauw as they won AT Wabash tonight 64-55. DePauw shot 52% and made 7 of 14 three pointers compared to 43% shooting and only 1 of 15 on three pointers for the Little Giants.

Wooster has to play AT DePauw on Saturday which should pose a tough test.

Obviously not a game to take lightly (are any?), but I never take Wabash/DePauw results at face value - too much emotion there. Woo should be a heavy favorite, even in Greencastle.

(Though I'll root for DePauw. As a Titan, DePauw is the biggest threat in women's hoops, but in men's, it is Wabash and Wooster. ;))

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 11, 2012, 10:14:26 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on January 11, 2012, 10:01:38 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2012, 09:56:05 PM
Quote from: wooscotsfan on January 11, 2012, 09:50:53 PM
Final: #16 Wooster 92 Hiram 64

Wooster was led tonight by Josh Claytor with 18 points (9 of 10 FG's), Justin Hallowell with 14 points (3 three pointers), Matt Fegan with 11 points (3 three pointers), Xavier Brown with 11 points and Ryan Snyder with 10 points.

Wooster is now 12-2 and their next game is at DePauw on Saturday 1/14.

DePauw appears to be not very good, but they just defeated arch-rival #14 Wabash tonite - can they pull off two upsets in a row, or was Wabash just different?

Impressive win by DePauw as they won AT Wabash tonight 64-55. DePauw shot 52% and made 7 of 14 three pointers compared to 43% shooting and only 1 of 15 on three pointers for the Little Giants.

Wooster has to play AT DePauw on Saturday which should pose a tough test.

I've only seen DePauw once (and under adverse circumstances), but that afternoon they were dominated by a mediocre Hiram team that Wooster thoroughly dismantled tonight. My gut tells me that DPU's upset win tonight had a large portion of rivalry fever in it. These same two rivals played in November on DPU's court, and Wabash eased to a 15-point win.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 11, 2012, 11:41:30 PM

DPU was extra motivated and Wabash couldn't hit shots. Rivalry plus a bad shooting game = Wabash loss.

Bigger shock in the league was Denison beating OWU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 12, 2012, 08:59:53 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	623	Middlebury	12-0	01/13 at Connecticut College; 01/14 at Wesleyan
#2	584	Virginia Wesleyan	12-1	def. Randolph, 76-62; 01/14 vs. Roanoke
#3	563	MIT	15-0	def. Coast Guard, 83-55; 01/14 at Babson
#4	546	Emory	12-0	01/13 at New York University; 01/15 at Brandeis
#5	527	Amherst	12-1	01/13 vs. Hamilton
#6	460	Augustana	11-3	LOST at #25 Illinois Wesleyan, 63-73; 01/14 at Elmhurst
#7	450	Franklin and Marshall	13-0	01/12 vs. Muhlenberg; 01/14 vs. Washington College
#8	434	Mary Hardin-Baylor	13-0	def. Concordia (Texas), 94-73; 01/12 at Schreiner; 01/14 vs. Texas Lutheran
#9	420	UW-Whitewater	14-1	def. UW-Platteville, 75-70; 01/14 vs. UW-Superior
#10	368	Whitworth	11-2	01/13 vs. Pacific; 01/14 vs. Linfield
#11	363	Hope	13-1	def. Albion, 78-61; 01/14 at Kalamazoo
#12	354	Williams	12-2	01/13 at Wesleyan; 01/14 at Connecticut College
#13	296	Cabrini	13-1	def. Centenary, 108-92; def. Rosemont, 94-66; 01/14 vs. Marywood
#14	271	Wabash	12-2	LOST to DePauw, 55-64; 01/14 vs. Oberlin
#15	249	UW-Stevens Point	12-3	def. UW-Stout, 71-56; 01/14 at UW-La Crosse
#16	239	Wooster	12-2	def. Hiram, 92-64; 01/14 at DePauw
#17	201	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	13-0	def. La Verne, 73-63; 01/14 vs. Redlands
#18	167	Puget Sound	11-3	LOST at Pacific Lutheran, 62-80; 01/14 at George Fox
#19	150	Birmingham-Southern	12-1	01/13 at Southwestern; 01/14 at Trinity (Texas)
#20	141	Rhode Island College	12-1	def. Southern Maine, 73-40; 01/14 at Keene State
#21	110	Buffalo State	11-2	def. Fredonia State, 74-71; 01/13 at Brockport State; 01/14 at Geneseo State
#22	102	Oswego State	9-3	LOST at Medgar Evers, 68-73; 01/13 vs. New Paltz State; 01/14 vs. Oneonta State
#23	86	Western Connecticut	13-1	def. Keene State, 94-87; 01/14 at Plymouth State
#24	61	WPI	12-2	def. Trinity (Conn.), 66-65; 01/14 vs. Wheaton (Mass.)
#25	56	Illinois Wesleyan	12-2	def. #6 Augustana, 73-63; 01/14 vs. Carthage

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	51	St. Thomas	9-3	def. Carleton, 66-59; 01/14 at Concordia-Moorhead
#27	28	Wittenberg	11-3	def. Kenyon, 71-63; 01/14 vs. Denison
#28	26	William Paterson	12-2	def. Rutgers-Newark, 69-67; 01/14 at Kean
T#29	19	Ohio Wesleyan	11-3	LOST at Denison, 66-69; 01/14 at Allegheny
T#29	19	Hardin-Simmons	11-1	01/12 at Sul Ross State; 01/14 at Howard Payne
T#29	19	Bethany	13-2	LOST to Thiel, 57-69; 01/14 at Westminster (Pa.)
#32	18	Wheaton (Ill.)	11-3	def. Millikin, 82-49; 01/14 vs. North Central (Ill.)
T#33	17	St. Mary's (Md.)	11-4	LOST to Mary Washington, 55-65; 01/14 at Frostburg State
T#33	17	Grinnell	10-0	def. Illinois College, 115-113; 01/13 at Lawrence; 01/14 at Carroll
#35	14	Washington U.	9-3	01/13 at Case Western Reserve; 01/15 at Carnegie Mellon
#36	13	Rochester	9-3	01/13 at Brandeis; 01/15 at New York University
T#37	10	Marietta	9-5	LOST at Capital, 66-82; 01/14 at T#37 John Carroll
T#37	10	John Carroll	10-3	LOST at Muskingum, 69-82; 01/14 vs. T#37 Marietta
#39	8	Eastern Connecticut	10-1	def. Mass-Dartmouth, 83-70; 01/12 vs. Maine-Presque Isle; 01/14 vs. Mass-Boston
T#40	7	Transylvania	12-2	def. Hanover, 72-67; 01/14 vs. Rose-Hulman
T#40	7	Lake Forest	10-1	def. Knox, 57-54; 01/13 at Ripon; 01/14 at Beloit
T#42	5	Hartwick	12-1	01/13 vs. Ithaca; 01/14 vs. Utica
T#42	5	Farmingdale State	8-4	LOST to St. Joseph's (L.I.), 72-83; 01/14 vs. Sage
T#42	5	Christopher Newport	11-3	def. Methodist, 77-70; 01/14 vs. Ferrum
#45	3	New Jersey City	12-2	def. John Jay, 83-71; def. Montclair State, 70-62; 01/14 at Richard Stockton
#46	2	Hampden-Sydney	11-3	def. Lynchburg, 90-67; 01/14 at Bridgewater (Va.)
#47	1	Randolph-Macon	12-3	def. Eastern Mennonite, 74-71; 01/14 at Emory and Henry

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 13, 2012, 11:17:04 PM

#21 Buffalo State loses to Brockport State 94-70. Bengals without 2nd leading scorer and leading rebounder Justin Mitchell who was out with an injury.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 14, 2012, 04:25:29 PM

Spirited effort for Babson today, but MIT comes away with the 72-63 victory. MIT was led by point guard Mitch Kates in about every way possible, as he had team and game highs in points (20, 8-12 FG), rebounds (8), assists (6), and steals (2). MIT's frontcourt, Tashman and Hollingsworth, each added 16 points, while Billy Bender had 11, and Jamie Karraker was 3-3 from 3 for 9 points. MIT now has a week break until they host WPI on January 21.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 14, 2012, 04:53:39 PM

Significant NCAC results today:

Wabash rights the ship and thwacks Oberlin 65-42.
Wooster falls to DePauw 75-66.
Witt lost a 15-point lead, but recovered to beat Denison 67-58.
OWU beat Allegheny 72-55.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 14, 2012, 05:47:21 PM

F&M loses to Washington College.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 14, 2012, 06:01:44 PM

#1 Middlebury escapes with a 65-62 win over Wesleyan CT. Wesleyan is in the middle of a brutal 3-game stretch against Williams, Middlebury and Amherst.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 14, 2012, 06:40:55 PM

Brutal, yes... but they crushed Williams last night... and could have success against Amherst. The Cardinals might be a surprise team in the NESCAC and could be a major player for the rest of the season the way they have been playing this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hope52 on January 14, 2012, 08:49:47 PM

hope won today

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 15, 2012, 05:48:40 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	623	Middlebury	14-0	def. Connecticut College, 72-56; def. Wesleyan, 65-62
#2	584	Virginia Wesleyan	13-1	def. Randolph, 76-62; def. Roanoke, 75-59
#3	563	MIT	16-0	def. Coast Guard, 83-55; def. Babson, 72-63
#4	546	Emory	13-1	LOST at New York University, 73-89; def. Brandeis, 95-58
#5	527	Amherst	13-1	def. Hamilton, 85-68
#6	460	Augustana	11-4	LOST at #25 Illinois Wesleyan, 63-73; LOST at Elmhurst, 55-56
#7	450	Franklin and Marshall	14-1	def. Muhlenberg, 87-55; LOST to Washington College, 74-78
#8	434	Mary Hardin-Baylor	15-0	def. Concordia (Texas), 94-73; def. Schreiner, 80-60; def. Texas Lutheran, 74-53
#9	420	UW-Whitewater	15-1	def. UW-Platteville, 75-70; def. UW-Superior, 80-58
#10	368	Whitworth	13-2	def. Pacific, 65-55; def. Linfield, 65-61
#11	363	Hope	14-1	def. Albion, 78-61; def. Kalamazoo, 88-67
#12	354	Williams	13-3	LOST at Wesleyan, 43-66; def. Connecticut College, 71-50
#13	296	Cabrini	14-1	def. Centenary, 108-92; def. Rosemont, 94-66; def. Marywood, 74-52
#14	271	Wabash	13-2	LOST to DePauw, 55-64; def. Oberlin, 65-42
#15	249	UW-Stevens Point	13-3	def. UW-Stout, 71-56; def. UW-La Crosse, 64-59
#16	239	Wooster	12-3	def. Hiram, 92-64; LOST at DePauw, 66-75
#17	201	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	14-0	def. La Verne, 73-63; def. Redlands, 76-67
#18	167	Puget Sound	11-4	LOST at Pacific Lutheran, 62-80; LOST at George Fox, 80-86
#19	150	Birmingham-Southern	14-1	def. Southwestern, 81-62; def. Trinity (Texas), 66-58
#20	141	Rhode Island College	12-2	def. Southern Maine, 73-40; LOST at Keene State, 91-92
#21	110	Buffalo State	11-4	def. Fredonia State, 74-71; LOST at Brockport State, 70-94; LOST at Geneseo State, 86-97
#22	102	Oswego State	11-3	LOST at Medgar Evers, 68-73; def. New Paltz State, 84-62; def. Oneonta State, 67-55
#23	86	Western Connecticut	13-2	def. Keene State, 94-87; LOST at Plymouth State, 72-82
#24	61	WPI	12-3	def. Trinity (Conn.), 66-65; LOST to Wheaton (Mass.), 51-65
#25	56	Illinois Wesleyan	13-2	def. #6 Augustana, 73-63; def. Carthage, 69-61

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	51	St. Thomas	10-3	def. Carleton, 66-59; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 76-62
#27	28	Wittenberg	12-3	def. Kenyon, 71-63; def. Denison, 67-58
#28	26	William Paterson	13-2	def. Rutgers-Newark, 69-67; def. Kean, 67-56
T#29	19	Ohio Wesleyan	12-3	LOST at Denison, 66-69; def. Allegheny, 72-55
T#29	19	Hardin-Simmons	12-2	LOST at Sul Ross State, 57-60; def. Howard Payne, 85-76
T#29	19	Bethany	14-2	LOST to Thiel, 57-69; def. Westminster (Pa.), 76-66
#32	18	Wheaton (Ill.)	12-3	def. Millikin, 82-49; def. North Central (Ill.), 66-64
T#33	17	St. Mary's (Md.)	11-5	LOST to Mary Washington, 55-65; LOST at Frostburg State, 72-85
T#33	17	Grinnell	11-1	def. Illinois College, 115-113; def. Lawrence, 103-94; LOST at Carroll, 106-109
#35	14	Washington U.	11-3	def. Case Western Reserve, 87-71; def. Carnegie Mellon, 66-64
#36	13	Rochester	9-5	LOST at Brandeis, 64-78; LOST at New York University, 50-74
T#37	10	Marietta	9-6	LOST at Capital, 66-82; LOST at T#37 John Carroll, 80-90
T#37	10	John Carroll	11-3	LOST at Muskingum, 69-82; def. T#37 Marietta, 90-80
#39	8	Eastern Connecticut	12-1	def. Mass-Dartmouth, 83-70; def. Maine-Presque Isle, 83-51; def. Mass-Boston, 82-52
T#40	7	Transylvania	13-2	def. Hanover, 72-67; def. Rose-Hulman, 60-46
T#40	7	Lake Forest	12-1	def. Knox, 57-54; def. Ripon, 84-75; def. Beloit, 67-62
T#42	5	Hartwick	13-2	LOST to Ithaca, 71-73; def. Utica, 87-81
T#42	5	Farmingdale State	9-4	LOST to St. Joseph's (L.I.), 72-83; def. Sage, 66-51
T#42	5	Christopher Newport	12-3	def. Methodist, 77-70; def. Ferrum, 107-79
#45	3	New Jersey City	12-3	def. John Jay, 83-71; def. Montclair State, 70-62; LOST at Richard Stockton, 48-55
#46	2	Hampden-Sydney	12-3	def. Lynchburg, 90-67; def. Bridgewater (Va.), 82-69
#47	1	Randolph-Macon	13-3	def. Eastern Mennonite, 74-71; def. Emory and Henry, 78-58

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 15, 2012, 11:01:36 PM

Wow, we're still seeing a ton of shakeout in the poll!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 16, 2012, 08:37:15 PM

Wow!!! NYU goes from zero to 87 in one weekend.

Is it a "UAA road loss" for Emory or are the Violets that good?

The top dog in the UAA is almost always Top 25 material...

and the runner-up (a 11-3/20-5 or better record is almost always Top 25 calibre as well.)

NYU needs to go 11-3 for me to think that they are Top 25. (Just my humble opinion...)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 16, 2012, 08:46:41 PM

They're now 20th in Massey, gaining 37 spots thanks to their week!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 16, 2012, 09:00:18 PM

Using average opponents Massey rating for the next 3 games, these teams have the hardest schedule:

UWSP: 40.67
Ohio Wesleyan: 47.33
WashU: 58.33
Wittenberg: 64.00
WPI: 83.33
NYU: 88.33
Wabash: 92.00
Williams: 103.33
Augustana: 110.00
W Conn: 113.00
Wheaton (IL): 116.00
Claremont Mudd Scripps: 116.00

and some of the easiest:
Oswego St.: 201.67
Hope: 209.67
St. Thomas: 214.33
Franklin & Marshall: 221.00
Wm Paterson: 225.00
Middlebury: 233.33
Bethany: 263.33
Cabrini: 308.00

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 16, 2012, 09:02:39 PM

Biggest movers in the Week 7 poll:
IWU +150
Wm Paterson +133
CMS +118
Birmingham-Southern +116
UWSP +94
Cabrini +92
NYU +87
Hope +87
UW-Whitewater +80

RIC -85
Emory -98
Buffalo St. -110
Williams -117
Franklin & Marshall -140
Puget Sound -161
Wooster -179
Augustana -340

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 16, 2012, 10:48:53 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 16, 2012, 08:37:15 PM
Wow!!! NYU goes from zero to 87 in one weekend.

Is it a "UAA road loss" for Emory or are the Violets that good?

The top dog in the UAA is almost always Top 25 material...

and the runner-up (a 11-3/20-5 or better record is almost always Top 25 calibre as well.)

NYU needs to go 11-3 for me to think that they are Top 25. (Just my humble opinion...)

12-1 isn't good enough?! (With their non-con schedule, I'm not necessarily convinced by 11-3, but eviscerating #4 Emory and a pretty good Rochester team won me over.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 17, 2012, 12:29:40 AM

I think he meant 11-3 in the UAA. Not an easy task, though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 17, 2012, 12:39:18 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 17, 2012, 12:29:40 AM
I think he meant 11-3 in the UAA. Not an easy task, though.

OOPS! You're almost certainly right. :-[

At 10-4, I'd definitely have them in the lower reaches of top 25. At 9-5, they'd receive earnest consideration.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 17, 2012, 03:13:14 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 17, 2012, 12:29:40 AM
I think he meant 11-3 in the UAA. Not an easy task, though.

I greatly respect the UAA, but they have such parity at the Top 50 level. In an average season, it is hard to allocate 3 Top 25 spots to the UAA, 3 Top 25 spots to the WIAC, 3 to the CCIW, 3 to the NESCAC and a 3 more to the NCAC/MIAA powers that season. That would leave only 10 spots for everyone else.

Do those 6 conferences have 20 teams in the Top 50? I believe so.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 17, 2012, 04:14:51 PM

Why allocate spots anyway? I can't see a conference quota - those things usually work themselves out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 17, 2012, 04:22:17 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 17, 2012, 04:14:51 PM
Why allocate spots anyway? I can't see a conference quota - those things usually work themselves out.

Ralph qualified it with the use of "In an average season", and in an average season he's pretty much right on.

I think he could add the NESCAC, they usually have 2 or 3 in an average season. Maybe even a couple spots for the ODAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 17, 2012, 04:34:54 PM

Quote from: sac on January 17, 2012, 04:22:17 PM
Quote from: smedindy on January 17, 2012, 04:14:51 PM
Why allocate spots anyway? I can't see a conference quota - those things usually work themselves out.

Ralph qualified it with the use of "In an average season", and in an average season he's pretty much right on.

I think he could add the NESCAC, they usually have 2 or 3 in an average season. Maybe even a couple spots for the ODAC.

Yeah, ODAC (aside from VaWes) seems a bit down this year, but they had three teams in the top FIVE just a couple seasons ago.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 17, 2012, 08:50:05 PM

Taylor Barrisse went 7-8 from deep to single-handedly keep Amherst in it at Wesleyan. Tied at 67, 2 seconds remaining; Amherst ball.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 17, 2012, 08:53:12 PM

Wesleyan by one. Sasha Brown makes a terribly timed foul with a one point lead, then sinks two free throws with 2 seconds on the clock to win by one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 17, 2012, 08:57:59 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 17, 2012, 08:53:12 PM

Wesleyan by one. Sasha Brown makes a terribly timed foul with a one point lead, then sinks two free throws with 2 seconds on the clock to win by one.

Why, oh why, couldn't magicman have picked this for the Pickems slate??!! I'll bet I would have been almost all alone in picking Wesleyan! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 18, 2012, 02:22:22 PM

Big weekend for UMHB in Abilene...
They face HSU on Thursday night and then go across town to McMurry on Saturday afternoon.

McMurry is dedicating the court at Kimbrell Arena to former McMurry head coach and current AD Ron Holmes in a ceremony between the women's and men's games.

This should be a mini-gauntlet for UMHB and probably the toughest raod trip of the season.

The ASC West hosts the men's tourney this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 18, 2012, 02:33:34 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 17, 2012, 08:57:59 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 17, 2012, 08:53:12 PM

Wesleyan by one. Sasha Brown makes a terribly timed foul with a one point lead, then sinks two free throws with 2 seconds on the clock to win by one.

Why, oh why, couldn't magicman have picked this for the Pickems slate??!! I'll bet I would have been almost all alone in picking Wesleyan! ;D

It was hardly an upset though. Massey predicted a 2-pt Amherst win, giving Wesleyan a 45% chance of winning. Saying you could have predicted this one right is close to saying you can call 'tails' when the coin is in the air.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 18, 2012, 04:26:16 PM

Good games tonight:
Wittenberg vs. Wabash
CMS vs. Pomona Pitzer
UWSP vs. Platteville

and of course...
Hope vs. Calvin

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: stag44 on January 18, 2012, 04:39:41 PM

Quote from: scottiedawg on January 18, 2012, 04:26:16 PM
Good games tonight:
Wittenberg vs. Wabash
CMS vs. Pomona Pitzer
UWSP vs. Platteville

and of course...
Hope vs. Calvin

Great rivalry games tonight!!

If you're in the Southern Cal area, I would venture out to see CMS play at Pomona Pitzer. Both teams are 3-0 in SCIAC play and CMS is #12 in the nation (might be the highest ranking since Oxy in '04 for a SCIAC team). Classes just started on Tuesday for all 5 colleges, so students will be fresh and excited for the game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 18, 2012, 04:50:52 PM

Oh, and don't forget that the CMS vs. Pomona Pitzer game will be for The Belt^TM!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 18, 2012, 05:12:10 PM

Quote from: scottiedawg on January 18, 2012, 04:26:16 PM
Good games tonight:
Wittenberg vs. Wabash
CMS vs. Pomona Pitzer
UWSP vs. Platteville

and of course...
Hope vs. Calvin

Calvin @ #7 Hope will be streamed here:

http://client.stretchinternet.com/client/calvin.portal#

It'll be the video feed from the West Michigan PBS affiliate. They've broadcast the game on TV locally for a number of years now. Unfortunately, you can tell the announcers see the teams about twice a year, and the video quality often looks like it's straight off one of those VHS tapes that you used to record the 1992 Final Four on. (Although they're bound to surprise us with an HD upgrade one of these years -- maybe this is it?)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 18, 2012, 06:33:53 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 17, 2012, 08:57:59 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 17, 2012, 08:53:12 PM

Wesleyan by one. Sasha Brown makes a terribly timed foul with a one point lead, then sinks two free throws with 2 seconds on the clock to win by one.

Why, oh why, couldn't magicman have picked this for the Pickems slate??!! I'll bet I would have been almost all alone in picking Wesleyan! ;D

I wanted to but it was a Tuesday game and since I didn't post the schedule until Sunday night I didn't want to throw every one a curve. I also wanted to choose 15 games instead of 10 but figured that wouldn't fly either. There's some great matchups that aren't on the schedule due to the 10 game rule. And just so you know I would have been all over Wesleyan. I watched them play Buffalo State on December 31st when Buff State was healthy and had their best big man in the lineup. Wesleyan lost that game 80-77 but I came away thinking that the Big Three in the NESCAC would lose a game or two to the Cardinals, especially on their home court.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CMSfan on January 18, 2012, 07:43:34 PM

CMS vs. P-P live stats and/or video here: http://livestats.prestosports.com/pomona/ (http://livestats.prestosports.com/pomona/)

Starts at 7:30 pm PST. Should be a great game!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 18, 2012, 08:53:59 PM

Quote from: CMSfan on January 18, 2012, 07:43:34 PM
CMS vs. P-P live stats and/or video here: http://livestats.prestosports.com/pomona/ (http://livestats.prestosports.com/pomona/)

Starts at 7:30 pm PST. Should be a great game!

And let's not forget what's at stake here tonight. National ranking, undefeated season, crosstown rivals, first place in the SCIAC, and most importantly, CMS is trying to take The D3 Championship Belt^TM from the Sagehens. Pat Coleman and D-Mac should be courtside with the commentary. This contest should be front page news on Wednesday's wrap.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 18, 2012, 09:10:04 PM

Thud goes the Little Giants. Wittenberg dominated the second half and cruised past Wabash 61-43. It was a great defensive performance by the Tigers. Witt now has a two-game lead in the NCAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: stag44 on January 18, 2012, 11:15:11 PM

Pomona up 23-22 at half vs CMS - really physical sloppy game. Very standard CMS PP game!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CMSfan on January 19, 2012, 12:39:26 AM

Stags Win!

P-P hit a 3 to tie it with six seconds left, but Remy Pinson channeled his inner Tyus Edney, going coast to coast for a game-winning lay-up. Awesome game. The Belt^TM moves to the good side of 6th Street!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 19, 2012, 07:33:05 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	622	Middlebury	15-0	def. Castleton State, 97-71; 01/20 at Hamilton
#2	595	Virginia Wesleyan	13-1	01/21 vs. Guilford
#3	575	MIT	16-0	01/21 vs. WPI
#4	547	Amherst	13-2	LOST at #38 Wesleyan, 67-68; 01/20 at Bowdoin; 01/21 at Colby
#5	500	UW-Whitewater	16-1	def. UW-Oshkosh, 62-45; 01/21 at UW-Stout
#6	494	Mary Hardin-Baylor	15-0	01/19 at T#34 Hardin-Simmons; 01/21 at McMurry
#7	450	Hope	15-1	def. Calvin, 81-65; 01/21 vs. Olivet
#8	448	Emory	13-1	01/20 vs. Carnegie Mellon; 01/22 vs. Case Western Reserve
#9	428	Whitworth	13-3	LOST to Whitman, 66-77; 01/20 at Willamette
#10	388	Cabrini	15-1	def. Gwynedd-Mercy, 78-73; 01/21 at Baptist Bible
#11	343	UW-Stevens Point	14-3	def. UW-Platteville, 71-57; 01/21 vs. T#34 UW-River Falls
#12	319	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	15-0	def. Pomona-Pitzer, 57-55; 01/21 at Whittier
#13	310	Franklin and Marshall	15-1	def. Dickinson, 65-62; 01/21 at McDaniel
#14	266	Birmingham-Southern	14-1	01/20 vs. Austin; 01/21 vs. University of Dallas
#15	237	Williams	13-3	01/19 vs. Skidmore; 01/22 vs. Hamilton
#16	211	Wabash	13-3	LOST at #21 Wittenberg, 43-61; 01/21 vs. Kenyon
#17	206	Illinois Wesleyan	13-3	LOST at T#47 North Central (Ill.), 69-82; 01/21 at Elmhurst
#18	159	William Paterson	15-2	def. Baruch, 72-58; def. New Jersey City, 72-58; 01/21 vs. Rutgers-Camden
#19	120	Augustana	12-4	def. North Park, 73-52; 01/21 vs. Carthage
#20	103	St. Thomas	11-4	LOST to Bethel, 68-69; def. St. Olaf, 78-77; 01/21 at St. Mary's (Minn.)
#21	99	Wittenberg	13-3	def. #16 Wabash, 61-43; 01/21 at Hiram
#22	97	Wheaton (Ill.)	13-3	def. Carthage, 79-73; 01/21 at North Park
#23	87	New York University	12-1	01/20 at Chicago; 01/22 at #29 Washington U.
#24	60	Wooster	13-3	def. Allegheny, 73-51; 01/21 vs. T#34 Ohio Wesleyan
#25	57	Eastern Connecticut	13-1	def. #31 Western Connecticut, 74-61; 01/21 at Southern Maine

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	56	Rhode Island College	13-2	def. Mass-Dartmouth, 61-57; 01/21 vs. Plymouth State
#27	47	Oswego State	11-3	01/21 vs. Cortland State
#28	42	Transylvania	14-2	def. Mount St. Joseph, 53-44; 01/21 at Anderson
#29	39	Washington U.	11-3	01/20 vs. Brandeis; 01/22 vs. #23 New York University
#30	37	Bethany	15-2	def. St. Vincent, 77-63; 01/21 vs. Grove City
#31	26	Western Connecticut	13-3	LOST at #25 Eastern Connecticut, 61-74; 01/21 vs. Mass-Boston
#32	24	Lake Forest	12-1	01/20 vs. St. Norbert; 01/21 vs. Ripon
#33	18	Worcester Polytech	13-3	def. Clark, 64-51; 01/21 at MIT
T#34	16	Hampden-Sydney	13-3	def. Washington and Lee, 78-56; 01/21 at T#44 Randolph-Macon
T#34	16	Ohio Wesleyan	13-3	def. Hiram, 75-62; 01/21 at #24 Wooster
T#34	16	UW-River Falls	12-5	LOST at UW-Superior, 82-85; 01/21 at #11 UW-Stevens Point
T#34	16	Hardin-Simmons	12-2	01/19 vs. #6 Mary Hardin-Baylor; 01/21 vs. Concordia (Texas)
#38	10	Wesleyan	13-4	def. #4 Amherst, 68-67; 01/20 vs. Tufts; 01/21 vs. Bates
T#39	6	Christopher Newport	13-3	def. Shenandoah, 77-58; 01/21 at Greensboro
T#39	6	Puget Sound	11-4	01/20 vs. Linfield; 01/21 vs. Lewis and Clark
T#39	6	St. Joseph's (L.I.)	12-2	def. Mount St. Vincent, 110-95; 01/19 vs. SUNY-Old Westbury; 01/21 at Mount St. Mary
T#39	6	Mary Washington	13-4	def. Hood, 63-51; 01/21 at Frostburg State
#43	5	John Carroll	12-3	def. Heidelberg, 94-68; 01/21 at Capital
T#44	4	St. Mary's (Md.)	12-5	def. Salisbury, 78-75; 01/21 at Stevenson
T#44	4	Randolph-Macon	14-3	def. Lynchburg, 85-74; 01/21 vs. T#34 Hampden-Sydney
#46	2	Grinnell	11-1	01/20 vs. Beloit; 01/21 vs. Lawrence
T#47	1	DePauw	11-5	def. Denison, 73-68; 01/21 vs. Oberlin
T#47	1	North Central (Ill.)	10-6	def. #17 Illinois Wesleyan, 82-69; 01/21 at Millikin

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2012, 09:36:04 AM

Quote from: magicman on January 18, 2012, 08:53:59 PM
Quote from: CMSfan on January 18, 2012, 07:43:34 PM
CMS vs. P-P live stats and/or video here: http://livestats.prestosports.com/pomona/ (http://livestats.prestosports.com/pomona/)

Starts at 7:30 pm PST. Should be a great game!

And let's not forget what's at stake here tonight. National ranking, undefeated season, crosstown rivals, first place in the SCIAC, and most importantly, CMS is trying to take The D3 Championship Belt^TM from the Sagehens. Pat Coleman and D-Mac should be courtside with the commentary. This contest should be front page news on Wednesday's wrap.

If only it was that easy to travel cross country to call a game... I would love to... but having a career kind of makes it a challenge. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 19, 2012, 10:41:40 AM

And as for the front page, lack of photos makes it a challenge. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 19, 2012, 12:59:49 PM

Yeah those careers tend to get in the way of fun things on occasion!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on January 19, 2012, 02:16:25 PM

I won a couple of Portesi pizzas last night ( ;D YUM ;D) answering the trivia question at the half of the UWSP men's radio broadcast and was wondering if the answer is a record or if anyone even keeps this type of stat anyway.

UWSP prior to last night's game had made a 3 point basket in 577 consecutive games dating back to the 1989-90 season. With 7 treys last night the streak is now 578 straight games. Anyone know of a longer string?

I don't know how long the System has been in effect at Grinnell, but they immediately come to mind as a potential challenger.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 19, 2012, 03:35:43 PM

Quote from: frodotwo on January 19, 2012, 02:16:25 PM
I won a couple of Portesi pizzas last night ( ;D YUM ;D) answering the trivia question at the half of the UWSP men's radio broadcast and was wondering if the answer is a record or if anyone even keeps this type of stat anyway.

UWSP prior to last night's game had made a 3 point basket in 577 consecutive games dating back to the 1989-90 season. With 7 treys last night the streak is now 578 straight games. Anyone know of a longer string?

I don't know how long the System has been in effect at Grinnell, but they immediately come to mind as a potential challenger.

I think many colleges and universities have still made a 3 in every game since the lines introduction. Unfortunately not many schools keep that information handy.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on January 19, 2012, 08:41:00 PM

Quote from: sac on January 19, 2012, 03:35:43 PM
Quote from: frodotwo on January 19, 2012, 02:16:25 PM
I won a couple of Portesi pizzas last night ( ;D YUM ;D) answering the trivia question at the half of the UWSP men's radio broadcast and was wondering if the answer is a record or if anyone even keeps this type of stat anyway.

UWSP prior to last night's game had made a 3 point basket in 577 consecutive games dating back to the 1989-90 season. With 7 treys last night the streak is now 578 straight games. Anyone know of a longer string?

I don't know how long the System has been in effect at Grinnell, but they immediately come to mind as a potential challenger.

I think many colleges and universities have still made a 3 in every game since the lines introduction. Unfortunately not many schools keep that information handy.

I figured as much.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 19, 2012, 08:51:36 PM

#15 Williams with a 76-59 win over Skidmore. Ephs with a 4 pt lead at 43-39 with 13:15 to play, go on a 16-0 run over the next 3:30 to put the game away.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 20, 2012, 12:48:34 PM

Quote from: sac on January 19, 2012, 03:35:43 PM
Quote from: frodotwo on January 19, 2012, 02:16:25 PM
I won a couple of Portesi pizzas last night ( ;D YUM ;D) answering the trivia question at the half of the UWSP men's radio broadcast and was wondering if the answer is a record or if anyone even keeps this type of stat anyway.

UWSP prior to last night's game had made a 3 point basket in 577 consecutive games dating back to the 1989-90 season. With 7 treys last night the streak is now 578 straight games. Anyone know of a longer string?

I don't know how long the System has been in effect at Grinnell, but they immediately come to mind as a potential challenger.

I think many colleges and universities have still made a 3 in every game since the lines introduction. Unfortunately not many schools keep that information handy.

I thought I remembered hearing that UNLV had the record for consecutive games for a 3 pointer several years ago... and the stats that I can find are all outdated:

http://hoopedia.nba.com/index.php?title=Three-Point_Field_Goal#Superlatives

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3AThree-point_field_goal#Conflict

These are both D-I records, I fully recognize... but I find it interesting that only 3 schools (as of 4 years ago) out of 120 odd D-I school had hit 3's in each of the games since the 3 pointer was instituted.

Since D-III has better than 3 times the member intitutions as D-I, I would expect this number to be higher...

Interestingly, due to certain school's styles (namely Grinnell), I think that some opponents have used a tactic to intentionally not taek 3's...This may skew the D-III results... I don't know of a D-I program that would take this route (doesn't mean it hasn't existed... but I just don't know it).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 20, 2012, 02:24:27 PM

As far as basketball goes there are only about 25% more D-III schools than D-I. There are about 330 Division I men's basketball schools, if memory serves.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 20, 2012, 02:39:48 PM

There are some conflicting reports, but the number is around 340 for D1 (ncaa stats ranks 338 teams for W-L% and ncaa RPI ranks 344 teams, could be due to teams that are reclassifying). D3 has 405 teams ranked by ncaa stats.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 20, 2012, 03:19:16 PM

Of course, there are schools like Belmont that journeyed from NAIA (I beleive) to D-1 so that also confounds the record-keeping.

And then what to do about teams that had an 'experimental' 3-point line when they were trying out the rule?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 20, 2012, 03:47:05 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 20, 2012, 02:24:27 PM
As far as basketball goes there are only about 25% more D-III schools than D-I. There are about 330 Division I men's basketball schools, if memory serves.

Quote from: Hugenerd on January 20, 2012, 02:39:48 PM
There are some conflicting reports, but the number is around 340 for D1 (ncaa stats ranks 338 teams for W-L% and ncaa RPI ranks 344 teams, could be due to teams that are reclassifying). D3 has 405 teams ranked by ncaa stats.

I think I was getting confused with football... Makes the discussion even more interesting because of potential Grinnell-foe anti-3-pt gameplans...

I don't know how many schools actually still do that anyway... but it seemed to be a fad 5-6 years ago, maybe? When Beloit or somebody was setting records for field goal percentage in a game?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 20, 2012, 04:18:30 PM

Quote from: frodotwo on January 19, 2012, 02:16:25 PM
I won a couple of Portesi pizzas last night ( ;D YUM ;D) answering the trivia question at the half of the UWSP men's radio broadcast and was wondering if the answer is a record or if anyone even keeps this type of stat anyway.

UWSP prior to last night's game had made a 3 point basket in 577 consecutive games dating back to the 1989-90 season. With 7 treys last night the streak is now 578 straight games. Anyone know of a longer string?

I don't know how long the System has been in effect at Grinnell, but they immediately come to mind as a potential challenger.

I think UNLV and some other D1 school has made a 3-pt shot ever since it's existence. I remember hearing that at some point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 21, 2012, 04:59:20 PM

#2 VA Wesleyan and #3 MIT both go down to unranked teams today.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 21, 2012, 05:22:43 PM

Quote from: scottiedawg on January 21, 2012, 04:59:20 PM
#2 VA Wesleyan and #3 MIT both go down to unranked teams today.

MIT lost 80-68 against WPI, who was ranked #24 last week and ranked as high as #17 this season. MIT led throughout the first half and the early part of the 2nd half, but a 9-0 run by WPI at about the 10 minute mark of the 2nd gave them the advantage. MIT couldn't overcome a -9 turnover margin, and WPI scored its last 10 points from the FT line (10-12) to account for the final margin. Big game for MIT point guard Mitch Kates in the losing effort. He had 22 points and 7 assists, surpassing the 1000 point plateau in the effort.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2012, 05:35:36 PM

And in the case of Va Wes, Guilford is not currently ranked, but they are still a VERY good team (now 13-5), and have probably been Va Wes's toughest rival the last few years.

Edit: scratch the 'probably' - Guilford is 9-1 in the last 10 games against Va Wes!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 21, 2012, 05:38:24 PM

#21 Wittenberg loses to a better-than-you-think Hiram squad, 65-51. The Tigers really clanked it up there, bending the iron at a 16-57 rate. The NCAC is cannibalizing itself this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 21, 2012, 07:27:17 PM

#6 UMHB lost at McMurry 75-71.

McMurry had a good crowd there as they dedicated the court to former McMurry head coach/current AD Ron Holmes at a ceremony between the games. McMurry jumped to a 16-3 lead in the first 5+ minutes and held off UMHB.

UMHB had had a tough 75-73 OT win at crosstown Hardin-Simmons on Thursday night. This is the road trip that I expected UMHB most likely to get a loss or two. UMHB coiuld sweep the rest of the regular season and host the Men's tourney.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 21, 2012, 09:18:27 PM

Wabash wins handily over Kenyon 83-59 and Wooster survives over OWU 72-68.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mass_d3fan on January 21, 2012, 09:55:28 PM

WPI goes into MIT's Cage and walks out with a big win,80-68. MIT had the whole week to prep for this one and WPI played without its 2nd leading scorer Marco Coppola. Matt Carr out dueled Noel Hollingsworth in a battle of pre-season All-Americans and the visiting Engineers got great balance from their seniors and young freshmen and lone sophomore. This game was also Coach Chris Bartley's 200th career win. I would not at all be surprised to see these two teams play two more times this year. Looking forward to seeing how the voters treat WPI after this one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 22, 2012, 12:19:41 AM

Point goes down to unranked River Falls at Quandt, completing the Falcons' regular season sweep of the Dawgs.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 22, 2012, 12:31:19 AM

I have # 2, 3, 6, 11, 12, and 21 falling this weekend.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mck99 on January 22, 2012, 11:05:34 AM

UNLV holds the NCAA Division I record for most consecutive games scoring a 3-point goal. Since the 3-point field goal was adopted by the NCAA in 1986-87, UNLV has converted at least one 3-pointer in all 818 games played. In UNLV's 818 games, the Runnin' Rebels have made 5,386-of-15,168 (.355) shots from behind the arc. Entering the 2011-12 season, Vanderbilt was second, nine games behind UNLV. UNLV, Vanderbilt and Princeton are the only three schools to make at least one 3-pointer in every game played since the 3-point line was implemented.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 22, 2012, 11:21:08 AM

That makes sense - early in the 3-pointer's time many coaches eschewed it, much like many NBA teams did when it first migrated to the NBA.

The ABA, of course, shot three-pointers like drunken sailors, and that was the fun of it! Many of us Hoosiers drew three-point lines on their driveways and emulated Billy Keller and Louie Dampier with their red, white and blue basketballs!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 22, 2012, 02:37:06 PM

#23 NYU 89
Wash U 75

I watched NYU's convincing win @ Wash U today via video stream. I was really impressed with the Violets. They have good inside players, good perimeter players, and really move the ball well on offense. The Stein guy down low is a ton, and the PG is also really good. This game was basically never close - NYU led comfortably almost the whole way.

NYU completed the rare UAA U. of Chicago/Wash U sweep - only the 5th time it has ever happened in UAA history. The Violets sure looked like a very solid Top 25 team. Honestly, they looked closer to #15 than that #23 spot they're in right now. (I've only seen NYU play this one time.)

I thought Wash U would win this game and get back into the Top 25. The Bears were not good defensively at all today though...they really struggled to stop NYU's offense. And quite frankly, it sure looked like the better team won this game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 22, 2012, 03:08:07 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 22, 2012, 02:37:06 PM
#23 NYU 89
Wash U 75

I watched NYU's convincing win @ Wash U today via video stream. I was really impressed with the Violets. They have good inside players, good perimeter players, and really move the ball well on offense. The Stein guy down low is a ton, and the PG is also really good. This game was basically never close - NYU led comfortably almost the whole way.

NYU completed the rare UAA U. of Chicago/Wash U sweep - only the 5th time it has ever happened in UAA history. The Violets sure looked like a very solid Top 25 team. Honestly, they looked closer to #15 than that #23 spot they're in right now. (I've only seen NYU play this one time.)

I thought Wash U would win this game and get back into the Top 25. The Bears were not good defensively at all today though...they really struggled to stop NYU's offense. And quite frankly, it sure looked like the better team won this game.

Thanks Titan Q!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 22, 2012, 05:42:01 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	622	Middlebury	16-0	def. Castleton State, 97-71; def. Hamilton, 76-64
#2	595	Virginia Wesleyan	13-2	LOST to Guilford, 55-60
#3	575	MIT	16-1	LOST to WPI, 68-80
#4	547	Amherst	15-2	LOST at #38 Wesleyan, 67-68; def. Bowdoin, 80-66; def. Colby, 82-64
#5	500	UW-Whitewater	17-1	def. UW-Oshkosh, 62-45; def. UW-Stout, 56-41
#6	494	Mary Hardin-Baylor	16-1	def. T#34 Hardin-Simmons, 75-73; LOST at McMurry, 71-75
#7	450	Hope	16-1	def. Calvin, 81-65; def. Olivet, 84-53
#8	448	Emory	15-1	def. Carnegie Mellon, 83-68; def. Case Western Reserve, 70-59
#9	428	Whitworth	14-3	LOST to Whitman, 66-77; def. Willamette, 83-69
#10	388	Cabrini	16-1	def. Gwynedd-Mercy, 78-73; def. Baptist Bible, 93-70
#11	343	UW-Stevens Point	14-4	def. UW-Platteville, 71-57; LOST to T#34 UW-River Falls, 75-82
#12	319	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	15-1	def. Pomona-Pitzer, 57-55; LOST at Whittier, 85-88
#13	310	Franklin and Marshall	16-1	def. Dickinson, 65-62; def. McDaniel, 70-46
#14	266	Birmingham-Southern	16-1	def. Austin, 92-62; def. University of Dallas, 100-78
#15	237	Williams	15-3	def. Skidmore, 76-59; def. Hamilton, 82-61
#16	211	Wabash	14-3	LOST at #21 Wittenberg, 43-61; def. Kenyon, 83-59
#17	206	Illinois Wesleyan	14-3	LOST at T#47 North Central (Ill.), 69-82; def. Elmhurst, 77-60
#18	159	William Paterson	16-2	def. Baruch, 72-58; def. New Jersey City, 72-58; def. Rutgers-Camden, 67-45
#19	120	Augustana	13-4	def. North Park, 73-52; def. Carthage, 90-70
#20	103	St. Thomas	12-4	LOST to Bethel, 68-69; def. St. Olaf, 78-77; def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 77-59
#21	99	Wittenberg	13-4	def. #16 Wabash, 61-43; LOST at Hiram, 51-65
#22	97	Wheaton (Ill.)	14-3	def. Carthage, 79-73; def. North Park, 75-52
#23	87	New York University	14-1	def. Chicago, 81-71; def. #29 Washington U., 89-75
#24	60	Wooster	14-3	def. Allegheny, 73-51; def. T#34 Ohio Wesleyan, 72-68
#25	57	Eastern Connecticut	14-1	def. #31 Western Connecticut, 74-61; def. Southern Maine, 58-44

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	56	Rhode Island College	14-2	def. Mass-Dartmouth, 61-57; def. Plymouth State, 61-43
#27	47	Oswego State	12-3	def. Cortland State, 69-67
#28	42	Transylvania	15-2	def. Mount St. Joseph, 53-44; def. Anderson, 58-55
#29	39	Washington U.	12-4	def. Brandeis, 80-54; LOST to #23 New York University, 75-89
#30	37	Bethany	16-2	def. St. Vincent, 77-63; def. Grove City, 78-57
#31	26	Western Connecticut	14-3	LOST at #25 Eastern Connecticut, 61-74; def. Mass-Boston, 82-73
#32	24	Lake Forest	14-1	def. St. Norbert, 62-54; def. Ripon, 83-75
#33	18	Worcester Polytech	14-3	def. Clark, 64-51; def. #3 MIT, 80-68
T#34	16	Hampden-Sydney	13-4	def. Washington and Lee, 78-56; LOST at T#44 Randolph-Macon, 80-86
T#34	16	Ohio Wesleyan	13-4	def. Hiram, 75-62; LOST at #24 Wooster, 68-72
T#34	16	UW-River Falls	13-5	LOST at UW-Superior, 82-85; def. #11 UW-Stevens Point, 82-75
T#34	16	Hardin-Simmons	12-4	LOST to #6 Mary Hardin-Baylor, 73-75; LOST to Concordia (Texas), 75-92
#38	10	Wesleyan	14-5	def. #4 Amherst, 68-67; def. Tufts, 58-57; LOST to Bates, 60-77
T#39	6	Christopher Newport	14-3	def. Shenandoah, 77-58; def. Greensboro, 91-69
T#39	6	Puget Sound	13-4	def. Linfield, 72-55; def. Lewis and Clark, 76-74
T#39	6	St. Joseph's (L.I.)	13-2	def. Mount St. Vincent, 110-95; def. SUNY-Old Westbury, 88-85; ~~01/21 at Mount St. Mary~~ postponed
T#39	6	Mary Washington	13-5	def. Hood, 63-51; LOST at Frostburg State, 75-76
#43	5	John Carroll	12-4	def. Heidelberg, 94-68; LOST at Capital, 68-85
T#44	4	St. Mary's (Md.)	13-5	def. Salisbury, 78-75; def. Stevenson, 59-56
T#44	4	Randolph-Macon	15-3	def. Lynchburg, 85-74; def. T#34 Hampden-Sydney, 86-80
#46	2	Grinnell	13-1	def. Beloit, 117-84; def. Lawrence, 98-74
T#47	1	DePauw	12-5	def. Denison, 73-68; def. Oberlin, 69-37
T#47	1	North Central (Ill.)	11-6	def. #17 Illinois Wesleyan, 82-69; def. Millikin, 74-37

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 22, 2012, 08:15:34 PM

Daryl, my undying thanks for doing this - I couldn't (easily) vote in my own PP without it! Most weeks it provides me with almost all I need for my ballot (though some weeks, like with this week's carnage, I start over from scratch). Keep it going!

+k from me (and every day this week if I remember - I've got many weeks of taking you for granted to make up for :P). I encourage others who feel the same way to join in on the karma boosts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 22, 2012, 08:44:07 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 22, 2012, 08:15:34 PM
Daryl, my undying thanks for doing this - I couldn't (easily) vote in my own PP without it! Most weeks it provides me with almost all I need for my ballot (though some weeks, like with this week's carnage, I start over from scratch). Keep it going!

+k from me (and every day this week if I remember - I've got many weeks of taking you for granted to make up for :P). I encourage others who feel the same way to join in on the karma boosts.

It is my pleasure -- my computer program means that most of the time it takes but a few minutes of my time (and the occasional times that I have to fix my program because of an unforeseen problem are a welcome diversion from grading homework). I'm glad to hear that others find the reports useful.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 22, 2012, 09:05:07 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 22, 2012, 08:44:07 PM
It is my pleasure -- my computer program means that most of the time it takes but a few minutes of my time (and the occasional times that I have to fix my program because of an unforeseen problem are a welcome diversion from grading homework). I'm glad to hear that others find the reports useful.

My thanks as well, Darryl. This is so helpful.

If it is a simple, quick fix (certainly not asking you to do anything major) can you indicate where the wins are played? For example, above it does not show that NYU won two road games this week...just says they won two games.

Just something to consider. Thanks again!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 22, 2012, 09:15:21 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 22, 2012, 09:05:07 PM
If it is a simple, quick fix (certainly not asking you to do anything major) can you indicate where the wins are played? For example, above it does not show that NYU won two road games this week...just says they won two games.

Just something to consider. Thanks again!

I think that should be a simple change, and I will try to put that in next week. (Ideally, I would like to identify games at neutral sites, but that will take a little more work -- so for now it remains on my to-do-someday list.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 23, 2012, 10:22:23 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 22, 2012, 12:31:19 AM
I have # 2, 3, 6, 11, 12, and 21 falling this weekend.

For the week, it was quite a few more than that: 2, 3, 4, 6, 9, 11, 12, 16, 17, 20, 21 all went down. In addition, ORV 29, 31, T34, T34, T34, T34 (thats right, all 4 teams tied at 34), 38, T39, and 43 also all went down.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 23, 2012, 10:26:41 AM

I would love to see Lake Forest, E Conn, Rhode Island Col and NYU get some more love in the new poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Wabash2011 on January 23, 2012, 05:42:09 PM

Interesting, for the NCAC ....http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2011-12/week8

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 23, 2012, 10:29:52 PM

Biggest movers in poll 8
NYU +105
Hope +99
F&M +99
E Conn +98
William Patterson +97
UW-W +95
Wooster +87
Emory +66
Williams +59
Cabrini +58
Birmingham Southern +57

Wittenberg -63
Amherst -65
CMS -72
IWU -78
VA Wesleyan -84
St. Thomas -84
MIT -87
Whitworth -89
MHB -91
Wabash -96
UW-SP -121

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 25, 2012, 08:55:01 PM

In ORV news...

Springfield down 2 with 10.7 seconds left in OT, hits 2 FTs to tie it. Then on WPIs next possesion, they get a long rebound and hit a buzzer beater to win it by 2.

Final: Springfield 65, WPI 63

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 25, 2012, 10:00:25 PM

Final: #19 Wooster 78 Kenyon 68 Wooster is now 15-3 and plays at Hiram on Saturday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 26, 2012, 08:20:06 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

At Titan Q's request, road victories say "won at," while home victories say "def." (as they did before).

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	623	Middlebury	17-0	def. Plattsburgh State, 73-54; 01/28 vs. #13 Williams
#2	595	UW-Whitewater	17-2	LOST to #16 UW-Stevens Point, 60-71; 01/28 vs. UW-Eau Claire
#3	549	Hope	17-1	won at Trine, 85-62; 01/28 vs. Alma
#4	514	Emory	15-1	def. Case Western Reserve, 70-59; 01/27 at Chicago
#5	511	Virginia Wesleyan	15-2	won at Bridgewater (Va.), 72-52; def. Eastern Mennonite, 91-65; 01/28 vs. #34 Christopher Newport
#6	488	MIT	17-1	def. Clark, 64-46; 01/28 vs. Coast Guard
#7	482	Amherst	16-2	won at #13 Williams, 67-65; 01/28 at Trinity (Conn.)
#8	446	Cabrini	17-1	def. Immaculata, 81-74; 01/28 at Centenary
#9	409	Franklin and Marshall	17-1	def. Johns Hopkins, 65-40; 01/28 vs. Haverford
#10	403	Mary Hardin-Baylor	16-1	01/26 vs. Howard Payne; 01/28 vs. Sul Ross State
#11	339	Whitworth	14-3	01/27 at George Fox; 01/28 at Lewis and Clark
#12	323	Birmingham-Southern	16-1	01/27 at Colorado College
#13	296	Williams	15-4	def. Hamilton, 82-61; LOST to #7 Amherst, 65-67; 01/28 at #1 Middlebury
#14	256	William Paterson	16-2	01/28 at Rowan
#15	247	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	16-1	def. Occidental, 75-64; 01/28 vs. Cal Lutheran
#16	222	UW-Stevens Point	15-4	won at #2 UW-Whitewater, 71-60; 01/28 at UW-Superior
#17	192	New York University	14-1	won at T#35 Washington U., 89-75; 01/27 vs. Carnegie Mellon
#18	155	Eastern Connecticut	14-2	LOST to Keene State, 56-64; 01/26 at TCNJ; 01/28 at #24 Rhode Island College
#19	147	Wooster	15-3	def. Kenyon, 78-68; 01/28 at Hiram
#20	136	Augustana	14-4	def. #22 Wheaton (Ill.), 70-46; 01/28 vs. Millikin
#21	128	Illinois Wesleyan	15-3	def. Millikin, 75-53; 01/28 at #22 Wheaton (Ill.)
#22	123	Wheaton (Ill.)	14-4	LOST at #20 Augustana, 46-70; 01/28 vs. #21 Illinois Wesleyan
#23	115	Wabash	14-4	LOST at Ohio Wesleyan, 64-66; 01/28 vs. Denison
#24	76	Rhode Island College	14-3	LOST at T#37 Western Connecticut, 87-93; 01/28 vs. #18 Eastern Connecticut
#25	68	Transylvania	16-2	won at Franklin, 73-65; 01/28 vs. Defiance

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	49	Lake Forest	15-1	won at Illinois College, 71-47; 01/28 vs. T#42 Grinnell
#27	48	WPI	14-4	LOST at Springfield, 63-65
#28	40	Oswego State	13-3	won at Geneseo State, 63-49; 01/27 at Plattsburgh State; 01/28 at Potsdam State
#29	36	Wittenberg	14-4	def. T#42 DePauw, 66-62; 01/28 at Oberlin
#30	20	Randolph-Macon	16-3	won at Roanoke, 87-62
#31	19	St. Thomas	13-4	def. Hamline, 89-73; 01/28 at Gustavus Adolphus
#32	16	Bethany	17-2	won at Geneva, 71-54
#33	9	St. Joseph's (L.I.)	14-2	won at NYU-Poly, 84-60; 01/28 vs. SUNY-Purchase
#34	8	Christopher Newport	16-3	def. Salisbury, 81-65; won at Averett, 91-72; 01/28 at #5 Virginia Wesleyan
T#35	7	UW-River Falls	14-5	won at UW-Stout, 72-50; 01/28 vs. UW-Platteville
T#35	7	Washington U.	12-4	LOST to #17 New York University, 75-89; 01/27 vs. Rochester
T#37	4	Albertus Magnus	15-1	def. Lasell, 90-74; 01/26 at Emmanuel; 01/28 at Mount Ida
T#37	4	Lycoming	15-3	LOST to Elizabethtown, 66-69; 01/28 at Lebanon Valley
T#37	4	St. Mary's (Md.)	14-5	def. Hood, 64-46; 01/28 at Mary Washington
T#37	4	Wesleyan	14-5	01/28 vs. Connecticut College
T#37	4	Western Connecticut	15-3	def. #24 Rhode Island College, 93-87; 01/28 at Southern Maine
T#42	1	DePauw	12-6	LOST at #29 Wittenberg, 62-66; 01/28 at Ohio Wesleyan
T#42	1	Grinnell	14-1	won at Monmouth, 102-90; 01/28 at #26 Lake Forest
T#42	1	Hampden-Sydney	14-4	won at Lynchburg, 92-59; 01/28 at Randolph

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 27, 2012, 10:49:31 PM

U. of Chicago 103
#4 Emory 102

Chicago led 96-89 with 2:45 to play, but kind of fell apart - Emory went on a 12-1 run to go up 101-97 with :27 to go. But Matt Johnson hit a 25-foot bomb at the buzzer to win the game.

Chicago's Matt Johnson has scored 93 points in his last two games (44 vs Brandeis, 49 tonight)! I have to wonder where that ranks in D3 history in terms of back-to-back games...93 is just crazy!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: howardjp on January 27, 2012, 11:17:34 PM

4 way 4-2 tie in the UAA -- Emory, Wash U, NYU, Deis

Quote from: Titan Q on January 27, 2012, 10:49:31 PM
U. of Chicago 103
#4 Emory 102

Chicago led 96-89 with 2:45 to play, but kind of fell apart - Emory went on a 12-1 run to go up 101-97 with :27 to go. But Matt Johnson hit a 25-foot bomb at the buzzer to win the game.

Chicago's Matt Johnson has scored 93 points in his last two games (44 vs Brandeis, 49 tonight)! I have to wonder where that ranks in D3 history in terms of back-to-back games...93 is just crazy!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2012, 11:18:38 PM

Sheesh - could the UAA or the Top 25 get any more confusing?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: howardjp on January 27, 2012, 11:38:19 PM

Tough enough to figure out my Judges ... knock off Amherst, NYU at NYU, Chicago at Chicago and get blown out by Wash U and Emory. Our psych majors are having a field day!

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2012, 11:18:38 PM
Sheesh - could the UAA or the Top 25 get any more confusing?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on January 28, 2012, 01:20:53 AM

No 4-way tie atop the UAA.

Wash-U's 83-78 victory at home over Rochester has placed the Bears in first place with a 5-1 UAA mark. NYU, Brandeis, and Emory are in a 3-way tie, one game behind the Bears.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 28, 2012, 10:25:43 AM

Matt Johnson's shot for Chicago to beat Emory made Sportscenter's top plays this morning.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 28, 2012, 06:26:45 PM

Quote from: sac on January 28, 2012, 10:25:43 AM
Matt Johnson's shot for Chicago to beat Emory made Sportscenter's top plays this morning.

Is that on the d3 buzzer beater site?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 28, 2012, 06:34:21 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 27, 2012, 10:49:31 PM
U. of Chicago 103
#4 Emory 102

Chicago led 96-89 with 2:45 to play, but kind of fell apart - Emory went on a 12-1 run to go up 101-97 with :27 to go. But Matt Johnson hit a 25-foot bomb at the buzzer to win the game.

Chicago's Matt Johnson has scored 93 points in his last two games (44 vs Brandeis, 49 tonight)! I have to wonder where that ranks in D3 history in terms of back-to-back games...93 is just crazy!!

If you remember or care to acknowledge the feat, Griffin Lentsch scored 89 in one game and then a paltry 25 the next, for Grinnell.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 28, 2012, 08:15:30 PM

Scoring 89 in Grinnell's offense against a Principia team that was short-handed isn't as impressive as scoring that many points in the heat of the UAA battle.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2012, 08:47:50 PM

Those 89 points was also playing 36 minutes in the system.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 28, 2012, 09:07:45 PM

Against Principia...no disrespect to them...and I'm not saying that it wasn't an accomplishment, but it probably was more like practice than anything.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 28, 2012, 09:12:05 PM

And if one player goes 36 minutes, is it still 'the system', or just a stunt to get a player a scoring record against a hopelessly over-matched team?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 28, 2012, 09:31:54 PM

Live video for #21 IWU @ #22 Wheaton...

http://www2.wheaton.edu/learnres/mediares/WETN/wetn_livewindow/WETN-TV.html

Getting ready to tip.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 29, 2012, 12:29:55 AM

I'm just pointing out what he scored. I don't think there's going to be an * next to his scoring feat because it was Principia or a ** next to Matt Johnson's two-game scoring binge because it was against two UAA teams. It is what it is.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 29, 2012, 01:48:32 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 28, 2012, 09:31:54 PM
Live video for #21 IWU @ #22 Wheaton...

http://www2.wheaton.edu/learnres/mediares/WETN/wetn_livewindow/WETN-TV.html

Getting ready to tip.

Wheaton defends home-court, 60-53.

Meanwhile, #20 Augustana (who beat Wheaton in Rock Island on Tuesday) 'squeaks by' Millikin, 98-28! (While Millikin shows occasional signs of rising from the 'rock-bottom they hit last year, over the last 3-4 years they have been the worst CCIW team I can ever recall. And this was NOT a case of 'running up the score'; Vikings' starters never saw the court the second half, while 4 Big Blue starters played the final minute.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 29, 2012, 06:56:53 PM

~~How They Fared (Complete)~~

Correct results posted below.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 29, 2012, 07:18:41 PM

Oswego St. will likely rise, but they have just played such a cupcake schedule. Most of the OWV teams below them deserve to be higher.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 29, 2012, 07:21:23 PM

Darryl, does your week start on Sunday or Monday? i.e. will you include the games from today in the current "How They Fared"?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 29, 2012, 07:50:03 PM

Quote from: scottiedawg on January 29, 2012, 07:21:23 PM
Darryl, does your week start on Sunday or Monday? i.e. will you include the games from today in the current "How They Fared"?

By just looking at the UAA teams above, it looks like Darryl goes Sunday through Saturday.

Darryl, any way to go Monday through Sunday to align with the D3hoops.com Top 25 voting period? No biggie if that would take a lot of work!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 29, 2012, 09:12:27 PM

Tonight was the first time I saw Sunday games not part of the report... tripped me up a bit on Hoopsville! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 29, 2012, 09:18:55 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 29, 2012, 07:50:03 PM
Quote from: scottiedawg on January 29, 2012, 07:21:23 PM
Darryl, does your week start on Sunday or Monday? i.e. will you include the games from today in the current "How They Fared"?

By just looking at the UAA teams above, it looks like Darryl goes Sunday through Saturday.

Darryl, any way to go Monday through Sunday to align with the D3hoops.com Top 25 voting period? No biggie if that would take a lot of work!

Whoops. My program should have reported games through today (and always has before) -- sorry about that. I'll have to look into the problem and post the corrected results.

(edit) Found the problem -- the d3hoops.com Top 25 page (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/index) mistakenly says "Through games of Sunday, Jan. 21" (should be Jan. 22) -- and my program foolishly took that date as correct, and checked for all games over the next 7 days.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 29, 2012, 09:26:17 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Sorry for the confusion -- I will adjust my program to always be sure to check the day of the week, not just the date!

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	623	Middlebury	18-0	def. Plattsburgh State, 73-54; def. #13 Williams, 80-79
#2	595	UW-Whitewater	18-2	LOST to #16 UW-Stevens Point, 60-71; def. UW-Eau Claire, 67-49
#3	549	Hope	18-1	won at Trine, 85-62; def. Alma, 104-77
#4	514	Emory	15-3	LOST at Chicago, 102-103; LOST at T#35 Washington U., 88-99
#5	511	Virginia Wesleyan	16-2	won at Bridgewater (Va.), 72-52; def. Eastern Mennonite, 91-65; won at #34 Christopher Newport, 89-74
#6	488	MIT	18-1	def. Clark, 64-46; def. Coast Guard, 80-55
#7	482	Amherst	17-2	won at #13 Williams, 67-65; won at Trinity (Conn.), 61-30
#8	446	Cabrini	18-1	def. Immaculata, 81-74; won at Centenary, 92-71
#9	409	Franklin and Marshall	18-1	def. Johns Hopkins, 65-40; def. Haverford, 77-57
#10	403	Mary Hardin-Baylor	18-1	def. Howard Payne, 83-62; def. Sul Ross State, 90-56
#11	339	Whitworth	16-3	won at George Fox, 85-66; won at Lewis and Clark, 79-59
#12	323	Birmingham-Southern	18-1	won at Colorado College, 53-42; won at Hendrix, 73-64
#13	296	Williams	15-5	LOST to #7 Amherst, 65-67; LOST at #1 Middlebury, 79-80
#14	256	William Paterson	16-3	LOST at Rowan, 62-85
#15	247	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	17-1	def. Occidental, 75-64; def. Cal Lutheran, 59-53
#16	222	UW-Stevens Point	16-4	won at #2 UW-Whitewater, 71-60; won at UW-Superior, 67-58
#17	192	New York University	15-2	LOST to Carnegie Mellon, 68-70; def. Case Western Reserve, 89-80
#18	155	Eastern Connecticut	15-3	LOST to Keene State, 56-64; won at TCNJ, 73-56; LOST at #24 Rhode Island College, 48-66
#19	147	Wooster	16-3	def. Kenyon, 78-68; won at Hiram, 88-73
#20	136	Augustana	15-4	def. #22 Wheaton (Ill.), 70-46; def. Millikin, 98-28
#21	128	Illinois Wesleyan	15-4	def. Millikin, 75-53; LOST at #22 Wheaton (Ill.), 53-60
#22	123	Wheaton (Ill.)	15-4	LOST at #20 Augustana, 46-70; def. #21 Illinois Wesleyan, 60-53
#23	115	Wabash	14-5	LOST at Ohio Wesleyan, 64-66; LOST to Denison, 62-72
#24	76	Rhode Island College	15-3	LOST at T#37 Western Connecticut, 87-93; def. #18 Eastern Connecticut, 66-48
#25	68	Transylvania	17-2	won at Franklin, 73-65; def. Defiance, 75-62

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	49	Lake Forest	15-2	won at Illinois College, 71-47; LOST to T#42 Grinnell, 92-98
#27	48	WPI	14-4	LOST at Springfield, 63-65
#28	40	Oswego State	15-3	won at Geneseo State, 63-49; won at Plattsburgh State, 69-64; won at Potsdam State, 76-56
#29	36	Wittenberg	15-4	def. T#42 DePauw, 66-62; won at Oberlin, 68-56
#30	20	Randolph-Macon	17-3	won at Roanoke, 87-62; def. Guilford, 74-45
#31	19	St. Thomas	13-5	def. Hamline, 89-73; LOST at Gustavus Adolphus, 77-82
#32	16	Bethany	17-2	won at Geneva, 71-54
#33	9	St. Joseph's (L.I.)	15-2	won at NYU-Poly, 84-60; def. SUNY-Purchase, 84-70
#34	8	Christopher Newport	16-4	def. Salisbury, 81-65; won at Averett, 91-72; LOST to #5 Virginia Wesleyan, 74-89
T#35	7	UW-River Falls	15-5	won at UW-Stout, 72-50; def. UW-Platteville, 61-53
T#35	7	Washington U.	14-4	def. Rochester, 83-78; def. #4 Emory, 99-88
T#37	4	Albertus Magnus	17-1	def. Lasell, 90-74; won at Emmanuel, 88-71; won at Mount Ida, 87-74
T#37	4	Lycoming	16-3	LOST to Elizabethtown, 66-69; won at Lebanon Valley, 77-72
T#37	4	St. Mary's (Md.)	14-6	def. Hood, 64-46; LOST at Mary Washington, 65-67
T#37	4	Wesleyan	15-5	def. Connecticut College, 61-57
T#37	4	Western Connecticut	15-4	def. #24 Rhode Island College, 93-87; LOST at Southern Maine, 84-85
T#42	1	DePauw	12-7	LOST at #29 Wittenberg, 62-66; LOST at Ohio Wesleyan, 61-74
T#42	1	Grinnell	15-1	won at Monmouth, 102-90; won at #26 Lake Forest, 98-92
T#42	1	Hampden-Sydney	14-5	won at Lynchburg, 92-59; LOST at Randolph, 60-61

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 7express on January 30, 2012, 03:03:40 AM

I'm interested to see how the top 25 shakes out with regards to the LEC.

I'd assume Eastern falls like a ton of bricks losing to Keene & RIC with a win over TCNJ sandwiched between the 2. RIC had a loss at Western, but a win over Eastern, I'd look for them to hold steady, probably around 23-28. Western almost certainly drops out with the loss to USM, and they may or not be replaced by Keene State.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 30, 2012, 04:23:20 PM

New Top 25 out. Someone really does not like Middlebury.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 30, 2012, 05:10:23 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 30, 2012, 04:23:20 PM

New Top 25 out. Someone really does not like Middlebury.

They still had them #2; apparently just really likes Va Wes. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: monsoon on January 30, 2012, 05:23:59 PM

Voters must have been tripping over each other running away from Emory; -336 points is a big drop.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 31, 2012, 07:28:50 AM

Quote from: monsoon on January 30, 2012, 05:23:59 PM
Voters must have been tripping over each other running away from Emory; -336 points is a big drop.

If you look at the schedule, their best win is now the blowout at Brandeis. Added to the losses they now have, it's not exactly a top ten resume.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 31, 2012, 11:37:39 AM

Quote from: monsoon on January 30, 2012, 05:23:59 PM
Voters must have been tripping over each other running away from Emory; -336 points is a big drop.

A 3 game losing streak (2 of which were this week), will do that to you.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 31, 2012, 03:06:32 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 31, 2012, 07:28:50 AM
Quote from: monsoon on January 30, 2012, 05:23:59 PM
Voters must have been tripping over each other running away from Emory; -336 points is a big drop.

If you look at the schedule, their best win is now the blowout at Brandeis. Added to the losses they now have, it's not exactly a top ten resume.

I have not had a chance to follow the conference as I have in years past, but I cannot help but think that both Washington and Chicago may have given Emory Top 10 quality games. Or, something like that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 31, 2012, 04:14:33 PM

Chicago and Wash U would then have to be ranked in the Top 10... and since they are not that is a tough argument to make.

Also, if Emory was as good as their ranking implied going in, they would have won those games... or at least one to keep from plummeting in the poles.

Remember, they also lost to NYU on the road and barely beat Rochester (who is not doing well this season) at home. Their entire resume is starting to look far less impressive than voters, like myself, thought this team would have or was capable of.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 31, 2012, 04:51:31 PM

Quote from: WUH on January 31, 2012, 03:06:32 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 31, 2012, 07:28:50 AM
Quote from: monsoon on January 30, 2012, 05:23:59 PM
Voters must have been tripping over each other running away from Emory; -336 points is a big drop.

If you look at the schedule, their best win is now the blowout at Brandeis. Added to the losses they now have, it's not exactly a top ten resume.

I have not had a chance to follow the conference as I have in years past, but I cannot help but think that both Washington and Chicago may have given Emory Top 10 quality games. Or, something like that.

Wins over NYU or WashU would justify a top ten ranking - unfortunately they lost both of those games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 31, 2012, 08:59:21 PM

#1 Middlebury has lost.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on January 31, 2012, 09:00:43 PM

Let's not be so quick to kick Emory when it's down, after patting its back for rising to #4 in the poll.

After all, entering Sunday's game at Wash-U, Emory was shooting 46% from the floor and 38% from 3-point range--and with 160 3s in 17 games to boot. 7 players have double-digit totals in 3-point baskets. The Eagles were averaging 87.5 ppg in their last 4--against the UAA, which is the 2nd-ranked conference in D3 according to the Massey Ratings. A pretty formidable crew. Lethal outside shooting, Austin Claunch's dribble penetration, and Jake Davis and Michael Friedberg inside--ingredients for a strong stew, in my opinion.

Wash-U played very good defense throughout the entire game. Some may chuckle at that, seeing that Emory was able to put up 88 points. But, the Bears held Emory to 33 first-half points on 34% shooting and 6-18 from 3-point range. Wash-U led 46-33 after shooting 50% and 6-10 from 3-point range.

Emory took the ball inside with Claunch and Greven more often in the 2nd half, and that led to the Eagles' 55-point total. Wash-U nearly matched that with 53 2nd-half points, and the Bears needed career highs from Dylan Richter (33 points), Matt Palucki (19 points), and Alan Aboona (12 assists) to stay at arm's length ahead of Emory; along with Chris Klimek's 15 points. Not to mention the 15-3 edge in 2nd chance points from a 52-31 rebounding advantage.

Emory had the road-trip misfortune of running into a very deep Wash-U team that is clicking very well, and a Chicago team with Matt Johnson channeling his inner Pete Maravich. That would be a tough couple of road games for most teams...so I believe we shouldn't throw dirt on Emory just yet. There is still the 2nd half of the UAA slate left to play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 31, 2012, 09:16:36 PM

We'll quickly see how good they are....three game stretch vs. Chicago, WashU and NYU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 31, 2012, 11:53:27 PM

Quote from: jaybird44 on January 31, 2012, 09:00:43 PM
Let's not be so quick to kick Emory when it's down, after patting its back for rising to #4 in the poll. [...] Emory had the road-trip misfortune of running into a very deep Wash-U team that is clicking very well, and a Chicago team with Matt Johnson channeling his inner Pete Maravich. That would be a tough couple of road games for most teams...so I believe we shouldn't throw dirt on Emory just yet. There is still the 2nd half of the UAA slate left to play.

Thank you! My point exactly, but supported with facts and knowledge.

Emory returns home for the next four games at home with only Case Western, Carnegie Mellon and Rochester to play on the road. My prediction: Emory finishes the season on a six game winning streak.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on January 31, 2012, 11:56:00 PM

We will indeed. I will be shuttling between the Chicago-Emory game and the Wash-U/Rochester game to start the weekend!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 01, 2012, 09:16:41 PM

Final: #14 Wooster 89 Denison 70

Wooster takes care of business with a convincing road win over Denison. Top scorers for Wooster were Jake Mays with 16 points, Xavier Brown with 15, Josh Claytor with 12, Justin Hallowell with 10 and Doug Thorpe with 10. Wooster's next game is Wabash at home on Saturday afternoon.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 01, 2012, 09:44:25 PM

Easy win on the road tonight for MIT, 85-56, over Wheaton (MA). Noel Hollingsworth becomes the second MIT player this season to surpass 1000 career points, and the third is not far behind as Jamie Karraker is only 8 points shy of the milestone. Big games out of MITs point guard Mitch Kates (who already passed 1000 points this season) and all-region forward Will Tashman. MIT is now 19-1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hope52 on February 01, 2012, 09:51:49 PM

hope won tonight over bulldogs

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: stag44 on February 02, 2012, 12:34:40 AM

#12 CMS beats La Verne 80-60

The Stags blitzed the Leopards out of the gates and were up 18-0 6minutes into the game led by 10pts from Chris Blees in that stretch. They shot 73% from the field in the 1st half and 65% for the game. Good, convincing win for them as they prepare for Whittier on Saturday night, the team that handed CMS its only defeat this year in double OT.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 02, 2012, 07:40:19 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Hey, look! Sunday's games are included this time!

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	624	Middlebury	18-1	LOST at #39 Keene State, 76-77; 02/03 vs. Bowdoin; 02/04 vs. Colby
#2	580	Hope	19-1	won at Adrian, 64-47; 02/04 at Albion
#3	555	Virginia Wesleyan	17-2	02/04 at Roanoke
#4	531	UW-Whitewater	19-2	won at UW-La Crosse, 71-61
#5	519	MIT	19-1	won at Wheaton (Mass.), 85-56; 02/04 at Springfield
#6	492	Amherst	18-2	def. #27 Rhode Island College, 79-69; 02/03 at Bates; 02/04 at Tufts
#7	468	Cabrini	20-1	def. Rosemont, 83-71; 02/04 at Marywood
#8	444	Franklin and Marshall	19-1	won at Ursinus, 63-54; 02/04 at Muhlenberg
#9	434	Mary Hardin-Baylor	18-1	02/02 at Howard Payne; 02/04 at Sul Ross State
#10	383	Whitworth	16-3	02/03 vs. Puget Sound; 02/04 vs. Pacific Lutheran
#11	370	Birmingham-Southern	18-1	02/03 at Millsaps; 02/05 at Rhodes
#12	313	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	18-1	won at La Verne, 80-60; 02/04 vs. Whittier
#13	311	UW-Stevens Point	17-4	def. UW-Platteville, 70-54; 02/04 vs. UW-La Crosse
#14	304	Wooster	17-3	won at Denison, 89-70; 02/04 vs. #41 Wabash
#15	267	Augustana	16-4	def. #24 Illinois Wesleyan, 80-78; 02/04 at North Central (Ill.)
#16	198	Williams	15-5	02/03 vs. Colby; 02/04 vs. Bowdoin
#17	178	Emory	15-3	02/03 vs. Chicago; 02/05 vs. #25 Washington U.
#18	152	Transylvania	18-2	def. Earlham, 89-76; 02/04 at Rose-Hulman
#19	146	New York University	15-2	02/03 at Carnegie Mellon; 02/05 at Case Western Reserve
#20	115	William Paterson	18-3	def. Montclair State, 83-70; 02/04 at Ramapo
#21	93	Randolph-Macon	17-3	02/04 at Washington and Lee
#22	89	Oswego State	16-3	def. Brockport State, 89-75; 02/04 at Cortland State
#23	84	Wheaton (Ill.)	16-4	won at Millikin, 82-27; 02/04 vs. Elmhurst
#24	78	Illinois Wesleyan	15-5	LOST at #15 Augustana, 78-80; 02/04 vs. North Park
#25	59	Washington U.	14-4	02/03 at Rochester; 02/05 at #17 Emory

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	56	Wittenberg	16-4	def. T#37 Ohio Wesleyan, 66-58; 02/04 vs. Allegheny
#27	36	Rhode Island College	15-4	LOST at #6 Amherst, 69-79; 02/04 at Mass-Boston
#28	32	Eastern Connecticut	16-4	LOST at T#45 Wesleyan, 65-66; 02/04 vs. Plymouth State
#29	31	Grinnell	16-1	def. Knox, 128-87; 02/03 at Ripon; 02/04 at St. Norbert
#30	26	Bethany	17-3	LOST at Thomas More, 57-68; 02/04 vs. Washington and Jefferson
T#31	21	Albertus Magnus	18-1	02/02 at Anna Maria; 02/04 vs. Emmanuel
T#31	21	Worcester Polytech	15-4	def. Babson, 70-49; 02/04 at Coast Guard
#33	20	UW-River Falls	15-5	02/04 at UW-Eau Claire
#34	19	Hartwick	18-2	02/03 vs. Alfred; 02/04 vs. Elmira
#35	15	St. Joseph's (L.I.)	16-2	def. T#45 Farmingdale State, 75-70; 02/04 vs. Sage
#36	12	Lake Forest	16-2	def. Monmouth, 79-66; 02/03 at Lawrence; 02/04 at Carroll
T#37	9	Christopher Newport	17-4	def. North Carolina Wesleyan, 73-71; 02/05 at Ferrum
T#37	9	Ohio Wesleyan	15-5	LOST at #26 Wittenberg, 58-66; 02/04 at Oberlin
#39	8	Keene State	15-4	def. #1 Middlebury, 77-76; 02/02 at St. Joseph's (Vt.); 02/04 vs. Southern Maine
#40	7	St. Thomas	14-6	LOST to St. John's, 56-61; 02/04 at Augsburg
#41	5	Wabash	15-5	won at DePauw, 65-63; 02/04 at #14 Wooster
T#42	2	Buffalo State	15-4	02/03 at Plattsburgh State; 02/04 at Potsdam State
T#42	2	John Carroll	15-4	won at Heidelberg, 97-57; 02/04 at Otterbein
T#42	2	Lycoming	16-4	LOST to Albright, 77-92; 02/04 vs. Arcadia
T#45	1	Farmingdale State	14-5	LOST at #35 St. Joseph's (L.I.), 70-75; 02/04 vs. Mount St. Vincent
T#45	1	Gustavus Adolphus	15-5	def. St. Olaf, 64-63
T#45	1	Hanover	15-4	def. Franklin, 72-66; 02/04 vs. Earlham
T#45	1	New Jersey City	16-5	def. Ramapo, 81-68
T#45	1	Wesleyan	16-5	def. #28 Eastern Connecticut, 66-65; 02/05 vs. Hamilton

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 05, 2012, 04:02:10 PM

Man, if the UAA were ever going to have a conference tournament, this would be the year to do it. Every team is legitimately able to win on any given night. Amazing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 05, 2012, 05:56:51 PM

How They Fared

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	624	Middlebury	20-1	LOST at #39 Keene State, 76-77; def. Bowdoin, 79-76; def. Colby, 72-53
#2	580	Hope	20-1	won at Adrian, 64-47; won at Albion, 75-69
#3	555	Virginia Wesleyan	18-2	won at Washington and Lee, 92-76; won at Roanoke, 98-83
#4	531	UW-Whitewater	19-2	won at UW-La Crosse, 72-62
#5	519	MIT	20-1	won at Wheaton (Mass.), 85-56; won at Springfield, 69-67
#6	492	Amherst	20-2	def. #27 Rhode Island College, 79-69; won at Bates, 67-54; won at Tufts, 74-65
#7	468	Cabrini	21-1	won at Eastern, 82-76; def. Rosemont, 83-71; won at Marywood, 76-63
#8	444	Franklin and Marshall	19-2	won at Ursinus, 63-54; LOST at Muhlenberg, 58-60
#9	434	Mary Hardin-Baylor	20-1	won at Howard Payne, 76-55; won at Sul Ross State, 60-58
#10	383	Whitworth	18-3	def. Puget Sound, 78-59; def. Pacific Lutheran, 82-80
#11	370	Birmingham-Southern	20-1	won at Millsaps, 64-52; won at Rhodes, 76-66
#12	313	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	19-1	won at La Verne, 80-60; def. Whittier, 65-64
#13	311	UW-Stevens Point	18-4	def. UW-Platteville, 70-54; def. UW-La Crosse, 76-60
#14	304	Wooster	18-3	won at Denison, 89-70; def. #41 Wabash, 77-59
#15	267	Augustana	16-5	def. #24 Illinois Wesleyan, 80-78; LOST at North Central (Ill.), 41-43
#16	198	Williams	16-6	def. Colby, 76-51; LOST to Bowdoin, 84-89
#17	178	Emory	16-4	def. Chicago, 83-67; LOST to #25 Washington U., 83-92
#18	152	Transylvania	19-2	def. Earlham, 89-76; won at Rose-Hulman, 56-51
#19	146	New York University	17-2	won at Carnegie Mellon, 88-76; won at Case Western Reserve, 98-85
#20	115	William Paterson	19-3	won at Brooklyn, 80-72; def. Montclair State, 83-70; won at Ramapo, 58-55
#21	93	Randolph-Macon	17-4	LOST at Washington and Lee, 56-78
#22	89	Oswego State	17-3	def. Brockport State, 89-75; won at Cortland State, 84-65
#23	84	Wheaton (Ill.)	17-4	won at Millikin, 82-27; def. Elmhurst, 76-65
#24	78	Illinois Wesleyan	16-5	LOST at #15 Augustana, 78-80; def. North Park, 84-63
#25	59	Washington U.	15-5	LOST at Rochester, 84-94; won at #17 Emory, 92-83

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	56	Wittenberg	17-4	def. T#37 Ohio Wesleyan, 66-58; def. Allegheny, 79-72
#27	36	Rhode Island College	16-4	LOST at #6 Amherst, 69-79; won at Mass-Boston, 75-51
#28	32	Eastern Connecticut	17-4	won at York (N.Y.), 77-52; LOST at T#45 Wesleyan, 65-66; def. Plymouth State, 72-52
#29	31	Grinnell	16-3	def. Knox, 128-87; LOST at Ripon, 96-105; LOST at St. Norbert, 96-97
#30	26	Bethany	18-3	LOST at Thomas More, 57-68; def. Washington and Jefferson, 81-49
T#31	21	Albertus Magnus	20-1	def. Suffolk, 110-70; won at Anna Maria, 83-74; def. Emmanuel, 92-68
T#31	21	Worcester Polytech	16-4	def. Babson, 70-49; won at Coast Guard, 82-76
#33	20	UW-River Falls	16-5	won at UW-Eau Claire, 63-41
#34	19	Hartwick	20-2	def. Alfred, 64-63; def. Elmira, 59-52
#35	15	St. Joseph's (L.I.)	17-2	def. T#45 Farmingdale State, 75-70; def. Sage, 90-77
#36	12	Lake Forest	18-2	def. Monmouth, 79-66; won at Lawrence, 66-58; won at Carroll, 69-57
T#37	9	Christopher Newport	18-4	def. North Carolina Wesleyan, 73-71; won at Ferrum, 85-78
T#37	9	Ohio Wesleyan	16-5	LOST at #26 Wittenberg, 58-66; won at Oberlin, 81-57
#39	8	Keene State	17-4	def. #1 Middlebury, 77-76; won at St. Joseph's (Vt.), 84-83; def. Southern Maine, 92-57
#40	7	St. Thomas	15-6	won at Macalester, 78-65; LOST to St. John's, 56-61; won at Augsburg, 75-72
#41	5	Wabash	15-6	won at DePauw, 65-63; LOST at #14 Wooster, 59-77
T#42	2	Buffalo State	17-4	won at Plattsburgh State, 92-74; won at Potsdam State, 88-79
T#42	2	John Carroll	15-5	won at Heidelberg, 97-57; LOST at Otterbein, 75-89
T#42	2	Lycoming	17-4	LOST to Albright, 77-92; def. Arcadia, 81-74
T#45	1	Farmingdale State	15-5	LOST at #35 St. Joseph's (L.I.), 70-75; def. Mount St. Vincent, 95-61
T#45	1	Gustavus Adolphus	15-5	won at Augsburg, 73-63; def. St. Olaf, 64-63
T#45	1	Hanover	15-5	def. Franklin, 72-66; LOST to Earlham, 53-57
T#45	1	New Jersey City	16-5	def. Ramapo, 81-68
T#45	1	Wesleyan	17-5	def. #28 Eastern Connecticut, 66-65; def. Hamilton, 65-50

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 05, 2012, 10:06:31 PM

Great work, Darryl!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 06, 2012, 05:35:52 PM

New rankings out:

http://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2011-12/week10

First place votes split between 4 teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 08, 2012, 10:12:56 PM

Final: #13 Wooster 54 Ohio Wesleyan 50 Nice road win for Wooster over a 16-5 OWU squad

Final: Wabash 55 #22 Wittenberg 49 Tigers drop the road game to the Little Giants

Big game this Saturday when #13 Wooster plays at #22 Wittenberg for First Place in the NCAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 09, 2012, 03:58:13 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

All day long I've had that nagging feeling that I had forgotten something ...

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	606	Hope	21-1	def. Kalamazoo, 87-59; 02/11 at Calvin
#2	571	Middlebury	21-1	won at Lyndon State, 103-70; 02/10 at Trinity (Conn.); 02/11 at #6 Amherst
#3	570	Virginia Wesleyan	18-3	LOST at #32 Randolph-Macon, 51-54; 02/11 vs. Hampden-Sydney
#4	537	UW-Whitewater	20-2	won at UW-Platteville, 77-58; 02/11 at UW-Superior
#5	528	MIT	21-1	def. Babson, 59-47; 02/11 at Clark
#6	502	Amherst	20-2	02/10 vs. #27 Williams; 02/11 vs. #2 Middlebury
#7	480	Cabrini	22-1	won at Neumann, 73-60; 02/11 vs. Philadelphia Bible
#8	451	Mary Hardin-Baylor	20-1	02/09 vs. Hardin-Simmons; 02/11 vs. McMurry
#9	419	Whitworth	18-3	02/10 at Linfield; 02/11 at Pacific
#10	400	Birmingham-Southern	20-1	02/10 vs. Centre; 02/12 vs. Sewanee
#11	359	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	20-1	def. Caltech, 93-62; 02/11 at Redlands
#12	334	UW-Stevens Point	19-4	won at UW-Oshkosh, 87-83
#13	324	Wooster	19-3	won at T#44 Ohio Wesleyan, 54-50; 02/11 at #22 Wittenberg
#14	306	Franklin and Marshall	20-2	def. Gettysburg, 60-53; 02/11 vs. Swarthmore
#15	245	Transylvania	20-2	def. Mount St. Joseph, 67-58; 02/11 vs. Manchester
#16	206	New York University	18-2	def. New Paltz State, 73-61; 02/10 at #23 Emory; 02/12 at Rochester
#17	195	William Paterson	20-3	won at Rutgers-Newark, 57-55; 02/11 vs. T#44 New Jersey City
#18	163	Oswego State	17-3	02/10 at Oneonta State; 02/11 at New Paltz State
#19	133	Wheaton (Ill.)	17-5	LOST at Carthage, 67-69; 02/11 at T#36 North Central (Ill.)
#20	108	Augustana	17-5	won at North Park, 59-57; 02/11 vs. Elmhurst
#21	105	Keene State	18-4	won at Plymouth State, 86-71; 02/11 at Western Connecticut
#22	69	Wittenberg	17-5	LOST at T#44 Wabash, 49-55; 02/11 vs. #13 Wooster
#23	49	Emory	16-4	02/10 vs. #16 New York University; 02/12 vs. Brandeis
#24	46	Albertus Magnus	21-1	won at Trinity (Conn.), 85-73; 02/11 at Lasell
#25	45	UW-River Falls	17-5	def. UW-Superior, 58-57; 02/11 vs. UW-Oshkosh

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	43	Illinois Wesleyan	16-6	LOST to T#36 North Central (Ill.), 73-80; 02/11 at Carthage
#27	39	Williams	16-6	02/10 at #6 Amherst; 02/11 at Trinity (Conn.)
#28	35	Lake Forest	18-2	02/11 at Monmouth
T#29	33	Rhode Island College	16-5	LOST at Mass-Dartmouth, 68-73; 02/09 vs. Bates; 02/11 at Southern Maine
T#29	33	Hartwick	20-2	02/10 at Nazareth; 02/11 at St. John Fisher
#31	31	WPI	16-5	LOST at Wheaton (Mass.), 69-71; 02/11 vs. Springfield
#32	30	Randolph-Macon	18-4	def. #3 Virginia Wesleyan, 54-51; 02/11 vs. Roanoke
#33	22	Washington U.	15-5	02/10 vs. Case Western Reserve; 02/12 vs. Carnegie Mellon
#34	21	Christopher Newport	18-4	02/11 vs. Greensboro
#35	19	St. Joseph's (L.I.)	18-2	won at SUNY-Maritime, 91-73; 02/09 at Mount St. Mary; 02/11 vs. Yeshiva
T#36	16	Buffalo State	17-4	02/10 vs. Geneseo State; 02/11 vs. Brockport State
T#36	16	North Central (Ill.)	16-6	won at #26 Illinois Wesleyan, 80-73; 02/11 vs. #19 Wheaton (Ill.)
#38	12	Bethany	19-3	won at Waynesburg, 75-44; 02/11 at Thiel
#39	6	Eastern Connecticut	17-5	LOST at Western Connecticut, 81-82; 02/11 vs. Mass-Dartmouth
T#40	4	Gustavus Adolphus	16-5	won at St. Mary's (Minn.), 64-44; 02/11 vs. Macalester
T#40	4	St. Thomas	15-6	02/11 vs. Concordia-Moorhead
T#42	3	St. Mary's (Md.)	17-6	def. Salisbury, 59-42; 02/11 at Wesley
T#42	3	Wesleyan	17-5	02/10 at Bowdoin; 02/11 at Colby
T#44	1	Lycoming	17-5	LOST at Messiah, 57-59; 02/11 vs. Widener
T#44	1	New Jersey City	17-5	won at Montclair State, 76-59; 02/11 at #17 William Paterson
T#44	1	Ohio Wesleyan	16-6	LOST to #13 Wooster, 50-54; 02/11 at Hiram
T#44	1	Wabash	16-6	def. #22 Wittenberg, 55-49; 02/11 at Kenyon

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BUBeaverFan on February 09, 2012, 04:25:50 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on February 09, 2012, 03:58:13 PM
How They Fared (So Far)

All day long I've had that nagging feeling that I had forgotten something ...

Top 25

Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#1 606 Hope 21-1 def. Kalamazoo, 87-59; 02/11 at Calvin
#2 571 Middlebury 21-1 won at Lyndon State, 103-70; 02/10 at Trinity (Conn.); 02/11 at #6 Amherst
#3 570 Virginia Wesleyan 18-3 LOST at #32 Randolph-Macon, 51-54; 02/11 vs. Hampden-Sydney
#4 537 UW-Whitewater 20-2 won at UW-Platteville, 77-58; 02/11 at UW-Superior
#5 528 MIT 21-1 def. Babson, 59-47; 02/11 at Clark
#6 502 Amherst 20-2 02/10 vs. #27 Williams; 02/11 vs. #2 Middlebury
#7 480 Cabrini 22-1 won at Neumann, 73-60; 02/11 vs. Philadelphia Bible
#8 451 Mary Hardin-Baylor 20-1 02/09 vs. Hardin-Simmons; 02/11 vs. McMurry
#9 419 Whitworth 18-3 02/10 at Linfield; 02/11 at Pacific
#10 400 Birmingham-Southern 20-1 02/10 vs. Centre; 02/12 vs. Sewanee
#11 359 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps 20-1 def. Caltech, 93-62; 02/11 at Redlands
#12 334 UW-Stevens Point 19-4 won at UW-Oshkosh, 87-83
#13 324 Wooster 19-3 won at T#44 Ohio Wesleyan, 54-50; 02/11 at #22 Wittenberg
#14 306 Franklin and Marshall 20-2 def. Gettysburg, 60-53; 02/11 vs. Swarthmore
#15 245 Transylvania 20-2 def. Mount St. Joseph, 67-58; 02/11 vs. Manchester
#16 206 New York University 18-2 def. New Paltz State, 73-61; 02/10 at #23 Emory; 02/12 at Rochester
#17 195 William Paterson 20-3 won at Rutgers-Newark, 57-55; 02/11 vs. T#44 New Jersey City
#18 163 Oswego State 17-3 02/10 at Oneonta State; 02/11 at New Paltz State
#19 133 Wheaton (Ill.) 17-5 LOST at Carthage, 67-69; 02/11 at T#36 North Central (Ill.)
#20 108 Augustana 17-5 won at North Park, 59-57; 02/11 vs. Elmhurst
#21 105 Keene State 18-4 won at Plymouth State, 86-71; 02/11 at Western Connecticut
#22 69 Wittenberg 17-5 LOST at T#44 Wabash, 49-55; 02/11 vs. #13 Wooster
#23 49 Emory 16-4 02/10 vs. #16 New York University; 02/12 vs. Brandeis
#24 46 Albertus Magnus 21-1 won at Trinity (Conn.), 85-73; 02/11 at Lasell
#25 45 UW-River Falls 17-5 def. UW-Superior, 58-57; 02/11 vs. UW-Oshkosh

Others receiving votes
Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#26 43 Illinois Wesleyan 16-6 LOST to T#36 North Central (Ill.), 73-80; 02/11 at Carthage
#27 39 Williams 16-6 02/10 at #6 Amherst; 02/11 at Trinity (Conn.)
#28 35 Lake Forest 18-2 02/11 at Monmouth
T#29 33 Rhode Island College 16-5 LOST at Mass-Dartmouth, 68-73; 02/09 vs. Bates; 02/11 at Southern Maine
T#29 33 Hartwick 20-2 02/10 at Nazareth; 02/11 at St. John Fisher
#31 31 WPI 16-5 LOST at Wheaton (Mass.), 69-71; 02/11 vs. Springfield
#32 30 Randolph-Macon 18-4 def. #3 Virginia Wesleyan, 54-51; 02/11 vs. Roanoke
#33 22 Washington U. 15-5 02/10 vs. Case Western Reserve; 02/12 vs. Carnegie Mellon
#34 21 Christopher Newport 18-4 02/11 vs. Greensboro
#35 19 St. Joseph's (L.I.) 18-2 won at SUNY-Maritime, 91-73; 02/09 at Mount St. Mary; 02/11 vs. Yeshiva
T#36 16 Buffalo State 17-4 02/10 vs. Geneseo State; 02/11 vs. Brockport State
T#36 16 North Central (Ill.) 16-6 won at #26 Illinois Wesleyan, 80-73; 02/11 vs. #19 Wheaton (Ill.)
#38 12 Bethany 19-3 won at Waynesburg, 75-44; 02/11 at Thiel
#39 6 Eastern Connecticut 17-5 LOST at Western Connecticut, 81-82; 02/11 vs. Mass-Dartmouth
T#40 4 Gustavus Adolphus 16-5 won at St. Mary's (Minn.), 64-44; 02/11 vs. Macalester
T#40 4 St. Thomas 15-6 02/11 vs. Concordia-Moorhead
T#42 3 St. Mary's (Md.) 17-6 def. Salisbury, 59-42; 02/11 at Wesley
T#42 3 Wesleyan 17-5 02/10 at Bowdoin; 02/11 at Colby
T#44 1 Lycoming 17-5 LOST at Messiah, 57-59; 02/11 vs. Widener
T#44 1 New Jersey City 17-5 won at Montclair State, 76-59; 02/11 at #17 William Paterson
T#44 1 Ohio Wesleyan 16-6 LOST to #13 Wooster, 50-54; 02/11 at Hiram
T#44 1 Wabash 16-6 def. #22 Wittenberg, 55-49; 02/11 at Kenyon

Yeah! You forgot to block the Manchester last second shot last night. Man that hurt! The Beavers need to pull out a win somewhere to try and make it into the conference tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 09, 2012, 05:49:15 PM

Quote from: BUBeaverFan on February 09, 2012, 04:25:50 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on February 09, 2012, 03:58:13 PM
How They Fared (So Far)

All day long I've had that nagging feeling that I had forgotten something ...

Yeah! You forgot to block the Manchester last second shot last night. Man that hurt! The Beavers need to pull out a win somewhere to try and make it into the conference tournament.

I'm pretty sure that something bad* happens if the PA announcer runs onto the floor and interferes with the game.

*Like a technical foul, or criminal charges.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 11, 2012, 06:13:41 PM

#3 Va Wesleyan already lost this week... 51-54 to Randy Mac
#6 Amherst beat #2 Middlebury in OT 77-75
UW Superior beats #4 UW Whitewater 60-58 on a 3 pointer by Ben Aalfs (dunno if it was a buzzer beater)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 12, 2012, 08:01:19 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	606	Hope	22-1	def. Kalamazoo, 87-59; won at Calvin, 83-70
#2	571	Middlebury	22-2	won at Lyndon State, 103-70; won at Trinity (Conn.), 76-47; LOST at #6 Amherst, 75-77
#3	570	Virginia Wesleyan	19-3	LOST at #32 Randolph-Macon, 51-54; def. Hampden-Sydney, 73-71
#4	537	UW-Whitewater	20-3	won at UW-Platteville, 77-58; LOST at UW-Superior, 58-60
#5	528	MIT	22-1	def. Babson, 59-47; won at Clark, 63-60
#6	502	Amherst	22-2	def. #27 Williams, 80-78; def. #2 Middlebury, 77-75
#7	480	Cabrini	23-1	won at Neumann, 73-60; def. Philadelphia Bible, 85-55
#8	451	Mary Hardin-Baylor	22-1	def. Hardin-Simmons, 89-80; def. McMurry, 90-87
#9	419	Whitworth	20-3	won at Linfield, 95-67; won at Pacific, 76-54
#10	400	Birmingham-Southern	22-1	def. Centre, 81-64; def. Sewanee, 85-49
#11	359	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	21-1	def. Caltech, 93-62; won at Redlands, 75-65
#12	334	UW-Stevens Point	19-4	won at UW-Oshkosh, 87-83
#13	324	Wooster	19-4	won at T#44 Ohio Wesleyan, 54-50; LOST at #22 Wittenberg, 62-68
#14	306	Franklin and Marshall	21-2	def. Gettysburg, 60-53; def. Swarthmore, 77-59
#15	245	Transylvania	21-2	def. Mount St. Joseph, 67-58; def. Manchester, 72-52
#16	206	New York University	18-4	def. New Paltz State, 73-61; LOST at #23 Emory, 70-73; LOST at Rochester, 53-62
#17	195	William Paterson	21-3	won at Rutgers-Newark, 57-55; def. T#44 New Jersey City, 85-79
#18	163	Oswego State	19-3	won at Oneonta State, 68-55; won at New Paltz State, 92-68
#19	133	Wheaton (Ill.)	18-5	LOST at Carthage, 67-69; won at T#36 North Central (Ill.), 64-61
#20	108	Augustana	18-5	won at North Park, 59-57; def. Elmhurst, 71-61
#21	105	Keene State	18-5	won at Plymouth State, 86-71; LOST at Western Connecticut, 105-108
#22	69	Wittenberg	18-5	LOST at T#44 Wabash, 49-55; def. #13 Wooster, 68-62
#23	49	Emory	18-4	def. #16 New York University, 73-70; def. Brandeis, 65-62
#24	46	Albertus Magnus	22-1	won at Trinity (Conn.), 85-73; won at Lasell, 76-73
#25	45	UW-River Falls	18-5	def. UW-Superior, 58-57; def. UW-Oshkosh, 85-71

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	43	Illinois Wesleyan	17-6	LOST to T#36 North Central (Ill.), 73-80; won at Carthage, 69-64
#27	39	Williams	17-7	LOST at #6 Amherst, 78-80; won at Trinity (Conn.), 67-60
#28	35	Lake Forest	19-2	won at Monmouth, 72-53
T#29	33	Rhode Island College	18-5	LOST at Mass-Dartmouth, 68-73; def. Bates, 77-61; won at Southern Maine, 77-65
T#29	33	Hartwick	22-2	won at Nazareth, 83-65; won at St. John Fisher, 64-62
#31	31	WPI	17-5	LOST at Wheaton (Mass.), 69-71; def. Springfield, 70-69
#32	30	Randolph-Macon	19-4	def. #3 Virginia Wesleyan, 54-51; def. Roanoke, 110-72
#33	22	Washington U.	17-5	def. Case Western Reserve, 78-60; def. Carnegie Mellon, 88-79
#34	21	Christopher Newport	19-4	def. Greensboro, 106-79
#35	19	St. Joseph's (L.I.)	19-3	won at SUNY-Maritime, 91-73; LOST at Mount St. Mary, 61-99; def. Yeshiva, 91-59
T#36	16	Buffalo State	17-6	LOST to Geneseo State, 82-84; LOST to Brockport State, 70-79
T#36	16	North Central (Ill.)	16-7	won at #26 Illinois Wesleyan, 80-73; LOST to #19 Wheaton (Ill.), 61-64
#38	12	Bethany	20-3	won at Waynesburg, 75-44; won at Thiel, 70-67
#39	6	Eastern Connecticut	18-5	LOST at Western Connecticut, 81-82; def. Mass-Dartmouth, 72-65
T#40	4	Gustavus Adolphus	17-5	won at St. Mary's (Minn.), 64-44; def. Macalester, 68-52
T#40	4	St. Thomas	16-6	def. Concordia-Moorhead, 62-54
T#42	3	St. Mary's (Md.)	18-6	def. Salisbury, 59-42; won at Wesley, 94-68
T#42	3	Wesleyan	19-5	won at Bowdoin, 74-61; won at Colby, 76-70
T#44	1	Lycoming	17-6	LOST at Messiah, 57-59; LOST to Widener, 69-70
T#44	1	New Jersey City	17-6	won at Montclair State, 76-59; LOST at #17 William Paterson, 79-85
T#44	1	Ohio Wesleyan	17-6	LOST to #13 Wooster, 50-54; won at Hiram, 79-73
T#44	1	Wabash	17-6	def. #22 Wittenberg, 55-49; won at Kenyon, 79-51

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 12, 2012, 09:05:28 PM

Thanks Darryl. +1! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 13, 2012, 12:15:43 AM

Great work, DN!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 15, 2012, 08:42:11 PM

#3 MIT defeats WPI 71-66 to avenge their only loss this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 15, 2012, 09:44:07 PM

Final: #22 Wooster 91 Allegheny 61 Wooster is now 20-4 on the season.

Congratulations to Wooster on another 20 win season - now 16 consecutive seasons with 20 or more wins!

...and Wooster has been to the NCAA Final Four three times in the last 9 years! It is great to be a Wooster Fan. :)

Special Thanks to Wooster Coaches Steve Moore and Doug Cline for their leadership of this top program!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 15, 2012, 10:18:28 PM

Two ranked WIAC teams lose tonight...

#12 UW Stevens Point loses at home to UW Stout 67-64

#19 UW River Falls loses at UW La Crosse 74-66

#9 UW Whitewater does manage to win tonight... and there's a 3 way tie in the WIAC for the final game... and Whitewater and RF play on Saturday

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 16, 2012, 12:54:22 AM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 15, 2012, 10:18:28 PM
Two ranked WIAC teams lose tonight...

#12 UW Stevens Point loses at home to UW Stout 67-64

#19 UW River Falls loses at UW La Crosse 74-66

#9 UW Whitewater does manage to win tonight... and there's a 3 way tie in the WIAC for the final game... and Whitewater and RF play on Saturday

Point what are your thoughts on the possibility of someone other than SP/RF/WW winning the WIAC auto-bid?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 16, 2012, 01:26:04 AM

Quote from: sac on February 16, 2012, 12:54:22 AM
Quote from: PointSpecial on February 15, 2012, 10:18:28 PM
Two ranked WIAC teams lose tonight...

#12 UW Stevens Point loses at home to UW Stout 67-64

#19 UW River Falls loses at UW La Crosse 74-66

#9 UW Whitewater does manage to win tonight... and there's a 3 way tie in the WIAC for the final game... and Whitewater and RF play on Saturday

Point what are your thoughts on the possibility of someone other than SP/RF/WW winning the WIAC auto-bid?

I'd say very slim... in part because SP, RF, and WW are such different teams. SP is guard-heavy but doesn't match up well to big guys, RF has a great front line but not as good guard play. WW is the most balanced of the top 3... but what it takes to beat one won't help you beat another. Then again, Superior did beat both RF and WW... though not in back to back games on their opponents home court.

It could always happen... but in addition to the above, I would be very surprised due to the format of the WIAC tourney.

3 years ago, the WIAC went from an 8 team tournament to a 6 team tournament, with the top two seeds getting a bye in the first round and then hosting in the second (reseeded so the top seed plays the lowest remaining seed). So, not only do the three non-SP/WW/RF teams have an uphill battle, which ever of those three end up at #3 will have that same uphill battle. They will have to play a game and then travel to a rested opponent... then travel AGAIN, more than likely to play another opponent who has only played one game during the week.

The WIAC tournament has had some historically interesting results.

In the 13 seasons of the WIAC tournament, the #1 seed is 26-5, winning 8 of the titles. The #2 seed is 20-10, winning 3 titles. The #3 seed is surprisingly 8-13, never winning the title and only making it to the title game twice. The #4 seed has won the remaining 2 titles and appeared in 4 title games... though not since 2005.

The 1 and 2 seed have met in the title game each of the last three years... and the tournament is set now up in such a way that it sort of encourages this.

In fact, the 3 seed has taken a thrashing... the 6 seed is 7-6 on the 3 seeds home court in the first round.

So, there ya go... more stuff than you ever wanted to know about the WIAC tournament!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 16, 2012, 07:16:54 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	623	Hope	23-1	won at Olivet, 75-60; 02/18 vs. Trine
#2	579	Amherst	22-2	02/18 vs. Hamilton
#3	551	MIT	23-1	won at T#38 WPI, 71-66
#4	527	Middlebury	22-2	02/18 vs. #35 Williams
#5	512	Mary Hardin-Baylor	22-1	02/16 vs. Schreiner; 02/18 at Texas Lutheran
#6	494	Cabrini	24-1	won at Keystone, 96-85
#7	462	Virginia Wesleyan	20-3	won at Lynchburg, 73-62; 02/18 vs. Emory and Henry; 02/19 vs. Washington and Lee
#8	446	Birmingham-Southern	23-1	won at Berry, 69-58; 02/18 vs. Oglethorpe
#9	429	UW-Whitewater	21-3	def. UW-Oshkosh, 76-64; 02/18 at #19 UW-River Falls
#10	419	Whitworth	21-3	won at Whitman, 81-74; 02/18 vs. Willamette
#11	385	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	22-1	won at Cal Lutheran, 57-46; 02/18 at Occidental
#12	342	UW-Stevens Point	19-5	LOST to UW-Stout, 64-67; 02/18 at UW-Eau Claire
#13	335	Franklin and Marshall	22-2	won at Johns Hopkins, 71-63; 02/18 at Dickinson
#14	300	Transylvania	22-2	won at Hanover, 74-65; 02/18 at Bluffton
#15	250	William Paterson	22-3	def. CCNY, 75-49
#16	229	Oswego State	20-3	def. Geneseo State, 67-56; 02/17 vs. Buffalo State; 02/18 vs. Fredonia State
#17	189	Augustana	18-5	02/18 at Carthage
#18	143	Emory	18-4	02/17 at Carnegie Mellon; 02/19 at Case Western Reserve
#19	138	UW-River Falls	18-6	LOST at UW-La Crosse, 66-74; 02/18 vs. #9 UW-Whitewater
#20	107	Albertus Magnus	23-1	won at Johnson and Wales, 87-73; 02/18 vs. St. Joseph's (Maine)
#21	89	Wittenberg	19-5	won at DePauw, 56-55; 02/18 vs. Hiram
#22	84	Wooster	20-4	def. Allegheny, 91-61; 02/18 vs. DePauw
#23	77	Randolph-Macon	20-4	def. Ferrum, 72-60; 02/18 at Hampden-Sydney
#24	57	Washington U.	17-5	02/17 at Brandeis; 02/19 at #30 New York University
#25	50	Hartwick	22-2	02/18 vs. Stevens

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	48	Western Connecticut	19-5	LOST at T#38 Rhode Island College, 78-79; 02/18 vs. Plymouth State
#27	44	Keene State	18-6	LOST to #36 Eastern Connecticut, 62-65; 02/18 at T#38 Rhode Island College
#28	42	Lake Forest	20-2	def. Knox, 64-50; 02/18 at Grinnell
#29	28	Wheaton (Ill.)	18-5	02/18 vs. North Park
#30	20	New York University	18-4	02/17 vs. Chicago; 02/19 vs. #24 Washington U.
#31	19	Bethany	21-3	def. Westminster (Pa.), 91-65; 02/18 at St. Vincent
#32	18	Wesleyan	19-5	02/18 vs. Bowdoin
#33	15	Illinois Wesleyan	18-6	won at Millikin, 84-45; 02/18 vs. Elmhurst
#34	14	Christopher Newport	20-4	won at Shenandoah, 69-60; 02/18 vs. Averett
#35	10	Williams	17-7	02/18 at #4 Middlebury
#36	9	Eastern Connecticut	19-5	won at #27 Keene State, 65-62; 02/18 at Mass-Boston
#37	8	Gustavus Adolphus	19-5	won at St. John's, 58-40; won at Concordia-Moorhead, 61-43; 02/18 vs. Bethel
T#38	7	North Central (Ill.)	17-7	won at North Park, 75-49; 02/18 vs. Millikin
T#38	7	Rhode Island College	19-5	def. #26 Western Connecticut, 79-78; 02/18 vs. #27 Keene State
T#38	7	WPI	17-6	LOST to #3 MIT, 66-71; 02/18 vs. Clark
#41	6	Lycoming	18-6	won at Elizabethtown, 69-68; 02/18 vs. Alvernia
#42	4	Wabash	17-7	LOST to Ohio Wesleyan, 81-82; 02/18 at Oberlin
T#43	1	Edgewood	18-6	LOST at Concordia (Wis.), 66-69; 02/18 vs. Concordia (Ill.)
T#43	1	Hobart	19-4	02/17 at Bard; 02/18 at Vassar

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 18, 2012, 12:18:44 AM

#16 Oswego State comes from 10 points down against Buffalo State and scores the final 15 points of the game to win 78-73 and stay perfect in the SUNYAC at 17-0. It marked the 31st straight regular season conference win for the Lakers which is the 2nd longest active streak in Division 3. Oswego's overall record improves to 21-3, 21-2 in D3 as they lost 1 game to DI Texas-Pan American.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 19, 2012, 06:28:25 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

I hope you'll forgive my little celebration at #14 ...

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	623	Hope	24-1	won at Olivet, 75-60; def. Trine, 65-46
#2	579	Amherst	23-2	def. Hamilton, 86-66
#3	551	MIT	23-1	won at T#38 WPI, 71-66
#4	527	Middlebury	23-2	def. #35 Williams, 73-61
#5	512	Mary Hardin-Baylor	24-1	def. Schreiner, 79-74; won at Texas Lutheran, 60-53
#6	494	Cabrini	24-1	won at Keystone, 96-85
#7	462	Virginia Wesleyan	22-3	won at Lynchburg, 73-62; def. Emory and Henry, 84-60; def. Washington and Lee, 77-49
#8	446	Birmingham-Southern	24-1	won at Berry, 69-58; def. Oglethorpe, 92-80
#9	429	UW-Whitewater	22-3	def. UW-Oshkosh, 76-64; won at #19 UW-River Falls, 55-53
#10	419	Whitworth	22-3	won at Whitman, 81-74; def. Willamette, 93-65
#11	385	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	23-1	won at Cal Lutheran, 57-46; won at Occidental, 55-47
#12	342	UW-Stevens Point	19-6	LOST to UW-Stout, 64-67; LOST at UW-Eau Claire, 58-77
#13	335	Franklin and Marshall	23-2	won at Johns Hopkins, 71-63; won at Dickinson, 63-53
#14	300	Transylvania	22-3	won at Hanover, 74-65; LOST at Bluffton, 65-83 ;D ;D ;D
#15	250	William Paterson	22-3	def. CCNY, 75-49
#16	229	Oswego State	22-3	def. Geneseo State, 67-56; def. Buffalo State, 78-73; def. Fredonia State, 75-44
#17	189	Augustana	19-5	won at Carthage, 74-73
#18	143	Emory	19-5	LOST at Carnegie Mellon, 79-82; won at Case Western Reserve, 105-71
#19	138	UW-River Falls	18-7	LOST at UW-La Crosse, 66-74; LOST to #9 UW-Whitewater, 53-55
#20	107	Albertus Magnus	24-1	won at Johnson and Wales, 87-73; def. St. Joseph's (Maine), 75-62
#21	89	Wittenberg	20-5	won at DePauw, 56-55; def. Hiram, 72-50
#22	84	Wooster	21-4	def. Allegheny, 91-61; def. DePauw, 74-67
#23	77	Randolph-Macon	20-5	def. Ferrum, 72-60; LOST at Hampden-Sydney, 71-79
#24	57	Washington U.	18-6	LOST at Brandeis, 69-79; won at #30 New York University, 74-68
#25	50	Hartwick	23-2	def. Stevens, 91-76

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	48	Western Connecticut	20-5	LOST at T#38 Rhode Island College, 78-79; def. Plymouth State, 90-70
#27	44	Keene State	18-7	LOST to #36 Eastern Connecticut, 62-65; LOST at T#38 Rhode Island College, 57-65
#28	42	Lake Forest	20-3	def. Knox, 64-50; LOST at Grinnell, 101-112
#29	28	Wheaton (Ill.)	19-5	def. North Park, 75-59
#30	20	New York University	19-5	def. Chicago, 79-69; LOST to #24 Washington U., 68-74
#31	19	Bethany	22-3	def. Westminster (Pa.), 91-65; won at St. Vincent, 76-64
#32	18	Wesleyan	20-5	def. Bowdoin, 78-59
#33	15	Illinois Wesleyan	19-6	won at Millikin, 84-45; def. Elmhurst, 79-60
#34	14	Christopher Newport	21-4	won at Shenandoah, 69-60; def. Averett, 99-95
#35	10	Williams	17-8	LOST at #4 Middlebury, 61-73
#36	9	Eastern Connecticut	20-5	won at #27 Keene State, 65-62; won at Mass-Boston, 76-68
#37	8	Gustavus Adolphus	19-6	won at St. John's, 58-40; won at Concordia-Moorhead, 61-43; LOST to Bethel, 52-68
T#38	7	North Central (Ill.)	18-7	won at North Park, 75-49; def. Millikin, 91-58
T#38	7	Rhode Island College	20-5	def. #26 Western Connecticut, 79-78; def. #27 Keene State, 65-57
T#38	7	WPI	18-6	LOST to #3 MIT, 66-71; def. Clark, 75-54
#41	6	Lycoming	18-7	won at Elizabethtown, 69-68; LOST to Alvernia, 60-68
#42	4	Wabash	18-7	LOST to Ohio Wesleyan, 81-82; won at Oberlin, 69-32
T#43	1	Edgewood	19-6	LOST at Concordia (Wis.), 66-69; def. Concordia (Ill.), 74-62
T#43	1	Hobart	21-4	won at Bard, 65-48; won at Vassar, 69-43

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 19, 2012, 09:28:47 PM

Great work, like usual, DN.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on February 20, 2012, 09:39:16 AM

There is another top 25 poll coming out tomorrow, right? There certainly won't be a whole lot of movement out of the top 10.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pjunito on February 20, 2012, 06:55:26 PM

DN, the last three weeks, I have been doing all this work on researching how the 25 fared during thier weeks.... All I had to do was come to this room earlier.... Thanks!! Great work...

Go Albertus!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 20, 2012, 08:25:56 PM

Thats interesting, in their only game of the week MIT avenged their only loss of the season, beating WPI on the road, and then somehow lost 25 points in the new Week 12 poll to drop from #3 to #4.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pjunito on February 20, 2012, 09:10:32 PM

Nerd, do you think WPI losing earlier in the week devalued slightly the MIT victory?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 20, 2012, 10:54:22 PM

Quote from: pjunito on February 20, 2012, 09:10:32 PM
Nerd, do you think WPI losing earlier in the week devalued slightly the MIT victory?

WPI's only loss this week was to MIT, so I don't follow your reasoning.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2012, 11:02:23 PM

Thanks for the heads-up, it's been corrected. Someone selected Mitchell from the dropdown menu instead of MIT.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 20, 2012, 11:09:53 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2012, 11:02:23 PM
Thanks for the heads-up, it's been corrected. Someone selected Mitchell from the dropdown menu instead of MIT.

Man, heartbreaker for Mitchell. They were dancing in the streets of New London, CT earlier today, and now...poof. Poll points gone.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 21, 2012, 06:31:11 AM

I think they were voting for the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cryogenics, Hematology, Exobiology, Linguistics and Lace-making. Isn't that the same school?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 21, 2012, 10:34:18 AM

Glad to see it was a clerical mistake.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pjunito on February 21, 2012, 02:41:22 PM

Nerd, I thought WPI lost to Wheaton on Saturday. That would drop their overrall record and give them a bad lost in the pollster's eyes.. Which would makeMIT win overthem not as impressive. That was my point.. However, now I understand that it was a clerical error.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 21, 2012, 06:38:30 PM

Quote from: pjunito on February 21, 2012, 02:41:22 PM
Nerd, I thought WPI lost to Wheaton on Saturday. That would drop their overrall record and give them a bad lost in the pollster's eyes.. Which would makeMIT win overthem not as impressive. That was my point.. However, now I understand that it was a clerical error.

That was last week, and I dont think I have ever seen a secondary result like that have an affect on a teams ranking. If a team drops, it is typically because of their own loss(es), especially this late in the year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 21, 2012, 07:06:17 PM

Or their results and other team's results are changing the mind of a voter... I have seen some teams fall due to another team's success or the team's results or play are not what voters expected... seen all of that happen on many occasions.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 21, 2012, 09:17:26 PM

Yes and that makes sense, like when Amherst beat #1 Middlebury just a week back and jumped ahead of several teams that didn't lose. Thats not relevent here, though, as my comment referred to what pjunito said, which is MIT's ranking being highly contingent on one of WPI's results, which isnt true. For example, that would be like Hope dropping a spot because Wheaton (IL) (Hope's best win) dropped out of the rankings in previous weeks, which obviously isnt true. There is a difference and I think you understand what I mean, but if you would like to argue its your choice.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 21, 2012, 09:22:05 PM

I am just saying I have reconsidered a team's win over an opponent if it turned out that opponent wasn't nearly as good as I was led to believe... then maybe I moved a team up or have them in a certain position too high because they aren't as good as I previously thought.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 21, 2012, 09:53:01 PM

I understand your explanation, and I am sure that is more true early in seasons when there are less games to go by, I just cant seeing it happening the last week of the regular season. I know that people give MIT a hard time for their scheduling, but if they were really dropped a spot for beating WPI on the road this week, I would have lost some faith in the voters. I know MIT gets knocked for their schedule, but its not as bad as people make it out to be. When the rankings come out tomorrow, you will see that their OWP will be in the 0.50's and their OOWP will be in the 0.53's, giving them an SOS somewhere in the 0.51-0.52 range, which will be essentially identical to a lot of other highly ranked teams (eg, Hope). I'm not trying to say voters don't look at the whole picture and dont have a right to reevaluate teams as they feel fit, just that in this case, at this late in the season, it didn't seem to be a very believable explanation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pjunito on February 21, 2012, 09:53:38 PM

Nerd, no need to argue with D-mac... I was scratching my head over why MIT lost so many points and was trying to think outside of the box. I understand and agree where you are coming from.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 21, 2012, 10:00:35 PM

Quote from: pjunito on February 21, 2012, 09:53:38 PM
Nerd, no need to argue with D-mac... I was scratching my head over why MIT lost so many points and was trying to think outside of the box. I understand and agree where you are coming from.

Dont worry pjunito, if we didnt argue on these boards sometimes, they would be a lot more boring. Dave and I like to go back and forth sometimes, but I dont think either of us ever take it personally. It may seem like I get heated sometimes, but its more my sense of humor and that I like to use satire to make my point when things seem absurd to me (ie, the Week 1 NE Region rankings).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pjunito on February 21, 2012, 10:28:51 PM

With that being said... Argue away!!!!! I enjoy reading both points of view!!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on February 21, 2012, 11:01:45 PM

Quote from: Hugenerd on February 21, 2012, 09:53:01 PM
I understand your explanation, and I am sure that is more true early in seasons when there are less games to go by, I just cant seeing it happening the last week of the regular season. I know that people give MIT a hard time for their scheduling, but if they were really dropped a spot for beating WPI on the road this week, I would have lost some faith in the voters. I know MIT gets knocked for their schedule, but its not as bad as people make it out to be. When the rankings come out tomorrow, you will see that their OWP will be in the 0.50's and their OOWP will be in the 0.53's, giving them an SOS somewhere in the 0.51-0.52 range, which will be essentially identical to a lot of other highly ranked teams (eg, Hope). I'm not trying to say voters don't look at the whole picture and dont have a right to reevaluate teams as they feel fit, just that in this case, at this late in the season, it didn't seem to be a very believable explanation.

Through most of tonight's results, I have MIT as having the #6 tournament resume in the country.

Amherst
Hope
Middlebury
Cabrini
Mary Hardin-Baylor
MIT

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 21, 2012, 11:03:24 PM

pjunito - MIT lost two points... that could be moving them down from 2 to 4 on a ballot... that's all.

And Hugenerd... I am just trying to give a point of view. For example, I moved MIT down my ballot a while back... when their play wasn't equating to where I had them ranked. They were winning... but not playing at the level I had them at... so I readjusted. But they weren't the only ones, my Top 15 was reevaluated that week... and another week I changed how I had my 15-25... I didn't blow up my ballot like I usually do... but it was close.

And voters can decide how to evaluate teams how they seem fit at any time. There are not set rules... and I wouldn't expect there to be other than do you due diligence and take it seriously.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 22, 2012, 12:04:08 AM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 21, 2012, 11:01:45 PM
Quote from: Hugenerd on February 21, 2012, 09:53:01 PM
I understand your explanation, and I am sure that is more true early in seasons when there are less games to go by, I just cant seeing it happening the last week of the regular season. I know that people give MIT a hard time for their scheduling, but if they were really dropped a spot for beating WPI on the road this week, I would have lost some faith in the voters. I know MIT gets knocked for their schedule, but its not as bad as people make it out to be. When the rankings come out tomorrow, you will see that their OWP will be in the 0.50's and their OOWP will be in the 0.53's, giving them an SOS somewhere in the 0.51-0.52 range, which will be essentially identical to a lot of other highly ranked teams (eg, Hope). I'm not trying to say voters don't look at the whole picture and dont have a right to reevaluate teams as they feel fit, just that in this case, at this late in the season, it didn't seem to be a very believable explanation.

Through most of tonight's results, I have MIT as having the #6 tournament resume in the country.

Amherst
Hope
Middlebury
Cabrini
Mary Hardin-Baylor
MIT

IMO, the overrated team on that Top 6 list is Cabrini! They have played no strong teams all year and this is essentially the same team that Wooster waxed by 17 points in a Sweet 16 game last year in the NCAA tourney. In fact, Cabrini graduated Dom Farrello who was a starter and top scorer for them last year.

The current Massey rating for Cabrini is only #16 and I think that rating may even be high.

Take a look at Cabrini's current roster and you will find that they have only 1 player that is 6'7". They have NO post depth and that is why Wooster outrebounded them last year in the NCAA tourney game by a 39 to 20 margin. If you have a quick guard that can stay in front of Corey Lemmons (Wooster did) and force him to take jump shots, they are very beatable.

I will be surprised if Cabrini makes it to the Elite Eight this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 22, 2012, 09:36:56 AM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on February 22, 2012, 12:04:08 AM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 21, 2012, 11:01:45 PM
Quote from: Hugenerd on February 21, 2012, 09:53:01 PM
I understand your explanation, and I am sure that is more true early in seasons when there are less games to go by, I just cant seeing it happening the last week of the regular season. I know that people give MIT a hard time for their scheduling, but if they were really dropped a spot for beating WPI on the road this week, I would have lost some faith in the voters. I know MIT gets knocked for their schedule, but its not as bad as people make it out to be. When the rankings come out tomorrow, you will see that their OWP will be in the 0.50's and their OOWP will be in the 0.53's, giving them an SOS somewhere in the 0.51-0.52 range, which will be essentially identical to a lot of other highly ranked teams (eg, Hope). I'm not trying to say voters don't look at the whole picture and dont have a right to reevaluate teams as they feel fit, just that in this case, at this late in the season, it didn't seem to be a very believable explanation.

Through most of tonight's results, I have MIT as having the #6 tournament resume in the country.

Amherst
Hope
Middlebury
Cabrini
Mary Hardin-Baylor
MIT

IMO, the overrated team on that Top 6 list is Cabrini! They have played no strong teams all year and this is essentially the same team that Wooster waxed by 17 points in a Sweet 16 game last year in the NCAA tourney. In fact, Cabrini graduated Dom Farrello who was a starter and top scorer for them last year.

The current Massey rating for Cabrini is only #16 and I think that rating may even be high.

Take a look at Cabrini's current roster and you will find that they have only 1 player that is 6'7". They have NO post depth and that is why Wooster outrebounded them last year in the NCAA tourney game by a 39 to 20 margin. If you have a quick guard that can stay in front of Corey Lemmons (Wooster did) and force him to take jump shots, they are very beatable.

I will be surprised if Cabrini makes it to the Elite Eight this year.

It all depends on the bracket.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on February 22, 2012, 10:58:33 AM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on February 22, 2012, 12:04:08 AM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 21, 2012, 11:01:45 PM
Quote from: Hugenerd on February 21, 2012, 09:53:01 PM
I understand your explanation, and I am sure that is more true early in seasons when there are less games to go by, I just cant seeing it happening the last week of the regular season. I know that people give MIT a hard time for their scheduling, but if they were really dropped a spot for beating WPI on the road this week, I would have lost some faith in the voters. I know MIT gets knocked for their schedule, but its not as bad as people make it out to be. When the rankings come out tomorrow, you will see that their OWP will be in the 0.50's and their OOWP will be in the 0.53's, giving them an SOS somewhere in the 0.51-0.52 range, which will be essentially identical to a lot of other highly ranked teams (eg, Hope). I'm not trying to say voters don't look at the whole picture and dont have a right to reevaluate teams as they feel fit, just that in this case, at this late in the season, it didn't seem to be a very believable explanation.

Through most of tonight's results, I have MIT as having the #6 tournament resume in the country.

Amherst
Hope
Middlebury
Cabrini
Mary Hardin-Baylor
MIT

IMO, the overrated team on that Top 6 list is Cabrini! They have played no strong teams all year and this is essentially the same team that Wooster waxed by 17 points in a Sweet 16 game last year in the NCAA tourney. In fact, Cabrini graduated Dom Farrello who was a starter and top scorer for them last year.

The current Massey rating for Cabrini is only #16 and I think that rating may even be high.

Take a look at Cabrini's current roster and you will find that they have only 1 player that is 6'7". They have NO post depth and that is why Wooster outrebounded them last year in the NCAA tourney game by a 39 to 20 margin. If you have a quick guard that can stay in front of Corey Lemmons (Wooster did) and force him to take jump shots, they are very beatable.

I will be surprised if Cabrini makes it to the Elite Eight this year.

I definitely would be the most skeptical about Cabrini too, but numbers is numbers. They're undefeated in-region and 3-0 versus regionally ranked teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: onetinsoldier on February 22, 2012, 11:43:44 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 22, 2012, 09:36:56 AM
Quote from: wooscotsfan on February 22, 2012, 12:04:08 AM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 21, 2012, 11:01:45 PM
Quote from: Hugenerd on February 21, 2012, 09:53:01 PM
I understand your explanation, and I am sure that is more true early in seasons when there are less games to go by, I just cant seeing it happening the last week of the regular season. I know that people give MIT a hard time for their scheduling, but if they were really dropped a spot for beating WPI on the road this week, I would have lost some faith in the voters. I know MIT gets knocked for their schedule, but its not as bad as people make it out to be. When the rankings come out tomorrow, you will see that their OWP will be in the 0.50's and their OOWP will be in the 0.53's, giving them an SOS somewhere in the 0.51-0.52 range, which will be essentially identical to a lot of other highly ranked teams (eg, Hope). I'm not trying to say voters don't look at the whole picture and dont have a right to reevaluate teams as they feel fit, just that in this case, at this late in the season, it didn't seem to be a very believable explanation.

Through most of tonight's results, I have MIT as having the #6 tournament resume in the country.

Amherst
Hope
Middlebury
Cabrini
Mary Hardin-Baylor
MIT

IMO, the overrated team on that Top 6 list is Cabrini! They have played no strong teams all year and this is essentially the same team that Wooster waxed by 17 points in a Sweet 16 game last year in the NCAA tourney. In fact, Cabrini graduated Dom Farrello who was a starter and top scorer for them last year.

The current Massey rating for Cabrini is only #16 and I think that rating may even be high.

Take a look at Cabrini's current roster and you will find that they have only 1 player that is 6'7". They have NO post depth and that is why Wooster outrebounded them last year in the NCAA tourney game by a 39 to 20 margin. If you have a quick guard that can stay in front of Corey Lemmons (Wooster did) and force him to take jump shots, they are very beatable.

I will be surprised if Cabrini makes it to the Elite Eight this year.

It all depends on the bracket.

I could not have said it better myself. I would be surprised if Cabrini didnt make the elite 8, assuming a bracket that the top Mid atlantic seed would deserve. I agree, they might not be on the same list the NE schools or a Va Wesleyan, but they probably wont have to play any of the those top tier teams before the elite 8. And of course, they will probably host.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 22, 2012, 11:56:55 PM

And let's not discount the play of Cory Lemons who is the team's leading scorer, rebounder, and assist man, and steals leader...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 23, 2012, 12:10:45 AM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 22, 2012, 10:58:33 AM
I definitely would be the most skeptical about Cabrini too, but numbers is numbers. They're undefeated in-region and 3-0 versus regionally ranked teams.

Their in-region OWP is barely .500 (.504). Their in-region results against ranked opponents are against Keystone (twice) and Widener, if I'm correct. Keystone's in-region OWP is worse at .486 (and 0-2 vsRR), Widener is legit with OWP at .585 and 4-4.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 23, 2012, 09:20:23 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Not many results, but perhaps useful to see what is coming this weekend.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	623	Hope	25-1	def. Calvin, 87-80; 02/25 vs. Adrian
#2	581	Amherst	23-2	02/25 vs. Bates
#3	549	MIT	23-1	02/25 vs. Babson
#4	530	Middlebury	23-2	02/25 vs. T#29 Wesleyan
#5	512	Mary Hardin-Baylor	24-1	02/24 vs. Mississippi College
#6	505	Cabrini	25-1	def. Immaculata, 87-68; 02/24 vs. Keystone
#7	469	Virginia Wesleyan	22-3	02/24 vs. Washington and Lee
#8	453	UW-Whitewater	22-3	02/24 vs. UW-La Crosse
#9	447	Birmingham-Southern	24-1	02/24 vs. University of Dallas
#10	410	Whitworth	22-3	02/23 vs. Lewis and Clark
#11	391	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	23-2	LOST to Pomona-Pitzer, 50-51; 02/24 vs. Redlands
#12	331	Franklin and Marshall	23-2	02/24 vs. Washington College; 02/25 vs. TBD
#13	288	William Paterson	23-3	def. Kean, 72-56; 02/25 at Richard Stockton
#14	274	Oswego State	23-3	def. New Paltz State, 73-62; 02/24 vs. Brockport State
#15	208	Albertus Magnus	25-1	def. Emerson, 82-58; 02/23 vs. Lasell
#16	206	Transylvania	22-3	02/25 vs. TBA
#17	189	Wittenberg	21-5	def. Kenyon, 73-61; 02/24 vs. Denison
#18	186	Augustana	19-6	LOST at #22 Wheaton (Ill.), 44-74
#19	160	Wooster	22-4	def. DePauw, 59-51; 02/24 vs. #42 Ohio Wesleyan; 02/25 at TBA
#20	130	UW-Stevens Point	20-6	def. UW-Superior, 62-52; 02/24 at #34 UW-River Falls
#21	111	Hartwick	23-2	02/24 vs. Ithaca
#22	89	Wheaton (Ill.)	20-5	def. #18 Augustana, 74-44; 02/24 vs. T#29 Illinois Wesleyan
#23	57	Rhode Island College	21-5	def. Plymouth State, 79-48; 02/24 at #33 Western Connecticut
#24	56	Washington U.	18-6	02/25 at Chicago
#25	52	Bethany	23-3	def. Waynesburg, 82-69; 02/23 vs. Washington and Jefferson

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	50	Emory	19-5	02/25 at Rochester
#27	34	North Central (Ill.)	18-7	IDLE
#28	31	Eastern Connecticut	20-5	02/24 vs. #36 Keene State
T#29	29	Illinois Wesleyan	19-6	02/24 at #22 Wheaton (Ill.)
T#29	29	Randolph-Macon	20-5	02/24 vs. Eastern Mennonite
T#29	29	Wesleyan	20-5	02/25 at #4 Middlebury
#32	26	Christopher Newport	21-4	02/24 vs. Methodist
#33	22	Western Connecticut	20-5	02/24 vs. #23 Rhode Island College
#34	21	UW-River Falls	18-7	02/24 vs. #20 UW-Stevens Point
#35	14	Lake Forest	20-3	02/24 vs. Carroll; 02/25 vs. TBD
#36	10	Keene State	19-7	def. Mass-Dartmouth, 75-64; 02/24 at #28 Eastern Connecticut
#37	8	New York University	19-5	02/25 at Brandeis
T#38	5	Gustavus Adolphus	19-6	IDLE
T#38	5	Hobart	22-4	def. Union, 73-53; 02/25 vs. Skidmore
#40	4	Worcester Polytech	18-6	02/25 vs. Springfield; 02/26 at TBD
#41	3	Wabash	18-8	LOST to Denison, 60-74
#42	2	Ohio Wesleyan	20-6	def. Hiram, 96-86; 02/24 at #19 Wooster
#43	1	Widener	18-8	LOST to Lycoming, 77-79

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie77 on February 23, 2012, 10:32:31 AM

North Central hosts #18 Augustana in a CCIW tournament semi-final on Friday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 23, 2012, 11:07:02 AM

Quote from: augie77 on February 23, 2012, 10:32:31 AM
North Central hosts #18 Augustana in a CCIW tournament semi-final on Friday.

Thanks for pointing that out. I should have prefaced that report by saying that it only includes games that have been added to the d3hoops.com schedule. The Augie/NC game is not listed on either of their d3hoops.com pages:
North Central (http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/North_Central_(Ill.)/Men/2011-12/index) and Augustana (http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Augustana/Men/2011-12/index)

Others should feel free to chip in with similar corrections.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 26, 2012, 08:49:50 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 16, 2012, 08:37:15 PM
Wow!!! NYU goes from zero to 87 in one weekend.

Is it a "UAA road loss" for Emory or are the Violets that good?

The top dog in the UAA is almost always Top 25 material...

and the runner-up (a 11-3/20-5 or better record is almost always Top 25 calibre as well.)

NYU needs to go 11-3 for me to think that they are Top 25. (Just my humble opinion...)

The Violets shrink in the last half of the season to go 9-5 in the UAA.

The weak non-conference schedule did not reflect the true NYU team early in the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 26, 2012, 08:59:24 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 26, 2012, 08:49:50 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 16, 2012, 08:37:15 PM
Wow!!! NYU goes from zero to 87 in one weekend.

Is it a "UAA road loss" for Emory or are the Violets that good?

The top dog in the UAA is almost always Top 25 material...

and the runner-up (a 11-3/20-5 or better record is almost always Top 25 calibre as well.)

NYU needs to go 11-3 for me to think that they are Top 25. (Just my humble opinion...)
The Violets shrink in the last half of the season to go 9-5 in the UAA.

The weak non-conference schedule did not reflect the true NYU team early in the season.

NYU's losses were by 3, 2, 3, 9 and 6 :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 26, 2012, 09:12:58 PM

Quote from: sac on February 26, 2012, 08:59:24 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 26, 2012, 08:49:50 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 16, 2012, 08:37:15 PM
Wow!!! NYU goes from zero to 87 in one weekend.

Is it a "UAA road loss" for Emory or are the Violets that good?

The top dog in the UAA is almost always Top 25 material...

and the runner-up (a 11-3/20-5 or better record is almost always Top 25 calibre as well.)

NYU needs to go 11-3 for me to think that they are Top 25. (Just my humble opinion...)
The Violets shrink in the last half of the season to go 9-5 in the UAA.

The weak non-conference schedule did not reflect the true NYU team early in the season.

NYU's losses were by 3, 2, 3, 9 and 6 :-\

And if NYU had swept the series with WashU, then they would have earned the AQ at 10-4.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on March 03, 2012, 10:14:01 AM

8 teams from the Top 25 eliminated in the first round of the NCAAs:

10. Mary Hardin-Baylor
11. Claremont-Mudd-Scripps
12. William Paterson
13. Birmingham-Southern
17. UW River Falls
18. Transylvania
20. Bethany
25. Christopher Newport

A couple of these teams seemed overrated, IMO. I never believed that Bethany or Birmingham-Southern even belonged in the Top 25 when their gaudy records came against weak competition and they had no real quality wins.

I think the Top 25 voters need to pay more attention to the SOS stat. Bethany had a very weak SOS of 0.437 and Birmingham-Southern was not much better at 0.443.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on March 03, 2012, 10:30:33 AM

I don't think BSC was that overrated. You don't want to double penalize people for their schedule. They're relatively isolated and did their future conference mate Barry a favor by giving them two games.

It's not like they got blown out - they played a tough team AND spent time locked in the basement of a hotel.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 03, 2012, 12:02:24 PM

I've never been completely satisfied that William Patterson deserved to be in the top 25. The problem this year was that some of the teams I thought were good, just didn't have the schedule or the record to prove it.

Edgewood was one I like a lot at the beginning of the year, but they had some terrible losses.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 03, 2012, 12:27:40 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on March 03, 2012, 10:14:01 AM
8 teams from the Top 25 eliminated in the first round of the NCAAs:

10. Mary Hardin-Baylor
11. Claremont-Mudd-Scripps
12. William Paterson
13. Birmingham-Southern
17. UW River Falls
18. Transylvania
20. Bethany
25. Christopher Newport

A couple of these teams seemed overrated, IMO. I never believed that Bethany or Birmingham-Southern even belonged in the Top 25 when their gaudy records came against weak competition and they had no real quality wins.

I think the Top 25 voters need to pay more attention to the SOS stat. Bethany had a very weak SOS of 0.437 and Birmingham-Southern was not much better at 0.443.

SOS doesn't explain all of those losses. March is March. Because of geography, Bethany had to go on the road for an 8-9 game. What would you expect?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on March 03, 2012, 12:30:46 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on March 03, 2012, 10:14:01 AM
8 teams from the Top 25 eliminated in the first round of the NCAAs:

10. Mary Hardin-Baylor
11. Claremont-Mudd-Scripps
12. William Paterson
13. Birmingham-Southern
17. UW River Falls
18. Transylvania
20. Bethany
25. Christopher Newport

A couple of these teams seemed overrated, IMO. I never believed that Bethany or Birmingham-Southern even belonged in the Top 25 when their gaudy records came against weak competition and they had no real quality wins.

I think the Top 25 voters need to pay more attention to the SOS stat. Bethany had a very weak SOS of 0.437 and Birmingham-Southern was not much better at 0.443.

I'm not that surprised that a good chunk of the Top 25 dropped first round games, since there seems to be a lot of parity all across DIII this year.

But only Birmingham-Southern lost to another ranked team (#22 Wittenberg), and UMHB, Willy Pat, UWRF and Transy all lost at home to unranked teams. Ouch.

The top of the poll held up much better, with teams 1-9 going 7-0 yesterday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 03, 2012, 12:46:40 PM

There are definitely a few teams on the upset list who have been ones that have just drifted upward by not losing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 04, 2012, 06:37:48 PM

Since I saw both BSC and Transy lose in person... I can tell you they deserved their Top 25 love because they are good teams (BSC lost to another Top 25 team)... Carroll on the other hand had been hot recently... shooting extremely well and if you look at the four Transy losses, they lost to teams who shot 60% or better (I think Carroll was just under that while Transy shot something like 46% for the game).

Can't say CMS is overrated since I have watched them play very good basketball this season and certainly think they are better then most of those teams they are ahead of... UMHB may be too high, but they had one loss going into the last week of the season.

Bethany and CNU? It's a crap shoot this season at that level of the Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 04, 2012, 09:02:39 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 04, 2012, 06:37:48 PM
Since I saw both BSC and Transy lose in person... I can tell you they deserved their Top 25 love because they are good teams (BSC lost to another Top 25 team)... Carroll on the other hand had been hot recently... shooting extremely well and if you look at the four Transy losses, they lost to teams who shot 60% or better (I think Carroll was just under that while Transy shot something like 46% for the game).

Can't say CMS is overrated since I have watched them play very good basketball this season and certainly think they are better then most of those teams they are ahead of... UMHB may be too high, but they had one loss going into the last week of the season.

Bethany and CNU? It's a crap shoot this season at that level of the Top 25.

Let's see how far Whitworth's coattails can pull UMHB.

UMHB and Trinity was a great match against 2 teams that play opposite styles of ball. It was a toss-up.

As hard as Whitworth tried they could not shake McMurry. Up by 4 at the half, the Pirates pushed the lead to 9 at 7:13 and at 3:39 remaining. Whitworth hits 1-2FT at 2:18 to push the lead to 5. In the next possession, McMurry bounces the ball off the foot at 2:13 left and the "end game" plays out. Whitworth hits 7 of 8 from the line and McMurry only hit 1 of 6 3FG's. Final Whitworth 90-79.

In his index, Knightslappy had Whitworth as his #2 team prior to the tourney and the most probable team to win after Round #1. Whitworth was about a 7-point favorite over McMurry and that game played out that way. UMHB was much more consistent in the ASC this season, and Trinity's young team put it together in the second half.

The UMHB games were fun to watch. Based on the full season, UMHB was clearly Top 25 and probably Top 15-17.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 05, 2012, 03:13:58 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 04, 2012, 09:02:39 PM
The UMHB games were fun to watch. Based on the full season, UMHB was clearly Top 25 and probably Top 15-17.

Based on efficiency adjusted for schedule I had them #20 going into the tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on March 09, 2012, 10:58:54 PM

PCT of points graduating
Wheaton-69%
Wittenberg-69%
W Conn-64%
Edgewood-64%
Oswego St.-63%
Whitworth-60%
UW-River Falls-60%
Lake Forest-60%
E Conn-57%
Augustana-55%
Illinois Wesleyan-49%
Farmingdale St.-48%
Mary Hardin Baylor-47%
UW-Whitewater-46%
Rhode Island College-45%
Hartwick-42%
Hope-42%
UW-Stevens Point-40%
Amherst-39%
Cabrini-37%
Wooster-35%
Virginia Wesleyan-35%
Christopher Newport-34%
WashU-33%
Randolph Macon-32%
Ohio Wesleyan-30%
Albertus Magnus-29%
Franklin & Marshall-29%
Middlebury-28%
Claremont Mudd Scripps-28%
NYU-28%
St. Thomas-28%
Birmingham Southern-24%
Rose-Hulman-18%
Bethany-15%
Wesleyan CT-14%
MIT-13%
North Central-12%
Transylvania-12%
William Patterson-2%

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on March 09, 2012, 11:03:14 PM

Your MIT numbers are incorrect...Hollingsworth and Karraker have a year of eligibility left due to redshirt seasons. MIT is only graduating 10% of their scoring (essentially just Billy Bender, who hasn't played the last 2.5 games due to injury).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on March 09, 2012, 11:09:55 PM

Corrected. Thanks! I know nothing of most of these rosters so I'm just going off what the player is listed as.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on March 09, 2012, 11:13:31 PM

No problem, just thought I would give you the inside scoop!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on March 09, 2012, 11:18:39 PM

Quote from: Hugenerd on March 09, 2012, 11:13:31 PM
No problem, just thought I would give you the inside scoop!

Not something MIT opponents like to hear!

On a much smaller magnitude, but one that could become bigger, Hope's Nate VanArendonk has 3 full years of eligibility left (even though listed as a soph). Here's to hoping he can fulfill the potential that gained him a D1 scholarship!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 10, 2012, 12:28:06 AM

I have to apologize to F&M. They are much, much better than I thought. They're a solid, championship level team. They're better than MIT; they're better than Cabrini.

Tonight they were better than Amherst. I'll have to do some thinking about whether they're overall better than the Jeffs, but they're at least as good.

MIT is a solid top 10 team, but probably nearer to the bottom of the top 10.

There will be a lot to think about for the final poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on March 10, 2012, 11:40:37 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 10, 2012, 12:28:06 AM

I have to apologize to F&M. They are much, much better than I thought. They're a solid, championship level team. They're better than MIT; they're better than Cabrini.

Tonight they were better than Amherst. I'll have to do some thinking about whether they're overall better than the Jeffs, but they're at least as good.

MIT is a solid top 10 team, but probably nearer to the bottom of the top 10.

There will be a lot to think about for the final poll.

MIT has won their last 3 games by at least 15 points. Their average margin of victory for all 4 NCAA tourney games is 14.5 points. They held F&M to their lowest scoring output of the season tonight, 54, and they scored 12 of those 54 points in the last 2.5 minutes when MIT had all but put the game away. And they are doing all this without their starting, senior, small forward who was injured around halftime of their opening round game. The better team won tonight.

Mitch Kates, MIT's PG, also outplayed Milligan pretty thoroughly on both ends of the court (don't let the boxscore fool you, Milligan had 9 points in garbage time to boost his numbers--the first 37.5 minutes of the game Kates held him to 14 points on 5-16 shooting, only 2 assists and 4 TOs). Kates was spectacular in the way he controlled the tempo of the game, if you didn't see it, the boxscore doesn't do it justice (his line was pretty darn good anyway, 21 points, 8 assists, 3 steals, 3 boards, and a block). Also, I dont want my post to be interpreted as meaning that Milligan isnt good, he is a spectacular, All-American guard. I just think it was clear that Kates outplayed him tonight and he deserves similar national recognition.

Don't sleep on the Engineers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on March 11, 2012, 12:07:05 AM

Quote from: Hugenerd on March 10, 2012, 11:40:37 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 10, 2012, 12:28:06 AM

I have to apologize to F&M. They are much, much better than I thought. They're a solid, championship level team. They're better than MIT; they're better than Cabrini.

Tonight they were better than Amherst. I'll have to do some thinking about whether they're overall better than the Jeffs, but they're at least as good.

MIT is a solid top 10 team, but probably nearer to the bottom of the top 10.

There will be a lot to think about for the final poll.

MIT has won their last 3 games by at least 15 points. Their average margin of victory for all 4 NCAA tourney games is 14.5 points. They held F&M to their lowest scoring output of the season tonight, 54, and they scored 12 of those 54 points in the last 2.5 minutes when MIT had all but put the game away. And they are doing all this without their starting, senior, small forward who was injured around halftime of their opening round game. The better team won tonight.

Mitch Kates, MIT's PG, also outplayed Milligan pretty thoroughly on both ends of the court (don't let the boxscore fool you, Milligan had 9 points in garbage time to boost his numbers--the first 37.5 minutes of the game Kates held him to 14 points on 5-16 shooting, only 2 assists and 4 TOs). Kates was spectacular in the way he controlled the tempo of the game, if you didn't see it, the boxscore doesn't do it justice (his line was pretty darn good anyway, 21 points, 8 assists, 3 steals, 3 boards, and a block).

Don't sleep on the Engineers.

I have to agree with Hugenerd. Kates has been great all year and tonight he was clearly the best player on the floor. At least 4 times that I remember, he just blew by everyone for an easy layup. The vaunted F&M defense didn't stop him much tonight. MIT doesn't have a long bench and it got shorter now that Bender is out but their starters can all light it up. In the Posters' Poll I had them as high as #2 and never worse than #4. I think they've earned their #3 ranking and now with a Final Four berth it looks like they've proved that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fritzdis on March 11, 2012, 12:40:57 AM

Quote from: magicman on March 11, 2012, 12:07:05 AM
The vaunted F&M defense didn't stop him much tonight.

The vaunted F&M defense relies on Matt Porter, who was injured 7 minutes into the game. MIT had scored 5 points. He didn't return until the second half and was clearly hobbled.

It would have been great to be able to see both teams at full strength.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 11, 2012, 07:17:39 AM

Quote from: fritzdis on March 11, 2012, 12:40:57 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 11, 2012, 12:07:05 AM
The vaunted F&M defense didn't stop him much tonight.

The vaunted F&M defense relies on Matt Porter, who was injured 7 minutes into the game. MIT had scored 5 points. He didn't return until the second half and was clearly hobbled.

It would have been great to be able to see both teams at full strength.

It's amazing to see how much difference one player makes. Didn't even look like the same team out there. Also, the MIT big guys really figured out what Amherst's bigs didn't and were able to play aggressive without getting into foul trouble. I guess I can't underestimate MIT anymore.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on March 11, 2012, 09:04:43 AM

Quote from: fritzdis on March 11, 2012, 12:40:57 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 11, 2012, 12:07:05 AM
The vaunted F&M defense didn't stop him much tonight.

The vaunted F&M defense relies on Matt Porter, who was injured 7 minutes into the game. MIT had scored 5 points. He didn't return until the second half and was clearly hobbled.

It would have been great to be able to see both teams at full strength.

MIT wasn't at full strength either, their starting 3 didn't play the whole game (he has been out since the first game of the tourney). Billy Bender is also considered the wing 'stopper' for MIT, but they have been able to adjust without him the last 3 games. Given how short Coach Anderson has his bench, its been amazing to watch the guys adjust to losing one of their starters who has played ~30+ mpg all season.

Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 11, 2012, 07:17:39 AM
Quote from: fritzdis on March 11, 2012, 12:40:57 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 11, 2012, 12:07:05 AM
The vaunted F&M defense didn't stop him much tonight.

The vaunted F&M defense relies on Matt Porter, who was injured 7 minutes into the game. MIT had scored 5 points. He didn't return until the second half and was clearly hobbled.

It would have been great to be able to see both teams at full strength.

It's amazing to see how much difference one player makes. Didn't even look like the same team out there. Also, the MIT big guys really figured out what Amherst's bigs didn't and were able to play aggressive without getting into foul trouble. I guess I can't underestimate MIT anymore.

Will Tashman did foul out, although 2-3 of those fouls called on him were on illegal screen called in the last 10 minutes of the game.

That still doesn't explain why F&M couldn't score any points. Do you think Matt Porter would have helped them score a ton more points (F&M had 44 points through 37.5 minutes when they went to the 'garbage time' style play). Also, I dont think Porter would have had much to do defensively with Kates, he and Milligan were matched up against eachother the whole night and Kates was getting a lot done, both taking the ball to the rim and with a few pull-ups he knocked down. If Porter would have helped off Karraker to stop his drives, I am certain that would have only opened more wide open 3s for Karraker, as Kates is very good at finding the open man when he draws help.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: r.w. mcnickels on March 11, 2012, 10:52:46 AM

Quote from: Hugenerd on March 10, 2012, 11:40:37 PM
Mitch Kates, MIT's PG, also outplayed Milligan pretty thoroughly on both ends of the court (don't let the boxscore fool you, Milligan had 9 points in garbage time to boost his numbers--the first 37.5 minutes of the game Kates held him to 14 points on 5-16 shooting, only 2 assists and 4 TOs). Kates was spectacular in the way he controlled the tempo of the game, if you didn't see it, the boxscore doesn't do it justice (his line was pretty darn good anyway, 21 points, 8 assists, 3 steals, 3 boards, and a block). Also, I dont want my post to be interpreted as meaning that Milligan isnt good, he is a spectacular, All-American guard. I just think it was clear that Kates outplayed him tonight and he deserves similar national recognition.

Kates is an excellent guard who should be an All-American, and he did outplay Milligan last night. But it would have been nice to see Milligan at 100 percent for this game. He suffered a foot injury against Amherst and had a lot of pain walking. Taking nothing away from MIT, but it was a different Milligan out there last night.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on March 11, 2012, 11:04:29 AM

Woulda, Coulda, Shoulda, if your aunt had balls she would be your uncle. You play with who you got and you don't cry injury. I can almost guarantee the players aren't crying injury, they are probably all blaming themselves individually for not stepping up and doing more, at least most athletes at every level I have known think this way.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fritzdis on March 11, 2012, 11:14:20 AM

Quote from: Hugenerd on March 11, 2012, 09:04:43 AM
Quote from: fritzdis on March 11, 2012, 12:40:57 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 11, 2012, 12:07:05 AM
The vaunted F&M defense didn't stop him much tonight.

The vaunted F&M defense relies on Matt Porter, who was injured 7 minutes into the game. MIT had scored 5 points. He didn't return until the second half and was clearly hobbled.

It would have been great to be able to see both teams at full strength.

MIT wasn't at full strength either, their starting 3 didn't play the whole game (he has been out since the first game of the tourney). Billy Bender is also considered the wing 'stopper' for MIT, but they have been able to adjust without him the last 3 games. Given how short Coach Anderson has his bench, its been amazing to watch the guys adjust to losing one of their starters who has played ~30+ mpg all season.

That's why I said both teams.

Quote
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 11, 2012, 07:17:39 AM
Quote from: fritzdis on March 11, 2012, 12:40:57 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 11, 2012, 12:07:05 AM
The vaunted F&M defense didn't stop him much tonight.

The vaunted F&M defense relies on Matt Porter, who was injured 7 minutes into the game. MIT had scored 5 points. He didn't return until the second half and was clearly hobbled.

It would have been great to be able to see both teams at full strength.

It's amazing to see how much difference one player makes. Didn't even look like the same team out there. Also, the MIT big guys really figured out what Amherst's bigs didn't and were able to play aggressive without getting into foul trouble. I guess I can't underestimate MIT anymore.

Will Tashman did foul out, although 2-3 of those fouls called on him were on illegal screen called in the last 10 minutes of the game.

That still doesn't explain why F&M couldn't score any points. Do you think Matt Porter would have helped them score a ton more points (F&M had 44 points through 37.5 minutes when they went to the 'garbage time' style play). Also, I dont think Porter would have had much to do defensively with Kates, he and Milligan were matched up against eachother the whole night and Kates was getting a lot done, both taking the ball to the rim and with a few pull-ups he knocked down. If Porter would have helped off Karraker to stop his drives, I am certain that would have only opened more wide open 3s for Karraker, as Kates is very good at finding the open man when he draws help.

Not a ton more points, but he would have been more effective offensively than F&M's other guards. I guarantee Porter would have gotten matched up with Kates with Milligan struggling to stop him.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 11, 2012, 05:00:09 PM

Quote from: Hugenerd on March 11, 2012, 09:04:43 AM
Quote from: fritzdis on March 11, 2012, 12:40:57 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 11, 2012, 12:07:05 AM
The vaunted F&M defense didn't stop him much tonight.

The vaunted F&M defense relies on Matt Porter, who was injured 7 minutes into the game. MIT had scored 5 points. He didn't return until the second half and was clearly hobbled.

It would have been great to be able to see both teams at full strength.

MIT wasn't at full strength either, their starting 3 didn't play the whole game (he has been out since the first game of the tourney). Billy Bender is also considered the wing 'stopper' for MIT, but they have been able to adjust without him the last 3 games. Given how short Coach Anderson has his bench, its been amazing to watch the guys adjust to losing one of their starters who has played ~30+ mpg all season.

Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 11, 2012, 07:17:39 AM
Quote from: fritzdis on March 11, 2012, 12:40:57 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 11, 2012, 12:07:05 AM
The vaunted F&M defense didn't stop him much tonight.

The vaunted F&M defense relies on Matt Porter, who was injured 7 minutes into the game. MIT had scored 5 points. He didn't return until the second half and was clearly hobbled.

It would have been great to be able to see both teams at full strength.

It's amazing to see how much difference one player makes. Didn't even look like the same team out there. Also, the MIT big guys really figured out what Amherst's bigs didn't and were able to play aggressive without getting into foul trouble. I guess I can't underestimate MIT anymore.

Will Tashman did foul out, although 2-3 of those fouls called on him were on illegal screen called in the last 10 minutes of the game.

That still doesn't explain why F&M couldn't score any points. Do you think Matt Porter would have helped them score a ton more points (F&M had 44 points through 37.5 minutes when they went to the 'garbage time' style play). Also, I dont think Porter would have had much to do defensively with Kates, he and Milligan were matched up against eachother the whole night and Kates was getting a lot done, both taking the ball to the rim and with a few pull-ups he knocked down. If Porter would have helped off Karraker to stop his drives, I am certain that would have only opened more wide open 3s for Karraker, as Kates is very good at finding the open man when he draws help.

No, that's the point. MIT stopped their interior scoring, which Amherst was incredibly unable to do. I was only saying the defense may have kept MIT's scoring down a bit. With the game I saw last night, there's no doubt that MIT was the better team. I'm just not sure what happened to F&M from Friday to Saturday - and I was offering some suggestions.

I'm not sure what you want from me. I was rooting for MIT and I was simply stating my impressions from being there and watching them play. I don't think MIT from Friday would have beaten F&M from Friday, but they didn't play Friday. I am not going to underestimate MIT any more.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on March 11, 2012, 06:33:46 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 11, 2012, 05:00:09 PM
Quote from: Hugenerd on March 11, 2012, 09:04:43 AM
Quote from: fritzdis on March 11, 2012, 12:40:57 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 11, 2012, 12:07:05 AM
The vaunted F&M defense didn't stop him much tonight.

The vaunted F&M defense relies on Matt Porter, who was injured 7 minutes into the game. MIT had scored 5 points. He didn't return until the second half and was clearly hobbled.

It would have been great to be able to see both teams at full strength.

MIT wasn't at full strength either, their starting 3 didn't play the whole game (he has been out since the first game of the tourney). Billy Bender is also considered the wing 'stopper' for MIT, but they have been able to adjust without him the last 3 games. Given how short Coach Anderson has his bench, its been amazing to watch the guys adjust to losing one of their starters who has played ~30+ mpg all season.

Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 11, 2012, 07:17:39 AM
Quote from: fritzdis on March 11, 2012, 12:40:57 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 11, 2012, 12:07:05 AM
The vaunted F&M defense didn't stop him much tonight.

The vaunted F&M defense relies on Matt Porter, who was injured 7 minutes into the game. MIT had scored 5 points. He didn't return until the second half and was clearly hobbled.

It would have been great to be able to see both teams at full strength.

It's amazing to see how much difference one player makes. Didn't even look like the same team out there. Also, the MIT big guys really figured out what Amherst's bigs didn't and were able to play aggressive without getting into foul trouble. I guess I can't underestimate MIT anymore.

Will Tashman did foul out, although 2-3 of those fouls called on him were on illegal screen called in the last 10 minutes of the game.

That still doesn't explain why F&M couldn't score any points. Do you think Matt Porter would have helped them score a ton more points (F&M had 44 points through 37.5 minutes when they went to the 'garbage time' style play). Also, I dont think Porter would have had much to do defensively with Kates, he and Milligan were matched up against eachother the whole night and Kates was getting a lot done, both taking the ball to the rim and with a few pull-ups he knocked down. If Porter would have helped off Karraker to stop his drives, I am certain that would have only opened more wide open 3s for Karraker, as Kates is very good at finding the open man when he draws help.

No, that's the point. MIT stopped their interior scoring, which Amherst was incredibly unable to do. I was only saying the defense may have kept MIT's scoring down a bit. With the game I saw last night, there's no doubt that MIT was the better team. I'm just not sure what happened to F&M from Friday to Saturday - and I was offering some suggestions.

I'm not sure what you want from me. I was rooting for MIT and I was simply stating my impressions from being there and watching them play. I don't think MIT from Friday would have beaten F&M from Friday, but they didn't play Friday. I am not going to underestimate MIT any more.

I dont think they would have played the same type of game on Friday if they were playing F&M. They adjust to their opponents and CSI and F&M are very different teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 12, 2012, 09:53:47 AM

Quote from: Hugenerd on March 11, 2012, 06:33:46 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 11, 2012, 05:00:09 PM
Quote from: Hugenerd on March 11, 2012, 09:04:43 AM
Quote from: fritzdis on March 11, 2012, 12:40:57 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 11, 2012, 12:07:05 AM
The vaunted F&M defense didn't stop him much tonight.

The vaunted F&M defense relies on Matt Porter, who was injured 7 minutes into the game. MIT had scored 5 points. He didn't return until the second half and was clearly hobbled.

It would have been great to be able to see both teams at full strength.

MIT wasn't at full strength either, their starting 3 didn't play the whole game (he has been out since the first game of the tourney). Billy Bender is also considered the wing 'stopper' for MIT, but they have been able to adjust without him the last 3 games. Given how short Coach Anderson has his bench, its been amazing to watch the guys adjust to losing one of their starters who has played ~30+ mpg all season.

Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 11, 2012, 07:17:39 AM
Quote from: fritzdis on March 11, 2012, 12:40:57 AM
Quote from: magicman on March 11, 2012, 12:07:05 AM
The vaunted F&M defense didn't stop him much tonight.

The vaunted F&M defense relies on Matt Porter, who was injured 7 minutes into the game. MIT had scored 5 points. He didn't return until the second half and was clearly hobbled.

It would have been great to be able to see both teams at full strength.

It's amazing to see how much difference one player makes. Didn't even look like the same team out there. Also, the MIT big guys really figured out what Amherst's bigs didn't and were able to play aggressive without getting into foul trouble. I guess I can't underestimate MIT anymore.

Will Tashman did foul out, although 2-3 of those fouls called on him were on illegal screen called in the last 10 minutes of the game.

That still doesn't explain why F&M couldn't score any points. Do you think Matt Porter would have helped them score a ton more points (F&M had 44 points through 37.5 minutes when they went to the 'garbage time' style play). Also, I dont think Porter would have had much to do defensively with Kates, he and Milligan were matched up against eachother the whole night and Kates was getting a lot done, both taking the ball to the rim and with a few pull-ups he knocked down. If Porter would have helped off Karraker to stop his drives, I am certain that would have only opened more wide open 3s for Karraker, as Kates is very good at finding the open man when he draws help.

No, that's the point. MIT stopped their interior scoring, which Amherst was incredibly unable to do. I was only saying the defense may have kept MIT's scoring down a bit. With the game I saw last night, there's no doubt that MIT was the better team. I'm just not sure what happened to F&M from Friday to Saturday - and I was offering some suggestions.

I'm not sure what you want from me. I was rooting for MIT and I was simply stating my impressions from being there and watching them play. I don't think MIT from Friday would have beaten F&M from Friday, but they didn't play Friday. I am not going to underestimate MIT any more.

I dont think they would have played the same type of game on Friday if they were playing F&M. They adjust to their opponents and CSI and F&M are very different teams.

True enough. They were sloppier Friday, but they didn't need to be quite as "on" as they would have against another team. I was just much more impressed by Saturday than Friday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 19, 2012, 08:55:54 PM

So the final poll is out. I think it's interesting that the voters, who thought IWU was not in the top 25 would put them above MIT, who seemed to have respect all season long.

I guess the rationale is that IWU was closer to Cabrini than MIT was to Whitewater?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 19, 2012, 09:07:42 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 19, 2012, 08:55:54 PM

So the final poll is out. I think it's interesting that the voters, who thought IWU was not in the top 25 would put them above MIT, who seemed to have respect all season long.

I guess the rationale is that IWU was closer to Cabrini than MIT was to Whitewater?

I don't understand either Cabrini or IWU at #2 or #3.......both were one shot away from being eliminated in round two. They both did well in the tournament but does that erase what other teams were able to accomplish.

Such as......Wheaton beat IWU 2 out of 3 times this season. North Central beat IWU twice. I don't really see how IWU's deeper run trumps those two head-to-head results just because IWU went further and won 4 games in the tournament. One of them an epic 2OT game that could have gone either way a dozen different ways.

I can certainly see why Cabrini was voted #2 by some they looked good and nearly pulled off the title, but again a narrow 2 point win in OT in round 2, and a last second shot win in the semi-final over a previously unranked IWU. Not to mention an 18 point collapse to Whitewater. Is this the stuff of a #2?

A little bit of final four hangover voting here I think. :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 19, 2012, 09:11:02 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 19, 2012, 08:55:54 PM

So the final poll is out. I think it's interesting that the voters, who thought IWU was not in the top 25 would put them above MIT, who seemed to have respect all season long.

I guess the rationale is that IWU was closer to Cabrini than MIT was to Whitewater?

Watching the 4 teams play in Salem, it seemed like UW-Whitewater, Cabrini, and IWU were pretty even...with MIT being just a little bit behind. That also seemed to be the consensus of the large group of coaches in Salem (that MIT was the 4th best team there).

IWU put 3 great wins on the board since that last Week 13 poll:

- @ #1 Hope
- @ #15 Wooster
- vs #22 Wittenberg

And lost to national runner up Cabrini in the final seconds.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 19, 2012, 09:13:34 PM

Quote from: sac on March 19, 2012, 09:07:42 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 19, 2012, 08:55:54 PM

So the final poll is out. I think it's interesting that the voters, who thought IWU was not in the top 25 would put them above MIT, who seemed to have respect all season long.

I guess the rationale is that IWU was closer to Cabrini than MIT was to Whitewater?

I don't understand either Cabrini or IWU at #2 or #3.......both were one shot away from being eliminated in round two. They both did well in the tournament but does that erase what other teams were able to accomplish.

Such as......Wheaton beat IWU 2 out of 3 times this season. North Central beat IWU twice. I don't really see how IWU's deeper run trumps those two head-to-head results just because IWU went further and won 4 games in the tournament. One of them an epic 2OT game that could have gone either way a dozen different ways.

I can certainly see why Cabrini was voted #2 by some they looked good and nearly pulled off the title, but again a narrow 2 point win in OT in round 2, and a last second shot win in the semi-final over a previously unranked IWU. Not to mention an 18 point collapse to Whitewater. Is this the stuff of a #2?

A little bit of final four hangover voting here I think. :-\

You're telling me that Cabrini didn't lay claim to #2 with the way they played national champion UW-Whitewater??

As far as their OT win @ Hobart, many national championship runs include some kind of last second win vs an inferior team...it happens often. Off the top of my head, IWU in 1997 vs Rose-Hulman...and Wash U a few years back vs Elmhurst.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 19, 2012, 09:20:23 PM

Its just my opinion Q, not a slight towards IWU. I was at the Hope/IWU game, you know that. But it just seems the regular season is being dismissed a little here.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on March 19, 2012, 09:22:35 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on March 19, 2012, 09:11:02 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 19, 2012, 08:55:54 PM

So the final poll is out. I think it's interesting that the voters, who thought IWU was not in the top 25 would put them above MIT, who seemed to have respect all season long.

I guess the rationale is that IWU was closer to Cabrini than MIT was to Whitewater?

Watching the 4 teams play in Salem, it seemed like UW-Whitewater, Cabrini, and IWU were pretty even...with MIT being just a little bit behind. That also seemed to be the consensus of the large group of coaches in Salem (that MIT was the 4th best team there).

IWU put 3 great wins on the board since that last Week 13 poll:

- @ #1 Hope
- @ #15 Wooster
- vs #22 Wittenberg

And lost to national runner up Cabrini in the final seconds.

Scranton put 3 great wins on the board since that last Week 13 poll:

- vs Messiah
- vs Becker
@ #4 Middlebury

And lost to national runner up Cabrini in the final minutes. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 19, 2012, 09:28:32 PM

Quote from: sac on March 19, 2012, 09:20:23 PM
Its just my opinion Q, not a slight towards IWU. I was at the Hope/IWU game, you know that. But it just seems the regular season is being dismissed a little here.

It's a good debate, Scott.

Shouldn't the post-season carry more weight than the regular season? Isn't that when things matter most? I guess that is up for debate, but I certainly always evaluate teams by what they do in the NCAA tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 19, 2012, 09:46:29 PM

Its tricky and I readily acknowledge that. I guess for me the regular season means a little more or shouldn't be totally dismissed. There are just too many unfair match-ups and vastly different paths in a tournament that is not properly seeded, my biggest gripe with the D3 tournament. For instance, can anyone say with certainty Cabrini gets out of the West Sectional(the 16 team bracket) with Whitworth, Whitewater, Wheaton, Va Wesleyan or out of IWU's section?

I guess I think back to last year's D1 tournament. Va. Commonwealth finished in the final four and their final ranking was #6. They didn't get a top 4 automatic vote and also were one shot away from not advancing from the sweet 16. Kind of similar to IWU, not ranked to start the tournament, beat a number of good teams along the way, lost a close game in the semi's. I don't recall if they won their conference or not.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on March 19, 2012, 10:20:05 PM

VCU was an at large team last year. That's why they were in the "First Four"

I don't buy the argument that 'one shot away from being eliminated'. A game is much more than one shot, one pass, one turnover. They won. Cabrini got #2 in my fan poll. They deserved it, and I don't buy the 'they wouldn't have won in a different region' deal because you can say that about any team every year. In a one-and-done knockout tournament you have matchups and other issues to deal with along the way. You can say Missouri could have won this year's tourney, except they lost.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 19, 2012, 10:30:09 PM

Quote from: sac on March 19, 2012, 09:46:29 PM
For instance, can anyone say with certainty Cabrini gets out of the West Sectional(the 16 team bracket) with Whitworth, Whitewater, Wheaton, Va Wesleyan or out of IWU's section?

Well of course no one can say that with certainty. But IWU did get out of IWU's section...and then Cabrini beat IWU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 19, 2012, 10:40:01 PM

sac, who would you rank #2 and #3, and why? Just curious.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 19, 2012, 10:59:36 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on March 19, 2012, 10:40:01 PM
sac, who would you rank #2 and #3, and why? Just curious.

Ooh, ooh, I know! But as the compiler of the Posters' Poll, I never rat out a voter! 8-)

(Though I know the who, the why is not mine to know. :P)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: izzy stradlin on March 20, 2012, 12:03:02 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on March 19, 2012, 09:28:32 PM
Quote from: sac on March 19, 2012, 09:20:23 PM
Its just my opinion Q, not a slight towards IWU. I was at the Hope/IWU game, you know that. But it just seems the regular season is being dismissed a little here.

It's a good debate, Scott.

Shouldn't the post-season carry more weight than the regular season? Isn't that when things matter most? I guess that is up for debate, but I certainly always evaluate teams by what they do in the NCAA tournament.

If you are trying to rank teams from best to worst, regular season should definitely carry more weight. The reason is that you want the largest sample size possible. This is especially true with the degree of variability in a sport like basketball.

The NCAA tournament is a fun way to place a label of national champion on a team, but it's not a very good way to determine which team is college basketball is truly the best. It's sample size is just much too small for that.

Ideally, if you wanted to determine what team is the best, you would have each team play an infinite number of games against all of the teams in division 3. Whoever has the best win% is your number 1. The regular season really isn't that great of a sample size, and the tournament is a horrible one.

In a 40 minute college basketball game, results are also not highly repeatable when teams are of comparable talent. In other words, if we played that same tournament again, it would play out entirely different. The teams that played well over that past few weekends did just that---they played well. We can't say that they are now playing well. Again, this is a small sample size of 1-6 games per team and a relatively low degree of repeatably.

So if we could play some more neutral court games, and I need to rank teams 1-25++ to base high stakes wagers upon, I want to use the absolute largest quantity of data I can get my hands on.

(Disclaimer: I am not a big fan of polls for the purpose they try to serve and I'd rather my team go to the final 4 than finish in the top 4)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 20, 2012, 12:20:31 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on March 19, 2012, 10:30:09 PM
Quote from: sac on March 19, 2012, 09:46:29 PM
For instance, can anyone say with certainty Cabrini gets out of the West Sectional(the 16 team bracket) with Whitworth, Whitewater, Wheaton, Va Wesleyan or out of IWU's section?

Well of course no one can say that with certainty. But IWU did get out of IWU's section...and then Cabrini beat IWU.

Bingo. +1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: rlk on March 20, 2012, 08:00:44 AM

Quote from: izzy stradlin on March 20, 2012, 12:03:02 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on March 19, 2012, 09:28:32 PM
Quote from: sac on March 19, 2012, 09:20:23 PM
Its just my opinion Q, not a slight towards IWU. I was at the Hope/IWU game, you know that. But it just seems the regular season is being dismissed a little here.

It's a good debate, Scott.

Shouldn't the post-season carry more weight than the regular season? Isn't that when things matter most? I guess that is up for debate, but I certainly always evaluate teams by what they do in the NCAA tournament.

If you are trying to rank teams from best to worst, regular season should definitely carry more weight. The reason is that you want the largest sample size possible. This is especially true with the degree of variability in a sport like basketball.

The NCAA tournament is a fun way to place a label of national champion on a team, but it's not a very good way to determine which team is college basketball is truly the best. It's sample size is just much too small for that.

Ideally, if you wanted to determine what team is the best, you would have each team play an infinite number of games against all of the teams in division 3. Whoever has the best win% is your number 1. The regular season really isn't that great of a sample size, and the tournament is a horrible one.

In a 40 minute college basketball game, results are also not highly repeatable when teams are of comparable talent. In other words, if we played that same tournament again, it would play out entirely different. The teams that played well over that past few weekends did just that---they played well. We can't say that they are now playing well. Again, this is a small sample size of 1-6 games per team and a relatively low degree of repeatably.

It's about who wins when it matters most. That's like any playoff tournament of any kind.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 20, 2012, 09:30:04 AM

This year is a tough one because Cabrini's style is so unusual for d3 play (at least at the level they were playing it). The teams we're used to seeing at the top generally play like Whitewater or IWU - and there's probably some bias that should a team like Whitewater or IWU see Cabrini more than a few times, they'd figure it out.

Is that fair? Probably not, certainly not from Cabrini's point of view, but in a poll where opinion counts, it does matter.

In my poster's poll, I voted Whitewater #1 and MIT #2. I know MIT got beat up pretty good, but they did play one of their worst games of the year and they did have some pretty impressive wins on their run (Amherst and F&M are no slouches).

As for Cabrini, I was quite impressed with them and the improvements made over last year. They do have some glaring weaknesses, which can be exploited (as Whitewater did in the second half of the championship game). Their style is high risk/high reward.

I don't vote on how a team would do against another in one game and so I can't entirely form an opinion based on one game either. I try to evaluate the teams over the long haul. I have less faith in Cabrini beating top teams on a consistent basis than I do for Whitewater or even some of the other final 4, 8 or 16 teams.

Cabrini didn't play a top team until they got to Salem, where they exposed IWU somewhat as being unable to adapt to a different style.

Granted their performances there elevated them in my mind, but I'm not sure they're the #3 team in the country.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on March 20, 2012, 09:54:08 AM

Massey had Cabrini #4 when all was said and done. They did beat Scranton twice, and most everyone in the tourney is top competition, so I don't think the statement that they didn't play a 'top team' is fair.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 20, 2012, 10:33:26 AM

Quote from: smedindy on March 20, 2012, 09:54:08 AM
Massey had Cabrini #4 when all was said and done. They did beat Scranton twice, and most everyone in the tourney is top competition, so I don't think the statement that they didn't play a 'top team' is fair.

I don't consider Scranton a top team. Their best game before IWU was Centre, which they lost. Granted it was over the holidays in Kentucky, so I give them the benefit of the doubt on that one. After that, it's Scranton and Keystone and Hobart - all good teams, but not serious competition.

I forgot about Eastern Connecticut - that would be the second best team and that game was pretty even.

I think I had Cabrini about #7 or #8 on my final poll. I think put VaWes, Whitworth, Amherst, and F&M above them (in addition to MIT and Whitewater). Maybe Hope as well - I don't have my final poll on me right now.

I had all of the final four participants in the top ten; I think they belong there. Outside of Whitewater, who was clearly the top team most of the year, I think spots 2-10 are pretty subjective at this point, at least for the teams that didn't play each other. Even then, I think I ranked hope above IWU just by virtue of how close their game was and the season as a whole.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 20, 2012, 11:03:57 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 20, 2012, 10:33:26 AM
Even then, I think I ranked hope above IWU just by virtue of how close their game was and the season as a whole.

Hope (27-2) clearly had a tremendous season and was a Final Four-caliber team, but I think IWU (23-8) has a good case for being ranked higher despite 6 more losses. First, obviously, IWU won the head-to-head matchup on Hope's floor. And then when you look at wins over NCAA tournament teams...

IWU
Washington U
Bethany (neutral)
@Staten Island
Wheaton
UW-Stevens Piont (neutral)
@Hope
@Wooster
Wittenberg (neutral)

Hope
Wheaton (neutral)
Westminster (Mo)

IWU lost 8 games, but 6 were to NCAA tournament teams...

@ UW-Whitewater
@ North Central
@ Wheaton
vs North Central
vs Wheaton (neutral)
vs Cabrini (neutral)

(The other two were @ Ripon in a game IWU played without all-CCIW PG Eliud Gonzalez, and @ Augustana - a very solid team.)

According to Massey, IWU played the 2nd strongest schedule in the country. I think you have to factor in quality of wins and quality of losses in this Top 25 discussion. What would, say, Amherst's (26-3) record be with IWU's schedule? We have no way to know, but you kind of have to look at it that way when sorting this all out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 20, 2012, 11:30:53 AM

Quote from: smedindy on March 20, 2012, 09:54:08 AM
Massey had Cabrini #4 when all was said and done. They did beat Scranton twice, and most everyone in the tourney is top competition, so I don't think the statement that they didn't play a 'top team' is fair.

This statement is simply not true, IMHO. There are automatic qualifiers from conferences that probably would never get a team in if the NCAA picked "the best 62 teams" if everyone was at-large. Yes, there are upsets, but I could name a few teams that wouldn't sniff the tourney.

I think the regular season should carry more weight than the post season. I think the post season has more to do with "getting hot" at the right time and winning 5 or 6 games in a row.

Being from Wisconsin, the Packers were hardly the best team in their Super Bowl year (10-6?), but they got hot at the right time.

Yes, the post season is where everything counts, but all because someone ends up winning the National Championship, I don't believe they should automatically be voted #1 and the loser of the final be voted #2 (though, in this year's case, I have no problem with that).

I also think you can't blame the bracket or schedule for a team to get into the Final. They play who the play, we can't argue that. Sure, we may think they weren't in the "bracket of death" but we'll never know what would've happened.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NEPAFAN on March 20, 2012, 11:32:43 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 20, 2012, 10:33:26 AM
Quote from: smedindy on March 20, 2012, 09:54:08 AM
Massey had Cabrini #4 when all was said and done. They did beat Scranton twice, and most everyone in the tourney is top competition, so I don't think the statement that they didn't play a 'top team' is fair.

I don't consider Scranton a top team. Their best game before IWU was Centre, which they lost. Granted it was over the holidays in Kentucky, so I give them the benefit of the doubt on that one. After that, it's Scranton and Keystone and Hobart - all good teams, but not serious competition.

I forgot about Eastern Connecticut - that would be the second best team and that game was pretty even.

I think I had Cabrini about #7 or #8 on my final poll. I think put VaWes, Whitworth, Amherst, and F&M above them (in addition to MIT and Whitewater). Maybe Hope as well - I don't have my final poll on me right now.

I had all of the final four participants in the top ten; I think they belong there. Outside of Whitewater, who was clearly the top team most of the year, I think spots 2-10 are pretty subjective at this point, at least for the teams that didn't play each other. Even then, I think I ranked hope above IWU just by virtue of how close their game was and the season as a whole.

You have Scranton confused with Misercordia. Scranton never played Centre.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NCF on March 20, 2012, 11:34:39 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 20, 2012, 11:30:53 AM
Quote from: smedindy on March 20, 2012, 09:54:08 AM
Massey had Cabrini #4 when all was said and done. They did beat Scranton twice, and most everyone in the tourney is top competition, so I don't think the statement that they didn't play a 'top team' is fair.

This statement is simply not true, IMHO. There are automatic qualifiers from conferences that probably would never get a team in if the NCAA picked "the best 62 teams" if everyone was at-large. Yes, there are upsets, but I could name a few teams that wouldn't sniff the tourney.

I think the regular season should carry more weight than the post season. I think the post season has more to do with "getting hot" at the right time and winning 5 or 6 games in a row.

Being from Wisconsin, the Packers were hardly the best team in their Super Bowl year (10-6?), but they got hot at the right time.

Yes, the post season is where everything counts, but all because someone ends up winning the National Championship, I don't believe they should automatically be voted #1 and the loser of the final be voted #2 (though, in this year's case, I have no problem with that).

I also think you can't blame the bracket or schedule for a team to get into the Final. They play who the play, we can't argue that. Sure, we may think they weren't in the "bracket of death" but we'll never know what would've happened.

I say the same thing for the football play-offs. If you picked the top 32 teams, some of the AQ's would be sitting at home.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 20, 2012, 11:47:04 AM

First off... people are underselling Cabrini. I have been cautious about them most of the year, despite the fact they kept rising in my Top 25 poll. I actually locked them into a spot for several weeks and moved teams around them... but eventually I had to move away from that plan as they kept winning and others didn't.

I am just not sure many teams would be able to handle Cabrini's defense. I have seen it quite a bit, but I think the way they played early and then late against IWU was amazing. To follow that up, if they had been smart with fouls in the UWW game... they probably walk away with that game... simply because an 18 point lead with that kind of pressure defense was just too much. (UWW made some great strategic moves especially against a Cabrini team that could not put its best foot forward due to fouls and it paid off in spades.)

Finally, Cabrini's style of play can be high scoring or sufficating and low scoring... in other words, they can adjust to different team's style. Look at the Castleton State score... then look at the championship game's score. They don't have to score a ton to win... but can if they need to. They can run up and down the court... or they can use their defense to shut down the other team's offense, taking pressure away from having to score a ton of points. That is a tough combination to deal with for any team.

Having seen most of the teams smedindy mentioned putting ahead of Cabrini... Cabrini is better than those. F&M is good, but they would have struggled against Cabrini's defense (fast enough to cut down on Milligan's drives to the lane and physical enough to shut-down the Diplomats interior game). Amherst struggled against F&M's stout defense, I can't imagine they would have had success against Cabrini's.

As for Hope and IWU... I agree that a head-to-head is significant in many cases, but since it was a 2 OT game... in the grand scheme of things, I couldn't knock Hope that far down for one loss on the season. If you go on that theory that IWU should be above Hope because of that... then IWU should be below North Central and Wheaton for the same reasons. Head-to-head is a good indicator, but it can't be the only one... I placed Hope #3 on my ballot... and IWU #5, though Q knows I was debating about leaving them out of my top ten.

Finally, MIT... I like their game... and I like their style... but unless they dictate the tempo and style of play, they can't win. They dictated a lot in the tournament until they ran into UWW (though, they did play a horrible game at the wrong time of the year). I think they would have struggled mightily with Cabrini's defense because I don't think the Engineers could have come down the court and set-up in a half-court set like IWU was able to do for part of the second half. I also don't think MIT would have been able to handle the full (or 3/4) court press from the Cavaliers, especially with a hobbled Hollingsworth. Also, they would have had to rely on Karraker and others to hit outside shots... and that aspect is not MIT's bread-and-butter and certainly was hot and cold this season. Finally, Kates struggled against UWW's guards... can you imagine what he would have faced with Cabrini's? MIT was a very good team this year, but they weren't #2 in the long run.

By the way, Scranton doesn't make that run in the tournament unless the following factors happen:
- they win the Landmark Conference for the AQ (they don't get in otherwise)
- Becker beats William Paterson (who was asleep in that game and probably would have matched up well against Scranton)
I can't put that much stock into how Scranton played in the tournament and put them as high as #15 or higher as some voters did. I gave them some love... but not that much (I still think their game plan against Middlebury was terrific and they are lucky they could hit the shots with just a few seconds on the shot clock time and time again... or that is a different outcome).

And as much as people have used the Massey ratings this year... I just don't put that much stock in them as a determining factor... call them secondary criteria for me :).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on March 20, 2012, 12:32:18 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 20, 2012, 11:47:04 AM
Finally, MIT... I like their game... and I like their style... but unless they dictate the tempo and style of play, they can't win. They dictated a lot in the tournament until they ran into UWW (though, they did play a horrible game at the wrong time of the year). I think they would have struggled mightily with Cabrini's defense because I don't think the Engineers could have come down the court and set-up in a half-court set like IWU was able to do for part of the second half. I also don't think MIT would have been able to handle the full (or 3/4) court press from the Cavaliers, especially with a hobbled Hollingsworth. Also, they would have had to rely on Karraker and others to hit outside shots... and that aspect is not MIT's bread-and-butter and certainly was hot and cold this season. Finally, Kates struggled against UWW's guards... can you imagine what he would have faced with Cabrini's? MIT was a very good team this year, but they weren't #2 in the long run.

Kates also outplayed Tibbs and Milligan on back-to-back nights. He had an off night against UWW, but he was missing layups he usually makes. I dont think it was that he was having trouble with their guards, its that he didnt play well in general that night (watch the video, he was making all those drives to the baskets in the first 4 rounds; for example, he had a layup at the end of the first half he missed that he typically makes, luckily Tashman was there to put it back in).

Hollingsworth and Karraker were both hurt essentially the whole season, but thats no excuse because they also performed well with the same injuries (Karraker has been having fluid drained from his knees regularly, from what I hear, and Hollingsworth played the whole season with a stress fracture in his foot). Collectively, they just didnt play well that night. A lot of the credit goes to UWW, but they missed an awful lot of open shots also (ones they made the weekend prior).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 20, 2012, 12:52:12 PM

Hugenerd, remember, I actually saw MIT play three straight games and was on the call for that last one (don't need to watch the video ;) )... and while Kates certainly was able to drive on UWW and in most of the games he played... his looks at the basket against UWW were not that good. While he got in the paint... he couldn't get a good handle on what to do next. The missed shot you talked about... was about as good as his looks got. I don't think he could have had more success against Cabrini.

MIT was good... just don't think they were title good.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on March 20, 2012, 02:14:33 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 20, 2012, 12:52:12 PM
Hugenerd, remember, I actually saw MIT play three straight games and was on the call for that last one (don't need to watch the video ;) )... and while Kates certainly was able to drive on UWW and in most of the games he played... his looks at the basket against UWW were not that good. While he got in the paint... he couldn't get a good handle on what to do next. The missed shot you talked about... was about as good as his looks got. I don't think he could have had more success against Cabrini.

MIT was good... just don't think they were title good.

Neither was Cabrini! Only UWW was championship good this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 20, 2012, 02:31:39 PM

Cabrini came damn close...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: rlk on March 20, 2012, 03:24:22 PM

Quote from: Hugenerd on March 20, 2012, 02:14:33 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 20, 2012, 12:52:12 PM
Hugenerd, remember, I actually saw MIT play three straight games and was on the call for that last one (don't need to watch the video ;) )... and while Kates certainly was able to drive on UWW and in most of the games he played... his looks at the basket against UWW were not that good. While he got in the paint... he couldn't get a good handle on what to do next. The missed shot you talked about... was about as good as his looks got. I don't think he could have had more success against Cabrini.

MIT was good... just don't think they were title good.

Neither was Cabrini! Only UWW was championship good this year.

No argument (as an MIT fan) with that. While we couldn't get our shots to fall, as Coach Anderson said, a lot of that was due to Whitewater's D. And it was Whitewater, after all, that refused to give up against Cabrini. That's a never say die, championship attitude, and I salute Whitewater as the true champions.

BTW, my wife told me that the video announcers were very impressed with how low we were able to hold Whitewater's scoring total (until the last 4 minutes, of course, when things got desperate). I believe they scored only 54 points until then. I don't think our D was too bad (Whitewater's own shooting percentage wasn't very good), but they got entirely too many second chances, and Davis of course was unstoppable (although it's interesting that he actually shot only 50%). And I do think Dawson had a very nice game indeed spelling Kates. He fouled out with only 11 minutes, but he got 5 points and zero turnovers, and it looked like a lot of his role was to play very tight defense and accept those fouls.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: rlk on March 20, 2012, 03:27:40 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 20, 2012, 02:31:39 PM
Cabrini came damn close...

Depends on how you look at it. If you look at the final score in isolation, yep. If you look at crunch time -- the final 15 minutes of the game -- they got blown off the court when it really mattered.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 20, 2012, 05:33:18 PM

Quote from: rlk on March 20, 2012, 03:24:22 PM
Quote from: Hugenerd on March 20, 2012, 02:14:33 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 20, 2012, 12:52:12 PM
Hugenerd, remember, I actually saw MIT play three straight games and was on the call for that last one (don't need to watch the video ;) )... and while Kates certainly was able to drive on UWW and in most of the games he played... his looks at the basket against UWW were not that good. While he got in the paint... he couldn't get a good handle on what to do next. The missed shot you talked about... was about as good as his looks got. I don't think he could have had more success against Cabrini.

MIT was good... just don't think they were title good.

Neither was Cabrini! Only UWW was championship good this year.
BTW, my wife told me that the video announcers were very impressed with how low we were able to hold Whitewater's scoring total (until the last 4 minutes, of course, when things got desperate). I believe they scored only 54 points until then. I don't think our D was too bad (Whitewater's own shooting percentage wasn't very good), but they got entirely too many second chances, and Davis of course was unstoppable (although it's interesting that he actually shot only 50%). And I do think Dawson had a very nice game indeed spelling Kates. He fouled out with only 11 minutes, but he got 5 points and zero turnovers, and it looked like a lot of his role was to play very tight defense and accept those fouls.

That was me on the call... and I did make a point of showing how low MIT kept UWW's offense.

And yes, in those 10 minutes, UWW was the better team... but Cabrini got a decent look at a 3 late... and nearly tied the game after all of that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on March 20, 2012, 08:40:36 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 20, 2012, 11:30:53 AM
Quote from: smedindy on March 20, 2012, 09:54:08 AM
Massey had Cabrini #4 when all was said and done. They did beat Scranton twice, and most everyone in the tourney is top competition, so I don't think the statement that they didn't play a 'top team' is fair.

This statement is simply not true, IMHO. There are automatic qualifiers from conferences that probably would never get a team in if the NCAA picked "the best 62 teams" if everyone was at-large. Yes, there are upsets, but I could name a few teams that wouldn't sniff the tourney.

By an independent measure Cabrini was the fourth best team regular AND post season combined. Remember there are over 400 D-3 teams. Most all tournament teams were in the top quartile of D-3 teams in Massey. Just because your sense doesn't think X is a top team doesn't mean they aren't. And the line separating the 62nd from the 102nd best isn't really that huge, considering over 400 teams are around.

And what would happen with you guys if the 'wrong' team from the 'wrong' region or 'wrong' conference went undefeated and won the title? The teams and conferences you always say are 'weak' and 'don't play anyone' - what happens if they play their schedule, then win the tourney? Would you scoff then?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on March 20, 2012, 08:42:49 PM

D-Mac, that wasn't me that had teams ahead of them. I had Cabrini #2 in my poll. I think people need to realize that there are others out there that can play and shatter the grained in notions of regional strengths.

And Massey is a heck of a rating system to take biases OUT, which is what we all want.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 20, 2012, 09:22:40 PM

Quote from: smedindy on March 20, 2012, 08:40:36 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 20, 2012, 11:30:53 AM
Quote from: smedindy on March 20, 2012, 09:54:08 AM
Massey had Cabrini #4 when all was said and done. They did beat Scranton twice, and most everyone in the tourney is top competition, so I don't think the statement that they didn't play a 'top team' is fair.

This statement is simply not true, IMHO. There are automatic qualifiers from conferences that probably would never get a team in if the NCAA picked "the best 62 teams" if everyone was at-large. Yes, there are upsets, but I could name a few teams that wouldn't sniff the tourney.

By an independent measure Cabrini was the fourth best team regular AND post season combined. Remember there are over 400 D-3 teams. Most all tournament teams were in the top quartile of D-3 teams in Massey. Just because your sense doesn't think X is a top team doesn't mean they aren't. And the line separating the 62nd from the 102nd best isn't really that huge, considering over 400 teams are around.

And what would happen with you guys if the 'wrong' team from the 'wrong' region or 'wrong' conference went undefeated and won the title? The teams and conferences you always say are 'weak' and 'don't play anyone' - what happens if they play their schedule, then win the tourney? Would you scoff then?

From an observer of "wrong team/wrong conference/wrong region" team, well-stated! +1!

Cabrini's system may continue to give teams fits when they first see it executed against them at the national level.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 20, 2012, 09:34:15 PM

Quote from: smedindy on March 20, 2012, 08:42:49 PM
D-Mac, that wasn't me that had teams ahead of them. I had Cabrini #2 in my poll. I think people need to realize that there are others out there that can play and shatter the grained in notions of regional strengths.

And Massey is a heck of a rating system to take biases OUT, which is what we all want.

And smedindy is obviously a bball genius, since he and I had identical picks for the top 8 on our Posters' Poll ballots! (While Ralph and I are often the most similar, I can't recall ever going that far down with no differences!)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on March 20, 2012, 09:41:24 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 20, 2012, 02:31:39 PM
Cabrini came damn close...

Both they and MIT were one UWW run away from potentially winning, but the result was the same in both games. UWW plays great defense, but MIT was missing wide open 3s that night. MIT was leading 3 minutes into the 2nd half, despite shooting 1-11 from 3 to that point. They shoot anywhere close to their season average and they could have been up double digits also. Would it have mattered? I don't know, but what I do know is both teams ended up losing. Getting outscored by 20-21 in a 13-14 minute span isn't that hot whether it happens at the beginning or at the end of the 2nd half, as UWW did to MIT and Cabrini, respectively.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 20, 2012, 10:32:40 PM

Quote from: rlk on March 20, 2012, 03:27:40 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 20, 2012, 02:31:39 PM
Cabrini came damn close...

Depends on how you look at it. If you look at the final score in isolation, yep. If you look at crunch time -- the final 15 minutes of the game -- they got blown off the court when it really mattered.

Cabrini had an 18-point lead with the clock under 14 minutes remaining in the game. Are you seriously telling me that those initial 26 minutes didn't really matter?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 20, 2012, 10:46:44 PM

My thought about Cabrini is that they have now been to the Final Four! Next year, they will have that experience and the 'wow" may be gone.

I will give UWW the credit that a WIAC season builds into a team. The murderers' row that is a WIAC schedule really tests a team. I submit to you that Cabrini has now been "baptized". They know what to expect and will more diligent.

Can you imagine what watching those last 14 minutes of video on October 15, 2012, does for Cabrini practices next season?

You always hate to predict dynasties, but Cabrini is in good shape to build one.

I am now a believer. I had never voted them higher than 10th in the Posters' Poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 20, 2012, 10:55:53 PM

It's a big step forward for Cabrini, but I don't know if I'd characterize it as a quantum leap forward. Remember, the Cavaliers made the Sweet Sixteen last season. (They also made the Sweet Sixteen back in 2002.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on March 21, 2012, 09:26:31 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 20, 2012, 10:46:44 PM
My thought about Cabrini is that they have now been to the Final Four! Next year, they will have that experience and the 'wow" may be gone.

I will give UWW the credit that a WIAC season builds into a team. The murderers' row that is a WIAC schedule really tests a team. I submit to you that Cabrini has now been "baptized". They know what to expect and will more diligent.

Can you imagine what watching those last 14 minutes of video on October 15, 2012, does for Cabrini practices next season?

You always hate to predict dynasties, but Cabrini is in good shape to build one.

I am now a believer. I had never voted them higher than 10th in the Posters' Poll.

I agree with the bolded statement from Ralph, the NJAC has not done as well in the tournament since they moved to the 2 division format and don't play every conference team twice a season. The NJAC regular season used to be a meat grinder and most NJAC teams were a tough out in the NCAA tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on March 21, 2012, 11:47:52 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 20, 2012, 10:32:40 PM
Quote from: rlk on March 20, 2012, 03:27:40 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 20, 2012, 02:31:39 PM
Cabrini came damn close...

Depends on how you look at it. If you look at the final score in isolation, yep. If you look at crunch time -- the final 15 minutes of the game -- they got blown off the court when it really mattered.

Cabrini had an 18-point lead with the clock under 14 minutes remaining in the game. Are you seriously telling me that those initial 26 minutes didn't really matter?

What is your argument that it did matter? Did it help them win the game? Whether they were up by 18 or 1 point at the 14 minute mark, they still lost the game. And since the final score is the only thing that matters in any sport, their first 26 minutes didnt matter enough to make up for their last 14 minutes. I am not arguing that they are or are not the #2 team in the country for this year, thats fine with me, they deserved to be where they were. What I was saying is that an 18 point lead at any point doesnt matter if you get outscored by more than that in the rest of the game. Did you watch the D1 game where Iona was beating BYU by 25 in the first half? Did that matter? They still ended up losing. I guess you may have a different definition of 'matter', but in terms of the final result of the game: No, the first 26 minutes did not matter.

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 20, 2012, 10:46:44 PM
My thought about Cabrini is that they have now been to the Final Four! Next year, they will have that experience and the 'wow" may be gone.

I will give UWW the credit that a WIAC season builds into a team. The murderers' row that is a WIAC schedule really tests a team. I submit to you that Cabrini has now been "baptized". They know what to expect and will more diligent.

Can you imagine what watching those last 14 minutes of video on October 15, 2012, does for Cabrini practices next season?

You always hate to predict dynasties, but Cabrini is in good shape to build one.

I am now a believer. I had never voted them higher than 10th in the Posters' Poll.

They are losing two key starters next year (Lemons and Boyd). It will be interesting who fits into those roles next year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 21, 2012, 02:29:27 PM

I would think that Cabrini is getting to the position that they just re-load.

They are becoming the best D3 program in the mid-Atlantic.

As they say, winning cures cancer, even the cancer that may be lurking from a difficult relationship between the past Cabrini "baggage" and the associated parties and the new national semi-finalist, comprised of a whole new cast of characters.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 21, 2012, 05:27:48 PM

It's a little early to anoint reload status. It's two trips to the tournament, with a lot of the same cast.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: r.w. mcnickels on March 21, 2012, 06:02:59 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 20, 2012, 10:55:53 PM
It's a big step forward for Cabrini, but I don't know if I'd characterize it as a quantum leap forward. Remember, the Cavaliers made the Sweet Sixteen last season. (They also made the Sweet Sixteen back in 2002.)

The Cavs also had two stellar years in 1994-95 and 1995-96. I think they were knocked out in the second round of NCAAs both years, but were good enough to go deeper. Cabrini does have some good history, and for the sake of Mid-Atlantic hoops, I hope the program continues on this upward trend.

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 21, 2012, 02:29:27 PM
They are becoming the best D3 program in the mid-Atlantic.

I think F&M would have to be in the discussion as well, considering the Dips' NCAA runs of the past 4 years and overall success since the '70s.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 21, 2012, 11:46:46 PM

I tend to give greater weight to tourney games, but do not discount regular season either. But occasionally posters surface who give ALL the weight to tourney games, saying FF should be 1-4, Elite Eight should be 5-8, etc. While the NCAA seems to have corrected a bit in recent years, do NOT forget 2009, the true 'bracket of death'!

7 of the top 8 d3hoops.com poll teams were in the west quadrant (and, though I didn't confirm it for sure, I believe there were at least 4-5 other top 25 teams in that quadrant). In the first round, poll positions prevailed, so the second round saw #1 St. Thomas ousting #4 UWSP, #2 WashU ousting #8 UWW, #3 Wheaton over #5 UW-Platteville, and #7 Puget Sound downing #21 Whitworth. The West sectional thus consisted of #1, #2, #3, and #7!

This was MUCH tougher than the Final Four, which saw WashU taking the title over #6 Richard Stockton (with them having beaten #23 Guilford and #28 F & M).

Most results happen on the floor; SOME happen with the schedulers!

(BTW, the d3hoops.com voters recognized this. The final poll for 2009 had WashU #1, Richard Stockton #5, Guilford #8, and F & M #11.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: rlk on March 22, 2012, 04:06:05 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 20, 2012, 05:33:18 PM
Quote from: rlk on March 20, 2012, 03:24:22 PM

BTW, my wife told me that the video announcers were very impressed with how low we were able to hold Whitewater's scoring total (until the last 4 minutes, of course, when things got desperate). I believe they scored only 54 points until then. I don't think our D was too bad (Whitewater's own shooting percentage wasn't very good), but they got entirely too many second chances, and Davis of course was unstoppable (although it's interesting that he actually shot only 50%). And I do think Dawson had a very nice game indeed spelling Kates. He fouled out with only 11 minutes, but he got 5 points and zero turnovers, and it looked like a lot of his role was to play very tight defense and accept those fouls.
That was me on the call... and I did make a point of showing how low MIT kept UWW's offense.

And yes, in those 10 minutes, UWW was the better team... but Cabrini got a decent look at a 3 late... and nearly tied the game after all of that.

Oh, forgot to mention...my wife was watching the MIT-UWW video (didn't make the trip with me), and she liked your play-by-play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 22, 2012, 05:28:01 PM

Quote from: Hugenerd on March 21, 2012, 11:47:52 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 20, 2012, 10:32:40 PM
Quote from: rlk on March 20, 2012, 03:27:40 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 20, 2012, 02:31:39 PM
Cabrini came damn close...

Depends on how you look at it. If you look at the final score in isolation, yep. If you look at crunch time -- the final 15 minutes of the game -- they got blown off the court when it really mattered.

Cabrini had an 18-point lead with the clock under 14 minutes remaining in the game. Are you seriously telling me that those initial 26 minutes didn't really matter?

What is your argument that it did matter? Did it help them win the game? Whether they were up by 18 or 1 point at the 14 minute mark, they still lost the game. And since the final score is the only thing that matters in any sport, their first 26 minutes didnt matter enough to make up for their last 14 minutes. I am not arguing that they are or are not the #2 team in the country for this year, thats fine with me, they deserved to be where they were. What I was saying is that an 18 point lead at any point doesnt matter if you get outscored by more than that in the rest of the game. Did you watch the D1 game where Iona was beating BYU by 25 in the first half? Did that matter? They still ended up losing. I guess you may have a different definition of 'matter', but in terms of the final result of the game: No, the first 26 minutes did not matter.

You're missing the point, Hugenerd. Your second question, "Did it help them win the game?", is not germane to this discussion. My definition of "matter" is predicated upon the initial premise of this conversation. What we're discussing here, as indicated by the quote-nesting above, is D-Mac's original comment:

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 20, 2012, 02:31:39 PM
Cabrini came damn close...

After rlk cast aspersions upon that statement of D-Mac's by insinuating that the first 25 minutes didn't really matter, I corrected him. It did really matter, because it explains why D-Mac is right ... Cabrini did come damned close to winning the game. After all, is anybody disputing that? Because that's what this argument is all about, not whether or not the last 14 minutes were more important than the first 26 minutes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on March 22, 2012, 08:11:13 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 22, 2012, 05:28:01 PM
Quote from: Hugenerd on March 21, 2012, 11:47:52 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 20, 2012, 10:32:40 PM
Quote from: rlk on March 20, 2012, 03:27:40 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 20, 2012, 02:31:39 PM
Cabrini came damn close...

Depends on how you look at it. If you look at the final score in isolation, yep. If you look at crunch time -- the final 15 minutes of the game -- they got blown off the court when it really mattered.

Cabrini had an 18-point lead with the clock under 14 minutes remaining in the game. Are you seriously telling me that those initial 26 minutes didn't really matter?

What is your argument that it did matter? Did it help them win the game? Whether they were up by 18 or 1 point at the 14 minute mark, they still lost the game. And since the final score is the only thing that matters in any sport, their first 26 minutes didnt matter enough to make up for their last 14 minutes. I am not arguing that they are or are not the #2 team in the country for this year, thats fine with me, they deserved to be where they were. What I was saying is that an 18 point lead at any point doesnt matter if you get outscored by more than that in the rest of the game. Did you watch the D1 game where Iona was beating BYU by 25 in the first half? Did that matter? They still ended up losing. I guess you may have a different definition of 'matter', but in terms of the final result of the game: No, the first 26 minutes did not matter.

You're missing the point, Hugenerd. Your second question, "Did it help them win the game?", is not germane to this discussion. My definition of "matter" is predicated upon the initial premise of this conversation. What we're discussing here, as indicated by the quote-nesting above, is D-Mac's original comment:

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 20, 2012, 02:31:39 PM
Cabrini came damn close...

After rlk cast aspersions upon that statement of D-Mac's by insinuating that the first 25 minutes didn't really matter, I corrected him. It did really matter, because it explains why D-Mac is right ... Cabrini did come damned close to winning the game. After all, is anybody disputing that? Because that's what this argument is all about, not whether or not the last 14 minutes were more important than the first 26 minutes.

I guess we were arguing about different comments, because my response was based on the assumption that you were responding to my original post on this topic, which, in a nutshell, stated that both Cabrini and MIT were buried by UWW with big 2nd half runs (against MIT it was earlier in the half, and against Cabrini it was to close out the game). Prior to those runs, both teams were winning (I know Cabrini led by more), but what they did up to that point didn't really matter because they both ended up losing: a loss is a loss ( I don't think there are moral victories in the national championship game). Nobody said Cabrini didn't play a close game, they just aren't a championship team because they lost...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 22, 2012, 11:29:50 PM

Quote from: rlk on March 22, 2012, 04:06:05 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 20, 2012, 05:33:18 PM
Quote from: rlk on March 20, 2012, 03:24:22 PM

BTW, my wife told me that the video announcers were very impressed with how low we were able to hold Whitewater's scoring total (until the last 4 minutes, of course, when things got desperate). I believe they scored only 54 points until then. I don't think our D was too bad (Whitewater's own shooting percentage wasn't very good), but they got entirely too many second chances, and Davis of course was unstoppable (although it's interesting that he actually shot only 50%). And I do think Dawson had a very nice game indeed spelling Kates. He fouled out with only 11 minutes, but he got 5 points and zero turnovers, and it looked like a lot of his role was to play very tight defense and accept those fouls.
That was me on the call... and I did make a point of showing how low MIT kept UWW's offense.

And yes, in those 10 minutes, UWW was the better team... but Cabrini got a decent look at a 3 late... and nearly tied the game after all of that.

Oh, forgot to mention...my wife was watching the MIT-UWW video (didn't make the trip with me), and she liked your play-by-play.

I was on color... so if she liked the PBP, that was Scott... so I will pass her comments on ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: rlk on March 23, 2012, 08:04:12 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 22, 2012, 11:29:50 PM
Quote from: rlk on March 22, 2012, 04:06:05 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 20, 2012, 05:33:18 PM
Quote from: rlk on March 20, 2012, 03:24:22 PM

BTW, my wife told me that the video announcers were very impressed with how low we were able to hold Whitewater's scoring total (until the last 4 minutes, of course, when things got desperate). I believe they scored only 54 points until then. I don't think our D was too bad (Whitewater's own shooting percentage wasn't very good), but they got entirely too many second chances, and Davis of course was unstoppable (although it's interesting that he actually shot only 50%). And I do think Dawson had a very nice game indeed spelling Kates. He fouled out with only 11 minutes, but he got 5 points and zero turnovers, and it looked like a lot of his role was to play very tight defense and accept those fouls.
That was me on the call... and I did make a point of showing how low MIT kept UWW's offense.

And yes, in those 10 minutes, UWW was the better team... but Cabrini got a decent look at a 3 late... and nearly tied the game after all of that.

Oh, forgot to mention...my wife was watching the MIT-UWW video (didn't make the trip with me), and she liked your play-by-play.
I was on color... so if she liked the PBP, that was Scott... so I will pass her comments on ;)

She wasn't specific about what aspect she liked more, now that I think about it. I know she liked the overall broadcast, and she specifically mentioned your point about the MIT D. So, let's just say kudos to both of you.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 23, 2012, 11:25:03 AM

I'll take it! :) Thanks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 23, 2012, 12:10:19 PM

Quote from: rlk on March 23, 2012, 08:04:12 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 22, 2012, 11:29:50 PM
Quote from: rlk on March 22, 2012, 04:06:05 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 20, 2012, 05:33:18 PM
Quote from: rlk on March 20, 2012, 03:24:22 PM

BTW, my wife told me that the video announcers were very impressed with how low we were able to hold Whitewater's scoring total (until the last 4 minutes, of course, when things got desperate). I believe they scored only 54 points until then. I don't think our D was too bad (Whitewater's own shooting percentage wasn't very good), but they got entirely too many second chances, and Davis of course was unstoppable (although it's interesting that he actually shot only 50%). And I do think Dawson had a very nice game indeed spelling Kates. He fouled out with only 11 minutes, but he got 5 points and zero turnovers, and it looked like a lot of his role was to play very tight defense and accept those fouls.
That was me on the call... and I did make a point of showing how low MIT kept UWW's offense.

And yes, in those 10 minutes, UWW was the better team... but Cabrini got a decent look at a 3 late... and nearly tied the game after all of that.

Oh, forgot to mention...my wife was watching the MIT-UWW video (didn't make the trip with me), and she liked your play-by-play.
I was on color... so if she liked the PBP, that was Scott... so I will pass her comments on ;)

She wasn't specific about what aspect she liked more, now that I think about it. I know she liked the overall broadcast, and she specifically mentioned your point about the MIT D. So, let's just say kudos to both of you.

She probably liked your dulcet tones and thought you had a sexy voice. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 26, 2012, 11:46:43 AM

I will take it! I work hard on those tones and sexy voice! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 17, 2012, 04:37:19 PM

The Preseason Top 25 is out: http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2012-13/preseason (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2012-13/preseason)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on October 17, 2012, 05:02:38 PM

MIT starts out the year in the top spot but it makes you wonder whether that would be the case if the rumor of a big injury turns out to be true. For those that haven't seen the NEWMAC boards, there is speculation that Noel Hollingsworth, MIT's All-American center may be out for the season. Hopefully that isn't the case but it will be something to watch as the early season progresses.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 17, 2012, 06:36:51 PM

Tough to vote based on "rumors"... and it is October 17th after all... injuries can change in a month... for ALL teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on October 17, 2012, 07:05:50 PM

Where's hugenerd when you need him? ??? He'll put an end to those rumors about Hollingsworth, one way or the other.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 17, 2012, 07:42:24 PM

2 question:

When does the women's preseason poll come out?

When do the preseason AA selections come out?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on October 18, 2012, 01:02:50 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 17, 2012, 07:42:24 PM
2 question:

When does the women's preseason poll come out?

When do the preseason AA selections come out?

If the ever present Mr. Ypsi would stop posting long enough to read the front page he might have the answers to his 2 question(sic). ;D

1. The women's D3hoops.com Top 25 preseason poll should be released next week.

2. The preseason AA selections will be released in the upcoming weeks.

Those answers were found here: http://d3hoops.com/notables/2012/10/mens-preseason-top-25 and

here: http://d3hoops.com/notables/2012/10/lets-get-started

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on October 18, 2012, 11:18:37 AM

Quote from: magicman on October 18, 2012, 01:02:50 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 17, 2012, 07:42:24 PM
2 question:

When does the women's preseason poll come out?

When do the preseason AA selections come out?

If the ever present Mr. Ypsi would stop posting long enough to read the front page he might have the answers to his 2 question(sic). ;D

He is slipping a bit and can apparently see nearly 100 years into the future, as he claimed the IWU Women took / will take the Walnut & Bronze in 2112 on the CCIW board :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 18, 2012, 12:43:12 PM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on October 18, 2012, 11:18:37 AM
Quote from: magicman on October 18, 2012, 01:02:50 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 17, 2012, 07:42:24 PM
2 question:

When does the women's preseason poll come out?

When do the preseason AA selections come out?

If the ever present Mr. Ypsi would stop posting long enough to read the front page he might have the answers to his 2 question(sic). ;D

He is slipping a bit and can apparently see nearly 100 years into the future, as he claimed the IWU Women took / will take the Walnut & Bronze in 2112 on the CCIW board :)

Yeah, that was either a typo, or (if we can keep Mia Smith alive and well that long) a prediction that the Titans will win EVERY title for the next century! You decide. 8-)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 18, 2012, 01:21:41 PM

In Mr. Ypsi's defense, that story wasn't on the front page at the point he posted that question. I posted the poll as soon as it was available to get it out before 5 ET and then went back and wrote a story around it that evening.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 18, 2012, 02:28:37 PM

Wow, defended by the Guru, himself. ;D

Watch your step, magicman and FDF - you don't know who you're dealing with! 8-)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 18, 2012, 03:02:41 PM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on October 18, 2012, 11:18:37 AM
Quote from: magicman on October 18, 2012, 01:02:50 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 17, 2012, 07:42:24 PM
2 question:

When does the women's preseason poll come out?

When do the preseason AA selections come out?

If the ever present Mr. Ypsi would stop posting long enough to read the front page he might have the answers to his 2 question(sic). ;D

He is slipping a bit and can apparently see nearly 100 years into the future, as he claimed the IWU Women took / will take the Walnut & Bronze in 2112 on the CCIW board :)

Chuck has revealed himself as a Rush fan. And, if you knew anything about Chuck, you'd know that I obviously don't mean this Rush:

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2Fd%2Fd1%2FLimbaugh_Award_cropped.jpg%2F180px-Limbaugh_Award_cropped.jpg&hash=8d538e956b888b15af620e64556bbc0776e15dc4)

I mean this Rush:

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.progarchives.com%2Fprogressive_rock_discography_band%2Frush.jpg&hash=7179a20b7e30c216597d9b97409410ff9c266111)(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2Fthumb%2Fc%2Fc9%2FRush_2112.jpg%2F220px-Rush_2112.jpg&hash=1fd5f09d6f6393f9e7b0d74ef981a8f5f8f259f3)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on October 18, 2012, 03:43:10 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 18, 2012, 03:02:41 PM
Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on October 18, 2012, 11:18:37 AM
Quote from: magicman on October 18, 2012, 01:02:50 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 17, 2012, 07:42:24 PM
2 question:

When does the women's preseason poll come out?

When do the preseason AA selections come out?

If the ever present Mr. Ypsi would stop posting long enough to read the front page he might have the answers to his 2 question(sic). ;D

He is slipping a bit and can apparently see nearly 100 years into the future, as he claimed the IWU Women took / will take the Walnut & Bronze in 2112 on the CCIW board :)

Chuck has revealed himself as a Rush fan. And, if you knew anything about Chuck, you'd know that I obviously don't mean this Rush:

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2Fd%2Fd1%2FLimbaugh_Award_cropped.jpg%2F180px-Limbaugh_Award_cropped.jpg&hash=8d538e956b888b15af620e64556bbc0776e15dc4)

I mean this Rush:

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.progarchives.com%2Fprogressive_rock_discography_band%2Frush.jpg&hash=7179a20b7e30c216597d9b97409410ff9c266111)(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2Fthumb%2Fc%2Fc9%2FRush_2112.jpg%2F220px-Rush_2112.jpg&hash=1fd5f09d6f6393f9e7b0d74ef981a8f5f8f259f3)

There will be no championship in 2112 by then they will 'have assumed control'.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 18, 2012, 03:46:19 PM

Nice! You're obviously no fly-by-night Rush fan, sac.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on October 18, 2012, 06:05:55 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 18, 2012, 01:21:41 PM
In Mr. Ypsi's defense, that story wasn't on the front page at the point he posted that question. I posted the poll as soon as it was available to get it out before 5 ET and then went back and wrote a story around it that evening.

Way to cover the Ypster's butt Pat, but truth be told he probably wouldn't have read the story anyways! ;D Although he does have more time on his hands since you killed off the political board. Good move, the old guy probably gets more rest now. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 18, 2012, 07:10:04 PM

Quote from: magicman on October 18, 2012, 06:05:55 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 18, 2012, 01:21:41 PM
In Mr. Ypsi's defense, that story wasn't on the front page at the point he posted that question. I posted the poll as soon as it was available to get it out before 5 ET and then went back and wrote a story around it that evening.

Way to cover the Ypster's butt Pat, but truth be told he probably wouldn't have read the story anyways! ;D Although he does have more time on his hands since you killed off the political board. Good move, the old guy probably gets more rest now. :D

Who you callin' old guy, Jerry?! :P

Nope, no more rest. Just more time to rag on the really old guys. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on October 23, 2012, 01:16:32 PM

Based on the Preseason rankings, here are some games of note for the year. Not all the schedules are released yet so there may be a few more to add. (Did this by glancing at schedules so hopefully I didn't make too many mistakes and/or leave out any match ups.)

11/17 (11) St. Thomas @ (14) Whitworth
11/17 (6) North Central (Ill) vs (7) Hope
11/17 (16) Transylvania vs (24) Randolph-Macon @
11/18 (19) St. Mary's (MD) @ (24) Randolph-Macon
11/27 (3) UW - Whitewater @ (8) Illinois Wesleyan
11/27 (10) Cabrini @ (18) Scranton

12/12 (3) UW-Whitewater vs (15) UW-Stevens Point
12/21 (11) St. Thomas vs (15) UW-Steven Point
12/22 (7) Hope @ (8) Illinois Wesleyan
12/28 (6) North Central (Ill) vs (17) Ramapo
12/30 (10) Cabrini vs (23) Wesleyan

1/4 (5) Amherst @ (23) Wesleyan
1/7 (9) Franklin & Marshall @ (19) St. Mary's (Md)
1/9 (17) Ramapo vs (20) William Paterson
1/12 (4) Middlebury vs (23) Wesleyan
1/15 (5) Amherst vs (23) Wesleyan
1/16 (24) Randolph-Macon @ (25) Hampden-Sydney
1/19 (13) Wooster @ (22) Ohio Wesleyan
1/23 (3) UW-Whitewater @ (15) UW Stevens Point
1/23 (6) North Central (Ill) @ (8) Illinois Wesleyan
1/30 (2) Virginia Wesleyan vs (24) Randolph-Macon

2/6 (13) Wooster vs (22) Ohio Wesleyan
2/6 (24) Randolph-Macon vs (25) Hampden-Sydney
2/9 (4) Middlebury vs (5) Amherst
2/13 (17) Ramapo @ (20) William Paterson
2/19 (6) North Central (Ill) vs (8) Illinois Wesleyan

Teams Without a Preseason Top 25 opponent on the schedule: (1) MIT, (12) Birmingham-Southern, (21) Washington U

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D.B. Cooper on October 23, 2012, 09:48:06 PM

madzillagd:

How about: 12/19: (9) F&M @ (16) Transylvania -- it makes me want to take a mid-week trip to Lexington.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 23, 2012, 09:55:05 PM

Quote from: madzillagd on October 23, 2012, 01:16:32 PM
Teams Without a Preseason Top 25 opponent on the schedule: (1) MIT, (12) Birmingham-Southern, (21) Washington U

Wash U might face #8 Illinois Wesleyan in the 2nd round of their Lopata Classic on Dec 1 (if IWU beats Tufts and Wash U beats Wilmington).

Thanks for compiling that list by the way!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 23, 2012, 10:08:38 PM

Quote from: D.B. Cooper on October 23, 2012, 09:48:06 PM
madzillagd:

How about: 12/19: (9) F&M @ (16) Transylvania -- it makes me want to take a mid-week trip to Lexington.

Great place to see a game...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on October 24, 2012, 08:46:59 AM

Great list - thanks for compiling it!!!

One minor adjustment: The 12/22 (7) Hope @ (8) Illinois Wesleyan should be a v not an @. This is actually being played at a neutral site (Orlando Florida)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on October 24, 2012, 10:28:12 AM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on October 24, 2012, 08:46:59 AM
Great list - thanks for compiling it!!!

One minor adjustment: The 12/22 (7) Hope @ (8) Illinois Wesleyan should be a v not an @. This is actually being played at a neutral site (Orlando Florida)

THANKS FDF... i'm getting senile enough i might have driven up to Bloomington to see that one.... ::) ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 24, 2012, 10:34:08 AM

Well if we are sticking to that detail... the Transylvania/RMC and RMC/St. Mary's games are on neutral floors as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on October 24, 2012, 12:23:30 PM

Take 2 - thanks for the corrections/updates.

1/17 (11) St. Thomas @ (14) Whitworth
11/17 (6) North Central (Ill) vs (7) Hope
11/17 (16) Transylvania vs (24) Randolph-Macon (Neutral Site)
11/18 (19) St. Mary's (MD) @ (24) Randolph-Macon (Neutral Site)
11/27 (3) UW - Whitewater @ (8) Illinois Wesleyan
11/27 (10) Cabrini @ (18) Scranton

12/12 (3) UW-Whitewater vs (15) UW-Stevens Point
12/19 (9) F&M @ (16) Transylvania
12/21 (11) St. Thomas vs (15) UW-Steven Point
12/22 (7) Hope vs (8) Illinois Wesleyan (in Orlando Florida)
12/28 (6) North Central (Ill) vs (17) Ramapo
12/30 (10) Cabrini vs (23) Wesleyan

1/4 (5) Amherst @ (23) Wesleyan
1/7 (9) Franklin & Marshall @ (19) St. Mary's (Md)
1/9 (17) Ramapo vs (20) William Paterson
1/12 (4) Middlebury vs (23) Wesleyan
1/15 (5) Amherst vs (23) Wesleyan
1/16 (24) Randolph-Macon @ (25) Hampden-Sydney
1/19 (13) Wooster @ (22) Ohio Wesleyan
1/23 (3) UW-Whitewater @ (15) UW Stevens Point
1/23 (6) North Central (Ill) @ (8) Illinois Wesleyan
1/30 (2) Virginia Wesleyan vs (24) Randolph-Macon

2/6 (13) Wooster vs (22) Ohio Wesleyan
2/6 (24) Randolph-Macon vs (25) Hampden-Sydney
2/9 (4) Middlebury vs (5) Amherst
2/13 (17) Ramapo @ (20) William Paterson
2/19 (6) North Central (Ill) vs (8) Illinois Wesleyan

Teams Without a Preseason Top 25 opponent on the schedule: (1) MIT, (12) Birmingham-Southern, (21) Washington U

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on October 24, 2012, 12:34:20 PM

Quote from: hopefan on October 24, 2012, 10:28:12 AM
Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on October 24, 2012, 08:46:59 AM
Great list - thanks for compiling it!!!

One minor adjustment: The 12/22 (7) Hope @ (8) Illinois Wesleyan should be a v not an @. This is actually being played at a neutral site (Orlando Florida)

THANKS FDF... i'm getting senile enough i might have driven up to Bloomington to see that one.... ::) ::)

You would only be a year early :) Hope & IWU supposed to start a home - home series in the 13-14 season - and I believe IWU is at home the first year

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on October 24, 2012, 02:32:07 PM

Number #10 Cabrini might face #2 VA Wesleyan on 11/17 if both win in their first games of the VW tourney.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hopester on October 24, 2012, 03:24:38 PM

Well if we are talking about top 25 vs top 25 games, there is another matchup looming out there

11-5 (16) Transylvania vs (3) Kentucky

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 24, 2012, 04:09:26 PM

I'm hoping to see Cabrini and VWC when they play nearby this year (I'm about 30 minutes from both Wesley and Washington College).

I've seen Cabrini in person the previous two years, so if nothing else I can compare them to previous incarnations.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 25, 2012, 01:01:32 AM

Quote from: Hopester on October 24, 2012, 03:24:38 PM
Well if we are talking about top 25 vs top 25 games, there is another matchup looming out there

11-5 (16) Transylvania vs (3) Kentucky

Too bad that only counts for one team... or maybe that is a good thing :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 25, 2012, 01:13:02 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 25, 2012, 01:01:32 AM
Quote from: Hopester on October 24, 2012, 03:24:38 PM
Well if we are talking about top 25 vs top 25 games, there is another matchup looming out there

11-5 (16) Transylvania vs (3) Kentucky
Too bad that only counts for one team... or maybe that is a good thing :)

The game is not in-region.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on October 25, 2012, 10:46:44 AM

True, but Kentucky can count the game toward its overall record while Transy cannot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on October 25, 2012, 12:10:29 PM

Kentucky has that game clearly tagged as an exhibition event.

http://www.ukathletics.com/sports/m-baskbl/sched/kty-m-baskbl-sched.html

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on October 25, 2012, 01:00:22 PM

Okay. So it doesn't count for anyone then. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 25, 2012, 02:07:56 PM

Yeah, I think we get into that silly exhibition/non-exhibition grey area starting on Nov. 7 or so, whenever the first official D-I playing date is.

Proud to say that's not a date I track. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 7express on October 25, 2012, 10:48:30 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 25, 2012, 02:07:56 PM
Yeah, I think we get into that silly exhibition/non-exhibition grey area starting on Nov. 7 or so, whenever the first official D-I playing date is.

Proud to say that's not a date I track. :)

I know I'm nitpocking here, but the first "official" division 1 games are part of the coaches vs. cancer classic, and 1 or 2 usually occur the first Monday of November which this year is the 5. Most schools tip off either the following Friday or Saturday; the 9th & 10th this year.
Note: Just checked and no games during the week this year so the official starting date is Friday, November 9 this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on October 26, 2012, 02:27:13 AM

I've always thought that 7xpress was an old nitpocker. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ECSUalum on October 28, 2012, 01:18:39 PM

Here is how good the predictions were last year with repsect to 2011/12 Preseason poll vs Final poll
for ONLY the top 14 teams in the Final poll. You make the judgement on how good the preseason polls are!!!!
I say they are poor, or not much research put into developing the preseason poll

D3hoops.com men's Top 25, final
Through end of 2011-12 season: rank deviation between
preseason and final polls
# School (1st votes) Rec Pts Prev. -------------------------

1 UW-Whitewater (25) 29-4 625 8 1-28 = 27
2 Cabrini 31-2 600 5 2-14 = 12
3 Illinois Wesleyan 23-8 551 3-38 = 35
4 MIT 29-2 543 3 4-10 = 6
5 Virginia Wesleyan 27-4 489 6 5-1 = 4
6 Hope 27-2 469 1 6- 32 = 26
7 Franklin and Marshall 28-3 467 9 7- 17 = 10
8 Amherst 26-3 458 2 8- 4 = 4
9 Middlebury 26-4 431 4 9- 5 = 4
10 Whitworth 26-4 406 7 10-12 = 2
11 Wittenberg 24-7 340 22 11-11 = 0
12 Wooster 26-5 319 15 12-9 = 3
13 Wheaton (Ill.) 23-7 261 24 13-25 = 12
14 Eastern Connecticut 24-6 234 21 14-NR = 41 * NR in top 55
Average of 14 deviations = 13.3

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 28, 2012, 02:42:48 PM

Quote from: ECSUalum on October 28, 2012, 01:18:39 PM
Here is how good the predictions were last year with repsect to 2011/12 Preseason poll vs Final poll
for ONLY the top 14 teams in the Final poll. You make the judgement on how good the preseason polls are!!!!
I say they are poor, or not much research put into developing the preseason poll

D3hoops.com men's Top 25, final
Through end of 2011-12 season: rank deviation between
preseason and final polls
# School (1st votes) Rec Pts Prev. -------------------------

1 UW-Whitewater (25) 29-4 625 8 1-28 = 27
2 Cabrini 31-2 600 5 2-14 = 12
3 Illinois Wesleyan 23-8 551 3-38 = 35
4 MIT 29-2 543 3 4-10 = 6
5 Virginia Wesleyan 27-4 489 6 5-1 = 4
6 Hope 27-2 469 1 6- 32 = 26
7 Franklin and Marshall 28-3 467 9 7- 17 = 10
8 Amherst 26-3 458 2 8- 4 = 4
9 Middlebury 26-4 431 4 9- 5 = 4
10 Whitworth 26-4 406 7 10-12 = 2
11 Wittenberg 24-7 340 22 11-11 = 0
12 Wooster 26-5 319 15 12-9 = 3
13 Wheaton (Ill.) 23-7 261 24 13-25 = 12
14 Eastern Connecticut 24-6 234 21 14-NR = 41 * NR in top 55
Average of 14 deviations = 13.3

I'd be glad to let you have a copy of the research I send out and you can spend time trying to rank teams so that fans can come take potshots at them a year later.

There are always surprise teams -- that's why we play the games. But I see from your list that half of the teams you posted were within a half-dozen spots of their original placement after 6,000 games were played. I call that good. There are always teams that surprise in any sport. (Oakland A's, anyone?)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 28, 2012, 02:47:23 PM

Quote from: ECSUalum on October 28, 2012, 01:18:39 PM
Here is how good the predictions were last year with repsect to 2011/12 Preseason poll vs Final poll
for ONLY the top 14 teams in the Final poll. You make the judgement on how good the preseason polls are!!!!
I say they are poor, or not much research put into developing the preseason poll

D3hoops.com men's Top 25, final
Through end of 2011-12 season: rank deviation between
preseason and final polls
# School (1st votes) Rec Pts Prev. -------------------------

1 UW-Whitewater (25) 29-4 625 8 1-28 = 27
2 Cabrini 31-2 600 5 2-14 = 12
3 Illinois Wesleyan 23-8 551 3-38 = 35
4 MIT 29-2 543 3 4-10 = 6
5 Virginia Wesleyan 27-4 489 6 5-1 = 4
6 Hope 27-2 469 1 6- 32 = 26
7 Franklin and Marshall 28-3 467 9 7- 17 = 10
8 Amherst 26-3 458 2 8- 4 = 4
9 Middlebury 26-4 431 4 9- 5 = 4
10 Whitworth 26-4 406 7 10-12 = 2
11 Wittenberg 24-7 340 22 11-11 = 0
12 Wooster 26-5 319 15 12-9 = 3
13 Wheaton (Ill.) 23-7 261 24 13-25 = 12
14 Eastern Connecticut 24-6 234 21 14-NR = 41 * NR in top 55
Average of 14 deviations = 13.3

As a former voter in the D3hoops.com Top 25 poll I can tell you that, 1) voting in the preseason poll is really difficult, and 2) a lot of research, analysis, and thought goes into it by 25 people that know and care about Division III and want to establish the most accurate preseason poll possible.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ECSUalum on October 28, 2012, 03:14:24 PM

No need to get defensive boys!! these results are a matter of opinion,( I presume we can still offer up our opinions on these threads, right?) and mine, based on doing similar comparisons over the years, is that preseason polls, no matter, baseball, basketball, soccer, are poor in predicting the final polls results, therefore, why do them!!! Why not wait for 5-10 games played and all the rosters published, and then rank the teams, would that not be more accurate?
Titan.. I am not making a judgement on how much the people who do the predictions CARE about D-III sports!! Only on the results of preseason poll accuracy

For example, Where is one getting info on the recruiting of freshman/transfer players for the top 50 teams?. I presume you do that as part of your formula for coming up with rankings. Are all the team schedules published when the pre-poll is announced?

BTW, I, (and I would imagine a lot of other people), would like to see the research, where is it published?

Has anyone published the track record over the last 5-10 years on pre vs final D-III polls? That would be interesting as well!!

Pat, got to take the good with the bad

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 28, 2012, 04:44:55 PM

Quote from: ECSUalum on October 28, 2012, 03:14:24 PM
No need to get defensive boys!! these results are a matter of opinion,( I presume we can still offer up our opinions on these threads, right?) and mine, based on doing similar comparisons over the years, is that preseason polls, no matter, baseball, basketball, soccer, are poor in predicting the final polls results, therefore, why do them!!! Why not wait for 5-10 games played and all the rosters published, and then rank the teams, would that not be more accurate?
Titan.. I am not making a judgement on how much the people who do the predictions CARE about D-III sports!! Only on the results of preseason poll accuracy

For example, Where is one getting info on the recruiting of freshman/transfer players for the top 50 teams?. I presume you do that as part of your formula for coming up with rankings. Are all the team schedules published when the pre-poll is announced?

BTW, I, (and I would imagine a lot of other people), would like to see the research, where is it published?

Has anyone published the track record over the last 5-10 years on pre vs final D-III polls? That would be interesting as well!!

Pat, got to take the good with the bad

We send out a preseason request to about 60 Division III schools. Here's what we got from Albertus Magnus, for example (since they are first alphabetically, it's an easy copy and paste). Not everyone provides information on incoming recruits, and let's be honest, most freshmen don't have a great impact on a team that has Top 25 hopes.

School   Albertus Magnus
Same coach?    Yes
W-L record    28-2
Conf record    GNAC, 18-0
NCAA tourney    Yes
Wins in tourney   1
Eliminated by   Middlebury
Returning starters   4
Returners 15+ mins   6
Total points   2599
Points returning   1763
Pct. returning   68%
Total rebounds   1243
Rebounds returning   836
Pct. returning   67%
Rebound margin   8.9
Total assists   489
Assists returning   440
Pct. returning   90%
Total steals   277
Steals returning   218
Pct. returning   79%
Total turnovers   458
Turnovers returning   356
Pct. returning   78%
Who's gone?    Ray Askew
Returning starter 1
Name    Darius Watson
position    G
height    6-5
PPG   19.1
Year    Jr.
Notes    52.3 FG%, 41.7 3PT%, 31 minutes per game
Returning starter 2
Name    Arshad Jackson
position    G
height    5-10
PPG   12
Year    Sr.
Notes    Led team with 31.2 minutes per game, 159 assists and 57 steals
Returning starter 3
Name    Zach Dugas
position    G
height    6-2
PPG   6.3
Year    Sr.
Notes    104 assists, 83.3 FT%
Returning starter 4
Name    Jefferson Lora
position    C
height    6-8
PPG   7.4
Year    Sr.
Notes    5.5 rpg, 53.7 FG%
Returning starter 5
Name
position
height
PPG
Year
Notes
Returning starter 6
Name
position
height
PPG
Year
Notes
Newcomer 1
Frosh/Trans?
where from
position
height
name
stats
Newcomer 2
Frosh/Trans?
where from
position
height
name
stats
Newcomer 3
Frosh/Trans?
where from
position
height
name
stats
Newcomer 4
Frosh/Trans?
where from
position
height
name
stats
Other notes    Spencer Smith will look to fill the void left by Ray Askew. In 2011-12, Smith averaged 15.3 minutes, 4.7 points and 4.3 rebounds per game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 28, 2012, 06:31:00 PM

Quote from: ECSUalum on October 28, 2012, 03:14:24 PM
No need to get defensive boys!! these results are a matter of opinion,( I presume we can still offer up our opinions on these threads, right?)

Absolutely we can offer up our opinions -- it's what these boards are for. But when you make a statement as aggressive as you did...

Quote from: ECSUalum on October 28, 2012, 01:18:39 PM
You make the judgement on how good the preseason polls are!!!!
I say they are poor, or not much research put into developing the preseason poll

...you can probably expect to get back a little defensiveness from those who support and/or administer the D3hoops.com poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on October 28, 2012, 06:50:54 PM

In reality, you'd need to do a 5-year study (at the least) on pre-season vs. final polls, and perhaps factor in injuries and defections and other wild cards to really want to get down to how pre-season polls add up to the final poll.

And really, the final poll is just window dressing. The actual action is the tournament, so you may ALSO want to do a 5-year study on that, noting that the draw many times puts elite teams against each other earlier than a purely seeded tournament would.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ECSUalum on October 28, 2012, 06:52:14 PM

The stats do not lie!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 28, 2012, 06:53:59 PM

Or midseason additions, like Cabrini had last year. No way to account for that in October.

Your "stats" are half a slice of one year's poll. Compare that to other polls, while you're at it. You've done about 5% of the necessary work, just enough to satisfy your own point of view.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 28, 2012, 06:54:29 PM

This would be the perfect opportunity to give us your preseason Top 25!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ECSUalum on October 28, 2012, 07:07:44 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 28, 2012, 06:53:59 PM
Or midseason additions, like Cabrini had last year. No way to account for that in October.

Your "stats" are half a slice of one year's poll. Compare that to other polls, while you're at it. You've done about 5% of the necessary work, just enough to satisfy your own point of view.

Then show everyone how well your predictions, (performance) have been over the last 5 years!!!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on October 28, 2012, 07:16:16 PM

Pat doesn't have to - he's just the poll taker. If you have a beef with it, do some math instead of a small cherry-picked sample. You need to get all Nate Silver with your premise otherwise it's just bloviating about something that's quite the inexact science.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ECSUalum on October 28, 2012, 08:10:53 PM

Quote from: smedindy on October 28, 2012, 07:16:16 PM
Pat doesn't have to - he's just the poll taker. If you have a beef with it, do some math instead of a small cherry-picked sample. You need to get all Nate Silver with your premise otherwise it's just bloviating about something that's quite the inexact science.

If it's an in exact science, then why waste your time publishing a preseason poll!! That's my whole point. "smedinky", show me your math that its an accurate poll!! The point is, do the polling when it makes sense and is meaningful. Coleman's response is: 50% of the top 14 has a small deviation, well if that's so then flip a coin to produce the preseason poll, and save your research time/money/resources!

If you want to do some research, why dont you do a survey here and see how many people think the pre season poll is useful/meaningful!!

I quess if you question the exec. editor of D3 hoops, and hurt his feelings, your a bloviator. This thread is starting to remind me of the politics thread that Coleman got rid of

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on October 28, 2012, 08:30:10 PM

I think the point has sailed high and wide here. It's not supposed to be the paragon of accuracy - it's a snapshot of thought at a point in time. Things happen - it's sports after all.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 28, 2012, 08:48:41 PM

Quote from: ECSUalum on October 28, 2012, 08:10:53 PM
Quote from: smedindy on October 28, 2012, 07:16:16 PM
Pat doesn't have to - he's just the poll taker. If you have a beef with it, do some math instead of a small cherry-picked sample. You need to get all Nate Silver with your premise otherwise it's just bloviating about something that's quite the inexact science.

If it's an in exact science, then why waste your time publishing a preseason poll!! That's my whole point. "smedinky", show me your math that its an accurate poll!! The point is, do the polling when it makes sense and is meaningful. Coleman's response is: 50% of the top 14 has a small deviation, well if that's so then flip a coin to produce the preseason poll, and save your research time/money/resources!

If you want to do some research, why dont you do a survey here and see how many people think the pre season poll is useful/meaningful!!

I quess if you question the exec. editor of D3 hoops, and hurt his feelings, your a bloviator. This thread is starting to remind me of the politics thread that Coleman got rid of

My feelings aren't hurt. Shoot -- we've been doing a Top 25 for 14 years and we've had a message board for a year longer than that. I've had time to develop a pretty thick skin. I just don't think that you reached any standard of proof here. This is the perfect opportunity to prove you can do better, if you think it's possible. Go right ahead.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ECSUalum on October 28, 2012, 08:59:48 PM

Pat, With all due respect, IMHO, wouldn't it be better to wait for some NCAA stats,W/L records, rosters, etc etc to roll in before you publish an "early vs pre season" hoops poll!!!!!! Again IMO, Pre season polls "do not compute"
I know people like to see their teams ranked early in the season, but, what, in fact, benefit does D3Hoops get from a pre season poll? If it is monetary, then maybe I can understand the rational, otherwise, I dont

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 28, 2012, 09:34:59 PM

Benefits include the publicity which comes from having a poll published, traffic bump, jump-start to launch the new season, etc.

If we vacate that, we give more visibility to less-credible rankings, who still will publish their preseason rankings. Doesn't benefit anyone.

One thing we did several years ago was delay the first regular season poll by one week, so we no longer have a first regular-season poll after the first weekend of games. This means the first poll is based on four or five games instead of one or two.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on October 28, 2012, 10:27:56 PM

Quote from: ECSUalum on October 28, 2012, 07:07:44 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 28, 2012, 06:53:59 PM
Or midseason additions, like Cabrini had last year. No way to account for that in October.

Your "stats" are half a slice of one year's poll. Compare that to other polls, while you're at it. You've done about 5% of the necessary work, just enough to satisfy your own point of view.
Then show everyone how well your predictions, (performance) have been over the last 5 years!!!!!

With all due respect, Pat is a busy man who is running a number of websites and a message board that is by far the most popular in Division III athletics.

If you want to know how well the "predictions" are vs. the "performance," do it yourself like the rest of us have.

And, these aren't Pat's predictions. It's a poll constructed by 25 media, coaches, administrators, etc. One person could put out their own poll (and we actually DO run a poster's poll... you should check it out if you're interested).

The poll is for fun. If you're not having any fun with it, then you don't have to "participate" in it.

D3hoops.com (and the other sites in the D3sports.com family) don't do anything that isn't done by other media outlets, such as the AP or ESPN. Are you calling them out on their preseason polls?

Or, how about this? Why not, as people have suggested, put your own poll out? You'll realize how difficult it is to rank the top 6% of teams, period, let alone in order.

And if you don't want to do that, why don't you figure out how far the teams moved compared to the full 405 teams, not just the top 14? You just acknowledged that the poll identified 8 of the top 14 teams in the top 14. 5 of the other 6 received votes in the poll (i.e. were identified by pollsters as being in the top 6% or with the possibility of attaining that level).

That's one of the difficulties of a poll at any point during the year.

Do you select teams that are good right now? Do you select teams that have played well throughout the year (i.e. the full body of work)? Do you select teams that have the potential for greatness by the end of the year? How do you deal with injuries (See Wheaton, Kent Raymond several years ago or UW Stevens Point, Tyler Tillema last season for example).

You could pot shot the rankings... but look deeper. Preseason #2 Augustana had their starting center leave the team half-way through the year. They started off the year 11-1... They finished 8-6 after they lost a significant piece of their team.

We could go on... but what's the use? Each team has a narrative. These are often complex and the fact of the matter is that we're talking about humans and college-age humans at that. Things change throughout the year and teams don't always reach their potential or live up to their expectations.

The top-25 poll is no different than what pretty much every conference in the land does. They put out preseason polls for their conferences as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 29, 2012, 01:23:30 AM

Just to add a note... waiting for the first collection of games (5, 10, whatever) also doesn't make the poll any better. Than pollsters may react to the games being played first and not the hours of research they consider in the preseason.

The preseason poll is actually HELPFUL for the pollsters, if I do say as one of them. I take the time to do the research, look at the teams that succeeded last year, teams that disappointed, teams that were rising, teams that will be falling... and take into account probably a dozen other factors (returning players, returning starters, injured players returning, players leaving, conference ups and downs, coaching changes, .... I could go on forever!). That information is needed and then helps weigh against what happens in the first few weeks to better gauge teams. If I only considered the beginning of the season some teams who have a couple of lucky wins or a team that got a lucky bounce or two early may be too highly touted when ignoring the preseason info.

As for transfers and freshmen... while I do the research, you just can't base a D3 poll on that kind of information in the preseason - it is even tough in the middle of the season (i.e. Pat's point about Cabrini and John's point about Augustana). Incoming freshmen may not be as good as they "appear" to be... they may change their mind about playing... they could suffer injuries in the weeks leading up as much as the upper classmen.

I end up spending good chunks of several days doing my Top 25... this year I had 60+ teams (I had a few more than Pat provided, as many voters may) to start... whittled down to about 41... and then tried to slot them into 25 spots. I could have gone several more days twisting teams around... taking teams out... putting them back in... adding teams... removing teams... etc.

Now... as other posters have said... you call the preseason poll(s) poor... but you provided a very small sample size (one year and just 14 of those teams) and you haven't provided an argument as to why exactly it is poor. Furthermore, you haven't provided how you would have voted on the poll.

And one last thing to consider... there were 50 teams who got votes in this season's Top 25... that means there probably wasn't one ballot that had the same 25 teams as any other ballot. You think the voters aren't doing their home work or taking this seriously?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on October 29, 2012, 03:14:28 AM

Of the Top 25 teams in last year's preseason poll, 14 of them made the Top 25 in the final poll. Several other teams in the preseason Top 25 ended up at #26 and #28 I think that's a pretty good number and shows that the voters did a fairly good job with their selections at the beginning of the year.

I'd also be willing to bet that a majority of the regulars on D3hoops are quite happy that there is a preseason poll. 8-) In fact an awful lot of us can't wait for it to come out. ;)

I can't help but wonder if ECSUalum would be so riled up about the preseason poll if his Eastern Connecticut Warriors had been ranked 15th or so instead of 33rd in the ORV category. ??? Last year they weren't ranked in the preseason poll at all but cracked the top 25 by week 7 and ended up at #14 in the final poll. This year they are already 6 weeks ahead of where they were last year at this time. ;D I'd be happy with that if it were my team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: toooldtohoop on October 29, 2012, 08:05:05 AM

I am grateful for the research and the time that all of you put into this forum. I start getting ready for hoop season early, and the preseason poll is one of a number of things that I look forward to.
Keep it coming!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Roundball999 on October 29, 2012, 09:26:57 AM

Quote from: ECSUalum on October 28, 2012, 08:59:48 PM
Pat, With all due respect, IMHO, wouldn't it be better to wait for some NCAA stats,W/L records, rosters, etc etc to roll in before you publish an "early vs pre season" hoops poll!!!!!! Again IMO, Pre season polls "do not compute"
I know people like to see their teams ranked early in the season, but, what, in fact, benefit does D3Hoops get from a pre season poll? If it is monetary, then maybe I can understand the rational, otherwise, I dont

OK, we get it, you think it's a waste of time and inaccurate.

Easy solution: don't read it. Or a simple statement that you think the polls are questionable, if you want to express your opinion. But while you're getting on the pollsters for being defensive, you're also demeaning their work in multiple posts.

Many of us are very appreciative of the time and effort it takes to put together these polls, yes even the preseason polls. It stimulates interest and conversation, including detailed discussion about teams and players. It's also interesting to see how the experts that are polled view things going into the season. We fully understand the polls are inaccurate by their nature, but amazingly that doesn't keep us awake at night.

Keep up the good work, D3hoops!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 29, 2012, 09:37:16 AM

Quote from: magicman on October 29, 2012, 03:14:28 AM
Of the Top 25 teams in last year's preseason poll, 14 of them made the Top 25 in the final poll. Several other teams in the preseason Top 25 ended up at #26 and #28 I think that's a pretty good number and shows that the voters did a fairly good job with their selections at the beginning of the year.

I'd also be willing to bet that a majority of the regulars on D3hoops are quite happy that there is a preseason poll. 8-) In fact an awful lot of us can't wait for it to come out. ;)

I can't help but wonder if ECSUalum would be so riled up about the preseason poll if his Eastern Connecticut Warriors had been ranked 15th or so instead of 33rd in the ORV category. ??? Last year they weren't ranked in the preseason poll at all but cracked the top 25 by week 7 and ended up at #14 in the final poll. This year they are already 6 weeks ahead of where they were last year at this time. ;D I'd be happy with that if it were my team.

And with Eastern Connecticut returning less than half of its points and just three people who played 15 or more minutes a game, it's a fair ranking. The X factor here isn't some freshman or transfer but the return of Mike Garrow.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ECSUalum on October 29, 2012, 10:38:26 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 28, 2012, 09:34:59 PM
Benefits include the publicity which comes from having a poll published, traffic bump, jump-start to launch the new season, etc.

If we vacate that, we give more visibility to less-credible rankings, who still will publish their preseason rankings. Doesn't benefit anyone.

One thing we did several years ago was delay the first regular season poll by one week, so we no longer have a first regular-season poll after the first weekend of games. This means the first poll is based on four or five games instead of one or two.

Ok Pat, understood, thanks, BYW my issue is not about ECSU's ranking High or low!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ECSUalum on October 29, 2012, 10:45:27 AM

Quote from: magicman on October 29, 2012, 03:14:28 AM
Of the Top 25 teams in last year's preseason poll, 14 of them made the Top 25 in the final poll. Several other teams in the preseason Top 25 ended up at #26 and #28 I think that's a pretty good number and shows that the voters did a fairly good job with their selections at the beginning of the year.

I'd also be willing to bet that a majority of the regulars on D3hoops are quite happy that there is a preseason poll. 8-) In fact an awful lot of us can't wait for it to come out. ;)

I can't help but wonder if ECSUalum would be so riled up about the preseason poll if his Eastern Connecticut Warriors had been ranked 15th or so instead of 33rd in the ORV category. ??? Last year they weren't ranked in the preseason poll at all but cracked the top 25 by week 7 and ended up at #14 in the final poll. This year they are already 6 weeks ahead of where they were last year at this time. ;D I'd be happy with that if it were my team.

Did I say anything about my concern with ECSU'S RANKING?????!!!! No one know how good or bad Eastern will be, (except for the Coach Geitner and his staff and players), untill the season starts and games are played.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ECSUalum on October 29, 2012, 10:55:57 AM

Quote from: Roundball999 on October 29, 2012, 09:26:57 AM
Quote from: ECSUalum on October 28, 2012, 08:59:48 PM
Pat, With all due respect, IMHO, wouldn't it be better to wait for some NCAA stats,W/L records, rosters, etc etc to roll in before you publish an "early vs pre season" hoops poll!!!!!! Again IMO, Pre season polls "do not compute"
I know people like to see their teams ranked early in the season, but, what, in fact, benefit does D3Hoops get from a pre season poll? If it is monetary, then maybe I can understand the rational, otherwise, I dont

OK, we get it, you think it's a waste of time and inaccurate.

Easy solution: don't read it. Or a simple statement that you think the polls are questionable, if you want to express your opinion. But while you're getting on the pollsters for being defensive, you're also demeaning their work in multiple posts.

Many of us are very appreciative of the time and effort it takes to put together these polls, yes even the preseason polls. It stimulates interest and conversation, including detailed discussion about teams and players. It's also interesting to see how the experts that are polled view things going into the season. We fully understand the polls are inaccurate by their nature, but amazingly that doesn't keep us awake at night.

Keep up the good work, D3hoops!

Its an ego trip for the teams that show up in the preseason polls, thats why everyone follows it. And to your comment "dont read it", dont be rediculous!!! :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ECSUalum on October 29, 2012, 11:00:48 AM

Quote from: John Gleich on October 28, 2012, 10:27:56 PM
Quote from: ECSUalum on October 28, 2012, 07:07:44 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 28, 2012, 06:53:59 PM
Or midseason additions, like Cabrini had last year. No way to account for that in October.

Your "stats" are half a slice of one year's poll. Compare that to other polls, while you're at it. You've done about 5% of the necessary work, just enough to satisfy your own point of view.
Then show everyone how well your predictions, (performance) have been over the last 5 years!!!!!

With all due respect, Pat is a busy man who is running a number of websites and a message board that is by far the most popular in Division III athletics.

If you want to know how well the "predictions" are vs. the "performance," do it yourself like the rest of us have.

And, these aren't Pat's predictions. It's a poll constructed by 25 media, coaches, administrators, etc. One person could put out their own poll (and we actually DO run a poster's poll... you should check it out if you're interested).

The poll is for fun. If you're not having any fun with it, then you don't have to "participate" in it.

D3hoops.com (and the other sites in the D3sports.com family) don't do anything that isn't done by other media outlets, such as the AP or ESPN. Are you calling them out on their preseason polls?

Or, how about this? Why not, as people have suggested, put your own poll out? You'll realize how difficult it is to rank the top 6% of teams, period, let alone in order.

And if you don't want to do that, why don't you figure out how far the teams moved compared to the full 405 teams, not just the top 14? You just acknowledged that the poll identified 8 of the top 14 teams in the top 14. 5 of the other 6 received votes in the poll (i.e. were identified by pollsters as being in the top 6% or with the possibility of attaining that level).

That's one of the difficulties of a poll at any point during the year.

Do you select teams that are good right now? Do you select teams that have played well throughout the year (i.e. the full body of work)? Do you select teams that have the potential for greatness by the end of the year? How do you deal with injuries (See Wheaton, Kent Raymond several years ago or UW Stevens Point, Tyler Tillema last season for example).

You could pot shot the rankings... but look deeper. Preseason #2 Augustana had their starting center leave the team half-way through the year. They started off the year 11-1... They finished 8-6 after they lost a significant piece of their team.

We could go on... but what's the use? Each team has a narrative. These are often complex and the fact of the matter is that we're talking about humans and college-age humans at that. Things change throughout the year and teams don't always reach their potential or live up to their expectations.

The top-25 poll is no different than what pretty much every conference in the land does. They put out preseason polls for their conferences as well.

Then I urge everyone to continue to have "fun" with the preseason poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Roundball999 on November 03, 2012, 10:03:48 AM

Quote from: ECSUalum on October 29, 2012, 10:55:57 AM
Quote from: Roundball999 on October 29, 2012, 09:26:57 AM
Quote from: ECSUalum on October 28, 2012, 08:59:48 PM
Pat, With all due respect, IMHO, wouldn't it be better to wait for some NCAA stats,W/L records, rosters, etc etc to roll in before you publish an "early vs pre season" hoops poll!!!!!! Again IMO, Pre season polls "do not compute"
I know people like to see their teams ranked early in the season, but, what, in fact, benefit does D3Hoops get from a pre season poll? If it is monetary, then maybe I can understand the rational, otherwise, I dont

OK, we get it, you think it's a waste of time and inaccurate.

Easy solution: don't read it. Or a simple statement that you think the polls are questionable, if you want to express your opinion. But while you're getting on the pollsters for being defensive, you're also demeaning their work in multiple posts.

Many of us are very appreciative of the time and effort it takes to put together these polls, yes even the preseason polls. It stimulates interest and conversation, including detailed discussion about teams and players. It's also interesting to see how the experts that are polled view things going into the season. We fully understand the polls are inaccurate by their nature, but amazingly that doesn't keep us awake at night.

Keep up the good work, D3hoops!

Its an ego trip for the teams that show up in the preseason polls, thats why everyone follows it. And to your comment "dont read it", dont be rediculous!!! :o

Ego trip, fun, inaccurate, whatever. People enjoy it, including many of us on these boards who have no direct involvement with any current team. We all understand these polls are far from perfect, so your posts just come off as sour grapes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ECSUalum on November 03, 2012, 02:28:50 PM

Sour grapes ????!!!! whatever!!!!!!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 7express on November 05, 2012, 06:20:32 PM

This maybe OT, but the Transylvania UK exhibition game is on Fox College Sports-Atlantic tonight at 8:00 PM. FCS-Atlantic is one of those digital cable packages. There's also FCS-Central and FCS-Pacfic, so make sure your tuned into the FCS-Atlantic channel.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 06, 2012, 11:02:43 AM

Checking the schedules for the pick em league...man, #24 Randolph-Macon has it rough. Plays Christopher Newport who was 23-5 last year, then #16 Tranyslvania and then #19 St. Mary's (Md).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 06, 2012, 01:57:42 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 06, 2012, 11:02:43 AM
Checking the schedules for the pick em league...man, #24 Randolph-Macon has it rough. Plays Christopher Newport who was 23-5 last year, then #16 Tranyslvania and then #19 St. Mary's (Md).

Or a great opportunity to make an early season statement :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 06, 2012, 06:05:54 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 06, 2012, 11:02:43 AM
Checking the schedules for the pick em league...man, #24 Randolph-Macon has it rough. Plays Christopher Newport who was 23-5 last year, then #16 Tranyslvania and then #19 St. Mary's (Md).

Plattsburgh State has to play #4 Middlebury on 11-25, then go to Oswego State who ended last year at #17 with a 26-4 log and is #32 in the ORV category this year. On 12-4 they travel to Keene State, a preseason pick to win the Little East Conference by many, and #41 in the ORV category (19-8 last year and have their 4 top scorers returning). They visit #9 Franklin & Marshall on Jan.2nd and could face Eastern Connecticut (#33 in the ORV category on Jan 3rd). 4 of those teams won games in the NCAA tournament this past year and many people felt that Keene State deserved a Pool C bid. With 4 of those 5 games on the road I'll be real happy if they go 2-3. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 07, 2012, 01:30:13 PM

Tough schedule indeed but RMC's stretch is three games in four days to open the season!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on November 15, 2012, 09:30:16 PM

As some anticipated, RMC is the first to fall with a 77-70 loss to Christopher Newport.

Consider the #24 spot officially up for grabs in the next poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 15, 2012, 10:08:35 PM

#15 Stevens Point trailed 21-11 in the first half but closed on an 18-2(?) run to close the half. Led by as many as 18 early in the second half and held on to win at Lawrence.

#15 UWSP 72
Lawrence 64

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 15, 2012, 10:30:46 PM

Quote from: madzillagd on November 15, 2012, 09:30:16 PM
As some anticipated, RMC is the first to fall with a 77-70 loss to Christopher Newport.

Consider the #24 spot officially up for grabs in the next poll.

Well, unless they succeed in their next two tests (Transylvania and St. Mary's - both ranked) and others fall around them. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 15, 2012, 11:00:37 PM

Next poll isn't until a week from Monday. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 16, 2012, 01:04:16 AM

Yep - meant to mention that - I think the lack of sleep is already getting to me... doesn't this usually only happen in mid-December and March? What in the world is going on in November? Oh... that's right... back to work...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 7express on November 16, 2012, 01:48:10 AM

Quote from: magicman on November 06, 2012, 06:05:54 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 06, 2012, 11:02:43 AM
Checking the schedules for the pick em league...man, #24 Randolph-Macon has it rough. Plays Christopher Newport who was 23-5 last year, then #16 Tranyslvania and then #19 St. Mary's (Md).

Plattsburgh State has to play #4 Middlebury on 11-25, then go to Oswego State who ended last year at #17 with a 26-4 log and is #32 in the ORV category this year. On 12-4 they travel to Keene State, a preseason pick to win the Little East Conference by many, and #41 in the ORV category (19-8 last year and have their 4 top scorers returning). They visit #9 Franklin & Marshall on Jan.2nd and could face Eastern Connecticut (#33 in the ORV category on Jan 3rd). 4 of those teams won games in the NCAA tournament this past year and many people felt that Keene State deserved a Pool C bid. With 4 of those 5 games on the road I'll be real happy if they go 2-3. ;D

Not to be outdone, Western Connecticut goes on the road to face #9 Franklin & Marshall Sunday then goes home 49 hours later and plays #28 (going by number of votes in the ORV category) Albertus Magnus. I think with the travel involved (about 4 hours from Danbury to Lancaster, PA) that might be the toughest 2 game schedule this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 17, 2012, 05:54:48 PM

#15 UW Stevens Point led by as many as 11 in the first half but by just one as they led 41-40 at St. Olaf.

The Oles came out and outworked, outshot, and outplayed the Pointers in the second half to take a 70-60 lead, but Point managed to get a few stops and hit a few shots... but trailed 81-79 with :31 left in the game.

St. Olaf missed the front end of a 1 and 1, but Point missed a 3 with 7 seconds left. St. Olaf then missed BOTH free throws of a double bonus situation and sophomore Joe Ritchay hit a 25 foot three pointer with 1.3 seconds left. I honestly don't know what happened after that because St. Olaf's camera didn't follow the play to the other side of the floor....

But the final ended up in Stevens Point's favor!

#15 UW Stevens Point defeats St. Olaf 82-81

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 17, 2012, 09:38:15 PM

Cabrini gets roasted by VWC tonight, a 37 point loss. Cabrini is ranked #10, mostly on the quality of last year's run. They lose Cory Lemons, but freshman Aaron Walton-Moss didn't come back this year. They got a great performance from freshman Arron Goodman and they should be a strong squad, but #10 is way too high for them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 17, 2012, 10:17:07 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 17, 2012, 09:38:15 PM

Cabrini gets roasted by VWC tonight, a 37 point loss. Cabrini is ranked #10, mostly on the quality of last year's run. They lose Cory Lemons, but freshman Aaron Walton-Moss didn't come back this year. They got a great performance from freshman Arron Goodman and they should be a strong squad, but #10 is way too high for them.

Without Lemons and Walton-Moss, that Cabrini team last year just would not have been very good...nowhere near a Top 25 team, let alone a Final 4 team.

Did the voters know Walton-Moss was not returning when they voted Cabrini #10? Or did that news just come out?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 17, 2012, 10:25:05 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 17, 2012, 10:17:07 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 17, 2012, 09:38:15 PM

Cabrini gets roasted by VWC tonight, a 37 point loss. Cabrini is ranked #10, mostly on the quality of last year's run. They lose Cory Lemons, but freshman Aaron Walton-Moss didn't come back this year. They got a great performance from freshman Arron Goodman and they should be a strong squad, but #10 is way too high for them.

Without Lemons and Walton-Moss, that Cabrini team last year just would not have been very good...nowhere near a Top 25 team, let alone a Final 4 team.

Did the voters know Walton-Moss was not returning when they voted Cabrini #10? Or did that news just come out?

My thought is grades. I know Walton-Moss didn't head to college directly after college because of grades. Maybe he had issues? I know he was planning (or at least said as much) to return at the end of last season.

On the CSAC board, Coach C seems to know what's going on. He also mentioned they may have some transfers coming in after Christmas (which is how Walton-Moss showed up last year).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 17, 2012, 10:30:16 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 17, 2012, 10:25:05 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on November 17, 2012, 10:17:07 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 17, 2012, 09:38:15 PM

Cabrini gets roasted by VWC tonight, a 37 point loss. Cabrini is ranked #10, mostly on the quality of last year's run. They lose Cory Lemons, but freshman Aaron Walton-Moss didn't come back this year. They got a great performance from freshman Arron Goodman and they should be a strong squad, but #10 is way too high for them.

Without Lemons and Walton-Moss, that Cabrini team last year just would not have been very good...nowhere near a Top 25 team, let alone a Final 4 team.

Did the voters know Walton-Moss was not returning when they voted Cabrini #10? Or did that news just come out?

My thought is grades. I know Walton-Moss didn't head to college directly after college because of grades. Maybe he had issues? I know he was planning (or at least said as much) to return at the end of last season.

On the CSAC board, Coach C seems to know what's going on. He also mentioned they may have some transfers coming in after Christmas (which is how Walton-Moss showed up last year).

I wouldn't rush to judgment, HF. Walton-Moss has a little daughter. Lots of guys have to hang up the sneakers due to the responsibilities of fatherhood.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 18, 2012, 04:26:11 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 17, 2012, 10:17:07 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 17, 2012, 09:38:15 PM

Cabrini gets roasted by VWC tonight, a 37 point loss. Cabrini is ranked #10, mostly on the quality of last year's run. They lose Cory Lemons, but freshman Aaron Walton-Moss didn't come back this year. They got a great performance from freshman Arron Goodman and they should be a strong squad, but #10 is way too high for them.

Without Lemons and Walton-Moss, that Cabrini team last year just would not have been very good...nowhere near a Top 25 team, let alone a Final 4 team.

Did the voters know Walton-Moss was not returning when they voted Cabrini #10? Or did that news just come out?

I am not sure about others... but I knew... and did not include them in my Top 25 (they were in my Top 40... along with Catholic... just couldn't squeeze all of the teams in I wanted to get in...)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 18, 2012, 10:58:21 PM

It was in the preseason info. Reportedly, he is also coming back at the semester break.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NEPAFAN on November 20, 2012, 03:15:48 PM

Does Massey still do ratings for Division 3?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on November 20, 2012, 03:59:14 PM

Yep:

http://masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&yr=2013&sub=11620

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 20, 2012, 04:09:34 PM

Quote from: NEPAFAN on November 20, 2012, 03:15:48 PM
Does Massey still do ratings for Division 3?

Yep, go to Mratings.com, then select basketball, College Men (or which ever group you want)

Then click on NCAA I near the upper left corner and select NCAA III

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg822.imageshack.us%2Fimg822%2F3749%2F1120201223526pm.png&hash=2ff5bf0cb72f06c203f98f46fc19aafefd45ab72)

It's only updated weekly... and there are some pretty drastic shifts from one week to the next with such a small amount of data.

Not all of the games played through the 19th appear to be in the system yet either, so I'd take it with a rather hefty grain of salt.

(Ex. UW Whitewater is 1-0, showing 0-0, St. Thomas is 2-0, showing 0-0, Whitworth is 0-1, showing 0-0, Wheaton is 2-0, showing 1-0, etc, etc etc).

And that doesn't even begin to talk about the quality of the data. There seems to be a fairly significant bias towards the WIAC. That may be partially due to the fact that the WIAC out of conference win % is at or near the top every year, or due to the fact that the WIAC has won 4 or the last 9 national championships and 2 of the last 3... but this has been the fact for much of the last decade.

You get weird things... the top 4 WIAC teams in the top 11 in the country.

I think Whitewater might be in the top 11, but it isn't a sure-fire thing yet. They had an opening night scare against Beloit.

I'm not sure that Stevens Point is there yet (pretty sure they're not, but they very well could be by the end of the year).

I'm almost certain that River Falls is not (they're 1-1 at the moment, having lost to Northwestern (MN) and likely to lose again tonight to St. Thomas).

La Crosse is 2-0 against middle of the road non-conference opponents. They were picked 3rd in the league in the preseason poll... so maybe they're that good... but we just don't know yet.

Massey has a bad habit of counting cames that shouldn't count, as well. MIT and Harvard played to start the year and Harvard won.

This is a bit confusing, though... because the game counted for Harvard... but it was an exhibition for MIT. So I'm not really sure how he'd deal with that one regardless...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 20, 2012, 04:10:12 PM

Quote from: smedindy on November 20, 2012, 03:59:14 PM
Yep:

http://masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&yr=2013&sub=11620

... Or somebody could just post the link... ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NEPAFAN on November 20, 2012, 04:14:36 PM

Thanks for the help ( both types) Gents.

I went to the site and couldn't find it, obviously.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 7express on November 20, 2012, 04:25:12 PM

It's only updated weekly... and there are some pretty drastic shifts from one week to the next with such a small amount of data.

Not all of the games played through the 19th appear to be in the system yet either, so I'd take it with a rather hefty grain of salt.

It's weird. There are some teams out of the LEC that have the correct record RIC, Eastern, Dartmouth & Plymouth, a school that only has 1 of its 2 games calculated (Western), and then 3 that have none of it's 2 games calculated (Southern Maine, Boston & Keene state)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 20, 2012, 05:07:45 PM

Quote from: 7express on November 20, 2012, 04:25:12 PM
It's only updated weekly... and there are some pretty drastic shifts from one week to the next with such a small amount of data.

Not all of the games played through the 19th appear to be in the system yet either, so I'd take it with a rather hefty grain of salt.

It's weird. There are some teams out of the LEC that have the correct record RIC, Eastern, Dartmouth & Plymouth, a school that only has 1 of its 2 games calculated (Western), and then 3 that have none of it's 2 games calculated (Southern Maine, Boston & Keene state)

Yeah, I'm not exactly sure what the data input is... he uses several different sites (of which this is one, I think).

Probably a bit of a hangover because football is in full swing and basketball is ramping up, perhaps?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on November 20, 2012, 07:27:40 PM

I wouldn't really use power rankings until mid or late December, when team start accumulating data points.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 20, 2012, 09:17:44 PM

Nice battle in New York State this evening that finished up a few minutes ago. SUNYAC contender Buffalo State defeated preseason Liberty League favorite Hobart at Hobart by a score 0f 80-74. Bengals turned an 8 point halftime deficit into an 8 point lead with 4 minutes to play and outlasted the Statesmen down the stretch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NEPAFAN on November 20, 2012, 09:53:30 PM

Quote from: smedindy on November 20, 2012, 07:27:40 PM
I wouldn't really use power rankings until mid or late December, when team start accumulating data points.

Without a doubt, I was just curious because I remember that site also includes a winning % for each team for each game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on November 21, 2012, 05:28:06 PM

A quick look going into the holiday where the top 25 stands...

1 MIT 3-0
2 Virginia Wesleyan 2-0
3 UW-Whitewater 1-0
4 Middlebury 3-0
5 Amherst 3-0
6 North Central (Ill.) 3-0
7 Hope 1-1 (lost to #6 North Central)
8 Illinois Wesleyan 3-0
9 Franklin and Marshall 3-0
10 Cabrini 2-1 (Lost to VA Wes)
11 St. Thomas 3-0
12 Birmingham-Southern 2-1 (Lost to LaGrange)
13 Wooster 2-1 (Lost to Adrian)
14 Whitworth 0-1 (Lost to #11 St. Thomas)
15 UW-Stevens Point 3-0
16 Transylvania 2-1 (Lost to Catholic)
17 Ramapo 2-0
18 Scranton 3-0
19 St. Mary's (Md.) 1-1 (Lost to Catholic)
20 William Paterson 2-1 (Lost to Stevens)
21 Washington U. 3-0
22 Ohio Wesleyan 2-0
23 Wesleyan 2-1 (Lost to Williams)
24 Randolph-Macon 0-3 (Lost to #16 Transylvania, #19 St Mary's (MD), Christopher Newport)
25 Hampden-Sydney 2-1 (Lost to NC Wesleyan)

Some of the preseason vote getters that didn't make the Top 25
Bethany 2-1 (Lost to Baldwin-Wallace)
New York University 2-0
Albertus Magnus 1-0
St. Norbert 1-1 (Lost to Augustana)
Rose-Hulman 2-1 (Lost to Carroll)
Carroll 3-0
Oswego State 2-0
Eastern Connecticut 2-1 (Lost to Clark)
Whitman 0-2 (Lost to St Thomas, UC Riverside)
Trinity (Texas) 1-2 (Lost to WA U, Chicago)
Hobart 1-1 (lost to Dickinson)
Christopher Newport 2-0 (Beat #24)
Augustana 2-0
Wittenberg 3-0
Williams 3-0 (Beat #23)

Notables that did not receive any votes during the preseason but are now on the radar.
Stevens 3-0 (Beat #20)
Catholic 2-0 (Beat #16 & #19)
LaGrange 2-0 (Beat #12)
Adrian 3-0 (Beat #13)
NC Wesleyan 3-0 (Beat #25)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on November 21, 2012, 05:49:34 PM

Figured I keep my thoughts separate from the facts. As you can see 10 teams in the Top 25 have already lost (note there are more games to be played before the next Top 25 will be coming out). In a simple world, all 10 teams with a loss would drop out of the top 25 to be replaced with 10 undefeated teams but that isn't happening. For example, Hope not only won't drop out of the Top 25 but they might even stay in the Top 10 with their only loss being to a team above them in the rankings. Same scenario for Cabrini.

My guess... 6 teams drop out of the top 25 maximum with more likely that number being 5. (I'm looking at you #19, 20, 23, 24, 25) Seven undefeated/unranked teams beat a ranked opponent. Catholic is the only absolute lock to not only make it but to leap over several teams already in. Christopher Newport & Williams are likely in because they received a good deal of votes previously and beat a ranked opponent. As for the last couple spots I think it's more likely we will see NYU and Albertus Magnus in than a Stevens or Adrian.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 26, 2012, 04:56:19 PM

My, how time flies ... I completely blanked out on the fact that last night was time for the inaugural "How They Fared" posting. Thanks, madzillagd, for picking up the slack. I'll try to get my act together and post the mid-week report on Thursday morning.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 26, 2012, 11:11:30 PM

New Top 25 is out. Top 4 spots are unchanged but 7 teams drop out. Catholic is the biggest mover on the list, checking in at #14 with 240 points.

Now Darryl can go to work! ;D Thanks for doing this again Darryl. 8-) It's such a great resource for us throughout the year. Plus k.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on November 26, 2012, 11:32:51 PM

Quote from: magicman on November 26, 2012, 11:11:30 PM
New Top 25 is out. Top 4 spots are unchanged but 7 teams drop out. Catholic is the biggest mover on the list, checking in at #14 with 240 points.

meow (https://twitter.com/Bias_Cat)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on November 27, 2012, 09:32:26 AM

Another top 25 match up. #18 Cabrini travels to #12 Scranton. Scranton might get some revenge this year. We'll see.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Argylebballer on November 27, 2012, 10:21:19 AM

This Thursdays game of #1 MIT at #27 RIC should be a good early season match up. RIC is always tough at home and has been playing good defense but the offense has been no where to be found.
MIT played well in the second half against Curry and has played great defense as well.
If there was a line I would be on the under all day.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NEPAFAN on November 27, 2012, 10:43:37 AM

Quote from: Argylebballer on November 27, 2012, 10:21:19 AM
This Thursdays game of #1 MIT at #27 RIC should be a good early season match up. RIC is always tough at home and has been playing good defense but the offense has been no where to be found.
MIT played well in the second half against Curry and has played great defense as well.
If there was a line I would be on the under all day.

I know some people if you really need a line on this game! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 27, 2012, 11:06:06 AM

#3 UW Whitewater travels to #7 Illinois Wesleyan tonight. Should be a really good early test for two teams who made it to Salem last year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on November 27, 2012, 11:25:17 AM

Biggest Gainers:

Catholic: 240
UW-Stevens Point: 220
Rochester: 152
Scranton: 133
Adrian: 132
St. Thomas: 129
Ramapo: 124
Christopher Newport: 107

Biggest Losers:

Randolph Macon: 102
Transylvania: 109
Wesleyan: 118
William Paterson: 122
Washington U: 134
Cabrini: 179
Birmingham Southern: 274
Hope: 276

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 28, 2012, 09:18:50 PM

#17 Rochester defeats RIT 66-59 in the first round of the Wendy's Classic, to improve to 6-0.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 29, 2012, 07:52:01 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	600	MIT	5-0	def. Tufts, 70-60; 11/29 at #27 Rhode Island College; 12/01 vs. Newbury
#2	599	Virginia Wesleyan	4-0	won at Methodist, 67-59; def. Roanoke, 73-67; 12/02 vs. Frostburg State
#3	580	UW-Whitewater	4-0	won at #7 Illinois Wesleyan, 71-65; 12/01 at UW-Stout
#4	546	Middlebury	5-0	def. Southern Vermont, 96-60; 12/02 at Johnson and Wales
#5	508	North Central (Ill.)	4-0	12/01 at Trine; 12/02 at Kalamazoo
#6	485	Amherst	4-0	def. Lasell, 84-69; 11/30 at Elms; 12/01 vs. T#44 Springfield
#7	439	Illinois Wesleyan	4-1	LOST to #3 UW-Whitewater, 65-71; 11/30 vs. Tufts; 12/01 at TBA
#8	428	St. Thomas	4-0	won at Macalester, 88-40; 12/01 at Hamline
#9	421	UW-Stevens Point	4-0	12/01 at UW-Superior
#10	366	Washington U.	5-0	11/30 vs. Wilmington; 12/01 vs. TBA
#11	342	Franklin and Marshall	3-0	11/29 at Ursinus; 12/01 at McDaniel
#12	276	Scranton	4-0	def. #21 Cabrini, 74-73; 12/01 vs. Susquehanna
#13	273	Ramapo	3-0	def. Kean, 60-55; 12/01 at Rutgers-Camden
#14	240	Catholic	4-0	won at Haverford, 74-68; def. Frostburg State, 73-56; 12/01 at Drew
#15	174	Whitworth	2-1	won at Montana Tech, 90-75; 12/01 vs. UC Santa Cruz
#16	173	Wooster	4-1	won at Ohio Northern, 67-56; 12/01 at #30 Wittenberg
#17	162	Rochester	6-0	won at Rochester Tech, 66-59; 11/30 vs. St. John Fisher; 12/01 at TBD
#18	146	Christopher Newport	4-0	12/01 at Maryville (Tenn.)
#19	141	Hope	2-2	11/30 at Carthage; 12/01 at #32 Wheaton (Ill.)
#20	132	Adrian	6-0	def. Mich.-Dearborn, 67-42; def. Mount Union, 63-48; 12/01 at Carnegie Mellon
#21	128	Cabrini	3-2	LOST at #12 Scranton, 73-74
#22	114	New York University	4-0	IDLE
#23	108	Albertus Magnus	3-0	def. Mitchell, 87-74; 12/01 vs. Lasell
#24	93	Williams	5-0	won at RPI, 105-60; 12/01 vs. T#44 Stevens
#25	89	St. Mary's (Md.)	3-1	12/01 vs. York (Pa.)

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	85	Transylvania	2-2	LOST at Centre, 64-70; 12/01 at Anderson
#27	53	Rhode Island College	4-0	11/29 vs. #1 MIT; 12/01 vs. Plymouth State
#28	52	Augustana	4-0	def. T#39 UW-Platteville, 69-57; 11/29 vs. UW-Oshkosh
#29	51	North Carolina Wesleyan	6-0	def. Mary Washington, 89-85; 12/01 at Roanoke Bible
#30	46	Wittenberg	4-0	def. Marietta, 73-63; 12/01 vs. #16 Wooster
#31	39	Ohio Wesleyan	4-1	won at Capital, 64-53; 12/01 at Allegheny
#32	35	Wheaton (Ill.)	4-0	won at Chicago, 64-52; 11/30 vs. T#36 Calvin; 12/01 vs. #19 Hope
#33	28	WPI	5-0	won at Elms, 76-62; 11/29 vs. Lasell; 12/01 at Husson
#34	24	Carroll	4-1	won at Lake Forest, 80-57
#35	21	Birmingham Southern	4-2	won at Emory, 75-72
T#36	17	Whitman	3-2	11/29 vs. UC Santa Cruz
T#36	17	Calvin	6-0	won at Manchester, 87-63; 11/30 at #32 Wheaton (Ill.); 12/01 vs. Carthage
#38	14	William Paterson	4-1	won at FDU-Florham, 69-61; def. Montclair State, 78-58; 12/01 at Richard Stockton
T#39	12	UW-Platteville	5-1	LOST at #28 Augustana, 57-69; 12/01 at UW-River Falls
T#39	12	Oswego State	3-0	won at SUNY-Cobleskill, 80-70; 11/30 vs. Plattsburgh State; 12/01 vs. Potsdam State
T#41	11	UW-La Crosse	5-0	won at Bethany Lutheran, 67-55; 12/01 at UW-Eau Claire
T#41	11	Rose-Hulman	4-1	won at Wabash, 61-37; def. Fontbonne, 72-54; 12/01 vs. Defiance
T#41	11	Hampden-Sydney	4-1	won at Wesley, 83-75; 11/30 vs. Methodist; 12/02 vs. Piedmont
T#44	7	Springfield	4-0	won at T#48 Keene State, 75-72; 11/30 at Westfield State; 12/01 at #6 Amherst
T#44	7	Stevens	4-0	12/01 at #24 Williams
#46	4	Salisbury	5-1	12/01 at Penn State-Abington
#47	2	LaGrange	4-1	won at Covenant, 69-55; 12/01 at Huntingdon
T#48	1	Augsburg	4-0	won at Gustavus Adolphus, 81-73; 12/01 vs. Concordia-Moorhead
T#48	1	Texas-Dallas	4-0	won at Austin, 61-50; 12/01 at Hardin-Simmons
T#48	1	Keene State	2-2	LOST to T#44 Springfield, 72-75; 12/01 at Mass-Dartmouth

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 29, 2012, 09:33:58 PM

Top ranked MIT loses to #27 Rhode Island College 68-44 in a game that was never close.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 01, 2012, 06:01:10 PM

#9 UWSP beats UW Superior 79-68

UW Super shot 57% in the first half and led by 3 at the half 37-34 and as many as 7 in the first half.

The Yellowjackets stayed hot in the second half and led 48-40 with just under 16 minutes left.

Point then went on a 9-0 run to take the lead 49-48. It was back and forth for a few possessions but SP retook the lead for good 53-51 on two Clayton Heuer FT's.

Point really turned up the D in the second half and they hit their free throws (24/25 for the game).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 01, 2012, 09:06:19 PM

#6 Amherst lost vs Springfield 70-64

#24 Williams lost vs Stevens 75-69

#23 Albertus Magnus won vs Lasell 81-77

#12 Scranton wins vs Susquehanna 78-63

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on December 01, 2012, 09:28:57 PM

#16 Wooster 60
ORV #30 Wittenberg 41

Wooster stakes an early claim to supremacy in the NCAC with a road win at arch-rival Wittenberg. After Wittenberg opened the scoring with a basket, the Scots scored the next 9 and established a lead that they wouldn't relinquish. Wittenberg simply never found an offensive rhythm all night, shooting a terrible 29% from the floor for the contest. Credit strong Wooster defense, but Witt also missed a number of open looks. Meanwhile the Scots put together a balanced scoring effort with 10 scorers in the book. Wooster opened the second half with a bucket to push the lead to 16 at 32-16 and Wittenberg never got it back below 14 the rest of the way.

One stat that jumps out was Wooster's commanding rebounding advantage - not many Woo-Witt games where the Scots enjoy a +16 advantage on the glass (41-25).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: howardjp on December 02, 2012, 05:12:14 PM

Brandeis' only loss was to RIC by 2 points in their opener. Looking better every game since.

quote author=magicman link=topic=4097.msg1472914#msg1472914 date=1354242838]
Top ranked MIT loses to #27 Rhode Island College 68-44 in a game that was never close.
[/quote]

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 02, 2012, 05:31:51 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	600	MIT	6-1	def. Tufts, 70-60; LOST at #27 Rhode Island College, 44-68; def. Newbury, 91-76
#2	599	Virginia Wesleyan	5-0	won at Methodist, 67-59; def. Roanoke, 73-67; def. Frostburg State, 85-64
#3	580	UW-Whitewater	5-0	won at #7 Illinois Wesleyan, 71-65; won at UW-Stout, 64-58
#4	546	Middlebury	6-0	def. Southern Vermont, 96-60; won at Johnson and Wales, 79-71
#5	508	North Central (Ill.)	6-0	won at Trine, 64-47; won at Kalamazoo, 72-57
#6	485	Amherst	5-1	def. Lasell, 84-69; def. Elms, 79-63; LOST to T#44 Springfield, 64-70
#7	439	Illinois Wesleyan	5-2	LOST to #3 UW-Whitewater, 65-71; def. Tufts, 71-62; LOST at #10 Washington U., 57-67
#8	428	St. Thomas	5-0	won at Macalester, 88-40; won at Hamline, 80-59
#9	421	UW-Stevens Point	5-0	won at UW-Superior, 79-68
#10	366	Washington U.	7-0	def. Wilmington, 73-62; def. #7 Illinois Wesleyan, 67-57
#11	342	Franklin and Marshall	5-0	won at Ursinus, 68-63; won at McDaniel, 80-70
#12	276	Scranton	5-0	def. #21 Cabrini, 74-73; def. Susquehanna, 78-63
#13	273	Ramapo	4-0	def. Kean, 60-55; won at Rutgers-Camden, 79-71
#14	240	Catholic	5-0	won at Haverford, 74-68; def. Frostburg State, 73-56; won at Drew, 66-55
#15	174	Whitworth	3-1	won at Montana Tech, 90-75; def. UC Santa Cruz, 61-48
#16	173	Wooster	5-1	won at Ohio Northern, 67-56; won at #30 Wittenberg, 60-41
#17	162	Rochester	8-0	won at Rochester Tech, 66-59; def. St. John Fisher, 63-50; def. Hobart, 73-64
#18	146	Christopher Newport	5-0	won at Maryville (Tenn.), 79-62
#19	141	Hope	3-3	won at Carthage, 82-70; LOST at #32 Wheaton (Ill.), 75-79
#20	132	Adrian	7-0	def. Mich.-Dearborn, 67-42; def. Mount Union, 63-48; won at Carnegie Mellon, 62-51
#21	128	Cabrini	3-2	LOST at #12 Scranton, 73-74
#22	114	New York University	4-0	IDLE
#23	108	Albertus Magnus	4-0	def. Mitchell, 87-74; def. Lasell, 81-77
#24	93	Williams	5-1	won at RPI, 105-60; LOST to T#44 Stevens, 69-75
#25	89	St. Mary's (Md.)	4-1	def. York (Pa.), 58-50

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	85	Transylvania	3-2	LOST at Centre, 64-70; won at Anderson, 75-45
#27	53	Rhode Island College	6-0	def. #1 MIT, 68-44; def. Plymouth State, 68-54
#28	52	Augustana	5-0	def. T#39 UW-Platteville, 69-57; def. UW-Oshkosh, 67-63
#29	51	North Carolina Wesleyan	7-0	def. Mary Washington, 89-85; won at Roanoke Bible, 77-53
#30	46	Wittenberg	4-1	def. Marietta, 73-63; LOST to #16 Wooster, 41-60
#31	39	Ohio Wesleyan	5-1	won at Capital, 64-53; won at Allegheny, 76-62
#32	35	Wheaton (Ill.)	6-0	won at Chicago, 64-52; def. T#36 Calvin, 54-37; def. #19 Hope, 79-75
#33	28	WPI	7-0	won at Elms, 76-62; def. Lasell, 94-62; won at Husson, 89-85
#34	24	Carroll	4-1	won at Lake Forest, 80-57
#35	21	Birmingham Southern	4-2	won at Emory, 75-72
T#36	17	Whitman	4-2	def. UC Santa Cruz, 87-65
T#36	17	Calvin	6-2	won at Manchester, 87-63; LOST at #32 Wheaton (Ill.), 37-54; LOST to Carthage, 63-74
#38	14	William Paterson	4-2	won at FDU-Florham, 69-61; def. Montclair State, 78-58; LOST at Richard Stockton, 54-63
T#39	12	UW-Platteville	6-1	LOST at #28 Augustana, 57-69; won at UW-River Falls, 74-48
T#39	12	Oswego State	4-1	won at SUNY-Cobleskill, 80-70; LOST to Plattsburgh State, 57-59; def. Potsdam State, 69-54
T#41	11	UW-La Crosse	6-0	won at Bethany Lutheran, 67-55; won at UW-Eau Claire, 84-69
T#41	11	Rose-Hulman	5-1	won at Wabash, 61-37; def. Fontbonne, 72-54; def. Defiance, 63-52
T#41	11	Hampden-Sydney	6-1	won at Wesley, 83-75; def. Methodist, 88-51; def. Piedmont, 100-62
T#44	7	Springfield	5-1	won at T#48 Keene State, 75-72; LOST at Westfield State, 54-68; won at #6 Amherst, 70-64
T#44	7	Stevens	5-0	won at #24 Williams, 75-69
#46	4	Salisbury	6-1	won at Penn State-Abington, 84-67
#47	2	LaGrange	5-1	won at Covenant, 69-55; won at Huntingdon, 81-72
T#48	1	Augsburg	5-0	won at Gustavus Adolphus, 81-73; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 81-76
T#48	1	Texas-Dallas	4-1	won at Austin, 61-50; LOST at Hardin-Simmons, 62-64
T#48	1	Keene State	3-2	LOST to T#44 Springfield, 72-75; won at Mass-Dartmouth, 81-76

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 02, 2012, 06:21:30 PM

Thanks again, Daryl +k

I'm guessing that Hope, Cabrini, and Williams drop out (Cabrini's loss was on the road by one point to a higher ranked team - no disgrace! - but they had been grossly overranked in the preseason due to missing a player no one expected them to be without, so less margin of error); replacements will be RIC (duh!), Augustana, and Wheaton (the teams above them either lost or had less impressive wins). I'm curious how much my Titans will be punished for TWO losses (both opponents in the top ten, and neither loss by any means a blowout) - I'll guess they only fall to 12 or 13.

With the poll always being quite fluid this early in the season, it is also possible that still-undefeated Stevens may jump all the way from 7 points to #24 or 25 on the basis of their win at #24 Williams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 02, 2012, 11:33:45 PM

Tough 3-day span for Tufts, possibly one of the most difficult trips in D3 this year? They played two (former) Top 7 teams on the road, about 1200 miles apart. Lost by 10 and 9, respectively, to MIT and IWU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 03, 2012, 01:53:51 AM

Quote from: Hugenerd on December 02, 2012, 11:33:45 PM
Tough 3-day span for Tufts, possibly one of the most difficult trips in D3 this year? They played two (former) Top 7 teams on the road, about 1200 miles apart. Lost by 10 and 9, respectively, to MIT and IWU.

Kinda sounds like a WashUStL road trip from Rochester to Emory.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 03, 2012, 08:33:55 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 03, 2012, 01:53:51 AM
Quote from: Hugenerd on December 02, 2012, 11:33:45 PM
Tough 3-day span for Tufts, possibly one of the most difficult trips in D3 this year? They played two (former) Top 7 teams on the road, about 1200 miles apart. Lost by 10 and 9, respectively, to MIT and IWU.
Kinda sounds like a WashUStL road trip from Rochester to Emory.

I agree about the travel, I meant with regard to the respective ranks of the teams also. Kind of reminds of the WashU/Chicago trip back in the early 2000s when Chicago had Reich and both those squads were pretty stacked.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ethelred the Unready on December 03, 2012, 08:57:52 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 03, 2012, 01:53:51 AM
Quote from: Hugenerd on December 02, 2012, 11:33:45 PM
Tough 3-day span for Tufts, possibly one of the most difficult trips in D3 this year? They played two (former) Top 7 teams on the road, about 1200 miles apart. Lost by 10 and 9, respectively, to MIT and IWU.
Kinda sounds like a WashUStL road trip from Rochester to Emory.

Oddly, I think it takes less time to go Rochester to Emory than Rochester to anywhere else in the UAA.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on December 03, 2012, 11:10:02 AM

Quote from: Ethelred the Unready on December 03, 2012, 08:57:52 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 03, 2012, 01:53:51 AM
Quote from: Hugenerd on December 02, 2012, 11:33:45 PM
Tough 3-day span for Tufts, possibly one of the most difficult trips in D3 this year? They played two (former) Top 7 teams on the road, about 1200 miles apart. Lost by 10 and 9, respectively, to MIT and IWU.
Kinda sounds like a WashUStL road trip from Rochester to Emory.

Oddly, I think it takes less time to go Rochester to Emory than Rochester to anywhere else in the UAA.

Rochester used to be travel partner with CMU (and Case with Emory), which is how it was when I played there, but the new arrangement makes much more sense. Its about a 6 hour bus ride to Rochester from CMU, but just 1.5 hours or so to Case. Since Emory is going to be a flight either way, you eliminate an extre 3-4 hours of driving (which is usually in the middle of winter also).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cardinalpride on December 03, 2012, 05:04:23 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 02, 2012, 06:21:30 PM
Thanks again, Daryl +k

I'm guessing that Hope, Cabrini, and Williams drop out (Cabrini's loss was on the road by one point to a higher ranked team - no disgrace! - but they had been grossly overranked in the preseason due to missing a player no one expected them to be without, so less margin of error); replacements will be RIC (duh!), Augustana, and Wheaton (the teams above them either lost or had less impressive wins). I'm curious how much my Titans will be punished for TWO losses (both opponents in the top ten, and neither loss by any means a blowout) - I'll guess they only fall to 12 or 13.

With the poll always being quite fluid this early in the season, it is also possible that still-undefeated Stevens may jump all the way from 7 points to #24 or 25 on the basis of their win at #24 Williams.

New D3Hoops poll has been released:
3 CCIW teams in the top 25 with Augie at 26th!!!
http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2012-13/week2

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 03, 2012, 05:16:03 PM

MIT's drop has got to be the biggest ever for a one-loss week, right?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 03, 2012, 05:18:00 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 03, 2012, 05:16:03 PM

MIT's drop has got to be the biggest ever for a one-loss week, right?

I believe so but don't have any documentation to back that up. It's a huge drop but exacerbated by the fact that the lineup that has been taking the floor isn't the one that voters ranked No. 1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 03, 2012, 05:45:39 PM

Quote from: cardinalpride on December 03, 2012, 05:04:23 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 02, 2012, 06:21:30 PM
Thanks again, Daryl +k

I'm guessing that Hope, Cabrini, and Williams drop out (Cabrini's loss was on the road by one point to a higher ranked team - no disgrace! - but they had been grossly overranked in the preseason due to missing a player no one expected them to be without, so less margin of error); replacements will be RIC (duh!), Augustana, and Wheaton (the teams above them either lost or had less impressive wins). I'm curious how much my Titans will be punished for TWO losses (both opponents in the top ten, and neither loss by any means a blowout) - I'll guess they only fall to 12 or 13.

With the poll always being quite fluid this early in the season, it is also possible that still-undefeated Stevens may jump all the way from 7 points to #24 or 25 on the basis of their win at #24 Williams.
New D3Hoops poll has been released:
3 CCIW teams in the top 25 with Augie at 26th!!!
http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2012-13/week2

Wow, I almost nailed it perfectly (and covered my a$$ with the last sentence about Stevens). Though IWU fell slightly further than I had expected.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 04, 2012, 10:52:31 AM

I decided my ballot much on your advice here... I figured I better meet your expectations ;).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 04, 2012, 04:31:50 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 04, 2012, 10:52:31 AM
I decided my ballot much on your advice here... I figured I better meet your expectations ;).

;D ;D +k

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 06, 2012, 08:11:55 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	611	Virginia Wesleyan	6-0	won at Lynchburg, 72-65; 12/08 vs. Guilford
#2	601	UW-Whitewater	6-0	won at #37 UW-La Crosse, 64-52; 12/08 vs. UW-Eau Claire
#3	563	Middlebury	6-0	12/06 vs. Johnson State; 12/08 vs. Skidmore
#4	549	North Central (Ill.)	6-0	12/08 vs. Simpson
#5	517	St. Thomas	7-0	def. Concordia-Moorhead, 93-64; won at St. Mary's (Minn.), 101-63
#6	454	Washington U.	8-0	won at Webster, 72-49; 12/08 at #22 Wheaton (Ill.)
#7	442	UW-Stevens Point	6-0	won at UW-Oshkosh, 74-53; 12/08 vs. #26 Augustana
#8	415	Franklin and Marshall	6-0	def. Gettysburg, 54-51; 12/08 vs. Haverford
#9	377	Scranton	5-0	12/06 at Mount St. Mary; 12/09 vs. Merchant Marine
#10	350	Amherst	6-1	won at Emmanuel, 84-58; 12/06 vs. Babson; 12/08 vs. Brandeis
#11	327	Rochester	9-0	won at Hamilton, 82-60; 12/08 vs. Hobart
#12	282	Catholic	5-1	LOST at DeSales, 66-76; 12/08 at Carnegie Mellon
#13	274	Ramapo	5-0	won at Montclair State, 84-61; 12/08 vs. TCNJ
#14	261	Rhode Island College	7-0	won at Salve Regina, 66-42; 12/06 at #30 WPI; 12/08 vs. Eastern Connecticut
#15	233	Christopher Newport	5-1	LOST at #24 St. Mary's (Md.), 60-65
#16	210	Wooster	5-1	12/08 vs. Wabash
#17	181	Illinois Wesleyan	5-2	IDLE
#18	180	MIT	7-1	def. Mass-Boston, 54-44; 12/06 at Salem State
#19	179	Adrian	7-0	IDLE
#20	176	Whitworth	3-1	12/07 vs. Pacific Lutheran; 12/08 vs. Puget Sound
#21	157	New York University	5-1	LOST to New Jersey City, 50-60; def. SUNY-Old Westbury, 80-76; 12/09 vs. #25 Stevens
#22	133	Wheaton (Ill.)	6-0	12/06 vs. Westminster (Mo.); 12/08 vs. #6 Washington U.
#23	116	Albertus Magnus	5-0	def. Trinity (Conn.), 73-65; 12/06 vs. Mount Ida; 12/08 at Norwich
#24	77	St. Mary's (Md.)	6-1	won at Medgar Evers, 83-38; def. #15 Christopher Newport, 65-60; 12/08 vs. Marymount
#25	68	Stevens	5-0	12/07 at Utica; 12/09 at #21 New York University

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	65	Augustana	6-0	def. St. Ambrose, 77-69; 12/08 at #7 UW-Stevens Point
#27	55	N.C. Wesleyan	7-0	12/09 at Maryville (Tenn.)
#28	37	Ohio Wesleyan	6-1	won at Kenyon, 81-69; 12/08 vs. DePauw
#29	35	Whitman	4-2	12/07 vs. Puget Sound; 12/08 vs. Pacific Lutheran
#30	30	WPI	8-0	won at Salem State, 75-71; 12/06 vs. #14 Rhode Island College; 12/08 at Fitchburg State
#31	26	Springfield	6-1	won at Western New England, 73-71; 12/06 vs. Trinity (Conn.); 12/08 vs. #38 Williams
#32	20	Birmingham-Southern	4-2	IDLE
#33	19	Rose-Hulman	6-1	won at Manchester, 70-52; 12/08 at Bluffton
#34	17	Carroll	5-1	def. Lawrence, 84-81; 12/08 at Monmouth
#35	16	Hampden-Sydney	7-1	won at Shenandoah, 91-62; 12/08 vs. Roanoke
#36	12	Augsburg	7-0	won at Bethel, 59-50; def. Hamline, 68-62
#37	11	UW-La Crosse	6-1	LOST to #2 UW-Whitewater, 52-64; 12/08 at UW-Superior; 12/09 at Northland
#38	10	Williams	7-1	won at Curry, 97-93; def. Castleton State, 96-52; 12/08 at #31 Springfield
#39	8	Transylvania	4-2	def. Earlham, 83-63; 12/08 vs. Manchester
#40	6	Oswego State	5-1	won at Brockport State, 81-80; 12/08 at Ithaca
T#41	5	Cabrini	4-3	won at Centenary (N.J.), 65-58; LOST to Immaculata, 60-66; 12/08 at Baptist Bible
T#41	5	UW-Stout	7-1	won at UW-Superior, 69-54; 12/08 at T#47 UW-Platteville
T#43	4	Thomas More	7-0	12/08 vs. Washington and Jefferson
T#43	4	Wittenberg	4-2	LOST at Otterbein, 80-85; 12/08 vs. Allegheny
#45	3	Hope	3-3	12/07 vs. Covenant; 12/08 vs. TBA
#46	2	Salisbury	7-1	won at Goucher, 69-59; 12/08 vs. Frostburg State
T#47	1	UW-Platteville	7-1	def. UW-Eau Claire, 56-48; 12/08 vs. T#41 UW-Stout
T#47	1	Lycoming	6-1	won at Elizabethtown, 88-71; 12/08 vs. Arcadia

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 06, 2012, 08:46:08 PM

More blood about to be spilled in the Top 25 tonight as WPI defeats #14 Rhode Island 79-68.

#10 Amherst is losing to Babson 65-53 with 4 minutes to go.

#18 MIT down 44-41 to Salem State at the half.

#3 Middlebury over Johnson State 103-67

#9 Scranton defeated Mount St. Mary 64-57

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 08, 2012, 10:28:51 PM

Heck of a game between #6 Washington University and #22 Wheaton as the Thunder got one final possession at their end with 3 seconds left to play. Inbounds pass goes to Tyler Peters on the right side and he fires up a jumper 1 tick before the buzzer goes off. Nothing but net.

Pat, you will want to put that one on the buzzer beaters link.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 08, 2012, 10:36:24 PM

... especially given the difficulty level of the shot. It was a well-contested fadeaway from 18 feet out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 08, 2012, 10:38:06 PM

Quote from: magicman on December 08, 2012, 10:28:51 PM
Heck of a game between #6 Washington University and #22 Wheaton as the Thunder got one final possession at their end with 3 seconds left to play. Inbounds pass goes to Tyler Peters on the right side and he fires up a jumper 1 tick before the buzzer goes off. Nothing but net.

Pat, you will want to put that one on the buzzer beaters link.

Those who have the video have to tell us where it is on YouTube so we can add it to our play list... OR email/dropbox us the video so we can put it up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 08, 2012, 10:50:43 PM

(#26) Augustana suffered its first loss in a close one AT #7 UWSP - it will be interesting to see if a LOSS can propel them into the Top 25! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 08, 2012, 11:09:57 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 08, 2012, 10:38:06 PM
Quote from: magicman on December 08, 2012, 10:28:51 PM
Heck of a game between #6 Washington University and #22 Wheaton as the Thunder got one final possession at their end with 3 seconds left to play. Inbounds pass goes to Tyler Peters on the right side and he fires up a jumper 1 tick before the buzzer goes off. Nothing but net.

Pat, you will want to put that one on the buzzer beaters link.
Those who have the video have to tell us where it is on YouTube so we can add it to our play list... OR email/dropbox us the video so we can put it up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjzOvXYL_9Q&feature=youtu.be.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 09, 2012, 03:19:31 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 08, 2012, 11:09:57 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 08, 2012, 10:38:06 PM
Quote from: magicman on December 08, 2012, 10:28:51 PM
Heck of a game between #6 Washington University and #22 Wheaton as the Thunder got one final possession at their end with 3 seconds left to play. Inbounds pass goes to Tyler Peters on the right side and he fires up a jumper 1 tick before the buzzer goes off. Nothing but net.

Pat, you will want to put that one on the buzzer beaters link.
Those who have the video have to tell us where it is on YouTube so we can add it to our play list... OR email/dropbox us the video so we can put it up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjzOvXYL_9Q&feature=youtu.be.

As usual Q to the rescue. Nice interview on Hoopsville the other night by the way.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 09, 2012, 04:14:18 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 08, 2012, 10:38:06 PM
Quote from: magicman on December 08, 2012, 10:28:51 PM
Heck of a game between #6 Washington University and #22 Wheaton as the Thunder got one final possession at their end with 3 seconds left to play. Inbounds pass goes to Tyler Peters on the right side and he fires up a jumper 1 tick before the buzzer goes off. Nothing but net.

Pat, you will want to put that one on the buzzer beaters link.
Those who have the video have to tell us where it is on YouTube so we can add it to our play list... OR email/dropbox us the video so we can put it up.

It was emailed to me and uploaded last night.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 09, 2012, 07:34:37 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	611	Virginia Wesleyan	7-0	won at Lynchburg, 72-65; def. Guilford, 63-49
#2	601	UW-Whitewater	7-0	won at #37 UW-La Crosse, 64-52; def. UW-Eau Claire, 79-65
#3	563	Middlebury	8-0	def. Johnson State, 103-67; def. Skidmore, 74-53
#4	549	North Central (Ill.)	7-0	def. Simpson, 65-46
#5	517	St. Thomas	7-0	def. Concordia-Moorhead, 93-64; won at St. Mary's (Minn.), 101-63
#6	454	Washington U.	8-1	won at Webster, 72-49; LOST at #22 Wheaton (Ill.), 64-66
#7	442	UW-Stevens Point	7-0	won at UW-Oshkosh, 74-53; def. #26 Augustana, 67-59
#8	415	Franklin and Marshall	7-0	def. Gettysburg, 54-51; def. Haverford, 61-59
#9	377	Scranton	6-1	won at Mount St. Mary, 64-57; LOST to Merchant Marine, 54-67
#10	350	Amherst	7-2	won at Emmanuel, 84-58; LOST to Babson, 70-78; def. Brandeis, 76-64
#11	327	Rochester	10-0	won at Hamilton, 82-60; def. Hobart, 86-80
#12	282	Catholic	6-1	LOST at DeSales, 66-76; won at Carnegie Mellon, 60-46
#13	274	Ramapo	6-0	won at Montclair State, 84-61; def. TCNJ, 78-58
#14	261	Rhode Island College	7-2	won at Salve Regina, 66-42; LOST at #30 WPI, 68-79; LOST to Eastern Connecticut, 68-76
#15	233	Christopher Newport	5-1	LOST at #24 St. Mary's (Md.), 60-65
#16	210	Wooster	6-1	def. Wabash, 97-56
#17	181	Illinois Wesleyan	5-2	IDLE
#18	180	MIT	7-2	def. Mass-Boston, 54-44; LOST at Salem State, 77-82
#19	179	Adrian	7-0	IDLE
#20	176	Whitworth	5-1	def. Pacific Lutheran, 63-56; def. Puget Sound, 78-45
#21	157	New York University	6-1	LOST to New Jersey City, 50-60; def. SUNY-Old Westbury, 80-76; def. #25 Stevens, 71-65
#22	133	Wheaton (Ill.)	8-0	def. Westminster (Mo.), 70-41; def. #6 Washington U., 66-64
#23	116	Albertus Magnus	7-0	def. Trinity (Conn.), 73-65; def. Mount Ida, 93-86; won at Norwich, 78-61
#24	77	St. Mary's (Md.)	7-1	won at Medgar Evers, 83-38; def. #15 Christopher Newport, 65-60; def. Marymount, 70-56
#25	68	Stevens	6-1	won at Utica, 72-59; LOST at #21 New York University, 65-71

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	65	Augustana	6-1	def. St. Ambrose, 77-69; LOST at #7 UW-Stevens Point, 59-67
#27	55	N.C. Wesleyan	7-1	LOST at Maryville (Tenn.), 72-86
#28	37	Ohio Wesleyan	7-1	won at Kenyon, 81-69; def. DePauw, 64-61
#29	35	Whitman	6-2	def. Puget Sound, 111-77; def. Pacific Lutheran, 81-68
#30	30	WPI	10-0	won at Salem State, 75-71; def. #14 Rhode Island College, 79-68; won at Fitchburg State, 78-75
#31	26	Springfield	7-2	won at Western New England, 73-71; def. Trinity (Conn.), 64-49; LOST to #38 Williams, 69-84
#32	20	Birmingham-Southern	4-2	IDLE
#33	19	Rose-Hulman	7-1	won at Manchester, 70-52; won at Bluffton, 63-43
#34	17	Carroll	6-1	def. Lawrence, 84-81; won at Monmouth, 71-63
#35	16	Hampden-Sydney	8-1	won at Shenandoah, 91-62; def. Roanoke, 100-62
#36	12	Augsburg	7-0	won at Bethel, 59-50; def. Hamline, 68-62
#37	11	UW-La Crosse	8-1	LOST to #2 UW-Whitewater, 52-64; won at UW-Superior, 69-58; won at Northland, 65-52
#38	10	Williams	8-1	won at Curry, 97-93; def. Castleton State, 96-52; won at #31 Springfield, 84-69
#39	8	Transylvania	4-3	def. Earlham, 83-63; LOST to Manchester, 57-59
#40	6	Oswego State	6-1	won at Brockport State, 81-80; won at Ithaca, 64-58
T#41	5	Cabrini	5-3	won at Centenary (N.J.), 65-58; LOST to Immaculata, 60-66; won at Baptist Bible, 77-70
T#41	5	UW-Stout	8-1	won at UW-Superior, 69-54; won at T#47 UW-Platteville, 64-55
T#43	4	Thomas More	7-1	LOST to Washington and Jefferson, 82-92
T#43	4	Wittenberg	5-2	LOST at Otterbein, 80-85; def. Allegheny, 67-63
#45	3	Hope	4-4	def. Covenant, 87-73; LOST to Spring Arbor, 73-77
#46	2	Salisbury	8-1	won at Goucher, 69-59; def. Frostburg State, 68-64
T#47	1	UW-Platteville	7-2	def. UW-Eau Claire, 56-48; LOST to T#41 UW-Stout, 55-64
T#47	1	Lycoming	7-1	won at Elizabethtown, 88-71; def. Arcadia, 90-72

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 10, 2012, 10:17:22 PM

#5 St. Thomas down 76-71 at Bethany Lutheran scores 5 points in the last 9 seconds to send it into OT.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 10, 2012, 10:49:20 PM

St. Thomas up by 3 with 51.7 seconds left against the Bethany Lutheran Vikings. Vikings with the ball out of time out. Pass goes inside and the Viking miss a short bank shot. Tommies get fouled on the rebound and make them both., now up by 5 with 23 seconds left. Another time out. Vikings get a three pointer and are down by 2 at 88-86. They foul and the Tommies go to the line and makes them both with 19 seconds left. 90-86. Vikings go coast to coast and lay it in and quickly foul with 12 seconds left. Tommies make them both. Vikings make a 3 pointer with 2.7 left to pull within 1 at 92-91. Time out called. Vikings foul before the inbound pass. Tommies make both free throws, Vikings try a length of the court pass that gets intercepted by the Tommies and it's a final 94-91. Great game to watch

Bethany Lutheran lost this game at the end of regulation and in OT because they had trouble making an inbounds pass, resulting in turnovers and points on several occasions. Tough loss for them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 10, 2012, 11:17:26 PM

NOT a good outing for UST. For the #5 ranked team to get nearly whipped by a 2-7 team from the UMAC is NOT a way to attract votes! 8-)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 11, 2012, 06:56:24 AM

Wow. I don't think I've ever seen a D-3 hoops Top 25 poll that was so out of whack in terms of its rating of New England teams at this point in the season. How on earth can Amherst be ranked seven spots ahead of Williams??? And what has Amherst done to be deserved to be ranked at ALL? Let's compare their resumes:

Amherst is 7-2 with no wins against any teams receiving votes in the poll. It has two credible wins: a home win vs. Brandeis and a home win vs. Curry -- a team that Williams beat on the road. Amherst lost to Springfield, a team that Williams absolutely dominated on the road just a few days later (Williams won by 16, but was up by 29 before garbage time). Williams' only loss was a close loss to a solid ARV Stevens team, a much better loss than Amherst's recent home loss to a mediocre Babson team. Williams has solid road wins vs. Wesleyan, Curry, and Springfield. So Williams has a better record vs. a better schedule, including one illuminating comparative game vs. Springfield, a team which dominated Amherst for most of the game on a neutral court and was in turn dominated by Williams for most of the game despite playing at home. And its not as if Williams is a team that came out of nowhere ... it's a squad that made two straight final fours before having a relatively down (but still not atrocious) year last year attributable entirely to basically the most flukey spate of injuries I've seen in decades as a Williams fan, where most of the team was playing through severely limiting injuries for most of the season, and where the only two contributing graduated players from that team were among the walking wounded and frankly just were not assets on the court. Now the team is basically healthy and playing to its ability level. Meanwhile, Amherst, while talented, had a big perceived flaw exacerbated by graduation of a class with strong perimeter skills -- a serious lack of outside shooting -- and that flaw is continuing to cost it in games. The Jeffs have also been very spotty on defense this season.

The statistics also indicate that Williams has played at a substantially higher level than Amherst. Williams is outscoring opponents by 23 pg and outrebounding opponents by 11 rpg, Amherst's figures are 15 ppg and 9 rpg respectively, against a much worse schedule, including only ONE road game (and two neutral court games) (Williams has played four true road games). Amherst is being outshot .39 percent to .34 percent from three point range which, if it continues, is going to be a BIG problem for the Jeffs when they start facing better teams. Williams shoots considerably better from both two and three point range than Amherst, and holds its opponents to considerably lower shooting percentages from both two and three range.

I realize that early in the season, there are still residual effects from last year, but let's face it, nine games is enough of a sample size to realize that Williams is substantially improved, and Amherst substantially worse, than teams which, when they faced each other last year, played two games that came down to the last shot.

I think it's also wrong for RIC to be ranked above Williams after two straight losses, one of which was not a very good home loss, in a week where Williams put up three wins including the convincing road win over Springfield. But at least there you have an argument since RIC has played a strong schedule, much stronger than Amherst's.

I question whether this Williams team is a top five team, although I think the upside potential on this team is similar to the 2011 Final Four squad, as the Ephs once again have an elite point guard-post combo (not as good as 2011's version featuring All Americans at both positions, but not as far behind as you might think) while also being MUCH stronger at forward this go-around. But I think there is no question they will be a top 20 team when all is said and done, and I have a LOT of questions about whether Amherst belongs, although we may not know about the Jeffs until they finally start playing some tough road games late in the season. I guess time will tell ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Roundball999 on December 11, 2012, 08:22:15 AM

Massey Ratings seem to agree with you about Williams relative to Amherst, but disagrees that either is a Top 20 team. They have Williams at #26 and Amherst at #89. RIC is at #94.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 11, 2012, 09:45:44 AM

There's always been an argument of why they even have preseason polls. It all has to do on where they start the season. If you look at the preseason poll, Amherst started out in 5th with 453 points after finishing last year in 8th. Williams, on the other hand, began with 27 points. That's a 426-point difference. In Week 1, Amherst actually gained 32 points after a 3-0 start, moving up to 485 points. Williams jumped 66 points to 93, moving into the Top 25 at 24th after a 4-0 start. Williams then lost AT HOME to Stevens, which resulted in an 83-point drop to 10 votes. In the mean time, Amherst also lost on a neutral court, to Springfield. They dropped 135 points to 350. Lastly, Amherst again lost and dropped 239 points to 111. On the other hand, Williams gained 27 points in a week, to move to 37 points. So if you look at it, despite losing a game throughout the early part of the year, Williams actually GAINED 10 points. Amherst, losing twice so far, dropped 342 points from the preseason. Williams has gained 352 points on Amherst. That's pretty good, I think, considering they've lost just one less game than Amherst. I think my math is right.

Preseason
Amherst 453
Williams 27

Week 1
Amherst 485
Williams 93

Week 2
Amherst 350
Williams 10

Week 3
Amherst 111
Williams 37

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 11, 2012, 10:09:58 AM

Greek Tragedy, I think your explanation for why they are positioned that way makes perfect sense, but sometimes voters just have to discount where they placed teams in preseason based on the available evidence. MIT is a perfect example -- they would have certainly been a top five team if healthy, but given the guys they are missing, they simply aren't a contending team right now, and the poll belatedly recognized that (although finally did so). Amherst, too, was clearly overrated to start the season ... looking to their record from last year was a bit deceptive, as they beat Midd and Williams four times, but by a combined eight points, including a few in which last second shots just missed for the opponent (and 3/4 were also at home). They had some flaws last year which F&M exposed, and then lost some key players, in particular Taylor Barrise, whose dead-eye shooting really opened up the rest of the floor for his teammates. Without anyone to fill that role on the roster, Amherst has struggled bit. They are still a talented team and given the fairly easy schedule they face over the next month, they will probably not only stay in the poll, but gradually improve, even though they won't have faced a single team receiving votes in a current Top 25 poll until January 23(!), and nonetheless will have (at least) two losses and generally played uninspired ball.

This is a case where voters should simply forget about where they had a team ranked pre-season and adjust expecations accordingly. Same with Williams, which is still being punished for last year, a flukey year filled with injuries and tough-luck losses, rather than the caliber of play and talent on the this year's roster.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on December 11, 2012, 12:20:50 PM

Posted on the NESCAC board but I throw this out here as well....

It's with considerable hesitation that I come forward and post this. I'm concerned for my own safety and the safety of my family but I think the truth needs to get out. NESCAC1, you do not need to be upset about the new Top 25 rankings and specifically the inclusion of Amherst and the exclusion of Williams. I know this defies all logic pertaining to how basketball teams are ranked: Wins/Losses, Strength of Schedule, Common Opponents, Point Differential, etc. However, what I'm here to tell you is that in this case there is something more devious afoot that goes far beyond the basketball court.

Yesterday, the D3Hoops agent pictured below was captured and in his possession was hard evidence of a far reaching conspiracy. This evidence came in the form of a hardcopy letter sent from Pat Coleman, aka The Don, to the voters of D3Hoops Top 25. The contents of the letter explain it all:

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cbc.ca%2Fgfx%2Ftopvideo%2Fikea-monkey-jr-121012.jpg&hash=74216116d83598b4604b5609b6b572f693eb8983)

From the Desk of the Don...

Dear Minions,

It has come to my attention that after the success of Operation Nerd and Operation 138, that our site traffic has started to lag and as you know this directly impacts the steady flow of riches to my lair. As you recall, our preseason ranking of MIT at #1 was simply a ploy to pull people in to the site and start the site hits early. We all knew MIT did not possess Weapons of Mass Execution but by downplaying our knowledge of the team we worked the rankings to perfection. Furthermore, our sleeper cell Jack Taylor did a tremendous job with Operation 138 and the national media hits were at an all-time high as a result.

Alas, the early season success has started to lag and we need to continue to look for new ways to boost the site. Although it may be going to the well once to often, as your fearless leader I propose we use the Top 25 gag one more time to drive traffic. Ranking a new #1 that can't maintain that spot is too obvious and would easily be spotted the users so I've come up with something a bit more complex.

This week I would like you all to rank Amherst above Williams in the polls. If you look at the results of the two clubs it's clear that Williams has outperformed Amherst at this point in the season but that is the beauty of this plan. The key is - the Williams fans KNOW they deserve to be ranked above Amherst, their arch rival, and that knowledge will drive them to the site. They'll post the records, the common opponents, how the teams played. All that will accomplish is stirring up the angst of other teams that feel they too are deserving. They in turn will post about their team, giving the reasons why they should be in the Top 25. The traffic will grow exponentially while we sit back and count our money. It's perfect.

From this point forward we will refer to this poll mischief as: Operation Troll.

Sincerely,
Pat Coleman
The Don

I for one am not going to take the bait and I suggest you follow suit. If you do not hear from me again soon you know what happened.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Roundball999 on December 11, 2012, 12:56:56 PM

Well done! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on December 11, 2012, 01:00:52 PM

That's outstanding. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 11, 2012, 07:38:43 PM

Quote from: madzillagd on December 11, 2012, 12:20:50 PM
Posted on the NESCAC board but I throw this out here as well....

It's with considerable hesitation that I come forward and post this. I'm concerned for my own safety and the safety of my family but I think the truth needs to get out. NESCAC1, you do not need to be upset about the new Top 25 rankings and specifically the inclusion of Amherst and the exclusion of Williams. I know this defies all logic pertaining to how basketball teams are ranked: Wins/Losses, Strength of Schedule, Common Opponents, Point Differential, etc. However, what I'm here to tell you is that in this case there is something more devious afoot that goes far beyond the basketball court.

Yesterday, the D3Hoops agent pictured below was captured and in his possession was hard evidence of a far reaching conspiracy. This evidence came in the form of a hardcopy letter sent from Pat Coleman, aka The Don, to the voters of D3Hoops Top 25. The contents of the letter explain it all:

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cbc.ca%2Fgfx%2Ftopvideo%2Fikea-monkey-jr-121012.jpg&hash=74216116d83598b4604b5609b6b572f693eb8983)

From the Desk of the Don...

Dear Minions,

It has come to my attention that after the success of Operation Nerd and Operation 138, that our site traffic has started to lag and as you know this directly impacts the steady flow of riches to my lair. As you recall, our preseason ranking of MIT at #1 was simply a ploy to pull people in to the site and start the site hits early. We all knew MIT did not possess Weapons of Mass Execution but by downplaying our knowledge of the team we worked the rankings to perfection. Furthermore, our sleeper cell Jack Taylor did a tremendous job with Operation 138 and the national media hits were at an all-time high as a result.

Alas, the early season success has started to lag and we need to continue to look for new ways to boost the site. Although it may be going to the well once to often, as your fearless leader I propose we use the Top 25 gag one more time to drive traffic. Ranking a new #1 that can't maintain that spot is too obvious and would easily be spotted the users so I've come up with something a bit more complex.

This week I would like you all to rank Amherst above Williams in the polls. If you look at the results of the two clubs it's clear that Williams has outperformed Amherst at this point in the season but that is the beauty of this plan. The key is - the Williams fans KNOW they deserve to be ranked above Amherst, their arch rival, and that knowledge will drive them to the site. They'll post the records, the common opponents, how the teams played. All that will accomplish is stirring up the angst of other teams that feel they too are deserving. They in turn will post about their team, giving the reasons why they should be in the Top 25. The traffic will grow exponentially while we sit back and count our money. It's perfect.

From this point forward we will refer to this poll mischief as: Operation Troll.

Sincerely,
Pat Coleman
The Don

I for one am not going to take the bait and I suggest you follow suit. If you do not hear from me again soon you know what happened.

:) :) :)
Not trying put words in his mouth, but did he just basically say...

"Eph 'em!"

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: tomt4525 on December 12, 2012, 09:49:03 PM

#6 Wisconsin Stevens Point knocks off defending national champion #2 Wisconsin Whitewater in Whitewater tonight...72-61...Preseason All American Tyler Tillema for UWSP goes down with a sprained ankle at the end of the first half and doesn't return.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 13, 2012, 08:11:46 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Quite a few idle teams as many schools have finals this week ...

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	611	Virginia Wesleyan	7-0	IDLE
#2	602	UW-Whitewater	7-1	LOST to #6 UW-Stevens Point, 61-72
#3	571	Middlebury	8-0	IDLE
#4	552	North Central (Ill.)	8-0	def. UW-Platteville, 73-64; 12/15 at Benedictine
#5	531	St. Thomas	8-0	won at Bethany Lutheran, 94-91
#6	465	UW-Stevens Point	8-0	won at #2 UW-Whitewater, 72-61; 12/15 vs. Edgewood
#7	430	Franklin and Marshall	7-0	IDLE
#8	414	Rochester	10-0	IDLE
#9	383	Wheaton (Ill.)	9-0	def. Cornell, 75-61; 12/14 at Northwestern (Minn.); 12/15 at North Central (Minn.)
#10	367	Washington U.	8-1	12/15 vs. Elmhurst
#11	365	Ramapo	7-0	def. Rutgers-Newark, 79-52; 12/15 vs. St. Joseph's (L.I.)
#12	296	Wooster	6-1	12/14 at Kenyon
#13	279	Whitworth	5-1	12/15 at Occidental
#14	271	Adrian	7-0	IDLE
#15	198	Catholic	6-1	12/15 at Gallaudet
#16	195	Scranton	6-1	12/15 vs. Keystone
#17	192	St. Mary's (Md.)	7-1	IDLE
#18	189	Illinois Wesleyan	5-2	12/15 vs. Chicago
#19	168	WPI	10-0	IDLE
#20	160	Christopher Newport	5-1	IDLE
#21	137	Albertus Magnus	7-0	IDLE
#22	111	Amherst	8-2	won at Anna Maria, 94-67
#23	81	Ohio Wesleyan	7-1	IDLE
#24	73	Rhode Island College	7-2	IDLE
#25	57	New York University	6-1	IDLE

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	52	MIT	7-2	12/13 at Bridgewater State
#27	49	Augustana	7-1	def. Knox, 84-49; 12/13 at Fontbonne; 12/16 at MacMurray
#28	45	Carroll	7-1	def. Milwaukee Engineering, 64-34; 12/15 vs. Ripon
T#29	37	Hampden-Sydney	8-1	IDLE
T#29	37	Williams	8-1	IDLE
#31	34	UW-Stout	9-1	def. UW-River Falls, 62-52
T#32	32	Whitman	6-2	IDLE
T#32	32	Rose-Hulman	8-1	def. Millikin, 67-43; 12/15 vs. Hanover
#34	31	North Carolina Wesleyan	7-1	12/15 at Guilford
#35	17	Augsburg	7-0	IDLE
#36	16	Stevens	6-1	IDLE
#37	14	Birmingham-Southern	4-2	12/15 at Millsaps
#38	12	Salisbury	8-1	IDLE
#39	9	Bethany	8-1	def. Frostburg State, 96-55; 12/15 vs. Olivet
#40	5	Lycoming	7-1	12/14 vs. Messiah; 12/16 vs. King's
T#41	2	Randolph	8-0	12/15 vs. Methodist
T#41	2	UW-La Crosse	8-1	IDLE
#43	1	Oswego State	6-1	12/14 at Cazenovia

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on December 13, 2012, 02:08:01 PM

Slow week on the Top 25 and even when there is an upset it really isn't an upset with both teams likely to stay in the Top 10. Maybe just switch places?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 14, 2012, 01:50:59 PM

Quote from: madzillagd on December 13, 2012, 02:08:01 PM
Slow week on the Top 25 and even when there is an upset it really isn't an upset with both teams likely to stay in the Top 10. Maybe just switch places?

I think it's still an upset. Remember, Whitewater is the defending national champion. They're also the defending conference champion and tough to beat on their home floor.

In terms of swapping spots... I think this next top 25 will be very interesting. I don't think it's quite as easy as just swapping spots.

Let's look at what has happened in the top 25's thus far this year.

First, let's remember how things finished last year:

1. UW Whitewater (25)
2. Cabrini
3. Illinois Wesleyan
4. MIT
5. Virginia Wesleyan
6. Hope
7. Franklin and Marshall
8. Amherst
9. Middlebury

And this was the preseason poll:

	Preseason

#	School (1st votes)	Rec	Pts	Final
1	MIT (12)	29-2	594	4
2	Virginia Wesleyan (3)	27-4	585	5
3	UW-Whitewater (10)	29-4	543	1
4	Middlebury	26-4	474	9
5	Amherst	26-3	453	8
6	North Central (Ill.)	22-8	444	16
7	Hope	27-2	417	6
8	Illinois Wesleyan	23-8	380	3

So, essentially, Whitewater retained 10 votes, lost 12 to MIT, and lost 3 to Virginia Wesleyan.

	Week 1

#	School (1st votes)	Rec	Pts	Prev.
1	MIT (10)	4-0	600	1
2	Virginia Wesleyan (6)	2-0	599	2
3	UW-Whitewater (8)	3-0	580	3
4	Middlebury	4-0	546	4
5	North Central (Ill.)	4-0	508	6
6	Amherst	3-0	485	5
7	Illinois Wesleyan	4-0	439	8
8	St. Thomas (1)	3-0	428	11

After a week of play, Whitewater lost two more votes. MIT also lost two votes. Three of those votes went to Virginia Wesleyan, and one of them went to St. Thomas. One pollster certainly help UST in high regard, as they were averaging being at about the 9 slow on ther other 24 ballots. It's also interesting to note that, while MIT lost two 1st place votes, they gained 6 poll points, and Whitewater, despite losing two 1st place votes, gained 37. So there seems to be some solidification at the top. This makes sense in one respect... Preseason pollsters only had last year's top 25, plus the new year's perspectuses (....perspecti?) to go off of. With week one, they have a couple of weeks worth of games, plus they have the preseason poll. This gives them lots and lots of information... it shows them where the other pollsters are slotting these teams as well. So, take Whitewater for example. They were 3rd, with 10 first place votes, and 543 poll points. If you take away the 10 first place votes, they averaged being slotted almost exactly in 6.5th (half picked them 6, the other half 7). After one week, they did lost two first place votes, but if you take away the 8 first place votes, the other 17 pollsters slotted them at about 3.5th. They improved by an average of about three slots in the poll (the math's not perfect... we're talking about 15 votes slotting them 6.5th and 17 voters slotting them 3.5th, and it's certainly plausible that the two voters that jumped from WW to a different team just dropped WW 1 spot... but even if you assume that and subtract off the two fairly-certain 2nd place voters, it goes from and average of 3.64 to 3.86... not a huge difference, but a sizable enough jump from 6.47 in the preseason).

	Week 2

#	School (1st votes)	Rec	Pts	Prev.
1	Virginia Wesleyan (13)	5-0	611	2
2	UW-Whitewater (10)	5-0	601	3
3	Middlebury (1)	6-0	563	4
4	North Central (Ill.)	6-0	549	5
5	St. Thomas (1)	5-0	517	8
6	Washington U.	7-0	454	10
7	UW-Stevens Point	5-0	442	9

So, MIT lost, and they dropped a massive amount of points... from 600 poll points and 10 first place votes to 18th and 180 poll points. They did lose at home and they were manhandled in the process by RIC, but I'm pretty sure (and Pat tweeted out that he thought so too, after the new poll in week 2) that this is the largest drop that a first place team has ever had in a poll.

So 10 first place votes had to find a home. 7 went to Va. Wesleyan, 2 went back to Whitewater, and 1 went to Middlebury.

So, one question is this... did the two voters that left Whitewater go back to them? Or were they two other voters? We'll never know, but it'll make you crazy if you think about it enough :-X ::) :o ;D

Oh, and by the way, St. Thomas still had one #1 fan.

	Week 3

#	School (1st votes)	Rec	Pts	Prev.
1	Virginia Wesleyan (12)	7-0	611	1
2	UW-Whitewater (11)	7-0	602	2
3	Middlebury (1)	8-0	571	3
4	North Central (Ill.)	7-0	552	4
5	St. Thomas (1)	7-0	531	5
6	UW-Stevens Point	7-0	465	7
7	Franklin and Marshall	7-0	430	8

So, now we get to last week's vote. The only movement (unless the Tommy Fan or the Panther Fan switched... and somebody else switched on... again, it'll drive ya nuts if you think too hard!) was one vote from VWU to UWW.

It's interesting how little movement there is at this point. Though we have a #1 team, it's not a concensus #1. Also interesting is how, though VWU lost a 1st place vote, they didn't lost any poll points. So they lost a #1, but someone else moved them up a slot... from #3 to #2, or something like that.

So, now the 11 first place votes of Whitewater (seemingly... it's not a given, but it's likely) have to be spread out. I'd say the one that jumped from VWU to UWW will jump back... so that would just leave 10.

And your guess is as good as mine there they'll go. But I don't think that UWSP will pick them all up. Point might not even pick any up.

The disparity between slots jumps from St. Thomas to Stevens Point.

VWU to UWW: 9 points
UWW to Middlebury: 31 points
Middlebury to North Central: 19 points
North Central to St. Thomas: 21 points
St. Thomas to Stevens Point: 66 points

And remember, an average spot in the poll equalf 25 points (1 additional point from each voter). So the spread between Whitewater and Stevens Point (137) was about 5.5 slots on the average ballot.

So what will the top 25 look like next week? The two remaining games are a rivalry game (North Central and Benedictine are playing in the "Battle of Maple Ave." The two schools are about 3 miles apart) and UWSP's tilt against Edgewood. I don't expect that either will be too difficult for the top 10 teams... both teams are 2-7.

If I was a voter who had slated St. Thomas above Stevens Point all year, I might be hesitant to pump the Pointers above the Tommies at this point, even with SP's big win. After all, we do have next Friday's "Mayan Special" in St. Paul to look forward to next week, and that could go pretty far in terms of slotting these West Region foes into their appropriate spot in the top 25.

For those looking ahead... Since the Tommies and Pointers started their series a few years ago, the games have always gone to the home team.

08-09 NCAA tournament @ UST: 53-50 Tommies win
09-10 reg season @ UWSP: 78-56 Pointer win
10-11 reg season @ UST: 61-54 Tommies win
10-11 NCAA tournament @ Augustana: 66-64 Tommies win
11-12 reg season @ UWSP: 72-66 Pointer win
12-13 reg season @ UST: ? ? ? :o ? ? ?

These teams also played once in 1974, a game the Tommies won. This is one of two series that UWSP has with D3 opponents of more than 1 game where they're not winning the overall series (Illinois Wesleyan is the other... Point is 1-3 against the Titans).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 14, 2012, 04:43:14 PM

Quote from: John Gleich on December 14, 2012, 01:50:59 PMplus the new year's perspectuses (....perspecti?) to go off of.

Prospectuses.

Hey, you asked! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 14, 2012, 04:55:40 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 14, 2012, 04:43:14 PM
Quote from: John Gleich on December 14, 2012, 01:50:59 PMplus the new year's perspectuses (....perspecti?) to go off of.

Prospectuses.

Hey, you asked! ;)

Yeah, I looked it up. But I was too lazy to go back and delete it once it was typed.

Ya know, Merrill Lynch could have cleared ALL of this up for us if, in their commercials, they pluralized perspectus.

"As your Merrill Lynch for some perspectuses..."

Maybe that's asking too much?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 15, 2012, 08:58:12 AM

Northwestern (MN) 67
#9 Wheaton 62

http://athletics.wheaton.edu/news/2012/12/14/MBB_1214124304.aspx

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 15, 2012, 04:57:25 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 15, 2012, 08:58:12 AM
Northwestern (MN) 67
#9 Wheaton 62

http://athletics.wheaton.edu/news/2012/12/14/MBB_1214124304.aspx

Sign of the end times.

First the Solar Eclipse.
Then 12/12/12.
Coming is Mayan convergence.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 15, 2012, 05:55:11 PM

Video for #4 North Central @ their local rival Benedictine...

http://client.stretchinternet.com/client/benu.portal#

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 15, 2012, 11:23:43 PM

#6 UWSP takes care of Edgewood 63-48 sans Tyler Tillema.

I didn't listen to the whole broadcast, so I'm not sure if they gave an update on his status (he got hurt right before halftime of the Whitewater game on Wednesday), but I honestly didn't expect him to play tonight, regardless.

Edgewood put up a pretty good fight, it was a 7 point game at the half. The Eagles were sending all 5 guys to the offensive board and UWSP had some early issues in the first half, but depth (and Joe Ritchay's career high 27 point night) put Edgewood away for good.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: tomt4525 on December 16, 2012, 02:17:45 AM

Quote from: John Gleich on December 15, 2012, 11:23:43 PM
#6 UWSP takes care of Edgewood 63-48 sans Tyler Tillema.

I didn't listen to the whole broadcast, so I'm not sure if they gave an update on his status (he got hurt right before halftime of the Whitewater game on Wednesday), but I honestly didn't expect him to play tonight, regardless.

Edgewood put up a pretty good fight, it was a 7 point game at the half. The Eagles were sending all 5 guys to the offensive board and UWSP had some early issues in the first half, but depth (and Joe Ritchay's career high 27 point night) put Edgewood away for good.

I didn't start listening to the broadcast until about directly when the game started so the announcers probably went more in depth about Tillema's health during pregame...but they did mention during the game that Tillema could be back for the tilt Friday at St Thomas but it was not a given. So, I take it as good news as he shouldn't miss extended time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 16, 2012, 05:26:07 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

~~One late score (Augustana/MacMurray) still missing, but I'll be out for a while (Christmas program at church), so I'll post the rest and add that one later.~~ Done (thanks, Titan Q).

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	611	Virginia Wesleyan	7-0	IDLE
#2	602	UW-Whitewater	7-1	LOST to #6 UW-Stevens Point, 61-72
#3	571	Middlebury	8-0	IDLE
#4	552	North Central (Ill.)	9-0	def. UW-Platteville, 73-64; won at Benedictine, 61-55
#5	531	St. Thomas	8-0	won at Bethany Lutheran, 94-91
#6	465	UW-Stevens Point	9-0	won at #2 UW-Whitewater, 72-61; def. Edgewood, 63-48
#7	430	Franklin and Marshall	7-0	IDLE
#8	414	Rochester	10-0	IDLE
#9	383	Wheaton (Ill.)	10-1	def. Cornell, 75-61; LOST at Northwestern (Minn.), 62-67; won at North Central (Minn.), 73-49
#10	367	Washington U.	9-1	def. Elmhurst, 82-56
#11	365	Ramapo	8-0	def. Rutgers-Newark, 79-52; def. St. Joseph's (L.I.), 110-76
#12	296	Wooster	7-1	won at Kenyon, 89-62
#13	279	Whitworth	6-1	won at Occidental, 95-66
#14	271	Adrian	7-0	IDLE
#15	198	Catholic	7-1	won at Gallaudet, 85-60
#16	195	Scranton	6-2	LOST to Keystone, 93-94
#17	192	St. Mary's (Md.)	7-1	IDLE
#18	189	Illinois Wesleyan	6-2	def. Chicago, 82-63
#19	168	WPI	10-0	IDLE
#20	160	Christopher Newport	5-1	IDLE
#21	137	Albertus Magnus	7-0	IDLE
#22	111	Amherst	8-2	won at Anna Maria, 94-67
#23	81	Ohio Wesleyan	7-1	IDLE
#24	73	Rhode Island College	7-2	IDLE
#25	57	New York University	6-1	IDLE

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	52	MIT	8-2	won at Bridgewater State, 74-61
#27	49	Augustana	9-1	def. Knox, 84-49; won at Fontbonne, 79-65; won at MacMurray, 86-74
#28	45	Carroll	7-2	def. Milwaukee Engineering, 64-34; LOST to Ripon, 76-79
T#29	37	Hampden-Sydney	8-1	IDLE
T#29	37	Williams	8-1	IDLE
#31	34	UW-Stout	9-1	def. UW-River Falls, 62-52
T#32	32	Whitman	6-2	IDLE
T#32	32	Rose-Hulman	9-1	def. Millikin, 67-43; def. Hanover, 62-61
#34	31	North Carolina Wesleyan	7-2	LOST at Guilford, 64-80
#35	17	Augsburg	7-0	IDLE
#36	16	Stevens	6-1	IDLE
#37	14	Birmingham-Southern	5-2	won at Millsaps, 65-60
#38	12	Salisbury	8-1	IDLE
#39	9	Bethany	9-1	def. Frostburg State, 96-55; def. Olivet, 63-59
#40	5	Lycoming	9-1	def. Messiah, 70-54; def. King's, 74-65
T#41	2	Randolph	9-0	def. Methodist, 71-56
T#41	2	UW-La Crosse	8-1	IDLE
#43	1	Oswego State	7-1	won at Cazenovia, 73-57

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 16, 2012, 07:36:32 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 16, 2012, 05:26:07 PM

One late score (Augustana/MacMurray) still missing, but I'll be out for a while (Christmas program at church), so I'll post the rest and add that one later.

Augustana 86
MacMurray 74

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 18, 2012, 01:04:24 AM

New top 25 LINK (http://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2012-13/week4)

Quote from: John Gleich on December 14, 2012, 01:50:59 PM

          Week 3

   #       School (1st votes)       Rec       Pts       Prev.
   1       Virginia Wesleyan (12)       7-0       611       1
   2       UW-Whitewater (11)       7-0       602       2
   3       Middlebury (1)       8-0       571       3
   4       North Central (Ill.)       7-0       552       4
   5       St. Thomas (1)       7-0       531       5
   6       UW-Stevens Point       7-0       465       7
   7       Franklin and Marshall       7-0       430       8

So, now we get to last week's vote. The only movement (unless the Tommy Fan or the Panther Fan switched... and somebody else switched on... again, it'll drive ya nuts if you think too hard!) was one vote from VWU to UWW.

It's interesting how little movement there is at this point. Though we have a #1 team, it's not a concensus #1. Also interesting is how, though VWU lost a 1st place vote, they didn't lost any poll points. So they lost a #1, but someone else moved them up a slot... from #3 to #2, or something like that.

So, now the 11 first place votes of Whitewater (seemingly... it's not a given, but it's likely) have to be spread out. I'd say the one that jumped from VWU to UWW will jump back... so that would just leave 10.

And your guess is as good as mine there they'll go. But I don't think that UWSP will pick them all up. Point might not even pick any up.

The disparity between slots jumps from St. Thomas to Stevens Point.

VWU to UWW: 9 points
UWW to Middlebury: 31 points
Middlebury to North Central: 19 points
North Central to St. Thomas: 21 points
St. Thomas to Stevens Point: 66 points

And remember, an average spot in the poll equalf 25 points (1 additional point from each voter). So the spread between Whitewater and Stevens Point (137) was about 5.5 slots on the average ballot.

So what will the top 25 look like next week? The two remaining games are a rivalry game (North Central and Benedictine are playing in the "Battle of Maple Ave." The two schools are about 3 miles apart) and UWSP's tilt against Edgewood. I don't expect that either will be too difficult for the top 10 teams... both teams are 2-7.

So, here we are... let's see how the ole half-prediction/discussion thingy went...

By the way, the great thing about not making any actual predictions is that I really can't have been wrong... ;D

In the last two remaining games, North Central hung on to defeat Benedictine in the Battle of Maple/Chicago Ave (I forgot the road name changes when you get in to Naperville). The Bene's stuck with the Cards through much of the game but couldn't score at the opportune time, and North Central won 61-55. By the way, Benedictine's free throw defense was outstanding... they held North Central to just 10/19 (Landon Gamble was 0/6). I watched a good portion of this game and Benedictine really had a good game plan. They just didn't have the fire power to seal the deal.

Stevens Point took care of Edgewood, though it wasn't without initial difficulties. Edgewood came out and all 5 guys crashed the boards and they had early success. Point adjusted and cruised to the victory.

So... to the rankings. Here was week 3:

	Week 3

#	School (1st votes)	Rec	Pts	Prev.
1	Virginia Wesleyan (12)	7-0	611	1
2	UW-Whitewater (11)	7-0	602	2
3	Middlebury (1)	8-0	571	3
4	North Central (Ill.)	7-0	552	4
5	St. Thomas (1)	7-0	531	5
6	UW-Stevens Point	7-0	465	7
7	Franklin and Marshall	7-0	430	8

And here's the new Week 4:

	Week 4

#	School (1st votes)	Rec	Pts	Prev.
1	Virginia Wesleyan (21)	7-0	621	1
2	Middlebury (2)	8-0	589	3
3	North Central (Ill.) (1)	9-0	570	4
4	St. Thomas (1)	8-0	541	5
5	UW-Stevens Point	9-0	531	6
6	UW-Whitewater	7-1	481	2
7	Rochester	10-0	436	8
8	Franklin and Marshall	7-0	428	7

I'm just looking at the top 7/8 because... meh, that's what I want to do. :D

	Difference from Wk 3

#	School (1st votes)	Diff
1	Virginia Wesleyan (21)	+ 10
2	Middlebury (2)	+ 28
3	North Central (Ill.) (1)	+ 18
4	St. Thomas (1)	+ 10
5	UW-Stevens Point	+ 66
6	UW-Whitewater	- 123
7	Rochester	+ 22
8	Franklin and Marshall	- 2

As expected, Whitewater dropped several spots. Stevens Point didn't leap anybody, but they did have the largest point-jump among the top 8. There was a sizable gap between #5 and #6. Interestingly, there still is a sizable gap between #5 and #6. But the distance between Stevens Point and St. Thomas shrank by 56 poll points ahead of their match-up this Friday.

We can look at what happened with this poll... Of Whitewater's eleven #1 votes, one went to North Central, one went to Middlebury, and the rest went to Virginia Wesleyan.

Va Wesleyan, we can tell from this poll, has 21 first place votes, and they were ranked #2 on the other 4 ballots.

But, based on the outcome of tonight's game, we'll likely have a new #1 next week. For the second straight year, Salisbury beat VWU. So, that's likely 21 first place votes up for grabs.

What's interesting is that this poll will probably not change until the new year. Over the Christmas break, there usually isn't an additional poll... because of finals and then several days off, there just aren't consistently enough games to do a new poll.

So VWU is going to be #1 through the rest of 2012, even though they lost tonight 76-67.

Darryl hasn't done the next installment of How They Fared (with the schedule of upcoming games) but we do know about the upcoming match up between the #4 Tommies and the #5 Pointers on Friday. I know that UWSP has finals this week, plus Tyler Tillema is still a question mark, and Point has never won at UST (either the old gym or the new one).

So, there's lots going against them in a game that they would be an underdog anyway.

Looking back at the poll, something weird happened... Rochester and F&M were both idle during the last week... and F&M dropped two point points and one position while Rochester gained 22 points and took F&M's spot. Weird.

So, lots is going to happen between now and the next poll... VWU's 21 first place votes are likely going to be dispersed among the next 3 or 4 teams depending what happens. I think it's safe to say that if Point beats UST, they will leap over them, but if they lose, it's anybody's guess. More than 2 whole poll positions (point-wise) separate Whitewater and Stevens Point, so there's a chance that Point could drop the game and drop some points and stay right where they are in the poll.

But, as I said, there's lots that could happen between now and then. I, for one, will probably wait 2 weeks before really thinking too hard about what it will look like!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on December 18, 2012, 11:19:04 AM

4th Poll

Most Votes Gained:
1. Williams, +90
2. UW-Stevens Point, +66
3. UW-Stout, +59
4. Augustana, +51
5. Ohio Wesleyan, +49

Most Votes Lost:
1. Scranton, -150
2. UW-Whitewater, -121
3. Wheaton, -111
4. Carroll, -44
5. Amherst, -37

Random Notes on the polls

74 teams have received a vote.
29 teams have received a vote in every poll.

The top 5 cumulative vote getters:
1. Virginia Wesleyan, 3027
2. UW-Whitewater, 2807
3. Middlebury, 2743
4. North Central, 2623
5. St. Thomas, 2316

The highest cumulative vote getters who didn't receive any in most recent poll:
1. Hope, 561
2. Cabrini, 440
3. William Paterson, 150
4. NC Wesleyan, 137
5. Whitman, 134

Teams that received 0 votes in preseason poll (current rank):
1. Adrian (12)
2. Catholic (15)
3. UW-Stout (23)
4. Salisbury (32)
5. Augsburg (33)

Most volatile teams by Standard Deviation of votes:
1. MIT
2. Amherst
3. Hope
4. Rochester
5. Wheaton

Most stable teams by Standard Deviation of votes:
1. these are all boring.....none of the 25 most stable teams has over 50 cumulative votes

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 18, 2012, 07:23:16 PM

I have no idea why I watched Transylvania upset College of Wooster 68-62, but that is the final from Kentucky. Good game. Transy had quite the crowd.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 19, 2012, 11:26:26 AM

Quote from: John Gleich on December 18, 2012, 01:04:24 AM
What's interesting is that this poll will probably not change until the new year. Over the Christmas break, there usually isn't an additional poll... because of finals and then several days off, there just aren't consistently enough games to do a new poll.

So VWU is going to be #1 through the rest of 2012, even though they lost tonight 76-67.

Well... more like the fact the poll always takes a two-week break over the holidays, especially since this year Monday falls on Christmas Eve and New Year's Eve. Finals have already happened... there were a number of teams "idle" in last week's poll due to time off... you could argue in those cases a third week off is warranted :). However... we just go by the fact that the voters are traveling and busy during the holidays. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jams0325 on December 19, 2012, 08:14:35 PM

Not a major point of contention but being a stickler for the facts I have to mention...it is VWC not VWU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 19, 2012, 08:34:46 PM

Quote from: jams0325 on December 19, 2012, 08:14:35 PM
Not a major point of contention but being a stickler for the facts I have to mention...it is VWC not VWU.

Sorry sir... won't happen again!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 19, 2012, 08:37:35 PM

Quote from: WUH on December 18, 2012, 07:23:16 PM
I have no idea why I watched Transylvania upset College of Wooster 68-62, but that is the final from Kentucky. Good game. Transy had quite the crowd.

Transy took down F&M tonight too, 86-73

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 19, 2012, 09:08:02 PM

Transy is having quite a week! Taking down #13 Wooster, then #8 F&M - if they can also down 8-1 Thomas More on Saturday, can anyone doubt they will jump all the way from 1 point to well into the Top 25?!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 20, 2012, 01:01:44 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 19, 2012, 09:08:02 PM
Transy is having quite a week! Taking down #13 Wooster, then #8 F&M - if they can also down 8-1 Thomas More on Saturday, can anyone doubt they will jump all the way from 1 point to well into the Top 25?!

They started off really rough and struggling to find themselves this season. I hope they have turned it around with these wins... because so far they have been a disappointment for me (tune in to Hoopsville tonight - hint, hint).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 20, 2012, 01:27:57 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

The list of upcoming games goes through the end of the calendar year*, because (I assume) the next poll is still a week and a half away.

Because of holiday travel plans, the next update will not come until Sunday, December 30.

*The "regular" calendar year, not the Mayan calendar year.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	621	Virginia Wesleyan	7-1	LOST to #32 Salisbury, 67-76; 12/20 at Wesley; 12/30 at Emory
#2	589	Middlebury	8-0	12/30 vs. RPI
#3	570	North Central (Ill.)	9-0	12/28 vs. #10 Ramapo; 12/29 at #41 UW-La Crosse
#4	541	St. Thomas	8-0	12/21 vs. #5 UW-Stevens Point
#5	531	UW-Stevens Point	9-0	12/21 at #4 St. Thomas; 12/29 at Texas-Dallas
#6	481	UW-Whitewater	7-1	12/22 at Edgewood; 12/29 vs. T#39 Northwestern (Minn.); 12/30 at TBA
#7	436	Rochester	10-0	IDLE
#8	428	Franklin and Marshall	8-1	def. Mount St. Joseph, 66-63; LOST at T#42 Transylvania, 73-86
#9	410	Washington U.	9-1	12/20 at MacMurray
#10	379	Ramapo	8-0	12/28 at #3 North Central (Ill.); 12/29 vs. Hiram
#11	303	Whitworth	8-1	won at Chapman, 67-62; won at Redlands, 70-57; 12/22 vs. Simpson
#12	300	Adrian	8-0	def. Northwestern Ohio, 71-68; 12/22 at Lawrence Tech; 12/29 at Mount Union; 12/30 at TBA
#13	292	Wooster	8-2	LOST at T#42 Transylvania, 62-68; def. Mount St. Joseph, 65-52; 12/28 vs. John Carroll; 12/29 vs. Marietta
#14	272	Wheaton (Ill.)	10-1	IDLE
#15	238	Catholic	8-1	def. Randolph-Macon, 67-55; 12/29 vs. Denison; 12/30 vs. TBD
#16	196	St. Mary's (Md.)	7-1	12/22 vs. FDU-Florham; 12/29 vs. Swarthmore; 12/30 vs. Misericordia
#17	193	Illinois Wesleyan	6-2	12/21 vs. Mississippi College; 12/22 vs. Hope; 12/30 at Franklin
#18	160	WPI	10-0	12/30 vs. Colby-Sawyer
#19	152	Christopher Newport	6-1	def. Eastern Mennonite, 66-46; 12/28 vs. Heidelberg
#20	145	Albertus Magnus	7-1	LOST at Yale, 63-112
#21	130	Ohio Wesleyan	7-1	12/22 vs. Anderson; 12/28 vs. Pitt-Greensburg
#22	100	Augustana	9-1	12/21 vs. Loras
#23	93	UW-Stout	9-1	12/29 at Loras; 12/30 at Concordia (Wis.)
#24	90	Williams	8-1	12/29 at Luther; 12/30 at TBA
#25	74	Amherst	8-2	12/30 at Medgar Evers

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	65	New York U.	6-1	12/29 vs. Widener; 12/30 vs. Clark
T#27	53	MIT	8-2	IDLE
T#27	53	Rose-Hulman	10-1	def. DePauw, 52-39
T#29	45	Scranton	7-3	LOST to St. Joseph's (L.I.), 57-69; def. Gwynedd-Mercy, 79-64
T#29	45	Hampden-Sydney	8-1	12/20 vs. Marygrove; 12/29 vs. Huntingdon; 12/30 vs. Johns Hopkins
#31	38	Rhode Island College	8-2	won at Johnson and Wales, 65-52
#32	27	Salisbury	9-2	won at #1 Virginia Wesleyan, 76-67; LOST at Randolph-Macon, 55-77; 12/21 at William & Mary
#33	19	Augsburg	7-0	12/21 vs. Pacific Lutheran
#34	11	Stevens	6-1	IDLE
T#35	10	Birmingham Southern	6-2	def. Rust, 102-89; 12/29 at Guilford; 12/30 at Maryville (Tenn.)
T#35	10	Randolph	9-0	12/29 at Johns Hopkins; 12/30 vs. Huntingdon
#37	8	Lycoming	9-1	12/29 vs. Cairn; 12/30 vs. TBA
#38	5	LaGrange	6-1	12/29 vs. Westminster (Pa.); 12/30 vs. DePauw/Connecticut Col.
T#39	4	Dubuque	9-1	12/28 at Monmouth
T#39	4	Northwestern (Minn.)	7-2	12/29 at #6 UW-Whitewater; 12/30 at TBD
#41	2	UW-La Crosse	8-1	12/21 at North Park; 12/29 vs. #3 North Central (Ill.); 12/30 at Hardin-Simmons
T#42	1	Transylvania	7-3	def. #13 Wooster, 68-62; def. #8 Franklin and Marshall, 86-73; 12/22 vs. Thomas More
T#42	1	Carroll	7-3	LOST to St. Norbert, 55-69; 12/30 at Cornell

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 20, 2012, 03:14:49 PM

Good work as usual.

BTW, those Stout gamea are in Wisconsin Dells...possibly at Kalahari? :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 20, 2012, 05:51:35 PM

So Virginia Wesleyan lost again tonight, to Wesley. I was going to go to the game, but I was delayed and would have missed the first half hour - so I decided to stay home. I figured that coming off the loss, VAWes would be on point and destroy a relatively weak Wesley squad. Oops.

Of course, had I gone, it would have been a blowout.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on December 20, 2012, 05:54:11 PM

Would have loved to see some video on this one. Was following the last 5 mins on Live Stats. 1 second left, down by 2... VW managed to get the steal on an inbounds and get a shot off but missed. Anybody have video or a first-hand account they can share?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 20, 2012, 05:56:36 PM

Quote from: madzillagd on December 20, 2012, 05:54:11 PM
Would have loved to see some video on this one. Was following the last 5 mins on Live Stats. 1 second left, down by 2... VW managed to get the steal on an inbounds and get a shot off but missed. Anybody have video or a first-hand account they can share?

Ok, now you're making me feel even worse.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 20, 2012, 08:26:13 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 20, 2012, 03:14:49 PM
Good work as usual.

BTW, those Stout gamea are in Wisconsin Dells...possibly at Kalahari? :o

Yep... they're playing one of those mini pool basketball courts. Could be interesting!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on December 21, 2012, 12:17:19 AM

Looks like we'll have a new number 1 next week as Virginia Wesleyan lost for the 2nd time since being named number 1.
Maybe being number 1 is a jinx. MIT began the year as #1, and quickly picked up 2 losses to tumble down the rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 21, 2012, 12:23:15 AM

Quote from: AndOne on December 21, 2012, 12:17:19 AM
Looks like we'll have a new number 1 next week as Virginia Wesleyan lost for the 2nd time since being named number 1.
Maybe being number 1 is a jinx. MIT began the year as #1, and quickly picked up 2 losses to tumble down the rankings.

Just FYI, it won't be until after the first of the year because of the holidays and how they overlap our voting schedule.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 21, 2012, 05:46:31 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 21, 2012, 12:23:15 AM
Quote from: AndOne on December 21, 2012, 12:17:19 AM
Looks like we'll have a new number 1 next week as Virginia Wesleyan lost for the 2nd time since being named number 1.
Maybe being number 1 is a jinx. MIT began the year as #1, and quickly picked up 2 losses to tumble down the rankings.

Just FYI, it won't be until after the first of the year because of the holidays and how they overlap our voting schedule.

Stupid holidays always getting in the way of the important things in life!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 30, 2012, 10:52:58 PM

How They Fared

This is complete for the past two weeks~~, except for the Williams/Cal Lutheran game that tips off in about 10 minutes~~.

Based on Pat's comments above, the next poll comes out a week from tomorrow.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	621	Virginia Wesleyan	7-3	LOST to #32 Salisbury, 67-76; LOST at Wesley, 70-72; LOST at Emory, 82-91
#2	589	Middlebury	9-0	def. RPI, 105-86
#3	570	North Central (Ill.)	11-0	won at #10 Ramapo, 67-57; def. #41 UW-La Crosse, 80-72
#4	541	St. Thomas	9-0	def. #5 UW-Stevens Point, 68-63
#5	531	UW-Stevens Point	10-1	LOST at #4 St. Thomas, 63-68; won at Texas-Dallas, 72-55
#6	481	UW-Whitewater	9-2	won at Edgewood, 75-48; def. T#39 Northwestern (Minn.), 71-61; LOST at St. Norbert, 55-66
#7	436	Rochester	10-0	IDLE
#8	428	Franklin and Marshall	8-1	def. Mount St. Joseph, 66-63; LOST at T#42 Transylvania, 73-86
#9	410	Washington U.	9-1	IDLE
#10	379	Ramapo	9-1	LOST to #3 North Central (Ill.), 57-67; won at Hiram, 99-87
#11	303	Whitworth	9-1	won at Chapman, 67-62; won at Redlands, 70-57; def. Simpson, 77-69
#12	300	Adrian	11-0	def. Northwestern Ohio, 71-68; won at Lawrence Tech, 72-52; won at Mount Union, 73-63; won at Defiance, 70-69
#13	292	Wooster	10-2	LOST at T#42 Transylvania, 62-68; def. Mount St. Joseph, 65-52; def. John Carroll, 81-67; def. Marietta, 59-57
#14	272	Wheaton (Ill.)	10-1	IDLE
#15	238	Catholic	10-1	def. Randolph-Macon, 67-55; def. Denison, 77-35; def. Husson, 82-49
#16	196	St. Mary's (Md.)	10-1	def. FDU-Florham, 73-64; def. Swarthmore, 75-56; def. Misericordia, 79-54
#17	193	Illinois Wesleyan	8-3	def. Mississippi College, 67-50; def. Hope, 68-67; LOST at Franklin, 66-67
#18	160	WPI	11-0	def. Colby-Sawyer, 66-44
#19	152	Christopher Newport	8-1	def. Eastern Mennonite, 66-46; def. Heidelberg, 65-53; def. Bridgewater (Va.), 97-74
#20	145	Albertus Magnus	7-1	LOST at Yale, 63-112
#21	130	Ohio Wesleyan	10-1	def. Anderson, 87-71; def. Pitt-Greensburg, 90-50; won at Bluffton, 75-51
#22	100	Augustana	10-1	def. Loras, 83-53
#23	93	UW-Stout	10-2	LOST to Loras, 67-74; won at Concordia (Wis.), 62-42
#24	90	Williams	10-1	won at Luther, 78-72; won at Cal Lutheran, 71-53
#25	74	Amherst	9-2	won at Medgar Evers, 93-61

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	65	New York U.	8-1	def. Widener, 97-88; def. Clark, 69-67
T#27	53	MIT	8-2	IDLE
T#27	53	Rose-Hulman	10-1	def. DePauw, 52-39
T#29	45	Scranton	7-3	LOST to St. Joseph's (L.I.), 57-69; def. Gwynedd-Mercy, 79-64
T#29	45	Hampden-Sydney	11-1	def. Marygrove, 75-50; def. Huntingdon, 99-54; def. Johns Hopkins, 73-58
#31	38	Rhode Island College	8-2	won at Johnson and Wales, 65-52
#32	27	Salisbury	9-3	won at #1 Virginia Wesleyan, 76-67; LOST at Randolph-Macon, 55-77; LOST at William & Mary, 49-82
#33	19	Augsburg	8-0	def. Pacific Lutheran, 73-65
#34	11	Stevens	6-1	IDLE
T#35	10	Birmingham Southern	7-3	def. Rust, 102-89; LOST at Guilford, 85-88; won at Maryville (Tenn.), 82-76
T#35	10	Randolph	11-0	won at Johns Hopkins, 70-48; def. Huntingdon, 75-73
#37	8	Lycoming	11-1	def. Cairn, 103-27; def. John Jay, 100-72
#38	5	LaGrange	7-2	def. Westminster (Pa.), 101-79; LOST at DePauw, 63-83
T#39	4	Dubuque	10-1	won at Monmouth, 76-71
T#39	4	Northwestern (Minn.)	7-4	LOST at #6 UW-Whitewater, 61-71; LOST to Marian, 69-71
#41	2	UW-La Crosse	9-3	LOST at North Park, 82-84; LOST at #3 North Central (Ill.), 72-80; def. Hardin-Simmons, 68-55
T#42	1	Transylvania	8-3	def. #13 Wooster, 68-62; def. #8 Franklin and Marshall, 86-73; def. Thomas More, 80-71
T#42	1	Carroll	8-3	LOST to St. Norbert, 55-69; won at Cornell, 83-65

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 31, 2012, 12:57:23 AM

+1 Darryl! Great work.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 31, 2012, 10:25:36 PM

Actually, we are doing a poll this week, just not until Jan. 2/3.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 01, 2013, 01:12:43 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 31, 2012, 10:25:36 PM
Actually, we are doing a poll this week, just not until Jan. 2/3.

Ah, that makes more sense; three weeks is an awfully long gap between polls.

I won't bother posting a Thursday morning report; I'll just wait until Sunday night. (I'm assuming the next poll will come out next Monday--right?)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 01, 2013, 01:43:02 PM

Stevens Point takes another holiday loss. They forgot to pack defense on their trip to Concordia (TX) and lost 96-82. The most points they've given up since a 101-92 loss to Northern Michigan in 2006-2007.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on January 01, 2013, 09:37:00 PM

A reminder to Darryl and the pollsters that Wash-U plays at MacMurray tomorrow (Wednesday) afternoon at 3:00 Central time, in a game rescheduled from December 20th because of bad weather.

Yours truly and Wash-U SID Chris Mitchell will have an audio broadcast of the game, beginning at 2:30 with the Bears Den Pre-Game Show. Chris will also man the Live Stats feature for those who want to follow the bouncing ball along with us!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 02, 2013, 11:16:34 AM

If Virginia Wesleyan goes from number 1 to unranked (unlikely but not entirely implausible), would that be a first in the poll's history?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 02, 2013, 02:02:12 PM

Probably, although I can't say when the last time was a No. 1 team lost three times in one poll cycle either.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 02, 2013, 04:09:42 PM

Pat, do you send out roster updates during the season?

Just curious because Cabrini now does have the roster that everyone thought they had to start they year. With the return of Walton-Moss it seems unlikely that they're undeserving of even one vote in the poll.

Are voters on their own to discover this kind of information? (Not making judgments one way or another, just curious.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 02, 2013, 04:21:52 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 02, 2013, 04:09:42 PM

Pat, do you send out roster updates during the season?

Just curious because Cabrini now does have the roster that everyone thought they had to start they year. With the return of Walton-Moss it seems unlikely that they're undeserving of even one vote in the poll.

Are voters on their own to discover this kind of information? (Not making judgments one way or another, just curious.)

Generally they are, yes. I also decided not to specifically inform voters that UWSP's Tyler Tillema didn't play in Texas.

If Cabrini wins at Wesley, that will give a good common-opponent reason to make sure Cabrini is at least on voters' minds.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 02, 2013, 11:24:42 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 01, 2013, 01:43:02 PM
Stevens Point takes another holiday loss. They forgot to pack defense on their trip to Concordia (TX) and lost 96-82. The most points they've given up since a 101-92 loss to Northern Michigan in 2006-2007.

Nice win for Concordia-Texas. Coach Stan Bonewitz likes the up-tempo game. Without Tyler Tillema, UWSP probably had to go deeper into the bench than they wanted to. UWSP only had 7 players in double digit minutes. I think that UWSP could solve the CTX style of play if they had gotten to play against it a couple of times, but it is a challenge for the first time. (CTX was alos very hot! They scored 77 points off 65 FGA's.

CTX also caused 17 turnovers and had 11 steals! That is another feature of ASC play.

http://www.d3hoops.com/seasons/men/2012-13/box_scores/20121231_bin4.xml

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mass_d3fan on January 03, 2013, 12:49:14 PM

I gotta give the other Engineers, WPI, some props here in this forum. I don't think anyone saw them being 12-0 & #14 at this point!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: northb on January 03, 2013, 10:59:23 PM

#7 Adrian loses to Calvin 56-50

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ECSUalum on January 04, 2013, 04:02:58 PM

Eastern Soccer Programs Recognized For Sporting Behavior
WILLIMANTIC, Conn. -- Eastern Connecticut State University is one of only four institutions nationwide – the only one from New England -- to have both its men's and women's soccer programs qualify for a 2012 National Soccer Coaches' Association of America (NSCAA) Ethics Award.

The Eastern men's and women's soccer team both qualified for a Bronze Team Ethics Award for accumulating ten or less yellow and no red cards over the course of the 2012 season. The Eastern men were issued eight yellow cards in 20 matches during a 17-2-1 season and the women's team was given three yellow cards in 18 matches during a 9-6-3 campaign.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Brian Hamilton on January 04, 2013, 04:04:02 PM

VWC lost to Newport News Apprentice and has lost 4 in a row.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 05, 2013, 03:42:00 PM

#2 Middlebury comes from 13 points down with 13 minutes to play and defeats Tufts 70-69. The Jumbos got a steal with 16 seconds left and a chance to win it but missed the final shot and allowed the Panthers to remain undefeated.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 05, 2013, 03:53:22 PM

I watched the 2nd half of #2 Middlebury's 1-point win over Tufts this afternoon. It's hard to evaluate a team from watching one half of basketball online, but I think there's a good chance Middlebury is ranked too high at #2. I compare #2 Middlebury to #25 Illinois Wesleyan - just as my best point of reference - and can't find any separation there. In fact, I think Middlebury would really struggle with IWU's frontcourt players. (Both beat Tufts in close games.) Again, just going off a quick look online today - maybe I need to see the Panthers again.

Massey has Middlebury's strength of schedule at #334 (before the Tufts game) -- opponents before today have been Ursinus, Lebanon Valley, Green Mountain, Plattsburgh State, Southern Vermont, Johnson and Wales, Johnson State, Skidmore, RPI, and Bates. I wonder what Middlebury's record would be with IWU's schedule -- games vs #5 Wash U, #8 Wheaton, and #12 UW-Whitewater. Or Whitewater's schedule, Stevens Point's, etc.

I think we're in another year of extreme parity, where there's not a ton of separation between the top 15 teams or so.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 05, 2013, 04:08:31 PM

I've seen Wash U play 4 times in person this year and a couple other times on video. In fact, as we speak, I'm watching the Bears play @ Chicago...

http://www.ustream.tv/channel/maroon-tv

My sense is that #5 Wash U is quite a bit better than #2 Middlebury. (Again, just going off a half of Middlebury basketball today.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 05, 2013, 04:19:57 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 05, 2013, 04:08:31 PM
I've seen Wash U play 4 times in person this year and a couple other times on video. In fact, as we speak, they are playing @ Chicago...

http://www.ustream.tv/channel/maroon-tv

My sense is that #5 Wash U is quite a bit better than #2 Middlebury. (Again, just going off a half of Middlebury basketball today.)

I wouldn't disgree with you Bob, Middlebury is certainly not as good as the team they had last year. I think their #2 ranking is probably too high as well. I've seen them play in person against Plattsburgh State and watched several other games online. They have played better than they did today especially on the defensive end.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: toooldtohoop on January 05, 2013, 05:03:37 PM

just curious....what is north central's strength of schedule?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 05, 2013, 05:07:41 PM

Quote from: toooldtohoop on January 05, 2013, 05:03:37 PM
just curious....what is north central's strength of schedule?

NCC is 77 in SOS.

Here are the top ten in SOS per Massey:

1. UW-Whitewater
2. UW-Stevens Point
3. Hobart
4. Randolph-Macon
5. Pacific Lutheran
6. Illinois Wesleyan
7. Carthage
8. Simpson
9. St. Thomas
10. Louisiana College

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: toooldtohoop on January 05, 2013, 05:27:40 PM

thanks Q. by the way-congrats to the Titans on getting a great road win to begin conference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 05, 2013, 05:39:10 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 05, 2013, 04:08:31 PM
I've seen Wash U play 4 times in person this year and a couple other times on video. In fact, as we speak, I'm watching the Bears play @ Chicago...

http://www.ustream.tv/channel/maroon-tv

My sense is that #5 Wash U is quite a bit better than #2 Middlebury. (Again, just going off a half of Middlebury basketball today.)

Of course just as I talk up Wash U...

Final from Chicago...

U. of Chicago 68
#5 Wash U 60

Big result in the UAA.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 05, 2013, 07:49:23 PM

Yeah, I'd say (as a NESCAC observer) that Midd is clearly overrated. I don't think any NESCAC team is a top-10 level right now, although Williams is right on the cusp, as the Ephs keep getting better and better and have had some pretty solid wins lately (Luther out west, plus two double-digit road wins vs. Tufts and Bates). If you compare the common opponents between Midd and Williams, it's hard to come to any conclusion other than that, right now, Williams is a better team:

Williams beat Southern Vermont by 30, RPI by 45, Tufts by 15, Bates by 11. Midd beat the same teams by 36, 19, 1, and 3. Williams' only loss was to Stevens, a top-25 caliber team which is better than any team Midd has played, and Williams has wins over solid Salem State, Springfield and Luther teams, all better wins than any Midd non-conference win.

I think Midd is really missing Ryan Sharry, everything for the Panthers has flowed over the last three years, on both ends, from its dominance and size advantage inside, led in particular by Sharry and also by some other solid big guys like Andrew Locke (who graduated the year before). Now Midd has mediocre-at-best big guys and is very dependent on its talented and experienced back-court, and it is Williams that has the dominant interior play (two all-American level talents in Taylor Epley and Mike Mayer, both of whom I expect to contend for regional individual honors this year, and national honors by next season). I think that Williams is a bit under-ranked right now, and probably belongs in the 10-15 range, just barely ahead of Midd, with Amherst (which seems to be improving after some struggles before the break) probably properly ranked.

Out of New England, I am most surprised / impressed by WPI, which has really looked good despite graduating a lot and featuring a very young frosh and soph dominated team. WPI looks good for a tourney spot this year, and could really cause some noise nationally in a year or two considering the youth on the roster.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 05, 2013, 08:21:20 PM

Video for #1 North Central hosting #8 Wheaton...

http://www.nctv17.com/schedule/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 05, 2013, 10:53:18 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 05, 2013, 05:07:41 PM
Quote from: toooldtohoop on January 05, 2013, 05:03:37 PM
just curious....what is north central's strength of schedule?

NCC is 77 in SOS.

Here are the top ten in SOS per Massey:

1. UW-Whitewater
2. UW-Stevens Point
3. Hobart
4. Randolph-Macon
5. Pacific Lutheran
6. Illinois Wesleyan
7. Carthage
8. Simpson
9. St. Thomas
10. Louisiana College

Pacific Lutheran and Louisiana College are getting credit for exhibitions vs D1 opponents that shouldn't count.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 06, 2013, 01:35:16 PM

Quote from: sac on January 05, 2013, 10:53:18 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 05, 2013, 05:07:41 PM
Quote from: toooldtohoop on January 05, 2013, 05:03:37 PM
just curious....what is north central's strength of schedule?

NCC is 77 in SOS.

Here are the top ten in SOS per Massey:

1. UW-Whitewater
2. UW-Stevens Point
3. Hobart
4. Randolph-Macon
5. Pacific Lutheran
6. Illinois Wesleyan
7. Carthage
8. Simpson
9. St. Thomas
10. Louisiana College

Pacific Lutheran and Louisiana College are getting credit for exhibitions vs D1 opponents that shouldn't count.

Respectfully, SOS can be used for several purposes.

SOS for D3 in-region ranking is one thing and should be carefully maintained.

If you are trying to gauge how good an isolated team is, and you have no other reference points in D3, then it is a fair measure for the NWC, SCIAC and the ASC/old "SCAC-West".

The ASC is becoming even more isolated as it "shrinks" with the departure to D-2 by McMurry this year and Mississippi College. Also the "split-off of the SAA" from the "SCAC-West" isolates the "Trinity/Southwestern/UDallas/Austin College/Colorado College" core as a reference point for the ASC teams even more.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2013, 01:38:30 PM

The ASC could take this opportunity to become less isolated, though, now that it has more non-conference games available.

Interestingly, next year four teams from the Northwest Conference are coming to the D3hoops.com Classic in Vegas. Three WIAC teams and Carroll will be joining them. Those NWC teams are taking the opportunity to mitigate their isolation. More ASC teams could follow Hardin-Simmons' lead and join us in Vegas in the future.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 06, 2013, 03:57:12 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2013, 01:38:30 PM
The ASC could take this opportunity to become less isolated, though, now that it has more non-conference games available.

Interestingly, next year four teams from the Northwest Conference are coming to the D3hoops.com Classic in Vegas. Three WIAC teams and Carroll will be joining them. Those NWC teams are taking the opportunity to mitigate their isolation. More ASC teams could follow Hardin-Simmons' lead and join us in Vegas in the future.

I wonder if that will really happen. I am glad that HSU has begun to travel in basketball. The Hoops Classic was a great place for them to play. I hope that the Hoops Classic will become a favored venue for "travel orphans" to go for "in-region" games of substance. Formerly, they (HSU) would get their 4-non-conference games against Southwestern, Trinity, and 1-2 "money games". With the departure of McMurry and MissCollege, HSU has become even a stronger voice in the conference.

Travel is really a huge problem, just to play the conference schedule.

ETBU seems to place its monies into Football and softball (National champs in 2010). Hoops seldom travel.
Louisiana College is three hours away from its nearest opponent. Sul Ross is four hours away. Howard Payne and LeTourneau are not overflowing with cash. Frequently, in the old 15 team conference, several ASC teams would spend 10-12 nights "on the road" for the 20/21 game conference schedule.
UTD has traveled some. The University of Texas System has plenty of money for "buildings" but operating budgets for athletics usually come out of student fees.
UTT has not traveled much in several sports. I am not sure how strong the donor base is for them, outside of Capital Funds projects for facilities.
Ozarks is in the South Region and Admin Region 3. They get no credit for going to Missouri or Illinois, which may be closer than most other "in-region" foes. Aside from Hendrix and Rhodes, everyone else in D-III is more than 4 hours away.

TLU and Schreiner are moving to the SCAC. They may have some extra travel monies available but they still have to get to Colorado College, somehow.

UMHB and Concordia have worked at getting snow-birds to come for the holidays.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2013, 04:24:06 PM

Starting next year the in-region issue gets downplayed for ASC schools. Remember, every D-III opponent will count in the primary criteria -- you just need to play 70% of your schedule in-region. As long as ASC schools continue to get 18 games against conference opponents, they'll meet that standard. Then they can get D-III opponents in other places.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 07, 2013, 12:23:26 AM

Emergency call for Darryl Nester; please pick up the house phone!

The Posters Poll is beginning for the year. My voters and I don't get the weekly updates from Pat. Without your 'How They Fared', participation is gonna drop to 3 or 4 of us fanatics - how many will research 40-50 teams, when (with your help) the (deep) research drops to a handful?!

We NEED you, man! (And please also cast a ballot. ;))

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 07, 2013, 06:13:49 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2013, 01:38:30 PM
The ASC could take this opportunity to become less isolated, though, now that it has more non-conference games available.

Interestingly, next year four teams from the Northwest Conference are coming to the D3hoops.com Classic in Vegas. Three WIAC teams and Carroll will be joining them. Those NWC teams are taking the opportunity to mitigate their isolation. More ASC teams could follow Hardin-Simmons' lead and join us in Vegas in the future.

Can you disclose all the teams, or at least the WIAC teams? Even if it isn't Stevens Point, I might be tempted. Besides, it's Vegas Baby! Also, the dates (not the specific game dates, but from what day through what day)?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 07, 2013, 07:31:08 AM

How They Fared (Complete)

Sorry this is late -- with the new semester beginning today, I got wrapped up in class prep last night. (And now I have to go teach Calculus in half an hour ....)

The upcoming games listed for Jan. 7 and 8 are a result of my program scanning for games one week out from the last poll.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	605	North Central (Ill.)	13-0	won at Elmhurst, 71-51; def. #8 Wheaton (Ill.), 69-55
#2	602	Middlebury	11-0	won at Bates, 59-56; won at Tufts, 70-69
#3	591	St. Thomas	11-0	def. Carleton, 78-69; def. #31 Augsburg, 94-52; 01/07 at Bethel
#4	537	Rochester	12-0	def. Rochester Tech, 78-48; def. #44 Emory, 89-80
#5	484	Washington U.	10-2	won at MacMurray, 77-62; LOST at Chicago, 60-68
#6	461	Whitworth	12-1	won at Pacific, 80-77; won at Lewis and Clark, 78-66; 01/08 vs. #33 Whitman
#7	433	Adrian	11-2	LOST at Calvin, 50-56; LOST to Hope, 72-81
#8	392	Wheaton (Ill.)	10-3	LOST to #25 Illinois Wesleyan, 80-83; LOST at #1 North Central (Ill.), 55-69
#9	359	Catholic	12-1	def. Washington College, 79-63; def. Merchant Marine, 74-57
#10	349	Ramapo	12-1	def. Medgar Evers, 80-61; won at Rowan, 88-87; def. Potsdam State, 94-80
#11	343	UW-Stevens Point	12-2	def. UW-River Falls, 82-65; won at UW-Eau Claire, 54-50
#12	334	UW-Whitewater	11-2	def. Cardinal Stritch, 91-81; won at UW-River Falls, 68-63
#13	310	St. Mary's (Md.)	13-1	won at Roanoke, 82-72; won at Frostburg State, 96-89; 01/07 vs. #17 Franklin and Marshall
#14	307	WPI	13-0	won at St. Joseph's (Maine), 58-45; def. Babson, 71-38; 01/08 at Coast Guard
#15	306	Wooster	10-2	IDLE
#16	216	Christopher Newport	11-1	def. Ferrum, 76-58; won at Methodist, 68-48; won at Greensboro, 90-60
#17	213	Franklin and Marshall	11-1	def. Plattsburgh State, 71-55; def. Eastern Connecticut, 56-52; def. Swarthmore, 81-58; 01/07 at #13 St. Mary's (Md.)
#18	179	Ohio Wesleyan	11-1	won at Wittenberg, 72-60
#19	162	Augustana	12-1	def. North Park, 89-54; won at Carthage, 68-56
#20	133	Albertus Magnus	9-1	def. Worcester State, 84-82; def. Johnson and Wales, 91-75; 01/08 at St. Joseph's (Maine)
#21	97	Williams	12-1	won at Tufts, 83-68; won at Bates, 80-69
#22	92	Amherst	11-2	won at Wesleyan, 75-61; won at Connecticut College, 77-67
#23	84	Virginia Wesleyan	8-4	LOST at Apprentice School, 89-100; won at Shenandoah, 87-54; 01/08 at Bridgewater (Va.)
#24	68	Hampden-Sydney	11-2	LOST at #41 Guilford, 54-68
#25	60	Illinois Wesleyan	10-3	won at #8 Wheaton (Ill.), 83-80; def. Elmhurst, 80-51

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	52	Rose-Hulman	12-1	def. Earlham, 67-59; won at Mount St. Joseph, 52-36
#27	50	Randolph	12-0	def. Randolph-Macon, 66-65
T#28	47	NYU	9-2	def. Alvernia, 62-60; LOST at Brandeis, 59-65; 01/08 vs. Hunter
T#28	47	MIT	10-2	won at Wheaton (Mass.), 84-47; 01/08 at Springfield
#30	31	Concordia (Texas)	10-2	won at T#47 Texas-Tyler, 79-71; won at East Texas Baptist, 87-82; 01/08 at Mary Hardin-Baylor
#31	28	Augsburg	9-1	def. North Central (Minn.), 82-74; LOST at #3 St. Thomas, 52-94; 01/07 at St. John's
#32	27	Transylvania	10-3	won at Franklin, 72-58; def. Defiance, 75-68
#33	22	Whitman	9-4	LOST at Lewis and Clark, 84-88; won at Pacific, 76-65; 01/08 at #6 Whitworth
#34	21	Rhode Island College	10-2	def. Wheaton (Mass.), 86-42; def. Mass-Boston, 63-49; 01/08 at Southern Maine
#35	20	Lycoming	11-2	LOST at Widener, 78-86
#36	10	Salisbury	10-4	LOST to Eastern Connecticut, 55-75; won at Plattsburgh State, 87-69
#37	8	UW-La Crosse	11-3	def. T#38 UW-Platteville, 65-53; def. UW-Oshkosh, 65-49
T#38	7	St. Norbert	8-3	def. Monmouth, 64-52
T#38	7	Bethany	11-3	won at Westminster (Pa.), 76-51; LOST at St. Vincent, 66-69; 01/07 at Carnegie Mellon
T#38	7	UW-Platteville	11-4	LOST at #37 UW-La Crosse, 53-65; def. UW-Superior, 96-55
#41	6	Guilford	11-2	won at Methodist, 84-61; def. #24 Hampden-Sydney, 68-54
#42	5	Stevens	8-1	won at Houghton, 80-61; won at Nazareth, 76-70; 01/07 at Kean
#43	4	UW-Stout	11-2	def. UW-Eau Claire, 54-46
#44	3	Emory	8-3	LOST at #4 Rochester, 80-89
T#45	2	Carroll (Wis.)	9-3	def. Grinnell, 119-110
T#45	2	Dubuque	10-2	LOST at Wartburg, 58-69
T#47	1	DeSales	10-2	won at Haverford, 64-41; 01/07 vs. Arcadia
T#47	1	Texas-Tyler	10-3	LOST to #30 Concordia (Texas), 71-79; LOST to Mary Hardin-Baylor, 71-75

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2013, 11:22:24 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 07, 2013, 06:13:49 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2013, 01:38:30 PM
The ASC could take this opportunity to become less isolated, though, now that it has more non-conference games available.

Interestingly, next year four teams from the Northwest Conference are coming to the D3hoops.com Classic in Vegas. Three WIAC teams and Carroll will be joining them. Those NWC teams are taking the opportunity to mitigate their isolation. More ASC teams could follow Hardin-Simmons' lead and join us in Vegas in the future.

Can you disclose all the teams, or at least the WIAC teams? Even if it isn't Stevens Point, I might be tempted. Besides, it's Vegas Baby! Also, the dates (not the specific game dates, but from what day through what day)?

I don't have the dates yet, but I can ask. Not everyone is signed on the dotted line as of yet but Stevens Point is supposed to be one of the teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 07, 2013, 12:46:53 PM

When you posted that information, am I to assume those are all men's teams you are talking about since this is the men's board?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2013, 12:47:50 PM

Correct, that's the men's field.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2013, 01:47:32 PM

Dates would be Dec. 28-30, 2013, as it stands right now. The NWC teams would be Whitworth, Whitman, George Fox and Linfield.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 07, 2013, 04:54:39 PM

Thanks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mass_d3fan on January 08, 2013, 01:16:12 PM

Congratulations to WPI for reaching #8 in the top 25. I believe this is the highest the Engineers have ever been ranked.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on January 09, 2013, 11:13:00 PM

Rough night for the Top 25. 1, 6, 7, 13, 17 all taking an L tonight. Wow. :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 10, 2013, 07:36:43 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	609	North Central (Ill.)	13-1	LOST at Carthage, 53-64; 01/12 vs. #17 Augustana
#2	594	St. Thomas	13-0	won at Bethel, 90-48; def. Gustavus Adolphus, 81-60; 01/12 vs. St. John's
#3	593	Middlebury	11-0	01/11 vs. Connecticut College; 01/12 vs. Wesleyan
#4	549	Rochester	12-0	01/11 vs. Chicago; 01/13 vs. #12 Washington U.
#5	488	Whitworth	13-1	def. T#35 Whitman, 112-100; 01/11 at George Fox
#6	428	Catholic	12-2	LOST at Juniata, 75-85; 01/12 at Moravian
#7	419	Ramapo	12-2	LOST to William Paterson, 64-65; 01/12 at Richard Stockton
#8	396	WPI	14-0	won at Coast Guard, 83-49; 01/10 at Worcester State; 01/12 at Wheaton (Mass.)
#9	385	St. Mary's (Md.)	14-1	def. #14 Franklin and Marshall, 63-57; 01/12 at Wesley
#10	376	UW-Stevens Point	13-2	def. T#43 UW-Stout, 70-51; 01/12 vs. #37 UW-La Crosse
#11	363	UW-Whitewater	12-2	won at UW-Platteville, 74-61; 01/12 at UW-Superior
#12	324	Washington U.	10-2	01/11 at Emory; 01/13 at #4 Rochester
#13	314	Christopher Newport	11-2	LOST at North Carolina Wesleyan, 109-112; 01/12 vs. LaGrange; 01/13 vs. Piedmont
#14	300	Franklin and Marshall	11-2	LOST at #9 St. Mary's (Md.), 57-63; 01/10 at Muhlenberg; 01/12 at Washington College
#15	274	Wooster	11-2	won at Hiram, 78-62; 01/12 vs. DePauw
#16	238	Ohio Wesleyan	12-1	def. Denison, 94-68; 01/12 vs. Allegheny
#17	223	Augustana	12-2	LOST at #22 Illinois Wesleyan, 60-63; 01/12 at #1 North Central (Ill.)
#18	165	Williams	12-1	01/11 vs. Wesleyan; 01/12 vs. Connecticut College
#19	152	Albertus Magnus	10-1	won at St. Joseph's (Maine), 92-75; 01/10 vs. Rivier; 01/12 at Emmanuel
#20	138	Wheaton (Ill.)	11-3	def. North Park, 73-49; 01/12 vs. Millikin
#21	121	Amherst	11-2	01/11 at Hamilton
#22	99	Illinois Wesleyan	11-3	def. #17 Augustana, 63-60; 01/12 vs. Carthage
#23	96	Rose-Hulman	13-1	def. Anderson, 69-40; 01/12 vs. #27 Transylvania
#24	82	Randolph	13-0	def. Roanoke, 73-61; 01/12 at #33 Virginia Wesleyan
#25	69	Adrian	12-2	def. Trine, 56-54; 01/12 at Olivet

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	60	MIT	10-3	LOST at Springfield, 53-56; 01/10 vs. Coast Guard; 01/12 vs. Babson
#27	37	Transylvania	10-4	LOST at Hanover, 64-69; 01/12 at #23 Rose-Hulman
#28	36	Rhode Island College	11-2	won at Southern Maine, 71-66; 01/12 vs. Keene State
T#29	32	Hampden-Sydney	12-2	won at Lynchburg, 79-70; 01/12 vs. Washington and Lee
T#29	32	Calvin	12-2	won at Kalamazoo, 79-53; 01/12 vs. Alma
#31	26	Concordia (Texas)	10-3	LOST at Mary Hardin-Baylor, 95-98; 01/10 vs. Hardin-Simmons; 01/13 vs. Fisher
#32	24	Guilford	12-2	won at Emory and Henry, 82-68; 01/12 at Eastern Mennonite
#33	17	Virginia Wesleyan	9-4	won at Bridgewater (Va.), 80-68; 01/12 vs. #24 Randolph
#34	13	NYU	10-2	def. Hunter, 81-65; 01/11 vs. Case Western Reserve; 01/13 vs. Carnegie Mellon
T#35	11	Whitman	9-5	LOST at #5 Whitworth, 100-112; 01/12 at George Fox
T#35	11	Stevens	9-1	won at Kean, 75-70; 01/11 vs. Alfred; 01/12 vs. St. John Fisher
#37	6	UW-La Crosse	12-3	def. UW-River Falls, 73-54; 01/12 at #10 UW-Stevens Point
T#38	5	St. Norbert	9-3	won at Ripon, 72-43; 01/12 vs. Illinois College
T#38	5	Brandeis	10-2	01/11 vs. Carnegie Mellon; 01/13 vs. Case Western Reserve
#40	4	Carroll (Wis.)	10-3	def. Beloit, 74-72; 01/12 at Knox
T#41	3	Augsburg	10-2	won at St. John's, 77-65; LOST to Carleton, 71-75; 01/12 at St. Olaf
T#41	3	Lycoming	11-3	LOST to Lebanon Valley, 86-90; 01/12 at Stevenson
T#43	2	UW-Stout	11-3	LOST at #10 UW-Stevens Point, 51-70; 01/12 at UW-Oshkosh
T#43	2	Albright	12-2	def. Hood, 63-57; 01/12 at Lebanon Valley
#45	1	Oswego State	9-2	LOST at Oneonta State, 57-67; 01/11 vs. Fredonia State; 01/12 vs. Buffalo State

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 11, 2013, 10:02:35 PM

Alan Aboona goes 10-11 from downtown to help Washington University in the come from behind win over Emory. Whew!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 12, 2013, 04:02:04 PM

Superior knocks off Whitewater 69-66.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njf1003 on January 12, 2013, 04:08:37 PM

All I have to say about this week is conference play....

Winless Washington (MD) knocks off #14 F&M 62-61...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 12, 2013, 04:41:51 PM

Quote from: njf1003 on January 12, 2013, 04:08:37 PM
All I have to say about this week is conference play....

Winless Washington (MD) knocks off #14 F&M 62-61...

F&M is not a Top 25 caliber team. I just got back from the game today. Comparing this team to the one I saw in the playoffs last year was night and day. I expected them to be worse; they lost a lot - but they're much worse.

I'm not sure how Hayk Gyokchyan scores 18 per night. He's the least athletic human being I've ever seen and is only capable of scoring either from open threes or when he gets the ball in the low post (the positioning for, he's not great at getting into and the team doesn't seem to be very good at getting him the ball there when he does). Their ballhandling is weak (I couldn't see them handling even an above average press), and while their signature aggressiveness and discipline is there, the talent level is well below what we normally expect from F&M.

I think it's a one year blip, as they've got a solid freshman backup PG right now and all of their best players are sophomores and juniors.

Of course, you also can't put marked improvement past Glenn Robinson. He was making some interesting choices today, presumably for future payout. Junior, Matt Porter, made a stupid mistake on defense half way through the first half and he got benched for 20 minutes. The officiating was atrocious today, but not one-sided.

The team isn't bad, but even on their best day, I can't see them beating a Top 15 team. I know I only vote in the Posters Poll, but I can't see myself voting for them at all the rest of the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2013, 05:15:21 PM

Gonna be a shake-up of the Top 25: #24 Randolph falls from the undefeated ranks, losing to Va Wes (no real disgrace in that, but no glory either!); one-time #7 (now #25) Adrian loses to Olivet!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2013, 05:22:28 PM

Just noticed that #23 RHIT also lost (to Transy) - gonna be a lot of room at the bottom of the ballot!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 12, 2013, 05:35:07 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2013, 05:22:28 PM
Just noticed that #23 RHIT also lost (to Transy) - gonna be a lot of room at the bottom of the ballot!

Time for Wesley to get some votes. They're up 15 on St. Mary's right now with 5 minutes to go. They've already beaten Cabrini (with Walton-Moss) and Virginia Wesleyan (for what that's worth).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 13, 2013, 04:24:34 PM

Anxiously awaiting Darryl's update.

Lots of carnage this week. It will take a bit longer to fill out my "Poster's Poll". ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 13, 2013, 05:58:58 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	609	North Central (Ill.)	14-1	LOST at Carthage, 53-64; def. #17 Augustana, 59-46
#2	594	St. Thomas	14-0	won at Bethel, 90-48; def. Gustavus Adolphus, 81-60; def. St. John's, 94-63
#3	593	Middlebury	13-0	def. Connecticut College, 85-68; def. Wesleyan, 78-77
#4	549	Rochester	14-0	def. Chicago, 64-47; def. #12 Washington U., 93-81
#5	488	Whitworth	14-1	def. T#35 Whitman, 112-100; won at George Fox, 61-59
#6	428	Catholic	13-2	LOST at Juniata, 75-85; won at Moravian, 85-59
#7	419	Ramapo	13-2	LOST to William Paterson, 64-65; won at Richard Stockton, 71-68
#8	396	WPI	16-0	won at Coast Guard, 83-49; won at Worcester State, 87-71; won at Wheaton (Mass.), 58-41
#9	385	St. Mary's (Md.)	14-2	def. #14 Franklin and Marshall, 63-57; LOST at Wesley, 54-68
#10	376	UW-Stevens Point	14-2	def. T#43 UW-Stout, 70-51; def. #37 UW-La Crosse, 62-57
#11	363	UW-Whitewater	12-3	won at UW-Platteville, 74-61; LOST at UW-Superior, 66-69
#12	324	Washington U.	11-3	won at Emory, 86-84; LOST at #4 Rochester, 81-93
#13	314	Christopher Newport	12-2	LOST at North Carolina Wesleyan, 109-112; def. LaGrange, 86-76; ~~01/13 vs. Piedmont~~ cancelled
#14	300	Franklin and Marshall	12-3	LOST at #9 St. Mary's (Md.), 57-63; won at Muhlenberg, 74-69; LOST at Washington College, 61-62
#15	274	Wooster	12-2	won at Hiram, 78-62; def. DePauw, 68-58
#16	238	Ohio Wesleyan	13-1	def. Denison, 94-68; def. Allegheny, 79-73
#17	223	Augustana	12-3	LOST at #22 Illinois Wesleyan, 60-63; LOST at #1 North Central (Ill.), 46-59
#18	165	Williams	14-1	def. Wesleyan, 74-65; def. Connecticut College, 96-63
#19	152	Albertus Magnus	12-1	won at St. Joseph's (Maine), 92-75; def. Rivier, 76-66; won at Emmanuel, 97-90
#20	138	Wheaton (Ill.)	12-3	def. North Park, 73-49; def. Millikin, 91-71
#21	121	Amherst	12-2	won at Hamilton, 79-77
#22	99	Illinois Wesleyan	12-3	def. #17 Augustana, 63-60; def. Carthage, 82-65
#23	96	Rose-Hulman	13-2	def. Anderson, 69-40; LOST to #27 Transylvania, 60-69
#24	82	Randolph	13-1	def. Roanoke, 73-61; LOST at #33 Virginia Wesleyan, 66-72
#25	69	Adrian	12-3	def. Trine, 56-54; LOST at Olivet, 49-52

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	60	MIT	12-3	LOST at Springfield, 53-56; def. Coast Guard, 83-45; def. Babson, 69-64
#27	37	Transylvania	11-4	LOST at Hanover, 64-69; won at #23 Rose-Hulman, 69-60
#28	36	Rhode Island College	12-2	won at Southern Maine, 71-66; def. Keene State, 58-55
T#29	32	Hampden-Sydney	13-2	won at Lynchburg, 79-70; def. Washington and Lee, 61-41
T#29	32	Calvin	13-2	won at Kalamazoo, 79-53; def. Alma, 86-63
#31	26	Concordia (Texas)	12-3	LOST at Mary Hardin-Baylor, 95-98; def. Hardin-Simmons, 116-83; def. Fisher, 88-64
#32	24	Guilford	13-2	won at Emory and Henry, 82-68; won at Eastern Mennonite, 77-66
#33	17	Virginia Wesleyan	10-4	won at Bridgewater (Va.), 80-68; def. #24 Randolph, 72-66
#34	13	NYU	12-2	def. Hunter, 81-65; def. Case Western Reserve, 75-58; def. Carnegie Mellon, 59-53
T#35	11	Whitman	9-6	LOST at #5 Whitworth, 100-112; LOST at George Fox, 73-76
T#35	11	Stevens	11-1	won at Kean, 75-70; def. Alfred, 72-48; def. St. John Fisher, 74-68
#37	6	UW-La Crosse	12-4	def. UW-River Falls, 73-54; LOST at #10 UW-Stevens Point, 57-62
T#38	5	St. Norbert	10-3	won at Ripon, 72-43; def. Illinois College, 95-59
T#38	5	Brandeis	12-2	def. Carnegie Mellon, 69-62; def. Case Western Reserve, 77-58
#40	4	Carroll (Wis.)	11-3	def. Beloit, 74-72; won at Knox, 91-51
T#41	3	Augsburg	11-2	won at St. John's, 77-65; LOST to Carleton, 71-75; won at St. Olaf, 90-82
T#41	3	Lycoming	12-3	LOST to Lebanon Valley, 86-90; won at Stevenson, 104-100
T#43	2	UW-Stout	12-3	LOST at #10 UW-Stevens Point, 51-70; won at UW-Oshkosh, 76-50
T#43	2	Albright	12-3	def. Hood, 63-57; LOST at Lebanon Valley, 67-77
#45	1	Oswego State	11-2	LOST at Oneonta State, 57-67; def. Fredonia State, 74-56; def. Buffalo State, 79-69

Other teams to watch (as suggested by posters on this board)

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
---	---	Wesley	14-4	won at Frostburg State, 75-67; def. #9 St. Mary's (Md.), 68-54

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 12, 2013, 05:35:07 PM
Time for Wesley to get some votes. They're up 15 on St. Mary's right now with 5 minutes to go. They've already beaten Cabrini (with Walton-Moss) and Virginia Wesleyan (for what that's worth).

Wesley has won 9 in a row; their last loss was on Dec. 8. Their four losses were by 2, 8, 8, and 8 points.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 13, 2013, 09:37:28 PM

Darryl, if they still don't get any votes this week, another team you might add to the 'watch list' is Cabrini. Good teams from weak conferences are always a problem for evaluation; in this case the problem is intensified by the addition mid-season of ROY Walton-Moss. They haven't yet made my PP ballot (largely because, as Hoops Fan noted, their loss to Wesley was WITH Walton-Moss), but they are clearly NOT the same team that quickly dropped from highly ranked to zero votes before his return.

Their biggest problem in getting re-ranked is that, playing in the CSAC, they will have essentially no chance to 'show what they've got' before the tourney.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 14, 2013, 09:54:44 AM

Now are you just suggesting these teams so you don't have to look up their results on the intarwebs? ;)

I've got a few I'm tracking that's not on this list, even someone I voted for in the PP, but I'm not a pesterer. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 14, 2013, 01:00:40 PM

Darryl,

What are your thoughts on the following 13 teams...

(Is this pestering?) ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 14, 2013, 03:29:06 PM

We want to consider Cabrini who barely got past 3-11 Marywood at home Saturday? Most of Cabrini's losses are, granted, not bad... but Immaculata is 5-7 and the Cavs have struggled against others as well. Walton-Moss' return is certainly good for the team, but they don't seem to be in sync thus I wouldn't consider them for the Top 25 at this point. There are a number of 4-loss teams I would consider before Cabrini (Virginia Wesleyan, Transylvania, Wesley to name a few).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 14, 2013, 04:01:50 PM

Wesley lost to York, Pa. York, Pa lost to Kalamazoo.

this would give me great pause about Wesley.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 14, 2013, 04:18:01 PM

Well... since that York loss (on 12/8)... Wesley has won 9 straight including against Eastern Mennonite, Virginia Wesleyan, and St. Mary's on Saturday... that at least allowed me to consider Wesley.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 14, 2013, 07:34:25 PM

Well, it all revolves around your definition of 'considering'. You really 'consider' all 400+ teams - most of them you consider them not in the Top 25 conversation! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 15, 2013, 01:06:34 AM

I agree with St Thomas as the current #1 team and with Rochester at #2. However, I think Whitworth should be #3 rather than Middlebury, and North Central should be #4. There is no way Middlebury should be ranked above either Whitworth or even North Central.
To date, Middlebury's opponents have a combined record of 78-107
North Central's opponents have a combined record of 124-98, and No. Central has defeated teams that were ranked #7, 10, 8, and 17 at the time they played. Given this, it doesn't make a lot of sense to me that Middlebury is ranked above No. Central.
Am I missing something?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frank uible on January 15, 2013, 07:21:11 AM

Middlebury receives its ranking through a mammoth northeast conspiracy.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 15, 2013, 07:49:47 AM

I have Middlebury ranked #5 in my poster's poll ballot mainly because their power ratings and SOS aren't that strong. In Massey, they're 30th with a 281 SOS. They're 17th in David Wilson's system. I think they're better than that, but it's hard to gauge, really with that schedule.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 15, 2013, 09:29:30 AM

Cabrini got its stud back (http://www.d3hoops.com/columns/around-the-nation/2012-13/cabrini-gets-its-stud-back), but the Cavs don't have Arron Goodman any more. The freshman, who was averaging 15.1 ppg and 9.4 rpg, isn't on the roster. Mailsy on the CSAC board mentioned that Goodman left the school because it wasn't a good fit for him (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4289.msg1484720#msg1484720).

I was looking forward to seeing Walton-Moss and Goodman play together this semester.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 15, 2013, 09:48:54 AM

It's almost refreshing that an athlete decides to move from a school because he didn't fit there. Wow, it's almost like he was a student first and was looking out for his academics. Oh, wait, this is D3! ;)

Sad for Cabrini though but these things happen.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 15, 2013, 01:36:12 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 15, 2013, 07:49:47 AM
I have Middlebury ranked #5 in my poster's poll ballot mainly because their power ratings and SOS aren't that strong. In Massey, they're 30th with a 281 SOS. They're 17th in David Wilson's system. I think they're better than that, but it's hard to gauge, really with that schedule.

According to Massey, they've not played a Top-100 D3 team. They've won three of their last four games by one possession. A Top-5 team should win nearly all these games by double digits, not merely 50% of them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on January 15, 2013, 05:34:48 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on January 15, 2013, 09:29:30 AM
Cabrini got its stud back (http://www.d3hoops.com/columns/around-the-nation/2012-13/cabrini-gets-its-stud-back), but the Cavs don't have Arron Goodman any more. The freshman, who was averaging 15.1 ppg and 9.4 rpg, isn't on the roster. Mailsy on the CSAC board mentioned that Goodman left the school because it wasn't a good fit for him (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4289.msg1484720#msg1484720).

I was looking forward to seeing Walton-Moss and Goodman play together this semester.

As was I. That would have been fun to watch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 17, 2013, 07:46:52 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	618	St. Thomas	16-0	won at St. Olaf, 94-64; def. Macalester, 92-53
#2	585	Rochester	14-0	01/18 at Carnegie Mellon; 01/20 at Case Western Reserve
#3	583	Middlebury	14-0	won at Castleton State, 54-38; 01/18 vs. Hamilton
#4	533	Whitworth	14-1	01/18 vs. Willamette; 01/19 vs. Linfield
#5	519	North Central (Ill.)	15-1	def. Millikin, 66-44; 01/19 at North Park
#6	501	WPI	17-0	def. Clark, 57-45; 01/19 vs. #32 MIT
#7	475	UW-Stevens Point	15-2	def. UW-Platteville, 65-60; 01/19 at UW-River Falls
#8	390	Wooster	13-2	def. Allegheny, 92-68; 01/19 at #9 Ohio Wesleyan
#9	379	Ohio Wesleyan	13-2	LOST at Hiram, 65-78; 01/19 vs. #8 Wooster
#10	343	Williams	15-1	won at Lyndon State, 90-59; 01/20 at Hamilton
#11	334	Catholic	14-2	def. Susquehanna, 82-65; 01/19 vs. #42 Scranton
#12	324	Ramapo	15-2	def. York (N.Y.), 78-52; def. New Jersey City, 60-54; 01/19 vs. Rutgers-Camden
#13	283	Washington U.	11-3	01/18 vs. New York University; 01/20 vs. #27 Brandeis
#14	245	St. Mary's (Md.)	15-2	won at Mary Washington, 58-54; 01/19 vs. Salisbury
#15	241	UW-Whitewater	13-3	def. UW-Oshkosh, 68-50; 01/19 vs. T#40 UW-Stout
#16	229	Amherst	13-2	def. Wesleyan, 66-58; 01/18 vs. Bowdoin; 01/19 vs. Colby
#17	224	Christopher Newport	12-2	01/19 vs. Maryville (Tenn.)
#18	221	Illinois Wesleyan	13-3	won at North Park, 86-59; 01/19 at Millikin
#19	183	Albertus Magnus	13-1	def. Suffolk, 95-76; 01/17 at Mount Ida; 01/19 vs. Emerson
#20	180	Wheaton (Ill.)	13-3	won at #23 Augustana, 86-67; 01/19 at Carthage
#21	85	Calvin	14-2	def. Hope, 75-49; 01/19 at Trine
#22	71	Guilford	14-2	def. #30 Randolph, 69-65; 01/19 at Washington and Lee
#23	68	Augustana	12-4	LOST to #20 Wheaton (Ill.), 67-86; 01/19 vs. Elmhurst
#24	67	Stevens	12-1	def. Merchant Marine, 66-56; 01/18 vs. Nazareth; 01/19 vs. Houghton
#25	62	Rhode Island College	13-2	won at Mass-Dartmouth, 70-64; 01/19 at Plymouth State

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	59	Franklin and Marshall	13-3	won at Johns Hopkins, 76-71; 01/19 vs. McDaniel
#27	53	Brandeis	12-2	01/18 at Chicago; 01/20 at #13 Washington U.
#28	46	Hampden-Sydney	14-2	def. Randolph-Macon, 70-60; 01/19 at Eastern Mennonite
#29	42	Rose-Hulman	14-2	won at Franklin, 58-42; 01/19 vs. Bluffton
#30	29	Randolph	13-2	LOST at #22 Guilford, 65-69; 01/19 vs. Bridgewater (Va.)
#31	28	Transylvania	12-4	def. Mount St. Joseph, 53-42; 01/19 vs. Anderson
#32	27	MIT	12-3	01/19 at #6 WPI
#33	25	NYU	12-2	01/18 at #13 Washington U.; 01/20 at Chicago
#34	19	Virginia Wesleyan	11-4	def. Eastern Mennonite, 60-55; 01/19 at Roanoke
#35	13	UW-La Crosse	12-5	LOST at T#40 UW-Stout, 55-63; 01/19 vs. UW-Eau Claire
#36	10	Adrian	13-3	def. Alma, 74-73; 01/19 vs. Kalamazoo
#37	9	Wesley	15-4	won at Salisbury, 70-64
#38	7	St. Norbert	11-3	won at Beloit, 66-56; 01/19 vs. Cornell
#39	5	Carroll	11-4	LOST to Lake Forest, 53-74
T#40	3	Concordia (Texas)	12-3	01/17 at Schreiner; 01/19 at Texas Lutheran
T#40	3	UW-Stout	13-3	def. #35 UW-La Crosse, 63-55; 01/19 at #15 UW-Whitewater
#42	2	Scranton	12-4	LOST to Drew, 69-72; 01/19 at #11 Catholic
T#43	1	Wittenberg	12-4	won at Wabash, 50-45; 01/19 vs. Hiram
T#43	1	Capital	11-5	LOST to Marietta, 68-69; 01/19 at Baldwin-Wallace

Other teams to watch (as suggested by posters on this board)

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
---	---	Cabrini	11-4	won at Gwynedd-Mercy, 93-80; 01/19 at Keystone

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 13, 2013, 09:37:28 PM
Darryl, if they still don't get any votes this week, another team you might add to the 'watch list' is Cabrini. Good teams from weak conferences are always a problem for evaluation; in this case the problem is intensified by the addition mid-season of ROY Walton-Moss. They haven't yet made my PP ballot (largely because, as Hoops Fan noted, their loss to Wesley was WITH Walton-Moss), but they are clearly NOT the same team that quickly dropped from highly ranked to zero votes before his return.

Their biggest problem in getting re-ranked is that, playing in the CSAC, they will have essentially no chance to 'show what they've got' before the tourney.

Despite the ensuing discussion about whether Cabrini was worth further consideration, it takes little effort on my part to add a team to the list, so here you go.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 17, 2013, 09:37:19 AM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 17, 2013, 07:46:52 AM

Despite the ensuing discussion about whether Cabrini was worth further consideration, it takes little effort on my part to add a team to the list, so here you go.

Regardless of "how little effort" it takes to add one more team, your diligence and tenacity to this effort, week after week, year after year, is greatly appreciated.

The most tangible way that we can thank you for this is generously to send karma your way!

I invite all of my fellow posters to "applaud" Darryl each time you consult his lists! +1! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 17, 2013, 06:45:47 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 17, 2013, 09:37:19 AM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 17, 2013, 07:46:52 AM

Despite the ensuing discussion about whether Cabrini was worth further consideration, it takes little effort on my part to add a team to the list, so here you go.
Regardless of "how little effort" it takes to add one more team, your diligence and tenacity to this effort, week after week, year after year, is greatly appreciated.

The most tangible way that we can thank you for this is generously to send karma your way!

I invite all of my fellow posters to "applaud" Darryl each time you consult his lists! +1! :)

I've applauded him so much my hands are sore. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 18, 2013, 09:11:39 PM

Darryl - great job again on the Top 25 results tracking! k+

One more team that deserves to be tracked is Marietta. They are 12-4 with 2 of those losses to #8 Wooster and #9 Ohio Wesleyan. Their other two losses were both on the road at Wittenberg and at Baldwin-Wallace which are tough places to get a win. Thanks for your excellent work! :)

UPDATE: Marietta won again today so they are 13-4 and in first place in the OAC with a 9-1 record.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 20, 2013, 09:24:34 AM

Massey Top 25...

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&yr=2013&sub=11620

1. St. Thomas
2. UW-Stevens Point
3. Rochester
4. North Central
5. Whitworth
6. UW-Whitewater
7. Wooster
8. Williams
9. Hampden-Sydney
10. WPI
11. Illinois Wesleyan
12. UW-Stout
13. Augustana
14. Washington U
15. Stevens
16. Calvin
17. Catholic
18. Randolph
19. Wheaton
20. Guilford
21. Christopher Newport
22. Ohio Wesleyan
23. Middlebury
24. St. Mary's
25. Rose-Hulman

Conference rankings...

1. WIAC - http://www.d3hoops.com/conf/WIAC/men/2012-13/standings
2. UAA - http://www.d3hoops.com/conf/UAA/men/2012-13/standings
3. CCIW - http://www.d3hoops.com/conf/CCIW/men/2012-13/standings
4. ODAC - http://www.d3hoops.com/conf/ODAC/men/2012-13/standings
5. MACC - http://www.d3hoops.com/conf/MACC/men/2012-13/standings

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 20, 2013, 03:54:34 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 20, 2013, 09:24:34 AM
Massey Top 25...

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&yr=2013&sub=11620

1. St. Thomas
2. UW-Stevens Point
3. Rochester
4. North Central
5. Whitworth
6. UW-Whitewater
7. Wooster
8. Williams
9. Hampden-Sydney
10. WPI
11. Illinois Wesleyan
12. UW-Stout
13. Augustana
14. Washington U
15. Stevens
16. Calvin
17. Catholic
18. Randolph
19. Wheaton
20. Guilford
21. Christopher Newport
22. Ohio Wesleyan
23. Middlebury
24. St. Mary's
25. Rose-Hulman

Conference rankings...

1. WIAC - http://www.d3hoops.com/conf/WIAC/men/2012-13/standings
2. UAA - http://www.d3hoops.com/conf/UAA/men/2012-13/standings
3. CCIW - http://www.d3hoops.com/conf/CCIW/men/2012-13/standings
4. ODAC - http://www.d3hoops.com/conf/ODAC/men/2012-13/standings
5. MACC - http://www.d3hoops.com/conf/MACC/men/2012-13/standings

Respectfully, I agree with the Top 4 conferences, but how does the MACC slip in there at #5?

Conference (only 10 members) with only one really "bad team" and 6 teams at .625 and better?

Good geographic proximity to build a strong SOS by avoiding "SOS-toxic" opponents?

The actual power rating for the MACC is 0.11

The MIAC is 6th at 0.10.
The IIAC is 7th at 0.10.

I am glad to see the ASC-West is 11th , ahead of the OAC Capital AC and NJAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 20, 2013, 04:11:10 PM

A lot of good / to great teams make for a better conference than "a couple of great ones, then some ok ones, then heinous ones".

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 20, 2013, 04:57:14 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	618	St. Thomas	16-0	won at St. Olaf, 94-64; def. Macalester, 92-53
#2	585	Rochester	16-0	won at Carnegie Mellon, 72-63; won at Case Western Reserve, 88-66
#3	583	Middlebury	15-0	won at Castleton State, 54-38; def. Hamilton, 66-47
#4	533	Whitworth	16-1	def. Willamette, 88-69; def. Linfield, 80-50
#5	519	North Central (Ill.)	16-1	def. Millikin, 66-44; won at North Park, 69-61
#6	501	WPI	18-0	def. Clark, 57-45; def. #32 MIT, 65-59
#7	475	UW-Stevens Point	16-2	def. UW-Platteville, 65-60; won at UW-River Falls, 80-44
#8	390	Wooster	14-2	def. Allegheny, 92-68; won at #9 Ohio Wesleyan, 88-82
#9	379	Ohio Wesleyan	13-3	LOST at Hiram, 65-78; LOST to #8 Wooster, 82-88
#10	343	Williams	16-1	won at Lyndon State, 90-59; won at Hamilton, 67-59
#11	334	Catholic	15-2	def. Susquehanna, 82-65; def. #42 Scranton, 58-48
#12	324	Ramapo	16-2	def. York (N.Y.), 78-52; def. New Jersey City, 60-54; def. Rutgers-Camden, 85-63
#13	283	Washington U.	12-4	def. New York University, 68-59; LOST to #27 Brandeis, 62-67
#14	245	St. Mary's (Md.)	16-2	won at Mary Washington, 58-54; def. Salisbury, 59-50
#15	241	UW-Whitewater	14-3	def. UW-Oshkosh, 68-50; def. T#40 UW-Stout, 58-55
#16	229	Amherst	15-2	def. Wesleyan, 66-58; def. Bowdoin, 80-70; def. Colby, 98-75
#17	224	Christopher Newport	13-2	def. Maryville (Tenn.), 79-71
#18	221	Illinois Wesleyan	14-3	won at North Park, 86-59; won at Millikin, 93-60
#19	183	Albertus Magnus	15-1	def. Suffolk, 95-76; won at Mount Ida, 106-91; def. Emerson, 91-67
#20	180	Wheaton (Ill.)	13-4	won at #23 Augustana, 86-67; LOST at Carthage, 61-62
#21	85	Calvin	15-2	def. Hope, 75-49; won at Trine, 56-43
#22	71	Guilford	14-3	def. #30 Randolph, 69-65; LOST at Washington and Lee, 58-62
#23	68	Augustana	13-4	LOST to #20 Wheaton (Ill.), 67-86; def. Elmhurst, 84-41
#24	67	Stevens	14-1	def. Merchant Marine, 66-56; def. Nazareth, 74-64; def. Houghton, 80-49
#25	62	Rhode Island College	14-2	won at Mass-Dartmouth, 70-64; won at Plymouth State, 57-54

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	59	Franklin and Marshall	14-3	won at Johns Hopkins, 76-71; def. McDaniel, 71-58
#27	53	Brandeis	14-2	won at Chicago, 59-55; won at #13 Washington U., 67-62
#28	46	Hampden-Sydney	15-2	def. Randolph-Macon, 70-60; won at Eastern Mennonite, 104-94
#29	42	Rose-Hulman	15-2	won at Franklin, 58-42; def. Bluffton, 67-64
#30	29	Randolph	14-2	LOST at #22 Guilford, 65-69; def. Bridgewater (Va.), 62-53
#31	28	Transylvania	13-4	def. Mount St. Joseph, 53-42; def. Anderson, 78-58
#32	27	MIT	12-4	LOST at #6 WPI, 59-65
#33	25	NYU	12-4	LOST at #13 Washington U., 59-68; LOST at Chicago, 58-77
#34	19	Virginia Wesleyan	12-4	def. Eastern Mennonite, 60-55; won at Roanoke, 89-82
#35	13	UW-La Crosse	12-6	LOST at T#40 UW-Stout, 55-63; LOST to UW-Eau Claire, 64-69
#36	10	Adrian	14-3	def. Alma, 74-73; def. Kalamazoo, 77-46
#37	9	Wesley	15-4	won at Salisbury, 70-64
#38	7	St. Norbert	12-3	won at Beloit, 66-56; def. Cornell, 80-63
#39	5	Carroll	11-4	LOST to Lake Forest, 53-74
T#40	3	Concordia (Texas)	13-4	LOST at Schreiner, 91-103; won at Texas Lutheran, 97-91
T#40	3	UW-Stout	13-4	def. #35 UW-La Crosse, 63-55; LOST at #15 UW-Whitewater, 55-58
#42	2	Scranton	12-5	LOST to Drew, 69-72; LOST at #11 Catholic, 48-58
T#43	1	Wittenberg	12-5	won at Wabash, 50-45; LOST to Hiram, 57-62
T#43	1	Capital	11-6	LOST to Marietta, 68-69; LOST at Baldwin-Wallace, 67-79

Other teams to watch (as suggested by posters on this board)

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
---	---	Marietta	13-4	won at T#43 Capital, 69-68; def. Wilmington, 98-87
---	---	Cabrini	11-5	won at Gwynedd-Mercy, 93-80; LOST at Keystone, 87-102

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 20, 2013, 06:20:08 PM

Great work, like usual, Darryl!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on January 21, 2013, 12:57:23 PM

Another team I'll throw out for the watch list is 12-4 Luther. Playing tonight on the road against 12-4 Dubuque, if they win that one I think they should get a good look by the pollsters. Saw them play in person against Williams. Very balanced team with one of the best big men in the country in Tyler Wedemier. Four losses but they've come against 16-1 Williams in OT at a neutral site, @ 19-3 DII Mounty Mercy, @ 13-4 UW-Stout, @ 12-6 UW-Lacrosse. Really not a 'bad' loss in the bunch. Between Luther and Stevens, the team Williams actually lost too, I would say Luther is the better team in my opinion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 21, 2013, 03:20:39 PM

Down goes Magnus!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 21, 2013, 04:10:21 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 21, 2013, 03:20:39 PM

Down goes Magnus!

A "nice" loss. To the #3 team in the conference. On the road.

Takes the "top 25" pressure off the team. Allows them to re-focus on "taking care of business" in the conference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 21, 2013, 04:12:14 PM

Guh... to lose before the poll is even released is gut-wrenching. At least teams playing at night are after the poll's release! Sheesh.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 21, 2013, 04:20:33 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 21, 2013, 04:12:14 PM
Guh... to lose before the poll is even released is gut-wrenching. At least teams playing at night are after the poll's release! Sheesh.

Is there such a thing as the "Hoopsville" jinx? Didn't we have this discussion a few years ago?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ziggy on January 21, 2013, 04:28:42 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 21, 2013, 04:10:21 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 21, 2013, 03:20:39 PM

Down goes Magnus!
A "nice" loss. To the #3 team in the conference. On the road.

Takes the "top 25" pressure off the team. Allows them to re-focus on "taking care of business" in the conference.

Is there some sarcasm there? I hope so...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 21, 2013, 04:29:06 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 21, 2013, 04:10:21 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 21, 2013, 03:20:39 PM

Down goes Magnus!
A "nice" loss. To the #3 team in the conference. On the road.

Takes the "top 25" pressure off the team. Allows them to re-focus on "taking care of business" in the conference.

I think they likely lost to the best team in the conference. But yes, now they can focus on winning the conference and not worry about ranking.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 21, 2013, 04:40:37 PM

Quote from: ziggy on January 21, 2013, 04:28:42 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 21, 2013, 04:10:21 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 21, 2013, 03:20:39 PM

Down goes Magnus!
A "nice" loss. To the #3 team in the conference. On the road.

Takes the "top 25" pressure off the team. Allows them to re-focus on "taking care of business" in the conference.

Is there some sarcasm there? I hope so...

Respectfully, no sarcasm.

In the CCIW, WIAC, UAA, ODAC, etc, playing a Top 25 team is pretty common and I think that the players and fans are accustomed to tight conference races. AMC doesn't face a conference line-up like those conferences so it can be hard for players to maintain the focus of winning the games to get to the tourney. IMHO, watching the Poll numbers sometimes becomes more prominent than winning the next conference game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 21, 2013, 04:49:47 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 21, 2013, 04:20:33 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 21, 2013, 04:12:14 PM
Guh... to lose before the poll is even released is gut-wrenching. At least teams playing at night are after the poll's release! Sheesh.
Is there such a thing as the "Hoopsville" jinx? Didn't we have this discussion a few years ago?

SSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ziggy on January 21, 2013, 06:25:00 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 21, 2013, 04:40:37 PM
Quote from: ziggy on January 21, 2013, 04:28:42 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 21, 2013, 04:10:21 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 21, 2013, 03:20:39 PM

Down goes Magnus!
A "nice" loss. To the #3 team in the conference. On the road.

Takes the "top 25" pressure off the team. Allows them to re-focus on "taking care of business" in the conference.

Is there some sarcasm there? I hope so...
Respectfully, no sarcasm.

In the CCIW, WIAC, UAA, ODAC, etc, playing a Top 25 team is pretty common and I think that the players and fans are accustomed to tight conference races. AMC doesn't face a conference line-up like those conferences so it can be hard for players to maintain the focus of winning the games to get to the tourney. IMHO, watching the Poll numbers sometimes becomes more prominent than winning the next conference game.

I can understand and agree with that. I was coming more from the perspective that for a true top 25 team that was not a "nice" loss. To put in terms of my world, Massey says that's like losing at Kalamzoo. As a Calvin fan, "nice" is about the last word coming out of my mouth to describe such a game. Of course, Massey didn't say Albertus Magnus is anywhere near a top 25 team anyway.

That being said, they certainly are well positioned to refocus and win the conference and the tourney bid that comes with it. It's game on at that point and the polls mean nothing one way or the other.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pjunito on January 21, 2013, 09:15:01 PM

Albertus won't see the top 25 again this year. They don't have the SOS to get the consideration again. However, I agree with some of the other pollsters (Mainly Turner), Win the GNAC championship get an automatic bid. Albertus had a good run (35 consecutive games won in conference). But, this lost middle of the regular season allows Coach Oliver to work on weaknesses. And gets everyone on the team refocused (no longer can they walk around and say we are the number 20, 19, 18) team in the country. Now they have to work harder to win games.

On final thing, please watch Darius Watson play.. He will be an All-American either this year or next; best player in the conference by far and probably in the state.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2013, 10:41:10 PM

A rough Monday for the top 25. #1 St. Thomas just lost by 2 to Concordia-Moorhead!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: (509)Rat on January 22, 2013, 02:40:20 AM

You're up, Rochester... 8-)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 22, 2013, 08:54:41 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2013, 10:41:10 PM
A rough Monday for the top 25. #1 St. Thomas just lost by 2 to Concordia-Moorhead!

Way to go Lutefiskers!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dcahill44 on January 22, 2013, 09:07:43 AM

Rochester (if they stay clean) will be #1 next week

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 22, 2013, 10:37:08 AM

Quote from: dcahill44 on January 22, 2013, 09:07:43 AM
Rochester (if they stay clean) will be #1 next week

I wouldn't say it's that automatic. Middlebury goes to Williams this weekend and a win there would be a good statement.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 22, 2013, 11:13:20 AM

And North Central goes on the road to two ranked opponents this week. I would have no problem ranking a 1-loss team ahead of an undefeated team because of strength of schedule and strength of conference. I only get a vote in the posters poll though!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 22, 2013, 11:37:48 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 22, 2013, 10:37:08 AM
Quote from: dcahill44 on January 22, 2013, 09:07:43 AM
Rochester (if they stay clean) will be #1 next week

I wouldn't say it's that automatic. Middlebury goes to Williams this weekend and a win there would be a good statement.

A (one, single) good statement indeed! I suppose a potential #1 should have a quality win on their resume.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 22, 2013, 11:41:48 AM

No doubt. I suspect you and I are in agreement on this particular case.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: (509)Rat on January 22, 2013, 12:03:04 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 22, 2013, 11:37:48 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 22, 2013, 10:37:08 AM
Quote from: dcahill44 on January 22, 2013, 09:07:43 AM
Rochester (if they stay clean) will be #1 next week

I wouldn't say it's that automatic. Middlebury goes to Williams this weekend and a win there would be a good statement.

A (one, single) good statement indeed! I suppose a potential #1 should have a quality win on their resume.

emphasis on the "single". I'm guessing a single game against Williams won't significantly bump up their overall SOS from 278th (massey). It certainly would be a very good win, on the road, though.

However, assuming both are undefeated it means Rochester beat Brandeis (and NYU, but mostly Brandeis) this weekend. What I'm getting at is, I would be surprised if Midd jumped Rochester even with the Williams win...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ethelred the Unready on January 22, 2013, 12:11:23 PM

Quote from: (509)Rat on January 22, 2013, 12:03:04 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 22, 2013, 11:37:48 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 22, 2013, 10:37:08 AM
Quote from: dcahill44 on January 22, 2013, 09:07:43 AM
Rochester (if they stay clean) will be #1 next week

I wouldn't say it's that automatic. Middlebury goes to Williams this weekend and a win there would be a good statement.

A (one, single) good statement indeed! I suppose a potential #1 should have a quality win on their resume.

emphasis on the "single". I'm guessing a single game against Williams won't significantly bump up their overall SOS from 278th (massey). It certainly would be a very good win, on the road, though.

However, assuming both are undefeated it means Rochester beat Brandeis (and NYU, but mostly Brandeis) this weekend. What I'm getting at is, I would be surprised if Midd jumped Rochester even with the Williams win...

Hey let's not forget that Midd goes on the road to St. Joseph (VT) before Williams. Sure, St. Joe's isn't, strictly speaking, a DIII school but you never know

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on January 22, 2013, 12:48:48 PM

We definitely will see some movement in the Top 10 this week with some great matchups.

#1 St Thomas: already lost as we know, expect a drop but not too far.
#2 Rochester: 1/25 NYU team on the bubble, 1/27 #19 Brandeis
#3 Midd: 1/26 @ #9 Williams
#5 North Central: 1/23 @ #16 Ill Wesleyan, 1/26 @ #25 Wheaton
#7 UWSP: 1/23 #13 UW-Whitewater
#9 Williams: 1/23 @ #14 Amherst, 1/26 #3 Middlebury

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: howardjp on January 22, 2013, 11:34:58 PM

After this coming weekend, Rochester will have 2 home games
left and will play 5 good UAA teams on the road

quote author=madzillagd link=topic=4097.msg1488132#msg1488132 date=1358876928]
We definitely will see some movement in the Top 10 this week with some great matchups.

#1 St Thomas: already lost as we know, expect a drop but not too far.
#2 Rochester: 1/25 NYU team on the bubble, 1/27 #19 Brandeis
#3 Midd: 1/26 @ #9 Williams
#5 North Central: 1/23 @ #16 Ill Wesleyan, 1/26 @ #25 Wheaton
#7 UWSP: 1/23 #13 UW-Whitewater
#9 Williams: 1/23 @ #14 Amherst, 1/26 #3 Middlebury
[/quote]

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 23, 2013, 04:07:14 PM

Offensive and defensive efficiency numbers (points per 100 possessions) for the current members of the Top-25:

Pace OEff DEff Margin Team
67.1   126.0   91.4   34.5   St. Thomas
66.8   122.1   94.8   27.2   Rochester
71.5   116.0   89.5   26.6   Williams
68.3   109.4   83.9   25.5   Calvin
64.1   113.4   89.1   24.3   Catholic
79.1   110.2   86.8   23.3   Hampden-Sydney
69.8   115.1   93.0   22.2   Middlebury
70.0   106.3   84.8   21.6   WPI
71.9   117.1   95.8   21.3   Amherst
64.9   106.9   86.0   21.0   North Central (Ill.)
66.6   109.1   88.7   20.4   Wheaton (Ill.)
66.9   113.7   95.1   18.6   Whitworth
68.5   109.1   90.6   18.5   Wooster
73.1   105.9   88.0   17.9   Ramapo
63.4   114.0   96.4   17.6   UW-Stevens Point
67.0   107.2   90.9   16.3   Brandeis
68.1   109.8   93.5   16.2   Washington U.
68.2   110.8   95.0   15.8   Ohio Wesleyan
66.5   104.5   89.2   15.4   St. Marys (Md.)
72.1   105.2   89.9   15.3   Christopher Newport
69.9   103.4   88.1   15.3   Stevens
67.0   107.7   92.9   14.8   Illinois Wesleyan
64.7   110.3   96.7   13.5   UW-Whitewater
69.0    92.5   79.6   13.0   Rhode Island College
78.8   109.1   100.4   8.7   Albertus Magnus

Margin is OEff minus DEff (or points better than your opponents per 100 possessions). Pace is possessions per game. Numbers are not adjusted for strength of opponent. I think, generally speaking, an average team would have a 100 OEff and DEff.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 23, 2013, 04:15:09 PM

For Albertus, did you exclude the Yale game? That could seriously skew their results.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 23, 2013, 04:39:09 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 23, 2013, 04:15:09 PM
For Albertus, did you exclude the Yale game? That could seriously skew their results.

What skews their results more: one game versus Yale or all the other games against terrible teams? Even with the Yale game, Massey rates their schedule as the 364th most difficult in Division III.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 23, 2013, 04:46:16 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 23, 2013, 04:39:09 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 23, 2013, 04:15:09 PM
For Albertus, did you exclude the Yale game? That could seriously skew their results.

What skews their results more: one game versus Yale or all the other games against terrible teams? Even with the Yale game, Massey rates their schedule as the 364th most difficult in Division III.

Good point. But several of the other teams also have lots of games against terrible teams; so far as I know, only Albertus has a game against a d1 (albeit a subpar one).

Probably a moot point anyway - after the loss to Anna Maria, they will probably not sniff the Top 25 again this season. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 23, 2013, 04:56:15 PM

Not helping Albertus Magnus' cause by saying Yale is sub-par considering the point spread was nearly 60 :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ziggy on January 23, 2013, 05:15:42 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 23, 2013, 04:56:15 PM
Not helping Albertus Magnus' cause by saying Yale is sub-par considering the point spread was nearly 60 :)

Right. Massey says Yale and St. Thomas are virtually equal on a neutral court: http://masseyratings.com/game.php?s0=193573&t0=6926&h=0&s1=193573&t1=9177, Yale by 3 at home.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 23, 2013, 05:37:30 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 23, 2013, 04:15:09 PM
For Albertus, did you exclude the Yale game? That could seriously skew their results.

At this point of the season, large margins should only move the needle about 2 points in either direction for both offense and defense.

Typically I have removed D1 results. Albertus was #46 of my 50, removing the Yale game would only get them to #38

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 23, 2013, 05:39:27 PM

OMG - people will think I'm an Albertus supporter! ::)

Just thought they should get a little more respect for being undefeated against d3 opponents until late January - regardless of opponents. Don't worry - they are off my PP ballot until they start a season 27-0 (maybe 26-1 IF their d1 opponent is Duke, Kansas, or Michigan! ;))

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 23, 2013, 07:53:46 PM

Williams falls to Amherst: 83-67.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 23, 2013, 09:26:37 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 23, 2013, 05:39:27 PM
OMG - people will think I'm an Albertus supporter! ::)

Just thought they should get a little more respect for being undefeated against d3 opponents until late January - regardless of opponents. Don't worry - they are off my PP ballot until they start a season 27-0 (maybe 26-1 IF their d1 opponent is Duke, Kansas, or Michigan! ;))

Reminds me of Grinnell several years ago. They started undefeated and never got any love. They finally broke into the poll and they rewarded their voters with a loss!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 24, 2013, 07:27:46 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	619	St. Thomas	17-1	LOST at Concordia-Moorhead, 52-54; def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 87-46; 01/26 vs. Hamline
#2	585	Rochester	16-0	01/25 vs. New York University; 01/27 vs. #19 Brandeis
#3	583	Middlebury	16-0	won at St. Joseph's (Vt.), 75-46; 01/26 at #9 Williams
#4	534	Whitworth	16-1	01/25 at Puget Sound; 01/26 at Pacific Lutheran
#5	519	North Central (Ill.)	16-2	LOST at #16 Illinois Wesleyan, 61-69; 01/26 at #25 Wheaton (Ill.)
#6	506	WPI	19-0	def. T#38 Springfield, 69-66
#7	483	UW-Stevens Point	17-2	def. #13 UW-Whitewater, 67-57; 01/26 vs. UW-Superior
#8	430	Wooster	15-2	def. Kenyon, 86-52; 01/26 vs. Hiram
#9	393	Williams	16-2	LOST at #14 Amherst, 67-83; 01/26 vs. #3 Middlebury
#10	358	Catholic	16-2	def. Goucher, 72-46; 01/26 at Merchant Marine
#11	351	Ramapo	17-2	won at Kean, 70-55; 01/26 at TCNJ
#12	317	St. Mary's (Md.)	17-2	won at Gallaudet, 63-47; 01/26 at York (Pa.)
#13	303	UW-Whitewater	14-4	LOST at #7 UW-Stevens Point, 57-67; 01/26 at UW-Eau Claire
#14	278	Amherst	16-2	def. #9 Williams, 83-67; 01/26 vs. Trinity (Conn.)
#15	236	Christopher Newport	14-2	def. Averett, 76-52; 01/26 vs. Methodist
#16	226	Illinois Wesleyan	15-3	def. #5 North Central (Ill.), 69-61; 01/26 at Elmhurst
#17	207	Calvin	16-2	won at Olivet, 73-57; 01/26 at #32 Adrian
#18	197	Albertus Magnus	15-2	LOST at Anna Maria, 88-97; 01/24 at Lasell; 01/26 vs. Norwich
#19	127	Brandeis	14-2	01/25 at T#38 Emory; 01/27 at #2 Rochester
#20	123	Stevens	14-2	LOST at Hartwick, 56-63; 01/25 at Ithaca; 01/26 at Elmira
#21	119	Rhode Island College	15-2	def. Western Connecticut, 56-51; 01/26 at Eastern Connecticut
#22	115	Ohio Wesleyan	14-3	won at Wabash, 77-53; 01/26 at DePauw
#23	106	Hampden-Sydney	16-2	won at T#33 Randolph, 79-63; 01/26 vs. #30 Guilford
#24	102	Washington U.	12-4	01/25 at Carnegie Mellon; 01/27 at Case Western Reserve
#25	51	Wheaton (Ill.)	14-4	def. Elmhurst, 77-52; 01/26 vs. #5 North Central (Ill.)

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	48	Franklin and Marshall	14-4	LOST at Dickinson, 63-71; 01/26 at Haverford
#27	47	Rose-Hulman	15-2	01/24 vs. Manchester; 01/26 vs. Mount St. Joseph
#28	32	Virginia Wesleyan	13-4	def. Shenandoah, 84-51; 01/26 at Washington and Lee
#29	25	Transylvania	14-4	def. Franklin, 87-68; 01/26 at Defiance
#30	24	Guilford	14-4	LOST to Lynchburg, 66-86; 01/26 at #23 Hampden-Sydney
#31	22	Wesley	15-4	01/26 at Marymount
#32	15	Adrian	15-3	won at Albion, 63-49; 01/26 vs. #17 Calvin
T#33	12	Augustana	14-4	won at Millikin, 63-54; 01/26 at North Park
T#33	12	Randolph	15-3	won at William Peace, 80-63; LOST to #23 Hampden-Sydney, 63-79; 01/26 at Shenandoah
#35	8	St. Norbert	13-3	won at Lake Forest, 64-48; 01/26 at Knox
#36	6	Marietta	13-5	LOST at Otterbein, 62-72; 01/26 at Ohio Northern
#37	4	MIT	13-4	won at Clark, 55-50; 01/26 at Coast Guard
T#38	1	Emory	11-4	01/25 vs. #19 Brandeis; 01/27 vs. New York University
T#38	1	Springfield	14-5	LOST at #6 WPI, 66-69; 01/26 vs. Babson

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: goscots on January 24, 2013, 08:40:05 AM

Wooster actually "won" two games yesterday as it was announced that their Jan 4 games against Sheridan (Canada) is now official instead of an exhibition. Wooster is now 16-2.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pjunito on January 24, 2013, 09:17:48 AM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 23, 2013, 04:39:09 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 23, 2013, 04:15:09 PM
For Albertus, did you exclude the Yale game? That could seriously skew their results.

What skews their results more: one game versus Yale or all the other games against terrible teams? Even with the Yale game, Massey rates their schedule as the 364th most difficult in Division III.

It is tough for a team like Albertus; none of the top teams in the region want to play them (It's a lose, lose for them). Albertus have been trying to schedule tougher out of conference games for 3 years now and everyone says no. Makes it hard to move up on SOS when the conference they play in is so weak.

I'm not saying they are a top 25 team (in my opinion, they are probably 35-40 team), but it is unfair to kill their SOS when other schools repeatly say no. Becker won't play them anymore after two consecutive loses to Albertus.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 24, 2013, 09:56:34 AM

Thanks, pjunito. We feel your pain. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pjunito on January 24, 2013, 10:09:51 AM

I think it was William Wallace who said: "It's all for nothing if you don't have Albertus Magnus Basketball"

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 24, 2013, 11:05:27 AM

Quote from: pjunito on January 24, 2013, 09:17:48 AM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 23, 2013, 04:39:09 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 23, 2013, 04:15:09 PM
For Albertus, did you exclude the Yale game? That could seriously skew their results.

What skews their results more: one game versus Yale or all the other games against terrible teams? Even with the Yale game, Massey rates their schedule as the 364th most difficult in Division III.

It is tough for a team like Albertus; none of the top teams in the region want to play them (It's a lose, lose for them). Albertus have been trying to schedule tougher out of conference games for 3 years now and everyone says no. Makes it hard to move up on SOS when the conference they play in is so weak.

I'm not saying they are a top 25 team (in my opinion, they are probably 35-40 team), but it is unfair to kill their SOS when other schools repeatly say no. Becker won't play them anymore after two consecutive loses to Albertus.

There are plenty of available regional opponents for Albertus. I can't imagine that not a single one will play them. Call Ramapo.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pjunito on January 24, 2013, 12:22:27 PM

Let's not kid ourselves Pat, adding Ramapo isn't going to move the SOS or Massey Ranking up 150 spots...

Here are there non conference opponents:
At West Conn, Wesleyan, Mitchell, Trinity, at Yale, Worcester St, At Coast Guard... West Conn is usually a solid program, Wes was ranked when they played Albertus, and trinity and Coast Guard usually have competitive teams. I don't deny, it is average at best. But, it isn't like Albertus is playing Souther VT, Umass Darthmouth, and Lesley along with Mitchell. Because the conference is so weak, the schedule would have to include teams like Williams, WPI, Ramapo, NYU, F and M to really make a dent in the SOS.

Would you agree?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 24, 2013, 12:43:10 PM

Ramapo would be a large improvement because the Roadrunners do play good out of conference games (i.e. North Central this season) - though the NJAC has made it more complicated. Furthermore, the NJAC isn't a bad conference for the SOS.

Wesleyan probably shouldn't have been ranked, but I understand the thought with how much they brought back; they aren't even close to living up to that potential. Coast Guard hasn't had a decent team in a number of years (last winning season was '07-'08). West Conn was predicted to not have a good year this time around because of how much they lost. Mitchell??? Really? Worcester State hasn't had a winning season since... Certainly Trinity is having a down year... and Albertus got thumped by Yale - but at least it was probably a pay day.

I think the point is, scrap the Coast Guards, Mitchells and maybe others for Ramapos, Rhode Islands, Stevens, NYUs, etc. and just two games could help their SOS. By the way, Massey's number means nothing in the grand scheme of things.

Can they get all the teams they want? Maybe not, but just a few will make a difference... PLUS wins over regionally ranked opponents goes a long way. Albertus has none.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pjunito on January 24, 2013, 01:03:40 PM

D-mac,

I agree with your assessment of the schedule (except, you can't really fault Albertus for West Conn and Wes not being as good as last year or what they were suppose to be). I would love nothing more than to have Albertus play a stronger out of conference schedule. I don't believe they are as good as last year and I watched every game since 2006. My point is this... They play 18 games in a conference that has one other team finish with a .600 win percentage. This will always kill SOS. However, I agree, a strong non conf schedule will allow the regional rankings to judge them more accurately. Good wins/losses agaisnt strong competition will help that.

Since the GNAC has an automatic bid, it doesn't hurt to play regional powers.. Win the conference, get an opportunity in March. That simple. I am on your side, let's see if the schedule is tougher next year.

And Yale is the kind of game that is good for a small liberal arts division 3 game to play. Most d3 teams don't have the depth to match up with a Division 1 school. It's an experience game, thats what Divison 3 athletics can proovide. An experience to play a D1 team in a great setting. if you are competitive, it makes it a better experience!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 24, 2013, 01:59:43 PM

Albertus last 3 losses to D3 opponents in regular season have come without their head coach Mitch Oliver present. Pretty interesting side stat............I watch a lot of ct d3 bball. This Albertus team is not as good as lasts yr(obv no askew). Depth is short and if their big man gets in foul trouble early they are in trouble. Some of their scores though look like 9-10 point games but in fact were blowouts with the bench being emptied early. I think this team is one of the better teams regionally right after the top tier teams. A first round NCAA win seems probable. The kid Watson may be best player in the state, 6'4 guard who shoots lights out and cannot be guarded one on one. I out Albertus 35-45 nationally

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 24, 2013, 07:03:17 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 24, 2013, 12:43:10 PM
I think the point is, scrap the Coast Guards, Mitchells and maybe others for Ramapos, Rhode Islands, Stevens, NYUs, etc. and just two games could help their SOS. By the way, Massey's number means nothing in the grand scheme of things.

Isn't Massey's SOS one of the primary criteria? Or does the NCAA use a different SOS (their own)?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 24, 2013, 07:15:49 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 24, 2013, 07:03:17 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 24, 2013, 12:43:10 PM
I think the point is, scrap the Coast Guards, Mitchells and maybe others for Ramapos, Rhode Islands, Stevens, NYUs, etc. and just two games could help their SOS. By the way, Massey's number means nothing in the grand scheme of things.

Isn't Massey's SOS one of the primary criteria? Or does the NCAA use a different SOS (their own)?

Surely you jest? ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 24, 2013, 07:21:33 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 24, 2013, 07:15:49 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 24, 2013, 07:03:17 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 24, 2013, 12:43:10 PM
I think the point is, scrap the Coast Guards, Mitchells and maybe others for Ramapos, Rhode Islands, Stevens, NYUs, etc. and just two games could help their SOS. By the way, Massey's number means nothing in the grand scheme of things.

Isn't Massey's SOS one of the primary criteria? Or does the NCAA use a different SOS (their own)?

Surely you jest? ???

I do hope he is kidding :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 24, 2013, 07:23:08 PM

scheduling is easy

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 24, 2013, 08:18:46 PM

It was tongue in cheek because we all know Massey's SOS would be too legit for the NCAA to use. :o :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 24, 2013, 08:56:07 PM

LOL Well, I would say that Massey isn't legit enough to be used... because they can't seperate the D3 teams schedules and such out of any other division or the NAIA, etc. That is a pretty big flaw.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 24, 2013, 09:53:34 PM

Good point, but we all know sometimes we wonder what the heck the NCAA is doing.

I previous post didn't come out very well. Sorry for the confusion. :-X :-[ ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 24, 2013, 09:55:02 PM

I think the SOS makes more sense these days especially when they release the information with the regional rankings. I have had less issues with the SOS over the last two seasons than what we couldn't see in the past.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 24, 2013, 09:55:07 PM

Quote from: sac on January 24, 2013, 07:23:08 PM
scheduling is easy

From what I heard, it's sometimes not as easy as it sounds. But, I'm not in the Northeast!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 7express on January 24, 2013, 10:00:01 PM

Bob Walsh and RIC will probably play anyone. You think they'd say no to a game vs. Albertus?? I highly doubt it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 24, 2013, 11:38:43 PM

Quote from: 7express on January 24, 2013, 10:00:01 PM
Bob Walsh and RIC will probably play anyone. You think they'd say no to a game vs. Albertus?? I highly doubt it.

Good point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 25, 2013, 12:00:30 AM

Albertus wouldn't say no to them, I'll tell you that much

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 25, 2013, 12:10:11 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 24, 2013, 09:55:07 PM
Quote from: sac on January 24, 2013, 07:23:08 PM
scheduling is easy

From what I heard, it's sometimes not as easy as it sounds. But, I'm not in the Northeast!

It was tongue in cheek because we all know, or at least most of us do, that its not.
;) :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 25, 2013, 12:23:31 AM

Quote from: 7express on January 24, 2013, 10:00:01 PM
Bob Walsh and RIC will probably play anyone. You think they'd say no to a game vs. Albertus?? I highly doubt it.

Watch out though... he'll play you, then he'll blog about you!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 25, 2013, 01:05:56 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 24, 2013, 09:53:34 PM
Good point, but we all know sometimes we wonder what the heck the NCAA is doing.

That's so true and I'm sure those same questions will arise again this year. It won't surprise me when the Regional Rankings come out in a couple of weeks to see Union College ranked among the 6 schools in the East. They currently have a 13-3 regional record, one of the best in the East but the winning percentage of their opponents is somewhere around .350. Geneseo State with a regional record of 12-4 has an OWP of around .525. Plattsburgh State with a regional record of 11-4 has an OWP of around .625. I'm willing to bet that Union will be ranked ahead of both of these schools. Union has 10 of their 13 wins against schools that have an average record of 4-11. They don't have a signature win of any kind and have lost 3 of their 6 games against so-so teams that have a winning record. Massey has them as the 11th ranked school in the East with an SOS of 320 (out of 412) but when the Regional Rankings come out the NCAA will have them much higher (unless they stumble badly between now and then).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 25, 2013, 06:55:15 AM

Darryl,
Did you find my requests. Check your PM

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 25, 2013, 09:05:16 AM

Quote from: magicman on January 25, 2013, 01:05:56 AM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 24, 2013, 09:53:34 PM
Good point, but we all know sometimes we wonder what the heck the NCAA is doing.

That's so true and I'm sure those same questions will arise again this year. It won't surprise me when the Regional Rankings come out in a couple of weeks to see Union College ranked among the 6 schools in the East. They currently have a 13-3 regional record, one of the best in the East but the winning percentage of their opponents is somewhere around .350. Geneseo State with a regional record of 12-4 has an OWP of around .525. Plattsburgh State with a regional record of 11-4 has an OWP of around .625. I'm willing to bet that Union will be ranked ahead of both of these schools. Union has 10 of their 13 wins against schools that have an average record of 4-11. They don't have a signature win of any kind and have lost 3 of their 6 games against so-so teams that have a winning record. Massey has them as the 11th ranked school in the East with an SOS of 320 (out of 412) but when the Regional Rankings come out the NCAA will have them much higher (unless they stumble badly between now and then).

Rochester, Stevens, Cortland State, Geneseo, Oswego, and NYU all appear to be much better candidates than Union (SOS is currently .391). Probably Plattsburgh too if they can get a few more W's -- maybe even if not.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 26, 2013, 03:57:33 PM

#9 Williamas 64 #3 Middlesbury 63

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 26, 2013, 04:54:24 PM

Tough loss for Ohio Wesleyan. DePauw knocks them off in OT 65-63. In the last minute of regulation, OWU was called for an intentional foul and a technical foul after the same play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 26, 2013, 08:01:33 PM

Video for #5 North Central @ #25 Wheaton...

http://www2.wheaton.edu/learnres/mediares/WETN/wetn_livewindow/WETN-TV.html

Should be a great CCIW game with a really good atmosphere at King Arena. It's about a "pick 'em."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 27, 2013, 10:37:20 AM

Highlights from the Wheaton/North Central game...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9fZHJh_wMU&feature=youtu.be

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 27, 2013, 03:13:14 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 27, 2013, 10:37:20 AM
Highlights from the Wheaton/North Central game...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9fZHJh_wMU&feature=youtu.be

looks like an awesome atmosphere.

Did anyone else chuckle when the number of shirtless Wheaton students seemed to quadruple for the overtime?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 27, 2013, 03:35:05 PM

Quote from: sac on January 27, 2013, 03:13:14 PM
Did anyone else chuckle when the number of shirtless Wheaton students seemed to quadruple for the overtime?

Yeah, noticed that too! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 27, 2013, 04:22:32 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	619	St. Thomas	18-1	LOST at Concordia-Moorhead, 52-54; def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 87-46; def. Hamline, 81-46
#2	585	Rochester	18-0	def. New York University, 65-50; def. #19 Brandeis, 69-65
#3	583	Middlebury	16-1	won at St. Joseph's (Vt.), 75-46; LOST at #9 Williams, 63-64
#4	534	Whitworth	18-1	won at Puget Sound, 62-53; won at Pacific Lutheran, 71-68
#5	519	North Central (Ill.)	16-3	LOST at #16 Illinois Wesleyan, 61-69; LOST at #25 Wheaton (Ill.), 69-71
#6	506	WPI	19-0	def. T#38 Springfield, 69-66
#7	483	UW-Stevens Point	18-2	def. #13 UW-Whitewater, 67-57; def. UW-Superior, 82-55
#8	430	Wooster	17-2	def. Kenyon, 86-52; def. Hiram, 68-63
#9	393	Williams	17-2	LOST at #14 Amherst, 67-83; def. #3 Middlebury, 64-63
#10	358	Catholic	17-2	def. Goucher, 72-46; won at Merchant Marine, 54-42
#11	351	Ramapo	18-2	won at Kean, 70-55; won at TCNJ, 73-72
#12	317	St. Mary's (Md.)	18-2	won at Gallaudet, 63-47; won at York (Pa.), 84-51
#13	303	UW-Whitewater	15-4	LOST at #7 UW-Stevens Point, 57-67; won at UW-Eau Claire, 72-63
#14	278	Amherst	17-2	def. #9 Williams, 83-67; def. Trinity (Conn.), 83-55
#15	236	Christopher Newport	15-2	def. Averett, 76-52; def. Methodist, 78-57
#16	226	Illinois Wesleyan	16-3	def. #5 North Central (Ill.), 69-61; won at Elmhurst, 71-52
#17	207	Calvin	17-2	won at Olivet, 73-57; won at #32 Adrian, 50-47
#18	197	Albertus Magnus	17-2	LOST at Anna Maria, 88-97; won at Lasell, 73-63; def. Norwich, 90-59
#19	127	Brandeis	14-4	LOST at T#38 Emory, 55-69; LOST at #2 Rochester, 65-69
#20	123	Stevens	15-3	LOST at Hartwick, 56-63; LOST at Ithaca, 69-80; won at Elmira, 64-48
#21	119	Rhode Island College	16-2	def. Western Connecticut, 56-51; won at Eastern Connecticut, 60-50
#22	115	Ohio Wesleyan	14-4	won at Wabash, 77-53; LOST at DePauw, 63-65
#23	106	Hampden-Sydney	17-2	won at T#33 Randolph, 79-63; def. #30 Guilford, 76-52
#24	102	Washington U.	14-4	won at Carnegie Mellon, 84-76; won at Case Western Reserve, 74-69
#25	51	Wheaton (Ill.)	15-4	def. Elmhurst, 77-52; def. #5 North Central (Ill.), 71-69

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	48	Franklin and Marshall	14-5	LOST at Dickinson, 63-71; LOST at Haverford, 42-52
#27	47	Rose-Hulman	17-2	def. Manchester, 55-53; def. Mount St. Joseph, 60-39
#28	32	Virginia Wesleyan	13-5	def. Shenandoah, 84-51; LOST at Washington and Lee, 68-69
#29	25	Transylvania	15-4	def. Franklin, 87-68; won at Defiance, 66-59
#30	24	Guilford	14-5	LOST to Lynchburg, 66-86; LOST at #23 Hampden-Sydney, 52-76
#31	22	Wesley	16-4	won at Marymount, 68-45
#32	15	Adrian	15-4	won at Albion, 63-49; LOST to #17 Calvin, 47-50
T#33	12	Augustana	15-4	won at Millikin, 63-54; won at North Park, 90-61
T#33	12	Randolph	16-3	won at William Peace, 80-63; LOST to #23 Hampden-Sydney, 63-79; won at Shenandoah, 65-50
#35	8	St. Norbert	14-3	won at Lake Forest, 64-48; won at Knox, 82-59
#36	6	Marietta	14-5	LOST at Otterbein, 62-72; won at Ohio Northern, 69-60
#37	4	MIT	14-4	won at Clark, 55-50; won at Coast Guard, 92-66
T#38	1	Emory	13-4	def. #19 Brandeis, 69-55; def. New York University, 80-61
T#38	1	Springfield	14-6	LOST at #6 WPI, 66-69; LOST to Babson, 65-69

Other teams to watch (as suggested by posters on this board)

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
---	---	Mary Hardin-Baylor	16-3	won at Sul Ross State, 69-56; won at Howard Payne, 76-52
---	---	Cortland State	14-3	won at Oneonta State, 64-54; won at Oswego State, 75-69

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 27, 2013, 05:14:10 PM

I've been waiting for your results post! Thanks +1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 27, 2013, 05:25:27 PM

Can you track Concordia of Texas too? They're behind Mary Hardin Baylor in their division of the ASC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 27, 2013, 06:05:51 PM

Quote from: John Gleich on January 27, 2013, 05:25:27 PM
Can you track Concordia of Texas too? They're behind Mary Hardin Baylor in their division of the ASC.

John -- I'll include them this coming week (assuming they get no votes tomorrow).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 27, 2013, 06:36:17 PM

Darryl, I was going to suggest you drop Cabrini - then saw you already did! I thought the return of Walton-Moss would make them a Top 25 team; I was mistaken!

+k again for doing this - I always get PP ballots a couple of hours after you post!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 27, 2013, 08:41:08 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 27, 2013, 06:36:17 PM
Darryl, I was going to suggest you drop Cabrini - then saw you already did! I thought the return of Walton-Moss would make them a Top 25 team; I was mistaken!

I usually only add extra teams on a week-to-week basis, unless someone requests them a second time. If MHB or Cortland State get no votes tomorrow, they won't appear on the Thursday report unless someone wants to see them again. (Send me a PM or post it here.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 28, 2013, 01:51:13 PM

It will be interesting to see what the voters do with #5 North Central, with two tough road losses this week (@ IWU, @ Wheaton in OT). What's interesting is that Massey didn't consider either game an "upset".

* Before the game @ IWU, Massey had North Central #4 and IWU #11...and Massey predicted a 2-point IWU win. The game ended up being a tight, one possession-type game that IWU pulled out in the final minute.

* Before the game @ Wheaton, Massey had North Central #8 and Wheaton #16...and Massey predicted a 5-point Wheaton win. Wheaton won in overtime.

(North Central sits at #8 in Massey - http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&yr=2013&sub=11620.)

Sometimes I think the human/subjective polls are too hard on teams that lose tough games on the road (especially conference games). Most times losses automatically mean lost poll points.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 28, 2013, 02:05:46 PM

But you also know from watching our poll regularly, from both the inside and outside, that that isn't as much the case. Many of our voters don't automatically drop a team for every loss.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 28, 2013, 02:50:52 PM

I'm curious to see how Williams, Amherst and Midd are grouped. Midd has the best record vs. teams other than the other two, but the worst head-to-head, and Amherst is the opposite. Given Midd's weak schedule to date (has played two tough opponents and split them, winning by a point and losing by a point, otherwise, a bunch of largely-outmatched opponents), I'd rank it just behind the other two. Amherst had some injury issues in its earlier losses and right now is at full strength and, accordingly, seems to be playing the best of the three. But it still has road games vs. both remaining, and Midd MAY get one or two key reserves back from injuries, while Williams rebounded nicely from a tough week with the Midd win on Saturday. I see all three (each has substantial flaws, but does any team this year NOT have noticeable flaws?) as right below the nationally elite (top five) level of some of the best Amherst/Williams/Midd squads in recent years, but also comfortably within the top 20 ... I'd put them all in a cluster right around the 8-12 range. Which is probably where they will end up ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 28, 2013, 03:32:39 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 28, 2013, 02:05:46 PM
But you also know from watching our poll regularly, from both the inside and outside, that that isn't as much the case. Many of our voters don't automatically drop a team for every loss.

Oh, no question, Pat.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 28, 2013, 05:02:16 PM

NCC only dropped 2 spots. Whether people agree with that or not, I really think it demonstrates the degree the D3hoops.com voters look at things.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: (509)Rat on January 28, 2013, 05:51:33 PM

I really appreciate everything d3hoops does...but this latest poll has me very confused. NCC only drops 2, staying 5 spots ahead of IWU. Midd, Williams, and Amherst are in the exact opposite order when comparing performances against each other. Also, Transylvania over Rose-Hulman...so head to head all of a sudden matters on that end of the poll? . Good thing none of this matters, the tourney will sort it all out.

Some real head scratchers in this one. Not much in the way of consistency in terms of how most of the teams are ranked.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 28, 2013, 05:54:16 PM

Quote from: (509)Rat on January 28, 2013, 05:51:33 PM
I really appreciate everything d3hoops does...but this latest poll has me very confused. NCC only drops 2, staying 5 spots ahead of IWU. Midd, Williams, and Amherst are in the exact opposite order when comparing performances against each other. Also, Transylvania over Rose-Hulman...so head to head all of a sudden matters on that end of the poll? . Good thing none of this matters, the tourney will sort it all out.

Some real head scratchers in this one. Not much in the way of consistency in terms of how most of the teams are ranked.

Rat -- what is the "proper" order for Amherst, Williams and Middlebury when the three teams split against each other? For me, Middlebury lost by one on the road, so that's hardly a ringing mandate for Williams beating Midd on a neutral floor.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 28, 2013, 05:56:10 PM

Sorry, that's not even true because Amherst and Middlebury haven't played yet. I don't think you can look at this and say there's one set in stone order it must be.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 28, 2013, 06:09:23 PM

Quote from: (509)Rat on January 28, 2013, 05:51:33 PM
I really appreciate everything d3hoops does...but this latest poll has me very confused. NCC only drops 2, staying 5 spots ahead of IWU. Midd, Williams, and Amherst are in the exact opposite order when comparing performances against each other. Also, Transylvania over Rose-Hulman...so head to head all of a sudden matters on that end of the poll? . Good thing none of this matters, the tourney will sort it all out.

Some real head scratchers in this one. Not much in the way of consistency in terms of how most of the teams are ranked.

I'll take them in order. I spent a lot of time musing over these very issues for the Posters Poll today.

NCC is pretty banged up right now and going through a very difficult patch of games. The CCIW is really good this year, even by their own standards. I also think the conference's prominence gives them extra attention from the voters. If you're watching the league even a little, you can see that NCC's very, very good. I think if they continue to lose, rather than rebound, you'll see the polls look more like the conference standings.

As for the NESCAC, I suspect we'll see more after the Midd-Amherst game. Middlebury actually helped their profile keeping it close at Williams. I certainly didn't expect that; I imagine it surprised some voters as well. Amherst had the best team returning, but they were sorely underperforming early in the season. The voters tend to make teams that start out slowly work for their ranking, much the same way they give strong teams (like NCC) the benefit of the doubt if they slow down in the middle of the season.

As for Transy and RHIT, I've been tracking them both all season. Transy's schedule is way, way better. Rose-Hulman being ranked earlier was more a result of their strong record and voters not know exactly how strong the schedule was. Clearly the head-to-head proved something, but it didn't change much. Neither team was ranked last week and they were separated by less than one position's worth of votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 28, 2013, 07:21:12 PM

I know NC only dropped two poll spots, but how many points did they lose relative to others in the poll? I'm not home yet so it's tougher to look... I can do it when I got home.

Some things are simply due to poll dynamics and what happened to others around NC did this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 28, 2013, 07:22:07 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 28, 2013, 06:09:23 PMNCC is pretty banged up right now and going through a very difficult patch of games. The CCIW is really good this year, even by their own standards.

That's not really true. The cumulative non-conference record is better than last year's -- which was a disaster by CCIW standards -- but it's still about 5 to 8 percent lower than it was during the league's heyday in the last decade. This may or may not affect the SOS of the CCIW's Pool C aspirants come Selection Monday.

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 28, 2013, 06:09:23 PMI also think the conference's prominence gives them extra attention from the voters.

I'll admit it, I think that that might be true.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 28, 2013, 07:23:41 PM

North Central went from 519 to 439, losing 80 points. Yes, only two spots, but the equivalent of a little more than three spots on the average ballot, masked by other movement around it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: (509)Rat on January 28, 2013, 07:28:17 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 28, 2013, 05:56:10 PM
Sorry, that's not even true because Amherst and Middlebury haven't played yet. I don't think you can look at this and say there's one set in stone order it must be.

You can do what you want with Midd since they have the better record, but Amherst and Williams have identical records and Amherst beat Williams handily. At the very least Amherst should have jumped Williams...

Hoops Fan sort of proves my point. There is very little consistency in how 1-25 appear to have been determined this week. NCC gets a pass because they are banged up and the voters are waiting to see if they'll lose even MORE games. All while Amherst has to "work" for their ranking (because running through their conference and beating the team directly ahead of them isn't enough). And Transy has a tougher sos and a head-to-head win (sounds a lot like IWU v NCC, no?)...

I know there are all kinds of criteria to evaluate a team and different pollsters weight those criteria differently. The problem I have with the poll this week is that no matter which criteria you decide to be most important, you can't justify the ranking of about 1/4 of the teams in the top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Charles on January 28, 2013, 07:41:55 PM

I know there are all kinds of criteria to evaluate a team and different pollsters weight those criteria differently. The problem I have with the poll this week is that no matter which criteria you decide to be most important, you can't justify the ranking of about 1/4 of the teams in the top 25.
[/quote]

So I am assuming SOS is not as important in D3hoops top 25?\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 28, 2013, 07:57:11 PM

I looked at the Amherst Wms game as a "rivalry game" in which there might be "no holds barred". Amherst won this one. I'll bet that they play again later in the season.

I look at the SOS numbers in quintiles or deciles rather than an ordinal ranking. Some regions just have too different variables to count, and Massey will count non-D3 and the NCAA will not for Regional Rankings sake.

UMHB is #20 on Massey (partially helped by the non-D3 schools that the ASC teams play to fill out a 25 game schedule), but they are stuck in the ASC with a paucity of D-3 teams to play who have "D-3 SOS building numbers", kinda the opposite end of the spectrum from the NESCAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2013, 09:06:01 PM

Quote from: Charles on January 28, 2013, 07:41:55 PM

I know there are all kinds of criteria to evaluate a team and different pollsters weight those criteria differently. The problem I have with the poll this week is that no matter which criteria you decide to be most important, you can't justify the ranking of about 1/4 of the teams in the top 25.

So I am assuming SOS is not as important in D3hoops top 25?\
[/quote]

You are assuming a lot... further more, the only SOS is a flawed system at Massey. There are 25 voters considering things differently and SOS of any kind, W/L, opponents, road vs. home, injuries, rivalries, etc. play factors...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 28, 2013, 10:23:16 PM

As I posted earlier, I like to see the voters take into account difficult conference road games. Here is a great example - the final 2 minutes and OT of the North Central @ Wheaton game Saturday.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kppJLcdU9ys

I think most would agree that playing in an atmosphere like this has an impact on the game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 28, 2013, 10:45:02 PM

OBJECTION! Counsel is leading the witness... ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 28, 2013, 11:28:58 PM

Quote from: (509)Rat on January 28, 2013, 07:28:17 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 28, 2013, 05:56:10 PM
Sorry, that's not even true because Amherst and Middlebury haven't played yet. I don't think you can look at this and say there's one set in stone order it must be.

You can do what you want with Midd since they have the better record, but Amherst and Williams have identical records and Amherst beat Williams handily. At the very least Amherst should have jumped Williams...

Except then Williams beat Middlebury, which is the kind of win Amherst doesn't have. And yes, Williams and Amherst will play again this year as part of their regular season schedule.

I think our voters see SOS as extremely important. Otherwise, why are there so many four-loss teams in the Top 25, while Albertus Magnus, with one loss to a D-III team, is out? Why was Middebury not only not No. 1, but slipping before its loss?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Charles on January 29, 2013, 05:48:23 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 28, 2013, 11:28:58 PM
Quote from: (509)Rat on January 28, 2013, 07:28:17 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 28, 2013, 05:56:10 PM
Sorry, that's not even true because Amherst and Middlebury haven't played yet. I don't think you can look at this and say there's one set in stone order it must be.

You can do what you want with Midd since they have the better record, but Amherst and Williams have identical records and Amherst beat Williams handily. At the very least Amherst should have jumped Williams...

Except then Williams beat Middlebury, which is the kind of win Amherst doesn't have. And yes, Williams and Amherst will play again this year as part of their regular season schedule.

I think our voters see SOS as extremely important. Otherwise, why are there so many four-loss teams in the Top 25, while Albertus Magnus, with one loss to a D-III team, is out? Why was Middebury not only not No. 1, but slipping before its loss?

So how does that explain WPI?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 29, 2013, 09:22:10 AM

Quote from: Charles on January 29, 2013, 05:48:23 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 28, 2013, 11:28:58 PM
Quote from: (509)Rat on January 28, 2013, 07:28:17 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 28, 2013, 05:56:10 PM
Sorry, that's not even true because Amherst and Middlebury haven't played yet. I don't think you can look at this and say there's one set in stone order it must be.

You can do what you want with Midd since they have the better record, but Amherst and Williams have identical records and Amherst beat Williams handily. At the very least Amherst should have jumped Williams...

Except then Williams beat Middlebury, which is the kind of win Amherst doesn't have. And yes, Williams and Amherst will play again this year as part of their regular season schedule.

I think our voters see SOS as extremely important. Otherwise, why are there so many four-loss teams in the Top 25, while Albertus Magnus, with one loss to a D-III team, is out? Why was Middebury not only not No. 1, but slipping before its loss?

So how does that explain WPI?

Quite well, actually. KS's strength of schedule calculations have them at .556, which might sound high but is actually average for a New England contender. And anecdotally, take a look at their schedule: no NESCAC teams, no Brandeis. Quality win against Rhode Island College and last two are wins against key contenders in their conference, which helped give them some legitimacy.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 29, 2013, 11:15:51 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 29, 2013, 09:22:10 AM
Quite well, actually. KS's strength of schedule calculations have them at .556, which might sound high but is actually average for a New England contender. And anecdotally, take a look at their schedule: no NESCAC teams, no Brandeis. Quality win against Rhode Island College and last two are wins against key contenders in their conference, which helped give them some legitimacy.

I'm not really sure I follow. I'm guessing you say this because the NESCAC teams have horrible SOSs...Brandeis has a respectable 38 though. RIC's is 219.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 29, 2013, 11:25:48 AM

No, actually my point being that WPI hasn't played anyone from the best conference in the region and hasn't played ranked Brandeis either. So WPI's schedule doesn't look that good in the eyes of a voter.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 29, 2013, 11:34:20 AM

Quote from: Charles on January 28, 2013, 07:41:55 PM

I know there are all kinds of criteria to evaluate a team and different pollsters weight those criteria differently. The problem I have with the poll this week is that no matter which criteria you decide to be most important, you can't justify the ranking of about 1/4 of the teams in the top 25.

So I am assuming SOS is not as important in D3hoops top 25?\
[/quote]

SOS is a tough indicator given the regionalization of d3. I've gone over this every season, but SOS in the NE region is inflated because of so many teams and conferences. A team can be 20-5 in the NECC without having played anyone of note (although teams with decent records in their own right). You can really load up on easy wins over teams with good records in the NE.

It's just not possible to do in other regions.

Catholic and Wesley and St. Mary's in the eastern part of the country have to work much harder to get a decent schedule. The NESCAC schools have the distinct advantage of scheduling to ability. When Williams has a down year, they can schedule easier teams and keep their SOS, if they're careful about it.

Those sorts of things are more difficult in other places.

Albertus has a terrible schedule and they're winning close games against absolutely terrible teams. That scares me.

WPI is winning, but they're really beating mid-level teams. They don't have a signature win. They have a history and a reputation, so people are giving them respect - but the schedule hasn't proven itself out yet.

Middlebury was the same way. I was shocked they kept it close at Williams. That one game changed a lot of perceptions.

And for Sager - when I say the CCIW is stronger this year, I simply mean that they're going four, maybe five deep this year. That hasn't happened in a while.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 29, 2013, 03:09:22 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 29, 2013, 11:34:20 AM
And for Sager - when I say the CCIW is stronger this year, I simply mean that they're going four, maybe five deep this year. That hasn't happened in a while.

Last year in the CCIW

No. Cent 12-2
Wheaton 11-3
Ill. Wes 10-4
Augustana 9-5
Carthage 6-8

Carthage beat Wheaton, and lost OT games to Augustana and NCC. In total 7 of their 8 conference losses came at the hands of the 4 teams above them all by single-digits. They lost their last 3 conference games.

It's not really that different I don't think

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 29, 2013, 03:51:03 PM

Quote from: sac on January 29, 2013, 03:09:22 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 29, 2013, 11:34:20 AM
And for Sager - when I say the CCIW is stronger this year, I simply mean that they're going four, maybe five deep this year. That hasn't happened in a while.

Last year in the CCIW

No. Cent 12-2
Wheaton 11-3
Ill. Wes 10-4
Augustana 9-5
Carthage 6-8

Carthage beat Wheaton, and lost OT games to Augustana and NCC. In total 7 of their 8 conference losses came at the hands of the 4 teams above them all by single-digits. They lost their last 3 conference games.

It's not really that different I don't think

And IWU made it to Salem, and North Central and... Augie(?) made it to the Elite 8 (Sweet 16? Sorry, I was focused on what UWSP's rival Whitewater was doing!)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 29, 2013, 08:07:57 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2013, 09:06:01 PM
You are assuming a lot... further more, the only SOS is a flawed system at Massey.

Dave, I assume you mean because there are some non-D3 games included in the Massey SOS? There is no question about that, but:

1) Are there really enough non-D3 games left out there for that to make a significant difference? In other words enough to make a team that has played weak schedule appear to have played a strong schedule, or vice versa? In just looking at the CCIW, a league that used to play quite a few NAIA games, this year out of 88 non-conference games, there were just 6 non-D3 (all NAIA) I believe.

2) As you allude to, Massey is really all we have in terms of SOS. The D3 criteria version of SOS is incredibly flawed for the reasons Hoops Fan points out...

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 29, 2013, 11:34:20 AM
SOS is a tough indicator given the regionalization of d3. I've gone over this every season, but SOS in the NE region is inflated because of so many teams and conferences. A team can be 20-5 in the NECC without having played anyone of note (although teams with decent records in their own right). You can really load up on easy wins over teams with good records in the NE.

IWU played 3 D3 games this year that are excluded from that calculation (Tufts, Mississippi College, Hope) at the present time. There are hundreds of games like that that aren't factored in to the D3 SOS.

I guess it just seems to me that Massey's SOS is generally very reliable. I don't see enough flaws to make me question the picture it paints. Just my opinion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 29, 2013, 08:15:31 PM

Quote from: John Gleich on January 29, 2013, 03:51:03 PM
Quote from: sac on January 29, 2013, 03:09:22 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 29, 2013, 11:34:20 AM
And for Sager - when I say the CCIW is stronger this year, I simply mean that they're going four, maybe five deep this year. That hasn't happened in a while.

Last year in the CCIW

No. Cent 12-2
Wheaton 11-3
Ill. Wes 10-4
Augustana 9-5
Carthage 6-8

Carthage beat Wheaton, and lost OT games to Augustana and NCC. In total 7 of their 8 conference losses came at the hands of the 4 teams above them all by single-digits. They lost their last 3 conference games.

It's not really that different I don't think

And IWU made it to Salem, and North Central and... Augie(?) made it to the Elite 8 (Sweet 16? Sorry, I was focused on what UWSP's rival Whitewater was doing!)

Last year the CCIW had three teams in the Sweet 16 - IWU, North Central, and Wheaton - with IWU advancing to Salem. Wheaton lost to eventual champ UW-Whitewater in the round of 16 and North Central lost to Wittenberg at Wooster. Augustana, which did not make the field, was right there with these 3 teams...CCIW results from 2012 should show hardly any separation between Augie and the 3 that made the tournament.

As sac pointed out, I don't see much difference in the configuration of the league this year. There are 4 good teams again (the same 4 actually), with Carthage playing that "on any given night..." role. The impressive thing is the degree that Augustana, IWU, and Wheaton reloaded from last year - each really lost a lot and inserted several new players this year.

Seems like the UAA, WIAC, CCIW, and ODAC are the top 4 leagues this year...not a real surprise there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 29, 2013, 08:40:05 PM

In external terms, the only difference between this season's CCIW and last season's CCIW is that North Central waited until January to have its injury flurry. Last season the Cardinals had a plague of hurts in December that played a huge role in messing up NCC's non-conference record. This year the Cards were healthy in the pre-conference portion of the season, which meant that their non-conference record is radically better than it was last season.

Of course, the postseason is a part of that equation, too, but we have no way of knowing yet how the CCIW will fare in March. All that we do know is that the league is not having an outstanding season to date by its own recent standards.

I posted the chart below on the afternoon of New Year's Eve. Here's how the CCIW has performed in the post-Carroll era in terms of overall non-con wins and losses as well as postseason play in particular (postseason CCIW vs. CCIW games not counted):

season	W-L (.pct)	D3 tmt W-L (# of teams in D3 tmt)
1992-93	55-38 (.591)	5-1 (1 team)
1993-94	50-39 (.562)	1-1 (1 team)
1994-95	54-38 (.587)	3-2 (2 teams)
1995-96	53-41 (.564)	6-2 (2 teams)
1996-97	45-37 (.548)	6-0 (1 team)
1997-98	46-44 (.511)	1-1 (1 team)
1998-99	59-34 (.634)	1-2 (2 teams)
1999-00	63-26 (.708)	0-1 (1 team)
2000-01	75-25 (.750)	8-2 (3 teams)
2001-02	60-33 (.645)	4-1 (1 team)
2002-03	61-30 (.670)	2-1 (1 team)
2003-04	62-28 (.678)	2-1 (1 team)
2004-05	63-27 (.700)	0-2 (2 teams)
2005-06	63-34 (.649)	7-3 (3 teams)
2006-07	66-23 (.741)	0-1 (1 team)
2007-08	66-28 (.702)	4-2 (2 teams)
2008-09	73-19 (.793)	2-2 (2 teams)
2009-10	60-35 (.632)	5-2 (3 teams)
2010-11	56-37 (.602)	4-2 (2 teams)
2011-12	59-40 (.596)	8-3 (3 teams)
2012-13	57-31 (.648)	?

As you can see, the CCIW is well below the .670-to-the.700s-and-up trend established at the turn of the millennium, even though it's up from the past couple of seasons.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 29, 2013, 08:47:38 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 29, 2013, 08:07:57 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2013, 09:06:01 PM
You are assuming a lot... further more, the only SOS is a flawed system at Massey.

Dave, I assume you mean because there are some non-D3 games included in the Massey SOS? There is no question about that, but:

1) Are there really enough non-D3 games left out there for that to make a significant difference? In other words enough to make a team that has played weak schedule appear to have played a strong schedule, or vice versa? In just looking at the CCIW, a league that used to play quite a few NAIA games, this year out of 88 non-conference games, there were just 6 non-D3 (all NAIA) I believe.

2) As you allude to, Massey is really all we have in terms of SOS. The D3 criteria version of SOS is incredibly flawed for the reasons Hoops Fan points out...

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 29, 2013, 11:34:20 AM
SOS is a tough indicator given the regionalization of d3. I've gone over this every season, but SOS in the NE region is inflated because of so many teams and conferences. A team can be 20-5 in the NECC without having played anyone of note (although teams with decent records in their own right). You can really load up on easy wins over teams with good records in the NE.

IWU played 3 D3 games this year that are excluded from that calculation (Tufts, Mississippi College, Hope) at the present time. There are hundreds of games like that that aren't factored in to the D3 SOS.

I guess it just seems to me that Massey's SOS is generally very reliable. I don't see enough flaws to make me question the picture it paints. Just my opinion.

Massey currently has Pacific Lutheran as playing the 12th toughest schedule in D3. Filtering out Pacific Lutheran' exhibition game with Seattle Pacific takes that schedule down to #30. Calvin is at #95 filter out their exhibition game with Ferris State takes it down to #118. I guess its up to the reader to decide if that's enough of an error.

The other big problem with massey is the number of missing scores, particularly involving NAIA and lower divisions. Its frustrating that it can't be 100% accurate but in general massey is usually 'in the ballpark' and its the best we have. I just wish it could be better and more accurate.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 29, 2013, 09:16:25 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 29, 2013, 08:40:05 PM
In external terms, the only difference between this season's CCIW and last season's CCIW is that North Central waited until January to have its injury flurry. Last season the Cardinals had a plague of hurts in December that played a huge role in messing up NCC's non-conference record. This year the Cards were healthy in the pre-conference portion of the season, which meant that their non-conference record is radically better than it was last season.

Of course, the postseason is a part of that equation, too, but we have no way of knowing yet how the CCIW will fare in March. All that we do know is that the league is not having an outstanding season to date by its own recent standards.

I posted the chart below on the afternoon of New Year's Eve. Here's how the CCIW has performed in the post-Carroll era in terms of overall non-con wins and losses as well as postseason play in particular (postseason CCIW vs. CCIW games not counted):

season W-L (.pct) D3 tmt W-L (# of teams in D3 tmt)
1992-93 55-38 (.591) 5-1 (1 team)
1993-94 50-39 (.562) 1-1 (1 team)
1994-95 54-38 (.587) 3-2 (2 teams)
1995-96 53-41 (.564) 6-2 (2 teams)
1996-97 45-37 (.548) 6-0 (1 team)
1997-98 46-44 (.511) 1-1 (1 team)
1998-99 59-34 (.634) 1-2 (2 teams)
1999-00 63-26 (.708) 0-1 (1 team)
2000-01 75-25 (.750) 8-2 (3 teams)
2001-02 60-33 (.645) 4-1 (1 team)
2002-03 61-30 (.670) 2-1 (1 team)
2003-04 62-28 (.678) 2-1 (1 team)
2004-05 63-27 (.700) 0-2 (2 teams)
2005-06 63-34 (.649) 7-3 (3 teams)
2006-07 66-23 (.741) 0-1 (1 team)
2007-08 66-28 (.702) 4-2 (2 teams)
2008-09 73-19 (.793) 2-2 (2 teams)
2009-10 60-35 (.632) 5-2 (3 teams)
2010-11 56-37 (.602) 4-2 (2 teams)
2011-12 59-40 (.596) 8-3 (3 teams)
2012-13 57-31 (.648) ?

As you can see, the CCIW is well below the .670-to-the.700s-and-up trend established at the turn of the millennium, even though it's up from the past couple of seasons.

I'm kind of confused why some people seem to think the CCIW is "down" or "not up to past standards". This years .648 win % puts it #7 on that 21 year list, making it in the top 1/3 and frankly above avg.

Are we simply comparing the CCIW to its very best seasons, and isn't that always going to be futile?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 30, 2013, 12:00:09 AM

If you look at the list, there's a pretty dramatic break between the '90s and the Oughts, sac. that's why I said this:

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 29, 2013, 08:40:05 PMAs you can see, the CCIW is well below the .670-to-the.700s-and-up trend established at the turn of the millennium, even though it's up from the past couple of seasons.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 30, 2013, 12:25:46 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 30, 2013, 12:00:09 AM
If you look at the list, there's a pretty dramatic break between the '90s and the Oughts, sac. that's why I said this:

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 29, 2013, 08:40:05 PMAs you can see, the CCIW is well below the .670-to-the.700s-and-up trend established at the turn of the millennium, even though it's up from the past couple of seasons.

The break is far less dramatic if you add in the post-season, where 93, 96, and 97 were better than most years in the aughts.

Reinforces the notion that tourney success is almost as much who is 'hot' and 'fortunate' as it is who is 'good'. ALL THREE are necessary to go very far (though 'good' is the most basic). I remain convinced that Hope last year was a perfectly worthy #1, even if we did take them out in the second round.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 30, 2013, 09:40:11 AM

Quote from: sac on January 29, 2013, 09:16:25 PM
I'm kind of confused why some people seem to think the CCIW is "down" or "not up to past standards". This years .648 win % puts it #7 on that 21 year list, making it in the top 1/3 and frankly above avg.

Are we simply comparing the CCIW to its very best seasons, and isn't that always going to be futile?

I think only Greg is in that camp. I don't recall seeing anyone else suggest that. I think the CCIW "is who we thought it was" (shout out to Dennis Green). Typical year really.

The CCIW's current problem - in terms of overall strength - is what's happening at North Park and Elmhurst. The programs at NPU and EC are not in great shape right now...althouth NPU has a new coach with a strong track record at Anderson, and Elmhurst's Mark Scherer has had a lot of good CCIW seasons in the past.

In North Central, Illinois Wesleyan, Wheaton, and Augustana, the CCIW really has four extremely strong "anchor" programs at the present time - each of these programs is poised to be good year after year. Carthage is a good, solid 5th program. Millikin plays 10 freshman this year and seems to have brighter days ahead under Matt Nadelhoffer, who is working his tail off to build the Big Blue.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2013, 10:28:14 AM

For me, Massey seems to overestimate schedule strength with Wisconsin as its epicenter. No doubt that Wisconsin is indeed a center of excellence in basketball and football, but in past years that has manifested itself in Massey having four MIAC teams in the top 30 in his ratings. This year doesn't seem as bad, so maybe I've gotten used to it or maybe something has changed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 30, 2013, 10:51:00 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2013, 10:28:14 AM
For me, Massey seems to overestimate schedule strength with Wisconsin as its epicenter. No doubt that Wisconsin is indeed a center of excellence in basketball and football, but in past years that has manifested itself in Massey having four MIAC teams in the top 30 in his ratings. This year doesn't seem as bad, so maybe I've gotten used to it or maybe something has changed.

MIAC or WIAC? (Not being flippant, wanting to check the history).

I think the strong WIAC rating does make intuitive sense though. They routinely have one of the top three or four non-conference winning percentages, and they don't shy away from playing the teams like St. Thomas, or the CCIW.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AO on January 30, 2013, 11:21:55 AM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 30, 2013, 10:51:00 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2013, 10:28:14 AM
For me, Massey seems to overestimate schedule strength with Wisconsin as its epicenter. No doubt that Wisconsin is indeed a center of excellence in basketball and football, but in past years that has manifested itself in Massey having four MIAC teams in the top 30 in his ratings. This year doesn't seem as bad, so maybe I've gotten used to it or maybe something has changed.

MIAC or WIAC? (Not being flippant, wanting to check the history).

I think the strong WIAC rating does make intuitive sense though. They routinely have one of the top three or four non-conference winning percentages, and they don't shy away from playing the teams like St. Thomas, or the CCIW.

Last year the MIAC had a terrific non-conference record; Massey must account better than the official d3 SOS for the high amount of conference games that the MIAC plays.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 30, 2013, 11:28:57 AM

Quote from: AO on January 30, 2013, 11:21:55 AM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 30, 2013, 10:51:00 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2013, 10:28:14 AM
For me, Massey seems to overestimate schedule strength with Wisconsin as its epicenter. No doubt that Wisconsin is indeed a center of excellence in basketball and football, but in past years that has manifested itself in Massey having four MIAC teams in the top 30 in his ratings. This year doesn't seem as bad, so maybe I've gotten used to it or maybe something has changed.

MIAC or WIAC? (Not being flippant, wanting to check the history).

I think the strong WIAC rating does make intuitive sense though. They routinely have one of the top three or four non-conference winning percentages, and they don't shy away from playing the teams like St. Thomas, or the CCIW.
Last year the MIAC had a terrific non-conference record; Massey must account better than the official d3 SOS for the high amount of conference games that the MIAC plays.

26-32?

WIAC was 65-27

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2013, 11:30:21 AM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 30, 2013, 10:51:00 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2013, 10:28:14 AM
For me, Massey seems to overestimate schedule strength with Wisconsin as its epicenter. No doubt that Wisconsin is indeed a center of excellence in basketball and football, but in past years that has manifested itself in Massey having four MIAC teams in the top 30 in his ratings. This year doesn't seem as bad, so maybe I've gotten used to it or maybe something has changed.

MIAC or WIAC? (Not being flippant, wanting to check the history).

I think the strong WIAC rating does make intuitive sense though. They routinely have one of the top three or four non-conference winning percentages, and they don't shy away from playing the teams like St. Thomas, or the CCIW.

I wouldn't bat an eye at the WIAC having that happen, no. It was the MIAC, and I know UST won the national title but six MIAC teams in the top 30 is how that season ended, including 14-11 St. John's:

http://masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&yr=2011&sub=11620

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AO on January 30, 2013, 11:40:50 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2013, 11:30:21 AM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 30, 2013, 10:51:00 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2013, 10:28:14 AM
For me, Massey seems to overestimate schedule strength with Wisconsin as its epicenter. No doubt that Wisconsin is indeed a center of excellence in basketball and football, but in past years that has manifested itself in Massey having four MIAC teams in the top 30 in his ratings. This year doesn't seem as bad, so maybe I've gotten used to it or maybe something has changed.

MIAC or WIAC? (Not being flippant, wanting to check the history).

I think the strong WIAC rating does make intuitive sense though. They routinely have one of the top three or four non-conference winning percentages, and they don't shy away from playing the teams like St. Thomas, or the CCIW.

I wouldn't bat an eye at the WIAC having that happen, no. It was the MIAC, and I know UST won the national title but six MIAC teams in the top 30 is how that season ended, including 14-11 St. John's:

http://masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&yr=2011&sub=11620

St. John's did have a win over D2 St. Cloud state, only non-conference loss to Stevens Point and they gave St. Thomas much better games than did runner-up Wooster.

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 30, 2013, 11:28:57 AM
Quote from: AO on January 30, 2013, 11:21:55 AM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 30, 2013, 10:51:00 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2013, 10:28:14 AM
For me, Massey seems to overestimate schedule strength with Wisconsin as its epicenter. No doubt that Wisconsin is indeed a center of excellence in basketball and football, but in past years that has manifested itself in Massey having four MIAC teams in the top 30 in his ratings. This year doesn't seem as bad, so maybe I've gotten used to it or maybe something has changed.

MIAC or WIAC? (Not being flippant, wanting to check the history).

I think the strong WIAC rating does make intuitive sense though. They routinely have one of the top three or four non-conference winning percentages, and they don't shy away from playing the teams like St. Thomas, or the CCIW.
Last year the MIAC had a terrific non-conference record; Massey must account better than the official d3 SOS for the high amount of conference games that the MIAC plays.

26-32?

WIAC was 65-27

Sorry confused my seasons, it was the 10-11 season that was very good for the MIAC in the non-conference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2013, 11:50:22 AM

Computers can't account for teams playing inspired against their archrivals. Yes, they lost to UWSP (by 27, mind you), but they also lost 10 other games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2013, 11:52:32 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2013, 11:50:22 AM
Computers can't account for teams playing inspired against their archrivals. Yes, they lost to UWSP (by 27, mind you), but they also lost 10 other games.

One of them to 2-23 Macalester.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AO on January 30, 2013, 12:12:20 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2013, 11:50:22 AM
Computers can't account for teams playing inspired against their archrivals. Yes, they lost to UWSP (by 27, mind you), but they also lost 10 other games.

Playing in the national championship game isn't enough to inspire you? In any given year how many teams ranked much above #30 could beat a D2 power like St. Cloud State, and play the D3 champs to the bitter end on their home floor?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 30, 2013, 12:20:46 PM

Glad you are focusing on just two games versus the 23 others that resulted in a poor record... and thus the complaint about Massey.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ziggy on January 30, 2013, 12:30:59 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2013, 11:50:22 AM
Computers can't account for teams playing inspired against their archrivals. Yes, they lost to UWSP (by 27, mind you), but they also lost 10 other games.

Nor can they account for teams playing uninspired against crappy teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AO on January 30, 2013, 12:44:55 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 30, 2013, 12:20:46 PM
Glad you are focusing on just two games versus the 23 others that resulted in a poor record... and thus the complaint about Massey.

The other 12 wins were nothing to sneeze at. The only cupcake on the MIAC schedule was Macalester. Subjectively they looked like they could beat a top 25 team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2013, 12:48:40 PM

Quote from: ziggy on January 30, 2013, 12:30:59 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2013, 11:50:22 AM
Computers can't account for teams playing inspired against their archrivals. Yes, they lost to UWSP (by 27, mind you), but they also lost 10 other games.

Nor can they account for teams playing uninspired against crappy teams.

No doubt. But regardless, No. 30 for the sixth-best team in the MIAC is excessive. (And they weren't even sixth-best in the MIAC standings.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 30, 2013, 12:58:29 PM

Can we even consider the MIAC a top 10 conference?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2013, 12:59:45 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 30, 2013, 12:58:29 PM
Can we even consider the MIAC a top 10 conference?

Oh, I would probably say so but I have fastidiously avoided thinking about how we would rank conferences subjectively because it's such a massive undertaking to rank 80-some leagues.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 30, 2013, 01:22:26 PM

Quote from: sac on January 29, 2013, 08:47:38 PM
Massey currently has Pacific Lutheran as playing the 12th toughest schedule in D3. Filtering out Pacific Lutheran' exhibition game with Seattle Pacific takes that schedule down to #30. Calvin is at #95 filter out their exhibition game with Ferris State takes it down to #118. I guess its up to the reader to decide if that's enough of an error.

The other big problem with massey is the number of missing scores, particularly involving NAIA and lower divisions. Its frustrating that it can't be 100% accurate but in general massey is usually 'in the ballpark' and its the best we have. I just wish it could be better and more accurate.

Massey does not count the games that are marked as exhibitions on his site, I do not believe. He DOES count the games when they're an exhibition for one team but not another (and doesn't mark these as exhibitions).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AO on January 30, 2013, 01:23:17 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2013, 12:59:45 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 30, 2013, 12:58:29 PM
Can we even consider the MIAC a top 10 conference?

Oh, I would probably say so but I have fastidiously avoided thinking about how we would rank conferences subjectively because it's such a massive undertaking to rank 80-some leagues.

Maybe try ranking the men's basketball conferences first, then see if you have the energy to rank the volleyball and field hockey conferences? :o (obviously the 40 or so men's conferences is still a large number) The UMAC can't be last in both football and basketball, right?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2013, 01:24:25 PM

I mean that if I go through the process to rank MBB conferences I have to do the same for WBB, and that's where I get 80-plus.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AO on January 30, 2013, 01:29:34 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2013, 01:24:25 PM
I mean that if I go through the process to rank MBB conferences I have to do the same for WBB, and that's where I get 80-plus.

Yes, I know, just poking fun at your self-imposed title IX regulations. You ought to feel ashamed that you haven't created the women's sport equivalent of d3football.com's Kickoff. :D

I suppose the women might also get a little upset that their best conference is #41 on your list...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 30, 2013, 06:37:59 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 30, 2013, 09:40:11 AM
Quote from: sac on January 29, 2013, 09:16:25 PM
I'm kind of confused why some people seem to think the CCIW is "down" or "not up to past standards". This years .648 win % puts it #7 on that 21 year list, making it in the top 1/3 and frankly above avg.

Are we simply comparing the CCIW to its very best seasons, and isn't that always going to be futile?

I think only Greg is in that camp. I don't recall seeing anyone else suggest that. I think the CCIW "is who we thought it was" (shout out to Dennis Green). Typical year really.

I didn't realize that we had established "camps" here, Bob. If there's any camps involved here, they consist of these two: Your opinion and mine. ;)

There is selection bias here at work, which I freely admit. In terms of the post-Carroll CCIW, the '90s were markedly down by comparison, the '00s were markedly up, and this decade seems to be in the middle, more or less. So the selection bias really comes down to how many previous seasons you want to lump in with the current one (or the past two or three) in order to make an evaluation.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2013, 05:58:28 PMThe CCIW's current problem - in terms of overall strength - is what's happening at North Park and Elmhurst. The programs at NPU and EC are not in great shape right now...althouth NPU has a new coach with a strong track record at Anderson, and Elmhurst's Mark Scherer has had a lot of good CCIW seasons in the past.

I painfully agree about NPU and Elmhurst. Can't deny it, as the 'jays have gone 4-7, 6-5, 5-6, and 5-6 in non-con play over the past four years, while NPU's gone 4-7, 5-6, 7-4, and 6-5 over that span.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2013, 05:58:28 PMIn North Central, Illinois Wesleyan, Wheaton, and Augustana, the CCIW really has four extremely strong "anchor" programs at the present time - each of these programs is poised to be good year after year. Carthage is a good, solid 5th program. Millikin plays 10 freshman this year and seems to have brighter days ahead under Matt Nadelhoffer, who is working his tail off to build the Big Blue.

Carthage has had its struggles over the past couple of years, going 11-11 in non-con play over that time. Since the Red Men will return zero bigs next season, the jury's out as to whether they will be "good, solid" next season, too. And let's not overplay Millikin's success just yet. It's true that the Big Blue are markedly better than they've been (which isn't saying much), and they definitely have a talented freshman class. But it's still a long ways away from being a healthy program, recordwise, and the jury has to remain out until we see just how many of those frosh return to campus in Decatur next fall.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 30, 2013, 06:58:45 PM

I realize this is the basketball board, but a question I hope someone can answer. Annually, Massey has NESCAC football teams ranked very high. Since Massey is a purely data-driven computer ranking (or so I understand it), how can they rank NESCAC football (whether high, low, or in between) since they NEVER play ANYONE outside of other NESCAC teams? There is NO data to compute for comparisons!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 30, 2013, 07:35:49 PM

Massey used to exclude the NESCAC. I think they're rated that way due to their offense / defense algorithms. Just ignore them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 30, 2013, 09:24:01 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 30, 2013, 07:35:49 PM
Massey used to exclude the NESCAC. I think they're rated that way due to their offense / defense algorithms. Just ignore them.

Even if that were true about offense/defense algorithms, how could they compare them to d3 schools when there is ZERO data for comparison purposes. (That's like saying your intramural team is undefeated with unbelievable stats; therefore they would win the d3 tourney!) I already ignore him for football (in general, not just NESCAC); if he makes that huge an error for football, should I have any trust in him in basketball? What other non-data biases does he have?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 30, 2013, 09:31:09 PM

I think he's quite accurate actually. It's a rating system, and it's fairly unbiased. I do some comparisons with his D-1 hoops ratings and it's pretty much a decent system comparable to Pomeroy and Sagarin.

Every rating system has its quirks - the NESCAC thing aside - it's a decent system. Football's ALWAYS going to be a bit hard to fairly rate because of the limited data sets - especially with some conferences only having one non-conference game.

Before denigrating, look up the theory:

http://masseyratings.com/theory/index.htm

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 30, 2013, 09:36:00 PM

BTW, I don't think it's an error, per se. Sagarin does ratings for Indiana HS football and there's one conference that doesn't play anyone else until the state tournament and he slots those teams in as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 30, 2013, 09:43:23 PM

I've studied the theory. Ranking the NESCAC in football totally violates his theory (appealing to Sagarin doing the same error for Indiana hs teams doesn't change anything). I have trouble trusting someone who is 'data-driven', yet does rankings when there is ZERO data. If even one NESCAC team played even one non-con team, that would be data, however tenuous. But ZERO data?! ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 30, 2013, 09:45:42 PM

I don't understand why just removing the NESCAC from the rankings changes anything. Since they're not connected, just remove them and adjust the rankings upward? Not so hard at all!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 30, 2013, 09:51:36 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 30, 2013, 09:45:42 PM
I don't understand why just removing the NESCAC from the rankings changes anything. Since they're not connected, just remove them and adjust the rankings upward? Not so hard at all!

Agreed, and when I do check Massey, that is what I do.

But if he can do such a blatant violation of his own theory, can I trust his computations? (I know he's not, but I can't help thinking of him as an Amherst sophomore! ;D)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on January 31, 2013, 12:01:16 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 30, 2013, 09:51:36 PM
Quote from: smedindy on January 30, 2013, 09:45:42 PM
I don't understand why just removing the NESCAC from the rankings changes anything. Since they're not connected, just remove them and adjust the rankings upward? Not so hard at all!

Agreed, and when I do check Massey, that is what I do.

But if he can do such a blatant violation of his own theory, can I trust his computations? (I know he's not, but I can't help thinking of him as an Amherst sophomore! ;D)

Hum, maybe you can't trust his computations and you obviously don't or should not ... or are u just ticked that you have to remove the NESCAC because Massey doesn't do it for you :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 31, 2013, 12:10:52 AM

Quote from: iwumichigander on January 31, 2013, 12:01:16 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 30, 2013, 09:51:36 PM
Quote from: smedindy on January 30, 2013, 09:45:42 PM
I don't understand why just removing the NESCAC from the rankings changes anything. Since they're not connected, just remove them and adjust the rankings upward? Not so hard at all!

Agreed, and when I do check Massey, that is what I do.

But if he can do such a blatant violation of his own theory, can I trust his computations? (I know he's not, but I can't help thinking of him as an Amherst sophomore! ;D)
Hum, maybe you can't trust his computations and you obviously don't or should not ... or are u just ticked that you have to remove the NESCAC because Massey doesn't do it for you :P

No, that is a trivial task I can easily do in my head. But if he can 'rank' teams that provide ZERO data for his supposedly 100% data-driven computations, I can't help but wonder what other shenanigans he may be up to. I don't necessarily think he is dishonest, but there certainly seems to be some glitch in his algorithm/thinking - does it spill over into other rankings?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 31, 2013, 04:49:38 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 30, 2013, 06:37:59 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 30, 2013, 09:40:11 AM
Quote from: sac on January 29, 2013, 09:16:25 PM
I'm kind of confused why some people seem to think the CCIW is "down" or "not up to past standards". This years .648 win % puts it #7 on that 21 year list, making it in the top 1/3 and frankly above avg.

Are we simply comparing the CCIW to its very best seasons, and isn't that always going to be futile?

I think only Greg is in that camp. I don't recall seeing anyone else suggest that. I think the CCIW "is who we thought it was" (shout out to Dennis Green). Typical year really.

I didn't realize that we had established "camps" here, Bob. If there's any camps involved here, they consist of these two: Your opinion and mine. ;)

There is selection bias here at work, which I freely admit. In terms of the post-Carroll CCIW, the '90s were markedly down by comparison, the '00s were markedly up, and this decade seems to be in the middle, more or less. So the selection bias really comes down to how many previous seasons you want to lump in with the current one (or the past two or three) in order to make an evaluation.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2013, 05:58:28 PMThe CCIW's current problem - in terms of overall strength - is what's happening at North Park and Elmhurst. The programs at NPU and EC are not in great shape right now...althouth NPU has a new coach with a strong track record at Anderson, and Elmhurst's Mark Scherer has had a lot of good CCIW seasons in the past.

I painfully agree about NPU and Elmhurst. Can't deny it, as the 'jays have gone 4-7, 6-5, 5-6, and 5-6 in non-con play over the past four years, while NPU's gone 4-7, 5-6, 7-4, and 6-5 over that span.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2013, 05:58:28 PMIn North Central, Illinois Wesleyan, Wheaton, and Augustana, the CCIW really has four extremely strong "anchor" programs at the present time - each of these programs is poised to be good year after year. Carthage is a good, solid 5th program. Millikin plays 10 freshman this year and seems to have brighter days ahead under Matt Nadelhoffer, who is working his tail off to build the Big Blue.

Carthage has had its struggles over the past couple of years, going 11-11 in non-con play over that time. Since the Red Men will return zero bigs next season, the jury's out as to whether they will be "good, solid" next season, too. And let's not overplay Millikin's success just yet. It's true that the Big Blue are markedly better than they've been (which isn't saying much), and they definitely have a talented freshman class. But it's still a long ways away from being a healthy program, recordwise, and the jury has to remain out until we see just how many of those frosh return to campus in Decatur next fall.

I'm really surprised at you Greg. Aren't you putting quite a few words in Pat's mouth here. ??? The funny thing is, where you end up, if you click on the quotes attributed to Mr. Coleman. ;D Time to use your super powers and make some corrections. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 31, 2013, 06:03:49 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2013, 12:59:45 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 30, 2013, 12:58:29 PM
Can we even consider the MIAC a top 10 conference?

Oh, I would probably say so but I have fastidiously avoided thinking about how we would rank conferences subjectively because it's such a massive undertaking to rank 80-some leagues.

I guess I can't poo-poo too much on the MIAC. Taking a quick look, I might have missed a game, they were 7-7 against the WIAC.

You may now return to your NESCAC football talk. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 31, 2013, 07:23:53 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	623	Rochester	18-0	02/01 at New York University; 02/03 at #25 Brandeis
#2	566	St. Thomas	19-1	won at Carleton, 74-52; 02/02 at Augsburg
#3	560	Whitworth	18-1	02/01 vs. Lewis and Clark; 02/02 vs. Pacific
#4	551	WPI	20-0	won at Babson, 66-43; 02/02 vs. Coast Guard
#5	528	UW-Stevens Point	18-3	LOST at UW-Platteville, 46-54; 02/02 at UW-La Crosse
#6	464	Middlebury	17-1	def. Keene State, 81-53; 02/01 at Bowdoin; 02/02 at Colby
#7	439	North Central (Ill.)	17-3	def. Carthage, 60-52; 02/02 vs. Elmhurst
#8	436	Wooster	18-2	def. Denison, 94-64; 02/02 at Wabash
#9	394	Williams	18-2	won at Southern Vermont, 93-45; 02/01 at Colby; 02/02 at Bowdoin
#10	378	Amherst	18-2	won at #18 Rhode Island College, 74-65; 02/01 vs. Bates; 02/02 vs. Tufts
#11	353	Catholic	18-2	def. Juniata, 62-53; 02/02 vs. Drew
#12	351	Illinois Wesleyan	17-3	won at #26 Augustana, 71-65; 02/02 vs. #20 Wheaton (Ill.)
#13	320	Ramapo	19-2	def. Montclair State, 75-58; 02/02 vs. Rowan
#14	299	St. Mary's (Md.)	19-2	def. #24 Wesley, 74-63
#15	285	UW-Whitewater	16-4	def. UW-La Crosse, 71-63; 02/02 vs. #29 St. Norbert
#16	247	Christopher Newport	15-2	02/02 vs. Greensboro
#17	230	Calvin	18-2	def. Albion, 83-63; 02/02 vs. Kalamazoo
#18	206	Rhode Island College	16-3	LOST to #10 Amherst, 65-74; 01/31 at Clark; 02/02 at Mass-Boston
#19	186	Hampden-Sydney	18-2	def. T#45 Lynchburg, 81-70; 02/02 at Washington and Lee
#20	128	Wheaton (Ill.)	16-4	won at North Park, 82-70; 02/02 at #12 Illinois Wesleyan
#21	114	Washington U.	14-4	02/01 vs. Carnegie Mellon; 02/03 vs. Case Western Reserve
#22	108	Transylvania	16-4	won at Earlham, 82-45; 02/02 vs. #23 Rose-Hulman
#23	100	Rose-Hulman	18-2	won at Anderson, 71-40; 02/02 at #22 Transylvania
#24	45	Wesley	16-5	LOST at #14 St. Mary's (Md.), 63-74; 02/02 vs. Frostburg State
#25	37	Brandeis	14-4	02/01 vs. #30 Emory; 02/03 vs. #1 Rochester

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	24	Augustana	15-5	LOST to #12 Illinois Wesleyan, 65-71; 02/02 vs. Carthage
T#27	22	Albertus Magnus	18-2	def. Emmanuel, 93-82; 01/31 at Suffolk; 02/02 at Rivier
T#27	22	MIT	15-4	def. Wheaton (Mass.), 70-57; 02/02 vs. Springfield
#29	21	St. Norbert	15-3	def. Lawrence, 68-54; 02/02 at #15 UW-Whitewater
#30	13	Emory	13-4	02/01 at #25 Brandeis; 02/03 at New York University
#31	11	Stevens	16-3	def. Hartwick, 62-55; 02/01 vs. Utica
T#32	9	Albright	17-3	won at T#45 Alvernia, 57-54; 02/02 vs. Lebanon Valley
T#32	9	Ohio Wesleyan	15-4	def. Wittenberg, 63-51; 02/02 vs. Oberlin
#34	7	UW-Stout	16-4	def. UW-Superior, 92-78; 02/02 vs. UW-Platteville
#35	6	Carroll	13-5	LOST at Ripon, 62-65; 02/02 vs. Cornell
T#36	5	DeSales	16-4	LOST at Delaware Valley, 71-74; 02/02 at Misericordia
T#36	5	Randolph	17-3	won at Emory and Henry, 71-44; 02/02 vs. Eastern Mennonite
T#38	4	Richard Stockton	15-5	LOST at New Jersey City, 50-60; 02/02 at Montclair State
T#38	4	Mary Hardin-Baylor	17-3	won at Concordia (Texas), 94-81; 01/31 at Hardin-Simmons
T#38	4	Adrian	15-5	LOST at Hope, 53-67; 02/02 at Trine
T#41	2	Centre	14-3	02/01 at Oglethorpe; 02/03 at Berry
T#41	2	Lycoming	14-6	won at Messiah, 67-66; 02/02 vs. Stevenson
T#41	2	Cortland State	15-3	def. Brockport State, 85-75; 02/01 at Fredonia State; 02/02 at Buffalo State
T#41	2	Virginia Wesleyan	13-6	LOST to Randolph-Macon, 65-68; 02/02 vs. Emory and Henry
T#45	1	Alvernia	15-4	LOST to T#32 Albright, 54-57; 02/02 vs. Elizabethtown
T#45	1	SUNY-Old Westbury	17-3	def. Mount St. Vincent, 72-71; 01/31 vs. Mount St. Mary; 02/02 vs. Yeshiva
T#45	1	Lynchburg	16-4	LOST at #19 Hampden-Sydney, 70-81; 02/02 vs. Randolph-Macon

Other teams to watch (as suggested by posters on this board)

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
---	---	Concordia (Texas)	15-5	LOST to T#38 Mary Hardin-Baylor, 81-94; 02/02 at Hardin-Simmons

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 31, 2013, 10:19:10 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 31, 2013, 12:10:52 AM
Quote from: iwumichigander on January 31, 2013, 12:01:16 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 30, 2013, 09:51:36 PM
Quote from: smedindy on January 30, 2013, 09:45:42 PM
I don't understand why just removing the NESCAC from the rankings changes anything. Since they're not connected, just remove them and adjust the rankings upward? Not so hard at all!

Agreed, and when I do check Massey, that is what I do.

But if he can do such a blatant violation of his own theory, can I trust his computations? (I know he's not, but I can't help thinking of him as an Amherst sophomore! ;D)
Hum, maybe you can't trust his computations and you obviously don't or should not ... or are u just ticked that you have to remove the NESCAC because Massey doesn't do it for you :P

No, that is a trivial task I can easily do in my head. But if he can 'rank' teams that provide ZERO data for his supposedly 100% data-driven computations, I can't help but wonder what other shenanigans he may be up to. I don't necessarily think he is dishonest, but there certainly seems to be some glitch in his algorithm/thinking - does it spill over into other rankings?

I'm obviously not a D3 football guy (didn't know it existed until this thread :)), but he does include weighted historical results as part of his preseason ratings (they get damped out as the season progresses). I'm assuming that a NESCAC team plays in the playoffs, so there's at least one data point to go off of. That's probably how his system ties them in.

Does the NESCAC champ fare well in the playoffs usually?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AO on January 31, 2013, 10:22:19 AM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 31, 2013, 10:19:10 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 31, 2013, 12:10:52 AM
Quote from: iwumichigander on January 31, 2013, 12:01:16 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 30, 2013, 09:51:36 PM
Quote from: smedindy on January 30, 2013, 09:45:42 PM
I don't understand why just removing the NESCAC from the rankings changes anything. Since they're not connected, just remove them and adjust the rankings upward? Not so hard at all!

Agreed, and when I do check Massey, that is what I do.

But if he can do such a blatant violation of his own theory, can I trust his computations? (I know he's not, but I can't help thinking of him as an Amherst sophomore! ;D)
Hum, maybe you can't trust his computations and you obviously don't or should not ... or are u just ticked that you have to remove the NESCAC because Massey doesn't do it for you :P

No, that is a trivial task I can easily do in my head. But if he can 'rank' teams that provide ZERO data for his supposedly 100% data-driven computations, I can't help but wonder what other shenanigans he may be up to. I don't necessarily think he is dishonest, but there certainly seems to be some glitch in his algorithm/thinking - does it spill over into other rankings?

I'm obviously not a D3 football guy (didn't know it existed until this thread :)), but he does include weighted historical results as part of his ratings (they get damped out as the season progresses). I'm assuming that a NESCAC team plays in the playoffs, so there's at least one data point to go off of. That's probably how his system ties them in.

Does the NESCAC champ fare well in the playoffs usually?

fun fact: The NESCAC and UMAC have the same number of playoff football wins.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 31, 2013, 10:26:03 AM

Quote from: AO on January 31, 2013, 10:22:19 AM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 31, 2013, 10:19:10 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 31, 2013, 12:10:52 AM
Quote from: iwumichigander on January 31, 2013, 12:01:16 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 30, 2013, 09:51:36 PM
Quote from: smedindy on January 30, 2013, 09:45:42 PM
I don't understand why just removing the NESCAC from the rankings changes anything. Since they're not connected, just remove them and adjust the rankings upward? Not so hard at all!

Agreed, and when I do check Massey, that is what I do.

But if he can do such a blatant violation of his own theory, can I trust his computations? (I know he's not, but I can't help thinking of him as an Amherst sophomore! ;D)
Hum, maybe you can't trust his computations and you obviously don't or should not ... or are u just ticked that you have to remove the NESCAC because Massey doesn't do it for you :P

No, that is a trivial task I can easily do in my head. But if he can 'rank' teams that provide ZERO data for his supposedly 100% data-driven computations, I can't help but wonder what other shenanigans he may be up to. I don't necessarily think he is dishonest, but there certainly seems to be some glitch in his algorithm/thinking - does it spill over into other rankings?

I'm obviously not a D3 football guy (didn't know it existed until this thread :)), but he does include weighted historical results as part of his ratings (they get damped out as the season progresses). I'm assuming that a NESCAC team plays in the playoffs, so there's at least one data point to go off of. That's probably how his system ties them in.

Does the NESCAC champ fare well in the playoffs usually?
fun fact: The NESCAC and UMAC have the same number of playoff football wins.

Do they not play in the playoffs, or are they just bad when they get there? Again, I'm not even convinced D3 football really exists.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 31, 2013, 10:29:58 AM

They don't play in the playoffs. It's 'beneath them' or something or other. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 31, 2013, 10:31:45 AM

Looks like NESCAC football has a 0.00 rating as a conference, which makes them "average" for college foobtall. He's not assuming they are average, there's just nothing by which he can assume they're not average (making them average for the division would be better though).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 31, 2013, 11:00:10 AM

I think that's wise mathematically when all is said and done. Who really knows?? That's why I can't vote for any NESCAC team in the football poster's poll. For all we know, the best of the NESCAC could have had either a badillion Stagg Bowls or falter against the UMAC. Or somewhere in between...

Ok, back to hoops.

I personally think UMHB is a sleeping giant this year and probably highly underrated.

Do any observers have insight on the SAA teams besides Centre?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 31, 2013, 11:20:01 AM

Well, I think we can nix Concordia Tx from the list...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 31, 2013, 12:39:41 PM

Quote from: John Gleich on January 31, 2013, 11:20:01 AM
Well, I think we can nix Concordia Tx from the list...

When I saw their result vs. MHB, I almost decided to drop them from the "other teams," but I figured it might be useful for anyone considering a vote for MHB to see that their road win came against a team with a 15-5 record.

I will leave Concordia off of Sunday's final report.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 31, 2013, 01:00:33 PM

I monitored the live stats for Concordia-UMHB on Tuesday night for front page reasons. The Cru jumped out to a big lead and were up 20 most of the game. Even at a 12-point margin, the game wasn't that close.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 31, 2013, 04:13:38 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on January 31, 2013, 01:00:33 PM
I monitored the live stats for Concordia-UMHB on Tuesday night for front page reasons. The Cru jumped out to a big lead and were up 20 most of the game. Even at a 12-point margin, the game wasn't that close.

Beating CTX on the road is a "statement" game between those 2. They were paired as travel partners inthe previous decade.

UMHB appears to be coming around. I will be interested to see where they are paired in the tourney. (I think that they win the ASC Pool A bid.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 31, 2013, 06:52:47 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 31, 2013, 04:49:38 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 30, 2013, 06:37:59 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 30, 2013, 09:40:11 AM
Quote from: sac on January 29, 2013, 09:16:25 PM
I'm kind of confused why some people seem to think the CCIW is "down" or "not up to past standards". This years .648 win % puts it #7 on that 21 year list, making it in the top 1/3 and frankly above avg.

Are we simply comparing the CCIW to its very best seasons, and isn't that always going to be futile?

I think only Greg is in that camp. I don't recall seeing anyone else suggest that. I think the CCIW "is who we thought it was" (shout out to Dennis Green). Typical year really.

I didn't realize that we had established "camps" here, Bob. If there's any camps involved here, they consist of these two: Your opinion and mine. ;)

There is selection bias here at work, which I freely admit. In terms of the post-Carroll CCIW, the '90s were markedly down by comparison, the '00s were markedly up, and this decade seems to be in the middle, more or less. So the selection bias really comes down to how many previous seasons you want to lump in with the current one (or the past two or three) in order to make an evaluation.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2013, 05:58:28 PMThe CCIW's current problem - in terms of overall strength - is what's happening at North Park and Elmhurst. The programs at NPU and EC are not in great shape right now...althouth NPU has a new coach with a strong track record at Anderson, and Elmhurst's Mark Scherer has had a lot of good CCIW seasons in the past.

I painfully agree about NPU and Elmhurst. Can't deny it, as the 'jays have gone 4-7, 6-5, 5-6, and 5-6 in non-con play over the past four years, while NPU's gone 4-7, 5-6, 7-4, and 6-5 over that span.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2013, 05:58:28 PMIn North Central, Illinois Wesleyan, Wheaton, and Augustana, the CCIW really has four extremely strong "anchor" programs at the present time - each of these programs is poised to be good year after year. Carthage is a good, solid 5th program. Millikin plays 10 freshman this year and seems to have brighter days ahead under Matt Nadelhoffer, who is working his tail off to build the Big Blue.

Carthage has had its struggles over the past couple of years, going 11-11 in non-con play over that time. Since the Red Men will return zero bigs next season, the jury's out as to whether they will be "good, solid" next season, too. And let's not overplay Millikin's success just yet. It's true that the Big Blue are markedly better than they've been (which isn't saying much), and they definitely have a talented freshman class. But it's still a long ways away from being a healthy program, recordwise, and the jury has to remain out until we see just how many of those frosh return to campus in Decatur next fall.

I'm really surprised at you Greg. Aren't you putting quite a few words in Pat's mouth here. ??? The funny thing is, where you end up, if you click on the quotes attributed to Mr. Coleman. ;D Time to use your super powers and make some corrections. ;)

Argh! Too much work to clear all that up. Oh, well, Pat and Bob know who is who. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 02, 2013, 03:56:47 PM

UPSET! Wabash, down 15-2 in the first half, puts on a defensive clinic and defeats Wooster 55-48!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 02, 2013, 06:29:39 PM

Quote from: smedindy on February 02, 2013, 03:56:47 PM
UPSET! Wabash, down 15-2 in the first half, puts on a defensive clinic and defeats Wooster 55-48!

I knew there was more to your REALLY GOOD day than Rose-Hulman beating Transy in the Pick Em League! Now I see what it was. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 02, 2013, 07:59:26 PM

Carnage in the Top 25 today so far:

#5 Stevens Point loses to UW-La Crosse 67-62

#8 Wooster goes down at Wabash 55-48 as smeds noted

#16 Christopher Newport loses to Greensboro 72-69

#22 Translyvania loses to #23 Rose-Hulman 53-49

T#36 Desales lost at Misericordia 66-55

T#36 Randolph lost to Eastern Mennonite 76-75

T#38 Adrian lost at Trine 64-46

T#41 Lycoming lost to Stevenson 82-76

T#45 Lynchburg lost to Randolph-Macon 91-77

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 02, 2013, 08:56:54 PM

I really hate carnage as a voter... makes for a very long Monday!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on February 02, 2013, 09:47:22 PM

Just take a spinner from a Life game, and tape team labels on each of the numbers. Start from the top or bottom of the poll, and spin until each of the poll slots are filled.

Or use an old See 'n Say, and instead of pulling a string to see which animal makes a noise, cover each animal spot with a potential top-25 team.

You needn't become too stressed about this process...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 03, 2013, 01:24:19 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 02, 2013, 08:56:54 PM
I really hate carnage as a voter... makes for a very long Monday!

Darryl is going to run out of red ink...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 03, 2013, 05:16:57 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 03, 2013, 01:24:19 AM
Darryl is going to run out of red ink...

I keep a spare toner cartridge on hand for such occasions.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 03, 2013, 05:17:44 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	623	Rochester	19-1	LOST at New York University, 51-65; won at #25 Brandeis, 66-59
#2	566	St. Thomas	20-1	won at Carleton, 74-52; won at Augsburg, 66-56
#3	560	Whitworth	20-1	def. Lewis and Clark, 89-70; def. Pacific, 98-63
#4	551	WPI	21-0	won at Babson, 66-43; def. Coast Guard, 89-53
#5	528	UW-Stevens Point	18-4	LOST at UW-Platteville, 46-54; LOST at UW-La Crosse, 62-67
#6	464	Middlebury	19-1	def. Keene State, 81-53; won at Bowdoin, 72-61; won at Colby, 85-62
#7	439	North Central (Ill.)	18-3	def. Carthage, 60-52; def. Elmhurst, 66-54
#8	436	Wooster	18-3	def. Denison, 94-64; LOST at Wabash, 48-55
#9	394	Williams	20-2	won at Southern Vermont, 93-45; won at Colby, 64-61; won at Bowdoin, 76-64
#10	378	Amherst	20-2	won at #18 Rhode Island College, 74-65; def. Bates, 86-69; def. Tufts, 100-89
#11	353	Catholic	19-2	def. Juniata, 62-53; def. Drew, 84-73
#12	351	Illinois Wesleyan	18-3	won at #26 Augustana, 71-65; def. #20 Wheaton (Ill.), 79-64
#13	320	Ramapo	20-2	def. Montclair State, 75-58; def. Rowan, 74-61
#14	299	St. Mary's (Md.)	19-2	def. #24 Wesley, 74-63
#15	285	UW-Whitewater	17-4	def. UW-La Crosse, 71-63; def. #29 St. Norbert, 63-38
#16	247	Christopher Newport	15-3	LOST to Greensboro, 69-72
#17	230	Calvin	19-2	def. Albion, 83-63; def. Kalamazoo, 92-50
#18	206	Rhode Island College	18-3	LOST to #10 Amherst, 65-74; won at Clark, 74-63; won at Mass-Boston, 81-50
#19	186	Hampden-Sydney	19-2	def. T#45 Lynchburg, 81-70; won at Washington and Lee, 77-67
#20	128	Wheaton (Ill.)	16-5	won at North Park, 82-70; LOST at #12 Illinois Wesleyan, 64-79
#21	114	Washington U.	16-4	def. Carnegie Mellon, 90-72; def. Case Western Reserve, 78-57
#22	108	Transylvania	16-5	won at Earlham, 82-45; LOST to #23 Rose-Hulman, 49-54
#23	100	Rose-Hulman	19-2	won at Anderson, 71-40; won at #22 Transylvania, 54-49
#24	45	Wesley	17-5	LOST at #14 St. Mary's (Md.), 63-74; def. Frostburg State, 69-49
#25	37	Brandeis	15-5	def. #30 Emory, 72-67; LOST to #1 Rochester, 59-66

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	24	Augustana	16-5	LOST to #12 Illinois Wesleyan, 65-71; def. Carthage, 83-74
T#27	22	Albertus Magnus	19-3	def. Emmanuel, 93-82; LOST at Suffolk, 91-92; won at Rivier, 73-55
T#27	22	MIT	16-4	def. Wheaton (Mass.), 70-57; def. Springfield, 68-59
#29	21	St. Norbert	15-4	def. Lawrence, 68-54; LOST at #15 UW-Whitewater, 38-63
#30	13	Emory	14-5	LOST at #25 Brandeis, 67-72; won at New York University, 74-69
#31	11	Stevens	17-3	def. Hartwick, 62-55; def. Utica, 85-77
T#32	9	Albright	18-3	won at T#45 Alvernia, 57-54; def. Lebanon Valley, 86-71
T#32	9	Ohio Wesleyan	16-4	def. Wittenberg, 63-51; def. Oberlin, 68-40
#34	7	UW-Stout	17-4	def. UW-Superior, 92-78; def. UW-Platteville, 53-50
#35	6	Carroll	14-5	LOST at Ripon, 62-65; def. Cornell, 67-57
T#36	5	DeSales	16-5	LOST at Delaware Valley, 71-74; LOST at Misericordia, 55-66
T#36	5	Randolph	17-4	won at Emory and Henry, 71-44; LOST to Eastern Mennonite, 75-76
T#38	4	Richard Stockton	16-5	LOST at New Jersey City, 50-60; won at Montclair State, 82-75
T#38	4	Mary Hardin-Baylor	18-3	won at Concordia (Texas), 94-81; won at Hardin-Simmons, 70-68
T#38	4	Adrian	15-6	LOST at Hope, 53-67; LOST at Trine, 46-64
T#41	2	Centre	15-4	LOST at Oglethorpe, 64-77; won at Berry, 71-60
T#41	2	Lycoming	14-7	won at Messiah, 67-66; LOST to Stevenson, 76-82
T#41	2	Cortland State	17-3	def. Brockport State, 85-75; won at Fredonia State, 65-52; won at Buffalo State, 88-72
T#41	2	Virginia Wesleyan	14-6	LOST to Randolph-Macon, 65-68; def. Emory and Henry, 86-63
T#45	1	Alvernia	16-4	LOST to T#32 Albright, 54-57; def. Elizabethtown, 78-57
T#45	1	SUNY-Old Westbury	19-3	def. Mount St. Vincent, 72-71; def. Mount St. Mary, 66-62; def. Yeshiva, 74-59
T#45	1	Lynchburg	16-5	LOST at #19 Hampden-Sydney, 70-81; LOST to Randolph-Macon, 77-91

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 04, 2013, 09:29:08 PM

This will be officially released on the site later, but:

1 St. Thomas (Minn.) (13)
2 WPI (8)
3 Whitworth (4)
4 Rochester (N.Y.)
5 Middlebury
6 Amherst
7 Williams
8 Catholic
9 Ill. Wesleyan
10 Ramapo
11 North Central (Ill.)
12 St. Mary's (Md.)
13 Calvin
14 Wooster
15 Wis.-Stevens Point
16 Wis.-Whitewater
17 Hampden-Sydney
18 Rhode Island Col.
19 Rose-Hulman
20 Washington (Mo.)
21 Chris. Newport
22 Wheaton (Ill.)
23 MIT
24 Cortland St.
25 Stevens

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 06, 2013, 01:11:24 PM

BTW, #3 Whitworth lost to Whitman in OT, 93-90.

chirp chirp chirp

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 07, 2013, 07:21:18 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Superseded -- complete report follows shortly after this ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 7express on February 10, 2013, 04:06:09 PM

2, 3 (twice), 4 in blowout fashion, 7 in blowout fashion at home, 8, 10, 13, 21(twice), 26, 27, 30, 32, 33 (twice), 35, 36 & 39 all go down this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 10, 2013, 08:03:48 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	608	St. Thomas	23-1	def. Bethel, 75-64; won at Gustavus Adolphus, 68-63; won at St. John's, 93-68
#2	585	WPI	22-1	def. Wheaton (Mass.), 86-59; LOST at Springfield, 60-66
#3	568	Whitworth	20-3	LOST at Whitman, 90-93; LOST to George Fox, 81-89
#4	521	Rochester	20-2	won at Chicago, 68-57; LOST at #20 Washington U., 53-72
#5	519	Middlebury	21-1	def. Lyndon State, 89-59; def. Trinity (Conn.), 66-59
#6	447	Amherst	21-2	won at #7 Williams, 65-48
#7	424	Williams	20-3	LOST to #6 Amherst, 48-65
#8	405	Catholic	20-3	won at Susquehanna, 74-53; LOST at Scranton, 74-82
#9	401	Illinois Wesleyan	20-3	def. North Park, 88-44; won at Carthage, 78-59
#10	400	Ramapo	20-3	LOST at Rutgers-Newark, 69-72
#11	399	North Central (Ill.)	20-3	won at Millikin, 59-58; won at #33 Augustana, 76-62
#12	368	St. Mary's (Md.)	21-2	def. Frostburg State, 73-53; won at Marymount, 74-64
#13	296	Calvin	20-3	won at Alma, 90-66; LOST at Hope, 70-73
#14	293	Wooster	20-3	def. T#27 Ohio Wesleyan, 74-67; def. Wittenberg, 75-71
#15	280	UW-Stevens Point	19-4	def. UW-Oshkosh, 62-52
#16	269	UW-Whitewater	19-4	def. UW-Platteville, 64-50; def. UW-Superior, 84-53
#17	256	Hampden-Sydney	21-2	won at Randolph-Macon, 66-47; def. Bridgewater (Va.), 95-49
#18	183	Rhode Island College	20-3	def. Mass-Dartmouth, 71-60; def. Southern Maine, 64-46
#19	147	Rose-Hulman	21-2	def. Franklin, 72-63; won at Defiance, 63-62
#20	144	Washington U.	18-4	def. Emory, 68-65; def. #4 Rochester, 72-53
#21	142	Christopher Newport	15-5	LOST to Virginia Wesleyan, 66-79; LOST at LaGrange, 68-73; ~~02/10 at Piedmont~~ cancelled
#22	69	Wheaton (Ill.)	18-5	def. #33 Augustana, 58-57; won at Millikin, 62-52
#23	56	MIT	17-4	won at Babson, 69-53
#24	52	Cortland State	19-3	def. Oneonta State, 84-56; def. Oswego State, 78-46
#25	45	Stevens	20-3	won at Baruch, 70-67; def. Elmira, 59-46; def. Ithaca, 87-65

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	40	Brandeis	16-6	won at Carnegie Mellon, 73-68; LOST at Case Western Reserve, 47-56
T#27	26	Transylvania	18-5	won at Mount St. Joseph, 65-39; won at Manchester, 91-47
T#27	26	Ohio Wesleyan	17-5	LOST at #14 Wooster, 67-74; def. Hiram, 63-61
#29	24	Wesley	19-5	def. Mary Washington, 67-52; won at York (Pa.), 69-61
T#30	23	Albertus Magnus	19-3	~~02/09 vs. St. Joseph's (Maine)~~ postponed
T#30	23	Albright	18-5	LOST at Hood, 60-70; LOST to Stevenson, 81-82
#32	22	UW-Stout	18-5	LOST at UW-La Crosse, 48-62; won at UW-Eau Claire, 70-54
#33	20	Augustana	16-7	LOST at #22 Wheaton (Ill.), 57-58; LOST to #11 North Central (Ill.), 62-76
#34	16	Mary Hardin-Baylor	20-3	def. Schreiner, 79-65; def. Texas Lutheran, 74-54
#35	9	St. Norbert	16-5	def. Carroll, 63-50; LOST at Grinnell, 99-104
T#36	5	Guilford	16-7	LOST at Randolph, 70-72; LOST to Virginia Wesleyan, 62-70
T#36	5	Franklin and Marshall	17-6	won at Gettysburg, 56-49; LOST at Swarthmore, 63-73
T#36	5	SUNY-Old Westbury	21-3	won at NYU-Poly, 93-81; def. SUNY-Maritime, 82-62
#39	4	Marietta	17-6	LOST to Capital, 67-70; def. Baldwin-Wallace, 72-70

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 12, 2013, 12:55:27 PM

I wonder if 29 points for the #25 team is a record low...no time to look now. Maybe I will have time later unless someone beats me to it (hopefully).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 12, 2013, 04:44:47 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 12, 2013, 12:55:27 PM
I wonder if 29 points for the #25 team is a record low...no time to look now. Maybe I will have time later unless someone beats me to it (hopefully).

I was wondering the same thing. One of our mathematicians needs to figure out what the minimum number of points a team can get and still be in the Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 12, 2013, 04:57:45 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 12, 2013, 04:44:47 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 12, 2013, 12:55:27 PM
I wonder if 29 points for the #25 team is a record low...no time to look now. Maybe I will have time later unless someone beats me to it (hopefully).

I was wondering the same thing. One of our mathematicians needs to figure out what the minimum number of points a team can get and still be in the Top 25.

While it would never happen, a team could be #25 with TWO points. 24 teams take every 1st thru 24th vote; one team get 2 #25 votes with the other #25 votes going one each to 23 different teams.

Don't hold your breath! 8-)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 12, 2013, 05:16:17 PM

Or a big tie for 25th with everyone at 1. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on February 13, 2013, 10:39:54 PM

I think we have a new top upset for the season. Previously (according to Massey) it was Manchester winning @ Transy in HCAC action. Tonight in HCAC play Rose-Hulman picked up their 3rd loss of the year falling to Earlham who gets their 3rd win of the year

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 13, 2013, 10:45:27 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 12, 2013, 05:16:17 PM
Or a big tie for 25th with everyone at 1. :)

You got me - I was thinking solo #25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 14, 2013, 03:01:47 AM

Lots of carnage in the Top 25 on Wednesday night as #5 WPI, #7 St. Mary's, #11 Hampden-Sydney, #16 Ramapo, #18 Rose-Hulman and #27 Translyvania all lost.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 14, 2013, 03:21:06 AM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on February 13, 2013, 10:39:54 PM
I think we have a new top upset for the season. Previously (according to Massey) it was Manchester winning @ Transy in HCAC action. Tonight in HCAC play Rose-Hulman picked up their 3rd loss of the year falling to Earlham who gets their 3rd win of the year

Earlham, 10 Freshmen, 3 kids from Detroit PSL, one from Inkster a Detroit suberb. There are just not many Quakers in the Detroit area. HC Marcus Gill is an Albion grad, I believe he's originally from Detroit.

Apparently this is some kind of rivalry game (I'm serious)
http://www.goearlham.com/news/2013/2/13/MBB_0213131831.aspx

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 14, 2013, 07:40:42 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

(removed -- superseded by the next post)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 17, 2013, 07:58:10 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

~~The MIT/Wheelock game is still early in the second half, but with MIT leading by 31, I am giving them the win. (The score posted is with just over 13 minutes to go.)~~ <fixed>

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	St. Thomas	24-1	def. St. Olaf, 62-57
#2	574	Amherst	23-2	won at #3 Middlebury, 104-101; def. Colby, 83-52
#3	568	Middlebury	22-2	LOST to #2 Amherst, 101-104; def. Wesleyan, 61-49
#4	515	Illinois Wesleyan	21-3	def. Millikin, 68-54
#5	499	WPI	23-2	LOST at #22 MIT, 60-69; won at Clark, 66-51
#6	466	Rochester	21-3	def. Carnegie Mellon, 81-77; LOST to Case Western Reserve, 51-57
#7	450	St. Mary's (Md.)	22-3	LOST at Salisbury, 71-72; def. Mary Washington, 89-80
#8	446	North Central (Ill.)	21-3	def. North Park, 88-61
#9	355	Wooster	21-4	won at Allegheny, 86-64; LOST at DePauw, 52-68
#10	347	Williams	22-3	def. Trinity (Conn.), 68-47; def. Bates, 88-79
#11	343	Hampden-Sydney	22-3	LOST to #36 Virginia Wesleyan, 77-78; won at Emory and Henry, 82-61
#12	326	Whitworth	22-3	won at Linfield, 86-53; won at Willamette, 86-67
#13	323	Catholic	22-3	won at Goucher, 71-43; def. Moravian, 86-70
#14	318	UW-Whitewater	21-4	won at UW-Oshkosh, 75-58; def. UW-River Falls, 72-69
#15	290	UW-Stevens Point	21-4	won at #32 UW-Stout, 76-74; def. UW-Eau Claire, 68-34
#16	288	Ramapo	21-4	def. Richard Stockton, 74-64; LOST at William Paterson, 60-61
#17	249	Washington U.	19-5	LOST at New York University, 82-86; won at Brandeis, 76-60
#18	237	Rose-Hulman	22-3	LOST at Earlham, 66-68; won at Hanover, 59-57
#19	215	Calvin	22-3	def. Trine, 61-59; def. Olivet, 86-60
#20	195	Rhode Island College	22-3	won at Western Connecticut, 69-60; won at Keene State, 86-64
#21	125	Wheaton (Ill.)	19-5	def. Carthage, 64-58
#22	93	MIT	20-4	def. Clark, 69-44; def. #5 WPI, 69-60; def. Wheelock, 76-34
#23	82	Cortland State	21-4	def. New Paltz State, 87-47; LOST at Plattsburgh State, 77-80; won at Potsdam State, 69-56
#24	68	Stevens	21-4	won at Alfred, 67-55; LOST at St. John Fisher, 73-82
#25	29	Wesley	19-6	LOST to Salisbury, 78-83

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
T#26	19	Albertus Magnus	21-4	won at Coast Guard, 87-82; def. St. Joseph's (Maine), 76-66; LOST at Johnson and Wales, 72-74
T#26	19	Transylvania	19-6	LOST to Hanover, 70-73; def. Bluffton, 81-74
T#28	18	Mary Hardin-Baylor	21-4	LOST to Howard Payne, 73-75; def. Sul Ross State, 87-61
T#28	18	Ohio Wesleyan	19-5	def. Wabash, 79-64; won at Denison, 67-64
#30	10	Christopher Newport	18-5	def. North Carolina Wesleyan, 93-67; won at Averett, 77-56; won at Ferrum, 76-52
#31	5	SUNY-Old Westbury	22-3	def. St. Joseph's (L.I.), 119-80; LOST at Sage, 96-98
#32	3	UW-Stout	19-6	LOST to #15 UW-Stevens Point, 74-76; def. UW-Oshkosh, 49-47
T#33	2	St. Norbert	18-5	def. Ripon, 57-52; won at Illinois College, 70-68
T#33	2	Randolph	20-5	won at Lynchburg, 58-49; LOST at Randolph-Macon, 52-70
T#33	2	Alvernia	21-4	def. Hood, 70-59; won at Messiah, 73-67
#36	1	Virginia Wesleyan	19-6	won at #11 Hampden-Sydney, 78-77; def. Lynchburg, 71-54

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 17, 2013, 08:24:11 PM

MIT-Wheelock now a final, MIT wins 76-34. Tashman finished with 28 points and 19 boards. Congrats to him, as he becomes the first player in MIT history to go for 1000 points and 1000 boards for his career.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 02 Warhawk on February 19, 2013, 07:32:37 PM

I'm relatively new to D3 hoops. I've always follwed UWW sports, but never d3 basketball on a national level. I was curious, of the top 25 teams, is there only a small group of schools that are serious national title contenders? Like in D3 football, there's always teams with impressive records, but never can win a tourny game because they play in a weak conference. I guess the same thing can be said about the 16th ranked teams in the NCAA D1 tournament.

I was wondering if the same applied to D3 basketball? If so, which schools are considered serious contenders? Also which schools may not be as strong, because they compiled a good record in a weak conference?

I understand if you don't to insult some programs on this thread, so feel free to send me an private message.

Thanks in advance. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 19, 2013, 07:41:30 PM

Warhawk - basketball is completely different than football has been. There are never teams we look at year in and year out as the favorite to win a national title like Mount Union and UW-Whitewater have been the last eight-plus years.

The fact teams play about 25 games a season, have to go through their conference usually twice (unless you are the NESCAC or you have an overloaded conference like the ODAC), and the bracket is more challenging with one more round thanks to 62 teams... you can never be sure who will win a national title.

Certainly there are always favorites from conferences like the WIAC, CCIW, NESCAC, UAA and ODAC, but teams have won national titles without coming from power conferences.

Basketball is a completely different beast.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 02 Warhawk on February 19, 2013, 07:54:24 PM

Thanks d-mac, that helps me understand.

So, outside the WIAC, CCIW, NESCAC, UAA and ODAC, are the teams with good records in other conferences really that good? Or are they just a product of playing in a weak conference? I should I be taking every team in the top 25 as serious contenders?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on February 19, 2013, 08:01:01 PM

02 Warhawk:

Those are the five "power conferences," to borrow the Division I terminology, but it is more possible for great teams in smaller conferences to make deep tournament runs in basketball than in football. Last year the Warhawks defeated Cabrini in the men's basketball final. Cabrini is from a conference that's comparable to the Northern Athletics Conference. Can you imagine the NAC football champion reaching the Stagg Bowl? That'll give you a sense for the greater parity in hoops.

Here's a comparison of how the Division III conferences stack up (http://www.d3hoops.com/guidebook/2012-13/2012-Conference-Guidebook-Conference-Comparison.pdf), including their NCAA tournament performance for the last 10 years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 19, 2013, 08:18:00 PM

Quote from: 02 Warhawk on February 19, 2013, 07:54:24 PM
Thanks d-mac, that helps me understand.

So, outside the WIAC, CCIW, NESCAC, UAA and ODAC, are the teams with good records in other conferences really that good? Or are they just a product of playing in a weak conference? I should I be taking every team in the top 25 as serious contenders?

Probably not every team in the top 25 (most champs have been in the top 5, or at least top 10, going in), but champs can come from just about any conference. While not common, a great team from a weak conference can still be a great team.

Football requires such numbers of contributors that great programs can dominate for a long time. In basketball, one great player can't carry you all the way, but even just two great players (with an adequate supporting cast) can get it done. So the turnover of teams is likely to be much greater.

Alternatively, a great program may not need stars. IWU has shot up the poll despite the fact that the guy I thought we needed to be an AA to succeed has been a relative dud (Victor Davis), the guy who led the team in scoring (despite being the sixth man) is out for the season (the younger brother of our graduated AA from a FF team - Jordan, then Brady, Zimmer); they succeed because we have ten guys that you barely notice the difference when some are on the bench - like in Lake Wobegon, they are all (well) 'above average'! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 19, 2013, 08:27:30 PM

In hoops as well, a decent conference can be hidden by a 'meat grinder' and by the double round robin (or close to it in some leagues) where familiarity breeds contempt.

Take this year's NCAC for example - they had a good to great non-conference record and pretty much dominated the OAC in inter-league play. But in the league they beat up each other, so much so that the three teams with the worst non-conference records (Denison, Wabash, Oberlin) made the tourney, two pretty good teams in DePauw and Wittenberg finished 9-7 in the league, and two teams that were 6-3 in the non-conference finished 9th and 10th. But they're not ELITE (only Wooster is really elite and OWU is in the pretty darn good category), just a lot of good teams this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on February 20, 2013, 08:24:48 AM

Quote from: gordonmann on February 19, 2013, 08:01:01 PM
Here's a comparison of how the Division III conferences stack up (http://www.d3hoops.com/guidebook/2012-13/2012-Conference-Guidebook-Conference-Comparison.pdf), including their NCAA tournament performance for the last 10 years.

It just struck me that, for all the quality teams the CCIW has turned out, they really haven't done that well in March. I mean, they've been really good of course, but not as good as the NCAC and only marginally better than the MIAA -- two leagues that are generally considered to be a tier below.

Perhaps it has to do with the teams making the tournament. The CCIW has a solid top and good depth, but the top teams are not necessarily better than Wooster, Wittenberg, Calvin, and Hope.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AO on February 20, 2013, 09:35:44 AM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 20, 2013, 08:24:48 AM
Quote from: gordonmann on February 19, 2013, 08:01:01 PM
Here's a comparison of how the Division III conferences stack up (http://www.d3hoops.com/guidebook/2012-13/2012-Conference-Guidebook-Conference-Comparison.pdf), including their NCAA tournament performance for the last 10 years.

It just struck me that, for all the quality teams the CCIW has turned out, they really haven't done that well in March. I mean, they've been really good of course, but not as good as the NCAC and only marginally better than the MIAA -- two leagues that are generally considered to be a tier below.

Perhaps it has to do with the teams making the tournament. The CCIW has a solid top and good depth, but the top teams are not necessarily better than Wooster, Wittenberg, Calvin, and Hope.

I'd say the CCIW should be ranked higher than the NCAC and MIAA due to depth from 3-7, but I'd put them all on the same tier. The next tier of conference should be a heavy favorite at every position in the conference, and I don't really see any single elite conference that fits that bill.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 02 Warhawk on February 20, 2013, 10:01:36 AM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 20, 2013, 08:24:48 AM
Quote from: gordonmann on February 19, 2013, 08:01:01 PM
Here's a comparison of how the Division III conferences stack up (http://www.d3hoops.com/guidebook/2012-13/2012-Conference-Guidebook-Conference-Comparison.pdf), including their NCAA tournament performance for the last 10 years.

It just struck me that, for all the quality teams the CCIW has turned out, they really haven't done that well in March. I mean, they've been really good of course, but not as good as the NCAC and only marginally better than the MIAA -- two leagues that are generally considered to be a tier below.

Perhaps it has to do with the teams making the tournament. The CCIW has a solid top and good depth, but the top teams are not necessarily better than Wooster, Wittenberg, Calvin, and Hope.

So the NCAC and the MIAA isn't a very strong conference in basketball (compared to the top tier conferences at least)?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on February 20, 2013, 10:23:57 AM

Quote from: 02 Warhawk on February 20, 2013, 10:01:36 AM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 20, 2013, 08:24:48 AM
Quote from: gordonmann on February 19, 2013, 08:01:01 PM
Here's a comparison of how the Division III conferences stack up (http://www.d3hoops.com/guidebook/2012-13/2012-Conference-Guidebook-Conference-Comparison.pdf), including their NCAA tournament performance for the last 10 years.

It just struck me that, for all the quality teams the CCIW has turned out, they really haven't done that well in March. I mean, they've been really good of course, but not as good as the NCAC and only marginally better than the MIAA -- two leagues that are generally considered to be a tier below.

Perhaps it has to do with the teams making the tournament. The CCIW has a solid top and good depth, but the top teams are not necessarily better than Wooster, Wittenberg, Calvin, and Hope.

So the NCAC and the MIAA isn't a very strong conference in basketball (compared to the top tier conferences at least)?

I'd say, generally speaking, the NCAC and MIAA are in the 6-15 range when it comes to conferenece rankings. In there with the MIAC, MACC, NWC, IIAC, ASW, OAC, and more recently the HCAC (among others). Decidedly above average, but not in the elite group.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 7express on February 20, 2013, 11:18:31 AM

I agree, the LEC isn't a strong/powerful as the WIAC, NESCAC, UAA is, especially this year, but the numbers Pat just posted should make them one of the powers in basketball. Last year 6th best record against non conference opponents, 5th best record against division 3 non conference opponents, 11th out of 43 conferences in winning percentage since 2003, and tied for 6th for the most bids since 2003.
Those numbers will take a dip for this season based on the talent that was lost, but the tournament numbers the last 10 years show the LEC isn't a slouch either.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2013, 11:29:08 AM

Quote from: 7express on February 20, 2013, 11:18:31 AM
I agree, the LEC isn't a strong/powerful as the WIAC, NESCAC, UAA is, especially this year, but the numbers Pat just posted should make them one of the powers in basketball. Last year 6th best record against non conference opponents, 5th best record against division 3 non conference opponents, 11th out of 43 conferences in winning percentage since 2003, and tied for 6th for the most bids since 2003.
Those numbers will take a dip for this season based on the talent that was lost, but the tournament numbers the last 10 years show the LEC isn't a slouch either.

Gotta give Gordon Mann credit where credit is due -- that's his post, and the Guidebook is his research and compilation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 20, 2013, 11:40:23 AM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 20, 2013, 08:24:48 AM
Quote from: gordonmann on February 19, 2013, 08:01:01 PM
Here's a comparison of how the Division III conferences stack up (http://www.d3hoops.com/guidebook/2012-13/2012-Conference-Guidebook-Conference-Comparison.pdf), including their NCAA tournament performance for the last 10 years.

It just struck me that, for all the quality teams the CCIW has turned out, they really haven't done that well in March. I mean, they've been really good of course, but not as good as the NCAC and only marginally better than the MIAA -- two leagues that are generally considered to be a tier below.

Perhaps it has to do with the teams making the tournament. The CCIW has a solid top and good depth, but the top teams are not necessarily better than Wooster, Wittenberg, Calvin, and Hope.

I think for the CCIW its who they're paired with in the tournament. To get to Salem a CCIW program has a strong possibility of having to go through a WIAC.

Another reason is the time frame of that awesome thing Gordan posted, if you go back just 2 more years and include 2001 and 2002, You get two more CCIW teams into the Final Four, a 13-4 record and two 3rd place finishes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on February 20, 2013, 11:58:16 AM

QuoteTo get to Salem a CCIW program has a strong possibility of having to go through a WIAC.

Right, along with other elite programs like St. Thomas, Wooster and Washington U.. Take a look at the Midwest Regional Section (http://static.psbin.com/u/t/i724kckysdkx7o/2012-Conference-Guidebook-Midwest.pdf) of the Conference Guidebook. Scroll down to MW-5 and it lists who the CCIW teams have played in the last 10 NCAA tournaments.

You can find similar summaries for every other conference grouped by region here.

http://www.d3hoops.com/guidebook/2012-13/index

Another more subjective way to measure conference strength is the number of All-American selections, which the Guidebook lists by region. Look at the number of selections and the diversity of teams for each conference. The CCIW, NESCAC, UAA and WIAC have a lot of selections and most members represented at some point. By contrast, the MIAA has a lot of selections from Hope and Calvin.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 02 Warhawk on February 20, 2013, 12:41:26 PM

So a team like WPI from the NEWMAC (which is a conference that hasn't been discussed as a "top tier") might struggle a bit in the tourny, having not faced tough competition yet?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2013, 12:44:15 PM

Last year MIT lost in the semis after UW-Whitewater had to make a comeback to win it... they are from the NEWMAC and had to go through some tough teams to get there... so you can't read into that at all.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 02 Warhawk on February 20, 2013, 12:46:49 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2013, 12:44:15 PM
Last year MIT lost in the semis after UW-Whitewater had to make a comeback to win it... they are from the NEWMAC and had to go through some tough teams to get there... so you can't read into that at all.

What do you mean? Tournament games aren't won on statistics and paper alone?

;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2013, 12:58:17 PM

LOL yep :). And if they were won on paper - MIT would be an easy favorite every year because of their book smarts! :)

Basically, there are power conferences to be sure, but as Gordon and others have noted, teams have come out of a lot of different conferences to play for a title or win one. In the 12 years I have been to the Final Four... I have seen title games featuring the following conferences: UAA, NESCAC, WIAC, CAC, Centennial, NJAC, CSAC, ODAC, MIAC, OAC, NCAC and MAC. Others at the Final Four included NEWMAC, CCIW and MIAA. That is 15 conferences out of 40+.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on February 20, 2013, 01:03:21 PM

Quote from: 02 Warhawk on February 20, 2013, 12:41:26 PM
So a team like WPI from the NEWMAC (which is a conference that hasn't been discussed as a "top tier") might struggle a bit in the tourny, having not faced tough competition yet?

If you look at the compiled data, the NEWMAC has done very well out of conference, with a top 5 or so out of conference record among all conferences in the last 10 years. As Dave stated, MIT made the national semifinals last year and has been in the tourney 4 straight years (if they make it this year, it will be 5). In the past 5-10 years, Clark, Coast Guard, MIT, and WPI have all made some time of run in the tourney.

Amherst only has two losses this year, both to NEWMAC schools, and neither of them were to the top 2 teams in the conference (#3 and #5 NEWMAC teams).

They may not be a Top 5 power, but they are in that above average group Knightslappy mentioned, and the top 5 teams in the conference (there are only 7 mens teams in the NEWMAC) could give a top team in the country a battle on any given night (for example, when Babson won at Amherst earlier this year).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 7express on February 20, 2013, 01:23:21 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2013, 11:29:08 AM
Quote from: 7express on February 20, 2013, 11:18:31 AM
I agree, the LEC isn't a strong/powerful as the WIAC, NESCAC, UAA is, especially this year, but the numbers Pat just posted should make them one of the powers in basketball. Last year 6th best record against non conference opponents, 5th best record against division 3 non conference opponents, 11th out of 43 conferences in winning percentage since 2003, and tied for 6th for the most bids since 2003.
Those numbers will take a dip for this season based on the talent that was lost, but the tournament numbers the last 10 years show the LEC isn't a slouch either.

Gotta give Gordon Mann credit where credit is due -- that's his post, and the Guidebook is his research and compilation.

My apologies Gordon Mann, I saw the D3sports logo on the post and figured it was Pat, my mistake.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on February 20, 2013, 03:26:08 PM

No problem.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 20, 2013, 09:51:14 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 20, 2013, 10:23:57 AM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on February 20, 2013, 10:01:36 AM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 20, 2013, 08:24:48 AM
Quote from: gordonmann on February 19, 2013, 08:01:01 PM
Here's a comparison of how the Division III conferences stack up (http://www.d3hoops.com/guidebook/2012-13/2012-Conference-Guidebook-Conference-Comparison.pdf), including their NCAA tournament performance for the last 10 years.

It just struck me that, for all the quality teams the CCIW has turned out, they really haven't done that well in March. I mean, they've been really good of course, but not as good as the NCAC and only marginally better than the MIAA -- two leagues that are generally considered to be a tier below.

Perhaps it has to do with the teams making the tournament. The CCIW has a solid top and good depth, but the top teams are not necessarily better than Wooster, Wittenberg, Calvin, and Hope.

So the NCAC and the MIAA isn't a very strong conference in basketball (compared to the top tier conferences at least)?

I'd say, generally speaking, the NCAC and MIAA are in the 6-15 range when it comes to conferenece rankings. In there with the MIAC, MACC, NWC, IIAC, ASW, OAC, and more recently the HCAC (among others). Decidedly above average, but not in the elite group.

The NCAC recently added DePauw and removed Earlham (to the HCAC - their problem now) so the NCAC is edging up in depth.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 21, 2013, 07:47:45 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	624	St. Thomas	24-1	02/22 vs. Carleton
#2	596	Amherst	23-2	02/23 vs. Tufts
#3	560	Illinois Wesleyan	21-4	LOST at #5 North Central (Ill.), 83-87
#4	540	Middlebury	22-2	02/23 at #7 Williams
#5	510	North Central (Ill.)	22-3	def. #3 Illinois Wesleyan, 87-83
#6	430	WPI	23-2	02/23 vs. Babson; 02/24 vs. TBA
#7	428	Williams	22-3	02/23 vs. #4 Middlebury
#8	408	Whitworth	22-3	02/21 vs. Lewis and Clark
#9	398	UW-Whitewater	21-4	02/21 vs. T#32 UW-Stout
#10	388	UW-Stevens Point	21-4	02/21 vs. UW-Platteville
#11	385	Catholic	23-3	def. Merchant Marine, 65-57; 02/23 vs. Juniata
#12	360	Hampden-Sydney	22-3	02/22 vs. Roanoke; 02/23 vs. ODAC Tournament Semifinals; 02/24 vs. ODAC Tournament Championship
#13	339	Rochester	21-3	02/23 at T#36 Emory
#14	296	St. Mary's (Md.)	22-3	02/21 vs. Mary Washington; 02/23 at CAC Championship
#15	269	Calvin	22-3	02/21 vs. Adrian
#16	265	Rhode Island College	23-3	def. Mass-Dartmouth, 62-58; 02/22 vs. Southern Maine
#17	261	Wooster	22-4	def. Oberlin, 74-47; 02/22 vs. Wittenberg
#18	199	Ramapo	22-4	def. William Paterson, 83-58; 02/22 vs. Rutgers-Newark
#19	172	MIT	20-4	02/23 vs. T#42 Springfield
#20	171	Wheaton (Ill.)	20-5	won at Elmhurst, 70-55
#21	145	Virginia Wesleyan	19-6	02/22 vs. Eastern Mennonite
#22	84	Washington U.	19-5	02/23 vs. Chicago
#23	79	Rose-Hulman	22-3	02/22 vs. Defiance
#24	44	Ohio Wesleyan	20-5	def. Denison, 77-56; 02/22 vs. Kenyon
#25	31	Cortland State	21-4	02/22 vs. Oswego State

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	26	Alvernia	22-4	def. Arcadia, 69-66; 02/23 vs. Lycoming
#27	21	Stevens	21-4	02/22 vs. Utica
#28	16	Christopher Newport	18-5	02/21 vs. Averett
#29	13	Cabrini	21-5	def. Neumann, 90-77; 02/22 vs. Keystone
#30	9	Mary Hardin-Baylor	21-4	02/22 vs. LeTourneau
#31	8	Transylvania	20-6	def. Mount St. Joseph, 75-57; 02/22 at Hanover
T#32	6	St. Norbert	18-5	02/22 vs. Ripon
T#32	6	UW-Stout	20-6	def. UW-Superior, 78-64; 02/21 at #9 UW-Whitewater
T#34	5	Albertus Magnus	22-4	def. Rivier, 84-65; 02/21 vs. Johnson and Wales
T#34	5	Capital	19-6	02/21 vs. Mount Union
T#36	4	Emory	18-6	def. Covenant, 75-50; 02/23 vs. #13 Rochester
T#36	4	Carroll	17-6	02/22 at Grinnell
T#38	3	Augsburg	20-6	def. St. John's, 74-67; 02/22 at Concordia-Moorhead
T#38	3	Thomas More	22-4	def. Geneva, 82-60; 02/21 vs. Thiel
T#38	3	DeSales	21-5	def. FDU-Florham, 59-57; 02/23 vs. Delaware Valley
T#38	3	Baldwin Wallace	19-6	IDLE
T#42	2	Springfield	18-7	02/23 at #19 MIT
T#42	2	Wesley	19-6	02/21 vs. Salisbury; 02/23 vs. TBD
T#42	2	Westfield State	21-4	02/21 vs. Fitchburg State
T#45	1	Hobart	20-6	def. Skidmore, 77-72; 02/23 vs. RPI
T#45	1	Franklin and Marshall	19-6	02/22 vs. Muhlenberg; 02/23 vs. TBD

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 21, 2013, 09:05:30 AM

I think I've come to the conclusion that the top teams from so-called weaker conferences are just as good as those top teams from power conferences. The difference between conferences is the depth. Back when I was un-informed and arrogant (and ignorant), I basically assumed that the WIAC's top dogs would beat any lower-tiered opponent, even if it was their best team. Throughout the many years, I have tried to focus more on the National stage rather than just the WIAC and nearby conferences and have come to appreciate the talent level of other teams in other conferences. Its nice to expand your horizons!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 21, 2013, 02:28:58 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 21, 2013, 09:05:30 AM
I think I've come to the conclusion that the top teams from so-called weaker conferences are just as good as those top teams from power conferences. The difference between conferences is the depth. Back when I was un-informed and arrogant (and ignorant), I basically assumed that the WIAC's top dogs would beat any lower-tiered opponent, even if it was their best team. Throughout the many years, I have tried to focus more on the National stage rather than just the WIAC and nearby conferences and have come to appreciate the talent level of other teams in other conferences. Its nice to expand your horizons!

I agree, especially if there is major travel involved. D-III has so few occasions when a team flies out of area prior to the tournament, that Home Court Advantage, HCA, is usually a major factor, IMHO.

Also, the HCA in the post-season really plays a big factor.

Going to radically neutral sights for the playoffs, like D-1, would expose this parity more readily.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on February 22, 2013, 11:21:33 AM

There is one more top 25 poll coming out, correct? Unlike the regional rankings. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 22, 2013, 11:48:48 AM

Theres another regional ranking, its just staying in the closet. Apparently it doesnt feel comfortable enough to come out yet. :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 22, 2013, 12:18:20 PM

Yes... one more Top 25 this Monday before the tournaments... and then one after.

And actually there is one more regional ranking done on Sunday... we just don't get to see it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on February 22, 2013, 04:58:04 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 22, 2013, 12:18:20 PM
Yes... one more Top 25 this Monday before the tournaments... and then one after.

And actually there is one more regional ranking done on Sunday... we just don't get to see it.

I still believe they should post that last regional ranking, even if it is at the end of the season!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 22, 2013, 05:53:43 PM

Quote from: mailsy on February 22, 2013, 04:58:04 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 22, 2013, 12:18:20 PM
Yes... one more Top 25 this Monday before the tournaments... and then one after.

And actually there is one more regional ranking done on Sunday... we just don't get to see it.

I still believe they should post that last regional ranking, even if it is at the end of the season!

Everybody wishes they would. But they won't. They've been pressed on it, many times, by Pat and Dave, and they won't budge because other sports don't want to have to release their info (Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that's what the answer has been, right Dave?)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 22, 2013, 06:59:01 PM

Tell them to suck it up! What do they have to hide?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 22, 2013, 11:01:49 PM

Yes, this is a decision forced on the sport's championship committee.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 22, 2013, 11:29:27 PM

Yes... to expand on it... the men's committee has stated a number of times to us in conversations and in interviews that they have been wanting to release the final rankings. They even stated that to the Championships Committee in an effort to get them approved... to no avail. Other sports don't want the final regional rankings released for apparently the reason they don't want their decisions second guessed. I would argue - and have argued - that not releasing the final regional rankings actually sets up more second guessing than by releasing them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 24, 2013, 05:23:38 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

The final report ....

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	624	St. Thomas	26-1	def. Carleton, 70-57; def. T#38 Augsburg, 92-65
#2	596	Amherst	25-2	def. Tufts, 80-64; def. #7 Williams, 74-73
#3	560	Illinois Wesleyan	21-5	LOST at #5 North Central (Ill.), 83-87; LOST to Augustana, 47-53
#4	540	Middlebury	22-3	LOST at #7 Williams, 80-87
#5	510	North Central (Ill.)	24-3	def. #3 Illinois Wesleyan, 87-83; def. #20 Wheaton (Ill.), 59-50; def. Augustana, 70-63
#6	430	WPI	25-2	def. Babson, 66-64; def. T#42 Springfield, 79-72
#7	428	Williams	23-4	def. #4 Middlebury, 87-80; LOST at #2 Amherst, 73-74
#8	408	Whitworth	24-3	def. Lewis and Clark, 74-69; def. Whitman, 93-72
#9	398	UW-Whitewater	23-4	def. T#32 UW-Stout, 64-59; def. UW-Platteville, 66-55
#10	388	UW-Stevens Point	21-5	LOST to UW-Platteville, 56-60
#11	385	Catholic	24-3	def. Merchant Marine, 65-57; def. Juniata, 63-62
#12	360	Hampden-Sydney	23-4	def. Roanoke, 72-49; LOST to Randolph-Macon, 59-64
#13	339	Rochester	21-4	LOST at T#36 Emory, 54-72
#14	296	St. Mary's (Md.)	24-3	def. Mary Washington, 89-81; def. T#42 Wesley, 79-78
#15	269	Calvin	24-3	def. Adrian, 71-44; def. Hope, 77-57
#16	265	Rhode Island College	25-3	def. Mass-Dartmouth, 62-58; def. Southern Maine, 61-47; def. Keene State, 60-53
#17	261	Wooster	23-5	def. Oberlin, 74-47; def. Wittenberg, 78-66; LOST to #24 Ohio Wesleyan, 66-76
#18	199	Ramapo	23-4	def. William Paterson, 83-58; def. Rutgers-Newark, 67-65
#19	172	MIT	20-5	LOST to T#42 Springfield, 60-68
#20	171	Wheaton (Ill.)	20-6	won at Elmhurst, 70-55; LOST at #5 North Central (Ill.), 50-59
#21	145	Virginia Wesleyan	21-7	def. Eastern Mennonite, 83-65; def. Randolph, 78-68; LOST to Randolph-Macon, 64-75
#22	84	Washington U.	20-5	def. Chicago, 72-54
#23	79	Rose-Hulman	24-3	def. Defiance, 81-59; def. Hanover, 64-59
#24	44	Ohio Wesleyan	22-5	def. Denison, 77-56; def. Kenyon, 77-64; won at #17 Wooster, 76-66
#25	31	Cortland State	23-4	def. Oswego State, 65-54; def. Plattsburgh State, 75-61

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	26	Alvernia	23-4	def. Arcadia, 69-66; def. Lycoming, 78-68
#27	21	Stevens	22-5	def. Utica, 102-66; LOST to Ithaca, 55-70
#28	16	Christopher Newport	21-5	def. Averett, 74-58; def. North Carolina Wesleyan, 72-59; def. Greensboro, 81-74
#29	13	Cabrini	22-5	def. Neumann, 90-77; def. Keystone, 90-74
#30	9	Mary Hardin-Baylor	23-5	def. LeTourneau, 61-54; def. Hardin-Simmons, 76-67; LOST to Concordia (Texas), 76-80
#31	8	Transylvania	20-7	def. Mount St. Joseph, 75-57; LOST at Hanover, 82-87
T#32	6	St. Norbert	20-5	def. Ripon, 75-65; def. T#36 Carroll, 92-68
T#32	6	UW-Stout	20-7	def. UW-Superior, 78-64; LOST at #9 UW-Whitewater, 59-64
T#34	5	Albertus Magnus	24-4	def. Rivier, 84-65; def. Johnson and Wales, 104-77; won at Anna Maria, 87-80
T#34	5	Capital	19-7	LOST to Mount Union, 59-63
T#36	4	Emory	19-6	def. Covenant, 75-50; def. #13 Rochester, 72-54
T#36	4	Carroll	18-7	won at Grinnell, 92-89; LOST at T#32 St. Norbert, 68-92
T#38	3	Augsburg	21-7	def. St. John's, 74-67; won at Concordia-Moorhead, 74-67; LOST at #1 St. Thomas, 65-92
T#38	3	Thomas More	23-5	def. Geneva, 82-60; def. Thiel, 86-80; LOST at St. Vincent, 67-81
T#38	3	DeSales	21-6	def. FDU-Florham, 59-57; LOST to Delaware Valley, 72-77
T#38	3	Baldwin Wallace	19-6	IDLE
T#42	2	Springfield	19-8	won at #19 MIT, 68-60; LOST at #6 WPI, 72-79
T#42	2	Wesley	20-7	def. Salisbury, 73-66; LOST at #14 St. Mary's (Md.), 78-79
T#42	2	Westfield State	21-5	LOST to Fitchburg State, 61-68
T#45	1	Hobart	21-6	def. Skidmore, 77-72; def. RPI, 72-63
T#45	1	Franklin and Marshall	20-7	def. Muhlenberg, 48-46; LOST to Dickinson, 40-64

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on February 25, 2013, 08:40:20 PM

New men's top 25 out. A lot of movement. But nobody dropped out. :)

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2012-13/week13

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 25, 2013, 08:49:58 PM

Well knock me over with a feather - my PP ballot (made out yesterday early evening) matches the official poll exactly thru the top 6, and, while rarely if ever an exact match after that, has the same 25 teams.

Congratulations official voters - you're getting closer and closer to The Truth^TM! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 25, 2013, 09:07:11 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 25, 2013, 08:49:58 PM
Well knock me over with a feather - my PP ballot (made out yesterday early evening) matches the official poll exactly thru the top 6, and, while rarely if ever an exact match after that, has the same 25 teams.

Congratulations official voters - you're getting closer and closer to The Truth^TM! ;D

There were only 51 points voted on the Receiving Votes #28 onward.

That is an incredible degree of consensus.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: northb on February 25, 2013, 09:08:30 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 25, 2013, 08:49:58 PM
Well knock me over with a feather - my PP ballot (made out yesterday early evening) matches the official poll exactly thru the top 6, and, while rarely if ever an exact match after that, has the same 25 teams.

Congratulations official voters - you're getting closer and closer to The Truth^TM! ;D

Oh, not This^TM again!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 25, 2013, 09:25:09 PM

Quote from: northb on February 25, 2013, 09:08:30 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 25, 2013, 08:49:58 PM
Well knock me over with a feather - my PP ballot (made out yesterday early evening) matches the official poll exactly thru the top 6, and, while rarely if ever an exact match after that, has the same 25 teams.

Congratulations official voters - you're getting closer and closer to The Truth^TM! ;D

Oh, not This^TM again!

You got something against ^TM?! What are you, a Chinese industrialist?! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: northb on February 26, 2013, 07:22:33 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 25, 2013, 09:25:09 PM
Quote from: northb on February 25, 2013, 09:08:30 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 25, 2013, 08:49:58 PM
Well knock me over with a feather - my PP ballot (made out yesterday early evening) matches the official poll exactly thru the top 6, and, while rarely if ever an exact match after that, has the same 25 teams.

Congratulations official voters - you're getting closer and closer to The Truth^TM! ;D

Oh, not This^TM again!
You got something against ^TM?! What are you, a Chinese industrialist?! ;D

I heard somewhere the The Belt^TM has a TM^TM. Do you want to incur the wrath of The Belt^{TM^TM}?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 27, 2013, 10:53:21 PM

Hey, when was the last time all of the d3hoops Top 25 made the tournament? I looked at the final poll, only three teams (Baldwin Wallace, Stout, and Plateville) got votes and missed out on the dance.

Not too shabby.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on October 28, 2013, 01:59:56 PM

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2013-14/preseason

Time to bring this thread out of hibernation.

Five teams received #1 votes:
Amherst (13)
Illinois Wesleyan (9)
Williams (1)
UW-Stevens Point (1)
Wheaton (1)

A little bit surprised to see someone throw a #1 to Wheaton after finishing 24th in the Final Poll of last year. I realize they are bringing all their top folks back, but they still lack in size overall. Seems a bit of a reach to jump over 23 other teams for a #1 spot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 29, 2013, 11:40:57 AM

Quote from: madzillagd on October 28, 2013, 01:59:56 PM
A little bit surprised to see someone throw a #1 to Wheaton after finishing 24th in the Final Poll of last year. I realize they are bringing all their top folks back, but they still lack in size overall. Seems a bit of a reach to jump over 23 other teams for a #1 spot.

Just because they were 24th overall doesn't mean that voter didn't have them ranked higher.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on October 29, 2013, 01:07:17 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on October 29, 2013, 11:40:57 AM
Just because they were 24th overall doesn't mean that voter didn't have them ranked higher.

I get that, just interesting to me that a voter would think that a team that finished 24th in the Final Poll last year, would bring back the same players + recruits and be the #1 team over someone like IWU. IWU brings back most of their guys, adds some high profile transfers, did better in the tournament and ended up 15 spots higher in the final poll than Wheaton. Obviously most of the voters in general think highly of Wheaton because they jumped up 19 spots overall so it's not like it's one person that thinks they will do well. Unfortunately we only usually get to see Dave's picks and a few comments from others on who they voted on but we can open it up to the board.

As of now, on the D3Hoops poll here's how many votes for each team for the #1 spot:
Amherst 83
IWU 70
Williams 42
UW-SP 56
Wheaton 34
Other 112

Anybody want to throw out their logic for their pick? Who are some of the "others" people think are the #1 team in the nation?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 29, 2013, 03:51:58 PM

Preseason polls are so overrated...and I think it tends to be a disadvantage to those that aren't in it because they have to work that much harder to get noticed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Just Bill on October 29, 2013, 04:08:02 PM

Quote from: northb on February 26, 2013, 07:22:33 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 25, 2013, 09:25:09 PM
Quote from: northb on February 25, 2013, 09:08:30 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 25, 2013, 08:49:58 PM
Well knock me over with a feather - my PP ballot (made out yesterday early evening) matches the official poll exactly thru the top 6, and, while rarely if ever an exact match after that, has the same 25 teams.

Congratulations official voters - you're getting closer and closer to The Truth^TM! ;D

Oh, not This^TM again!
You got something against ^TM?! What are you, a Chinese industrialist?! ;D

I heard somewhere the The Belt^TM has a TM^TM. Do you want to incur the wrath of The Belt^{TM^TM}?

Weasels on line 1...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 29, 2013, 05:19:53 PM

Quote from: madzillagd on October 29, 2013, 01:07:17 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on October 29, 2013, 11:40:57 AM
Just because they were 24th overall doesn't mean that voter didn't have them ranked higher.

I get that, just interesting to me that a voter would think that a team that finished 24th in the Final Poll last year, would bring back the same players + recruits and be the #1 team over someone like IWU.

Maybe that voter is connected to IWU and didn't want to vote for their own school?

Maybe they just know something we don't?

I'm still shocked Amherst is #1. They lost a lot from a team I didn't think was entirely dominant (even if they were the best). I know there's a lot of "it's there's until they lose" voters out there, but it was still surprising to me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 15, 2013, 10:36:53 PM

Well Southern Vermont, they of 1-24 last year, they got a new coach, about eight new players and a new outlook on life. SVC 88 - Williams 87.

Let the games begin!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 16, 2013, 10:04:10 PM

#4 UWSP beats Lawrence 99-73.

Point led by as many as 19 in the first half and 14 at halftime, but Larry U cut the lead to 6 at 67-61 with about 11:30 left in the 2nd half. But Tyler Tillema really put the Pointers on his back in the second half.

Hass ended up with 33, hitting 7/7 3's and despite being 0-4 from the FT line (including missing the front end of a 1 and 1). Tillema ended with 23, 16 of those in the second half.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 16, 2013, 10:05:47 PM

#6 North Central on the ropes at home... Depauw is leading NCC 59-47 with 5 minutes left.

Vid - http://new.livestream.com/accounts/3095812/events/2416052
Stats - http://www.sidearmstats.com/ncc/mbball/

Make that 62-47. Yikes. 4:30 left

Off an NCC miss, DePauw throws one up and it goes in, 64-47.

NCC gets a bucket and gets fouled... 64-49 but they miss the FT and foul on the rebound. NCC shooing < 50% from the FT line.

DePauw drops 2 in, 66-49 DePauw.

NCC trying to hang, they hit a 3, 66-52, but there's only 3 minutes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 16, 2013, 10:17:29 PM

Two NCC FT's cuts it to 12 with 1:33 left.

NCC riding a 20 game home winning streak going back two seasons.

DePauw answers with 2 FT's of their own. 70-56 DePauw.

NCC turns it over and fouls. This one's over.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 16, 2013, 10:20:23 PM

And a few miles to the north, Wittenberg is giving #5 Wheaton all it can handle... THOSE Tigers are leading the Thunder 37-36 with 9:06 left in the 2nd half.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 16, 2013, 10:21:07 PM

DePauw finishes the upset 77-64 over #6 NCC and ends the 20 game home winning streak.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 16, 2013, 10:25:11 PM

Witt leads Wheaton 44-42 with the ball after 2 missed FT's by the Thunder. 6:04 left.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 16, 2013, 10:33:22 PM

Wheaton makes 1/2 and Wittenberg travels on the next possession. A nice layup by Wheaton makes it 46-45.

Neither team wants to win this game... Witt misses the first FT after a foul on the other end. Under 3:40, makes the second. 47-45.

Wheaton misses a wild shot, Witt with the rebound.

Witt misses but gets the O board and then gets fouled, 2 shots coming.

Witt misses another FT and another.

Wheaton scores to tie it at 47

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 16, 2013, 10:39:23 PM

Wheaton missing FT's... missed last 3, made one, 46-43 Wittenberg leads with the ball 4:40. Wittenberg with happy feet, 2nd TO in a row #d3h

Neither team wants to win. Witt and Wheaton both have missed a bunch of FT's in the last few mins. Witt holds a 2 pt lead #d3h

Wheaton ties it on a 15 footer but Wittenberg nails a 3 for a 50-47 lead. Wheaton missed a 15 ft shot and Witt gets the board. 2:15 #d3h

Off a Witt miss, Peters gets fouled for Wheaton, to the line, 1/2 50-48 Witt 1:47 but ball OB to Wheaton. #d3h

Peters nails a 3 with 1:25 to go to put Wheaton up 51-50. Witt responds with a 3 of their own 53-51 Witt leads 1:01 left. #d3h

Wheaton to the line for 2, down 2. :48 left. 2/2, ties it at 53 #d3h Timeout Wheaton

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 16, 2013, 10:40:33 PM

Peters on O and on D for Wheaton, gets a steal. :17 left, Wheaton ball. 53-53 tie game vs. Wittenberg.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 16, 2013, 10:43:06 PM

Wheaton missed a long 3 and tip in for the win, going to OT vs. Wittenberg.

Wheaton didn't really run much there... interesting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 16, 2013, 10:47:18 PM

Peters left along nails a 3 for a 56-53 lead.

Witt then misses 2 FT's, Wheaton boards it.

Teuscher nails a deep corner 3 and gets fouled, converts the 4 point play, 60-53 Wheaton leads.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 16, 2013, 10:49:33 PM

Both teams trade baskets, then Peters misses 2 FT's. Witt boards, 62-55.

Witt gets fouled and now it's 62-57.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 16, 2013, 10:57:51 PM

Some stuff happened... the baby woke up and I missed it.

Wheaton leading 69-60, Wheaton to shoot 2, under :45 left.

nails em both 71-60. Witt misses, Wheaton boards again, to shoot 2 again. Both are good 73-60 Wheaton

Witt scores inside, then forces a Wheaton TO 73-62. But Witt's shot gets blocked and Wheaton runs the clock out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 16, 2013, 11:04:48 PM

#5 Wheaton survives in OT vs. Wittenberg 73-62.

Wittenberg had a bunch of opportunities to win this in regulation (and Wheaton had chances too...) but they turned it over on back-to-back possessions and missed several free throws.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 19, 2013, 10:06:28 PM

#5 Wheaton got by Wittenberg, but they couldn't get by Loras.

Loras 73 #5 Wheaton 72

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 22, 2013, 03:39:30 PM

So I think that the next Top 25 will be early next week (Tuesday's the day, I think? ... through games this Sunday if I remember correctly) but it looks like there could be a decent amount of shake-up.

I'm not snazzy enough to get all of the results for all of the teams... but I can list the teams who have lost:

#3 Williams - 11/15 vs S. Vermont (neutral) L 88-87
#5 Wheaton - 11/19 @ Loras L 74-73
#6 North Central - 11/16 vs DePauw L 77-64
#15 St. Thomas - 11/15 @ Pomona-Pitzer L 80-77
#16 Randolph Macon -11/16 @ Scranton L 78-76; 11/19 vs Christopher Newport L 84-83
#20 Morrisville St - 11/17 @ NYU L 80-63;11/20 @ Geneseo St L 89-82
#21 Alvernia - 11/15 vs #18 Middlebury L 81-71 (neutral)
#22 Rhode Island College - 11/15 vs Skidmore L 79-70 (neutral); vs Lasell L 98-94
#23 Centre - 11/18 @ Franklin L 102-97

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 22, 2013, 09:23:51 PM

Hope and Whitewater involved in a tight one. Warhawks up 58-54 with 11:45 to play in the game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 22, 2013, 10:00:19 PM

Rose Hulman leads Washington University 50-46 at the half thanks in part to nine three pointers. Klimek on the bench for large parts of the first half.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 22, 2013, 10:08:24 PM

Warhawks pull away to defeat Hope by an 83-70 score.

Hope scored with 9:44 left to go to take a 61-60 lead. It was the last time the Dutchmen had the advantage. An 8-1 spurt by Whitewater gave them a 68-62 lead with 6:28 left and they never looked back. 2 minutes later the lead had grown to 10. It reached as much as 14 before the final horn sounded.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 22, 2013, 10:23:10 PM

Washington University leads 64-63 with eleven minutes to go.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 22, 2013, 10:38:43 PM

#3 Williams - 11/15 vs S. Vermont (neutral) L 88-87
#5 Wheaton - 11/19 @ Loras L 74-73
#6 North Central - 11/16 vs DePauw L 77-64
#10 St Mary's MD - 11/22 #19 Cabrini L 84-78 (neutral)
#15 St. Thomas - 11/15 @ Pomona-Pitzer L 80-77
#16 Randolph Macon -11/16 @ Scranton L 78-76; 11/19 vs Christopher Newport L 84-83
#18 Middlebury - 11/22 @ Stevenson L 80-69
#20 Morrisville St - 11/17 @ NYU L 80-63;11/20 @ Geneseo St L 89-82
#21 Alvernia - 11/15 vs #18 Middlebury L 81-71 (neutral)
#22 Rhode Island College - 11/15 vs Skidmore L 79-70 (neutral); vs Lasell L 98-94
#23 Centre - 11/18 @ Franklin L 102-97

And either #10 St. Mary's or #18 Middlebury is going to pick up loss #2, as they play on Sunday.
Also #5 Wheaton goes to #8 Wooster Saturday so one will pick up a loss (or, another loss, as the case may be).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 22, 2013, 11:07:59 PM

Washington University defeats Rose Hulman 94-74 after an early scare to avoid the list of ranked teams with losses.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 23, 2013, 05:04:32 PM

I knew WPI was going to lose some games without Coppola, but getting trounced by Castleton State? Yikes!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 23, 2013, 07:35:19 PM

#8 Wooster has defeated #5 Wheaton (IL), 77-73.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 23, 2013, 09:06:07 PM

So top 25 losses today thus far...

#5 Wheaton lost to #8 Wooster 77-73
#6 North Central lost to Aurora 91-82
#9 WPI lost to Castleton St 77-65

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 23, 2013, 09:11:46 PM

UWRF leads #15 St Thomas 52-49 with 11:29 left in the 2nd half

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 23, 2013, 09:22:32 PM

#2 IWU trails Loras 75-70 with 3:35 in the 2nd

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 23, 2013, 09:33:17 PM

Loras leads #2 IWU by 4 with under a minute, 1 FT coming. Good, 77-72

2 top 5 teams going down in a week?

:25.3 left, IWU to the line for 2

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 23, 2013, 09:34:41 PM

Quote from: John Gleich on November 23, 2013, 09:11:46 PM
UWRF leads #15 St Thomas 52-49 with 11:29 left in the 2nd half

UST leads 66-64 over UWRF under 4:00

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 23, 2013, 09:39:35 PM

Loras takes down their second top 5 CCIW team... Is North Central next?

Loras wins 80-75 over #2 IWU

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 23, 2013, 10:13:00 PM

Three cheers for pre-season polls.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 23, 2013, 10:20:56 PM

Whitman playing Washington University close in St. Louis. Bears lead 55-49.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 23, 2013, 11:02:38 PM

WUSTL defeats Whitman 76-68.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 23, 2013, 11:56:18 PM

I was going to call it a night and sum everything up... there's one more top 25 game of consequence:

Colorado College @ #12 Whitworth

Live Stats (http://www.whitworth.edu/Athletics/Teams/Basketball/livestats/xlive.htm) CC is currently leading 37-29 with 0:49 remaining in the first half.

#2 IWU - 11/23 vs Loras L 80-75
#3 Williams - 11/15 vs S. Vermont (neutral) L 88-87
#5 Wheaton - 11/19 @ Loras L 74-73; 11/23 @ #8 Wooster L 77-73
#6 North Central - 11/16 vs DePauw L 77-64; 11/23 @ Aurora L 91-82
#9 WPI - 11/23 @ Castleton St L 77-65
#10 St Mary's MD - 11/22 #19 Cabrini L 84-78 (neutral)
#15 St. Thomas - 11/15 @ Pomona-Pitzer L 80-77
#16 Randolph Macon -11/16 @ Scranton L 78-76; 11/19 vs Christopher Newport L 84-83
#18 Middlebury - 11/22 @ Stevenson L 80-69
#20 Morrisville St - 11/17 @ NYU L 80-63;11/20 @ Geneseo St L 89-82
#21 Alvernia - 11/15 vs #18 Middlebury L 81-71 (neutral)
#22 Rhode Island College - 11/15 vs Skidmore L 79-70 (neutral); vs Lasell L 98-94
#23 Centre - 11/18 @ Franklin L 102-97

And either #10 St. Mary's or #18 Middlebury is going to pick up loss #2, as they play on Sunday.

That's at least 19 losses by top 25 teams (would be 21 if Whitworth loses tonight and Salisbury takes out Cabrini tomorrow). Pretty crazy...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 24, 2013, 12:05:44 AM

Quote from: sac on November 23, 2013, 10:13:00 PM
Three cheers for pre-season polls.

Precisely. More than anything else, PS's chart o' losses posted above indicates that a preseason poll holds no value other than as a conversation piece and/or a promotional tool.

What has always gotten my dander up is the fact that the first in-season poll is based in large part upon the preseason poll, as well as actual early-season results. That taints the first poll; and because the first poll is tainted, the second poll (which is based upon the first poll plus another week's worth of results) is also tainted, albeit somewhat less so. And so on and so forth, until you finally get to the point somewhere in late December (hopefully) when the stink of the preseason poll has finally been leached out of the current Top 25. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 24, 2013, 01:11:55 AM

Down goes Whitworth 65-60 to Colorado College

#2 IWU - 11/23 vs Loras L 80-75
#3 Williams - 11/15 vs S. Vermont (neutral) L 88-87
#5 Wheaton - 11/19 @ Loras L 74-73; 11/23 @ #8 Wooster L 77-73
#6 North Central - 11/16 vs DePauw L 77-64; 11/23 @ Aurora L 91-82
#9 WPI - 11/23 @ Castleton St L 77-65
#10 St Mary's MD - 11/22 #19 Cabrini L 84-78 (neutral)
#12 Whitworth - 11/23 Colorado College L 65-60
#15 St. Thomas - 11/15 @ Pomona-Pitzer L 80-77
#16 Randolph Macon -11/16 @ Scranton L 78-76; 11/19 vs Christopher Newport L 84-83
#18 Middlebury - 11/22 @ Stevenson L 80-69
#20 Morrisville St - 11/17 @ NYU L 80-63;11/20 @ Geneseo St L 89-82
#21 Alvernia - 11/15 vs #18 Middlebury L 81-71 (neutral)
#22 Rhode Island College - 11/15 vs Skidmore L 79-70 (neutral); vs Lasell L 98-94
#23 Centre - 11/18 @ Franklin L 102-97

And either #10 St. Mary's or #18 Middlebury is going to pick up loss #2, as they play on Sunday.

That's at least 19 20 losses by top 25 teams (would be 21 if ~~Whitworth loses tonight and~~ Salisbury takes out Cabrini tomorrow). Pretty crazy...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 24, 2013, 10:10:42 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 24, 2013, 12:05:44 AM
..a preseason poll holds no value other than as a conversation piece and/or a promotional tool.

What other value is it supposed to hold? Even when highly accurate, in D3 hoops at least, that's all a voter poll is meant to achieve.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 24, 2013, 12:22:10 PM

By the way... it really doesn't matter where teams were ranked or who was ranked... when we have had this many losses in the top fifty teams in the country. You may go through that list and see losses and assume they shouldn't be ranked... but even if we did the list over and over and over and over again... there would be quite a number of losses in the preseason Top 25 this season... because no one seems to be getting off on the right foot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Charles on November 24, 2013, 12:44:11 PM

Polling is over rated at this time of the year. who came back, who didn't what is the stregnth of the opponents?

I saw the #9 team lst year have to travel to the #8 team in the NCAAa in the seond round.

Team in NE play many more bad teams night in night out than mid atlantic, or midwest.

Polling is more for us fans at this point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 24, 2013, 09:30:02 PM

#2 IWU - 11/23 vs Loras L 80-75
#3 Williams - 11/15 vs S. Vermont (neutral) L 88-87
#5 Wheaton - 11/19 @ Loras L 74-73; 11/23 @ #8 Wooster L 77-73
#6 North Central - 11/16 vs DePauw L 77-64; 11/23 @ Aurora L 91-82
#9 WPI - 11/23 @ Castleton St L 77-65
#10 St Mary's MD - 11/22 #19 Cabrini L 84-78 (neutral)
#12 Whitworth - 11/23 Colorado College L 65-60
#15 St. Thomas - 11/15 @ Pomona-Pitzer L 80-77
#16 Randolph Macon -11/16 @ Scranton L 78-76; 11/19 vs Christopher Newport L 84-83
#18 Middlebury - 11/22 @ Stevenson L 80-69; 11/23 #10 St. Mary's 81-78 (OT) (Neutral)
#20 Morrisville St - 11/17 @ NYU L 80-63;11/20 @ Geneseo St L 89-82
#21 Alvernia - 11/15 vs #18 Middlebury L 81-71 (neutral)
#22 Rhode Island College - 11/15 vs Skidmore L 79-70 (neutral); vs Lasell L 98-94
#23 Centre - 11/18 @ Franklin L 102-97

#10 St. Mary's beat #18 Middlebury today 81-78 in OT

#19 Cabrini survived against Salisbury

That's 20 losses by top 25 teams since the preseason poll came out.

It may be more fruitful to see who from the top 25 DIDN'T lose...

1. Amherst (3-0)
4. UWSP (3-0)
7. UMHB (1-0)
8. Wooster (3-0)
11. Wash U (4-0)
13. UWW (3-0)
14. Hampden-Sydney (3-0)
17. Calvin (3-0)
19. Cabrini (3-0)
24. St. Norbert (2-0)
25. Virginia Wesleyan (3-0)

And just for giggles, let's check ORV teams:

Bald Wally - (2-1) (loss @ #8 Wooster)
Wittenberg (3-1) (loss @ #5 Wheaton in OT)
Emory (3-2) (loss @ Birmingham-Southern; loss @ #25 VWC)
Augustana (3-1) (loss @ UW Platteville)
Catholic (3-1) (loss vs RV E Conn)
Trinity (Tx) (2-3) (loss vs #12 Whitworth; loss vs Pac Lutheran, loss vs RV Ohio Wesleyan)
Christopher Newport (3-1) (loss vs RV Emory)
Concordia (Tx) (1-0)
UW Stout (2-1) (loss vs NAIA Mount Mercy)
DeSales (3-1) (loss @ Arcadia)
Rochester (1-3) (loss vs Oneonta St; loss @ RV Hobart; loss @ Nazareth)
Plattsburgh St (2-1) (loss @ RV Richard Stockton)
Ithaca (2-3) (loss @ Haverford; loss @ Oswego St; loss @ RV Hobart)
Eastern Conn (3-1) (loss vs SUNY Purchase)
Transy (0-2) (loss vs Heidelberg; loss @ Thomas More)
Frank & Marsh (2-2) (loss vs Baruch; loss vs Alvernia)
Hobart (2-0)
Wesley (3-0)
Ohio Wesleyan (2-1) (loss vs La Verne)
Del Valley (3-1) (loss @ Widener)
Tufts (4-1) (loss @ Emerson)
Brandeis (3-1) (loss vs #22 RIC)
Dickinson (3-1) (loss vs Juniata)
Rich Stockton (3-0)

This is pretty unbelievable... out of a sample of 49 programs (roughly 1/6 of D-III) only 15 are undefeated after a week and a half of games.

73 programs (48 others) ARE indeed undefeated, with 2 more not having played a game up to this point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 24, 2013, 10:03:06 PM

Quote from: sac on November 23, 2013, 10:13:00 PM
Three cheers for pre-season polls.

Preseason polls are... a crapshoot.

But, I wonder how last year's postseason poll has fared to begin the season.

1. Amherst (3-0)
2. MHBU (1-0)
3. North Central (2-2)
4. St. Thomas (2-1)
5. Williams (3-1)
6. Middlebury (3-2)
7. Calvin (3-0)
8. St. Mary's (2-1)
9. Illinois Wesleyan (3-1)
10. UWW (3-0)
11. Whitworth (2-1)
12. Catholic (3-1)
13. Cabrini (3-0)
14. Wooster (3-0)
15. UWSP (3-0)
16. Va Wesleyan (3-0)
17. Randolph-Macon (1-2)
18. WPI (3-1)
19. Ithaca (2-3)
20. Morrisville St (2-2)
21. RIC (2-2)
22. Wash U (4-0)
23. Rochester (1-3)
24. Wheaton (3-2)
25. Ohio Wesleyan (2-1)

So, if we just take last year's poll, there are 9 of the top 25 who are still undefeated. Certainly, teams that were good last year don't need to be good this year... if they had a team chock full of seniors and now they've got a bunch of freshmen running around, then they're probably going to struggle.

But the results are very similar to the preseason poll.

This isnt' to disparage the poll or the pollsters... it just shows how difficult the job actually is!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 24, 2013, 10:44:14 PM

My cynicism towards pre-season polls isn't only directed at this years D3hoops poll, its every pre-season poll that is a terrible idea. In no sport is it more terrible than D1 football where fortunes are dictated and opinions formed about teams that sometimes last all season based on a poll published in August before a single down has occurred.

All pre-season polls should be burned and thrown away. In a perfect world no poll should take place in any sport until about a quarter of the season has taken place.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 24, 2013, 11:00:01 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on November 24, 2013, 10:10:42 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 24, 2013, 12:05:44 AM
..a preseason poll holds no value other than as a conversation piece and/or a promotional tool.

What other value is it supposed to hold? Even when highly accurate, in D3 hoops at least, that's all a voter poll is meant to achieve.

You're basically reinforcing my point here, David.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on November 25, 2013, 08:34:55 AM

Quote from: sac on November 24, 2013, 10:44:14 PM
My cynicism towards pre-season polls isn't only directed at this years D3hoops poll, its every pre-season poll that is a terrible idea. In no sport is it more terrible than D1 football where fortunes are dictated and opinions formed about teams that sometimes last all season based on a poll published in August before a single down has occurred.

All pre-season polls should be burned and thrown away. In a perfect world no poll should take place in any sport until about a quarter of the season has taken place.

Other than D1 football, aren't all polls "for entertainment purposes only"? What's wrong with preseason entertainment? It's like filling out a march madness bracket or reading Buster Olney's MLB power rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on November 25, 2013, 12:33:08 PM

Agreed KS. As a result of the Top 25 I already was able to watch Loras beat Wheaton, Wooster beat Wheaton, and St. Mary's beat Midd. All games I probably wouldn't have tuned into if the teams weren't ranked. With 40-50 games available on a night, I tend to look for the ranked matchups first, regional battles second when deciding what to throw on in the background.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on November 25, 2013, 12:39:39 PM

Is there going to be a new poll this week or do we wait till after Turkey Day?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 25, 2013, 12:44:43 PM

Quote from: mailsy on November 25, 2013, 12:39:39 PM
Is there going to be a new poll this week or do we wait till after Turkey Day?

I think there should be one this week... probably tomorrow (or whenever the voters all get their ballots in).

The polls run through games on Sunday, so through yesterday's games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NEPAFAN on November 25, 2013, 12:55:55 PM

Quote from: John Gleich on November 25, 2013, 12:44:43 PM
Quote from: mailsy on November 25, 2013, 12:39:39 PM
Is there going to be a new poll this week or do we wait till after Turkey Day?

I think there should be one this week... probably tomorrow (or whenever the voters all get their ballots in).

The polls run through games on Sunday, so through yesterday's games.

Agreed, there was no poll last week, so don't think we go two weeks without a poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dcahill44 on November 25, 2013, 01:13:08 PM

What East region teams do you think get votes this week if anyone. Nazareth 3-0, RIT 4-0, Hobart 2-0, NYU 3-0... Not saying anyone should get votes... nor does it matter if they get votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 25, 2013, 04:02:08 PM

Poll comes out tonight-ish... the first week is always skipped due to the lack of games.

As for East Region... Hobart was already on my ballot and will stay there. Nothing against NYU, but voters have been burned by them far too often to reward them for starting 3-0; the others certainly are worth looking at, but RIT only beat one good team and barely survived against a sub-par team... and Nazareth's only significant win was against Rochester who has started 1-3. There are others that may get some looks as well, though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 25, 2013, 04:40:02 PM

Quote from: dcahill44 on November 25, 2013, 01:13:08 PM
What East region teams do you think get votes this week if anyone. Nazareth 3-0, RIT 4-0, Hobart 2-0, NYU 3-0... Not saying anyone should get votes... nor does it matter if they get votes.

I'm not a voter, but I'd say Hobart will likely get more votes. They were already "on the RADAR" for the voters as they were receiving votes, and the two teams that they beat were also receiving votes.

If you beat a team who I think is good, then you're probably good too.

Under that logic, Loras will probably pick up a few votes... even though they lost two games to two unranked teams (and beat two top-6 teams, both of whom will fall pretty significantly with this next poll, I'd imagine).

It isn't a lock that an undefeated team gets a look... if you haven't beaten anyone of note, then it won't mean as much.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 25, 2013, 05:32:22 PM

Sorry for my delinquency in not posting HTF last night -- I'll do better next week, I promise.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 25, 2013, 06:22:33 PM

Darryl, much thanks for doing those updates. I'm not sure the Posters' Poll would even exist if not for them! ;)

John, my guess would be that IWU will only fall a couple of slots, but Wheaton (and NCC) will probably fall fairly drastically, with 2 losses each (though Wheaton's other loss, @Wooster, is certainly not a bad loss). The consensus in the CCIW seems to be that both were over-ranked to begin with (esp. NCC).

As for Loras, two great wins, but with losses to Millikin and (especially) Rockford, I can't see them getting all that much support just yet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 25, 2013, 08:30:18 PM

Under the radar game for Tuesday that may or may not affect the new poll

Mt. St. Joseph (2-0) at DePauw (3-0)

DePauw beat North Central, MSJ beat Wilmington who beat Miami(Ohio)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 25, 2013, 09:47:24 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on November 25, 2013, 05:32:22 PM
Sorry for my delinquency in not posting HTF last night -- I'll do better next week, I promise.

I picked ya up for week 1... at least a bit... but this was pretty easy. The delta was very easy to figure out from 0... but... here on out it would be very difficult to do what I did again!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 26, 2013, 12:10:32 AM

New Poll http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2013-14/week1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on November 26, 2013, 11:54:25 AM

My ??? of the week looking at the poll....

- Midd loses 2 games and drops only 1 spot in the polls versus NCC loses 2 games and drops 16 spots in the polls. (Yes Midd has better wins but still a 15 spot difference in reaction is pretty amazing)

- NCC (2-2) with 2 wins over Valor Christian and Illinois Tech stays in at #22 versus Loras (2-2) with 2 wins over #2 IWU and #5 Wheaton is still on the outside. The point differential was NCC 97, Loras 8. Definitely a vote for where people think they will end up versus a vote for what they've accomplished (or haven't accomplished) so far.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 26, 2013, 12:12:00 PM

Quote from: madzillagd on November 26, 2013, 11:54:25 AM
My ??? of the week looking at the poll....

- Midd loses 2 games and drops only 1 spot in the polls versus NCC loses 2 games and drops 16 spots in the polls. (Yes Midd has better wins but still a 15 spot difference in reaction is pretty amazing)

Also Midd has better losses.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on November 26, 2013, 01:36:45 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 26, 2013, 12:12:00 PM
Quote from: madzillagd on November 26, 2013, 11:54:25 AM
My ??? of the week looking at the poll....

- Midd loses 2 games and drops only 1 spot in the polls versus NCC loses 2 games and drops 16 spots in the polls. (Yes Midd has better wins but still a 15 spot difference in reaction is pretty amazing)

Also Midd has a better loss es.

Corrected ;).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 26, 2013, 01:41:40 PM

Is this the first year SUNY-Purchase has been referred to as Purchase State? I've never heard them called that before.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 26, 2013, 02:43:59 PM

Quote from: madzillagd on November 26, 2013, 01:36:45 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 26, 2013, 12:12:00 PM
Quote from: madzillagd on November 26, 2013, 11:54:25 AM
My ??? of the week looking at the poll....

- Midd loses 2 games and drops only 1 spot in the polls versus NCC loses 2 games and drops 16 spots in the polls. (Yes Midd has better wins but still a 15 spot difference in reaction is pretty amazing)

Also Midd has a better loss es.

Don't correct it because they had both better losses and better wins...

And Loras needs to do more than just beat Top 25 teams... like beat teams they shouldn't thus lose to if they are beating Top 25 teams.

Corrected ;).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 26, 2013, 04:22:19 PM

North Central was highly ranked based off of their finish last year. As has been attested by CCIW posters, they lost quite a bit from last year's team... and, if ranked, should have probably been in the mid-20's or in a similar level with "ORV" teams.

Wheaton has some very good players... but they have very little depth, as they have for the past few years. So, they have the ability to win tough games against tough competition... but they also may be stretched thin by teams that otherwise would be put away by deeper teams.

So, though the wins by Loras appeared good, they were wins against over-rated teams (who also lost other games... their oppontents' stock is falling, not rising).

And while the jury may still be out on Millikin (4-1 is a very respectable start), they have yet to win any CCIW games themselves this season... and may just be a lot of hype and no substance.

The loss against Rockford was just bad and is a pretty glaring blemish on their record.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 26, 2013, 05:05:28 PM

Quote from: madzillagd on November 26, 2013, 11:54:25 AM
My ??? of the week looking at the poll....

- Midd loses 2 games and drops only 1 spot in the polls versus NCC loses 2 games and drops 16 spots in the polls. (Yes Midd has better wins but still a 15 spot difference in reaction is pretty amazing)

- NCC (2-2) with 2 wins over Valor Christian and Illinois Tech stays in at #22 versus Loras (2-2) with 2 wins over #2 IWU and #5 Wheaton is still on the outside. The point differential was NCC 97, Loras 8. Definitely a vote for where people think they will end up versus a vote for what they've accomplished (or haven't accomplished) so far.

Looks like you answered your own question vis-à-vis North Central, madzilla. Not only did NCC lose two games, but the two games that the Cardinals won were against absolutely awful competition. Valor Christian is a USCAA outfit that North Central has used several times now as a tipoff tourney cupcake. Illinois Tech is a startup program; IIT is so bad that the Scarlet Hawks were beaten by a club team from Northeastern Illinois University (which doesn't have varsity athletics) the other night. IIT probably won't beat a legit college varsity team this year.

Never mind comparing NCC to Middlebury; I'm astonished that any of the pollsters still have NCC on their ballots at all. Anyone who thinks that North Central will end up #22 isn't paying close attention to the Cardinals.

Quote from: magicman on November 26, 2013, 01:41:40 PM
Is this the first year SUNY-Purchase has been referred to as Purchase State? I've never heard them called that before.

Probably just going along with the common convention of referring to all non-D1 SUNY schools as "____ State".

Quote from: John Gleich on November 26, 2013, 04:22:19 PM
North Central was highly ranked based off of their finish last year. As has been attested by CCIW posters, they lost quite a bit from last year's team... and, if ranked, should have probably been in the mid-20's or in a similar level with "ORV" teams.

Again, though, why does anybody still have the Cards on their ballot?

Quote from: John Gleich on November 26, 2013, 04:22:19 PMWheaton has some very good players... but they have very little depth, as they have for the past few years. So, they have the ability to win tough games against tough competition... but they also may be stretched thin by teams that otherwise would be put away by deeper teams.

I thought that Wheaton was ranked a bit too high in the preseason poll, although not as drastically as NCC was. Mike Schauer's boys are now #14, which is right about where I think they initially belonged.

Quote from: John Gleich on November 26, 2013, 04:22:19 PM
So, though the wins by Loras appeared good, they were wins against over-rated teams (who also lost other games... their oppontents' stock is falling, not rising).

And while the jury may still be out on Millikin (4-1 is a very respectable start), they have yet to win any CCIW games themselves this season... and may just be a lot of hype and no substance.

The loss against Rockford was just bad and is a pretty glaring blemish on their record.

It's certainly worth keeping an eye on the Duhawks to ascertain whether last week was a fluke or the beginning of a trend. Their upcoming home contest against Augustana on Dec. 4 should prove interesting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 26, 2013, 05:22:51 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 26, 2013, 05:05:28 PM
Quote from: John Gleich on November 26, 2013, 04:22:19 PM
North Central was highly ranked based off of their finish last year. As has been attested by CCIW posters, they lost quite a bit from last year's team... and, if ranked, should have probably been in the mid-20's or in a similar level with "ORV" teams.

Again, though, why does anybody still have the Cards on their ballot?

Yep, I'm with you. A #22 team with 2 losses (such as Rhode Island College...) probably would have found itself with just 2 poll points (like RIC).

An ORV team with 2 losses (such as Franklin and Marshall) probably won't have any votes at all (like F&M).

But, unless they lose over their next few games, NCC will most likely STAY in the poll, because they were ranked last week. Definitely an example of poll fail. (I'd imagine that there's probably a .gif somewhere of a poll fail, but I don't want to go looking for it, as it would probably be found on a site a bit less family-friendly than this one...).

Quote
Quote from: John Gleich on November 26, 2013, 04:22:19 PMWheaton has some very good players... but they have very little depth, as they have for the past few years. So, they have the ability to win tough games against tough competition... but they also may be stretched thin by teams that otherwise would be put away by deeper teams.

I thought that Wheaton was ranked a bit too high in the preseason poll, although not as drastically as NCC was. Mike Schauer's boys are now #14, which is right about where I think they initially belonged.

But... should they even be that high? They were TOO highly ranked to begin with... probably should have been mid-teens. See what happened to Randolph-Macon... they dropped out (though those losses weren't against equal competition).

Quote
Quote from: John Gleich on November 26, 2013, 04:22:19 PM
So, though the wins by Loras appeared good, they were wins against over-rated teams (who also lost other games... their oppontents' stock is falling, not rising).

And while the jury may still be out on Millikin (4-1 is a very respectable start), they have yet to win any CCIW games themselves this season... and may just be a lot of hype and no substance.

The loss against Rockford was just bad and is a pretty glaring blemish on their record.

It's certainly worth keeping an eye on the Duhawks to ascertain whether last week was a fluke or the beginning of a trend. Their upcoming home contest against Augustana on Dec. 4 should prove interesting.

Agreed. Augie's lone loss seems decent (Platteville) until the Pio's dropped one to St. Olaf. But, then again, St. Olaf's lone loss was to Augie.

Guess maybe we should look at the Oles? They've got a big test tomorrow... at my Pointers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 26, 2013, 05:42:59 PM

I think that when the smoke clears at the end of February, Wheaton will be sitting somewhere in the vicinity of #14. That's what I meant by that statement.

Augie is legit. The team didn't have the services of starting center Kevin Schlitter (who doesn't pass the eyeball test, as he looks too heavy to be effective, but who really is a highly-skilled low-post player) the night that it lost to UWP, as he was out with the flu. Not saying that Augie would've definitely beaten the Pios if it had Schlitter in the lineup, as I'm always wary about making those kinds of declarations. But I suspect that Augie's on its way to another 20-win season, or very close to it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 26, 2013, 08:26:48 PM

Good analysis by Greg and John as usual. I don't understand how a 2-2 team can still be in the Top 25. Give the teams out there that merit a mention their moment in the sun. It's one thing to be 2-2 with 2 good wins and 2 good losses. North Central isn't even close to that. John Carroll 4-0, Richard Stockton 3-0, New Jersey City 4-0 are just a few of the teams out there that deserve to be ranked over North Central. I'd be willing to wager that come the end of February, John Carroll will be ranked and have a better record than North Central.

Looks like the Wesley Wolverines might be moving into the Top 25 next week as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 27, 2013, 12:40:44 AM

Quote from: John Gleich on November 26, 2013, 05:22:51 PM

But, unless they lose over their next few games, NCC will most likely STAY in the poll, because they were ranked last week. Definitely an example of poll fail. (I'd imagine that there's probably a .gif somewhere of a poll fail, but I don't want to go looking for it, as it would probably be found on a site a bit less family-friendly than this one...).

Its not a .gif, because, yeah you're right.......but NC is the driveway here.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.failpix.net%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2009%2F04%2Fpole_fail.jpg&hash=3a2649a181d58fcf4cff369afee8dc40b07ddbf7)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 27, 2013, 08:56:53 AM

Quote from: sac on November 27, 2013, 12:40:44 AM
Quote from: John Gleich on November 26, 2013, 05:22:51 PM

But, unless they lose over their next few games, NCC will most likely STAY in the poll, because they were ranked last week. Definitely an example of poll fail. (I'd imagine that there's probably a .gif somewhere of a poll fail, but I don't want to go looking for it, as it would probably be found on a site a bit less family-friendly than this one...).

Its not a .gif, because, yeah you're right.......but NC is the driveway here.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.failpix.net%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2009%2F04%2Fpole_fail.jpg&hash=3a2649a181d58fcf4cff369afee8dc40b07ddbf7)

Always there when I need ya! Thanks Sac!

Two top 10 losses last night...

#6 Mary Hardin Baylor dropped their contest against Trinity (Tx) 62-58
#8 Hampden-Sydney did the same against 4-0 RV Wesley 78-72

Other top 25 results of note:

#5 Whitewater pulled away from #17 St Norbert on the road 73-62 after leading by 2 at the half (despite shooting 23%). They picked themselves up by shooting 70% in the second half.

#7 Illinois Wesleyan squeaked by winless Wabash 68-57. The injuries are really piling up for the Titans... I think they have 4 major contributors who are out right now with injuries. We'll have to see if they can weather the storm while those guys are out or if they take a few more lumps.

#9 Cabrini handed RV Scranton its first loss in pretty convincing fashion 98-79.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 27, 2013, 09:15:57 AM

Quote from: John Gleich on November 27, 2013, 08:56:53 AM
#7 Illinois Wesleyan squeaked by winless Wabash 68-57. The injuries are really piling up for the Titans... I think they have 4 major contributors who are out right now with injuries. We'll have to see if they can weather the storm while those guys are out or if they take a few more lumps.

IWU has 4 extremely important perimeter players out right now:

* Starting PG Dylan Overstreet (knee) - 1st Team all-CCIW last year

* SG Jordan Nelson (ankle) - transfer from D1 Evansville

* G/F Alex Rossi (abdominal strain) - transfer from D1 Valparaiso

In addition, SG Brady Zimmer (back) - IWU's per game scoring leader in CCIW play last year, 14 ppg - just recently started practicing for the first time this season and hasn't been much of a factor on the floor yet for the Titans.

These four players, collectively, are the difference between IWU being a legitimate national championship contender and just a pretty good team -- these are all big-time difference makers. Overstreet is just a really good floor general and leader, but also a big scoring threat. Nelson and Rossi both earned D1 full rides because they are elite shooters. And Zimmer can score via the 3-point shot or dribble penetration.

The good news for IWU fans is that Overstreet, Rossi, and Nelson are expected to be back by late-December/CCIW time.

The 5th key player out right now is 6-8/245 C Mike Marietti (knee). Many close to the program felt strongly that Marietti would be the starting 5 this year. If not a starter, probably a 15-20 minute per game reserve. Marietti could return in mid-January...not quite sure. His return would be gravy...to me, the perimeter guys are the priority.

IWU has 10 days off now before facing #4 Wash U -- will be interesting to see if any of those 4 perimeter guys are back for that game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 27, 2013, 12:15:47 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 27, 2013, 09:15:57 AM
These four players, collectively, are the difference between IWU being a legitimate national championship contender and just a pretty good team -- these are all big-time difference makers.

IWU's depth, especially on the perimeter, is staggering this year. It's amazing that they can have as many good perimeter players out... and still be "just a pretty good team!"

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 27, 2013, 01:55:24 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 27, 2013, 09:15:57 AM
IWU has 10 days off now before facing #4 Wash U -- will be interesting to see if any of those 4 perimeter guys are back for that game.

I am thankful the game is scheduled during reading week for both teams, unlike two years ago when the Bears traveled to play an Illinois Wesleyan squad that had finished with finals a week prior.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on November 27, 2013, 02:00:47 PM

Quote from: WUH on November 27, 2013, 01:55:24 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on November 27, 2013, 09:15:57 AM
IWU has 10 days off now before facing #4 Wash U -- will be interesting to see if any of those 4 perimeter guys are back for that game.

I am thankful the game is scheduled during reading week for both teams, unlike two years ago when the Bears traveled to play an Illinois Wesleyan squad that had finished with finals a week prior.

I'm old school... what is 'reading week'? is it finals week? or the week before finals? or something else?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 27, 2013, 04:31:06 PM

Quote from: John Gleich on November 27, 2013, 12:15:47 PM
IWU's depth, especially on the perimeter, is staggering this year. It's amazing that they can have as many good perimeter players out... and still be "just a pretty good team!"

Definitely deep on the perimeter, but the 4 "difference makers" are Overstreet, Rossi, Nelson, and Zimmer.

When these guys are all in the mix, the Titans will be extremely tough to guard.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on November 27, 2013, 09:20:39 PM

Final: #3 Wooster 81 #23 Marietta 78

Nice road win for Wooster as they beat a 4-0 Marietta team. Wooster has now defeated 3 teams ranked in the top 30 (Baldwin Wallace, Wheaton, Marietta).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 27, 2013, 09:51:13 PM

Another Top 25 team at risk for a loss as Carthage leads No. 4 Washington University by 4 with one minute left.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 27, 2013, 10:03:22 PM

And, No. 4 Washington University falls to Carthage in a back and forth game that featured three technical fouls and some other questionable calls on both sides.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 27, 2013, 10:07:07 PM

After leading just 39-37 at the half, #2 Stevens Point takes over the second half, beating St. Olaf 88-66

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 30, 2013, 10:22:42 AM

#11 Calvin lost to NAIA D-I Cornerstone University 85-66 last night

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 01, 2013, 01:31:13 PM

I completely forgot to publish my Top 25 ballot from last week, but I figure it is never too late: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2013/12/01/daves-top-25-ballot-week-1/ (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2013/12/01/daves-top-25-ballot-week-1/)

As you can see, I was clearly writing that last week... it just slipped my mind to button it up and publish it.

Now on to this week's ballot!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 01, 2013, 03:51:07 PM

Top 25's DePauw/Washington in a good one

video: http://client.stretchinternet.com/client/wustl.portal#
livestats: http://bearsports-livestats.wustl.edu/Basketball/xlive.htm

Update: Washington 71 DePauw 60

Bears stronger down stretch. Enjoying their post-game cake they baked I'm sure.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 01, 2013, 07:53:42 PM

How They Fared
~~I think the only missing score is Christopher Newport/Eastern Mennonite (at halftime as I post this).~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	597	Amherst	3-0	IDLE
#2	589	UW-Stevens Point	4-0	def. St. Olaf, 88-66
#3	540	Wooster	4-0	won at #23 Marietta, 81-78
#4	527	Washington U.	5-1	LOST at Carthage, 80-82; def. #25 DePauw, 71-60
#5	506	UW-Whitewater	4-0	won at #17 St. Norbert, 73-62
#6	495	Mary Hardin-Baylor	2-1	LOST at Southwestern, 58-62; def. Trinity (Texas), 73-67
#7	472	Illinois Wesleyan	4-1	def. Wabash, 68-57
#8	448	Hampden-Sydney	4-2	LOST to #26 Wesley, 72-78; won at #39 Springfield, 89-82; LOST at Carnegie Mellon, 62-68
#9	415	Cabrini	5-0	def. #41 Scranton, 98-79; def. T#56 Widener, 111-99
#10	395	Williams	5-1	def. Curry, 96-65; won at Massachusetts College, 106-71
#11	347	Calvin	5-1	won at Manchester, 78-50; LOST to Cornerstone, 66-85; def. Aquinas, 77-55
#12	279	St. Mary's (Md.)	3-1	won at Franklin and Marshall, 64-61
#13	267	Virginia Wesleyan	5-0	def. Apprentice School, 103-68; won at Emory and Henry, 103-72
#14	251	Wheaton (Ill.)	3-2	IDLE
#15	218	WPI	4-1	def. Worcester State, 78-61
#16	207	Whitworth	3-2	def. Carleton, 70-61; LOST at Colorado College, 65-81
#17	188	St. Norbert	2-1	LOST to #5 UW-Whitewater, 62-73
#18	166	St. Thomas	2-1	IDLE
#19	147	Middlebury	4-2	won at RPI, 92-79
#20	106	UW-Platteville	4-2	LOST at Buena Vista, 80-98
#21	98	Wittenberg	4-1	def. Otterbein, 97-77
#22	97	North Central (Ill.)	3-2	def. Benedictine, 69-55
#23	88	Marietta	4-1	LOST to #3 Wooster, 78-81
#24	65	Augustana	4-1	won at Knox, 88-50
#25	58	DePauw	4-1	def. Mount St. Joseph, 80-74; LOST at #4 Washington U., 60-71

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	52	Wesley	5-0	won at #8 Hampden-Sydney, 78-72; def. York (Pa.), 70-56
#27	48	Alvernia	3-2	LOST at Stevenson, 52-75; won at Penn State-Berks, 95-83
#28	38	New Jersey City	5-1	def. Rutgers-Newark, 61-52; LOST to Albertus Magnus, 63-77
#29	36	Centre	4-1	won at Transylvania, 84-75
#30	30	Augsburg	3-0	IDLE
#31	29	Concordia (Texas)	2-1	def. Schreiner, 95-80; LOST at Louisiana College, 86-92
#32	26	Christopher Newport	4-1	def. Eastern Mennonite, 68-59
T#33	25	John Carroll	4-0	IDLE
T#33	25	Baldwin Wallace	3-1	won at Olivet, 101-89
#35	24	Catholic	3-1	IDLE
#36	22	Hobart	3-0	won at Buffalo State, 85-83
#37	20	Purchase State	5-0	def. T#51 Brockport State, 98-90
#38	18	Cortland State	2-0	~~11/26 vs. Utica~~ postponed
#39	17	Springfield	4-1	def. Keene State, 82-65; LOST to #8 Hampden-Sydney, 82-89; def. Penn St.-New Kensington, 109-62
#40	15	Brandeis	4-1	def. Lasell, 78-69
#41	12	Scranton	4-1	LOST at #9 Cabrini, 79-98; def. Mount St. Mary, 77-64
#42	11	Randolph-Macon	2-3	LOST at T#45 Guilford, 71-73; won at Frostburg State, 99-75
#43	10	Emory	5-2	def. Maryville (Tenn.), 90-79; won at LaGrange, 106-84
#44	9	Eastern Connecticut	5-1	won at Connecticut College, 69-45
T#45	8	Guilford	6-0	def. #42 Randolph-Macon, 73-71
T#45	8	Dubuque	6-0	won at Clarke, 75-64
T#45	8	Loras	3-2	won at UW-Eau Claire, 77-64
T#48	7	Franklin	3-2	LOST at Southeastern (Fla.), 97-107; LOST at Eckerd, 77-94
T#48	7	Dickinson	4-1	won at Gettysburg, 74-52
T#48	7	Southern Vermont	3-1	IDLE
T#51	5	Texas-Dallas	4-0	won at Austin, 67-56; won at Hardin-Simmons, 80-57
T#51	5	Brockport State	1-1	LOST at SUNY-Purchase, 90-98
T#51	5	Ohio Wesleyan	4-1	def. Capital, 90-73; def. Hanover, 88-79
T#54	4	Babson	4-1	won at Becker, 62-60; LOST at Bowdoin, 54-66
T#54	4	DeSales	3-2	LOST to Moravian, 72-77
T#56	2	Richard Stockton	5-0	def. TCNJ, 65-46; def. T#60 Neumann, 101-79
T#56	2	UW-Stout	5-1	won at Luther, 88-83; def. Ashford, 56-41; def. Wartburg, 64-56
T#56	2	Rhode Island College	3-3	won at Bridgewater State, 76-68; LOST at T#60 MIT, 38-54
T#56	2	Widener	5-1	LOST at #9 Cabrini, 99-111
T#60	1	Neumann	3-1	def. Rosemont, 77-73; LOST to T#56 Richard Stockton, 79-101
T#60	1	New York U.	4-0	won at NYU-Poly, 86-41
T#60	1	MIT	4-2	LOST at Tufts, 61-77; def. T#56 Rhode Island College, 54-38

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on December 03, 2013, 12:55:55 AM

Strange But True Top 25 (Week Two) Trivia

Week Two poll in 2012-13 had 19 of the top 25 undefeated, while only 9 are undefeated in the top 25 in 2013-14. The Week Two poll for this year is one week earlier than last year.

#1 Amherst was idle....and still gained 16 points.

While former #22 North Central won their only game of the week against Benedictine and lost 55 points dropping out of the top 25. The rest of the Top 25 can breathe easy none of them meet the Eagles this year.

St. Thomas dropped from #15 in the preseason poll to #18 in Week 1 and is now back to #15........without playing last week.

St. Mary's gained 55 points in the poll and didn't move an inch, remaining at #12. While Williams gained 54 points and jumped 3 spots.

Wheaton went 0-1 for the week and gained 12 points and one spot up to #13.

And Middlebury went 1-0 and lost 12 points and two spots to #21

Whitworth was 1-1 on the week and fell off a cliff, losing 173 points and 15 spots from #16 to #31.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 03, 2013, 05:48:00 AM

Nice work, frodo. You must have been bored waiting for the WIAC fantasy league to start! :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 03, 2013, 10:37:20 AM

Quote from: frodotwo on December 03, 2013, 12:55:55 AM
Strange But True Top 25 (Week Two) Trivia

Awesome! +1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on December 03, 2013, 11:56:55 AM

Tonight should be a very good matchup with Tufts @ WPI. Pretty much everyone on the NESCAC boards had Tufts primed to have a big year, possibly jumping into the top tier of teams with Amherst/Midd/Williams but unfortunately life happens and their star sophomore (NESCAC ROY last year) Palleschi had his career ended early due to health problems. While everyone was expecting a let down, Tufts have rolled to a 5-1 start fueled largely by the play of another good freshman big man, Hunter Sabety (14.5 ppg, 7.7 rpg). They handled MIT last week in another NEWMAC match up, tonight will be their toughest test of the year so far against WPI who also lost one of their main guys. Should be a good game with two very balanced teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 04, 2013, 09:17:04 PM

Final: #3 Wooster 79 Ohio Wesleyan 71 :)

Nice road win for Wooster at OWU which was 4-1. Wooster was led in scoring by Doug Thorpe with 18 points, freshman Dan Fanelly with 15 points and Kenny DeBoer with 13 points. Wooster is now 5-0 and will face #24 DePauw Saturday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 04, 2013, 09:56:44 PM

#2 UWSP beats Eau Claire 74-55 without Tyler Tillema (held out as a precautionary measure after rolling an ankle).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 05, 2013, 07:08:05 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	613	Amherst	4-0	won at Westfield State, 83-59; 12/05 vs. Anna Maria; 12/07 at Emerson
#2	598	UW-Stevens Point	5-0	won at UW-Eau Claire, 74-55
#3	565	Wooster	5-0	won at #35 Ohio Wesleyan, 79-71; 12/07 vs. #24 DePauw
#4	546	UW-Whitewater	5-0	won at Beloit, 93-62; 12/07 at #37 UW-Stout
#5	481	Illinois Wesleyan	4-1	12/07 vs. #8 Washington U.
#6	471	Cabrini	7-0	def. Gwynedd-Mercy, 95-84; won at Marywood, 90-71; 12/07 vs. Baptist Bible
#7	449	Williams	6-1	def. RPI, 113-88; 12/07 vs. Springfield
#8	424	Washington U.	5-1	12/07 at #5 Illinois Wesleyan
#9	392	Calvin	5-1	12/06 vs. #44 Carthage; 12/07 vs. #13 Wheaton (Ill.)
#10	382	Virginia Wesleyan	7-0	def. Methodist, 87-71; def. Lynchburg, 93-66
#11	364	Mary Hardin-Baylor	2-1	12/05 at Sul Ross State; 12/07 at Howard Payne
#12	334	St. Mary's (Md.)	4-1	won at Salisbury, 57-48; 12/07 at Penn State-Harrisburg
#13	263	Wheaton (Ill.)	4-2	def. Chicago, 84-61; 12/06 at Hope; 12/07 at #9 Calvin
#14	243	WPI	5-1	def. #51 Tufts, 70-67; 12/05 vs. Newbury; 12/07 vs. Fitchburg State
#15	230	St. Thomas	3-1	won at #32 Augsburg, 71-53
#16	217	Wittenberg	5-1	won at Wabash, 60-46; 12/07 vs. Allegheny
#17	189	Wesley	5-1	LOST at Marymount, 73-80; 12/07 at Frostburg State
#18	155	St. Norbert	3-1	def. Lake Forest, 71-56; 12/07 at Grinnell
#19	143	Augustana	5-1	won at T#53 Loras, 67-65
#20	135	Hampden-Sydney	4-2	12/07 at Bridgewater (Va.)
#21	125	Middlebury	5-2	def. Castleton State, 90-80; 12/07 at Skidmore
#22	92	Marietta	5-1	won at Otterbein, 109-72; 12/07 vs. Wilmington
#23	67	Hobart	3-1	LOST to Rochester, 75-85
#24	54	DePauw	5-1	def. Denison, 66-51; 12/07 at #3 Wooster
#25	51	SUNY-Purchase	6-0	won at Mount St. Vincent, 69-53; 12/07 vs. Farmingdale State

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	49	Colorado College	5-0	def. Johnson & Wales (CO), 71-56
#27	43	Guilford	6-0	12/07 at Shenandoah
#28	42	North Central (Ill.)	3-2	IDLE
#29	41	Centre	4-2	LOST at Asbury, 81-87; 12/05 at Brescia
#30	39	John Carroll	4-1	LOST at Mount Union, 100-113; 12/07 vs. Ohio Northern
#31	34	Whitworth	3-2	12/07 vs. UC Santa Cruz
#32	32	Augsburg	3-1	LOST to #15 St. Thomas, 53-71; 12/07 vs. St. Olaf
#33	28	Eastern Connecticut	6-1	def. New Paltz State, 77-53; 12/07 vs. Rhode Island College
#34	26	Catholic	3-2	LOST at Loyola (Md.), 75-87; 12/07 vs. Drew
#35	25	Ohio Wesleyan	4-2	LOST to #3 Wooster, 71-79; 12/07 at Denison
#36	22	Emory	6-2	def. Covenant, 110-76
#37	20	UW-Stout	5-1	12/05 at UW-Superior; 12/07 vs. #4 UW-Whitewater
#38	15	Christopher Newport	5-1	won at Southern Virginia, 80-54; 12/07 at York (Pa.)
T#39	13	Dubuque	6-0	IDLE
T#39	13	Texas-Dallas	4-0	12/05 at Texas-Tyler; 12/07 at University of the Ozarks
T#39	13	Baldwin Wallace	4-1	won at Ohio Northern, 72-68; 12/07 vs. Capital
T#42	12	Concordia (Texas)	3-1	won at Mississippi College, 93-83; 12/05 vs. Howard Payne; 12/07 vs. Sul Ross State
T#42	12	Brandeis	5-1	def. Becker, 78-58; 12/07 vs. Babson; 12/08 at Tufts or Salem State
#44	11	Carthage	3-2	LOST to Cardinal Stritch, 69-70; 12/06 at #9 Calvin; 12/07 at Hope
#45	9	UW-Platteville	5-2	def. UW-Oshkosh, 80-66; 12/07 at UW-River Falls
T#46	8	Richard Stockton	5-1	LOST at William Paterson, 72-74; 12/07 at #49 New Jersey City
T#46	8	Albertus Magnus	5-0	won at Mount Ida, 89-64; 12/05 at Emmanuel; 12/07 vs. Suffolk
#48	7	Southern Vermont	4-1	won at Elms, 85-79; 12/06 at St. Joseph's (Vt.); 12/07 at TBA
#49	6	New Jersey City	5-2	LOST at Rowan, 59-62; 12/07 vs. T#46 Richard Stockton
#50	4	Defiance	5-0	won at Manchester, 67-48; 12/07 at Mount St. Joseph
#51	3	Tufts	5-2	LOST at #14 WPI, 67-70; 12/07 vs. Salem State; 12/08 vs. TBD
#52	2	Scranton	4-1	12/07 at Susquehanna
T#53	1	Stevenson	5-1	won at Hood, 79-76; 12/07 at Arcadia
T#53	1	Dickinson	5-1	won at McDaniel, 64-52; 12/07 vs. Swarthmore
T#53	1	Cortland State	3-0	won at Ithaca, 79-63; 12/06 vs. Potsdam State; 12/07 vs. Plattsburgh State
T#53	1	Loras	3-3	LOST to #19 Augustana, 65-67
T#53	1	NYU	5-0	def. Merchant Marine, 77-67; 12/08 vs. York (N.Y.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 07, 2013, 01:05:16 AM

In the ASC, Texas-Dallas looks like they are back in form. Concordia-Texas does not have it this season. I still don't have an opinion about UMHB yet. I think that they will contend, but getting a bid beyond the conference Pool A is uncertain at this time. Unfortunately, the conference is isolated again with few chances to play measurable foes outside this part of the country.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 07, 2013, 03:01:06 PM

A new #1 next week as Amherst goes down.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 07, 2013, 06:39:04 PM

#3 Wooster makes their case, drubbing #24 DePauw 64-48.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 07, 2013, 07:15:24 PM

Video link for #8 Wash U @ #5 IWU, 7:00pm (Central):

http://client.stretchinternet.com/client/iwu.portal#

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 07, 2013, 09:36:29 PM

I tell you what, we may be seeing the rebirth of the NEWMAC in New England:

WPI is winning despite losing their best player for the year. Emerson took out the preseason #1 today. Springfield went to Williamstown and gave them a game. Babson is playing very well. A rebuilding, but strong MIT squad might be the fifth best team in the conference.

They're looking good and should be back on the radar for major conferences - at least this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 08, 2013, 09:01:13 AM

#5 IWU 98
#8 Wash U 73

http://bearsports.wustl.edu/Stats/TeamStats/basketball-mens/2013-2014/game7.htm

http://www.pantagraph.com/sports/college/basketball/men/depth-big-surge-keys-no-iwu-in-rout-of-washington/article_6582335e-5fb5-11e3-96f4-0019bb2963f4.html

IWU PG Dylan Overstreet, a 1st Team all-CCIW player last year, returned from injury for the Titans. D1 transfer Jordan Nelson, a 6-1 SG from Evansville, also made his debut last night. Both guards are at about 80% health-wise but having them in the rotation really makes a big impact.

IWU is a very deep team - the Titans got 43 points off the bench last night vs the Bears.

The Titans looked strong last night vs a very talented Wash U team. The Bears beat #24 DePauw by 11 in their last game before this one. Wash U's other loss was by 2-points @ hard-to-figure-out Carthage from the CCIW.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 08, 2013, 06:34:30 PM

Curious to see if Wooster can make up 33 points on Stevens Point. The dawgs won at Eau Claire while the Scots topped RV Ohio Wesleyan amd #24 DePauw.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 08, 2013, 09:43:44 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	613	Amherst	5-1	won at Westfield State, 83-59; def. Anna Maria, 97-65; LOST at Emerson, 79-90
#2	598	UW-Stevens Point	5-0	won at UW-Eau Claire, 74-55
#3	565	Wooster	6-0	won at #35 Ohio Wesleyan, 79-71; def. #24 DePauw, 64-48
#4	546	UW-Whitewater	5-1	won at Beloit, 93-62; LOST at #37 UW-Stout, 69-74
#5	481	Illinois Wesleyan	5-1	def. #8 Washington U., 98-73
#6	471	Cabrini	8-0	def. Gwynedd-Mercy, 95-84; won at Marywood, 90-71; def. Baptist Bible, 100-71
#7	449	Williams	7-1	def. RPI, 113-88; def. Springfield, 80-75
#8	424	Washington U.	5-2	LOST at #5 Illinois Wesleyan, 73-98
#9	392	Calvin	6-2	LOST to #44 Carthage, 68-74; def. #13 Wheaton (Ill.), 78-51
#10	382	Virginia Wesleyan	7-0	def. Methodist, 87-71; def. Lynchburg, 93-66
#11	364	Mary Hardin-Baylor	3-2	LOST to Sul Ross State, 70-74; def. Howard Payne, 72-68
#12	334	St. Mary's (Md.)	5-1	won at Salisbury, 57-48; won at Penn State-Harrisburg, 67-60
#13	263	Wheaton (Ill.)	5-3	def. Chicago, 84-61; def. Hope, 80-61; LOST at #9 Calvin, 51-78
#14	243	WPI	7-1	def. #51 Tufts, 70-67; def. Newbury, 81-37; def. Fitchburg State, 88-53
#15	230	St. Thomas	3-1	won at #32 Augsburg, 71-53
#16	217	Wittenberg	6-1	won at Wabash, 60-46; def. Allegheny, 86-58
#17	189	Wesley	6-1	LOST at Marymount, 73-80; won at Frostburg State, 84-68
#18	155	St. Norbert	4-1	def. Lake Forest, 71-56; won at Grinnell, 121-115
#19	143	Augustana	5-1	won at T#53 Loras, 67-65
#20	135	Hampden-Sydney	4-3	LOST at Bridgewater (Va.), 57-65
#21	125	Middlebury	6-2	def. Castleton State, 90-80; won at Skidmore, 89-84
#22	92	Marietta	6-1	won at Otterbein, 109-72; def. Wilmington, 98-77
#23	67	Hobart	4-2	LOST to Rochester, 75-85; def. Nazareth, 77-71; LOST to Geneseo State, 73-82
#24	54	DePauw	5-2	def. Denison, 66-51; LOST at #3 Wooster, 48-64
#25	51	SUNY-Purchase	7-0	won at Mount St. Vincent, 69-53; def. Farmingdale State, 77-57

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	49	Colorado College	5-0	def. Johnson & Wales (CO), 71-56
#27	43	Guilford	7-0	won at Shenandoah, 78-77
#28	42	North Central (Ill.)	3-2	IDLE
#29	41	Centre	5-2	LOST at Asbury, 81-87; won at Brescia, 81-62
#30	39	John Carroll	5-1	LOST at Mount Union, 100-113; def. Ohio Northern, 82-64
#31	34	Whitworth	4-2	def. UC Santa Cruz, 87-67
#32	32	Augsburg	4-1	LOST to #15 St. Thomas, 53-71; def. St. Olaf, 71-66
#33	28	Eastern Connecticut	7-1	def. New Paltz State, 77-53; def. Rhode Island College, 77-74
#34	26	Catholic	4-2	LOST at Loyola (Md.), 75-87; def. Drew, 82-60
#35	25	Ohio Wesleyan	5-2	LOST to #3 Wooster, 71-79; won at Denison, 65-63
#36	22	Emory	6-2	def. Covenant, 110-76
#37	20	UW-Stout	7-1	won at UW-Superior, 79-68; def. #4 UW-Whitewater, 74-69
#38	15	Christopher Newport	6-1	won at Southern Virginia, 80-54; won at York (Pa.), 63-60
T#39	13	Dubuque	6-0	IDLE
T#39	13	Texas-Dallas	5-0	won at Texas-Tyler, 77-52; ~~12/07 at University of the Ozarks~~ postponed
T#39	13	Baldwin Wallace	5-1	won at Ohio Northern, 72-68; def. Capital, 59-58
T#42	12	Concordia (Texas)	4-2	won at Mississippi College, 93-83; LOST to Howard Payne, 85-87; def. Sul Ross State, 93-90
T#42	12	Brandeis	6-2	def. Becker, 78-58; LOST to Babson, 47-78; won at #51 Tufts, 90-82
#44	11	Carthage	4-3	LOST to Cardinal Stritch, 69-70; won at #9 Calvin, 74-68; LOST to Hope, 58-80
#45	9	UW-Platteville	6-2	def. UW-Oshkosh, 80-66; won at UW-River Falls, 66-48
T#46	8	Richard Stockton	6-1	LOST at William Paterson, 72-74; won at #49 New Jersey City, 69-51
T#46	8	Albertus Magnus	7-0	won at Mount Ida, 89-64; won at Emmanuel, 91-71; def. Suffolk, 99-62
#48	7	Southern Vermont	6-1	won at Elms, 85-79; won at St. Joseph's (Vt.), 74-64; won at RPI, 109-88
#49	6	New Jersey City	5-3	LOST at Rowan, 59-62; LOST to T#46 Richard Stockton, 51-69
#50	4	Defiance	6-0	won at Manchester, 67-48; won at Mount St. Joseph, 72-64
#51	3	Tufts	5-4	LOST at #14 WPI, 67-70; LOST to Salem State, 78-81; LOST to T#42 Brandeis, 82-90
#52	2	Scranton	5-1	won at Susquehanna, 82-68
T#53	1	Stevenson	6-1	won at Hood, 79-76; won at Arcadia, 87-81
T#53	1	Dickinson	6-1	won at McDaniel, 64-52; def. Swarthmore, 79-59
T#53	1	Cortland State	4-1	won at Ithaca, 79-63; def. Potsdam State, 78-53; LOST to Plattsburgh State, 61-64
T#53	1	Loras	3-3	LOST to #19 Augustana, 65-67
T#53	1	NYU	6-0	def. Merchant Marine, 77-67; def. York (N.Y.), 64-61

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 09, 2013, 09:11:20 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 08, 2013, 06:34:30 PM
Curious to see if Wooster can make up 33 points on Stevens Point. The dawgs won at Eau Claire while the Scots topped RV Ohio Wesleyan amd #24 DePauw.

Point will be #1. SP was closer to Amherst at #1 than Wooster was to Point at #2 and SP was already ranked #1 by 6 voters.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 09, 2013, 06:01:57 PM

I wonder how many people realize Emerson is coached by former Ohio State head coach Jim O'Brien.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: old_hooper on December 09, 2013, 06:38:04 PM

O'Brien credentials...27 years at DI, Coach of the Year in three different conferences, the Atlantic 10, the Big East and twice in the Big 10 and was selected National Co-Coach of the Year in 1999. Two Big 10 titles at OSU and FF appearance in 99. He is a guy that loves to coach and very interesting that he is at Emerson. They are very young team that showed they can play and you got to believe he will bring in additional talent. Amherst was missing two starters but make no mistake about it, Emerson will be a team that will be heard from in the next couple years under Coach O'Brien's influence.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 09, 2013, 07:42:57 PM

There's really no appropriate board for this (apart from the HCAC board, where it is already posted), but tonight's Manchester/Butler game will be telecast on Fox Sports 1, the new Fox competitor to ESPN, at 8pm. I presume that those who are national fans of D3, most of whom probably read this board, would like to know. Telecast begins at 8 Eastern.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 09, 2013, 10:33:07 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 09, 2013, 07:42:57 PM
There's really no appropriate board for this (apart from the HCAC board, where it is already posted), but tonight's Manchester/Butler game will be telecast on Fox Sports 1, the new Fox competitor to ESPN, at 8pm. I presume that those who are national fans of D3, most of whom probably read this board, would like to know. Telecast begins at 8 Eastern.

That didn't go well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 10, 2013, 06:27:46 AM

NEW POLL-WTIH WIAC FLAVOR (posted on WIAC board...)

NEW POLL (http://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2013-14/week3) is out.

As expected by most, Point jumps to #1, going from 598 points and 6 first place votes to 611 and 16.

Wooster goes to #2, going from 565 and no first place votes to 602 and 8. Wooster gained 24 points on Point.

Whitewater drops 84 points and goes from 4th to 8th.

With the win over Whitewater, Stout jumps from ORV to 19th and gains 131 points.

Despite winning twice last week, Platteville goes from 9 votes (after dropping out of the Top 25-was #20 in Week 1 with 106 points) to zero votes.

Former #1 Amherst drops from 1st to 7th and loses 147 points.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: amh63 on December 11, 2013, 03:53:12 PM

For the long time posters here, your thoughts on the move up of St. Mary of MD, with a gain in points AFTER loosing a day earlier to an unranked team. I had watched St. Mary play live in the Stevenson Hoopsville Tourny and wondered about their rankings afterwards.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 11, 2013, 04:00:17 PM

Quote from: amh63 on December 11, 2013, 03:53:12 PM
For the long time posters here, your thoughts on the move up of St. Mary of MD, with a gain in points AFTER loosing a day earlier to an unranked team. I had watched St. Mary play live in the Stevenson Hoopsville Tourny and wondered about their rankings afterwards.

That loss is during "next week."

The poll is for games through 12/8. They moved up last week... but after their loss Monday, they'll most likely lose points next week.

Technically, I think their record on the Top 25 should read 5-1, not 5-2 (since the second loss came after the Sunday deadline).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 11, 2013, 05:52:31 PM

Loosing a day earlier? Well, you'd better tighten things up! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 11, 2013, 07:38:21 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 11, 2013, 05:52:31 PM
Loosing a day earlier? Well, you'd better tighten things up! ;)

Good luck with that one, Mr. Quixote.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 11, 2013, 08:47:43 PM

Number 1 making a statement tonight. Point 42 - Whitewater 22 at the half.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 11, 2013, 10:34:17 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 11, 2013, 07:38:21 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 11, 2013, 05:52:31 PM
Loosing a day earlier? Well, you'd better tighten things up! ;)

Good luck with that one, Mr. Quixote.

He's an Amherst guy. He's fair game for having his spelling corrected. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 12, 2013, 01:22:06 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 11, 2013, 08:47:43 PM

Number 1 making a statement tonight. Point 42 - Whitewater 22 at the half.

Weird game. Whitewater opens 2nd half with 10-0 run. Point builds it back up and then Whitewater is sorta back in it (8-12 points back). Point had about a 15-point lead with less than 3 minutes to go and then all of a sudden, with about a minute to go, it's 8 points. Turnovers and missed FTs hurt Point. Margin should've been bigger, but give Whitewater credit for not giving up...

After Stout surprised Whitewater over the weekend, they go over to River Falls and drop one there. The Falcons were winless in conference going into the game against the Blue Devils.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 12, 2013, 02:20:23 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 12, 2013, 01:22:06 AM

After Stout surprised Whitewater over the weekend, they go over to River Falls and drop one there. The Falcons were winless in conference going into the game against the Blue Devils.

Stout was 11x16 from the line. River Falls was 26-36. Stout lost by 6. 20 more free throw attempts? Looks like a little home cooking to me. :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 12, 2013, 09:03:20 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	611	UW-Stevens Point	6-0	def. #8 UW-Whitewater, 79-67; 12/14 at St. John's
#2	602	Wooster	6-0	12/14 at Wabash
#3	558	Illinois Wesleyan	5-1	12/14 at Chicago
#4	537	Cabrini	8-0	IDLE
#5	511	Williams	7-1	IDLE
#6	481	Virginia Wesleyan	7-0	12/15 vs. #27 Christopher Newport
#7	466	Amherst	6-1	won at Brandeis, 75-70; 12/12 at T#33 Babson
#8	462	UW-Whitewater	5-2	LOST at #1 UW-Stevens Point, 67-79
#9	396	St. Mary's (Md.)	5-2	LOST to DeSales, 70-80; 12/14 at Mary Washington
#10	358	Washington U.	5-2	12/14 vs. Coe
#11	322	WPI	8-1	won at Colby-Sawyer, 85-66; 12/14 vs. Keene State
#12	307	St. Thomas	5-1	won at Macalester, 78-55; def. Hamline, 75-52; 12/14 vs. Bethany Lutheran
#13	280	Wittenberg	6-1	12/14 at Denison
#14	247	Calvin	6-2	12/14 vs. Finlandia
#15	214	Augustana	6-1	def. Central, 79-57; 12/14 vs. MacMurray
#16	212	St. Norbert	4-1	12/14 at Cornell
#17	176	Marietta	6-1	12/14 at Heidelberg
#18	163	Middlebury	6-2	IDLE
#19	151	UW-Stout	7-2	LOST at UW-River Falls, 64-70
#20	134	Mary Hardin-Baylor	3-2	12/14 at Concordia (Texas)
#21	131	Wesley	6-1	IDLE
#22	120	Wheaton (Ill.)	5-3	12/14 vs. Alma
#23	110	Guilford	7-0	12/14 vs. Methodist
#24	90	SUNY-Purchase	7-0	IDLE
#25	68	Colorado College	5-1	LOST at Northern Colo., 57-96

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	57	Eastern Connecticut	7-1	IDLE
#27	53	Christopher Newport	6-1	12/15 at #6 Virginia Wesleyan
#28	35	Emory	6-3	LOST at Oglethorpe, 86-97
#29	28	DePauw	5-3	LOST to Rose-Hulman, 61-64
#30	26	Catholic	4-2	12/15 at Randolph-Macon
#31	21	Whitworth	4-2	IDLE
#32	19	Southern Vermont	6-1	12/12 at Union
T#33	18	Texas-Dallas	5-1	LOST at Trinity (Texas), 58-63
T#33	18	Babson	7-1	12/12 vs. #7 Amherst
#35	17	Albertus Magnus	7-0	IDLE
#36	15	Brockport State	4-1	IDLE
#37	14	Augsburg	4-3	LOST at Gustavus Adolphus, 54-74; LOST at Concordia-Moorhead, 57-68
#38	11	Scranton	5-1	12/14 vs. Merchant Marine
T#39	10	Stevenson	6-1	IDLE
T#39	10	Baldwin Wallace	5-1	12/14 vs. Wilmington
T#41	9	North Central (Ill.)	4-2	won at Wilberforce, 78-59; 12/13 at Bridgewater (Va.); 12/14 at Eastern Mennonite
T#41	9	Springfield	6-2	won at Westfield State, 67-59; 12/13 vs. Worcester State
T#41	9	Dickinson	6-1	IDLE
#44	8	John Carroll	5-1	12/14 at Capital
#45	7	Hampden-Sydney	5-3	def. Randolph, 60-56
T#46	5	Defiance	6-0	12/14 vs. Transylvania
T#46	5	New York U.	6-1	LOST at Stevens, 65-68
T#46	5	Bowdoin	8-0	won at Maine Maritime, 92-44; 12/13 vs. Maine-Farmington
T#49	3	Dubuque	6-0	12/13 vs. North Central (Minn.)
T#49	3	Alvernia	5-2	IDLE
#51	2	Ohio Wesleyan	6-2	won at Anderson, 70-59; 12/14 at Hiram
#52	1	Centre	5-2	IDLE

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: amh63 on December 12, 2013, 04:26:35 PM

John G. ......Thanks for the response to my inquiry. I thought about the "voting schedule" factor but the 5-2 record was the reason for my post here. Normally, I do not worry about the rankings at this time of the season. In the NESCAC, our teams start practice later than many conferences and our up front schedule of non conference games are primarily used....at least for the Amherst coach, to build/blend this season's team.....in time for the conference games starting in January '14.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on December 14, 2013, 05:35:47 PM

Maybe St Mary's will fall to 11 after the losses this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 14, 2013, 07:45:25 PM

Quote from: amh63 on December 12, 2013, 04:26:35 PM
John G. ......Thanks for the response to my inquiry. I thought about the "voting schedule" factor but the 5-2 record was the reason for my post here. Normally, I do not worry about the rankings at this time of the season. In the NESCAC, our teams start practice later than many conferences and our up front schedule of non conference games are primarily used....at least for the Amherst coach, to build/blend this season's team.....in time for the conference games starting in January '14.

Thanks for the comment. When does the NESCAC permit the start of practice?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on December 14, 2013, 09:18:41 PM

NESCAC doesn't start practice until 11/1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 15, 2013, 09:27:58 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	611	UW-Stevens Point	7-0	def. #8 UW-Whitewater, 79-67; won at St. John's, 71-51
#2	602	Wooster	7-0	won at Wabash, 54-41
#3	558	Illinois Wesleyan	6-1	won at Chicago, 80-61
#4	537	Cabrini	8-0	IDLE
#5	511	Williams	7-1	IDLE
#6	481	Virginia Wesleyan	7-1	LOST to #27 Christopher Newport, 80-83
#7	466	Amherst	7-1	won at Brandeis, 75-70; won at T#33 Babson, 90-77
#8	462	UW-Whitewater	5-2	LOST at #1 UW-Stevens Point, 67-79
#9	396	St. Mary's (Md.)	5-3	LOST to DeSales, 70-80; LOST at Mary Washington, 64-66
#10	358	Washington U.	6-2	def. Coe, 62-59
#11	322	WPI	9-1	won at Colby-Sawyer, 85-66; def. Keene State, 88-69
#12	307	St. Thomas	6-1	won at Macalester, 78-55; def. Hamline, 75-52; def. Bethany Lutheran, 92-57
#13	280	Wittenberg	7-1	won at Denison, 97-69
#14	247	Calvin	7-2	def. Finlandia, 106-56
#15	214	Augustana	7-1	def. Central, 79-57; def. MacMurray, 100-69
#16	212	St. Norbert	5-1	won at Cornell, 81-70
#17	176	Marietta	7-1	won at Heidelberg, 82-80
#18	163	Middlebury	6-2	IDLE
#19	151	UW-Stout	7-2	LOST at UW-River Falls, 64-70
#20	134	Mary Hardin-Baylor	3-3	LOST at Concordia (Texas), 93-96
#21	131	Wesley	6-1	IDLE
#22	120	Wheaton (Ill.)	6-3	def. Alma, 89-70
#23	110	Guilford	8-0	def. Methodist, 68-66
#24	90	SUNY-Purchase	7-0	IDLE
#25	68	Colorado College	5-1	LOST at Northern Colo., 57-96

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	57	Eastern Connecticut	7-1	IDLE
#27	53	Christopher Newport	7-1	won at #6 Virginia Wesleyan, 83-80
#28	35	Emory	6-3	LOST at Oglethorpe, 86-97
#29	28	DePauw	5-3	LOST to Rose-Hulman, 61-64
#30	26	Catholic	4-3	LOST at Randolph-Macon, 63-80
#31	21	Whitworth	4-2	IDLE
#32	19	Southern Vermont	6-2	LOST at Union, 75-95
T#33	18	Texas-Dallas	5-1	LOST at Trinity (Texas), 58-63
T#33	18	Babson	7-2	LOST to #7 Amherst, 77-90
#35	17	Albertus Magnus	7-0	IDLE
#36	15	Brockport State	4-1	IDLE
#37	14	Augsburg	4-3	LOST at Gustavus Adolphus, 54-74; LOST at Concordia-Moorhead, 57-68
#38	11	Scranton	5-2	LOST to Merchant Marine, 83-86
T#39	10	Stevenson	6-1	IDLE
T#39	10	Baldwin Wallace	5-1	IDLE
T#41	9	North Central (Ill.)	6-2	won at Wilberforce, 78-59; won at Bridgewater (Va.), 60-51; won at Eastern Mennonite, 70-68
T#41	9	Springfield	7-2	won at Westfield State, 67-59; def. Worcester State, 91-49
T#41	9	Dickinson	6-1	IDLE
#44	8	John Carroll	6-1	won at Capital, 81-67
#45	7	Hampden-Sydney	5-3	def. Randolph, 60-56
T#46	5	Defiance	7-0	def. Transylvania, 78-50
T#46	5	New York U.	6-1	LOST at Stevens, 65-68
T#46	5	Bowdoin	9-0	won at Maine Maritime, 92-44; def. Maine-Farmington, 59-53
T#49	3	Dubuque	7-0	def. North Central (Minn.), 93-57
T#49	3	Alvernia	5-2	IDLE
#51	2	Ohio Wesleyan	7-2	won at Anderson, 70-59; won at Hiram, 69-67
#52	1	Centre	5-2	IDLE

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 16, 2013, 08:21:34 AM

It's time to get off the St. Mary's bandwagon. I don't know what happened between last year and this one. They've got among the best returning talent in the country, but they're not playing well. A very good team, but they'll have to figure something out soon to really be a contender.

It's can't be a Sampson situation with Laguerre's hair can it?

(Also, I just found out I'm in the picture on St. Mary's basketball homepage right now. Funny.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on December 16, 2013, 09:46:40 PM

Quote from: John Gleich on December 11, 2013, 04:00:17 PM
Quote from: amh63 on December 11, 2013, 03:53:12 PM
For the long time posters here, your thoughts on the move up of St. Mary of MD, with a gain in points AFTER loosing a day earlier to an unranked team. I had watched St. Mary play live in the Stevenson Hoopsville Tourny and wondered about their rankings afterwards.

That loss is during "next week."

The poll is for games through 12/8. They moved up last week... but after their loss Monday, they'll most likely lose points next week.

Technically, I think their record on the Top 25 should read 5-1, not 5-2 (since the second loss came after the Sunday deadline).

John Gleich reffed the Pitt-Greensburg-Juniata game tonight; is that you?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 17, 2013, 12:39:50 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 16, 2013, 08:21:34 AM

It's time to get off the St. Mary's bandwagon. I don't know what happened between last year and this one. They've got among the best returning talent in the country, but they're not playing well. A very good team, but they'll have to figure something out soon to really be a contender.

It's can't be a Sampson situation with Laguerre's hair can it?

(Also, I just found out I'm in the picture on St. Mary's basketball homepage right now. Funny.)

Really? You have never seen a team lose two games in a row? DeSales is certainly a headscratcher, though DeSales has been one of the winningest programs in the country in the last 11 years, and they lost to a seemingly much better Mary Wash team that is playing very well especially at home. Mary Wash plays VWC Tuesday night.

Not sure this time of year after two games they are deserving of that comment. I still have them in my Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 17, 2013, 09:31:28 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 17, 2013, 12:39:50 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 16, 2013, 08:21:34 AM

It's time to get off the St. Mary's bandwagon. I don't know what happened between last year and this one. They've got among the best returning talent in the country, but they're not playing well. A very good team, but they'll have to figure something out soon to really be a contender.

It's can't be a Sampson situation with Laguerre's hair can it?

(Also, I just found out I'm in the picture on St. Mary's basketball homepage right now. Funny.)

Really? You have never seen a team lose two games in a row? DeSales is certainly a headscratcher, though DeSales has been one of the winningest programs in the country in the last 11 years, and they lost to a seemingly much better Mary Wash team that is playing very well especially at home. Mary Wash plays VWC Tuesday night.

Not sure this time of year after two games they are deserving of that comment. I still have them in my Top 25.

Well, I had them in the Top 5. Even in wins they haven't played like it. I'm not doubting the talent or the potential, certainly Top 25 is worthwhile, but I'm no longer expecting them to make waves this season, unless something changes between now and February, they're just underachieving this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 17, 2013, 05:06:16 PM

Quote from: ronk on December 16, 2013, 09:46:40 PM
Quote from: John Gleich on December 11, 2013, 04:00:17 PM
Quote from: amh63 on December 11, 2013, 03:53:12 PM
For the long time posters here, your thoughts on the move up of St. Mary of MD, with a gain in points AFTER loosing a day earlier to an unranked team. I had watched St. Mary play live in the Stevenson Hoopsville Tourny and wondered about their rankings afterwards.

That loss is during "next week."

The poll is for games through 12/8. They moved up last week... but after their loss Monday, they'll most likely lose points next week.

Technically, I think their record on the Top 25 should read 5-1, not 5-2 (since the second loss came after the Sunday deadline).

John Gleich reffed the Pitt-Greensburg-Juniata game tonight; is that you?

Did I he do a good job?

It isn't me... but, ironically, I just found out (last week) that there's someone ~~masquerading as me~~ who's got a SWEET name who is also an NCAA ref out in Pennsylvania.

I was asked by another poster if I worked for his company, because he saw my name there too. I hadn't done a google search for my name in a while, but when I did, I found a few more "mes" including the guy above.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 17, 2013, 05:23:56 PM

I'm surprised that 9-0 Bowdoin is not getting a bit more love in the D3 hoops top 25, they seem to deserve a spot at the tail end of the top 25 rankings, not way down at the bottom of the ARV. Bowdoin is from a power conference, has a few solid wins under its belt vs. Bates and Babson, and is one of a fairly small handful of undefeated teams left. The Polar Bears have shown in the past that they have talent, and they are always well-coached. I find particularly cryptic that the following teams are still ranked above Bowdoin: a two-loss Babson team that Bowdoin beat by double-digits, Albertus Magnus, which has feasted on an extremely weak schedule and which always posts a gaudy record before falling to good teams, and a whole slew of three loss teams which seem to be earning votes on big name programs / past reputation / pre-season expectations (St. Mary's, Augsburg, Emory, Depauw, Catholic, Hampden-Sydney).

The top five teams look exactly right to me and they seem to be the class of D-3 this season. In fact I'd be very surprised if one of those five did not ultimately emerge victorious in Salem; all seem pretty loaded, albeit save for Illinois Wesleyan, none appear deep enough to sustain a major injury. I do think Wash U. may be a bit overrated, being placed above a lot of really good one-loss teams like St. Thomas, Wittinberg, Augustana, Wesley, and so on. With no wins vs. a top 25 team, a loss to a non-top-25 team, and the blow-out loss to IWU (I wouldn't punish a team for losing to IWU, but losing by 25 is another story), I don't see why they are ranked so highly. I think another case of pre-season expectations exceeding actual performance to date, as they seem to lack any depth at all this season beyond the top four players ... to me, Bowdoin's resume as of now is a lot stronger than Wash. U.'s, in fact.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 17, 2013, 06:46:08 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on December 17, 2013, 05:23:56 PM
I do think Wash U. may be a bit overrated, being placed above a lot of really good one-loss teams like St. Thomas, Wittenberg, Augustana, Wesley, and so on. With no wins vs. a top 25 team, a loss to a non-top-25 team, and the blow-out loss to IWU (I wouldn't punish a team for losing to IWU, but losing by 25 is another story), I don't see why they are ranked so highly. I think another case of pre-season expectations exceeding actual performance to date, as they seem to lack any depth at all this season beyond the top four players ...

I would have to agree with this. Depth is a definitely problem, though I would give the team five or six rather than four. The team looked strong through the first few games and did beat a previously ranked DePauw squad, but has not played particularly well since November. They nearly lost to Coe College over the weekend at home.

They may begin to slide down the rankings unless they beat Wheaton on January 2nd.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on December 17, 2013, 08:04:10 PM

Quote from: John Gleich on December 17, 2013, 05:06:16 PM
Quote from: ronk on December 16, 2013, 09:46:40 PM
Quote from: John Gleich on December 11, 2013, 04:00:17 PM
Quote from: amh63 on December 11, 2013, 03:53:12 PM
For the long time posters here, your thoughts on the move up of St. Mary of MD, with a gain in points AFTER loosing a day earlier to an unranked team. I had watched St. Mary play live in the Stevenson Hoopsville Tourny and wondered about their rankings afterwards.

That loss is during "next week."

The poll is for games through 12/8. They moved up last week... but after their loss Monday, they'll most likely lose points next week.

Technically, I think their record on the Top 25 should read 5-1, not 5-2 (since the second loss came after the Sunday deadline).

John Gleich reffed the Pitt-Greensburg-Juniata game tonight; is that you?

Did I he do a good job?

It isn't me... but, ironically, I just found out (last week) that there's someone ~~masquerading as me~~ who's got a SWEET name who is also an NCAA ref out in Pennsylvania.

I was asked by another poster if I worked for his company, because he saw my name there too. I hadn't done a google search for my name in a while, but when I did, I found a few more "mes" including the guy above.

I didn't watch the game, so I don't know how good a job that he did. Just was checking the box score of Landmark Conference foe Juniata and noticed his name.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on December 18, 2013, 09:03:20 AM

I think Guilford is a questionable choice at #17. They're 8-0, but I'm having a hard time finding a single result on their schedule that is commensurate with that ranking. Perhaps a two-point home win over Randolph-Macon is that (though Macon isn't a ranked team, and a two-point home win would suggest they're basically even teams), but other than that they have some close calls against some poor competition.

Their last three games are now:

Overtime at NC Wesleyan
2-pt home win vs. Methodist
1-pt road win at Shenandoah

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 18, 2013, 10:50:59 PM

Quote from: WUH on December 17, 2013, 06:46:08 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on December 17, 2013, 05:23:56 PM
I do think Wash U. may be a bit overrated, being placed above a lot of really good one-loss teams like St. Thomas, Wittenberg, Augustana, Wesley, and so on. With no wins vs. a top 25 team, a loss to a non-top-25 team, and the blow-out loss to IWU (I wouldn't punish a team for losing to IWU, but losing by 25 is another story), I don't see why they are ranked so highly. I think another case of pre-season expectations exceeding actual performance to date, as they seem to lack any depth at all this season beyond the top four players ...

I would have to agree with this. Depth is a definitely problem, though I would give the team five or six rather than four. The team looked strong through the first few games and did beat a previously ranked DePauw squad, but has not played particularly well since November. They nearly lost to Coe College over the weekend at home.

They may begin to slide down the rankings unless they beat Wheaton on January 2nd.

Wheaton's having its own problems right now, though. Their sixth man and top perimeter threat, senior guard Michael Kvam, was just dismissed from the team. Since the WC @ WUSTL game will be played in St. Louis, I think that the Bears will be a solid favorite.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on December 19, 2013, 12:22:58 PM

Was able to catch the Cabrini game online yesterday and having now seen 4 or the top 5 teams it struck me how different the style of play is. I've only caught bits and pieces of UW-SP and not a whole game yet, so I still need to see them. I think the first place vote Cabrini received may be stretching it a bit given their defensive prowess or lack thereof, although given their schedule they very well might win out just outscoring everyone in their path. Cabrini/Williams are definitely looking to outscore teams versus clamping down on the defensive end.

Here's a breakdown of the top 5 teams

PPG FG% 3% FT% OPP PPG FG% 3% FT%
UW-SP 81.9 58.6 54.7 65.9 59.9 40.7 26.6 71.5
Wooster 69.0 42.1 34.6 78.3 61.0 42.4 31.2 58.2
IWU 87.5 51.6 47.7 71.0 65.1 38.7 31.1 69.4
Cabrini 94.2 50.6 40.3 83.1 80.0 44.9 36.5 67.5
Williams 94.9 54.4 42.5 79.2 75.6 42.0 33.7 66.7

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 19, 2013, 01:48:39 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 18, 2013, 10:50:59 PM
Wheaton's having its own problems right now, though. Their sixth man and top perimeter threat, senior guard Michael Kvam, was just dismissed from the team. Since the WC @ WUSTL game will be played in St. Louis, I think that the Bears will be a solid favorite.

Point well taken. I did read about the dismissal on the CCIW thread.

It is speculation on my part, but I am thinking that a win over Wheaton may still prevent WUSTL from sliding (or may cushion the fall) if other Top 25 times continue to play well and knowing that WUSTL only has two other SLIAC teams on the calender to bolster their credentials before conference season begins.

Of course, if WUSTL plays like they played against Coe, a win over Webster may not be a safe conclusion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 19, 2013, 04:22:35 PM

Stevens-Point's statistical dominance is pretty darn impressive. Especially when you consider that they have played a strong schedule, including double-digit wins over Whitewater and Hope. The next four games are very tough for Stevens-Point: St. Thomas, Whitman, Whitworth, and North Central, all good teams. In my mind they are already the favorite, but if they win those four, they become the overwhelming favorite. Shooting 54.7 percent from three, while holding your opponent to 26.6 percent, is absolutely insane. Steven-Point is, right now, sinking threes at better than DOUBLE the rate of its opponents. A recipe for easy victories ... That can't possibly continue, especially in light of the upcoming schedule, but even through only seven games, that is insane. And Stevens-Point certainly has the historical success to suggest that its crazy-hot shooting is not just an early-season fluke. Tillema and Haas are very, very difficult covers.

Wooster's stats are by far the least impressive of the top five, and they appear to lack much of an inside presence this year. They seem like a top-15 team, but not really a top-five team, at this point -- 42 percent from the field, even vs. a very good schedule to date, is not very good, and reflects the fact that they are heavily reliant on perimeter players to score. I wonder how a loss (to a non D-3 team, so hard to judge) will affect the ranking.

What scares me as a non-Cabrini fan about Cabrini is that Walton-Moss has proven, again and again, that he can carry the team on his back in big games vs. top-notch opponents. He is so good that Cabrini can beat anyone on any given day. But Cabrini does seem very, very small, which can't help on the defensive end.

Based on early-season results, I'd say, going into the holidays, that Stevens Point, IWU, and Williams, in that order, are the top three, followed very closely by Cabrini and Amherst. Any of those five teams are talented enough to be a major threat to win a D3 title in what appears to be a very top-heavy year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on December 19, 2013, 04:55:19 PM

Nescac1 - Having seen 2 1/2 of the Wooster games they definitely are a team that is grinding out victories rather than blowing people away with a huge talent edge. I don't expect much of an impact from the non-D3 loss but even if they drop just a couple spots I think it may be appropriate based on what I've seen. While he's not going to blow anybody away with his production, I will say watching Kipfer come off the bench in all his Thor-like glory and bust his butt for 18 mins in a game is about the most entertaining thing I've watched all year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 19, 2013, 05:17:28 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on December 19, 2013, 04:22:35 PM
Wooster's stats are by far the least impressive of the top five [...]

But Wooster's played much better free throw defense than the other top 5 teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 19, 2013, 10:07:36 PM

Wooster's played a pretty tough schedule. Their only two softies, Oberlin and Wabash, are league games won on the road by 19 and 13.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 20, 2013, 12:28:25 AM

Anybody else intrigued by the fact that the Amherst-Emerson result hasn't even shown up on Massey?

I emailed him and let him no (strangely, to no response... every other time I've noted a difference, I've at least gotten an acknowledgement...).

The game slot even has been removed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on December 20, 2013, 09:05:13 AM

Quote from: John Gleich on December 20, 2013, 12:28:25 AM
Anybody else intrigued by the fact that the Amherst-Emerson result hasn't even shown up on Massey?

I emailed him and let him no (strangely, to no response... every other time I've noted a difference, I've at least gotten an acknowledgement...).

The game slot even has been removed.

Confirmation of his (i.e. Massey's) WIAC bias.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 20, 2013, 10:19:06 AM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 20, 2013, 09:05:13 AM
Quote from: John Gleich on December 20, 2013, 12:28:25 AM
Anybody else intrigued by the fact that the Amherst-Emerson result hasn't even shown up on Massey?

I emailed him and let him no (strangely, to no response... every other time I've noted a difference, I've at least gotten an acknowledgement...).

The game slot even has been removed.

Confirmation of his (i.e. Massey's) WIAC bias.

That's GOTTA be it. I don't know why I didn't realize it!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on December 20, 2013, 11:38:37 AM

Quote from: John Gleich on December 20, 2013, 10:19:06 AM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 20, 2013, 09:05:13 AM
Quote from: John Gleich on December 20, 2013, 12:28:25 AM
Anybody else intrigued by the fact that the Amherst-Emerson result hasn't even shown up on Massey?

I emailed him and let him no (strangely, to no response... every other time I've noted a difference, I've at least gotten an acknowledgement...).

The game slot even has been removed.

Confirmation of his (i.e. Massey's) WIAC bias.

That's GOTTA be it. I don't know why I didn't realize it!

When did you send him the note? Typically when he makes a manual change, it doesn't show up until the full database update each sunday/monday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 20, 2013, 12:54:59 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 20, 2013, 11:38:37 AM
Quote from: John Gleich on December 20, 2013, 10:19:06 AM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 20, 2013, 09:05:13 AM
Quote from: John Gleich on December 20, 2013, 12:28:25 AM
Anybody else intrigued by the fact that the Amherst-Emerson result hasn't even shown up on Massey?

I emailed him and let him no (strangely, to no response... every other time I've noted a difference, I've at least gotten an acknowledgement...).

The game slot even has been removed.

Confirmation of his (i.e. Massey's) WIAC bias.

That's GOTTA be it. I don't know why I didn't realize it!

When did you send him the note? Typically when he makes a manual change, it doesn't show up until the full database update each sunday/monday.

December 8th.

Maybe the disappearance is in preparation for a manual change...? Or maybe he's a closet Amherst fan and wants to see them stay at #2...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 21, 2013, 04:59:18 AM

I emailed Mr. Massey a couple of weeks ago about some missing scores. He responded in about 10 minutes and explained if the score isn't reported to the NCAA by the SID it doesn't get picked up by his computer as it is apparently tied into that website. I did notice that about a day or so later all the missing scores were added to his ratings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 21, 2013, 08:58:07 AM

Just a note to say that I am not planning to post a "How They Fared" report this week. I am assuming that the next poll comes out on Dec. 30 -- which would be consistent with past years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 21, 2013, 08:10:15 PM

Bethany at 9-0 and 3-0 against the OAC including wins over Mt. Union and Baldwin-Wallace should start getting consideration in the poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 23, 2013, 11:15:13 AM

Actually, we're taking this week *and* next week off. Many of our voters are out of the office this week and traveling at tournaments next week and we will vote again after the first of the year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 24, 2013, 12:15:48 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 23, 2013, 11:15:13 AM
Actually, we're taking this week *and* next week off. ...

Good to know. I'll still plan to post a report this Sunday night, but won't be able to post until about 10:00pm (EST) ... but given the poll schedule, that should not present a problem.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on December 27, 2013, 12:50:54 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on December 19, 2013, 04:22:35 PM
Wooster's stats are by far the least impressive of the top five, and they appear to lack much of an inside presence this year. They seem like a top-15 team, but not really a top-five team, at this point -- 42 percent from the field, even vs. a very good schedule to date, is not very good, and reflects the fact that they are heavily reliant on perimeter players to score. I wonder how a loss (to a non D-3 team, so hard to judge) will affect the ranking.

I generally agree with your assessment of Wooster.

Though actually I think the ability of this year's team to still similar production in the paint as last year's team has been something of a nice surprise so far, considering the Scots graduated two senior posts last year in Josh Claytor and Jake Mays.

Last season those two combined to shoot 208-361 (57.6%), averaging 16.9 PPG and were responsible for 23.0% of Wooster's total points.

Through 9 games this year their replacements - freshman Dan Fanelly and sophmore Josh Kipfer - have combined for a remarkably similar line: 61-102 (59.8%) from the field, 15.5 PPG, and responsibility for 22.5% of Wooster's total points.

It's true that no one's going to confuse Wooster for a dominant low post team (which has been true for awhile), but at least so far the "inside presence" seems similar to last year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on December 27, 2013, 01:06:33 AM

Quote from: sac on December 19, 2013, 10:07:36 PM
Wooster's played a pretty tough schedule. Their only two softies, Oberlin and Wabash, are league games won on the road by 19 and 13.

Wooster's opponents to date are 55-25 (.688) in non-Wooster games. Fourteen of those losses belong to the aforementioned Oberlin and Wabash; the other seven opponents are 51-11 (.823) in non-Wooster games to-date. Though many of the games have been close, Wooster is 6-1 against those seven teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 27, 2013, 04:35:40 PM

BTW, Massey now has the Emerson / Amherst game. It's the third most unlikely result of the year thus far, behind Principia / Millikin and Transylvania / Wilmington.

That of course could change due to fluctuations in rankings going forward, but I don't think anything can catch Principia / Millikin...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 27, 2013, 05:24:20 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 27, 2013, 04:35:40 PM
BTW, Massey now has the Emerson / Amherst game. It's the third most unlikely result of the year thus far, behind Principia / Millikin and Transylvania / Wilmington.

That of course could change due to fluctuations in rankings going forward, but I don't think anything can catch Principia / Millikin...

Yep, it showed up... either on the 16th, or the 23rd (can't remember) and Amherst plummeted in the ratings.

Wooster's win vs Westmont is now up too (which it wasn't earlier) but the lost to Arizona Christian isn't there still.

Interestingly, Arizona Chiristian is ranked 506 in all of college basketball (compared to 519 for Westmont). Wooster is currently #309 and #2 in D-III.

Here's the top (several) in D-III and their overall rankings, to compare with Arizona Christian and Westmont:

(Massey rank, overall rank, d3hoops rank)

#1 UWSP - 210 (#1)
#2 Wooster - 309 (#2)
#3 Cabrini - 339 (#4)
#4 IWU - 370 (#3)
#5 UW Whitewater - 409 (#12)
#6 Augustana - 429 (#13)
#7 SUNY Purchase - 430 (#21)
#8 Christopher Newport - 434 (#18)
#9 Marietta - 441 (#15)
#10 Mary Washington - 444 (ORV #2)
#11 Dickinson - 450 (ORV #8)
#12 Richard Stockton - 455 (ORV #11)
#13 St Thomas - 474 (#7)
#14 Va Wesleyan - 482 (#10)
#15 Bethany (VW) - 486 (NR)
#16 Wesley - 492 (#20)
#17 Albertus Magnus - 494 (ORV #6)
#18 Bowdoin - 497 (ORV #20)
#19 Brockport State - 522 (ORV #7)
#20 Amherst - 528 (#6)
#21 Stevenson - 531 (ORV #3)
#22 Wittenberg - 541 (#11)
#23 Wheaton - 545 (#24)
#24 CO College - 558 (#25)
#25 UT Dallas - 569 (ORV #14)

So, in essence, Wooster's win (and loss) were to teams akin to #18/#19 in the country.

The big outlier for Massey would be Bethany (WV).

Who's missing in Massey's top 25 that are in the D3hoops.com top 25?

(D3hoops rank, Massey rank)

#5 Williams (38)
#8 WPI (61)
#9 Wash U (26)
#14 St Norbert (36)
#16 Calvin (53)
#17 Guilford (43)
#19 Middlebury (37)
#22 E Conn (42)
#23 St. Mary (34)

The outlier(s?) here would be WPI and Calvin.

A couple of extra thoughts... (so, the 2 cents on top of my 2 cents?)

The D3hoops top 25 is already about 2 weeks old... so some of these ratings or rankings that seem off might be closer once results show up in the rankings (and are already showing up in the ratings).

Massey really seems down on the NESCAC.

Here's how Massey would rank the conferences:

1. UAA
2. WIAC
3. OAC (Wooster, and the conference, will drop when the AZ Christian result posts, based on the information above)
4. CCIW
5. ODAC
6. MAC Commonwealth
7. Capital
8. NESCAC

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 27, 2013, 05:56:35 PM

Wooster's not in the OAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 27, 2013, 10:54:15 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 27, 2013, 05:56:35 PM
Wooster's not in the OAC.

That, of course, is true.

I'll go sit down now...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 28, 2013, 06:47:44 PM

#1 Stevens Points with a win over Whitworth 93-75. A close game for the first half, Whitworth had a 2 point, 45-43 lead, at the break but the Pointers outscored the Pirates 50-30 in the 2nd half to win going away. Pointers' Tyler Tilema with 33 points to capture scoring honors.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 29, 2013, 03:52:51 AM

Only going away in about the last six minutes... that was still a close game until foul trouble for Whitworth started seeing their best players heading for the bench with under 8 to play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 29, 2013, 06:09:17 AM

Other than Tillema and Haas, Stevens-Point doesn't wow you with overwhelming individual talent, not particularly big or quick or dynamic off the dribble (again, other than Tillema), but wow they play well on both ends as a team, such an impressive system to watch. They are tough defensively despite lacking an imposing interior presence just because each guy knows his role and they seem almost never to be out of position. As usual, on offense their off-the-ball motion is so precise and unrelenting, and all of their high screens are very effective. The offense rarely seems to get bogged down into a quagmire situation. They are great at getting open, and when they get open they have deadly shooters from deep and a nice interior finisher in Richard, and Tillema is great at breaking down the defense on his own on the rare occasions when the system isn't generating easy looks through motion and ball movement. They are particularly good at exploiting help defense. Almost all their shot attempts seem to be close to the rim or good looks in rhythm from three, which is why they are so efficient offensively. The only weakness so far seems to be spotty team foul shooting, but it will take an incredibly disciplined and well-prepared defensive team to slow down that offense.

I like Whitworth's two frosh, especially Jurlina from Australia. They will be better as they get those two guys get more experience.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 29, 2013, 08:31:25 PM

Final: Wooster 88 Thiel 53

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 29, 2013, 09:44:23 PM

I appreciate your insight and thoughts on the Pointers, nescac1. I think what makes the Pointers stand out is that the whole team can be involved. Instead of everyone standing around watching Tillema create and break down the defense, the players understand and have the ability to get themselves open, giving Tillema options. As a Pointer fan, I will admit we don't have a lot of guys athletic enough to create their own shots (like conference rival Whitewater), but its nice to know our guys are smart enough to get open, instead of "watching the pain dry"!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 29, 2013, 10:35:51 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

A couple of games are still in progress. In addition, the score for Stevenson vs. Lagrange might not be correct, although it should be close: The live stats appeared to be stuck at 10 seconds left in the second half.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	618	UW-Stevens Point	9-0	def. #7 St. Thomas, 75-62; won at T#29 Whitworth, 93-75; 12/29 at Whitman; 12/31 at T#39 North Central (Ill.); 01/04 vs. UW-La Crosse
#2	599	Wooster	9-1	def. Westmont, 53-47; LOST at Arizona Christian, 60-62; def. Thiel, 88-53; 12/30 vs. Hanover; 01/04 vs. Denison
#3	566	Illinois Wesleyan	9-1	def. Blackburn, 95-61; def. Wilmington, 74-65; won at Hope, 91-83; 01/02 vs. Franklin; 01/04 at Elmhurst
#4	550	Cabrini	9-0	def. Randolph-Macon, 98-91; 01/02 vs. #20 Wesley
#5	529	Williams	8-1	def. Washington College, 84-76; 12/30 at Washington and Lee; 01/02 at T#46 Hampden-Sydney
#6	501	Amherst	7-1	01/01 at Nova Southeastern
#7	397	St. Thomas	6-2	LOST at #1 UW-Stevens Point, 62-75; 01/04 vs. Carleton
#8	395	WPI	9-1	01/03 at Becker
#9	368	Washington U.	6-2	12/30 at Fontbonne; 01/02 vs. #24 Wheaton (Ill.); 01/04 vs. Webster
#10	358	Virginia Wesleyan	8-2	LOST at #27 Mary Washington, 87-95; def. Ferrum, 105-64; 01/03 vs. North Carolina Wesleyan
#11	346	Wittenberg	10-1	won at Thomas More, 87-70; def. Grove City, 79-40; def. Kean, 91-75
#12	338	UW-Whitewater	8-2	def. Alma, 97-69; def. Lawrence, 73-56; won at Augsburg, 89-81; 12/30 vs. Edgewood; 01/04 vs. UW-River Falls
#13	297	Augustana	10-1	def. Mount St. Joseph, 81-56; won at UW-La Crosse, 71-58; def. UW-Oshkosh, 63-41; 01/04 vs. Carthage
#14	259	St. Norbert	7-1	def. Carroll, 76-69; def. Alma, 103-69; 12/30 vs. Viterbo; 01/04 vs. Lawrence
#15	254	Marietta	8-2	def. Muskingum, 79-70; LOST to T#46 Ohio Wesleyan, 74-79; 12/30 at Albion
#16	243	Calvin	8-2	won at Redlands, 88-82; 12/30 at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps
#17	206	Guilford	9-2	won at North Carolina Wesleyan, 84-78; LOST at T#32 Dickinson, 75-90; LOST to Birmingham-Southern, 56-72; 01/04 vs. Messiah
#18	177	Christopher Newport	8-1	def. Salisbury, 56-47; 12/30 vs. Pitt-Greensburg; 01/04 vs. Frostburg State
#19	173	Middlebury	6-2	01/02 at Salve Regina
#20	141	Wesley	7-1	won at Ramapo, 76-67; 01/02 at #4 Cabrini; 01/04 vs. Southern Virginia
#21	110	SUNY-Purchase	7-0	01/04 vs. SUNY-Old Westbury
#22	90	Eastern Connecticut	7-3	LOST at T#39 North Central (Ill.), 69-70; LOST to Carthage, 58-61; 01/04 at Plymouth State
#23	86	St. Mary's (Md.)	7-3	won at Susquehanna, 54-51; won at Sacred Heart (P.R.), 61-56; 01/04 vs. Marymount
#24	84	Wheaton (Ill.)	7-3	def. Northwestern (Minn.), 69-47; 01/02 at #9 Washington U.; 01/04 at Millikin
#25	71	Colorado College	6-1	won at Lehman, 82-75; 12/30 at T#34 Babson; 01/04 at University of Dallas

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	50	UW-Stout	7-3	LOST at Millikin, 56-68; 12/30 at Plattsburgh State; 01/04 vs. UW-Eau Claire
#27	38	Mary Washington	9-1	def. #10 Virginia Wesleyan, 95-87; won at Randolph, 51-50; 01/04 vs. York (Pa.)
#28	26	Stevenson	8-1	def. Marywood, 89-65; def. LaGrange, 102-90; 12/30 at #30 Oglethorpe; 01/04 vs. Widener
T#29	24	Whitworth	5-3	def. Southwestern, 74-59; LOST to #1 UW-Stevens Point, 75-93; 12/29 at T#39 UW-Platteville; 01/03 at Pacific; 01/04 at Willamette
#30	26	Oglethorpe	10-1	def. Rust, 80-72; 12/30 vs. #28 Stevenson
#31	22	Albertus Magnus	7-1	LOST at Central Conn. St., 82-85
T#32	21	Brockport State	4-1	12/30 at Hamilton; 12/31 at TBA
T#32	21	Dickinson	9-2	won at Catholic, 86-74; def. T#43 Alvernia, 72-57; def. #17 Guilford, 90-75; LOST at Randolph-Macon, 71-77
T#34	14	Babson	7-2	12/30 vs. #25 Colorado College; 01/04 vs. Elms
T#34	14	John Carroll	8-2	LOST at Rose-Hulman, 80-85; won at Howard Payne, 99-86; won at Austin, 90-76; 01/04 at Muskingum
#36	17	Richard Stockton	9-1	won at Millsaps, 70-65; def. Gettysburg, 59-53; 01/04 vs. Rutgers-Newark
#37	12	Baldwin Wallace	6-4	LOST to Wilmington, 74-87; LOST at Mount Union, 79-90; LOST at Bethany, 58-60; won at Southwestern, 76-62; 12/30 at Schreiner; 01/04 vs. Otterbein
#38	11	Defiance	8-1	LOST at Oakland, 66-87; def. Albion, 50-48; 12/30 vs. T#46 Ohio Wesleyan; 01/04 at Hanover
T#39	10	Texas-Dallas	6-1	won at Sul Ross State, 79-71; 01/02 vs. Louisiana College; 01/04 vs. Mississippi College
T#39	10	North Central (Ill.)	7-3	def. #22 Eastern Connecticut, 70-69; LOST at Buffalo State, 72-80; 12/31 vs. #1 UW-Stevens Point; 01/04 vs. North Park
T#39	10	UW-Platteville	8-3	won at George Fox, 98-91; 12/29 vs. T#29 Whitworth; 01/04 at UW-Superior
#42	7	Dubuque	8-0	def. AIB College of Business, 109-66; 12/30 vs. Rockford; 01/03 vs. Bethany Lutheran
T#43	6	Emory	6-3	01/03 vs. Piedmont
T#43	6	Alvernia	6-3	LOST at T#32 Dickinson, 57-72; won at York (Pa.), 89-55; 12/30 vs. SUNY-Old Westbury; 01/04 at Lebanon Valley
T#43	6	Bowdoin	9-0	IDLE
T#46	5	Springfield	7-2	01/03 vs. Lyndon State; 01/04 vs. TBD
T#46	5	Hampden-Sydney	6-3	def. Washington and Jefferson, 78-65; 12/30 vs. Baruch; 01/02 vs. #5 Williams
T#46	5	Ohio Wesleyan	8-2	won at #15 Marietta, 79-74; 12/30 at #38 Defiance
#49	2	Centre	6-2	def. Thomas More, 85-64; 12/30 at Hope; 12/31 at Cincinnati Christian Col.; 01/04 vs. Sewanee
#50	1	Juniata	8-2	def. Pitt-Greensburg, 93-76; def. Nazareth, 57-56; LOST at Washington and Jefferson, 73-79; 01/03 vs. Valley Forge Chrst.; 01/04 vs. TBD

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 29, 2013, 11:48:15 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 29, 2013, 09:44:23 PM
I appreciate your insight and thoughts on the Pointers, nescac1. I think what makes the Pointers stand out is that the whole team can be involved. Instead of everyone standing around watching Tillema create and break down the defense, the players understand and have the ability to get themselves open, giving Tillema options. As a Pointer fan, I will admit we don't have a lot of guys athletic enough to create their own shots (like conference rival Whitewater), but its nice to know our guys are smart enough to get open, instead of "watching the pain dry"!

"Whole team can get involved"

And then Tillema and Hass combine for 65 of Stevens Point's 87 in night two (74.7% of the scoring).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 30, 2013, 01:21:35 AM

Quote from: John Gleich on December 29, 2013, 11:48:15 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 29, 2013, 09:44:23 PM
I appreciate your insight and thoughts on the Pointers, nescac1. I think what makes the Pointers stand out is that the whole team can be involved. Instead of everyone standing around watching Tillema create and break down the defense, the players understand and have the ability to get themselves open, giving Tillema options. As a Pointer fan, I will admit we don't have a lot of guys athletic enough to create their own shots (like conference rival Whitewater), but its nice to know our guys are smart enough to get open, instead of "watching the pain dry"!

"Whole team can get involved"

And then Tillema and Hass combine for 65 of Stevens Point's 87 in night two (74.7% of the scoring).

Yes... they had a ton of the scoring tonight... but the team as a whole played very well. While some didn't get big numbers... guys like Ryf, Ritchay and even Lutz had some huge plays and played outstanding defense. It doesn't show up in the box score, but this is a very deep team with guys who fill their roles well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 30, 2013, 09:47:35 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 30, 2013, 01:21:35 AM
Quote from: John Gleich on December 29, 2013, 11:48:15 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 29, 2013, 09:44:23 PM
I appreciate your insight and thoughts on the Pointers, nescac1. I think what makes the Pointers stand out is that the whole team can be involved. Instead of everyone standing around watching Tillema create and break down the defense, the players understand and have the ability to get themselves open, giving Tillema options. As a Pointer fan, I will admit we don't have a lot of guys athletic enough to create their own shots (like conference rival Whitewater), but its nice to know our guys are smart enough to get open, instead of "watching the pain dry"!

"Whole team can get involved"

And then Tillema and Hass combine for 65 of Stevens Point's 87 in night two (74.7% of the scoring).

Yes... they had a ton of the scoring tonight... but the team as a whole played very well. While some didn't get big numbers... guys like Ryf, Ritchay and even Lutz had some huge plays and played outstanding defense. It doesn't show up in the box score, but this is a very deep team with guys who fill their roles well.

I totally agree. I think that Ryf may be the glue that holds everything together. Balls that don't go right from Tillema to a scorer are often going through Ryf on their way to Hass out one of the interior players. He's also a great defender.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 05, 2014, 05:58:44 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	618	UW-Stevens Point	12-0	def. #7 St. Thomas, 75-62; won at T#29 Whitworth, 93-75; def. Whitman, 89-79; won at T#39 North Central (Ill.), 66-64; def. UW-La Crosse, 74-61
#2	599	Wooster	11-1	def. Westmont, 53-47; LOST at Arizona Christian, 60-62; def. Thiel, 88-53; def. Hanover, 63-53; def. Denison, 100-75
#3	566	Illinois Wesleyan	11-1	def. Blackburn, 95-61; def. Wilmington, 74-65; won at Hope, 91-83; def. Franklin, 83-67; won at Elmhurst, 104-73
#4	550	Cabrini	9-0	def. Randolph-Macon, 98-91; ~~01/02 vs. #20 Wesley~~ postponed
#5	529	Williams	10-1	def. Washington College, 84-76; won at Washington and Lee, 60-58; won at T#46 Hampden-Sydney, 70-68
#6	501	Amherst	7-2	LOST at Nova Southeastern, 101-105
#7	397	St. Thomas	7-2	LOST at #1 UW-Stevens Point, 62-75; def. Carleton, 82-52
#8	395	WPI	10-1	won at Becker, 70-64
#9	368	Washington U.	9-2	won at Fontbonne, 87-50; def. #24 Wheaton (Ill.), 84-80; def. Webster, 85-68
#10	358	Virginia Wesleyan	9-2	LOST at #27 Mary Washington, 87-95; def. Ferrum, 105-64; def. North Carolina Wesleyan, 79-71
#11	346	Wittenberg	10-1	won at Thomas More, 87-70; def. Grove City, 79-40; def. Kean, 91-75
#12	338	UW-Whitewater	10-2	def. Alma, 97-69; def. Lawrence, 73-56; won at Augsburg, 89-81; def. Edgewood, 85-53; def. UW-River Falls, 70-41
#13	297	Augustana	11-1	def. Mount St. Joseph, 81-56; won at UW-La Crosse, 71-58; def. UW-Oshkosh, 63-41; def. Carthage, 82-74
#14	259	St. Norbert	9-1	def. Carroll, 76-69; def. Alma, 103-69; def. Viterbo, 70-63; def. Lawrence, 81-68
#15	254	Marietta	9-2	def. Muskingum, 79-70; LOST to T#46 Ohio Wesleyan, 74-79; def. Albion, 76-73
#16	243	Calvin	8-3	won at Redlands, 88-82; LOST at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 50-66
#17	206	Guilford	9-3	won at North Carolina Wesleyan, 84-78; LOST at T#32 Dickinson, 75-90; LOST to Birmingham-Southern, 56-72; LOST to Messiah, 72-82
#18	177	Christopher Newport	10-1	def. Salisbury, 56-47; def. Pitt-Greensburg, 76-70; def. Frostburg State, 72-59
#19	173	Middlebury	6-3	LOST at Salve Regina, 69-76
#20	141	Wesley	8-1	won at Ramapo, 76-67; ~~01/02 at #4 Cabrini~~ postponed; def. Southern Virginia, 67-51
#21	110	SUNY-Purchase	8-0	def. SUNY-Old Westbury, 86-78
#22	90	Eastern Connecticut	8-3	LOST at T#39 North Central (Ill.), 69-70; LOST to Carthage, 58-61; won at Plymouth State, 61-49
#23	86	St. Mary's (Md.)	8-3	won at Susquehanna, 54-51; won at Sacred Heart (P.R.), 61-56; def. Marymount, 92-83
#24	84	Wheaton (Ill.)	8-4	def. Northwestern (Minn.), 69-47; LOST at #9 Washington U., 80-84; won at Millikin, 92-84
#25	71	Colorado College	7-2	won at Lehman, 82-75; LOST at T#34 Babson, 90-93; won at University of Dallas, 78-66

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	50	UW-Stout	8-4	LOST at Millikin, 56-68; LOST to Plattsburgh State, 40-62; def. UW-Eau Claire, 56-45
#27	38	Mary Washington	10-1	def. #10 Virginia Wesleyan, 95-87; won at Randolph, 51-50; def. York (Pa.), 80-60
#28	26	Stevenson	9-2	def. Marywood, 89-65; def. LaGrange, 102-90; LOST at #30 Oglethorpe, 76-77; def. Widener, 105-100
T#29	24	Whitworth	8-3	def. Southwestern, 74-59; LOST to #1 UW-Stevens Point, 75-93; won at T#39 UW-Platteville, 84-77; won at Pacific, 65-52; won at Willamette, 64-53
#30	26	Oglethorpe	11-1	def. Rust, 80-72; def. #28 Stevenson, 77-76
#31	22	Albertus Magnus	7-1	LOST at Central Conn. St., 82-85
T#32	21	Brockport State	6-1	won at Hamilton, 74-62; won at Medaille, 66-52
T#32	21	Dickinson	9-2	won at Catholic, 86-74; def. T#43 Alvernia, 72-57; def. #17 Guilford, 90-75; LOST at Randolph-Macon, 71-77
T#34	14	Babson	9-2	def. #25 Colorado College, 93-90; def. Elms, 84-57
T#34	14	John Carroll	8-3	LOST at Rose-Hulman, 80-85; won at Howard Payne, 99-86; won at Austin, 90-76; LOST at Muskingum, 85-87
#36	17	Richard Stockton	10-1	won at Millsaps, 70-65; def. Gettysburg, 59-53; def. Rutgers-Newark, 77-68
#37	12	Baldwin Wallace	7-5	LOST to Wilmington, 74-87; LOST at Mount Union, 79-90; LOST at Bethany, 58-60; won at Southwestern, 76-62; LOST to Schreiner, 74-77; def. Otterbein, 90-67
#38	11	Defiance	8-3	LOST at Oakland, 66-87; def. Albion, 50-48; LOST to T#46 Ohio Wesleyan, 62-75; LOST at Hanover, 63-67
T#39	10	Texas-Dallas	8-1	won at Sul Ross State, 79-71; def. Louisiana College, 80-61; def. Mississippi College, 71-60
T#39	10	North Central (Ill.)	8-4	def. #22 Eastern Connecticut, 70-69; LOST at Buffalo State, 72-80; LOST to #1 UW-Stevens Point, 64-66; def. North Park, 82-54
T#39	10	UW-Platteville	9-4	won at George Fox, 98-91; LOST to T#29 Whitworth, 77-84; won at UW-Superior, 77-73
#42	7	Dubuque	11-0	def. AIB College of Business, 109-66; def. Rockford, 89-81; def. St. Francis (IL), 79-62; def. Bethany Lutheran, 83-71
T#43	6	Emory	7-3	def. Piedmont, 83-65
T#43	6	Alvernia	7-4	LOST at T#32 Dickinson, 57-72; won at York (Pa.), 89-55; def. SUNY-Old Westbury, 96-76; LOST at Lebanon Valley, 81-89
T#43	6	Bowdoin	9-0	IDLE
T#46	5	Springfield	9-2	def. Lyndon State, 84-77; def. Bridgewater State, 80-66
T#46	5	Hampden-Sydney	7-4	def. Washington and Jefferson, 78-65; def. Baruch, 51-49; LOST to #5 Williams, 68-70
T#46	5	Ohio Wesleyan	9-2	won at #15 Marietta, 79-74; won at #38 Defiance, 75-62
#49	2	Centre	8-3	def. Thomas More, 85-64; LOST at Hope, 68-75; def. Cincinnati Christian, 84-73; def. Sewanee, 48-46
#50	1	Juniata	10-2	def. Pitt-Greensburg, 93-76; def. Nazareth, 57-56; LOST at Washington and Jefferson, 73-79; def. Valley Forge Chrst., 94-48; def. Case Western Reserve, 74-64

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 06, 2014, 11:52:06 AM

What are Richard Stocktons chances of getting in the Top 25?

Also, I saw below someone saying a score may have been wrong. The other night I was monitoring all the scores on here and Carthage was playing Augustana, and something must have went haywire, because it was showing Carthage blowing out Augustana by like 30 points, and even had a final score showing Cathage won the game. I even checked the school paqes and it showed that.
The next morning when I got up, the score was totaly different and Augustana had won the game by a lot.

It is probably a good idea to hold off on posting comments about games until the next day, unless you know for sure the score is right.

On another side note-- last night I wanted to watch hoopeville live on here at 7pm est, and I got the commercial at the begining, but no sound or video feed for the show.

I watched part of it today from the archives.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 06, 2014, 03:09:02 PM

Updated Massey...

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?s=cb2014&sub=11620

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 06, 2014, 05:04:11 PM

I think the voters should show Richard Stockton and Brockport State some top 25 love in the next poll. With all these teams with 2, 3 and even 4 losses in the Top 25, (and I realize that many of them have just recently picked up some of those losses due to the long pause since the last poll) I think it's time for some fresh blood.

Richard Stockton, now 10-1, has only a 2 point loss at conference rival William Paterson that's keeping them off the undefeated list.

Likewise, Brockport State's only blemish on their record, is a double overtime loss on the road at #21 SUNY-Purchase. The Golden Eagles had the lead late in regulation when Purchase hit a free throw with seconds left to send it to the extra sessions. If Brockport had won that game I believe they would be ranked in place of Purchase. Earlier there was an article on the front page referring to the Golden Eagles as Road Warriors since all 7 of their games have been in the visitors gym or on a neutral court. Their 1st home game of the season isn't until Jan. 14th.

The Massey Ratings have had Stockton and Brockport in his top 25 for several weeks and in his updated rankings today Stockton checks in at #8 and Brockport is right behind at #9. Massey also shows Stockton with a Strength of Schedule ranking of #29 and Brockport at #67. There are at least 15 teams in the D3 hoops Top 25 that have a SOS below these 2 teams. Some examples in the current Top 25 are, #20 Wesley #104, #16 Calvin #169, #14 St. Norberts #182, #8 WPI #363, #6 Amherst #138, #5 Williams #227.

It's time for both these schools to get some Top 25 recognition and move into the 20-25 range. Hope the voters see things as I do.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on January 06, 2014, 07:22:21 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 06, 2014, 05:04:11 PM
I think the voters should show Richard Stockton and Brockport State some top 25 love in the next poll. With all these teams with 2, 3 and even 4 losses in the Top 25, (and I realize that many of them have just recently picked up some of those losses due to the long pause since the last poll) I think it's time for some fresh blood.

Richard Stockton, now 10-1, has only a 2 point loss at conference rival William Paterson that's keeping them off the undefeated list.

Likewise, Brockport State's only blemish on their record, is a double overtime loss on the road at #21 SUNY-Purchase. The Golden Eagles had the lead late in regulation when Purchase hit a free throw with seconds left to send it to the extra sessions. If Brockport had won that game I believe they would be ranked in place of Purchase. Earlier there was an article on the front page referring to the Golden Eagles as Road Warriors since all 7 of their games have been in the visitors gym or on a neutral court. Their 1st home game of the season isn't until Jan. 14th.

The Massey Ratings have had Stockton and Brockport in his top 25 for several weeks and in his updated rankings today Stockton checks in at #8 and Brockport is right behind at #9. Massey also shows Stockton with a Strength of Schedule ranking of #29 and Brockport at #67. There are at least 15 teams in the D3 hoops Top 25 that have a SOS below these 2 teams. Some examples in the current Top 25 are, #20 Wesley #104, #16 Calvin #169, #14 St. Norberts #182, #8 WPI #363, #6 Amherst #138, #5 Williams #227.

It's time for both these schools to get some Top 25 recognition and move into the 20-25 range. Hope the voters see things as I do.

Well you got half your wish. Stockton is ranked 23rd in the latest poll but still not enough love for Brockport State to get into the top 25.

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2013-14/week5

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 06, 2014, 11:52:11 PM

Quote from: mailsy on January 06, 2014, 07:22:21 PM
Quote from: magicman on January 06, 2014, 05:04:11 PM
I think the voters should show Richard Stockton and Brockport State some top 25 love in the next poll. With all these teams with 2, 3 and even 4 losses in the Top 25, (and I realize that many of them have just recently picked up some of those losses due to the long pause since the last poll) I think it's time for some fresh blood.

Richard Stockton, now 10-1, has only a 2 point loss at conference rival William Paterson that's keeping them off the undefeated list.

Likewise, Brockport State's only blemish on their record, is a double overtime loss on the road at #21 SUNY-Purchase. The Golden Eagles had the lead late in regulation when Purchase hit a free throw with seconds left to send it to the extra sessions. If Brockport had won that game I believe they would be ranked in place of Purchase. Earlier there was an article on the front page referring to the Golden Eagles as Road Warriors since all 7 of their games have been in the visitors gym or on a neutral court. Their 1st home game of the season isn't until Jan. 14th.

The Massey Ratings have had Stockton and Brockport in his top 25 for several weeks and in his updated rankings today Stockton checks in at #8 and Brockport is right behind at #9. Massey also shows Stockton with a Strength of Schedule ranking of #29 and Brockport at #67. There are at least 15 teams in the D3 hoops Top 25 that have a SOS below these 2 teams. Some examples in the current Top 25 are, #20 Wesley #104, #16 Calvin #169, #14 St. Norberts #182, #8 WPI #363, #6 Amherst #138, #5 Williams #227.

It's time for both these schools to get some Top 25 recognition and move into the 20-25 range. Hope the voters see things as I do.

Well you got half your wish. Stockton is ranked 23rd in the latest poll but still not enough love for Brockport State to get into the top 25.

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2013-14/week5

mailsy,

To paraphrase MeatLoaf: "1 out of 2 ain't bad". ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 07, 2014, 08:09:43 AM

Albertus Magnus (which just missed the top 25) is a team that bears close watching. They typically post gaudy records vs. weak competition, and this year is no exception, winning all games v. D3 by double-digits. But, they caught my attention with a narrow three point loss to D-1 Central Connecticut. They are again led by Darius Watson, one of the top players in New England, but he has been joined by two JC transfers who are both posting impressive stats: 6'8 center and pronunciation nightmare Victor Ljuljdjuraj, who is averaging 15.4-9.2 and 4.2 blocks in less than 26 mpg and who had his best game vs. Central Conn, and PG Eian Davis, who is averaging 14.4-4.4-8.8 plus 2.2 steals. That on paper seems like a very impressive three-man core. They have good size across the board, with a starting group that goes 6'1, 6'2, 6'4, 6'5, 6'8, and a 6'6 sixth man (who is also a JC transfer). They play no one of consequence going forward and will likely enter the tourney with no more than 3, and probably fewer, losses, while being a major unknown due to the lack of quality competition and the reliance on transfers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 07, 2014, 12:42:50 PM

QuoteThe other night I was monitoring all the scores on here and Carthage was playing Augustana, and something must have went haywire, because it was showing Carthage blowing out Augustana by like 30 points, and even had a final score showing Cathage won the game. I even checked the school paqes and it showed that. The next morning when I got up, the score was totaly different and Augustana had won the game by a lot.

I noticed the same thing. Someone accidentally posted the women's score to the men's page. Carthage women beat Augustana by something like 30 points.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on January 07, 2014, 12:43:42 PM

Dave posted his rankings and his thoughts on his latest poll. Here's the link for those of you that didn't see it... http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/01/07/daves-top-25-ballot-week-5/

You mentioned you were nervous about putting WPI up so high and you really should be. :P I agree Williams didn't look great their first couple of games coming out the gate but a win at H-SC is solid and shouldn't be downplayed. Neither one of these teams is setting any milestones when it comes to SOS but of the two WPI has played no one (Massey SOS: Williams: 225, WPI 362). WPI has only played 2 teams with winning records and at that those teams were 7-5 and 6-4. The overall record of opponents: WPI 38-71, Williams 55-63.

Plus we have the luxury of some common opponents:
RPI - WPI won by 16, Williams won by 25.
Curry - WPI won by 22, Williams won by 31.
Salem St - WPI won by 12, Williams won by 26.

I think the voters got it right to put Williams ahead of WPI at this point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pjunito on January 07, 2014, 04:08:40 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 07, 2014, 08:09:43 AM
Albertus Magnus (which just missed the top 25) is a team that bears close watching. They typically post gaudy records vs. weak competition, and this year is no exception, winning all games v. D3 by double-digits. But, they caught my attention with a narrow three point loss to D-1 Central Connecticut. They are again led by Darius Watson, one of the top players in New England, but he has been joined by two JC transfers who are both posting impressive stats: 6'8 center and pronunciation nightmare Victor Ljuljdjuraj, who is averaging 15.4-9.2 and 4.2 blocks in less than 26 mpg and who had his best game vs. Central Conn, and PG Eian Davis, who is averaging 14.4-4.4-8.8 plus 2.2 steals. That on paper seems like a very impressive three-man core. They have good size across the board, with a starting group that goes 6'1, 6'2, 6'4, 6'5, 6'8, and a 6'6 sixth man (who is also a JC transfer). They play no one of consequence going forward and will likely enter the tourney with no more than 3, and probably fewer, losses, while being a major unknown due to the lack of quality competition and the reliance on transfers.

Albertus does play SUNY Purchase (currently #18) on January 27 in New Haven. This will be a great measuring stick for Albertus. I agree with you NESCAC, this Albertus team is the best one under Mitch Oliver. The GNAC conference is a weak one, therefore Albertus won't get much respect. However, this team has good size, quickness and shoots the ball well (50% for field, averages 8 three's a game and makes 41% of those threes). Should be a fun conference season in New Haven.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 08, 2014, 10:06:48 AM

Quote from: gordonmann on January 07, 2014, 12:42:50 PM
QuoteThe other night I was monitoring all the scores on here and Carthage was playing Augustana, and something must have went haywire, because it was showing Carthage blowing out Augustana by like 30 points, and even had a final score showing Cathage won the game. I even checked the school paqes and it showed that. The next morning when I got up, the score was totaly different and Augustana had won the game by a lot.

I noticed the same thing. Someone accidentally posted the women's score to the men's page. Carthage women beat Augustana by something like 30 points.

Constantly reposting as well. I deleted that score three times over the course of the night before the school posting it finally noticed it was posting to the wrong team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 08, 2014, 09:01:24 PM

Final: #2 Wooster 92 Kenyon 52

Convincing road win for Wooster as they bury Kenyon by 40 points. Wooster was led by Doug Thorpe with 16 points.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 08, 2014, 09:50:23 PM

Interesting night

Augustana 81 Illinois Wesleyan 73

Stevens Point 61 Stout 60

Wittenberg 62 Ohio Wesleyan 60 OT

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on January 09, 2014, 12:37:50 AM

Quote from: sac on January 08, 2014, 09:50:23 PM
Interesting night

Augustana 81 Illinois Wesleyan 73

Stevens Point 61 Stout 60

Wittenberg 62 Ohio Wesleyan 60 OT

Even more interesting was that Witt was down 45-23 with just over 16 minutes left in the game and held OWU to just 9 points the rest of the way to force OT at 54 all! :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on January 10, 2014, 01:05:38 AM

When do the 1st regional rankings come out?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 10, 2014, 03:47:10 AM

Quote from: ronk on January 10, 2014, 01:05:38 AM
When do the 1st regional rankings come out?

Usually the 1st part of February. Last year the 1st set was released on Wed. Feb. 6th, 2nd set on Feb.13th, 3rd set on Feb 20th, and the final set on Feb. 27th was the one we didn't get to see. The NCAA bids were announced on Feb. 28th I believe.

Last year the final day of the conference tournaments was on Feb. 24th. This year the final day of the season is a week later. The last conference tournament won't be over until March 2nd. If the NCAA follows the same format they have in the past of 3 published regional rankings and 1 hidden one, then I'm guessing this year it might be February 12th before we see the first set. Then one would follow on the 19th, the 26th, and the hidden one on March 5th. Of course they could give us an extra one this year and make the 1st one on Feb.5th, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for that to happen.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 10, 2014, 12:51:19 PM

Quote from: sac on January 08, 2014, 09:50:23 PM
Interesting night

Augustana 81 Illinois Wesleyan 73

Stevens Point 61 Stout 60

Wittenberg 62 Ohio Wesleyan 60 OT

Stout is a completely different animal at home. Games against Point are always entertaining and usually close. Stout did knock off Whitewater at home before heading to River Falls and taking one on the chin. River Falls had lost by 18 and 28 the previous two conference games. Go figure!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 10, 2014, 12:56:49 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 10, 2014, 12:51:19 PM
Quote from: sac on January 08, 2014, 09:50:23 PM
Interesting night

Augustana 81 Illinois Wesleyan 73

Stevens Point 61 Stout 60

Wittenberg 62 Ohio Wesleyan 60 OT

Stout is a completely different animal at home. Games against Point are always entertaining and usually close. Stout did knock off Whitewater at home before heading to River Falls and taking one on the chin. River Falls had lost by 18 and 28 the previous two conference games. Go figure!

Stout is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, wrapped in an enigma.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 10, 2014, 01:00:30 PM

Its also to be noted that both their top player and 3rd best player were each playing on one leg. Whitehead nursing a previous injury that made him sit the previous game and Jenny limping around due to an injury sustained against Point...and they still almost won.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 10, 2014, 05:38:20 PM

That was a really tough shot by Tillema to beat Stout. He's reached the point where I expect him to make whatever shot he takes in that type of situation, wherever he is.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 10, 2014, 06:37:06 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 10, 2014, 03:47:10 AM
Quote from: ronk on January 10, 2014, 01:05:38 AM
When do the 1st regional rankings come out?

Usually the 1st part of February. Last year the 1st set was released on Wed. Feb. 6th, 2nd set on Feb.13th, 3rd set on Feb 20th, and the final set on Feb. 27th was the one we didn't get to see. The NCAA bids were announced on Feb. 28th I believe.

Last year the final day of the conference tournaments was on Feb. 24th. This year the final day of the season is a week later. The last conference tournament won't be over until March 2nd. If the NCAA follows the same format they have in the past of 3 published regional rankings and 1 hidden one, then I'm guessing this year it might be February 12th before we see the first set. Then one would follow on the 19th, the 26th, and the hidden one on March 5th. Of course they could give us an extra one this year and make the 1st one on Feb.5th, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for that to happen.

Close... but...

There will be a total of four regional rankings with three of them being released to the public and one kept private at the end of the year. The regional rankings come out on Wednesdays involving games and records through the previous Sunday. Regional committees discuss their rankings and then vote on Mondays... the national committee gets together on Tuesdays to discuss and make any changes needed and then the regional rankings are released on Wednesday. However, the last regional ranking we don't get to see is done for the selection and bracket process, so that is all done in a tighter range of just Sunday for all parties.

Timing this year:
First regional rankings - Wednesday, February 12 (followed by the 19 and the 26)
Final regional rankings (not public) - Sunday, March 2
Selection bracket announcement along with hosts for first and second rounds - Monday, March 3

Keep in mind the men's committee for years has not had a problem with releasing the final regional rankings... but the NCAA won't allow them to do so.

Title: Re: top 25
Post by: hplc2222 on January 12, 2014, 09:53:08 AM

As of this morning there are 7 undefeated teams, 10 one loss teams, 29 two loss teams, and 29 3 loss teams = 75 teams.
Richard Stockton took their 2nd loss yesterday at Montclair. Now I am not sure they can stay in the Top 25.

Could the collapse be coming for Stockton?

Title: Re: Re: top 25
Post by: hplc2222 on January 12, 2014, 10:15:22 AM

Richard Stockton is one of only 24 teams in the nation with at least 11 wins and no more than 2 losses. William Paterson is alo one of these teams. Will that record be strong enough to keep Richard Stocton inside the Top 25?

Stockton's 2 losses were on the road. A 2 point loss to William Paterson and a one point loss yesterday at Montclair.
They had the Montclair game, up double digits in the 2nd half but let it get away at the end, even with a lead in the final minute.

the 24 teams with at least 11 wins and no more than 2 losses - 15 of the teams are in the Top 25 currently

Mary Washington 11-2 **
Wesley 11-1**
Wittenberg 12-1**
Wooster 12-1**
Dickinson 11-2
Endicott 11-2

Augustana 12-2**
Illinois Wesleyan 12-2**
Bowdoin 12-0**
Williams 11-0**
Cabrini 11-0**
WPI 12-1**

William Paterson 11-2
Richard Stockton 11-2**
Dubuque 13-0
St Vincent 12-2
Oglethrope 12-1
Junita 11-2

Cal lutheran 12-2
Messiah 12-0**
NYU 11-1
St Norbert 11-1**
UW Stevens Point 14-0**
UW Whitewater 12-2**

Title: Re: Re: top 25
Post by: hplc2222 on January 12, 2014, 10:31:10 AM

The other 10 teams currently in the Top 25 that are not on the list of - at least 11 wins no more than 2 losses are ::

Washington U 10-2 , Amherst 10-2, St Thomas 9-2, Christopher Newport 10-3, Virginia Wesleyan 10-3, Suny Purchase 10-0, Marietta 10-3, St Marys md 10-3., Ohio Wesleyan 10-3, Babson 10-3

Basicaly I now have the new Top 25 narrowed down to 34 teams.

Title: Re: Re: top 25
Post by: hplc2222 on January 12, 2014, 10:46:23 AM

The other 10 + win teams that are neither on the current Top 25, nor fall in the list of at least 11 wins and no more than 2 losses are ::
26 teams

Penn State-Behrend 10-2, Husson 10-0, Texas-Dallas 10-1, Concordia 10-3, Lakeland 11-3, Aurora 10-5, Milwaukee Engineering 10-3, Marymount 10-3, Depauw 10-3, Eastern Nazarene 10-2, Daniel Webster 10-2, Wheaton Ill 10-4, Springfield 10-3, Alfred 10-2, Whitworth 10-3, Albertus Magnus 10-1, Mount Union 10-2, Rose-Hulman 10-3, Guilford 10-3, Bethany 11-3, Scranton 10-3, Stevenson 10-3, Oswego State 10-2, Grinnell 10-2, UW Platteville 10-4, UW La Crosse 10-4

Title: Re: Re: top 25
Post by: hplc2222 on January 12, 2014, 11:19:46 AM

At this point it may be easier to identify teams that may drop out of the Top 25 based on how they played since the vote vote. I have identified 6 teams.

Will any of these teams drop out and who would they be replaced with?

games played since last Top 25 vote::

25 Babson 10-3, beat Emerson 72-44, lost to Springfield 88-81, both at home

23 Richard Stockton, 11-2 beat Rutgers Camden at home by 15, had a 28 point lead then cleared the bench, then lost at Montclair by 1 point

22 Ohio Wesleyan 10-3 - lost at Wittenberg 62-60, won at Allegheny 76-64

19 Marieeta 10-3 - lost at Ohio Northen 78-73, beat Baldwin Wallace 97-86 at home

15 Virginia Wesleyan - 10-3 - lost at Bridgewater 78-65, beat Randolph 75-46 at home

14 Christopher Newport 10-3 - lost at home against Wesley 64-46, lost at Penn St Harrisburg 63-60

Title: Re: Re: top 25
Post by: hplc2222 on January 12, 2014, 11:39:08 AM

Another way to look at it could be there are 46 teams with no more than 2 losses and 6 teams with 3 losses in the Top 25.

I'm going to say Babson drops out, everyone else stays in.

any opinions?

Title: Re: Re: top 25
Post by: hplc2222 on January 12, 2014, 12:12:48 PM

At this point as a beginer, I have to trust last weeks vote. In other words, the experts have the Top 25 and their reasons teams are in or out.

Taking that into account I am predicting the list may change up a bit but only Babson drops out.

This is where it stands now.

undefeated - 7 teams -------- 6 in top 25
1 loss ------- 10 teams - ------5 in top 25
2 loss - ----- 29 teams ------- 8 in top 25
3 loss - ------29 teams - ------6 in top 25

Title: Re: Re: top 25
Post by: hplc2222 on January 12, 2014, 12:48:07 PM

correction, only 5 of of 7 undefeated teams are in the top 25-- dubuque and husson are not in

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 12, 2014, 01:21:02 PM

NYU at 11-1 will not make it in this week. But they play at Chicago on the 17th and at Washington U on the 19th. Voters will want to wait and see if they can those games on the road I think.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 12, 2014, 02:31:32 PM

Top 25 voters will probably want to know two of Marietta's three leading scorers did not play in either game last week. Leading scorer Andy Dollman also did not play in the Wednesday loss at Ohio Northern but returned Saturday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 12, 2014, 02:33:48 PM

Have we seen anything about whether their absence is temporary?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 12, 2014, 03:04:51 PM

Were the 3 players all hurt? I did not see an article saying they were suspended. Does Marietta have winter break classes?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 12, 2014, 04:34:40 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 12, 2014, 02:33:48 PM
Have we seen anything about whether their absence is temporary?

Well Hammond has only played in 7 games this year, the other guard Ewing has missed the last two games. A search of the Marietta site and local papers has revealed no clues. They are both still on the roster.

Title: Re: Re: top 25
Post by: pjunito on January 12, 2014, 05:42:59 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 12, 2014, 11:39:08 AM
Another way to look at it could be there are 46 teams with no more than 2 losses and 6 teams with 3 losses in the Top 25.

I'm going to say Babson drops out, everyone else stays in.

any opinions?

Well, I think the only teams that could move into top 25 this week is Albertus Magnus and Wheaton (because of their win vs Augustana). So, if those two teams move out, I think Ohio Wesleyan and Babson fall out. If only one of those two teams make it, then Babson falls out. I think there will be a lot of movement between 13 and 22, teams shifting spots.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 12, 2014, 06:08:12 PM

oglethorpe just won in double overtime at Rhodes to go to 13-1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 12, 2014, 07:15:16 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	623	UW-Stevens Point	14-0	won at UW-Stout, 61-60; won at UW-Superior, 86-69
#2	576	Wooster	12-1	won at Kenyon, 92-52
#3	571	Illinois Wesleyan	12-2	LOST at #12 Augustana, 73-81; won at North Park, 74-57
#4	563	Cabrini	11-0	def. Cairn, 91-51; def. Centenary (N.J.), 96-72
#5	525	Williams	11-2	won at Trinity (Conn.), 80-60; LOST at #8 Amherst, 73-84
#6	464	WPI	12-1	won at #34 Springfield, 81-61; def. T#36 MIT, 59-47
#7	438	Washington U.	10-2	def. Chicago, 80-69
#8	422	Amherst	10-2	def. T#45 Eastern Connecticut, 94-81; def. Hamilton, 91-73; def. #5 Williams, 84-73
#9	398	Wittenberg	12-1	def. #22 Ohio Wesleyan, 62-60; def. Hiram, 80-79
#10	385	UW-Whitewater	12-2	won at UW-Oshkosh, 86-55; def. UW-Eau Claire, 90-51
#11	375	St. Thomas	9-2	def. St. Olaf, 62-61; won at St. Mary's (Minn.), 87-58
#12	343	Augustana	12-2	def. #3 Illinois Wesleyan, 81-73; LOST at #28 Wheaton (Ill.), 63-66
#13	315	St. Norbert	11-1	def. Beloit, 68-48; won at Monmouth, 81-58
#14	278	Christopher Newport	10-3	LOST to #16 Wesley, 46-64; LOST at Penn State-Harrisburg, 60-63
#15	269	Virginia Wesleyan	10-3	LOST at Bridgewater (Va.), 65-78; def. Randolph, 75-46
#16	213	Wesley	11-1	won at Washington College, 66-51; won at #14 Christopher Newport, 64-46; def. #17 Mary Washington, 68-67
#17	149	Mary Washington	11-2	won at Salisbury, 75-70; LOST at #16 Wesley, 67-68
#18	139	SUNY-Purchase	10-0	won at Mount St. Mary, 81-66; def. Manhattanville, 82-64
#19	135	Marietta	10-3	LOST at Ohio Northern, 73-78; def. Baldwin Wallace, 97-86
#20	103	Messiah	12-0	def. Lycoming, 79-76; def. Alvernia, 89-78
#21	90	St. Mary's (Md.)	10-3	def. Frostburg State, 97-54; won at Southern Virginia, 84-49
#22	77	Ohio Wesleyan	10-3	LOST at #9 Wittenberg, 60-62; won at Allegheny, 76-64
#23	75	Richard Stockton	11-2	def. Rutgers-Camden, 76-61; LOST at Montclair State, 69-70
#24	70	Bowdoin	12-0	def. Bridgewater State, 64-59; def. Connecticut College, 64-47; def. Wesleyan, 63-54
#25	61	Babson	10-3	def. Emerson, 72-44; LOST to #34 Springfield, 81-89

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	57	Albertus Magnus	10-1	def. Norwich, 97-85; won at Rivier, 93-82; won at Suffolk, 94-73
#27	53	Calvin	9-4	won at Alma, 90-82; LOST to Hope, 63-71
#28	37	Wheaton (Ill.)	10-4	def. Elmhurst, 93-68; def. #12 Augustana, 66-63
#29	35	Oglethorpe	13-1	won at Hendrix, 70-69; won at Rhodes, 73-72
#30	34	Whitworth	10-3	def. Pacific Lutheran, 76-73; def. Puget Sound, 60-49
#31	31	Brockport State	8-1	won at Potsdam State, 75-57; won at Plattsburgh State, 85-78
#32	30	Middlebury	7-5	LOST to Plattsburgh State, 47-63; LOST to Bates, 61-64; def. Tufts, 80-66
#33	22	Colorado College	9-2	def. Austin, 68-53; def. Centenary (La.), 79-71
#34	21	Springfield	10-3	LOST to #6 WPI, 61-81; won at #25 Babson, 89-81
#35	16	Dickinson	11-2	def. Washington College, 78-66; won at Ursinus, 94-70
T#36	14	Birmingham-Southern	7-5	LOST at T#38 Emory, 61-76; LOST at Sewanee, 54-58; LOST at Centre, 71-85
T#36	14	MIT	9-3	def. Clark, 63-36; LOST at #6 WPI, 47-59
T#38	12	Staten Island	10-2	def. Lehman, 95-62; won at Medgar Evers, 113-79
T#38	12	Emory	9-3	def. T#36 Birmingham-Southern, 76-61; def. Rochester, 77-54
T#40	10	DePauw	10-3	won at Kenyon, 62-54
T#40	10	Texas-Dallas	10-1	won at LeTourneau, 80-57; won at East Texas Baptist, 84-72
T#40	10	William Paterson	11-2	won at Kean, 75-71; def. New Jersey City, 69-66
T#40	10	Stevenson	10-3	LOST at Albright, 82-89; def. Lebanon Valley, 86-72
#44	8	Dubuque	13-0	def. Wartburg, 67-63; won at Central, 74-67
T#45	1	Eastern Connecticut	9-4	LOST at #8 Amherst, 81-94; def. Mass-Boston, 81-60
T#45	1	St. Vincent	12-2	def. Thiel, 76-69; won at Bethany, 83-77
T#45	1	Guilford	10-3	won at Bridgewater (Va.), 69-60

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 13, 2014, 09:02:07 AM

Babson and Christopher Newport were the only 2 teams in the TOP 25 to lose games at home last week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 13, 2014, 09:22:59 AM

Time for my Top 25 guess

1) UW Stevens Point
2) Wooster
3) Cabrini
4) WPI
5) Wittenberg
6) Washinton U
7) UW Whitewater
8) Augustana
9) Illinois Wesleyan
10) Amherst
11) Williams
12) St Thomas
13) St Norbert
14) Wesley
15) Messiah
16) Mary Washington
17) Ohio Wesleyan
18) Virginia Wesleyan
19) Suny Purchase
20) Bowdoin
21) Christopher newport
22) St Marys MD.
23) Richard Stockton
24) Marietta
25) Albertus Magnus

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 13, 2014, 09:36:37 AM

The reason I am keeping Richard Stockton in the Top 25 is because they were voted in the Top 25 last week and to me that says they deserve to be there. A 1 point loss on the road to a conference rival is not that bad (and their other loss was only 2 points at William Paterson.

I say keep Richard Stockton in the Top 25 this week and see how they do. They play at home against Rowan on Wednesday and at Ramapo on Saturday. Let us see what they do this week before taking them out of the Top 25.

any opinions?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 13, 2014, 10:24:59 AM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 13, 2014, 09:36:37 AM
The reason I am keeping Richard Stockton in the Top 25 is because they were voted in the Top 25 last week and to me that says they deserve to be there. A 1 point loss on the road to a conference rival is not that bad (and their other loss was only 2 points at William Paterson.

I say keep Richard Stockton in the Top 25 this week and see how they do. They play at home against Rowan on Wednesday and at Ramapo on Saturday. Let us see what they do this week before taking them out of the Top 25.

any opinions?

Check out the Posters poll

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 13, 2014, 10:37:51 AM

as of this morning of the 416 teams
undefeated - 7
1 loss - 10
2 loss - 28
3 loss - 30
4 loss - 52

= 127 teams

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 13, 2014, 10:59:21 AM

You really should join the poster's poll! :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 13, 2014, 11:16:46 AM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 13, 2014, 09:22:59 AM
Time for my Top 25 guess

1) UW Stevens Point
2) Wooster
3) Cabrini
4) WPI
5) Wittenberg
6) Washinton U
7) UW Whitewater
8) Augustana
9) Illinois Wesleyan
10) Amherst
11) Williams
12) St Thomas
13) St Norbert
14) Wesley
15) Messiah
16) Mary Washington
17) Ohio Wesleyan
18) Virginia Wesleyan
19) Suny Purchase
20) Bowdoin
21) Christopher newport
22) St Marys MD.
23) Richard Stockton
24) Marietta
25) Albertus Magnus

Based on the head-to-head result (http://www.cciw.org/custompages/CCIW_Links/MBasketball/Stats/1314/13iwmb6.htm), interested in your placement of Wash U and Illinois Wesleyan. What is your thinking there? Thanks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 13, 2014, 11:27:53 AM

I thought I had to put Illinois Wesleyan behind Augustana because Augustana just beat them head to head. Washington U was 7, did not lose last week, they moved up 1.
makes sense?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 13, 2014, 01:41:13 PM

So IWU drops 6 spots because they lost on the road to a ranked opponent?

I understand your head to head thinking, but IWU did have a 230+ point lead on Augie.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 13, 2014, 02:00:02 PM

Brockport State improves their record to 8-1 with a pair of wins this past weekend and I think, deserves a place in the D3hoops top 25. Mr. Massey also thinks they should be ranked and not just in the Top 25. The Massey Ratings now have them ranked at #7 in the country with a strength of schedule ranked at #44. It's not very often that you can find a team in Massey's Ratings that will be ranked that high by his system and not be found in the D3hoops Top 25. There are 8 teams in Massey's Top 25 that aren't in the D3hoops Top 25 but all of those teams with the exception of Plattsburgh at #24 and Wilmington at #21 are in the Others Receiving Votes category. Brockport is the only team in Massey's top ten that is not ranked by D3hoops. That seems like a strange outlier.

Brockport State just beat a Plattsburgh State team, that prior to Saturday's game, Massey had ranked #18. He currently has them ranked after, their loss to Brockport at #24, with a SOS at #16 in the country. The Plattsburgh Cardinals should be Brockport's main challenger for SUNYAC supremacy, and it was the only game on Brockport's remaining schedule that Massey had predicted they would lose. Plattsburgh made it to the 2nd round of last year's NCAA tournament before falling to National Champion, Amherst, and the Cardinals returned a ton of talent, including 7 of their top 9 players, along with 4 starters.

With an 8-1 record, all on the road and their only loss a double OT affair at D3hoops #18 SUNY-Purchase (10-0), I believe it's time the voters of this website stopped looking at teams with 3 or 4 losses and give the Golden Eagles a spot in the Top 25. The SUNYAC has done very well this year with the non-conference portion of their schedule and the top teams in our conference have shown they can play with anybody.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 13, 2014, 02:07:52 PM

I am just a novice, this is only my 2nd week doing this in my life. I am intrested to see how close I get and where my mistakes were so I can learn.
I'll go by the actualy vote

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 13, 2014, 02:16:32 PM

Not so sure Brockport deserves a Top 25 this week,..... let us wait and see how many losses they have when they get to 11 wins. Their are 24 teams in the nation with at least 11 wins and no more than 2 losses. Only 15 of them were in the Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 13, 2014, 02:25:09 PM

I guess, but really dont know enough yet, to say if Brockport rolls off like 5 or 6 in a row from this point, they will be in the Top 25.
All these teams are battling to get inside the Top 25. Last weeks vote was the important vote , because of the 3 week layoff in voting, and now everyones into conference play fully.

I wouldnt be suprised if Richard Stockton dropped out, but I wouldnt be suprised if they stayed in. ATA 11-2, 6-0 OUT OF CONFERENCE, THE 2 LOOSES COMING BY A COMBINED 3 POINTS ALL ON THE ROAD,....

Give them another week to prove it.

People want Wheaton in there at 4 losses.

we will see.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 13, 2014, 02:42:43 PM

Vote in the posters poll - you'll have a say there and a debating platform

I voted for Brockport there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 13, 2014, 02:56:57 PM

We always welcome new posters. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 13, 2014, 03:06:21 PM

hplc... the question Titan Q is asking you is also the head-to-head with IWU and Wash U... a game that IWU won. So if you have Augustana ahead of IWU for head-to-head reasons... shouldn't Wash U be behind IWU for the same reason?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 13, 2014, 03:23:16 PM

Washington did not lose this week,.. this poll is a week to week poll, is it not? They were 7 even after that loss, and did not lose this week, since Illinois Wesleyan lost a game , they drop, , not out of the Top 25, but behind everyone I had move up 1,....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 13, 2014, 03:25:26 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 13, 2014, 02:56:57 PM
We always welcome new posters. ;D

Greek,

What's this WE stuff?...You got worms? ??? We, in the posters poll, just got a message from you on yesterday evening that you were out. ;D Say it ain't so Greek? A poll with only 1 of our WIAC insiders instead of the usual 2 would seem out of sorts. Please reconsider. What's another couple of hours of lost sleep. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 13, 2014, 03:46:16 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 13, 2014, 03:23:16 PM
Washington did not lose this week,.. this poll is a week to week poll, is it not? They were 7 even after that loss, and did not lose this week, since Illinois Wesleyan lost a game , they drop, , not out of the Top 25, but behind everyone I had move up 1,....

I think you have to keep the objective of the poll in mind though. The poll is ultimately supposed to provide a snapshot of the best 25 teams, in order. It's not necessarily supposed to be about automatically moving teams up and down each week based on results within the week.

I think a ballot starts to look odd when you end up with your situation of Wash U over IWU. I think it's fair to say that any completely neutral fans who saw that game would agree that IWU is a better team than Wash U. (And to clarify, I don't think one head-to-head result should always dictate where teams are ranked relative to each other -- but that one was pretty convincing.)

Just some healthy discussion. I appreciate your passion and interest in the top 25 picture!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 13, 2014, 03:55:33 PM

good, so Stockton's loss by 1 point at Montclair, should not affect their standing in the Top 25, as overall, after all the 3 week layoff, the voters think they are one of the Top 25 teams in D3.

as far as welcoming new people posting,.. I have felt welcomed by Pat Coleman ever since I started 3 or 4 weeks ago.

IT REALLY DOESNT MATTER FOR THE TOP TEAMS, UNLESS SOMEONE CAN COME OUT AND SAY HOW THEY DETERMINE HOME COURTS IN THE FIRST 2 ROUNDS.

It is all about bubble teams, and teams / schools, that catch lightening in a bottle, and teams that arent in the mid west or great lakes region, from eastern areas, that have decent programs,...

don't get upset at me by nit picking is someones 4 or 6,...... etc,,,,,

its basically about the Top 62

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 13, 2014, 04:59:51 PM

titan q - i dont HAVE to do anything but live and die, how dare you,... come on man,

I have been objection on my Top 25,.. i got 22 of 25 last week, and I hope to do the same this week

why do you feel the need to pick on me?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 13, 2014, 05:05:37 PM

Just cause I am not a lacky for the mid west and great lakes region, is no reason to come after me on here

I put UW Stevens Polint 1,.... what is your problem?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 13, 2014, 05:07:23 PM

you want to really say want i think and not what i know -- i will put St Thomas at 2

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 13, 2014, 05:11:36 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 13, 2014, 03:46:16 PMI think a ballot starts to look odd when you end up with your situation of Wash U over IWU. I think it's fair to say that any completely neutral fans who saw that game would agree that IWU is a better team than Wash U.

I think even the WUSTL partisans would agree that IWU is the better team. I know I do. As much as I hate to say it, IWU is probably a much better team at this point, though that last meeting was certainly not our best effort.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 13, 2014, 05:13:07 PM

hplc... a couple of notes:

- Titan Q is not picking on you... but when you put your ballot out there, many will look to ask you questions and even disagree with what you have put out there - I should know... I put my ballot out each week for all to see. I am ONE voter and it is more for people to see how a voter votes and thinks. Titan Q isn't picking on you as much as he is asking your thinking. He does have a point as well since the Top 25 has never been a week to week poll in determining who the top teams are just that week... but overall. So voters like myself do not ignore an IWU vs. Wash U game and while we take note of what happened to week to week we consider the overall picture as well (how each is weighted varies voter to voter and team to team).

- Remember, the Top 25 is NOT used by the NCAA to determine jack-squat. It is something used nationally as a gauge all season long and most importantly something to discuss... the NCAA has very different criteria that is far more restrictive when it comes to voting.

- With that last statement in mind... you write (without the caps): "It really doesn't matter for the top teams, unless someone can come out and say how they determine home courts in the first two rounds." The answer is they do say. How bubble teams and Pool B and Pool C teams are selected to the NCAA tournament; how teams are regionally ranked are the same factors at play for hosting. Also in play are geographical considerations (busing three teams to one location instead of flying one, two or three teams) and whether it is the men's right to host or the women's per each weekend are deciding factors. All of this is out there... it is not hidden... it is very well known.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 13, 2014, 05:20:29 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 13, 2014, 04:59:51 PM
titan q - i dont HAVE to do anything but live and die, how dare you,... come on man,

I have been objection on my Top 25,.. i got 22 of 25 last week, and I hope to do the same this week

why do you feel the need to pick on me?

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 13, 2014, 05:05:37 PM
Just cause I am not a lacky for the mid west and great lakes region, is no reason to come after me on here

I put UW Stevens Polint 1,.... what is your problem?

Are you being serious or joking around? Just making sure you don't really think I am "picking on you" or "coming after" you. If you think that, you have dramatically misinterpreted my conversation with you. I was just inquiring into your rankings and providing an opinion of my own in response.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 13, 2014, 05:26:06 PM

I am not a voter though. Good so Stockton should be in the Top 25 still, since the lose at MONTCLAIR WOULDNT MATTTER

I appreciate your input,.. but I could not care less

In other words, I am going to think and say what I want to ,.. but you'll never see me adress another poster on personal issues really.

Yaes I had a comment about Brockport,....... but it was in the context of what I have been saying for weeks, about wind and losses

YOUR WHOLE RESPONSE TO ME IS STATIC

DONT BOTHER IN THE FUTURE

ok

i'll make me comments and sat what I think,

you want to give an opinion about a team, and where they are, go ahead

you want to screw with a customer of D3 hoops, you should be kicked off this website

\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 13, 2014, 05:31:33 PM

Wow... where is this coming from... hplc if you are on these boards you will notice everyone converses with one another and even disagrees... that is the nature of chat boards. You put out your Top 25 and that then entertains people to question you and ask what your thinking and rationale is behind your decisions. It is par for the course. It happens to everyone. You can have your point of view and that is fine - but it doesn't mean people aren't curious as to what you decided and state if they have a problem with your thoughts. It is still your opinion... you are welcome to them. But also realize people are welcome to their opinions and if they aren't in alignment with yours... that's how the cookie crumbles.

You have been welcomed to these boards with open arms and instead you are now attacking people who have not attacked you. And I don't understand your thought about Stockton... you can do what you want with them in your opinion. You can read this more tonight or tomorrow from me... but they weren't on my ballot last week nor all season and a loss to Montclair St isn't going to garner any spot on my ballot this week. Again, I am one of 25 voters... so we will see what others think.

Relax my man... you don't need to go nuclear because people disagree or question you.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 13, 2014, 05:36:04 PM

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.reactiongifs.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F05%2Ftumblr_ljh0puClWT1qfkt17.gif&hash=4d3d5e2abde6724be0ba9c0a02a52ca7da147392)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 13, 2014, 05:38:46 PM

I havnt attacked anyone, is this a nickle and dime operation? I could not care less about yoyur ballot.

Bautr no one disagreed, they arguing is Washington should move up from 7 to 6, my god man.,

thats idiotic

I havnt seen anyone else put yup a guess at the Top 25, just me.

Could that be because they will be attacked?

I am a scientist,,

no one from espn would comment about what a poster said on one of their threads

listen , lets all let it go,.......

i like to write, thats for sure,.. but to let you know, i'm not into reading others peoples opinions

especialy when they go after mine

and especialy it is riduclous we are talking about 4, 5, 6, 7 , 8, 9 pote in the Top 25

toms of games left to be played

sheesh

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 13, 2014, 05:58:48 PM

sac - I love you man!

hplc... this is a chat room so thus everyone has their opinions and thus reading people's comments is reading their opinions. And the questions are not Washington moving up a spot, but why are they so far ahead of IWU who they lost to this season. It's a valid question.

And you aren't paying attention if you think others don't put their Top 25s out there... go to the "Posters' Poll" thread in their very section (Multi-Regional Topics) and you will see many Top 25 ballots from non-Top 25 voters just like yourself. And you can go to the D3blogs to see my ballot each week of the season. In fact... I am writing mine right now and will post it tonight or tomorrow after the Top 25 is released.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 13, 2014, 06:00:25 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 13, 2014, 02:16:32 PM
Not so sure Brockport deserves a Top 25 this week,..... let us wait and see how many losses they have when they get to 11 wins. Their are 24 teams in the nation with at least 11 wins and no more than 2 losses. Only 15 of them were in the Top 25.

The Top 25 is never about quantity but about quality. Brockport is 8-1 and had a game postponed last week because of the snowstorms in western NY. It's not their fault that the schedule is what it is.

Look at other schools that don't have 11 wins that are in the Top 25. St Thomas 9-2, 1 more win but also 1 more loss with an SOS of 88, twice that of Brockport's 44. Christopher Newport, Virginia Wesleyan, Marietta, St. Mary's, Ohio Wesleyan, and Babson are all 10-3. Again 2 more wins, but 2 more losses. I'd rather be 8-1 right now and have a win over my toughest conference opponent than be 10-3 and yet to face that opponent.

Brockport, regardless of the fact that they don't have your arbitrary number of 11 wins, certainly has the credentials at the present time that are equal to or better than a number of teams ranked ahead of them as the Massey Ratings suggest.

As an analogy, since you were pointing out Richard Stockton earlier and their 2 close losses.... Plattsburgh State lost to Richard Stockton down there in Stockton's tip off tournament at the beginning of the year. Originally Plattsburgh was supposed to play Alvernia on day 1 of the tournament and Stockton was to play Bridgewater State. The winners would meet the next day for the championship and the losers in the consolation game. Well Alvernia found themselves with a scheduling problem and had to pull out of the tournament, so Stockton played Bridgewater the 1st day and won. Then they were idle the next day while Plattsburgh played Bridgewater and the Cardinals won. The next day Plattsburgh had to play a well rested Stockton on the Ospreys home court and the game came down to a final possession where the Cards, down 2, were whistled for a traveling violation, while calling time out, and turned the ball over. They then had to foul and lost 78-74.

You state that you have no problem with Stockton dropping out or staying in the Top 25 but imply that they should be given another week because the losses were so close.

Brockport beat the Cardinals in Plattsburgh while Stockton barely beat them at home. If Stockton had to play a return game against Plattsburgh I'd be willing to bet on the Cardinals to turn the tables.

I happen to agree with you that Stockton should still be ranked, but Brockport was ranked ahead of Stockton in the ORV's in week #3 and week #4 and all they've done is win. I see no reason why Stockton leaped over them last week as I thought they both should have made the Top 25, but only Stockton did so.

I understand that the voters are still trying to sort out the bottom 10 to 12 spots, but when I see some teams with multiple losses and a SOS that's not as good as the Eagles then I think an adjustment is needed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 13, 2014, 06:38:28 PM

I have been on this board for a yr or so as a registered user. However, I have been on the site/board for several yrs. And i can say that this board compared to other boards(my new england softball board being one example lol) is completely respectful of one another. I have never seen anyone get "picked" on. Dave you and the others do a great job. Not brown nosing, just calling it how i see it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 13, 2014, 07:38:30 PM

i DONT KNOW THAT I'M BERING PICKED ON, ALTHOUTH I CLAIMED IT,..... all i am saying is that it appewarts from a nationalo D3 stANDP[OINT, THAT THE MID WEST ANDS GREAT LAKES REGION, GETS ENORMOUS, amout od attention,...... and just becausae a guy from atlazntic fandom says something, a ton of briocks falls on them?

gtf out of here

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 13, 2014, 07:40:41 PM

Ironically... it wasn't that you had an Atlantic team in your poll but where you positions other teams that raised the questions.

Of course, I am from the Mid-Atlantic region (with a national score, of course)... just saying :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 13, 2014, 07:48:44 PM

dave , come on, man, you cares where "i"{put a TEAM " i am nobody,... please let me enjoy this,.. and stop the arguments over whos 1-10

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 13, 2014, 08:14:24 PM

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmrwgifs.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F04%2FThe-Big-Lebowski-WTF-Gif.gif&hash=27c44f8c64e37f8a3dbb82561283adbdd4836e0d)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pjunito on January 13, 2014, 10:11:57 PM

Isn't this what sports is all about? Debating our opinions throughout the season. Who's better, who should move up, who should move down. I have been here for a few years now and think this is a great medium to interact with other fellow d3 hoop fans. I have learned a lot about how the D3 selection process works. I have enjoyed watching great games over the years.

At every level you have teams who take longer to drop out of a top 25 poll and others who take a longer time to break in. That is just the way it is; it is a subjective poll. Brockport keeps winning and they will break the top 25 - teams like Albertus lose, they fall out.

Can't wait for this week top 25 to be revealed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D3HoopJunkie on January 13, 2014, 10:32:47 PM

I had to hop on here and comment because of what I am reading! These board are here in the first place to encourage healthy debate and questions ones opinions which is what a sports thread like what we all participate on here is all about. I started posting officially last season and have enjoyed it from the beginning. Never once have I seen this type of conversation on any of the threads until now. We are all grown men (and women) posting our opinions on the passion that we all have for our school of choose, conference and most of all D3 basketball as a whole. I really believe that all of the posters on this website are what makes this D3 community so special. In a way we are the ones that are really spreading the word to others about D3Hoops and that is great. What Dave McHugh and Pat Coleman have done for the D3 landscape is unbelievable and I can guarantee you Mr. HPLC that neither Dave nor Titan ever wanted to make you feel this way. You provide a great deal insight with your Top 25 and if someone disagrees with you then so be it. Keep the conversation going and see what others have to say. Again that is why we are all here.

I hope this doesn't deter you from posting hplc because myself along with others really are interested in your opinion. It makes for great debate and conversation.

I too like many poster here tonight do not want to sound like I am taking a side but really its just my honest opinion and how I feel. And also as a die hard UConn fan I am sorry hplc but you are completely off when saying that people don't attack each other on thee ESPN threads. It happends daily and I have taken a number of backhanded comments and disagreements on the chin for some of the things I have posted but once again (this seems to be the common theme LOL) that is what these boards like every other is all about.

What sums this up best is what Pat Coleman has at the bottom of each of his posts that reads

"Let's discuss (sports) in a positive way, sometimes kidding each other with no disrespect."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pjunito on January 13, 2014, 10:46:36 PM

Junkie...

Can you really blame people for getting on UConn football this past year? Their biggest accomplishment was not getting blown out by Michigan. lol.

I kid because I love junkie...

Let's go falcons!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 13, 2014, 10:54:53 PM

lol,. thats too complicated for me read read, let alone respond,....lol,..WHERES THE TOP 25 LIST?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 13, 2014, 11:16:26 PM

Bump
How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	623	UW-Stevens Point	14-0	won at UW-Stout, 61-60; won at UW-Superior, 86-69
#2	576	Wooster	12-1	won at Kenyon, 92-52
#3	571	Illinois Wesleyan	12-2	LOST at #12 Augustana, 73-81; won at North Park, 74-57
#4	563	Cabrini	11-0	def. Cairn, 91-51; def. Centenary (N.J.), 96-72
#5	525	Williams	11-2	won at Trinity (Conn.), 80-60; LOST at #8 Amherst, 73-84
#6	464	WPI	12-1	won at #34 Springfield, 81-61; def. T#36 MIT, 59-47
#7	438	Washington U.	10-2	def. Chicago, 80-69
#8	422	Amherst	10-2	def. T#45 Eastern Connecticut, 94-81; def. Hamilton, 91-73; def. #5 Williams, 84-73
#9	398	Wittenberg	12-1	def. #22 Ohio Wesleyan, 62-60; def. Hiram, 80-79
#10	385	UW-Whitewater	12-2	won at UW-Oshkosh, 86-55; def. UW-Eau Claire, 90-51
#11	375	St. Thomas	9-2	def. St. Olaf, 62-61; won at St. Mary's (Minn.), 87-58
#12	343	Augustana	12-2	def. #3 Illinois Wesleyan, 81-73; LOST at #28 Wheaton (Ill.), 63-66
#13	315	St. Norbert	11-1	def. Beloit, 68-48; won at Monmouth, 81-58
#14	278	Christopher Newport	10-3	LOST to #16 Wesley, 46-64; LOST at Penn State-Harrisburg, 60-63
#15	269	Virginia Wesleyan	10-3	LOST at Bridgewater (Va.), 65-78; def. Randolph, 75-46
#16	213	Wesley	11-1	won at Washington College, 66-51; won at #14 Christopher Newport, 64-46; def. #17 Mary Washington, 68-67
#17	149	Mary Washington	11-2	won at Salisbury, 75-70; LOST at #16 Wesley, 67-68
#18	139	SUNY-Purchase	10-0	won at Mount St. Mary, 81-66; def. Manhattanville, 82-64
#19	135	Marietta	10-3	LOST at Ohio Northern, 73-78; def. Baldwin Wallace, 97-86
#20	103	Messiah	12-0	def. Lycoming, 79-76; def. Alvernia, 89-78
#21	90	St. Mary's (Md.)	10-3	def. Frostburg State, 97-54; won at Southern Virginia, 84-49
#22	77	Ohio Wesleyan	10-3	LOST at #9 Wittenberg, 60-62; won at Allegheny, 76-64
#23	75	Richard Stockton	11-2	def. Rutgers-Camden, 76-61; LOST at Montclair State, 69-70
#24	70	Bowdoin	12-0	def. Bridgewater State, 64-59; def. Connecticut College, 64-47; def. Wesleyan, 63-54
#25	61	Babson	10-3	def. Emerson, 72-44; LOST to #34 Springfield, 81-89

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	57	Albertus Magnus	10-1	def. Norwich, 97-85; won at Rivier, 93-82; won at Suffolk, 94-73
#27	53	Calvin	9-4	won at Alma, 90-82; LOST to Hope, 63-71
#28	37	Wheaton (Ill.)	10-4	def. Elmhurst, 93-68; def. #12 Augustana, 66-63
#29	35	Oglethorpe	13-1	won at Hendrix, 70-69; won at Rhodes, 73-72
#30	34	Whitworth	10-3	def. Pacific Lutheran, 76-73; def. Puget Sound, 60-49
#31	31	Brockport State	8-1	won at Potsdam State, 75-57; won at Plattsburgh State, 85-78
#32	30	Middlebury	7-5	LOST to Plattsburgh State, 47-63; LOST to Bates, 61-64; def. Tufts, 80-66
#33	22	Colorado College	9-2	def. Austin, 68-53; def. Centenary (La.), 79-71
#34	21	Springfield	10-3	LOST to #6 WPI, 61-81; won at #25 Babson, 89-81
#35	16	Dickinson	11-2	def. Washington College, 78-66; won at Ursinus, 94-70
T#36	14	Birmingham-Southern	7-5	LOST at T#38 Emory, 61-76; LOST at Sewanee, 54-58; LOST at Centre, 71-85
T#36	14	MIT	9-3	def. Clark, 63-36; LOST at #6 WPI, 47-59
T#38	12	Staten Island	10-2	def. Lehman, 95-62; won at Medgar Evers, 113-79
T#38	12	Emory	9-3	def. T#36 Birmingham-Southern, 76-61; def. Rochester, 77-54
T#40	10	DePauw	10-3	won at Kenyon, 62-54
T#40	10	Texas-Dallas	10-1	won at LeTourneau, 80-57; won at East Texas Baptist, 84-72
T#40	10	William Paterson	11-2	won at Kean, 75-71; def. New Jersey City, 69-66
T#40	10	Stevenson	10-3	LOST at Albright, 82-89; def. Lebanon Valley, 86-72
#44	8	Dubuque	13-0	def. Wartburg, 67-63; won at Central, 74-67
T#45	1	Eastern Connecticut	9-4	LOST at #8 Amherst, 81-94; def. Mass-Boston, 81-60
T#45	1	St. Vincent	12-2	def. Thiel, 76-69; won at Bethany, 83-77
T#45	1	Guilford	10-3	won at Bridgewater (Va.), 69-60

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D3HoopJunkie on January 13, 2014, 11:20:14 PM

PJ, Please don't get me stated on UConn football. We will be at it all night even though the last few games were somewhat encouraging moving forward and I think the new head coach signing was an absolute home run.

And hplc, I don't partake in making a Top 25 list because I simply choose not to and frankly I do not know enough about the West and Mid West regions in order to make an accurate Top 25 that I would really feel comfortable with. Me making my own Top 25 or not has nothing to do with my previous post. Maybe you should "read read" it before you continue to ruin your reputation on here as a poster. I tried to treat you with respect but obviously you are to irrational to understand that the comments made weren't to throw you into such a negative tail spin.

Its called Karma for a reason and its not just the +/- on the threads here that matter but really the +/- in real life that count.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 13, 2014, 11:37:14 PM

Augie beat IWU, but Augie also lost to Wheaton this week. Both lost a game and IWU was way ahead in the rankings prior to meeting this week. I'm not sure there is any possible way you could put Augustana ahead of IWU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 13, 2014, 11:46:54 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 13, 2014, 03:25:26 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 13, 2014, 02:56:57 PM
We always welcome new posters. ;D

Greek,

What's this WE stuff?...You got worms? ??? We, in the posters poll, just got a message from you on yesterday evening that you were out. ;D Say it ain't so Greek? A poll with only 1 of our WIAC insiders instead of the usual 2 would seem out of sorts. Please reconsider. What's another couple of hours of lost sleep. ::)

I meant we welcome new posters IN GENERAL, not necessarily specific to the Posters Poll. :) :D I basically work 7 days a week and have a needy wife and a 3 year old. LOL ::) :P I also have the Pool C stuff coming up soon and the Tourney fantasy league. ;D I'm not retired like some guys! LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 14, 2014, 07:49:38 AM

D3hoops.com and Massey have the same top 4, in the same order, today.

1. UW-Stevens Point
2. Wooster
3. Cabrini
4. Illinois Wesleyan

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?s=cb2014&sub=11620

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2013-14/week6

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 15, 2014, 07:44:03 PM

That DePauw - Wittenberg score is the women's game, right? Witt didn't lose by 40 did they?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 15, 2014, 07:49:08 PM

Live stats says its the men! It was 39-31 at half and then I guess DPU just went bananas.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on January 15, 2014, 07:57:27 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 15, 2014, 07:49:08 PM
Live stats says its the men! It was 39-31 at half and then I guess DPU just went bananas.

Both DePauw and Witt sites confirm, it was 72-46 DePauw over Witt tonight. Witt scored 8 pts in the final 14 minutes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 09:53:43 AM

Richard Stockton (12-2) is one of 17 teams with at least 12 wins and no more than 2 losses.

Richard Stockton just bounced back from a 1 point loss on the road to crush Rowan at home by 29 points 88-59. They play at Ramapo on Saturday, then 3 games at home next week.

Their 2 losses were both on the road by a combined total of 3 points. Thats how close they are to being 14-0.

Wheaton is now 10-5, Ohio Weslyan is 11-3 and lost to Wittenberg who just got crushed at Depauw 72-46, Virginia Wesleyan is 11-3 and lost to Bridgewater 78-65.

As of this morning there are 6 undefeated teams, 10 one loss teams, 21 two loss teams, and 32 three loss team.(69 teams).

There must be room somewhere for Richard Stockton in the Top 25. I mean what does a NJAC team have to do, go undefeated to get recognition?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 10:28:45 AM

In Richard Stockton's (12-2) 12 wins, they have won the games by:: (in order of wins)

8, 4, 5, 19, 22, 14, 17, 5, 6, 9, 15, 29 avg = 12.75

There 2 losses were on the road by a combined 3 points.

If They beat Ramapo on the road this Saturday they will be 13-2

Of those 15 games only 6 of them were at home in thier gym/arena in Galloway.

That is impressive

It is not easy to go into other team's gyms and win in D3.

And it is not like William Paterson and Montclair are around the corner travel wise. They are way up in North Jersey and Stockton is way down in South Jersey.

There are currently only 8 teams with at least 13 wins and no more than 2 losses. Richard Stockton can get into this group by winning on Saturday on the road.

I would be shocked if Ricahrd Stocton is standing at 13-2 through games played Sunday (only 6 of those games at home) and not get in the Top 25 on the next vote.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 10:49:58 AM

William Paterson , now 11-3, recieved more points than Richard Stockton in the last vote.

William Paterson talied 23 points putting them at #32, and Stockton tallied 14 points putting them at #36.

Wiliam Paterson just lost in their home gym in overtime to Ramapo by 3 points. They allowed Ramapo to shoot 58.3% from the field last night.

Ramapo is now 4-4 in the NJAC and 7-8 overall.

Richard Stockton has a better defense and better rebounding than William Paterson.

Stockton plays at Ramapo on Saturday. A win puts them at 13-2 (with only 6 of those games at home).

All I am saying is that if they do win the game, I would be shocked if they do not get back into the Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 16, 2014, 11:09:09 AM

Richard Stockton will need teams 23-35 to have bad weeks to be ranked next week. They sit at #36 and only received 14 (points or votes, not sure exactly how it works). Meanwhile the 26th ranked team received 26 points/votes. Huge gap I think to jump into top 25. Plus their loss to Montclair is a bad loss, a 6-8 team. Granted they've lost by 3 total in their two losses. Not saying they aren't a top 25 team, just don't see them hopping so many teams in such a short amount of time

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 16, 2014, 11:09:51 AM

26th ranked team received 65 points/votes * not 26

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 11:25:54 AM

I think they are , should be , a Top 25 team, based on what they have done. If they are sitting as one only 7 or 8 teams in the nation Sunday night with 13 wins and no more than 2 losses, I do not see how they can not get in. They were in the Top 25 2 weeks ago. I hicuup, a one point loss , on the road, I mean come on.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 16, 2014, 11:53:47 AM

Not disagreeing if they are/aren't a top 25 team. But they sit at 36 and have 11 teams to pass to get in this week, so I dont see it happening this week

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 12:08:22 PM

It happened before. Here are the teams, 23-36 who you said Stockton has to beat out in a vote, their record through this morning, and who they play through sunday night and their records.
All the games are conference games, where anything can happen.

If Stockton is sitting at 13-2 Sunday night, having played only 6 games at home all season, with only the 2 road losses by a combined 3 points, they should get in the Top 25.

23   Albertus Magnus----------11-1   - saturday at st joes 7-6
24   Oglethorpe----------------13-1   - saturday at berry 3-10
25   Colorado College----------9-2 - friday at schreniner 7-7, saturday at texas lutheran 5-8
26 Christopher Newport -------10-4 - saturday marymount 11-3
27 Whitworth--------------------10-3 - friday at george fox 9-4, saturday at linfield 2-11
28 Brockport State--------------9-1 - friday oswego state 10-3, saturday at cortland state 9-4
29 Marietta--------------------- 10-4 - saturday at john carrol 10-4
30 Emory-------------------------9-3 - friday carnegie mellon 7-5, sunday case western reserve 9-3
31 DePauw ----------------------11-3 saturday ohio wesleyan 11-3
32 William Paterson-------------11-3 saturday at rutgers camden 3-12
33 Dickinson---------------------12-2 - saturdy at haverford 5-7
34 Springfield--------------------11-3 - saturday at mit 10-3,
35 Texas-Dallas -----------------10-1 - thursday mary hardon baylor 8-5 , saturday concordi 10-3
36 Richard Stockton-------------12-2 - saturday at ramapo 7-8

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 16, 2014, 12:20:40 PM

I had Richard Stockton 15th on my ballot in the fan poll this week so obviously I feel they're a quality team. But you must understand that you can't just look at a team in a vacuum, all teams must be looked at and you have to compare not just the record but the schedule.

Based on your statements about 13 wins and 2 or fewer losses, I'm sure you are championing Dubuque as well... they were one of three teams that fit that category last Sunday yet they received fewer votes (6) than RS (14). By my count there could be over 20 teams with 13 wins and no more than 2 losses by Sunday... there's already 9 as of this moment (1 UW-Stevens Point, 2 Wooster, 3 Cabrini, 4 Illinois Wesleyan, 5 WPI... 13 Augustana, 24 Oglethorpe, T40 Dubuque, 42 St Vincent)
Other teams that could reach that 13-2 or better mark by Sunday include NYU (10 votes) and Husson (0).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 12:43:36 PM

I understand and am aware of the complexity. Here is another analysis

As of this morning there are 6 undefeated teams, 10 one loss teams, 21 two loss teams, and 32 three loss team.(69 teams). 45 teams received votes last vote

an additional 44 teams have 4 losses

here is where we sit right at this moment of posting:

undeated 6 teams - 5 teams recieved votes, 4 in top 25
1 loss - 10 teams - 10 teams received votes, 7 in top 25
2 loss - 21 teams - 13 teams recieved votes,10 in top 25
3 loss - 32 teams - 10 teams recieved votes, 3 in top 25
4 loss - 44 teams - 4 teams received votes, 0 in top 25
5 loss------------------2 teams recieved votes, 1 in top 25
6 loss-------------------1 team recieved vote , 0 in top 25

1   UW-Stevens Point -------15-0
2   Wooster ---------------------13-1
3   Cabrini------------------------13-0
4   Illinois Wesleyan----------13-2
5   WPI----------------------------13-1
6   Amherst----------------------11-2
7   Washington U.------------10-2
8   UW-Whitewater-----------13-2
9   Wittenberg------------------12-2
10   Williams---------------------11-2
11   St. Thomas-----------------11-2
12   St. Norbert------------------12-1
13   Augustana------------------13-2
14   Wesley-----------------------12-1
15   Messiah----------------------12-1
16   St. Mary's (Md.)-----------11-3
17   SUNY-Purchase-----------11-0
18   Virginia Wesleyan--------11-3
19   Bowdoin----------------------12-0
20   Mary Washington---------12-2
21   Wheaton (Ill.)---------------10-5
22   Ohio Wesleyan------------11-3
23   Albertus Magnus----------11-1   - saturday at st joes 7-6
24   Oglethorpe-------------------13-1   - saturday at berry 3-10
25   Colorado College-----------9-2 - friday at schreniner 7-7, saturday at texas lutheran 5-8
26 Christopher Newport -----10-4 - saturday marymount 11-3
27 Whitworth--------------------10-3 - friday at george fox 9-4, saturday at linfield 2-11
28 Brockport State-------------9-1 - friday oswego state 10-3, saturday at cortland state 9-4
29 Marietta-----------------------10-4 - saturday at john carrol 10-4
30 Emory--------------------------9-3 - friday carnegie mellon 7-5, sunday case western reserve 9-3
31 DePauw ----------------------11-3 saturday ohio wesleyan 11-3
32 William Paterson----------11-3 saturday at rutgers camden 3-12
33 Dickinson--------------------12-2 - saturday at haverford 5-7
34 Springfield-------------------11-3 - saturday at mit 10-3,
35 Texas-Dallas ---------------10-1 - thursday mary hardon baylor 8-5 , saturday concordi 10-3
36 Richard Stockton----------12-2 - saturday at ramapo 7-8
37 New York University------11-1
38 Hope----------------------------8-6
39 Babson------------------------10-4
40 Dubuque----------------------14-0
41 Calvin--------------------------10-4
42 St. Vincent------------------12-2
43 UW-Platteville--------------10-5
44 Oswego State--------------10-3
45 Stevenson-------------------11-3

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 01:11:30 PM

I guess I really enjoyed Richard Stockton's run to the finals in 2009. Their schedule that year was not that different. Thet lost 2 regular season games that year, Middlebury 61-58 on a neutral court, and at TCNJ 79-73. They won the NJAC tourney, and were ranked I believe in the Top 10 at the start of the NCAA tourney. They got 2 homes games I think in the tourney.

Thats the key, to be ranked high enough you get to play lower ranked teams you can beat, especially if you get home games in the tourney.

This Stockton team is not as good because they dont have an offensive point guard like lancioni.

However their defense and rebounding is very good and have a nack to go on long runs in games by spreading the ball around, threes and drives.

Even in the games it looks like they won by 5 or 6 points or so, most of the games they had huge leads in and teams came back late after Stockton unloaded the bench in the last 5 minutes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 16, 2014, 01:19:58 PM

I don't see RS jumpimg 11 teams to get into the Top 25. William Paterson is ahead of them and they beat RS, right? WP has one more loss and they've lost by a combined 7 points, I think.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 01:31:54 PM

I understand but didnt a team just drop from 14 to out of the Top 25,..... and didnt Stockton just 2 weeks ago go from like 37 to 23 in one vote?

William Paterson just lost at home to Ramapo, allowing them to shoot 58.3% from the field on their home court.

Stockton plays at Ramapo this Saturday. This game is key to proving what RS can do.

Take a team like Colorado College, was in the Top 25, dropped out, and got back in, jumping many teams in last weeks vote.

Things like this happen.

You read everything I wrote today, even on the previous page?

They go to 13-2 having had only 6 home games, and 2 losses by a combined 3 points on the road, so close to 15-0

Lots of conference games to play for every team in the nation yet, including conference tourneys.

I understand we have to wait and see.

Do you think it was just the presence of Lancioni at point guard in 2009 that gave voters the willingness to ran k Stockton high?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 02:13:20 PM

Let me preface this by saying I do not think it is right or fair to talk about individual D3 players. These are students.
(and I am not convinced it is right to talk about D1 players even)

D3 basketball is very intresting though and highly competitive in nature.

Richard Stockton's top 5 players in the 2009/2009 finals season

omar smith 12.8 51.2%, jerome hubbard 12.8 ppg 39%, santini lancioni 12.6 ppg 38%, michael farrow 11.1 ppg 51.6%, kai massaquoi 10.7 ppg 56.1%

Richard Stockton's top 5 players in this 2013/2014 season

josh blamon 16.6 ppg 54.6%, nnamdi usuwa 13.1 ppg 56.5%, james williams 10.9 40.8%, rich surh 9.4 41.3%, kevin johnson 8.6 41.7%

Richard Stockton is hitting 3's at 39.1%, 109 for 279, their overall fg % is 46.3

Josh Blamon is a great player for Stockton. But if you watch the games he doesn't hog the ball. Stockton likes to run and drive, and pass the ball around, and they have confidence in any player to hit a three, and that is how they are winning these games with runs. ( what is impressive is it is on the road, where some like me would say or think the rim could be messed with a few milmeters here and there to throw off a road team)

King Gilchrist on William Paterson is another great player in the NJAC, scored 34 points last night in a loss.

Stockton's "Team" is better.

Another point of all this is that by the end of the season there will be around 40 teams in the nation with 6 or less loses, and less than 25 will be in the Top 25

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 16, 2014, 02:33:38 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 01:31:54 PM
I understand but didnt a team just drop from 14 to out of the Top 25,..... and didnt Stockton just 2 weeks ago go from like 37 to 23 in one vote?

They did make a big jump... but that was during the holidays when there were 3 weeks (and more games than usual) between polls.

A line that gets used a lot around here during the end of football season when discussing who should get the at-large bids... "don't lose to X and we're not having this discussion". Right now, I think that applies to the top 25 poll and losing to Montclair St. Had they won that game they'd be solidly in the rankings but because they lost, they opened up the possibility to be left out.

The good thing about basketball is that there's plenty more games than football in a season so keep winning and they'll eventually climb their way back in, it just won't be as rapidly as you'd hope. If they could knock off a highly ranked team in the near future they'd get a little boost, but just running through a ho-hum stretch of opponents usually isn't enough to have a pollster jump Team A over other teams that are doing the same thing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 02:53:08 PM

ok, but Stocktons 2nd loss in the season, in 2008/2009, in the middle of the regular season, to )TCNJ (formerly Trenton State), that season, didnt drop them that much , but to only between ranking 15-20.

Unless you are Stevens Point this season, you probably are not going undefeated.

Alot of the teams that have votes, have bad home loses, un-like Stockton

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 16, 2014, 02:55:35 PM

You referenced the Richard Stockton run in 2009... and that helps me with this point. Do you know how many wins NJAC teams have had in the NCAA tournament since then? None. Not one. Even when hosting games the NJAC can't get out of the first round.

Someone used a great word with me when it comes to voting in a top 25 (which again, I do): trust. You have to trust a team's record is more than smoke and mirrors. You have to trust when a team goes on a slide, their coach and the atmosphere created for the team will pull them out with no problems. You have to trust that a team won't face a sub par team and lay an egg (though, that is a tough one for anyone sometimes). Trust is paramount.

And as a result, I don't trust teams in the NJAC. I don't trust them because their regular seasons haven't added up to much success in the postseason recently. I don't trust they won't lose a game that has everyone scratching their heads. I don't trust that the top of the NJAC is better than half of the conferences in the country. I don't trust that out of conference scheduling results in good teams versus easy schedules - thus their SOS tends to be pretty low.

Out of conference, Richard Stockton has played one team with a decent record: Plattsburgh State (8-3). In conference, they lost to William Paterson who lost to Brooklyn this season. They also lost to Montclair State whose resume has been reported.

I understand you think Richard Stockton is a Top 25 team, but there is enough concern for me to not rank them. However, I will keep watching the Ospreys to see what happens in the weeks ahead and maybe I will change my mind. Heck, I do that every week when moving teams in and out of my ballot.

And per your thought that a lot of teams have bad home losses... give me your examples.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 03:05:20 PM

well, thats ok, just your opinion. but afterall saying all that, why was Stockton so highly ranked in 2009 finals run?
What is the difference between them this year and that year?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 16, 2014, 03:19:58 PM

Hey Dave, NJAC almost had one win in the Ncaa's until this happened

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vLVqtEcB_ic

Couldn't help myself

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 16, 2014, 03:20:45 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 03:05:20 PM
well, thats ok, just your opinion. but afterall saying all that, why was Stockton so highly ranked in 2009 finals run?
What is the difference between them this year and that year?

5 years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 16, 2014, 03:24:40 PM

Five seasons! :)

The rest of the conference... Stockton had won three games the year before and made it to the Elite 8... as I said, not one NJAC team (even highly rated Rampao last year) has won a single game in the next four NCAA tournament: 0-7 in that span.

Stockton was also 27-2 entering the NCAA tournament that year and had played teams like Middlebury (L), Widener (W), Carnegie Mellon (W), and Scranton (W) in out of conference play. That was a far better schedule than this season's. The conference was also better. You had Montclair State and William Paterson with 20+ win seasons. Of course Stocton's only loss in conference that year was to eventual 10-15 TCNJ (guh!), but by that point they had been 3-1 against far better opponents and had risen well in the Top 25.

And Gnac... I know... but they didn't, did they :). And so the record difference is 0-7 vs. 1-6 if that doesn't happen :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 16, 2014, 03:27:25 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 16, 2014, 03:20:45 PM
Quote from: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 03:05:20 PM
well, thats ok, just your opinion. but afterall saying all that, why was Stockton so highly ranked in 2009 finals run?
What is the difference between them this year and that year?

5 years.

Exactly. Chuck McBreen talked about what he thought some of the differences are in our conversation at the D3hoops.com Classic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFKGcrPQmZk

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 03:28:13 PM

I am asking you since you had an opinion about Richard Stockton and the Top 25,...... what is the difference in their team and record for the 2009 season vs the 2014 season?

In other words why would bey be ranked then and not ranked now?

not about who won championships

I am sticking to my guns here.

If Stockton beats Ramapo Saturday to move to 13-2, only 6 home games in that time,......having lost only 2 games both on the road for 3 points combined,.. that close to 15-0,...

Dominating opponents

They deserve to be ranked between 15-20, well insidfe the Top 25

Like I wrote weeks ago, somewhere,.. being ranked high, and getting decent seeding in the ncaa year in year out, is a self fullfilling machine

it look like politics to me

stockton had a new arena, they got ranked high and had home games in the ncaa

thats what it looks like, politics

however, if it were to be looked at legitimatley, this season Stockton can be a Top 25 team

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 16, 2014, 03:31:58 PM

hplc... I did answer that question... go back and read the part on who they played in '09 especially in out of conference play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 03:33:54 PM

you think a team like Amherst in the middle of the regular season can go in galloway and beat Stockton this year,.. maybe maybe not,.... they''ll mauyl them on the boards

what games are you watching?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 16, 2014, 03:36:49 PM

Yeah... I do think the defending national champions can go into Richard Stockton's place and win... and I don't think it will be close.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 03:41:09 PM

That's is then,..... maybe then would, maybe they wouldn't, we will never know for sure.

Amherst plays a chesscake schedule, a meat pitch schedule,..... they dont get hammered in the lane game after game.

NJAC is one of the tuffest conferences in the nation.

You go into one of these gyms, againast a Top NJAC team, good luck not gettin g hurt.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 03:43:46 PM

you think Amherst 5 foot 8 point guard would go into galloway and rain threes? Amherst wouldnt last 10 minutes in the NJAC

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 16, 2014, 03:48:09 PM

Amherst is the defending natl champion and went toe to toe with a D1 opponent this yr. I find it hard to believe they wouldn't last 10 mins in a conference that hasn't won an ncaa game in quite a bit

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 16, 2014, 03:50:38 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 03:41:09 PM
That's is then,..... maybe then would, maybe they wouldn't, we will never know for sure.

Amherst plays a chesscake schedule, a meat pitch schedule,..... they dont get hammered in the lane game after game.

NJAC is one of the tuffest conferences in the nation.

You go into one of these gyms, againast a Top NJAC team, good luck not gettin g hurt.

Yet they seem to do well in March, where the NJAC hasn't of late.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 16, 2014, 03:52:51 PM

massey says

Amherst wins 4 of 7 against Wm. Patterson, avg score of 88-85

ps give me a minute popcorns in the microwave

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 16, 2014, 03:54:08 PM

Quote from: GnacBballFan on January 16, 2014, 03:48:09 PM
Amherst is the defending natl champion and went toe to toe with a D1 opponent this yr. I find it hard to believe they wouldn't last 10 mins in a conference that hasn't won an ncaa game in quite a bit

Nova Southeastern is a D2 school, for what it's worth.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 03:55:01 PM

I get all that. But think a moment,........ if you reversed their respective conferences, put Amherst in the NJAC and Stockton in Amherst's conference the past 10 years

with the high seeds available Amherst has gotten, it is a self running machine,
in Amhersts conference, the positions would be reversed

Since like they 86 or 87 season Stockton has averaged 19 wins a year,.... put them in Amhersts conference that jumps to 22-23 wins a year in regular season

Then we are talking about high ranking in the ncaa, and high seeding in the ncaa,.. giving you a shot at a national title every year

i see it clearly

and it isnt just amherst and the new england smalls

However , I respect teams like St Thomas, who I think can beat Stevens Point this year

Every once in a while the NJAC has a team that would compete in any conference, and I believe Stockton is that team this year

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 16, 2014, 03:56:39 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 03:55:01 PM
I get all that. But think a moment,........ if you reversed their respective conferences, put Amherst in the NJAC and Stockton in Amherst's conference the past 10 years

Um, just NO!

The NESCAC is a far better conference than the NJAC

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 03:58:20 PM

don't just say things to say things, Amherst plays schools with less than 1000 students,... Yeah Stockton lost at montclair by 1 point, they have like 18,000 students, should be a d2 or d1 team

you are not looking at it right

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on January 16, 2014, 04:01:37 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 03:58:20 PM
don't just say things to say things, Amherst plays schools with less than 1000 students,... Yeah Stockton lost at montclair by 1 point, they have like 18,000 students, should be a d2 or d1 team

you are not looking at it right

The size of the school has nothing to do with the ability of the basketball team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 16, 2014, 04:01:46 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 03:58:20 PM
don't just say things to say things, Amherst plays schools with less than 1000 students,... Yeah Stockton lost at montclair by 1 point, they have like 18,000 students, should be a d2 or d1 team

you are not looking at it right

Perhaps you should look into the history of NESCAC National Championship teams and how many NESCAC schools have progressed to the Final Four since being allowed to compete in the national tournament. Through the same half of the bracket as the NJAC schools most of the time I might add.

School size means zero by the way.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 16, 2014, 04:01:57 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 16, 2014, 03:54:08 PM
Quote from: GnacBballFan on January 16, 2014, 03:48:09 PM
Amherst is the defending natl champion and went toe to toe with a D1 opponent this yr. I find it hard to believe they wouldn't last 10 mins in a conference that hasn't won an ncaa game in quite a bit

Nova Southeastern is a D2 school, for what it's worth.

My apologies, I got ahead of myself

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 04:03:34 PM

again, it is self running machine, when you are ranked high, play lesser teams in the ncaa, you have a better shot

i'm not saying amherst didnt win the champuonships,

i'm saying they never would have got their playing in the NJAC

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 16, 2014, 04:05:39 PM

Do the research man

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 16, 2014, 04:10:26 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 03:55:01 PM
with the high seeds available Amherst has gotten, it is a self running machine,
in Amhersts conference, the positions would be reversed

Since like they 86 or 87 season Stockton has averaged 19 wins a year,.... put them in Amhersts conference that jumps to 22-23 wins a year in regular season

I think "earned" is a better word there.

I think part of the perception is that the NJAC has gone downhill in the past 15 years, and especially in the past five. Watch the Chuck McBreen interview I mentioned earlier for some thoughts as to why.

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 04:03:34 PM
again, it is self running machine, when you are ranked high, play lesser teams in the ncaa, you have a better shot

That lasts for about a round, maybe two. The NJAC's eight-game NCAA Tournament losing streak in the past three seasons comes against representatives of the NEAC, USAC, NECC, CSAC, GNAC (twice), ODAC and Little East. The last five in a row are all against reps of lower-level conferences (everything since the ODAC loss to Virginia Wesleyan and the Little East loss to Rhode Island College). Playing yourself into better seeding in the regular season would not have helped.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 04:11:23 PM

in 10 days from now, When Stockton is standing at 16-2, you'll understand

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 16, 2014, 04:14:47 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 04:11:23 PM
in 10 days from now, When Stockton is standing at 16-2, you'll understand

You might want to look at the NJAC's recent track record to do some of that research sac mentioned. Gordon Mann puts together a fantastic resource every year -- worth checking out to get some of that NJAC history post-1987:
http://www.d3hoops.com/guidebook/index

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 16, 2014, 04:18:52 PM

First year NESCAC teams were allowed to compete in the post-season (per conference rules) was 1997, since they've had a very steady stream of teams make it to the D3 Final Four

Final Four Teams
1997 Williams
1998 Williams
1999 Conn. College
2003 Williams--NATIONAL CHAMPION
2004 Williams, Amherst
2006 Amherst
2007 Amherst--NATIONAL CHAMPION
2008 Amherst
2010 Williams
2011 Williams, Middlebury
2013 Amherst--NATIONAL CHAMPION

In the same time frame, the NJAC has had two teams Stockton State and William Patterson.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 16, 2014, 04:24:56 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 03:58:20 PM
don't just say things to say things, Amherst plays schools with less than 1000 students,... Yeah Stockton lost at montclair by 1 point, they have like 18,000 students, should be a d2 or d1 team

you are not looking at it right

Richard Stockton has 5k students... Amherst managed to win the title last year with a measly 1700.
Duke (which has handled themselves quite well in D1) has about 6500... Butler which made back to back D1 championship games a few years ago has 4k. Central Florida has a whopping 60k and has never won a tournament game (0-4).
Enrollment size doesn't mean anything... Montclair doesn't play with 18000 players, they play with 15 or so like every other school.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 16, 2014, 04:26:46 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 03:58:20 PM
don't just say things to say things, Amherst plays schools with less than 1000 students,... Yeah Stockton lost at montclair by 1 point, they have like 18,000 students, should be a d2 or d1 team

you are not looking at it right

I would think you need to ask Montclair on Why D3? I'm sure they have the proper answer for that.

Too many smaller publics are going to D1 to try to earn a fast buck with tournament revenue or be a punching bag for the majors. I think Montclair is doing it the right way...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 16, 2014, 04:34:50 PM

Mind you, Massey has Richard Stockton 19th and Amherst 20th, but that's a really miniscule data point when there are 413 teams rated in D3.

When there 400+ teams to deal with, those ranked in the 26-50 (or so) may be just as capable of handling almost everyone just as a Top 20 team could. There's just so many teams in the universe.
Case in point - yesterday DePauw (48) and Stevenson (50) defeated Wittenberg and Messiah. The DPU game wasn't close after halftime. I don't think those results are necessarily anomalous, unlike the Principia / Millkin game or even when Emerson upset Amherst.

That's why we shouldn't get anything in a bunch until tourney time. Heck, the time to raise cain is during the Regional Rankings process, not Pat's Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 16, 2014, 04:40:50 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 04:11:23 PM
in 10 days from now, When Stockton is standing at 16-2, you'll understand

Stockton could definitely end the season with only two losses. They're favored in every other game on their schedule. But conference affiliation doesn't help you in the NCAAs.

The UAA, WIAC, and CCIW are meatgrinder conferences and they have a lot of high seeds every year.

Right now the top conferences in Massey:

1. UAA
2. CCIW
3. WIAC
4. OAC
5. MAC

The NESCAC is 10th in Massey (he splits the ASC into two conferences) and the NJAC is 11th. But my perception is that the NESCAC is down with some teams not performing to capability compared to 2013 while the NJAC has many teams tracking better than 2013

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 16, 2014, 04:42:57 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 04:11:23 PM
in 10 days from now, When Stockton is standing at 16-2, you'll understand

If they're 16-2 (which would include a win over Will Pat) then they very well might be ranked. But as you mentioned earlier...

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 12:08:22 PM
All the games are conference games, where anything can happen.

Which I think was demonstrated best when Montclair St beat Stockton.

It's one thing to be supportive and excited for a team (most of us here are, even if it's not basketball), but you do seem to be rather aggressive about things at times, or at least that's how it seems to me. It's not the free for all of the espn boards (I can't stand to read comments over there :() it's more of a lazy Sunday chat on the porch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 04:45:39 PM

those conferences were all stil ranked in2009,, still waiting for a legit explanation on basketball terms why stoclkton would be highly ranked in 2009 and not inj 2013 on an appearant great season working out?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 16, 2014, 05:03:30 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 04:45:39 PM
those conferences were all stil ranked in2009,, still waiting for a legit explanation on basketball terms why stoclkton would be highly ranked in 2009 and not inj 2013 on an appearant great season working out?

because its 2014 and not 2009?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 16, 2014, 05:05:43 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 04:45:39 PM
those conferences were all stil ranked in2009,, still waiting for a legit explanation on basketball terms why stoclkton would be highly ranked in 2009 and not inj 2013 on an appearant great season working out?

It could be that in 2009 there were fewer teams that hadn't picked up a few losses therefore making it easier to make the top 25 with just 2 losses.

As of last Sunday (when the latest ballots were made) I counted 45 teams with 2 or fewer losses (and of course sprinkle in a few 3 or 4 loss teams in the discussion as well). I don't have the data for 2009 but if for example only 25-30 teams had 2 or fewer losses then it would be far easier for a 2 loss team to be up in the rankings compared to this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 16, 2014, 05:11:34 PM

Quote from: sac on January 16, 2014, 05:03:30 PM
Quote from: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 04:45:39 PM
those conferences were all stil ranked in2009,, still waiting for a legit explanation on basketball terms why stoclkton would be highly ranked in 2009 and not inj 2013 on an appearant great season working out?

because its 2014 and not 2009?

we have a winner!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 16, 2014, 05:20:01 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 04:11:23 PM
in 10 days from now, When Stockton is standing at 16-2, you'll understand

A few quick points...

1) I think you're putting too much stock in the d3hoops.com Top 25. As much as it is the preeminent ranking of D3 basketball, when you truly boil it down (and this conversation has practically boiled it dry), it's the opinion of 25 coaches, SID's, and media members. It isn't the opinion of a single person. And when they have taken a look at Richard Stockton, compared to the other 411 teams in the country, a few have placed them in the top 25, but not all. Even the ones who have, have likely placed them fairly low in the top 25 (probably all the 23-25 range, unless a single voter voted them in at 12 and they were off every other ballot, or something similar).

But, in the end, it's just a poll. It has no bearing on ANY post season selections, seeding, hosting, or the like. It's for fun, along the same lines that each of the student athletes is playing for the love of the game and not for a scholarship.

2) One of the main differences that has been cited between the 2009 version of RS and the 2013 version is the schedule:

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 16, 2014, 03:24:40 PM
Stockton was also 27-2 entering the NCAA tournament that year and had played teams like Middlebury (L), Widener (W), Carnegie Mellon (W), and Scranton (W) in out of conference play. That was a far better schedule than this season's. The conference was also better. You had Montclair State and William Paterson with 20+ win seasons.

Another difference was that RS was ranked in the preseason. They were "on the RADAR" before the season even began. That meant that, after an 8-1 start, they jumped in at #23. But they only played 3 games during December... while other teams played more, and lost around them. So, through matriculation, they rose, even though they only won 3 games in 4 weeks, all the way up to #13.

After they lost their second game in the first week of January, they won 12 straight games to be 25-2 going into the NCAA tournament. After playing tougher teams than they've played this year.

3) RS may be as good as you think they are. They may be a top 25 team. But, it's better to be UNDERRATED and prove everyone wrong (i.e. keep winning) than it is to be OVERRATED and prove them wrong (start losing).

That brings me to my final point.

4) Similar to #1, it's just a poll. If you think you should be ranked, but you're not, then win the games on your schedule and play into a ranking. That's the only way that any team will become ranked. Prove that you're one of the top 6% in the land.

When it gets down to it, talk is cheap. Just go out and play and prove who is the better team. If it's you, great. If it isn't you, learn from it, get better, and hope to have a chance at seeing that team (or better teams) down the line... and do what you need to do to win.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 16, 2014, 05:45:39 PM

I don't know why but I'll try this tact. Here's the 2009 poll progression of Richard Stockton compared to this season

Pre-S unranked #37
Poll 1 unranked #28
Poll 2 #23
Poll 3 #20
Poll 4 #14
Poll 5 #13
Poll 6 #14 (January 11)
Poll 7 #13
Poll 8 #12
Poll 9 #10
Poll 10 #9
Poll 11 #10
Poll 12 #10
Poll 13 #6
Final #5

2014
Pre-S unranked #50
Poll 1 unranked #56
Poll 2 unranked #46
Poll 3 unranked no votes
Poll 4 unranked #36
Poll 5 unranked no votes

Well it looks to me like a lot of it has to do with where Stockton started the season in the pollsters eyes. In 2009 #37. They made their way into the top 25 relatively quickly for a team that started in that position. Their first loss actually moved them up the poll. Their second loss only cost them 1 spot in the poll because so many other teams around them lost that same week.

This year Stockton is starting from a much lower position #50, which mean maybe only a couple of the 25 voters have them on the ballot which means they have to do quite a bit more to convince those 23 other voters or so to vote for them. Plus it looks as if the "others receiving votes" crowd is much larger this year. So the votes are being spread around to more teams, a sign of indecision.

Stockton isn't going to be ranked any time soon even if they win a few games, its just the way poll dynamics are going to work this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 16, 2014, 05:55:08 PM

Let's also remember that Richard Stockton had made a deep run in the NCAA tournament in 2008... putting them on the radar in the preseason poll the following season. The last two years... 20 win seasons but no NCAA tournament berth. Harder to be recognized in the preseason when you don't have a resume to build from.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on January 16, 2014, 08:40:46 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 03:55:01 PM
I get all that. But think a moment,........ if you reversed their respective conferences, put Amherst in the NJAC and Stockton in Amherst's conference the past 10 years

with the high seeds available Amherst has gotten, it is a self running machine,
in Amhersts conference, the positions would be reversed

Since like they 86 or 87 season Stockton has averaged 19 wins a year,.... put them in Amhersts conference that jumps to 22-23 wins a year in regular season

Then we are talking about high ranking in the ncaa, and high seeding in the ncaa,.. giving you a shot at a national title every year

i see it clearly

and it isnt just amherst and the new england smalls

However , I respect teams like St Thomas, who I think can beat Stevens Point this year

Every once in a while the NJAC has a team that would compete in any conference, and I believe Stockton is that team this year

12/21/13 UWSP 75 St. Thomas 62

I think any number of teams can beat Stevens Point as long as they outplay them and outscore them. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 17, 2014, 06:10:40 AM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 02:53:08 PM
ok, but Stocktons 2nd loss in the season, in 2008/2009, in the middle of the regular season, to )TCNJ (formerly Trenton State), that season, didnt drop them that much , but to only between ranking 15-20.

Unless you are Stevens Point this season, you probably are not going undefeated.

Alot of the teams that have votes, have bad home loses, un-like Stockton

Of the top 25

Worse I can find:

Ohio Wesleyan with a neutral court loss to La Verne(5-9) (2nd game of the season)
St. Mary's loss to DeSales (8-6)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 17, 2014, 09:50:33 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 17, 2014, 06:10:40 AM
Quote from: hplc2222 on January 16, 2014, 02:53:08 PM
ok, but Stocktons 2nd loss in the season, in 2008/2009, in the middle of the regular season, to )TCNJ (formerly Trenton State), that season, didnt drop them that much , but to only between ranking 15-20.

Unless you are Stevens Point this season, you probably are not going undefeated.

Alot of the teams that have votes, have bad home loses, un-like Stockton

Of the top 25

Worse I can find:

Ohio Wesleyan with a neutral court loss to La Verne(5-9) (2nd game of the season)
St. Mary's loss to DeSales (8-6)

Of the ORV... here's every home loss (I didn't include Oswego because they lost this week and won't get any votes next week)

Chris Newport: Emory (9-3), Wesley (12-1)
Whitworth: Colorado College (9-2)
Marietta: Wooster (13-1)
DePauw: Rose-Hulman (11-3)
Dickinson: Juniata (11-3)
Springfield: Hampden-Sydney [OT] (9-5), WPI (13-1)

Hope: Illinois Wesleyan (13-2)
Babson: Amherst (11-2), Springfield [OT] (11-3)
Calvin: Cornerstone [NAIA] (15-3), Carthage (10-5), Hope (8-6)
UW-Platteville: St Olaf (9-4)
Stevenson: Birmingham Southern (7-5)

8 teams have no home losses: Brockport St, Emory, William Paterson, Texas-Dallas, Richard Stockton, NYU, Dubuque, St Vincent

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 17, 2014, 09:55:06 AM

you missed stockton was ranked 23 2 weeks ago

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 17, 2014, 11:43:22 AM

Quotestill waiting for a legit explanation on basketball terms why stoclkton would be highly ranked in 2009 and not inj 2013 on an appearant great season working out?

When Stockton made its run to the final in 2009, the NJAC was still considered one of the stronger conferences in Division III, based in part its performance in the NCAA tournament. The conference went 8-5 in the NCAA tournament (.615) with four Sweet 16 appearances from 2004 - 2008. Pretty good.

Since 2009, the NJAC has gone 0-8 in the NCAA tournament. The NJAC hasn't won an NCAA touranment game since Stockton defeated Franklin & Marshall in 2009 Final Four.

More than that, the NJAC has had a nationally ranked team lose at home or on a neutral floor to an unranked team from one of Division III's weakest conferences in the first round of the last four NCAA tournaments. Here are those results showing the ranking of the opponent's conference according to non-conference winning percentage last year.

2013: #15 Ramapo loses to Morrisville State (NEAC, 42nd of 43 conferences for out-of-conference winning percentage)

2012: #12 William Paterson loses to Becker (NECC, 43rd of 43 conferences)

2011: "30th" Ramapo lost to Johnson & Wales (NAC, 40th of 43 conferences)

Ramapo had the fifth highest vote of teams outside the Top 25.

2010: #7 William Paterson lost to Albertus Magnus (GNAC, 36th of 43 conferences)

In all of these cases, the teams that beat the NJAC's best squad were not only unranked. Those NJAC beaters didn't receive a single Top 25 vote in the poll immediately before the NCAA tournament in any of those years. So not one voter in any year thought the team that was playing the NJAC's best team was a Top 25 team. And the NJAC lost to those teams every time.

There's a very strong correlation between conferences that win the NCAA tournament and conferences whose teams are ranked in the Top 25. Until the NJAC wins games in the tournament, they are not going to get as much love in the Top 25 rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 17, 2014, 11:59:38 AM

Quote from: sac on January 16, 2014, 05:45:39 PM
I don't know why but I'll try this tact. Here's the 2009 poll progression of Richard Stockton compared to this season

Pre-S unranked #37
Poll 1 unranked #28
Poll 2 #23
Poll 3 #20
Poll 4 #14
Poll 5 #13
Poll 6 #14 (January 11)
Poll 7 #13
Poll 8 #12
Poll 9 #10
Poll 10 #9
Poll 11 #10
Poll 12 #10
Poll 13 #6
Final #5

2014
Pre-S unranked #50
Poll 1 unranked #56
Poll 2 unranked #46
Poll 3 unranked no votes
Poll 4 unranked #36
Poll 5 ~~unranked no votes~~ ranked #23 and in the latest poll week 6 Stockton has dropped down to #36

Well it looks to me like a lot of it has to do with where Stockton started the season in the pollsters eyes. In 2009 #37. They made their way into the top 25 relatively quickly for a team that started in that position. Their first loss actually moved them up the poll. Their second loss only cost them 1 spot in the poll because so many other teams around them lost that same week.

This year Stockton is starting from a much lower position #50, which mean maybe only a couple of the 25 voters have them on the ballot which means they have to do quite a bit more to convince those 23 other voters or so to vote for them. Plus it looks as if the "others receiving votes" crowd is much larger this year. So the votes are being spread around to more teams, a sign of indecision.

Stockton isn't going to be ranked any time soon even if they win a few games, its just the way poll dynamics are going to work this year.

sac,

some slight corrections.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: realist on January 17, 2014, 12:55:14 PM

Mark Twain — 'Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.'
:)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 17, 2014, 01:14:30 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 17, 2014, 11:59:38 AM
Quote from: sac on January 16, 2014, 05:45:39 PM
I don't know why but I'll try this tact. Here's the 2009 poll progression of Richard Stockton compared to this season

Pre-S unranked #37
Poll 1 unranked #28
Poll 2 #23
Poll 3 #20
Poll 4 #14
Poll 5 #13
Poll 6 #14 (January 11)
Poll 7 #13
Poll 8 #12
Poll 9 #10
Poll 10 #9
Poll 11 #10
Poll 12 #10
Poll 13 #6
Final #5

2014
Pre-S unranked #50
Poll 1 unranked #56
Poll 2 unranked #46
Poll 3 unranked no votes
Poll 4 unranked #36
Poll 5 ~~unranked no votes~~ ranked #23 and in the latest poll week 6 Stockton has dropped down to #36

Well it looks to me like a lot of it has to do with where Stockton started the season in the pollsters eyes. In 2009 #37. They made their way into the top 25 relatively quickly for a team that started in that position. Their first loss actually moved them up the poll. Their second loss only cost them 1 spot in the poll because so many other teams around them lost that same week.

This year Stockton is starting from a much lower position #50, which mean maybe only a couple of the 25 voters have them on the ballot which means they have to do quite a bit more to convince those 23 other voters or so to vote for them. Plus it looks as if the "others receiving votes" crowd is much larger this year. So the votes are being spread around to more teams, a sign of indecision.

Stockton isn't going to be ranked any time soon even if they win a few games, its just the way poll dynamics are going to work this year.

sac,

some slight corrections.

Thanks I had a devil of time keeping Stockton and William Patterson separate in my head.

I don't think it changes my conclusion much, Stockton started from a much lower position in a more difficult poll environment this year. It looks like at #23 Stockton is really only 3 weeks off their 2009 pace in the polls, which I think I pointed out had lots of movement because of several losses each week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 18, 2014, 09:58:45 AM

Will Wheaton beat Illinois Wesleyan today? and if not, and they drop to 6 losses, will they drop out of the Top 25?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 18, 2014, 10:28:00 AM

34 teams with no more than 2 losses
(4 teams in top 25 have 3 losses, 1 team has 5)

undefeated
UW Stevens Point 15-0-------#1
Cabrini 13-0------------------ #3
SUNY Purchase 11-0---- ----#17
Dubuque 14-0-------------- -#40
Husson 12-0---------------- --no votes

1 loss
Wooster 13-1------------------- #2
WPI 13-1 -----------------------#5
St Norbert 12-1---------------- #12
Wesley 12-1 --------------------#14
Messiah 12-1---------------- ---#15
Bowdoin 12-1------------------ #19
Albertus Magnus -11-1-------- #23
Oglethorpe 13-1--------------- #24
Brockport State 10-1----- ----#28
Texas Dallas 11-1------------- #35

2 loss
Illinois Wesleyan 13-2------- #4
Amherst 12-2---------------- #6
Washington U 11-2--------- #7
UW Whitewater 13-2------- #8
Wittenberg 12-2------------- #9
Williams 12-2------------- -- #10
St Thomas 11-2------------ #11
Augustana 13-2------------- #13
Mary Wahington 12-2--------#20
Dickinson 12-2-------------- #33
Richard Stockton 12-2------#36
NYU 11-2-------------------- #37
St Vincent 13-2---------- -- #42
Staten Island 12-2 ------------ no votes
Mount Union 11-2 --------------no votes
Genesco State 9-2 --------------no votes
Grinnel 11-2 -------------------- no votes
Hibert 11-2 --------------------- no votes
Penn State Behrend 11-2 ----- no votes

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 18, 2014, 10:32:08 AM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 18, 2014, 10:28:00 AM
34 teams with no more than 2 losses
(3 teams in top 25 have 3 losses, 1 team has 5)

undefeated
UW Stevens Point 15-0-------#1
Cabrini 13-0------------------ #3
SUNY Purchase 11-0---- ----#17
Dubuque 14-0-------------- -#40
Husson 12-0---------------- --no votes

1 loss
Wooster 13-1------------------- #2
WPI 13-1 -----------------------#5
St Norbert 12-1---------------- #12
Wesley 12-1 --------------------#14
Messiah 12-1---------------- ---#15
Bowdoin 12-1------------------ #19
Albertus Magnus -11-1-------- #23
Oglethorpe 13-1--------------- #24
Brockport State 10-1----- ----#28
Texas Dallas 11-1------------- #35

2 loss
Illinois Wesleyan 13-2------- #4
Amherst 12-2---------------- #6
Washington U 11-2--------- #7
UW Whitewater 13-2------- #8
Wittenberg 12-2------------- #9
Williams 12-2------------- -- #10
St Thomas 11-2------------ #11
Augustana 13-2------------- #13
Mary Wahington 12-2--------#20
Dickinson 12-2-------------- #33
Richard Stockton 12-2------#36
NYU 11-2-------------------- #37
St Vincent 13-2---------- -- #42
Staten Island 12-2 ------------ no votes
Mount Union 11-2 --------------no votes
Genesco State 9-2 --------------no votes
Grinnel 11-2 -------------------- no votes
Hibert 11-2 --------------------- no votes
Penn State Behrend 11-2 ----- no votes

The bolded statement is misleading - Wheaton had four losses at the time the poll was done.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 18, 2014, 11:14:09 AM

I know, that is where the teams stand going into today's games.

From the list of those 34 teams, every team is playing today except 6 teams : Cabrini, WPI, Washington U, Wittenberg, NYU, and Staten Island.

By this time tomorrow morning the list could look a lot different.

Moving day games I think today.

The only teams on the 34 team list playing tomorrow are NYU and Washingto U, and they play each other

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 18, 2014, 11:25:20 AM

Colorado college ranked 25 also has 3 losses now, they lost last night.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 18, 2014, 11:41:51 AM

Of the 34 teams currently with no more than 2 losses, 20 of them are in the Top 25 and and 27 total recieved votes last vote (top 45)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 18, 2014, 11:48:10 AM

The 7 teams with no more than 2 losses that recieved votes last vote, but not inside the Top 25 are:

All these teams play today except NYU that plays tomorrow

These are the teams that need to win today (or tomorrow for NYU), to stay in the fight for Monday's vote

Brockport State 10-1----- #28*
Texas Dallas 11-1--------- #35*
Dickinson 12-2------------ #33*
Richard Stockton 12-2- ---#36*
NYU 11-2--------------------#37
St Vincent 13-2---------- - #42*
Dubuque 14-0-------------- #40*

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 18, 2014, 01:15:00 PM

If number 21 Wheaton Ill loses to number 4 Illinois Wesleyan today, to drop to 10-6, I think despite playing a hard sc deule, they would have to drop out of the Top 25.

Going into today's games there are 161 teams in the Nation with no mo0re than 5 losses. Hrd to believe the voters couldnt come up with 25 better teams out of those 161 teams

as of this morning here is how it sits (I put up the no more than 2 loss teams (34) on the previous page

0 loss - 5
1 loss - 10
2 loss - 19

3 loss - 29
4 loss - 40
5 loss - 58
(that is 161 teams)

6 loss - 42 teams

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 18, 2014, 01:39:47 PM

depauw 11-3 #31, has a halftime lead at home against Ohio Wesleyan 11-3 #22. not sure who I should be rooting for in this one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 18, 2014, 01:50:29 PM

I was trying to think about how many years it would take to have all 416 D3 schools get a Final 4 appearance.

I guess 3200 years. lol

There have been 39 Final 4's I guess it started in 1975.

If each year 4 different teams got in, that would be 156 teams in 156 slots

I wonder how many teams since the start of the 1974/1975 season have actualy made the Final 4

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: realist on January 18, 2014, 02:55:45 PM

hplc: If you really want to know answers to questions like this you should become familiar with sites like this on: www.ncaa.com/history/basketball-men/d3

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 18, 2014, 03:27:02 PM

That link only gives the final game, not the Final 4 - 4 teams

Richard Stockton's up eary 19-10 at Ramapo with 10:56 left in the first half

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 18, 2014, 03:54:19 PM

Richard Stockton has a 45-22 lead at halftime at ramapo. Stocktons defense is doing it this afternoon. Ramapo has not scored less than 60 points in a game all season.

Here are Ramapo's point totals for the season

83 L, 78 L, 69 L, 84 W, 78 W, 93 W, 86 W, 92 L, 67 L, 72 L, 71 W, 69 L, 61 L, 78 W, 99 W (7-8 record)

Richard Stockton's defense is incedible to hold Ramapo at Ramapo to just 22 points in the first half

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 18, 2014, 03:55:21 PM

http://d3hoops.com/archives/index

All the final four participants can be found using the links on this page.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 18, 2014, 04:26:24 PM

never heard of the iron bowl, lol, have no idea what that is,

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 18, 2014, 04:29:18 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 18, 2014, 04:26:24 PM
never heard of the iron bowl, lol, have no idea what that is,

Alabama vs Auburn football is referred to as the Iron Bowl because it was played annually in Birmingham, AL until the late 80's.

Birmingham was the south's leading producer of iron through much of the 20th century and Legion Field where the game was played was almost entirely an iron and steel structure.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 18, 2014, 05:02:46 PM

Richard Stockton just won at Ramapo 90-69, to go to 13-2. The game was not even that close, Stockton put the bench in when they got a 30 point lead.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 18, 2014, 06:12:21 PM

current status
33 teams with no more than 2 losses
(20 are in Top 25 last vote)

undefeated
UW Stevens Point ---------15-0--- #1 saturday 8pm
Cabrini -------------------- 13-0----#3
SUNY Purchase------------ 12-0---#17
Dubuque------------------- 14-0--- #40 saturday 5pm
Husson----------------------13-0----no votes

1 loss
Wooster----------------------- 14-1-----#2 saturday 730pm
WPI ---------------------------13-1 -----#5
St Norbert-------------------- 13-1-----#12
Wesley------------------------ 13-1 ----#14
Messiah----------------------- 12-1---- #15 saturday 5pm
Bowdoin---------------------- 13-1-----#19
Albertus Magnus---------- - 12-1--- #23
Oglethorpe------------------- 13-1------#24 saturday 8pm
Brockport State------------ 10-1-----#28 saturday 6pm
Texas Dallas---------------- 12-1------#35

2 loss
Illinois Wesleyan----------- 13-2--- #4 saturday 8pm
Amherst----------------------- 13-2---- #6
Washington U--------------- 11-2---- #7 plays sunday
UW Whitewater------------ 14-2--- #8
Wittenberg------------------- 12-2-----#9 saturday 730pm
Williams---------------------- 13-2-----#10
St Thomas------------------- 12-2----#11
Augustana------------------- 13-2----#13 saturday 8pm
Mary Wahington----------- 13-2-----#20
Dickinson--------------------- 13-2-----#33
Richard Stockton----------- 13-2- -#36
NYU----------------------------11-2----#37- plays sunday
St Vincent-------------------- -14-2--- #42
Staten Island---------------- 12-2 -- no votes
Mount Union----------------- 12-2 ---no votes
Genesco St------------------- -9-2 --- no votes saturday 8pm
Hilbert------------------------- 12-2 ---no votes
Penn State Behrend------ 12-2 - no votes

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 18, 2014, 07:21:27 PM

Could see some new teams in top 25 for sure, Richard Stockton most likely not one of them

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 18, 2014, 07:24:25 PM

This coming week Richard Stockton plays Brrooklyn 4-11 on Monday, Kean 9-5 on Wednesday, and William Paterson 12-3 on Saturday

If they win all 3 of those games to get to 16-2, will they be in the Top 25 then?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 18, 2014, 08:03:53 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 18, 2014, 07:24:25 PM
This coming week Richard Stockton plays Brrooklyn 4-11 on Monday, Kean 9-5 on Wednesday, and William Paterson 12-3 on Saturday

If they win all 3 of those games to get to 16-2, will they be in the Top 25 then?

Probably, but such a question cannot be answered in isolation - depends on what other teams do.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 18, 2014, 09:15:50 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 18, 2014, 08:03:53 PM
Quote from: hplc2222 on January 18, 2014, 07:24:25 PM
This coming week Richard Stockton plays Brrooklyn 4-11 on Monday, Kean 9-5 on Wednesday, and William Paterson 12-3 on Saturday

If they win all 3 of those games to get to 16-2, will they be in the Top 25 then?

Probably, but such a question cannot be answered in isolation - depends on what other teams do.

This, right here, is the absolute key to everything here, hplc2222.

Richard Stockton isn't playing in a bubble. And it isn't just pure wins and losses that matters, it matters WHO the wins and losses are against. And WHO the wins and losses of other teams being considered are against.

Wins against Ramapo, Brooklyn College, and Kean aren't ones that will drive RS up in the rankings, per say. None of them are banner wins. They are, however, questionable losses, should RS drop a game to them.

The game against William Patterson is more important for RS, it's the biggest game, by far, left on the schedule. But based on the schedule, RS really SHOULDN'T lose another game. They'll be favored in each one.

Then, it's up to them to make some noise if they get to the NCAA tournament, which no one from their conference has managed to do since RS's trip to Salem in '09, as has been noted here.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 18, 2014, 09:16:12 PM

Final: #2 Wooster 69 #9 Wittenberg 62

Nice road win for the Wooster Scots in a big rivalry game with the Tigers. Scott Purcell led Wooster with 14 points

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 18, 2014, 09:29:35 PM

It's been a rough couple of weeks for Wittenberg, albeit against (mostly) stiff competition. A week ago Wednesday, they fell behind Ohio Wesleyan by 22 in the second half before roaring back to claim a brilliant overtime victory. The following Saturday they barely survived lowly Hiram by 1, then on Wednesday DePauw blew their stripes off by 26. Tonight they fell behind Wooster by 19 early in the second half. They did pull themselves together and stage another nearly miraculous comeback, closing to within 3, but this time could not seal the deal. Although the Old Tigers may hang on to a top 25 slot, I think they have seen the last of the top 10 for a while.

And oh by the way, Ohio Wesleyan, who couldn't hold their large second-half lead against Witt, won today at DePauw, who could and did, by 11. So much for the transitive property of D3 hoops.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 18, 2014, 10:03:12 PM

very difficult to find the illinois wesleyan vs wheaton ill score---- the live score and auduio and video isnt working, the games not updated on neither teams own website, and its not showing on d3 hoops,lol

im watching the end of oglethorpe though ok.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 18, 2014, 10:08:00 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 18, 2014, 10:03:12 PM
very difficult to find the illinois wesleyan vs wheaton ill score---- the live score and auduio and video isnt working, the games not updated on neither teams own website, and its not showing on d3 hoops,lol

im watching the end of oglethorpe though ok.

I watched a very good video, and fairly quick stats updates - don't know what your trouble may have been. IWU won 78-71 - game ended about a minute ago.

Generally your best bet is to go to the hoe team's website for directions, though the d3hoops.com links worked perfectly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on January 18, 2014, 10:09:02 PM

IWU 78, Wheaton 71: final.

Twitter is a great way to get updates on many D3 teams. This website's Twitter feed is very reliable and posted frequent updates on the IWU/Wheaton game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 18, 2014, 10:17:15 PM

Current status of 51 teams who would all like to be in the Top 25

32 teams with no more than 2 losses
(19 are in Top 25 last vote)
undefeated
UW Stevens Point-----------16-0----#1
Cabrini ----------------------13-0----#3
SUNY Purchase------------- 12-0---#17
Dubuque---------------------15-0--- #40
Husson-----------------------13-0----no votes

1 loss
Wooster--------------------- 15-1-----#2
WPI --------------------------13-1 -----#5
St Norbert------------------- 13-1-----#12
Wesley----------------------- 13-1 ----#14
Messiah-----------------------13-1---- #15
Bowdoin----------------------13-1-----#19
Albertus Magnus-------------12-1----- #23
Oglethorpe------------------ 14-1------#24
Brockport State------------- 11-1-----#28
Texas Dallas----------------- 12-1------#35

2 loss
Illinois Wesleyan------------ 14-2--- #4
Amherst----------------------13-2---- #6
Washington U----------------11-2---- #7
UW Whitewater------------- 14-2--- #8
Williams-----------------------13-2---#10
St Thomas------------------- 12-2----#11
Augustana------------------- 14-2----#13
Mary Wahington------------- 13-2-----#20
Dickinson--------------------- 13-2----#33
Richard Stockton------------- 13-2- -#36
NYU----------------------------11-2----#37-
St Vincent---------------------14-2--- #42
Staten Island----------------- 12-2 -- no votes
Mount Union------------------ 12-2 ---no votes
Genesco St--------------------10-2 --- no votes
Hilbert------------------------- 12-2 ---no votes
Penn State Behrend------ ----12-2 - no votes

teams with 3 or more losses that received votes last vote
09 Wittenberg--------------------12-3
16   St. Mary's (Md.)--------------11-4
18   Virginia Wesleyan------------12-3
21   Wheaton (Ill.)----------------10-6
22   Ohio Wesleyan---------------12-3
25   Colorado College-------------10-3
26 Christopher Newport ---------11-4
27 Whitworth---------------------10-4
29 Marietta-----------------------11-4
30 Emory--------------------------9-4
31 DePauw -----------------------11-4
32 William Paterson---------------12-3
34 Springfield--------------------11-4
38 Hope---------------------------9-6
39 Babson------------------------11-4
41 Calvin-------------------------11-4
43 UW-Platteville----------------11-5
44 Oswego State----------------10-4
45 Stevenson--------------------11-3

Washington U, NYU, Emory, and Stevenson play on Sunday. Whitworth plays 11pm Saturday

Then we can vote. lol

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 09:42:25 AM

This weeks Top 25 pick was easy to do. What I did was take my list of the Top 51 teams, eliminated 21 teams based on either low or no votes last vote and it became really easy to see the list in my head. I cut and paste teams as I eliminated the remaining teams onto the Top 25 list. I assumed that Washington U wins today and NYU losses dropping to 3 losses. Maybe I dropped Washington too far but to me it looks right.

1 UW Stevens Point------------16-0
2 Wooster----------------------15-1
3 Cabrini------------------------13-0
4 Illinoins Wesleyan-----------14-2
5 WPI---------------------------13-1
6 Amherst----------------------13-2
7 UW Whitewater--------------14-2
8 Wesley----------------------- 13-1
9 Williams----------------------13-2
10 St Thomas------------------12-2
11 Messiah---------------------13-1
12 St Norbert------------------13-1
13 Washington U--------------12-2 (assuming they win sunday for 12th win)
14 Augustana------------------14-2
15 Suny Purchase-------------12-0
16 Bowdoin--------------------13-1
17 Mary Washington----------13-2
18 Albertus Magnus-----------12-1
19 Dickinson------------------ 13-2
20 Richard Stockton---------- 13-2
21 Oglethorpe-----------------14-1
22 Wittenberg-----------------12-3
23 Brockport State------------11-1
24 Virginia Wesleyan----------12-3
25 Ohio Wesleyan-------------12-3

others that were considered
Dubuque 15-0, Texas Dallas 12-1, St Vincent 14-2. St Marys Md. 11-4, Wheaton 10-6

Richard Stockton is one of 20 teams in the Nation with at least 13 wins and no more than 2 losses. Their 2 losses on the road by a combined 3 points. are 6-0 at home, 7-2 on the road.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2014, 01:09:51 PM

Your posting your ballot before games are even played on Sunday?!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 01:18:13 PM

yes, basicaly, i knew this morning whitworth already won last night, and i could basicaly pencil in Wshington U beating NYU today. Emory nor Stevenson werent getting in even if they win today.

So yeah, I figured ouyt my Top 25 this morning.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 01:23:22 PM

aren't sports fans allowed to to that? lol,... ESPN makes up whos better on monday a week before games are even played, sheesh.

Plus, normaly I may not have done it, but it WAS so cut and dry this week. Very easy list.

I spent the entire day yesterday from 8am to 11pm monitoring and watching the games, making and updating my list of the 51 teams, and studying all the teams wins-losses, as best I could

and spent all night in bed sleeping thinking aqbout the list.

It was really easy to wake up this morning and make my Top 25 list.

I am analytical by trade and nature.

So yeah. I put it out

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2014, 01:41:01 PM

Well I don't think you are giving Stevenson much credit... beat a previously undefeated Messiah squad and has now beaten two then-ranked Top 25 teams this season. Also, what happens if Wash U actually does lose (only winning by 8 close to halftime)? Finally, your Top 25 this week is completely different from last week... you dropped Wash U why? The problem I see is you are too analytical and not looking at the big picture or who these teams are and who they are actually playing (or who their opponents are actually playing).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 01:49:30 PM

Not sure if it is proper for a broadcaster to chastise a fan. But i'll take it with a grain of salt.

As far as Stevenson goes, the voters had them at 45 last vote, the last on the list, if they win today they go to 12-3, probably move up 7-10 spots.

Wshington U is not losing to NYU today. NYU been on the road in motels for days, having just played in Chicago Friday and lost that in a pitiful offensive performance, I watched much of that game until it became such a poorly played game it became unwatychable

Like I said I probably shouild not have dropped Washintgton U, but I prefer teams like Whitewater and St Thomas , they are money teams if you will, as in they exhibit more mental tuffness I feel.

Thats all, just one fans opinion.

I did look at who teams play and who they lost to, especialy home court loses

here are some example

Colorado College 10-3 lost at Northern Colorado 96-57 blown out, lost at Babson 93-90, and just this week Lost at Scheiner 9-7 - 71-58

St Mary Md. 11-4 - despite the tuff losses against hard teams - cabrini, mary washington, and wesley, they also lost at home to desales 9-7, 80-70

Texas-Dallas 12-1 was ranked at 35 last vote, lost at trinity 9-7, 63-58

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 19, 2014, 02:18:32 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 01:49:30 PMWshington U is not losing to NYU today. NYU been on the road in motels for days, having just played in Chicago Friday and lost that in a pitiful offensive performance, I watched much of that game until it became such a poorly played game it became unwatychable

It wasn't unwatchable at all. I was at the NYU @ UC game. It was actually a well-played game in which the defenses dominated.

Just because the defenses are stronger than the offenses doesn't make a game either poorly-played or unwatchable.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 02:24:27 PM

I watched the game on the computer, and you make take that as defense,.. i dont,..... i saw it as poorly played
nyu COULDNT GET OFF A SHOT, NEITHER HAD A RUN IN THE GAME, NOR DID ANYTHING

any team can have a hiccup, like that

that was the first nyu game i saw all season

i just am, used to watching a team like stockton that has dominating periords in games

50 points?

and then after probably leaving thursday morning for chicago at 6am, losing friday night in chicago, expecxt then to living in motels, go into st louis and beat washington university the 7th ranked team in the nation?

are you serious?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 19, 2014, 02:54:21 PM

You're apparently one of those fans who believes that basketball is all about offense, and nothing but offense. Fine. To each his own.

In the spirit of neighborliness, let me introduce you to the Grinnell Pioneers. (http://pioneers.grinnell.edu/index.aspx?path=mbball&&tab=0) All the offense you could ever wish for, and then some.

(By the way, you're operating under a misconception regarding UAA teams. They don't "live in motels," and they don't take buses across the country. They fly to UAA games in distant cities; in fact, they're the only teams in D3 that regularly fly as part of their regular-season schedule. Two or three weekends per season, depending upon the team, they fly to a UAA city on a Friday for a road game, then either bus to the travel partner (Chicago/Washington, Case Western Reserve/Carnegie Mellon, NYU/Brandeis, Emory/Rochester) or fly in the case of the Emory/Rochester tandem, play a game Sunday, and then fly home that day.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 03:00:12 PM

actualy i'm not, stockton goes on those runs because of steals, rebounds on both sides of the court, and plowing the lane,... yes they hit jumpers too, they have hot hands, but the runs are off the defensive play,... they probaly been on a 15-0 rrun in every game they played tghis season

understand?

you are saying that nyu took a plan to chicago friday morning, took a plan back to washington square nyc friday night, took a plane to chicago sunday morning, and played today?

is that what you are saying?

maybe they did, i dont know, but i find that highly doubtful

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2014, 03:01:22 PM

Broadcaster chastising a fan? Not quite... just asking questions and stating my opinion.

Wash U by the way would be considered by many to be a money team... they won back-to-back titles not that long ago.

And just because teams play really good defense and don't put up a ton of points doesn't mean they aren't good nor is the game good. You have watched one particular style of basketball and have liked it for a long time, clearly. However, there are many styles of basketball out there and that makes each team a very different beast.

As for SMC comparison you gave... yes, they lost to DeSales at home... but one game doesn't make a season (as we have noted to your Stockton examples). Also, DeSales has won more games in the Mid-Atlantic region, and one of the ten winningest programs in the country, this century. That is understanding who the opponents are... DeSales may not be having a terrific season, but they are a very well coached team and they happened to have taken an 11 hour drive to SMC in a snow storm - it is usually about four hours. I think they proved more than SMC disproved.

And your Stevenson example seems to ignore the fact they beat Messiah. Voters don't tend to move teams in that scenario up just 7-10 spots. You are also not considering teams at the bottom of the Top 25 and in between who didn't have good weeks like Wheaton (Ill.).

Back to your UAA argument... the schedule for NYU and all UAA teams has been the same for a very, very long time. These teams are not unfamiliar with a travel day on Thursday (probably later than you think - not a morning flight), play on Friday, travel on Saturday and then play on Sunday. The UAA has shown to have the tightest bonds within teams and between the men's and women's programs simply because of this fact. And the schedule is what proves if you are a good team or not. There is a reason the conference is so highly regarded, the teams prove themselves in the tournaments, and NYU used to be one of those teams along with nearly every other team in the conference that has proven themselves. The schedule is what it is and an NYU upset over Wash U would not even come close to being the biggest surprise in that conference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 19, 2014, 03:10:17 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 03:00:12 PM
you are saying that nyu took a plan to chicago friday morning, took a plan back to washington square nyc friday night, took a plane to chicago sunday morning, and played today?

is that what you are saying?

maybe they did, i dont know, but i find that highly doubtful

NYU flew into Chicago Friday, played Univ. of Chicago, drove to St. Louis on Saturday where Washington University is located and will play this afternoon and fly home.

NYU's travel partner Brandeis, flew to St. Louis Friday and did the same, drove to Chicago Saturday and played Chicago this afternoon.

Both the men's and women's teams travel together.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 03:11:35 PM

one game doesnt make or break a season - tell that to stockton haters who dropped them from 23 back to 36 because of the 1 point loss at montclair

or another way can can word it is messiah lost to stevenson

my only point about nyu was that no way they were doing that and winning the game in st louis today,... especialy after scoring only 50 in chicago on friday night

it is like a prediction

a fan prediction

by the way,...... i caught a few minutes of your broadcasts here and there on hoopsville,.... they are informative and appreciated

but what you are doing would like stephen a smith or skip bayless responsing to what a fan might write on an areticle on espn.com

not sure it is professional to do it

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2014, 03:13:06 PM

The only crazy travel schedule by UAA standards is when travel partners have to go to Rochester and Emory. That requires flying to either Rochester, NY or Atlanta, GA... playing on Friday... flying to the other city on Saturday... playing Sunday... and then flying home (though, some schools like NYU, Brandeis, Carnegie Mellon, and Case Western Reserve can drive to Rochester... but if they play Emory first on that schedule they are only driving home :).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 19, 2014, 03:18:12 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2014, 03:13:06 PM
The only crazy travel schedule by UAA standards is when travel partners have to go to Rochester and Emory. That requires flying to either Rochester, NY or Atlanta, GA... playing on Friday... flying to the other city on Saturday... playing Sunday... and then flying home (though, some schools like NYU, Brandeis, Carnegie Mellon, and Case Western Reserve can drive to Rochester... but if they play Emory first on that schedule they are only driving home :).

I would actually think the flying on Saturday would be preferable to a bus trip between Chicago and St. Louis, Pittsburgh and Cleveland or Boston and New York. Those aren't long but its still a bus.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 03:18:45 PM

can i ask a stupid question, .... is that rochester ny or rochester minnesoata? sorry i dont know,.... i am not an expert by an means on D3 basketball

I am learning

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2014, 03:20:07 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 03:11:35 PM
one game doesnt make or break a season - tell that to stockton haters who dropped them from 23 back to 36 because of the 1 point loss at montclair

It made a decision for voters on one week... not a season. And voters were probably buying in to Stockton and saw them lose and decided to sell. Same happened to SMC... I have probably had them rated the highest most of the season even after their loss to DeSales... though, I will change that thinking this week.

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 03:11:35 PM
or another way can can word it is messiah lost to stevenson

Sure... in double-overtime... on the road... against a team who has lost just a single game at home this season... is at the top of the conference with Messiah... etc., etc., etc.

But honestly... a team had to lose that game and since I saw it in person... I can tell you neither team lost the game. Someone just had to win.

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 03:11:35 PM
my only point about nyu was that no way they were doing that and winning the game in st louis today,... especialy after scoring only 50 in chicago on friday night

it is like a prediction

a fan prediction

But... it has happened... it will happen in this league... just because they put up 50 against Chicago doesn't mean they can't put up more against Wash U... and they did: 65.

That all said, I never buy into NYU until they get into the meat of the UAA schedule and especially play this particular travel weekend. I got burned by NYU as a voter in the past.

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 03:11:35 PM
by the way,...... i caught a few minutes of your broadcasts here and there on hoopsville,.... they are informative and appreciated

but what you are doing would like stephen a smith or skip bayless responsing to what a fan might write on an areticle on espn.com

not sure it is professional to do it

I am also a fan... and I don't hide the fact I am a fan or the host of the show. I have also covered Division III athletics and especially basketball for 15 years (19 if you count my college days)... and I am not chastising you... but pointing out my opinions and questioning yours to better understand your point of view and to maybe help you understand the landscape better. I had and have people do the same for me all of the time - it has made me a better broadcaster and understand the Division III world.

And it is Rochester, NY.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 03:29:35 PM

thats fine, i get it,........ just the Top 25 list was very easy this week, not agonizing like other weeks,....

i u nderstand you need an outlet,.... i of all people understand that

its just that stockton lost 2 games by 3 points , both on the road, where the game was tied of they had the lead in the final seconds, and sitting at 13-2, and getting no respect, when they should be 15-0, is hasrd for a fan to swallow.

you can read what i what today under njac in the atlantic division thread on that

Suny Purchase is the front runner right now for the top seed in the atlantic region

Stockton's defense is so good though, they could make a lot of these national teams have problems in games

From an outsider looking in, it may look like Stockiton is doing it on offense, but that is far from the truth

their games are all won on defense

then running on defense, by defense, by the use of defense,

understand?

this is a Top 25 team, im sorry, but thats the truth

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 03:50:12 PM

lol, by the way, stevenson is up 43-22 bearing the end of the first half,... they got this game,...
it doesnt matter , they might beat messiah in the conference tourney for the automatic or not,... both teams are in the NCAA i guess

the conference tourney champions and one of the 19 at large bids

but, has there been a year in recent history where so many teams have extremely good records at this point in the season?

we are looking at a dozen or more teams possibly running the table for 3 or less losses

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2014, 03:56:41 PM

Yeah... probably every year... but it never happens. We are starting to turn the corner on the second round of conference games (for most conferences) and thus the grind of the conference schedule takes its toll. Teams who may have gotten their toughest opponents at home still have to face them on the road... teams who may not do well on the road will trip teams up at home... injuries and classes take their toll, etc., etc., etc. On the men's side the last six weeks of the season are usually full of upsets and strange outcomes... and we aren't even talking about the conference tournaments, yet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 04:19:20 PM

so if a team like Richard Stockton can run the table and be 23-2 at the end of the regular season,.... despite the haters, theyll be inside the top 25, maybe even ahead of suny purchase for the lead in the atlantic region

this is what i hope for

i have looked at previos final standings

23-2 at the end of a regular season for an njac team, is a top 10 ncaa team.

no?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 19, 2014, 04:20:01 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2014, 03:56:41 PM
Yeah... probably every year... but it never happens. We are starting to turn the corner on the second round of conference games (for most conferences) and thus the grind of the conference schedule takes its toll. Teams who may have gotten their toughest opponents at home still have to face them on the road... teams who may not do well on the road will trip teams up at home... injuries and classes take their toll, etc., etc., etc. On the men's side the last six weeks of the season are usually full of upsets and strange outcomes... and we aren't even talking about the conference tournaments, yet.

Everyone but the NESCAC you mean. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2014, 04:23:24 PM

Thus "for most conferences."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 19, 2014, 04:33:41 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 03:29:35 PM
this is a Top 25 team, im sorry, but thats the truth

The truth is that:
a) the Top 25 is a fluid, ever changing list that can be argued 100 different ways without being settled. Once you get beyond the top few teams it's not possible to universally state who is a Top 25 team. Without every single team playing one another multiple times you can't rank teams without some subjectivity.
b) the difference between teams that are ranked 18th, 25th, and 33rd for example isn't much... so a single loss may not seem like much but is enough to drop a team quite a ways in that group.
c) the d3hoops poll doesn't mean jack squat... there's no trophy for being ranked... it has no influence on the tournament... and no one will remember who was ranked 22nd in January.

It's clear you're in the minority on the Stockton issue, but that doesn't mean you have to repeat the same comments constantly. I think everybody knows by now that Stockton is 13-2, with close losses on the road. We don't need reminded anymore.

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 04:19:20 PM
so if a team like Richard Stockton can run the table and be 23-2 at the end of the regular season,.... despite the haters, theyll be inside the top 25

Just because others see the team differently than you does not make them "haters". And yes, I feel fairly confident that if they are 23-2 at the end of the season they'll be ranked in the top 25.

So everyone... can we please get back to d3 basketball as a whole rather than focusing on just Richard Stockton? There are other teams in the Top 25 discussion after all.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 04:35:57 PM

there are 43 confersnces, 416 d3 teams, stcktons made the final 4 twice in 87 season,.. it would take i estimate 3200 before every team in d3 gets into the final 4

so what are you talking about

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 19, 2014, 04:37:22 PM

Bump
How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	623	UW-Stevens Point	14-0	won at UW-Stout, 61-60; won at UW-Superior, 86-69
#2	576	Wooster	12-1	won at Kenyon, 92-52
#3	571	Illinois Wesleyan	12-2	LOST at #12 Augustana, 73-81; won at North Park, 74-57
#4	563	Cabrini	11-0	def. Cairn, 91-51; def. Centenary (N.J.), 96-72
#5	525	Williams	11-2	won at Trinity (Conn.), 80-60; LOST at #8 Amherst, 73-84
#6	464	WPI	12-1	won at #34 Springfield, 81-61; def. T#36 MIT, 59-47
#7	438	Washington U.	10-2	def. Chicago, 80-69
#8	422	Amherst	10-2	def. T#45 Eastern Connecticut, 94-81; def. Hamilton, 91-73; def. #5 Williams, 84-73
#9	398	Wittenberg	12-1	def. #22 Ohio Wesleyan, 62-60; def. Hiram, 80-79
#10	385	UW-Whitewater	12-2	won at UW-Oshkosh, 86-55; def. UW-Eau Claire, 90-51
#11	375	St. Thomas	9-2	def. St. Olaf, 62-61; won at St. Mary's (Minn.), 87-58
#12	343	Augustana	12-2	def. #3 Illinois Wesleyan, 81-73; LOST at #28 Wheaton (Ill.), 63-66
#13	315	St. Norbert	11-1	def. Beloit, 68-48; won at Monmouth, 81-58
#14	278	Christopher Newport	10-3	LOST to #16 Wesley, 46-64; LOST at Penn State-Harrisburg, 60-63
#15	269	Virginia Wesleyan	10-3	LOST at Bridgewater (Va.), 65-78; def. Randolph, 75-46
#16	213	Wesley	11-1	won at Washington College, 66-51; won at #14 Christopher Newport, 64-46; def. #17 Mary Washington, 68-67
#17	149	Mary Washington	11-2	won at Salisbury, 75-70; LOST at #16 Wesley, 67-68
#18	139	SUNY-Purchase	10-0	won at Mount St. Mary, 81-66; def. Manhattanville, 82-64
#19	135	Marietta	10-3	LOST at Ohio Northern, 73-78; def. Baldwin Wallace, 97-86
#20	103	Messiah	12-0	def. Lycoming, 79-76; def. Alvernia, 89-78
#21	90	St. Mary's (Md.)	10-3	def. Frostburg State, 97-54; won at Southern Virginia, 84-49
#22	77	Ohio Wesleyan	10-3	LOST at #9 Wittenberg, 60-62; won at Allegheny, 76-64
#23	75	Richard Stockton	11-2	def. Rutgers-Camden, 76-61; LOST at Montclair State, 69-70
#24	70	Bowdoin	12-0	def. Bridgewater State, 64-59; def. Connecticut College, 64-47; def. Wesleyan, 63-54
#25	61	Babson	10-3	def. Emerson, 72-44; LOST to #34 Springfield, 81-89

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	57	Albertus Magnus	10-1	def. Norwich, 97-85; won at Rivier, 93-82; won at Suffolk, 94-73
#27	53	Calvin	9-4	won at Alma, 90-82; LOST to Hope, 63-71
#28	37	Wheaton (Ill.)	10-4	def. Elmhurst, 93-68; def. #12 Augustana, 66-63
#29	35	Oglethorpe	13-1	won at Hendrix, 70-69; won at Rhodes, 73-72
#30	34	Whitworth	10-3	def. Pacific Lutheran, 76-73; def. Puget Sound, 60-49
#31	31	Brockport State	8-1	won at Potsdam State, 75-57; won at Plattsburgh State, 85-78
#32	30	Middlebury	7-5	LOST to Plattsburgh State, 47-63; LOST to Bates, 61-64; def. Tufts, 80-66
#33	22	Colorado College	9-2	def. Austin, 68-53; def. Centenary (La.), 79-71
#34	21	Springfield	10-3	LOST to #6 WPI, 61-81; won at #25 Babson, 89-81
#35	16	Dickinson	11-2	def. Washington College, 78-66; won at Ursinus, 94-70
T#36	14	Birmingham-Southern	7-5	LOST at T#38 Emory, 61-76; LOST at Sewanee, 54-58; LOST at Centre, 71-85
T#36	14	MIT	9-3	def. Clark, 63-36; LOST at #6 WPI, 47-59
T#38	12	Staten Island	10-2	def. Lehman, 95-62; won at Medgar Evers, 113-79
T#38	12	Emory	9-3	def. T#36 Birmingham-Southern, 76-61; def. Rochester, 77-54
T#40	10	DePauw	10-3	won at Kenyon, 62-54
T#40	10	Texas-Dallas	10-1	won at LeTourneau, 80-57; won at East Texas Baptist, 84-72
T#40	10	William Paterson	11-2	won at Kean, 75-71; def. New Jersey City, 69-66
T#40	10	Stevenson	10-3	LOST at Albright, 82-89; def. Lebanon Valley, 86-72
#44	8	Dubuque	13-0	def. Wartburg, 67-63; won at Central, 74-67
T#45	1	Eastern Connecticut	9-4	LOST at #8 Amherst, 81-94; def. Mass-Boston, 81-60
T#45	1	St. Vincent	12-2	def. Thiel, 76-69; won at Bethany, 83-77
T#45	1	Guilford	10-3	won at Bridgewater (Va.), 69-60

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2014, 04:42:07 PM

sac - that was last week's results...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 04:45:04 PM

bump, thats not the last actual vote, cause stockton was 36, and middlebery wasnt even in it

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 04:47:42 PM

The real Top 25

1 UW Stevens Point------------16-0
2 Wooster----------------------15-1
3 Cabrini------------------------13-0
4 Illinoins Wesleyan-----------14-2
5 WPI---------------------------13-1
6 Amherst----------------------13-2
7 UW Whitewater--------------14-2
8 Wesley----------------------- 13-1
9 Williams----------------------13-2
10 St Thomas------------------12-2
11 Messiah---------------------13-1
12 St Norbert------------------13-1
13 Washington U--------------12-2 (assuming they win sunday for 12th win)
14 Augustana------------------14-2
15 Suny Purchase-------------12-0
16 Bowdoin--------------------13-1
17 Mary Washington----------13-2
18 Albertus Magnus-----------12-1
19 Dickinson------------------ 13-2
20 Richard Stockton---------- 13-2
21 Oglethorpe-----------------14-1
22 Wittenberg-----------------12-3
23 Brockport State------------11-1
24 Virginia Wesleyan----------12-3
25 Ohio Wesleyan-------------12-3

how I came to determine it
31 teams with no more than 2 losses
(19 are in Top 25 last vote)
undefeated
UW Stevens Point-----------16-0----#1
Cabrini --------------------------13-0----#3
SUNY Purchase------------ 12-0---#17
Dubuque----------------------- 15-0--- #40
Husson------------------------- 13-0----no votes

1 loss
Wooster----------------------- 15-1-----#2
WPI -----------------------------13-1 -----#5
St Norbert-------------------- 13-1-----#12
Wesley------------------------ 13-1 ----#14
Messiah----------------------- 13-1---- #15
Bowdoin----------------------- 13-1-----#19
Albertus Magnus---------- -12-1--- #23
Oglethorpe------------------- 14-1------#24
Brockport State------------ 11-1-----#28
Texas Dallas---------------- 12-1------#35

2 loss
Illinois Wesleyan----------- 14-2--- #4
Amherst----------------------- 13-2---- #6
Washington U---------------12-2---- #7
UW Whitewater------------ 14-2--- #8
Williams---------------------- -13-2-----#10
St Thomas------------------- 12-2----#11
Augustana------------------- 14-2----#13
Mary Wahington----------- 13-2-----#20
Dickinson--------------------- 13-2-----#33
Richard Stockton----------- 13-2- -#36
St Vincent---------------------14-2--- #42
Staten Island---------------- 12-2 -- no votes
Mount Union----------------- 12-2 ---no votes
Genesco St-------------------10-2 --- no votes
Hilbert-------------------------- 12-2 ---no votes
Penn State Behrend------ 12-2 - no votes

teams with 3 or more losses that received votes last vote
09 Wittenberg-------------------12-3
16   St. Mary's (Md.)-----------11-4
18   Virginia Wesleyan--------12-3
21   Wheaton (Ill.)---------------10-6
22   Ohio Wesleyan------------12-3
25   Colorado College----------10-3
26 Christopher Newport -----11-4
27 Whitworth--------------------11-4
29 Marietta-----------------------11-4
30 Emory--------------------------10-4
31 DePauw ----------------------11-4
32 William Paterson----------12-3
34 Springfield--------------------11-4
37 NYU----------------------------- 11-3
38 Hope----------------------------9-6
39 Babson------------------------11-4
41 Calvin--------------------------11-4
43 UW-Platteville--------------11-5
44 Oswego State--------------10-4
45 Stevenson-------------------12-3

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 19, 2014, 04:58:58 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Stevenson/Lycoming went final just moments ago ...

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	623	UW-Stevens Point	16-0	def. UW-Oshkosh, 58-30; def. UW-River Falls, 65-48
#2	593	Wooster	14-1	def. Hiram, 94-71; won at #9 Wittenberg, 69-62
#3	578	Cabrini	13-0	won at Immaculata, 84-62; def. Rosemont, 92-78
#4	496	Illinois Wesleyan	14-2	won at Millikin, 75-57; def. #21 Wheaton (Ill.), 78-71
#5	486	WPI	14-1	def. #39 Babson, 66-62; won at Emerson, 64-50
#6	475	Amherst	13-2	won at Wesleyan, 76-62; won at Tufts, 75-67; won at Bates, 82-71
#7	473	Washington U.	12-2	def. Brandeis, 82-72; def. #37 New York University, 81-65
#8	441	UW-Whitewater	14-2	def. #43 UW-Platteville, 77-58; def. UW-Superior, 97-52
#9	430	Wittenberg	12-3	LOST at #31 DePauw, 46-72; LOST to #2 Wooster, 62-69
#10	423	Williams	13-2	def. #19 Bowdoin, 69-64; def. Colby, 69-62
#11	381	St. Thomas	12-2	won at Bethel, 81-68; def. Gustavus Adolphus, 61-50; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 76-60
#12	350	St. Norbert	13-1	def. Ripon, 102-62; won at Illinois College, 76-53
#13	319	Augustana	14-2	won at North Central (Ill.), 62-50; def. North Park, 73-58
#14	272	Wesley	13-1	def. Salisbury, 68-62; won at #16 St. Mary's (Md.), 75-72
#15	233	Messiah	13-1	LOST at T#44 Stevenson, 99-103; def. Arcadia, 78-70
#16	175	St. Mary's (Md.)	11-4	won at York (Pa.), 69-51; LOST to #14 Wesley, 72-75
#17	154	SUNY-Purchase	12-0	won at SUNY-Maritime, 84-46; def. NYU-Poly, 94-70
#18	147	Virginia Wesleyan	12-3	won at Hampden-Sydney, 79-73; def. Guilford, 84-59
#19	119	Bowdoin	13-1	LOST at #10 Williams, 64-69; won at Hamilton, 85-66
#20	106	Mary Washington	13-2	def. #26 Christopher Newport, 76-65; def. Penn State-Harrisburg, 88-47
#21	98	Wheaton (Ill.)	10-6	LOST at Carthage, 62-67; LOST at #4 Illinois Wesleyan, 71-78
#22	97	Ohio Wesleyan	12-3	def. Wabash, 80-62; won at #31 DePauw, 75-64
#23	96	Albertus Magnus	12-1	def. Anna Maria, 100-66; def. St. Joseph's (Maine), 86-78
#24	92	Oglethorpe	14-1	def. Berry, 76-61
#25	67	Colorado College	10-3	LOST at Schreiner, 58-71; won at Texas Lutheran, 97-85

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	65	Christopher Newport	11-4	LOST at #20 Mary Washington, 65-76; def. Marymount, 76-69
#27	59	Whitworth	11-4	LOST at George Fox, 85-98; won at Linfield, 83-59
T#28	40	Brockport State	11-1	def. Fredonia State, 97-47; def. T#44 Oswego State, 78-64; won at Cortland State, 77-65
T#28	40	Marietta	11-4	LOST at Mount Union, 72-73; won at John Carroll, 78-70
#30	28	Emory	10-4	LOST to Carnegie Mellon, 83-95; def. Case Western Reserve, 102-76
#31	27	DePauw	11-4	def. #9 Wittenberg, 72-46; LOST to #22 Ohio Wesleyan, 64-75
#32	23	William Paterson	12-3	LOST to Ramapo, 96-99; won at Rutgers-Camden, 83-60
#33	21	Dickinson	13-2	def. Johns Hopkins, 75-65; won at Haverford, 77-72
#34	18	Springfield	11-4	def. Wheaton (Mass.), 71-58; LOST at MIT, 51-55
#35	16	Texas-Dallas	12-1	def. Mary Hardin-Baylor, 70-58; def. Concordia (Texas), 95-49
#36	14	Richard Stockton	13-2	def. Rowan, 88-59; won at Ramapo, 90-69
#37	10	New York University	11-3	LOST at Chicago, 50-58; LOST at #7 Washington U., 65-81
#38	8	Hope	9-6	LOST at Albion, 49-67; def. Olivet, 80-72
#39	7	Babson	11-4	LOST at #5 WPI, 62-66; won at Wheaton (Mass.), 80-59
T#40	6	Dubuque	15-0	def. Luther, 79-69; def. Buena Vista, 65-63
T#40	6	Calvin	11-4	def. Adrian, 78-54; won at Kalamazoo, 90-72
#42	5	St. Vincent	14-2	won at Geneva, 90-48; def. Thomas More, 75-61
#43	4	UW-Platteville	11-5	LOST at #8 UW-Whitewater, 58-77; def. UW-La Crosse, 80-79
T#44	2	Oswego State	10-5	LOST to New Paltz State, 75-83; LOST at T#28 Brockport State, 64-78; LOST to Geneseo State, 62-66
T#44	2	Stevenson	12-3	def. #15 Messiah, 103-99; won at Lycoming, 79-74

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 19, 2014, 05:01:16 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 04:35:57 PM
there are 43 confersnces, 416 d3 teams, stcktons made the final 4 twice in 87 season,.. it would take i estimate 3200 before every team in d3 gets into the final 4

so what are you talking about

I think the better question is what are you talking about... to get 416 teams each to the final four once it would take 104 years... 104 years x 4 teams each year = 416

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 04:47:42 PM
~~The real Top 25~~ hplc2222's Top 25

Fixed it for you :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 19, 2014, 05:23:28 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2014, 04:42:07 PM
sac - that was last week's results...

for some reason, can't think why, it was easy for them to get lost.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Just Bill on January 19, 2014, 05:56:31 PM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 19, 2014, 04:33:41 PM
So everyone... can we please get back to d3 basketball as a whole rather than focusing on just Richard Stockton? There are other teams in the Top 25 discussion after all.

I don't necessarily disagree with you, but generally the rule of etiquette on these boards has always been don't criticize someone else's choice of topic without presenting your own.

So what do you want to talk about?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 19, 2014, 06:42:40 PM

Quote from: Just Bill on January 19, 2014, 05:56:31 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 19, 2014, 04:33:41 PM
So everyone... can we please get back to d3 basketball as a whole rather than focusing on just Richard Stockton? There are other teams in the Top 25 discussion after all.

I don't necessarily disagree with you, but generally the rule of etiquette on these boards has always been don't criticize someone else's choice of topic without presenting your own.

So what do you want to talk about?

It's not that I'm criticizing the choice of topic (Stockton is a team in the Top 25 discussion after all [probably about 28th or 29th in the next poll I'd guess])... I just feel like it's run it's course for now. You can only go over the same thing so many times before you're beating a dead horse.

As to other topics... probably not much change will happen in the top half (other than Witt dropping).
How far will they fall after losing to two good teams?
If/when could Husson start getting votes if they stay unbeaten?
Of course I'd love some HCAC discussion... but the best we've got is Rose-Hulman who is 12-3. I don't see them getting any votes quite yet. Maybe in a couple weeks if they keep winning they'll sneak onto a couple ballots.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 19, 2014, 07:37:15 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 01:49:30 PM
I did look at who teams play and who they lost to, especialy home court loses

here are some example

Colorado College 10-3 lost at Northern Colorado 96-57 blown out [...]

Northern Colorado is a D1 scholarship program, currently leading the Big Sky Conference and sporting an overall record of 11-4 which includes a win at Kansas State (14-4). And yes, they blew out the Tigers in Greeley.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 19, 2014, 08:12:56 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 19, 2014, 07:37:15 PM
Quote from: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 01:49:30 PM
I did look at who teams play and who they lost to, especialy home court loses

here are some example

Colorado College 10-3 lost at Northern Colorado 96-57 blown out [...]

Northern Colorado is a D1 scholarship program, currently leading the Big Sky Conference and sporting an overall record of 11-4 which includes a win at Kansas State (14-4). And yes, they blew out the Tigers in Greeley.

I thought to myself that Northern Colorado was a D1 program when I read that.

Richard Stockton won't be in top 25 this week, close yes, but anyone who follows the poll can see that quite clearly

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 19, 2014, 08:14:51 PM

I guess that makes me a "hater." Lol

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 19, 2014, 08:47:46 PM

Quote from: sac on January 19, 2014, 05:23:28 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2014, 04:42:07 PM
sac - that was last week's results...
for some reason, can't think why, it was easy for them to get lost.

I apologize for not posting a mid-week report; I was heading for San Diego Thursday morning. I'll try to post one this week ... although it might still get lost in the ensuing discussion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 19, 2014, 09:03:48 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 19, 2014, 08:47:46 PM
Quote from: sac on January 19, 2014, 05:23:28 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2014, 04:42:07 PM
sac - that was last week's results...
for some reason, can't think why, it was easy for them to get lost.
I apologize for not posting a mid-week report; I was heading for San Diego Thursday morning. I'll try to post one this week ... although it might still get lost in the ~~ensuing discussion~~ ongoing hplc2222 tirade.

Fixed it for you, Darryl. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 19, 2014, 09:17:11 PM

As a Pointer fan, I feel there is a decent chance Stevens Point could lose this week. They play at Platteville Wednesday and face conference player of the year and monster inside presence Chas across and then travel to La Crosse this weekend. It will be a demanding week for the Dawgs.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 19, 2014, 10:27:00 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 19, 2014, 08:47:46 PM
I apologize for not posting a mid-week report; I was heading for San Diego Thursday morning. I'll try to post one this week ... although it might still get lost in the ensuing discussion.

If it'll help you out, Darryl, I can go to San Diego for you this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 19, 2014, 10:51:35 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 19, 2014, 10:27:00 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 19, 2014, 08:47:46 PM
I apologize for not posting a mid-week report; I was heading for San Diego Thursday morning. I'll try to post one this week ... although it might still get lost in the ensuing discussion.

If it'll help you out, Darryl, I can go to San Diego for you this week.

You wouldn't want to; it was kind of chilly. I think someone set the AC too low in the convention center.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 19, 2014, 10:53:51 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 19, 2014, 10:51:35 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 19, 2014, 10:27:00 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 19, 2014, 08:47:46 PM
I apologize for not posting a mid-week report; I was heading for San Diego Thursday morning. I'll try to post one this week ... although it might still get lost in the ensuing discussion.

If it'll help you out, Darryl, I can go to San Diego for you this week.
You wouldn't want to; it was kind of chilly. I think someone set the AC too low in the convention center.

unless its snowing in there, its still an improvement for some of us

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 11:28:59 PM

DONT JUSDT SAY TGHIJGSTO SAY THINGS, RICHARD STOCKMTON IS AS GOOD AS 15-0

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 19, 2014, 11:29:55 PM

They are 13-2

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 19, 2014, 11:38:06 PM

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2F3%2F3b%2FParis_Tuileries_Garden_Facepalm_statue.jpg&hash=72aebbc775689550d91e916dc0e2f4f47309ba81)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 19, 2014, 11:50:06 PM

TGHIJGSTO!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 19, 2014, 11:53:32 PM

How dare you!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 20, 2014, 12:03:34 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 19, 2014, 11:50:06 PM
TGHIJGSTO!

OMG LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 20, 2014, 12:23:12 AM

Before this all started I was actually thinking Richard Stockton was looking really good this year. I've voted them pretty high in both weeks of Posters Poll voting so far.

Now, well let's just say that this board is not helping my confidence. If anything, the arguments here are hurting their case.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 20, 2014, 12:53:29 AM

I can't find the source; could someone please post the animated 'beating a dead horse' for hplc2222!

I might have put them on my PP ballot this week (though I think they are 27 or 28), but he(?) has totally turned me off.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on January 20, 2014, 01:23:07 AM

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mouseowners.com%2Fforums%2Fimages%2Fsmilies%2Fbeatdeadhorse5.gif&hash=0674b525e332ca360d8b784b824916d88f83537e)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 20, 2014, 10:21:01 AM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 11:28:59 PM
DONT JUSDT SAY TGHIJGSTO SAY THINGS, RICHARD STOCKMTON IS AS GOOD AS 15-0

Not sure what device you used to post this but you might want to reconsider using it in the future. Didn't really come out as comprehensible.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 20, 2014, 01:11:29 PM

I actually googled "TGHIJGSTO" for fun, thinking it might be some techie slang term like ROTFLMAO or something, but apparently the closest thing I came up with was TIJESTO. Basically dough.

I think hplc2222's version is "don't just say THINGS TO say things." :P

Typing on phones sucks. But when I do, I try to proof read most of the time, apparently our Richard Stockton fan doesn't. :-X

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on January 20, 2014, 01:14:42 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 20, 2014, 01:11:29 PM
I actually googled "TGHIJGSTO" for fun, thinking it might be some techie slang term like ROTFLMAO or something, but apparently the closest thing I came up with was TIJESTO. Basically dough.

I'll admit I did the same - ROTFLMAO ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 20, 2014, 01:18:04 PM

Quote from: sac on January 19, 2014, 10:53:51 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 19, 2014, 10:51:35 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 19, 2014, 10:27:00 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 19, 2014, 08:47:46 PM
I apologize for not posting a mid-week report; I was heading for San Diego Thursday morning. I'll try to post one this week ... although it might still get lost in the ensuing discussion.

If it'll help you out, Darryl, I can go to San Diego for you this week.
You wouldn't want to; it was kind of chilly. I think someone set the AC too low in the convention center.

unless its snowing in there, its still an improvement for some of us

Need we remind you of our recent discussion about the -30 below temperatures in the Midwest recently? Anything above 35° I'm probably pulling out my shorts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 20, 2014, 02:38:59 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 20, 2014, 10:21:01 AM
Quote from: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 11:28:59 PM
DONT JUSDT SAY TGHIJGSTO SAY THINGS, RICHARD STOCKMTON IS AS GOOD AS 15-0

Not sure what device you used to post this but you might want to reconsider using it in the future. Didn't really come out as comprehensible.

I think it is supposed to read "Don't just say things to say things, Richard Stockton is as good as 15-0." Which, you're right, is incomprehensible.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 20, 2014, 03:33:44 PM

On the other hand, this may be the fastest anyone attains karma distribution level from one subject.

It's kind of like watching Grinnell go for an assist record I imagine.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 20, 2014, 05:51:30 PM

This will probably change the course of this conversation.

http://www.d3hoops.com/seasons/men/2013-14/contrib/20140120tpl3kl

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 20, 2014, 06:07:28 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 20, 2014, 05:51:30 PM
This will probably change the course of this conversation.

http://www.d3hoops.com/seasons/men/2013-14/contrib/20140120tpl3kl

Not really, Pat. They are just 11 points from being 16-0. Keep that in mind, voters. :-\ :P :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 20, 2014, 06:25:18 PM

Haters.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 20, 2014, 06:35:37 PM

So much for Dickie Stockton being just about the only team without a bad home loss! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 20, 2014, 06:40:17 PM

I am looking forward to learning how many D3's have 3 or fewer losses myself.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 20, 2014, 07:30:31 PM

The new poll (http://d3hoops.com/top25/index) is out. Not much change, apart from the predictable plummet by Wittenberg. Dubuque, at 15-0 that might as well be 15-0, cracks the poll at #25. Still no poll love for Rochester (MN).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 20, 2014, 08:10:51 PM

Funny he's no where to be found

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 20, 2014, 10:31:36 PM

Philly news reporting a shooting outside the Widener gym tonight. No games going on, but obviously not a great situation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on January 21, 2014, 08:12:56 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 20, 2014, 06:07:28 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 20, 2014, 05:51:30 PM
This will probably change the course of this conversation.

http://www.d3hoops.com/seasons/men/2013-14/contrib/20140120tpl3kl

Not really, Pat. They are just 11 points from being 16-0. Keep that in mind, voters. :-\ :P :o

Really?? Unbelieveable, I'm at a loss for words. Oh TGHIJGSTO!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 21, 2014, 11:54:33 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 20, 2014, 10:31:36 PM
Philly news reporting a shooting outside the Widener gym tonight. No games going on, but obviously not a great situation.

The school is not in a great neighborhood... though, too bad to hear it happened right outside the gym meaning on campus.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 21, 2014, 12:11:02 PM

0 loss - 5
1 loss - 10
2 loss - 12
3 loss - 24
=51 teams

4 loss - 37

will stocktons game be cancelled tomorrow night? The snow supposde to stop by morning. union nj is a 2 hour plus ride to galloway at least.

after their game on sunday, maybe they should pray for snow

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 21, 2014, 03:22:08 PM

Sac,

If you are going quote someone, it's got to be word for word...or in this case, letter for letter!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 21, 2014, 04:11:43 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 20, 2014, 05:51:30 PM
This will probably change the course of this conversation.

http://www.d3hoops.com/seasons/men/2013-14/contrib/20140120tpl3kl

In the game report for Brooklyn's upset of Dick Stockton, this paragraph caught my eye:

QuoteJai Kellman scored a game-high 18 points for Brooklyn with Egzon Gjonbalaj adding 16 markers. Valon Djombalic grabbed 10 rebounds to go with two blocks.

Beaten by the likes of Ezgon Gjonbalaj and Valon Djombalic? All I can say to that is ... TGHIJGSTO!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 21, 2014, 04:48:04 PM

I think TGHIJGSTO is hosting the Winter Olympics in 2022

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 21, 2014, 07:27:09 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 21, 2014, 04:11:43 PM
In the game report for Brooklyn's upset of Dick Stockton, this paragraph caught my eye:

QuoteJai Kellman scored a game-high 18 points for Brooklyn with Egzon Gjonbalaj adding 16 markers. Valon Djombalic grabbed 10 rebounds to go with two blocks.

Beaten by the likes of Ezgon Gjonbalaj and Valon Djombalic? All I can say to that is ... TGHIJGSTO!

This is comedy gold.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ScotsFan on January 21, 2014, 08:41:52 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 21, 2014, 04:11:43 PM

QuoteJai Kellman scored a game-high 18 points for Brooklyn with Egzon Gjonbalaj adding 16 markers. Valon Djombalic grabbed 10 rebounds to go with two blocks.

I wouldn't envy Brooklyn's play by play guy... :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 21, 2014, 09:15:51 PM

Speaking as the play-by-play guy who has had to get used to pronouncing the name of North Park's freshman PG -- Nikki Przybyslawski (she prefers the authentic Polish pronunciation, which doesn't help matters) -- all I can say to my Brooklyn colleague (if the Bulldogs do indeed have a PBP guy) is the same thing that the New Yorker said to the tourist in response to the question, "How do I get to Broadway?"

Practice, practice, practice! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2014, 09:41:12 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 21, 2014, 09:15:51 PM
Speaking as the play-by-play guy who has had to get used to pronouncing the name of North Park's freshman PG -- Nikki Przybyslawski (she prefers the authentic Polish pronunciation, which doesn't help matters) -- all I can say to my Brooklyn colleague (if the Bulldogs do indeed have a PBP guy) is the same thing that the New Yorker said to the tourist in response to the question, "How do I get to Broadway?"

Practice, practice, practice! ;)

Yeah, Michigan had a star running back a couple of decades ago named Tshimanga Biakabatuka (in 1995, he had 313 yards against Ohio State); I got to where I had no trouble with it, but the announcers settled on 'Touchdown Tim'! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pjunito on January 21, 2014, 10:12:29 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 21, 2014, 09:15:51 PM
Speaking as the play-by-play guy who has had to get used to pronouncing the name of North Park's freshman PG -- Nikki Przybyslawski (she prefers the authentic Polish pronunciation, which doesn't help matters) -- all I can say to my Brooklyn colleague (if the Bulldogs do indeed have a PBP guy) is the same thing that the New Yorker said to the tourist in response to the question, "How do I get to Broadway?"

Practice, practice, practice! ;)

I remember that game as Touchdown Timmy leaps in for another TD.. I may have had my winged undies on that day.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 22, 2014, 10:08:58 AM

where it is now - if i counted right

0 loss - 4

1 loss - 11

2 loss - 12

3 loss - 25

=52 teams

lots of games tonight-

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 22, 2014, 10:26:57 AM

nice work. +1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 22, 2014, 10:30:23 AM

hplc2222,

I know they have a ~~game beforehand~~ postponed, but do you think Richard Stockton will rebound and take down William Paterson this weekend? They only lost by 2 before though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 22, 2014, 10:39:17 AM

nj got hammered with a snow storm, but the roads are clear right now and most everyones shoveled out, the game shouldnt be postponed, but i see it is
they probabl,y closed the school for classes today, who knows.

it sucks they arent playing today, they needed this game against kean. kean is 9-6.

you hold brooklyn to 63 points in your building you should win that game.

but they just didnt have the hot hand.

if they get hot they can have 6 players in double figures.

thats why they play they games

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 22, 2014, 12:06:16 PM

Brookyln was only 5-10. RS only beat Kean by 5 before. They were probably itching to play to get that bad taste out of their mouths. Now they have to wait nearly a week to play again.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 22, 2014, 05:13:05 PM

basicaly the stockton loss to brooklyn was on the point guard kevin johnson

he cantr dish, he cant swish, he double dribbles constantlym, cant drive, gets balls stolen,.. and despite is they were 13-2

gerry needs to considere replacing him

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 22, 2014, 05:31:47 PM

to answer the question, ... based on kevin jognson not being able to play on a level. ca;pable of competing,.. william patterson could roll all over stockton saturday

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 22, 2014, 06:28:38 PM

You've quickly soured on your boys.

Johnson was hardly the only one to have a bad game. Yeah, 1-7 isn't good, but the team only shot 30%. Blamon was 3-14, Reuben 1-6, and Williams 1-9. Previously, Kevin Johnson had a pretty good all-around game against Ramapo: 5 pts, 5 rebounds, 5 assists and 3 steals.

Just a week ago you were sure they were a Top 25 team, now you think they'll get rolled all over by a team they lost to by just 2 points on the road.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 23, 2014, 08:24:29 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

"Postponed" has had a good week so far. If they keep this up through Sunday, perhaps they can get some votes in the next poll.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	622	UW-Stevens Point	17-0	won at UW-Platteville, 76-61; 01/25 at UW-La Crosse
#2	594	Wooster	15-1	def. Allegheny, 73-68; 01/25 at #35 DePauw
#3	581	Cabrini	15-0	def. Marywood, 82-68; def. Neumann, 94-68; 01/25 at Keystone
#4	513	Illinois Wesleyan	15-2	def. North Central (Ill.), 72-57; 01/25 at T#44 Carthage
#5	501	WPI	15-1	def. Clark, 81-69; 01/25 at Wheaton (Mass.)
#6	494	Amherst	14-2	won at #9 Williams, 82-70; 01/25 at Trinity (Conn.)
#7	460	UW-Whitewater	14-3	LOST at UW-La Crosse, 83-88; 01/25 at UW-River Falls
#8	447	Washington U.	12-2	01/24 at Case Western Reserve; 01/26 at Carnegie Mellon
#9	424	Williams	13-3	LOST to #6 Amherst, 70-82; 01/25 vs. Hamilton
#10	395	St. Thomas	13-3	LOST at St. John's, 69-77; def. #34 Augsburg, 82-70
#11	373	St. Norbert	14-1	won at Beloit, 76-56; 01/25 vs. Cornell
#12	331	Wesley	13-1	01/23 at Penn State-Harrisburg; 01/25 at Southern Virginia
#13	329	Augustana	15-2	def. Millikin, 72-57; 01/25 at Elmhurst
#14	219	SUNY-Purchase	12-0	~~01/21 at Yeshiva~~ postponed; 01/23 at Sage; 01/25 vs. St. Joseph's (L.I.)
#15	211	Mary Washington	13-2	~~01/22 vs. Southern Virginia~~ postponed; 01/23 vs. Southern Virginia; 01/25 at York (Pa.)
#16	182	Virginia Wesleyan	12-4	LOST at T#44 Randolph-Macon, 62-78; 01/25 vs. Washington and Lee
#17	178	Messiah	13-1	01/23 at Widener; 01/25 at Hood
#18	170	Wittenberg	13-3	won at Kenyon, 66-54; 01/25 at Allegheny
#19	162	Ohio Wesleyan	13-3	def. Oberlin, 81-72; 01/25 vs. Denison
#20	159	Albertus Magnus	14-1	def. Rivier, 73-52; def. Elms, 113-97; 01/25 at Lasell
#21	149	Oglethorpe	14-1	01/24 vs. Centre; 01/25 vs. Sewanee
#22	123	Bowdoin	14-1	def. Maine-Presque Isle, 82-51; 01/25 vs. Colby
#23	78	Brockport State	12-1	def. Buffalo State, 84-69; 01/24 at Oneonta State; 01/25 at New Paltz State
#24	74	St. Mary's (Md.)	11-4	~~01/22 vs. #33 Christopher Newport~~ postponed; 01/25 at Marymount
#25	40	Dubuque	16-0	won at Coe, 66-56; 01/25 at Loras

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	38	Dickinson	13-3	LOST at Franklin and Marshall, 58-67; 01/25 at Swarthmore
#27	33	Mount Union	13-3	LOST at Capital, 70-88; won at Muskingum, 73-50; 01/25 vs. Heidelberg
#28	27	Whitworth	12-4	won at Whitman, 84-80; 01/25 vs. Lewis and Clark
#29	24	Texas-Dallas	13-1	won at University of the Ozarks, 84-63; 01/23 vs. University of the Ozarks; 01/25 vs. Texas-Tyler
#30	21	William Paterson	14-3	won at John Jay, 91-71; def. TCNJ, 83-56; 01/25 at T#31 Richard Stockton
T#31	20	Stevenson	12-4	LOST at Elizabethtown, 63-65; 01/25 vs. Arcadia
T#31	20	Richard Stockton	13-3	LOST to Brooklyn, 55-63; 01/25 vs. #30 William Paterson
#33	18	Christopher Newport	11-4	~~01/22 at #24 St. Mary's (Md.)~~ postponed; 01/25 at Frostburg State
#34	16	Augsburg	11-5	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 97-60; LOST at #10 St. Thomas, 70-82; 01/25 at St. Olaf
#35	15	DePauw	12-4	won at Wabash, 70-60; 01/25 vs. #2 Wooster
T#36	11	Colorado College	11-3	won at Johnson & Wales (CO), 75-65; 01/24 vs. Southwestern; 01/25 vs. Trinity (Texas)
T#36	11	Rose-Hulman	12-4	LOST at Hanover, 62-67; 01/25 vs. Transylvania
#38	10	St. Vincent	15-2	def. Waynesburg, 87-68
#39	9	Springfield	12-4	won at Coast Guard, 73-60; 01/25 vs. Clark
#40	8	Calvin	12-4	def. Trine, 71-49; 01/25 at Olivet
#41	7	Babson	12-4	def. #43 MIT, 65-47; 01/25 vs. Coast Guard
#42	6	Emory	10-4	01/24 at New York University; 01/26 at Brandeis
#43	5	MIT	11-4	LOST at #41 Babson, 47-65; 01/25 vs. Emerson
T#44	3	Randolph-Macon	12-4	def. #16 Virginia Wesleyan, 78-62; 01/25 at Roanoke
T#44	3	Hampden-Sydney	10-6	LOST at Guilford, 72-74; 01/25 at Randolph
T#44	3	Staten Island	14-2	def. Kean, 83-72; def. York (N.Y.), 80-75; 01/25 vs. Brooklyn
T#44	3	Carthage	11-6	LOST at Elmhurst, 70-73; 01/25 vs. #4 Illinois Wesleyan
#48	2	Eastern Connecticut	12-4	def. Keene State, 84-53; 01/25 at Rhode Island College
T#49	1	Geneseo State	11-2	def. Fredonia State, 79-63; 01/24 at New Paltz State; 01/25 at Oneonta State
T#49	1	Marietta	12-4	def. Capital, 82-72; 01/25 at Wilmington
T#49	1	Scranton	13-3	won at Drew, 82-72; 01/25 vs. Catholic

Other teams to watch (as suggested by posters on this board)

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
---	---	Penn State-Behrend	13-2	won at Hilbert, 55-52; 01/23 vs. Pitt-Bradford; 01/25 at Pitt-Greensburg

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 23, 2014, 11:50:19 PM

I know they've lost seven games already, but I would be absolutely terrified to play Mary Hardin-Baylor right now. Best seven loss team in d3, I think.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 24, 2014, 07:48:01 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 23, 2014, 11:50:19 PM

I know they've lost seven games already, but I would be absolutely terrified to play Mary Hardin-Baylor right now. Best seven loss team in d3, I think.

I believe that the established precedent on this board is that, if you are going to make such a statement, you must follow it up with detailed statistics. Please begin with a list of all teams in D3 with 7 losses, and your analysis of the quality of those losses. You can then move on to telling us why MHB deserves to be considered the best of that group. (And perhaps even better than some of the six- and five-loss teams. We'll need a list of those, too.) If, at some point, you feel obliged to post increasingly incoherent comments, and/or post in all caps, we would certainly understand.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pjunito on January 24, 2014, 08:06:18 AM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 24, 2014, 07:48:01 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 23, 2014, 11:50:19 PM

I know they've lost seven games already, but I would be absolutely terrified to play Mary Hardin-Baylor right now. Best seven loss team in d3, I think.
I believe that the established precedent on this board is that, if you are going to make such a statement, you must follow it up with detailed statistics. Please begin with a list of all teams in D3 with 7 losses, and your analysis of the quality of those losses. You can then move on to telling us why MHB deserves to be considered the best of that group. (And perhaps even better than some of the six- and five-loss teams. We'll need a list of those, too.) If, at some point, you feel obliged to post increasingly incoherent comments, and/or post in all caps, we would certainly understand.

I'm pretty sure UW-Stevens is the best 0 team lost in the country.. But, I'll begin working on list today for everyone.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 24, 2014, 08:18:53 AM

Or the best 0 loss team. I say tomato, you say tomato! :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 24, 2014, 08:26:09 AM

Quote from: pjunito on January 24, 2014, 08:06:18 AM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 24, 2014, 07:48:01 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 23, 2014, 11:50:19 PM

I know they've lost seven games already, but I would be absolutely terrified to play Mary Hardin-Baylor right now. Best seven loss team in d3, I think.
I believe that the established precedent on this board is that, if you are going to make such a statement, you must follow it up with detailed statistics. Please begin with a list of all teams in D3 with 7 losses, and your analysis of the quality of those losses. You can then move on to telling us why MHB deserves to be considered the best of that group. (And perhaps even better than some of the six- and five-loss teams. We'll need a list of those, too.) If, at some point, you feel obliged to post increasingly incoherent comments, and/or post in all caps, we would certainly understand.

I'm pretty sure UW-Stevens is the best 0 team lost in the country.. But, I'll begin working on list today for everyone.

Don't sleep on Dubuque, man. We have no idea what they could do against real competition.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 09:42:41 AM

0 loss - 4
1 loss - 11
2 loss - 9
3 loss - 18
= 42teams

4 loss = 44 teams

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 24, 2014, 11:03:28 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 23, 2014, 11:50:19 PM

I know they've lost seven games already, but I would be absolutely terrified to play Mary Hardin-Baylor right now. Best seven loss team in d3, I think.

UMHB has dealt with it all this year including two of their best players in car accidents at the beginning of the season. My interview with Coach DeWeese was very interesting as he talked about the challenges they have had to deal with this season. That being said, seven losses is seven losses and unless they win the conference the only teams that have to be terrified is their own conference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 24, 2014, 11:41:00 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 24, 2014, 08:26:09 AM
Quote from: pjunito on January 24, 2014, 08:06:18 AM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 24, 2014, 07:48:01 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 23, 2014, 11:50:19 PM

I know they've lost seven games already, but I would be absolutely terrified to play Mary Hardin-Baylor right now. Best seven loss team in d3, I think.
I believe that the established precedent on this board is that, if you are going to make such a statement, you must follow it up with detailed statistics. Please begin with a list of all teams in D3 with 7 losses, and your analysis of the quality of those losses. You can then move on to telling us why MHB deserves to be considered the best of that group. (And perhaps even better than some of the six- and five-loss teams. We'll need a list of those, too.) If, at some point, you feel obliged to post increasingly incoherent comments, and/or post in all caps, we would certainly understand.

I'm pretty sure UW-Stevens is the best 0 team lost in the country.. But, I'll begin working on list today for everyone.

Don't sleep on Dubuque, man. We have no idea what they could do against real competition.

LOL

Ya know, bad schedule or not... I've been saying it for years. Beat the teams on the schedule you have, don't hypothetically beat teams that aren't on your schedule. The hypothetical games don't count, but the real ones do.

If a team is supposed to be ranked, then PROVE it by winning your games (uh, the real ones). Plain and simple.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 11:43:30 AM

60 team list
(no more than 3 losses or recieved votes last vote)

0 loss
uw stevens point-------------- 17-0 #1
cabrini--------------------------15-0 #3
suny purchase---------------- -13-0 #14
dubuqu-------------------------16-0 #25

1 loss
wooster--------------------------- 15-1 #2
wpi-------------------------------- 15-1 #5
st norbert----------------------- --14-1 #11
wesley---------------------------- 14-1 #12
messiah--------------------------- 14-1 #17
albertus magnus------------- ----14-1 #20
oglethorpe------------------------ 14-1 #21
bowdoin------------------------- - 14-1 #22
brockport state------------------- 12-1 #23
texas-dallas----------------------- 14-1 #29
husson----------------------------- 13-1 no votes

2 loss
illinois wesleyan----------------- 15-2 #4
amherst-------------------------- 14-2 #6
washington u-------------------- 12-2 #8
augustana------------------------15-2 #13
mary washington----------------14-2 #15
st vincent------------------------ 15-2 #38
staten islamd-------------------- 14-2 # 46
genesco state--------------------11-2 #49
penn state behrend------------- 14-2 no votes

3 loss
uw whitewater------------------ 14-3 #7
williams------------------------- 13-3 #9
st thomas---------------------- -13-3 #10
wittenberg---------------------- 13-3 #18
ohio wesleyan-------------------13-3 #19
dickinson----------------------- -13-3 #26
mount union---------------------13-3 #27
william paterson---------------- 14-3 #30
richard stockton-----------------13-3 #32
colorado college---------------- 11-3 #36
scranton-------------------------13-3 #51
endicott--------------------------13-3 no votes
lewis and clark------------------ 12-3 no votes
hilbert----------------------------11-3 no votes
centre----------------------------11-3 no votes
vassar--------------------------- 11-3 no votes
plattsburg state----------------- 11-3 no votes
nyu------------------------------- 11-3 no votes

others receiving votes last vote
virginia wesleyan----------------- 12-4 #16
st marys md-------------------.-- 11-4 #24
whitworth------------------------ 12-4 #28
stevenson------------------------ 12-4 #31
christopher newport------------- 11-4 #33
auguburg------------------------- 11-5 #34
depauw ---------------------------12-4 #35
rose-hulman----------------------12-4 #37
springfield------------------------ 12-4 #39
calvin------------------------------12-4 #40
babson---------------------------- 12-4 #41
emory----------------------------- 10-4 #42
mit-------------------------------- 11-4 #43
randolph macon------------------ 12-4 #44
hampden - sydney----------------10-6 #45
carthage---------------------------11-6 #47
eastern conneticut--------------- 12-4 #48
marietta---------------------------12-4 #50

playing today of those 60 teams - washington u, centre, oglethorpe, brockport state, husson, genesco state, nyu, emory, vassar, plattsburg state, colorado college, lewis and clark

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 12:28:27 PM

the remaining 29 4-loss teams in the nation right now (no votes last vote, but may want to keep an eye out).

louisiana college 9-4
concordia 11-4
marian 14-4
lakeland 13-4
milwalkie engineering 13-4
marymount 12-4
mcdaniel 12-4
sunyit 8-4
nicols 11-4
eastern nararene 10-4

mitchell 11-4
daniel webster 11-4
gwynedd-mercy 12-4
alfred 10-4
johnson and wales 12-4
defiance 12-4
guilford 12-4
lynchburg 12-4
bethany 13-4
juniata 12-4

claremont-mudd scripps 11-4
cal lutheran 13-4
hobart 10-4
mount st mary 12-4
farmingdale state 11-4
hood 12-4
macmurray 11-4
st olaf 12-4
grinnell 11-4

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 24, 2014, 12:52:22 PM

Hplc2222,

Can you post the 5-6-7 loss teams for Hoops Fan so he can make an argument for MHB being the best 7-loss team? ;D ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 01:03:08 PM

no, thats too much for me.
there are 42 teams with no more than 3 losses, 44 teams with exactly 4 losses..... that is 86 teams
and they currently have one 5 loss team and two 6 loss teams with votes

auguburg-------------------------- 11-5 #34
hampden - sydney-----------------10-6 #45
carthage----------------------------11-6 #47

that is 89 teams

i am only going to keep track of the 42 teams with no more than 3 losses, and the additional 18 teams that had votes in the last poll.

to get into 5,6,7 loss teams right now is too much work and makes everything way too complicated

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 01:38:35 PM

Mary Harden Baylor is 9-7

they beat on my list of 89 teams---concordia (76-74)

lost to on my list of 89 teams- concorodia, louisiana college, texas dallas

they are in 6th place of a 12 team conference in Texas, 7-6 in conference

i have no intrest in trying to figure out who the best 7 loss team in the nation is.

Top 25-35 is hard enough

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 24, 2014, 01:56:50 PM

I was actually joking. ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 02:02:36 PM

And dont look now but Rutgers Newark, a preseason pick to win the njac is sitting at 12-5 and tied for the conference lead at 8-2, and just won 6 in a row.. They play at Montclair on Saturday, where Stockton lost by 1 point earlier.

Could 3 NJAC teams receive votes next round?

(Kean 9-6 , 5-4 in the NJAC, is playing at D1 Princeton on Sunday.)

Richard Stockton plays at home on Saturday against William Paterson. The winner has hopes to crack inside the Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pjunito on January 24, 2014, 02:36:15 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 24, 2014, 08:18:53 AM
Or the best 0 loss team. I say tomato, you say tomato! :P

If you're saying tomato, than I must have said bacon.... Thanks for the catch Greek.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 03:03:15 PM

0 loss - 4
1 loss - 11
2 loss - 9
3 loss - 18
4 loss - 44
5 loss - 35
6 loss - 40
7 loss - 43

= 204 teams

204 teams out of 416 teams in D3 have no more than 7 losses.

161 teams have no more than 6 losses.

I predict by the end of the season, through the final game, including all games for everyone, there will be no more than 45 teams with 6 or less losses

Right now if you are one of the current 42 teams with no more than 3 losses, you have done well. Top 10% of the nation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 24, 2014, 03:28:57 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 24, 2014, 11:03:28 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 23, 2014, 11:50:19 PM

I know they've lost seven games already, but I would be absolutely terrified to play Mary Hardin-Baylor right now. Best seven loss team in d3, I think.

UMHB has dealt with it all this year including two of their best players in car accidents at the beginning of the season. My interview with Coach DeWeese was very interesting as he talked about the challenges they have had to deal with this season. That being said, seven losses is seven losses and unless they win the conference the only teams that have to be terrified is their own conference.

They weren't the #1 seed in their conference tourney last year either, were they? A good run towards the end of February and people will have to look out for them once again.

(Although I don't see any way they're getting by Texas-Dallas this year - that's a heck of a team.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 24, 2014, 03:30:08 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 24, 2014, 07:48:01 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 23, 2014, 11:50:19 PM

I know they've lost seven games already, but I would be absolutely terrified to play Mary Hardin-Baylor right now. Best seven loss team in d3, I think.
I believe that the established precedent on this board is that, if you are going to make such a statement, you must follow it up with detailed statistics. Please begin with a list of all teams in D3 with 7 losses, and your analysis of the quality of those losses. You can then move on to telling us why MHB deserves to be considered the best of that group. (And perhaps even better than some of the six- and five-loss teams. We'll need a list of those, too.) If, at some point, you feel obliged to post increasingly incoherent comments, and/or post in all caps, we would certainly understand.

TGHIJGSTO!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 03:33:44 PM

dont just say things to say things, lol ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 04:07:39 PM

just found something weird. There are 32 teams in the nation with at least 13 wins and no more than 3 losses. Richard Stockton is 13-3 and ranked at number 32.

Four 4 loss teams are ranked higher than Stockton, and none of the 4 have 13 wins yet.

virginia wesleyan-------------- 12-4 #16
st marys md-------------------. 11-4 #24
whitworth-----------------------12-4 #28
stevenson-----------------------12-4 #31

The winner of William Patterson at Richard Stockton on Saturday should get into the Top 25

any opinions?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 04:31:33 PM

If Richard Stockton wins they will be 14-3, if William Paterson wins they will be 15-3

Currently as I type, there are only 21 teams in the nation with at least 14 wins and no more than 3 losses, and only 8 teams in the nation with at least 15 wins and no more than 3 losses.

This game means a lot to both teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 24, 2014, 04:58:13 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 24, 2014, 12:52:22 PM
Hplc2222,

Can you post the 5-6-7 loss teams for Hoops Fan so he can make an argument for MHB being the best 7-loss team? ;D ;)

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F24.media.tumblr.com%2Ff7fc9e3157c6222a56ca5cb0e9e72eb1%2Ftumblr_milv0ewoJf1s47u0to1_250.jpg&hash=8d1cd9ff671dc4efe87dc986e4346566fb70b28c)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 24, 2014, 05:42:03 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 03:33:44 PM
dont just say things to say things, lol ;D

I'm glad you find humor when we're taking friendly shots at you. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 24, 2014, 06:50:15 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 24, 2014, 08:26:09 AM
Quote from: pjunito on January 24, 2014, 08:06:18 AM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 24, 2014, 07:48:01 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 23, 2014, 11:50:19 PM

I know they've lost seven games already, but I would be absolutely terrified to play Mary Hardin-Baylor right now. Best seven loss team in d3, I think.
I believe that the established precedent on this board is that, if you are going to make such a statement, you must follow it up with detailed statistics. Please begin with a list of all teams in D3 with 7 losses, and your analysis of the quality of those losses. You can then move on to telling us why MHB deserves to be considered the best of that group. (And perhaps even better than some of the six- and five-loss teams. We'll need a list of those, too.) If, at some point, you feel obliged to post increasingly incoherent comments, and/or post in all caps, we would certainly understand.

I'm pretty sure UW-Stevens is the best 0 team lost in the country.. But, I'll begin working on list today for everyone.

Don't sleep on Dubuque, man. We have no idea what they could do against real competition.

They've faced real competition. All of their games are against real basketball teams!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 24, 2014, 06:57:40 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 24, 2014, 07:48:01 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 23, 2014, 11:50:19 PM

I know they've lost seven games already, but I would be absolutely terrified to play Mary Hardin-Baylor right now. Best seven loss team in d3, I think.
I believe that the established precedent on this board is that, if you are going to make such a statement, you must follow it up with detailed statistics. Please begin with a list of all teams in D3 with 7 losses, and your analysis of the quality of those losses. You can then move on to telling us why MHB deserves to be considered the best of that group. (And perhaps even better than some of the six- and five-loss teams. We'll need a list of those, too.) If, at some point, you feel obliged to post increasingly incoherent comments, and/or post in all caps, we would certainly understand.

Using Massey, here are the best X loss teams in the D-3 Universe:

0 - UW - SP
1 - Wooster
2 - Illinois Wesleyan
3 - UW - Whitewater
4 - Randolph Macon
5 - Wilmington
6 - Wheaton (IL)
7 - Hope
8 - Schreiner
9 - Ohio Northern
10 - Salisbury St.
11- Heidelberg
12 - Pacific Luthern
13 - Washington (MD)
14 - Rust
15 - North Park
16 - D'Youville
17 - UC Santa Cruz

YMMV. Consult your dealer for options and accessories. If symptoms persist, treat with Wild Turkey and hammer.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 24, 2014, 07:01:19 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 24, 2014, 06:57:40 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 24, 2014, 07:48:01 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 23, 2014, 11:50:19 PM

I know they've lost seven games already, but I would be absolutely terrified to play Mary Hardin-Baylor right now. Best seven loss team in d3, I think.
I believe that the established precedent on this board is that, if you are going to make such a statement, you must follow it up with detailed statistics. Please begin with a list of all teams in D3 with 7 losses, and your analysis of the quality of those losses. You can then move on to telling us why MHB deserves to be considered the best of that group. (And perhaps even better than some of the six- and five-loss teams. We'll need a list of those, too.) If, at some point, you feel obliged to post increasingly incoherent comments, and/or post in all caps, we would certainly understand.

Using Massey, here are the best X loss teams in the D-3 Universe:

15 - North Park

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFloZbT99oE

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 24, 2014, 07:07:18 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 24, 2014, 06:57:40 PM
0 - UW - SP
1 - Wooster
2 - Illinois Wesleyan
3 - UW - Whitewater
4 - Randolph Macon
5 - Wilmington
6 - Wheaton (IL)
7 - Hope
8 - Schreiner
9 - Ohio Northern
10 - Salisbury St.
11- Heidelberg
12 - Pacific Luthern
13 - Washington (MD)
14 - Rust
15 - North Park
16 - D'Youville
17 - UC Santa Cruz

Hmmmm. Forget the well-known Massey WIAC bias, I think I detect a Posting Up HoF bias in there.

apologies if I have missed any

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 24, 2014, 07:26:49 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 24, 2014, 06:57:40 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 24, 2014, 07:48:01 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 23, 2014, 11:50:19 PM

I know they've lost seven games already, but I would be absolutely terrified to play Mary Hardin-Baylor right now. Best seven loss team in d3, I think.
I believe that the established precedent on this board is that, if you are going to make such a statement, you must follow it up with detailed statistics. Please begin with a list of all teams in D3 with 7 losses, and your analysis of the quality of those losses. You can then move on to telling us why MHB deserves to be considered the best of that group. (And perhaps even better than some of the six- and five-loss teams. We'll need a list of those, too.) If, at some point, you feel obliged to post increasingly incoherent comments, and/or post in all caps, we would certainly understand.

Using Massey, here are the best X loss teams in the D-3 Universe:

0 - UW - SP
1 - Wooster
2 - Illinois Wesleyan
3 - UW - Whitewater
4 - Randolph Macon
5 - Wilmington
6 - Wheaton (IL)
7 - Hope
8 - Schreiner
9 - Ohio Northern
10 - Salisbury St.
11- Heidelberg
12 - Pacific Luthern
13 - Washington (MD)
14 - Rust
15 - North Park
16 - D'Youville
17 - UC Santa Cruz

YMMV. Consult your dealer for options and accessories. If symptoms persist, treat with Wild Turkey and hammer.

Hope has 6 losses, Massey is incorrectly counting their exhibition loss to Grand Valley State.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 07:58:58 PM

but seriously,......... if William Paterson beats Richard Stockton tomorrow,.. to get to a sn eaky 15-3, having beat Stockton twice then, at this point,..... then William Paterson will be inside the Top 26

NO?

and if Richard Stockton wins thne game,.. they maintain their position at 32,.. maybe move up to 26-31?

no?

any opinions of this particular bubble game tomorrow?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 08:01:40 PM

0 loss - 4
1 loss - 11
2 loss - 9
3 loss - 18
4 loss - 44
5 loss - 35
6 loss - 40
7 loss - 43

= 204 teams

204 teams out of 416 teams in D3 have no more than 7 losses.

161 teams have no more than 6 losses.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 24, 2014, 08:06:26 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 07:58:58 PM
but seriously,......... if William Paterson beats Richard Stockton tomorrow,.. to get to a sn eaky 15-3, having beat Stockton twice then, at this point,..... then William Paterson will be inside the Top 26

NO?

and if Richard Stockton wins thne game,.. they maintain their position at 32,.. maybe move up to 26-31?

no?

any opinions of this particular bubble game tomorrow?

Will Pat could crack the top 25 if they win depending on the teams ahead of them.
Stockton has no chance after losing to Brooklyn on Monday. A 2nd loss and they'll receive no votes, win and they might hang on to just a couple.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 08:11:28 PM

like I said earlied, there is only 8 D3 teams in the nation with at least 15 win and no more than 3 losses,...... William Patterson 14-3 #30, wins AT Stockton 13-3, tomorrow,.. then Willian Paterson emerges as the Top NJAC team, at 15-3, and a Top 25 national team, with king-gilchrist as one 0of the best players in the nation, having beat Stockton twice theoreticaly.

But we also have Rutgers Newark at 12-5 , winners of 6 in a row, and a preseason coaches favorite in conference.

any opinions on this game tomorrow?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 08:15:31 PM

no, I think that if Stockton wins the game to get to 14-3,.. they would masintaion a position inside the Top 32,........ with a chance in future weeks to get higher, like you said, depending on how many losses other teams suffer

but that is why they play the games

this game is preobably the most intriguing game tomorrow in the nation

it is a pre-cursor to who will come out of the NJAC

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 08:26:11 PM

LET ME WORD IT ANOTHER WAY, ........ there are 42 teams in the nation with 3 or less losses,.. both stockton and william peterson have 3 losses,..... we can know , that some of those 42 teams are losing tonight, tommorow, or sunday,....

Any 3 loss team standing on monday morning deserves votes

probably william peterson will get to 2r at 15-3 with the 2nd win againsat stockton,...... or stockton will get to 14-3,... and mai ntain their position

you can talk abouit the brooklyn game all you want,.. it was on a sunday afrternoon,.....

stockton is not used to playiong on sunday, usualy wednesday and saturday

and i knew that would be a tricky game

thneyu held brookyn to 63 points,..... and brooklyn is capavble of putting up 100

3 losses aint a dceath nail, .. 4 losses is

understand?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 24, 2014, 08:34:55 PM

All teams with three losses or less are not equal based just on their record... you seem to keep missing that point.

For example, UW-Stevens Point is undefeated and #1... Dubuque is undefeated and now #25. If everything was equal... shouldn't they be ranked 1 and 2? Splitting first place votes?

And smedindy... Salisbury got rid of "State" many years ago ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 08:37:43 PM

the top 60 teams in the nation right now, as ofd this morning

60 team list
(no more than 3 losses or recieved votes last vote)

0 loss
uw stevens point-------------- 17-0 #1
cabrini--------------------------15-0 #3
suny purchase---------------- 13-0 #14
dubuqu-------------------------16-0 #25

1 loss
wooster------------------------- 15-1 #2
wpi-------------------------------15-1 #5
st norbert----------------------- 14-1 #11
wesley--------------------------- 14-1 #12
messiah------------------------- 14-1 #17
albertus magnus------------- ---14-1 #20
oglethorpe---------------------- 14-1 #21
bowdoin------------------------- 14-1 #22
brockport state------------------ 12-1 #23
texas-dallas-------------------- -14-1 #29
husson---------------------------13-1 no votes

2 loss
illinois wesleyan------------------ 15-2 #4
amherst-------------------------- 14-2 #6
washington u------------------ --12-2 #8
augustana-----------------------15-2 #13
mary washington----------------14-2 #15
st vincent------------------------ 15-2 #38
staten islamd----------------- --14-2 # 46
genesco state--------------------11-2 #49
penn state behrend--------- ---14-2 no votes

3 loss
uw whitewater------------------ 14-3 #7
williams------------------------- 13-3 #9
st thomas---------------------- 13-3 #10
wittenberg----------------------13-3 #18
ohio wesleyan----------------- 13-3 #19
dickinson----------------------- 13-3 #26
mount union--------------------13-3 #27
william paterson-------------- 14-3 #30
richard stockton---------------13-3 #32
colorado college-------------- 11-3 #36
scranton-----------------------13-3 #51
endicott------------------------ 13-3 no votes
lewis and clark---------------- 12-3 no votes
hilbert---------------------------11-3 no votes
centre--------------------------- 11-3 no votes
vassar-------------------------- 11-3 no votes
plattsburg state---------------- 11-3 no votes
nyu-------------------------------11-3 no votes

others receiving votes last vote
virginia wesleyan-------------- 12-4 #16
st marys md-------------------.11-4 #24
whitworth-----------------------12-4 #28
stevenson-----------------------12-4 #31
christopher newport----------- 11-4 #33
auguburg----------------------- 11-5 #34
depauw -------------------------12-4 #35
rose-hulman--------------------12-4 #37
springfield-----------------------12-4 #39
calvin----------------------------12-4 #40
babson---------------------------12-4 #41
emory--------------------------- 10-4 #42
mit------------------------------- 11-4 #43
randolph macon---------------- 12-4 #44
hampden - sydney--------------10-6 #45
carthage-------------------------11-6 #47
eastern conneticut-------------- 12-4 #48
marietta--------------------------12-4 #50

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 08:45:03 PM

i understand uw stevens point and the one or even 2 loss teams right now, have real shot at the championship,......

but of the 42 teams in the nation with no more than 3 losses, 33 had votes ,.. 9 did not

stockton sits at 32, william paterson at 30

they play each lother saturday

ikt is a bubble game

voters already have them inside, in this

so the winner of the game gets recopgnition

i do get it

usualy one team from the conference njac gets recopgnitrion, and 2 teams get in the ncaa tourney

they havnt had a win since stocktopn made the finals

but

i am not even talki g about that

i am talkingt about at least 1 team, the winnewr of tommorows game, william patterson at stockton,.. maintaining a postion yo at least get a favorable game inj the ncaa tourney

am i really wrong ?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on January 24, 2014, 08:51:53 PM

Yes

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 08:55:39 PM

lol, how can i be wrong about saying a team ranked 30 playing againsat a team ranked 32, tomorrow, where one in 14-3, the other at 13-3,... that the winner wouldnt maintain where they are, or move slighntly higher?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 24, 2014, 09:02:47 PM

Quote from: sac on January 24, 2014, 07:26:49 PM
Quote from: smedindy on January 24, 2014, 06:57:40 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 24, 2014, 07:48:01 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 23, 2014, 11:50:19 PM

I know they've lost seven games already, but I would be absolutely terrified to play Mary Hardin-Baylor right now. Best seven loss team in d3, I think.
I believe that the established precedent on this board is that, if you are going to make such a statement, you must follow it up with detailed statistics. Please begin with a list of all teams in D3 with 7 losses, and your analysis of the quality of those losses. You can then move on to telling us why MHB deserves to be considered the best of that group. (And perhaps even better than some of the six- and five-loss teams. We'll need a list of those, too.) If, at some point, you feel obliged to post increasingly incoherent comments, and/or post in all caps, we would certainly understand.

Using Massey, here are the best X loss teams in the D-3 Universe:

0 - UW - SP
1 - Wooster
2 - Illinois Wesleyan
3 - UW - Whitewater
4 - Randolph Macon
5 - Wilmington
6 - Wheaton (IL)
7 - Hope
8 - Schreiner
9 - Ohio Northern
10 - Salisbury St.
11- Heidelberg
12 - Pacific Luthern
13 - Washington (MD)
14 - Rust
15 - North Park
16 - D'Youville
17 - UC Santa Cruz

YMMV. Consult your dealer for options and accessories. If symptoms persist, treat with Wild Turkey and hammer.

Hope has 6 losses, Massey is incorrectly counting their exhibition loss to Grand Valley State.

But if Massey had the losses correctly, Hope wouldn't have made Smedindy's list at all, since 6-loss Wheaton beat them by 19! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 09:04:59 PM

jum sorery, but whoever canme up with that ,list, is not seeing what i am seeing

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 09:07:21 PM

0 loss
uw stevens point-------------- 17-0 #1
cabrini---------------------------- 15-0 #3
suny purchase---------------- 13-0 #14
dubuqu----------------------------16-0 #25

1 loss
wooster------------------------- 15-1 #2
wpi-------------------------------- 15-1 #5
st norbert----------------------- 14-1 #11
wesley--------------------------- 14-1 #12
messiah------------------------- 14-1 #17
albertus magnus------------- 14-1 #20
oglethorpe---------------------- 14-1 #21
bowdoin------------------------- 14-1 #22
brockport state---------------- 12-1 #23
texas-dallas-------------------- 14-1 #29
husson--------------------------- 13-1 no votes

2 loss
illinois wesleyan-------------- 15-2 #4
amherst-------------------------- 14-2 #6
washington u------------------ 12-2 #8
augustana-----------------------15-2 #13
mary washington-------------14-2 #15
st vincent----------------------- 15-2 #38
staten islamd----------------- 14-2 # 46
genesco state-----------------11-2 #49
penn state behrend--------- 14-2 no votes

3 loss
uw whitewater---------------- 14-3 #7
williams------------------------- 13-3 #9
st thomas---------------------- 13-3 #10
wittenberg---------------------- 13-3 #18
ohio wesleyan---------------- 13-3 #19
dickinson----------------------- 13-3 #26
mount union--------------------13-3 #27
william paterson-------------- 14-3 #30
richard stockton---------------13-3 #32
colorado college-------------- 11-3 #36
scranton------------------------- 13-3 #51
endicott-------------------------- 13-3 no votes
lewis and clark---------------- 12-3 no votes
hilbert----------------------------- 11-3 no votes
centre----------------------------- 11-3 no votes
vassar----------------------------- 11-3 no votes
plattsburg state---------------- 11-3 no votes
nyu--------------------------------- 11-3 no votes

others receiving votes last vote
virginia wesleyan-------------- 12-4 #16
st marys md-------------------. 11-4 #24
whitworth------------------------ -12-4 #28
stevenson------------------------ 12-4 #31
christopher newport----------- 11-4 #33
auguburg-------------------------- 11-5 #34
depauw ----------------------------12-4 #35
rose-hulman----------------------12-4 #37
springfield------------------------ 12-4 #39
calvin------------------------------- 12-4 #40
babson---------------------------- 12-4 #41
emory------------------------------ 10-4 #42
mit----------------------------------- 11-4 #43
randolph macon---------------- 12-4 #44
hampden - sydney-------------10-6 #45
carthage---------------------------11-6 #47
eastern conneticut------------ 12-4 #48
marietta----------------------------12-4 #50

29 4-loss teams in the nation right now ( no votes last vote, but may want to keep an eye

louisiana college 9-4
concordia 11-4
marian 14-4
lakeland 13-4
milwalkie engineering 13-4
marymount 12-4
mcdaniel 12-4
sunyit 8-4
nicols 11-4
eastern nararene 10-4

mitchell 11-4
daniel webster 11-4
gwynedd-mercy 12-4
alfred 10-4
johnson and wales 12-4
defiance 12-4
guilford 12-4
lynchburg 12-4
bethany 13-4
juniata 12-4

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 09:13:25 PM

claremont-mudd scripps 11-4
cal lutheran 13-4
hobart 10-4
mount st mary 12-4
farmingdale state 11-4
hood 12-4
macmurray 11-4
st olaf 12-4
grinnell 11-4

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 09:26:45 PM

hoopeville never talks about the Njac, yet they are relevant nationaly, have won a championship, rowan, hbave made final fours,.... usualy get 2 or or in thne past 3 teams in the ncaa tourney

this is the nj/myc market

to totally ignore the njac on hoopseville, is notr tight,

this one guy on here likes to list the 13 or 14 ncaa tournets stevens point has made, stocktons made 13 too

is isnt right to ignore the njac

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 24, 2014, 09:35:25 PM

hplc2222, +k to you, both for your hard work and for keeping a good humor about the good-humored ribbing. BUT, while I find your lists interesting and even somewhat useful, I hope that you understand that listing W-L records without any consideration of WHO teams played is virtually meaningless in isolation. Just for one example, Husson got to 13-0 without receiving a single top-25 vote (and probably not even being very seriously on any voter's radar). Why? Because they don't play a single top-100 team the entire season! On the other hand, Virginia Wesleyan is currently ranked 16th despite four losses. Why? Because they have played a number of very tough teams (and beaten some).

With 416 teams in d3, it would be theoretically possible to go 0-25 yet be the 26th best team (or higher, if some of the losses were to the same team twice). Likewise to go 25-0, yet be the 26th worst (or lower). Neither of these will ever happen of course, but the point remains.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 09:48:02 PM

you m issed my point,....... i am talikng about the 30th ranked team in the nation, playing againsy the 32nd ranked team in the nation tomorrow,.... and hoopseville totally disreagardes tgis game, and the conference

this is what i am talkinbg about
]
becausae if william patterson win this game to get to 15-3, already ranked at 30, and beating stocktton twice,.. with one opn the top 10 best scoreers in the nation, this is somethin g that needs to be mentioned

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 09:58:45 PM

oglkethorope just scored 47 points in a gamne , a loss,..... and you want to put down stockton,... come on man,. tghese are d3 players,... they arent olympic quality athletes

anyone can lose

but comke on man 47 points, are you kiddingv me

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 24, 2014, 10:17:13 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 09:58:45 PM
oglkethorope just scored 47 points in a gamne , a loss,..... and you want to put down stockton,... come on man,. tghese are d3 players,... they arent olympic quality athletes

anyone can lose

but comke on man 47 points, are you kiddingv me

Nope... not kidding you. Amazingly not every game is a 90-88 type of score.
How about NJ City (who is currently middle of the pack in the NJAC) who won a game 39-38... in OT. They were home to conference foe Rutgers-Camden just 9 days ago when these two teams combined to score 70 points in regulation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 24, 2014, 10:30:10 PM

Cincinnati(18-2) 44 Pittsburgh(17-2) 43

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 10:37:42 PM

'don't just say things to say things'

pk

so oglethorpr gets away with lodsing a game by scoring only 47 points, but stockton doesnt get saway with losing to holding brooklyn to 63

CAtcg 22

which has always been my argument on here

NJAC HATERS

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 24, 2014, 11:03:22 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 10:37:42 PM
'don't just say things to say things'

pk

so oglethorpr gets away with lodsing a game by scoring only 47 points, but stockton doesnt get saway with losing to holding brooklyn to 63

CAtcg 22

which has always been my argument on here

NJAC HATERS

They're not getting away for only scoring 47, but we also aren't making a big deal about it like you are. The fact is they lost. It doesn't matter if the score was 47-52 or 87-92. They lost and will drop when the next rankings come out.

And your argument is comparing apples and oranges... Oglethorpe scored 47 while Stockton gave up 63 isn't valid because it's not the same comparison. It's either Oglethorpe scored 47 while Stockton managed to score 55, or it's Oglethorpe only gave up 52 while Stockton gave up 63. Either way both teams lost.

I had been impressed with the changes in your demeanor the past few days but I'm starting to feel like the old hplc is returning whenever someone disagrees with your opinion which is unfortunate to see. :(

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on January 24, 2014, 11:32:51 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 10:37:42 PM
'don't just say things to say things'

pk

so oglethorpr gets away with lodsing a game by scoring only 47 points, but stockton doesnt get saway with losing to holding brooklyn to 63

CAtcg 22

which has always been my argument on here

NJAC HATERS

I'm pretty sure Oglethorpe will not "get away" with a loss. It will in all surety drop them from their lofty #21 ranking, possibly even out of the top 25. As a for instance, Marietta was ranked #19 in weekly poll #5 and then lost on the road to 6-5 Ohio Northern and then dropped out of the Top 25 to #29 the following week.

A home loss to a 4-11 team certainly does not translate to a "good loss" for any team, so even though 4 teams ahead of Dick Stockton lost, I don't think they would pass Whitworth or UT-Dallas if they happen to beat Willy Paterson. Conversely if Paterson beats Stockton it may be enough to catapult them to #25 past Whit and UTD. That's up to the voters and in my mind three wins in the week should be enough to do so.

I don't think anyone hates the NJAC, they are just not thought of highly enough on the national scene right now. Strange that 5-11 Brooklyn College is 3-0 against 3 teams from the NJAC even though Massey has them rated as only the 290th best team in D3.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 24, 2014, 11:42:28 PM

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fa%2Fa0%2FRichard_Stockton_signature.png&hash=cd6f4cab4ee669973f5dd383a9add0675129a75f)

Richard Stockton was really a John Hancock hater.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 25, 2014, 12:31:40 AM

At the risk of igniting another flood of posts, two things.

1. This is not really a game of 30 vs. 32 Remember that Richard Stockton lost once already since this poll came out, which people have already mentioned. If the voters voted today, Richard Stockton would not have those votes.
2. Your list of the so-called 60-best teams is standings, not rankings. Just because they are the 60 teams with the fewest losses in Division III means nothing. Otherwise, 9-6 Bates would have gotten crushed going into unbeaten Husson's gym.

I'll let others decide if a conference that hasn't won an NCAA Tournament game in four years is truly nationally relevant.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 25, 2014, 01:09:18 AM

As far as conferences being nationally relevant... unless you're the NESCAC (who always seems to be nationally competitive in just about every sport) or maybe UAA (who is as close to a national conference geographically as D3 has) I don't think any conference is truly nationally relevant. Obviously having a team do well will garner a little attention, but there are more than 40 conferences and over 400 teams in D3 so it really takes some effort to stand out on a national level.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 25, 2014, 02:36:26 AM

The five best conferences that get national recognition because their teams always before in the regular season AND THE POSTSESASON are the UAA, NESCAC, WIAC, CCIW and ODAC. If your team is not in one of those conferences, you have to prove more than just being in a conference. Sorry, but the NJAC has NOTHING to stake a claim to now or in recent memory.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on January 25, 2014, 10:36:47 AM

Just putting my thoughts out there on the "talk". Just to give some perspective on the whole "Top 25" I went back to 2008-09 when the current coach took over at Cabrini and the former PnAC became the CSAC. In the 8-9 preseason poll Cabrini wasn't even a thought. In the first poll someone gave them a 25th vote to give them "1" point and were the 51st rank team in the poll and then didn't show up in the poll again the rest of the year. Only team to get any additional votes that year was Gwynedd Mercy(4 or T39). GMC won the conference. I asked a lot of questions about Cavs record and why they weren't getting votes and started to understand a little more about the D3 landscape. The answer was they hadn't done anything and the conference hadn't done anything. Cavs finished 25-6.

In 9-10 preseason poll Cavs had no votes. Gwynedd did(4). In the first poll of the new year Cavs got 5 votes and at the time were 3-0. Wk2, Got 18 votes and were 33 team in poll and were 6-0. Wk3 23, 32nd 6-0. Wk4 2, 39th 7-1. Wk5 1, 44th 6-0. Wk6 1, 40th 9-1. Wk7 32, 26th, 12-1. Wk8 38, 26th, 15-1, Wk9 12, 29th, 16-2(lost on the road to a team that was 7-10) Wk10 cracked the top 25 ranked 24th, 58 pts, 18-2. Wk 11 90, 22nd 20-2. Wk 12 142, 21st, 23-2. Wk 13 176, 20th 25-2. Won the conference and was on a roll going into the NCAA tourney. They were matched up against the 16th team in the nation Randolph Macon. I thought they're a good team but so is Cabrini. Cavs can win this. They proceeded to get blown out by 29. Randy Mac went on to the final 4 that year. In the final poll they dropped out of the top 25 and got 14, 33rd and finished 25-3. I realized there are good teams out there that play in much better conferences and the Cavaliers had a lot of work ahead of them.

2010-11 preseason they got 32 votes and ranked 32nd. They didn't get any more votes until week 13, 3 votes, 43rd and were 22-5. At one point in the season they won 14 in a row and still didn't get any votes. They didn't deserve any at the time. They really hadn't proved themselves and neither did the conference. They proceeded by beating a New Jersey City team that was ranked ahead of them and got to the sweet 16 that year. Finished 19th in the poll with 129 votes and were 24-6.

2011-12 Preseason started off with a bang they were bringing a lot back and were ranked 14th. I really wasn't sure if they should have been ranked that high, but these Top 25 voters seem to know things and I've learned to trust much of what they put out there now. They stayed in the top 25. After being ranked 14th they moved up went down to 13th after an out of conf last second loss at Centre College and got up to #5 before the tourney. They were a good team. They got to the final four. Beat IWU(sorry TitanQ) to get to the final and lost by 3 to Wisc WW. They finished 2nd in the polls and deservedly so. That year there were 4 teams with 8 losses in the final poll. 1 knocked out round 1, 1 each in the sweet 16, elite 8 and final four. Voters saw what the teams did and got the votes for it.

2012-13 Cavs were ranked 10th in preseason poll and proceeded to drop in polls than eventually out. Than got no votes at all until week 12. They got 13 votes and ranked 29th. They were 20-5. Week 14: 10 30th 22-5. They got into the NCAA tourney and proceeded to win three road games against "better" competition. They weren't supposed to win these games but they did and the voters recognized them again. Final standings they were ranked 13th.

This year they started out 19th. They won 2 games at the Hoopsville Invitational (unreportedly there were some locals that asked them if they were ready for this scene?) They were the only team to come out unscathed. Now they've gone up the polls to number 3. They are a very good team. Are they the number 3 team in nation? The voters seem to think that they are. I don't know. But I'll trust there judgment. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: northb on January 25, 2014, 10:56:51 AM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 25, 2014, 01:09:18 AM
As far as conferences being nationally relevant... unless you're the NESCAC (who always seems to be nationally competitive in just about every sport) or maybe UAA (who is as close to a national conference geographically as D3 has) I don't think any conference is truly nationally relevant. Obviously having a team do well will garner a little attention, but there are more than 40 conferences and over 400 teams in D3 so it really takes some effort to stand out on a national level.

In a different way, Calvin and Hope are internationally relevant with Rivalry games simulcast to over 80 sites, from Austria to Zeek's Pizza in Washington.

http://www.calvinhope.com/gather/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 25, 2014, 11:21:28 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 25, 2014, 02:36:26 AM
The five best conferences that get national recognition because their teams always before in the regular season AND THE POSTSESASON are the UAA, NESCAC, WIAC, CCIW and ODAC. If your team is not in one of those conferences, you have to prove more than just being in a conference. Sorry, but the NJAC has NOTHING to stake a claim to now or in recent memory.

Dave -- Good list, I would suggest that the NCAC (Wooster, Wittenberg, Ohio Wesleyan) deserves some consideration as well -- perhaps 6th on that list? :)

Wooster
-11 Years in a Row in the NCAA tournament
-Sweet Sixteen the last 4 Years in a Row (only 1 other D3 team has managed that feat -- Hint: also starts with a "W" ;))
-Final Four Appearances in 2003, 2007 and 2011 (National Runner-up)
-Best Win Percentage of Any NCAA Team in the 2000's

Wittenberg
-In the NCAA Tournament 5 times in the last 10 Years (remember, Wooster also in each of those years)
-Final Four and National Runner-up in 2006
-Elite Eight in 2012

Ohio Wesleyan
-In the NCAA Tournament 3 times in the last 6 Years (remember, Wooster also in each of those years)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 25, 2014, 11:26:59 AM

Hplc2222,

You are right. It's a big game... in the conference. When I think of the NJAC, I do think WP and RS. It's big because WP has already beaten RS. But, there are still a lot of games left. When the regional ranking come out in three weeks, WP will virtually always be ahead of RS if they win on the road today, simply because of H2H. If RS wins today, they won't get into the Top 25 and I would venture to bet they will actually LOSE votes based on losing on Monday to Brooklyn.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 25, 2014, 11:31:18 AM

What hurt Cabrini in 2012-13 is they were not particularly forthcoming with us in the preseason about the status of Aaron Walton-Moss. I think if they'd be willing to say he could come back for the second semester, Cabrini would have gotten much more of a benefit of the doubt. And after AWM's return, they basically only had conference games left, so there was no opportunity to prove themselves for a national ballot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on January 25, 2014, 12:40:40 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 25, 2014, 11:31:18 AM
What hurt Cabrini in 2012-13 is they were not particularly forthcoming with us in the preseason about the status of Aaron Walton-Moss. I think if they'd be willing to say he could come back for the second semester, Cabrini would have gotten much more of a benefit of the doubt. And after AWM's return, they basically only had conference games left, so there was no opportunity to prove themselves for a national ballot.

Pat,

Absolutely agree. Not arguing the fact. Just that's what the voters had to go on. Voters do a pretty good job of judging the teams that are picked each week. CSAC not a real strong conference. That I am fully aware of. Especially considering that it has less than a .500 winning pct against out of conference teams. Which has been the norm for the conference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 25, 2014, 12:52:23 PM

As far as conferences go, as of today Massey has the following (for what it's worth)...

1. CCIW
2. UAA
3. WIAC
4. OAC
5. MACC

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?s=cb2014&sub=11620&c=1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 25, 2014, 02:47:38 PM

Oh oh we're in trouble now. Richard Stockton has defeated William Paterson 81-57. Someone will be crowing till the cows come home.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 25, 2014, 02:49:10 PM

Stockton should be ranked number 1 , they just beat william paterson 81-57, started so strong defensivly, william paterson only had 5 points in the first 10 minutes. Now Stockton is 14-3, anbd teams in the rankings are losing all over the place.
Stockton for number 1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 25, 2014, 02:52:23 PM

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fantitrustlair.files.wordpress.com%2F2010%2F05%2Fexhausted.jpg&hash=e133c5dfc1852b48792177efdeef6b2a688d9fb2)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 25, 2014, 02:57:41 PM

Final: DePauw 78 #2 Wooster 74

Wooster drops the road game and this is the third year in a row that they have lost in Greencastle. Congrats to DePauw and this win keeps them in the NCAC race at 8-2. Wooster still leads the NCAC at 9-1. DePauw shot 57% overall from the floor and made 7 out of 11 on three point shots.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 25, 2014, 05:05:09 PM

I'll just say seeing Cabrini at the Hoopsville Tournament is what is keeping me from ranking them too high. Like every team they've had the past few years, there is good talent, but not great talent (outside a couple individual stars). Their real strength comes in preparation and coaching. Those players are some of the most confident and now experienced guys out there. That serves them well come tournament time, but it also means they're playing to peak ability most of the season. They've proven they can maintain it, as difficult as it seems, but it's still a high degree of difficulty.

Personally, I'd rather rank a loaded, but under-performing team like IWU over a Cabrini squad that looks better on the floor than they do on paper.

For me it's a give and take. Cabrini's model wins games, I'm not sure it's tailor made for rankings. I don't think there's anyone associated with the program who cares one lick about that trade off.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SgtPaul on January 25, 2014, 06:08:19 PM

Pointers finished off a good week on the road beating UW LaCrosse 91-72. Trevor Haas set the school record for points in a game with 45.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 25, 2014, 06:24:06 PM

is it ok if i pencil in wins for dubuque, augustana, illinois wesleyan, oglethorp uw whitewater, colorado college, whitworth, and a loss for carthage, in tonights games?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 25, 2014, 06:28:03 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 25, 2014, 06:24:06 PM
is it ok if i pencil in wins for dubuque, augustana, illinois wesleyan, oglethorp uw whitewater, colorado college, whitworth, and a loss for carthage, in tonights games?

I would have thought so, but Augie is down to Elmhurst, 36-23, at the half.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 25, 2014, 06:33:25 PM

Quote from: sac on January 24, 2014, 07:26:49 PM
Quote from: smedindy on January 24, 2014, 06:57:40 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 24, 2014, 07:48:01 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 23, 2014, 11:50:19 PM

I know they've lost seven games already, but I would be absolutely terrified to play Mary Hardin-Baylor right now. Best seven loss team in d3, I think.
I believe that the established precedent on this board is that, if you are going to make such a statement, you must follow it up with detailed statistics. Please begin with a list of all teams in D3 with 7 losses, and your analysis of the quality of those losses. You can then move on to telling us why MHB deserves to be considered the best of that group. (And perhaps even better than some of the six- and five-loss teams. We'll need a list of those, too.) If, at some point, you feel obliged to post increasingly incoherent comments, and/or post in all caps, we would certainly understand.

Using Massey, here are the best X loss teams in the D-3 Universe:

0 - UW - SP
1 - Wooster
2 - Illinois Wesleyan
3 - UW - Whitewater
4 - Randolph Macon
5 - Wilmington
6 - Wheaton (IL)
7 - Hope
8 - Schreiner
9 - Ohio Northern
10 - Salisbury St.
11- Heidelberg
12 - Pacific Luthern
13 - Washington (MD)
14 - Rust
15 - North Park
16 - D'Youville
17 - UC Santa Cruz

YMMV. Consult your dealer for options and accessories. If symptoms persist, treat with Wild Turkey and hammer.

Hope has 6 losses, Massey is incorrectly counting their exhibition loss to Grand Valley State.

Not incorrect in Massey's universe, since it's a game that counted for GVSU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 25, 2014, 06:34:41 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 24, 2014, 08:34:55 PM

And smedindy... Salisbury got rid of "State" many years ago ;)

Welp, so they did. I was typing in a hurry and making a point that wasn't related to the darn name, trying to get all of the luddites under control here. That's a tough job. And you know how HARD it was to find some of those teams. And the fact UC-Santa Cruz, with 17 losses was higher than D'Youville with 16? ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 25, 2014, 07:47:06 PM

can i pencil in colorado college losing ?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 25, 2014, 07:54:37 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 25, 2014, 06:24:06 PM
is it ok if i pencil in wins for dubuque, augustana, illinois wesleyan, oglethorp uw whitewater, colorado college, whitworth, and a loss for carthage, in tonights games?

I can tell you that there are not any road wins that get penciled in in the CCIW. I suspect most leagues work the same way.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 25, 2014, 08:22:58 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 25, 2014, 07:54:37 PM
Quote from: hplc2222 on January 25, 2014, 06:24:06 PM
is it ok if i pencil in wins for dubuque, augustana, illinois wesleyan, oglethorp uw whitewater, colorado college, whitworth, and a loss for carthage, in tonights games?

I can tell you that there are not any road wins that get penciled in in the CCIW. I suspect most leagues work the same way.

Well, there are a few that can be penciled in, but only a fool would ink any in! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 25, 2014, 08:36:41 PM

hopw do i get thbe dubuque score?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 25, 2014, 08:58:11 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 25, 2014, 08:36:41 PM
hopw do i get thbe dubuque score?

http://client.stretchinternet.com/client/loras.portal#

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on January 25, 2014, 10:11:24 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 25, 2014, 02:49:10 PM
Stockton should be ranked number 1 , they just beat william paterson 81-57, started so strong defensivly, william paterson only had 5 points in the first 10 minutes. Now Stockton is 14-3, anbd teams in the rankings are losing all over the place.
Stockton for number 1

They are ranked #1...................................in the NJAC right??
Nowhere else......... period.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 25, 2014, 10:26:53 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 25, 2014, 06:33:25 PM
Quote from: sac on January 24, 2014, 07:26:49 PM
Quote from: smedindy on January 24, 2014, 06:57:40 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 24, 2014, 07:48:01 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 23, 2014, 11:50:19 PM

I know they've lost seven games already, but I would be absolutely terrified to play Mary Hardin-Baylor right now. Best seven loss team in d3, I think.
I believe that the established precedent on this board is that, if you are going to make such a statement, you must follow it up with detailed statistics. Please begin with a list of all teams in D3 with 7 losses, and your analysis of the quality of those losses. You can then move on to telling us why MHB deserves to be considered the best of that group. (And perhaps even better than some of the six- and five-loss teams. We'll need a list of those, too.) If, at some point, you feel obliged to post increasingly incoherent comments, and/or post in all caps, we would certainly understand.

Using Massey, here are the best X loss teams in the D-3 Universe:

0 - UW - SP
1 - Wooster
2 - Illinois Wesleyan
3 - UW - Whitewater
4 - Randolph Macon
5 - Wilmington
6 - Wheaton (IL)
7 - Hope
8 - Schreiner
9 - Ohio Northern
10 - Salisbury St.
11- Heidelberg
12 - Pacific Luthern
13 - Washington (MD)
14 - Rust
15 - North Park
16 - D'Youville
17 - UC Santa Cruz

YMMV. Consult your dealer for options and accessories. If symptoms persist, treat with Wild Turkey and hammer.

Hope has 6 losses, Massey is incorrectly counting their exhibition loss to Grand Valley State.

Not incorrect in Massey's universe, since it's a game that counted for GVSU.

It did not count for GVSU either, clearly marked as exhibition
http://www.gvsulakers.com/sports/m-baskbl/sched/grva-m-baskbl-sched.html

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on January 26, 2014, 09:01:20 AM

Quote from: frodotwo on January 25, 2014, 10:11:24 PM
Quote from: hplc2222 on January 25, 2014, 02:49:10 PM
Stockton should be ranked number 1 , they just beat william paterson 81-57, started so strong defensivly, william paterson only had 5 points in the first 10 minutes. Now Stockton is 14-3, anbd teams in the rankings are losing all over the place.
Stockton for number 1

They are ranked #1...................................in the NJAC right??
Nowhere else......... period.

My mistake, they're not even #1 in their own conference ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 26, 2014, 09:51:29 AM

Rutgers Newark is 13-5, (9-2 in NJAC) in first place in the conference, and just rolled off 7 wins ina row. They may get some votes tomorrow.

Stockton plays Rutgers Newark on Saturday. If Stockton wins that game, they for sure will be number 1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 26, 2014, 09:57:41 AM

85 team list
(categories- 0 loss, 1 loss, 2 loss, 3 loss, 4+ loss and votes, 4 loss no votes)

0 loss (3)
uw stevens point-------------18-0 #1
cabrini------------------------ 16-0 #3
suny purchase----------------14-0 #14

1 loss (8)
wpi--------------------------------16-1 #5
st norbert-------------------------15-1 #11
wesley----------------------------15-1 #12
albertus magnus-----------------15-1 #20
bowdoin--------------------------15-1 #22
brockport state------------------14-1 #23
dubuque-------------------------16-1 #25
texas-dallas---------------------15-1 #29

2 loss (10)
wooster-------------------------15-2 #2
amherst-------------------------15-2 #6
washington u-------------------13-2 #8
mary washington---------------15-2 #15
messiah-------------------------14-2 #17
oglethorpe----------------------15-2 #21
st vincent-----------------------15-2 #38
staten island--------------------15-2 # 46
genesco state-------------------13-2 #49
husson--------------------------14-2 no votes

3 loss (16)
illinois wesleyan----------------15-3 #4
uw whitewater---------------- -15-3 #7
williams-------------------------14-3 #9
st thomas---------------------- 13-3 #10
augustana----------------------15-3 #13
wittenberg----------------------14-3 #18
ohio wesleyan------------------14-3 #19
dickinson-----------------------14-3 #26
mount union-------------------13-3 #27
richard stockton---------------14-3 #32
scranton-----------------------14-3 #51
penn state behrend-----------14-3 no votes
hilbert--------------------------13-3 no votes
centre------------------------- 12-3 no votes
vassar----------------------- --13-3 no votes
plattsburg state----------------13-3 no votes

others receiving votes last vote (20)
virginia wesleyan---------------13-4 #16
st marys md--------------------.12-4 #24
whitworth---------------------- -13-4 #28
william paterson----------------14-4 #30
stevenson-----------------------13-4 #31
christopher newport------------12-4 #33
auguburg------------------------11-6 #34
depauw -------------------------13-4 #35
colorado college---------------- 12-4 #36
rose-hulman--------------------13-4 #37
springfield----------------------13-4 #39
calvin----------------------------13-4 #40
babson------------------------- 13-4 #41
emory---------------------------11-4 #42
mit------------------------------12-4 #43
randolph macon----------------13-4 #44
hampden - sydney-------------10-7 #45
carthage------------------------12-6 #47
eastern conneticut-------------13-4 #48
marietta------------------------13-4 #50

The additional 4 loss teams (28)
concordia texas---------00---13-4
marian-------------- ----------14-4
lakeland---------------------- 14-4
milwalkie engineering------- 14-4
mcdaniel--------------------- 13-4
sunyit------------------------ -9-4
nicols------------------------- 12-4
eastern nararene------------ 11-4
mitchell---------------------- 12-4
daniel webster--------------- 12-4

gwynedd-mercy------------- 13-4
alfred------------------------ 11-4
johnson and wales---------- 13-4
defiance--------------------- 13-4
guilford---------------------- 13-4
lynchburg -------------------13-4
bethany--------------------- 14-4
claremont-mudd scripps----12-4
cal lutheran----------------- 14-4
hobart----------------------- 12-4

mount st mary-------------- 13-4
hood------------------------- 13-4
macmurray----------------- 12-4
st olaf----------------------- 13-4
grinnell---------------------- 12-4
endicot-----------------------13-4
lewis and clark-------------- 12-4
nyu---------------------------11-4

playing sunday of those 85 teams -
washington u, sunyit, emory, nyu, hilbert (postponed), centre, mt union - 7 teams

playing monday of those 85 teams -
suny purchase, albertus magnus, christopher newport, st marys md, mit, texas dallas, - 7 teams

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pjunito on January 26, 2014, 10:10:32 AM

SUNY Purchase plays at Albertus.. This will be best opponents at D3 level for both teams.. Both play in weak conferences, so this game is big for both teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 26, 2014, 10:37:16 AM

My guess at this weeks Top 25. Last week I had 23 of 25.

1)uw stevens point----------------18-0
2)cabrini----------------------------16-0
3)wpi---------------------------- ---16-1
4)wooster---------------------------15-2
5)amherst---------------------------15-2
6)washington u---------------------13-2
7)illinois wesleyan------------------15-3
8)wesley-----------------------------15-1
9)mary washington-----------------15-2
10)st norbert------------------------15-1
11)williams--------------------------14-3
12)uw whitewater------------------ 15-3
13)st thomas------------------------13-3
14)suny purchase-------------------14-0
15)albertus magnus-----------------15-1
16)bowdoin--------------------------15-1
17)augustana------------------------15-3
18)ohio wesleyan--------------------14-3
19)st marys md---------------------.12-4
20)messiah---------------------------14-2
21)wittenberg------------------------14-3
22)oglethorpe------------------------15-2
23)brockport state-------------------14-1
24)richard stockton------------------14-3
25)virginia wesleyan-----------------13-4

other teams considered:::
dubuque 16-1, texas-dallas 15-1, dickinson 16-1, whitworth 13-4, depauw 13-4

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 26, 2014, 10:57:17 AM

let me see if I can explain something.

There are 37 teams that have no more than 3 losses. 31 of those teams recieved votes last week.

27 of those teams had more votes than Richard Stockton

23 of those 27 teams have at least 14 wins.

That puts Richard Stockton at 24 in my mind.

Washington U can get to 14 wins today. Washington U is already ranked ahead of Richard Stockton on my Top 25 list.

Mount Union plays tomorrow, not today. I think they just changed/fixed the schedule on D3 Hoops.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 26, 2014, 12:42:11 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 26, 2014, 10:57:17 AM
Mount Union plays tomorrow, not today. I think they just changed/fixed the schedule on D3 Hoops.

Yes. Snow has played havoc with schedules in Ohio and Michigan and games keep getting moved.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 26, 2014, 01:48:13 PM

not sure if this helps but it was interesting to make up

The only team I had drop out from last weeks vote was dubuque.

I shuffled the Top 25 a bit and again added in Richard Stockton

Below are the 17 teams that ranked #21 to #37 last vote, showing the teams they lost to in season

oglethorpe----------------------15-2 #21- I have at 22
lagrange 10-7 by 8, Centre 12-3 by 5

bowdoin-------------------------15-1 #22 I have at 16
williams 16-1 by 5

brockport state---------------14-1 #23 I have at 23
suny purchase 14-0 by 8

st marys md-------------------12-4 #24 I have at 19
cabrini 16-0 by 6, desales 10-7 by 10, mary washington 15-2 by 2, wesley 15-1 by 3,

dubuque-------------------------16-1 #25 I dropped out
loras 11-6 by 10

dickinson------------------------14-3 #26
juniata 12-5 by 2, randplf macon 13-4 by 6, franklin and marshal 12-5 by 9

mount union--------------------13-3 #27
bethany 14-4 by 18, rochester 7-8 by 7, capital 8-9 by 18

whitworth------------------------ 13-4 #28
colorado college 12-4 by 5, colorado college 12-4 by 16, uw stevens point 18-0 by 18,
george fox 12-5 by 13

texas-dallas---------------------15-1 #29
trinity 11-7 by 5

william paterson--------------14-4 #30
brooklyn 5-12 by 2, rutgers newark 13-5 by 2, ramapo 7-11 by 3,
richard stockton 14-3 by 24

stevenson------------------------13-4 #31
birmingham southern 9-6 by 1, oglethorpe 15-2 by 1, albright 10-7 by 7,
elizabethtown 7-10 by 2

richard stockton---------------14-3 #32
william paterson 14-4 by 2, montclair state 6-11 by 1, brooklyn 5-12 by 8

christopher newport-----------12-4 #33
emory 11-4 by 2, wesley 15-1 by 18, penn state harrisburg 6-11 by 3,
mary washington 15-2 by 11

augsuburg-------------------------11-6 #34
st thomas 13-3 by 18, gustavus adolphus 12-5 by 20,
concordia moorehead 8-9 by 9, uw whitewater 15-3 by 8,
st thomas 13-3 by 12, st olaf 13-4 by 19

depauw ---------------------------13-4 #35
washington u 13-2 by 11, wooster 15-2 by 16, rose hulman 13-4 by 3,
ohio wesleyan 14-3 by 11

colorado college-------------- 12-4 #36
northern colorado by 39, babson 13-4 by 3, schreiner 9-8 by 13,
trinity texas 11-7 by 15

rose-hulman---------------------13-4 #37
washington u 13-2 by 20, carroll 9-7 by 3, translyvania 6-11 by 3,
hanover 11-6 by 5

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 26, 2014, 02:12:48 PM

Despite losing by 8 to Brooklyn AT HOME, you are moving Richard Stockton up 8 spots?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 26, 2014, 02:13:39 PM

My team once lost to Rowan in the Final Four. They ended up making a rule called 'the Rowan Rule' to prevent a college team from assembling the same kind of roster.

They are no longer my least favorite NJAC program. That's all I'm saying.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 26, 2014, 02:18:49 PM

I personaly dropped stockton from 21 to 24 in my personal list. Actualy Stockton is at 31 tied with stevenson technicaly, both with 20 votes.

Stockton is sure to win at TCNJ wednesday to get to 15-3, then another big game on saturday against rutgers newark who is 13-5, leads the conference, just rolled off 7 in a row.

Stockton wins that game, in a fashion they just beat william paterson. I feel my pick will be justied sitting at 16-3

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 26, 2014, 02:23:44 PM

what did rowan do in 1997 was it?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 26, 2014, 02:44:43 PM

i'm listening to Kean at Princeton on the -"listen"- link on the official kean page. If you want to watch the game, the Ivy League is charging $19.95 to buy the sports package...lol.

Princeton up by 14 at halftime, 37-23

Kean played yesterday at home, beaing TCNJ 91-62.

If Kean can make this a game it would be good for the NJAC Need to hit some threes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 26, 2014, 03:17:48 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 26, 2014, 02:18:49 PM
I personaly dropped stockton from 21 to 24 in my personal list. Actualy Stockton is at 31 tied with stevenson technicaly, both with 20 votes.

Stockton is sure to win at TCNJ wednesday to get to 15-3, then another big game on saturday against rutgers newark who is 13-5, leads the conference, just rolled off 7 in a row.

Stockton wins that game, in a fashion they just beat william paterson. I feel my pick will be justied sitting at 16-3

You aren't supposed to make a Top 25 based on next week's games...that doesn't make any sense.

Sure to win at TCNJ? It's a road game and RS did lose AT HOME to Brooklyn (4-11 at the time).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 26, 2014, 03:35:21 PM

i can make a top 25 however i want, lol, sports are here for my entertainment, my enjoyment,

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 26, 2014, 04:01:10 PM

Of course you can. ;) But if it doesn't make any sense, you'll be talking to yourself in a padded room!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on January 26, 2014, 04:28:22 PM

LOL

Or whistling in the dark, to no one in particular.

If any team is worth a jump of 8 rungs up the ladder, I would be inclined to give that ticket to DePauw. The Tigers are making quite a surge at the moment.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 26, 2014, 05:00:11 PM

obviously all the voters dont agree on who is a top 25 team, otherwise 51 teams would not have had votes last time.
their is much difference among the ballots it seems, 20 coachs/sports writers voted for stockton right?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 26, 2014, 05:11:31 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 26, 2014, 05:00:11 PM
obviously all the voters dont agree on who is a top 25 team, otherwise 51 teams would not have had votes last time.
their is much difference among the ballots it seems, 20 coachs/sports writers voted for stockton right?

Well technically they could have if 20 out of the 25 pollsters all placed them 25th. But that seems highly unlikely that you'd have that many people all agree on the #25 team.
It could also have been just 4 people who placed them 21st. Or an 18th, 19th, and 21st. But if I had to guess on how many out of 25 had them on their ballot I'd probably guess about 6 or 7.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 26, 2014, 05:19:38 PM

how do you know how many voters there are?
The D3hoops.com Top 25 is voted on by a panel of 25 coaches, Sports Information Directors and media members from across the country, and is published weekly.

we know 25 coaches vote, out of 416, but we have nol idea how many media members vote.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 26, 2014, 05:24:59 PM

who gets the media votes, does stephan a smith vote from espn?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 26, 2014, 05:25:36 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 26, 2014, 05:19:38 PM
how do you know how many voters there are?
The D3hoops.com Top 25 is voted on by a panel of 25 coaches, Sports Information Directors and media members from across the country, and is published weekly.

we know 25 coaches vote, out of 416, but we have nol idea how many media members vote.

No, it's 25 total between coaches, SID, and media. If I remember correctly each of the 8 regions has three voters and the 25th vote belongs to Pat? If not him then someone connected to the d3 sites.
Another way to check is count the #1 votes. In the last poll UWSP got 23, Wooster and Cabrini each got 1 for a total of 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 26, 2014, 05:38:57 PM

oh, ok, people are picking stockton at any rate, and many other teams, as 51 teams got votes, that means a lot of disagreement about who is a top 25 team in the nation.

they do vote on merit right?

they dont just vote for good teams in their region for the sake of trying to increase the index number do they?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 26, 2014, 05:41:06 PM

The man behind the curtain, some call him Oz, gets the 25th vote.

My opinion is that Richard Stockton may lose votes. The loss to Brooklyn hurts more than their win vs William Paterson, IMHO.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 26, 2014, 05:50:46 PM

There is a 100-point gap between 13 and 14. I think that's where the big indecision comes in. Then, between 14th and 22nd its less than 100 points separating those slots. RS has to get twice as many points as they currently have to make this week's Top 25. Its noted that with all the carnage, it may take less than 40 points in this upcoming poll to crack the Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 26, 2014, 05:51:53 PM

but a lot of people lost games everyone cant move down, so, just have to see. 23 people acutaly make up the vote, but 6 billion people give or take a billion, have the right to make up their own top 25 for fun.

I have to admitt I feel pressured on here for weeks, since i started on this site, to somehow - fall in line- with the way the vote goes.

the guy from hoopesville was even saying he tried to explain to me 3 times that i shouldnt put stockton in my list.

i just have to ignore the pressure and have the entertainment and enjoyment i want out of it.

it wopuld be like the ncaa contacting a sports fan at large cause they thought miami should be in the top 25.

come on man.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 26, 2014, 05:56:27 PM

I don't think anyone is pressuring you to do anything. Some of us are just disagreeing with you! :P We are using various forms of information to back up our views.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 26, 2014, 05:57:49 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	622	UW-Stevens Point	18-0	won at UW-Platteville, 76-61; won at UW-La Crosse, 91-72
#2	594	Wooster	15-2	def. Allegheny, 73-68; LOST at #35 DePauw, 74-78
#3	581	Cabrini	16-0	def. Marywood, 82-68; def. Neumann, 94-68; won at Keystone, 94-84
#4	513	Illinois Wesleyan	15-3	def. North Central (Ill.), 72-57; LOST at T#44 Carthage, 73-80
#5	501	WPI	16-1	def. Clark, 81-69; won at Wheaton (Mass.), 83-69
#6	494	Amherst	15-2	won at #9 Williams, 82-70; won at Trinity (Conn.), 67-61
#7	460	UW-Whitewater	15-3	LOST at UW-La Crosse, 83-88; won at UW-River Falls, 62-42
#8	447	Washington U.	14-2	won at Case Western Reserve, 77-64; won at Carnegie Mellon, 94-81
#9	424	Williams	14-3	LOST to #6 Amherst, 70-82; def. Hamilton, 88-68
#10	395	St. Thomas	13-3	LOST at St. John's, 69-77; def. #34 Augsburg, 82-70
#11	373	St. Norbert	15-1	won at Beloit, 76-56; def. Cornell, 84-62
#12	331	Wesley	15-1	won at Penn State-Harrisburg, 66-63; won at Southern Virginia, 84-65
#13	329	Augustana	15-3	def. Millikin, 72-57; LOST at Elmhurst, 74-83
#14	219	SUNY-Purchase	14-0	~~01/21 at Yeshiva~~ postponed; won at Sage, 76-73; def. St. Joseph's (L.I.), 67-63
#15	211	Mary Washington	15-2	def. Southern Virginia, 113-79; won at York (Pa.), 63-57
#16	182	Virginia Wesleyan	13-4	LOST at T#44 Randolph-Macon, 62-78; def. Washington and Lee, 85-54
#17	178	Messiah	14-2	won at Widener, 95-87; LOST at Hood, 77-78
#18	170	Wittenberg	14-3	won at Kenyon, 66-54; won at Allegheny, 61-43
#19	162	Ohio Wesleyan	14-3	def. Oberlin, 81-72; def. Denison, 83-75
#20	159	Albertus Magnus	15-1	def. Rivier, 73-52; def. Elms, 113-97; won at Lasell, 101-91
#21	149	Oglethorpe	15-2	LOST to Centre, 47-52; def. Sewanee, 82-69
#22	123	Bowdoin	15-1	def. Maine-Presque Isle, 82-51; def. Colby, 64-59
#23	78	Brockport State	14-1	def. Buffalo State, 84-69; won at Oneonta State, 81-79; won at New Paltz State, 78-69
#24	74	St. Mary's (Md.)	12-4	~~01/22 vs. #33 Christopher Newport~~ postponed; won at Marymount, 52-49
#25	40	Dubuque	16-1	won at Coe, 66-56; LOST at Loras, 66-76

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	38	Dickinson	14-3	LOST at Franklin and Marshall, 58-67; won at Swarthmore, 80-52
#27	33	Mount Union	13-3	LOST at Capital, 70-88; won at Muskingum, 73-50
#28	27	Whitworth	13-4	won at Whitman, 84-80; def. Lewis and Clark, 81-65
#29	24	Texas-Dallas	15-1	won at University of the Ozarks, 84-63; def. University of the Ozarks, 97-76; def. Texas-Tyler, 76-72
#30	21	William Paterson	14-4	won at John Jay, 91-71; def. TCNJ, 83-56; LOST at T#31 Richard Stockton, 57-81
T#31	20	Stevenson	13-4	LOST at Elizabethtown, 63-65; def. Arcadia, 80-78
T#31	20	Richard Stockton	14-3	LOST to Brooklyn, 55-63; def. #30 William Paterson, 81-57
#33	18	Christopher Newport	12-4	~~01/22 at #24 St. Mary's (Md.)~~ postponed; won at Frostburg State, 84-41
#34	16	Augsburg	11-6	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 97-60; LOST at #10 St. Thomas, 70-82; LOST at St. Olaf, 63-82
#35	15	DePauw	13-4	won at Wabash, 70-60; def. #2 Wooster, 78-74
T#36	11	Colorado College	12-4	won at Johnson & Wales (CO), 75-65; def. Southwestern, 74-57; LOST to Trinity (Texas), 48-63
T#36	11	Rose-Hulman	13-4	LOST at Hanover, 62-67; def. Transylvania, 66-38
#38	10	St. Vincent	15-2	def. Waynesburg, 87-68
#39	9	Springfield	13-4	won at Coast Guard, 73-60; def. Clark, 94-76
#40	8	Calvin	13-4	def. Trine, 71-49; won at Olivet, 95-53
#41	7	Babson	13-4	def. #43 MIT, 65-47; def. Coast Guard, 76-56
#42	6	Emory	12-4	won at New York University, 86-82; won at Brandeis, 94-88
#43	5	MIT	12-4	LOST at #41 Babson, 47-65; def. Emerson, 71-66
T#44	3	Randolph-Macon	13-4	def. #16 Virginia Wesleyan, 78-62; won at Roanoke, 70-57
T#44	3	Hampden-Sydney	10-7	LOST at Guilford, 72-74; LOST at Randolph, 73-76
T#44	3	Staten Island	15-2	def. Kean, 83-72; def. York (N.Y.), 80-75; def. Brooklyn, 86-58
T#44	3	Carthage	12-6	LOST at Elmhurst, 70-73; def. #4 Illinois Wesleyan, 80-73
#48	2	Eastern Connecticut	13-4	def. Keene State, 84-53; won at Rhode Island College, 73-58
T#49	1	Geneseo State	13-2	def. Fredonia State, 79-63; won at New Paltz State, 92-82; won at Oneonta State, 83-69
T#49	1	Marietta	13-4	def. Capital, 82-72; won at Wilmington, 78-76
T#49	1	Scranton	14-3	won at Drew, 82-72; def. Catholic, 92-82

Other teams to watch (as suggested by posters on this board)

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
---	---	Penn State-Behrend	14-3	won at Hilbert, 55-52; def. Pitt-Bradford, 69-57; LOST at Pitt-Greensburg, 61-65
---	---	Plattsburgh State	13-3	def. Potsdam State, 73-58; won at Buffalo State, 87-83; won at Fredonia State, 77-42

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 26, 2014, 06:01:12 PM

I watched part of the game at carthage last night on here. They do it up. Huge crowd of fans, the introductions are over the top like it was the knicks at madison square garden or something.

They treat it like big time.

Stockton be lucky to get 50 paying fans in the 3000 seat sports arena, located about 100 yards from the dorms.

I wonder if that has anything to do with this appearant skew I have mentioned from time to time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on January 26, 2014, 06:14:14 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 26, 2014, 05:41:06 PM
The man behind the curtain, some call him Oz, gets the 25th vote.

My opinion is that Richard Stockton may lose votes. The loss to Brooklyn hurts more than their win vs William Paterson, IMHO.

Agree. RS lost in their house to a 5-11 BC does not hep get votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 26, 2014, 06:17:28 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 26, 2014, 05:51:53 PM
but a lot of people lost games everyone cant move down, so, just have to see. 23 people acutaly make up the vote, but 6 billion people give or take a billion, have the right to make up their own top 25 for fun.

I have to admitt I feel pressured on here for weeks, since i started on this site, to somehow - fall in line- with the way the vote goes.

the guy from hoopesville was even saying he tried to explain to me 3 times that i shouldnt put stockton in my list.

i just have to ignore the pressure and have the entertainment and enjoyment i want out of it.

it wopuld be like the ncaa contacting a sports fan at large cause they thought miami should be in the top 25.

come on man.

Nothing like misspelling the show's name while trying to indicate I said something I didn't. I have not explained to you three times that you shouldn't put stockton on your list. You are welcome to... but I have explained when you have asked why I haven't put them on my list. That is a big difference. You are welcome to your opinion as I have mine, but it doesn't mean I don't disagree with your opinion.

Back to the voters... 25 total... three from each of the eight regions, comprised of coaches, SIDs, and media members. I am one of those voters and I believe I represent the Mid-Atlantic Region (being one of the three from that region). Pat Coleman is the 25th vote and does not represent a specific region. And not one person votes only on teams from his region and such. However, most of those in their regions have that frame of reference, so you do get teams who get a few votes spread out across the country. I myself may "represent" the MA region, but I take a much more national look at things - though this year there have been a number of MA teams who have deserved Top 25 attention unlike many recent years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 26, 2014, 06:28:25 PM

i never asked why they werent on your list. i have never seen your list, so how could i comment or ask about it.

well, maybe it is my perception,....about being pressured

the media gets their say -- you have an internet tv show,.. and their are writers on d3hoops that get their say.

i read some of it, watch some of it,. very little commentary or opinion in d3 sports on the part of the media.

patrick ewing misses a finger roll in a game 7 of a conference finals the media is all over him with commetary

a kid in d3 misses a finger roll that could have won the game for his team,-- no commetary from the media in articles about the game

i think this is one of the differences i am experiencing.

instead of talking about the players, the teams, and the games, the media, as i perceive it, as you are part of the media, are directly adressing fans opinions ---- but dont cover the sport the way the big sports are covered
, and maybe thats by the nature of d3 in general

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 26, 2014, 08:54:10 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 26, 2014, 05:38:57 PM
oh, ok, people are picking stockton at any rate

Before the loss to Brooklyn, yes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pjunito on January 26, 2014, 09:34:37 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 26, 2014, 06:28:25 PM
i never asked why they werent on your list. i have never seen your list, so how could i comment or ask about it.

well, maybe it is my perception,....about being pressured

the media gets their say -- you have an internet tv show,.. and their are writers on d3hoops that get their say.

i read some of it, watch some of it,. very little commentary or opinion in d3 sports on the part of the media.

patrick ewing misses a finger roll in a game 7 of a conference finals the media is all over him with commetary

a kid in d3 misses a finger roll that could have won the game for his team,-- no commetary from the media in articles about the game

i think this is one of the differences i am experiencing.

instead of talking about the players, the teams, and the games, the media, as i perceive it, as you are part of the media, are directly adressing fans opinions ---- but dont cover the sport the way the big sports are covered
, and maybe thats by the nature of d3 in general

hp.. I enjoy reading your post. You are passionate about Stockton Basketball and that is a good thing. I think everyone in these forums are passionate about d3 basketball and the schools they root for. I have no issues with you putting anyone in your top 25 at all..

But, I don't think other people need to agree with your ballet just because you get to high five the starting forward from RS.

You and everyone else have the right to their opinions and in reality the only thing that will change anything (in top 25 or anywhere else) is what happens on the court. If Stockton keeps winning, their will get votes.. if they win their conference, they go to the NCAA tournament.. there, they can prove to anyone how good they are.

One other note... I think your idea of media coverage for D3 sports is a little off. The "media" job is to sell their product ( they do this by reporting stories that are attractive to their viewers or readers). I believe D3hoops does a great job of this, but they can't have a person covering every single men and women team in division 3, not possible. So, they draw on national stories and have fun with the boards.

I'm enjoying all of the post over the last 17 day... Keep them coming.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 26, 2014, 10:08:55 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 26, 2014, 10:37:16 AM
My guess at this weeks Top 25. Last week I had 23 of 25.

1)uw stevens point----------------18-0
2)cabrini----------------------------16-0
3)wpi---------------------------- ---16-1
4)wooster---------------------------15-2
5)amherst---------------------------15-2
6)washington u---------------------13-2
7)illinois wesleyan------------------15-3
8)wesley-----------------------------15-1
9)mary washington-----------------15-2
10)st norbert------------------------15-1
11)williams--------------------------14-3
12)uw whitewater------------------ 15-3
13)st thomas------------------------13-3
14)suny purchase-------------------14-0
15)albertus magnus-----------------15-1
16)bowdoin--------------------------15-1
17)augustana------------------------15-3
18)ohio wesleyan--------------------14-3
19)st marys md---------------------.12-4
20)messiah---------------------------14-2
21)wittenberg------------------------14-3
22)oglethorpe------------------------15-2
23)brockport state-------------------14-1
24)richard stockton------------------14-3
25)virginia wesleyan-----------------13-4

other teams considered:::
dubuque 16-1, texas-dallas 15-1, dickinson 16-1, whitworth 13-4, depauw 13-4

Just so we can see how hard it is to manage to get all but 2 or 3 teams here's my prediction for the new top 25... not my personal ranking (still have to work on that for the fan poll)

1) UW-Stevens Point
2) Cabrini
3) Wooster
4) WPI
5) Amherst
6) WashU
7) Illinois Wesleyan
8) St Norbert
9) Wesley
10) Williams
11) UW-Whitewater
12) St Thomas
13) SUNY-Purchase
14) Mary Washington
15) Wittenberg
16) Ohio Wesleyan
17) Albertus Magnus
18) Augustana
19) Bowdoin
20) Brockport St
21) Virginia Wesleyan
22) St Mary's
23) Whitworth
24) Texas-Dallas
25) Messiah

Compared to the last ranking I think Oglethorpe and Dubuque drop while Whitworth and UT-Dallas climb in. The next four teams (in alphabetical order) are Christopher Newport, Depauw, Dubuque, and Oglethorpe

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 09:13:26 AM

if the 3 voters from the atlantic region all put stockton number 1, that would be 75 points, enough to get them in the top 25 maybe.lol ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2014, 09:21:29 AM

I know at least one of the voters in that region... pretty sure he isn't going to do that ROFL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 09:38:29 AM

If Stockton had beat Brooklyn, didnt have the off game like that, and were 15-2. They would be 1 of 19 teams with at least 15 wins, and 1 of only 16 teams with at least 15 wins no more than 2 losses.

0 loss - 3
1 loss - 8
2 loss- 10
3 loss -16
4 loss - 45

I hope no one votes for a team with 5 losses or 6 losses this week.

Voters from the south will vote for Texas Dallas, from the west Whitworth, from the altantic Stockton

I see it now I think.

Like I said weeks ago, wveryone knows who the Top 20 teams are

It is 21-25 thats hard, and really goes all the way out to 51 teams by voters

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2014, 10:04:33 AM

If everyone knew who the Top 25 teams are... we wouldn't have had 51 teams getting votes last week.

And IF Stockton beat Brooklyn... we can't live in that world. You like to talk about ifs and assumptions of wins in the future...

And back to not knowing my Top 25... I post it each week on Monday night or Tuesday morning. It is in the "Daily Dose" on the front page and we tweet it out as well (@d3hoopsville). You do a lot of research for stuff here, but you don't seem to do a lot of research in general.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 10:10:01 AM

I put this up the other day, but I think it is worth revisiting

Below are the 17 teams that ranked #21 to #37 last vote, showing the teams they lost to in season

If Dubuque is dropping out, the question really becomes which team ranked between 26-37 last vote is the 25th best team in the nation.

They all have losses, and maybe it is Texas Dallas, with the one loss to Trinity.

But the voters know more than me.

However if voters are basing the votes for 21-25 on region and not on merit, than it becomes something harder to see or understand

Thats why I have been repeatedly told it is about conferences and how many wins they get in the NCAA tourney.

But that doesnt explain why ramapo was ranked well inside the top 25 last year at a time i guess.

anyone of those teams 26-37 last time could be inside the top 25 if they didnt have 1 or 2 close losses that they took.

so it is really close among them all i think

oglethorpe----------------------15-2 #21- I have at 22
lagrange 10-7 by 8, Centre 12-3 by 5

bowdoin-------------------------15-1 #22 I have at 16
williams 16-1 by 5

brockport state---------------14-1 #23 I have at 23
suny purchase 14-0 by 8

st marys md-------------------12-4 #24 I have at 19
cabrini 16-0 by 6, desales 10-7 by 10, mary washington 15-2 by 2, wesley 15-1 by 3,

dubuque-------------------------16-1 #25 I dropped out
loras 11-6 by 10

dickinson------------------------14-3 #26
juniata 12-5 by 2, randplf macon 13-4 by 6, franklin and marshal 12-5 by 9

mount union--------------------13-3 #27
bethany 14-4 by 18, rochester 7-8 by 7, capital 8-9 by 18

whitworth------------------------ 13-4 #28
colorado college 12-4 by 5, colorado college 12-4 by 16, uw stevens point 18-0 by 18,
george fox 12-5 by 13

texas-dallas---------------------15-1 #29
trinity 11-7 by 5

william paterson--------------14-4 #30
brooklyn 5-12 by 2, rutgers newark 13-5 by 2, ramapo 7-11 by 3,
richard stockton 14-3 by 24

stevenson------------------------13-4 #31
birmingham southern 9-6 by 1, oglethorpe 15-2 by 1, albright 10-7 by 7,
elizabethtown 7-10 by 2

richard stockton---------------14-3 #32
william paterson 14-4 by 2, montclair state 6-11 by 1, brooklyn 5-12 by 8

christopher newport-----------12-4 #33
emory 11-4 by 2, wesley 15-1 by 18, penn state harrisburg 6-11 by 3,
mary washington 15-2 by 11

augsuburg-------------------------11-6 #34
st thomas 13-3 by 18, gustavus adolphus 12-5 by 20,
concordia moorehead 8-9 by 9, uw whitewater 15-3 by 8,
st thomas 13-3 by 12, st olaf 13-4 by 19

depauw ---------------------------13-4 #35
washington u 14-2 by 11, wooster 15-2 by 16, rose hulman 13-4 by 3,
ohio wesleyan 14-3 by 11

colorado college-------------- 12-4 #36
northern colorado by 39, babson 13-4 by 3, schreiner 9-8 by 13,
trinity texas 11-7 by 15

rose-hulman---------------------13-4 #37
washington u 14-2 by 20, carroll 9-7 by 3, translyvania 6-11 by 3,
hanover 11-6 by 5

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2014, 10:22:52 AM

My comment about voting per region shouldn't be misconstrued into they are deciding teams that way over merit. I am indicating that teams are being selected based on their merit from those voters who may feel a team in their region has more merit than a team another voter feels strongly about in their region. They are all based on merit of some kind... not some conscious or unconscious rule that they have to have x amount of teams from their region.

And you put teams up that have x, y, z number of losses ... but comparing those records is not apples to apples.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on January 27, 2014, 10:30:23 AM

In your list of teams, look at the total records of the teams that each of them lost to (for example Oglethorpe has 2 losses to a combined 22-10 opponent record). When you do that you will see that there is 1, just 1 team who has lost to a combined record under .500. Richard Stockton (3 losses to a combined 25-27 record).

You have to consider who they lost to, not just the fact that they lost.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 27, 2014, 10:41:41 AM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 09:13:26 AM
if the 3 voters from the atlantic region all put stockton number 1, that would be 75 points, enough to get them in the top 25 maybe.lol ;D

They lost at home to Brooklyn lol not happening

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 27, 2014, 10:43:28 AM

And yes I think that was sarcasm from hp, but after all these posts idk to be honest lol

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 11:46:20 AM

would a one point win against a 7-9 team be better than a [point loss? UW stevens point had a close one this season too i think in vegas.
if i were to be really sacrcastic id say they shaved points-- but that would be just stupid and bitter.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 12:00:29 PM

I really did not want to know this much about the process. I did not join here, and come on here for the purpose of learning all this stuff.

But for many years I would come to the site to see the Top 25 list each week, to see if stockton got on it--- like magic

mystery of it.

now a lot of the mystery is gone

too complicated to figure of the records of who lost to who, then carry it out 3-4 removed times out , so on and so fourth

other factors are involved

like days of week games are played-- for example if a team is used to playing on wednesdays and saturdays, and they throw in a monday or sunday game, thats tuff

or you might get up for a great team and win, then be so beat up lose to a worse team

the best teams rise to the top through this

this is why everyone right now with 3 or less losses- 37 teams-- are all up for condieration in my book

0 loss (3)
uw stevens point-------------18-0 #1
cabrini----------------------- 16-0 #3
suny purchase----------------14-0 #14

1 loss (8)
wpi------------------------------16-1 #5
st norbert-----------------------15-1 #11
wesley--------------------------15-1 #12
albertus magnus---------------15-1 #20
bowdoin------------------------15-1 #22
brockport state-----------------14-1 #23
dubuque------------------------16-1 #25
texas-dallas---------------------15-1 #29

2 loss (10)
wooster--------------------------15-2 #2
amherst--------------------------15-2 #6
washington u--------------------14-2 #8
mary washington----------------15-2 #15
messiah-------------------------14-2 #17
oglethorpe----------------------15-2 #21
st vincent-----------------------15-2 #38
staten island--------------------15-2 # 46
genesco state-------------------13-2 #49
husson--------------------------14-2 no votes

3 loss (16)
illinois wesleyan----------------15-3 #4
uw whitewater---------------- -15-3 #7
williams-------------------------14-3 #9
st thomas---------------------- 13-3 #10
augustana----------------------15-3 #13
wittenberg----------------------14-3 #18
ohio wesleyan------------------14-3 #19
dickinson------------------------14-3 #26
mount union--------------------13-3 #27
richard stockton----------------14-3 #32
scranton-------------------------14-3 #51
penn state behrend-------------14-3 no votes
hilbert----------------------------14-3 no votes
centre--------------------------- 13-3 no votes
vassar----------------------------13-3 no votes
plattsburg state------------------13-3 no votes

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 27, 2014, 12:04:27 PM

I just ran all the numbers, and it turns out that Richard Stockton is the best team in D3. Also, it's looking like Rust will end up with all of the All-Americans.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 27, 2014, 12:10:46 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 27, 2014, 12:04:27 PM
I just ran all the numbers, and it turns out that Richard Stockton is the best team in D3. Also, it's looking like Rust will end up with all of the All-Americans.

Oh, you know it's true!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 27, 2014, 12:11:56 PM

Quote from: sac on January 25, 2014, 10:26:53 PM
Quote from: smedindy on January 25, 2014, 06:33:25 PM
Quote from: sac on January 24, 2014, 07:26:49 PM
Quote from: smedindy on January 24, 2014, 06:57:40 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 24, 2014, 07:48:01 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 23, 2014, 11:50:19 PM

I know they've lost seven games already, but I would be absolutely terrified to play Mary Hardin-Baylor right now. Best seven loss team in d3, I think.
I believe that the established precedent on this board is that, if you are going to make such a statement, you must follow it up with detailed statistics. Please begin with a list of all teams in D3 with 7 losses, and your analysis of the quality of those losses. You can then move on to telling us why MHB deserves to be considered the best of that group. (And perhaps even better than some of the six- and five-loss teams. We'll need a list of those, too.) If, at some point, you feel obliged to post increasingly incoherent comments, and/or post in all caps, we would certainly understand.

Using Massey, here are the best X loss teams in the D-3 Universe:

0 - UW - SP
1 - Wooster
2 - Illinois Wesleyan
3 - UW - Whitewater
4 - Randolph Macon
5 - Wilmington
6 - Wheaton (IL)
7 - Hope
8 - Schreiner
9 - Ohio Northern
10 - Salisbury St.
11- Heidelberg
12 - Pacific Luthern
13 - Washington (MD)
14 - Rust
15 - North Park
16 - D'Youville
17 - UC Santa Cruz

YMMV. Consult your dealer for options and accessories. If symptoms persist, treat with Wild Turkey and hammer.

Hope has 6 losses, Massey is incorrectly counting their exhibition loss to Grand Valley State.

Not incorrect in Massey's universe, since it's a game that counted for GVSU.

It did not count for GVSU either, clearly marked as exhibition
http://www.gvsulakers.com/sports/m-baskbl/sched/grva-m-baskbl-sched.html

So much for that. I'll go dig a hole and sit in it now...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 12:15:38 PM

If Stockton losses to TCNJ wednesday, i'll eat my socks in a stew. ok? And that could be a tricky game on the road, having just got beat up in the william paterson game.

If you watched the william paterson-stockton game on saturday---- players from both teams were on the floor almost every possession-- diving, falling backwards, slipping on the floor-- giving it all they had

Stockton proved they are the tuffer team by beating them by 24 points

thats one aspect the voters fail to take into consideration - how tuff the njac plays its games inside and on the run

this isnt the world of grinnell if you will

it is a tuff conference

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 27, 2014, 12:20:35 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 12:15:38 PM
If Stockton losses to TCNJ wednesday, i'll eat my socks in a stew. ok? And that could be a tricky game on the road, having just got beat up in the william paterson game.

If you watched the william paterson-stockton game on saturday---- players from both teams were on the floor almost every possession-- diving, falling backwards, slipping on the floor-- giving it all they had

Stockton proved they are the tuffer team by beating them by 24 points

thats one aspect the voters fail to take into consideration - how tuff the njac plays its games inside and on the run

this isnt the world of grinnell if you will

it is a tuff conference

Almost every conference is internally tough - since teams know each other inside and out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 27, 2014, 12:24:54 PM

Quote from: sac on January 25, 2014, 10:26:53 PM
Quote from: smedindy on January 25, 2014, 06:33:25 PM
Quote from: sac on January 24, 2014, 07:26:49 PM
Quote from: smedindy on January 24, 2014, 06:57:40 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 24, 2014, 07:48:01 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 23, 2014, 11:50:19 PM

I know they've lost seven games already, but I would be absolutely terrified to play Mary Hardin-Baylor right now. Best seven loss team in d3, I think.
I believe that the established precedent on this board is that, if you are going to make such a statement, you must follow it up with detailed statistics. Please begin with a list of all teams in D3 with 7 losses, and your analysis of the quality of those losses. You can then move on to telling us why MHB deserves to be considered the best of that group. (And perhaps even better than some of the six- and five-loss teams. We'll need a list of those, too.) If, at some point, you feel obliged to post increasingly incoherent comments, and/or post in all caps, we would certainly understand.

Using Massey, here are the best X loss teams in the D-3 Universe:

0 - UW - SP
1 - Wooster
2 - Illinois Wesleyan
3 - UW - Whitewater
4 - Randolph Macon
5 - Wilmington
6 - Wheaton (IL)
7 - Hope
8 - Schreiner
9 - Ohio Northern
10 - Salisbury St.
11- Heidelberg
12 - Pacific Luthern
13 - Washington (MD)
14 - Rust
15 - North Park
16 - D'Youville
17 - UC Santa Cruz

YMMV. Consult your dealer for options and accessories. If symptoms persist, treat with Wild Turkey and hammer.

Hope has 6 losses, Massey is incorrectly counting their exhibition loss to Grand Valley State.

Not incorrect in Massey's universe, since it's a game that counted for GVSU.

It did not count for GVSU either, clearly marked as exhibition
http://www.gvsulakers.com/sports/m-baskbl/sched/grva-m-baskbl-sched.html

Have you emailed him about this? He's usually very quick to correct errors like this.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 12:27:03 PM

ii'll agree withy that, but the games i have watched this year, the njac teams take the worse physical abuse, a lot of it self imposed,

reminds of something i saw on the larry bird video--- someone told bird if he keeps diving for balls and moping the floor with his body, he wont be physicaly able to play in a few years anymore.

the njac only plays run and gun when teams give it to them.

for the most part the games can be a blood bath physicaly

and this stockton team plays defense and rebounds like that,

but another point is i think they only committed 3 fouls the entire 2nd half against william paterson

so during that 4-5 days off cause of the snow in between, the coach coached them up to play tuff, but not to foul william paterson

this takes extreme discipline, and the players pulled it off

stockton is a top 25 team in reality

just needs more ti9me to prove it i guess

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 27, 2014, 12:35:29 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 27, 2014, 12:04:27 PM
I just ran all the numbers, and it turns out that Richard Stockton is the best team in D3. Also, it's looking like Rust will end up with all of the All-Americans.

There has to be a slight error there Rust should only have 4 All-Americans.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 12:44:55 PM

I guess the only way Stockton can prove it would be to win out the regular season, get to 22-3, then win the NJAC tourney ( I think the NJAC has a bye, not every team gets in) so 2 more wins for 24-3, then go ionto the NCAA tourney and win a couple games.

suny purchase is the front runner in the region i guess?

then this is what i am more interested in knowing.......

i know there are 8 regions, but teams must cross over regions in the first 2 rounds of the tourney no

how many sites are there for the first 2 rounds , 8?

a site for each of the 8 regions?

can someone explain how that works?

i am more interested in learning that than i am about the top 25 voting works

in other words, stockton would need to be no lower than a 4 seed in the national bracket to get a favorable game i think

but i assume they do it like division 1 and even out the brackets as certain areas of the nation are top loaded with top teams?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 27, 2014, 12:55:10 PM

I'm glad you are finally talking about something else besides just RS. Expand your knowledge, grasshopper!

D3 tourney is nothing like D1. No seeding, per say. They don't really even out the brackets. There is a mileage rule they try to go by. The less flights the better.

Others can fill you in more. Typing on my phone sucks (yes, real world problem!)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 01:20:36 PM

Stocktons 2009 championship run --- not exactly a whos who of D3

unless my memory is wrong, the first 2 games were at stockton, maybe the first 4

Rensselaer is way up by Albany, at least a 5 hour to 6 hour drive from Galloway down by AC

I think if Stockton, or whoever comes out of the NJAC or the Atlantic region, gets favorable games, anyone can make a run at the title--- going from what happened in 2009

no?

Stockton 79, Rensselaer 65
Stockton 95, Gwynedd-Mercy 88
Stockton 71, St. Lawrence 68
Stockton 103, Farmingdale State 60
Stockton 62, Franklin & Marshall 58
Washington-St. Louis 61, Stockton 52

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 27, 2014, 01:20:55 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 12:44:55 PM
I guess the only way Stockton can prove it would be to win out the regular season, get to 22-3, then win the NJAC tourney ( I think the NJAC has a bye, not every team gets in) so 2 more wins for 24-3, then go ionto the NCAA tourney and win a couple games.

This is what people have been saying, yes.

In fact...

Quote from: John Gleich on January 16, 2014, 05:20:01 PM
That brings me to my final point.

4) Similar to #1, it's just a poll. If you think you should be ranked, but you're not, then win the games on your schedule and play into a ranking. That's the only way that any team will become ranked. Prove that you're one of the top 6% in the land.

When it gets down to it, talk is cheap. Just go out and play and prove who is the better team. If it's you, great. If it isn't you, learn from it, get better, and hope to have a chance at seeing that team (or better teams) down the line... and do what you need to do to win.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 01:30:44 PM

i'll agree with that,..... right now there are 37 teams with no more than 3 losses going into todays games

anyone of those teams, but lets take the bubble teams- could win out, it doesnt have to be stockton, it could be anyone

centre can win out for example

i just am rooting for stockton cause i spent 4 years there and graduated from there

but i like to root for any under dog in the end from the njac or atlantic region

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 27, 2014, 01:31:04 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 01:20:36 PM
Stocktons 2009 championship run --- not exactly a whos who of D3

unless my memory is wrong, the first 2 games were at stockton, maybe the first 4

Rensselaer is way up by Albany, at least a 5 hour to 6 hour drive from Galloway down by AC

I think if Stockton, or whoever comes out of the NJAC or the Atlantic region, gets favorable games, anyone can make a run at the title--- going from what happened in 2009

no?

Stockton 79, Rensselaer 65
Stockton 95, Gwynedd-Mercy 88
Stockton 71, St. Lawrence 68
Stockton 103, Farmingdale State 60
Stockton 62, Franklin & Marshall 58
Washington-St. Louis 61, Stockton 52

With all due respect... nobody cares about 2009 anymore.

UWSP isn't ranked #1 because of the 2010, 2005, and 2004 national championships (even though Tyler Tillema was on the 2010 team).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 01:38:09 PM

since you brought that up, uwsp has made the ncaa tourney how many times 13?

so has stockton

1987- final 4, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1996, 1997, 1999, 2008, 2009 finals, 2011

of those 13 appearances they were only ousted in the first round 3 times-- and have had the same head coach the entire time to this day -- a head coach with the most wins in the njac history

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 27, 2014, 01:42:48 PM

For info about how the D3 tournament works, look here:

http://d3hoops.com/interactive/faq/ncaatournament

In short:

62 teams, which come from:

Pool A: 42 bids - 41 conference tournament winners (plus UAA reg season champ)
Pool B: 1 bid - best team from conferences who don't get a Pool A bid
Pool C: 19 bids - 19 at-large teams

So, unless you're one of the 42 who win their conference's automatic bid, you've got to be selected
by the national committee.

How are teams selected? Glad you asked. Read the FAQ:

Quote
What does the NCAA use to select and seed teams into the tournament?

These are the selection (and seeding) criteria:

The following primary criteria (not in priority order) will be reviewed:
• Win-loss percentage against regional opponents.
• Strength-of-schedule (only contests versus regional competition).
- Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OWP) (weighted 2/3).
- Opponents' Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OOWP) (weighted 1/3).
- Add OWP and OOWP to give total strength of schedule
- See more info on men's SOS below
• In-region head-to-head competition.
• In-region results versus common regional opponents.
• In-region results versus regionally ranked teams.
Note:
• Once an opponent is listed in a regional ranking, it is considered ranked throughout the process. (Once ranked, always ranked.)
• Conference postseason contests are included.
• Contests versus provisional and reclassifying members in their third and fourth years shall count in the primary criteria. Provisional and reclassifying members shall remain ineligible for rankings and selection.

If the evaluation of the primary criteria does not result in a decision by the committee, the following secondary criteria (for ranking and selections) will be evaluated:
• Out-of-region head-to-head competition.
• Overall Division III win-loss percentage.
• Results versus common non Division III opponents.
• Results versus all Division III ranked teams.
• Overall win-loss percentage.
• Results versus all common opponents.
• Overall DIII Strength of Schedule.
Additionally, input is provided by regional advisory committees for consideration by the Division III men's and women's basketball committees. In order to be considered for selection for Pools B or C, an institution must play at least 50 percent of its competition against Division III in-region opponents.

Coaches' polls and/or any other outside polls or rankings are not used as a selection criterion by the basketball committee for selection purposes.

Here's the end all with it.

I think that part of the reason why you want Richard Stockton to be ranked is that you believe that their ranking will in some way affect their selection in the NCAA tournament. This is not true.

The D3hoops.com Top 25 poll isn't one of the criteria.

So, even though Amherst was the #2 ranked team going into the tournament, it didn't have anything to do with their selection. Their selection was because they won the NESCAC conference tournament.

Same with their Championship opponent, Mary Hardin-Baylor. Though they were receiving votes in the final regular season poll (they recieved 9 poll points, 5th most in the ORV category), they got into the tournament by winning their conference tournament as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 27, 2014, 01:43:17 PM

By my count, UW-Stevens Point has been in the NCAA tournament 12 times with record of 28-9 and three national championships (2004, 2006 and 2010).

Richard Stockton has been in the NCAA tournament 13 times with a record of 22-15 and two Final Four appearances (1987 when they were called Stockton State and 2009).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 27, 2014, 01:45:54 PM

The tournament will take care of any poll issues. Win or go home.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 01:48:32 PM

i guess they played 2 conselation games ? otherwise 15 losses in 13 appearances doesnt make any sense.

do they still do that? have conselation games in the first 2 rounds for the gyms/arenas hosting?

considering there are 416 teams in D3 basketball, Stockton has done fairly well

not a Stevens Point, but well, for what they are, no?

i said a few weeks ago or so, it would take three thousand two hundred years before every D3 team makes a final 4, Stocktons already done it twice

understand where I am coming from

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 27, 2014, 02:05:42 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 01:38:09 PM
since you brought that up, uwsp has made the ncaa tourney how many times 13?

so has stockton

1987- final 4, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1996, 1997, 1999, 2008, 2009 finals, 2011

of those 13 appearances they were only ousted in the first round 3 times-- and have had the same head coach the entire time to this day -- a head coach with the most wins in the njac history

The WIAC as a conference came to be called the WIAC starting in 1997, when they combined the men's conference, the WSUC (Wisconsin State University Conference) and the WWIAC (Wisconsin Women's Intercollegiate Athletic Conference) to become the WIAC and jump from the NAIA to NCAA DIII.

Prior to 1997, individual programs had dual membership in NAIA and NCAA D-III (most notably Whitewater and Platteville, who won national championships in 84 & 89, and 91 & 95, respectively, before the conference switched over.

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 01:48:32 PM
i guess they played 2 conselation games ? otherwise 15 losses in 13 appearances doesnt make any sense.

Yes, back in the 80's (and I don't know when they switched it), 4 teams would go to a regional for the first two rounds. There would be 2 games... and winners would take on winners, losers would take on losers. So, it would be possible to make it to a regional and come home with 2 losses.

Quotedo they still do that? have conselation games in the first 2 rounds for the gyms/arenas hosting?

Nope, not since the 80's (ish). Ask Gregory Sager, he likely knows.

Quote
considering there are 416 teams in D3 basketball, Stockton has done fairly well

Absolutely. As has been said here many times, the NJAC has historically been a power conference. But since Stockton's run in 2009, they haven't won a single NCAA tournament game.

Quote
not a Stevens Point, but well, for what they are, no?

Well, there's only one Stevens Point, what can I say?

Quote
i said a few weeks ago or so, it would three thousand two hundred years before every D3 team makes a final 4, Stocktons already done it twice

undferstand where I am coming from

The takeaway here is, though, that past successes aren't a determining factor in future results, especially when you're going between seasons. And even within a season, any team *COULD* lose to any other team, at any time.

As they say, that's why ya play the games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 02:08:52 PM

Thats when I went to Stockton, when they were called Stockton State, September of 84 to May of 88. Back than TCNJ was Trenton State and a great team, Rowan was Glassboro, New Jersey City was Jersey City State College and also a dominant team.

To this day, if you look at the web site that has the computer rankings, they list Jersey City with zero stats on it for the season, no wins, no losses, nothing, no ranking, ....

I emailed the website to inform them of this flaw, that they are now known as New Jersey City, months ago,... have failed to fix it -- cause that actualy would affect the computer math, even if slightly, no?

The same sight also has mixed up Alfred with Alfred State, .. still not fixed - which is a major flaw cause Alfred is pretty good, and Alfred State cant win a game

but anyway

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 02:28:03 PM

Here is Stocktons post season - post conference tourney, post season records
Stockton has had the same head coach since the start of of the 85/86 season, except for 94/95 when he had a medical issue

my poin t, if you look at it, is that if Stockton is close, they deserve the benefit of the doubt, because of the head coach being the common demoninator

they dont get ousted in first rounds often

POSTSEASON RESULTS
1984 ECAC Tournament
Moravian 59, Stockton 57

1986 ECAC Tournament
Stony Brook 75, Stockton 54

1987 NCAA Tournament
Stockton 67, Roanoke 64
Stockton 88, Cal St.-Stanislaus 80
Stockton 68, Widener 65 (OT)
Clark 77, Stockton 70
Wittenberg 82, Stockton 80 (OT)

1988 NCAA Tournament
Emory & Henry 72, Stockton 59
Stockton 72, Bridgewater 70

1989 NCAA Tournament
Shenendoah 74, Stockton 64

1990 NCAA Tournament
Stockton 100, Hunter 84
Stockton 73, Jersey City St. 71
Washington 80, Stockton 79
Johns Hopkins 78, Stockton 74

1991 ECAC Tournament
Stockton 62, Manhattanville 61
Stockton 73, Jersey City St. 70
Medgar Evers 103, Stockton 94

1992 NCAA Tournament
Kean 65, Stockton 60

1993 NCAA Tournament
Stockton 106, Catholic 91
Rowan 84, Stockton 61

1994 NCAA Tournament
Stockton 74, NJIT 69
Albany 60, Stockton 54

1995 ECAC Tournament
Stockton 89, FDU-Madison 69
Stockton 78, New Paltz 57
Kean 92, Stockton 71

1996 NCAA Tournament
Stockton 80, Mt. St. Vincent 54
Stockton 81, NYU 77 (OT)
Stockton 95, Anna Maria 88
Rowan 98, Stockton 70

1997 NCAA Tournament
Stockton 78, York 71
Stockton 64, William Paterson 60
Williams 85, Stockton 61
Stockton 62, New Jersey City 56
Stockton 60, Wilkes 50
William Paterson 50, Stockton 49

2000 ECAC Tournament
Stockton 77, Staten Island 68
Stockton 77, Vassar 48
Montclair State 78, Stockton 75 (OT)

2001 ECAC Tournament
Stockton 60, Baruch 58
New Jersey City 68, Stockton 63

2002 ECAC Tournament
Stockton 72, Lehman 70
Ramapo 81, Stockton 78

2003 ECAC Tournament
Manhattanville 67, Stockton 64

2004 ECAC Tournament
Stockton 81, Mt. St. Mary (NY) 79 (OT)
NYU 70, Stockton 66

2005 ECAC Tournament
Stockton 79, Manhattanville 78
Stockton 63, Rutgers-Newark 56
Kean 66, Stockton 57

2006 ECAC Tournament
Stockton 80, Lehman 66
New Jersey City 73, Stockton 56

2007 ECAC Tournament
Stockton 78, Old Westbury 73
Stockton 80, New Jersey City 69
NYU 58, Stockton 55

2008 NCAA Tournament
Stockton 84, Immaculata 75 (OT)
Stockton 78, Rhode Island College 70
Amherst 85, Stockton 77

2009 NCAA Tournament
Stockton 79, Rensselaer 65
Stockton 95, Gwynedd-Mercy 88
Stockton 71, St. Lawrence 68
Stockton 103, Farmingdale State 60
Stockton 62, Franklin & Marshall 58
Washington-St. Louis 61, Stockton 52

2010 NCAA Tournament
Virginia Wesleyan 85, Stockton 82

2011 ECAC Tournament
Mount St. Mary (NY) 85, Stockton 80

2012 ECAC Tournament
Stockton 85, Medgar Evers 73
Brooklyn 57, Stockton 53

2013 ECAC Tournament
Stockton 79, Sage 69
Stockton 67, John Jay 53
Old Westbury 74, Stockton 73

NCAA Tournament: 22-15 (.595)
ECAC Tournament: 17-15 (.531)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 27, 2014, 02:36:02 PM

Ok, is it just me or can we move a lot of this Stockton stuff to the NJAC board? I mean, I can appreciate fandom but I want to talk about more of the D3 Universe here....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 02:39:43 PM

its ok, i had to get it out, because the vote is coming out tonight. I need Stockton to be in the Top 30.

smed-- what we were talking about was/is the NCAA tourney and how regions are set up for home games , for favorible game, and things like this, within the regions

but i tie it into the Top 25,. even though someone told me one has nothing to do with the other

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 27, 2014, 02:43:31 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 02:39:43 PM
its ok, i had to get it out, because the vote is coming out tonight. I need Stockton to be in the Top 30.

Why?

Quote
but i tie it into the Top 25,. even though someone told me one has nothing to do with the other

This is 100% correct.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 02:48:30 PM

theres the catch 22 isnt it?? is past post season ncaa tourney results dont matter, or as i have been whipped by people telling me , have nothing to do with the top 25

why are other people on here stating the exact opposite,... fully stating and whiping me, saying that past post season results DO MEAN SOMETHING , as far as the rankings go

see my point

catch 22

they want it both ways

so i had to put up stocktons record,.. and history , basically all under the same head colach for the past 30 years

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 02:51:34 PM

Ranking does not lead to postseason seeding.
Postseason success (or more importantly, lack of utter postseason debacles) help in future ranking.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 03:02:21 PM

well, there are 19 at large bids, the people that pick those, dont consider the rankings, reprase is, the actualy rankings, make 50 teams got votes after all the conference tourneys were done, by default the rankings, where you actualy are in wins-losses, wouldnt matter?

so now we come full circle to past - post season records

Stockton was the runner up last year in the ECAC,... which could be considered as the D3 version of the NIT,...

a precursor if you will, for the NCAA for the next season

all i am saying is, i have made an arguement for the benefit of the doubt, about stockton,....

but no one on here sinc e i have been on, has made an argument for any other bubble team

i guess for now i am the SALT that goes into the drink

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 27, 2014, 03:08:03 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 02:48:30 PM
theres the catch 22 isnt it?? is past post season ncaa tourney results dont matter, or as i have been whipped by people telling me , have nothing to do with the top 25

why are other people on here stating the exact opposite,... fully stating and whiping me, saying that past post season results DO MEAN SOMETHING , as far as the rankings go

see my point

catch 22

they want it both ways

so i had to put up stocktons record,.. and history , basically all under the same head colach for the past 30 years

There's no Catch 22 (however, the book is a fun read if you haven't read it).

The d3hoops.com Top 25 has no bearing whatsoever on the selection of teams for the NCAA tournament. The coach doesn't matter. Who the players are (i.e. even if they do have awesome names like Bloochy Magliore did last year for Staten Island) doesn't matter.

The only things that matter are:

1) If you win your conference's automatic bid. For the NJAC, that means winning the conference tournament.

2) If you don't win the conference tournament, then you have to get an at-large bid, based on the criteria that I posted below:

• Win-loss percentage against regional opponents.
• Strength-of-schedule (only contests versus regional competition).
• In-region head-to-head competition.
• In-region results versus common regional opponents.
• In-region results versus regionally ranked teams.

That's it. Fin. End of story.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 03:08:52 PM

Runner-up in one region of the ECAC tournament. There are FOUR ECAC tournaments, so it's like being No. 8 among East Coast non-NESCAC teams that didn't make the tournament. ECAC tournament isn't what it used to be.

No, nobody else has made a hundred posts arguing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 03:11:17 PM

But past past post season matters in top 25 rankings, ... i had had that drilled into my head on this website

when is the last time a team ranked in the Top 25 just before tourney selection didnt get in the ncaa tourney?

see my point?
never probably

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 27, 2014, 03:13:01 PM

bump

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	622	UW-Stevens Point	18-0	won at UW-Platteville, 76-61; won at UW-La Crosse, 91-72
#2	594	Wooster	15-2	def. Allegheny, 73-68; LOST at #35 DePauw, 74-78
#3	581	Cabrini	16-0	def. Marywood, 82-68; def. Neumann, 94-68; won at Keystone, 94-84
#4	513	Illinois Wesleyan	15-3	def. North Central (Ill.), 72-57; LOST at T#44 Carthage, 73-80
#5	501	WPI	16-1	def. Clark, 81-69; won at Wheaton (Mass.), 83-69
#6	494	Amherst	15-2	won at #9 Williams, 82-70; won at Trinity (Conn.), 67-61
#7	460	UW-Whitewater	15-3	LOST at UW-La Crosse, 83-88; won at UW-River Falls, 62-42
#8	447	Washington U.	14-2	won at Case Western Reserve, 77-64; won at Carnegie Mellon, 94-81
#9	424	Williams	14-3	LOST to #6 Amherst, 70-82; def. Hamilton, 88-68
#10	395	St. Thomas	13-3	LOST at St. John's, 69-77; def. #34 Augsburg, 82-70
#11	373	St. Norbert	15-1	won at Beloit, 76-56; def. Cornell, 84-62
#12	331	Wesley	15-1	won at Penn State-Harrisburg, 66-63; won at Southern Virginia, 84-65
#13	329	Augustana	15-3	def. Millikin, 72-57; LOST at Elmhurst, 74-83
#14	219	SUNY-Purchase	14-0	~~01/21 at Yeshiva~~ postponed; won at Sage, 76-73; def. St. Joseph's (L.I.), 67-63
#15	211	Mary Washington	15-2	def. Southern Virginia, 113-79; won at York (Pa.), 63-57
#16	182	Virginia Wesleyan	13-4	LOST at T#44 Randolph-Macon, 62-78; def. Washington and Lee, 85-54
#17	178	Messiah	14-2	won at Widener, 95-87; LOST at Hood, 77-78
#18	170	Wittenberg	14-3	won at Kenyon, 66-54; won at Allegheny, 61-43
#19	162	Ohio Wesleyan	14-3	def. Oberlin, 81-72; def. Denison, 83-75
#20	159	Albertus Magnus	15-1	def. Rivier, 73-52; def. Elms, 113-97; won at Lasell, 101-91
#21	149	Oglethorpe	15-2	LOST to Centre, 47-52; def. Sewanee, 82-69
#22	123	Bowdoin	15-1	def. Maine-Presque Isle, 82-51; def. Colby, 64-59
#23	78	Brockport State	14-1	def. Buffalo State, 84-69; won at Oneonta State, 81-79; won at New Paltz State, 78-69
#24	74	St. Mary's (Md.)	12-4	~~01/22 vs. #33 Christopher Newport~~ postponed; won at Marymount, 52-49
#25	40	Dubuque	16-1	won at Coe, 66-56; LOST at Loras, 66-76

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	38	Dickinson	14-3	LOST at Franklin and Marshall, 58-67; won at Swarthmore, 80-52
#27	33	Mount Union	13-3	LOST at Capital, 70-88; won at Muskingum, 73-50
#28	27	Whitworth	13-4	won at Whitman, 84-80; def. Lewis and Clark, 81-65
#29	24	Texas-Dallas	15-1	won at University of the Ozarks, 84-63; def. University of the Ozarks, 97-76; def. Texas-Tyler, 76-72
#30	21	William Paterson	14-4	won at John Jay, 91-71; def. TCNJ, 83-56; LOST at T#31 Richard Stockton, 57-81
T#31	20	Stevenson	13-4	LOST at Elizabethtown, 63-65; def. Arcadia, 80-78
T#31	20	Richard Stockton	14-3	LOST to Brooklyn, 55-63; def. #30 William Paterson, 81-57
#33	18	Christopher Newport	12-4	~~01/22 at #24 St. Mary's (Md.)~~ postponed; won at Frostburg State, 84-41
#34	16	Augsburg	11-6	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 97-60; LOST at #10 St. Thomas, 70-82; LOST at St. Olaf, 63-82
#35	15	DePauw	13-4	won at Wabash, 70-60; def. #2 Wooster, 78-74
T#36	11	Colorado College	12-4	won at Johnson & Wales (CO), 75-65; def. Southwestern, 74-57; LOST to Trinity (Texas), 48-63
T#36	11	Rose-Hulman	13-4	LOST at Hanover, 62-67; def. Transylvania, 66-38
#38	10	St. Vincent	15-2	def. Waynesburg, 87-68
#39	9	Springfield	13-4	won at Coast Guard, 73-60; def. Clark, 94-76
#40	8	Calvin	13-4	def. Trine, 71-49; won at Olivet, 95-53
#41	7	Babson	13-4	def. #43 MIT, 65-47; def. Coast Guard, 76-56
#42	6	Emory	12-4	won at New York University, 86-82; won at Brandeis, 94-88
#43	5	MIT	12-4	LOST at #41 Babson, 47-65; def. Emerson, 71-66
T#44	3	Randolph-Macon	13-4	def. #16 Virginia Wesleyan, 78-62; won at Roanoke, 70-57
T#44	3	Hampden-Sydney	10-7	LOST at Guilford, 72-74; LOST at Randolph, 73-76
T#44	3	Staten Island	15-2	def. Kean, 83-72; def. York (N.Y.), 80-75; def. Brooklyn, 86-58
T#44	3	Carthage	12-6	LOST at Elmhurst, 70-73; def. #4 Illinois Wesleyan, 80-73
#48	2	Eastern Connecticut	13-4	def. Keene State, 84-53; won at Rhode Island College, 73-58
T#49	1	Geneseo State	13-2	def. Fredonia State, 79-63; won at New Paltz State, 92-82; won at Oneonta State, 83-69
T#49	1	Marietta	13-4	def. Capital, 82-72; won at Wilmington, 78-76
T#49	1	Scranton	14-3	won at Drew, 82-72; def. Catholic, 92-82

Other teams to watch (as suggested by posters on this board)

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
---	---	Penn State-Behrend	14-3	won at Hilbert, 55-52; def. Pitt-Bradford, 69-57; LOST at Pitt-Greensburg, 61-65
---	---	Plattsburgh State	13-3	def. Potsdam State, 73-58; won at Buffalo State, 87-83; won at Fredonia State, 77-42

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 27, 2014, 03:15:17 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 03:02:21 PM
well, there are 19 at large bids, the people that pick those, dont consider the rankings, reprase is, the actualy rankings, make 50 teams got votes after all the conference tourneys were done, by default the rankings, where you actualy are in wins-losses, wouldnt matter?

~~so now we come full circle to past - post season records~~
~~Stockton was the runner up last year in the ECAC,... which could be considered as the D3 version of the NIT,...~~
~~a precursor if you will, for the NCAA for the next season~~
~~all i am saying is, i have made an arguement for the benefit of the doubt, about stockton,....~~
~~but no one on here sinc e i have been on, has made an argument for any other bubble team~~
~~i guess for now i am the SALT that goes into the drink~~

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 03:11:17 PM
But past past post season matters in top 25 rankings, ... i had had that drilled into my head on this website

when is the last time a team ranked in the Top 25 just before tourney selection didnt get in the ncaa tourney?

see my point?
never probably

No.

Past season success has ZERO. Nothing. Zilch. to do with selection for this year. It matters as much as it would matter if your girlfriend was Miss America.

Ranking in the d3hoops.com Top 25 has nothing to do with selection. Nothing.

Read the link that I posted. You will learn about the actual process.

http://d3hoops.com/interactive/faq/ncaatournament

The wins and losses DO matter... but they're not the be all, end all in selection.

I'm not going to reply to another post of yours until you read what's on that link. I suggest everyone else do the same.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on January 27, 2014, 03:16:39 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 27, 2014, 02:36:02 PM
Ok, is it just me or can we move a lot of this Stockton stuff to the NJAC board? I mean, I can appreciate fandom but I want to talk about more of the D3 Universe here....

Hardly anyone on the NJAC board ;D and, I haven't seen some of you guys work this hard other than regional rankings prior tournament ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 03:16:49 PM

going into todays games

85 team list
(categories- 0 loss, 1 loss, 2 loss, 3 loss, 4+ loss and votes, 4 loss no votes)

0 loss (3)
uw stevens point-------------18-0 #1
cabrini----------------------------16-0 #3
suny purchase----------------14-0 #14

1 loss (8)
wpi--------------------------------16-1 #5
st norbert-----------------------15-1 #11
wesley---------------------------15-1 #12
albertus magnus-------------15-1 #20
bowdoin-------------------------15-1 #22
brockport state---------------14-1 #23
dubuque------------------------16-1 #25
texas-dallas-------------------15-1 #29

2 loss (10)
wooster--------------------------15-2 #2
amherst-------------------------15-2 #6
washington u------------------14-2 #8
mary washington-------------15-2 #15
messiah-------------------------14-2 #17
oglethorpe----------------------15-2 #21
st vincent-----------------------15-2 #38
staten island-------------------15-2 # 46
genesco state----------------13-2 #49
husson--------------------------14-2 no votes

3 loss (16)
illinois wesleyan---------------15-3 #4
uw whitewater---------------- -15-3 #7
williams---------------------------14-3 #9
st thomas----------------------- 13-3 #10
augustana-----------------------15-3 #13
wittenberg-----------------------14-3 #18
ohio wesleyan-----------------14-3 #19
dickinson------------------------14-3 #26
mount union--------------------13-3 #27
richard stockton---------------14-3 #32
scranton-------------------------14-3 #51
penn state behrend----------14-3 no votes
hilbert-----------------------------14-3 no votes
centre---------------------------- 13-3 no votes
vassar-----------------------------13-3 no votes
plattsburg state----------------13-3 no votes

others receiving votes last vote (20)
virginia wesleyan---------------13-4 #16
st marys md--------------------.12-4 #24
whitworth------------------------ -13-4 #28
william paterson----------------14-4 #30
stevenson------------------------13-4 #31
christopher newport-----------12-4 #33
auguburg-------------------------11-6 #34
depauw ---------------------------13-4 #35
colorado college-------------- 12-4 #36
rose-hulman---------------------13-4 #37
springfield------------------------13-4 #39
calvin-------------------------------13-4 #40
babson--------------------------- 13-4 #41
emory------------------------------12-4 #42
mit-----------------------------------12-4 #43
randolph macon----------------13-4 #44
hampden - sydney------------10-7 #45
carthage---------------------------12-6 #47
eastern conneticut-------------13-4 #48
marietta----------------------------13-4 #50

The additional 4 loss teams (28)
concordia texas------------13-4
marian-------------- ----------14-4
lakeland---------------------- 14-4
milwalkie engineering--- 14-4
mcdaniel--------------------- 13-4
sunyit------------------------- 10-4
nicols------------------------- 12-4
eastern nararene--------- 11-4
mitchell---------------------- 12-4
daniel webster------------- 12-4

gwynedd-mercy----------- 13-4
alfred-------------------------- 11-4
johnson and wales------- 13-4
defiance---------------------- 13-4
guilford------------------------ 13-4
lynchburg --------------------13-4
bethany----------------------- 14-4
claremont-mudd scripps-12-4
cal lutheran------------------ 14-4
hobart-------------------------- 12-4

mount st mary-------------- 13-4
hood---------------------------- 13-4
macmurray------------------ 12-4
st olaf-------------------------- 13-4
grinnell------------------------ 12-4
endicot----------------------- -13-4
lewis and clark------------- 12-4
nyu----------------------------- 12-4

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 03:20:05 PM

again, when was the last time a team after all the conference tourneys were fin ished, did not win the final game in the conference to9urney, but was ranked in the top 25, was not picked as one of the 19 at large bids?

never happened

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 27, 2014, 03:21:13 PM

So, does Carthage get more than just 3 poll points in the top 25... despite the loss to Elmhurst, because of the win over IWU?

Does it matter that Elmhurst beat Augie?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 03:23:16 PM

i watched a lot of the cathage game, THEY JUST TOOK OUT illinois WESLEYAN HANDEDLY , ALBIET AT HOME

yeah,.. based on my general knowledge,....... carthage is a team that could get one of those 19 at large bids, because they have the ability to knock off a bigtime ranked team

absolutley

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 27, 2014, 03:34:29 PM

It happens more than you think, hp.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 03:40:57 PM

in the regular season,,,,, and hear again the ugly catch 22 raises its head

most good teams lose gam e,..... and most of those lose a game or 2 to teams that arent in the top 200

it happens

rearing its head again

there is something else thnat i have descibed about what needcs to be considered

tuff play

basicaly,.... some opf the teams are getting away with murder going through east schedules, and dont have to mop up the floor with their bodies in game, win or lose

stockton should get extra consideratioon because thats what they do, mop up the floor when called for

they are a tuff team this season

like i said, ill eat my socks they lose to TCNJ wednesday

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 27, 2014, 03:43:13 PM

Quote from: iwumichigander on January 27, 2014, 03:16:39 PM
Quote from: smedindy on January 27, 2014, 02:36:02 PM
Ok, is it just me or can we move a lot of this Stockton stuff to the NJAC board? I mean, I can appreciate fandom but I want to talk about more of the D3 Universe here....
Hardly anyone on the NJAC board ;D and, I haven't seen some of you guys work this hard other than regional rankings prior tournament ::)

Right?! LOL ;D ;) :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pjunito on January 27, 2014, 03:49:33 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 03:20:05 PM
again, when was the last time a team after all the conference tourneys were fin ished, did not win the final game in the conference to9urney, but was ranked in the top 25, was not picked as one of the 19 at large bids?

never happened

HP, in 2011-12 Albertus Magnus College was ranked in top 15 after regular season.. If they didn't win their conference tournament, they would not have made it to the NCAA tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: lildave678 on January 27, 2014, 03:53:39 PM

Winning the conference certainly kept AMC in, but yeah, you would have had a 27-1 (or 26-2 if you give them say, a conference semi's loss) that would've been fringe top 25 that wasn't making the tourney (barring some magic from selection committee, but they hate the GNAC :P ).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 03:56:56 PM

but if ifs and but were candy and nuts, id have a hell of a christmas

thats the closet you got, but obviously they did win

but what i said was, ny question was

was a team rsanked in the top 25, AFTER THE CONFERENCE TOURNAMANTSa, and still didnt make the NCAA tourney, despite losing thier conference tounrey,

the answer is no it never happened

probably

they would gbet o0ne of the 190 at largbe bids

i have made a strong, a really strong, argument for stockton today

but games need to be played yet

i understand that

but they have to be in the top 30

they just kicked the crap out of the 30th ranked team in the nation by 24 points

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pjunito on January 27, 2014, 04:12:52 PM

HP, what is your argument? That Stockon should get a bid into the tournament or be ranked in top 25?

If we took your logic, then any team that beats a top 25 or 30 team should get votes for the top 25 and that just isn't the way it works.

The lost RS had last week is worst than the win they had. So, at the end of the week, RS should get less votes not more. If Stanford beats Arizona this week, you think they will get top 25 votes? No, they have one good win but a lot of bad losses. You have to look at the body of work.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 04:16:53 PM

both, cause it is possible they could get screwed over, based on all the negativity about them on here for losingf a - monday- game - to brooklyn

brooklyns a truiff team man, much better than their record, they had hard luck in games

except for the stockton game

right, lol

i want stockton to be ranked inside the top 25 and also do damage in the ncaa tourney

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on January 27, 2014, 04:22:01 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 04:16:53 PM
i want stockton to be ranked inside the top 25 and also do damage in the ncaa tourney

As does every fan of every team - we/they all want the same thing. But just because you want that doesn't mean you can negate the facts that people are sharing with you to demonstrate why they aren't ranked right now. A bad loss is a bad loss and the consequences of that loss are that RS will not be ranked - at least not this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2014, 04:37:52 PM

FYI - this is the new selection criteria for the NCAA tournament (which also affects who hosts):

Primary Selection Criteria
The primary criteria emphasize competition leading up to NCAA championships; all criteria listed will be evaluated (not listed in priority order).

●● Win-loss percentage against Division III opponents.

●● Division III strength of schedule.
-- Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OWP).
-- Opponents' Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OOWP).

●● Division III head-to-head competition.

●● Results versus common Division III opponents.

●● Results versus ranked Division III teams as established at the time of selection.

Secondary Selection Criteria
If the evaluation of the primary criteria does not result in a decision, the secondary criteria will be reviewed. All the criteria listed will be evaluated (not listed in priority order). The secondary criteria introduce results against all other opponents from other classifications (i.e., provisionals, NAIA, NCAA Divisions I and II).

●● Non-Division III win-loss percentage.

●● Results versus common non-Division III opponents.

Additionally, input is provided by regional advisory committees for consideration by the Basketball Committee.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 04:39:18 PM

absoltley,.. but then that arises another question, expect for me, rooting for stockton, and another guy on here talkiing about some best 7 loss team in the nation, that is now 9-8,........ there is no one else,... i am a lone voice in the wind

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 04:42:03 PM

see, thats the delema, cause if this was NFL talk, youd get thousands of people talking about any one of the 32 nfl teams, and people talking about everey one of them

as far as i can tell, i am the o0nly one talking anbout any particular team, for several weeks

and in here lies an opportuiity

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 27, 2014, 04:42:42 PM

My point is that there are boards for the single conference (team discussions)...sigh.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 04:50:43 PM

i understand that, but it seems everyone graviatates to this top 25 board, ... and i was told under certain terms, to post in here,..... about my liking stockton tol be in the top 25 in the natuon this year,...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: northb on January 27, 2014, 04:59:14 PM

HP--I think what you are referring to was posters saying that last year's ranking has something to do with early season rankings. All things being equal, that is in the equation. That is, the voters may be considering how that team did last year to help them start out their ranking. However, as the season wears on, the benefit if the previous year's (one year, not the years before that) performance washes out.

Also, if I understand it correctly, the selection committee goes into this blind, with each region's best team left on the board being compared with all the other regions' best teams, based on the noted criteria. When a team from one region is picked, then the next team in that region goes into the mix until all spots are taken.

However, I did hear recently that they are going to change this, and on 2014-15 the criteria will be the following:
1) How you did over the last 20 years
2) How hard you wipe the floor
3) How long your coach has been with the team
4) Number of posts on this board
5) Length of posts on this board

Tiebreaker is that they flip a TGHIJGSTO

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 05:11:13 PM

wrong, but thats ok,.............. i am one fan, out of 7 billion people in the world, ok? i am new to posting thoughtrs on D3 hoops, very very very new, a novive in it

but your comment is what i am getting at

there is a distinction here

tiger woods crashjes his car at the end of a drivweay, espn gets a milliuon posys on 2-3 articles over it-- everyone chimmin g in on their thoughrts and reaction

carthage just kicked the crap ouyt of illinois wesleyan and only one person said something and i was the only person to respond

inhere lays the ooportunity

think about it this way

right now in the united states there are probablt 30-40 million americans that have grasduated from division 3 colleges that are alive today

huge opportunity to cash in

i realize i am one person in the windwebsite, and a few stranglers like me

this forum, area, is wide open

for example, carthage just kicked the sh-t out of ill wesleyan, and had 1000 plus fans at the game, m aybe more,.. no one iks posting

huge opportunity to expand thew business

bjut no one is posting on here , exvcept for the 25 voters, tnhe people thjat run this

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2014, 05:16:36 PM

There is a long conversation about it the CCIW board... since it was a CCIW game. That tends to be where most conversations take place... their conference threads. It does bleed into here as well, but especially with threads like the CCIW which are very strong.

You started a topic related to the Top 25 and Richard Stockton only in the Atlantic Region board... you didn't go into the NJAC board... you were asked if you had Top 25 topics to talk about them in the Top 25 board and not start a whole other topic. You came here, but your conversation has gone from being a Top 25 discussion to ONLY a Richard Stockton discussion from your perspective... so I think some people are pointing out you can have a NJAC discussion in the NJAC board.

Also, you talk about the NJAC being run and gun... did you see the 39-38 OT game a few weeks back?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 27, 2014, 05:18:57 PM

I'm not a Top 25 voter. I do vote in the Posters Poll, but I'm not a top 25 voter. I would gather that most of the Top 25 voters DON'T post here.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 05:22:28 PM

i did go into the njac bioard, no one responded, months between posts on there,...

dave, we have been through this before,.......

you are a mermber of the mecdia,... i understand you like to tsalk about d3 basketball

where are your thoughts, youyr opinions, your soliques, abnout the teams, the games,.. on your own

without having to respond to fans opinions>?

i'm afraid if i say anything else i will get in trouble

but let me say this

make you own opinion, and have fans rwact to it, then you have every right to rewspond

to not put up an initial opini9on, but gop afgter fans for their opin ions, i kinda think is bogus

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 05:29:44 PM

take a lessonj from mike francesa,... he puts up hisd thoughts, his opinions, on hosd nyc/nation radio show anmd then he takes callers opinions and answer them

what you are doing , dave, is not saying any opinion, but going aftyer fans for their opinion

this busin esas is wide open to make bi8llions of dollars

lthe business of sports talk doersnt work like the way you want it to

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 05:33:33 PM

when dave mac puts up his opinion about players, about teams, about the way games go,...... then he hns every right to talk to fans that give their opinion , in reraction to what dave mac says']

but if dave m,ac refuses to put up rwal true red whit and blue opin ions, in first aqmendment rights, about the games

how does dave mac think , as a member of the media, he can get away with going ater fans for their opinions

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 27, 2014, 05:48:09 PM

This is against my better judgement... but...

To prove to you that the d3hoops.com top 25 poll doesn't have anything to do with selection for the NCAA tournament, here are WIAC teams who have missed the NCAA tournament (that's the same WIAC with 10 national titles and a handful of other Final Four appearances)

2001-02
#15 UW Whitewater
#16 UW Stevens Point

2002-03
#22 UW Whitewater

2003-04
#21 UW River Falls
(also UWW, UW Oshkosh and UW Platteville receiving votes)

2004-05
#23 UW Platteville
(also UWW, UW Oshkosh receiving votes)

Again, against my better judgement...

Dave is much more than a

Quotemermber of the mecdia.

He has the only national radio show about D-III athletics.

I might be wrong... but to be a

Quotemermber of the mecdia

one must get paid to do it. Maybe you haven't noticed, but there's an indiegogo crowdsourcing project ongoing right now to raise funds so they can do more and cover more... so that they can upgrade their "studio" (which, I believe, is just in Dave's house, though I might be wrong).

The same goes for this website. Pat Coleman does this as a labor of love and makes little, if any, money doing it. Both guys have other full time jobs.

In other words...

_______________________

^^^ I think you just crossed the line.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 27, 2014, 05:53:26 PM

looking for the top 25 board......
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.tvtropes.org%2Fpmwiki%2Fpub%2Fimages%2Frsz_bugs_2_4558.jpg&hash=73ba970a10db8bfb32732be3ed4bafe1ec27d5db)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 27, 2014, 06:09:25 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 05:50:55 PM
see, if you arer not a member of the media, or a voter for the top 25,..... that is a great post

but if tyiou are either of thodse thbings it is comp0letely bogujs

#Bqhatevwr

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 27, 2014, 06:25:56 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 05:50:55 PM
see, if you arer not a member of the media, or a voter for the top 25,..... that is a great post

but if tyiou are either of thodse thbings it is comp0letely bogujs
\
\
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nE3rzJqJzAI

You're entitled to your own opinion. But, the thing about an opinion is that it can still be wrong.

Truth exists. You seem dead-set at redefining things the way that you see fit, but truth exists and reality is counter to the way that you see it and have described it.

Initially, I thought that you were just an over-exuberant fan. They come around every now and again... well-meaning people who don't have a lot of exposure to things outside of their individual school or conference.

Many posters, like myself, have taken it upon ourselves over the years to teach the children in the way they should go, so when they grow old, they will not depart from it.

However, you seem to be immune to reason, conjuring up your own logic that is counter to the truth.

The purpose of this board is to discuss the Top 25 in D-III athletics. Please get back on topic and discuss it.

It may also be worth your while to check out the board's Terms of Service.

http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=5787.0

I fully acknowledge that I'm treading a bit close to the line on 3., but you appear to be in violation of 1., 4., and 5.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on January 27, 2014, 06:33:07 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 03:56:56 PM
but if ifs and but were candy and nuts, id have a hell of a christmas

thats the closet you got, but obviously they did win

but what i said was, ny question was

was a team rsanked in the top 25, AFTER THE CONFERENCE TOURNAMANTSa, and still didnt make the NCAA tourney, despite losing thier conference tounrey,

the answer is no it never happened

probably

they would gbet o0ne of the 190 at largbe bids

i have made a strong, a really strong, argument for stockton today

but games need to be played yet

i understand that

but they have to be in the top 30

they just kicked the crap out of the 30th ranked team in the nation by 24 points

Happens often actually as a matter of fact two WIAC teams finished in the D# Hoops Top 25 prior to the start of the NCAA tourney in 2007, including UW-Oshkosh, who was ranked #9 in the country. They were in the TOP TEN and DID NOT make the tourney. UW-La Crosse was ranked #16 and DID NOT make the tourney!!

Here's the link, take a look http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2006-07/week13 (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2006-07/week13)

In 2009 Buena Vista was 23-3 and ranked #14 in the poll and DID NOT make the tourney. They lost in their conference tourney and didn't rank high enough in the Regional Rankings to get in.

There are other instances as well, but these are the ones fresh in my mind. The point here is that the D3 Hoops Top 25 Poll means nothing as far as getting into the NCAA tournament goes. Nada, Zilch, Doodely Squat. It's an opinion poll until the final game of the year, when the team that wins the final D3 game of the year is always the National Champion and the D3 Hoops #1 team for real.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 27, 2014, 07:21:08 PM

The terrorists have already won.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 27, 2014, 07:44:04 PM

And here's something on this board that isn't about Richard Stockton, for a change of pace.

#16 Albertus Magnus leads #13 SUNY-Purchase 42-31 at the half.

One of these schools will suffer their first D3 loss of the season tonight.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 27, 2014, 08:01:25 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 27, 2014, 07:44:04 PM
And here's something on this board that isn't about Richard Stockton, for a change of pace.

#16 Albertus Magnus leads #13 SUNY-Purchase 42-31 at the half.

One of these schools will suffer their first D3 loss of the season tonight.

Interesting. I thought Purchase would handle 'em.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 27, 2014, 08:05:33 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 27, 2014, 07:57:18 PM
hp, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are 'fat-fingering' your phone on your posts - but, PLEASE edit, they are borderline unreadable.

borderline?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on January 27, 2014, 08:06:43 PM

UH OH, the new poll is out guess where Stockton is...........................and it ain't #1

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2013-14/week8 (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2013-14/week8)

Looks to be #40.

Let the rant ................... continue ::) ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 27, 2014, 08:22:19 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 07:50:32 PM
by the wat, albertus magnus is kickingf the bejesus out of suny ;pluncghase tonight,..... bujt nothing a cew tghreees cant take care olf... gthe gsame may be cl,ose than yoy thimk

That's not true any longer as Purchase has a 65-61 lead with 10 minutes left in the game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 27, 2014, 08:30:46 PM

Albertus back in front 74-71 with 6 minutes left in the game. Purchase going to the line to shoot 3. Now tied up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 27, 2014, 08:39:58 PM

Albertus Magnus up 82-75 with 2:02 left to go. Purchase real undisciplined for the past few minutes and throwing up some bad shots. They're beating themselves.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 08:42:54 PM

from my perspective the dang thing on d3 hoops still has 40-45, inj the suny-albertus game, and thaTS EVEN QAFTER I REBOOTED MY COMPUTER

TALOK ABOUT PEOPLE INJ TECNOLY INDUSTRY DROPPIONG TGHE BALL;
'

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 27, 2014, 08:46:31 PM

Albertus Magnus hands SUNY-Purchase their 1st loss 87-79.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 08:47:46 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 08:42:54 PM
from my perspective the dang thing on d3 hoops still has 40-45, inj the suny-albertus game, and thaTS EVEN QAFTER I REBOOTED MY COMPUTER

TALOK ABOUT PEOPLE INJ TECNOLY INDUSTRY DROPPIONG TGHE BALL;
'

Hi. I don't know how you think we get scores, but it's not by magic. It takes a person to post scores, and if one of the schools doesn't post the scores, or use PrestoSports live stats, then it doesn't get updated.

I've deleted about 12 of your posts today -- if you want to continue to be allowed to post, you need to do two things:

1. Write legible posts in the english language. Posting in ALL CAPS is considering SHOUTING and is in violation of the Terms of Service.
2. Slow down. You post way too often -- you are both trolling and rolling the board.

I haven't had to cite anyone for rolling the board in probably 8 years. This is ridiculous. You've set this board back 8 years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 08:49:31 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 08:47:46 PM
Hi. I don't know how you think we get scores, but it's not by magic.

Actually, I would think you should already know this, considering your own alma mater doesn't post scores on our site.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: lildave678 on January 27, 2014, 08:49:41 PM

I love how AMC has a video feed but no box score. I'm pretty sure at one point AMC was 5-14 (or close to it) from the line. And we got T'd up to start the game - Purchase went 1-2 from the line before the tip. Hopefully one of the guys who were there can shed some light. Assuming it was dunking during warmups?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: lildave678 on January 27, 2014, 08:52:29 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 27, 2014, 08:46:31 PM
Albertus Magnus hands SUNY-Purchase their 1st loss 87-79.

Magic, appears that you watched a majority, if not all of the game. Care to share an unbiased opinion on the game/both teams? All of us on the GNAC board are homers haha ;D ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 08:53:46 PM

Quote from: lildave678 on January 27, 2014, 08:49:41 PM
I love how AMC has a video feed but no box score. I'm pretty sure at one point AMC was 5-14 (or close to it) from the line. And we got T'd up to start the game - Purchase went 1-2 from the line before the tip. Hopefully one of the guys who were there can shed some light. Assuming it was dunking during warmups?

Another possible reason could be if the starters weren't noted in the scorebook 10 minutes before the game, or if a player weren't properly listed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 27, 2014, 08:54:08 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 08:47:46 PM
Hi. I don't know how you think we get scores, but it's not by magic.

I can verify that. I have absolutely nothing to do with posting the Albertus Magnus/Purchase score.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 08:55:16 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 27, 2014, 08:54:08 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 08:47:46 PM
Hi. I don't know how you think we get scores, but it's not by magic.

I can verify that. I have absolutely nothing to do with posting the Albertus Magnus/Purchase score.

Also true!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: lildave678 on January 27, 2014, 08:56:05 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 08:53:46 PM
Quote from: lildave678 on January 27, 2014, 08:49:41 PM
I love how AMC has a video feed but no box score. I'm pretty sure at one point AMC was 5-14 (or close to it) from the line. And we got T'd up to start the game - Purchase went 1-2 from the line before the tip. Hopefully one of the guys who were there can shed some light. Assuming it was dunking during warmups?

Another possible reason could be if the starters weren't noted in the scorebook 10 minutes before the game, or if a player weren't properly listed.

Ah, that could be too. I do the book for home games for my high schools girl's team. They are GOD AWFUL so refs usually don't give a hoot but I've had a couple make sure I have the starters marked and the number of players in the book matches the number of players dressed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 08:56:15 PM

oh, it takes a person, really??????????????? well that persoin should not have a job of it it is 2 hpours latewter and it still says 450-409,... you thing these peopkme deserve to get paid gor theie qoute unquote job

come on man

what if you were making a medicaqtion in aq phrama, and you boss waqs like, oh werll , fill olut the aperwork when you caqn

lol

are you seriopus?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: lildave678 on January 27, 2014, 08:57:14 PM

Did you just compare a pharmacy to a D3 basketball game? Lol

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 08:59:24 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 08:56:15 PM
oh, it takes a person, really??????????????? well that persoin (sic) should not have a job of it it is 2 hpours (sic) latewter (sic) and it still says 450-409,... you thing these peopkme (sic) deserve to get paid gor (sic) theie (sic) qoute (sic) unquote job

come on man

what if you were making a medicaqtion (sic) in aq (sic) phrama (sic), and you boss waqs (sic) like, oh werll (sic) , fill olut (sic) the aperwork (sic) when you caqn (sic)

lol

are you seriopus? (sic)

Except that pharmacies have paid staff and we are really a two-person shop.

If this distresses you, you do not have to post here anymore.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 09:00:44 PM

yes i dcid, this is a multi billionh dollar year indudtry, ... if you cant see it, you need glasses

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 27, 2014, 09:01:58 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 08:56:15 PM
oh, it takes a person, really??????????????? well that persoin should not have a job of it it is 2 hpours latewter and it still says 450-409,... you thing these peopkme deserve to get paid gor theie qoute unquote job

come on man

what if you were making a medicaqtion in aq phrama, and you boss waqs like, oh werll , fill olut the aperwork when you caqn

lol

are you seriopus?

It's probably some freshman baseball player running the computer. If you want Albertus to improve their game staff, perhaps a donation from you to that effect could get the ball rolling.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 09:02:33 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 09:00:44 PM
yes i dcid, this is a multi billionh dollar year indudtry, ... if you cant see it, you need glasses

There are not a billion dollars in Division III basketball, sir.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 09:03:34 PM

thyedre is absoltley no rfeason an hour after the fact im still seeingf 40-45 at halftikme in ton ights suntights suny purchase game]
\plenty of people need jobs that would, coyuld, update oit immediateley

wft

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 27, 2014, 09:04:17 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 09:02:33 PM
Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 09:00:44 PM
yes i dcid, this is a multi billionh dollar year indudtry, ... if you cant see it, you need glasses

There are not a billion dollars in Division III basketball, sir.

Oh, come on, Pat. You mean to tell me if you add this site, PLUS the salary from your regular job, you're not pulling in ten figures?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 09:04:50 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 09:03:34 PM
thyedre is absoltley no rfeason an hour after the fact im still seeingf 40-45 at halftikme in ton ights suntights suny purchase game]
\plenty of people need jobs that would, coyuld, update oit immediateley

wft

Great. As long as they are willing to work for free, and can spell, send them my way. There are no full-time staff here, and as I already mentioned, unpaid. Thanks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 09:05:12 PM

yoiu cdfomntg think 416 teams in d3 genberaste multyi billions dollars?
do the math sir

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 27, 2014, 09:05:48 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 09:03:34 PM
thyedre is absoltley no rfeason an hour after the fact im still seeingf 40-45 at halftikme in ton ights suntights suny purchase game]
\plenty of people need jobs that would, coyuld, update oit immediateley

wft

Just out of curiosity, how much money do you think d3 schools are paying the person running the live stats for an average basketball game?

I'm willing to venture it ranges from $0-$10 per game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 27, 2014, 09:06:21 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 09:05:12 PM
yoiu cdfomntg think 416 teams in d3 genberaste multyi billions dollars?
do the math sir

I'm starting to think you're just a really intelligent spam bot at this point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 27, 2014, 09:06:46 PM

Quote from: lildave678 on January 27, 2014, 08:52:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on January 27, 2014, 08:46:31 PM
Albertus Magnus hands SUNY-Purchase their 1st loss 87-79.

Magic, appears that you watched a majority, if not all of the game. Care to share an unbiased opinion on the game/both teams? All of us on the GNAC board are homers haha ;D ;D

Both teams got game. Good shooters from long distance, good penetrators to get to the rim, good height for some inside buckets. The entire game was back and forth action. I have seen both teams play before and expected a close game. The webcast wasn't the best quality so it's really hard to see how good some of the drives to the basket were when the video is a little herky jerky. Likewise with the big guys operating inside.

Bottom line I think these teams both deserve to be ranked and think they are about where they should be in the polls. I know that neither team plays in a great league but they're beating the teams on their schedule and it wouldn't surprise me if they win a few games in the tournament, if they get there, and I expect they both will get there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 27, 2014, 09:06:50 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 27, 2014, 09:05:48 PM
Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 09:03:34 PM
thyedre is absoltley no rfeason an hour after the fact im still seeingf 40-45 at halftikme in ton ights suntights suny purchase game]
\plenty of people need jobs that would, coyuld, update oit immediateley

wft

Just out of curiosity, how much money do you think d3 schools are paying the person running the live stats for an average basketball game?

I'm willing to venture it ranges from $0-$10 per game.

I'm willing to bet its a bag of popcorn and a watered down pop at some places.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 27, 2014, 09:07:46 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 27, 2014, 09:06:46 PM
Quote from: lildave678 on January 27, 2014, 08:52:29 PM
Quote from: magicman on January 27, 2014, 08:46:31 PM
Albertus Magnus hands SUNY-Purchase their 1st loss 87-79.

Magic, appears that you watched a majority, if not all of the game. Care to share an unbiased opinion on the game/both teams? All of us on the GNAC board are homers haha ;D ;D

Both teams got game. Good shooters from long distance, good penetrators to get to the rim, good height for some inside buckets. The entire game was back and forth action. I have seen both teams play before and expected a close game. The webcast wasn't the best quality so it's really hard to see how good some of the drives to the basket were when the video is a little herky jerky. Likewise with the big guys operating inside.

Bottom line I think these teams both deserve to be ranked and think they are about where they should be in the polls. I know that neither team plays in a great league but they're beating the teams on their schedule and it wouldn't surprise me if they win a few games in the tournament, if they get there, and I expect they both will get there.

...and they'll likely get matched up against each other in round one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 09:08:07 PM

de3 basdketbazll is a multi billion dollzar a year indusztry
\
work for free,..
i am already doing that for you

pay me 1000 a month

ill mazke sure e very stockton game is updated to witrhin 30 seconds

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 09:09:20 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 27, 2014, 09:04:17 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 09:02:33 PM
Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 09:00:44 PM
yes i dcid, this is a multi billionh dollar year indudtry, ... if you cant see it, you need glasses

There are not a billion dollars in Division III basketball, sir.

Oh, come on, Pat. You mean to tell me if you add this site, PLUS the salary from your regular job, you're not pulling in ten figures?

If half of them are after the decimal? Sure. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 27, 2014, 09:10:47 PM

Good to know every D3 basketball school is pulling in at least 2.3 million dollars in revenue.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 09:11:12 PM

Alright. For the next three days, this board is going to be much more sane.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on January 27, 2014, 09:12:27 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 09:11:12 PM
Alright. For the next three days, this board is going to be much more sane.

thank you

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 09:12:59 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 09:08:07 PM
pay me 1000 a month

For the record, nobody on this site gets a thousand dollars a month. And with 800 teams, I'd have to have $800,000 a month. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 09:13:49 PM

Quote from: iwumichigander on January 27, 2014, 09:12:27 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 09:11:12 PM
Alright. For the next three days, this board is going to be much more sane.
thank you

Yep, you bet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on January 27, 2014, 09:14:38 PM

Quote from: iwumichigander on January 27, 2014, 09:12:27 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 09:11:12 PM
Alright. For the next three days, this board is going to be much more sane.
thank you

My eyes thank you as well

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 27, 2014, 09:15:02 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 09:11:12 PM
Alright. For the next three days, this board is going to be much more sane.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimgur.com%2F6bZMF.png&hash=b36eb77660f3b854deb38f339ab782b42f2f368b)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 27, 2014, 09:17:48 PM

I think as the night gets longer, hplc's liquid intake becomes mass quantities. Where are the Coneheads when you need them. They could cart him off to another planet, where he obviously belongs. 8-)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 27, 2014, 09:18:41 PM

Quote from: sac on January 27, 2014, 09:10:47 PM
Good to know every D3 basketball school is pulling in at least 2.3 million dollars in revenue.

Is there a single d3 men's basketball team turning a profit at the end of the year? Even one?

You'd have to think Hope or IWU would be the likeliest candidates, what with large pools of people willing to pay actual money to watch games.

Even then it seems like an iffy proposition.

It also makes me wonder what kind of cash is floating around Stockton.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 27, 2014, 09:18:50 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 09:08:07 PM
de3 basdketbazll is a multi billion dollzar a year indusztry

A Romanian spambot.

Seriously, can't we all agree to stop feeding this troll? Please? EDIT: Thanks, Pat, maybe now I can post without the message "while you were typing 5 new replies have been posted."

In the meantime, a new Top 25 poll (http://d3hoops.com/top25/index) has been released. Not a whole lot of changes overall; in fact, nobody moved more than 5 positions. UTD and DePauw crack the poll (aside: four NCAC teams, woohoo!), Albertus moves up and will likely move up more next week, the one dogged Cabrini voter sticks to his guns. Ahh, actual top 25 discussion, ain't it nice?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on January 27, 2014, 09:19:57 PM

At the half

St. Mary's 26 Chris Newport 25 http://client.stretchinternet.com/client/smcm.portal (http://client.stretchinternet.com/client/smcm.portal)
UT Dallas 39 Hardin SImmons 28 http://cometsports.utdallas.edu/showcase/?Live=231#close (http://cometsports.utdallas.edu/showcase/?Live=231#close)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: lildave678 on January 27, 2014, 09:22:10 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 27, 2014, 09:18:41 PM
Quote from: sac on January 27, 2014, 09:10:47 PM
Good to know every D3 basketball school is pulling in at least 2.3 million dollars in revenue.

Is there a single d3 men's basketball team turning a profit at the end of the year? Even one?

You'd have to think Hope or IWU would be the likeliest candidates, what with large pools of people willing to pay actual money to watch games.

Even then it seems like an iffy proposition.

It also makes me wonder what kind of cash is floating around Stockton.

Exactly, I know every D3 game I've been to, save the NCAA tournament games at Willy P/Middlebury when AMC got there, there was no charge for it. I'm assuming its like that in most of D3, where sporting events do not generate revenue through admissions.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 27, 2014, 09:26:07 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 27, 2014, 09:18:41 PM
Quote from: sac on January 27, 2014, 09:10:47 PM
Good to know every D3 basketball school is pulling in at least 2.3 million dollars in revenue.

Is there a single d3 men's basketball team turning a profit at the end of the year? Even one?

You'd have to think Hope or IWU would be the likeliest candidates, what with large pools of people willing to pay actual money to watch games.

Even then it seems like an iffy proposition.

It also makes me wonder what kind of cash is floating around Stockton.

Not even close. Every program that I know of has a backcourt club or something similar... and the t-shirt table is for the same reason... to raise funds for the program. And the funds that are brought in from the gate go into the general athletic fund, I would think (which, in turn, offsets the deficit that that fund has).

Most schools that I know of let students in for free... if they were trying to make loads of money, then they'd charge everybody.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 27, 2014, 09:30:45 PM

Just taking a look at Richard Stockton, uh, I mean, the Top 25. Interesting to see Wooster drop 3 spots after losing at RV and now ranked De Pauw while Augustana drops just one spot after losing at Elmhurst.

I may have even kept Wooster #2 as Cabrini may be undefeated but their schedule lacks, right?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on January 27, 2014, 09:34:17 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 27, 2014, 09:30:45 PM
Just taking a look at Richard Stockton, uh, I mean, the Top 25. Interesting to see Wooster drop 3 spots after losing at RV and now ranked De Pauw while Augustana drops just one spot after losing at Elmhurst.

I may have even kept Wooster #2 as Cabrini may be undefeated but their schedule lacks, right?

Out of conference was good. They have #9 Wesley on Feb 3. Conference... eh, not so good. :(

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 27, 2014, 09:39:12 PM

Quote from: John Gleich on January 27, 2014, 09:26:07 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 27, 2014, 09:18:41 PM
Quote from: sac on January 27, 2014, 09:10:47 PM
Good to know every D3 basketball school is pulling in at least 2.3 million dollars in revenue.

Is there a single d3 men's basketball team turning a profit at the end of the year? Even one?

You'd have to think Hope or IWU would be the likeliest candidates, what with large pools of people willing to pay actual money to watch games.

Even then it seems like an iffy proposition.

It also makes me wonder what kind of cash is floating around Stockton.

Not even close. Every program that I know of has a backcourt club or something similar... and the t-shirt table is for the same reason... to raise funds for the program. And the funds that are brought in from the gate go into the general athletic fund, I would think (which, in turn, offsets the deficit that that fund has).

Most schools that I know of let students in for free... if they were trying to make loads of money, then they'd charge everybody.

Yeah, I mean the schools that do it on the cheap are not raising any revenue at all. The schools that sell tickets and draw crowds are putting a lot more money into the program (full-time coaches, travel, etc).

Shoot, most D1 schools lose money on athletics, there's no way to believe d3 schools are doing any better.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 27, 2014, 09:44:01 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 27, 2014, 09:30:45 PM
Just taking a look at Richard Stockton, uh, I mean, the Top 25. Interesting to see Wooster drop 3 spots after losing at RV and now ranked De Pauw while Augustana drops just one spot after losing at Elmhurst.

I may have even kept Wooster #2 as Cabrini may be undefeated but their schedule lacks, right?

Cabrini's played all comers this year. They can't help that their already bad conference is even worse this season. They've gone out of their way to play teams. The Wesley game got snowed out earlier and postponed. That would/will tell us a lot, I think.

My issue with them has been that I did see them at the Hoopsville Tournament. Their actual on-court play can rival anyone, but their talent doesn't. That's tough to judge. I was keeping IWU and Augustana ahead of them, but I can't really do that anymore. There have been too many flaws exposed in the top teams - and Cabrini is the kind of team that will exploit those flaws.

Wooster has been tough all year. They've had good wins, but they seem to be keeping games close that should be blowouts. I'm very hesitant to trust a team like that.

We've reached a point where I think Point is #1 and no one else really deserves to be higher than 8th. I'm not sure, even if the Posters Poll, if Ypsi would let me submit a ballot with six blank spots on it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pjunito on January 27, 2014, 09:46:01 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 08:53:46 PM
Quote from: lildave678 on January 27, 2014, 08:49:41 PM
I love how AMC has a video feed but no box score. I'm pretty sure at one point AMC was 5-14 (or close to it) from the line. And we got T'd up to start the game - Purchase went 1-2 from the line before the tip. Hopefully one of the guys who were there can shed some light. Assuming it was dunking during warmups?

Another possible reason could be if the starters weren't noted in the scorebook 10 minutes before the game, or if a player weren't properly listed.

Albertus received a Technical before the game started for a uniform violation.. No 20, James Jennings was wearing a under arm sweatshirt that is agaisnt the rules.. Purchase was awarded 2 FTs before tip off.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pjunito on January 27, 2014, 09:53:37 PM

The video feed is poor and the camera person needs training at the Albertus home games.. That is why I went to the game tonight..

I don't know about the best point guard, but Eain Davis for Albertus has to be the quickest pg in the nation. He was unstoppable and completely turned the game around in the first 10 minutes of the game and last 10 minutes of the second half.

Very good game, entertaining.. SUNY Purchase shot the ball very poorly from the outside, if they hit a few more shots, they win.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 10:12:32 PM

... and as he chose to continue harassing me via email, his ban has been extended permanently.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on January 27, 2014, 10:17:45 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 10:12:32 PM
... and as he chose to continue harassing me via email, his ban has been extended permanently.

Well, I certainly won't miss the illegible writings! ;D It's called editing and proofreading for a reason. TGHIJGSTO!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 27, 2014, 10:19:52 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 09:00:44 PM
yes i dcid, this is a multi billionh dollar year indudtry, ... if you cant see it, you need glasses

It's a student doing an internship. You are ridiculous, and I can't believe you went to RS in 84, bc you spell like an 8th grader, and have the attitude of my 14 yr old sister. I'm sorry I've had enough of this guy

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 27, 2014, 10:21:59 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 10:12:32 PM
... and as he chose to continue harassing me via email, his ban has been extended permanently.

Thanks Pat -- a wise decision on your part and much appreciated!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: lildave678 on January 27, 2014, 10:25:43 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 10:12:32 PM
... and as he chose to continue harassing me via email, his ban has been extended permanently.

Hallelujah! I'll be the first to admit that I'm an Albertus homer who only really knows about the GNAC, but I lurk this thread all the time trying to learn more about the D3 Landscape as a whole (heck, I follow CT high school ball just as closely) and its tough with a RS mention every post.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 27, 2014, 10:30:53 PM

hplc2222 (if we choose to believe him) was a college graduate and (from the dates he claimed for attending Stockton) was 50+ years old. Absolutely no excuse for his behavior.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on January 27, 2014, 10:46:12 PM

How much is it that I have to donate to force Dave to wear a Richard Stockton shirt on Hoopsville?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 27, 2014, 10:48:07 PM

Quote from: madzillagd on January 27, 2014, 10:46:12 PM
How much is it that I have to donate to force Dave to wear a Richard Stockton shirt on Hoopsville?

Oh, a million ought to do it! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 27, 2014, 10:49:13 PM

Gone, but (alas!) not forgotten. Maybe by page 549?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2014, 10:58:56 PM

Quote from: madzillagd on January 27, 2014, 10:46:12 PM
How much is it that I have to donate to force Dave to wear a Richard Stockton shirt on Hoopsville?

$100 and select the Slam Dunk perk before they run out... I would be happy to do it in spite!

And it is too bad he was banned, I was starting to enj... ... enj ... ... oh jeez, I couldn't even get myself to say it.

Now that he is gone, I might as well share the fact he attacked me via email (post-ups) this weekend and eventually claimed I was making $250k a year hosting a national talk show. He also thought it was ridiculous that we host a basketball event in Las Vegas and that the games shouldn't even take place because betting is allowed.

The best part is he claims I don't put my opinions out there, but admitted he barely watched one Hoopsville show... and apparently doesn't read my ballot blog...

Speaking of which, do you guys want me to post my blog each week when I finish here on the board? Wasn't sure.

Now to get back to prepping for Thursday's marathon Hoopsville show!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 7express on January 27, 2014, 11:02:01 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 09:03:34 PM
thyedre is absoltley no rfeason an hour after the fact im still seeingf 40-45 at halftikme in ton ights suntights suny purchase game]
\plenty of people need jobs that would, coyuld, update oit immediateley

wft

WTF is correct??

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 7express on January 27, 2014, 11:04:12 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 09:11:12 PM
Alright. For the next three days, this board is going to be much more sane.

Thank you!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 27, 2014, 11:07:45 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2014, 10:58:56 PM
Speaking of which, do you guys want me to post my blog each week when I finish here on the board? Wasn't sure.

Now to get back to prepping for Thursday's marathon Hoopsville show!

I've enjoyed it when you have.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 7express on January 27, 2014, 11:08:44 PM

Quote from: mailsy on January 27, 2014, 10:17:45 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 10:12:32 PM
... and as he chose to continue harassing me via email, his ban has been extended permanently.

Well, I certainly won't miss the illegible writings! ;D It's called editing and proofreading for a reason. TGHIJGSTO!!!

Or stop typing a phone! I know typing on the hand-held device sucks, but I try to proofread first, and even if I do make a couple of mistakes, at least you can understand what I'm saying and don't have to look at it for 60 seconds, and scratch your head trying to think of what he was trying to post.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 27, 2014, 11:14:29 PM

Poll Votes:

Oglethorpe 42
Centre 5

This seems out of whack for two conference teams with 1 loss difference between them with Centre having just beaten Oglethorpe last week 52-47 at Oglethorpe.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 11:16:05 PM

Agreed. The gap in overall record isn't big enough to merit that extreme difference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on January 27, 2014, 11:20:20 PM

I got a good laugh on this board tonight. +1's to Mr. Ypsi, David Collenge, D Mac and 7.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on January 27, 2014, 11:21:46 PM

And +1 for madzillagd too. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 27, 2014, 11:22:10 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2014, 10:58:56 PM
Speaking of which, do you guys want me to post my blog each week when I finish here on the board? Wasn't sure.

Now to get back to prepping for Thursday's marathon Hoopsville show!

Are you seriopus?? Of course we do.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2014, 11:30:38 PM

I just never post it here.. I guess that was more of my question. Writing it up now... will "officially" post it on twitter in the morning, but will probably post the link here tonight for you.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 27, 2014, 11:36:06 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 27, 2014, 09:18:50 PM
Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 09:08:07 PM
de3 basdketbazll is a multi billion dollzar a year indusztry

A Romanian spambot.

Seriously, can't we all agree to stop feeding this troll? Please? EDIT: Thanks, Pat, maybe now I can post without the message "while you were typing 5 new replies have been posted."

In the meantime, a new Top 25 poll (http://d3hoops.com/top25/index) has been released. Not a whole lot of changes overall; in fact, nobody moved more than 5 positions. UTD and DePauw crack the poll (aside: four NCAC teams, woohoo!), Albertus moves up and will likely move up more next week, the one dogged Cabrini voter sticks to his guns. Ahh, actual top 25 discussion, ain't it nice?

Agreed, no one pay attention, wish I read this earlier

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 27, 2014, 11:41:44 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 10:12:32 PM
... and as he chose to continue harassing me via email, his ban has been extended permanently.

The news gets better and better as I catch up! Lol

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 28, 2014, 12:17:15 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 08:53:46 PM
Quote from: lildave678 on January 27, 2014, 08:49:41 PM
I love how AMC has a video feed but no box score. I'm pretty sure at one point AMC was 5-14 (or close to it) from the line. And we got T'd up to start the game - Purchase went 1-2 from the line before the tip. Hopefully one of the guys who were there can shed some light. Assuming it was dunking during warmups?

Another possible reason could be if the starters weren't noted in the scorebook 10 minutes before the game, or if a player weren't properly listed.

This happened to our women's team at CWU this year. The starters weren't in the book - and the irony is that during that stretch of the season we all KNEW who the starters would be.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 28, 2014, 12:18:01 AM

I go away for a few hours for bowling and I miss all the fun? :( I didn't even get to say goobdhye to him

How long do you think it'll take for him to try to make a new account since I have a hunch he won't realize the whole IP address thing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 28, 2014, 12:20:37 AM

Quote from: lildave678 on January 27, 2014, 09:22:10 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 27, 2014, 09:18:41 PM
Quote from: sac on January 27, 2014, 09:10:47 PM
Good to know every D3 basketball school is pulling in at least 2.3 million dollars in revenue.

Is there a single d3 men's basketball team turning a profit at the end of the year? Even one?

You'd have to think Hope or IWU would be the likeliest candidates, what with large pools of people willing to pay actual money to watch games.

Even then it seems like an iffy proposition.

It also makes me wonder what kind of cash is floating around Stockton.

Exactly, I know every D3 game I've been to, save the NCAA tournament games at Willy P/Middlebury when AMC got there, there was no charge for it. I'm assuming its like that in most of D3, where sporting events do not generate revenue through admissions.

At Wabash, all events are free to everyone, except football. There, when I left, it was $5 unless you were a student, faculty or staff, parent, letterman, or knew people that could let you in. So...um...yeah.

The Monon Bell game is a flat fee for everyone but that pays for the security, etc. So it's not really a huge revenue boost.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 28, 2014, 12:23:16 AM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 28, 2014, 12:18:01 AM
I go away for a few hours for bowling and I miss all the fun? :( I didn't even get to say goobdhye to him

How long do you think it'll take for him to try to make a new account since I have a hunch he won't realize the whole IP address thing.

Yeah, the username and IP address both get blocked.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2014, 12:23:39 AM

Here you guys go... enjoy: www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/01/28/daves-top-25-ballot-week-8/ (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/01/28/daves-top-25-ballot-week-8/)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 28, 2014, 12:33:50 AM

Wait a minute? If it's a state school, then their budget, revenue and expense numbers should be public? Couldn't we just look up those to see revenue / expense in athletics? It may vary state by state.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 7express on January 28, 2014, 01:58:19 AM

Quote from: lildave678 on January 27, 2014, 09:22:10 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 27, 2014, 09:18:41 PM
Quote from: sac on January 27, 2014, 09:10:47 PM
Good to know every D3 basketball school is pulling in at least 2.3 million dollars in revenue.

Is there a single d3 men's basketball team turning a profit at the end of the year? Even one?

You'd have to think Hope or IWU would be the likeliest candidates, what with large pools of people willing to pay actual money to watch games.

Even then it seems like an iffy proposition.

It also makes me wonder what kind of cash is floating around Stockton.

Exactly, I know every D3 game I've been to, save the NCAA tournament games at Willy P/Middlebury when AMC got there, there was no charge for it. I'm assuming its like that in most of D3, where sporting events do not generate revenue through admissions.

Western Connecticut basketball games are free of charge whether your a student, faculty, or fan. Which is surprising, because they have one of the nicer gymnasium's in the Little East Conference, if not the nicest. All seats in the Feldman arena, minus the bleachers behind the baskets which they only take out for the Globetrotters anyways, are chairbacks, so if the school wanted to make a couple extra bucks that way instead of raising the tuition, they could easily charge $3 or $4 to fans because they actually have good enough seats where I wouldn't mind paying that price, not that'd I'd have to anyways going to school there and stuff. Southern Maine, UMass-Dartmouth & Plymouth all charge in upwards of $4 to sit on bleachers. Eastern Connecticut used to charge that as well for bleacher seating, but the last few times I've been there I've gotten in free, not sure if it's because I've gotten there early enough before they start ticketing, or they stopped ticketing entirely.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SgtPaul on January 28, 2014, 06:05:47 AM

At UWSP general admission for adults is $6, reserved seats are $8. Students get in free.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 28, 2014, 07:06:03 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2014, 12:23:39 AM
Here you guys go... enjoy: www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/01/28/daves-top-25-ballot-week-8/ (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/01/28/daves-top-25-ballot-week-8/)

Dave is the right forum to discuss your blog/top 25?

If so just two things: 1) maybe I missed it but can you point me in the right direction to finding KnightSlappy's rpi? Would love to have a look. 2) what was the reasoning for having Brockport St at #15 and SUNY Purchase not in your top 25, even though Purchase had given Brockport their only loss and were perfect themselves before last night? SOS or RPI? Thanks and sorry if this is the wrong forum to discuss your blog!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NYHOOPS8 on January 28, 2014, 08:46:54 AM

I find it odd that the NCAA uses the D3Hoops Top 25 on their website yet doesn't use it as a point of reference for their selection criteria.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 28, 2014, 09:12:18 AM

Quote from: NYHOOPS8 on January 28, 2014, 08:46:54 AM
I find it odd that the NCAA uses the D3Hoops Top 25 on their website yet doesn't use it as a point of reference for their selection criteria.

Anything for a little extra PR. They're smart enough to recognize the billion-dollar cash cow that is D3 basketball, and want to milk it for all it's worth.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pjunito on January 28, 2014, 09:32:24 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2014, 12:23:39 AM
Here you guys go... enjoy: www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/01/28/daves-top-25-ballot-week-8/ (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/01/28/daves-top-25-ballot-week-8/)

Thanks Dave.. I enjoy reading your Daily Dose... Please continue to post your Top 25 in this thread.. Make it easier for me to navigate. (because I know you only want to make it easier for me. )

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 28, 2014, 09:38:16 AM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 28, 2014, 09:12:18 AM
Quote from: NYHOOPS8 on January 28, 2014, 08:46:54 AM
I find it odd that the NCAA uses the D3Hoops Top 25 on their website yet doesn't use it as a point of reference for their selection criteria.
Anything for a little extra PR. They're smart enough to recognize the billion-dollar cash cow that is D3 basketball, and want to milk it for all it's worth.

LOL

+1

In all seriousness. I presume they got permission from The Great and Powerful Oz, I mean Pat (and got paid?) resulting in great publicity for the site.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on January 28, 2014, 10:01:40 AM

Greek,

I was just thinking you should ^TM or ® TGHIJGSTO!!! [ TGHIJGSTO!!!^TM TGHIJGSTO!!!^® ] ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Just Bill on January 28, 2014, 10:02:09 AM

A few years ago the NABC (men's coaches association) stopped doing their national Top 25 poll. In part, because the D3Hoops poll was being used and referenced far more than their own poll, and had a stronger reputation. I imagine the NCAA wanted to still offer some kind of national poll on their website, so D3Hoops is it.

I wish the WBCA (women's coaches association) would drop their poll too. Few schools pay attention to it and it just creates confusion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 28, 2014, 10:03:03 AM

Quote from: NYHOOPS8 on January 28, 2014, 08:46:54 AM
I find it odd that the NCAA uses the D3Hoops Top 25 on their website yet doesn't use it as a point of reference for their selection criteria.

They post all the Top 25 polls done in all divisions. What I don't like is that they use the poll but don't put a title on it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 28, 2014, 10:27:40 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2014, 12:23:39 AM
Here you guys go... enjoy: www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/01/28/daves-top-25-ballot-week-8/ (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/01/28/daves-top-25-ballot-week-8/)

Please keep posting your link. Thanks!

What are your thoughts on St. Norbert? Their only loss is to Whitewater at home. The MWC is just plain bad with the Green Knights already up four games. Grinnell, Illinois College and Ripon don't strike fear in anyone. Grzesk has them playing very good ball and he has a good track record (great things previously at Lakeland College). Their four NC wins over North Park, Oshkosh, Viterbo and Alma aren't impressive at all. Is it another year of gaudy record and one-and-done in the NCAAs?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on January 28, 2014, 10:50:10 AM

Concerning basketball revenue, I put together a quick, rough calculation on the gross intake for Hope. Seeing as Hope has lead the nation in attendance for many years, I would assume this is the highest intake of any DIII program by far.

Hope charges:
Reserved seating (1600 seats): $10 for all ages
Bleacher seating (1400 seats): $7 for adults, $5 for under 18
MIAA students, faculty, and staff: No charge

Average attendance 12-13 season: 2748 (.916 capacity)

So assuming 400 freebies, 30% of bleachers under 18, you get basically $20,000 per game. With 13 home dates in the 12-13 season, that's a total of $260,000 gross. While that is a big number, I suspect it's break even at best and probably still a net loss (takes a lot of funds to support the building, staff, coaches, etc).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 28, 2014, 11:14:37 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 28, 2014, 10:27:40 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2014, 12:23:39 AM
Here you guys go... enjoy: www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/01/28/daves-top-25-ballot-week-8/ (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/01/28/daves-top-25-ballot-week-8/)

Please keep posting your link. Thanks!

What are your thoughts on St. Norbert? Their only loss is to Whitewater at home. The MWC is just plain bad with the Green Knights already up four games. Grinnell, Illinois College and Ripon don't strike fear in anyone. Grzesk has them playing very good ball and he has a good track record (great things previously at Lakeland College). Their four NC wins over North Park, Oshkosh, Viterbo and Alma aren't impressive at all. Is it another year of gaudy record and one-and-done in the NCAAs?

I feel like we talk about St. Norbert all the time in this discussion...

St. Norbert is considerably better than their competition... but that doesn't necessarily mean that they should keep matriculating up the poll. Just because other teams are losing around them doesn't mean that SNC should keep moving up.

I would have said the same for Dubuque if they stayed undefeated... they shouldn't automatically continue to move up even though other teams around them lose.

Dubuque lost themselves, so it's a moot point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 28, 2014, 11:34:52 AM

Quote from: John Gleich on January 28, 2014, 11:14:37 AM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 28, 2014, 10:27:40 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2014, 12:23:39 AM
Here you guys go... enjoy: www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/01/28/daves-top-25-ballot-week-8/ (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/01/28/daves-top-25-ballot-week-8/)

Please keep posting your link. Thanks!

What are your thoughts on St. Norbert? Their only loss is to Whitewater at home. The MWC is just plain bad with the Green Knights already up four games. Grinnell, Illinois College and Ripon don't strike fear in anyone. Grzesk has them playing very good ball and he has a good track record (great things previously at Lakeland College). Their four NC wins over North Park, Oshkosh, Viterbo and Alma aren't impressive at all. Is it another year of gaudy record and one-and-done in the NCAAs?

I feel like we talk about St. Norbert all the time in this discussion...

St. Norbert is considerably better than their competition... but that doesn't necessarily mean that they should keep matriculating up the poll. Just because other teams are losing around them doesn't mean that SNC should keep moving up.

I would have said the same for Dubuque if they stayed undefeated... they shouldn't automatically continue to move up even though other teams around them lose.

Dubuque lost themselves, so it's a moot point.

St. Norbert's is 11th in Massey. So they must be doing something right. While their schedule is in the upper half of D-3, it's not good compared to the others around it. However, they are TCB by beating the teams they should be by the margins they should, and thus are rewarded in that measure.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 28, 2014, 11:54:51 AM

Quote from: John Gleich on January 28, 2014, 11:14:37 AM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 28, 2014, 10:27:40 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2014, 12:23:39 AM
Here you guys go... enjoy: www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/01/28/daves-top-25-ballot-week-8/ (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/01/28/daves-top-25-ballot-week-8/)

Please keep posting your link. Thanks!

What are your thoughts on St. Norbert? Their only loss is to Whitewater at home. The MWC is just plain bad with the Green Knights already up four games. Grinnell, Illinois College and Ripon don't strike fear in anyone. Grzesk has them playing very good ball and he has a good track record (great things previously at Lakeland College). Their four NC wins over North Park, Oshkosh, Viterbo and Alma aren't impressive at all. Is it another year of gaudy record and one-and-done in the NCAAs?

I feel like we talk about St. Norbert all the time in this discussion...

St. Norbert is considerably better than their competition... but that doesn't necessarily mean that they should keep matriculating up the poll. Just because other teams are losing around them doesn't mean that SNC should keep moving up.

I would have said the same for Dubuque if they stayed undefeated... they shouldn't automatically continue to move up even though other teams around them lose.

Dubuque lost themselves, so it's a moot point.

Agreed about St. Norbert. I feel like they are already too high, frankly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on January 28, 2014, 12:04:46 PM

Just looking at the poll. I was thinking about a former poster who shall be nameless. The suggestion was that "his" team should be ranked. But the top 25 voters obviously didn't think so. Even from his own region. So the top25 is broken down as such:
The top 2 regions have 5 each in the poll. MidAtlantic(2,9,12,22,25) and the Northeast(3,4,11,16,19). The Great Lakes(5,17,18,23) and MidWest(6,7,8,14) with 4 each. 3 in the West(1,10,15) 2 in the South(21,24) and 1 each in the East(20) and Atlantic(14). ORV: NE-4, MA-3, W-3, GL-3, S-3, E-2, MW-2 & A-2. This will change. But it goes to show that even his region put his team at the lower end of the poll.

On another thought regarding this. I'm impressed with the MidAtlantic teams this year. Maybe someone from the MidAtlantic could win the whole thing this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on January 28, 2014, 12:09:11 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 27, 2014, 10:30:53 PM
hplc2222 (if we choose to believe him) was a college graduate and (from the dates he claimed for attending Stockton) was 50+ years old. Absolutely no excuse for his behavior.

He was not a novice. Scroll through the Atlantic Region NJAC and the "Top 25" he created as a thread. He was perfectly capable of writing clearly and typing without errors.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 28, 2014, 12:18:50 PM

http://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com/p/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency.html?m=1

Is this the most up-to-date efficency rankings? Dated 12/18/13

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2014, 01:56:34 PM

Quote from: GnacBballFan on January 28, 2014, 07:06:03 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2014, 12:23:39 AM
Here you guys go... enjoy: www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/01/28/daves-top-25-ballot-week-8/ (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/01/28/daves-top-25-ballot-week-8/)

Dave is the right forum to discuss your blog/top 25?

If so just two things: 1) maybe I missed it but can you point me in the right direction to finding KnightSlappy's rpi? Would love to have a look. 2) what was the reasoning for having Brockport St at #15 and SUNY Purchase not in your top 25, even though Purchase had given Brockport their only loss and were perfect themselves before last night? SOS or RPI? Thanks and sorry if this is the wrong forum to discuss your blog!

Gnac... I wasn't sure if this was the right forum especially since I don't have one particular team in my poll... but I thought I would see if I would be accepted LOL.

As for your question: I was waiting to see what happened in the AMC/Purchase State game to give me a better sense of both of those teams. I just don't trust their conferences or those teams with gaudy records as a result. Remember, AMC lost three times in conference last year - if were really that good that should never happen. Purchase worries me because they have a .478 SOS as of Sunday (Staten Island's is .464 BTW). AMC's is .460. Brockport's is .578. I realize Purchase beat Brockport, but that SOS told me more than the single game did. If Purchase had won, I would have probably put them in the poll next week. Now I will consider AMC instead. Honestly, I have probably 40 teams I am seriously considering each week... far more than I usually have this time of the season, so it has been a challenge each week.

pjunito - you are welcome... I think. :)

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 28, 2014, 10:27:40 AM
What are your thoughts on St. Norbert? Their only loss is to Whitewater at home. The MWC is just plain bad with the Green Knights already up four games. Grinnell, Illinois College and Ripon don't strike fear in anyone. Grzesk has them playing very good ball and he has a good track record (great things previously at Lakeland College). Their four NC wins over North Park, Oshkosh, Viterbo and Alma aren't impressive at all. Is it another year of gaudy record and one-and-done in the NCAAs?

Here is what I wrote a few weeks ago in my blog:

Quote
Honestly, St. Norbert is too high in my poll right now... but again, someone has to fill this spot on the ballot. The team hasn't really played and beaten anyone of note except they played Whitewater and lost. Their conference isn't going to really challenge them (except a team I am not going to mention), so I am going to have to be careful not to move St. Norbert up the poll in the coming weeks just because they are winning.

I followed that with this a week later:

Quote
This may be the unsung team of the Midwest Region and Wisconsin. The Green Knights just look good right now. The problem is they never get a break since they play in a conference that is middle of the pack and sit in a geographical area where they know the first weekend of the NCAA tournament is going to be anything but a cupcake. I like St. Norbert because I think they are sneaky good... time will tell if that gut feeling is right.

I know Pat fears they are too far up in the poll and I can understand that fear (as I showed in the first comment), but they are a very good squad who isn't taking bad losses in conference right now. And I think that is the key, they are blowing away their conference when in normal years that sometimes is a battle down to the last weekend and SNC would have already lost a handful of games.

The problem is they never get to prove themselves with a deep run because they usually run into a pretty talented squad in the first or second night of the tournament (they have beaten Hope in the first round in recent years). Sure, they need to win against a really good team in the tournament to stop the skeptics, but they are probably one of the rare teams year in and year out that because of geography never get a semi-easy game or two in the first weekend. They end up always seeing Top 10 talent. If they were in the Mid-Atlantic, East, Atlantic, Northeast or the west side of the South Regions they would probably get more favorable match-ups to let them get a foothold in the tournament.

That all being said, I think the Green Knights this year surprise their skeptics with a big first weekend... though we are five weeks away from even knowing match ups at this point.

Quote from: mailsy on January 28, 2014, 12:04:46 PM
On another thought regarding this. I'm impressed with the MidAtlantic teams this year. Maybe someone from the MidAtlantic could win the whole thing this year.

The Mid-Atlantic has shocked me. I knew the CAC would be better, but not this good. Mary Washington has completely changed the complextion in that conference and that is a great sign for the future. I would argue they are a top ten conference this year as they have the best season in conference history. The Centennial has actually become more interesting than I thought it would be, but not for the usual reasons. McDaniel has proven there are some decent teams in there, but the gap from Dickinson down to the rest is still pretty wide. The MAC Commonwealth actually isn't as good at the top as I expected, but they still have very good teams and that conference race is going to be thrilling down to the end. The Landmark is a disappointment. Scranton, Catholic and Juniata just keep tripping up at the wrong time... I don't know if they get two bids this season. However, because of the CAC and the MACC... this region is far better than in recent memory.

As for the question about the SOS and RPI numbers... KnightSlappy has been kind of enough to run reports for me the last two Hoopsville nights so I have the information. When I saw the carnage in my Top 25 this past week, I decided to use those numbers - even if they are not solid just yet - to help me. Seeing major differences in SOS helped me especially for tough choices.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 28, 2014, 02:39:25 PM

Thanks for answering the questions Dave! Yes I see where you are coming from on Purchase and Albertus. With regards to Albertus and their 3 losses last yr in conference, that was a completely different team. As an albertus fan PJ will tell you I was never too high on the Falcons last yr. however, with the juco all american transfer Eian Davis, who leads the nation in assists and had 14 against purchase to go with 26 points I believe, as well his juco teammate 6'8 victor Ldujahja(forgive the spelling), this albertus team would beat this yrs team by 20. But that's my opinion and I see why you are thinking that way. Hopefully last nights win over purchase, which looked like it was gonna be a route until albertus couldn't hit free throws, and if they can pull out a win against the JWU team that has won 11 straight will change that. I sound like too much of a homer so I'll stop now lol, but I gotta stick up for my boys, they are legit this yr

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pjunito on January 28, 2014, 02:47:52 PM

Dave...

Do you take non conference SOS into consideration? Teams like Purchase, Albertus play in weak conference.. Conference combine record is 77-90, that's TGHIJGSTO!!! There is nothing Albertus can do about that other than win their games by a healthy margin (Which they have, winning by an average of 16.6 points per game). They played on the road a lot this season and have 3 players who average over 16 points a game. And they have the quickest guard in the nation by far. I don't think you have seen them play Dave. If you have, no way they are not already in your top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 28, 2014, 03:03:45 PM

Pj, you realize we just jinxed albertus into losing to JWU tomorrow right?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2014, 03:04:00 PM

Gnac - you actually raise points that are a concern... not being able to put away opponents and making sure they get past Johnson and Wales. I have a wait and see approach right now... and now they have beaten Purchase which I waited on... and now I will see how they finish the week.

pj - I have seen AMC on video and while I see your points, they still don't blow me away. Quick point guard is nice, but it isn't like they are playing against the same competition they will see in the NCAA tournament. Three guys averaging 16+ points a game is nice, but most of their games are in a conference where that shouldn't surprise people. Sure, they played a lot of games on the road in the out-of-conference season, but there isn't a team on that list that blows me away:
- Lehman (10-8 & 5-5 in a weak CUNYAC)
- Mitchell (12-4 and 8-1 in a weak NECC)
- Newbury (1-16 and 1-7 in a weak NECC)
- New Jersey City (10-7 and 6-5 in an average NJAC)
- Central Connecticut State (sure D1... but they are 5-14 and 1-5 in the NEC)
- Elms (8-10 and 6-3 in the weak NECC)
- Purchase State (14-1 and 8-0 in the weak CUNYAC)

Out of conference, Division III opponent record: 55-46 with an SOS of roughly .460.

There has to be better competition than playing CUNYAC and NECC teams. They are in Connecticut, the LEC would be a good fit, so would NEWMAC teams. Yes, the conference isn't great, but that is when you take it upon yourself to find better competition outside of the conference and AMC doesn't have that on their resume. This team will be out of the NCAA tournament if they don't win the automatic qualifier.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Just Bill on January 28, 2014, 03:13:00 PM

Quote from: iwumichigander on January 28, 2014, 12:09:11 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 27, 2014, 10:30:53 PM
hplc2222 (if we choose to believe him) was a college graduate and (from the dates he claimed for attending Stockton) was 50+ years old. Absolutely no excuse for his behavior.
He was not a novice. Scroll through the Atlantic Region NJAC and the "Top 25" he created as a thread. He was perfectly capable of writing clearly and typing without errors.

Oh my goodness. I didn't realize that. He was actually using English over there. Punctuation! Capitalization! It's unbelievable. What on earth was he playing at? I guess it doesn't matter now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 28, 2014, 03:22:45 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2014, 03:04:00 PM
Gnac - you actually raise points that are a concern... not being able to put away opponents and making sure they get past Johnson and Wales. I have a wait and see approach right now... and now they have beaten Purchase which I waited on... and now I will see how they finish the week.

pj - I have seen AMC on video and while I see your points, they still don't blow me away. Quick point guard is nice, but it isn't like they are playing against the same competition they will see in the NCAA tournament. Three guys averaging 16+ points a game is nice, but most of their games are in a conference where that shouldn't surprise people. Sure, they played a lot of games on the road in the out-of-conference season, but there isn't a team on that list that blows me away:
- Lehman (10-8 & 5-5 in a weak CUNYAC)
- Mitchell (12-4 and 8-1 in a weak NECC)
- Newbury (1-16 and 1-7 in a weak NECC)
- New Jersey City (10-7 and 6-5 in an average NJAC)
- Central Connecticut State (sure D1... but they are 5-14 and 1-5 in the NEC)
- Elms (8-10 and 6-3 in the weak NECC)
- Purchase State (14-1 and 8-0 in the weak CUNYAC)

Out of conference, Division III opponent record: 55-46 with an SOS of roughly .460.

There has to be better competition than playing CUNYAC and NECC teams. They are in Connecticut, the LEC would be a good fit, so would NEWMAC teams. Yes, the conference isn't great, but that is when you take it upon yourself to find better competition outside of the conference and AMC doesn't have that on their resume. This team will be out of the NCAA tournament if they don't win the automatic qualifier.

Dave I won't disagree with your points as I can see why you are waiting on then. The only one I guess I will disagree with is central ct state. They are still d1 scholarship players regardless of their record which is against other d1 opponents. It's most likely the best team albertus will face this yr regardless of whom they may run into

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 28, 2014, 03:26:01 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2014, 03:04:00 PM
Gnac - you actually raise points that are a concern... not being able to put away opponents and making sure they get past Johnson and Wales. I have a wait and see approach right now... and now they have beaten Purchase which I waited on... and now I will see how they finish the week.

pj - I have seen AMC on video and while I see your points, they still don't blow me away. Quick point guard is nice, but it isn't like they are playing against the same competition they will see in the NCAA tournament. Three guys averaging 16+ points a game is nice, but most of their games are in a conference where that shouldn't surprise people. Sure, they played a lot of games on the road in the out-of-conference season, but there isn't a team on that list that blows me away:
- Lehman (10-8 & 5-5 in a weak CUNYAC)
- Mitchell (12-4 and 8-1 in a weak NECC)
- Newbury (1-16 and 1-7 in a weak NECC)
- New Jersey City (10-7 and 6-5 in an average NJAC)
- Central Connecticut State (sure D1... but they are 5-14 and 1-5 in the NEC)
- Elms (8-10 and 6-3 in the weak NECC)
- Purchase State (14-1 and 8-0 in the weak CUNYAC)

Out of conference, Division III opponent record: 55-46 with an SOS of roughly .460.

There has to be better competition than playing CUNYAC and NECC teams. They are in Connecticut, the LEC would be a good fit, so would NEWMAC teams. Yes, the conference isn't great, but that is when you take it upon yourself to find better competition outside of the conference and AMC doesn't have that on their resume. This team will be out of the NCAA tournament if they don't win the automatic qualifier.

And the only other point I'll bring up is that they are 20th in the Massey after last night. Not even sure if that prices anything but is worth noting

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 28, 2014, 03:26:39 PM

Means* jeez I feel like Hp with these typos

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 28, 2014, 03:29:16 PM

Quote from: pjunito on January 28, 2014, 02:47:52 PM
Dave...

Do you take non conference SOS into consideration? Teams like Purchase, Albertus play in weak conference.. Conference combine record is 77-90, that's TGHIJGSTO^TM!!! There is nothing Albertus can do about that other than win their games by a healthy margin (Which they have, winning by an average of 16.6 points per game). They played on the road a lot this season and have 3 players who average over 16 points a game. And they have the quickest guard in the nation by far. I don't think you have seen them play Dave. If you have, no way they are not already in your top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pjunito on January 28, 2014, 03:30:23 PM

Hey Dave,

you make great points.. Would love for Oliver to schedule more competitive games... I don't think he isn't trying to. It is odd that no Western CT, no Wesleyan, and no Trinity this year. Albertus use to play these teams all the time, and also played Coast Guard and Conn College. None of these teams are on the schedule this year for various reasons. Albertus scrimmaged WPI this year, but no actual game. This will always hurt their SOS.. But, no of the teams I just mentioned (besides WPI) are having great seasons. So, it's not like they dumped great teams off their schedule.

But, your points are valid and I can't argue with the SOS and the quality of the GNAC.

However, I do disagree on the automatic qualifier. Albertus could be ranked third in the region at the end of the year. I think they have a legit shot at getting one of the Pool C bids...

GNAC< I didn't mean to jinx.. If Albertus beats JWU and St. Joes this week... And If they continue to play well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pjunito on January 28, 2014, 03:32:09 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 28, 2014, 03:29:16 PM
Quote from: pjunito on January 28, 2014, 02:47:52 PM
Dave...

Do you take non conference SOS into consideration? Teams like Purchase, Albertus play in weak conference.. Conference combine record is 77-90, that's TGHIJGSTO^TM!!! There is nothing Albertus can do about that other than win their games by a healthy margin (Which they have, winning by an average of 16.6 points per game). They played on the road a lot this season and have 3 players who average over 16 points a game. And they have the quickest guard in the nation by far. I don't think you have seen them play Dave. If you have, no way they are not already in your top 25.

Thanks Greek. Didn't know if the ^tm was officially recognized yet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 28, 2014, 03:52:48 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2014, 03:04:00 PM
Gnac - you actually raise points that are a concern... not being able to put away opponents and making sure they get past Johnson and Wales. I have a wait and see approach right now... and now they have beaten Purchase which I waited on... and now I will see how they finish the week.

pj - I have seen AMC on video and while I see your points, they still don't blow me away. Quick point guard is nice, but it isn't like they are playing against the same competition they will see in the NCAA tournament. Three guys averaging 16+ points a game is nice, but most of their games are in a conference where that shouldn't surprise people. Sure, they played a lot of games on the road in the out-of-conference season, but there isn't a team on that list that blows me away:
- Lehman (10-8 & 5-5 in a weak CUNYAC)
- Mitchell (12-4 and 8-1 in a weak NECC)
- Newbury (1-16 and 1-7 in a weak NECC)
- New Jersey City (10-7 and 6-5 in an average NJAC)
- Central Connecticut State (sure D1... but they are 5-14 and 1-5 in the NEC)
- Elms (8-10 and 6-3 in the weak NECC)
- Purchase State (14-1 and 8-0 in the weak CUNYAC)

Out of conference, Division III opponent record: 55-46 with an SOS of roughly .460.

There has to be better competition than playing CUNYAC and NECC teams. They are in Connecticut, the LEC would be a good fit, so would NEWMAC teams. Yes, the conference isn't great, but that is when you take it upon yourself to find better competition outside of the conference and AMC doesn't have that on their resume. This team will be out of the NCAA tournament if they don't win the automatic qualifier.

I guess I shoulda never said I don't disagree with you lol. But another thing is, you said it worries you albertus might not be able to put teams away. But why is that? Besides last night, in a game they didn't put away but managed to win by 8, what other game have they failed to put away? I don't wanna turn this into an albertus saga like Richard Stockton, just some fair points being questioned is all

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pjunito on January 28, 2014, 04:27:07 PM

TGHIJGSTO^TM!!! GNAC TGHIJGSTO^TM!!!

Dave, I think the reason GNAC and I are so gitty... (Can I use "gitty" in a sports forum or did that go out of style in the 90's? ) is because we've seen other Albertus teams, probably seen over 150 games last 8 years. And we've been gitty about two other teams the 2009-10 team and the 2011-12 team (both went to second round of NCAA tournaments). But, this team is so much better than any of those.

But, again.. Dave, I respect your opinion and enjoy listening to Hoopsville and reading you daily dose. Keep up the good work.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: northb on January 28, 2014, 04:34:08 PM

Quote from: pjunito on January 28, 2014, 04:27:07 PM
TGHIJGSTO^TM!!! GNAC TGHIJGSTO^TM!!!

Dave, I think the reason GNAC and I are so ~~gitty~~giddy... (Can I use "~~gitty~~giddy" in a sports forum or did that go out of style in the 90's? ) is because we've seen other Albertus teams, probably seen over 150 games last 8 years. And we've been ~~gitty~~ giddy about two other teams the 2009-10 team and the 2011-12 team (both went to second round of NCAA tournaments). But, this team is so much better than any of those.

But, again.. Dave, I respect your opinion and enjoy listening to Hoopsville and reading you daily dose. Keep up the good work.

fixed it for you, and yes you can use it

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 28, 2014, 05:00:56 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 28, 2014, 12:18:50 PM
http://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com/p/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency.html?m=1

Is this the most up-to-date efficency rankings? Dated 12/18/13

http://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com/p/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency.html

These numbers are now five days old, but more updated than the previous set.

NOTE: These are completely different than the numbers I've been running for the Pool C board (and sending to Dave for Hoopsville). The SOS here is NOT the NCAA's SOS.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 28, 2014, 06:11:19 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 28, 2014, 03:29:16 PM TGHIJGSTO^TM!!!

You sure you want to be paying royalties on this? To....him?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 28, 2014, 07:05:14 PM

I bought the rights to TGHJIGSTO^TM

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 28, 2014, 07:51:43 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 28, 2014, 07:05:14 PM
I bought the rights to TGHJIGSTO^TM

Do the world a favor and release it into the public domain.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 28, 2014, 08:01:45 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 28, 2014, 07:05:14 PM
I bought the rights to TGHJIGSTO^TM

Where did you come up with $1,000 a month?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on January 28, 2014, 08:04:11 PM

Quote from: sac on January 28, 2014, 08:01:45 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 28, 2014, 07:05:14 PM
I bought the rights to TGHJIGSTO^TM

Where did you come up with $1,000 a month?

From the billions and billions of dollars that D3 has. He just skimmed a little off the top. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 28, 2014, 09:13:08 PM

Quote from: pjunito on January 28, 2014, 03:30:23 PM
Hey Dave,

you make great points.. Would love for Oliver to schedule more competitive games... I don't think he isn't trying to. It is odd that no Western CT, no Wesleyan, and no Trinity this year. Albertus use to play these teams all the time, and also played Coast Guard and Conn College. None of these teams are on the schedule this year for various reasons. Albertus scrimmaged WPI this year, but no actual game. This will always hurt their SOS.. But, no of the teams I just mentioned (besides WPI) are having great seasons. So, it's not like they dumped great teams off their schedule.

But, your points are valid and I can't argue with the SOS and the quality of the GNAC.

However, I do disagree on the automatic qualifier. Albertus could be ranked third in the region at the end of the year. I think they have a legit shot at getting one of the Pool C bids...

GNAC< I didn't mean to jinx.. If Albertus beats JWU and St. Joes this week... And If they continue to play well.

Albertus might have the cred now to get some of the better teams to play them, with recent history. I'm not sure just how easy it is to schedule good opponents in the NE region. I haven't talked to a ton of coaches, but those I have say it's like pulling teeth to schedule any non-conference opponent. They're usually scrambling to fill dates.

I suspect the NESCAC and NEWMAC have their pick from many different offers. There's not a ton of incentive to play teams like Albertus unless you know you're going to get respect for it even in a loss.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: lildave678 on January 28, 2014, 09:21:54 PM

Exactly what I was thinking Hoops Fan...even with recent success there really is no incentive to play someone like an Albertus. If you're a top NESCAC team for example, if you win you're supposed to beat a GNAC team. If you lose, OH NO YOU LOST TO A GNAC TEAM! Maybe if they can get out of the 2nd round that'll start to change.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2014, 11:43:18 PM

AMC is welcome to come to the Hoopsville Classic (we will probably invite them formally soon - maybe)... :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 29, 2014, 06:41:04 AM

That be awesome Dave

Looking forward to this Cabrini vs Wesley game next, I'd imagine there will be video. Just read an article in the Philly enquirer about Aaron Walton-Moss, type of kid you root for. Sounds like a D1 scholarship player type of talent, can't wait to see him for the first time

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on January 29, 2014, 07:17:15 AM

I see him live regularly. He does things that are amazing! and he really is a good young man.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 29, 2014, 07:18:28 AM

Quote from: mailsy on January 29, 2014, 07:17:15 AM
I see him live regularly. He does things that are amazing! and he really is a good young man.

I took both those things away from the article as well! Looking forward to it!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 29, 2014, 07:38:38 AM

Quote from: GnacBballFan on January 29, 2014, 06:41:04 AM
That be awesome Dave

Looking forward to this Cabrini vs Wesley game next, I'd imagine there will be video. Just read an article in the Philly enquirer about Aaron Walton-Moss, type of kid you root for. Sounds like a D1 scholarship player type of talent, can't wait to see him for the first time

I saw somewhere Gordon Mann said he's going to be helping Cabrini with the broadcast, so I assume it will be available. I'd love to get up there for it, but I'm not sure that'll happen. Maybe if Mailsy buys me a ticket (do they even charge for regular season at Cabrini?).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pjunito on January 29, 2014, 09:10:49 AM

Great piece on AWM. Can't wait to see him play on Monday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on January 29, 2014, 10:34:31 AM

Top 25 games of interest for January 28th

Cabrini takes their new #2 ranking on the road and visits 13-4 Gwynedd-Mercy. The Griffins lost to Cabrini on the road 95-84, but are undefeated at home so far this year. Their other three losses are by a combined 7 points. Aaron Walton-Moss torched G-M for 29 points and 18 rebounds in the earlier meeting.

Rhode Island College invades Amherst, MA to take on the 15-2 Lord Jeffs. At 12-6 the Anchormen's streak of 7 straight 20 win seasons is in jeopardy. A big road win here would get them a little closer to that goal.

#17 Ohio Wesleyan travels to Wooster to take on the #5 Scots in the only matchup of the night featuring two top 25 teams. The Scots led from start to finish in their early December meeting. The Battling Bishops have won 5 straight since their OT loss at Wittenberg, including a road win against surging DePauw.

#9 Wesley will attempt to exact revenge for their only defeat of the season when Marymount travels to Dover, DE for a rematch. A 16-2 run midway through the first half propelled the Saints to an 80-73 victory over the Wolverines.

Platteville will look to even their season series against #10 Whitewater when the teams meet on Bo Ryan court in Platteville. The Pioneers fell to the Warhawks two weeks ago 77-58, a game in which they were within one point with 8 minutes left in the first half, but were then outscored 14-2 to trail by 13 at the half and never threatened the lead again.

North Central tries to get back into the CCIW tourney race when they travel to Rock Island, IL to take on the #14 Augustana Vikings. The Cardinals have lost five of their last six and must beat Augie in a rematch of a game the Cards lost at home by 12.

Fresh off a victory over previously unbeaten Purchase, the sixteenth ranked Albertus Magnus team hosts Johnson and Wales, RI. The J&W Wildcats are riding an 11 game win streak, and trail the first place Falcons by only one game in the GNAC title race.

And Richard Stockton plays at TCNJ.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: chip on January 29, 2014, 10:37:58 AM

Cabrini's game tonight and the one next week vs. Wesley will have live video and should have live stats as well. The easiest way to access the video is to go to their MBB schedule below and click details and then watch. Once in Live Video click the men's basketball "click to view" on the top right and it will take you to a near identical screen that will broadcast the game.

http://cabriniathletics.com/schedule.aspx?path=mbball

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on January 29, 2014, 10:52:31 AM

Quote from: chip on January 29, 2014, 10:37:58 AM
Cabrini's game tonight and the one next week vs. Wesley will have live video and should have live stats as well. The easiest way to access the video is to go to their MBB schedule below and click details and then watch. Once in Live Video click the men's basketball "click to view" on the top right and it will take you to a near identical screen that will broadcast the game.

http://cabriniathletics.com/schedule.aspx?path=mbball

Awesome, I'll be watching Monday ty

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 29, 2014, 10:53:30 AM

Gordon is planning to be at the Cabrini-Wesley game... and I may join him (need to work on some things to clear my schedule).

Interesting notes: One of Wesley's assistant coaches is A.J. Williams... former starting guard at Cabrini. And Cabrini head coach Marcus Kahn was once the grad assistant at Wesley.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 29, 2014, 11:04:37 AM

Quote from: frodotwo on January 29, 2014, 10:34:31 AM
Fresh off a victory over previously unbeaten Purchase, the sixteenth ranked Albertus Magnus team hosts Johnson and Wales, RI. The J&W Wildcats are riding an 11 game win streak, and trail the first place Falcons by only one game in the GNAC title race.

Good work Steve! +1

More importantly, The Belt^TM is on the line!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 29, 2014, 11:26:22 AM

Quote from: frodotwo on January 29, 2014, 10:34:31 AM
Top 25 games of interest for January ~~28th~~ 29th

Cabrini takes their new #2 ranking on the road and visits 13-4 Gwynedd-Mercy. The Griffins lost to Cabrini on the road 95-84, but are undefeated at home so far this year. Their other three losses are by a combined 7 points. Aaron Walton-Moss torched G-M for 29 points and 18 rebounds in the earlier meeting.

Rhode Island College invades Amherst, MA to take on the 15-2 Lord Jeffs. At 12-6 the Anchormen's streak of 7 straight 20 win seasons is in jeopardy. A big road win here would get them a little closer to that goal.

#17 Ohio Wesleyan travels to Wooster to take on the #5 Scots in the only matchup of the night featuring two top 25 teams. The Scots led from start to finish in their early December meeting. The Battling Bishops have won 5 straight since their OT loss at Wittenberg, including a road win against surging DePauw.

#9 Wesley will attempt to exact revenge for their only defeat of the season when Marymount travels to Dover, DE for a rematch. A 16-2 run midway through the first half propelled the Saints to an 80-73 victory over the Wolverines.

Platteville will look to even their season series against #10 Whitewater when the teams meet on Bo Ryan court in Platteville. The Pioneers fell to the Warhawks two weeks ago 77-58, a game in which they were within one point with 8 minutes left in the first half, but were then outscored 14-2 to trail by 13 at the half and never threatened the lead again.

North Central tries to get back into the CCIW tourney race when they travel to Rock Island, IL to take on the #14 Augustana Vikings. The Cardinals have lost five of their last six and must beat Augie in a rematch of a game the Cards lost at home by 12.

Fresh off a victory over previously unbeaten Purchase, the sixteenth ranked Albertus Magnus team hosts Johnson and Wales, RI. The J&W Wildcats are riding an 11 game win streak, and trail the first place Falcons by only one game in the GNAC title race.

And Richard Stockton plays at TCNJ.

Slight correction. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Just Bill on January 29, 2014, 12:23:18 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 29, 2014, 11:04:37 AM
Quote from: frodotwo on January 29, 2014, 10:34:31 AM
Fresh off a victory over previously unbeaten Purchase, the sixteenth ranked Albertus Magnus team hosts Johnson and Wales, RI. The J&W Wildcats are riding an 11 game win streak, and trail the first place Falcons by only one game in the GNAC title race.

Good work Steve! +1

More importantly, The Belt^TM is on the line!

That is ALWAYS the top story.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 29, 2014, 04:57:44 PM

Quote from: John Gleich on January 27, 2014, 02:05:42 PM
Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 01:48:32 PM
i guess they played 2 conselation games ? otherwise 15 losses in 13 appearances doesnt make any sense.

Yes, back in the 80's (and I don't know when they switched it), 4 teams would go to a regional for the first two rounds. There would be 2 games... and winners would take on winners, losers would take on losers. So, it would be possible to make it to a regional and come home with 2 losses.

Quotedo they still do that? have conselation games in the first 2 rounds for the gyms/arenas hosting?

Nope, not since the 80's (ish). Ask Gregory Sager, he likely knows.

The NCAA discontinued D3 regional consolation games after the '89 tournament. They went from a regional bracket structure to a sectional bracket structure for '90, and had sectional consolation games that year. They discontinued them after that one year. The national consolation game managed to hang on until it, too, got the kibosh after the '09 tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 29, 2014, 06:22:23 PM

Did they have an all-star game last year in Salem even though they were playing the quarters and semis (twice as many games)?

Maybe we can do what the NFL did and let last year's NCAA tourney fantasy league winner and this year's winner pick the all-star teams next year!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 29, 2014, 06:25:14 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 29, 2014, 06:22:23 PM
Maybe we can do what the NFL did and let last year's NCAA tourney fantasy league winner and this year's winner pick the all-star teams next year!!

Are you seriopus?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on January 29, 2014, 07:06:37 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 29, 2014, 11:04:37 AM
Quote from: frodotwo on January 29, 2014, 10:34:31 AM
Fresh off a victory over previously unbeaten Purchase, the sixteenth ranked Albertus Magnus team hosts Johnson and Wales, RI. The J&W Wildcats are riding an 11 game win streak, and trail the first place Falcons by only one game in the GNAC title race.

Good work Steve! +1

More importantly, The Belt^TM is on the line!

Wow how did I miss that ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 29, 2014, 10:02:13 PM

Wesley avenges their only loss of the year with a win over Marymount tonight.

That is one tough conference this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 30, 2014, 08:59:27 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

I had to look up and enter the Richard Stockton score myself. C'mon, Pat, did you forget to send hplc his paycheck?

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 08:42:54 PM
TALOK ABOUT PEOPLE INJ TECNOLY INDUSTRY DROPPIONG TGHE BALL;

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	624	UW-Stevens Point	19-0	def. UW-Eau Claire, 74-50; 02/01 vs. UW-Superior
#2	599	Cabrini	17-0	won at Gwynedd-Mercy, 80-77; 02/01 at Rosemont
#3	551	Amherst	16-2	def. Rhode Island College, 80-60; 01/31 at Colby; 02/01 at #19 Bowdoin
#4	537	WPI	17-1	won at Coast Guard, 71-65; 02/01 vs. T#32 Springfield
#5	512	Wooster	15-3	LOST to #17 Ohio Wesleyan, 60-62; 02/01 vs. Wabash
#6	502	Illinois Wesleyan	16-3	def. Millikin, 86-52; 02/01 vs. North Park
#7	447	Washington U.	14-2	01/31 at Rochester; 02/02 at #30 Emory
#8	436	St. Norbert	16-1	won at Lake Forest, 72-52; 02/01 vs. Knox
#9	414	Wesley	16-1	def. Marymount, 78-70; 02/01 vs. Frostburg State
#10	393	UW-Whitewater	16-3	won at UW-Platteville, 80-68; 02/01 vs. UW-Stout
#11	382	Williams	15-3	won at Castleton State, 75-62; 01/31 at Middlebury
#12	291	Mary Washington	16-2	def. Frostburg State, 87-59; 02/01 vs. Marymount
#13	285	SUNY-Purchase	15-1	LOST at #16 Albertus Magnus, 79-87; def. Mount St. Vincent, 68-48; 02/01 at Farmingdale State
#14	276	Augustana	15-4	LOST to North Central (Ill.), 59-66; 02/01 vs. Wheaton (Ill.)
#15	258	St. Thomas	14-3	def. Macalester, 89-40; 02/01 at Carleton
#16	233	Albertus Magnus	17-1	def. #13 SUNY-Purchase, 87-79; def. Johnson and Wales, 78-74; 02/01 at St. Joseph's (Maine)
#17	227	Ohio Wesleyan	15-3	won at #5 Wooster, 62-60; 02/01 vs. Hiram
#18	223	Wittenberg	15-3	def. Wabash, 70-50; 02/01 vs. Denison
#19	169	Bowdoin	16-1	won at Thomas, 106-42; 01/31 vs. Trinity (Conn.); 02/01 vs. #3 Amherst
#20	140	Brockport State	15-1	def. Cortland State, 89-71; 02/01 vs. T#37 Geneseo State
#21	124	Virginia Wesleyan	13-4	01/30 vs. Bridgewater (Va.); 02/01 at Lynchburg
#22	88	Messiah	15-2	def. Elizabethtown, 80-65; 02/01 vs. Albright
#23	66	DePauw	14-4	won at Denison, 68-63; 02/01 at Oberlin
#24	60	Texas-Dallas	15-2	LOST to Hardin-Simmons, 74-79; 01/30 vs. Sul Ross State; 02/01 vs. Howard Payne
#25	50	St. Mary's (Md.)	13-4	def. #31 Christopher Newport, 73-62; 01/30 vs. Salisbury; 02/01 vs. Penn State-Harrisburg

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	42	Oglethorpe	15-2	01/31 vs. Millsaps; 02/02 vs. Birmingham-Southern
#27	37	Whitworth	13-4	01/31 vs. Willamette; 02/01 vs. Pacific
#28	20	Calvin	14-4	won at Albion, 68-49; 02/01 vs. Alma
#29	15	Dubuque	17-1	def. Simpson, 76-66; 02/01 vs. Coe
#30	14	Emory	12-4	01/31 vs. Chicago; 02/02 vs. #7 Washington U.
#31	13	Christopher Newport	12-5	LOST at #25 St. Mary's (Md.), 62-73; 01/30 vs. Southern Virginia; 02/01 vs. York (Pa.)
T#32	12	Staten Island	16-2	won at CCNY, 74-51; 01/31 vs. Baruch
T#32	12	Springfield	14-4	won at Emerson, 68-58; 02/01 at #4 WPI
#34	11	St. Vincent	16-2	won at Washington and Jefferson, 80-77; 02/01 vs. Westminster (Pa.)
#35	10	Randolph-Macon	14-4	won at Hampden-Sydney, 69-60; 02/01 vs. Guilford
#36	9	Babson	13-5	LOST at Clark, 70-71; 02/01 at Emerson
T#37	6	Geneseo State	14-2	def. Oswego State, 81-73; 02/01 at #20 Brockport State
T#37	6	Scranton	15-3	won at Moravian, 73-65; 02/01 at Juniata
T#37	6	Carthage	13-6	def. North Park, 89-72; 02/01 at North Central (Ill.)
T#40	5	Richard Stockton	15-3	won at TCNJ, 95-71; 02/01 at Rutgers-Newark
T#40	5	Dickinson	14-4	LOST to Muhlenberg, 72-75; 02/01 at Washington College
T#40	5	Centre	13-3	01/31 at Hendrix; 02/02 at Rhodes
#43	4	Marietta	14-4	def. Otterbein, 104-68; 02/01 vs. Ohio Northern
#44	3	Colorado College	12-4	01/31 at Southwestern; 02/01 at Trinity (Texas)
T#45	1	Plattsburgh State	13-3	01/31 vs. Oneonta State; 02/01 vs. New Paltz State
T#45	1	Rose-Hulman	14-4	def. Anderson, 68-66; 02/01 vs. Defiance
T#45	1	Eastern Connecticut	14-4	won at Western Connecticut, 84-72; 02/01 vs. Plymouth State

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2014, 11:39:11 AM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 30, 2014, 08:59:27 AM
How They Fared (So Far)

I had to look up and enter the Richard Stockton score myself. C'mon, Pat, did you forget to send hplc his paycheck?
Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 08:42:54 PM
TALOK ABOUT PEOPLE INJ TECNOLY INDUSTRY DROPPIONG TGHE BALL;

Yeah. Literally every Richard Stockton home game is like that and many of their road games. We clean up unreported scores when we can, as always. :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 30, 2014, 03:13:18 PM

Sadly, Stockton is not alone in that regard in that conference. Some schools -- NJCU, Montclair, Kean and Willy P -- post everything. Others not so much.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 30, 2014, 03:31:00 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 30, 2014, 08:59:27 AM

T#40 5 Richard Stockton 15-3 won at TCNJ, 95-71

Looks like hplc2222's socks (and digestive tract) are safe until further notice.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 01, 2014, 07:21:38 PM

Cabrini 75 Rosemont 74

Walton-Moss did not play for Cabrini

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on February 01, 2014, 08:29:41 PM

Quote from: sac on February 01, 2014, 07:21:38 PM
Cabrini 75 Rosemont 74

Walton-Moss did not play for Cabrini

Any idea why he didn't play? It would be horrible for him to miss time with an injury.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 01, 2014, 08:30:55 PM

Gonna be a shake up in the Top 25 this week - Darryl's 'How They Fared' will have a lot more red than usual.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 01, 2014, 08:59:46 PM

Quote from: frodotwo on February 01, 2014, 08:29:41 PM
Quote from: sac on February 01, 2014, 07:21:38 PM
Cabrini 75 Rosemont 74

Walton-Moss did not play for Cabrini

Any idea why he didn't play? It would be horrible for him to miss time with an injury.

He was too preoccupied with the details of his Superbowl party. I hear it will be THE event of the year in the Suburban Philly social scene.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 01, 2014, 09:41:12 PM

Quote from: frodotwo on February 01, 2014, 08:29:41 PM
Quote from: sac on February 01, 2014, 07:21:38 PM
Cabrini 75 Rosemont 74

Walton-Moss did not play for Cabrini

Any idea why he didn't play? It would be horrible for him to miss time with an injury.

There's this terrific website called D3hoops.com (http://d3hoops.com/landing/index) that covers Cabrini and the other 400+ Division 3 schools like you wouldn't believe. One simple click from their front page led me to this info (http://d3hoops.com/notables/2014/02/wrapup-feb01-men):

Quote from: D3hoops.comWalton-Moss, who had a triple-double on Thursday night against Gwynedd Mercy, and in the first Cabrini-Rosemont game, injured his ankle on Thursday.

Seriously. You should check it out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on February 01, 2014, 10:03:48 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 01, 2014, 09:41:12 PM
Quote from: frodotwo on February 01, 2014, 08:29:41 PM
Quote from: sac on February 01, 2014, 07:21:38 PM
Cabrini 75 Rosemont 74

Walton-Moss did not play for Cabrini

Any idea why he didn't play? It would be horrible for him to miss time with an injury.

There's this terrific website called D3hoops.com (http://d3hoops.com/landing/index) that covers Cabrini and the other 400+ Division 3 schools like you wouldn't believe. One simple click from their front page led me to this info (http://d3hoops.com/notables/2014/02/wrapup-feb01-men):
Quote from: D3hoops.comWalton-Moss, who had a triple-double on Thursday night against Gwynedd Mercy, and in the first Cabrini-Rosemont game, injured his ankle on Thursday.
Seriously. You should check it out.

Wow what excellent information, I'll have to remember that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 01, 2014, 11:15:22 PM

Rutgers-Newark 73 Richard Stockton 63

that's a blow to their #1 credentials.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: monsoon on February 01, 2014, 11:24:51 PM

Quote from: sac on February 01, 2014, 11:15:22 PM
Rutgers-Newark 73 Richard Stockton 63

that's a blow to their #1 credentials.

Darn, what a shame.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on February 01, 2014, 11:29:26 PM

Quote from: frodotwo on February 01, 2014, 10:03:48 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on February 01, 2014, 09:41:12 PM
Quote from: frodotwo on February 01, 2014, 08:29:41 PM
Quote from: sac on February 01, 2014, 07:21:38 PM
Cabrini 75 Rosemont 74

Walton-Moss did not play for Cabrini

Any idea why he didn't play? It would be horrible for him to miss time with an injury.

There's this terrific website called D3hoops.com (http://d3hoops.com/landing/index) that covers Cabrini and the other 400+ Division 3 schools like you wouldn't believe. One simple click from their front page led me to this info (http://d3hoops.com/notables/2014/02/wrapup-feb01-men):
Quote from: D3hoops.comWalton-Moss, who had a triple-double on Thursday night against Gwynedd Mercy, and in the first Cabrini-Rosemont game, injured his ankle on Thursday.
Seriously. You should check it out.

Wow what excellent information, I'll have to remember that.

He got his ankle rolled on during the GMU game Wednesday. AWM grabbed a rebound by the foul line with under 5 minutes to go and the guy tried to grab him and fell on his AWM's leg and rolled his ankle.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 02, 2014, 05:20:45 AM

Quote from: mailsy on February 01, 2014, 11:29:26 PM
Quote from: frodotwo on February 01, 2014, 10:03:48 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on February 01, 2014, 09:41:12 PM
Quote from: frodotwo on February 01, 2014, 08:29:41 PM
Quote from: sac on February 01, 2014, 07:21:38 PM
Cabrini 75 Rosemont 74

Walton-Moss did not play for Cabrini

Any idea why he didn't play? It would be horrible for him to miss time with an injury.

There's this terrific website called D3hoops.com (http://d3hoops.com/landing/index) that covers Cabrini and the other 400+ Division 3 schools like you wouldn't believe. One simple click from their front page led me to this info (http://d3hoops.com/notables/2014/02/wrapup-feb01-men):
Quote from: D3hoops.comWalton-Moss, who had a triple-double on Thursday night against Gwynedd Mercy, and in the first Cabrini-Rosemont game, injured his ankle on Thursday.
Seriously. You should check it out.

Wow what excellent information, I'll have to remember that.

He got his ankle rolled on during the GMU game Wednesday. AWM grabbed a rebound by the foul line with under 5 minutes to go and the guy tried to grab him and fell on his AWM's leg and rolled his ankle.

Is that guy in the witness protection program now?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 02, 2014, 07:02:19 AM

Quote from: sac on February 01, 2014, 11:15:22 PM
Rutgers-Newark 73 Richard Stockton 63

that's a blow to their #1 credentials.

Holy TGHIJGSTO^TM! I wonder if our Stockton backer is having Sock chowder for his superbowl party today?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 02, 2014, 10:25:02 AM

Quote from: magicman on February 02, 2014, 07:02:19 AM
Quote from: sac on February 01, 2014, 11:15:22 PM
Rutgers-Newark 73 Richard Stockton 63

that's a blow to their #1 credentials.

Holy TGHIJGSTO^TM! I wonder if our Stockton backer is having Sock chowder for his superbowl party today?

...and he can have an extra large slice of Humble Pie for his dessert! ;) ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 02, 2014, 10:57:52 AM

Fortunately for his digestive system, he only bet his sock soup on beating TCNJ (7-13, 5-8), not against a good team like Rutgers-Newark (15-5, 11-2).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on February 02, 2014, 02:03:40 PM

#7 WashU 70, Emory 66 (Final)

Coupled with Case-Western's 80-73 win over NYU, WashU's lead has grown to 3 games in the UAA, midway through the conference season. Bears have replays of this weekend's Rochester and Emory games in the upcoming weekend at home.

WashU shot over 80% from the free-throw line today, and held Emory to 6-29 from 3-point range. Some nice icing on a 4-game road trip cake.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 02, 2014, 05:59:23 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	624	UW-Stevens Point	20-0	def. UW-Eau Claire, 74-50; def. UW-Superior, 63-46
#2	599	Cabrini	18-0	won at Gwynedd-Mercy, 80-77; won at Rosemont, 75-74
#3	551	Amherst	17-3	def. Rhode Island College, 80-60; LOST at Colby, 75-80; won at #19 Bowdoin, 70-67
#4	537	WPI	18-1	won at Coast Guard, 71-65; def. T#32 Springfield, 71-70
#5	512	Wooster	16-3	LOST to #17 Ohio Wesleyan, 60-62; def. Wabash, 75-68
#6	502	Illinois Wesleyan	16-3	def. Millikin, 86-52
#7	447	Washington U.	16-2	won at Rochester, 78-75, won at #30 Emory, 70-66
#8	436	St. Norbert	17-1	won at Lake Forest, 72-52; def. Knox, 87-51
#9	414	Wesley	17-1	def. Marymount, 78-70; def. Frostburg State, 85-49
#10	393	UW-Whitewater	17-3	won at UW-Platteville, 80-68; def. UW-Stout, 70-59
#11	382	Williams	16-3	won at Castleton State, 75-62; won at Middlebury, 64-61
#12	291	Mary Washington	17-2	def. Frostburg State, 87-59; def. Marymount, 64-53
#13	285	SUNY-Purchase	16-1	LOST at #16 Albertus Magnus, 79-87; def. Mount St. Vincent, 68-48; won at Farmingdale State, 55-46
#14	276	Augustana	15-5	LOST to North Central (Ill.), 59-66; LOST to Wheaton (Ill.), 70-76
#15	258	St. Thomas	15-3	def. Macalester, 89-40; won at Carleton, 65-59
#16	233	Albertus Magnus	17-2	def. #13 SUNY-Purchase, 87-79; def. Johnson and Wales, 78-74; LOST at St. Joseph's (Maine), 55-74
#17	227	Ohio Wesleyan	16-3	won at #5 Wooster, 62-60; def. Hiram, 88-61
#18	223	Wittenberg	15-4	def. Wabash, 70-50; LOST to Denison, 60-63
#19	169	Bowdoin	17-2	won at Thomas, 106-42; def. Trinity (Conn.), 46-39; LOST to #3 Amherst, 67-70
#20	140	Brockport State	16-1	def. Cortland State, 89-71; def. T#37 Geneseo State, 73-68
#21	124	Virginia Wesleyan	15-4	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 69-58; won at Lynchburg, 93-73
#22	88	Messiah	16-2	def. Elizabethtown, 80-65; def. Albright, 90-87
#23	66	DePauw	14-5	won at Denison, 68-63; LOST at Oberlin, 60-62
#24	60	Texas-Dallas	17-2	LOST to Hardin-Simmons, 74-79; def. Sul Ross State, 97-80; def. Howard Payne, 95-70
#25	50	St. Mary's (Md.)	14-5	def. #31 Christopher Newport, 73-62; LOST to Salisbury, 62-65; def. Penn State-Harrisburg, 79-55

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	42	Oglethorpe	16-3	def. Millsaps, 67-64; LOST to Birmingham-Southern, 65-78
#27	37	Whitworth	15-4	def. Willamette, 87-58; def. Pacific, 83-58
#28	20	Calvin	15-4	won at Albion, 68-49; def. Alma, 78-67
#29	15	Dubuque	18-1	def. Simpson, 76-66; def. Coe, 71-65
#30	14	Emory	12-6	LOST to Chicago, 60-69; LOST to #7 Washington U., 66-70
#31	13	Christopher Newport	13-5	LOST at #25 St. Mary's (Md.), 62-73; def. York (Pa.), 73-57
T#32	12	Staten Island	17-2	won at CCNY, 74-51; def. Baruch, 92-67
T#32	12	Springfield	14-5	won at Emerson, 68-58; LOST at #4 WPI, 70-71
#34	11	St. Vincent	17-2	won at Washington and Jefferson, 80-77; def. Westminster (Pa.), 101-54
#35	10	Randolph-Macon	15-4	won at Hampden-Sydney, 69-60; def. Guilford, 103-58
#36	9	Babson	14-5	LOST at Clark, 70-71; won at Emerson, 77-71
T#37	6	Geneseo State	14-3	def. Oswego State, 81-73; LOST at #20 Brockport State, 68-73
T#37	6	Scranton	16-3	won at Moravian, 73-65; won at Juniata, 63-54
T#37	6	Carthage	14-6	def. North Park, 89-72; won at North Central (Ill.), 54-49
T#40	5	Richard Stockton	15-4	won at TCNJ, 95-71; LOST at Rutgers-Newark, 63-73
T#40	5	Dickinson	15-4	LOST to Muhlenberg, 72-75; won at Washington College, 79-69
T#40	5	Centre	15-3	won at Hendrix, 71-55; won at Rhodes, 89-57
#43	4	Marietta	15-4	def. Otterbein, 104-68; def. Ohio Northern, 76-71
#44	3	Colorado College	13-5	won at Southwestern, 71-64; LOST at Trinity (Texas), 48-52
T#45	1	Plattsburgh State	15-3	def. Oneonta State, 77-54; def. New Paltz State, 90-78
T#45	1	Rose-Hulman	15-4	def. Anderson, 68-66; def. Defiance, 58-54
T#45	1	Eastern Connecticut	15-4	won at Western Connecticut, 84-72; def. Plymouth State, 59-56

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on February 03, 2014, 11:16:45 AM

Top 25 matchup between Cabrini and Wesley has been postponed. No date set.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 03, 2014, 11:48:10 AM

This one is going to get harder and harder to reschedule... in fact... I don't see another date possible.

Cabrini's schedule:
- 2/5 HOME
- 2/10 AWAY
- 2/12 AWAY
- 2/15 AWAY
- 2/17 AWAY
- 2/19 HOME

Wesley's schedule:
- 2/5 AWAY
- 2/8 HOME
- 2/12 AWAY
- 2/15 AWAY
- 2/19 HOME
- 2/22 HOME

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on February 03, 2014, 11:56:48 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 03, 2014, 11:48:10 AM
This one is going to get harder and harder to reschedule... in fact... I don't see another date possible.

Cabrini's schedule:
- 2/5 HOME
- 2/10 AWAY
- 2/12 AWAY
- 2/15 AWAY
- 2/17 AWAY
- 2/19 HOME

Wesley's schedule:
- 2/5 AWAY
- 2/8 HOME
- 2/12 AWAY
- 2/15 AWAY
- 2/19 HOME
- 2/22 HOME

The RAC has decided to let the D3 hoops national pick-em league choose the winner. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 03, 2014, 01:13:43 PM

It is a nonconference game. I guess they don't have to reschedule it, right?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on February 03, 2014, 01:24:19 PM

True. But it would be a shame if we didn't see these teams play each other.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 03, 2014, 02:22:09 PM

No... they don't have to reschedule it... it has been postponed now twice. However, I think the game would help both of them in the SOS numbers and vRRO criteria... so I bet they are trying to hash something out... it just doesn't look good unless maybe they are daring enough to try something on conference tournament week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 03, 2014, 06:22:19 PM

Here is my Top 25 ballot for Week 9: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/02/03/daves-top-25-ballot-week-9-2/ (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/02/03/daves-top-25-ballot-week-9-2/)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 03, 2014, 06:52:02 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 03, 2014, 06:22:19 PM
Here is my Top 25 ballot for Week 9: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/02/03/daves-top-25-ballot-week-9-2/ (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/02/03/daves-top-25-ballot-week-9-2/)

Good read. That Point game at Whitewater is going to be a doozy.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 03, 2014, 10:22:38 PM

Quote from: mailsy on February 03, 2014, 11:16:45 AM
Top 25 matchup between Cabrini and Wesley has been postponed. No date set.

That sucks. Cabrini is only an hour north of me (and I'm a half hour north of Wesley). They got, likely, somewhere around a foot of snow. We got barely enough to be visible on the ground - and it only lasted for a half hour. Crazy storm today.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 04, 2014, 12:59:55 AM

The rest of the week looks even worse... teams may be looking for conference games to make up leaving even less room for a non-conference tilt.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 05, 2014, 08:10:41 AM

Big game (duh!) in Whitewater tonight as the #7 Warhawks welcome #1 Stevens Point. My initial thought was that the Pointers could hold onto the #1 spot even if they lose a close one on the road since they have 24 of the 25 1st place votes. But looking again, they only have a 24 point lead, meaning the vote is a lot closer than I think it is despite the 1st place vote discrepancy. If my math is correct, the other 24 voters that didn't vote Cabrini #1 voted them #2.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 05, 2014, 10:10:11 AM

The counterbalance to that is that Cabrini is without its national player of the year candidate, but they only have one game this week, at home vs. Immaculata.

If UWW won, it would probably come down to a split of the No. 1 votes. A loss on the road at Whitewater wouldn't necessarily convince me to turn over my top spot but it depends on how the game goes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 05, 2014, 11:11:49 AM

Is there any word on how long AWM will be out or do I need to check the front page first so I don't get yelled at like my fellow Pointer, frodotwo? :'( ??? >:( ;D ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 05, 2014, 11:20:23 AM

I heard he was in the walk-through on Sunday as the team got ready for the game against Wesley... but he wasn't doing anything in regular practice. That was obviously a few days ago and now that the Wesley game has been postponed (probably for good), I suspect Cabrini is going to park him until he is heeled. Play him in games you can win without him and he gets hurt... your chances of going deep into the NCAA tournament are probably gone.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 05, 2014, 11:53:38 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 05, 2014, 11:11:49 AM
Is there any word on how long AWM will be out or do I need to check the front page first so I don't get yelled at like my fellow Pointer, frodotwo? :'( ??? >:( ;D ;)

I don't envision us doing a story solely to say AWM will play tonight. :) And I don't picture Cabrini announcing in advance that he won't play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jeffjo on February 05, 2014, 01:21:25 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 05, 2014, 08:10:41 AM
If my math is correct, the other 24 voters that didn't vote Cabrini #1 voted them #2.

You were close. To hit 600 points exactly, the votes have to average 24. Since one counted for 25 points, one must count for 23 to balance the average. So one #1, twenty-three #2's, and one #3.

I once wrote a program to guestimate the entire set of votes. It's not perfect (there always seem to be some anomalies - you'll see some below), but I think it is informative. Starting with #1, it says:

UW-Stevens Point, 24 1
Cabrini, 1, 23, 1
WPI, 0, 1, 18, 3, 0, 1, 1, (and a #13)
Washington U., 0, 0, 6, 8, 3, 2, 1, 2, 0, 1, 1, (and a #16)
Illinois Wesleyan, 0, 0, 0, 7, 4, 3, 3, 2, 2, 1, 1, 1, (and a #17)
Wesley, 0, 0, 0, 4, 5, 4, 4, 2, 1, 2, 1, 1, (and a #18)
UW-Whitewater, 0, 0, 0, 3, 6, 4, 3, 2, 2, 2, 1, 1, (and a #19)

These are spread out more than usual because somehow there are 31 points missing (all the totals add up to 8094, and it should be 8125). I'm guessing they belong somewhere in 3 to 5, since the differences in totals there are too big and that's where the result starts to look unusual. If I'm right, it can't change the rankings, but it will make somebody look closer to the top.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 05, 2014, 03:21:18 PM

Good catch. I have to retype the results manually into the page so sometimes there are issues. Missed a number typing on the keypad but it's Brockport who should have 30 more, so the order is alright. The 1 is down in the ORV section.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 05, 2014, 04:51:31 PM

Carry-over from the CCIW board (and further discussion):

Quote from: John Gleich on February 05, 2014, 03:13:29 PM
Quote from: iwu70 on February 04, 2014, 03:40:54 AM
New poll, IWU up to #5. Wash U at #4. Amherst and Wooster dropping down. Augie down to #23, Wheaton still getting some love in ORVs. No love for Gramps and his Carthage squad. Sorry Gramps. More time to go. I think Augie drops out of the top 25 with another loss or two.

Carthage women still flying high.

IWU70

Anyone else take issue with Wash U's ranking ABOVE IWU?

If ever there was a clear result in the head-to-head, the 25 point drubbing in the Nut House would be it.

I get that IWU went 1-0 on the week vs Wash U going 2-0, due to the the postponed game Saturday.

But IWU won via a 34 point drubbing of Milikin.
Wash U won their two games by a total of 7.

And I get that one of Wash U's victories had been against Emory, who was receiving votes. But Emory lost to BOTH Chicago and Wash U.

I just don't see any reason why IWU lost 23 poll points in a week that they went 1-0 and won their game by 34.

I DO get why they could have lost points the week before, after the Carthage loss (and they did lose points... 513 down to 502). But then to sink from 502 to 479 when they didn't lose?

That just doesn't make sense.

In a similar sense, I think that the ranking of UWW above St. Norbert is correct, by virtue of UWW's victory over the Knights. I don't understand how Norbert is above Amherst, Williams, and Wooster... but that's a discussion for the top 25 board.

St. Norbert is way too high. Just because teams around them are losing DOESN'T mean that a) that team needs to drop b) teams ranked lower need to be bumped up in the poll.

It's the old matriculation again, rearing its ugly head. When a team, like St. Norbert, whallops its conference, it should rise to a certain level... say, 15, or 12, but then it should stop, irregardless of what happens to the teams around it.

St. Norbert has played one good team - UW Whitewater - and they lost. They've played, and beaten, their conference, but that's not saying a whole lot.

Ergo, they should only rise to a certain point, and then stop. I get that they can't help their schedule (... well, sort of, but the MWC is a difficult environment, with only 5 non-con games allowed) but they shouldn't be rewarded for beating a bad schedule, beyond a certain point.

If they're that good, then let them make some noise in the NCAA tournament. Nobody from the MWC has done that since Lawrence was undefeated and ranked #1 in the country back in 05-06.

Maybe I'm being too harsh on St. Norbert and I'm not remember Lawrence well enough. But if you go through a season undefeated, no matter how bad your conference, it's hard to gauge exactly how good that team really is.

But, in my mind, there's no chance that St. Norbert is really better than Amherst, Williams, and Wooster.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on February 05, 2014, 05:08:33 PM

Quote from: John Gleich on February 05, 2014, 04:51:31 PM
St. Norbert is way too high. Just because teams around them are losing DOESN'T mean that a) that team needs to drop b) teams ranked lower need to be bumped up in the poll.

It's the old matriculation again, rearing its ugly head. When a team, like St. Norbert, whallops its conference, it should rise to a certain level... say, 15, or 12, but then it should stop, irregardless of what happens to the teams around it.

St. Norbert has played one good team - UW Whitewater - and they lost. They've played, and beaten, their conference, but that's not saying a whole lot.

Ergo, they should only rise to a certain point, and then stop. I get that they can't help their schedule (... well, sort of, but the MWC is a difficult environment, with only 5 non-con games allowed) but they shouldn't be rewarded for beating a bad schedule, beyond a certain point.

If they're that good, then let them make some noise in the NCAA tournament. Nobody from the MWC has done that since Lawrence was undefeated and ranked #1 in the country back in 05-06.

Maybe I'm being too harsh on St. Norbert and I'm not remember Lawrence well enough. But if you go through a season undefeated, no matter how bad your conference, it's hard to gauge exactly how good that team really is.

But, in my mind, there's no chance that St. Norbert is really better than Amherst, Williams, and Wooster.

Don't you think destroying said weak competition counts for something? I think this is where Massey provides a good sniff test, a computer system that has no regard for ordinal rank and therefore no propensity to "float up" a team just because a few teams around them lost.

Massey has St. Norbert #9 which means #8 probably isn't unreasonable.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 05, 2014, 05:16:54 PM

Having seen St. Norbert firsthand, I think that the Green Knights are legit within the lower reaches of the top ten. But I wouldn't put them any higher than that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 05, 2014, 05:58:38 PM

This week sort of showed me that St. Norbert has hit its ceiling with the voters. More concerned about the rent on Wesley being too damn high. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 05, 2014, 06:05:22 PM

If they're that good, let them make some noise in the NCAA tournament. The MWC hasn't done that since 2006, when undefeated Lawrence was ranked #1. - approximate quote from John Gleich

Even then, they didn't make all that much noise - IWU ousted them in the third round in their own gym. ;D (IWU has a proud history of doing that in the gyms of #1 or #2 ranked teams, most recently #1 Hope in round two in 2012. I haven't researched this in detail, but in just the last 10-15 years, I can recall victories @ #1 Chicago, @ #2 Hanover, and I believe we've done it in St. Louis to Wash U a couple of times [unless those were regular season games I'm remembering]. Alas, we've also lost some we should have won. :()

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 05, 2014, 06:40:40 PM

I knew when the Vikings undefeated season came up, it was only a matter of time before Ypsi would chime in and remind us (not that we needed it) who knocked them off their perch! :P :D

I do believe Lawrence dominated the first half (I was there with swampgoon) and were up double-digits at the break. But of course, the Titans came back to win. They beat Puget Sound the next night to advance.

Not to defend the MWC or to make excuses for their poor record in the NCAAs, but its tough to get out of the first weekend when the MWC rep is usually matched up with a top WIAC or CCIW school. Its not like they get to play the old Lake Michigan Conference rep or the IIAC team. I realize you have to play the best to be the best, but they just seem to get them the 1st weekend.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 05, 2014, 06:45:04 PM

I've never seen St. Norbert but was curious and looked them up ... and for those who have seen them, just how good is Kam Cerroni? A senior D1 transfer with insane shooting percentages ... 58/58/91! Although based on stats he doesn't do that much more than shoot threes (71 of 91 fgs are from downtown), a volume shooter who can hit threes at that rate and who can't be fouled seems like he would make that team dangerous vs. anyone ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 05, 2014, 07:26:26 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 05, 2014, 06:40:40 PM
I knew when the Vikings undefeated season came up, it was only a matter of time before Ypsi would chime in and remind us (not that we needed it) who knocked them off their perch! :P :D

I do believe Lawrence dominated the first half (I was there with swampgoon) and were up double-digits at the break. But of course, the Titans came back to win. They beat Puget Sound the next night to advance.

Not to defend the MWC or to make excuses for their poor record in the NCAAs, but its tough to get out of the first weekend when the MWC rep is usually matched up with a top WIAC or CCIW school. Its not like they get to play the old Lake Michigan Conference rep or the IIAC team. I realize you have to play the best to be the best, but they just seem to get them the 1st weekend.

But, of course! AND it gave me an opportunity to crow about some of the other scalps on our wall! ;D In fairness to Lawrence, earlier that year IWU had been unanimously #1 (before running into to strong headwinds in the CCIW), and by the FF was predicted by d3hoops to win it all (darned Va Wes! >:().

Except for years the committee gets really creative, it is not just tough for the MWC rep to advance - teams from both the CCIW and WIAC generally have to face off way too early.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 05, 2014, 10:07:00 PM

Point loses 81-76 in OT at Whitewater, thus opening the door for Richard Stockton to take over #1 next week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: monsoon on February 05, 2014, 10:10:48 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 05, 2014, 10:07:00 PM
Point loses 81-76 in OT at Whitewater, thus opening the door for Richard Stockton to take over #1 next week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 05, 2014, 11:50:26 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 05, 2014, 05:08:33 PM
Quote from: John Gleich on February 05, 2014, 04:51:31 PM
St. Norbert is way too high. Just because teams around them are losing DOESN'T mean that a) that team needs to drop b) teams ranked lower need to be bumped up in the poll.

It's the old matriculation again, rearing its ugly head. When a team, like St. Norbert, whallops its conference, it should rise to a certain level... say, 15, or 12, but then it should stop, irregardless of what happens to the teams around it.

St. Norbert has played one good team - UW Whitewater - and they lost. They've played, and beaten, their conference, but that's not saying a whole lot.

Ergo, they should only rise to a certain point, and then stop. I get that they can't help their schedule (... well, sort of, but the MWC is a difficult environment, with only 5 non-con games allowed) but they shouldn't be rewarded for beating a bad schedule, beyond a certain point.

If they're that good, then let them make some noise in the NCAA tournament. Nobody from the MWC has done that since Lawrence was undefeated and ranked #1 in the country back in 05-06.

Maybe I'm being too harsh on St. Norbert and I'm not remember Lawrence well enough. But if you go through a season undefeated, no matter how bad your conference, it's hard to gauge exactly how good that team really is.

But, in my mind, there's no chance that St. Norbert is really better than Amherst, Williams, and Wooster.

Don't you think destroying said weak competition counts for something? I think this is where Massey provides a good sniff test, a computer system that has no regard for ordinal rank and therefore no propensity to "float up" a team just because a few teams around them lost.

Massey has St. Norbert #9 which means #8 probably isn't unreasonable.

I wish people would stop being so provincial and look at the entire D3 universe. They have a 194 SOS ranking in Massey. But remember that's in the UPPER HALF! And a 'good team' is probably one in the upper 1/3 of D3. They've played a couple of teams in that realm. And with the emphasis on regionality in D3 they're always going to have a tough draw in the post-season. But who is to say they wouldn't do very well in another region?

A team shouldn't stop moving up unless it is proven that they are NOT all that. They are doing exactly what they are supposed to be doing, and dare I say, doing what almost every 'elite' team in D3 would do to their schedule. There should be no ceiling or floor on any team based on 'rep' or what not. The data will work out where a team should be on merit, not rep.

And how can you MOVE UP in the poll on post season success when it's the CURRENT season that we're dealing with? Past post seasons should NOT be prologue IMHO. Take each year as a separate data set.

All that I have St. Norbert at 8th in my Poster's Poll ballot. But if they keep winning like they have been and others flail, they'll move up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 06, 2014, 07:39:30 AM

I know the NCAA doesn't like it, but I do take margin of victory into account. Early in the season, you had teams like Dubuque and Husson undefeated in terrible conferences - plus winning games by single digits. St. Norbert and, to a lesser extent, Albertus Magnus - were putting up good records against bad opponents, but if you're beating bad teams by 20 and 30 points, that should count for something. It's still basketball. Even Point isn't going to beat teams near the top of the MWC by more than that.

Yeah, they have something to prove, but winning those games by big margin proves they at least deserve a spot in the conversation. (That's part of the reason I like St. Olaf. They're winning games forcefully in a conference generally better than the MWC.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on February 06, 2014, 08:37:06 AM

Relatively new to the d3 scene. Really following it hard (not just my alum this yr like I have for 6 yrs, but d3 hoops as a whole). And I love reading the insight from you guys. However, one thing I see a lot of, that really has become a pet peeve I guess, is how years past always seem to come in to play a tad with top 25 relevance. In this case St. Norbert. The way the top 25 should work, is if you keep winning and others keep losing you move up. Now of course there are other things that go into it, but we hp on here talking about Richard Stockton and there runner up finish yrs ago. And we disclaimed it since it is 2013-2014 season, and rightfully so imo. But I just seem to see years past and postseason success come into play if a team is "real" or not this yr and don't agree with it. Dave mchugh hasn't trusted my alum, albertus, this yr bc of their sos(which I get), and bc he's been burned by them in yrs past. The latter part to me I disagree with, it's a totally different team from yrs past. And in the case of st Norbert, I believe they had a ton of starters returning as well as a D1 transfer from GB come in, so who is to say they have a certain ceiling as far as the top 25 goes? Again I think your guys insight is great, just my two cents on the top 25

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 06, 2014, 09:18:10 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	624	UW-Stevens Point	20-1	LOST at #7 UW-Whitewater, 76-81
#2	600	Cabrini	18-0	~~02/03 vs. #6 Wesley~~ postponed; 02/06 vs. Immaculata
#3	556	WPI	18-1	02/06 vs. Emerson; 02/08 at #43 Babson
#4	513	Washington U.	16-2	02/07 vs. Rochester; 02/09 vs. Emory
#5	479	Illinois Wesleyan	17-3	def. #23 Augustana, 84-69; 02/08 vs. Elmhurst
#6	471	Wesley	17-1	~~02/03 at #2 Cabrini~~ postponed; 02/06 at York (Pa.); 02/08 vs. T#32 Christopher Newport
#7	467	UW-Whitewater	18-3	def. #1 UW-Stevens Point, 81-76; 02/08 at UW-Superior
#8	446	St. Norbert	18-1	won at Lawrence, 79-69
#9	444	Amherst	18-3	won at Lasell, 95-74; 02/07 vs. Connecticut College; 02/08 vs. Wesleyan
#10	396	Williams	17-3	won at Stevens, 83-68; 02/07 vs. Bates; 02/08 vs. Tufts
#11	393	Wooster	17-3	def. Kenyon, 86-56; 02/08 at Denison
#12	348	Mary Washington	18-2	won at T#39 St. Mary's (Md.), 67-61; 02/08 vs. Salisbury
#13	309	Ohio Wesleyan	16-4	LOST to #22 Wittenberg, 55-66; 02/08 at Kenyon
#14	282	St. Thomas	17-3	won at Hamline, 89-53; def. Bethel, 65-56; 02/08 vs. St. Mary's (Minn.)
#15	241	Brockport State	16-1	02/07 vs. Plattsburgh State; 02/08 vs. Potsdam State
#16	207	Virginia Wesleyan	15-5	LOST to Eastern Mennonite, 82-85; 02/08 at Randolph
#17	182	Messiah	16-3	LOST at Lycoming, 73-81; 02/08 at Arcadia
#18	172	Bowdoin	18-2	def. Plymouth State, 58-49; 02/09 at Middlebury
#19	157	Albertus Magnus	17-2	02/06 at Anna Maria; 02/08 vs. Mount Ida
#20	153	SUNY-Purchase	17-1	def. Mount St. Mary, 76-70; 02/08 vs. SUNY-Maritime; 02/09 at Yeshiva
#21	92	Whitworth	15-4	02/07 at Puget Sound; 02/08 at Pacific Lutheran
#22	90	Wittenberg	16-4	won at #13 Ohio Wesleyan, 66-55; 02/08 at Oberlin
#23	74	Augustana	15-6	LOST at #5 Illinois Wesleyan, 69-84; 02/08 at Carthage
#24	60	Texas-Dallas	17-2	02/06 at Mississippi College; 02/08 at Louisiana College
#25	57	Centre	15-3	02/07 vs. #34 Oglethorpe; 02/09 vs. Berry

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	49	Dubuque	19-1	won at Wartburg, 83-65; 02/08 at Simpson
#27	36	Calvin	15-5	LOST at T#39 Hope, 65-83; 02/08 at Adrian
#28	28	Staten Island	18-2	won at Lehman, 86-76; 02/06 at St. Joseph's (Bklyn.); 02/08 at John Jay
T#29	24	Randolph-Macon	16-4	won at Bridgewater (Va.), 76-60; 02/08 vs. Lynchburg
T#29	24	Eastern Connecticut	15-5	LOST at Wesleyan, 62-68; 02/08 at Mass-Boston
#31	18	Marietta	15-4	02/06 at Muskingum; 02/08 vs. Heidelberg
T#32	16	Christopher Newport	14-6	def. Southern Virginia, 91-76; LOST at Salisbury, 58-83; 02/08 at #6 Wesley
T#32	16	Mount Union	16-3	won at Baldwin Wallace, 104-98; 02/08 at Otterbein
#34	14	Oglethorpe	16-3	02/07 at #25 Centre; 02/09 at Sewanee
#35	12	Geneseo State	14-3	02/07 vs. Potsdam State; 02/08 vs. Plattsburgh State
#36	9	St. Vincent	17-3	LOST at Thiel, 121-124; 02/08 at Grove City
#37	7	Wheaton (Ill.)	15-6	def. Carthage, 87-54; 02/08 vs. Millikin
#38	6	Scranton	17-3	won at Merchant Marine, 75-63; 02/08 vs. Susquehanna
T#39	5	Hope	14-6	def. Kalamazoo, 76-61; def. #27 Calvin, 83-65; 02/08 vs. Albion
T#39	5	St. Mary's (Md.)	14-6	LOST to #12 Mary Washington, 61-67; 02/08 at Frostburg State
T#39	5	DePauw	14-5	02/07 vs. Allegheny; 02/08 vs. Hiram
#42	3	Rose-Hulman	16-4	won at Earlham, 65-54; 02/08 at Manchester
#43	2	Babson	14-5	02/06 vs. Wheaton (Mass.); 02/08 vs. #3 WPI
T#44	1	Rutgers-Newark	15-5	~~02/05 at William Paterson~~ postponed; 02/08 vs. TCNJ
T#44	1	Springfield	14-5	02/06 vs. MIT; 02/08 at Wheaton (Mass.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 06, 2014, 11:18:13 AM

Quote from: GnacBballFan on February 06, 2014, 08:37:06 AM
The way the top 25 should work, is if you keep winning and others keep losing you move up.

Well, honestly, that isn't really the case, though. If Albertus or Husson keep winning, there aren't teams on that schedule that merit them moving up. Whereas if someone such as Whitewater loses a game to a ranked opponent or a particularly strong team in its particularly strong conference, that doesn't mean they have to move down.

What worries me about St. Norbert is the primary point in their favor is a loss. It is not a bad loss, by any stretch, but it's a loss. Best out of conference win is UW-Oshkosh, sixth in the WIAC. A decent win, but there's some gap in there. St. Norbert could be reasonably thought to be slotted between the third- and fifth-best team in the WIAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 06, 2014, 11:31:33 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 06, 2014, 11:18:13 AM
Quote from: GnacBballFan on February 06, 2014, 08:37:06 AM
The way the top 25 should work, is if you keep winning and others keep losing you move up.

Well, honestly, that isn't really the case, though. If Albertus or Husson keep winning, there aren't teams on that schedule that merit them moving up. Whereas if someone such as Whitewater loses a game to a ranked opponent or a particularly strong team in its particularly strong conference, that doesn't mean they have to move down.

What worries me about St. Norbert is the primary point in their favor is a loss. It is not a bad loss, by any stretch, but it's a loss. Best out of conference win is UW-Oshkosh, sixth in the WIAC. A decent win, but there's some gap in there. St. Norbert could be reasonably thought to be slotted between the third- and fifth-best team in the WIAC.

The data on Massey shows that they WOULD be the #3 team in the WIAC, Pat! (LAX is fourth at #53 and Platteville is fifth at #57)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Just Bill on February 06, 2014, 11:54:13 AM

Quote from: GnacBballFan on February 06, 2014, 08:37:06 AM
The way the top 25 should work, is if you keep winning and others keep losing you move up.

That would describe standings. Standings are completely objective. Whatever you're record is, it is, and that's where you sit.

These are rankings. Inherently subjective. There's simply no hard and fast, automatic rules that can be applied when 25 people meld their opinion into one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D3HoopJunkie on February 06, 2014, 12:00:17 PM

Pat, I must say that like GNACBballFan I to am fairly new to the D3 scene as a whole. However just to your point on Top 25 NOT moving up and down based on simply winning and losing I must disagree with you. That is exactly what you get with the D1 polls week in and week out. Its who is winning there games and who is losing. Now I realize that there is certainly much more parity within the D1 ranks an amongst the conferences but at the same time I think a perfect example to counter your point for this year in D1 is Wichita State who is currently the #4 ranked team in the country. They play in the Missouri Valley which certainly isnt the "cream of the crop" and yet are ranked #4. They actually have a great RPI but there SOS is definitely down because of there weak conference. I personal thin they are going to run the regular season table.

Just wanted to get your thoughts on this. Simply trying to get a better understanding. Thanks

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 06, 2014, 12:45:19 PM

Quote from: D3HoopJunkie on February 06, 2014, 12:00:17 PM
Pat, I must say that like GNACBballFan I to am fairly new to the D3 scene as a whole. However just to your point on Top 25 NOT moving up and down based on simply winning and losing I must disagree with you. That is exactly what you get with the D1 polls week in and week out. Its who is winning there games and who is losing. Now I realize that there is certainly much more parity within the D1 ranks an amongst the conferences but at the same time I think a perfect example to counter your point for this year in D1 is Wichita State who is currently the #4 ranked team in the country. They play in the Missouri Valley which certainly isnt the "cream of the crop" and yet are ranked #4. They actually have a great RPI but there SOS is definitely down because of there weak conference. I personal thin they are going to run the regular season table.

Just wanted to get your thoughts on this. Simply trying to get a better understanding. Thanks

It all comes down to what you want the objective of the D3hoops.com Top 25 to be. Should it be:

A) A reflection of the teams with the best records? If that's the case, you just automatically move teams up as they win, and down as they lose.

or

B) A reflection - the best guess of the voters at that given moment - of the top 25 teams, in order? In other words, if #1 played #2 on a neutral court, the poll would predict #1 to win the game. If that's the case, then way more goes into it than moving teams up and down based on wins and losses.

I've always been in the "B" camp. With the UW-Stevens Point/UW-Whitewater game last night, for example, I don't even consider that an "upset." UWSP lost on the road, in OT, at the 2nd best team in the WIAC - to me, that is an expected result. I don't consider the Pointers any less of a team today because of what happened last night. If I had them #1 before that game, I'd still have them #1. By the same token, if Cabrini beats Cairn Monday, I won't consider the Cavaliers a better team than I did before the game was played.

I believe you have to dig into wins and losses carefully, factoring in strength of schedule, when you put a Top 25 poll together.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 06, 2014, 01:12:33 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on February 06, 2014, 12:45:19 PM
Quote from: D3HoopJunkie on February 06, 2014, 12:00:17 PM
Pat, I must say that like GNACBballFan I to am fairly new to the D3 scene as a whole. However just to your point on Top 25 NOT moving up and down based on simply winning and losing I must disagree with you. That is exactly what you get with the D1 polls week in and week out. Its who is winning there games and who is losing. Now I realize that there is certainly much more parity within the D1 ranks an amongst the conferences but at the same time I think a perfect example to counter your point for this year in D1 is Wichita State who is currently the #4 ranked team in the country. They play in the Missouri Valley which certainly isnt the "cream of the crop" and yet are ranked #4. They actually have a great RPI but there SOS is definitely down because of there weak conference. I personal thin they are going to run the regular season table.

Just wanted to get your thoughts on this. Simply trying to get a better understanding. Thanks

It all comes down to what you want the objective of the D3hoops.com Top 25 to be. Should it be:

A) A reflection of the teams with the best records? If that's the case, you just automatically move teams up as they win, and down as they lose.

or

B) A reflection - the best guess of the voters at that given moment - of the top 25 teams, in order? In other words, if #1 played #2 on a neutral court, the poll would predict #1 to win the game. If that's the case, then way more goes into it than moving teams up and down based on wins and losses.

I've always been in the "B" camp. With the UW-Stevens Point/UW-Whitewater game last night, for example, I don't even consider that an "upset." UWSP lost on the road, in OT, at the 2nd best team in the WIAC - to me, that is an expected result. I don't consider the Pointers any less of a team today because of what happened last night. If I had them #1 before that game, I'd still have them #1. By the same token, if Cabrini beats Cairn Monday, I won't consider the Cavaliers a better team than I did before the game was played.

I believe you have to dig into wins and losses carefully, factoring in strength of schedule, when you put a Top 25 poll together.

Well said.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on February 06, 2014, 01:48:46 PM

Incidentally Cabrini's game against Immaculata, which was postponed from Wednesday to tonight, is now postponed with the make up date TBD. Cabrini's campus hasn't had power fully restored yet after yesterday's storm.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on February 06, 2014, 01:51:19 PM

I think my quote of "move teams up as they win or lose" came off in the wrong way. I don't simply think teams move up and down based on losses in the sense that #7 beats #6 and they swap spots. I understand there is objectivity and sos(I agreed with this part in my post) that go into the process. What I don't get is when previous yrs are involved and how certain teams/conferences have done in the tourney in yrs past. That's my fault for not making that clear.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 06, 2014, 01:59:20 PM

Quote from: D3HoopJunkie on February 06, 2014, 12:00:17 PM
Pat, I must say that like GNACBballFan I to am fairly new to the D3 scene as a whole. However just to your point on Top 25 NOT moving up and down based on simply winning and losing I must disagree with you. That is exactly what you get with the D1 polls week in and week out. Its who is winning there games and who is losing. Now I realize that there is certainly much more parity within the D1 ranks an amongst the conferences but at the same time I think a perfect example to counter your point for this year in D1 is Wichita State who is currently the #4 ranked team in the country. They play in the Missouri Valley which certainly isnt the "cream of the crop" and yet are ranked #4. They actually have a great RPI but there SOS is definitely down because of there weak conference. I personal thin they are going to run the regular season table.

Just wanted to get your thoughts on this. Simply trying to get a better understanding. Thanks

But this isn't Division I. We have more teams, we play fewer games and we have fewer out of region games.

Cabrini doesn't play in the Missouri Valley of D-III, however. Cabrini's conference is the 36th-best out of the 47 groupings in D-III that Massey rates, for example. The Missouri Valley is 11th out of 39. For Cabrini to have a similar conference slate, they'd have to play in the Landmark or the Iowa Conference.

There is such a wide, wide disparity. Cabrini has the No. 1193 schedule in college basketball as per Massey, while UWSP has the No. 669 schedule.

Even if Massey is not perfect, that is a huge, huge difference. It's a lot easier to go unbeaten vs. Cabrini's schedule.

Massey, for example, thinks Whitewater is the 324th-best program in all of college basketball. Best team on Cabrini's schedule is No. 449 Randolph-Macon, and Cabrini doesn't have to play them twice or play at their place. Toughest road game was at No. 685 St. Mary's.

Massey doesn't have to be perfect, just in the ballpark, to show how much of a difference there is in the teams' schedules.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 06, 2014, 02:01:43 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 06, 2014, 01:59:20 PM
Cabrini doesn't play in the Missouri Valley of D-III, however. Cabrini's conference is the 36th-best out of the 47 groupings in D-III that Massey rates, for example. The Missouri Valley is 11th out of 39. For Cabrini to have a similar conference slate, they'd have to play in the Landmark or the Iowa Conference.

One last point for those who understand D-I better. It's not like Cabrini is playing in D-III's Missouri Valley Conference. Cabrini is playing in D-III's Atlantic Sun or Southland.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 06, 2014, 02:06:55 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 06, 2014, 01:59:20 PM
Quote from: D3HoopJunkie on February 06, 2014, 12:00:17 PM
Pat, I must say that like GNACBballFan I to am fairly new to the D3 scene as a whole. However just to your point on Top 25 NOT moving up and down based on simply winning and losing I must disagree with you. That is exactly what you get with the D1 polls week in and week out. Its who is winning there games and who is losing. Now I realize that there is certainly much more parity within the D1 ranks an amongst the conferences but at the same time I think a perfect example to counter your point for this year in D1 is Wichita State who is currently the #4 ranked team in the country. They play in the Missouri Valley which certainly isnt the "cream of the crop" and yet are ranked #4. They actually have a great RPI but there SOS is definitely down because of there weak conference. I personal thin they are going to run the regular season table.

Just wanted to get your thoughts on this. Simply trying to get a better understanding. Thanks

But this isn't Division I. We have more teams, we play fewer games and we have fewer out of region games.

Cabrini doesn't play in the Missouri Valley of D-III, however. Cabrini's conference is the 36th-best out of the 47 groupings in D-III that Massey rates, for example. The Missouri Valley is 11th out of 39. For Cabrini to have a similar conference slate, they'd have to play in the Landmark or the Iowa Conference.

There is such a wide, wide disparity. Cabrini has the No. 1193 schedule in college basketball as per Massey, while UWSP has the No. 669 schedule.

Even if Massey is not perfect, that is a huge, huge difference. It's a lot easier to go unbeaten vs. Cabrini's schedule.

Massey, for example, thinks Whitewater is the 324th-best program in all of college basketball. Best team on Cabrini's schedule is No. 449 Randolph-Macon, and Cabrini doesn't have to play them twice or play at their place. Toughest road game was at No. 685 St. Mary's.

Massey doesn't have to be perfect, just in the ballpark, to show how much of a difference there is in the teams' schedules.

But, if Cabrini pounds everyone like they are supposed to, who is to say they're not the best in the country even with their schedule? You have to factor in ALL of the data, not automatically pooh-pooh it because of one factor (SOS). Don't get all Billy Packer on us, people...

It's very rare for a team with that SOS to be that highly rated in a valid algorithm unless it was really warranted, but here they are and it seems valid, no matter what the elitists and nay-sayers may think. Conference play is hard no matter who you play and what league you're in. You see those teams sometimes you know your opponents better than you know yourself.

They did drop after their narrow win against Rosemont, down to #4. And that drop was valid. I was surprised they didn't drop more - but the body of work is larger now - there is more data to work with.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 06, 2014, 02:12:51 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 06, 2014, 02:01:43 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 06, 2014, 01:59:20 PM
Cabrini doesn't play in the Missouri Valley of D-III, however. Cabrini's conference is the 36th-best out of the 47 groupings in D-III that Massey rates, for example. The Missouri Valley is 11th out of 39. For Cabrini to have a similar conference slate, they'd have to play in the Landmark or the Iowa Conference.

One last point for those who understand D-I better. It's not like Cabrini is playing in D-III's Missouri Valley Conference. Cabrini is playing in D-III's Atlantic Sun or Southland.

Except the Atlantic Sun and Southland are usually used as punching bags for the elite teams, unless one of their teams happens to get really good, then they don't get games anymore and then the bloviating elitists on the tee vee will pooh-pooh their schedules even though the corrupt system prevented them from getting good games. Yeah, it irks me to no end.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 06, 2014, 02:18:21 PM

Quote from: smedindy on February 06, 2014, 02:06:55 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 06, 2014, 01:59:20 PM
Quote from: D3HoopJunkie on February 06, 2014, 12:00:17 PM
Pat, I must say that like GNACBballFan I to am fairly new to the D3 scene as a whole. However just to your point on Top 25 NOT moving up and down based on simply winning and losing I must disagree with you. That is exactly what you get with the D1 polls week in and week out. Its who is winning there games and who is losing. Now I realize that there is certainly much more parity within the D1 ranks an amongst the conferences but at the same time I think a perfect example to counter your point for this year in D1 is Wichita State who is currently the #4 ranked team in the country. They play in the Missouri Valley which certainly isnt the "cream of the crop" and yet are ranked #4. They actually have a great RPI but there SOS is definitely down because of there weak conference. I personal thin they are going to run the regular season table.

Just wanted to get your thoughts on this. Simply trying to get a better understanding. Thanks

But this isn't Division I. We have more teams, we play fewer games and we have fewer out of region games.

Cabrini doesn't play in the Missouri Valley of D-III, however. Cabrini's conference is the 36th-best out of the 47 groupings in D-III that Massey rates, for example. The Missouri Valley is 11th out of 39. For Cabrini to have a similar conference slate, they'd have to play in the Landmark or the Iowa Conference.

There is such a wide, wide disparity. Cabrini has the No. 1193 schedule in college basketball as per Massey, while UWSP has the No. 669 schedule.

Even if Massey is not perfect, that is a huge, huge difference. It's a lot easier to go unbeaten vs. Cabrini's schedule.

Massey, for example, thinks Whitewater is the 324th-best program in all of college basketball. Best team on Cabrini's schedule is No. 449 Randolph-Macon, and Cabrini doesn't have to play them twice or play at their place. Toughest road game was at No. 685 St. Mary's.

Massey doesn't have to be perfect, just in the ballpark, to show how much of a difference there is in the teams' schedules.

But, if Cabrini pounds everyone like they are supposed to, who is to say they're not the best in the country even with their schedule? You have to factor in ALL of the data, not automatically pooh-pooh it because of one factor (SOS). Don't get all Billy Packer on us, people...

It's very rare for a team with that SOS to be that highly rated in a valid algorithm unless it was really warranted, but here they are and it seems valid, no matter what the elitists and nay-sayers may think. Conference play is hard no matter who you play and what league you're in. You see those teams sometimes you know your opponents better than you know yourself.

They did drop after their narrow win against Rosemont, down to #4. And that drop was valid. I was surprised they didn't drop more - but the body of work is larger now - there is more data to work with.

Which is why Cabrini has gotten to No. 2 in the first place, and similarly, how St. Norbert has gotten to No. 8. But not all unbeaten teams have proven the same thing with their resume so far.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 06, 2014, 02:51:44 PM

Cabrini IS the only undefeated team. I may or may not vote them #1 next week in my ballot as it depends on the weekend's result.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 06, 2014, 03:07:51 PM

Quote from: smedindy on February 06, 2014, 02:51:44 PM
Cabrini IS the only undefeated team. I may or may not vote them #1 next week in my ballot as it depends on the weekend's result.

Right. The only question is how many teams would be undefeated against that schedule ... those are the sorts of things a lot of the voters consider.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 06, 2014, 03:24:36 PM

Quote from: smedindy on February 06, 2014, 02:51:44 PM
Cabrini IS the only undefeated team. I may or may not vote them #1 next week in my ballot as it depends on the weekend's result.

Neither Point nor Cabrini play this weekend. Is there someone else you had in mind being #1?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 06, 2014, 03:31:42 PM

My people are calling representatives of both teams and we are scrambling our resources to set up a scrimmage to settle who is the best team this weekend as both have an open date Saturday.. Its a scrimmage since the teams don't want to go over the 25-game threshold.

Stevens Point is willing to travel East, but the temperature needs to be above 70°. Cabrini just want power. Cabrini reps will more than likely agree to financial terms but a sticking point is locating an unused aircraft carrier to play the game on.

Details forthcoming!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 06, 2014, 03:42:21 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on February 06, 2014, 01:48:46 PM
Incidentally Cabrini's game against Immaculata, which was postponed from Wednesday to tonight, is now postponed with the make up date TBD. Cabrini's campus hasn't had power fully restored yet after yesterday's storm.

Scheduled for next Thursday now. They will have a game Wednesday, Thursday and Saturday. Immaculata has a game this weekend already.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 06, 2014, 04:16:52 PM

Pretty much ends anyone's hopes that Cabrini-Wesley would make up their twice-postponed game (though, I really didn't have hope).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 06, 2014, 04:50:15 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 06, 2014, 03:24:36 PM
Quote from: smedindy on February 06, 2014, 02:51:44 PM
Cabrini IS the only undefeated team. I may or may not vote them #1 next week in my ballot as it depends on the weekend's result.

Neither Point nor Cabrini play this weekend. Is there someone else you had in mind being #1?

No. But these things interlock with other games and stuff and things.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 06, 2014, 04:51:20 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 06, 2014, 03:07:51 PM
Quote from: smedindy on February 06, 2014, 02:51:44 PM
Cabrini IS the only undefeated team. I may or may not vote them #1 next week in my ballot as it depends on the weekend's result.

Right. The only question is how many teams would be undefeated against that schedule ... those are the sorts of things a lot of the voters consider.

But power rankings will take that into account. Remember it's not just that they won, it's how they won.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 06, 2014, 04:52:18 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 06, 2014, 04:16:52 PM
Pretty much ends anyone's hopes that Cabrini-Wesley would make up their twice-postponed game (though, I really didn't have hope).

They should meet in the tournament then. Make it so, NCAA!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 06, 2014, 05:33:09 PM

Quote from: GnacBballFan on February 06, 2014, 01:51:19 PM
I think my quote of "move teams up as they win or lose" came off in the wrong way. I don't simply think teams move up and down based on losses in the sense that #7 beats #6 and they swap spots. I understand there is objectivity and sos(I agreed with this part in my post) that go into the process. What I don't get is when previous yrs are involved and how certain teams/conferences have done in the tourney in yrs past. That's my fault for not making that clear.

Here's my 2c on this question. As has been alluded to in several previous posts, D3 is not as national as D1, Teams tend to play non-conference games against teams in their general area. There are relatively few intersectional games, whereas such games are common in D1. Therefore your average D3 team's record will be heavily dependent on how they stand relative to the other teams in their (for lack of a better term) region. It's much more difficult to compare regions, and consequently teams from different regions. SOS and Massey are tools that can help shed light on these comparisons.

It is true that this year's Albertus (or whoever) is not last year's Albertus. I could argue that, due in large part to the importance of coaching at the D3 level, it's not unreasonable to use last year's result as one factor in gauging this year's team, but I won't. Instead I will argue that, while teams go up and down from one year to the next, regions as a whole tend to stay relatively stable. How good the Mid-Atlantic Region as a whole is vis-a-vis the other regions is likely to be fairly close to how the were last year.

Finally, intersectional games, while rare in the regular season, abound (relatively speaking) in the NCAA tournament, especially as you get deeper in the draw. (Of course, they don't abound nearly as much as some of us would like.)

If you put all of these factors together, what you realize is that there is a certain amount of predictive value in how the members of a conference or region have fared in recent tournaments when considering the prospects of a team this year. Take Richard Stockton, for example. They are running up a good record in the NJAC and Atlantic Region, or so I have been told. What does that mean on a national level? Well, in the recent past, it has meant diddly, as the NJAC teams have gone belly-up in the NCAA tournament despite gaudy records. Does that mean that Stockton State will as well? No, but, well, maybe it does. It does mean that caution should be exercised when getting dazzled by a great record in the Atlantic.

Or look at Cabrini. Brilliant record, crappy conference, mamby-pamby schedule. Are they the bees knees nationally? Well, they were in the national title game two years ago, and a sectional final last year, so they (or a reasonable facsimile thereof) have shown that their game works even when the competition steps up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 06, 2014, 06:05:05 PM

But, when there's enough data, the data will illustrate what you said by basing it on the profiles of the teams played this season. I contend that the data will throw out contenders and pretenders. Last year's Albertus Magnus squad had a horrid Massey profile, for good reason.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 06, 2014, 09:41:23 PM

FYI... #3 WPI losses at home to Emerson and #6 Wesley losses on the road to York (Pa.).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on February 06, 2014, 09:46:27 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 06, 2014, 09:41:23 PM
FYI... #3 WPI losses at home to Emerson and #6 Wesley losses on the road to York (Pa.).

By 14!! Losing 62-48.

Do you think the focus on Cabrini(and subsequent postponement) had anything to do with that?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 06, 2014, 09:49:58 PM

You never know... possibly... that was actually two games for them that were postponed... tonight's was supposed to be played last night... York County, PA was pretty hammered by the two back-to-back storms. What I saw, they didn't look focused.

By the way... Cabrini will play FOUR games next week!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 06, 2014, 09:59:29 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 06, 2014, 09:41:23 PM
FYI... #3 WPI losses at home to Emerson and #6 Wesley losses on the road to York (Pa.).

Emerson also beat Amherst earlier this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 06, 2014, 10:04:57 PM

Yep... it was hard to miss that one as Amherst was #1 at the time :).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 06, 2014, 10:06:51 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 06, 2014, 10:04:57 PM
Yep... it was hard to miss that one as Amherst was #1 at the time :).

I think you meant Belt^TM holders at the time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on February 06, 2014, 11:54:17 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 06, 2014, 09:49:58 PM
You never know... possibly... that was actually two games for them that were postponed... tonight's was supposed to be played last night... York County, PA was pretty hammered by the two back-to-back storms. What I saw, they didn't look focused.

By the way... Cabrini will play FOUR games next week!

Yeah. I know. ??? Monday 2/10 at Cairn(Massey rating #401) who won their second game of the season tonight. Wednesday 2/12 at Centenary(374). They won tonight over Rosemont. Thursday 2/13 vs Immaculata (315) this is the 2x postponement game and finally at Baptist Bible (323) on 2/15 who just lost to Cairn(see above). A loss to any of these teams will drop them in the polls.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 07, 2014, 12:50:13 AM

I'm betting that UWSP will remain #1, though perhaps only winning 15 of the 25 #1 votes. What say y'all?

I suspect many thought that #3 WPI had floated up to high, and will take the opportunity to drop them precipitously (losing AT HOME to a team that was 10-9 can do that). Likewise for #6 Wesley, losing (albeit on the road) to a team that was 3-16 can also do that sort of thing. I'd expect both to fall to the teens.

Recognizing that we still have weekend games, I'll take a stab at a top 5 of UWSP, Cabrini, Wash U, IWU, and UWW. Though, since IWU destroyed Wash U h-to-h, I have trouble with 3 and 4. I personally at this moment in time would have 3. IWU, 4. UWW, 5. Wash U.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 07, 2014, 09:04:01 AM

Had Cabrini played this week and won, I was still pretty confident Point would remain #1, this after losing to the #7 team on the road in OT. With shocking losses by WPI and Wesley, the Top 5 will definitely have a different look.

I'm not sure if Whitewater has enough to jump Wash U. as the Bears have a 46 point lead on the Warhawks. They are only 12 behind the Titans.

With no horse in the race, I really don't have any problem with Wash U. being above IWU despite them losing to your boys. How long can you use that? Aside from that head to head loss, Wash U. has lost just once while IWU has lost THREE times. What if IWU had 4 losses or 5 losses? Can you still use that H2H card to validate putting IWU ahead of Wash U.? Where do you draw the line?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 07, 2014, 01:07:51 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 07, 2014, 09:04:01 AM
Had Cabrini played this week and won, I was still pretty confident Point would remain #1, this after losing to the #7 team on the road in OT. With shocking losses by WPI and Wesley, the Top 5 will definitely have a different look.

I'm not sure if Whitewater has enough to jump Wash U. as the Bears have a 46 point lead on the Warhawks. They are only 12 behind the Titans.

With no horse in the race, I really don't have any problem with Wash U. being above IWU despite them losing to your boys. How long can you use that? Aside from that head to head loss, Wash U. has lost just once while IWU has lost THREE times. What if IWU had 4 losses or 5 losses? Can you still use that H2H card to validate putting IWU ahead of Wash U.? Where do you draw the line?

I think you can given how utterly mediocre the UAA is this year. I know the travel is a killer, but still, that schedule isn't proving much.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 07, 2014, 01:42:08 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 07, 2014, 01:07:51 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 07, 2014, 09:04:01 AM
Had Cabrini played this week and won, I was still pretty confident Point would remain #1, this after losing to the #7 team on the road in OT. With shocking losses by WPI and Wesley, the Top 5 will definitely have a different look.

I'm not sure if Whitewater has enough to jump Wash U. as the Bears have a 46 point lead on the Warhawks. They are only 12 behind the Titans.

With no horse in the race, I really don't have any problem with Wash U. being above IWU despite them losing to your boys. How long can you use that? Aside from that head to head loss, Wash U. has lost just once while IWU has lost THREE times. What if IWU had 4 losses or 5 losses? Can you still use that H2H card to validate putting IWU ahead of Wash U.? Where do you draw the line?

I think you can given how utterly mediocre the UAA is this year. I know the travel is a killer, but still, that schedule isn't proving much.

Ironically, the UAA is ranked as one of the top conferences in both non-con wins and in Massey. I think it's the lack of truly abysmal teams... the bottom is just higher than in the past, and while there aren't a lot of top contenders (just Wash U) there are several in the 30-60 range.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 07, 2014, 01:50:46 PM

Quote from: John Gleich on February 07, 2014, 01:42:08 PM
Ironically, the UAA is ranked as one of the top conferences in both non-con wins and in Massey.

Yes, Massey has had the UAA and CCIW as the top 2 conferences most of the season - they're basically tied for 1st today.

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?s=cb2014&sub=11620&c=1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 07, 2014, 01:52:29 PM

It's depth and breadth. I don't think teams are 'weaker' this year - more are stronger.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 07, 2014, 03:23:18 PM

Wash U. hasn't lost since the IWU setback, while th Titans have dropped two games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 07, 2014, 03:53:23 PM

The UAA went 62-25 in the non-conference, every team won at least 6 games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 07, 2014, 10:23:19 PM

Plattsburgh State knocks off #15 Brockport State 92-89 and ends the Golden Eagles winning streak at 15. Outstanding game by both teams as Plattsburgh avenged an earlier loss to Brockport and closed the gap on the league leading Eagles. Brockport remains in first place in the SUNYAC with a 10-1 record. Plattsburgh is in second place with a 10-2 record.

Tomorrow Plattsburgh completes their two day road trip as they travel over to Geneseo to take on the third place Knights who have a 9-2 league record. The SUNYAC is one of only 2 leagues in D3 that has 3 teams with 3 losses or less. the other league is the NESCAC. The 3 teams in the SUNYAC are Brockport 16-2, Plattsburgh 16-3, and Geneseo 16-3.

The NESCAC teams are Amherst 19-3, Bowdoin 18-2 and Williams 18-3.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 08, 2014, 03:49:47 PM

Final: Babson 71 #3 WPI 62

Having watched WPI on video this year, I am underwhelmed and don't consider them a top 10 team...and certainly not the #3 team in the nation. With 2 losses this week, hopefully they will drop out of the top ten.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 08, 2014, 04:15:34 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on February 08, 2014, 03:49:47 PM
Final: Babson 71 #3 WPI 62

Having watched WPI on video this year, I am underwhelmed and don't consider them a top 10 team...and certainly not the #3 team in the nation. With 2 losses this week, hopefully they will drop out of the top ten.

I think I had them about 24th before this week. So... yeah.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 08, 2014, 04:35:33 PM

Massey had WPI #27 before these two losses.

Looks like just they floated up the D3hoops.com poll behind a gaudy record against a weak schedule (Massey SOS of #273).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 08, 2014, 05:01:11 PM

Wesley Wesleyan barely avoids their second loss of the week, escaping Christopher Newport at home 66-63. Maybe it's just as well that the Cabrini game evaporated.

All three ranked NCAC teams sweated out narrow road victories over "Bottom Six" (the conference's second division) teams:
Wooster 78, Denison 73 (Denison won at Wittenberg last week)
Wittenberg 70, Oberlin 63 (Oberlin beat DePauw last week)
Ohio Wesleyan 68, Kenyon 65 (Kenyon...has a really good English Department)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 08, 2014, 09:42:41 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on February 08, 2014, 03:49:47 PM
Final: Babson 71 #3 WPI 62

Having watched WPI on video this year, I am underwhelmed and don't consider them a top 10 team...and certainly not the #3 team in the nation. With 2 losses this week, hopefully they will drop out of the top ten.

No need to worry, definitely happening. Indeed, they floated. Hard to believe they got this far into the season before reality bit them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: realist on February 08, 2014, 09:57:18 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 08, 2014, 09:42:41 PM
Quote from: wooscotsfan on February 08, 2014, 03:49:47 PM
Final: Babson 71 #3 WPI 62

Having watched WPI on video this year, I am underwhelmed and don't consider them a top 10 team...and certainly not the #3 team in the nation. With 2 losses this week, hopefully they will drop out of the top ten.

No need to worry, definitely happening. Indeed, they floated. Hard to believe they got this far into the season before reality bit them.

Request permission to use this quote as an example of "fair, balanced, and objective" reporting for future journalism classes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 08, 2014, 10:11:08 PM

Quote from: realist on February 08, 2014, 09:57:18 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 08, 2014, 09:42:41 PM
Quote from: wooscotsfan on February 08, 2014, 03:49:47 PM
Final: Babson 71 #3 WPI 62

Having watched WPI on video this year, I am underwhelmed and don't consider them a top 10 team...and certainly not the #3 team in the nation. With 2 losses this week, hopefully they will drop out of the top ten.

No need to worry, definitely happening. Indeed, they floated. Hard to believe they got this far into the season before reality bit them.

Request permission to use this quote as an example of "fair, balanced, and objective" reporting for future journalism classes.

A message board is about opinion, not reporting, so hopefully if you're teaching a journalism class you know the difference. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 08, 2014, 10:27:49 PM

Pretty big backlash on WPI, don't you think? I mean, the loss to Emerson is definitely a surprise, but losing on the road to Babson, who they only beat by 4 at home can't be a complete shocker. Babson is a respectable 16-5 (7-3 in conference).

There are more than a few teams that have had hiccups along the way. Is WPI too high at #3? I think they are, but they have been winning a lot of their games by double-digits.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 7express on February 08, 2014, 10:35:38 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 08, 2014, 10:27:49 PM
Pretty big backlash on WPI, don't you think? I mean, the loss to Emerson is definitely a surprise, but losing on the road to Babson, who they only beat by 4 at home can't be a complete shocker. Babson is a respectable 16-5 (7-3 in conference).

There are more than a few teams that have had hiccups along the way. Is WPI too high at #3? I think they are, but they have been winning a lot of their games by double-digits.

Even the 2 games they won last week: 6 @ Coast Guard, 1 vs. Springfield at home weren't very impressive either. They should be lucky they won the Springfield game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 08, 2014, 11:14:58 PM

After losing Marco Coppola before the season began, I'm surprised they did this well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 09, 2014, 06:21:08 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	624	UW-Stevens Point	20-1	LOST at #7 UW-Whitewater, 76-81
#2	600	Cabrini	18-0	~~02/03 vs. #6 Wesley~~ postponed; ~~02/06 vs. Immaculata~~ postponed
#3	556	WPI	18-3	LOST to Emerson, 67-71; LOST at #43 Babson, 62-71
#4	513	Washington U.	18-2	def. Rochester, 77-61; def. Emory, 94-80
#5	479	Illinois Wesleyan	18-3	def. #23 Augustana, 84-69; def. Elmhurst, 80-68
#6	471	Wesley	18-2	~~02/03 at #2 Cabrini~~ postponed; LOST at York (Pa.), 48-62; def. T#32 Christopher Newport, 66-63
#7	467	UW-Whitewater	19-3	def. #1 UW-Stevens Point, 81-76; won at UW-Superior, 77-44
#8	446	St. Norbert	18-1	won at Lawrence, 79-69
#9	444	Amherst	20-3	won at Lasell, 95-74; def. Connecticut College, 77-65; def. Wesleyan, 81-56
#10	396	Williams	19-3	won at Stevens, 83-68; def. Bates, 92-70; def. Tufts, 93-70
#11	393	Wooster	18-3	def. Kenyon, 86-56; won at Denison, 78-73
#12	348	Mary Washington	18-3	won at T#39 St. Mary's (Md.), 67-61; LOST to Salisbury, 71-81
#13	309	Ohio Wesleyan	17-4	LOST to #22 Wittenberg, 55-66; won at Kenyon, 68-65
#14	282	St. Thomas	18-3	won at Hamline, 89-53; def. Bethel, 65-56; def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 92-59
#15	241	Brockport State	17-2	LOST to Plattsburgh State, 89-92; def. Potsdam State, 88-60
#16	207	Virginia Wesleyan	16-5	LOST to Eastern Mennonite, 82-85; won at Randolph, 65-63
#17	182	Messiah	17-3	LOST at Lycoming, 73-81; won at Arcadia, 81-70
#18	172	Bowdoin	18-3	def. Plymouth State, 58-49; LOST at Middlebury, 66-69
#19	157	Albertus Magnus	19-2	won at Anna Maria, 109-104; def. Mount Ida, 88-52
#20	153	SUNY-Purchase	19-1	def. Mount St. Mary, 76-70; def. SUNY-Maritime, 72-50; won at Yeshiva, 75-59
#21	92	Whitworth	17-4	won at Puget Sound, 84-74; won at Pacific Lutheran, 70-58
#22	90	Wittenberg	17-4	won at #13 Ohio Wesleyan, 66-55; won at Oberlin, 70-63
#23	74	Augustana	16-6	LOST at #5 Illinois Wesleyan, 69-84; won at Carthage, 65-58
#24	60	Texas-Dallas	19-2	won at Mississippi College, 78-69; won at Louisiana College, 72-67
#25	57	Centre	17-3	def. #34 Oglethorpe, 77-67; def. Berry, 82-72

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	49	Dubuque	20-1	won at Wartburg, 83-65; won at Simpson, 86-75
#27	36	Calvin	16-5	LOST at T#39 Hope, 65-83; won at Adrian, 68-55
#28	28	Staten Island	20-2	won at Lehman, 86-76; won at St. Joseph's (Bklyn.), 95-73; won at John Jay, 78-67
T#29	24	Randolph-Macon	17-4	won at Bridgewater (Va.), 76-60; def. Lynchburg, 84-72
T#29	24	Eastern Connecticut	16-5	LOST at Wesleyan, 62-68; won at Mass-Boston, 71-58
#31	18	Marietta	17-4	won at Muskingum, 78-66; def. Heidelberg, 76-56
T#32	16	Christopher Newport	14-7	def. Southern Virginia, 91-76; LOST at Salisbury, 58-83; LOST at #6 Wesley, 63-66
T#32	16	Mount Union	17-3	won at Baldwin Wallace, 104-98; won at Otterbein, 76-66
#34	14	Oglethorpe	17-4	LOST at #25 Centre, 67-77; won at Sewanee, 78-66
#35	12	Geneseo State	16-3	def. Potsdam State, 78-61; def. Plattsburgh State, 60-51
#36	9	St. Vincent	18-3	LOST at Thiel, 121-124; won at Grove City, 68-52
#37	7	Wheaton (Ill.)	16-6	def. Carthage, 87-54; def. Millikin, 73-48
#38	6	Scranton	18-3	won at Merchant Marine, 75-63; def. Susquehanna, 77-73
T#39	5	Hope	15-6	def. Kalamazoo, 76-61; def. #27 Calvin, 83-65; def. Albion, 88-73
T#39	5	St. Mary's (Md.)	15-6	LOST to #12 Mary Washington, 61-67; won at Frostburg State, 72-54
T#39	5	DePauw	15-6	LOST to Allegheny, 66-69; def. Hiram, 84-71
#42	3	Rose-Hulman	17-4	won at Earlham, 65-54; won at Manchester, 85-65
#43	2	Babson	16-5	def. Wheaton (Mass.), 67-48; def. #3 WPI, 71-62
T#44	1	Rutgers-Newark	16-6	LOST at William Paterson, 50-74; def. TCNJ, 87-53
T#44	1	Springfield	16-5	def. MIT, 59-51; won at Wheaton (Mass.), 73-72

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 09, 2014, 06:42:24 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 08, 2014, 11:14:58 PM
After losing Marco Coppola before the season began, I'm surprised they did this well.

Did he drop out in order to enroll in film school? ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 09, 2014, 08:21:39 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 09, 2014, 06:42:24 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 08, 2014, 11:14:58 PM
After losing Marco Coppola before the season began, I'm surprised they did this well.

Did he drop out in order to enroll in film school? ;)

That's something one might transfer, say, to Emerson for. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 10, 2014, 05:19:16 PM

New Top 25 is out... and here is my take: www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/02/10/daves-top-25-ballot-week-10-2/ (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/02/10/daves-top-25-ballot-week-10-2/)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 10, 2014, 06:11:08 PM

I watch some of the St. Olaf/St. John's game this weekend. I really can't believe St. Olaf is only getting 2 votes in the poll.

Losses to Augustana, Stevens Point and St. Thomas(by 1) and Augsburg over 2 months ago now.

Looked like a big strong team that would be a tougher match-up for a lot of D3 squads.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 10, 2014, 10:06:48 PM

Cairn had a lights out shooting night, and AWM sat out, but Cabrini only won by seven.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 10, 2014, 11:51:54 PM

This is going to be a tough week for Cabrini... especially with a monster storm looking for Thursday...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 11, 2014, 12:10:54 AM

East coasters and their monster storms. ::)

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/t1/1660895_10151808678651706_1553140025_n.jpg)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 11, 2014, 12:27:32 AM

Well... I remember working at the station back in 2010 when we got back-to-back 30-inch blizzards in four days... so you can pretend you have it worse, but we do get our big storms. This looks to be the biggest of the year with some predictions today starting at a foot for my area ... and already climbing. Also, we have many more people located in our target zones and that makes things much more difficult :).

By the way... Cabrini had their game(s) against Immaculata postponed twice last week because of an ice storm... their game on Thursday looks very doubtful... and it is supposed to be Immaculata.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SgtPaul on February 11, 2014, 12:39:56 AM

Give me snow, -20 in Stevens Point again tonight. It's warmer when it snows. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 11, 2014, 12:44:34 AM

Yeah... I feel bad for you guys to be sure... and my sister in Anchorage is pointing out they basically have had a non-winter and events like the Iditirod (sp?) are in real trouble.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 11, 2014, 09:01:19 AM

Facebook said this week's poll was not the closest vote. What was? Just curious if you knew off hand.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 11, 2014, 10:33:26 AM

Quote from: sac on February 10, 2014, 06:11:08 PM
I watch some of the St. Olaf/St. John's game this weekend. I really can't believe St. Olaf is only getting 2 votes in the poll.

Losses to Augustana, Stevens Point and St. Thomas(by 1) and Augsburg over 2 months ago now.

Looked like a big strong team that would be a tougher match-up for a lot of D3 squads.

At first glance, I thought the same thing. But looking at the achedule, I can see why. To start off, last year they weren't very good at all and St. Thomas was, thus the Tommies getting some love in the preseason poll while the Oles were nowhere to be found for good reason. The Oles start off 2-2 before getting to just 7-4 after their loss at St. Thomas. They hven't lost since. If they beat St. Thomas tomorrow, they very well could be ahead of them in next week's regional rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 11, 2014, 05:34:59 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 11, 2014, 10:33:26 AM
Quote from: sac on February 10, 2014, 06:11:08 PM
I watch some of the St. Olaf/St. John's game this weekend. I really can't believe St. Olaf is only getting 2 votes in the poll.

Losses to Augustana, Stevens Point and St. Thomas(by 1) and Augsburg over 2 months ago now.

Looked like a big strong team that would be a tougher match-up for a lot of D3 squads.

At first glance, I thought the same thing. But looking at the achedule, I can see why. To start off, last year they weren't very good at all and St. Thomas was, thus the Tommies getting some love in the preseason poll while the Oles were nowhere to be found for good reason. The Oles start off 2-2 before getting to just 7-4 after their loss at St. Thomas. They hven't lost since. If they beat St. Thomas tomorrow, they very well could be ahead of them in next week's regional rankings.

Even a fifth loss to St. Thomas wouldn't change my mind that they look like a very good team. Unless the Tommies crush them or something.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on February 11, 2014, 07:20:45 PM

I'm glad Cabrini wasn't voted #1. Although it was a day after the current poll, they just gave up 96 points to a 2-20 team who they only beat by 7 points. That just doesn't sound like a #1 team---or even a #2. ::)
Won-loss records can sometimes be deceiving. :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 11, 2014, 07:42:14 PM

To be fair to Cabrini, when you are missing the best player in the country AND your second-leading scorer as well, it's hard to get a fair read on how much that result really means. Having seen Cairn play, I'd say that any other top-10 team, even missing its two best players, would handle Cairn easily. But none of those players are Aaron Walton-Moss, who seems to be the MVP of D3 this year and has posted one of the best statistical seasons in D3 history. I assume he will be back soon, but a bigger concern for Cabrini is that A.J. Picard, one of Cabrini's two lights-out shooters (along with Rafferty), has now been out for half the season. I'm not sure if he is done for the year, but if he is, as dominant as Walton-Moss is, I'm not sure he has enough around him for Cabrini to make it to Salem.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 11, 2014, 07:50:09 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on February 11, 2014, 07:42:14 PM
To be fair to Cabrini, when you are missing the best player in the country AND your second-leading scorer as well, it's hard to get a fair read on how much that result really means.

Since the poll is a current power ranking, the absence of AWM for the past two games is more than enough reason not to put Cabrini at the top of anyone's ballot -- even if he is projected to return at some point. Right now, Cabrini should not be considered by anyone to be the #1 team in the country as long as he's not in the lineup. (It probably shouldn't even be considered to be a top ten team without him.) The embarrassingly close win over Cairn simply reflects that reality.

When AWM is back in the lineup is the time to reconsider whether Cabrini deserves to be ranked that highly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on February 11, 2014, 09:14:39 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on February 11, 2014, 07:42:14 PM
To be fair to Cabrini, when you are missing the best player in the country AND your second-leading scorer as well, it's hard to get a fair read on how much that result really means. Having seen Cairn play, I'd say that any other top-10 team, even missing its two best players, would handle Cairn easily. But none of those players are Aaron Walton-Moss, who seems to be the MVP of D3 this year and has posted one of the best statistical seasons in D3 history. I assume he will be back soon, but a bigger concern for Cabrini is that A.J. Picard, one of Cabrini's two lights-out shooters (along with Rafferty), has now been out for half the season. I'm not sure if he is done for the year, but if he is, as dominant as Walton-Moss is, I'm not sure he has enough around him for Cabrini to make it to Salem.

Maybe its just me nescac, but I'd say you're contradicting yourself a bit.
You say "any other top-10 team, even missing its two best players, could handle Cairn easily." However, Cabrini, didn't handle Cairn easily with its 2 best players missing.
Is this not another reason for not voting Cabrini even as high as #2, at least currently?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 11, 2014, 09:40:49 PM

He also says, but none of those players are Aaron Walton-Moss...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 11, 2014, 09:50:09 PM

Quote from: AndOne on February 11, 2014, 09:14:39 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on February 11, 2014, 07:42:14 PM
To be fair to Cabrini, when you are missing the best player in the country AND your second-leading scorer as well, it's hard to get a fair read on how much that result really means. Having seen Cairn play, I'd say that any other top-10 team, even missing its two best players, would handle Cairn easily. But none of those players are Aaron Walton-Moss, who seems to be the MVP of D3 this year and has posted one of the best statistical seasons in D3 history. I assume he will be back soon, but a bigger concern for Cabrini is that A.J. Picard, one of Cabrini's two lights-out shooters (along with Rafferty), has now been out for half the season. I'm not sure if he is done for the year, but if he is, as dominant as Walton-Moss is, I'm not sure he has enough around him for Cabrini to make it to Salem.

Maybe its just me nescac, but I'd say you're contradicting yourself a bit.
You say "any other top-10 team, even missing its two best players, could handle Cairn easily." However, Cabrini, didn't handle Cairn easily with its 2 best players missing.
Is this not another reason for not voting Cabrini even as high as #2, at least currently?

In defense of nescac1, you left out his next phrase: "But none of those players are Aaron Walton-Moss...". His loss is probably greater than the loss of any other d3 player.

Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 11, 2014, 07:50:09 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on February 11, 2014, 07:42:14 PM
To be fair to Cabrini, when you are missing the best player in the country AND your second-leading scorer as well, it's hard to get a fair read on how much that result really means.

Since the poll is a current power ranking, the absence of AWM for the past two games is more than enough reason not to put Cabrini at the top of anyone's ballot -- even if he is projected to return at some point. Right now, Cabrini should not be considered by anyone to be the #1 team in the country as long as he's not in the lineup. (It probably shouldn't even be considered to be a top ten team without him.) The embarrassingly close win over Cairn simply reflects that reality.

When AWM is back in the lineup is the time to reconsider whether Cabrini deserves to be ranked that highly.

That is one way of viewing the poll, but not my preferred way. I view it as who has been how good over the course of the season (with special emphasis, but not exclusive concern, with the immediate present). When Kent Raymond went down for a few games a few years ago, I downgraded Wheaton somewhat (but less than if he was expected to be out for the season); when he returned to form, they bounced right back.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 11, 2014, 09:58:27 PM

The problem, Chuck, is that you can't assume anything in terms of an injury to a star player. Kent Raymond did come back and return to form -- eventually. But some players have lingering issues with regard to their injuries, ankle sprains included, that nag at them for the rest of the season. Even a loss of a quarter of a step can be crucial, because any injury to a star player -- especially one of AWM's abilities and importance to his team -- is magnified.

With your way of looking at it, a team that has a slightly gimpy star may deserve to be at the top of the heap based upon the team's past performance. But I'm not sure that the d3hoops.com pollsters are supposed to be looking at it that way. I've always been led to believe that the Top 25 poll is a ranking of teams as they stand right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 11, 2014, 10:22:43 PM

#19 Brockport State defeats #31 Geneseo State 66-62 in a great game at Geneseo. Pre-season All American guard, John Ivy, with only 3 points in the 1st half, puts his team on his back and scores 23 of his team's 32 second half points. He has 7 of their final 10 points including a huge 3 pointer, followed by a driving layup and then 2 key free throws to keep Brockport in front by 3 points after Geneseo had closed to within a point. Ivy finished with 26 points and 5 boards.

Gordon Lyons, Geneseo's 6'5" forward had his 13th double-double of the season with 25 points and 17 rebounds. If this guy doesn't make an All American list somewhere then the boat has been missed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 11, 2014, 11:19:19 PM

Aaron Walton-Moss will return... I know he was in the walk-throughs for the Wesley and Immaculata preps... I highly suspect the team is making sure they don't have him get injured again or worse against competition he doesn't need to play against. As for Picard, I have heard he is due back any game and I am surprised he didn't play against Cairn... but then again they may be resting him against an opponent he doesn't need to play against.

Also remember this... they are scheduled to play four games this week, three of them on the road. Resting guys against Cairn makes all the sense in the world!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on February 12, 2014, 12:17:38 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 11, 2014, 09:40:49 PM
He also says, but none of those players are Aaron Walton-Moss...

But I think the point that some of us are making is that the supposed #2 team in the nation shouldn't need their best player, no matter who he is, in order to defeat a 2-20 team by only 7 points. And a #2 team shouldn't be giving up 96 points to a 2-20 team! Is AWM the best defensive player too? :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 12, 2014, 12:34:08 AM

Cabrini led by 20 with 8 minutes to play and led by double-digits for large portions of the game.

Every good team that has ever played basketball has beaten someone and let off the gas and had a team play them harder right to the end.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 12, 2014, 11:44:20 AM

Quote from: AndOne on February 12, 2014, 12:17:38 AM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 11, 2014, 09:40:49 PM
He also says, but none of those players are Aaron Walton-Moss...

But I think the point that some of us are making is that the supposed #2 team in the nation shouldn't need their best player, no matter who he is, in order to defeat a 2-20 team by only 7 points. And a #2 team shouldn't be giving up 96 points to a 2-20 team! Is AWM the best defensive player too? :-\

Things happen in a game or in a season. Playing four games and letting off the gas on one game against a weaker opponent happens. I've seen many times where a team had thought they had enough cushion to call off the dogs, and then they had to hustle back in to put in the starters when the scrubs lazed it up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: chip on February 12, 2014, 12:14:07 PM

Cairn shot a ridiculous 61% from 3 in that game. Walls scored 34 for Cabrini. That is the scary thing people are not looking at. Once Cabrini gets Picard and AWM back, they will have 3 or 4 guys that can easily go for double-figures off the bench.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 12, 2014, 09:32:08 PM

Carnage in the NCAC tonight, as #14 OWU and #15 Wittenberg both lose, and #9 Wooster is on the ropes at Hiram.

Update: Wooster survives by 5. Their reward for this not-terribly-impressive win is a 2-game conference lead with three games remaining.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 13, 2014, 08:26:47 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	608	UW-Stevens Point	21-1	def. UW-Platteville, 74-59; 02/15 at UW-River Falls
#2	603	Cabrini	20-0	won at Cairn, 103-96; won at Centenary (N.J.), 69-53; 02/13 vs. Immaculata; 02/15 at Baptist Bible
#3	563	UW-Whitewater	20-3	def. UW-La Crosse, 63-45; 02/15 vs. UW-Oshkosh
#4	545	Washington U.	18-2	02/14 at Brandeis; 02/16 at New York University
#5	516	Illinois Wesleyan	19-3	won at North Central (Ill.), 80-68; 02/15 vs. Carthage
#6	487	St. Norbert	19-1	won at Carroll, 68-62; 02/15 vs. Grinnell
#7	485	Amherst	20-3	02/16 vs. Middlebury
#8	436	Williams	19-3	02/14 at Connecticut College; 02/15 at Wesleyan
#9	433	Wooster	19-3	won at Hiram, 76-71; 02/15 vs. #15 Wittenberg
#10	364	Wesley	19-2	won at Salisbury, 67-62; 02/15 at #13 Mary Washington
#11	347	St. Thomas	19-3	won at T#41 St. Olaf, 55-51; 02/15 at Concordia-Moorhead
#12	330	WPI	19-3	won at MIT, 64-52; 02/15 vs. Coast Guard
#13	252	Mary Washington	18-4	LOST at T#39 Christopher Newport, 61-74; 02/15 vs. #10 Wesley
#14	246	Ohio Wesleyan	17-5	LOST at Wabash, 66-77; 02/15 vs. Allegheny
#15	226	Wittenberg	17-5	LOST to DePauw, 49-71; 02/15 at #9 Wooster
#16	225	Whitworth	17-4	02/14 vs. Linfield; 02/15 vs. George Fox
#17	221	Albertus Magnus	20-2	def. Lasell, 92-61; 02/15 at Norwich
#18	202	SUNY-Purchase	20-1	won at SUNY-Old Westbury, 85-68; 02/13 at NYU-Poly; 02/16 vs. Yeshiva
#19	189	Brockport State	18-2	won at #31 Geneseo State, 66-62; 02/14 at Buffalo State; 02/15 at Fredonia State
#20	124	Texas-Dallas	19-2	02/13 vs. East Texas Baptist; 02/15 vs. LeTourneau
#21	95	Randolph-Macon	17-5	LOST at Eastern Mennonite, 68-73; 02/15 vs. Emory and Henry
#22	90	Centre	17-3	02/14 at Birmingham-Southern; 02/16 at Millsaps
#23	85	Dubuque	20-2	LOST to Loras, 70-71; 02/15 vs. Central
#24	80	Bowdoin	18-3	02/14 at Bates; 02/15 at Tufts
#25	71	Messiah	17-4	LOST to Stevenson, 60-64; 02/15 at Lebanon Valley

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	61	Virginia Wesleyan	17-5	def. Hampden-Sydney, 66-63; 02/15 at Roanoke
#27	48	Wheaton (Ill.)	17-6	won at North Park, 103-66; 02/15 at North Central (Ill.)
#28	39	Staten Island	21-2	def. Hunter, 88-82; 02/13 vs. CCNY
#29	25	Mount Union	19-3	def. Heidelberg, 87-68; def. Muskingum, 113-77; 02/15 vs. Ohio Northern
#30	23	Marietta	17-5	LOST at Capital, 55-75; 02/15 at Baldwin Wallace
#31	21	Geneseo State	16-4	LOST to #19 Brockport State, 62-66; 02/14 at Fredonia State; 02/15 at Buffalo State
#32	20	Hope	16-6	won at Olivet, 108-57; 02/15 vs. Alma
T#33	13	Scranton	19-3	def. Drew, 67-63; 02/15 at Catholic
T#33	13	Augustana	17-6	won at Millikin, 76-59; 02/15 vs. Elmhurst
#35	11	Babson	17-5	won at #38 Springfield, 67-61; 02/15 vs. Clark
#36	8	Plattsburgh State	16-4	02/14 vs. Cortland State; 02/15 vs. Oswego State
#37	7	Calvin	17-5	def. Kalamazoo, 86-59; 02/15 at Trine
#38	4	Springfield	16-6	LOST to #35 Babson, 61-67; 02/15 vs. Emerson
T#39	3	Christopher Newport	15-7	def. #13 Mary Washington, 74-61; 02/15 vs. Penn State-Harrisburg
T#39	3	Rose-Hulman	18-4	def. Hanover, 61-50; 02/15 at Bluffton
T#41	2	Eastern Connecticut	17-5	won at Keene State, 72-69; 02/15 vs. Mass-Dartmouth
T#41	2	St. Olaf	17-5	LOST to #11 St. Thomas, 51-55; 02/15 vs. Hamline
T#43	1	St. Vincent	19-3	def. Geneva, 77-62; 02/15 vs. Bethany
T#43	1	Dickinson	18-4	def. McDaniel, 83-61; 02/15 at Johns Hopkins

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 13, 2014, 09:11:48 AM

I checked the boxscore, Aaron Walton-Moss played but didn't start.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 13, 2014, 09:34:27 AM

I no longer believe there is such as thing as a "top 25." Perhaps we can got to a Top 15 for the rest of the season?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 13, 2014, 11:15:16 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 13, 2014, 09:34:27 AM

I no longer believe there is such as thing as a "top 25." Perhaps we can got to a Top 15 for the rest of the season?

There's always a Top 25, Top 50, Top 100, Top 358, whatever...as long as there are enough teams to fill those slots.

And remember, this is the back half of conference season. The long knives are out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on February 13, 2014, 12:39:36 PM

Cabrini postponed again. Make up date with Immaculata is 2/20. Are they predicting snow for this day? :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 13, 2014, 01:01:44 PM

AWM just wants more time to rest. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on February 13, 2014, 01:06:57 PM

Yeah. Picard, Forrest and Robinson also need it as well. (The other 3 members of the walking wounded.) ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 13, 2014, 02:03:59 PM

Quote from: mailsy on February 13, 2014, 12:39:36 PM
Cabrini postponed again. Make up date with Immaculata is 2/20. Are they predicting snow for this day? :D

Actually... yes. Long range forecast has something brewing mid-week next week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 13, 2014, 07:13:20 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 13, 2014, 02:03:59 PM
Quote from: mailsy on February 13, 2014, 12:39:36 PM
Cabrini postponed again. Make up date with Immaculata is 2/20. Are they predicting snow for this day? :D

Actually... yes. Long range forecast has something brewing mid-week next week.

Can they move the game to a neutral site, like Florida or Las Vegas? ::) ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 13, 2014, 09:28:52 PM

Now you are assuming the teams could fly out of the east coast per bad weather! LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 13, 2014, 09:37:41 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 13, 2014, 09:28:52 PM
Now you are assuming the teams could fly out of the east coast per bad weather! LOL

Besides, Florida is currently colder than Sochi! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 13, 2014, 11:33:14 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 13, 2014, 02:03:59 PM
Quote from: mailsy on February 13, 2014, 12:39:36 PM
Cabrini postponed again. Make up date with Immaculata is 2/20. Are they predicting snow for this day?

Actually... yes. Long range forecast has something brewing mid-week next week.

Do they have power at Cabrini yet?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on February 13, 2014, 11:57:38 PM

Yes. School got it back late Saturday night. School opened back up Sunday. Cancelled classes Thurs and Friday this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 15, 2014, 02:57:46 PM

#10 Wesley 91 #13 Mary Washington 75

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on February 15, 2014, 04:18:33 PM

#2 Cabrini loses at Baptist Bible 106-97.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 15, 2014, 04:23:29 PM

Quote from: jaybird44 on February 15, 2014, 04:18:33 PM
#2 Cabrini loses at Baptist Bible 106-97.

Walton-Moss played and scored 21 too, looks like they were missing at least a couple bench guys.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 15, 2014, 06:57:07 PM

That's 8-15, Massey #339 Baptist Bible, by the way.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on February 15, 2014, 07:57:14 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 15, 2014, 06:57:07 PM
That's 8-15, Massey #339 Baptist Bible, by the way.

Upset of the year in D3.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 15, 2014, 08:02:50 PM

The 3 SUNYAC schools continued to win and keep hopes alive for a 3 bid league this year.

#19 Brockport State 93 Fredonia State 61 Brockport is now 20-2

#31 Geneseo State 81 Buffalo State 67 Geneseo is now 18-4

#36 Plattsburgh State 82 Oswego State 72 in OT Plattsburgh is now 18-4

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 15, 2014, 08:11:36 PM

Quote from: Fifth and Putnam on February 15, 2014, 07:57:14 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 15, 2014, 06:57:07 PM
That's 8-15, Massey #339 Baptist Bible, by the way.

Upset of the year in D3.

They'd get some competition from then #6 Wesley losing to then 3-win York (PA), and perhaps a couple of others, but yeah, it ranks up there pretty high!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 15, 2014, 09:11:07 PM

#9 Wooster 60, #15 Wittenberg 55. Scots sweep the season series, and have eliminated the Tigers from the NCAC title hunt. Wooster can do no worse than tie for the crown with #14 Ohio Wesleyan, who won today in overtime vs. lowly Allegheny.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 15, 2014, 09:29:19 PM

Upset in the making?

Point and River Falls tied at 48 with 4 minutes to play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 15, 2014, 10:02:34 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 15, 2014, 09:29:19 PM
Upset in the making?

Point and River Falls tied at 48 with 4 minutes to play.

Nope.

Point survives 54-50. Stevens Point held River Falls scoreless in the final 4:18 but RF had the ball down 2 with the shot clock off and missed a 3 with 6 seconds left. Steven Pelkofer got the rebound and hit 2 FT's for the final margin.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 7express on February 15, 2014, 11:05:34 PM

Quote from: Fifth and Putnam on February 15, 2014, 07:57:14 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 15, 2014, 06:57:07 PM
That's 8-15, Massey #339 Baptist Bible, by the way.

Upset of the year in D3.

I think Wesley losing to an at the time 3 win York was more of an upset, but it's close.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 15, 2014, 11:57:51 PM

Dubuque loses both home games this week. Ouch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 16, 2014, 12:46:25 AM

With 6+ to go, George Fox was up on Whitworth by 11. With 5 to go, Whitworth is only down 5.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on February 16, 2014, 12:53:30 AM

Now 89-81 with 2:03 to go and GF has the ball

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 16, 2014, 01:09:33 AM

WOW! George Fox up by 11 with barely over a minute to go - now going to overtime!

(Though Whitworth did miss a layup at the buzzer.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 16, 2014, 01:29:24 AM

Whiteworth NEVER led in regulation, but wins 105-101 in OT!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 16, 2014, 03:12:51 AM

I feel for George Fox, a bit, but not much. We were leading Alaska-Fairbanks by 26 with 4:00 in the first half. Alaska's big Serbian was back at the hotel as he was sick. But this scrub who had scored just 17 points all year lit us up for 26 points and we lost by 8.

Sports.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 16, 2014, 03:17:53 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 15, 2014, 08:11:36 PM
Quote from: Fifth and Putnam on February 15, 2014, 07:57:14 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 15, 2014, 06:57:07 PM
That's 8-15, Massey #339 Baptist Bible, by the way.

Upset of the year in D3.

They'd get some competition from then #6 Wesley losing to then 3-win York (PA), and perhaps a couple of others, but yeah, it ranks up there pretty high!

Right now the Massey Upset tool has Northland over Northwestern (MN) as the largest upset, with Southern Vermont over Williams second. But the tool may be off, because it says the Upset Factor for Howard Payne beating Hardin Simmons is just 87 when HP is 303 right now and H-S is 60, unless there are other factors that go into that. May have to check.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 16, 2014, 06:20:01 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	608	UW-Stevens Point	22-1	def. UW-Platteville, 74-59; won at UW-River Falls, 54-50
#2	603	Cabrini	20-1	won at Cairn, 103-96; won at Centenary (N.J.), 69-53; LOST at Baptist Bible, 97-106
#3	563	UW-Whitewater	21-3	def. UW-La Crosse, 63-45; def. UW-Oshkosh, 75-51
#4	545	Washington U.	20-2	won at Brandeis, 95-82; won at New York University, 79-75
#5	516	Illinois Wesleyan	20-3	won at North Central (Ill.), 80-68; def. Carthage, 80-66
#6	487	St. Norbert	20-1	won at Carroll, 68-62; def. Grinnell, 113-88
#7	485	Amherst	21-3	def. Middlebury, 84-67
#8	436	Williams	21-3	won at Connecticut College, 98-90; won at Wesleyan, 87-70
#9	433	Wooster	20-3	won at Hiram, 76-71; def. #15 Wittenberg, 60-55
#10	364	Wesley	20-2	won at Salisbury, 67-62; won at #13 Mary Washington, 91-75
#11	347	St. Thomas	20-3	won at T#41 St. Olaf, 55-51; won at Concordia-Moorhead, 81-67
#12	330	WPI	20-3	won at MIT, 64-52; def. Coast Guard, 56-45
#13	252	Mary Washington	18-5	LOST at T#39 Christopher Newport, 61-74; LOST to #10 Wesley, 75-91
#14	246	Ohio Wesleyan	18-5	LOST at Wabash, 66-77; def. Allegheny, 81-76
#15	226	Wittenberg	17-6	LOST to DePauw, 49-71; LOST at #9 Wooster, 55-60
#16	225	Whitworth	19-4	def. Linfield, 91-59; def. George Fox, 105-101
#17	221	Albertus Magnus	21-2	def. Lasell, 92-61; won at Norwich, 86-71
#18	202	SUNY-Purchase	21-1	won at SUNY-Old Westbury, 85-68; ~~02/13 at NYU-Poly~~ postponed; def. Yeshiva, 80-51
#19	189	Brockport State	20-2	won at #31 Geneseo State, 66-62; won at Buffalo State, 94-74; won at Fredonia State, 93-61
#20	124	Texas-Dallas	21-2	def. East Texas Baptist, 95-70; def. LeTourneau, 75-52
#21	95	Randolph-Macon	18-5	LOST at Eastern Mennonite, 68-73; def. Emory and Henry, 65-39
#22	90	Centre	18-4	LOST at Birmingham-Southern, 50-53; won at Millsaps, 90-56
#23	85	Dubuque	20-3	LOST to Loras, 70-71; LOST to Central, 74-80
#24	80	Bowdoin	19-4	won at Bates, 75-49; LOST at Tufts, 62-66
#25	71	Messiah	18-4	LOST to Stevenson, 60-64; won at Lebanon Valley, 82-73

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	61	Virginia Wesleyan	17-6	def. Hampden-Sydney, 66-63; LOST at Roanoke, 79-84
#27	48	Wheaton (Ill.)	17-7	won at North Park, 103-66; LOST at North Central (Ill.), 66-71
#28	39	Staten Island	22-2	def. Hunter, 88-82; def. CCNY, 97-70
#29	25	Mount Union	19-4	def. Heidelberg, 87-68; def. Muskingum, 113-77; LOST to Ohio Northern, 85-90
#30	23	Marietta	18-5	LOST at Capital, 55-75; won at Baldwin Wallace, 91-80
#31	21	Geneseo State	18-4	LOST to #19 Brockport State, 62-66; won at Fredonia State, 77-56; won at Buffalo State, 81-67
#32	20	Hope	17-6	won at Olivet, 108-57; def. Alma, 70-67
T#33	13	Scranton	20-3	def. Drew, 67-63; won at Catholic, 80-71
T#33	13	Augustana	18-6	won at Millikin, 76-59; def. Elmhurst, 80-52
#35	11	Babson	18-5	won at #38 Springfield, 67-61; def. Clark, 68-53
#36	8	Plattsburgh State	18-4	def. Cortland State, 88-71; def. Oswego State, 82-72
#37	7	Calvin	18-5	def. Kalamazoo, 86-59; won at Trine, 69-65
#38	4	Springfield	16-6	LOST to #35 Babson, 61-67
T#39	3	Christopher Newport	16-7	def. #13 Mary Washington, 74-61; def. Penn State-Harrisburg, 74-44
T#39	3	Rose-Hulman	19-4	def. Hanover, 61-50; won at Bluffton, 61-55
T#41	2	Eastern Connecticut	18-5	won at Keene State, 72-69; def. Mass-Dartmouth, 79-73
T#41	2	St. Olaf	18-5	LOST to #11 St. Thomas, 51-55; def. Hamline, 88-37
T#43	1	St. Vincent	19-4	def. Geneva, 77-62; LOST to Bethany, 65-85
T#43	1	Dickinson	19-4	def. McDaniel, 83-61; won at Johns Hopkins, 68-63

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 16, 2014, 07:17:57 PM

In lieu of karma, please consider a donation to the Vs. Cancer Foundation (http://www.stayclassy.org/fundraise?fcid=299537). On February 27, along with the Bluffton University baseball team, I'm going to get a severe haircut. I'm hoping I can tap into some of those billions of dollars floating around D3 hoops.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 16, 2014, 09:21:39 PM

So, how far does Cabrini fall (or do they)? Their loss, though it was in the third game in the week, wasn't against a top tier opponent.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 16, 2014, 10:56:55 PM

Williams and Amherst both seem to be peaking at the right time, Amherst in particular. With three losses each I realize neither is going to make the top five, but I think Amherst is right there with Stevens Point in terms of favorites to win the title, and Williams is right there with the rest of the top five, based on how they are playing at the moment. Amherst does not look much different to me from the team that won last year's title. Different cast of characters, but Toomey is playing at a much higher level than last season, and he has a similar caliber of ridiculous athletes around him -- just a far more athletic group than the other title contenders. Amherst is not quite as deep as last season but the starting five is just as good, and obviously extremely well-practiced at playing their best in the biggest moments.

Williams is playing light years better than they were even a month ago, although they are still not at Amherst's level right now. Still, I do think the Ephs can play with anybody as they have two legit all-Americans leading the way.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 17, 2014, 10:44:34 AM

Usually when outsiders think WIAC, they think Stevens Point. I will tell you though, Whitewater is also a threat, not only for the WIAC title, but for a national title. They are always the most athletic team in the league and can play with anyone. Tough draw and disappointing tourney last year, but are better this year.

I can see the Warhawks getting a 1st place vote or two, actually.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 17, 2014, 07:38:32 PM

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/index

Don't look now, but Richard Stockton is just 6 points away from being ranked...

I wish I still had my old spreadsheet from when I obsessively tracked the Top 25. This week, 49 men's teams showed up on at least one ballot; I'm willing to bet that's a record for this late in the season. Last season, week 11's poll had 36 teams getting votes.

UPDATE: It is the most, at least since the 2001-02 season, the first for which the poll is archived on this site. The next most populous week 11 poll was in 2006-07, when 45 teams were nominated. This week's poll has 22.5% more teams listed than the average week 11 poll over the previous dozen seasons.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 17, 2014, 07:45:15 PM

I'm surprised Wittenberg is still holding on to a ranking. They've lost 3 of their last 5 now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 17, 2014, 11:39:15 PM

Quote from: sac on February 17, 2014, 07:45:15 PM
I'm surprised Wittenberg is still holding on to a ranking. They've lost 3 of their last 5 now.

Agreed. There were just too many other losses in that area that cushioned their fall.

Quote from: David Collinge on February 17, 2014, 07:38:32 PM
http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/index

Don't look now, but Richard Stockton is just 6 points away from being ranked...

I wish I still had my old spreadsheet from when I obsessively tracked the Top 25. This week, 49 men's teams showed up on at least one ballot; I'm willing to bet that's a record for this late in the season. Last season, week 11's poll had 36 teams getting votes.

UPDATE: It is the most, at least since the 2001-02 season, the first for which the poll is archived on this site. The next most populous week 11 poll was in 2006-07, when 45 teams were nominated. This week's poll has 22.5% more teams listed than the average week 11 poll over the previous dozen seasons.

I wish you still had that too, David. :(

The 2000-01 Week 11 poll also had 49 teams receiving votes.
http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2000-01/week11

The 1999-2000 Week 11 poll had 40 teams receiving votes.
http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/1999-00/week11

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 17, 2014, 11:52:57 PM

If anyone cares for some light reading, here is my ballot: www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/02/17/daves-top-25-ballot-week-11-2/ (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/02/17/daves-top-25-ballot-week-11-2/)... I am about ready to give up :).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 17, 2014, 11:57:42 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 17, 2014, 11:52:57 PM
If anyone cares for some light reading, here is my ballot: www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/02/17/daves-top-25-ballot-week-11-2/ (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/02/17/daves-top-25-ballot-week-11-2/)... I am about ready to give up :).

Just FYI Dave, IWU does not have 3 losses in the CCIW...the Titans are 10-2 right now.

If the Titans beat North Park Wednesday, they are guaranteed a share of the CCIW title - you say "they could lose the regular season title." As long as they beat NPU, all they could lose is the tie-breaker. In an 11-3 tie, both teams would share the regular season title.

Also worth noting, Cabrini's SOS per Massey is #195. IWU is #10 and Wash U's #6.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 18, 2014, 12:10:03 AM

TitanQ - thanks for catching that, I was rushing through that section as I heard one of my kids crying as she woke up from a nap and heard the other one running around upstairs - mom hadn't gotten home yet. I will go back to fix that.

As for the Massey stuff... I know what it says and I know what the SOS says, but that is also why I made the comment that those numbers have not indicated just how good Cabrini has been over the last few years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 18, 2014, 08:12:01 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 18, 2014, 12:10:03 AM
As for the Massey stuff... I know what it says and I know what the SOS says, but that is also why I made the comment that those numbers have not indicated just how good Cabrini has been over the last few years.

Cabrini has become one of the top programs in Division III - no doubt. But at the same time, I don't think things that happened in past seasons should be factored into the Top 25 voting process here in mid/late-February. Cabrini should be evaluated based on 2013-14 only, and the fact is they have played a weak schedule and have very few "good wins"...certainly not enough good wins to get a free pass for a loss to Baptist Bible.

I'm most confused by you slotting Cabrini #2 after such a horrendous loss, while at the same time making it sound like Illinois Wesleyan and Washington U aren't even decent candidates for that spot:

Yeah, the Titans were knocking on the door of number-two thanks to Cabrini's loss, but I just don't feel they are the second-best team in the country... or even third-best.
----------
More of the same with the Bears of Washington University. I have stated in past weeks I am nervous with this team this far up in ballot and I know I am not the only one thinking that. Again, had I moved Cabrini down it probably would have resulted in Wash U. moving up to number three and that simply makes me cringe. I like how the Bears are playing and they are rolling away with the UAA title, but I am not sure their conference standing is a sign of how good the Bears are or proves that the rest of the UAA took a step back (or for some more than one) this season.

The CCIW and UAA are the top two conferences this year. Wash U is the undefeated (so far) champion of the UAA, and with a win Wednesday over North Park, IWU will earn the CCIW title (Wheaton can share that title with a home win over IWU Saturday). Both teams have several more "good wins" than Cabrini. The teams that win leagues like the WIAC, UAA, and CCIW are very good.

Just saying - I don't agree with your suggestion that Wash U and IWU are not even good candidates for the #2 spot.

Oh, and thanks for posting your ballot...makes for good conversation here.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 18, 2014, 08:20:55 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on February 18, 2014, 08:12:01 AM
I'm most confused by you slotting Cabrini #2 after such a horrendous loss, while at the same time making it sound like Illinois Wesleyan and Washington U aren't even decent candidates for that spot:

Yeah, the Titans were knocking on the door of number-two thanks to Cabrini's loss, but I just don't feel they are the second-best team in the country... or even third-best.

I think IWU is better than Cabrini, even when healthy, so I can't defend that part - but Cabrini has been in such disarray - going a week without power on campus and having their two best players in and out of the lineup for a week - plus playing in a conference where they don't even have to try most nights. Yeah, it was a terrible loss, but it really doesn't tell us anything at all, which is frustrating.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 18, 2014, 11:01:45 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on February 18, 2014, 08:12:01 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 18, 2014, 12:10:03 AM
As for the Massey stuff... I know what it says and I know what the SOS says, but that is also why I made the comment that those numbers have not indicated just how good Cabrini has been over the last few years.

Cabrini has become one of the top programs in Division III - no doubt. But at the same time, I don't think things that happened in past seasons should be factored into the Top 25 voting process here in mid/late-February. Cabrini should be evaluated based on 2013-14 only, and the fact is they have played a weak schedule and have very few "good wins"...certainly not enough good wins to get a free pass for a loss to Baptist Bible.

But that's exactly what some voters do. Take for example our long debate about Richard Stockton. Wasn't part of that argument about NOT voting them into the Top 25 because what the NJAC hasn't done in the NCAAs the last few years. And isn't an argument of some that say, "Well, I voted them into the poll a few times in the past and then got burned by them, that's why I don't vote them now..."???

Same goes with the preseason poll. Believe it or not, that poll effects who's in the Top 25 now.

I do agree with you, Bob, that Dave's argument about Cabrini is flawed as the CCIW and the UAA are much better conferences than the CSAC and Massey and the SOS prove that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 18, 2014, 11:27:45 AM

Put it another way, Cabrini's loss to Baptist Bible was equivalent to #2 Florida losing to UI-Edwardsville.

They wouldn't be #2 anymore after that loss.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 18, 2014, 11:41:21 AM

Agreed. It's one thing if AWM didn't play in the game but he scored 21 points, played 29 minutes. Rafferty started. Cabrini anywhere near full strength should win that game, seeing as more than half of Division III would do so.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 18, 2014, 11:46:06 AM

Massey DOES show how good Cabrini is. That's a false statement right then and there.

Remember the entire D3 universe is what's being measured. Right now they fell to #17, not just because of the Baptist Bible loss, but after a pedestrian win over Cairn. Still that's in the Top 4% of all teams in D-3 that Massey ranks. Last year they wound up #20 because losses to Keystone and Immaculata and five point wins over Marywood don't help the calculations much at all.

When a team is in the top 4% to 5% of the D-3 universe they are a program of quality and distinction. Where you rank them on that tier is up to you. But don't say the numbers don't show it. They do.

Also, remember that many times a team making the final four gets there by being a good team that catches breaks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 18, 2014, 02:14:19 PM

Quote from: sac on February 18, 2014, 11:27:45 AM
Put it another way, Cabrini's loss to Baptist Bible was equivalent to #2 Florida losing to UI-Edwardsville.

They wouldn't be #2 anymore after that loss.

But that doesn't mean they shouldn't still be #2. I hope our voters are smarter than the D1 voters.

I dropped Cabrini a couple of spots, but I can see why others wouldn't. That was hardly the team they'll be trotting out at the end of next week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 18, 2014, 02:36:29 PM

If they do trot out that team and it plays like it should, then I would expect some of our voters, myself included, to move them back up a couple spots. I prefer to reflect what's on the floor right now, though, and that isn't a No. 2 team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 18, 2014, 07:20:37 PM

You could say that Cabrini played like "#2" against Cairn and Baptist Bible, so... 8-)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GnacBballFan on February 18, 2014, 09:00:45 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on February 18, 2014, 08:12:01 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 18, 2014, 12:10:03 AM
As for the Massey stuff... I know what it says and I know what the SOS says, but that is also why I made the comment that those numbers have not indicated just how good Cabrini has been over the last few years.

Cabrini has become one of the top programs in Division III - no doubt. But at the same time, I don't think things that happened in past seasons should be factored into the Top 25 voting process here in mid/late-February. Cabrini should be evaluated based on 2013-14 only, and the fact is they have played a weak schedule and have very few "good wins"...certainly not enough good wins to get a free pass for a loss to Baptist Bible.

I'm most confused by you slotting Cabrini #2 after such a horrendous loss, while at the same time making it sound like Illinois Wesleyan and Washington U aren't even decent candidates for that spot:

Yeah, the Titans were knocking on the door of number-two thanks to Cabrini's loss, but I just don't feel they are the second-best team in the country... or even third-best.
----------
More of the same with the Bears of Washington University. I have stated in past weeks I am nervous with this team this far up in ballot and I know I am not the only one thinking that. Again, had I moved Cabrini down it probably would have resulted in Wash U. moving up to number three and that simply makes me cringe. I like how the Bears are playing and they are rolling away with the UAA title, but I am not sure their conference standing is a sign of how good the Bears are or proves that the rest of the UAA took a step back (or for some more than one) this season.

The CCIW and UAA are the top two conferences this year. Wash U is the undefeated (so far) champion of the UAA, and with a win Wednesday over North Park, IWU will earn the CCIW title (Wheaton can share that title with a home win over IWU Saturday). Both teams have several more "good wins" than Cabrini. The teams that win leagues like the WIAC, UAA, and CCIW are very good.

Just saying - I don't agree with your suggestion that Wash U and IWU are not even good candidates for the #2 spot.

Oh, and thanks for posting your ballot...makes for good conversation here.

This was basically the same point i was trying to make on here about a week and a half ago. That these polls should based on 2013-2014 results. just my opinion, but i agree with you Titan

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 18, 2014, 10:08:45 PM

Oswego St. 95 #14Brockport St. 83

Brockport was last weeks East Region #1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 19, 2014, 12:51:28 AM

I have been debating whether to re-enter the fray, but I think I need to clear something up. I am in no way keeping Cabrini #2 because of past performance. My point was that in the case of Cabrini, their SOS in the past has not been a direct correlation to just how good a team they really are. Their SOS has been poor each of the last two seasons, but they have proven by going deep in the NCAA tournament (last year on the road the entire time) that their SOS number doesn't actually give you something to knock them on. That is very, very rare... if not unique. There are not many other teams anyone can say have weak SOS numbers and yet we know that number means nothing.

Cabrini has gone toe-to-toe with some of the best teams in the country the last two seasons and come out on top in nearly all of them. Thus, when I look at the data, I throw the SOS out when it comes to Cabrini because I don't see that number as being something that actually represents anything for that team. I am not keeping Cabrini #2 because they went to the title game two years ago or they had a hellish road trip all the way to Salem. I have a number of reasons I kept Cabrini #2... SOS was just one I threw out the window in their case.

Which gets me to my next thought, every voter has a ton of reasons to move and place teams accordingly. My reasons are not indicative of Pat's or the other 23. I don't take my job lightly and spend a lot of time each week going over it. I have presented my ideas for where and why I place teams on my ballot, but don't put words in my mouth. You certainly don't have to agree with my decisions... I sometimes don't agree with all of my decisions and could honestly constantly change my mind until the cows come home... but I have a deadline and ultimately I have go with the decision that feels the best... or doesn't feel the worst. Could I regret keeping Cabrini #2? As I stated in the blog... yes - time will tell.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 19, 2014, 11:20:48 AM

Of COURSE the SOS doesn't measue how good a team Cabrini is Dave. SOS measures STRENGTH OF SCHEDULE, it's not a power ranking. Big difference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on February 19, 2014, 11:25:12 AM

Quote from: smedindy on February 19, 2014, 11:20:48 AM
Of COURSE the SOS doesn't measue how good a team Cabrini is Dave. SOS measures STRENGTH OF SCHEDULE, it's not a power ranking. Big difference.

Also, the NCAA's SOS (or any SOS defined as 2/3 OWP and 1/3 OOWP) doesn't necessarily do a good job of defining a team's actual strength of schedule. And WP and SOS would mean much more if you could also add in MOV. But then we're basically back to Massey.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 19, 2014, 11:26:24 AM

I wish one of you guys with time on their hands would KenPom this thing. I think some of you do, but publish it with bells and whistles and orangutangs.

I do know it's nigh near impossible to get all of the box scores, etc. because some teams are reluctant or worse.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on February 19, 2014, 11:48:15 AM

Quote from: smedindy on February 19, 2014, 11:26:24 AM
I wish one of you guys with time on their hands would KenPom this thing. I think some of you do, but publish it with bells and whistles and orangutangs.

I do know it's nigh near impossible to get all of the box scores, etc. because some teams are reluctant or worse.

I had the spreadsheet started and updated through late January, but it was just too much to keep up with. Having to copy/paste box score data from each game took too much time.

Maybe if we had an army of volunteers chipping in...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 19, 2014, 01:20:08 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 19, 2014, 11:48:15 AM
Quote from: smedindy on February 19, 2014, 11:26:24 AM
I wish one of you guys with time on their hands would KenPom this thing. I think some of you do, but publish it with bells and whistles and orangutangs.

I do know it's nigh near impossible to get all of the box scores, etc. because some teams are reluctant or worse.

I had the spreadsheet started and updated through late January, but it was just too much to keep up with. Having to copy/paste box score data from each game took too much time.

Maybe if we had an army of volunteers chipping in...

Someone take 3-4 conferences each?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on February 19, 2014, 01:45:34 PM

Quote from: smedindy on February 19, 2014, 01:20:08 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 19, 2014, 11:48:15 AM
Quote from: smedindy on February 19, 2014, 11:26:24 AM
I wish one of you guys with time on their hands would KenPom this thing. I think some of you do, but publish it with bells and whistles and orangutangs.

I do know it's nigh near impossible to get all of the box scores, etc. because some teams are reluctant or worse.

I had the spreadsheet started and updated through late January, but it was just too much to keep up with. Having to copy/paste box score data from each game took too much time.

Maybe if we had an army of volunteers chipping in...

Someone take 3-4 conferences each?

I also ran into the issue of some box scores being incomplete or incorrect.

Mayhaps I'll share a google document with my schedule page and anyone that wants to can fill in some games. If we get there then great. If not, then we don't.

(I can tell you that, through February 3, I had Cabrini #15)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 19, 2014, 02:46:12 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 19, 2014, 11:25:12 AM
Quote from: smedindy on February 19, 2014, 11:20:48 AM
Of COURSE the SOS doesn't measue how good a team Cabrini is Dave. SOS measures STRENGTH OF SCHEDULE, it's not a power ranking. Big difference.

Also, the NCAA's SOS (or any SOS defined as 2/3 OWP and 1/3 OOWP) doesn't necessarily do a good job of defining a team's actual strength of schedule. And WP and SOS would mean much more if you could also add in MOV. But then we're basically back to Massey.

Right. It comes back to confidence. You can look at Team A and Team B and say, "they both look pretty good." If Team A has a strong SOS and Team B has a weak SOS - that doesn't necessarily change your opinion that they're similarly talented teams, it just gives you more confidence for one and less for the other.

It's still a judgment call.

I am not a stat guy or someone great with metrics. I'm sure there are fantastic ways to figure out a real power ranking - figuring in pace of play and team tendencies and actual performance, etc. I'm still not sure we'd get enough cross pollination in d3 for that to work on more than a regional level, though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on February 19, 2014, 05:12:10 PM

The current Top 10 with their NCAA primary/secondary data:

#1 UWSP 5-1-0 .587
#2 UWWW 3-1-0 .572
#3 Wash U 6-2-0 .601
#4 IWU 5-2-0 .558
#5 St Nor 0-1-0 .496 1-0-0
#6 Cabrini 2-0-0 .492
#7 Amherst 8-0-0 .588 0-1-0
#8 Wooster 5-1-0 .556 1-1-0
#9 Williams 4-2-0 .558 1-0-0
#10 Wesley 3-0-0 .521

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 19, 2014, 05:26:44 PM

Quote from: madzillagd on February 19, 2014, 05:12:10 PM
The current Top 10 with their NCAA primary/secondary data:

#1 UWSP 5-1-0 .587
#2 UWWW 3-1-0 .572
#3 Wash U 6-2-0 .601
#4 IWU 5-2-0 .558
#5 St Nor 0-1-0 .496 1-0-0
#6 Cabrini 2-0-0 .492
#7 Amherst 8-0-0 .588 0-1-0
#8 Wooster 5-1-0 .556 1-1-0
#9 Williams 4-2-0 .558 1-0-0
#10 Wesley 3-0-0 .521

Leaves off one pretty important one. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on February 19, 2014, 05:42:07 PM

We get to see the W/L on the list every week so I figured I didn't need to add that too.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on February 19, 2014, 08:52:22 PM

Upset watch in Franklin... Grizzlies lead #24 Rose-Hulman 59-50 more than halfway through the 2nd half on Senior Night

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 19, 2014, 09:14:26 PM

Not looking good now. 69-66, RH with 24 seconds to go. No upset for the Grizz

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on February 19, 2014, 09:20:51 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 19, 2014, 09:14:26 PM
Not looking good now. 69-66, RH with 24 seconds to go. No upset for the Grizz

This is Indiana... no lead in any sport is ever safe ;)
RHIT went on a 14-2 run after being down 64-57. But now with Franklin down 71-66 Grizzlies get a quick 3 and steal the inbounds. Couldn't get the shot to tie fall though and Rose survives 71-69.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 19, 2014, 11:50:29 PM

The wheels have completely fallen off the Dubuque bandwagon. They just lost their 3rd in a row.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 20, 2014, 08:57:18 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

(deleted-complete report below)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 23, 2014, 06:05:07 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

The final report for the season.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	624	UW-Stevens Point	24-1	won at UW-Oshkosh, 70-51; def. UW-Stout, 72-49
#2	575	UW-Whitewater	22-3	won at UW-Eau Claire, 82-57
#3	567	Washington U.	22-2	def. Case Western Reserve, 87-61; def. Carnegie Mellon, 83-79
#4	526	Illinois Wesleyan	22-3	def. North Park, 107-61; won at #32 Wheaton (Ill.), 97-88
#5	508	St. Norbert	22-1	won at Ripon, 78-62; def. Illinois College, 90-63
#6	496	Cabrini	23-1	won at Neumann, 84-72; def. Keystone, 86-73; def. Immaculata, 77-66
#7	492	Amherst	22-3	def. Colby, 82-72
#8	444	Wooster	22-3	won at Allegheny, 89-57; def. Oberlin, 82-53
#9	443	Williams	22-3	def. Tufts, 87-77
#10	391	Wesley	22-2	def. Penn State-Harrisburg, 70-40; def. T#44 St. Mary's (Md.), 64-62
#11	379	St. Thomas	21-4	won at Gustavus Adolphus, 73-68; LOST to St. John's, 69-76
#12	333	WPI	22-3	def. Wheaton (Mass.), 58-46; won at Clark, 65-60
#13	297	Whitworth	20-5	def. Whitman, 79-76; LOST at Lewis and Clark, 70-73
#14	279	Brockport State	22-3	LOST at Oswego State, 83-95; def. New Paltz State, 86-66; def. Oneonta State, 86-71
#15	273	Albertus Magnus	23-2	won at Johnson and Wales, 96-81; def. Emmanuel, 95-78
#16	267	SUNY-Purchase	23-2	won at NYU-Poly, 78-55; def. Sage, 84-65; LOST at St. Joseph's (L.I.), 61-65
#17	228	Texas-Dallas	22-3	won at Concordia (Texas), 94-72; LOST at Mary Hardin-Baylor, 71-75
#18	122	Ohio Wesleyan	19-6	won at Oberlin, 93-60; LOST to #36 DePauw, 63-64
#19	99	Mary Washington	20-5	won at Southern Virginia, 103-97; won at Penn State-Harrisburg, 82-56
#20	95	Randolph-Macon	20-5	def. Hampden-Sydney, 90-67; won at Washington and Lee, 68-62
#21	73	Staten Island	24-2	def. Medgar Evers, 111-65; def. CCNY, 85-47
#22	62	Wittenberg	19-6	def. Kenyon, 80-71; won at Hiram, 86-60
#23	50	Centre	20-4	def. Hendrix, 71-55; def. Rhodes, 70-52
#24	48	Rose-Hulman	20-5	won at Franklin, 71-69; LOST at Mount St. Joseph, 57-69
#25	46	Scranton	22-3	def. Moravian, 67-61; def. Goucher, 93-76

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	40	Richard Stockton	21-4	won at Rowan, 75-72
#27	39	Bowdoin	19-5	LOST to Trinity (Conn.), 67-71
#28	37	Babson	20-5	won at Coast Guard, 72-63; won at MIT, 53-42
#29	34	Hope	19-6	won at Kalamazoo, 110-78; won at Adrian, 73-56
T#30	31	Augustana (Ill.)	19-6	won at North Park, 91-61
T#30	31	Dickinson	20-5	won at Muhlenberg, 92-86; LOST to Franklin and Marshall, 57-72
#32	30	Wheaton (Ill.)	17-8	LOST to #4 Illinois Wesleyan, 88-97
#33	29	Geneseo State	20-5	LOST at Cortland State, 53-65; def. Oneonta State, 68-63; def. New Paltz State, 79-68
#34	20	Calvin	20-5	def. Olivet, 83-63; def. Albion, 83-57
#35	15	Oglethorpe	19-6	LOST at Birmingham-Southern, 59-75; LOST at Millsaps, 67-75
#36	13	DePauw	18-7	def. Wabash, 75-74; won at #18 Ohio Wesleyan, 64-63
#37	12	Mount Union	20-5	won at #46 Marietta, 81-77; LOST at Wilmington, 77-84
T#38	11	St. Olaf	20-5	def. Macalester, 78-54; won at Bethel, 62-40
T#38	11	Dubuque	21-4	LOST at Buena Vista, 75-77; won at Luther, 72-66
T#38	11	Eastern Connecticut	20-5	def. Western Connecticut, 74-59; won at Southern Maine, 68-58
#41	10	Messiah	19-5	def. Widener, 80-69; LOST at Alvernia, 63-69
#42	9	Plattsburgh State	21-4	won at Potsdam State, 76-61; def. Fredonia State, 87-63; def. Buffalo State, 88-73
#43	8	Virginia Wesleyan	19-6	def. Shenandoah, 93-74; won at Guilford, 75-57
T#44	5	St. Mary's (Md.)	18-7	won at T#47 Christopher Newport, 69-64; LOST at #10 Wesley, 62-64
T#44	5	William Paterson	20-5	won at Ramapo, 81-61
#46	4	Marietta	19-6	LOST to #37 Mount Union, 77-81; def. John Carroll, 94-87
T#47	1	Milwaukee School of Engineering	21-5	def. Wisconsin Lutheran, 84-70; LOST to Edgewood, 70-76
T#47	1	Christopher Newport	17-8	LOST to T#44 St. Mary's (Md.), 64-69; won at Marymount, 59-56
T#47	1	Springfield	19-6	def. Emerson, 76-66; won at Clark, 76-64; def. Coast Guard, 83-60

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: monsoon on February 23, 2014, 06:21:04 PM

Thanks for all of your work with this again this year, Darryl.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 23, 2014, 09:50:29 PM

Great work, like usual. +1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NEHoopsFan99 on February 24, 2014, 06:07:25 PM

Not entirely sure how 19-6 Hope ended up on the rankings this week. Of all the teams on the Top 25 bubble they're the least impressive in my eyes. Personally I don't think any team with 6 or more losses should be ranked at this point pre-conference tourney. Luckily the NCAA knows better than the polls do.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 24, 2014, 06:47:21 PM

Quote from: NEHoopsFan99 on February 24, 2014, 06:07:25 PM
Not entirely sure how 19-6 Hope ended up on the rankings this week. Of all the teams on the Top 25 bubble they're the least impressive in my eyes. Personally I don't think any team with 6 or more losses should be ranked at this point pre-conference tourney. Luckily the NCAA knows better than the polls do.

Of Hope's 6 losses, four of them are to current #1 UW Stevens Point, current #2 UW Whitewater, current #4 IWU, and Cornerstone (MI) currently #3 in NAIA D-I.

Their other two losses were to Wheaton, who finished second in the CCIW and played Saturday night for a share of the conference title and the top seed in their tournament, and Albion, tied for third in the MIAA.

They started the year out 3/4 but have won 16/17.

Sometimes a little more digging is required to understand the rationale of a ranking. While it does make sense to look at the season as a whole (i.e. the win/loss record), WHO a team beats or loses to matters... as well as how they're doing right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 24, 2014, 06:48:34 PM

Massey Rating of 16. Their 6 losses were to Whitewater, Stevens Point, Wheaton, NAIA Cornerstone (25-4), Illinois Wesleyan and a conference roadie at Albion. Five of those six losses don't diminish them at all - and you can always quibble about a roadie in the midst of a conference grind.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 24, 2014, 07:16:45 PM

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2013-14/week12

New poll is out with Hope (as mentioned) and Richard Stockton in with Ohio Wesleyan and Rose-Hulman out.

Point and Whitewater have the same number of votes as last week.

St. Thomas drops just one spot after losing at home, but loses 55 points.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 24, 2014, 07:25:40 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 24, 2014, 07:16:45 PM
New poll is out with Hope (as mentioned) and Richard Stockton in with Ohio Wesleyan and Rose-Hulman out.

TGHIJGSTO!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 24, 2014, 08:17:22 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on February 24, 2014, 07:25:40 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 24, 2014, 07:16:45 PM
New poll is out with Hope (as mentioned) and Richard Stockton in with Ohio Wesleyan and Rose-Hulman out.

TGHIJGSTO!

Surprised they didn't get any 1st place votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NEHoopsFan99 on February 24, 2014, 09:24:04 PM

Quote from: smedindy on February 24, 2014, 06:48:34 PM
Massey Rating of 16. Their 6 losses were to Whitewater, Stevens Point, Wheaton, NAIA Cornerstone (25-4), Illinois Wesleyan and a conference roadie at Albion. Five of those six losses don't diminish them at all - and you can always quibble about a roadie in the midst of a conference grind.

Not sure why you think a high Massey rating means anything. I understand that they have had 4 good losses but so has Babson and Ohio Wesleyan. How can you argue Hope has had a better season than a team like Babson? I think at some point 6 losses is just too much regardless of who you're losing to. It's not like those were even close games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 24, 2014, 10:16:50 PM

Quote from: NEHoopsFan99 on February 24, 2014, 09:24:04 PM
Quote from: smedindy on February 24, 2014, 06:48:34 PM
Massey Rating of 16. Their 6 losses were to Whitewater, Stevens Point, Wheaton, NAIA Cornerstone (25-4), Illinois Wesleyan and a conference roadie at Albion. Five of those six losses don't diminish them at all - and you can always quibble about a roadie in the midst of a conference grind.

Not sure why you think a high Massey rating means anything. I understand that they have had 4 good losses but so has Babson and Ohio Wesleyan. How can you argue Hope has had a better season than a team like Babson? I think at some point 6 losses is just too much regardless of who you're losing to. It's not like those were even close games.

I don't really care if Hope is ranked or not, but they are 17-1 since Christmas.

Its not like they've just accumulated a bunch of losses and stick in the poll for no reason at all. Like say, Wittenberg who are 7-5 in their last 12.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NEHoopsFan99 on February 24, 2014, 10:19:35 PM

Agreed Wittenberg was only saved by their enormous cushion. They really shouldn't be ranked.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 24, 2014, 10:25:40 PM

Quote from: NEHoopsFan99 on February 24, 2014, 09:24:04 PM
Not sure why you think a high Massey rating means anything.

Because Massey has no bias, and Massey does not overreact to losses like voters in a subjective poll do.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 25, 2014, 12:00:14 AM

Quote from: NEHoopsFan99 on February 24, 2014, 09:24:04 PM
Quote from: smedindy on February 24, 2014, 06:48:34 PM
Massey Rating of 16. Their 6 losses were to Whitewater, Stevens Point, Wheaton, NAIA Cornerstone (25-4), Illinois Wesleyan and a conference roadie at Albion. Five of those six losses don't diminish them at all - and you can always quibble about a roadie in the midst of a conference grind.

Not sure why you think a high Massey rating means anything. I understand that they have had 4 good losses but so has Babson and Ohio Wesleyan. How can you argue Hope has had a better season than a team like Babson? I think at some point 6 losses is just too much regardless of who you're losing to. It's not like those were even close games.

I think it's an extreme fallacy to compare OWU's losses to Woo, Witt, Witt and DePauw to four losses vs. teams that are all in the top five in the country for their level (and one of those levels includes scholarships).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NEHoopsFan99 on February 25, 2014, 12:53:30 AM

You're focusing on their losses but what about quality wins? Sure a tough schedule with mostly losses to top teams could be easily outweighed by some quality wins but I don't see it. Who have they beaten that makes them T25 worthy? I don't see having enough quality wins to justify Top 25 status but that's just me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 25, 2014, 12:57:41 AM

They've also beaten No. 21 Centre on a neutral floor. Carthage isn't ranked but most people would think of crushing a team in the top half of the CCIW on a neutral floor as being a quality win.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 25, 2014, 01:13:09 AM

and, ya know, two wins over Calvin.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 25, 2014, 12:57:41 AM
They've also beaten No. 21 Centre on a neutral floor. Carthage isn't ranked but most people would think of crushing a team in the top half of the CCIW on a neutral floor as being a quality win.

10 days after Carthage beat WashU as well, and a day after Carthage beat Calvin.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 25, 2014, 06:19:26 AM

I'm not completely on NEHoopsfan99's side. But, he does have an argument to some extent.

We've discussed Hope's schedule before. Yes, they have those "quality" losses to all of those teams...but, they didn't win any of them.

It has taken them a long time to get into the poll, but like sac said, they have won 16 of their last 17 games and not too many teams can say that. On that merit, anyone can crack the Top 25.

It's been noted they did beat Centre and Carthage, but those games were before the New Year and we are at the end of February.

sac can say "two wins over Calvin" all he wants. ;) But, how good was their schedule at 20-5? They beat Wheaton, lost to CMS and lost to Carthage. Hope has one more loss against a much better schedule. I don't think I would get too excited beating Calvin twice (yeah, yeah, I know about the rivalry).

I'm just saying he has a better argument than our Richard Stockton friend. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on February 25, 2014, 07:02:44 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 25, 2014, 06:19:26 AM
sac can say "two wins over Calvin" all he wants. ;)

No, actually, I don't think he can.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 25, 2014, 10:28:41 AM

Quote from: sac on February 25, 2014, 01:13:09 AM
and, ya know, two wins over Calvin.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 25, 2014, 12:57:41 AM
They've also beaten No. 21 Centre on a neutral floor. Carthage isn't ranked but most people would think of crushing a team in the top half of the CCIW on a neutral floor as being a quality win.

10 days after Carthage beat WashU as well, and a day after Carthage beat Calvin.

NE99 seems focused on the Top 25 as his only measure so I was trying to provide him with data he might recognize as valid.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 25, 2014, 10:44:49 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 25, 2014, 06:19:26 AM
It's been noted they did beat Centre and Carthage, but those games were before the New Year and we are at the end of February.

It's been noted they did lose to Whitewater and Stevens Point, but those games were before Thanksgiving, we are at the end of February. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 25, 2014, 10:56:42 AM

Thats not helping your argument for Hope being ranked. ??? ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on February 25, 2014, 11:31:10 AM

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.memegenerator.net%2Finstances%2F500x%2F46473793.jpg&hash=5156129e3164a6532ee6273f4fbad249db6257bb)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on February 25, 2014, 11:42:23 AM

Quote from: NEHoopsFan99 on February 25, 2014, 12:53:30 AM
You're focusing on their losses but what about quality wins? Sure a tough schedule with mostly losses to top teams could be easily outweighed by some quality wins but I don't see it. Who have they beaten that makes them T25 worthy? I don't see having enough quality wins to justify Top 25 status but that's just me.

Who has St. Norbert beaten?
Who has Whitworth beaten?
What about Illinois Welsyan? -- one win over Wash U. that's it, but even Carthage did that and they're not ranked!
What about Wash U? They lost to 2 of their 3 CCIW opponents, and sure, they're undefeated in the UAA, but no one else in the UAA is even ranked!

As far as I can tell, only about four teams deserve to be in the Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: realist on February 25, 2014, 11:45:38 AM

It is safe to say that not very many coaches or teams are going to say on selection day: "Oh goody Hope is in our pod".

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 25, 2014, 12:02:39 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 25, 2014, 11:42:23 AM
Quote from: NEHoopsFan99 on February 25, 2014, 12:53:30 AM
You're focusing on their losses but what about quality wins? Sure a tough schedule with mostly losses to top teams could be easily outweighed by some quality wins but I don't see it. Who have they beaten that makes them T25 worthy? I don't see having enough quality wins to justify Top 25 status but that's just me.

Who has St. Norbert beaten?
Who has Whitworth beaten?
What about Illinois Welsyan? -- one win over Wash U. that's it, but even Carthage did that and they're not ranked!
What about Wash U? They lost to 2 of their 3 CCIW opponents, and sure, they're undefeated in the UAA, but no one else in the UAA is even ranked!

As far as I can tell, only about four teams deserve to be in the Top 25.

Pretty much outlines in short form the difficulty of ranking a division that stays mostly regional and plays a limited 25 game schedule.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 25, 2014, 12:10:17 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 25, 2014, 11:42:23 AM
Quote from: NEHoopsFan99 on February 25, 2014, 12:53:30 AM
You're focusing on their losses but what about quality wins? Sure a tough schedule with mostly losses to top teams could be easily outweighed by some quality wins but I don't see it. Who have they beaten that makes them T25 worthy? I don't see having enough quality wins to justify Top 25 status but that's just me.

Who has St. Norbert beaten?
Who has Whitworth beaten?
What about Illinois Welsyan? -- one win over Wash U. that's it, but even Carthage did that and they're not ranked!
What about Wash U? They lost to 2 of their 3 CCIW opponents, and sure, they're undefeated in the UAA, but no one else in the UAA is even ranked!

As far as I can tell, only about four teams deserve to be in the Top 25.

I didn't rank hope in my Top 25 but I certainly would call them frauds since they were ranked. In a universe of over 400 teams there's a wafer thin line between 25 and 26, or even between 25 and 30.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 25, 2014, 12:30:59 PM

None of those teams have 6 losses. ??? ;D

Part of his argument is the quantity of losses, not the quality. I don't agree with this, mind you.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NEHoopsFan99 on February 25, 2014, 01:01:23 PM

I just think there are more worthy teams

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 25, 2014, 01:13:31 PM

Quote from: NEHoopsFan99 on February 25, 2014, 01:01:23 PM
I just think there are more worthy teams

Who and why? Just for argument's sake.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Just Bill on February 25, 2014, 01:22:29 PM

This Hope game in particular gives me pause, when I think about their credentials...

http://athletics.hope.edu/sports/mbkb/2013-14/boxscores/20140104_z46o.xml?view=plays

That's the 7th place team from the NACC, which is far, far from a power conference, going on the road and being tied with Hope with 3 minutes to play. A few made free throws for Edgewood down the stretch and that's a damaging loss.

Yes, they won, but that's not exactly a banner-waving win.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 25, 2014, 01:52:23 PM

Quote from: Just Bill on February 25, 2014, 01:22:29 PM
This Hope game in particular gives me pause, when I think about their credentials...

http://athletics.hope.edu/sports/mbkb/2013-14/boxscores/20140104_z46o.xml?view=plays

That's the 7th place team from the NACC, which is far, far from a power conference, going on the road and being tied with Hope with 3 minutes to play. A few made free throws for Edgewood down the stretch and that's a damaging loss.

Yes, they won, but that's not exactly a banner-waving win.

Edgewood just knocked off MSOE this past weekend in their tournament, evidently they are capable of beating pretty good teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 25, 2014, 01:53:41 PM

Team X playing Team Y won but didn't won by as much as I thought they should so reasons and stuff and things....

MOV is included in the independent Massey ratings so that's already taken that close win into consideration.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 25, 2014, 03:44:59 PM

Finally posted my ballot... enjoy if you must... www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/02/25/daves-top-25-ballot-week-12-2/ (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/02/25/daves-top-25-ballot-week-12-2/)

:)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 25, 2014, 03:55:59 PM

Quote from: sac on February 25, 2014, 01:52:23 PM
Quote from: Just Bill on February 25, 2014, 01:22:29 PM
This Hope game in particular gives me pause, when I think about their credentials...

http://athletics.hope.edu/sports/mbkb/2013-14/boxscores/20140104_z46o.xml?view=plays

That's the 7th place team from the NACC, which is far, far from a power conference, going on the road and being tied with Hope with 3 minutes to play. A few made free throws for Edgewood down the stretch and that's a damaging loss.

Yes, they won, but that's not exactly a banner-waving win.

Edgewood just knocked off MSOE this past weekend in their tournament, evidently they are capable of beating pretty good teams.

They split with them during the regular season. Not a complete shock, though it was a 2 vs 7 game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on February 26, 2014, 11:56:51 AM

Hope's losses are to...
#1 and #2 team in the West (#1 and #2 in the nation according to D3Hoops.com)
the #2 and #3 team in the Midwest (#4 and unranked according to D3hoops.com)
the #5 team in the NAIA Div. 2
and one, ugly in conference loss on the road...

Five of those six losses were in 2013 and five of them were on the road. Currently, the Flying Dutchmen are starting a freshman and two sophomores. To compare, UWSP and UWWW both start three seniors and two juniors. It would be illogical to expect a very young Hope team to go to Wisconsin and play two experienced teams with realistic national championship aspirations and come out with a win. Losing to Illinois Wesleyan at home, Wheaton at Calvin, or Cornerstone at Calvin, are anything but embarrassing losses (other than perhaps the manner in which they lost to Wheaton)

You can (and should) hold the loss at Albion against them. But since losing to IWU before Christmas, Hope is (16-1). If you are going to define a team by one loss, you then have to be universal with your criticism. Cabrini's lone loss is to (9-16) Baptist Bible. WPI lost at home to (13-2) Emerson. St. Thomas lost at home last week to (15-10) St. John's and Purchase went to (9-17) St Jospeh's (L.I.) and lost. How is Wittenberg not being bashed for remaining in D3hoops' top 25? They too have 6 losses, including a home loss to (12-14) Denison.

Not only should Hope be in the top 25, but if they win out, they should be in the conversation for hosting the first round, as the # 2 team from the Great Lakes region.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 26, 2014, 11:59:37 AM

Welcome to the board! Good to see you!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NEHoopsFan99 on February 26, 2014, 02:02:10 PM

Quote from: sethteater on February 26, 2014, 11:56:51 AM
Hope's losses are to...
#1 and #2 team in the West (#1 and #2 in the nation according to D3Hoops.com)
the #2 and #3 team in the Midwest (#4 and unranked according to D3hoops.com)
the #5 team in the NAIA Div. 2
and one, ugly in conference loss on the road...

Five of those six losses were in 2013 and five of them were on the road. Currently, the Flying Dutchmen are starting a freshman and two sophomores. To compare, UWSP and UWWW both start three seniors and two juniors. It would be illogical to expect a very young Hope team to go to Wisconsin and play two experienced teams with realistic national championship aspirations and come out with a win. Losing to Illinois Wesleyan at home, Wheaton at Calvin, or Cornerstone at Calvin, are anything but embarrassing losses (other than perhaps the manner in which they lost to Wheaton)

You can (and should) hold the loss at Albion against them. But since losing to IWU before Christmas, Hope is (16-1). If you are going to define a team by one loss, you then have to be universal with your criticism. Cabrini's lone loss is to (9-16) Baptist Bible. WPI lost at home to (13-2) Emerson. St. Thomas lost at home last week to (15-10) St. John's and Purchase went to (9-17) St Jospeh's (L.I.) and lost. How is Wittenberg not being bashed for remaining in D3hoops' top 25? They too have 6 losses, including a home loss to (12-14) Denison.

Not only should Hope be in the top 25, but if they win out, they should be in the conversation for hosting the first round, as the # 2 team from the Great Lakes region.

Unfortunately you can't look at any team's record in a vacuum. It's plain silly to argue they're a 16-1 team. Breaking the record into 2013 and 2014 is nonsensical. The NCAA looks at each team's season holistically and so should we. I'm not saying Hope isn't a solid team- but their conference and region are simply not as strong as others. Furthermore, regardless of how great their losses are, they still have 6 and no great wins. There are other teams with higher RPI and SOS with less losses that are not ranked, or that are more deserving to host. Not saying they won't but there are a lot of other great teams out there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on February 26, 2014, 02:15:23 PM

NEHoopsFan99 - I'm not in disagreement with what you are saying but I think you've got to provide which teams should take their place so a comparison can be made. If you look at the next 4 teams on the list that got votes but didn't make the top 25 they have 6, 5, 5, and 5 losses each. Who are the more worthy teams?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NEHoopsFan99 on February 26, 2014, 02:40:25 PM

Babson, Plattsburgh State and Richard Stockton should all be ranked higher. But I guess I got carried away for arguments sake. Top 25 really does not mean much

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on February 26, 2014, 02:45:04 PM

NEHoopsFan99, I agree completely that you do have to look at the entire body of work and losses are losses. I never said they are a 16-1 team. But I do think how a team finishes the year should matter more than how they start the year. The selection committee for division 1 agrees. My point wasn't that those losses don't or shouldn't count. It was simply that the team that lost those games is a different team that has gone 16-1 since then. And they were against teams to whom everyone could/would/has lost. How can you hold the four losses to @UWWW, @UWSP, IWU, and the NAIA D2 #5 team against them and make the blanket statement "they are a 6 loss team." In the NCAA, they are a 5 loss team. Randolph-Macon lost to Scranton, Christopher Newport, Guilford, Cabrini, and Eastern Menonite. Do wins against Dickenson and Virginia Wesleyan really stand out that much more than Centre and Carthage?

Randolph-Macon lost 4 of their first 8. They are 14-1 in 2013 and sit at #13 in the country (d3hoops) and #1 in the south (ncaa)... Hope lost 5 of their first 8, to better opponents, then went 16-1, and are #2 in the GL. And they don't belong in the top 25 or in at least the conversation to host? That doesn't make sense to me.

Let me be clear. I think highly of Randolph-Macon. This arguement is not in any way shape or form meant to devalue what they have done...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 26, 2014, 03:20:45 PM

For the record, the Top 25 voters can look at whatever they want to when deciding who are the Top 25 teams... they don't have to follow NCAA criteria, nor does the NCAA follow Top 25 voters criteria (of which there are 25 opinions and criteria).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on February 26, 2014, 03:40:12 PM

"For the record, the Top 25 voters can look at whatever they want to when deciding who are the Top 25 teams... they don't have to follow NCAA criteria, nor does the NCAA follow Top 25 voters criteria (of which there are 25 opinions and criteria)."

Agreed. In a perfect world, every voter would have watched every team under consideration, as well. Dave, you've made an argument at least once this year has been something along the lines of "I have seen them in person..." The eye test can go a long ways and seldom lies. You can't fake having a 6'10" center that dominates inside; but you have to see in person how fast he moves to the help side, how quick he gets into the lane, does he play like he's 6'10"?... to really know if he could hold his own against someone like David Falk (Eastern Menn.)

I can't apply the "eye test" to every team in the top 25. I wish I could. The best I can do is compare the teams I see to the teams I've seen, both this year and teams that have gone deep in years past. This is an admittedly flawed way of measuring, but who has the time to live stream 20+ games a week?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 26, 2014, 03:41:25 PM

Well... I have been guilty of watching that may games in a week... and this weekend it will be at least 8 games in person (maybe 10) and countless online.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NEHoopsFan99 on February 26, 2014, 03:44:40 PM

Alright I must admit you Hope fans have won me over! I think there are a few teams that deserve to make the top but haven't, and a few that are in the top that shouldn't be(cough cough Wittenberg) but you've all convinced me of why Hope is one that does deserve to be there. Rooting for all underdogs typically overlooked by national voters :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 26, 2014, 04:17:49 PM

I personally think the eye test lies a lot more than not because of ingrained biases. I know in baseball it's revelatory that the 'eye test' falls on its face many times when dealing with defensive metrics.

BTW - Not a Hope fan in the least. More of a fan of metrics and analysis.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 26, 2014, 05:10:04 PM

Its a lot of discussion over 58 poll votes. :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 26, 2014, 05:47:32 PM

Quote from: sac on February 26, 2014, 05:10:04 PM
Its a lot of discussion over 58 poll votes. :-\

it's worth it even over one. Or none.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jeffjo on February 26, 2014, 05:49:38 PM

Quote from: sethteater on February 26, 2014, 11:56:51 AM
Hope's losses are to...
#1 and #2 team in the West (#1 and #2 in the nation according to D3Hoops.com)
the #2 and #3 team in the Midwest (#4 and unranked according to D3hoops.com)
the #5 team in the NAIA Div. 2
and one, ugly in conference loss on the road...

Agreed: These loses (excluding the last one) can't be held against them. But they can't help them, either.

On any given day, a ranked 11-25 team can beat a top 10 team. Just not that often. One such loss counts as nothing. Three such losses are questionable. But given five opportunities, and no successes, means the team can't be put in an equivalent category.

Step up at least once, or step back. Kudos for obtaining such a tough schedule, but it means nothing if you can't do something with it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 26, 2014, 07:52:03 PM

Quote from: sethteater on February 26, 2014, 02:45:04 PM
Randolph-Macon lost 4 of their first 8. They are 14-1 in 2013 and sit at #13 in the country (d3hoops) and #1 in the south (ncaa)... Hope lost 5 of their first 8, to better opponents, then went 16-1, and are #2 in the GL. And they don't belong in the top 25 or in at least the conversation to host? That doesn't make sense to me.

Conference. Conference. Conference.

The MIAA is two teams (and Albion once a decade). The ODAC is rough; their top end is down this year, but the parity is as high as always.

Plus, RMC beat a few of the good teams they played non-conference. Hope had the misfortune of scheduling really, really, really good teams this year (as opposed to really good ones), but wins speak louder than good loses (even if good loses aren't silent).

I have no doubt both teams are improving as the season goes along, but there's way, way more evidence to back an RMC vote. A lot of times it doesn't come down to which team I think is better, but which team's case I can more easily defend.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on February 26, 2014, 09:58:49 PM

Ugh, after that overtime debacle... I should learn to stay quiet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 26, 2014, 10:02:20 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 26, 2014, 07:52:03 PM
Quote from: sethteater on February 26, 2014, 02:45:04 PM
Randolph-Macon lost 4 of their first 8. They are 14-1 in 2013 and sit at #13 in the country (d3hoops) and #1 in the south (ncaa)... Hope lost 5 of their first 8, to better opponents, then went 16-1, and are #2 in the GL. And they don't belong in the top 25 or in at least the conversation to host? That doesn't make sense to me.

Conference. Conference. Conference.

The MIAA is two teams (and Albion once a decade). The ODAC is rough; their top end is down this year, but the parity is as high as always.

Plus, RMC beat a few of the good teams they played non-conference. Hope had the misfortune of scheduling really, really, really good teams this year (as opposed to really good ones), but wins speak louder than good loses (even if good loses aren't silent).

I have no doubt both teams are improving as the season goes along, but there's way, way more evidence to back an RMC vote. A lot of times it doesn't come down to which team I think is better, but which team's case I can more easily defend.

It may be that way for some people, but I'd stack Hope and Calvin's tournament success over the last 2 1/2 decades against any conference and be very comfortable with what they've accomplished. They are capable of competing outside their conference just fine.

You'll get no argument from me that the league has been down for the last 5 or 6 years and I'd even include Hope and Calvin in that statement. But I've watched enough of this league to know whoever comes out of it can stack up just fine with their peers in D3, sometimes even better than I think.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 26, 2014, 10:02:58 PM

Quote from: sethteater on February 26, 2014, 09:58:49 PM
Ugh, after that overtime debacle... I should learn to stay quiet.

Survive and advance is all the post-season is about. Hope showed great poise tonight, lesser teams lose that game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on February 26, 2014, 10:31:19 PM

Quote from: sac on February 26, 2014, 10:02:58 PM
Quote from: sethteater on February 26, 2014, 09:58:49 PM
Ugh, after that overtime debacle... I should learn to stay quiet.

Survive and advance is all the post-season is about. Hope showed great poise tonight, lesser teams lose that game.

Trine put Hope on the line too often in 2nd half with Hope making the freebies with the clock off to get to OT.

IMHO sethteater, the argument for Hope needs to be framed within their vRRO games against the current Top 25 (#s 1,2 & 4) and current regional ranked teams Midwest #2 IWU, #3 Wheaton, #6 Carthage, West #1 UW-SP, #2 UW-WW

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on February 27, 2014, 07:30:48 AM

"Survive and advance is all the post-season is about. Hope showed great poise tonight, lesser teams lose that game."

Agreed sac! My ugh comment was more of a 1.) sigh of relief they pulled off a victory and 2.) A sigh of confusion to what I saw in the first half...

The first half they seemed transparent and one dimensional, forcing the ball down low every possesion. The second half was a poised and gritty effort with much better ball movement and shot selection.

iwumichigander, I agree that Trine put Hope on the line too often. But Hope center, a not much better than 50% free throw shooter, made 2 clutch free throws to tie the game late in the second half. I think Trine took their foot off the gas a little to early, milking the clock and trying to get the game done with... All in all, it was an incredible effort by Trine and their freshman, Will Dixon, could be really special...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on February 27, 2014, 07:38:21 AM

Quote from: Just Bill on February 25, 2014, 01:22:29 PM
This Hope game in particular gives me pause, when I think about their credentials...

http://athletics.hope.edu/sports/mbkb/2013-14/boxscores/20140104_z46o.xml?view=plays

That's the 7th place team from the NACC, which is far, far from a power conference, going on the road and being tied with Hope with 3 minutes to play. A few made free throws for Edgewood down the stretch and that's a damaging loss.

Yes, they won, but that's not exactly a banner-waving win.

Edgewood is one game (@Marion on Saturday) from the playoffs themselves...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on April 29, 2014, 10:09:25 PM

If anyone is still holding onto Cabrini stock... sell. Sell, sell, sell!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on April 29, 2014, 10:56:06 PM

... and buy Mary Washington stock with the proceeds, presumably?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on April 30, 2014, 07:38:03 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on April 29, 2014, 10:56:06 PM
... and buy Mary Washington stock with the proceeds, presumably?

I don't know. Their valuation is pretty high right now - it's probably a safe bet for steady gains, but I don't see it as a big splash.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on April 30, 2014, 10:38:23 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on April 29, 2014, 10:09:25 PM

If anyone is still holding onto Cabrini stock... sell. Sell, sell, sell!

Yeah thanks and I can't get out of it. Darn broker!!! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on April 30, 2014, 04:30:45 PM

Quote from: mailsy on April 30, 2014, 10:38:23 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on April 29, 2014, 10:09:25 PM

If anyone is still holding onto Cabrini stock... sell. Sell, sell, sell!
Yeah thanks and I can't get out of it. Darn broker!!! ;D

The question is...what will the status be of their #1 asset. Will this asset be transferred to another company? A company with the stock symbol MW. If that happens it will really trigger a selling spree of Cabrini stock.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on April 30, 2014, 05:12:25 PM

Depending on who Cabrini hires (and Aaron Walton-Moss' first-semester status), Cabrini will still be better than Mary Washington next year, I'd say. But by 2015-16 that will flip.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on April 30, 2014, 05:50:34 PM

Yeah... UMW lost a LOT from last year's team... Cabrini lost some, but AWM makes up for a lot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on April 30, 2014, 10:39:22 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on April 30, 2014, 05:12:25 PM
Depending on who Cabrini hires (and Aaron Walton-Moss' first-semester status), Cabrini will still be better than Mary Washington next year, I'd say. But by 2015-16 that will flip.

It may actually work out better for Cabrini in the short term if they get somebody in who can figure out what to do with Walls. I've never seen a player so completely change the dynamics of a team. They were night and day from the beginning to the end of the season and not in a good way.

I think it's tough to say adding a player of Walls' caliber hurts you, but they were not playing Kahn basketball in the tournament. Bringing in a new system better suited to the players on the floor could help Cabrini next year - after that, well, tough going.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on May 02, 2014, 06:22:30 PM

Well ... maybe it's not such a good idea anymore to buy UMW stock. (http://news.fredericksburg.com/sports/2014/05/01/college-basketball-coach-learned-of-dismissal-a-year-ago/)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on May 02, 2014, 07:39:12 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on May 02, 2014, 06:22:30 PM
Well ... maybe it's not such a good idea anymore to buy UMW stock. (http://news.fredericksburg.com/sports/2014/05/01/college-basketball-coach-learned-of-dismissal-a-year-ago/)

Well that's some kind of read.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on May 03, 2014, 03:17:56 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on May 02, 2014, 06:22:30 PM
Well ... maybe it's not such a good idea anymore to buy UMW stock. (http://news.fredericksburg.com/sports/2014/05/01/college-basketball-coach-learned-of-dismissal-a-year-ago/)

Thanks for posting the link Greg.

That puts an entirely different spin on Mary Washington's Coach Rod Wood and his "promotion" to "Director of Athletic Facilities" by Athletic Director Ken Tyler.

It was also interesting to read that new coach Marcus Kahn was a former assistant under AD Tyler, who fired Wood and hired Kahn. In view of the facts that were put forth in the story, it makes you wonder how accurate this statement from the Mary Washington press release announcing Kahn's hiring is:

"We had a very strong applicant pool and Marcus emerged as the consensus choice among our search committee and staff" said Tyler on Monday.

I'm wondering just how strong that applicant pool was.

Most of the comments to the article from the Fredericksburg newspaper were not in support of the dismissal of Coach Wood, especially after the season his team had.

Here's a link to a letter that the Mary Washington players wrote to the Mary Washington administration:

http://cdn.blogs.fredericksburg.com/sports/files/2014/05/playerletter.pdf

I dumped all my UMW stock overnight.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on May 03, 2014, 11:20:31 AM

My faith in the 'purity' of D3 sports over all others takes a hit when I read stories like this.... Thankfully it doesn't seem to happen often... How difficult for Coach Wood....And to a lesser extent for Coach Kahn, who may simply be a pawn in this rather ugly situation.... And finally for the players, who have lost all trust in the administration....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on May 03, 2014, 11:38:16 AM

Things were certainly not done well, but it is Marcus Kahn. He's not exactly the beneficiary of nepotism.

I do wonder how much of this Kahn knew before he took the job.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on May 03, 2014, 01:56:48 PM

Quote from: magicman on May 03, 2014, 03:17:56 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on May 02, 2014, 06:22:30 PM
Well ... maybe it's not such a good idea anymore to buy UMW stock. (http://news.fredericksburg.com/sports/2014/05/01/college-basketball-coach-learned-of-dismissal-a-year-ago/)

Thanks for posting the link Greg.

Thank D-Mac. I first saw the link when he posted it on Facebook, and I've merely passed it along to d3boards.com, since this current thread was already about Kahn and his move to UMW. The link is also now up on d3hoops.com in the "What We're Reading" section of the front page.

Quote from: magicman on May 03, 2014, 03:17:56 AMThat puts an entirely different spin on Mary Washington's Coach Rod Wood and his "promotion" to "Director of Athletic Facilities" by Athletic Director Ken Tyler.

It was also interesting to read that new coach Marcus Kahn was a former assistant under AD Tyler, who fired Wood and hired Kahn. In view of the facts that were put forth in the story, it makes you wonder how accurate this statement from the Mary Washington press release announcing Kahn's hiring is:

"We had a very strong applicant pool and Marcus emerged as the consensus choice among our search committee and staff" said Tyler on Monday.

I'm wondering just how strong that applicant pool was.

Most of the comments to the article from the Fredericksburg newspaper were not in support of the dismissal of Coach Wood, especially after the season his team had.

Here's a link to a letter that the Mary Washington players wrote to the Mary Washington administration:

http://cdn.blogs.fredericksburg.com/sports/files/2014/05/playerletter.pdf

I dumped all my UMW stock overnight.

Agreed on all points.

Quote from: hopefan on May 03, 2014, 11:20:31 AM
My faith in the 'purity' of D3 sports over all others takes a hit when I read stories like this.... Thankfully it doesn't seem to happen often...

True, but it never hurts to be a little skeptical about the way that administrators operate with regard to sports, even on the D3 level. Human nature is human nature, after all.

Quote from: Hoops Fan on May 03, 2014, 11:38:16 AM

Things were certainly not done well, but it is Marcus Kahn. He's not exactly the beneficiary of nepotism.

I do wonder how much of this Kahn knew before he took the job.

That's a very good question.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on May 04, 2014, 10:55:11 AM

Quote from: magicman on May 03, 2014, 03:17:56 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on May 02, 2014, 06:22:30 PM
Well ... maybe it's not such a good idea anymore to buy UMW stock. (http://news.fredericksburg.com/sports/2014/05/01/college-basketball-coach-learned-of-dismissal-a-year-ago/)

It was also interesting to read that new coach Marcus Kahn was a former assistant under AD Tyler, who fired Wood and hired Kahn. In view of the facts that were put forth in the story, it makes you wonder how accurate this statement from the Mary Washington press release announcing Kahn's hiring is:

"We had a very strong applicant pool and Marcus emerged as the consensus choice among our search committee and staff" said Tyler on Monday.

I'm wondering just how strong that applicant pool was.

I know some of those who applied and who were finalists... it actually was a strong applicant pool. Interestingly enough, Kahn was the only D3 name I didn't know in the finalists pool... I only knew the person was a former assistant for Tyler... and I completely blanked on that person being Kahn.

It certainly seems like Kahn was targeted and was Tyler's choice for the job... but I do know a lot of quality applicants were in play... just not sure if the committee thought about going in a different direction.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on May 04, 2014, 08:43:54 PM

Quote from: magicman on May 03, 2014, 03:17:56 AM
It was also interesting to read that new coach Marcus Kahn was a former assistant under AD Tyler...

This was in our story ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on May 05, 2014, 03:19:10 PM

That's a really, really thorough article on UMW. I'm always impressed and gratified when someone does that with a Division III program.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on May 06, 2014, 08:32:45 PM

Quote from: Warren Thompson on May 06, 2014, 05:20:53 PM
Greg, I'm about ready to dump my LVC stock. :'(

Warren, you should follow my cue. Instead of thinking of NPU basketball as a tanked stock, I think of it as Confederate money: Worthless for a century and more after Appomattox, but nowadays a $1 CSA bill tends to go for anywhere from $30 to $50 on eBay.

Moral of the story: Value is dependent upon time, in both directions. If you've grown too jaded to subscribe to the quaint notion of "hope" anymore as a sports fan, you have to look for your solace wherever you can. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Warren Thompson on May 07, 2014, 11:30:03 AM

Greg, LVC basketball, men's and women's, isn't "tanked stock." It retains its value. I'm not so "jaded" that I don't have any hope. In fact, I have firm hopes for the following: the Cubs in a World Series before the Apocalypse; the return of sleeves on football jerseys; and sports teams with only two uniforms, home and away, and the occasional throwback kit.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: northb on May 07, 2014, 02:40:28 PM

Quote from: Warren Thompson on May 07, 2014, 11:30:03 AM
In fact, I have firm hopes for the following: the Cubs in a World Series before the Apocalypse;

AA groups define insanity as doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Warren Thompson on May 07, 2014, 04:26:12 PM

Quote from: northb on May 07, 2014, 02:40:28 PM
Quote from: Warren Thompson on May 07, 2014, 11:30:03 AM
In fact, I have firm hopes for the following: the Cubs in a World Series before the Apocalypse;

AA groups define insanity as doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

Well, there you have it. Thanks for explaining the condition afflicting all Cub fans.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on May 08, 2014, 04:34:06 PM

Maybe some Cubs fans... this Cubs fan just expects there to be 162 games of baseball... anything else would be considered gravy. It would be insane to expect them to win anything any year... especially with this management and ownership team!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on May 08, 2014, 06:20:36 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on May 08, 2014, 04:34:06 PM
Maybe some Cubs fans... this Cubs fan just expects there to be 162 games of baseball... anything else would be considered gravy. It would be insane to expect them to win anything any year... especially with this management and ownership team!

Exactly. I haven't expected even minimal competence out of the Cubs for several years now, and I won't expect it again for at least another couple of seasons.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: northb on May 09, 2014, 11:16:24 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on May 08, 2014, 06:20:36 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on May 08, 2014, 04:34:06 PM
Maybe some Cubs fans... this Cubs fan just expects there to be 162 games of baseball... anything else would be considered gravy. It would be insane to expect them to win anything any year... especially with this management and ownership team!

Exactly. I haven't expected even minimal competence out of the Cubs for several years now, and I won't expect it again for at least another couple of seasons.

Which is what Cubs fans have been saying for decades: not this year, or even next year, but in a few years we have a chance. I wonder what the Red Sox' success has done to Cubs fans--hope that the curse can be reversed? And then there's Bartman...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on May 09, 2014, 11:45:23 AM

I have Red Sox fans in my family... and while they haven't, many Red Sox fans have become intolerable... so I will take my enjoyment of one of the best baseball stadiums in the country and hope they figure it out. Also, Bartman had less to do with that play than Alou who barely made an effort and the fans next to Bartman who also were interfering. Plus... it was in the stands to begin with and the NEXT play is actually what undid the Cubs in that game. It's like blaming Bill Buckner for the Red Sox losing the World Series... because people forget how the Mets got into a scoring chance in the first place (Red Sox blowing the lead late with Buckner not playing a roll) and then blowing Game 7.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on May 09, 2014, 09:24:41 PM

Quote from: northb on May 09, 2014, 11:16:24 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on May 08, 2014, 06:20:36 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on May 08, 2014, 04:34:06 PM
Maybe some Cubs fans... this Cubs fan just expects there to be 162 games of baseball... anything else would be considered gravy. It would be insane to expect them to win anything any year... especially with this management and ownership team!

Exactly. I haven't expected even minimal competence out of the Cubs for several years now, and I won't expect it again for at least another couple of seasons.

Which is what Cubs fans have been saying for decades: not this year, or even next year, but in a few years we have a chance.

That's not true. Hopes were very high that the future was now back in the latter part of the decade, when the Cubs won the NL Central title in back-to-back seasons ('07 and '08).

And I said "minimal competence" in a few years, which is a different thing altogether than being a contender. I'm not bold enough (or deluded enough) to say about the Cubs that "in a few years we have a chance." Banking everything on a fistful of post-adolescents who are liked but not exactly drooled over by the farm-system mavens at Baseball Prospectus and Baseball America doth not a future pennant guarantee. Baseball isn't even close to being that predictable.

Quote from: northb on May 09, 2014, 11:16:24 AMI wonder what the Red Sox' success has done to Cubs fans--hope that the curse can be reversed?

Cubs fans don't really believe in the goat curse. Don't mix up myth with reality. A good story sells books and newspapers and makes for fun conversation, but that doesn't mean that anybody really believes that some Greek tavern owner dosed the Cubs with bad juju 69 years ago because team management wouldn't let his pet goat into the ballpark. Nobody is more aware than Cubs fans of how chronic front-office incompetence is what has really doomed the franchise for all but a few stretches of years since World War II.

I don't think that Cubs fandom really pays all that much attention to the turnaround of the Red Sox, either, except indirectly via the presence of Theo Epstein as the man driving what's supposed to be the coming turnaround of the Cubs. The fan base of the Cubs is much more concerned with the success of their archrival, the Cardinals -- a franchise whose front office perennially does everything right while that of the Cubs perennially does everything wrong.

As for Bartman, D-Mac is right on target. The guy was just a scapegoat for an eighth-inning implosion that took place on the field and not in the stands, and for which the Cubs themselves (with a fair bit of help from the Marlins) were responsible rather than some hapless fan in a green hoodie and headphones.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on May 12, 2014, 12:12:13 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on May 09, 2014, 09:24:41 PM
As for Bartman, D-Mac is right on target. The guy was just a scapegoat for an eighth-inning implosion that took place on the field and not in the stands, and for which the Cubs themselves (with a fair bit of help from the Marlins) were responsible rather than some hapless fan in a green hoodie and headphones.

We must now call into question everything Mr. Sager has ever recollected: Bartman's sweatshirt was dark in color (either black or navy) and it did not have a hood (but he was wearing green turtleneck).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: northb on May 12, 2014, 02:40:11 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on May 09, 2014, 09:24:41 PM
[
Cubs fans don't really believe in the goat curse. Don't mix up myth with reality. A good story sells books and newspapers and makes for fun conversation, but that doesn't mean that anybody really believes that some Greek tavern owner dosed the Cubs with bad juju 69 years ago because team management wouldn't let his pet goat into the ballpark. Nobody is more aware than Cubs fans of how chronic front-office incompetence is what has really doomed the franchise for all but a few stretches of years since World War II.

It was a Service Goat

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on May 12, 2014, 04:21:37 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on May 12, 2014, 12:12:13 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on May 09, 2014, 09:24:41 PM
As for Bartman, D-Mac is right on target. The guy was just a scapegoat for an eighth-inning implosion that took place on the field and not in the stands, and for which the Cubs themselves (with a fair bit of help from the Marlins) were responsible rather than some hapless fan in a green hoodie and headphones.

We must now call into question everything Mr. Sager has ever recollected: Bartman's sweatshirt was dark in color (either black or navy) and it did not have a hood (but he was wearing green turtleneck).

Is now the proper time for me to fall upon my sword? I'm not sure about the etiquette of such things.

Quote from: northb on May 12, 2014, 02:40:11 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on May 09, 2014, 09:24:41 PM
[
Cubs fans don't really believe in the goat curse. Don't mix up myth with reality. A good story sells books and newspapers and makes for fun conversation, but that doesn't mean that anybody really believes that some Greek tavern owner dosed the Cubs with bad juju 69 years ago because team management wouldn't let his pet goat into the ballpark. Nobody is more aware than Cubs fans of how chronic front-office incompetence is what has really doomed the franchise for all but a few stretches of years since World War II.

It was a Service Goat

???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on May 13, 2014, 04:59:45 PM

A seeing eye goat???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Just Bill on May 13, 2014, 05:41:45 PM

No, no, no. A service goat is a goat in the military. Like this one:

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F1.bp.blogspot.com%2F_h8lco0yxl-k%2FTICvQdvonOI%2FAAAAAAAAEmY%2Fc-CgYwwC4BY%2Fs1600%2Fmen_who_stare_at_goats_001.jpg&hash=c29b86729867246eed22662185efec739e558d7d)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on May 13, 2014, 11:32:50 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on May 12, 2014, 04:21:37 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on May 12, 2014, 12:12:13 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on May 09, 2014, 09:24:41 PM
As for Bartman, D-Mac is right on target. The guy was just a scapegoat for an eighth-inning implosion that took place on the field and not in the stands, and for which the Cubs themselves (with a fair bit of help from the Marlins) were responsible rather than some hapless fan in a green hoodie and headphones.

We must now call into question everything Mr. Sager has ever recollected: Bartman's sweatshirt was dark in color (either black or navy) and it did not have a hood (but he was wearing green turtleneck).

Is now the proper time for me to fall upon my sword? I'm not sure about the etiquette of such things.

You have to commit Harry Caray ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on May 14, 2014, 03:30:45 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on May 13, 2014, 11:32:50 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on May 12, 2014, 04:21:37 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on May 12, 2014, 12:12:13 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on May 09, 2014, 09:24:41 PM
As for Bartman, D-Mac is right on target. The guy was just a scapegoat for an eighth-inning implosion that took place on the field and not in the stands, and for which the Cubs themselves (with a fair bit of help from the Marlins) were responsible rather than some hapless fan in a green hoodie and headphones.

We must now call into question everything Mr. Sager has ever recollected: Bartman's sweatshirt was dark in color (either black or navy) and it did not have a hood (but he was wearing green turtleneck).

Is now the proper time for me to fall upon my sword? I'm not sure about the etiquette of such things.

You have to commit Harry Caray ...

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F0-media-cdn.foolz.us%2Fffuuka%2Fboard%2Fvp%2Fimage%2F1393%2F55%2F1393553341448.jpg&hash=e2e6038856cf181c8c9257ba3d201ceff31fd2fb)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on June 06, 2014, 10:40:53 AM

Cabrini has hired a new coach. Previous assistant to Marcus, Tim McDonald.

http://www.cabriniathletics.com/coaches.aspx?rc=513

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on June 09, 2014, 03:51:29 PM

On paper, but for the coaching change, Cabrini looks like a clear-cut choice for pre-season number two, after Wisconsin Whitewater (who after two titles in three years, and with two likely pre-season all-Americans leading the way, is a surefire number one). Do folks think the coaching change will hurt Cabrini's outlook much?

I say no, given that next year seems like a year where most of the top 12 in the final poll have been fairly decimated by graduation, so it's hard to see who else would supplant them. Williams and IWU both bring back a lot of perimeter firepower and are legit top-10 teams for sure, but each lost elite guys on the interior with no obvious replacements in sight. Amherst will be right there again thanks to two D1 transfers, but losing the best player in program history plus two other top-notch starters will surely lead to some early growing pains. And Stevens-Point, Wash U., Mary Washington and St. Norbert might not even be top-25 squads in light of the guys they are graduating ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on June 10, 2014, 08:31:56 AM

I wouldn't put Cabrini in the Top 5 - not to start the year. They're bringing back much of their talent, but they're losing two starters and they weren't a Top 10 team at the end of last year. If they can get the chemistry worked out and fit everybody into the system, then, yes, they will be very good - but based on the end of last season, I couldn't justify them so high in the preseason.

I'd add Augustana to your list. They graduated no one from a pretty good team. MIT should be very good as well - they suffered through a lot of injuries last year and didn't lose anyone from the team.

There's a post here somewhere where I listed teams from the tournament who had the best returning cast. I'll have to see if I can find it again.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on June 11, 2014, 02:42:06 PM

From what I have been told... there is a 6-6 A10 transfer headed to Cabrini for next season... just an FYI. The coach I was talking to made the transfer sound like a big deal for Cabrini.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on June 12, 2014, 12:47:58 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on June 11, 2014, 02:42:06 PM
From what I have been told... there is a 6-6 A10 transfer headed to Cabrini for next season... just an FYI. The coach I was talking to made the transfer sound like a big deal for Cabrini.

Well, that might change things.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dcahill44 on June 12, 2014, 01:30:08 PM

http://cornandsoybeandigest.com/blog/lessons-learned-student-athlete Everyone should read this story. Really cool. Division 3 gained another fan this day. Purity of D3 is like no other. I love the Purity of the sport.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on June 13, 2014, 07:07:25 AM

Quote from: dcahill44 on June 12, 2014, 01:30:08 PM
http://cornandsoybeandigest.com/blog/lessons-learned-student-athlete Everyone should read this story. Really cool. Division 3 gained another fan this day. Purity of D3 is like no other. I love the Purity of the sport.

+1. Thanks for sharing that story! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on June 18, 2014, 12:36:47 PM

Williams head coach Mike Maker on to Marist: http://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2014/06/mike-maker-takes-d1-job (http://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2014/06/mike-maker-takes-d1-job)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on June 20, 2014, 07:22:14 AM

Wow! What a way to start the season for the Cavaliers at the Hoopsville Classic. SUNY Purchase on Saturday(11-22) and then WPI on Sunday. Could help set the tone for the season as it did last year when Cabrini went 2-0. I'll probably be taking the trip down again. Very nice tournament last year. If you can't go down to Stevenson, the video is really good. Should be a great tournament again! :)

http://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2014/06/hoopsville-classic-pairings-announced

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on June 20, 2014, 04:01:32 PM

Everything you wrote... is what we strive for :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on June 20, 2014, 04:08:33 PM

Forgot to update... I believe my information on a 6-6 transfer from an A10 school is incorrect... he actually may be 6-10! I need to double-check.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on July 14, 2014, 04:09:29 PM

Update to an update... I have circled back on this and found out from my source that the report is unfounded. He was pretty sure (and he should be as he would know) that this was happening, but now reports rank this report up there with Walton Moss leaving the school for UMW... not true. Sorry for the confusion. I usually stay out of the fray regarding recruiting and transfers... and this example #1 as to why. I will go back to ignoring everything I hear until an SA is in a jersey and playing :).

On a completely seperate note, we are rebuilding the Hoopsville studio and are looking for your help. Find out why we are rebuilding and what you can do to help us here: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/07/14/rebuilding-hoopsvilles-studio/ (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2014/07/14/rebuilding-hoopsvilles-studio/). Then let us know your ideas!!! Thanks!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on September 27, 2014, 11:21:42 AM

About 2 1/2 weeks until the preseason begins. I saw something from Cabrini's website re the Sporting News on the Division 3 Preseason Top 10. Here is the top 10. Any thoughts?

Sporting News Division III Preseason Top 10
1. Amherst College
2. University of Wisconsin-Whitewater
3. Augustana College
4. Williams College
5. Cabrini College
6. Albertus Magnus College
7. Dickinson College
8. Randolph-Macon College
9. Virginia Wesleyan College
10. Rhode Island College

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on September 27, 2014, 09:11:25 PM

Quote from: mailsy on September 27, 2014, 11:21:42 AM
About 2 1/2 weeks until the preseason begins. I saw something from Cabrini's website re the Sporting News on the Division 3 Preseason Top 10. Here is the top 10. Any thoughts?

Sporting News Division III Preseason Top 10
1. Amherst College
2. University of Wisconsin-Whitewater
3. Augustana College
4. Williams College
5. Cabrini College
6. Albertus Magnus College
7. Dickinson College
8. Randolph-Macon College
9. Virginia Wesleyan College
10. Rhode Island College

The Sporting News never really has a clue.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 27, 2014, 11:20:50 PM

I would have UWW #1, Augie #2, Amherst maybe 7 or 8, and Williams (who lost the two best players in D3, and their coach), no where near the top 25, much less the top 10.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on September 28, 2014, 01:15:49 PM

The Sporting News rankings were posted before Robinson announced his transfer. I think had Robinson stuck around, the Ephs' ranking would have been dead-on given how much the rest of the top D3 teams are losing. Without him, Mayer, Epley and Maker, however, yeah, a lot of things will have to go right for the Ephs to finish the season as a top 25 team, although it's not totally out of the question as they return a strong group of seniors who will have a chance to shine in the spotlight. Top 10, though, would be a minor miracle.

I'd agree with UWW at 1, Augie at 2, and Amherst in the bottom half of the top 10.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on September 29, 2014, 03:01:12 PM

Yeah... that list is a bit of a question mark. Does anyone really think RIC is a top ten team? Dickinson is good, but they lose some valuable talent... number seven? Albertus Magnus I don't think has proven they are a top ten team. Amherst loses a ton so really number one? Augustana, I know they bring back a lot, but number two?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on September 29, 2014, 03:11:23 PM

Augustana brings back everyone

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on September 29, 2014, 05:28:43 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on September 29, 2014, 03:01:12 PM
Yeah... that list is a bit of a question mark. Does anyone really think RIC is a top ten team? Dickinson is good, but they lose some valuable talent... number seven? Albertus Magnus I don't think has proven they are a top ten team. Amherst loses a ton so really number one? Augustana, I know they bring back a lot, but number two?

As sac said, Augustana brings back everyone from a 20-8 team that made it to the second round last season before losing to UWW on the home floor of the Warhawks. Augie's a more than reasonable choice for preseason #2.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on September 29, 2014, 09:12:36 PM

I know... but I don't know if I would jump them to #2... while they brought back everyone, they also underperformed (though, you can't knock them for losing to UWW). I guess I am just used to them underperforming my expectations that I think #2 is too high to start.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on September 30, 2014, 12:08:26 AM

It's a new year, Dave, and this team shouldn't be penalized for the tendency of Augie teams in the past to fall short of expectations. After all, those disappointments had nothing to do with the current cast of characters. I don't think that last season's team underperformed at all. The Doggies were picked to finish third in the CCIW preseason poll (with zero first-place votes), and that's precisely where they ended up. And as far as the tournament was concerned, Augie went as far as could be reasonably expected of that team, given the competition.

There's a lot to be said for upperclassmen in terms of their focus, their drive, and their ability to learn from the mistakes of their previous campaigns. Augie's going to be a team that plays eleven or twelve guys every night, all of whom are juniors and seniors, and all of whom have put in at least two previous seasons of varsity ball. That's a great recipe for success.

I just don't see anyone else who leaps to mind except for UWW who looks better situated coming into this season. And I don't say that as a CCIW partisan, because it certainly wouldn't break my heart if Grey Giovanine never had a chance to cut down the nets in Salem.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on October 07, 2014, 10:46:39 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on September 30, 2014, 12:08:26 AM
And I don't say that as a CCIW partisan, because it certainly wouldn't break my heart if Grey Giovanine never had a chance to cut down the nets in Salem.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 13, 2014, 01:53:56 PM

Pat, when can we expect to see the pre-season poll?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 13, 2014, 05:51:25 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 13, 2014, 01:53:56 PM
Pat, when can we expect to see the pre-season poll?

BTW, this is not to complain you are tardy or anything. Official practice doesn't even start for two more days, so we can't even know of unexpected (non-graduating-senior) losses until then; then I suppose you need a couple of weeks to call top 50 coaches to write up your 'cheat-sheets' for the voters. About Nov. 1st?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 13, 2014, 08:39:07 PM

We do have the requests out to schools. Deadline is later this week, then it'll take me a couple days to go through and format the info and send it to voters, so I would say middle of next week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on October 23, 2014, 11:21:44 AM

http://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2014/10/defending-champs-return-to-top-spot

It's out. Apparently not everybody got the memo on what Williams lost. #25 would have been generous and a nice nod to last year's effort but #5 is pretty ridiculous at this point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on October 23, 2014, 12:34:17 PM

I count 60 teams receiving votes, 10 more than last years pre-season poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 23, 2014, 12:40:40 PM

Quote from: madzillagd on October 23, 2014, 11:21:44 AM
http://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2014/10/defending-champs-return-to-top-spot

It's out. Apparently not everybody got the memo on what Williams lost. #25 would have been generous and a nice nod to last year's effort but #5 is pretty ridiculous at this point.

We sent the memo to everyone but the challenge as a voter is to determine who in the heck to put above them and there is no consensus. You can look at the vote total drops -- 88 points to No. 2 alone, to see where people think there are gaps.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 23, 2014, 12:42:55 PM

Good demonstration here.

Votes for Williams by place in the poll: 0 3 1 4 5 0 0 2 0 2 1 0 0 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (one voter left Williams off entirely)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 23, 2014, 01:10:36 PM

Pretty shocked to see Point #7.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on October 23, 2014, 01:34:43 PM

Cabrini at 20. They only play the number 10, 11, 12, 14 and 21st ranked teams as part of their OOC games. Wow!! Four of their first 6 games against ranked teams. It certainly might give us an idea of how this team will do this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 23, 2014, 01:38:08 PM

Agreed on that, too. But would Albertus be better?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on October 23, 2014, 02:28:44 PM

Quote from: WUH on October 07, 2014, 10:46:39 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on September 30, 2014, 12:08:26 AM
And I don't say that as a CCIW partisan, because it certainly wouldn't break my heart if Grey Giovanine never had a chance to cut down the nets in Salem.

+1

The entire CCIW feels exactly the same way. If you took a poll of CCIW fans, especially those who regularly post on D3Hoops and who are, in my opinion, the most knowledgable about the goings on within the conference, Coach G would win the Most Disliked Poll by a wide margin. And, I think a vote among his fellow coaches would yield the same result.

He may be the nicest guy in Rock Island off the court, and anyone who says he isn't a great tactical coach just plain doesn't know basketball. However his on court antics/rants are legendary, especially including his stomp, stomp, stomp dance, running wave-off dance, and his famous world record coat toss routine.

As far as Augie's pre-season ranking, I think the voters nailed that one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D3HoopJunkie on October 23, 2014, 03:10:14 PM

Pat, not to sound like a homer cause Lord knows I am but when you say would Albertus be better? My answer is yes. Believe me I am more than happy and excited for this team as pre-season 8th. I think it is a justifiable ranking but when you look at what Albertus returned and what teams like Williams and Point lost is it really that "crazy" to place Albertus ahead of them? Certainly the reputation of these 2 teams precedes them but if we are looking at it from the perspective of what talent and depth teams returned from last years rosters which is what I believe "pre-season" should be ranked on I really feel that Albertus could have been placed ahead of these 2 programs.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 23, 2014, 03:15:04 PM

As a voter, I can tell you this... this was the biggest clusterf--- of a pre-season vote I have ever tried to figure out. I actually asked for permission to start at #10 - and was justifiably laughed at :). There just isn't any good answers this year... way to many questions from #1 on down. Usually I pride myself in having a ballot that is relatively close, though pre-season can be slightly off, to the overall poll... my ballot this year doesn't even look like the final ballot. I will probably put mine together and place it online (though, I don't have any real insight on this one)... so you can compare.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on October 23, 2014, 03:28:16 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 23, 2014, 03:15:04 PM
There just isn't any good answers this year... way to many questions from #1 on down.

It is always interesting hearing voter perspective since I do not have the time to follow the other conferences, let alone the UAA, but I figured this was the case when I read the list and noticed Washington University in the Top 10 and Emory in the Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on October 23, 2014, 04:01:00 PM

Quote from: WUH on October 23, 2014, 03:28:16 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 23, 2014, 03:15:04 PM
There just isn't any good answers this year... way to many questions from #1 on down.

It is always interesting hearing voter perspective since I do not have the time to follow the other conferences, let alone the UAA, but I figured this was the case when I read the list and noticed Washington University in the Top 10 and Emory in the Top 25.

.

Wash U may not be the best D3 team in St Louis.... Note nothing against Wash U, but they lost a lot of last year's pie.. Who might be better? We'll find out when they play Webster...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 23, 2014, 04:55:45 PM

Quote from: D3HoopJunkie on October 23, 2014, 03:10:14 PM
Pat, not to sound like a homer cause Lord knows I am but when you say would Albertus be better? My answer is yes. Believe me I am more than happy and excited for this team as pre-season 8th. I think it is a justifiable ranking but when you look at what Albertus returned and what teams like Williams and Point lost is it really that "crazy" to place Albertus ahead of them?

But Junkie, how in the world would we know Albertus is better? Not one of these games is going to prove to a voter that Albertus is top 10 material:

11/15   vs. Lyndon State •   5:30 PM
11/16   at TBD •   TBA
@ Richard Stockton Tournament
11/20   vs. Mitchell •   7:00 PM
11/25   at SUNY-Purchase •   TBA
12/2   vs. Anna Maria * •   7:00 PM
12/4   vs. Johnson and Wales * •   7:00 PM
12/6   at Suffolk * •   3:00 PM
12/13   vs. New Jersey City •   3:00 PM
12/15   vs. Western Connecticut •   7:00 PM
1/6   at Rivier * •   7:00 PM
1/8   at Norwich * •   7:00 PM   LS V
1/10   vs. St. Joseph's (Maine) * •   3:00 PM
1/14   at Emmanuel * •   7:30 PM   LS
1/17   vs. Lasell * •   3:00 PM
1/19   vs. Rivier * •   3:00 PM
1/24   at St. Joseph's (Maine) * •   2:00 PM
1/27   vs. Mount Ida * •   7:00 PM
1/29   vs. Newbury •   7:00 PM
1/31   vs. Norwich * •   3:00 PM
2/4   at Lasell * •   7:00 PM
2/7   vs. Suffolk * •   3:00 PM
2/10   at Mount Ida * •   6:00 PM
2/14   at Johnson and Wales * •   TBA   LS
2/17   vs. Emmanuel * •   7:00 PM
2/21   at Anna Maria * •   3:00 PM   LS

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 23, 2014, 05:09:10 PM

As a pessimistic Pointer fan, they are rated way too high considering losing who they did. On the other hand, they could be starting 4 seniors and 1 junior this year. With that said, I don't know if they'll even be the 2nd best team in the WIAC this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 23, 2014, 05:25:02 PM

Quote from: hopefan on October 23, 2014, 04:01:00 PM
Quote from: WUH on October 23, 2014, 03:28:16 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 23, 2014, 03:15:04 PM
There just isn't any good answers this year... way to many questions from #1 on down.

It is always interesting hearing voter perspective since I do not have the time to follow the other conferences, let alone the UAA, but I figured this was the case when I read the list and noticed Washington University in the Top 10 and Emory in the Top 25.
.

Wash U may not be the best D3 team in St Louis.... Note nothing against Wash U, but they lost a lot of last year's pie.. Who might be better? We'll find out when they play Webster...

My thinking exactly. And Webster, which returns four starters, the top five scorers, and the top three rebounders from a team that lost a controversial tourney game at Illinois Wesleyan that went right down to the final buzzer, didn't even get a single frickin' point in the poll! And then you've got our most stalwart UWSP fan absolutely horrified that his Pointers are #7, given all the dire predictions in the WIAC room about a dramatic falloff for UWSP this season. Then there's Williams being picked #5, which is going to come as a shock to the NESCAC room (including the Ephs fans -- maybe even especially the Ephs fans); and Illinois Wesleyan and Wheaton are both picked too high, at least by preseason lights. And so on.

So what does this all mean? Well, the fact that sixty different teams received votes is the first clue that there's comparatively little agreement here as compared to past preseasons, as sac pointed out. But I think that D3HoopJunkie nailed it:

Quote from: D3HoopJunkie on October 23, 2014, 03:10:14 PM
Pat, not to sound like a homer cause Lord knows I am but when you say would Albertus be better? My answer is yes. Believe me I am more than happy and excited for this team as pre-season 8th. I think it is a justifiable ranking but when you look at what Albertus returned and what teams like Williams and Point lost is it really that "crazy" to place Albertus ahead of them? Certainly the reputation of these 2 teams precedes them but if we are looking at it from the perspective of what talent and depth teams returned from last years rosters which is what I believe "pre-season" should be ranked on I really feel that Albertus could have been placed ahead of these 2 programs.

(Emphasis mine.)

In a situation in which there really doesn't appear to be any clear-cut consensus (aside from defending champ UWW being the alpha dog), I think that a certain number of pollsters -- not all of them, certainly, and I'm not even sure how many of them do this -- default to brand-name mode and simply go with a familiar program, regardless of whether or not that program is bringing back a team that merits anywhere near where they're picked.

I don't like that method of filling out a ballot, but I can certainly understand it. What I would hope, however, is that the pollsters would be quick to throw out that preseason ballot and start over again from scratch every week for the first few weeks of the season. Pat and I have had an argument off and on for the past fifteen years about the wisdom of having early-season polls at all. While I agree that a preseason poll is a good public relations device, and that having one has probably helped to cement d3hoops.com's reputation as the definitive and most authoritative source of information about NCAA Division III basketball, the truth of the matter is that the preseason poll often ends up becoming a template upon which pollsters base their first in-season poll, rather than sticking to actual results (because, of course, the database of actual results is so limited at that point). Then, of course, the pollsters base the second in-season poll upon the first, which means that it, too, is tainted by the now-thoroughly-obsolete preseason poll. We're generally deep into the season by the time that the preseason-poll effect is finally nullified.

A year like this, in which the preseason poll invites so much skepticism, is a recipe for disaster for the usefulness of the first few in-season polls -- unless, as I said, the pollsters do the smart thing by throwing out the preseason poll entirely and starting all over once the regular season begins.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on October 23, 2014, 07:12:45 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 23, 2014, 04:55:45 PM
Quote from: D3HoopJunkie on October 23, 2014, 03:10:14 PM
Pat, not to sound like a homer cause Lord knows I am but when you say would Albertus be better? My answer is yes. Believe me I am more than happy and excited for this team as pre-season 8th. I think it is a justifiable ranking but when you look at what Albertus returned and what teams like Williams and Point lost is it really that "crazy" to place Albertus ahead of them?

But Junkie, how in the world would we know Albertus is better? Not one of these games is going to prove to a voter that Albertus is top 10 material:

@ Richard Stockton Tournament

The above statment is TGHIJGSTO!!! man

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on October 23, 2014, 07:48:41 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 23, 2014, 05:09:10 PM
As a pessimistic Pointer fan, they are rated way too high considering losing who they did. On the other hand, they could be starting 4 seniors and 1 junior this year. With that said, I don't know if they'll even be the 2nd best team in the WIAC this season.

Really? Who in the WIAC would be #2? There was a SIGNIFICANT dropoff after UWW (#2 in the conf). Everyone else had 10+ losses.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on October 23, 2014, 07:48:56 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 23, 2014, 05:25:02 PM
And then you've got our most stalwart UWSP fan absolutely horrified that his Pointers are #7, given all the dire predictions in the WIAC room about a dramatic falloff for UWSP this season.

Hey, who died and made him most stalwart?

Tom is pretty notorious for downplaying the Pointers. Maybe it's his reverse psychology mojo... But...

All I know is that Whitewater required overtime to beat SP least year (they should have never had a chance down 5 with 2 mins, no disrespect to my good friend Nick Bennett) and lost two other pretty convincing games to Point. I get that talent was lost, and significant talent at that, but Whitewater had won one match up out of 10 against UWSP.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on October 23, 2014, 08:37:45 PM

Back when I had more time and and higher interest level in such things, I recall doing some minimal research that suggested that the d3hoops.com preseason polls are far more accurate than we give them credit for. By "accurate," I mean (or meant, at the time) as a prediction of the final, post-tournament poll, IIRC. Sure, you have what turn out to be blatant mistakes, but come March I think you might be surprised.

And on a not entirely unrelated note, I do think there is some value in selecting in part by "name brand." As a Wooster fan, I feel confident that the Scots can win 20 games in any year with any graduation losses. Success in D3 hoops is unusually coach-dependent, and there are some coaches and programs that can spin gold from straw and do it year in and year out. I may not be able to show objectively that Williams or Illinois Wesleyan is among the best 5 or 10 teams in the nation, but I would certainly not bet against it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 23, 2014, 11:42:50 PM

Just as a hint... Wash U is not my top UAA team - Chicago is - though both are in my Top 15 (didn't have any where else to put them).

Augustana... is in my Top 5. Despite my dismissal of them being that high, they are that high in my ballot - but again, I wanted to start at #10. I only have maybe three or four teams I feel comfortable in my Top 10.

Shocker: Stevens Point isn't even in my Top 25. When I heard the words "young" and "rebuilding"... I just can't justify a vote. That being said, there are probably other teams on my ballot who thus don't justify a vote... and again, I wish I started at #10.

There are several other surprises in my ballot... I will try and do my blog for early next week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 23, 2014, 11:48:10 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 23, 2014, 05:25:02 PM
I don't like that method of filling out a ballot, but I can certainly understand it. What I would hope, however, is that the pollsters would be quick to throw out that preseason ballot and start over again from scratch every week for the first few weeks of the season. Pat and I have had an argument off and on for the past fifteen years about the wisdom of having early-season polls at all. While I agree that a preseason poll is a good public relations device, and that having one has probably helped to cement d3hoops.com's reputation as the definitive and most authoritative source of information about NCAA Division III basketball, the truth of the matter is that the preseason poll often ends up becoming a template upon which pollsters base their first in-season poll, rather than sticking to actual results (because, of course, the database of actual results is so limited at that point). Then, of course, the pollsters base the second in-season poll upon the first, which means that it, too, is tainted by the now-thoroughly-obsolete preseason poll. We're generally deep into the season by the time that the preseason-poll effect is finally nullified.

A year like this, in which the preseason poll invites so much skepticism, is a recipe for disaster for the usefulness of the first few in-season polls -- unless, as I said, the pollsters do the smart thing by throwing out the preseason poll entirely and starting all over once the regular season begins.

I don't necessarily throw my preseason ballot out and start fresh early in the season for this reason: I need a base to work from. Doing the pre-season poll is a very, very time consuming process - even more this year with so much out there that makes no sense. I can't do that kind of work each and every week for the first few weeks. If I were to throw out my ballot and introduce 50-75 teams to consider... I would rather watch paint dry.

That being said, I am more than willing to gut parts of it that I was clearly not right or had the right information. I don't hold fast to the ballot and hold fast to pre-season thoughts if what on the court is proving otherwise. I also don't hold fast each and ever week. I have pointed out that I tend to blow up my ballot at least three times a year (sometimes as few as two - or semi-blow it up on several occasions) because I am trapped in a situation where my ballot is ditacting things I am no longer seeing in reality.

Now... I will say this... I know about 10 to 15 of the voters (never ask, just happen to find out on most occasions)... and I have very interesting conversations with each of them throughout the year, but not every week. I know there are differing opinions on a lot of teams and this preseason ballot is a very interesting one compared to other ballots I have seen. What gets me is sometimes I think voters are stuck in their ways and not willing to look outside the box. I have no proof, but I think some of the teams on the pre-season ballot are FAR too high and others too low and others not even being considered... because voters won't change off a strange mindset. However, I am one voter - one voice - and I am in no way saying voters have to think more like me or others... I just wish some would think in a more grand scale.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 24, 2014, 08:29:56 AM

For the record, I'm definitely not the Pointer stalwart, nor was I horrified about their ranking. I was shocked. I believe there is a big difference. :o :D ;)

Everyone should know by now I'm a self proclaimed pessimistic Pointer fan. I already told John I was prepared for another 17-10 season, not unlike our season after our 2nd National Championship.

Then again, Point won in 2005 and 2010, so we're due in 2015, right?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 24, 2014, 08:30:32 AM

Albertus really needs to go undefeated this year to justify that ranking with their schedule. However, if they end up in the title game of the Stockton tournament against TGHIJGSTO, I'll make every effort to be there. Magnus has built up a reputation and their roster looks as good, if not better than last season. They're no sleeper, even if they always end up untested.

I'm going to make one day of the Hoopsville tournament (hopefully Saturday, but maybe Sunday) and I should be able to catch Dickinson when they play nearby at Washington College.

I'm pretty excited to be able to get a good look (if early) at a good number of good teams.

Magnus, Stockton, Cabrini, Chicago, WPI, Macon, Witt, MHB, Dickinson. I don't know if Purchase or Gwynedd Mercy are any good this year, but hopefully I'll get a chance to find out.

Even if the rankings prove horribly incorrect, it'll make me feel like I'm seeing some good teams, anyway.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 24, 2014, 09:28:05 AM

John,

I don't understand your logic. Those examples were from last year. From what Point lost and what Whitewater lost, along with the 2 recruits Point brought in, compared to what Whitewater added, Point's going to have a big drop off this year. I haven't looked closely to see what other teams in the WIAC are doing, but I wouldn't be surprised to see someone other than Point in 2nd place come February.

Now to contradict my pessimistic feelings this year...

Dave,

To call Point young and rebuilding may be inaccurate. Point returns two senior starters in Ritchay and Ryf, along with senior Alex Richard (14+ min a game) and junior Stephen Pelkofer (20 mpg). Lastly both senior Jordan Lutz and junior Sean McCann averaged over 11 minutes a game. So Point could potentially start 4 seniors and 1 junior. You usually don't rebuild with 4 senior starters and a junior.

So whether or not Point is a Top 25 team at the end of the year remains to be seen, but I agree with you now, they aren't in October.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on October 24, 2014, 10:53:33 AM

Quote from: hopefan on October 23, 2014, 04:01:00 PM
Wash U may not be the best D3 team in St Louis.... Note nothing against Wash U, but they lost a lot of last year's pie.. Who might be better? We'll find out when they play Webster...

Just to be clear, I am not suggesting that Washington University deserves a No. 9 ranking, but rather, I acknowledging that the fact that they are ranked suggests that there are indeed no good answers.

Washington University is seriously not a Top 25 team. Emory is probably not a Top 25 team. I am not sold on Chicago as a Top 15 team. Chicago should be the favorites in the UAA, but that may not be saying much compared to, say last year.

Otherwise, I will see you at that Webster game on December 10th.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on October 24, 2014, 12:18:31 PM

Quote from: WUH on October 24, 2014, 10:53:33 AM
Quote from: hopefan on October 23, 2014, 04:01:00 PM
Wash U may not be the best D3 team in St Louis.... Note nothing against Wash U, but they lost a lot of last year's pie.. Who might be better? We'll find out when they play Webster...

Just to be clear, I am not suggesting that Washington University deserves a No. 9 ranking, but rather, I acknowledging that the fact that they are ranked suggests that there are indeed no good answers.

Washington University is seriously not a Top 25 team. Emory is probably not a Top 25 team. I am not sold on Chicago as a Top 15 team. Chicago should be the favorites in the UAA, but that may not be saying much compared to, say last year.

Otherwise, I will see you at that Webster game on December 10th.

One plus I did notice for Wash U is what looks to be a pretty solid recruiting class.. Hopefully some of those kids can fill some minutes...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on October 24, 2014, 12:25:50 PM

Quote from: hopefan on October 24, 2014, 12:18:31 PM
One plus I did notice for Wash U is what looks to be a pretty solid recruiting class.. Hopefully some of those kids can fill some minutes...

Have you ever seen David Schmelter from SLUH play?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: stag44 on October 24, 2014, 01:38:07 PM

Would love to hear any thoughts on where Claremont-Mudd-Scripps fell on ballots and how people are thinking about the SCIAC Teams (CMS and Chapman) - great to see them getting some love from the voters in the preseason!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 24, 2014, 02:09:37 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 23, 2014, 11:48:10 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 23, 2014, 05:25:02 PM
I don't like that method of filling out a ballot, but I can certainly understand it. What I would hope, however, is that the pollsters would be quick to throw out that preseason ballot and start over again from scratch every week for the first few weeks of the season. Pat and I have had an argument off and on for the past fifteen years about the wisdom of having early-season polls at all. While I agree that a preseason poll is a good public relations device, and that having one has probably helped to cement d3hoops.com's reputation as the definitive and most authoritative source of information about NCAA Division III basketball, the truth of the matter is that the preseason poll often ends up becoming a template upon which pollsters base their first in-season poll, rather than sticking to actual results (because, of course, the database of actual results is so limited at that point). Then, of course, the pollsters base the second in-season poll upon the first, which means that it, too, is tainted by the now-thoroughly-obsolete preseason poll. We're generally deep into the season by the time that the preseason-poll effect is finally nullified.

A year like this, in which the preseason poll invites so much skepticism, is a recipe for disaster for the usefulness of the first few in-season polls -- unless, as I said, the pollsters do the smart thing by throwing out the preseason poll entirely and starting all over once the regular season begins.

I don't necessarily throw my preseason ballot out and start fresh early in the season for this reason: I need a base to work from. Doing the pre-season poll is a very, very time consuming process - even more this year with so much out there that makes no sense. I can't do that kind of work each and every week for the first few weeks. If I were to throw out my ballot and introduce 50-75 teams to consider... I would rather watch paint dry.

That being said, I am more than willing to gut parts of it that I was clearly not right or had the right information. I don't hold fast to the ballot and hold fast to pre-season thoughts if what on the court is proving otherwise. I also don't hold fast each and ever week. I have pointed out that I tend to blow up my ballot at least three times a year (sometimes as few as two - or semi-blow it up on several occasions) because I am trapped in a situation where my ballot is ditacting things I am no longer seeing in reality.

Now... I will say this... I know about 10 to 15 of the voters (never ask, just happen to find out on most occasions)... and I have very interesting conversations with each of them throughout the year, but not every week. I know there are differing opinions on a lot of teams and this preseason ballot is a very interesting one compared to other ballots I have seen. What gets me is sometimes I think voters are stuck in their ways and not willing to look outside the box. I have no proof, but I think some of the teams on the pre-season ballot are FAR too high and others too low and others not even being considered... because voters won't change off a strange mindset. However, I am one voter - one voice - and I am in no way saying voters have to think more like me or others... I just wish some would think in a more grand scale.

Your third paragraph pretty much gets at what I've suspected, and the specific concern that I voiced yesterday, D-Mac.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on October 24, 2014, 02:26:19 PM

Someone (or someone's) voted for a 20-8 Wittenberg team that loses 3 of it top 4 scorers and were given a swift first round NCAA exit to Calvin, by 15.

I think that's thinking outside the box.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on October 24, 2014, 07:42:01 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 24, 2014, 09:28:05 AM
John,

I don't understand your logic. Those examples were from last year. From what Point lost and what Whitewater lost, along with the 2 recruits Point brought in, compared to what Whitewater added, Point's going to have a big drop off this year. I haven't looked closely to see what other teams in the WIAC are doing, but I wouldn't be surprised to see someone other than Point in 2nd place come February.

Now to contradict my pessimistic feelings this year...

Point is the two-time defending WIAC champ and the WIAC tournament champ and has had Whitewater's number (to the tune of 8 in a row dating back to the WIAC tournament in 2010, the last time UWSP hoisted the Walnut and Bronze) and 9 of the last 10 (SP won 2/3 match-ups last season).

I get that Whitewater has lots back, but it isn't everybody. They lost 61% of their "starts," 49% of their minutes, 44% of their points, 38% of their rebounds, 46% of their steals, and 47% of their assists.

(No, I'm not willing do do these calculations for UWSP)

WW does return 2 starters, who were major contributors (#1 and #4 scorer) but lost scorer's 2, 3, and 5. It isn't simply automatic that the remaining pieces will be able to slot in and fill those voids... and even WITH the voids, WW hasn't had success against Point.
/Pointer Spin

In terms of places in the conference... look at history. The future isn't determined by past results, but SP has finished outside of the top two in the WIAC just once since 1999-2000. That season (05-06) they were just two games out of first. Every other season, UW Stevens Point has either tied for the conference title or ended the regular season one game back.

Let me repeat that. With the exception of one year in the last 14, UWSP has never been further than 1 game back at the end of the regular season and they boast 10 conference titles (3 2nd, 1 3rd). Add 3 National Titles and 12 NCAA appearances during the span.

Whitewater hasn't been quite as dominant, but they've been darn close.

WW has 5 conference titles (5 2nd, 2 3rd, 1 4th, 1 8th). Add 2 National Titles and 7 NCAA appearances.

The rest of the conference has combined for 3 conference titles (one outright and 2 shared). Depending how you define second place, (first team after the champions/co-champs), there are more "second place," especially because ties happen a lot in a 16 game conference schedule, with 9 combined NCAA tournament appearances.

Do I think Point is going to go undefeated? By no means. This team will have some growing pains. They're ranked too high right now. I wouldn't rank them higher than 15 or 20. But I can't rationalize too many teams to put in front of them and I think they'll be in the mix for an NCAA tournament bid when the selection comes around.

I'm also not 100% sold on Whitewater. The pieces that they lost may not have had the scoring ability of K. J. Evans or the speed of Quardell Young, but they were solid players who defended hard and took care of the ball. This isn't to say that I think the cabinet is bare for Whitewater, not by any stretch of the imagination. But there's a reason why Merg and Bryson started for several years. They brought a lot to the table.

Quote
Dave,

To call Point young and rebuilding may be inaccurate. Point returns two senior starters in Ritchay and Ryf, along with senior Alex Richard (14+ min a game) and junior Stephen Pelkofer (20 mpg). Lastly both senior Jordan Lutz and junior Sean McCann averaged over 11 minutes a game. So Point could potentially start 4 seniors and 1 junior. You usually don't rebuild with 4 senior starters and a junior.

So whether or not Point is a Top 25 team at the end of the year remains to be seen, but I agree with you now, they aren't in October.

Point doesn't have a lot of apparent firepower. If you look at two years ago when Tillema went down, there weren't too many players who stepped up, and it was often a 3-man show last year.

But this is a new year and players are going to HAVE to step up. I guess there's a chance that they won't... but that would be atypical for 1) seniors and 2) players at UWSP in general when they're called upon.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 24, 2014, 10:38:02 PM

UWSP lost 62% of its points, 45% of its rebounds, 49% of its assists. Six players back who averaged 10 or more minutes, although only two starters back.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 24, 2014, 10:44:03 PM

There's just not a single team this year where you know what you're gonna get. Augustana is the best bet because they're the same team, but that team wasn't exactly consistent last year.

Even when you find a team bringing lots of guys back, the one they lose turns out to be an All-American or something.

You see all these seemingly big transfers coming in, but you never really know how they'll play.

Should be a fun season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 25, 2014, 01:21:30 AM

Quote from: sac on October 24, 2014, 02:26:19 PM
Someone (or someone's) voted for a 20-8 Wittenberg team that loses 3 of it top 4 scorers and were given a swift first round NCAA exit to Calvin, by 15.

I think that's thinking outside the box.

Actually... I would say that is not thinking outside the box. They voted for a team that always gets votes... they aren't giving that spot on the ballot to a team that maybe deserves it, but because they don't have the pedigree of Witt... the voter doesn't think they deserve it. That's not looking at the grand scale. (Watch, it will end up being voters I respect and I will have egg on my face...)

I have seen it often... and while this isn't a fair comparison, I keep an eye on all rankings in most Division III sports... in field hockey, Messiah has been getting votes despite now being 9-6 overall and 3-2 in the conference... but for some reason, some Top 20 coaches insist on giving them votes... they don't deserve them... but they get them anyway.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on October 25, 2014, 02:35:15 PM

The facts that Dave points out in the 1st paragraph of the above post is the strongest possible evidence of the folly of pre-season polls.
"They voted for a team that always gets votes." Grrrrrrrrrrrrrr!
"The pedigree of___________." Grrrrrrrrrrrr!

This seems both stupid as well as wrong. It begs the question of why someone who votes for a team that "always gets votes," or has "a pedigree" is included on the panel?

Someone even voted Illinois Wesleyan as the #1 team. ???
Because they always got votes? Because they have a pedigree?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on October 25, 2014, 03:25:52 PM

Quote from: AndOne on October 25, 2014, 02:35:15 PM
The facts that Dave points out in the 1st paragraph of the above post is the strongest possible evidence of the folly of pre-season polls.
"They voted for a team that always gets votes." Grrrrrrrrrrrrrr!
"The pedigree of___________." Grrrrrrrrrrrr!

This seems both stupid as well as wrong.

Voting for a team with a pedigree of success is probably a good use of bayesian reasoning.

Everyone has question marks and everyone has holes to fill. Who's more likely to fill those holes with quality players? The ones that do it year after year. Is that always the case? No. But voters have very little to go on right now.

Some argue that this is reason to not have preseason poll, but if the point is nothing more than entertainment value, then why not have it?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 25, 2014, 04:26:20 PM

Just as long as one is not wedded to the concept once contrary evidence accumulates, I see absolutely nothing wrong with voting (partially) on reputation in the pre-season and early season polls. Some teams are consistenty high up at the end, regardless of what they look like on paper in the early going. Such teams as Williams, Wooster, UWSP, IWU, etc. are simply good bets to high spots when there simply is no other concrete information.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on October 25, 2014, 04:55:05 PM

But you can't vote for a team partially. its a whole vote or nothing. You can give 1/2 a vote. And as far as IWU, you would think people would know they lost Ziemnik and Davis, each of whom is a big loss and together a HUGE loss. A team with great guard play, a vast unknown at the forward(s) and a marginal center is not the #4 team in the country-at least not going in. As far as the person who voted them #1, not only out to lunch, but out to dinner too.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on October 25, 2014, 05:35:28 PM

No one really knows anything about any team until we get through December....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on October 25, 2014, 06:20:50 PM

I will try to be better at noting my sarcasm. :)

(Witt kept getting ranked last year when they probably shouldn't have and lost much from that team)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 25, 2014, 08:12:08 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on October 25, 2014, 03:25:52 PM
Quote from: AndOne on October 25, 2014, 02:35:15 PM
The facts that Dave points out in the 1st paragraph of the above post is the strongest possible evidence of the folly of pre-season polls.
"They voted for a team that always gets votes." Grrrrrrrrrrrrrr!
"The pedigree of___________." Grrrrrrrrrrrr!

This seems both stupid as well as wrong.

Voting for a team with a pedigree of success is probably a good use of bayesian reasoning.

Over the past 24 hours there's been a reference to Simpson's paradox and a reference to Bayesian probability here on d3boards.com, from two different posters.

Tell me that there's a chatroom for D1 fans anywhere in this fair land of ours in which something like that will ever happen.

Bicipites hominum matrum terra grata. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 25, 2014, 08:33:12 PM

Quote from: AndOne on October 25, 2014, 04:55:05 PM
But you can't vote for a team partially. its a whole vote or nothing. You can give 1/2 a vote. And as far as IWU, you would think people would know they lost Ziemnik and Davis, each of whom is a big loss and together a HUGE loss. A team with great guard play, a vast unknown at the forward(s) and a marginal center is not the #4 team in the country-at least not going in. As far as the person who voted them #1, not only out to lunch, but out to dinner too.

The 'partially' refers to reason for the vote (i.e., partially on reputation but also on whatever info is available that early in the season), not give them a 'partial vote'.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on October 26, 2014, 02:01:30 AM

What if you write your vote in for North... ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 26, 2014, 01:44:50 PM

Quote from: AndOne on October 25, 2014, 04:55:05 PM
But you can't vote for a team partially. its a whole vote or nothing. You can give 1/2 a vote. And as far as IWU, you would think people would know they lost Ziemnik and Davis, each of whom is a big loss and together a HUGE loss. A team with great guard play, a vast unknown at the forward(s) and a marginal center is not the #4 team in the country-at least not going in. As far as the person who voted them #1, not only out to lunch, but out to dinner too.

#4 sounds too high to me too (based on what I think a "#4 team" is), but it still comes down to the voters having to figure out who should be ranked higher than IWU (or Amherst, Williams, etc). From what I'm hearing and sensing, the 2014-15 picture is extremely fuzzy here in the preseason. When one analyzes 1) 2013-14 results, and 2) returning players for 2014-15 (the two high level factors that generally go into preseason poll voting), I'm not sure that produces a list of teams that should clearly be ranked ahead of a team like IWU.

I think most would agree that UW-Whitewater, the defending champs, should be in the preseason top 2 -- the Warhawks lost some important players but return a lot. I personally believe Augustana - which returns their entire rotation from a 20-8/NCAA tournament team - is a good top two pick as well. After that, it sounds like a lot of candidates for spots 3 down to, heck, 25.

This has been said already, but I do think teams with a proven track record often get the benefit of the doubt in preseason polls like this one (where this is not much clarity). In the case of IWU, Ron Rose has led the Titans to 5 consecutive NCAA tournament appearances (five 20+ win seasons), with 4 Sweet 16s, 3 Elite 8s, and 2 Final Fours in that span. Like other coaches at strong programs, he's proven himself as a really good "reloader" - able to plug new guys in (usually from IWU's JV program - Eliud Gonzalez, Kevin Reed, Victor Davis, Andrew Ziemnik, Dylan Overstreet, etc ) and able to mesh those with returnees.

Regarding 2014-15 personnel, the Titans do have a lot of returning talent from a CCIW championship/Final Four team -- an elite backcourt and the starting center. I believe IWU has more talent at the open forward spots than some realize.

While I think #4 is too high for IWU (and that the #1 vote was bizarre), in a preseason with this much uncertainty, I don't think it's a bad thing for voters to go with some of the proven programs as they wait for games to sort things out. I really haven't heard anyone make a strong case for who should be ranked higher than some of the "name brands" that landed at the top.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 26, 2014, 01:59:56 PM

The biggest CCIW-related head-scratcher I see in the preseason poll is that Carthage has 2 poll points. Carthage was 16-10/9-5 last year and I just don't see any type of preseason Top 25 case to be made...

Carthage (16-10, 9-5)
G - Donte Logan, 5-11/160 Jr
~~G - Malcom Kelly, 6-0/185 Sr~~ ~~1st Team All-CCIW~~
~~G - Kevin Sykes Jr, 6-3/160 Sr~~
~~F - Marlon Senior, 6-5/195 Sr~~ ~~2nd Team All-CCIW~~
C - Mike Kastel, 6-7/235 Jr

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 26, 2014, 02:06:33 PM

We were sent Reese Herth as a returning starter too, if that means anything. 57% of their scoring and 76% of the rebounding returns.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on October 26, 2014, 03:10:34 PM

Only Bosko could figure out how to start 6 guys. ???

* Hearth started primarily in the beginning of the season when Carthage was waiting for Malcom Kelly to return to the team in December.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on October 26, 2014, 05:23:10 PM

I think total returnees is more important than starters, per se. Some teams start a player and he plays just 10-15 minutes a game by design, while the benchies take most of the minutes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 26, 2014, 05:55:42 PM

Agreed. We also ask for number of returnees who averaged 10-plus minutes per game. (Carthage noted it had five.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on October 26, 2014, 06:11:11 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 26, 2014, 05:55:42 PM
Agreed. We also ask for number of returnees who averaged 10-plus minutes per game. (Carthage noted it had five.)

Out of curiosity do you ask for class make-up? Such as how many Sr's, Jr's, So's.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on October 26, 2014, 07:23:31 PM

Here is Wooster's wins by season for the past 24 seasons:
26, 24, 26, 31, 25, 23, 23, 29, 26, 27, 26, 30, 21, 24, 26, 25, 22, 23, 19, 26, 18, 21, 26, 25
(Yes, Wooster have benefited from a weak conference, although that is less true now than in years past.)

Knowing absolutely nothing else about the 2014-15 Scots, I would not be uncomfortable ranking them at #10.

During this period, Wooster has had 5 D3hoops.com All-Americans (2 1st team) graduate and not return the next season. Some years they have had severe graduation losses, others lots of contributors returned. As far as I know, we have no 25th year seniors suiting up for the 2014-15 season.

I'm not trying to blow Wooster's horn; I'm just saying at the D3 level, the concept of "reload not rebuild" has credibility at certain "name brand" programs. I don't know what % of points and rebounds were lost by how many graduating starters in any of those years, but the program has filled those holes and moved on. The same is more or less true at maybe two dozen other schools ranging from Amherst to UWSP to IWU to VWC. Pedigree as a sole factor may be a poor reason for ranking a team high in the preseason, but in my estimation is is a factor.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on October 26, 2014, 09:18:09 PM

But consider (with regard to ranking by pedigree) the possibility that:

1. Unfortunately, there probably is a poster or two who DOES rank a team or a few teams solely due to pedigree.

2. Using this criteria would seem to make it difficult for a historically middle of the pack or weaker team that is about to have their best season in many years, to receive the attention it deserves.

If anybody thinks I'm wrong, please tell me why.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on October 26, 2014, 09:29:05 PM

Only early on, and usually I've seen the teams separate logically in any poll. Of course, polls don't matter - it's the tournament that does!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on October 26, 2014, 11:11:37 PM

It's a little hard for me to imagine the circumstance where the historically middle-of-the-pack team on the verge of the great season could be spotted in the preseason, at least by those not close to the program. Maybe they return everyone, but that's everyone from an admittedly middle-of-the-pack team. Short of spending their summers dominating NBA players in three-on-three tournaments, this team is going to start the season off the radar, regardless of who is in the preseason poll.

As smeds points out, if they have the great season, they'll find their way into the poll, and then into the tournament where, to paraphrase Drew Carey (and Aisha Tyler) "everything is made up and the polls don't matter."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 26, 2014, 11:17:23 PM

I have gotten lucky once calling a team like you describe, David... I am hoping I am lucky a second time this year... but once in how many years as a pollster? Oof.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on October 27, 2014, 12:28:15 AM

Since the subject has been broached, how about throwing out the names of teams that didn't receive votes that maybe should be on the radar.

I'd like to see a roster first but Albion might be one of those teams. Should return all but one senior from last years team. Certainly not pre-season top 25 material but they might end up being a pretty good team this year, a lot of players will be in their 3rd year of varsity play. Very experienced.

From the OAC, Marietta. Return all 3 players who received all league honors. 19-7 last year and struggled with injuries to their two top players all year. One of those, Andy Dollman, returns

I'm a little surprised they received no attention at all, but with Mt. Union the probable OAC favorite not enough room for 2 OAC's on the ballot I would guess. I would have thought someone might take that flyer, Jon VanderWal's made tham a good program.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on October 27, 2014, 08:08:12 AM

A team that should have been ranked in the Top 25 in the preseason poll but only received 11 points is Plattsburgh State. The Cardinals made the Sweet 16 last year and ended up in the #24 spot in the final D3hoops poll. Massey had them at #15 in his final poll. Plattsburgh is coming off consecutive 20 win seasons and went to the NCAA tournament in both of those years. They won a 1st round game 2 years ago and then lost at Amherst to the Lord Jeffs to finish with a 20-9 slate. Last year they beat MIT 76-53 in the 1st round and then defeated Eastern Connecticut 70-60 to reach the Sweet 16. They lost at Amherst once again to end their season with a 24-6 record. Interestingly, MIT (#16 with 246 points) and Eastern Connecticut (#36 with 37 points) are both ranked higher than Plattsburgh State in the preseason poll yet Plattsburgh has more returning talent than either of these teams. Pat mentioned to me, in a post over on the SUNYAC board, that he didn't receive any info back from Plattsburgh and I assume that's the reason for the Cardinals low point total. No team in the East Region has been to the NCAA tournament more than Plattsburgh State (6 appearances) in the past 9 years and the Cardinals have won 20 games 5 times in the past 8 seasons. Both of these indicate a successful program and under Coach Tom Curle's leadership they have proven to be among the top schools in the SUNYAC conference and the East Region more often than not.

Not many schools can lose 3 starters to graduation and yet claim to return 5 starters. Due to an odd set of circumstances that is exactly the situation that Plattsburgh has this year. And only 4 of those 5 returning starters will start and possibly only 3 will start.

In addition to the 2 starters that return from last year's team the Cardinals return 3 players that started 2 years ago.

One of those players, 6'6" senior forward Ezra Hodgson, started 26 of 28 games 2 years ago but last year became the team's 6th man for the most part and only started 12 games. Ezra enters this year with 594 career points and has averaged 8.6 ppg the past 2 years. He had 27 points against MIT in last years NCAA contest. He is a 40% shooter from 3 point range (made 46 last year, 40 the year before), 47% from the field and 81% from the line. He averaged 11.1 ppg for the final 17 games last year. He averaged 17.1 ppg in the SUNYAC tournament and made the All-Tournament team. His ability to hit the clutch shot down the stretch has been huge for the Cardinals in a number of games the past 2 years.

A 2nd former starter that returns for his senior season is 6'2" guard Jordan Moody. Jordan played in 6 games last year but had to take a leave of absence from the team due to an internship he needed for his studies. Jordan started 5 of those 6 games and was averaging 11.8 ppg. The previous year as a sophomore he started 23 of 29 games and averaged 10.0 ppg. He shot 49.5 % from the field 2 years ago and 53% in the 6 games last year. He has the quickest 1st step on the team and can get to the rim easily with his speed and athleticism.

The 3rd former starter that returns for his final year is 5th year senior Reggie Williams. Reggie is a 6'6" 240 lb forward who is returning from a medical redshirt that saw him miss the entire 2013-14 season with a fracture in his foot. 3 years ago Reggie started 25 of 26 games as a sophomore. His junior year Reggie was asked to be the 6th man and occasional starter which he did until the Cardinals lost another player to a season ending injury. Reggie started the final 6 games of the 2012-13 season and averaged 10.0 ppg with 5.2 rpg. He was the 2nd leading shot blocker in the SUNYAC conference with 1.4 bpg.

The top returning scorer for the Cardinals is 6'2" senior shooting guard Shamoy McIntosh. Shamoy has started 52 of 56 games in the past 2 years and will go over the 1000 point mark in the early part of his final season with the Cardinals. Last year he averaged 12.9 ppg and 4.0 rpg. He shot 36 % from the field, 33% from long range (42 3's last year) and 76.4% from the line.

The other returning starter from last year is 6'1" junior guard Eddie Correa. Eddie started 25 of 30 games last year and averaged 10.9 ppg and 2.6 rpg. He is the top 3 point shooter on the team as he had 81 3's last year after making 31 his freshman year. Eddie shot 36.2% from the field and 37.5 % from 3 point range. He was 82.9% from the line. I expect him to improve on all those numbers this year after seeing him at practice the past few weeks.

So there's the 5 returning starters, 4 of whom averaged double figures, and the one that didn't, Hodgson, at 8.6 ppg, is capable of being the leading scorer on the team this year, as he will start, instead of coming off the bench, as he did for most of last year.

One of the above mentioned guards, either Correa or Moody won't be starting this year because the back-up point guard for the past 2 years, 5'7" senior, Mike Mitchell, will be the floor general this year. Mitchell has only started 3 of 57 games in the past 2 years but has averaged 17 minutes of floor time and is ready to direct the Cardinal offense. He averaged 5.3 ppg, 1.5 rpg and 1.5 apg last season. He is a superb passer and also an excellent 3 point shooter in his own right. He had six 3 pointers at Cortland last year to lead the Cards in that win and was the most accurate 3 point shooter on the team as he canned 31 of 70 attempts from long distance for a 44.3 percentage. Mike had double digits in points on 6 occasions last season. He shot 46.4% from the field, 70% from the line and had 129 assists the past 2 seasons off the bench.

Bench players returning:

Xavier Thomas...6'2" junior guard/forward who has the highest vertical leap on the team. Had 148 points (4.9 ppg) and 108 rebounds (3.6 rpg) in 30 games off the bench last season. Xavier averaged 12 minutes a game and tied for the team lead in blocks. Had a career high 21 points and 12 rebounds at Buffalo State last year. He hit the weight room big time over the summer and will see more action this year.

Alan Siergiej...6'6" senior forward who is the blue collar worker on the team. Played in 28 games last year and averaged 2.4 ppg and 1.5 rpg in 7 minutes of court time per game. Shot 60% from the field and 73.7% from the line. Does all the little things to help the team. Had a season high 14 points against Fredonia State and scored 10 points in the NCAA game against MIT.

Gary Tibbs...6'4" senior forward who returns to the team after sitting out last year. Has played in 47 games for the Cardinals with 4 starts his sophomore season. Has a career average of 2.3 ppg and 2.1 rpg. Averages 50% from the field.

Vaughn Dweck...6"4" sophomore forward who saw limited action last year. Appeared in 10 games and averaged 1.6 ppg. Has improved his game over the summer and his shooting ability will be an asset.

Owen Mitchell...6'4" sophomore who also saw limited action last year. Appeared in 12 games and averaged 0.8 ppg. Owen also is progressing nicely and will see an increase in his floor time this year.

Newcomers

Kyle Richardson...6'4" junior forward who transferred to Plattsburgh from Division II Millersville University could also find himself in the starting lineup as he will push the returning Plattsburgh veterans. He started 10 of 27 games for Millersville last year and averaged 5.4 ppg and 2.9 rpg. Scored 24 points and 20 points for season highs. Very athletic and a good rebounder. Was 2nd on the Millersville team in blocked shots with 30.

Tyler Coppin-Carter...6' 2" sophomore guard who is another transfer that will get meaningful minutes in the Cardinals backcourt.

Zach Coleman...6'2" freshman guard who will be groomed to take over the point guard position from Mitchell. He will also get some quality playing this year.

I think this year's Cardinal team could be better than last season's 24-6 team. Last year they averaged almost 78 ppg and despite losing 34 ppg through graduation they will return over 70 ppg because of their unique situation. I expect 4 players to average double figures and it wouldn't surprise me if 5 double digit scorers emerge. There will probably be at least a 10 man rotation that will see double digit minutes as the Cardinals have the talent to come at you in waves. I believe they are the team to beat in the SUNYAC conference after just missing out last year and finishing 2nd to Brockport State. The previous year they were 2nd to Cortland State. The SUNYAC had 3 teams receiving points in the preseason poll which I'm fairly sure hasn't happened in the past. The Cardinals were ranked behind Brockport and Geneseo in the poll and I expect those 3 teams to battle for conference supremecy. It will be another interesting year in the conference to say the least.

Plattsburgh traveled to Vermont on Saturday to take on Division II St. Michaels College in a scrimmage. They defeated the Purple Knights by a 4 point margin.

Sorry for the long post, I wanted to give Pat, Dave and any other Top 25 voter who checks out this board the correct information on Plattsburgh State, since they apparently didn't get much info from the school to form an opinion about the team.

And yes I'm slightly biased but I noticed some chatter about other posters' favorite teams and saw they were out there plugging away.

TGHIJGSTO, Baby. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 27, 2014, 08:13:31 AM

An even greater effect of the wholesale lack of proven teams will be the loss of comparison benefit early in the season. Usually you can get a solid gauge on 80% of the teams because of their opponents. Most years, somewhere around 80% of the teams are who we expect them to be - thus early season rankings comes down to guessing which teams are in the 80% vs the 20% and judging accordingly.

If we're at 60% or 50% or just completely at a loss this year, it's going to take a lot longer for the consensus "best" teams to rise to collective consciousness.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 27, 2014, 10:21:23 AM

Quote from: magicman on October 27, 2014, 08:08:12 AM
Pat mentioned to me, in a post over on the SUNYAC board, that he didn't receive any info back from Plattsburgh and I assume that's the reason for the Cardinals low point total.

Indeed. Voters generally aren't going to vote for someone outside their region that we don't have info on.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 27, 2014, 11:53:25 AM

Yeah... I tried to do my own research on Plattsburgh and could only get so far before I gave up... they didn't provide info and that makes it tough for voters outside of the region, as mentioned. And when it comes down to figuring out 25 teams from my cut-down list of 60... Plattsburgh didn't make it based on what I did find didn't impress me. If I had your write up earlier... who knows :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on October 27, 2014, 12:50:36 PM

Quote from: sac on October 27, 2014, 12:28:15 AM
... Jon VanderWal's made tham a good program.

Every time I read that name, I think first of the pinch-hitter and backup 1B/OF...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: realist on October 27, 2014, 03:31:11 PM

After reading the post by magicman above, and the responses to it I am curious.
Calvin finsihed last season at # 15 in the final poll, and (to me) it would have been very generous to see them hold that position in the recently announced preseason poll.
What type of information did the voters get on Calvin that can explain the move all the way to # 6?

Before the start of the 2012-2013 season Calvin did not merit even ORO. They finished the season making it to the sweet 16, and the final poll placed them at #7. Beating a team like UWSP at their place does deserve some credit.

Before the 2013-2014 season Calvin was positioned @ #17 in the poll which seemed resonable. At the end of week 6 Calvin only had 6 ORO points, and by the 12th week garnered 31 ORO points. A nice run to the sweet 16 including wins over Witt, and Wash U led to a final rankiing of 15.

Calvin struggled with a crappy sos the past 2 seasons. In fact last year they never managed to make it onto the regioanl ranked list in the GL region. I notice a Wooster squad that had a high regional ranking last season is now # 10 in this years preseason poll exactly where they were in the final poll last season.

I can understand that some schools shot themselves in the foot by not responding to a request for information, but can't begin to imagine what they told you about Calvin that merited jumping 9 spots. Don't get me wrong I would love to see Calvin deserve that lofty ranking, and I hope you have info to explain the rise that, it seems, few if any, Calvin supporters can find.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 27, 2014, 04:37:03 PM

I think Calvin was better than most voters thought. In the end, it's often what a team brings back vs what other teams lose. Calvin brings back a pretty sizable amount of their scoring, coupled with the experience from last year and their history of program strength, it's a safe bet.

I get the impression the pre-season poll is all about not looking foolish. You pick teams that are at least defensible, even if they end up playing poorly throughout the year.

If I was running a poll, I'd wait until January to start publishing results simply for this reason. I'd rather judge on what's actually happened as opposed to potential. But it is what it is.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 27, 2014, 05:40:07 PM

Quote from: realist on October 27, 2014, 03:31:11 PM
I can understand that some schools shot themselves in the foot by not responding to a request for information, but can't begin to imagine what they told you about Calvin that merited jumping 9 spots. Don't get me wrong I would love to see Calvin deserve that lofty ranking, and I hope you have info to explain the rise that, it seems, few if any, Calvin supporters can find.

There are only two schools of any significance on that list: Plattsburgh and Purchase. And what Hoops Fan says is correct: It's not just what your team brings back, but what everyone else brings back. If you looked at the list of 50 schools we got info from and tried to pick out the sure bets out of that group, you would have a *very* short list.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on October 27, 2014, 05:52:28 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 27, 2014, 05:40:07 PM
Quote from: realist on October 27, 2014, 03:31:11 PM
I can understand that some schools shot themselves in the foot by not responding to a request for information, but can't begin to imagine what they told you about Calvin that merited jumping 9 spots. Don't get me wrong I would love to see Calvin deserve that lofty ranking, and I hope you have info to explain the rise that, it seems, few if any, Calvin supporters can find.

There are only two schools of any significance on that list: Plattsburgh and Purchase. And what Hoops Fan says is correct: It's not just what your team brings back, but what everyone else brings back. If you looked at the list of 50 schools we got info from and tried to pick out the sure bets out of that group, you would have a *very* short list.

ok, I gotta take the bait... Webster is bringing A LOT back... SLIAC historical or not... I still would have liked to have seen just a mention.....but OK, it gives the Gorlocks a chance to sneak up on some people, just like they snuck up on IWU last year....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 27, 2014, 06:24:05 PM

The complete and utter absence of Webster from the preseason poll is one of the bigger head-scratchers as far as this preseason poll is concerned. In picking sixty other teams worthy of attention without even a smidgen of love for Webster, it's as though the entire pollster corps developed amnesia concerning the Gorloks' controversial near-win at IWU in last year's tourney. And the bulk of last year's Gorloks team is back this season.

As one of the St. Louis guys put it, preseason #9 Wash U might not be the best D3 team in the Gateway City this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 27, 2014, 06:42:13 PM

Well, I guess we will see. None of our 25 voters even asked for Webster info. If they are worthy then we will get votes for them based on their non-conference results.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ziggy on October 27, 2014, 08:04:48 PM

It is important to remember that there could be a high degree of variability between individual top 25s and the composite made when all the votes are tallied.

Although there probably was at least one ballot that had Calvin as high as number six, it is entirely possible they could have ended up there on the basis of a high frequency of votes in the 8-15 range.

With 415 total points, the "average ballot" had Calvin more like 9-10.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on October 27, 2014, 08:40:12 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 27, 2014, 06:24:05 PM
The complete and utter absence of Webster from the preseason poll is one of the bigger head-scratchers as far as this preseason poll is concerned. In picking sixty other teams worthy of attention without even a smidgen of love for Webster, it's as though the entire pollster corps developed amnesia concerning the Gorloks' controversial near-win at IWU in last year's tourney. And the bulk of last year's Gorloks team is back this season.

As one of the St. Louis guys put it, preseason #9 Wash U might not be the best D3 team in the Gateway City this season.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 27, 2014, 06:42:13 PM
Well, I guess we will see. None of our 25 voters even asked for Webster info. If they are worthy then we will get votes for them based on their non-conference results.

I think this reflects the difference between winning that tourney game vs IWU and losing it -- regardless of how down to the wire it went. Had Webster won that game and given a good showing in the next game against whoever it was IWU played, we might be seeing some votes for Webster. You can see how reputation affects voting in these polls using the Webster baseball team as an example. It took a trip to the World Series in 2012 for Webster baseball to start showing up in the pre-season polls in spite of some good showings in the regionals in prior years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 27, 2014, 09:35:34 PM

Yep. Some of us have complained about brand-name bias in this room (some of us have defended it), but one thing that hasn't really been touched upon much is weak-conference bias. I remember commenting upon this when Cabrini started to get good. Some posters are just going to plain resist the idea that a team from a weak conference can be any good -- the fact that Pat says that none of the 25 pollsters even inquired about Webster material is telling -- and therefore a good team from a weak league is going to have an uphill battle in terms of just getting any recognition at all, especially when (as Pat did with the Albertus Magnus schedule) it's possible for a pollster to use a weak schedule as justification and then eventually turn it into a self-fulfilling prophecy. ("How can Albertus Magnus / Webster be any good when they're ranked so low / not even ranked?")

Weak league and weak schedule or not, Webster should've earned some respect last March. That game against Illinois Wesleyan was analyzed to death on d3boards.com afterwards, because it was so close and so controversial. You might be right that it became easy for the pollsters to forget about it because the Gorloks ended up on the wrong end of the score, controversy or not. Nevertheless, given that and the fact that the Gorloks have so much returning from last year's cast, the absence of Webster from all 25 ballots looks like a glaring oversight.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on October 27, 2014, 09:46:17 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 27, 2014, 06:42:13 PM
Well, I guess we will see. None of our 25 voters even asked for Webster info. If they are worthy then we will get votes for them based on their non-conference results.

Should they have received it anyway, to refresh their memories? I feel it surely could have been made available... Is this a fallacy in the system that could be corrected in the future?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on October 27, 2014, 10:25:59 PM

It's notable that Webster very nearly won a game.

They fished 135th in the Massey ratings and their best win was over Spalding (Massey #156, who they also lost to). They ended 19-7 against a soft D3 portion of the schedule. Let's not get too excited.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on October 27, 2014, 10:54:13 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on October 27, 2014, 10:25:59 PM
It's notable that Webster very nearly won a game.

They fished 135th in the Massey ratings and their best win was over Spalding (Massey #156, who they also lost to). They ended 19-7 against a soft D3 portion of the schedule. Let's not get too excited.

Agree that it's premature to think about Webster meriting top 25 votes now. For the sake of accuracy, Webster ended last season at 20-8 (18-7 regular season plus two wins in SLIAC tourney, plus the loss to IWU).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on October 27, 2014, 11:11:53 PM

Knightslappy... you know as well as I do that Massey is just a bunch of numbers that don't take into account anything but scores... those of us who have seen Webster regularly, and the knowledgeable CCIW fans who watched Webster give IWU the scare of a lifetime, know that they are worth generating a little excitement going into the season....

YOU haven't seen them play (otherwise if you came down to ST Louis, you should have contacted me... we'd have gone out to dinner) and are likely unaware that Webster started out 5-5, missing starting forward Aaron Griffin for most of that time due to injury, and Hunter Ward for all but one game of the first 10 as he waited for transfer eligibility that came in the 2nd semester. Once Ward worked his way into the starting lineup, he average 17 ppg, including the 25 against IWU... The Massey numbers don't take that kind of info into account...

Yes they lost at Spalding after beating them earlier... but they went back to Spalding and beat them in the Conference tourney 2 weeks later... and that is a TOUGH Gym to win in... think of the Holland Civic Center with 30% of the seating (or less)

And of course, we can pull out the comparative scores

Webster 70 IWU 71
Calvin 64 IWU 78

In this case Knightslappy, throw the final Massey numbers out... at least for now, fans of Webster can be excited about the upcoming season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on October 27, 2014, 11:14:11 PM

Quote from: y_jack_lok on October 27, 2014, 10:54:13 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on October 27, 2014, 10:25:59 PM
It's notable that Webster very nearly won a game.

They fished 135th in the Massey ratings and their best win was over Spalding (Massey #156, who they also lost to). They ended 19-7 against a soft D3 portion of the schedule. Let's not get too excited.

Agree that it's premature to think about Webster meriting top 25 votes now. For the sake of accuracy, Webster ended last season at 20-8 (18-7 regular season plus two wins in SLIAC tourney, plus the loss to IWU).

I still say one voter putting them at #25 would have been justifiable.... ;D ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 28, 2014, 12:45:52 AM

Quote from: hopefan on October 27, 2014, 09:46:17 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 27, 2014, 06:42:13 PM
Well, I guess we will see. None of our 25 voters even asked for Webster info. If they are worthy then we will get votes for them based on their non-conference results.

Should they have received it anyway, to refresh their memories? I feel it surely could have been made available... Is this a fallacy in the system that could be corrected in the future?

Someone has to have a school on their radar in order for us to ask for it. We're not going to ask for all 400 teams and then filter out afterward. :)

Indeed, I looked back at Webster's 2013-14 last year too to see what I was missing and yes, one close loss to a brand-name team (and one big loss to another) but when I asked the "who did they beat" question, I don't see what I'm supposed to be looking for.

Fontbonne took UMHB to the wire in the first round in 2008 as well and it wasn't a leading indicator of anything. Sometimes close losses happen in the first round and I would have thought Gregory would have known that. I'm perfectly OK with Webster not getting any votes. Hey, even in the most bare-bones analysis -- nobody that Webster beat last year got any votes, so there is no obvious logical fallacy.

This sounds a lot like eyeball test from a pretty biased observer (sorry, Hopefan) and Gregory fixating on one close loss ... I, on the other hand, will be glad to wait for a win.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 28, 2014, 07:51:37 AM

I think Webster is a legitimate Top 25 candidate (they have some really impressive talent), and a team that voters should keep a very close eye on, but I think "glaring oversight" seems over the top.

IWU led Webster by 18 points in the 2nd half of that game. Had the Titans won by 13 or 9 or something "comfortable", I don't think there would be mention of Webster here as a preseason Top 25 team. I don't agree with the suggestion that because Webster made that impressive 2nd half comeback, and lost in a game that came down to the final seconds, that the Gorloks should be in the 2014-15 preseason poll. There has to be more on the 2013-14 resume than a great 17 minutes to say "glaring oversight", doesn't there?

In my opinion, had Webster landed in the preseason Top 25 it would have been fair...and had Webster received some votes but not made it, it would have been fair...just as it's fair that they didn't get any votes at all. As it worked out, I think Webster falls in the category of "teams to watch." The Gorloks should be very good and will have a chance to open some eyes with their 2014-15 play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on October 28, 2014, 10:46:03 AM

Thanks for the feedback guys... good discussion... it's what makes this site great to the people who care about D3hoops...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 28, 2014, 10:56:28 AM

According to the schedule, Webster will get a couple of shots to see what they are made of. They play Texas-Dallas and Washington U. by their 10th game of the season. Loras, although not real good recently, may also give them a test on the road.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 28, 2014, 11:27:15 AM

Agreed -- and the UTD game comes before the first regular-season ballot so that's a good opportunity for Webster to get into the conversation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on October 28, 2014, 11:46:47 AM

UTD graduated 3 starters and 4 of its top 8 rotation. :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 28, 2014, 11:52:29 AM

Quote from: sac on October 28, 2014, 11:46:47 AM
UTD graduated 3 starters and 4 of its top 8 rotation. :-\

Still will be better than anyone in the SLIAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on October 28, 2014, 12:41:32 PM

Quote from: hopefan on October 27, 2014, 11:11:53 PM
Knightslappy... you know as well as I do that Massey is just a bunch of numbers that don't take into account anything but scores...

Sounds like "Fan Excuse Bingo" from the Cancellation Bear Twitter Feed! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on October 28, 2014, 01:23:27 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 28, 2014, 11:52:29 AM
Quote from: sac on October 28, 2014, 11:46:47 AM
UTD graduated 3 starters and 4 of its top 8 rotation. :-\

Still will be better than anyone in the SLIAC.

I'll just counter with "????????" ... hope the Webster kids are reading this.... ;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on October 28, 2014, 05:03:21 PM

Quote from: magicman on October 27, 2014, 08:08:12 AM
Interestingly, MIT (#16 with 246 points) and Eastern Connecticut (#36 with 37 points) are both ranked higher than Plattsburgh State in the preseason poll yet Plattsburgh has more returning talent than either of these teams.

I honestly don't know anything about the Plattsburgh team (so I can't comment on returning talent for them), and I know they had a great game against MIT last year, but just wanted to point out that MIT is returning everybody from last year. Literally everyone, they had no seniors on last year's squad (they have 5 this season, including 3 likely startes). They have made NCAAs I believe 6 years in a row now.

I think they are placed pretty appropriately in the rankings, so no complaints here, but I just wanted to make the point about the returning talent in response to your comment.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on October 28, 2014, 08:22:56 PM

Quote from: Hugenerd on October 28, 2014, 05:03:21 PM
Quote from: magicman on October 27, 2014, 08:08:12 AM
Interestingly, MIT (#16 with 246 points) and Eastern Connecticut (#36 with 37 points) are both ranked higher than Plattsburgh State in the preseason poll yet Plattsburgh has more returning talent than either of these teams.

I honestly don't know anything about the Plattsburgh team (so I can't comment on returning talent for them), and I know they had a great game against MIT last year, but just wanted to point out that MIT is returning everybody from last year. Literally everyone, they had no seniors on last year's squad (they have 5 this season, including 3 likely startes). They have made NCAAs I believe 6 years in a row now.

I think they are placed pretty appropriately in the rankings, so no complaints here, but I just wanted to make the point about the returning talent in response to your comment.

Hello Hugenerd,
I know that MIT has everyone coming back, I saw that NCAA game and I was quite familiar with MIT's roster. I believe if Plattsburgh and MIT happen to face off again this year that Plattsburgh will once again come out on top. I think the Cardinals will be better than they were last year. I can see the Engineers having a decent season but I'll be surprised if they end up in the Top 15. And if they do then Plattsburgh should be in the Top 10. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 28, 2014, 08:54:30 PM

Quote from: hopefan on October 28, 2014, 01:23:27 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 28, 2014, 11:52:29 AM
Quote from: sac on October 28, 2014, 11:46:47 AM
UTD graduated 3 starters and 4 of its top 8 rotation. :-\

Still will be better than anyone in the SLIAC.

I'll just counter with "????????" ... hope the Webster kids are reading this.... ;D ;D ;D

I don't know why that would be bulletin board material. I don't think Webster is going to play itself and this year's UT-Dallas team is going to be better than anyone Webster would play in the SLIAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on October 28, 2014, 09:50:54 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 28, 2014, 08:54:30 PM
Quote from: hopefan on October 28, 2014, 01:23:27 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 28, 2014, 11:52:29 AM
Quote from: sac on October 28, 2014, 11:46:47 AM
UTD graduated 3 starters and 4 of its top 8 rotation. :-\

Still will be better than anyone in the SLIAC.

I'll just counter with "????????" ... hope the Webster kids are reading this.... ;D ;D ;D

I don't know why that would be bulletin board material. I don't think Webster is going to play itself and this year's UT-Dallas team is going to be better than anyone Webster would play in the SLIAC.

Pat, you're saying UT Dallas is better than ANYONE in the SLIAC despite losing 4 players,,, Webster is in the SLIAC... the way I took it, you're saying they are still better than Webster, though you may not have meant it that way....You didn't say "better than anyone Webster plays in the SLIAC"... ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 28, 2014, 11:08:56 PM

Hopefan,

While I am sure you want to see a slight in every post about your adopted favorite team, I'm sure you can see the context in that I was talking about teams on Webster's schedule.

That, by definition, does not include Webster.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on October 28, 2014, 11:33:27 PM

Wrong twice Pat.. didn't catch the context, can't see it's a given, can't read your mind... maybe my senility strikes
AND
No, I think I've been very fair in this discussion, AND I support the entire SLIAC... Webster is by no means my adopted favorite team... When SLIAC plays SLIAC, I'm just rooting for a close entertaining game, going to Fulton or Jacksonville or Greenville or Louisville if that's the best game of the night... now of course, if Webster, or anyone else is pushing for recognition, then naturally I'm pulling for them to do whatever helps...

Hey.. no harm intended.... ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 28, 2014, 11:37:17 PM

Well, it's unfortunate that you have to assume that it's a shot at Webster, because it isn't.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on October 29, 2014, 11:00:20 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 28, 2014, 11:08:56 PM
While I am sure you want to see a slight in every post about your adopted favorite team, I'm sure you can see the context in that I was talking about teams on Webster's schedule.

This is not how I read it either.

You said that Texas Dallas will still be better than anyone in the SLIAC. Webster is anyone in the SLIAC. Had you said anyone else in the SLIAC, that would have been more clear.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on October 29, 2014, 11:20:23 PM

Quote from: sac on October 28, 2014, 11:46:47 AM
UTD graduated 3 starters and 4 of its top 8 rotation. :-\

WUSTL also graduated three starters, including the point guard, and a key reserve who were responsible for 57% of the scoring.

In terms of returning starters, Palucki averaged 11.1 points and 6.9 rebounds per game. Nick Burt average 7.8 points and 5.8 rebounds per game. It all goes down hill from there.

I am definitely not conceding anything to Webster yet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on October 30, 2014, 08:43:15 PM

Quote from: magicman on October 28, 2014, 08:22:56 PM
Quote from: Hugenerd on October 28, 2014, 05:03:21 PM
Quote from: magicman on October 27, 2014, 08:08:12 AM
Interestingly, MIT (#16 with 246 points) and Eastern Connecticut (#36 with 37 points) are both ranked higher than Plattsburgh State in the preseason poll yet Plattsburgh has more returning talent than either of these teams.

I honestly don't know anything about the Plattsburgh team (so I can't comment on returning talent for them), and I know they had a great game against MIT last year, but just wanted to point out that MIT is returning everybody from last year. Literally everyone, they had no seniors on last year's squad (they have 5 this season, including 3 likely startes). They have made NCAAs I believe 6 years in a row now.

I think they are placed pretty appropriately in the rankings, so no complaints here, but I just wanted to make the point about the returning talent in response to your comment.

Hello Hugenerd,
I know that MIT has everyone coming back, I saw that NCAA game and I was quite familiar with MIT's roster. I believe if Plattsburgh and MIT happen to face off again this year that Plattsburgh will once again come out on top. I think the Cardinals will be better than they were last year. I can see the Engineers having a decent season but I'll be surprised if they end up in the Top 15. And if they do then Plattsburgh should be in the Top 10. ;)

Well, they will have plenty of opportunities to show they belong....they have 8 games this year against teams that are currently ranked or receiving votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on October 30, 2014, 09:16:49 PM

Quote from: WUH on October 29, 2014, 11:20:23 PM
Quote from: sac on October 28, 2014, 11:46:47 AM
UTD graduated 3 starters and 4 of its top 8 rotation. :-\

WUSTL also graduated three starters, including the point guard, and a key reserve who were responsible for 57% of the scoring.

In terms of returning starters, Palucki averaged 11.1 points and 6.9 rebounds per game. Nick Burt average 7.8 points and 5.8 rebounds per game. It all goes down hill from there.

I am definitely not conceding anything to Webster yet.

I look for Burt to have a breakout year... he'll see the ball A LOT more... I think he could be a 15 ppg scorer...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 30, 2014, 09:52:08 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 28, 2014, 12:45:52 AM
Quote from: hopefan on October 27, 2014, 09:46:17 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 27, 2014, 06:42:13 PM
Well, I guess we will see. None of our 25 voters even asked for Webster info. If they are worthy then we will get votes for them based on their non-conference results.

Should they have received it anyway, to refresh their memories? I feel it surely could have been made available... Is this a fallacy in the system that could be corrected in the future?

Someone has to have a school on their radar in order for us to ask for it. We're not going to ask for all 400 teams and then filter out afterward. :)

Indeed, I looked back at Webster's 2013-14 last year too to see what I was missing and yes, one close loss to a brand-name team (and one big loss to another) but when I asked the "who did they beat" question, I don't see what I'm supposed to be looking for.

Fontbonne took UMHB to the wire in the first round in 2008 as well and it wasn't a leading indicator of anything. Sometimes close losses happen in the first round and I would have thought Gregory would have known that. I'm perfectly OK with Webster not getting any votes. Hey, even in the most bare-bones analysis -- nobody that Webster beat last year got any votes, so there is no obvious logical fallacy.

This sounds a lot like eyeball test from a pretty biased observer (sorry, Hopefan) and Gregory fixating on one close loss ... I, on the other hand, will be glad to wait for a win.

Quote from: Titan Q on October 28, 2014, 07:51:37 AM
I think Webster is a legitimate Top 25 candidate (they have some really impressive talent), and a team that voters should keep a very close eye on, but I think "glaring oversight" seems over the top.

IWU led Webster by 18 points in the 2nd half of that game. Had the Titans won by 13 or 9 or something "comfortable", I don't think there would be mention of Webster here as a preseason Top 25 team. I don't agree with the suggestion that because Webster made that impressive 2nd half comeback, and lost in a game that came down to the final seconds, that the Gorloks should be in the 2014-15 preseason poll. There has to be more on the 2013-14 resume than a great 17 minutes to say "glaring oversight", doesn't there?

In my opinion, had Webster landed in the preseason Top 25 it would have been fair...and had Webster received some votes but not made it, it would have been fair...just as it's fair that they didn't get any votes at all. As it worked out, I think Webster falls in the category of "teams to watch." The Gorloks should be very good and will have a chance to open some eyes with their 2014-15 play.

I don't think that you guys are looking at this in the larger context.

We're talking about a preseason that is exceptionally jumbled up, to the point where: a) ten more teams got votes than was the case for last year's preseason poll; b) brand-name bias has, rightly or wrongly, again become a live issue, simply because so many programs that finished high last year have lost huge portions of last year's team, bringing up talk of ancillary and/or fallback methods for selecting teams for the preseason poll; and c) you yourself, Bob, have said:

Quote from: Titan Q on October 26, 2014, 01:44:50 PMFrom what I'm hearing and sensing, the 2014-15 picture is extremely fuzzy here in the preseason.

Quote from: Titan Q on October 26, 2014, 01:44:50 PMI think most would agree that UW-Whitewater, the defending champs, should be in the preseason top 2 -- the Warhawks lost some important players but return a lot. I personally believe Augustana - which returns their entire rotation from a 20-8/NCAA tournament team - is a good top two pick as well. After that, it sounds like a lot of candidates for spots 3 down to, heck, 25.

I fully agree that Webster needs to be examined in the light of more than just last season's tournament loss to IWU. But, instead of just taking a cursory glance at Webster's W-L and Massey rating last season, why not look at the full context of Webster's 2012-13 season? To wit:

Quote from: hopefan on October 27, 2014, 11:11:53 PM
Knightslappy... you know as well as I do that Massey is just a bunch of numbers that don't take into account anything but scores... those of us who have seen Webster regularly, and the knowledgeable CCIW fans who watched Webster give IWU the scare of a lifetime, know that they are worth generating a little excitement going into the season....

YOU haven't seen them play (otherwise if you came down to ST Louis, you should have contacted me... we'd have gone out to dinner) and are likely unaware that Webster started out 5-5, missing starting forward Aaron Griffin for most of that time due to injury, and Hunter Ward for all but one game of the first 10 as he waited for transfer eligibility that came in the 2nd semester. Once Ward worked his way into the starting lineup, he average 17 ppg, including the 25 against IWU... The Massey numbers don't take that kind of info into account...

More importantly, of course, is what they're bringing to the table this season, which is their four leading scorers and three leading rebounders from a year ago:

Ahmad Smith (16.4 ppg)
Kevin Miller (14.6 ppg, 8.4 rpg)
Hunter Ward (11.1 ppg, 5.5 rpg)
Aaron Griffin (8.0 ppg, 5.7 rpg)

Given that the whole problem with putting together this preseason poll was the dearth of ranked and/or playoff teams that are bringing back all, or nearly all, of their starting lineups from last season intact, Webster stands out as a team that returns a sizeable amount of firepower.

I still believe that the lack of even one single solitary point for the Gorloks in the entire poll was an egregious oversight.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on October 31, 2014, 12:57:24 AM

Quote from: hopefan on October 30, 2014, 09:16:49 PM
I look for Burt to have a breakout year... he'll see the ball A LOT more... I think he could be a 15 ppg scorer...

Nick Burt will be fun to watch this year. He will go from being a UAA Honorable Mention in 2013-2014 to a First Team player in 2014-2015 if WUSTL is competitive in the conference. Second Team otherwise.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 31, 2014, 03:49:00 PM

I should point out... I have used historical bias and memory in my voting as well. Sometimes I give the benefit of the doubt to teams that have either shown despite losses are just as strong the next year, coaches who seem to have a knack of getting the most out of players even after a huge amount of losses, or those who continuing prove me wrong in similar situations. My original argument is that sometimes those kinds of points are outweighed greatly by a bias that the name simply is the name and a team is ranked too high, ranked in the first place, or another team is not ranked who may deserve it but has no history.

Case in point... Williams is ranked way to high and I can not figure out what off-season news would allow that to happen... besides the fact they finished second last year and are Williams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 31, 2014, 04:35:07 PM

Williams is too high every year; it's just tradition.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 31, 2014, 04:47:54 PM

Because finishing second last year proved that theory? :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 01, 2014, 03:20:36 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 31, 2014, 04:47:54 PM
Because finishing second last year proved that theory? :)

Every rules needs an exception, right?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 01, 2014, 04:22:47 PM

I think they have proven the exception a number of times LOL

But again... way too high this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on November 01, 2014, 05:29:16 PM

I'll agree that Williams is way too high this season ... with Robinson, I'd put them second, but losing the best returning player in the country unexpectedly, not to mention the best center in the country due to graduation, and a nationally-elite coach, is just too much to overcome -- I do think they have top-25 talent, but top 5 talent? Not for a few years at least, probably, because of the rough off-season.

In the past, though, hard to say Williams has EVER been over-ranked considering they ended the season in Salem 4 of the past 5 years, including two national championship games, with the only exception being a year when they were absolutely devastated by injuries to almost every key guy on the roster. Williams in fact tends to generally exceed, not fail to meet, pre-season expectations ... which is why they probably received the (admittedly suspect) benefit of the doubt this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 01, 2014, 10:54:40 PM

I guess it comes down to how one looks at the poll. I tend to see it as a representation of the current state of affairs; others see it as predictive of the final poll. Williams almost always improves over the course of the season - thus a final four finish doesn't necessarily negate a lower pre-season ranking.

I did think they were one of the top two teams going into last season. Even with the loss to Whitewater, I still would have ranked them #1 at the end.

At the same time, most years, they improve over the course of the season. Which means the high ranking probably means most voters look at the Top 25 different than I would.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 06, 2014, 10:17:56 PM

Augie got out to a quick start at Bradley and held on at the end to take the exhibition. Obviously its still an exhibition, but Augie won the battle in the paint against a D1 opponent in a mid-level conference. Pretty impressive.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 06, 2014, 10:59:58 PM

That IS impressive. While it is no longer the case, I well remember when Bradley was a national championship contender.

But I can't help wondering, does this say more about Augie or Bradley?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 07, 2014, 01:57:54 AM

Bradley was picked 8th in the 10 team Missouri Valley. With 11 upper class players. The Missouri Valley has produced some pretty good teams that have done damage in the tournament lately, such as Wichita State.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 07, 2014, 06:06:27 PM

One thing to keep in mind, though, was that Bradley was missing two starters last night.

It's still a great achievement by Augie, but it's not Chaminade beating Ralph Sampson's Virginia team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 07, 2014, 10:05:23 PM

Exhibition is exhibition. The Bradley guys came in underestimating Augie and had to work to catch up, which they did pretty quickly. From there on out it looked like the coach was experimenting with lineups. It wasn't a true game, but still one most d3 teams lose by 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on November 08, 2014, 12:38:27 AM

Many teams just futz around with combinations in exhibitions. This goes for D-2 and D-3 teams along with D-1 teams.

Still, though.,..good for Augie.

Michigan State beat St. Cloud State 101-46 - yikes!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 08, 2014, 08:44:56 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 07, 2014, 10:05:23 PM

Exhibition is exhibition. The Bradley guys came in underestimating Augie and had to work to catch up, which they did pretty quickly. From there on out it looked like the coach was experimenting with lineups. It wasn't a true game, but still one most d3 teams lose by 25.

I agree that the Bradley players probably underestimated Division III Augustana -- that seems pretty natural when DI and DIII meet. But I don't think your other points are a very accurate depiction of what happened Thursday night.

Regarding catching up quickly, it's not like Augie got out to a huge lead and then Bradley decided to start playing and easily cut into it from that point on. Augustana led by 12 midway through the 1st, and the lead was down to 4 at the half, and then 3 in the opening minutes of the 2nd. But Augie went on a 7-0 run at that point and Bradley was never closer than 3 until the final seconds of the game. The final margin of 2 points is fairly misleading, as Augie controlled the final minutes of the game and was never in any real jeopardy of losing.

Regarding experimenting with lineups, if you're suggesting Bradley was just kind of testing combinations out for real games and not necessarily worried about beating Augustana, I'm confident that was not the case. I listened to the Bradley broadcast, including Geno Ford's postgame interview, and Ford was pushing every button he could to win this game. He mentioned "struggling to handle Augustana's size" (Bradley had 1 low post FG in the game), "having a hard time with their defensive pressure", and "not able to contain the point guard." Ford substituted a lot, but he said he was looking for combinations that would work vs the trouble Augie was causing them.

Finally, regarding the above point, Bradley did not want to lose this game. It is a huge embarrassment for Geno Ford and the Bradley program to lose to a local Division III team -- it's not like losing to some DII team 7 states away that BU fans have never heard of where you can sort of write it off. Bradley fans know about CCIW teams like Illinois Wesleyan and Augustana pretty well, and believe their mid-major Braves team should crush these type of DIII teams. (I am good friends with many Bradley and Illinois State fans and know very well what they think of CCIW teams relative to the Missouri Valley.) In fact, I was surprised to learn this game was scheduled. IWU has been trying to schedule Bradley for years now, and they won't play the Titans. Playing good CCIW teams is considered a "no win" situation for Division I teams like Bradley and Illinois State -- you are expected to win by 25, and a loss is a disaster. Grey Giovanine was only able to get this scheduled because Bradley assistant Ronald Coleman played for Giovanine at DI Lamar. I am 100% sure that Geno Ford was doing absolutely everything necessary to win this game -- what happened Thursday is nothing short of an enormous embarrassment for Bradley basketball, and they knew going in that a loss would be.

With Bradley missing two starters, the talent gap between the Division III Vikings (who might be the best team in Division III this year, and who have the size and some other attributes to play with a DI) and Division I Braves is just not very big -- in fact, two Augie players were consistently highlighted by the Bradley radio guys as the "best players on the floor" and "two guys we could use this year" -- crazy long and athletic Tayvian Johnson (a 6-6 F) and PG Hunter Hill. Also consider Augie is an experienced, veteran team returning their entire 2013-14 rotation, while Bradley is still piecing their 2014-15 together. In my opinion, that's why Augie was able to win the game...not because Bradley wasn't trying hard to win the game or experimenting with lineups.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 15, 2014, 07:46:38 PM

Also it's not like Geno Ford is a stranger to D3. For two years he was the head coach at Muskingum, where his father was a superstar player and is the current head coach. Geno scheduled Muskingum (and perhaps other OAC schools) when he was at Kent State, and at Bradley he has played Wooster.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 15, 2014, 09:14:56 PM

#10 Wooster had no problem dispatching #20 Cabrini, 97-80 at Wooster. The two all-Americans were overshadowed by Wooster's Evan Pannell (23 points, 4-4 from deep) and Josh Kipfer (26 points, 15 rebounds). By comparison, Xavier Brown, nursing a sore ankle, was held to 4 points, all on free throws, while Cabrini's Aaron Walton-Moss tallied 16 points (8 per half) before fouling out on a technical. Cabrini's last lead was at 9-8; the Scots led by 14 at the half and held a double-digit lead for the last 26+ minutes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 15, 2014, 10:07:39 PM

We all knew the preseason poll was off. Day one - Augustana barely escapes Albion at home. IWU and Williams lose. It's like there just isn't a Top 10. Can we rank 11-25 instead?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 15, 2014, 10:11:33 PM

#7 UWSP struggles (trailing at 5 at the half) but pulls out the W for their 20th straight home opener victory, 70-57 over St. Johns

#1 Whitewater falls to NAIA in-state rival Cardinal Stritch 71-66

Cardinal Stritch is (was?) ranked #2 in NAIA, but started off their season 1-3 before topping the Warhawks in Whitewater.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 15, 2014, 10:20:16 PM

Richard Stockton squeaked by Wilkes. I'm going to attempt to brave South Jersey for their game against Albertus Magnus (who looked great against weak competition).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 15, 2014, 11:14:15 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 15, 2014, 10:07:39 PM

We all knew the preseason poll was off. Day one - Augustana barely escapes Albion at home. IWU and Williams lose. It's like there just isn't a Top 10. Can we rank 11-25 instead?

Game was in Cincinnati, and you have to experience playing Albion to understand why that score shouldn't be surprising.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 16, 2014, 10:32:09 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 15, 2014, 10:20:16 PM

Richard Stockton squeaked by Wilkes.

[squeaky voice]TGHIJGSTO![/squeaky voice]

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 16, 2014, 11:20:57 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 15, 2014, 10:07:39 PM

We all knew the preseason poll was off. Day one - Augustana barely escapes Albion at home. IWU and Williams lose. It's like there just isn't a Top 10. Can we rank 11-25 instead?

Thus my comments earlier that I had asked Pat if I could just start at #10 this year LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on November 16, 2014, 09:50:10 PM

Final: Richard Stockton 84 #8 Albertus Magnus 75 TGHIJGSTO! :)

So in the first weekend of action, #1, #4, #5 and #8 all register a loss.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 16, 2014, 10:59:28 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on November 16, 2014, 09:50:10 PM
Final: Richard Stockton 84 #8 Albertus Magnus 75 TGHIJGSTO!

I went to Stockton tonight. Google gave me the wrong exit number twice, but I got there in plenty of time. I did not meet TGHIJGSTO!, but if this game is indicative of how things go there, I can understand why he is as he is.

I'll start with overall impressions, then address each team:

I've never been part of such a clusterf*** of a game. I know it is early in the season, but it was a parade of "what will happen next." The refs blew a few calls early (it is the beginning of their season, too) and the players and coaches got on them hard. I would have called a T on both teams within the first 90 seconds. I've never seen refs put up with that kind of abuse. In the first half, it was totally unjustified - but the emotional energy of the outrage had opposite effects on the teams. Eian Davis from AMC just lost his mind early on and was never a factor. Whereas Stockton used the energy to lock down and focus. They got out to a huge lead.

In the second half, the refs seemed to give into pressure and just started failing left and right. I have absolutely no ties to either team, but it was just such a clueless half of officiating. They had to stop the game twice to clean blood off the floor, but the refs refused to call anything but touch fouls. A handcheck up top or a hand brushing an arm on a block attempt drew quick whistles - nailing some guy with an elbow got a play on.

At one point, one of the Stockton guards drove the lane and gave such a blatant push-off that even the home crowd was all murmuring "charge." The side ref, with a perfect view called offensive foul, the guy behind the basket, blocked by the defender, called block. The guy with the view deferred. It was a huge momentum swing and foul #3 on Big Vic from AMC, early in the second half.

Things got worse from there. Not just the refs, but the players were so out of control and wild. At one point I said out loud, "it's as if no one on that floor has ever seen a basketball game before," and got a lot of nods all around.

I expected Albertus to be the in-form squad, with them returning so much of their core - while Stockton would have to be working through chemistry issues, bringing back only four players from last year. It was exactly the opposite. Stockton restocked very well. I think they're deeper and more well rounded than the Sweet 16 team from last season. They've got a ways to go, as every team does this time of year, but they'll be formidable for anyone. Josh Blamon showed his class early, keeping his team locked-in and together. He didn't appear much in the stat sheet, but made a steal and three-point play with about 90 seconds to go that sealed the game. It was a huge spot and a great play.

As for Albertus, I have no idea where to start. They were clearly the best team on the floor and will be among the best in the country - but they were undisciplined and arrogant. There's not even a fine line between arrogance and confidence and Albertus leapt across it. They seemed to expect to win, to get every call. I came in excited to see Davis play, but he was such a headcase. Held scoreless early, he spent five minutes of the sideline after getting poked in the eye. When he did play early in the second half, he was too emotional to stay on the floor and got himself benched.

Big Vic is among the most athletic big men I've ever seen in d3. He's a jumper, great with body-control and smart. Unfortunately he isn't very assertive and his teammates just forgot he existed. Every time they went to him, they either got a basket or a kick-out. They just so rarely looked inside it didn't even matter when he fouled out. To think they're wasting such an advantage is mind-blowing.

The big revelation for me is Tavon Sledge. He scored something like 32 against Lyndon last night, so I knew he was good, but he's very good. Only 5'9", he had a couple of huge dunks - they even tried to run an alley-oop to him in traffic, which would have worked if it hadn't been telegraphed so thoroughly every person in the gym knew it was coming. Sledge is fast, has a killer handle, and incredible court vision. He's an All-American type point guard for sure. I haven't seen anyone so naturally understand everything happening on the court all at once since Cory Lemons. Sledge isn't as good as Lemons and he's much shorter, but when he's got the ball you just know everything is moving slower for him than for everyone else.

The rest of the team worked hard and they had a pretty good stretch in the second half, but most of the game consisted of stupid turnovers, poor decision-making, and lazy defense. They have the depth and athleticism to run, which is what they tried to do, but I wouldn't trust anyone but Vic and Sledge to make good decisions. If I were coaching that team, with the skills they bring and the shooters they have, I'd be running a half court set every time. Get the ball in to Vic, let him work or dish.

The biggest tragedy of the whole thing is that AMC doesn't have a single other team on the schedule who will challenge them to work on what they'll need to contend for a national title. They certainly have the talent to do it, but they're going to get away with sloppy play and turnovers all year, winning on talent alone. I don't see any way they improve enough to get farther than they did last year without a serious, award-worthy coaching job. Sad.

In the end, both teams are likely Top-15 caliber (Albertus could be Top 5, but we'll never see them against an opponent good enough to be able to tell for sure). I'll know better when I see the Hoopsville Tourney next Saturday and get a broader sense of how teams are playing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 16, 2014, 11:31:11 PM

To be honest... considering the teams... I am not surprised good behavior wasn't at the forefront. Many have heard my thoughts about AMC last year in the NCAA tournament and I have seen Richard Stockton on several occasions and they aren't exactly choir boys. I also hate to say it, but it seems for both it starts at the top. I would not say either of them are the poster teams for sportsmanship in our division.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 16, 2014, 11:39:30 PM

It was crazy, because there was no need for it early on. The refs could have squashed it with technicals - and it wouldn't have been out of line. Instead they went the whole half getting killed. When they finally stopped the game to warn and lecture the coaches, it was far too late. Then, once the teams stopped yelling, the refs started sucking.

I did think it was poor form for Stockton to let one of their assistants walk the sidelines yelling at the refs by name.

Props to Big Vic and Sledge for keeping cool even when things got very frustrating in the second half. I don't think I heard or saw anything from the Stockton players, but that assistant would have been ejected two minutes in had I been officiating that game. The fans can say whatever they want, but the benches need to show some measure of respect.

It was an experience I will not soon forget, although not for the best reasons. It could have been a really awesome game. In the end, no one should be proud of what happened tonight. At least I learned something about the teams, though, or the 4 hours driving and $10 in tolls would not have been worth it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 17, 2014, 12:49:23 AM

Same thing happened with AMC last year against Williams... from the opening tip they went after them and it got worse and worse and worse. I thought a tech early would have stopped it all, but I don't think the refs wanted to fire one of those in the playoffs. It culminated with an AMC player body checking a Williams player into his bench and only getting a flagrant or tech called; not ejected as he should have been. And an AMC player bumping and getting in the face of a ref when he disagreed with a clear and obvious blocking/hand checking call and not even getting a tech.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D3HoopJunkie on November 17, 2014, 01:29:51 AM

Dave I was at the game last year and Eian did not check that Williams player into his bench. It was a hard foul no doubt about it but not worthy of getting ejected. I didnt say anything last year because honestly I dont want to get in a back and forth on here about whats right and whats wrong whos right whos wrong. I just wanna support my team but I have to totally disagree with your assessment there and if you think that game was called fairly then I really cant side with you at all on that issue. I was even more disappointed with some of the words you used on Hoopsville following that game in regards to the team.

Dave again I'm not here to argue, what you guys do at D3Hoops.com is fantastic but 90% of the refereening at this level is atrocious and on almost every occasion games get out of hand because the referees have no control over whats going on. To me thats sad. I heard not only Coach Oliver but Coach Maker telling the refs the rules in that game last year and it was clear they had no idea what was going on.

HoopsFan appreciate the assessment. The fact that Albertus even had a shot in this game the way they played im sure showed you how talented they are.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 17, 2014, 01:49:28 AM

I understand you have your opinion and you are entitled to it, but I was not the only person in that gym who thought the same way. I am not going to go back and forth, either, but I have been around this game long enough and come from a rather neutral point of view... as did most of the people I talked with some of whom were FAR closer than I was at the time... and I am going to stick to my opinion. It takes a lot for me to be upset about behavior and sportsmanship especially when in a major game like an NCAA tournament. However, I also think sportsmanship and behavior are very important and always held myself and those on my team as a player or coach to a high standard as such (as taught to me by parents and coaches), so I am going to state when I think those standards are below par (well below my standard). I am sorry you didn't like my thoughts and comments, but I didn't like the actions I witnessed first hand.

As for whether the game was called fairly, the common complaint I heard from AMC fans and others was they didn't like the fact they couldn't get away with the physical play. I had no problems with the face they were being called for aggressive hand checking especially when it was impeding the direction of an offensive player - something that has been a point of emphasis for several years now - even 45 feet from the basket. Furthermore, no matter how the game is officiated, teams need to adjust accordingly and AMC was deadset to play their way be damned the calls and were shocked when they kept getting called for the same fouls all of the time. I was looking forward to seeing AMC compete, but I thought they did not adjust well to the game in many facets and their frustrations eventually put them in some very bad situations - like the foul against Williams I discussed (again, the Williams player was off of his feet and into the bench after the foul).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 17, 2014, 08:54:27 AM

Quote from: D3HoopJunkie on November 17, 2014, 01:29:51 AM
HoopsFan appreciate the assessment. The fact that Albertus even had a shot in this game the way they played im sure showed you how talented they are.

Yeah, it's a good team. Sledge and Vic alone should be able to win a first round tourney game. Adding in the rest of the pieces is great - if they can find some discipline. Sledge was throwing crazy passes all over the place, but they were always smart passes. Everyone else seemed like they were trying to do what he does without the ability to do it.

1) They've got to cut down on turnover considerably.

2) They have to make sure Vic touches the ball on every possession. Every one. He's a smart enough guy to know when to pass out.

I just don't see any team on their schedule who will challenge them enough to learn those things before tourney time. I'll be rooting for them to get it together, though - fun to watch when they're working right.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Roundball999 on November 17, 2014, 04:29:19 PM

Quote from: D3HoopJunkie on November 17, 2014, 01:29:51 AM
Dave I was at the game last year and Eian did not check that Williams player into his bench. It was a hard foul no doubt about it but not worthy of getting ejected. I didnt say anything last year because honestly I dont want to get in a back and forth on here about whats right and whats wrong whos right whos wrong. I just wanna support my team but I have to totally disagree with your assessment there and if you think that game was called fairly then I really cant side with you at all on that issue. I was even more disappointed with some of the words you used on Hoopsville following that game in regards to the team.

Dave again I'm not here to argue, what you guys do at D3Hoops.com is fantastic but 90% of the refereening at this level is atrocious and on almost every occasion games get out of hand because the referees have no control over whats going on. To me thats sad. I heard not only Coach Oliver but Coach Maker telling the refs the rules in that game last year and it was clear they had no idea what was going on.

HoopsFan appreciate the assessment. The fact that Albertus even had a shot in this game the way they played im sure showed you how talented they are.

Have to disagree there. I see many games (admittedly the majority are MIAA) and the refs are generally at least adequate and games virtually never get "out of hand". If you're seeing that happen with any frequency, then I have to think the teams/coaches involved have to bear some blame because it is not endemic to the DIII game. I would also have question why a guy like Dave, who knows the game, sees games/teams all over the country and is an an ambassador for the division, would single out a team for such comments if there weren't some credible reason.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 17, 2014, 08:07:20 PM

Overall the officiating in d3 is pretty good. It's different from region to region for sure, but there have been scant few games I thought the refs decided things or had a real impact. Adjusting to officials is part of the game.

Now for sure, like what happened last night, there are times the refs just refuse to set boundaries and define the parameters of the game, but at the same time, teams don't have to push things so far just because they're not meeting resistance.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 17, 2014, 08:34:35 PM

If you want to judge how good officiating is in your area make a list of your league officials off box scores and compare them to D2 and low D1 games on your leagues non-game days. If your officials are being asked to do higher level games or being promoted, then your league has generally good officiating.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 18, 2014, 10:37:41 AM

I was recently skimming through the MIAC's season preview and I was impressed that St. Thomas was going for their 10th straight regular season title this year.

I don't have time to do the research, but what other current streaks are there? What's the longest in history?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 18, 2014, 12:30:45 PM

Wooster's won 9 of 10 NCAC titles and had a streak of 7 until Witt won it in 2012. Only other long one I can think of.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 18, 2014, 01:30:59 PM

I think Cabrini is going for 6-straight this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 18, 2014, 03:31:03 PM

Whitworth is going for its fifth straight NWC title this season. The Pirates have won six of the last seven NWC chips.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 18, 2014, 09:27:25 PM

So, I know it's early and they start practice later than everyone else, but we at least have to ask: is the NESCAC a one bid league this year?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Bucket on November 20, 2014, 11:49:35 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 18, 2014, 09:27:25 PM

So, I know it's early and they start practice later than everyone else, but we at least have to ask: is the NESCAC a one bid league this year?

Uh, no.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 20, 2014, 03:38:31 PM

Quote from: Bucket on November 20, 2014, 11:49:35 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 18, 2014, 09:27:25 PM

So, I know it's early and they start practice later than everyone else, but we at least have to ask: is the NESCAC a one bid league this year?

Uh, no.

I concur.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 20, 2014, 08:41:56 PM

So, Hayden Rooke-Ley went 12-15 from three for Williams tonight in a big win over Johnson State.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 20, 2014, 11:12:59 PM

That's the perfect Williams name. What basketball name sounds more like it should belong to someone who leans his head out of the back window of the Rolls and asks, "Pardon me, would you have any Grey Poupon?" than Hayden Rooke-Ley? ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 21, 2014, 08:22:25 AM

So did we all see Rutgers-Newark went out to Whitworth and won a close game? I thought Whitworth was going to be decent. Rutgers-Newark hasn't been super impressive in their first two games. I have no idea what to do with this?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 21, 2014, 09:58:13 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 21, 2014, 08:22:25 AM

So did we all see Rutgers-Newark went out to Whitworth and won a close game? I thought Whitworth was going to be decent. Rutgers-Newark hasn't been super impressive in their first two games. I have no idea what to do with this?

Hmm....

Losers in the first week.

Whitewater
Stevens Point
Illinois Wesleyan
Whitworth
Williams (x2)
Cabrini

This is pretty good list of the "who's who" of best winning percentage in the last decade.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 21, 2014, 10:33:52 AM

Quote from: John Gleich on November 21, 2014, 09:58:13 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 21, 2014, 08:22:25 AM

So did we all see Rutgers-Newark went out to Whitworth and won a close game? I thought Whitworth was going to be decent. Rutgers-Newark hasn't been super impressive in their first two games. I have no idea what to do with this?

Hmm....

Losers in the first week.

Whitewater
Stevens Point
Illinois Wesleyan
Whitworth
Williams (x2)
Cabrini

This is pretty good list of the "who's who" of best winning percentage in the last decade.

So it's going to be a fun year. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 21, 2014, 01:05:44 PM

Whitewater did lose to preseason #3 NAIA Cardinal Stritch (though just 1-3 going into that Whitewater game, I think).
I think most of us were expecting Point to have a down year.
Cabrini did lose at Wooster (ranked higher).

It's always a fun year, though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 21, 2014, 01:36:21 PM

Quote from: John Gleich on November 21, 2014, 09:58:13 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 21, 2014, 08:22:25 AM

So did we all see Rutgers-Newark went out to Whitworth and won a close game? I thought Whitworth was going to be decent. Rutgers-Newark hasn't been super impressive in their first two games. I have no idea what to do with this?

Hmm....

Losers in the first week.

Whitewater
Stevens Point
Illinois Wesleyan
Whitworth
Williams (x2)
Cabrini

This is pretty good list of the "who's who" of best winning percentage in the last decade.

The Whitworth result is the only one that surprised me, though. Point, IWU, Williams all lost a lot from last year. Cabrini was playing terribly at the end of the year AND lost a bunch, Whitewater had a tough opponent. I wouldn't have been surprised with Newark giving Whitworth a game, but winning in Washington is a pretty big feat... or is it? I have no idea.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 21, 2014, 01:39:38 PM

Rutgers-Newark has 13 upperclassmen and were 20-9 last year. They were selected pre-season favorite in the NJAC.

http://www.njacsports.com/news/2014/11/10/MBB_1110143127.aspx

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 21, 2014, 07:57:59 PM

Quote from: sac on November 21, 2014, 01:39:38 PM
Rutgers-Newark has 13 upperclassmen and were 20-9 last year. They were selected pre-season favorite in the NJAC.

http://www.njacsports.com/news/2014/11/10/MBB_1110143127.aspx

Like I said, still expected them to lose in Washington.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on November 21, 2014, 08:45:33 PM

Final: #10 Wooster 80 Mount Union 73

Wooster gets a solid win over a Mount Union team picked to win the OAC conference this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on November 22, 2014, 09:09:27 PM

Final: #10 Wooster 91 St. Vincent 53

Wooster overwhelms the team picked to win the PAC this season. Wooster was led by Dan Fanelly with 25 points, 10 boards and Xavier Brown with 21 points.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 23, 2014, 12:03:06 AM

Went to the Hoopsville Tournament today. Lots to see. I was very impressed with WPI, Gwynedd Mercy, and Wittenberg. Chicago was solid, but I expected more from the UAA preseason favorite. Macon and Cabrini were as I expected.

WPI and Chicago were both good squads, but without much Senior contribution, they'll be much better next year. Likewise, Wittenberg is very, very young. They lost by 21, but they were right in the game the whole first half. Loads of confidence and athleticism.

Gwynedd Mercy and Cabrini look very much alike; their matchups this year will be fun. Cabrini has Aaron Walton Moss, but a load of young athletic players who have already jumped into the Cabrini style. They'll be dangerous.

Macon was the most impressive - probably the team I would have ranked highest coming in. Senior leadership, but also playing a freshman at PG for most of the game (pretty effectively). Deep bench and lots of size. I'll be interested to see how they fair in the ODAC. Consistency will be a big focus for them this year.

Purchase doesn't have Neri - out for the year- so they're mediocre at best. Mary Hardin-Baylor just seems undermanned right now. Sloppy and loose, lacking confidence. They're the only two teams I wouldn't put in consideration for the rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 23, 2014, 10:46:01 AM

Great seeing you at the event, again, Hoops Fan. Sorry I couldn't chat more... but nice to chat when I could.

Neri isn't the only person Purchase lost... they have seven players (apparently) out with injury. They are completely out of sorts and Coach Charney won't mince words about that. However, dealing with this early will only make them better. Look for them to still battle for the Skyline title and make the NCAA tournament accordingly. As for Neri, I hope he considers returning for a fifth year. There were nine NBA scouts planning to make the trip to the Hoopsville Classic to see him play against Cabrini and Aaron Walton-Moss.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 23, 2014, 01:17:30 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 23, 2014, 12:03:06 AM

Went to the Hoopsville Tournament today. Lots to see. I was very impressed with WPI, Gwynedd Mercy, and Wittenberg. Chicago was solid, but I expected more from the UAA preseason favorite. Macon and Cabrini were as I expected.

WPI and Chicago were both good squads, but without much Senior contribution, they'll be much better next year. Likewise, Wittenberg is very, very young. They lost by 21, but they were right in the game the whole first half. Loads of confidence and athleticism.

Oberlin 65 Witt 63
Capital 63 Witt 46
Stevenson 75 Witt 65
Randolph-Macon 70 Witt 49

This is Witt's first 0-4 start since 1955. There were probably players on that team who shot FT's underhanded. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 23, 2014, 05:52:48 PM

Don't know if a new poll is coming tomorrow, but I needed to test my program anyway. This is complete ~~except for two games: Cabrini/WPI and Catholic @ SUNY-Purchase~~.

How They Fared

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	Record	Results
#1	614	UW-Whitewater	3-1	LOST to Cardinal Stritch, 66-71; won at #35 Hope, 82-80; def. Bluffton, 67-46; def. Trinity Int'l, 95-72
#2	526	Amherst	3-0	won at Anna Maria, 74-67; def. Johnson State, 108-60; def. Mount Ida, 100-72
#3	495	Augustana	4-0	def. Albion, 51-47; won at T#57 Mount St. Joseph, 71-57; won at Thomas More, 91-61; def. Rust, 91-69
#4	475	Illinois Wesleyan	2-1	LOST at Benedictine, 60-61; won at Buena Vista, 76-63; won at Illinois College, 89-64
#5	436	Williams	2-2	LOST to Southern Vermont, 68-75; LOST to Oneonta State, 68-74; def. Johnson State, 94-59; won at Wesleyan, 85-77
#6	415	Calvin	2-1	def. Anderson, 108-98; def. Waynesburg, 89-71; LOST to Ohio Wesleyan, 71-85
#7	393	UW-Stevens Point	2-1	def. St. John's, 70-59; LOST at #37 St. Olaf, 69-70; won at #35 Hope, 77-66
#8	350	Albertus Magnus	2-1	def. Lyndon State, 110-82; LOST at #33 Richard Stockton, 75-84; def. Mitchell, 119-88
#9	322	Washington U.	4-0	won at Rhodes, 85-71; won at Hendrix, 75-68; def. UW-Eau Claire, 72-61; won at #18 Wheaton (Ill.), 73-69
#10	309	Wooster	3-0	def. #20 Cabrini, 97-80; def. Mount Union, 80-73; def. St. Vincent, 91-53
#11	303	Randolph-Macon	3-1	won at #30 Mary Washington, 63-58; LOST at #24 Christopher Newport, 70-71; def. Mary Hardin-Baylor, 66-62; won at #45 Wittenberg, 70-49
#12	280	WPI	3-1	def. RPI, 66-55; def. Curry, 67-54; won at #39 Chicago, 81-79; LOST to #20 Cabrini, 61-68
#13	270	St. Thomas	3-0	def. UW-Eau Claire, 78-74; won at #32 Whitman, 96-86; won at #17 Whitworth, 90-69
#14	263	Dickinson	3-0	def. Valley Forge, 90-59; won at Salisbury, 87-70; won at Haverford, 75-57
#15	253	Emory	2-0	def. Oglethorpe, 104-77; def. Guilford, 77-75
#16	246	MIT	1-0	won at Gordon, 64-51
#17	232	Whitworth	1-2	def. D'Youville, 103-49; LOST to Rutgers-Newark, 72-74; LOST to #13 St. Thomas, 69-90
#18	222	Wheaton (Ill.)	2-2	def. Franklin, 80-66; LOST at Defiance, 65-67; def. Olivet, 94-67; LOST to #9 Washington U., 69-73
#19	218	Virginia Wesleyan	3-0	def. TCNJ, 91-60; def. Apprentice School, 87-68; def. Salisbury, 79-65
#20	164	Cabrini	3-1	LOST at #10 Wooster, 80-97; def. Eastern, 91-85; def. SUNY-Purchase, 90-65; def. #12 WPI, 68-61
#21	146	Scranton	3-1	def. Centenary (N.J.), 69-54; def. Alvernia, 57-54; LOST at Misericordia, 44-49; won at Elizabethtown, 65-54
#22	98	Texas-Dallas	3-0	def. Texas Lutheran, 92-77; won at MacMurray, 86-81; won at Webster, 69-48
#23	90	Babson	3-1	def. Salve Regina, 91-69; LOST to Bates, 51-54; def. Lasell, 87-65; won at Skidmore, 75-74
#24	83	Christopher Newport	2-1	def. #11 Randolph-Macon, 71-70; won at Washington and Lee, 64-53; LOST at Lynchburg, 66-90
#25	81	Centre	3-0	won at Maryville (Tenn.), 73-62; def. Transylvania, 74-72; def. Franklin, 74-60

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	Record	Results
#26	74	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	3-1	LOST to Ohio Northern, 67-71; won at Illinois Tech, 81-38; def. San Diego Christian, 69-53; def. Trinity (Texas), 64-54
T#27	73	Chapman	2-0	won at West Coast Baptist, 78-52; def. St. Katherine, 86-52
T#27	73	Wesley	1-2	LOST to Ramapo, 62-69; LOST at Gwynedd-Mercy, 70-85; def. Washington College, 67-34
#29	67	DePauw	3-0	won at Franklin, 79-60; won at Anderson, 71-52; won at Otterbein, 54-42
#30	64	Mary Washington	0-4	LOST to Lynchburg, 55-73; LOST to #11 Randolph-Macon, 58-63; LOST at Shenandoah, 61-69; LOST to Hampden-Sydney, 57-58
#31	62	St. Norbert	3-0	won at UW-Oshkosh, 67-50; def. North Park, 76-65; def. Monmouth, 75-47
#32	52	Whitman	2-1	def. D'Youville, 129-88; LOST to #13 St. Thomas, 86-96; def. Rutgers-Newark, 89-62
#33	48	Richard Stockton	5-0	def. Wilkes, 76-75; def. #8 Albertus Magnus, 84-75; def. Farmingdale State, 76-47; won at Stevens, 73-49; won at Misericordia, 67-64
#34	47	Springfield	4-0	def. SUNY-Cobleskill, 59-41; won at Vassar, 82-44; won at Western New England, 90-77; def. Elms, 62-56
#35	38	Hope	0-2	LOST to #1 UW-Whitewater, 80-82; LOST to #7 UW-Stevens Point, 66-77
#36	37	Eastern Connecticut	4-1	def. Newbury, 78-50; def. Colby, 74-53; def. Nichols, 80-56; LOST at Hartwick, 71-74; won at Oneonta State, 101-78
#37	31	St. Olaf	2-0	won at Bethany Lutheran, 102-70; def. #7 UW-Stevens Point, 70-69
#38	28	Hobart	1-0	won at Ithaca, 84-66
#39	19	Chicago	3-1	won at Lake Forest, 75-68; won at Dominican, 70-48; LOST to #12 WPI, 79-81; won at T#51 Stevenson, 73-71
#40	18	Brockport State	1-2	LOST to #46 Rhode Island College, 62-72; LOST at Roanoke, 61-83; def. St. Lawrence, 66-63
#41	16	Geneseo State	1-1	LOST to Wilmington, 81-83; won at Rose-Hulman, 73-57
#42	12	New Jersey City	2-2	def. Bridgewater State, 85-84; LOST at Franklin and Marshall, 57-63; LOST to Brooklyn, 73-88; def. Kean, 64-45
T#43	11	Bowdoin	3-0	won at Elms, 77-57; won at Westfield State, 68-56; won at St. Joseph's (Maine), 75-69
T#43	11	Plattsburgh State	2-1	won at Elizabethtown, 74-59; won at Lycoming, 78-64; LOST at Western Connecticut, 84-89
#45	10	Wittenberg	0-4	LOST at Oberlin, 63-65; LOST at Capital, 46-63; LOST at T#51 Stevenson, 65-75; LOST to #11 Randolph-Macon, 49-70
#46	8	Rhode Island College	3-1	won at #40 Brockport State, 72-62; LOST at Marymount, 59-67; won at Lasell, 75-57; def. T#57 Brandeis, 66-60
#47	7	Staten Island	1-2	LOST at Salem State, 66-74; won at Mass-Dartmouth, 71-65; LOST at Ramapo, 78-82
T#48	6	New York U.	2-2	def. John Jay, 80-51; LOST to Union, 62-64; LOST to Sage, 65-68; won at Manhattanville, 89-63
T#48	6	York (N.Y.)	1-1	LOST to McDaniel, 65-69; won at Penn State-Harrisburg, 69-61
#50	5	Widener	4-1	def. Penn State Lehigh Valley, 97-74; LOST to Misericordia, 53-62; def. Immaculata, 58-50; def. FDU-Florham, 75-49; won at Muhlenberg, 68-65
T#51	3	Morrisville State	1-2	LOST at Potsdam State, 61-64; LOST at Clarkson, 45-64; won at Vaughn, 87-78
T#51	3	Stevenson	3-1	def. Covenant, 77-55; def. Cairn, 68-56; def. #45 Wittenberg, 75-65; LOST to #39 Chicago, 71-73
T#53	2	Carthage	1-2	def. North Central (Minn.), 85-73; LOST to St. Francis (IL), 57-70; LOST to UW-La Crosse, 67-80
T#53	2	Tufts	2-2	LOST at Johnson and Wales, 52-74; LOST at Regis (Mass.), 59-71; def. Emerson, 70-49; won at Wentworth, 58-51
T#53	2	Dallas	0-0	IDLE
T#53	2	Grinnell	1-2	LOST at George Fox, 114-124; def. Blackburn, 136-112; LOST at Beloit, 109-118
T#57	1	Johns Hopkins	3-1	won at Lebanon Valley, 75-70; won at Keuka, 71-55; LOST to Alvernia, 59-63; won at Ursinus, 76-56
T#57	1	Purchase State	0-5	LOST at Colby, 70-73; LOST at Newbury, 68-72; LOST at Manhattanville, 65-70; LOST at #20 Cabrini, 65-90; LOST to Catholic, 62-69
T#57	1	Brandeis	0-2	LOST to Mass-Dartmouth, 76-78; LOST at #46 Rhode Island College, 60-66
T#57	1	Mount St. Joseph	2-1	def. Berry, 87-72; LOST to #3 Augustana, 57-71; won at Wilmington, 82-68

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 23, 2014, 08:11:37 PM

Glad to see you back Darryl. Plus K.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 23, 2014, 08:13:54 PM

Next week for poll. Nice work!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 24, 2014, 08:42:27 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 23, 2014, 08:13:54 PM
Next week for poll. Nice work!

I'm pretty sure there's a poll coming out tomorrow.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 24, 2014, 09:25:19 AM

[EDIT] Oops -- never mind. I see that there is a "University of Dallas" in addition to "Texas-Dallas." My apologies to their fans.

The correct information for the University of Dallas is:

Rank	Pts	Team	Record	Results
T#53	2	Dallas	4-0	def. UC Santa Cruz, 64-57; def. Redlands 75-73; def. Howard Payne, 71-56; def. Sul Ross State, 79-76

Quote from: Darryl Nester on November 23, 2014, 05:52:48 PM
How They Fared

Rank Pts Team Record Results
...
#22 98 Texas-Dallas 3-0 def. Texas Lutheran, 92-77; won at MacMurray, 86-81; won at Webster, 69-48
...
T#53 2 Dallas 0-0 IDLE

Oops -- I guess I was not paying attention to all of the messages my program was spitting out last night, or I might have noticed that UT-Dallas is apparently listed twice in the Preseason Top 25: once as "#22 Texas-Dallas" and once toward the end of the "Others Receiving votes" list as "Dallas." (They weren't idle; my program simply could not access any information about them.)

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 08:42:54 PM
TALOK ABOUT PEOPLE INJ TECNOLY INDUSTRY DROPPIONG TGHE BALL;

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 24, 2014, 10:51:00 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 24, 2014, 08:42:27 AM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 23, 2014, 08:13:54 PM
Next week for poll. Nice work!

I'm pretty sure there's a poll coming out tomorrow.

OK. I guess that would be 2 weeks then.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 24, 2014, 07:34:57 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on November 24, 2014, 09:25:19 AM
Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 08:42:54 PM
TALOK ABOUT PEOPLE INJ TECNOLY INDUSTRY DROPPIONG TGHE BALL;

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gifsforum.com%2Fimages%2Fgif%2Fclap%2520clap%2520clap%2Fgrand%2Fclap-clap-clap-eccbc87e4b5ce2fe28308fd9f2a7baf3-2242.gif&hash=6070007419fa53e9720f3899637d4051ac4adf55)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 24, 2014, 08:42:22 PM

Quote from: sac on November 23, 2014, 01:17:30 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 23, 2014, 12:03:06 AM

Went to the Hoopsville Tournament today. Lots to see. I was very impressed with WPI, Gwynedd Mercy, and Wittenberg. Chicago was solid, but I expected more from the UAA preseason favorite. Macon and Cabrini were as I expected.

WPI and Chicago were both good squads, but without much Senior contribution, they'll be much better next year. Likewise, Wittenberg is very, very young. They lost by 21, but they were right in the game the whole first half. Loads of confidence and athleticism.

Oberlin 65 Witt 63
Capital 63 Witt 46
Stevenson 75 Witt 65
Randolph-Macon 70 Witt 49

This is Witt's first 0-4 start since 1955. There were probably players on that team who shot FT's underhanded. ;)

To be fair, that's one of the tougher opening stretches in the country. They're going to have more than their share of rough patches this year, but there are only two seniors on the roster. They play good minutes and leadership roles, but neither of them is irreplaceable. One of the things that stands out is when young players come out of the gate believing they belong on the court. Witt was full of them. It was fun to watch the dueling freshman #5s on the floor for Witt and Macon. The early results had me expecting nothing from Witt and they way over-delivered.

And, for what it's worth, we might see FT percentages improve if more people were willing to shoot them underhanded today.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 24, 2014, 08:44:43 PM

Tried to watch a little tonight to see EConn and MIT - both games were blowouts, but I noticed MIT has 5 of its top 6 guys at 6'6" or taller. They seem to be playing only 6 again this time around (as they did famously in their recent deep run). We'll see how it goes, but it's got to be a little intimidating to some teams.

For comparison, both WPI and Chicago had entire starting fives shorter than 6'6"

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 24, 2014, 08:51:14 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 24, 2014, 08:42:22 PM
Quote from: sac on November 23, 2014, 01:17:30 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 23, 2014, 12:03:06 AM

Went to the Hoopsville Tournament today. Lots to see. I was very impressed with WPI, Gwynedd Mercy, and Wittenberg. Chicago was solid, but I expected more from the UAA preseason favorite. Macon and Cabrini were as I expected.

WPI and Chicago were both good squads, but without much Senior contribution, they'll be much better next year. Likewise, Wittenberg is very, very young. They lost by 21, but they were right in the game the whole first half. Loads of confidence and athleticism.

Oberlin 65 Witt 63
Capital 63 Witt 46
Stevenson 75 Witt 65
Randolph-Macon 70 Witt 49

This is Witt's first 0-4 start since 1955. There were probably players on that team who shot FT's underhanded. ;)

To be fair, that's one of the tougher opening stretches in the country. They're going to have more than their share of rough patches this year, but there are only two seniors on the roster. They play good minutes and leadership roles, but neither of them is irreplaceable. One of the things that stands out is when young players come out of the gate believing they belong on the court. Witt was full of them. It was fun to watch the dueling freshman #5s on the floor for Witt and Macon. The early results had me expecting nothing from Witt and they way over-delivered.

And, for what it's worth, we might see FT percentages improve if more people were willing to shoot them underhanded today.

True, dat - but that's how girls shoot free throws! :P

And I can recall several players who might have done better if they did hook shots from the line (MUCH higher percentage than when they faced the basket from the field), but might drive the coach to drink! ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on November 24, 2014, 08:58:56 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 24, 2014, 08:44:43 PM

Tried to watch a little tonight to see EConn and MIT - both games were blowouts, but I noticed MIT has 5 of its top 6 guys at 6'6" or taller. They seem to be playing only 6 again this time around (as they did famously in their recent deep run). We'll see how it goes, but it's got to be a little intimidating to some teams.

For comparison, both WPI and Chicago had entire starting fives shorter than 6'6"

MIT has about another 5 players who aren't seeing PT that are 6'6" or taller also. Coach Anderson appears to have had some success recently recruiting tall players. With regard to the short bench, note also that they have played their first few games without Pre-season All-American Matt Redfield who is 6'8".

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on November 24, 2014, 09:56:51 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 24, 2014, 08:42:22 PM
Quote from: sac on November 23, 2014, 01:17:30 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 23, 2014, 12:03:06 AM

Went to the Hoopsville Tournament today. Lots to see. I was very impressed with WPI, Gwynedd Mercy, and Wittenberg. Chicago was solid, but I expected more from the UAA preseason favorite. Macon and Cabrini were as I expected.

WPI and Chicago were both good squads, but without much Senior contribution, they'll be much better next year. Likewise, Wittenberg is very, very young. They lost by 21, but they were right in the game the whole first half. Loads of confidence and athleticism.

Oberlin 65 Witt 63
Capital 63 Witt 46
Stevenson 75 Witt 65
Randolph-Macon 70 Witt 49

This is Witt's first 0-4 start since 1955. There were probably players on that team who shot FT's underhanded. ;)

To be fair, that's one of the tougher opening stretches in the country. They're going to have more than their share of rough patches this year, but there are only two seniors on the roster. They play good minutes and leadership roles, but neither of them is irreplaceable. One of the things that stands out is when young players come out of the gate believing they belong on the court. Witt was full of them. It was fun to watch the dueling freshman #5s on the floor for Witt and Macon. The early results had me expecting nothing from Witt and they way over-delivered.

And, for what it's worth, we might see FT percentages improve if more people were willing to shoot them underhanded today.

Oberlin's not a rough stretch. They hadn't lost to them since 1979. Even if the Yeomen are improved, that's still a bad loss.

Capital's also a bad loss. They were under .500 last year and Capital has lost to two very pedestrian teams thus far (Thomas More and Methodist)

I can't whitewash the Old Tigers; they look bad.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 24, 2014, 10:46:45 PM

Quote from: smedindy on November 24, 2014, 09:56:51 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 24, 2014, 08:42:22 PM
Quote from: sac on November 23, 2014, 01:17:30 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 23, 2014, 12:03:06 AM

Went to the Hoopsville Tournament today. Lots to see. I was very impressed with WPI, Gwynedd Mercy, and Wittenberg. Chicago was solid, but I expected more from the UAA preseason favorite. Macon and Cabrini were as I expected.

WPI and Chicago were both good squads, but without much Senior contribution, they'll be much better next year. Likewise, Wittenberg is very, very young. They lost by 21, but they were right in the game the whole first half. Loads of confidence and athleticism.

Oberlin 65 Witt 63
Capital 63 Witt 46
Stevenson 75 Witt 65
Randolph-Macon 70 Witt 49

This is Witt's first 0-4 start since 1955. There were probably players on that team who shot FT's underhanded. ;)

To be fair, that's one of the tougher opening stretches in the country. They're going to have more than their share of rough patches this year, but there are only two seniors on the roster. They play good minutes and leadership roles, but neither of them is irreplaceable. One of the things that stands out is when young players come out of the gate believing they belong on the court. Witt was full of them. It was fun to watch the dueling freshman #5s on the floor for Witt and Macon. The early results had me expecting nothing from Witt and they way over-delivered.

And, for what it's worth, we might see FT percentages improve if more people were willing to shoot them underhanded today.

Oberlin's not a rough stretch. They hadn't lost to them since 1979. Even if the Yeomen are improved, that's still a bad loss.

Capital's also a bad loss. They were under .500 last year and Capital has lost to two very pedestrian teams thus far (Thomas More and Methodist)

I can't whitewash the Old Tigers; they look bad.

Those teams are a heck of a lot better than, say, Johnson State and Mount Ida.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on November 24, 2014, 11:25:53 PM

Still ain't rough. Oberlin's Massey rating was 288 last year and that was a high water for them for a while. Oberlin's won 44 games from 2006-07 through last season.

Capital last beat Wittenberg in 2010-11.

I can't say that a second rate OAC team and a historically challenged team is rough by any means, especially for a team the caliber of Wittenberg. Those should have been gimmie "W"s.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 24, 2014, 11:54:41 PM

Witt beat capital by 24 last year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 25, 2014, 01:51:39 AM

If we are talking tough stretches, Hope's schedule has to be up there. They played the defending champs in the 1st game and then WIAC power Stevens Point. Hope then plays their annual NAIA foes and the annual CCIW challenge.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 25, 2014, 06:45:38 AM

Seeing Oberlin listed among a "tough stretch" just makes me wish all the harder that Jim Loesel was still around. He'd really enjoy that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 25, 2014, 07:47:43 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 25, 2014, 01:51:39 AM
If we are talking tough stretches, Hope's schedule has to be up there. They played the defending champs in the 1st game and then WIAC power Stevens Point. Hope then plays their annual NAIA foes and the annual CCIW challenge.

Exactly. It's been tough. Few teams play even two decent opponents. I don't think they're comparable talent wise, but I find it difficult to believe Witt would be winless against a majority of the schedules in the country. That's all I was trying to say. They're not going to be contenders this year, for sure, but they're not winless terrible. It's a strong, young team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 25, 2014, 07:48:23 AM

Let's get this week 1 poll out so we can talk about actual Top 25 related things.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 25, 2014, 12:19:49 PM

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2014-15/week1

New Top 25 is indeed out. Lots of surprises as expected, but hard to argue with anything this early in a chaotic season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 25, 2014, 12:21:01 PM

I wonder how long it's been since Williams was unranked? I'm too lazy to check.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 25, 2014, 02:08:36 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 25, 2014, 12:21:01 PM

I wonder how long it's been since Williams was unranked? I'm too lazy to check.

Not that long ago. Week 3 2013 they had just dropped out of the poll.

In 2012 they went 17-8 and finished unranked, started 2013 unranked and made the week 2 poll before losing to Stevenson which knocked them out for week 3 and re-entered the poll in Week 4. They've been ranked since I believe (though I stopped here)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 25, 2014, 02:33:25 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 25, 2014, 12:19:49 PM
http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2014-15/week1

New Top 25 is indeed out. Lots of surprises as expected, but hard to argue with anything this early in a chaotic season.

Is a surprise a surprise if it's expected?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Just Bill on November 25, 2014, 05:06:38 PM

Quote from: John Gleich on November 25, 2014, 02:33:25 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 25, 2014, 12:19:49 PM
http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2014-15/week1

New Top 25 is indeed out. Lots of surprises as expected, but hard to argue with anything this early in a chaotic season.

Is a surprise a surprise if it's expected?

That is so deep.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 25, 2014, 10:15:56 PM

Quote from: John Gleich on November 25, 2014, 02:33:25 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 25, 2014, 12:19:49 PM
http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2014-15/week1

New Top 25 is indeed out. Lots of surprises as expected, but hard to argue with anything this early in a chaotic season.

Is a surprise a surprise if it's expected?

I expected to be surprised, I just didn't know what those surprises might be.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 27, 2014, 12:07:46 AM

Quote from: smedindy on November 24, 2014, 11:25:53 PM
Still ain't rough. Oberlin's Massey rating was 288 last year and that was a high water for them for a while. Oberlin's won 44 games from 2006-07 through last season.

Capital last beat Wittenberg in 2010-11.

I can't say that a second rate OAC team and a historically challenged team is rough by any means, especially for a team the caliber of Wittenberg. Those should have been gimmie "W"s.

Massey had Witt with the 24th toughest schedule through Nov 25th. The numbers may not bear out that way by the end, but they've scheduled a little bit better than most.

(Hope is at #2 - but only because Cal Lutheran's only game so far was at Pepperdine.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 29, 2014, 07:34:25 PM

#5 Wooster falls at Hanover, 70-57.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on November 29, 2014, 09:37:33 PM

#4 Wash-U struggling vs. Fontbonne, leading 38-36 at halftime.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on November 29, 2014, 10:11:58 PM

WashU up 59-48, midway through 2nd half in California.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 29, 2014, 10:15:55 PM

Quote from: jaybird44 on November 29, 2014, 10:11:58 PM
WashU up 59-48, midway through 2nd half in California.

WashU is playing Fontbonne in California?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on November 29, 2014, 10:19:46 PM

Yep.

Wash-U leading Fontbonne 66-54 with 5:00 left 2nd half.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on November 29, 2014, 10:22:20 PM

4:00 left 2nd half: Wash-U 76, Fontbonne 57.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on November 29, 2014, 10:25:22 PM

Final: Wash-U 82, Fontbonne 67

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 30, 2014, 07:03:36 PM

New HTF report coming soon (I hope). I'm having a few computer issues (spontaneous freezes), but I am hoping they are cured now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 30, 2014, 07:17:53 PM

How They Fared (Complete) -- Men's games:

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	Record	Results
#1	611	Augustana	5-0	def. Knox, 86-61
#2	561	Amherst	3-0	IDLE
#3	558	UW-Whitewater	4-1	won at Alma, 84-71
#4	512	Washington U.	6-0	def. Carthage, 84-49; won at Fontbonne, 82-67
#5	489	Wooster	3-1	LOST at Hanover, 57-70
#6	461	St. Thomas	4-0	def. UW-River Falls, 70-69
#7	399	Dickinson	4-1	LOST to Gettysburg, 61-67; won at #18 Cabrini, 95-81
#8	386	Illinois Wesleyan	5-1	def. Milwaukee Engineering, 97-63; def. Austin, 85-57; def. Centenary (La.), 92-71
#9	379	Emory	4-0	def. LaGrange, 82-65; def. Maryville (Tenn.), 68-57
#10	339	Calvin	4-2	def. Manchester, 74-56; won at Aquinas, 73-64; LOST at Cornerstone, 60-65
#11	327	UW-Stevens Point	3-2	def. Edgewood, 69-60; LOST to North Central (Ill.), 56-63
#12	318	Virginia Wesleyan	4-0	won at Methodist, 89-71
#13	293	Randolph-Macon	3-2	LOST to Frostburg State, 67-76
#14	267	WPI	4-1	def. Worcester State, 70-52
#15	254	Richard Stockton	6-0	def. Rowan, 68-63
#16	252	MIT	4-0	def. Newbury, 77-57; def. Tufts, 71-64; def. Fitchburg State, 63-58
#17	248	Albertus Magnus	3-1	won at SUNY-Purchase, 86-82
#18	240	Cabrini	3-3	LOST at #24 Scranton, 65-85; LOST to #7 Dickinson, 81-95
#19	173	Texas-Dallas	3-2	LOST at Louisiana College, 64-73; LOST to Hardin-Simmons, 68-79
#20	137	Centre	5-0	won at Hanover, 69-59; won at Thomas More, 84-75
#21	126	Ohio Wesleyan	5-0	won at Capital, 85-67; def. T#51 Defiance, 77-63
#22	90	DePauw	4-0	def. Rose-Hulman, 77-58
#23	81	Chicago	5-1	def. Beloit, 82-63; def. Bethany, 78-52
#24	71	Scranton	4-1	def. #18 Cabrini, 85-65
#25	62	Springfield	4-1	LOST at Keene State, 72-100

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	Record	Results
#26	59	St. Olaf	4-0	won at Pacific Lutheran, 77-64; won at Linfield, 77-61
#27	49	Williams	5-2	def. Massachusetts College, 82-71; def. Skidmore, 86-77; won at Union, 83-77
#28	48	Bowdoin	4-0	won at University of New England, 67-48
T#29	45	St. Norbert	4-0	won at Lake Forest, 111-103
T#29	45	Babson	4-1	def. Becker, 59-58
#31	38	Christopher Newport	3-1	won at Haverford, 71-66
#32	28	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	5-1	def. Lewis and Clark, 55-34; def. Grove City, 71-55
#33	23	Marietta	5-0	won at Westminster (Pa.), 87-69
#34	22	Chapman	4-0	won at UC Santa Cruz, 68-37; def. T#49 Whitman, 72-67
T#35	20	Rhode Island College	5-1	def. Bridgewater State, 58-56; won at Salve Regina, 69-54
T#35	20	Rutgers-Newark	5-1	won at New Jersey City, 62-46; won at Stevens, 69-52
#37	14	Hampden-Sydney	3-0	IDLE
#38	9	Wheaton (Ill.)	3-2	def. Benedictine, 86-73
#39	8	Messiah	4-1	won at York (Pa.), 75-69; LOST to Lebanon Valley, 80-83
T#40	7	Catholic	4-2	def. Washington and Lee, 92-52; LOST at DeSales, 75-80
T#40	7	Ohio Northern	4-0	def. T#51 Defiance, 59-57
T#40	7	Whitworth	3-2	won at Redlands, 80-61; won at Caltech, 76-48
T#43	6	Oglethorpe	6-2	won at Covenant, 76-68; won at Maryville (Tenn.), 86-75; LOST to LaGrange, 70-76
T#43	6	Bates	5-0	def. Southern Maine, 56-47; won at University of New England, 101-85
T#43	6	Dubuque	6-0	won at Willamette, 83-60; won at Colorado College, 77-68
T#43	6	Lynchburg	5-0	won at Ferrum, 84-64; won at Goucher, 68-43
T#43	6	Stevenson	5-2	won at Penn State-Berks, 72-64; LOST at #48 Eastern Connecticut, 61-66; won at T#51 Rochester, 83-75
#48	4	Eastern Connecticut	7-1	def. Connecticut College, 88-60; def. T#43 Stevenson, 66-61; won at York (N.Y.), 70-60
T#49	2	Franklin and Marshall	6-0	won at Johns Hopkins, 60-51; won at Elizabethtown, 87-65
T#49	2	Whitman	3-2	LOST at #34 Chapman, 67-72; won at UC Santa Cruz, 72-49
T#51	1	Misericordia	6-1	won at Albright, 71-61; def. York (Pa.), 72-64
T#51	1	Widener	5-1	def. Ursinus, 78-63
T#51	1	Defiance	2-2	LOST at T#40 Ohio Northern, 57-59; LOST at #21 Ohio Wesleyan, 63-77
T#51	1	Rochester	3-2	LOST to York (N.Y.), 76-80; LOST to T#43 Stevenson, 75-83

Additional Team (that I may have slighted in last week's post)

Rank	Pts	Team	Record	Results
---	---	University of Dallas	6-0	won at Linfield, 61-51; won at Portland Bible College (OR), 72-60

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 30, 2014, 09:11:27 PM

Daryl doesn't get enough +k for these.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 30, 2014, 10:42:15 PM

Quote from: sac on November 30, 2014, 09:11:27 PM
Daryl doesn't get enough +k for these.

Agreed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 01, 2014, 01:37:17 PM

Quote from: sac on November 29, 2014, 10:15:55 PM
Quote from: jaybird44 on November 29, 2014, 10:11:58 PM
WashU up 59-48, midway through 2nd half in California.

WashU is playing Fontbonne in California?

The craziest thing about Fontbonne playing Washington University in California is not that they are separated by a two-lane road, but that Fontbonne traveled all the way to California for just the one game. At least Washington University played two games.

Incidentally, the NCAA mileage calculator states that the institutions are 8 miles apart when the gyms are probably a 8 minute walk away from each other. Maybe 1/4 miles.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on December 01, 2014, 04:52:25 PM

Actually Fontbonne goes west again in December. They play @ CLU on 12/29. Strange to take two separate trips to CA in one year a month apart.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 01, 2014, 05:10:03 PM

Quote from: WUH on December 01, 2014, 01:37:17 PM
Quote from: sac on November 29, 2014, 10:15:55 PM
Quote from: jaybird44 on November 29, 2014, 10:11:58 PM
WashU up 59-48, midway through 2nd half in California.

WashU is playing Fontbonne in California?

The craziest thing about Fontbonne playing Washington University in California is not that they are separated by a two-lane road, but that Fontbonne traveled all the way to California for just the one game. At least Washington University played two games.

Incidentally, the NCAA mileage calculator states that the institutions are 8 miles apart when the gyms are probably a 8 minute walk away from each other. Maybe 1/4 miles.

That reminds me of UWSP in 2003-04...

We played out in Las Vegas against UW Oshkosh (the first of four times we would play, and beat, our closest conference foe) in front of 250 people right after Christmas, then we played Lawrence (the closest school to UWSP) in the Elite 8 in front of 200 in the Best Game Nobody Saw out in Tacoma at UPS.

Then, in the Final Four, Williams and Amherst played for a bid to get in the finals.

Sure, this isn't traveling half way across the country to play a team that's right across the street... but still interesting none the less!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on December 01, 2014, 05:54:03 PM

LOTS of losses among the Top 25 and ORVs. Apparently it's difficult to get a handle on many of these teams, especially early in the season.
I saw the current #3 team, UWW, who didn't look like either #1, which they were at the time, or #3 when they were only up by 6 against Bluffton wth only 4 minutes to go. And Sat night, Stevens Point didn't look like #11 in their loss to North Central.
Looks like another pretty good shakeup in the next poll

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jeffjo on December 02, 2014, 09:41:01 AM

Quote from: WUH on December 01, 2014, 01:37:17 PMThe craziest thing about Fontbonne playing Washington University in California is not that they are separated by a two-lane road, but that Fontbonne traveled all the way to California for just the one game. At least Washington University played two games.

Incidentally, the NCAA mileage calculator states that the institutions are 8 miles apart when the gyms are probably a 8 minute walk away from each other. Maybe 1/4 miles.

It's about 1/2 mile - but that's not the most interesting thing. (A) The gym is one of the closest WashU campus buildings to the WashU dorms, but (B) almost all of them are closer to Fontbonne's gym, in the center of their campus!

Did we ever get a reason for the California trip? Did they just want a beach for Thanksgiving?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 02, 2014, 11:27:37 AM

If I understand correctly, prior to the building boom on the South 40, Washington University rented a residence hall from Fontbonne south of Wydown Blvd.

I need to double check the years, but at one time, it would have been possible for a WUSTL basketball to live closer to the Fontbonne gym than any other building on the WUSTL campus.

I invite anyone to correct me if I am wrong about the rental arrangement.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jeffjo on December 02, 2014, 03:14:48 PM

Quote from: WUH on December 02, 2014, 11:27:37 AMI need to double check the years, but at one time, it would have been possible for a WUSTL basketball to live closer to the Fontbonne gym than any other building on the WUSTL campus.

You don't need the rental agreement for that. From Google Earth, a center-to-center measurement of Wheeler dorm (SW corner of the South 40) to:

Fontbonne's Dunham Student Activity Center is about 250 yards.
WashU's Simon Hall (closest on campus) is about 650 yards.
WashU's Field House is about 675 yards.

For my first dorm, Rubelmann in the center of the South 40, these numbers are 390, 450, and 550. Still closer to Dunham. I believe Gregg, a new dorm, is now the closest to campus. Its numbers are 570, 265, and 450; but about half of campus is further than 570.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 02, 2014, 04:16:55 PM

We do actually have a new Top 25 out guys, any new thoughts not having to do with St. Louis geographical inanities?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 02, 2014, 04:47:18 PM

Nah. It's too early to get things in a twist about rankings that'll change 218 times before the tournament!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 02, 2014, 04:50:07 PM

Probably too early to talk rankings, even though I do.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 02, 2014, 04:56:41 PM

Quote from: jeffjo on December 02, 2014, 03:14:48 PM
You don't need the rental agreement for that. From Google Earth, a center-to-center measurement of Wheeler dorm (SW corner of the South 40) to:

I was referring to the fact that WUSTL students used to live on the Fontbonne campus in a dorm they rented from then Fontbonne College. It was known as Wash Hall. And, believe it or not, at one time, Fontbonne and Washington University students lived side by side in the dorm. If I understand correctly, students living in that dorm had to walk by the Fontbonne gym in order to get to campus.

I love the Google Earth numbers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on December 02, 2014, 07:53:29 PM

Upset Alert: Emory 37, Piedmont 37 at halftime.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on December 02, 2014, 08:05:59 PM

Alex Foster's 5 early points of the 2nd half have fued an Emory burst to a 47-39 lead. 10-2 run to start the half for Emory.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on December 02, 2014, 08:13:22 PM

Piedmont cut Emory's lead to 51-47, 5 minutes into 2nd half, but Will Trawick's made 3 pushed lead back to 7.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on December 02, 2014, 08:17:58 PM

Emory 59-55 with 13 left 2nd half...Eagles making just enough 3s to stay in front of a determined Piedmont team playing at home.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on December 02, 2014, 08:26:24 PM

Upset Alert sirens full blast...Piedmont leads Emory 70-65, 8 minutes left 2nd half

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on December 02, 2014, 08:32:59 PM

Piedmont lead grew to 8 with 6:21 left 2nd half, now a 6-point lead over #6 Emory.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on December 02, 2014, 09:03:55 PM

UPSET: Piedmont 87, #6 Emory 85. Eagles' Alex Foster had 23 points, but missed two 3s in last 8 seconds of the game. Emory 13-39 from beyond the arc tonight. Piedmont had 5 players in double figures, and outshot Emory 59-39% from the floor. Also outrebounded Emory 42-34.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 02, 2014, 09:07:09 PM

Is anything an upset anymore?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 02, 2014, 09:12:13 PM

Good question.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on December 02, 2014, 09:18:51 PM

Only because there are polls to use as reference points.

Emory gets to take out its frustrations Friday night vs. winless Trinity TX in the Lopata Classic Friday night in St. Louis. Wash-U will beware La Verne U., who plays very good defense and has a 6th man (Kendall McClain) who leads the team with 14.5 ppg and 53% 3-point shooting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 02, 2014, 09:20:42 PM

Knox over Augustana would be an upset! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on December 02, 2014, 09:26:42 PM

No, Ypsi.
Knox over Augie would be a miracle ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 02, 2014, 09:31:44 PM

LOL!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 02, 2014, 09:38:55 PM

Quote from: AndOne on December 02, 2014, 09:26:42 PM
No, Ypsi.
Knox over Augie would be a miracle ;)

Yeah, these 30-mile-apart schools would be a Chaminade over Virginia level of upset.

I'd agree that 'upsets' are becoming more rare as the great middle-ground seems to expand. But there are still plenty of match-ups where 'upset' would be the go-to term. Beyond (in both directions) that great middle-ground, there are some 'haves' and many 'have nots'.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 02, 2014, 10:18:09 PM

Now, the series is 47-28 in favor of Augie over Knox. It's not like the Witt / Oberlin series when Oberlin beat them this year!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 03, 2014, 12:49:51 AM

I'd have to ask Augustana SID Dave Wrath, but I'm sure that the last time Knox picked up one of those 28 wins over Augustana was ancient history in college basketball terms. Aside from the shocking two-point win that Augie eked out over the Ex-Siwash three seasons ago, Augie has beaten Knox like a drum for as long as I can remember. Last season the Giovanine Brigade walloped Knox by 38, and the year before that by 35. And we're talking about an Augie program whose style of play doesn't really lend itself to blowout wins.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 03, 2014, 12:59:42 AM

Well, yeah, but the wins are in the book, ya know. They count the same....even if most of them happened during the center jump days.

I had the Augie media guide up but had to finish dinner and the girlfriend shanghai'd the laptop.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 03, 2014, 03:21:53 PM

1977 Knox 99 Augustana 96

To be fair to Knox, the two schools only met a handful of times until this latest stretch of 7 games in 8 years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 03, 2014, 06:24:07 PM

Good early season Top25 and conference match-up between Ohio Wesleyan and Wooster tonight.

stats: http://www.woosterathletics.com/sports/mbkb/2014-15/boxscores/20141203_cilo.xml
video: http://portal.stretchinternet.com/wooster/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 03, 2014, 09:08:43 PM

#4 OWU built a 26-point lead at Wooster, then held on as the #10 Scots closed to within 2. Final score OWU 92, Wooster 89.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 03, 2014, 10:07:36 PM

Final from Pella, IA...

Central 89
#1-Augustana 78

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 03, 2014, 10:10:22 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 03, 2014, 10:07:36 PM
Final from Pella, IA...

Central 89
#1-Augustana 78

Oh good gosh. We have no #1 team. It just doesn't exist. Everyone's going to end up voting for Amherst and the weakest schedule in d3 next week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ziggy on December 03, 2014, 10:11:01 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 03, 2014, 10:10:22 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 03, 2014, 10:07:36 PM
Final from Pella, IA...

Central 89
#1-Augustana 78

Oh good gosh. We have no #1 team. It just doesn't exist. Everyone's going to end up voting for Amherst and the weakest schedule in d3 next week.

I mean, I put an idea out there on twitter... https://twitter.com/ZacSnyder/status/540341481203306496

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 03, 2014, 10:12:34 PM

#1, 5, 7, 10, and 18 all lost tonight. #17 Chicago is tied with Wheaton in the second half.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 03, 2014, 10:36:39 PM

Wheaton over Chicago, 62-51.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 03, 2014, 10:59:27 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 03, 2014, 09:08:43 PM
#4 OWU built a 26-point lead at Wooster, then held on as the #10 Scots closed to within 2. Final score OWU 92, Wooster 89.

Anybody know the last time Wooster lost in back to back games?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 03, 2014, 11:15:03 PM

Quote from: John Gleich on December 03, 2014, 10:59:27 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on December 03, 2014, 09:08:43 PM
#4 OWU built a 26-point lead at Wooster, then held on as the #10 Scots closed to within 2. Final score OWU 92, Wooster 89.

Anybody know the last time Wooster lost in back to back games?

DePauw and OWU, January 2014. The question will be, after Friday, is when they lost three in a row, that goes back beyond the d3hoops.com archives.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 04, 2014, 01:19:29 AM

Maybe we rank the bottom 25?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 04, 2014, 07:18:21 AM

Quote from: smedindy on December 04, 2014, 01:19:29 AM
Maybe we rank the bottom 25?

I'm more thinking like, say, a 50 team ranking in which we simply don't order the teams we name? Announce, "these are fifty good teams" and leave it at that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 04, 2014, 08:32:05 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

As has been noted, there's a fair amount of red in the top 25 (more, in fact, than in the ORV group). If you're looking for a poll with less volatility, might I suggest the women's top 25 (with only one loss in the top 25)? When I post these reports on the women's side, I sometimes wonder if I am just talking to myself.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	616	Augustana	5-1	LOST at Central, 78-89; 12/06 vs. Fontbonne
#2	567	Amherst	4-0	def. Westfield State, 78-67; 12/06 vs. Emerson
#3	561	UW-Whitewater	5-1	won at UW-Oshkosh, 78-59; 12/06 vs. UW-Platteville
#4	542	Washington U.	6-0	12/05 vs. La Verne; 12/06 vs. Trinity (Texas)
#5	502	St. Thomas	4-1	LOST at Gustavus Adolphus, 65-68; 12/06 at St. John's
#6	458	Emory	4-1	LOST at Piedmont, 85-87; 12/05 vs. Trinity (Texas); 12/06 vs. La Verne
#7	427	Virginia Wesleyan	4-1	LOST to #26 Randolph-Macon, 47-55; 12/06 at Guilford; 12/07 at Ferrum
#8	417	Richard Stockton	7-0	won at TCNJ, 78-56; 12/06 vs. William Paterson
#9	411	Illinois Wesleyan	5-1	12/06 vs. #17 Chicago
#10	377	Wooster	3-2	LOST to #14 Ohio Wesleyan, 89-92; 12/06 at #18 DePauw
#11	349	MIT	4-1	LOST to Mass-Boston, 52-59; 12/04 at Salem State; 12/06 at Framingham State
#12	304	Dickinson	5-1	def. McDaniel, 53-38; 12/06 at Swarthmore
#13	300	WPI	5-1	won at Tufts, 68-65; 12/06 at Fitchburg State
#14	271	Ohio Wesleyan	6-0	won at #10 Wooster, 92-89; 12/06 vs. Denison
#15	236	Centre	6-0	def. Asbury, 74-61
#16	221	Albertus Magnus	4-1	def. Anna Maria, 96-80; 12/04 vs. Johnson and Wales; 12/06 at Suffolk
#17	179	Chicago	5-2	LOST to T#43 Wheaton (Ill.), 51-62; 12/06 at #9 Illinois Wesleyan
#18	174	DePauw	4-1	LOST at Denison, 65-67; 12/06 vs. #10 Wooster
#19	143	Calvin	4-2	12/05 at T#43 Wheaton (Ill.); 12/06 at Carthage
#20	106	St. Olaf	5-0	won at Macalester, 68-58; 12/06 at Bethel
#21	105	Scranton	4-1	12/06 vs. Juniata
#22	91	North Central (Ill.)	4-0	12/04 at Pomona-Pitzer; 12/06 at Redlands
#23	87	UW-Stevens Point	4-2	def. UW-Eau Claire, 64-50; 12/06 vs. UW-Superior
#24	77	St. Norbert	5-0	won at Ripon, 80-68; 12/06 vs. Grinnell
#25	74	Eastern Connecticut	7-1	12/06 at #34 Rhode Island College

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	64	Randolph-Macon	4-2	won at #7 Virginia Wesleyan, 55-47; 12/06 vs. T#32 Lynchburg
#27	58	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	5-1	IDLE
#28	47	Babson	5-1	def. #29 Bowdoin, 68-48; 12/06 vs. Tufts; 12/07 vs. Brandeis or Salem State
#29	42	Bowdoin	4-1	LOST at #28 Babson, 48-68; 12/04 at T#43 Bates; 12/06 vs. Colby
#30	39	Marietta	6-0	won at Muskingum, 84-74; 12/06 at Wilmington
#31	30	Williams	6-2	won at RPI, 86-69; 12/06 at T#38 Springfield
T#32	29	Lynchburg	6-0	def. Randolph, 76-57; 12/06 at #26 Randolph-Macon
T#32	29	Chapman	4-0	12/05 vs. Bristol
#34	25	Rhode Island College	6-1	won at Elms, 67-52; 12/06 vs. #25 Eastern Connecticut
#35	24	Dubuque	6-0	12/04 vs. Clarke
#36	23	Misericordia	7-1	def. FDU-Florham, 81-72; 12/06 at DeSales
#37	19	Cabrini	4-3	def. Neumann, 81-60; 12/06 at Centenary (N.J.)
T#38	15	Springfield	4-2	LOST at Trinity (Conn.), 76-81; 12/06 vs. #31 Williams
T#38	15	Christopher Newport	4-1	def. Southern Virginia, 89-79; 12/06 at Frostburg State
#40	12	Marymount	6-0	won at Wesley, 62-57; 12/06 vs. St. Mary's (Md.)
T#41	10	Ohio Northern	5-0	def. Otterbein, 78-67; 12/06 at Mount Union
T#41	10	Franklin and Marshall	7-0	won at Ursinus, 64-49; 12/06 vs. Haverford
T#43	8	Bates	6-0	def. Colby, 76-70; 12/04 vs. #29 Bowdoin
T#43	8	Wheaton (Ill.)	4-2	won at #17 Chicago, 62-51; 12/05 vs. #19 Calvin; 12/06 at Hope
#45	6	Widener	6-1	def. Albright, 80-77; 12/06 vs. Messiah
T#46	3	Rutgers-Newark	5-1	won at Montclair State, 62-60; 12/06 vs. TCNJ
T#46	3	Texas-Dallas	3-2	12/04 at University of the Ozarks; 12/06 at Texas-Tyler
#48	4	Gettysburg	4-2	LOST to Johns Hopkins, 52-68; 12/06 at Washington College
#49	3	Whitworth	3-2	IDLE
#50	2	Stevenson	5-2	12/06 at Arcadia
#51	1	Keene State	5-0	12/04 at Colby-Sawyer; 12/06 vs. Mass-Boston

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fantastic50 on December 04, 2014, 09:19:57 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 03, 2014, 11:15:03 PM
Quote from: John Gleich on December 03, 2014, 10:59:27 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on December 03, 2014, 09:08:43 PM
#4 OWU built a 26-point lead at Wooster, then held on as the #10 Scots closed to within 2. Final score OWU 92, Wooster 89.

Anybody know the last time Wooster lost in back to back games?

DePauw and OWU, January 2014. The question will be, after Friday, is when they lost three in a row, that goes back beyond the d3hoops.com archives.

Wooster has an online all-time archive of season/game results... http://www.woosterathletics.com/sports/mbkb/results/index (http://www.woosterathletics.com/sports/mbkb/results/index)
- In November 2008, Wooster lost three of four (L vs W&J, W vs Mesiah, L at Carnegie Mellon, L neu UW-Platteville).
- In 1989-90, the Scots lost four of six at two different points in the season (including their most recent to Oberlin)
- In Steve Moore's first season, 1987-88, Wooster closed the season with a 5-7 stretch.

However, the last time Wooster lost more than two consecutive games was in 1987, in Lu Wims final season coaching the Scots, when they dropped five in a row late in an 8-18 campaign.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 04, 2014, 11:02:31 AM

And people thought I was kidding when I said I wanted to start my poll at #10... I have wanted to start the poll at #10 for weeks. This gives me even better reason to start at #10.

By the way... Amherst isn't going to be my new #1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on December 04, 2014, 11:29:44 AM

I think, were I a voter, that I'd be giving Ohio Wesleyan a serious look for the top position. They've started 6-0 against a schedule that has contained two road games against Top-20 teams (and both were Top-10 at the time of the contest).

Probably either them or Washington U., would be my pick.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 04, 2014, 11:30:39 AM

Quote from: smedindy on December 04, 2014, 01:19:29 AM
Maybe we rank the bottom 25?

Imagine the excitement when the worst team in Division III beats the second worst!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 04, 2014, 11:52:12 AM

Quote from: WUH on December 04, 2014, 11:30:39 AM
Quote from: smedindy on December 04, 2014, 01:19:29 AM
Maybe we rank the bottom 25?

Imagine the excitement when the worst team in Division III beats the second worst!

I'm giddy about that anyway!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 04, 2014, 12:43:00 PM

Perhaps it would be helpful if someone were to, say, make a list of all undefeated teams, and all 1-loss team, and all 2-loss teams, etc., and then state the case as to why Richard Stockton should be number 1. (Which, given current circumstances, might not be hard to do.)

If only we had not banned the one person who might be able to help us through this difficult time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 04, 2014, 01:02:39 PM

So I take it Amherst will be #1 unless Emerson pulls the upset. I think they may need Lake and Palmer...

But wouldn't that be The Nice!

Oh, TGHIJGSTO!!! (Said in a Butters voice...)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 04, 2014, 02:34:44 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 04, 2014, 01:02:39 PM
So I take it Amherst will be #1 unless Emerson pulls the upset. I think they may need Lake and Palmer...

But wouldn't that be The Nice!

Oh, TGHIJGSTO!!! (Said in a Butters voice...)

I hardly ever give + or - Ks around here, and I never keep track of who. However, this is apparently the third time I tried to give you a +k in the last 24 hours.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jeffjo on December 04, 2014, 04:05:16 PM

Quote from: WUH on December 02, 2014, 11:27:37 AMI need to double check the years, but at one time, it would have been possible for a WUSTL basketball to live closer to the Fontbonne gym than any other building on the WUSTL campus.

Quote from: WUH on December 02, 2014, 04:56:41 PM
Quote from: jeffjo on December 02, 2014, 03:14:48 PM
You don't need the rental agreement for that. From Google Earth, a center-to-center measurement of Wheeler dorm (SW corner of the South 40) to:
I was referring to the fact that WUSTL students used to live on the Fontbonne campus in a dorm they rented from then Fontbonne College.

I really don't mean to sound testy, but you were referring to the possibility that "a WUSTL [student athlete could] live closer to the Fontbonne gym than any other building on the WUSTL campus." You used the possibility of these rentals as evidence, not the subject. And you don't need that evidence - it was possible entirely within the South 40.

But yes, I do know several WashU students who lived at Fontbonne. I sometimes ate dinner at Wohl Center with them, so they were under the umbrella of the South 40 but lived across the street. But they were Law students. Other kinds of students may have been possible in other years, but these are the ones I know of. And it possible, but unlikely, that they could have been on a team. But not basketball, as we had no basketball team when I attended.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 04, 2014, 04:31:26 PM

Quote from: jeffjo on December 04, 2014, 04:05:16 PM
I really don't mean to sound testy, but you were referring to the possibility that "a WUSTL [student athlete could] live closer to the Fontbonne gym than any other building on the WUSTL campus." You used the possibility of these rentals as evidence, not the subject. And you don't need that evidence - it was possible entirely within the South 40.

I should probably make this my last post on the matter, but my point was: if you live on the South 40, you are both living on the WUSTL campus and living next to another WUSTL building because every WUSTL dorm has a WUSTL dorm or other building practically next door. If you lived at Fontbonne, you were not living next door to another WUSTL building. I do not know if student athletes lived in Wash Hall, but I think Washington University students lived there through about 1999 or 2000.

In terms of the Top 25, this is definitely No. 1 in terms of the most trivial matters I have ever discussed here, which is saying something. I apologize.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 04, 2014, 06:53:13 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 04, 2014, 12:43:00 PM
Perhaps it would be helpful if someone were to, say, make a list of all undefeated teams, and all 1-loss team, and all 2-loss teams, etc., and then state the case as to why Richard Stockton should be number 1. (Which, given current circumstances, might not be hard to do.)

If only we had not banned the one person who might be able to help us through this difficult time.

I can state the case in one magical, wonderful word ... wait for it, wait for it ...

TGHIJGSTO!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 04, 2014, 06:58:45 PM

Quote from: WUH on December 04, 2014, 04:31:26 PM
Quote from: jeffjo on December 04, 2014, 04:05:16 PM
I really don't mean to sound testy, but you were referring to the possibility that "a WUSTL [student athlete could] live closer to the Fontbonne gym than any other building on the WUSTL campus." You used the possibility of these rentals as evidence, not the subject. And you don't need that evidence - it was possible entirely within the South 40.

I should probably make this my last post on the matter, but my point was: if you live on the South 40, you are both living on the WUSTL campus and living next to another WUSTL building because every WUSTL dorm has a WUSTL dorm or other building practically next door. If you lived at Fontbonne, you were not living next door to another WUSTL building. I do not know if student athletes lived in Wash Hall, but I think Washington University students lived there through about 1999 or 2000.

In terms of the Top 25, this is definitely No. 1 in terms of the most trivial matters I have ever discussed here, which is saying something. I apologize.

Don't apologize. This is a wonderfully wacky topic. I keep wondering how to introduce The Belt^TM into this bandying over distances with regard to Wydown Boulevard dorm geography.

Quote from: smedindy on December 04, 2014, 01:02:39 PM
So I take it Amherst will be #1 unless Emerson pulls the upset. I think they may need Lake and Palmer...

But wouldn't that be The Nice!

You gotta see the show!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 05, 2014, 08:31:12 AM

Albertus Magnus won a too close game over Johnson & Wales last night. Rumor has it 5'9" Tavon Sledge dunked over someone during the game. Hopefully we'll see video. Sledge had two open court dunks against Richard Stockton and they had one set play where Big Vic threw him an alley oop. They didn't make it that time, but I assume the play is in the repertoire, so perhaps they nailed it last night.

Always fun to see a little guy dunk, even better when he posterizes someone.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D3HoopJunkie on December 05, 2014, 09:01:33 AM

Hoops Fan, I was at the game and I'm praying someone got it on video. I am an Albertus fan and I sure people think I am exaggerating a little but it honestly was the best in game dunk I have ever seen in person. Certainly I have seen better dunks on highlight reels from NBA superstars Vince Carter, Tracy McGrady and King James to name a few but not in person. And he is a very generous 5'9. It was simply amazing!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: lildave678 on December 05, 2014, 09:17:23 AM

Forget the dunk (just kidding), the Falcons won the game on a buzzer beater 3 starting under their own hoop with I believe 2.4 seconds on the clock. Threw a Laettner-esque pass to Big Vic somewhere around the top of the key. Facing the direction the ball came from (away from the hoop) he kinda volleyball tap passed it to a wide open Wiggins who drilled the 3. Those end of game heaves always end up knocked down haha I was in shock!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Just Bill on December 05, 2014, 09:38:47 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 04, 2014, 06:58:45 PM
Don't apologize. This is a wonderfully wacky topic. I keep wondering how to introduce The Belt^TM into this bandying over distances with regard to Wydown Boulevard dorm geography.

I'm sorry, did you page me?

Pat made me promise to only poison one thread. Sorry.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 05, 2014, 10:31:54 AM

Quote from: fantastic50 on December 04, 2014, 09:19:57 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 03, 2014, 11:15:03 PM
Quote from: John Gleich on December 03, 2014, 10:59:27 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on December 03, 2014, 09:08:43 PM
#4 OWU built a 26-point lead at Wooster, then held on as the #10 Scots closed to within 2. Final score OWU 92, Wooster 89.

Anybody know the last time Wooster lost in back to back games?

DePauw and OWU, January 2014. The question will be, after Friday, is when they lost three in a row, that goes back beyond the d3hoops.com archives.

Wooster has an online all-time archive of season/game results... http://www.woosterathletics.com/sports/mbkb/results/index (http://www.woosterathletics.com/sports/mbkb/results/index)
- In November 2008, Wooster lost three of four (L vs W&J, W vs Mesiah, L at Carnegie Mellon, L neu UW-Platteville).
- In 1989-90, the Scots lost four of six at two different points in the season (including their most recent to Oberlin)
- In Steve Moore's first season, 1987-88, Wooster closed the season with a 5-7 stretch.

However, the last time Wooster lost more than two consecutive games was in 1987, in Lu Wims final season coaching the Scots, when they dropped five in a row late in an 8-18 campaign.

Thanks, I was more musing than anything else... and on my phone. The phone doesn't search databases very well...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 05, 2014, 05:50:39 PM

Quote from: Just Bill on December 05, 2014, 09:38:47 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 04, 2014, 06:58:45 PM
Don't apologize. This is a wonderfully wacky topic. I keep wondering how to introduce The Belt^TM into this bandying over distances with regard to Wydown Boulevard dorm geography.

I'm sorry, did you page me?

Pat made me promise to only poison one thread. Sorry.

I dunno, I thought I heard Pat say on a recent football broadcast that he needs more of The Belt^TM in his life.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.ytimg.com%2Fvi%2FW9ypIp_H2V8%2F0.jpg&hash=2c08eda204e9d04b6cbf9b6db522647945cfcd5b)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 06, 2014, 06:50:59 PM

Final: Wooster 76 DePauw 63

Wooster rebounds from two losses with a solid road win in Indiana beating the #18 DePauw Tigers. Dan Fanelly led Wooster with 17 points.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 07, 2014, 01:09:57 AM

Hoops Fan,

Wittenberg lost again, and are 1-6...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 07, 2014, 10:40:08 AM

Quote from: smedindy on December 07, 2014, 01:09:57 AM
Hoops Fan,

Wittenberg lost again, and are 1-6...

The Tigers are shooting 22.5% from behind the arc.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 07, 2014, 11:39:24 AM

Okay, so maybe those votes in the preseason poll were unjustified.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 07, 2014, 12:03:06 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on December 07, 2014, 11:39:24 AM
Okay, so maybe those votes in the preseason poll were unjustified.

Wittenberg's had two 13-13 seasons, 2009 and 1968 otherwise they have not had a losing record since 1956. It was really 1957 that Wittenberg basketball started to be "Wittenberg basketball."

Two things:
Witt joined the NCAC in 1990 and have failed to win 10 conference games only twice, both years going 9-7 in 2009, 2013. Wittenberg is currently 0-3 with 13 games remaining, 6 vs Ohio Wesleyan, Wooster and DePauw. To reach 9 wins they have to win 2 from these 3 teams and win everything else.

To reach 13 wins the Tigers need to win 12 of their remaining 18 scheduled games. At 1-6, with no conference wins and 6 games remaining vs Wooster, DePauw and Ohio Wesleyan the Tigers are fully on losing record watch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 07, 2014, 06:17:05 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	616	Augustana	6-1	LOST at Central, 78-89; def. Fontbonne, 116-62
#2	567	Amherst	5-0	def. Westfield State, 78-67; def. Emerson, 80-59
#3	561	UW-Whitewater	6-1	won at UW-Oshkosh, 78-59; def. UW-Platteville, 76-60
#4	542	Washington U.	8-0	def. La Verne, 83-48; def. Trinity (Texas), 79-77
#5	502	St. Thomas	5-1	LOST at Gustavus Adolphus, 65-68; won at St. John's, 77-69
#6	458	Emory	6-1	LOST at Piedmont, 85-87; def. Trinity (Texas), 83-74; won at La Verne, 80-59
#7	427	Virginia Wesleyan	6-1	LOST to #26 Randolph-Macon, 47-55; won at Guilford, 84-66; won at Ferrum, 86-67
#8	417	Richard Stockton	8-0	won at TCNJ, 78-56; def. William Paterson, 53-45
#9	411	Illinois Wesleyan	6-1	def. #17 Chicago, 61-56
#10	377	Wooster	4-2	LOST to #14 Ohio Wesleyan, 89-92; won at #18 DePauw, 76-63
#11	349	MIT	6-1	LOST to Mass-Boston, 52-59; won at Salem State, 73-37; won at Framingham State, 64-61
#12	304	Dickinson	6-1	def. McDaniel, 53-38; won at Swarthmore, 68-60
#13	300	WPI	6-1	won at Tufts, 68-65; won at Fitchburg State, 75-61
#14	271	Ohio Wesleyan	7-0	won at #10 Wooster, 92-89; def. Denison, 76-74
#15	236	Centre	6-0	def. Asbury, 74-61
#16	221	Albertus Magnus	6-1	def. Anna Maria, 96-80; def. Johnson and Wales, 94-91; won at Suffolk, 98-84
#17	179	Chicago	5-3	LOST to T#43 Wheaton (Ill.), 51-62; LOST at #9 Illinois Wesleyan, 56-61
#18	174	DePauw	4-2	LOST at Denison, 65-67; LOST to #10 Wooster, 63-76
#19	143	Calvin	5-3	LOST at T#43 Wheaton (Ill.), 66-70; won at Carthage, 75-73
#20	106	St. Olaf	5-1	won at Macalester, 68-58; LOST at Bethel, 57-67
#21	105	Scranton	5-1	def. Juniata, 61-48
#22	91	North Central (Ill.)	6-0	won at Pomona-Pitzer, 79-77; won at Redlands, 64-47
#23	87	UW-Stevens Point	5-2	def. UW-Eau Claire, 64-50; def. UW-Superior, 77-54
#24	77	St. Norbert	6-0	won at Ripon, 80-68; def. Grinnell, 102-75
#25	74	Eastern Connecticut	8-1	won at #34 Rhode Island College, 53-47

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	64	Randolph-Macon	5-2	won at #7 Virginia Wesleyan, 55-47; def. T#32 Lynchburg, 53-52
#27	58	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	5-1	IDLE
#28	47	Babson	7-1	def. #29 Bowdoin, 68-48; def. Tufts, 68-63; def. Salem State, 73-71
#29	42	Bowdoin	4-3	LOST at #28 Babson, 48-68; LOST at T#43 Bates, 51-71; LOST to Colby, 48-61
#30	39	Marietta	7-0	won at Muskingum, 84-74; won at Wilmington, 71-69
#31	30	Williams	7-2	won at RPI, 86-69; won at T#38 Springfield, 67-59
T#32	29	Lynchburg	6-1	def. Randolph, 76-57; LOST at #26 Randolph-Macon, 52-53
T#32	29	Chapman	5-0	def. Bristol, 85-65
#34	25	Rhode Island College	6-2	won at Elms, 67-52; LOST to #25 Eastern Connecticut, 47-53
#35	24	Dubuque	7-0	def. Clarke, 95-85
#36	23	Misericordia	7-2	def. FDU-Florham, 81-72; LOST at DeSales, 59-60
#37	19	Cabrini	5-3	def. Neumann, 81-60; won at Centenary (N.J.), 91-72
T#38	15	Springfield	4-3	LOST at Trinity (Conn.), 76-81; LOST to #31 Williams, 59-67
T#38	15	Christopher Newport	5-1	def. Southern Virginia, 89-79; won at Frostburg State, 85-67
#40	12	Marymount	7-0	won at Wesley, 62-57; def. St. Mary's (Md.), 66-62
T#41	10	Ohio Northern	5-1	def. Otterbein, 78-67; LOST at Mount Union, 70-77
T#41	10	Franklin and Marshall	8-0	won at Ursinus, 64-49; def. Haverford, 92-42
T#43	8	Bates	7-0	def. Colby, 76-70; def. #29 Bowdoin, 71-51
T#43	8	Wheaton (Ill.)	5-3	won at #17 Chicago, 62-51; def. #19 Calvin, 70-66; LOST at Hope, 55-66
#45	6	Widener	7-1	def. Albright, 80-77; def. Messiah, 83-67
T#46	3	Rutgers-Newark	7-1	won at Montclair State, 62-60; def. TCNJ, 66-56
T#46	3	Texas-Dallas	5-2	won at University of the Ozarks, 68-64; won at Texas-Tyler, 63-55
#48	4	Gettysburg	5-2	LOST to Johns Hopkins, 52-68; won at Washington College, 59-58
#49	3	Whitworth	3-2	IDLE
#50	2	Stevenson	6-2	won at Arcadia, 86-80
#51	1	Keene State	7-0	won at Colby-Sawyer, 91-83; def. Mass-Boston, 107-97

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 09, 2014, 08:41:42 PM

Trine 87 #6 Ohio Wesleyan 82

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: howardjp on December 09, 2014, 08:46:34 PM

From Amherst:

Brandeis Judges 78 - #2 Amherst 58

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 09, 2014, 09:21:17 PM

Wow - with #1 @ #4 on Wed. and #5 @ #3 on Sat., we're guaranteed at least 4 of the top 6 losing this week.

Looks like another shake-up comin' on!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 09, 2014, 10:31:57 PM

Quote from: howardjp on December 09, 2014, 08:46:34 PM
From Amherst:

Brandeis Judges 78 - #2 Amherst 58

You have got to be kidding! Go Judges!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 09, 2014, 11:52:22 PM

Where's Allen M. Karon when you need him?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 10, 2014, 01:21:28 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 09, 2014, 11:52:22 PM
Where's Allen M. Karon when you need him?

Exactly. You'd think Brandeis' favorite son would be all over this one.

It was just a short week ago we were discussing Brandeis on the Undefeated and Winless board and it wasn't the Undefeated Pool we had them listed in. Starting out 0-4 the Judges were the only team in the UAA that hadn't won a game. Now they have back to back wins over 2 NESCAC opponents in the past 3 days.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 10, 2014, 02:34:28 PM

I give up... I am going to just throw darts at a wall full of Division III teams with records above .500 each week and see what my ballot looks like accordingly. I probably have just as good a chance that way!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2014, 12:26:47 AM

Yep... darts I say.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 11, 2014, 08:21:14 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Reminder: Do not throw darts at your computer screen. Print out this report first, and throw darts at the paper.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	593	UW-Whitewater	6-2	LOST at #4 Augustana, 94-96
#2	586	Amherst	5-1	LOST to Brandeis, 58-78; 12/11 vs. #23 Babson
#3	582	Washington U.	9-0	won at Webster, 80-70; 12/13 vs. #5 Illinois Wesleyan
#4	524	Augustana	7-1	def. #1 UW-Whitewater, 96-94
#5	496	Illinois Wesleyan	6-1	12/13 at #3 Washington U.
#6	450	Ohio Wesleyan	7-1	LOST at Trine, 82-87; 12/13 vs. Hiram
#7	404	Richard Stockton	9-0	won at Rutgers-Camden, 82-66; 12/13 at Rutgers-Newark
#8	398	St. Thomas	6-1	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 75-43; 12/13 at Augsburg
#9	391	Emory	7-1	won at Covenant, 72-59
#10	381	Dickinson	6-1	12/12 at #16 North Central (Ill.); 12/13 vs. TBD
#11	356	Virginia Wesleyan	6-1	12/14 at #31 Christopher Newport
#12	317	WPI	7-1	won at Newbury, 65-53; 12/12 vs. Massachusetts College
#13	272	Albertus Magnus	6-1	12/13 vs. New Jersey City
#14	271	Centre	6-0	IDLE
#15	269	MIT	7-1	def. Emmanuel, 63-42; 12/11 at #43 Rhode Island College; 12/13 at Bridgewater State
#16	234	North Central (Ill.)	6-0	12/12 vs. #10 Dickinson
#17	218	Wooster	4-2	12/13 vs. Wabash
#18	167	Scranton	5-1	12/14 vs. Merchant Marine
#19	160	Eastern Connecticut	8-1	IDLE
#20	153	St. Norbert	6-0	12/13 at UW-Eau Claire
#21	138	UW-Stevens Point	6-2	won at UW-Stout, 73-56; 12/13 at Lawrence
#22	110	Randolph-Macon	5-2	IDLE
#23	94	Babson	7-1	12/11 at #2 Amherst
#24	79	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	5-1	12/13 at West Coast Baptist
#25	68	Marietta	7-0	12/13 at Heidelberg

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	38	Chapman	5-0	12/13 vs. La Sierra
T#27	35	Calvin	5-3	IDLE
T#27	35	Williams	7-2	IDLE
#29	34	Lynchburg	6-1	IDLE
#30	31	St. Olaf	6-1	won at St. John's, 84-73; 12/13 vs. Carleton
#31	29	Christopher Newport	5-1	12/14 vs. #11 Virginia Wesleyan
#32	26	Franklin and Marshall	8-0	12/13 vs. Albright
#33	25	Bates	7-0	IDLE
#34	23	DePauw	5-2	def. Earlham, 69-49; 12/13 at Oberlin
#35	19	Cabrini	5-3	IDLE
#36	18	Dubuque	8-0	won at Bethany Lutheran, 85-62; 12/13 at Elmhurst
#37	16	Hardin-Simmons	6-0	12/13 vs. Southwestern
#38	15	Keene State	7-0	12/13 vs. Southern Maine
#39	14	Chicago	5-3	12/13 at Kalamazoo
T#40	10	Widener	8-1	won at Swarthmore, 70-65; 12/13 at T#47 Stevenson
T#40	10	Marymount	7-0	IDLE
T#40	10	Cortland State	6-0	12/13 at SUNYIT
#43	5	Rhode Island College	6-3	LOST at Johnson and Wales, 65-77; 12/11 vs. #15 MIT; 12/13 at Mass-Boston
T#44	4	Middlebury	7-0	IDLE
T#44	4	Western Connecticut	6-0	def. Pine Manor, 114-99; 12/11 at Worcester State
#46	3	Bowdoin	5-3	def. Maine Maritime, 71-49; 12/12 at Maine-Farmington
T#47	2	DeSales	7-2	won at Penn State-Berks, 80-64; 12/13 at Muhlenberg
T#47	2	Whitworth	3-2	IDLE
T#47	2	Stevenson	6-2	12/13 vs. T#40 Widener
T#50	1	Gustavus Adolphus	6-1	won at Carleton, 63-57; 12/13 vs. Hamline
T#50	1	Misericordia	7-2	IDLE
T#50	1	Wheaton (Ill.)	5-3	12/13 at Alma
T#50	1	Central	5-1	won at Westminster (Mo.), 91-68; 12/12 vs. Mount Mercy; 12/13 at St. Ambrose

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on December 11, 2014, 08:43:40 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2014, 12:26:47 AM
Yep... darts I say.

Darts may be to defining - might want to use water balloons

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 11, 2014, 10:29:54 AM

No. 1 losing in double overtime at No. 4 is no cause for alarm. Great game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 11, 2014, 10:32:24 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 11, 2014, 10:29:54 AM
No. 1 losing in double overtime at No. 4 is no cause for alarm. Great game.

Yes.

Wasn't Augustana the favorite last night (in Rock Island)? #1 @ #4 (where #4 is presenting a hostile crowd of 2600), shouldn't #4 win a close game?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 11, 2014, 10:39:12 AM

I would think so, yes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 11, 2014, 11:18:53 AM

Whitewater will probably drop out of the Top 25 next week. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2014, 11:31:18 AM

It is a good thing Augustana won... or they certainly were going to drop out!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 11, 2014, 01:01:36 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2014, 11:31:18 AM
It is a good thing Augustana won... or they certainly were going to drop out!

??? This is just puzzling

Sometimes good teams lose, that doesn't really change the fact they're a good team. I really don't understand what people are looking for or expecting for the top 10. Perfection?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2014, 02:02:11 PM

sac - you do realize there is a thick dose of sarcasm... right? If Augustana had lost per my ballot... they might not have moved much. I had UWW #1 and Augustana #4 or something - by my ballot UWW should win so Augustana losing wouldn't shift things. Now the other way around, they will both shift accordingly.

But again... pretty sure the two of use were being sarcastic.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 11, 2014, 03:04:47 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2014, 02:02:11 PM
sac - you do realize there is a thick dose of sarcasm... right? If Augustana had lost per my ballot... they might not have moved much. I had UWW #1 and Augustana #4 or something - by my ballot UWW should win so Augustana losing wouldn't shift things. Now the other way around, they will both shift accordingly.

But again... pretty sure the two of use were being sarcastic.

Your previous posts about this years votes make your sarcasm less clear. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 11, 2014, 03:19:37 PM

Of course, now we have to ask ourselves, does the Augustana team that might be weaker due to the loss of a key post player winning over Whitewater, mean Whitewater isn't quite as good as we thought they might have been?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 11, 2014, 04:49:12 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 11, 2014, 03:19:37 PM

Of course, now we have to ask ourselves, does the Augustana team that might be weaker due to the loss of a key post player winning over Whitewater, mean Whitewater isn't quite as good as we thought they might have been?

Since the sarcasm detector seems to be turned off in this room, I have to ask you, HF: Are you being sarcastic when you refer to Augie's "loss of a key post player"?

(As far as team strength is concerned, everything I saw from both Augie and UWW last night further sold me on the conviction that they're both legitimate Top Five teams.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 11, 2014, 05:07:22 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 11, 2014, 04:49:12 PM
As far as team strength is concerned, everything I saw from both Augie and UWW last night further sold me on the conviction that they're both legitimate Top Five teams.

Yay! We have found TWO teams for the top five! That's a good start. Maybe some others will assert themselves as worthy as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 11, 2014, 05:13:08 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 11, 2014, 04:49:12 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 11, 2014, 03:19:37 PM

Of course, now we have to ask ourselves, does the Augustana team that might be weaker due to the loss of a key post player winning over Whitewater, mean Whitewater isn't quite as good as we thought they might have been?

Since the sarcasm detector seems to be turned off in this room, I have to ask you, HF: Are you being sarcastic when you refer to Augie's "loss of a key post player"?

(As far as team strength is concerned, everything I saw from both Augie and UWW last night further sold me on the conviction that they're both legitimate Top Five teams.)

I have to agree with you Greg. If that game had been for the National Championship last night it would go down in history as a classic. Both those teams looked like Top 5 teams to me as they went back and forth down the stretch in both regulation and the overtimes. If there were 10 more seconds in the game we might have seen a 3rd OT.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 11, 2014, 05:15:58 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 11, 2014, 05:07:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 11, 2014, 04:49:12 PM
As far as team strength is concerned, everything I saw from both Augie and UWW last night further sold me on the conviction that they're both legitimate Top Five teams.

Yay! We have found TWO teams for the top five! That's a good start. Maybe some others will assert themselves as worthy as well.

Well, certainly the winner of IWU @ WashU (and if IWU wins on the road over #3 WashU, they should probably BOTH remain in the top five). Just need to find one (or two) more. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2014, 06:22:28 PM

Quote from: sac on December 11, 2014, 03:04:47 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2014, 02:02:11 PM
sac - you do realize there is a thick dose of sarcasm... right? If Augustana had lost per my ballot... they might not have moved much. I had UWW #1 and Augustana #4 or something - by my ballot UWW should win so Augustana losing wouldn't shift things. Now the other way around, they will both shift accordingly.

But again... pretty sure the two of use were being sarcastic.

Your previous posts about this years votes make your sarcasm less clear. :)

SMH... pretty sure most of what I have stated about the ballot this year has been sarcastic:
- Wanting to start at #10 - I've asked to do it and Pat knows I am kidding (mostly).
- Deciding it might as well throw darts - sure, it's one idea, but a sarcastic one.
- Stating that teams will fall from the Top 5 right out of the Top 25 for losing a game.

Did I miss any? :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 11, 2014, 06:34:04 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2014, 06:22:28 PM
Did I miss any? :)

Are you being sarcastic?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 11, 2014, 07:50:43 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 11, 2014, 04:49:12 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 11, 2014, 03:19:37 PM

Of course, now we have to ask ourselves, does the Augustana team that might be weaker due to the loss of a key post player winning over Whitewater, mean Whitewater isn't quite as good as we thought they might have been?

Since the sarcasm detector seems to be turned off in this room, I have to ask you, HF: Are you being sarcastic when you refer to Augie's "loss of a key post player"?

(As far as team strength is concerned, everything I saw from both Augie and UWW last night further sold me on the conviction that they're both legitimate Top Five teams.)

I don't know - that's sort of the point. There was some hay made about the injury and subsequent loss. Coach was pretty adamant on Hoopsville "we're not the same team that got ranked #1 on Monday." I didn't see them before, so I can't compare.

At some point there was some sarcasm about ranking. Is Augie now like a #6 vs the preseason #2 - does that make Whitewater more like a #5 than a #1. It's nitpicky at this point, but those discussions happen all the time (because we're all crazy).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2014, 07:53:53 PM

Quote from: sac on December 11, 2014, 06:34:04 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2014, 06:22:28 PM
Did I miss any? :)

Are you being sarcastic?

Not sure... confused myself :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2014, 08:44:35 PM

Wow... #2 Amherst losses its second straight not only on the schedule, but at home... #23 Babson beats them 68-49. We were already guaranteed to have four of the top five lose this week... didn't think we would be guaranteed to have five total losses in that grouping.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 11, 2014, 09:10:11 PM

Say WashU loses that game. What's the over under for number of schools getting a first place vote next week? 5.5? 6? 6.5?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 11, 2014, 09:11:24 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 11, 2014, 07:50:43 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 11, 2014, 04:49:12 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 11, 2014, 03:19:37 PM

Of course, now we have to ask ourselves, does the Augustana team that might be weaker due to the loss of a key post player winning over Whitewater, mean Whitewater isn't quite as good as we thought they might have been?

Since the sarcasm detector seems to be turned off in this room, I have to ask you, HF: Are you being sarcastic when you refer to Augie's "loss of a key post player"?

(As far as team strength is concerned, everything I saw from both Augie and UWW last night further sold me on the conviction that they're both legitimate Top Five teams.)

I don't know - that's sort of the point. There was some hay made about the injury and subsequent loss. Coach was pretty adamant on Hoopsville "we're not the same team that got ranked #1 on Monday." I didn't see them before, so I can't compare.

I responded at length to that claim by Augustana head coach Grey Giovanine in the CCIW room last week, which is why I thought that you might've been sarcastic -- I wasn't sure if you'd read it or not. Here's what I had to say about Giovanine's assertions, vis-a-vis the injured big man, Kevin Schlitter:

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 04, 2014, 05:39:55 PM
I'm fascinated by Augie's situation at the moment. Not so much last night's loss, as I don't think it's a terrible loss. As sac noted, the Dutch were a second-round D3 tourney team last season. Plus, Central was 3-0 going into the contest and was playing at home, and that seems like a good scenario for a possible upset.

But what fascinates me is Grey Giovanine's quote in Josh Smith's Around the Region column today on d3hoops.com:

Quote"We're not the same team we were two weeks ago," Augustana head coach Grey Giovanine said, prior to Wednesday's 89-78 loss at Central. "We lost our best, most experienced front line player for the season. So the team that was ranked No. 1 in the country, well, that team isn't here anymore.

"Losing Kevin Schlitter for the year is a major blow, so we're really kind of having to redefine our team."

C'mon, Grey. Kevin Schlitter is your best front-line player? Is that why you weren't starting him and why you were only giving him fewer than 13 minutes of playing time per game this season? Heck, in his final game Schlitter got a whopping six minutes off of the bench in a 22-point thrashing of Rust. Who are you trying to kid, Grey? Everybody and his uncle knows that your best front-line players are your starters: PF Ben Ryan, SF Tayvian Johnson, and C Nick Hoepfner. Two years ago you had to play without Schlitter, and Augie finished 19-8 with what was basically a sophomore-dominated team that is almost identical in roster makeup to this season's senior-dominated team.

I'm not saying that Schlitter is chopped liver. He's a good player, and any CCIW team would be happy to have him. But Grey Giovanine hardly has to "redefine" his team in Schlitter's absence, since, as I said, the Doggies played almost the entire season two years ago with Schlitter out for the season. The Augie coach will almost certainly do the same thing that he did in 2012-13, which is to plug Alex Dziagwa and/or Brandon Motzel right into Schlitter's spot in the rotation and continue on as though nothing had happened.

I'm not trying to pile on Giovanine here, given the constant coat-throwing gibes that are starting to get a little redundant. But this really seems to me to be a less-than-honest response to the media regarding the as-yet-unexplained loss of Kevin Schlitter for the year. Perhaps some Augustana fan can point out what it is that I seem to be missing in Giovanine's comments, but it reads to me as a case of truth-bending poor-mouth on his part.

I don't back down from anything I had to say in that post. In fact, last night's game reinforces it for me. Augustana does just fine without Kevin Schlitter.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2014, 09:27:21 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 11, 2014, 09:10:11 PM

Say WashU loses that game. What's the over under for number of schools getting a first place vote next week? 5.5? 6? 6.5?

If they lose... I said on Hoopsville it's a pick-em... Yeah... six might be a safe bet.

By the way, Amherst has lost their last two games - both at home - by an avereage of 19.5 points! They are off until Dec. 30 when they travel to Drew... they are then at Goucher (1/2) before heading to Eastern Connecticut (1/6)... before heading to Hamilton (1/9) and Williams (1/10). My bet is one night at Amherst and that coming before the Hamilton trip. Lose two in a row at home to end this part of the season... it isn't going to be a fun holiday break.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 11, 2014, 09:48:00 PM

From reading the NESCAC room, it sounds to me like Amherst is a very talented but young and inexperienced team. This could be the "young and inexperienced" part coming to the fore.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 11, 2014, 10:25:38 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2014, 09:27:21 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 11, 2014, 09:10:11 PM

Say WashU loses that game. What's the over under for number of schools getting a first place vote next week? 5.5? 6? 6.5?

If they lose... I said on Hoopsville it's a pick-em... Yeah... six might be a safe bet.

By the way, Amherst has lost their last two games - both at home - by an avereage of 19.5 points! They are off until Dec. 30 when they travel to Drew... they are then at Goucher (1/2) before heading to Eastern Connecticut (1/6)... before heading to Hamilton (1/9) and Williams (1/10). My bet is one night at Amherst and that coming before the Hamilton trip. Lose two in a row at home to end this part of the season... it isn't going to be a fun holiday break.

I realize that it all depends on how other teams do (can't assign a ranking in a vacuum!) but any estimate how you will place Amherst? I'm guessing they would drop below 10; but below 15?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on December 11, 2014, 10:40:27 PM

They're a 5-2 team with the 2 losses by 20 and 19 points, both coming at home. Last week, UWSP, with a 5-2 record, which has now gone to 6-2, was ranked 21st. Accordingly, it wouldn't seem surprising to see them drop not just below 15, but below 20.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on December 11, 2014, 10:53:25 PM

Quote from: AndOne on December 11, 2014, 10:40:27 PM
They're a 5-2 team with the 2 losses by 20 and 19 points, both coming at home. Last week, UWSP, with a 5-2 record, which has now gone to 6-2, was ranked 21st. Accordingly, it wouldn't seem surprising to see them drop not just below 15, but below 20.

combined 14 -30 record of their competition before the two home losses will not help Amherst either but I don't see them below 20 --- yet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 11, 2014, 10:58:04 PM

In the absence of other losses, such a team could be expected to fall anywhere from 12-18 spots, based on my past observations. Not sure losing two at home makes a big difference but the level of opponent is definitely a factor.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 12, 2014, 06:28:16 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 11, 2014, 09:48:00 PM
From reading the NESCAC room, it sounds to me like Amherst is a very talented but young and inexperienced team. This could be the "young and inexperienced" part coming to the fore.

Young is right, but I'd also say they may be the most experienced "young team" in the country. They've got floor leaders with serious tournament experience.

I doubt any team will go undefeated this year - we may not have anyone go undefeated in conference. I suspect 3 losses overall might be the best anyone does.

Amherst has played a weak schedule with a team coping from serious losses. They got ranked high by default and stayed there because other teams lost. Brandeis and Babson were, by far, the best teams they've played so far. Their resume is certainly not as impressive as Point right now.

To me the bigger mystery will be how much this helps Babson. They've had early wins, but in such a way it was tough to judge them. Amherst's second loss will only make it more difficult to figure out just how good they are.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 12, 2014, 10:15:12 AM

Its worth noting this weekend is the big Johnson and Wales tournament at Johnson and Wales, North Carolina

Fri Johnson and Wales(Co.) vs Johnson and Wales(NC)
Fri Johnson and Wales(RI) vs Johnson and Wales (FL)

Sat: Winners vs Winners, losers vs losers

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 12, 2014, 10:46:18 AM

I am rooting for Johnson and Wales in that one!

Reminds me of the annual Concordia tournament in the Midwest.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on December 12, 2014, 10:48:38 AM

Amherst will remain ranked because AMHERST(!) and #2(!), but I'd take the resumes of unranked Chicago, St. Olaf, Calvin, Lynchburg, Wheaton (Ill.), Hope, Central, and even Williams (to name a few) ahead of them at this point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 12, 2014, 11:08:33 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 12, 2014, 10:46:18 AM
I am rooting for Johnson and Wales in that one!

Reminds me of the annual Concordia tournament in the Midwest.

Hosted by Concordia, Michigan this year in Ann Arbor.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 12, 2014, 12:03:56 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 11, 2014, 10:25:38 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2014, 09:27:21 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 11, 2014, 09:10:11 PM

Say WashU loses that game. What's the over under for number of schools getting a first place vote next week? 5.5? 6? 6.5?

If they lose... I said on Hoopsville it's a pick-em... Yeah... six might be a safe bet.

By the way, Amherst has lost their last two games - both at home - by an avereage of 19.5 points! They are off until Dec. 30 when they travel to Drew... they are then at Goucher (1/2) before heading to Eastern Connecticut (1/6)... before heading to Hamilton (1/9) and Williams (1/10). My bet is one night at Amherst and that coming before the Hamilton trip. Lose two in a row at home to end this part of the season... it isn't going to be a fun holiday break.

I realize that it all depends on how other teams do (can't assign a ranking in a vacuum!) but any estimate how you will place Amherst? I'm guessing they would drop below 10; but below 15?

In the Massey Ratings Amherst fell 58 spots, from the Top 10 all the way down to #67.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 12, 2014, 12:11:59 PM

Williams fell from 5 to out of the poll earlier in the season, right? Could happen but it's easier when you lost what Williams lost and then start the season 0-2.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 12, 2014, 12:56:54 PM

I believe Amherst has been in every poll since week 1 of the 2010-11 season. They finished 2010 unranked and did not appear in the following pre-season poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 12, 2014, 01:16:58 PM

Quote from: magicman on December 12, 2014, 12:03:56 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 11, 2014, 10:25:38 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2014, 09:27:21 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 11, 2014, 09:10:11 PM

Say WashU loses that game. What's the over under for number of schools getting a first place vote next week? 5.5? 6? 6.5?

If they lose... I said on Hoopsville it's a pick-em... Yeah... six might be a safe bet.

By the way, Amherst has lost their last two games - both at home - by an avereage of 19.5 points! They are off until Dec. 30 when they travel to Drew... they are then at Goucher (1/2) before heading to Eastern Connecticut (1/6)... before heading to Hamilton (1/9) and Williams (1/10). My bet is one night at Amherst and that coming before the Hamilton trip. Lose two in a row at home to end this part of the season... it isn't going to be a fun holiday break.

I realize that it all depends on how other teams do (can't assign a ranking in a vacuum!) but any estimate how you will place Amherst? I'm guessing they would drop below 10; but below 15?

In the Massey Ratings Amherst fell 58 spots, from the Top 10 all the way down to #67.

That's not a fall, it's a plummet. THUD!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 12, 2014, 01:37:45 PM

My opinion on Massey is dependent on many factors - I can sometimes take it and sometimes leave it - but I have read it by others several times already: isn't Massey at this point in the season a bit off. There is not enough information to breakdown accurate rankings in a computer that is lacking information. The old D1A college football system didn't release standings until halfway through the season for that very reason. Whether you like or dislike Massey, I think we have to wait until January to see if their rankings are legit because Amherst could jump 40 spots with a couple of wins on 12/30, 1/2, and 1/6.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on December 12, 2014, 01:42:27 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 12, 2014, 01:37:45 PM
My opinion on Massey is dependent on many factors - I can sometimes take it and sometimes leave it - but I have read it by others several times already: isn't Massey at this point in the season a bit off. There is not enough information to breakdown accurate rankings in a computer that is lacking information. The old D1A college football system didn't release standings until halfway through the season for that very reason. Whether you like or dislike Massey, I think we have to wait until January to see if their rankings are legit because Amherst could jump 40 spots with a couple of wins on 12/30, 1/2, and 1/6.

There is also not enough information at this point in the season for you or me to come up with accurate rankings in our brains that are lacking information.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ziggy on December 12, 2014, 01:45:20 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 12, 2014, 01:42:27 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 12, 2014, 01:37:45 PM
My opinion on Massey is dependent on many factors - I can sometimes take it and sometimes leave it - but I have read it by others several times already: isn't Massey at this point in the season a bit off. There is not enough information to breakdown accurate rankings in a computer that is lacking information. The old D1A college football system didn't release standings until halfway through the season for that very reason. Whether you like or dislike Massey, I think we have to wait until January to see if their rankings are legit because Amherst could jump 40 spots with a couple of wins on 12/30, 1/2, and 1/6.

There is also not enough information at this point in the season for you or me to come up with accurate rankings in our brains that are lacking information.

Isn't any of this kind of beside the point considering any residual data would make Amherst look better, not worse? Any historical data used to fill early season holes by Massey will to be Amherst's benefit in the rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 12, 2014, 01:48:24 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 12, 2014, 01:37:45 PM
My opinion on Massey is dependent on many factors - I can sometimes take it and sometimes leave it - but I have read it by others several times already: isn't Massey at this point in the season a bit off. There is not enough information to breakdown accurate rankings in a computer that is lacking information. The old D1A college football system didn't release standings until halfway through the season for that very reason. Whether you like or dislike Massey, I think we have to wait until January to see if their rankings are legit because Amherst could jump 40 spots with a couple of wins on 12/30, 1/2, and 1/6.

Any ranking is going to be a bit off this time of year. Honestly, I think Massey might have a chance to be more accurate at this point than the subjective polls.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 12, 2014, 02:02:26 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 12, 2014, 01:37:45 PM
My opinion on Massey is dependent on many factors - I can sometimes take it and sometimes leave it - but I have read it by others several times already: isn't Massey at this point in the season a bit off. There is not enough information to breakdown accurate rankings in a computer that is lacking information. The old D1A college football system didn't release standings until halfway through the season for that very reason. Whether you like or dislike Massey, I think we have to wait until January to see if their rankings are legit because Amherst could jump 40 spots with a couple of wins on 12/30, 1/2, and 1/6.

Some teams have already played as much as 1/3 of their season though. That's not a small amount of data.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 12, 2014, 02:30:50 PM

I never really look at power rankings seriously until after December. Schedules are out of sync until then, it seems. Some play a lot then hibernate, while others space their games out.

I do look at them to see who's naughty and nice, though.

Massey hasn't solved the 'exhibition for me, not for thee' issue consistently. But really, it's not his fault; since he includes all results (unlike Sagarin or Ken Pom) he's gotta put those games on somewhere if they count for someone. He did leave off a women's game that counted for CWU against Evergreen (love those Geoducks) because it was an exhibition for them. However, Alaska - Anchorage got to 'exhibition' its three games in the Shootout this year, but Massey counted them. Maybe it's a D-1 thing since most everyone pays attention there primarily, or it may be an NCAA / NAIA thing.

The solution would be that the games count for both or they don't but that would be too rational for the NCAA / NAIA or whoever.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 12, 2014, 02:59:16 PM

I look to Massey for SOS numbers mostly (especially at this time of year). They may not be super accurate on the minute level (comparing #234 to @276), but they're quite helpful for comparing #34 to #398.

For example, I knew Amherst's early schedule was weak, but Massey helped to show just how weak.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 12, 2014, 04:03:36 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 12, 2014, 01:42:27 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 12, 2014, 01:37:45 PM
My opinion on Massey is dependent on many factors - I can sometimes take it and sometimes leave it - but I have read it by others several times already: isn't Massey at this point in the season a bit off. There is not enough information to breakdown accurate rankings in a computer that is lacking information. The old D1A college football system didn't release standings until halfway through the season for that very reason. Whether you like or dislike Massey, I think we have to wait until January to see if their rankings are legit because Amherst could jump 40 spots with a couple of wins on 12/30, 1/2, and 1/6.

There is also not enough information at this point in the season for you or me to come up with accurate rankings in our brains that are lacking information.

Considering D-Mac's frantic search for darts and a dartboard to help him construct his latest ballot, I sense that you're preaching to the choir on this one, O Dean of KnightSlappy U.

Quote from: Titan Q on December 12, 2014, 01:48:24 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 12, 2014, 01:37:45 PM
My opinion on Massey is dependent on many factors - I can sometimes take it and sometimes leave it - but I have read it by others several times already: isn't Massey at this point in the season a bit off. There is not enough information to breakdown accurate rankings in a computer that is lacking information. The old D1A college football system didn't release standings until halfway through the season for that very reason. Whether you like or dislike Massey, I think we have to wait until January to see if their rankings are legit because Amherst could jump 40 spots with a couple of wins on 12/30, 1/2, and 1/6.

Any ranking is going to be a bit off this time of year. Honestly, I think Massey might have a chance to be more accurate at this point than the subjective polls.

... which isn't saying much.

Quote from: sac on December 12, 2014, 02:02:26 PMSome teams have already played as much as 1/3 of their season though. That's not a small amount of data.

But some have played a lot less than that. As smeds said, once everybody's skeds sync up, Massey becomes much more useful.

I just don't think that there's enough "connectivity" yet in the results ledger to make Massey really accurate. I think that HF's right about it being much more useful to establish gross percentiles than the sort of minute shakedown that would distinguish teams within, say, 30 to 50 spots of each other.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 12, 2014, 09:06:15 PM

It's interesting, for sure. John Carroll had played just four games before this weekend (weather). But by the end of December, Massey will be as interconnected as it's likely to be -- what it will lack is intraconnection, since we will have had so few conference games at that point. But most of the non-conference games, and really, the vast majority of the interregional games will have taken place.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 13, 2014, 04:59:13 PM

Video for #5 Illinois Wesleyan @ #3 Wash U - http://portal.stretchinternet.com/wustl/.

Tipping soon.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 13, 2014, 05:57:13 PM

Excellent game going on between Wash U and Illinois Wesleyan. IWU was down by as much as 13 points in the 1st half but has come all the way back to gain a 1 point 53-52 lead with 16:16 left to play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 14, 2014, 06:09:45 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Games played on a neutral court are now identified: "def. (n)" means "defeated on a neutral court", and "LOST to (n)" means "lost on a neutral court." (If you note any such games are NOT identified, it either means the changes to my program need some more work, or those games are not marked as occurring on a neutral court on the d3hoops.com scoreboard.)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	593	UW-Whitewater	6-2	LOST at #4 Augustana, 94-96
#2	586	Amherst	5-2	LOST to Brandeis, 58-78; LOST to #23 Babson, 49-68
#3	582	Washington U.	10-0	won at Webster, 80-70; def. #5 Illinois Wesleyan, 90-72
#4	524	Augustana	7-1	def. #1 UW-Whitewater, 96-94
#5	496	Illinois Wesleyan	6-2	LOST at #3 Washington U., 72-90
#6	450	Ohio Wesleyan	8-1	LOST at Trine, 82-87; def. Hiram, 92-84
#7	404	Richard Stockton	10-0	won at Rutgers-Camden, 82-66; won at Rutgers-Newark, 48-45
#8	398	St. Thomas	7-1	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 75-43; won at Augsburg, 57-40
#9	391	Emory	7-1	won at Covenant, 72-59
#10	381	Dickinson	8-1	def. (n) #16 North Central (Ill.), 80-73; won at Juniata, 65-59
#11	356	Virginia Wesleyan	7-1	won at #31 Christopher Newport, 84-83
#12	317	WPI	8-1	won at Newbury, 65-53; def. Massachusetts College, 74-61
#13	272	Albertus Magnus	7-1	def. New Jersey City, 88-82
#14	271	Centre	6-0	IDLE
#15	269	MIT	7-3	def. Emmanuel, 63-42; LOST at #43 Rhode Island College, 37-53; LOST at Bridgewater State, 77-84
#16	234	North Central (Ill.)	7-1	LOST to (n) #10 Dickinson, 73-80; def. (n) Penn State York, 87-67
#17	218	Wooster	5-2	def. Wabash, 81-52
#18	167	Scranton	6-1	def. Merchant Marine, 83-70
#19	160	Eastern Connecticut	8-1	IDLE
#20	153	St. Norbert	7-0	won at UW-Eau Claire, 66-55
#21	138	UW-Stevens Point	7-2	won at UW-Stout, 73-56; won at Lawrence, 60-49
#22	110	Randolph-Macon	5-2	IDLE
#23	94	Babson	8-1	won at #2 Amherst, 68-49
#24	79	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	6-1	won at West Coast Baptist, 80-57
#25	68	Marietta	8-0	won at Heidelberg, 83-77

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	38	Chapman	6-0	def. La Sierra, 89-72
T#27	35	Calvin	5-3	IDLE
T#27	35	Williams	7-2	IDLE
#29	34	Lynchburg	6-1	IDLE
#30	31	St. Olaf	7-1	won at St. John's, 84-73; def. Carleton, 73-70
#31	29	Christopher Newport	5-2	LOST to #11 Virginia Wesleyan, 83-84
#32	26	Franklin and Marshall	9-0	def. Albright, 74-70
#33	25	Bates	7-0	IDLE
#34	23	DePauw	5-3	def. Earlham, 69-49; LOST at Oberlin, 63-67
#35	19	Cabrini	5-3	IDLE
#36	18	Dubuque	8-1	won at Bethany Lutheran, 85-62; LOST at Elmhurst, 93-98
#37	16	Hardin-Simmons	7-0	def. Southwestern, 81-63
#38	15	Keene State	8-0	def. Southern Maine, 74-67
#39	14	Chicago	6-3	won at Kalamazoo, 72-53
T#40	10	Widener	8-2	won at Swarthmore, 70-65; LOST at T#47 Stevenson, 65-73
T#40	10	Marymount	7-0	IDLE
T#40	10	Cortland State	7-0	won at SUNYIT, 75-49
#43	5	Rhode Island College	8-3	LOST at Johnson and Wales, 65-77; def. #15 MIT, 53-37; won at Mass-Boston, 89-63
T#44	4	Middlebury	7-0	IDLE
T#44	4	Western Connecticut	7-0	def. Pine Manor, 114-99; won at Worcester State, 95-52
#46	3	Bowdoin	6-3	def. Maine Maritime, 71-49; won at Maine-Farmington, 72-41
T#47	2	DeSales	7-3	won at Penn State-Berks, 80-64; LOST at Muhlenberg, 57-86
T#47	2	Whitworth	3-2	IDLE
T#47	2	Stevenson	7-2	def. T#40 Widener, 73-65
T#50	1	Gustavus Adolphus	7-1	won at Carleton, 63-57; def. Hamline, 82-61
T#50	1	Misericordia	7-2	IDLE
T#50	1	Wheaton (Ill.)	6-3	won at Alma, 85-65
T#50	1	Central	6-2	won at Westminster (Mo.), 91-68; won at St. Ambrose, 86-84; LOST to Mount Mercy, 46-73

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 14, 2014, 06:47:27 PM

Just a couple upsets away from the ultimate TGHIJGSTO!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 15, 2014, 08:13:38 PM

Western Connecticut leads Albertus Magnus 57-56 at the half. Lots of scoring, lots of fouls (every starter on both teams has two). I watched the last eight minutes or so. Pretty sloppy. Albertus still doesn't look dialed in. They're definitely playing to the level of their opponents so far this year. Let's see if Western can wake them up a bit.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: falcons2010 on December 16, 2014, 05:17:37 PM

Albertus 110-92 over western ct last night.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 17, 2014, 07:29:54 PM

Christopher Newport lost a close one at Salisbury in which the teams combined to shoot 34-100 from the floor. Almost 80 rebounds in this one, 35 turnovers. This is barely a basketball game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TheOsprey on December 17, 2014, 08:38:35 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 14, 2014, 06:47:27 PM
Just a couple upsets away from the ultimate TGHIJGSTO!!!

I ask that someone please enlighten me on this abbreviation. Thank you for any input!!

TGHIJGSTO??

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Just Bill on December 17, 2014, 08:40:52 PM

It was an over-excited poster's attempt to type "THINGS TO". He liked all caps. Kind of a psycho.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TheOsprey on December 17, 2014, 08:45:03 PM

Thanks Bill!! I was wondering if it had any connection to Stockton's hoop squad!! Just curious. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 17, 2014, 08:56:05 PM

Quote from: TheOsprey on December 17, 2014, 08:38:35 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 14, 2014, 06:47:27 PM
Just a couple upsets away from the ultimate TGHIJGSTO!!!

I ask that someone please enlighten me on this abbreviation. Thank you for any input!!

TGHIJGSTO??

Tghijgsto made its glorious first appearance on this page http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4097.7875 a few posts from the top.

The previous pages were a very long uh.......we'll call it a debate, about Richard Stockton's position in the poll. Its pretty much legendary now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TheOsprey on December 17, 2014, 09:55:44 PM

Thanks sac!! Good stuff!!

I glad my boy isn't obsessed!? :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 17, 2014, 10:05:13 PM

Quote from: sac on December 17, 2014, 08:56:05 PM
Quote from: TheOsprey on December 17, 2014, 08:38:35 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 14, 2014, 06:47:27 PM
Just a couple upsets away from the ultimate TGHIJGSTO!!!

I ask that someone please enlighten me on this abbreviation. Thank you for any input!!

TGHIJGSTO??

Tghijgsto made its glorious first appearance on this page http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4097.7875 a few posts from the top.

The previous pages were a very long uh.......we'll call it a debate, about Richard Stockton's position in the poll. Its pretty much legendary now.

The funny thing is... He was just a year early...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TheOsprey on December 17, 2014, 10:37:08 PM

I hope that's the case this season!! TGHIJGSTO!! :D

Beach on one side, casinos on the others!! Now that is a dormitory!!

http://cts.vresp.com/c/?TheRichardStocktonCo/0fcea04dd2/b1ec997bad/203e7a9b51/siteID=197&pageID=16&layout=news&ID=170

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 18, 2014, 09:01:41 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

In the past, there has been a 2- or 3-week gap between polls over the holidays; this list includes two weeks' worth of games (and even then, there are a number of idle teams).

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	621	Washington U.	10-0	12/20 at Coe
#2	587	Augustana	8-1	won at MacMurray, 78-73
#3	555	UW-Whitewater	6-2	12/19 vs. Monmouth; 12/20 vs. Kalamazoo
#4	552	Richard Stockton	10-0	IDLE
#5	473	Dickinson	8-1	12/22 at Alvernia
#6	458	St. Thomas	7-1	12/20 vs. #20 UW-Stevens Point
#7	438	Emory	7-1	IDLE
#8	413	Virginia Wesleyan	8-1	def. Mary Washington, 81-60
#9	397	Illinois Wesleyan	7-2	def. Loras, 94-72
#10	355	Ohio Wesleyan	8-1	12/20 vs. Otterbein
#11	323	WPI	8-1	IDLE
#12	313	Albertus Magnus	8-1	def. #42 Western Connecticut, 110-92
#13	294	Centre	6-0	12/19 vs. Huntingdon (n); 12/20 vs. MacMurray (n)
#14	241	Wooster	6-2	won at Pitt-Bradford, 89-67
#15	235	Amherst	5-2	IDLE
#16	224	Scranton	6-1	12/28 vs. Husson (n)
#17	194	Babson	8-1	IDLE
#18	191	St. Norbert	8-0	won at Illinois College, 87-58
#19	188	Eastern Connecticut	8-1	IDLE
#20	152	UW-Stevens Point	7-2	12/20 at #6 St. Thomas
#21	149	North Central (Ill.)	8-1	won at Benedictine, 65-64; 12/27 vs. Olivet; 12/28 vs. Adrian (n)
#22	140	Randolph-Macon	6-2	def. #40 Cabrini, 105-92; 12/18 vs. Averett
#23	110	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	6-1	12/20 vs. Westmont
#24	83	Marietta	9-0	won at Baldwin Wallace, 86-77; 12/20 vs. John Carroll
#25	54	Franklin and Marshall	9-0	IDLE

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	44	Chapman	6-0	12/22 at La Sierra
#27	37	St. Olaf	7-1	12/22 vs. Northwestern (Minn.)
#28	35	Bates	7-0	IDLE
T#29	34	Williams	7-2	IDLE
T#29	34	MIT	7-3	IDLE
#31	31	Lynchburg	7-1	def. #37 Marymount, 69-62
#32	21	Chicago	7-3	def. North Park, 90-86
#33	19	Hardin-Simmons	8-0	won at Howard Payne, 77-59; 12/18 vs. Sul Ross State
T#34	18	Gustavus Adolphus	7-1	IDLE
T#34	18	Christopher Newport	5-3	LOST at Salisbury, 48-54
#36	15	Cortland State	7-0	IDLE
#37	14	Marymount	7-1	LOST at #31 Lynchburg, 62-69; 12/19 vs. Maryville (Tenn.) (n); 12/20 vs. Roanoke (n)
#38	11	Stevenson	7-2	12/18 at Macalester
#39	10	Rhode Island College	8-3	IDLE
#40	9	Cabrini	5-4	LOST at #22 Randolph-Macon, 92-105
#41	8	Calvin	5-3	12/19 at Ripon; 12/20 at UW-Oshkosh
#42	6	Western Connecticut	7-1	LOST at #12 Albertus Magnus, 92-110
T#43	5	Middlebury	7-0	IDLE
T#43	5	Dubuque	8-1	12/20 vs. Birmingham-Southern (n); 12/21 vs. Bridgewater (Va.) (n)
T#45	4	Bethel	6-1	12/20 at UW-La Crosse
T#45	4	Keene State	8-0	IDLE
#47	3	Widener	9-2	won at Drew, 80-69; 12/20 vs. St. Mary's (Md.)
#48	2	Wheaton (Ill.)	6-3	12/19 at Trinity (Texas); 12/20 vs. Texas Lutheran (n)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 18, 2014, 09:55:51 AM

Quote from: TheOsprey on December 17, 2014, 10:37:08 PM
I hope that's the case this season!! TGHIJGSTO!! :D

Beach on one side, casinos on the others!! Now that is a dormitory!!

http://cts.vresp.com/c/?TheRichardStocktonCo/0fcea04dd2/b1ec997bad/203e7a9b51/siteID=197&pageID=16&layout=news&ID=170

Speaking of TGHIJGSTO, a couple of us are already anticipating Richard Stockton making the NCAA tournament and also making noise as we've taken Josh Blamon in the Futures Tournament Fantasy League. Join and pick your team before the New Year!

Don't worry, no draft!

(shameless plug)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 18, 2014, 10:25:30 AM

Anyone know where I can find the men's preseason AA list? I found the women's under 'notables' in the News section, but can't find the men's either there or under awards.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 18, 2014, 10:38:08 AM

http://www.d3hoops.com/awards/all-americans/index (http://www.d3hoops.com/awards/all-americans/index) - go to the bottom of the page. You can find it by following the "Awards" link... and then "All-America"...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 18, 2014, 10:51:49 AM

Thanks, d-mac. I just didn't go far enough down the page.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on December 18, 2014, 10:41:48 PM

#20 Stevens Point has 2 losses. One was to #21 North Central which has only one loss which was to #5 Dickinson (#10 at the time). Yet UWSP is ranked above NCC. ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 18, 2014, 11:10:13 PM

Quote from: AndOne on December 18, 2014, 10:41:48 PM
#20 Stevens Point has 2 losses. One was to #21 North Central which has only one loss which was to #5 Dickinson (#10 at the time). Yet UWSP is ranked above NCC. ???

UWSP has played a tougher schedule. But, yeah, NCC won AT Stevens Point by 7. Perhaps the explanation is that it is still early enough in the season (in terms of playing quality teams) that reputation did it. NCC had excellent seasons 2 and 3 years ago, but has generally been just OK; UWSP has been continuously superb for many years, including national titles.

(As a CCIW partisan, imagine the difficulty I had typing this post! :P)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 18, 2014, 11:23:31 PM

That may indeed be the accurate explanation, but it's still shallow reasoning on the part of the pollsters. NCC ought to be ahead of UWSP.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 19, 2014, 09:24:00 AM

I'm not arguing with the conclusion in any way shape or form... I think that NC should be ahead of UWSP as well due to the head to head.

But I think it's very difficult to look at two individual teams in a vacuum like this.

In week 3, NC was ranked #16 and had 234 poll points (avg ranking #16.64). UWSP was ranked #21 and had 138 poll points (average ranking #20.48).

In week 4 (Dec 8th-Dec 14th) UWSP won twice (@ UW Stout and @ Lawrence) and received 152 poll points (average ranking 19.92), an increase of 14 poll points (0.56 ranking "increase").

North Central won once (Penn State York) and lost once (Dickinson) and received 149 poll points (average ranking 20.04), a decrease of 85 poll points (3.4 ranking decrease per ballot.

So, UWSP barely moved, but North Central dropped three and a half spots on every ballot (on average).

They're effectively tied in the poll (152 vs 149) at #20.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on December 19, 2014, 02:41:29 PM

John--

With all due respect, I don't give a poop how many points my team gets, I care what place they are voted to.
Whether one team won twice in a week and another won only once that week shouldn't matter. The placement/ranking should be the result of the body of work for the entire season to that point.

The first line of your post said all that needs to be said. "I think that NC should be ahead of UWSP as well due to the head to head."
The fact that NCC has one loss and UWSP has two is just added reinforcement of that fact. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 19, 2014, 02:50:26 PM

Quote from: AndOne on December 19, 2014, 02:41:29 PM
John--

With all due respect, I don't give a poop how many points my team gets, I care what place they are voted to.
Whether one team won twice in a week and another won only once that week shouldn't matter. The placement/ranking should be the result of the body of work for the entire season to that point.

The first line of your post said all that needs to be said. "I think that NC should be ahead of UWSP as well due to the head to head."
The fact that NCC has one loss and UWSP has two is just added reinforcement of that fact. :)

But you're also assuming the poll has some mind of its own. It's a conglomeration of individual ballots. Sure, some people are voting for Stevens Point who aren't even voting for NCC, but the drop in North Central's ranking may be due to some voters moving them from #8 to #11. That's why the points matter - they tell the story in comparison to last week. Only dropping an average of three spots after a road loss to a good team is probably about right.

I doubt too many voters dropped NCC below Stevens Point - likely a number already had them below. Remember, head-to-head is just one game. Dickinson lost at home to Gettysburg, but no one is voting Gettysburg above Dickinson.

I think North Central has the better resume right now, but I can certainly see why some would be skeptical (even if I disagree). It's not a crazy travesty or anything. Now Amherst and Williams being so high to start the year... maybe.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 19, 2014, 03:09:12 PM

Quote from: AndOne on December 19, 2014, 02:41:29 PMThe placement/ranking should be the result of the body of work for the entire season to that point.

Actually, the impression that I get is that pollsters tend to weigh recent results more than older results, because it's supposed to be a power poll rather than a mere W-L ranking. The more recent the results, the more accurate an indication they are of a team's current relative strength.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 19, 2014, 03:11:27 PM

The Pointers are likely to move significantly (i.e. at least a few spots) next week as they are set to take on St. Thomas on Saturday evening.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on December 20, 2014, 03:43:06 PM

WashU up by 4 at halftime at Coe. Trailed early from Coe 3s, took a 13-point lead with about 4 minutes left, then late 3s brought the Kohawks within 4.

Bears playing good on the road, but the defense has to be vigilant from the arc on every Coe possession.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on December 20, 2014, 06:17:54 PM

WashU gets a nice road win @ Coe, winning by 10. Coe made 14 treys, but WashU was 21-23 from FT line, including several by Matt Palucki down the stretch in the 2nd half. Bears also had a 38-30 edge in rebounds and shot around 51% from the floor.

Mitch Styzcinski had a career-high 19 points and 9 rebounds. I believe all of the starters scored in double-figures, and David Fatoki's had a career-high 11 assists and only 1 turnover.

20 days until the Bears' next game Jan. 10 @ Chicago.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 21, 2014, 09:29:53 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 18, 2014, 09:01:41 AM
How They Fared (So Far)

In the past, there has been a 2- or 3-week gap between polls over the holidays; this list includes two weeks' worth of games (and even then, there are a number of idle teams). ...

Because (I am assuming) there is no poll tomorrow, I'll refrain from posting an update tonight--which would only include a handful of games, anyway.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 21, 2014, 10:04:49 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 21, 2014, 09:29:53 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 18, 2014, 09:01:41 AM
How They Fared (So Far)

In the past, there has been a 2- or 3-week gap between polls over the holidays; this list includes two weeks' worth of games (and even then, there are a number of idle teams). ...
Because (I am assuming) there is no poll tomorrow, I'll refrain from posting an update tonight--which would only include a handful of games, anyway.

Next poll is 1/5, I believe.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 28, 2014, 10:06:21 PM

How They Fared (So Far)
The next report will be next Sunday (at the end of this three-week stretch).

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	621	Washington U.	11-0	won at Coe, 88-78
#2	587	Augustana	8-1	won at MacMurray, 78-73; 12/29 vs. Luther (n); 12/30 vs. Coe (n); 01/03 at Carthage
#3	555	UW-Whitewater	8-2	def. Monmouth, 74-54; def. Kalamazoo, 89-53; 12/31 vs. Beloit; 01/03 at UW-River Falls
#4	552	Richard Stockton	10-0	01/03 vs. #31 Lynchburg (n); 01/04 vs. TBA (n)
#5	473	Dickinson	9-1	won at Alvernia, 71-64; 01/03 at York (N.Y.)
#6	458	St. Thomas	8-1	def. #20 UW-Stevens Point, 68-66; 01/03 at Carleton
#7	438	Emory	7-1	12/29 vs. #28 Bates; 12/30 vs. Birmingham Southern/Union; 01/03 vs. #8 Virginia Wesleyan
#8	413	Virginia Wesleyan	8-1	def. Mary Washington, 81-60; 12/31 at North Carolina Wesleyan; 01/03 at #7 Emory
#9	397	Illinois Wesleyan	7-2	def. Loras, 94-72; 12/29 vs. Nazareth (n); 12/30 vs. TBA (n); 01/03 at #21 North Central (Ill.)
#10	355	Ohio Wesleyan	9-1	def. Otterbein, 92-81; 01/03 at Hope
#11	323	WPI	8-1	12/29 vs. T#29 Williams (n); 12/30 vs. FDU-Florham (n)
#12	313	Albertus Magnus	8-1	def. #42 Western Connecticut, 110-92
#13	294	Centre	8-0	def. (n) Huntingdon, 71-55; def. (n) MacMurray, 70-48; 12/29 vs. Johns Hopkins (n); 12/30 vs. TBA (n); 01/04 at Sewanee
#14	241	Wooster	6-2	won at Pitt-Bradford, 89-67; 12/29 vs. UW-La Crosse; 12/30 vs. TBD; 01/03 at Denison
#15	235	Amherst	5-2	12/30 at Drew; 01/02 at Goucher
#16	224	Scranton	6-2	LOST to (n) Husson, 74-79; 12/29 vs. Hanover (n); 01/02 at King's; 01/03 vs. Wilkes (n)
#17	194	Babson	8-1	12/31 vs. Colby; 01/03 at Elms
#18	191	St. Norbert	8-0	won at Illinois College, 87-58; 12/29 vs. St. Scholastica; 01/03 at Cornell
#19	188	Eastern Connecticut	8-1	12/30 vs. #24 Marietta (n); 12/31 vs. Messiah (n); 01/03 vs. Plymouth State
#20	152	UW-Stevens Point	7-3	LOST at #6 St. Thomas, 66-68; 12/29 at Pomona-Pitzer; 12/31 at #23 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps
#21	149	North Central (Ill.)	10-1	won at Benedictine, 65-64; def. Olivet, 76-54; def. (n) Adrian, 75-69; 01/03 vs. #9 Illinois Wesleyan
#22	140	Randolph-Macon	7-2	def. #40 Cabrini, 105-92; def. Averett, 74-69; 12/29 vs. Carroll; 12/30 vs. Baruch
#23	110	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	7-1	def. Westmont, 79-64; 12/31 vs. #20 UW-Stevens Point; 01/03 vs. Redlands
#24	83	Marietta	10-0	won at Baldwin Wallace, 86-77; def. John Carroll, 82-68; 12/30 vs. #19 Eastern Connecticut (n); 12/31 vs. Mass-Dartmouth (n)
#25	54	Franklin and Marshall	9-0	01/03 vs. Immaculata; 01/04 vs. TBD

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	44	Chapman	7-0	won at La Sierra, 81-58; 12/29 vs. Oberlin; 12/30 vs. St. Joseph's (Bklyn.); 01/03 at Whittier
#27	37	St. Olaf	8-1	def. Northwestern (Minn.), 85-60; 01/03 vs. T#34 Gustavus Adolphus
#28	35	Bates	7-0	12/29 at #7 Emory; 12/30 vs. Birmingham Southern/Union (n); 01/03 at Southern Vermont
T#29	34	Williams	7-2	12/29 vs. #11 WPI (n); 12/30 at Salem State; 01/03 at Endicott
T#29	34	MIT	7-3	IDLE
#31	31	Lynchburg	7-1	def. #37 Marymount, 69-62; 01/01 at Penn St. Mont Alto; 01/03 vs. #4 Richard Stockton (n); 01/04 vs. #25 Franklin & Marshall or Immaculata (n)
#32	21	Chicago	7-3	def. North Park, 90-86; 01/03 vs. Illinois Tech
#33	19	Hardin-Simmons	9-0	won at Howard Payne, 77-59; def. Sul Ross State, 90-66; 12/29 vs. Texas Lutheran; 01/03 at Louisiana College
T#34	18	Gustavus Adolphus	7-1	01/03 at #27 St. Olaf
T#34	18	Christopher Newport	5-3	LOST at Salisbury, 48-54; 12/29 vs. Otterbein; 01/03 vs. York (Pa.)
#36	15	Cortland State	7-0	01/03 vs. Medaille
#37	14	Marymount	9-1	LOST at #31 Lynchburg, 62-69; def. (n) Maryville (Tenn.), 57-49; def. (n) Roanoke, 76-62; 01/03 at Mary Washington
#38	11	Stevenson	8-2	won at Macalester, 61-58; 12/30 at Allegheny; 01/03 at Albright
#39	10	Rhode Island College	8-3	IDLE
#40	9	Cabrini	5-4	LOST at #22 Randolph-Macon, 92-105; 01/03 at Rosemont
#41	8	Calvin	6-4	LOST at Ripon, 80-86; won at UW-Oshkosh, 75-63; 12/31 at Finlandia
#42	6	Western Connecticut	7-1	LOST at #12 Albertus Magnus, 92-110; 01/03 at Western New England
T#43	5	Middlebury	7-0	01/02 vs. Salve Regina
T#43	5	Dubuque	10-1	def. (n) Birmingham-Southern, 76-62; def. (n) Bridgewater (Va.), 58-51
T#45	4	Bethel	7-1	won at UW-La Crosse, 84-62; 01/03 vs. St. John's
T#45	4	Keene State	8-0	12/31 vs. Plattsburgh State; 01/03 at Castleton State
#47	3	Widener	9-3	won at Drew, 80-69; LOST to St. Mary's (Md.), 46-60; 01/03 at Lycoming
#48	2	Wheaton (Ill.)	7-4	won at Trinity (Texas), 68-63; LOST to (n) Texas Lutheran, 56-63; 01/03 at Elmhurst

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 30, 2014, 09:02:58 PM

Final: #14 Wooster 78 Hope 75

Wooster moves to 8-2 with a nice regional win over a strong Hope team. Wooster was led by Dan Fanelly with 28 points and Xavier Brown with 14.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 04, 2015, 04:09:01 PM

TGHIJGSTO getting double teamed by Franklin and Marshall. F&M is up 20 in the 2nd half

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 04, 2015, 04:50:19 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 04, 2015, 04:09:01 PM
TGHIJGSTO getting double teamed by Franklin and Marshall. F&M is up 20 in the 2nd half

don't say things just to say things

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 04, 2015, 06:00:40 PM

Since the last Top 25 poll, here are the losses by teams in the Top 25:

#4 Richard Stockton lost at #25 Franklin & Marshall
#8 Virginia Wesleyan lost at #7 Emory
#9 Illinois Wesleyan lost twice, at Cal Lutheran and at #21 North Central
#10 Ohio Wesleyan lost at Hope
#13 Centre lost twice, at Johns Hopkins and at Sewanee
#16 Scranton lost to Husson at a neutral site
#18 St. Norbert lost at home to John Carroll
#19 Eastern Connecticut lost to #24 Marietta at a neutral site
#20 UW Stevens Point lost at #6 St. Thomas
#23 Claremont Mudd Scripps lost at home to #20 UW Stevens Point

Have to think that both #24 Marietta (now 12-0) and #25 Franklin & Marshall (now 11-0) will move up significantly with their quality wins and the losses by teams just above them in the poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 04, 2015, 06:56:20 PM

How They Fared

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	Record	Results
#1	621	Washington U.	11-0	won at Coe, 88-78
#2	587	Augustana	11-1	won at MacMurray, 78-73; def. (n) Luther, 87-59; def. (n) Coe, 71-66; won at Carthage, 73-42
#3	555	UW-Whitewater	10-2	def. Monmouth, 74-54; def. Kalamazoo, 89-53; def. Beloit, 92-51; won at UW-River Falls, 67-63
#4	552	Richard Stockton	11-1	def. (n) #31 Lynchburg, 62-60; LOST at #25 Franklin and Marshall, 63-71
#5	473	Dickinson	10-1	won at Alvernia, 71-64; won at York (N.Y.), 83-71
#6	458	St. Thomas	9-1	def. #20 UW-Stevens Point, 68-66; won at Carleton, 74-69
#7	438	Emory	10-1	def. #28 Bates, 84-65; def. Union, 83-67; def. #8 Virginia Wesleyan, 77-64
#8	413	Virginia Wesleyan	9-2	def. Mary Washington, 81-60; won at North Carolina Wesleyan, 91-59; LOST at #7 Emory, 64-77
#9	397	Illinois Wesleyan	8-4	def. Loras, 94-72; def. (n) Nazareth, 84-41; LOST at Cal Lutheran, 61-67; LOST at #21 North Central (Ill.), 72-78
#10	355	Ohio Wesleyan	9-2	def. Otterbein, 92-81; LOST at Hope, 61-87
#11	323	WPI	10-1	def. (n) T#29 Williams, 73-71; def. (n) FDU-Florham, 76-39
#12	313	Albertus Magnus	8-1	def. #42 Western Connecticut, 110-92
#13	294	Centre	9-2	def. (n) Huntingdon, 71-55; def. (n) MacMurray, 70-48; LOST to (n) Johns Hopkins, 51-66; def. (n) Elmira, 86-60; LOST at Sewanee, 51-53
#14	241	Wooster	9-2	won at Pitt-Bradford, 89-67; def. UW-La Crosse, 66-58; def. Hope, 78-75; won at Denison, 95-72
#15	235	Amherst	7-2	won at Drew, 78-74; won at Goucher, 80-76
#16	224	Scranton	9-2	LOST to (n) Husson, 74-79; def. (n) Hanover, 64-61; won at King's, 86-83; def. (n) Wilkes, 75-73
#17	194	Babson	10-1	def. Colby, 72-65; won at Elms, 86-57
#18	191	St. Norbert	10-1	won at Illinois College, 87-58; def. St. Scholastica, 82-55; LOST to John Carroll, 70-80; won at Cornell, 66-48
#19	188	Eastern Connecticut	10-2	LOST to (n) #24 Marietta, 78-79; def. (n) Messiah, 87-80; def. Plymouth State, 66-41
#20	152	UW-Stevens Point	9-3	LOST at #6 St. Thomas, 66-68; won at Pomona-Pitzer, 57-49; won at #23 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 71-65
#21	149	North Central (Ill.)	11-1	won at Benedictine, 65-64; def. Olivet, 76-54; def. (n) Adrian, 75-69; def. #9 Illinois Wesleyan, 78-72
#22	140	Randolph-Macon	9-2	def. #40 Cabrini, 105-92; def. Averett, 74-69; def. Carroll, 85-56; def. Baruch, 80-65
#23	110	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	8-2	def. Westmont, 79-64; LOST to #20 UW-Stevens Point, 65-71; def. Redlands, 68-44
#24	83	Marietta	12-0	won at Baldwin Wallace, 86-77; def. John Carroll, 82-68; def. (n) #19 Eastern Connecticut, 79-78; def. (n) Mass-Dartmouth, 83-63
#25	54	Franklin and Marshall	11-0	def. Immaculata, 77-73; def. #4 Richard Stockton, 71-63

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	Record	Results
#26	44	Chapman	10-0	won at La Sierra, 81-58; def. Oberlin, 72-50; def. St. Joseph's (Bklyn.), 75-68; won at Whittier, 82-68
#27	37	St. Olaf	9-1	def. Northwestern (Minn.), 85-60; def. T#34 Gustavus Adolphus, 85-61
#28	35	Bates	8-2	LOST at #7 Emory, 65-84; LOST to (n) Birmingham-Southern, 72-76; won at Southern Vermont, 72-67
T#29	34	Williams	9-3	LOST to (n) #11 WPI, 71-73; won at Salem State, 84-77; won at Endicott, 79-76
T#29	34	MIT	7-3	IDLE
#31	31	Lynchburg	8-3	def. #37 Marymount, 69-62; won at Penn St. Mont Alto, 77-68; LOST to (n) #4 Richard Stockton, 60-62; LOST to (n) Immaculata, 58-62
#32	21	Chicago	8-3	def. North Park, 90-86; def. Illinois Tech, 84-31
#33	19	Hardin-Simmons	10-1	won at Howard Payne, 77-59; def. Sul Ross State, 90-66; LOST to Texas Lutheran, 54-77; def. Louisiana College, 89-66
T#34	18	Gustavus Adolphus	7-2	LOST at #27 St. Olaf, 61-85
T#34	18	Christopher Newport	8-3	LOST at Salisbury, 48-54; def. Otterbein, 71-55; def. Hood, 75-68; def. York (Pa.), 95-61
#36	15	Cortland State	8-0	def. Medaille, 76-48
#37	14	Marymount	9-2	LOST at #31 Lynchburg, 62-69; def. (n) Maryville (Tenn.), 57-49; def. (n) Roanoke, 76-62; LOST at Mary Washington, 64-66
#38	11	Stevenson	9-3	won at Macalester, 61-58; won at Allegheny, 83-72; LOST at Albright, 58-59
#39	10	Rhode Island College	8-3	IDLE
#40	9	Cabrini	5-5	LOST at #22 Randolph-Macon, 92-105; LOST at Rosemont, 78-85
#41	8	Calvin	7-4	LOST at Ripon, 80-86; won at UW-Oshkosh, 75-63; won at Finlandia, 82-68
#42	6	Western Connecticut	8-1	LOST at #12 Albertus Magnus, 92-110; won at Western New England, 83-57
T#43	5	Middlebury	8-0	def. Salve Regina, 94-66
T#43	5	Dubuque	10-1	def. (n) Birmingham-Southern, 76-62; def. (n) Bridgewater (Va.), 58-51
T#45	4	Bethel	7-2	won at UW-La Crosse, 84-62; LOST to St. John's, 67-69
T#45	4	Keene State	9-1	LOST to Plattsburgh State, 94-99; won at Castleton State, 84-65
#47	3	Widener	9-4	won at Drew, 80-69; LOST to St. Mary's (Md.), 46-60; LOST at Lycoming, 64-69
#48	2	Wheaton (Ill.)	7-5	won at Trinity (Texas), 68-63; LOST to (n) Texas Lutheran, 56-63; LOST at Elmhurst, 75-83

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 05, 2015, 09:33:30 AM

This is just a crazy year. WashU, I think, clearly has the best resume thus far, but it doesn't look anything like a team you'd be comfortable voting #1 in most years.

I've gotten to see a fair number of squads in person: Albertus Magnus, Richard Stockton, WPI, Chicago, Cabrini, Grynedd-Mercy, Randolph-Macon, Mary Hardin-Baylor, Purchase, and Wittenberg. I'm going to attempt to see both Dickinson and F&M at Washington College (right down the road from here) in the next few weeks.

I just don't think I've ever seen so many teams capable of competing with the best. To me there's only about 15 teams really worthy of being ranked and another thirty pretty competitive for the last ten actual ranking spots.

It's been said over and over, but an absolutely nuts year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 7express on January 05, 2015, 04:19:09 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 05, 2015, 09:33:30 AM
This is just a crazy year. WashU, I think, clearly has the best resume thus far, but it doesn't look anything like a team you'd be comfortable voting #1 in most years.

I've gotten to see a fair number of squads in person: Albertus Magnus, Richard Stockton, WPI, Chicago, Cabrini, Grynedd-Mercy, Randolph-Macon, Mary Hardin-Baylor, Purchase, and Wittenberg. I'm going to attempt to see both Dickinson and F&M at Washington College (right down the road from here) in the next few weeks.

I just don't think I've ever seen so many teams capable of competing with the best. To me there's only about 15 teams really worthy of being ranked and another thirty pretty competitive for the last ten actual ranking spots.

It's been said over and over, but an absolutely nuts year.

There my #1 because there's not many better choices. The only other 2 unbeaten I have Marietta & F&M are too low in the polls to make that jump.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 06, 2015, 09:33:10 AM

Quote from: 7express on January 05, 2015, 04:19:09 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 05, 2015, 09:33:30 AM
This is just a crazy year. WashU, I think, clearly has the best resume thus far, but it doesn't look anything like a team you'd be comfortable voting #1 in most years.

I've gotten to see a fair number of squads in person: Albertus Magnus, Richard Stockton, WPI, Chicago, Cabrini, Grynedd-Mercy, Randolph-Macon, Mary Hardin-Baylor, Purchase, and Wittenberg. I'm going to attempt to see both Dickinson and F&M at Washington College (right down the road from here) in the next few weeks.

I just don't think I've ever seen so many teams capable of competing with the best. To me there's only about 15 teams really worthy of being ranked and another thirty pretty competitive for the last ten actual ranking spots.

It's been said over and over, but an absolutely nuts year.

There my #1 because there's not many better choices. The only other 2 unbeaten I have Marietta & F&M are too low in the polls to make that jump.

Sometimes you just have to bite that bullet and admit defeat. :)

Marietta will be an interesting team to watch. They've already beaten JCU and Baldwin-Wallace leaving only 4 games with Mt. Union(2), JCU and BW remaining. No one else in the OAC should bother them, but its the OAC and surely someone will at some point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on January 06, 2015, 10:11:52 AM

Quote from: 7express on January 05, 2015, 04:19:09 PMThere my #1 because there's not many better choices. The only other 2 unbeaten I have Marietta & F&M are too low in the polls to make that jump."

For what it's worth, Marrietta is #2 in the Massay ratings. Franklin and Marshall down at 17.

Not that I expect them to be high, but what's with the lack of votes for Hope, #9 in Massay but only 5 TOTAL POINTS on D3hoops.com?! I thought it would be a long shot that they would crack the top 25, but expected them a little higher on the ladder than 5 points.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 06, 2015, 10:38:05 AM

Quote from: HOPEful on January 06, 2015, 10:11:52 AM
Quote from: 7express on January 05, 2015, 04:19:09 PMThere my #1 because there's not many better choices. The only other 2 unbeaten I have Marietta & F&M are too low in the polls to make that jump."

For what it's worth, Marrietta is #2 in the Massay ratings. Franklin and Marshall down at 17.

Not that I expect them to be high, but what's with the lack of votes for Hope, #9 in Massay but only 5 TOTAL POINTS on D3hoops.com?! I thought it would be a long shot that they would crack the top 25, but expected them a little higher on the ladder than 5 points.

4 losses is probably 1 too many for most voters. You only get points if you get someone's top 25 slot so not surprising they aren't on many ballots. There are still a lot of 1, 2 and 3 loss teams out there.

Elmhurst, ranked '#28', is a good team I've seen in person, but they aren't better than Hope......or ya know, Albion!.......who also might be better than Hope.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 06, 2015, 10:52:19 AM

Hipe is #9 becasue they've play Whitewater, Stevens Point, Wooster and Ohio Wesleyan. But, they've only gone 1-3 in those games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on January 06, 2015, 10:55:24 AM

Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 10:38:05 AM
Elmhurst, ranked '#28', is a good team I've seen in person, but they aren't better than Hope......or ya know, Albion!.......who also might be better than Hope.

And a respectable 38 in Massey. The non- Hope/Calvin MIAA teams are looking stronger this year than they have been in a while

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 06, 2015, 11:06:24 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 06, 2015, 10:52:19 AM
Hipe is #9 becasue they've play Whitewater, Stevens Point, Wooster and Ohio Wesleyan. But, they've only gone 1-3 in those games.

a two point loss and a 3 point loss. I think Hope's shown they can play with anyone. Win those games and people would be falling all over themselves to rank them in the top 10. The poll is a fickle beast.

One team is ranked the other isn't...

losses to:
7-5 by 1
11-0 by 18
11-1 by 6
7-3 by 6

losses to
10-2 by 2
9-3 by 11
9-7 by 4
9-2 by 3

...fickle

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 06, 2015, 11:17:19 AM

You also have to take into account o where they start the season. IWU started 437 points ahead of Hope. Its harder to gain points than to lose points, IMO. IWU has dropped over 400 points in four losses. Hope has dropped 33.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 06, 2015, 11:18:54 AM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on January 04, 2015, 06:00:40 PM
Since the last Top 25 poll, here are the losses by teams in the Top 25:

#4 Richard Stockton lost at #25 Franklin & Marshall
#8 Virginia Wesleyan lost at #7 Emory
#9 Illinois Wesleyan lost twice, to Cal Lutheran, and to #21 North Central
#10 Ohio Wesleyan lost at Hope
#13 Centre lost twice, at Johns Hopkins and at Sewanee
#16 Scranton lost to Husson at a neutral site
#18 St. Norbert lost at home to John Carroll
#19 Eastern Connecticut lost to #24 Marietta at a neutral site
#20 UW Stevens Point lost at #6 St. Thomas
#23 Claremont Mudd Scripps lost at home to #20 UW Stevens Point

Have to think that both #24 Marietta (now 12-0) and #25 Franklin & Marshall (now 11-0) will move up significantly with their quality wins and the losses by teams just above them in the poll.

Yet, despite losing their last 2 games and, at 8-4, having 2 more losses than anyone else in the Top 25 poll than 9-3 UWSP, IWU remains in the D3Hoops Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2015, 12:00:37 PM

IWU fell pretty far... at some point there is a cushion with the teams at the bottom. I left them in my Top 25 (barely) based on the fact that I ranked NCC and thus considered the loss not as extreme - though punished them for the Cal Lutheran loss. One more "hit" especially to lower CCIW team and they are gone for sure.

Per Hope... I went to look at their resume and when I saw four losses decided against it. You can "play with anyone" but unless you can prove you can beat them, you still have four losses. I can't put a team like Hope on my ballot when they show they can beat up on Ohio Wesleyan, but can't beat Wooster or others. It doesn't add up. It tells me they are more streaky then good and that isn't a Top 25 resume. Give them time... if they keep winning and dominate against Calvin (surprisingly bad team this year in my opinion), then they will earn votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 06, 2015, 12:03:03 PM

They did drop 295 points.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 06, 2015, 12:07:56 PM

Dave,

You don't sound real high on Ohio Wesleyan, who beat Wooster in Wooster earlier this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 06, 2015, 12:10:38 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2015, 12:00:37 PM
IWU fell pretty far... at some point there is a cushion with the teams at the bottom. I left them in my Top 25 (barely) based on the fact that I ranked NCC and thus considered the loss not as extreme - though punished them for the Cal Lutheran loss. One more "hit" especially to lower CCIW team and they are gone for sure.

Per Hope... I went to look at their resume and when I saw four losses decided against it. You can "play with anyone" but unless you can prove you can beat them, you still have four losses. I can't put a team like Hope on my ballot when they show they can beat up on Ohio Wesleyan, but can't beat Wooster or others. It doesn't add up. It tells me they are more streaky then good and that isn't a Top 25 resume. Give them time... if they keep winning and dominate against Calvin (surprisingly bad team this year in my opinion), then they will earn votes.

........by the way the teams Hope beat have a better overall record than those IWU has beat, by 6 games.

Is IWU more "streaky" than good?

So they have to "dominate" Calvin, that's a pretty ridiculous assertion I think. Seriously? dominate them?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2015, 12:12:23 PM

That isn't what I am saying... in fact, you prove my point. Hope beats Ohio Wesleyan but lost to Wooster... who lost to Ohio Wesleyan. I am not knocking Ohio Wesleyan... I am knocking the ability for Hope to put it together every game. They can beat Ohio Wesleyan but can't beat Wooster. If they are a Top 25 team their win against Ohio Wesleyan would also have a win over Wooster to compliment it.

As for my thoughts on Ohio Wesleyan, they can be found in this week's blog: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2015/01/06/daves-top-25-ballot/ (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2015/01/06/daves-top-25-ballot/)

"Talk about a meteoric rise; a picture of the Battling Bishops would be in the Division III dictionary next to meteoric the way they started the season. That start included a convincing win over Calvin before dispatching Wooster and Denison a few weeks later. Since then, OWU is 2-2 with losses to Trine and Hope in the last month (and the Hope loss was bad). I'm not sure if most of us bought into Mike DeWitt's squad took much (he certainly thinks we did), but with Wittenberg, Allegheny, and Wabash ahead before facing DePauw, once again our answers will only come if there are losses."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2015, 12:13:36 PM

Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 12:10:38 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2015, 12:00:37 PM
IWU fell pretty far... at some point there is a cushion with the teams at the bottom. I left them in my Top 25 (barely) based on the fact that I ranked NCC and thus considered the loss not as extreme - though punished them for the Cal Lutheran loss. One more "hit" especially to lower CCIW team and they are gone for sure.

Per Hope... I went to look at their resume and when I saw four losses decided against it. You can "play with anyone" but unless you can prove you can beat them, you still have four losses. I can't put a team like Hope on my ballot when they show they can beat up on Ohio Wesleyan, but can't beat Wooster or others. It doesn't add up. It tells me they are more streaky then good and that isn't a Top 25 resume. Give them time... if they keep winning and dominate against Calvin (surprisingly bad team this year in my opinion), then they will earn votes.

........by the way the teams Hope beat have a better overall record than those IWU has beat, by 6 games.

Is IWU more "streaky" than good?

So they have to "dominate" Calvin, that's a pretty ridiculous assertion I think. Seriously? dominate them?

I would like to see Hope prove themselves... so yes. Dominate. Calvin is clearly down from expectations. If they were to lose to Calvin (and yes, I get it is a big rival), then I am not sure a fifth loss would garner anything. Furthermore, squeaking one out doesn't tell me anything either. Dominate and Hope is clearly a player.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 06, 2015, 12:17:55 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2015, 12:13:36 PM
Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 12:10:38 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2015, 12:00:37 PM
IWU fell pretty far... at some point there is a cushion with the teams at the bottom. I left them in my Top 25 (barely) based on the fact that I ranked NCC and thus considered the loss not as extreme - though punished them for the Cal Lutheran loss. One more "hit" especially to lower CCIW team and they are gone for sure.

Per Hope... I went to look at their resume and when I saw four losses decided against it. You can "play with anyone" but unless you can prove you can beat them, you still have four losses. I can't put a team like Hope on my ballot when they show they can beat up on Ohio Wesleyan, but can't beat Wooster or others. It doesn't add up. It tells me they are more streaky then good and that isn't a Top 25 resume. Give them time... if they keep winning and dominate against Calvin (surprisingly bad team this year in my opinion), then they will earn votes.

........by the way the teams Hope beat have a better overall record than those IWU has beat, by 6 games.

Is IWU more "streaky" than good?

So they have to "dominate" Calvin, that's a pretty ridiculous assertion I think. Seriously? dominate them?

I would like to see Hope prove themselves... so yes. Dominate. Calvin is clearly down from expectations. If they were to lose to Calvin (and yes, I get it is a big rival), then I am not sure a fifth loss would garner anything. Furthermore, squeaking one out doesn't tell me anything either. Dominate and Hope is clearly a player.

With due respect Dave. good grief.

So who has IWU proven they can beat?

Also I appreciate a voter willing to defend their votes and take the abuse. I just don't get the answers I receive sometimes. There seems to be one set of standards for some teams and another for others.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 06, 2015, 12:20:28 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2015, 12:12:23 PM
That isn't what I am saying... in fact, you prove my point. Hope beats Ohio Wesleyan but lost to Wooster... who lost to Ohio Wesleyan. I am not knocking Ohio Wesleyan... I am knocking the ability for Hope to put it together every game. They can beat Ohio Wesleyan but can't beat Wooster. If they are a Top 25 team their win against Ohio Wesleyan would also have a win over Wooster to compliment it.

I just don't even know what to say to that. They HAVE to beat Wooster, seriously?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2015, 12:27:17 PM

Every single team on the ballot has a different set of standards because you can't translate anything from one team to the next. I have seen Chicago in action... I take that information forward when looking at IWU (who I have seen on video only). But my criteria for what I am seeing with IWU and their schedule I certainly can't put with someone else on the ballot - teams are different. You might not like the answers you get, but I am also just one voter. Clearly I have been on a different page than many voters since I have had teams far higher than the national poll reveals and I have had teams far lower (just look at this week's ballot, for example).

This is hands down the most difficult year to vote. There are plenty of teams that deserve attention and trying to wade through the information is a challenge. I seriously thought about dropping IWU off my ballot this week, but the teams I had "behind" them didn't seem like teams that were better than IWU. I can't take them out of the poll if there isn't anyone I would put ahead of them; I can't move a team up or into the poll if I don't think they are better than the teams ahead of them.

Again, I moved NCC into the poll and head of IWU - that caused IWU's fall to be less severe than the 11-spot plunge they already had (falling to 22 on my ballot). Behind them are CMS, St. Olaf, and F&M... couldn't see them moving below those squads - at this point.

And just because you have one point of view doesn't mean mine is going to be the same, just as I don't expect yours to jive with mine. There is a reason there are 25 voters on the poll from across the country (all eight regions). And this year it is FAR harder than in years past.

Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 12:20:28 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2015, 12:12:23 PM
That isn't what I am saying... in fact, you prove my point. Hope beats Ohio Wesleyan but lost to Wooster... who lost to Ohio Wesleyan. I am not knocking Ohio Wesleyan... I am knocking the ability for Hope to put it together every game. They can beat Ohio Wesleyan but can't beat Wooster. If they are a Top 25 team their win against Ohio Wesleyan would also have a win over Wooster to compliment it.

I just don't even know what to say to that. They HAVE to beat Wooster, seriously?

To be a Top 25 team? YES! Do you want me to seriously put Hope on my ballot at 7-4 with a 1-3 against teams that really matter when the "1" is Ohio Wesleyan and the "3" includes Wooster who Ohio Wesleyan beat? If Hope is as good as a Top 25 team should be... than the win over Ohio Wesleyan would also translate into a win over Wooster. My wife joked with me that I should put Goucher on my Top 25 if they had beaten Amherst - she knew to joke with me accordingly because that isn't how it works. I was ready to put Hope on my ballot with the thumping they gave Ohio Wesleyan, but how can I justify it if they lost three others including to Wooster?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 06, 2015, 12:33:03 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2015, 12:27:17 PM

To be a Top 25 team? YES! Do you want me to seriously put Hope on my ballot at 7-4 with a 1-3 against teams that really matter when the "1" is Ohio Wesleyan and the "3" includes Wooster who Ohio Wesleyan beat? If Hope is as good as a Top 25 team should be... than the win over Ohio Wesleyan would also translate into a win over Wooster. My wife joked with me that I should put Goucher on my Top 25 if they had beaten Amherst - she knew to joke with me accordingly because that isn't how it works. I was ready to put Hope on my ballot with the thumping they gave Ohio Wesleyan, but how can I justify it if they lost three others including to Wooster?

So shouldn't Ohio Wesleyan's win over Wooster be followed with a win over Trine and Hope......I mean, if they are a top 25 team. You have them 13, and they didn't play anywhere near Hope's schedule, not even close.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 06, 2015, 12:33:48 PM

You still didn't answer who IWU beat to justify a top 25 slot, let alone be ahead of Hope on any poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2015, 01:13:53 PM

Ohio Wesleyan: wins over Calvin (7-4), Wooster (9-2), Defiance (8-3), Denison (8-4) among others.
Hope: win over Ohio Wesleyan (9-2) and the only other good record I could find was Mount Union (8-3).

Yes... Hope has played a number of good teams, but they have lost to those teams (UW-Whitewater, UW-Stevens Point, Wooster). Their other wis are Cornerstone and Aquinas out of the division and Carthage, Wheaton, Pitt-Greensburg, and Spalding.

So how do I justify Hope? How do I dismiss Ohio Wesleyan?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 06, 2015, 01:33:12 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2015, 01:13:53 PM
Ohio Wesleyan: wins over Calvin (7-4), Wooster (9-2), Defiance (8-3), Denison (8-4) among others.
Hope: win over Ohio Wesleyan (9-2) and the only other good record I could find was Mount Union (8-3).

Yes... Hope has played a number of good teams, but they have lost to those teams (UW-Whitewater, UW-Stevens Point, Wooster). Their other wis are Cornerstone and Aquinas out of the division and Carthage, Wheaton, Pitt-Greensburg, and Spalding.

So how do I justify Hope? How do I dismiss Ohio Wesleyan?

#13 though, with a loss to Trine and a Hope team that hasn't proven anything to you?

You've twisted this argument into some Hope guy wants his team ranked argument, again. I never asked you to justify Hope, or Ohio Wesleyan even. I pointed out OWU because I think the expectations you've heaped on Hope don't jibe with a team that lost twice to a much lesser opponent in Trine and a Hope team you feel needs to dominate Calvin to even get a look. In your eyes shouldn't those OWU losses then be "bad" losses that cancel out beating Denison and Defiance?

I'm fine with Hope not being ranked, you can see that comment just after the poll came out. But your assertions of what Hope has to do to be ranked for you don't jibe with what you expect other teams to do to be ranked for you.

I asked you who IWU beat to justify a ranking in the top 25. I don't see how anyone can have them ahead of Hope on their poll. 7 weeks into a season, pre-season poll biases should be washed out by now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2015, 01:37:44 PM

IWU beat Chicago. And preseason is pretty much playing no roll at this point. However, when a team is high there is a cushion to fall. It is harder to push upward as well.

I am not twisting the argument - I read surprise from a board member to my comment that a win over Wooster was needed by Hope when I pointed out why I didn't vote Hope on my ballot accordingly as an argument for why isn't Hope ranked.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 06, 2015, 01:43:03 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2015, 01:37:44 PM
IWU beat Chicago. And preseason is pretty much playing no roll at this point. However, when a team is high there is a cushion to fall. It is harder to push upward as well.

I am not twisting the argument - I read surprise from a board member to my comment that a win over Wooster was needed by Hope when I pointed out why I didn't vote Hope on my ballot accordingly as an argument for why isn't Hope ranked.

Chicago is not equal to Ohio Wesleyan, not according the poll or your ballot.

Shouldn't then IWU be required by you to beat North Central like you require Hope to beat Wooster to be in the top 25? 10-1/9-2 both games on the road. Hope lost by 3, IWU lost by 6

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 06, 2015, 01:49:48 PM

Hope's got a decent resume, but it's tough to argue everyone should be voting for them. IWU, on the other hand, is definitely riding on reputation. Their best win is Chicago at home, a team that's not been as good as advertised this season.

Personally, I'd choose Hope over IWU in a poll right now, but it would have to be at least a coin toss in a head to head game. Likely neither one deserves to be ranked.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2015, 01:53:21 PM

I didn't vote for IWU based on that fact, but I can see why people might.

As someone pointed out when talking about UW-Oshkosh in football: They've proven to us they can lose to a good team. Now we need to see them win.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:02:44 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2015, 01:53:21 PM
I didn't vote for IWU based on that fact, but I can see why people might.

As someone pointed out when talking about UW-Oshkosh in football: They've proven to us they can lose to a good team. Now we need to see them win.

But they did win, over one of your ranked teams and the other team hasn't.

So its not like Oshkosh.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2015, 02:04:21 PM

Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:02:44 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2015, 01:53:21 PM
I didn't vote for IWU based on that fact, but I can see why people might.

As someone pointed out when talking about UW-Oshkosh in football: They've proven to us they can lose to a good team. Now we need to see them win.

But they did win, over one of your ranked teams and the other team hasn't.

So its not like Oshkosh.

Well, except sac, we were talking about the playoffs for Oshkosh and not the Top 25. After all, Oshkosh was in the Top 25. The principle is exactly the same.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:06:01 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2015, 02:04:21 PM
Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:02:44 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2015, 01:53:21 PM
I didn't vote for IWU based on that fact, but I can see why people might.

As someone pointed out when talking about UW-Oshkosh in football: They've proven to us they can lose to a good team. Now we need to see them win.

But they did win, over one of your ranked teams and the other team hasn't.

So its not like Oshkosh.

Well, except sac, we were talking about the playoffs for Oshkosh and not the Top 25. After all, Oshkosh was in the Top 25. The principle is exactly the same.

except its not ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2015, 02:06:29 PM

IWU fell 11 spots in my poll... I hit the cushion with them because I didn't feel comfortable with others above them. I have said they would have fallen out if I had teams I would have put ahead of them. I indeed put NCC ahead of them. That is me having the same argument that they should have beaten NCC as I have with Hope needing to be Wooster. However, I also ranked NCC for the first time this week based on that win over IWU - probably cushioning IWU from falling any further as well (if NCC wasn't ranked at all, I would have had a hard time justifying IWU staying in my poll).

The difference is this: IWU was in my poll and fell the most of all the teams in it (without falling out)... but they landed on a cushion. Hope wasn't in my poll and needed to make a stronger argument (as a result) to get into the poll. Yes, it benefits the team already in the poll, but they were there for a reason and Hope wasn't prior to this week's poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2015, 02:08:32 PM

Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:06:01 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2015, 02:04:21 PM
Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:02:44 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2015, 01:53:21 PM
I didn't vote for IWU based on that fact, but I can see why people might.

As someone pointed out when talking about UW-Oshkosh in football: They've proven to us they can lose to a good team. Now we need to see them win.

But they did win, over one of your ranked teams and the other team hasn't.

So its not like Oshkosh.

Well, except sac, we were talking about the playoffs for Oshkosh and not the Top 25. After all, Oshkosh was in the Top 25. The principle is exactly the same.

except its not ;)

In your opinion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:12:12 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2015, 02:08:32 PM
Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:06:01 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2015, 02:04:21 PM
Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:02:44 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2015, 01:53:21 PM
I didn't vote for IWU based on that fact, but I can see why people might.

As someone pointed out when talking about UW-Oshkosh in football: They've proven to us they can lose to a good team. Now we need to see them win.

But they did win, over one of your ranked teams and the other team hasn't.

So its not like Oshkosh.

Well, except sac, we were talking about the playoffs for Oshkosh and not the Top 25. After all, Oshkosh was in the Top 25. The principle is exactly the same.

except its not ;)

In your opinion.

You guys are a trip sometimes, your own words says its not. :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2015, 02:13:42 PM

Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:12:12 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2015, 02:08:32 PM
Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:06:01 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2015, 02:04:21 PM
Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:02:44 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2015, 01:53:21 PM
I didn't vote for IWU based on that fact, but I can see why people might.

As someone pointed out when talking about UW-Oshkosh in football: They've proven to us they can lose to a good team. Now we need to see them win.

But they did win, over one of your ranked teams and the other team hasn't.

So its not like Oshkosh.

Well, except sac, we were talking about the playoffs for Oshkosh and not the Top 25. After all, Oshkosh was in the Top 25. The principle is exactly the same.

except its not ;)

In your opinion.

You guys are a trip sometimes, your own words says its not. :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)

I don't know why you are arguing with me, seeing that I agree with you on IWU. Is there a point, sac, or are you just here to argue with everyone?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 06, 2015, 02:15:28 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2015, 02:13:42 PM
Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:12:12 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2015, 02:08:32 PM
Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:06:01 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2015, 02:04:21 PM
Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:02:44 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2015, 01:53:21 PM
I didn't vote for IWU based on that fact, but I can see why people might.

As someone pointed out when talking about UW-Oshkosh in football: They've proven to us they can lose to a good team. Now we need to see them win.

But they did win, over one of your ranked teams and the other team hasn't.

So its not like Oshkosh.

Well, except sac, we were talking about the playoffs for Oshkosh and not the Top 25. After all, Oshkosh was in the Top 25. The principle is exactly the same.

except its not ;)

In your opinion.

You guys are a trip sometimes, your own words says its not. :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)

I don't know why you are arguing with me, seeing that I agree with you on IWU. Is there a point, sac, or are you just here to argue with everyone?

He didn't argue with me (or maybe he just missed my post in the midst of the morass).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2015, 02:16:08 PM

Going to boil it down for you here: Oshkosh didn't beat a playoff team and lost to four good teams so the principle "proved you can lose" aka "not who you lost to, it's who you beat" is valid to use when debating Oshkosh's playoff candidacy.

Illinois Wesleyan hasn't beaten a Top 25 team and has lost to a bunch of good teams so the principle "proved you can lose" aka "not who you lost to, it's who you beat" is valid to use when debating IWU's Top 25 candidacy.

I see a parallel.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:19:55 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 06, 2015, 02:15:28 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2015, 02:13:42 PM
Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:12:12 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2015, 02:08:32 PM
Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:06:01 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2015, 02:04:21 PM
Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:02:44 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2015, 01:53:21 PM
I didn't vote for IWU based on that fact, but I can see why people might.

As someone pointed out when talking about UW-Oshkosh in football: They've proven to us they can lose to a good team. Now we need to see them win.

But they did win, over one of your ranked teams and the other team hasn't.

So its not like Oshkosh.

Well, except sac, we were talking about the playoffs for Oshkosh and not the Top 25. After all, Oshkosh was in the Top 25. The principle is exactly the same.

except its not ;)

In your opinion.

You guys are a trip sometimes, your own words says its not. :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)

I don't know why you are arguing with me, seeing that I agree with you on IWU. Is there a point, sac, or are you just here to argue with everyone?

He didn't argue with me (or maybe he just missed my post in the midst of the morass).

Keep telling me Wittenberg is good. ;) :D

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2015, 02:16:08 PM
Going to boil it down for you here: Oshkosh didn't beat a playoff team and lost to four good teams so the principle "proved you can lose" aka "not who you lost to, it's who you beat" is valid to use when debating Oshkosh's playoff candidacy.

Illinois Wesleyan hasn't beaten a Top 25 team and has lost to a bunch of good teams so the principle "proved you can lose" aka "not who you lost to, it's who you beat" is valid to use when debating IWU's Top 25 candidacy.

I see a parallel.

Well then the problem here is I thought you were talking about Hope. :)

.......but your words still say its not like Oshkosh. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:20:55 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2015, 02:06:29 PM
IWU fell 11 spots in my poll... I hit the cushion with them because I didn't feel comfortable with others above them. I have said they would have fallen out if I had teams I would have put ahead of them. I indeed put NCC ahead of them. That is me having the same argument that they should have beaten NCC as I have with Hope needing to be Wooster. However, I also ranked NCC for the first time this week based on that win over IWU - probably cushioning IWU from falling any further as well (if NCC wasn't ranked at all, I would have had a hard time justifying IWU staying in my poll).

The difference is this: IWU was in my poll and fell the most of all the teams in it (without falling out)... but they landed on a cushion. Hope wasn't in my poll and needed to make a stronger argument (as a result) to get into the poll. Yes, it benefits the team already in the poll, but they were there for a reason and Hope wasn't prior to this week's poll.

Here's the problem I have with this Dave.

You say you looked at Hope's record and dismissed them because they have 4 losses. Why not the same dismissal of 4 loss IWU? If you continue to rank them then you are in fact continuing a pre-season bias, yet you stated you have none.

I would think at this point in the voting year you would place two 4 loss teams side by side, in which case I don't see how you (or anyone) can justify IWU in the poll or above Hope. It doesn't mesh.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2015, 02:21:43 PM

Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:19:55 PM
Well then the problem here is I thought you were talking about Hope. :)

Well, perhaps you should be careful about who you lump in together. That would be like saying all Hope fans are argumentative about minor points.

Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:19:55 PM
.......but your words still say its not like Oshkosh. :D

It's not like Oshkosh? Explain to me how, rather than just stating the negative over and over.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2015, 02:24:12 PM

Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:20:55 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2015, 02:06:29 PM
IWU fell 11 spots in my poll... I hit the cushion with them because I didn't feel comfortable with others above them. I have said they would have fallen out if I had teams I would have put ahead of them. I indeed put NCC ahead of them. That is me having the same argument that they should have beaten NCC as I have with Hope needing to be Wooster. However, I also ranked NCC for the first time this week based on that win over IWU - probably cushioning IWU from falling any further as well (if NCC wasn't ranked at all, I would have had a hard time justifying IWU staying in my poll).

The difference is this: IWU was in my poll and fell the most of all the teams in it (without falling out)... but they landed on a cushion. Hope wasn't in my poll and needed to make a stronger argument (as a result) to get into the poll. Yes, it benefits the team already in the poll, but they were there for a reason and Hope wasn't prior to this week's poll.

Here's the problem I have with this Dave.

You say you looked at Hope's record and dismissed them because they have 4 losses. Why not the same dismissal of 4 loss IWU? If you continue to rank them then you are in fact continuing a pre-season bias, yet you stated you have none.

I would think at this point in the voting year you would place two 4 loss teams side by side, in which case I don't see how you (or anyone) can justify IWU in the poll or above Hope. It doesn't mesh.

I've answered this three times, at least. Please go back and read my answers before trying to dig for more. I did compare... and I told you why IWU was left in the poll and Hope was left off the poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:27:26 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2015, 02:21:43 PM
Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:19:55 PM
Well then the problem here is I thought you were talking about Hope. :)

Well, perhaps you should be careful about who you lump in together. That would be like saying all Hope fans are argumentative about minor points.

Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:19:55 PM
.......but your words still say its not like Oshkosh. :D

It's not like Oshkosh? Explain to me how, rather than just stating the negative over and over.

its underlined and bolded

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2015, 02:28:54 PM

In both cases, I am talking about a team's candidacy for a group by comparing them to the members of the group.

If the fact that one group is "football playoff teams" and the other is "basketball Top 25 teams" is exclusionary for you, then I guess I can't help you there. Seems like a fair comparison.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on January 06, 2015, 02:38:55 PM

Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 01:33:12 PM
You've twisted this argument into some Hope guy wants his team ranked argument

Thank you, SAC. My point was made using Hope as the example, but really isn't about getting "my team ranked higher"...

I don't understand how a team can beat OWU by 26 points and not turn more than 3 (points worth of) heads. But if that's the case, how does OWU not get punished worse for losing to an "justifiably unranked" opponent by 26 points?!

If instead of scheduling games against UWWW, UWSP, and two NAIA Div. 2 opponents, Hope had instead chosen to schedule home tournaments against lesser foes, they could be sitting at 10-1 with their 1 loss being by 3 @ Wooster. Would this make them any better of a team?

How does Amhurst stay ranked after getting blown out by Brandeis and Babson in back to back weeks? How does a Scranton team (their best win is against Alvernia) crack the top 25?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 06, 2015, 02:39:06 PM

Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 12:33:03 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2015, 12:27:17 PM

To be a Top 25 team? YES! Do you want me to seriously put Hope on my ballot at 7-4 with a 1-3 against teams that really matter when the "1" is Ohio Wesleyan and the "3" includes Wooster who Ohio Wesleyan beat? If Hope is as good as a Top 25 team should be... than the win over Ohio Wesleyan would also translate into a win over Wooster. My wife joked with me that I should put Goucher on my Top 25 if they had beaten Amherst - she knew to joke with me accordingly because that isn't how it works. I was ready to put Hope on my ballot with the thumping they gave Ohio Wesleyan, but how can I justify it if they lost three others including to Wooster?

So shouldn't Ohio Wesleyan's win over Wooster be followed with a win over Trine and Hope......I mean, if they are a top 25 team. You have them 13, and they didn't play anywhere near Hope's schedule, not even close.

Massey SOS has Hope #2 and OWU #19. So they ARE close. Your statement seems like OWU has played hacks and frauds and rummies all season long. Not so.

All this quibbling is fascinating because it's kind of semi-meaningless right now. And their poll ranking will not have any affect at all in their post-season chances or seeding.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:53:20 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2015, 02:24:12 PM
Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:20:55 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2015, 02:06:29 PM
IWU fell 11 spots in my poll... I hit the cushion with them because I didn't feel comfortable with others above them. I have said they would have fallen out if I had teams I would have put ahead of them. I indeed put NCC ahead of them. That is me having the same argument that they should have beaten NCC as I have with Hope needing to be Wooster. However, I also ranked NCC for the first time this week based on that win over IWU - probably cushioning IWU from falling any further as well (if NCC wasn't ranked at all, I would have had a hard time justifying IWU staying in my poll).

The difference is this: IWU was in my poll and fell the most of all the teams in it (without falling out)... but they landed on a cushion. Hope wasn't in my poll and needed to make a stronger argument (as a result) to get into the poll. Yes, it benefits the team already in the poll, but they were there for a reason and Hope wasn't prior to this week's poll.

Here's the problem I have with this Dave.

You say you looked at Hope's record and dismissed them because they have 4 losses. Why not the same dismissal of 4 loss IWU? If you continue to rank them then you are in fact continuing a pre-season bias, yet you stated you have none.

I would think at this point in the voting year you would place two 4 loss teams side by side, in which case I don't see how you (or anyone) can justify IWU in the poll or above Hope. It doesn't mesh.

I've answered this three times, at least. Please go back and read my answers before trying to dig for more. I did compare... and I told you why IWU was left in the poll and Hope was left off the poll.

You've answered without really answering.

Your justification for ranking IWU is their win over Chicago, #16 on your poll
Hope has a win over #13 on your poll Ohio Wesleyan.

They both have losses to highly rated teams. IWU to #1 Washington, Hope to #4 Whitewater (--your poll rankings btw)
They both have losses to good ranked teams on the road IWU to #21 North Central, Hope to #10 Wooster
They both have losses to good teams IWU to Cal Lutheran, Hope to Stevens Point
They both have losses to iffy team IWU to Benedictine, Hope to Aquinas

Somewhere in your argument you state Hope have to beat Wooster for you to rank them, yet that is not a requirement of IWU vs North Central. Why? you haven't answered that. Is it only because you already ranked them? That's kind of weak.

Side by side, Hope has the better wins and losses and a stronger schedule.

If the argument for IWU to be ranked is just 'I already had them ranked' that's a pretty disappointing justification.

Quote from: smedindy on January 06, 2015, 02:39:06 PM
Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 12:33:03 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2015, 12:27:17 PM

To be a Top 25 team? YES! Do you want me to seriously put Hope on my ballot at 7-4 with a 1-3 against teams that really matter when the "1" is Ohio Wesleyan and the "3" includes Wooster who Ohio Wesleyan beat? If Hope is as good as a Top 25 team should be... than the win over Ohio Wesleyan would also translate into a win over Wooster. My wife joked with me that I should put Goucher on my Top 25 if they had beaten Amherst - she knew to joke with me accordingly because that isn't how it works. I was ready to put Hope on my ballot with the thumping they gave Ohio Wesleyan, but how can I justify it if they lost three others including to Wooster?

So shouldn't Ohio Wesleyan's win over Wooster be followed with a win over Trine and Hope......I mean, if they are a top 25 team. You have them 13, and they didn't play anywhere near Hope's schedule, not even close.

Massey SOS has Hope #2 and OWU #19. So they ARE close. Your statement seems like OWU has played hacks and frauds and rummies all season long. Not so.

All this quibbling is fascinating because it's kind of semi-meaningless right now. And their poll ranking will not have any affect at all in their post-season chances or seeding.

There is a pretty big gap from #2 to #19

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on January 06, 2015, 03:01:51 PM

Arguing a loss is a loss is asinine. A two point loss to UWWW and a 3 point loss to Wooster is not equal to a loss to a lesser opponent.

Also, how is it that a loss to an NAIA opponent is counted but a win is not? The win against Cornerstone might be Hope's best win of the season, but it gets swept under the rug.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 06, 2015, 03:15:35 PM

I have a headache.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 06, 2015, 03:22:00 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 06, 2015, 03:15:35 PM
I have a headache.

And, I am feeling depressed. I am feeling depressed because it has been way too long since I have seen my team play. I need basketball or maybe some Xanax.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 06, 2015, 03:28:56 PM

There may not be anyone with greener blood than I - FWIW, I would currently have Hope higher than IWU. I haven't yet studied them (or others) closely enough to rank them precisely (the first Posters Poll ballot covers games thru this coming Sunday, so such study is in my near future! ;)), but suspect they would both be somewhere in the 20s, with Hope a spot or two higher.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2015, 03:57:34 PM

Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:53:20 PM
You've answered without really answering.

I think you don't like my answers and thus think I am not answering it. I am not trying to sway you. I am simply giving you my position. I don't care if you like the answer or not from this single voter of 25, but let's not pretend I am not answering the question.

Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:53:20 PM
Your justification for ranking IWU is their win over Chicago, #16 on your poll
Hope has a win over #13 on your poll Ohio Wesleyan.

They both have losses to highly rated teams. IWU to #1 Washington, Hope to #4 Whitewater (--your poll rankings btw)
They both have losses to good ranked teams on the road IWU to #21 North Central, Hope to #10 Wooster
They both have losses to good teams IWU to Cal Lutheran, Hope to Stevens Point
They both have losses to iffy team IWU to Benedictine, Hope to Aquinas

Somewhere in your argument you state Hope have to beat Wooster for you to rank them, yet that is not a requirement of IWU vs North Central. Why? you haven't answered that. Is it only because you already ranked them? That's kind of weak.

Side by side, Hope has the better wins and losses and a stronger schedule.

If the argument for IWU to be ranked is just 'I already had them ranked' that's a pretty disappointing justification.

No... I said that since IWU was already ranked I had my reasons to put them in my Top 25 at an earlier point of the season. They have lost and plummeted in my rankings, as I have described, but have stayed in the rankings because I didn't have any one to put in ahead of them - they are 22 for crying out loud. Furthermore, I ranked NCC with the win over IWU probably easing the fall for the Titans. (I am not one of those voters who has a #15 team facing a #5 team and punish the #15 team for the loss when my ballot clearly indicated I expected that to happen.)

Hope has not been ranked and honestly not on my radar until recently. With a new coach and a curious season last year (the early round loss and not maybe stepping forward like expected), I didn't consider them for the preseason poll. That means they need to turn my head after that point. They did that with the win over Ohio Wesleyan... so I went a looked at their resume further. That's where I found they had certainly played a number of good teams, but hadn't won any games besides the OWU one. And I had a common opponent which OWU had beat and Hope had lost to (Wooster). That didn't solve the question I had: is Hope a Top 25 team? That merely muddied the waters. And with nothing else telling me that Hope should be on my ballot (like a win over Wooster or even UWW or UWSP - who is also not on my ballot and hasn't been all year), they stayed off.

Does that mean it is easier to stay on a ballot then come off of it? Yes - at least if you are starting high. I had a reason to put you on in the first place.

Does that make it harder to get on my ballot? Yes. I am not going to throw teams around willy-nilly for the heck of it. If that were the case, Dubuque, St. Norbert, Chapman, Cortland State, Elmhurst, Middlebury, Hardin-Simmons, Rowan, Keene St., Carnegie Mellon, PSU-Behrend, Eastern Nazarene, East Tex. Baptist, W. Connecticut, Hilbert, and Lancaster Bible would all be in my Top 25 because they all have one loss or less and aren't on my ballot.

Hope is on my radar and I am watching carefully. They have Trine and Calvin upcoming this week alone. Win both and depending on what others do, they probably enter my Top 25.

IWU is also on my radar to pull them off my ballot. They have Carthage and Wheaton this week. Win both they probably don't necessarily climb, but lose just one and they are gone.

Hope is 7-4 against a 86-47 (.647) OWP (two of which are outside of DIII at 21-11).
IWU is 7-4 against a 77-54 (.588) OWP (all of which are DIII opponents).

But that measure, Hope is comparable if not better than IWU... and thus why I considered them and they were the 26th team on my board.

I spent two hours Sunday night and another two to three hours Monday pouring over my ballot. I then spent another two to three hours putting my blog together which allows me to think things through even more (and make changes if necessary). All of that time doesn't compute the amount of time I think about the Top 25 or discuss it with others or on Hoopsville. I don't make decisions lightly (though, throwing darts sometimes seems like an easier way to decide teams) and I probably spend WAY too much time on this. Right now Hope is off and IWU is on. Right now my Top 25 is public record, but that doesn't mean it will like that next week. I am known for blowing up my ballot... it could happen any week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: monsoon on January 06, 2015, 04:31:39 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2015, 03:57:34 PM

Quote from: sac on January 06, 2015, 02:53:20 PM
Your justification for ranking IWU is their win over Chicago, #16 on your poll
Hope has a win over #13 on your poll Ohio Wesleyan.

They both have losses to highly rated teams. IWU to #1 Washington, Hope to #4 Whitewater (--your poll rankings btw)
They both have losses to good ranked teams on the road IWU to #21 North Central, Hope to #10 Wooster
They both have losses to good teams IWU to Cal Lutheran, Hope to Stevens Point
They both have losses to iffy team IWU to Benedictine, Hope to Aquinas

Somewhere in your argument you state Hope have to beat Wooster for you to rank them, yet that is not a requirement of IWU vs North Central. Why? you haven't answered that. Is it only because you already ranked them? That's kind of weak.

Side by side, Hope has the better wins and losses and a stronger schedule.

If the argument for IWU to be ranked is just 'I already had them ranked' that's a pretty disappointing justification.

No... I said that since IWU was already ranked I had my reasons to put them in my Top 25 at an earlier point of the season. They have lost and plummeted in my rankings, as I have described, but have stayed in the rankings because I didn't have any one to put in ahead of them - they are 22 for crying out loud. Furthermore, I ranked NCC with the win over IWU probably easing the fall for the Titans. (I am not one of those voters who has a #15 team facing a #5 team and punish the #15 team for the loss when my ballot clearly indicated I expected that to happen.)

Hope has not been ranked and honestly not on my radar until recently. With a new coach and a curious season last year (the early round loss and not maybe stepping forward like expected), I didn't consider them for the preseason poll. That means they need to turn my head after that point. They did that with the win over Ohio Wesleyan... so I went a looked at their resume further. That's where I found they had certainly played a number of good teams, but hadn't won any games besides the OWU one. And I had a common opponent which OWU had beat and Hope had lost to (Wooster). That didn't solve the question I had: is Hope a Top 25 team? That merely muddied the waters. And with nothing else telling me that Hope should be on my ballot (like a win over Wooster or even UWW or UWSP - who is also not on my ballot and hasn't been all year), they stayed off.

Does that mean it is easier to stay on a ballot then come off of it? Yes - at least if you are starting high. I had a reason to put you on in the first place.

Does that make it harder to get on my ballot? Yes. I am not going to throw teams around willy-nilly for the heck of it. If that were the case, Dubuque, St. Norbert, Chapman, Cortland State, Elmhurst, Middlebury, Hardin-Simmons, Rowan, Keene St., Carnegie Mellon, PSU-Behrend, Eastern Nazarene, East Tex. Baptist, W. Connecticut, Hilbert, and Lancaster Bible would all be in my Top 25 because they all have one loss or less and aren't on my ballot.

Hope is on my radar and I am watching carefully. They have Trine and Calvin upcoming this week alone. Win both and depending on what others do, they probably enter my Top 25.

IWU is also on my radar to pull them off my ballot. They have Carthage and Wheaton this week. Win both they probably don't necessarily climb, but lose just one and they are gone.

Hope is 7-4 against a 86-47 (.647) OWP (two of which are outside of DIII at 21-11).
IWU is 7-4 against a 77-54 (.588) OWP (all of which are DIII opponents).

But that measure, Hope is comparable if not better than IWU... and thus why I considered them and they were the 26th team on my board.

I spent two hours Sunday night and another two to three hours Monday pouring over my ballot. I then spent another two to three hours putting my blog together which allows me to think things through even more (and make changes if necessary). All of that time doesn't compute the amount of time I think about the Top 25 or discuss it with others or on Hoopsville. I don't make decisions lightly (though, throwing darts sometimes seems like an easier way to decide teams) and I probably spend WAY too much time on this. Right now Hope is off and IWU is on. Right now my Top 25 is public record, but that doesn't mean it will like that next week. I am known for blowing up my ballot... it could happen any week.

This was helpful, Dave, and clearer, to me, at least, than earlier posts in this thread. Thanks to you, sac, Pat, hopeful, and others for the conversation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 06, 2015, 04:35:42 PM

Thanks for the responses Dave. Your answer still is basically I ranked IWU ahead of Hope because I already had them ranked, that's fine I guess. You finally compare them side by side in this last answer but your answer is the same. Now you say you had Hope 26th when in your very first post you said you 'dismissed them' (my words not yours) because of 4 losses, 26th on your list doesn't sound like dismissing them. It would have helped to reveal that then but you didn't you simply justified not ranking Hope and then made some pretty wild statements about what would result in a ranking. It only makes me wonder more why you didn't compare the two 4 loss teams you were considering side by side or reach a different conclusion.

I'm not trying to pick some fight with you remember no one here asked you to respond and you're the only voter who ever seems to participate here regularly. Willfully sticking your neck into the guillotine. I'm just trying to understand why your criteria that you stated to make your ballot seems to be so different for one team(7-4 happens to be my team) and another team (also 7-4 with a slightly weaker resume).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2015, 05:12:53 PM

If it makes you feel better... there are at least ten teams sitting 26th on my ballot ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 7express on January 06, 2015, 05:29:50 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 06, 2015, 03:15:35 PM
I have a headache.

Seriously! I get it you want your team to be ranked, but top 25 rankings have no bearing on whether that team gets selected for the NCAA tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on January 06, 2015, 06:04:08 PM

Dave, I too appreciate your openness to show (and defend) your ballot. Although I may not agree with some of the methods, I very much enjoy the conversation/debate.

My issue is less with Hope or IWU and more with Amherst still making the cut. Drew (6-5), Emerson (7-4), and Babson (10-1) are the only teams they've played so far with winning records. A week after losses to Brandeis (5-5) by 20 and Babson (10-1) by 19, Amherst went to OT against Goucher (1-9). I don't think where expectations began preseason should have any impact on voting in January. Even with a win against E. Connecticut, I don't see Amherst as a top 25 team at this point in the season.

However, I do realize we are sqaubling over the #20+ team in the country in January... :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 06, 2015, 07:17:45 PM

From sac the immortal:

QuoteThere is a pretty big gap from #2 to #19

You are losing sight that we are dealing with the ENTIRE D3 Universe. It's barely a blip, really. 17 places out of a 416 team sample? Bah.

You made it sound like OWU played all Earlhams and Keystones and Cal Techs.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 06, 2015, 07:29:32 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 06, 2015, 07:17:45 PM
From sac the immortal:
QuoteThere is a pretty big gap from #2 to #19

You are losing sight that we are dealing with the ENTIRE D3 Universe. It's barely a blip, really. 17 places out of a 416 team sample? Bah.

You made it sound like OWU played all Earlhams and Keystones and Cal Techs.

I'm quite mortal :-\

Even if its only #2 to #19 that gap is enormous, the same gap back from OWU is into the 200's.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 06, 2015, 07:48:26 PM

So, when does the new Top 25 come out? :-*

Sac, +1 for "jibe."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 06, 2015, 07:56:19 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 06, 2015, 07:48:26 PM
So, when does the new Top 25 come out? :-*

You mean the poll where Wooster can notch 4 more wins including beating Hope, which has the #2 SOS in the nation according to Massey, and Wooster doesn't even move one spot in the poll??? ::) ???

I guess "quality wins" don't count for much in this poll. :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2015, 08:06:28 PM

Yeah, but Wooster gained 49 points in what was a very fluid poll. That's moving up on a lot of ballots... it just didn't add up for a move up the overall ballot. #SeeTheWholePicture

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 06, 2015, 08:15:07 PM

When does Nate Silver weigh in on this poll?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 06, 2015, 10:06:46 PM

Husson enters the Top 25 and proceeds to lose to Colby on the road.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on January 06, 2015, 11:05:32 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on January 06, 2015, 07:56:19 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 06, 2015, 07:48:26 PM
So, when does the new Top 25 come out? :-*

You mean the poll where Wooster can notch 4 more wins including beating Hope, which has the #2 SOS in the nation according to Massey, and Wooster doesn't even move one spot in the poll??? ::) ???

I guess "quality wins" don't count for much in this poll. :o

well, Dave has plenty of time to evaluate (prior to tonight) the other six of seven undefeated teams that did not make the Top 25😦😡

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D3HoopJunkie on January 07, 2015, 11:19:04 AM

Pat or Dave,

What going on with the Around the Region Columns this year? I'm sure the reporters are busy and all but there just hasn't been as many columns this year as opposed to years past??? I really enjoy reading the "feel good" stories on teams from all around the country. Not to mention I don't think there has been 1 posted by the Northeast columnist yet?? There are certainly enough story lines going on in D3Hoops this year....No??

Not sure if this is the best spot to post this but didn't really see fit anywhere else just figured it was the most active spot recently. Perhaps a thread could be started for Around The Region where all of us posters can present topics on interesting stories if we hear of any? Just a thought

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2015, 11:36:13 AM

Quote from: D3HoopJunkie on January 07, 2015, 11:19:04 AM
Pat or Dave,

What going on with the Around the Region Columns this year? I'm sure the reporters are busy and all but there just hasn't been as many columns this year as opposed to years past??? I really enjoy reading the "feel good" stories on teams from all around the country. Not to mention I don't think there has been 1 posted by the Northeast columnist yet?? There are certainly enough story lines going on in D3Hoops this year....No??

Not sure if this is the best spot to post this but didn't really see fit anywhere else just figured it was the most active spot recently. Perhaps a thread could be started for Around The Region where all of us posters can present topics on interesting stories if we hear of any? Just a thought

Around the East-Northeast has posted five columns this season:
http://www.d3hoops.com/columns/around-the-region/east-northeast/index

Everyone is filing on a regular basis -- it's only Atlantic/Mid-Atlantic where I am looking to still hire someone, after promoting Rob Knox to write Around the Nation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D3HoopJunkie on January 07, 2015, 11:57:22 AM

Apologies Pat, I must have been looking in the wrong place on the website.

Thanks

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2015, 12:31:11 PM

We generally start a little slow because traffic is lower before the holidays and some of our writers also write (and I also edit) for D3football.com so it's a matter of priority, but we have been running them throughout.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 07, 2015, 08:48:44 PM

Drove down the road a bit to see Dickinson play at Washington College tonight. I was excited to see All-American Gerry Wixted play in person for the first time - then he didn't play a minute. I asked a guy in a Dickinson hat after the game, he said, "Word is he punched someone in practice." So there's that.

Even Wixted-less, this is a very, very good team - as good, if not better, than any I've seen so far this year. They'll need to improve their defense and it's tough to judge intensity when you're playing a clearly inferior team, but, despite the score, they were solidly in control whenever they wanted to be. A lot of height, although the bigs are a little thin, especially compared to typical Midwest front lines. They've got talented, confident players at every position and a young, but definitely exciting bench. Senior leadership, solid PG play - oh yeah, and an All-American power forward sitting on the bench.

Definitely some flaws - the team's a bit streaky (or at least they were tonight), prone to lapses in concentration and discipline, the aforementioned defense, which could be tighter. They also have only one shoot (he's confident, has a quick trigger, and is capable of getting his own shot), so a tight zone can really push them out of their offense - which is all penetration and ball movement.

In a season where no team gives you complete confidence, I think they're well placed in the Top Five and I wouldn't feel bad about voting them #1 if the teams above them struggle at some point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 08, 2015, 07:36:05 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	622	Washington U.	11-0	01/10 at #34 Chicago
#2	598	Augustana	12-1	def. #28 Elmhurst, 58-56; 01/10 vs. North Park
#3	560	UW-Whitewater	11-2	def. UW-Superior, 88-57; 01/10 vs. UW-Stout
#4	526	Dickinson	11-1	won at Washington College, 88-81; 01/10 vs. Ursinus
#5	511	St. Thomas	10-1	def. Macalester, 96-45; 01/10 vs. Concordia-Moorhead
#6	504	Emory	10-1	01/10 at Rochester
#7	430	WPI	11-1	def. Springfield, 73-53; 01/10 at MIT
#8	426	Virginia Wesleyan	10-2	won at #37 Lynchburg, 83-82; 01/10 vs. Washington and Lee
#9	367	Marietta	12-0	01/10 at Ohio Northern
#10	354	North Central (Ill.)	12-1	won at Millikin, 62-46; 01/10 at Wheaton (Ill.)
#11	322	Franklin and Marshall	12-0	won at Swarthmore, 83-65; 01/10 vs. Washington College
#12	321	Richard Stockton	12-1	won at New Jersey City, 58-56; 01/10 vs. Ramapo
#13	301	Albertus Magnus	9-1	won at Rivier, 87-68; 01/08 at Norwich; 01/10 vs. St. Joseph's (Maine)
#14	289	Wooster	10-2	def. Kenyon, 77-63; 01/10 vs. Oberlin
#15	275	Babson	11-1	won at Emerson, 67-43; 01/10 at Springfield
#16	208	Randolph-Macon	10-2	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 63-45; 01/10 vs. Guilford
#17	202	Ohio Wesleyan	10-2	def. Wittenberg, 75-63; 01/10 vs. Allegheny
#18	190	Amherst	8-2	won at #21 Eastern Connecticut, 59-51; 01/09 at Hamilton; 01/10 at #38 Williams
#19	121	UW-Stevens Point	10-3	def. UW-Platteville, 74-55; 01/10 at UW-Oshkosh
#20	107	St. Norbert	11-1	won at Lawrence, 81-72
#21	105	Eastern Connecticut	10-3	LOST to #18 Amherst, 51-59; 01/10 at Mass-Boston
#22	102	Illinois Wesleyan	9-4	won at Wheaton (Ill.), 77-68; 01/10 vs. Carthage
#23	98	Husson	8-2	LOST at Colby, 94-99; 01/10 vs. Maine Maritime
#24	88	Scranton	10-2	def. Drew, 73-69; 01/08 at Susquehanna; 01/10 vs. Goucher
#25	79	Centre	9-2	01/09 vs. Birmingham-Southern; 01/11 vs. Millsaps

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	76	Chapman	11-0	won at Occidental, 99-68; 01/10 vs. #29 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps
#27	60	St. Olaf	10-1	won at St. Mary's (Minn.), 81-50; 01/10 vs. Hamline
#28	41	Elmhurst	11-2	LOST at #2 Augustana, 56-58; 01/10 at Millikin
#29	40	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	8-2	01/08 at Caltech; 01/10 at #26 Chapman
#30	39	Cortland State	8-1	LOST to New Paltz State, 73-78; 01/09 vs. Oswego State
#31	35	Middlebury	9-0	won at Plattsburgh State, 63-53; 01/09 at #36 Bates; 01/11 at Tufts
#32	24	Hampden-Sydney	10-2	def. Randolph, 59-57; 01/10 at Bridgewater (Va.)
#33	17	Dubuque	11-1	def. Central, 79-63; 01/10 vs. Wartburg
#34	13	Chicago	8-3	01/10 vs. #1 Washington U.
#35	12	Hardin-Simmons	10-1	01/08 vs. LeTourneau; 01/10 vs. East Texas Baptist
#36	11	Bates	9-2	def. Brandeis, 60-55; 01/09 vs. #31 Middlebury
#37	8	Lynchburg	8-4	LOST to #8 Virginia Wesleyan, 82-83; 01/10 at Eastern Mennonite
#38	6	Williams	9-3	01/09 vs. T#44 Trinity (Conn.); 01/10 vs. #18 Amherst
#39	5	Hope	7-5	LOST at Trine, 62-65; 01/10 vs. Calvin
T#40	3	Rowan	11-1	def. Montclair State, 66-53; 01/10 at Kean
T#40	3	Western Connecticut	8-2	LOST to Mitchell, 92-95; 01/08 at Mass-Dartmouth; 01/10 vs. Plymouth State
T#42	2	Johns Hopkins	10-2	won at Haverford, 80-78; 01/10 vs. Swarthmore
T#42	2	William Paterson	10-2	def. Kean, 68-58; 01/10 at Rutgers-Newark
T#44	1	Cal Lutheran	8-2	def. Redlands, 71-56; 01/10 at Pomona-Pitzer
T#44	1	Christopher Newport	9-3	won at Wesley, 75-62; 01/10 vs. Penn State-Harrisburg
T#44	1	Trinity (Conn.)	10-2	won at Manhattanville, 75-60; 01/09 at #38 Williams; 01/10 at Hamilton

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on January 08, 2015, 09:30:15 AM

A bunch of losses by the highly debated 20+ teams... (Obviously, Hope won't be moving up :/)

Winner of Chapman v. Claremont Mudd Scripts on Saturday has to be moving into the top 25, no? Maybe replacing Husson? Or E. Connecticut?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 08, 2015, 09:42:59 AM

Quote from: HOPEful on January 08, 2015, 09:30:15 AM
A bunch of losses by the highly debated 20+ teams... (Obviously, Hope won't be moving up :/)

Winner of Chapman v. Claremont Mudd Scripts on Saturday has to be moving into the top 25, no? Maybe replacing Husson? Or E. Connecticut?

Probably Elmhurst because they proved they can play with Augustana, but not Albion because losing by two to Augustana proves Augustana might not be good. ;D :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 08, 2015, 10:39:56 AM

Quote from: HOPEful on January 08, 2015, 09:30:15 AM
A bunch of losses by the highly debated 20+ teams... (Obviously, Hope won't be moving up :/)

Winner of Chapman v. Claremont Mudd Scripts on Saturday has to be moving into the top 25, no? Maybe replacing Husson? Or E. Connecticut?

Chapman has played a lot of those west coast schools that are just schedule filler. The records listed below are records vs. D3 opponents.

Chapman (11-0)
Nov. 19   7:30 PM   at West Coast Baptist (1-3)   W, 78-52
Nov. 22   7:30 PM   St. Katherine (0-2)   W, 86-52
Nov. 28   1:00 PM   at UC Santa Cruz (7-10) •   W, 68-37
Nov. 29   1:00 PM   Whitman (8-4) @ Santa Cruz, Calif. •   W, 72-67
Dec. 5   7:30 PM   Bristol (0-2)   W, 85-65
Dec. 13   7:30 PM   La Sierra (0-3)   W, 89-72
Dec. 22   7:30 PM   at La Sierra (0-3)   W, 81-58
Dec. 29   4:30 PM   Oberlin (6-6) •   W, 72-50
Dec. 30   4:30 PM   St. Joseph's (Bklyn.) (8-4) •   W, 75-68 OT
Jan. 3   7:00 PM   at Whittier (7-4) * •   W, 82-68
Jan. 6   7:30 PM   at Occidental (5-4) * •   W, 99-68
Jan. 10   4:00 PM   Claremont-Mudd-Scripps (8-2) * •
Losses:

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on January 08, 2015, 10:57:37 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 08, 2015, 10:39:56 AM
Chapman has played a lot of those west coast schools that are just schedule filler.

Agreed. But at what point does an undefeated team deserve to be ranked, regardless of who they've played. IMO, beating Claremont-Mudd-Scripps (8-2) would put them at that point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 08, 2015, 11:26:04 AM

Quote from: HOPEful on January 08, 2015, 10:57:37 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 08, 2015, 10:39:56 AM
Chapman has played a lot of those west coast schools that are just schedule filler.

Agreed. But at what point does an undefeated team deserve to be ranked, regardless of who they've played. IMO, beating Claremont-Mudd-Scripps (8-2) would put them at that point.

You have to play someone, anyone, in my mind. We have undefeated teams in football all the time who don't get ranked because they haven't played anyone, for example. Not the same in basketball because it's hard to go through a 25-game season playing nobody at all but definitely possible to get through 11 games of a season, go 11-0 and not deserve to be ranked.

CMS is an opponent that should make some more voters take notice.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on January 08, 2015, 11:56:36 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 08, 2015, 11:26:04 AM
...CMS is an opponent that should make some more voters take notice...

Lengthy response for what appears to be a statement of agreement... ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 08, 2015, 12:05:58 PM

Pat, if a football team does go 11-0, then they won a first round playoff game, so I think a ranking would follow, right? ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 08, 2015, 12:42:53 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 08, 2015, 12:05:58 PM
Pat, if a football team does go 11-0, then they won a first round playoff game, so I think a ranking would follow, right? ;)

Probably, though there are a handful of first-round opponents who could still rightfully be called 'playing nobody'! Now, if they get to 12-0.... :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 08, 2015, 12:44:54 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 08, 2015, 12:42:53 PM
Quote from: smedindy on January 08, 2015, 12:05:58 PM
Pat, if a football team does go 11-0, then they won a first round playoff game, so I think a ranking would follow, right? ;)

Probably, though there are a handful of first-round opponents who could still rightfully be called 'playing nobody'! Now, if they get to 12-0.... :)

Macalester could have gone 11-0 winning the MWC title game ... NEFC teams have done it previously ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 08, 2015, 12:45:26 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on January 08, 2015, 11:56:36 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 08, 2015, 11:26:04 AM
...CMS is an opponent that should make some more voters take notice...

Lengthy response for what appears to be a statement of agreement... ;)

Only partial agreement, though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: madzillagd on January 08, 2015, 12:53:09 PM

Well here is the list of D3 schools within 1,000 miles that Chapman has not played or won't be playing in conference:

/end

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 08, 2015, 01:24:46 PM

Reminds me of Grinnell. I think they went as far as 13-0 one year before they cracked the Top 25. A game or so after that, they played "someone" (Lawrence, St. Norbert, Carroll) and lost, never to see them in the poll again (at least for the remainder of the season).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 08, 2015, 01:47:14 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 08, 2015, 12:44:54 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 08, 2015, 12:42:53 PM
Quote from: smedindy on January 08, 2015, 12:05:58 PM
Pat, if a football team does go 11-0, then they won a first round playoff game, so I think a ranking would follow, right? ;)

Probably, though there are a handful of first-round opponents who could still rightfully be called 'playing nobody'! Now, if they get to 12-0.... :)

Macalester could have gone 11-0 winning the MWC title game ... NEFC teams have done it previously ...

Forgot about title games.

Still, even for someone to have a 90% chance of winning each game, stringing 10 or 11 in a row is a feat...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 08, 2015, 08:55:53 PM

Quote from: sac on January 08, 2015, 09:42:59 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on January 08, 2015, 09:30:15 AM
A bunch of losses by the highly debated 20+ teams... (Obviously, Hope won't be moving up :/)

Winner of Chapman v. Claremont Mudd Scripts on Saturday has to be moving into the top 25, no? Maybe replacing Husson? Or E. Connecticut?

Probably Elmhurst because they proved they can play with Augustana, but not Albion because losing by two to Augustana proves Augustana might not be good. ;D :D

Great point Sac -- you move up in this poll if your team plays in the CCIW! ::) Other conferences are discounted by the poll voters. :D

How else can a rational person explain North Central moving up 11 spots since the last poll while Wooster (which also had 4 wins and one quality win just like North Central) went nowhere and they continue to sit in the #14 slot. Apparently, Wooster needs to apply for CCIW membership :P

BTW, a fact based rating based on actual results and each team's actual SOS has Wooster ranked as #7 in the nation (Massey ratings) higher than North Central. :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 08, 2015, 09:02:23 PM

Yeah... because once again we are ignoring the fact that Wooster gained points (48) meaning they moved up people's ballots. They may have stayed at 14, but they gained points. Why should we let the facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory.

Oh... and did anyone consider the fact voters decided that the win by NCC proved what they may have been thinking about the Cardinals and moved them up accordingly while Wooster got the results expected and didn't move as swiftly. I know Wooster moved up my ballot and NCC entered my ballot because Wooster did as I expected (usually means not as strong a move up) and NCC got the job done which encouraged me to move them into the poll.

Conspiracies are beaten like a dead horse (cue the GIF) around here and the facts are always ignored.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 08, 2015, 09:17:45 PM

And there was a week when IWU gained points, but dropped a spot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: stag44 on January 09, 2015, 01:34:25 AM

CMS vs Chapman on Saturday is going to be a treat of a game. CMS boasts the nations best scoring defense (52.2ppg) while Chapman has a top 10 fg%, 3pt% and scoring margin nationally.

The teams are quite familiar with each other and the winner should be in the drivers seat for the SCIAC and hopefully put into the top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 09, 2015, 07:52:35 AM

Wooster gained a lot in my estimation. They'd done enough to doubt them this season, but this week helped solidify their reputation in my mind. Being in the CCIW does help North Central, but I'm guessing winning a game against a good opponent after a very lackluster early schedule helps even more.

I think it's also easier to rank a CCIW team higher early because we all know their conference schedule will wring the truth out of the situation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D3HoopJunkie on January 09, 2015, 10:42:29 AM

Pat, Dave or Anyone who may know,

I'm curious as to what the exact requirements are for a school to host a weekend of the NCAA tournament??? Obviously seating capacity of the gym, parking, approved hotels and so on are all factor but can someone elaborate for me with specific details. Maybe there is a link someone can attach? As an Albertus supporter I'm obviously intrigued. I know our gym is small but can we bring in bleachers and throw them on the end lines lol (they have done this for the GNAC tourney) Maybe setup some makeshift seating to help us get to whatever number it may be!!!

If we are fortunate enough to get to the tourney it would be awesome to somehow host a pod. I know it's unlikely we host but I can dream right!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 09, 2015, 11:23:13 AM

Usually 1,000 is the minimum for seating. (From the manual: " To host sectional competition, arena seating for at least 1,000 spectators is required." That indicates for sectionals, not the first weekend, but the NCAA still wants 1,000 seats and I can't remember any time a site with 600 or even 800 has hosted anything but a single game.)

As has been discussed in previous years... and as it seems has been indicated by the NCAA in previous years... AMC does not have the seating capacity to host NCAA tournament games for an entire weekend. The best they could expect is a first-round bye game (where they host the Thursday game and the winner takes on the team with the first-round bye), but if they are regionally ranked high then that won't happen. They could also maybe get a first round bye and host the second round game, but again... with a capacity of just 600 for basketball games... that just isn't enough in the eyes of the NCAA to host a game.

Unless AMC finds another facility in the area to host the games... don't expect to see AMC with any games at their place (and be pleasantly surprised if they get one).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 09, 2015, 11:55:43 AM

Shocked I am that a Wooster fan is braying about being disrespected. Maybe they should stick to complaining about announcers or thuggish opponents! ;) :D ;D

Seriously, win the league, do well in the tourney. The rest takes care of itself.

I don't think there's any voter who doesn't know the depth and breadth of Wooster's history. In fact, I personally think all pollsters think too much on reputation and not enough on the results. But I know it's hard to separate wheat from chaff even using Massey or other power rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 09, 2015, 02:41:25 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 09, 2015, 07:52:35 AM
I think it's also easier to rank a CCIW team higher early because we all know their conference schedule will wring the truth out of the situation.

Actually, Hoops Fan hits on something key here. This is definitely true, at least in my mind. I am hesitant to highly rank early in the season a team who plays nobody, because I may not get any corroborating evidence until March, when it's too late. Someone in the WIAC or CCIW or ODAC or NESCAC will get that test sooner rather than later.

If you're someone like Albertus Magnus, I'm waiting until you play and beat somebody who is on my ballot or near my ballot before I put you anywhere above something like 12-15.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 09, 2015, 03:53:18 PM

When Augustana won its opener to Albion(now 8-3) by 4 the poll was characterized as being "off" and suggestions that Augustana was overrated. The idea that their poll ranking can only be validated by beating only CCIW or other highly ranked opponents like Whitewater is very frustrating.

I've watched Albion live and they're very good and beat a CCIW by 8 that has 2 losses. Yet nothing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 09, 2015, 03:55:46 PM

Quote from: sac on January 09, 2015, 03:53:18 PM
When Augustana won its opener to Albion(now 8-3) by 4 the poll was characterized as being "off" and suggestions that Augustana was overrated. The idea that their poll ranking can only be validated by beating only CCIW or other highly ranked opponents like Whitewater is very frustrating.

I've watched Albion live and they're very good and beat a CCIW by 8 that has 2 losses. Yet nothing.

I kind of figured you might respond as such. That's why I specifically said a team like Albertus Magnus, which plays in one of the worst conferences in Division III.

I don't lump the MIAA in with those leagues. Should I?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 09, 2015, 03:59:25 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 09, 2015, 03:55:46 PM
Quote from: sac on January 09, 2015, 03:53:18 PM
When Augustana won its opener to Albion(now 8-3) by 4 the poll was characterized as being "off" and suggestions that Augustana was overrated. The idea that their poll ranking can only be validated by beating only CCIW or other highly ranked opponents like Whitewater is very frustrating.

I've watched Albion live and they're very good and beat a CCIW by 8 that has 2 losses. Yet nothing.

I kind of figured you might respond as such. That's why I specifically said a team like Albertus Magnus, which plays in one of the worst conferences in Division III.

I don't lump the MIAA in with those leagues. Should I?

No but it doesn't change the fact that I should feel some frustration at the poll dynamics just because you specifically chose to avoid a topic because you fear my wrath. ;D

Its just frustrating to see repeated year after year deferential treatment to teams from specific conferences when teams from others seem to have to walk on water to get even a morsel of recognition.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 09, 2015, 04:10:50 PM

Quote from: sac on January 09, 2015, 03:59:25 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 09, 2015, 03:55:46 PM
Quote from: sac on January 09, 2015, 03:53:18 PM
When Augustana won its opener to Albion(now 8-3) by 4 the poll was characterized as being "off" and suggestions that Augustana was overrated. The idea that their poll ranking can only be validated by beating only CCIW or other highly ranked opponents like Whitewater is very frustrating.

I've watched Albion live and they're very good and beat a CCIW by 8 that has 2 losses. Yet nothing.

I kind of figured you might respond as such. That's why I specifically said a team like Albertus Magnus, which plays in one of the worst conferences in Division III.

I don't lump the MIAA in with those leagues. Should I?

No but it doesn't change the fact that I should feel some frustration at the poll dynamics just because you specifically chose to avoid a topic because you fear my wrath. ;D

Hi, sac -- I didn't avoid the topic. I specifically chose to add extra information to something Hoops Fan said. I'm sorry it didn't speak to your specific frustration but my post was not meant to answer every person's question. However, I did word it so that if you read it, you should have been able to understand what I was specifically speaking to. I will try even harder in the future to make sure you personally are able to understand what I'm saying so that we can avoid these back-and-forth exchanges.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 09, 2015, 04:14:19 PM

There's never been a reason for you to treat posters the way you do. I don't get you.

Have fun at whatever game you're watching this weekend.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 09, 2015, 04:45:18 PM

Two teams came into the last poll one 8-4 the other 7-4, one was pre-season #4 one #6

One's season has been characterized as "is clearly down from expectations", the other remains in the poll because they "have a cushion"

losses
Team A
8-5
11-0
8-3
12-1
39 wins

Team B
10-2
11-4
7-6
9-3
38 wins

Wins
Team A
8-4
1-11
7-6
5-7
5-8
8-3
5-7
4-6
43 wins

Team B
4-8
6-7
2-11
10-7
5-7
8-5
6-11
41 wins

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 09, 2015, 05:45:21 PM

Not this again...

I'm waiting for sac to have a huge typo so we can make an acronym out of it to post when the horse he's beating has gone to glue.- ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 09, 2015, 05:51:21 PM

Quote from: sac on January 09, 2015, 04:14:19 PM
There's never been a reason for you to treat posters the way you do. I don't get you.

I guess I don't see your big-teethed smiles at the end of posts in which you've railed on me as being genuine, and this time around I don't feel like pretending they are. I'll answer fake genuineness in kind.

But I think it's probably fair for you to consider that 'the way I treat posters' is something you've cemented in your brain from more than a decade ago -- a characterization that is not really true anymore. You assume I'm treating you poorly -- just like the other day when you assumed I was arguing against you, when in fact I was in agreement.

People who have only come to the board in the past five or so years probably have a different take. Your view may be a bit outdated.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 09, 2015, 06:16:49 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 09, 2015, 04:10:50 PM

Hi, sac -- I didn't avoid the topic. I specifically chose to add extra information to something Hoops Fan said. I'm sorry it didn't speak to your specific frustration but my post was not meant to answer every person's question. However, I did word it so that if you read it, you should have been able to understand what I was specifically speaking to. I will try even harder in the future to make sure you personally are able to understand what I'm saying so that we can avoid these back-and-forth exchanges.

Yeah, with responses like that one I can't imagine why that would be cemented in my brain.

I posted something that was my own thought adding extra info just as you say you did, you quoted it, I responded back. Where did I "rail on you" Pat? I'm sorry did I waste your work afternoon again?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 09, 2015, 07:01:58 PM

It was past tense, not that exact post.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 09, 2015, 07:15:13 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 09, 2015, 07:01:58 PM
It was past tense, not that exact post.

Then I'd like to see where I've "railed on him" in the past, because that seems like something cemented in his brain.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 09, 2015, 05:51:21 PM
Quote from: sac on January 09, 2015, 04:14:19 PM
There's never been a reason for you to treat posters the way you do. I don't get you.

I guess I don't see your big-teethed smiles at the end of posts in which you've railed on me as being genuine, and this time around I don't feel like pretending they are. I'll answer fake genuineness in kind.

This also doesn't seem like my issue.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 09, 2015, 09:33:39 PM

I think that the current situation calls for, not one, but two of these:

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1.kym-cdn.com%2Fphotos%2Fimages%2Fnewsfeed%2F000%2F540%2F662%2F748.gif&hash=c5b3a1efc4a9cf351a08c8e16bb6c18b65a7d36e)

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1.kym-cdn.com%2Fphotos%2Fimages%2Fnewsfeed%2F000%2F540%2F662%2F748.gif&hash=c5b3a1efc4a9cf351a08c8e16bb6c18b65a7d36e)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 10, 2015, 08:14:19 AM

I'm not going to stop critiquing the poll or asking for explanations about certain things, that's what this board is for. If you don't like my posts, don't read them, I hear that's a popular thing to tell people to do anyway.

In the meantime enjoy your games today, lots of good and bad teams out there to enjoy.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 10, 2015, 11:03:57 AM

Quote from: sac on January 10, 2015, 08:14:19 AM
I'm not going to stop critiquing the poll or asking for explanations about certain things, that's what this board is for. If you don't like my posts, don't read them, I hear that's a popular thing to tell people to do anyway.

In the meantime enjoy your games today, lots of good and bad teams out there to enjoy.

I imagine it's relatively futile to expect good answers, though, when, I'm guessing, few of the voters actually participate here.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 11, 2015, 01:20:02 AM

The people who you are DEMANDING answers for aren't answering here, sac. You're just yelling at a cloud.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 11, 2015, 01:37:37 AM

Love the new scoreboard feature, Pat!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 11, 2015, 10:43:24 AM

Quote from: smedindy on January 11, 2015, 01:20:02 AM
The people who you are DEMANDING answers for aren't answering here, sac. You're just yelling at a cloud.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F91sn32Q.jpg&hash=07368de57496e81a8357d3c2397913711228e422)
Couldn't resist ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 11, 2015, 11:55:31 AM

Quote from: smedindy on January 11, 2015, 01:20:02 AM
The people who you are DEMANDING answers for aren't answering here, sac. You're just yelling at a cloud.

good grief I didn't DEMAND answers from anyone, I asked, pretty nicely actually. Let's not cement things in people's heads that aren't there. ;) :D one more for sure. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 11, 2015, 02:55:03 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 11, 2015, 01:37:37 AM
Love the new scoreboard feature, Pat!

Thanks. Hopefully people find it useful. It's the format we have used on D3football.com for a couple of years but everything takes three times the setup for D3hoops.com (two genders, more conferences) so it sat on a to-do list for a really long time. :(

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 11, 2015, 10:58:20 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	622	Washington U.	11-1	LOST at #34 Chicago, 43-63
#2	598	Augustana	13-1	def. #28 Elmhurst, 58-56; def. North Park, 88-51
#3	560	UW-Whitewater	12-2	def. UW-Superior, 88-57; def. UW-Stout, 96-67
#4	526	Dickinson	12-1	won at Washington College, 88-81; def. Ursinus, 73-57
#5	511	St. Thomas	11-1	def. Macalester, 96-45; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 64-38
#6	504	Emory	11-1	won at Rochester, 84-69
#7	430	WPI	11-2	def. Springfield, 73-53; LOST at MIT, 46-51
#8	426	Virginia Wesleyan	11-2	won at #37 Lynchburg, 83-82; def. Washington and Lee, 73-60
#9	367	Marietta	13-0	won at Ohio Northern, 72-62
#10	354	North Central (Ill.)	13-1	won at Millikin, 62-46; won at Wheaton (Ill.), 75-70
#11	322	Franklin and Marshall	13-0	won at Swarthmore, 83-65; def. Washington College, 88-80
#12	321	Richard Stockton	12-1	won at New Jersey City, 58-56
#13	301	Albertus Magnus	11-1	won at Rivier, 87-68; won at Norwich, 89-72; def. St. Joseph's (Maine), 101-88
#14	289	Wooster	11-2	def. Kenyon, 77-63; def. Oberlin, 91-71
#15	275	Babson	12-1	won at Emerson, 67-43; won at Springfield, 59-56
#16	208	Randolph-Macon	11-2	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 63-45; def. Guilford, 72-54
#17	202	Ohio Wesleyan	11-2	def. Wittenberg, 75-63; def. Allegheny, 89-72
#18	190	Amherst	9-3	won at #21 Eastern Connecticut, 59-51; won at Hamilton, 93-86; LOST at #38 Williams, 70-71
#19	121	UW-Stevens Point	11-3	def. UW-Platteville, 74-55; won at UW-Oshkosh, 83-57
#20	107	St. Norbert	11-1	won at Lawrence, 81-72
#21	105	Eastern Connecticut	11-3	LOST to #18 Amherst, 51-59; won at Mass-Boston, 83-78
#22	102	Illinois Wesleyan	10-4	won at Wheaton (Ill.), 77-68; def. Carthage, 73-61
#23	98	Husson	9-2	LOST at Colby, 94-99; def. Maine Maritime, 78-64
#24	88	Scranton	12-2	def. Drew, 73-69; won at Susquehanna, 70-68; def. Goucher, 68-67
#25	79	Centre	10-3	LOST to Birmingham-Southern, 61-66; def. Millsaps, 81-44

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	76	Chapman	12-0	won at Occidental, 99-68; def. #29 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 73-68
#27	60	St. Olaf	11-1	won at St. Mary's (Minn.), 81-50; def. Hamline, 76-58
#28	41	Elmhurst	12-2	LOST at #2 Augustana, 56-58; won at Millikin, 74-60
#29	40	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	9-3	won at Caltech, 58-33; LOST at #26 Chapman, 68-73
#30	39	Cortland State	8-2	LOST to New Paltz State, 73-78; LOST to Oswego State, 67-81
#31	35	Middlebury	9-2	won at Plattsburgh State, 63-53; LOST at #36 Bates, 53-57; LOST at Tufts, 63-80
#32	24	Hampden-Sydney	10-3	def. Randolph, 59-57; LOST at Bridgewater (Va.), 75-76
#33	17	Dubuque	11-2	def. Central, 79-63; LOST to Wartburg, 63-74
#34	13	Chicago	9-3	def. #1 Washington U., 63-43
#35	12	Hardin-Simmons	12-1	def. LeTourneau, 72-59; def. East Texas Baptist, 82-80
#36	11	Bates	10-2	def. Brandeis, 60-55; def. #31 Middlebury, 57-53
#37	8	Lynchburg	9-4	LOST to #8 Virginia Wesleyan, 82-83; won at Eastern Mennonite, 72-70
#38	6	Williams	10-4	LOST to T#44 Trinity (Conn.), 69-71; def. #18 Amherst, 71-70
#39	5	Hope	7-6	LOST at Trine, 62-65; LOST to Calvin, 64-88
T#40	3	Rowan	12-1	def. Montclair State, 66-53; won at Kean, 76-73
T#40	3	Western Connecticut	9-3	LOST to Mitchell, 92-95; LOST at Mass-Dartmouth, 81-92; def. Plymouth State, 65-58
T#42	2	Johns Hopkins	11-2	won at Haverford, 80-78; def. Swarthmore, 84-57
T#42	2	William Paterson	11-2	def. Kean, 68-58; won at Rutgers-Newark, 75-68
T#44	1	Cal Lutheran	9-2	def. Redlands, 71-56; won at Pomona-Pitzer, 62-55
T#44	1	Christopher Newport	10-3	won at Wesley, 75-62; def. Penn State-Harrisburg, 81-58
T#44	1	Trinity (Conn.)	12-2	won at Manhattanville, 75-60; won at #38 Williams, 71-69; won at Hamilton, 60-51

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on January 12, 2015, 10:17:47 AM

Perhaps we should change the poll to top 20? Amherst, E.Connecticut, Husson, and Centre all lost last week and should drop out. Chapman, St. Olaf, and Chicago should jump up. Then who? Does Hardin Simmons (12-1) jump 10 spots? Does Rowan (12-1) jump 15? Does Elmhurst move up since they only lost by 2 at Auggie?

Seems like a tall task to figure out. I won't scrutinize your rankings too hard this week Dave! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 12, 2015, 10:27:53 AM

Quote from: HOPEful on January 12, 2015, 10:17:47 AM
Does Elmhurst move up since they own lost by 2 at Auggie?

Hasn't that already been dubbed the CCIW rule? You lose a close game to a CCIW school and you automatically get ranked, or even move up in the rankings? ;D :) ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dc_has_been on January 12, 2015, 12:40:27 PM

Should Amherst drop out from 18 for a 1 point loss to a team receiving votes? I doubt even WashU drops over 7 spots after losing by 20 to a team receiving votes? IMO, I would keep E. Conn in the top 25 too, but just barely.

Just wanted to add my two cents!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 12, 2015, 12:41:04 PM

Pretty much sums up part of my challenge as a voter today.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 12, 2015, 12:49:38 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 12, 2015, 10:27:53 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on January 12, 2015, 10:17:47 AM
Does Elmhurst move up since they own lost by 2 at Auggie?

Hasn't that already been dubbed the CCIW rule? You lose a close game to a CCIW school and you automatically get ranked, or even move up in the rankings? ;D :) ???

I'd say that happens with WIAC and NESCAC teams too, when the situation warrants.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 12, 2015, 12:59:03 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 12, 2015, 12:49:38 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 12, 2015, 10:27:53 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on January 12, 2015, 10:17:47 AM
Does Elmhurst move up since they own lost by 2 at Auggie?

Hasn't that already been dubbed the CCIW rule? You lose a close game to a CCIW school and you automatically get ranked, or even move up in the rankings? ;D :) ???

I'd say that happens with WIAC and NESCAC teams too, when the situation warrants.

I didn't think Elmhurst was good enough to get that result, so they do indeed benefit from it, in my opinion. I wouldn't really penalize Amherst for their result either. Rivalry games are tough. If Hope hadn't lost a second game this week, I wouldn't even hold the blowout vs Calvin against them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 12, 2015, 12:59:28 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 12, 2015, 12:49:38 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 12, 2015, 10:27:53 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on January 12, 2015, 10:17:47 AM
Does Elmhurst move up since they own lost by 2 at Auggie?

Hasn't that already been dubbed the CCIW rule? You lose a close game to a CCIW school and you automatically get ranked, or even move up in the rankings? ;D :) ???

I'd say that happens with WIAC and NESCAC teams too, when the situation warrants.

A 2-pt loss on the road against a Top 5 team is, at worst, a neutral result if the goal is to figure out who the best teams are.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 12, 2015, 02:10:02 PM

Meanwhile it took me about 10 minutes to do my women's Top 25 ballot, including a few minutes to actually fill out the ballot online. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on January 12, 2015, 02:46:50 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 12, 2015, 12:59:03 PM
I wouldn't really penalize Amherst for their result either

I would agree if they hadn't already lost to Brandeis and Babson and gone to OT against Goucher. I have to believe that this team is still ranked above teams like Elmhurst, Chapman, and St. Olaf because of their program's history, not because of this year's resume.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2015, 02:50:32 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on January 12, 2015, 02:46:50 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 12, 2015, 12:59:03 PM
I wouldn't really penalize Amherst for their result either
I would agree if they hadn't already lost to Brandeis and Babson and gone to OT against Goucher. I have to believe that this team is still ranked above teams like Elmhurst, Chapman, and St. Olaf because of their program's history, not because of this year's resume.

Agreed. Elmhurst, Chapman, and St. Olaf are all near the bottom of my PP ballot; Amherst is not on it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 12, 2015, 03:04:09 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on January 12, 2015, 02:10:02 PM
Meanwhile it took me about 10 minutes to do my women's Top 25 ballot, including a few minutes to actually fill out the ballot online. :)

Gordon - I would love to switch with you, but I am worried then things would get topsy turvy and the challenge would follow me to the women's side LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 12, 2015, 05:11:26 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on January 12, 2015, 02:46:50 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 12, 2015, 12:59:03 PM
I wouldn't really penalize Amherst for their result either
I would agree if they hadn't already lost to Brandeis and Babson and gone to OT against Goucher. I have to believe that this team is still ranked above teams like Elmhurst, Chapman, and St. Olaf because of their program's history, not because of this year's resume.

I think Amherst has already been punished for those, and they did at least beat Eastern Connecticut this week, which will help them try to tread water.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2015, 05:42:28 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 12, 2015, 05:11:26 PM
Quote from: HOPEful on January 12, 2015, 02:46:50 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 12, 2015, 12:59:03 PM
I wouldn't really penalize Amherst for their result either
I would agree if they hadn't already lost to Brandeis and Babson and gone to OT against Goucher. I have to believe that this team is still ranked above teams like Elmhurst, Chapman, and St. Olaf because of their program's history, not because of this year's resume.

I think Amherst has already been punished for those, and they did at least beat Eastern Connecticut this week, which will help them try to tread water.

Agreed, but E. Conn has also fallen off my ballot - both they and Amherst are probably in my 26-35 range.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 12, 2015, 05:43:23 PM

Richard Stockton just lost at home to Ramapo by 2. Cane missed a three at the buzzer.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TheOsprey on January 12, 2015, 05:45:06 PM

Stockton falls to Ramapo @ home 65-63. :-\. Ramapo banks in a flat footed 3 with 1.5 secs. Left and the Ospreys three rims out at the buzzer.

The Ospreys got to get more creative offensively, or more losses are coming in conference play. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on January 12, 2015, 06:06:45 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on January 06, 2015, 06:04:08 PM
My issue is... more with Amherst still making the cut. Drew (6-5), Emerson (7-4), and Babson (10-1) are the only teams they've played so far with winning records. A week after losses to Brandeis (5-5) by 20 and Babson (10-1) by 19, Amherst went to OT against Goucher (1-9). I don't think where expectations began preseason should have any impact on voting in January. Even with a win against E. Connecticut, I don't see Amherst as a top 25 team at this point in the season.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 12, 2015, 05:11:26 PM
I think Amherst has already been punished for those, and they did at least beat Eastern Connecticut this week, which will help them try to tread water.

The win against Eastern Connecticut was a very good win for Lord Jeffs and should help to build up their credit. However, prior to that win, their most notable victory was against Westfield St. (8-5). Ideally, I'd like to see polls crediting teams based upon their resume, regardless of expectations at the beginning of the season or historically. Falling from a #2 preseason ranking shouldn't be a punishment, but a reassessment of the quality of this season's team. In contrast, St. Olaf beats UW Stevens Point and Gustavus Aldolphus and loses only at Bethel (8-3) and can't crack the top 25. It's not impossible to imagine that if their exact resumes were reversed, Amherst would be receiving multiple number 1 votes this week while for St. Olaf, one win against Eastern Connecticut would not be enough to turn any heads.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 12, 2015, 06:11:23 PM

It is bound to start the conversation and bring on plenty of arguments (right?), so here is my Top 25 ballot this week: http://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2014-15/week6 (http://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2014-15/week6)

Enjoy?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on January 12, 2015, 06:36:03 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 12, 2015, 06:11:23 PM
It is bound to start the conversation and bring on plenty of arguments (right?), so here is my Top 25 ballot this week: http://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2014-15/week6 (http://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2014-15/week6)

Enjoy?

If that's your ballot, it matches perfectly the actual poll when all the voters votes are compiled -- or maybe it' just the wrong link.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on January 12, 2015, 06:55:48 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 12, 2015, 06:11:23 PM
It is bound to start the conversation and bring on plenty of arguments (right?), so here is my Top 25 ballot this week:
Enjoy?

This weeks rankings have improved so much, I won't even mention the minor disagreements I may have with them... :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 12, 2015, 07:37:41 PM

Someone on the UAA board said this was Case Western's first ever poll vote. Is Sager around to verify that?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 12, 2015, 08:59:25 PM

Sorry... I grabbed the wrong link: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2015/01/12/daves-top-25-ballot-week-6-2/ (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2015/01/12/daves-top-25-ballot-week-6-2/)

And Case Western did receive a vote in the overall poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2015, 11:09:47 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 12, 2015, 07:37:41 PM

Someone on the UAA board said this was Case Western's first ever poll vote. Is Sager around to verify that?

David Collinge is our resident historian on poll voting, not me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 12, 2015, 11:20:53 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 12, 2015, 07:37:41 PM

Someone on the UAA board said this was Case Western's first ever poll vote. Is Sager around to verify that?

This is not true. I don't know if this is the overall list but here are a few polls in which Case received a vote -- and it's not all ancient history, either.

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2010-11/preseason
http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2007-08/week4
http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2007-08/week3

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 13, 2015, 08:32:10 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2015, 11:09:47 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 12, 2015, 07:37:41 PM

Someone on the UAA board said this was Case Western's first ever poll vote. Is Sager around to verify that?

David Collinge is our resident historian on poll voting, not me.

I thought you might be knowledgable enough in UAA history to know.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 13, 2015, 08:33:05 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 12, 2015, 11:20:53 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 12, 2015, 07:37:41 PM

Someone on the UAA board said this was Case Western's first ever poll vote. Is Sager around to verify that?

This is not true. I don't know if this is the overall list but here are a few polls in which Case received a vote -- and it's not all ancient history, either.

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2010-11/preseason
http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2007-08/week4
http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2007-08/week3

So, we're guessing they've never received two votes at the same time?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 13, 2015, 08:39:18 AM

It's possible. But only a few of the years of polls are in a database I can search.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on January 13, 2015, 10:23:39 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 12, 2015, 08:59:25 PM
Sorry... I grabbed the wrong link: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2015/01/12/daves-top-25-ballot-week-6-2/ (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2015/01/12/daves-top-25-ballot-week-6-2/)

And Case Western did receive a vote in the overall poll.

Fascinating. Thanks for sharing that. As an ODAC watcher (and R-MC alum) I was curious to see where you had R-MC and VWC. Not that I know anywhere near as much as you do, but my observations are that you have both teams ranked a little high and while I agree that R-MC might merit a slightly higher ranking than VWC, I'd say separating them six spots might be too wide a spread.

Again, thanks for sharing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 13, 2015, 01:28:47 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 13, 2015, 08:39:18 AM
It's possible. But only a few of the years of polls are in a database I can search.

And unfortunately my databases died along with my old laptop. :(

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 14, 2015, 09:46:31 AM

Just a heads up that this week's mid-week HTF update will be late (or I might skip it altogether). Tomorrow at 3:30am, I'll be leaving to catch a plane to Washington, DC. I suppose I could post it before I leave, but I think I might have other things on my mind ....

(If anyone else is going to be at the NCAA convention, maybe we can meet up.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 14, 2015, 11:28:22 AM

I will be there, Darryl.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 14, 2015, 11:40:39 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 13, 2015, 01:28:47 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 13, 2015, 08:39:18 AM
It's possible. But only a few of the years of polls are in a database I can search.

And unfortunately my databases died along with my old laptop. :(

Maybe we can "crowd fund" to have the CIA retrieve the data.

It is vital to national security for D3Nation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 14, 2015, 11:54:43 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 13, 2015, 01:28:47 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 13, 2015, 08:39:18 AM
It's possible. But only a few of the years of polls are in a database I can search.

And unfortunately my databases died along with my old laptop. :(

I started using Dropbox a couple years back for (partially) this reason. All of my D3 spreadsheets (of which there are many) are now backed up to the proverbial cloud. (And accessible on any computer.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: booyakasha on January 14, 2015, 02:29:48 PM

Anybody notice anything interesting about this link to F&M's schedule on d3hoops???

http://d3hoops.com/teams/Franklin_and_Marshall/men/2014-15/index

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 14, 2015, 02:37:36 PM

Quote from: booyakasha on January 14, 2015, 02:29:48 PM
Anybody notice anything interesting about this link to F&M's schedule on d3hoops???

http://d3hoops.com/teams/Franklin_and_Marshall/men/2014-15/index

Like many schools who have PrestoSports websites, F&M posts playoff games as TBA. That isn't particularly unusual.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: booyakasha on January 14, 2015, 02:59:16 PM

Ahhh gotcha, I checked a couple other schools and didn't see it so I figured it was only on F&M.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 14, 2015, 03:01:20 PM

I don't know about the current season but Hampden-Sydney and Hardin-Simmons have definitely done it, along with schools not created from hyphenating words beginning with H and words beginning with S. (Although admittedly, usually I hide them from our site. I just didn't catch this one until you mentioned it.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 14, 2015, 05:37:27 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 14, 2015, 11:54:43 AM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 13, 2015, 01:28:47 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 13, 2015, 08:39:18 AM
It's possible. But only a few of the years of polls are in a database I can search.

And unfortunately my databases died along with my old laptop. :(

I started using Dropbox a couple years back for (partially) this reason. All of my D3 spreadsheets (of which there are many) are now backed up to the proverbial cloud. (And accessible on any computer.)

Well you're not an old fart who can barely figure out how to use his phone. I actually still have the old dead laptop (I think) and someone smarter and younger than me could probably extract the databases (disclaimer: really just Excel workbooks) from them, but it hardly seems worth the aggravation since I hadn't updated them for a couple of years when the death occurred a couple of years ago. And anyway all of the data is available here on the site (isn't it?).

Plus I thought I sent them to Pat when I quit keeping track of this stuff, but maybe not. Or maybe if I did, he saw that they were just big workbooks and rolled his eyes while deleting them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 14, 2015, 05:50:02 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 14, 2015, 05:37:27 PM
Plus I thought I sent them to Pat when I quit keeping track of this stuff, but maybe not. Or maybe if I did, he saw that they were just big workbooks and rolled his eyes while deleting them.

No no, definitely not, but I have also had hardware losses in the past couple years. :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 14, 2015, 07:29:51 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 14, 2015, 03:01:20 PM
I don't know about the current season but Hampden-Sydney and Hardin-Simmons have definitely done it, along with schools not created from hyphenating words beginning with H and words beginning with S. (Although admittedly, usually I hide them from our site. I just didn't catch this one until you mentioned it.)

Hope has been doing it on their schedules for as long as I can remember.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 14, 2015, 08:04:10 PM

Rowan lost by 2 at home to William Patterson.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 14, 2015, 09:14:11 PM

Wabash 75 #17 Ohio Wesleyan 70

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 14, 2015, 09:25:34 PM

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstream1.gifsoup.com%2Fview4%2F4781542%2Fwizard-angst-o.gif&hash=7a35b67d6a2ff9d0177fa95a705c19b928f87531) (http://gifsoup.com/view/4781542/wizard-angst.html) GIFSoup (http://gifsoup.com)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 14, 2015, 09:50:44 PM

Carthage 70 #22 Elmhurst 68

Johns Hopkins 64 #4 Dickenson 57

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njf1003 on January 14, 2015, 10:00:52 PM

Hopkins 67 #4 Dickinson 54

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 14, 2015, 10:16:45 PM

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on January 15, 2015, 12:10:59 AM

I am so glad I don't vote Dave. My sympathies go out to you.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 14, 2015, 10:16:45 PM
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstream1.gifsoup.com%2Fview4%2F4781542%2Fwizard-angst-o.gif&hash=7a35b67d6a2ff9d0177fa95a705c19b928f87531) (http://gifsoup.com/view/4781542/wizard-angst.html) GIFSoup (http://gifsoup.com)

AGAIN

That is too funny!!! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 15, 2015, 01:06:07 AM

And WPI beat Babson.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 15, 2015, 05:03:14 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

A little earlier than usual, thanks to free WiFi in the Dayton airport ....

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	624	Augustana	14-1	won at #9 North Central (Ill.), 75-64; 01/17 vs. Wheaton (Ill.)
#2	578	UW-Whitewater	13-2	won at UW-Eau Claire, 62-61; 01/17 at UW-La Crosse
#3	541	St. Thomas	11-1	01/17 at Hamline
#4	540	Dickinson	12-2	LOST at T#43 Johns Hopkins, 54-67; 01/17 vs. Haverford
T#5	520	Emory	11-1	01/16 at T#5 Washington U.; 01/18 at #23 Chicago
T#5	520	Washington U.	11-1	01/16 vs. T#5 Emory; 01/18 vs. Rochester
#7	426	Marietta	14-0	def. Capital, 80-56; 01/17 at Otterbein
#8	403	Virginia Wesleyan	12-2	won at Shenandoah, 76-68; 01/17 vs. Emory and Henry
#9	388	North Central (Ill.)	13-2	LOST to #1 Augustana, 64-75; 01/17 vs. #22 Elmhurst
#10	381	Franklin and Marshall	14-0	def. Muhlenberg, 85-57; 01/17 at McDaniel
#11	373	Richard Stockton	13-2	LOST to Ramapo, 63-65; won at Montclair State, 59-57; 01/17 vs. Kean
#12	341	Albertus Magnus	12-1	won at Emmanuel, 84-58; 01/17 vs. Lasell
#13	304	WPI	12-2	won at #15 Babson, 67-57; 01/17 vs. Emerson
#14	294	Wooster	12-2	won at Hiram, 85-60; 01/17 vs. Wittenberg
#15	283	Babson	12-2	LOST to #13 WPI, 57-67; 01/17 vs. Wheaton (Mass.)
#16	264	Randolph-Macon	12-2	won at T#32 Hampden-Sydney, 77-55; 01/17 at Roanoke
#17	223	Ohio Wesleyan	11-3	LOST at Wabash, 70-75; 01/17 vs. T#43 DePauw
#18	166	UW-Stevens Point	12-3	def. UW-La Crosse, 57-46; 01/17 at UW-River Falls
#19	150	St. Norbert	12-1	def. Beloit, 73-53; 01/17 vs. Knox
#20	131	Chapman	13-0	def. Pomona-Pitzer, 58-56; 01/17 at Caltech
#21	99	St. Olaf	12-1	def. Augsburg, 79-60
#22	92	Elmhurst	12-3	LOST to Carthage, 68-70; 01/17 at #9 North Central (Ill.)
#23	77	Chicago	9-3	01/16 vs. Rochester; 01/18 vs. T#5 Emory
#24	72	Scranton	12-3	LOST at Ithaca, 80-88; 01/17 at Catholic
#25	59	Amherst	10-3	def. Wesleyan, 69-46; 01/16 vs. Tufts; 01/17 vs. T#29 Bates

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	42	Illinois Wesleyan	11-4	def. Millikin, 93-60; 01/17 vs. North Park
#27	34	Eastern Connecticut	12-3	def. Mass-Dartmouth, 86-66; 01/17 at Southern Maine
#28	32	Hardin-Simmons	12-1	01/15 at Mary Hardin-Baylor; 01/17 at Concordia (Texas)
T#29	25	Husson	10-2	def. Maine-Farmington, 72-52; 01/16 at Colby-Sawyer; 01/17 at New England College
T#29	25	Bates	11-2	def. Maine-Presque Isle, 60-47; 01/16 at T#36 Trinity (Conn.); 01/17 at #25 Amherst
#31	18	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	10-3	def. Whittier, 90-57; 01/17 vs. La Verne
T#32	16	Hampden-Sydney	10-4	LOST to #16 Randolph-Macon, 55-77; 01/17 vs. Eastern Mennonite
T#32	16	Williams	10-4	01/16 at Bowdoin; 01/17 at Colby
#34	12	Rhode Island College	11-3	won at Southern Maine, 72-57; 01/17 vs. Plymouth State
#35	9	Centre	10-3	01/17 vs. Sewanee
T#36	8	Rowan	12-2	LOST to #40 William Paterson, 84-86; 01/17 at Rutgers-Newark
T#36	8	Whitworth	11-2	01/16 at Pacific; 01/17 at George Fox
T#36	8	Trinity (Conn.)	12-3	LOST to Merchant Marine, 56-58; 01/16 vs. T#29 Bates; 01/17 vs. Tufts
#39	7	MIT	10-3	won at Coast Guard, 62-36; 01/17 vs. Springfield
#40	6	William Paterson	12-2	won at T#36 Rowan, 86-84; 01/17 vs. TCNJ
#41	5	Lynchburg	9-5	LOST at Guilford, 56-61; 01/17 vs. Washington and Lee
#42	3	Dubuque	12-2	won at Luther, 68-65; 01/17 at Buena Vista
T#43	2	DePauw	10-4	LOST at Wittenberg, 56-65; 01/17 at #17 Ohio Wesleyan
T#43	2	Johns Hopkins	12-2	def. #4 Dickinson, 67-54; 01/17 vs. Ursinus
T#45	1	Cal Lutheran	10-2	won at Caltech, 77-56; 01/17 vs. Occidental
T#45	1	Case Western Reserve	10-2	01/16 vs. New York University; 01/18 vs. Brandeis

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 15, 2015, 07:45:15 AM

And #2 Whitewater escapes by 1. Apparently Eau Claire took the lead with 3 seconds to go. On the ensuing inbounds, the Blugolds inexplicably let Whitewater roll the ball to midcourt before Quardell Young scooped it up and drove the lane for the winning layup with 1 second left.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 15, 2015, 09:04:03 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 15, 2015, 07:45:15 AM
And #2 Whitewater escapes by 1. Apparently Eau Claire took the lead with 3 seconds to go. On the ensuing inbounds, the Blugolds inexplicably let Whitewater roll the ball to midcourt before Quardell Young scooped it up and drove the lane for the winning layup with 1 second left.

That is just plain stupid. They deserve to lose if that's what happened. ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 15, 2015, 09:49:56 AM

Well, to Eau Claire's credit, there is no precedent for Quardell Young getting the ball near mid-court and then driving for a winning layup in a last-second pressure situation. Oh yeah, never mind ... :(.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 17, 2015, 12:07:13 PM

With Amherst going down again, next week might be the 1st week in forever that no NESCAC teams make the Top 25 poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njf1003 on January 17, 2015, 03:36:03 PM

McDaniel 59 #10 F&M 58

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 18, 2015, 12:03:21 AM

Here is one of the reasons that Wooster should be ranked in the Top 10 ;D -- check out this Evan Pannell video clip: www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUMhSGtD_xE

Evan Pannell is one of the top athletes playing for Wooster and he had 30 points in the win tonight. All-America guard Xavier Brown led with 33 points. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 18, 2015, 10:23:50 AM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on January 18, 2015, 12:03:21 AM
Evan Pannell is one of the top athletes playing for Wooster and he had 30 points in the win tonight. All-America guard Xavier Brown led with 33 points. ;)

First time in Wooster's long history that two players scored 30 or more points in the same contest. With the win, the Scots take a 55-54 advantage in the all-time series and move to within 55 wins of the Tigers, the winningest program all-time in D3.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 18, 2015, 06:50:15 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	624	Augustana	15-1	won at #9 North Central (Ill.), 75-64; def. Wheaton (Ill.), 78-74
#2	578	UW-Whitewater	14-2	won at UW-Eau Claire, 62-61; won at UW-La Crosse, 71-64
#3	541	St. Thomas	12-1	won at Hamline, 75-41
#4	540	Dickinson	13-2	LOST at T#43 Johns Hopkins, 54-67; def. Haverford, 83-46
T#5	520	Emory	11-3	LOST at T#5 Washington U., 67-80; LOST at #23 Chicago, 74-80
T#5	520	Washington U.	13-1	def. T#5 Emory, 80-67; def. Rochester, 90-85
#7	426	Marietta	15-0	def. Capital, 80-56; won at Otterbein, 105-66
#8	403	Virginia Wesleyan	13-2	won at Shenandoah, 76-68; def. Emory and Henry, 85-62
#9	388	North Central (Ill.)	13-3	LOST to #1 Augustana, 64-75; LOST to #22 Elmhurst, 57-66
#10	381	Franklin and Marshall	14-1	def. Muhlenberg, 85-57; LOST at McDaniel, 58-59
#11	373	Richard Stockton	14-2	LOST to Ramapo, 63-65; won at Montclair State, 59-57; def. Kean, 74-53
#12	341	Albertus Magnus	13-1	won at Emmanuel, 84-58; def. Lasell, 109-90
#13	304	WPI	13-2	won at #15 Babson, 67-57; def. Emerson, 73-58
#14	294	Wooster	13-2	won at Hiram, 85-60; def. Wittenberg, 104-97
#15	283	Babson	13-2	LOST to #13 WPI, 57-67; def. Wheaton (Mass.), 65-63
#16	264	Randolph-Macon	13-2	won at T#32 Hampden-Sydney, 77-55; won at Roanoke, 101-73
#17	223	Ohio Wesleyan	12-3	LOST at Wabash, 70-75; def. T#43 DePauw, 76-64
#18	166	UW-Stevens Point	13-3	def. UW-La Crosse, 57-46; won at UW-River Falls, 58-51
#19	150	St. Norbert	13-1	def. Beloit, 73-53; def. Knox, 87-45
#20	131	Chapman	14-0	def. Pomona-Pitzer, 58-56; won at Caltech, 67-58
#21	99	St. Olaf	12-1	def. Augsburg, 79-60
#22	92	Elmhurst	13-3	LOST to Carthage, 68-70; won at #9 North Central (Ill.), 66-57
#23	77	Chicago	11-3	def. Rochester, 88-81; def. T#5 Emory, 80-74
#24	72	Scranton	12-4	LOST at Ithaca, 80-88; LOST at Catholic, 65-71
#25	59	Amherst	11-4	def. Wesleyan, 69-46; LOST to Tufts, 53-80; def. T#29 Bates, 70-53

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	42	Illinois Wesleyan	12-4	def. Millikin, 93-60; def. North Park, 76-66
#27	34	Eastern Connecticut	13-3	def. Mass-Dartmouth, 86-66; won at Southern Maine, 74-46
#28	32	Hardin-Simmons	13-2	LOST at Mary Hardin-Baylor, 81-90; won at Concordia (Texas), 92-88
T#29	25	Husson	12-2	def. Maine-Farmington, 72-52; won at Colby-Sawyer, 82-77; won at New England College, 82-79
T#29	25	Bates	11-4	def. Maine-Presque Isle, 60-47; LOST at T#36 Trinity (Conn.), 59-66; LOST at #25 Amherst, 53-70
#31	18	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	11-3	def. Whittier, 90-57; def. La Verne, 66-39
T#32	16	Hampden-Sydney	10-5	LOST to #16 Randolph-Macon, 55-77; LOST to Eastern Mennonite, 81-90
T#32	16	Williams	11-5	LOST at Bowdoin, 60-67; won at Colby, 72-65
#34	12	Rhode Island College	12-3	won at Southern Maine, 72-57; def. Plymouth State, 68-53
#35	9	Centre	11-3	def. Sewanee, 58-45
T#36	8	Rowan	12-3	LOST to #40 William Paterson, 84-86; LOST at Rutgers-Newark, 60-65
T#36	8	Whitworth	13-2	won at Pacific, 79-66; won at George Fox, 89-68
T#36	8	Trinity (Conn.)	13-4	LOST to Merchant Marine, 56-58; def. T#29 Bates, 66-59; LOST to Tufts, 55-59
#39	7	MIT	11-3	won at Coast Guard, 62-36; def. Springfield, 74-54
#40	6	William Paterson	13-2	won at T#36 Rowan, 86-84; def. TCNJ, 78-60
#41	5	Lynchburg	10-5	LOST at Guilford, 56-61; def. Washington and Lee, 69-62
#42	3	Dubuque	12-3	won at Luther, 68-65; LOST at Buena Vista, 78-85
T#43	2	DePauw	10-5	LOST at Wittenberg, 56-65; LOST at #17 Ohio Wesleyan, 64-76
T#43	2	Johns Hopkins	13-2	def. #4 Dickinson, 67-54; def. Ursinus, 67-50
T#45	1	Cal Lutheran	10-3	won at Caltech, 77-56; LOST to Occidental, 72-75
T#45	1	Case Western Reserve	12-2	def. New York University, 77-64; def. Brandeis, 83-81

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 18, 2015, 07:52:54 PM

The "at UMHB, at Concordia TX" may be the hardest road trip in the ASC this season. Don't knock HSU too hard for that 1-1 week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 18, 2015, 08:43:27 PM

Is 5 losses in the last 8 enough to stop voting for Lynchburg?

or 5 losses in the last 7 for Hampden-Sydney?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 18, 2015, 09:39:49 PM

Quote from: sac on January 18, 2015, 08:43:27 PM
Is 5 losses in the last 8 enough to stop voting for Lynchburg?

or 5 losses in the last 7 for Hampden-Sydney?

One would hope.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 19, 2015, 12:10:31 PM

Thanks for all you do, Darryl!

Happy 300th (+) to your Karma!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 19, 2015, 01:08:00 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 19, 2015, 12:10:31 PM
Thanks for all you do, Darryl!

Happy 300th (+) to your Karma!

Darryl has to be the person with the highest perfect karma (most positive karma without a single negative one). And I don't know why anyone would ever give him negative karma. Thanks again for what you do!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 19, 2015, 01:29:44 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 19, 2015, 01:08:00 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 19, 2015, 12:10:31 PM
Thanks for all you do, Darryl!

Happy 300th (+) to your Karma!

Darryl has to be the person with the highest perfect karma (most positive karma without a single negative one). And I don't know why anyone would ever give him negative karma. Thanks again for what you do!

Thanks, everyone. I aim to please (and be otherwise inoffensive).

I live in dread of the day I (inadvertently or not) say something that earns my first mark on the minus side. Maybe I should just hurl some blasphemous comments at some sacred D3 institution to get it over with.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: lildave678 on January 19, 2015, 02:47:34 PM

Hey I'm close! :-X

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2015, 03:41:37 PM

It was great to meet Darryl this past weekend at the NCAA Convention... though all attempts to have other than passing conversations failed. Every time we saw each other one of us was either headed in another direction or tied up with someone. Next time we will have to coordinate a bit better. Though, nice to put a face with a name!

Darryl - great work as always.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2015, 05:05:15 PM

Call it an historic Top 25 on the men's side this week. No NESCAC team since February 25, 2002 and Johns Hopkins returns after a nearly seven year absence: http://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2015/01/no-nescac-teams-ranked (http://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2015/01/no-nescac-teams-ranked) - certainly thought provoking.

And in case you are curious, here is how I voted: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2015/01/19/daves-top-25-ballot-week-7-3/ (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2015/01/19/daves-top-25-ballot-week-7-3/)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 19, 2015, 05:34:43 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 17, 2015, 12:07:13 PM
With Amherst going down again, next week might be the 1st week in forever that no NESCAC teams make the Top 25 poll.

Just about forever, yep.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 19, 2015, 05:55:39 PM

No NESCAC or Brandeis, NYU or Rochester

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: monsoon on January 19, 2015, 06:16:52 PM

Congrats to CWRU on their first appearance in the poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on January 19, 2015, 07:02:09 PM

Quote from: sac on January 18, 2015, 08:43:27 PM
Is 5 losses in the last 8 enough to stop voting for Lynchburg?

or 5 losses in the last 7 for Hampden-Sydney?

Apparently, yes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on January 19, 2015, 08:04:29 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2015, 05:05:15 PM
Call it an historic Top 25 on the men's side this week. No NESCAC team since February 25, 2002 and Johns Hopkins returns after a nearly seven year absence: http://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2015/01/no-nescac-teams-ranked (http://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2015/01/no-nescac-teams-ranked) - certainly thought provoking.

And in case you are curious, here is how I voted: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2015/01/19/daves-top-25-ballot-week-7-3/ (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2015/01/19/daves-top-25-ballot-week-7-3/)

Dave,
With regard to your ballot and comment on Scranton, the injury in the 1st minute against Ithaca, was to FR PG Kevin Doolan, not Ross Danzig. He's been starting since the 2nd game, very effective over the past month, and Scranton's 1st true PG since Randy Arnold. Ross did sprain an ankle in the 1st week of the season, but remarkably, came back 6 days later.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hugenerd on January 19, 2015, 08:37:42 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2015, 05:05:15 PM
Call it an historic Top 25 on the men's side this week. No NESCAC team since February 25, 2002 and Johns Hopkins returns after a nearly seven year absence: http://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2015/01/no-nescac-teams-ranked (http://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2015/01/no-nescac-teams-ranked) - certainly thought provoking.

And in case you are curious, here is how I voted: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2015/01/19/daves-top-25-ballot-week-7-3/ (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2015/01/19/daves-top-25-ballot-week-7-3/)

Glad to see you are high on two NEWMAC teams...wonder what you will think of MIT when they pick up a win over the second of those two teams this week. MIT has been playing a lot better the last 4, since the return of their pre-season All-American PF/C, Matt Redfield.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 19, 2015, 08:41:10 PM

{This tongue-in-cheek post is especially for sac! ;))

Man, the CCIW gets no respect. IWU goes 2-0 in conference play, winning by a combined 43 points, and LOSES 16 points. :o You guys have got to get off your anti-CCIW crusade!

;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 19, 2015, 11:18:58 PM

Teams that we allegedly underrated a few weeks ago -- Middlebury, Albion, Hope ... who did I miss? Teams we allegedly overrated -- University of Chicago, Illinois Wesleyan (what is the value of IWU's win over Chicago now?) ... Not all of this conversation was from this board but it was all there, and some of it was pretty vocal.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 20, 2015, 12:56:53 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 19, 2015, 11:18:58 PM
Teams that we allegedly underrated a few weeks ago -- Middlebury, Albion, Hope ... who did I miss? Teams we allegedly overrated -- University of Chicago, Illinois Wesleyan (what is the value of IWU's win over Chicago now?) ... Not all of this conversation was from this board but it was all there, and some of it was pretty vocal.

If by allege, you mean to argue or assert with out evidence or proof, I would allege that Illinois Wesleyan is underrated, but evidentally, all it takes is a few postseason losses at home to make one think that the Titans are always better than their regular season record. I think they are.

As for Chicago, I stand by what I said at the time. In fact, their record at the time looks even worse today, with the exception of the overtime loss to Worcester Polytechnic. I just needed to see the potential do what they did over the last two weeks as evidence or proof and they did, so:

D3Hoops.com Top 25 Committee 1
Fan of a rival school with a D3boards.com login 0

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 20, 2015, 01:14:53 AM

I am not sure I had your post in mind, actually!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 20, 2015, 09:26:50 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 19, 2015, 11:18:58 PM
Teams that we allegedly underrated a few weeks ago -- Middlebury, Albion, Hope ... who did I miss? Teams we allegedly overrated -- University of Chicago, Illinois Wesleyan (what is the value of IWU's win over Chicago now?) ... Not all of this conversation was from this board but it was all there, and some of it was pretty vocal.

I think Amherst was in there as well. :-X ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 20, 2015, 09:56:58 AM

And if you go back further, overrated Calvin and underrated Webster. But it all comes out in the wash.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 20, 2015, 11:04:28 AM

Higher on D3Hoops than Massey:
Husson, 81 spots
Trinity CT, 56
Albertus Magnus, 30
Centre, 25
Amherst, 21
Emory, 18
Christopher Newport, 17
Dickinson, 16
WPI, 11
Babson, 11
MIT, 11
Williams, 10

Higher on Massey than D3Hoops:
Hardin-Simmons, -18
Whitworth, -15
William Paterson, -15
St. Olaf, -13
UW-Stevens Point, -11
Chapman, -9
Illinois Wesleyan, -8
Eastern Connecticut, -4
Marietta, -3
St. Norbert, -3
North Central (Ill.), -3
St. Thomas, -2
Wooster, -2
Elmhurst, -1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 20, 2015, 11:06:25 AM

Teams with most cumulative points (but zero in latest poll):
Calvin, 940
Scranton, 873
Cabrini, 451
DePauw, 356
Texas-Dallas, 274
Wheaton (Ill.), 242
Springfield, 124
Lynchburg, 113
Bates, 110
Bowdoin, 104
Rhode Island College, 80
Dubuque, 73
Wesley, 73

Teams with most cumulative points (but zero in preseason poll):
Ohio Wesleyan, 1726
Marietta, 1504
North Central (Ill.), 1440
Franklin and Marshall, 1059
Elmhurst, 238
Husson, 138
Lynchburg, 113
Bates, 110
Hardin-Simmons, 93
Dubuque, 73
Cortland State, 64
Hampden-Sydney, 54
Case Western, 47

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 20, 2015, 11:20:49 AM

Quote from: ronk on January 19, 2015, 08:04:29 PM
Dave,
With regard to your ballot and comment on Scranton, the injury in the 1st minute against Ithaca, was to FR PG Kevin Doolan, not Ross Danzig. He's been starting since the 2nd game, very effective over the past month, and Scranton's 1st true PG since Randy Arnold. Ross did sprain an ankle in the 1st week of the season, but remarkably, came back 6 days later.

I apologize... was told he had injured it once again... I will make the necessary edit(s).

Quote from: Hugenerd on January 19, 2015, 08:37:42 PM
Glad to see you are high on two NEWMAC teams...wonder what you will think of MIT when they pick up a win over the second of those two teams this week. MIT has been playing a lot better the last 4, since the return of their pre-season All-American PF/C, Matt Redfield.

I have MIT on my radar... as they were on my ballot for a few weeks earlier this season. I do like how they are playing, but have circled the next few games as ones I want to see before buying back in again.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on January 20, 2015, 11:31:54 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 19, 2015, 11:18:58 PM
Teams that we allegedly underrated a few weeks ago -- Middlebury, Albion, Hope ... who did I miss? Teams we allegedly overrated -- University of Chicago, Illinois Wesleyan (what is the value of IWU's win over Chicago now?) ...

Easy to point out when it works in your favor. Amherst started the season #2 and stayed ranked way too long while Marietta was getting no love. Neither were Chapman, St. Olaf, or Elmhurst.

I don't think that the argument was ever that those teams were or were not better/worse, but that their resume, at that point in the season, did not merit being ranked where they were. Once again, this is being made out to be a "MY TEAMS NOT RANKED, *cry*!" argument when it's not. It's simply a "the voters need to adjust their preseason rankings quicker and give less credit to previous season performances" argument. If someone said Chicago was overrated BEFORE beating Washington and Emory, I might agree. But their resume has changed. So should their perception.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 20, 2015, 01:18:47 PM

Yes, the Chicago comment was before they beat Wash U. But one thing to consider is that voters still also look at a team's potential. If we were only ranking based on their actual wins and losses so far, we would just have an RPI. But was Chicago potentially better than what they had shown? Sure. And was Amherst worse? Yep.

Rinsing and repeating the previous line: It all comes out in the wash. Sometimes the polls are right, sometimes they aren't. Sometimes something that was right in the preseason looks wrong in February and looks right again in March.

It's meant to be a snapshot of 25 independent, geographically dispersed voters' collective opinion. They won't always agree with your personal opinion, but generally, everyone who is on this board regularly is in a conference/region/state that is represented by someone.

Quote from: HOPEful on January 20, 2015, 11:31:54 AM
Once again, this is being made out to be a "MY TEAMS NOT RANKED, *cry*!" argument when it's not.

Except when it is.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 20, 2015, 02:44:17 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 20, 2015, 01:18:47 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on January 20, 2015, 11:31:54 AM
Once again, this is being made out to be a "MY TEAMS NOT RANKED, *cry*!" argument when it's not.

Except when it is.

Except it never was. That proof lies in the pages previously which this website archives, no one ever advocated for Hope getting votes in the poll.

Quote from: HOPEful on January 20, 2015, 11:31:54 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 19, 2015, 11:18:58 PM
Teams that we allegedly underrated a few weeks ago -- Middlebury, Albion, Hope ... who did I miss? Teams we allegedly overrated -- University of Chicago, Illinois Wesleyan (what is the value of IWU's win over Chicago now?) ...
Easy to point out when it works in your favor. Amherst started the season #2 and stayed ranked way too long while Marietta was getting no love. Neither were Chapman, St. Olaf, or Elmhurst.

I don't think that the argument was ever that those teams were or were not better/worse, but that their resume, at that point in the season, did not merit being ranked where they were. Once again, this is being made out to be a "MY TEAMS NOT RANKED, *cry*!" argument when it's not. It's simply a "the voters need to adjust their preseason rankings quicker and give less credit to previous season performances" argument. If someone said Chicago was overrated BEFORE beating Washington and Emory, I might agree. But their resume has changed. So should their perception.

I would just not worry about, you cannot ~~win~~ even attempt to make an argument against the masters of this universe, every argument you make will be spun into whining about your team not getting votes. Then you'll be negged to death.

2 weeks ago IWU didn't have the resume to be ranked, you know it, I know it. Leave it at that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on January 20, 2015, 03:10:33 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 20, 2015, 01:18:47 PM
It's meant to be a snapshot of 25 independent, geographically dispersed voters' collective opinion. They won't always agree with your personal opinion, but generally, everyone who is on this board regularly is in a conference/region/state that is represented by someone.

Once again, this statement refuses to accept that this isn't about "my" team vs. "your" team. I simply believe that the Amhursts, Wisconsin WW and SPs, IWUs, Washingtons, Woosters, and even Hope/Calvins of the D3 universe get the upper hand/benefit of the doubt in the polls where others are asked to prove themselves first.

Quote from: HOPEful on January 20, 2015, 11:31:54 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 20, 2015, 01:18:47 PM
Once again, this is being made out to be a "MY TEAMS NOT RANKED, *cry*!" argument when it's not.

Except when it is.

It's not. And I don't understand your desire to respond condescendingly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 20, 2015, 04:05:39 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on January 20, 2015, 03:10:33 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 20, 2015, 01:18:47 PM
It's meant to be a snapshot of 25 independent, geographically dispersed voters' collective opinion. They won't always agree with your personal opinion, but generally, everyone who is on this board regularly is in a conference/region/state that is represented by someone.
Once again, this statement refuses to accept that this isn't about "my" team vs. "your" team. I simply believe that the Amhursts, Wisconsin WW and SPs, IWUs, Washingtons, Woosters, and even Hope/Calvins of the D3 universe get the upper hand/benefit of the doubt in the polls where others are asked to prove themselves first.

Shouldn't they, though? These schools all have built up a history of winning their leagues, making the tournament, and having success once there. And we're not just talking ancient history. We're talking about last year and the year before that.

Isn't it more intellectually rigorous to assign a Bayesian prior to each team before assessing their wins and losses? I mean, we do this all the time without thinking about it. If Olivet loses to Calvin by 24 we say "well Olivet is not a very good team", but if Hope loses to Calvin by 24 we say "well Hope must have had a poor game". We instantly recognize the results as being more indicative of Olivet's relative quality than Hope's.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on January 20, 2015, 05:12:31 PM

^^ Think D1 and Wichita State, Butler, etc. that don't have the same long-term resumes as Kentucky, Louisville, Kansas, North Carolina, the top Big 10 schools. In their first year of being strong teams they start the season in obscurity then work their way up over the course of the season. Then maybe the next year they get some attention at the bottom of the pre-season polls and if they do well again they move up more quickly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 20, 2015, 05:29:57 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on January 20, 2015, 03:10:33 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 20, 2015, 01:18:47 PM
It's meant to be a snapshot of 25 independent, geographically dispersed voters' collective opinion. They won't always agree with your personal opinion, but generally, everyone who is on this board regularly is in a conference/region/state that is represented by someone.
Once again, this statement refuses to accept that this isn't about "my" team vs. "your" team. I simply believe that the Amhursts, Wisconsin WW and SPs, IWUs, Washingtons, Woosters, and even Hope/Calvins of the D3 universe get the upper hand/benefit of the doubt in the polls where others are asked to prove themselves first.

Quote from: HOPEful on January 20, 2015, 11:31:54 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 20, 2015, 01:18:47 PM
Once again, this is being made out to be a "MY TEAMS NOT RANKED, *cry*!" argument when it's not.

Except when it is.
It's not. And I don't understand your desire to respond condescendingly.

I didn't say Hope fans were arguing for Hope to be ranked. I see multiple people have read it that way but what I was actually saying was that sometimes it is indeed fans arguing for their own team to be ranked.

If I had said "Except this time it is," then I would expect your outrage. But that wasn't what I was getting at. I wasn't even just talking about Hope -- I specifically (and intentionally) mentioned multiple schools.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 20, 2015, 05:32:47 PM

MOST of the time, by my eyes, it's fans of a so-called 'disrespected' team being all whiny and TGHIJGSTO!!! about it. It's annoying.

My feeling is as of the turn of the calendar and conference play kicks in the past should not be prologue. Before Dec. 31 yeah sure, but those polls are basically muffins. Now, consider this year's resume ONLY.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 20, 2015, 05:34:58 PM

Quote from: y_jack_lok on January 20, 2015, 05:12:31 PM
^^ Think D1 and Wichita State, Butler, etc. that don't have the same long-term resumes as Kentucky, Louisville, Kansas, North Carolina, the top Big 10 schools. In their first year of being strong teams they start the season in obscurity then work their way up over the course of the season. Then maybe the next year they get some attention at the bottom of the pre-season polls and if they do well again they move up more quickly.

Yeah -- I think it's fair to believe that if a program does it more than once ... or more than 10 times ... that it's easier to believe they might do it again, even if they take a couple of losses early in the season. That's why a team like Amherst sticks around in the poll until it's painfully obvious they aren't reloading.

Quote from: smedindy on January 20, 2015, 05:32:47 PM
MOST of the time, by my eyes, it's fans of a particular team being all whiny and THIGSTO about it. It's annoying.

It sure is! But it's great when people are willing and able to engage on the topic without it turning into ax-grinding.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 20, 2015, 06:03:09 PM

What if people were just aloud to vent without having to be characterized as whining or having an axe to grind.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 20, 2015, 06:40:04 PM

Believe me, plenty of people are aloud around here! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 20, 2015, 07:20:20 PM

I don't mind the whining or the axe-grinding, because I can remember a time when I wasn't allowed to speak aloud. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: northb on January 20, 2015, 09:05:16 PM

Oh, Crap! I got dead horse all over me >:(

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 20, 2015, 09:25:02 PM

Just found out that TGHIJGSTO has taken up sending his email screeds to Stockton's SID. Poor guy. :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 20, 2015, 10:03:34 PM

Is he still using the ALL THUMBS feature on his cell phone to compose them?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 20, 2015, 10:24:31 PM

It's fair to say neither the style nor content has changed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 21, 2015, 07:43:18 AM

The stars really aligned for tonight, didn't they? We're getting the top two teams in a host of conferences playing each other, plus tough conferences tests for a number of other ranked teams:

IWu @ Augustana
Point at Whitewater
Tommies at St Olaf
F&M at Dickinson
Mt Union @ Marietta
VAWes at Macon

Even Stockton at Rowan and Babson at MIT

Hampden Sydney at Lynchburg and Baldwin Wallace at John Carroll down the list as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 21, 2015, 08:38:16 AM

Yeah, definitely a pretty nice schedule. Should be a triple header on ESPN OCHO or something.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D3HoopJunkie on January 21, 2015, 09:48:52 AM

Plus K to Greek.....Anytime I see a Dodgeball reference I gotta dish out the +++++++++

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on January 21, 2015, 10:10:28 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 20, 2015, 05:34:58 PM
It sure is! But it's great when people are willing and able to engage on the topic without it turning into ax-grinding.

Pat, I appologize if I took your comment out of context. Also if I overreacted. Happens occationally :-\ Moving forward, I will try to express my opinions without using MIAA teams as the examples. I think often valid points are poo pooed away as, "Here's another ____ fan crying that their team is under ranked while ____ is over ranked"

Quote from: y_jack_lok on January 20, 2015, 05:12:31 PM
Think D1 and Wichita State, Butler, etc. that don't have the same long-term resumes as Kentucky, Louisville, Kansas, North Carolina, the top Big 10 schools...

But if a 12-1 Western Kentucky team starts the season by beating Kentucky, I don't care what they've done in any other season. They've got my attention and votes if they continue to preform and that level/don't lose... Essentially, isn't this what St. Olaf did when they beat Stevens Point?

I'm not trying to say that the Whitewaters, Amhersts, and Washingtons of the world should be on equal playing field with everyone else. I'm just saying that it seems like the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction, and very bad or multiple losses are shrugged off when you are a have and seem to damn your entire season when you are a have not.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 21, 2015, 10:54:03 AM

Quote from: HOPEful on January 21, 2015, 10:10:28 AM
But if a 12-1 Western Kentucky team starts the season by beating Kentucky, I don't care what they've done in any other season. They've got my attention and votes if they continue to preform and that level/don't lose... Essentially, isn't this what St. Olaf did when they beat Stevens Point?

Not really, because the order of events is different. If St. Olaf was 12-1 at the time they beat UWSP, rather than 1-0, then you'd have a different story, for sure, because St. Olaf would already on the radar more than the 31 points they got in the preseason poll. Also, beating a team by one point at home isn't necessarily a sign that the winning team is also the better team, and that's something that comes up all the time. Who's the better team? That's the question we're trying to answer, not just line up teams by wins and losses. On a neutral floor, it is reasonable for a voter to believe UWSP is the better team. This was a legit one-point game, not a game in which UWSP threw in a late 3 to make it closer than it seemed.

And although most voters probably aren't aware of this (certainly not something in the packet of info I share with them), the foul that sent St. Olaf to the line with a few seconds left appears to be debatable. Some of the debate: http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4423.15810

But on a more general level -- in addition to the home-court advantage part, sometimes early-season wins get lost in the shuffle. Voters are trying to deal with a bunch of stuff all at once in that first regular-season poll. Overreacting to one win more often than not will lead to us as voters having to correct again later. It's a matter of striking the right balance.

The weekly voting packet reminds voters of the last 4-5 weeks of results, plus a list of every team that a Top 25 candidate has lost to and what their current record is vs. D-III teams. They will always know, for example, that UWSP lost 70-69 at St. Olaf. It's up to them to decide how to interpret it. This year, even more than most, it's difficult to go to a voter and say they are absolutely wrong on a particular point.

Hope this helps.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 21, 2015, 12:20:46 PM

St. Olaf essential got the same love they did at the end of last year. The final poll had them 36th or so. The preseason poll had them at 37th with more votes. They ended with the same overall record as St. Thomas and finished a game back in the MIAC standings. They went 1-2 vs the Tommies, but lost their 1st round NCAA tourney game by double-figures. Had they won one game or at least not been beaten that bad, they might have gotten more love.

Their win over Point helped them move up to 26th in the 1st poll. Their double-digit road loss to Bethel knocked them out of the poll this year. I've always felt it harder to get (back) into the poll than it is to drop out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 21, 2015, 12:32:48 PM

Quote from: D3HoopJunkie on January 21, 2015, 09:48:52 AM
Plus K to Greek.....Anytime I see a Dodgeball reference I gotta dish out the +++++++++

Thanks. Love Jason Bateman's commentary!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 21, 2015, 12:43:33 PM

Personally, I tend to discount (not ignore) games the first week of the season, those in x-mas/new years tournaments (or the first game after a long holiday layoff), and big time rivalry games. Something different happens there. Those games still matter, but I have less faith in those outcomes being as indicative as games in the middle of the season, when teams are on semi-regular schedules.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 21, 2015, 01:19:35 PM

Let me review.

Games Hoops Fan discounts (not ignores)

-1st week games
-holiday tournaments
-games coming off long layoffs
-rivalry games

Should we add:

-2nd night of back to back games
-games after rivalry games (possible let downs)
-sandwich/trap games (games between rivalry games)
-games immediately prior or after Finals/Midterms

;D :o ::) ;) :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 21, 2015, 01:28:57 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 21, 2015, 01:19:35 PM
Let me review.

Games Hoops Fan discounts (not ignores)

-1st week games
-holiday tournaments
-games coming off long layoffs
-rivalry games

Should we add:

-2nd night of back to back games
-games after rivalry games (possible let downs)
-sandwich/trap games (games between rivalry games)
-games immediately prior or after Finals/Midterms

;D :o ::) ;) :D

I certainly take those situations (and all situations) into account, but usually just for picking games in the post-season. At some point you have to draw a line between what matters on one night and what matters over the course of a season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on January 21, 2015, 03:05:01 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 21, 2015, 12:20:46 PM
They went 1-2 vs the Tommies, but lost their 1st round NCAA tourney game by double-figures. Had they won one game or at least not been beaten that bad, they might have gotten more love.

A 13 point loss and a 10 point loss are clearly being called by "double-figures" and a "double digit" loss in order to exaggerate your point here. I hardly think a 10 point loss to Central at a neutral site or a 13 point loss at Bethel are bad losses. It only illustrates my point further.

Augustana's only loss this year is to Central. By "double digits" (11)! I don't believe St. Olaf should be ranked above Auggie. Again, I'm not arguing St. Olaf is better than Augustana. I just think it's hypocritical to damn one team for a loss they incurred last year and brush it under the rug for another team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: monsoon on January 21, 2015, 03:52:58 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 21, 2015, 10:54:03 AM

The weekly voting packet reminds voters of the last 4-5 weeks of results, plus a list of every team that a Top 25 candidate has lost to and what their current record is vs. D-III teams. They will always know, for example, that UWSP lost 70-69 at St. Olaf. It's up to them to decide how to interpret it.

Thanks, Pat. I appreciated this peek behind the curtain.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 21, 2015, 04:10:31 PM

Quote from: monsoon on January 21, 2015, 03:52:58 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 21, 2015, 10:54:03 AM

The weekly voting packet reminds voters of the last 4-5 weeks of results, plus a list of every team that a Top 25 candidate has lost to and what their current record is vs. D-III teams. They will always know, for example, that UWSP lost 70-69 at St. Olaf. It's up to them to decide how to interpret it.

Thanks, Pat. I appreciated this peek behind the curtain.

I meant to give you a better peek. Here's the UWSP resume as our voters received on Sunday afternoon. Some also keep other notes and do more tracking, but this is indicative of what we pull from the database and send each week.

UW-Stevens Point (13-3)
Dec. 3 7:00 PM UW-Eau Claire (6-10) * • W, 64-50
Dec. 6 3:00 PM UW-Superior (8-9) * • W, 77-54
Dec. 10 7:00 PM at UW-Stout (3-13) * • W, 73-56
Dec. 13 3:00 PM at Lawrence (5-7) • W, 60-49
Dec. 20 7:00 PM at St. Thomas (12-1) • L, 68-66
Dec. 29 4:00 PM at Pomona-Pitzer (2-12) • W, 57-49
Dec. 31 4:00 PM at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps (11-3) • W, 71-65
Jan. 7 7:00 PM UW-Platteville (11-5) * • W, 74-55
Jan. 10 7:00 PM at UW-Oshkosh (10-6) * • W, 83-57
Jan. 14 7:00 PM UW-La Crosse (7-9) * • W, 57-46
Jan. 17 5:00 PM at UW-River Falls (6-10) * • W, 58-51
Jan. 21 7:00 PM at UW-Whitewater (14-2) * •
Jan. 24 7:00 PM UW-Oshkosh (10-6) * •
Losses: St. Olaf (12-1) 69-70 (V); North Central (Ill.) (13-3) 63-56 (H); St. Thomas (12-1) 66-68 (V);

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 21, 2015, 05:26:50 PM

I actually never said they were bad losses. Whether you think I am implied that is entirely up to you. I'm going to view a 1 to 4 point win/loss differently than I would view a 10-13 point win/loss. I'm confident that's the norm rather than the exception here. I usually do not have the time to scroll through play by plays to see the circumstances on how such results occurred.

Had St. Olaf beaten Stevens Point by "double-digits", I'm confident that the Oles would've received even more votes in that following poll. Point's double-digit home loss looks worse than had they lost by 2, IMO. In the same manner, Point's road two losses by a combined 3 points to two teams with a combined record of 26-2 looks pretty good. Had Point been beaten by double-figures both times, they may not even be ranked now. So yeah, margin of victory/loss does play a part in ot. The circumstances leading up to those results also play a part in it.

St. Olaf's loss in the tourney, they were basically down double-digits the whole 2nd half and most of the 1st. They did cut the lead to 4 or 5 midway through the 2nd half but Central built it back up to as many as 18 with 2 minutes to go. It's not like the Oles were down 5 with 2 minutes to go and they played the "foul to stop the clock and pray they miss frwe throws" game. They were thoroughly beaten from the looks of it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on January 21, 2015, 08:14:24 PM

Quote from: sac on January 20, 2015, 02:44:17 PM
I would just not worry about, you cannot ~~win~~ even attempt to make an argument against the masters of this universe, every argument you make will be spun into whining about your team not getting votes. Then you'll be negged to death.
2 weeks ago IWU didn't have the resume to be ranked, you know it, I know it. Leave it at that.

Uncle.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 21, 2015, 09:43:28 PM

Point loses 59-44 at Whitewater with starting guard Stephen Pelkofer in a boot to start the game. Not a good sign going forward.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2015, 10:02:47 PM

There will be a new #1 next week: final from Rock Island, IWU 89, Augie 84. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njf1003 on January 21, 2015, 10:08:16 PM

#14 F&M falls 81-48 to #7 Dickinson. Dickinson couldn't miss from 3 for a good part of the 2nd half which doomed the Diplomats.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 21, 2015, 11:32:25 PM

Quote from: njf1003 on January 21, 2015, 10:08:16 PM
#14 F&M falls 81-48 to #7 Dickinson. Dickinson couldn't miss from 3 for a good part of the 2nd half which doomed the Diplomats.

33 points is a lot of 3-pointers to lose by, though. Man ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 22, 2015, 07:58:02 AM

How They Fared (So Far)
Should have had my coffee first -- I nearly posted the women's report here. Might have made for some interesting conversation. (I wonder if that would have been enough to get smited.)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	624	Augustana	15-2	LOST to T#28 Illinois Wesleyan, 84-89; 01/24 at Millikin
#2	589	UW-Whitewater	15-2	def. #15 UW-Stevens Point, 59-44; 01/24 at UW-Superior
#3	573	St. Thomas	14-1	won at Bethel, 80-69; won at #19 St. Olaf, 86-77; 01/24 vs. St. John's
#4	547	Washington U.	13-1	01/23 at New York University; 01/25 at Brandeis
#5	498	Marietta	16-0	def. Mount Union, 86-82; 01/24 vs. Heidelberg
#6	455	Virginia Wesleyan	13-3	LOST at #11 Randolph-Macon, 66-69; 01/24 vs. Lynchburg
#7	428	Dickinson	14-2	def. #14 Franklin and Marshall, 81-48; 01/24 vs. Swarthmore
#8	410	WPI	14-2	won at Clark, 63-42; 01/24 vs. Wheaton (Mass.)
#9	385	Albertus Magnus	14-1	def. Rivier, 87-53; 01/24 at St. Joseph's (Maine)
#10	381	Wooster	14-2	won at Allegheny, 104-73; 01/24 vs. DePauw
#11	342	Randolph-Macon	14-2	def. #6 Virginia Wesleyan, 69-66; 01/24 vs. Emory and Henry
#12	319	Emory	11-3	01/23 vs. #25 Case Western Reserve; 01/25 vs. Carnegie Mellon
#13	318	Richard Stockton	15-2	won at Rowan, 83-59; 01/24 vs. Rutgers-Newark
#14	264	Franklin and Marshall	14-2	LOST at #7 Dickinson, 48-81; 01/24 at Haverford
#15	235	UW-Stevens Point	13-4	LOST at #2 UW-Whitewater, 44-59; 01/24 vs. UW-Oshkosh
#16	227	St. Norbert	14-1	won at Carroll, 67-61; 01/24 at Monmouth
#17	224	North Central (Ill.)	14-3	won at Carthage, 87-82; 01/24 at North Park
#18	213	Chapman	15-0	won at La Verne, 72-52; 01/24 vs. Redlands
#19	201	St. Olaf	13-2	won at Concordia-Moorhead, 72-48; LOST to #3 St. Thomas, 77-86; 01/24 vs. Bethel
#20	186	Babson	14-2	won at #30 MIT, 61-48; 01/24 at Coast Guard
#21	177	Chicago	11-3	01/23 at Brandeis; 01/25 at New York University
#22	105	Elmhurst	14-3	won at North Park, 75-50; 01/24 vs. T#28 Illinois Wesleyan
#23	99	Ohio Wesleyan	13-3	won at Oberlin, 86-61; 01/24 at Denison
#24	64	Johns Hopkins	14-2	won at Washington College, 88-73; 01/24 at Muhlenberg
#25	46	Case Western Reserve	12-2	01/23 at #12 Emory; 01/25 at Rochester

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	38	Eastern Connecticut	14-3	won at Keene State, 95-71; 01/24 vs. Rhode Island College
#27	30	Whitworth	13-2	01/23 vs. Puget Sound; 01/24 vs. Pacific Lutheran
T#28	26	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	12-3	won at Cal Lutheran, 73-65; 01/24 at Pomona-Pitzer
T#28	26	Illinois Wesleyan	13-4	won at #1 Augustana, 89-84; 01/24 at #22 Elmhurst
#30	22	MIT	11-4	LOST to #20 Babson, 48-61; 01/24 at Emerson
#31	18	William Paterson	15-2	def. John Jay, 80-66; def. Ramapo, 86-81; 01/24 at Rutgers-Camden
#32	15	Husson	12-2	01/23 vs. Johnson State; 01/24 vs. Lyndon State
#33	14	Hardin-Simmons	13-2	01/22 vs. University of the Ozarks; 01/24 vs. Texas-Tyler
#34	9	Amherst	12-4	def. T#39 Williams, 86-76; 01/24 vs. T#37 Trinity (Conn.)
#35	7	Centre	11-3	01/23 at Rhodes; 01/25 at Hendrix
#36	4	Christopher Newport	12-4	def. Mary Washington, 53-49; 01/24 vs. Frostburg State
T#37	2	St. John Fisher	13-2	def. Alfred, 77-46; 01/23 at Houghton; 01/24 vs. Ithaca
T#37	2	Trinity (Conn.)	13-5	LOST at Fisher, 62-71; 01/24 at #34 Amherst
T#39	1	Catholic	14-3	def. Juniata, 74-59; 01/24 at Merchant Marine
T#39	1	Williams	11-6	LOST at #34 Amherst, 76-86; 01/24 at Hamilton

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 22, 2015, 09:46:54 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2015, 10:02:47 PM
There will be a new #1 next week: final from Rock Island, IWU 89, Augie 84. ;D

Yeah, but they lost to a fellow CCIW team by single-digits. That counts for something, right?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 22, 2015, 10:00:06 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 22, 2015, 09:46:54 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2015, 10:02:47 PM
There will be a new #1 next week: final from Rock Island, IWU 89, Augie 84. ;D

Yeah, but they lost to a fellow CCIW team by single-digits. That counts for something, right?

It does, but that would be partially negated by the fact that it was at home.

By the way, as I said earlier in the week, Illinois Wesleyan is underrated.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 22, 2015, 10:16:44 AM

Quote from: WUH on January 22, 2015, 10:00:06 AM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 22, 2015, 09:46:54 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2015, 10:02:47 PM
There will be a new #1 next week: final from Rock Island, IWU 89, Augie 84. ;D

Yeah, but they lost to a fellow CCIW team by single-digits. That counts for something, right?

It does, but that would be partially negated by the fact that it was at home.

By the way, as I said earlier in the week, Illinois Wesleyan is underrated.

That was a tongue in cheek comment. I failed to add ;) ;D ;D :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 22, 2015, 10:31:35 AM

Quote from: WUH on January 22, 2015, 10:00:06 AM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 22, 2015, 09:46:54 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 21, 2015, 10:02:47 PM
There will be a new #1 next week: final from Rock Island, IWU 89, Augie 84. ;D

Yeah, but they lost to a fellow CCIW team by single-digits. That counts for something, right?

It does, but that would be partially negated by the fact that it was at home.

By the way, as I said earlier in the week, Illinois Wesleyan is underrated.

I'm trying desperately to keep up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 22, 2015, 11:23:23 AM

Quote from: WUH on January 22, 2015, 10:31:35 AM
By the way, as I said earlier in the week, Illinois Wesleyan is underrated.

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 22, 2015, 10:31:35 AM
I'm trying desperately to keep up.

It is much easier when you ignore both your mind and the computer and let superstition (and possibly fear) take over.

"Guys like us, we're not some brainiacs on the nerd patrol. We're not members of the factinista. We go straight from the gut."
-Stephen Colbert

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 24, 2015, 04:46:00 PM

Denison 73 #23 Ohio Wesleyan 70

#5 Marietta 80 Heidelberg 74 --H'berg hung with them the whole way.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 25, 2015, 05:40:46 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	624	Augustana	16-2	LOST to T#28 Illinois Wesleyan, 84-89; won at Millikin, 71-68
#2	589	UW-Whitewater	16-2	def. #15 UW-Stevens Point, 59-44; won at UW-Superior, 83-59
#3	573	St. Thomas	15-1	won at Bethel, 80-69; won at #19 St. Olaf, 86-77; def. St. John's, 79-72
#4	547	Washington U.	14-2	LOST at New York University, 67-91; won at Brandeis, 79-68
#5	498	Marietta	17-0	def. Mount Union, 86-82; def. Heidelberg, 80-74
#6	455	Virginia Wesleyan	14-3	LOST at #11 Randolph-Macon, 66-69; def. Lynchburg, 78-55
#7	428	Dickinson	15-2	def. #14 Franklin and Marshall, 81-48; def. Swarthmore, 72-45
#8	410	WPI	15-2	won at Clark, 63-42; def. Wheaton (Mass.), 92-68
#9	385	Albertus Magnus	15-1	def. Rivier, 87-53; won at St. Joseph's (Maine), 80-66
#10	381	Wooster	15-2	won at Allegheny, 104-73; def. DePauw, 63-62
#11	342	Randolph-Macon	15-2	def. #6 Virginia Wesleyan, 69-66; def. Emory and Henry, 69-53
#12	319	Emory	13-3	def. #25 Case Western Reserve, 78-65; def. Carnegie Mellon, 79-53
#13	318	Richard Stockton	16-2	won at Rowan, 83-59; def. Rutgers-Newark, 65-57
#14	264	Franklin and Marshall	15-2	LOST at #7 Dickinson, 48-81; won at Haverford, 82-66
#15	235	UW-Stevens Point	14-4	LOST at #2 UW-Whitewater, 44-59; def. UW-Oshkosh, 69-66
#16	227	St. Norbert	15-1	won at Carroll, 67-61; won at Monmouth, 76-62
#17	224	North Central (Ill.)	14-4	won at Carthage, 87-82; LOST at North Park, 68-92
#18	213	Chapman	16-0	won at La Verne, 72-52; def. Redlands, 83-63
#19	201	St. Olaf	13-3	won at Concordia-Moorhead, 72-48; LOST to #3 St. Thomas, 77-86; LOST to Bethel, 89-95
#20	186	Babson	15-2	won at #30 MIT, 61-48; won at Coast Guard, 81-73
#21	177	Chicago	11-5	LOST at Brandeis, 58-59; LOST at New York University, 68-85
#22	105	Elmhurst	15-3	won at North Park, 75-50; def. T#28 Illinois Wesleyan, 76-73
#23	99	Ohio Wesleyan	13-4	won at Oberlin, 86-61; LOST at Denison, 70-73
#24	64	Johns Hopkins	15-2	won at Washington College, 88-73; won at Muhlenberg, 80-75
#25	46	Case Western Reserve	13-3	LOST at #12 Emory, 65-78; won at Rochester, 65-37

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	38	Eastern Connecticut	15-3	won at Keene State, 95-71; def. Rhode Island College, 83-59
#27	30	Whitworth	15-2	def. Puget Sound, 78-72; def. Pacific Lutheran, 78-59
T#28	26	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	12-4	won at Cal Lutheran, 73-65; LOST at Pomona-Pitzer, 57-58
T#28	26	Illinois Wesleyan	13-5	won at #1 Augustana, 89-84; LOST at #22 Elmhurst, 73-76
#30	22	MIT	12-4	LOST to #20 Babson, 48-61; won at Emerson, 64-55
#31	18	William Paterson	16-2	def. John Jay, 80-66; def. Ramapo, 86-81; won at Rutgers-Camden, 92-73
#32	15	Husson	13-3	def. Johnson State, 90-67; LOST to Lyndon State, 85-101
#33	14	Hardin-Simmons	15-2	def. University of the Ozarks, 102-81; def. Texas-Tyler, 91-53
#34	9	Amherst	12-5	def. T#39 Williams, 86-76; LOST to T#37 Trinity (Conn.), 54-70
#35	7	Centre	12-4	LOST at Rhodes, 67-74; won at Hendrix, 65-62
#36	4	Christopher Newport	13-4	def. Mary Washington, 53-49; def. Frostburg State, 92-58
T#37	2	St. John Fisher	15-2	def. Alfred, 77-46; won at Houghton, 89-77; def. Ithaca, 96-70
T#37	2	Trinity (Conn.)	14-5	LOST at Fisher, 62-71; won at #34 Amherst, 70-54
T#39	1	Catholic	15-3	def. Juniata, 74-59; won at Merchant Marine, 68-67
T#39	1	Williams	11-7	LOST at #34 Amherst, 76-86; LOST at Hamilton, 64-67

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 27, 2015, 09:59:47 AM

I can't believe someone is still voting for Amherst.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 27, 2015, 11:15:40 AM

I had the same reaction. It's a small number of votes out of the total and I don't generally complain about votes since I know how tough it is to do the ballots. But even if the voter(s) is keeping a slot for the best NESCAC team, I don't see how you conclude its Amherst at this point.

It's a really stunning drop off for the conference this year. Not only do the NESCAC not have anyone ranked, they probably don't have anyone at this point deserving of votes.

You get credit for calling this one early in the season, Hoops Fan.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2015, 11:39:53 AM

When Dave Hixon told me at the beginning of the month he didn't think the winner of the conference would have less than three or four losses, it stuck with me. I couldn't believe he thought the NESCAC top would be that vulnerable. He was very accurate. Not sure the NESCAC gets more than a single at-large bid at this point.

In the meantime, I took another stab at my Top 25 - actually blowing it up for the most part. Here it is in case you want some "light" reading: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2597 (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2597)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 28, 2015, 11:12:34 AM

Dave- Thanks for your blog

I thought there might be a "well, they played without one of their best players/starters, so we'll give them a little break on their recent poor results (a blowout loss on the road to Top 3 team and conference rival and a OT escape at home vs improving opponent- won 6 of 7...)" unwritten thought.

This is regarding Stevens Point. Not a big deal as I could see them dropping out anyway, but you specifically brought those points out, though you did mention Pelkofer was out. :-)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 28, 2015, 11:27:06 AM

I was not entirely sure where best to post this, but I thought others may be interested.

According to a story in Inside Higher Ed, a NCAA survey suggests that 21 percent of Division III Men's Basketball players believe that it is somewhat likely that they will play in the NBA: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/01/27/college-athletes-greatly-overestimate-their-chances-playing-professionally

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2015, 11:31:48 AM

Yeah... I have taken a new approach to injuries. If a guy is out for a game and they lose, but is back and they win... I might discount the loss a bit - though it proves how important that guy is. If a player is out for multiple games (or season) at this point in the season, I think it is a bigger deal. I have seen teams lose a very important player at the beginning of the year and end up being okay (i.e. Wash U when they lost Wallis - went on to win a national title). That injury might make them hurt a little at the beginning of the season, but they have time to get better with another player the rest of the season. This time of year... an injury to that important a player is a big hit - especially to a team like UWSP who already had less talent than in years past.

Not going to shy away from those things - no point in sugar coating or writing something that you have to read into to understand. I might as well tell people my opinions and not try and make you read into my thoughts which could result in you misreading my point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2015, 11:38:22 AM

Quote from: WUH on January 28, 2015, 11:27:06 AM
I was not entirely sure where best to post this, but I thought others may be interested.

According to a story in Inside Higher Ed, a NCAA survey suggests that 21 percent of Division III Men's Basketball players believe that it is somewhat likely that they will play in the NBA: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/01/27/college-athletes-greatly-overestimate-their-chances-playing-professionally

The article takes a bit of a leap here with the term "professionally." Here is the actual question asked to student-athletes:

"How likely do you think it is that you will become a professional and/or Olympic athlete in your sport?"

I was at the NCAA Convention when Mark Emmert repeated the fact that Division III men's basketball players answered that question at 21%. He didn't say NBA. He said professionally.

My first reaction, and the reaction of other Division IIIs in attendance, was we are talking purely professionally - NBA is part of that word, but not the entire picture. Considering how many leagues exist in Europe, Israel, and other locales around the world that numbers didn't surprise me. However, when you break that number down and realize two or three players on a 15 man roster think or will play pro - that number seems a bit high. Who knows... at least they think they can play professionally at some point.

But to say that the survey is talking about the NBA is not accurate and I promise you the number of student-athletes asked if they would be playing in the NBA ... the number would be far lower!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 28, 2015, 11:59:51 AM

Good catch, Dave.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 28, 2015, 12:06:27 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2015, 11:38:22 AM
Quote from: WUH on January 28, 2015, 11:27:06 AM
I was not entirely sure where best to post this, but I thought others may be interested.

According to a story in Inside Higher Ed, a NCAA survey suggests that 21 percent of Division III Men's Basketball players believe that it is somewhat likely that they will play in the NBA: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/01/27/college-athletes-greatly-overestimate-their-chances-playing-professionally

The article takes a bit of a leap here with the term "professionally." Here is the actual question asked to student-athletes:

"How likely do you think it is that you will become a professional and/or Olympic athlete in your sport?"

I was at the NCAA Convention when Mark Emmert repeated the fact that Division III men's basketball players answered that question at 21%. He didn't say NBA. He said professionally.

My first reaction, and the reaction of other Division IIIs in attendance, was we are talking purely professionally - NBA is part of that word, but not the entire picture. Considering how many leagues exist in Europe, Israel, and other locales around the world that numbers didn't surprise me. However, when you break that number down and realize two or three players on a 15 man roster think or will play pro - that number seems a bit high. Who knows... at least they think they can play professionally at some point.

But to say that the survey is talking about the NBA is not accurate and I promise you the number of student-athletes asked if they would be playing in the NBA ... the number would be far lower!

I'm a bit surprised that such a source would so misrepresent the survey responses - though to most casual fans I'm sure 'professional' DOES mean NBA. IWU, for example, has not had an NBA player since Jack Sikma, but has had quite a few play for a time in Europe or elsewhere.

On the other hand, I wonder how many of the athletes themselves thought 'NBA' when the survey asked 'professionally'. The 'misrepresentation' of results could have come partly from each side!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 28, 2015, 12:07:29 PM

Not to mention how many guys who could play professionally somewhere just choose not to pursue it (or even inquire at all).

There's always a league for someone to play in if they really want to make $6000 a year in a foreign country and live in virtual poverty. Usually players with a d3 education decide they can do better in other venues.

21% is certainly too high for the number of players who could actually get a job playing ball professionally, but I don't think it's outrageous that 21% think it's a possibility.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 28, 2015, 12:13:32 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2015, 11:38:22 AM
The article takes a bit of a leap here with the term "professionally." Here is the actual question asked to student-athletes:

"How likely do you think it is that you will become a professional and/or Olympic athlete in your sport?"

I was at the NCAA Convention when Mark Emmert repeated the fact that Division III men's basketball players answered that question at 21%. He didn't say NBA. He said professionally.

My first reaction, and the reaction of other Division IIIs in attendance, was we are talking purely professionally - NBA is part of that word, but not the entire picture. Considering how many leagues exist in Europe, Israel, and other locales around the world that numbers didn't surprise me. However, when you break that number down and realize two or three players on a 15 man roster think or will play pro - that number seems a bit high. Who knows... at least they think they can play professionally at some point.

But to say that the survey is talking about the NBA is not accurate and I promise you the number of student-athletes asked if they would be playing in the NBA ... the number would be far lower!

Very interesting...thanks for sharing. Quite a big leap.

I have been running surveys for undergraduates for a long time and when I read this, my first thought was that a follow-up question asking "how serious when you answered the question about becoming a professional."

I will say, the way the question was worded leaves open the possibility too that one could see the possibility of becoming a coach as synonymous with becoming a professional.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 28, 2015, 12:25:30 PM

Like Hoops Fan says there are many professional options out there, its just a matter of pursuing them. Hope has had recent players play professionally in Mongolia, Canada, Australia and Europe. To say nothing of the upstart local professional leagues like the PBL and IBL. I don't find the 21% number unrealistic at all.

I hope this link works but you can find out the professional destinations of players from D3 schools here. http://www.usbasket.com/ncaa3/ex-ncaa-d3-basketball-players.asp It goes back to about 1998 and will list the last known professional team.

For example: Brandon Crawford graduated from Albion in 2006 and has spent the last 8 years playing professionally in South America in Chile, Columbia, Argentina and Uruguay. He just began his 9th professional year in Germany.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2015, 12:52:56 PM

There really have been a lot of players who play professionally somewhere... there have also been probably far more who have thought about it and decided to pursue other options. Again, I don't think the 21% number is all that surprising... if we were talking about it being a reality - that's where three players on each 15 man roster becomes a bit more hard to add up! LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 28, 2015, 03:38:09 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 28, 2015, 12:06:27 PM
I'm a bit surprised that such a source would so misrepresent the survey responses - though to most casual fans I'm sure 'professional' DOES mean NBA. IWU, for example, has not had an NBA player since Jack Sikma, but has had quite a few play for a time in Europe or elsewhere.

On the other hand, I wonder how many of the athletes themselves thought 'NBA' when the survey asked 'professionally'. The 'misrepresentation' of results could have come partly from each side!

Casual fans may equate the words "professional basketball" with the NBA, but college basketball players most certainly don't, at least at the D3 level. When you're as immersed in the sport as they are, you're well aware of the fact that there are professional leagues all over the world -- and, as sac indicated, that there are minor professional leagues here in the U.S. as well. Plus, there are so many D3 players who've gone on to play professionally in Europe, South America, the Far East, etc., that things like overseas tryouts and agent connections are a part of the grapevine among D3 players. Also, a D3 coach will often mention to prospects as part of his recruiting pitch that this player or that from his program has gone on to play professionally in Uruguay or Turkey or Australia or wherever. I can't tell you how many CCIW players I've met over the years that have talked about so-and-so from this team or that giving consideration to trying out for an overseas basketball contract after he graduated. As D-Mac implied in his comment posted below the Inside Higher Ed article, a D3 student-athlete is more likely to view an overseas pro gig as an educational experience -- sort of as a postgraduate Study Abroad situation, only with basketball instead of books -- than as the steppingstone to the NBA that D1 basketball players usually conceive overseas ball to be.

In other words, the misrepresentation of which you speak almost certainly does not come from the side of the players in D3. They all know full well that the NBA is only the pinnacle of a much, much wider range of professional basketball options around the world.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2015, 04:44:49 PM

And for an article written on a site called "Inside Higher Ed" probably should have known better than to take the leap they did with the word "professional."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 28, 2015, 05:24:05 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2015, 04:44:49 PM
And for an article written on a site called "Inside Higher Ed" probably should have known better than to take the leap they did with the word "professional."

Inside Higher Ed is not the Chronicle of Higher Education, but it is well regarded and the editors should not have allowed for this mistake.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 28, 2015, 05:24:53 PM

Otherwise, I am glad I posted the article. Thanks everyone for the interesting discussion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 29, 2015, 07:27:43 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	611	UW-Whitewater	17-2	won at UW-Platteville, 65-64; 01/31 vs. UW-La Crosse
#2	603	St. Thomas	16-1	def. Gustavus Adolphus, 64-52; 01/31 vs. Augsburg
#3	561	Marietta	18-0	def. Muskingum, 93-77; 01/31 vs. Baldwin Wallace
#4	541	Augustana	17-2	won at #16 Elmhurst, 77-73; 01/31 at North Park
#5	489	Dickinson	16-2	won at Muhlenberg, 90-78; 01/31 vs. Washington College
#6	447	WPI	15-2	01/29 vs. Coast Guard; 01/31 at Springfield
#7	444	Washington U.	14-2	01/30 vs. Carnegie Mellon; 02/01 vs. T#26 Case Western Reserve
#8	423	Randolph-Macon	16-2	won at Bridgewater (Va.), 58-55; 01/31 at Lynchburg
#9	422	Albertus Magnus	15-1	01/29 vs. Newbury; 01/31 vs. Norwich
#10	405	Wooster	15-3	LOST at #32 Ohio Wesleyan, 85-92; 01/31 at Wabash
#11	355	Virginia Wesleyan	15-3	won at Randolph, 82-74; 01/31 vs. Roanoke
#12	342	Emory	13-3	01/30 at Brandeis; 02/01 at #23 New York University
#13	334	Richard Stockton	16-3	LOST at TCNJ, 63-66; 01/31 at #25 William Paterson
#14	290	St. Norbert	16-1	def. Ripon, 85-65; 01/31 vs. Carroll
#15	283	Chapman	16-0	01/29 at Cal Lutheran; 01/31 at Pomona-Pitzer
#16	248	Elmhurst	15-4	LOST to #4 Augustana, 73-77; 01/31 vs. Millikin
#17	208	Babson	16-2	def. Clark, 80-59; 01/31 vs. Emerson
#18	176	Johns Hopkins	16-2	def. McDaniel, 65-59; 01/31 vs. Haverford
#19	173	UW-Stevens Point	15-4	won at UW-La Crosse, 63-44; 01/31 at UW-Eau Claire
#20	152	Franklin and Marshall	16-2	def. Gettysburg, 70-48; 01/31 vs. Swarthmore
#21	95	Whitworth	15-2	01/30 vs. Lewis and Clark; 01/31 vs. Willamette
#22	85	Eastern Connecticut	15-3	01/29 vs. Western Connecticut; 01/31 at Plymouth State
#23	69	New York University	12-4	01/30 vs. Rochester; 02/01 vs. #12 Emory
#24	63	St. Olaf	14-3	def. Macalester, 74-52; 01/31 at Carleton
#25	52	William Paterson	16-2	~~01/28 at New Jersey City~~ postponed; 01/31 vs. #13 Richard Stockton

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
T#26	47	Case Western Reserve	13-3	01/30 at #33 Chicago; 02/01 at #7 Washington U.
T#26	47	North Central (Ill.)	14-5	LOST to Millikin, 66-69; 01/31 vs. Wheaton (Ill.)
#28	36	Hardin-Simmons	15-2	01/29 at Sul Ross State; 01/31 vs. Howard Payne
#29	27	Catholic	16-3	won at Susquehanna, 82-65; 01/31 at Moravian
#30	26	St. John Fisher	15-2	01/30 at Nazareth; 01/31 vs. Utica
#31	24	Illinois Wesleyan	14-5	def. Wheaton (Ill.), 79-70; 01/31 at Carthage
#32	18	Ohio Wesleyan	14-4	def. #10 Wooster, 92-85; 01/31 at Hiram
#33	10	Chicago	11-5	01/30 vs. T#26 Case Western Reserve; 02/01 vs. Carnegie Mellon
#34	6	MIT	12-4	01/29 at Wheaton (Mass.); 01/31 vs. Clark
#35	5	Brooklyn	16-4	LOST at Lehman, 78-81; 01/30 vs. Staten Island
#36	4	Amherst	12-5	~~01/27 vs. Lasell~~ postponed; 01/30 vs. Colby; 01/31 vs. Bowdoin
#37	2	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	13-4	def. Occidental, 82-51; 01/31 at Whittier
T#38	1	Aurora	15-5	LOST at Rockford, 77-86; 01/30 vs. Illinois Tech
T#38	1	Rhode Island College	13-4	01/29 at Mass-Dartmouth; 01/31 vs. Mass-Boston

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 29, 2015, 08:19:55 AM

#19 Stevens Point topped La Crosse 63-44 last night.

An impressive feat happened in the 1st half of that game. With La Crosse leading 9-4, the visitors went on a 27-0 run. Impressive, right? But Stevens Point held La Crosse scoreless FOR THE REST OF THE HALF. The Eagles didn't score for the last 15:53 of the half. La Crosse is a decent team. They're 8-11 and 3-7 in conference. They have a nice win over D2 Winona St. A 2-pt loss to Aurora and they were respectable in a single digit loss to Wooster.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D3HoopJunkie on January 30, 2015, 12:47:03 PM

Wasn't sure where to post this but I figured this would be a good spot.

Pat or Dave or Anyone,

What is the longest Division 3 Men's basketball home winning streak of all time?

Albertus Magnus hit 50 in a row last night and I have to think they are closing in on whatever the record may be?

Thanks in advance for any info

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2015, 01:51:11 PM

Yes -- on Twitter this morning, in fact, Albertus Magnus showed it didn't know the difference between having the record and being the active leader in the category. The NCAA statistics folks corrected them and noted "The record is 62 by
North Park from Feb. 8, 1984, to Feb. 3, 1988."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 30, 2015, 06:38:47 PM

Alas, I am forced to report that the NCAA statistics folks are incorrect. Williams won 64 straight on the home floor of the Ephs from 2001 to 2005, snapping North Park's record.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2015, 10:47:35 PM

Ahh yes. This. http://www.d3hoops.com/seasons/men/2004-05/contrib/20150130y9zyxl

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 31, 2015, 09:41:56 PM

Augie goes down at North Park. Whitewater just barely survives... again.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 31, 2015, 11:36:43 PM

It always gets interesting when the calender starts to flip to February.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 01, 2015, 04:57:10 AM

Five ranked teams, #4 Augustana, #6 WPI, #10 Wooster, #15 Chapman (for the 2nd time in 3 days), and #22 Eastern Connecticut all lose to unranked teams. #25 William Paterson loses to #13 Richard Stockton.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 01, 2015, 09:57:10 AM

TGHIJGSTO! will probably be ranked #1 then.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 01, 2015, 11:12:11 AM

Are you seriopus?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 01, 2015, 01:40:25 PM

I DONT JUSDT SAY TGHIJGSTO SAY THINGS, GREG.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 01, 2015, 04:52:21 PM

I'm still basking in the afterglow of calling this game yesterday:

Quote from: d3hoops.com Saturday men's wrap-up
Thayne Recker lived up to his name with 53 points, 19 of them after regulation, as he led Bluffton to a 103-102 win in triple overtime over Hanover. Recker was an incredible 25-for-28 from the foul line. Austin Rohde added 22 points for the Beavers. Recker's 53 points is the most by a Division III men's basketball player this season.

The Super Bowl is going to have a hard time living up to that.

Meanwhile, there's still this ...
How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	611	UW-Whitewater	18-2	won at UW-Platteville, 65-64; def. UW-La Crosse, 68-67
#2	603	St. Thomas	17-1	def. Gustavus Adolphus, 64-52; def. Augsburg, 90-75
#3	561	Marietta	19-0	def. Muskingum, 93-77; def. Baldwin Wallace, 84-81
#4	541	Augustana	17-3	won at #16 Elmhurst, 77-73; LOST at North Park, 69-76
#5	489	Dickinson	17-2	won at Muhlenberg, 90-78; def. Washington College, 97-56
#6	447	WPI	16-3	def. Coast Guard, 69-45; LOST at Springfield, 59-63
#7	444	Washington U.	15-3	def. Carnegie Mellon, 79-59; LOST to T#26 Case Western Reserve, 78-89
#8	423	Randolph-Macon	17-2	won at Bridgewater (Va.), 58-55; won at Lynchburg, 72-68
#9	422	Albertus Magnus	17-1	def. Newbury, 109-57; def. Norwich, 99-72
#10	405	Wooster	15-4	LOST at #32 Ohio Wesleyan, 85-92; LOST at Wabash, 65-68
#11	355	Virginia Wesleyan	16-3	won at Randolph, 82-74; def. Roanoke, 84-66
#12	342	Emory	14-4	won at Brandeis, 65-51; LOST at #23 New York University, 92-96
#13	334	Richard Stockton	17-3	LOST at TCNJ, 63-66; won at #25 William Paterson, 61-57
#14	290	St. Norbert	17-1	def. Ripon, 85-65; def. Carroll, 75-30
#15	283	Chapman	16-2	LOST at Cal Lutheran, 66-69; LOST at Pomona-Pitzer, 87-89
#16	248	Elmhurst	16-4	LOST to #4 Augustana, 73-77; def. Millikin, 88-72
#17	208	Babson	17-2	def. Clark, 80-59; def. Emerson, 75-50
#18	176	Johns Hopkins	17-2	def. McDaniel, 65-59; def. Haverford, 96-54
#19	173	UW-Stevens Point	16-4	won at UW-La Crosse, 63-44; won at UW-Eau Claire, 49-40
#20	152	Franklin and Marshall	17-2	def. Gettysburg, 70-48; def. Swarthmore, 84-76
#21	95	Whitworth	17-2	def. Lewis and Clark, 68-60; def. Willamette, 90-83
#22	85	Eastern Connecticut	16-4	def. Western Connecticut, 82-68; LOST at Plymouth State, 57-65
#23	69	New York University	13-5	LOST to Rochester, 60-64; def. #12 Emory, 96-92
#24	63	St. Olaf	15-3	def. Macalester, 74-52; won at Carleton, 58-50
#25	52	William Paterson	16-3	LOST to #13 Richard Stockton, 57-61

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
T#26	47	Case Western Reserve	14-4	LOST at #33 Chicago, 72-81; won at #7 Washington U., 89-78
T#26	47	North Central (Ill.)	15-5	LOST to Millikin, 66-69; def. Wheaton (Ill.), 63-62
#28	36	Hardin-Simmons	16-3	won at Sul Ross State, 75-61; LOST to Howard Payne, 76-81
#29	27	Catholic	17-3	won at Susquehanna, 82-65; won at Moravian, 78-38
#30	26	St. John Fisher	17-2	won at Nazareth, 80-63; def. Utica, 100-65
#31	24	Illinois Wesleyan	15-5	def. Wheaton (Ill.), 79-70; won at Carthage, 77-65
#32	18	Ohio Wesleyan	15-4	def. #10 Wooster, 92-85; won at Hiram, 70-64
#33	10	Chicago	13-5	def. T#26 Case Western Reserve, 81-72; def. Carnegie Mellon, 86-65
#34	6	MIT	14-4	won at Wheaton (Mass.), 80-53; def. Clark, 80-57
#35	5	Brooklyn	17-4	LOST at Lehman, 78-81; def. Staten Island, 83-63
#36	4	Amherst	14-5	~~01/27 vs. Lasell~~ postponed; def. Colby, 83-62; def. Bowdoin, 81-66
#37	2	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	14-4	def. Occidental, 82-51; won at Whittier, 76-70
T#38	1	Aurora	16-5	LOST at Rockford, 77-86; def. Illinois Tech, 101-38
T#38	1	Rhode Island College	14-5	LOST at Mass-Dartmouth, 62-72; def. Mass-Boston, 70-59

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on February 02, 2015, 08:44:27 AM

What a mess! Can we just admit that at this point the rankings mean nothing? What a crazy year! It seems as though their are 35 teams that could win it all and all of them could also lose in the first round.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on February 02, 2015, 09:33:23 AM

Thayne Recker.... any relation to Luke Recker?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 02, 2015, 02:10:14 PM

Quote from: hopefan on February 02, 2015, 09:33:23 AM
Thayne Recker.... any relation to Luke Recker?

I don't believe so, although they might be cousins (second, third, ...). I'll have to ask him next time I see him. However, Luke's father, Clair Recker, played at Bluffton in the early 70's (still second in all-time scoring with 1667 points).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 03, 2015, 12:18:27 PM

If anyone wants to give it a read, here is my Top 25 ballot for this week: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2603 (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2603)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D3HoopJunkie on February 03, 2015, 01:11:23 PM

Don't give me that "no team to put in the 11 spot" bologna Dave ;D ;) You are coming around and warming up to the Falcons!!!I can just tell!!!

Great break down as usual!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: stag44 on February 03, 2015, 01:53:46 PM

Surprising that Claremont-Mudd-Scripps dropped out completely this week - I'm guessing only one voter had them on, but wins by 31 and 6 only to be overtaken by Cal Lutheran who they beat.

Big game tonight between them and Chapman - Winner has the inside lane to winning the SCIAC

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 03, 2015, 04:41:39 PM

Quote from: D3HoopJunkie on February 03, 2015, 01:11:23 PM
Don't give me that "no team to put in the 11 spot" bologna Dave ;D ;) You are coming around and warming up to the Falcons!!!I can just tell!!!

Great break down as usual!

Ha... keep on believing :)

Quote from: stag44 on February 03, 2015, 01:53:46 PM
Surprising that Claremont-Mudd-Scripps dropped out completely this week - I'm guessing only one voter had them on, but wins by 31 and 6 only to be overtaken by Cal Lutheran who they beat.

Big game tonight between them and Chapman - Winner has the inside lane to winning the SCIAC

The losses by Chapman might have hurt them here. I have CMS on my ballot until a couple of weeks ago. I think voters have been considering Chapman, CMS, and Cal Lu all season, but there is no way two of them belong in the Top 25 at the same time. I wouldn't be surprised if the lone voter who may have been voting for CMS decided on something different this week - I've been known for doing that :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 03, 2015, 07:19:09 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 03, 2015, 12:18:27 PM
If anyone wants to give it a read, here is my Top 25 ballot for this week: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2603 (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2603)

You made a slight error in your blog comment about Augustana, D-Mac. NPU isn't "at the bottom of their conference." The team that is at the bottom of the CCIW is a certain orange-colored team in west suburban DuPage County whose first initial is "Wheaton" and whose second initial is "College."

And, yes, if you think that you're detecting a hint of schadenfreude in this post, you are correct. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 03, 2015, 07:46:12 PM

Ha yes... I was also being somewhat generic since NPU was tied with said orange-colored team prior to their game with Augustana... though the hint of schadenfreude is rather strong :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 04, 2015, 06:08:06 AM

So.... Whitworth?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: njf1003 on February 04, 2015, 09:47:49 PM

#16 F&M plays better against a top 15 team but still falls to #13 Hopkins 50-46.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 04, 2015, 10:19:37 PM

According to the scoreboard, North Central just beat Augustana 72-70. That's Augie's second straight loss and third in five games and stood atop the poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 05, 2015, 07:53:32 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	615	UW-Whitewater	18-2	02/07 vs. UW-Eau Claire
#2	597	St. Thomas	18-1	won at St. Mary's (Minn.), 79-57; 02/07 vs. Carleton
#3	580	Marietta	20-0	won at Capital, 85-73; 02/07 vs. Wilmington
#4	542	Dickinson	18-2	won at Gettysburg, 72-60; 02/07 at Ursinus
#5	510	Randolph-Macon	18-2	def. Eastern Mennonite, 76-73; 02/07 at Washington and Lee
#6	472	Augustana	17-4	LOST to T#39 North Central (Ill.), 70-72; 02/07 vs. Carthage
#7	458	Albertus Magnus	18-1	won at Lasell, 96-86; 02/07 vs. Suffolk
#8	432	Virginia Wesleyan	17-3	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 77-59; 02/07 at Emory and Henry
#9	409	St. Norbert	18-1	def. Lawrence, 81-63; 02/07 at Beloit
#10	348	WPI	17-3	won at Emerson, 81-73; 02/07 vs. #11 Babson
#11	347	Babson	18-2	won at Wheaton (Mass.), 75-50; 02/07 at #10 WPI
#12	338	Washington U.	15-3	02/06 at Carnegie Mellon; 02/08 at #28 Case Western Reserve
#13	284	Johns Hopkins	18-2	won at #16 Franklin and Marshall, 50-46; 02/07 at Swarthmore
#14	256	Emory	14-4	02/06 vs. Brandeis; 02/08 vs. New York University
#15	251	UW-Stevens Point	17-4	def. UW-River Falls, 63-40; 02/07 at UW-Platteville
#16	246	Franklin and Marshall	17-3	LOST to #13 Johns Hopkins, 46-50; 02/07 at Washington College
#17	227	Richard Stockton	18-3	def. Rutgers-Camden, 58-51; 02/07 at Ramapo
#18	222	Whitworth	17-3	LOST at Whitman, 44-68; 02/07 at Linfield
#19	208	Elmhurst	17-4	won at Carthage, 78-75; 02/07 at Wheaton (Ill.)
#20	169	Wooster	16-4	won at Kenyon, 93-91; 02/07 vs. Denison
#21	105	St. Olaf	16-3	def. St. John's, 71-67; 02/07 at Gustavus Adolphus
#22	85	Chapman	17-2	won at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 65-62; 02/07 vs. Occidental
#23	84	Catholic	18-3	def. Elizabethtown, 68-65; 02/07 vs. Drew
#24	48	St. John Fisher	17-2	02/06 vs. Elmira
#25	47	William Paterson	17-3	~~02/02 at New Jersey City~~ postponed; won at Montclair State, 70-67; 02/07 vs. Rutgers-Newark

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	45	Ohio Wesleyan	16-4	won at Wittenberg, 49-47; 02/07 vs. Kenyon
#27	38	NYU	13-5	02/06 at Rochester; 02/08 at #14 Emory
#28	37	Case Western Reserve	14-4	02/06 vs. #30 Chicago; 02/08 vs. #12 Washington U.
#29	29	Illinois Wesleyan	16-5	won at Millikin, 80-61; 02/07 vs. T#39 North Central (Ill.)
#30	24	Chicago	13-5	02/06 at #28 Case Western Reserve; 02/08 at Carnegie Mellon
T#31	12	MIT	14-5	LOST at Springfield, 38-66; 02/07 vs. Coast Guard
T#31	12	Eastern Connecticut	16-4	02/07 vs. Mass-Boston
T#33	9	Centre	14-4	02/06 vs. Rhodes; 02/08 vs. Hendrix
T#33	9	Hardin-Simmons	16-4	LOST to Texas-Dallas, 62-68; 02/07 at Louisiana College
T#33	9	Penn State-Behrend	18-2	02/07 vs. Franciscan (Ohio)
#36	7	Amherst	15-5	won at Rhode Island College, 72-63; 02/06 at Connecticut College; 02/07 at Wesleyan
#37	5	Trinity (Conn.)	16-5	02/06 at Wesleyan; 02/07 at Connecticut College
#38	4	Cal Lutheran	14-4	def. Pomona-Pitzer, 63-61; 02/07 at Redlands
T#39	2	Bates	15-4	def. Maine-Farmington, 77-64; 02/06 vs. Williams; 02/07 vs. Hamilton
T#39	2	North Central (Ill.)	16-5	won at #6 Augustana, 72-70; 02/07 at #29 Illinois Wesleyan
#41	1	Bethel	12-6	LOST at Hamline, 75-76; 02/07 at St. John's

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 05, 2015, 06:50:59 PM

Grinnell anyone?

http://m.espn.go.com/general/story?storyId=12274993&src=desktop&ex_cid=espnFB

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on February 05, 2015, 07:06:34 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 05, 2015, 06:50:59 PM
Grinnell anyone?

http://m.espn.go.com/general/story?storyId=12274993&src=desktop&ex_cid=espnFB

Maybe the coach thought he'd get suspended if he ran up the score any further. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 06, 2015, 10:41:54 PM

Not sure where to put this.

Ripon's Ty Sabin hit the 1,000 - point plateau in just his 43rd game. Thought that was impressive. Surely not a record though. Any idea what is? Regardless, congrats!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 06, 2015, 10:46:22 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 06, 2015, 10:41:54 PM
Not sure where to put this.

Ripon's Ty Sabin hit the 1,000 - point plateau in just his 43rd game. Thought that was impressive. Surely not a record though. Any idea what is? Regardless, congrats!

Greg Grant from TCNJ has the single season scoring record - 1,044 points in 1989, 32 total games. Assuming he didn't have 45 in the final game, I'd guess 31 is the record.

You mean to start a career, though, huh?

Do transfers count? Kyle Myrick transferred into Lincoln as a Junior and scored a bunch really fast. He might be up there. Or are you talking just freshmen coming in and scoring 1,000 quickly?

I'm guessing John Grotberg from Grinnell is probably the fastest to 1,000 starting with freshman year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 06, 2015, 10:53:52 PM

The NCAA doesn't list a record in its record book, but Andre Foreman, the all-time leading scorer in D-III, scored 616 in his first season in 25 games and 663 in the 26 games in his sophomore year.

By the way, Foreman was just 2-for-6 from 3-point range those two seasons.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 06, 2015, 11:04:24 PM

John Grotberg went over 1,000 January 4, 2007 against Oshkosh, just his 32nd NCAA game. That has to be the record. I can't imagine any other freshman/soph averaging 31.5ppg to start a career.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 07, 2015, 02:38:37 AM

I'm guessing fastest to 1,000 points is what I'm looking for. Thanks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: northb on February 07, 2015, 07:58:05 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 06, 2015, 10:41:54 PM
Not sure where to put this.

Ripon's Ty Sabin hit the 1,000 - point plateau in just his 43rd game. Thought that was impressive. Surely not a record though. Any idea what is? Regardless, congrats!

Springsteen's Born To Run. Now, that was a record!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: monsoon on February 07, 2015, 09:23:41 AM

Quote from: northb on February 07, 2015, 07:58:05 AM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 06, 2015, 10:41:54 PM
Not sure where to put this.

Ripon's Ty Sabin hit the 1,000 - point plateau in just his 43rd game. Thought that was impressive. Surely not a record though. Any idea what is? Regardless, congrats!

Springsteen's Born To Run. Now, that was a record!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 08, 2015, 05:21:19 PM

Is Daryl ok? I'm missing my easy-to-read Top 25 update.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 08, 2015, 06:45:27 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 08, 2015, 05:21:19 PM
Is Daryl ok? I'm missing my easy-to-read Top 25 update.

I'm OK; I was just preoccupied with grading. It's coming shortly. (The network bandwidth in my house is currently bogged down with the other two residents bingewatching on Netflix ["Life" and "Breaking Bad"], so the report is taking a little longer to complete.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 08, 2015, 06:48:50 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	615	UW-Whitewater	19-2	def. UW-Eau Claire, 77-62
#2	597	St. Thomas	19-1	won at St. Mary's (Minn.), 79-57; def. Carleton, 68-52
#3	580	Marietta	21-0	won at Capital, 85-73; def. Wilmington, 85-75
#4	542	Dickinson	18-3	won at Gettysburg, 72-60; LOST at Ursinus, 50-53
#5	510	Randolph-Macon	19-2	def. Eastern Mennonite, 76-73; won at Washington and Lee, 82-77
#6	472	Augustana	18-4	LOST to T#39 North Central (Ill.), 70-72; def. Carthage, 60-29
#7	458	Albertus Magnus	19-1	won at Lasell, 96-86; def. Suffolk, 113-70
#8	432	Virginia Wesleyan	18-3	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 77-59; won at Emory and Henry, 88-54
#9	409	St. Norbert	19-1	def. Lawrence, 81-63; won at Beloit, 74-53
#10	348	WPI	17-4	won at Emerson, 81-73; LOST to #11 Babson, 55-59
#11	347	Babson	19-2	won at Wheaton (Mass.), 75-50; won at #10 WPI, 59-55
#12	338	Washington U.	16-4	LOST at Carnegie Mellon, 59-72; won at #28 Case Western Reserve, 95-75
#13	284	Johns Hopkins	19-2	won at #16 Franklin and Marshall, 50-46; won at Swarthmore, 56-55
#14	256	Emory	15-5	def. Brandeis, 89-53; LOST to New York University, 70-72
#15	251	UW-Stevens Point	18-4	def. UW-River Falls, 63-40; won at UW-Platteville, 67-55
#16	246	Franklin and Marshall	17-4	LOST to #13 Johns Hopkins, 46-50; LOST at Washington College, 80-81
#17	227	Richard Stockton	18-4	def. Rutgers-Camden, 58-51; LOST at Ramapo, 46-52
#18	222	Whitworth	18-3	LOST at Whitman, 44-68; won at Linfield, 67-50
#19	208	Elmhurst	17-5	won at Carthage, 78-75; LOST at Wheaton (Ill.), 68-76
#20	169	Wooster	16-5	won at Kenyon, 93-91; LOST to Denison, 72-76
#21	105	St. Olaf	17-3	def. St. John's, 71-67; won at Gustavus Adolphus, 82-68
#22	85	Chapman	18-2	won at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 65-62; def. Occidental, 94-66
#23	84	Catholic	19-3	def. Elizabethtown, 68-65; def. Drew, 82-57
#24	48	St. John Fisher	18-2	def. Elmira, 82-66
#25	47	William Paterson	18-3	~~02/02 at New Jersey City~~ postponed; won at Montclair State, 70-67; def. Rutgers-Newark, 95-61

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	45	Ohio Wesleyan	17-4	won at Wittenberg, 49-47; def. Kenyon, 102-93
#27	38	NYU	14-6	LOST at Rochester, 75-85; won at #14 Emory, 72-70
#28	37	Case Western Reserve	14-6	LOST to #30 Chicago, 73-79; LOST to #12 Washington U., 75-95
#29	29	Illinois Wesleyan	17-5	won at Millikin, 80-61; def. T#39 North Central (Ill.), 76-44
#30	24	Chicago	14-6	won at #28 Case Western Reserve, 79-73; LOST at Carnegie Mellon, 48-73
T#31	12	MIT	15-5	LOST at Springfield, 38-66; def. Coast Guard, 78-58
T#31	12	Eastern Connecticut	17-4	def. Mass-Boston, 78-61
T#33	9	Centre	16-4	def. Rhodes, 57-54; def. Hendrix, 70-41
T#33	9	Hardin-Simmons	16-5	LOST to Texas-Dallas, 62-68; LOST at Louisiana College, 63-65
T#33	9	Penn State-Behrend	19-2	def. Franciscan (Ohio), 61-41
#36	7	Amherst	17-5	won at Rhode Island College, 72-63; won at Connecticut College, 94-61; won at Wesleyan, 76-59
#37	5	Trinity (Conn.)	18-5	won at Wesleyan, 65-61; won at Connecticut College, 80-68
#38	4	Cal Lutheran	15-4	def. Pomona-Pitzer, 63-61; won at Redlands, 48-47
T#39	2	Bates	17-4	def. Maine-Farmington, 77-64; def. Williams, 70-68; def. Hamilton, 73-71
T#39	2	North Central (Ill.)	16-6	won at #6 Augustana, 72-70; LOST at #29 Illinois Wesleyan, 44-76
#41	1	Bethel	12-7	LOST at Hamline, 75-76; LOST at St. John's, 61-74

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 09, 2015, 07:10:11 PM

New Top 25 is out. Quite a bit of movement. Marietta got two of Whitewater's #1 votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on February 10, 2015, 10:46:25 AM

I took the rankings according to D3hoops.com and Massey and then took an average. Since D3hoops.com only ranks the teams with top 25 votes, I gave a ranking of 50th to any team that recieved 0 votes. Thought it would give an interesting blend of computer rankings and voter opinion... you know, because the BCS was so popular :P

1   St Thomas (3)
2   UW Whitewater (4)
3   Marietta (5)
4   Randolph Macon (11)
5   St Norbert (12)
6   Virginia Wesleyan (15)
7   UW Stevens Point (16)
7   Babson (16)
9   St Olaf (21)
10   Augustana (22)
11   Johns Hopkins (23)
12   Washington (30)
13   Dickinson (32)
14   Illinois Wesleyan (33)
14   Chapman (33)
16   William Paterson (34)
17   Whitworth (35)
17   Albertus Magnus (35)
19   St John Fisher (37)
20   Richard Stockton (41)
21   Elmhurst (43)
22   Emory (44)
22   Catholic (44)
24   WPI (45)
25   Ohio Wesleyan (48)
26   E Connecticut (50)
27   Amherst (58)
28   Wooster (65)
29   Hope (67)
29   North Central (67)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 11, 2015, 02:55:32 PM

Regional Rankings are out: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2015/02/11/first-regional-rankings-released-today/ (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2015/02/11/first-regional-rankings-released-today/)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 11, 2015, 04:18:53 PM

I am a day late with this - sorry about that (been really busy of late) - but here is my Top 25 for Week 10: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2621 (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2621)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D3HoopJunkie on February 11, 2015, 04:33:49 PM

DAVE!! We moved up 1 last week and I thought there was hope!!!! It looked as if you were warming up to the Falcons!! Now we go back to 12!!! CMON MAN!! ;D

I will say though I think you have more faith in the Falcons then the Regional Rankings Commitee apparently. Like you said though a lot can change in the next couple weeks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 11, 2015, 04:43:41 PM

Just keeping AMC at the ceiling for now... they might move up a slot again next week since Chapman has already lost this week.

And a lot can change... and the criteria in the Northeast says AMC shouldn't be that high.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ferraro13 on February 11, 2015, 07:17:24 PM

That's why the criteria is a bunch of garbage lol bc they are a top 3 team in NE. End of story

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 11, 2015, 08:00:13 PM

As soon as you realize every team in every sport in the Division III athletics is playing with the same criteria... and that is far more important than Top 25 standings... the better. The Top 25 doesn't matter in Division I, either. Criteria... criteria... criteria... and trust me the criteria now is FAR better than in recent D3 history.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: lildave678 on February 11, 2015, 09:08:55 PM

Down goes Virginia Wesleyan and Marietta.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on February 11, 2015, 09:48:53 PM

Stevens Point over Whitewater, 72-69.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 11, 2015, 09:53:46 PM

Quote from: WUH on February 11, 2015, 09:48:53 PM
Stevens Point over Whitewater, 72-69.

shhh Stevens Point is "down" this year

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 11, 2015, 10:01:02 PM

Not to take anything away from the win, but preseason 1st team All - American KJ Evans didn't play for Whitewater. If Quardell Young is 1A, Evans is 1B. Point missed the 1st of a 1-1 up 3 and Whitewater had 2 chances to tie it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 12, 2015, 08:08:23 AM

Numbers 1, 3, 5, 9, 19, 22, and 24 all lost last night - only one of them (IWU) to a higher ranked team. Going to be another shakeup this week - not to mention the heart attack it's going to give the regional committees.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 12, 2015, 09:31:49 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	610	UW-Whitewater	19-3	LOST at #12 UW-Stevens Point, 69-72; 02/14 vs. UW-River Falls
#2	598	St. Thomas	20-1	won at Macalester, 68-48; 02/14 at Concordia-Moorhead
#3	591	Marietta	21-1	LOST at Mount Union, 92-102; 02/14 at John Carroll
#4	540	Randolph-Macon	20-2	def. Hampden-Sydney, 79-65; 02/14 at Randolph
#5	498	Virginia Wesleyan	18-4	LOST at Eastern Mennonite, 75-87; 02/14 at Washington and Lee
#6	483	Albertus Magnus	20-1	won at Mount Ida, 95-59; 02/14 at Johnson and Wales
#7	470	St. Norbert	20-1	def. Lake Forest, 93-80; 02/14 at Knox
#8	417	Babson	20-2	def. Springfield, 76-57; 02/14 at Clark
#9	409	Dickinson	18-4	LOST at McDaniel, 73-78; 02/14 vs. #10 Johns Hopkins
#10	380	Johns Hopkins	20-2	def. Gettysburg, 66-54; 02/14 at #9 Dickinson
#11	362	Augustana	19-4	won at #24 Illinois Wesleyan, 82-56; 02/14 vs. Millikin
#12	358	UW-Stevens Point	19-4	def. #1 UW-Whitewater, 72-69; 02/14 vs. UW-Stout
#13	293	WPI	18-4	def. #38 MIT, 69-56; 02/14 at Coast Guard
#14	230	Washington U.	16-4	02/13 at #20 Emory; 02/15 at Rochester
#15	209	St. Olaf	19-3	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 68-40; won at Augsburg, 67-58; 02/14 at Hamline
#16	195	Catholic	20-3	won at Goucher, 100-85
#17	162	St. John Fisher	18-2	02/13 vs. Houghton; 02/14 vs. Nazareth
#18	158	Chapman	18-3	LOST to Whittier, 63-79
#19	154	Richard Stockton	18-5	LOST to New Jersey City, 65-70; 02/14 at Kean
#20	147	Emory	15-5	02/13 vs. #14 Washington U.; 02/15 vs. #33 Chicago
#21	143	Whitworth	18-3	02/13 vs. George Fox; 02/14 vs. Pacific
#22	126	William Paterson	19-4	won at New Jersey City, 62-59; LOST at Kean, 65-66; 02/14 at TCNJ
#23	124	Ohio Wesleyan	18-4	def. Wabash, 81-80; 02/14 at Allegheny
#24	101	Illinois Wesleyan	17-6	LOST to #11 Augustana, 56-82; 02/14 at North Park
#25	54	Elmhurst	18-5	def. North Park, 89-49; 02/14 vs. #36 North Central (Ill.)

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	51	Franklin and Marshall	18-4	def. Ursinus, 91-38; 02/14 at Muhlenberg
#27	47	Wooster	17-5	def. Hiram, 79-44; 02/14 at Wittenberg
T#28	44	NYU	14-6	02/13 vs. Case Western Reserve; 02/15 vs. Carnegie Mellon
T#28	44	Eastern Connecticut	18-4	def. Keene State, 82-76; 02/14 at Mass-Dartmouth
#30	29	Penn State-Behrend	20-2	def. Medaille, 89-60; 02/14 at Mount Aloysius
#31	19	Scranton	17-5	LOST to Susquehanna, 60-74; 02/14 at Goucher
#32	16	Amherst	17-5	02/12 vs. Lasell; 02/15 at Middlebury
#33	14	Chicago	14-6	02/13 at Rochester; 02/15 at #20 Emory
#34	13	Bates	17-4	02/13 at Bowdoin; 02/14 at Colby
#35	11	Trinity (Conn.)	18-5	02/13 at Middlebury
#36	10	North Central (Ill.)	17-6	def. Carthage, 65-61; 02/14 at #25 Elmhurst
#37	5	Centre	16-4	02/13 at Birmingham-Southern; 02/15 at Millsaps
#38	4	MIT	15-6	LOST at #13 WPI, 56-69; 02/14 vs. Wheaton (Mass.)
#39	3	Cal Lutheran	16-4	won at La Verne, 71-64; 02/14 vs. Whittier
T#40	1	Clarkson	17-4	02/13 at Union; 02/14 at RPI
T#40	1	Rhode Island College	15-7	LOST at Western Connecticut, 76-84; 02/14 vs. Southern Maine
T#40	1	Sage	18-4	won at SUNY-Purchase, 101-75; 02/15 vs. Yeshiva

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 12, 2015, 01:09:31 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 12, 2015, 08:08:23 AM

Numbers 1, 3, 5, 9, 19, 22, and 24 all lost last night - only one of them (IWU) to a higher ranked team. Going to be another shakeup this week - not to mention the heart attack it's going to give the regional committees.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi767.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fxx312%2Fglyttery%2Fqnw6ll.gif&hash=7231ce6576a05ad25f46e19a9ba021e0a292bbd6) (http://media.photobucket.com/user/glyttery/media/qnw6ll.gif.html)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 12, 2015, 02:41:42 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 12, 2015, 01:09:31 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 12, 2015, 08:08:23 AM

Numbers 1, 3, 5, 9, 19, 22, and 24 all lost last night - only one of them (IWU) to a higher ranked team. Going to be another shakeup this week - not to mention the heart attack it's going to give the regional committees.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi767.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fxx312%2Fglyttery%2Fqnw6ll.gif&hash=7231ce6576a05ad25f46e19a9ba021e0a292bbd6) (http://media.photobucket.com/user/glyttery/media/qnw6ll.gif.html)

Everytime I see this I'm reminded of Mr. Rogers episodes. That could be King Friday's servant.

Maybe that just shows my age.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 12, 2015, 02:46:18 PM

It is a Potter Puppet Pal(?).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on February 12, 2015, 03:08:05 PM

Quote from: sac on February 12, 2015, 02:41:42 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 12, 2015, 01:09:31 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 12, 2015, 08:08:23 AM

Numbers 1, 3, 5, 9, 19, 22, and 24 all lost last night - only one of them (IWU) to a higher ranked team. Going to be another shakeup this week - not to mention the heart attack it's going to give the regional committees.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi767.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fxx312%2Fglyttery%2Fqnw6ll.gif&hash=7231ce6576a05ad25f46e19a9ba021e0a292bbd6) (http://media.photobucket.com/user/glyttery/media/qnw6ll.gif.html)

Everytime I see this I'm reminded of Mr. Rogers episodes. That could be King Friday's servant.

Maybe that just shows my age.

Mister Rogers' Neighborhood ran on network television in the United States from 1968 to 2001. So, assuming you were a viewer between the age of 4 and 6, you're somewhere between 18 and 53.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 12, 2015, 03:13:18 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 12, 2015, 03:08:05 PM
Quote from: sac on February 12, 2015, 02:41:42 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 12, 2015, 01:09:31 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 12, 2015, 08:08:23 AM

Numbers 1, 3, 5, 9, 19, 22, and 24 all lost last night - only one of them (IWU) to a higher ranked team. Going to be another shakeup this week - not to mention the heart attack it's going to give the regional committees.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi767.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fxx312%2Fglyttery%2Fqnw6ll.gif&hash=7231ce6576a05ad25f46e19a9ba021e0a292bbd6) (http://media.photobucket.com/user/glyttery/media/qnw6ll.gif.html)

Everytime I see this I'm reminded of Mr. Rogers episodes. That could be King Friday's servant.

Maybe that just shows my age.

Mister Rogers' Neighborhood ran on network television in the United States from 1968 to 2001. So, assuming you were a viewer between the age of 4 and 6, you're somewhere between 18 and 53.

Or have kids of the right age. I know much more about Barney and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles than I wish I did! ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 12, 2015, 03:35:15 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 12, 2015, 03:08:05 PM
Quote from: sac on February 12, 2015, 02:41:42 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 12, 2015, 01:09:31 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 12, 2015, 08:08:23 AM

Numbers 1, 3, 5, 9, 19, 22, and 24 all lost last night - only one of them (IWU) to a higher ranked team. Going to be another shakeup this week - not to mention the heart attack it's going to give the regional committees.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi767.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fxx312%2Fglyttery%2Fqnw6ll.gif&hash=7231ce6576a05ad25f46e19a9ba021e0a292bbd6) (http://media.photobucket.com/user/glyttery/media/qnw6ll.gif.html)

Everytime I see this I'm reminded of Mr. Rogers episodes. That could be King Friday's servant.

Maybe that just shows my age.

Mister Rogers' Neighborhood ran on network television in the United States from 1968 to 2001. So, assuming you were a viewer between the age of 4 and 6, you're somewhere between 18 and 53.

Yes, somewhere in there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SgtPaul on February 12, 2015, 04:10:56 PM

Glad I am not a voter in the polls(Poster or otherwise). This year would require almost as much of a time commitment as a fantasy baseball team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 12, 2015, 05:17:11 PM

Quote from: SgtPaul on February 12, 2015, 04:10:56 PM
Glad I am not a voter in the polls(Poster or otherwise). This year would require almost as much of a time commitment as a fantasy baseball team.

Or just a really open mind.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on February 12, 2015, 05:21:22 PM

QuoteEverytime I see this I'm reminded of Mr. Rogers episodes. That could be King Friday's servant.

Maybe that just shows my age.

YES! Me too!

"Meow, meow, meow, meow, meow, meow..."

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.neighborhoodarchive.com%2Fimages%2Fmrn%2Fcharacters%2Fdaniel_striped_tiger%2F1751.jpg&hash=1b062a41159724101cccedb86dd42323ef5ef957)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 12, 2015, 05:38:27 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on February 12, 2015, 05:21:22 PM
QuoteEverytime I see this I'm reminded of Mr. Rogers episodes. That could be King Friday's servant.

Maybe that just shows my age.

YES! Me too!

"Meow, meow, meow, meow, meow, meow..."

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.neighborhoodarchive.com%2Fimages%2Fmrn%2Fcharacters%2Fdaniel_striped_tiger%2F1751.jpg&hash=1b062a41159724101cccedb86dd42323ef5ef957)

They do have the animated Daniel Tiger's Neighborhood now. In animation, he's way less creepy - although all the little songs will be stuck in your heard for the rest of time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 12, 2015, 05:44:09 PM

Yes... this is true. Gordon will learn that soon enough LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 12, 2015, 06:22:27 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on February 12, 2015, 05:21:22 PM
QuoteEverytime I see this I'm reminded of Mr. Rogers episodes. That could be King Friday's servant.

Maybe that just shows my age.

YES! Me too!

"Meow, meow, meow, meow, meow, meow..."

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.neighborhoodarchive.com%2Fimages%2Fmrn%2Fcharacters%2Fdaniel_striped_tiger%2F1751.jpg&hash=1b062a41159724101cccedb86dd42323ef5ef957)

Gordon,

That looks a lot like one of Just Bill's weasels.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 12, 2015, 06:35:00 PM

Quote from: magicman on February 12, 2015, 06:22:27 PM
Quote from: gordonmann on February 12, 2015, 05:21:22 PM
QuoteEverytime I see this I'm reminded of Mr. Rogers episodes. That could be King Friday's servant.

Maybe that just shows my age.

YES! Me too!

"Meow, meow, meow, meow, meow, meow..."

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.neighborhoodarchive.com%2Fimages%2Fmrn%2Fcharacters%2Fdaniel_striped_tiger%2F1751.jpg&hash=1b062a41159724101cccedb86dd42323ef5ef957)

Gordon,

That looks a lot like one of Just Bill's weasels.

Careful, magicman - they're in the process, too. That's Just Bill's weasels^TM! :o

I don't know about anyone else, but I'm getting very nervous about posting anything for fear of trademark violation^TM. (Down, weasel^TM, down!)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 12, 2015, 06:56:08 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 12, 2015, 08:08:23 AM

Numbers 1, 3, 5, 9, 19, 22, and 24 all lost last night - only one of them (IWU) to a higher ranked team. Going to be another shakeup this week - not to mention the heart attack it's going to give the regional committees.

Though WW was higher ranked, Whitewater at Point wasn't an upset, especially with Evans being out. Massey had UWSP a 3 point favorite. Point should have likely been the favorite or at least a pick-em.

I don't think that result changes things in the Central, especially with Augustana's W over Illinois Wesleyan last night. I mused at length about SP vs. Augie on the WIAC page... I don't see UWSP jumping to #2 unless Augustana loses and Whitewater would need to lose at least one more to drop out of the top spot in the Central.

Central – Records as of 2/8
1 UW-Whitewater 18-1 19-2
2 Augustana 18-4 18-4
3 UW-Stevens Point 18-4 18-4
4 Washington U. 16-4 16-4
5 Illinois Wesleyan 17-5 17-5
6 St. Norbert 19-1 19-1
7 Elmhurst 17-5 17-5
8 North Central (Ill.) 14-6 16-6

1. Whitewater's remaining schedule:

2/14 Vs. River Falls (#3 WIAC 8-5; Last time: WW 67 RF 63)
2/18 Vs. Oshkosh (#5 WIAC 6-7; Last time: WW 78 Osh 59
2/21 @ Stout (#9 WIAC 0-13; Last time: WW 96 Stout 67)
2/24 WIAC Tournament Bye
2/26 WIAC Tournament vs (TBD)

2. Augustana's remaining schedule:

2/14 Vs. Millikin (#7 CCIW 3-9; Last time Augie 71 Millikin 68)
2/21 @ Wheaton (#6 CCIW 4-8; Last time Augie 78 Wheaton 74)
2/27 CCIW Tournament (location TBD)

3. Stevens Point remaining schedule:

2/14 Vs. Stout (#9 WIAC 0-13; Last Time Point 73 Stout 56)
2/18 Bye
2/21 @ Superior (#8 WIAC 2-11; Last Time Point 77 Superior 54)
2/24 WIAC Tournament Bye
2/26 WIAC Tournament vs (TBD)

After that, though... it gets interesting.

4. Wash U - UAA MADNESS

2/13 @ Emory (Tied #2 UAA 5-4; Last Time Wash U 80 Emory 67)
2/15 @ Rochester (Tied #2 UAA 5-4; Last Time Wash U 90 Roch 85)
2/20 Vs. NYU (Tied #2 UAA 5-4; Last Time NYU 91 Wash U 67)
2/22 Vs. Brandeis (#8 UAA 2-7; Last Time Wash U 79 Brand 68)
2/28 Vs. Chicago (#1 UAA 6-3; Last Time Chi 63 Wash U 43)

Yikes.

5. IWU already lost once, has to play Elmhurst and a North Park team fighting for a CCIW conference tourney birth.

6. St Norbert can only screw things up for everybody else by losing in the conference tournament. Carnage will be strewn around them...

7. Elmhurst has North Central and IWU, as mentioned before.

8. North Central has Elmhurst and North Park.

Chicago has to be close to cracking the ranking.... but they've got a meat grinder of and end of the year too... Same schedule as Wash U, their UAA traveling partner.

In other words, I'm fairly confident about the top 3. And maybe Norbert. But everybody else? Not so much.

And beyond any regular season nuttiness, all of these teams have to lose AGAIN in the conference tournament to be eligible for a Pool C. (which is maybe where this post should have gone in hindsight...)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 13, 2015, 05:59:00 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 12, 2015, 03:13:18 PM
Or have kids of the right age. I know much more about Barney and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles than I wish I did! ::)

My wife can name all the Thomas the Train trains...among other useless trivia.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 15, 2015, 05:19:05 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Probably one of the highest red-to-blue ratios ever ...

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	610	UW-Whitewater	20-3	LOST at #12 UW-Stevens Point, 69-72; def. UW-River Falls, 85-66
#2	598	St. Thomas	20-2	won at Macalester, 68-48; LOST at Concordia-Moorhead, 66-72
#3	591	Marietta	21-2	LOST at Mount Union, 92-102; LOST at John Carroll, 71-86
#4	540	Randolph-Macon	21-2	def. Hampden-Sydney, 79-65; won at Randolph, 74-66
#5	498	Virginia Wesleyan	19-4	LOST at Eastern Mennonite, 75-87; won at Washington and Lee, 71-53
#6	483	Albertus Magnus	21-1	won at Mount Ida, 95-59; won at Johnson and Wales, 77-75
#7	470	St. Norbert	21-1	def. Lake Forest, 93-80; won at Knox, 73-40
#8	417	Babson	21-2	def. Springfield, 76-57; won at Clark, 77-73
#9	409	Dickinson	19-4	LOST at McDaniel, 73-78; def. #10 Johns Hopkins, 59-57
#10	380	Johns Hopkins	20-3	def. Gettysburg, 66-54; LOST at #9 Dickinson, 57-59
#11	362	Augustana	20-4	won at #24 Illinois Wesleyan, 82-56; def. Millikin, 73-65
#12	358	UW-Stevens Point	20-4	def. #1 UW-Whitewater, 72-69; def. UW-Stout, 85-44
#13	293	WPI	19-4	def. #38 MIT, 69-56; won at Coast Guard, 65-47
#14	230	Washington U.	17-5	LOST at #20 Emory, 87-93; won at Rochester, 94-87
#15	209	St. Olaf	20-3	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 68-40; won at Augsburg, 67-58; won at Hamline, 100-88
#16	195	Catholic	20-3	won at Goucher, 100-85
#17	162	St. John Fisher	20-2	def. Houghton, 97-65; def. Nazareth, 71-51
#18	158	Chapman	18-3	LOST to Whittier, 63-79
#19	154	Richard Stockton	19-5	LOST to New Jersey City, 65-70; won at Kean, 64-63
#20	147	Emory	17-5	def. #14 Washington U., 93-87; def. #33 Chicago, 85-82
#21	143	Whitworth	20-3	def. George Fox, 90-76; def. Pacific, 89-50
#22	126	William Paterson	19-5	won at New Jersey City, 62-59; LOST at Kean, 65-66; LOST at TCNJ, 70-80
#23	124	Ohio Wesleyan	19-4	def. Wabash, 81-80; won at Allegheny, 80-66
#24	101	Illinois Wesleyan	17-7	LOST to #11 Augustana, 56-82; LOST at North Park, 83-85
#25	54	Elmhurst	19-5	def. North Park, 89-49; def. #36 North Central (Ill.), 84-78

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	51	Franklin and Marshall	19-4	def. Ursinus, 91-38; won at Muhlenberg, 65-56
#27	47	Wooster	18-5	def. Hiram, 79-44; won at Wittenberg, 63-59
T#28	44	NYU	16-6	def. Case Western Reserve, 94-73; def. Carnegie Mellon, 94-82
T#28	44	Eastern Connecticut	19-4	def. Keene State, 82-76; won at Mass-Dartmouth, 74-65
#30	29	Penn State-Behrend	21-2	def. Medaille, 89-60; won at Mount Aloysius, 80-57
#31	19	Scranton	18-5	LOST to Susquehanna, 60-74; won at Goucher, 82-64
#32	16	Amherst	18-6	def. Lasell, 69-52; LOST at Middlebury, 69-82
#33	14	Chicago	15-7	won at Rochester, 72-63; LOST at #20 Emory, 82-85
#34	13	Bates	18-5	LOST at Bowdoin, 70-98; won at Colby, 82-77
#35	11	Trinity (Conn.)	19-5	won at Middlebury, 90-85
#36	10	North Central (Ill.)	17-7	def. Carthage, 65-61; LOST at #25 Elmhurst, 78-84
#37	5	Centre	18-4	won at Birmingham-Southern, 69-42; won at Millsaps, 61-59
#38	4	MIT	16-6	LOST at #13 WPI, 56-69; def. Wheaton (Mass.), 71-56
#39	3	Cal Lutheran	17-4	won at La Verne, 71-64; def. Whittier, 111-108
T#40	1	Clarkson	18-5	LOST at Union, 70-75; won at RPI, 59-57
T#40	1	Rhode Island College	16-7	LOST at Western Connecticut, 76-84; def. Southern Maine, 65-44
T#40	1	Sage	19-4	won at SUNY-Purchase, 101-75; def. Yeshiva, 64-47

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 16, 2015, 07:02:45 PM

New number one on the men's side: Randolph-Macon. Here is the Top 25: http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2014-15/week11 (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2014-15/week11)

And here is my take: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2015/02/16/daves-top-25-ballot-week-11-3/ (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2015/02/16/daves-top-25-ballot-week-11-3/)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on February 16, 2015, 09:16:08 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 16, 2015, 07:02:45 PM
New number one on the men's side: Randolph-Macon. Here is the Top 25: http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2014-15/week11 (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2014-15/week11)

And here is my take: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2015/02/16/daves-top-25-ballot-week-11-3/ (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2015/02/16/daves-top-25-ballot-week-11-3/)

Very interesting to read your comments on your ballot. As a Randolph-Macon alum and fan I share the slight unease with which you voted them #1. I will nitpick about one thing. You said they had beaten everyone in the conference. Actually, they play Shenandoah for the first and only time Wednesday night. I'm hoping that game and the final game at E&H work out so you can keep the Jackets at the top of your ballot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 16, 2015, 09:50:28 PM

Yeah... I was being broad stroked by saying everyone - basically everyone they had faced so far. Rare end of season, first time playing game Wednesday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 16, 2015, 11:12:21 PM

I'm struck by the #1 vote that Stevens Point got and that they're up to #5. I think that's a bit of an over-reaction on the win over Whitewater... Or maybe it's simply a reaction to the carnage elsewhere in the poll.

Or maybe I'm just unconvinced by the lack of consistent production by a star or two... I just don't know how far defense and clean play can take them when the competition really ramps up come tournament time.

If you look at Point's four losses, some very curious things can be found.

Against St. Olaf, SP gave up 70, but shot 51% from the field, 58% from 3, and just turned it over 10 times. Certainly should have been able to score more than 69.

The North Central game was one that Stevens Point turned it over just 6 times, caused 17 NC TO's, shot 19 more times and held them to 63... But Point scored just 56.

Against St Thomas, SP shot 60% and 53% from 3, and turned it over just 4 times. But UST shot 51% and 58% from 3 and just turned it over 2 times and won 68-66.

In game 1 at Whitewater, Point hung with them for a half, but feel apart and has no offense in the second half. Granted, it was the first game that Pelkofer missed, but even in game 2, with KJ Evans gone for Whitewater, Point shot nearly 60% and turned it over just 6 times and barely squeaked by by 3, surviving two different tying attempts.

But... I guess SP has won 17/19, with the two losses being to WW and UST, and it makes sense that it would take Point some time to find its identity, after losing so much talent last year.

I would love to see them have great success as the post season unfolds... But I just don't know if they have what it takes for a sustained run.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 16, 2015, 11:12:56 PM

Randolph-Macon was, in my opinion, far and away the most impressive team at the Hoopsville Classic in November. Obviously everybody's had some issues this year. I imagine the long winning streak got them this position.

I tend to think St. Thomas is still #1 - they lost a trap game (with the St. Olaf matchup tonight), which isn't great, but there aren't usually trap games in the tournament - I don't know that this will matter in the long run.

In any event, no one really "deserves" the #1 spot, so it's tough to argue with any of a half dozen teams getting #1 votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 17, 2015, 12:21:04 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 16, 2015, 11:12:56 PM
Randolph-Macon was, in my opinion, far and away the most impressive team at the Hoopsville Classic in November. Obviously everybody's had some issues this year. I imagine the long winning streak got them this position.

I tend to think St. Thomas is still #1 - they lost a trap game (with the St. Olaf matchup tonight), which isn't great, but there aren't usually trap games in the tournament - I don't know that this will matter in the long run.

In any event, no one really "deserves" the #1 spot, so it's tough to argue with any of a half dozen teams getting #1 votes.

To be honest... number one teams shouldn't be losing trap games. That is why I took UST off of my number one slot.

And I do think there are trap games sometimes in round one or two... depending on the match-ups. We have seen some games that shouldn't be close become nail bitters because clearly the top team didn't take the AQ team very seriously.

And I agree, I was very impressed with RMC at the Hoopsville Classic, but some of their results after that weekend worried me. I gave them the nod because they have won 18 straight and they have taken on a lot of good teams and won. Sometimes simply winning matters the most.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 17, 2015, 08:53:54 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 17, 2015, 12:21:04 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 16, 2015, 11:12:56 PM
Randolph-Macon was, in my opinion, far and away the most impressive team at the Hoopsville Classic in November. Obviously everybody's had some issues this year. I imagine the long winning streak got them this position.

I tend to think St. Thomas is still #1 - they lost a trap game (with the St. Olaf matchup tonight), which isn't great, but there aren't usually trap games in the tournament - I don't know that this will matter in the long run.

In any event, no one really "deserves" the #1 spot, so it's tough to argue with any of a half dozen teams getting #1 votes.

To be honest... number one teams shouldn't be losing trap games. That is why I took UST off of my number one slot.

And I do think there are trap games sometimes in round one or two... depending on the match-ups. We have seen some games that shouldn't be close become nail bitters because clearly the top team didn't take the AQ team very seriously.

And I agree, I was very impressed with RMC at the Hoopsville Classic, but some of their results after that weekend worried me. I gave them the nod because they have won 18 straight and they have taken on a lot of good teams and won. Sometimes simply winning matters the most.

Did they keep starting that freshman PG? If so, that might explain early struggles, right?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on February 17, 2015, 10:38:23 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 17, 2015, 08:53:54 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 17, 2015, 12:21:04 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 16, 2015, 11:12:56 PM
Randolph-Macon was, in my opinion, far and away the most impressive team at the Hoopsville Classic in November. Obviously everybody's had some issues this year. I imagine the long winning streak got them this position.

I tend to think St. Thomas is still #1 - they lost a trap game (with the St. Olaf matchup tonight), which isn't great, but there aren't usually trap games in the tournament - I don't know that this will matter in the long run.

In any event, no one really "deserves" the #1 spot, so it's tough to argue with any of a half dozen teams getting #1 votes.

To be honest... number one teams shouldn't be losing trap games. That is why I took UST off of my number one slot.

And I do think there are trap games sometimes in round one or two... depending on the match-ups. We have seen some games that shouldn't be close become nail bitters because clearly the top team didn't take the AQ team very seriously.

And I agree, I was very impressed with RMC at the Hoopsville Classic, but some of their results after that weekend worried me. I gave them the nod because they have won 18 straight and they have taken on a lot of good teams and won. Sometimes simply winning matters the most.

Did they keep starting that freshman PG? If so, that might explain early struggles, right?

From what I can determine, R-MC's freshman pg Rip Engle has not started any games. He is averaging 13.3 mpg for the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 17, 2015, 10:44:34 AM

Rip Engle was the football coach at Penn State preceding Joe Paterno. Seems a little old to see that many minutes. :D (also kind of dead)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 17, 2015, 11:02:51 AM

+k sac!

The early struggles I think were more the team finding themselves. Expectations are always high and I think the Frostburg State game (some call it the worst home loss in RMC history) definitely seemed to wake them up. Sometimes teams need those moments.

My struggle with the number one vote is I do start considering this time of the year whether I think the team has a legitimate chance of making the final four in Salem and whether they can win a championship. I am just not sure about RMC. It has been awhile since an ODAC team has made the run and honestly many have been disappointed over the years.

The other side of that coin is I couldn't find any team I was that sure would be in Salem... it is just that kind of year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on February 17, 2015, 01:19:13 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 17, 2015, 11:02:51 AM
+k sac!

The early struggles I think were more the team finding themselves. Expectations are always high and I think the Frostburg State game (some call it the worst home loss in RMC history) definitely seemed to wake them up. Sometimes teams need those moments.

My struggle with the number one vote is I do start considering this time of the year whether I think the team has a legitimate chance of making the final four in Salem and whether they can win a championship. I am just not sure about RMC. It has been awhile since an ODAC team has made the run and honestly many have been disappointed over the years.

The other side of that coin is I couldn't find any team I was that sure would be in Salem... it is just that kind of year.

A valid concern after the first round exit on their home court last year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 17, 2015, 03:44:58 PM

Quote from: y_jack_lok on February 17, 2015, 10:38:23 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 17, 2015, 08:53:54 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 17, 2015, 12:21:04 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 16, 2015, 11:12:56 PM
Randolph-Macon was, in my opinion, far and away the most impressive team at the Hoopsville Classic in November. Obviously everybody's had some issues this year. I imagine the long winning streak got them this position.

I tend to think St. Thomas is still #1 - they lost a trap game (with the St. Olaf matchup tonight), which isn't great, but there aren't usually trap games in the tournament - I don't know that this will matter in the long run.

In any event, no one really "deserves" the #1 spot, so it's tough to argue with any of a half dozen teams getting #1 votes.

To be honest... number one teams shouldn't be losing trap games. That is why I took UST off of my number one slot.

And I do think there are trap games sometimes in round one or two... depending on the match-ups. We have seen some games that shouldn't be close become nail bitters because clearly the top team didn't take the AQ team very seriously.

And I agree, I was very impressed with RMC at the Hoopsville Classic, but some of their results after that weekend worried me. I gave them the nod because they have won 18 straight and they have taken on a lot of good teams and won. Sometimes simply winning matters the most.

Did they keep starting that freshman PG? If so, that might explain early struggles, right?

From what I can determine, R-MC's freshman pg Rip Engle has not started any games. He is averaging 13.3 mpg for the season.

My bad. I guess he was playing a few more minutes early in the season and, looking at the boxscore, there may have been an injury in play for the starter at the Hoopsville Classic.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on February 17, 2015, 06:18:01 PM

^^^ R-MC's senior pg Marcus Badger has started all 23 games for the Jackets and is averaging 24.0 mpg, more than anyone else on the team. I'm not aware of any injury he's had, but backup senior pg Trent Walker was injured for a while the first half of the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 17, 2015, 10:10:35 PM

Alfred 60 # 16 St. John Fisher 59

Alfred lost this same game by 31 three and a half weeks ago

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 18, 2015, 05:56:42 AM

Caltech won a third conference game last night. Not sure if that puts them in consideration or not.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on February 18, 2015, 03:25:14 PM

I think that puts them in the category of "teams we don't have to talk about like it's a space shuttle launch when they win a conference game." :)

Seriously, Caltech has been extremely bad in the past. Now they are just another well below average team so they can exchange their punchline status for anonymity.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 19, 2015, 12:56:10 AM

For now -- it only takes one season to slide right back into the other category, though. Don't be too quick to push them out of ignominy.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 19, 2015, 07:34:07 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	603	Randolph-Macon	22-2	def. Shenandoah, 103-72; 02/21 at Emory and Henry
#2	594	UW-Whitewater	21-3	def. UW-Oshkosh, 69-47; 02/21 at UW-Stout
#3	547	St. Thomas	21-3	def. #15 St. Olaf, 66-49; LOST to Bethel, 65-71; 02/21 vs. Hamline
#4	522	St. Norbert	21-1	02/21 vs. Cornell
#5	494	UW-Stevens Point	20-4	02/21 at UW-Superior
#6	492	Babson	22-2	def. Coast Guard, 66-51; 02/21 vs. MIT
#7	484	Albertus Magnus	22-1	def. Emmanuel, 99-89; 02/19 vs. Mount Ida; 02/21 at Anna Maria
#8	442	Augustana	20-4	02/21 at Wheaton (Ill.)
#9	414	Marietta	22-2	def. Otterbein, 95-69; 02/21 vs. Ohio Northern
#10	404	Virginia Wesleyan	20-4	def. Hampden-Sydney, 68-58; 02/21 vs. Guilford
#11	355	Dickinson	20-4	def. Muhlenberg, 53-43; 02/21 at #27 Franklin and Marshall
#12	352	WPI	20-4	won at Wheaton (Mass.), 89-43; 02/21 vs. Clark
#13	309	Johns Hopkins	21-3	won at McDaniel, 70-56; 02/21 vs. Washington College
#14	263	Catholic	21-3	won at Juniata, 75-60; 02/21 at Scranton
#15	254	St. Olaf	21-4	LOST at #3 St. Thomas, 49-66; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 65-60
#16	221	St. John Fisher	20-3	LOST at Alfred, 59-60; 02/20 at Hartwick; 02/21 at Stevens
#17	206	Ohio Wesleyan	20-4	def. Oberlin, 106-76; 02/21 at DePauw
#18	201	Emory	17-5	02/20 at Case Western Reserve; 02/22 at Carnegie Mellon
#19	192	Whitworth	20-3	02/20 at Pacific Lutheran; 02/21 at Puget Sound
#20	157	Washington U.	17-5	02/20 vs. New York University; 02/22 vs. Brandeis
#21	111	Elmhurst	19-5	02/21 at #35 Illinois Wesleyan
#22	74	Chapman	18-4	LOST at Redlands, 59-62; 02/19 vs. T#32 Cal Lutheran; 02/21 vs. La Verne
#23	71	Richard Stockton	20-5	def. Montclair State, 77-56
#24	68	Wooster	19-5	def. Allegheny, 80-63; 02/21 at Oberlin
#25	51	Eastern Connecticut	20-4	won at Western Connecticut, 70-60; 02/21 vs. Southern Maine

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	50	Penn State-Behrend	22-2	def. Hilbert, 64-62; 02/21 vs. Pitt-Greensburg
#27	40	Franklin and Marshall	19-5	LOST at Gettysburg, 62-76; 02/21 vs. #11 Dickinson
#28	29	NYU	16-6	02/20 at #20 Washington U.; 02/22 at #36 Chicago
#29	20	William Paterson	19-6	LOST to Rowan, 60-62
T#30	16	Trinity (Conn.)	19-5	02/21 vs. Colby
T#30	16	Centre	18-4	02/20 at Berry; 02/22 at Oglethorpe
T#32	11	Bates	19-5	won at St. Joseph's (Maine), 62-57; 02/21 vs. Wesleyan
T#32	11	Mount Union	18-6	LOST at #37 John Carroll, 81-88; 02/21 at Wilmington
T#32	11	Cal Lutheran	17-4	02/19 at #22 Chapman; 02/21 at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps
#35	10	Illinois Wesleyan	17-7	02/21 vs. #21 Elmhurst
#36	9	Chicago	15-7	02/20 vs. Brandeis; 02/22 vs. New York University
#37	6	John Carroll	18-5	def. T#32 Mount Union, 88-81; 02/21 at Muskingum
#38	5	Amherst	18-6	02/21 at Tufts
#39	4	Bowdoin	17-7	LOST to Husson, 61-72; 02/21 vs. Williams
T#40	2	Calvin	18-6	won at Olivet, 87-74; 02/21 at Albion
T#40	2	East Texas Baptist	19-4	02/19 at Howard Payne; 02/21 at Sul Ross State
T#42	1	Dubuque	19-5	LOST to Buena Vista, 80-94; 02/21 vs. Luther
T#42	1	Sage	20-4	won at Mount St. Mary, 93-91; 02/19 at Sarah Lawrence

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 19, 2015, 10:41:38 AM

Week 2's regional rankings made an early appearance today: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2630 (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2630)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 22, 2015, 05:52:13 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	603	Randolph-Macon	23-2	def. Shenandoah, 103-72; won at Emory and Henry, 82-63
#2	594	UW-Whitewater	22-3	def. UW-Oshkosh, 69-47; won at UW-Stout, 86-77
#3	547	St. Thomas	22-3	def. #15 St. Olaf, 66-49; LOST to Bethel, 65-71; def. Hamline, 89-62
#4	522	St. Norbert	22-1	def. Cornell, 58-48
#5	494	UW-Stevens Point	21-4	won at UW-Superior, 70-60
#6	492	Babson	23-2	def. Coast Guard, 66-51; def. MIT, 62-51
#7	484	Albertus Magnus	24-1	def. Emmanuel, 99-89; def. Mount Ida, 97-68; won at Anna Maria, 75-68
#8	442	Augustana	21-4	won at Wheaton (Ill.), 89-55
#9	414	Marietta	23-2	def. Otterbein, 95-69; def. Ohio Northern, 74-65
#10	404	Virginia Wesleyan	21-4	def. Hampden-Sydney, 68-58; def. Guilford, 85-64
#11	355	Dickinson	20-5	def. Muhlenberg, 53-43; LOST at #27 Franklin and Marshall, 53-69
#12	352	WPI	21-4	won at Wheaton (Mass.), 89-43; def. Clark, 61-56
#13	309	Johns Hopkins	22-3	won at McDaniel, 70-56; def. Washington College, 87-58
#14	263	Catholic	21-4	won at Juniata, 75-60; LOST at Scranton, 71-83
#15	254	St. Olaf	21-4	LOST at #3 St. Thomas, 49-66; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 65-60
#16	221	St. John Fisher	21-4	LOST at Alfred, 59-60; won at Hartwick, 69-68; LOST at Stevens, 54-60
#17	206	Ohio Wesleyan	21-4	def. Oberlin, 106-76; won at DePauw, 86-77
#18	201	Emory	19-5	won at Case Western Reserve, 71-65; won at Carnegie Mellon, 75-63
#19	192	Whitworth	22-3	won at Pacific Lutheran, 68-39; won at Puget Sound, 66-63
#20	157	Washington U.	19-5	def. New York University, 97-75; def. Brandeis, 72-44
#21	111	Elmhurst	19-6	LOST at #35 Illinois Wesleyan, 66-96
#22	74	Chapman	20-4	LOST at Redlands, 59-62; def. T#32 Cal Lutheran, 86-70; def. La Verne, 81-40
#23	71	Richard Stockton	20-5	def. Montclair State, 77-56
#24	68	Wooster	20-5	def. Allegheny, 80-63; won at Oberlin, 58-45
#25	51	Eastern Connecticut	21-4	won at Western Connecticut, 70-60; def. Southern Maine, 67-53

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	50	Penn State-Behrend	23-2	def. Hilbert, 64-62; def. Pitt-Greensburg, 91-64
#27	40	Franklin and Marshall	20-5	LOST at Gettysburg, 62-76; def. #11 Dickinson, 69-53
#28	29	NYU	16-8	LOST at #20 Washington U., 75-97; LOST at #36 Chicago, 60-77
#29	20	William Paterson	19-6	LOST to Rowan, 60-62
T#30	16	Trinity (Conn.)	20-5	def. Colby, 66-63
T#30	16	Centre	20-4	won at Berry, 71-61; won at Oglethorpe, 63-61
T#32	11	Bates	19-6	won at St. Joseph's (Maine), 62-57; LOST to Wesleyan, 59-66
T#32	11	Mount Union	19-6	LOST at #37 John Carroll, 81-88; won at Wilmington, 74-71
T#32	11	Cal Lutheran	17-6	LOST at #22 Chapman, 70-86; LOST at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 54-64
#35	10	Illinois Wesleyan	18-7	def. #21 Elmhurst, 96-66
#36	9	Chicago	16-8	LOST to Brandeis, 63-78; def. New York University, 77-60
#37	6	John Carroll	19-5	def. T#32 Mount Union, 88-81; won at Muskingum, 101-79
#38	5	Amherst	19-6	won at Tufts, 92-66
#39	4	Bowdoin	18-7	LOST to Husson, 61-72; def. Williams, 87-74
T#40	2	Calvin	19-6	won at Olivet, 87-74; won at Albion, 71-54
T#40	2	East Texas Baptist	20-5	LOST at Howard Payne, 77-81; won at Sul Ross State, 77-70
T#42	1	Dubuque	20-5	LOST to Buena Vista, 80-94; def. Luther, 77-63
T#42	1	Sage	21-4	won at Mount St. Mary, 93-91; won at Sarah Lawrence, 72-35

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on February 22, 2015, 06:30:52 PM

Quote from: sac on February 17, 2015, 10:44:34 AM
Rip Engle was the football coach at Penn State preceding Joe Paterno. Seems a little old to see that many minutes. :D (also kind of dead)

If I remember correctly, Rip Engle was the coach of Brown and Paterno was his smartest player so Engle hired him as an assistant coach when he got the Penn St job.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 24, 2015, 02:44:14 PM

With the new Top 25 comes my ballot: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2636 (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2636)

Continues to be a challenging season as a voter.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on February 24, 2015, 05:17:18 PM

A thought that came to me. When was the last time, if ever, did an unranked team going into the tourney ever win the national championship?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 24, 2015, 11:30:04 PM

Quote from: mailsy on February 24, 2015, 05:17:18 PM
A thought that came to me. When was the last time, if ever, did an unranked team going into the tourney ever win the national championship?

In the D3hoops.com era... never. However, UMHB came darn close in 2013 (wasn't even receiving votes! http://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2012-13/week13 (http://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2012-13/week13))!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 25, 2015, 11:31:16 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

Not much to see yet; mostly just interesting as a list of some of the games coming up this weekend.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	612	Randolph-Macon	23-2	02/26 vs. Randolph (n)
#2	601	UW-Whitewater	22-3	02/26 vs. UW-Eau Claire
#3	540	St. Norbert	22-1	02/27 vs. Ripon
#4	518	UW-Stevens Point	21-4	02/26 vs. UW-Oshkosh
#5	515	Babson	23-2	02/28 vs. MIT; 03/01 vs. NEWMAC Tournament Finals
#6	493	St. Thomas	22-3	02/27 vs. Gustavus Adolphus
#7	472	Albertus Magnus	25-1	def. Suffolk, 108-82; 02/26 vs. St. Joseph's (Maine)
#8	457	Augustana	21-4	02/27 vs. North Central (Ill.)
#9	434	Marietta	24-2	def. Capital, 78-55; 02/26 vs. Baldwin Wallace
#10	418	Virginia Wesleyan	21-4	02/26 vs. Washington and Lee (n)
#11	350	Johns Hopkins	22-3	02/27 vs. Gettysburg
#12	343	WPI	21-4	02/28 vs. Springfield (n); 03/01 vs. TBA (n)
#13	279	Ohio Wesleyan	22-4	def. Oberlin, 83-66; 02/27 vs. DePauw
#14	267	Dickinson	20-5	02/27 vs. #25 Franklin and Marshall (n)
#15	252	Emory	19-5	02/28 vs. Rochester
#16	247	Whitworth	22-3	02/26 vs. Willamette; 02/28 at NWC Tournament
#17	211	Washington U.	19-5	02/28 vs. T#37 Chicago
#18	193	St. Olaf	21-4	02/27 vs. Bethel
#19	161	Catholic	22-4	def. Drew, 79-53; 02/28 vs. #33 Scranton
#20	133	Wooster	21-5	def. Denison, 106-68; 02/27 vs. Wabash (n); 02/28 vs. TBD (n)
#21	122	Richard Stockton	21-5	def. Rutgers-Newark, 70-54; 02/27 vs. William Paterson
#22	103	Eastern Connecticut	22-4	def. Southern Maine, 80-39; 02/27 vs. Keene State; 02/28 at TBD
#23	86	Penn State-Behrend	23-2	02/27 vs. Hilbert
#24	51	St. John Fisher	21-4	02/27 vs. Ithaca
#25	46	Franklin and Marshall	20-5	02/27 vs. #14 Dickinson (n); 02/28 vs. TBD (n)

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	41	Centre	20-4	02/27 vs. Berry (n)
#27	33	John Carroll	20-5	def. Heidelberg, 75-66; 02/26 vs. T#37 Mount Union
#28	30	Elmhurst	19-6	02/27 vs. #31 Illinois Wesleyan (n)
#29	29	Chapman	21-4	def. Caltech, 86-64; 02/27 vs. Whittier
#30	25	Trinity (Conn.)	20-5	02/28 vs. Wesleyan
#31	18	Illinois Wesleyan	18-7	02/27 vs. #28 Elmhurst (n)
#32	17	St. Mary's (Md.)	20-4	02/26 vs. Christopher Newport; 02/28 at CAC Championship
#33	10	Scranton	21-5	def. Susquehanna, 67-53; 02/28 at #19 Catholic
#34	5	Southern Vermont	22-3	02/27 vs. Becker; 02/28 vs. NECC Championship
T#35	4	East Texas Baptist	20-5	02/26 vs. University of the Ozarks
T#35	4	Whitman	20-5	02/26 vs. Lewis and Clark
T#37	2	Chicago	16-8	02/28 at #17 Washington U.
T#37	2	Mount Union	20-6	def. Ohio Northern, 101-82; 02/26 at #27 John Carroll
#39	1	Sage	21-4	02/26 vs. SUNY-Old Westbury

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 25, 2015, 11:56:42 PM

Daryl, I can't recall EVER seeing one of your updates with NO red on it!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 26, 2015, 09:31:47 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 25, 2015, 11:56:42 PM
Daryl, I can't recall EVER seeing one of your updates with NO red on it!

No red on the women's side, either. Of course, it's also a fairly small set of games, and I think that all (or most) were first-round games in conference playoffs, and all were apparently hosted by the ranked team. (If a ranked team wins at home, it is reported as "def. ____." If they win on the road, they "won at ____.")

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 26, 2015, 10:34:38 AM

The women's updates have always been less 'bloody' than the men's. They just haven't developed (yet?) the parity that exists among the men. The last undefeated men's team fell a few weeks ago; the women still have several unbeaten teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on March 01, 2015, 05:45:19 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

The last report for the season ...

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	612	Randolph-Macon	26-2	def. (n) Randolph, 72-63; def. (n) Eastern Mennonite, 67-57; def. (n) #10 Virginia Wesleyan, 81-74
#2	601	UW-Whitewater	24-3	def. UW-Eau Claire, 82-60; def. UW-Oshkosh, 71-57
#3	540	St. Norbert	24-1	def. Ripon, 85-74; def. Grinnell, 91-73
#4	518	UW-Stevens Point	21-5	LOST to UW-Oshkosh, 47-50
#5	515	Babson	25-2	def. MIT, 57-47; def. Springfield, 72-62
#6	493	St. Thomas	24-3	def. Gustavus Adolphus, 83-79; def. Bethel, 66-63
#7	472	Albertus Magnus	27-1	def. Suffolk, 108-82; def. St. Joseph's (Maine), 81-51; def. Johnson and Wales, 98-85
#8	457	Augustana	23-4	def. North Central (Ill.), 82-76; def. #31 Illinois Wesleyan, 78-74
#9	434	Marietta	25-3	def. Capital, 78-55; def. Baldwin Wallace, 78-74; LOST to T#37 Mount Union, 81-85
#10	418	Virginia Wesleyan	23-5	def. (n) Washington and Lee, 81-53; def. (n) Guilford, 61-51; LOST to (n) #1 Randolph-Macon, 74-81
#11	350	Johns Hopkins	23-4	def. Gettysburg, 80-67; LOST to #14 Dickinson, 62-65
#12	343	WPI	21-5	LOST to (n) Springfield, 46-51
#13	279	Ohio Wesleyan	22-5	def. Oberlin, 83-66; LOST to DePauw, 65-69
#14	267	Dickinson	22-5	def. (n) #25 Franklin and Marshall, 82-68; won at #11 Johns Hopkins, 65-62
#15	252	Emory	20-5	def. Rochester, 88-69
#16	247	Whitworth	24-3	def. Willamette, 89-64; def. Lewis and Clark, 69-58
#17	211	Washington U.	20-5	def. T#37 Chicago, 84-67
#18	193	St. Olaf	21-5	LOST to Bethel, 67-75
#19	161	Catholic	22-5	def. Drew, 79-53; LOST to #33 Scranton, 65-76
#20	133	Wooster	22-6	def. Denison, 106-68; def. (n) Wabash, 68-55; LOST to (n) DePauw, 56-69
#21	122	Richard Stockton	22-5	def. Rutgers-Newark, 70-54; def. William Paterson, 65-61
#22	103	Eastern Connecticut	22-5	def. Southern Maine, 80-39; LOST to Keene State, 63-81
#23	86	Penn State-Behrend	23-3	LOST to Hilbert, 59-64
#24	51	St. John Fisher	23-4	def. Ithaca, 90-75; def. Alfred, 77-62
#25	46	Franklin and Marshall	20-6	LOST to (n) #14 Dickinson, 68-82

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	41	Centre	21-5	def. (n) Berry, 90-74; LOST to (n) Hendrix, 53-55
#27	33	John Carroll	20-6	def. Heidelberg, 75-66; LOST to T#37 Mount Union, 88-89
#28	30	Elmhurst	19-7	LOST to (n) #31 Illinois Wesleyan, 67-80
#29	29	Chapman	22-5	def. Caltech, 86-64; def. Whittier, 83-66; LOST to Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 66-71
#30	25	Trinity (Conn.)	20-6	LOST to Wesleyan, 52-55
#31	18	Illinois Wesleyan	19-8	def. (n) #28 Elmhurst, 80-67; LOST at #8 Augustana, 74-78
#32	17	St. Mary's (Md.)	20-5	LOST to Christopher Newport, 69-83
#33	10	Scranton	22-5	def. Susquehanna, 67-53; won at #19 Catholic, 76-65
#34	5	Southern Vermont	23-4	def. Becker, 71-66; LOST to Regis (Mass.), 72-74
T#35	4	East Texas Baptist	23-5	def. University of the Ozarks, 67-52; def. Howard Payne, 75-73; def. Concordia (Texas), 82-71
T#35	4	Whitman	20-6	LOST to Lewis and Clark, 73-84
T#37	2	Chicago	16-9	LOST at #17 Washington U., 67-84
T#37	2	Mount Union	22-6	def. Ohio Northern, 101-82; won at #27 John Carroll, 89-88; won at #9 Marietta, 85-81
#39	1	Sage	23-4	def. SUNY-Old Westbury, 92-74; def. St. Joseph's (L.I.), 84-70

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 01, 2015, 10:02:55 PM

I see red things.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on March 02, 2015, 03:26:14 AM

Plus K Darryl for a job well done once again. How They Fared is such a great resource for all of us. Hope to see you back at it next year. 8-)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 02, 2015, 11:57:28 AM

Just for the record - at the beginning of the season I said Wittenberg was "a good, young team." I said the same thing about Salisbury last year - that good young core managed to make it to the tournament this year. I don't know how Witt will do next year, but that good young team should be much improved.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NEPAFAN on March 02, 2015, 12:03:58 PM

Is there a new top 25 for this week or does it take a break for the tourney?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 02, 2015, 12:14:47 PM

Quote from: NEPAFAN on March 02, 2015, 12:03:58 PM
Is there a new top 25 for this week or does it take a break for the tourney?

Final regular season poll this week, then the break 'til the final poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on March 04, 2015, 11:51:02 PM

In doing research for tomorrow night's Wash-U/DePauw tilt, I discovered a couple of things that underscored the quandry that Dave McHugh and the other d3hoops.com pollsters faced every week...and the unbelievable parity that we saw this season.

I counted 50 different teams that were ranked at some point in the poll...from the preseason edition to this week's poll. Of those 50 teams, 16 didn't receive a single vote in this week's final regular-season ranking: NYU, North Central, Chicago, Case-Western, Amherst, Husson, Centre, MIT, DePauw, Cabrini, Texas-Dallas, Springfield, Williams, Wheaton, Christopher Newport, and Richard Stockton.

And, of those 16, the ones who were able to make it into the NCAA tourney are Amherst, DePauw, and Springfield.

An unprecedented ebb and flow this season in men's D3 basketball, no?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on March 04, 2015, 11:54:38 PM

Add Richard Stockton to the short list of teams who didn't receive votes in this week's poll, yet made it to the NCAA Tourney.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 05, 2015, 12:11:06 AM

Quote from: jaybird44 on March 04, 2015, 11:51:02 PM
In doing research for tomorrow night's Wash-U/DePauw tilt, I discovered a couple of things that underscored the quandry that Dave McHugh and the other d3hoops.com pollsters faced every week...and the unbelievable parity that we saw this season.

I counted 50 different teams that were ranked at some point in the poll...from the preseason edition to this week's poll. Of those 50 teams, 16 didn't receive a single vote in this week's final regular-season ranking: NYU, North Central, Chicago, Case-Western, Amherst, Husson, Centre, MIT, DePauw, Cabrini, Texas-Dallas, Springfield, Williams, Wheaton, Christopher Newport, and Richard Stockton.

And, of those 16, the ones who were able to make it into the NCAA tourney are Amherst, DePauw, and Springfield.

An unprecedented ebb and flow this season in men's D3 basketball, no?

Quote from: jaybird44 on March 04, 2015, 11:54:38 PM
Add Richard Stockton to the short list of teams who didn't receive votes in this week's poll, yet made it to the NCAA Tourney.

Richard Stockton (listed just as Stockton) is #17. DePauw got 19 points. A few of the others surprised me that they got ZERO points. Others (I'm looking especially at you, Wheaton ;)) just had very disappointing seasons.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on March 05, 2015, 01:44:20 AM

Thanks for the corrections, Mr. Ypsi :)

I guess I needed another cup of coffee to catch those...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 05, 2015, 06:41:35 AM

I guess I didn't notice that Amherst got zero votes. I would not be surprised if that was the first time that has happened in D3hoops.com poll history.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 05, 2015, 09:29:34 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on March 05, 2015, 06:41:35 AM
I guess I didn't notice that Amherst got zero votes. I would not be surprised if that was the first time that has happened in D3hoops.com poll history.

They didn't get any last week either.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 05, 2015, 05:41:48 PM

Okay; whenever it was that Amherst dropped to zero this season may have been the first time ever. Better?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 05, 2015, 05:50:07 PM

Back in January when the last NESCAC team dropped out of the Top 25, I checked to see when the last time that happened. Turned out it was a streak of 191 consecutive polls, dating to Feb. 25, 2002.

http://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2015/01/no-nescac-teams-ranked

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 15, 2015, 01:35:49 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 05, 2015, 12:11:06 AM
Quote from: jaybird44 on March 04, 2015, 11:51:02 PM
In doing research for tomorrow night's Wash-U/DePauw tilt, I discovered a couple of things that underscored the quandry that Dave McHugh and the other d3hoops.com pollsters faced every week...and the unbelievable parity that we saw this season.

I counted 50 different teams that were ranked at some point in the poll...from the preseason edition to this week's poll. Of those 50 teams, 16 didn't receive a single vote in this week's final regular-season ranking: NYU, North Central, Chicago, Case-Western, Amherst, Husson, Centre, MIT, DePauw, Cabrini, Texas-Dallas, Springfield, Williams, Wheaton, Christopher Newport, and Richard Stockton.

And, of those 16, the ones who were able to make it into the NCAA tourney are Amherst, DePauw, and Springfield.

An unprecedented ebb and flow this season in men's D3 basketball, no?
Quote from: jaybird44 on March 04, 2015, 11:54:38 PM
Add Richard Stockton to the short list of teams who didn't receive votes in this week's poll, yet made it to the NCAA Tourney.

Richard Stockton (listed just as Stockton) is #17. DePauw got 19 points. A few of the others surprised me that they got ZERO points. Others (I'm looking especially at you, Wheaton ;)) just had very disappointing seasons.

Looking at the Northeast, the dynamics of the Pool system and the Strength of Schedule calculations play differently in that region. I can imagine that 25 voters have judged Amherst and Springfield as not one of the best 25 teams in the country, but easily tap them for one of the 19 Pool C bids, the best of the rest.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 15, 2015, 02:41:18 PM

It'll be a top ten Final Four:

#4 Babson vs. #6 Augustana
#8 UW-Stevens Point vs. #9 Virginia Wesleyan

Congrats to the pollsters for reading the tea leaves well enough to place the eventual Final Four that high in their end-of-regular-season poll. Considering that this has been a year in which everything seemed to be up for grabs due to there being a real dearth of standout teams, that's an accomplishment.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D3HoopJunkie on March 25, 2015, 09:09:00 AM

Dave,

I'm sure you are absolutely exhausted when it comes to the Top 25, especially after this season!! I was just curious if you were going to do a Final Top 25 analysis on the Daily Dose blog. I enjoyed your take on the Top 25 all season long and I was curious how your final rankings compared to how the overall final rankings finished up and what your take on each team was after such an outstanding well balanced season.

Peer pressure here Dave!!!! ;D :D ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 26, 2015, 12:09:11 PM

Exhausted... good word. Sick as well - massive sinus infection started to take hold in Salem and grounded me this week. I am playing catch-up.

And I will give you a blog... just hadn't gotten around to it. Needed to take care of some work (that actually pays, or tries to pay, the bills) first. Hopefully by tomorrow I will post something - unless I can get it turned today.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 22, 2015, 11:21:19 AM

We've got a Top 25:

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2015-16/preseason

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 22, 2015, 11:33:04 AM

And here's a little more about it that poll watchers will probably enjoy:
http://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2015/10/mens-preseason-no-1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on October 22, 2015, 12:00:16 PM

Its a little weird that so many top 10 teams were left completely off of at least one ballot, and so few teams appeared on all 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 22, 2015, 02:42:39 PM

Quote from: sac on October 22, 2015, 12:00:16 PM
Its a little weird that so many top 10 teams were left completely off of at least one ballot, and so few teams appeared on all 25.

And honestly, I don't know for sure if that's normal or not because we haven't published that full grid before. But I think it is unusual, which is why I put it out there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on October 22, 2015, 03:05:08 PM

I don't vote in the men's poll so that Trinity vote at No. 2 isn't me. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 22, 2015, 03:19:03 PM

Thanks for posting the ballot breakdown grid, Pat. It's very helpful.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 22, 2015, 03:58:10 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 22, 2015, 02:42:39 PM
Quote from: sac on October 22, 2015, 12:00:16 PM
Its a little weird that so many top 10 teams were left completely off of at least one ballot, and so few teams appeared on all 25.

And honestly, I don't know for sure if that's normal or not because we haven't published that full grid before. But I think it is unusual, which is why I put it out there.

I was blown away seeing just how many of last year's Top 10 lost a significant amount. With 25 voters it doesn't seem to far-fetched at least one of them wouldn't give teams the benefit of the doubt.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 22, 2015, 09:51:06 PM

I can tell you it was a mixed bag for me... some schools I gave the benefit of the doubt and others I didn't. I also gave varying degrees of that benefit. I was all over the place... and I could have kept writing, erasing, moving, adjusting, etc. for days and never gotten comfortable with my ballot. This was one of the more difficult preseason MBB Top 25's I've ever considered.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 23, 2015, 07:32:31 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 22, 2015, 09:51:06 PM
I can tell you it was a mixed bag for me... some schools I gave the benefit of the doubt and others I didn't. I also gave varying degrees of that benefit. I was all over the place... and I could have kept writing, erasing, moving, adjusting, etc. for days and never gotten comfortable with my ballot. This was one of the more difficult preseason MBB Top 25's I've ever considered.

I was wondering if perhaps it were easier this year because almost no one expects it to be right? Outside of Augustana, you're not really going to have anyone upset if their team isn't where they want it to be, since it's literally a guessing game for almost everybody.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 23, 2015, 10:06:35 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 15, 2015, 02:41:18 PM
It'll be a top ten Final Four:

#4 Babson vs. #6 Augustana
#8 UW-Stevens Point vs. #9 Virginia Wesleyan

Congrats to the pollsters for reading the tea leaves well enough to place the eventual Final Four that high in their end-of-regular-season poll. Considering that this has been a year in which everything seemed to be up for grabs due to there being a real dearth of standout teams, that's an accomplishment.

I thought I would expand on this a little.

2015 Final Four - Preseason Poll - Final Regular Season Poll
Babson - 23 - 4
Augustana - 3 - 6
UWSP - 7 - 8
VWC - 19 - 9

2014- Pre - Final
Whitewater - 13 - 3
IWU - 2 - 6
Amherst - 1 -7
Wiliams -3 - 9

2013
St. Thomas - 11 - 1
MHB - ORV - no votes
Amherst - 5 - 2
North Central - 6 - 3

2012
Cabrini - 14 - 5
IWU - ORV - ORV
MIT - 10 - 3
Whitewater - ORV - 8

2011
Wooster - 6 - 5
Williams - 8 - 4
St. Thomas - 13 - 8
Middlebury - 9 - 2

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 23, 2015, 12:05:02 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on October 23, 2015, 07:32:31 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 22, 2015, 09:51:06 PM
I can tell you it was a mixed bag for me... some schools I gave the benefit of the doubt and others I didn't. I also gave varying degrees of that benefit. I was all over the place... and I could have kept writing, erasing, moving, adjusting, etc. for days and never gotten comfortable with my ballot. This was one of the more difficult preseason MBB Top 25's I've ever considered.

I was wondering if perhaps it were easier this year because almost no one expects it to be right? Outside of Augustana, you're not really going to have anyone upset if their team isn't where they want it to be, since it's literally a guessing game for almost everybody.

Damn... I wish I thought of that excuse before voting!!! LOL

To some extent that is a fair point... no one is really going to be up in arms since there is so much parity and unknowns extending over from last year into this year... but, that actually makes it hard to place teams. Is Team A better than Team B: yes. Is Team B better than Team C: yes. Is Team C better than Team A: yes. Crap. I had 50 teams and couldn't get below I think about 35 comfortably... and then from 2-25 I struggled. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on October 23, 2015, 01:59:26 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 22, 2015, 11:33:04 AM
And here's a little more about it that poll watchers will probably enjoy:
http://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2015/10/mens-preseason-no-1

Pat,
When's the women's poll expected to be out?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on October 23, 2015, 02:41:23 PM

Ronk:

We're collecting information from the schools now and then will distribute the ballot to the voters.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Bengalsrule on October 26, 2015, 12:26:12 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 22, 2015, 03:19:03 PM
Thanks for posting the ballot breakdown grid, Pat. It's very helpful.

Ditto Pat. New insight that is much appreciated!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 26, 2015, 05:08:08 PM

OK... finally got my Top 25 ballot thoughts put together: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2676 (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2676)

Talk about parity and wide open. I suspect this season will be nuts! It was a very challenging ballot to do this preseason.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on October 26, 2015, 11:14:58 PM

Pat,
Would you provide a link to the info to which Gordon Mann referred which is used by the Top 25 voters for the preseason poll? Some of us non-voters would like to see the newcomers(Frosh,xfers) that would affect that poll, and, more importantly, the conference races.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 26, 2015, 11:35:34 PM

Probably not, ronk. First off... the data is in an Excel file; not online. It is a LARGE file LOL.

Second, some of that info I am sure isn't necessarily for public consumption (I am sometimes a little surprised by the info in the system)... and per that, not sure programs or SIDs would appreciate the info being made public if they didn't think it would be in the first place.

That's just my two cents.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on October 26, 2015, 11:44:37 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 26, 2015, 11:35:34 PM
Probably not, ronk. First off... the data is in an Excel file; not online. It is a LARGE file LOL.

Second, some of that info I am sure isn't necessarily for public consumption (I am sometimes a little surprised by the info in the system)... and per that, not sure programs or SIDs would appreciate the info being made public if they didn't think it would be in the first place.

That's just my two cents.

Thought it was worth a try. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 27, 2015, 12:40:51 AM

Quote from: ronk on October 26, 2015, 11:44:37 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 26, 2015, 11:35:34 PM
Probably not, ronk. First off... the data is in an Excel file; not online. It is a LARGE file LOL.

Second, some of that info I am sure isn't necessarily for public consumption (I am sometimes a little surprised by the info in the system)... and per that, not sure programs or SIDs would appreciate the info being made public if they didn't think it would be in the first place.

That's just my two cents.

Thought it was worth a try. ;)

When I first started up the Fan Poll, Pat was gracious enough to send me a copy of what he sent to his voters. But this was way later in the season (the Fan Poll has always only started up in January), and whether or not it had been edited I have no idea. I still thought it was an awfully nice thing for him to do, since he was obviously less than thrilled about there even being a Fan Poll!

(I always went out of my way to stress that we were in no way a competitor to the D3hoops.com poll, that his was the REAL poll, and I think he eventually came around to the notion that this increased poster involvement. I gave up running the poll a couple of years ago, though I'm still a voter.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 30, 2015, 09:22:22 AM

http://athletics.uwsp.edu/sports/2014/12/10/MBB_1210140918.aspx

Pointer article came out with the preseason Top 25 and had some nice historical information on them.

They've been ranked for 46 weeks in a row now (start of the 2012-2013 season). Probably not a huge feat. It was also noted that they've been in the Top 25 for 135 of the last 137 weeks (the other two weeks, they still received votes) dating back to the start of the 2006-2007 season.

I only mention this because last year there was talk about Amherst finally dropping out and the NESCAC not in the polls for the first time since 2002 (?).

The only other team I could think of off hand that could have such a streak would be St. Thomas since they've won the last 10 or so MIAC championships. Any thoughts or ideas of other streaks or who holds the all-time record and current streak?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on October 30, 2015, 02:07:34 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 30, 2015, 09:22:22 AM
Probably not a huge feat.

Easy for you to say... :P ;D

What's most interesting to me about the rankings are that Point has been ranked #1 more than any other ranking.... and they've never been #22!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 31, 2015, 08:48:07 AM

Quote from: John Gleich on October 30, 2015, 02:07:34 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 30, 2015, 09:22:22 AM
Probably not a huge feat.

Easy for you to say... :P ;D

What's most interesting to me about the rankings are that Point has been ranked #1 more than any other ranking.... and they've never been #22!

Well, off the top of my head, possible candidates could be Wooster, Whitworth, St. Thomas, Amherst, Williams, Virginia Wesleyan...

I could be completely wrong and just be a spoiled Pointer fan who is used to being part of a winning program. ::) ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 02, 2015, 09:50:34 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 30, 2015, 09:22:22 AM
http://athletics.uwsp.edu/sports/2014/12/10/MBB_1210140918.aspx

Pointer article came out with the preseason Top 25 and had some nice historical information on them.

They've been ranked for 46 weeks in a row now (start of the 2012-2013 season). Probably not a huge feat. It was also noted that they've been in the Top 25 for 135 of the last 137 weeks (the other two weeks, they still received votes) dating back to the start of the 2006-2007 season.

I only mention this because last year there was talk about Amherst finally dropping out and the NESCAC not in the polls for the first time since 2002 (?).

The only other team I could think of off hand that could have such a streak would be St. Thomas since they've won the last 10 or so MIAC championships. Any thoughts or ideas of other streaks or who holds the all-time record and current streak?

Back when I still tracked stuff like this, Amherst and Wooster were neck and neck and far ahead of everyone else in categories like most top 10s and top 25s, both overall and consecutively. IIRC, both had been in every top 25 from the very first poll through the first 10 years or so. Been a few years, though, and memory fades. Also, memory fades.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 09, 2015, 02:56:52 PM

So how much did Whitworth have to pay La Verne to play a 12:01 am Friday morning game? ??? ;D :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 09, 2015, 04:08:38 PM

Knowing the LaVerne coach... nothing. He likes unique things like that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 12, 2015, 01:56:47 PM

"The off-season is over. The basketball season has arrived, but it can't start without Hoopsville hitting the air! Tune in tonight as Dave talks to the two preseason number one teams, touches base with a major coaching change, checks in with the men's basketball National Committee chair, and previews the Northeast Region.

Show starts at 7PM ET! www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2015-16/nov12 (http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2015-16/nov12)

Guests include:
- Grey Giovanine, head coach for #1 Augustana men
- Jeff Hans, head coach for #1 Thomas More women
- Brian Van Haaften, men's basketball committee chair and head coach for Buena Vista
- Trevor Woodruff, head coach for Scranton women
- Matt Noonan, Northeast Regional Reporter"

You can also catch up on the Hoopsville New Rules Special we did and published yesterday. We chatted with:
- Bill Raleigh, Southwestern Assistant Athletic Director and former men's basketball coach along with being on the men's rules committee
- Brad Duckworth, Alverno Athletic Director and women's head coach along with being the current chair of the women's rules committee
- Tim Fitzpatrick, Coast Guard Athletic Director

You can watch or listen to that show here: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2015-16/rules-special (http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2015-16/rules-special)

AND BIG NEWS... Hoopsville has added Sunday shows to this year's November and December schedule. That means the show will air Thursdays and Sundays from the beginning of the season until the end. Each show will air at 7pm ET (unless noted) with a few shows in November and December being canceled due to holidays or other responsibilities (i.e. Gagliari Trophy and Stagg Bowl Week).

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com (http://www.d3hoopsville.com)
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville (http://www.facebook.com/Hoopsville)
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville (http://www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville)
SoundCloud (podcast): www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville (http://www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 17, 2015, 10:08:38 AM

Based on the preseason poll, Stevens Point plays:

Vs #15 St. Olaf
Vs#16 Hope
Vs St. Norbert RV (57)
At #1 Augustana
At North Central RV (10)
Vs #4 St. Thomas
Vs Keene St. RV (4)

Any other similarly tough nonconference schedules?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 17, 2015, 12:34:00 PM

Augustana:
at UW-Whitewater RV (60)
vs. #9 UW-Stevens Point
at Wash U RV (15)

And those three games are in a course of ten days in December.

They also have:
at UW-La Crposse
vs. UW-Oskosh
vs. Edgewood

North Central:
vs. #7 Mount Union
vs. #17 Chicago
vs. #9 UW-Stevens Point
vs. Centre RV (8)

Plus UW-Platteville.e

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 24, 2015, 04:04:14 PM

Just a quick note to reassure anyone who might be wondering: I'm once again planning to post "How They Fared" updates this season. I just did a trial run of my program to confirm that it is still working correctly (after moving it from my old PC to my new Macbook).

I'll post a "mid-week" update on Thursday morning (or perhaps Wednesday evening), and then another report on Sunday night, so the voters can refer to it for the first in-season poll.

(P.S. Thanks for the nudge, scottiedawg.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 24, 2015, 04:40:17 PM

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1248.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fhh488%2Fifoundcallie%2F101379-Jim-Carrey-I-like-it-alot-gif-GflM.gif&hash=c83505568ef1a52ef00b11334c38aaef63a43c90)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 25, 2015, 10:06:21 PM

Final from Elmhurst...

Benedictine 94
#8 Elmhurst 86

Benedictine has now won at #24 IWU and at #8 Elmhurst. I've watched them play quite a bit and they look like a very legitimate Top 25 team to me. Great perimeter play and a 6-9 stud in the low post (and some other good bigs).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on November 25, 2015, 10:31:58 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 17, 2015, 12:34:00 PM
Augustana:
at UW-Whitewater RV (60)
vs. #9 UW-Stevens Point
at Wash U RV (15)

And those three games are in a course of ten days in December.

They also have:
at UW-La Crposse
vs. UW-Oskosh
vs. Edgewood

North Central:
vs. #7 Mount Union
vs. #17 Chicago
vs. #9 UW-Stevens Point
vs. Centre RV (8)

Plus UW-Platteville.e

Plus North Central has #1 Augie, #8 Elmhurst, and #24 IWU twice each.
That's 9 games against Top 25 teams plus one ORV, and Plateville, and now (3-0) Benedictine.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 25, 2015, 10:39:40 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 17, 2015, 12:34:00 PM
Augustana:
at UW-Whitewater RV (60)
vs. #9 UW-Stevens Point
at Wash U RV (15)

And those three games are in a course of ten days in December.

They also have:
at UW-La Crposse
vs. UW-Oskosh
vs. Edgewood

North Central:
vs. #7 Mount Union
vs. #17 Chicago
vs. #9 UW-Stevens Point
vs. Centre RV (8)

Plus UW-Platteville.e

I think IWU's non-conference schedule is as tough as Augustana's...maybe tougher. Here is how I'd rank IWU's opponents, strongest to weakest...

1. Ohio Wesleyan (#13), 22-6/16-2 NCAC/picked 1st in NCAC
2. Chicago (#17), 16-9/8-6 UAA; picked 1st in UAA
3. Benedictine, 18-9/15-5 NACC; picked 2nd in NACC (lost 86-88)
4. Washington U. (ORV), 20-6/9-5 UAA; picked 4th in UAA
5. Texas Lutheran, 18-10/11-3 SCAC; picked 2nd in SCAC
6. Rose-Hulman, 14-10/10-7 HCAC; picked 2nd in HCAC (won 86-76)
7. Southwestern, 15-11/8-6 SCAC; picked 5th in SCAC
8. Milwaukee School of Engineering, 13-13/10-10 NACC; picked 4th in NACC
9. Loras, 10-15/5-9 IIAC; picked 6th in IIAC
10. Wilmington, 11-14, 8-10 OAC; picked 8th in OAC (won 84-61)
11. Greenville, 13-12/10-8 SLIAC; picked 5th in SLIAC (won 150-117)

Augustana's...

1. UW-Stevens Point (#9) 27-5/15-1 WIAC; picked 1st in WIAC
2. UW-Oshkosh (#23), 16-10/9-7 WIAC; picked 3rd in WIAC
3. UW-Whitewater (ORV) 24-4, 15-1 WIAC; picked 2nd in WIAC
4. Washington U. (ORV), 20-6/9-5 UAA; picked 4th in UAA
5. Lewis & Clark, 16-11/10-6; picked 3rd in NWC
6. Puget Sound, 12-12/7-9 NWC; picked 5th in NWC
7. UW-La Crosse, 11-14/6-10; picked 7th in WIAC (won 88-60)
8. Edgewood, 14-13/12-8 NACC; picked 7th NACC
9. George Fox, 5-20/3-13 NWC; picked 7th in NWC
10. Fontbonne, 13-14/11-7 SLIAC; picked 3rd in SLIAC (won 80-57)
11. MacMurray, 13-13/13-5 SLIAC; picked 4th in SLIAC

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 25, 2015, 10:57:47 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	623	Augustana	2-0	def. UW-La Crosse, 88-60; won at Fontbonne, 80-57
#2	462	Virginia Wesleyan	2-2	LOST at Wesley, 91-92; def. Milwaukee Engineering, 73-59; def. Averett, 88-66; LOST at #45 Salisbury, 60-71; 11/28 vs. Emory and Henry; 11/29 vs. North Carolina Wesleyan
#3	452	Whitworth	3-0	def. La Verne, 87-80; def. Caltech, 80-58; def. Northwest (Wash.), 84-54; 11/27 vs. Hamline (n); 11/28 at Colorado College
#4	443	St. Thomas	3-0	won at UW-Eau Claire, 76-62; def. (n) #18 Emory, 82-70; def. (n) T#48 Southern Vermont, 79-67
#5	416	Amherst	3-0	def. Johnson State, 104-52; def. Worcester State, 97-79; def. Anna Maria, 86-64
#6	399	Catholic	2-2	def. Neumann, 75-64; def. (n) La Roche, 84-65; LOST at #11 Marietta, 90-92; LOST at Washington and Lee, 72-74; 11/29 vs. Wesley
#7	359	Mount Union	3-2	LOST to (n) #31 William Paterson, 78-100; def. (n) Potsdam State, 70-56; def. Penn St. Beaver, 118-91; LOST at #40 North Central (Ill.), 68-83; def. (n) #17 Chicago, 74-58
#8	356	Elmhurst	3-1	won at Curry, 83-61; won at Greenville, 123-111; def. (n) Westminster (Mo.), 81-58; LOST to Benedictine, 86-93; 11/29 vs. Alma
#9	355	UW-Stevens Point	3-1	won at UW-Superior, 69-61; def. #15 St. Olaf, 68-65; LOST to #16 Hope, 56-68; def. T#33 St. Norbert, 66-61
#10	350	Babson	5-0	def. Framingham State, 69-41; def. Anna Maria, 97-67; won at Lasell, 74-72; def. Elms, 103-71; won at Becker, 70-65; 11/29 at Bowdoin
#11	335	Marietta	4-1	def. Westminster (Pa.), 100-82; won at Bethany, 78-65; def. Methodist, 79-64; def. #6 Catholic, 92-90; LOST at St. Vincent, 80-85
#12	292	Trinity (Conn.)	1-1	LOST at Springfield, 69-80; won at Framingham State, 71-60; 11/27 vs. Me.-Fort Kent (n); 11/28 vs. TBA (n)
#13	268	Ohio Wesleyan	5-0	won at Otterbein, 80-75; def. (n) Capital, 72-59; def. Alma, 96-77; def. T#41 Calvin, 91-83; def. Trine, 70-53; 11/28 at #24 Illinois Wesleyan
#14	249	Eastern Connecticut	2-2	LOST to (n) #36 WPI, 50-60; def. (n) Western New England, 80-51; LOST to (n) Johnson and Wales, 59-72; def. (n) Ramapo, 96-71; 11/28 vs. Hartwick (n); 11/29 vs. TBA (n)
#15	224	St. Olaf	1-1	def. Bethany Lutheran, 82-53; LOST at #9 UW-Stevens Point, 65-68; 11/28 vs. UW-River Falls
#16	219	Hope	2-0	won at UW-La Crosse, 65-47; won at #9 UW-Stevens Point, 68-56; 11/27 vs. Aquinas (n); 11/28 at Cornerstone
#17	209	Chicago	2-2	LOST at North Park, 66-72; def. Lake Forest, 67-61; LOST to (n) #7 Mount Union, 58-74; won at #40 North Central (Ill.), 74-61; 11/27 at Pacific Lutheran; 11/28 at Puget Sound
#18	194	Emory	4-1	def. Piedmont, 72-60; def. Birmingham-Southern, 88-54; def. Belhaven, 72-65; LOST to (n) #4 St. Thomas, 70-82; won at Stevenson, 79-75; 11/28 at Maryville (Tenn.); 11/29 vs. LaGrange (n)
#19	193	Franklin and Marshall	4-1	def. Elizabethtown, 80-49; def. Oneonta State, 79-71; def. (n) New Jersey City, 79-67; LOST to (n) Lancaster Bible, 66-94; won at Muhlenberg, 81-78
#20	159	Wooster	2-1	def. Silver Lake, 89-48; LOST to Skidmore, 63-72; won at Cabrini, 79-59
#21	157	Dickinson	1-3	LOST to Cabrini, 82-87; won at Stevenson, 77-67; LOST to (n) #22 St. John Fisher, 68-82; LOST at McDaniel, 56-66
#22	134	St. John Fisher	3-0	def. SUNYIT, 96-73; def. (n) DeSales, 74-64; def. (n) #21 Dickinson, 82-68
#23	132	UW-Oshkosh	2-2	LOST at T#33 St. Norbert, 62-68; LOST to Coe, 70-75; def. Wisconsin Lutheran, 88-81; def. Edgewood, 99-53
#24	129	Illinois Wesleyan	3-1	LOST to Benedictine, 86-88; def. Greenville, 150-117; def. Wilmington, 84-61; def. Rose-Hulman, 86-76; 11/28 vs. #13 Ohio Wesleyan
#25	114	East Texas Baptist	2-0	won at Rhodes, 58-55; won at Centenary (La.), 72-61; 11/27 vs. Schreiner (n); 11/28 at Texas Lutheran

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	99	Randolph-Macon	1-3	LOST to Mary Washington, 66-83; LOST to (n) St. Vincent, 68-70; won at Frostburg State, 84-74; LOST to T#46 Christopher Newport, 65-74; 11/29 at Averett
#27	84	NYU	3-0	def. SUNY-Purchase, 75-53; def. Moravian, 104-76; def. Arcadia, 90-87; 11/29 vs. Massachusetts College
#28	82	Johns Hopkins	1-3	LOST to Lynchburg, 80-91; def. (n) DePauw, 82-74; LOST at #39 Washington U., 62-78; LOST at Gettysburg, 70-83
#29	75	Bates	2-1	def. (n) Norwich, 79-49; def. (n) Me.-Fort Kent, 86-65; LOST at Southern Maine, 92-106; 11/29 vs. University of New England
#30	69	Scranton	3-1	def. Bryn Athyn, 94-68; def. Ursinus, 71-62; def. Ithaca, 78-67; LOST to Hobart, 73-79; 11/28 vs. King's (n); 11/29 vs. Wilkes
#31	63	William Paterson	3-2	def. (n) #7 Mount Union, 100-78; won at Drew, 70-62; def. Lehman, 73-71; LOST at Brooklyn, 66-80; LOST to Ramapo, 0-2; 11/28 vs. Rosemont (n)
#32	60	UW-Whitewater	2-1	won at T#48 Ripon, 74-60; LOST to Davenport, 74-85; def. Finlandia, 80-52; 11/28 vs. Ohio Northern
T#33	57	St. Norbert	1-1	def. #23 UW-Oshkosh, 68-62; LOST at #9 UW-Stevens Point, 61-66; 11/28 at Monmouth
T#33	57	John Carroll	4-0	def. (n) Transylvania, 92-75; won at St. Mary's (Md.), 100-88; def. (n) Birmingham-Southern, 117-93; def. (n) Rust, 120-88; 11/28 at La Roche
#35	54	Oswego State	4-0	won at St. Lawrence, 73-67; def. Mount St. Mary, 71-46; def. (n) Morrisville State, 61-59; won at Clarkson, 73-58; 11/28 vs. Middlebury (n); 11/29 vs. TBA (n)
#36	52	WPI	5-0	def. (n) #14 Eastern Connecticut, 60-50; won at Westfield State, 59-50; def. Curry, 89-64; def. Staten Island, 66-62; def. Worcester State, 57-51
#37	47	Stockton	3-1	LOST to Staten Island, 68-72; def. Neumann, 86-71; def. Gwynedd Mercy, 81-64; won at Rowan, 88-71
#38	23	Bethel	4-0	def. Martin Luther, 94-71; won at UW-River Falls, 62-55; def. UW-La Crosse, 83-76; def. Buena Vista, 91-86
#39	15	Washington U.	3-0	def. Blackburn, 90-60; def. Pomona-Pitzer, 87-65; def. #28 Johns Hopkins, 78-62; 11/27 at Spalding; 11/29 at Hanover
#40	10	North Central (Ill.)	1-1	def. #7 Mount Union, 83-68; LOST to #17 Chicago, 61-74; 11/28 at Aurora
T#41	9	Albertus Magnus	3-0	def. SUNY-Purchase, 101-84; won at Mitchell, 99-91; def. Norwich, 65-64
T#41	9	Calvin	2-1	def. (n) Waynesburg, 83-77; LOST at #13 Ohio Wesleyan, 83-91; won at Manchester, 89-77; 11/27 at Cornerstone; 11/28 vs. Aquinas (n)
T#43	8	Centre	3-1	LOST to Maryville (Tenn.), 62-70; won at Franklin, 71-60; won at Transylvania, 61-46; def. Berea, 80-66; 11/28 vs. Thomas More
T#43	8	Hardin-Simmons	2-3	won at Schreiner, 76-70; LOST at Southwestern, 74-80; won at Trinity (Texas), 85-72; LOST to Schreiner, 82-84; LOST at Texas Lutheran, 89-99; 11/28 vs. Southwestern
#45	7	Salisbury	5-0	def. (n) Rowan, 62-61; won at Widener, 83-50; def. (n) T#48 Southern Vermont, 60-59; def. (n) DeSales, 89-79; def. #2 Virginia Wesleyan, 71-60
T#46	4	Christopher Newport	3-0	def. Lynchburg, 72-56; def. Washington and Lee, 70-52; won at #26 Randolph-Macon, 74-65; 11/29 vs. Frostburg State
T#46	4	Keene State	5-0	def. Green Mountain, 108-104; def. T#50 Endicott, 100-88; def. Lasell, 93-91; won at University of New England, 89-66; won at Springfield, 87-78
T#48	2	Ripon	2-1	LOST to #32 UW-Whitewater, 60-74; def. Lawrence, 88-80; won at Wisconsin Lutheran, 85-73
T#48	2	Southern Vermont	1-2	def. Massachusetts College, 102-72; LOST to (n) #45 Salisbury, 59-60; LOST to (n) #4 St. Thomas, 67-79; 11/29 at Castleton State
T#50	1	Endicott	2-2	def. (n) Elms, 93-89; LOST at T#46 Keene State, 88-100; def. (n) Clark, 88-72; LOST to (n) Lyndon State, 81-87
T#50	1	Northwestern (Minn.)	5-0	def. Gustavus Adolphus, 75-73; won at Hamline, 81-67; def. Marian, 87-66; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 83-64; won at Macalester, 64-61

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 7express on November 26, 2015, 02:51:40 AM

That's a lot of red there :o. I think for sure WPI cracks the next poll (when is it anyways??), and Keene State should too.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 26, 2015, 06:30:09 AM

Lots of big bolded black marks in Darryl's first "How They Fared" report. 24 losses among the Top 25 teams and another 24 losses among the 26 teams in the ORV category. That's a whole lot of carnage.

Ten teams had 2 losses:

#2 Virginia Wesleyan
#6 Catholic
#7 Mt. Union
#14 Eastern Connecticut
#17 Chicago
#23 UW-Oshkosh
#28 Johns Hopkins
#31 William Paterson (with their unfortunate forfeit)
#48 Southern Vermont
#50 Endicott

And three teams had 3 losses:

#21 Dickinson
#26 Randolph-Macon
#43 Hardin-Simmons

One interesting fact...Benedictine University is responsible for 2 of the losses on this board as they defeated #24 Illinois Wesleyan 88-86 back on November 14th and last night held on to down Elmhurst 94-86. At halftime they had a 28 point lead. I wonder if they'll get some love from the Top 25 voters? In between these 2 wins Benedictine defeated Wheaton College (Ill) by a 76-61 score, so the Eagles are currently in 1st place in the CCIW with a 3-0 record. They could conceivably improve that CCIW record to 5-0 as they will play at North Central on Dec.22nd and end the year with a Dec. 30th game hosting Carthage. At that time they will have played 11 games...6 in their own NACC conference and 5 in the CCIW. Too bad that on New Year's Day they can't choose which conference they would like to be in for the rest of the season.

And plus K to Darryl for doing this again. 8-)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 26, 2015, 09:20:15 AM

Quote from: magicman on November 26, 2015, 06:30:09 AM
One interesting fact...Benedictine University is responsible for 2 of the losses on this board as they defeated #24 Illinois Wesleyan 88-86 back on November 14th and last night held on to down Elmhurst 94-86. At halftime they had a 28 point lead. I wonder if they'll get some love from the Top 25 voters? In between these 2 wins Benedictine defeated Wheaton College (Ill) by a 76-61 score, so the Eagles are currently in 1st place in the CCIW with a 3-0 record. They could conceivably improve that CCIW record to 5-0 as they will play at North Central on Dec.22nd and end the year with a Dec. 30th game hosting Carthage. At that time they will have played 11 games...6 in their own NACC conference and 5 in the CCIW. Too bad that on New Year's Day they can't choose which conference they would like to be in for the rest of the season.

Benedictine is very good. Their starters:

G - Tahron Harvey, 6-2/185 Jr. 16.0 ppg, 6.0 rpg, 4.7 apg
G - John Dodson, 6-0/185 Sr. 12.0 ppg, 4.3 rpg
G - Michael Blaszczk, 6-3/190 Jr. 16.0 ppg, 5.7 rpg
F - Adam Reynolds, 6-5/225 Jr. 12.7 ppg, 6.7 rpg
F - Luke Johnson, 6-9/235 Sr. 13.7 ppg, 7.0 rpg

They have great balance -- a strong group of perimeter players, and strong posts, led by 6-9 Luke Johnson. Johnson started 9 games for Division II St. Leo in 2014-15 - he is one of the better 5s in Division III.

Elmhurst is a big, deep, and very talented team - what BU did to the Bluejays last night in the 1st half, on Elmhurst's floor, was impressive.

Having watched parts of Benedictine's first 3 games, I see a team that could be ranked as high as about #15 right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 26, 2015, 10:02:39 AM

Thanks for the breakdown Q,

I haven't seen them play yet but their results have certainly been impressive. I would think they will be ranked when the next poll comes out and somewhere in the middle of the pack would seem to be about right. 5 players averaging double figures, generally gets the job done.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 26, 2015, 11:18:34 AM

Quote from: magicman on November 26, 2015, 06:30:09 AM
Lots of big bolded black marks in Darryl's first "How They Fared" report. 24 losses among the Top 25 teams and another 24 losses among the 26 teams in the ORV category. That's a whole lot of carnage.

Well, it is two weeks' worth of games, you know.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 26, 2015, 12:07:12 PM

Quote from: AndOne on November 25, 2015, 10:31:58 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 17, 2015, 12:34:00 PM
Augustana:
at UW-Whitewater RV (60)
vs. #9 UW-Stevens Point
at Wash U RV (15)

And those three games are in a course of ten days in December.

They also have:
at UW-La Crposse
vs. UW-Oskosh
vs. Edgewood

North Central:
vs. #7 Mount Union
vs. #17 Chicago
vs. #9 UW-Stevens Point
vs. Centre RV (8)

Plus UW-Platteville.e

Plus North Central has #1 Augie, #8 Elmhurst, and #24 IWU twice each.
That's 9 games against Top 25 teams plus one ORV, and Plateville, and now (3-0) Benedictine.

Considering it was talking about out of conference opponents... I was sticking to non-CCIW teams... because we can get into UW-Stevens Points and UW-Whitewater's schedules as well with themselves, Oshkosh, and Platteville to add. But the original post I was responding to was about non-conference schedules.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 26, 2015, 03:35:54 PM

Quote from: magicman on November 26, 2015, 06:30:09 AM
One interesting fact...Benedictine University is responsible for 2 of the losses on this board as they defeated #24 Illinois Wesleyan 88-86 back on November 14th and last night held on to down Elmhurst 94-86. At halftime they had a 28 point lead. I wonder if they'll get some love from the Top 25 voters?

St. Vincent is responsible for two of the losses on Darryl's board as well, as the Bearcats beat #11 Marietta, 85-80, and followed it up with a win over the top ORV team, Randolph-Macon, 70-68. However, in between those two wins the Bearcats lost a neutral-floor contest to Hood; even though Hood is currently 4-0, I suspect that that's enough to keep any pollster from taking St. Vincent seriously right now.

Quote from: magicman on November 26, 2015, 06:30:09 AMIn between these 2 wins Benedictine defeated Wheaton College (Ill) by a 76-61 score, so the Eagles are currently in 1st place in the CCIW with a 3-0 record. They could conceivably improve that CCIW record to 5-0 as they will play at North Central on Dec.22nd and end the year with a Dec. 30th game hosting Carthage. At that time they will have played 11 games...6 in their own NACC conference and 5 in the CCIW. Too bad that on New Year's Day they can't choose which conference they would like to be in for the rest of the season.

The subject of Benedictine's thwarted aspiration over the years to join the CCIW comes up on CCIW Chat every two or three years. Last time the discussion created quite a brouhaha. As a result, if you'd really like the 411 on it, you're better off PMing me. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 26, 2015, 06:25:12 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 17, 2015, 10:08:38 AM
Based on the preseason poll, Stevens Point plays:

Vs #15 St. Olaf
Vs#16 Hope
Vs St. Norbert RV (57)
At #1 Augustana
At North Central RV (10)
Vs #4 St. Thomas
Vs Keene St. RV (4)

Any other similarly tough nonconference schedules?

Yes. I was specifying nonconference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on November 26, 2015, 10:20:22 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 26, 2015, 06:25:12 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 17, 2015, 10:08:38 AM
Based on the preseason poll, Stevens Point plays:

Vs #15 St. Olaf
Vs#16 Hope
Vs St. Norbert RV (57)
At #1 Augustana
At North Central RV (10)
Vs #4 St. Thomas
Vs Keene St. RV (4)

Any other similarly tough nonconference schedules?

Yes. I was specifying nonconference.

Don't you mean preseason?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 26, 2015, 10:25:49 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 26, 2015, 03:35:54 PM
Quote from: magicman on November 26, 2015, 06:30:09 AM
One interesting fact...Benedictine University is responsible for 2 of the losses on this board as they defeated #24 Illinois Wesleyan 88-86 back on November 14th and last night held on to down Elmhurst 94-86. At halftime they had a 28 point lead. I wonder if they'll get some love from the Top 25 voters?

St. Vincent is responsible for two of the losses on Darryl's board as well, as the Bearcats beat #11 Marietta, 85-80, and followed it up with a win over the top ORV team, Randolph-Macon, 70-68. However, in between those two wins the Bearcats lost a neutral-floor contest to Hood; even though Hood is currently 4-0, I suspect that that's enough to keep any pollster from taking St. Vincent seriously right now.

Quote from: magicman on November 26, 2015, 06:30:09 AMIn between these 2 wins Benedictine defeated Wheaton College (Ill) by a 76-61 score, so the Eagles are currently in 1st place in the CCIW with a 3-0 record. They could conceivably improve that CCIW record to 5-0 as they will play at North Central on Dec.22nd and end the year with a Dec. 30th game hosting Carthage. At that time they will have played 11 games...6 in their own NACC conference and 5 in the CCIW. Too bad that on New Year's Day they can't choose which conference they would like to be in for the rest of the season.

The subject of Benedictine's thwarted aspiration over the years to join the CCIW comes up on CCIW Chat every two or three years. Last time the discussion created quite a brouhaha. As a result, if you'd really like the 411 on it, you're better off PMing me. ;)

I've been an eavesdropper on one or two of those brouhahas. ::) Remember them well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 26, 2015, 10:41:06 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on November 26, 2015, 10:20:22 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 26, 2015, 06:25:12 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 17, 2015, 10:08:38 AM
Based on the preseason poll, Stevens Point plays:

Vs #15 St. Olaf
Vs#16 Hope
Vs St. Norbert RV (57)
At #1 Augustana
At North Central RV (10)
Vs #4 St. Thomas
Vs Keene St. RV (4)

Any other similarly tough nonconference schedules?

Yes. I was specifying nonconference.

Don't you mean preseason?

Troublemaker. And on Thanksgiving, even!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 28, 2015, 09:07:17 AM

Great game on tap tonight...

NAIA D2 #1 Cornerstone vs NCAA D3 #16 Hope.
http://www.cugoldeneagles.com/sport/0/1.php

Cornerstone, the defending NAIA D2 national champion, is most likely a basket or two better than the best NCAA D3 team - they are absolutely loaded. (Having watched both play, I'd favor Cornerstone by 4-5 points against Augustana on a neutral court.) Hope is quite a bit better than D3 #16...I believe the Dutchmen are a top 5 team.

Great D3/NAIA matchup, and a great chance to see just how strong Hope is.

(Cornerstone beat Calvin by 31 last night.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on November 28, 2015, 06:19:47 PM

Final: #13 Ohio Wesleyan 94 Illinois Wesleyan 85

Very nice road win for Ohio Wesleyan as they pick up a victory in a tough CCIW venue. Bishops are now 6-0 and deserve to move up in the rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 28, 2015, 09:58:22 PM

Cornerstone 73 (NAIA D2 #1)
Hope 67 (NCAA D3 #16)

Hope led for about 38 minutes and would love to have the final 2 back.

I believe Hope is a tiny bit better than Augustana.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 28, 2015, 10:13:42 PM

Augustana 88 LaCrosse. 60
Hope 65 LaCrosse 47

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 28, 2015, 10:19:29 PM

Quote from: sac on November 28, 2015, 10:13:42 PM
Augustana 88 LaCrosse. 60
Hope 65 LaCrosse 47

Quote from: sac on November 22, 2015, 04:40:00 PM
North Central 83 Mt. Union 68
Mt. Union 74 Chicago 58
Chicago 74 North Central 61

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 29, 2015, 06:25:40 PM

~~Two results still pending -- will edit to update when they finish~~
How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	623	Augustana	2-0	def. UW-La Crosse, 88-60; won at Fontbonne, 80-57
#2	462	Virginia Wesleyan	4-2	LOST at Wesley, 91-92; def. Milwaukee Engineering, 73-59; def. Averett, 88-66; LOST at #45 Salisbury, 60-71; def. Emory and Henry, 76-61; def. North Carolina Wesleyan, 80-67
#3	452	Whitworth	5-0	def. La Verne, 87-80; def. Caltech, 80-58; def. Northwest (Wash.), 84-54; def. (n) Hamline, 69-56; won at Colorado College, 73-66
#4	443	St. Thomas	3-0	won at UW-Eau Claire, 76-62; def. (n) #18 Emory, 82-70; def. (n) T#48 Southern Vermont, 79-67
#5	416	Amherst	3-0	def. Johnson State, 104-52; def. Worcester State, 97-79; def. Anna Maria, 86-64
#6	399	Catholic	3-2	def. Neumann, 75-64; def. (n) La Roche, 84-65; LOST at #11 Marietta, 90-92; LOST at Washington and Lee, 72-74; def. Wesley, 94-92
#7	359	Mount Union	3-2	LOST to (n) #31 William Paterson, 78-100; def. (n) Potsdam State, 70-56; def. Penn St. Beaver, 118-91; LOST at #40 North Central (Ill.), 68-83; def. (n) #17 Chicago, 74-58
#8	356	Elmhurst	4-1	won at Curry, 83-61; won at Greenville, 123-111; def. (n) Westminster (Mo.), 81-58; LOST to Benedictine, 86-94; def. Alma, 71-69
#9	355	UW-Stevens Point	3-1	won at UW-Superior, 69-61; def. #15 St. Olaf, 68-65; LOST to #16 Hope, 56-68; def. T#33 St. Norbert, 66-61
#10	350	Babson	5-1	def. Framingham State, 69-41; def. Anna Maria, 97-67; won at Lasell, 74-72; def. Elms, 103-71; won at Becker, 70-65; LOST at Bowdoin, 84-88
#11	335	Marietta	4-1	def. Westminster (Pa.), 100-82; won at Bethany, 78-65; def. Methodist, 79-64; def. #6 Catholic, 92-90; LOST at St. Vincent, 80-85
#12	292	Trinity (Conn.)	3-1	LOST at Springfield, 69-80; won at Framingham State, 71-60; def. (n) Me.-Fort Kent, 90-51; won at Mass-Boston, 77-54
#13	268	Ohio Wesleyan	6-0	won at Otterbein, 80-75; def. (n) Capital, 72-59; def. Alma, 96-77; def. T#41 Calvin, 91-83; def. Trine, 70-53; won at #24 Illinois Wesleyan, 94-85
#14	249	Eastern Connecticut	4-2	LOST to (n) #36 WPI, 50-60; def. (n) Western New England, 80-51; LOST to (n) Johnson and Wales, 59-72; def. (n) Ramapo, 96-71; def. (n) Hartwick, 93-87; won at Hamilton, 77-69
#15	224	St. Olaf	1-2	def. Bethany Lutheran, 82-53; LOST at #9 UW-Stevens Point, 65-68; LOST to UW-River Falls, 77-80
#16	219	Hope	3-1	won at UW-La Crosse, 65-47; won at #9 UW-Stevens Point, 68-56; def. (n) Aquinas, 95-61; LOST at Cornerstone, 67-73
#17	209	Chicago	4-2	LOST at North Park, 66-72; def. Lake Forest, 67-61; LOST to (n) #7 Mount Union, 58-74; won at #40 North Central (Ill.), 74-61; won at Pacific Lutheran, 62-58; def. (n) Puget Sound, 75-46
#18	194	Emory	4-3	def. Piedmont, 72-60; def. Birmingham-Southern, 88-54; def. Belhaven, 72-65; LOST to (n) #4 St. Thomas, 70-82; won at Stevenson, 79-75; LOST at Maryville (Tenn.), 67-91; LOST to (n) LaGrange, 86-91
#19	193	Franklin and Marshall	4-1	def. Elizabethtown, 80-49; def. Oneonta State, 79-71; def. (n) New Jersey City, 79-67; LOST to (n) Lancaster Bible, 66-94; won at Muhlenberg, 81-78
#20	159	Wooster	2-1	def. Silver Lake, 89-48; LOST to Skidmore, 63-72; won at Cabrini, 79-59
#21	157	Dickinson	1-3	LOST to Cabrini, 82-87; won at Stevenson, 77-67; LOST to (n) #22 St. John Fisher, 68-82; LOST at McDaniel, 56-66
#22	134	St. John Fisher	3-0	def. SUNYIT, 96-73; def. (n) DeSales, 74-64; def. (n) #21 Dickinson, 82-68
#23	132	UW-Oshkosh	2-2	LOST at T#33 St. Norbert, 62-68; LOST to Coe, 70-75; def. Wisconsin Lutheran, 88-81; def. Edgewood, 99-53
#24	129	Illinois Wesleyan	3-2	LOST to Benedictine, 86-88; def. Greenville, 150-117; def. Wilmington, 84-61; def. Rose-Hulman, 86-76; LOST to #13 Ohio Wesleyan, 85-94
#25	114	East Texas Baptist	3-1	won at Rhodes, 58-55; won at Centenary (La.), 72-61; def. (n) Schreiner, 84-73; LOST at Texas Lutheran, 78-79

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	99	Randolph-Macon	1-4	LOST to Mary Washington, 66-83; LOST to (n) St. Vincent, 68-70; won at Frostburg State, 84-74; LOST to T#46 Christopher Newport, 65-74; LOST at Averett 76-85
#27	84	NYU	4-0	def. SUNY-Purchase, 75-53; def. Moravian, 104-76; def. Arcadia, 90-87; def. Massachusetts College, 97-67
#28	82	Johns Hopkins	1-3	LOST to Lynchburg, 80-91; def. (n) DePauw, 82-74; LOST at #39 Washington U., 62-78; LOST at Gettysburg, 70-83
#29	75	Bates	2-2	def. (n) Norwich, 79-49; def. (n) Me.-Fort Kent, 86-65; LOST at Southern Maine, 92-106; LOST to University of New England, 89-101
#30	69	Scranton	5-1	def. Bryn Athyn, 94-68; def. Ursinus, 71-62; def. Ithaca, 78-67; LOST to Hobart, 73-79; def. (n) King's, 70-58; def. (n) Wilkes, 60-50
#31	63	William Paterson	4-2	def. (n) #7 Mount Union, 100-78; won at Drew, 70-62; def. Lehman, 73-71; LOST at Brooklyn, 66-80; LOST to Ramapo, 0-2; def. (n) Rosemont, 72-68
#32	60	UW-Whitewater	3-1	won at T#48 Ripon, 74-60; LOST to Davenport, 74-85; def. Finlandia, 80-52; def. Ohio Northern, 93-73
T#33	57	St. Norbert	2-1	def. #23 UW-Oshkosh, 68-62; LOST at #9 UW-Stevens Point, 61-66; won at Monmouth, 64-59
T#33	57	John Carroll	5-0	def. (n) Transylvania, 92-75; won at St. Mary's (Md.), 100-88; def. (n) Birmingham-Southern, 117-93; def. (n) Rust, 120-88; won at La Roche, 87-83
#35	54	Oswego State	6-0	won at St. Lawrence, 73-67; def. Mount St. Mary, 71-46; def. (n) Morrisville State, 61-59; won at Clarkson, 73-58; def. (n) Middlebury, 70-55; won at Rochester, 55-54
#36	52	WPI	5-0	def. (n) #14 Eastern Connecticut, 60-50; won at Westfield State, 59-50; def. Curry, 89-64; def. Staten Island, 66-62; def. Worcester State, 57-51
#37	47	Stockton	3-1	LOST to Staten Island, 68-72; def. Neumann, 86-71; def. Gwynedd Mercy, 81-64; won at Rowan, 88-71
#38	23	Bethel	4-0	def. Martin Luther, 94-71; won at UW-River Falls, 62-55; def. UW-La Crosse, 83-76; def. Buena Vista, 91-86
#39	15	Washington U.	5-0	def. Blackburn, 90-60; def. Pomona-Pitzer, 87-65; def. #28 Johns Hopkins, 78-62; won at Spalding, 74-49; won at Hanover, 84-64
#40	10	North Central (Ill.)	1-2	def. #7 Mount Union, 83-68; LOST to #17 Chicago, 61-74; LOST at Aurora, 92-95
T#41	9	Albertus Magnus	3-0	def. SUNY-Purchase, 101-84; won at Mitchell, 99-91; def. Norwich, 65-64
T#41	9	Calvin	2-3	def. (n) Waynesburg, 83-77; LOST at #13 Ohio Wesleyan, 83-91; won at Manchester, 89-77; LOST at Cornerstone, 72-103; LOST to (n) Aquinas, 77-87
T#43	8	Centre	4-1	LOST to Maryville (Tenn.), 62-70; won at Franklin, 71-60; won at Transylvania, 61-46; def. Berea, 80-66; def. Thomas More, 68-61
T#43	8	Hardin-Simmons	3-3	won at Schreiner, 76-70; LOST at Southwestern, 74-80; won at Trinity (Texas), 85-72; LOST to Schreiner, 82-84; LOST at Texas Lutheran, 89-99; def. Southwestern, 82-69
#45	7	Salisbury	5-0	def. (n) Rowan, 62-61; won at Widener, 83-50; def. (n) T#48 Southern Vermont, 60-59; def. (n) DeSales, 89-79; def. #2 Virginia Wesleyan, 71-60
T#46	4	Christopher Newport	4-0	def. Lynchburg, 72-56; def. Washington and Lee, 70-52; won at #26 Randolph-Macon, 74-65; def. Frostburg State, 74-47
T#46	4	Keene State	5-0	def. Green Mountain, 108-104; def. T#50 Endicott, 100-88; def. Lasell, 93-91; won at University of New England, 89-66; won at Springfield, 87-78
T#48	2	Ripon	2-1	LOST to #32 UW-Whitewater, 60-74; def. Lawrence, 88-80; won at Wisconsin Lutheran, 85-73
T#48	2	Southern Vermont	2-2	def. Massachusetts College, 102-72; LOST to (n) #45 Salisbury, 59-60; LOST to (n) #4 St. Thomas, 67-79; won at Castleton, 100-82
T#50	1	Endicott	2-2	def. (n) Elms, 93-89; LOST at T#46 Keene State, 88-100; def. (n) Clark, 88-72; LOST to (n) Lyndon State, 81-87
T#50	1	Northwestern (Minn.)	5-0	def. Gustavus Adolphus, 75-73; won at Hamline, 81-67; def. Marian, 87-66; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 83-64; won at Macalester, 64-61

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on November 29, 2015, 06:33:17 PM

#30 Scranton-Wilkes was a neutral court game @ Marywood.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 29, 2015, 06:37:49 PM

Quote from: ronk on November 29, 2015, 06:33:17 PM
#30 Scranton-Wilkes was a neutral court game @ Marywood.

Thanks for the heads up. My program catches some automatically, but doesn't get them all. I'll edit to fix that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on November 29, 2015, 07:06:47 PM

So... What's the next next top 25 going to look like? All of the 2+ loss teams should drop, without question.

Are there any "good" losses? Hope's loss to Cornerstone is over that comes to mind. Perhaps Stevens Point's to Hope? SP was the only top 25 team to lose just one game to another ranked team (others that lost to a ranked team also lost other games or lost a single game to a non-ranked team). But the win over St. Olaf is tempered by Olaf's subsequent loss to UW River Falls.

It has been mentioned how difficult this top 25 was to put together by the voters... So maybe lots of stock shouldn't be put in the current poll.

By all accounts, Benedictine should be ranked, so IWU's two losses are to Ohio Wesleyan and a very good Benedictine team.

St. Norbert's win vs an over-rated UW Oshkosh team is tempered by their loss to UWSP.

Lots of moving pieces. Any other thoughts?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 29, 2015, 08:02:51 PM

You are just making it more complicated in my head. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 29, 2015, 09:37:18 PM

Quote from: John Gleich on November 29, 2015, 07:06:47 PM
So... What's the next next top 25 going to look like? All of the 2+ loss teams should drop, without question.

Are there any "good" losses? Hope's loss to Cornerstone is over that comes to mind. Perhaps Stevens Point's to Hope? SP was the only top 25 team to lose just one game to another ranked team (others that lost to a ranked team also lost other games or lost a single game to a non-ranked team). But the win over St. Olaf is tempered by Olaf's subsequent loss to UW River Falls.

It has been mentioned how difficult this top 25 was to put together by the voters... So maybe lots of stock shouldn't be put in the current poll.

By all accounts, Benedictine should be ranked, so IWU's two losses are to Ohio Wesleyan and a very good Benedictine team.

St. Norbert's win vs an over-rated UW Oshkosh team is tempered by their loss to UWSP.

Lots of moving pieces. Any other thoughts?

I think Benedictine (who won AT IWU and AT Elmhurst, as well as a home win over Wheaton) will definitely enter the rankings between 15 and 20 - not bad for a team receiving zero votes in the preseason poll! Unfortunately, IWU's losses were both at the Shirk, so I would expect they will be gone - but I have strong hopes they will return in a few weeks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 30, 2015, 06:56:28 PM

I would think Oswego State's 6-0 start would get them some love and into the Top 25 somewhere between 20 and 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 30, 2015, 08:51:58 PM

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2015-16/week1
There are 10 new teams in the Top 25 this week, that's the most from pre-season to week 1 in the polls history. We had 9 in 2009. I imagine that's also a record for all of the polls, hard to imagine we've ever had 10 new teams at any other time.

The 4 new Top 10 teams ties the record which is 3 consecutive years now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on November 30, 2015, 09:31:10 PM

There may be 10 new teams in the top 25 but it is also clear that voters have trouble admitting their preseason mistakes so we still have two teams with 2 losses that are still ranked despite very unimpressive results. ::) At this stage, I would expect that a 2 loss team that is ranked would have 2 quality losses and/or have 1-2 quality wins that suggest they are deserving of a Top 25 ranking.

#15 Viriginia Wesleyan (4-2) and #22 Catholic (3-2) fit neither description so they are still ranked because the voters cannot admit their preseason mistakes.

#15 Virginia Wesleyan (4-2)
-Have a Loss vs. a team that has a record of 1-3 (that's right...they beat Va. Wesleyan and then LOST their next 3 games)
-3 of Virginia Wesleyan's 4 Wins are against Teams that have a Losing Record so far this season

#22 Catholic (3-2)
-Have a Loss to a team with a record of 3-2
-Catholic's 3 wins are against 3 teams that have a cumulative record of 4-11

No logical reason for these two teams with 2 losses and unimpressive results to be ranked ahead of other undefeated or 1 loss teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 30, 2015, 09:34:51 PM

Quote from: sac on November 30, 2015, 08:51:58 PM
http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2015-16/week1
There are 10 new teams in the Top 25 this week, that's the most from pre-season to week 1 in the polls history. We had 9 in 2009. I imagine that's also a record for all of the polls, hard to imagine we've ever had 10 new teams at any other time.

The 4 new Top 10 teams ties the record which is 3 consecutive years now.

I feel it's important to point out that this year there's an extra week between preseason and week 1. There were 17 playing days in between (16 if you don't count Thanksgiving).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 30, 2015, 10:27:40 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 29, 2015, 09:37:18 PM
Quote from: John Gleich on November 29, 2015, 07:06:47 PM
So... What's the next next top 25 going to look like? All of the 2+ loss teams should drop, without question.

Are there any "good" losses? Hope's loss to Cornerstone is over that comes to mind. Perhaps Stevens Point's to Hope? SP was the only top 25 team to lose just one game to another ranked team (others that lost to a ranked team also lost other games or lost a single game to a non-ranked team). But the win over St. Olaf is tempered by Olaf's subsequent loss to UW River Falls.

It has been mentioned how difficult this top 25 was to put together by the voters... So maybe lots of stock shouldn't be put in the current poll.

By all accounts, Benedictine should be ranked, so IWU's two losses are to Ohio Wesleyan and a very good Benedictine team.

St. Norbert's win vs an over-rated UW Oshkosh team is tempered by their loss to UWSP.

Lots of moving pieces. Any other thoughts?

I think Benedictine (who won AT IWU and AT Elmhurst, as well as a home win over Wheaton) will definitely enter the rankings between 15 and 20 - not bad for a team receiving zero votes in the preseason poll! Unfortunately, IWU's losses were both at the Shirk, so I would expect they will be gone - but I have strong hopes they will return in a few weeks.

Wow! The voters were even less tied to 'anchoring bias' than I expected - Benedictine went from zero points to #12! As I expected, IWU fell out, but still got 45 points, so I'm quite hopeful they will be back soon. (But I'm offended that Hope rose from #16 to #5, while OWU beat IWU at the Shirk and only rose from #13 to #6! :o ;D)

Benedictine has probably already played their two toughest games of the season - I'd say they have an outside shot at being the 2006 Lawrence of 2016.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 30, 2015, 10:35:12 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 30, 2015, 10:27:40 PM
Benedictine has probably already played their two toughest games of the season - I'd say they have an outside shot at being the 2006 Lawrence of 2016.

Benedictine is not favored to win their league...

http://www.naccsports.org/sports/mbkb/2015-16/releases/20151029dlydu5

Guessing they have plenty of tough games left.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 30, 2015, 10:51:17 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 30, 2015, 10:35:12 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 30, 2015, 10:27:40 PM
Benedictine has probably already played their two toughest games of the season - I'd say they have an outside shot at being the 2006 Lawrence of 2016.

Benedictine is not favored to win their league...

http://www.naccsports.org/sports/mbkb/2015-16/releases/20151029dlydu5

Guessing they have plenty of tough games left.

Yeah, and we know how infallible coaches' pre-season polls are! ;D

I doubt they will go undefeated, but I don't see any games on their remaining schedule tougher than @IWU and @Elmhurst.

So I'll stick with outside chance of reprising Lawrence.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: coachrcal on November 30, 2015, 11:01:20 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on November 30, 2015, 09:31:10 PM
There may be 10 new teams in the top 25 but it is also clear that voters have trouble admitting their preseason mistakes so we still have two teams with 2 losses that are still ranked despite very unimpressive results. ::) At this stage, I would expect that a 2 loss team that is ranked would have 2 quality losses and/or have 1-2 quality wins that suggest they are deserving of a Top 25 ranking.

#15 Viriginia Wesleyan (4-2) and #22 Catholic (3-2) fit neither description so they are still ranked because the voters cannot admit their preseason mistakes.

#15 Virginia Wesleyan (4-2)
-Have a Loss vs. a team that has a record of 1-3 (that's right...they beat Va. Wesleyan and then LOST their next 3 games)
-3 of Virginia Wesleyan's 4 Wins are against Teams that have a Losing Record so far this season

#22 Catholic (3-2)
-Have a Loss to a team with a record of 3-2
-Catholic's 3 wins are against 3 teams that have a cumulative record of 4-11

No logical reason for these two teams with 2 losses and unimpressive results to be ranked ahead of other undefeated or 1 loss teams.

I agree, some of these rankings make no sense. How dose a team get beat by 30 and move up one spot

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 30, 2015, 11:03:31 PM

I didn't think IWU was a top 25 team in preseason - they're pretty much playing to form. ORV sounds about right until they prove something. I don't think that's too harsh. I'm guessing there's a number of teams in the poll almost entirely because they haven't lost yet.

This is going to be a tough year to figure out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 30, 2015, 11:12:28 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 30, 2015, 11:03:31 PM

I didn't think IWU was a top 25 team in preseason - they're pretty much playing to form. ORV sounds about right until they prove something. I don't think that's too harsh. I'm guessing there's a number of teams in the poll almost entirely because they haven't lost yet.

This is going to be a tough year to figure out.

Two of IWU's best bigs are in street clothes. Once they return, I think they are a top 20 team. And since it will be an even year tourney, I have hopes they will finish much higher (2006: FF; 2008: nobody's perfect :P; 2010: E8; 2012: FF; 2014: FF; 2016: ??)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 30, 2015, 11:15:05 PM

Looked at Brooklyn's roster tonight. Three dudes all seniors all named Gjonbalaj. I did a story on them last year, could've sworn there was only one Gjonbalaj. Is Brooklyn doing secret human cloning work? If so, they may need to be ranked higher than #24. They look pretty similar in the team photo.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 30, 2015, 11:17:03 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on November 30, 2015, 11:15:05 PM

Looked at Brooklyn's roster tonight. Three dudes all seniors all named Gjonbalaj. I did a story on them last year, could've sworn there was only one Gjonbalaj. Is Brooklyn doing secret human cloning work? If so, they may need to be ranked higher than #24. They look pretty similar in the team photo.

Even crazier? If you google "gjonbalaj triplets" you get a bunch of youtube videos with 14 year old soccer players from Staten Island. Maybe the cloning thing is just a family project?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 30, 2015, 11:37:10 PM

Quote from: coachrcal on November 30, 2015, 11:01:20 PM
Quote from: wooscotsfan on November 30, 2015, 09:31:10 PM
There may be 10 new teams in the top 25 but it is also clear that voters have trouble admitting their preseason mistakes so we still have two teams with 2 losses that are still ranked despite very unimpressive results. ::) At this stage, I would expect that a 2 loss team that is ranked would have 2 quality losses and/or have 1-2 quality wins that suggest they are deserving of a Top 25 ranking.

#15 Viriginia Wesleyan (4-2) and #22 Catholic (3-2) fit neither description so they are still ranked because the voters cannot admit their preseason mistakes.

#15 Virginia Wesleyan (4-2)
-Have a Loss vs. a team that has a record of 1-3 (that's right...they beat Va. Wesleyan and then LOST their next 3 games)
-3 of Virginia Wesleyan's 4 Wins are against Teams that have a Losing Record so far this season

#22 Catholic (3-2)
-Have a Loss to a team with a record of 3-2
-Catholic's 3 wins are against 3 teams that have a cumulative record of 4-11

No logical reason for these two teams with 2 losses and unimpressive results to be ranked ahead of other undefeated or 1 loss teams.

I agree, some of these rankings make no sense. How dose a team get beat by 30 and move up one spot

I suppose you mean F&M? They moved down a spot, rather than up, but I don't think that was the only game that F&M played in the first 17 days either. Lots of churn in the early poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 01, 2015, 12:00:52 AM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on November 30, 2015, 09:31:10 PM
There may be 10 new teams in the top 25 but it is also clear that voters have trouble admitting their preseason mistakes so we still have two teams with 2 losses that are still ranked despite very unimpressive results. ::) At this stage, I would expect that a 2 loss team that is ranked would have 2 quality losses and/or have 1-2 quality wins that suggest they are deserving of a Top 25 ranking.

#15 Viriginia Wesleyan (4-2) and #22 Catholic (3-2) fit neither description so they are still ranked because the voters cannot admit their preseason mistakes.

#15 Virginia Wesleyan (4-2)
-Have a Loss vs. a team that has a record of 1-3 (that's right...they beat Va. Wesleyan and then LOST their next 3 games)
-3 of Virginia Wesleyan's 4 Wins are against Teams that have a Losing Record so far this season

#22 Catholic (3-2)
-Have a Loss to a team with a record of 3-2
-Catholic's 3 wins are against 3 teams that have a cumulative record of 4-11

No logical reason for these two teams with 2 losses and unimpressive results to be ranked ahead of other undefeated or 1 loss teams.

Well let's consider a few things:
- How far these two teams actually fell:
- VWC was #2 and fell to #15 losing 245 points... that's a lot
- CUA was #6 and fell to #22 losing 291 points... that's a ton.
- There is a point where a team falling from high in a poll can only fall so far before a cushion of some kind breaks their fall. Call it Top 25 physics. LOL
- Yes, Wesley's loss was bad, though it was close (near buzzer beater). However, their other loss which you decided to apparently ignore was to Salisbury who is now ranked #17 at an undefeated 5-0. They also have a win over Averett which you may not think is much, but they are off to a pretty good start this season as well.
- Catholic may have some tough losses, but there are a number of buzzer beaters in there. It isn't all about the line score, but what actually happened in the games.
- We can also talk about reputation, which so many people hate. I am not saying it is a deciding factor, BUT many voters know VWC, for example, is a team that is always solid, well coached, and deserving of being nationally ranked.

So I would counter there are several logical reasons to keep those two programs in the Top 25... it's not black and white. There is a lot that goes into these things and a lot of teams came out of the poll for various reasons... and a lot of teams who entered the poll for various reasons.

I would also like to counter the "it is also clear that voters have trouble admitting their preseason mistakes." What exactly does that mean? Voters vote. Misreading teams, injuries, unexpected surprises, strange bounces of the ball can do a wonder of things that will have voters, like myself, reevaluating their choices. I don't see those choices and votes as mistakes. It's not like we have to go out and apologize for voting for teams in a certain manner.

But this isn't easy. 59 teams received votes this week! 59! Seven teams in the Top 25 I don't have on my ballot and some of them I'm not even considering for my reasons (blog tomorrow). There are a TON of questions in what is a wide open season. Voters aren't making mistakes, they are simply doing their best to determine who the best 25 teams in the country are. We certainly don't all agree (obviously), but your statement of saying they are making "mistakes" makes it seem like you know better, that the voters aren't trying or taking this seriously. Maybe I am reading that wrong... and if that is the case... my mistake.

Quote from: coachrcal on November 30, 2015, 11:01:20 PM
I agree, some of these rankings make no sense. How dose a team get beat by 30 and move up one spot

I am not sure what team you are referring to specifically (I assume F&M, though they moved down a spot), but there are a couple of things to consider here as well:
- There was 17 days between the start of the season and now. One game does not really make a statement to a resume. There are anywhere from two to seven games to consider for teams. The entire resume will always be considered, but this week it truly is the case. So one game, even a 30-point loss, is being outweighed by other factors.
- Did you notice how many points they lost (as they fell a spot)? I am pretty sure we are talking about F&M... if so, they lost 52 points. That's at least two spots per voter if all 25 voters voted for them - but it's a bigger fall than that because F&M is one of the seven teams I didn't vote for this week, so not all voters are voting for them and thus those who are voting for them gave them a bigger hit than two spots on their ballots.
- It's not a vacuum. Looking at one team and whether they went up or down doesn't tell you what really happened. You have to look at what happened around them with team. F&M is surrounded by teams who are either new to the poll or dropped from way up. That means F&M took a hit, but there were a lot of teams on all the ballots moving around them as well.
- Let's not pretend the loss didn't have some kind of affect. Lancaster Bible went from not being on anyone's radar to receiving some love from the voters (ORV with 8 points).
- You are also don't seem to be looking at the entire poll if you are angry about this, why are you not angry that Hope moved up 11 spots despite a seven point loss or UWSP moved up two spots despite a loss to Hope (which makes sense if you look at the entire poll). What about Marietta? They moved up two despite a loss as well. And let's not forget UW-Whitewater... they went from UNRANKED to RANKED despite losing a game. Not all losses are equal, not all point spreads are equal, not all results are equal.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 01, 2015, 12:01:06 AM

And what Pat said. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 01, 2015, 12:16:58 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 01, 2015, 12:00:52 AM- Yes, Wesley's loss was bad, though it was close (near buzzer beater). However, their other loss which you decided to apparently ignore was to Salisbury who is now ranked #17 at an undefeated 5-0.

I'm not getting into the middle of this argument, but, to be fair to wsf, this is what he said (emphasis added):

Quote from: wooscotsfan on November 30, 2015, 09:31:10 PM
There may be 10 new teams in the top 25 but it is also clear that voters have trouble admitting their preseason mistakes so we still have two teams with 2 losses that are still ranked despite very unimpressive results. ::) At this stage, I would expect that a 2 loss team that is ranked would have 2 quality losses and/or have 1-2 quality wins that suggest they are deserving of a Top 25 ranking.

As you yourself said, D-Mac, VWC's loss to Wesley (1-3) was bad. Therefore, wsf didn't "apparently ignore" the fact that Salisbury was ranked. Rather, Salisbury's status simply isn't germane to wsf's point. He said that his expectation is that a two-loss team that's ranked would have two quality losses. Since one of VWC's losses clearly isn't "quality", VWC therefore doesn't deserve to be ranked under his criterion, regardless of the status of that other loss.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 01, 2015, 12:26:38 AM

Well, I would agree to that point... what I should have said about Wesley's loss wasn't "bad" as a head scratcher. However, I also know VWC has had trouble playing in that gym in the past and it didn't stop them from being a pretty good team who deserved being nationally ranked - maybe they should stop playing at Wesley. LOL

I would also point out, or at least already tried, that they did take a major hit for that loss. They fell a ton in the poll. They lost a lot of points. I will double check, but I dropped them a fair distance on my ballot.

But there was also a LOT of other things going on in the poll this week. VWC took a massive hit (13 spots and a ton of points) and ten teams entered the poll where others dropped out. That is a lot of shaking up. So, just because they stayed in the poll doesn't mean they were given a break for that or even the Salisbury loss (as with CUA as well).

I think this season, there are going to be losses probably by everyone that makes no sense. There are going to be crazy weeks for the poll, there are going to be crazy choices. I am not sure about other voters, but I dropped out six teams from my ballot this week and felt like I was constantly searching for teams that deserved to be ranked. There is a massive gap in my poll from 6 to 7 - where I don't feel my number seven team should be number seven... but maybe 12 or 15... but someone has to fill in those slots. To see that... look at the point total difference between number five and six... it's massive.

I understand the point that VWC only has maybe one quality loss... however, I don't agree they weren't punished just because they remained in the Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 01, 2015, 08:11:26 AM

I watched Virginia Wesleyan lose to Wesley in person. VWC is the better team, hands down. I chalk that one up to "first game of the year, overlooking the opponent, not quite having our chemistry together after losing so many players" problems.

However, during the course of the game, I noticed they have some real problems in the post, which factored significantly in them giving up the halftime lead - without real scoring in the post, it's tough to hold a lead. After that game I might've put them 20th or so.

I continued to follow the box score as they continued to give up big second half leads (even in wins). I don't think it's a Top 25 squad - not right now, not the way they're playing.

BUT, I only know that because I saw them in the first game, noticed some stuff in person, and followed the rest of their schedule particularly. I certainly haven't done that for every team - I doubt voters are really following that closely either. It takes time work everything out.

They were number 2 overall, so it's going to take more than two losses to drop them all the way out. That's just how these polls work.

The crazier thing to me, I don't see a single ODAC team worth voting for. Roanoke is probably the best right now. That's pretty unusual.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on December 01, 2015, 10:40:34 AM

I think every poll in every sport is subject to some degree of anchoring bias. While some may be due to voters not wanting to significantly deviate from their previous rankings, some is due to the way human brains work. It's hard to force yourself to analyze each team's body of work irrespective to the previous week's ranking and sentiment.

Of course, that's some of the fun in these human rankings. I love looking at D3hoops in conjunction with Massey.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on December 01, 2015, 10:40:46 AM

Biggest vote gainers
Hope, 292
Benedictine, 282
WashU, 220
St. John Fisher, 194
WPI, 186
Salisbury, 181
OH Wesleyan, 139
John Carroll, 136
Christopher Newport, 133
Amherst, 131
St. Thomas, 128
Whitworth, 121
Brooklyn, 95
NYU, 80
UW-Whitewater, 47
UWSP, 37

Biggest vote losers
Catholic, -291
Mt. Union, -275
VA Wesleyan, -245
St. Olaf, -210
E. Conn, -203
Chicago, -170
Emory, -170
Dickinson, -157
UW-Oshkosh, -132
Trinity (CT), -121
Randolph-Macon, -99
IL Wesleyan, -84
Johns Hopkins, -82
Wooster, -79
Bates, -75
F&M, -52
Babson, -35
St. Norbert, -28
E. Texas Baptist, -26
Scranton, -25
Bethel, -19

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 01, 2015, 12:23:25 PM

I find the Benedictine rise most surprising. Sure, they had good wins, but I think it more likely reflects on the relative strength of Elmhurst and IWU than on Benedictine. I think they deserve to be ranked, but maybe those other two teams shouldn't be (or shouldn't be as high). Maybe all three of them in the 20's?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on December 01, 2015, 01:51:21 PM

I don't envy the voters. If I had to vote I'd make my own homegrown Massey, which would probably be fraught with theoretical and statistical errors.

The nice thing is most teams have strong enough schedules that these things work themselves out over time.

I would bet if VA Wesleyan and Catholic continue to lose, they would drop mighty fast. As already pointed out, they did lose a ton of votes, 1st and 3rd most. The actual drop in rankings is academic at that point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 01, 2015, 03:44:07 PM

OK... finally got my ballot and blog posted. There was a lot to talk about this week, obviously. I do enjoy when we get further into the season and get into weekly voting as I don't have to write capsules on every single team. LOL

Here you go if you are interested: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2680 (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2680)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 01, 2015, 03:54:36 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 01, 2015, 03:44:07 PM
OK... finally got my ballot and blog posted. There was a lot to talk about this week, obviously. I do enjoy when we get further into the season and get into weekly voting as I don't have to write capsules on every single team. LOL

Here you go if you are interested: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2680 (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2680)

fyi, Hope lost to Cornerstone by 6 not 7. 73-67

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 01, 2015, 04:01:18 PM

Stupid typo... I will go and fix. Thanks. But as a result, I need Pat to adjust my ballot and move Hope UP one slot to SECOND. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 01, 2015, 04:09:58 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 01, 2015, 03:44:07 PM
OK... finally got my ballot and blog posted. There was a lot to talk about this week, obviously. I do enjoy when we get further into the season and get into weekly voting as I don't have to write capsules on every single team. LOL

Here you go if you are interested: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2680 (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2680)

I would agree with you on Washington University. They are playing very good basketball at the moment and I like that almost every game has yet another player emerging as the primary offensive threat, and Johns Hopkins looked like a tough team to me, so I like that win. But otherwise, just too soon to know.

What are your thoughts on NYU in the Top 25?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 01, 2015, 04:36:36 PM

I don't like NYU in the Top 25 at all... if Hakeem Hicks was there, I'd probably be voting for them, but not without (he is focusing on his studies this semester so he can graduate in a few weeks and apparently is on the Knicks practice squad from what I heard). But NYU has proven year in and year out to play well against an average to below-average out-of-conference schedule and then lay an egg when it comes to conference play. How many times have we seen NYU ranked in the out-of-conference part of the season and then disappear as voters scramble to get them off their ballots. Their only win I take note in is a three-point victory over Arcadia... the only team with a winning record ... and the rest of their non-conference slate is pretty easy. Now, I get they have dominated those opponents... but the schedule and opponents does NOTHING to prepare NYU for the UAA. Nothing. Never has; never will.

Current out-of-conference opponents record: 18-33 with ONE winning record (Arcadia's 5-1) for a .353 winning percentage. What is rest for NYU (not counting who they have already played): 6-22 (.214).

I'm not really sure why people keep buying in to NYU... but I am sure there are people who wonder why I buy into other teams I vote for, so I probably shouldn't cast any stones. However, when was the last time NYU actually ended up as good as their out-of-conference record made them look? They aren't even in the UAA conversation last year if not for Hicks showing up for the second semester.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 01, 2015, 05:33:11 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 01, 2015, 08:11:26 AM
The crazier thing to me, I don't see a single ODAC team worth voting for. Roanoke is probably the best right now. That's pretty unusual.

Man, do I wish Jim Loesel were still around to read this. (He's not, is he?)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: oldknight on December 01, 2015, 05:40:04 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 01, 2015, 03:44:07 PM
OK... finally got my ballot and blog posted. There was a lot to talk about this week, obviously. I do enjoy when we get further into the season and get into weekly voting as I don't have to write capsules on every single team. LOL

Here you go if you are interested: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2680 (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2680)

Dave: You have a far better handle nationally on teams than I do but let me give a couple of observations. Putting Hope third (or is it second?) seems about right. The Dutchmen clearly deserve a top 5 ranking. Putting OWU at 6 seems a bit too high for me. From what I've seen of these two teams, Hope is definitely better than the Bishops. And speaking of team nicknames, you put Amherst at 5 and then boldly call them "Lord Jeffs." Apparently you're unaware some on the Amherst campus would consider that to be a microaggression for your insensitive mention of an inherently racist mascot. Or so we're told by the group Amherst Uprising: http://amherstuprising.com/demands.html (see demand 7).

Amherst President Martin refused to renounce Lord Jeffrey Amherst so stand strong Dave!

In case it's not obvious, I am teasing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 01, 2015, 09:53:10 PM

I was unaware of what was going on with the students at Amherst. There are so many protests at so many schools, I simply can't keep up... so I focus on what grabs my attention (i.e. Washington College and University of Chicago scares recently).

It is is certainly interesting per the Lord Jeffs (especially since I think the Washington NFL team should get rid of their mascot name)... but I will have to read up on it more (though, I get it has to do with smallpox and the French and Indian War). It also will be interesting to hear what the board of trustees has to say while the President continues to say no. :) In the meantime, I will patiently wait for the hate mail from the Amherst student-body. :) And I love a good natured tease. LOL

As for Hope and Ohio Wesleyan. I get your point... I would say OWU is in the area I am nervous about as well. But that isn't to say a number three team and a number six team are close together... they may be worlds apart because the difference between four and five might be just as wide. We see it in women's basketball all of the time - a large gap between the top tier and the middle tier even if they are ranked close together. Same in football.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 01, 2015, 10:16:06 PM

Having watched #5 Hope and #6 OWU, I agree with oldknight that Hope is the better team...by a decent margin in my opinion. For me, Hope's bigs are the difference. But that said, I think OWU is ranked right where they should be. I can't really make a case for a single team below #6 to be ranked ahead of the Bishops.

There are always tiers/separating points in the poll. Right now, I think there is a break after #5. Whatever the right order is for the top 5 - I think Hope might be better than Augustana, but want to see a few more games - those 5 seem to be the elite teams at this point. I think Ohio Wesleyan on down there is a whole bunch of parity.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 01, 2015, 10:36:34 PM

In my mind, Augie, Hope, and St. Thomas are in a mini group at the top, with Whitworth and OWU behind. Whitworth might be in the first group - they appear that way on paper - but we need some better results to know. There might be a gap between those teams, but I'm not sure who else to make a Top 10 squad at this point.

As for NYU - I think that Arcadia win is better than most undefeated teams have. Maybe they won't end up as a Top 25 team, but they deserve to be there right now - at least as much as anyone.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 01, 2015, 10:58:55 PM

I can't buy into a team with an OOP of .353 right no even if they have a win against an Arcadia team that certainly could be beat. NYU always has a win like that in their out-of-conference and then gets lit-up in the UAA. I'm not sure it's warranted to rank a team in the Top 25 if I have no confidence they are going to win, or be in the upper tier, of their conference. I bought in to NYU last year after seeing them in person dismantle Wash U with Hicks leading the way. They were good. Hicks isn't back.

Is the Arcadia win better than others who are undefeated? Possibly, but those other teams also have either a proven track record of keeping up that winning ability in conference or have far better out-of-conference schedules in general.

It also doesn't help that when I talk to those who know NYU well, they aren't impressed, either.

Who knows... they may prove me completely wrong and I welcome that actually.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 01, 2015, 11:12:04 PM

d-mac, keep up the good fight re: NYU. I gave up on them years ago running the fan poll. They always had a great record early; they always disappointed when push came to shove. A steady diet of cupcakes gets you diabetes, not a UAA title or a run in the national tourney. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 01, 2015, 11:28:34 PM

Thanks for discussing NYU.

I was surprised to see them in the Top 25.

Just for reference, NYU is No. 31 in Massey with a No. 321 strength of schedule.

There used to be an NYU fan who would appear midseason and complain about the terrible non-conference schedule before disappearing for the season. He or she did not like Joe Nesci.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 02, 2015, 12:03:40 AM

Massey is utterly irrelevant until at least mid-January. At this point his data-based system has almost no data. ::)

And in football, he is a bad joke. He includes NESCAC in his 'data-based' system, even though they not only don't participate in the playoffs, they don't ever play anyone outside of NESCAC. There is NO data!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 02, 2015, 12:36:48 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 02, 2015, 12:03:40 AM
Massey is utterly irrelevant until at least mid-January. At this point his data-based system has almost no data. ::)

I thought that went without saying but I guess I better remember to throw in the disclaimer.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 02, 2015, 12:48:10 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 02, 2015, 12:03:40 AM
Massey is utterly irrelevant until at least mid-January. At this point his data-based system has almost no data. ::)

And in football, he is a bad joke. He includes NESCAC in his 'data-based' system, even though they not only don't participate in the playoffs, they don't ever play anyone outside of NESCAC. There is NO data!

That's not a bad joke. You know his reasoning. Why can't you just ignore those teams....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 02, 2015, 02:20:15 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 02, 2015, 12:03:40 AM
Massey is utterly irrelevant until at least mid-January. At this point his data-based system has almost no data. ::)

A little under 20% of the season's games have been played, that's not totally irrelevant. By this weekend it should pop over 20%. I find Nov/Dec to be the most relevant since this is the time of the year the majority of non-conference games are played.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 02, 2015, 06:36:16 PM

Big game as #1 Augie heads to Whitewater tonight. The Warhawks are flying under the radar, imo, as they've won some low-profile games: coming from behind to top Ripon, and cruising over Finlandia and Ohio Northern. They hung tough and lost to #3 NAIA II Davenport (Hope losing to #2 Cornerstone recently).

Whitewater literally lost their entire roster and has several nice transfers come in and Southeast Conference POTY Andre Brown. I think Brown was hurt last game as he started but just played 3 minutes. That could factor into tonight's game. Massey actually has Whitewater winning 71-69. I expect Augustana to win but I wouldn't be surprised if Whitewater pulls one out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 02, 2015, 08:49:29 PM

St John Fisher can't stand prosperity as the D3hoops 10th ranked team goes down in the first round of the Wendy's College Classic Tournament. The top seeded Cardinals matched up against the 8th seeded Tigers from RIT. The Tigers opened up a 20 point lead on Fisher at 52-32 with 14 minutes left in the game. Fisher went on a 28-6 run to take a 60-58 lead with 4 minutes remaining but the Tigers hung tough and managed to complete the upset by winning 69-64.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 02, 2015, 10:39:42 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 02, 2015, 06:36:16 PM
Big game as #1 Augie heads to Whitewater tonight. The Warhawks are flying under the radar, imo, as they've won some low-profile games: coming from behind to top Ripon, and cruising over Finlandia and Ohio Northern. They hung tough and lost to #3 NAIA II Davenport (Hope losing to #2 Cornerstone recently).

Whitewater literally lost their entire roster and has several nice transfers come in and Southeast Conference POTY Andre Brown. I think Brown was hurt last game as he started but just played 3 minutes. That could factor into tonight's game. Massey actually has Whitewater winning 71-69. I expect Augustana to win but I wouldn't be surprised if Whitewater pulls one out.

Whitewater sure doesn't look like a Top 25 team to me right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 02, 2015, 11:20:10 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Augustana	3-0	won at #23 UW-Whitewater, 75-55; 12/05 vs. #7 UW-Stevens Point
#2	573	Whitworth	5-0	12/04 vs. Lewis and Clark; 12/05 vs. Linfield
#3	571	St. Thomas	4-0	def. Concordia-Moorhead, 92-64; 12/05 vs. Carleton
#4	548	Amherst	4-0	won at Westfield State, 89-65; 12/05 at Emerson
#5	511	Hope	3-1	12/04 vs. Wheaton (Ill.); 12/05 vs. Carthage
#6	407	Ohio Wesleyan	7-0	def. #28 Wooster, 88-75; 12/05 at Denison
#7	392	UW-Stevens Point	3-1	12/05 at #1 Augustana
#8	366	Elmhurst	5-1	def. Adrian, 82-50; 12/05 vs. Albion
#9	349	Marietta	5-1	def. Muskingum, 78-67; 12/05 vs. Wilmington
#10	328	St. John Fisher	3-1	LOST to (n) Rochester Tech, 64-69
#11	315	Babson	5-1	12/05 vs. Brandeis (n); 12/06 vs. TBA (n)
#12	282	Benedictine	4-0	won at Rockford, 89-79; 12/05 vs. Marian
#13	238	WPI	6-0	def. Tufts, 85-70; 12/03 vs. Framingham State; 12/05 vs. Fitchburg State
#14	235	Washington U.	5-0	12/05 at #32 Illinois Wesleyan
#15	217	Virginia Wesleyan	4-2	12/05 at Washington and Lee
#16	193	John Carroll	6-0	def. Heidelberg, 82-63; 12/05 at Ohio Northern
#17	181	Salisbury	5-1	LOST at #21 Christopher Newport, 60-71; 12/05 at Frostburg State
#18	171	Trinity (Conn.)	4-1	def. Vassar, 74-56
#19	164	New York University	5-0	def. John Jay, 81-67
#20	141	Franklin and Marshall	5-1	def. Ursinus, 63-57; 12/05 vs. Washington College
#21	137	Christopher Newport	5-0	def. #17 Salisbury, 71-60; 12/05 at Marymount
#22	108	Catholic	3-3	LOST at #54 Susquehanna, 81-87; 12/05 at Moravian
#23	107	UW-Whitewater	3-2	LOST to #1 Augustana, 55-75; 12/05 at Beloit
#24	95	Brooklyn	7-0	won at SUNY-Old Westbury, 91-64; def. Stevens, 107-92; 12/04 vs. John Jay
#25	89	Oswego State	6-0	12/04 at Fredonia State; 12/05 at Buffalo State

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	88	East Texas Baptist	3-1	12/03 vs. McMurry; 12/05 vs. Hardin-Simmons
#27	84	Mount Union	4-2	def. Baldwin Wallace, 110-109; 12/05 at Capital
#28	80	Wooster	2-2	LOST at #6 Ohio Wesleyan, 75-88; 12/05 vs. DePauw
#29	60	William Paterson	4-3	LOST at New Jersey City, 64-70; 12/05 vs. T#30 Stockton
T#30	46	Stockton	3-2	LOST to TCNJ, 70-76; 12/05 at #29 William Paterson
T#30	46	Eastern Connecticut	4-2	12/05 vs. T#51 Southern Maine
#32	45	Illinois Wesleyan	3-2	12/05 vs. #14 Washington U.
#33	44	Scranton	5-1	12/05 at Juniata
#34	39	Chicago	5-2	won at Wheaton (Ill.), 77-52; 12/05 vs. Kalamazoo
#35	30	Northwestern (Minn.)	5-1	LOST at T#51 Bethel, 62-64; 12/05 at Finlandia
#36	29	St. Norbert	3-1	def. Ripon, 59-57; 12/05 at Grinnell
#37	24	Emory	4-3	12/06 at Guilford
#38	20	Texas Lutheran	5-1	12/05 at Mary Hardin-Baylor
#39	17	Albertus Magnus	4-0	won at Suffolk, 80-70; 12/03 at Emmanuel
T#40	15	Montclair State	4-1	LOST at Rutgers-Newark, 87-90; 12/05 at Ramapo
T#40	15	Centre	5-1	def. Hanover, 84-80
T#42	14	Skidmore	4-1	won at TCNJ, 69-57; 12/05 vs. Middlebury
T#42	14	St. Olaf	2-2	def. Augsburg, 69-65; 12/05 at St. John's
#44	12	Whitman	4-0	12/04 vs. Linfield; 12/05 vs. Lewis and Clark
#45	9	Pacific Lutheran	5-1	def. Puget Sound, 72-60; 12/05 at Willamette
#46	8	Lancaster Bible	5-0	won at Penn State-Berks, 113-103; 12/05 vs. Bryn Athyn
T#47	6	Geneseo State	5-0	won at Nazareth, 83-81; 12/04 vs. TBA (n); 12/04 vs. Roberts Wesleyan (n); 12/05 vs. TBA (n)
T#47	6	St. Vincent	3-1	def. Bethany, 73-61; 12/05 at Geneva
T#49	5	Penn State-Behrend	4-0	won at D'Youville, 71-60; 12/05 vs. La Roche
T#49	5	Williams	4-0	12/03 vs. Union; 12/05 vs. Wesleyan
T#51	4	Aurora	4-0	def. Concordia-Chicago, 126-95; 12/05 vs. Lakeland
T#51	4	Bethel	5-0	def. #35 Northwestern (Minn.), 64-62; 12/05 vs. Concordia-Moorhead
T#51	4	Southern Maine	4-3	LOST to Bowdoin, 55-81; 12/05 at T#30 Eastern Connecticut
#54	3	Susquehanna	6-0	def. #22 Catholic, 87-81; 12/05 at Merchant Marine
#55	2	Eastern Nazarene	7-0	won at Curry, 70-58; 12/05 at Endicott
T#56	1	Hobart	3-2	LOST to Roberts Wesleyan, 58-59
T#56	1	Keene State	5-0	12/05 vs. Mass-Dartmouth
T#56	1	MIT	5-2	won at Mass-Boston, 74-66; 12/03 vs. Salem State; 12/05 vs. Framingham State
T#56	1	Southern Vermont	2-2	12/03 vs. Regis (Mass.); 12/05 at Lesley

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 02, 2015, 11:37:57 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 02, 2015, 10:39:42 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 02, 2015, 06:36:16 PM
Big game as #1 Augie heads to Whitewater tonight. The Warhawks are flying under the radar, imo, as they've won some low-profile games: coming from behind to top Ripon, and cruising over Finlandia and Ohio Northern. They hung tough and lost to #3 NAIA II Davenport (Hope losing to #2 Cornerstone recently).

Whitewater literally lost their entire roster and has several nice transfers come in and Southeast Conference POTY Andre Brown. I think Brown was hurt last game as he started but just played 3 minutes. That could factor into tonight's game. Massey actually has Whitewater winning 71-69. I expect Augustana to win but I wouldn't be surprised if Whitewater pulls one out.

Whitewater sure doesn't look like a Top 25 team to me right now.

Thanks Mr. Obvious. ;D

That's easy to say now. They were up 1 at halftime and I'm sure you weren't saying "Whitewater sure doesn't look like a Top 25 team to me right now" at halftime. I'm not too concerned. They played the #1 team in the nation that was in the National Title game last year and returned basically everyone, while Whitewater, as I mentioned, lost basically everyone. It's early. Point didn't look good to start last year either. Whitewater has the talent to be a good team and, gulp, even a Top 25 team later this year. I definitely didn't expect a blowout in the 2nd half, but hats off to Augie. Though I expected Whitewater to challenge Augie tonight, I do not expect Point to do the same Saturday. Even before tonight's outcome, I think Point loses by double-digits this weekend (13-17 pts).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on December 02, 2015, 11:46:27 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 02, 2015, 11:20:10 PM
How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#1 625 Augustana 3-0 won at #23 UW-Whitewater, 75-55; 12/05 vs. #7 UW-Stevens Point
#2 573 Whitworth 5-0 12/04 vs. Lewis and Clark; 12/05 vs. Linfield
#3 571 St. Thomas 4-0 def. Concordia-Moorhead, 92-64; 12/05 vs. Carleton
#4 548 Amherst 4-0 won at Westfield State, 89-65; 12/05 at Emerson
#5 511 Hope 3-1 12/04 vs. Wheaton (Ill.); 12/05 vs. Carthage
#6 407 Ohio Wesleyan 7-0 def. #28 Wooster, 88-75; 12/05 at Denison
#7 392 UW-Stevens Point 3-1 12/05 at #1 Augustana
#8 366 Elmhurst 5-1 def. Adrian, 82-50; 12/05 vs. Albion
#9 349 Marietta 5-1 def. Muskingum, 78-67; 12/05 vs. Wilmington
#10 328 St. John Fisher 3-1 LOST to (n) Rochester Tech, 64-69
#11 315 Babson 5-1 12/05 vs. Brandeis (n); 12/06 vs. TBA (n)
#12 282 Benedictine 4-0 won at Rockford, 89-79; 12/05 vs. Marian
#13 238 WPI 6-0 def. Tufts, 85-70; 12/03 vs. Framingham State; 12/05 vs. Fitchburg State
#14 235 Washington U. 5-0 12/05 at #32 Illinois Wesleyan
#15 217 Virginia Wesleyan 4-2 12/05 at Washington and Lee
#16 193 John Carroll 6-0 def. Heidelberg, 82-63; 12/05 at Ohio Northern
#17 181 Salisbury 5-1 LOST at #21 Christopher Newport, 60-71; 12/05 at Frostburg State
#18 171 Trinity (Conn.) 4-1 def. Vassar, 74-56
#19 164 New York University 5-0 def. John Jay, 81-67
#20 141 Franklin and Marshall 5-1 def. Ursinus, 63-57; 12/05 vs. Washington College
#21 137 Christopher Newport 5-0 def. #17 Salisbury, 71-60; 12/05 at Marymount
#22 108 Catholic 3-3 LOST at #54 Susquehanna, 81-87; 12/05 at Moravian
#23 107 UW-Whitewater 3-2 LOST to #1 Augustana, 55-75; 12/05 at Beloit
#24 95 Brooklyn 7-0 won at SUNY-Old Westbury, 91-64; def. Stevens, 107-92; 12/04 vs. John Jay
#25 89 Oswego State 6-0 12/04 at Fredonia State; 12/05 at Buffalo State

Others receiving votes
Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#26 88 East Texas Baptist 3-1 12/03 vs. McMurry; 12/05 vs. Hardin-Simmons
#27 84 Mount Union 4-2 def. Baldwin Wallace, 110-109; 12/05 at Capital
#28 80 Wooster 2-2 LOST at #6 Ohio Wesleyan, 75-88; 12/05 vs. DePauw
#29 60 William Paterson 4-3 LOST at New Jersey City, 64-70; 12/05 vs. T#30 Stockton
T#30 46 Stockton 3-2 LOST to TCNJ, 70-76; 12/05 at #29 William Paterson
T#30 46 Eastern Connecticut 4-2 12/05 vs. T#51 Southern Maine
#32 45 Illinois Wesleyan 3-2 12/05 vs. #14 Washington U.
#33 44 Scranton 5-1 12/05 at Juniata
#34 39 Chicago 5-2 won at Wheaton (Ill.), 77-52; 12/05 vs. Kalamazoo
#35 30 Northwestern (Minn.) 5-1 LOST at T#51 Bethel, 62-64; 12/05 at Finlandia
#36 29 St. Norbert 3-1 def. Ripon, 59-57; 12/05 at Grinnell
#37 24 Emory 4-3 12/06 at Guilford
#38 20 Texas Lutheran 5-1 12/05 at Mary Hardin-Baylor
#39 17 Albertus Magnus 4-0 won at Suffolk, 80-70; 12/03 at Emmanuel
T#40 15 Montclair State 4-1 LOST at Rutgers-Newark, 87-90; 12/05 at Ramapo
T#40 15 Centre 5-1 def. Hanover, 84-80
T#42 14 Skidmore 4-1 won at TCNJ, 69-57; 12/05 vs. Middlebury
T#42 14 St. Olaf 2-2 def. Augsburg, 69-65; 12/05 at St. John's
#44 12 Whitman 4-0 12/04 vs. Linfield; 12/05 vs. Lewis and Clark
#45 9 Pacific Lutheran 5-1 def. Puget Sound, 72-60; 12/05 at Willamette
#46 8 Lancaster Bible 5-0 won at Penn State-Berks, 113-103; 12/05 vs. Bryn Athyn
T#47 6 Geneseo State 5-0 won at Nazareth, 83-81; 12/04 vs. TBA (n); 12/04 vs. Roberts Wesleyan (n); 12/05 vs. TBA (n)
T#47 6 St. Vincent 3-1 def. Bethany, 73-61; 12/05 at Geneva
T#49 5 Penn State-Behrend 4-0 won at D'Youville, 71-60; 12/05 vs. La Roche
T#49 5 Williams 4-0 12/03 vs. Union; 12/05 vs. Wesleyan
T#51 4 Aurora 4-0 def. Concordia-Chicago, 126-95; 12/05 vs. Lakeland
T#51 4 Bethel 5-0 def. #35 Northwestern (Minn.), 64-62; 12/05 vs. Concordia-Moorhead
T#51 4 Southern Maine 4-3 LOST to Bowdoin, 55-81; 12/05 at T#30 Eastern Connecticut
#54 3 Susquehanna 6-0 def. #22 Catholic, 87-81; 12/05 at Merchant Marine
#55 2 Eastern Nazarene 7-0 won at Curry, 70-58; 12/05 at Endicott
T#56 1 Hobart 3-2 LOST to Roberts Wesleyan, 58-59
T#56 1 Keene State 5-0 12/05 vs. Mass-Dartmouth
T#56 1 MIT 5-2 won at Mass-Boston, 74-66; 12/03 vs. Salem State; 12/05 vs. Framingham State
T#56 1 Southern Vermont 2-2 12/03 vs. Regis (Mass.); 12/05 at Lesley

My understanding is that #33 Scranton's record should be 4-1 since its opening game victory was against Bryn Athyn, a year 2 provisional team and is essentially no contest as far as regional ranking criteria.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 03, 2015, 12:31:09 AM

Quote from: ronk on December 02, 2015, 11:46:27 PM
My understanding is that Scranton's record should be 4-1 since its opening game victory was against Bryn Athyn, a year 2 provisional team and is essentially no contest as far as regional ranking criteria.

But it counts on their overall record, so Scranton is 5-1 indeed. If this page were about regional rankings, that would be more likely to be relevant.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 7express on December 03, 2015, 01:09:47 AM

I can't believe Southern Maine got more votes then Keene State.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AllStar on December 03, 2015, 02:22:55 AM

Quote from: 7express on December 03, 2015, 01:09:47 AM
I can't believe Southern Maine got more votes then Keene State.

Makes no sense why Southern Maine is even getting votes at all.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 03, 2015, 07:08:14 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 02, 2015, 11:37:57 PM
That's easy to say now. They were up 1 at halftime and I'm sure you weren't saying "Whitewater sure doesn't look like a Top 25 team to me right now" at halftime.

Actually I was saying that halftime, when the score was 29-28. The first half was really ugly and neither team looked very good. In the 2nd, Augie looked outstanding while UW-Whitewater still looked pretty disorganized and really struggled to shoot it:

FG = 32.3%
3-point = 12.5%
FT = 67%

I do know that UWW has 7 transfers this year, so I am guessing the Warhawks will be better in January than December...but they are not a Top 25 team right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 03, 2015, 12:51:59 PM

Quote from: AllStar on December 03, 2015, 02:22:55 AM
Quote from: 7express on December 03, 2015, 01:09:47 AM
I can't believe Southern Maine got more votes then Keene State.

Makes no sense why Southern Maine is even getting votes at all.

Beating a Bates team that went 21-7 last year might get you noticed.

The question I have is whats going on at University of New England, also with a win over Bates and Southern Maine. 8 wins the most in a single season the last 5 years and have 5 already.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 03, 2015, 01:20:56 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 03, 2015, 07:08:14 AM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 02, 2015, 11:37:57 PM
That's easy to say now. They were up 1 at halftime and I'm sure you weren't saying "Whitewater sure doesn't look like a Top 25 team to me right now" at halftime.

Actually I was saying that halftime, when the score was 29-28. The first half was really ugly and neither team looked very good. In the 2nd, Augie looked outstanding while UW-Whitewater still looked pretty disorganized and really struggled to shoot it:

FG = 32.3%
3-point = 12.5%
FT = 67%

I do know that UWW has 7 transfers this year, so I am guessing the Warhawks will be better in January than December...but they are not a Top 25 team right now.

So at halftime, in the same post you could've said, "Augustana sure doesn't look like the #1 team in the nation" since they were losing to a team that didn't look like a Top 25 team... ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Bengalsrule on December 03, 2015, 01:45:30 PM

Quote from: sac on December 03, 2015, 12:51:59 PM
Quote from: AllStar on December 03, 2015, 02:22:55 AM
Quote from: 7express on December 03, 2015, 01:09:47 AM
I can't believe Southern Maine got more votes then Keene State.

Makes no sense why Southern Maine is even getting votes at all.

Beating a Bates team that went 21-7 last year might get you noticed.

The question I have is whats going on at University of New England, also with a win over Bates and Southern Maine. 8 wins the most in a single season the last 5 years and have 5 already.

I can answer that in 3 words..."Coach Ed Silva". I met this guy 5 years ago, during the Buff State Bengals "Sweet 16" run, while at a holiday tournament at Worcester State U.!! And although the BENGALS beat Elms in double OT, I, along with many others, were extremely impressed by the discipline that his team showed. Even their warm up was similar (in part) to what you see the University of Hawaii do before their games. And after having watched his team 2 days in a row, up close and personal, many of us were even more impressed ( we faced each other in the "opening round" of the WSU tourney)!! There are few coaches that I have met, over the years, that have impressed me as much as Silva did with his demeanor, the respect that not only his his players accorded him but also players from another team that played in Elms conference had for him too. I've learned, over the years, that you can find out something about the person when just standing at the concession stand ordering a coke and having a quick conversation (because both of you are thirsty/hungry). Casual conversations with Silva, and his players, afforded many from Buffalo some insight into a man that is well respected both on and off the court. Those players from "another team" were from Becker, which was roughly 20 mins away from Worcester S. U.. Many of those Becker players drove over to WSU to watch the games and scout Elms. I asked some of them during the 1st day of the tourney why they were there and they shared the fact that they played in the same conference as Elms. However later on further conversations revealed somewhat of an admiration for the Elms coach, and his program, that was hard to miss after listening to these Becker players for 2 days. Elms also won the NECC title that year and went to the NCAA's.

I have since watched him thru the years since he moved on to UNE in the spring of 2012. I actually emailed him to congratulate him when he took the post and wished him the best in his new role. He definitely has taken some lumps ( a record of 5 wins and 20 losses in 2012-13, 1-24 in 13-14 and 8-19 last season) plus, if memory serves me correctly, I even posted on the CCC boards 2/3 years ago, that those folks should stay tuned because Silva can coach. I'm happy for the guy and expect his team to continue to make improvements. He had a 7 time league champ at Elms and I expect that, given the time, he will have another winner at UNE. Moral of this post..."Don't count this team or guy out. Silva can flat out coach!!!" ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 03, 2015, 02:07:09 PM

Silva's had some trouble recruiting to UNE and getting kids to stick around. He's got two really good players this year and with the discipline he instills, a good night is a night they beat about anybody. They're not consistently having good nights yet, but they're having them, which is better than the past couple seasons.

I was at the ENC/Curry dual tournament at Thanksgiving - there's a lot of respect in the conference for what UNE might be capable of. They'll be right up there with ENC and Endicott.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 03, 2015, 02:53:22 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 03, 2015, 01:20:56 PM

So at halftime, in the same post you could've said, "Augustana sure doesn't look like the #1 team in the nation" since they were losing to a team that didn't look like a Top 25 team... ::)

At halftime I was thinking that what I have speculated on here is true -- that Hope is better than Augustana.

I left the game thinking that Hope/Augustana is a push.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on December 03, 2015, 03:52:22 PM

Quote from: Bengalsrule on December 03, 2015, 01:45:30 PM
Quote from: sac on December 03, 2015, 12:51:59 PM
Quote from: AllStar on December 03, 2015, 02:22:55 AM
Quote from: 7express on December 03, 2015, 01:09:47 AM
I can't believe Southern Maine got more votes then Keene State.

Makes no sense why Southern Maine is even getting votes at all.

Beating a Bates team that went 21-7 last year might get you noticed.

The question I have is whats going on at University of New England, also with a win over Bates and Southern Maine. 8 wins the most in a single season the last 5 years and have 5 already.

I can answer that in 3 words..."Coach Ed Silva". I met this guy 5 years ago, during the Buff State Bengals "Sweet 16" run, while at a holiday tournament at Worcester State U.!! And although the BENGALS beat Elms in double OT, I, along with many others, were extremely impressed by the discipline that his team showed. Even their warm up was similar (in part) to what you see the University of Hawaii do before their games. And after having watched his team 2 days in a row, up close and personal, many of us were even more impressed ( we faced each other in the "opening round" of the WSU tourney)!! There are few coaches that I have met, over the years, that have impressed me as much as Silva did with his demeanor, the respect that not only his his players accorded him but also players from another team that played in Elms conference had for him too. I've learned, over the years, that you can find out something about the person when just standing at the concession stand ordering a coke and having a quick conversation (because both of you are thirsty/hungry). Casual conversations with Silva, and his players, afforded many from Buffalo some insight into a man that is well respected both on and off the court. Those players from "another team" were from Becker, which was roughly 20 mins away from Worcester S. U.. Many of those Becker players drove over to WSU to watch the games and scout Elms. I asked some of them during the 1st day of the tourney why they were there and they shared the fact that they played in the same conference as Elms. However later on further conversations revealed somewhat of an admiration for the Elms coach, and his program, that was hard to miss after listening to these Becker players for 2 days. Elms also won the NECC title that year and went to the NCAA's.

I have since watched him thru the years since he moved on to UNE in the spring of 2012. I actually emailed him to congratulate him when he took the post and wished him the best in his new role. He definitely has taken some lumps ( a record of 5 wins and 20 losses in 2012-13, 1-24 in 13-14 and 8-19 last season) plus, if memory serves me correctly, I even posted on the CCC boards 2/3 years ago, that those folks should stay tuned because Silva can coach. I'm happy for the guy and expect his team to continue to make improvements. He had a 7 time league champ at Elms and I expect that, given the time, he will have another winner at UNE. Moral of this post..."Don't count this team or guy out. Silva can flat out coach!!!" ;)

Scranton played Elms(Silva) in the 2008 NCAA regional @ Gettysburg(Pat Coleman was there also); Scranton had better talent including a post(Bicknell) that Elms couldn't stop but Elms' full court press was so effective that each time Scranton got into its half court offense there was usually <15 seconds on the shot clock; they were so exhausted breaking the press that halfway through the 2nd half of a close game they ran out of gas and Elms won in a rout.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 04, 2015, 09:54:54 PM

Great night for #d3h.

Buff State trailed the whole second half, hit a three with 2 seconds to go to tie and send it to overtime. The same guy hits an off-balanced runner to take a two point lead with six seconds left in overtime - then Cortland comes down and nails a contested three to win. Gutsy decision to shoot for the win rather than go to the hoop.

Then...

Hope trailed the whole game (they made the first bucket and never led again) down 7 with 2 minutes to go - they get it to 2 with 25 seconds to go, get a turnover on the full court press and run in for a hoop and the foul (which the guy hit). Wheaton comes tearing down the other way and nails a three that hits the rim first, then the backboard, then in. Hope doesn't call a time out, runs the length of the court and get's an off balanced runner to go, with a foul. They miss the FT and Wheaton is content to go to OT. They're in OT now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 04, 2015, 10:10:36 PM

Double OT at Hope now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Bengalsrule on December 04, 2015, 11:23:44 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 04, 2015, 09:54:54 PM
Great night for #d3h.
Buff State trailed the whole second half, hit a three with 2 seconds to go to tie and send it to overtime. The same guy hits an off-balanced runner to take a two point lead with six seconds left in overtime - then Cortland comes down and nails a contested three to win. Gutsy decision to shoot for the win rather than go to the hoop.

Great night for #d3h...but horrible night for yours truly :'( :'(. I had a birds eye view of JP Reagan's game winner at the buzzer, when Cortland quickly got the ball up court to Reagan who was 2 for 2 from beyond the arc for the night. Painful night for my beloved BENGALS who fought back from 7 down with 2:20 left in regulation :( :(. Nico McLean hits a 3 pointer with 2 seconds left in regulation to tie it up. Then McLean hits a 2 pointer with less than 7 seconds in O/T to put Buff State up by 2. You know the rest. This 1 hurt!! Kudos to Cortland, they were the better team tonight. Next up, #25 Oswego State (in less than 17 hours). Gotta love these SUNYAC schedulers!!!

Go BENGALS

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Bengalsrule on December 05, 2015, 06:59:39 PM

What a difference a day makes... :D.!! After a devastating loss :'( yesterday to Cortland, my beloved BENGALS come back today with a "quality" win vs #25 Oswego! And while this means nothing more than just a win, my boys sure could use this "shot in the arm" after yesterdays buzzer beater loss.

I must admit at half time there were many who were wondering if Buff State was out of their funk yet. A season low 23 point on 27.9 % shooting, at halftime, is not a way to beat Oswego (who was up 32-23). However Jordan Chateau "J. C". decided that after scoring only 5 pts and snatching 5 rebounds vs. Cortland, it was time to step up. And step up he did!! 22 pts, 9 rebounds and 1 block is the kind of performance that many of the BENGAL faithful had come to expect from J.C.. And he delivered. :)

Add Lovell Smiths double-double (17 points and 11 boards), Mike Henry's "near" double -double (10 boards and 9 pts), Nico McLeans 9 pts, 8 rebounds and 4 steals and Jordan Glover's 8 pts and 4 steals, and you have a starting unit that accounted for all but 1 point in this "must win" game. And after Buff State was outscored by 9 in the 1st half , they turned it around and held Oswego to 19% shooting in the 2nd half and nearly doubled Oswegos pts (43-24)

A 1-1 weekend, against 2 of the top tier SUNYAC teams, is not what BENGAL faithful had in mind Friday morning...but we'll take it. Alfred U. (4-1) is next up this Saturday. BENGALS are gonna have to do better if they want that "W". Here's to hoping that T.B.I.Y.T.C. (the best is yet to come)!! ;)

GO BENGALS!!
Modify message

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 05, 2015, 08:44:43 PM

SMH... it's going to be another long Monday in front of my ballot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 06, 2015, 05:15:36 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Augustana	4-0	won at #23 UW-Whitewater, 75-55; def. #7 UW-Stevens Point, 81-58
#2	573	Whitworth	7-0	def. Lewis and Clark, 76-64; def. Linfield, 63-49
#3	571	St. Thomas	4-1	def. Concordia-Moorhead, 92-64; LOST to Carleton, 66-67
#4	548	Amherst	5-0	won at Westfield State, 89-65; won at Emerson, 99-74
#5	511	Hope	5-1	def. Wheaton (Ill.), 88-83; def. Carthage, 93-83
#6	407	Ohio Wesleyan	8-0	def. #28 Wooster, 88-75; won at Denison, 92-82
#7	392	UW-Stevens Point	3-2	LOST at #1 Augustana, 58-81
#8	366	Elmhurst	6-1	def. Adrian, 82-50; def. Albion, 77-54
#9	349	Marietta	6-1	def. Muskingum, 78-67; def. Wilmington, 81-72
#10	328	St. John Fisher	4-2	LOST to (n) Rochester Tech, 64-69; LOST to (n) Brockport State, 50-67; def. Nazareth, 83-66
#11	315	Babson	6-2	def. (n) Brandeis, 75-65; LOST to (n) Tufts, 80-83
#12	282	Benedictine	5-0	won at Rockford, 89-79; def. Marian, 84-76
#13	238	WPI	7-1	def. Tufts, 85-70; def. Framingham State, 59-50; LOST to Fitchburg State, 56-57
#14	235	Washington U.	5-1	LOST at #32 Illinois Wesleyan, 57-67
#15	217	Virginia Wesleyan	5-2	won at Washington and Lee, 65-52
#16	193	John Carroll	7-0	def. Heidelberg, 82-63; won at Ohio Northern, 86-68
#17	181	Salisbury	6-1	LOST at #21 Christopher Newport, 60-71; won at Frostburg State, 73-31
#18	171	Trinity (Conn.)	4-1	def. Vassar, 74-56
#19	164	New York University	5-0	def. John Jay, 81-67
#20	141	Franklin and Marshall	6-1	def. Ursinus, 63-57; def. Washington College, 75-50
#21	137	Christopher Newport	6-0	def. #17 Salisbury, 71-60; won at Marymount, 68-58
#22	108	Catholic	4-3	LOST at #54 Susquehanna, 81-87; won at Moravian, 96-79
#23	107	UW-Whitewater	4-2	LOST to #1 Augustana, 55-75; won at Beloit, 73-71
#24	95	Brooklyn	8-0	won at SUNY-Old Westbury, 91-64; def. Stevens, 107-92; def. John Jay, 91-64
#25	89	Oswego State	7-1	won at Fredonia State, 67-62; LOST at Buffalo State, 56-66

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	88	East Texas Baptist	5-1	def. McMurry, 105-91; def. Hardin-Simmons, 90-75
#27	84	Mount Union	5-2	def. Baldwin Wallace, 110-109; won at Capital, 68-62
#28	80	Wooster	3-2	LOST at #6 Ohio Wesleyan, 75-88; def. DePauw, 85-56
#29	60	William Paterson	4-4	LOST at New Jersey City, 64-70; LOST to T#30 Stockton, 53-64
T#30	46	Stockton	4-2	LOST to TCNJ, 70-76; won at #29 William Paterson, 64-53
T#30	46	Eastern Connecticut	5-2	def. T#51 Southern Maine, 80-61
#32	45	Illinois Wesleyan	4-2	def. #14 Washington U., 67-57
#33	44	Scranton	5-2	LOST at Juniata, 52-54
#34	39	Chicago	6-2	won at Wheaton (Ill.), 77-52; def. Kalamazoo, 75-63
#35	30	Northwestern (Minn.)	7-1	LOST at T#51 Bethel, 62-64; won at Northland, 73-68; won at Finlandia, 85-77
#36	29	St. Norbert	4-1	def. Ripon, 59-57; won at Grinnell, 104-91
#37	24	Emory	5-3	won at Guilford, 82-66
#38	20	Texas Lutheran	6-1	won at Mary Hardin-Baylor, 81-71
#39	17	Albertus Magnus	5-0	won at Suffolk, 80-70; won at Emmanuel, 84-73
T#40	15	Montclair State	4-2	LOST at Rutgers-Newark, 87-90; LOST at Ramapo, 81-85
T#40	15	Centre	5-1	def. Hanover, 84-80
T#42	14	Skidmore	5-1	won at TCNJ, 69-57; def. Middlebury, 82-77
T#42	14	St. Olaf	2-3	def. Augsburg, 69-65; LOST at St. John's, 68-72
#44	12	Whitman	6-0	def. Linfield, 89-53; def. Lewis and Clark, 87-80
#45	9	Pacific Lutheran	6-1	def. Puget Sound, 72-60; won at Willamette, 77-67
#46	8	Lancaster Bible	6-0	won at Penn State-Berks, 113-103; def. Bryn Athyn, 102-75
T#47	6	Geneseo State	6-1	won at Nazareth, 83-81; LOST to (n) Roberts Wesleyan, 82-85; def. (n) Rochester Tech, 91-80
T#47	6	St. Vincent	4-1	def. Bethany, 73-61; won at Geneva, 78-67
T#49	5	Penn State-Behrend	4-1	won at D'Youville, 71-60; LOST to La Roche, 57-59
T#49	5	Williams	5-1	def. Union, 80-64; LOST to Wesleyan, 56-58
T#51	4	Aurora	5-0	def. Concordia-Chicago, 126-95; def. Lakeland, 105-81
T#51	4	Bethel	6-0	def. #35 Northwestern (Minn.), 64-62; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 75-66
T#51	4	Southern Maine	4-4	LOST to Bowdoin, 55-81; LOST at T#30 Eastern Connecticut, 61-80
#54	3	Susquehanna	7-0	def. #22 Catholic, 87-81; won at Merchant Marine, 64-61
#55	2	Eastern Nazarene	8-0	won at Curry, 70-58; won at Endicott, 70-65
T#56	1	Hobart	4-3	LOST to Roberts Wesleyan, 58-59; def. Nazareth, 75-73; LOST to (n) Brockport State, 81-82
T#56	1	Keene State	6-0	def. Mass-Dartmouth, 103-84
T#56	1	MIT	5-3	won at Mass-Boston, 74-66; LOST to Salem State, 61-70; ~~12/05 vs. Framingham State~~ postponed
T#56	1	Southern Vermont	4-2	def. Regis (Mass.), 76-62; won at Lesley, 98-75

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 06, 2015, 06:54:07 PM

Teams are finally settling into the season, but that doesn't mean things have gotten easier. Tonight on Hoopsville, Dave returns from the Wendy's Classic where he talked to those who helped wrap up the historic tournament. He also chats with those showing heir strength early in the campaign and pulling off upsets.

Hoopsville hits the air at 7PM ET! www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2015-16/dec6 (http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2015-16/dec6)

Guests include (in order):

- Guy Kalland, Carleton men's coach
- Bob Quillman, Central Region Reporter
- Jimmy Smith, Texas Lutheran men's coach
- Anthony Ewing, No. 10 Univ. of New England women's coach
- Scott Hemer, SUNY Geneseo women's coach
- Luke Flockerzi, Rochester men's coach
- J.C. DeLass, East Region Reporter

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com (http://www.d3hoopsville.com)
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville (http://www.facebook.com/Hoopsville)
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville (http://www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville)
SoundCloud (podcast): www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville (http://www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville)

AND our podcast as been approved for iTunes!!! You should be able to find it... but here is a link, just in case: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087 (https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on December 08, 2015, 05:42:31 PM

Biggest vote gainers
OH Wesleyan, 134
Brooklyn, 114
John Carroll, 106
Christopher Newport, 104
F&M, 79
Marietta, 76
NYU, 72
Elmhurst, 69
VA Wesleyan, 64

Biggest vote losers
St. John Fisher, -248
Babson, -151
St. Thomas, -108
Catholic, -102
WashU, -84
Amherst, -82
Wooster, -65
Oswego St., -60
William Paterson, -51
UW-Whitewater, -47
WPI, -40

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 08, 2015, 08:56:36 PM

Amherst gave up a big lead, then hit FTs down the stretch to stay undefeated against Brandeis.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 09, 2015, 02:58:22 PM

A little delayed, but finally posted... my Top 25 ballot for Week 2: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2687 (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2687)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 09, 2015, 03:41:01 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 09, 2015, 02:58:22 PM
A little delayed, but finally posted... my Top 25 ballot for Week 2: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2687 (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2687)

I love these blogs.

I have to admit that I was surprised to see Washington University in the Top 25 overall and it your Top 25. My thought was that the voters would preemptively take them out with Augustana looming on Saturday, but maybe some voters did not want to be proven wrong if the Bears pull the upset, but does anyone actually see that happening?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 09, 2015, 03:47:26 PM

Well, I sure don't. I was pretty unimpressed by the Wash U team I saw the other day, and both times that I've seen Augie it's looked like a team that has "Salem" written all over it. I think that the Doggies are going to win this one going away. But, you know what? You never can tell. That's why they play the games, right?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 09, 2015, 04:04:41 PM

That is why they play the games.

I have not confirmed this yet, but Michael Bregman is not listed as a reserve on the tip sheet for the games this week and I have never heard of someone recovering from mono in one week so I assume Schmelter is out.

Sadly, a loss to Augustana would break a long record of (almost) only losing the big games at home during the postseason.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 09, 2015, 04:32:04 PM

Well... I said why they are still there... I honestly don't love that I have them there... I should have just saved face and cut them altogether and never had them in my Top 25 in the first place. Sometimes I ignore my gut and the other voice in my head and instinct takes over... instinct pushed for WashU and instinct is bad right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 09, 2015, 06:15:08 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 09, 2015, 02:58:22 PM
A little delayed, but finally posted... my Top 25 ballot for Week 2: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2687 (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2687)

So D Mac...

Why do you have Elmhurst higher than Benedictine? (Benedictine beat Elmhurst convincingly at Elmhurst.)

And why Wash U ranked and IWU not? (IWU beat Wash U.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 09, 2015, 08:54:27 PM

Really seems like a great game going on at Albertus Magnus, hosting Brooklyn. AMC got out to a 15 point lead in the early second half, but Brooklyn is systematically working its way back. The video isn't coming through for me. A real shame.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 09, 2015, 09:27:49 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on December 09, 2015, 08:54:27 PM

Really seems like a great game going on at Albertus Magnus, hosting Brooklyn. AMC got out to a 15 point lead in the early second half, but Brooklyn is systematically working its way back. The video isn't coming through for me. A real shame.

Brooklyn goes down. They were within four at two minutes to go. The teams seemed very even throughout, but if you look at the box score, Brooklyn was radically out-rebounded. That'll be a problem going forward if they can't get it fixed.

Albertus is better than we expect with what they lost last year. This'll look good on their resume.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 09, 2015, 10:48:14 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Augustana	4-0	12/12 at #20 Washington U.
#2	584	Whitworth	7-0	12/12 vs. Colorado College (n)
#3	564	Amherst	6-0	won at Brandeis, 72-65; 12/10 at #19 Babson; 12/12 at Lasell
#4	541	Ohio Wesleyan	8-0	12/12 at Hiram
#5	498	Hope	5-1	12/12 vs. UW-Platteville
#6	463	St. Thomas	5-1	def. Macalester, 78-53; 12/12 at UW-River Falls
#7	435	Elmhurst	7-1	def. Olivet, 106-67; 12/12 at Dubuque
#8	425	Marietta	6-1	12/12 at Heidelberg
#9	402	UW-Stevens Point	3-3	LOST at North Central (Ill.), 49-63; 12/12 vs. Lawrence
#10	336	Benedictine	6-0	def. Milwaukee Engineering, 84-58; 12/12 at Edgewood
#11	299	John Carroll	7-0	12/12 at Wilmington
#12	281	Virginia Wesleyan	5-2	12/13 vs. #13 Christopher Newport
#13	241	Christopher Newport	6-0	12/13 at #12 Virginia Wesleyan
#14	236	New York University	5-0	IDLE
#15	231	Trinity (Conn.)	4-2	LOST at #37 Eastern Connecticut, 49-57; 12/11 vs. #34 Susquehanna (n); 12/12 vs. TBA (n)
#16	220	Franklin and Marshall	7-1	won at Albright, 69-63
#17	209	Brooklyn	9-1	def. Medgar Evers, 95-71; LOST at #35 Albertus Magnus, 89-106; 12/11 at Lehman
#18	198	WPI	8-1	won at Massachusetts College, 84-69
#19	164	Babson	6-2	12/10 vs. #3 Amherst
#20	151	Washington U.	6-1	def. Webster, 79-72; 12/12 vs. #1 Augustana
#21	148	Salisbury	6-2	LOST to Penn State-Harrisburg, 63-66
#22	100	East Texas Baptist	5-1	12/10 vs. Louisiana College; 12/12 vs. Rust
#23	82	Mount Union	6-2	won at Ohio Northern, 79-71; 12/12 vs. Otterbein
#24	80	St. John Fisher	4-2	12/13 vs. Oneonta State (n)
#25	60	UW-Whitewater	5-2	def. Wheaton (Ill.), 80-72

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	55	Illinois Wesleyan	4-2	12/12 at Loras
#27	53	Chicago	6-2	IDLE
#28	44	Texas Lutheran	6-1	IDLE
#29	35	Whitman	6-0	IDLE
T#30	33	Lancaster Bible	6-0	12/11 at Cairn
T#30	33	Bethel	7-0	def. Gustavus Adolphus, 82-73; 12/12 at St. John's
T#32	29	Oswego State	7-1	12/11 vs. Cazenovia
T#32	29	St. Norbert	5-1	def. Lake Forest, 64-61; 12/12 vs. UW-Eau Claire
#34	28	Susquehanna	7-0	12/11 vs. #15 Trinity (Conn.) (n); 12/12 at TBA
#35	23	Albertus Magnus	6-1	LOST to Fitchburg State, 85-91; def. #17 Brooklyn, 106-89
#36	21	Centre	5-1	IDLE
#37	17	Eastern Connecticut	6-2	def. #15 Trinity (Conn.), 57-49; 12/10 at Connecticut College; 12/12 vs. Rhode Island College
T#38	16	Skidmore	5-1	IDLE
T#38	16	Wooster	3-2	12/12 at Wabash
T#40	14	Keene State	6-0	12/12 at Mass-Boston
T#40	14	Pacific Lutheran	7-1	won at Northwest (Wash.), 68-61; 12/11 at Evergreen St.
#42	13	Williams	5-2	LOST at Oneonta State, 62-75; 12/12 vs. Springfield
#43	11	Aurora	5-1	LOST to Marian, 96-98; 12/12 at Concordia (Wis.)
#44	10	St. Vincent	4-2	LOST at T#48 Catholic, 56-80; 12/12 vs. Chatham
T#45	9	William Paterson	5-4	won at Montclair State, 78-74; 12/12 vs. FDU-Florham
T#45	9	Northwestern (Minn.)	7-1	12/11 vs. Crown; 12/12 vs. Minnesota-Morris
#47	8	Stockton	5-2	def. Rutgers-Camden, 71-51; 12/12 vs. Rutgers-Newark
T#48	6	Catholic	5-3	def. #44 St. Vincent, 80-56; 12/11 at Dickinson
T#48	6	Scranton	5-2	12/13 vs. Merchant Marine
T#48	6	Eastern Nazarene	9-0	def. Gordon, 100-84
#51	5	Tufts	6-2	def. Plymouth State, 91-80
T#52	3	Southern Vermont	5-2	won at Vassar, 76-64; 12/12 vs. Massachusetts College (n); 12/13 vs. TBA (n)
T#52	3	Juniata	7-0	12/11 vs. Penn State York; 12/12 vs. TBD
#54	2	Geneseo State	6-1	IDLE
#55	1	Maryville (Tenn.)	6-1	IDLE

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 09, 2015, 11:33:22 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 09, 2015, 06:15:08 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 09, 2015, 02:58:22 PM
A little delayed, but finally posted... my Top 25 ballot for Week 2: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2687 (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/?p=2687)

So D Mac...

Why do you have Elmhurst higher than Benedictine? (Benedictine beat Elmhurst convincingly at Elmhurst.)

And why Wash U ranked and IWU not? (IWU beat Wash U.)

Because one game doesn't always automatically mean a swap... sometimes I feel it does and sometimes I feel it doesn't.

Yes, Benedictine beat Elmhurst and I had Elmhurst in the Top 5 and Benedictine not ranked at the time. I certainly wasn't going to either remove Elmhurst or vault Benedictine ahead of Elmhurst in the Top 25 based on that game. Benedictine got into the ballot and is about as high as I am comfortable with based on the Elmhurst win and others. Should Elmhurst be lower? You could certainly make that argument, but I am not of that opinion right now. I will admit they may not be the 7th (?) best team in the country, but I don't feel that anyone behind them should be ahead of them... so they sit there.

I don't think IWU is a Top 25 team (and I may incorrectly have Wash U as a Top 25 team). Just because IWU won doesn't mean they are now a Top 25 team. Wash U dropped a lot in my poll (and yes, I thought about removing as I stated in the blog), just didn't happen to drop out.

There are times a head-to-head matchup might result in a swap in the polls (Christopher Newport and Salisbury this week), but not all of the time. I just don't buy in the fact that one game trumps the rest of the resume or should automatically mean a team should jump ahead of the other.

Now, I have been pretty open that I may be wrong with Wash U and I thoroughly suspect they will be off my ballot next week after they play Augustana. That's a mistake I probably have made, but I liked what I saw in their start despite the other voice in my head yelling at me to ignore it (and other voices who talked to me after I bought in; timing is a bitch). However, there are so many teams to move around and think about that sometimes you can't hear all the voices accurately.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 13, 2015, 04:43:06 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Augustana	5-0	won at #20 Washington U., 70-67
#2	584	Whitworth	8-0	def. (n) Colorado College, 72-56
#3	564	Amherst	8-0	won at Brandeis, 72-65; won at #19 Babson, 103-96; won at Lasell, 101-69
#4	541	Ohio Wesleyan	8-1	LOST at Hiram, 72-74
#5	498	Hope	6-1	def. UW-Platteville, 79-69
#6	463	St. Thomas	6-1	def. Macalester, 78-53; won at UW-River Falls, 67-54
#7	435	Elmhurst	8-1	def. Olivet, 106-67; won at Dubuque, 76-64
#8	425	Marietta	7-1	won at Heidelberg, 79-72
#9	402	UW-Stevens Point	4-3	LOST at North Central (Ill.), 49-63; def. Lawrence, 64-53
#10	336	Benedictine	7-0	def. Milwaukee Engineering, 84-58; won at Edgewood, 77-57
#11	299	John Carroll	8-0	won at Wilmington, 84-68
#12	281	Virginia Wesleyan	5-3	LOST to #13 Christopher Newport, 61-64
#13	241	Christopher Newport	7-0	won at #12 Virginia Wesleyan, 64-61
#14	236	New York University	5-0	IDLE
#15	231	Trinity (Conn.)	5-3	LOST at #37 Eastern Connecticut, 49-57; LOST to (n) #34 Susquehanna, 74-79; won at King's, 90-63
#16	220	Franklin and Marshall	7-1	won at Albright, 69-63
#17	209	Brooklyn	9-2	def. Medgar Evers, 95-71; LOST at #35 Albertus Magnus, 89-106; LOST at Lehman, 77-80
#18	198	WPI	8-1	won at Massachusetts College, 84-69
#19	164	Babson	6-3	LOST to #3 Amherst, 96-103
#20	151	Washington U.	6-2	def. Webster, 79-72; LOST to #1 Augustana, 67-70
#21	148	Salisbury	6-2	LOST to Penn State-Harrisburg, 63-66
#22	100	East Texas Baptist	7-1	def. Louisiana College, 78-68; def. Rust, 88-79
#23	82	Mount Union	7-2	won at Ohio Northern, 79-71; def. Otterbein, 92-82
#24	80	St. John Fisher	4-3	LOST to (n) Oneonta State, 73-77
#25	60	UW-Whitewater	5-2	def. Wheaton (Ill.), 80-72

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	55	Illinois Wesleyan	4-3	LOST at Loras, 81-92
#27	53	Chicago	6-2	IDLE
#28	44	Texas Lutheran	6-1	IDLE
#29	35	Whitman	7-0	won at Walla Walla, 101-65
T#30	33	Lancaster Bible	7-0	won at Cairn, 97-93
T#30	33	Bethel	7-1	def. Gustavus Adolphus, 82-73; LOST at St. John's, 78-89
T#32	29	Oswego State	8-1	def. Cazenovia, 75-50
T#32	29	St. Norbert	6-1	def. Lake Forest, 64-61; def. UW-Eau Claire, 89-60
#34	28	Susquehanna	9-0	def. (n) #15 Trinity (Conn.), 79-74; def. (n) Apprentice School, 90-61
#35	23	Albertus Magnus	6-1	LOST to Fitchburg State, 85-91; def. #17 Brooklyn, 106-89
#36	21	Centre	5-1	IDLE
#37	17	Eastern Connecticut	7-3	def. #15 Trinity (Conn.), 57-49; LOST at Connecticut College, 72-85; def. Rhode Island College, 77-44
T#38	16	Skidmore	5-1	IDLE
T#38	16	Wooster	4-2	won at Wabash, 74-52
T#40	14	Keene State	6-1	LOST at Mass-Boston, 70-77
T#40	14	Pacific Lutheran	7-2	won at Northwest (Wash.), 68-61; LOST at Evergreen St., 83-93
#42	13	Williams	6-2	LOST at Oneonta State, 62-75; def. Springfield, 72-62
#43	11	Aurora	6-1	LOST to Marian, 96-98; won at Concordia (Wis.), 92-91
#44	10	St. Vincent	5-2	LOST at T#48 Catholic, 56-80; def. Chatham, 82-63
T#45	9	William Paterson	6-4	won at Montclair State, 78-74; def. FDU-Florham, 85-55
T#45	9	Northwestern (Minn.)	9-1	def. Crown, 106-69; def. Minnesota-Morris, 91-79
#47	8	Stockton	6-2	def. Rutgers-Camden, 71-51; def. Rutgers-Newark, 70-50
T#48	6	Catholic	6-3	def. #44 St. Vincent, 80-56; won at Dickinson, 81-71
T#48	6	Scranton	6-2	def. Merchant Marine, 68-56
T#48	6	Eastern Nazarene	9-0	def. Gordon, 100-84
#51	5	Tufts	6-2	def. Plymouth State, 91-80
T#52	3	Southern Vermont	7-2	won at Vassar, 76-64; def. (n) Massachusetts College, 106-44; won at RPI, 68-59
T#52	3	Juniata	8-1	def. Penn State York, 71-61; LOST to Randolph, 53-65
#54	2	Geneseo	6-1	IDLE
#55	1	Maryville (Tenn.)	6-1	IDLE

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 13, 2015, 05:46:01 PM

As we close in on the holiday break, many teams have made some significant moves in the early part of the season. Tonight on Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave talks to teams who find themselves in good position before some time off, but can they keep up the momentum?

Watch Hoopsville LIVE at 7pm ET: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2015-16/dec13 (http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2015-16/dec13)

Guests include (in order):
- Michelle Ferenz, Whitman women's coach
- Keith Mondillo, Gwynedd Mercy women's coach
- Jamie Benton, Johnson and Wales men's coach
- Page Moir, Roanoke men's coach

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com (http://www.d3hoopsville.com)
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville (http://www.facebook.com/Hoopsville)
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville (http://www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville)
SoundCloud (podcast): www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville (http://www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville)

AND our podcast as been approved for iTunes!!! Just search for it or follow it via this link: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087 (https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 14, 2015, 10:40:35 PM

~~How They Fared (So Far)~~ Upcoming Games

If this year's schedule is like the last several, the next poll will come out on January 4. Rather than posting a partial update between now and then, here's a list of the games scheduled for the next three weeks. I'll post the final report on Sunday, January 3.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Augustana	5-0	12/15 vs. MacMurray; 12/18 at Puget Sound; 12/20 at Lewis and Clark; 12/22 at George Fox; 12/29 vs. UW-Oshkosh (n); 12/30 vs. Edgewood (n); 01/02 vs. Wheaton (Ill.)
#2	589	Whitworth	8-0	12/19 vs. Millsaps; 12/29 vs. Calvin (n); 12/30 vs. Mary Hardin-Baylor (n)
#3	574	Amherst	8-0	01/02 vs. Rust (n); 01/03 at Rhodes
#4	513	Hope	6-1	12/21 vs. Hanover; 12/22 vs. Grace Bible; 12/29 vs. Messiah (n); 12/30 vs. Beloit (n)
#5	497	St. Thomas	6-1	12/15 at #19 UW-Stevens Point; 01/02 vs. Hamline
#6	464	Elmhurst	8-1	12/19 at Buena Vista; 12/29 at Concordia-Chicago; 01/02 vs. T#33 Illinois Wesleyan
#7	448	Benedictine	7-0	12/16 vs. T#46 Aurora; 12/19 at Marian; 12/22 at T#52 North Central (Ill.); 12/30 vs. Carthage; 01/02 at Concordia (Wis.)
#8	438	Marietta	7-1	12/16 vs. Baldwin Wallace; 12/19 at #10 John Carroll; 12/29 vs. Mount St. Joseph (n); 12/30 vs. TBA (n)
#9	432	Ohio Wesleyan	8-1	12/19 vs. Kenyon; 12/22 at Transylvania
#10	396	John Carroll	8-0	12/19 vs. #8 Marietta; 12/29 vs. Brockport State (n); 12/30 vs. Bridgewater State (n)
#11	388	Christopher Newport	7-0	12/16 at Pitt-Greensburg; 12/29 vs. Shenandoah; 12/30 vs. Shenandoah; 01/02 vs. Southern Virginia
#12	279	New York University	5-0	12/30 vs. Yeshiva; 01/02 vs. Salve Regina (n); 01/03 vs. Emmanuel
#13	267	Franklin and Marshall	7-1	12/30 at Carnegie Mellon; 01/02 vs. Misericordia
#14	205	WPI	8-1	12/29 at Bates; 01/02 at T#43 Eastern Nazarene
#15	195	East Texas Baptist	7-1	12/29 vs. Southwestern (n); 12/30 vs. #25 Texas Lutheran (n); 01/02 vs. Concordia (Texas)
#16	176	Mount Union	7-2	12/28 vs. Hood (n); 12/29 vs. Colby (n)
#17	148	Susquehanna	9-0	12/29 vs. Johns Hopkins (n); 12/30 at TBA; 01/02 vs. Moravian
#18	145	Virginia Wesleyan	5-3	12/16 at Mary Washington; 12/30 vs. Southern Virginia; 01/02 vs. Emory
#19	132	UW-Stevens Point	4-3	12/15 vs. #5 St. Thomas; 12/22 at Edgewood; 12/29 vs. T#52 Keene State (n); 12/30 vs. Hamilton (n)
#20	127	UW-Whitewater	5-2	12/20 vs. Concordia-Chicago; 12/27 vs. Concordia (Texas) (n); 12/28 vs. FDU-Florham (n); 12/30 at Colorado College
#21	118	Washington U.	6-2	12/17 at Fontbonne; 12/29 vs. #32 Centre (n); 12/30 at Wittenberg/Earlham
#22	100	Chicago	7-2	def. T#33 Illinois Wesleyan, 74-57; 12/19 at Albion; 01/02 at Illinois Tech
#23	80	St. Norbert	6-1	12/19 vs. Cornell; 12/22 vs. Illinois College; 12/29 vs. Anderson; 12/30 vs. TBA
#24	78	Babson	6-3	12/31 at Bates
#25	74	Texas Lutheran	6-1	12/19 vs. T#33 Illinois Wesleyan (n); 12/20 vs. Alma (n); 12/29 at Texas-Tyler; 12/30 vs. #15 East Texas Baptist (n); 01/02 vs. Southwestern

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	71	Brooklyn	9-2	01/03 vs. Staten Island
#27	62	Whitman	7-0	12/20 vs. Millsaps; 12/21 vs. Redlands; 12/29 vs. T#39 Tufts (n)
T#28	56	Salisbury	6-2	12/20 vs. Concordia (Wis.) (n); 12/21 vs. #38 Wooster (n); 01/02 vs. St. Mary's (Md.)
T#28	56	Oswego State	8-1	IDLE
#30	46	Trinity (Conn.)	5-3	12/30 vs. Anna Maria; 12/31 vs. TBA
#31	43	Lancaster Bible	7-0	12/18 vs. Mount Aloysius
#32	32	Centre	5-1	12/15 at Spalding; 12/19 vs. T#52 North Central (Ill.) (n); 12/20 vs. Stevenson (n); 12/29 vs. #21 Washington U. (n); 12/30 vs. TBA (n); 01/03 vs. Sewanee
T#33	29	Illinois Wesleyan	4-4	LOST at #22 Chicago, 57-74; 12/18 vs. Southwestern (n); 12/19 vs. #25 Texas Lutheran (n); 12/30 at Milwaukee Engineering; 01/02 at #6 Elmhurst
T#33	29	Northwestern (Minn.)	9-1	12/15 at UW-Stout; 01/02 vs. North Central (Minn.)
T#33	29	Albertus Magnus	6-1	IDLE
#36	21	Pacific Lutheran	7-2	12/28 vs. Mary Hardin-Baylor (n); 12/29 vs. UW-Stout (n)
#37	16	Skidmore	5-1	12/28 vs. Ramapo (n); 12/30 vs. UW-Stout (n); 01/02 vs. Bard; 01/03 vs. Hobart
#38	13	Wooster	4-2	12/20 vs. St. Mary's (Md.) (n); 12/21 vs. T#28 Salisbury (n); 12/29 vs. Pitt-Bradford; 12/30 vs. TBA; 01/03 vs. Denison
T#39	12	Tufts	6-2	12/29 vs. #27 Whitman (n); 12/30 vs. Cal Lutheran / Geneva (n)
T#39	12	Bethel	7-1	01/02 vs. Macalester
T#39	12	Juniata	8-1	12/19 vs. Pitt-Bradford; 01/02 vs. Drew
#42	11	William Paterson	6-4	12/19 at Rutgers-Camden
T#43	10	St. John Fisher	4-3	12/29 vs. Cazenovia; 12/30 vs. TBA
T#43	10	Stockton	6-2	12/19 vs. Gettysburg (n); 12/20 vs. TBA (n); 01/02 vs. Alvernia (n); 01/03 vs. TBA (n)
T#43	10	Eastern Nazarene	9-0	01/02 vs. #14 WPI
T#46	7	Roanoke	7-1	12/20 at Frostburg State; 01/02 vs. Kenyon
T#46	7	MIT	8-2	IDLE
T#46	7	Aurora	6-1	12/16 at #7 Benedictine; 12/19 vs. Maryville (Tenn.) (n); 01/02 at Wisconsin Lutheran
T#49	6	Scranton	6-2	12/29 vs. Stevenson (n); 12/30 vs. TBA; 01/02 vs. Elizabethtown
T#49	6	St. Vincent	5-2	12/27 vs. Mary Hardin-Baylor (n); 12/29 vs. Ramapo (n); 12/30 vs. Calvin (n); 01/02 vs. Westminster (Pa.)
#51	5	New Jersey City	7-2	12/29 vs. Buffalo State (n); 12/30 vs. TBA (n)
T#52	4	Keene State	6-1	12/29 vs. #19 UW-Stevens Point (n); 12/30 vs. Loras (n)
T#52	4	North Central (Ill.)	3-3	12/15 vs. Albion; 12/18 vs. Hartwick (n); 12/19 vs. #32 Centre (n); 12/22 vs. #7 Benedictine; 12/30 at Robert Morris-Chicago; 01/02 vs. North Park
T#54	3	St. John's	8-1	01/02 vs. St. Mary's (Minn.)
T#54	3	Southern Vermont	7-2	12/21 at Bates
T#56	2	Catholic	6-3	12/29 vs. Waynesburg; 12/30 vs. TBA; 01/02 at Merchant Marine
T#56	2	Eastern Connecticut	7-3	12/20 vs. Berry (n); 12/21 vs. LaGrange (n)
#58	1	Geneseo	6-1	IDLE

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on December 15, 2015, 10:14:53 AM

Biggest vote gainers:
Christopher Newport, 147
Susquehanna, 120
Benedictine, 112
John Carroll, 97
E. Texas Baptist, 95
Mt. Union, 94
UW-Whitewater, 67
St. Norbert, 51
F&M, 47
Chicago, 47
NYU, 43
St. Thomas, 34
Texas Lutheran, 30

Biggest vote losers:
UWSP, -270
Trinity (CT), -185
Brooklyn, -138
VA Wesleyan, -136
OH Wesleyan, -109
Salisbury, -92
Babson, -86
St. John Fisher, -70
WashU, -33
IL Wesleyan, -26
Bethel, -21
E. Conn, -15
Williams, -13
Keene St., -10

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 15, 2015, 11:47:13 AM

Great work, you guys. +1k

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 20, 2015, 11:10:38 AM

ALL HAIL THE KING! HAPPY BIRTHDAY, PAT!!!!!!

*at least according to FB.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on December 20, 2015, 05:10:59 PM

Anxious to see the new poll. Expect the possibility of some major changes especially among some of the previous ORV teams moving into the Top 25

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 20, 2015, 05:21:00 PM

I saw Alma (MIAA) play yesterday in San Antonio vs Mary Hardin-Baylor. I was very impressed. I think they are a Top 25 team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 20, 2015, 06:48:07 PM

Two Texas Lutheran (#25) scores from the Trinity tournament in San Antonio...

Texas Lutheran 82
Alma 81
(today)

Illinois Wesleyan 92
Texas Lutheran 86
(yesterday)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 20, 2015, 06:48:27 PM

Quote from: AndOne on December 20, 2015, 05:10:59 PM
Anxious to see the new poll. Expect the possibility of some major changes especially among some of the previous ORV teams moving into the Top 25

Perhaps you are not expecting to see that poll tomorrow, but if so, I think you'll be disappointed. I earlier speculated that the next poll would come out on January 4, and I did not hear anything to contradict that. For example, last year, polls were posted on 12/15 and then 1/5. The schedule was similar in 2013-14.

Of the 58 teams who received votes in the last poll, nearly half (27) have not played any games since then. That's why I have not posted a HTF report this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Bengalsrule on December 23, 2015, 02:38:12 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 20, 2015, 06:48:27 PM

Quote from: AndOne on December 20, 2015, 05:10:59 PM
Anxious to see the new poll. Expect the possibility of some major changes especially among some of the previous ORV teams moving into the Top 25
Perhaps you are not expecting to see that poll tomorrow, but if so, I think you'll be disappointed. I earlier speculated that the next poll would come out on January 4, and I did not hear anything to contradict that. For example, last year, polls were posted on 12/15 and then 1/5. The schedule was similar in 2013-14.

Of the 58 teams who received votes in the last poll, nearly half (27) have not played any games since then. That's why I have not posted a HTF report this week.

Makes sense!! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on December 30, 2015, 04:58:54 PM

can...barely...wait...until...1/3! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 30, 2015, 10:17:57 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

Still a few games left in this three-week stretch (including some still going on this evening), but it felt like time for an update. The full report will be posted Sunday night, as usual.

Also, note that I can include in the report any additional teams who might be worthy of consideration. If you have suggestions, post them here, or send me a PM.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Augustana	11-0	def. MacMurray, 86-62; won at Puget Sound, 73-49; won at Lewis and Clark, 83-50; won at George Fox, 76-58; def. (n) UW-Oshkosh, 67-65; def. (n) Edgewood, 79-44; 01/02 vs. Wheaton (Ill.)
#2	589	Whitworth	11-0	def. Millsaps, 86-47; def. Calvin, 68-65; won at Mary Hardin-Baylor, 68-58
#3	574	Amherst	8-0	01/02 vs. Rust (n); 01/03 at Rhodes
#4	513	Hope	10-1	def. Hanover, 85-81; def. Grace Bible, 98-83; def. (n) Messiah, 80-58; def. (n) Beloit, 86-66
#5	497	St. Thomas	7-1	won at #19 UW-Stevens Point, 56-38; 01/02 vs. Hamline
#6	464	Elmhurst	10-1	won at Buena Vista, 125-115; won at Concordia-Chicago, 99-52; 01/02 vs. T#33 Illinois Wesleyan
#7	448	Benedictine	11-0	def. T#46 Aurora, 90-62; won at Marian, 83-61; won at T#52 North Central (Ill.), 75-73; def. Carthage, 82-78; 01/02 at Concordia (Wis.)
#8	438	Marietta	10-2	def. Baldwin Wallace, 93-78; LOST at #10 John Carroll, 78-82; def. (n) Mount St. Joseph, 83-80; won at #38 Wooster, 72-57
#9	432	Ohio Wesleyan	10-1	def. Kenyon, 96-62; won at Transylvania, 96-72
#10	396	John Carroll	11-0	def. #8 Marietta, 82-78; def. (n) Brockport State, 115-94; def. (n) Bridgewater State, 89-68
#11	388	Christopher Newport	9-1	won at Pitt-Greensburg, 93-74; def. Shenandoah, 80-69; LOST to T#49 Scranton, 58-65; 01/02 vs. Southern Virginia
#12	279	New York University	6-0	def. Yeshiva, 66-57; 01/02 vs. Salve Regina (n); 01/03 vs. Emmanuel
#13	267	Franklin and Marshall	7-2	LOST at Carnegie Mellon, 54-74; 01/02 vs. Misericordia
#14	205	WPI	9-1	won at Bates, 58-51; 01/02 at T#43 Eastern Nazarene
#15	195	East Texas Baptist	8-2	def. (n) Southwestern, 70-60; LOST to (n) #25 Texas Lutheran, 54-69; 01/02 vs. Concordia (Texas)
#16	176	Mount Union	8-3	def. (n) Hood, 65-63; LOST to (n) Colby, 81-87
#17	148	Susquehanna	11-0	def. (n) Johns Hopkins, 72-64; won at Albright, 62-60; 01/02 vs. Moravian
#18	145	Virginia Wesleyan	6-4	LOST at Mary Washington, 67-68; def. Southern Virginia, 71-44; 01/02 vs. Emory
#19	132	UW-Stevens Point	6-4	LOST to #5 St. Thomas, 38-56; won at Edgewood, 82-66; def. (n) T#52 Keene State, 65-56; 12/30 vs. Hamilton (n)
#20	127	UW-Whitewater	9-2	def. Concordia-Chicago, 107-84; def. (n) Concordia (Texas), 108-90; def. (n) FDU-Florham, 84-73; won at Colorado College, 81-58
#21	118	Washington U.	8-3	won at Fontbonne, 74-69; def. (n) #32 Centre, 75-67; LOST at Wittenberg, 61-72
#22	100	Chicago	8-2	def. T#33 Illinois Wesleyan, 74-57; won at Albion, 69-65; 01/02 at Illinois Tech
#23	80	St. Norbert	9-2	def. Cornell, 79-46; def. Illinois College, 76-67; def. Anderson, 94-66; LOST to Alma, 65-82
#24	78	Babson	6-3	12/31 at Bates
#25	74	Texas Lutheran	8-3	LOST to (n) T#33 Illinois Wesleyan, 86-92; def. (n) Alma, 82-81; LOST at Texas-Tyler, 84-87; def. (n) #15 East Texas Baptist, 69-54; 01/02 vs. Southwestern

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	71	Brooklyn	9-2	01/03 vs. Staten Island
#27	62	Whitman	9-1	def. Millsaps, 95-52; def. Redlands, 118-72; LOST to (n) T#39 Tufts, 95-107; 12/30 vs. Geneva (n)
T#28	56	Salisbury	8-2	def. (n) Concordia (Wis.), 50-49; def. (n) #38 Wooster, 67-50; 01/02 vs. St. Mary's (Md.)
T#28	56	Oswego State	8-1	IDLE
#30	46	Trinity (Conn.)	6-3	def. Anna Maria, 87-58; 12/31 vs. Delaware Valley; 12/31 vs. Delaware Valley (n)
#31	43	Lancaster Bible	8-0	def. Mount Aloysius, 99-56
#32	32	Centre	8-3	won at Spalding, 46-43; LOST to (n) T#52 North Central (Ill.), 59-73; def. (n) Stevenson, 73-53; LOST to (n) #21 Washington U., 67-75; def. (n) Earlham, 55-54; 01/03 vs. Sewanee
T#33	29	Illinois Wesleyan	6-5	LOST at #22 Chicago, 57-74; def. (n) Southwestern, 85-77; def. (n) #25 Texas Lutheran, 92-86; LOST at Milwaukee Engineering, 69-89; 01/02 at #6 Elmhurst
T#33	29	Northwestern (Minn.)	10-1	won at UW-Stout, 66-63; 01/02 vs. North Central (Minn.)
T#33	29	Albertus Magnus	6-1	IDLE
#36	21	Pacific Lutheran	9-2	won at Mary Hardin-Baylor, 77-74; def. UW-Stout, 73-56
#37	16	Skidmore	5-3	LOST at Ramapo, 76-90; LOST to UW-Stout, 62-63; 01/02 vs. Bard; 01/03 vs. Hobart
#38	13	Wooster	6-4	def. (n) St. Mary's (Md.), 49-35; LOST to (n) T#28 Salisbury, 50-67; def. Pitt-Bradford, 79-59; LOST to #8 Marietta, 57-72; 01/03 vs. Denison
T#39	12	Tufts	7-2	def. (n) #27 Whitman, 107-95; 12/30 at Cal Lutheran
T#39	12	Bethel	7-1	01/02 vs. Macalester
T#39	12	Juniata	9-1	def. Pitt-Bradford, 63-51; 01/02 vs. Drew
#42	11	William Paterson	7-4	won at Rutgers-Camden, 73-57
T#43	10	St. John Fisher	6-3	def. Cazenovia, 94-63; def. RPI, 67-54
T#43	10	Stockton	8-2	def. (n) Gettysburg, 68-57; won at Hood, 73-64; 01/02 vs. Alvernia (n); 01/03 vs. TBA (n)
T#43	10	Eastern Nazarene	9-0	01/02 vs. #14 WPI
T#46	7	Roanoke	8-1	won at Frostburg State, 88-73; 01/02 vs. Kenyon
T#46	7	MIT	8-2	IDLE
T#46	7	Aurora	7-3	LOST at #7 Benedictine, 62-90; LOST to (n) Maryville (Tenn.), 94-103; won at Rhodes, 107-95; 01/02 at Wisconsin Lutheran
T#49	6	Scranton	8-2	def. (n) Stevenson, 81-67; won at #11 Christopher Newport, 65-58; 01/02 vs. Elizabethtown
T#49	6	St. Vincent	7-2	def. (n) Mary Hardin-Baylor, 91-85; def. Ramapo, 73-71; 12/30 at Calvin; 01/02 vs. Westminster (Pa.)
#51	5	New Jersey City	7-4	LOST to (n) Buffalo State, 116-119; LOST to (n) Western Connecticut, 65-84
T#52	4	Keene State	6-3	LOST to (n) #19 UW-Stevens Point, 56-65; LOST to (n) Loras, 102-112
T#52	4	North Central (Ill.)	7-4	def. Albion, 77-63; def. (n) Hartwick, 84-67; def. (n) #32 Centre, 73-59; LOST to #7 Benedictine, 73-75; won at Robert Morris-Chicago, 69-65; 01/02 vs. North Park
T#54	3	St. John's	8-1	01/02 vs. St. Mary's (Minn.)
T#54	3	Southern Vermont	8-2	won at Bates, 67-63
T#56	2	Catholic	8-3	def. Waynesburg, 71-42; def. Williams, 65-57; 01/02 at Merchant Marine
T#56	2	Eastern Connecticut	8-4	def. (n) Berry, 66-60; LOST to (n) LaGrange, 53-61
#58	1	Geneseo	6-1	IDLE

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on December 31, 2015, 10:30:55 AM

Wooster has two very long streaks active, 20-win seasons (19 years) and NCAA tournament appearances (13.) These streaks must be among the longest active streaks in D3, if not the longest, and may be among the longest all-time. (Might make for an interesting discussion.) At 6-4 with a conference season looming in a league that's not the pushover it once was, both of these streaks are in serious jeopardy.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Bengalsrule on January 03, 2016, 04:09:52 PM

From Darryl.....
How They Fared (So Far)

Still a few games left in this three-week stretch (including some still going on this evening), but it felt like time for an update. The full report will be posted Sunday night, as usual.

Also, note that I can include in the report any additional teams who might be worthy of consideration. If you have suggestions, post them here, or send me a PM.

Darryl, I humbly offer The Buffalo State Bengals for consideration! Thier last 2 wins, this past week, were against......

1- Lehman College - 8-1 prior to meeting Buff State in the Championship game of the Coaches vs Cancer tourney, 12/30, at Lehman. (Lehman is the sole leader of CUNY @ 4-0). Lehman had previously defeated then #17 Brooklyn college on the same home court on 12/11. Bengals defeated Lehman 82-73, stopping Lehman's win streak at 8 games!!

2 -New Jersey City U - (Featured team in the 12/16 issue of D3hoops). Bengals defeated the Gothic Knights (sole leader of the NJAC @ 5-0) in the 1st round of the Coaches Vs. Cancer tourney, on 12/29, at Lehman college in double overtime (119-116). Bengals were down by 9 in the 1st overtime. Stopped NJCU win streak at 7!!

I should note that the Coaches vs. Cancer tourney had 4 teams with a combined 26-9 record (when the tourney began) . Lehman, NJCU and Western Conn are all currently in first in their respective conferences, with both Lehman and NJCU being in sole possession of 1st place.

lastly...

The BENGALS sole loss, to a Div 3 team, was to fellow SUNYAC foe Cortland (8-1), by 1 point ( a painful buzzer beating 3 ptr, in overtime :'(). Buff State's only other loss was in their season opener, vs NAIA-2 Point Park (8-5) by 2 points!

Go BENGALS!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 03, 2016, 04:39:36 PM

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) returns to the air after the holidays with plenty to talk about. Dave McHugh talks with coaches whose teams made some statements over the holidays. They include Wartburg and Capital women's programs along with the No. 17 Susquehanna men's program. You will also hear from a few coaches at this year's D3hoops.com Classic (http://www.d3hoops.com/classic/index).

Watch Hoopsville LIVE at 7pm ET: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2015-16/jan3 (http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2015-16/jan3)

Guests include (in order):
- Bob Amsberry, Wartburg women's coach
- Dixie Jeffries, Capital's women's coach
- Frank Marcinek, No. 17 Susquehanna's men's coach

D3hoops.com Classic Interviews:
- UW-Stout's Eddie Andrist
- Calvin's Kevin Vande Streek
- possibly more

You can tune into the podcast after the show airs here::
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville (http://www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville)
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087 (https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087)

And don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com (http://www.d3hoopsville.com)
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville (http://www.facebook.com/Hoopsville)
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville (http://www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 03, 2016, 04:54:09 PM

Amherst lost to Rhodes 76-69

Rhodes lost to 5-6 MacMurray from the SLIAC. Process that voters. ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 03, 2016, 05:04:09 PM

How They Fared (~~Nearly~~ Complete)

Three scores still pending -- I will edit in as they become available. All three of these games are (I believe) somewhere in the second half: Skidmore vs. Hobart, Wooster vs. Denison, Stockton vs. Berkeley (N.Y.)

~~(In case I run late with the final updates, this at least gives Dave a nearly-complete set of results to report on Hoopsville.)~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Augustana	12-0	def. MacMurray, 86-62; won at Puget Sound, 73-49; won at Lewis and Clark, 83-50; won at George Fox, 76-58; def. (n) UW-Oshkosh, 67-65; def. (n) Edgewood, 79-44; def. Wheaton (Ill.), 72-68
#2	589	Whitworth	11-0	def. Millsaps, 86-47; def. (n) Calvin, 68-65; def. (n) Mary Hardin-Baylor, 68-58
#3	574	Amherst	9-1	def. (n) Rust, 97-93; LOST at Rhodes, 69-76
#4	513	Hope	10-1	def. Hanover, 85-81; def. Grace Bible, 98-83; def. (n) Messiah, 80-58; def. (n) Beloit, 86-66
#5	497	St. Thomas	8-1	won at #19 UW-Stevens Point, 56-38; def. Hamline, 89-70
#6	464	Elmhurst	11-1	won at Buena Vista, 125-115; won at Concordia-Chicago, 99-52; def. T#33 Illinois Wesleyan, 78-64
#7	448	Benedictine	12-0	def. T#46 Aurora, 90-62; won at Marian, 83-61; won at T#52 North Central (Ill.), 75-73; def. Carthage, 82-78; won at Concordia (Wis.), 83-70
#8	438	Marietta	10-2	def. Baldwin Wallace, 93-78; LOST at #10 John Carroll, 78-82; def. (n) Mount St. Joseph, 83-80; won at #38 Wooster, 72-57
#9	432	Ohio Wesleyan	10-1	def. Kenyon, 96-62; won at Transylvania, 96-72
#10	396	John Carroll	11-0	def. #8 Marietta, 82-78; def. (n) Brockport State, 115-94; def. (n) Bridgewater State, 89-68
#11	388	Christopher Newport	10-1	won at Pitt-Greensburg, 93-74; def. Shenandoah, 80-69; LOST to T#49 Scranton, 58-65; def. Southern Virginia, 75-40
#12	279	New York University	8-0	def. Yeshiva, 66-57; def. (n) Salve Regina, 77-62; def. Emmanuel, 79-61
#13	267	Franklin and Marshall	8-2	LOST at Carnegie Mellon, 54-74; def. Misericordia, 81-76
#14	205	WPI	10-1	won at Bates, 58-51; won at T#43 Eastern Nazarene, 67-65
#15	195	East Texas Baptist	8-3	def. (n) Southwestern, 70-60; LOST to (n) #25 Texas Lutheran, 54-69; LOST to Concordia (Texas), 90-101
#16	176	Mount Union	8-3	def. (n) Hood, 65-63; LOST to (n) Colby, 81-87
#17	148	Susquehanna	12-0	def. (n) Johns Hopkins, 72-64; won at Albright, 62-60; def. Moravian, 89-64
#18	145	Virginia Wesleyan	7-4	LOST at Mary Washington, 67-68; def. Southern Virginia, 71-44; def. Emory, 71-68
#19	132	UW-Stevens Point	7-4	LOST to #5 St. Thomas, 38-56; won at Edgewood, 82-66; def. (n) T#52 Keene State, 65-56; def. (n) Hamilton, 61-43
#20	127	UW-Whitewater	9-2	def. Concordia-Chicago, 107-84; def. (n) Concordia (Texas), 108-90; def. (n) FDU-Florham, 84-73; won at Colorado College, 81-58
#21	118	Washington U.	8-3	won at Fontbonne, 74-69; def. (n) #32 Centre, 75-67; LOST at Wittenberg, 61-72
#22	100	Chicago	9-2	def. T#33 Illinois Wesleyan, 74-57; won at Albion, 69-65; won at Illinois Tech, 85-65
#23	80	St. Norbert	9-2	def. Cornell, 79-46; def. Illinois College, 76-67; def. Anderson, 94-66; LOST to Alma, 65-82
#24	78	Babson	6-4	LOST at Bates, 78-83
#25	74	Texas Lutheran	9-3	LOST to (n) T#33 Illinois Wesleyan, 86-92; def. (n) Alma, 82-81; LOST at Texas-Tyler, 84-87; def. (n) #15 East Texas Baptist, 69-54; def. Southwestern, 91-87

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	71	Brooklyn	10-2	def. Staten Island, 73-70
#27	62	Whitman	10-1	def. Millsaps, 95-52; def. Redlands, 118-72; LOST to (n) T#39 Tufts, 95-107; def. (n) Geneva, 103-81
T#28	56	Salisbury	8-3	def. (n) Concordia (Wis.), 50-49; def. (n) #38 Wooster, 67-50; LOST to St. Mary's (Md.), 67-70
T#28	56	Oswego State	8-1	IDLE
#30	46	Trinity (Conn.)	7-3	def. Anna Maria, 87-58; def. Delaware Valley, 78-64
#31	43	Lancaster Bible	8-0	def. Mount Aloysius, 99-56
#32	32	Centre	8-4	won at Spalding, 46-43; LOST to (n) T#52 North Central (Ill.), 59-73; def. (n) Stevenson, 73-53; LOST to (n) #21 Washington U., 67-75; def. (n) Earlham, 55-54; LOST to Sewanee, 54-58
T#33	29	Illinois Wesleyan	6-6	LOST at #22 Chicago, 57-74; def. (n) Southwestern, 85-77; def. (n) #25 Texas Lutheran, 92-86; LOST at Milwaukee Engineering, 69-89; LOST at #6 Elmhurst, 64-78
T#33	29	Northwestern (Minn.)	10-2	won at UW-Stout, 66-63; LOST to North Central (Minn.), 72-76
T#33	29	Albertus Magnus	6-1	IDLE
#36	21	Pacific Lutheran	9-2	won at Mary Hardin-Baylor, 77-74; def. UW-Stout, 73-56
#37	16	Skidmore	6-4	LOST at Ramapo, 76-90; LOST to UW-Stout, 62-63; LOST to Bard, 75-82; def. Hobart, 71-54
#38	13	Wooster	7-4	def. (n) St. Mary's (Md.), 49-35; LOST to (n) T#28 Salisbury, 50-67; def. Pitt-Bradford, 79-59; LOST to #8 Marietta, 57-72; def. Denison, 83-67
T#39	12	Tufts	8-2	def. (n) #27 Whitman, 107-95; won at Cal Lutheran, 85-78
T#39	12	Bethel	8-1	def. Macalester, 107-95
T#39	12	Juniata	9-2	def. Pitt-Bradford, 63-51; LOST to Drew, 71-78
#42	11	William Paterson	7-4	won at Rutgers-Camden, 73-57
T#43	10	St. John Fisher	6-3	def. Cazenovia, 94-63; def. RPI, 67-54
T#43	10	Stockton	9-3	def. (n) Gettysburg, 68-57; won at Hood, 73-64; def. (n) Alvernia, 62-56; LOST to (n) Berkeley (N.Y.), 76-83
T#43	10	Eastern Nazarene	9-1	LOST to #14 WPI, 65-67
T#46	7	Roanoke	10-1	won at Frostburg State, 88-73; def. Kenyon, 84-76; def. McDaniel, 90-84
T#46	7	MIT	8-2	IDLE
T#46	7	Aurora	8-3	LOST at #7 Benedictine, 62-90; LOST to (n) Maryville (Tenn.), 94-103; won at Rhodes, 107-95; won at Wisconsin Lutheran, 86-81
T#49	6	Scranton	9-2	def. (n) Stevenson, 81-67; won at #11 Christopher Newport, 65-58; def. Elizabethtown, 79-50
T#49	6	St. Vincent	8-3	def. (n) Mary Hardin-Baylor, 91-85; def. Ramapo, 73-71; LOST at Calvin, 66-77; def. Westminster (Pa.), 81-77
#51	5	New Jersey City	7-4	LOST to (n) Buffalo State, 116-119; LOST to (n) Western Connecticut, 65-84
T#52	4	Keene State	6-3	LOST to (n) #19 UW-Stevens Point, 56-65; LOST to (n) Loras, 102-112
T#52	4	North Central (Ill.)	8-4	def. Albion, 77-63; def. (n) Hartwick, 84-67; def. (n) #32 Centre, 73-59; LOST to #7 Benedictine, 73-75; won at Robert Morris-Chicago, 69-65; def. North Park, 76-64
T#54	3	St. John's	9-1	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 81-68
T#54	3	Southern Vermont	8-2	won at Bates, 67-63
T#56	2	Catholic	8-4	def. Waynesburg, 71-42; def. Williams, 65-57; LOST at Merchant Marine, 84-87
T#56	2	Eastern Connecticut	8-4	def. (n) Berry, 66-60; LOST to (n) LaGrange, 53-61
#58	1	Geneseo	6-1	IDLE

Other teams to watch

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
---	---	Buffalo State	7-2	def. (n) #51 New Jersey City, 119-116; won at Lehman, 82-73

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 03, 2016, 05:05:18 PM

Quote from: sac on January 03, 2016, 04:54:09 PM
Amherst lost to Rhodes 76-69

Rhodes lost to 5-6 MacMurray from the SLIAC. Process that voters. ???

Please don't make me. LOL :-X :-\ ::) ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 04, 2016, 07:07:19 PM

New top 25 is out.

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2015-16/week4

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 04, 2016, 07:36:23 PM

Very Midwestern heavy at the top. Are the top teams in the East just playing each other more and knocking each other off? Or is it just very unsettled?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 04, 2016, 07:49:51 PM

I didn't go thru every week's poll, but this may be the first week since D3hoops began their polls (1999-00) that IWU did not get a single vote in either the men's or women's poll. This is the first year since the early 90s that BOTH teams are down the same season. Pretty good run for the Titans. ;D

We'll be back!! ;D (Though maybe not this season.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 04, 2016, 08:09:32 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 04, 2016, 07:49:51 PM
I didn't go thru every week's poll, but this may be the first week since D3hoops began their polls (1999-00) that IWU did not get a single vote in either the men's or women's poll. This is the first year since the early 90s that BOTH teams are down the same season. Pretty good run for the Titans. ;D

We'll be back!! ;D (Though maybe not this season.)

To correct myself: I'd forgotten 2001-02, when the men graduated most of a FF team, but the women had not yet begun their rise to national relevance. I chose week 9 at random, and neither team had any votes (having already demolished my earlier post, I didn't check to see if either EVER got any votes that year ::)).

(I had previously only carefully checked 2006-07, when again the men had graduated most of a FF team, but the women HAD risen up by then.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on January 04, 2016, 08:22:56 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 04, 2016, 08:09:32 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 04, 2016, 07:49:51 PM
I didn't go thru every week's poll, but this may be the first week since D3hoops began their polls (1999-00) that IWU did not get a single vote in either the men's or women's poll. This is the first year since the early 90s that BOTH teams are down the same season. Pretty good run for the Titans. ;D

We'll be back!! ;D (Though maybe not this season.)

To correct myself: I'd forgotten 2001-02, when the men graduated most of a FF team, but the women had not yet begun their rise to national relevance. I chose week 9 at random, and neither team had any votes (having already demolished my earlier post, I didn't check to see if either EVER got any votes that year ::)).

(I had previously only carefully checked 2006-07, when again the men had graduated most of a FF team, but the women HAD risen up by then.)

What link did u use to check; I may do the same for Scranton.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 04, 2016, 08:56:12 PM

Quote from: sac on January 04, 2016, 07:36:23 PM
Very Midwestern heavy at the top. Are the top teams in the East just playing each other more and knocking each other off? Or is it just very unsettled?

This year its a combination of unknown quantities and weak scheduling. CNU and Susquehanna are playing well, but no one really trusts them yet. WPI and Amherst maybe haven performed as well as expected against the schedule they've got. F&M has essentially the same team from last year that people weren't too high on. Just seems like luck of the draw so far. I imagine Amherst losing the day before the poll didn't help them any.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 04, 2016, 10:07:01 PM

Quote from: ronk on January 04, 2016, 08:22:56 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 04, 2016, 08:09:32 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 04, 2016, 07:49:51 PM
I didn't go thru every week's poll, but this may be the first week since D3hoops began their polls (1999-00) that IWU did not get a single vote in either the men's or women's poll. This is the first year since the early 90s that BOTH teams are down the same season. Pretty good run for the Titans. ;D

We'll be back!! ;D (Though maybe not this season.)

To correct myself: I'd forgotten 2001-02, when the men graduated most of a FF team, but the women had not yet begun their rise to national relevance. I chose week 9 at random, and neither team had any votes (having already demolished my earlier post, I didn't check to see if either EVER got any votes that year ::)).

(I had previously only carefully checked 2006-07, when again the men had graduated most of a FF team, but the women HAD risen up by then.)

What link did u use to check; I may do the same for Scranton.

I just checked manually thru the 'previous years' on the Top 25 link from the front page. Most years I was quite sure that one or the other (or both) would have gotten votes in every poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on January 04, 2016, 10:36:16 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 04, 2016, 10:07:01 PM
Quote from: ronk on January 04, 2016, 08:22:56 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 04, 2016, 08:09:32 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 04, 2016, 07:49:51 PM
I didn't go thru every week's poll, but this may be the first week since D3hoops began their polls (1999-00) that IWU did not get a single vote in either the men's or women's poll. This is the first year since the early 90s that BOTH teams are down the same season. Pretty good run for the Titans. ;D

We'll be back!! ;D (Though maybe not this season.)

To correct myself: I'd forgotten 2001-02, when the men graduated most of a FF team, but the women had not yet begun their rise to national relevance. I chose week 9 at random, and neither team had any votes (having already demolished my earlier post, I didn't check to see if either EVER got any votes that year ::)).

(I had previously only carefully checked 2006-07, when again the men had graduated most of a FF team, but the women HAD risen up by then.)

What link did u use to check; I may do the same for Scranton.

I just checked manually thru the 'previous years' on the Top 25 link from the front page. Most years I was quite sure that one or the other (or both) would have gotten votes in every poll.

Thanks, I didn't know about those links. Only had to go back a few years to eliminate Scranton on the criteria.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 05, 2016, 10:03:31 AM

Biggest vote gainers:
Susquehanna, 185
WPI, 124
UW-Whitewater, 97
Chicago, 97
Scranton, 81
John Carroll, 74
Trine, 73
Tufts, 68
Benedictine, 57
Elmhurst, 46
NYU, 36
St. Thomas, 33
St. John's, 33
Oswego St., 32
Pacific Lutheran, 29
Hope, 25
OH Wesleyan, 25

Biggest vote losers:
E. Texas Baptist, -167
Amherst, -163
F&M, -113
Marietta, -99
VA Wesleyan, -98
WashU, -79
Babson, -72
Christopher Newport, -71
Mt. Union, -69
Texas Lutheran, -59
Salisbury, -47
Centre, -29
IL Wesleyan, -29
UWSP, -29
St. Norbert, -28

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 05, 2016, 06:52:07 PM

Mt. Union (8-3) is currently ranked 18h, and UW-Stevens Point (7-4) is ranked 19th.
North Central (8-4) is currently tied for 36th in the ORV.

North Central has the most difficult schedule in the country (per Massey).
Their only double digit loss was to #16 Chicago. Their other 3 losses were by 3 to Aurora (8-3), by 2 to #6 Benedictine (12-0), and by 1 to ORV Alma (7-4).

With having the country's most difficult schedule they have the same number of wins and only one more loss than #18 Mt. Union, and one more win and the same number of losses as #19 UWSP.

Among the teams that NCC has beaten are both Mt. Union AND Stevens Point!
Yet UMU is 18th, UWSP is 19th, and NCC is 36th. ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 05, 2016, 07:14:31 PM

Quote from: AndOne on January 05, 2016, 06:52:07 PM
Mt. Union (8-3) is currently ranked 18h, and UW-Stevens Point (7-4) is ranked 19th.
North Central (8-4) is currently tied for 36th in the ORV.

North Central has the most difficult schedule in the country (per Massey).
Their only double digit loss was to #16 Chicago. Their other 3 losses were by 3 to Aurora (8-3), by 2 to #6 Benedictine (12-0), and by 1 to ORV Alma (7-4).

With having the country's most difficult schedule they have the same number of wins and only one more loss than #18 Mt. Union, and one more win and the same number of losses as #19 UWSP.

Among the teams that NCC has beaten are both Mt. Union AND Stevens Point!
Yet UMU is 18th, UWSP is 19th, and NCC is 36th. ???

I think you've read massey wrong. NCC has played the 4th most difficult schedule, Alma is #1. NCC has the #1 schedule going forward, or remaining.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 05, 2016, 07:29:36 PM

I think NCC is a Top 25 team. I do NOT think Point or Mt. Union are.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2016, 01:02:10 AM

NCC is on my radar, but that start to the season still gives me pause. They have certainly started playing better, but I want to see if they stay consistent before I now put them on my ballot.

UWSP... hasn't been on my ballot since early December.

Mount Union... number 14 on my ballot. I think they are pretty good.

There are 25 voters and in a year of TONS of parity... it isn't that easy to have consensus. Have you seen how many teams are being voted for every week?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 06, 2016, 12:06:23 PM

Quote from: sac on January 05, 2016, 07:14:31 PM
Quote from: AndOne on January 05, 2016, 06:52:07 PM
Mt. Union (8-3) is currently ranked 18h, and UW-Stevens Point (7-4) is ranked 19th.
North Central (8-4) is currently tied for 36th in the ORV.

North Central has the most difficult schedule in the country (per Massey).
Their only double digit loss was to #16 Chicago. Their other 3 losses were by 3 to Aurora (8-3), by 2 to #6 Benedictine (12-0), and by 1 to ORV Alma (7-4).

With having the country's most difficult schedule they have the same number of wins and only one more loss than #18 Mt. Union, and one more win and the same number of losses as #19 UWSP.

Among the teams that NCC has beaten are both Mt. Union AND Stevens Point!
Yet UMU is 18th, UWSP is 19th, and NCC is 36th. ???

I think you've read massey wrong. NCC has played the 4th most difficult schedule, Alma is #1. NCC has the #1 schedule going forward, or remaining.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2016, 01:02:10 AM
NCC is on my radar, but that start to the season still gives me pause. They have certainly started playing better, but I want to see if they stay consistent before I now put them on my ballot.

UWSP... hasn't been on my ballot since early December.

Mount Union... number 14 on my ballot. I think they are pretty good.

There are 25 voters and in a year of TONS of parity... it isn't that easy to have consensus. Have you seen how many teams are being voted for every week?

sac-

You are correct.

sac & Dave-

#36 NCC has "only" played the 4th most difficult schedule to date. BUT, #19 Stevens Point has played the 5th most difficult, and #18 Mt. Union has played only the 60th most difficult so far.

Dave-

With all due respect, I think you should be giving NCC a little more respect than just being "on your radar."
* You said that Mt. Union is #14 on your current ballot, and that you "think they are pretty good."
* However, as evidenced above, NCC has played the 4th toughest schedule in the country to date while Mt. Union comes in considerably down the line at 60th toughest. AND, to top things off, NCC beat UMU, then ranked #7 in the nation by D3Hoops.

It seems like the evidence shows NCC is "pretty good" too. In fact, it appears that based on the facts that 1) NCC has played a much more difficult schedule, and, especially 2) that they beat UMU, that rather than just being on your radar NCC actually deserves to be ranked above UMU.
JMHO based on the available info.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 06, 2016, 12:58:10 PM

Mt Union has been playing most of this season without one of their key contributors Kyle Scelza. Pretty sure he was expected to be a starter this year. Scelza returned to play only sparingly in Mounts last two games, that's adding a good 40% 3pt shooter to an already good 3pt shooting team.

I would guess Dave and the other voters have been made aware of that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 06, 2016, 08:05:48 PM

Quote from: AndOne on January 06, 2016, 12:06:23 PM
Quote from: sac on January 05, 2016, 07:14:31 PM
Quote from: AndOne on January 05, 2016, 06:52:07 PM
Mt. Union (8-3) is currently ranked 18h, and UW-Stevens Point (7-4) is ranked 19th.
North Central (8-4) is currently tied for 36th in the ORV.

North Central has the most difficult schedule in the country (per Massey).
Their only double digit loss was to #16 Chicago. Their other 3 losses were by 3 to Aurora (8-3), by 2 to #6 Benedictine (12-0), and by 1 to ORV Alma (7-4).

With having the country's most difficult schedule they have the same number of wins and only one more loss than #18 Mt. Union, and one more win and the same number of losses as #19 UWSP.

Among the teams that NCC has beaten are both Mt. Union AND Stevens Point!
Yet UMU is 18th, UWSP is 19th, and NCC is 36th. ???

I think you've read massey wrong. NCC has played the 4th most difficult schedule, Alma is #1. NCC has the #1 schedule going forward, or remaining.
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2016, 01:02:10 AM
NCC is on my radar, but that start to the season still gives me pause. They have certainly started playing better, but I want to see if they stay consistent before I now put them on my ballot.

UWSP... hasn't been on my ballot since early December.

Mount Union... number 14 on my ballot. I think they are pretty good.

There are 25 voters and in a year of TONS of parity... it isn't that easy to have consensus. Have you seen how many teams are being voted for every week?

sac-

You are correct.

sac & Dave-

#36 NCC has "only" played the 4th most difficult schedule to date. BUT, #19 Stevens Point has played the 5th most difficult, and #18 Mt. Union has played only the 60th most difficult so far.

Dave-

With all due respect, I think you should be giving NCC a little more respect than just being "on your radar."
* You said that Mt. Union is #14 on your current ballot, and that you "think they are pretty good."
* However, as evidenced above, NCC has played the 4th toughest schedule in the country to date while Mt. Union comes in considerably down the line at 60th toughest. AND, to top things off, NCC beat UMU, then ranked #7 in the nation by D3Hoops.

It seems like the evidence shows NCC is "pretty good" too. In fact, it appears that based on the facts that 1) NCC has played a much more difficult schedule, and, especially 2) that they beat UMU, that rather than just being on your radar NCC actually deserves to be ranked above UMU.
JMHO based on the available info.

And furthermore, NCC has played a much tougher schedule than UMU, whose schedule strength is only 60th. NCC has played the 4th toughest. And NCC actually BEAT UMU!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2016, 08:42:53 PM

When I say "on the radar" it is a catch-all for every team I am tracking and considering for the Top 25, but isn't on my ballot. There are teams on my ballot and on my radar... nothing more than that. So you can think I am not respecting NCC all you want, but in reality, they are on my radar and being considered. I just haven't pulled the trigger as of yet.

In the meantime, here i my ballot. Sorry for the delay - been a bit swamped recently: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/01/06/daves-top-25-ballot-week-4/ (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/01/06/daves-top-25-ballot-week-4/)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 06, 2016, 10:04:25 PM

You don't have to whine about Point anymore. They lost at Eau Claire tonight.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 06, 2016, 10:07:32 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 06, 2016, 10:04:25 PM
You don't have to whine about Point anymore. They lost at Eau Claire tonight.

We never relax about Point until they are six feet under with a silver stake through the heart! 8-)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 06, 2016, 10:20:54 PM

I only watched the last two minutes and OT, but is it just me or did Elmhurst actually look like the better team out there? Not just played better, but if I didn't know which team was which, I would've picked the Bluejays as the higher ranked team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pg04 on January 06, 2016, 10:24:00 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 06, 2016, 10:04:25 PM
You don't have to whine about Point anymore. They lost at Eau Claire tonight.

Darn. Should have aborted that pick in the other league ;D. I'll be lucky if I get > 0 points in that one ;D ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 06, 2016, 10:29:27 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

~~Chapman/Pomona-Pitzer set to get underway soon, but here's all the other action so far.~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Augustana	12-1	LOST at #5 Elmhurst, 75-77; 01/09 at North Park
#2	596	Whitworth	12-0	def. #25 Whitman, 95-89; 01/08 at Pacific
#3	538	Hope	11-1	def. Albion, 68-65; 01/09 at Olivet
#4	530	St. Thomas	9-1	won at Gustavus Adolphus, 71-53; 01/09 vs. T#34 Bethel
#5	510	Elmhurst	12-1	def. #1 Augustana, 77-75; 01/09 at Millikin
#6	505	Benedictine	13-0	def. Dominican, 110-78; 01/09 vs. Wisconsin Lutheran
#7	470	John Carroll	12-0	def. Capital, 75-74; 01/09 at Muskingum
#8	457	Ohio Wesleyan	11-1	won at Wittenberg, 77-70; 01/09 at Allegheny
#9	411	Amherst	10-1	def. Eastern Connecticut, 68-65; 01/08 vs. Williams
#10	339	Marietta	10-2	01/09 vs. Ohio Northern
#11	333	Susquehanna	12-0	01/07 at #21 Scranton; 01/09 vs. Merchant Marine
#12	329	WPI	11-1	won at Springfield, 69-56; 01/09 vs. #49 MIT
#13	317	Christopher Newport	11-1	won at Penn State-Harrisburg, 77-65; 01/09 vs. Wesley
#14	315	New York University	9-0	won at Wells, 89-67; 01/09 vs. Brandeis
#15	224	UW-Whitewater	10-2	won at UW-Stout, 75-59; 01/09 vs. #19 UW-Stevens Point
#16	197	Chicago	9-2	01/09 at #30 Washington U.
#17	154	Franklin and Marshall	8-2	01/07 at McDaniel; 01/09 vs. Swarthmore
#18	107	Mount Union	9-3	def. Heidelberg, 104-80; 01/09 at Wilmington
#19	103	UW-Stevens Point	7-5	LOST at UW-Eau Claire, 59-63; 01/09 at #15 UW-Whitewater
#20	88	Oswego State	8-2	LOST at Oneonta State, 52-90
#21	87	Scranton	10-2	won at Drew, 69-62; 01/07 vs. #11 Susquehanna; 01/09 at Goucher
#22	80	Tufts	9-2	won at Mass-Boston, 74-61; 01/08 vs. Bowdoin; 01/09 vs. T#36 Colby
#23	73	Trine	10-2	LOST at Calvin, 70-74; 01/09 vs. Kalamazoo
#24	69	Brooklyn	11-2	won at York (N.Y.), 80-46; 01/08 vs. Baruch
#25	68	Whitman	10-2	LOST at #2 Whitworth, 89-95; 01/09 at Pacific

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
T#26	52	Lancaster Bible	8-0	01/07 at Penn College; 01/09 vs. Penn State-Abington
T#26	52	St. Norbert	10-2	def. Lawrence, 82-62
#28	50	Pacific Lutheran	9-2	01/08 at Linfield; 01/09 at George Fox
#29	47	Virginia Wesleyan	8-4	won at Shenandoah, 89-78; 01/09 vs. T#53 Roanoke
#30	39	Washington U.	8-3	01/09 vs. #16 Chicago
#31	36	St. John's	10-1	won at Macalester, 81-56; 01/09 at Concordia-Moorhead
T#32	30	Albertus Magnus	7-1	won at Anna Maria, 108-93; 01/07 vs. Lasell; 01/09 at St. Joseph's (Maine)
T#32	30	Trinity (Conn.)	7-4	LOST at Plattsburgh State, 73-81; 01/07 vs. Elms; 01/10 vs. Williams
T#34	28	Bethel	9-1	won at St. Olaf, 76-66; 01/09 at #4 St. Thomas
T#34	28	East Texas Baptist	8-3	01/07 at Howard Payne; 01/09 at Sul Ross State
T#36	21	Colby	10-1	won at Pine Manor, 115-97; 01/08 at Bates; 01/09 at #22 Tufts
T#36	21	North Central (Ill.)	9-4	def. Millikin, 83-54; 01/09 at Wheaton (Ill.)
#38	20	Wesleyan	11-1	won at Rhode Island College, 79-77; 01/08 vs. Middlebury; 01/09 vs. Hamilton
T#39	15	William Paterson	7-5	LOST at Kean, 73-78; 01/09 vs. Rutgers-Newark
T#39	15	Texas Lutheran	9-3	01/08 vs. University of Dallas; 01/09 vs. Austin
#41	14	Delaware Valley	11-2	IDLE
#42	11	Northwestern (Minn.)	10-2	01/08 at Bethany Lutheran
T#43	10	Stockton	9-4	LOST to New Jersey City, 69-74; 01/09 at Ramapo
T#43	10	Eastern Nazarene	9-2	LOST to Salve Regina, 74-83; 01/07 at Wentworth; 01/09 vs. Nichols
T#45	9	Alma	8-4	won at Kalamazoo, 86-85; 01/09 vs. Adrian
T#45	9	Salisbury	9-3	def. York (Pa.), 75-56; 01/09 at Mary Washington
T#47	8	Johnson and Wales	10-1	def. St. Joseph's (Maine), 93-51; 01/07 vs. Rivier; 01/09 vs. Norwich
T#47	8	Southern Vermont	8-3	LOST at Middlebury, 74-92; 01/09 vs. Mitchell
#49	7	MIT	9-2	def. Clark, 56-51; 01/09 at #12 WPI
T#50	6	Babson	7-4	def. Emerson, 80-63; 01/09 vs. Springfield
T#50	6	Buffalo State	8-2	won at Brockport State, 81-73; 01/08 at Potsdam State; 01/09 at Plattsburgh State
#52	5	Juniata	10-2	def. Goucher, 69-62; 01/07 at Elizabethtown; 01/09 at Eastern
T#53	3	Carroll	10-1	def. Ripon, 72-66; 01/09 at Cornell
T#53	3	Centre	8-4	01/08 vs. Rhodes; 01/10 vs. Hendrix
T#53	3	Roanoke	11-1	won at Washington and Lee, 105-96; 01/09 at #29 Virginia Wesleyan
T#56	2	Chapman	8-2	def. Pomona-Pitzer, 73-62
T#56	2	Geneseo	6-2	LOST to Fredonia State, 86-89; 01/08 vs. Oneonta State; 01/09 vs. New Paltz State
---	---	Hiram	10-2	def. DePauw, 91-60; 01/09 at Wittenberg

I added Hiram (http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Hiram/men/2015-16/index), having seen them play twice at Bluffton's holiday tournament. Note that their two losses were 30-100 to DI Akron, and 67-71 at Allegheny.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2016, 10:34:27 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 06, 2016, 10:20:54 PM

I only watched the last two minutes and OT, but is it just me or did Elmhurst actually look like the better team out there? Not just played better, but if I didn't know which team was which, I would've picked the Bluejays as the higher ranked team.

I watched the whole game... very evenly matched. I don't think the last two minutes were a testament of how good either team was compared to the other. Really had to see the entire thing (archive might be available?).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 07, 2016, 01:45:23 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2016, 08:42:53 PM
When I say "on the radar" it is a catch-all for every team I am tracking and considering for the Top 25, but isn't on my ballot. There are teams on my ballot and on my radar... nothing more than that. So you can think I am not respecting NCC all you want, but in reality, they are on my radar and being considered. I just haven't pulled the trigger as of yet.

If you don't give credit where it's deserved, that certainly seems like disrespect.
And this can't be eliminated by saying that although they might not be on your ballot, they're on your "radar."
Evidence suggests that the trigger lock needs to removed from your gun. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 07, 2016, 01:47:17 AM

Quote from: sac on January 06, 2016, 12:58:10 PM
Mt Union has been playing most of this season without one of their key contributors Kyle Scelza. Pretty sure he was expected to be a starter this year. Scelza returned to play only sparingly in Mounts last two games, that's adding a good 40% 3pt shooter to an already good 3pt shooting team.

I would guess Dave and the other voters have been made aware of that.

Further info, Mt Union was/is/has been actually missing two players. DeAllen Jackson has also been hurt, he's actually the starter that's been missing. Scelza comes off the bench.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 07, 2016, 09:03:22 AM

Quote from: AndOne on January 07, 2016, 01:45:23 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2016, 08:42:53 PM
When I say "on the radar" it is a catch-all for every team I am tracking and considering for the Top 25, but isn't on my ballot. There are teams on my ballot and on my radar... nothing more than that. So you can think I am not respecting NCC all you want, but in reality, they are on my radar and being considered. I just haven't pulled the trigger as of yet.

If you don't give credit where it's deserved, that certainly seems like disrespect.
And this can't be eliminated by saying that although they might not be on your ballot, they're on your "radar."
Evidence suggests that the trigger lock needs to removed from your gun. ;)

And evidence suggests unless I vote how you and others want me to... it doesn't matter anyway. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 07, 2016, 09:49:11 AM

I actually find it somewhat amusing that some posters take the D3hoops poll so seriously and how offended some can get, some more than others (a certain banned member comes to mind). Anyway, I've always taken the polls as more "entertainment value" since they are completely subjective and many times made by the uninformed. Granted, Pat sends out information packets and whatnot, but I'm guessing not every voter spends enough time reading up on that stuff, let alone doing their own "homework." As far as I know, the polls have absolutely no bearing on the NCAA selection committee, there's no trophy for finishing 1st in the poll and no one gets a Top 25 Participant ribbon at the end of the year. ;D :P ??? :)

Make your voice heard and join the Poster's Poll, if there is one this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 07, 2016, 10:59:07 AM

TGHIJGSTO!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 07, 2016, 11:01:28 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 07, 2016, 09:49:11 AM
I actually find it somewhat amusing that some posters take the D3hoops poll so seriously and how offended some can get, some more than others (a certain banned member comes to mind). Anyway, I've always taken the polls as more "entertainment value" since they are completely subjective and many times made by the uninformed. Granted, Pat sends out information packets and whatnot, but I'm guessing not every voter spends enough time reading up on that stuff, let alone doing their own "homework." As far as I know, the polls have absolutely no bearing on the NCAA selection committee, there's no trophy for finishing 1st in the poll and no one gets a Top 25 Participant ribbon at the end of the year.

Make your voice heard and join the Poster's Poll, if there is one this year.

What's more, I always liked when good teams were getting overlooked, especially when I was vocal in supporting them early. Good teams eventually get recognized by the polls, but if the polls are late to the party it just makes me look smarter for being on the bandwagon early.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 07, 2016, 02:58:41 PM

We are back to our normal Sunday and Thursday Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) shows tonight! Now that we are getting back into our routine, we get back into the habit of featuring the East, Mid-Atlantic, Great Lakes, and West Regions on Thursday night shows (Northeast, Atlantic, Central, and South Regions on Sunday nights). Tonight, Dave McHugh talks with coaches who are succeeding so far this season thanks to a bit of a youth movement. How those squads are either exceeding early expectations or reloading pretty nicely. Dave also gets an assist from Pat Coleman to help cover the much anticipated men's basketball game between No. 1 Augustana at No. 5 Elmhurst which needed overtime to be decided. And Dave talks about the latest Hoopsville partner - the WBCA. With the WBCA coming onboard with the NABC there needed to be some branding changes. You will hear the change almost immediately.

Watch Hoopsville tonight at 7pm ET: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2015-16/jan7 (http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2015-16/jan3) - a show that had to be pre-recorded tonight due to other commitments.

Guests and/or topics include (in order):
- Pat Coleman, coverage of No. 1 Augie vs. No. 5 Blue Jays
- Ron Rohn, No. 10 Muhlenberg women's coach
- Lindsay Goldblatt, Cal Lutheran women's coach
- Fajri Ansari, Buffalo State men's coach
- Chris Kibler, Hiram men's coach

You can tune into the podcast after the show airs here::
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville (http://www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville)
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087 (https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087)

And don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com (http://www.d3hoopsville.com)
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville (http://www.facebook.com/Hoopsville)
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville (http://www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 07, 2016, 09:06:15 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 07, 2016, 10:59:07 AM
TGHIJGSTO!!!

it can never be said often, or loudly, enough.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pg04 on January 07, 2016, 09:11:49 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 07, 2016, 09:06:15 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 07, 2016, 10:59:07 AM
TGHIJGSTO!!!

it can never be said often, or loudly, enough.

It may be foolish to ask what it means but...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 07, 2016, 09:20:03 PM

Quote from: pg04 on January 07, 2016, 09:11:49 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 07, 2016, 09:06:15 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 07, 2016, 10:59:07 AM
TGHIJGSTO!!!

it can never be said often, or loudly, enough.

It may be foolish to ask what it means but...

We need a wiki or something for all the running gags. Something about how Jack Sikma both is and isn't qualified to be the best d3 player of all time - maybe a crazy subpage about The Roop.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 07, 2016, 09:26:30 PM

Quote from: pg04 on January 07, 2016, 09:11:49 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 07, 2016, 09:06:15 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 07, 2016, 10:59:07 AM
TGHIJGSTO!!!

it can never be said often, or loudly, enough.

It may be foolish to ask what it means but...

A couple(?) of years ago, a wildly over-enthusiastic Richard Stockton supporter kept arguing his team was being grossly disrespected by the poll. In his rabid haste to post, he would go ALL CAPS and mangle words. I no longer recall whether this particular 'word' was even translatable into English in his post (I think it might have been intended as 'things to'), but it has become a standing joke among regulars.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Just Bill on January 07, 2016, 09:35:57 PM

I believe it's supposed to say THINGS TO

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pg04 on January 07, 2016, 09:48:47 PM

Ah, thanks for the explanation. We used to have a lot more crazy posters. Where did they go?? All get banned? :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 07, 2016, 10:35:59 PM

Quote from: pg04 on January 07, 2016, 09:48:47 PM
Ah, thanks for the explanation. We used to have a lot more crazy posters. Where did they go?? All get banned? :P

My understanding is that it take A LOT for Pat to ban anyone. (After all, I'm still here, and I used to be a lot worse than I am now! ;D Plus, of course, the site's advertising income depends on eyeballs.) I suspect that most simply tired of trolldom on this site and moved on to more fervent sites. MOST of us here are 'boringly' civilized! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 07, 2016, 11:03:37 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 07, 2016, 09:26:30 PM
Quote from: pg04 on January 07, 2016, 09:11:49 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 07, 2016, 09:06:15 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 07, 2016, 10:59:07 AM
TGHIJGSTO!!!

it can never be said often, or loudly, enough.

It may be foolish to ask what it means but...

A couple(?) of years ago, a wildly over-enthusiastic Richard Stockton supporter kept arguing his team was being grossly disrespected by the poll. In his rabid haste to post, he would go ALL CAPS and mangle words. I no longer recall whether this particular 'word' was even translatable into English in his post (I think it might have been intended as 'things to'), but it has become a standing joke among regulars.

I went to look as to when this was, but I think Pat deleted all of his posts (those related to them)... OR blocking him did that. I think it was two seasons ago. He went after me on Facebook, believe it or not (we are not friends, he trolled me on Messager) - that got him a block and a report to Facebook. Not a word since.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 07, 2016, 11:13:54 PM

I actually had it "bookmarked" somewhere, or I left myself a note as to when it started. I believe he was trying to say something like, "Don't just say things to say things."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 08, 2016, 12:12:36 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 07, 2016, 09:06:15 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 07, 2016, 10:59:07 AM
TGHIJGSTO!!!

it can never be said often, or loudly, enough.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimageshack.com%2Fa%2Fimg911%2F4097%2FzPrEF3.jpg&hash=bbf2c42fd71c9cf21f6583eab08012d10985f37d)

Not sure if that can be blown up at all... so....

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimageshack.com%2Fa%2Fimg908%2F4157%2FJx2e9D.jpg&hash=a36e0c3eb48114c09786bb186194ef0fbcec5325)

Saw this on the road a while back and thought that it needed to be shared!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 08, 2016, 12:59:00 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 07, 2016, 10:35:59 PM
Quote from: pg04 on January 07, 2016, 09:48:47 PM
Ah, thanks for the explanation. We used to have a lot more crazy posters. Where did they go?? All get banned? :P

My understanding is that it take A LOT for Pat to ban anyone. (After all, I'm still here, and I used to be a lot worse than I am now! ;D Plus, of course, the site's advertising income depends on eyeballs.) I suspect that most simply tired of trolldom on this site and moved on to more fervent sites. MOST of us here are 'boringly' civilized! :D

Don't sell yourself short, Chuck.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 08, 2016, 01:08:22 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 08, 2016, 12:59:00 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 07, 2016, 10:35:59 PM
Quote from: pg04 on January 07, 2016, 09:48:47 PM
Ah, thanks for the explanation. We used to have a lot more crazy posters. Where did they go?? All get banned? :P

My understanding is that it take A LOT for Pat to ban anyone. (After all, I'm still here, and I used to be a lot worse than I am now! ;D Plus, of course, the site's advertising income depends on eyeballs.) I suspect that most simply tired of trolldom on this site and moved on to more fervent sites. MOST of us here are 'boringly' civilized! :D

Don't sell yourself short, Chuck.

The Guru hasn't come after me in years like in the days he gave me my name! ;D

Either he has mellowed or I have - I suspect both.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pg04 on January 08, 2016, 01:27:00 AM

Believe it or not or not, I had my own run ins with the guru on here way back when I was a student at Brockport. I can recall getting either suspended or blocked briefly in the previous incarnation of the board. It's been so long I don't remember exactly why.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 08, 2016, 10:08:11 AM

Heck... I got my START by having run ins with the guru at the VERY beginning of these boards. My reward? He quoted me on the Post Up graphic for years. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 08, 2016, 02:04:08 PM

I believe all of the above is true.

Indeed, something Dave said became the Posting Up graphic quote, although I used pictures of Andy Panko and later Luke Moo to illustrate. It does take a lot to get a poster banned these days -- partially because you folks as a community do a good job setting good examples and/or keeping people in line. I don't remember banning pg04 but that is obviously a *long* time ago and he and I are Facebook friends and such.

I think I've definitely mellowed. I get amused by reading the 2005 posts that are on this board -- at least, until I cringe. I'm 43 now -- not necessarily feeling my age because I'm not sure what 43 is supposed to feel like, but I definitely have tried to have a much thicker skin and a slower trigger finger.

Also, because I no longer need to come in and manually delete posts in order to keep the board from overloading the server, I spend less time on D3boards now. More time on Twitter. Definitely the nature of the beast these days.

D3boards has never been a huge part of our ad revenue -- it runs a little bit less than 10%, even though it generally provides about 25% of our page views. Just the nature of the beast, really. Forums never provide high ad rates. But its value to the network is much greater than 10% and it isn't going anywhere.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pg04 on January 08, 2016, 02:13:28 PM

Yeah it was something like 2002 or so. Naive college student and all that ;D. I am not sure why it all happened but I do recall emailing to apologize. Unless I've completely constructed the memory which I guess is possible with me :).

There used to be a lot of doozies here and I am not sure I can blame the quick trigger finger. I think all us now old timers have mellowed. ;)

I've enjoyed getting to know Pat virtually over the years, though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 08, 2016, 04:03:24 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 07, 2016, 09:26:30 PM
Quote from: pg04 on January 07, 2016, 09:11:49 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 07, 2016, 09:06:15 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 07, 2016, 10:59:07 AM
TGHIJGSTO!!!

it can never be said often, or loudly, enough.

It may be foolish to ask what it means but...

A couple(?) of years ago, a wildly over-enthusiastic Richard Stockton supporter kept arguing his team was being grossly disrespected by the poll. In his rabid haste to post, he would go ALL CAPS and mangle words. I no longer recall whether this particular 'word' was even translatable into English in his post (I think it might have been intended as 'things to'), but it has become a standing joke among regulars.

David Collinge memorably referred to the offending poster, hplc2222, as a "Romanian spambot". The enthusiasm of hplc2222, a brand-new poster at the time, was contagious (at least for awhile), and his dedication to researching every D3 team's W-L was admirable. But his incoherence, combined with his bizarre delusion that D-Mac was rolling in the big bucks as a D3 media celebrity, spelled his eventual end via banishment ... but not before we all had a ringside seat to such hysteria as:

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 09:02:33 PM
Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 09:00:44 PM
yes i dcid, this is a multi billionh dollar year indudtry, ... if you cant see it, you need glasses

There are not a billion dollars in Division III basketball, sir.

That was a great moment in d3boards.com history, right up there with the best of the D3 Championship Belt^TM thread and the time that the board regulars decided to build a quote pyramid in one of the multi-regional rooms.

Quote from: John Gleich on January 08, 2016, 12:12:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 07, 2016, 09:06:15 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 07, 2016, 10:59:07 AM
TGHIJGSTO!!!

it can never be said often, or loudly, enough.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimageshack.com%2Fa%2Fimg911%2F4097%2FzPrEF3.jpg&hash=bbf2c42fd71c9cf21f6583eab08012d10985f37d)

Not sure if that can be blown up at all... so....

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimageshack.com%2Fa%2Fimg908%2F4157%2FJx2e9D.jpg&hash=a36e0c3eb48114c09786bb186194ef0fbcec5325)

Saw this on the road a while back and thought that it needed to be shared!

Nice!

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 07, 2016, 11:13:54 PM
I actually had it "bookmarked" somewhere, or I left myself a note as to when it started. I believe he was trying to say something like, "Don't just say things to say things."

Here is the actual quote (which linguistic archaeologists have theorized was intended to read, "Don't just say things to say things, Richard Stockton is as good as 15-0"):

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 11:28:59 PM
DONT JUSDT SAY TGHIJGSTO SAY THINGS, RICHARD STOCKMTON IS AS GOOD AS 15-0

It's even better in the original context, because you can see how it reads as a demand to not merely say "TGHIJGSTO" in reply, but to say "things" as well. Naturally, resident wisenheimer David Collinge immediately replied to hplc2222's post in a defiant manner:

Quote from: David Collinge on January 19, 2014, 11:50:06 PM
TGHIJGSTO!

I like to think of it as the d3boards.com equivalent to General Anthony McAuliffe's reply of "Nuts!" to the German demand that he surrender the besieged city of Bastogne during the Battle of the Bulge.

Another nice aspect of that original post is that it allows me to occasionally think of our overzealous friend's favorite school as "Richard Stockmton". Of course, he also had a couple of other fat-fingered episodes regarding the home school of the Ospreys:

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 03:29:35 PM
From an outsider looking in, it may look like Stockiton is doing it on offense, but that is far from the truth

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 08:45:03 PM
they havnt had a win since stocktopn made the finals

"Stockmton" or "Stockiton" or "Stocktopn"? You decide. ;)

Some of his other posts were masterpieces of gibberish as well:

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 04:35:57 PM
there are 43 confersnces, 416 d3 teams, stcktons made the final 4 twice in 87 season,.. it would take i estimate 3200 before every team in d3 gets into the final 4

so what are you talking about

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 05:11:13 PM
i realize i am one person in the windwebsite, and a few stranglers like me

... but my favorite remains:

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 08:56:15 PM
oh, it takes a person, really??????????????? well that persoin should not have a job of it it is 2 hpours latewter and it still says 450-409,... you thing these peopkme deserve to get paid gor theie qoute unquote job

come on man

what if you were making a medicaqtion in aq phrama, and you boss waqs like, oh werll , fill olut the aperwork when you caqn

lol

are you seriopus?

I felt a little badly about picking on hplc2222 at first. After all, he was obviously putting a lot of time into constructing his own ballots while painstakingly assembling lists of all of D3's one-loss teams, two-loss teams, etc., even though he didn't seem to be putting much effort into using Spellcheck. Then I found out that he was harassing D-Mac off the boards. After that, the gloves were off in terms of making fun of hplc2222, as far as I was concerned.

Of course, hplc2222 firmly believed that D-Mac had it coming to him. After all:

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 09:26:45 PM
to totally ignore the njac on hoopseville, is notr tight,

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 05:22:28 PM
dave, we have been through this before,.......

you are a mermber of the mecdia,... i understand you like to tsalk about d3 basketball

That's almost a compelling argument. Many's the time that I, too, have thought that D-Mac was notr tight, as far as mermbers of the mecdia are concerned.

Even Darryl "Perfect Karma" Nester, the politest man on the boards this side of Ralph Turner, got in on the fun:

Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 24, 2014, 07:48:01 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 23, 2014, 11:50:19 PM

I know they've lost seven games already, but I would be absolutely terrified to play Mary Hardin-Baylor right now. Best seven loss team in d3, I think.
I believe that the established precedent on this board is that, if you are going to make such a statement, you must follow it up with detailed statistics. Please begin with a list of all teams in D3 with 7 losses, and your analysis of the quality of those losses. You can then move on to telling us why MHB deserves to be considered the best of that group. (And perhaps even better than some of the six- and five-loss teams. We'll need a list of those, too.) If, at some point, you feel obliged to post increasingly incoherent comments, and/or post in all caps, we would certainly understand.

But this might be my favorite dig at our posting-challenged friend from Dick Stockton:

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 08:45:03 PM
i understand uw stevens point and the one or even 2 loss teams right now, have real shot at the championship,......

but of the 42 teams in the nation with no more than 3 losses, 33 had votes ,.. 9 did not

stockton sits at 32, william paterson at 30

they play each lother saturday

ikt is a bubble game

voters already have them inside, in this

so the winner of the game gets recopgnition

i do get it

usualy one team from the conference njac gets recopgnitrion, and 2 teams get in the ncaa tourney

they havnt had a win since stocktopn made the finals

but

i am not even talki g about that

i am talkingt about at least 1 team, the winnewr of tommorows game, william patterson at stockton,.. maintaining a postion yo at least get a favorable game inj the ncaa tourney

am i really wrong ?

Quote from: iwumichigander on January 24, 2014, 08:51:53 PM
Yes

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 08, 2016, 04:25:06 PM

If I had unlimited free time, I would seriously develop and maintain two Tumblr blogs.

The first would be a blog of GIF files recorded from live streams of Grey Giovanine tearing off his coat and throwing it in to the bench or stands (why no Augustana student has done this is beyond me) and the second would be a blog of every Gregory Sager post that included more than three block quotes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 08, 2016, 04:35:59 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 08, 2016, 04:03:24 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 07, 2016, 09:26:30 PM
Quote from: pg04 on January 07, 2016, 09:11:49 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 07, 2016, 09:06:15 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 07, 2016, 10:59:07 AM
TGHIJGSTO!!!

it can never be said often, or loudly, enough.

It may be foolish to ask what it means but...

A couple(?) of years ago, a wildly over-enthusiastic Richard Stockton supporter kept arguing his team was being grossly disrespected by the poll. In his rabid haste to post, he would go ALL CAPS and mangle words. I no longer recall whether this particular 'word' was even translatable into English in his post (I think it might have been intended as 'things to'), but it has become a standing joke among regulars.

David Collinge memorably referred to the offending poster, hplc2222, as a "Romanian spambot". The enthusiasm of hplc2222, a brand-new poster at the time, was contagious (at least for awhile), and his dedication to researching every D3 team's W-L was admirable. But his incoherence, combined with his bizarre delusion that D-Mac was rolling in the big bucks as a D3 media celebrity, spelled his eventual end via banishment ... but not before we all had a ringside seat to such hysteria as:

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 09:02:33 PM
Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 09:00:44 PM
yes i dcid, this is a multi billionh dollar year indudtry, ... if you cant see it, you need glasses

There are not a billion dollars in Division III basketball, sir.

That was a great moment in d3boards.com history, right up there with the best of the D3 Championship Belt^TM thread and the time that the board regulars decided to build a quote pyramid in one of the multi-regional rooms.

Quote from: John Gleich on January 08, 2016, 12:12:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 07, 2016, 09:06:15 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 07, 2016, 10:59:07 AM
TGHIJGSTO!!!

it can never be said often, or loudly, enough.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimageshack.com%2Fa%2Fimg911%2F4097%2FzPrEF3.jpg&hash=bbf2c42fd71c9cf21f6583eab08012d10985f37d)

Not sure if that can be blown up at all... so....

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimageshack.com%2Fa%2Fimg908%2F4157%2FJx2e9D.jpg&hash=a36e0c3eb48114c09786bb186194ef0fbcec5325)

Saw this on the road a while back and thought that it needed to be shared!

Nice!

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 07, 2016, 11:13:54 PM
I actually had it "bookmarked" somewhere, or I left myself a note as to when it started. I believe he was trying to say something like, "Don't just say things to say things."

Here is the actual quote (which linguistic archaeologists have theorized was intended to read, "Don't just say things to say things, Richard Stockton is as good as 15-0"):

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 11:28:59 PM
DONT JUSDT SAY TGHIJGSTO SAY THINGS, RICHARD STOCKMTON IS AS GOOD AS 15-0

It's even better in the original context, because you can see how it reads as a demand to not merely say "TGHIJGSTO" in reply, but to say "things" as well. Naturally, resident wisenheimer David Collinge immediately replied to hplc2222's post in a defiant manner:

Quote from: David Collinge on January 19, 2014, 11:50:06 PM
TGHIJGSTO!

I like to think of it as the d3boards.com equivalent to General Anthony McAuliffe's reply of "Nuts!" to the German demand that he surrender the besieged city of Bastogne during the Battle of the Bulge.

Another nice aspect of that original post is that it allows me to occasionally think of our overzealous friend's favorite school as "Richard Stockmton". Of course, he also had a couple of other fat-fingered episodes regarding the home school of the Ospreys:

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 03:29:35 PM
From an outsider looking in, it may look like Stockiton is doing it on offense, but that is far from the truth

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 08:45:03 PM
they havnt had a win since stocktopn made the finals

"Stockmton" or "Stockiton" or "Stocktopn"? You decide. ;)

Some of his other posts were masterpieces of gibberish as well:

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 04:35:57 PM
there are 43 confersnces, 416 d3 teams, stcktons made the final 4 twice in 87 season,.. it would take i estimate 3200 before every team in d3 gets into the final 4

so what are you talking about

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 05:11:13 PM
i realize i am one person in the windwebsite, and a few stranglers like me

... but my favorite remains:

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 08:56:15 PM
oh, it takes a person, really??????????????? well that persoin should not have a job of it it is 2 hpours latewter and it still says 450-409,... you thing these peopkme deserve to get paid gor theie qoute unquote job

come on man

what if you were making a medicaqtion in aq phrama, and you boss waqs like, oh werll , fill olut the aperwork when you caqn

lol

are you seriopus?

I felt a little badly about picking on hplc2222 at first. After all, he was obviously putting a lot of time into constructing his own ballots while painstakingly assembling lists of all of D3's one-loss teams, two-loss teams, etc., even though he didn't seem to be putting much effort into using Spellcheck. Then I found out that he was harassing D-Mac off the boards. After that, the gloves were off in terms of making fun of hplc2222, as far as I was concerned.

Of course, hplc2222 firmly believed that D-Mac had it coming to him. After all:

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 09:26:45 PM
to totally ignore the njac on hoopseville, is notr tight,

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 05:22:28 PM
dave, we have been through this before,.......

you are a mermber of the mecdia,... i understand you like to tsalk about d3 basketball

That's almost a compelling argument. Many's the time that I, too, have thought that D-Mac was notr tight, as far as mermbers of the mecdia are concerned.

Even Darryl "Perfect Karma" Nester, the politest man on the boards this side of Ralph Turner, got in on the fun:

Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 24, 2014, 07:48:01 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 23, 2014, 11:50:19 PM

I know they've lost seven games already, but I would be absolutely terrified to play Mary Hardin-Baylor right now. Best seven loss team in d3, I think.
I believe that the established precedent on this board is that, if you are going to make such a statement, you must follow it up with detailed statistics. Please begin with a list of all teams in D3 with 7 losses, and your analysis of the quality of those losses. You can then move on to telling us why MHB deserves to be considered the best of that group. (And perhaps even better than some of the six- and five-loss teams. We'll need a list of those, too.) If, at some point, you feel obliged to post increasingly incoherent comments, and/or post in all caps, we would certainly understand.

But this might be my favorite dig at our posting-challenged friend from Dick Stockton:

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 08:45:03 PM
i understand uw stevens point and the one or even 2 loss teams right now, have real shot at the championship,......

but of the 42 teams in the nation with no more than 3 losses, 33 had votes ,.. 9 did not

stockton sits at 32, william paterson at 30

they play each lother saturday

ikt is a bubble game

voters already have them inside, in this

so the winner of the game gets recopgnition

i do get it

usualy one team from the conference njac gets recopgnitrion, and 2 teams get in the ncaa tourney

they havnt had a win since stocktopn made the finals

but

i am not even talki g about that

i am talkingt about at least 1 team, the winnewr of tommorows game, william patterson at stockton,.. maintaining a postion yo at least get a favorable game inj the ncaa tourney

am i really wrong ?

Quote from: iwumichigander on January 24, 2014, 08:51:53 PM
Yes

OUTSTANDING! I had forgotten about a few of these... I am sitting here cracking up next to my very sick wife (as we sit at the ER)... I actually feel bad and need to move on from this page quickly. LOL

His harassment off these boards... was very real... and way over the line.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 08, 2016, 04:39:07 PM

I remember getting a LOT of joy out of the seemingly harmless question "are you seriopus?"

Dave, best wishes for the best outcome for your wife.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 08, 2016, 04:41:11 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 08, 2016, 04:39:07 PM
I remember getting a LOT of joy out of the seemingly harmless question "are you seriopus?"

I am seriopus, and stop calling me Shirpley

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pg04 on January 08, 2016, 04:42:59 PM

Sager, I gave you +k yesterday but will again as soon as I can. Thanks for the effort! That's great.

Dave, thoughts to you and your wife.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 08, 2016, 04:52:31 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 08, 2016, 04:39:07 PM
I remember getting a LOT of joy out of the seemingly harmless question "are you seriopus?"

Dave, best wishes for the best outcome for your wife.

+k I'd forgotten all about 'seriopus' - that was all the rage for awhile.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 08, 2016, 05:03:28 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 08, 2016, 04:39:07 PM
I remember getting a LOT of joy out of the seemingly harmless question "are you seriopus?"

Dave, best wishes for the best outcome for your wife.

Ditto to both comments.

Quote from: sac on January 08, 2016, 04:41:11 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 08, 2016, 04:39:07 PM
I remember getting a LOT of joy out of the seemingly harmless question "are you seriopus?"

I am seriopus, and stop calling me Shirpley

(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/ba/b4/67/bab467e7fe840c843a9d15088e2494f5.jpg)

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 08, 2016, 04:52:31 PM
+k I'd forgotten all about 'seriopus' - that was all the rage for awhile.

It was the gift that keeps on giving.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 08, 2016, 05:11:38 PM

I also gave Greg a plus K yesterday over the mascot hairdos on the Belt^TM board. #1900 It was. But I will have to give you another one for bringing this thread back from the dead. It was several weeks of highly entertaining drama on the Top 25 board and deserves a second run. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on January 08, 2016, 05:13:43 PM

Thank you, thank you that really was quite the memory jogger. Work was asking why I was laughing so hard. +k to you Mr. Sager! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 08, 2016, 05:24:24 PM

Oh my... it is almost that much better when you can see all of the gold without the fluff.

Do you remember how much this board scrolled?

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 08, 2016, 02:04:08 PM
I get amused by reading the 2005 posts that are on this board -- at least, until I cringe.

I just read a number of my posts from the off-season between 04-05 and 05-06... yikes, I was wordy and overused parentheses... (and ellipses).

Talk about cringe!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 08, 2016, 06:04:30 PM

Thanks for the laughs and memories, Greg. I was a month off. I was looking from the beginning of February forward. I FB'd Pat and asked if he deleted all that and he thought he might have, so I stopped looking.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 08, 2016, 06:55:05 PM

Quote from: John Gleich on January 08, 2016, 05:24:24 PM
Oh my... it is almost that much better when you can see all of the gold without the fluff.

Do you remember how much this board scrolled?

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 08, 2016, 02:04:08 PM
I get amused by reading the 2005 posts that are on this board -- at least, until I cringe.

I just read a number of my posts from the off-season between 04-05 and 05-06... yikes, I was wordy and overused parentheses... (and ellipses).

Talk about cringe!

Yeah, I hated when I had to teach a night class on conference game day - most of the good stuff had already disappeared forever before I got home! :(

When Pat first updated, I asked him how many pages he'd be able to keep, and he replied he hoped for about 25. Fortunately technology kept evolving and now he rarely if ever has to delete anything (for space reasons, at least ;D).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 08, 2016, 11:49:17 PM

Thank you gentlemen... things turned out better than feared. Though, one of the crazier days in an ER. She is recovering, but it will be slow. Turned out to be nothing serious per concerns at the beginning of the day. But still enough that she needs to slow things down. But considering the kids were in school and then picked up by the grandmother... we called it an impromptu date night. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 09, 2016, 09:18:49 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 08, 2016, 11:49:17 PM
Thank you gentlemen... things turned out better than feared. Though, one of the crazier days in an ER. She is recovering, but it will be slow. Turned out to be nothing serious per concerns at the beginning of the day. But still enough that she needs to slow things down. But considering the kids were in school and then picked up by the grandmother... we called it an impromptu date night. LOL

Glad to hear things worked out. Date nights are always welcome, but not if they are spent in the ER. I'm assuming you got out after you left the ER.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 09, 2016, 10:02:02 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 09, 2016, 09:18:49 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 08, 2016, 11:49:17 PM
Thank you gentlemen... things turned out better than feared. Though, one of the crazier days in an ER. She is recovering, but it will be slow. Turned out to be nothing serious per concerns at the beginning of the day. But still enough that she needs to slow things down. But considering the kids were in school and then picked up by the grandmother... we called it an impromptu date night. LOL

Glad to hear things worked out. Date nights are always welcome, but not if they are spent in the ER. I'm assuming you got out after you left the ER.

Ha! No. We got home after 10 - having spent roughly 8 hours at the ER. Wife and I were exhausted (mine based mainly on the severe sleep deprivation I have been dealing with for the last six months).. so she went to bed and I sat on the couch scrolling through scores and the boards. Ah the life.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 09, 2016, 11:59:13 PM

UWSP dropped their second straight WIAC game and their 6th game of the year. They were likely already going to drop out after the loss to Eau Claire on Wed.

Point has been ranked in 50 straight top 25 polls and 129/131. It will be 129/132 this week (and barring a substantial turn around, not likely for a return this season).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 10, 2016, 05:15:48 PM

Believe it or not, but we are pretty much halfway through the 2015-16 season and there are plenty of teams still surprising and records being rewritten.

Tonight on Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) we chat with the fourth person to reach the 900 wins in men's college basketball, a woman who keeps herself very busy even when she isn't coaching, and several other teams who are surprising everyone by leading their conference races.

Hoopsville hits the air at 7:00 PM ET and you can watch it here: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2015-16/jan10 (http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2015-16/jan10)

Guests include ( in order):
- Glenn Robinson, #17 F&M men's coach - won career game 900 Saturday
- Pat Manning, #18 Williams women's coach - WBCA Center Court segment
- Amanda Crockett, North Park women's coach
- Mac Brown, New Jersey City men's coach
- Kendal Wallace, LaGrange men's coach

You can tune into the podcast after the show airs here::
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville (http://www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville)
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087 (https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087)

And don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com (http://www.d3hoopsville.com)
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville (http://www.facebook.com/Hoopsville)
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville (http://www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 10, 2016, 05:26:21 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

One loss at the top ... and then a bunch of losses (32 of them) starting at #19.

As noted earlier, I added Hiram at the end as a "team worth watching."

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Augustana	13-1	LOST at #5 Elmhurst, 75-77; won at North Park, 79-66
#2	596	Whitworth	13-0	def. #25 Whitman, 95-89; won at Pacific, 62-50
#3	538	Hope	12-1	def. Albion, 68-65; won at Olivet, 79-64
#4	530	St. Thomas	10-1	won at Gustavus Adolphus, 71-53; def. T#34 Bethel, 69-66
#5	510	Elmhurst	13-1	def. #1 Augustana, 77-75; won at Millikin, 73-65
#6	505	Benedictine	14-0	def. Dominican, 110-78; def. Wisconsin Lutheran, 81-67
#7	470	John Carroll	13-0	def. Capital, 75-74; won at Muskingum, 97-91
#8	457	Ohio Wesleyan	12-1	won at Wittenberg, 77-70; won at Allegheny, 89-77
#9	411	Amherst	11-1	def. Eastern Connecticut, 68-65; def. Williams, 78-66
#10	339	Marietta	11-2	def. Ohio Northern, 72-71
#11	333	Susquehanna	14-0	won at #21 Scranton, 78-63; def. Merchant Marine, 91-72
#12	329	WPI	12-1	won at Springfield, 69-56; def. #49 MIT, 70-62
#13	317	Christopher Newport	12-1	won at Penn State-Harrisburg, 77-65; def. Wesley, 81-68
#14	315	New York University	10-0	won at Wells, 89-67; def. Brandeis, 69-67
#15	224	UW-Whitewater	11-2	won at UW-Stout, 75-59; def. #19 UW-Stevens Point, 69-63
#16	197	Chicago	10-2	won at #30 Washington U., 70-69
#17	154	Franklin and Marshall	10-2	won at McDaniel, 59-43; def. Swarthmore, 57-54
#18	107	Mount Union	10-3	def. Heidelberg, 104-80; won at Wilmington, 82-79
#19	103	UW-Stevens Point	7-6	LOST at UW-Eau Claire, 59-63; LOST at #15 UW-Whitewater, 63-69
#20	88	Oswego State	8-2	LOST at Oneonta State, 52-90
#21	87	Scranton	11-3	won at Drew, 69-62; LOST to #11 Susquehanna, 63-78; won at Goucher, 78-77
#22	80	Tufts	11-2	won at Mass-Boston, 74-61; def. Bowdoin, 102-69; def. T#36 Colby, 92-65
#23	73	Trine	11-2	LOST at Calvin, 70-74; def. Kalamazoo, 77-59
#24	69	Brooklyn	11-3	won at York (N.Y.), 80-46; LOST to Baruch, 89-97
#25	68	Whitman	11-2	LOST at #2 Whitworth, 89-95; won at Pacific, 91-74

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
T#26	52	Lancaster Bible	10-0	won at Penn College, 109-52; def. Penn State-Abington, 108-60
T#26	52	St. Norbert	10-2	def. Lawrence, 82-62
#28	50	Pacific Lutheran	9-4	LOST at Linfield, 51-53; LOST at George Fox, 74-82
#29	47	Virginia Wesleyan	8-5	won at Shenandoah, 89-78; LOST to T#53 Roanoke, 84-93
#30	39	Washington U.	8-4	LOST to #16 Chicago, 69-70
#31	36	St. John's	10-2	won at Macalester, 81-56; LOST at Concordia-Moorhead, 65-83
T#32	30	Albertus Magnus	8-2	won at Anna Maria, 108-93; LOST to Lasell, 81-94; won at St. Joseph's (Maine), 56-52
T#32	30	Trinity (Conn.)	9-4	LOST at Plattsburgh State, 73-81; def. Elms, 92-63; def. Williams, 76-75
T#34	28	Bethel	9-2	won at St. Olaf, 76-66; LOST at #4 St. Thomas, 66-69
T#34	28	East Texas Baptist	9-4	LOST at Howard Payne, 65-67; won at Sul Ross State, 67-62
T#36	21	Colby	10-3	won at Pine Manor, 115-97; LOST at Bates, 69-73; LOST at #22 Tufts, 65-92
T#36	21	North Central (Ill.)	10-4	def. Millikin, 83-54; won at Wheaton (Ill.), 71-62
#38	20	Wesleyan	12-2	won at Rhode Island College, 79-77; LOST to Middlebury, 76-86; def. Hamilton, 82-76
T#39	15	William Paterson	7-6	LOST at Kean, 73-78; LOST to Rutgers-Newark, 65-78
T#39	15	Texas Lutheran	11-3	def. University of Dallas, 73-72; def. Austin, 96-93
#41	14	Delaware Valley	11-2	IDLE
#42	11	Northwestern (Minn.)	12-2	won at Bethany Lutheran, 84-66; won at Martin Luther, 97-71
T#43	10	Stockton	9-5	LOST to New Jersey City, 69-74; LOST at Ramapo, 64-70
T#43	10	Eastern Nazarene	9-4	LOST to Salve Regina, 74-83; LOST at Wentworth, 58-80; LOST to Nichols, 67-79
T#45	9	Alma	9-4	won at Kalamazoo, 86-85; def. Adrian, 85-66
T#45	9	Salisbury	10-3	def. York (Pa.), 75-56; won at Mary Washington, 81-70
T#47	8	Johnson and Wales	12-1	def. St. Joseph's (Maine), 93-51; def. Rivier, 91-53; def. Norwich, 84-48
T#47	8	Southern Vermont	9-3	LOST at Middlebury, 74-92; def. Mitchell, 103-87
#49	7	MIT	9-3	def. Clark, 56-51; LOST at #12 WPI, 62-70
T#50	6	Babson	8-4	def. Emerson, 80-63; def. Springfield, 91-76
T#50	6	Buffalo State	9-3	won at Brockport State, 81-73; won at Potsdam State, 84-78; LOST at Plattsburgh State, 91-98
#52	5	Juniata	11-3	def. Goucher, 69-62; won at Elizabethtown, 60-46; LOST at Eastern, 68-73
T#53	3	Carroll	11-1	def. Ripon, 72-66; won at Cornell, 59-55
T#53	3	Centre	10-4	def. Rhodes, 56-33; def. Hendrix, 77-74
T#53	3	Roanoke	12-1	won at Washington and Lee, 105-96; won at #29 Virginia Wesleyan, 93-84
T#56	2	Chapman	8-2	def. Pomona-Pitzer, 73-62
T#56	2	Geneseo	7-3	LOST to Fredonia State, 86-89; LOST to Oneonta State, 65-76; def. New Paltz State, 71-67
---	---	Hiram	11-2	def. DePauw, 91-60; won at Wittenberg, 72-68

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 10, 2016, 06:52:57 PM

Does Hope's #3 position in the poll get a rethink?

Hope gained almost 300 poll votes moving from #16 pre-season to #5 in week 1 based largely on their win at Stevens Point who is now 7-6 on the year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 10, 2016, 07:42:05 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 08, 2016, 04:03:24 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 07, 2016, 09:26:30 PM
Quote from: pg04 on January 07, 2016, 09:11:49 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 07, 2016, 09:06:15 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 07, 2016, 10:59:07 AM
TGHIJGSTO!!!

it can never be said often, or loudly, enough.

It may be foolish to ask what it means but...

A couple(?) of years ago, a wildly over-enthusiastic Richard Stockton supporter kept arguing his team was being grossly disrespected by the poll. In his rabid haste to post, he would go ALL CAPS and mangle words. I no longer recall whether this particular 'word' was even translatable into English in his post (I think it might have been intended as 'things to'), but it has become a standing joke among regulars.

David Collinge memorably referred to the offending poster, hplc2222, as a "Romanian spambot". The enthusiasm of hplc2222, a brand-new poster at the time, was contagious (at least for awhile), and his dedication to researching every D3 team's W-L was admirable. But his incoherence, combined with his bizarre delusion that D-Mac was rolling in the big bucks as a D3 media celebrity, spelled his eventual end via banishment ... but not before we all had a ringside seat to such hysteria as:

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 27, 2014, 09:02:33 PM
Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 09:00:44 PM
yes i dcid, this is a multi billionh dollar year indudtry, ... if you cant see it, you need glasses

There are not a billion dollars in Division III basketball, sir.

That was a great moment in d3boards.com history, right up there with the best of the D3 Championship Belt^TM thread and the time that the board regulars decided to build a quote pyramid in one of the multi-regional rooms.

Quote from: John Gleich on January 08, 2016, 12:12:36 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 07, 2016, 09:06:15 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 07, 2016, 10:59:07 AM
TGHIJGSTO!!!

it can never be said often, or loudly, enough.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimageshack.com%2Fa%2Fimg911%2F4097%2FzPrEF3.jpg&hash=bbf2c42fd71c9cf21f6583eab08012d10985f37d)

Not sure if that can be blown up at all... so....

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimageshack.com%2Fa%2Fimg908%2F4157%2FJx2e9D.jpg&hash=a36e0c3eb48114c09786bb186194ef0fbcec5325)

Saw this on the road a while back and thought that it needed to be shared!

Nice!

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 07, 2016, 11:13:54 PM
I actually had it "bookmarked" somewhere, or I left myself a note as to when it started. I believe he was trying to say something like, "Don't just say things to say things."

Here is the actual quote (which linguistic archaeologists have theorized was intended to read, "Don't just say things to say things, Richard Stockton is as good as 15-0"):

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 11:28:59 PM
DONT JUSDT SAY TGHIJGSTO SAY THINGS, RICHARD STOCKMTON IS AS GOOD AS 15-0

It's even better in the original context, because you can see how it reads as a demand to not merely say "TGHIJGSTO" in reply, but to say "things" as well. Naturally, resident wisenheimer David Collinge immediately replied to hplc2222's post in a defiant manner:

Quote from: David Collinge on January 19, 2014, 11:50:06 PM
TGHIJGSTO!

I like to think of it as the d3boards.com equivalent to General Anthony McAuliffe's reply of "Nuts!" to the German demand that he surrender the besieged city of Bastogne during the Battle of the Bulge.

Another nice aspect of that original post is that it allows me to occasionally think of our overzealous friend's favorite school as "Richard Stockmton". Of course, he also had a couple of other fat-fingered episodes regarding the home school of the Ospreys:

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 03:29:35 PM
From an outsider looking in, it may look like Stockiton is doing it on offense, but that is far from the truth

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 08:45:03 PM
they havnt had a win since stocktopn made the finals

"Stockmton" or "Stockiton" or "Stocktopn"? You decide. ;)

Some of his other posts were masterpieces of gibberish as well:

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 19, 2014, 04:35:57 PM
there are 43 confersnces, 416 d3 teams, stcktons made the final 4 twice in 87 season,.. it would take i estimate 3200 before every team in d3 gets into the final 4

so what are you talking about

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 05:11:13 PM
i realize i am one person in the windwebsite, and a few stranglers like me

... but my favorite remains:

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 08:56:15 PM
oh, it takes a person, really??????????????? well that persoin should not have a job of it it is 2 hpours latewter and it still says 450-409,... you thing these peopkme deserve to get paid gor theie qoute unquote job

come on man

what if you were making a medicaqtion in aq phrama, and you boss waqs like, oh werll , fill olut the aperwork when you caqn

lol

are you seriopus?

I felt a little badly about picking on hplc2222 at first. After all, he was obviously putting a lot of time into constructing his own ballots while painstakingly assembling lists of all of D3's one-loss teams, two-loss teams, etc., even though he didn't seem to be putting much effort into using Spellcheck. Then I found out that he was harassing D-Mac off the boards. After that, the gloves were off in terms of making fun of hplc2222, as far as I was concerned.

Of course, hplc2222 firmly believed that D-Mac had it coming to him. After all:

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 09:26:45 PM
to totally ignore the njac on hoopseville, is notr tight,

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 05:22:28 PM
dave, we have been through this before,.......

you are a mermber of the mecdia,... i understand you like to tsalk about d3 basketball

That's almost a compelling argument. Many's the time that I, too, have thought that D-Mac was notr tight, as far as mermbers of the mecdia are concerned.

Even Darryl "Perfect Karma" Nester, the politest man on the boards this side of Ralph Turner, got in on the fun:

Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 24, 2014, 07:48:01 AM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 23, 2014, 11:50:19 PM

I know they've lost seven games already, but I would be absolutely terrified to play Mary Hardin-Baylor right now. Best seven loss team in d3, I think.
I believe that the established precedent on this board is that, if you are going to make such a statement, you must follow it up with detailed statistics. Please begin with a list of all teams in D3 with 7 losses, and your analysis of the quality of those losses. You can then move on to telling us why MHB deserves to be considered the best of that group. (And perhaps even better than some of the six- and five-loss teams. We'll need a list of those, too.) If, at some point, you feel obliged to post increasingly incoherent comments, and/or post in all caps, we would certainly understand.

But this might be my favorite dig at our posting-challenged friend from Dick Stockton:

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 08:45:03 PM
i understand uw stevens point and the one or even 2 loss teams right now, have real shot at the championship,......

but of the 42 teams in the nation with no more than 3 losses, 33 had votes ,.. 9 did not

stockton sits at 32, william paterson at 30

they play each lother saturday

ikt is a bubble game

voters already have them inside, in this

so the winner of the game gets recopgnition

i do get it

usualy one team from the conference njac gets recopgnitrion, and 2 teams get in the ncaa tourney

they havnt had a win since stocktopn made the finals

but

i am not even talki g about that

i am talkingt about at least 1 team, the winnewr of tommorows game, william patterson at stockton,.. maintaining a postion yo at least get a favorable game inj the ncaa tourney

am i really wrong ?

Quote from: iwumichigander on January 24, 2014, 08:51:53 PM
Yes

Acknowledgements for the compliment, and the reference to me aside, that has to be the best post that I have read in years.

The inverted pyramid was unique.

I think that most of the "less sophisticated posters" have moved onto other forums/social media.

These boards have mellowed but I think that the community has become more educated.

As for Pat Coleman being 43, his birthday was recently noted on Facebook. My wife and I will be celebrating our 44th anniversary later this month. I did my obstetrical math and realized I am old enough to be his daddy! :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 10, 2016, 08:30:04 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 08, 2016, 04:03:24 PM

But this might be my favorite dig at our posting-challenged friend from Dick Stockton:

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 24, 2014, 08:45:03 PM
i understand uw stevens point and the one or even 2 loss teams right now, have real shot at the championship,......

but of the 42 teams in the nation with no more than 3 losses, 33 had votes ,.. 9 did not

stockton sits at 32, william paterson at 30

they play each lother saturday

ikt is a bubble game

voters already have them inside, in this

so the winner of the game gets recopgnition

i do get it

usualy one team from the conference njac gets recopgnitrion, and 2 teams get in the ncaa tourney

they havnt had a win since stocktopn made the finals

but

i am not even talki g about that

i am talkingt about at least 1 team, the winnewr of tommorows game, william patterson at stockton,.. maintaining a postion yo at least get a favorable game inj the ncaa tourney

am i really wrong ?

Quote from: iwumichigander on January 24, 2014, 08:51:53 PM
Yes

This exchange, then and now, inescapably calls to mind Tom Brookshier and Duane Thomas (http://www.classictvsports.com/2013/01/the-infamous-tom-brookshier-evidently.html). "Evidently."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 10, 2016, 08:43:40 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 10, 2016, 07:42:05 PM...

Acknowledgements for the compliment, and the reference to me aside, that has to be the best post that I have read in years.

I want to add my own note of appreciation to Gregory Sager for this trip down memory lane (and the favorable comparison to Ralph Turner).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 10, 2016, 08:52:39 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 10, 2016, 05:26:21 PM
How They Fared (Complete)

One loss at the top ... and then a bunch of losses (32 of them) starting at #19.

As noted earlier, I added Hiram at the end as a "team worth watching."

Top 25

Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#1 625 Augustana 13-1 LOST at #5 Elmhurst, 75-77; won at North Park, 79-66
#2 596 Whitworth 13-0 def. #25 Whitman, 95-89; won at Pacific, 62-50
#3 538 Hope 12-1 def. Albion, 68-65; won at Olivet, 79-64
#4 530 St. Thomas 10-1 won at Gustavus Adolphus, 71-53; def. T#34 Bethel, 69-66
#5 510 Elmhurst 13-1 def. #1 Augustana, 77-75; won at Millikin, 73-65
#6 505 Benedictine 14-0 def. Dominican, 110-78; def. Wisconsin Lutheran, 81-67
#7 470 John Carroll 13-0 def. Capital, 75-74; won at Muskingum, 97-91
#8 457 Ohio Wesleyan 12-1 won at Wittenberg, 77-70; won at Allegheny, 89-77
#9 411 Amherst 11-1 def. Eastern Connecticut, 68-65; def. Williams, 78-66
#10 339 Marietta 11-2 def. Ohio Northern, 72-71
#11 333 Susquehanna 14-0 won at #21 Scranton, 78-63; def. Merchant Marine, 91-72
#12 329 WPI 12-1 won at Springfield, 69-56; def. #49 MIT, 70-62
#13 317 Christopher Newport 12-1 won at Penn State-Harrisburg, 77-65; def. Wesley, 81-68
#14 315 New York University 10-0 won at Wells, 89-67; def. Brandeis, 69-67
#15 224 UW-Whitewater 11-2 won at UW-Stout, 75-59; def. #19 UW-Stevens Point, 69-63
#16 197 Chicago 10-2 won at #30 Washington U., 70-69
#17 154 Franklin and Marshall 10-2 won at McDaniel, 59-43; def. Swarthmore, 57-54
#18 107 Mount Union 10-3 def. Heidelberg, 104-80; won at Wilmington, 82-79
#19 103 UW-Stevens Point 7-6 LOST at UW-Eau Claire, 59-63; LOST at #15 UW-Whitewater, 63-69
#20 88 Oswego State 8-2 LOST at Oneonta State, 52-90
#21 87 Scranton 11-3 won at Drew, 69-62; LOST to #11 Susquehanna, 63-78; won at Goucher, 78-77
#22 80 Tufts 11-2 won at Mass-Boston, 74-61; def. Bowdoin, 102-69; def. T#36 Colby, 92-65
#23 73 Trine 11-2 LOST at Calvin, 70-74; def. Kalamazoo, 77-59
#24 69 Brooklyn 11-3 won at York (N.Y.), 80-46; LOST to Baruch, 89-97
#25 68 Whitman 11-2 LOST at #2 Whitworth, 89-95; won at Pacific, 91-74

Others receiving votes
Rank Pts Team W-L Results
T#26 52 Lancaster Bible 10-0 won at Penn College, 109-52; def. Penn State-Abington, 108-60
T#26 52 St. Norbert 10-2 def. Lawrence, 82-62
#28 50 Pacific Lutheran 9-4 LOST at Linfield, 51-53; LOST at George Fox, 74-82
#29 47 Virginia Wesleyan 8-5 won at Shenandoah, 89-78; LOST to T#53 Roanoke, 84-93
#30 39 Washington U. 8-4 LOST to #16 Chicago, 69-70
#31 36 St. John's 10-2 won at Macalester, 81-56; LOST at Concordia-Moorhead, 65-83
T#32 30 Albertus Magnus 8-2 won at Anna Maria, 108-93; LOST to Lasell, 81-94; won at St. Joseph's (Maine), 56-52
T#32 30 Trinity (Conn.) 9-4 LOST at Plattsburgh State, 73-81; def. Elms, 92-63; def. Williams, 76-75
T#34 28 Bethel 9-2 won at St. Olaf, 76-66; LOST at #4 St. Thomas, 66-69
T#34 28 East Texas Baptist 9-4 LOST at Howard Payne, 65-67; won at Sul Ross State, 67-62
T#36 21 Colby 10-3 won at Pine Manor, 115-97; LOST at Bates, 69-73; LOST at #22 Tufts, 65-92
T#36 21 North Central (Ill.) 10-4 def. Millikin, 83-54; won at Wheaton (Ill.), 71-62
#38 20 Wesleyan 12-2 won at Rhode Island College, 79-77; LOST to Middlebury, 76-86; def. Hamilton, 82-76
T#39 15 William Paterson 7-6 LOST at Kean, 73-78; LOST to Rutgers-Newark, 65-78
T#39 15 Texas Lutheran 11-3 def. University of Dallas, 73-72; def. Austin, 96-93
#41 14 Delaware Valley 11-2 IDLE
#42 11 Northwestern (Minn.) 12-2 won at Bethany Lutheran, 84-66; won at Martin Luther, 97-71
T#43 10 Stockton 9-5 LOST to New Jersey City, 69-74; LOST at Ramapo, 64-70
T#43 10 Eastern Nazarene 9-4 LOST to Salve Regina, 74-83; LOST at Wentworth, 58-80; LOST to Nichols, 67-79
T#45 9 Alma 9-4 won at Kalamazoo, 86-85; def. Adrian, 85-66
T#45 9 Salisbury 10-3 def. York (Pa.), 75-56; won at Mary Washington, 81-70
T#47 8 Johnson and Wales 12-1 def. St. Joseph's (Maine), 93-51; def. Rivier, 91-53; def. Norwich, 84-48
T#47 8 Southern Vermont 9-3 LOST at Middlebury, 74-92; def. Mitchell, 103-87
#49 7 MIT 9-3 def. Clark, 56-51; LOST at #12 WPI, 62-70
T#50 6 Babson 8-4 def. Emerson, 80-63; def. Springfield, 91-76
T#50 6 Buffalo State 9-3 won at Brockport State, 81-73; won at Potsdam State, 84-78; LOST at Plattsburgh State, 91-98
#52 5 Juniata 11-3 def. Goucher, 69-62; won at Elizabethtown, 60-46; LOST at Eastern, 68-73
T#53 3 Carroll 11-1 def. Ripon, 72-66; won at Cornell, 59-55
T#53 3 Centre 10-4 def. Rhodes, 56-33; def. Hendrix, 77-74
T#53 3 Roanoke 12-1 won at Washington and Lee, 105-96; won at #29 Virginia Wesleyan, 93-84
T#56 2 Chapman 8-2 def. Pomona-Pitzer, 73-62
T#56 2 Geneseo 7-3 LOST to Fredonia State, 86-89; LOST to Oneonta State, 65-76; def. New Paltz State, 71-67
--- --- Hiram 11-2 def. DePauw, 91-60; won at Wittenberg, 72-68

Time to begin the NYU over/under for the number of wins this season for the Violets. I say they go 20-5.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 10, 2016, 09:02:55 PM

If they win 8 conference games... I would be surprised.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 10, 2016, 11:08:05 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 10, 2016, 09:02:55 PM
If they win 8 conference games... I would be surprised.

I'll take the over on that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2016, 12:22:53 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 10, 2016, 11:08:05 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 10, 2016, 09:02:55 PM
If they win 8 conference games... I would be surprised.

I'll take the over on that.

I'll take the under. NYU does this year-after-year. Their non-con schedule is so filled with cupcakes, I'm surprised the athletic department doesn't all have diabetes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 11, 2016, 10:41:40 AM

Yeah, Massey has their strength of schedule as 382 and they still have 1-13 Hunter on the schedule.

I'll go with surprised if NYU wins 8 conference games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 11, 2016, 02:52:34 PM

Well, who got the recogpnition when they played each lother? How many lothers were there, anyway?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 11, 2016, 04:55:53 PM

Those wondering where our NJAC "friend" went to... he found another way to harass me: https://twitter.com/jimw4lefts (https://twitter.com/jimw4lefts)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 11, 2016, 04:59:02 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 11, 2016, 04:55:53 PM
Those wondering where our NJAC "friend" went to... he found another way to harass me: https://twitter.com/jimw4lefts (https://twitter.com/jimw4lefts)

:o ::) ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 11, 2016, 05:06:53 PM

Those are some seriopus accusations he's making.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2016, 05:32:22 PM

That guy is SERIOPUSLY disturbed. :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 11, 2016, 06:24:28 PM

Things all went down hill when Pat Coleman and his millions took over the league. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pg04 on January 11, 2016, 06:28:07 PM

Looks like he's spelling better there at least. Ramblings of a blithering idiot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 11, 2016, 06:59:32 PM

Quote from: pg04 on January 11, 2016, 06:28:07 PM
Looks like he's spelling better there at least. Ramblings of a blithering idiot.

RACIST!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 11, 2016, 07:23:22 PM

In his excellent summary of the story of "TGHIJGSTO," Gregory Sager mentioned:

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 08, 2016, 04:03:24 PM...
That was a great moment in d3boards.com history, right up there with the best of the D3 Championship Belt^TM thread and the time that the board regulars decided to build a quote pyramid in one of the multi-regional rooms.

In case anyone wants to revisit the quote pyramid, you can see it HERE (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4097.msg1044112;topicseen#msg1044112). (In fact, it was in this multi-regional room. Finding it was much easier than I thought it might be, once I recalled that at some point someone had described it as a "ziggurat." It turns out that someone was none other than Gregory Sager.)

At least we can take comfort in the fact that the quote pyramid won't re-surface on social media to accuse us of racism.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Stoppable on January 11, 2016, 07:26:37 PM

That made me curious. There may be "40 million alums", but there were about 3.2 million fans at all Division III men's and women's games combined last year, and a lot of those are the same people (like me) getting multiple counted.

ETA: And the "40 million" is probably several times too high as well, come to think of it. But never let the facts get in a way of a good ridiculous allegation, am I right? ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 11, 2016, 07:49:36 PM

Since you are an 'alum' via CASE standards if you passed one credit, and many D-3 colleges have adult, executive, or non-degree granting classes then, um....that's still a crazy number. That's about 94,000 alumni of record per school.

We could look through the VSE reports to see how many 'alumni of record' there are for the D-3 schools that submit. Not all do. In my 2014 printed guide, I found just three UW schools that did (Eau Claire, River Falls and Stout). UW-EC alumni of record is 79,657. His beloved Dick Stockton has just over 44,000 alumni of record.

Where you will get the large numbers of alumni of record are at the Research / Doctoral institutions. Johns Hopkins has 161,636 alumni of record. Wash U. 128,963. NYU has 489,110 (!) But frankly, how many masters or doctoral students OR alumni at these large institutions know or care about their D-3 teams? Illinois Tech has 67,000 alumni of record. I would bet most of them don't even realize they have a hoops team that's D-3. Being a doctoral or even a masters student at these institutions is a whole 'nuther world, yet they count as alumnni just the same. Usually it's about 1/3 to 1/2 of the alums are undergrad alums at these schools.

Pat, since you "took over the league" have you stopped your job search? ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pg04 on January 11, 2016, 07:51:10 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 11, 2016, 06:59:32 PM
Quote from: pg04 on January 11, 2016, 06:28:07 PM
Looks like he's spelling better there at least. Ramblings of a blithering idiot.
RACIST!

:( ??? :'( :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2016, 08:05:42 PM

Quote from: pg04 on January 11, 2016, 07:51:10 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 11, 2016, 06:59:32 PM
Quote from: pg04 on January 11, 2016, 06:28:07 PM
Looks like he's spelling better there at least. Ramblings of a blithering idiot.
RACIST!

:( ??? :'( :o

Ya just gotta understand DC's humor - he was responding to you in character for "Mr. Stockiton (aka, Stocktmton, etc.)".

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pg04 on January 11, 2016, 08:16:01 PM

I know! I was trying to play the game! ;D But it's impossible to tell ??? I should have put a smiley below.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 11, 2016, 08:36:04 PM

Quote from: Ryan Stoppable on January 11, 2016, 07:26:37 PM
But never let the facts get in a way of a good ridiculous allegation, am I right? ;D

RACIST! YOU'RE JUST TRYING TO SUPPRESS DISCUSSION!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 11, 2016, 08:39:04 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2016, 08:05:42 PM
Quote from: pg04 on January 11, 2016, 07:51:10 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 11, 2016, 06:59:32 PM
Quote from: pg04 on January 11, 2016, 06:28:07 PM
Looks like he's spelling better there at least. Ramblings of a blithering idiot.
RACIST!

:( ??? :'( :o

Ya just gotta understand DC's humor - he was responding to you in character for "Mr. Stockiton (aka, Stocktmton, etc.)".

I CAN PROVE IT

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pg04 on January 11, 2016, 08:49:14 PM

It seems like his (re?)appearance coincides with me asking about him to begin with and the ensuing conversation. So if I'm any to blame, I'm sorry. :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on January 11, 2016, 08:50:03 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 11, 2016, 08:39:04 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2016, 08:05:42 PM
Quote from: pg04 on January 11, 2016, 07:51:10 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 11, 2016, 06:59:32 PM
Quote from: pg04 on January 11, 2016, 06:28:07 PM
Looks like he's spelling better there at least. Ramblings of a blithering idiot.
RACIST!

:( ??? :'( :o

Ya just gotta understand DC's humor - he was responding to you in character for "Mr. Stockiton (aka, Stocktmton, etc.)".

I CAN PROVE IT

u guys rearly sumptum pricking on DC

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on January 11, 2016, 08:53:52 PM

Quote from: pg04 on January 11, 2016, 08:49:14 PM
It seems like his (re?)appearance coincides with me asking about him to begin with and the ensuing conversation. So if I'm any to blame, I'm sorry. :P

pretty sure he still lurks the boards; as I recall he even created a new id and came back after Pat cut him off; which did not last long before Pat shut him down again

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 11, 2016, 09:05:23 PM

Quote from: pg04 on January 11, 2016, 08:49:14 PM
It seems like his (re?)appearance coincides with me asking about him to begin with and the ensuing conversation. So if I'm any to blame, I'm sorry. :P

No... just timing... because if you notice his tweets they date back to December some time. I actually responded to him on air without realizing it was him and mainly because I had made a dumb slip of the tongue per some team and he apparently got mad at me. In hindsight, I should have ignored him... but again, didn't realize it was him. I also didn't notice most of those tweets because you will notice his hashtags run into the next word keeping them, luckily, from popping up on my TweetDeck.

That being said... this guy gets my blood boiling to no end. There is nothing more insulting than what he is throwing around... I better stop typing before my emotions take over, actually.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pg04 on January 11, 2016, 09:09:59 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 11, 2016, 09:05:23 PM
Quote from: pg04 on January 11, 2016, 08:49:14 PM
It seems like his (re?)appearance coincides with me asking about him to begin with and the ensuing conversation. So if I'm any to blame, I'm sorry. :P

No... just timing... because if you notice his tweets they date back to December some time. I actually responded to him on air without realizing it was him and mainly because I had made a dumb slip of the tongue per some team and he apparently got mad at me. In hindsight, I should have ignored him... but again, didn't realize it was him. I also didn't notice most of those tweets because you will notice his hashtags run into the next word keeping them, luckily, from popping up on my TweetDeck.

That being said... this guy gets my blood boiling to no end. There is nothing more insulting than what he is throwing around... I better stop typing before my emotions take over, actually.

Apparently his caps lock button is perpetually broken also. Sorry you (and Pat) have to be brunt of these FALSE accusations. Especially when you run all of D3! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 11, 2016, 09:13:26 PM

SMH... he doesn't get how awesome it would be if I could actually run Division III LOL.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 11, 2016, 10:02:40 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 11, 2016, 09:13:26 PM
SMH... he doesn't get how awesome it would be if I could actually run Division III LOL.

You're a true fan, Dave. If it were me, I'd just pocket the millions. Seriopusly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 11, 2016, 10:03:38 PM

Yeah... good call. I think I may cut and run after the season. Serioupusly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pg04 on January 11, 2016, 10:04:49 PM

TGHIJGSTO!!!

(Edit: Sorry I had to say it at least once :) )

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on January 11, 2016, 10:23:13 PM

This is seriouposly the best thread of 2016. Ditto pg04! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 11, 2016, 11:18:09 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 11, 2016, 07:23:22 PM
In his excellent summary of the story of "TGHIJGSTO," Gregory Sager mentioned:
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 08, 2016, 04:03:24 PM...
That was a great moment in d3boards.com history, right up there with the best of the D3 Championship Belt^TM thread and the time that the board regulars decided to build a quote pyramid in one of the multi-regional rooms.
In case anyone wants to revisit the quote pyramid, you can see it HERE (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4097.msg1044112;topicseen#msg1044112). (In fact, it was in this multi-regional room. Finding it was much easier than I thought it might be, once I recalled that at some point someone had described it as a "ziggurat." It turns out that someone was none other than Gregory Sager.)

At least we can take comfort in the fact that the quote pyramid won't re-surface on social media to accuse us of racism.

Actually, it's RACISIM. :P ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 12, 2016, 12:02:41 AM

Re: the quote pyramid. Towards the end Greg nailed it perfectly - it is not a ziggurat, it is a Mayan pyramid (and the entire thing, top to bottom, is a Mayan pyramid with another Mayan pyramid plopped on top upside down). Geez, if magicman was indeed the sacrifice, once that other pyramid got plopped it may have done in two or three of his reincarnations! ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 12, 2016, 07:52:03 AM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 11, 2016, 07:23:22 PM
In his excellent summary of the story of "TGHIJGSTO," Gregory Sager mentioned:
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 08, 2016, 04:03:24 PM...
That was a great moment in d3boards.com history, right up there with the best of the D3 Championship Belt^TM thread and the time that the board regulars decided to build a quote pyramid in one of the multi-regional rooms.
In case anyone wants to revisit the quote pyramid, you can see it HERE (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4097.msg1044112;topicseen#msg1044112). (In fact, it was in this multi-regional room. Finding it was much easier than I thought it might be, once I recalled that at some point someone had described it as a "ziggurat." It turns out that someone was none other than Gregory Sager.)

At least we can take comfort in the fact that the quote pyramid won't re-surface on social media to accuse us of racism.

Thanks for bringing that link back, Darryl. I was, unknowingly, at the time, the person that started the quote pyramid. Of course, without Sager, it would never have amounted to much more than a hill of beans, instead of the lofty heights it attained.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 12, 2016, 08:50:01 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 11, 2016, 04:55:53 PM
Those wondering where our NJAC "friend" went to... he found another way to harass me: https://twitter.com/jimw4lefts (https://twitter.com/jimw4lefts)

Sorry to see that this troll is still causing a problem for you Dave. He sounds worse than ever. I'd call the police, just so it's on the record.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 12, 2016, 08:58:23 AM

So completely off topic:

A Hilbert (Wisconsin) high school girls basketball player was suspended for FIVE games for tweeting "Eat sh!t WIAA" (Wisconsin Interscholastic Athletic Association). This was a response to the WIAA's crackdown on student chants. Among chants no longer tolerated:

-Air ball
-You can't do that
-fundamentals
-there's a net there
-sieve
-we can't hear you
-scoreboard
-your season's over

Give me a break. We, as parents, are forced to raise the biggest wusses. It reminds me of that commerical when the parent questions to himself why everyone gets a participation trophy and crosses out "participant" and writes "champ".

By the time by 4-year old is in high school we won't even be able to cheer because we'll hurt the other teams' feelings or worse yet, we'll be forced to cheer for the other team! Grow some, toughen up, etc.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/bobcook/2016/01/09/teen-athlete-tweets-wisconsin-incident-highlights-need-for-adults-to-stop-overreacting/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 12, 2016, 10:00:44 AM

How does one chant "sieve" anyway? Wouldn't "strainer" or "colander" be better choices? Or "kit-chen u-ten-sil to strain out im-pur-i-ties"? Oh, burn!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on January 12, 2016, 10:11:00 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 12, 2016, 08:58:23 AM
So completely off topic:

A Hilbert (Wisconsin) high school girls basketball player was suspended for FIVE games for tweeting "Eat sh!t WIAA" (Wisconsin Interscholastic Athletic Association). This was a response to the WIAA's crackdown on student chants. Among chants no longer tolerated:

-Air ball
-You can't do that
-fundamentals
-there's a net there
-sieve
-we can't hear you
-scoreboard
-your season's over

Give me a break. We, as parents, are forced to raise the biggest wusses. It reminds me of that commerical when the parent questions to himself why everyone gets a participation trophy and crosses out "participant" and writes "champ".

By the time by 4-year old is in high school we won't even be able to cheer because we'll hurt the other teams' feelings or worse yet, we'll be forced to cheer for the other team! Grow some, toughen up, etc.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/bobcook/2016/01/09/teen-athlete-tweets-wisconsin-incident-highlights-need-for-adults-to-stop-overreacting/

Such outrageous behavior may fall under secondary criteria for Pool C berths and hosting deliberations ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Just Bill on January 12, 2016, 10:22:27 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 12, 2016, 08:58:23 AM
So completely off topic:

A Hilbert (Wisconsin) high school girls basketball player was suspended for FIVE games for tweeting "Eat sh!t WIAA" (Wisconsin Interscholastic Athletic Association). This was a response to the WIAA's crackdown on student chants. Among chants no longer tolerated:

-Air ball
-You can't do that
-fundamentals
-there's a net there
-sieve
-we can't hear you
-scoreboard
-your season's over

Give me a break. We, as parents, are forced to raise the biggest wusses. It reminds me of that commerical when the parent questions to himself why everyone gets a participation trophy and crosses out "participant" and writes "champ".

By the time by 4-year old is in high school we won't even be able to cheer because we'll hurt the other teams' feelings or worse yet, we'll be forced to cheer for the other team! Grow some, toughen up, etc.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/bobcook/2016/01/09/teen-athlete-tweets-wisconsin-incident-highlights-need-for-adults-to-stop-overreacting/

How about we focus on parent and adult behavior at these games first?

I only recall once that I went to a high school game and thought the students' chants/cheers really went over the line. But I can recall several incidents of parents and adults behaving like absolute a**holes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 12, 2016, 10:26:53 AM

Alternate acceptable chants?

-~~airball~~ - you missed the hoop completely
-~~you can't do that~~ - that's not accepted
-~~fundamentals~~ - elementary skills
-~~there's a net there~~ -you're supposed to aim that way
-~~sieve~~ - colander
-~~we can't hear you~~ - we're hard of hearing
-~~scoreboard~~ - score tracker
-~~your season's over~~ - we're moving on

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 12, 2016, 11:24:48 AM

Biggest vote gainers:
Roanoke, 108
Tufts, 91
Elmhurst, 65
UW-Whitewater, 62
Chicago, 62
F&M, 43
Mt. Union, 41
Benedictine, 30
Lancaster Bible, 28
Hiram, 27
Marietta, 24
Susquehanna, 21
Cortland State, 20
WPI, 19
Whitman, 19

Biggest vote losers:
UWSP, -101
Augustana, -68
Oswego St., -65
Brooklyn, -62
Pacific Lutheran, -50
Trine, -44
VA Wesleyan, -41
Scranton, -37
NYU, -35
WashU, -33
Albertus Magnus, -29
St. John's, -28
E. Texas Baptist, -28
Trinity (CT), -24
Colby, -16
William Paterson, -15
Wesleyan, -14
Stockton, -10
E. Nazarene, -10

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Just Bill on January 12, 2016, 11:29:29 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 12, 2016, 10:00:44 AM
How does one chant "sieve" anyway? Wouldn't "strainer" or "colander" be better choices? Or "kit-chen u-ten-sil to strain out im-pur-i-ties"? Oh, burn!

The Sieve chant is a Wisconsin Badgers hockey staple. Here's a sample:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-M9tPqA75I (Back when the Kohl Center was full. Rough times there.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 12, 2016, 12:28:23 PM

I believe Cornell is the originators of the college hockey 'sieve' cheer. Its been stolen by many other schools, including Michigan's own version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8e2tBmYwjM

and Cornell, starts at around 40 seconds https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVkVL9wQ7Io

Michigan stole it from Cornell around 1991 and I happen to know that because I was in Ann Arbor during a weekend NCAA tournament series against Cornell and witnessed the theft by Michigan's students first hand. Its a weekend Michigan fans still talk about today.

I'm pretty sure every good hockey cheer has been stolen from Cornell.

Michigan students used to cheer "ugly parents" when the opponent scored a goal and the small band of fans in the corner stood to cheer. Maybe the Wisconsin high school kids should try that one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 12, 2016, 12:28:42 PM

Quote from: Just Bill on January 12, 2016, 10:22:27 AM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 12, 2016, 08:58:23 AM
So completely off topic:

A Hilbert (Wisconsin) high school girls basketball player was suspended for FIVE games for tweeting "Eat sh!t WIAA" (Wisconsin Interscholastic Athletic Association). This was a response to the WIAA's crackdown on student chants. Among chants no longer tolerated:

-Air ball
-You can't do that
-fundamentals
-there's a net there
-sieve
-we can't hear you
-scoreboard
-your season's over

Give me a break. We, as parents, are forced to raise the biggest wusses. It reminds me of that commerical when the parent questions to himself why everyone gets a participation trophy and crosses out "participant" and writes "champ".

By the time by 4-year old is in high school we won't even be able to cheer because we'll hurt the other teams' feelings or worse yet, we'll be forced to cheer for the other team! Grow some, toughen up, etc.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/bobcook/2016/01/09/teen-athlete-tweets-wisconsin-incident-highlights-need-for-adults-to-stop-overreacting/

How about we focus on parent and adult behavior at these games first?

I only recall once that I went to a high school game and thought the students' chants/cheers really went over the line. But I can recall several incidents of parents and adults behaving like absolute a**holes.

At a recent game I was working, a visiting parent was so bad in the opening minutes of the game he actually yelled at the home coach... and the coach responded! He turned around and said, "I'm not talking to you." At that point an event staff member was parked at the front of the bleachers were the parent was sitting and he got the message real quick. But not before yelling and screaming about 3 seconds violation on the home team. That prompted this tweet from me:

"You are being too aggressive a fan if you are worrying about the opponent's possible 3-second violation in a game your team leads 17-0. (https://twitter.com/d3hoopsville/status/685934669767032834)"

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 12, 2016, 01:13:17 PM

Everyone has their own version of the sieve cheer and I can say that I was doing it back in the late 80s/early 90s when UWSP was dominating the D3 men's hockey landscape. But it wasn't the sieve cheer that I remember so fondly, it's the Rowdy Crowdy cheer originated by some student lifer named Marvin. I'll refrain from posting the whole song, but it lasted about 3 minutes and basically said we have a winning coach, team and crowd and you have a losing coach, team and crowd.. and by the way, your goalie is a sieve, sieve, sieve, sieve....

Nothing like having your parents let you and your best friend hop on a bus at 16 yrs old and trek out to Rochester, NY with a bunch of drunk college students to watch hockey. Proud to have seen all four hockey titles (4 in 5 years) and all 4 basketball titles. ;D :D :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 12, 2016, 02:57:10 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 12, 2016, 12:28:42 PM
At a recent game I was working, a visiting parent was so bad in the opening minutes of the game he actually yelled at the home coach... and the coach responded! He turned around and said, "I'm not talking to you." At that point an event staff member was parked at the front of the bleachers were the parent was sitting and he got the message real quick. But not before yelling and screaming about 3 seconds violation on the home team.

Parents are far worse in my experience.

Especially, at girls high school basketball games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pg04 on January 12, 2016, 04:10:42 PM

Reading more it seems like this is all an over reaction or at least an 18 year old too late reaction

From http://www.wissports.net/news_article/show/598062

"Now, let's look at the WIAA's Sportsmanship Guidelines which caused the offending tweet in the first place, and have begun to catch national attention.

For one thing, it is important to note that these aren't new, despite what several journalists have falsely indicated. The Sportsmanship Guidelines have been around for years, with the WIAA's Sportsmanship Committee founded in 1997. Currently, the committee consists of 11 members, including school administrators, an officials representative, and a member of WACPC (Wisconsin Association of Cheer/Pom Coaches).

The Sportsmanship Guidelines were developed and approved by the member schools. Every member school receives the guidelines as part of their tournament information. It is up to the member schools to enforce them as they see fit.

Every state association has similar guidelines, though not all go into specific detail about "inappropriate sportsmanship" cheers as the WIAA guide does. However, all identify taunting, disrespectful, and demeaning cheers or chants as "inappropriate sportsmanship"."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Just Bill on January 12, 2016, 04:55:20 PM

It is. It's a lot of thunder about nothing really. It's the same guidelines they've had for years. The WIAA doesn't set rules on what chants can and can't be done. The WIAA sets the Sportsmanship bar as high as possible and then it's up to the member schools to decide what is and isn't acceptable. Just about every school does a fine job allowing the students to have fun without crossing the line. It's worked this way well for decades.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2016, 05:15:15 PM

Quote from: Just Bill on January 12, 2016, 10:22:27 AM
How about we focus on parent and adult behavior at these games first?

I only recall once that I went to a high school game and thought the students' chants/cheers really went over the line. But I can recall several incidents of parents and adults behaving like absolute a**holes.

I'm usually far more irritated by things that adults (presumably the parents of players for the most part, although that's not always true) yell during the course of a game than anything that students chant. College students are only semi-grownups, and the judgment center of the brain isn't fully developed until age 25 (https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/encyclopedia/content.aspx?ContentTypeID=1&ContentID=3051), anyway; real grownups, on the other hand, ought to know better. Of course, some would say that, as North Park's former chant leader back during the '80s, I have a greater tolerance for student nonsense than I really ought to have. ;)

Quote from: pg04 on January 12, 2016, 04:10:42 PMThe Sportsmanship Guidelines were developed and approved by the member schools. Every member school receives the guidelines as part of their tournament information. It is up to the member schools to enforce them as they see fit.

The CCIW has a Sportsmanship Statement that's supposed to be read before every athletic event. If you go to a CCIW gym or stadium, you'll no doubt hear it recited faithfully over the P.A. sometime during pregame -- and it will then promptly be flouted by a large percentage of the people on the premises.

Quote from: Just Bill on January 12, 2016, 11:29:29 AM
Quote from: David Collinge on January 12, 2016, 10:00:44 AM
How does one chant "sieve" anyway? Wouldn't "strainer" or "colander" be better choices? Or "kit-chen u-ten-sil to strain out im-pur-i-ties"? Oh, burn!

The Sieve chant is a Wisconsin Badgers hockey staple. Here's a sample:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-M9tPqA75I (Back when the Kohl Center was full. Rough times there.)

I've never heard the "sieve" chant before. I suspect that it's mostly a college hockey thing, and college hockey is not a hot sports item in Chicagoland.

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 12, 2016, 01:13:17 PM
Michigan students used to cheer "ugly parents" when the opponent scored a goal and the small band of fans in the corner stood to cheer. Maybe the Wisconsin high school kids should try that one.

One of the chants that NPU"s Carlson Crazies used for years in the crackerbox whenever an opponent was at the free-throw line was, "Your mom is hot! Your mom is hot! Your mom is hot!", since quite often the bulk of the visiting fan section consists of the parents of the opposing players. The exception was whenever Illinois Wesleyan came to town. As some of you are already aware, IWU's got a fan bus that transports several dozen septuagenarians and octogenarians (and beyond, no doubt) to every Titans road basketball game. This zealous batch of green-wearing senior citizens (who are treated to free donuts on the bus courtesy of a Bloomington funeral home, surely the best example of target-constituency marketing in all of McLean County) is the most noticeable element, and sometimes the biggest, of the visitors section whenever the Titans are on the road. (A former Titans player once said to me, "At other schools, the back of the fan bus has a keg. At IWU, the back of the fan bus has a defibrillator.") So whenever IWU was the visiting team in the crackerbox and a Titan was at the free-throw line, the Carlson Crazies would alter their chant to, "Your grandma's hot! Your grandma's hot! Your grandma's hot!")

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 12, 2016, 05:34:34 PM

If anyone is interested in my Top 25 blog for this week, here it is: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/01/12/daves-top-25-ballot-week-5-4/

We have had some technical issues the last few weeks that we at least found a temporary solution to.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 12, 2016, 05:52:48 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 12, 2016, 05:34:34 PM
If anyone is interested in my Top 25 blog for this week, here it is: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/01/12/daves-top-25-ballot-week-5-4/

We have had some technical issues the last few weeks that we at least found a temporary solution to.

"I can only assume that is based on the Benedictine beat Carthage, Carthage beat Augustana, thus Benedictine would also beat Augustana theory. It is a theory I just can't buy into"

You might want to edit that little part written under the Benedictine section

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 12, 2016, 05:55:38 PM

O-ver re-ac-tion! [clap clap clap-clap-clap]

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pg04 on January 12, 2016, 05:58:06 PM

People really enjoy getting mad or offended about things that people get mad or offended about these days ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 12, 2016, 06:18:11 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 12, 2016, 05:34:34 PM
If anyone is interested in my Top 25 blog for this week, here it is: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/01/12/daves-top-25-ballot-week-5-4/

We have had some technical issues the last few weeks that we at least found a temporary solution to.

Thanks for posting, Dave. I do have some questions on your Benedictine comments...

"Benedictine is clearly a good team, but in a sub-par conference. They clearly have gotten it done out of conference (five games, five opponents from the CCIW)."

* With wins at #2 Elmhurst and at #25 North Central - probably a better 2-win combo than any of the 5 teams you ranked ahead of Benedictine have - why does the strength of BU's conference matter?
-----

"My concern is someone in their conference is going to beat them and that will raise more questions than it answers."

* Shouldn't you wait until after someone in the NACC beats Benedictine before you hold it against them?
-----

"I also don't think Benedictine would be able to beat Augustana. So I moved the Eagles up, but I'm not sure I can move them much higher."

* Benedictine traveled to Elmhurst and led 47-19 at halftime, and beat them in a game that was never close...Elmhurst beat Augustana in the same gym. Why are you assuming BU would not be able to beat Augustana? I get that A beating B, and B beating C, does mean that A would automatically beat C...but aren't you taking that to the opposite extreme in assuming BU would not beat Augie?

* And I guess I don't understand how you can have Whitworth #3, Hope #4, and St. Thomas #5 but not go higher than #6 with BU? Outside of name brand, what is the case for those 3 being higher than Benedictine?
-----

It seems like you are voting based on traditional perceptions of Benedictine, and not what they actually have and are doing in 2015-16.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 12, 2016, 06:25:42 PM

For what it's worth, Massey has Benedictine #1.

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?s=cb2016&sub=11620

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 12, 2016, 08:47:59 PM

Greg, for what its worth, the "ugly parents" comment wasn't mine. You quoted me but I didn't post that. ??? ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Stoppable on January 12, 2016, 11:31:20 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 12, 2016, 06:18:11 PM
"Benedictine is clearly a good team, but in a sub-par conference. They clearly have gotten it done out of conference (five games, five opponents from the CCIW)."

While the NCAA Tournament results from previous seasons are obviously not there, how true is that this year? In addition to Benedictine, the Massey ratings have five other NACC teams ranked #104 or higher (so basically in the top quarter of D3), and the conference as a whole is over .500 in non-conference play.

(For that matter, our current second place Aurora also beat the aforementioned North Central; Benedictine demolished the Spartans by 28 in their first meeting.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 13, 2016, 12:01:51 AM

I'll preface this by saying, usually it doesn't matter what I write in response. I have found with many people on these boards they rather just tell me I am wrong than listen to my point of view - the view of one single voter. I do these blogs because they provide me a chance to do my homework in even more detail and really think through my decisions as a voter. I appreciate that you don't have to agree with me just as I don't have to agree with you (being generic here), but I find it rather surprising how many people would rather tell me I am wrong and tell me how to vote than anything else. Just needed to get that off my chest, please don't take it personally.

Quote from: Titan Q on January 12, 2016, 06:18:11 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 12, 2016, 05:34:34 PM
If anyone is interested in my Top 25 blog for this week, here it is: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/01/12/daves-top-25-ballot-week-5-4/

We have had some technical issues the last few weeks that we at least found a temporary solution to.

Thanks for posting, Dave. I do have some questions on your Benedictine comments...

"Benedictine is clearly a good team, but in a sub-par conference. They clearly have gotten it done out of conference (five games, five opponents from the CCIW)."

* With wins at #2 Elmhurst and at #25 North Central - probably a better 2-win combo than any of the 5 teams you ranked ahead of Benedictine have - why does the strength of BU's conference matter?
-----

Hope has some good wins especially if I look outside of Division III which in the past posters have felt I should do more often. Furthermore, you say they have a win over #25 NCC based on the overall poll, but I haven't ranked NCC as of yet (I want to see how they do this week) and thus that win doesn't hold as much weight. It holds weight, but not as much. I appreciate that Benedictine may have "more" in those two wins than Whitworth (who beat Calvin in a game I called and now Whitman who is also ranked), but feel Whitworth is a deeper team with more weapons on the floor at any given time. I have also seen St. Thomas (called one of their games as well) and feel the Tommies wins over Emory (while not as strong as in the past), UWSP, and Bethel (now - not before I voted last time) are more significant.

Quote from: Titan Q on January 12, 2016, 06:18:11 PM

"My concern is someone in their conference is going to beat them and that will raise more questions than it answers."

* Shouldn't you wait until after someone in the NACC beats Benedictine before you hold it against them?
-----

Why? I'm already ranking them sixth. I am simply stating what worries me about the team and the conference. Nothing more. But the same argument can be made about NYU. There are many here who don't understand why the Violets are so highly ranked, or ranked period, versus a weak out of conference schedule when many of us feel they may not be .500 in the UAA. I am not getting questioned for not voting for NYU because I am concerned they are going to get killed in the conference. Nothing is perfect, but reading into the information I have and trust along with watching what I can online makes me believe that a loss in the NACC will give me more questions than it actually answers. Just as I have felt with teams like Albertus Magnus in the past and, again, not the same concern that I didn't rank them high enough.

Quote from: Titan Q on January 12, 2016, 06:18:11 PM

"I also don't think Benedictine would be able to beat Augustana. So I moved the Eagles up, but I'm not sure I can move them much higher."

* Benedictine traveled to Elmhurst and led 47-19 at halftime, and beat them in a game that was never close...Elmhurst beat Augustana in the same gym. Why are you assuming BU would not be able to beat Augustana? I get that A beating B, and B beating C, does mean that A would automatically beat C...but aren't you taking that to the opposite extreme in assuming BU would not beat Augie?

* And I guess I don't understand how you can have Whitworth #3, Hope #4, and St. Thomas #5 but not go higher than #6 with BU? Outside of name brand, what is the case for those 3 being higher than Benedictine?
-----

Because the information I have in front of me plus what I have been able to see online, I don't feel Benedictine is better than the teams ahead of them despite beating one of them (and that team beating another). Trust me when I say, I am not the only voter who feels this way though as I have talked to several who have the same opinion, though out of respect for them and to not give away information, I won't name them or what regions they represent. They got the win over Elmhurst in a game that clearly was not the Blue Jays best and clearly was one of the best for the Eagles. I am just not of the opinion I am going to let that one game trump all.

Quote from: Titan Q on January 12, 2016, 06:18:11 PM

It seems like you are voting based on traditional perceptions of Benedictine, and not what they actually have and are doing in 2015-16.

That may seem like a great political-style one-liner, but if that was truly the case and I was voting on simply traditional perceptions... you could argue Benedictine would not be in my Top 25 let alone knocking on the door of the Top 5. That statement borders on hyperbole that may sound great, but it couldn't be further from the truth.

Quote from: Titan Q on January 12, 2016, 06:25:42 PM
For what it's worth, Massey has Benedictine #1.

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?s=cb2016&sub=11620

It actually means nothing to me to be honest. I check out Massey to make sure there isn't a team slipping through the radar, but considering five of Benedictine's 14 games are against CCIW opponents and thus their schedules, I am not making much of it. We can go around and around about Massey, but I feel the system has it's flaws and one of those flaws is it tends to add value somehow to WIAC and CCIW teams and those those who play them. I have said in the past I don't put much stock in the rankings other than to help me make sure there isn't someone I'm missing. I am certainly not going to rank based on them, either - though I am sure some voters do.

You all are making a big deal out of something I don't think is a big deal. Benedictine is sixth on my ballot and fifth overall. Considering someone gave them a first place vote, there are others who have them lower on their ballots than I do. I pretty much have them where they reside overall. So you may not like what I say about Benedictine and that's fine, but if you don't like where they are ranked it doesn't appear I'm the guy who is dismissing them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 13, 2016, 12:48:08 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 13, 2016, 12:01:51 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 12, 2016, 06:18:11 PM

It seems like you are voting based on traditional perceptions of Benedictine, and not what they actually have and are doing in 2015-16.

That may seem like a great political-style one-liner, but if that was truly the case and I was voting on simply traditional perceptions... you could argue Benedictine would not be in my Top 25 let alone knocking on the door of the Top 5. That statement borders on hyperbole that may sound great, but it couldn't be further from the truth.

I have quibbles with several other of your replies to Q, but this one burned me up. As you know (since you posted supporting me) I also believe that 'tradition' (especially continuity in great coaching, institutional support, etc.) is and should be a factor in voting, I'm shocked that you would accuse Q of being the one to use hyperbole and 'a great political-style one-liner' in this exchange. Anyone who would even mention Benedictine not being in the top 25 is not engaging in 'history'; they are down Alice's 'rabbit-hole'. Talk about hyperbole!

And it is rather silly to talk about their weak conference when conference games have barely begun (and they went 5-0 against the CCIW, which is rarely called a 'weak conference'). Personally, I suspect they will sweep and go 25-0 entering the tourney (or 26, or 27, or whatever), but since nearly every team stumbles at some point, so what?

I am NOT a Benedictine fan (in fact, since they've beaten IWU two years in a row, I'm becoming a 'hater'! >:(), but based on THIS year's evidence, I think it is incontrovertible that you ARE thinking on traditional grounds.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 13, 2016, 08:18:32 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 13, 2016, 12:01:51 AM
I'll preface this by saying, usually it doesn't matter what I write in response. I have found with many people on these boards they rather just tell me I am wrong than listen to my point of view - the view of one single voter. I do these blogs because they provide me a chance to do my homework in even more detail and really think through my decisions as a voter. I appreciate that you don't have to agree with me just as I don't have to agree with you (being generic here), but I find it rather surprising how many people would rather tell me I am wrong and tell me how to vote than anything else. Just needed to get that off my chest, please don't take it personally.

Dave, when you publish a public blog, tweet it out, and post it here, I think it's fair to say you are inviting reactions and opinions. I can only speak for myself, but I'm certainly not trying to attack you...I'm just posting my opinions to things you have said publicly. Just debating the Top 25...on the "Top 25 talk" board.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 13, 2016, 12:01:51 AM
That may seem like a great political-style one-liner, but if that was truly the case and I was voting on simply traditional perceptions... you could argue Benedictine would not be in my Top 25 let alone knocking on the door of the Top 5. That statement borders on hyperbole that may sound great, but it couldn't be further from the truth.

I wasn't trying to make a political-style one-liner at all. I was just posting what I thought was happening in saying, "It seems like you are voting based on traditional perceptions of Benedictine, and not what they actually have and are doing in 2015-16."

First, there is a 14-0 team with a win over #2 that you say you probably can't move them higher than #6...which I guess I don't understand. Second, you've recently made a some comments (on the CCIW board I think) about still factoring in your preseason thoughts about Benedictine in making your ballot. I think my comment was at least fair speculation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 13, 2016, 08:21:20 AM

masseyratings.com seems to have done ok with last years Final Four teams.

#1 Stevens Point
#2 Augustana
#3 Va Wesleyan
#9 Babson

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 13, 2016, 12:01:51 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 12, 2016, 06:18:11 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 12, 2016, 05:34:34 PM
If anyone is interested in my Top 25 blog for this week, here it is: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/01/12/daves-top-25-ballot-week-5-4/

We have had some technical issues the last few weeks that we at least found a temporary solution to.

Thanks for posting, Dave. I do have some questions on your Benedictine comments...

"Benedictine is clearly a good team, but in a sub-par conference. They clearly have gotten it done out of conference (five games, five opponents from the CCIW)."

* With wins at #2 Elmhurst and at #25 North Central - probably a better 2-win combo than any of the 5 teams you ranked ahead of Benedictine have - why does the strength of BU's conference matter?
-----

Hope has some good wins especially if I look outside of Division III which in the past posters have felt I should do more often. Furthermore, you say they have a win over #25 NCC based on the overall poll, but I haven't ranked NCC as of yet (I want to see how they do this week) and thus that win doesn't hold as much weight. It holds weight, but not as much. I appreciate that Benedictine may have "more" in those two wins than Whitworth (who beat Calvin in a game I called and now Whitman who is also ranked), but feel Whitworth is a deeper team with more weapons on the floor at any given time. I have also seen St. Thomas (called one of their games as well) and feel the Tommies wins over Emory (while not as strong as in the past), UWSP, and Bethel (now - not before I voted last time) are more significant.

Hope's best 4 wins using massey
Aquinas #548
UWSP #720
LaCrosse #747
Albion #787

Benedictine's best 4 wins
Elmhurst #336
North Central #464
Aurora #643
Ill. Wesleyan #774

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 13, 2016, 08:25:28 AM

Hopefully last thought on the whole high school suspension. 5 games is a complete overreaction to a tweet. The school said that the WIAA basically said, "do something about it," while the WIAA denies that.

The argument isn't that the regulations aren't new, the amended additions of what can and can't be said is new, I believe. It's ridiculous that you can't yell things such as "scoreboard," "we can't hear you," "your season's over"...those chants aren't even directed at one person. And even chants like, "airball," "fundamentals, " and "sieve" are hardly mean-spirited.

Yes, it's probably the parents and adults that we need to focus on, not a bunch of students having fun.

My point of posting the controversy wasn't even about the girl getting suspended, it was what was being banned.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 13, 2016, 09:25:06 AM

Dave, Thank you for taking the time to share your ballot and your thought process. I think everyone appreciates that!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on January 13, 2016, 11:30:41 AM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 13, 2016, 09:25:06 AM
Dave, Thank you for taking the time to share your ballot and your thought process. I think everyone appreciates that!

Seconded! Although i have disagreed many a time with said thought process, I have always respected being able to question, banter, and even debate your votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 13, 2016, 01:01:29 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 13, 2016, 08:18:32 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 13, 2016, 12:01:51 AM
I'll preface this by saying, usually it doesn't matter what I write in response. I have found with many people on these boards they rather just tell me I am wrong than listen to my point of view - the view of one single voter. I do these blogs because they provide me a chance to do my homework in even more detail and really think through my decisions as a voter. I appreciate that you don't have to agree with me just as I don't have to agree with you (being generic here), but I find it rather surprising how many people would rather tell me I am wrong and tell me how to vote than anything else. Just needed to get that off my chest, please don't take it personally.

Dave, when you publish a public blog, tweet it out, and post it here, I think it's fair to say you are inviting reactions and opinions. I can only speak for myself, but I'm certainly not trying to attack you...I'm just posting my opinions to things you have said publicly. Just debating the Top 25...on the "Top 25 talk" board.

Don't get me wrong, I do appreciate debate and I take the thoughts of others, like yourselves, very much into consideration when I consider my ballot each week. However, there are some - and I am certainly not pointing my finger at you - that will just yell and scream at me because I am not voting how they feel and won't actually listen to my point of view... just blast me for it. The comment was per those who are in that camp that no matter what I was about to write I was wrong.

I understand that by blogging and tweeting I am inviting reactions and opinions, that is fine. However, I am not inviting people to tell me I am wrong and don't know what I am doing. That is a completely different tract.

Quote from: Titan Q on January 13, 2016, 08:18:32 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 13, 2016, 12:01:51 AM
That may seem like a great political-style one-liner, but if that was truly the case and I was voting on simply traditional perceptions... you could argue Benedictine would not be in my Top 25 let alone knocking on the door of the Top 5. That statement borders on hyperbole that may sound great, but it couldn't be further from the truth.

I wasn't trying to make a political-style one-liner at all. I was just posting what I thought was happening in saying, "It seems like you are voting based on traditional perceptions of Benedictine, and not what they actually have and are doing in 2015-16."

First, there is a 14-0 team with a win over #2 that you say you probably can't move them higher than #6...which I guess I don't understand. Second, you've recently made a some comments (on the CCIW board I think) about still factoring in your preseason thoughts about Benedictine in making your ballot. I think my comment was at least fair speculation.

My comments about the preseason were not that I was factoring them in and those comments were made several weeks ago, if memory serves. My comments were that in the preseason I wasn't even considering them and didn't think they would have a stand out year. Per the fact I was coming from a completely blind area with them, it took me a little longer to understand what they were doing and buy in. I had done research on 50 or more teams in the preseason. I had gotten to know, to the best of my abilities, a lot of teams. Benedictine was not one of them. As a result of that, I had to get up to speed on them and that took some time considering I was a little surprised. I am not voting based on the fact that they were not in my preseason poll or on my radar. I highly suspect three-quarters of my current Top 25 was not on my preseason poll and probably at least a third (though, I might be off) were not part of the group I researched at the beginning of the season.

Again, that isn't saying I am voting for or against them per my preseason expectations or information. It is just to explain where I was coming from when starting to look at them more seriously.

There are two other undefeated squads I don't have on my ballot, yet the one I have sixth in the country - which, let's be honest is pretty damn good no matter who the team is - is getting a ton of attention because I don't have them fifth, fourth, maybe first? There is only one voter who has them first and I suspect there is someone who has them tenth while everyone else has them in the 4-6 range (based on their points and average points). It seems I am right there on the median for them, so I don't get why everyone would be upset.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 13, 2016, 12:48:08 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 13, 2016, 12:01:51 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 12, 2016, 06:18:11 PM

It seems like you are voting based on traditional perceptions of Benedictine, and not what they actually have and are doing in 2015-16.

That may seem like a great political-style one-liner, but if that was truly the case and I was voting on simply traditional perceptions... you could argue Benedictine would not be in my Top 25 let alone knocking on the door of the Top 5. That statement borders on hyperbole that may sound great, but it couldn't be further from the truth.

I have quibbles with several other of your replies to Q, but this one burned me up. As you know (since you posted supporting me) I also believe that 'tradition' (especially continuity in great coaching, institutional support, etc.) is and should be a factor in voting, I'm shocked that you would accuse Q of being the one to use hyperbole and 'a great political-style one-liner' in this exchange. Anyone who would even mention Benedictine not being in the top 25 is not engaging in 'history'; they are down Alice's 'rabbit-hole'. Talk about hyperbole!

And it is rather silly to talk about their weak conference when conference games have barely begun (and they went 5-0 against the CCIW, which is rarely called a 'weak conference'). Personally, I suspect they will sweep and go 25-0 entering the tourney (or 26, or 27, or whatever), but since nearly every team stumbles at some point, so what?

I am NOT a Benedictine fan (in fact, since they've beaten IWU two years in a row, I'm becoming a 'hater'! >:(), but based on THIS year's evidence, I think it is incontrovertible that you ARE thinking on traditional grounds.

A) If you think I was being serious that I wouldn't be voting for them because they are in the NACC, you are nuts. I was using an extreme point of view, a bit of hyperbole, to point out why I thought the comment was ridiculous. I am not in anyway, shape, or form voting in such a manner. Clearly. I have them sixth. Yes, I do consider tradition, historic team consistency, etc. is at play and maybe that is why Bob and others don't like the fact I have them sixth. I am comfortable with them with ALL the information I have including how they have done traditionally to have them sixth. My comment about the fact a loss in conference will raise more questions is per the fact that traditionally they don't dominate the NACC. I used a hyperbole type comment to point out why I thought the comment to me was on the same par. I am not making the comment because that is how I am actually voting or would ever vote.

B) I don't think there is ANY evidence that I am thinking on traditional grounds. They are SIXTH on my ballot. That is right about where they are averaging on EVERYONE'S ballots. I know for a FACT there are those voting in the same general area as me with the exact same thinking. It isn't incorrect thinking. But you are all up in arms about this, but you aren't up in arms about other teams this year or in the past. I don't understand why you think this needs to be your bailiwick.

C) I agree that it might not matter if they stumble, but I was just stating what is going on in my mind. I am looking for more information about them and a loss would make it more challenging to understand them. I expected Augustana, and to be honest pretty much everyone, to lose this season. That doesn't mean a bad loss isn't something to be concerned about. That doesn't mean a loss to one team rather than another won't be confusing. That's all I am saying.

Quote from: sac on January 13, 2016, 08:21:20 AM
masseyratings.com seems to have done ok with last years Final Four teams.

#1 Stevens Point
#2 Augustana
#3 Va Wesleyan
#9 Babson

I'd be more interested in where Massey had those four teams prior to the tournament starting. I can't seem to find that archival data (his website went sideways trying to get there for me), but I did find this piece of information at the top rather interesting: "Note: historical ratings have been re-computed, and may differ slightly from original postings due to updated data or algorithm modification." Leaves a lot to be interrupted.

I will also say by the end of the season, the ratings seem to be more true or give a better scope of things. But anywhere between the beginning of the season and about three-quarters through, I take no stock in them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 13, 2016, 01:03:47 PM

I really loathe 'perception carryover' this late in the season. Not picking on anyone - this happens everywhere. But when you look at this season more closely, the better it looks. There are pretty solid data points happening now.

Also, conference losses happen. I take a random road conferences losses with a shrug - "That'll happen." Happens in every league.

Right now, it's about the time to take the Massey ratings seriously. Teams have been connected to each other...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 13, 2016, 01:17:45 PM

The reason conferences losses happen is why Augustana is still my number one pick. I think people are confusing my "my concern is someone in their conference is going to beat them and that will raise more questions than it answers." All I am saying is they beat North Central and Elmhurst, so a loss to Wisconsin Lutheran would confuse me; raise more questions. It certainly won't answer the questions if they are good or overrated. That's all I am saying. Nothing more. I am not going to pull them out of the poll should they lose.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 13, 2016, 01:30:19 PM

See, I guess I don't think a conference road loss is 'confusing'. Also, many teams have conference nemesis that for some reason always give them issues for no darn good reason. (For Wabash, that's Oberlin - for some reason the Yeomen tend to give the LG's fits more often than not....)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 13, 2016, 01:46:31 PM

I guess it depends on the conference loss, then.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 13, 2016, 02:35:33 PM

Quote
Quote from: sac on January 13, 2016, 08:21:20 AM
masseyratings.com seems to have done ok with last years Final Four teams.

#1 Stevens Point
#2 Augustana
#3 Va Wesleyan
#9 Babson

I'd be more interested in where Massey had those four teams prior to the tournament starting. I can't seem to find that archival data (his website went sideways trying to get there for me), but I did find this piece of information at the top rather interesting: "Note: historical ratings have been re-computed, and may differ slightly from original postings due to updated data or algorithm modification." Leaves a lot to be interrupted.

I will also say by the end of the season, the ratings seem to be more true or give a better scope of things. But anywhere between the beginning of the season and about three-quarters through, I take no stock in them.

Only Va Wesleyan was outside the top 10 at the beginning of the tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on January 13, 2016, 02:39:21 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 13, 2016, 01:17:45 PM
The reason conferences losses happen is why Augustana is still my number one pick. I think people are confusing my "my concern is someone in their conference is going to beat them and that will raise more questions than it answers." All I am saying is they beat North Central and Elmhurst, so a loss to Wisconsin Lutheran would confuse me; raise more questions. It certainly won't answer the questions if they are good or overrated. That's all I am saying. Nothing more. I am not going to pull them out of the poll should they lose.

I understand your thinking regarding Benedictine. And, yes, a loss in the NACC to other than Aurora or Rockford, might have me rethinking them. However, it over the continuum of time, I think most CCIW followers would say both Benedictine and Aurora would be solidly in the middle tier of the CCIW (higher in some seasons).

So, if we were to put Benedictine in the CCIW -today:
Benedictine would be tied for first place and have the best overall record with wins over NCC and Elmhurst with Elmhurst having defeated Augustana.
The above is what I think the CCIW posters are saying voters should take into consideration.

And, what maybe different about Benedictine this season - the player "who shall not be named" , who returned from last year's squad, so far does not seem to be spelling team with an "I". Does that make Benedictine a top 5 team? Like you, I do not think so.

Because - I do not think Benedictine could repeat wins over all 3 CCIW teams again. And, that would be the level of competition it would face in the NCAA tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 13, 2016, 04:29:19 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 12, 2016, 06:18:11 PM
* Benedictine traveled to Elmhurst and led 47-19 at halftime, and beat them in a game that was never close...

I'm basically on your side in this debate, Bob, but I need to point out that the Benedictine @ Elmhurst game actually was close towards the end. Elmhurst whittled away at that 28-point halftime lead and had it down to five (87-82) with forty seconds left and four (88-84) with seventeen seconds left. I'm sure that you've seen more than your share of games in which a five-point lead has evaporated in the final minute.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 13, 2016, 04:37:00 PM

At this point, to me, Benedictine has undoubtedly the best resume in the country, but after watching Elmhurst and Augustana, I'm having a hard time thinking Benedictine should be favored over either, even if they're perfectly capable of beating both.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 13, 2016, 05:16:06 PM

Quote from: Ryan Stoppable on January 12, 2016, 11:31:20 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 12, 2016, 06:18:11 PM
"Benedictine is clearly a good team, but in a sub-par conference. They clearly have gotten it done out of conference (five games, five opponents from the CCIW)."
While the NCAA Tournament results from previous seasons are obviously not there, how true is that this year? In addition to Benedictine, the Massey ratings have five other NACC teams ranked #104 or higher (so basically in the top quarter of D3), and the conference as a whole is over .500 in non-conference play.

(For that matter, our current second place Aurora also beat the aforementioned North Central; Benedictine demolished the Spartans by 28 in their first meeting.)

This is a good point, and it's worth a response. League rankings can be just as fluid as team rankings from season to season. F'rinstance, does anybody really think that the MIAA is still the same middling circuit it's usually been, even though it's no longer just the two Dutch-American powers and their own private collection of tomato cans?

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 13, 2016, 12:01:51 AMFurthermore, you say they have a win over #25 NCC based on the overall poll, but I haven't ranked NCC as of yet (I want to see how they do this week) and thus that win doesn't hold as much weight. It holds weight, but not as much. I appreciate that Benedictine may have "more" in those two wins than Whitworth (who beat Calvin in a game I called and now Whitman who is also ranked), but feel Whitworth is a deeper team with more weapons on the floor at any given time. I have also seen St. Thomas (called one of their games as well) and feel the Tommies wins over Emory (while not as strong as in the past), UWSP, and Bethel (now - not before I voted last time) are more significant.

??? You're putting weight behind St. Thomas's win over UWSP as being "more significant"? D-Mac, UWSP is 7-6, 0-2. And the Pointers have a 14-point loss to -- wait for it -- North Central.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 13, 2016, 12:01:51 AM
Because the information I have in front of me plus what I have been able to see online, I don't feel Benedictine is better than the teams ahead of them despite beating one of them (and that team beating another). Trust me when I say, I am not the only voter who feels this way though as I have talked to several who have the same opinion, though out of respect for them and to not give away information, I won't name them or what regions they represent.

Using the opinions of others as an endorsement of one's own opinion is an argument that has limited substance. Groupthink doesn't wash with me. If you've got pertinent data on hand that causes you to be the outlier, then be the outlier.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 13, 2016, 12:01:51 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 12, 2016, 06:25:42 PM
For what it's worth, Massey has Benedictine #1.

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?s=cb2016&sub=11620

It actually means nothing to me to be honest. I check out Massey to make sure there isn't a team slipping through the radar, but considering five of Benedictine's 14 games are against CCIW opponents and thus their schedules, I am not making much of it. We can go around and around about Massey, but I feel the system has it's flaws and one of those flaws is it tends to add value somehow to WIAC and CCIW teams and those those who play them. I have said in the past I don't put much stock in the rankings other than to help me make sure there isn't someone I'm missing. I am certainly not going to rank based on them, either - though I am sure some voters do.

Careful, Dave. Some of the other voters whose opinions you cite as an endorsement of your own may be secretly poisoning their ballots by using Massey. :D

Quote from: HOPEful on January 13, 2016, 11:30:41 AM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 13, 2016, 09:25:06 AM
Dave, Thank you for taking the time to share your ballot and your thought process. I think everyone appreciates that!
Seconded! Although i have disagreed many a time with said thought process, I have always respected being able to question, banter, and even debate your votes.

Thirded! Although I don't agree with your reasoning about Benedictine, D-Mac, I do appreciate both your transparency via the blog and your willingness to publicly debate your ballot.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 13, 2016, 12:48:08 AMAs you know (since you posted supporting me) I also believe that 'tradition' (especially continuity in great coaching, institutional support, etc.) is and should be a factor in voting

Chuck, I'm going to start calling you "Tevye".

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fonwardtoourpast.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F04%2FTradition-from-fiddler.jpg&hash=2623b05033939636cd166b6283b1ab58bb4dde33)

Quote from: Titan Q on January 13, 2016, 08:18:32 AM
I wasn't trying to make a political-style one-liner at all. I was just posting what I thought was happening in saying, "It seems like you are voting based on traditional perceptions of Benedictine, and not what they actually have and are doing in 2015-16."

First, there is a 14-0 team with a win over #2 that you say you probably can't move them higher than #6...which I guess I don't understand. Second, you've recently made a some comments (on the CCIW board I think) about still factoring in your preseason thoughts about Benedictine in making your ballot. I think my comment was at least fair speculation.

Agreed.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 13, 2016, 01:01:29 PMB) I don't think there is ANY evidence that I am thinking on traditional grounds. They are SIXTH on my ballot. That is right about where they are averaging on EVERYONE'S ballots. I know for a FACT there are those voting in the same general area as me with the exact same thinking. It isn't incorrect thinking. But you are all up in arms about this, but you aren't up in arms about other teams this year or in the past. I don't understand why you think this needs to be your bailiwick.

Why in the world should it matter? Why are our motivations relevant to this conversation? I can guarantee that nobody's jonesing to see Benedictine move up just for the sake of Benedictine moving up. There aren't any BU fans in here pushing on behalf of "their" team. In fact, kiko pointed out in CCIW Chat that it's mostly a bunch of CCIW fans who're taking up the argument on behalf of the Bennies, in opposition to two of our league's own (Augustana and Elmhurst). There are no ulterior motives here, I'm pretty sure.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 13, 2016, 01:01:29 PM
Quote from: sac on January 13, 2016, 08:21:20 AM
masseyratings.com seems to have done ok with last years Final Four teams.

#1 Stevens Point
#2 Augustana
#3 Va Wesleyan
#9 Babson

I'd be more interested in where Massey had those four teams prior to the tournament starting. I can't seem to find that archival data (his website went sideways trying to get there for me), but I did find this piece of information at the top rather interesting: "Note: historical ratings have been re-computed, and may differ slightly from original postings due to updated data or algorithm modification." Leaves a lot to be interrupted.

I will also say by the end of the season, the ratings seem to be more true or give a better scope of things. But anywhere between the beginning of the season and about three-quarters through, I take no stock in them.

So you don't take stock in Massey in mid-January, but you do take stock in Benedictine's (and the NACC's) history, in spite of the fact that, by your own admission, you didn't research the Bennies at all this past preseason and thus didn't realize that they were returning four starters (and three of the four top bench guys) from an 18-9 team and had added a 6'9 D2 transfer as well? OK.

Quote from: smedindy on January 13, 2016, 01:03:47 PM
I really loathe 'perception carryover' this late in the season. Not picking on anyone - this happens everywhere. But when you look at this season more closely, the better it looks. There are pretty solid data points happening now.

Also, conference losses happen. I take a random road conferences losses with a shrug - "That'll happen." Happens in every league.

Right now, it's about the time to take the Massey ratings seriously. Teams have been connected to each other...

Yes, yes, and yes. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 13, 2016, 05:29:04 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 13, 2016, 09:25:06 AM
Dave, Thank you for taking the time to share your ballot and your thought process. I think everyone appreciates that!

Agree!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 13, 2016, 05:33:05 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 13, 2016, 04:37:00 PM

At this point, to me, Benedictine has undoubtedly the best resume in the country, but after watching Elmhurst and Augustana, I'm having a hard time thinking Benedictine should be favored over either, even if they're perfectly capable of beating both.

To be fair though, have you watched Benedictine?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 13, 2016, 11:41:54 PM

I'd pay to watch a Benedictine vs Alma quarterfinal game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 14, 2016, 07:09:09 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 13, 2016, 05:33:05 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 13, 2016, 04:37:00 PM

At this point, to me, Benedictine has undoubtedly the best resume in the country, but after watching Elmhurst and Augustana, I'm having a hard time thinking Benedictine should be favored over either, even if they're perfectly capable of beating both.

To be fair though, have you watched Benedictine?

I caught part of one game, but not enough to feel like I saw a good sample.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 14, 2016, 07:37:34 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	603	Whitworth	13-0	01/15 at Willamette; 01/16 at George Fox
#2	575	Elmhurst	14-1	won at Carthage, 78-58; 01/16 at Wheaton (Ill.)
#3	557	Augustana	14-1	def. #25 North Central (Ill.), 76-49; 01/16 at Carthage
#4	541	Hope	12-2	LOST at T#41 Alma, 75-86; 01/16 vs. T#26 Trine
#5	535	Benedictine	14-0	01/14 at Concordia-Chicago; 01/16 vs. Concordia (Wis.)
#6	521	St. Thomas	12-1	def. Augsburg, 88-77; won at #38 St. John's, 85-73; 01/16 at St. Mary's (Minn.)
#7	475	John Carroll	14-0	won at Otterbein, 94-80; 01/16 vs. #19 Mount Union
#8	449	Ohio Wesleyan	13-1	def. Wabash, 88-76; 01/16 at DePauw
#9	416	Amherst	11-1	01/15 vs. T#41 Wesleyan; 01/16 vs. Connecticut College
#10	363	Marietta	12-2	won at Capital, 78-74; 01/16 vs. Otterbein
#11	354	Susquehanna	15-0	def. Juniata, 60-55; 01/16 at Drew
#12	348	WPI	12-2	LOST to T#39 Babson, 71-75; 01/16 at Emerson
#13	330	Christopher Newport	13-1	won at Mary Washington, 80-62; 01/16 vs. York (Pa.)
#14	286	UW-Whitewater	11-3	LOST to UW-River Falls, 70-75; 01/16 at UW-La Crosse
#15	280	New York University	11-0	won at Hunter, 81-76; 01/15 vs. Emory; 01/17 vs. Rochester
#16	259	Chicago	10-2	01/15 at Carnegie Mellon; 01/17 at Case Western Reserve
#17	197	Franklin and Marshall	11-2	won at Haverford, 87-56; 01/14 vs. Johns Hopkins; 01/16 at Washington College
#18	171	Tufts	11-2	01/15 at Middlebury; 01/16 at Hamilton
#19	148	Mount Union	11-3	def. Muskingum, 94-70; 01/16 at #7 John Carroll
#20	111	Roanoke	12-2	LOST to Hampden-Sydney, 92-100; 01/16 vs. Randolph-Macon
#21	87	Whitman	11-2	01/15 at George Fox; 01/16 at Willamette
#22	80	Lancaster Bible	10-0	01/15 at Cazenovia; 01/16 at Morrisville State
#23	63	St. Norbert	11-2	won at Beloit, 86-60; 01/16 at Knox
#24	50	Scranton	11-4	LOST at Merchant Marine, 65-66; 01/16 vs. Catholic
#25	39	North Central (Ill.)	10-5	LOST at #3 Augustana, 49-76; 01/16 at Illinois Wesleyan

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
T#26	29	Bethel	10-3	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 79-70; LOST to Augsburg, 62-66; 01/16 vs. Hamline
T#26	29	Trine	12-2	def. Adrian, 69-55; 01/16 at #4 Hope
#28	27	Hiram	11-3	LOST at Wooster, 69-100; 01/16 at Oberlin
#29	24	Texas Lutheran	11-3	01/15 at Trinity (Texas); 01/16 at Schreiner
#30	23	Oswego State	8-3	LOST to Brockport State, 67-77; 01/15 vs. Plattsburgh State; 01/16 vs. Potsdam State
#31	20	Cortland State	9-2	LOST to Geneseo State, 76-77; 01/15 vs. Potsdam State; 01/16 vs. Plattsburgh State
#32	17	Carroll	12-1	def. Lawrence, 84-83
#33	11	Johnson and Wales	13-1	def. T#50 Albertus Magnus, 113-58; 01/16 at Suffolk
T#34	10	MIT	10-3	def. Coast Guard, 70-52; 01/16 vs. Springfield
T#34	10	Northwestern (Minn.)	12-2	01/15 vs. St. Scholastica; 01/16 vs. UW-Superior
T#34	10	Delaware Valley	12-2	def. Manhattanville, 73-52; 01/16 at Wilkes
#37	9	Chapman	8-4	LOST at La Verne, 69-70; LOST at Occidental, 65-71; 01/16 at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps
#38	8	St. John's	10-3	LOST to #6 St. Thomas, 73-85; 01/16 vs. Augsburg
T#39	7	Babson	9-4	won at #12 WPI, 75-71; 01/16 at Wheaton (Mass.)
T#39	7	Brooklyn	12-3	won at Hunter, 96-89; 01/17 at Keystone
T#41	6	Virginia Wesleyan	9-5	won at Eastern Mennonite, 96-94; 01/16 at Randolph
T#41	6	Wesleyan	12-2	01/15 at #9 Amherst; 01/16 at T#41 Trinity (Conn.)
T#41	6	Alma	10-4	def. #4 Hope, 86-75; 01/16 at Calvin
T#41	6	Trinity (Conn.)	9-4	01/15 vs. Connecticut College; 01/16 vs. T#41 Wesleyan
T#41	6	Washington U.	8-4	01/15 at Case Western Reserve; 01/17 at Carnegie Mellon
#46	5	Colby	10-3	01/15 at Williams
#47	4	Swarthmore	10-3	LOST at Johns Hopkins, 49-60; 01/14 vs. Dickinson; 01/16 vs. McDaniel
T#48	2	Salisbury	11-3	won at Wesley, 66-52; 01/16 vs. Southern Virginia
T#48	2	UW-Stevens Point	8-6	def. UW-Platteville, 60-57; 01/16 vs. UW-Oshkosh
T#50	1	Albertus Magnus	9-3	def. Baruch, 91-89; LOST at #33 Johnson and Wales, 58-113; 01/16 vs. Mount Ida
T#50	1	Oneonta State	9-3	01/15 at New Paltz State
T#50	1	St. Vincent	11-3	won at Washington and Jefferson, 89-67; 01/16 vs. Thomas More

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 14, 2016, 11:58:57 AM

I can't keep up with much of this thread right now since I am in San Antonio... but Greg, one thing I wanted to clear up. I didn't do NO research on Benedictine in the preseason. The quick research I did apparently didn't entice me and thus I moved on. I know there were four seniors coming back, but something about what I was looking at didn't excite me. Not much more I can say. Furthermore, transfers don't register with me either because I hear promises of transfers all of the time that don't end up working out either on the court or being on the team. You live out there and have a better understanding of how that transfer may change Benedictine, but even where I live I am not going to really understand how a transfer will impact a team. Heck, Ramapo got a transfer from Albright who didn't play at all for the Lions... but has turned into their best weapon at Ramapo. I wouldn't have had a clue that would happen, so I see a transfer information but I just don't put stock in them when I don't understand what the real impact will be. (Did anyone see Duncan Robinson being one of the main reasons Michigan is succeeding this season? Sure, we all know he could play and would contribute, but he's beating teams like Maryland right now).

As for taking stock in Massey... I just don't buy into the math. I am not about to go around and around on this as we have in the past, but it doesn't seem solid for me. I may change my mind in the future, but not right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 14, 2016, 12:03:54 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 14, 2016, 11:58:57 AM
I can't keep up with much of this thread right now since I am in San Antonio... but Greg, one thing I wanted to clear up. I didn't do NO research on Benedictine in the preseason. The quick research I did apparently didn't entice me and thus I moved on. I know there were four seniors coming back, but something about what I was looking at didn't excite me. Not much more I can say. Furthermore, transfers don't register with me either because I hear promises of transfers all of the time that don't end up working out either on the court or being on the team. You live out there and have a better understanding of how that transfer may change Benedictine, but even where I live I am not going to really understand how a transfer will impact a team. Heck, Ramapo got a transfer from Albright who didn't play at all for the Lions... but has turned into their best weapon at Ramapo. I wouldn't have had a clue that would happen, so I see a transfer information but I just don't put stock in them when I don't understand what the real impact will be. (Did anyone see Duncan Robinson being one of the main reasons Michigan is succeeding this season? Sure, we all know he could play and would contribute, but he's beating teams like Maryland right now).

As for taking stock in Massey... I just don't buy into the math. I am not about to go around and around on this as we have in the past, but it doesn't seem solid for me. I may change my mind in the future, but not right now.

Massey might look wrong to you because the D3 tournament is seeded wrong by the NCAA.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 14, 2016, 12:32:59 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 14, 2016, 11:58:57 AM
I can't keep up with much of this thread right now since I am in San Antonio... but Greg, one thing I wanted to clear up. I didn't do NO research on Benedictine in the preseason. The quick research I did apparently didn't entice me and thus I moved on. I know there were four seniors coming back, but something about what I was looking at didn't excite me. Not much more I can say. Furthermore, transfers don't register with me either because I hear promises of transfers all of the time that don't end up working out either on the court or being on the team. You live out there and have a better understanding of how that transfer may change Benedictine, but even where I live I am not going to really understand how a transfer will impact a team. Heck, Ramapo got a transfer from Albright who didn't play at all for the Lions... but has turned into their best weapon at Ramapo. I wouldn't have had a clue that would happen, so I see a transfer information but I just don't put stock in them when I don't understand what the real impact will be. (Did anyone see Duncan Robinson being one of the main reasons Michigan is succeeding this season? Sure, we all know he could play and would contribute, but he's beating teams like Maryland right now).

As for taking stock in Massey... I just don't buy into the math. I am not about to go around and around on this as we have in the past, but it doesn't seem solid for me. I may change my mind in the future, but not right now.

I don't know about others, but I predicted he would be a D1 star once he had a year with Michigan's strength coach. I only saw him live once (the total destruction of Amherst in Salem in 2014), but the only real weakness I saw in his game was that he was rather 'wispy', even by D3 standards. I had heard that he had a very good work ethic, so a top-flight strength coach was really the only missing ingredient.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 14, 2016, 12:57:07 PM

Lets go to the files.......

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on August 11, 2014, 07:07:09 PM
I saw Duncan Robinson in Salem - he is definitely legit!

Right now his only real drawback is a rather slight physique. But a year of bulking up should solve that. I see no reason he can't be a solid player, perhaps even a star.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 14, 2016, 02:31:34 PM

I didn't think he wouldn't succeed at Michigan... I just didn't think in his first year he would be a major contributor. I figured he would grow into the role. I am thrilled for him to say the least. Wispy would be the right description for him in Salem to be sure.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 14, 2016, 02:37:11 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 14, 2016, 02:31:34 PM
I didn't think he wouldn't succeed at Michigan... I just didn't think in his first year he would be a major contributor. I figured he would grow into the role. I am thrilled for him to say the least. Wispy would be the right description for him in Salem to be sure.

Technically he didn't play in his first year at Michigan, this is his second. He lifted weights and shot 3-pointers all day for a year(probably).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 14, 2016, 02:58:41 PM

To be honest, I'm pleasantly surprised that he is this good this quickly. I kinda figured next year would be his break-out season. I was pretty sure he'd already be in the rotation this season (Coach Beilein sometimes said that DR's 3-point shooting was the missing ingredient from last year's team), but if The Big Ten had a 'newcomer of the year' award (they just have a 'freshman of the year' award), he'd win it hands down.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 14, 2016, 03:14:51 PM

Quote from: sac on January 14, 2016, 02:37:11 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 14, 2016, 02:31:34 PM
I didn't think he wouldn't succeed at Michigan... I just didn't think in his first year he would be a major contributor. I figured he would grow into the role. I am thrilled for him to say the least. Wispy would be the right description for him in Salem to be sure.

Technically he didn't play in his first year at Michigan, this is his second. He lifted weights and shot 3-pointers all day for a year(probably).

Apparently. 59-106 from 3, 69-127 overall. I guess 6'8" in D3 makes you an unstoppable foward and 6'8" in D1 makes you a shooting guard, 3-pt specialist. Not sure what his shot totals were in D3.

Edit: 81-179 from 3 at Williams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 14, 2016, 03:37:23 PM

As the basketball spins... there continue to be incredible stories around Division III as we get further into conference schedules. Teams leading conferences that no one suspected, programs finding success with alums at the helm, and Division III making national headlines but not for the obvious reasons. Tonight on Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave McHugh talks to those still proving people wrong as the season enters the second half.

Dave is in San Antonio for the NCAA Convention, so tonight's show is pre-recorded. Dave talked to most of the guests before some played their midweek games. The pre-recorded show along with podcast will be available starting at 7pm ET here: http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2015-16/jan14

Guests include (in order of appearance):
- Dr. Oliver Eslinger, Caltech men's coach - NABC Coach's Corner
- Rob deGrandpre, Hilbert men's coach
- Kelly Dunne, Nazareth women's coach
- Zach Filzen, No. 22 Lancaster Bible men's coach (Gordon Mann interview)
- Ashlee Rogers, Marymount women's coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville (http://www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville)
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087 (https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087)

And don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com (http://www.d3hoopsville.com)
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville (http://www.facebook.com/Hoopsville)
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville (http://www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on January 14, 2016, 05:37:13 PM

Re: transfers, Wooster got a transfer who had been a contributor (IIRC) at the Air Force Academy but wanted to come home for whatever reason. While he's turned into a nice player after a couple of years in the program, he's not the star you'd think he'd be with that resume. You never know.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 14, 2016, 05:45:30 PM

People tend to lump all D1-to-D3 transfers into the same category, but in the vast majority of cases there's a big, big difference in quality between transfers who used to be D1 scholarship players and those who used to be D1 walk-ons. There tends to be a gap as well between former D1 preferred walk-ons and those who succeeded at an open tryout at their old D1 school for the chance to sit at the end of the bench, wear a uniform, and be scout-team cannon fodder for the rotation players in practice. But the biggest gap is between the ex-D1-scholies and the ex-D1-walk-ons in general.

The overall term "D1 transfer" can be a little vague and misleading if you don't specify whether or not that particular player had a scholie.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on January 14, 2016, 07:10:54 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 14, 2016, 02:58:41 PM
To be honest, I'm pleasantly surprised that he is this good this quickly. I kinda figured next year would be his break-out season. I was pretty sure he'd already be in the rotation this season (Coach Beilein sometimes said that DR's 3-point shooting was the missing ingredient from last year's team), but if The Big Ten had a 'newcomer of the year' award (they just have a 'freshman of the year' award), he'd win it hands down.

I think next year in terms of being a more complete player (pretty good now as a shooter). He has some work to do on the defense side as still catching up to the speed of play at this level and gets lost and/or loses his man too easily. If he makes similar progress in the weight and strength department then he should be a really special player next season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 15, 2016, 10:14:07 AM

Quote from: David Collinge on January 14, 2016, 05:37:13 PM
Re: transfers, Wooster got a transfer who had been a contributor (IIRC) at the Air Force Academy but wanted to come home for whatever reason. While he's turned into a nice player after a couple of years in the program, he's not the star you'd think he'd be with that resume. You never know.

As Greg mentioned, all transfers aren't created equal. D-I to D-III doesn't necessarily mean that someone will come in and dominate.

A good D-I role player may be able to step in and be a great D-III role player. Or maybe just a good D-III role player. It's even possible that a player might be able to succeed more on the D-I level.

That may be counterintitive, but I really think that it holds. Take, say, a post player who is a very physical player and a great defender against big 6'10" or 7' D-I players. Put him on a D-III team against 6'4" to 6'6" mobile posts and he isn't in the situation where he could succeed the most.

And even though that same player might be able to average 4-6 points against D-I caliber defenders, it doesn't mean that he will suddenly become a 30 ppg rim shaker against D-III opponents.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 15, 2016, 11:46:18 AM

I know a lot of University of Missouri basketball fans who would argue that they have an entire team, save maybe 1 or 2, who would be role players at the Division III level. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 15, 2016, 02:09:50 PM

Hey, who dinged my karma?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 15, 2016, 02:17:33 PM

Quote from: WUH on January 15, 2016, 02:09:50 PM
Hey, who dinged my karma?

A Mizzou hoops fan who wears black and gold colored glasses...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 15, 2016, 05:29:11 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 15, 2016, 02:17:33 PM
Quote from: WUH on January 15, 2016, 02:09:50 PM
Hey, who dinged my karma?

A Mizzou hoops fan who wears black and gold colored glasses...

+1 I was mistaken when I described the fans as they. I was raised in the era of Mike Sanbothe, our hometown hero, and have been a Mizzou loyalist every since. I am not quitting on the team but I sure know a lot of people who have. It has been a rough stretch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 15, 2016, 08:08:42 PM

Yeah, D-1 to D-2 transfers don't necessarily mean they're stars, in any sport. I can see where the D-1 to D-3 transfers would be the same.

Even the scholarship players at top programs who transfer sometimes are just role players everywhere. I've seen a lot of JUCO to D-1 to lower division transfers and they're mainly complementary players that just didn't fit in at the D-1 place, or they got homesick.

In the two seasons before this one, we've have D-1 big men transfer to CWU and they've been stiffs even at D-2. Even at 6'10 or 6'11. Last night there was a women's player for Alaska-Anchorage who went JUCO to D-1 at Penn State to Anchorage and is last on the Anchorage team in games played and minutes. (Anchorage is 2nd in the nation in D-2 and play a fast moving game dependent on defense and steals ("Mayhem" is on the back of their jerseys) so maybe that has a little to do with it too.)

Transfers from D-1 to top D-3 programs also may have to slide into a role at first to make sure they work together with the team well. I don't think many would be bucket-fillers unless they went to a no-hoper D-3 program.

I also recall many times a D-1 football player washes out wherever due to stuff and things and plays down levels his last year or two and rarely do you see them light it up.

You just never know with transfers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 15, 2016, 08:20:46 PM

The only transfers that are 'virtually' guaranteed are those who clearly established themselves in D1 and transferred for reasons basically unrelated to basketball performance. The clearest examples are both women: Olivia Lett (SIU to IWU), who became national POY, and Sydney Moss (Florida? to Thomas More), who wanted to be a student, rather than just a bball player, and is widely considered the best D3 player ever. (I don't recall the reason for Olivia's transfer, but suspect it was the same as Sydney - being a D1 athlete, especially in the 'big name' sports, is a full-time job. D3 athletes love their sport just as much as D1, but they do NOT work the same hours. D3 also sometimes gets D1-level athletes specifically because they want to play 2 or more sports, and would not be allowed to in D1.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pg04 on January 15, 2016, 10:27:52 PM

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 08:56:15 PM
oh, it takes a person, really??????????????? well that persoin should not have a job of it it is 2 hpours latewter and it still says 450-409,... you thing these peopkme deserve to get paid gor theie qoute unquote job

come on man

what if you were making a medicaqtion in aq phrama, and you boss waqs like, oh werll , fill olut the aperwork when you caqn

lol

are you seriopus?

The score was 450-409 omg! Sorry I clicked on the link of a recent post and found this.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 15, 2016, 10:31:35 PM

Well, keep in mind that the scoreboard operator was clearly impaired during that game, having previously taken a medicaqtion he bought in aq phrama that had been made without filling out the proper aperwork.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: pg04 on January 15, 2016, 10:34:42 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 15, 2016, 10:31:35 PM
Well, keep in mind that the scoreboard operator was clearly impaired during that game, having previously taken a medicaqtion he bought in aq phrama that had been made without filling out the proper aperwork.

I hope that persoin was fired, seriopusly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 15, 2016, 10:52:55 PM

Yes, he was ... 2 hpours latewter.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 16, 2016, 05:23:13 PM

I'll be interested to see if Alma (a perennial loser in the MIAA until last season) can jump all the way from 6 pts. to IN the top 25. They had a pretty good week ( ;)), beating #4 Hope by 11 and demolishing Calvin today by 22. I'd have to think that would be enough to jump them to the low 20s, but they'd have to pass an awful lot of teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 17, 2016, 04:55:52 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Brooklyn/Keystone live stats are stalled at 4 seconds, so that score might not be exactly right.

31 losses (if I counted correctly). I want to apologize to Hiram supporters for highlighting that team last week, only to have them suffer two losses this week.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	603	Whitworth	15-0	won at Willamette, 81-77; won at George Fox, 91-57
#2	575	Elmhurst	15-1	won at Carthage, 78-58; won at Wheaton (Ill.), 71-46
#3	557	Augustana	15-1	def. #25 North Central (Ill.), 76-49; won at Carthage, 71-63
#4	541	Hope	13-2	LOST at T#41 Alma, 75-86; def. T#26 Trine, 74-51
#5	535	Benedictine	16-0	won at Concordia-Chicago, 103-67; def. Concordia (Wis.), 76-67
#6	521	St. Thomas	13-1	def. Augsburg, 88-77; won at #38 St. John's, 85-73; won at St. Mary's (Minn.), 91-61
#7	475	John Carroll	15-0	won at Otterbein, 94-80; def. #19 Mount Union, 116-93
#8	449	Ohio Wesleyan	14-1	def. Wabash, 88-76; won at DePauw, 74-67
#9	416	Amherst	13-1	def. T#41 Wesleyan, 66-40; def. Connecticut College, 88-86
#10	363	Marietta	13-2	won at Capital, 78-74; def. Otterbein, 109-58
#11	354	Susquehanna	15-1	def. Juniata, 60-55; LOST at Drew, 74-76
#12	348	WPI	13-2	LOST to T#39 Babson, 71-75; won at Emerson, 70-62
#13	330	Christopher Newport	14-1	won at Mary Washington, 80-62; def. York (Pa.), 72-53
#14	286	UW-Whitewater	11-4	LOST to UW-River Falls, 70-75; LOST at UW-La Crosse, 70-72
#15	280	New York University	12-1	won at Hunter, 81-76; LOST to Emory, 64-71; def. Rochester, 77-67
#16	259	Chicago	12-2	won at Carnegie Mellon, 70-68; won at Case Western Reserve, 112-100
#17	197	Franklin and Marshall	13-2	won at Haverford, 87-56; def. Johns Hopkins, 63-60; won at Washington College, 82-72
#18	171	Tufts	12-3	LOST at Middlebury, 82-85; won at Hamilton, 86-60
#19	148	Mount Union	11-4	def. Muskingum, 94-70; LOST at #7 John Carroll, 93-116
#20	111	Roanoke	13-2	LOST to Hampden-Sydney, 92-100; def. Randolph-Macon, 91-85
#21	87	Whitman	13-2	won at George Fox, 91-73; won at Willamette, 80-67
#22	80	Lancaster Bible	12-0	won at Cazenovia, 92-77; won at Morrisville State, 97-66
#23	63	St. Norbert	12-2	won at Beloit, 86-60; won at Knox, 56-53
#24	50	Scranton	11-5	LOST at Merchant Marine, 65-66; LOST to Catholic, 62-73
#25	39	North Central (Ill.)	11-5	LOST at #3 Augustana, 49-76; won at Illinois Wesleyan, 96-89

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
T#26	29	Bethel	11-3	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 79-70; LOST to Augsburg, 62-66; def. Hamline, 104-66
T#26	29	Trine	12-3	def. Adrian, 69-55; LOST at #4 Hope, 51-74
#28	27	Hiram	11-4	LOST at Wooster, 69-100; LOST at Oberlin, 67-75
#29	24	Texas Lutheran	13-3	won at Trinity (Texas), 71-66; won at Schreiner, 69-46
#30	23	Oswego State	9-4	LOST to Brockport State, 67-77; LOST to Plattsburgh State, 68-85; def. Potsdam State, 81-72
#31	20	Cortland State	10-3	LOST to Geneseo State, 76-77; def. Potsdam State, 93-72; LOST to Plattsburgh State, 68-75
#32	17	Carroll	12-1	def. Lawrence, 84-83
#33	11	Johnson and Wales	14-1	def. T#50 Albertus Magnus, 113-58; won at Suffolk, 90-50
T#34	10	MIT	11-3	def. Coast Guard, 70-52; def. Springfield, 73-57
T#34	10	Northwestern (Minn.)	13-3	LOST to St. Scholastica, 74-81; def. UW-Superior, 87-78
T#34	10	Delaware Valley	12-3	def. Manhattanville, 73-52; LOST at Wilkes, 57-60
#37	9	Chapman	9-4	LOST at La Verne, 69-70; LOST at Occidental, 65-71; won at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 77-71
#38	8	St. John's	11-3	LOST to #6 St. Thomas, 73-85; def. Augsburg, 91-68
T#39	7	Babson	10-4	won at #12 WPI, 75-71; won at Wheaton (Mass.), 92-81
T#39	7	Brooklyn	13-3	won at Hunter, 96-89; won at Keystone, 75-67
T#41	6	Virginia Wesleyan	10-5	won at Eastern Mennonite, 96-94; won at Randolph, 66-65
T#41	6	Wesleyan	12-4	LOST at #9 Amherst, 40-66; LOST at T#41 Trinity (Conn.), 62-76
T#41	6	Alma	11-4	def. #4 Hope, 86-75; won at Calvin, 86-64
T#41	6	Trinity (Conn.)	11-4	def. Connecticut College, 78-56; def. T#41 Wesleyan, 76-62
T#41	6	Washington U.	10-4	won at Case Western Reserve, 96-80; won at Carnegie Mellon, 92-84
#46	5	Colby	10-4	LOST at Williams, 66-75
#47	4	Swarthmore	12-3	LOST at Johns Hopkins, 49-60; def. Dickinson, 82-68; def. McDaniel, 59-54
T#48	2	Salisbury	12-3	won at Wesley, 66-52; def. Southern Virginia, 67-52
T#48	2	UW-Stevens Point	8-7	def. UW-Platteville, 60-57; LOST to UW-Oshkosh, 59-64
T#50	1	Albertus Magnus	10-3	def. Baruch, 91-89; LOST at #33 Johnson and Wales, 58-113; def. Mount Ida, 98-82
T#50	1	Oneonta State	10-3	won at New Paltz State, 90-67
T#50	1	St. Vincent	12-3	won at Washington and Jefferson, 89-67; def. Thomas More, 72-66

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 17, 2016, 06:16:40 PM

Great work as always, Darryl! I wish I had seen you in San Antonio... had my head on a swivel looking for you... would love to have caught up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 17, 2016, 06:40:59 PM

Each and every week there are games that will surprise. Each and every season there are programs that will surprise. This season there may be more than the rest.

Tonight on Hoopsville, Dave returns from the NCAA Convention in San Antonio where he got more than a taste of Texas basketball. Plus, there are a few teams making a statement in their conferences and it's time to shine a light on their success.

Dave also got a chance while at the NCAA Convention to talk to the parents of one of the more influencial student-athletes the NCAA has seen. Brent and Lisa Hill talk about the legacy left by their daughter Lauren and the recognition she got from the NCAA.

You can watch the show starting at 7pm ET tonight right here: http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2015-16/jan17

Guests include (in order):
- Janson Hightower, Southwestern men's coach
- Cameron Hill, No. 17 Trinity (Texas) women's coach
- Jessica Ott, Milwaukee Engineering women's coach - WBCA Center Court
- Bill Geitner, Eastern Connecticut's men's coach
- Steven Schulman, Lehman's men's coach
- Bill and Lisa Hill, Lauren Hill's parents

You can also tune into the podcast(s):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville (http://www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville)
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087 (https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087)

And don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com (http://www.d3hoopsville.com)
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville (http://www.facebook.com/Hoopsville)
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville (http://www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 17, 2016, 06:46:55 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 17, 2016, 06:16:40 PM
Great work as always, Darryl! I wish I had seen you in San Antonio... had my head on a swivel looking for you... would love to have caught up.

It would probably be easier if I had not had so much extra stuff to do in my room in the evenings. I should have at least tracked you down to say "hello" following the issues forum (I had a pretty good idea of where you were in the room from the picture you tweeted.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 17, 2016, 07:11:28 PM

Ha! There is pretty much just one place I can be in that room without being up on the dais. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2016, 01:40:12 PM

This week's Top 25 ballot and thoughts: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/01/19/daves-top-25-ballot-week-6-3/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on January 20, 2016, 08:41:13 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2016, 01:40:12 PM
This week's Top 25 ballot and thoughts: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/01/19/daves-top-25-ballot-week-6-3/

Something must be wrong with me because I agree with your ballot and a lot of your reasoning! ;D

Just nitpicking a bit, but Hope did not struggle at all against Olivet. They were up 43-21 at half and Hope put in their third string very early. Every player on their team had at least 9 minutes of playing time. However, a fall of 4 spots is more than justified by their loss to Alma coupled with their other struggles this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 20, 2016, 11:38:00 AM

My comment about Hope was I expected them to end the game stronger even with the reserves in.

As for your agreeing with my ballot... I could say something snarky like it's about time you saw things my way... but that isn't right because I don't necessarily agree with how I see things. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on January 20, 2016, 12:47:13 PM

Catholic and Juniata play tonight; winner gets Dave's #25 position on next week's ballot. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 20, 2016, 12:52:16 PM

Um... no. Not a chance.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 20, 2016, 01:13:49 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on January 20, 2016, 08:41:13 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2016, 01:40:12 PM
This week's Top 25 ballot and thoughts: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/01/19/daves-top-25-ballot-week-6-3/

Something must be wrong with me because I agree with your ballot and a lot of your reasoning! ;D

Just nitpicking a bit, but Hope did not struggle at all against Olivet. They were up 43-21 at half and Hope put in their third string very early. Every player on their team had at least 9 minutes of playing time. However, a fall of 4 spots is more than justified by their loss to Alma coupled with their other struggles this season.

It was 34-7 and Olivet finally reached double-digit points with 5 minutes to play in the first half. It was never close.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 20, 2016, 05:03:47 PM

Biggest vote gainers:
Whitman, 126
Alma, 101
F&M, 82
Chicago, 77
Christopher Newport, 63
Texas Lutheran, 38
John Carroll, 34
Lancaster Bible, 34
Carroll, 32
St. Norbert, 31
Johnson and Wales, 29
OH Wesleyan, 25

Biggest vote losers:
UW-Whitewater, -248
Hope, -121
Susquehanna, -101
NYU, -76
WPI, -75
Roanoke, -52
Scranton, -50
Tufts, -39
Hiram, -27
Bethel, -24
Oswego St., -23
Cortland State, -20

**10 teams went from receiving votes to receiving 0. We're finally moving to more consolidation and consensus as we get more and more data.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 20, 2016, 10:19:43 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

Delaware Valley at FDU-Florham might be wrong; the live stats are stuck at 0:18.
UW-River Falls vs. UW-Stevens Point score is missing; live stats stuck at half time, and I was unable to determine the final score while watching the 90-second free preview of the video archive. (corrected; thanks, magicman)

Also corrected a typo ("Eatern Connecticut" instead of "Eastern ...") which resulted in that team showing up as IDLE with a record of 0-0.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	602	Whitworth	15-0	01/22 vs. Pacific Lutheran; 01/23 vs. Puget Sound
#2	588	Elmhurst	16-1	def. North Park, 91-88; 01/23 at #25 North Central (Ill.)
#3	576	Augustana	16-1	won at Illinois Wesleyan, 77-60; 01/23 vs. Millikin
#4	557	Benedictine	17-0	won at Dominican, 91-67; 01/23 at Milwaukee Engineering
#5	509	John Carroll	16-0	won at Baldwin Wallace, 102-89; 01/23 vs. Wilmington
#6	503	St. Thomas	14-1	def. St. Olaf, 75-66; 01/23 at Carleton
#7	474	Ohio Wesleyan	15-1	def. Oberlin, 81-69; 01/23 vs. Denison
#8	440	Amherst	13-2	LOST at Wesleyan, 44-71; 01/22 at Bowdoin; 01/23 at Colby
#9	420	Hope	14-2	won at Adrian, 76-73; 01/23 vs. Kalamazoo
#10	393	Christopher Newport	15-1	won at St. Mary's (Md.), 83-67; 01/23 at Frostburg State
#11	386	Marietta	14-2	won at #18 Mount Union, 98-85; 01/23 vs. Heidelberg
#12	336	Chicago	12-2	01/22 vs. #17 New York University; 01/24 vs. Brandeis
#13	279	Franklin and Marshall	13-3	LOST at Gettysburg, 57-73; 01/23 vs. McDaniel
#14	273	WPI	14-2	def. Clark, 67-66; 01/23 at Wheaton (Mass.)
#15	253	Susquehanna	16-1	def. Goucher, 98-67; 01/23 vs. Elizabethtown
#16	213	Whitman	13-2	01/22 vs. Puget Sound; 01/23 vs. Pacific Lutheran
#17	204	New York University	12-1	01/22 at #12 Chicago; 01/24 at #31 Washington U.
#18	165	Mount Union	11-5	LOST to #11 Marietta, 85-98; 01/23 at Otterbein
#19	132	Tufts	12-3	01/22 at Wesleyan; 01/23 at Connecticut College
#20	114	Lancaster Bible	12-0	01/21 vs. Keuka; 01/22 vs. Wells
#21	107	Alma	12-4	won at T#34 Trine, 96-91; 01/23 vs. Albion
#22	94	St. Norbert	13-2	def. #26 Carroll, 82-58; 01/23 vs. Monmouth
#23	62	Texas Lutheran	13-3	01/22 vs. Colorado College; 01/23 vs. Centenary (La.)
#24	59	Roanoke	14-2	won at Emory and Henry, 98-90; 01/23 at Shenandoah
#25	55	North Central (Ill.)	12-5	def. Carthage, 97-68; 01/23 vs. #2 Elmhurst

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	49	Carroll	12-2	LOST at #22 St. Norbert, 58-82; 01/23 vs. Illinois College
#27	40	Johnson and Wales	15-1	def. Emmanuel, 116-74; 01/23 at St. Joseph's (Maine)
#28	38	UW-Whitewater	12-4	won at UW-Oshkosh, 66-60; 01/23 vs. UW-Eau Claire
T#29	25	MIT	12-3	won at T#29 Babson, 71-66; 01/23 vs. Emerson
T#29	25	Babson	10-5	LOST to T#29 MIT, 66-71; 01/23 vs. Coast Guard
#31	23	Washington U.	10-4	01/22 vs. Brandeis; 01/24 vs. #17 New York University
#32	22	Plattsburgh State	12-2	won at Potsdam State, 83-71; 01/23 vs. Brockport State; 01/24 vs. Geneseo State
#33	19	Salisbury	13-3	def. Marymount, 72-65; 01/23 at Penn State-Harrisburg
T#34	16	Trine	12-4	LOST to #21 Alma, 91-96; 01/23 vs. Olivet
T#34	16	Brooklyn	14-3	def. CCNY, 87-78; 01/22 at John Jay
#36	14	Trinity (Conn.)	12-4	def. Keene State, 83-65; 01/22 at Colby; 01/23 at Bowdoin
#37	7	Virginia Wesleyan	11-5	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 86-65; 01/23 vs. Lynchburg
T#38	6	Oneonta State	10-3	01/22 vs. Buffalo State; 01/23 vs. Fredonia State
T#38	6	Penn State-Behrend	13-1	def. Hilbert, 69-58; 01/21 vs. D'Youville; 01/23 at La Roche
T#40	5	Bethel	12-3	won at Carleton, 71-61; 01/23 at Concordia-Moorhead
T#40	5	Hampden-Sydney	12-4	LOST at Randolph, 55-57; 01/23 at Eastern Mennonite
#42	4	St. John Fisher	11-3	~~01/19 vs. Utica~~ postponed; 01/22 at Hartwick; 01/23 at Stevens
T#43	3	Albertus Magnus	11-3	def. Rivier, 80-64; 01/23 at Norwich
T#43	3	St. John's	12-3	def. Gustavus Adolphus, 87-83; 01/23 at St. Olaf
#45	2	Northwestern (Minn.)	13-3	01/22 vs. Finlandia; 01/23 vs. Northland
T#46	1	Delaware Valley	13-3	won at FDU-Florham, 72-60; 01/23 vs. DeSales
T#46	1	Eastern Connecticut	12-5	def. Western Connecticut, 71-63; 01/23 at Southern Maine
T#46	1	UW-River Falls	11-5	def. UW-Stevens Point, 56-48;; 01/23 at UW-Platteville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 20, 2016, 11:10:39 PM

Darryl,

UW-River Falls won that game 56-48.

The Delaware Valley-FDU-Florham score is correct.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 21, 2016, 12:00:43 AM

Quote from: magicman on January 20, 2016, 11:10:39 PM
Darryl,

UW-River Falls won that game 56-48.

The Delaware Valley-FDU-Florham score is correct.

Speaking of which, River Falls is looking pretty good. Undefeated in conference and three of those five losses don't look so bad.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 21, 2016, 05:47:17 PM

It isn't easy to coach at any level. It is a joy to coach Division III says many a coach. Some enjoy it on their way up the ladder, others on their way closer to retirement, and others as their passion.

Tonight on Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) we talk to many coaches in different aspects of their careers with varying teams who are succeeding on the court and off of it because of what coaching has taught them including facing the challenges no one should face especially off the court.

Hoopsville hits the air tonight at 7:00 pm ET with a jam packed show. Talking to programs who are leading their conferences or in the hunt facing the challenge that not everyone expect them to be competitive. We also talk to a few coaches who are taking care of more than Xs and Os. They are taking care of their team after a horrific circumstance of a player's murder or looking out of their own battling cancer.

You can watch the show starting at 7pm ET tonight right here: http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2015-16/jan21 (http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2015-16/jan21)

Guests include (in order):
- Scott Hemer, SUNY Geneseo women's coach
- Chris Downs, St. Lawrence men's coach
- Dan Priest, Kenyon men's coach (NABC Coach's Corner)
- Guy Rancourt, Lycoming men's coach
- Amanda Bailey, Luther women's coach
- Jacquie Hullah, Carngie Mellon women's coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville (http://www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville)
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087 (https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087)

And don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com (http://www.d3hoopsville.com)
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville (http://www.facebook.com/Hoopsville)
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville (http://www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 22, 2016, 12:43:00 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 21, 2016, 12:00:43 AM
Quote from: magicman on January 20, 2016, 11:10:39 PM
Darryl,

UW-River Falls won that game 56-48.

The Delaware Valley-FDU-Florham score is correct.

Speaking of which, River Falls is looking pretty good. Undefeated in conference and three of those five losses don't look so bad.

Another thing to consider regarding River Falls is that 4 of their 5 losses were without their floor leader, Grant Erickson, who's first game wasn't until the Alma loss. He didn't even start that game. In addition, they have beaten preseason title contenders Oshkosh, Stevens Point and at Whitewater.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D3HoopJunkie on January 22, 2016, 01:16:11 PM

Before I begin this post I need to state beforehand that I am an Albertus Magnus supporter.

Johnson and Wales University should be in the Top 25......I know they are right on the cusp according to the last poll but I have seen this team play many times this year and they are without question worthy of a Top 25 ranking. As an Albertus supporter it absolutely KILLS me to say this. For those of you who don't know much about the GNAC this is hands down the biggest rivalry within the conference and I have no doubts one of the more "heated" I would bet to guess in the country. 2 very well coached teams who flat out hate each other.

As an Albertus supporter I have been fortunate enough to see some of the best D3 has to offer over the past few seasons because of their success in making it to the post season. I think back to a William Patterson team who was as experienced and deep as anyone going into the tournament that season, a Middlebury squad with Ryan Sherry as there leader, Desales with Darnell Braswell who to this day is still one of the best D3 players I have ever seen on both sides of the ball, a loaded Williams team who had as complete of a starting 5 as you can have including Duncan Robinson and finally last year's Dickinson team who were very polished and had an outstanding player in Gerry Wixted coupled with a ton of length and athleticism. Not to mention my own Falcons from last season who had about as much athleticism and scoring ability as any of the previous teams I just mentioned.

Again, I believe I have seen some of the best D3Hoops has to offer and I must say that this year's Johnson and Wales team could have competed with any of the above listed. I think that come tourney time they are going to be a very dangerous team as long as they don't slip up and let my youthful Falcons catch them sleeping in the GNAC tournament because there is no team other than Albertus in the GNAC capable of beating this JWU squad this season.

They lack an inside interior presence but they make up for it a great deal with their athleticism and their ability to shoot the basketball from the perimeter. They can flat out shoot the basketball. Quarry Greenaway is a pretty special player too. He is a player that a team can ride in a tournament format such as the NCAA.

They will be interesting to watch as the season progresses. Kills me to endorse that program but all the credit in the world goes to Coach Benton and his players. They would be very deserving

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 22, 2016, 01:27:06 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 22, 2016, 12:43:00 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on January 21, 2016, 12:00:43 AM
Quote from: magicman on January 20, 2016, 11:10:39 PM
Darryl,

UW-River Falls won that game 56-48.

The Delaware Valley-FDU-Florham score is correct.

Speaking of which, River Falls is looking pretty good. Undefeated in conference and three of those five losses don't look so bad.

Another thing to consider regarding River Falls is that 4 of their 5 losses were without their floor leader, Grant Erickson, who's first game wasn't until the Alma loss. He didn't even start that game. In addition, they have beaten preseason title contenders Oshkosh, Stevens Point and at Whitewater.

Wasn't aware of that - good to know.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 24, 2016, 04:44:47 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	602	Whitworth	17-0	def. Pacific Lutheran, 93-62; def. Puget Sound, 87-68
#2	588	Elmhurst	16-2	def. North Park, 91-88; LOST at #25 North Central (Ill.), 62-80
#3	576	Augustana	17-1	won at Illinois Wesleyan, 77-60; def. Millikin, 96-50
#4	557	Benedictine	18-0	won at Dominican, 91-67; won at Milwaukee Engineering, 67-52
#5	509	John Carroll	17-0	won at Baldwin Wallace, 102-89; def. Wilmington, 79-70
#6	503	St. Thomas	15-1	def. St. Olaf, 75-66; won at Carleton, 71-61
#7	474	Ohio Wesleyan	16-1	def. Oberlin, 81-69; def. Denison, 82-76
#8	440	Amherst	14-3	LOST at Wesleyan, 44-71; won at Bowdoin, 92-78; LOST at Colby, 64-66
#9	420	Hope	15-2	won at Adrian, 76-73; def. Kalamazoo, 86-78
#10	393	Christopher Newport	15-1	won at St. Mary's (Md.), 83-67; ~~01/23 at Frostburg State~~ postponed
#11	386	Marietta	15-2	won at #18 Mount Union, 98-85; def. Heidelberg, 82-71
#12	336	Chicago	14-2	def. #17 New York University, 69-58; def. Brandeis, 65-50
#13	279	Franklin and Marshall	13-3	LOST at Gettysburg, 57-73
#14	273	WPI	15-2	def. Clark, 67-66; won at Wheaton (Mass.), 79-57
#15	253	Susquehanna	16-1	def. Goucher, 98-67
#16	213	Whitman	14-3	def. Puget Sound, 102-76; LOST to Pacific Lutheran, 74-79
#17	204	New York University	13-2	LOST at #12 Chicago, 58-69; won at #31 Washington U., 75-72
#18	165	Mount Union	12-5	LOST to #11 Marietta, 85-98; won at Otterbein, 94-61
#19	132	Tufts	13-4	LOST at Wesleyan, 77-78; won at Connecticut College, 83-81
#20	114	Lancaster Bible	14-0	def. Keuka, 100-80; def. Wells, 86-59
#21	107	Alma	13-4	won at T#34 Trine, 96-91; def. Albion, 75-64
#22	94	St. Norbert	14-2	def. #26 Carroll, 82-58; def. Monmouth, 73-56
#23	62	Texas Lutheran	15-3	def. Colorado College, 81-79; def. Centenary (La.), 88-79
#24	59	Roanoke	14-2	won at Emory and Henry, 98-90
#25	55	North Central (Ill.)	13-5	def. Carthage, 97-68; def. #2 Elmhurst, 80-62

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	49	Carroll	13-2	LOST at #22 St. Norbert, 58-82; def. Illinois College, 94-59
#27	40	Johnson and Wales	16-1	def. Emmanuel, 116-74; won at St. Joseph's (Maine), 82-61
#28	38	UW-Whitewater	12-5	won at UW-Oshkosh, 66-60; LOST to UW-Eau Claire, 63-66
T#29	25	MIT	12-4	won at T#29 Babson, 71-66; LOST to Emerson, 56-66
T#29	25	Babson	11-5	LOST to T#29 MIT, 66-71; ~~01/23 vs. Coast Guard~~ postponed; def. Coast Guard, 100-90
#31	23	Washington U.	10-6	LOST to Brandeis, 66-69; LOST to #17 New York University, 72-75
#32	22	Plattsburgh State	13-3	won at Potsdam State, 83-71; LOST to Brockport State, 63-74; def. Geneseo State, 98-87
#33	19	Salisbury	13-3	def. Marymount, 72-65
T#34	16	Trine	13-4	LOST to #21 Alma, 91-96; def. Olivet, 55-54
T#34	16	Brooklyn	15-3	def. CCNY, 87-78; won at John Jay, 78-66
#36	14	Trinity (Conn.)	14-4	def. Keene State, 83-65; won at Colby, 62-60; won at Bowdoin, 85-66
#37	7	Virginia Wesleyan	12-5	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 86-65; def. Lynchburg, 86-78
T#38	6	Oneonta State	11-4	LOST to Buffalo State, 73-82; def. Fredonia State, 95-66
T#38	6	Penn State-Behrend	15-1	def. Hilbert, 69-58; def. D'Youville, 69-47; won at La Roche, 71-59
T#40	5	Bethel	12-4	won at Carleton, 71-61; LOST at Concordia-Moorhead, 61-69
T#40	5	Hampden-Sydney	12-4	LOST at Randolph, 55-57
#42	4	St. John Fisher	11-4	LOST at Hartwick, 66-78
T#43	3	Albertus Magnus	11-3	def. Rivier, 80-64; ~~01/23 at Norwich~~ postponed
T#43	3	St. John's	13-3	def. Gustavus Adolphus, 87-83; won at St. Olaf, 81-72
#45	2	Northwestern (Minn.)	15-3	def. Finlandia, 93-45; def. Northland, 72-52
T#46	1	Delaware Valley	14-3	won at FDU-Florham, 72-60; def. DeSales, 75-47
T#46	1	Eastern Connecticut	12-6	def. Western Connecticut, 71-63; LOST at Southern Maine, 76-77
T#46	1	UW-River Falls	11-6	def. UW-Stevens Point, 56-48; LOST at UW-Platteville, 61-72

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 24, 2016, 05:01:03 PM

Despite technical problems over the last few weeks, Sunday's edition of Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) has not been derailed by Mother Nature's rath! Three-feet of snow and still we will get two-hours of the show all thanks to that wonderful home studio.

Tonight, Dave McHugh talks to programs who are storming the competition right now. Whether in the midst of long winning streaks or dominating their conference, these programs are making the turn at five weeks to go in pretty good shape.

You can tune into Hoopsville tonight starting at 7:00 PM ET right here: http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2015-16/jan24

Guest include (in order):
- Cherise Galasso, WPI women's coach
- Gabby Lisella, No. 22 Rowan women's coach
- Kris Huffman, DePauw women's coach (WBCA Center Court)
- Mike McGrath, No. 12 Chicago men's coach
- Bert West, East Texas Baptist men's coast It isn't easy to coach at any level. It is a joy to coach Division III says many a coach. Some enjoy it on their way up the ladder, others on their way closer to retirement, and others as their passion.

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville (http://www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville)
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087 (https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087)

And don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com (http://www.d3hoopsville.com)
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville (http://www.facebook.com/Hoopsville)
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville (http://www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 25, 2016, 04:44:19 PM

Little earlier than usual, which is nice... here is the MBB Top 25 for Week 7: http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2015-16/week7

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 25, 2016, 06:40:04 PM

Biggest vote gainers:
N. Central (IL), 153
Alma, 131
St. Norbert, 125
Roanoke, 63
Susquehanna, 59
Texas Lutheran, 58
Johnson and Wales, 49
Wesleyan, 48
Chicago, 45
WPI, 37
John Carroll, 32
St. Thomas, 32
Gettysburg, 27
Marietta, 24

Biggest vote losers:
Amherst, -194
F&M, -155
Whitman, -127
Mt. Union, -126
Tufts, -105
NYU, -96
Elmhurst, -92
Carroll, -47
MIT, -25
UW-Whitewater, -24
WashU, -23
Babson, -18
Trine, -15

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 26, 2016, 04:53:21 PM

Finally got my Top 25 blog done, bracketed by hours of shoveling the last few days. You can check it out here: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/01/26/daves-top-25-blog-week-7/

I also want to point out that I have apparently inspired a few others to reveal their brackets and some their reasoning:
- Ira Thor: http://irathor.tumblr.com/post/138004547557/heres-my-division-iii-top-25-ballot-for-january
- Ryan Scott: http://onemorethingblog.blogspot.com/2016/01/worlds-colliding.html

Enjoy.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 26, 2016, 07:15:58 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 26, 2016, 04:53:21 PM
I also want to point out that I have apparently inspired a few others to reveal their brackets and some their reasoning:
- Ira Thor: http://irathor.tumblr.com/post/138004547557/heres-my-division-iii-top-25-ballot-for-january
- Ryan Scott: http://onemorethingblog.blogspot.com/2016/01/worlds-colliding.html

(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/f8/3e/13/f83e13fc005394433a6a76a793f11042.jpg)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 27, 2016, 08:33:36 PM

Don't look now, but Bryson Fonville is sticking it to Susquehanna tonight. Impressive display.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 27, 2016, 09:19:32 PM

Susquehanna and Roanoke both go down - the opponent in both cases (Catholic and Randolph) both shot more than 50% from three. Tough to beat that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 27, 2016, 10:04:06 PM

Ohio Wesleyan goes down at Wooster.

Augie put 7 guys in double figures tonight in beating Elmhurst. That's a good team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2016, 10:10:13 PM

Nice to see Fonville show up! He's been MIA a lot this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 27, 2016, 10:19:11 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2016, 10:10:13 PM
Nice to see Fonville show up! He's been MIA a lot this season.

But not even the best performance of the night in the region. Marquis Marshall at Alvernia went for 31 and 18 in a win over Lycoming!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 27, 2016, 10:33:31 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	613	Whitworth	17-0	01/29 at Linfield; 01/30 at Lewis and Clark
#2	590	Augustana	18-1	def. #6 Elmhurst, 97-84; 01/30 vs. North Park
#3	578	Benedictine	19-0	def. Rockford, 95-72; 01/30 vs. Lakeland
#4	541	John Carroll	18-0	won at Heidelberg, 95-78; 01/30 vs. Ohio Northern
#5	535	St. Thomas	17-1	won at Concordia-Moorhead, 79-70; won at Macalester, 67-61
#6	496	Elmhurst	16-3	LOST at #2 Augustana, 84-97; 01/30 vs. Millikin
#7	482	Ohio Wesleyan	16-2	LOST at Wooster, 90-91; 01/30 vs. Hiram
#8	431	Hope	16-2	def. Calvin, 75-67; 01/30 at Albion
#9	416	Christopher Newport	16-1	won at Southern Virginia, 82-73; 01/30 vs. Penn State-Harrisburg
#10	410	Marietta	16-2	won at Muskingum, 108-97; 01/30 at Baldwin Wallace
#11	381	Chicago	14-2	01/29 vs. T#44 Emory; 01/31 vs. Rochester
#12	312	Susquehanna	16-2	LOST at Catholic, 80-101
#13	310	WPI	16-2	won at Coast Guard, 78-58; 01/30 vs. Springfield
#14	246	Amherst	15-3	won at Williams, 71-50; 01/30 at #27 Trinity (Conn.)
#15	238	Alma	14-4	def. Olivet, 93-55; 01/30 vs. Kalamazoo
#16	219	St. Norbert	15-2	won at Ripon, 83-63; 01/30 at #43 Carroll
#17	208	North Central (Ill.)	14-5	won at Millikin, 94-60; 01/30 vs. Wheaton (Ill.)
#18	131	Lancaster Bible	15-0	won at Valley Forge, 100-75; 01/29 vs. Wilson; 01/30 vs. Gallaudet
#19	124	Franklin and Marshall	15-3	def. McDaniel, 68-48; won at Dickinson, 64-62; 01/30 vs. Haverford
#20	122	Roanoke	15-3	won at Shenandoah, 85-68; LOST to Randolph, 86-91; 01/30 vs. #37 Virginia Wesleyan
#21	120	Texas Lutheran	15-3	01/29 at Colorado College; 01/31 at Centenary (La.)
#22	108	New York University	13-2	01/29 vs. Carnegie Mellon; 01/31 vs. Case Western Reserve
#23	89	Johnson and Wales	16-1	01/28 at Emmanuel; 01/30 at Anna Maria
#24	86	Whitman	14-3	01/29 at Lewis and Clark; 01/30 at Linfield
#25	48	Wesleyan	15-4	01/30 vs. Connecticut College

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	39	Mount Union	13-5	won at Baldwin Wallace, 80-79; 01/30 vs. Capital
#27	30	Trinity (Conn.)	14-5	LOST at Merchant Marine, 60-67; 01/30 vs. #14 Amherst
#28	29	Penn State-Behrend	16-1	won at Pitt-Bradford, 74-58; 01/30 vs. Penn State-Altoona
T#29	27	Gettysburg	13-5	LOST to T#41 Swarthmore, 69-76; LOST to McDaniel, 65-67; 01/30 at Washington College
T#29	27	Tufts	13-4	01/28 at Newbury; 01/30 vs. Bates
T#29	27	Salisbury	14-3	won at St. Mary's (Md.), 73-41; 01/30 at York (Pa.)
#32	20	Brooklyn	16-3	def. Lehman, 100-99; 01/30 at Staten Island
#33	16	Plattsburgh State	13-3	01/29 at Buffalo State; 01/30 at Fredonia State
#34	14	UW-Whitewater	12-6	LOST to UW-Platteville, 75-78; 01/30 at UW-River Falls
#35	12	St. John's	14-4	LOST to Carleton, 72-75; def. Hamline, 91-82; 01/30 at Bethel
#36	10	Delaware Valley	15-3	won at Misericordia, 74-70; 01/30 vs. Eastern
#37	9	Virginia Wesleyan	12-6	LOST at Randolph-Macon, 59-88; 01/30 at #20 Roanoke
T#38	7	Babson	12-5	won at Clark, 72-50; 01/30 at Emerson
T#38	7	Northwestern (Minn.)	15-3	01/29 at Minnesota-Morris; 01/30 at Crown
#40	5	Aurora	15-3	won at Concordia-Chicago, 100-82; 01/30 vs. Edgewood
T#41	4	Albertus Magnus	12-3	def. Suffolk, 72-56; 01/30 vs. St. Joseph's (Maine)
T#41	4	Swarthmore	15-3	won at T#29 Gettysburg, 76-69; won at Haverford, 66-51; 01/30 vs. Johns Hopkins
#43	2	Carroll	14-2	def. Beloit, 87-76; 01/30 vs. #16 St. Norbert
T#44	1	Emory	11-5	01/29 at #11 Chicago; 01/31 at Washington U.
T#44	1	Trine	13-5	LOST at Albion, 65-74; 01/30 vs. Calvin

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2016, 06:17:43 PM

There are several turning points during the Division III basketball season and we have arrived at yet another. The time in the season when many conferences start heading into the second half of round-robin play.

Thursday night on Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave McHugh talks to some of the teams who are leading their conferences after the first half of play and looking to keep up their mometum. Some have also emerged as an unexpected frontrunner - a theme of the season so far. McHugh also talks to a coach who has one of the more interesting coaching challenges in the country - leading a service academy program with height, practice time, and other restrictions.

Hoopsville hits the air at 7:00 PM ET and you can watch the show here: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2015-16/jan28. We will also have more information on next week's marathon show along with the third-annual fundraising efforts.

Guests include (in order):
- John Krikorian, No. 9 Christopher Newport men's coach
- Chad Shutler, No. 21 Bluffton women's coach
- Kevin Jaskiewicz, Coast Guard men's coach (NABC Coach's Corner)
- Marianne O'Connor-Ermi, St. John Fisher women's coach
- Brad Bjorkgren, Simpson men's coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville (http://www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville)
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087 (https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087)

And don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com (http://www.d3hoopsville.com)
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville (http://www.facebook.com/Hoopsville)
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville (http://www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 31, 2016, 05:16:19 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	613	Whitworth	19-0	won at Linfield, 67-55; won at Lewis and Clark, 89-80
#2	590	Augustana	19-1	def. #6 Elmhurst, 97-84; def. North Park, 95-92
#3	578	Benedictine	20-0	def. Rockford, 95-72; def. Lakeland, 87-62
#4	541	John Carroll	19-0	won at Heidelberg, 95-78; def. Ohio Northern, 84-73
#5	535	St. Thomas	17-1	won at Concordia-Moorhead, 79-70; won at Macalester, 67-61
#6	496	Elmhurst	17-3	LOST at #2 Augustana, 84-97; def. Millikin, 85-56
#7	482	Ohio Wesleyan	17-2	LOST at Wooster, 90-91; def. Hiram, 123-95
#8	431	Hope	17-2	def. Calvin, 75-67; won at Albion, 74-66
#9	416	Christopher Newport	17-1	won at Southern Virginia, 82-73; def. Penn State-Harrisburg, 90-41
#10	410	Marietta	17-2	won at Muskingum, 108-97; won at Baldwin Wallace, 90-70
#11	381	Chicago	14-4	LOST to T#44 Emory, 63-69; LOST to Rochester, 76-84
#12	312	Susquehanna	16-2	LOST at Catholic, 80-101
#13	310	WPI	16-3	won at Coast Guard, 78-58; LOST to Springfield, 51-56
#14	246	Amherst	16-3	won at Williams, 71-50; won at #27 Trinity (Conn.), 89-82
#15	238	Alma	15-4	def. Olivet, 93-55; def. Kalamazoo, 85-80
#16	219	St. Norbert	16-2	won at Ripon, 83-63; won at #43 Carroll, 74-72
#17	208	North Central (Ill.)	15-5	won at Millikin, 94-60; def. Wheaton (Ill.), 71-67
#18	131	Lancaster Bible	17-0	won at Valley Forge, 100-75; def. Wilson, 101-73; def. Gallaudet, 91-73
#19	124	Franklin and Marshall	16-3	def. McDaniel, 68-48; won at Dickinson, 64-62; def. Haverford, 88-64
#20	122	Roanoke	15-4	won at Shenandoah, 85-68; LOST to Randolph, 86-91; LOST to #37 Virginia Wesleyan, 72-73
#21	120	Texas Lutheran	16-4	won at Colorado College, 80-66; LOST at Centenary (La.), 82-87
#22	108	New York University	14-3	LOST to Carnegie Mellon, 80-85; def. Case Western Reserve, 100-82
#23	89	Johnson and Wales	18-1	won at Emmanuel, 82-54; won at Anna Maria, 103-62
#24	86	Whitman	16-3	won at Lewis and Clark, 100-71; won at Linfield, 82-55
#25	48	Wesleyan	16-4	def. Connecticut College, 87-79

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	39	Mount Union	14-5	won at Baldwin Wallace, 80-79; def. Capital, 97-96
#27	30	Trinity (Conn.)	14-6	LOST at Merchant Marine, 60-67; LOST to #14 Amherst, 82-89
#28	29	Penn State-Behrend	17-1	won at Pitt-Bradford, 74-58; def. Penn State-Altoona, 71-44
T#29	27	Gettysburg	14-5	LOST to T#41 Swarthmore, 69-76; LOST to McDaniel, 65-67; won at Washington College, 79-61
T#29	27	Tufts	15-4	won at Newbury, 99-78; def. Bates, 90-75
T#29	27	Salisbury	14-4	won at St. Mary's (Md.), 73-41; LOST at York (Pa.), 68-76
#32	20	Brooklyn	16-4	def. Lehman, 100-99; LOST at Staten Island, 80-81
#33	16	Plattsburgh State	15-3	won at Buffalo State, 94-92; won at Fredonia, 89-75
#34	14	UW-Whitewater	12-7	LOST to UW-Platteville, 75-78; LOST at UW-River Falls, 68-73
#35	12	St. John's	14-5	LOST to Carleton, 72-75; def. Hamline, 91-82; LOST at Bethel, 72-81
#36	10	Delaware Valley	16-3	won at Misericordia, 74-70; def. Eastern, 72-70
#37	9	Virginia Wesleyan	13-6	LOST at Randolph-Macon, 59-88; won at #20 Roanoke, 73-72
T#38	7	Babson	13-5	won at Clark, 72-50; won at Emerson, 79-53
T#38	7	Northwestern (Minn.)	17-3	won at Minnesota-Morris, 78-67; won at Crown, 82-56
#40	5	Aurora	16-3	won at Concordia-Chicago, 100-82; def. Edgewood, 103-90
T#41	4	Albertus Magnus	13-3	def. Suffolk, 72-56; def. St. Joseph's (Maine), 105-58
T#41	4	Swarthmore	15-4	won at T#29 Gettysburg, 76-69; won at Haverford, 66-52; LOST to Johns Hopkins, 53-62
#43	2	Carroll	14-3	def. Beloit, 87-76; LOST to #16 St. Norbert, 72-74
T#44	1	Emory	13-5	won at #11 Chicago, 69-63; won at Washington U., 82-73
T#44	1	Trine	14-5	LOST at Albion, 65-74; def. Calvin, 80-67

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 31, 2016, 06:11:34 PM

There are just four weeks left in the regular season and teams are feeling the pressure to take care of business. Sunday night on Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave McHugh talks to many coaches in the conference playoff mix. Whether they are trying to position themselves to stay at home for the tournament or just get into the playoffs, there is a lot on the line with less games to play.

You can watch Hoopsville starting at 7:00 PM ET here: http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2015-16/jan31

Tonight's guests include (in order):
- Brad Fischer, No. 11 UW-Oshkosh women's coach
- Casey Stitzel, Delaware Valley men's coach
- Mary Beth Spirk, Moravian women's coach (WBCA Center Court)
- Drew Gaeng, Hendrix women's coach
- Joe Reilly, No. 25 Wesleyan men's coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

And a reminder the Hoopsville Fundraising Project has begun yet again. Please consider helping us cover Division III basketball the way it deserves to be covered. If you can not donate, please don't worry about - we understand. At least share the campaign with anyone you think might be interested: http://igg.me/at/hoopsville-fundraiser/x/6029509

Also, if you know any advertisers interested in promoting their company or products on the show, send them our way: hoopsville@d3hoops.com

Thanks!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on February 01, 2016, 05:49:00 PM

Biggest vote gainers:
Johnson and Wales, 108
Amherst, 91
Lancaster Bible, 91
N. Central (IL), 82
F&M, 74
Whitman, 73
St. Norbert, 69
Alma, 68
Wesleyan, 59
Christopher Newport, 44
Penn St Behrend, 41
Marietta, 39
Plattsburgh St., 29
Hope, 28

Biggest vote losers:
Chicago, -226
WPI, -126
Susquehanna, -119
Roanoke, -105
Texas Lutheran, -90
NYU, -84
OH Wesleyan, -68
Elmhurst, -63
Gettysburg, -26
Salisbury, -25
Brooklyn, -19
UW-Whitewater, -14
Trinity (CT), -14
St. John's, -12

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 02, 2016, 05:51:26 AM

scottie,
This post from January 25th looks an awful lot like:

Quote from: scottiedawg on January 25, 2016, 06:40:04 PM
Biggest vote gainers:
N. Central (IL), 153
Alma, 131
St. Norbert, 125
Roanoke, 63
Susquehanna, 59
Texas Lutheran, 58
Johnson and Wales, 49
Wesleyan, 48
Chicago, 45
WPI, 37
John Carroll, 32
St. Thomas, 32
Gettysburg, 27
Marietta, 24

Biggest vote losers:
Amherst, -194
F&M, -155
Whitman, -127
Mt. Union, -126
Tufts, -105
NYU, -96
Elmhurst, -92
Carroll, -47
MIT, -25
UW-Whitewater, -24
WashU, -23
Babson, -18
Trine, -15

This post from February 1st: :D

Quote from: scottiedawg on February 01, 2016, 05:49:00 PM
Biggest vote gainers:
N. Central (IL), 153
Alma, 131
St. Norbert, 125
Roanoke, 63
Susquehanna, 59
Texas Lutheran, 58
Johnson and Wales, 49
Wesleyan, 48
Chicago, 45
WPI, 37
John Carroll, 32
St. Thomas, 32
Gettysburg, 27
Marietta, 24

Biggest vote losers:
Amherst, -194
F&M, -155
Whitman, -127
Mt. Union, -126
Tufts, -105
NYU, -96
Elmhurst, -92
Carroll, -47
MIT, -25
UW-Whitewater, -24
WashU, -23
Babson, -18
Trine, -15

Did you get your weeks mixed up? ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 02, 2016, 07:36:51 AM

I don't see any similarities. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 02, 2016, 07:58:51 AM

I'm pretty sure Susquehanna is among the biggest losers this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on February 02, 2016, 09:40:58 AM

Quote from: magicman on February 02, 2016, 05:51:26 AM
scottie,
This post from January 25th looks an awful lot like:

Did you get your weeks mixed up? ???

Yes I did. Easy to forget to do manual work. ;-) Thanks for the catch. Edited my original post.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 03, 2016, 01:26:00 AM

#20 Whitman beat #2 Whitworth 87-71 last night.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 03, 2016, 09:30:42 AM

Quote from: sac on February 03, 2016, 01:26:00 AM
#20 Whitman beat #2 #1 Whitworth 87-71 last night.

Fixed it for you.

Calls into question... I wonder what the largest margin of defeat was for a team ranked #1?

16 isn't that rare... 8-10 pt game, plus some free throws at the end?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 03, 2016, 11:07:14 AM

It kinda stinks that they're almost certainly going to end up facing each other twice more - NWC Championship and the second round of the NCAAs. Both teams deserve a shot to prove themselves against someone from somewhere else in the post-season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 03, 2016, 11:13:50 AM

Yeah, a likely senario is that Whitworth gets a bye and plays the winner of Whitman and a SCIAC team or a similar opponent. That's the life of living on a D3 island.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 03, 2016, 11:40:35 AM

Yeah, I would love to sit here and tell you that it might find a way to work out and have a different option... but until the bracket is 64 teams (which would force maybe some different options depending on the season), they aren't going to avoid each other in the second round.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on February 03, 2016, 12:35:52 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 03, 2016, 11:07:14 AM

It kinda stinks that they're almost certainly going to end up facing each other twice more - NWC Championship and the second round of the NCAAs. Both teams deserve a shot to prove themselves against someone from somewhere else in the post-season.

Whitman has to get into the tournament first. Very bubbly right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 03, 2016, 01:07:22 PM

I'd rather be bubbly than flat. I hate it when my wife doesn't put the cap on tight!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Stoppable on February 03, 2016, 01:43:21 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 03, 2016, 11:40:35 AM
Yeah, I would love to sit here and tell you that it might find a way to work out and have a different option... but until the bracket is 64 teams (which would force maybe some different options depending on the season), they aren't going to avoid each other in the second round.

Why isn't the NCAA Tournament 64 teams? Division III is larger than Division I is, and they have 68. Would adding two more at large berths screw things up somehow?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 03, 2016, 02:00:24 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 03, 2016, 01:07:22 PM
I'd rather be bubbly than flat. I hate it when my wife doesn't put the cap on tight!

This can go a few different directions, Greek.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 03, 2016, 02:11:53 PM

Quote from: Ryan Stoppable on February 03, 2016, 01:43:21 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 03, 2016, 11:40:35 AM
Yeah, I would love to sit here and tell you that it might find a way to work out and have a different option... but until the bracket is 64 teams (which would force maybe some different options depending on the season), they aren't going to avoid each other in the second round.

Why isn't the NCAA Tournament 64 teams? Division III is larger than Division I is, and they have 68. Would adding two more at large berths screw things up somehow?

Power 5 conference schools would have to cut back on the ivory back scratchers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on February 03, 2016, 02:34:26 PM

If provisionals advance as expected we'll hit 416 D3 full-member D3 teams next season. That is supposed to be enough for a 64-team tournament.

Then again, according to NCAA Division III bylaws we were supposed to be at 63 teams by now, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 03, 2016, 03:05:58 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 03, 2016, 11:13:50 AM
Yeah, a likely senario is that Whitworth gets a bye and plays the winner of Whitman and a SCIAC team or a similar opponent. That's the life of living on a D3 island.

Ditto.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 03, 2016, 03:07:14 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 03, 2016, 02:00:24 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 03, 2016, 01:07:22 PM
I'd rather be bubbly than flat. I hate it when my wife doesn't put the cap on tight!

This can go a few different directions, Greek.

ROTFL!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 03, 2016, 03:32:38 PM

Quote from: Ryan Stoppable on February 03, 2016, 01:43:21 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 03, 2016, 11:40:35 AM
Yeah, I would love to sit here and tell you that it might find a way to work out and have a different option... but until the bracket is 64 teams (which would force maybe some different options depending on the season), they aren't going to avoid each other in the second round.

Why isn't the NCAA Tournament 64 teams? Division III is larger than Division I is, and they have 68. Would adding two more at large berths screw things up somehow?

I assume you want a real answer. There's an access ratio, which means a certain percentage of teams make the tournament (with a cap at 64). D3 should be at 63 right now, but the NCAA wanted to save a little money, so they're only going to bump up when we hit enough for 64, which should be next year. The d1 tournament gets as many teams as it wants because it funds every championship for every sport at every level and thus can do whatever it wants to make more money (as it should).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 03, 2016, 03:47:19 PM

The access ratio for D3 is 6.5:1. In other words, there's one tournament slot for every 6.5 schools that sponsor the sport -- or, as KS and HF point out, there's supposed to be one for every 6.5 schools, but D3 is lagging behind the ratio in terms of men's basketball.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 03, 2016, 04:26:30 PM

To be honest, the NCAA is instituting a rule across all sports to resist adding teams to the brackets in odd numbers, i.e. one at a time, in an effort to save money. We were recently in a pretty good hole and while more money comes in, sports are expanding and costs are increasing thus the division is always in jeopardy of entering that hole again. Thus they are using the little known rule that was forgotten about when tournaments across the board were expanded at the drop of the hat each and every time - feeding into the problem.

Right now the math puts us at exactly 63 schools, so we need 6 to 7 schools to be eligible next season and with the way the process works, I can't speak to if that number will actually be high enough next year. Most I spoke with at the NCAA say it won't be next year, but they will admit that is coming off the top of their heads usually. When you have schools like Iowa Wesleyan who have to repeat years, it makes the math a bit fuzzy.

But again... ALL NCAA tournaments in Division III have been slowed in their increase to even numbers and only when it is clear the expansion is warranted. This is NOT a basketball-only item despite how many might feel.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 03, 2016, 04:26:38 PM

For the third consecutive year, Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) will air for 12 hours as the regular season enters the final four weeks. Dave McHugh will chat with coaches, administrators, student-athletes, and others involved in Division III basketball from around the country. Other guests will include those who have Division III roots or appreciate the division and the game along with the student-athletes who play the sport.

Hoopsville will air from 10 a.m. to 10 p.m. (and maybe later) on Thursday, February 4 live from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can see what guests are scheduled, get more information, and watch the show here: http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2015-16/feb4

You can also read the press release about the show: http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/hoopsville-marathon-2016

Time	Guest	School
10:15am	Connie Tilley	St. Norbert (WBB) - WBCA Center Court
10:40am	Jamie Purdy	Peidmont (WBB)
11:00am	Keri Carollo	UW-Whitewater (WBB) - Nat'l Committee Chair
11:20am	Brent Pollari	Saint Mary's (Minn.) (WBB)
11:40am	Kent Madsen	No. 21 Wheaton (Ill.) (WBB)
12:00pm	Russell Loyd	Rose-Hulman (MBB)
12:20pm	Kevin Broderick	Nazareth (MBB)
12:40pm	Justin Scott	Arcadia (MBB)
1:00pm	Sam Hargraves	No. 12 Alma (MBB)
1:20pm	Lenny Reich	Mount Union (SID)
1:40pm	Maureen Webster	Clarkson (WBB)
2:00pm	Betsy Witman	York (Pa.) (WBB)
2:20pm	Sara Lee	Denison (WBB)
2:40pm	Klay Kneuppel	Wisconsin Lutheran (MBB)
3:00pm	Brian Van Haaften	Buena Vista (MBB) - Nat'l Committee Chair
3:30pm	Sydney Moss	No. 1 Thomas More (WBB)
3:45pm	Aaron Rousell	Bucknell (WBB) - former Chicago coach
4:00pm	Tim Shanahan	Staten Island (WBB)
4:20	Pat Cunningham	Trinity (Texas) (MBB) - NABC Coach's Corner
4:50pm	Bubba Smith	Sewanee (MBB)
5:15pm	Ben Strong	Former Guilford All-American
5:30pm	Kevin Connors	ESPN SportsCenter Anchor - Ithaca alumnus
6:00pm	Kristen Dowling	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps (WBB)
6:20pm	Allison Coleman	Sage (WBB)
6:40pm	Landry Kosmalski	Swarthmore (MBB)
7:00pm	Dave Niland	No. 23 Penn State-Behrend (MBB)
7:20pm	Aaron Galletta	Lasell (MBB)
7:40pm	John Baron	Gwynedd-Mercy (MBB)
8:00pm
8:20pm
8:40pm	Melissa Hodgdon	Wheaton (Mass.) (WBB)
9:00pm	G.P. Gromacki	No. 2 Amherst (WBB)
9:20pm	James Wagner

We hope to get at least the full show on a podcast, or several podcast, during the on Friday. You can find it here:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

And a reminder the Hoopsville Fundraising Project has begun yet again. Please consider helping us cover Division III basketball the way it deserves to be covered. If you can not donate, please don't worry about - we understand. At least share the campaign with anyone you think might be interested: http://igg.me/at/hoopsville-fundraiser/x/6029509

Also, if you know any advertisers interested in promoting their company or products on the show, send them our way: hoopsville@d3hoops.com

Thanks!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on February 03, 2016, 04:28:08 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 03, 2016, 03:47:19 PM
The access ratio for D3 is 6.5:1. In other words, there's one tournament slot for every 6.5 schools that sponsor the sport -- or, as KS and HF point out, there's supposed to be one for every 6.5 schools, but D3 is lagging behind the ratio in terms of men's basketball.

What would the ratio have to be to get a 2nd SLIAC team in?

ok, ok, I'm sorry.. just inserting a little humor....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 03, 2016, 05:10:35 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 03, 2016, 03:07:14 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 03, 2016, 02:00:24 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 03, 2016, 01:07:22 PM
I'd rather be bubbly than flat. I hate it when my wife doesn't put the cap on tight!

This can go a few different directions, Greek.
ROTFL!

I was trying to narrow down those directions... :-X ??? ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 03, 2016, 06:22:12 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 03, 2016, 01:07:22 PM
I'd rather be bubbly than flat. I hate it when my wife doesn't put the cap on tight!

So THAT'S what happened to UWSP. I knew there had to be an explanation...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on February 03, 2016, 10:04:25 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 03, 2016, 04:26:30 PM
To be honest, the NCAA is instituting a rule across all sports to resist adding teams to the brackets in odd numbers, i.e. one at a time, in an effort to save money. We were recently in a pretty good hole and while more money comes in, sports are expanding and costs are increasing thus the division is always in jeopardy of entering that hole again. Thus they are using the little known rule that was forgotten about when tournaments across the board were expanded at the drop of the hat each and every time - feeding into the problem.

Right now the math puts us at exactly 63 schools, so we need 6 to 7 schools to be eligible next season and with the way the process works, I can't speak to if that number will actually be high enough next year. Most I spoke with at the NCAA say it won't be next year, but they will admit that is coming off the top of their heads usually. When you have schools like Iowa Wesleyan who have to repeat years, it makes the math a bit fuzzy.

But again... ALL NCAA tournaments in Division III have been slowed in their increase to even numbers and only when it is clear the expansion is warranted. This is NOT a basketball-only item despite how many might feel.

I have 412 full-member NCAA schools that sponsor men's basketball which would give us 63.4 bids. NCAA truncates the decimal so 63 bids. But as Dave mentions they haven't been adding teams in odd-number increments (despite what the bylaws say).

416 is the magic number for a 64-team tournament (64 x 6.5 = 416).

I have three Year 4 provisional members (Houghton, Southern Virginia, Valley Forge) who would become full NCAA members next year in 2016-17 if they advance as expected. Plus dual-member Nebraska Wesleyan (who I didn't count in the 412 number) is leaving NAIA to fully participate in D3. That would get us to 64 the team threshold.

NCAA Pre-Championship Manual says 410 teams this year, but it's not counting Chatham at all and lists Wilson as a provisional member. I think those are errors.

I will set the over/under on actual tournament bids for 2016-17 at 62.5 (-110) you may place your wagers accordingly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 03, 2016, 10:20:46 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	609	Whitworth	19-1	LOST at #20 Whitman, 71-87; 02/06 vs. Pacific
#2	597	Augustana	20-1	won at #13 North Central (Ill.), 76-68; 02/06 vs. Carthage
#3	579	Benedictine	21-0	won at #30 Aurora, 93-70; 02/06 at Wisconsin Lutheran
#4	551	John Carroll	20-0	def. Otterbein, 95-48; 02/06 at Capital
#5	536	St. Thomas	18-1	def. Gustavus Adolphus, 87-72; 02/06 at Hamline
#6	460	Christopher Newport	19-1	won at Frostburg State, 82-71; won at #41 Salisbury, 61-59; 02/06 at Wesley
#7	459	Hope	18-2	def. Olivet, 94-58; 02/06 vs. #12 Alma
#8	449	Marietta	18-2	def. Capital, 77-63; 02/06 at Wilmington
#9	433	Elmhurst	18-3	def. Carthage, 96-70; 02/06 vs. Wheaton (Ill.)
#10	414	Ohio Wesleyan	18-2	def. Wittenberg, 87-66; 02/06 at Kenyon
#11	337	Amherst	17-3	def. Rhode Island College, 88-51; 02/05 at Bates; 02/06 at #26 Tufts
#12	306	Alma	16-4	won at Adrian, 68-63; 02/06 at #7 Hope
#13	290	North Central (Ill.)	15-6	LOST to #2 Augustana, 68-76; 02/06 vs. Illinois Wesleyan
#14	288	St. Norbert	17-2	won at Lawrence, 62-59; 02/06 vs. Beloit
#15	222	Lancaster Bible	18-0	won at Penn State-Abington, 76-54; 02/06 vs. Penn State-Berks
#16	198	Franklin and Marshall	17-3	def. Muhlenberg, 72-43; 02/06 at T#42 Swarthmore
#17	197	Johnson and Wales	19-1	won at Lasell, 101-68; 02/06 vs. Anna Maria
#18	193	Susquehanna	17-2	won at Juniata, 74-71; 02/06 at Moravian
#19	184	WPI	16-4	LOST to Emerson, 53-56; 02/06 at T#34 Babson
#20	159	Whitman	17-3	def. #1 Whitworth, 87-71; 02/05 vs. Pacific
#21	155	Chicago	14-4	02/05 at #29 Emory; 02/07 at Rochester
#22	107	Wesleyan	17-4	won at Emmanuel, 78-60; 02/05 vs. Williams
#23	70	Penn State-Behrend	18-1	def. Alfred State, 81-45; 02/06 at Franciscan (Ohio)
#24	45	Plattsburgh State	15-3	02/05 vs. SUNY Oneonta; 02/06 vs. SUNY New Paltz
#25	43	Mount Union	14-5	02/06 vs. Ohio Northern

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	37	Tufts	16-4	def. Mass-Dartmouth, 101-82; 02/05 vs. #33 Trinity (Conn.); 02/06 vs. #11 Amherst
#27	30	Texas Lutheran	16-4	02/05 vs. Trinity (Texas); 02/06 vs. Schreiner
#28	24	NYU	15-3	won at Stevens, 74-66; 02/05 at Carnegie Mellon; 02/07 at Case Western Reserve
#29	22	Emory	13-5	02/05 vs. #21 Chicago; 02/07 vs. Washington U.
#30	19	Aurora	16-4	LOST to #3 Benedictine, 70-93; 02/06 at Milwaukee Engineering
#31	18	Delaware Valley	16-4	LOST at Manhattanville, 74-81; 02/06 at DeSales
#32	17	Roanoke	16-4	won at Guilford, 64-62; 02/06 at Hampden-Sydney
#33	16	Trinity (Conn.)	14-6	02/05 at #26 Tufts; 02/06 at Bates
T#34	10	Babson	14-5	def. Wheaton (Mass.), 86-75; 02/06 vs. #19 WPI
T#34	10	Wooster	15-5	def. Kenyon, 101-88; 02/06 at Denison
T#34	10	Northwestern (Minn.)	17-3	02/06 at North Central (Minn.)
#37	8	Albertus Magnus	14-3	won at Rivier, 92-82; 02/06 at Lasell
#38	7	Catholic	15-5	won at Elizabethtown, 73-60; 02/06 at Drew
#39	5	Carroll	14-4	LOST at Ripon, 65-75; 02/06 vs. Grinnell
#40	4	MIT	15-4	won at Springfield, 53-43; 02/06 at Coast Guard
#41	2	Salisbury	15-5	won at Penn State-Harrisburg, 82-56; LOST to #6 Christopher Newport, 59-61; 02/06 vs. Mary Washington
T#42	1	Brooklyn	16-5	LOST to York (N.Y.), 94-96; 02/05 vs. Hunter
T#42	1	Gettysburg	14-6	LOST at Johns Hopkins, 48-68; 02/06 at Haverford
T#42	1	New Jersey City	13-7	def. Kean, 79-52; LOST at Ramapo, 73-80; 02/06 at TCNJ
T#42	1	North Park	14-7	won at Wheaton (Ill.), 74-61; 02/06 vs. Millikin
T#42	1	Swarthmore	16-4	def. Ursinus, 83-64; 02/06 vs. #16 Franklin and Marshall

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 04, 2016, 03:06:32 AM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 03, 2016, 10:04:25 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 03, 2016, 04:26:30 PM
To be honest, the NCAA is instituting a rule across all sports to resist adding teams to the brackets in odd numbers, i.e. one at a time, in an effort to save money. We were recently in a pretty good hole and while more money comes in, sports are expanding and costs are increasing thus the division is always in jeopardy of entering that hole again. Thus they are using the little known rule that was forgotten about when tournaments across the board were expanded at the drop of the hat each and every time - feeding into the problem.

Right now the math puts us at exactly 63 schools, so we need 6 to 7 schools to be eligible next season and with the way the process works, I can't speak to if that number will actually be high enough next year. Most I spoke with at the NCAA say it won't be next year, but they will admit that is coming off the top of their heads usually. When you have schools like Iowa Wesleyan who have to repeat years, it makes the math a bit fuzzy.

But again... ALL NCAA tournaments in Division III have been slowed in their increase to even numbers and only when it is clear the expansion is warranted. This is NOT a basketball-only item despite how many might feel.

I have 412 full-member NCAA schools that sponsor men's basketball which would give us 63.4 bids. NCAA truncates the decimal so 63 bids. But as Dave mentions they haven't been adding teams in odd-number increments (despite what the bylaws say).

416 is the magic number for a 64-team tournament (64 x 6.5 = 416).

I have three Year 4 provisional members (Houghton, Southern Virginia, Valley Forge) who would become full NCAA members next year in 2016-17 if they advance as expected. Plus dual-member Nebraska Wesleyan (who I didn't count in the 412 number) is leaving NAIA to fully participate in D3. That would get us to 64 the team threshold.

NCAA Pre-Championship Manual says 410 teams this year, but it's not counting Chatham at all and lists Wilson as a provisional member. I think those are errors.

I will set the over/under on actual tournament bids for 2016-17 at 62.5 (-110) you may place your wagers accordingly.

I specifically checked about Nebraska Wesleyan recently and was told they are always counted in the total even if they don't declare. Otherwise, the number would constantly fluxawate. So they are in the total already.

I will check on the number in the handbook, but Elisa at the NCAA is usually pretty good on staying on top of that stuff and she and I talked awhile back about those numbers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on February 04, 2016, 08:53:23 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 04, 2016, 03:06:32 AM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 03, 2016, 10:04:25 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 03, 2016, 04:26:30 PM
To be honest, the NCAA is instituting a rule across all sports to resist adding teams to the brackets in odd numbers, i.e. one at a time, in an effort to save money. We were recently in a pretty good hole and while more money comes in, sports are expanding and costs are increasing thus the division is always in jeopardy of entering that hole again. Thus they are using the little known rule that was forgotten about when tournaments across the board were expanded at the drop of the hat each and every time - feeding into the problem.

Right now the math puts us at exactly 63 schools, so we need 6 to 7 schools to be eligible next season and with the way the process works, I can't speak to if that number will actually be high enough next year. Most I spoke with at the NCAA say it won't be next year, but they will admit that is coming off the top of their heads usually. When you have schools like Iowa Wesleyan who have to repeat years, it makes the math a bit fuzzy.

But again... ALL NCAA tournaments in Division III have been slowed in their increase to even numbers and only when it is clear the expansion is warranted. This is NOT a basketball-only item despite how many might feel.

I have 412 full-member NCAA schools that sponsor men's basketball which would give us 63.4 bids. NCAA truncates the decimal so 63 bids. But as Dave mentions they haven't been adding teams in odd-number increments (despite what the bylaws say).

416 is the magic number for a 64-team tournament (64 x 6.5 = 416).

I have three Year 4 provisional members (Houghton, Southern Virginia, Valley Forge) who would become full NCAA members next year in 2016-17 if they advance as expected. Plus dual-member Nebraska Wesleyan (who I didn't count in the 412 number) is leaving NAIA to fully participate in D3. That would get us to 64 the team threshold.

NCAA Pre-Championship Manual says 410 teams this year, but it's not counting Chatham at all and lists Wilson as a provisional member. I think those are errors.

I will set the over/under on actual tournament bids for 2016-17 at 62.5 (-110) you may place your wagers accordingly.

I specifically checked about Nebraska Wesleyan recently and was told they are always counted in the total even if they don't declare. Otherwise, the number would constantly fluxawate. So they are in the total already.

I will check on the number in the handbook, but Elisa at the NCAA is usually pretty good on staying on top of that stuff and she and I talked awhile back about those numbers.

You are correct, Nebraska Wesleyan is counted in their total, so they must be missing one more as well.

...checking the Manual... OK, seems the NCAA has (48) teams counted for the West region but clearly list 49 teams (page 30). So there should be 413 eligible institutions, not 410 as shown on page 24.

They're missing Chatham, have Wilson erroneously called out as a provisional member, and have dropped one west region team from the total.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 04, 2016, 12:32:30 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 03, 2016, 03:47:19 PM
The access ratio for D3 is 6.5:1. In other words, there's one tournament slot for every 6.5 schools that sponsor the sport -- or, as KS and HF point out, there's supposed to be one for every 6.5 schools, but D3 is lagging behind the ratio in terms of men's basketball.

And in the early 2000's, the access ratio was 1:7.5 for most sports. Talk about eliminating Pool C!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 07, 2016, 04:40:30 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	609	Whitworth	20-1	LOST at #20 Whitman, 71-87; def. Pacific, 84-57
#2	597	Augustana	21-1	won at #13 North Central (Ill.), 76-68; def. Carthage, 69-47
#3	579	Benedictine	22-0	won at #30 Aurora, 93-70; won at Wisconsin Lutheran, 86-62
#4	551	John Carroll	21-0	def. Otterbein, 95-48; won at Capital, 91-72
#5	536	St. Thomas	19-1	def. Gustavus Adolphus, 87-72; won at Hamline, 82-65
#6	460	Christopher Newport	20-1	won at Frostburg State, 82-71; won at #41 Salisbury, 61-59; won at Wesley, 78-74
#7	459	Hope	19-2	def. Olivet, 94-58; def. #12 Alma, 71-57
#8	449	Marietta	19-2	def. Capital, 77-63; won at Wilmington, 98-85
#9	433	Elmhurst	19-3	def. Carthage, 96-70; def. Wheaton (Ill.), 70-62
#10	414	Ohio Wesleyan	19-2	def. Wittenberg, 87-66; won at Kenyon, 72-57
#11	337	Amherst	18-4	def. Rhode Island College, 88-51; won at Bates, 88-69; LOST at #26 Tufts, 73-84
#12	306	Alma	16-5	won at Adrian, 68-63; LOST at #7 Hope, 57-71
#13	290	North Central (Ill.)	16-6	LOST to #2 Augustana, 68-76; def. Illinois Wesleyan, 89-69
#14	288	St. Norbert	18-2	won at Lawrence, 62-59; def. Beloit, 72-56
#15	222	Lancaster Bible	19-0	won at Penn State-Abington, 76-54; def. Penn State-Berks, 107-90
#16	198	Franklin and Marshall	18-3	def. Muhlenberg, 72-43; won at T#42 Swarthmore, 72-66
#17	197	Johnson and Wales	20-1	won at Lasell, 101-68; def. Anna Maria, 98-63
#18	193	Susquehanna	18-2	won at Juniata, 74-71; won at Moravian, 88-66
#19	184	WPI	16-5	LOST to Emerson, 53-56; LOST at T#34 Babson, 87-91
#20	159	Whitman	18-3	def. #1 Whitworth, 87-71; def. Pacific, 88-75
#21	155	Chicago	14-6	LOST at #29 Emory, 53-61; LOST at Rochester, 76-77
#22	107	Wesleyan	18-4	won at Emmanuel, 78-60; def. Williams, 66-63
#23	70	Penn State-Behrend	19-1	def. Alfred State, 81-45; won at Franciscan (Ohio), 85-48
#24	45	Plattsburgh State	17-3	def. SUNY Oneonta, 92-87; def. SUNY New Paltz, 102-64
#25	43	Mount Union	15-5	def. Ohio Northern, 89-83

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	37	Tufts	17-5	def. Mass-Dartmouth, 101-82; LOST to #33 Trinity (Conn.), 76-88; def. #11 Amherst, 84-73
#27	30	Texas Lutheran	17-5	LOST to Trinity (Texas), 82-83; def. Schreiner, 81-70
#28	24	NYU	17-3	won at Stevens, 74-66; won at Carnegie Mellon, 70-67; won at Case Western Reserve, 80-79
#29	22	Emory	15-5	def. #21 Chicago, 61-53; def. Washington U., 74-73
#30	19	Aurora	17-4	LOST to #3 Benedictine, 70-93; won at Milwaukee Engineering, 87-79
#31	18	Delaware Valley	16-5	LOST at Manhattanville, 74-81; LOST at DeSales, 58-73
#32	17	Roanoke	17-4	won at Guilford, 64-62; won at Hampden-Sydney, 97-80
#33	16	Trinity (Conn.)	16-6	won at #26 Tufts, 88-76; won at Bates, 78-66
T#34	10	Babson	15-5	def. Wheaton (Mass.), 86-75; def. #19 WPI, 91-87
T#34	10	Wooster	16-5	def. Kenyon, 101-88; won at Denison, 82-75
T#34	10	Northwestern (Minn.)	18-3	won at North Central (Minn.), 93-79
#37	8	Albertus Magnus	14-4	won at Rivier, 92-82; LOST at Lasell, 83-98
#38	7	Catholic	16-5	won at Elizabethtown, 73-60; won at Drew, 73-69
#39	5	Carroll	15-4	LOST at Ripon, 65-75; def. Grinnell, 127-126
#40	4	MIT	16-4	won at Springfield, 53-43; won at Coast Guard, 74-67
#41	2	Salisbury	16-5	won at Penn State-Harrisburg, 82-56; LOST to #6 Christopher Newport, 59-61; def. Mary Washington, 76-68
T#42	1	Brooklyn	17-5	LOST to York (N.Y.), 94-96; def. Hunter, 103-96
T#42	1	Gettysburg	15-6	LOST at Johns Hopkins, 48-68; won at Haverford, 67-32
T#42	1	New Jersey City	14-7	def. Kean, 79-52; LOST at Ramapo, 73-80; won at TCNJ, 81-56
T#42	1	North Park	14-8	won at Wheaton (Ill.), 74-61; LOST to Millikin, 55-61
T#42	1	Swarthmore	16-5	def. Ursinus, 83-64; LOST to #16 Franklin and Marshall, 66-72

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 09, 2016, 12:12:57 PM

If anyone is interested, here is my ballot for this week: http://irathor.tumblr.com/post/138948109927/my-d3hoopscom-top-25-ballot-week-9. I went through a bit of a shake-up; blew up a good chunk and started over. Still not completely comfortable with it, but it is what it is for right now.

Of course, here is the full ballot to peruse if needed: http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2015-16/week9

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 09, 2016, 12:37:01 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 09, 2016, 12:12:57 PM
If anyone is interested, here is my ballot for this week: http://irathor.tumblr.com/post/138948109927/my-d3hoopscom-top-25-ballot-week-9. I went through a bit of a shake-up; blew up a good chunk and started over. Still not completely comfortable with it, but it is what it is for right now.

Of course, here is the full ballot to peruse if needed: http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2015-16/week9

That appears to be Ira's ballot?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 09, 2016, 12:38:14 PM

HAHAHAHA. It is. That was the last thing I apparently "copied" on my computer. Sorry for the confusion... SMH - I think my head is still full of cobwebs from the Hoopsville Marathon Show.

Thanks, sac, for pointing that out - I do appreciate it. Here is the actual blog: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/02/09/daves-top-25-week-9/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on February 09, 2016, 01:23:02 PM

Biggest vote gainers:
Whitman, 162
Plattsburgh St., 85
Penn St Behrend, 62
Johnson and Wales, 57
Wesleyan, 42
Susquehanna, 40
F&M, 38
St. Norbert, 34
Mt. Union, 33
Emory, 28
Benedictine, 25
Christopher Newport, 23
John Carroll, 20
Lancaster Bible, 17

Biggest vote losers:
WPI, -181
Chicago, -155
Amherst, -150
Whitworth, -79
N. Central (IL), -77
Alma, -44
Texas Lutheran, -24
Delaware Valley, -18
Albertus Magnus, -8
Catholic, -7

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 10, 2016, 01:52:32 PM

Regional rankings: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/02/10/first-2016-regional-rankings-released-today/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on February 10, 2016, 08:44:58 PM

Baldwin Wallace 79
#3 John Carroll 78

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 10, 2016, 10:04:35 PM

Well, it's the day of reckoning. It always comes in February and it always comes out of nowhere.

Tonight we saw losses from JCU, St. Thomas, OWU, Susquehanna, Behrend...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 10, 2016, 10:20:02 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	612	Augustana	22-1	def. Illinois Wesleyan, 76-60; 02/13 at Millikin
#2	604	Benedictine	23-0	def. Concordia-Chicago, 111-59; 02/13 vs. Edgewood
#3	571	John Carroll	21-1	LOST to Baldwin Wallace, 78-79; 02/13 at #8 Marietta
#4	543	St. Thomas	20-2	def. St. John's, 69-68; LOST at Augsburg, 89-98; 02/13 at Bethel
#5	530	Whitworth	20-1	02/12 vs. George Fox; 02/13 vs. Willamette
#6	483	Christopher Newport	21-1	def. Mary Washington, 79-68; 02/13 at York (Pa.)
#7	468	Hope	20-2	won at Trine, 57-50; 02/13 vs. Adrian
#8	451	Marietta	20-2	def. #23 Mount Union, 106-81; 02/13 vs. #3 John Carroll
#9	427	Elmhurst	20-3	won at North Park, 89-84; 02/13 vs. #18 North Central (Ill.)
#10	410	Ohio Wesleyan	19-3	LOST at Wabash, 71-76; 02/13 vs. Allegheny
#11	322	St. Norbert	19-2	won at Lake Forest, 69-44; 02/13 vs. Knox
#12	321	Whitman	18-3	02/12 vs. Willamette; 02/13 vs. George Fox
#13	262	Alma	17-5	def. Calvin, 91-79; 02/13 vs. Trine
#14	254	Johnson and Wales	21-1	def. Lasell, 93-60; 02/13 at Albertus Magnus
#15	239	Lancaster Bible	20-0	won at Bryn Athyn, 89-69; 02/12 vs. SUNYIT; 02/13 vs. SUNY-Cobleskill
#16	236	Franklin and Marshall	18-3	02/13 at Johns Hopkins
#17	233	Susquehanna	18-3	LOST to Scranton, 58-67; 02/13 vs. Drew
#18	213	North Central (Ill.)	17-6	won at Carthage, 95-77; 02/13 at #9 Elmhurst
#19	187	Amherst	18-4	02/12 vs. Middlebury; 02/13 vs. Hamilton
#20	149	Wesleyan	18-4	02/12 at Bowdoin; 02/13 at Colby
#21	132	Penn State-Behrend	19-2	LOST at Medaille, 52-71; 02/13 vs. Mount Aloysius
#22	130	Plattsburgh State	17-3	02/12 vs. Cortland; 02/13 vs. Oswego State
#23	76	Mount Union	15-6	LOST at #8 Marietta, 81-106; 02/13 at Heidelberg
#24	50	Emory	15-5	02/12 vs. #26 New York University; 02/14 vs. Brandeis
#25	46	Tufts	18-5	won at Pine Manor, 105-98; 02/12 at Williams

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	37	New York University	17-3	02/12 at #24 Emory; 02/14 at T#40 Rochester
#27	27	Babson	16-5	won at Springfield, 68-64; 02/13 vs. Clark
#28	22	Wooster	16-6	LOST at Hiram, 69-70; 02/13 vs. Wittenberg
T#29	15	Trinity (Conn.)	16-6	02/12 vs. Hamilton; 02/13 vs. Middlebury
T#29	15	Aurora	18-4	won at Dominican, 99-79; 02/13 vs. Concordia (Wis.)
#31	11	Roanoke	18-4	def. Washington and Lee, 93-92; 02/13 vs. Bridgewater (Va.)
#32	9	Northwestern (Minn.)	18-3	02/12 vs. Martin Luther; 02/13 vs. Bethany Lutheran
#33	8	Stockton	17-6	LOST at New Jersey City, 61-68; 02/13 vs. Kean
#34	7	East Texas Baptist	18-4	02/11 at University of the Ozarks; 02/13 at Texas-Dallas
#35	6	Texas Lutheran	17-5	02/12 at University of Dallas; 02/13 at Austin
#36	5	Salisbury	17-5	def. Wesley, 68-62; 02/13 at Southern Virginia
T#37	3	St. Vincent	17-5	def. Washington and Jefferson, 101-57; 02/13 vs. Grove City
T#37	3	WPI	17-5	won at T#40 MIT, 58-50; 02/13 vs. Coast Guard
T#37	3	UW-La Crosse	15-7	won at UW-River Falls, 78-56; 02/13 vs. UW-Oshkosh
T#40	2	MIT	16-5	LOST to T#37 WPI, 50-58; 02/12 vs. Framingham State; 02/13 at Wheaton (Mass.)
T#40	2	Rochester	14-6	02/12 vs. Brandeis; 02/14 vs. #26 New York University
#42	1	Concordia-Moorhead	15-8	LOST to St. Mary's (Minn.), 55-56; won at Hamline, 88-79; 02/13 at St. John's

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 11, 2016, 11:43:38 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on February 10, 2016, 10:04:35 PM

Well, it's the day of reckoning. It always comes in February and it always comes out of nowhere.

Tonight we saw losses from JCU, St. Thomas, OWU, Susquehanna, Behrend...

Always seems to be on a regional ranking day if memory serves as well. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 11, 2016, 08:19:59 PM

Regional rankings are finally out and with them comes plenty of upheaval around the country. What do the rankings really mean? What teams should everyone be watching this week? Who is jockeying to lock up their conference's regular season title?

On Thursday night's Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave McHugh hopes to get a lot of these questions answered. McHugh will talk to coaches from around the country who have their teams poised to capture conference crowns or at while also positioning themselves the best they can in the regional rankings.

Hoopsville is on the air NOW, but you can also watch it On Demand or listen to the podcasts (when the show is done) here: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2015-16/feb11

Guests include (in order of appearance):
- Janice Luck, No. 12 Albright women's coach
- Jon VanderWal, No. 8 Marietta men's coach
- Lance Loya, Mount Aloysius men's coach - NABC Coach's Corner
- Tom Glynn, Nichols' men's coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

And a reminder the Hoopsville Fundraising Project has begun yet again. Please consider helping us cover Division III basketball the way it deserves to be covered: http://igg.me/at/hoopsville-fundraiser/x/6029509

Also, if you know any advertisers interested in promoting their company or products on the show, send them our way: hoopsville@d3hoops.com

Thanks!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 14, 2016, 05:15:47 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	612	Augustana	23-1	def. Illinois Wesleyan, 76-60; won at Millikin, 77-52
#2	604	Benedictine	24-0	def. Concordia-Chicago, 111-59; def. Edgewood, 88-54
#3	571	John Carroll	21-2	LOST to Baldwin Wallace, 78-79; LOST at #8 Marietta, 81-86
#4	543	St. Thomas	21-2	def. St. John's, 69-68; LOST at Augsburg, 89-98; won at Bethel, 75-59
#5	530	Whitworth	22-1	def. George Fox, 83-67; def. Willamette, 72-53
#6	483	Christopher Newport	22-1	def. Mary Washington, 79-68; won at York (Pa.), 80-60
#7	468	Hope	21-2	won at Trine, 57-50; def. Adrian, 94-71
#8	451	Marietta	21-2	def. #23 Mount Union, 106-81; def. #3 John Carroll, 86-81
#9	427	Elmhurst	20-4	won at North Park, 89-84; LOST to #18 North Central (Ill.), 64-79
#10	410	Ohio Wesleyan	20-3	LOST at Wabash, 71-76; def. Allegheny, 105-84
#11	322	St. Norbert	20-2	won at Lake Forest, 69-44; def. Knox, 83-47
#12	321	Whitman	20-3	def. Willamette, 103-52; def. George Fox, 97-72
#13	262	Alma	18-5	def. Calvin, 91-79; def. Trine, 69-50
#14	254	Johnson and Wales	21-2	def. Lasell, 93-60; LOST at Albertus Magnus, 94-102
#15	239	Lancaster Bible	22-0	won at Bryn Athyn, 89-69; def. SUNYIT, 86-64; def. SUNY-Cobleskill, 95-71
#16	236	Franklin and Marshall	18-4	LOST at Johns Hopkins, 69-74
#17	233	Susquehanna	19-3	LOST to Scranton, 58-67; def. Drew, 86-60
#18	213	North Central (Ill.)	18-6	won at Carthage, 95-77; won at #9 Elmhurst, 79-64
#19	187	Amherst	20-4	def. Middlebury, 83-70; def. Hamilton, 65-53
#20	149	Wesleyan	18-6	LOST at Bowdoin, 71-80; LOST at Colby, 64-73
#21	132	Penn State-Behrend	20-2	LOST at Medaille, 52-71; def. Mount Aloysius, 87-76
#22	130	Plattsburgh State	18-4	def. Cortland, 99-78; LOST to Oswego State, 74-90
#23	76	Mount Union	15-7	LOST at #8 Marietta, 81-106; LOST at Heidelberg, 70-87
#24	50	Emory	16-6	LOST to #26 New York University, 56-73; def. Brandeis, 66-58
#25	46	Tufts	19-5	won at Pine Manor, 105-98; won at Williams, 77-73

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	37	New York University	18-4	won at #24 Emory, 73-56; LOST at T#40 Rochester, 63-75
#27	27	Babson	17-5	won at Springfield, 68-64; def. Clark, 80-56
#28	22	Wooster	17-6	LOST at Hiram, 69-70; def. Wittenberg, 99-86
T#29	15	Trinity (Conn.)	18-6	def. Hamilton, 96-86; def. Middlebury, 97-86
T#29	15	Aurora	18-5	won at Dominican, 99-79; LOST to Concordia (Wis.), 110-120
#31	11	Roanoke	19-4	def. Washington and Lee, 93-92; def. Bridgewater (Va.), 104-67
#32	9	Northwestern (Minn.)	20-3	def. Martin Luther, 82-42; def. Bethany Lutheran, 74-63
#33	8	Stockton	18-6	LOST at New Jersey City, 61-68; def. Kean, 76-56
#34	7	East Texas Baptist	19-5	won at University of the Ozarks, 79-62; LOST at Texas-Dallas, 68-69
#35	6	Texas Lutheran	19-5	won at University of Dallas, 80-71; won at Austin, 68-64
#36	5	Salisbury	18-5	def. Wesley, 68-62; won at Southern Virginia, 75-57
T#37	3	St. Vincent	17-6	def. Washington and Jefferson, 101-57; LOST to Grove City, 63-65
T#37	3	WPI	18-5	won at T#40 MIT, 58-50; def. Coast Guard, 69-60
T#37	3	UW-La Crosse	15-8	won at UW-River Falls, 87-77; LOST to UW-Oshkosh, 60-62
T#40	2	MIT	18-5	LOST to T#37 WPI, 50-58; def. Framingham State, 63-52; won at Wheaton (Mass.), 71-63
T#40	2	Rochester	16-6	def. Brandeis, 71-54; def. #26 New York University, 75-63
#42	1	Concordia-Moorhead	15-9	LOST to St. Mary's (Minn.), 55-56; won at Hamline, 88-79; LOST at St. John's, 64-75

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on February 14, 2016, 05:23:18 PM

21/42 teams receiving votes lost.

4 of those 21 teams lost twice

6/25 losses were to teams receiving votes

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 14, 2016, 05:37:35 PM

It might be a holiday for those romantically inclined, but it is also getting down to the end of the Division III basketball season. Just two weeks remain between now and the end of the regular season and nothing has been determined.

On Sunday night's Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave McHugh will talk to some teams who have emerged from no where to be in a position to surprise when their conference tournaments begin. McHugh also talks to a few teams who can't seem to be knocked off their conference pedestal, but still feel they have something to prove. And the hectic schedule of conference travel can take it's toll.

Sunday's show start at 7:00 pm ET and promises to go well into overtime. You can watch the show here: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2015-16/feb14

Guests included (in order of appearance):
- Tara Macciocco, Marywood women's coach
- Dr. George Barber, Greenville men's coach
- Ruth Sinn, No. 8 St. Thomas women's coach (WBCA Center Court)
- Rusty Eggen, Northeast Region Report, WPI Sports Information Director
- Angela Santa Fe, Regis (Mass.) women's coach
- Andy Partee, Colorado College men's coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

And a reminder the Hoopsville Fundraising Project is halfway to the deadline but we are not that close to the goal. Please consider helping us cover Division III basketball the way it deserves to be covered: http://igg.me/at/hoopsville-fundraiser/x/6029509.

Thanks!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on February 16, 2016, 10:02:54 AM

Biggest vote gainers:
N. Central (IL), 122
Tufts, 109
Amherst, 89
Babson, 86
Marietta, 83
Roanoke, 83
Whitman, 75
Alma, 51
St. Norbert, 45
Lancaster Bible, 45
Rochester, 41
Hope, 39
Christopher Newport, 36
Whitworth, 33
Trinity (CT), 33
Albertus Magnus, 24

Biggest vote losers:
John Carroll, -157
F&M, -155
Wesleyan, -143
Elmhurst, -96
St. Thomas, -83
Mt. Union, -76
Penn St Behrend, -74
OH Wesleyan, -73
Plattsburgh St., -70
Johnson and Wales, -68
Susquehanna, -65
Emory, -25
Wooster, -17
Aurora, -15

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 16, 2016, 10:44:25 AM

My Top 25 blog is complete. Enjoy, maybe? It went through a second consecutive week of turmoil: www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/02/16/daves-top-25-ballot-week-10-4/

That's what I get for having a least one week where it was relatively quiet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Swish3 on February 16, 2016, 11:45:12 AM

So Roanoke wins two home games against Washington and Lee and Bridgewater who are 10-13 and 6-16 respectively, yet that's enough for them to go from #31 to #21? Doesn't make sense to me...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 16, 2016, 01:39:01 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 16, 2016, 10:44:25 AM
My Top 25 blog is complete. Enjoy, maybe? It went through a second consecutive week of turmoil: www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/02/16/daves-top-25-ballot-week-10-4/

That's what I get for having a least one week where it was relatively quiet.

Thanks, as always, for sharing.

One thing... on the picture for St. Norbert, it says this:

Quote
St. Norbert is still undefeated in conference. A feat that has them readily moving up the IIAC.

I think you meant "poll?"

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 16, 2016, 03:58:03 PM

Ha! Yep! I will go fix that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 16, 2016, 10:21:56 PM

Quote from: Swish3 on February 16, 2016, 11:45:12 AM
So Roanoke wins two home games against Washington and Lee and Bridgewater who are 10-13 and 6-16 respectively, yet that's enough for them to go from #31 to #21? Doesn't make sense to me...

The poll is not a bubble. Look at how teams around them did. I bet they lost.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 17, 2016, 11:41:47 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 16, 2016, 10:21:56 PM
Quote from: Swish3 on February 16, 2016, 11:45:12 AM
So Roanoke wins two home games against Washington and Lee and Bridgewater who are 10-13 and 6-16 respectively, yet that's enough for them to go from #31 to #21? Doesn't make sense to me...

The poll is not a bubble. Look at how teams around them did. I bet they lost.

Yeah... a little more complicated. See what teams around them did and how they moved... see what the point differences are for all teams, including Roanoke, from week to week. You are looking at it in a vaccum of one team when there are a total of 45 teams being voted on and a number of other teams being considered.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 17, 2016, 09:35:08 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 10, 2016, 08:52:39 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 10, 2016, 05:26:21 PM
How They Fared (Complete)

One loss at the top ... and then a bunch of losses (32 of them) starting at #19.

As noted earlier, I added Hiram at the end as a "team worth watching."

Top 25

Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#1 625 Augustana 13-1 LOST at #5 Elmhurst, 75-77; won at North Park, 79-66
#2 596 Whitworth 13-0 def. #25 Whitman, 95-89; won at Pacific, 62-50
#3 538 Hope 12-1 def. Albion, 68-65; won at Olivet, 79-64
#4 530 St. Thomas 10-1 won at Gustavus Adolphus, 71-53; def. T#34 Bethel, 69-66
#5 510 Elmhurst 13-1 def. #1 Augustana, 77-75; won at Millikin, 73-65
#6 505 Benedictine 14-0 def. Dominican, 110-78; def. Wisconsin Lutheran, 81-67
#7 470 John Carroll 13-0 def. Capital, 75-74; won at Muskingum, 97-91
#8 457 Ohio Wesleyan 12-1 won at Wittenberg, 77-70; won at Allegheny, 89-77
#9 411 Amherst 11-1 def. Eastern Connecticut, 68-65; def. Williams, 78-66
#10 339 Marietta 11-2 def. Ohio Northern, 72-71
#11 333 Susquehanna 14-0 won at #21 Scranton, 78-63; def. Merchant Marine, 91-72
#12 329 WPI 12-1 won at Springfield, 69-56; def. #49 MIT, 70-62
#13 317 Christopher Newport 12-1 won at Penn State-Harrisburg, 77-65; def. Wesley, 81-68
#14 315 New York University 10-0 won at Wells, 89-67; def. Brandeis, 69-67
#15 224 UW-Whitewater 11-2 won at UW-Stout, 75-59; def. #19 UW-Stevens Point, 69-63
#16 197 Chicago 10-2 won at #30 Washington U., 70-69
#17 154 Franklin and Marshall 10-2 won at McDaniel, 59-43; def. Swarthmore, 57-54
#18 107 Mount Union 10-3 def. Heidelberg, 104-80; won at Wilmington, 82-79
#19 103 UW-Stevens Point 7-6 LOST at UW-Eau Claire, 59-63; LOST at #15 UW-Whitewater, 63-69
#20 88 Oswego State 8-2 LOST at Oneonta State, 52-90
#21 87 Scranton 11-3 won at Drew, 69-62; LOST to #11 Susquehanna, 63-78; won at Goucher, 78-77
#22 80 Tufts 11-2 won at Mass-Boston, 74-61; def. Bowdoin, 102-69; def. T#36 Colby, 92-65
#23 73 Trine 11-2 LOST at Calvin, 70-74; def. Kalamazoo, 77-59
#24 69 Brooklyn 11-3 won at York (N.Y.), 80-46; LOST to Baruch, 89-97
#25 68 Whitman 11-2 LOST at #2 Whitworth, 89-95; won at Pacific, 91-74

Others receiving votes
Rank Pts Team W-L Results
T#26 52 Lancaster Bible 10-0 won at Penn College, 109-52; def. Penn State-Abington, 108-60
T#26 52 St. Norbert 10-2 def. Lawrence, 82-62
#28 50 Pacific Lutheran 9-4 LOST at Linfield, 51-53; LOST at George Fox, 74-82
#29 47 Virginia Wesleyan 8-5 won at Shenandoah, 89-78; LOST to T#53 Roanoke, 84-93
#30 39 Washington U. 8-4 LOST to #16 Chicago, 69-70
#31 36 St. John's 10-2 won at Macalester, 81-56; LOST at Concordia-Moorhead, 65-83
T#32 30 Albertus Magnus 8-2 won at Anna Maria, 108-93; LOST to Lasell, 81-94; won at St. Joseph's (Maine), 56-52
T#32 30 Trinity (Conn.) 9-4 LOST at Plattsburgh State, 73-81; def. Elms, 92-63; def. Williams, 76-75
T#34 28 Bethel 9-2 won at St. Olaf, 76-66; LOST at #4 St. Thomas, 66-69
T#34 28 East Texas Baptist 9-4 LOST at Howard Payne, 65-67; won at Sul Ross State, 67-62
T#36 21 Colby 10-3 won at Pine Manor, 115-97; LOST at Bates, 69-73; LOST at #22 Tufts, 65-92
T#36 21 North Central (Ill.) 10-4 def. Millikin, 83-54; won at Wheaton (Ill.), 71-62
#38 20 Wesleyan 12-2 won at Rhode Island College, 79-77; LOST to Middlebury, 76-86; def. Hamilton, 82-76
T#39 15 William Paterson 7-6 LOST at Kean, 73-78; LOST to Rutgers-Newark, 65-78
T#39 15 Texas Lutheran 11-3 def. University of Dallas, 73-72; def. Austin, 96-93
#41 14 Delaware Valley 11-2 IDLE
#42 11 Northwestern (Minn.) 12-2 won at Bethany Lutheran, 84-66; won at Martin Luther, 97-71
T#43 10 Stockton 9-5 LOST to New Jersey City, 69-74; LOST at Ramapo, 64-70
T#43 10 Eastern Nazarene 9-4 LOST to Salve Regina, 74-83; LOST at Wentworth, 58-80; LOST to Nichols, 67-79
T#45 9 Alma 9-4 won at Kalamazoo, 86-85; def. Adrian, 85-66
T#45 9 Salisbury 10-3 def. York (Pa.), 75-56; won at Mary Washington, 81-70
T#47 8 Johnson and Wales 12-1 def. St. Joseph's (Maine), 93-51; def. Rivier, 91-53; def. Norwich, 84-48
T#47 8 Southern Vermont 9-3 LOST at Middlebury, 74-92; def. Mitchell, 103-87
#49 7 MIT 9-3 def. Clark, 56-51; LOST at #12 WPI, 62-70
T#50 6 Babson 8-4 def. Emerson, 80-63; def. Springfield, 91-76
T#50 6 Buffalo State 9-3 won at Brockport State, 81-73; won at Potsdam State, 84-78; LOST at Plattsburgh State, 91-98
#52 5 Juniata 11-3 def. Goucher, 69-62; won at Elizabethtown, 60-46; LOST at Eastern, 68-73
T#53 3 Carroll 11-1 def. Ripon, 72-66; won at Cornell, 59-55
T#53 3 Centre 10-4 def. Rhodes, 56-33; def. Hendrix, 77-74
T#53 3 Roanoke 12-1 won at Washington and Lee, 105-96; won at #29 Virginia Wesleyan, 93-84
T#56 2 Chapman 8-2 def. Pomona-Pitzer, 73-62
T#56 2 Geneseo 7-3 LOST to Fredonia State, 86-89; LOST to Oneonta State, 65-76; def. New Paltz State, 71-67
--- --- Hiram 11-2 def. DePauw, 91-60; won at Wittenberg, 72-68
Time to begin the NYU over/under for the number of wins this season for the Violets. I say they go 20-5.

18-4! Can they do it?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 17, 2016, 10:14:19 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	617	Augustana	23-1	02/20 at Wheaton (Ill.)
#2	607	Benedictine	24-0	02/20 at Lakeland
#3	563	Whitworth	22-1	02/19 at Puget Sound; 02/20 at Pacific Lutheran
#4	534	Marietta	22-2	won at Otterbein, 80-56; 02/20 at Ohio Northern
#5	519	Christopher Newport	23-1	def. St. Mary's (Md.), 69-53; 02/20 vs. Marymount
#6	507	Hope	22-2	won at Kalamazoo, 90-79; 02/20 at Calvin
#7	460	St. Thomas	22-2	won at St. Olaf, 78-72; 02/20 vs. St. Mary's (Minn.)
#8	414	John Carroll	21-3	LOST at Mount Union, 94-100; 02/20 vs. Muskingum
#9	396	Whitman	20-3	02/19 at Pacific Lutheran; 02/20 at Puget Sound
#10	367	St. Norbert	20-2	02/20 at Cornell
#11	337	Ohio Wesleyan	21-3	won at Oberlin, 93-75; 02/20 vs. DePauw
#12	335	North Central (Ill.)	18-6	02/20 at North Park
#13	331	Elmhurst	20-4	02/20 at Illinois Wesleyan
#14	313	Alma	18-6	LOST at Albion, 66-71; 02/20 at Olivet
#15	284	Lancaster Bible	22-0	02/18 at Gallaudet; 02/20 at Wilson
#16	276	Amherst	20-4	02/20 vs. Bowdoin
#17	186	Johnson and Wales	22-2	won at Norwich, 74-41; 02/20 vs. Mount Ida
#18	168	Susquehanna	20-3	won at Goucher, 67-53; 02/18 vs. Elizabethtown; 02/20 at Elizabethtown
#19	155	Tufts	19-5	02/20 vs. Williams
#20	113	Babson	18-5	won at Coast Guard, 80-73; 02/20 at #43 MIT
#21	94	Roanoke	19-5	LOST at Lynchburg, 156-160 :o (2OT); 02/20 at Randolph-Macon
#22	81	Franklin and Marshall	20-4	won at Ursinus, 74-61; def. Gettysburg, 71-60; 02/20 vs. Dickinson
#23	60	Plattsburgh State	19-4	def. SUNY Potsdam, 93-62; 02/19 at Brockport; 02/20 at SUNY Geneseo
#24	58	Penn State-Behrend	20-3	LOST at Hilbert, 59-63; 02/20 vs. Pitt-Greensburg
#25	48	Trinity (Conn.)	18-6	02/20 vs. Colby

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
T#26	43	New York U.	18-4	02/19 vs. #35 Chicago; 02/21 vs. Washington U.
T#26	43	Rochester	16-6	02/19 at Case Western Reserve; 02/21 at Carnegie Mellon
#28	29	Northwestern (Minn.)	20-3	02/19 at UW-Superior; 02/20 at St. Scholastica
#29	25	Emory	16-6	02/19 at Carnegie Mellon; 02/21 at Case Western Reserve
#30	24	Albertus Magnus	17-5	won at Mount Ida, 96-91; 02/20 vs. Emmanuel
#31	22	Salisbury	19-5	won at Marymount, 73-59; 02/20 vs. Frostburg State
T#32	20	Texas Lutheran	19-5	02/19 at Southwestern
T#32	20	WPI	19-5	def. Wheaton (Mass.), 70-55; 02/20 at Clark
#34	15	Scranton	19-5	won at Cabrini, 94-73; 02/20 at T#40 Catholic
#35	11	Chicago	16-6	02/19 at New York University; 02/21 at Brandeis
#36	9	New Jersey City	18-7	won at Rutgers-Camden, 76-53
#37	7	Carroll	18-4	won at Lawrence, 70-51; 02/20 at Lake Forest
T#38	6	Wesleyan	18-6	02/20 at Middlebury
T#38	6	Virginia Wesleyan	17-7	LOST to Guilford, 60-71; 02/20 at Lynchburg
T#40	5	Catholic	18-5	def. Juniata, 83-60; 02/20 vs. #34 Scranton; 02/21 vs. Merchant Marine
T#40	5	Wooster	18-6	won at Allegheny, 92-74; 02/20 vs. Oberlin
#42	4	St. John's	17-7	LOST at Gustavus Adolphus, 62-63; 02/20 at Augsburg
#43	3	MIT	19-5	won at Emerson, 67-49; 02/20 vs. #20 Babson
#44	2	Stockton	19-6	won at Montclair State, 83-78 (live stats stalled with 4 seconds remaining)
T#45	1	Dubuque	17-6	02/17 at Wartburg (Wartburg up 13 with 11 minutes remaining); 02/20 vs. Central
T#45	1	UW-La Crosse	15-9	LOST at UW-Eau Claire, 57-64; 02/20 vs. UW-Stevens Point

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 18, 2016, 04:49:38 PM

There isn't that much time left in the regular season as teams continue to fight to get into conference tournaments and position themselves for hopefully NCAA tournament bids. Second round of Regional Rankings are also out with plenty of answers... and questions. Plus, some teams are putting on some shows recently including a lot of buzzer beaters!

On Thursday night's Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave McHugh rolls up his sleeves and takes a look at what is happening as we head into the last ten days of the regular season. McHugh will also get some insight on Wednesday's insane men's basketball game between Lynchburg and No. 21 Roanoke. Plus, get a preview of the NESCAC men's and women's tournaments along with talking to ranked teams on both the men's and women's side.

Hoopsville hits the air at 7:00 pm ET and promises to go at least 2 1/2 hours. You can watch the show here: http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2015-16/feb18

Guests scheduled (in order of appearance):
- Alex Graves, Lynchburg senior forward
- Howard Herman, Berkshire Eagle, NESCAC tournaments preview
- Brian Morehouse, No. 3 Hope women's coach
- Bill Broderick, No. 16 Christopher Newport women's coach
- Tom Curle, No. 23 Plattsburgh State men's coach
- Eric Bridgeland, No. 9 Whitman men's coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

And a reminder the Hoopsville Fundraising Project is halfway to the deadline but we are not that close to the goal. Please consider helping us cover Division III basketball the way it deserves to be covered: http://igg.me/at/hoopsville-fundraiser/x/6029509.

Thanks!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 20, 2016, 10:41:31 AM

Every member of the Top 25 is playing a game today. That might be the first time ever, perhaps - certainly the first time this season. I imagine often the UAA prevents it from happening.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 20, 2016, 10:44:42 AM

Past most peoples bedtimes last night, #3 Whitworth beat Puget Sound on a rebound put-back at the buzzer 67-65

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 21, 2016, 09:20:14 AM

Quote from: sac on February 20, 2016, 10:44:42 AM
Past most peoples bedtimes last night, #3 Whitworth beat Puget Sound on a rebound put-back at the buzzer 67-65

Thanks for staying up late so we didn't have to!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 21, 2016, 05:01:03 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	617	Augustana	24-1	won at Wheaton (Ill.), 103-101
#2	607	Benedictine	25-0	won at Lakeland, 100-76
#3	563	Whitworth	24-1	won at Puget Sound, 67-65; won at Pacific Lutheran, 73-71
#4	534	Marietta	23-2	won at Otterbein, 80-56; won at Ohio Northern, 97-73
#5	519	Christopher Newport	24-1	def. St. Mary's (Md.), 69-53; def. Marymount, 89-59
#6	507	Hope	23-2	won at Kalamazoo, 90-79; won at Calvin, 65-61
#7	460	St. Thomas	23-2	won at St. Olaf, 78-72; def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 77-48
#8	414	John Carroll	22-3	LOST at Mount Union, 94-100; def. Muskingum, 99-76
#9	396	Whitman	22-3	won at Pacific Lutheran, 82-72; won at Puget Sound, 83-57
#10	367	St. Norbert	21-2	won at Cornell, 72-62
#11	337	Ohio Wesleyan	22-3	won at Oberlin, 93-75; def. DePauw, 81-57
#12	335	North Central (Ill.)	19-6	won at North Park, 84-74
#13	331	Elmhurst	20-5	LOST at Illinois Wesleyan, 67-77
#14	313	Alma	19-6	LOST at Albion, 66-71; won at Olivet, 97-85
#15	284	Lancaster Bible	24-0	won at Gallaudet, 76-64; won at Wilson, 91-64
#16	276	Amherst	21-4	def. Bowdoin, 83-76
#17	186	Johnson and Wales	23-2	won at Norwich, 74-41; def. Mount Ida, 89-69
#18	168	Susquehanna	22-3	won at Goucher, 67-53; def. Elizabethtown, 86-70; won at Elizabethtown, 83-69
#19	155	Tufts	20-5	def. Williams, 77-71
#20	113	Babson	19-5	won at Coast Guard, 80-73; won at #43 MIT, 94-80
#21	94	Roanoke	19-6	LOST at Lynchburg, 156-160; LOST at Randolph-Macon, 73-89
#22	81	Franklin and Marshall	20-5	won at Ursinus, 74-61; def. Gettysburg, 71-60; LOST to Dickinson, 86-88
#23	60	Plattsburgh State	21-4	def. SUNY Potsdam, 93-62; won at Brockport, 76-72; won at SUNY Geneseo, 76-72
#24	58	Penn State-Behrend	20-4	LOST at Hilbert, 59-63; LOST to (n) Pitt-Greensburg, 72-77
#25	48	Trinity (Conn.)	19-6	def. Colby, 71-60

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
T#26	43	New York U.	19-5	def. #35 Chicago, 72-59; LOST to Washington U., 70-71
T#26	43	Rochester	17-7	won at Case Western Reserve, 99-92; LOST at Carnegie Mellon, 97-102
#28	29	Northwestern (Minn.)	20-5	LOST at UW-Superior, 86-94; LOST at St. Scholastica, 69-76
#29	25	Emory	17-7	won at Carnegie Mellon, 83-68; LOST at Case Western Reserve, 78-88
#30	24	Albertus Magnus	18-5	won at Mount Ida, 96-91; def. Emmanuel, 90-87
#31	22	Salisbury	20-5	won at Marymount, 73-59; def. Frostburg State, 84-61
T#32	20	Texas Lutheran	19-6	LOST at Southwestern, 81-83
T#32	20	WPI	20-5	def. Wheaton (Mass.), 70-55; won at Clark, 88-60
#34	15	Scranton	19-6	won at Cabrini, 94-73; LOST at T#40 Catholic, 74-79
#35	11	Chicago	17-7	LOST at New York University, 59-72; won at Brandeis, 62-52
#36	9	New Jersey City	18-7	won at Rutgers-Camden, 76-53
#37	7	Carroll	19-4	won at Lawrence, 70-51; won at Lake Forest, 61-48
T#38	6	Wesleyan	18-7	LOST at Middlebury, 74-86
T#38	6	Virginia Wesleyan	17-8	LOST to Guilford, 60-71; LOST at Lynchburg, 75-80
T#40	5	Catholic	20-5	def. Juniata, 83-60; def. #34 Scranton, 79-74; def. Merchant Marine, 80-61
T#40	5	Wooster	19-6	won at Allegheny, 92-74; def. Oberlin, 97-56
#42	4	St. John's	18-7	LOST at Gustavus Adolphus, 62-63; won at Augsburg, 77-66
#43	3	MIT	19-6	won at Emerson, 67-49; LOST to #20 Babson, 80-94
#44	2	Stockton	19-6	won at Montclair State, 83-80
T#45	1	Dubuque	18-7	LOST at Wartburg, 56-67; def. Central, 67-57
T#45	1	UW-La Crosse	16-9	LOST at UW-Eau Claire, 57-64; def. UW-Stevens Point, 55-53

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 21, 2016, 06:55:45 PM

The entire regular season has basically come down to this week: Championship Week.

Almost all conferences will determine their automatic bids to the NCAA tournament via their own tournaments. Those that haven't started already, will begin soon. And in a matter of a week, 87 teams on the men's and women's sides will know they are headed to the NCAA tournament.

Sunday night on Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave McHugh talks to some of the teams who hope home court will be their ticket to the NCAA post-season play. Each of the teams featured tonight won their regular season conference titles and need to win their conference tournaments to get into the NCAA tournament.

Hoopsville hits the air at 7pm ET. Tune in here: http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2015-16/feb21

Guests include (in order of appearance):
- Stacey Brunner-Jones, Concordia-Wisconsin women's coach
- Mike Ricks, Birmingham-Southern women's coach
- Bernard Tomlin, SUNY Old Westbury men's coach
- Mike McDevitt, St. Joseph's (Maine) women's coach
- Ryan Scott, Mid-Atlantic Region Report

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

And a reminder the Hoopsville Fundraising Project is halfway to the deadline but we are not that close to the goal. Please consider helping us cover Division III basketball the way it deserves to be covered: http://igg.me/at/hoopsville-fundraiser/x/6029509.

Thanks!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 24, 2016, 02:13:34 PM

Final public regional rankings are out: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/02/24/third-ncaa-regional-ranking/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 24, 2016, 03:57:55 PM

If TLU wins the SCAC tourney, do they host a regional? If so, who flies into Seguin (San Antonio is 40 miles west on I-10.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 24, 2016, 04:06:29 PM

From what I have been able to figure out... there is a chance TLU will NOT host because they made need a geographically centered team to pull it off.

Let me give you a "what if"
- TLU is in (AQ or at-large)
- ETBU is in (AQ)
- Birmingham-Southern is in (AQ)
- Emory (or someone else)

The committee can get BSC to ETBU by bus because it is 490 miles. That means they can get TLU to ETBU as well. Leaving just one flight in to ETBU for a pod. If they hosted at TLU, that is two flights.

A few years ago, we were told the committee was only giving geographic pods in the second weekend (I can explain that better another time), but I have since learned the NCAA forced them away from a geographic pod with Centre (featuring Emory) in 2014. This year they may be encouraging them to the other way.

Long story short... TLU probably only hosts if all the right things come into play and there is a third Texas team. The reality is - that isn't going to happen. SO the other way they host is if it is just TLU and ETBU by themselves.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 24, 2016, 04:09:36 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 24, 2016, 04:06:29 PM
From what I have been able to figure out... there is a chance TLU will NOT host because they made need a geographically centered team to pull it off.

Let me give you a "what if"
- TLU is in (AQ or at-large)
- ETBU is in (AQ)
- Birmingham-Southern is in (AQ)
- Emory (or someone else)

The committee can get BSC to ETBU by bus because it is 490 miles. That means they can get TLU to ETBU as well. Leaving just one flight in to ETBU for a pod. If they hosted at TLU, that is two flights.

A few years ago, we were told the committee was only giving geographic pods in the second weekend (I can explain that better another time), but I have since learned the NCAA forced them away from a geographic pod with Centre (featuring Emory) in 2014. This year they may be encouraging them to the other way.

Long story short... TLU probably only hosts if all the right things come into play and there is a third Texas team. The reality is - that isn't going to happen. SO the other way they host is if it is just TLU and ETBU by themselves.

The interesting thing will be if there's three west coast teams and two texas teams. A lot of possibilities with that one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 24, 2016, 04:31:05 PM

If they have three west coast teams (being two from NWC)... they will have to fly two teams (one being SCIAC) to the NWC. However, it will already force other flights, so they can get creative.

However, NWC isn't going to avoid a second round game - that is almost guaranteed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 24, 2016, 05:35:35 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 24, 2016, 04:31:05 PM
If they have three west coast teams (being two from NWC)... they will have to fly two teams (one being SCIAC) to the NWC. However, it will already force other flights, so they can get creative.

However, NWC isn't going to avoid a second round game - that is almost guaranteed.

Unless one of them loses in the first round.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on February 24, 2016, 06:05:17 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 24, 2016, 04:06:29 PM
From what I have been able to figure out... there is a chance TLU will NOT host because they made need a geographically centered team to pull it off.

Let me give you a "what if"
- TLU is in (AQ or at-large)
- ETBU is in (AQ)
- Birmingham-Southern is in (AQ)
- Emory (or someone else)

The committee can get BSC to ETBU by bus because it is 490 miles. That means they can get TLU to ETBU as well. Leaving just one flight in to ETBU for a pod. If they hosted at TLU, that is two flights.

A few years ago, we were told the committee was only giving geographic pods in the second weekend (I can explain that better another time), but I have since learned the NCAA forced them away from a geographic pod with Centre (featuring Emory) in 2014. This year they may be encouraging them to the other way.

Long story short... TLU probably only hosts if all the right things come into play and there is a third Texas team. The reality is - that isn't going to happen. SO the other way they host is if it is just TLU and ETBU by themselves.

Was that the Scranton(Mid-Atlantic) lost hosting opportunity?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 24, 2016, 10:10:26 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

Just two losses among 12 games so far, but better match-ups are on their way this weekend. Final report for the season coming this Sunday.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	614	Augustana	24-1	02/26 vs. Illinois Wesleyan
#2	610	Benedictine	25-0	02/26 vs. Marian
#3	560	Whitworth	24-1	02/25 vs. Puget Sound
#4	537	Marietta	24-2	def. Wilmington, 93-78; 02/25 vs. Baldwin Wallace
#5	534	Christopher Newport	24-1	02/25 vs. St. Mary's (Md.)
#6	499	Hope	23-2	02/26 vs. Trine; 02/27 vs. TBA
#7	472	St. Thomas	23-2	02/26 vs. Bethel
#8	406	St. Norbert	21-2	02/26 vs. Lake Forest
#9	399	Whitman	22-3	02/25 vs. Pacific Lutheran
#10	388	Ohio Wesleyan	23-3	def. Wabash, 100-80; 02/26 vs. Denison
#11	350	North Central (Ill.)	19-6	02/26 vs. #17 Elmhurst
#12	330	John Carroll	23-3	def. Capital, 83-71; 02/25 vs. Mount Union
#13	327	Amherst	21-4	02/27 vs. #18 Tufts
#14	296	Johnson and Wales	24-2	def. St. Joseph's (Maine), 73-36; 02/25 vs. Emmanuel
#15	260	Lancaster Bible	25-0	def. Penn College, 98-72; 02/27 vs. SUNYIT
#16	232	Susquehanna	23-3	def. #32 Scranton, 77-72; 02/27 at #27 Catholic
#17	218	Elmhurst	20-5	02/26 vs. #11 North Central (Ill.)
#18	209	Tufts	20-5	02/27 vs. #13 Amherst
#19	184	Alma	19-6	02/26 vs. Albion
#20	170	Babson	19-5	02/27 vs. Emerson; 02/28 vs. NEWMAC Tournament Finals
#21	149	Plattsburgh State	21-4	02/26 vs. Oswego State
#22	75	Trinity (Conn.)	19-6	02/27 vs. Middlebury
#23	54	Salisbury	20-5	02/25 vs. Mary Washington; 02/27 vs. TBA
#24	44	WPI	20-5	02/27 vs. T#43 MIT; 02/28 vs. NEWMAC Tournament Championship
#25	43	Franklin and Marshall	20-5	02/26 vs. McDaniel or Gettysburg; 02/27 vs. TBD

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	27	Albertus Magnus	19-5	def. Mount Ida, 109-87; 02/25 at Lasell
#27	21	Catholic	21-5	def. Juniata, 79-66; 02/27 vs. #16 Susquehanna
#28	18	New Jersey City	18-8	LOST to TCNJ, 82-92
#29	16	Wooster	20-6	def. Oberlin, 78-63; 02/26 vs. Hiram; 02/27 vs. TBA
#30	14	Carroll	19-4	02/26 vs. Ripon
#31	11	Rochester	17-7	02/27 vs. T#34 Emory
#32	9	Scranton	19-7	LOST at #16 Susquehanna, 72-77
#33	8	St. John Fisher	20-5	02/26 vs. Stevens
T#34	7	Emory	17-7	02/27 at #31 Rochester
T#34	7	New York U.	19-5	02/27 at Brandeis
#36	6	East Texas Baptist	20-5	02/25 vs. Mary Hardin-Baylor
#37	5	Roanoke	19-6	02/26 vs. Randolph
#38	4	Stockton	20-6	def. Rutgers-Newark, 95-75
#39	3	Aurora	20-5	02/26 vs. Milwaukee Engineering
T#40	2	Chicago	17-7	02/27 vs. Washington U.
T#40	2	Penn State-Behrend	20-4	02/27 vs. Pitt-Greensburg/Medaille
T#40	2	UW-La Crosse	16-9	02/26 vs. TBD
T#43	1	MIT	19-6	02/27 vs. #24 WPI; 02/28 at TBA
T#43	1	St. John's	19-7	def. Augsburg, 99-86; 02/26 at St. Olaf
T#43	1	Texas Lutheran	19-6	02/27 vs. Winner of Game 1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 25, 2016, 12:28:17 AM

Quote from: ronk on February 24, 2016, 06:05:17 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 24, 2016, 04:06:29 PM
From what I have been able to figure out... there is a chance TLU will NOT host because they made need a geographically centered team to pull it off.

Let me give you a "what if"
- TLU is in (AQ or at-large)
- ETBU is in (AQ)
- Birmingham-Southern is in (AQ)
- Emory (or someone else)

The committee can get BSC to ETBU by bus because it is 490 miles. That means they can get TLU to ETBU as well. Leaving just one flight in to ETBU for a pod. If they hosted at TLU, that is two flights.

A few years ago, we were told the committee was only giving geographic pods in the second weekend (I can explain that better another time), but I have since learned the NCAA forced them away from a geographic pod with Centre (featuring Emory) in 2014. This year they may be encouraging them to the other way.

Long story short... TLU probably only hosts if all the right things come into play and there is a third Texas team. The reality is - that isn't going to happen. SO the other way they host is if it is just TLU and ETBU by themselves.

Was that the Scranton(Mid-Atlantic) lost hosting opportunity?

That was the situation in some manner... there were a lot of trickle-down ramifications. Scranton losing the hosting was just one of a few.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 25, 2016, 06:21:37 PM

The final days of the regular season are here. Results of games across the country are affecting other teams not even playing. How will it all shake out and how does one result affect another?

Thursday night on Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave McHugh gives you the insight you need to know how the NCAA Tournament brackets are already taking shape. Dave will talk to many coaches around the country who are looking to lock up automatic bids, securing at-large opportunities, or knowingly playing for the postseason lives. Dave will even make sure you better understand the selection criteria and how something like the Strength of Schedule helps or hurts teams.

Hoopsville hits the air at 7pm ET. You can tune in below.

Guests include (in order of appearance)
- Michele Durand, No. 10 Ohio Northern women's coach
- Fred Richter, DeSales women's coach
- Warren Caruso, Husson men's coach
- Zach Frilen, No. 15 Lancaster Bible men's coach
- Todd Raridon, No. 11 North Central (Ill.) men's coach
- Marcus Kahn (Mary Washington) or Andy Sachs (Salisbury), CAC men's semifinal winner
- Matt Snyder, Strength of Schedule/Numbers guru

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

And the Hoopsville Fundraising project is in it's closing days as well, but we have not met the goal. Please consider helping us cover Division III basketball the way it deserves to be covered: http://igg.me/at/hoopsville-fundraiser/x/6029509.

Thanks!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 28, 2016, 05:23:15 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	614	Augustana	26-1	def. Illinois Wesleyan, 83-74; def. #17 Elmhurst, 69-53
#2	610	Benedictine	27-0	def. Marian, 91-82; def. Milwaukee Engineering, 83-57
#3	560	Whitworth	26-1	def. Puget Sound, 75-58; def. Pacific Lutheran, 75-62
#4	537	Marietta	25-3	def. Wilmington, 93-78; def. Baldwin Wallace, 91-66; LOST to #12 John Carroll, 85-87
#5	534	Christopher Newport	26-1	def. St. Mary's (Md.), 57-56; def. #23 Salisbury, 68-67
#6	499	Hope	23-3	LOST to Trine, 77-82
#7	472	St. Thomas	24-3	def. Bethel, 63-46; LOST to St. Olaf, 66-72
#8	406	St. Norbert	23-2	def. Lake Forest, 63-48; def. #30 Carroll, 71-69
#9	399	Whitman	22-4	LOST to Pacific Lutheran, 68-82
#10	388	Ohio Wesleyan	23-4	def. Wabash, 100-80; LOST to Denison, 85-95
#11	350	North Central (Ill.)	19-7	LOST to (n) #17 Elmhurst, 58-60
#12	330	John Carroll	25-3	def. Capital, 83-71; def. Mount Union, 93-74; won at #4 Marietta, 87-85
#13	327	Amherst	22-5	def. (n) #18 Tufts, 86-83; LOST to (n) Middlebury, 79-81
#14	296	Johnson and Wales	26-2	def. St. Joseph's (Maine), 73-36; def. Emmanuel, 97-79; def. #26 Albertus Magnus, 86-75
#15	260	Lancaster Bible	27-0	def. Penn College, 98-72; def. SUNYIT, 75-57; def. Morrisville State, 97-71
#16	232	Susquehanna	23-4	def. #32 Scranton, 77-72; LOST at #27 Catholic, 80-83
#17	218	Elmhurst	21-6	def. (n) #11 North Central (Ill.), 60-58; LOST at #1 Augustana, 53-69
#18	209	Tufts	20-6	LOST to (n) #13 Amherst, 83-86
#19	184	Alma	21-6	def. (n) Albion, 77-64; def. (n) Trine, 62-54
#20	170	Babson	21-5	def. Emerson, 74-69; def. T#43 MIT, 81-69
#21	149	Plattsburgh State	21-5	LOST to Oswego State, 74-81
#22	75	Trinity (Conn.)	19-7	LOST to Middlebury, 58-70
#23	54	Salisbury	21-6	def. Mary Washington, 83-78; LOST at #5 Christopher Newport, 67-68
#24	44	WPI	20-6	LOST to (n) T#43 MIT, 80-96
#25	43	Franklin and Marshall	22-5	def. Gettysburg, 74-63; def. Swarthmore, 75-64

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	27	Albertus Magnus	20-6	def. Mount Ida, 109-87; won at Lasell, 87-80; LOST at #14 Johnson and Wales, 75-86
#27	21	Catholic	22-5	def. Juniata, 79-66; def. #16 Susquehanna, 83-80
#28	18	New Jersey City	18-8	LOST to TCNJ, 82-92
#29	16	Wooster	21-7	def. Oberlin, 78-63; def. (n) Hiram, 92-79; LOST to (n) Denison, 81-92
#30	14	Carroll	20-5	def. (n) Ripon, 58-55; LOST at #8 St. Norbert, 69-71
#31	11	Rochester	17-8	LOST to T#34 Emory, 75-84
#32	9	Scranton	19-7	LOST at #16 Susquehanna, 72-77
#33	8	St. John Fisher	21-6	def. Stevens, 85-62; LOST to Hartwick, 91-93
T#34	7	Emory	18-7	won at #31 Rochester, 84-75
T#34	7	New York U.	20-5	won at Brandeis, 71-50
#36	6	East Texas Baptist	21-6	def. (n) Mary Hardin-Baylor, 70-64; LOST to (n) Louisiana College, 44-56
#37	5	Roanoke	19-7	LOST to (n) Randolph, 62-74
#38	4	Stockton	21-6	def. Rutgers-Newark, 95-75; def. TCNJ, 60-53
#39	3	Aurora	20-6	LOST to Milwaukee Engineering, 96-100
T#40	2	Chicago	17-8	LOST to Washington U., 54-67
T#40	2	Penn State-Behrend	20-5	LOST to (n) Pitt-Greensburg, 64-67
T#40	2	UW-La Crosse	16-10	LOST to UW-River Falls, 61-72
T#43	1	MIT	20-7	def. (n) #24 WPI, 96-80; LOST at #20 Babson, 69-81
T#43	1	St. John's	19-8	def. Augsburg, 99-86; LOST at St. Olaf, 80-91
T#43	1	Texas Lutheran	21-6	won at Centenary (La.), 80-70; def. (n) Colorado College, 80-77

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on March 06, 2016, 09:45:58 AM

Utilizing the Feburary 28th Top 25 Ranking, here are the 13 teams now in the Sweet 16:

1. Augustana
2. Benedictine
4. Christopher Newport
7. St. Norbert
8. St. Thomas
10. Ohio Wesleyan
11. Whitman
12. Johnson & Wales
13. Alma
15. Amherst
16. Babson
20. Tufts
25. Emory

3 Teams Not Ranked in the last Top 25 that are in the Sweet 16:
Wooster
Oswego State
Keene State

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 06, 2016, 10:41:06 AM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on March 06, 2016, 09:45:58 AM

3 Teams Not Ranked in the last Top 25 that are in the Sweet 16:
Wooster
Oswego State
Keene State

All in the same sectional.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 06, 2016, 06:57:20 PM

It may have been one of the best weekends of the Division III basketball tournaments in recent history. Upsets, close finishes, buzzer beaters, and more. Survive and advance hasn't fit better as a description than after the first two rounds of this year's championships.

Tonight, Dave McHugh recaps it all on Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) tonight. From those who surprised to those who survived. Even the favorites had their moments. Dave will talk to many who are not only still playing, but get a chance to host next weekend and hope it helps them get to the final four.

Hoopsville hits the air at 7pm ET here: http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2015-16/mar6

Guests include (in order of apperance):
- Brian Sortino, Oswego State junior guard
- Jason Leone, Oswego State men's coach
- John Tauer, No. 8 St. Thomas men's coach (Pat Coleman interview)
- Trevor Woodruff, No. 3 Scranton women's coach
- Megan Haughey, Stevens women's coach
- Bob Sheldon, No. 20 Tufts men's coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

And the Hoopsville Fundraising project is in it's closing days as well, but we have not met the goal. Please consider helping us cover Division III basketball the way it deserves to be covered: http://igg.me/at/hoopsville-fundraiser/x/6029509.

Thanks!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on March 11, 2016, 10:46:52 PM

Utilizing the February 28th Top 25 Rankings, here are the Elite Eight matchups:

#1 Augustana vs. #8 St. Thomas

#2 Benedictine vs. #13 Alma

#4 Christopher Newport vs. NR Wooster

#15 Amherst vs. #20 Tufts

Wooster is the team that the Top 25 voters missed and the Scots return their top 4 scorers next season. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 11, 2016, 10:51:20 PM

Probably more a matter of "peaking at the right time;" if there's one program in D3 that generally does not get overlooked by the poll voters, it's Wooster.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on March 11, 2016, 11:02:45 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on March 11, 2016, 10:51:20 PM
Probably more a matter of "peaking at the right time;" if there's one program in D3 that generally does not get overlooked by the poll voters, it's Wooster.

North Central and Emory were both ranked in the last Top 25 poll each with 7 losses. Wooster also with 7 losses was obviously not ranked.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 11, 2016, 11:09:25 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on March 11, 2016, 11:02:45 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on March 11, 2016, 10:51:20 PM
Probably more a matter of "peaking at the right time;" if there's one program in D3 that generally does not get overlooked by the poll voters, it's Wooster.

North Central and Emory were both ranked in the last Top 25 poll each with 7 losses. Wooster also with 7 losses was obviously not ranked.

While I greatly respect the NCAC, North Central (CCIW) and Emory (UAA) both play in overall tougher conferences. The NCAC is more comparable to the MIAA - generally 2 (maybe 3) nationally relevant teams, but not much depth.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 11, 2016, 11:19:47 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on March 11, 2016, 10:51:20 PM
Probably more a matter of "peaking at the right time;" if there's one program in D3 that generally does not get overlooked by the poll voters, it's Wooster.

Also a bracket that avoided the entire Great Lakes and Midwest Regions. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 11, 2016, 11:21:05 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on March 11, 2016, 11:02:45 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on March 11, 2016, 10:51:20 PM
Probably more a matter of "peaking at the right time;" if there's one program in D3 that generally does not get overlooked by the poll voters, it's Wooster.

North Central and Emory were both ranked in the last Top 25 poll each with 7 losses. Wooster also with 7 losses was obviously not ranked.

I get what you are saying, but Wooster, alongside Amherst, has historically dominated the Top 25 poll since its inception. I no longer know which is #1 and which is #2, but they are 1-2 in top 10 rankings, top 25 rankings, and overall weeks with votes; Wooster has been left out of the poll altogether (i.e. zero votes) only a handful of times ever. I doubt that there's ever been a ballot cast by a voter who didn't give Wooster serious consideration.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 11, 2016, 11:22:29 PM

Quote from: sac on March 11, 2016, 11:19:47 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on March 11, 2016, 10:51:20 PM
Probably more a matter of "peaking at the right time;" if there's one program in D3 that generally does not get overlooked by the poll voters, it's Wooster.

Also a bracket that avoided the entire Great Lakes and Midwest Regions. :)

This.

No slight to the Scots, who are certainly very good, but ... this. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 11, 2016, 11:56:35 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 11, 2016, 11:22:29 PM
Quote from: sac on March 11, 2016, 11:19:47 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on March 11, 2016, 10:51:20 PM
Probably more a matter of "peaking at the right time;" if there's one program in D3 that generally does not get overlooked by the poll voters, it's Wooster.

Also a bracket that avoided the entire Great Lakes and Midwest Regions. :)

This.

No slight to the Scots, who are certainly very good, but ... this. ;)

Hey, I'm not the one arguing they should be ranked -- although we all know, I am sure, that they've secured a top 15 slot in the final poll, regardless of what happens from here on out. My point is that they lost to every good team they played in the non-conference (Skidmore, Salisbury, Marietta), then followed that up with conference losses to Wittenberg, Hiram, and Denison (and, of course, OWU), none of which are terrible by themselves but taken as a whole are less than inspiring. And yes, Lancaster Bible, Endicott, and Oswego St. are not a murderer's row, but they are Wooster's three best wins outside OWU, and they put the Scots in the Sectional final. Wooster doesn't win these games in November/December; I call that peaking. Whether that improvement is enough to handle Christopher Newport tomorrow remains to be seen. One thing's for sure: if Wooster wins, it will be attributed at least in part to CNU's geography. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 12, 2016, 08:29:17 AM

Wooster was really young and didn't play a great schedule. They're surviving on ball control and one guy scoring. They're going to be a great team next year, that's for sure. I saw them play two games at Catholic and they weren't even the best team in that pod. Obviously going on a run will help that impression, but unless they win tonight, I don't know that it would greatly change my perception on them right now. Walking a tightrope, is how I'd describe them.

That being said, a lot of the teams near the bottom of my poll did poorly in the tournament and won't be ranked, so there will probably be room for Wooster - I just don't know that they're Top 15 (at least until the preseason poll this fall).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fantastic50 on March 12, 2016, 11:22:18 AM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 12, 2016, 08:29:17 AM

Wooster was really young and didn't play a great schedule.

The SOS rankings among the 62 NCAA tournament teams refute this. (Matt Snyder's data.)

1) North Central (Ill.) (18-7, 0.600, CE)
2) Emory (17-7, 0.587, SO)
3) Middlebury (17-10, 0.578, NE)
4) St. Thomas (24-3, 0.564, WE)
5) Amherst (22-5, 0.564, NE)
6) Wooster (20-7, 0.563, GL)
7) Trinity (Conn.) (18-7, 0.563, NE)
8) UW-Oshkosh (17-9, 0.562, CE)
9) Salisbury (21-6, 0.562, MA)
10) Tufts (20-6, 0.561, NE)
11) Alma (21-6, 0.558, GL)
12) Catholic (22-5, 0.556, MA)
13) Marietta (25-3, 0.556, GL)
14) Scranton (18-7, 0.556, MA)
15) St. Olaf (18-9, 0.554, WE)
16) Susquehanna (21-4, 0.554, MA)
17) Plattsburgh State (21-5, 0.552, EA)
18) Oswego State (20-8, 0.552, EA)
19) LaGrange (17-7, 0.552, SO)
20) Elmhurst (21-6, 0.543, CE)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 12, 2016, 11:29:28 AM

I guess maybe I should say they didn't win enough on that schedule. Hiram was their best win until the OWU game on 1/27. They lost to every decent team they played until then. It remained their only signature win until the tournament when, as we've established, they've yet to play a better team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fantastic50 on March 12, 2016, 12:11:20 PM

Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 12, 2016, 11:29:28 AM
I guess maybe I should say they didn't win enough on that schedule. Hiram was their best win until the OWU game on 1/27. They lost to every decent team they played until then.

No argument there. With so many young guys in the rotation, Wooster was not a tournament-caliber team for much of the season. Had the Scots lost the back-and-forth home game against OWU, I think the NCAC final loss to Denison would have burst their bubble. Spencer Williams' pair of free throws in the final second probably saved the season.

Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 12, 2016, 11:29:28 AM
It remained their only signature win until the tournament when, as we've established, they've yet to play a better team.

We'll never know quite what to say about Lancaster Bible, with such different results against the only two tournament teams they played. If Wooster has a poor-shooting night against them, the Chargers might still be undefeated. Maybe that's a quality win for Wooster, and maybe it's not.

Wooster certainly has benefited from getting sent east, and from upsets of Catholic and Marietta. It is interesting to note that last night's victory at Oswego was only the 2nd true road win for the Scots in their long tournament history, against 11 such defeats. In the three years they have advanced to Salem, Wooster played nine tournament home games and two (the 2007 sectional) at a neutral site.

While Wooster is among the 25 best teams right now, I also question whether they deserve a spot in the post-tournament rankings, based on the results of the whole season. In that kind of poll, I don't think that you can ignore bad losses from November and December.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 12, 2016, 02:24:38 PM

Quote from: fantastic50 on March 12, 2016, 12:11:20 PM
Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 12, 2016, 11:29:28 AM
I guess maybe I should say they didn't win enough on that schedule. Hiram was their best win until the OWU game on 1/27. They lost to every decent team they played until then.

No argument there. With so many young guys in the rotation, Wooster was not a tournament-caliber team for much of the season. Had the Scots lost the back-and-forth home game against OWU, I think the NCAC final loss to Denison would have burst their bubble. Spencer Williams' pair of free throws in the final second probably saved the season.

Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 12, 2016, 11:29:28 AM
It remained their only signature win until the tournament when, as we've established, they've yet to play a better team.

We'll never know quite what to say about Lancaster Bible, with such different results against the only two tournament teams they played. If Wooster has a poor-shooting night against them, the Chargers might still be undefeated. Maybe that's a quality win for Wooster, and maybe it's not.

Wooster certainly has benefited from getting sent east, and from upsets of Catholic and Marietta. It is interesting to note that last night's victory at Oswego was only the 2nd true road win for the Scots in their long tournament history, against 11 such defeats. In the three years they have advanced to Salem, Wooster played nine tournament home games and two (the 2007 sectional) at a neutral site.

While Wooster is among the 25 best teams right now, I also question whether they deserve a spot in the post-tournament rankings, based on the results of the whole season. In that kind of poll, I don't think that you can ignore bad losses from November and December.

I'm high on LBC - they got outcoached against Wooster, their best player was hampered by injury, and their schedule hadn't properly prepared them for tournament play. At the same time, they're probably not better than OWU regardless, so the statement still stands.

Wooster is benefiting most from discipline. They're just not making mistakes. I think CNU will be a bridge too far in that regard; I don't think this Wooster squad is good enough to beat CNU, even with mistake-free ball (although CNU has not been at their best in the tournament, so you never know).

Fanelly is obviously a great talent, but this team is winning because the coaches have the other guys extremely prepared to fill their roles. If they do indeed make it to Salem, you have to put Moore in the COY conversation - even with the relatively weaker competition, he's squeezed every bit out of this team in March.

(And I am typically the farthest thing from a COW apologist.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on March 12, 2016, 02:41:02 PM

Quote from: fantastic50 on March 12, 2016, 12:11:20 PM
It is interesting to note that last night's victory at Oswego was only the 2nd true road win for the Scots in their long tournament history, against 11 such defeats. In the three years they have advanced to Salem, Wooster played nine tournament home games and two (the 2007 sectional) at a neutral site.

That's a very interesting stat. I wonder how that compares to road teams in general in the tournament.

I think it also speaks to the number of times they've hosted, which is a product of his successful they've been (and thus the top 25 conversation)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 22, 2016, 10:31:41 PM

What a season of Division III basketball and it isn't quite over with yet! The men might have crowned their championship, but the women have one more game to go.

On this episode of Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave McHugh looks back at the two championship weekends with help from Ryan Scott, Gordon Mann, and Adam Turer. We look at the championship for St. Thomas and the near perfect miss by Benedictine. We also take a look at the two semifinal games in women's basketball and the upcoming championship between St. Thomas and Tufts to be played in Indianapolis.

Dave also talks to Page Moir, head coach for Roanoke, who suddenly announced on Tuesday he is stepping down from the position and looking for something new to challenge him.

You can watch the show in its entirety or listen to the podcast above.

Guests include (in order of appearance):
- Page Moir, Roanoke men's coach
- Keith Bunkenburg, No. 2 Benedictine men's coach
- Steve Fritz, St. Thomas athletics director and former men's coach
- John Tauer, No 1. St. Thomas men's coach
- Ryan Scott, D3hoops.com Mid-Atlantic reporter
- Gordon Mann and Adam Turer, women's semifinals report
- Jeff Hans, No. 1 Thomas More women's coach
- Carla Berube, No. 7 Tufts women's coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 23, 2016, 01:14:06 PM

Quote from: John Gleich on March 12, 2016, 02:41:02 PM
Quote from: fantastic50 on March 12, 2016, 12:11:20 PM
It is interesting to note that last night's victory at Oswego was only the 2nd true road win for the Scots in their long tournament history, against 11 such defeats. In the three years they have advanced to Salem, Wooster played nine tournament home games and two (the 2007 sectional) at a neutral site.

That's a very interesting stat. I wonder how that compares to road teams in general in the tournament.

I think it also speaks to the number of times they've hosted, which is a product of his successful they've been (and thus the top 25 conversation)

I'm sure a little has to do with geography as well. Sure you have to be good to earn it on most occasions and advance past the first weekend to have a shot at hosting again, but sometimes it's geography, plain and simple. Ask CNU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 23, 2016, 02:14:11 PM

Well... Wooster is centrally located and usually doesn't lose hosting chances to others in the pod. In my memory bank they usually have been the host due to rankings, not geography. That doesn't mean that and gender priority doesn't play a role, but I think for Wooster geography has played less of a role.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 23, 2016, 02:14:42 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 23, 2016, 01:14:06 PM
Quote from: John Gleich on March 12, 2016, 02:41:02 PM
Quote from: fantastic50 on March 12, 2016, 12:11:20 PM
It is interesting to note that last night's victory at Oswego was only the 2nd true road win for the Scots in their long tournament history, against 11 such defeats. In the three years they have advanced to Salem, Wooster played nine tournament home games and two (the 2007 sectional) at a neutral site.

That's a very interesting stat. I wonder how that compares to road teams in general in the tournament.

I think it also speaks to the number of times they've hosted, which is a product of his successful they've been (and thus the top 25 conversation)

I'm sure a little has to do with geography as well. Sure you have to be good to earn it on most occasions and advance past the first weekend to have a shot at hosting again, but sometimes it's geography, plain and simple. Ask CNU.

But geographic proximity is yyuuuugggge in Division 3.

I remember talking to Ron Holmes, the former McMurry coach, whose teams made the Elite 8 in 2000 and Sweet 16 in 2001. He realized that an ASC team would likely never host an 8/16 men's weekend. Even this year, one loss UT-Tyler women played undefeated GFU in Minneapolis.

I would love the records in post-season of D3 teams that fly versus: (1) home/jhost teams; (2) non-flight teams on a neutral site.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 23, 2016, 02:17:32 PM

In men, the flying team tends not do as well, though Mary Hardin-Baylor proved that all wrong in 2013 winning at Whitworth and Salem (three games total) before flying to Atlanta.

On the women's side, the flying teams tend to fair much better as the fact NWC teams have ended up in the final four on several occasions.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 23, 2016, 02:38:02 PM

Checked out the Top 25 poll and more often than not, the champion was crowned #1 with all 25 1st place votes and the runner up was given the #2 spot. Made me think how many times that hasn't happened. Fear not...

Since the 2000 Final Poll, every champion, has finished #1 with all 25 1st place votes and the runner up was 2nd. This was the case dating all the way back to the 2009 tournament. That year, Washington U. topped Richard Stockton in the Final. RSC, though, finished just 5th in the Final Poll. Wheaton, St. Thomas and UWSP all finished ahead of RSC in the Final Poll.

This year, to remind you, was THEE Bracket of Death of all brackets of death. Going into the tourney, 7 of the top 8 in the Top 25 poll were all in the same sectional:

#1 UST lost to Washington U in the Elit 8
#3 Wheaton lost to Washington U in the Sweet 16
#4 UWSP lost to UST in the 2nd rd
#5 UW-Platteville lost to Wheaton in the 2nd rd
#7 Puget Sound lost to UST in the Sweet16
#8 UW-Whitewater lost to Washington U in 2nd rd.

Richard Stockton went into the tourney #6

It happened again in UWSP's 2nd championship in 2005. Point went into the tourney #1, while losing Finalist Rochester went in #21, but finished just 4th.

#14 Calvin finished 2nd in the Final Poll, losing to Rochester in the semis and #10 Trinity (tx) finished 3rd after losing to Point in the Elite 8.

It happened in 2003 when #24 Gustavus Adolphus lost to Williams in the final and finished #3. Wooster started the tourney #6 and lost to Williams in the semis to finish ahead of the Gusties in the Final Poll.

The previous year it happened as well. In the 2002 tourney, #6 Otterbein topped #4 Elizabethtown in the Final, but finished below #1 Carthage, who lost to Otterbein in the semis.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 23, 2016, 02:43:36 PM

And the women's UWSP team hosted #2 and undefeated George Fox.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 23, 2016, 09:24:18 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on March 11, 2016, 11:56:35 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 11, 2016, 11:22:29 PM
Quote from: sac on March 11, 2016, 11:19:47 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on March 11, 2016, 10:51:20 PM
Probably more a matter of "peaking at the right time;" if there's one program in D3 that generally does not get overlooked by the poll voters, it's Wooster.

Also a bracket that avoided the entire Great Lakes and Midwest Regions. :)

This.

No slight to the Scots, who are certainly very good, but ... this. ;)
Hey, I'm not the one arguing they should be ranked -- although we all know, I am sure, that they've secured a top 15 slot in the final poll, regardless of what happens from here on out.

Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 12, 2016, 08:29:17 AM

Wooster was really young and didn't play a great schedule. They're surviving on ball control and one guy scoring. They're going to be a great team next year, that's for sure. I saw them play two games at Catholic and they weren't even the best team in that pod. Obviously going on a run will help that impression, but unless they win tonight, I don't know that it would greatly change my perception on them right now. Walking a tightrope, is how I'd describe them.

That being said, a lot of the teams near the bottom of my poll did poorly in the tournament and won't be ranked, so there will probably be room for Wooster - I just don't know that they're Top 15 (at least until the preseason poll this fall).

14th in the final poll. (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2015-16/final)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 23, 2016, 10:07:01 PM

Quote from: David Collinge on March 23, 2016, 09:24:18 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on March 11, 2016, 11:56:35 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 11, 2016, 11:22:29 PM
Quote from: sac on March 11, 2016, 11:19:47 PM
Quote from: David Collinge on March 11, 2016, 10:51:20 PM
Probably more a matter of "peaking at the right time;" if there's one program in D3 that generally does not get overlooked by the poll voters, it's Wooster.

Also a bracket that avoided the entire Great Lakes and Midwest Regions. :)

This.

No slight to the Scots, who are certainly very good, but ... this. ;)
Hey, I'm not the one arguing they should be ranked -- although we all know, I am sure, that they've secured a top 15 slot in the final poll, regardless of what happens from here on out.

Quote from: Hoops Fan on March 12, 2016, 08:29:17 AM

Wooster was really young and didn't play a great schedule. They're surviving on ball control and one guy scoring. They're going to be a great team next year, that's for sure. I saw them play two games at Catholic and they weren't even the best team in that pod. Obviously going on a run will help that impression, but unless they win tonight, I don't know that it would greatly change my perception on them right now. Walking a tightrope, is how I'd describe them.

That being said, a lot of the teams near the bottom of my poll did poorly in the tournament and won't be ranked, so there will probably be room for Wooster - I just don't know that they're Top 15 (at least until the preseason poll this fall).

14th in the final poll. (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2015-16/final)

I had them 23rd, so some people really liked them. It seems there's a lot of priority put on the round you got to more than who you played. Then again, I did watch those first two games in person. We'll see. I like their chances for next year, for sure.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 24, 2016, 05:09:17 PM

I had them right at 15... only because I wasn't sure if I should move them down further. Those behind them started to become too difficult to move ahead of them. Personally, I probably have Wooster too high.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: David Collinge on March 24, 2016, 06:14:05 PM

Just to be clear, my prediction of a top 15 placement for Wooster was just that-- a prediction. After 17 years of fairly close poll-watching, I have a certain amount of familiarity with how the poll works. I did not intend to comment on the merits of that ranking, one way or the other.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on September 19, 2016, 03:08:50 PM

Thought fans of the teams who have a shot of appearing in Salem would find this interesting, a great article on Roanoke ...

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/09/roanoke-virginia-redevelopment-what-works-214247

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Bucket on September 19, 2016, 03:14:43 PM

It is, indeed, a great piece.

As some are aware, I grew up just north of Roanoke, and so much of this Politico story details events from my childhood and adolescence (1970s and '80s). So glad to see the Star City enjoying such a renaissance.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D3HoopJunkie on September 21, 2016, 11:28:59 AM

When does the first preseason Top 25 Poll normally release?

I know I am a little early and all but I was just curious

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on September 21, 2016, 12:17:14 PM

Usually in mid/late October. Shortly after practices begin if memory serves.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on September 22, 2016, 07:21:02 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on September 21, 2016, 12:17:14 PM
Usually in mid/late October. Shortly after practices begin if memory serves.

Usually it's when voters get around to sending a ballot back. I feel like Nov 1st is a pretty typical time to expect something.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on September 22, 2016, 12:05:25 PM

I've always voted in October - twice been on a vacation when I did it. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 23, 2016, 06:47:51 PM

Gordon Mann posted in the WIAC page that it lloked like 1st thing next week (not this comong week).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 24, 2016, 10:58:14 AM

I voted today, so it should be soon.

This year I decided not to kill myself trying to get every last placement right. Without results on the floor, you can really only guess. My top two were easy - after that, there's a whole lot of who knows. I'm much more comfortable once we get to January.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 24, 2016, 02:17:55 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 24, 2016, 10:58:14 AM

I voted today, so it should be soon.

This year I decided not to kill myself trying to get every last placement right. Without results on the floor, you can really only guess. My top two were easy - after that, there's a whole lot of who knows. I'm much more comfortable once we get to January.

Sadly, you will have to vote five or more times before January, though. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 24, 2016, 02:42:46 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 24, 2016, 10:58:14 AM

I voted today, so it should be soon.

This year I decided not to kill myself trying to get every last placement right. Without results on the floor, you can really only guess. My top two were easy - after that, there's a whole lot of who knows. I'm much more comfortable once we get to January.

1st two were easy? Let the speculation begin!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on October 24, 2016, 04:07:49 PM

My guess: Christopher Newport and Amherst will be the overwhelming favorites in many posters' polls. Babson, Wooster, Whitman, St. Thomas (lose a ton but then again they always seem just to reload), and St. Norbert also warrant some consideration ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 24, 2016, 05:19:52 PM

I'm very impressed with CNU. I am skeptical of Amhert - not the talent on the roster, but their ability to put it together on the floor. The dominant force on that team graduated and I want to see a few games before I give them top 5 credit.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on October 24, 2016, 05:29:41 PM

Especially as an Eph fan, I don't entirely disagree with you about Amherst. The talent is undeniable, the leadership and chemistry (despite a ton of experience) is uncertain. But the Former Jeffs are the only returning Final Four team that returns most of its key pieces, in fact only graduating one senior who ever played. The other three squads from Salem all look to be substantially diminished. So on paper, Amherst almost has to be one of the top 2-3 favorites. I don't think this Amherst team is nearly as strong as the 2007-08 or 2013-14 juggernauts, but then again, there aren't a lot of teams -- CNU excepted -- that were super impressive last season and still return the bulk of their talent. Hence, I think Amherst has to be a top 3-4 team, at least, just by default.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 24, 2016, 06:36:38 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on October 24, 2016, 05:29:41 PM
Especially as an Eph fan, I don't entirely disagree with you about Amherst. The talent is undeniable, the leadership and chemistry (despite a ton of experience) is uncertain. But the Former Jeffs are the only returning Final Four team that returns most of its key pieces, in fact only graduating one senior who ever played. The other three squads from Salem all look to be substantially diminished. So on paper, Amherst almost has to be one of the top 2-3 favorites. I don't think this Amherst team is nearly as strong as the 2007-08 or 2013-14 juggernauts, but then again, there aren't a lot of teams -- CNU excepted -- that were super impressive last season and still return the bulk of their talent. Hence, I think Amherst has to be a top 3-4 team, at least, just by default.

I don't disagree with the logic, I just didn't have Amherst as highly rated, even last year. I didn't think their path to Salem was as difficult as others and the team really did little to impress me on the court. I've got them a few places above where they were in my final poll last year. I'm fully ready to give credit when they prove it on the floor. I tried to just tweak my final rankings from last year to reflect graduation, transfer, etc. There are just too many variables to try and properly evaluate 50+ teams before the season even starts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 25, 2016, 07:40:23 AM

I'm putting Babson #2. They return everyone and had it not been for Flannery's injury and not playing 100%, Babson may have been in the Final last year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on October 25, 2016, 11:32:42 AM

Agreed -- I would actually put Babson (barely) over Amherst to start the year, as well -- they look loaded and Flannery has to be the pre-season national POY favorite. They are big, strong, and tough up front. Both look like clear top-5 and maybe even top-3 teams ... and New England as a whole looks fairly shallow this year (I see NESCAC as 4, at most 5, deep in high-quality teams, the Little East has 1-2 good-but-not-elite squads, and I think Babson is going to dominate NEWMAC this year, although MIT could be interesting). So both could put up very gaudy records.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on October 30, 2016, 11:16:15 PM

While certainly not the #1 pre-season team, North Central should be highly placed to begin the season. They return 4 starters from last year's team which ranked #25 in the final poll. They sustained 8 losses on the season while playing what was generally regarded to be the nation's toughest schedule.
They lost to:
#2 Benedictine by 2
#3 Augustana by 8 (plus another loss to Augie)
#6 Alma by 1
#18 Elmhurst by 2
#24 St. Olaf by 2
Their other 2 losses were to teams that won 17 and 20 games.

Among the returnees is 6'8" junior post Alex Sorenson (15.3 ppg, 7.7 rpg), a D3Hoops 2nd team All-Region player who led the CCIW in 3 point shooting percentage (50%), and blocked shots. In a head to head confrontation with national POY, Luke Johnson, Sorenson won the rebound battle 8-6, and outscored Johnson 20-8. Also returning is 6'6" soph wing Connor Raridon (13.2 ppg, 6.7 rpg, 109'assists), the Regional Freshman of The Year. Other returning starters are junior Erwin Henry (9.0 ppg), and senior Jagger Anderson (8.9 ppg, 101 assists).
The Cardinals are the conference Coaches Poll pick to win the CCIW.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 30, 2016, 11:25:38 PM

And don't sleep on WashU - they only lost to Big 10 U of Illinois by 7 today. Hard to gauge an exhibition game, but even if the UI coach was more interested in seeing everyone than winning, impressive nonetheless. WashU actually out-rebounded Illinois. :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on October 31, 2016, 12:17:16 AM

Especially when Illinois can roll out 6'10" Maverick Morgan and Michael Finke, and 6'11" Mike Thorne Jr.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on October 31, 2016, 12:27:06 AM

Unless the pre-season pundits are wrong about the Illini, Illinois started only 2 projected starters, with 1 not playing at all, and another significant rotation guy not playing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 31, 2016, 07:54:03 AM

Poll is out

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2016-17/preseason

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 31, 2016, 08:17:43 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 31, 2016, 07:54:03 AM
Poll is out

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2016-17/preseason

Going to be LOTS of sorting out in November and December. My #6 team didn't even make the Top 25. Crazy.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 31, 2016, 11:04:26 AM

Voters are clearly all over the place. There are a lot of teams to consider this year thanks to parity... which also makes the top half of the poll even more difficult.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 31, 2016, 05:33:48 PM

As I keep telling people whenever someone posts the D3 preseason rankings of The Sporting News or DIII News, the d3hoops.com preseason Top 25 is the only D3 men's basketball forecast that's really worth taking seriously. Before I say anything further, I want to make it clear that I still believe that.

Be that as it may, however, there are still some stray voters in the d3hoops.com poll who make me wonder how much they're really paying attention when they make out their preseason ballots, as opposed to simply re-posting last March's tourney results for their respective Top 25s. I could cite other examples, but I'll use two cases in point from the league whose games I broadcast, the CCIW: 1) Augustana may be coming off of a championship game appearance and an Elite Eight appearance over the past two seasons, but Augie lost six seniors who were not only their top six scorers but also their top six rebounders and top six minutes-eaters. Picking the Rock Islanders #18 -- which means that there's individual voters who picked them even higher than that -- is ridiculous; and 2) how Elmhurst, which lost a whopping nine players who averaged double-digit minutes last season, was deemed worthy of appearing on someone's ballot (if not on two of them, since EC got two points in the poll) is beyond me. Coach John Baines is forced to re-construct almost his entire rotation this season. Granted, the CCIW coaches' preseason poll is notorious for getting it wrong, but the CCIW coaches picked the Bluejays to finish sixth out of nine teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 31, 2016, 07:19:30 PM

I agree completely with Augie. I also think it's amazing that St. Thomas is ranked where they are, if ranked at all. Sure, they actually return someone, but #10 and a 1st place vote?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on October 31, 2016, 09:21:45 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 31, 2016, 07:19:30 PM
I agree completely with Augie. I also think it's amazing that St. Thomas is ranked where they are, if ranked at all. Sure, they actually return someone, but #10 and a 1st place vote?

Last time a defending champ was ranked out the following season's pre-season poll was the 2006 poll when Stevens Point came in ranked #26 following their 2005 title.

Otherwise, every defending champion has been ranked in the top 10 the following pre-season poll.
St. Thomas #10
Stevens Point #9
Whitewater #1
Amherst #1
Whitewater #3
St. Thomas #8
Stevens Point #1
Washington #1
Washington #1
Amherst #2
Va. Wesleyan #1
Stevens Point #26
Stevens Point #1
Williams #1
Otterbein #10
Catholic #5
Calvin #1
Platteville #1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on October 31, 2016, 09:45:04 PM

Also kind of interesting here's where the eventual champion started in the poll

St. Thomas #4
Stevens Point #7
Whitewater #13
Amherst #5
Whitewater #28
St. Thomas #13
Stevens Point #10
Washington #1
Washington #1
Amherst #5
Va. Wesleyan #11
Stevens Point #1
Stevens Point #3
Williams #11
Otterbein NR
Catholic #7
Calvin #22
Platteville (no poll)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 31, 2016, 10:08:43 PM

My point is all because they are the defending champion doesn't mean they should be ranked. Look at who St. Thomas has lost and look who they are returning. They should be in the 20s, if raned at all. Last preseason Point was ranked #9, which was a joke considering they lost 4 senior starters.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 31, 2016, 11:31:52 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 31, 2016, 10:08:43 PM
My point is all because they are the defending champion doesn't mean they should be ranked. Look at who St. Thomas has lost and look who they are returning. They should be in the 20s, if raned at all. Last preseason Point was ranked #9, which was a joke considering they lost 4 senior starters.

I agree that some people have them too high, but I think there's also the issue of "who else do I put in?" Yes, there are certain teams bringing everybody back who need to be added, but there aren't a lot of those teams, especially not a lot on a national radar. Unless we've literally got voters pulling "maybe" teams out of thin air, we're going to end up with some usual suspects simply because they're usual suspects and they're that way for a reason.

It's just pre-season. The games will work themselves out, and very quickly given the schedule we've got in Nov-Dec this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 01, 2016, 12:56:16 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 31, 2016, 11:31:52 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 31, 2016, 10:08:43 PM
My point is all because they are the defending champion doesn't mean they should be ranked. Look at who St. Thomas has lost and look who they are returning. They should be in the 20s, if raned at all. Last preseason Point was ranked #9, which was a joke considering they lost 4 senior starters.

I agree that some people have them too high, but I think there's also the issue of "who else do I put in?" Yes, there are certain teams bringing everybody back who need to be added, but there aren't a lot of those teams, especially not a lot on a national radar. Unless we've literally got voters pulling "maybe" teams out of thin air, we're going to end up with some usual suspects simply because they're usual suspects and they're that way for a reason.

It's just pre-season. The games will work themselves out, and very quickly given the schedule we've got in Nov-Dec this year.

Totally agree that preseason rankings are pretty much a joke (but fun to talk about). ;)

There is one 'usual suspect' that got ZERO votes. IWU has the same coach who went to Salem in both 2012 and 2014, and a guy who I suspect will be some level of All-American at season's end - Trevor Seibring. They were picked to finish second in the CCIW, yet THREE teams picked below them are in the top 25 or receiving votes. My team has been 'Rodney Dangerfield-ed'. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 01, 2016, 07:35:26 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 01, 2016, 12:56:16 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 31, 2016, 11:31:52 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 31, 2016, 10:08:43 PM
My point is all because they are the defending champion doesn't mean they should be ranked. Look at who St. Thomas has lost and look who they are returning. They should be in the 20s, if raned at all. Last preseason Point was ranked #9, which was a joke considering they lost 4 senior starters.

I agree that some people have them too high, but I think there's also the issue of "who else do I put in?" Yes, there are certain teams bringing everybody back who need to be added, but there aren't a lot of those teams, especially not a lot on a national radar. Unless we've literally got voters pulling "maybe" teams out of thin air, we're going to end up with some usual suspects simply because they're usual suspects and they're that way for a reason.

It's just pre-season. The games will work themselves out, and very quickly given the schedule we've got in Nov-Dec this year.

Totally agree that preseason rankings are pretty much a joke (but fun to talk about). ;)

There is one 'usual suspect' that got ZERO votes. IWU has the same coach who went to Salem in both 2012 and 2014, and a guy who I suspect will be some level of All-American at season's end - Trevor Seibring. They were picked to finish second in the CCIW, yet THREE teams picked below them are in the top 25 or receiving votes. My team has been 'Rodney Dangerfield-ed'. ;D

That could end up being an oversight. IWU was not included in the 50 or so teams voters got information for before the vote. Typically that includes teams receiving votes at the end of last season, teams that won games in the tourney, and any other teams a voter requests. Maybe we all forgot about IWU? I personally added three or four teams to the list, but didn't think of IWU. Mea culpa - we can't all be perfect.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on November 01, 2016, 09:30:28 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 01, 2016, 12:56:16 AM
Totally agree that preseason rankings are pretty much a joke (but fun to talk about). ;)

Unlike the late-season rankings which are Very Serious Business. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on November 01, 2016, 10:03:25 AM

Not true sac, regarding alleged lack of quality among the Illini starters. 6 of the 7 top scorers are back, and 4 of them saw significant minutes Sunday. And, when WashU cut the Illini lead from 29 to 20, the starters came back in.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on November 01, 2016, 10:32:55 AM

I will say this for St. Thomas -- more than any other D3 program, they just reload, not rebuild, even when they suffer big losses. They graduated four starters from their 2011 title team, and the fifth starter played only nine games before suffering a season-ending injury. They still finished with 22 wins, a league title, and made it to the second round of the tourney. And that was a down year for them.

This team actually returns a bit more than that, returning its leading scorer and another starter as well, plus three more guys who were at least minor rotation players. All St. Thomas does is win its league, win at least 22 games (usually more) and typically make a deep tourney run nearly every year. Until that changes, I do think they deserve the benefit of the doubt -- each year guys emerge from deep on the bench to make a massive impact. The coach seems to really favor playing seniors but talent is always buried on the bench, and no matter what, they will ALWAYS D up and make shots from distance.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on November 01, 2016, 10:41:56 AM

I think the bigger issue with the pre-season rankings is the ordering of some teams within various conferences. Tufts I think will finish behind Midd and likely Williams and Trinity as well in the NESCAC. They didn't seem to have much on the bench last year and relied inordinately on their five starters, two of whom graduated and one of whom suffered an ACL tear in March. I am also always wary of teams which have very good injury luck and until Pace hurt his ACL in the tourney, Tufts' entire rotation (top eight guys) missed only THREE total games combined. That's incredibly difficult to repeat.

And the CCIW folks have already piped in about the relative ordering of teams from that conference ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on November 01, 2016, 03:32:38 PM

I put together the information request for the voters and didn't include Illinois Wesleyan for men (I did for women). That may have been an oversight on my part, but it wasn't intentional. The Titans can put my name on the message board and use me as a rallying point throughout the season if that will make people feel better. :-\

Of course voters are free to vote for whom they want. Fifty-five teams got votes and that's more than we had on our information request. Some teams on our information request garnered no votes.

Augustana and Elmhurst were clear about the number and caliber of players they lost. We put statistical measures to that, too, so it's not just a list of names. Some voters chose to stick with those teams (mostly Augustana -- the Elmhurst and Carroll votes are outliers and not significant numerically) and I respect that, even if I don't agree with it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 01, 2016, 03:45:03 PM

You know we are all desperately in need of a basketball fix when we are arguing (yet again) about the preseason rankings...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 01, 2016, 04:57:36 PM

Quote from: WUH on November 01, 2016, 03:45:03 PM
You know we are all desperately in need of a basketball fix when we are arguing (yet again) about the preseason rankings...

But that's part of the fun!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 01, 2016, 05:14:45 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 01, 2016, 12:56:16 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 31, 2016, 11:31:52 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 31, 2016, 10:08:43 PM
My point is all because they are the defending champion doesn't mean they should be ranked. Look at who St. Thomas has lost and look who they are returning. They should be in the 20s, if raned at all. Last preseason Point was ranked #9, which was a joke considering they lost 4 senior starters.

I agree that some people have them too high, but I think there's also the issue of "who else do I put in?" Yes, there are certain teams bringing everybody back who need to be added, but there aren't a lot of those teams, especially not a lot on a national radar. Unless we've literally got voters pulling "maybe" teams out of thin air, we're going to end up with some usual suspects simply because they're usual suspects and they're that way for a reason.

It's just pre-season. The games will work themselves out, and very quickly given the schedule we've got in Nov-Dec this year.

Totally agree that preseason rankings are pretty much a joke (but fun to talk about). ;)

There is one 'usual suspect' that got ZERO votes. IWU has the same coach who went to Salem in both 2012 and 2014, and a guy who I suspect will be some level of All-American at season's end - Trevor Seibring. They were picked to finish second in the CCIW, yet THREE teams picked below them are in the top 25 or receiving votes. My team has been 'Rodney Dangerfield-ed'. ;D

It's true that the Titans have a very good center in Seibring, and it's also true that they were picked #2 in the (ever-dubious) CCIW coaches preseason poll. But the Titans also went 13-13 last season and had some considerable shortcomings.

i don't think it's as much a matter of the Titans being underrated by the Top 25 pollsters as it is a matter of some of the other CCIW teams (notably Augie and Elmhurst, although Carroll's going to be in the position now of proving that it can beat somebody besides the MWC's lineup of tomato cans) being overrated.

I think that the CCIW will produce its fair share of Top-25-caliber teams this year -- it always does -- but I also think that right now we don't know which teams will achieve that status, with the singular exception of North Central.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 01, 2016, 05:20:52 PM

gordonmann, I hope my ;D at the end of my post made you understand that I wasn't REALLY complaining - though I did find it odd that the team picked by the coaches preseason to finish second in what D3hoops.com ranked the best conference in the country recently would receive ZERO votes! I have no idea whether or not they currently deserve to be in the Top 25 (my brain is still in football mode for a couple more weeks ;)), but that NO ONE had them on their ballot seemed curious.

I don't know whether Coach Rose would think this makes good bulletin-board material, but thanks for the suggestion! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 01, 2016, 05:23:41 PM

You put too much stock in that annual exercise in gamesmanship known as the CCIW coaches poll, Chuck.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 01, 2016, 05:32:25 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 01, 2016, 05:14:45 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 01, 2016, 12:56:16 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 31, 2016, 11:31:52 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 31, 2016, 10:08:43 PM
My point is all because they are the defending champion doesn't mean they should be ranked. Look at who St. Thomas has lost and look who they are returning. They should be in the 20s, if raned at all. Last preseason Point was ranked #9, which was a joke considering they lost 4 senior starters.

I agree that some people have them too high, but I think there's also the issue of "who else do I put in?" Yes, there are certain teams bringing everybody back who need to be added, but there aren't a lot of those teams, especially not a lot on a national radar. Unless we've literally got voters pulling "maybe" teams out of thin air, we're going to end up with some usual suspects simply because they're usual suspects and they're that way for a reason.

It's just pre-season. The games will work themselves out, and very quickly given the schedule we've got in Nov-Dec this year.

Totally agree that preseason rankings are pretty much a joke (but fun to talk about). ;)

There is one 'usual suspect' that got ZERO votes. IWU has the same coach who went to Salem in both 2012 and 2014, and a guy who I suspect will be some level of All-American at season's end - Trevor Seibring. They were picked to finish second in the CCIW, yet THREE teams picked below them are in the top 25 or receiving votes. My team has been 'Rodney Dangerfield-ed'. ;D

It's true that the Titans have a very good center in Seibring, and it's also true that they were picked #2 in the (ever-dubious) CCIW coaches preseason poll. But the Titans also went 13-13 last season and had some considerable shortcomings.

i don't think it's as much a matter of the Titans being underrated by the Top 25 pollsters as it is a matter of some of the other CCIW teams (notably Augie and Elmhurst, although Carroll's going to be in the position now of proving that it can beat somebody besides the MWC's lineup of tomato cans) being overrated.

I think that the CCIW will produce its fair share of Top-25-caliber teams this year -- it always does -- but I also think that right now we don't know which teams will achieve that status, with the singular exception of North Central.

While I don't think it totally explains 13-13, I'm convinced that a fair share (perhaps 4-6 losses) of that was the loss for most of the season of Brady Rose. From what I saw (alas, only on the screen), he was a nearly irreplaceable quarterback for the team (despite the scandalous carping by one supposed Titan supporter that the only reason he played at all was nepotism - a libel on both Rose pere and Rose fils).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 01, 2016, 07:16:57 PM

I strongly disagree. Rose showed signs as a freshman that he could become a really solid CCIW player eventually, but he wasn't going to be worth anywhere close to four-to-six games last season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on November 01, 2016, 07:52:54 PM

4-6 losses due to Brady Rose being lost after 6 six games? ???
Looks like IWU will have a player capable of walking on water this year.

In Rose's absence, the guard spots were primarily maned by Bryce Dolan and Joel Pennington who both did a much more than adequate job.

Dolan shot .457 overall, .440 from three, and .862 from the line. He scored 13.3 ppg.
Pennington shot .494 overall, .449 from three, and .789 from the line. He scored 9.8 ppg.
Rose shot .412 overall, .419 from three, and .667 from the line, and scored 10.5 ppg in his 6 games.
It wasn't his shooting that was missed. His quarterbacking abilities were the biggest part of what IWU lost by his absence.

I think what, in large part, accounted for those losses was Rose playing Freshmen Colin Bonnett and Mark Falotico as much as they played. They would have been better served by giving those minutes to Derrick Streety or Nick Coleman, especially in place of the minutes that went to Falotico who shot only .348 overall, .423 from the line, and was a distinct liability on defense, committing more fouls than C/F Ryan Coyle in only slightly more than half the minutes Coyle played.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 01, 2016, 09:29:18 PM

I will be doing my usual ballot article soon enough, but just a heads up I will not be going through each team. I am going to post my ballot and share some preseason thoughts to try something different (just for preseason).

So with that in mind, here are a few thoughts:

The parity we now have in Division III men (and continually growing) has made the Top 25, especially in the preseason, far more difficult. I had 50+ teams I started with and wasn't able to whittle down many. That parity has made the seasons and the tournament awesome. It has made voting in the poll painful (in a good way). I actually tried to make it easier on myself this year and not over think it... not sure if that worked or not.

- I actually changed my first place vote three times over the summer and in the last few days before I voted. Wasn't cut and dry, though I disagree with the overall number one. But I'll save that for the blog. LOL
- I voted for UST #11. Some of the reasons have already been stated, but it came down to the fact that John Tauer (and others) have shown that they can still have a team competing on a national level even after losing a lot. I have dismissed them in the past before eventually having to put them back on my ballot with my tail between my legs. History does play a role when you consider how a team recovers or grows... I went with what history has told me about UST.
- I didn't vote for IWU, nor Augustana, WashU, or some other stalwarts (no WIAC schools, for example). IWU was 13-13 last year. I get they have good players, but that doesn't mean without seeing any games this year I am ready to just throw them on my ballot. I don't understand why because they are IWU and finished second in the coaches poll (more on that in a second), its curious that they aren't on anyone's ballot. Augustana lost a ton and I have seen them usually have to take a year or two to recover. Wash U was 15-10 and didn't look like themselves last year. There wasn't anything I saw that told me that suddenly they are a Top 25 team. And no WIAC schools because... well why? Let me see how they come back before I jump there.
- Not sure why people reference preseason coaches polls as to how or why Top 25 voters should vote a certain way. There is far too much going on politically in those things along with rules. I don't even think voters should vote according to conference standings. There is more information on a national poll to position teams different than coaches polls and conference standings. Teams could face each other and the losing team still be ahead of the winning team in the standings, but voters put the winning team ahead of the losing team. Let's not use conference polls and standings as the barometer or the measuring stick.
- Remember this is also a national poll. So many people will make arguments for why a team should be ranked based on rather narrow or regional reasons. Not national reasons. Have a larger focus and field of view and see the entire scope to appreciate where teams truly fit. That is why there are 25 voters, 3 from each of the 8 regions, to give us as much of a national scope as possible.
- I agree there seems to always be some interesting voters. I don't know enough of how people vote (nor should I) to understand those types of votes. I am sure those people have their reasons, but I also agree that some of them seem too extreme. If I am not voting for Augustana, then someone probably has them in their Top 10 to compensate. I know voters who swear they will vote for last year's #1/defending champs as #1 until they lose - one voter clearly is sticking to that. To some extent I say, let them vote. But at the same time, it can be interesting. That all said, this year's preseason vote says one thing to me: voters are all over the place trying to figure out the national landscape this year. Heck, when people see my ballot they may think the same thing of me.

And I will finish with this, can we stop calling the preseason poll a joke. There are 25 voters who dedicate quite a lot of time to the process of voting. Even if they take only an hour, they are still volunteering their time to vote. We appreciate their efforts and the time they take. To call the preseason poll (or early season polls) as a joke, even in jest, is disrespectful of those efforts and time. And while I understand some people say they are kidding around, when it is repeated a lot and often, it stops becoming just kidding around to the voters. You are welcome to disagree and voice those disagreements. You are welcome to produce your own Top 25 ballot to the masses for consideration. You are welcome to call the preseason poll not something to be taken too seriously, but please stop calling the final product a joke. It is not appreciated at least from this long-time voter.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on November 02, 2016, 12:50:05 AM

Dave,

I will argue with NONE of what you say.
If I may, I will instead pose a few questions for your consideration.

1. Are the people who vote in the pre-season and weekly polls throughout the season like Supreme Court judges? Once appointed, do they serve for life or until they resign?
2. Has increasing the size of the panel ever been considered like perhaps 4 or 5 voters per region?
3. Has it ever been considered that bringing some new blood might increase the objectivity of the panel in that perhaps people on the panel over the long term have fallen into a certain pattern such as always voting for teams in a certain region or regions, always voting for a favorite team(s), always voting for last season's champ as #1 in the next pre-season poll.
4. I think to call the entire poll a joke is misguided as you suggest. However, can you understand that "joke" might seem applicable to portions of the poll such as someone voting Elmhurst, even as their #25 team, given EC lost 9 of their first 10 players, especially considering that all 9 were seniors and EC will likely finish near the bottom of their conference in this, a rebuilding season?

Again, just some questions to help understand how things work, and whether any considerations have been given to possible changes that might hopefully improve the product?
Thank you.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 02, 2016, 01:39:11 AM

Dave, I apologize for calling the preseason poll a joke. I certainly did not mean to offend. Let me spin it much more positively:

The preseason poll is an almost surely futile (though well-meaning) attempt to make order out of chaos. The results ARE statistically significantly above zero in reflecting eventual reality, but reflect reality somewhat like a funhouse mirror.

Better? :D I really do admire you guys willing to stick your necks out (at least the one's who DO identify themselves and stick their necks out! ::)) - there's a reason why when I ran the Posters' Poll it didn't begin until January!

As a wise man once said, at this point nobody knows nothing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 02, 2016, 01:29:36 PM

Quote from: AndOne on November 02, 2016, 12:50:05 AM
Dave,

I will argue with NONE of what you say.
If I may, I will instead pose a few questions for your consideration.

1. Are the people who vote in the pre-season and weekly polls throughout the season like Supreme Court judges? Once appointed, do they serve for life or until they resign?
2. Has increasing the size of the panel ever been considered like perhaps 4 or 5 voters per region?
3. Has it ever been considered that bringing some new blood might increase the objectivity of the panel in that perhaps people on the panel over the long term have fallen into a certain pattern such as always voting for teams in a certain region or regions, always voting for a favorite team(s), always voting for last season's champ as #1 in the next pre-season poll.
4. I think to call the entire poll a joke is misguided as you suggest. However, can you understand that "joke" might seem applicable to portions of the poll such as someone voting Elmhurst, even as their #25 team, given EC lost 9 of their first 10 players, especially considering that all 9 were seniors and EC will likely finish near the bottom of their conference in this, a rebuilding season?

Again, just some questions to help understand how things work, and whether any considerations have been given to possible changes that might hopefully improve the product?
Thank you.

Happy to try and answer these. No promises I have the answers you are looking for.

Quote from: AndOne on November 02, 2016, 12:50:05 AM
1. Are the people who vote in the pre-season and weekly polls throughout the season like Supreme Court judges? Once appointed, do they serve for life or until they resign?

Not necessarily. We have turnover I would say every year. Heck, Pat is no longer voting this season (I am now considered the "25th voter" on the men's poll). We also have voters who move on in their careers, leave the division, are no longer able to give us the time, or plenty of other personal or career factors we all know can play a roll. I also know that behind the scenes we sometimes have voters who either start missing deadlines or whatnot that have to be addressed or even replaced. I also think that if we see a voter who's voting habits aren't lining up for whatever reason (I can probably name a dozen "what ifs") there is a discussion about what to do with that voter. I have no examples I would share about any of those... but we do have turnover every year. That isn't to say there aren't voters who have been voting longer than I have been voting, but they tend to be the ones who are very solid. I will also say that no, there is not a set time term limit to their voting. I don't think their needs to be. We would lose voters I don't think we would want to lose.

Quote from: AndOne on November 02, 2016, 12:50:05 AM
2. Has increasing the size of the panel ever been considered like perhaps 4 or 5 voters per region?

The voting size has remained the same for as long as I know - probably exactly the same since the first poll. 25 voters. 3 from each of the 8 regions with a "25th voter" who tends to have a more national scope (though, all voters do to some degree). Pat has been that 25th voter since the beginning and I have represented the Mid-Atlantic since I started voting (forget how long I have done this, but I did not vote in the early years). Now that Pat has left, I am the "25th voter" and we found someone new to replace me as a representative of the Mid-Atlantic.

I will also add, the voters are made up of basketball coaches, Sports Information Directors, and media members around the country. We try and find a nice balance of that group, but that doesn't necessarily mean a coach leaves the group we replace them with a coach. Or an SID leave and we replace them with an SID. We try and look for the best option when we replace voters.

Quote from: AndOne on November 02, 2016, 12:50:05 AM
3. Has it ever been considered that bringing some new blood might increase the objectivity of the panel in that perhaps people on the panel over the long term have fallen into a certain pattern such as always voting for teams in a certain region or regions, always voting for a favorite team(s), always voting for last season's champ as #1 in the next pre-season poll.

As I have already indicated, we bring in new blood probably on a yearly basis. How much is new depends on the year and other circumstances. I think some of the ones that are new this year are outstanding choices who know not only their region but also the national landscape incredibly well. However, I do not know how they are voting nor do I search that information out.

I would agree there probably are some who may have fallen into some patterns. I know it is something I have considered looking at, but since Gordon is officially "running" the poll, I don't want to get in his way on that. It is also the first year since Pat ran the poll(s), so there is some time needed for Gordon or even myself to get more acquainted with how people are voting.

As for some of your examples, we purposely have voters from each region because we don't want to miss people in those regions. Certainly, that might mean some get votes that make no sense to you, but they may be a very reasonable vote for that voter or because they are being overlooked by those in other regions doing the same. I think that is a completely fair thing to have. If we didn't spread it out, I think some voters would unfairly pick teams that maybe don't deserve Top 25 attention over those being completely ignored. I find the "extra votes" to sometimes be very helpful. It forces those teams into our weekly data email and forces me to maybe look at a team I am missing as well.

Voting for last season's champ in the next pre-season poll is a personal taste kind of thing to me. It happens in nearly all polls I am aware of (especially reputable polls). I understand the argument and while having argued against the idea understand the premises. Once in awhile, like this year, it might look strange. But overall, I don't think it is the end of the world. In the grand scheme of things, I don't think it adjust the overall poll that much. If they vote them #1 and I happen to leave them off the poll, the team slots in 12th or 13th. One voter voting for UST #1 isn't the reason they are 11th, for example.

Quote from: AndOne on November 02, 2016, 12:50:05 AM
4. I think to call the entire poll a joke is misguided as you suggest. However, can you understand that "joke" might seem applicable to portions of the poll such as someone voting Elmhurst, even as their #25 team, given EC lost 9 of their first 10 players, especially considering that all 9 were seniors and EC will likely finish near the bottom of their conference in this, a rebuilding season?

I understand your point and I didn't consider Elmhurst because of that. Elmhurst was not part of the data set of 50-some-odd teams sent to us, so that voter took it upon themselves to vote for Elmhurst. If we were to ask them, I am sure they would have a very valid reason in their minds for the vote. Just as I did to include Hardin-Simmons, also not in the data set, as a team I wanted to vote for. I don't think it is the end of the world unless they keep voting for Elmhurst despite the fact they lost, say, the first five games of the season.

We try not to tell voters what to do. That could be confused as guiding the vote and "rigging" (since it is a popular term these days) the Top 25. We present information on the teams the voters are interested in (in the preseason, a mass email is sent looking for teams outside of the list Gordon created to add; during the season the list is comprised of all the teams - for the most part - being voted on the previous week). If a voter finds a team not in the list they want to vote on, they are welcome to do that. That team's information will then be added to the list for the next week (knock on wood; sometimes teams slip through by accident). But too much hand-holding or guiding will only result in a bias Top 25 that isn't really a free vote, but adjusting to the wishes of those running the poll and that isn't fair to anyone.

In my opinion, I can find many votes I don't understand and question, but I can't necessarily say they are wrong votes. We can argue about them, I have voiced my opinion on my blog, but to say they are flat out wrong is a dangerous place to go. I can say with confidence, I have not seen voting habits necessarily change because I voice my opinion on a blog. I can also say that I chat with a good number of voters on any given week (I have not known the entire 25-person block until recently; just those who reached out to me or I already knew) and none of us have the same read. It is great to go back and forth with one another to see if our "reads" are similar or why they are different. I may make a change up or down or feel more comfortable with my decision based on those conversations, but I don't think anyone feels pressured to change their vote. If a voter is clearly off on their own for no good reason, I am sure that is handled behind the scenes. However, I have never been part of that conversation if it has ever happened, so I can't even say it has happened.

Quote from: AndOne on November 02, 2016, 12:50:05 AM
...and whether any considerations have been given to possible changes that might hopefully improve the product?
Thank you.

I know I have debated on my own the idea of changes, but not sure what changes would really work. We could obviously expand the panel from 25 to say 30, 35, or 50. I don't like many of those numbers because they could give particular regions a bit too much influence. And a number like 33 (4 per region = 32 plus one more voter) doesn't make much sense let alone 42. That means going to 50 and trying to find 25 more voters who are able to not only give their time to this (it is a lot of time) along with being good enough to understand the entire landscape of Division III is tough. Not to mention the fact, we can point to a lot of voting panels that are just too large and honestly need to be trimmed (the Baseball Hall of Fame, the D1 basketball poll(s), etc.). I think 25 is good for now, but I would say we are always looking for improvement. Who knows, maybe Gordon and I will come up with a plan after handling this (Gordon primarily) for the first time.

I hope some of that helps.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 02, 2016, 01:43:11 PM

You also have to realize that there's no direction as to what Top 25 people are voting for. Someone could be voting for the 25 teams they think will be the best at the end of the season. Another voter could be voting for the 25 teams they think are best at the moment of the vote. You could have someone voting UST #1 right now simply because they're just repeating their final vote from last year (with no games played yet, only the ones from last year should count). I would agree with that last approach, but I understand it.

You get the same kind of disparity in the final vote. Some people are picking the 25 best teams of March, others are putting more emphasis on the whole season. That's why its good to have a diversity of voters.

And yes, if a voter doesn't vote for a team that everyone else does, they'll get an email asking if they made a mistake. I am consistently amazed with how seriously voters take the poll, especially the coaches who have better things to do with their time than watch film of teams on the opposite coast they have little chance of every playing - but a lot of them do. They want to be as well informed as anyone.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 02, 2016, 08:23:47 PM

I think we need a preseason Hoopsville that corresponds with the release of the preseason poll. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on November 02, 2016, 09:21:47 PM

Quote from: WUH on November 02, 2016, 08:23:47 PM
I think we need a preseason Hoopsville that corresponds with the release of the preseason poll. :)

I'll second that.
Possibly a call in discussion (perhaps a certain number of calls per each spot) where callers could opine why or why not a team deserved to be voted in the spot they finished in the poll.
Certainly there would be no shortage of possible formats to fill the time slot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on November 02, 2016, 09:37:06 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 02, 2016, 01:43:11 PM

You also have to realize that there's no direction as to what Top 25 people are voting for. Someone could be voting for the 25 teams they think will be the best at the end of the season. Another voter could be voting for the 25 teams they think are best at the moment of the vote. You could have someone voting UST #1 right now simply because they're just repeating their final vote from last year (with no games played yet, only the ones from last year should count). I would agree with that last approach, but I understand it.

You get the same kind of disparity in the final vote. Some people are picking the 25 best teams of March, others are putting more emphasis on the whole season. That's why its good to have a diversity of voters.

And yes, if a voter doesn't vote for a team that everyone else does, they'll get an email asking if they made a mistake. I am consistently amazed with how seriously voters take the poll, especially the coaches who have better things to do with their time than watch film of teams on the opposite coast they have little chance of every playing - but a lot of them do. They want to be as well informed as anyone.

I strongly feel that every poll should be a representation of where a team is at the moment. A team that was 18-0, and ranked 1st, but loses their next 3 in a row is no longer the nation's best team just because they had a perfect first 18 games. Heck, there might have even been a 17-1 team that was better at the time based on a tougher schedule.
Would be interested in other's opinions. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 03, 2016, 01:22:52 AM

Please someone look up AndOne's past comments regarding "body of work" being most important, you can find these arguments in many places including Top25, PoolC, CCIW and probably a number of other places. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 03, 2016, 01:15:40 PM

Quote from: sac on November 03, 2016, 01:22:52 AM
Please someone look up AndOne's past comments regarding "body of work" being most important, you can find these arguments in many places including Top25, PoolC, CCIW and probably a number of other places. ;D

HA! Exactly. Whatever argument fits the bill. :)

Quote from: WUH on November 02, 2016, 08:23:47 PM
I think we need a preseason Hoopsville that corresponds with the release of the preseason poll. :)

Quote from: AndOne on November 02, 2016, 09:21:47 PM
Quote from: WUH on November 02, 2016, 08:23:47 PM
I think we need a preseason Hoopsville that corresponds with the release of the preseason poll. :)

I'll second that.
Possibly a call in discussion (perhaps a certain number of calls per each spot) where callers could opine why or why not a team deserved to be voted in the spot they finished in the poll.
Certainly there would be no shortage of possible formats to fill the time slot.

A) I have enough going on and will be struggling just to get the first show on the air Nov. 13...
B) I am just one voter... I can't speak for all the rest... not sure my questions would work.
C) It does give me an idea... maybe Periscope or Facebook Live? Maybe next week in conjunction to me releasing my preseason blog?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on November 03, 2016, 01:51:16 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 03, 2016, 01:15:40 PM
Quote from: sac on November 03, 2016, 01:22:52 AM
Please someone look up AndOne's past comments regarding "body of work" being most important, you can find these arguments in many places including Top25, PoolC, CCIW and probably a number of other places. ;D

HA! Exactly. Whatever argument fits the bill. :)

Yep. I'm practicing changing positions in preparation for my entry into the political arena. You can't get elected without the ability to change positions rapidly and often!

Seriously though, I don't recall pushing the "body of work" argument that much. There was an occasion a couple of years ago when I did so. Pretty sure it was in connection with something having to do with the relative placements of NCC and UWSP in a poll or something.
At any rate, who doesn't sometimes change their feelings/thinking on a subject? Isn't that called being inflexible? ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on November 03, 2016, 01:55:52 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 03, 2016, 01:15:40 PM

Quote from: WUH on November 02, 2016, 08:23:47 PM
I think we need a preseason Hoopsville that corresponds with the release of the preseason poll. :)

Quote from: AndOne on November 02, 2016, 09:21:47 PM
Quote from: WUH on November 02, 2016, 08:23:47 PM
I think we need a preseason Hoopsville that corresponds with the release of the preseason poll. :)

I'll second that.
Possibly a call in discussion (perhaps a certain number of calls per each spot) where callers could opine why or why not a team deserved to be voted in the spot they finished in the poll.
Certainly there would be no shortage of possible formats to fill the time slot.

A) I have enough going on and will be struggling just to get the first show on the air Nov. 13...
B) I am just one voter... I can't speak for all the rest... not sure my questions would work.
C) It does give me an idea... maybe Periscope or Facebook Live? Maybe next week in conjunction to me releasing my preseason blog?

Dave,

Should I apologize for putting an idea in your head that undoubtedly would make more work for you?

AND, thanks for your answers to the questions I previously posed regarding the pre-season poll!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 03, 2016, 02:06:18 PM

Quote from: AndOne on November 03, 2016, 01:55:52 PM

Dave,

Should I apologize for putting an idea in your head that undoubtedly would make more work for you?

AND, thanks for your answers to the questions I previously posed regarding the pre-season poll!

Yeah, you probably should. Actually, I have been thinking about how to utilize those options with the show without trying to broadcast the show through those mediums (no chance). So, I have debated when and what. The problem is, I have a lot on my shoulders these days (especially trying to pay the bills), so to get side tracked with items that don't necessarily bring in the money isn't the best use of my time. I could be driving an Uber or Lyft car in that time frame! LOL

But who knows, maybe it would be a good test pattern as it where.

And you are welcome. I hope it gives you some insight and wasn't too confusing. I am sure there are other opinions on some of that out there.

AndOne - hard to base a preseason poll on the now when there hasn't been any games played. Body of work, history, patterns, tea leaves, darts on the wall... they all play a role. Too difficult to pigeon hole it into one thing. Furthermore, I don't think we want to see that much movement during the regular season in the poll if we based it only on the now. There is a delicate balancing act between the now, the past, and the future when it comes to voting. No one gets it perfectly right and everyone probably changes their emphasis week to week, team to team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 03, 2016, 02:54:12 PM

I'm covering the Hoopsville Tournament again this year and my laptop is all set up for live broadcasting on Youtube - maybe I can do some sideline reports that way. We'll have to see what we come up with.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 03, 2016, 06:23:39 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 03, 2016, 01:15:40 PM
A) I have enough going on and will be struggling just to get the first show on the air Nov. 13...
B) I am just one voter... I can't speak for all the rest... not sure my questions would work.
C) It does give me an idea... maybe Periscope or Facebook Live? Maybe next week in conjunction to me releasing my preseason blog?

We all understand. Thanks in advance for sharing your feedback on the voting process in the weekly blogs and for what will certainly be another great season of Hoopsville.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 03, 2016, 06:54:14 PM

No problem, WUH. I am glad there is an audience for the work. If there wasn't, I wouldn't make the effort anymore.

Though just as a head's up... the first Top 25 blog isn't going to go through each team. Doesn't seem to be the most effective. I can write some thoughts on the upcoming season more effectively.

Look for it early to mid week next week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 03, 2016, 10:06:11 PM

If you don't talk about the Cubs the whole time, I may try to listen in. ??? :P ::) ;D :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 04, 2016, 10:06:27 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 03, 2016, 10:06:11 PM
If you don't talk about the Cubs the whole time, I may try to listen in. ??? :P ::) ;D :)

Hmm... sounds like a challenge... to talk about them all of the time! LOL

But otherwise... I'm a professional... I know what the show is about. I don't know how to discuss a winning Cubs team, so why try and rock the boat? ROFL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 05, 2016, 11:25:59 PM

Hampden-Sydney took D1 Longwood to OT tonight. What's more, Guilherme Guimaraes went 14-15 from the floor for 30 points with 12 rebounds.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 13, 2016, 04:40:08 PM

Believe it not, the 2016-17 basketball season is just days away. But the season can't start without Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) hitting the air!

Tune in tonight starting at 7pm as Dave talks to the two preseason numbers one teams, finds out how the offseason went for the two defending national championships, and touches bases with the men's and women's basketball committee chairs.

Guests include:
- Kevin Vande Streek, men's basketball committee chair and head coach for Calvin
- Bobbi Morgan, women's basketball committee chair and head coach for Haverford
- John Tauer, head coach for No. 10 St. Thomas men
- Dave Hixon, head coach for No. 1 Amherst men
- Jeff Hans, head coach for No. 4 Thomas More women
- Carla Berube, head coach for No. 1 Tufts women

You can watch the show here: http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2016-17/nov13

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 20, 2016, 07:37:46 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

My first trial run for the new season; I did not bother to look up missing scores as I usually would. I assume there will be a new poll on Monday, 11/28; I will post a complete report next Sunday (no midweek report this week).

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	590	Amherst	2-0	def. Green Mountain, 83-41; def. St. Lawrence, 90-68; 11/21 at Anna Maria
#2	582	Christopher Newport	2-1	def. Randolph-Macon, 70-47; def. (n) #35 UW-Stevens Point, 71-51; LOST to (n) #17 Marietta, 50-74; 11/27 at Dickinson
#3	545	Babson	4-0	def. Albertus Magnus, 101-81; def. Lasell, 90-72; def. Anna Maria, 99-49; def. #26 Endicott, 72-60; 11/22 vs. Becker; 11/27 vs. Bowdoin
#4	531	St. Norbert	1-1	LOST at UW-Eau Claire, 67-68; won at #6 Benedictine, 71-70
#5	465	Tufts	2-0	def. (n) FDU-Florham, 91-81; def. (n) Southern Virginia, 80-69; 11/22 at MIT; 11/26 vs. Emerson
#6	457	Benedictine	1-1	won at Wheaton (Ill.), 86-76; LOST to #4 St. Norbert, 70-71; 11/21 vs. #13 North Central (Ill.); 11/26 vs. #21 UW-Oshkosh
#7	446	Wooster	2-0	def. Oberlin, 104-65; def. Defiance, 98-63; 11/23 at #17 Marietta; 11/27 vs. St. John Fisher
#8	388	Ohio Wesleyan	2-0	def. (n) Albion, 91-77; won at Trine, 79-72; 11/22 vs. Capital; 11/26 vs. Illinois Wesleyan
#9	384	Whitman	1-0	def. St. Olaf, 108-78; 11/25 vs. Schreiner; 11/26 vs. #47 Texas Lutheran
#10	344	St. Thomas	2-1	LOST to T#53 UW-River Falls, 65-74; def. (n) Pacific Lutheran, 80-72; won at Puget Sound, 78-74; 11/22 vs. St. Scholastica
#11	306	John Carroll	0-1	LOST at Mount St. Joseph, 82-101; 11/20 vs. Hanover; 11/26 vs. La Roche
#12	289	Whitworth	1-0	def. St. Olaf, 70-69; 11/25 vs. #47 Texas Lutheran; 11/26 vs. Schreiner
#13	286	North Central (Ill.)	0-0	11/21 at #6 Benedictine; 11/23 vs. #14 Alma; 11/25 vs. Aurora
#14	261	Alma	1-2	def. Ohio Northern, 80-72; LOST to #18 Augustana, 77-89; LOST to Finlandia, 85-89; 11/23 at #13 North Central (Ill.); 11/27 vs. T#49 Elmhurst
#15	254	Emory	2-1	LOST at Covenant, 70-74; def. (n) William Peace, 100-80; won at Guilford, 69-66; 11/26 vs. LaGrange; 11/27 vs. Maryville (Tenn.)
#16	234	Virginia Wesleyan	3-0	def. Methodist, 99-61; def. Frostburg State, 78-62; def. Concordia (Texas), 101-94; 11/22 vs. T#45 Salisbury; 11/26 vs. Emory and Henry
#17	200	Marietta	3-0	def. La Roche, 101-75; def. (n) Albright, 74-56; def. (n) #2 Christopher Newport, 74-50; 11/23 vs. #7 Wooster; 11/27 vs. Bethany
#18	164	Augustana	3-0	won at MacMurray, 75-69; won at #14 Alma, 89-77; won at Calvin, 79-60; 11/22 vs. Fontbonne; 11/27 vs. #20 Washington U.
#19	146	Keene State	3-0	def. Southern Vermont, 87-60; won at Hartwick, 79-63; def. (n) SUNY Oneonta, 104-90; 11/22 vs. Springfield
#20	139	Washington U.	2-0	won at Webster, 60-59; won at DePauw, 84-77; 11/23 vs. Hanover; 11/27 at #18 Augustana
#21	128	UW-Oshkosh	1-1	def. (n) Iowa Wesleyan, 88-70; LOST at Wartburg, 72-83; 11/22 at Edgewood; 11/26 at #6 Benedictine
#22	127	Hope	2-0	won at UW-Stout, 70-50; def. (n) T#53 UW-River Falls, 90-81; 11/25 vs. Aquinas; 11/26 vs. Cornerstone
#23	117	Franklin and Marshall	2-0	def. Lancaster Bible, 94-91; def. York (Pa.), 91-71; 11/22 vs. Gettysburg; 11/27 at Lebanon Valley
#24	88	Middlebury	2-0	def. (n) Salem State, 82-55; won at Eastern Connecticut, 83-74; 11/22 vs. SUNY New Paltz; 11/27 vs. #26 Endicott
#25	86	Susquehanna	2-1	LOST to Misericordia, 116-120; def. Penn St.-Wilkes Barre, 91-58; def. King's, 78-65; 11/22 vs. #30 Lycoming; 11/27 at Penn State-Harrisburg

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	79	Endicott	1-1	def. (n) Anna Maria, 86-56; LOST at #3 Babson, 60-72; 11/27 at #24 Middlebury
#27	74	Oswego State	2-1	LOST to Nazareth, 57-63; def. SUNY-Maritime, 104-69; def. SUNY-Canton, 83-75; 11/22 vs. Clarkson; 11/26 vs. Colby; 11/27 vs. TBD
#28	60	Skidmore	3-0	def. Castleton, 77-61; def. (n) Randolph-Macon, 80-60; won at Stevenson, 81-70; 11/22 at Ithaca
#29	43	Swarthmore	2-0	def. Penn State-Abington, 69-52; won at Centenary (N.J.), 86-80; 11/22 vs. Washington College; 11/27 at Misericordia
#30	42	Lycoming	3-0	def. Fredonia, 80-66; def. Penn St.-Schuylkill, 111-81; def. Western Connecticut, 103-90; 11/22 at #25 Susquehanna; 11/27 vs. Penn State-Altoona
#31	36	Johnson and Wales	0-2	LOST to (n) St. Lawrence, 63-74; LOST to (n) Green Mountain, 70-73
#32	28	New Jersey City	2-1	won at York (N.Y.), 82-45; def. (n) Spalding, 59-53; LOST to (n) Baldwin Wallace, 61-64; 11/22 vs. Rutgers-Newark; 11/26 vs. Staten Island
#33	25	WPI	3-0	def. Eastern Connecticut, 76-62; def. Salve Regina, 59-55; def. #48 DeSales, 73-70; 11/22 at Worcester State
#34	24	Lynchburg	2-1	def. Johns Hopkins, 67-61; won at Stevenson, 101-80; LOST to (n) #35 UW-Stevens Point, 73-83; 11/22 at Ferrum; 11/26 at Washington and Lee
#35	21	UW-Stevens Point	1-2	LOST at St. Olaf, 55-63; LOST to (n) #2 Christopher Newport, 51-71; def. (n) #34 Lynchburg, 83-73; 11/26 at Lawrence
#36	18	Rochester	3-0	won at Ithaca, 104-94; def. Alfred, 71-62; def. Washington and Lee, 77-50; 11/22 vs. Hobart; 11/26 vs. Waynesburg; 11/27 vs. TBA
#37	16	UW-Whitewater	2-0	def. Colorado College, 90-71; def. Lindsey Wilson (Ky.), 85-78; 11/26 at Ohio Northern
#38	14	Trinity (Conn.)	0-2	LOST at Mass-Dartmouth, 76-83; LOST to (n) Southern Vermont, 80-83; 11/22 at Elms
#39	12	Birmingham-Southern	2-1	LOST at Baruch, 72-76; def. Rose-Hulman, 80-69; def. Wabash, 72-65; 11/22 vs. Covenant
#40	11	Hardin-Simmons	1-2	LOST to Southwestern, 95-98; def. Schreiner, 93-72; LOST to #47 Texas Lutheran, 66-90; 11/26 vs. Trinity (Texas)
T#41	10	Stockton	0-0	11/19 vs. SUNY-Old Westbury; 11/22 vs. Rowan
T#41	10	UW-La Crosse	1-0	won at Lakeland, 86-66; 11/22 at Viterbo; 11/25 at Webster; 11/26 vs. MacMurray
T#43	7	Northwestern (Minn.)	0-2	LOST to Hamline, 78-88; 11/18 vs. Trinity Bible (N.D.); LOST to Central, 61-76; 11/22 vs. Macalester
T#43	7	Roanoke	2-0	def. Worcester State, 78-60; def. Ferrum, 81-55; 11/22 at Bridgewater (Va.); 11/26 at North Carolina Wesleyan
T#45	6	Carroll	2-0	def. Principia, 75-57; def. Blackburn, 90-72; 11/22 at Rockford; 11/26 at Chicago; 11/27 vs. TBD
T#45	6	Salisbury	3-0	def. Goucher, 70-52; def. Staten Island, 83-65; def. Johns Hopkins, 74-49; 11/22 at #16 Virginia Wesleyan
#47	5	Texas Lutheran	3-0	def. Mary Hardin-Baylor, 87-84; won at McMurry, 80-72; won at #40 Hardin-Simmons, 90-66; 11/25 at #12 Whitworth; 11/26 vs. #9 Whitman
#48	3	DeSales	2-1	def. Rosemont, 94-60; def. (n) Bates, 71-70; LOST at #33 WPI, 70-73; 11/22 at Moravian
T#49	2	Bethel	1-1	LOST to (n) Heidelberg, 87-89; def. (n) Luther, 88-78; 11/22 vs. Martin Luther
T#49	2	Chapman	1-1	def. La Sierra, 88-63; LOST to San Diego Christian, 62-73; 11/23 at George Fox; 11/26 at Lewis and Clark
T#49	2	Elmhurst	0-3	LOST at Loras, 102-104; LOST to (n) Greenville, 98-110; LOST to (n) Westminster (Mo.), 81-88; 11/22 vs. Concordia-Chicago; 11/27 at #14 Alma
T#49	2	TCNJ	2-1	def. John Jay, 75-58; def. (n) T#53 SUNY Geneseo, 79-68; 11/20 vs. TBD; LOST to (n) Penn State-Harrisburg, 68-74; 11/22 vs. Rutgers-Camden
T#53	1	Neumann	1-0	def. Rowan, 113-96; 11/19 at Eastern; 11/22 vs. Keystone; 11/26 vs. Valley Forge
T#53	1	SUNY Geneseo	2-1	def. Medaille, 79-64; LOST to (n) T#49 TCNJ, 68-79; def. (n) New Rochelle, 86-74; 11/22 at Morrisville State
T#53	1	UW-River Falls	1-1	won at #10 St. Thomas, 74-65; 11/18 vs. Robert Morris-Chicago; LOST to (n) #22 Hope, 81-90; 11/22 at Carthage

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 21, 2016, 02:59:46 PM

You are correct, new poll on 11/28 - though, I am not looking forward to it. Already too much work to deal with. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: woolax on November 22, 2016, 08:23:20 PM

#7 Wooster @ #17 Marietta tomorrow, what do people think about this match up?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on November 23, 2016, 02:51:52 PM

I think that the Wooster depth will be too much for the Pioneers. Should be a good game. AJ Edwards is sitting on a big game I think.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 23, 2016, 02:57:53 PM

You may think Wooster lacks depth, but Marietta has surprisingly good depth off the bench - I am taking the Pioneers because Wooster doesn't like playing out of their gym.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 23, 2016, 03:19:46 PM

Marietta is more athletic than Wooster - I think their talent runs deeper into the lineup. The other issue is pace of play. Wooster can't run with Marietta, but Marietta has a good chance to hang with Wooster in a halfcourt game. Wouldn't surprise me to see Wooster win, but I'd take Marietta to win 3 out of 4.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on November 23, 2016, 03:50:12 PM

These are both deep, talented teams that have played well in the early going. Both are running 9-10 deep in their rotations, scoring efficiently (FG% 50%+), and playing stout defense (opp. FG% around 35%). CNU was expected to be Marietta's first test and they passed that with flying colors. That win, plus simply having another game played, gives Marietta an edge vs. a Wooster squad that hasn't had to break a sweat in either of its first games.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 23, 2016, 02:57:53 PM
I am taking the Pioneers because Wooster doesn't like playing out of their gym.

This might be fair regarding Wooster's performance in true road games in the NCAA tournament over the years (which really is bad!), but consider me a skeptic regarding regular season games. Hard to run decades-long streaks of 20+ win seasons if you have some systemic issue with winning games on the road. More likely, it's just harder to beat good teams, period, regardless of where the contest occurs. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on November 23, 2016, 06:23:44 PM

To be fair, games at Kenyon or Oberlin or Earlham (back in the day) don't really fill people with fear and loathing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 23, 2016, 06:44:58 PM

Quote from: smedindy on November 23, 2016, 06:23:44 PM
To be fair, games at Kenyon or Oberlin or Earlham (back in the day) don't really fill people with fear and loathing.

Well, not fear, but maybe on the 'loathing'! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on November 23, 2016, 07:47:05 PM

Well in the end the venue didn't seem to matter all that much, as Marietta out-classed Wooster throughout and notched a wire-to-wire 99-70 victory. The Pioneers are *good.*

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on November 23, 2016, 10:57:37 PM

Yeah dang, was I wrong. I am all in on Marietta now LOL. They will see a nice bump in the next poll. Top 5 you think?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on November 24, 2016, 12:01:05 AM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on November 23, 2016, 10:57:37 PM
Yeah dang, was I wrong. I am all in on Marietta now LOL. They will see a nice bump in the next poll. Top 5 you think?

Assuming each wins its remaining game before the next poll, I could imagine the next poll basically swapping Wooster and Marietta's poll positions. Wooster might lose around half its poll points and end up somewhere in the high teens (e.g., a loss of 225 points = the average voter dropping the Scots nine spots). And Marietta would gain at least an equal number of points, probably more, and lands solidly within the top 7.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 24, 2016, 12:16:22 AM

Quote from: kiltedbryan on November 24, 2016, 12:01:05 AM
Quote from: Smitty Oom on November 23, 2016, 10:57:37 PM
Yeah dang, was I wrong. I am all in on Marietta now LOL. They will see a nice bump in the next poll. Top 5 you think?

Assuming each wins its remaining game before the next poll, I could imagine the next poll basically swapping Wooster and Marietta's poll positions. Wooster might lose around half its poll points and end up somewhere in the high teens (e.g., a loss of 225 points = the average voter dropping the Scots nine spots). And Marietta would gain at least an equal number of points, probably more, and lands solidly within the top 7.

Since #17 Marietta beat #2 CNU by 24 before beating #7 Wooster by 29, I'd be shocked if they didn't land in the top 5, and probably receive a handful of #1 votes. Assuming, of course, no shocks before the next vote.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 24, 2016, 02:56:57 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 24, 2016, 12:16:22 AM
Quote from: kiltedbryan on November 24, 2016, 12:01:05 AM
Quote from: Smitty Oom on November 23, 2016, 10:57:37 PM
Yeah dang, was I wrong. I am all in on Marietta now LOL. They will see a nice bump in the next poll. Top 5 you think?

Assuming each wins its remaining game before the next poll, I could imagine the next poll basically swapping Wooster and Marietta's poll positions. Wooster might lose around half its poll points and end up somewhere in the high teens (e.g., a loss of 225 points = the average voter dropping the Scots nine spots). And Marietta would gain at least an equal number of points, probably more, and lands solidly within the top 7.

Since #17 Marietta beat #2 CNU by 24 before beating #7 Wooster by 29, I'd be shocked if they didn't land in the top 5, and probably receive a handful of #1 votes. Assuming, of course, no shocks before the next vote.

Surely the lowest that can be justified right now is 3 after Amherst and Babson, and 2 can easily be argued since they beat 2 at neutral, and then also beat 7 -- both handily. The only other one I could see maybe jumping in there is North Central with what they have coming up. If they swept, you'd have to consider them as well I think.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 26, 2016, 10:44:48 AM

The problem for Marietta is how far down did some voters have them? They were slotted 17... and I know voters who had them higher than that which obviously means there are voters who had them lower. Those lower voters have to make a tough decision - pole vault the Pioneers into the Top 5 when they had reasons to not have them very high to begin with or move them up a bit less aggressively (say Top 10 instead of Top 5)... those decisions by those voters will dictate how this turns out.

As for number one votes, those who didn't vote for Amherst or Babson are the ones who will probably decide how many votes go Marietta's way. I am not sure if those who vote for Amherst or Babson, like myself, will jump ship based on a couple of weeks of games. Too many other variables and questions outside of just Marietta to consider. That said, they have certainly made a statement so Monday's poll will be fascinating to watch.

Per the comment about Wooster rattling off so many 20+ win seasons and thus should do well on the road, I do argue this: Wooster plays a lot of home games on their schedule and it is hard to get them out of their place (much like F&M and others), so the road games usually come down to conference games and a few out-of-conference and I have not known Wooster to usually schedule too many difficult games out-of-conference on the road. The fact they played at Marietta is a welcome sign, though the tub-thumping might have them resort back to their former days.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 26, 2016, 12:57:59 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 26, 2016, 10:44:48 AM
The problem for Marietta is how far down did some voters have them? They were slotted 17... and I know voters who had them higher than that which obviously means there are voters who had them lower. Those lower voters have to make a tough decision - pole vault the Pioneers into the Top 5 when they had reasons to not have them very high to begin with or move them up a bit less aggressively (say Top 10 instead of Top 5)... those decisions by those voters will dictate how this turns out.

As for number one votes, those who didn't vote for Amherst or Babson are the ones who will probably decide how many votes go Marietta's way. I am not sure if those who vote for Amherst or Babson, like myself, will jump ship based on a couple of weeks of games. Too many other variables and questions outside of just Marietta to consider. That said, they have certainly made a statement so Monday's poll will be fascinating to watch.

Per the comment about Wooster rattling off so many 20+ win seasons and thus should do well on the road, I do argue this: Wooster plays a lot of home games on their schedule and it is hard to get them out of their place (much like F&M and others), so the road games usually come down to conference games and a few out-of-conference and I have not known Wooster to usually schedule too many difficult games out-of-conference on the road. The fact they played at Marietta is a welcome sign, though the tub-thumping might have them resort back to their former days.

If someone wanted to vote Amherst and Babson ahead of them, I'd have no argument. North Central won at #6 and at home against #14, and went 3-0 in a 5 day period. I wouldn't put them ahead of Marietta, but there's at least some justification now. But that's as low as you can go, IMO.

But they beat #2 at neutral by a million and #7 at home and are +25 margin per game. #4 lost to an unranked team. #5 beat nobodies, #6 lost to #4, #7 has been covered, #8 lost to an unranked team, #9 played nobodies, and #10 and 11 both lost to mediocre teams.

Any lower than 4th and that voter shouldn't have a vote because they clearly aren't paying enough attention.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: (509)Rat on November 27, 2016, 12:09:13 AM

Quotepole vault the Pioneers into the Top 5 when they had reasons to not have them very high to begin with or move them up a bit less aggressively

This pollster logic is the absolute worst (and it happens in football and basketball at every level in college athletics). Especially when it comes to changing pre-season polls, where you are largely guessing on how good a team will be based on people you've maybe never seen play. Or you are guessing on how much a player or group of players have improved from the previous season. Anyone who is unwilling to blow up their rankings from week to week (or 'weeks' in the case of basketball), is the one who shouldn't be participating in the polls.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 27, 2016, 12:18:03 AM

^^ This. ^^

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 27, 2016, 01:20:09 AM

Quote from: (509)Rat on November 27, 2016, 12:09:13 AM
Quotepole vault the Pioneers into the Top 5 when they had reasons to not have them very high to begin with or move them up a bit less aggressively

This pollster logic is the absolute worst (and it happens in football and basketball at every level in college athletics). Especially when it comes to changing pre-season polls, where you are largely guessing on how good a team will be based on people you've maybe never seen play. Or you are guessing on how much a player or group of players have improved from the previous season. Anyone who is unwilling to blow up their rankings from week to week (or 'weeks' in the case of basketball), is the one who shouldn't be participating in the polls.

BINGO. Exactly why when I ran ran the Fan Poll we didn't start until January. I love the d3hoops.com Preseason Poll, but there are inevitably some clinkers, and by January they are usually obvious. (Both ranked teams who shouldn't have been, and unranked teams who should have been.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 27, 2016, 03:08:50 AM

This problem is even worse in baseball where some teams play 15 games before others have done much more than get started.

Very hard to dislodge the teams that are ranked early, which of course tend to be the ones that have played more games. If you're a southern school, you get it given to you; if you're from up north, you have to prove it.

There shouldn't be polls in baseball until April.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: (509)Rat on November 27, 2016, 07:17:23 AM

Don't get me wrong, Pre-season polls aren't worthless (meaningless, sure). Media outlets need content, us fans need something to discuss...politely ;D and more often than not many of the teams everyone thought would be near the top end up there throughout the season. But if Marietta is still undefeated come time for the next poll, folks have to be ok with saying "I was way off, the Pioneers are a top 5 team right now." That's all.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 27, 2016, 08:35:57 AM

Quote from: (509)Rat on November 27, 2016, 12:09:13 AM
Quotepole vault the Pioneers into the Top 5 when they had reasons to not have them very high to begin with or move them up a bit less aggressively

This pollster logic is the absolute worst (and it happens in football and basketball at every level in college athletics). Especially when it comes to changing pre-season polls, where you are largely guessing on how good a team will be based on people you've maybe never seen play. Or you are guessing on how much a player or group of players have improved from the previous season. Anyone who is unwilling to blow up their rankings from week to week (or 'weeks' in the case of basketball), is the one who shouldn't be participating in the polls.

Agree 100%, (509)Rat. If there are voters who are stuck on what their preseason guess was, and unwilling to shift from guess to evaluating actual results once the season starts, then they are really hurting the accuracy and credibility of the poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 27, 2016, 04:05:55 PM

It was pretty ridiculous that they were ranked so low anyway. How many other teams had a first-team all-American coming back from team with 53 wins the past 2 years?

I guess if you went by the horrible miss of D3hoops only making Edwards an honorable mention pick, you might think something different though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 27, 2016, 04:33:56 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 27, 2016, 04:05:55 PM
It was pretty ridiculous that they were ranked so low anyway. How many other teams had a first-team all-American coming back from team with 53 wins the past 2 years?

I guess if you went by the horrible miss of D3hoops only making Edwards an honorable mention pick, you might think something different though.

Two thoughts... lots of teams bring back individuals and lots of teams lose players... how many important players did Marietta lose besides the one player coming back? They also didn't get as far as others expected and didn't finish as strong last year which makes people give pause. Really hard to argue losing a bunch of players who clearly were important to the team that because of one played the team should be highly ranked. That is a very fair look at Marietta. And I would argue I don't think Marietta thought they would easily beat CNU or Wooster let alone win both games. So to say they were ranked so low was ridiculous... is ridiculous.

As for Edwards pre-season pick - I am fine with it. I don't see any reason last year having him ahead of those who were ahead of him. If you look at the guys who were ahead of him, it would be a difficult argument to put him above them. He moved up to first-team because he was that good and those ahead of him all graduated. Leaving him one of the best big men back this season. I do like how he plays, though he has some areas that I think will be exposed this season... I look forward to seeing him adjust his game to those challenges.

Quote from: (509)Rat on November 27, 2016, 12:09:13 AM
Quotepole vault the Pioneers into the Top 5 when they had reasons to not have them very high to begin with or move them up a bit less aggressively

This pollster logic is the absolute worst (and it happens in football and basketball at every level in college athletics). Especially when it comes to changing pre-season polls, where you are largely guessing on how good a team will be based on people you've maybe never seen play. Or you are guessing on how much a player or group of players have improved from the previous season. Anyone who is unwilling to blow up their rankings from week to week (or 'weeks' in the case of basketball), is the one who shouldn't be participating in the polls.

Just sharing insight. I have seen many trends with voters over the years. Moving a team dramatically up and down a poll is something that seems hard to do for a lot of voters. Even I have struggled with the idea especially early in a season when you don't have enough data on all the teams involved. Sure, I see what Marietta has done against a good schedule, but I haven't had the chance to see what others have done and I for one have been burned FAR too many times by jumping on a team with little data and they fail miserably or jumping off a team and seeing them rally.

Not saying any of this is related to Marietta. I plan to move them up significantly in my poll. I am just sharing what I have seen the trend be. Yes, people can say they were wrong in pre-season and move a team... but it is that extra voice in your head that makes you wonder if you are just having a gunshot reaction and not looking at the entire picture. That last part is where I have seen voters, including myself, get a little gun shy.

Like it or hate it... I don't really care. Just sharing thoughts with you to give you an idea of where voters may come from. As I have stated numerous times, there are 25 voters out there and not one voter has the same mentality as any of the other 24.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 27, 2016, 06:13:24 PM

How They Fared -- final report before the first in-season poll.

~~A few games are still in progress (and one has not yet started); I will edit those in when available.~~
~~One game missing (Marietta vs. Bethany, starting at 7:00)~~
COMPLETE

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	590	Amherst	3-0	def. Green Mountain, 83-41; def. St. Lawrence, 90-68; won at Anna Maria, 75-64
#2	582	Christopher Newport	3-1	def. Randolph-Macon, 70-47; def. (n) #35 UW-Stevens Point, 71-51; LOST to (n) #17 Marietta, 50-74; won at Dickinson, 76-56
#3	545	Babson	6-0	def. Albertus Magnus, 101-81; def. Lasell, 90-72; def. Anna Maria, 99-49; def. #26 Endicott, 72-60; def. Becker, 91-57; def. Bowdoin, 78-74
#4	531	St. Norbert	1-1	LOST at UW-Eau Claire, 67-68; won at #6 Benedictine, 71-70
#5	465	Tufts	4-0	def. (n) FDU-Florham, 91-81; def. (n) Southern Virginia, 80-69; won at MIT, 74-66; def. Emerson, 87-72
#6	457	Benedictine	2-2	won at Wheaton (Ill.), 86-76; LOST to #4 St. Norbert, 70-71; LOST to #13 North Central (Ill.), 69-72; def. #21 UW-Oshkosh, 68-55
#7	446	Wooster	3-1	def. Oberlin, 104-65; def. Defiance, 98-63; LOST at #17 Marietta, 70-99; def. St. John Fisher, 85-75
#8	388	Ohio Wesleyan	2-2	def. (n) Albion, 91-77; won at Trine, 79-72; LOST to Capital, 76-82; LOST to Illinois Wesleyan, 70-88
#9	384	Whitman	3-0	def. St. Olaf, 108-78; def. (n) Schreiner, 90-61; def. (n) #47 Texas Lutheran, 98-82
#10	344	St. Thomas	3-1	LOST to T#53 UW-River Falls, 65-74; def. (n) Pacific Lutheran, 80-72; won at Puget Sound, 78-74; def. St. Scholastica, 83-65
#11	306	John Carroll	1-2	LOST at Mount St. Joseph, 82-101; LOST to (n) Hanover, 89-90; def. La Roche, 107-82
#12	289	Whitworth	3-0	def. St. Olaf, 70-69; def. #47 Texas Lutheran, 95-87; def. Schreiner, 87-63
#13	286	North Central (Ill.)	3-0	won at #6 Benedictine, 72-69; def. #14 Alma, 78-59; def. Aurora, 88-78
#14	261	Alma	1-4	def. Ohio Northern, 80-72; LOST to #18 Augustana, 77-89; LOST to Finlandia, 85-89; LOST at #13 North Central (Ill.), 59-78; LOST to T#49 Elmhurst, 96-104
#15	254	Emory	3-2	LOST at Covenant, 70-74; def. (n) William Peace, 100-80; won at Guilford, 69-66; LOST to (n) LaGrange, 84-95; def. (n) Maryville (Tenn.), 71-62
#16	234	Virginia Wesleyan	3-2	def. Methodist, 99-61; def. Frostburg State, 78-62; def. Concordia (Texas), 101-94; LOST to T#45 Salisbury, 60-68; LOST to Emory and Henry, 77-79
#17	200	Marietta	5-0	def. La Roche, 101-75; def. (n) Albright, 74-56; def. (n) #2 Christopher Newport, 74-50; def. #7 Wooster, 99-70; def. Bethany, 87-71
#18	164	Augustana	4-1	won at MacMurray, 75-69; won at #14 Alma, 89-77; won at Calvin, 79-60; def. Fontbonne, 106-66; LOST to #20 Washington U., 61-68
#19	146	Keene State	4-0	def. Southern Vermont, 87-60; won at Hartwick, 79-63; def. (n) SUNY Oneonta, 104-90; def. Springfield, 107-84
#20	139	Washington U.	4-0	won at Webster, 60-59; won at DePauw, 84-77; def. Hanover, 81-61; won at #18 Augustana, 68-61
#21	128	UW-Oshkosh	2-2	def. (n) Iowa Wesleyan, 88-70; LOST at Wartburg, 72-83; won at Edgewood, 74-63; LOST at #6 Benedictine, 55-68
#22	127	Hope	3-1	won at UW-Stout, 70-50; def. (n) T#53 UW-River Falls, 90-81; def. Aquinas, 93-80; LOST to Cornerstone, 78-95
#23	117	Franklin and Marshall	3-1	def. Lancaster Bible, 94-91; def. York (Pa.), 91-71; LOST to Gettysburg, 54-57; won at Lebanon Valley, 73-67
#24	88	Middlebury	3-1	def. (n) Salem State, 82-55; won at Eastern Connecticut, 83-74; def. SUNY New Paltz, 94-62; LOST to #26 Endicott, 89-93
#25	86	Susquehanna	4-1	LOST to Misericordia, 116-120; def. Penn St.-Wilkes Barre, 91-58; def. King's, 78-65; def. #30 Lycoming, 75-74; won at Penn State-Harrisburg, 82-56

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	79	Endicott	2-1	def. (n) Anna Maria, 86-56; LOST at #3 Babson, 60-72; won at #24 Middlebury, 93-89
#27	74	Oswego State	4-2	LOST to Nazareth, 57-63; def. SUNY-Maritime, 104-69; def. SUNY-Canton, 83-75; def. Clarkson, 72-71; def. (n) Colby, 67-63; LOST at Hamilton, 70-78
#28	60	Skidmore	3-1	def. Castleton, 77-61; def. (n) Randolph-Macon, 80-60; won at Stevenson, 81-70; LOST at Ithaca, 85-89
#29	43	Swarthmore	4-0	def. Penn State-Abington, 69-52; won at Centenary (N.J.), 86-80; def. Washington College, 74-61; def. Misericordia, 83-75
#30	42	Lycoming	4-1	def. Fredonia, 80-66; def. Penn St.-Schuylkill, 111-81; def. Western Connecticut, 103-90; LOST at #25 Susquehanna, 74-75; def. Penn State-Altoona, 85-67
#31	36	Johnson and Wales	0-2	LOST to (n) St. Lawrence, 63-74; LOST to (n) Green Mountain, 70-73
#32	28	New Jersey City	4-1	won at York (N.Y.), 82-45; def. (n) Spalding, 59-53; LOST to (n) Baldwin Wallace, 61-64; def. Rutgers-Newark, 77-60; def. Staten Island, 88-62
#33	25	WPI	4-0	def. Eastern Connecticut, 76-62; def. Salve Regina, 59-55; def. #48 DeSales, 73-70; won at Worcester State, 91-54
#34	24	Lynchburg	4-1	def. Johns Hopkins, 67-61; won at Stevenson, 101-80; LOST to (n) #35 UW-Stevens Point, 73-83; won at Ferrum, 76-73; won at Washington and Lee, 81-63
#35	21	UW-Stevens Point	2-2	LOST at St. Olaf, 55-63; LOST to (n) #2 Christopher Newport, 51-71; def. (n) #34 Lynchburg, 83-73; won at Lawrence, 69-50
#36	18	Rochester	6-0	won at Ithaca, 104-94; def. Alfred, 71-62; def. Washington and Lee, 77-50; def. Hobart, 73-59; def. Waynesburg, 83-57; def. Elmira, 88-50
#37	16	UW-Whitewater	3-0	def. Colorado College, 90-71; def. Lindsey Wilson (Ky.), 85-78; won at Ohio Northern, 87-72
#38	14	Trinity (Conn.)	1-2	LOST at Mass-Dartmouth, 76-83; LOST to (n) Southern Vermont, 80-83; won at Elms, 88-59
#39	12	Birmingham-Southern	2-2	LOST at Baruch, 72-76; def. Rose-Hulman, 80-69; def. Wabash, 72-65; LOST to Covenant, 65-68
#40	11	Hardin-Simmons	2-2	LOST to Southwestern, 95-98; def. Schreiner, 93-72; LOST to #47 Texas Lutheran, 66-90; def. Trinity (Texas), 91-74
T#41	10	Stockton	1-1	def. SUNY-Old Westbury, 74-55; LOST to Rowan, 100-101
T#41	10	UW-La Crosse	4-0	won at Lakeland, 86-66; won at Viterbo, 72-59; won at Webster, 79-56; def. (n) MacMurray, 95-50
T#43	7	Northwestern (Minn.)	1-2	LOST to Hamline, 78-88; LOST to Central, 61-76; def. Macalester, 68-61
T#43	7	Roanoke	2-2	def. Worcester State, 78-60; def. Ferrum, 81-55; LOST at Bridgewater (Va.), 55-74; LOST at North Carolina Wesleyan, 69-76
T#45	6	Carroll	4-1	def. Principia, 75-57; def. Blackburn, 90-72; won at Rockford, 84-71; LOST at Chicago, 83-94; def. (n) East-West, 93-76
T#45	6	Salisbury	4-0	def. Goucher, 70-52; def. Staten Island, 83-65; def. Johns Hopkins, 74-49; won at #16 Virginia Wesleyan, 68-60
#47	5	Texas Lutheran	3-2	def. Mary Hardin-Baylor, 87-84; won at McMurry, 80-72; won at #40 Hardin-Simmons, 90-66; LOST at #12 Whitworth, 87-95; LOST to (n) #9 Whitman, 82-98
#48	3	DeSales	2-2	def. Rosemont, 94-60; def. (n) Bates, 71-70; LOST at #33 WPI, 70-73; LOST at Moravian, 92-105
T#49	2	Bethel	2-1	LOST to (n) Heidelberg, 87-89; def. (n) Luther, 88-78; def. Martin Luther, 95-46
T#49	2	Chapman	2-2	def. La Sierra, 88-63; LOST to San Diego Christian, 62-73; LOST at George Fox, 81-97; won at Lewis and Clark, 60-50
T#49	2	Elmhurst	2-3	LOST at Loras, 102-104; LOST to (n) Greenville, 98-110; LOST to (n) Westminster (Mo.), 81-88; def. Concordia-Chicago, 88-68; won at #14 Alma, 104-96
T#49	2	TCNJ	3-1	def. John Jay, 75-58; def. (n) T#53 SUNY Geneseo, 79-68; LOST to (n) Penn State-Harrisburg, 68-74; def. Rutgers-Camden, 106-66
T#53	1	Neumann	4-0	def. Rowan, 113-96; won at Eastern, 106-90; def. Keystone, 105-71; def. (n) Valley Forge, 87-58
T#53	1	SUNY Geneseo	3-1	def. Medaille, 79-64; LOST to (n) T#49 TCNJ, 68-79; def. (n) New Rochelle, 86-74; won at Morrisville State, 103-93
T#53	1	UW-River Falls	3-1	won at #10 St. Thomas, 74-65; def. (n) Robert Morris-Chicago, 103-98; LOST to (n) #22 Hope, 81-90; won at Carthage, 81-75

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 27, 2016, 06:29:28 PM

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) returns to the air tonight - shortly - at 7pm ET! Join us as Dave McHugh takes a look at yet another crazy start to the Division III basketball season especially on the men's side. Dave will also bring back interviews conducted at this year's #Hoopsville Classic. There will also be plenty of time to answer your questions, so join us!

Guests include (recorded at Hoopsville Classic):
- Josh Merkel, Randolph-Macon men's coach
- Joe Burke, Skidmore men's coach
- Rick Ferry, Albright men's coach

Show hits the air at 7:00 PM ET here: http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2016-17/nov27 #d3h.

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 27, 2016, 08:50:47 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 27, 2016, 04:33:56 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 27, 2016, 04:05:55 PM
It was pretty ridiculous that they were ranked so low anyway. How many other teams had a first-team all-American coming back from team with 53 wins the past 2 years?

I guess if you went by the horrible miss of D3hoops only making Edwards an honorable mention pick, you might think something different though.

Two thoughts... lots of teams bring back individuals and lots of teams lose players... how many important players did Marietta lose besides the one player coming back? They also didn't get as far as others expected and didn't finish as strong last year which makes people give pause. Really hard to argue losing a bunch of players who clearly were important to the team that because of one played the team should be highly ranked. That is a very fair look at Marietta. And I would argue I don't think Marietta thought they would easily beat CNU or Wooster let alone win both games. So to say they were ranked so low was ridiculous... is ridiculous.

As for Edwards pre-season pick - I am fine with it. I don't see any reason last year having him ahead of those who were ahead of him. If you look at the guys who were ahead of him, it would be a difficult argument to put him above them. He moved up to first-team because he was that good and those ahead of him all graduated. Leaving him one of the best big men back this season. I do like how he plays, though he has some areas that I think will be exposed this season... I look forward to seeing him adjust his game to those challenges.

Hrm, whatever weaknesses you think can be exposed that you've found, you're the only one. Btw, was talking about the postseason awards last year where the NABC picked Edwards first team and D3sports didn't pick him for any of their teams.

Bethany is a really athletic and physical team that plays credible 6-5, 6-6, 6-6 and 6-8 guys and Edwards went 15-10 in 23 minutes. He's the 2nd best player I've ever seen at MC, and I'll be very pleasantly surprised to see one better than the first (who did not get anywhere near the accolades he deserved).

Btw, MC has beaten Wooster the last 3 times they've played. Won by 15 in their tournament last year.

How many other teams that won 25+ games the last two years and have their best player, an All-American, coming back are ranked outside the top 15 preseason? I bet not many.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 28, 2016, 07:28:10 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 27, 2016, 08:50:47 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 27, 2016, 04:33:56 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 27, 2016, 04:05:55 PM
It was pretty ridiculous that they were ranked so low anyway. How many other teams had a first-team all-American coming back from team with 53 wins the past 2 years?

I guess if you went by the horrible miss of D3hoops only making Edwards an honorable mention pick, you might think something different though.

Two thoughts... lots of teams bring back individuals and lots of teams lose players... how many important players did Marietta lose besides the one player coming back? They also didn't get as far as others expected and didn't finish as strong last year which makes people give pause. Really hard to argue losing a bunch of players who clearly were important to the team that because of one played the team should be highly ranked. That is a very fair look at Marietta. And I would argue I don't think Marietta thought they would easily beat CNU or Wooster let alone win both games. So to say they were ranked so low was ridiculous... is ridiculous.

As for Edwards pre-season pick - I am fine with it. I don't see any reason last year having him ahead of those who were ahead of him. If you look at the guys who were ahead of him, it would be a difficult argument to put him above them. He moved up to first-team because he was that good and those ahead of him all graduated. Leaving him one of the best big men back this season. I do like how he plays, though he has some areas that I think will be exposed this season... I look forward to seeing him adjust his game to those challenges.

Hrm, whatever weaknesses you think can be exposed that you've found, you're the only one. Btw, was talking about the postseason awards last year where the NABC picked Edwards first team and D3sports didn't pick him for any of their teams.

AJ Edwards was an Honorable Mention AA last year - http://www.d3hoops.com/awards/all-americans/men/2016. Given the immense talent and depth of d3h at that position last season, I think he's properly ranked, as he is this year, given how many post players graduated.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 28, 2016, 11:22:55 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 27, 2016, 08:50:47 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 27, 2016, 04:33:56 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 27, 2016, 04:05:55 PM
It was pretty ridiculous that they were ranked so low anyway. How many other teams had a first-team all-American coming back from team with 53 wins the past 2 years?

I guess if you went by the horrible miss of D3hoops only making Edwards an honorable mention pick, you might think something different though.

Two thoughts... lots of teams bring back individuals and lots of teams lose players... how many important players did Marietta lose besides the one player coming back? They also didn't get as far as others expected and didn't finish as strong last year which makes people give pause. Really hard to argue losing a bunch of players who clearly were important to the team that because of one played the team should be highly ranked. That is a very fair look at Marietta. And I would argue I don't think Marietta thought they would easily beat CNU or Wooster let alone win both games. So to say they were ranked so low was ridiculous... is ridiculous.

As for Edwards pre-season pick - I am fine with it. I don't see any reason last year having him ahead of those who were ahead of him. If you look at the guys who were ahead of him, it would be a difficult argument to put him above them. He moved up to first-team because he was that good and those ahead of him all graduated. Leaving him one of the best big men back this season. I do like how he plays, though he has some areas that I think will be exposed this season... I look forward to seeing him adjust his game to those challenges.

Hrm, whatever weaknesses you think can be exposed that you've found, you're the only one. Btw, was talking about the postseason awards last year where the NABC picked Edwards first team and D3sports didn't pick him for any of their teams.

Bethany is a really athletic and physical team that plays credible 6-5, 6-6, 6-6 and 6-8 guys and Edwards went 15-10 in 23 minutes. He's the 2nd best player I've ever seen at MC, and I'll be very pleasantly surprised to see one better than the first (who did not get anywhere near the accolades he deserved).

Btw, MC has beaten Wooster the last 3 times they've played. Won by 15 in their tournament last year.

How many other teams that won 25+ games the last two years and have their best player, an All-American, coming back are ranked outside the top 15 preseason? I bet not many.

As Ryan noted - he was on the honorable mention team for D3hoops.com. Also, comparing the D3hoops.com team and the NABC team is like comparing apples and oranges. NABC selects one player from each region and puts them on the first team (notice there are eight players per team?). Then they select another player from each region and that makes up the second team. Then they selected another player from each region and that makes up the third team. It continues. One player, each region, each team. We don't do that. We do it like most other All-America selections and as Ryan and I have both mentioned, Edwards being an HM is not a knock on him with the amount of talent at forwards and centers last season. It was a thick crop of players - probably the deepest at that position in a number of years. He was an All-American Honorable Mention - considering how many players there are in Division III, that ain't bad.

Not sure why you mention that Marietta beat Wooster the last three times, now... I thought Marietta would beat Wooster in that game. I did say I didn't think the wins would be easy and that I didn't think they would win both games - I actually thought they would lose to CNU going in to the season. But I made sure that Marietta and CNU played each other at the Hoopsville Classic because I knew it could potentially be an outstanding game and a match-up of what many thought would have been an elite eight game last year. No brainer match-up. It was the only game we didn't change while going through five or six different versions of the schedule for this year's event. But again, we all know they have beaten Wooster three times now... I didn't actually say I thought they would lose to Wooster - heck, I argued that playing at Marietta was a benefit and after the Hoopsville Classic I thought Wooster was in deep trouble. The only thing I could foresee, and Jon Vander Wal said it to me as well, was that Marietta might overlook Wooster because of the CNU game. They clearly didn't and that is a testament to them. No one is arguing Marietta isn't a good team.

As for the weakness comment... I have no idea what you are trying to say.

Per your last question, we could go in circles on this... because how many teams won 25+ games the previous two years, lost three or more players that were part of those teams, returned one outstanding player, etc., etc., etc. ... we could show plenty of examples if you really look at all the data. Not to mention the fact, parity in Division III has made the Top 25 rather muddy. Voters are clearly all over the place which says a lot for how many good teams there are now in Division III. There are no "great" teams necessarily (though, last year showed a few rise to the top), but there are a ton of good teams. The difference between teams in the Top 25 poll on any given weak is razor thin. It probably isn't a surprise anymore that a #17 can beat a #2 (though, the margin in that game was a surprise). Five years ago... that would have been more shocking.

Marietta lost to John Carroll twice last season with that team - many voters felt JCU would be the better squad and with those players gone Marietta would still be good, but might not be as good especially considering that team wasn't able to get past Gwynedd-Mercy even though Edwards was on the floor for that game. That is probably why Marietta was down at 17 (their point total is an average of 22, I would contend that is too low; I had them 16). It is a fair assessment. Remember, they are still ranked. Only 5.5% of Division III teams can say they are in the Top 25 in any given week. Marietta is part of that conversation. Don't worry about where they are positioned right now. They aren't being ignored. They will move up in this week's poll. Enjoy it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on November 28, 2016, 11:27:07 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 27, 2016, 04:33:56 PM
...Moving a team dramatically up and down a poll is something that seems hard to do for a lot of voters. Even I have struggled with the idea especially early in a season when you don't have enough data on all the teams involved....

Although I can understand this logic, I think the one exception should be between the preseason rankings and the 1st "actual" rankings. Preseason is a guess based on the year(s) prior and expectations. No one has a better resume right now than Marietta and not moving them up because a team ahead of them didn't lose is rediculous. Although I agree that voters should be blowing up their rankings every week, if ever there is a week to do so, it's between the preseason and week 1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 28, 2016, 02:47:14 PM

I agree with that point to some degree... but your opinion is Marietta's resume is better than everyone else's.. but I didn't move my first place vote away from Babson.

Also, there is more to voting than looking at wins, losses, and the resume. I know I take into account the opponents, illnesses and injuries (if known), and other factors. Some undefeated teams that had pretty weak schedules didn't make my Top 25 (resume thinking) while some teams with two-losses remained (understanding other factors).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 28, 2016, 03:21:38 PM

I love seeing this conversation as a former voter.

One thing I always had to balance as a voter as well was whether to let one or two games completely sway me off my preseason expectations. As a voter, you at least have to consider this to be two weeks, and if you are someone who just cannot move a team more than X number of positions in a week ... you better at least double it.

But yeah, to Sager's point, I don't like voters who are unwilling to at least blow up their ranking from preseason to regular season. Actual games have to take some precedence over a spreadsheet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on November 28, 2016, 03:26:52 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 28, 2016, 02:47:14 PM
Also, there is more to voting than looking at wins, losses, and the resume. I know I take into account the opponents, illnesses and injuries (if known), and other factors. Some undefeated teams that had pretty weak schedules didn't make my Top 25 (resume thinking) while some teams with two-losses remained (understanding other factors).

I undestand. I wrote no one currently has a better resume; not that they should be number 1. I am very ok with number 1 votes going to Amherst, Babson, and Tufts, or North Central. The point isn't necessarily about the result but about the methodology. I would be ok with most rationale for how a voter votes, other than "well, the teams I had ahead of them didn't lose this week"... Especially when "last week" was a pre-season ranking...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on November 28, 2016, 04:32:36 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 28, 2016, 03:21:38 PM
Actual games have to take some precedence over a spreadsheet.

:-[

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on November 28, 2016, 05:08:21 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 28, 2016, 03:21:38 PM
I love seeing this conversation as a former voter.

One thing I always had to balance as a voter as well was whether to let one or two games completely sway me off my preseason expectations. As a voter, you at least have to consider this to be two weeks, and if you are someone who just cannot move a team more than X number of positions in a week ... you better at least double it.

But yeah, to Sager's point, I don't like voters who are unwilling to at least blow up their ranking from preseason to regular season. Actual games have to take some precedence over a spreadsheet.

But what if the spreadsheet has data from actual games?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 28, 2016, 05:33:26 PM

Quote from: smedindy on November 28, 2016, 05:08:21 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 28, 2016, 03:21:38 PM
I love seeing this conversation as a former voter.

One thing I always had to balance as a voter as well was whether to let one or two games completely sway me off my preseason expectations. As a voter, you at least have to consider this to be two weeks, and if you are someone who just cannot move a team more than X number of positions in a week ... you better at least double it.

But yeah, to Sager's point, I don't like voters who are unwilling to at least blow up their ranking from preseason to regular season. Actual games have to take some precedence over a spreadsheet.

But what if the spreadsheet has data from actual games?

Well, a preseason ranking spreadsheet has that. It's just data from last season's games. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 28, 2016, 05:57:42 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 28, 2016, 11:22:55 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 27, 2016, 08:50:47 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 27, 2016, 04:33:56 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 27, 2016, 04:05:55 PM
It was pretty ridiculous that they were ranked so low anyway. How many other teams had a first-team all-American coming back from team with 53 wins the past 2 years?

I guess if you went by the horrible miss of D3hoops only making Edwards an honorable mention pick, you might think something different though.

Two thoughts... lots of teams bring back individuals and lots of teams lose players... how many important players did Marietta lose besides the one player coming back? They also didn't get as far as others expected and didn't finish as strong last year which makes people give pause. Really hard to argue losing a bunch of players who clearly were important to the team that because of one played the team should be highly ranked. That is a very fair look at Marietta. And I would argue I don't think Marietta thought they would easily beat CNU or Wooster let alone win both games. So to say they were ranked so low was ridiculous... is ridiculous.

As for Edwards pre-season pick - I am fine with it. I don't see any reason last year having him ahead of those who were ahead of him. If you look at the guys who were ahead of him, it would be a difficult argument to put him above them. He moved up to first-team because he was that good and those ahead of him all graduated. Leaving him one of the best big men back this season. I do like how he plays, though he has some areas that I think will be exposed this season... I look forward to seeing him adjust his game to those challenges.

Hrm, whatever weaknesses you think can be exposed that you've found, you're the only one. Btw, was talking about the postseason awards last year where the NABC picked Edwards first team and D3sports didn't pick him for any of their teams.

Bethany is a really athletic and physical team that plays credible 6-5, 6-6, 6-6 and 6-8 guys and Edwards went 15-10 in 23 minutes. He's the 2nd best player I've ever seen at MC, and I'll be very pleasantly surprised to see one better than the first (who did not get anywhere near the accolades he deserved).

Btw, MC has beaten Wooster the last 3 times they've played. Won by 15 in their tournament last year.

How many other teams that won 25+ games the last two years and have their best player, an All-American, coming back are ranked outside the top 15 preseason? I bet not many.

As Ryan noted - he was on the honorable mention team for D3hoops.com.

Yes, this is correct. Also correct is me saying that he was not selected to a team. Honorable mention is not a team.

Also, comparing the D3hoops.com team and the NABC team is like comparing apples and oranges. NABC selects one player from each region and puts them on the first team (notice there are eight players per team?). Then they select another player from each region and that makes up the second team. Then they selected another player from each region and that makes up the third team. It continues. One player, each region, each team. We don't do that. We do it like most other All-America selections and as Ryan and I have both mentioned, Edwards being an HM is not a knock on him with the amount of talent at forwards and centers last season. It was a thick crop of players - probably the deepest at that position in a number of years. He was an All-American Honorable Mention - considering how many players there are in Division III, that ain't bad.

It doesn't represent his quality, though. It just doesn't. I guess Vander Wal should play him more minutes to impress you. Team be damned. Guarantee if he had averaged 22-12 or something we wouldn't even be entertaining this. But 25 mpg vs. 35 mpg, especially playing for a balanced team, makes a difference.

So what you're saying is Edwards was first team because no one was any good in the Great Lakes and he was elevated by default? Whatever.

Not sure why you mention that Marietta beat Wooster the last three times, now...

Because you implied that the result was unexpected. Beating them by 15 in their building last year suggests that it wouldn't have been. To me beating them soundly was totally expected, as they are vastly overrated as usual. They really haven't been that good. They have maybe 2-3 players that could play for MC this season. Did you know they've only won their league once in the last 4 years? Yet people still rank them and put them in tourney fields based on the name.

[snip bunch of stuff]

As for the weakness comment... I have no idea what you are trying to say.

OK well let me make it crystal clear. I'm saying that you're blowing smoke.

If you see these weaknesses in Edwards' game that are exploitable, then you see things that people that actually coach haven't seen. He played basically as a stretch post against CNU, then played as a pure low post against Bethany. Anything he gets his hands on is his, he's quick enough to get by almost anyone that would guard him, and can elevate and play above the rim. He can play against guys bigger than him, or shorter (though that doesn't happen very often because coaches aren't that stupid). He doesn't play for a team that runs everything through him. He can't play point guard, so maybe that's a weakness for you? Then again MC had a guy that put up Edwards numbers *and* good assist numbers, and more than 2 blocks and steals per game, and still couldn't get recognition. But I'm used to it from the d3 family of sites.

Per your last question, we could go in circles on this... because how many teams won 25+ games the previous two years, lost three or more players that were part of those teams, returned one outstanding player, etc., etc., etc. ... we could show plenty of examples if you really look at all the data.

I'm not asking about that other stuff and there are no circles. I'm asking a simple question that could be answered with 4 columns on a table, and filtering. Nothing else. Filter teams for 25+ wins, all-Americans for non-seniors on those teams (just forwards would be even more restrictive as more A-A forwards tend to be seniors), and preseason ranking for lower than 15. How many rows do you get? And I imagine the answer would be very few. ONLY after all of that would the "other stuff" you're talking about matter. Basically we're saying you won 25+ games in 2 straight years -- so obviously you were pretty good. Then after that you STILL retain your best player who is one of the top couple dozen players in the country or so! If NCAA data was better organized I'd do this myself. I'm pretty confident it would show how jobbed Marietta got in the preseason poll.

As far as Hoopville matchups go, why was Marietta put against Albright? That was a joke of game that will hurt strength of schedule. Vander Wal smartly conserved minutes rather than padding stats and trying to win by a million, but it was still a pointless game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 28, 2016, 06:30:11 PM

Kudos to whoever the single person that voted Marietta #1 was.

Considering #4 is the lowest justifiable position to rank them and they ended up #4, there have to be some regrettable votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on November 28, 2016, 08:39:17 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 28, 2016, 05:57:42 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 28, 2016, 11:22:55 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 27, 2016, 08:50:47 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 27, 2016, 04:33:56 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 27, 2016, 04:05:55 PM
It was pretty ridiculous that they were ranked so low anyway. How many other teams had a first-team all-American coming back from team with 53 wins the past 2 years?

I guess if you went by the horrible miss of D3hoops only making Edwards an honorable mention pick, you might think something different though.

Two thoughts... lots of teams bring back individuals and lots of teams lose players... how many important players did Marietta lose besides the one player coming back? They also didn't get as far as others expected and didn't finish as strong last year which makes people give pause. Really hard to argue losing a bunch of players who clearly were important to the team that because of one played the team should be highly ranked. That is a very fair look at Marietta. And I would argue I don't think Marietta thought they would easily beat CNU or Wooster let alone win both games. So to say they were ranked so low was ridiculous... is ridiculous.

As for Edwards pre-season pick - I am fine with it. I don't see any reason last year having him ahead of those who were ahead of him. If you look at the guys who were ahead of him, it would be a difficult argument to put him above them. He moved up to first-team because he was that good and those ahead of him all graduated. Leaving him one of the best big men back this season. I do like how he plays, though he has some areas that I think will be exposed this season... I look forward to seeing him adjust his game to those challenges.

Hrm, whatever weaknesses you think can be exposed that you've found, you're the only one. Btw, was talking about the postseason awards last year where the NABC picked Edwards first team and D3sports didn't pick him for any of their teams.

Bethany is a really athletic and physical team that plays credible 6-5, 6-6, 6-6 and 6-8 guys and Edwards went 15-10 in 23 minutes. He's the 2nd best player I've ever seen at MC, and I'll be very pleasantly surprised to see one better than the first (who did not get anywhere near the accolades he deserved).

Btw, MC has beaten Wooster the last 3 times they've played. Won by 15 in their tournament last year.

How many other teams that won 25+ games the last two years and have their best player, an All-American, coming back are ranked outside the top 15 preseason? I bet not many.

As Ryan noted - he was on the honorable mention team for D3hoops.com.

Yes, this is correct. Also correct is me saying that he was not selected to a team. Honorable mention is not a team.

Also, comparing the D3hoops.com team and the NABC team is like comparing apples and oranges. NABC selects one player from each region and puts them on the first team (notice there are eight players per team?). Then they select another player from each region and that makes up the second team. Then they selected another player from each region and that makes up the third team. It continues. One player, each region, each team. We don't do that. We do it like most other All-America selections and as Ryan and I have both mentioned, Edwards being an HM is not a knock on him with the amount of talent at forwards and centers last season. It was a thick crop of players - probably the deepest at that position in a number of years. He was an All-American Honorable Mention - considering how many players there are in Division III, that ain't bad.

It doesn't represent his quality, though. It just doesn't. I guess Vander Wal should play him more minutes to impress you. Team be damned. Guarantee if he had averaged 22-12 or something we wouldn't even be entertaining this. But 25 mpg vs. 35 mpg, especially playing for a balanced team, makes a difference.

So what you're saying is Edwards was first team because no one was any good in the Great Lakes and he was elevated by default? Whatever.

Not sure why you mention that Marietta beat Wooster the last three times, now...

Because you implied that the result was unexpected. Beating them by 15 in their building last year suggests that it wouldn't have been. To me beating them soundly was totally expected, as they are vastly overrated as usual. They really haven't been that good. They have maybe 2-3 players that could play for MC this season. Did you know they've only won their league once in the last 4 years? Yet people still rank them and put them in tourney fields based on the name.

[snip bunch of stuff]

As for the weakness comment... I have no idea what you are trying to say.

OK well let me make it crystal clear. I'm saying that you're blowing smoke.

If you see these weaknesses in Edwards' game that are exploitable, then you see things that people that actually coach haven't seen. He played basically as a stretch post against CNU, then played as a pure low post against Bethany. Anything he gets his hands on is his, he's quick enough to get by almost anyone that would guard him, and can elevate and play above the rim. He can play against guys bigger than him, or shorter (though that doesn't happen very often because coaches aren't that stupid). He doesn't play for a team that runs everything through him. He can't play point guard, so maybe that's a weakness for you? Then again MC had a guy that put up Edwards numbers *and* good assist numbers, and more than 2 blocks and steals per game, and still couldn't get recognition. But I'm used to it from the d3 family of sites.

Per your last question, we could go in circles on this... because how many teams won 25+ games the previous two years, lost three or more players that were part of those teams, returned one outstanding player, etc., etc., etc. ... we could show plenty of examples if you really look at all the data.

I'm not asking about that other stuff and there are no circles. I'm asking a simple question that could be answered with 4 columns on a table, and filtering. Nothing else. Filter teams for 25+ wins, all-Americans for non-seniors on those teams (just forwards would be even more restrictive as more A-A forwards tend to be seniors), and preseason ranking for lower than 15. How many rows do you get? And I imagine the answer would be very few. ONLY after all of that would the "other stuff" you're talking about matter. Basically we're saying you won 25+ games in 2 straight years -- so obviously you were pretty good. Then after that you STILL retain your best player who is one of the top couple dozen players in the country or so! If NCAA data was better organized I'd do this myself. I'm pretty confident it would show how jobbed Marietta got in the preseason poll.

As far as Hoopville matchups go, why was Marietta put against Albright? That was a joke of game that will hurt strength of schedule. Vander Wal smartly conserved minutes rather than padding stats and trying to win by a million, but it was still a pointless game.

I don't understand your beef with any of this. He explained how the system is different between the NABC and D3hoops. Do I wish A.J. had received a better showing and made 1st or 2nd team on the D3hoops team...Yes, of course. Do I think he was robbed? No. Those guys ahead of him were some pretty darn good ball players.

As far as the preseason ranking goes, I'm not much for blowing smoke up my backside but I'd like to think I know a thing or two about the Marietta program. I had some serious question marks about this team heading into the season. Who would fill the hole that Eddy Grenert left on the block and provide that 1-2 punch down low? Could anyone replace the production Luis Garcia had on the wing last year? I knew the guys on the roster who needed to step up and fill those roles, but I hadn't seen them do it on the floor consistently enough to sleep soundly about it. If the voting sheet had been sitting on my desk, I don't think I could have placed Marietta higher than #15 to start the year. Too many question marks I had that needed to be answered.

Now we can sit here now after 5 games and say all those questions so far have checkmarks next to them and then some. Guess what? They won the tough games on the schedule and they moved up in the poll accordingly. If they continue to impress and win ballgames, they'll keep moving up. There's plenty of tough games on the schedule left to impress voters...undefeated Wesleyan, #5 Whitman, John Carroll, Baldwin Wallace, Mount Union...so on and so forth. There's no need to get upset about a preseason ranking that everyone forgets about in a couple of weeks anyways.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 28, 2016, 09:57:48 PM

Quote from: Fifth and Putnam on November 28, 2016, 08:39:17 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 28, 2016, 05:57:42 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 28, 2016, 11:22:55 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 27, 2016, 08:50:47 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 27, 2016, 04:33:56 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 27, 2016, 04:05:55 PM
It was pretty ridiculous that they were ranked so low anyway. How many other teams had a first-team all-American coming back from team with 53 wins the past 2 years?

I guess if you went by the horrible miss of D3hoops only making Edwards an honorable mention pick, you might think something different though.

Two thoughts... lots of teams bring back individuals and lots of teams lose players... how many important players did Marietta lose besides the one player coming back? They also didn't get as far as others expected and didn't finish as strong last year which makes people give pause. Really hard to argue losing a bunch of players who clearly were important to the team that because of one played the team should be highly ranked. That is a very fair look at Marietta. And I would argue I don't think Marietta thought they would easily beat CNU or Wooster let alone win both games. So to say they were ranked so low was ridiculous... is ridiculous.

As for Edwards pre-season pick - I am fine with it. I don't see any reason last year having him ahead of those who were ahead of him. If you look at the guys who were ahead of him, it would be a difficult argument to put him above them. He moved up to first-team because he was that good and those ahead of him all graduated. Leaving him one of the best big men back this season. I do like how he plays, though he has some areas that I think will be exposed this season... I look forward to seeing him adjust his game to those challenges.

Hrm, whatever weaknesses you think can be exposed that you've found, you're the only one. Btw, was talking about the postseason awards last year where the NABC picked Edwards first team and D3sports didn't pick him for any of their teams.

Bethany is a really athletic and physical team that plays credible 6-5, 6-6, 6-6 and 6-8 guys and Edwards went 15-10 in 23 minutes. He's the 2nd best player I've ever seen at MC, and I'll be very pleasantly surprised to see one better than the first (who did not get anywhere near the accolades he deserved).

Btw, MC has beaten Wooster the last 3 times they've played. Won by 15 in their tournament last year.

How many other teams that won 25+ games the last two years and have their best player, an All-American, coming back are ranked outside the top 15 preseason? I bet not many.

As Ryan noted - he was on the honorable mention team for D3hoops.com.

Yes, this is correct. Also correct is me saying that he was not selected to a team. Honorable mention is not a team.

Also, comparing the D3hoops.com team and the NABC team is like comparing apples and oranges. NABC selects one player from each region and puts them on the first team (notice there are eight players per team?). Then they select another player from each region and that makes up the second team. Then they selected another player from each region and that makes up the third team. It continues. One player, each region, each team. We don't do that. We do it like most other All-America selections and as Ryan and I have both mentioned, Edwards being an HM is not a knock on him with the amount of talent at forwards and centers last season. It was a thick crop of players - probably the deepest at that position in a number of years. He was an All-American Honorable Mention - considering how many players there are in Division III, that ain't bad.

It doesn't represent his quality, though. It just doesn't. I guess Vander Wal should play him more minutes to impress you. Team be damned. Guarantee if he had averaged 22-12 or something we wouldn't even be entertaining this. But 25 mpg vs. 35 mpg, especially playing for a balanced team, makes a difference.

So what you're saying is Edwards was first team because no one was any good in the Great Lakes and he was elevated by default? Whatever.

Not sure why you mention that Marietta beat Wooster the last three times, now...

Because you implied that the result was unexpected. Beating them by 15 in their building last year suggests that it wouldn't have been. To me beating them soundly was totally expected, as they are vastly overrated as usual. They really haven't been that good. They have maybe 2-3 players that could play for MC this season. Did you know they've only won their league once in the last 4 years? Yet people still rank them and put them in tourney fields based on the name.

[snip bunch of stuff]

As for the weakness comment... I have no idea what you are trying to say.

OK well let me make it crystal clear. I'm saying that you're blowing smoke.

If you see these weaknesses in Edwards' game that are exploitable, then you see things that people that actually coach haven't seen. He played basically as a stretch post against CNU, then played as a pure low post against Bethany. Anything he gets his hands on is his, he's quick enough to get by almost anyone that would guard him, and can elevate and play above the rim. He can play against guys bigger than him, or shorter (though that doesn't happen very often because coaches aren't that stupid). He doesn't play for a team that runs everything through him. He can't play point guard, so maybe that's a weakness for you? Then again MC had a guy that put up Edwards numbers *and* good assist numbers, and more than 2 blocks and steals per game, and still couldn't get recognition. But I'm used to it from the d3 family of sites.

Per your last question, we could go in circles on this... because how many teams won 25+ games the previous two years, lost three or more players that were part of those teams, returned one outstanding player, etc., etc., etc. ... we could show plenty of examples if you really look at all the data.

I'm not asking about that other stuff and there are no circles. I'm asking a simple question that could be answered with 4 columns on a table, and filtering. Nothing else. Filter teams for 25+ wins, all-Americans for non-seniors on those teams (just forwards would be even more restrictive as more A-A forwards tend to be seniors), and preseason ranking for lower than 15. How many rows do you get? And I imagine the answer would be very few. ONLY after all of that would the "other stuff" you're talking about matter. Basically we're saying you won 25+ games in 2 straight years -- so obviously you were pretty good. Then after that you STILL retain your best player who is one of the top couple dozen players in the country or so! If NCAA data was better organized I'd do this myself. I'm pretty confident it would show how jobbed Marietta got in the preseason poll.

As far as Hoopville matchups go, why was Marietta put against Albright? That was a joke of game that will hurt strength of schedule. Vander Wal smartly conserved minutes rather than padding stats and trying to win by a million, but it was still a pointless game.

I don't understand your beef with any of this. He explained how the system is different between the NABC and D3hoops. Do I wish A.J. had received a better showing and made 1st or 2nd team on the D3hoops team...Yes, of course. Do I think he was robbed? No. Those guys ahead of him were some pretty darn good ball players.

As far as the preseason ranking goes, I'm not much for blowing smoke up my backside but I'd like to think I know a thing or two about the Marietta program. I had some serious question marks about this team heading into the season. Who would fill the hole that Eddy Grenert left on the block and provide that 1-2 punch down low? Could anyone replace the production Luis Garcia had on the wing last year? I knew the guys on the roster who needed to step up and fill those roles, but I hadn't seen them do it on the floor consistently enough to sleep soundly about it. If the voting sheet had been sitting on my desk, I don't think I could have placed Marietta higher than #15 to start the year. Too many question marks I had that needed to be answered.

Now we can sit here now after 5 games and say all those questions so far have checkmarks next to them and then some. Guess what? They won the tough games on the schedule and they moved up in the poll accordingly. If they continue to impress and win ballgames, they'll keep moving up. There's plenty of tough games on the schedule left to impress voters...undefeated Wesleyan, #5 Whitman, John Carroll, Baldwin Wallace, Mount Union...so on and so forth. There's no need to get upset about a preseason ranking that everyone forgets about in a couple of weeks anyways.

Well, I'll admit that no one including me would go to this level of detail on every team in a preseason ranking (but that's part of my point; normally when you're looking at a program with a track record, you look at whether they have their key guy or two back and then assume the rest will come together).

But for people more familiar, I think there were plenty of reasons to be optimistic. Kyle Dixon was really really good the 2nd half of the year. I don't know how he could have been better, 47% FG, 48% 3FG in the league, good defense, good athletic ability, was really solid in postseason. Wallace was inconsistent shooting-wise (so was Garcia until about the last 8 games of his career), but got more aggressive and productive in league play. 7 ppg in 13 min is real impact. I think we've just started to see what he can do. I really thought either of them could have been starters last year, but there was no way anyone was starting over McKean regardless of what the stat sheet said, and I can't argue with that with as much as it meant to him. And then Keith Richardson coming back you figure would be another all action sparkplus. He averaged 10 a game in 19 min in league play two years ago as a soph. Would have been hard for that to go far wrong.

And once upon a time, Thome was preferred in the rotation to Edwards. Credible shooter from 3, post game a little below what you'd like, but good hands and good timing blocking shots (11 stl and 10 blk in league play as a 13 mpg guy). And his reb rate adjusted for minutes was pretty close to Grenert. IMO people worry too much about "oh can he go from the bench to starting" -- it's the same game, and as long as you're not playing garbage minutes, it shouldn't matter too much. And it hasn't.

If they were going to be down, they would have been last year losing two sophomore guards they might have figured on being their top 2 scorers (one of whom I think had a chance to be an All-American himself). But like I said before, good programs keep going. Vander Wal has built that kind of program.

I'm not really worried about the schedule being strong enough, but I do wonder why MC drew the short straw in a tournament with 7 pretty decent to really good teams. Would have loved to see MC play Stevens Point. Win or lose, would have been a big help to SOS, and UWSP (and most of the teams up here) play a very different style to what has become common down there. Would have been good for MC to see that before they play someone like that in the tournament. Instead they get a waste game they traveled to Baltimore for. They could have played Hiram and gotten that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on November 29, 2016, 12:12:17 AM

Quite a few bits and bytes about a ranking in November...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on November 29, 2016, 08:48:48 AM

I'm actually shocked at how close Massey is to the D3hoops voters, even with the tiny sample size. The top 3 have SoSs of 250, 226, and 255 - clearly driving down their massey ratings. I think most people are fine with them being in the top 5 regardless. And the last 3 is basically a crap shoot for voters and a proverbial revolving door.

Team D3hoops Massey +/-
Amherst (19)     1     14     13
Babson (5)     2     20     18
Tufts     3     22 19
Marietta (1)     4     1     3
Whitman     5     3     2
North Central (Ill.)    6     2     4
Chris. Newport     7     6     1
Whitworth     8     9     1
Washington U.     9     13     4
St. Norbert     10     19     9
Wooster     11      31     20
St. Thomas     12     4     8
Keene State     13     32     19
Benedictine     14     16     2
Hope     15     10     5
Illinois Wesleyan   16     11     5
Augustana     17     5     12
Rochester     18     28 10
Salisbury     19     12     7
Baldwin Wallace    20     30     10
UW-Eau Claire     21     18     3
Mount St. Joseph 22     29     7
WPI     23     58     35
Endicott     24     72     48
Susquehanna     25     52     27

At this point, I don't think anyone has any reason to whine about where they are ranked (or not ranked)...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 29, 2016, 09:25:52 AM

Good stuff. Goes a long way toward confirming what I suspected about who has done the most so far.

I hope Whitman didn't overschedule by having a home game on the 18th before games in Florida on the 20th and 22nd. I think they're really good.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on November 29, 2016, 09:39:39 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 29, 2016, 09:25:52 AM
I hope Whitman didn't overschedule by having a home game on the 18th before games in Florida on the 20th and 22nd. I think they're really good.

Kinda funny they play two Ohio teams and a Pennsylvania team in that stretch. But it could have been even worse. Playing Wooster at home, flying across the country, and playing the next day is brutal enough. At least least they get King's on the 20th and Marrietta on the 22nd and not the other way around!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 29, 2016, 09:55:32 AM

Quote from: HOPEful on November 29, 2016, 09:39:39 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 29, 2016, 09:25:52 AM
I hope Whitman didn't overschedule by having a home game on the 18th before games in Florida on the 20th and 22nd. I think they're really good.

Kinda funny they play two Ohio teams and a Pennsylvania team in that stretch. But it could have been even worse. Playing Wooster at home, flying across the country, and playing the next day is brutal enough. At least least they get King's on the 20th and Marrietta on the 22nd and not the other way around!

I feel like some scientist should study them for the effect of multi-time zone travel on human performance or something.

Of course they have on their schedule the games taking place in Orlando, so maybe they'll just go to the wrong place and forfeit. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: whyDiii on November 29, 2016, 10:17:08 AM

Quote from: smedindy on November 29, 2016, 12:12:17 AM
Quite a few bits and bytes about a ranking in November...

There is no avoiding the controversy this early as most people have seen less than half of the top 25 teams(my guess). Definitely a lot of bickering for the second poll of 2016! As of right now I think the movement has made sense and is easily justifiable. Bottom of the top 25 indeed always a crap shoot this early.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on November 29, 2016, 01:08:27 PM

Quote from: whyDiii on November 29, 2016, 10:17:08 AM
There is no avoiding the controversy this early as most people have seen less than half of the top 25 teams(my guess). Definitely a lot of bickering for the second poll of 2016...

Just don't say Edwards isn't as good as McCarthy, Palleschi, and Flannery. Don't even imply it!! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 29, 2016, 01:23:42 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on November 29, 2016, 01:08:27 PM
Quote from: whyDiii on November 29, 2016, 10:17:08 AM
There is no avoiding the controversy this early as most people have seen less than half of the top 25 teams(my guess). Definitely a lot of bickering for the second poll of 2016...

Just don't say Edwards isn't as good as McCarthy, Palleschi, and Flannery. Don't even imply it!! :)

I wouldn't even say that. But I definitely don't think there were 20 players better than him last year in D3, but my point was more that he was returning from a team that was clearly good besides him. But whatever. If they can make it through the next few weeks in good shape it's all downhill from there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on November 29, 2016, 02:20:57 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 29, 2016, 01:23:42 PM
I wouldn't even say that. But I definitely don't think there were 20 players better than him last year in D3, but my point was more that he was returning from a team that was clearly good besides him. But whatever. If they can make it through the next few weeks in good shape it's all downhill from there.

I was just poking the bear :)

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbourbonstreetshots.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F04%2Fpokeing-bear3-610x400.jpg&hash=8b1cd2be85c06219054b411636bc7784e45576b2)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on November 29, 2016, 05:05:16 PM

As a New England observer, Amherst is a worthy number one this year -- they look loaded and are firing on all cylinders to start the season. Babson has despite being undefeated been up-and-down, a few players haven't been performing the way they did last year, but Flannery is so darn good and they have so much experience around him that I could see Babson ending the season in the top five. Tufts has a lot of explosive scoring ability once again, but I'd be absolutely stunned to see them in the top five by late in the season. They may not be the second-best team in NESCAC, let alone the country. In all events, there will be some major changes coming soon -- Tufts plays WPI and probably Babson, Babson plays Amherst and probably Tufts, in the next few weeks. So something has to give.

Endicott plays a ridiculously weak schedule from here on out, so they could stick around and very slowly move up -- would not be surprised to see them finish with between one and three total losses. I think Midd will bound back and quickly return to the poll, Keene is likely to fall a bit but seem legit based on their performance so far. There are so many New England teams doing well that I understand why Williams isn't getting any votes yet, but watch out for the Ephs -- they are gradually starting to come together and the talent, if not the experience, is there. If they win the next two games, including on the road against a likely-unbeaten Wesleyan squad, I hope they start to at least earn some attention. In all events, they will have a chance to show their mettle (or show that a team with only one senior and two juniors playing in the rotation isn't quite there yet) when they face Hope and Amherst one week apart in late December / early January.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 30, 2016, 08:22:37 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 29, 2016, 01:23:42 PM
Quote from: HOPEful on November 29, 2016, 01:08:27 PM
Quote from: whyDiii on November 29, 2016, 10:17:08 AM
There is no avoiding the controversy this early as most people have seen less than half of the top 25 teams(my guess). Definitely a lot of bickering for the second poll of 2016...

Just don't say Edwards isn't as good as McCarthy, Palleschi, and Flannery. Don't even imply it!! :)

I wouldn't even say that. But I definitely don't think there were 20 players better than him last year in D3, but my point was more that he was returning from a team that was clearly good besides him. But whatever. If they can make it through the next few weeks in good shape it's all downhill from there.

Of course, he's not competing against all 20 above him, just the 8-10 post players. If you look at those names, it's tough to move him up - based on last year's results, playing alongside Grennert. I imagine we'll get to see everything he's capable of this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 30, 2016, 11:28:51 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 30, 2016, 08:22:37 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 29, 2016, 01:23:42 PM
Quote from: HOPEful on November 29, 2016, 01:08:27 PM
Quote from: whyDiii on November 29, 2016, 10:17:08 AM
There is no avoiding the controversy this early as most people have seen less than half of the top 25 teams(my guess). Definitely a lot of bickering for the second poll of 2016...

Just don't say Edwards isn't as good as McCarthy, Palleschi, and Flannery. Don't even imply it!! :)

I wouldn't even say that. But I definitely don't think there were 20 players better than him last year in D3, but my point was more that he was returning from a team that was clearly good besides him. But whatever. If they can make it through the next few weeks in good shape it's all downhill from there.

Of course, he's not competing against all 20 above him, just the 8-10 post players. If you look at those names, it's tough to move him up - based on last year's results, playing alongside Grennert. I imagine we'll get to see everything he's capable of this year.

That shouldn't matter. People don't have a problem with putting 4 guards on there.

But I still don't buy this.

Bottom line is if you normalize Edwards to 35 mpg, we're not having this conversation because he would have been a first team A-A. He got penalized for Vander Wal's sub patterns (which isn't to say his sub patterns were wrong).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 30, 2016, 11:37:00 AM

A little late, here is my Top 25 ballot for Week 1 (along with my pre-season ballot in there) along with my thoughts. Remember, I am sharing this because people find it interesting and you get my insight... but I am ONE voter. I don't have any more points or weight than anyone else even if my designation has changed (I used to be one of the three Mid-Atlantic voters, I have now taken over Pat's former role as the 25th voter - the national slot): http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/11/30/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-1/

Per the comment about why Marietta was scheduled against Albright - I would love to see you try and put an eight-team classic together.

First off, we wanted to avoid any team playing two teams from the same conference. This year we were challenged with two teams from the MAC Commonwealth and two from the ODAC - it happened and nothing we could do about it.

Secondly, there are a ton of timing issues to work through. You don't want teams to have too tough a turn around, you don't want to give teams a much longer break than their opponent on the second day. There are games you want to feature in a more prime slot while also giving the host school (Stevenson) the timing they want to play since they want to shine for their own fans. You have to consider what travel plans may be before and after the event and you have to consider other details that can throw wrenches in the scheduling. For example, some schools have request not to play teams (while everyone has requests to play teams; the year we had Middlebury, FIVE teams wanted to play the Panthers).

There is plenty more I can go into and explain why there were five or six versions of the schedule along with countless hours twisting things around. It came down to this: Albright was going to face UWSP, Marietta, CNU, or Lynchburg - plain and simple. When we worked through all the schedules, Marietta was the only one we could slot in against Albright. Marietta was also the only team who got a nice benefit of a few extra hours turnaround to the next day, but since CNU wasn't playing less than 24 hours earlier, we stuck with this. But that was a sticking point for us for a long time. We eventually had to stick with this schedule because it was the best version we could produce.

But to your point about Albright hurting Marietta's SOS... I don't think you know what you are talking about. First off, Albright is currently 2-2 and has a pretty good out-of-conference schedule that will actually help Marietta's SOS. Secondly, the MAC Commonwealth is not a bad conference and usually produced very good SOS numbers in the past ten years. Thirdly, Albright will absolutely play a factor in the Commonwealth race this season. There is nothing about that match-up that will hurt Marietta in the slightest. LaRoche and Bethany will actually hurt Marietta's SOS more than Albright's because LaRoche's (AMCC) and Bethany's (PAC) conferences are in the lower third, maybe quarter, of Division III which will pull the Pioneer's SOS down. Commonwealth is in the top half, possibly top third (can't remember where Gordon slotted them off the top of my head).

Don't worry about the game against Albright... it won't hurt Marietta a damn bit. (By the way, Albright's coach admitted his team was overwhelmed by Marietta psychologically in pre-game, but that is why teams come to the event - to improve and prepare for things out of their norm; they looked pretty darn good against RMC the next day.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 30, 2016, 11:42:36 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 30, 2016, 11:28:51 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 30, 2016, 08:22:37 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 29, 2016, 01:23:42 PM
Quote from: HOPEful on November 29, 2016, 01:08:27 PM
Quote from: whyDiii on November 29, 2016, 10:17:08 AM
There is no avoiding the controversy this early as most people have seen less than half of the top 25 teams(my guess). Definitely a lot of bickering for the second poll of 2016...

Just don't say Edwards isn't as good as McCarthy, Palleschi, and Flannery. Don't even imply it!! :)

I wouldn't even say that. But I definitely don't think there were 20 players better than him last year in D3, but my point was more that he was returning from a team that was clearly good besides him. But whatever. If they can make it through the next few weeks in good shape it's all downhill from there.

Of course, he's not competing against all 20 above him, just the 8-10 post players. If you look at those names, it's tough to move him up - based on last year's results, playing alongside Grennert. I imagine we'll get to see everything he's capable of this year.

That shouldn't matter. People don't have a problem with putting 4 guards on there.

But I still don't buy this.

Bottom line is if you normalize Edwards to 35 mpg, we're not having this conversation because he would have been a first team A-A. He got penalized for Vander Wal's sub patterns (which isn't to say his sub patterns were wrong).

If we normalize Edwards to 35 mpg... because everyone should just change the math to make your argument work. SMH

Move on... you have an axe to grind and it has gotten old. No one has knocked Edwards, but you won't except it. Sure, some have put four guards on a lineup, but we try not to. We have also put three forwards on a team in the past. Happens a lot. NABC puts EIGHT players on a team. Can you put eight players on a court to play a game?

Even adding three forwards to a team wouldn't have moved Edwards up as far as you would have liked last year. He's good, yes. But those ahead of him last year were better in the opinion of a number of people. Who cares. It was last year. He was a first-team AA pre-season selection this year... apparently that doesn't matter to you. You come from a very jaded and blinded point of view which is perfectly fine... the difference is those who vote on All-Region and All-American... don't. There are probably between 6500-7000 players in Division III and you are squabbling over the fact he was selected, but not high enough, as one of the best 25 - the top 0.35-0.38% - in the country. Unreal.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on November 30, 2016, 01:26:53 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 30, 2016, 11:37:00 AM
A little late, here is my Top 25 ballot for Week 1 (along with my pre-season ballot in there) along with my thoughts. Remember, I am sharing this because people find it interesting and you get my insight... but I am ONE voter....

Love it and REALLY appreciate that you're willing to publicize and give rationale to your votes. Even when I may disagree, I respect the votes a lot more knowing the rationale I disagree with rather than just a number.

On just this ballot, I agree with your numbers and find it surprising that 19 voters have Amherst #1. Not that they aren't deserving, but I would certainly think Babson, Tufts and Marietta would deserve a more equal number of #1 votes. However, differentiating between #1 and #4 at this point in the season is a pretty pointless exercise.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 30, 2016, 02:18:46 PM

Thank you HOPEful... I do appreciate your thoughts. I certainly do NOT expect everyone or even a majority of people to agree with me. However, I do think it makes for an interesting conversation. I also learn a lot from this. People chime in with their thoughts that sometimes I don't agree with at all and others help me make a more informed decision next time. Heck, I have coaches always contacting me behind the scenes to share their thoughts especially on teams that are their's! I think that just makes for a more informed fan-base.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 30, 2016, 02:59:04 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 30, 2016, 11:37:00 AM
A little late, here is my Top 25 ballot for Week 1 (along with my pre-season ballot in there) along with my thoughts. Remember, I am sharing this because people find it interesting and you get my insight...

I love the Top 25 Ballot blog... Just a few thoughts...

You knew if I responded that I was going to say this: I cannot believe you left out Washington University. In my mind, this will prove to be a Week 1 whiff before January begins...

I said this before, but I am still surprised that the pre-season poll had Emory way in and Rochester out. The Yellowjackets were more balanced last season with Jared Seltzer, but I still think this guard-heavy squad is a post season team.

Emory has had a few seasons of retooling with a player going from First or Second team-level to arguably UAA Player of the Year-level every season in Will Trawick, Alex Foster and Jake Davis. I watched parts of two games and they did not look like a Top 25 team, but I still have them as my No. 3 team in the UAA. Time will tell if Emory or Chicago are Top 25 teams, but I am not counting the Eagles out just yet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 30, 2016, 03:11:32 PM

Quote from: WUH on November 30, 2016, 02:59:04 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 30, 2016, 11:37:00 AM
A little late, here is my Top 25 ballot for Week 1 (along with my pre-season ballot in there) along with my thoughts. Remember, I am sharing this because people find it interesting and you get my insight...

I love the Top 25 Ballot blog... Just a few thoughts...

You knew if I responded that I was going to say this: I cannot believe you left out Washington University. In my mind, this will prove to be a Week 1 whiff before January begins...

I said this before, but I am still surprised that the pre-season poll had Emory way in and Rochester out. The Yellowjackets were more balanced last season with Jared Seltzer, but I still think this guard-heavy squad is a post season team.

Emory has had a few seasons of retooling with a player going from First or Second team-level to arguably UAA Player of the Year-level every season in Will Trawick, Alex Foster and Jake Davis. I watched parts of two games and they did not look like a Top 25 team, but I still have them as my No. 3 team in the UAA. Time will tell if Emory or Chicago are Top 25 teams, but I am not counting the Eagles out just yet.

I debated long and hard about Wash U. I would have mentioned that, but when I used to mention other teams I was considering it only opened up the door to so many others who felt they were getting slighted even more because not only did I not vote for their team, I didn't mention them as one I was watching either (even if I couldn't mention them all). So, I stopped doing that - less work, too.

After seeing what Wash U had last year and not being impressed (by their standards) and not being blown away with what they had coming back... I didn't go with them in the preseason. I know they are off to a good start, but not ever undefeated team has made my ballot. I am waiting to see what the next week brings to be sure before I get more serious with them.

As for Rochester, you will notice I did include them in my Top 25 in the preseason. I thought about putting them higher, but resigned to putting them 25th at the end.

As for Emory, I thought they had better tools back and with the schedule looking the way it did, I expected them to be undefeated by now... I am a little surprised they are not.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 30, 2016, 03:30:37 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 30, 2016, 03:11:32 PM
As for Rochester, you will notice I did include them in my Top 25 in the preseason. I thought about putting them higher, but resigned to putting them 25th at the end.

I was not surprised to see that you had them in the preseason poll.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 30, 2016, 03:11:32 PM
As for Emory, I thought they had better tools back and with the schedule looking the way it did, I expected them to be undefeated by now... I am a little surprised they are not.

Very true...and I definitely understand why you are leaving off the teams that you considered but did not ultimately include.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 30, 2016, 04:33:01 PM

Quote from: WUH on November 30, 2016, 02:59:04 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 30, 2016, 11:37:00 AM
A little late, here is my Top 25 ballot for Week 1 (along with my pre-season ballot in there) along with my thoughts. Remember, I am sharing this because people find it interesting and you get my insight...

I love the Top 25 Ballot blog... Just a few thoughts...

You knew if I responded that I was going to say this: I cannot believe you left out Washington University. In my mind, this will prove to be a Week 1 whiff before January begins...

I said this before, but I am still surprised that the pre-season poll had Emory way in and Rochester out. The Yellowjackets were more balanced last season with Jared Seltzer, but I still think this guard-heavy squad is a post season team.

Emory has had a few seasons of retooling with a player going from First or Second team-level to arguably UAA Player of the Year-level every season in Will Trawick, Alex Foster and Jake Davis. I watched parts of two games and they did not look like a Top 25 team, but I still have them as my No. 3 team in the UAA. Time will tell if Emory or Chicago are Top 25 teams, but I am not counting the Eagles out just yet.

If it helps, I haven't voted for Emory yet, just added Rochester in week 1, and named WashU in both polls so far.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 30, 2016, 07:17:06 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 30, 2016, 11:42:36 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 30, 2016, 11:28:51 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 30, 2016, 08:22:37 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 29, 2016, 01:23:42 PM
Quote from: HOPEful on November 29, 2016, 01:08:27 PM
Quote from: whyDiii on November 29, 2016, 10:17:08 AM
There is no avoiding the controversy this early as most people have seen less than half of the top 25 teams(my guess). Definitely a lot of bickering for the second poll of 2016...

Just don't say Edwards isn't as good as McCarthy, Palleschi, and Flannery. Don't even imply it!! :)

I wouldn't even say that. But I definitely don't think there were 20 players better than him last year in D3, but my point was more that he was returning from a team that was clearly good besides him. But whatever. If they can make it through the next few weeks in good shape it's all downhill from there.

Of course, he's not competing against all 20 above him, just the 8-10 post players. If you look at those names, it's tough to move him up - based on last year's results, playing alongside Grennert. I imagine we'll get to see everything he's capable of this year.

That shouldn't matter. People don't have a problem with putting 4 guards on there.

But I still don't buy this.

Bottom line is if you normalize Edwards to 35 mpg, we're not having this conversation because he would have been a first team A-A. He got penalized for Vander Wal's sub patterns (which isn't to say his sub patterns were wrong).

If we normalize Edwards to 35 mpg... because everyone should just change the math to make your argument work. SMH

Just to make my argument work, eh? Karl-Anthony Towns was a 2nd team AA by AP and NABC with 10 pts and 6.7 rebs a game, as a freshman no less (obviously). Why? Because the people picking the teams were savvy enough to see that he only played 21 mpg on a balanced team and looked at the impact he had and how good he was. SMH. Edwards was 18-8 in D3 on not many more mpg in a similarly powerful conference.

Move on... you have an axe to grind and it has gotten old. No one has knocked Edwards, but you won't except it. Sure, some have put four guards on a lineup, but we try not to. We have also put three forwards on a team in the past. Happens a lot. NABC puts EIGHT players on a team. Can you put eight players on a court to play a game?

Can you imagine playing a game without substituting?

Even adding three forwards to a team wouldn't have moved Edwards up as far as you would have liked last year. He's good, yes. But those ahead of him last year were better in the opinion of a number of people. Who cares. It was last year. He was a first-team AA pre-season selection this year... apparently that doesn't matter to you. You come from a very jaded and blinded point of view which is perfectly fine... the difference is those who vote on All-Region and All-American... don't. There are probably between 6500-7000 players in Division III and you are squabbling over the fact he was selected, but not high enough, as one of the best 25 - the top 0.35-0.38% - in the country. Unreal.

You assume I'm just some biased dumb guy that supports a team. That's where you fail. I've been in these discussion and made all-American votes, and done a whole lot of other statistical analysis.

I care because IMO it impacted where people voted Marietta in the preseason poll, and because it was just a crazy oversight. Not for the first time where Marietta is concerned, it might be said. Not even the most ridiculous one. I remember when DeSalvo wasn't the pitcher of the year in I guess it was 2000. That was ridiculous and obviously we know that now, but it really should have been known then. Jesse Duperow's senior year being overlooked was just nuts. I could go on Fortunately MC had the schedule to right that wrong quickly, but it didn't have to be that way. My theory is it's because Marietta is off the beaten path from just about anywhere to anywhere, even in its own region. You don't see MC home games by just happening to have some free time and deciding to catch a game, unless you live in Marietta. It's different now with online video, or I would have thought.

At any rate, I can't get the NCAA's historical stats to come up so I can't actually test out what you're saying about there just being no room at the inn (I suspect he was shuffled down the list because the others are seniors).

The fact that there are a lot of D3 players does not in itself invaldate my point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 30, 2016, 07:28:57 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 30, 2016, 11:37:00 AM
A little late, here is my Top 25 ballot for Week 1 (along with my pre-season ballot in there) along with my thoughts. Remember, I am sharing this because people find it interesting and you get my insight... but I am ONE voter. I don't have any more points or weight than anyone else even if my designation has changed (I used to be one of the three Mid-Atlantic voters, I have now taken over Pat's former role as the 25th voter - the national slot): http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/11/30/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-1/

Per the comment about why Marietta was scheduled against Albright - I would love to see you try and put an eight-team classic together.

First off, we wanted to avoid any team playing two teams from the same conference. This year we were challenged with two teams from the MAC Commonwealth and two from the ODAC - it happened and nothing we could do about it.

Secondly, there are a ton of timing issues to work through. You don't want teams to have too tough a turn around, you don't want to give teams a much longer break than their opponent on the second day. There are games you want to feature in a more prime slot while also giving the host school (Stevenson) the timing they want to play since they want to shine for their own fans. You have to consider what travel plans may be before and after the event and you have to consider other details that can throw wrenches in the scheduling. For example, some schools have request not to play teams (while everyone has requests to play teams; the year we had Middlebury, FIVE teams wanted to play the Panthers).

There is plenty more I can go into and explain why there were five or six versions of the schedule along with countless hours twisting things around. It came down to this: Albright was going to face UWSP, Marietta, CNU, or Lynchburg - plain and simple. When we worked through all the schedules, Marietta was the only one we could slot in against Albright. Marietta was also the only team who got a nice benefit of a few extra hours turnaround to the next day, but since CNU wasn't playing less than 24 hours earlier, we stuck with this. But that was a sticking point for us for a long time. We eventually had to stick with this schedule because it was the best version we could produce.

But to your point about Albright hurting Marietta's SOS... I don't think you know what you are talking about. First off, Albright is currently 2-2 and has a pretty good out-of-conference schedule that will actually help Marietta's SOS. Secondly, the MAC Commonwealth is not a bad conference and usually produced very good SOS numbers in the past ten years. Thirdly, Albright will absolutely play a factor in the Commonwealth race this season. There is nothing about that match-up that will hurt Marietta in the slightest. LaRoche and Bethany will actually hurt Marietta's SOS more than Albright's because LaRoche's (AMCC) and Bethany's (PAC) conferences are in the lower third, maybe quarter, of Division III which will pull the Pioneer's SOS down. Commonwealth is in the top half, possibly top third (can't remember where Gordon slotted them off the top of my head).

Don't worry about the game against Albright... it won't hurt Marietta a damn bit. (By the way, Albright's coach admitted his team was overwhelmed by Marietta psychologically in pre-game, but that is why teams come to the event - to improve and prepare for things out of their norm; they looked pretty darn good against RMC the next day.)

MC plays LaRoche and Bethany because they're the geographically closest non-conference D3 programs, along with St. Vincent, Waynesburg, both of whom they've also played, and W&J and maybe 1-2 others that are close enough that I am not going to bother to refer to google maps. Those are 100+ mile trips, and again, the nearest non-conference opponents. Maybe that's a reality check for you. It's not realistic to just go and play anyone anywhere and maintain academic integrity. That's why these tournaments are important for them.

I have several specific reasons for why I'm confident this game will hurt their SOS and I am not going to share them because to be honest I think MC has figured some things out that other programs haven't and so it's a competitive advantage. So I'm satisfied with letting you think it won't matter, even though I'm pretty sure I could prove that wrong.

It's obvious you vastly underestimate me, and I'm too busy to worry about trying to prove you wrong when I don't think it'll matter if I do.

Btw, pretty sure Lynchburg is closer to Stevenson than Marietta is. Totally unconvinced that they couldn't have played Albright.

Ok back to real, actual work.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 30, 2016, 10:46:46 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

~~No result yet from Nebraska Wesleyan @ Wartburg.~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	611	Amherst	4-0	def. Westfield State, 84-59; 12/03 vs. Emerson
#2	599	Babson	7-0	def. Bates, 87-53; 12/02 vs. Salem State; 12/03 vs. TBA
#3	558	Tufts	5-0	def. #23 WPI, 75-71; 12/02 at Brandeis; 12/03 vs. TBA
#4	542	Marietta	5-0	12/03 at #20 Baldwin Wallace
#5	510	Whitman	3-0	12/02 at Willamette
#6	485	North Central (Ill.)	3-1	LOST to UW-Platteville, 40-57; 12/03 vs. #16 Illinois Wesleyan
#7	447	Christopher Newport	4-1	def. Southern Virginia, 80-55; 12/03 vs. Frostburg State
#8	437	Whitworth	3-0	12/03 at Willamette
#9	380	Washington U.	4-0	12/02 vs. UC Santa Cruz; 12/03 vs. Rhodes/UW-Eau Claire
#10	378	St. Norbert	1-1	12/02 at Knox; 12/03 at Illinois College
#11	357	Wooster	3-2	LOST to Denison, 59-65; 12/03 at Wabash
#12	297	St. Thomas	4-1	def. Macalester, 72-61; 12/03 at Augsburg
#13	292	Keene State	5-0	def. Trinity (Conn.), 76-66; 12/03 at Mass-Dartmouth
#14	207	Benedictine	3-2	def. Rockford, 96-65; 12/03 at Marian
#15	201	Hope	4-1	won at T#41 John Carroll, 85-72; 12/03 vs. #32 UW-La Crosse
#16	184	Illinois Wesleyan	5-0	12/03 at #6 North Central (Ill.)
#17	175	Augustana	5-1	def. #50 UW-Oshkosh, 77-64; 12/03 vs. #39 North Park
#18	168	Rochester	6-0	12/02 vs. #51 St. John Fisher; 12/03 at Nazareth
#19	162	Salisbury	5-0	def. St. Mary's (Md.), 64-59; 12/03 at Penn State-Harrisburg
#20	116	Baldwin Wallace	4-0	12/03 vs. #4 Marietta
#21	112	UW-Eau Claire	4-0	12/02 vs. Rhodes; 12/03 vs. UC-Santa Cruz or Washington Univeristy
#22	96	Mount St. Joseph	5-1	LOST at Anderson, 74-78; 12/03 vs. Rose-Hulman
#23	84	WPI	4-1	LOST at #3 Tufts, 71-75; 12/01 at Framingham State; 12/03 at Fitchburg State
#24	81	Endicott	3-1	def. Curry, 85-56; 12/03 at Eastern Nazarene
#25	70	Susquehanna	4-1	12/03 at Goucher

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
T#26	50	Ohio Wesleyan	2-3	LOST to (n) Otterbein, 66-72; 12/03 at DePauw
T#26	50	Swarthmore	4-0	12/01 at Muhlenberg; 12/03 vs. Dickinson
T#26	50	UW-Whitewater	4-0	def. Beloit, 82-70
#29	44	Scranton	5-1	LOST at Hobart, 58-70; 12/03 vs. Juniata
#30	31	Franklin and Marshall	3-1	12/01 vs. Ursinus; 12/03 at Haverford
#31	29	New Jersey City	5-1	def. William Paterson, 71-69; 12/03 vs. Rutgers-Camden
#32	28	UW-La Crosse	4-1	LOST at Luther, 58-67; 12/02 at Albion; 12/03 at #15 Hope
T#33	25	Capital	4-2	LOST to Wittenberg, 60-63; 12/03 at Ohio Northern
T#33	25	East Texas Baptist	4-0	12/01 at Hardin-Simmons; 12/03 at McMurry
T#33	25	Emory	4-2	won at Birmingham-Southern, 75-70; 12/03 at Piedmont
T#33	25	Virginia Wesleyan	4-2	won at North Carolina Wesleyan, 83-63; 12/04 at Roanoke
#37	24	Skidmore	4-1	def. TCNJ, 96-84; 12/03 vs. Houghton
#38	21	Lycoming	5-1	won at Messiah, 87-75; 12/03 vs. Hood
#39	20	North Park	4-0	def. Alma, 88-81; 12/03 at #17 Augustana
#40	19	Wartburg	6-0	def. Nebraska Wesleyan, 92-76; 12/03 at Simpson
T#41	18	John Carroll	1-3	LOST to #15 Hope, 72-85; 12/03 at Muskingum
T#41	18	Lynchburg	4-2	LOST to Shenandoah, 71-74
#43	16	UW-River Falls	4-1	def. Viterbo, 72-46; 12/02 vs. La Verne; 12/03 at Redlands
#44	14	Middlebury	5-1	def. RPI, 79-72; def. Johnson State, 99-83
T#45	10	Neumann	5-0	won at Clarks Summit, 107-67; 12/03 at Gwynedd Mercy
T#45	10	Plattsburgh State	3-1	LOST at St. Lawrence, 73-91; 12/02 at Buffalo State; 12/03 at Fredonia
#47	9	Misericordia	4-1	12/02 at Utica
#48	7	Carroll	4-1	IDLE
#49	4	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	4-0	12/02 vs. San Diego Christian
#50	3	UW-Oshkosh	2-3	LOST at #17 Augustana, 64-77; 12/03 vs. Calvin
#51	1	St. John Fisher	3-1	12/02 vs. #18 Rochester; 12/03 vs. Rochester Tech

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 01, 2016, 12:10:42 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 30, 2016, 07:17:06 PM
You assume I'm just some biased dumb guy that supports a team. That's where you fail. I've been in these discussion and made all-American votes, and done a whole lot of other statistical analysis.

I care because IMO it impacted where people voted Marietta in the preseason poll, and because it was just a crazy oversight. Not for the first time where Marietta is concerned, it might be said. Not even the most ridiculous one. I remember when DeSalvo wasn't the pitcher of the year in I guess it was 2000. That was ridiculous and obviously we know that now, but it really should have been known then. Jesse Duperow's senior year being overlooked was just nuts. I could go on Fortunately MC had the schedule to right that wrong quickly, but it didn't have to be that way. My theory is it's because Marietta is off the beaten path from just about anywhere to anywhere, even in its own region. You don't see MC home games by just happening to have some free time and deciding to catch a game, unless you live in Marietta. It's different now with online video, or I would have thought.

At any rate, I can't get the NCAA's historical stats to come up so I can't actually test out what you're saying about there just being no room at the inn (I suspect he was shuffled down the list because the others are seniors).

The fact that there are a lot of D3 players does not in itself invaldate my point.

I assume nothing... you are making assumptions now. Where do you get off saying I fail? Again, I am not assuming anything about you except what you have proven - you are a fan of Marietta's which will automatically have you fall in the category of being a fan who sees through the color of one's team. When it comes to my alma mater, I am sure I am just as guilty as everyone else (I certainly was nearly 20 years ago when I first started posting on these boards).

As for your assertion that his placement on last year's All-America list affected people's voting is probably a little insane. First off, the voting panel of 25 has quite a few NABC coaches on it, so they are fully aware of how their panel decided All-Americans, thus they are going to remember he was a first-teamer for them. Secondly, I for one have NEVER adjusted my voting based on whether an individual was a first-teamer or an honorable mention. I will note they were an All-American and I would know that considering I am on the panel that makes those decisions for D3hoops.com. But that isn't going to make me move Marietta around as a result of that. I certainly didn't look at Marietta and say, "hmm, Edwards is back, he's only an honorable mention, that doesn't mean much, 16 looks good," versus, "hmm, Edwards is back, we had him second team, that makes the team a stud, I'll put the Pioneers fifth." There are so many other factors involved that to think that made Marietta so low ranked is ridiculous. Your fellow fan pretty much summed up what I think a lot of the voters were thinking when it came to the Pioneers. And again, it was a pre-season poll. In the long run it affects nothing. The NCAA certainly doesn't use it for selections and it isn't going to affect any of the players' resume when it comes to them getting jobs after college.

"Fortunately MC had the schedule to right that wrong quickly, but it didn't have to be that way." Seriously? Take a chill pill, dude! You are way too wrapped up in this. I promise you, the coaching staff and players didn't care a smidgen as much as you are making this out to be.

And Marietta is not off the beaten path not with video streaming available almost everywhere now. Sure, we can't get to games as voters all over the country, but they can't do it in Division I, either. You also probably just ignored last year altogether when Marietta got as high as fourth in the Top 25 in the final weeks of the season and was sixth heading into the tournament... if your theory that no one is able to see them in their own gym were true, then explain their ranking (that's rhetorical). By your theory, Whitman and Whitworth wouldn't even be in the Top 10 or even the Top 25 at all, no one would consider voting for East Texas Baptist, and who would want to vote for Wartburg since it isn't exactly close to anything in Iowa.

Marietta is 5 1/2 hours from my house. I've made the trip. I don't mind trips like that. I regret not making it for the John Carroll game last year (something I posted about on the board and talked about on the show). But if I am willing to drive 5 1/2 hours to see them at their place others are as well. Furthermore, those who vote on our panel have seen them in person because there are coaches in and around their region, SIDs who see them, and other media members who see them in person as well. The only teams in Division III that can seriously make a claim that maybe they aren't appreciated because people can't see them are Colorado College, Nebraska Wesleyan, teams in the NWC and SCIAC, Finlandia, and a handful of others in extreme locations like northern New York, Maine, etc.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 30, 2016, 07:28:57 PM

MC plays LaRoche and Bethany because they're the geographically closest non-conference D3 programs, along with St. Vincent, Waynesburg, both of whom they've also played, and W&J and maybe 1-2 others that are close enough that I am not going to bother to refer to google maps. Those are 100+ mile trips, and again, the nearest non-conference opponents. Maybe that's a reality check for you. It's not realistic to just go and play anyone anywhere and maintain academic integrity. That's why these tournaments are important for them.

Maybe you are the one starting to make assumptions on who people are here. I know full well where Marietta is located, what teams are around them, and what they can or cannot do in terms of travel. Just to make sure you know exactly how it worked: I was the one who invited them to the Hoopsville Classic after all. So don't try and insult me by saying "maybe that's a reality check for you." I would be happy to give you my Division III basketball resume if you are not aware of it - or others can. I know exactly how things are situated not only for Marietta, but around the country.

My point about LaRoche and Bethany as opponents had nothing to do with criticizing their schedule - they have a very good schedule. It was to point out that there are two teams in LaRoche and Bethany who actually are not as good as Albright in terms of SOS - those two conferences are SOS killers; Albright's is not. I wasn't saying they shouldn't play LaRoche or Bethany - I made no such comment. I am comparing opponents and your disinterest in Albright when that isn't a problem in reality.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 30, 2016, 07:28:57 PM

I have several specific reasons for why I'm confident this game will hurt their SOS and I am not going to share them because to be honest I think MC has figured some things out that other programs haven't and so it's a competitive advantage. So I'm satisfied with letting you think it won't matter, even though I'm pretty sure I could prove that wrong.

This may go down as one of the most ridiculous statements I have read in a long time - well, outside of the one we deleted in the NEWMAC today because it attacked a coach with no facts to back it up (though, we had the facts). You aren't going to share "several specific reasons?" Seriously? Then why say anything at all? Why make a point of trying to seem like you have all the answers, but the rest of us are not good enough to be privy to them? If you are going to make a claim like that, back it up. Otherwise, don't bother.

I know how the SOS system works, how regional rankings are conducted, and how national selections are orchestrated... I know it pretty well. You are alluding to the fact that Marietta has found some competitive advantage presumably on the basketball floor... not sure how that affects other team's schedules or their conferences (especially the AMCC or the PAC). Sounds more like smoke and mirrors and double-talk. Though, I will be sure to ask Coach VanderWal the next time I chat with him which should be sometime in the next week - maybe I will even ask him on air. It might be a nice change of pace for the show.

Unless Albright losses the rest of it's games, I am confident that they won't hurt Marietta's SOS.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 30, 2016, 07:28:57 PM
It's obvious you vastly underestimate me, and I'm too busy to worry about trying to prove you wrong when I don't think it'll matter if I do.

Not sure how to respond to this. Underestimate you? Are you a ninja that has attained the highest black belt level possible? I don't over, under, or estimate people, period. I respond to what I see written or spoken towards me. Though, "I'm too busy to worry about trying to prove you wrong" cracks me up. Not sure why you are concerned about proving anyone wrong. This is a discussion board not a fight club. We discuss things on these boards. Sometimes people are wrong and right, but usually people are just sharing information and opinions. I have shared some things that are not opinions, but those are clearly just facts to clarify the situation. I am certainly not trying to prove you wrong in any my statements. I am simply telling you my thought process and why I think A or B about a situation. But if you are too busy, I will make sure to have appreciated your time. We will miss you from the boards, I guess.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on November 30, 2016, 07:28:57 PM
Btw, pretty sure Lynchburg is closer to Stevenson than Marietta is. Totally unconvinced that they couldn't have played Albright.

Nothing you wrote here has anything to do with how we schedule at the Hoopsville Classic. Distance as nothing to do with it. Never has. Never will. The only thing distance affects is when teams may be arriving for the event, how many nights they may have to spend, and sometimes how many we try and invite from "near by" as to try and keep costs down.

Lynchburg was actually the last team into the tournament to replace another team that didn't work out at the last minute (by our standards - it was May) - Lynchburg happen to be two hours closer than the other team. However, I had invited teams as far away as the Iowa/Illinois border in an effort to fill the hole. Lynchburg happened to work out.

Oh by the way, Lynchburg is a four hour drive from their campus to Stevenson. Marietta is slightly more than five hours to Stevenson. Not sure that is relevant. That is basically irrelevant in my mind when it comes to distance in Division III.

We actually had Lynchburg-Marietta lined up as a possible game, but other factors that either that caused or elsewhere in the match-ups or timing didn't allow it to happen. I had Marietta lined up against all seven of the other programs at some point during the scheduling discussions. There wasn't an option not included when it came to Marietta. The only limitations we had where not to have teams play two opponents from the same conference, not to have conference opponents face each other at all, and CNU/RMC couldn't play each other since they were facing each other just days prior to the tournament. I wanted to make sure CNU and Marietta stayed on the schedule, but one of the versions we nearly went with actually didn't allow that to happen.

One of the other things we try and do is put match-ups together that we don't normally get to see even in the NCAA tournament. We don't have to worry about the 500 mile rule after all. That may not have affected Marietta, necessarily, but it affected other match-ups in the tournament.

But you think you could put Lynchburg v. Albright. Well, now we have to change Albright's other opponent in RMC because they are in the same conference as Lynchburg. And now I have to look for another opponent for Albright. But not just Albright, I have to look for another opponent for RMC as well. And to make it more challenging, I can't forget Stevenson who is in Albright's conference because anything I change with Albright will also affect Stevenson. And there is one other note: Stevenson hosts this event - they have the right to pick who they want to play and when they want to play those games. Absolutely nothing wrong with that but that also affects what we can do.

But if you are so convinced Lynchburg-Albright could have happened instead of Marietta-Albright, feel free to let me know how the entire tournament would have been scheduled. Remember also, you have to figure out the game times for teams (2, 4, 6, 8 is the schedule - you can't change it) without having a team have too brutal a turn-around from their first game or be unfair to the second opponent because you gave too much of a break to someone (i.e. Marietta playing four-hours later on Saturday, which is unusual for how we run the tournament, was on the limits of okay with us because CNU was playing exactly 24 hours later; had CNU been playing two hours earlier, we would have looked to fix the schedule in a different way).

We don't throw darts and come up with a schedule. I would suggest not assuming you know anything about how this is actually done.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 05:16:25 AM

**** it. you're the god of d3 basketball. I don't give a **** anymore.

I'm about to throw my computer out into the rain and just not give a **** about anything anymore.

Anyone up for biking from Barrow to the Tierra del Fuego? I'm pretty much done with the world.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on December 01, 2016, 07:58:41 AM

Yikes Spencer, seems a little extreme man... Marietta is still 5-0... seems like that's something to care about.

And I don't know why I feel compelled touch on the subject, but, it's my understanding that there is a 54 mile stretch between Panama and Columbia where roads cease to exist (rainforest)... do you plan on just taking a boat from Panama to Columbia?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on December 01, 2016, 10:20:01 AM

TGHIJGSTO ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on December 01, 2016, 10:48:50 AM

I'm not sure the best place to post this, but I've made a (strong, I think) attempt at re-creating the Ken Pomeroy ratings for D3 MBB.

http://detroitjockcity.com/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency-ratings/

Data set includes D3 vs. D3 only. Numbers will be a bit wonky here in the early going. Hopefully they'll stabilize nicely as we go.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on December 01, 2016, 11:00:45 AM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 01, 2016, 10:48:50 AM
http://detroitjockcity.com/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency-ratings/
Data set includes D3 vs. D3 only. Numbers will be a bit wonky here in the early going. Hopefully they'll stabilize nicely as we go.

I like many aspects of this, including and not limited to the fact that it's d3 v. d3 only. As Dave pointed out recently on another board, Massey doesn't/can't seem to ever get that right... However, I'm convinced that the human polls are guilty of the same thing. It seems the d3 community discredits any win over NAIA/non-d3 but continues to, at least on some level, hold those loses against teams. But I've beaten that horse too many times...

And seeing has it has Hope #2, clearly it has to be accurate :)

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 22, 2016, 01:07:37 PM
I'm convinced Massey can't actually figure out how to handle the quirks of NCAA basketball in terms of games that do or don't count and other facets...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie77 on December 01, 2016, 11:15:03 AM

North Central is not in the top 100?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on December 01, 2016, 11:36:11 AM

Quote from: augie77 on December 01, 2016, 11:15:03 AM
North Central is not in the top 100?

Not yet. The system perhaps favors teams with blowout wins in these early days before the data stabilizes. Their biggest (point margin) win has come against Alma which the computer does not love at the moment. Their ranking will likely rise as things go.

I'm hoping to build in a historical bias (like the Top 25 voters, Massey, and KenPom do) in future versions to help stabilize our early-season numbers.

Right now NCC is getting credit, (per 100 possessions) relative to an average team, for

Benedictine: +19 points
Alma: +11 points
Aurora: +10 points
UW-Platteville: -1 pts

That equals out to about +10 pts (per 100 possessions) per game. Good but yet unexceptional.

Compare that to the similarly-rated Calvin who's currently getting credit for:

Finlandia: +21 pts
Augustana: -5 pts
Carthage: +16 pts

That comes out to about +10 per game as well. They're really benefiting from their 41-pt win over Finlandia because there are fewer games to average across.

Calvin is NOT actually better (or really close) to North Central. Consistent play will even these things out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: monsoon on December 01, 2016, 12:59:26 PM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on December 01, 2016, 10:20:01 AM
TGHIJGSTO ;D

Indeed! +K

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 01, 2016, 01:06:13 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 05:16:25 AM
**** it. you're the god of d3 basketball. I don't give a **** anymore.

I'm about to throw my computer out into the rain and just not give a **** about anything anymore.

Anyone up for biking from Barrow to the Tierra del Fuego? I'm pretty much done with the world.

Spence, seriously, why do you keep coming around here if you can't handle conversation and non-Marietta-favorable opinions? Maybe this isn't the place for you.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 01, 2016, 01:22:11 PM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on December 01, 2016, 10:20:01 AM
TGHIJGSTO ;D

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lovethispic.com%2Fuploaded_images%2F17967-Audience-Clapping-Gif.gif%3F1&hash=c97dc7c35a1517ec6f2fb063b4ca6219b6934ab5)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 01:34:40 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on December 01, 2016, 07:58:41 AM
Yikes Spencer, seems a little extreme man... Marietta is still 5-0... seems like that's something to care about.

And I don't know why I feel compelled touch on the subject, but, it's my understanding that there is a 54 mile stretch between Panama and Columbia where roads cease to exist (rainforest)... do you plan on just taking a boat from Panama to Columbia?

I dunno. Other people have done it so I figure there's some way. I started out thinking about going from northernmost point to southernmost, but that is very not possible lol.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 01:40:24 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 01, 2016, 10:48:50 AM
I'm not sure the best place to post this, but I've made a (strong, I think) attempt at re-creating the Ken Pomeroy ratings for D3 MBB.

http://detroitjockcity.com/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency-ratings/

Data set includes D3 vs. D3 only. Numbers will be a bit wonky here in the early going. Hopefully they'll stabilize nicely as we go.

Yeah there are a few that don't really seem to make sense (like CMS, which on the numbers I can't figure out how they're #1; a few points of adjusted D doesn't seem like it should counterweight those schedule numbers), but on balance this looks pretty solid, actually.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 01:55:23 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 01, 2016, 01:06:13 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 05:16:25 AM
**** it. you're the god of d3 basketball. I don't give a **** anymore.

I'm about to throw my computer out into the rain and just not give a **** about anything anymore.

Anyone up for biking from Barrow to the Tierra del Fuego? I'm pretty much done with the world.

Spence, seriously, why do you keep coming around here if you can't handle conversation and non-Marietta-favorable opinions? Maybe this isn't the place for you.

Would you rather I have gone blow by blow through another post that I thought was so full of holes it could have been Suicide Squad? What would have been gained from that? This was at least a discussion related to the topic of the board. You now have made it a personal one, even though I'm sure I will blamed for that when this reply is posted. **** it. I don't care.

It's not about non-Marietta-favorable anything. You sound like Jim Dixon after I tell him he's full of it for saying that the 06 title was a fluke. It's about being right vs. being wrong. But that doesn't matter here if you're of a certain rank or stature, and I recognized that and disengaged, only for you to bring it back up. **** that, I stopped giving a **** about rank about 3 years before I left the military.

Seems to me the only ones that get prickly about assessments and analyses that are critical of people on the approved list from people that aren't ... well that was a labored sentence but it's the era of Trump, sentences don't even have to end anymore. Believe me.

Just remember, you all are the ones that came to me asking for content and I told you I couldn't do it because of the lack of respect YOU gave me in situations just like this, and then people threw their respective hissy fits about it and now I'm a huge villain. Which is whatever. I don't care. I don't care about much anymore. Trump is president and I'm in a program possessed by the devil and winter is coming and I've decided not to care abotu any of it. And so I really don't care about what someone on the internet thinks of me.

So I hope it made you feel good to pile on after the whistle and jack the thread entirely. Because **** it, at this point I just want to watch the world burn.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 01, 2016, 02:18:47 PM

Bump

Quote from: Darryl Nester on November 30, 2016, 10:46:46 PM
How They Fared (So Far)

~~No result yet from Nebraska Wesleyan @ Wartburg.~~

Top 25

Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#1 611 Amherst 4-0 def. Westfield State, 84-59; 12/03 vs. Emerson
#2 599 Babson 7-0 def. Bates, 87-53; 12/02 vs. Salem State; 12/03 vs. TBA
#3 558 Tufts 5-0 def. #23 WPI, 75-71; 12/02 at Brandeis; 12/03 vs. TBA
#4 542 Marietta 5-0 12/03 at #20 Baldwin Wallace
#5 510 Whitman 3-0 12/02 at Willamette
#6 485 North Central (Ill.) 3-1 LOST to UW-Platteville, 40-57; 12/03 vs. #16 Illinois Wesleyan
#7 447 Christopher Newport 4-1 def. Southern Virginia, 80-55; 12/03 vs. Frostburg State
#8 437 Whitworth 3-0 12/03 at Willamette
#9 380 Washington U. 4-0 12/02 vs. UC Santa Cruz; 12/03 vs. Rhodes/UW-Eau Claire
#10 378 St. Norbert 1-1 12/02 at Knox; 12/03 at Illinois College
#11 357 Wooster 3-2 LOST to Denison, 59-65; 12/03 at Wabash
#12 297 St. Thomas 4-1 def. Macalester, 72-61; 12/03 at Augsburg
#13 292 Keene State 5-0 def. Trinity (Conn.), 76-66; 12/03 at Mass-Dartmouth
#14 207 Benedictine 3-2 def. Rockford, 96-65; 12/03 at Marian
#15 201 Hope 4-1 won at T#41 John Carroll, 85-72; 12/03 vs. #32 UW-La Crosse
#16 184 Illinois Wesleyan 5-0 12/03 at #6 North Central (Ill.)
#17 175 Augustana 5-1 def. #50 UW-Oshkosh, 77-64; 12/03 vs. #39 North Park
#18 168 Rochester 6-0 12/02 vs. #51 St. John Fisher; 12/03 at Nazareth
#19 162 Salisbury 5-0 def. St. Mary's (Md.), 64-59; 12/03 at Penn State-Harrisburg
#20 116 Baldwin Wallace 4-0 12/03 vs. #4 Marietta
#21 112 UW-Eau Claire 4-0 12/02 vs. Rhodes; 12/03 vs. UC-Santa Cruz or Washington Univeristy
#22 96 Mount St. Joseph 5-1 LOST at Anderson, 74-78; 12/03 vs. Rose-Hulman
#23 84 WPI 4-1 LOST at #3 Tufts, 71-75; 12/01 at Framingham State; 12/03 at Fitchburg State
#24 81 Endicott 3-1 def. Curry, 85-56; 12/03 at Eastern Nazarene
#25 70 Susquehanna 4-1 12/03 at Goucher

Others receiving votes
Rank Pts Team W-L Results
T#26 50 Ohio Wesleyan 2-3 LOST to (n) Otterbein, 66-72; 12/03 at DePauw
T#26 50 Swarthmore 4-0 12/01 at Muhlenberg; 12/03 vs. Dickinson
T#26 50 UW-Whitewater 4-0 def. Beloit, 82-70
#29 44 Scranton 5-1 LOST at Hobart, 58-70; 12/03 vs. Juniata
#30 31 Franklin and Marshall 3-1 12/01 vs. Ursinus; 12/03 at Haverford
#31 29 New Jersey City 5-1 def. William Paterson, 71-69; 12/03 vs. Rutgers-Camden
#32 28 UW-La Crosse 4-1 LOST at Luther, 58-67; 12/02 at Albion; 12/03 at #15 Hope
T#33 25 Capital 4-2 LOST to Wittenberg, 60-63; 12/03 at Ohio Northern
T#33 25 East Texas Baptist 4-0 12/01 at Hardin-Simmons; 12/03 at McMurry
T#33 25 Emory 4-2 won at Birmingham-Southern, 75-70; 12/03 at Piedmont
T#33 25 Virginia Wesleyan 4-2 won at North Carolina Wesleyan, 83-63; 12/04 at Roanoke
#37 24 Skidmore 4-1 def. TCNJ, 96-84; 12/03 vs. Houghton
#38 21 Lycoming 5-1 won at Messiah, 87-75; 12/03 vs. Hood
#39 20 North Park 4-0 def. Alma, 88-81; 12/03 at #17 Augustana
#40 19 Wartburg 6-0 def. Nebraska Wesleyan, 92-76; 12/03 at Simpson
T#41 18 John Carroll 1-3 LOST to #15 Hope, 72-85; 12/03 at Muskingum
T#41 18 Lynchburg 4-2 LOST to Shenandoah, 71-74
#43 16 UW-River Falls 4-1 def. Viterbo, 72-46; 12/02 vs. La Verne; 12/03 at Redlands
#44 14 Middlebury 5-1 def. RPI, 79-72; def. Johnson State, 99-83
T#45 10 Neumann 5-0 won at Clarks Summit, 107-67; 12/03 at Gwynedd Mercy
T#45 10 Plattsburgh State 3-1 LOST at St. Lawrence, 73-91; 12/02 at Buffalo State; 12/03 at Fredonia
#47 9 Misericordia 4-1 12/02 at Utica
#48 7 Carroll 4-1 IDLE
#49 4 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps 4-0 12/02 vs. San Diego Christian
#50 3 UW-Oshkosh 2-3 LOST at #17 Augustana, 64-77; 12/03 vs. Calvin
#51 1 St. John Fisher 3-1 12/02 vs. #18 Rochester; 12/03 vs. Rochester Tech

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on December 01, 2016, 02:38:53 PM

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Freplycandy.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2FAmused-Bill-Hader-Eating-Popcorn.jpg&hash=96f6a7c526f94958c9746ce7db734ce65b6eee77) (https://fabiusmaximus.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/20130928-world-burn.jpg)

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 01:55:23 PM
So I hope it made you feel good to pile on after the whistle and jack the thread entirely. Because **** it, at this point I just want to watch the world burn.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 02:46:03 PM

Looks right. US up in flames. Yep. Just put a little Satan in Minneapolis running a prediction algorithm.

Quote from: HOPEful on December 01, 2016, 02:38:53 PM
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Freplycandy.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2FAmused-Bill-Hader-Eating-Popcorn.jpg&hash=96f6a7c526f94958c9746ce7db734ce65b6eee77) (https://fabiusmaximus.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/20130928-world-burn.jpg)
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 01:55:23 PM
So I hope it made you feel good to pile on after the whistle and jack the thread entirely. Because **** it, at this point I just want to watch the world burn.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on December 01, 2016, 02:54:24 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 01:55:23 PM
It's about being right vs. being wrong.

Last time I checked, both the top 25 poll and the all American awards were the OPINIONs of voters - just because they don't share your opinion or mine does not make it right or wrong. Come to think of it, these board are all about sharing opinions.

Anyway enjoy your bike ride...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 01, 2016, 02:59:49 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 01:55:23 PM
Just remember, you all are the ones that came to me asking for content and I told you I couldn't do it because of the lack of respect YOU gave me in situations just like this, and then people threw their respective hissy fits about it and now I'm a huge villain. Which is whatever. I don't care. I don't care about much anymore. Trump is president and I'm in a program possessed by the devil and winter is coming and I've decided not to care abotu any of it. And so I really don't care about what someone on the internet thinks of me.

So I hope it made you feel good to pile on after the whistle and jack the thread entirely. Because **** it, at this point I just want to watch the world burn.

I mean, really, you get the respect you earn. (And I didn't come to you for content.)

I made one post, you made however-many, and I'm the one jacking the thread. Got it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on December 01, 2016, 03:06:23 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 01, 2016, 02:59:49 PM

So I hope it made you feel good to pile on after the whistle and jack the thread entirely...

You can jack the thread, but I can Jack Sparrow the thread!

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs2.quickmeme.com%2Fimg%2F90%2F9013727c15a253ccec3be8f2b63d06dde53a6bf7518cd8905a30a42bf85a42c4.jpg&hash=5b710db6bf3811423a00fa475eef0dcf5c84cb19)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 03:08:45 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 01, 2016, 02:59:49 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 01:55:23 PM
Just remember, you all are the ones that came to me asking for content and I told you I couldn't do it because of the lack of respect YOU gave me in situations just like this, and then people threw their respective hissy fits about it and now I'm a huge villain. Which is whatever. I don't care. I don't care about much anymore. Trump is president and I'm in a program possessed by the devil and winter is coming and I've decided not to care abotu any of it. And so I really don't care about what someone on the internet thinks of me.

So I hope it made you feel good to pile on after the whistle and jack the thread entirely. Because **** it, at this point I just want to watch the world burn.

I mean, really, you get the respect you earn. (And I didn't come to you for content.)

I made one post, you made however-many, and I'm the one jacking the thread. Got it.

Jim did and he writes for your site, right? Would you like me to specify when I'm using the plural you every time? I would think the fact that someone provides free content for sometihng you generate ad revenue off of would earn a certain amount of gratitude and respect. Guess you read a different book. Whatever, don't care, no ragrets.

My posts were on the topic of the thread. Yours was to personaly call out someone and uninvite them from posting in so many words. If you can't tell the difference between those two, I don't know how to help you. At least dave couched his undercurrent of contempt with something that could actually be said to be relevant. You just come out of the locker room with your theme music blaring running with a metal folding chair over your head.

YOu do get the "most ironic signature quote" award, however.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 03:10:30 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on December 01, 2016, 03:06:23 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 01, 2016, 02:59:49 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 01:55:23 PM
So I hope it made you feel good to pile on after the whistle and jack the thread entirely...
You can jack the thread, but I can Jack Sparrow the thread!
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs2.quickmeme.com%2Fimg%2F90%2F9013727c15a253ccec3be8f2b63d06dde53a6bf7518cd8905a30a42bf85a42c4.jpg&hash=5b710db6bf3811423a00fa475eef0dcf5c84cb19)

Piracy is an interesting idea. Only problem is most pirates wound up dead after a not too long period of piracy. One exception was Benjamin Bridgeman, who did his plundering, then re-integrated into British society without them knowing who he was. Hero.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Every

Also not sure what the hell has happened to the quote attribution here.

(modified by GS for formatting)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 01, 2016, 03:20:57 PM

I get that you think you're being picked on, but if you go look back and see that I only addressed you once you started dropping asterisk-replaced words, maybe you'll see how I ended up here. Or if you don't, at least others will.

The topic of the conversation became you, at that point, and I addressed the topic. We don't have a super high bar that you have to surpass to post here, so I hope you can remain over that bar.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on December 01, 2016, 03:23:26 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 01, 2016, 03:20:57 PM
We don't have a super high bar that you have to surpass to post here...

This made me giggle ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 03:36:58 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 01, 2016, 03:20:57 PM
I get that you think you're being picked on, but if you go look back and see that I only addressed you once you started dropping asterisk-replaced words, maybe you'll see how I ended up here. Or if you don't, at least others will.

The topic of the conversation became you, at that point, and I addressed the topic. We don't have a super high bar that you have to surpass to post here, so I hope you can remain over that bar.

It became me when you made it me, and not before.

And I very much doubt you do hope what you claim to. I neither care what you hope, or whether I run afoul of a bar that is subject to movement at any time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ziggy on December 01, 2016, 03:46:12 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 03:08:45 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 01, 2016, 02:59:49 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 01:55:23 PM
Just remember, you all are the ones that came to me asking for content and I told you I couldn't do it because of the lack of respect YOU gave me in situations just like this, and then people threw their respective hissy fits about it and now I'm a huge villain. Which is whatever. I don't care. I don't care about much anymore. Trump is president and I'm in a program possessed by the devil and winter is coming and I've decided not to care abotu any of it. And so I really don't care about what someone on the internet thinks of me.

So I hope it made you feel good to pile on after the whistle and jack the thread entirely. Because **** it, at this point I just want to watch the world burn.

I mean, really, you get the respect you earn. (And I didn't come to you for content.)

I made one post, you made however-many, and I'm the one jacking the thread. Got it.

Jim did and he writes for your site, right? Would you like me to specify when I'm using the plural you every time? I would think the fact that someone provides free content for sometihng you generate ad revenue off of would earn a certain amount of gratitude and respect. Guess you read a different book. Whatever, don't care, no ragrets.

My posts were on the topic of the thread. Yours was to personaly call out someone and uninvite them from posting in so many words. If you can't tell the difference between those two, I don't know how to help you. At least dave couched his undercurrent of contempt with something that could actually be said to be relevant. You just come out of the locker room with your theme music blaring running with a metal folding chair over your head.

YOu do get the "most ironic signature quote" award, however.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FOG2hHwW.jpg&hash=2d5d1e8e754e166228f85110aca4a4333246b6c1)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 01, 2016, 04:04:02 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on December 01, 2016, 07:58:41 AM
Yikes Spencer, seems a little extreme man... Marietta is still 5-0... seems like that's something to care about.

And I don't know why I feel compelled touch on the subject, but, it's my understanding that there is a 54 mile stretch between Panama and Columbia where roads cease to exist (rainforest)... do you plan on just taking a boat from Panama to Columbia?

The forest there is so dense the last person who attempted to cross it took three month - and this was just a couple years ago, with the benefit of all-terrain vehicles. You need a ferry at some point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 04:04:16 PM

Quote from: ziggy on December 01, 2016, 03:46:12 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 03:08:45 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 01, 2016, 02:59:49 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 01:55:23 PM
Just remember, you all are the ones that came to me asking for content and I told you I couldn't do it because of the lack of respect YOU gave me in situations just like this, and then people threw their respective hissy fits about it and now I'm a huge villain. Which is whatever. I don't care. I don't care about much anymore. Trump is president and I'm in a program possessed by the devil and winter is coming and I've decided not to care abotu any of it. And so I really don't care about what someone on the internet thinks of me.

So I hope it made you feel good to pile on after the whistle and jack the thread entirely. Because **** it, at this point I just want to watch the world burn.

I mean, really, you get the respect you earn. (And I didn't come to you for content.)

I made one post, you made however-many, and I'm the one jacking the thread. Got it.

Jim did and he writes for your site, right? Would you like me to specify when I'm using the plural you every time? I would think the fact that someone provides free content for sometihng you generate ad revenue off of would earn a certain amount of gratitude and respect. Guess you read a different book. Whatever, don't care, no ragrets.

My posts were on the topic of the thread. Yours was to personaly call out someone and uninvite them from posting in so many words. If you can't tell the difference between those two, I don't know how to help you. At least dave couched his undercurrent of contempt with something that could actually be said to be relevant. You just come out of the locker room with your theme music blaring running with a metal folding chair over your head.

YOu do get the "most ironic signature quote" award, however.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FOG2hHwW.jpg&hash=2d5d1e8e754e166228f85110aca4a4333246b6c1)

Congratulations, you passed the test.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 04:05:56 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 01, 2016, 04:04:02 PM
Quote from: HOPEful on December 01, 2016, 07:58:41 AM
Yikes Spencer, seems a little extreme man... Marietta is still 5-0... seems like that's something to care about.

And I don't know why I feel compelled touch on the subject, but, it's my understanding that there is a 54 mile stretch between Panama and Columbia where roads cease to exist (rainforest)... do you plan on just taking a boat from Panama to Columbia?

The forest there is so dense the last person who attempted to cross it took three month - and this was just a couple years ago, with the benefit of all-terrain vehicles. You need a ferry at some point.

Eh, time is only time. Food and water are the only real obstacles. And animals that want my food and water, of course.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on December 01, 2016, 05:00:40 PM

Good news is that there is no internet service there - guess it's good news depending on who you are

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 01, 2016, 05:34:12 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 03:08:45 PMAt least dave couched his undercurrent of contempt with something that could actually be said to be relevant. You just come out of the locker room with your theme music blaring running with a metal folding chair over your head.

I'm suddenly rooting for Marietta to win possession of The Belt^TM. This guy's a natural for The Belt^TM's board.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fvignette4.wikia.nocookie.net%2Fprowrestling%2Fimages%2Fd%2Fdd%2FThe_Great_American_Bash_2005.5.jpg%2Frevision%2Flatest%3Fcb%3D20101212200903&hash=2bf7ed1db3ab570c33db1ed7b8a45a50761d8f9b)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 01, 2016, 05:39:23 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on December 01, 2016, 03:23:26 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 01, 2016, 03:20:57 PM
We don't have a super high bar that you have to surpass to post here...
This made me giggle ;D

TGHIJGSTO!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on December 01, 2016, 05:46:23 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 01, 2016, 05:39:23 PM
Quote from: HOPEful on December 01, 2016, 03:23:26 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 01, 2016, 03:20:57 PM
We don't have a super high bar that you have to surpass to post here...
This made me giggle ;D

TGHIJGSTO!!!

No pole vaulting here. More like limbo!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 01, 2016, 05:53:29 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 01, 2016, 05:34:12 PM
I'm suddenly rooting for Marietta to win possession of The Belt^TM. This guy's a natural for The Belt^TM's board.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fvignette4.wikia.nocookie.net%2Fprowrestling%2Fimages%2Fd%2Fdd%2FThe_Great_American_Bash_2005.5.jpg%2Frevision%2Flatest%3Fcb%3D20101212200903&hash=2bf7ed1db3ab570c33db1ed7b8a45a50761d8f9b)

LTHTTOACTS

Laughing too hard to think of anything clever to say.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 06:26:19 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 01, 2016, 05:34:12 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 03:08:45 PMAt least dave couched his undercurrent of contempt with something that could actually be said to be relevant. You just come out of the locker room with your theme music blaring running with a metal folding chair over your head.

I'm suddenly rooting for Marietta to win possession of The Belt^TM. This guy's a natural for The Belt^TM's board.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fvignette4.wikia.nocookie.net%2Fprowrestling%2Fimages%2Fd%2Fdd%2FThe_Great_American_Bash_2005.5.jpg%2Frevision%2Flatest%3Fcb%3D20101212200903&hash=2bf7ed1db3ab570c33db1ed7b8a45a50761d8f9b)

Too bad John Carroll lost.

I wonder what Pat's music would be. Probably something that he thinks sounds hard but is really banal. Like Enter Sandman or Hells Bells.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 01, 2016, 06:54:17 PM

Pat's in charge, he's stylin', and he's from Minnesota. This is his entrance theme. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZCiLAqMQZY)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 07:29:53 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 01, 2016, 06:54:17 PM
Pat's in charge, he's stylin', and he's from Minnesota. This is his entrance theme. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZCiLAqMQZY)

That might get you hyped up to buy a belt more than win one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 07:44:00 PM

The greatest theme music ever. Equally effective at inspiring the Western world to hate you without even attacking them, and spurring domestic increases in tractor production.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U06jlgpMtQs

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 01, 2016, 09:21:57 PM

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffbcmagdalena.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F08%2FReading-a-map.jpg&hash=69226914764090ec6c17d7ef3ae19ba612d17337)

Not even sure where we are anymore.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 01, 2016, 11:20:16 PM

I'm gonna lobby D-Mac to play "Jungle Love" prior to every Pat Coleman appearance on Hoopsville.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 11:51:57 PM

Oh I thought you were kidding about that. That's seriously terrible theme music.

You might want to read the lyrics.

This would be my Minneapolis-themed bumper intro.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJcCzWcgPsY

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 02, 2016, 12:01:53 AM

Quote from: sac on December 01, 2016, 09:21:57 PM
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffbcmagdalena.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F08%2FReading-a-map.jpg&hash=69226914764090ec6c17d7ef3ae19ba612d17337)

Not even sure where we are anymore.

Millennials be like "why is he reading a paper in the middle of the road? And why is he reading a paper?"

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 02, 2016, 12:32:54 AM

Quote from: HOPEful on December 01, 2016, 11:00:45 AM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 01, 2016, 10:48:50 AM
http://detroitjockcity.com/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency-ratings/
Data set includes D3 vs. D3 only. Numbers will be a bit wonky here in the early going. Hopefully they'll stabilize nicely as we go.

I like many aspects of this, including and not limited to the fact that it's d3 v. d3 only. As Dave pointed out recently on another board, Massey doesn't/can't seem to ever get that right... However, I'm convinced that the human polls are guilty of the same thing. It seems the d3 community discredits any win over NAIA/non-d3 but continues to, at least on some level, hold those loses against teams. But I've beaten that horse too many times...

And seeing has it has Hope #2, clearly it has to be accurate :)

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 22, 2016, 01:07:37 PM
I'm convinced Massey can't actually figure out how to handle the quirks of NCAA basketball in terms of games that do or don't count and other facets...

As I said before, Massey deals with the entire UNIVERSE of basketball. NCAA, NAIA, etc. The fact that games count for one entity and not for another makes it pretty difficult to isolate count / not count when you're dealing with the ENTIRE universe of hoops. Try to understand that, please, before bashing.

The issue is the split count / not count. They make analysis crazy.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 02, 2016, 12:38:01 AM

I must have missed something.

It's still early (5 games) and probably models stabilize at the end of the month.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 02, 2016, 01:16:55 AM

Quote from: smedindy on December 02, 2016, 12:32:54 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on December 01, 2016, 11:00:45 AM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 01, 2016, 10:48:50 AM
http://detroitjockcity.com/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency-ratings/
Data set includes D3 vs. D3 only. Numbers will be a bit wonky here in the early going. Hopefully they'll stabilize nicely as we go.

I like many aspects of this, including and not limited to the fact that it's d3 v. d3 only. As Dave pointed out recently on another board, Massey doesn't/can't seem to ever get that right... However, I'm convinced that the human polls are guilty of the same thing. It seems the d3 community discredits any win over NAIA/non-d3 but continues to, at least on some level, hold those loses against teams. But I've beaten that horse too many times...

And seeing has it has Hope #2, clearly it has to be accurate :)

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 22, 2016, 01:07:37 PM
I'm convinced Massey can't actually figure out how to handle the quirks of NCAA basketball in terms of games that do or don't count and other facets...

As I said before, Massey deals with the entire UNIVERSE of basketball. NCAA, NAIA, etc. The fact that games count for one entity and not for another makes it pretty difficult to isolate count / not count when you're dealing with the ENTIRE universe of hoops. Try to understand that, please, before bashing.

The issue is the split count / not count. They make analysis crazy.

Yes, and this is not a defect; it's a feature. It's unfortunate that teams in D3 don't play more non-D3 games anymore because of dumb rules that discourage it (or like in baseball have limited the total number of games such that it doesn't make sense to play non-D3 games anymore). The lack of connecting events makes comparing D3 to other divisions more difficult, but that doesn't mean it's not still worth attempting.

Where Massey really goes wrong is in the baseball rankings where because Southern and Western teams are first-order connected to D2/NAIA and other divisions are, he overrates teams from those regions to a rather ridiculous extent (like teams from the west coast that are below .500 can be top 20 sometimes). But aside from that, his rankings usually make good sense. If for some reason I was trying to establish betting lines for D3 (I'm not, that would be dumb), I would much sooner use Massey than the polls.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 02, 2016, 02:36:03 AM

Wow - had to do too much work (which I thought others had too much to do to be here as well) to check this board out today... missed some fun! Too much to go back to... but couple of thoughts:

- Pat's theme music... tempting... very, very tempting.
- Reading a newspaper in the middle of nowhere... classic.
- Sager who has now thrown the initials around several times today in reference to this board... outstanding, sir. Though, I do have to check in to see if that guy (not Sager) is getting any closer to a lawsuit.
- I have contempt for people here... that's new... never have; don't plan to... but I doubt that will be listened to. I am sure I already have too many holes in this response to warrant bothering to find out.
- References to Trump... never thought the civility of our boards would be tarnished by political speak.. but oh well.
- I am now a D3 god... about damn time. I have been working really hard to attain that level. Now, is that like Twitter and Facebook verified accounts? Do I get some special icon or emoji I can put on my account so everyone knows my status? That would be really, really helpful especially for those who assume I don't know jack... it would also look really, really cool.
- And then a baseball comment about being restricted to how many games they play... that's hysterical... completely hysterical... especially from someone who claimed that academics is such a priority as an explanation for not traveling very far and thus the reasoning for playing LaRoche and Bethany (which I once again say are fine opponents, just not conferences)... but baseball needs to play more than 40 games (the most in Division III, but only about a quarter of the division even plays 75% of that allotment, but I digress)... I should mention, baseball and softball (among others) where the imputus behind the, failed, effort to reduce schedules my 10% - and baseball could still be cut... but I really need to move on... I have to get back to my worldly affairs as god.

Oh... and I have soccer games to call tomorrow - I am up WAY too late, but I had to check out the ~~dumpster fire~~ fun. Let me say... many of you made me laugh so hard I spit up my drink. Thank you. That was truly awesome. Love when our humor gets involved.

BTW - the reference to Pomeroy... bravo.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 02, 2016, 05:02:05 AM

I thought that was the back of an old-school map.

You have no idea what you're talking about with regard to academics vs. games played in D3 baseball. None at all. Perhaps you're not aware of the rules and what they used to be and how they changed.

It wouldn't surprise me if the membership wanted to reduce games played further. D3 has always been a tyranny of the majority in that way -- there are more schools that would be fine with athletics being glorified intramurals than there are schools that have real interest in athletics as a part of their mission and the improvement of their business. But when they did that, it gave D2 and NAIA a selling point against D3s that emphasize the sport that wasn't there before. Perhaps that was the intention in the eyes of some, to level the playing field.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on December 02, 2016, 07:48:47 AM

Quote from: smedindy on December 02, 2016, 12:32:54 AM
As I said before, Massey deals with the entire UNIVERSE of basketball. NCAA, NAIA, etc. The fact that games count for one entity and not for another makes it pretty difficult to isolate count / not count when you're dealing with the ENTIRE universe of hoops. Try to understand that, please, before bashing.

The issue is the split count / not count. They make analysis crazy.

smedindy, I wasn't attempting to bash. I spend WAY too much time on Massey. My point was simply that no matter the poll or rankings system, they all have limitations and flaws. This is only a bad thing if you're trying to use one of these tools to be the end all be all rankings...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 02, 2016, 09:14:31 AM

So, what board is this? ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 02, 2016, 10:02:16 AM

Quote from: sac on December 01, 2016, 09:21:57 PM
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffbcmagdalena.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F08%2FReading-a-map.jpg&hash=69226914764090ec6c17d7ef3ae19ba612d17337)

Not even sure where we are anymore.

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 02, 2016, 09:14:31 AM
So, what board is this? ???

Quote from: Homer Simpson
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pop-cultured.net%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F04%2Fhomer-3d-300x225.jpg&hash=5b4e6248bc531ba6d8a23ddc1c41a18912768cf8)

Uh, I'm somewhere where I don't know where I am.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 02, 2016, 12:37:47 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 02, 2016, 09:14:31 AM
So, what board is this? ???

It's the Usually-React-To-Darryl's-Lists, Occasional-Dumpster-Fire board.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 02, 2016, 12:44:20 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 02, 2016, 05:02:05 AM
It wouldn't surprise me if the membership wanted to reduce games played further. D3 has always been a tyranny of the majority in that way -- there are more schools that would be fine with athletics being glorified intramurals than there are schools that have real interest in athletics as a part of their mission and the improvement of their business.

Not true at all... Most Division III schools use athletics as part of a recruitment strategy. A lot of institutions need athletics to keep the doors open.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 02, 2016, 12:48:50 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 02, 2016, 02:36:03 AM
- Pat's theme music... tempting... very, very tempting.

Pat doesn't realize this, but his absolute refusal to take the bait thus far is making this even funnier.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 02, 2016, 02:36:03 AM- Reading a newspaper in the middle of nowhere... classic.

The guy in sac's picture is actually reading a map, but the idea that it's a newspaper instead is wonderfully surreal.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 02, 2016, 02:36:03 AM- Sager who has now thrown the initials around several times today in reference to this board... outstanding, sir. Though, I do have to check in to see if that guy (not Sager) is getting any closer to a lawsuit.

I always feel as though I'm about one bad post away from a lawsuit.

(I'm curious if our Stockton friend is still ranting and raving indecipherably somewhere out there in cyberspace, though.)

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 02, 2016, 02:36:03 AM
Oh... and I have soccer games to call tomorrow

I almost have soccer season out of my system now. I haven't had the urge to call a fast-break outlet a "through pass" more than once a game over the past two weeks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 02, 2016, 01:16:00 PM

Quote from: WUH on December 02, 2016, 12:44:20 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 02, 2016, 05:02:05 AM
It wouldn't surprise me if the membership wanted to reduce games played further. D3 has always been a tyranny of the majority in that way -- there are more schools that would be fine with athletics being glorified intramurals than there are schools that have real interest in athletics as a part of their mission and the improvement of their business.

Not true at all... Most Division III schools use athletics as part of a recruitment strategy. A lot of institutions need athletics to keep the doors open.

Really? I know that many schools add or maintain football to add to male enrollment. But most every athletics department (even D1) lose money on athletics. Those that make money are who you'd expect, but even the Power conferences have money losing athletics departments.

But if sports went away, enrollment may shift from school A to school B but I don't think anyone would shut their doors.

I mentioned in a football board regarding enrollment that most people at NYU don't even know they had athletics, and someone chimed in that it was the same at Carnegie - Mellon.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 02, 2016, 01:16:39 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on December 02, 2016, 07:48:47 AM
Quote from: smedindy on December 02, 2016, 12:32:54 AM
As I said before, Massey deals with the entire UNIVERSE of basketball. NCAA, NAIA, etc. The fact that games count for one entity and not for another makes it pretty difficult to isolate count / not count when you're dealing with the ENTIRE universe of hoops. Try to understand that, please, before bashing.

The issue is the split count / not count. They make analysis crazy.

smedindy, I wasn't attempting to bash. I spend WAY too much time on Massey. My point was simply that no matter the poll or rankings system, they all have limitations and flaws. This is only a bad thing if you're trying to use one of these tools to be the end all be all rankings...

Right, I never emphasize that. I just try to make sure no one is being an irrational luddite, like a lot of baseball mediots and yakkers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 02, 2016, 01:19:31 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 02, 2016, 12:48:50 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 02, 2016, 02:36:03 AM- Sager who has now thrown the initials around several times today in reference to this board... outstanding, sir. Though, I do have to check in to see if that guy (not Sager) is getting any closer to a lawsuit.

I always feel as though I'm about one bad post away from a lawsuit.

(I'm curious if our Stockton friend is still ranting and raving indecipherably somewhere out there in cyberspace, though.)

www.creedthoughts.gov.www\creedthoughts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 02, 2016, 01:44:09 PM

Quote from: WUH on December 02, 2016, 12:44:20 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 02, 2016, 05:02:05 AM
It wouldn't surprise me if the membership wanted to reduce games played further. D3 has always been a tyranny of the majority in that way -- there are more schools that would be fine with athletics being glorified intramurals than there are schools that have real interest in athletics as a part of their mission and the improvement of their business.

Not true at all... Most Division III schools use athletics as part of a recruitment strategy. A lot of institutions need athletics to keep the doors open.

That just means they need to have a roster. Not that they actually need to attempt to be competitive.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 02, 2016, 01:45:27 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 02, 2016, 01:16:00 PM
Really? I know that many schools add or maintain football to add to male enrollment. But most every athletics department (even D1) lose money on athletics. Those that make money are who you'd expect, but even the Power conferences have money losing athletics departments.

But if sports went away, enrollment may shift from school A to school B but I don't think anyone would shut their doors.

Definitely, recruiting male students is part of a larger recruitment strategy for most institutions and the use of athletics is a big part of that strategy. Athletic departments lose money, but the overall net revenue gain for the institution is significant.

If you think about a small private college in Missouri, for example, they may have a sticker price of $25,000 with a room and board in the $10,000-15,000 range. Let's say they have 20 players on the Men's Basketball team. That is $700,000 in revenue. Even if we assume that everyone on the team is a high need student and the institution discounts the tuition heavily, take the $5,815 in Pell, $5,500 in Stafford Loans and say $1,000 in Perkins, that is $12,315 per person or $246,300 in revenue per year for 20 players. Not a lot, but that would be the absolute minimum revenue that a 20 player basketball team would generate, though I think the vast majority of Division III institutions bring in significantly more revenue per 20 player team than that.

Certainly some of those 20 players would consider the institution even if they could not play sports, but I do think a significant number of both men and women would gravitate to the larger state institutions without the option to play sports.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Drake Palmer on December 02, 2016, 01:52:50 PM

Somehow, I feel like I accidentally wandered into the old Liberty League football board circa 2008 or so. The last 4-5 pages or so has been highly entertaining reading. ;)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3T-VAi2Xqq8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3T-VAi2Xqq8)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 02, 2016, 02:16:06 PM

Quote from: WUH on December 02, 2016, 01:45:27 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 02, 2016, 01:16:00 PM
Really? I know that many schools add or maintain football to add to male enrollment. But most every athletics department (even D1) lose money on athletics. Those that make money are who you'd expect, but even the Power conferences have money losing athletics departments.

But if sports went away, enrollment may shift from school A to school B but I don't think anyone would shut their doors.

Definitely, recruiting male students is part of a larger recruitment strategy for most institutions and the use of athletics is a big part of that strategy. Athletic departments lose money, but the overall net revenue gain for the institution is significant.

If you think about a small private college in Missouri, for example, they may have a sticker price of $25,000 with a room and board in the $10,000-15,000 range. Let's say they have 20 players on the Men's Basketball team. That is $700,000 in revenue. Even if we assume that everyone on the team is a high need student and the institution discounts the tuition heavily, take the $5,815 in Pell, $5,500 in Stafford Loans and say $1,000 in Perkins, that is $12,315 per person or $246,300 in revenue per year for 20 players. Not a lot, but that would be the absolute minimum revenue that a 20 player basketball team would generate, though I think the vast majority of Division III institutions bring in significantly more revenue per 20 player team than that.

Certainly some of those 20 players would consider the institution even if they could not play sports, but I do think a significant number of both men and women would gravitate to the larger state institutions without the option to play sports.

Adrian College President Jeffrey Docking wrote a book about it http://adrian.edu/about-us/from-the-president/crisisinhighereducation/

Adrian has gone from being closer to closing its doors than people realize to having a future of some kind for the foreseeable future.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 02, 2016, 02:28:36 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 02, 2016, 01:16:00 PM
Quote from: WUH on December 02, 2016, 12:44:20 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 02, 2016, 05:02:05 AM
It wouldn't surprise me if the membership wanted to reduce games played further. D3 has always been a tyranny of the majority in that way -- there are more schools that would be fine with athletics being glorified intramurals than there are schools that have real interest in athletics as a part of their mission and the improvement of their business.

Not true at all... Most Division III schools use athletics as part of a recruitment strategy. A lot of institutions need athletics to keep the doors open.

Really? I know that many schools add or maintain football to add to male enrollment. But most every athletics department (even D1) lose money on athletics. Those that make money are who you'd expect, but even the Power conferences have money losing athletics departments.

But if sports went away, enrollment may shift from school A to school B but I don't think anyone would shut their doors.

I mentioned in a football board regarding enrollment that most people at NYU don't even know they had athletics, and someone chimed in that it was the same at Carnegie - Mellon.

No, it's right. Maybe not for NYU or Carnegie-Mellon, but IIRC more than half the students at Mount Union for example are intercollegiate athletes. I forget where I read that.

While Mount does make an effort to be competitive in most if not all sports (probably in part because of the sports culture in NE Ohio), having a team and a roster does not in any way imply an attempt to be competitive.

I know that tyranny of the majority is what drove the reduction in the effective max games in baseball. Some programs were willing to legally schedule 50+ regular season games per year, which you could do with a very small impact on class time missed, and the ones that didn't wanted to limit the ones that did. What this effectively means now is that if you schedule at the hard limit now and get a rainout, you have to scramble to replace that game, whereas if you had that happen before and you had like 55 games scheduled or something, then if you lose a game or two to weather, maybe not that big a deal.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 02, 2016, 05:40:53 PM

Quote from: Drake Palmer on December 02, 2016, 01:52:50 PM
Somehow, I feel like I accidentally wandered into the old Liberty League football board circa 2008 or so. The last 4-5 pages or so has been highly entertaining reading. ;)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3T-VAi2Xqq8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3T-VAi2Xqq8)

When I think of the Liberty League football board circa 2008, Apocalypse Now isn't the Brando movie that comes to mind. It's Last Tango In Paris.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 02, 2016, 07:05:03 PM

HAPPY BIRTHDAY, DAVE COLLINGE!!! 🎁🎂🎈

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 02, 2016, 08:57:37 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 02, 2016, 07:05:03 PM
HAPPY BIRTHDAY, DAVE COLLINGE!!! 🎁🎂🎈

Where's mine? I turned 35 yesterday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 02, 2016, 09:56:04 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 02, 2016, 08:57:37 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 02, 2016, 07:05:03 PM
HAPPY BIRTHDAY, DAVE COLLINGE!!! 🎁🎂🎈

Where's mine? I turned 35 yesterday.

You're practically a teeny-bopper. :o Much too young for us long-timers to bother with! ;D

But happy 35th anyway. (I think I have some shoes and sweatshirts older than you. :()

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on December 02, 2016, 10:15:51 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 02, 2016, 09:56:04 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 02, 2016, 08:57:37 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 02, 2016, 07:05:03 PM
HAPPY BIRTHDAY, DAVE COLLINGE!!! 🎁🎂🎈

Where's mine? I turned 35 yesterday.

You're practically a teeny-bopper. :o Much too young for us long-timers to bother with! ;D

But happy 35th anyway. (I think I have some shoes and sweatshirts older than you. :()

I know I have a Cabrini shirt that's close to that age. ;D
Happy Belated Birthday Ryan!
Happy? ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 02, 2016, 10:48:48 PM

Quote from: sac on December 02, 2016, 02:16:06 PM
Quote from: WUH on December 02, 2016, 01:45:27 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 02, 2016, 01:16:00 PM
Really? I know that many schools add or maintain football to add to male enrollment. But most every athletics department (even D1) lose money on athletics. Those that make money are who you'd expect, but even the Power conferences have money losing athletics departments.

But if sports went away, enrollment may shift from school A to school B but I don't think anyone would shut their doors.

Definitely, recruiting male students is part of a larger recruitment strategy for most institutions and the use of athletics is a big part of that strategy. Athletic departments lose money, but the overall net revenue gain for the institution is significant.

If you think about a small private college in Missouri, for example, they may have a sticker price of $25,000 with a room and board in the $10,000-15,000 range. Let's say they have 20 players on the Men's Basketball team. That is $700,000 in revenue. Even if we assume that everyone on the team is a high need student and the institution discounts the tuition heavily, take the $5,815 in Pell, $5,500 in Stafford Loans and say $1,000 in Perkins, that is $12,315 per person or $246,300 in revenue per year for 20 players. Not a lot, but that would be the absolute minimum revenue that a 20 player basketball team would generate, though I think the vast majority of Division III institutions bring in significantly more revenue per 20 player team than that.

Certainly some of those 20 players would consider the institution even if they could not play sports, but I do think a significant number of both men and women would gravitate to the larger state institutions without the option to play sports.

Adrian College President Jeffrey Docking wrote a book about it http://adrian.edu/about-us/from-the-president/crisisinhighereducation/

Adrian has gone from being closer to closing its doors than people realize to having a future of some kind for the foreseeable future.

I think students go where their academic programs match their interests,and where they can get the best deal on tuition and aid at a school that matches their interest. Adrian's strategy worked for Adrian, and having a good wellness facility is key for everyone. But other schools may have other ways to get students in the door.

What really needs to happen is these small schools promote themselves and the benefits of a liberal arts education.

For some colleges, athletics is just another activity. Many schools have music and theater programs, but a few schools recruit heavily for music and theater and make it a priority, and others just have it as a student activity. Coaches sometimes don't have the ability to recruit much because of budgetary constraints.

Also, there needs to be a case made to fund endowments and scholarships at these schools. Spend money to improve fundraising and alumni outreach - and you can get a big bang for your buck over and above what a class of basketball players would bring.

But the recruitment and retention of male students is paramount to this all, and I think as a society we've failed a little bit on making a case for liberal arts education, and the benefits of critical thinking and reasoning.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 02, 2016, 11:53:55 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 02, 2016, 10:48:48 PM
Quote from: sac on December 02, 2016, 02:16:06 PM
Quote from: WUH on December 02, 2016, 01:45:27 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 02, 2016, 01:16:00 PM
Really? I know that many schools add or maintain football to add to male enrollment. But most every athletics department (even D1) lose money on athletics. Those that make money are who you'd expect, but even the Power conferences have money losing athletics departments.

But if sports went away, enrollment may shift from school A to school B but I don't think anyone would shut their doors.

Definitely, recruiting male students is part of a larger recruitment strategy for most institutions and the use of athletics is a big part of that strategy. Athletic departments lose money, but the overall net revenue gain for the institution is significant.

If you think about a small private college in Missouri, for example, they may have a sticker price of $25,000 with a room and board in the $10,000-15,000 range. Let's say they have 20 players on the Men's Basketball team. That is $700,000 in revenue. Even if we assume that everyone on the team is a high need student and the institution discounts the tuition heavily, take the $5,815 in Pell, $5,500 in Stafford Loans and say $1,000 in Perkins, that is $12,315 per person or $246,300 in revenue per year for 20 players. Not a lot, but that would be the absolute minimum revenue that a 20 player basketball team would generate, though I think the vast majority of Division III institutions bring in significantly more revenue per 20 player team than that.

Certainly some of those 20 players would consider the institution even if they could not play sports, but I do think a significant number of both men and women would gravitate to the larger state institutions without the option to play sports.

Adrian College President Jeffrey Docking wrote a book about it http://adrian.edu/about-us/from-the-president/crisisinhighereducation/

Adrian has gone from being closer to closing its doors than people realize to having a future of some kind for the foreseeable future.

I think students go where their academic programs match their interests,and where they can get the best deal on tuition and aid at a school that matches their interest. Adrian's strategy worked for Adrian, and having a good wellness facility is key for everyone. But other schools may have other ways to get students in the door.

What really needs to happen is these small schools promote themselves and the benefits of a liberal arts education.

For some colleges, athletics is just another activity. Many schools have music and theater programs, but a few schools recruit heavily for music and theater and make it a priority, and others just have it as a student activity. Coaches sometimes don't have the ability to recruit much because of budgetary constraints.

Also, there needs to be a case made to fund endowments and scholarships at these schools. Spend money to improve fundraising and alumni outreach - and you can get a big bang for your buck over and above what a class of basketball players would bring.

But the recruitment and retention of male students is paramount to this all, and I think as a society we've failed a little bit on making a case for liberal arts education, and the benefits of critical thinking and reasoning.

I see it like this. Schools like NYU and CMU (MIT, etc) play D3 because why wouldn't they? It's questionable whether they even need athletics at all. I guess maybe there are a few students that have value to them academically that still want that (like Herb Sendek, for example).

There are other schools that use it as a recruitment/enrollment boost. A few of those have been named on this thread.

There are also schools that seem to emphasize sports because it increases their visibility in their areas of interest -- like the WIAC schools for example.

There might be other strategic positionings, but those are the main 3 that come to my mind. There can be hybrids of those as well -- I would say Marietta is a combination of columns B and C. We do benefit from academic exclusivity particular to petroleum engineering, but in general, it's more the other two I think -- small school, the enrollment boost helps; and it raises the profile of Marietta for local/regional students choosing schools. Football is bad, but football in the region is bad too so it may not matter much.

What I don't understand is why anyone plays D2. You don't get D1 exposure, and you're paying for athletics scholarships that you could be using for academics. The only somewhat cogent answer I've ever gotten is from a friend at a southern D2 school that says it would eat them alive in expenses to move to D3. But then my next answer is ok move an entire conference. He says the bigger state schools aren't interested.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 03, 2016, 01:39:16 AM

Not sure why they say they would have more expenses in Division III, unless they are in an area no where close to Division III schools - but in the south there are a lot of DIIIs.

What people don't appreciate is that across all NCAA divisions and sports, the base budget to run athletics is very similar for all schools. The differences for many are in how much they want to put into athletics or not. The budgets start to change in DII and DI when the scholarships are added to the budgets. So D1s who are starting to struggle will transfer to D3 because they can drop the millions of dollars of scholarships from their budget and suddenly they aren't underwater anymore. It is the biggest reason Division III continues to grow from D1, D2, and NAIA looking for the same athletic experience, but without the massive financial burden.

And please stop pretending I don't understand the Division III landscape. I work very, very hard to educate myself and then inform people of what is going on in the Division. You keep trying to pretend, apparently, that I don't know anything... yet, I don't think you could find anyone in this Division that feels that way. I do far more than just cover basketball in this division and your constant attempts to disrespect me and what I know is getting annoying. Maybe I should just ignore you for my own sake, but I had to at least say something before I do.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 03, 2016, 01:46:25 AM

I can speak about my current D-2 experience at Central Washington.

I used to be a critic of D2 but now I work for a D2 school. In some cases the athletics scholarships do help students afford college when they could not before. Few scholarships are full scholarships, but every little bit helps. The conference up here used to be NAIA before they moved over, and they didn't want to give up athletics scholarships for recruiting purposes. The student athletes here, for the most part, are pretty serious about their grades and degrees too. The instagram pages of athletes during commencement all show them beaming with their caps and gowns.

A lot of the D-2 schools don't have big endowments that they can use for scholarships. It's a different world at state schools that aren't the behemoths, and NCAA D-2 is a lot more structured and cleaner than the NAIA.

The mission here, at least, is to turn the hidden gems and first generation students into scholars and life-long learners. Affordability is the key here. We're trying not to use as many transfers as we have in the past - though the University as a whole does get a lot of transfer students from community colleges in Washington State. But our AD wants more emphasis on freshmen instead of transfers unless there's a true need at a position.

It's not like you're going to get a lot of exposure playing football for a D-1AA school, or hoops for someone like Niagara or Canisius.

However, not all D-2 schools can use all of their scholarship allotments due to budgets. I don't know of a D-1 school that doesn't max out in most of their programs. Maybe some don't. But it seems only Alaska - Anchorage has the ability to use a lot of their allotment in each sport they offer in our conference. (Thank you, Division 1 hockey - though Alaska - Fairbanks also has D-1 hockey and doesn't seem to be able to utilize their allotment.)

Conversely, Western Oregon made the D-2 final four in hoops last year and is usually ranked last in aid given to men's athletes.

Anyway, that's long winded. I know in the Midwest, there's a lot of choices in colleges, but I think the D-2 choice is one of dollars and cents for the athletes if the schools have similar academic programs.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 03, 2016, 01:54:26 AM

If you're interested in studying revenues, expenses, and scholarship dollars for all college sports, I'd recommend the EADA analysis.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 03, 2016, 08:39:44 AM

Quote from: smedindy on December 03, 2016, 01:46:25 AM
However, not all D-2 schools can use all of their scholarship allotments due to budgets. I don't know of a D-1 school that doesn't max out in most of their programs. Maybe some don't. But it seems only Alaska - Anchorage has the ability to use a lot of their allotment in each sport they offer in our conference. (Thank you, Division 1 hockey - though Alaska - Fairbanks also has D-1 hockey and doesn't seem to be able to utilize their allotment.)

From what I know, those schools grandfathered into multiple division have to keep all the books separate. They can't use income generated by the D1 program to support programs in other divisions. Now, I'm not sure how that translates to shared facilities like weight rooms and the like, but a couple of D3 institutions have the same issues. Maybe that's a good idea for an Around the Nation column?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 03, 2016, 11:15:42 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 03, 2016, 01:39:16 AM

And please stop pretending I don't understand the Division III landscape. I work very, very hard to educate myself and then inform people of what is going on in the Division. You keep trying to pretend, apparently, that I don't know anything... yet, I don't think you could find anyone in this Division that feels that way. I do far more than just cover basketball in this division and your constant attempts to disrespect me and what I know is getting annoying. Maybe I should just ignore you for my own sake, but I had to at least say something before I do.

I don't believe I have said that, but if you think the games reduction in baseball was about class time, then you really don't understand that occurrence in particular, and that's demonstrable.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 03, 2016, 11:30:06 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 03, 2016, 01:39:16 AM
Not sure why they say they would have more expenses in Division III, unless they are in an area no where close to Division III schools - but in the south there are a lot of DIIIs.

Not really wanting to give away who I'm talking about here, but honestly I'm not sure they have a lot of good solutions either way. None of the existing D3 conferences would really work for them, but I don't think their D2 one does either. Which to me means they should be D1 (though the post about not fully funding has some merit; in D2 it's probably easier to get away with that), but they aren't.

What I mainly don't get for D2s is that it seems like a straddle strategy, which is not a strategy at all, unless it's a bad one. All in or all out.

Anyhoo, I don't think I would want to see a lot of their current league go D3 anyway.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 03, 2016, 03:39:21 PM

But it's not a straddle strategy. It's finances and realism in recruiting. I think a lot of the lower D-1 conferences really should be D-2 or D-3.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 03, 2016, 04:27:31 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 03, 2016, 03:39:21 PM
But it's not a straddle strategy. It's finances and realism in recruiting. I think a lot of the lower D-1 conferences really should be D-2 or D-3.

It is. You might not think it is, but it is.

But you're right, there's not a big difference between D1 and D2, most of the time. But there is a difference, especially in basketball, and when it comes into play, it's significant. Even low D1 is on TV a lot more than D2. Through NCAA tournament, NIT, the other tournaments now, FCS playoffs, regular season games again major conference teams (there are a few of those against D2s, but nearly not many).

D2 is the worst of both world. None of the high-end exposure potential, all of the expense (well, most of the expense).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 03, 2016, 04:31:55 PM

Well, the big problem is that D-2 can offer partial scholarships and D-1 can't. That's something that will help a great deal for smaller school budgets.

The only thing keeping a lot of these programs afloat are the 'guarantee games'. Most SWAC and MEAC teams are designated opponents in November and December, and that's not really fair for them or their team. And, no one really watches those anyway except the fans of the team that's buying the games.

I don't think a lot of Alabama A&M or Maryland-Eastern Shore games are on anything but ESPN 3 or a very regional network.

Example: Mississippi Valley State. I looked them up since my wife is a Michigan State alum.

They play 13 non-conference games, 12 on the road and one neutral site game at Liberty against U Mass - Lowell.

Not only do they play teams like Michigan State, West Virginia, Gonzaga and Indiana, but also Liberty, Seattle U, Grand Canyon and Drake. Those last four aren't gonna get you any exposure, and the first four will only be watched by die hard fans of those four schools, if then.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 03, 2016, 04:41:05 PM

Wow, that was a blitzkrieg. Marietta down 42-34 with 16 min to go, just dismantled a ranked team on the road by 28 the rest of the way. 84-64 final I think it was.

Started out riding Edwards (who got 2 early fouls and didn't play a lot in the first half), which BW initially dealt with pretty well with some very physical post defense, then he got a few, then a few 3s went down and then guards were going to the basket off the dribble at will.

BW has some good players, but Marietta's improvement on defense was really evident and they dominated the boards again. Holding a team like BW to 29 in a half is just outstanding.

5 in double figures for Marietta. Keith Richardson and BW's Cam Kuhn (really good scorer) tied for game high with 17.

MC now has a win over a ranked opponent at home, on the road and on a neutral court, all by blowout. Not sure what else you can do to earn a #1 ranking.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 03, 2016, 04:46:04 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 03, 2016, 04:31:55 PM
Well, the big problem is that D-2 can offer partial scholarships and D-1 can't. That's something that will help a great deal for smaller school budgets.

The only thing keeping a lot of these programs afloat are the 'guarantee games'. Most SWAC and MEAC teams are designated opponents in November and December, and that's not really fair for them or their team. And, no one really watches those anyway except the fans of the team that's buying the games.

I don't think a lot of Alabama A&M or Maryland-Eastern Shore games are on anything but ESPN 3 or a very regional network.

Example: Mississippi Valley State. I looked them up since my wife is a Michigan State alum.

They play 13 non-conference games, 12 on the road and one neutral site game at Liberty against U Mass - Lowell.

Not only do they play teams like Michigan State, West Virginia, Gonzaga and Indiana, but also Liberty, Seattle U, Grand Canyon and Drake. Those last four aren't gonna get you any exposure, and the first four will only be watched by die hard fans of those four schools, if then.

Very few such things as bad publicity. The end.

Grand Canyon is actually a fantastic example of the argument for playing D1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 03, 2016, 06:52:29 PM

What?

I was talking about MVSU, playing at Grand Canyon as part of their 12-game roadie to start the year. No one will watch that game, except alumni.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 03, 2016, 06:58:24 PM

Well., wishing Marietta to be ranked #1 is fine, but Babson just beat Tufts. So Tufts voters will probably vote up Babson at #2 or #1, and thus making it harder for Marietta to be ranked #1.

I see no reason not to have Amherst and Babson behind Marietta, if I was already voting that way.

Also, maybe B-W shouldn't have been ranked? Sometimes teams show up in the Top 25 early on, and by the end of the year you wonder why.

Wooster was probably overrated, as they barely beat a Wabash team that isn't even shaving yet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 03, 2016, 07:12:25 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 03, 2016, 06:52:29 PM
What?

I was talking about MVSU, playing at Grand Canyon as part of their 12-game roadie to start the year. No one will watch that game, except alumni.

Great, now I'm talking about Grand Canyon, who drew more total fans than Arizona State last year (and it was 5806 to 5805 in per game). They're actually playing Louisville at home.

There's more than one possible experience, you know.

MVSU isn't even a reclassification -- they've been in D1 for years, so not sure what your point is. That we're even talking about an HBCU from Itta Bena, Mississippi on a D3 board really tells its own story. They've been in the tournament twice since 2008, which is probably part of why they get good guarantee games.

Both cases really prove my point that D2 is a poor choice. It would be a worse choice for both of them, and is for the vast majority of cases.

To tell the story another way, which school gets more out of their athletics -- MVSU, or nearby D2 Delta State? For that answer, I'll refer to to some guy named Jerry Rice.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 03, 2016, 07:27:53 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 03, 2016, 06:58:24 PM
Well., wishing Marietta to be ranked #1 is fine, but Babson just beat Tufts. So Tufts voters will probably vote up Babson at #2 or #1, and thus making it harder for Marietta to be ranked #1.

I see no reason not to have Amherst and Babson behind Marietta, if I was already voting that way.

Also, maybe B-W shouldn't have been ranked? Sometimes teams show up in the Top 25 early on, and by the end of the year you wonder why.

Wooster was probably overrated, as they barely beat a Wabash team that isn't even shaving yet.

So? Tufts is overrated too. They tried to lose at home earlier in the week to a team ranked comparably to BW.

Take down 3 ranked opponents in 6 games by 20+ points each, only 1 of them in your gym. Two of them top 10.

If the poll is about this season, which team has proven the most in their games this year, there's only one choice. If it's about who the old money is, then I guess there's more than one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 03, 2016, 07:52:41 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 03, 2016, 07:27:53 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 03, 2016, 06:58:24 PM
Well., wishing Marietta to be ranked #1 is fine, but Babson just beat Tufts. So Tufts voters will probably vote up Babson at #2 or #1, and thus making it harder for Marietta to be ranked #1.

I see no reason not to have Amherst and Babson behind Marietta, if I was already voting that way.

Also, maybe B-W shouldn't have been ranked? Sometimes teams show up in the Top 25 early on, and by the end of the year you wonder why.

Wooster was probably overrated, as they barely beat a Wabash team that isn't even shaving yet.

So? Tufts is overrated too. They tried to lose at home earlier in the week to a team ranked comparably to BW.

Take down 3 ranked opponents in 6 games by 20+ points each, only 1 of them in your gym. Two of them top 10.

If the poll is about this season, which team has proven the most in their games this year, there's only one choice. If it's about who the old money is, then I guess there's more than one.

Tufts is unproven and quite possibly over-ranked. They haven't played anyone at all until today. Amherst is, quite frankly, in the same boat. They get Babson next week. We'll see how it goes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 03, 2016, 10:16:23 PM

Babson has played a lot of oil cans and hasn't stepped in an opposing team's home gym yet. Pretty amazing considering they're more than 1/3 of the way through the schedule.

I have always said you treat every season on its own. You have a decent body of work on every team now, so no reason not to rank based on what has actually been accomplished this season rather than where you started out ranking someone.

Massey has Amherst and Babson 13 and 15 (before yesterday's games, so not include today or Whitman's win over Willamette) because they just haven't played anyone. He has Tufts 22.

He has Marietta #1 at #362 in all divisions. Whitman #2 and 410. You start getting to other D3s around 450. So basically those two are playing low D1/high D2 caliber ball. Marietta after today would be probably ranked around 30 among D2s.

Why is it that the top 3 teams in the poll are all from MA even though the computer rankings indicate much more strength in the midwest and west? Is there a regional bias among the voters?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 03, 2016, 10:21:46 PM

#6 NCC 84, #16 IWU 75. Final margin is misleading - wheels came off for the Titans over the last 5 minutes of an otherwise extremely tight contest.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 03, 2016, 11:07:56 PM

#21-UW-Eau Claire 64
#9-Washington U. 50
(at Wash U)

UW-Eau Claire is now 6-0 with wins over current #10 and #9.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 03, 2016, 11:09:52 PM

North Park 87
#18-Augustana 78
(at Augustana)

North Park is now 5-0 overall and 1-0 in the CCIW with the huge road win at Augie. NPU has two of the best players in Division III in Jordan Robinson and Juwan Henry.

Augie should probably drop out of the Top 25 after the home loss and be replaced by North Park. Really impressive win tonight for NPU - Augie is a really hard place to win.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 03, 2016, 11:44:29 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 03, 2016, 11:15:42 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 03, 2016, 01:39:16 AM

And please stop pretending I don't understand the Division III landscape. I work very, very hard to educate myself and then inform people of what is going on in the Division. You keep trying to pretend, apparently, that I don't know anything... yet, I don't think you could find anyone in this Division that feels that way. I do far more than just cover basketball in this division and your constant attempts to disrespect me and what I know is getting annoying. Maybe I should just ignore you for my own sake, but I had to at least say something before I do.

I don't believe I have said that, but if you think the games reduction in baseball was about class time, then you really don't understand that occurrence in particular, and that's demonstrable.

I don't know if the whistle has blown on this but if not and I am still allowed to post, I'll say this -- no, the original reduction in schedule was likely not about class time, but all of the recent ones, and the discussions over reducing them further, have absolutely had that as a component. The presidents have taken a much bigger role in making NCAA legislation in the past decade-plus and those are no longer as heavily AD-driven. Dave did quality coverage on this from the NCAA convention.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 04, 2016, 12:34:58 AM

If you can't play a 40 game season in college baseball, then it's not much different from intramurals. There are states where high schools play 40 games, I'm pretty sure.

One reason I was in favor of a D4 is this kind of tyranny of the majority. Hopefully the people making decisions realize that there's a reason that D3 school students play baseball -- it's because they like baseball!

Reducing by a few games isn't going to say anything for the amount of time good programs put in before game day. It's just depriving kids of actually doing what they want to do -- they don't prepare just to prepare.

Now, if you wanted to say you can only have so many mid-week game *dates*, I could maybe see some logic in that, but then you get jammed if you get games rained out. Maybe you could have x number of midweek "rain" dates. Or track full days of class missed or something (like if you play a 7 p.m. home game on a weeknight, that's not really affecting class time at all).

But to go below a hard limit of 40 would probably lead to fewer baseball players choosing D3 schools, or just choosing to become students (or maybe walkons in a few cases) at a D1.

I wonder if Marietta's president will be in on any of these discussions. He might be able to offer some interesting perspective from his experience.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 04, 2016, 12:52:47 AM

There's definitely talk about this on the table, still. They tried to push through a blanket 10% reduction in all contests, because (IMO) they were politically unwilling to make difficult decisions about which sports needed reductions and which ones did not. The rest of the conversation is for another board, though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 04, 2016, 12:59:57 AM

To bring it back on topic then, I feel like basketball is pretty much at its lower limit as well.

If you cut 2-3 games from the schedule, then you're basically playing like 3 non-conference games if you have a 10 team league, or having some crazy scheduling scheme where you don't play everyone twice. That would make it really hard to have any kind of credible SOS system.

We've just spent time talking about how important playing and traveling to play has become in D3 basketball. So all that would be gone, and this thread would be a much more fact-challenged discussion.

And who knows what would happen with football. Ohio high schools play a 10 game season (well most of them).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 04, 2016, 02:56:58 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 03, 2016, 11:09:52 PM
North Park 87
#18-Augustana 78
(at Augustana)

North Park is now 5-0 overall and 1-0 in the CCIW with the huge road win at Augie. NPU has two of the best players in Division III in Jordan Robinson and Juwan Henry.

Augie should probably drop out of the Top 25 after the home loss and be replaced by North Park. Really impressive win tonight for NPU - Augie is a really hard place to win.

This is Augie's 45th season in the Carver Center, and the Rock Islanders have won 81% of their games in that building. And that's not a record complied against a steady diet of cupcakes, either; most of Augustana's home wins during that 45-year span have been over CCIW opponents.

I'm excited about the strong possibility that North Park will appear in the new Top 25 on Monday. NPU hasn't been ranked since 2000 ... which is, coincidentally, also the last time that the Vikings beat Augie in the Carver Center.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 04, 2016, 12:07:43 PM

Marietta now up to #337 all divisions in Massey ratings.

They are #1 by a mile in D3 in rating. The distance between them at 1.05 and #2 (Whitman, .85) is equal to the difference between 2nd and 14th.

In power rating (more related to quality of performance than win/loss), it's the same general story. MC easily #1, the distance between 1st and 2nd (Augustana) greater than 2nd to 10th.

Amherst 12th, Babson 13th. Tufts 23rd. Really North Park and Hope should be getting more consideration than Amherst and Babson. The Whitman-Whitworth winner has a really strong case for #2 (or #1 if Marietta should stumble next week, have a feeling John Carroll is going to find themselves for that game in U Heights).

But it's not even a debate at this point who should be #1.

Btw, the power ratings suggest that despite taking a couple of early losses, Augustana, Benedictine and St. Thomas have still played pretty well overall. North Park takes a big leap up after their win.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 04, 2016, 01:39:18 PM

Surprise! Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is already On the Road this season, but in rather familiar territory: the Roanoke Valley.

Dave was already in Salem, Virginia for the Division III soccer championships, so why to check out the newest gymnasium in D3?!

Hoopsville will air shortly after the Virginia Wesleyan-Roanoke men's game. At halftime of the game, the court will be dedicated to former Roanoke coach Charlie Moir, the father of former Roanoke Coach Page Moir.

Today's special show will feature interviews with Roanoke coach Clay Nunley, Carey Harveycutter, and others.

Dave will also take a look at the first week's Top 25 and ahead to Week 2's poll.

Show hits the air at 2:30 PM ET here: http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2016-17/dec4.

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 04, 2016, 01:55:16 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 03, 2016, 11:15:42 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 03, 2016, 01:39:16 AM

And please stop pretending I don't understand the Division III landscape. I work very, very hard to educate myself and then inform people of what is going on in the Division. You keep trying to pretend, apparently, that I don't know anything... yet, I don't think you could find anyone in this Division that feels that way. I do far more than just cover basketball in this division and your constant attempts to disrespect me and what I know is getting annoying. Maybe I should just ignore you for my own sake, but I had to at least say something before I do.

I don't believe I have said that, but if you think the games reduction in baseball was about class time, then you really don't understand that occurrence in particular, and that's demonstrable.

I have talked to nearly all the players involved in the "reduction" topic in the last two years... it started when there was a bill on the table at the NCAA Convention to cut the number of events nearly across the board by 10% (except football and other play-once-a-week). Those who proposed it and endorsed it came from the ODAC, Centennial, and MWC. When talking to them, they had found that in baseball, softball, and other sports including some in basketball, not all allotted number of games were being used was at the tune of 20%. In baseball, the average was most schools only played 30 or 32 of the 40 games, especially those who have four actual seasons each year. There was also an argument that 40 games was too many games in terms of missed class time BECAUSE when teams are trying to make up games earlier in the year that have been postponed due to snow, rain, field conditions, etc. that teams were then being forced to condense games into a very small window. This not only caused class problems, but more importantly it simply couldn't have the logistics work out to get all the games in. This resulted in an imbalance and a difficult situation for a committee when it came to making a decision between schools were played the full 40(plus) versus those who only played 30 or 32. When there was that much of a difference, the SOS, vRRO, overall record, and such were very much difficult to compare.

There was also the consideration of the expense of travel. When ADs are telling me the huge amount of money that would be saved (to the tune of half a million dollars if not more) but cutting 10% of games across the board, then the numbers start talking to a lot of people and they start wondering if things need to be cut back. Soccer is playing 20 games in the same window that I played 17 in college. Baseball, softball, volleyball (who has a "day" limit not an "events" limit), lacrosse, and others had grown to the tune of three to seven or more games in their seasons but had NOT increased the amount of time (weeks) those games were allowed to be played in.

So it came down to presidents trying to make an effort to preserve the student-athlete experience and not turn things into an athlete-only mandate. More games, less time in class, bigger expenses, etc. all added up to what they felt was something they didn't feel DIII was fairly representing... plus the unevenness in sports like baseball, softball, etc.

There were also other factors like lacrosse trying to go to a football-style scheduling, but with more games and starting earlier and earlier in the year.

It ended up nearly being killed - it was pushed for a committee to further research the topic before a vote was done. That vote would have killed the bill overwhelmingly. That research has been done and who knows if anyone will do anything with it. However, I have heard a couple of key things out of it that may happen - entities may endorse them to be voted on at a future convention: there is still a push to reduce baseball and softball to 32 games; and a push to allow ALL sports to have two exhibition/scrimmages exemptions (adding sports like field hockey who don't have any allotment and decreasing basketball who has several more if you add up all of the exemptions). There could be others, but the idea of killing 10% across the board was ill-conceived and will not happen (trying to shoe-horn an idea in for everyone never works).

That is the easiest way I can describe something I covered extensively in the last two years. You can make all the arguments you want and I won't disagree that classroom affects were part of it (they always will be in Division III when presidents are the ones voting on how to run Division III), but it also was far more complicated than just classroom attendance and wasn't necessarily the first thought people had who put the bill(s) up for a vote (those who suggested it were not actually presidents; the presidents add their own reasons on top of the original).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 04, 2016, 02:17:42 PM

Not every team has the ability to travel for holiday or spring break tournaments. Budgets are tough for a lot of schools. And if there's bad weather, doubleheaders that are cancelled can add costs and reduce time for academics, especially close to finals in the spring.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 04, 2016, 03:54:19 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 04, 2016, 01:55:16 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 03, 2016, 11:15:42 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 03, 2016, 01:39:16 AM

And please stop pretending I don't understand the Division III landscape. I work very, very hard to educate myself and then inform people of what is going on in the Division. You keep trying to pretend, apparently, that I don't know anything... yet, I don't think you could find anyone in this Division that feels that way. I do far more than just cover basketball in this division and your constant attempts to disrespect me and what I know is getting annoying. Maybe I should just ignore you for my own sake, but I had to at least say something before I do.

I don't believe I have said that, but if you think the games reduction in baseball was about class time, then you really don't understand that occurrence in particular, and that's demonstrable.

I have talked to nearly all the players involved in the "reduction" topic in the last two years...

[snipped the rest]

So you're talking about something that didn't happen.

I'm talking about something that did, more than a decade ago. Probably closer to 15 years now.

Pat knew that (I think, seemed to anyway). You (apparently) didn't.

I'm talking about the lifting of the two-tournament rule. It used to be that you could play in a tournament and count it as one game. In effect, this meant your spring trip counted as one game, in most cases, and you could play an in-season weekend tournament and count that as one game if you wanted. All lifting the rule did was prevent students from playing baseball during a time when they mostly wouldn't have been in class anyway. Academics had nothing to do with it.

If those ridiculous reductions happens, the next news will be talking about a split in D3.

I really hope Marietta's new president gets involved in these discussions if they seriously progress. He ran a university that balanced major athletics and quality academics (on par with some of the bigger OAC schools like Otterbein and BW, and the MIAC schools classified as regional universities by US News; like Hamline, Bethel) at a state school.

So is there talk about reducing practice/training time? That's a much bigger time investment than the games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 04, 2016, 03:59:34 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 04, 2016, 02:17:42 PM
Not every team has the ability to travel for holiday or spring break tournaments. Budgets are tough for a lot of schools. And if there's bad weather, doubleheaders that are cancelled can add costs and reduce time for academics, especially close to finals in the spring.

That's a choice schools can make. So it not having a program if you think you're not getting enough out of it. But don't limit the options and capabilities of other schools that have a different strategy than you do. Do you think a quality high school (on par academically, and good athletically) would rather play 30 games or 50 after they spring all fall and winter (and maybe summer too) preparing for the season? Do you think they might be inclined to consider a school that will give them the opportunity to play more? Of course they would. Because they want to play baseball, not just be on a baseball team (or softball, a sport for which game limits is even more ridiculous because a game can be over in an hour sometimes).

Whatever, let's get back to discussing why Marietta is the clear choice for #1 ranking in the next men's basketball poll. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 04, 2016, 04:53:29 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	611	Amherst	5-0	def. Westfield State, 84-59; def. Emerson, 79-62
#2	599	Babson	9-0	def. Bates, 87-53; def. (n) Salem State, 82-73; def. (n) #3 Tufts, 91-78
#3	558	Tufts	6-1	def. #23 WPI, 75-71; won at Brandeis, 74-72; LOST to (n) #2 Babson, 78-91
#4	542	Marietta	6-0	won at #20 Baldwin Wallace, 84-64
#5	510	Whitman	4-0	won at Willamette, 80-65
#6	485	North Central (Ill.)	4-1	LOST to UW-Platteville, 40-57; def. #16 Illinois Wesleyan, 84-75
#7	447	Christopher Newport	5-1	def. Southern Virginia, 80-55; def. Frostburg State, 62-53
#8	437	Whitworth	4-0	won at Willamette, 91-79
#9	380	Washington U.	5-1	def. UC Santa Cruz, 84-69; LOST to #21 UW-Eau Claire, 50-64
#10	378	St. Norbert	3-1	won at Knox, 76-37; won at Illinois College, 63-52
#11	357	Wooster	4-2	LOST to Denison, 59-65; won at Wabash, 66-62
#12	297	St. Thomas	4-2	def. Macalester, 72-61; LOST at Augsburg, 70-76
#13	292	Keene State	5-1	def. Trinity (Conn.), 76-66; LOST at Mass-Dartmouth, 71-83
#14	207	Benedictine	4-2	def. Rockford, 96-65; won at Marian, 95-66
#15	201	Hope	5-1	won at T#41 John Carroll, 85-72; def. #32 UW-La Crosse, 80-75
#16	184	Illinois Wesleyan	5-1	LOST at #6 North Central (Ill.), 75-84
#17	175	Augustana	5-2	def. #50 UW-Oshkosh, 77-64; LOST to #39 North Park, 78-87
#18	168	Rochester	8-0	def. (n) #51 St. John Fisher, 77-66; won at Nazareth, 64-59
#19	162	Salisbury	6-0	def. St. Mary's (Md.), 64-59; won at Penn State-Harrisburg, 70-39
#20	116	Baldwin Wallace	4-1	LOST to #4 Marietta, 64-84
#21	112	UW-Eau Claire	6-0	def. (n) Rhodes, 120-94; won at #9 Washington U., 64-50
#22	96	Mount St. Joseph	6-1	LOST at Anderson, 74-78; def. Rose-Hulman, 73-69
#23	84	WPI	5-2	LOST at #3 Tufts, 71-75; won at Framingham State, 69-52; LOST at Fitchburg State, 61-74
#24	81	Endicott	4-1	def. Curry, 85-56; won at Eastern Nazarene, 72-68
#25	70	Susquehanna	5-1	won at Goucher, 68-62

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
T#26	50	Ohio Wesleyan	3-3	LOST to (n) Otterbein, 66-72; won at DePauw, 84-71
T#26	50	Swarthmore	6-0	won at Muhlenberg, 81-49; def. Dickinson, 72-65
T#26	50	UW-Whitewater	4-0	def. Beloit, 82-70
#29	44	Scranton	6-1	LOST at Hobart, 58-70; def. Juniata, 78-61
#30	31	Franklin and Marshall	4-2	LOST to Ursinus, 86-102; won at Haverford, 70-63
#31	29	New Jersey City	6-1	won at William Paterson, 71-69; def. Rutgers-Camden, 81-64
#32	28	UW-La Crosse	5-2	LOST at Luther, 58-67; won at Albion, 64-61; LOST at #15 Hope, 75-80
T#33	25	Capital	4-3	LOST to Wittenberg, 60-63; LOST at Ohio Northern, 65-87
T#33	25	East Texas Baptist	4-2	LOST at Hardin-Simmons, 78-84; LOST at McMurry, 58-80
T#33	25	Emory	5-2	won at Birmingham-Southern, 75-70; won at Piedmont, 65-59
T#33	25	Virginia Wesleyan	5-2	won at North Carolina Wesleyan, 83-63; won at Roanoke, 71-63
#37	24	Skidmore	5-1	def. TCNJ, 96-84; def. Houghton, 96-76
#38	21	Lycoming	6-1	won at Messiah, 87-75; def. Hood, 61-60
#39	20	North Park	5-0	def. Alma, 88-81; won at #17 Augustana, 87-78
#40	19	Wartburg	6-1	def. Nebraska Wesleyan, 92-76; LOST at Simpson, 68-81
T#41	18	John Carroll	1-4	LOST to #15 Hope, 72-85; LOST at Muskingum, 95-99
T#41	18	Lynchburg	4-2	LOST to Shenandoah, 71-74
#43	16	UW-River Falls	6-1	def. Viterbo, 72-46; def. (n) La Verne, 71-69; won at Redlands, 81-58
#44	14	Middlebury	5-1	def. RPI, 79-72; def. Johnson State, 99-83
T#45	10	Neumann	6-0	won at Clarks Summit, 107-67; won at Gwynedd Mercy, 90-78
T#45	10	Plattsburgh State	5-1	LOST at St. Lawrence, 73-91; won at Buffalo State, 87-80; won at Fredonia, 75-57
#47	9	Misericordia	5-1	won at Utica, 98-76
#48	7	Carroll	4-1	IDLE
#49	4	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	5-0	def. San Diego Christian, 90-62
#50	3	UW-Oshkosh	3-3	LOST at #17 Augustana, 64-77; def. Calvin, 73-52
#51	1	St. John Fisher	4-2	LOST to (n) #18 Rochester, 66-77; def. Rochester Tech, 85-77

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 04, 2016, 05:15:50 PM

This is a good idea, someone should make a board for top 25 discussion. :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 04, 2016, 05:29:18 PM

Quote from: sac on December 04, 2016, 05:15:50 PM
This is a good idea, someone should make a board for top 25 discussion. :P

Well, 2 through 25 anyway.

#1 is open and shut.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 04, 2016, 11:30:02 PM

Ah, geez. So if Marietta's not #1 do we have another week of this? (Of course, I added to it, but I regret my choices now...)

For all we know right now, Eau Claire, or Whitman or Whitworth may be the best team. But it's way early to assert something with such vehemence.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 04, 2016, 11:48:49 PM

That new building at Roanoke is very, very nice. It will be interesting to see if it has the kind of effect that the remodeled building at Marietta did (they're a little similar in style, but Roanoke has a few different finishing touches).

There's a LOT of talent in the southside. With the new building and Nunley in charge, can they get the borderline all state kid from Cave Spring or Martinsville? Can they get the role guy from a good GW Danville or EC Glass team that can be a star in D3 like Demarcus Morrison and David Apple at Averett in the 90s?

Exciting times, looking forward to seeing how it works out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 04, 2016, 11:58:52 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 04, 2016, 11:30:02 PM
Ah, geez. So if Marietta's not #1 do we have another week of this? (Of course, I added to it, but I regret my choices now...)

For all we know right now, Eau Claire, or Whitman or Whitworth may be the best team. But it's way early to assert something with such vehemence.

Massey might not be perfect, but he's not wrong by like a factor of 20%. Of course the best team may end up being someone else and Marietta plays teams coming up that are capable of a win against almost anyone, but the best choice for best team right now based on what we know is clear, because they've proven the most by a lot.

I'd like to hear someone say what else Marietta could do at this point. I've never seen an MC team play 15 better minutes than they did at Ursprung this weekend, considering the opponent, the site and the momentum of the game. It went from BW looking good and playing tough to on the ropes in like 5 minutes, then basically over in another 5. BW is a good offensive team, but you wouldnt have known it from Saturday. Jake Fetherolf is a tough customer that gave Edwards a tough game, but MC just overwhelmed BW on the boards.

I do think the Whitman-Whitworth winner has a helluvan argument for #2. If it's Whitman, well they should be top 3 anyway, and if it's Whitworth winning away against a team as good as Whitman is certainly worthy of reward.

I would add North Park and Hope to your list based on what they've done so far.

But one team is head and shoulders above so far this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 05, 2016, 12:36:14 AM

Spence, Geez, give it a rest! You're TWO MONTHS too early to give a damn about the polling! ::)

And even then, the d3hoops.com poll doesn't ultimately mean squat for the real goal.

TGHIJGSTO already! :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 12:51:26 AM

If it doesn't matter then why do it?

But really it's all about what is earned. I can't imagine anyone saying Marietta hasn't done the most to justify a #1 ranking so far, or that they could have done more. Being ranked #1 would likely be a boost to the players and program, but more important is that it's nothing less than they've earned.

And I have no idea what that jumble of letters means, and I don't care.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 01:00:43 AM

For you people negging me for stating a case and enumerating facts, you know I don't care, right? I don't neg people for disagreeing with me because it's stupid and I generally don't care enough.

"If everybody likes you, you're doing it wrong."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 05, 2016, 01:24:10 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 12:51:26 AM
If it doesn't matter then why do it?

But really it's all about what is earned. I can't imagine anyone saying Marietta hasn't done the most to justify a #1 ranking so far, or that they could have done more. Being ranked #1 would likely be a boost to the players and program, but more important is that it's nothing less than they've earned.

And I have no idea what that jumble of letters means, and I don't care.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 04, 2016, 11:58:52 PM
But one team is head and shoulders above so far this season.

Well imagine it because I'll say it. Could they do more? No... they've beaten everyone they've faced so far... but so have other teams. Kentucky is head and shoulders above *insert D3 school here* Marietta is not. Certainly I'd peg them as among the top few right now (perhaps even #1), but would I say they're a clear #1 right now... absolutely not.

TGHIJGSTO is a reference to an NJAC supporter a few years ago who had some similarities to you (albeit with far worse spelling and a lot more destructive tendencies). I'd hate to see you go down the path he did.

And I don't think people are giving you negative votes because they disagree with you... it's all about your tone and attitude. People disagree around here all the time but rarely do those people get negative feedback. You make it seem like you know better than everyone and can't believe you have to spend your time trying to convince us that you're right.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie77 on December 05, 2016, 03:35:50 AM

Is this the Marietta team that lost to Augustana, 100-51, in 2015? I was there. They had pretty uniforms.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 05:29:12 AM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 05, 2016, 01:24:10 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 12:51:26 AM
If it doesn't matter then why do it?

But really it's all about what is earned. I can't imagine anyone saying Marietta hasn't done the most to justify a #1 ranking so far, or that they could have done more. Being ranked #1 would likely be a boost to the players and program, but more important is that it's nothing less than they've earned.

And I have no idea what that jumble of letters means, and I don't care.
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 04, 2016, 11:58:52 PM
But one team is head and shoulders above so far this season.
Well imagine it because I'll say it. Could they do more? No... they've beaten everyone they've faced so far... but so have other teams. Kentucky is head and shoulders above *insert D3 school here* Marietta is not. Certainly I'd peg them as among the top few right now (perhaps even #1), but would I say they're a clear #1 right now... absolutely not.

TGHIJGSTO is a reference to an NJAC supporter a few years ago who had some similarities to you (albeit with far worse spelling and a lot more destructive tendencies). I'd hate to see you go down the path he did.

And I don't think people are giving you negative votes because they disagree with you... it's all about your tone and attitude. People disagree around here all the time but rarely do those people get negative feedback. You make it seem like you know better than everyone and can't believe you have to spend your time trying to convince us that you're right.

Well, MC isn't just beating everyone on their schedule, they're beating pretty much everyone on their schedule by 20+. And half of those teams were ranked, and only one was at home.

Kentucky is head, shoulders, knees and toes (knees and toes) above Marietta haha. I wouldn't mind seeing MC play West Liberty though. I think it would be a good game at least. And maybe if we beat them they'd stop taking recruits that could do well at MC and burying them on their bench. Got one of them back (Wallace) but didn't get the other -- transfers into Marietta are pretty uncommon, so it's a surprise that Wallace came in. Too many WV D2s are taking local kids and then not doing anything with them. Two from my high school alma mater in that boat right now. It's sad to see because there aren't really that many good ballplayers in the immediate area. I don't think Vander Wal has had a regular starter from southeast Ohio. Dillon Young is close but I would consider that central Ohio. OK derailed a bit there.

I don't necessarily think I know better than anyone, but I'm giving the most honest interpretation of the facts of anyone (except the person that voted them #1 last week). To me they're an even stronger #1 than last week because they went on the road to a ranked team that might be the #2 team in the conference and over 15 minutes just totally dismantled them. Babson's win over Tufts looks good but Tufts' ranking is a joke. They've proven next to nothing. Babson has played 9 games and hasn't played in any games as challenging as playing at BW.

It would be one thing if the top 3 teams were stacking their resumes as well, but they're not, really. Even teams ranked below MC have a better case to being top 3 than the teams that are there. Whitman, North Park, Hope, to name a few. Of course it's early but you go on what you have to go on, which at this point is more than preseason expectations.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 05:32:24 AM

Quote from: augie77 on December 05, 2016, 03:35:50 AM
Is this the Marietta team that lost to Augustana, 100-51, in 2015? I was there. They had pretty uniforms.

Yes, that was a soul cleansing. I think it has to do with the improvement on defense. And obviously, Edwards was nowhere near what he is now. I think this team has a very good chance to be better than that one, though, and that team made it farther than an MC team has ever been, I think.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on December 05, 2016, 08:05:15 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 12:51:26 AM
If it doesn't matter then why do it?

"The point is to entertain people and make them forget that we are all dying right in front of each other, that this is just this horrible rotten slog to rigor mortis, that we are going to lose everybody we know, we are going to lose everything we have. And the only way to distract ourselves is by separating our day into distractions."
-Sam Miller

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 09:45:57 AM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 05, 2016, 08:05:15 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 12:51:26 AM
If it doesn't matter then why do it?

"The point is to entertain people and make them forget that we are all dying right in front of each other, that this is just this horrible rotten slog to rigor mortis, that we are going to lose everybody we know, we are going to lose everything we have. And the only way to distract ourselves is by separating our day into distractions."
-Sam Miller

Jeez. And people say I'm morose.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 05, 2016, 11:42:07 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 01:00:43 AM
For you people negging me for stating a case and enumerating facts, you know I don't care, right? I don't neg people for disagreeing with me because it's stupid and I generally don't care enough.

"If everybody likes you, you're doing it wrong."

I think people are questioning your "facts." Quite honestly, I agree with your conclusions and disagree with nearly all of your supporting evidence. I like Massey a lot, but it's virtually useless until February - and even he would tell you so. The number need as full a season as possible to be truly trustworthy. I like it as a tool to see what teams are getting numerical buzz - it's tough to follow all 418 - but you can't really trust those ratings early, not because it doesn't get most teams right - it does - but because it gets a few teams very, very wrong (until there's more data). It's those early outlier that make it dubious in November and December.

I've got Marietta #1 on my ballot - shoot, I've got Whitman #3, both for two weeks in a row now. I agree with you there, but people are rightly challenging the words you're using to back those ideas up. It might be time to take a step back and a deep breath for a little while.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 05, 2016, 12:03:58 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 05, 2016, 08:05:15 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 12:51:26 AM
If it doesn't matter then why do it?

"The point is to entertain people and make them forget that we are all dying right in front of each other, that this is just this horrible rotten slog to rigor mortis, that we are going to lose everybody we know, we are going to lose everything we have. And the only way to distract ourselves is by separating our day into distractions."
-Sam Miller

On a similar note, anyone going to see the Belko Experiment?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 12:08:48 PM

As far as being a fully robust rank suitable for things like seeding a tournament, maybe it's not great. But if this was football, you would say by this point in the season that the rankings are already pretty useful, and while the better team wins more frequently in football (especially in D3), the better team wins pretty frequently in basketball compared to sports like baseball or soccer -- frequently enough, IMO, that even 5 or 6 instances have value. Even in soccer, the first 5 results of a Premier League season for a club have been shown to have pretty surprising predictive power for the full season (38 games), especially when adjusted for schedule strength. So I'm not on board with saying 5ish games is worthless -- though I recognize not everyone has 5 games yet -- and this is especially true when you've already played several good opponents.

In fairness, your statement that it gets most teams right shows you basically understand this. But I don't see a reason to think MC is one of the teams it has wrong, though, given that people that don't use Massey at all are saying pretty much the same thing as far as the impressiveness of MC's wins. Whether through Massey or just intuitively, apparently you've done that and for what little it probably means, kudos to you for doing that.

Like I say, the difference between #1 and #2 right now on Massey is massive, large enough that the effect of small sample size is somewhat diminished as a factor in interpretation. To get statsy, the chance that the current ranking is an outlier to the true mean by enough to make Marietta actually not #1 in the rankings is probably pretty danged small. The difference between Marietta and the peloton in the D3 rankings is by far larger than the difference between #1 and #2 in D1 or D2.

I don't know what better way there is to back up than what I've done. I've looked at the results in the context of the national rankings, in the context of computer rankings, and in their own context (in terms of the consistently high margin of victory, regardless of opponent). I've voted in college and high school polls in the past and this is how I tend to do it. Strength of schedule matters a lot.

To be honest, the only reason not to support them for #1 is anchoring bias -- the notion that an initial value influences the setting of future values, as in a negotiation -- or, something like this where changing opinion is required. I had this argument on baseball with regard to anchoring bias for teams that start their season earlier (they tend to be stickier even when northern teams start their seasons), but it never really went anywhere even though it's a very well-researched and accepted cognitive bias.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 05, 2016, 02:13:03 PM

I don't think after five or six games Massey is that useful. Massey's limitations in football is that the regionality really rears its head, and there's not a lot of crossover. It takes maybe 9 weeks to get a solid idea. What I use Massey for more in football for D-3 is a reality check on the "SOS" the NCAA uses.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 05:14:20 PM

New topic: Is there going to be a top 25 to talk about today?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 05, 2016, 05:41:27 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 05:14:20 PM
New topic: Is there going to be a top 25 to talk about today?

Don't know why there wouldn't be, but there are a couple of the voters on here so they could say for sure.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 05, 2016, 05:43:02 PM

There had better be. There are an awful lot of people who root for my alma mater who are waiting on this poll with bated breath.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on December 05, 2016, 05:49:34 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 05, 2016, 02:13:03 PM
I don't think after five or six games Massey is that useful. Massey's limitations in football is that the regionality really rears its head, and there's not a lot of crossover. It takes maybe 9 weeks to get a solid idea. What I use Massey for more in football for D-3 is a reality check on the "SOS" the NCAA uses.

Completely agree. Massey is all about data analysis. Not enough data at this point to really get a trend analysis. Since most teams have either not started, or just started, conference play Massey deals with a plethora of data based on non-conference play that ranges from cupcakes to playing opponents that are clearly better than the other team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on December 05, 2016, 06:08:00 PM

The new Top 25 is out. I'm sure this is going to lead to more interesting observations. ;D

http://d3hoops.com/top25/index

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 05, 2016, 06:15:15 PM

Not enough real info for some voters to blow up their top three.

Congrats to Mr. Sager for the North Park appearance.

Like in football, voters really had to be sure to put a team like Denison in the Top 25. The Big Red's athletics program is improving greatly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 06:17:05 PM

Quote from: mailsy on December 05, 2016, 06:08:00 PM
The new Top 25 is out. I'm sure this is going to lead to more interesting observations. ;D

http://d3hoops.com/top25/index

No real change. Voters on autopilot. No big surprise.

Thanks to Ryan for being the only responsible voter.

Hope the Pios take this as the slight that it is at this point, and stay hungry.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 05, 2016, 06:18:44 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 06:17:05 PM
Quote from: mailsy on December 05, 2016, 06:08:00 PM
The new Top 25 is out. I'm sure this is going to lead to more interesting observations. ;D

http://d3hoops.com/top25/index

No real change. Voters on autopilot. No big surprise.

Thanks to Ryan for being the only responsible voter.

What's not responsible about voters choosing who they think is #1. It's not like someone didn't vote for Marietta, or voted someone weird as #1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 06:20:35 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 05, 2016, 06:18:44 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 06:17:05 PM
Quote from: mailsy on December 05, 2016, 06:08:00 PM
The new Top 25 is out. I'm sure this is going to lead to more interesting observations. ;D

http://d3hoops.com/top25/index

No real change. Voters on autopilot. No big surprise.

Thanks to Ryan for being the only responsible voter.

What's not responsible about voters choosing who they think is #1. It's not like someone didn't vote for Marietta, or voted someone weird as #1.

IMO, 24 people voted someone weird as #1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 06:28:35 PM

Quote from: iwumichigander on December 05, 2016, 05:49:34 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 05, 2016, 02:13:03 PM
I don't think after five or six games Massey is that useful. Massey's limitations in football is that the regionality really rears its head, and there's not a lot of crossover. It takes maybe 9 weeks to get a solid idea. What I use Massey for more in football for D-3 is a reality check on the "SOS" the NCAA uses.
Completely agree. Massey is all about data analysis. Not enough data at this point to really get a trend analysis. Since most teams have either not started, or just started, conference play Massey deals with a plethora of data based on non-conference play that ranges from cupcakes to playing opponents that are clearly better than the other team.

But that's just where such a system really is most useful. I mean you can look at conference standings and conference power ratings or something and get a pretty good idea of league play is worth for a given team. It's all of the connections that aren't obvious that computers help you get a handle on. Really that's the heavy lifting. From there the extra data points are just to get closer to being able to assume a normal distribution across the data.

There's not really a need for any trend analysis here -- only analysis of the full sweep of data available. And often times what is perceived as a trend is really the result of noise or some delta in the epsilon term that wasn't previously present (like impact of randomness on the binary result, some of which we've already seen this season). Eventually you could do some kind of time-series analysis, but it might just mean that what you think is a time-series trend is just the impact of some z variable that isn't being accounted for (which could be a whole host of things).

Eventually people will be dragged kicking and screaming to having to understand this stuff, or lose their jobs to computers. Oh well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 05, 2016, 06:30:10 PM

Suh-weet! This is North Park's first appearance in the poll since week eight of the 1999-00 season. There was a lot of ugly basketball played by the Vikings between then and now, so this really feels like a payoff for a lot of hard work during Tom Slyder's tenure as head coach to climb back from basketball oblivion; in fact, the current NPU senior class went 4-21, 1-13 as freshmen.

Now to keep it going. The first test certainly won't be an easy one, as NPU has to travel to #16 Illinois Wesleyan the day after tomorrow.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on December 05, 2016, 06:34:35 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 05, 2016, 06:30:10 PM
Suh-weet! This is North Park's first appearance in the poll since week eight of the 1999-00 season. There was a lot of ugly basketball played by the Vikings between then and now, so this really feels like a payoff for a lot of hard work during Tom Slyder's tenure as head coach to climb back from basketball oblivion; in fact, the current NPU senior class went 4-21, 1-13 as freshmen.

Now to keep it going. The first test certainly won't be an easy one, as NPU has to travel to #16 Illinois Wesleyan the day after tomorrow.

congratulations NPU. Vikings have come a long way. Give credit to the players for staying with it, but Tom Slyder, and staff, certain,y deserves high praise.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 07:00:20 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 05, 2016, 06:30:10 PM
Suh-weet! This is North Park's first appearance in the poll since week eight of the 1999-00 season. There was a lot of ugly basketball played by the Vikings between then and now, so this really feels like a payoff for a lot of hard work during Tom Slyder's tenure as head coach to climb back from basketball oblivion; in fact, the current NPU senior class went 4-21, 1-13 as freshmen.

Now to keep it going. The first test certainly won't be an easy one, as NPU has to travel to #16 Illinois Wesleyan the day after tomorrow.

Fully deserved. Probably should be higher, really.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 05, 2016, 07:13:17 PM

I have no issue with where NPU landed in this poll. I'm fine with the Vikes having to scratch and claw their way up the ladder.

One thing's for sure: Wednesday's game @ #16 Illinois Wesleyan and Saturday's home game against ORV Carroll will guarantee that the Vikings won't be able to rest upon their laurels.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 10:13:56 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 05, 2016, 07:13:17 PM
I have no issue with where NPU landed in this poll. I'm fine with the Vikes having to scratch and claw their way up the ladder.

One thing's for sure: Wednesday's game @ #16 Illinois Wesleyan and Saturday's home game against ORV Carroll will guarantee that the Vikings won't be able to rest upon their laurels.

I get your point, but I think NP has done more than teams ranked ahead.

Believe me, having been around for the bad old days of MC basketball, I'm thrilled that they're even conversationally relevant for this topic, and how good they've been over the past now several years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 06, 2016, 11:25:25 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 12:08:48 PM
I don't know what better way there is to back up than what I've done. I've looked at the results in the context of the national rankings, in the context of computer rankings, and in their own context (in terms of the consistently high margin of victory, regardless of opponent). I've voted in college and high school polls in the past and this is how I tend to do it. Strength of schedule matters a lot.

But you are also looking at the "context of national rankings" from the admitted, and clearly strong, bias of being a Marietta fan. Nothing against you or you being a fan, but that can and probably is slanting your point of view. I know if my alma mater was considered I would probably worry about giving them too much or too little credit as I try and balance the tint of my glasses along with my pride. I understand your passion and your claim to have voted in a number of polls, but your bias seems to have a lot of weight even if you have good data you are trying to use. Your "tone" and your approach isn't letting others see them.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 12:08:48 PM
To be honest, the only reason not to support them for #1 is anchoring bias -- the notion that an initial value influences the setting of future values, as in a negotiation -- or, something like this where changing opinion is required. I had this argument on baseball with regard to anchoring bias for teams that start their season earlier (they tend to be stickier even when northern teams start their seasons), but it never really went anywhere even though it's a very well-researched and accepted cognitive bias.

Speaking of tone - "anchoring bias." You start throwing things out there to blame or discredit voters, they, like me, start to tune you out. Heck, it is a fight just to read through every word you write when you speak down to people you disagree with.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 06:17:05 PM
Quote from: mailsy on December 05, 2016, 06:08:00 PM
The new Top 25 is out. I'm sure this is going to lead to more interesting observations. ;D

http://d3hoops.com/top25/index

No real change. Voters on autopilot. No big surprise.

Thanks to Ryan for being the only responsible voter.

Hope the Pios take this as the slight that it is at this point, and stay hungry.

And this is a great example of my point. Voters are not on autopilot. If they were, we would get our polls back an hour after we send them out on Sunday evening... not a full 24 hours later when many of us have poured over the data to make decisions. Also... there is more to vote on than who is number one and where we are going to put your Marietta team.

Responsible voter... that is a joke of a statement, especially from someone who claims to have voted in other polls that I assume were for publication. Quit attacking said voters... you are dangerously close to the NJAC poster reference given earlier. Enjoy the season and the fact Marietta isn't being ignored. Plugging for first place votes and saying voters aren't being responsible could actually hurt your team - leaving negative thoughts with people. Hate to see the Pioneers lose a couple of games, the return on you will be pretty harsh from those on here that are known to have long memories (and it won't be me).

I have Marietta #2. Despite their wins, I think Babson is the better team. I think Babson has better talent on the court with their starting five than Marietta. No, that is NOT a slight at Edwards. It is a compliment to how many players on Babson's squad I think can take over a game at any one point. I also think Flannery is better than Edwards (different positions, I know) and has proven he can put his team on his back - and yes, that could backfire on them as well. And please, don't argue each and every player to me as to why they are better... I am just going to ignore it. I have seen Marietta in person. I will probably see them again. I know Babson well as well. I have my opinion as one of the 25 voters and you are not going to change my mind - especially with the approach you have given in here. Other factors will change my mind.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 06, 2016, 01:34:57 PM

Got my blog out a little quicker this week: http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2016-17/week2

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 06, 2016, 01:37:47 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 06, 2016, 01:34:57 PM
Got my blog out a little quicker this week: http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2016-17/week2

Thats a link to the poll not your blog. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mugsy on December 06, 2016, 01:47:05 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 05, 2016, 06:30:10 PM
Suh-weet! This is North Park's first appearance in the poll since week eight of the 1999-00 season. There was a lot of ugly basketball played by the Vikings between then and now, so this really feels like a payoff for a lot of hard work during Tom Slyder's tenure as head coach to climb back from basketball oblivion; in fact, the current NPU senior class went 4-21, 1-13 as freshmen.

Now to keep it going. The first test certainly won't be an easy one, as NPU has to travel to #16 Illinois Wesleyan the day after tomorrow.

No correlation to NPU appearing on top 25 poll for the 1st time since 1999-00 season and appearing on page 666 of this board. :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on December 06, 2016, 01:59:29 PM

Quote from: sac on December 06, 2016, 01:37:47 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 06, 2016, 01:34:57 PM
Got my blog out a little quicker this week: http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2016-17/week2

Thats a link to the poll not your blog. :)

It's actually here...

http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/12/06/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-2/ (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/12/06/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-2/)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 06, 2016, 02:03:07 PM

Quote from: Mugsy on December 06, 2016, 01:47:05 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 05, 2016, 06:30:10 PM
Suh-weet! This is North Park's first appearance in the poll since week eight of the 1999-00 season. There was a lot of ugly basketball played by the Vikings between then and now, so this really feels like a payoff for a lot of hard work during Tom Slyder's tenure as head coach to climb back from basketball oblivion; in fact, the current NPU senior class went 4-21, 1-13 as freshmen.

Now to keep it going. The first test certainly won't be an easy one, as NPU has to travel to #16 Illinois Wesleyan the day after tomorrow.

No correlation to NPU appearing on top 25 poll for the 1st time since 1999-00 season and appearing on page 666 of this board. :P

Leave it to a Wheaton guy to point that out. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 06, 2016, 02:22:14 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on December 06, 2016, 01:59:29 PM
Quote from: sac on December 06, 2016, 01:37:47 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 06, 2016, 01:34:57 PM
Got my blog out a little quicker this week: http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2016-17/week2

Thats a link to the poll not your blog. :)
It's actually here...

http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/12/06/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-2/ (http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/12/06/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-2/)

Sorry about that... had the wrong link in the paste-queue. Thanks, HOPEful for solving that glitch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on December 06, 2016, 02:23:14 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 06, 2016, 01:34:57 PM
Got my blog out a little quicker this week: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/12/06/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-2/

Dave, I think my favorite part about your blog this week is the references to "the usual suspects". This is far and away my biggest problem with human polls. It seems to me that the traditional powers are always given (in my opinion) too much benifit of the doubt. Amherst still has 19 of the 25 first place votes. That isn't to say the Amherst isn't really good. But St. Lawrence is the only team the Lord Jeffs have played so far this season with a winning record. At this point in the season, I don't understand the arguement for ranking Amherst ahead of Marietta and Babson. If these teams were just Team A, Team B, and Team C, I wonder if those same voters wouldn't switch around their votes slightly.

I also recognize the flip side of this coin in that the traditional names are traditional names for a reason.

And Amherst plays Babson on Thursday, so next weeks #1 will either change or have a much stronger resume for being there...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 06, 2016, 02:46:42 PM

14 – Baldwin Wallace (Unchanged)
As with Tufts, my poll predicted Baldwin Wallace would lose to Hope, so I haven't moved them. That said, this is one of those teams you try and better understand despite not being from a group you know well. I nervously watch to see if the shoe will drop on the Yellow Jackets. Shamelessly, I hope they continue to have a great season.

BW and Hope have not played. Hope played John Carroll last week. BW lost to Marietta.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 06, 2016, 03:19:27 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on December 06, 2016, 02:23:14 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 06, 2016, 01:34:57 PM
Got my blog out a little quicker this week: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/12/06/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-2/

Dave, I think my favorite part about your blog this week is the references to "the usual suspects". This is far and away my biggest problem with human polls. It seems to me that the traditional powers are always given (in my opinion) too much benifit of the doubt. Amherst still has 19 of the 25 first place votes. That isn't to say the Amherst isn't really good. But St. Lawrence is the only team the Lord Jeffs have played so far this season with a winning record. At this point in the season, I don't understand the arguement for ranking Amherst ahead of Marietta and Babson. If these teams were just Team A, Team B, and Team C, I wonder if those same voters wouldn't switch around their votes slightly.

I also recognize the flip side of this coin in that the traditional names are traditional names for a reason.

And Amherst plays Babson on Thursday, so next weeks #1 will either change or have a much stronger resume for being there...

Yeah - you can have this play out either way as you describe. Amherst got a lot of those first-place votes in the preseason and thus why even if Babson and Marietta have better resumes, pollsters aren't going to change. If I feel they are the number one team in the country, it is going to take something happening to that team usually for me to change my mind -i.e. the mentality. I have changed my first-place vote a very few number of times without that team having lost.

The usual suspects argument is something I have made in the past and why I have left teams off or removed teams. I have to be careful, though, not to then punish those types of teams when they may indeed be good.

Quote from: sac on December 06, 2016, 02:46:42 PM
14 – Baldwin Wallace (Unchanged)
As with Tufts, my poll predicted Baldwin Wallace would lose to Hope, so I haven't moved them. That said, this is one of those teams you try and better understand despite not being from a group you know well. I nervously watch to see if the shoe will drop on the Yellow Jackets. Shamelessly, I hope they continue to have a great season.

BW and Hope have not played. Hope played John Carroll last week. BW lost to Marietta.

SMH - sorry. Complete type/brain fart on my part. Not sure why I was thinking Hope. Will go in and fix now. Thanks for mentioning it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 06, 2016, 06:22:13 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 06, 2016, 11:25:25 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 12:08:48 PM
I don't know what better way there is to back up than what I've done. I've looked at the results in the context of the national rankings, in the context of computer rankings, and in their own context (in terms of the consistently high margin of victory, regardless of opponent). I've voted in college and high school polls in the past and this is how I tend to do it. Strength of schedule matters a lot.

But you are also looking at the "context of national rankings" from the admitted, and clearly strong, bias of being a Marietta fan.

Nothing against you or you being a fan, but that can and probably is slanting your point of view. I know if my alma mater was considered I would probably worry about giving them too much or too little credit as I try and balance the tint of my glasses along with my pride. I understand your passion and your claim to have voted in a number of polls, but your bias seems to have a lot of weight even if you have good data you are trying to use. Your "tone" and your approach isn't letting others see them.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 12:08:48 PM
To be honest, the only reason not to support them for #1 is anchoring bias -- the notion that an initial value influences the setting of future values, as in a negotiation -- or, something like this where changing opinion is required. I had this argument on baseball with regard to anchoring bias for teams that start their season earlier (they tend to be stickier even when northern teams start their seasons), but it never really went anywhere even though it's a very well-researched and accepted cognitive bias.

Speaking of tone - "anchoring bias." You start throwing things out there to blame or discredit voters, they, like me, start to tune you out. Heck, it is a fight just to read through every word you write when you speak down to people you disagree with.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 06:17:05 PM
Quote from: mailsy on December 05, 2016, 06:08:00 PM
The new Top 25 is out. I'm sure this is going to lead to more interesting observations. ;D

http://d3hoops.com/top25/index

No real change. Voters on autopilot. No big surprise.

Thanks to Ryan for being the only responsible voter.

Hope the Pios take this as the slight that it is at this point, and stay hungry.

And this is a great example of my point. Voters are not on autopilot. If they were, we would get our polls back an hour after we send them out on Sunday evening... not a full 24 hours later when many of us have poured over the data to make decisions. Also... there is more to vote on than who is number one and where we are going to put your Marietta team.

Responsible voter... that is a joke of a statement, especially from someone who claims to have voted in other polls that I assume were for publication. Quit attacking said voters... you are dangerously close to the NJAC poster reference given earlier. Enjoy the season and the fact Marietta isn't being ignored. Plugging for first place votes and saying voters aren't being responsible could actually hurt your team - leaving negative thoughts with people. Hate to see the Pioneers lose a couple of games, the return on you will be pretty harsh from those on here that are known to have long memories (and it won't be me).

I have Marietta #2. Despite their wins, I think Babson is the better team. I think Babson has better talent on the court with their starting five than Marietta. No, that is NOT a slight at Edwards. It is a compliment to how many players on Babson's squad I think can take over a game at any one point. I also think Flannery is better than Edwards (different positions, I know) and has proven he can put his team on his back - and yes, that could backfire on them as well. And please, don't argue each and every player to me as to why they are better... I am just going to ignore it. I have seen Marietta in person. I will probably see them again. I know Babson well as well. I have my opinion as one of the 25 voters and you are not going to change my mind - especially with the approach you have given in here. Other factors will change my mind.

OK I really don't have a lot of time for this, but suffice to say that I disagree iwth a lot of this, especially the implication that I am speaking and acting out of bias rather than being data-driven.

Anchoring bias isn't just throwing things out there. It's a real thing and it absolutely happens in polling. There's been a lot of writing in behavioral economics and psychology about it. If I was younger I would be going for a PhD in this field. Really interesting stuff.

I often find it more interesting to read the works of people with whom i disagree (though the recent turn of one of our major political parties is really challenging that).

But what is most odious about your post is the implication that you or others would consider changing the way you vote based on a personal vendetta. If this was my poll I would kick you off it right now because that calls into question the integrity of the voting and the poll itself. That's really poor form. Even if you say you wouldn't do it, the fact that it occurs you suggests that you might, and that you would even bring it up and put the thought in someone's head would not be acceptable to me either.

I've voted in numerous AP polls and some nationwide non-AP ones, including in D3. I have never and would never even consider knocking a team down because I don't like them or someone associated with them. Even in 2011 when I was convinced that Marietta would be the team to beat when the rest of the world was riding Heidelberg, I still recognized that Heidelberg was the people's favorite because of what they had done the previous year. I ended up being right, but that's somewhat beside the point in this case. Of course I don't remember exactly where I ranked them, but I know I had Heidelberg ranked pretty high for most of the year. And no one that knows me needs to ask where I stand on them or Wooster.

Speaking of which, I've been on the house mike when Wooster was being presented with a regional championship and called out their names for all tournament and earned compliments from the SID for the professionalism with which I did it.

So yeah, I really don't appreciate either the implications of bias impacting what is a very unbiased defense (I mean seriously what is biased about being ranked like 20% higher than anyone else in Massey, or having won home, road and neutral against ranked teams in the first 6 games, or having won every game by I think it's 18+ points -- and that wasn't even one of the ranked teams; there's just absolutely nothing to pick on there), especially in the face of implying that voters (oh but not you of course ::)) could decide to downgrade a team's ranking based on their opinion of someone.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 06, 2016, 07:45:40 PM

Personal messages may be the way to go now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 06, 2016, 08:48:31 PM

Yes, please.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 06, 2016, 09:11:10 PM

Spence, for you to be SO invested in the polls SO early in the season IS getting tiresome.

You remind me of me eleven years ago. I wasn't protesting the polling (IWU was unanimously #1), but giddiness overtook me and I started giving probabilities of IWU being an undefeated national champion (they finished third in the last season D3 still had a third-place game). Looking back, I blush at how much people must have been put off by those posts. :-[

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie77 on December 06, 2016, 09:23:22 PM

Don't feed the troll!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 06, 2016, 09:30:16 PM

Quote from: augie77 on December 06, 2016, 09:23:22 PM
Don't feed the troll!

I don't think Spence is Appleton Rocks! He is a bit over-invested (and over-enthusiastic) fan, not IMO a troll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 06, 2016, 09:46:11 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 06, 2016, 09:11:10 PM
Spence, for you to be SO invested in the polls SO early in the season IS getting tiresome.

You remind me of me eleven years ago. I wasn't protesting the polling (IWU was unanimously #1), but giddiness overtook me and I started giving probabilities of IWU being an undefeated national champion (they finished third in the last season D3 still had a third-place game). Looking back, I blush at how much people must have been put off by those posts. :-[

That's not going to happen. I don't think there's anything wrong with having the courage of conviction when the facts are on your side. I know that facts aren't really "in" this year, but I do hope there's still a place for them in our country at some point in the future. I'm not invested at all. I spent 23 1/2 straight hours in the same school building yesterday and last night. This is definitely not my priority in any way.

I'm not going to be giving probabilities of anything, though, even though I could, because it's way too easy to look ridiculous. What was the probability fo MC losing to Gwynedd last year? I don't know, but it happened. Predictives is an interest of mine, but that's not really the right application, IMO.

But that doesn't say anything about looking backward at what has already happened and making an honest, eyes-wide-open assessment of it and what it says about the teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 06, 2016, 09:50:06 PM

Quote from: augie77 on December 06, 2016, 09:23:22 PM
Don't feed the troll!

The only post you've made on the topic that I've seen was a blatant troll relating to the Augustana-MC game, which I acknowledged and then sidestepped.

Good talk.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 06, 2016, 11:14:29 PM

Marietta cruises again, +25 at Otterbein. Was up 33-13 after 14 minutes. 10 players played at least 10 minutes.

Dillon Young and Anthony Wallace tied for game high with 19. AJ Edwards had 15 and added 7 offensive rebounds. Marietta got its own rebound almost as often as Otterbein rebounded a Marietta miss (17 off rebs to 18 def reb).

Elsewhere, Tufts lost again. Massively overrated. Lucky not to be on a 3 game losing streak.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 07, 2016, 09:26:08 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 06, 2016, 09:50:06 PM
Quote from: augie77 on December 06, 2016, 09:23:22 PM
Don't feed the troll!

The only post you've made on the topic that I've seen was a blatant troll relating to the Augustana-MC game, which I acknowledged and then sidestepped.

Good talk.

Trolling is not about what one says, but about what one fails to address. A troll is someone who only engages the points on which they can argue and ignores those that make their perspective look weaker - thus filling the page/board/comments with, essentially propaganda - whether it's deserved or not. What I've seen is you making the same argument over and over again with no real new information. People understood your position, engaged a little, you responded. It should've been over. Continued posting is what moves something like this into the troll territory.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 09:30:17 AM

Then I guess once a team is mentioned on this thread, it shall never be spoken of again. Gonna be a pretty short thread.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 07, 2016, 09:32:03 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 09:30:17 AM
Then I guess once a team is mentioned on this thread, it shall never be spoken of again. Gonna be a pretty short thread.

This will be Exhibit B: arguing points nobody made.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 10:12:17 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 07, 2016, 09:32:03 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 09:30:17 AM
Then I guess once a team is mentioned on this thread, it shall never be spoken of again. Gonna be a pretty short thread.

This will be Exhibit B: arguing points nobody made.

Except that you did.

"People understood your position, engaged a little, you responded. It should've been over. "

Why should it be over? Is Marietta off topic for this thread now? No, no they aren't. Far from.

There's a lot of research to back up the benefit of repetition in learning. This really shouldn't be a teaching forum, but apparently it is because 1 voter out of 25 chose the *clearly* best choice. Objectively, it should not even be a discussion. There's Marietta, there's Whitman, and then there's everyone else in terms of what is actually provable with results, and we have enough results that nothing else is really relevant at this point.

Everything else is anchoring bias -- people came into the season with an opinion and they're unwilling to change even in the face of incontrovertible evidence.

But y'all feel free to label me however you want if it makes you feel better.

(FYI, I'm averaging about 3 hours of sleep for about 4-5 days, so any goofy typos are probably attributable to this)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on December 07, 2016, 12:07:22 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 10:12:17 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 07, 2016, 09:32:03 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 09:30:17 AM
Then I guess once a team is mentioned on this thread, it shall never be spoken of again. Gonna be a pretty short thread.

This will be Exhibit B: arguing points nobody made.

Except that you did.

"People understood your position, engaged a little, you responded. It should've been over. "

Why should it be over? Is Marietta off topic for this thread now? No, no they aren't. Far from.

There's a lot of research to back up the benefit of repetition in learning. This really shouldn't be a teaching forum, but apparently it is because 1 voter out of 25 chose the *clearly* best choice. Objectively, it should not even be a discussion. There's Marietta, there's Whitman, and then there's everyone else in terms of what is actually provable with results, and we have enough results that nothing else is really relevant at this point.

Everything else is anchoring bias -- people came into the season with an opinion and they're unwilling to change even in the face of incontrovertible evidence.

But y'all feel free to label me however you want if it makes you feel better.

(FYI, I'm averaging about 3 hours of sleep for about 4-5 days, so any goofy typos are probably attributable to this)

I think Marietta is very probably the best team in Division III right now. I also think you're overstating the case a little bit. I wouldn't have a particular problem with Whitman or Babson or Hope, to name a few. I don't think anything is 'provable' with respect to those teams (and a few others) right now (or even come March).

I would also use the term 'Bayesian prior' instead of 'anchoring bias' in this case. It's very reasonable for voters, fans, and the like to include some amount of weight for a program's recent history when submitting their opinion for who is probably the best team, particularly in the early going (Massey does it).

I value your enthusiasm, however. "Nothing great was ever achieved without enthusiasm." - Ralph Waldo Emerson

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on December 07, 2016, 12:25:49 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 10:12:17 AM
"...incontrovertible evidence..."

= something that does not exist in sports without head to head results.

No one here has denied that Marietta is a really good team. Why is it so important to you that they are recognized as the current #1 in a human poll? Whether a team is ranked #1 or #15 on D3hoops.com in December is completely meaningless. Your team has John Carroll, Wesleyan, and Whitman before Christmas. Wouldn't you rather be excited knowing your team is playing as well as anyone and has the very real opportunity to make this a really special season rather than spending too much time concerned with whether others think they're the best team or "just" elite...

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 10:12:17 AMThere's Marietta, there's Whitman, and then there's everyone else

How? It seems like you are simply using Massey numbers and forming your assessment of every team in D3 basketball based on an SoS algorithm after 5 games. And you're getting angry because most voters don't vote in the exact order of Massey. Marietta looks really good right now. So does Babson. And Amherst. And Whitewater. And Hope. And North Park.

And if Babson goes into Amherst on Saturday and gets a win, I'd be ok if next week all 25 first place votes go to the Beavers. And if Amherst is able to play the same sufficating defense against Flannery and Co., I don't know who, if anyone, will be able to score on them this season. And although I'm usually on the other side of what Dave calls "the usual suspects" aguement, I've seen Amherst win it all twice in the last 10 years. I think Babson would have last year if Flannery didn't get hurt. That counts for something in the eyes of voters.

Marietta is really good. But their case for #1 is far from incontrovertible. Luckily for us all, the polls are mostly for fun and we get to watch in all unfold on the court.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 07, 2016, 01:07:25 PM

For the record, the following statement never mentioned voters and their opinions of Marietta when they voted:

Quote
"Plugging for first place votes and saying voters aren't being responsible could actually hurt your team - leaving negative thoughts with people."

I made sure not to say comments would affect how voters felt about Marietta. I was talking about people in general, especially on these boards, when someone like yourself constantly trolls - Ryan's explanation is best - for one's team. Your comments have no affect on me voting and how I vote... I am quite confident they don't affect the 24 other voters. However, your comments do have an affect those reading them and posting thoughts here. I have seen it in the past and alluded to the NJAC comparison as well. That was what I was talking about.

Quote
Speaking of which, I've been on the house mike when Wooster was being presented with a regional championship and called out their names for all tournament and earned compliments from the SID for the professionalism with which I did it.

Congrats... but has no bearing to the argument. I am a professional announcer and have been for 20+ years. That doesn't mean if my alma mater was in a national conversation it wouldn't be hard to put those feelings aside. That said, I have announced several instances where "my team" wasn't being honored with the hardware and had to announce the moment. I did it... professionally... was thanked for that work... it is what you are supposed to be paid to do.

The voters have Marietta third, right now. They average 22.8 points per voter which is pretty much locked in at #3. I have them second, which means one or two voters probably have them fourth. Not bad. Top 5 at the start of the season. Don't see why we are complaining about it.

As for "anchoring bias," if a pollster has their reasons to vote for a team number one and there is no evidence they see to knock said team down, why should they? You can argue circles around whether or not you feel there is evidence to the contrary, but it comes down to how individual voters feel and if they don't think there is any evidence to change their opinion, who says they should change their opinion? You talk about these boards being a place for opinion, the pollsters are allowed the same freedom. I don't have Amherst number one, but I am not chastising voters who do. I don't see it the same way they do, but I don't tell them they are wrong.

Quote
This really shouldn't be a teaching forum, but apparently it is because 1 voter out of 25 chose the *clearly* best choice. Objectively, it should not even be a discussion.

These two sentences contradict themselves. In an opinion you say, "clearly best choice," followed by "objectively, it should not even be discussed." You aren't being objective. You have clearly stated your affinity for Marietta and haven't proven any objectivity. By telling people there is clearly a best choice, you aren't being objective. By telling people they are wrong for not voting for Marietta, you aren't being objective.

You maybe need some sleep - and that is coming from a guy whose last 20+ years of life have been lived basically sleep deprived (career and health wise). I now try hard to stay off these boards in the evening so I can go to bed, maybe you should try it too and lay off the caffeine. You are fired up, as Ypsi has stated, for no real reason. You just want to the victorious moment Marietta is crowned #1 and you probably will still be ticked off if they aren't unanimous - unless they win the national championship, the chances of a unanimous number one this year for any team are pretty slim.

Good for you on your voting experience (though, in Division III basketball, there is only one poll, so I am not sure where you have actually voted in Division III - nor is it relevant). But to be riding one team so hard and telling other voters they are wrong in how they vote is disturbing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 01:09:28 PM

This is in response to HOPEful (since another reply slipped in there.

If your team has been the best team, why would you not want them to be ranked as such?

That has nothing to do with the future.

Massey is really just support for what I've said other ways regarding schedule and game dominance, and it's obviously not biased in favor of a particular team.

And again, it's not just the ranking, it's the rating. MC is 1.07, Whitman is .91, Hope is .80 (which the polls also are underrating them). So that's basically like 15% above Whitman and more than 25% above Hope, which is the #3 team in the division! Do you really think Massey is off by that much?

Add in the fact that the 3 primary teams being overrated just happen to be from the same region of the country, and it really starts to look like something is going on here.

Sure, other teams are looking good, but no one has looked as good against as good a schedule as Marietta. I don't think many people are even disputing that -- just contending that for some reason it's acceptable to vote on some other basis.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 01:31:01 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 07, 2016, 01:07:25 PM
As for "anchoring bias," if a pollster has their reasons to vote for a team number one and there is no evidence they see to knock said team down, why should they? You can argue circles around whether or not you feel there is evidence to the contrary, but it comes down to how individual voters feel and if they don't think there is any evidence to change their opinion, who says they should change their opinion? You talk about these boards being a place for opinion, the pollsters are allowed the same freedom. I don't have Amherst number one, but I am not chastising voters who do. I don't see it the same way they do, but I don't tell them they are wrong.
Quote

You can't (well you could, but the case isn't very strong) because there's not really the evidence to base that argument. Their bodies of work are not much different. There is evidence on which to base my argument.

Apparently if you support a team, you can't be objective even if you've held jobs more than a decade that required just that. That will probably be news to all of the people that run betting lines or make projections based on public opinion polls...they may have an opinion, so obviously thye can't be objective.

It's ridiculous. You're falling back on bias because you have no other argument, and then you further cast the blame back on me for being "fired up." I guess people are supposed to just not care about such injustices.

Again, it's not like this is close. No one else has close to the body of work. MC could probably lose and still be #2 to Whitman -- the two are that much above everyone else.

I voted in D3 baseball. I also voted in conference polls in D1, and AP polls for several high school sports in different states.

Funny that the guy throwing around implications of backlash against me in voting is disturbed by anything re: the polls.

You should just say I thought Babson was the best team and until they lose I'm not changing my mind. I would at least respect the honesty in that.

I wouldn't be telling the voters (are all of them here?) they're wrong if they weren't so wrong. If it was close, I'd be fine. But it's not close. It's not even close to being close. If someone is a quarter of a lap ahead after 1 lap of a 5 lap race, sure they might not win, but you'd certainly say they were a clear leader in the race.

Feel free to make a fact-based case that someone else other than Whitman has made the best case for itself in the season so far. Even against a tougher schedule and using the bench more liberally in lopsided games, MC has a higher margin of victory than Babson.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 07, 2016, 01:46:20 PM

Per this line: "You should just say I thought Babson was the best team and until they lose I'm not changing my mind. I would at least respect the honesty in that."

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 06, 2016, 11:25:25 AM
I have Marietta #2. Despite their wins, I think Babson is the better team. I think Babson has better talent on the court with their starting five than Marietta. No, that is NOT a slight at Edwards. It is a compliment to how many players on Babson's squad I think can take over a game at any one point. I also think Flannery is better than Edwards (different positions, I know) and has proven he can put his team on his back - and yes, that could backfire on them as well. And please, don't argue each and every player to me as to why they are better... I am just going to ignore it. I have seen Marietta in person. I will probably see them again. I know Babson well as well. I have my opinion as one of the 25 voters and you are not going to change my mind - especially with the approach you have given in here. Other factors will change my mind.

Hey... look at that paragraph of my post yesterday at 11:35 AM ET... did you read that? That comes from the one you quoted and said you didn't have time to respond. Pretty sure I am stating my case.

Furthermore, I have posted my ballot and my point of view for I think five years. Nearly every week of those seasons. I don't shy away from it. I put my ballot and my thoughts out in the open for whomever cares to read them.

Quote
Funny that the guy throwing around implications of backlash against me in voting is disturbed by anything re: the polls.

Are you reading anything I write? I didn't say there would be backlash on the poll, I never mentioned voters in my statement, I said that people in general have not taken well to trolling as the NJAC case is a great example of on these boards. In no way did I mention anything about a backlash, just that people will not take kindly to you and it could taint their impression of Marietta - in their opinions on these boards when you speak. They just aren't going to take the case seriously when you are the author.

Quote
I wouldn't be telling the voters (are all of them here?) they're wrong if they weren't so wrong. If it was close, I'd be fine. But it's not close. It's not even close to being close. If someone is a quarter of a lap ahead after 1 lap of a 5 lap race, sure they might not win, but you'd certainly say they were a clear leader in the race.

Yeah... believe it or not, I know voters are reading these pages, because there have been comments to me about how "they are so wrong." I am not sure what you determine as close. Marietta's vote total has them third... that's close to the top, but again, your determination of close might be something hair-thin. Who knows.

And laps of a race compared to a basketball ~~race~~ poll (Edit: got my mind doing gymnastics to stay with the thought process, apparently)? Wow... ok.

Quote
It's ridiculous. You're falling back on bias because you have no other argument, and then you further cast the blame back on me for being "fired up." I guess people are supposed to just not care about such injustices.

Hmm... made my argument many times as I have stated above. Said it on these boards, blog about it nearly weekly, etc. You are the one who keeps throwing out arguments and "facts," has them countered by people, and then no longer brings them up. I have stated my opinion rather often for who ever wants to read it. I am not falling back on anything, I am just making an argument for why I don't think your "bias" point of view is not necessarily accurate. It may work for you; doesn't work for me. And I am not casting any blame, but I am saying you are a little too worked up on this. But to call this is an injustice is just about the biggest stretch I have read in awhile. ... Nope... NJAC example was based on the same premise. Never mind.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 02:10:25 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 07, 2016, 01:46:20 PM

Yeah... believe it or not, I know voters are reading these pages, because there have been comments to me about how "they are so wrong." I am not sure what you determine as close. Marietta's vote total has them third... that's close to the top, but again, your determination of close might be something hair-thin. Who knows.

And laps of a race compared to a basketball ~~race~~ poll (Edit: got my mind doing gymnastics to stay with the thought process, apparently)? Wow... ok.
Quote

And I'm glad voters are reading. I'm pleasantly surprised. Maybe at some point they'll be convicted.

As for the race, it's an analogy. Think of a season as a 5 lap race. Basically we've finished 1 lap, and MC is like a quarter of a lap ahead of the peloton. Whitman is the only other team ahead of the pack. Which team is ahead? Obvious things are obvious.

You can walk it back all you want but everyone saw what you did. You tried to scare me into line by implying people might vote against my interests because of me. It was odious and despicable and I'd throw you off the poll if it was my poll. I notice you didn't go back and copy that part.

Btw, you can tar me with this NJAC thing all you wnat. I don't know what the **** you're talking about so I don't care. I probably wouldn't care anyway, since you all keep bringing it up. Since I know I'm right and the facts are on my side, I can only assume the same was true in this case and that's why you see it as a basis of comparison. That might not be true, but based on what I know it well could be, and so why would I be bothered by that?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on December 07, 2016, 02:11:26 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 01:31:01 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 07, 2016, 01:07:25 PM
As for "anchoring bias," if a pollster has their reasons to vote for a team number one and there is no evidence they see to knock said team down, why should they? You can argue circles around whether or not you feel there is evidence to the contrary, but it comes down to how individual voters feel and if they don't think there is any evidence to change their opinion, who says they should change their opinion? You talk about these boards being a place for opinion, the pollsters are allowed the same freedom. I don't have Amherst number one, but I am not chastising voters who do. I don't see it the same way they do, but I don't tell them they are wrong.
Quote

You can't (well you could, but the case isn't very strong) because there's not really the evidence to base that argument. Their bodies of work are not much different. There is evidence on which to base my argument.

Apparently if you support a team, you can't be objective even if you've held jobs more than a decade that required just that. That will probably be news to all of the people that run betting lines or make projections based on public opinion polls...they may have an opinion, so obviously thye can't be objective.

It's ridiculous. You're falling back on bias because you have no other argument, and then you further cast the blame back on me for being "fired up." I guess people are supposed to just not care about such injustices.

Again, it's not like this is close. No one else has close to the body of work. MC could probably lose and still be #2 to Whitman -- the two are that much above everyone else.

I voted in D3 baseball. I also voted in conference polls in D1, and AP polls for several high school sports in different states.

Funny that the guy throwing around implications of backlash against me in voting is disturbed by anything re: the polls.

You should just say I thought Babson was the best team and until they lose I'm not changing my mind. I would at least respect the honesty in that.

I wouldn't be telling the voters (are all of them here?) they're wrong if they weren't so wrong. If it was close, I'd be fine. But it's not close. It's not even close to being close. If someone is a quarter of a lap ahead after 1 lap of a 5 lap race, sure they might not win, but you'd certainly say they were a clear leader in the race.

Feel free to make a fact-based case that someone else other than Whitman has made the best case for itself in the season so far. Even against a tougher schedule and using the bench more liberally in lopsided games, MC has a higher margin of victory than Babson.

You've made your point...numerous times. People have responded to you....numerous times. You still don't agree. We're spinning circles here about something that at the end of the day means next to nothing, especially a couple of weeks into the season. I love the Top 25 ranking, it spurs discussion and conversation about teams which is why we're all fans and congregating here. However, it is not criteria for regional rankings, doesn't affect seeding in the NCAA tournament, and guarantees nothing in terms of where your school finishes the season. I know I can't be the only one who has hated logging onto these boards the last several days and seeing another argument over one team's ranking. Relax. Can we move on and talk about something else? There's some great stories out there this season in addition to Marietta.

(modified by GS for formatting)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 02:18:55 PM

I don't think I'm the one keeping this going at this point.

It's pretty much just people having a go at me and making trolling accusations. Ho hum.

I don't think they realize how little I care of their personal views of me. I don't think a lot of most of them either, based on evidence provided here.

If you have this little tolerance of someone that disagrees with you and you feel like you have to tar them with that label or some collection of letters unintelligible to anyone that isn't "in on the joke", then you really haven't earned much respect from me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 03:07:06 PM

Btw, the Kenpommy effort that was posted here earlier has much the same solution as Massey, excepting CMS bc they have only 3 D3 games so far.

It has Marietta 40.2, Hope 32.6, Whitman 31.2. MC 25% above anyone else in the field, and the only team top 10 in adjusted offense and adjusted defense efficiency, again aside from CMS.

So it's not just me, and it's not just me and Massey. There's pretty much no way to make a data-driven argument against Marietta being #1. Apparently everyone else agrees since no one has tried to do it.

http://detroitjockcity.com/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency-ratings/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on December 07, 2016, 03:14:35 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 03:07:06 PM
Btw, the Kenpommy effort that was posted here earlier has much the same solution as Massey, excepting CMS bc they have only 3 D3 games so far.

It has Marietta 40.2, Hope 32.6, Whitman 31.2. MC 25% above anyone else in the field, and the only team top 10 in adjusted offense and adjusted defense efficiency, again aside from CMS.

So it's not just me, and it's not just me and Massey. There's pretty much no way to make a data-driven argument against Marietta being #1. Apparently everyone else agrees since no one has tried to do it.

http://detroitjockcity.com/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency-ratings/

To be clear, the linked data makes such an argument.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 03:17:39 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 07, 2016, 03:14:35 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 03:07:06 PM
Btw, the Kenpommy effort that was posted here earlier has much the same solution as Massey, excepting CMS bc they have only 3 D3 games so far.

It has Marietta 40.2, Hope 32.6, Whitman 31.2. MC 25% above anyone else in the field, and the only team top 10 in adjusted offense and adjusted defense efficiency, again aside from CMS.

So it's not just me, and it's not just me and Massey. There's pretty much no way to make a data-driven argument against Marietta being #1. Apparently everyone else agrees since no one has tried to do it.

http://detroitjockcity.com/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency-ratings/

To be clear, the linked data makes such an argument.

How so?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on December 07, 2016, 03:20:43 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 03:17:39 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 07, 2016, 03:14:35 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 03:07:06 PM
Btw, the Kenpommy effort that was posted here earlier has much the same solution as Massey, excepting CMS bc they have only 3 D3 games so far.

It has Marietta 40.2, Hope 32.6, Whitman 31.2. MC 25% above anyone else in the field, and the only team top 10 in adjusted offense and adjusted defense efficiency, again aside from CMS.

So it's not just me, and it's not just me and Massey. There's pretty much no way to make a data-driven argument against Marietta being #1. Apparently everyone else agrees since no one has tried to do it.

http://detroitjockcity.com/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency-ratings/

To be clear, the linked data makes such an argument.

How so?

In Claremont-Mudd-Scripps being rated #1 and Marietta being rated #2.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 03:24:58 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 07, 2016, 03:20:43 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 03:17:39 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 07, 2016, 03:14:35 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 03:07:06 PM
Btw, the Kenpommy effort that was posted here earlier has much the same solution as Massey, excepting CMS bc they have only 3 D3 games so far.

It has Marietta 40.2, Hope 32.6, Whitman 31.2. MC 25% above anyone else in the field, and the only team top 10 in adjusted offense and adjusted defense efficiency, again aside from CMS.

So it's not just me, and it's not just me and Massey. There's pretty much no way to make a data-driven argument against Marietta being #1. Apparently everyone else agrees since no one has tried to do it.

http://detroitjockcity.com/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency-ratings/

To be clear, the linked data makes such an argument.

How so?

In Claremont-Mudd-Scripps being rated #1 and Marietta being rated #2.

You have to be kidding me. And people accuse me of parroting the computer.

But whatever. Fine. Does anyone care to argue that CMS is the best team and is by nearly 1/2 better than anyone else in the country except Marietta?

Go.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on December 07, 2016, 03:42:52 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 03:24:58 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 07, 2016, 03:20:43 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 03:17:39 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 07, 2016, 03:14:35 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 03:07:06 PM
Btw, the Kenpommy effort that was posted here earlier has much the same solution as Massey, excepting CMS bc they have only 3 D3 games so far.

It has Marietta 40.2, Hope 32.6, Whitman 31.2. MC 25% above anyone else in the field, and the only team top 10 in adjusted offense and adjusted defense efficiency, again aside from CMS.

So it's not just me, and it's not just me and Massey. There's pretty much no way to make a data-driven argument against Marietta being #1. Apparently everyone else agrees since no one has tried to do it.

http://detroitjockcity.com/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency-ratings/

To be clear, the linked data makes such an argument.

How so?

In Claremont-Mudd-Scripps being rated #1 and Marietta being rated #2.

You have to be kidding me. And people accuse me of parroting the computer.

But whatever. Fine. Does anyone care to argue that CMS is the best team and is by nearly 1/2 better than anyone else in the country except Marietta?

Go.

None of us has taken that position, I don't think. Of course there's tons of uncertainty in CMS's data. Just like there's tons of uncertainty (though less) in Martietta's data.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 04:05:53 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 07, 2016, 03:42:52 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 03:24:58 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 07, 2016, 03:20:43 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 03:17:39 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 07, 2016, 03:14:35 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 03:07:06 PM
Btw, the Kenpommy effort that was posted here earlier has much the same solution as Massey, excepting CMS bc they have only 3 D3 games so far.

It has Marietta 40.2, Hope 32.6, Whitman 31.2. MC 25% above anyone else in the field, and the only team top 10 in adjusted offense and adjusted defense efficiency, again aside from CMS.

So it's not just me, and it's not just me and Massey. There's pretty much no way to make a data-driven argument against Marietta being #1. Apparently everyone else agrees since no one has tried to do it.

http://detroitjockcity.com/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency-ratings/

To be clear, the linked data makes such an argument.

How so?

In Claremont-Mudd-Scripps being rated #1 and Marietta being rated #2.

You have to be kidding me. And people accuse me of parroting the computer.

But whatever. Fine. Does anyone care to argue that CMS is the best team and is by nearly 1/2 better than anyone else in the country except Marietta?

Go.

None of us has taken that position, I don't think. Of course there's tons of uncertainty in CMS's data. Just like there's tons of uncertainty (though less) in Martietta's data.

Again, how so?

They've played more than double the games and there's basically no game they've played that you can reasonably say they should have lost or could have lost.

The difference is massive, which is why no one has tried to make that argument about CMS. It's patently foolish. If they're still there in 2 more games, then maybe you have to ask why.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 07, 2016, 04:39:16 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 01:31:01 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 07, 2016, 01:07:25 PM
As for "anchoring bias," if a pollster has their reasons to vote for a team number one and there is no evidence they see to knock said team down, why should they? You can argue circles around whether or not you feel there is evidence to the contrary, but it comes down to how individual voters feel and if they don't think there is any evidence to change their opinion, who says they should change their opinion? You talk about these boards being a place for opinion, the pollsters are allowed the same freedom. I don't have Amherst number one, but I am not chastising voters who do. I don't see it the same way they do, but I don't tell them they are wrong.
Quote

You can't (well you could, but the case isn't very strong) because there's not really the evidence to base that argument. Their bodies of work are not much different. There is evidence on which to base my argument.

Apparently if you support a team, you can't be objective even if you've held jobs more than a decade that required just that. That will probably be news to all of the people that run betting lines or make projections based on public opinion polls...they may have an opinion, so obviously thye can't be objective.

It's ridiculous. You're falling back on bias because you have no other argument, and then you further cast the blame back on me for being "fired up." I guess people are supposed to just not care about such injustices.

Again, it's not like this is close. No one else has close to the body of work. MC could probably lose and still be #2 to Whitman -- the two are that much above everyone else.

I voted in D3 baseball. I also voted in conference polls in D1, and AP polls for several high school sports in different states.

Funny that the guy throwing around implications of backlash against me in voting is disturbed by anything re: the polls.

You should just say I thought Babson was the best team and until they lose I'm not changing my mind. I would at least respect the honesty in that.

I wouldn't be telling the voters (are all of them here?) they're wrong if they weren't so wrong. If it was close, I'd be fine. But it's not close. It's not even close to being close. If someone is a quarter of a lap ahead after 1 lap of a 5 lap race, sure they might not win, but you'd certainly say they were a clear leader in the race.

Feel free to make a fact-based case that someone else other than Whitman has made the best case for itself in the season so far. Even against a tougher schedule and using the bench more liberally in lopsided games, MC has a higher margin of victory than Babson.

When you don't format properly and your replies end up getting mixed in with the original statements within a quote box, I just skip right past the post without reading it. And I'm sure that I'm not the only one.

If you're going to be so painstaking in your replies, take the time to format your post properly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 04:47:16 PM

I don't suppose it would help if I said that as far as I could tell, there was nothing I could do to improve the formatting. I checked.

Anything to criticize me at this point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 04:49:53 PM

Oh dammit. Apparently you can't stop it from formatting when you don't want it to either.

Basically I just cut some out of Dave's post because it wasn't relevant to my reply and made the post even longer. And it came out like that. I didn't put my post inside of any quote statement.

I don't know how to show this without posting the code, but I can't do that without it formatting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 07, 2016, 04:50:55 PM

Please, spare us the paranoia. All I said was that if you don't format properly, you run the risk of having people skip past your post. Nobody likes to have to sort out who is saying what when they're reading dialogue. That's all.

The "preview" button is there for a reason.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 05:02:06 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 07, 2016, 04:50:55 PM
Please, spare us the paranoia. All I said was that if you don't format properly, you run the risk of having people skip past your post. Nobody likes to have to sort out who is saying what when they're reading dialogue. That's all.

The "preview" button is there for a reason.

There wasn't anything wrong about the formatting, though. It looked just like your post does now. Quote statement, text, closed quote. I did that on purpose to make it simple, rather than trying to do the in-stream replying, which ironically would have made it much more difficult to follow than that about which you are complaining now.

Previewing wouldn't give me any way to change what it decided to do. I don't know why it does it different if you edit inside of the previous post.

I don't think it's that hard to work out who is saying what, though, really, unless you think Dave quoted himself for some reason.

Anything to pick a fight with me though. Paranoia, indeed. It's not paranoia if they really are out to get you, and clearly this thread is now for the crime of making an inarguable point that runs counter to the majority view. Fiery pitchforks and all of that.

It's not hard to see why comfortable lies propagate much more easily than inconvenient truth.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 05:06:07 PM

Whatever, I have things to do and I need a break from you jagoffs anyway.

I haven't seen a bunch of people so hell bent on clinging to lies since Election Day.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 07, 2016, 05:09:28 PM

(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/5b/15/2e/5b152e865bc82ebd66242df033137a31.jpg)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 07, 2016, 05:12:41 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 05:02:06 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 07, 2016, 04:50:55 PM
Please, spare us the paranoia. All I said was that if you don't format properly, you run the risk of having people skip past your post. Nobody likes to have to sort out who is saying what when they're reading dialogue. That's all.

The "preview" button is there for a reason.

There wasn't anything wrong about the formatting, though. It looked just like your post does now. Quote statement, text, closed quote.

There's your problem. You need to close the quote after the quoted statement and before your text; otherwise, your new text gets included within a quote box.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 05:02:06 PMI did that on purpose to make it simple, rather than trying to do the in-stream replying, which ironically would have made it much more difficult to follow than that about which you are complaining now.

Previewing wouldn't give me any way to change what it decided to do. I don't know why it does it different if you edit inside of the previous post.

The whole point of previewing is that it shows you exactly how a post will appear once you post it. If what you're seeing on the preview screen isn't right, you then have the chance to edit (or re-edit) until it does turn out the way it's supposed to look.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 05:02:06 PMI don't think it's that hard to work out who is saying what, though, really, unless you think Dave quoted himself for some reason.

New text should not appear within a quote box. That seems pretty self-explanatory.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 05:02:06 PMAnything to pick a fight with me though. Paranoia, indeed.

I am not trying to pick a fight with you. I am patiently attempting to explain to you that you're hampering your ability to communicate your points because your formatting is faulty. This is an attempt to aid you, not an attempt to goad you.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 05:02:06 PMIt's not paranoia if they really are out to get you, and clearly this thread is now for the crime of making an inarguable point that runs counter to the majority view. Fiery pitchforks and all of that.

It's not hard to see why comfortable lies propagate much more easily than inconvenient truth.

(https://67.media.tumblr.com/02eddcf103eca015d58bf54980a2e777/tumblr_nzigbanjEM1tq4of6o1_500.gif)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 06:21:15 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 07, 2016, 05:12:41 PM
There's your problem. You need to close the quote after the quoted statement and before your text; otherwise, your new text gets included within a quote box.

Except that's not what I said.

I said your statement was open quote, text, closed quote. YOUR statement, YOUR text. My text was after the quote.

Like this (all i've done is change the brackets to parentheses):
------
(quote author=Gregory Sager link=topic=4097.msg1778092#msg1778092 date=1481148761)
There's your problem. You need to close the quote after the quoted statement and before your text; otherwise, your new text gets included within a quote box.
(/quote)
------

Looked the same way.
FFS who cares? Take it up with Pat. I followed normal coding convention. I don't know why it did what it did. Looks like it's did with the posts from Dave but not yours. Why don't we do a test where I reply to everyone in such a way so we can see what it does? Won't that be fun? Because it's soooo important.

I'm out. Have fun getting your pedant on figuring this out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on December 07, 2016, 06:22:53 PM

Not to get caught up in this debacle, er, debate, how exciting that Marietta plays games at Daytona Beach on Dec 21 and 22, against undefeated Wesleyan, then undefeated Whitman. What a great tourney. I'll be down that way, but unfortunately not until right after Christmas.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 07, 2016, 07:25:11 PM

I think the old Earlham poster made more sense than this guy.

You know it's true!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 07, 2016, 07:58:31 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 07, 2016, 07:25:11 PM
I think the old Earlham poster made more sense than this guy.

You know it's true!!!

I don't recall the Earlham poster, but, while MORE insulting than our 'friend' from Richard Stockton, Spence does at least type better than he did!

TGHIJGSTO ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 07, 2016, 10:25:36 PM

I'm more shocked there was an Earlham poster than just about anything else I've encountered here.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 07, 2016, 10:41:53 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

As a public service, I've highlighted a result that deserves extra attention, in case anyone had not yet heard the news.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	611	Amherst	6-0	def. Brandeis, 76-58; 12/08 vs. #2 Babson; 12/10 vs. Lasell
#2	603	Babson	9-0	12/08 at #1 Amherst
#3	572	Marietta	7-0	won at Otterbein, 79-54; 12/10 at John Carroll
#4	529	Whitman	5-0	def. #7 Whitworth, 79-65; 12/10 vs. Covenant
#5	507	Tufts	6-2	LOST to Mass-Boston, 74-76; 12/10 at Wentworth
#6	479	Christopher Newport	5-1	12/11 vs. York (Pa.)
#7	474	Whitworth	4-1	LOST at #4 Whitman, 65-79; 12/09 vs. Covenant
#8	408	St. Norbert	4-1	def. Lawrence, 76-45; 12/10 at Cornell
#9	392	North Central (Ill.)	4-2	LOST to Carthage, 75-85; 12/10 at Millikin
#10	367	UW-Eau Claire	7-0	def. Viterbo, 68-59; 12/10 at Buena Vista; 12/11 at #41 Wartburg
#11	358	Rochester	9-0	def. SUNY Geneseo, 82-80
#12	340	Hope	5-1	12/10 vs. UW-Stevens Point
#13	313	Washington U.	6-1	def. Fontbonne, 103-64; 12/10 at Central
#14	277	Benedictine	5-2	won at Milwaukee Engineering, 71-52; 12/10 vs. Edgewood
#15	274	Salisbury	6-0	12/10 at Southern Virginia
#16	193	Illinois Wesleyan	5-2	LOST to #18 North Park, 68-72; 12/10 at Elmhurst
#17	165	Wooster	4-3	LOST at Hiram, 68-72; 12/10 vs. DePauw
#18	146	North Park	6-0	won at #16 Illinois Wesleyan, 72-68; 12/10 vs. T#45 Carroll
#19	135	Keene State	5-1	12/08 at Lasell; 12/10 vs. Mass-Boston
#20	124	Endicott	5-1	won at University of New England, 78-65; 12/08 vs. Salem State; 12/10 vs. Bridgewater State
#21	111	St. Thomas	4-3	LOST to Hamline, 61-74; 12/10 vs. St. John's
#22	96	Swarthmore	7-0	won at Ursinus, 75-67
#23	89	Susquehanna	5-1	12/09 vs. Trinity (Conn.); 12/10 at TBA
#24	76	Baldwin Wallace	5-1	def. Heidelberg, 67-64; 12/10 at Muskingum
#25	73	Denison	7-0	won at Oberlin, 72-69; 12/10 at Wittenberg

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	58	UW-Whitewater	4-0	12/08 vs. Rockford; 12/10 vs. Kalamazoo; 12/11 vs. George Fox
#27	52	Augustana	6-2	def. Wheaton (Ill.), 73-71; 12/10 vs. Carthage
#28	35	New Jersey City	7-1	won at Kean, 78-52; 12/10 vs. TCNJ
#29	34	Skidmore	5-2	LOST at T#45 Plattsburgh State, 78-86; 12/10 at T#33 Middlebury
#30	24	UW-River Falls	7-1	def. UW-Superior, 92-63
T#31	23	Emory	6-2	def. Rust, 93-72
T#31	23	Lycoming	6-1	12/10 at Widener
T#33	19	Middlebury	6-1	won at Southern Vermont, 86-72; 12/10 vs. #29 Skidmore
T#33	19	Scranton	6-1	IDLE
T#33	19	Wesleyan (Conn.)	8-0	def. Vassar, 77-53; 12/10 at Westfield State
#36	18	Chicago	6-1	IDLE
#37	17	Virginia Wesleyan	6-2	won at Averett, 104-76
#38	16	Neumann	7-0	won at Delaware Valley, 105-77; 12/10 vs. Catholic
#39	13	Mount St. Joseph	6-1	12/10 at Manchester
#40	11	Brockport	6-1	LOST at Hobart, 52-65; 12/09 at SUNY Potsdam; 12/10 at T#45 Plattsburgh State
#41	7	Wartburg	7-1	won at Coe, 70-66; 12/11 vs. #10 UW-Eau Claire
T#42	5	Lynchburg	4-2	12/09 vs. Case Western Reserve; 12/10 vs. TBA
T#42	5	Ramapo	7-0	won at Rutgers-Newark, 68-46; 12/10 vs. Kean
#44	4	Guilford	5-1	12/10 at Methodist
T#45	3	Carroll	4-2	LOST to Elmhurst, 56-69; 12/10 at #18 North Park
T#45	3	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	5-0	12/09 at Whittier
T#45	3	Plattsburgh State	6-1	def. #29 Skidmore, 86-78; 12/09 vs. SUNY Geneseo; 12/10 vs. #40 Brockport
T#48	1	UW-La Crosse	5-2	12/10 vs. Loras
T#48	1	WPI	6-2	def. Massachusetts College, 105-68; 12/10 at Salem State

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 07, 2016, 10:58:03 PM

Quote from: sac on December 07, 2016, 10:25:36 PM
I'm more shocked there was an Earlham poster than just about anything else I've encountered here.

Pix or it didn't happen.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 07, 2016, 10:58:34 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 07, 2016, 10:58:03 PM
Quote from: sac on December 07, 2016, 10:25:36 PM
I'm more shocked there was an Earlham poster than just about anything else I've encountered here.

Pix or it didn't happen.

Wait, I remember -- did he talk an inordinate amount about 3-pointers?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 07, 2016, 11:25:43 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 07, 2016, 10:58:34 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 07, 2016, 10:58:03 PM
Quote from: sac on December 07, 2016, 10:25:36 PM
I'm more shocked there was an Earlham poster than just about anything else I've encountered here.

Pix or it didn't happen.

Wait, I remember -- did he talk an inordinate amount about 3-pointers?

Yep, that's the guy. And smeds quoted his catchphrase.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on December 07, 2016, 11:45:15 PM

+ 1 Karma to those who made me chuckle tonight and just shaking my head to our newest TGHIJGSTO ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 07, 2016, 11:57:07 PM

Quote from: mailsy on December 07, 2016, 11:45:15 PM
+ 1 Karma to those who made me chuckle tonight and just shaking my head to our newest TGHIJGSTO ;D

And the best part about it is that he's totally seriopus.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on December 08, 2016, 12:59:35 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 07, 2016, 11:57:07 PM
Quote from: mailsy on December 07, 2016, 11:45:15 PM
+ 1 Karma to those who made me chuckle tonight and just shaking my head to our newest TGHIJGSTO ;D

And the best part about it is that he's totally seriopus.

I been waiting for that quote for the past 3 days!!! ;D Plus 1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 08, 2016, 01:15:35 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 07, 2016, 11:25:43 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 07, 2016, 10:58:34 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 07, 2016, 10:58:03 PM
Quote from: sac on December 07, 2016, 10:25:36 PM
I'm more shocked there was an Earlham poster than just about anything else I've encountered here.

Pix or it didn't happen.

Wait, I remember -- did he talk an inordinate amount about 3-pointers?

Yep, that's the guy. And smeds quoted his catchphrase.

He was all about boosting Travis Brett for his skills. I think he may have been Travis Brett himself, or a relative.

And now, he's an insurance agent down in his home county.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 08, 2016, 07:39:43 AM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 07, 2016, 10:41:53 PM
How They Fared (So Far)

As a public service, I've highlighted a result that deserves extra attention, in case anyone had not yet heard the news.
...

I have finally answered the question, "What can I do that would make someone smite me?"

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on December 08, 2016, 08:15:31 AM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 08, 2016, 07:39:43 AM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 07, 2016, 10:41:53 PM
How They Fared (So Far)

As a public service, I've highlighted a result that deserves extra attention, in case anyone had not yet heard the news.
...

I have finally answered the question, "What can I do that would make someone smite me?"

You should be flattered. A smite just means he's smitten.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fantasiescometrue.com%2Fimages%2Fmedium%2Ffct_9927d7ec3951dd5.jpg&hash=f32ff900f838e578ca0d0cb36a17d74175c55be3)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on December 08, 2016, 10:04:19 AM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 08, 2016, 07:39:43 AM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 07, 2016, 10:41:53 PM
How They Fared (So Far)

As a public service, I've highlighted a result that deserves extra attention, in case anyone had not yet heard the news.
...

I have finally answered the question, "What can I do that would make someone smite me?"

Consider it a badge of honor!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 08, 2016, 10:58:42 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 01:00:43 AM
For you people negging me for stating a case and enumerating facts, you know I don't care, right? I don't neg people for disagreeing with me because it's stupid and I generally don't care enough.

"If everybody likes you, you're doing it wrong."

Darryl,

Guess you should disagree with him. Then he won't smite.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 08, 2016, 11:21:13 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 08, 2016, 10:58:42 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 01:00:43 AM
For you people negging me for stating a case and enumerating facts, you know I don't care, right? I don't neg people for disagreeing with me because it's stupid and I generally don't care enough.

"If everybody likes you, you're doing it wrong."

Darryl,

Guess you should disagree with him. Then he won't smite.

To be fair, I don't actually know who it was that dinged me ...

In any case, it's sort of a relief to finally get that first smiting out of the way.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on December 08, 2016, 11:24:46 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 01:09:28 PMIf your team has been the best team, why would you not want them to be ranked as such?"

It's one thing to want, and another to demand. If human ranks were solely based on metrics and algorithms, they would cease to exist. Humans have watched Joey Flannery, Johnny McCarthy, and A.J. Edwards play and dispite what you may think, it is concievable that at this point in the season, the "eye test" gives a slight nod to the reigning All American or the Lord Jeffs.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 01:09:28 PMAnd again, it's not just the ranking, it's the rating. MC is 1.07, Whitman is .91, Hope is .80 (which the polls also are underrating them). So that's basically like 15% above Whitman and more than 25% above Hope, which is the #3 team in the division! Do you really think Massey is off by that much?

It's not that Massey is "off" but that the sample size is still too small. Too compensate for a lack of data, at this point in the season Massey has to in part go off of last year's data. I will use Hope as my example, because I am most familiar with them... I am very happy with their play so far this season, but I will be the first to admit that they are NOT a top 5 team yet. But Massey gives them quality wins for beating Stout, River Falls, John Carroll, and La Crosse. I watched all of these games and can tell you that the only team that looked truly impressive was La Crosse, and they lost to Luther. The numbers don't lie, but without enough data, they can decieve.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 01:09:28 PMAdd in the fact that the 3 primary teams being overrated just happen to be from the same region of the country, and it really starts to look like something is going on here.

What's going on here is that the whole region is being elivated by last years results. St. Thomas (4-3), St. Olaf (2-3), Wooster (4-3), John Carroll (2-4), Alma (1-6), Dubuque (2-3), Wheaton (4-3), etc. all appear as better wins currently than they acually should/will be when the data normalizes. Yes, Marietta beat Wooster by 29. But that win is not nearly as sexy after the Scots lost to Hiram (2-5). There just isn't enough data yet to trust the computer rankings!

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 07, 2016, 01:09:28 PMSure, other teams are looking good, but no one has looked as good against as good a schedule as Marietta. I don't think many people are even disputing that -- just contending that for some reason it's acceptable to vote on some other basis.

Because it is acceptable. No one ever defined the rankings to be "the teams that looked the best against the best". That's one way to vote (and a very good way to vote as well). But there are perfectly acceptable other ways.

Like, "if the playoffs started today, who would I put the best odds on to win it all?" or "Head-to-head who would I pick to win?"... And if a voter told me they thought head-to-head Joey Flannery would carry Babson past Marietta or that Amherst's defense would test Edwards and Richardson in ways they haven't been tested so far this season, I could disagree with them, but I could also see and respect their opinion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 08, 2016, 11:50:30 AM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 08, 2016, 11:21:13 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 08, 2016, 10:58:42 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 05, 2016, 01:00:43 AM
For you people negging me for stating a case and enumerating facts, you know I don't care, right? I don't neg people for disagreeing with me because it's stupid and I generally don't care enough.

"If everybody likes you, you're doing it wrong."

Darryl,

Guess you should disagree with him. Then he won't smite.

To be fair, I don't actually know who it was that dinged me ...

In any case, it's sort of a relief to finally get that first smiting out of the way.

Since you'd gone 11 years without a smite, I am pretty sure it's not on you.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie77 on December 08, 2016, 11:56:39 AM

I yanked on his chain and walked away smite-free. Pretty sure it wasn't Spencer. +1 Darryl!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 08, 2016, 12:08:25 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 08, 2016, 11:50:30 AM
Since you'd gone 11 years without a smite, I am pretty sure it's not on you.

I'm like the Forty-Year-Old Virgin of D3Boards posters.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/43/40-Year-OldVirginMoviePoster.jpg)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on December 08, 2016, 01:24:28 PM

That's what she said! 8-)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 08, 2016, 01:47:45 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 08, 2016, 07:39:43 AM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 07, 2016, 10:41:53 PM
How They Fared (So Far)

As a public service, I've highlighted a result that deserves extra attention, in case anyone had not yet heard the news.
...

I have finally answered the question, "What can I do that would make someone smite me?"

I'd like to know who smote Darryl, so that I can give him a piece of my mind. That's like yanking the ladder out from under the lineman who has just spent all night restoring your electricity after a storm.

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 08, 2016, 12:08:25 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 08, 2016, 11:50:30 AM
Since you'd gone 11 years without a smite, I am pretty sure it's not on you.

I'm like the Forty-Year-Old Virgin of D3Boards posters.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/43/40-Year-OldVirginMoviePoster.jpg)

Looks like someone has just pulled a piece of tape off of your bare chest, Darryl. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on December 08, 2016, 02:02:47 PM

As far as polls go, MHO has always been that, more than anything, voters like WINS. The teams that are good enough to truly be among the nation's elite, and that are able to beat just about any team from any region, are naturally going to chalk up those wins.
However, there are always going to be some teams that consistently appear in the Top 25 that really aren't that good. This is due primarily due to the fact that they play a weak non-conference schedule or play in a weak conference where they dominate either all the other teams or all but one of them or, in some cases, are teams that both play a weak non-con schedule and play in a generally weak conference. Teams that play in stronger conferences and beat each other up will often suffer in a poll.

Also, and I know the powers that be will probably dispute this, but two, possibly three, things also seem pretty natural:
1. I think there is some regional bias built in. Northeastern or Eastern basketball is better than Great Lakes, Central or Western basketball, or vice versa.
2. Familiarity. How well does a voter in Mass really know teams in Ohio, Illinois, or Wisconsin?
3. Habit. Team X is always good. They must be better than their not so current record would seem to indicate. I almost always vote for them. They have to be at least the 20th or so best teams in the country.

So, if you're not one of the truly best teams, you will be well served, poll-wise, by playing weak non-conf teams and in a weaker conference. Both circumstances will help you rack up lots of WINS which makes you very attractive even though you're really just pretty. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 08, 2016, 02:14:43 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 08, 2016, 01:47:45 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 08, 2016, 07:39:43 AM
I'm like the Forty-Year-Old Virgin of D3Boards posters.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/43/40-Year-OldVirginMoviePoster.jpg)

Looks like someone has just pulled a piece of tape off of your bare chest, Darryl. ;)

(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/bb/40/26/bb4026a6b6eed38e7f6f59b1edbc60f2.jpg)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 08, 2016, 02:34:26 PM

Quote from: AndOne on December 08, 2016, 02:02:47 PM
1. I think there is some regional bias built in. Northeastern or Eastern basketball is better than Great Lakes, Central or Western basketball, or vice versa.

I completely disagree with this. I think many of our voters, and I know myself, don't think this way at all. In fact, I think most would argue and agree the proof has been that GL, Central, and some of the West is better than the East - especially deeper. However, I would say individual teams will prove that otherwise - Lancaster Bible is a great example of that especially after playing a weak schedule. But no, I don't think the voters think this way at all.

Quote from: AndOne on December 08, 2016, 02:02:47 PM
2. Familiarity. How well does a voter in Mass really know teams in Ohio, Illinois, or Wisconsin?

Thus the reason there are three voters from each of the eight regions in the country. To outweigh any familiarity. Sure, there is going to be this... but that is why, by design, there are three voters in each region. It serves two purposes: to make sure the voting is "weighted" geographically/regionally as fairly as possible; to allow teams who may be ignored by some voters to get some attention that they may very well deserve. Sure, it is hard to know teams around the country, but I think the D3hoops (along with football) polls may be the best at achieving this knowledge as any I have seen in Division III. Webstreaming has also been invaluable along with the increase of cross-country, cross-regional play especially early on in a season.

Quote from: AndOne on December 08, 2016, 02:02:47 PM
3. Habit. Team X is always good. They must be better than their not so current record would seem to indicate. I almost always vote for them. They have to be at least the 20th or so best teams in the country.

I have even admitted this can sometimes be a challenge. Voters become familiar with teams like Wooster, Amherst, Whitewater, Stevens Point, name a CCIW, St. Thomas, etc. because they are always good. F&M remains highly considered because Robinson always wins. I think this is the hardest habit to break because these teams also prove year in and year out to be in the conversation. Two years ago I didn't vote for UWSP until the last half or third of the season - I thought the luster was gone. I was one of a few or the only one; they went on to win the national championship. Last year, I down played Wooster a lot and didn't include them in my rankings for many weeks, they looked good and finished in the second weekend of the tournament (had a legit chance of making it again to Salem. Those examples are times when I as a voter try and buck the trend and it comes back to remind me that they are good - which makes it even harder to ignore them later.

Quote from: AndOne on December 08, 2016, 02:02:47 PM
So, if you're not one of the truly best teams, you will be well served, poll-wise, by playing weak non-conf teams and in a weaker conference. Both circumstances will help you rack up lots of WINS which makes you very attractive even though you're really just pretty. ;)

This, along with your first part I didn't quote, doesn't always hold water. There are plenty of teams right now who have lots of wins early in the season who aren't getting votes or at least not in the Top 25. If that was the case, every undefeated team (there are 24) would be nationally ranked. Also, Lancaster Bible would have jumped up in our poll last year faster and higher. Same with Benedictine (though, they had some games that allowed voters to realize their quality faster than LBC). Yes, wins certainly help, but you can gain a lot of information in losses as well. There also just isn't a system voters agree on. I talk to up to ten voters a week to get their take on things or they to get my take... none of us have the same read on things and none of us have the same "forumula."

(modified by GS for formatting)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on December 08, 2016, 03:04:46 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 07, 2016, 05:12:41 PM
There's your problem. You need to close the quote after the quoted statement and before your text; otherwise, your new text gets included within a quote box.

Mr Sager, to be fair you need to scold Dave now too! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 08, 2016, 03:08:09 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 08, 2016, 02:34:26 PM
Quote from: AndOne on December 08, 2016, 02:02:47 PM
1. I think there is some regional bias built in. Northeastern or Eastern basketball is better than Great Lakes, Central or Western basketball, or vice versa.
[/quote/
I completely disagree with this. I think many of our voters, and I know myself, don't think this way at all. In fact, I think most would argue and agree the proof has been that GL, Central, and some of the West is better than the East - especially deeper. However, I would say individual teams will prove that otherwise - Lancaster Bible is a great example of that especially after playing a weak schedule. But no, I don't think the voters think this way at all.

Quote from: AndOne on December 08, 2016, 02:02:47 PM
2. Familiarity. How well does a voter in Mass really know teams in Ohio, Illinois, or Wisconsin?
Thus the reason there are three voters from each of the eight regions in the country. To outweigh any familiarity. Sure, there is going to be this... but that is why, by design, there are three voters in each region. It serves two purposes: to make sure the voting is "weighted" geographically/regionally as fairly as possible; to allow teams who may be ignored by some voters to get some attention that they may very well deserve. Sure, it is hard to know teams around the country, but I think the D3hoops (along with football) polls may be the best at achieving this knowledge as any I have seen in Division III. Webstreaming has also been invaluable along with the increase of cross-country, cross-regional play especially early on in a season.

Quote from: AndOne on December 08, 2016, 02:02:47 PM
3. Habit. Team X is always good. They must be better than their not so current record would seem to indicate. I almost always vote for them. They have to be at least the 20th or so best teams in the country.
I have even admitted this can sometimes be a challenge. Voters become familiar with teams like Wooster, Amherst, Whitewater, Stevens Point, name a CCIW, St. Thomas, etc. because they are always good. F&M remains highly considered because Robinson always wins. I think this is the hardest habit to break because these teams also prove year in and year out to be in the conversation. Two years ago I didn't vote for UWSP until the last half or third of the season - I thought the luster was gone. I was one of a few or the only one; they went on to win the national championship. Last year, I down played Wooster a lot and didn't include them in my rankings for many weeks, they looked good and finished in the second weekend of the tournament (had a legit chance of making it again to Salem. Those examples are times when I as a voter try and buck the trend and it comes back to remind me that they are good - which makes it even harder to ignore them later.

Quote from: AndOne on December 08, 2016, 02:02:47 PM
So, if you're not one of the truly best teams, you will be well served, poll-wise, by playing weak non-conf teams and in a weaker conference. Both circumstances will help you rack up lots of WINS which makes you very attractive even though you're really just pretty. ;)

This, along with your first part I didn't quote, doesn't always hold water. There are plenty of teams right now who have lots of wins early in the season who aren't getting votes or at least not in the Top 25. If that was the case, every undefeated team (there are 24) would be nationally ranked. Also, Lancaster Bible would have jumped up in our poll last year faster and higher. Same with Benedictine (though, they had some games that allowed voters to realize their quality faster than LBC). Yes, wins certainly help, but you can gain a lot of information in losses as well. There also just isn't a system voters agree on. I talk to up to ten voters a week to get their take on things or they to get my take... none of us have the same read on things and none of us have the same "forumula."

IMPROPER FORMATTING KLAXON

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi411.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fpp200%2Fheicher7%2FRed-Siren-Animated.gif&hash=afb374a611e9c0b241edd5e6da9f1360fe9f47b1)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 08, 2016, 03:08:59 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on December 08, 2016, 03:04:46 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 07, 2016, 05:12:41 PM
There's your problem. You need to close the quote after the quoted statement and before your text; otherwise, your new text gets included within a quote box.
Mr Sager, to be fair you need to scold Dave now too! ;D

Actually, Dave is the common denominator here.

I don't expect I'll be getting an apology.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 08, 2016, 03:13:58 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on December 08, 2016, 03:04:46 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 07, 2016, 05:12:41 PM
There's your problem. You need to close the quote after the quoted statement and before your text; otherwise, your new text gets included within a quote box.
Mr Sager, to be fair you need to scold Dave now too! ;D

Duly noted. Come take your punishment, D-Mac:

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fclutterinclarityout.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F09%2F1.jpg&hash=1e66d37e2a3cecc6352e6c11ad2836386499c40b)

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 08, 2016, 03:08:09 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 08, 2016, 02:34:26 PM
Quote from: AndOne on December 08, 2016, 02:02:47 PM
1. I think there is some regional bias built in. Northeastern or Eastern basketball is better than Great Lakes, Central or Western basketball, or vice versa.
[/quote/
I completely disagree with this. I think many of our voters, and I know myself, don't think this way at all. In fact, I think most would argue and agree the proof has been that GL, Central, and some of the West is better than the East - especially deeper. However, I would say individual teams will prove that otherwise - Lancaster Bible is a great example of that especially after playing a weak schedule. But no, I don't think the voters think this way at all.

Quote from: AndOne on December 08, 2016, 02:02:47 PM
2. Familiarity. How well does a voter in Mass really know teams in Ohio, Illinois, or Wisconsin?
Thus the reason there are three voters from each of the eight regions in the country. To outweigh any familiarity. Sure, there is going to be this... but that is why, by design, there are three voters in each region. It serves two purposes: to make sure the voting is "weighted" geographically/regionally as fairly as possible; to allow teams who may be ignored by some voters to get some attention that they may very well deserve. Sure, it is hard to know teams around the country, but I think the D3hoops (along with football) polls may be the best at achieving this knowledge as any I have seen in Division III. Webstreaming has also been invaluable along with the increase of cross-country, cross-regional play especially early on in a season.

Quote from: AndOne on December 08, 2016, 02:02:47 PM
3. Habit. Team X is always good. They must be better than their not so current record would seem to indicate. I almost always vote for them. They have to be at least the 20th or so best teams in the country.
I have even admitted this can sometimes be a challenge. Voters become familiar with teams like Wooster, Amherst, Whitewater, Stevens Point, name a CCIW, St. Thomas, etc. because they are always good. F&M remains highly considered because Robinson always wins. I think this is the hardest habit to break because these teams also prove year in and year out to be in the conversation. Two years ago I didn't vote for UWSP until the last half or third of the season - I thought the luster was gone. I was one of a few or the only one; they went on to win the national championship. Last year, I down played Wooster a lot and didn't include them in my rankings for many weeks, they looked good and finished in the second weekend of the tournament (had a legit chance of making it again to Salem. Those examples are times when I as a voter try and buck the trend and it comes back to remind me that they are good - which makes it even harder to ignore them later.

Quote from: AndOne on December 08, 2016, 02:02:47 PM
So, if you're not one of the truly best teams, you will be well served, poll-wise, by playing weak non-conf teams and in a weaker conference. Both circumstances will help you rack up lots of WINS which makes you very attractive even though you're really just pretty. ;)

This, along with your first part I didn't quote, doesn't always hold water. There are plenty of teams right now who have lots of wins early in the season who aren't getting votes or at least not in the Top 25. If that was the case, every undefeated team (there are 24) would be nationally ranked. Also, Lancaster Bible would have jumped up in our poll last year faster and higher. Same with Benedictine (though, they had some games that allowed voters to realize their quality faster than LBC). Yes, wins certainly help, but you can gain a lot of information in losses as well. There also just isn't a system voters agree on. I talk to up to ten voters a week to get their take on things or they to get my take... none of us have the same read on things and none of us have the same "forumula."

IMPROPER FORMATTING KLAXON

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi411.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fpp200%2Fheicher7%2FRed-Siren-Animated.gif&hash=afb374a611e9c0b241edd5e6da9f1360fe9f47b1)

I have to admit that I laughed out loud at that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 08, 2016, 03:21:53 PM

I actually would like to see IMPROPER FORMATTING KLAXON join the dead horse beating as one of the memes of the board. Not lying.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 08, 2016, 03:28:11 PM

Does it need to be formatting-related? Or just IMPROPER ------- KLAXON?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 08, 2016, 03:34:45 PM

Oh, I think it should definitely be IMPROPER FORMATTING KLAXON. If you make it generic, it loses its punch. Trust me, it'll get plenty of use if it's kept specific to formatting bollixes ... and it won't just be used by me, either.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 08, 2016, 04:16:59 PM

I suppose you know your business as the resident formatting pedant. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 08, 2016, 04:20:23 PM

In all seriousness, I'm not sure that the problem is related to either me or Dave excepting that we both have edited in-text and snipped parts of comments.

I think the board might be doing something wonky with that. He said there was text he snipped in the message that earned the use of the klaxon.

Speaking of which...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-SJjFcnsGs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-SJjFcnsGs)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 08, 2016, 04:29:32 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 08, 2016, 03:13:58 PM
Quote from: HOPEful on December 08, 2016, 03:04:46 PM
Mr Sager, to be fair you need to scold Dave now too! ;D

Duly noted. Come take your punishment, D-Mac:

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fclutterinclarityout.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F09%2F1.jpg&hash=1e66d37e2a3cecc6352e6c11ad2836386499c40b)

"Steiner, come out and get your whipping...."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxL3ZNTnCY4

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on December 08, 2016, 04:37:28 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 08, 2016, 03:21:53 PM
I actually would like to see IMPROPER FORMATTING KLAXON join the dead horse beating as one of the memes of the board. Not lying.

(https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTFRNQEZmXL4mmrICZHeBK-phCW1rvjkn_G6LrXZ3NlEM-nyagj_A)

Did you say Klaxon??? ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 08, 2016, 06:28:06 PM

To be honest... not sure where my improper quoting techique has occured... I know how to find the extra "[/quote]" options or find when there aren't enough. The only thing I did to shorten the process was grab quotes from previous posts by coping and pasting and putting the necessary "quote" needs around them... looked pretty good actually. LOL

Any way... to business:

The season has started fast and for some teams they still haven't lost. Not unexpected for some, maybe completely unexpected for others.

And there is a big battle between #1 and #2 in Division III men's basketball on tap!

On Thursday's edition of Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave is back in studio and talking to some of the teams who find themselves without a loss, but probably still with plenty of questions that remain unanswered. Many of the teams are nationally ranked, but one of the teams tonight finds itself undefeated and receiving narry a point in any of the Division III polls.

Also on Thursday's edition, Dave will talk LIVE with either #1 Amherst or #2 Babson. The two men's programs face off in a rare #1 v #2 regular season battle. We chat with the winning coach after the game.

You can watch Hoopsville below staring at 7:00 pm ET. We are also experimenting with simulcasting the show on Facebook Live! More info here: http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2016-17/dec8

Guests included (in order):
- Bob Amsberry, No. 8 Wartburg women's coach
- Amy Reed, Rochester Tech women's coach
- Landry Kosmalski, No. 22 Swarthmore men's coach
- Jon VanderWal, No. 3 Marietta men's coach
- Either Dave Hixon (No. 1 Amherst) or Stephen Brennan (No. 2 Banson) men's coach

This is most likley the last Thursday edition of Hoopsville before the holiday break (due to D3football.com coverage of Gagliardi Trophy and Stagg Bowl next week and proximity of Christmas the following week). The Thursday edition of the show will return January 5, 2017 - but stay tuned if we change our minds in two weeks.

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 08, 2016, 06:43:15 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 08, 2016, 04:16:59 PM
I suppose you know your business as the resident formatting pedant. ;)

Actually, I said this as the resident meme pedant.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on December 08, 2016, 06:56:22 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 08, 2016, 06:43:15 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 08, 2016, 04:16:59 PM
I suppose you know your business as the resident formatting pedant. ;)

Actually, I said this as the resident meme pedant.

I didn't know your pedantry needed any qualifiers. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 08, 2016, 08:35:30 PM

First for me tonight, watching Amherst and Babson with an Australian doing the play-by-play.

Amherst ties it with a 3 at 81 for overtime.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 08, 2016, 09:05:52 PM

Amherst 99 Babson 97 2OT

Babson will feel like they should have closed it out twice, credit Amherst for hitting big shots late in regulation and both OT's. Terrific game, 2 really good teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 08, 2016, 09:17:23 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 08, 2016, 06:56:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 08, 2016, 06:43:15 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 08, 2016, 04:16:59 PM
I suppose you know your business as the resident formatting pedant. ;)

Actually, I said this as the resident meme pedant.

I didn't know your pedantry needed any qualifiers. ;D

There are different branches of pedantry, O Dean of KnightSlappy U, and I would be more than happy to explain them all to you at length in excruciating detail. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 09, 2016, 03:17:14 PM

Interesting that there is basically agreement between the Massey ratings and the Kenpommy ratings on http://detroitjockcity.com/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency-ratings/ on the top 3 teams (minus CMS which only has 3 D3 games).

Both rankings have Marietta, Whitman and Hope in the top 4. Both also have Amherst, UW-Eau Claire, CNU and Salisbury in the top 10, but neither in the top 5.

Composite of the two rankings (equal weighting) has:
1. Marietta (1st and 1st, aggregate of 2)
2. Whitman (5)
3. Hope (6)
4. Amherst (14)
5. Babson (15)
6. Eau Claire (17)
7. Salisbury (18)
8. Christopher Newport (19)
9. St. Norbert (20)
10. Neumann (22)
11. Benedictine (23)
12. River Falls (26)

There's less agreement on ranking within the peloton from there. If I had more time and sleep banked I could normalize the actual ratings rather than using the ordinals, but I don't so this is what ya get. It really would just show MC and Whitman extended from the pack.

Basically there's a clear top 3, then a pack of about 8 or 9 depending on whether you include River Falls, then everyone else.

Matchups of teams in the dirty dozen: Amherst over Babson, Marietta over CNU, Eau Claire over St. Norbert, St. Norbert over Benedictine, Hope over River Falls. In all cases, the winner is ranked ahead of the loser. That may not stay true forever, but it seems to suggest that the rankings now are already pretty sentient.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 10, 2016, 11:08:26 AM

Marietta and Whitman play on December 22nd, so we'll get another data point there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on December 10, 2016, 04:01:41 PM

John Carroll 88
#3 Marietta 76

John Carroll trailed by 6 at the half but put it all together in the 2nd half. Simon Kucharewicz ate up the Pioneers all afternoon finishing with 22 points. Keith Richardson came off the bench for the Pioneers and put in 31. You had to know JCU was going to put the wheels back on the bus at some point this year. They looked like the OAC title contender we all thought they would be at the beginning of the season.

Surely this will cool down the conversation on here the last week or so about Marietta. Maybe not...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie77 on December 10, 2016, 04:28:15 PM

Say it ain't so, Spencer.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 10, 2016, 04:35:14 PM

Anyone that didn't think this would be a very tough game to win either doesn't know the OAC very well or was just fooling themselves. That JCU really needed a win just made it all the tougher.

I'm sure the voters will be more than happy to overreact to it to knock down a team they underrated from the start.

John Carroll played really well in the second half and when you go up there you know what you're going ot get...very physical play that they'll be allowed to get away with.

Gotta run stuff to get your big guy the ball in games like that because they're not going to call the off the ball stuff. They're just not.

Oh well, toughest road trip of the season out of the way early. MC has 5 of their first 6 league games away. I doubt anyone else in the country has that kind of conference start. Adding the two DB games and they have a stretch of 1 in 8 games at home.

But I'm sure the voters will just look at the score and go 'yep, they are who we thought they were.' And still be wrong.

I wouldn't be surprised if they're still top 3 in computers even after this because of the schedule they've played so far. And at the end of the year, John Carroll's going to be right there among the best on their schedule. They're better than Wooster for sure.

Guess JCU got their paybacks for the favoritism shown them when they got rooked out of 1, maybe 2 plays worth of time at the end of the football game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 10, 2016, 04:36:06 PM

Quote from: augie77 on December 10, 2016, 04:28:15 PM
Say it ain't so, Spencer.

Haha aren't you the one that called me a troll?

Physician, heal thyself.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie77 on December 10, 2016, 04:53:16 PM

Has it occurred to you that there's a reason people react so strongly to you?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 10, 2016, 05:31:30 PM

Quote from: augie77 on December 10, 2016, 04:53:16 PM
Has it occurred to you that there's a reason people react so strongly to you?

Well it would be pretty unusual if there wasn't.

Has it occurred to you that I don't care?

Has it occurred to you that you are a pointless troll?

At least I spur and promote conversation, whatever you think of me. Seems the only thing you exist on this thread to do is troll me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 10, 2016, 05:46:29 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 10, 2016, 04:35:14 PM
Anyone that didn't think this would be a very tough game to win either doesn't know the OAC very well or was just fooling themselves. That JCU really needed a win just made it all the tougher.

I'm sure the voters will be more than happy to overreact to it to knock down a team they underrated from the start.

John Carroll played really well in the second half and when you go up there you know what you're going ot get...very physical play that they'll be allowed to get away with.

Gotta run stuff to get your big guy the ball in games like that because they're not going to call the off the ball stuff. They're just not.

Oh well, toughest road trip of the season out of the way early. MC has 5 of their first 6 league games away. I doubt anyone else in the country has that kind of conference start. Adding the two DB games and they have a stretch of 1 in 8 games at home.

But I'm sure the voters will just look at the score and go 'yep, they are who we thought they were.' And still be wrong.

I wouldn't be surprised if they're still top 3 in computers even after this because of the schedule they've played so far. And at the end of the year, John Carroll's going to be right there among the best on their schedule. They're better than Wooster for sure.

Guess JCU got their paybacks for the favoritism shown them when they got rooked out of 1, maybe 2 plays worth of time at the end of the football game.

I doubt it. My prediction for the next poll (assuming no more upsets) is Babson remains #2, Whitman moves to #3, and Marietta is #4 (at worst #5 behind Tufts). But whatever happens, remember that you lost fairly decisively to a team who (while ranked in the preseason) entered the game 2-4.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 10, 2016, 06:53:39 PM

yeah I guess John Carroll should have played a bunch of cupcakes like Babson.

Anyway, got an evening to have. Laters.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 10, 2016, 07:00:15 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 10, 2016, 06:53:39 PM
yeah I guess John Carroll should have played a bunch of cupcakes like Babson.

Anyway, got an evening to have. Laters.

Since you have such contempt for the d3hoops.com poll, what makes you so sure Marietta didn't also play a 'bunch of cupcakes'? You point to the ranked teams Marietta beat, but you demean the poll. You can't really have it both ways. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on December 10, 2016, 09:01:12 PM

Stevens Point takes down #12 Hope in Michigan by a 74-72 score in a back and forth match. Missed free throws doom the Flying Dutchmen (17-28 from the line). Bublitz, Delmore and Nelson (24-19-17) lead the Pointers while Blackledge (17) and Carlson (5-9 treys for 15) lead Hope.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 10, 2016, 10:34:26 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 10, 2016, 07:00:15 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 10, 2016, 06:53:39 PM
yeah I guess John Carroll should have played a bunch of cupcakes like Babson.

Anyway, got an evening to have. Laters.

Since you have such contempt for the d3hoops.com poll, what makes you so sure Marietta didn't also play a 'bunch of cupcakes'? You point to the ranked teams Marietta beat, but you demean the poll. You can't really have it both ways. ;)

2016 is the year of having it both ways, though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie77 on December 10, 2016, 11:56:55 PM

Number 18 North Park lost to Carroll on a buzzer-beating three pointer, 84-81. With this loss, every CCIW team has a conference loss, assuring a 44th consecutive season in which the conference champ will have at least one loss. Last time a team went undefeated in conference was Augustana in 1973.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 11, 2016, 01:36:37 PM

How They Fared (~~Nearly~~ Complete)

My schedule later this afternoon is a bit uncertain, and there are only three games today among teams on the list ~~(York @ CNU and UW-Eau Claire @ Wartburg, both at 4pm, and~~ ~~George Fox @ UW-Whitewater at 8pm~~), so I will post the report now, and edit those scores in later if my schedule allows. ~~(The GF/UWW game might not get added until tomorrow morning.)~~

In the interest of preserving my fragile karma score, I will refrain from highlighting any results that might deserve extra attention.

[edit] now only GF/UWW missing
[2nd edit] Apparently the GF/uWW game started at 7:00, not 8:00, because it's over already.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	611	Amherst	8-0	def. Brandeis, 76-58; def. #2 Babson, 99-97; def. Lasell, 92-68
#2	603	Babson	9-1	LOST at #1 Amherst, 97-99
#3	572	Marietta	7-1	won at Otterbein, 79-54; LOST at John Carroll, 76-88
#4	529	Whitman	6-0	def. #7 Whitworth, 79-65; def. Covenant, 101-85
#5	507	Tufts	7-2	LOST to Mass-Boston, 74-76; won at Wentworth, 78-63
#6	479	Christopher Newport	6-1	def. York (Pa.), 85-59
#7	474	Whitworth	5-1	LOST at #4 Whitman, 65-79; def. Covenant, 93-62
#8	408	St. Norbert	5-1	def. Lawrence, 76-45; won at Cornell, 66-58
#9	392	North Central (Ill.)	5-2	LOST to Carthage, 75-85; won at Millikin, 73-67
#10	367	UW-Eau Claire	8-1	def. Viterbo, 68-59; won at Buena Vista, 63-60; LOST at #41 Wartburg, 90-103
#11	358	Rochester	9-0	def. SUNY Geneseo, 82-80
#12	340	Hope	5-2	LOST to UW-Stevens Point, 72-74
#13	313	Washington U.	6-2	def. Fontbonne, 103-64; LOST at Central, 80-84
#14	277	Benedictine	6-2	won at Milwaukee Engineering, 71-52; def. Edgewood, 77-59
#15	274	Salisbury	7-0	won at Southern Virginia, 88-64
#16	193	Illinois Wesleyan	6-2	LOST to #18 North Park, 68-72; won at Elmhurst, 88-57
#17	165	Wooster	5-3	LOST at Hiram, 68-72; def. DePauw, 82-65
#18	146	North Park	6-1	won at #16 Illinois Wesleyan, 72-68; LOST to T#45 Carroll, 81-84
#19	135	Keene State	6-2	LOST at Lasell, 79-97; def. Mass-Boston, 90-80
#20	124	Endicott	6-2	won at University of New England, 78-65; def. Salem State, 82-64; LOST to Bridgewater State, 82-86
#21	111	St. Thomas	5-3	LOST to Hamline, 61-74; def. St. John's, 82-69
#22	96	Swarthmore	7-0	won at Ursinus, 75-67
#23	89	Susquehanna	7-1	def. (n) Trinity (Conn.), 62-58; def. (n) Gwynedd Mercy, 80-74
#24	76	Baldwin Wallace	5-2	def. Heidelberg, 67-64; LOST at Muskingum, 95-98
#25	73	Denison	8-0	won at Oberlin, 72-69; won at Wittenberg, 72-68

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	58	UW-Whitewater	7-0	def. Rockford, 97-85; def. Kalamazoo, 80-64; def. George Fox, 98-63
#27	52	Augustana	7-2	def. Wheaton (Ill.), 73-71; def. Carthage, 86-70
#28	35	New Jersey City	8-1	won at Kean, 78-52; def. TCNJ, 54-52
#29	34	Skidmore	5-3	LOST at T#45 Plattsburgh State, 78-86; LOST at T#33 Middlebury, 71-72
#30	24	UW-River Falls	7-1	def. UW-Superior, 92-63
T#31	23	Emory	6-2	def. Rust, 93-72
T#31	23	Lycoming	7-1	won at Widener, 74-62
T#33	19	Middlebury	7-1	won at Southern Vermont, 86-72; def. #29 Skidmore, 72-71
T#33	19	Scranton	6-1	IDLE
T#33	19	Wesleyan (Conn.)	9-0	def. Vassar, 77-53; won at Westfield State, 90-52
#36	18	Chicago	6-1	IDLE
#37	17	Virginia Wesleyan	6-2	won at Averett, 104-76
#38	16	Neumann	8-0	won at Delaware Valley, 105-77; def. Catholic, 83-63
#39	13	Mount St. Joseph	7-1	won at Manchester, 76-68
#40	11	Brockport	8-1	LOST at Hobart, 52-65; won at SUNY Potsdam, 95-59; won at T#45 Plattsburgh State, 94-88
#41	7	Wartburg	8-1	won at Coe, 70-66; def. #10 UW-Eau Claire, 103-90
T#42	5	Lynchburg	5-3	LOST to (n) Case Western Reserve, 63-64; def. (n) St. Joseph's (Vt.), 105-61
T#42	5	Ramapo	8-0	won at Rutgers-Newark, 68-46; def. Kean, 96-62
#44	4	Guilford	5-2	LOST at Methodist, 65-70
T#45	3	Carroll	5-2	LOST to Elmhurst, 56-69; won at #18 North Park, 84-81
T#45	3	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	6-0	won at Whittier, 73-68
T#45	3	Plattsburgh State	6-3	def. #29 Skidmore, 86-78; LOST to SUNY Geneseo, 71-86; LOST to #40 Brockport, 88-94
T#48	1	UW-La Crosse	5-3	LOST to Loras, 79-88
T#48	1	WPI	7-2	def. Massachusetts College, 105-68; won at Salem State, 87-62

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 11, 2016, 01:49:07 PM

Both Massey and D3 efficiency ratings have Marietta dropping just a couple of spots, with Whitman moving ahead of them.

Wherever scores get reported doesn't seem to have gotten the message on North Park and Hope's losses yet.

So MC really should be #2, but they obviously won't be. This is the problem with being underrated in the first place. MC will probably drop now out of overreaction (John Carroll is actually really good, they just played good teams early and had some 50/50 type results), and because the voters were looking for a reason not to believe in them in the first place.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: monsoon on December 11, 2016, 02:51:37 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 11, 2016, 01:36:37 PM
How They Fared (Nearly Complete)

My schedule later this afternoon is a bit uncertain, and there are only three games today among teams on the list (York @ CNU and UW-Eau Claire @ Wartburg, both at 4pm, and George Fox @ UW-Whitewater at 8pm), so I will post the report now, and edit those scores in later if my schedule allows. (The GF/UWW game might not get added until tomorrow morning.)

In the interest of preserving my fragile karma score, I will refrain from highlighting any results that might deserve extra attention.

Top 25

Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#1 611 Amherst 8-0 def. Brandeis, 76-58; def. #2 Babson, 99-97; def. Lasell, 92-68
#2 603 Babson 9-1 LOST at #1 Amherst, 97-99
#3 572 Marietta 7-1 won at Otterbein, 79-54; LOST at John Carroll, 76-88
#4 529 Whitman 6-0 def. #7 Whitworth, 79-65; def. Covenant, 101-85
#5 507 Tufts 7-2 LOST to Mass-Boston, 74-76; won at Wentworth, 78-63
#6 479 Christopher Newport 5-1 12/11 vs. York (Pa.)
#7 474 Whitworth 5-1 LOST at #4 Whitman, 65-79; def. Covenant, 93-62
#8 408 St. Norbert 5-1 def. Lawrence, 76-45; won at Cornell, 66-58
#9 392 North Central (Ill.) 5-2 LOST to Carthage, 75-85; won at Millikin, 73-67
#10 367 UW-Eau Claire 8-0 def. Viterbo, 68-59; won at Buena Vista, 63-60; 12/11 at #41 Wartburg
#11 358 Rochester 9-0 def. SUNY Geneseo, 82-80
#12 340 Hope 5-2 LOST to UW-Stevens Point, 72-74
#13 313 Washington U. 6-2 def. Fontbonne, 103-64; LOST at Central, 80-84
#14 277 Benedictine 6-2 won at Milwaukee Engineering, 71-52; def. Edgewood, 77-59
#15 274 Salisbury 7-0 won at Southern Virginia, 88-64
#16 193 Illinois Wesleyan 6-2 LOST to #18 North Park, 68-72; won at Elmhurst, 88-57
#17 165 Wooster 5-3 LOST at Hiram, 68-72; def. DePauw, 82-65
#18 146 North Park 6-1 won at #16 Illinois Wesleyan, 72-68; LOST to T#45 Carroll, 81-84
#19 135 Keene State 6-2 LOST at Lasell, 79-97; def. Mass-Boston, 90-80
#20 124 Endicott 6-2 won at University of New England, 78-65; def. Salem State, 82-64; LOST to Bridgewater State, 82-86
#21 111 St. Thomas 5-3 LOST to Hamline, 61-74; def. St. John's, 82-69
#22 96 Swarthmore 7-0 won at Ursinus, 75-67
#23 89 Susquehanna 7-1 def. (n) Trinity (Conn.), 62-58; def. (n) Gwynedd Mercy, 80-74
#24 76 Baldwin Wallace 5-2 def. Heidelberg, 67-64; LOST at Muskingum, 95-98
#25 73 Denison 8-0 won at Oberlin, 72-69; won at Wittenberg, 72-68

Others receiving votes
Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#26 58 UW-Whitewater 6-0 def. Rockford, 97-85; def. Kalamazoo, 80-64; 12/11 vs. George Fox
#27 52 Augustana 7-2 def. Wheaton (Ill.), 73-71; def. Carthage, 86-70
#28 35 New Jersey City 8-1 won at Kean, 78-52; def. TCNJ, 54-52
#29 34 Skidmore 5-3 LOST at T#45 Plattsburgh State, 78-86; LOST at T#33 Middlebury, 71-72
#30 24 UW-River Falls 7-1 def. UW-Superior, 92-63
T#31 23 Emory 6-2 def. Rust, 93-72
T#31 23 Lycoming 7-1 won at Widener, 74-62
T#33 19 Middlebury 7-1 won at Southern Vermont, 86-72; def. #29 Skidmore, 72-71
T#33 19 Scranton 6-1 IDLE
T#33 19 Wesleyan (Conn.) 9-0 def. Vassar, 77-53; won at Westfield State, 90-52
#36 18 Chicago 6-1 IDLE
#37 17 Virginia Wesleyan 6-2 won at Averett, 104-76
#38 16 Neumann 8-0 won at Delaware Valley, 105-77; def. Catholic, 83-63
#39 13 Mount St. Joseph 7-1 won at Manchester, 76-68
#40 11 Brockport 8-1 LOST at Hobart, 52-65; won at SUNY Potsdam, 95-59; won at T#45 Plattsburgh State, 94-88
#41 7 Wartburg 7-1 won at Coe, 70-66; 12/11 vs. #10 UW-Eau Claire
T#42 5 Lynchburg 5-3 LOST to (n) Case Western Reserve, 63-64; def. (n) St. Joseph's (Vt.), 105-61
T#42 5 Ramapo 8-0 won at Rutgers-Newark, 68-46; def. Kean, 96-62
#44 4 Guilford 5-2 LOST at Methodist, 65-70
T#45 3 Carroll 5-2 LOST to Elmhurst, 56-69; won at #18 North Park, 84-81
T#45 3 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps 6-0 won at Whittier, 73-68
T#45 3 Plattsburgh State 6-3 def. #29 Skidmore, 86-78; LOST to SUNY Geneseo, 71-86; LOST to #40 Brockport, 88-94
T#48 1 UW-La Crosse 5-3 LOST to Loras, 79-88
T#48 1 WPI 7-2 def. Massachusetts College, 105-68; won at Salem State, 87-62

There's an awful lot of red in that report this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on December 11, 2016, 03:11:27 PM

I'm curious how much closer Neumann will get to the top 25 this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 11, 2016, 06:15:03 PM

Quote from: mailsy on December 11, 2016, 03:11:27 PM
I'm curious how much closer Neumann will get to the top 25 this week.

Massey has them #9 now. Efficiency rankings have them pretty high as well. But this is d3, don't take too kindly to them there newfangled machines here!

Another team the pollsters are asleep on. Very weird that they aren't ranked and Denison is. Just more proof of the poll love-in that is Wooster, not just in basketball either.

Unfortunately Neumann has a long layoff now. Hopefully they don't lose ground during the break.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 11, 2016, 07:50:45 PM

Quote from: mailsy on December 11, 2016, 03:11:27 PM
I'm curious how much closer Neumann will get to the top 25 this week.

I've watched two of their games. Supremely talented team; I'm not seeing much discipline, which is difficult. I haven't really looked at my ballot yet. Lots of losses, so I'm not saying I won't vote for them, but I doubt that I will just yet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2016, 08:50:40 PM

The challenge with Neumann is their conference is hard to read. In the past, Cabrini has been an incredibly talented team that left the conference in the dust. GMC in the past has shown signs of getting big wins on occasion, but not being on the same level as those past Cabrini team. So, seeing Neumann win doesn't mean much against a conference which the bottom half is usually pretty poor. Neumann has also played an interesting schedule against some interesting, but nothing major teams. Win over Catholic last year means more than this year. Win over GMC the same as Catholic. I like the wins over Rowan and Eastern, but they aren't significant wins. It just hard to read into it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on December 11, 2016, 08:52:31 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 11, 2016, 07:50:45 PM
Quote from: mailsy on December 11, 2016, 03:11:27 PM
I'm curious how much closer Neumann will get to the top 25 this week.

I've watched two of their games. Supremely talented team; I'm not seeing much discipline, which is difficult. I haven't really looked at my ballot yet. Lots of losses, so I'm not saying I won't vote for them, but I doubt that I will just yet.

The test will be handling Scranton @ home on the 30th. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 11, 2016, 08:55:43 PM

Quote from: ronk on December 11, 2016, 08:52:31 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 11, 2016, 07:50:45 PM
Quote from: mailsy on December 11, 2016, 03:11:27 PM
I'm curious how much closer Neumann will get to the top 25 this week.

I've watched two of their games. Supremely talented team; I'm not seeing much discipline, which is difficult. I haven't really looked at my ballot yet. Lots of losses, so I'm not saying I won't vote for them, but I doubt that I will just yet.

The test will be handling Scranton @ home on the 30th. ::)

There are an unbelievable number of teams that have tough opponents waiting for them between now and New Year's Day. A lot of teams I'd prefer to wait on.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 11, 2016, 09:08:06 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2016, 08:50:40 PM
The challenge with Neumann is their conference is hard to read.

Amherst SOS: 206. Neumann SOS: 135.

Total cop out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2016, 09:31:33 PM

You call it a cop out, but I also don't care much for Massey's numbers at this point in the season. As many have talked about, their numbers aren't that solid until late January (in my opinion). Again, you can call it a cop out, but your opinion on how I vote affects me about as much as Trump's opinion on the same topic.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 11, 2016, 09:31:47 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 11, 2016, 08:55:43 PM
Quote from: ronk on December 11, 2016, 08:52:31 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 11, 2016, 07:50:45 PM
Quote from: mailsy on December 11, 2016, 03:11:27 PM
I'm curious how much closer Neumann will get to the top 25 this week.

I've watched two of their games. Supremely talented team; I'm not seeing much discipline, which is difficult. I haven't really looked at my ballot yet. Lots of losses, so I'm not saying I won't vote for them, but I doubt that I will just yet.

The test will be handling Scranton @ home on the 30th. ::)

There are an unbelievable number of teams that have tough opponents waiting for them between now and New Year's Day. A lot of teams I'd prefer to wait on.

By wait do you mean not give them credit for what they've already done just because you didn't expect them to do it?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 11, 2016, 09:32:50 PM

Neumann must get a ton of layups, shoot 53% as a team but only 35% from 3. 139 assists on 281 baskets. Opponents have 157 turnovers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 11, 2016, 09:36:30 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2016, 09:31:33 PM
You call it a cop out, but I also don't care much for Massey's numbers at this point in the season. As many have talked about, their numbers aren't that solid until late January (in my opinion). Again, you can call it a cop out, but your opinion on how I vote affects me about as much as Trump's opinion on the same topic.

Of course you don't care for them; they disagree with you and reveal your bias.

Just because many talk about it doesn't mean it's right. It's almost certainly not right that you need that many games worth of data. Considering computers are better than humans at this kind of thing, it's odd that you and others trust yourselves over them. Guess just the world we live in -- resist or don't though, the age is coming when it will be accepted that there are just some things humans aren't very good at and can benefit from help doing. This is really child's play for a computer.

Be careful, I got accused of destroying the virginity of the board in so many words for referencing Trump. But then we all know the rules are different for me. And you. I guess 500 viewers buys you a lot of goodwill.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2016, 09:51:58 PM

I didn't get a chance to post this prior to Hoopsville hitting the air Sunday night. I apologize. Was trying to finish up some holiday items around the house and spend some time with the family.

The advantage, Hoopsville is available On Demand and via podcast:

This might be one of the toughest parts of the Division III season. Balancing finals, time off, and starting to get into a groove with the basketball season which then is disrupted by a break. Some teams are caught looking ahead, some are worn out or distracted, others are simply cruising along.

On Sunday night's Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave will talk to several teams who are not only off to good starts, but also discovering some of the bumps in the road a third of the way into the season.

You can watch the Hoopsville archive or listen to the podcast here: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2016-17/dec11

Guests include (in order):
- Andrew Sachs, No. 15 Salisbury men's coach
- Tom Slyder, No. 18 North Park men's coach
- Jon Prevo, Rose-Hulman women's coach
- Loree Payne, No. 22 Puget Sound women's coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

A reminder that Thursday's edition of Hoopsville will not take place due to D3football.com coverage of Gagliardi Trophy and Stagg Bowl next week. We will be back on air Sunday, December 18 for the final show before the Christmas holiday. Hoopsville will then return on January 5, 2017 and air Sundays and Thursdays at 7:00 PM ET for the rest of the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 11, 2016, 09:59:58 PM

Two things:

1. PM's are useful
2. See #1

Thanks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 11, 2016, 10:05:45 PM

Quote from: sac on December 11, 2016, 09:59:58 PM
Two things:

1. PM's are useful
2. See #1

Thanks.

What has been off-topic since your last post? I don't see the logic in trying to force people to PM when the discussion is germane to the thread topic.

Unless you're just trying to suppress someone's opinion, of course. Then, the logic is clear.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2016, 10:19:04 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 11, 2016, 09:36:30 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2016, 09:31:33 PM
You call it a cop out, but I also don't care much for Massey's numbers at this point in the season. As many have talked about, their numbers aren't that solid until late January (in my opinion). Again, you can call it a cop out, but your opinion on how I vote affects me about as much as Trump's opinion on the same topic.

Of course you don't care for them; they disagree with you and reveal your bias.

Nope. You are clearly new to the basketball boards after ten years driving people crazy on the baseball boards. Where you bored or did you finally realize Marietta had a good team and decided to drill it into everyone's heads over here? Despite the fact, we have known they have been good for a few years now.

Also per that, we have discussed and debated Massey ratings quite a bit on these boards over the years. I am in the camp that I don't take much stock in them at this point in the season. I haven't for years. I find too many flaws and not enough data to see anything in them that means much at this point. Those numbers are going to shift a lot as conference play becomes more and more prevalent. (I also have issues with how non-D1 games can't be weeded out not to mention the fact they influence the numbers too greatly; a team playing a top D1 program for money gets a boost in Massey as a result at this point in the season.)

I also don't take much stock in the NCAA SOS at this point in the season, either! The conference schedule will influence the SOS greatly, so I can't get a read on a team's scheduling strength or anything else when we have only played a third of the season (weeks wise) and maybe a quarter (games wise).

I understand you like Massey probably more than most, but you demanding I and others use it as a determining fact isn't going to change my mind. I also use other items like what I have seen either in person or via web stream. I also consider what I know about the opponents that Massey can't gauge. If the Top 25 and the voters were voting strictly on what Massey or other computers said, we wouldn't need to vote at all - though, we also would have teams like CMS ranked pretty high, wouldn't we?!

The difference between Neumann and Amherst is a great example. Sure, Amherst has played a soft schedule leading up to their game against Babson. That is common knowledge and something I have discussed on Hoopsville often. I didn't vote Amherst number one, but I am also not going to have Massey dictate to me that Amherst isn't a good team when I have seen them and know the talent that they have. Neumann on the other hand I understand has what appears to be a better schedule number, but looking at that schedule doesn't blow me away (as I stated). I have been told by some they are pretty good; they are the pick to win the conference. I am looking at them, but don't turn around and tell me I am trying to cop out with my answer. I am giving my opinion on a team. Just my opinion. You keep saying things like tell me your opinion at least you will respect that... and then you don't respect it. You are a damn hypocrite. Heck, when we do give you reasons and explanations, I am pretty sure you ignored them.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 11, 2016, 09:36:30 PM
Just because many talk about it doesn't mean it's right. It's almost certainly not right that you need that many games worth of data. Considering computers are better than humans at this kind of thing, it's odd that you and others trust yourselves over them. Guess just the world we live in -- resist or don't though, the age is coming when it will be accepted that there are just some things humans aren't very good at and can benefit from help doing. This is really child's play for a computer.

Dude, get over yourself. The Top 25 is NOT a computer poll and never designed to be. The D1 polls must drive you crazy (but please, don't tell us about why). Computers can't figure out things like injuries, finals distractions, illnesses, and so many factors. Pollsters as a result use their rather educated experience to vote. They may use Massey, some more or less than others. They may talk to other people, coaches, etc. to get their take on things - I do. They do everything they can to best understand who the best 25 teams are in the country on any given week. You are more than welcome to disagree, you clearly do, but are you just going to disagree with people everytime? First you hated how Marietta was ranked (though, interestingly Coach VanderWal is on record saying he thought #17 was rather high in the preseason considering the number of questions surrounding his team). Now you hate people's opinions about Neumann. What next? Are you going to hate that Wesleyan isn't getting enough love? Or do you now have to look them up and criticize us because they aren't in the Top 25?

Give it a rest. We get you disagree. You apparently disagree all the time in baseball as well. You aren't adding anything to this dialogue. The NJAC comparison made earlier (which you think makes your case better) was actually a guy who did the same thing as you did... pestered and even yelled at people because they disagreed with him (with bad language and a struggles with the writing). It got so bad he had to be banned (not saying you will be, just saying what happened). Turns out he was not proven right. It has gotten worse, off the boards, but that isn't worth talking about.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 11, 2016, 09:36:30 PM
Be careful, I got accused of destroying the virginity of the board in so many words for referencing Trump. But then we all know the rules are different for me. And you. I guess 500 viewers buys you a lot of goodwill.

Rules are different for you... you just aren't following them. Sorry if you didn't like the reference, I was just trying to find the most outlandish comparison I could off the top of my head. Not sure what the 500 viewers comment is about, but it doesn't buy me anything.

I am a voter who puts his ballot out there every week. I state my opinions. I am in no way think I am right. I state that accordingly. I also admit when I am wrong - often. But don't say I am coping out. That couldn't be further from the truth. You can disagree, that's fine, but do it respectfully. I don't mind a respectful conversation, but you have dragged things into a rather nasty area to the point I rather avoid these boards... and that doesn't let me enjoy covering Division III basketball one bit. Just tone it down a bit, will ya?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 11, 2016, 10:24:11 PM

PM's......PM's......PM's.....PM's.....PM's.....PM's.....PM's.....PM's.....PM's......PM's.....PM's.....PM's.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 11, 2016, 10:27:17 PM

I'm a big analytics guy and even I say that it's too early to really rely on Massey for anything except a general idea. It's too early for Sagarin or KenPom, really, as well.

With over 400 teams in D-3, there are a lot of things to consider, and not every team will be slotted in right where you think they should be in any poll or ranking system. A big upset or two can ripple through everything until the data calms down.

Besides, every team has a couple of months to prove their mettle.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 11, 2016, 10:27:55 PM

Good Lord, totally makes sense why a guy has a 180 min show for 500 viewers with a post like that. Sure do love to hear/read your own words.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 11, 2016, 11:16:25 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 11, 2016, 10:05:45 PM
Quote from: sac on December 11, 2016, 09:59:58 PM
Two things:

1. PM's are useful
2. See #1

Thanks.

What has been off-topic since your last post? I don't see the logic in trying to force people to PM when the discussion is germane to the thread topic.

Unless you're just trying to suppress someone's opinion, of course. Then, the logic is clear.

Spence,

I don't think anyone is trying to suppress your opinion. You just don't need to roll the board by posting it repeatedly. You've made your opinion clear. Just use a little moderation in repeating it so that we don't have to use our moderation tools in, to use your term, blowing the whistle on this conversation.

I know you know there's a TOS since I'm not sure which iteration this is of your posting privileges, but I'm making an official reference for you now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 11, 2016, 11:47:48 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 11, 2016, 10:27:17 PM
I'm a big analytics guy and even I say that it's too early to really rely on Massey for anything except a general idea. It's too early for Sagarin or KenPom, really, as well.

That's the CW. But is it true?

You say you're a big analytics guy (I'd be genuinely interested to know in what context, btw). I would encourage you to read all 3 parts of this and the original stuff from which it's derived, but for me as it specifically relates to this discussion, the end result is the chart in the 3rd.

https://jameswgrayson.wordpress.com/2013/04/07/after-how-many-premiership-games-does-talent-become-more-important-than-random-variation/

Keep in mind, this is for Premier League soccer, which rates just below baseball in terms of the amount of random variation involved in the game. In the original Birnbaum article, Tom Tango's comments add up to this, summarized by Grayson.

"The equation works out that you know roughly as much after 12 NFL games (75% of the season) as you do after 14 NBA games (17%), 36 NHL games (44%), and 69 MLB games (43%)." For PL soccer, it's even higher, 47% of games. Point: basketball is by far the least random.

So in case you didn't open the link...the real point is this.

(https://jameswgrayson.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/screen-shot-2013-04-07-at-9-23-14-pm.png)

So in soccer, 3 games or less (of results, nothing else) is pretty much worthless, but by 5 games you can get close to half of the information that you're ever going to get on talent vs. results. By 8 games you have about 2/3 of it. After 10 games, the curve levels off from 70ish%. So you only gain about 3% more information per game between 10 games and the end of the season. It's basically a logarthmic scale.

How does this work in basketball? Easy answer is I don't know. But we know from Tango's work that it's obviously a steeper learning curve, and that the % of variation due to talent by the end of the season is probably quite a bit higher as well.

If by 8 games you can get 2/3 of the information on offer in soccer, then I don't think it's a stretch to say you could get it in 5 in basketball. It might be less. I doubt it's more based on Tango's equations.

And this is all purely based on the result -- W, L, T in soccer and hockey; binary in baseball, football (excepting rare cases) and the NBA. If one adds in things like margin of victory with diminishing returns, it stands to reason that more information would be gained. Massey does this, though the power rating does it more than the standard rating. This was one of the ridiculous things about the BCS not including margin of victory.

So we're likely at a point in the season when each result yields progressively less information, yet the people here that vote are saying they can't make judgments -- at least not those that contradict their original thinking -- based on the majority of the useful information that they're *ever* going to get.

So, we'll go back to your self-identification as an analytics guy. And then I'll ask: Is the CW right that it's too early?

(And yes this probably was offtopic, but everyone here could stand to read and understand it. Especially the voters.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 12:01:21 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 11, 2016, 11:16:25 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 11, 2016, 10:05:45 PM
Quote from: sac on December 11, 2016, 09:59:58 PM
Two things:

1. PM's are useful
2. See #1

Thanks.

What has been off-topic since your last post? I don't see the logic in trying to force people to PM when the discussion is germane to the thread topic.

Unless you're just trying to suppress someone's opinion, of course. Then, the logic is clear.

Spence,

I don't think anyone is trying to suppress your opinion. You just don't need to roll the board by posting it repeatedly. You've made your opinion clear. Just use a little moderation in repeating it so that we don't have to use our moderation tools in, to use your term, blowing the whistle on this conversation.

I know you know there's a TOS since I'm not sure which iteration this is of your posting privileges, but I'm making an official reference for you now.

I feel like other people have done a lot more to make this confrontational and personal than I have, and one of them is you.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 12, 2016, 12:11:27 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 12:01:21 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 11, 2016, 11:16:25 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 11, 2016, 10:05:45 PM
Quote from: sac on December 11, 2016, 09:59:58 PM
Two things:

1. PM's are useful
2. See #1

Thanks.

What has been off-topic since your last post? I don't see the logic in trying to force people to PM when the discussion is germane to the thread topic.

Unless you're just trying to suppress someone's opinion, of course. Then, the logic is clear.

Spence,

I don't think anyone is trying to suppress your opinion. You just don't need to roll the board by posting it repeatedly. You've made your opinion clear. Just use a little moderation in repeating it so that we don't have to use our moderation tools in, to use your term, blowing the whistle on this conversation.

I know you know there's a TOS since I'm not sure which iteration this is of your posting privileges, but I'm making an official reference for you now.

I feel like other people have done a lot more to make this confrontational and personal than I have, and one of them is you.

It is that overwhelming lack of self-awareness which has turned pretty much everyone against you. YOU have been confrontational and insulting from virtually your first post. I came to your defense after one of your earlier banishments. If it happens again, don't hold your breath.

Donald Trump made statements during the campaign that would have killed off any other candidacy in American history. You, sir, are no Donald Trump. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 12, 2016, 12:21:42 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 12:01:21 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 11, 2016, 11:16:25 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 11, 2016, 10:05:45 PM
Quote from: sac on December 11, 2016, 09:59:58 PM
Two things:

1. PM's are useful
2. See #1

Thanks.

What has been off-topic since your last post? I don't see the logic in trying to force people to PM when the discussion is germane to the thread topic.

Unless you're just trying to suppress someone's opinion, of course. Then, the logic is clear.

Spence,

I don't think anyone is trying to suppress your opinion. You just don't need to roll the board by posting it repeatedly. You've made your opinion clear. Just use a little moderation in repeating it so that we don't have to use our moderation tools in, to use your term, blowing the whistle on this conversation.

I know you know there's a TOS since I'm not sure which iteration this is of your posting privileges, but I'm making an official reference for you now.

I feel like other people have done a lot more to make this confrontational and personal than I have, and one of them is you.

I understand you may feel that way -- I'm sure there's not a great way to make a dry, analytical judgment about feelings, but if we counted up the number of posts made by you here about this subject in the past 10-12 days and the number I've made about your posting, that's a statistic I think favors my point of view.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 12:45:59 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 12, 2016, 12:21:42 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 12:01:21 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 11, 2016, 11:16:25 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 11, 2016, 10:05:45 PM
Quote from: sac on December 11, 2016, 09:59:58 PM
Two things:

1. PM's are useful
2. See #1

Thanks.

What has been off-topic since your last post? I don't see the logic in trying to force people to PM when the discussion is germane to the thread topic.

Unless you're just trying to suppress someone's opinion, of course. Then, the logic is clear.

Spence,

I don't think anyone is trying to suppress your opinion. You just don't need to roll the board by posting it repeatedly. You've made your opinion clear. Just use a little moderation in repeating it so that we don't have to use our moderation tools in, to use your term, blowing the whistle on this conversation.

I know you know there's a TOS since I'm not sure which iteration this is of your posting privileges, but I'm making an official reference for you now.

I feel like other people have done a lot more to make this confrontational and personal than I have, and one of them is you.

I understand you may feel that way -- I'm sure there's not a great way to make a dry, analytical judgment about feelings, but if we counted up the number of posts made by you here about this subject in the past 10-12 days and the number I've made about your posting, that's a statistic I think favors my point of view.

Well, I'm pretty sure I could prove out my feeling, so really it's more than that. But whatever. I want the focus as mcuh as possible to be on my post to smedindy because I think it really encapsulates the whole problem here -- people simply have the wrong idea about information gain.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 12, 2016, 01:22:29 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 12:45:59 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 12, 2016, 12:21:42 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 12:01:21 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 11, 2016, 11:16:25 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 11, 2016, 10:05:45 PM
Quote from: sac on December 11, 2016, 09:59:58 PM
Two things:

1. PM's are useful
2. See #1

Thanks.

What has been off-topic since your last post? I don't see the logic in trying to force people to PM when the discussion is germane to the thread topic.

Unless you're just trying to suppress someone's opinion, of course. Then, the logic is clear.

Spence,

I don't think anyone is trying to suppress your opinion. You just don't need to roll the board by posting it repeatedly. You've made your opinion clear. Just use a little moderation in repeating it so that we don't have to use our moderation tools in, to use your term, blowing the whistle on this conversation.

I know you know there's a TOS since I'm not sure which iteration this is of your posting privileges, but I'm making an official reference for you now.

I feel like other people have done a lot more to make this confrontational and personal than I have, and one of them is you.

I understand you may feel that way -- I'm sure there's not a great way to make a dry, analytical judgment about feelings, but if we counted up the number of posts made by you here about this subject in the past 10-12 days and the number I've made about your posting, that's a statistic I think favors my point of view.

Well, I'm pretty sure I could prove out my feeling, so really it's more than that.

No, you really can't. You just don't seem to have any self-awareness as to how you come off. I'm sorry to say that, but you really don't. I don't think that I'm going out on a limb here in saying that pretty much everybody who posts here thinks that you're the one who has made this board confrontational and personal. It never was the least bit confrontational or personal before you showed up, with the exception of that NJAC poster a few years ago to whom Dave refers (and for most of us that particular poster was a source of great amusement rather than vexation). And although you say that you don't care what other people think about you, the fact of the matter is that they're going to tune you out because your attitude irritates them, which makes your stance self-defeating. Your posts have a tendency to be long and redundant, which doesn't help matters, but it's your belligerence that is the bigger problem in terms of your getting a fair hearing.

You can't be an effective Marietta booster, or even a halfway-decent gadfly, if your attitude alienates people into skipping right past your posts or abandoning this particular board altogether. And sac is right: If you have a personal issue with someone, take it to PMs. Don't air your dirty laundry here.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 01:41:52 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 12, 2016, 01:22:29 AM
You can't be an effective Marietta booster, or even a halfway-decent gadfly, if your attitude alienates people into skipping right past your posts or abandoning this particular board altogether. And sac is right: If you have a personal issue with someone, take it to PMs. Don't air your dirty laundry here.

Seriously? After this post?

Physician, heal thyself.

Btw, it is the introduction of a new way of thinking that runs counter to the norm that has made this thread confrontational. I just happen to be the person with those ideas.

As you all have proven (and seem to quite revel in), you'll do the same if it's someone else. TGHISTIHOFMEHSREXOI!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 01:57:58 AM

Mapping the timeline...

McHugh accused me of having an axe to grind on Nov. 30th. Pat jumped in on Dec. 1st with his "maybe this isn't the place for you" comment, which basically opened the door for everyone to follow suit and imply that this isn't the place for me. That's when everything changed. Before that it was just McHugh with his haughty air like he knew it all and I was just a peon in comparison. Everyone else was taking things at face value, and maybe poking the bear in a mostly joking way (like Hopefan or Hopeful or whatever the handle is, I can't remember right now).

But the point is that as usual, I'm right. Things did definitely change after (and soon after at that) Pat's adversarial post personally attacking me that followed up McHugh's baseless accusation.

Neither of those posts were born of anything but personal contempt. I don't feel much responsibility at all for that, especially when everyone else had been just fine with me up to that point. Dave didn't like having his opinion challenged, and Pat just doesn't like me and has been unjust with me in the past, so no real surprise there. He's tremendously ungrateful for the benefit I provided his network of sites in the past.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 12, 2016, 02:20:26 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 05:16:25 AM
**** it. you're the god of d3 basketball. I don't give a **** anymore.

I'm about to throw my computer out into the rain and just not give a **** about anything anymore.

Anyone up for biking from Barrow to the Tierra del Fuego? I'm pretty much done with the world.

Your simplified timeline glosses over the fact that you dropped this post in, which was reported and brought me to the board. Play the victim card if that helps you but I don't know if people will agree. This is the trigger, not my post.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 02:59:30 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 12, 2016, 02:20:26 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 01, 2016, 05:16:25 AM
**** it. you're the god of d3 basketball. I don't give a **** anymore.

I'm about to throw my computer out into the rain and just not give a **** about anything anymore.

Anyone up for biking from Barrow to the Tierra del Fuego? I'm pretty much done with the world.

Your simplified timeline glosses over the fact that you dropped this post in, which was reported and brought me to the board. Play the victim card if that helps you but I don't know if people will agree. This is the trigger, not my post.

Interesting. So I basically say whatever, i don't care, I'm done, and that's your cue to come in and throw a Molotov cocktail?

Maybe I just like using asterisks in creative ways. Like ****. Maybe I should use asterisks for every **** letter **** I write. (not curse words).

Seems to me if you had let things be, you might already **** the outcome you desired in the first place. (also not cursing)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on December 12, 2016, 08:21:54 AM

I wish we put side bets on what would happen when Marietta loses. It's easy for me to play "Monday Morning Quarterback" and say I would have put money that Spence would continue to fight his now absurd opinion like a lunatic, but really, that's what I would have bet on!! I promise!

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimgdex.com%2Fi%2F4f6cb2fa4f89b.jpg&hash=c0e267d8effcd336157346d3fd7c6abb2a99089f)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 12, 2016, 08:35:23 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 11, 2016, 09:31:47 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 11, 2016, 08:55:43 PM
Quote from: ronk on December 11, 2016, 08:52:31 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 11, 2016, 07:50:45 PM
Quote from: mailsy on December 11, 2016, 03:11:27 PM
I'm curious how much closer Neumann will get to the top 25 this week.

I've watched two of their games. Supremely talented team; I'm not seeing much discipline, which is difficult. I haven't really looked at my ballot yet. Lots of losses, so I'm not saying I won't vote for them, but I doubt that I will just yet.

The test will be handling Scranton @ home on the 30th. ::)

There are an unbelievable number of teams that have tough opponents waiting for them between now and New Year's Day. A lot of teams I'd prefer to wait on.

By wait do you mean not give them credit for what they've already done just because you didn't expect them to do it?

Teams need to have some decent wins before I'll buy in. I did end up voting for Neumann, by the way. After looking at the options, their wins thus far have been more impressive than a lot of other teams. As I said, looking through many of those teams, they've got game coming up in the next two weeks that, if they win, will give me much more confidence in their abilities.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 12, 2016, 08:40:25 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 01:41:52 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 12, 2016, 01:22:29 AM
You can't be an effective Marietta booster, or even a halfway-decent gadfly, if your attitude alienates people into skipping right past your posts or abandoning this particular board altogether. And sac is right: If you have a personal issue with someone, take it to PMs. Don't air your dirty laundry here.

Seriously? After this post?

Physician, heal thyself.

Btw, it is the introduction of a new way of thinking that runs counter to the norm that has made this thread confrontational. I just happen to be the person with those ideas.

As you all have proven (and seem to quite revel in), you'll do the same if it's someone else. TGHISTIHOFMEHSREXOI!!

If you have an argument to make, then make it. If you can manage one post without filling it with argumentative fallacies, you might be taken seriously. There is a real difference between requiring a fair hearing and requiring agreement - you need to find that difference.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 08:42:56 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 12, 2016, 08:40:25 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 01:41:52 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 12, 2016, 01:22:29 AM
You can't be an effective Marietta booster, or even a halfway-decent gadfly, if your attitude alienates people into skipping right past your posts or abandoning this particular board altogether. And sac is right: If you have a personal issue with someone, take it to PMs. Don't air your dirty laundry here.

Seriously? After this post?

Physician, heal thyself.

Btw, it is the introduction of a new way of thinking that runs counter to the norm that has made this thread confrontational. I just happen to be the person with those ideas.

As you all have proven (and seem to quite revel in), you'll do the same if it's someone else. TGHISTIHOFMEHSREXOI!!

If you have an argument to make, then make it. If you can manage one post without filling it with argumentative fallacies, you might be taken seriously. There is a real difference between requiring a fair hearing and requiring agreement - you need to find that difference.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

I already have.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 08:50:03 AM

Quote from: HOPEful on December 12, 2016, 08:21:54 AM
I wish we put side bets on what would happen when Marietta loses. It's easy for me to play "Monday Morning Quarterback" and say I would have put money that Spence would continue to fight his now absurd opinion like a lunatic, but really, that's what I would have bet on!! I promise!

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimgdex.com%2Fi%2F4f6cb2fa4f89b.jpg&hash=c0e267d8effcd336157346d3fd7c6abb2a99089f)

Who would have had "the trolls come out in force and my positions and previous statements get misrepresented"?

I don't have the right personality or mental state to be gaslighted. If the military couldn't do it, I rather doubt you all will be able to.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 12, 2016, 08:51:01 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 08:42:56 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 12, 2016, 08:40:25 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 01:41:52 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 12, 2016, 01:22:29 AM
You can't be an effective Marietta booster, or even a halfway-decent gadfly, if your attitude alienates people into skipping right past your posts or abandoning this particular board altogether. And sac is right: If you have a personal issue with someone, take it to PMs. Don't air your dirty laundry here.

Seriously? After this post?

Physician, heal thyself.

Btw, it is the introduction of a new way of thinking that runs counter to the norm that has made this thread confrontational. I just happen to be the person with those ideas.

As you all have proven (and seem to quite revel in), you'll do the same if it's someone else. TGHISTIHOFMEHSREXOI!!

If you have an argument to make, then make it. If you can manage one post without filling it with argumentative fallacies, you might be taken seriously. There is a real difference between requiring a fair hearing and requiring agreement - you need to find that difference.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

I already have.

Clearly you have not. When you say, "I think X," and others say, "I disagree. My opinion is Y," and follow it with a few detailed arguments, that's generally the end. Pressing on to somehow force the other person into agreement means you don't really understand the difference between being heard and being agreed with. You've had the same argument here at least three times now and spent most of the last few just insulting the opponent, which is, in my opinion, the lowest form of argumentative fallacy. Move on, man. There are a lot of actual games in the Top 25 that people could be talking about.

Eau Claire and WashU both went down to IIAC teams this week. Or maybe you might be interested in breaking down the Marietta loss to John Carroll and what voters might be able to learn about each team by it?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 09:24:46 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 12, 2016, 08:35:23 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 11, 2016, 09:31:47 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 11, 2016, 08:55:43 PM
Quote from: ronk on December 11, 2016, 08:52:31 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 11, 2016, 07:50:45 PM
Quote from: mailsy on December 11, 2016, 03:11:27 PM
I'm curious how much closer Neumann will get to the top 25 this week.

I've watched two of their games. Supremely talented team; I'm not seeing much discipline, which is difficult. I haven't really looked at my ballot yet. Lots of losses, so I'm not saying I won't vote for them, but I doubt that I will just yet.

The test will be handling Scranton @ home on the 30th. ::)

There are an unbelievable number of teams that have tough opponents waiting for them between now and New Year's Day. A lot of teams I'd prefer to wait on.

By wait do you mean not give them credit for what they've already done just because you didn't expect them to do it?

Teams need to have some decent wins before I'll buy in. I did end up voting for Neumann, by the way. After looking at the options, their wins thus far have been more impressive than a lot of other teams. As I said, looking through many of those teams, they've got game coming up in the next two weeks that, if they win, will give me much more confidence in their abilities.

If a team is highly ranked in a computer ranking by now, it's highly likely that team does have at least one quality win. To your credit, it seems you worked that out independently.

Beyond that, I would encourage you to read my post to smedindy and the associated links (and the links in that are useful too, it's basically all good stuff). The upcoming games might offer more information, but probably not as much as it seems.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 09:43:09 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 12, 2016, 08:51:01 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 08:42:56 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 12, 2016, 08:40:25 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 01:41:52 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 12, 2016, 01:22:29 AM
You can't be an effective Marietta booster, or even a halfway-decent gadfly, if your attitude alienates people into skipping right past your posts or abandoning this particular board altogether. And sac is right: If you have a personal issue with someone, take it to PMs. Don't air your dirty laundry here.

Seriously? After this post?

Physician, heal thyself.

Btw, it is the introduction of a new way of thinking that runs counter to the norm that has made this thread confrontational. I just happen to be the person with those ideas.

As you all have proven (and seem to quite revel in), you'll do the same if it's someone else. TGHISTIHOFMEHSREXOI!!

If you have an argument to make, then make it. If you can manage one post without filling it with argumentative fallacies, you might be taken seriously. There is a real difference between requiring a fair hearing and requiring agreement - you need to find that difference.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

I already have.

Clearly you have not. When you say, "I think X," and others say, "I disagree. My opinion is Y," and follow it with a few detailed arguments, that's generally the end. Pressing on to somehow force the other person into agreement means you don't really understand the difference between being heard and being agreed with. You've had the same argument here at least three times now and spent most of the last few just insulting the opponent, which is, in my opinion, the lowest form of argumentative fallacy. Move on, man. There are a lot of actual games in the Top 25 that people could be talking about.

Eau Claire and WashU both went down to IIAC teams this week. Or maybe you might be interested in breaking down the Marietta loss to John Carroll and what voters might be able to learn about each team by it?

So now you want me to make your arguments? I've said all I wanted to say, made the larger point. It's now up to the reader to decide what to do with it.

I thought that's what everyone wanted.

But if you insist: voters might learn from Saturday. John Carroll is good, especially at home, and really especially when their backs are against the wall and they're looking at potentially having their regular season hopes in Moran's last season dashed in the 2nd week of December.

I would think that anyone bestowed with a vote would not need to be told that. I was very concerned about this game, maybe more than any on the schedule.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Coach C on December 12, 2016, 10:14:53 AM

Returning to the thread, I have to say that Neumann is the best team no one is voting for at this point. Scary fast, Pressure D, quick in the post, good mid-range shooters and slashers. Yeah they have some trouble with the long range shot, but they can certainly play with the top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 12, 2016, 11:43:33 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 01:41:52 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 12, 2016, 01:22:29 AM
You can't be an effective Marietta booster, or even a halfway-decent gadfly, if your attitude alienates people into skipping right past your posts or abandoning this particular board altogether. And sac is right: If you have a personal issue with someone, take it to PMs. Don't air your dirty laundry here.

Seriously? After this post?

Physician, heal thyself.

I don't have a personal issue with you. I do find it annoying that you've hijacked the board with a wearying repetition of the same argument on behalf of Marietta, but annoyance with someone's posts isn't a personal issue.

I'm simply trying to explain to you how you're coming across, and how it's negatively affecting the very thing that you're trying to do here, which is to persuade everyone that you're right about Marietta being undervalued in the poll. But it appears that my effort was wasted, so I'll cease and desist.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 12, 2016, 11:44:04 AM

Quote from: Coach C on December 12, 2016, 10:14:53 AM
Returning to the thread, I have to say that Neumann is the best team no one is voting for at this point. Scary fast, Pressure D, quick in the post, good mid-range shooters and slashers. Yeah they have some trouble with the long range shot, but they can certainly play with the top 25.

What Neumann did to Catholic in the second half of their game on Saturday afternoon was a real eye-opener. Nobody else has done that to the Cardinals this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 12:53:11 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 12, 2016, 11:43:33 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 01:41:52 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 12, 2016, 01:22:29 AM
You can't be an effective Marietta booster, or even a halfway-decent gadfly, if your attitude alienates people into skipping right past your posts or abandoning this particular board altogether. And sac is right: If you have a personal issue with someone, take it to PMs. Don't air your dirty laundry here.

Seriously? After this post?

Physician, heal thyself.

I don't have a personal issue with you. I do find it annoying that you've hijacked the board with a wearying repetition of the same argument on behalf of Marietta, but annoyance with someone's posts isn't a personal issue.

I'm simply trying to explain to you how you're coming across, and how it's negatively affecting the very thing that you're trying to do here, which is to persuade everyone that you're right about Marietta being undervalued in the poll. But it appears that my effort was wasted, so I'll cease and desist.

Why is it that if I repeat something, it's a problem; but when someone else repeats something to me, it's not and somehow I'm the hijacker?

Curious, that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on December 12, 2016, 12:57:00 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 12:53:11 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 12, 2016, 11:43:33 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 01:41:52 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 12, 2016, 01:22:29 AM
You can't be an effective Marietta booster, or even a halfway-decent gadfly, if your attitude alienates people into skipping right past your posts or abandoning this particular board altogether. And sac is right: If you have a personal issue with someone, take it to PMs. Don't air your dirty laundry here.

Seriously? After this post?

Physician, heal thyself.

I don't have a personal issue with you. I do find it annoying that you've hijacked the board with a wearying repetition of the same argument on behalf of Marietta, but annoyance with someone's posts isn't a personal issue.

I'm simply trying to explain to you how you're coming across, and how it's negatively affecting the very thing that you're trying to do here, which is to persuade everyone that you're right about Marietta being undervalued in the poll. But it appears that my effort was wasted, so I'll cease and desist.

Why is it that if I repeat something, it's a problem; but when someone else repeats something to me, it's not and somehow I'm the hijacker?

Curious, that.

Scrolling, scrolling,scrolling,boring

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on December 12, 2016, 01:18:13 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 11, 2016, 11:47:48 PM
"The equation works out that you know roughly as much after 12 NFL games (75% of the season) as you do after 14 NBA games (17%), 36 NHL games (44%), and 69 MLB games (43%)." For PL soccer, it's even higher, 47% of games. Point: basketball is by far the least random.

Hmmmm... 30 NHL teams, 30 NBA teams, 32 NFL teams, 20 EPL teams and...

424 D3 Basketball teams. Totally the same thing though... ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on December 12, 2016, 02:07:30 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on December 12, 2016, 01:18:13 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 11, 2016, 11:47:48 PM
"The equation works out that you know roughly as much after 12 NFL games (75% of the season) as you do after 14 NBA games (17%), 36 NHL games (44%), and 69 MLB games (43%)." For PL soccer, it's even higher, 47% of games. Point: basketball is by far the least random.

Hmmmm... 30 NHL teams, 30 NBA teams, 32 NFL teams, 20 EPL teams and...

424 D3 Basketball teams. Totally the same thing though... ::)

My thought exactly - add the 241 games against non D3 teams thus far this season and that's 665 total teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 03:01:00 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on December 12, 2016, 01:18:13 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 11, 2016, 11:47:48 PM
"The equation works out that you know roughly as much after 12 NFL games (75% of the season) as you do after 14 NBA games (17%), 36 NHL games (44%), and 69 MLB games (43%)." For PL soccer, it's even higher, 47% of games. Point: basketball is by far the least random.

Hmmmm... 30 NHL teams, 30 NBA teams, 32 NFL teams, 20 EPL teams and...

424 D3 Basketball teams. Totally the same thing though... ::)

It's not about the number of teams. It's about the randomness of results inherent in the game and league. I will admit being surprised by the NFL calculation, but I guess maybe I shouldn't have been given the presence and nature of their salary cap, and overall parity in the league. I think in general football is more robust to randomness, but it's the way the NFL is set up that sets up susceptibility to it.

The PL is the opposite. There couldn't be fewer safeguards to ensure parity if you tried, so the randomness is pretty much all a result of the game play itself.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 12, 2016, 03:17:23 PM

Well,

A. Metrics and analytics are a big part of my job.
B. I've been a analytics guy since I first read a Bill James Baseball Abstract in the early 80's. Before then, I had a Baseball Encyclopedia in grade school and loved to digest basketball stats.
C. I've followed Sagarin since it was published in USA Today, and Massey when I learned about it for D-3.
D. I've followed KenPom since mid-2006 or so.
E. I used to do my own damn rankings but stopped because I have a job and two writing gigs, a stat gig here at CWU, a new wife, meals to cook, dogs to walk, and books to read.
F. So, when I vote in the posters poll, I'll look at Massey, look at the Top 25, dive in to teams that are highly ranked in both, and come up with my opinion.

My observation is this, and it is supported by Sagarin and Massey. It takes a while for all of the teams to connect to each other, especially in D-3 when some teams spend a lot of their pre-conference playing non D-3 teams. I suspect now Massey is all connected, but in my opinion, until conference play gets going, we don't really know where teams are within a 10-15 place ranking.

Mind you, thinking Marietta is 4th or 5th versus 1st, when you have 400+ teams, is in the realm of error or "damn, close".

Plus, the NBA is NOT college basketball. The level between the worst NBA team and the best is very small, compared to the worst D-3 team and the best.

And yet, we have results like Delaware State beating St. John's, Finlandia beating Alma, Wisconsin-Superior beating Hamline who beat St. Thomas (think about that)!

Right now, Whitman is #1 in Massey. They may be the best team, they may not be. After 1/4 of the season, it's still to early to really tell.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 12, 2016, 03:21:53 PM

EPL, NHL and NBA are closed leagues in which all of the teams play each other at least once. NFL and college basketball are not like that at all. In D3 the 420 teams makes the randomness of goofy results (or more random) much more likely to occur vs the other sports. The lack of fully intertwined schedules (relatively) and the still mostly regional aspects of the sport makes ranking teams with high degrees of accuracy very difficult.

With that said, Massey is much more accurate even in early December than most people are willing to give it credit for. The error range or variability is simply wider this time of year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 03:30:12 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 12, 2016, 03:17:23 PM
F. So, when I vote in the posters poll, I'll look at Massey, look at the Top 25, dive in to teams that are highly ranked in both, and come up with my opinion.

My observation is this, and it is supported by Sagarin and Massey. It takes a while for all of the teams to connect to each other, especially in D-3 when some teams spend a lot of their pre-conference playing non D-3 teams. I suspect now Massey is all connected, but in my opinion, until conference play gets going, we don't really know where teams are within a 10-15 place ranking.

Mind you, thinking Marietta is 4th or 5th versus 1st, when you have 400+ teams, is in the realm of error or "damn, close".

Plus, the NBA is NOT college basketball. The level between the worst NBA team and the best is very small, compared to the worst D-3 team and the best.

And yet, we have results like Delaware State beating St. John's, Finlandia beating Alma, Wisconsin-Superior beating Hamline who beat St. Thomas (think about that)!

Right now, Whitman is #1 in Massey. They may be the best team, they may not be. After 1/4 of the season, it's still to early to really tell.

Obviously we know transitivity doesn't really work in sports, for the most part. I would say that where there's little separation, we never really know "true" ranking. Like what's the difference between a team with a .78 rating and .76? But that's not the situation with the top 2 teams right now. They're pretty significantly extended from even the top chase pack. Real world results often obscure who the best team is as well -- the best team in a game doesn't always win.

I would further argue that the difference you're talking about in level between NBA teams and D3 only decreases the effect of randomness and allows more knowledge gain earlier. I don't really think the total number of teams in D3 is all that relevant because a large number of those teams are not competitive with the ones that are on topic for this thread -- just like in D1 there are 300+ plus teams but only a small fraction of those are serious top 25 contenders.

Sagarin used to have a little bit in the narrative on his page for a ranking that said whether the teams in it were connected or not. I don't think it's there anymore. He probably got too many emails asking what it meant :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on December 12, 2016, 04:01:50 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 03:30:12 PM
Obviously we know transitivity doesn't really work in sports, for the most part. I would say that where there's little separation, we never really know "true" ranking. Like what's the difference between a team with a .78 rating and .76? But that's not the situation with the top 2 teams right now. They're pretty significantly extended from even the top chase pack...

Are you really arguing that Whitman is far and away the best team in the country? They have 1 win against a team with a winning record. And that's Whitworth, who has 0 wins against teams with winning records. Massey is one measuring tool and a very good one at that. But it's just one tool.

The point of a human poll is to look at more than just computer rankings. Compare the play of Howell vs. McCarthy vs. Edwards vs. Flannery... Compare the teams TO margains, effeciency, etc. Massey tells me Whitman is #1, but it also tells me they have the #125 defense so far this season vs. Marietta's #37, Amherst's #26, and Babson's #76. Personally, f I were a D3 voter, I'd still have Whitman behind Amherst, Babson, and Marietta, playing a little wait and see until they go against Wooster and Marietta. I'd also be totally fine with voters who think they're #1...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 04:14:45 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on December 12, 2016, 04:01:50 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 03:30:12 PM
Obviously we know transitivity doesn't really work in sports, for the most part. I would say that where there's little separation, we never really know "true" ranking. Like what's the difference between a team with a .78 rating and .76? But that's not the situation with the top 2 teams right now. They're pretty significantly extended from even the top chase pack...

Are you really arguing that Whitman is far and away the best team in the country? They have 1 win against a team with a winning record. And that's Whitworth, who has 0 wins against teams with winning records. Massey is one measuring tool and a very good one at that. But it's just one tool.

The point of a human poll is to look at more than just computer rankings. Compare the play of Howell vs. McCarthy vs. Edwards vs. Flannery... Compare the teams TO margains, effeciency, etc. Massey tells me Whitman is #1, but it also tells me they have the #125 defense so far this season vs. Marietta's #37, Amherst's #26, and Babson's #76. Personally, f I were a D3 voter, I'd still have Whitman behind Amherst, Babson, and Marietta, playing a little wait and see until they go against Wooster and Marietta. I'd also be totally fine with voters who think they're #1...

Basically, Whitman has soundly beaten pretty good teams with challenging schedules and Whitworth has beaten several of the same teams.

Massey's offensive and defensive ratings are not tempo-neutral.

Playing the wait and see game only sets a team to not be rewarded as it should be for what it has already done.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 12, 2016, 04:33:23 PM

New poll out. http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2016-17/week3

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 12, 2016, 05:24:10 PM

Whitman's claim to a high Massey is running all over St. Olaf and beating Whitworth at home by 14, though they only beat a gack-worthy Willamette on the road by 15.

St. Olaf seems to be down this year, and it looks like that Whitman game got away from them in the second half thanks to Whitman's pressure. Using a pressure defense can cause the points to pile up against you if you have issues. But with only 6-7 games, that one game is going to be muted a bit.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 12, 2016, 06:13:23 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 12, 2016, 05:24:10 PM
Whitman's claim to a high Massey is running all over St. Olaf and beating Whitworth at home by 14, though they only beat a gack-worthy Willamette on the road by 15.

St. Olaf seems to be down this year, and it looks like that Whitman game got away from them in the second half thanks to Whitman's pressure. Using a pressure defense can cause the points to pile up against you if you have issues. But with only 6-7 games, that one game is going to be muted a bit.

St. Olaf has played one of the toughest schedules in the country so far, and plays in a tough conference too. Massey has them top 50 but because of their schedule projected to only go 14-11 or so. Their pure power rating rank is 34, showing how tough their schedule has been and how competitive they've been against it in most games.

Similar to John Carroll, whose pure power rating rank is 38.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on December 12, 2016, 09:02:16 PM

Quote from: mailsy on December 11, 2016, 03:11:27 PM
I'm curious how much closer Neumann will get to the top 25 this week.

mea culpa ;D :-X

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on December 13, 2016, 08:21:38 AM

How does Babson get 3 first place votes after losing to Amherst?!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on December 13, 2016, 08:28:08 AM

Quote from: HOPEful on December 13, 2016, 08:21:38 AM
How does Babson get 3 first place votes after losing to Amherst?!

Two point loss in double overtime on the road? Based on that result alone one would probably pick Babson to win on a neutral court, no?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 13, 2016, 08:48:36 AM

Quote from: HOPEful on December 13, 2016, 08:21:38 AM
How does Babson get 3 first place votes after losing to Amherst?!

I watched all 50 minutes of that game. I never once thought Amherst was the better team. I'd pick Babson in a rematch, even if it were at Amherst. I couldn't bring myself to go against ten games of perceptions because of one 2OT win. I would note that every voter now has Amherst at either #1 or #2; they definitely proved themselves with that game. I moved them up a number of slots because of that tremendous performance. If those teams played 100 times, Amherst might win 48, but I don't think they win 50.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on December 13, 2016, 09:27:16 AM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 13, 2016, 08:28:08 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on December 13, 2016, 08:21:38 AM
How does Babson get 3 first place votes after losing to Amherst?!
Two point loss in double overtime on the road? Based on that result alone one would probably pick Babson to win on a neutral court, no?

But they didn't play on a neutral court. They played at Amherst. I don't care if it took 6 overtimes, Amherst won the game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on December 13, 2016, 10:00:49 AM

Quote from: HOPEful on December 13, 2016, 09:27:16 AM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 13, 2016, 08:28:08 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on December 13, 2016, 08:21:38 AM
How does Babson get 3 first place votes after losing to Amherst?!
Two point loss in double overtime on the road? Based on that result alone one would probably pick Babson to win on a neutral court, no?

But they didn't play on a neutral court. They played at Amherst. I don't care if it took 6 overtimes, Amherst won the game.

In my mind this becomes the same argument as the annual discussion about a national champion - are they the best team because they won the championship, or did they win the championship by playing well for a short stretch of games, perhaps beating a better team or teams?? We can all cite champions who people would say were not the best team for a given year, but did win a naty.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 13, 2016, 12:15:34 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on December 13, 2016, 09:27:16 AM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 13, 2016, 08:28:08 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on December 13, 2016, 08:21:38 AM
How does Babson get 3 first place votes after losing to Amherst?!
Two point loss in double overtime on the road? Based on that result alone one would probably pick Babson to win on a neutral court, no?

But they didn't play on a neutral court. They played at Amherst. I don't care if it took 6 overtimes, Amherst won the game.

The point of a Top 25 isn't solely to represent what has already happened. We have standings for that. It's exactly to do what KS suggests: rank who would win on a neutral floor. And the championship is played on a neutral floor, so that makes sense.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 13, 2016, 12:51:00 PM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on December 13, 2016, 10:00:49 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on December 13, 2016, 09:27:16 AM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 13, 2016, 08:28:08 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on December 13, 2016, 08:21:38 AM
How does Babson get 3 first place votes after losing to Amherst?!
Two point loss in double overtime on the road? Based on that result alone one would probably pick Babson to win on a neutral court, no?

But they didn't play on a neutral court. They played at Amherst. I don't care if it took 6 overtimes, Amherst won the game.

In my mind this becomes the same argument as the annual discussion about a national champion - are they the best team because they won the championship, or did they win the championship by playing well for a short stretch of games, perhaps beating a better team or teams?? We can all cite champions who people would say were not the best team for a given year, but did win a naty.

This is the same argument for why someone might hypothetically NOT vote the tourney winner #1 in the final poll. If anything, an inferior team running the tournament and winning a title is even more credit to them than a consensus #1 winning. Usually, because of the talent in the tournament, a team who wins will have played and beaten the kind of competition necessary to secure a #1 - but it doesn't have to be the case.

A champion is someone who wins a tournament - and the best team doesn't always win. There's no shame in being one without the other. I think of that UCONN team with Kemba Walker that had to win five games in the Big East Tourney just to get in, then won six to get the national title. That wasn't the best team in D1 that year, but they won games when it counted. Those are two very different things.

Amherst scored more points on Thursday - they won the game. No excuses for Babson. But, if they would have played the same game the next night, I'd still pick Babson; I think they're the better team and nothing in that game showed me different. Now if they'd've come out and dominated Babson the way Marietta dismantled CNU, of course its a different story.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 13, 2016, 12:58:53 PM

We've seen in other places this year where something with a 30% chance of happening does indeed happen.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 13, 2016, 01:48:49 PM

So this is the last poll until the new year?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 13, 2016, 01:52:37 PM

Fwiw, and not much, I thought Babson looked the better team and should have won the game. But the better team should have been able to close out that game, yet didn't, so for now Amherst should ranked ahead of them IMO.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 13, 2016, 02:24:46 PM

Maybe they couldn't close out because they play their guys too many minutes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: amh63 on December 13, 2016, 02:57:28 PM

Ryan Scott, read your initial post here on the Babson game with Amherst and your vote. Have a question for you that may help me understand your projection of the outcome of a possible future game between the two teams. What ten observations? Need some clarity..time period...sites.
Last season, Babson played early in the season three Nescac teams with 4 of the present starters. They lost to Bowdoin in OT. They played Tufts and lost in OT. They played Amherst in their house and lost in 2OTs. Later in the post season in Medford, Amherst beat Babson again and beat Tufts the next day to go to the Final 4. Four starters from that team and others played in this season's game at Amherst. This season, Babson beat Bowdoin in a close game and also beat Tufts in a battle. Were any of these games in your 10 Observations?
In any case, Babson has played in a lot of close games, as has Amherst to get to last year's Final 4.
Was Amherst lucky last season in the matchups and likewise this season? Was Babson unfortunate last season in games as it seemed to you this season in the Amherst game. Basically the same players to a great degree. In short, the ball does take funny bounces in games between good teams. Maybe the future game will have both teams with the same amount of rest and practice time...Amherst had played on Tuesday before the Thursday game and the Sat. before. Flannery did sit out the game before the Tufts game this year with a "foot issue" and played 39 min. In the Tufts game and all 50 minutes in the Amherst game. Any clarity with the foot issue?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 13, 2016, 04:13:45 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 13, 2016, 01:48:49 PM
So this is the last poll until the new year?

There is a new poll next Monday, then the break.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 14, 2016, 08:50:04 AM

Quote from: amh63 on December 13, 2016, 02:57:28 PM
Ryan Scott, read your initial post here on the Babson game with Amherst and your vote. Have a question for you that may help me understand your projection of the outcome of a possible future game between the two teams. What ten observations? Need some clarity..time period...sites.
Last season, Babson played early in the season three Nescac teams with 4 of the present starters. They lost to Bowdoin in OT. They played Tufts and lost in OT. They played Amherst in their house and lost in 2OTs. Later in the post season in Medford, Amherst beat Babson again and beat Tufts the next day to go to the Final 4. Four starters from that team and others played in this season's game at Amherst. This season, Babson beat Bowdoin in a close game and also beat Tufts in a battle. Were any of these games in your 10 Observations?
In any case, Babson has played in a lot of close games, as has Amherst to get to last year's Final 4.
Was Amherst lucky last season in the matchups and likewise this season? Was Babson unfortunate last season in games as it seemed to you this season in the Amherst game. Basically the same players to a great degree. In short, the ball does take funny bounces in games between good teams. Maybe the future game will have both teams with the same amount of rest and practice time...Amherst had played on Tuesday before the Thursday game and the Sat. before. Flannery did sit out the game before the Tufts game this year with a "foot issue" and played 39 min. In the Tufts game and all 50 minutes in the Amherst game. Any clarity with the foot issue?

I don't compare one season to the next, generally. Based on the one actual game between the two, it seemed like Amherst played at or near their abilities throughout - they made fewer errors, hit big shots, and got stops when they needed them. Still, it feels like mistakes from Babson opened the door to Amherst's heroics more than anything Amherst did to earn them. Again, we're talking the two best teams in the country, so it's not as if I'm trashing one and praising the other - we're really splitting hairs - as a 2OT game would indicate.

I'd imagine, in a 100 game sample, Amherst would play most games at about 95% of what they did in this one and Babson would play about the same. That's the difference for me. I had been voting Amherst #9 until this point, mostly because I hadn't seen anything from them that told me they could really hang with a top team. The Babson game certainly put those questions to rest - as much as I love you all, your word that these players could step up wasn't quite enough for me to vote on. Last year, I thought the team relied too heavily on Connor Green and I wanted to see them play good competition without him.

As far as the rest of the schedule is concerned, Amherst should be a better tested in conference this year and it's certainly close enough that I might change my mind. It's very hard for a team like Babson to keep up this level of play throughout a whole season without regular challenges (NEWMAC is not as good as some voters seem to think this year). Amherst will get them and that could make a big difference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on December 14, 2016, 09:44:07 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 14, 2016, 08:50:04 AM
I don't compare one season to the next, generally. Based on the one actual game between the two, it seemed like Amherst played at or near their abilities throughout - they made fewer errors, hit big shots, and got stops when they needed them. Still, it feels like mistakes from Babson opened the door to Amherst's heroics more than anything Amherst did to earn them. Again, we're talking the two best teams in the country, so it's not as if I'm trashing one and praising the other - we're really splitting hairs - as a 2OT game would indicate.

I'd imagine, in a 100 game sample, Amherst would play most games at about 95% of what they did in this one and Babson would play about the same. That's the difference for me. I had been voting Amherst #9 until this point, mostly because I hadn't seen anything from them that told me they could really hang with a top team. The Babson game certainly put those questions to rest - as much as I love you all, your word that these players could step up wasn't quite enough for me to vote on. Last year, I thought the team relied too heavily on Connor Green and I wanted to see them play good competition without him...

Two takeaways from this...

1.) The first part is a whole lot of subjective opinion. I think it is unfair to respond to any team who just won an incredible back and forth battle to one of the best teams in the country with, "They didn't do anything special to win, Babson just didn't play their best"... Add to that predictions on how it would go if they played again, or at a neutral site, etc. places your subjective opinions to those questions ahead of the existing results. I find that to be somewhat irresponsible.

2.) The second point is important. Amherst may have jumped 7 spots on someone's ranking after that win. I still think it's irresponsible to vote Babson 1 and Amherst 2 immediately following a game in which Amherst beat Babson. However, I do respect the decision more knowing where Amherst and Babson each started before the game was played. How much should Babson be punished for losing to a top 10 team on the road in 2OT?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 14, 2016, 03:59:46 PM

I would wonder whether that %age of capacity determination is made in other games.

I don't think it's that weird that a team that generally couldn't close the deal in close games against good teams last year has trouble again with mostly the same players.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 14, 2016, 07:55:18 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on December 14, 2016, 09:44:07 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 14, 2016, 08:50:04 AM
I don't compare one season to the next, generally. Based on the one actual game between the two, it seemed like Amherst played at or near their abilities throughout - they made fewer errors, hit big shots, and got stops when they needed them. Still, it feels like mistakes from Babson opened the door to Amherst's heroics more than anything Amherst did to earn them. Again, we're talking the two best teams in the country, so it's not as if I'm trashing one and praising the other - we're really splitting hairs - as a 2OT game would indicate.

I'd imagine, in a 100 game sample, Amherst would play most games at about 95% of what they did in this one and Babson would play about the same. That's the difference for me. I had been voting Amherst #9 until this point, mostly because I hadn't seen anything from them that told me they could really hang with a top team. The Babson game certainly put those questions to rest - as much as I love you all, your word that these players could step up wasn't quite enough for me to vote on. Last year, I thought the team relied too heavily on Connor Green and I wanted to see them play good competition without him...

Two takeaways from this...

1.) The first part is a whole lot of subjective opinion. I think it is unfair to respond to any team who just won an incredible back and forth battle to one of the best teams in the country with, "They didn't do anything special to win, Babson just didn't play their best"... Add to that predictions on how it would go if they played again, or at a neutral site, etc. places your subjective opinions to those questions ahead of the existing results. I find that to be somewhat irresponsible.

2.) The second point is important. Amherst may have jumped 7 spots on someone's ranking after that win. I still think it's irresponsible to vote Babson 1 and Amherst 2 immediately following a game in which Amherst beat Babson. However, I do respect the decision more knowing where Amherst and Babson each started before the game was played. How much should Babson be punished for losing to a top 10 team on the road in 2OT?

I try to do my voting as much on subjective opinion as possible. It seems like the only point of a human poll is to be subjective - we've got lots of computers and conference stands to be objective for us. Obviously, it's nice to have tools to gauge strength of schedule and all that when we can't see every game every team plays, but I work pretty hard to at least see everybody I'm voting for on video multiple times (I've seen 20 of my 25 at least once already this year). By the end of the season, I've usually accomplished it. There's a lot of subjectivity that goes into things. I downgraded Whitman this week after seeing them play a few times - as good and as talented as they are, I think they'll have trouble with a disciplined team with size.

I watched the entire Amherst-Babson game specifically because I wanted to see how Amherst responded. I was duly impressed, but I don't think you can count on that performance on a regular basis and I don't feel comfortable ranking them based on one game. I know there are lots of different ways people approach a Top 25, but I don't look at it as a "who's best right now," kind of thing; I look at it as who's best over the course of the season. Yes, there's some priority for more recent results, but in the end, Babson just seems like a better team to me, so I ranked them that way.

I'm much more comfortable approaching things this way because we do have a tournament. I'd have a much harder time in something like D1 football where the polls really do count for something.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 14, 2016, 08:46:04 PM

Springfield beats Amherst 71-70 - Pride tried to give it away down the stretch, but they just barely hung on. Great defense from Springfield and an unwillingness to concede when Amherst pretty quickly removed the first half deficit. Maybe the NEWMAC will be a little tougher than I thought.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 14, 2016, 08:47:37 PM

It looks like Denison lost as well. Capital really getting some big wins this year - too bad they're losing a bunch, too.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 15, 2016, 07:24:07 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

A light week of action leading up to the final poll of 2016, with 16 of the 50 vote-receiving teams idle., and 23 more playing just one game.

I discovered late last night that the file format for each team's schedule had changed slightly, so I had to do a little recoding this morning. The good news is that, because of the format change, future reports should now show when a game went to overtime. (The aggregated score reports have always included this information, but individual team pages had not.)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	622	Amherst	8-1	LOST at Springfield, 70-71
#2	595	Babson	9-1	IDLE
#3	576	Whitman	6-0	12/18 vs. T#35 Wooster
#4	525	Marietta	7-1	12/17 vs. Wilmington
#5	489	Christopher Newport	6-1	12/17 at #10 Salisbury
#6	474	St. Norbert	5-1	IDLE
#7	456	Rochester	10-0	def. Union, 77-58
#8	435	Whitworth	5-1	12/18 at La Verne
#9	396	Tufts	8-2	won at Framingham State, 74-56
#10	390	Salisbury	7-0	12/17 vs. #5 Christopher Newport
#11	336	UW-Eau Claire	8-1	IDLE
#12	314	Benedictine	7-2	won at Aurora, 96-93; 12/17 vs. Marian
#13	267	North Central (Ill.)	6-2	won at Albion, 68-57; 12/17 vs. Robert Morris-Chicago
#14	257	Hope	5-2	IDLE
#15	201	Swarthmore	7-0	12/17 vs. Rowan; 12/18 vs. TBD
#16	187	Denison	8-1	LOST at Capital, 75-84
#17	184	Washington U.	6-2	12/17 vs. #21 Illinois Wesleyan
#18	175	Susquehanna	7-1	12/18 vs. LaGrange
#19	170	North Park	6-1	12/17 vs. Trine
#20	135	UW-Whitewater	7-0	IDLE
#21	112	Illinois Wesleyan	6-2	12/17 at #17 Washington U.
#22	97	Wesleyan	9-0	IDLE
#23	93	Wartburg	8-1	IDLE
#24	63	Augustana	7-3	LOST at UW-La Crosse, 63-74; 12/16 vs. #31 Central
#25	62	UW-River Falls	8-1	won at Carleton, 69-64; 12/17 at Hamline

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	54	New Jersey City	8-1	12/17 vs. Albertus Magnus
#27	49	Neumann	8-0	IDLE
#28	39	Emory	6-2	IDLE
#29	38	Middlebury	7-1	IDLE
#30	30	Endicott	6-2	IDLE
#31	29	Central	7-1	12/16 at #24 Augustana
T#32	27	Chicago	6-1	12/17 vs. Monmouth; 12/18 at Rhodes
T#32	27	Lycoming	8-1	def. Alvernia, 86-85; 12/16 vs. Nazareth; 12/18 vs. SUNY Potsdam
#34	25	Keene State	6-2	IDLE
T#35	23	Wooster	5-3	12/18 at #3 Whitman
T#35	23	Virginia Wesleyan	6-2	12/17 vs. Wesley
#37	19	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	6-0	12/17 at Westmont
#38	18	Baldwin Wallace	6-2	def. Pitt-Greensburg, 121-59; 12/17 vs. Capital
#39	17	Brockport	8-1	IDLE
#40	15	Misericordia	8-1	IDLE
T#41	14	Bethel	6-1	12/16 at Concordia-St. Paul
T#41	14	Mount St. Joseph	7-2	LOST at Thomas More, 62-65; 12/17 vs. Defiance
T#41	14	Scranton	6-2	LOST at Arcadia, 66-77; 12/18 vs. Emory and Henry
#44	13	Ramapo	8-0	12/15 at Farmingdale State
#45	12	Williams	8-1	IDLE
#46	4	Carroll	5-2	IDLE
T#47	3	WPI	7-2	IDLE
T#47	3	UW-Stevens Point	4-3	LOST at #49 St. Thomas, 64-73
#49	2	St. Thomas	6-3	def. T#47 UW-Stevens Point, 73-64
T#50	1	MIT	7-3	LOST at Mass-Dartmouth, 70-72
T#50	1	Ripon	6-0	IDLE

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on December 15, 2016, 08:02:25 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 14, 2016, 07:55:18 PM
Quote from: HOPEful on December 14, 2016, 09:44:07 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 14, 2016, 08:50:04 AM
I don't compare one season to the next, generally. Based on the one actual game between the two, it seemed like Amherst played at or near their abilities throughout - they made fewer errors, hit big shots, and got stops when they needed them. Still, it feels like mistakes from Babson opened the door to Amherst's heroics more than anything Amherst did to earn them. Again, we're talking the two best teams in the country, so it's not as if I'm trashing one and praising the other - we're really splitting hairs - as a 2OT game would indicate.

I'd imagine, in a 100 game sample, Amherst would play most games at about 95% of what they did in this one and Babson would play about the same. That's the difference for me. I had been voting Amherst #9 until this point, mostly because I hadn't seen anything from them that told me they could really hang with a top team. The Babson game certainly put those questions to rest - as much as I love you all, your word that these players could step up wasn't quite enough for me to vote on. Last year, I thought the team relied too heavily on Connor Green and I wanted to see them play good competition without him...

Two takeaways from this...

1.) The first part is a whole lot of subjective opinion. I think it is unfair to respond to any team who just won an incredible back and forth battle to one of the best teams in the country with, "They didn't do anything special to win, Babson just didn't play their best"... Add to that predictions on how it would go if they played again, or at a neutral site, etc. places your subjective opinions to those questions ahead of the existing results. I find that to be somewhat irresponsible.

2.) The second point is important. Amherst may have jumped 7 spots on someone's ranking after that win. I still think it's irresponsible to vote Babson 1 and Amherst 2 immediately following a game in which Amherst beat Babson. However, I do respect the decision more knowing where Amherst and Babson each started before the game was played. How much should Babson be punished for losing to a top 10 team on the road in 2OT?

I try to do my voting as much on subjective opinion as possible. It seems like the only point of a human poll is to be subjective - we've got lots of computers and conference stands to be objective for us...

...I'm much more comfortable approaching things this way because we do have a tournament. I'd have a much harder time in something like D1 football where the polls really do count for something.

Thank you for sharing this Ryan. I thinks it's natural for us all to view these things differently, but I find hearing the rationale for other opinions to be fascinating!

Also, it is only fitting that Amherst loses to Springfield after I have been arguing for them as number 1. The amount of undefeated teams out there sure is dwindling!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 17, 2016, 03:32:29 PM

Marietta up 45-19, not even halftime yet.

Just ridiculous how much game dominance they can assert.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 03:44:53 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 17, 2016, 03:32:29 PM
Marietta up 45-19, not even halftime yet.

Just ridiculous how much game dominance they can assert.

Spence, we are all aware that Marietta is VERY good this season. But you're gonna brag about dominating Wilma?? Seriously? WILMA?? :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 17, 2016, 04:10:43 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 03:44:53 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 17, 2016, 03:32:29 PM
Marietta up 45-19, not even halftime yet.

Just ridiculous how much game dominance they can assert.

Spence, we are all aware that Marietta is VERY good this season. But you're gonna brag about dominating Wilma?? Seriously? WILMA?? :o

They're usually not a half bad team in the league. Not their best year this year, but certainly no one has beaten up on them like this. Marietta had a 40-12 stretch after being down 7-5.

If they played Babson's schedule they'd probably 7-2. Most of the teams they've lost to are not bad teams.

That people seem to have a problem about reporting events taking place within the top 25 (seemingly on topic) confuses me.

Edit: Wilmington finally started scoring (as they can, again not a bad team), but AJ Edwards had a monster game -- 30 points, 17 rebounds (9 offensive) in 28 minutes. Just unstoppable in the second half.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on December 17, 2016, 04:55:22 PM

Thank god AJ Edwards finally had a monster game, I was going to ask if he belonged in All-American talk still after an average start to the year! ;)

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fasttrack.hk%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F05%2FTHE-BEAR-1b.png&hash=e22e7001893e6bcb17553be2ec6ccff0106c3c9f)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 17, 2016, 05:49:54 PM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on December 17, 2016, 04:55:22 PM
Thank god AJ Edwards finally had a monster game, I was going to ask if he belonged in All-American talk still after an average start to the year! ;)

You don't know what you're talking about if you think he's been average. No star player I've ever seen has less plays run for him because Marietta doesn't need to. John Carroll basically played 2 guys on him (fronted the post with a spy behind) and he still got double figures.

I'm glad 18 and 10 or so on 56% FG for a top 5 team playing 26 mpg is average to you.

Keith Richardson in his first start of the year had a "quiet" 21 with 4 assists. He's playing like an all-American too. Averaging 17 a game playing 21 mpg (that will surely go up). 51% FG, 61% from 3.

Next week in Florida should be fun to watch. I won't be there but at least I won't be in Minnesota. Leaving at 6 am on the coldest day in 5 years is going to be the opposite of awesome.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 17, 2016, 08:37:51 PM

#19 North Park 81
Trine 62

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 17, 2016, 09:01:29 PM

Looks like a lot of the Top 25 are idle. Are they also shiftless?

/Replacements 4-ever

//Anything to change gears of the board

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 17, 2016, 09:10:34 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 08:50:54 PM
That's really stretching for it, Spence. Virtually everyone uses the shorthand of Wilma (for Wilmington), Heidi (for Heidelberg), Musky (for Muskingum), etc. No offense is intended (and certainly not misogynistic - know any women named "Musky"?)

Perhaps you should cut back on your coffee intake.

I know a couple places in the U.P., if you stick around late enough.......

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 17, 2016, 09:27:48 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 08:50:54 PM
That's really stretching for it, Spence. Virtually everyone uses the shorthand of Wilma (for Wilmington), Heidi (for Heidelberg), Musky (for Muskingum), etc. No offense is intended (and certainly not misogynistic - know any women named "Musky"?)

Perhaps you should cut back on your coffee intake.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.livescience.com%2Fimages%2Fi%2F000%2F049%2F290%2Foriginal%2Fbull-fight.jpg%3Finterpolation%3Dlanczos-none%26amp%3Bfit%3Dinside%257C660%3A%2A&hash=af362af4d41a0b4e2b9cbebadf47e4fe4167da2b)

You're not the bull ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 17, 2016, 09:34:34 PM

I've used Wilma and Musky. I use Berg for Heidelberg.

But we all use shorthand for some schools (Witt, DPU, Wash U, C-M, CMS, Cal Tech, MIT, CWRU, UMHB, etc.)

Then there's all of those SUNY schools.

If you're familiar with a school and it's naturally nicknamable, I use it. Heck, it's standard to call a team Ole Miss, or KU for Kansas.

Otherwise, we'd all be calling it Rutgers, the State University of New jersey

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 17, 2016, 09:39:03 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 17, 2016, 09:01:29 PM
Looks like a lot of the Top 25 are idle. Are they also shiftless?

/Replacements 4-ever

//Anything to change gears of the board

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 17, 2016, 09:11:17 PMYep, more personal attacks and excuses for your own misbehavior.

Are you just too lazy to type out the names of OAC schools? Do you just have that little regard for the conference that they aren't worth your time to use the full names?

As close to true as that might be, that's not the right. Those names came about because of the schools' weaknesses in football more than anything else.

And Musky? Boy there's a real brain buster. Their team nickname is the Fighting Muskies! Wow, craaaaaaaaazy to call them Musky, isn't it? Nothing similar to the mildly disparaging terms for the other two that you used.

Fact remains that you accuse me of doing that which you actually did. I haven't called Babson "Babs", have I? Or Amherst "Amy"...

I say again, you are a hypocrite.

And oh...it's hard to cut back intake of anything to a point below 0 (except the temperature in Minnesota).

But by all means, keep trying to make it about me. Seems that's what half the board wants anyway. I just want to discuss and share regarding top 25 teams or teams worthy of discussion for same.

Funny how you have a problem with that. What's your agenda that you're against that?

Here comes a regular.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 09:42:37 PM

I also call Randolph Macon "Randy Mac", does that make me whatever the opposite of misogynist is? (Only after the fact did I discover that most RMC supporters LIKE "Randy Mac". ;D)

Spence, when EVERYONE is mocking you, does it ever give you a feeling that maybe you're not doing something right?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 09:44:59 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 17, 2016, 09:34:34 PM
I've used Wilma and Musky. I use Berg for Heidelberg.

But we all use shorthand for some schools (Witt, DPU, Wash U, C-M, CMS, Cal Tech, MIT, CWRU, UMHB, etc.)

Then there's all of those SUNY schools.

If you're familiar with a school and it's naturally nicknamable, I use it. Heck, it's standard to call a team Ole Miss, or KU for Kansas.

Otherwise, we'd all be calling it Rutgers, the State University of New jersey

[/b]

Or, God forbid, THE Ohio State University! :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie77 on December 17, 2016, 09:51:49 PM

Are there any female Augies? Or Auggies up in Minnesota?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 17, 2016, 09:54:57 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 08:50:54 PM
That's really stretching for it, Spence. Virtually everyone uses the shorthand of Wilma (for Wilmington), Heidi (for Heidelberg), Musky (for Muskingum), etc. No offense is intended (and certainly not misogynistic - know any women named "Musky"?)

Behold!

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.petemaina.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F06%2FJesica-Retzleff.jpg&hash=2e5dde9436bf46152acf923b9c08bcfdd6722bd9)

Chuck, you obviously have a deep and abiding hatred of women. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 10:01:39 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 17, 2016, 09:54:57 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 08:50:54 PM
That's really stretching for it, Spence. Virtually everyone uses the shorthand of Wilma (for Wilmington), Heidi (for Heidelberg), Musky (for Muskingum), etc. No offense is intended (and certainly not misogynistic - know any women named "Musky"?)

Behold!

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.petemaina.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F06%2FJesica-Retzleff.jpg&hash=2e5dde9436bf46152acf923b9c08bcfdd6722bd9)

Chuck, you obviously have a deep and abiding hatred of women. ;D

Oy! I'm convicted! :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 17, 2016, 10:10:12 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 17, 2016, 09:34:34 PM
I've used Wilma and Musky. I use Berg for Heidelberg.

Until about a half-hour ago, I thought that everybody used those nicknames. Including OAC fans.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 09:42:37 PM
I also call Randolph Macon "Randy Mac", does that make me whatever the opposite of misogynist is?

For the record, misandrist is the opposite of misogynist. I don't think anybody really cares, but I'll do anything ... anything ... to deflect this conversation in a harmless direction.

And that includes posting more pictures of freshwater sport-fish mermaids.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 09:42:37 PM(Only after the fact did I discover that most RMC supporters LIKE "Randy Mac". ;D)

Or Willy Pat for William Paterson, St. Larry for St. Lawrence, and Wash & Jeff for Washington & Jefferson. In the opposite direction, I sometimes refer to Millikin University as Jimmy Millikin, even though it's not customary to refer to the school by the full name of the benefactor after whom it's named. And I've often used Dick Stockton for Richard Stockton, but I was never seriopus about it.

One of my all-time favorites is sac's nickname for Baldwin-Wallace, Bald Wally. (But why do I feel as though I've just thrown sac under the bus for bringing that up?)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on December 17, 2016, 10:14:39 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 17, 2016, 10:10:12 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 17, 2016, 09:34:34 PM
I've used Wilma and Musky. I use Berg for Heidelberg.

Until about a half-hour ago, I thought that everybody used those nicknames. Including OAC fans.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 09:42:37 PM
I also call Randolph Macon "Randy Mac", does that make me whatever the opposite of misogynist is?

For the record, misandrist is the opposite of misogynist. I don't think anybody really cares, but I'll do anything ... anything ... to deflect this conversation in a harmless direction.

And that includes posting more pictures of freshwater sport-fish mermaids.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 09:42:37 PM(Only after the fact did I discover that most RMC supporters LIKE "Randy Mac". ;D)

Or Willy Pat for William Paterson, St. Larry for St. Lawrence, and Wash & Jeff for Washington & Jefferson. In the opposite direction, I sometimes refer to Millikin University as Jimmy Millikin, even though it's not customary to refer to the school by the full name of the benefactor after whom it's named. And I've often used Dick Stockton for Richard Stockton, but I was never seriopus about it.

One of my all-time favorites is sac's nickname for Baldwin-Wallace, Bald Wally. (But why do I feel as though I've just thrown sac under the bus for bringing that up?)

SAC will be okay as he has learned to roll under the bus rather than being run over by the bus!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 10:22:39 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 17, 2016, 10:10:12 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 17, 2016, 09:34:34 PM
I've used Wilma and Musky. I use Berg for Heidelberg.

Until about a half-hour ago, I thought that everybody used those nicknames. Including OAC fans.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 09:42:37 PM
I also call Randolph Macon "Randy Mac", does that make me whatever the opposite of misogynist is?

For the record, misandrist is the opposite of misogynist. I don't think anybody really cares, but I'll do anything ... anything ... to deflect this conversation in a harmless direction.

And that includes posting more pictures of freshwater sport-fish mermaids.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 09:42:37 PM(Only after the fact did I discover that most RMC supporters LIKE "Randy Mac". ;D)

Or Willy Pat for William Paterson, St. Larry for St. Lawrence, and Wash & Jeff for Washington & Jefferson. In the opposite direction, I sometimes refer to Millikin University as Jimmy Millikin, even though it's not customary to refer to the school by the full name of the benefactor after whom it's named. And I've often used Dick Stockton for Richard Stockton, but I was never seriopus about it.

One of my all-time favorites is sac's nickname for Baldwin-Wallace, Bald Wally. (But why do I feel as though I've just thrown sac under the bus for bringing that up?)

I'm pretty sure I learned those nicknames ON the OAC board. But since you follow the OAC football and basketball boards (at least), you're probably well aware that Spence does NOT post there.

And I think I came up with Willy Pat without reference to that board, and have used Bald Wally since before I ever recall sac using the term. Both are (to me) utterly obvious, though I suppose to Spence they are "hate speech". :o

Some nicknames just jump out at ya.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 17, 2016, 10:25:03 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 17, 2016, 09:34:34 PM
I've used Wilma and Musky. I use Berg for Heidelberg.

But we all use shorthand for some schools (Witt, DPU, Wash U, C-M, CMS, Cal Tech, MIT, CWRU, UMHB, etc.)

Then there's all of those SUNY schools.

Only one of those is a female name. So you see the difference.

And the person that used it accused someone else of being disparaging.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 17, 2016, 10:26:51 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 17, 2016, 10:10:12 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 17, 2016, 09:34:34 PM
I've used Wilma and Musky. I use Berg for Heidelberg.

Until about a half-hour ago, I thought that everybody used those nicknames. Including OAC fans.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 09:42:37 PM
I also call Randolph Macon "Randy Mac", does that make me whatever the opposite of misogynist is?

For the record, misandrist is the opposite of misogynist. I don't think anybody really cares, but I'll do anything ... anything ... to deflect this conversation in a harmless direction.

And that includes posting more pictures of freshwater sport-fish mermaids.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 09:42:37 PM(Only after the fact did I discover that most RMC supporters LIKE "Randy Mac". ;D)

Or Willy Pat for William Paterson, St. Larry for St. Lawrence, and Wash & Jeff for Washington & Jefferson. In the opposite direction, I sometimes refer to Millikin University as Jimmy Millikin, even though it's not customary to refer to the school by the full name of the benefactor after whom it's named. And I've often used Dick Stockton for Richard Stockton, but I was never seriopus about it.

One of my all-time favorites is sac's nickname for Baldwin-Wallace, Bald Wally. (But why do I feel as though I've just thrown sac under the bus for bringing that up?)

Still just the one women's name.

You're making my point for me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 17, 2016, 10:26:57 PM

Salisbury took out CNU today by one point in an ugly, ugly game that ended with some excitement. Halfcourt buzzer beater from Chad Barcikowski.

Also, Swarthmore goes down to Rowan for their first loss of the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 10:34:42 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 17, 2016, 10:25:03 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 17, 2016, 09:34:34 PM
I've used Wilma and Musky. I use Berg for Heidelberg.

But we all use shorthand for some schools (Witt, DPU, Wash U, C-M, CMS, Cal Tech, MIT, CWRU, UMHB, etc.)

Then there's all of those SUNY schools.

Only one of those is a female name. So you see the difference.

And the person that used it accused someone else of being disparaging.

So a female name is automatically 'disparaging'? :o I guess we know where you are coming from. And you say I am the misogynist. Hypocrite.

BTW, are Randy Mac, Willy Pat, and Bald Wally male and acceptable? Hypocrite and scumbag. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 17, 2016, 10:36:32 PM

Quote from: augie77 on December 17, 2016, 09:51:49 PM
Are there any female Augies? Or Auggies up in Minnesota?

I wonder if the super fans are called Auggie Doggies?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 17, 2016, 10:36:57 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 17, 2016, 10:26:51 PM
Still just the one women's name.

You're making my point for me.

There's a point to all of this?

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, there were two games today that involved a pair of Top 25 teams:

#10 Salisbury 59
#5 Christopher Newport 58

#21 Illinois Wesleyan 73
#17 Washington (MO) 72

This is always an interesting time of the year for big games in the Top 25, because the pollsters have to sort out how much value to place upon games like this in the context of so many idle teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 17, 2016, 10:38:24 PM

Next week's neutral court games should also tell something - unless a team is just too busy working on their tans.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 17, 2016, 10:39:21 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 17, 2016, 10:26:57 PM
Salisbury took out CNU today by one point in an ugly, ugly game that ended with some excitement. Halfcourt buzzer beater from Chad Barcikowski.

Also, Swarthmore goes down to Rowan for their first loss of the season.

Makes Neumann look that much better, the Rowan result.

Massey had Salisbury and CNU 2nd and 3rd in the nation in defense, so no surprise that was a grind.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 17, 2016, 10:39:52 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 10:34:42 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 17, 2016, 10:25:03 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 17, 2016, 09:34:34 PM
I've used Wilma and Musky. I use Berg for Heidelberg.

But we all use shorthand for some schools (Witt, DPU, Wash U, C-M, CMS, Cal Tech, MIT, CWRU, UMHB, etc.)

Then there's all of those SUNY schools.

Only one of those is a female name. So you see the difference.

And the person that used it accused someone else of being disparaging.

So a female name is automatically 'disparaging'? :o I guess we know where you are coming from. And you say I am the misogynist. Hypocrite.

BTW, are Randy Mac, Willy Pat, and Bald Wally male and acceptable? Hypocrite and scumbag. ::)

Now you're just being obtuse.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 17, 2016, 10:41:42 PM

Salisbury's game winning shot
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNkcW55x6Ks&feature=youtu.be

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 17, 2016, 10:42:29 PM

I'd rather be obtuse than an acute pain the kiester.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on December 17, 2016, 10:43:35 PM

Still scrolling, scrolling oops, scrolling some more

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 10:44:07 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 17, 2016, 10:39:52 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 10:34:42 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 17, 2016, 10:25:03 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 17, 2016, 09:34:34 PM
I've used Wilma and Musky. I use Berg for Heidelberg.

But we all use shorthand for some schools (Witt, DPU, Wash U, C-M, CMS, Cal Tech, MIT, CWRU, UMHB, etc.)

Then there's all of those SUNY schools.

Only one of those is a female name. So you see the difference.

And the person that used it accused someone else of being disparaging.

So a female name is automatically 'disparaging'? :o I guess we know where you are coming from. And you say I am the misogynist. Hypocrite.

BTW, are Randy Mac, Willy Pat, and Bald Wally male and acceptable? Hypocrite and scumbag. ::)

Now you're just being obtuse.

:o ;D :-*

You lose.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 17, 2016, 10:46:41 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 17, 2016, 10:36:57 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 17, 2016, 10:26:51 PM
Still just the one women's name.

You're making my point for me.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, there were two games today that involved a pair of Top 25 teams:

#10 Salisbury 59
#5 Christopher Newport 58

#21 Illinois Wesleyan 73
#17 Washington (MO) 72

Massey had these 62-60 and 72-70. Impressive more for having the total points and spread basically spot on than picking up the winner in basically toss up games. It's like the guy knows what he's doing or something.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 17, 2016, 10:48:28 PM

Quote from: iwumichigander on December 17, 2016, 10:43:35 PM
Still scrolling, scrolling oops, scrolling some more

Don't blame you. The personal attacks against me have gotten ridiculous.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 17, 2016, 10:50:50 PM

Quote from: sac on December 17, 2016, 10:41:42 PM
Salisbury's game winning shot
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNkcW55x6Ks&feature=youtu.be

That'll do.

Any idea how much time was left? 3 or so seconds maybe? Seemed like a lot of time to just give him the run up with no pressure. Gave him half a chance.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 17, 2016, 10:52:56 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 17, 2016, 10:38:24 PM
Next week's neutral court games should also tell something - unless a team is just too busy working on their tans.

A Tim Curry reference, perhaps?

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.rockymusic.org%2Fimg%2Fvinyllps%2FTimCurry-Simplicity-DiscLabelFront.jpg&hash=91ab0f9a9129673e6f3f25ce83c54650631cfcb0)

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 17, 2016, 10:46:41 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 17, 2016, 10:36:57 PM
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, there were two games today that involved a pair of Top 25 teams:

#10 Salisbury 59
#5 Christopher Newport 58

#21 Illinois Wesleyan 73
#17 Washington (MO) 72

Massey had these 62-60 and 72-70. Impressive more for having the total points and spread spot on than picking up the winner in basically toss up games. It's like the guy knows what he's doing or something.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Frs962.pbsrc.com%2Falbums%2Fae103%2FRBourne69%2FHal%25209000%2Fhal_9000_1.jpg%7Ec200&hash=6f97daf9e5f2434ab2b8078fbb7246b89d0b3b41)

Let me put it this way, Mr. Amor. The 9000 series is the most reliable computer ever made. No 9000 computer has ever made a mistake or distorted information. We are all, by any practical definition of the words, foolproof and incapable of error.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 17, 2016, 10:54:19 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 10:44:07 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 17, 2016, 10:39:52 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 10:34:42 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 17, 2016, 10:25:03 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 17, 2016, 09:34:34 PM
I've used Wilma and Musky. I use Berg for Heidelberg.

But we all use shorthand for some schools (Witt, DPU, Wash U, C-M, CMS, Cal Tech, MIT, CWRU, UMHB, etc.)

Then there's all of those SUNY schools.

Only one of those is a female name. So you see the difference.

And the person that used it accused someone else of being disparaging.

So a female name is automatically 'disparaging'? :o I guess we know where you are coming from. And you say I am the misogynist. Hypocrite.

BTW, are Randy Mac, Willy Pat, and Bald Wally male and acceptable? Hypocrite and scumbag. ::)

Now you're just being obtuse.

:o ;D :-*

You lose.

Wasn't aware there was a competition taking place. I'm merely pointing out your hypocrisy. Perhaps the "game" for you is to deflect?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 10:59:55 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 17, 2016, 10:54:19 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 10:44:07 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 17, 2016, 10:39:52 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 10:34:42 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 17, 2016, 10:25:03 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 17, 2016, 09:34:34 PM
I've used Wilma and Musky. I use Berg for Heidelberg.

But we all use shorthand for some schools (Witt, DPU, Wash U, C-M, CMS, Cal Tech, MIT, CWRU, UMHB, etc.)

Then there's all of those SUNY schools.

Only one of those is a female name. So you see the difference.

And the person that used it accused someone else of being disparaging.

So a female name is automatically 'disparaging'? :o I guess we know where you are coming from. And you say I am the misogynist. Hypocrite.

BTW, are Randy Mac, Willy Pat, and Bald Wally male and acceptable? Hypocrite and scumbag. ::)

Now you're just being obtuse.

:o ;D :-*

You lose.

Wasn't aware there was a competition taking place. I'm merely pointing out your hypocrisy. Perhaps the "game" for you is to deflect?

I just haven't figured out what the hypocrisy was? Is it that I don't automatically assume that a female reference is therefore disparagement? Sorry, I wasn't raised that way.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 17, 2016, 11:10:02 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 10:59:55 PM

I just haven't figured out what the hypocrisy was? Is it that I don't automatically assume that a female reference is therefore disparagement? Sorry, I wasn't raised that way.

Go call Wilmington or Heidelberg male athletes Wilma and Heidi to their faces and I think you'll understand.

Bottom line is you accuse me of disparagement because I have very valid criticisms of teams and their schedules. Meanwhile, you're calling teams names and implying that beating them soundly is no big deal because apparently to you they're just Wilma or Heidi and it should be assumed that you'll beat them.

Never mind that Wilmington has had some pretty darned good basketball teams and players. SW Ohio has a lot of good players and not as many D3 schools.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 17, 2016, 11:23:04 PM

Concern troll is concerned.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 17, 2016, 11:55:54 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 17, 2016, 11:23:04 PM
Concern troll is concerned.

Ironic. I'm not the one trolling here.

Remember, this started because I made a perfectly legitimate, on-topic post about a live event.

It's obvious people just have it out for me no matter what I say or do.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 18, 2016, 12:00:27 AM

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.someecards.com%2Fsomeecards%2Fusercards%2F8cdd7c802e78f0c400a8a6c35ce963cfea.png&hash=0b2ceabd3ce201150bda947813720fb6fdc4893d)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie77 on December 18, 2016, 12:05:19 AM

How's your trip planning coming along? Barrow to Tierra del Fuego?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 12:16:17 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 06:30:40 PM
The problem is, you DON'T really talk Top 25 - you talk Marietta. Anything else you post is just to denigrate other top teams, or claim that JCU (who lost AGAIN today) is MUCH better than their record,

Going back to the time when this thread was at least somewhat about basketball rather than just taking shots at me...

Massey had this game 84-87; it ended up 93-91 because Nate Burger went 7 of 9 from 3.

There are 8 OAC teams that come tomorrow will likely be in the Massey top 100. It's not the WIAC or CCIW, but it's right there with any other league in D3. A former OAC coach I used to know (not by Gotye) used to say you could be a pretty good team in the OAC and finish 8th. It may not have been true then, but I think it is now.

Iowa has the same number of good teams, just one total team fewer. NESCAC well we'll see soon how good they are, but their bad teams are merely below average rather than Otterbein bad. Minnesota has 7 pretty good teams, but their schedules are a little tougher across the board, partly due to access to the Wisconsin teams for non-cons. UAA is 4 quite good teams and 4 bad teams.

Those leagues are a pretty decent piece above the rest.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 18, 2016, 12:19:54 AM

Moderator reports piling up on this board, on both sides. Lovely.

If Wilma is bad because it's a woman's name, what do we do with the Etta Express? Also a problem?

Anyway, here's a wide range of previous references to Wilmington as Wilma.

http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4097.msg1156529;topicseen#msg1156529
http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4097.msg645307;topicseen#msg645307
http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4292.msg1732464;topicseen#msg1732464
http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4292.msg1177571;topicseen#msg1177571
http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4292.msg885231;topicseen#msg885231
http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4292.msg682171;topicseen#msg682171
http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=5126.msg1172585#msg1172585
http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=3841.msg1773069;topicseen#msg1773069
http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=3841.msg1759044;topicseen#msg1759044
http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=3841.msg1719186;topicseen#msg1719186
http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=3841.msg1695405;topicseen#msg1695405
http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=3841.msg1693507;topicseen#msg1693507

Meanwhile -- as much as I find Spence personally grating and annoying, there are indeed several posts here that serve solely to bash a fellow poster and do not discuss the topic at hand.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 12:23:08 AM

Quote from: augie77 on December 18, 2016, 12:05:19 AM
How's your trip planning coming along? Barrow to Tierra del Fuego?

Barrow would be a step up from Minnesota right now.

Did read about the Darien Gap, though. Hard to imagine a place you can't put a road through. Sounds like it would be cool if you had a guide. Panamanian military is boosting its presence to fight crime through it though, so seems like it would be at least possible if you had them on your side and a reason for them to be so (maybe writing for someone, publicity for the country).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 12:24:08 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 18, 2016, 12:19:54 AM
Moderator reports piling up on this board, on both sides. Lovely.

If Wilma is bad because it's a woman's name, what do we do with the Etta Express? Also a problem?

I'm just going to assume you're not serious. Or you just came in from the cold, which would make anyone's mind foggy.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 18, 2016, 12:52:35 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 12:24:08 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 18, 2016, 12:19:54 AM
Moderator reports piling up on this board, on both sides. Lovely.

If Wilma is bad because it's a woman's name, what do we do with the Etta Express? Also a problem?

I'm just going to assume you're not serious.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/8f/Etta_James_(1962_album).jpg)

Meet Etta James, Spence. One of the greatest R&B singers of all time. If you've never heard Etta James sing, you're missing out. She truly had a gift.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F5ix042l4hz014t29y23lodi14dw.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F05%2FEttaBaker.jpg&hash=844d53963191ad3d1ee2c51b096bd543a1b85775)

Meet Etta Baker, Spence. She was a Piedmont blues guitarist and singer from North Carolina.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.criminalelement.com%2Fimages%2Fstories%2F8.8-8.14%2FHays_Etta-Place-Katharine%2520Ross-Butch-%2520Sundance.jpg&hash=2b50dc033aca08ad0dae1f120914b425d2c811e7)

Ever seen Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, Spence? Great movie. Get it from Netflix sometime. In this film, the girlfriend of the Sundance Kid (Robert Redford) is played by Katharine Ross. The character's name? Etta Place. Along with Butch, Sundance, and the rest of the Hole In the Wall Gang, her character was based upon a real person whose name was Etta Place, who lived in the Old West and hung around with outlaws. Here's a picture of the real-life Sundance and Etta:

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/26/Sundance_Kid_and_wife-clean.jpg)

Moving right along ...

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsspd.humanitiestexas.org%2Fp.php%3Fa%3DRX5zeHFjZ39bSVtOTDY5MyxgZmAlPzswKzQxOS4mNic%2BIi0kPycjKD87LiY0LTsuOjoyJT46%26amp%3Bamp%3Bm%3D1409415331&hash=86224a224fb750ceedc630f975a239cf23998c9a)

Meet singer/actress Etta Moten, Spence, also known as Etta Moten Barnett. She was a featured player in a lot of movies back in the '30s, back when there weren't a lot of opportunities for black women to be seen on the silver screen. She played Bess in Porgy and Bess on Broadway, sang at the White House for FDR, was a prominent civic leader in Chicago's black community for many decades, and lived to the ripe old age of 102.

Etta Express, indeed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 18, 2016, 01:08:01 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 12:16:17 AM
There are 8 OAC teams that come tomorrow will likely be in the Massey top 100. It's not the WIAC or CCIW, but it's right there with any other league in D3. A former OAC coach I used to know (not by Gotye) used to say you could be a pretty good team in the OAC and finish 8th. It may not have been true then, but I think it is now.

The OAC has always been good, as far as I'm concerned ... and I go back almost all the way to the beginning of D3 back in the mid-'70s.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 12:16:17 AMIowa has the same number of good teams, just one total team fewer.

The IIAC has strung together a nice portfolio of non-conference wins this season, and both of the IIAC teams that I've seen (one in person, one via webcast) are good. But let's not be hasty. We're talking about a league whose reputation has always been that of a circuit that runs up gaudy records by playing lots of cupcakes -- not by design, mind you, but more as a happenstance of geography, since Iowa is at a remove from almost all of the traditional Central Region and West Region powerhouses, while a lot of UMAC and MWC dross is close at hand -- and then never gets anywhere in the NCAA tourney. The next IIAC team that makes it to the Final Four will be the first -- and we're talking about a league that has been a part of D3 since the division's inception.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 12:16:17 AMNESCAC well we'll see soon how good they are, but their bad teams are merely below average rather than Otterbein bad.

The NESCAC is always there. Sure, it's a league that has three built-in advantages: 1) it only plays a single round-robin schedule, so it doesn't beat up upon itself the way that all of the other strong leagues in D3 do; 2) New England D3s are so thick on the ground that NESCAC teams can cherry-pick schedules that suit their needs (i.e., good teams in bad leagues that'll add luster to a team's strength of schedule); and 3) the NESCAC's top dog always has the easiest road to Salem. But don't let that fool you; the top half of that league is always good, and its champion can play with anybody in the nation in any given season.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 12:16:17 AMMinnesota has 7 pretty good teams, but their schedules are a little tougher across the board, partly due to access to the Wisconsin teams for non-cons.

The MIAC has traditionally been overrated, and it still is as a whole. But St. Thomas, over the past decade, has been one of the best programs in the entire division, and the Tommies have the hardware to prove it. Just don't let that fool you into thinking that the Tommies are reflective of the whole league.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 12:16:17 AMUAA is 4 quite good teams and 4 bad teams.

This year, yes. Usually, no. The UAA is usually one of the three or four best leagues in the nation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 01:31:46 AM

I'm aware it's a name. No disagreement from me on Etta James, btw.

I'm guessing you've never been to Schaly Stadium, or Pioneer Park (when Schaly was the coach).

It's not like Etta is a slang term. During the Schaly era it was literally the baseball program team nickname. He didn't use anything else, purposefully. Literally on the public address script it was "MC Etta Express". You didn't say Pioneers around him. He invented the name Etta Express expressly to not have to use the name Pioneers.

That has changed with Brewer, but Etta Express is still very much a name the team calls itself, by any definition.

Somehow guessing that this isn't the case with Wilmington and Heidelberg. Though to be honest, when you're stuck with a name like Student Princes, just about anything is better. They actually did call themselves 'the Berg' for a while. Somehow managed to pick something even worse.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fpioneers.marietta.edu%2Fimages%2F2009%2F8%2F20%2FDSC_0023.jpg&hash=b565f81a3401ac350e616d99a24d7bb1de4ad457)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fpioneers.marietta.edu%2Fimages%2F2009%2F8%2F20%2FDSC_0035.jpg&hash=e053f9d9f455623a7df35e59a812a699075208b1)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fpioneers.marietta.edu%2Fimages%2F2009%2F8%2F20%2FDSC_0054.jpg&hash=f1c15043af2d063f7f27fbf6031508a288fa1ffa)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fpioneers.marietta.edu%2Fimages%2F2009%2F8%2F20%2FDSC_0052.jpg&hash=0288a1348ee928effc4ccaedded4271bda452761)

FYI, Marietta itself is a nickname for a female: it was named for the then-Queen of France -- Marie Antoinette, without whose assistance in the revolution we would have stayed limey Brits, at least for the time being, and settlement west of the Ohio would likely have been forbidden. Even more objectionable, we were would have been Quebecois. Shudder. Pretty impressive that she helped us even though the British tried to sell us out to them.

Washington sneaked out to the Ohio country before the war to do some surveying, told Rufus Putnam "damn, dog. It's pretty great out there. I would check it out myself if I didn't have this plantation full of slaves to run." After the Revolution, the government gave or sold tracts of land in the area -- of which one of my direct ancestors got one for his service to Gen. Washington at Valley Forge. (He wasn't part of the Ohio Company though, his land was south of Parkersburg in WV).

Point being that you picked a damn poor example of disparaging names. Being named Marietta is a source of pride and a woman that offered help she didn't have to offer to allow us to settle there. And the Etta Express is the only name most of the older generation baseball alums ever knew.

More than likely, most of the other Ettas in part owe their names to the original Marietta.

So unless Wilmington has some connection to prehistoric um...history? or Heidelberg to the Swiss Alps ... it doesn't work.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 01:58:37 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 18, 2016, 01:08:01 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 12:16:17 AM
There are 8 OAC teams that come tomorrow will likely be in the Massey top 100. It's not the WIAC or CCIW, but it's right there with any other league in D3. A former OAC coach I used to know (not by Gotye) used to say you could be a pretty good team in the OAC and finish 8th. It may not have been true then, but I think it is now.

The OAC has always been good, as far as I'm concerned ... and I go back almost all the way to the beginning of D3 back in the mid-'70s.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 12:16:17 AMIowa has the same number of good teams, just one total team fewer.

The IIAC has strung together a nice portfolio of non-conference wins this season, and both of the IIAC teams that I've seen (one in person, one via webcast) are good. But let's not be hasty. We're talking about a league whose reputation has always been that of a circuit that runs up gaudy records by playing lots of cupcakes -- not by design, mind you, but more as a happenstance of geography, since Iowa is at a remove from almost all of the traditional Central Region and West Region powerhouses, while a lot of UMAC and MWC dross is close at hand -- and then never gets anywhere in the NCAA tourney. The next IIAC team that makes it to the Final Four will be the first -- and we're talking about a league that has been a part of D3 since the division's inception.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 12:16:17 AMNESCAC well we'll see soon how good they are, but their bad teams are merely below average rather than Otterbein bad.

The NESCAC is always there. Sure, it's a league that has three built-in advantages: 1) it only plays a single round-robin schedule, so it doesn't beat up upon itself the way that all of the other strong leagues in D3 do; 2) New England D3s are so thick on the ground that NESCAC teams can cherry-pick schedules that suit their needs (i.e., good teams in bad leagues that'll add luster to a team's strength of schedule); and 3) the NESCAC's top dog always has the easiest road to Salem. But don't let that fool you; the top half of that league is always good, and its champion can play with anybody in the nation in any given season.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 12:16:17 AMMinnesota has 7 pretty good teams, but their schedules are a little tougher across the board, partly due to access to the Wisconsin teams for non-cons.

The MIAC has traditionally been overrated, and it still is as a whole. But St. Thomas, over the past decade, has been one of the best programs in the entire division, and the Tommies have the hardware to prove it. Just don't let that fool you into thinking that the Tommies are reflective of the whole league.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 12:16:17 AMUAA is 4 quite good teams and 4 bad teams.

This year, yes. Usually, no. The UAA is usually one of the three or four best leagues in the nation.

This is all fine, but I was talking about this year and primarily looking at top 100 teams (though actually I used top 1000 in all cbk, because it ends up being pretty close to the same thing and that's what you get when you order by conference in Masseyland).

I would agree with Iowa not having a Final 4 team, but they have a lot of pretty good teams and Wartburg is 2-0 vs. the WIAC. Central has wins over Platteville and Wash U. Both teams beat Grinnell, not that I really know how much that says. Most of the other top 2/3 or so of the Iowa conference have at least one noteworthy win. And in MN, Concordia-MN is getting a boost from having played a top 200 team and getting beaten by 35. Still think it's a good league though and Bethel (a good team this year who Heidelberg beat on a neutral court) got screwed out of a bid a couple of years ago because their schedule didn't get enough credit.

My basic point is that it's the WIAC, CCIW and then a group of conferences that could be 3rd, and the OAC is in that group. Massey has the OAC 7th right now but the main reason is Otterbein is so bad and there's only 1 legit top 35 or so team (though I think Mount and John Carroll could well end up there). So it's not a real surprise when a team like Northern beats another good team at home, or Muskingum knocks off a couple of conference heavies at home.

I feel like Marietta is the best team in the conference, but by no means can they walk into a conference gym and get a win without playing well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 18, 2016, 09:15:52 AM

As usual, Spence, you're bending over so far backwards to make a point that your hair is going to get stuck in your shoetops behind your ankles. The issue is this: You threw a conniption over nicknames that have been common currency on this site for as long as I can remember -- and I've been a reader and poster here for two decades now, so I'm pretty sure that those nicknames predate this site. What caused your tantrum? It's because they're female nicknames. And your school? Why, it has a female nickname, too. Hence:

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 18, 2016, 12:19:54 AM
If Wilma is bad because it's a woman's name, what do we do with the Etta Express? Also a problem?

No disparagement ever meant, none ever taken ... except by you.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 09:26:37 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 18, 2016, 09:15:52 AM
As usual, Spence, you're bending over so far backwards to make a point that your hair is going to get stuck in your shoetops behind your ankles.

Why the hell would I read anything beyond this? What the hell gives you the right to be at utter pill and then think your opinion means jack?

You've been reported, again. I'm done suffering fools. Pat said something yesterday about this and apparently you can't listen.

Funny how you complain about me, but you're being more of a jerk than I ever was. I can't make a post without you or some similar dumbkopf having something snide to say and then blaming me for the aftermath.

You got a problem with me? Come up to Minnesota and say it to my face. Otherwise, shut up and stay on topic if all you can do is personally insult and attack me.

You apparently can't read, either. I already covered all the etta stuff with Pat, quite thoroughly, I thought.

This is the last time I say it because I end up spending more time dealing with this crap than anything relating to the topic. I'm just going to start wearing out the report button and Pat can decide what to do from there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 09:43:17 AM

Now, what I actually came here for...teams in the top 10 in both rating and power rating:
(ordered by overall rating, mostly so people wouldn't have a gripe about Marietta being listed first)

Whitman (1, 2)
Marietta (2, 1)
Neumann (5, 6)
Whitewater (6, 5)
Salisbury (3, 9)
River Falls (4, 8)
Hope (8, 4)

Babs is ranked 13, 17 and Amy is 25, 19.

The efficiency ratings haven't been updated yet, but I'd expected Etta, Neumann (hello Neumann), Salisbury (steak), (Christine Todd) Whitman, and Hope (well...crap) to be top 10 from the group above. River (Rose) Falls was 19th coming into today and (Betty) Whitewater somehow 30th (might need to look at something there).

So it would appear you have a consensus top 5 between the three sets of rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 18, 2016, 10:02:56 AM

The best team Whitewater has played all season is a 4-4 Ohio Northern squad. Their schedule is terrible. They might be good, but there's very little way to know that at this point. I generally don't vote for a team until they have a good win on their books.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 10:18:26 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 18, 2016, 10:02:56 AM

The best team Whitewater has played all season is a 4-4 Ohio Northern squad. Their schedule is terrible. They might be good, but there's very little way to know that at this point. I generally don't vote for a team until they have a good win on their books.

Lindsey Wilson is a better win. They're ranked about the same as Oshkosh and just beat a 13-1 team that has wins over Virginia Union and Central State.

Winning a true road game against ONU is a credible win as well. Top 100 team in their gym and beat them soundly. Guess it depends on how good you consider to be good. I'd say a 100ish team at home is comparable to 50ish on the road. Mount Union is ranked 57th and is projected a 1 point loser at Northern, who is 93rd. So seems about right to me.

Whitewater hasn't come close to losing either.

They play Ripon and Central before the first of the year.

Did you vote for Babson and Amherst with their poor schedules? Or Rochester or Swarthmore...

I'm all for having teams prove it, but I'm also for consistency and it doesn't seem like Whitwater has played a markedly worse schedule than any of those teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PeterEscobar on December 18, 2016, 11:04:34 AM

Babson beat Albertus Magnus, Endicott, Tufts, and lost in double OT to Amherst. Albertus is the odds on favorite to win the GNAC and get to the NCAA Tournament where they have historically won games. Endicott is the same team that reached the round of 32 last season, added a talented crop of freshman, and are favorites to win the CCC and return to the NCAA Tournament. Tufts was top 5 in the country when Babson beat them and Amherst was number 1 in the country when they lost on a buzzer-beater. Stop with the Babson played nobody lines... Their strength of schedule according to the DIII efficiency ratings (http://detroitjockcity.com/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency-ratings/) is 33 out of 400+ teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 11:23:19 AM

Albertus Magnus is ranked 197 by Massey. Endicott is 90 (so like 7th or 8th in the OAC, or worse than everyone in the WIAC), Tufts is down to 59 and their schedule stinks at 191. Their best win is either home to Worcester Tech or at MIT. Tech is 80th and was at home. MIT was 105 and away. We've seen in the past day a team get disparaged for losing a road game to a team in the fringe of top 100. So in the next day are we supposed to give credit for beating one? Can't have it both ways, can we? It can't both be a bad loss and a good win to do basically the same thing.

And they lost to Amherst, who hasn't played anyone else really either other than St. Lawrence, and they just lost to a bad team. Brandeis is Amherst's third best win. They're ranked similarly to Wilmington, who obviously at least one poster here thinks isn't worth a pitcher of warm spit.

So we're back to trying to have it both ways.

Babs and Amy need to toughen up. If you're going to say Whitewater hasn't proven anything yet, you have to say the same thing about Babs and Amy.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 18, 2016, 12:17:56 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 09:26:37 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 18, 2016, 09:15:52 AM
As usual, Spence, you're bending over so far backwards to make a point that your hair is going to get stuck in your shoetops behind your ankles.

Why the hell would I read anything beyond this? What the hell gives you the right to be at utter pill and then think your opinion means jack?

You've been reported, again. I'm done suffering fools. Pat said something yesterday about this and apparently you can't listen.

Funny how you complain about me, but you're being more of a jerk than I ever was. I can't make a post without you or some similar dumbkopf having something snide to say and then blaming me for the aftermath.

You got a problem with me? Come up to Minnesota and say it to my face. Otherwise, shut up and stay on topic if all you can do is personally insult and attack me.

You apparently can't read, either. I already covered all the etta stuff with Pat, quite thoroughly, I thought.

This is the last time I say it because I end up spending more time dealing with this crap than anything relating to the topic. I'm just going to start wearing out the report button and Pat can decide what to do from there.

Personal threats are not necessary.

Honestly -- if you want to be a lightning rod then you have to understand that you're going to get hit by lightning.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 12:24:01 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 18, 2016, 12:17:56 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 09:26:37 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 18, 2016, 09:15:52 AM
As usual, Spence, you're bending over so far backwards to make a point that your hair is going to get stuck in your shoetops behind your ankles.

Why the hell would I read anything beyond this? What the hell gives you the right to be at utter pill and then think your opinion means jack?

You've been reported, again. I'm done suffering fools. Pat said something yesterday about this and apparently you can't listen.

Funny how you complain about me, but you're being more of a jerk than I ever was. I can't make a post without you or some similar dumbkopf having something snide to say and then blaming me for the aftermath.

You got a problem with me? Come up to Minnesota and say it to my face. Otherwise, shut up and stay on topic if all you can do is personally insult and attack me.

You apparently can't read, either. I already covered all the etta stuff with Pat, quite thoroughly, I thought.

This is the last time I say it because I end up spending more time dealing with this crap than anything relating to the topic. I'm just going to start wearing out the report button and Pat can decide what to do from there.

Personal threats are not necessary.

Honestly -- if you want to be a lightning rod then you have to understand that you're going to get hit by lightning.

Are you talking about him or me? I'm just trying to have on topic discussions and can't make a post without people losing their heads now being useless trolls under the guise of "poking the bear" or "bullfighting" or some other garbage that obscures that they're really just being gormless twits.

I never wanted to *be* anything. Other people are the ones making me *be* something, whatever that is. I did nothing to invite anything that has happened this weekend. This started with me making one post about an in-game score. Then everyone piled on from that.

If that's my fault, then I don't know what isn't my fault.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 18, 2016, 12:35:15 PM

I guess I'm not surprised you disagree, but yes, you act like a lightning rod and you have in every iteration on our boards over the past however-many-years it has been. And it's interesting that even though it is a different subset of posters, it still happens, whether it's baseball fans, OAC football fans or now national men's basketball fans.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 12:41:49 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 18, 2016, 12:35:15 PM
I guess I'm not surprised you disagree, but yes, you act like a lightning rod and you have in every iteration on our boards over the past however-many-years it has been. And it's interesting that even though it is a different subset of posters, it still happens, whether it's baseball fans, OAC football fans or now national men's basketball fans.

Because there's a culture norm set that it's ok to attack me, and so people do it. No points for guessing who sets that norm.

Funny how yesterday you correctly said people were in the wrong, but today it's me when nothing has changed -- same crap.

Btw, it wasn't OAC football fans. It was St. John Fisher football fans that couldn't handle the truth. Just like now it's Amherst and Babson boosters that can't handle the truth about how their teams have proven nothing.

Seems like people here feel entitled to their comfortable misconceptions, and when I come and smash those down, they last out at me and you make it ok for them to do so. Then I eventually feel like I have to take things into my own hands and you punish me for it.

That's why I'm saying I'm not letting it happen again. But I do need the moderator to actually properly moderate, I guess, or it's all for nowt. But i will be hitting the button to alert to any personal attacks or obviously personally motivated threadjacks in the future. But I suppose you could just find it more convenient to get rid of me and not be getting buzzed anymore and let the mob win. I would hope that wouldn't happen, but it could.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 12:45:21 PM

Interesting analogy though. My understanding of a lightning rod is that it just sits there and does nothing until there's an electrical storm. Then it's there to soak up energy that could potentially damage the house.

So do you blame the rod, or the lightning?

Interesting analogy, indeed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 18, 2016, 12:48:23 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 12:41:49 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 18, 2016, 12:35:15 PM
I guess I'm not surprised you disagree, but yes, you act like a lightning rod and you have in every iteration on our boards over the past however-many-years it has been. And it's interesting that even though it is a different subset of posters, it still happens, whether it's baseball fans, OAC football fans or now national men's basketball fans.

Because there's a culture norm set that it's ok to attack me, and so people do it. No points for guessing who sets that norm.

Well, if that's my fault, then I don't know what isn't my fault. But the board operates really well across the spectrum of conversations you aren't involved in, so I think your version of the norm is probably not what's causing it. When you have 18-year posters saying something, that does say something.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 12:57:12 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 18, 2016, 12:48:23 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 12:41:49 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 18, 2016, 12:35:15 PM
I guess I'm not surprised you disagree, but yes, you act like a lightning rod and you have in every iteration on our boards over the past however-many-years it has been. And it's interesting that even though it is a different subset of posters, it still happens, whether it's baseball fans, OAC football fans or now national men's basketball fans.

Because there's a culture norm set that it's ok to attack me, and so people do it. No points for guessing who sets that norm.

Well, if that's my fault, then I don't know what isn't my fault. But the board operates really well across the spectrum of conversations you aren't involved in, so I think your version of the norm is probably not what's causing it. When you have 18-year posters saying something, that does say something.

I don't know who has been here what number of years.

But would this happen to be one of the people that personally insulted and disparaged me with a rather graphic and completely unnecessary turn of phrase?

That says something indeed, that someone that you've let post here that long thinks they're above the rules.

But you might be talking about someone else.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 01:00:04 PM

And what is really well? Because a culture where any new and divergent viewpoint or even an attempt to convey information is insulted and stamped upon doesn't seem like one that works very well for fostering open and honest discussion.

Again, seems much more like people get attached to their comfortable falsehoods and the norm is not to burst their bubbles. But that's not open and honest discussion; that's just platitudes.

And then when they successfully chase off the divergent, they mock him into the interminable future using cryptic initials.

Great system you got there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 01:05:03 PM

I can see counting on the moderator to be impartial and punish personal attacks against me is gonna go really well.

Oh well, all I can do is take the high road and if cronyism wins out, then not much I can do about that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 18, 2016, 01:13:25 PM

Is this the graphic turn of phrase?

"As usual, Spence, you're bending over so far backwards to make a point that your hair is going to get stuck in your shoetops behind your ankles."

Maybe I'm misunderstanding but he's not saying you have your head ... uhm ... where the sun don't shine. It's descriptive, sure. But not graphic.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 01:00:04 PM
And what is really well? Because a culture where any new and divergent viewpoint or even an attempt to convey information is insulted and stamped upon doesn't seem like one that works very well for fostering open and honest discussion.

I think it's been described to you by other people how you come off here. This is not a description that I think most people would agree with.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 01:41:52 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 18, 2016, 01:13:25 PM
(snipped...disagree I think there was every intent to dance right up to the line, but whatever I don't care)

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 01:00:04 PM
And what is really well? Because a culture where any new and divergent viewpoint or even an attempt to convey information is insulted and stamped upon doesn't seem like one that works very well for fostering open and honest discussion.

I think it's been described to you by other people how you come off here. This is not a description that I think most people would agree with.

The truth is not a majority vote. It is a fact that I have been insulted and disparaged in response to completely on-topic and timely posts. I don't care who agrees or disagrees, because it's provably true.

Btw, just got a message via email re: moderation referencing the roughness and offtopicness of the thread. Apparently a lot of it has been deleted, as it should be.

So I'll bow out and leave you to hash that out with him.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 18, 2016, 01:43:42 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 18, 2016, 10:02:56 AM

The best team Whitewater has played all season is a 4-4 Ohio Northern squad. Their schedule is terrible. They might be good, but there's very little way to know that at this point. I generally don't vote for a team until they have a good win on their books.

One thing to watch with regard to UW-Whitewater is that the Warhawks have just brought in a potentially important semester-break addition in 6'5 swingman Derek Rongstad, who played in 11 games last year and seven this year as a preferred walk-on at D1 Milwaukee. There's always a certain hazard involved in semester-break additions in terms of disrupting chemistry and inadvertently causing disaffection on teams that are already having success, but if his upside for UWW matches his pedigree coming out of high school, he could be a difference-maker for the Warhawks in WIAC play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 18, 2016, 02:02:44 PM

I remember a couple of times Wabash added mid-season players from the football team and it messed things up a bit, and they wound up leaving the team anyway because they didn't anticipate how their professors would react when they had to miss class for basketball and indoor track (which they also did).

Wabash has had dual sport athletes (football and basketball), like many schools, but they were intentional, not join-the-team in the second semester type.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 18, 2016, 02:17:09 PM

Again, I really think its too early to use Massey for anything but a general guide, not gospel. But yeah, Whitewater's best win was over an NAIA team whose best win was against Washington Adventist (The Shock, for you nickname people).

Meanwhile, River Falls has played a decent schedule and I'd say they may be the best WIAC team this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 18, 2016, 03:53:17 PM

The holiday break for some teams has started and for others is about to begin. Where does everyone stand? What have we learned as we finish the first "half" of the season? On Sunday's edition of Hoopsville, Dave talks to some teams who are making waves early and takes the pulse of the season so far.

It is also the First Semester Finale of Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) which will be off the air for the holidays returning on Thursday, January 5, 2017.

You can watch Hoopsville starting at 7:00 PM here: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2016-17/dec18

Guests include (in order of appearance):
- Veronica Nolt, Elizabethtown women's coach
- Dan Raymond, Ithaca women's coach
- Marc Brown, New Jersey City men's coach
- Other guests to be determined

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

A reminder that Thursday's edition of Hoopsville will not take place due to D3football.com coverage of Gagliardi Trophy and Stagg Bowl next week. We will be back on air Sunday, December 18 for the final show before the Christmas holiday. Hoopsville will then return on January 5, 2017 and air Sundays and Thursdays at 7:00 PM ET for the rest of the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on December 18, 2016, 05:26:28 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 17, 2016, 10:48:28 PM
Quote from: iwumichigander on December 17, 2016, 10:43:35 PM
Still scrolling, scrolling oops, scrolling some more

Don't blame you. The personal attacks against me have gotten ridiculous.

scrolling you because you just do not get it. Read the terms of service --- and, to save your valuable time read 1,3 and 5 --- particularly read number five

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 18, 2016, 05:49:24 PM

How They Fared (~~Nearly~~ Complete)

Three late results will be edited in when available:
Whitman vs. Wooster
Whitworth vs. La Verne
Susquehanna vs. LaGrange

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	622	Amherst	8-1	LOST at Springfield, 70-71
#2	595	Babson	9-1	IDLE
#3	576	Whitman	7-0	def. T#35 Wooster, 80-79
#4	525	Marietta	8-1	def. Wilmington, 104-77
#5	489	Christopher Newport	6-2	LOST at #10 Salisbury, 58-59
#6	474	St. Norbert	5-1	IDLE
#7	456	Rochester	10-0	def. Union, 77-58
#8	435	Whitworth	6-1	won at La Verne, 96-88
#9	396	Tufts	8-2	won at Framingham State, 74-56
#10	390	Salisbury	8-0	def. #5 Christopher Newport, 59-58
#11	336	UW-Eau Claire	8-1	IDLE
#12	314	Benedictine	7-2	won at Aurora, 96-93; ~~12/17 vs. Marian~~ postponed
#13	267	North Central (Ill.)	6-3	won at Albion, 68-57; LOST to Robert Morris-Chicago, 70-77
#14	257	Hope	5-2	IDLE
#15	201	Swarthmore	8-1	LOST to Rowan, 84-92; def. Averett, 61-60
#16	187	Denison	8-1	LOST at Capital, 75-84
#17	184	Washington U.	6-3	LOST to #21 Illinois Wesleyan, 72-73
#18	175	Susquehanna	8-1	def. LaGrange, 82-65
#19	170	North Park	7-1	def. Trine, 81-62
#20	135	UW-Whitewater	7-0	IDLE
#21	112	Illinois Wesleyan	7-2	won at #17 Washington U., 73-72
#22	97	Wesleyan	9-0	IDLE
#23	93	Wartburg	8-1	IDLE
#24	63	Augustana	8-3	LOST at UW-La Crosse, 63-74; def. #31 Central, 88-73
#25	62	UW-River Falls	9-1	won at Carleton, 69-64; won at Hamline, 89-58

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	54	New Jersey City	9-1	def. Albertus Magnus, 81-59
#27	49	Neumann	8-0	IDLE
#28	39	Emory	6-2	IDLE
#29	38	Middlebury	7-1	IDLE
#30	30	Endicott	6-2	IDLE
#31	29	Central	7-2	LOST at #24 Augustana, 73-88
T#32	27	Chicago	8-1	def. (n) Monmouth, 93-77; won at Rhodes, 121-101
T#32	27	Lycoming	10-1	def. Alvernia, 86-85; def. Nazareth, 86-78; def. SUNY Potsdam, 86-64
#34	25	Keene State	6-2	IDLE
T#35	23	Wooster	5-4	LOST at #3 Whitman, 79-80
T#35	23	Virginia Wesleyan	7-2	def. Wesley, 100-67
#37	19	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	6-1	LOST at Westmont, 64-80
#38	18	Baldwin Wallace	6-3	def. Pitt-Greensburg, 121-59; LOST to Capital, 62-75
#39	17	Brockport	8-1	IDLE
#40	15	Misericordia	8-1	IDLE
T#41	14	Bethel	7-1	won at Concordia-St. Paul, 87-69
T#41	14	Mount St. Joseph	8-2	LOST at Thomas More, 62-65; def. Defiance, 73-66
T#41	14	Scranton	7-2	LOST at Arcadia, 66-77; won at Emory and Henry, 63-51
#44	13	Ramapo	9-0	def. (n) Farmingdale State, 88-73
#45	12	Williams	8-1	IDLE
#46	4	Carroll	5-2	IDLE
T#47	3	WPI	7-2	IDLE
T#47	3	UW-Stevens Point	4-3	LOST at #49 St. Thomas, 64-73
#49	2	St. Thomas	6-3	def. T#47 UW-Stevens Point, 73-64
T#50	1	MIT	7-3	LOST at Mass-Dartmouth, 70-72
T#50	1	Ripon	6-0	IDLE

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 18, 2016, 06:02:51 PM

Bump

Quote from: sac on December 17, 2016, 10:41:42 PM
Salisbury's game winning shot
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNkcW55x6Ks&feature=youtu.be

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 07:58:31 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 18, 2016, 02:17:09 PM
Again, I really think its too early to use Massey for anything but a general guide, not gospel. But yeah, Whitewater's best win was over an NAIA team whose best win was against Washington Adventist (The Shock, for you nickname people).

Meanwhile, River Falls has played a decent schedule and I'd say they may be the best WIAC team this season.

Wouldn't disagree with RF as the best. or Eau Claire. Could be any of the 3. They all seem tournament-capable but we'll see. The WIAC has 6-7 teams that could contend for that.

Washington Adventist is comparable to St. Norbert or IWU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 08:25:27 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 18, 2016, 05:49:24 PM

Three late results will be edited in when available:
Whitman vs. Wooster

This is shaping up to be a really good game. Whitman was up 10 early in the 2nd half but Wooster has erased almost all of the lead. Whitman by 2 right now.

Whitman announcer clearly didn't check pronunciations. :)

Officials calling it way too tight on both ends. Whitman in 2 shot foul for 12 minutes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on December 18, 2016, 08:43:11 PM

Scheduling note. I'm going to release the Top 25 poll a little later than usual tomorrow, hopefully around 9 or 9:30 pm ET because of these late finishes and holiday travels for some of our voters.

Figured people on this board would want to know. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 09:11:42 PM

Whitman wins by a point. 80-79. Milt Davis will see 2 wide open jumpers in his sleep tonight. Couldn't make either one. Not really sure why he was behind the 3 point line to take them. Didn't need 3.

Whitman pretty much relied on Harrison and Howell to make things happen for them.

Despite the loss, Wooster showed there's still something to them. Played most of the game without Fanelly due to the aforementioned crazy tight whistle. One guy kept making calls that weren't his to make from the outside position.

Can see why Whitman overwhelms less athletic teams. Will be interesting to see how they match up against another athletic club.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on December 18, 2016, 10:08:56 PM

Some interesting holiday games this week in the Top 25 as we get #4 Marietta taking on #22 Wesleyan and #3 Whitman on back to back nights Wednesday and Thursday down in Daytona. The Pioneers can't look ahead to Whitman because Wesleyan is certainly good enough to punish them. It's also another great opportunity to add two more quality wins to an already impressive resume for Marietta.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 10:16:34 PM

Quote from: Fifth and Putnam on December 18, 2016, 10:08:56 PM
Some interesting holiday games this week in the Top 25 as we get #4 Marietta taking on #22 Wesleyan and #3 Whitman on back to back nights Wednesday and Thursday down in Daytona. The Pioneers can't look ahead to Whitman because Wesleyan is certainly good enough to punish them. It's also another great opportunity to add two more quality wins to an already impressive resume for Marietta.

Oh man, Marietta talk when they're not even playing!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOy6hqzfsAs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOy6hqzfsAs)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 18, 2016, 10:19:24 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on December 18, 2016, 08:43:11 PM
Scheduling note. I'm going to release the Top 25 poll a little later than usual tomorrow, hopefully around 9 or 9:30 pm ET because of these late finishes and holiday travels for some of our voters.

Figured people on this board would want to know. :)

Thanks for the heads-up, Gordo. Yes, for the first time in a long time, I'm actually waiting with bated breath on Mondays for the new poll to come out. I'm sure that you can guess why. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 10:35:44 PM

Should be interesting to see who is the new #1. Really should be Whitman but who knows with the northeast bias in the poll. The current #2's most impressive data point is somehow a loss to a team that lost to a team ranked 231st. Bizarre cognitive disconnect there.

Salisbury should really get strong consideration moving up too. Will voters note the difference in margin between Marietta and Salisbury vs. CNU (or Marietta and Whitman vs. Wooster)? Should they? Could go either way.

I assume Neumann and Whitewater will continue to get dissed because voters didn't expect them to be good. It's all their fault for the voters not thinking more of them!

Will voters continue to bundle Babs and Amy based on a head to head result? If the opinion of Babs is based on "well most games they would have beaten Amy", what does that say now that Amy got beat by a bad team? Would be interesting to see opinions of a team changed based on what someone that beat them did, but that's relaly about all the info you have on those teams. Amy has proven nothing to suggest they're even a top 25 team other than beat another team that hasn't really proved anything. It's really ridiculous how much voters are believing in this self-perpetuating loop. Do I really think the northeast biased vote will make that adjustment? Nope. But they should.

The biases and logical breaks will be very plain to see with the results of this poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 18, 2016, 10:37:21 PM

Watched Whitman and Wooster tonight - those seems like pretty evenly matched teams. I'll hold off making any huge changes until we see Whitman in Florida next week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 10:41:39 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 18, 2016, 10:37:21 PM

Watched Whitman and Wooster tonight - those seems like pretty evenly matched teams. I'll hold off making any huge changes until we see Whitman in Florida next week.

But surely you don't think that was even a 50th%ile game for Whitman. Heck if they just shoot their average from the foul line, they win by 10 or so.

So by the Babs precedent, don't you have to give them credit as if they had won by more? That's basically what the case was for Babs when they played Amy -- "they lost, but they could have played better and if they had, they would have won."

You see the logical failure now? You have to apply that logic to every single game or you're being biased.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 19, 2016, 07:43:33 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 10:41:39 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 18, 2016, 10:37:21 PM

Watched Whitman and Wooster tonight - those seems like pretty evenly matched teams. I'll hold off making any huge changes until we see Whitman in Florida next week.

But surely you don't think that was even a 50th%ile game for Whitman. Heck if they just shoot their average from the foul line, they win by 10 or so.

So by the Babs precedent, don't you have to give them credit as if they had won by more? That's basically what the case was for Babs when they played Amy -- "they lost, but they could have played better and if they had, they would have won."

You see the logical failure now? You have to apply that logic to every single game or you're being biased.

Only if I'm voting Whitman and Wooster the same. I've got Whitman in the top 5 and not voting for Wooster at all. I'm not going to shift them based on this one game, which is better for Whitman, because if I were to move them, it would definitely be down.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on December 19, 2016, 04:23:46 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 17, 2016, 10:10:12 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 17, 2016, 09:34:34 PM
I've used Wilma and Musky. I use Berg for Heidelberg.

Until about a half-hour ago, I thought that everybody used those nicknames. Including OAC fans.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 09:42:37 PM
I also call Randolph Macon "Randy Mac", does that make me whatever the opposite of misogynist is?

For the record, misandrist is the opposite of misogynist. I don't think anybody really cares, but I'll do anything ... anything ... to deflect this conversation in a harmless direction.

And that includes posting more pictures of freshwater sport-fish mermaids.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 09:42:37 PM(Only after the fact did I discover that most RMC supporters LIKE "Randy Mac". ;D)

Or Willy Pat for William Paterson, St. Larry for St. Lawrence, and Wash & Jeff for Washington & Jefferson. In the opposite direction, I sometimes refer to Millikin University as Jimmy Millikin, even though it's not customary to refer to the school by the full name of the benefactor after whom it's named. And I've often used Dick Stockton for Richard Stockton, but I was never seriopus about it.

One of my all-time favorites is sac's nickname for Baldwin-Wallace, Bald Wally. (But why do I feel as though I've just thrown sac under the bus for bringing that up?)

For accuracy' sake William Paterson is usually referred to as Willy P not Willy Pat. At least that is what we use here in NJ.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on December 19, 2016, 04:25:01 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 17, 2016, 10:36:32 PM
Quote from: augie77 on December 17, 2016, 09:51:49 PM
Are there any female Augies? Or Auggies up in Minnesota?

I wonder if the super fans are called Auggie Doggies?

Where is the Doggie Daddies?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on December 19, 2016, 04:40:37 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 18, 2016, 10:19:24 PM
Quote from: gordonmann on December 18, 2016, 08:43:11 PM
Scheduling note. I'm going to release the Top 25 poll a little later than usual tomorrow, hopefully around 9 or 9:30 pm ET because of these late finishes and holiday travels for some of our voters.

Figured people on this board would want to know. :)

Thanks for the heads-up, Gordo. Yes, for the first time in a long time, I'm actually waiting with bated breath on Mondays for the new poll to come out. I'm sure that you can guess why. ;)

Because you can't wait to see NJCU break into the top 25 this week?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 19, 2016, 05:33:30 PM

Quote from: Knightstalker on December 19, 2016, 04:23:46 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 17, 2016, 10:10:12 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 17, 2016, 09:34:34 PM
I've used Wilma and Musky. I use Berg for Heidelberg.

Until about a half-hour ago, I thought that everybody used those nicknames. Including OAC fans.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 09:42:37 PM
I also call Randolph Macon "Randy Mac", does that make me whatever the opposite of misogynist is?

For the record, misandrist is the opposite of misogynist. I don't think anybody really cares, but I'll do anything ... anything ... to deflect this conversation in a harmless direction.

And that includes posting more pictures of freshwater sport-fish mermaids.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2016, 09:42:37 PM(Only after the fact did I discover that most RMC supporters LIKE "Randy Mac". ;D)

Or Willy Pat for William Paterson, St. Larry for St. Lawrence, and Wash & Jeff for Washington & Jefferson. In the opposite direction, I sometimes refer to Millikin University as Jimmy Millikin, even though it's not customary to refer to the school by the full name of the benefactor after whom it's named. And I've often used Dick Stockton for Richard Stockton, but I was never seriopus about it.

One of my all-time favorites is sac's nickname for Baldwin-Wallace, Bald Wally. (But why do I feel as though I've just thrown sac under the bus for bringing that up?)

For accuracy' sake William Paterson is usually referred to as Willy P not Willy Pat. At least that is what we use here in NJ.

I think outsiders have said Willy Pat. Like Dick Stockton (who's the Leslie Visser of the NJAC...Ramapo?)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 19, 2016, 10:31:55 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 19, 2016, 07:43:33 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 10:41:39 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 18, 2016, 10:37:21 PM

Watched Whitman and Wooster tonight - those seems like pretty evenly matched teams. I'll hold off making any huge changes until we see Whitman in Florida next week.

But surely you don't think that was even a 50th%ile game for Whitman. Heck if they just shoot their average from the foul line, they win by 10 or so.

So by the Babs precedent, don't you have to give them credit as if they had won by more? That's basically what the case was for Babs when they played Amy -- "they lost, but they could have played better and if they had, they would have won."

You see the logical failure now? You have to apply that logic to every single game or you're being biased.

Only if I'm voting Whitman and Wooster the same. I've got Whitman in the top 5 and not voting for Wooster at all. I'm not going to shift them based on this one game, which is better for Whitman, because if I were to move them, it would definitely be down.

Nah, this is just not correct. If you look at one game through that % of peak type framework, and then you don't in another game, then you're being inconsistent and biased. It doesn't matter if you're voting the two teams the same or not.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 19, 2016, 10:56:48 PM

Let's have all the voters quit their jobs, leave their families, and hermit themselves in the D3 Networks Cave of All Knowldege and just watch all of the D3 hoops games so they have an idea about every team in every game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PeterEscobar on December 19, 2016, 11:08:12 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 11:23:19 AM
Albertus Magnus is ranked 197 by Massey. Endicott is 90 (so like 7th or 8th in the OAC, or worse than everyone in the WIAC), Tufts is down to 59 and their schedule stinks at 191. Their best win is either home to Worcester Tech or at MIT. Tech is 80th and was at home. MIT was 105 and away. We've seen in the past day a team get disparaged for losing a road game to a team in the fringe of top 100. So in the next day are we supposed to give credit for beating one? Can't have it both ways, can we? It can't both be a bad loss and a good win to do basically the same thing.

And they lost to Amherst, who hasn't played anyone else really either other than St. Lawrence, and they just lost to a bad team. Brandeis is Amherst's third best win. They're ranked similarly to Wilmington, who obviously at least one poster here thinks isn't worth a pitcher of warm spit.

So we're back to trying to have it both ways.

Babs and Amy need to toughen up. If you're going to say Whitewater hasn't proven anything yet, you have to say the same thing about Babs and Amy.

Who would you like to see Babson play in the region then? Playing the pre-season favorites in three conferences obviously isn't good enough for you so what would be?

I am also going to laugh so hard when you see how many first place votes Marietta got this week in the top 25 poll............

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 19, 2016, 11:12:41 PM

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/index

Really surprised Chicago is not ranked. 8-1 with just a buzzer beater loss to #13 North Park.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 19, 2016, 11:14:29 PM

Quote from: PeterEscobar on December 19, 2016, 11:08:12 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 11:23:19 AM
Albertus Magnus is ranked 197 by Massey. Endicott is 90 (so like 7th or 8th in the OAC, or worse than everyone in the WIAC), Tufts is down to 59 and their schedule stinks at 191. Their best win is either home to Worcester Tech or at MIT. Tech is 80th and was at home. MIT was 105 and away. We've seen in the past day a team get disparaged for losing a road game to a team in the fringe of top 100. So in the next day are we supposed to give credit for beating one? Can't have it both ways, can we? It can't both be a bad loss and a good win to do basically the same thing.

And they lost to Amherst, who hasn't played anyone else really either other than St. Lawrence, and they just lost to a bad team. Brandeis is Amherst's third best win. They're ranked similarly to Wilmington, who obviously at least one poster here thinks isn't worth a pitcher of warm spit.

So we're back to trying to have it both ways.

Babs and Amy need to toughen up. If you're going to say Whitewater hasn't proven anything yet, you have to say the same thing about Babs and Amy.

Who would you like to see Babson play in the region then? Playing the pre-season favorites in three conferences obviously isn't good enough for you so what would be?

I am also going to laugh so hard when you see how many first place votes Marietta got this week in the top 25 poll............

I don't even care at this point. I know most of the voters are totally full of it. IMO Whitman should be #1 right now anyway.

But voting Babson #1 over Whitman is just a completely irresponsible vote, and whoever voted Amherst #1 would kicked out of the poll if it was me because they are obviously not paying any attention.

I'm not surprised. I know how the sausage is made in other D3 sports polls. The methodology is garbage. The rationale for voting one team and not voting another are completely inconsistent.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on December 19, 2016, 11:16:54 PM

At least 9 of our voters agree. :)

It took longer than I hoped, but the new poll is up, Greg Sager will be happy and so am I because I get to say...

"Hello, Neumann."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 19, 2016, 11:19:50 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on December 19, 2016, 11:16:54 PM
At least 9 of our voters agree. :)

It took longer than I hoped, but the new poll is up, Greg Sager will be happy and so am I because I get to say...

"Hello, Neumann."

Stop stealing my material. I said that two days ago.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PeterEscobar on December 19, 2016, 11:24:01 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 19, 2016, 11:14:29 PM
But voting Babson #1 over Whitman is just a completely irresponsible vote, and whoever voted Amherst #1 would kicked out of the poll if it was me because they are obviously not paying any attention.

Well let's be honest, if you were running a poll you wouldn't allow any other voters. You've made it very clear that unless people agree exactly with you that they are idiots...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on December 19, 2016, 11:26:21 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 19, 2016, 11:19:50 PM
Quote from: gordonmann on December 19, 2016, 11:16:54 PM
At least 9 of our voters agree. :)

It took longer than I hoped, but the new poll is up, Greg Sager will be happy and so am I because I get to say...

"Hello, Neumann."

Stop stealing my material. I said that two days ago.

Yeah? And I said that years ago on the CSAC board. ;D

Congrats to the Neumann Knights. First time ever in the top 25!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 19, 2016, 11:40:57 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 19, 2016, 11:19:50 PM
Quote from: gordonmann on December 19, 2016, 11:16:54 PM
At least 9 of our voters agree. :)

It took longer than I hoped, but the new poll is up, Greg Sager will be happy and so am I because I get to say...

"Hello, Neumann."

Stop stealing my material. I said that two days ago.

Jerry Seinfeld on line 1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 19, 2016, 11:46:13 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on December 19, 2016, 11:16:54 PM
At least 9 of our voters agree. :)

It took longer than I hoped, but the new poll is up, Greg Sager will be happy and so am I because I get to say...

"Hello, Neumann."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6tIf8ZWSFc

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 20, 2016, 12:38:10 AM

Quote from: PeterEscobar on December 19, 2016, 11:24:01 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 19, 2016, 11:14:29 PM
But voting Babson #1 over Whitman is just a completely irresponsible vote, and whoever voted Amherst #1 would kicked out of the poll if it was me because they are obviously not paying any attention.
Well let's be honest, if you were running a poll you wouldn't allow any other voters. You've made it very clear that unless people agree exactly with you that they are idiots...

Whatever you want to think.

I think there are legitimate cases for voting Whitman, Salisbury, Whitewater, Marietta, and maybe a few others. There's not one for voting Amherst after they lost to a team ranked in the 200s and when they've played a crap schedule. There's just not a rationale for that. It's totally senseless.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 20, 2016, 12:39:33 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 19, 2016, 11:40:57 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 19, 2016, 11:19:50 PM
Quote from: gordonmann on December 19, 2016, 11:16:54 PM
At least 9 of our voters agree. :)

It took longer than I hoped, but the new poll is up, Greg Sager will be happy and so am I because I get to say...

"Hello, Neumann."

Stop stealing my material. I said that two days ago.

Jerry Seinfeld on line 1.

There was a character on Seinfeld named Neumann?

(Note: yeah, no crap it's from Seinfeld. Otherwise the fact that it's Neumann wouldn't even hold humor value. Thanks, Captain Obvious.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 20, 2016, 01:34:20 AM

Bump

Quote from: sac on December 18, 2016, 06:02:51 PM
Bump

Quote from: sac on December 17, 2016, 10:41:42 PM
Salisbury's game winning shot
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNkcW55x6Ks&feature=youtu.be

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 20, 2016, 08:13:54 AM

It's funny how fast Whitman can go from criminally underrated to borderline overrated.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Swish3 on December 20, 2016, 08:52:26 AM

So, CNU loses at Salisbury by one point on a miraculous half court buzzer beater and they slip four spots to #9 while Salisbury moves up five to #5? Simply doesn't make sense to me....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on December 20, 2016, 09:16:19 AM

Quote from: Swish3 on December 20, 2016, 08:52:26 AM
So, CNU loses at Salisbury by one point on a miraculous half court buzzer beater and they slip four spots to #9 while Salisbury moves up five to #5? Simply doesn't make sense to me....

Seems appropriate to me. I don't get what doesn't make sense. CNU lost another game. It was very close and on the road so they only fell 4 spots. Salisbury is still undefeated and now has a win against a very good CNU team. Moving up five spots again makes perfect sense.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Swish3 on December 20, 2016, 09:20:53 AM

Quote from: HOPEful on December 20, 2016, 09:16:19 AM
Quote from: Swish3 on December 20, 2016, 08:52:26 AM
So, CNU loses at Salisbury by one point on a miraculous half court buzzer beater and they slip four spots to #9 while Salisbury moves up five to #5? Simply doesn't make sense to me....

Seems appropriate to me. I don't get what doesn't make sense. CNU lost another game. It was very close and on the road so they only fell 4 spots. Salisbury is still undefeated and now has a win against a very good CNU team. Moving up five spots again makes perfect sense.

I guess I don't get that what I said doesn't make sense to you, and let's leave it at that...we've each stated our opinions.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on December 20, 2016, 10:09:35 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 20, 2016, 12:39:33 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 19, 2016, 11:40:57 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 19, 2016, 11:19:50 PM
Quote from: gordonmann on December 19, 2016, 11:16:54 PM
At least 9 of our voters agree. :)

It took longer than I hoped, but the new poll is up, Greg Sager will be happy and so am I because I get to say...

"Hello, Neumann."

Stop stealing my material. I said that two days ago.

Jerry Seinfeld on line 1.

There was a character on Seinfeld named Neumann?

(Note: yeah, no crap it's from Seinfeld. Otherwise the fact that it's Neumann wouldn't even hold humor value. Thanks, Captain Obvious.)

Newman was indeed a character on NBC's seminal sitcom "Seinfeld". Played by Wayne Knight, Newman was an overweight (and rather incompetent) postal worker who lived in Jerry Seinfeld's building and acted as a foil to the show's eponymous main character. Although he (i.e. Newman) was friendly with Jerry's friend and neighbor Cosmo Kramer, he and Jerry despised each other. Jerry and Newman regularly greeted each other with a disdainful "Hello Newman", "Hello Jerry" exchange. Newman's two biggest weakness were food (notably Drake's Coffee Cake) and Elaine, Jerry's friend and ex-girlfriend.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on December 20, 2016, 10:56:12 AM

I do not understand how Neumann jumped NJCU when they have not played since December 10. NJCU held a very high scoring team in Albertus Magnus to 30 points under their scoring average, the previous week they held TCNJ to 30 points under their scoring average. NJCU is 9-1 and undefeated in the NJAC. I do not get how Neumann gained 19 points to debut at 23 in the poll. I honestly do not understand how Chicago passed them and how NJCU lost 3 points when blowing out Albertus Magnus.

NJCU must be the Rodney Dangerfield of D-III, I'm telling you, we don't get no respect.
(https://media.giphy.com/media/xT77XP9O9da9O04fAI/giphy.gif)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 20, 2016, 11:58:18 AM

Here is my Top 25 ballot for anyone who cares: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/12/20/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-4/

Sorry for not getting one out last week despite it being so interesting... Stagg Bowl week takes a lot out of me especially in the lead up. Just not enough time. Will continue to try and plan that better in the future. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: monsoon on December 20, 2016, 12:02:28 PM

Thanks for sharing this (nearly) every week, Dave!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 20, 2016, 12:10:44 PM

Quote from: monsoon on December 20, 2016, 12:02:28 PM
Thanks for sharing this (nearly) every week, Dave!

Ha! You are welcome... I really need to figure out how to get the Stagg Bowl week blog complete. I had it written in my head, but didn't have time to sit down and do it. I even told myself I would do it when I arrived in Roanoke. HA! Like there is ANY time for that when I am there! LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 20, 2016, 12:18:54 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 20, 2016, 11:58:18 AM
Here is my Top 25 ballot for anyone who cares: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/12/20/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-4/

I think I'll take this opportunity to say regarding our prior to discussion of your ballot: you were right, I was wrong...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 20, 2016, 12:39:04 PM

Quote from: WUH on December 20, 2016, 12:18:54 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 20, 2016, 11:58:18 AM
Here is my Top 25 ballot for anyone who cares: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/12/20/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-4/

I think I'll take this opportunity to say regarding our prior to discussion of your ballot: you were right, I was wrong...

Ha! I had to go back and remember what you and I discussed! Things got crazy and I lost track. We shall see... still a lot of basketball to be played. I am certainly known for being as wrong as I am right. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 20, 2016, 12:56:24 PM

Quote from: Swish3 on December 20, 2016, 08:52:26 AM
So, CNU loses at Salisbury by one point on a miraculous half court buzzer beater and they slip four spots to #9 while Salisbury moves up five to #5? Simply doesn't make sense to me....

I don't disagree, but maybe CNU was a little high to start with and Salisbury a little low. Massey has MC 1 (by the very slightest of margins over Whitman) and Salisbury 4 (with Neumann 3 ad Whitewater 5).

Then again, losing to MC at neutral and at Salisbury isn't really damning.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 20, 2016, 12:59:15 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 20, 2016, 10:09:35 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 20, 2016, 12:39:33 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 19, 2016, 11:40:57 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 19, 2016, 11:19:50 PM
Quote from: gordonmann on December 19, 2016, 11:16:54 PM
At least 9 of our voters agree. :)

It took longer than I hoped, but the new poll is up, Greg Sager will be happy and so am I because I get to say...

"Hello, Neumann."

Stop stealing my material. I said that two days ago.

Jerry Seinfeld on line 1.

There was a character on Seinfeld named Neumann?

(Note: yeah, no crap it's from Seinfeld. Otherwise the fact that it's Neumann wouldn't even hold humor value. Thanks, Captain Obvious.)

Newman was indeed a character on NBC's seminal sitcom "Seinfeld". Played by Wayne Knight, Newman was an overweight (and rather incompetent) postal worker who lived in Jerry Seinfeld's building and acted as a foil to the show's eponymous main character. Although he (i.e. Newman) was friendly with Jerry's friend and neighbor Cosmo Kramer, he and Jerry despised each other. Jerry and Newman regularly greeted each other with a disdainful "Hello Newman", "Hello Jerry" exchange. Newman's two biggest weakness were food (notably Drake's Coffee Cake) and Elaine, Jerry's friend and ex-girlfriend.

(https://cdn.cpbgroup.com/styles/inline-content-2-3rds/s3/hotels_2.png?itok=c6oMTcIG)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 20, 2016, 01:12:44 PM

Quote from: Knightstalker on December 20, 2016, 10:56:12 AM
I do not understand how Neumann jumped NJCU when they have not played since December 10. NJCU held a very high scoring team in Albertus Magnus to 30 points under their scoring average, the previous week they held TCNJ to 30 points under their scoring average. NJCU is 9-1 and undefeated in the NJAC. I do not get how Neumann gained 19 points to debut at 23 in the poll. I honestly do not understand how Chicago passed them and how NJCU lost 3 points when blowing out Albertus Magnus.

NJCU must be the Rodney Dangerfield of D-III, I'm telling you, we don't get no respect.
(https://media.giphy.com/media/xT77XP9O9da9O04fAI/giphy.gif)

Maybe Neumann had a good lobbyist working the room?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 20, 2016, 01:42:54 PM

Quote from: Knightstalker on December 20, 2016, 10:56:12 AM
I do not understand how Neumann jumped NJCU when they have not played since December 10. NJCU held a very high scoring team in Albertus Magnus to 30 points under their scoring average, the previous week they held TCNJ to 30 points under their scoring average. NJCU is 9-1 and undefeated in the NJAC. I do not get how Neumann gained 19 points to debut at 23 in the poll. I honestly do not understand how Chicago passed them and how NJCU lost 3 points when blowing out Albertus Magnus.

NJCU must be the Rodney Dangerfield of D-III, I'm telling you, we don't get no respect.
(https://media.giphy.com/media/xT77XP9O9da9O04fAI/giphy.gif)

Long story short: no quality wins. Only loss to a decent but not great middle of the pack OAC team (somewhere between 50-100 in D3 probably). A Magnus hasn't beaten anyone, and TCNJ only has Geneseo. Not even sure between them and Ramapo who should be ranked.

This time during the break (sort of) might be a good time to explore who is under-rated (who is overrated might cause problems).

Aside from teams already discussed (Whitewater, Neumann, River Falls), I would put in a word for Bethel. 7-1, lost first game of the year and hasn't had a close game since, just beat a D-II in their gym (even if their gym is biking distance from Bethel). Concordia has lost a number of games but mostly to pretty solid D-IIs, Obviously the voters have a lower opinion of basketball in MN than I do. I think Bethel is probably better than some teams that are ranked that I won't mention except to say they lost last week and moved down in the poll but not out.

Chicago has been mentioned. Their best win is over Carroll at home who beat North Park but lost to Elmhurst. Chicago lost to North Park by 1 first game of the year.

Whitworth (7-1). Hasn't really beaten anyone that great (St. Olaf has played a great schedule and is probably still a pretty good win), but if they were an eastern team, they'd be ranked.

Wartburg (9-1) has a win over Eau Claire at home, and plays North Central tonight at neutral. If they win that, they should definitely move way up. Even as it is they should probably be a little higher based on the win over Eau Claire (by 13 and scoring 100 against a good defensive team).

Susquehanna (8-1) -- I don't know really who the best team is from the 4-5 in central/eastern PA aside from Neumann, but Susquehanna has the best wins, beating Lycoming, Gwynedd-Mercy, and going out of region to play Trinity and LaGrange, which aren't great wins but better than a lot of their regional peers. Only loss is first game to Misericordia in 2OT.
Not sure how to differentiate really between them, Lycoming (10-1), Misericordia (8-1), Gwynedd (6-2), Swarthmore (8-1), but I'm really confused why Swarthmore has been the one anointed out of the group. Scranton (8-2) probably shouldn't be ranked right now but is pribably as good or better htan some of the above.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 20, 2016, 02:20:13 PM

More fun with numbers:
I looked up the teams that have top 75 ratings in both offense and defense on Massey -- because it's not efficiency-based, most teams have a high rating on either one or the other but not both (think Greenville, Grinnell). I ordered them by offense because I htink that's slightly more important than defense for basketball (if you can score, you have a higher margin of error because another team can have a hot shooting night and you can still win).

Only 4 teams are top 50 in both, so this seemed a bit restrictive (though I have had success using that has a metric for D1 postseason) -- Marietta, Benedictine, River Falls and Augustana. Adjusted for schedule, Hope might well be in there as well.

O D T SOS
Marietta 13 45 58 43
Whitewater 16 58 74 173
Bethel 18 65 83 74
Hope 20 60 80 1
Benedictine 31 29 60 45
Whitworth 38 69 107 42
River Falls 47 19 66 26
Augustana 50 37 87 29
Va Wesleyan53 72 125 111
St. Johns 58 73 131 50
Amherst 60 40 100 210
Susq. 64 68 132 142

Interesting who isn't in this list at all.

If you lower the bar to top 100 in both, you get Chicago, Babson, Brockport, Buena Vista, Wooster, St. Thomas, Illinois Wesleyan, Skidmore, Williams, Wheaton, Wesleyan, and Eau Claire. Of those, Buena Vista, St. Thomas, IWU, Wheaton and Eau Claire have the strongest SOS. Wooster's is pretty solid as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on December 20, 2016, 03:18:46 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 20, 2016, 02:20:13 PM
More fun with numbers:
I looked up the teams that have top 75 ratings in both offense and defense on Massey -- because it's not efficiency-based, most teams have a high rating on either one or the other but not both (think Greenville, Grinnell). I ordered them by offense because I htink that's slightly more important than defense for basketball (if you can score, you have a higher margin of error because another team can have a hot shooting night and you can still win).

Only 4 teams are top 50 in both, so this seemed a bit restrictive (though I have had success using that has a metric for D1 postseason) -- Marietta, Benedictine, River Falls and Augustana. Adjusted for schedule, Hope might well be in there as well.

O D T SOS
Marietta 13 45 58 43
Whitewater 16 58 74 173
Bethel 18 65 83 74
Hope 20 60 80 1
Benedictine 31 29 60 45
Whitworth 38 69 107 42
River Falls 47 19 66 26
Augustana 50 37 87 29
Va Wesleyan53 72 125 111
St. Johns 58 73 131 50
Amherst 60 40 100 210
Susq. 64 68 132 142

Interesting who isn't in this list at all.

If you lower the bar to top 100 in both, you get Chicago, Babson, Brockport, Buena Vista, Wooster, St. Thomas, Illinois Wesleyan, Skidmore, Williams, Wheaton, Wesleyan, and Eau Claire. Of those, Buena Vista, St. Thomas, IWU, Wheaton and Eau Claire have the strongest SOS. Wooster's is pretty solid as well.

Fun exercise. A tweak I would make is that I would use Knightslappy's data...
http://detroitjockcity.com/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency-ratings/ (http://detroitjockcity.com/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency-ratings/)

I think it's unfair to credit teams or discredit them based off of their numbers against D1, D2, NAIA, or NCCAA teams...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 20, 2016, 04:36:08 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on December 20, 2016, 03:18:46 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 20, 2016, 02:20:13 PM
More fun with numbers:
I looked up the teams that have top 75 ratings in both offense and defense on Massey -- because it's not efficiency-based, most teams have a high rating on either one or the other but not both (think Greenville, Grinnell). I ordered them by offense because I htink that's slightly more important than defense for basketball (if you can score, you have a higher margin of error because another team can have a hot shooting night and you can still win).

Only 4 teams are top 50 in both, so this seemed a bit restrictive (though I have had success using that has a metric for D1 postseason) -- Marietta, Benedictine, River Falls and Augustana. Adjusted for schedule, Hope might well be in there as well.

O D T SOS
Marietta 13 45 58 43
Whitewater 16 58 74 173
Bethel 18 65 83 74
Hope 20 60 80 1
Benedictine 31 29 60 45
Whitworth 38 69 107 42
River Falls 47 19 66 26
Augustana 50 37 87 29
Va Wesleyan53 72 125 111
St. Johns 58 73 131 50
Amherst 60 40 100 210
Susq. 64 68 132 142

Interesting who isn't in this list at all.

If you lower the bar to top 100 in both, you get Chicago, Babson, Brockport, Buena Vista, Wooster, St. Thomas, Illinois Wesleyan, Skidmore, Williams, Wheaton, Wesleyan, and Eau Claire. Of those, Buena Vista, St. Thomas, IWU, Wheaton and Eau Claire have the strongest SOS. Wooster's is pretty solid as well.

Fun exercise. A tweak I would make is that I would use Knightslappy's data...
http://detroitjockcity.com/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency-ratings/ (http://detroitjockcity.com/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency-ratings/)

I think it's unfair to credit teams or discredit them based off of their numbers against D1, D2, NAIA, or NCCAA teams...

I think because Massey rates in all divisions, it's fine. One of the strengths of it for lower division work, actually.

I don't think you should throw out results for that reason.

You can certainly do this with efficiency rankings but something seems off about those. Maybe it's because they're throwing out non-D3 results, or maybe something else. Still interesting to look at.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 20, 2016, 05:11:22 PM

At the Cruzin' Classic in Fort Lauderdale, #20 North Central defeated #19 Wartburg in double OT, 94-91. The Cardinals needed a buzzer-beater trey to send the game into overtime and a trey with four seconds left in the first overtime to send the game into a second extra session. The Knights missed a trey attempt in the final second of the second OT that would've sent it into a third.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 20, 2016, 10:05:45 PM

UW-Oshkosh 58
#7-St. Norbert 45

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 20, 2016, 11:19:50 PM

Happy birthday to the Guru, without Pat Coleman, we wouldn't have this site. 🎁🎂🎈

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 20, 2016, 11:20:34 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 20, 2016, 10:05:45 PM
UW-Oshkosh 58
#7-St. Norbert 45

I think it was 42-20 at halftime. Wow.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 20, 2016, 11:57:46 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 20, 2016, 10:05:45 PM
UW-Oshkosh 58
#7-St. Norbert 45

And this is why I like teams that are good on offense.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 21, 2016, 12:16:56 AM

Quote from: Swish3 on December 20, 2016, 08:52:26 AM
So, CNU loses at Salisbury by one point on a miraculous half court buzzer beater and they slip four spots to #9 while Salisbury moves up five to #5? Simply doesn't make sense to me....

So this one is actually among the easiest to explain. CNU was the better team last year. While the rivalry kept those games close, Salisbury could not match the talent or execution of the Captains. Despite getting Wyatt Smith back, SU lost a pretty solid chunk of their team, especially where depth is concerned, while CNU brought back the vast majority of their production. Add to that a Final Four run and they're a top returning team, while Salisbury is a little suspect.

The Seagulls earned their Top 10 spot with good wins (and no losses), but while they weren't playing duds, the schedule wasn't exactly a murderer's row either. CNU, on the other hand, while winning most of the games they were supposed to win, certainly haven't looked like last year's team or the one people expected this year.

Cut to Saturday. You have a CNU team that is more talented and should be better playing not do great, while Salisbury goes toe-to-toe with them and digs real deep for a strong night. Except, there have been enough games this year where you can't entirely write off the CNU performance. This game sort of solidified the trends in people's minds that maybe they didn't want to buy into previously, but were sort of forced into.

Salisbury is good and CNU is not as good as we expected. All things can change, of course, but right now those are two very evenly matched teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 21, 2016, 10:44:38 AM

~~How They Fared~~ What's Coming Up

A few games have already taken place this week; ordinarily I would post this report on Thursday morning, but I thought it would be more helpful to see a list of what's in store in the next week and a half. A number of the upcoming games are holiday tournaments, so quite a few opponents are "TBA/TBD".

(I assume the next poll is coming out on January 2 [edit: Gordon Mann has confirmed this]; that would be consistent with the last time January 1 fell on a Sunday, in the 2011-12 season.)

BTW, I am happy to see that--as I had hoped--my program now notes when a game went to overtime (see #19 Wartburg/#20 North Central below).

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	609	Babson	9-1	12/31 at #26 Chicago
#2	597	Whitman	8-0	def. (n) King's, 80-62; 12/22 vs. #4 Marietta; 12/30 vs. Crown; 12/31 vs. Buena Vista
#3	573	Amherst	8-1	12/31 vs. Keystone
#4	549	Marietta	8-1	12/21 vs. #17 Wesleyan; 12/22 vs. #2 Whitman
#5	480	Salisbury	8-0	12/28 vs. T#33 Ramapo; 12/29 vs. Hardin-Simmons
#6	474	Rochester	10-0	IDLE
#7	471	St. Norbert	5-2	LOST at UW-Oshkosh, 45-58; 12/29 vs. Finlandia; 12/30 vs. TBA
#8	449	Whitworth	7-1	won at Chapman, 78-69; 12/21 vs. Alma; 12/30 vs. Buena Vista; 12/31 vs. Crown
#9	422	Christopher Newport	6-2	12/28 vs. Pitt-Greensburg; 12/29 vs. TBD; 01/01 vs. #32 Virginia Wesleyan
#10	392	Tufts	8-2	IDLE
#11	351	UW-Eau Claire	8-1	12/28 vs. Gustavus Adolphus; 12/29 vs. UC Santa Cruz
#12	318	Benedictine	7-3	LOST to (n) Menlo, 70-72; 12/31 vs. Concordia (Wis.)
#13	241	North Park	7-1	12/19 at Manchester; 12/21 at Albion; 12/30 vs. Manchester
#14	230	Susquehanna	9-1	def. (n) Eastern, 82-76
#15	219	Hope	7-2	def. Spalding, 79-51; def. Johnson and Wales, 100-75; 12/29 vs. #37 Williams; 12/30 vs. TBA
#16	212	UW-Whitewater	8-0	def. Trine, 85-60; 12/21 vs. T#41 Ripon; 12/29 vs. Lawrence; 12/30 vs. Central
#17	209	Wesleyan	10-0	def. (n) Washington and Lee, 66-61; 12/21 vs. #4 Marietta
#18	191	Illinois Wesleyan	8-2	def. #26 Chicago, 72-54; 12/29 vs. T#29 Middlebury; 12/30 vs. TBD
#19	173	Wartburg	9-2	def. (n) SUNYIT, 70-56; LOST to (n) #20 North Central (Ill.), 91-94 2OT; 12/31 at Waldorf
#20	149	North Central (Ill.)	7-3	def. (n) #19 Wartburg, 94-91 2OT; 12/21 vs. Wheaton (Mass.); 12/29 at UW-Stevens Point
#21	136	Swarthmore	8-1	12/30 at Hood
#22	113	UW-River Falls	9-1	12/30 vs. St. Olaf
#23	68	Neumann	8-0	12/30 vs. Scranton
#24	67	Denison	8-1	IDLE
#25	60	Washington U.	6-3	12/29 vs. Ohio Wesleyan; 12/30 at T#43 Wooster

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	53	Chicago	8-2	LOST at #18 Illinois Wesleyan, 54-72; 12/31 vs. #1 Babson
#27	50	New Jersey City	9-1	12/29 vs. Gettysburg; 12/30 vs. TBA
#28	39	Emory	6-2	12/29 vs. Berry; 12/31 vs. Hampden-Sydney
T#29	35	Lycoming	10-1	12/29 vs. Fredonia; 12/30 vs. TBD
T#29	35	Middlebury	7-1	12/29 vs. #18 Illinois Wesleyan; 12/30 vs. TBA
#31	26	Keene State	6-2	12/28 at #40 WPI; 12/30 vs. University of New England
#32	25	Virginia Wesleyan	7-2	12/30 vs. Mary Washington; 01/01 at #9 Christopher Newport
T#33	20	Brockport	8-1	IDLE
T#33	20	Ramapo	9-0	12/28 vs. #5 Salisbury; 12/29 vs. Gustavus Adolphus
#35	19	Endicott	6-2	12/29 vs. Southern Maine; 12/30 vs. Regis (Mass.)
#36	11	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	6-1	12/28 vs. Emerson; 12/29 vs. Oberlin
#37	9	Williams	8-1	12/29 vs. #15 Hope; 12/30 vs. TBA
#38	8	Bethel	7-1	12/30 vs. UW-Superior
#39	6	Carroll	6-2	won at Milwaukee Engineering, 87-70; 12/22 at Loras; 12/29 at University of Dallas; 12/31 at Austin
#40	4	WPI	7-2	12/28 vs. #31 Keene State; 12/30 vs. Eastern Nazarene
T#41	3	Capital	8-3	IDLE
T#41	3	Ripon	6-0	12/21 at #16 UW-Whitewater; 12/29 at Willamette; 12/30 at Pacific
T#43	2	UW-La Crosse	6-3	12/22 at Northland; 12/31 vs. Coe
T#43	2	Wooster	5-4	12/21 at Lewis and Clark; 12/29 vs. Hobart; 12/30 vs. #25 Washington U.
T#45	1	Misericordia	8-1	12/29 vs. TBD; 12/30 vs. TBD
T#45	1	St. Thomas	6-3	IDLE

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on December 21, 2016, 11:11:39 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 20, 2016, 04:36:08 PM
I think because Massey rates in all divisions, it's fine. One of the strengths of it for lower division work, actually.
I don't think you should throw out results for that reason.
You can certainly do this with efficiency rankings but something seems off about those. Maybe it's because they're throwing out non-D3 results, or maybe something else. Still interesting to look at.

I disagree. Personally, that fact that Massey counts non D3 games is by far the thing I like least about it. There are just too few mutual opponents to accurately quantify Hope's win against Aquinas or their loss to Cornerstone. Furthermore, when the NCAA begins doing regional rankings, they'll (kind of) throw these game out...

What is it that "seems off"? With the exception of CMS, the two are very similar. Heck, once again if you rule out CMS as an early season anomaly, Marrietta, Neumann, Babson, Salisbury, Hope, Whitman, River Falls, CNU, and Bethel feels pretty similar and perhaps better ordered than Massey's numbers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 21, 2016, 11:35:25 AM

Quote from: HOPEful on December 21, 2016, 11:11:39 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 20, 2016, 04:36:08 PM
I think because Massey rates in all divisions, it's fine. One of the strengths of it for lower division work, actually.
I don't think you should throw out results for that reason.
You can certainly do this with efficiency rankings but something seems off about those. Maybe it's because they're throwing out non-D3 results, or maybe something else. Still interesting to look at.
I disagree. Personally, that fact that Massey counts non D3 games is by far the thing I like least about it. There are just too few mutual opponents to accurately quantify Hope's win against Aquinas or their loss to Cornerstone. Furthermore, when the NCAA begins doing regional rankings, they'll (kind of) throw these game out...

What is it that "seems off"? With the exception of CMS, the two are very similar. Heck, once again if you rule out CMS as an early season anomaly, Marrietta, Neumann, Babson, Salisbury, Hope, Whitman, River Falls, CNU, and Bethel feels pretty similar and perhaps better ordered than Massey's numbers.

I don't know why you need a lot of mutual opponents, or any. You have Cornerstone and their network of teams with their collective strength, and Hope with the same. The connection is the matchup; there doesn't really need to be another one. It just doesn't make sense to throw out data. The NCAA does it because they want to discourage playing a lot of out of division teams. I don't think it's a good thing there either. If you play a good D2 or NAIA and win, you should get credit for that. And if you lose to a good team, that shouldn't hurt you much either (like how people hold it against teams like Hope in the D3 poll).

Just the fact that the efficiency rankings are holding onto CMS is suspect, especially with how poor their schedule rating is. Some of the SOS assessments don't seem right either. But similar to the CMS issue is where a team like Ramapo is rated...their schedule is correctly assessed as poor, but it doesn't seem to impact their ranking that much. It really doesn't seem like the schedule is being adjusted for nearly enough. Do you really think Ramapo is top 30 in the nation on both offense and defense? And on the other end, if North Park has a top 10 schedule, shouldn't they be ranked higher in total?

I'm also not sure that efficiency rankings get you what you really want all the time. Like St. Norbert being ranked top 100 in offensive efficiency. Well that's great, but the slow tempo is still gonna lead to being more likely to lose when you're the better team. I think Massey does a better job of accounting for that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on December 21, 2016, 12:14:59 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 21, 2016, 11:35:25 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on December 21, 2016, 11:11:39 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 20, 2016, 04:36:08 PM
I think because Massey rates in all divisions, it's fine. One of the strengths of it for lower division work, actually.
I don't think you should throw out results for that reason.
You can certainly do this with efficiency rankings but something seems off about those. Maybe it's because they're throwing out non-D3 results, or maybe something else. Still interesting to look at.
I disagree. Personally, that fact that Massey counts non D3 games is by far the thing I like least about it. There are just too few mutual opponents to accurately quantify Hope's win against Aquinas or their loss to Cornerstone. Furthermore, when the NCAA begins doing regional rankings, they'll (kind of) throw these game out...

What is it that "seems off"? With the exception of CMS, the two are very similar. Heck, once again if you rule out CMS as an early season anomaly, Marrietta, Neumann, Babson, Salisbury, Hope, Whitman, River Falls, CNU, and Bethel feels pretty similar and perhaps better ordered than Massey's numbers.

I don't know why you need a lot of mutual opponents, or any. You have Cornerstone and their network of teams with their collective strength, and Hope with the same. The connection is the matchup; there doesn't really need to be another one. It just doesn't make sense to throw out data. The NCAA does it because they want to discourage playing a lot of out of division teams. I don't think it's a good thing there either. If you play a good D2 or NAIA and win, you should get credit for that. And if you lose to a good team, that shouldn't hurt you much either (like how people hold it against teams like Hope in the D3 poll).

Just the fact that the efficiency rankings are holding onto CMS is suspect, especially with how poor their schedule rating is. Some of the SOS assessments don't seem right either. But similar to the CMS issue is where a team like Ramapo is rated...their schedule is correctly assessed as poor, but it doesn't seem to impact their ranking that much. It really doesn't seem like the schedule is being adjusted for nearly enough. Do you really think Ramapo is top 30 in the nation on both offense and defense? And on the other end, if North Park has a top 10 schedule, shouldn't they be ranked higher in total?

I'm also not sure that efficiency rankings get you what you really want all the time. Like St. Norbert being ranked top 100 in offensive efficiency. Well that's great, but the slow tempo is still gonna lead to being more likely to lose when you're the better team. I think Massey does a better job of accounting for that.

I think the worlds of NAIA and D3 are intertwined enough that including the games improves the data set (NAIA-II and D3 have played each other 50 times this year).

I would love to include those games in the efficiency rankings, but it would take a lot more programming work than I'm willing to put in. It's more than just counting those games (D3 vs. NAIA) it would mean counting all NAIA vs. NAIA games as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 21, 2016, 12:41:09 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 21, 2016, 12:14:59 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 21, 2016, 11:35:25 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on December 21, 2016, 11:11:39 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 20, 2016, 04:36:08 PM
I think because Massey rates in all divisions, it's fine. One of the strengths of it for lower division work, actually.
I don't think you should throw out results for that reason.
You can certainly do this with efficiency rankings but something seems off about those. Maybe it's because they're throwing out non-D3 results, or maybe something else. Still interesting to look at.
I disagree. Personally, that fact that Massey counts non D3 games is by far the thing I like least about it. There are just too few mutual opponents to accurately quantify Hope's win against Aquinas or their loss to Cornerstone. Furthermore, when the NCAA begins doing regional rankings, they'll (kind of) throw these game out...

What is it that "seems off"? With the exception of CMS, the two are very similar. Heck, once again if you rule out CMS as an early season anomaly, Marrietta, Neumann, Babson, Salisbury, Hope, Whitman, River Falls, CNU, and Bethel feels pretty similar and perhaps better ordered than Massey's numbers.

I don't know why you need a lot of mutual opponents, or any. You have Cornerstone and their network of teams with their collective strength, and Hope with the same. The connection is the matchup; there doesn't really need to be another one. It just doesn't make sense to throw out data. The NCAA does it because they want to discourage playing a lot of out of division teams. I don't think it's a good thing there either. If you play a good D2 or NAIA and win, you should get credit for that. And if you lose to a good team, that shouldn't hurt you much either (like how people hold it against teams like Hope in the D3 poll).

Just the fact that the efficiency rankings are holding onto CMS is suspect, especially with how poor their schedule rating is. Some of the SOS assessments don't seem right either. But similar to the CMS issue is where a team like Ramapo is rated...their schedule is correctly assessed as poor, but it doesn't seem to impact their ranking that much. It really doesn't seem like the schedule is being adjusted for nearly enough. Do you really think Ramapo is top 30 in the nation on both offense and defense? And on the other end, if North Park has a top 10 schedule, shouldn't they be ranked higher in total?

I'm also not sure that efficiency rankings get you what you really want all the time. Like St. Norbert being ranked top 100 in offensive efficiency. Well that's great, but the slow tempo is still gonna lead to being more likely to lose when you're the better team. I think Massey does a better job of accounting for that.

I think the worlds of NAIA and D3 are intertwined enough that including the games improves the data set (NAIA-II and D3 have played each other 50 times this year).

I would love to include those games in the efficiency rankings, but it would take a lot more programming work than I'm willing to put in. It's more than just counting those games (D3 vs. NAIA) it would mean counting all NAIA vs. NAIA games as well.

Right, in no way am I saying you necessarily should do that or that what you have done doesn't have any value without doing so.

I'd be curious to know how you did what you have done.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on December 21, 2016, 01:40:27 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 20, 2016, 05:11:22 PM
At the Cruzin' Classic in Fort Lauderdale, #20 North Central defeated #19 Wartburg in double OT, 94-91. The Cardinals needed a buzzer-beater trey to send the game into overtime and a trey with four seconds left in the first overtime to send the game into a second extra session. The Knights missed a trey attempt in the final second of the second OT that would've sent it into a third.

Yes, and they did it without their best all-around player, and last year's D3Hoops Regional Rookie of the Year, Connor Raridon who is out with a broken hand.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on December 21, 2016, 02:10:52 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 20, 2016, 10:05:45 PM
UW-Oshkosh 58
#7-St. Norbert 45

Not that St. Norbert isn't a good team, but their lofty ranking is often boosted by the fact that they play in a really bad conference. If they can post a good non conference record, they are usually going to be highly ranked the rest of the year because their conference presents them with virtually no competition. The second best team in their conference the last few years, Carroll, transfered to the CCIW this year so now it's even easier for St. Norbert to slice through the rest of the Midwest Conference. St.N also benefits from being close enough to be able to recruit Catholic kids from the entire Chicagoland area, a major producer of college talent as well, of course, as recruiting close by Green Bay, and the entire state of Wisconsin, especially the Catholic population thereof. St. Norb's 2 losses have come when they have played schools from a strong conference. This year, that's the WIAC which has given St. Norbert it's two losses.

Another team that enjoys the same advantage is Benedictine. A team with 3 very good players to be sure, but another team that is continually propped up by playing in a terrible conference. The Northern Athletics Collegiate Conference is probably even worse overall than St. Norbert's Midwest Conference.
And, again, With BU being located in the western suburbs, they are right in the middle of the metropolitan Chicagoland area. One of the entire Chicagoland's top producers of talent, which also happens to be a private Catholic (BU is a Catholic institution) HS, is Benet Academy which is located directly across the street from Benedictine.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 21, 2016, 02:22:58 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on December 21, 2016, 11:11:39 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 20, 2016, 04:36:08 PM
I think because Massey rates in all divisions, it's fine. One of the strengths of it for lower division work, actually.
I don't think you should throw out results for that reason.
You can certainly do this with efficiency rankings but something seems off about those. Maybe it's because they're throwing out non-D3 results, or maybe something else. Still interesting to look at.
I disagree. Personally, that fact that Massey counts non D3 games is by far the thing I like least about it. There are just too few mutual opponents to accurately quantify Hope's win against Aquinas or their loss to Cornerstone. Furthermore, when the NCAA begins doing regional rankings, they'll (kind of) throw these game out...

What is it that "seems off"? With the exception of CMS, the two are very similar. Heck, once again if you rule out CMS as an early season anomaly, Marrietta, Neumann, Babson, Salisbury, Hope, Whitman, River Falls, CNU, and Bethel feels pretty similar and perhaps better ordered than Massey's numbers.

The other issue is that, for all intents and purposes, these non-d3 games are no different than an exhibition. Yes, they count in the overall record on the archive of the team's website, but there's no difference in a win vs a loss. As a voter, I tend to discount them almost entirely. You can never be sure how the players or the coach approach the game when it doesn't matter one whit for their season - especially for teams with NCAA Tournament ambitions.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 21, 2016, 02:23:15 PM

Quote from: AndOne on December 21, 2016, 02:10:52 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 20, 2016, 10:05:45 PM
UW-Oshkosh 58
#7-St. Norbert 45

Not that St. Norbert isn't a good team, but their lofty ranking is often boosted by the fact that they play in a really bad conference. If they can post a good non conference record, they are usually going to be highly ranked the rest of the year because their conference presents them with virtually no competition. The second best team in their conference the last few years, Carroll, transfered to the CCIW this year so now it's even easier for St. Norbert to slice through the rest of the Midwest Conference. St.N also benefits from being close enough to be able to recruit Catholic kids from the entire Chicagoland area, a major producer of college talent as well, of course, as recruiting close by Green Bay, and the entire state of Wisconsin, especially the Catholic population thereof. St. Norb's 2 losses have come when they have played schools from a strong conference. This year, that's the WIAC which has given St. Norbert it's two losses.

Another team that enjoys the same advantage is Benedictine. A team with 3 very good players to be sure, but another team that is continually propped up by playing in a terrible conference. The Northern Athletics Collegiate Conference is probably even worse overall than St. Norbert's Midwest Conference.
And, again, With BU being located in the western suburbs, they are right in the middle of the metropolitan Chicagoland area. One of the entire Chicagoland's top producers of talent, which also happens to be a private Catholic (BU is a Catholic institution) HS, is Benet Academy which is located directly across the street from Benedictine.

You'd think that's already baked into the pollsters calculus though? This has been a truth for years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 21, 2016, 02:24:27 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 21, 2016, 02:22:58 PM
Quote from: HOPEful on December 21, 2016, 11:11:39 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 20, 2016, 04:36:08 PM
I think because Massey rates in all divisions, it's fine. One of the strengths of it for lower division work, actually.
I don't think you should throw out results for that reason.
You can certainly do this with efficiency rankings but something seems off about those. Maybe it's because they're throwing out non-D3 results, or maybe something else. Still interesting to look at.
I disagree. Personally, that fact that Massey counts non D3 games is by far the thing I like least about it. There are just too few mutual opponents to accurately quantify Hope's win against Aquinas or their loss to Cornerstone. Furthermore, when the NCAA begins doing regional rankings, they'll (kind of) throw these game out...

What is it that "seems off"? With the exception of CMS, the two are very similar. Heck, once again if you rule out CMS as an early season anomaly, Marrietta, Neumann, Babson, Salisbury, Hope, Whitman, River Falls, CNU, and Bethel feels pretty similar and perhaps better ordered than Massey's numbers.

The other issue is that, for all intents and purposes, these non-d3 games are no different than an exhibition. Yes, they count in the overall record on the archive of the team's website, but there's no difference in a win vs a loss. As a voter, I tend to discount them almost entirely. You can never be sure how the players or the coach approach the game when it doesn't matter one whit for their season - especially for teams with NCAA Tournament ambitions.

They may change their rotations a bit to give more experience, but I can tell you from watching D2 vs. NAIA or D3 at CWU is that the NAIA and D3 teams take them pretty darn seriously, exhibition or countable game. Same with the D2 school - I've heard the coaches' ire for lapses in play.

When CWU faces a D-1 opponent they're not just there to get in a good sweat.

When you hit the court as a college athlete or coach, you compete.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 21, 2016, 02:27:50 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 21, 2016, 02:24:27 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 21, 2016, 02:22:58 PM
Quote from: HOPEful on December 21, 2016, 11:11:39 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 20, 2016, 04:36:08 PM
I think because Massey rates in all divisions, it's fine. One of the strengths of it for lower division work, actually.
I don't think you should throw out results for that reason.
You can certainly do this with efficiency rankings but something seems off about those. Maybe it's because they're throwing out non-D3 results, or maybe something else. Still interesting to look at.
I disagree. Personally, that fact that Massey counts non D3 games is by far the thing I like least about it. There are just too few mutual opponents to accurately quantify Hope's win against Aquinas or their loss to Cornerstone. Furthermore, when the NCAA begins doing regional rankings, they'll (kind of) throw these game out...

What is it that "seems off"? With the exception of CMS, the two are very similar. Heck, once again if you rule out CMS as an early season anomaly, Marrietta, Neumann, Babson, Salisbury, Hope, Whitman, River Falls, CNU, and Bethel feels pretty similar and perhaps better ordered than Massey's numbers.

The other issue is that, for all intents and purposes, these non-d3 games are no different than an exhibition. Yes, they count in the overall record on the archive of the team's website, but there's no difference in a win vs a loss. As a voter, I tend to discount them almost entirely. You can never be sure how the players or the coach approach the game when it doesn't matter one whit for their season - especially for teams with NCAA Tournament ambitions.

They may change their rotations a bit to give more experience, but I can tell you from watching D2 vs. NAIA or D3 at CWU is that the NAIA and D3 teams take them pretty darn seriously, exhibition or countable game.

When you hit the court as a college athlete or coach, you compete.

I'm not saying they don't take them seriously, but there are some things you can't control. A rivalry game is almost always close no matter how good each team is, because there's an added pressure that can't really be chosen or quantified. I just mean the intangibles of the situation are super hard to predict - especially when it's nationwide. I think you have to make some consideration (albeit not the same consideration) for games on opening night or at travel tournaments over the holidays. The unusual circumstances make those games much harder to use as a gauge than a conference or close regional game might be.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on December 21, 2016, 02:29:50 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 21, 2016, 02:23:15 PM
Quote from: AndOne on December 21, 2016, 02:10:52 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 20, 2016, 10:05:45 PM
UW-Oshkosh 58
#7-St. Norbert 45

Not that St. Norbert isn't a good team, but their lofty ranking is often boosted by the fact that they play in a really bad conference. If they can post a good non conference record, they are usually going to be highly ranked the rest of the year because their conference presents them with virtually no competition. The second best team in their conference the last few years, Carroll, transfered to the CCIW this year so now it's even easier for St. Norbert to slice through the rest of the Midwest Conference. St.N also benefits from being close enough to be able to recruit Catholic kids from the entire Chicagoland area, a major producer of college talent as well, of course, as recruiting close by Green Bay, and the entire state of Wisconsin, especially the Catholic population thereof. St. Norb's 2 losses have come when they have played schools from a strong conference. This year, that's the WIAC which has given St. Norbert it's two losses.

Another team that enjoys the same advantage is Benedictine. A team with 3 very good players to be sure, but another team that is continually propped up by playing in a terrible conference. The Northern Athletics Collegiate Conference is probably even worse overall than St. Norbert's Midwest Conference.
And, again, With BU being located in the western suburbs, they are right in the middle of the metropolitan Chicagoland area. One of the entire Chicagoland's top producers of talent, which also happens to be a private Catholic (BU is a Catholic institution) HS, is Benet Academy which is located directly across the street from Benedictine.

You'd think that's already baked into the pollsters calculus though? This has been a truth for years.

Yes, you'd think. But logical thought and reality are often widely differentiating variables! ??? :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 21, 2016, 02:33:39 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 21, 2016, 02:27:50 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 21, 2016, 02:24:27 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 21, 2016, 02:22:58 PM
Quote from: HOPEful on December 21, 2016, 11:11:39 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 20, 2016, 04:36:08 PM
I think because Massey rates in all divisions, it's fine. One of the strengths of it for lower division work, actually.
I don't think you should throw out results for that reason.
You can certainly do this with efficiency rankings but something seems off about those. Maybe it's because they're throwing out non-D3 results, or maybe something else. Still interesting to look at.
I disagree. Personally, that fact that Massey counts non D3 games is by far the thing I like least about it. There are just too few mutual opponents to accurately quantify Hope's win against Aquinas or their loss to Cornerstone. Furthermore, when the NCAA begins doing regional rankings, they'll (kind of) throw these game out...

What is it that "seems off"? With the exception of CMS, the two are very similar. Heck, once again if you rule out CMS as an early season anomaly, Marrietta, Neumann, Babson, Salisbury, Hope, Whitman, River Falls, CNU, and Bethel feels pretty similar and perhaps better ordered than Massey's numbers.

The other issue is that, for all intents and purposes, these non-d3 games are no different than an exhibition. Yes, they count in the overall record on the archive of the team's website, but there's no difference in a win vs a loss. As a voter, I tend to discount them almost entirely. You can never be sure how the players or the coach approach the game when it doesn't matter one whit for their season - especially for teams with NCAA Tournament ambitions.

They may change their rotations a bit to give more experience, but I can tell you from watching D2 vs. NAIA or D3 at CWU is that the NAIA and D3 teams take them pretty darn seriously, exhibition or countable game.

When you hit the court as a college athlete or coach, you compete.

I'm not saying they don't take them seriously, but there are some things you can't control. A rivalry game is almost always close no matter how good each team is, because there's an added pressure that can't really be chosen or quantified. I just mean the intangibles of the situation are super hard to predict - especially when it's nationwide. I think you have to make some consideration (albeit not the same consideration) for games on opening night or at travel tournaments over the holidays. The unusual circumstances make those games much harder to use as a gauge than a conference or close regional game might be.

It's not like it's baseball where you might hold back your better pitching.

If anything, teams are going to be more motivated to try to knock off a higher division team. They aren't just going to lay down because it's not a D3 team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AO on December 21, 2016, 02:47:26 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 18, 2016, 01:08:01 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 12:16:17 AMMinnesota has 7 pretty good teams, but their schedules are a little tougher across the board, partly due to access to the Wisconsin teams for non-cons.

The MIAC has traditionally been overrated, and it still is as a whole. But St. Thomas, over the past decade, has been one of the best programs in the entire division, and the Tommies have the hardware to prove it. Just don't let that fool you into thinking that the Tommies are reflective of the whole league.

What league or leagues should be rated higher than the MIAC and who is doing the ratings? I guess you could say since they only play 5 non-conference games you have less confidence in their ranking, but that should tend to make them look worse than they are as often as it makes them look better. The lack of post-season success for MIAC teams not named St. Thomas can also be partly blamed on this 20 game conference schedule which brings everyone's SOS down to .500 and makes it tougher to get at-large bids. Bethel has to be one of the best teams in the d3hoops.com era to have never made it to the tourney. The Royals have 3 Massey top 25 (http://www.masseyratings.com/team.php?t=679&s=292154&sub=11620&all=1) finishes in the last 8 years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on December 21, 2016, 03:40:34 PM

I think the CCIW, WIAC, and NESCAC are generally regarded as the top D3 basketball conferences.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 21, 2016, 04:03:30 PM

Yeah, I think WIAC, CCIW and NESCAC are a clear top three in some order.

And, I think most folks would also put UAA, OAC, and ODAC as the next three, in some order.

MIAC I'd say is part of a pretty big bunch of strong conferences positioned underneath those six (NWC, NJAC, NEWMAC, MIAA, SUNYAC, Centennial, I'm sure there are a few others in the mix that I'm not thinking of). But there is no way to put it in the top six, as good as St. Thomas is as an individual program.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on December 21, 2016, 04:09:46 PM

Funny you should ask...

http://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2016/11/2016-conference-ranking-part-1

I had the MIAC ranked fifth behind the CCIW, NESCAC, WIAC, UAA and ODAC.

:)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Stoppable on December 21, 2016, 04:23:37 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 21, 2016, 02:23:15 PM
Quote from: AndOne on December 21, 2016, 02:10:52 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 20, 2016, 10:05:45 PM
UW-Oshkosh 58
#7-St. Norbert 45

Not that St. Norbert isn't a good team, but their lofty ranking is often boosted by the fact that they play in a really bad conference. If they can post a good non conference record, they are usually going to be highly ranked the rest of the year because their conference presents them with virtually no competition. The second best team in their conference the last few years, Carroll, transfered to the CCIW this year so now it's even easier for St. Norbert to slice through the rest of the Midwest Conference. St.N also benefits from being close enough to be able to recruit Catholic kids from the entire Chicagoland area, a major producer of college talent as well, of course, as recruiting close by Green Bay, and the entire state of Wisconsin, especially the Catholic population thereof. St. Norb's 2 losses have come when they have played schools from a strong conference. This year, that's the WIAC which has given St. Norbert it's two losses.

Another team that enjoys the same advantage is Benedictine. A team with 3 very good players to be sure, but another team that is continually propped up by playing in a terrible conference. The Northern Athletics Collegiate Conference is probably even worse overall than St. Norbert's Midwest Conference.
And, again, With BU being located in the western suburbs, they are right in the middle of the metropolitan Chicagoland area. One of the entire Chicagoland's top producers of talent, which also happens to be a private Catholic (BU is a Catholic institution) HS, is Benet Academy which is located directly across the street from Benedictine.

You'd think that's already baked into the pollsters calculus though? This has been a truth for years.

Benedictine wasn't ranked last year until they started beating CCIW teams in non-confidence, never got to #1 despite being undefeated and the wins over highly-ranked CCIW opposition, and proved themselves worthy of the hype in the NCAA Tournament. This year, they have three losses, but all razor thin and two to ranked opponents.

Are you suggesting they should be penalized for playing in what is admittedly not a very good conference and beating the teams that are on their conference schedule?

(And before that, they hadn't made the Tourney since 2011 - where is this "propping up" coming in as far as BU is concerned?)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AO on December 21, 2016, 04:37:35 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on December 21, 2016, 04:03:30 PM
Yeah, I think WIAC, CCIW and NESCAC are a clear top three in some order.

And, I think most folks would also put UAA, OAC, and ODAC as the next three, in some order.

MIAC I'd say is part of a pretty big bunch of strong conferences positioned underneath those six (NWC, NJAC, NEWMAC, MIAA, SUNYAC, Centennial, I'm sure there are a few others in the mix that I'm not thinking of). But there is no way to put it in the top six, as good as St. Thomas is as an individual program.

The ODAC has gone 43-45 in the non-conference thus far and didn't have a team in the sweet sixteen last year. I'm with Gordon here.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 21, 2016, 04:58:13 PM

One year is too small a sample size. ODAC (like WIAC last year) may be having a relatively down year so far, but Virginia Wesleyan is like St. Thomas one of the truly elite D3 programs year after year, and ODAC has more depth than the MIAC, with programs like Hampden Sydney, Guilford and Randolph Macon all being nationally prominent over the past 10-15 years and making deep tourney runs. OAC is also always very, very deep and strong across the board.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AO on December 21, 2016, 05:06:58 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on December 21, 2016, 04:58:13 PM
One year is too small a sample size. ODAC (like WIAC last year) may be having a relatively down year so far, but Virginia Wesleyan is like St. Thomas one of the truly elite D3 programs year after year, and ODAC has more depth than the MIAC, with programs like Hampden Sydney, Guilford and Randolph Macon all being nationally prominent over the past 10-15 years and making deep tourney runs. OAC is also always very, very deep and strong across the board.

I'm talking about current conference rankings as it relates to the current top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 21, 2016, 05:10:59 PM

Ahh, gotcha AO, that would be a closer call then. MIAC hasn't exactly been lighting it up so far this year in out of conference play either, though, at least relative to the top conferences.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on December 21, 2016, 05:25:53 PM

Quote from: Ryan Stoppable on December 21, 2016, 04:23:37 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 21, 2016, 02:23:15 PM
Quote from: AndOne on December 21, 2016, 02:10:52 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 20, 2016, 10:05:45 PM
UW-Oshkosh 58
#7-St. Norbert 45

Not that St. Norbert isn't a good team, but their lofty ranking is often boosted by the fact that they play in a really bad conference. If they can post a good non conference record, they are usually going to be highly ranked the rest of the year because their conference presents them with virtually no competition. The second best team in their conference the last few years, Carroll, transfered to the CCIW this year so now it's even easier for St. Norbert to slice through the rest of the Midwest Conference. St.N also benefits from being close enough to be able to recruit Catholic kids from the entire Chicagoland area, a major producer of college talent as well, of course, as recruiting close by Green Bay, and the entire state of Wisconsin, especially the Catholic population thereof. St. Norb's 2 losses have come when they have played schools from a strong conference. This year, that's the WIAC which has given St. Norbert it's two losses.

Another team that enjoys the same advantage is Benedictine. A team with 3 very good players to be sure, but another team that is continually propped up by playing in a terrible conference. The Northern Athletics Collegiate Conference is probably even worse overall than St. Norbert's Midwest Conference.
And, again, With BU being located in the western suburbs, they are right in the middle of the metropolitan Chicagoland area. One of the entire Chicagoland's top producers of talent, which also happens to be a private Catholic (BU is a Catholic institution) HS, is Benet Academy which is located directly across the street from Benedictine.

You'd think that's already baked into the pollsters calculus though? This has been a truth for years.

Benedictine wasn't ranked last year until they started beating CCIW teams in non-confidence, never got to #1 despite being undefeated and the wins over highly-ranked CCIW opposition, and proved themselves worthy of the hype in the NCAA Tournament. This year, they have three losses, but all razor thin and two to ranked opponents.

Are you suggesting they should be penalized for playing in what is admittedly not a very good conference and beating the teams that are on their conference schedule?

(And before that, they hadn't made the Tourney since 2011 - where is this "propping up" coming in as far as BU is concerned?)

You bet I think they should be "penalized" for playing in a weak conference. That is not to say they are not a good team (exceptional last year), but there is no way you can deny their ranking is "propped up" by getting to play all those games against weak conference teams. But look what happens when they play a good team from another conference. They lose. Not by much, but they still lose. What do you think their record would be if they had to play in the WIAC, CCIW, or NESCAC all year instead of the very weak conference in which they do get to play which presents virtually no competition? Nowhere near as good as it will end up this year because of all the easy conference wins. There is no way BU is a better team than North Park, Whitewater, or Illinois Wesleyan. They may be better than NCC right now but that's only because NCC is without Connor Raridon currently. With Raridon, NCC has already beaten BU. But yet, BU is currently ranked above all those teams. JMHO.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Stoppable on December 21, 2016, 07:44:18 PM

Quote from: AndOne on December 21, 2016, 05:25:53 PM
Quote from: Ryan Stoppable on December 21, 2016, 04:23:37 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 21, 2016, 02:23:15 PM
Quote from: AndOne on December 21, 2016, 02:10:52 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 20, 2016, 10:05:45 PM
UW-Oshkosh 58
#7-St. Norbert 45

Not that St. Norbert isn't a good team, but their lofty ranking is often boosted by the fact that they play in a really bad conference. If they can post a good non conference record, they are usually going to be highly ranked the rest of the year because their conference presents them with virtually no competition. The second best team in their conference the last few years, Carroll, transfered to the CCIW this year so now it's even easier for St. Norbert to slice through the rest of the Midwest Conference. St.N also benefits from being close enough to be able to recruit Catholic kids from the entire Chicagoland area, a major producer of college talent as well, of course, as recruiting close by Green Bay, and the entire state of Wisconsin, especially the Catholic population thereof. St. Norb's 2 losses have come when they have played schools from a strong conference. This year, that's the WIAC which has given St. Norbert it's two losses.

Another team that enjoys the same advantage is Benedictine. A team with 3 very good players to be sure, but another team that is continually propped up by playing in a terrible conference. The Northern Athletics Collegiate Conference is probably even worse overall than St. Norbert's Midwest Conference.
And, again, With BU being located in the western suburbs, they are right in the middle of the metropolitan Chicagoland area. One of the entire Chicagoland's top producers of talent, which also happens to be a private Catholic (BU is a Catholic institution) HS, is Benet Academy which is located directly across the street from Benedictine.

You'd think that's already baked into the pollsters calculus though? This has been a truth for years.

Benedictine wasn't ranked last year until they started beating CCIW teams in non-confidence, never got to #1 despite being undefeated and the wins over highly-ranked CCIW opposition, and proved themselves worthy of the hype in the NCAA Tournament. This year, they have three losses, but all razor thin and two to ranked opponents.

Are you suggesting they should be penalized for playing in what is admittedly not a very good conference and beating the teams that are on their conference schedule?

(And before that, they hadn't made the Tourney since 2011 - where is this "propping up" coming in as far as BU is concerned?)

You bet I think they should be "penalized" for playing in a weak conference. That is not to say they are not a good team (exceptional last year), but there is no way you can deny their ranking is "propped up" by getting to play all those games against weak conference teams. But look what happens when they play a good team from another conference. They lose. Not by much, but they still lose. What do you think their record would be if they had to play in the WIAC, CCIW, or NESCAC all year instead of the very weak conference in which they do get to play which presents virtually no competition? Nowhere near as good as it will end up this year because of all the easy conference wins. There is no way BU is a better team than North Park, Whitewater, or Illinois Wesleyan. They may be better than NCC right now but that's only because NCC is without Connor Raridon currently. With Raridon, NCC has already beaten BU. But yet, BU is currently ranked above all those teams. JMHO.

I would instead argue that if Benedictine is in fact over-ranked (and they will drop after taking a 3rd loss last night) it is because they are the defending national runners up, not because of beating up the NACC.

Last year, they would have done just fine I'm either the WIAC (which was down a lot) or the CCIW (which they went 5-0 against, playing all the top teams except Augustana which would have been a hell of a game). This year, maybe not so much, but couldn't you level the same charge at a lot of the current Top 25?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 21, 2016, 09:08:53 PM

Today's results look like some argument will now be put paid to.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie77 on December 21, 2016, 09:20:51 PM

Just as Marietta was probably over-rated, it seems undefeated Wesleyan may be under-rated.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PeterEscobar on December 21, 2016, 11:17:06 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 21, 2016, 09:08:53 PM
Today's results look like some argument will now be put paid to.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.giphy.com%2FTU0YWTjo2e208.gif&hash=07d6476954882894863687f4a99c6e810cb3b26f)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 21, 2016, 11:46:28 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 21, 2016, 09:08:53 PM
Today's results look like some argument will now be put paid to.

if only

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on December 22, 2016, 12:12:24 AM

Ryan Stoppable,

Apples and oranges I'm afraid. This year's team is still pretty good, with 3 returning starters who could play about anywhere, but they are missing the guy who was somehow named D3 POY, plus last year's point guard, and 6th man so, no, its not the same team.

You're right when you say last year's BU team could have competed well in any conference, because they Had 6 very good players. This year they have only 3 such players. But, that's still enough to pretty much dominate their weak conference. So, the primary reason for being over rated remains that they get to play the vast majority of their games against a weak conference. It's not that they aren't as good as they were last year. Two different years, two different teams.

As far as being able to level the same charge at a lot of the Top 25, I honestly don't know. Unfortunately, I don't know all the teams, and all the conferences all over the country. I only know what's in my back yard, and within a few blocks, which BU almost literally is. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 22, 2016, 03:10:30 AM

Quote from: AO on December 21, 2016, 02:47:26 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 18, 2016, 01:08:01 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 12:16:17 AMMinnesota has 7 pretty good teams, but their schedules are a little tougher across the board, partly due to access to the Wisconsin teams for non-cons.

The MIAC has traditionally been overrated, and it still is as a whole. But St. Thomas, over the past decade, has been one of the best programs in the entire division, and the Tommies have the hardware to prove it. Just don't let that fool you into thinking that the Tommies are reflective of the whole league.
What league or leagues should be rated higher than the MIAC and who is doing the ratings? I guess you could say since they only play 5 non-conference games you have less confidence in their ranking, but that should tend to make them look worse than they are as often as it makes them look better. The lack of post-season success for MIAC teams not named St. Thomas can also be partly blamed on this 20 game conference schedule which brings everyone's SOS down to .500 and makes it tougher to get at-large bids. Bethel has to be one of the best teams in the d3hoops.com era to have never made it to the tourney. The Royals have 3 Massey top 25 (http://www.masseyratings.com/team.php?t=679&s=292154&sub=11620&all=1) finishes in the last 8 years.

I must've passed through the looking glass and into Bizarro World, because I'm reading a post that actually appears to be UMAC stalwart AO defending a league whose posters have harangued him for years. ;)

Seriously, though, your points about MIAC teams being victimized in the selection process by small sample size with regard to non-con play has some validity to it. The fact of the matter is, though, that the MIAC has been a member league of D3 since the division's inception back in 1974-75, and in all that time there's only been three other instances apart from UST's recent run in which a MIAC team has reached the Final Four (Hamline in '77, St. Thomas in '94, and Gustavus Adolphus in '03). That can't be blamed upon lack of Pool C access, because Pool C's only been around since 2000. Furthermore, in the early years of the D3 tourney the West Region was D3's weak sister (the WIAC was still an NAIA circuit at that point), which took some of the luster out of Hamline's achievement, and in '94 UST dodged the usual WIAC guillotine in the tourney by being moved to the South Region's sectional, where the Tommies were able to advance to the Final Four by beating Hampden-Sydney and Greensboro; that was an era in which the ODAC wasn't nearly as formidable as it became a few years later.

Also, while I agree with you that Bethel is one of the best programs in D3 not to have made it to the tourney over the past two decades, let's be honest here about what that really means. It's like being the shiniest toy in the Goodwill bin. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 22, 2016, 07:21:55 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 22, 2016, 03:10:30 AM

Also, while I agree with you that Bethel is one of the best programs in D3 not to have made it to the tourney over the past two decades, let's be honest here about what that really means. It's like being the shiniest toy in the Goodwill bin. ;)

If I said this about a D3 school, people would jump so far down my throat they'd have to come out the other end.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 22, 2016, 10:49:14 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 22, 2016, 07:21:55 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 22, 2016, 03:10:30 AM

Also, while I agree with you that Bethel is one of the best programs in D3 not to have made it to the tourney over the past two decades, let's be honest here about what that really means. It's like being the shiniest toy in the Goodwill bin. ;)

If I said this about a D3 school, people would jump so far down my throat they'd have to come out the other end.

I actually find good value at Goodwill and don't feel ashamed at all being seen there. And, considering what Goodwill does for the community, the analogy is a little harsh.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 22, 2016, 10:54:35 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 22, 2016, 10:49:14 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 22, 2016, 07:21:55 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 22, 2016, 03:10:30 AM

Also, while I agree with you that Bethel is one of the best programs in D3 not to have made it to the tourney over the past two decades, let's be honest here about what that really means. It's like being the shiniest toy in the Goodwill bin. ;)

If I said this about a D3 school, people would jump so far down my throat they'd have to come out the other end.

I actually find good value at Goodwill and don't feel ashamed at all being seen there. And, considering what Goodwill does for the community, the analogy is a little harsh.

Not sure if you're addressing me or him. I don't disagree with you, though there are lots of orgs that do the same thing with lower overhead.

I'm not the one that made the analogy. I just said how people's reaction would change if it was me that said it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AO on December 22, 2016, 11:02:07 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 22, 2016, 03:10:30 AM
Quote from: AO on December 21, 2016, 02:47:26 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 18, 2016, 01:08:01 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 12:16:17 AMMinnesota has 7 pretty good teams, but their schedules are a little tougher across the board, partly due to access to the Wisconsin teams for non-cons.

The MIAC has traditionally been overrated, and it still is as a whole. But St. Thomas, over the past decade, has been one of the best programs in the entire division, and the Tommies have the hardware to prove it. Just don't let that fool you into thinking that the Tommies are reflective of the whole league.
What league or leagues should be rated higher than the MIAC and who is doing the ratings? I guess you could say since they only play 5 non-conference games you have less confidence in their ranking, but that should tend to make them look worse than they are as often as it makes them look better. The lack of post-season success for MIAC teams not named St. Thomas can also be partly blamed on this 20 game conference schedule which brings everyone's SOS down to .500 and makes it tougher to get at-large bids. Bethel has to be one of the best teams in the d3hoops.com era to have never made it to the tourney. The Royals have 3 Massey top 25 (http://www.masseyratings.com/team.php?t=679&s=292154&sub=11620&all=1) finishes in the last 8 years.

I must've passed through the looking glass and into Bizarro World, because I'm reading a post that actually appears to be UMAC stalwart AO defending a league whose posters have harangued him for years. ;)

Seriously, though, your points about MIAC teams being victimized in the selection process by small sample size with regard to non-con play has some validity to it. The fact of the matter is, though, that the MIAC has been a member league of D3 since the division's inception back in 1974-75, and in all that time there's only been three other instances apart from UST's recent run in which a MIAC team has reached the Final Four (Hamline in '77, St. Thomas in '94, and Gustavus Adolphus in '03). That can't be blamed upon lack of Pool C access, because Pool C's only been around since 2000. Furthermore, in the early years of the D3 tourney the West Region was D3's weak sister (the WIAC was still an NAIA circuit at that point), which took some of the luster out of Hamline's achievement, and in '94 UST dodged the usual WIAC guillotine in the tourney by being moved to the South Region's sectional, where the Tommies were able to advance to the Final Four by beating Hampden-Sydney and Greensboro; that was an era in which the ODAC wasn't nearly as formidable as it became a few years later.

Also, while I agree with you that Bethel is one of the best programs in D3 not to have made it to the tourney over the past two decades, let's be honest here about what that really means. It's like being the shiniest toy in the Goodwill bin. ;)

If we're just going to talk about historical conference rankings and throw out the best team's recent run, then the UAA has only had 5 final four appearances by Rochester/NYU, the OAC has only 5 final fours by Ohio Northern/Otterbein, and the ODAC has only 2 final fours by Guilford and Randolph-Macon.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 22, 2016, 11:07:50 AM

For ODAC, (I assume you are excluding VWU), Hampden Sydney has had two final fours including a national title appearance, and an elite 8 run.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AO on December 22, 2016, 11:16:50 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on December 22, 2016, 11:07:50 AM
For ODAC, (I assume you are excluding VWU), Hampden Sydney has had two final fours including a national title appearance, and an elite 8 run.

Good catch, I was just going by the conference guidebooks (http://static.psbin.com/c/f/wkfs7pqxalzmsc/ODAC.pdf).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 22, 2016, 11:35:28 AM

Quote from: AO on December 22, 2016, 11:02:07 AM

If we're just going to talk about historical conference rankings and throw out the best team's recent run, then the UAA has only had 5 final four appearances by Rochester/NYU, the OAC has only 5 final fours by Ohio Northern/Otterbein, and the ODAC has only 2 final fours by Guilford and Randolph-Macon.

A good bit of NCAA trivia to keep in mind when discussing the OAC is that since John Carroll's Final Four run in 2004 the OAC has had exactly one team advance beyond the round of 16. Marietta in 2015 who lost in their Sectional Final.

Many reasons for this, not the least of which being plopped in a pretty tough Great Lakes Region but also the conferences parity working against itself and the OAC not always sending its regular season conference champion to the tournament.

I'm not sure I'd always call the OAC strong, but its almost always a balanced, parity driven league. At least that's my perspective.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on December 22, 2016, 12:40:37 PM

QuoteFor ODAC, (I assume you are excluding VWU), Hampden Sydney has had two final fours including a national title appearance, and an elite 8 run.
Good catch, I was just going by the conference guidebooks.

Hm. Someone should fix that. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 22, 2016, 01:35:28 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 22, 2016, 10:49:14 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 22, 2016, 07:21:55 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 22, 2016, 03:10:30 AM

Also, while I agree with you that Bethel is one of the best programs in D3 not to have made it to the tourney over the past two decades, let's be honest here about what that really means. It's like being the shiniest toy in the Goodwill bin. ;)

If I said this about a D3 school, people would jump so far down my throat they'd have to come out the other end.

I actually find good value at Goodwill and don't feel ashamed at all being seen there. And, considering what Goodwill does for the community, the analogy is a little harsh.

The people who work at Goodwill fix the toys that are donated. The toys in the bin are "before" toys, not "after" toys. Big difference.

Quote from: AO on December 22, 2016, 11:02:07 AMIf we're just going to talk about historical conference rankings and throw out the best team's recent run, then the UAA has only had 5 final four appearances by Rochester/NYU, the OAC has only 5 final fours by Ohio Northern/Otterbein, and the ODAC has only 2 final fours by Guilford and Randolph-Macon.

Yes, but the UAA has only been in existence since 1987-88. Again, big difference. Also, you're forgetting that Wittenberg made several Final Four visits when it was an OAC member in the '70s and '80s, and John Carroll got to the season's final weekend back in '04. And, as I said, the ODAC didn't really take a step forward as a conference in terms of strength until the late '90s (although you left out that Roanoke made a Final Four appearance prior to that).

Quote from: sac on December 22, 2016, 11:35:28 AM
Quote from: AO on December 22, 2016, 11:02:07 AM

If we're just going to talk about historical conference rankings and throw out the best team's recent run, then the UAA has only had 5 final four appearances by Rochester/NYU, the OAC has only 5 final fours by Ohio Northern/Otterbein, and the ODAC has only 2 final fours by Guilford and Randolph-Macon.

A good bit of NCAA trivia to keep in mind when discussing the OAC is that since John Carroll's Final Four run in 2004 the OAC has had exactly one team advance beyond the round of 16. Marietta in 2015 who lost in their Sectional Final.

Many reasons for this, not the least of which being plopped in a pretty tough Great Lakes Region but also the conferences parity working against itself and the OAC not always sending its regular season conference champion to the tournament.

I'm not sure I'd always call the OAC strong, but its almost always a balanced, parity driven league. At least that's my perspective.

That's exactly why I do call it strong: It combines historical post-season success with top-to-bottom balance.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 22, 2016, 07:51:41 PM

Refs ruined a good game in Daytona. 71-70, they just let a guy get mugged bringing the ball up against the press for the winning basket.

Whitman's good but that was complete trash. Guess that's why they're D3 refs in Florida where there are no D3 teams.

Laugh all you want but if you watched the game you know it was total BS and these refs were junk.

I'd like to see just one game where a team doesn't get away with WWE-style defense against the post.

Maybe doing all this travel right after finals left a tired team that was made moreso by having to make up for an injury. Would still rather play good teams and risk losing than play oil cans and have an inflated ranking then get punked in the tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: (509)Rat on December 22, 2016, 08:09:24 PM

Well worth the energy/mouse clicks it took to get here...

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fesq.h-cdn.co%2Fassets%2F15%2F44%2F1446087423-trump5.gif&hash=64bac10d1a715de1ab86cc73dc543d8ea73524b6)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 22, 2016, 08:56:10 PM

This is about the crowd I would expect to post Trump gifs.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 22, 2016, 09:30:14 PM

I don't think someone knows many of us well.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn0.dailydot.com%2Fuploaded%2Fimages%2Foriginal%2F2016%2F7%2F6%2Fberniesandersnope.gif&hash=8b1a939b4f4652bf5f345ef91707adc30fb0f23a)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 22, 2016, 09:31:16 PM

Oh, and we used to deal with a poster on the NCAC board who always complained about the refs if Wooster got so much of a scratch against them. He REALLY hated John Carroll.

They also thought any hard contact was one of these. Sounds similar to the above rant.

(https://larrybrownsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/grayson-allen-trip.jpg)

BTW, those refs work a D-2 league in Florida and probably other NAIA and D-2 leagues in the area.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 22, 2016, 10:06:02 PM

Whitman and Marietta combined to go 12-25 from the FT line, 6-12 and 6-13. :-[

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: (509)Rat on December 22, 2016, 11:22:50 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 22, 2016, 08:56:10 PM
This is about the crowd I would expect to post Trump gifs.

[deleted line]

Whitman and Marietta appeared to be evenly matched teams both from a personnel and scheme/style standpoint. This game was exactly what I expected. This was a great result for the NWC and a really bad result for the guy who thinks Marietta should be #1.

Carry on

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie77 on December 22, 2016, 11:29:59 PM

So Marietta has lost three out of four (thank goodness for Wilma!). Where will they be ranked in the next poll?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 22, 2016, 11:47:22 PM

Quote from: sac on December 22, 2016, 10:06:02 PM
Whitman and Marietta combined to go 12-25 from the FT line, 6-12 and 6-13. :-[

Destiny in their hands there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 22, 2016, 11:54:22 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 22, 2016, 11:47:22 PM
Quote from: sac on December 22, 2016, 10:06:02 PM
Whitman and Marietta combined to go 12-25 from the FT line, 6-12 and 6-13. :-[

Destiny in their hands there.

When that is the case, complaining about the officiating seems weak and misplaced.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 07:01:43 AM

Quote from: (509)Rat on December 22, 2016, 11:22:50 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 22, 2016, 08:56:10 PM
This is about the crowd I would expect to post Trump gifs.

[deleted line]

Whitman and Marietta appeared to be evenly matched teams both from a personnel and scheme/style standpoint. This game was exactly what I expected. This was a great result for the NWC and a really bad result for the guy who thinks Marietta should be #1.

Carry on

I guess only Babson can lose and not have it hurt them. Weird how they can play a trash schedule, get beat by the one decent team they did play, and be #1; but if you play good teams and lose, you're garbage. East coast bias.

If you recall, I've been advocating for Whitman to be #1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 07:06:36 AM

Quote from: smedindy on December 22, 2016, 11:54:22 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 22, 2016, 11:47:22 PM
Quote from: sac on December 22, 2016, 10:06:02 PM
Whitman and Marietta combined to go 12-25 from the FT line, 6-12 and 6-13. :-[

Destiny in their hands there.

When that is the case, complaining about the officiating seems weak and misplaced.

Yeah, because officials never screw up and change the result of a game in so doing. Did you see the last minute of the game? Foul shots had nothing to do with it...excepting the lack of awarding them.

I wouldn't go back to that event if I was Vander Wal. Hopefully the Great Lakes Invitational takes the place of it. Was just a depressing feeling -- crap refs, no crowd, ugly building, bad shooting background. Daytona has seen its best days come and go.

MC has one of the best facilities in D3, and draws 1000+ practically every game. They should take advantage of it and only play on the road when it benefits the program (like playing other good in-region programs, or home and home with someone).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 07:35:13 AM

Quote from: augie77 on December 22, 2016, 11:29:59 PM
So Marietta has lost three out of four (thank goodness for Wilma!). Where will they be ranked in the next poll?

Yeah I'm sure you're really concerned.

Nice display of misogyny and disrespect for a D3 school there as well.

Since you're so concerned, Massey has Marietta 16th in rating but 5th in power rating (how good you really have played, independent of the luck of the score line).

The only teams with 1-3 losses, 8+ wins, and a top 30 schedule are North Park, Illinois Wesleyan, Augustana, North Central, River Falls and Marietta (Eau Claire is close). River Falls is the only 1-loss team in that. It's like playing a number of capable teams increases your chances of losing or something.

The PWR is Whitewater, Whitman, Neumann, Hope and MC -- which all pretty much makes sense.

But you all just keep sleeping.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 23, 2016, 08:29:19 AM

One thing there is not, and never has been, in the D3 hoops world is east coast bias. If there was an east coast bias, an undefeated Wesleyan team (that fairly easily handled Marietta by the way) would have been ranked higher than 17 heading into that game (I don't think that ranking was wrong, by the way, just saying it wasn't biased). I don't see how you can attack the quality of east coast hoops a few days after a team that finished fifth in NESCAC last year just beat your guys by double-digits.

As for Babson, you obviously don't know much about basketball outside your region if you think Babson played a "trash" schedule. They won by double digits at Tufts, to begin with, which was a pre-season top-five team and a returning Elite 8 team. Playing Amherst even on the road isn't just any "loss," everyone who watched that team could see it involved two of the best teams in the country playing at an incredibly high level. Lasell, Bowdoin, Bates and Albertus Magnus are all quality, above-.500 teams with some solid talent as well. Christopher Newport is a great win for Marietta -- similar to the Tufts win for Babson. But the Wooster win looks a lot less impressive in hindsight considering how badly and unexpectedly Wooster has struggled this year. I don't think Marietta's second and third-best wins are materially different in quality from Babson's, honestly. And the fact is that Marietta has lost three times, Babson only once.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 23, 2016, 08:31:02 AM

I watched the end of the Marietta game. There were two calls in the final minute that went Whitman's way. Without replay is really impossible to evaluate the foul. Certainly that type of play gets whistled 98% of the time (a defender pushing a ball, and the possessing player's hands over the back of his head until he falls down), but I do think you can do that without fouling. Until/unless we get a replay, we just can't know. Whether it was a foul or not, it's a surprise one wasn't called.

I got to watch a decent portion of the second half and I wouldn't say one team deserved the win over the other, they were very evenly matched. Narrative might say Marietta deserved things because they worked so hard to finally get the lead back - and that's a tough way to lose.

These are two very similar squads and I was impressed with the way Whitman responded to what was a pretty aggressive rebounding effort from Marietta; they didn't back down on the glass.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 08:53:17 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on December 23, 2016, 08:29:19 AM
One thing there is not, and never has been, in the D3 hoops world is east coast bias. If there was an east coast bias, an undefeated Wesleyan team (that fairly easily handled Marietta by the way) would have been ranked higher than 17 heading into that game (I don't think that ranking was wrong, by the way, just saying it wasn't biased). I don't see how you can attack the quality of east coast hoops a few days after a team that finished fifth in NESCAC last year just beat your guys by double-digits.

As for Babson, you obviously don't know much about basketball outside your region if you think Babson played a "trash" schedule. They won by double digits at Tufts, to begin with, which was a pre-season top-five team and a returning Elite 8 team. Playing Amherst even on the road isn't just any "loss," everyone who watched that team could see it involved two of the best teams in the country playing at an incredibly high level. Lasell, Bowdoin, Bates and Albertus Magnus are all quality, above-.500 teams with some solid talent as well. Christopher Newport is a great win for Marietta -- similar to the Tufts win for Babson. But the Wooster win looks a lot less impressive in hindsight considering how badly and unexpectedly Wooster has struggled this year. I don't think Marietta's second and third-best wins are materially different in quality from Babson's, honestly. And the fact is that Marietta has lost three times, Babson only once.

Yep, like I said, bias, right here.

You're completely delusional, and you miss the point on scheduling.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 23, 2016, 09:00:31 AM

Babson's schedule is #40 on massey, that's top 10% of D3. That's not trash.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 09:10:38 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 23, 2016, 08:31:02 AM
I watched the end of the Marietta game. There were two calls in the final minute that went Whitman's way. Without replay is really impossible to evaluate the foul. Certainly that type of play gets whistled 98% of the time (a defender pushing a ball, and the possessing player's hands over the back of his head until he falls down), but I do think you can do that without fouling. Until/unless we get a replay, we just can't know. Whether it was a foul or not, it's a surprise one wasn't called.

I got to watch a decent portion of the second half and I wouldn't say one team deserved the win over the other, they were very evenly matched. Narrative might say Marietta deserved things because they worked so hard to finally get the lead back - and that's a tough way to lose.

These are two very similar squads and I was impressed with the way Whitman responded to what was a pretty aggressive rebounding effort from Marietta; they didn't back down on the glass.

All fair enough. I thought it was obvious that Whitman was playing superaggressive on the press not really caring if they got a foul, but the refs refused to call about 3; the last one being the most ridiculous. You can't just go through a guy and take the ball. A lot like the officials at John Carroll, really. Marietta never gets that benefit of doubt even at home because they never have hometown refs -- they always come from up north somewhere.

Probably Marietta having their tallest player would have helped with the rebounding, though Dixon did a great job (and probably would have improved the perimeter defense having him at the 3 too). But with Thome they are normally dominant on the boards -- not so much because he gets a ton of rebounds but he prevents someone else from getting it and then usually Edwards or a guard does. Both teams did well on the others' best perimeter guys. Realistically, Butler wouldn't go 6 for 6 again and that was basically the difference.

I go back to the rationale for not dropping Babson when they lost to Amherst and say if you're being honest and consistent, you have to treat this pretty much the same way. Whitman's really good -- that's no surprise to me, I think I was on that earlier than most. The Wesleyan game was a fluke but good luck getting you all to believe that -- Wesleyan had just played awful the previous game, and Marietta shot pretty much the worst they have all year (in a terrible shooting environment, should never play there again).

I think the power rating of 5 is fair, but obviously the poll doesn't work like that. But they beat CNU who is top 10, and Wesleyan I assume will be top 10, and Whitman really should be #1 but probably won't be because east coast bias. So I'd say they should be somewhere around 10-ish now. Doesn't get any easier with 2 tough OAC road games, then this ridiculous stretch is over.

That's something else that should be considered that probably won't be...does anyone else in the country play 7 of 8 games away from home in Dec/Jan? Not sure how their league schedule ended up that way, but it's certainly not a help.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 23, 2016, 09:14:40 AM

If anything, after that game, I'd be more inclined to move Whitman DOWN a little - but that would require having someone to put above them, and those are few and far between. We're just going to have to get used to just about every team being overrated this year.

This is the point in the season where teams real strengths and weaknesses are starting to be more apparent. Marietta is a very good team, but they've now shown, over a couple games, that they struggle with aggressive bigs. Whitman, St. Norbert, and CNU have similar issues. You've also got a series of teams with strong post players who could give those teams problems, but might not be "better" overall.

Now you get into making choices - just because I think Team A could beat Team B head-to-head (largely because of matchup problems), do I rate Team B higher, even if I think they'd do worse against the rest of the Top 10 overall than Team A would? I'm not even sure yet how I'll answer those questions.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 23, 2016, 09:15:02 AM

Quote from: AO on December 21, 2016, 02:47:26 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 18, 2016, 01:08:01 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 12:16:17 AMMinnesota has 7 pretty good teams, but their schedules are a little tougher across the board, partly due to access to the Wisconsin teams for non-cons.

The MIAC has traditionally been overrated, and it still is as a whole. But St. Thomas, over the past decade, has been one of the best programs in the entire division, and the Tommies have the hardware to prove it. Just don't let that fool you into thinking that the Tommies are reflective of the whole league.
What league or leagues should be rated higher than the MIAC and who is doing the ratings? I guess you could say since they only play 5 non-conference games you have less confidence in their ranking, but that should tend to make them look worse than they are as often as it makes them look better. The lack of post-season success for MIAC teams not named St. Thomas can also be partly blamed on this 20 game conference schedule which brings everyone's SOS down to .500 and makes it tougher to get at-large bids. Bethel has to be one of the best teams in the d3hoops.com era to have never made it to the tourney. The Royals have 3 Massey top 25 (http://www.masseyratings.com/team.php?t=679&s=292154&sub=11620&all=1) finishes in the last 8 years.

I saw this the other day and it tweaked my curiosity. I only have 10 years worth of w/l's but here's the top 10 winningest teams in the last decade who have missed making an NCAA tournament appearance.

1. MSOE --163
2. Lakeland --161
3. Cal Lutheran --154
Grinnell --154
5. Bethel --153
6. Augsburg --152
Nichols --152
Oglethorpe --152
9. Lewis & Clark --151
10. Juniata --150
Keystone --150

---Nichols, Juniata and Keystone have some ECAC post-season wins I wasn't able to pull out. Wabash is next on the list at 147.

---IF you were to extend this back to 1998 I have to think Bethel would be at or near the top.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 09:26:47 AM

Quote from: sac on December 23, 2016, 09:00:31 AM
Babson's schedule is #40 on massey, that's top 10% of D3. That's not trash.

What are you talking about? Are we just making things up now? It's 112 and their league won't bring it up.

Endicott is borderline top 100, Tufts is top 50-70 (61 right now). And that's all they have. They lost to the best team they've played, which is not even top 20. the other teams being touted on their schedule would be 7th or 8th at best in most power conferences, and dead last in the WIAC. So would beating Heidelberg at home be a quality win for Marietta, or IWU beating Elmhurst? Babson's first game in a hostile environment was Amherst -- the 10th game of the year.

Putting Babson #1 based on what they have done this season is completely crazy. Amherst's schedule is even worse but at least they beat Babson. They're both being given vastly more credit than they have earned.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 09:33:38 AM

Quote from: sac on December 23, 2016, 09:15:02 AM
Quote from: AO on December 21, 2016, 02:47:26 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 18, 2016, 01:08:01 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 18, 2016, 12:16:17 AMMinnesota has 7 pretty good teams, but their schedules are a little tougher across the board, partly due to access to the Wisconsin teams for non-cons.

The MIAC has traditionally been overrated, and it still is as a whole. But St. Thomas, over the past decade, has been one of the best programs in the entire division, and the Tommies have the hardware to prove it. Just don't let that fool you into thinking that the Tommies are reflective of the whole league.
What league or leagues should be rated higher than the MIAC and who is doing the ratings? I guess you could say since they only play 5 non-conference games you have less confidence in their ranking, but that should tend to make them look worse than they are as often as it makes them look better. The lack of post-season success for MIAC teams not named St. Thomas can also be partly blamed on this 20 game conference schedule which brings everyone's SOS down to .500 and makes it tougher to get at-large bids. Bethel has to be one of the best teams in the d3hoops.com era to have never made it to the tourney. The Royals have 3 Massey top 25 (http://www.masseyratings.com/team.php?t=679&s=292154&sub=11620&all=1) finishes in the last 8 years.

I saw this the other day and it tweaked my curiosity. I only have 10 years worth of w/l's but here's the top 10 winningest teams in the last decade who have missed making an NCAA tournament appearance.

1. MSOE --163
2. Lakeland --161
3. Cal Lutheran --154
Grinnell --154
5. Bethel --153
6. Augsburg --152
Nichols --152
Oglethorpe --152
9. Lewis & Clark --151
10. Juniata --150
Keystone --150

---Nichols, Juniata and Keystone have some ECAC post-season wins I wasn't able to pull out. Wabash is next on the list at 147.

---IF you were to extend this back to 1998 I have to think Bethel would be at or near the top.

Bethel and Augsburg would have by far the toughest schedule on that list.

One thing that's being lost here in talking about St. Thomas and their dominance is that it would also hurt other MIAC teams, given the lack of at-large bids in D3. Bethel got robbed a couple of years back in just such a way. Beat St. Olaf 3 times. Beat St. Thomas 1 of 3 and lost by 3 in the championship. Didn't get a bid. They're proof that you're better off playing a weaker schedule. Working for Babson.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 23, 2016, 09:34:39 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 09:26:47 AM
Quote from: sac on December 23, 2016, 09:00:31 AM
Babson's schedule is #40 on massey, that's top 10% of D3. That's not trash.

What are you talking about? Are we just making things up now? It's 112 and their league won't bring it up.

Endicott is borderline top 100, Tufts is top 50-70 (61 right now). And that's all they have. They lost to the best team they've played, which is not even top 20. the other teams being touted on their schedule would be 7th or 8th at best in most power conferences, and dead last in the WIAC. So would beating Heidelberg at home be a quality win for Marietta, or IWU beating Elmhurst? Babson's first game in a hostile environment was Amherst -- the 10th game of the year.

Putting Babson #1 based on what they have done this season is completely crazy. Amherst's schedule is even worse but at least they beat Babson. They're both being given vastly more credit than they have earned.

My mistake I mixed numbers with teams. 112 is still top 25% of D3 and not trash. I could also get into why massey's SOS isn't actually SOS but frequently gets sited as so, including by me but I won't.

If you want another metric try knightslappy's regional ranking data link which uses the same criteria the NCAA uses for SOS and really the only SOS calculation that matters, even if it is flawed. Babson is at .664 Marietta is at .602 still not trash.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 09:39:30 AM

Quote from: sac on December 23, 2016, 09:34:39 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 09:26:47 AM
Quote from: sac on December 23, 2016, 09:00:31 AM
Babson's schedule is #40 on massey, that's top 10% of D3. That's not trash.

What are you talking about? Are we just making things up now? It's 112 and their league won't bring it up.

Endicott is borderline top 100, Tufts is top 50-70 (61 right now). And that's all they have. They lost to the best team they've played, which is not even top 20. the other teams being touted on their schedule would be 7th or 8th at best in most power conferences, and dead last in the WIAC. So would beating Heidelberg at home be a quality win for Marietta, or IWU beating Elmhurst? Babson's first game in a hostile environment was Amherst -- the 10th game of the year.

Putting Babson #1 based on what they have done this season is completely crazy. Amherst's schedule is even worse but at least they beat Babson. They're both being given vastly more credit than they have earned.

My mistake I mixed numbers with teams. 112 is still top 25% of D3 and not trash. I could also get into why massey's SOS isn't actually SOS but frequently gets sited as so, including by me but I won't.

If you want another metric try knightslappy's regional ranking data link which uses the same criteria the NCAA uses for SOS and really the only SOS calculation that matters, even if it is flawed. Babson is at .664 Marietta is at .602 still not trash.

Outside the top 100 is crap when you're talking about top 25 consideration. If you're not in the top 100 schedule wise it's because you don't care because it's not really that hard to get there because, well, most programs in D3 don't really care that much.

Again, Babson's next win over a top 50 team will be their first. Hopefully the NCAA will take that into consideration as well, but it probably won't matter because their league is also weak so they'll probably get an automatic. So just like last year they'll go in with an inflated record and get beat by the first good team they run into, and everyone will talk about how unlucky they are and what a great season they had.

They're a 1 man team and an overrated one at that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 09:43:20 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 23, 2016, 09:14:40 AM
If anything, after that game, I'd be more inclined to move Whitman DOWN a little - but that would require having someone to put above them, and those are few and far between. We're just going to have to get used to just about every team being overrated this year.

This is the point in the season where teams real strengths and weaknesses are starting to be more apparent. Marietta is a very good team, but they've now shown, over a couple games, that they struggle with aggressive bigs. Whitman, St. Norbert, and CNU have similar issues. You've also got a series of teams with strong post players who could give those teams problems, but might not be "better" overall.

Now you get into making choices - just because I think Team A could beat Team B head-to-head (largely because of matchup problems), do I rate Team B higher, even if I think they'd do worse against the rest of the Top 10 overall than Team A would? I'm not even sure yet how I'll answer those questions.

No way in the world you can drop a team for beating a top 5 opponent. That's just madness.

Aggressive bigs? I thought you said you watched the Whitman game. They don't have any bigs. And Whitman won playing against one of hte best bigs in the country. So yeah, not following there at all.

I think it comes down to there being more quality non-conference games being played, so naturally the better teams have more of a chance to lose (especially if they're playing another of the better teams, someone has to lose).

As mentioned before, if you have a top 40 schedule, you have at least 1 and usually 2+ losses right now -- except Whitman.

Whitman has to be #1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 23, 2016, 09:44:01 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 09:39:30 AM
Quote from: sac on December 23, 2016, 09:34:39 AM
Babson is at .664 Marietta is at .602 still not trash.

Outside the top 100 is crap when you're talking about top 25 consideration. If you're not in the top 100 schedule wise it's because you don't care because it's not really that hard to get there because, well, most programs in D3 don't really care that much.

Again, Babson's next win over a top 50 team will be their first. Hopefully the NCAA will take that into consideration as well, but it probably won't matter because their league is also weak so they'll probably get an automatic. So just like last year they'll go in with an inflated record and get beat by the first good team they run into, and everyone will talk about how unlucky they are and what a great season they had.

They're a 1 man team and an overrated one at that.

Nice side step of facts that don't meet your narrative.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 09:54:33 AM

No idea what the hell those numbers are or where they came from or if they're accurate. Guy got his shizz wrong the first time.

If it takes out all the non D3 games it's useless, though. Does it account for playing almost all home games? Just numbers with no context is useless.

The only other rankings I've seen are the kenpom style ones which those numbers don't make sense for.

That's why I didn't address it. Why do you care? Am I required to address every single thing someone says to me? Do you really want that? Hell I thought you all were wanting me to post less, not respond to every troll on this thread.

Typical hypocrisy. I'm damned if I do and damned if I don't.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 23, 2016, 10:32:51 AM

Wesleyan beat Marietta by 15 points. I've watched a lot of northeast basketball over the past few years and I'm pretty confident that on a neutral floor, Babson and Amherst would both be favored over Wesleyan by at least 10 points. And over Marietta by at least 15.

Marietta has one really good win, Christopher Newport, just as Babson has one really good win, a road win over a top-ten Tufts team. Marietta got totally and completely owned by Wesleyan on the inside. Babson, trust me, is a better interior team than Wesleyan. I'm willing to grant that Marietta is the best three-loss team in the country. That should put them somewhere towards the bottom of the top 25, which is totally fair. They would probably be something like the 6th or 7th best team in New England, after Babson, Amherst, Wesleyan, Tufts, Midd and maybe Williams. Lots of folks overrated Marietta based on destorying Wooster but Wooster is clearly way, way down this year.

The D3hoops rankings are in no way biased towards New England. Many of the rankings you cite to, on the other hand, are consistently PROVEN to be biased against New England teams -- teams that may fare poorly in certainly statistical rankings, but, year after year, get to the Final Four and generally fare well once they get there. Amherst, Williams, Middlebury, and Babson have all played in the Final Four in this decade. As recently as 2013, Amherst won a title, and as recently as 2014, Williams came within one point of a title in the most loaded Final Four in recent memory. Williams and Amherst have each played in seven final fours, combining for three titles and four second-place finishes. How many Final Fours has Marietta played in, exactly?

Amherst made the Final Four last year and graduated only one player. Babson brought back its entire squad from a Sweet 16 team that likely would have done better but for an injury to a guy who is probably only the best player in the country. The game they faced off in this year was absolutely spectacular.

Tufts made the Elite 8 last year and has two legit star players. All of these are proven successful programs that you are dismissing based on absolutely no knowledge whatsoever of the ACTUAL strength of their opponents, none of whom you have likely seen play. When Marietta doesn't lose by double-digits, after getting absolutely DESTROYED in the paint, to what will likely end up as something like the 4th or 5th best team in the region, then you can start talking smack about New England. But the results speak for themselves. To you, every Marietta loss will just be a "fluke" and only their wins "count." You ever consider that maybe some of your wins were against teams that were themselves having an off night??? That happens too, you know.

Right now, Babson, Amherst, Wesleyan, and Middlebury have as many losses combined as Marietta has in total. One of those teams isn't even ranked; if there was truly a Northeast bias, one-loss Midd and Williams teams would both be ranked ahead of Marietta (I'm not complaining, by the way, that they aren't, both have more to prove at this point). And crucially, head-to-head vs. Marietta, they are 1-0. Since that Rust dude was posting like crazy a few years back, I don't think I've ever seen a more unhinged, biased home-team poster on these boards. Dude, you've got a good squad. A good squad that now has three losses and will deservely drop in the rankings. But there are lots of other really talented teams in D3 that you haven't seen play, and that, in your ignorance, you are unfairly dismissing. If Marietta starts winning again, they will get plenty of respect. But you have to win the games you play and Marietta lost both of them this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 23, 2016, 10:43:52 AM

Quote from: sac on December 23, 2016, 09:44:01 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 09:39:30 AM
Quote from: sac on December 23, 2016, 09:34:39 AM
Babson is at .664 Marietta is at .602 still not trash.

Outside the top 100 is crap when you're talking about top 25 consideration. If you're not in the top 100 schedule wise it's because you don't care because it's not really that hard to get there because, well, most programs in D3 don't really care that much.

Again, Babson's next win over a top 50 team will be their first. Hopefully the NCAA will take that into consideration as well, but it probably won't matter because their league is also weak so they'll probably get an automatic. So just like last year they'll go in with an inflated record and get beat by the first good team they run into, and everyone will talk about how unlucky they are and what a great season they had.

They're a 1 man team and an overrated one at that.

Nice side step of facts that don't meet your narrative.

Let Spencer have his say. It is Festivus, after all.
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bluffton.edu%2F%7Enesterd%2Fimages%2FFrank-Costanza-Festivus-small.jpg&hash=740d663273908f5d79c463db371243ae0d9aae9d)
(Still miffed that I wasn't the first one to post "Hello, Neumann.")

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 11:14:23 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on December 23, 2016, 10:32:51 AM
Wesleyan beat Marietta by 15 points. I've watched a lot of northeast basketball over the past few years and I'm pretty confident that on a neutral floor, Babson and Amherst would both be favored over Wesleyan by at least 10 points. And over Marietta by at least 15.

Marietta has one really good win, Christopher Newport, just as Babson has one really good win, a road win over a top-ten Tufts team. Marietta got totally and completely owned by Wesleyan on the inside. Babson, trust me, is a better interior team than Wesleyan. I'm willing to grant that Marietta is the best three-loss team in the country. That should put them somewhere towards the bottom of the top 25, which is totally fair. They would probably be something like the 6th or 7th best team in New England, after Babson, Amherst, Wesleyan, Tufts, Midd and maybe Williams. Lots of folks overrated Marietta based on destorying Wooster but Wooster is clearly way, way down this year.

The D3hoops rankings are in no way biased towards New England. Many of the rankings you cite to, on the other hand, are consistently PROVEN to be biased against New England teams -- teams that may fare poorly in certainly statistical rankings, but, year after year, get to the Final Four and generally fare well once they get there. Amherst, Williams, Middlebury, and Babson have all played in the Final Four in this decade. As recently as 2013, Amherst won a title, and as recently as 2014, Williams came within one point of a title in the most loaded Final Four in recent memory. Williams and Amherst have each played in seven final fours, combining for three titles and four second-place finishes. How many Final Fours has Marietta played in, exactly?

Amherst made the Final Four last year and graduated only one player. Babson brought back its entire squad from a Sweet 16 team that likely would have done better but for an injury to a guy who is probably only the best player in the country. The game they faced off in this year was absolutely spectacular.

Tufts made the Elite 8 last year and has two legit star players. All of these are proven successful programs that you are dismissing based on absolutely no knowledge whatsoever of the ACTUAL strength of their opponents, none of whom you have likely seen play. When Marietta doesn't lose by double-digits, after getting absolutely DESTROYED in the paint, to what will likely end up as something like the 4th or 5th best team in the region, then you can start talking smack about New England. But the results speak for themselves. To you, every Marietta loss will just be a "fluke" and only their wins "count." You ever consider that maybe some of your wins were against teams that were themselves having an off night??? That happens too, you know.

Right now, Babson, Amherst, Wesleyan, and Middlebury have as many losses combined as Marietta has in total. One of those teams isn't even ranked; if there was truly a Northeast bias, one-loss Midd and Williams teams would both be ranked ahead of Marietta (I'm not complaining, by the way, that they aren't, both have more to prove at this point). And crucially, head-to-head vs. Marietta, they are 1-0. Since that Rust dude was posting like crazy a few years back, I don't think I've ever seen a more unhinged, biased home-team poster on these boards. Dude, you've got a good squad. A good squad that now has three losses and will deservely drop in the rankings. But there are lots of other really talented teams in D3 that you haven't seen play, and that, in your ignorance, you are unfairly dismissing. If Marietta starts winning again, they will get plenty of respect. But you have to win the games you play and Marietta lost both of them this week.

Gee, I wonder if missing a 6-7 senior big man would have had anything to do with being easier to breach inside?

LOL Tufts top 10. That's cute. Massey has them 61. CNU is a legitimately good team.

Schedules matter. If you play a bunch of oil cans and a couple of decent teams, you can split against those decent teams and still be like 9-1, 10-1 and people like you think it's a great team. But it's not.

I'm sorry you're just full of it if you think there are 7 NE teams better than Marietta. Completely and utterly full of it.

Btw, Amherst beat Babson with and without Flannery, and bottled him up pretty good in the 2nd half and OT -- he was basically dependent on free throws. From what I've seen I'd take Tim Howell of Whitman over him. Really tough to handle and an outstanding shooter. Marietta did an awesome job on him. I don't think Flannery could stay in front of Howell, but Howell could deal with Flannery. Flannery gets his points no matter what because Babson needs him to take shot after shot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 11:30:07 AM

Whatever, this is all ridiculous. The poll is obviously representative of nothing except some biased opinions and has no basis in reality of how good teams are or aren't.

In the last 20 years, the only New England teams to win titles are Amherst and Williams. Stevens Point, Whitewater, Wash U, St. Thomas and Amherst have every title but 1 since 2004.

Not seeing how too many other folks have a lot of room to brag.

This season is definitely not looking like last season where there were a number of teams had 0-2 losses going into the tournament and had tested themselves. Might be that the only team that fits that description this year is Whitman. Partly because of the teams and partly because of the schedules.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 23, 2016, 11:35:10 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 11:30:07 AM
Whatever, this is all ridiculous.

Amen

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 23, 2016, 11:37:40 AM

Based on how much trouble Marietta had dealing with New England players like Joseph Kuo, Jordan Sears, and Harry Rafferty, none of whom have ever won any individual accolades in their conference or region, I'd say Flannery could would put up 40 on y'all without breaking much of a sweat. I note that Amherst has Johnny McCarthy, one of the best wing defenders in the country, and Flannery was still unstoppable in that game. But hey, after he likely and (deservedly) wins every national player of the year award this year, I'm sure you will still be questioning his talent level.

Tufts is a top 10 team on the D3hoops rankings. Which typically proves to correlate better to NCAA D3 tournament results than any other ranking, year, after year, after year. Massey as I noted consistently underrates New England teams when you compare those rankings to how they perform in NCAA play. But I'm sure if Marietta loses in the second round and Babson makes it to the title game you'd still say that Marietta is better based on some sort of dumb statistical formula. Whatever.

Schedules do matter. The point is, you have no basis whatsoever to conclude that Marietta beat better teams than Babson did. None. You are claiming that a whole bunch of teams who you have almost certainly never seen play are weak opponents. Bates' Delpeche brothers would have eaten Marietta's bigs for lunch inside. Bowdoin's Jack Simonds could score 30 vs. Marietta. Have you ever seen those dudes play? Until you do, your claim that these are "cans" is utterly worthless.

Statistical formulas are silly to rely on without any sort of eye test to validate them, especiallly when there is very little play between regions. Babson has not played any Midwest teams, so there is no way to compare them to a Midwest team based on any kind of reliable statistic. Massey or any other formula is simply one data point, not a definitive ranking of quality. And its a highly unreliable one at that. Marietta DID play a New England team. Look what happened when they did. Res ipsa loquitor.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 11:43:54 AM

Just looked at the Wesleyan box and no surprised this guy doesn't know what he's talking about as far as Wesleyan destroying Marietta in the paint.

Wesleyan did have a lot of points in the paint, but it's not like they were making every shot. They only shot 44% from the field and they don't take many 3s. They were 24-48 inside the 3 point line. That's pretty normal.

Marietta lost that game because they shot poorly from 3 (they shot pretty close to the same as Wesleyan from 3 -- 15-33). That's not going to happen very often in a venue suited for small school and small crowd basketball. And of course you had the same refs that can't call a game that led to MC committing more turnovers than it has in more than 3 years (and this is playing in the uptempo OAC against several pressing teams).

By the way, as far as Marietta getting dominated -- they led with 6 minutes to go. Was mostly foul shots that made up the margin, with some ridiculous officiating worked in there as the order of the tournament. Like I say, not sure where you get D3 refs in a state that doesn't have D3.

But by all means folks, continue to overreact and play "they are who we thought they were." I'd give a team more credit for playing good teams than for playing oil cans, but apparently the voters disagree. That tells you basically everything you need to know about the poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 11:58:09 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on December 23, 2016, 11:37:40 AM
Based on how much trouble Marietta had dealing with New England players like Joseph Kuo, Jordan Sears, and Harry Rafferty, none of whom have ever won any individual accolades in their conference or region, I'd say Flannery could would put up 40 on y'all without breaking much of a sweat. I note that Amherst has Johnny McCarthy, one of the best wing defenders in the country, and Flannery was still unstoppable in that game.

Wrong.

Flannery was unstoppable for a half and then impotent in the second half. 3 for 13 shooting in the second half. Like I said, he still got 10 in the half because no one else really shoots the ball for them. Then he had 5 free throws before he made a field goal in overtime.

11-28 shooting is not an impressive performance. He pads stats with free throws and because he plays every minute (which might be part of why he sucked in the second half).

Flannery went 3 for 10 in his only NCAA tournament game last year. Last year against Amherst in a similar defensive optional multi OT game he went 8 for 26. Against Tufts he went 5 for 18. 7 for 20 against Bowdoin.

Seems like he throws a lot of bricks when Babson actually plays decent opponents, and fattens up on the weak ones and on volume. Either he's a ballhog, or Babson doesn't have anyone else that's that good.

LOL @ Massey being highly unreliable. I'd like to see you do better.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 23, 2016, 12:39:55 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 23, 2016, 10:43:52 AM
Quote from: sac on December 23, 2016, 09:44:01 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 09:39:30 AM
Quote from: sac on December 23, 2016, 09:34:39 AM
Babson is at .664 Marietta is at .602 still not trash.

Outside the top 100 is crap when you're talking about top 25 consideration. If you're not in the top 100 schedule wise it's because you don't care because it's not really that hard to get there because, well, most programs in D3 don't really care that much.

Again, Babson's next win over a top 50 team will be their first. Hopefully the NCAA will take that into consideration as well, but it probably won't matter because their league is also weak so they'll probably get an automatic. So just like last year they'll go in with an inflated record and get beat by the first good team they run into, and everyone will talk about how unlucky they are and what a great season they had.

They're a 1 man team and an overrated one at that.

Nice side step of facts that don't meet your narrative.
Let Spencer have his say. It is Festivus, after all.
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bluffton.edu%2F%7Enesterd%2Fimages%2FFrank-Costanza-Festivus-small.jpg&hash=740d663273908f5d79c463db371243ae0d9aae9d)
(Still miffed that I wasn't the first one to post "Hello, Neumann.")

Congratulations on picking up your second smite in more than a decade. You're on a roll!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 23, 2016, 12:42:02 PM

Meanwhile, back on this planet:

Have a great Holiday Season, no matter which permutation of Holiday you celebrate during this festive time of year.

Let us celebrate the games and sports we love, the athletes that play them, and the joy they bring us in competition. From Whitman to Franciscan and all in-between, let us give thanks and praise to all involved in D-3 athletics, and college athletics in general.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 23, 2016, 12:44:29 PM

And let us all give thanks to Pat, Gordon, Ryan and all who make this community fun (for the most part), and to all of the regular posters who are just as nerdly as me and care about things like Rust's schedule and UMPI and all the other stuff us lovers of minutiae dive into.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 23, 2016, 12:48:13 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 23, 2016, 12:39:55 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 23, 2016, 10:43:52 AM
Quote from: sac on December 23, 2016, 09:44:01 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 09:39:30 AM
Quote from: sac on December 23, 2016, 09:34:39 AM
Babson is at .664 Marietta is at .602 still not trash.

Outside the top 100 is crap when you're talking about top 25 consideration. If you're not in the top 100 schedule wise it's because you don't care because it's not really that hard to get there because, well, most programs in D3 don't really care that much.

Again, Babson's next win over a top 50 team will be their first. Hopefully the NCAA will take that into consideration as well, but it probably won't matter because their league is also weak so they'll probably get an automatic. So just like last year they'll go in with an inflated record and get beat by the first good team they run into, and everyone will talk about how unlucky they are and what a great season they had.

They're a 1 man team and an overrated one at that.

Nice side step of facts that don't meet your narrative.
Let Spencer have his say. It is Festivus, after all.
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bluffton.edu%2F%7Enesterd%2Fimages%2FFrank-Costanza-Festivus-small.jpg&hash=740d663273908f5d79c463db371243ae0d9aae9d)
(Still miffed that I wasn't the first one to post "Hello, Neumann.")

Congratulations on picking up your second smite in more than a decade. You're on a roll!

I'm sure this looks like I did it, but I didn't. I love Festivus

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 23, 2016, 12:53:15 PM

Quote from: sac on December 23, 2016, 12:48:13 PM

I'm sure this looks like I did it, but I didn't. I love Festivus

I can't imagine you smiting Daryl! No, not what I was picturing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 23, 2016, 01:05:35 PM

I hope for only one thing: that Babson plays Marietta in the NCAA tourney, and that Flannery doesn't have to play through a severe injury like in last year'a tourney (which actually kept him out of the prior game entirely). Then I guarantee we will hear about another dozen excuses (the lighting! The refs! Food poisoning!) for why Flannery was able to put up 40 on Marietta. Has Marietta ever in its history lost a game in which they were simply the worse team? It seems the answer is no. How they don't have three titles by now I'll never understand. Must be the lighting is off in Salem.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 23, 2016, 01:08:35 PM

Wesleyan outscored Marietta 48 to 20 in the paint. Joseph Kuo, probably only the fourth best center in NESCAC, owned the paint on both ends in that game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 23, 2016, 01:14:31 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on December 23, 2016, 01:05:35 PM
I hope for only one thing: that Babson plays Marietta in the NCAA tourney, and that Flannery doesn't have to play through a severe injury like in last year'a tourney (which actually kept him out of the prior game entirely). Then I guarantee we will hear about another dozen excuses (the lighting! The refs! Food poisoning!) for why Flannery was able to put up 40 on Marietta. Has Marietta ever in its history lost a game in which they were simply the worse team? It seems the answer is no. How they don't have three titles by now I'll never understand. Must be the lighting is off in Salem.

Does anything before 2011 count? They were...not good.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 23, 2016, 01:16:51 PM

The thing about Babson being a one-man team -- whether you believe that's true or not -- is kind of irrelevant. You can win as a one-man team in basketball, so much more than in any other sport. We only play five-on-five. One great player is a huge deal.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 01:32:01 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 23, 2016, 01:14:31 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on December 23, 2016, 01:05:35 PM
I hope for only one thing: that Babson plays Marietta in the NCAA tourney, and that Flannery doesn't have to play through a severe injury like in last year'a tourney (which actually kept him out of the prior game entirely). Then I guarantee we will hear about another dozen excuses (the lighting! The refs! Food poisoning!) for why Flannery was able to put up 40 on Marietta. Has Marietta ever in its history lost a game in which they were simply the worse team? It seems the answer is no. How they don't have three titles by now I'll never understand. Must be the lighting is off in Salem.

Does anything before 2011 count? They were...not good.

Couple years before that, but yeah no kidding.

Has MC ever lost a game where it was the worst team? Hundreds of times. They had one season where they ran probably the worst version of the Grinnell system that has ever been run. And because of that stupid season, the record books are completely whacked. Had a few pretty good teams in the 90s, and one great great player (I'm very confident he could have played overseas if he wanted) that didn't get his due because for some reason he played at Marietta during that time, but yeah, not a lot.

The combination of Vander Wal and the Ban Johnson Arena renovation has transformed the program into something I never thought possible, to be honest.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PeterEscobar on December 23, 2016, 01:35:29 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on December 23, 2016, 01:05:35 PM
I hope for only one thing: that Babson plays Marietta in the NCAA tourney, and that Flannery doesn't have to play through a severe injury like in last year'a tourney (which actually kept him out of the prior game entirely). Then I guarantee we will hear about another dozen excuses (the lighting! The refs! Food poisoning!) for why Flannery was able to put up 40 on Marietta. Has Marietta ever in its history lost a game in which they were simply the worse team? It seems the answer is no. How they don't have three titles by now I'll never understand. Must be the lighting is off in Salem.

Don't mind the fact he didn't practice before the Tufts or the Amherst game because of a foot injury and then went out and dropped 40+ points on both or the fact that he was universally selected as national player of the year last year, he obviously stinks and is overrated ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PeterEscobar on December 23, 2016, 01:37:32 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 23, 2016, 01:16:51 PM
The thing about Babson being a one-man team -- whether you believe that's true or not -- is kind of irrelevant. You can win as a one-man team in basketball, so much more than in any other sport. We only play five-on-five. One great player is a huge deal.

Especially when you surround that one player with two guards who shoot over 50% from 3; a NE-10 transfer who has shot over 60% from the field since arriving at Babson; a forward who had eight Division II offers out of Gonzaga College HS (one of the best HS leagues in the nation) who wanted a chance at a national title... ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 01:38:02 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 23, 2016, 01:16:51 PM
The thing about Babson being a one-man team -- whether you believe that's true or not -- is kind of irrelevant. You can win as a one-man team in basketball, so much more than in any other sport. We only play five-on-five. One great player is a huge deal.

Well was more referencing the legend of Bill Brasky Flannery at that point, but really how many great teams in D3 have been one-man bands like that? Where even if your supposed best player is shooting blanks you just let him keep shooting because you really don't have other choices?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 01:39:20 PM

Quote from: PeterEscobar on December 23, 2016, 01:37:32 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 23, 2016, 01:16:51 PM
The thing about Babson being a one-man team -- whether you believe that's true or not -- is kind of irrelevant. You can win as a one-man team in basketball, so much more than in any other sport. We only play five-on-five. One great player is a huge deal.
Especially when you surround that one player with two guards who shoot over 50% from 3; a NE-10 transfer who has shot over 60% from the field since arriving at Babson; a forward who had eight Division II offers out of Gonzaga College HS (one of the best HS leagues in the nation) who wanted a chance at a national title... ::)

Yet they need one guy to take a significant plurality if not majority of their shots in a game against a quality opponent.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PeterEscobar on December 23, 2016, 01:40:30 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 01:32:01 PM
The combination of Vander Wal and the Ban Johnson Arena renovation has transformed the program into something I never thought possible, to be honest.

A team that lost in the first round on their home floor last year? Did they have a lighting issue that night too?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PeterEscobar on December 23, 2016, 01:41:52 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 01:39:20 PM
Quote from: PeterEscobar on December 23, 2016, 01:37:32 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 23, 2016, 01:16:51 PM
The thing about Babson being a one-man team -- whether you believe that's true or not -- is kind of irrelevant. You can win as a one-man team in basketball, so much more than in any other sport. We only play five-on-five. One great player is a huge deal.
Especially when you surround that one player with two guards who shoot over 50% from 3; a NE-10 transfer who has shot over 60% from the field since arriving at Babson; a forward who had eight Division II offers out of Gonzaga College HS (one of the best HS leagues in the nation) who wanted a chance at a national title... ::)

Yet they need one guy to take a significant plurality if not majority of their shots in a game against a quality opponent.

Ask VanderWal if he would want Flannery on his team and if he would let Flannery take big shots in big games ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 01:50:22 PM

Quote from: PeterEscobar on December 23, 2016, 01:35:29 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on December 23, 2016, 01:05:35 PM
I hope for only one thing: that Babson plays Marietta in the NCAA tourney, and that Flannery doesn't have to play through a severe injury like in last year'a tourney (which actually kept him out of the prior game entirely). Then I guarantee we will hear about another dozen excuses (the lighting! The refs! Food poisoning!) for why Flannery was able to put up 40 on Marietta. Has Marietta ever in its history lost a game in which they were simply the worse team? It seems the answer is no. How they don't have three titles by now I'll never understand. Must be the lighting is off in Salem.
Don't mind the fact he didn't practice before the Tufts or the Amherst game because of a foot injury and then went out and dropped 40+ points on both or the fact that he was universally selected as national player of the year last year, he obviously stinks and is overrated ::)

If you don't mind a guy shooting 35% to get his points, he's your guy.

Let me know when they beat a Massey top 50 opponent.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 01:52:05 PM

Quote from: PeterEscobar on December 23, 2016, 01:41:52 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 01:39:20 PM
Quote from: PeterEscobar on December 23, 2016, 01:37:32 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 23, 2016, 01:16:51 PM
The thing about Babson being a one-man team -- whether you believe that's true or not -- is kind of irrelevant. You can win as a one-man team in basketball, so much more than in any other sport. We only play five-on-five. One great player is a huge deal.
Especially when you surround that one player with two guards who shoot over 50% from 3; a NE-10 transfer who has shot over 60% from the field since arriving at Babson; a forward who had eight Division II offers out of Gonzaga College HS (one of the best HS leagues in the nation) who wanted a chance at a national title... ::)

Yet they need one guy to take a significant plurality if not majority of their shots in a game against a quality opponent.
Ask VanderWal if he would want Flannery on his team and if he would let Flannery take big shots in big games ::)

I'd just take Raneal Ewing back if we're making theoretical additions.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 02:00:40 PM

Quote from: PeterEscobar on December 23, 2016, 01:40:30 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 01:32:01 PM
The combination of Vander Wal and the Ban Johnson Arena renovation has transformed the program into something I never thought possible, to be honest.
A team that lost in the first round on their home floor last year? Did they have a lighting issue that night too?

You wouldn't understand if I explained what last year's issue was. Starts with ending up playing what you thought were going to be your 4th and 5th guards against a team whose top 3 players were guards. Gwynedd Mercy was a much better team than that matchup -- saw trouble coming with that matchup when it was made. Was unfortunate -- that team as it was put together originally would have played St. Thomas and given them a run for their money.

Not everyone can draw Hartwick in the first round. When MC got an upstate NY team they won by like 600 points (Medaile).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 02:09:11 PM

All I want for Christmas is -100 karma...

(still thinking dinging someone just because you disagree with them is silly, but whatever. I only ding people if they have taken a personal swipe at me, since obviously Pat isn't going to do anything about it).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 02:14:46 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on December 23, 2016, 01:08:35 PM
Wesleyan outscored Marietta 48 to 20 in the paint. Joseph Kuo, probably only the fourth best center in NESCAC, owned the paint on both ends in that game.

Shooting 50% from 2 is like shooting 33.3% from 3. Nothing spectacular at all. If all your 2s are in the paint, you'd probably expect to shoot better than that, actually. If Wesleyan had shot like 70% from 2, then I would agree with you. But they didn't. They just took a lot of shots from there, and not many from anywhere else.

You're really being dishonest playing like it was a blowout and Marietta got owned and dominated and blah dee blah. After 34 minutes played, Marietta led. Weird how they got dominated so much.

If you've never seen a close game get out of hand late on free throws, you haven't watched very much basketball. And you've certainly never bet on basketball haha.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on December 23, 2016, 02:15:25 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 23, 2016, 01:16:51 PM
The thing about Babson being a one-man team -- whether you believe that's true or not -- is kind of irrelevant. You can win as a one-man team in basketball, so much more than in any other sport. We only play five-on-five. One great player is a huge deal.

Like those Horace Jenkins William Paterson teams that did really well and lost to Catholic one year in the title game? One great player and several good complimentary players. Or go back even further to the TCNJ team with Greg Grant who made the final four in 89?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on December 23, 2016, 02:17:11 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 02:14:46 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on December 23, 2016, 01:08:35 PM
Wesleyan outscored Marietta 48 to 20 in the paint. Joseph Kuo, probably only the fourth best center in NESCAC, owned the paint on both ends in that game.

Shooting 50% from 2 is like shooting 33.3% from 3. Nothing spectacular at all. If all your 2s are in the paint, you'd probably expect to shoot better than that, actually. If Wesleyan had shot like 70% from 2, then I would agree with you. But they didn't. They just took a lot of shots from there, and not many from anywhere else.

You're really being dishonest playing like it was a blowout and Marietta got owned and dominated and blah dee blah. After 34 minutes played, Marietta led. Weird how they got dominated so much.

If you've never seen a close game get out of hand late on free throws, you haven't watched very much basketball. And you've certainly never bet on basketball haha.

Lighten up Francis.
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ff3nation.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F08%2Flightenupfrancis.jpg&hash=642dc7ab7a93c7d99883a0d08c71ccd970fff304)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 02:35:54 PM

Quote from: Knightstalker on December 23, 2016, 02:15:25 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 23, 2016, 01:16:51 PM
The thing about Babson being a one-man team -- whether you believe that's true or not -- is kind of irrelevant. You can win as a one-man team in basketball, so much more than in any other sport. We only play five-on-five. One great player is a huge deal.

Like those Horace Jenkins William Paterson teams that did really well and lost to Catholic one year in the title game? One great player and several good complimentary players. Or go back even further to the TCNJ team with Greg Grant who made the final four in 89?

Horace Jenkins is just a different class. But yeah if you have a 25 year old dude with a 44 inch vertical that was good enough to play in the NBA and who is also an all-time great defender in the division, yeah that probably can get you a long way.

That this is where you have to go for a counter though really proves the rule. Jenkins is an outlier in every sense of the word for D3 basketball.

(and while I'm less familiar with the story, I imagine Grant is as well)

Flannery isn't an NBA player.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 02:36:54 PM

Quote from: Knightstalker on December 23, 2016, 02:17:11 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 02:14:46 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on December 23, 2016, 01:08:35 PM
Wesleyan outscored Marietta 48 to 20 in the paint. Joseph Kuo, probably only the fourth best center in NESCAC, owned the paint on both ends in that game.

Shooting 50% from 2 is like shooting 33.3% from 3. Nothing spectacular at all. If all your 2s are in the paint, you'd probably expect to shoot better than that, actually. If Wesleyan had shot like 70% from 2, then I would agree with you. But they didn't. They just took a lot of shots from there, and not many from anywhere else.

You're really being dishonest playing like it was a blowout and Marietta got owned and dominated and blah dee blah. After 34 minutes played, Marietta led. Weird how they got dominated so much.

If you've never seen a close game get out of hand late on free throws, you haven't watched very much basketball. And you've certainly never bet on basketball haha.

Lighten up Francis.
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ff3nation.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F08%2Flightenupfrancis.jpg&hash=642dc7ab7a93c7d99883a0d08c71ccd970fff304)

+k for great taste in entertainment.

Jerry Stiller, not so much.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on December 23, 2016, 02:37:47 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 23, 2016, 01:16:51 PM
The thing about Babson being a one-man team -- whether you believe that's true or not -- is kind of irrelevant. You can win as a one-man team in basketball, so much more than in any other sport. We only play five-on-five. One great player is a huge deal.

Boy, is this ever true!
I've been pushing this theory (fact I think is the right word) for a long time in discussions about basketball, and have been somewhat surprised at the level of resistance I've encountered. People will say if you stop that one great player you almost certainly win. But often times, that's easier said than done.

One thing that's weird though is you have that great player healthy and play an inferior team, and your team, including your great player has a poor game and you lose. Then, before your next game your great player gets hurt. That next game is against a team ranked 10th, 15th, or 20th and you win despite not having that great player available. People step up.
Of course, it also helps when you have a 2nd great player, or a team of very good players or, if you're really lucky, both! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 02:48:20 PM

Quote from: AndOne on December 23, 2016, 02:37:47 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 23, 2016, 01:16:51 PM
The thing about Babson being a one-man team -- whether you believe that's true or not -- is kind of irrelevant. You can win as a one-man team in basketball, so much more than in any other sport. We only play five-on-five. One great player is a huge deal.

Boy, is this ever true!
I've been pushing this theory (fact I think is the right word) for a long time in discussions about basketball, and have been somewhat surprised at the level of resistance I've encountered. People will say if you stop that one great player you almost certainly win. But often times, that's easier said than done.

One thing that's weird though is you have that great player healthy and play an inferior team, and your team, including your great player has a poor game and you lose. Then, before your next game your great player gets hurt. That next game is against a team ranked 10th, 15th, or 20th and you win despite not having that great player available. People step up.
Of course, it also helps when you have a 2nd great player, or a team of very good players or, if you're really lucky, both! :)

That's the difference between a team with a great player, and a one man team.

Most teams with great players don't need their great player to take a boatload of shots even when he's not hitting, though. That's the thing.

I've seen what happens to 1 man teams in quality conferences. It's generally not pretty.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on December 23, 2016, 02:48:38 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 02:35:54 PM

Flannery isn't an NBA player.

And that's fine.
I've seen several D3 players that were GREAT who didn't have any more chance of playing in the NBA than you or I did.

I hope you're not suggesting that you can't deservingly be labeled as great just because you're not NBA material. ;)

Besides, if you are NBA material, the chances that you're playing D3 basketball are so small, that they aren't worth even discussing. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 23, 2016, 03:24:52 PM

So no one wants peace on earth, they'd rather just nitpick and fuss?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 03:38:39 PM

Quote from: AndOne on December 23, 2016, 02:48:38 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 02:35:54 PM

Flannery isn't an NBA player.

And that's fine.
I've seen several D3 players that were GREAT who didn't have any more chance of playing in the NBA than you or I did.

I hope you're not suggesting that you can't deservingly be labeled as great just because you're not NBA material. ;)

Besides, if you are NBA material, the chances that you're playing D3 basketball are so small, that they aren't worth even discussing. :)

Kind of making my point for me. There's great, and then there's NBA player in D3 great. Only the latter kind has been brought up as the type that can singlehandedly take a team to a level approaching greatness.

I think more of Jesse Duperow, who had a season for Marietta in 2002 (and a career, really) that I really doubt has ever been duplicated in D3. He was #2/#2/#2/#2/#1 in the conference in Pts/Reb/Ast/Stl/Blk, and 4th in made 3s. Pretty rare combination. But because no better definition of a 1 man team (13-13, 8-10) has ever been written, you and most have probably never heard of him. They were the proverbial pretty good OAC team that ended up in 6th. I'm also not sure he even won conference player of the year because he happened to be in the league at the same time as Jeff Gibbs. Probably the most under-decorated player in D3 history. If he had decided to go to Otterbein instead of MC, Otterbein would have won 4 straight titles -- I can't imagine anyone that was around the OAC then disputing this.

Jesse could have played overseas if he wanted to, and was a D-I caliber player (we know this because he played against a D-I team; had 20 pts, 13 rebs, 7-21 FG, 9 turnovers because like I said, one man team; look familiar re: what I said earlier about Flannery?), but he wasn't an NBA player. And so even as ridiculously good and multi-talented as he was, he couldn't lift an otherwise pretty crappy team.

So for that reason and having seen that experience, failing that a team has an NBA player, I don't think a one-man team is ultimately going to get to the highest level.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 23, 2016, 03:42:13 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 23, 2016, 12:39:55 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 23, 2016, 10:43:52 AM
Let Spencer have his say. It is Festivus, after all. ...

Congratulations on picking up your second smite in more than a decade. You're on a roll!

I knew I was living dangerously when I posted that, but I threw caution to the winds.

Anyway, enough with the airing of grievances. Time to move on to the the feats of strength; I have to go wrestle with some lumber in the garage.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on December 23, 2016, 03:57:52 PM

Darryl,

In the immortal words of Sgt. Esterhaus, "let's be careful out there," when you go to the garage to wrestle that lumber! 8-)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: (509)Rat on December 23, 2016, 04:33:07 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 23, 2016, 03:42:13 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 23, 2016, 12:39:55 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 23, 2016, 10:43:52 AM
Let Spencer have his say. It is Festivus, after all. ...

Congratulations on picking up your second smite in more than a decade. You're on a roll!

I knew I was living dangerously when I posted that, but I threw caution to the winds.

Anyway, enough with the airing of grievances. Time to move on to the the feats of strength; I have to go wrestle with some lumber in the garage.

Make it 3 smites...it's a Festivus Miracle

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PeterEscobar on December 23, 2016, 05:12:42 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 02:09:11 PM
All I want for Christmas is -100 karma...

(still thinking dinging someone just because you disagree with them is silly, but whatever. I only ding people if they have taken a personal swipe at me, since obviously Pat isn't going to do anything about it).

I don't think people ding you because they disagree with you, I think people ding you because how you behave and berate people... But that has been discussed ad nauseam over previous pages and was just responded to with "physician, heal thyself" so on that note... Happy Festivus

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.giphy.com%2F2TIhD9M7lyOKQ.gif&hash=b0c324d77c8ce452b6f5ccade89472c97424d605)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 07:46:43 PM

I don't know why you would believe that though because I've gotten dinged after posts that wouldn't by any definition be described like you're saying.

So we're left with intolerance as the logical explanation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 23, 2016, 08:32:36 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 07:46:43 PM
I don't know why you would believe that though because I've gotten dinged after posts that wouldn't by any definition be described like you're saying.

So we're left with intolerance as the logical explanation.

Yes, yours. Merry Christmas - here's #100 (unless someone beat me to it). ;D

No one likes the guy who comes off as believing he is the smartest one in the room.

(I've been around for MANY years. Trust me - you ain't the smartest one in the room.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 08:50:44 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 23, 2016, 08:32:36 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 07:46:43 PM
I don't know why you would believe that though because I've gotten dinged after posts that wouldn't by any definition be described like you're saying.

So we're left with intolerance as the logical explanation.

Yes, yours. Merry Christmas - here's #100 (unless someone beat me to it). ;D

No one likes the guy who comes off as believing he is the smartest one in the room.

(I've been around for MANY years. Trust me - you ain't the smartest one in the room.)

Around where, though?

The last time someone thought I had an overblown opinion of my intelligence, they commissioned a test that ended up proving them wrong.

Funny, I haven't said whether I am or am not the smartest one in the room. To me it's not even really relevant. But it obviously matters to you. The reason for that is your issue, not mine.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 23, 2016, 09:13:47 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 07:46:43 PM
I don't know why you would believe that though because I've gotten dinged after posts that wouldn't by any definition be described like you're saying.

That's kind of a fallacy, though -- just because it's the most recent post doesn't mean it's the one that gets you dinged. Not everyone reads every message immediately after it's posted.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 23, 2016, 09:31:19 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 23, 2016, 09:13:47 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 07:46:43 PM
I don't know why you would believe that though because I've gotten dinged after posts that wouldn't by any definition be described like you're saying.

That's kind of a fallacy, though -- just because it's the most recent post doesn't mean it's the one that gets you dinged. Not everyone reads every message immediately after it's posted.

Not only might a ding (or applaud, for that matter) not be the most recent post, it might not even be for anything on this particular thread. That is the fundamental flaw of the smite/applaud system in current use: there is no way to know WHAT has caused the action. I suppose it can be seen as a basic 'vote' on a poster's overall demeanor, but that is about all. For specific violations (or perceived violations) of proper protocol, one better just confront the (perceived) abuser, because applaud/smite just ain't gonna do the trick. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on December 23, 2016, 09:57:26 PM

I'm curious Pat what was the shortest time someone got to -100 k. ;D

I looks like it would take Darryl over 5 centuries to get there. :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 23, 2016, 10:04:09 PM

Quote from: mailsy on December 23, 2016, 09:57:26 PM
I'm curious Pat what was the shortest time someone got to -100 k. ;D

I looks like it would take Darryl over 5 centuries to get there. :o

I am still perplexed and somewhat angered by the smite that someone gave Darryl.

(Surely it was an error!)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 23, 2016, 10:28:53 PM

Is the Karma even necessary?? Now it reminds me of Uber or the Community Episode about it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: (509)Rat on December 23, 2016, 10:34:26 PM

QuoteThe last time someone thought I had an overblown opinion of my intelligence, they commissioned a test that ended up proving them wrong.

(https://media.giphy.com/media/1PgPvWLfXGkCY/giphy.gif)

Oh and I smited Darryl after he got the infamous 2nd smite for making fun of Spence...I'm terribly impressionable. You know when you tell your kid "if Billy jumped off a bridge...?" Yeah I would follow Billy right off that bridge.

Back to top 25 talk. How funny will it be when Marietta drops below Whitworth in the next poll?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 23, 2016, 11:11:55 PM

Quote from: (509)Rat on December 23, 2016, 10:34:26 PM
QuoteThe last time someone thought I had an overblown opinion of my intelligence, they commissioned a test that ended up proving them wrong.

(https://media.giphy.com/media/1PgPvWLfXGkCY/giphy.gif)

Oh and I smited Darryl after he got the infamous 2nd smite for making fun of Spence...I'm terribly impressionable. You know when you tell your kid "if Billy jumped off a bridge...?" Yeah I would follow Billy right off that bridge.

Back to top 25 talk. How funny will it be when Marietta drops below Whitworth in the next poll?

Obviously, they will. As well as 12-20 other teams.

I'm eagerly awaiting photos of Spense's oversized brain exploding. :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 23, 2016, 11:16:28 PM

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fthoughtcatalog.files.wordpress.com%2F2013%2F09%2Fangryto.gif%3Fw%3D584%26amp%3Bh%3D325&hash=9516275dfa35f436159656e4bc0ed8a3da4fa7b1)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on December 24, 2016, 12:10:54 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 23, 2016, 09:13:47 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 23, 2016, 07:46:43 PM
I don't know why you would believe that though because I've gotten dinged after posts that wouldn't by any definition be described like you're saying.

That's kind of a fallacy, though -- just because it's the most recent post doesn't mean it's the one that gets you dinged. Not everyone reads every message immediately after it's posted.

Since when do you even have to make a post to get dinged?? You may not have posted anything at all for a week, and they'll still do it anyway. Some people will just come on and ding you out of nothing but hatred or just because doing so, even for no real reason, makes them feel powerful and/or good. :(

Quote from: smedindy on December 23, 2016, 10:28:53 PM
Is the Karma even necessary?? Now it reminds me of Uber or the Community Episode about it.

Shocking that anyone would even dare to pose the question!
But, if for no other reason than the above, it would seem like the answer very well might be no. :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie77 on December 24, 2016, 03:29:51 AM

Does anybody else have the sneaking suspicion that our President-Elect*** is a closet Marietta fan? Recent posts sound very much like tweets we've come to see. Everything he's associated with is "the greatest", no acknowledgement of weakness, and if you disagree you're a loser. There are many other similarities....

Could it be??

Make Marietta Great Again! ;D

***Not a political statement; rather an observation regarding temperament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 24, 2016, 04:50:21 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 23, 2016, 11:11:55 PM
Quote from: (509)Rat on December 23, 2016, 10:34:26 PM
QuoteThe last time someone thought I had an overblown opinion of my intelligence, they commissioned a test that ended up proving them wrong.

(https://media.giphy.com/media/1PgPvWLfXGkCY/giphy.gif)

Oh and I smited Darryl after he got the infamous 2nd smite for making fun of Spence...I'm terribly impressionable. You know when you tell your kid "if Billy jumped off a bridge...?" Yeah I would follow Billy right off that bridge.

Back to top 25 talk. How funny will it be when Marietta drops below Whitworth in the next poll?

Obviously, they will. As well as 12-20 other teams.

I'm eagerly awaiting photos of Spense's oversized brain exploding. :o

You'll be disappointed. The poll is just a collection of knee-jerk reactions that mean nothing.

Really nothing would shock me as far as the next poll goes, especially if the voters are as vindictive toward MC as the posters here. Not sure what they've done to make people so jealous, like someone said it's not like it's been a traditionally great program like baseball. Try to lay it at my doorstep if you want, but it was here before me and is the reason I started posting -- the disrespect their accomplishments got in the poll and lack of discussion of it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 24, 2016, 04:53:59 AM

Quote from: AndOne on December 24, 2016, 12:10:54 AM

Shocking that anyone would even dare to pose the question!
But, if for no other reason than the above, it would seem like the answer very well might be no. :o

Of course it's not. It's quite silly because it has nothing to do with a real definition of karma, but rather disagreement, mostly, and possibly disapproval (which is where being able to -k without it being associated with a post comes in).

It's high school foolishness.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 24, 2016, 04:55:30 AM

Quote from: augie77 on December 24, 2016, 03:29:51 AM
Does anybody else have the sneaking suspicion that our President-Elect*** is a closet Marietta fan? Recent posts sound very much like tweets we've come to see. Everything he's associated with is "the greatest", no acknowledgement of weakness, and if you disagree you're a loser. There are many other similarities....

Could it be??

Make Marietta Great Again! ;D

***Not a political statement; rather an observation regarding temperament.

Great post. Would read again.

And people accuse me of trolling and threadjacking? This is like the Christmas miracle of trolling and threadjacking.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 24, 2016, 09:45:31 AM

Unfortunately just an exhibition for both teams, but an impressive win by Benedictine over NAIA D2 defending national champ Indiana Wesleyan...

http://www.d3hoops.com/seasons/men/2016-17/contrib/2016122102n4b8

I believe safe to say Indiana Wesleyan is much closer to a really strong D2 team than a top D3 team.

Being an exhibition, I'm not clear if both teams played their starters...but this result definitely caught by attention.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 24, 2016, 10:33:57 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 24, 2016, 09:45:31 AM
Unfortunately just an exhibition for both teams, but an impressive win by Benedictine over NAIA D2 defending national champ Indiana Wesleyan...

http://www.d3hoops.com/seasons/men/2016-17/contrib/2016122102n4b8

I believe safe to say Indiana Wesleyan is much closer to a really strong D2 team than a top D3 team.

Being an exhibition, I'm not clear if both teams played their starters...but this result definitely caught by attention.

It does look like Ind. Wesleyan played the second unit.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 24, 2016, 01:43:18 PM

Normal people who think the Top 25 poll is meaningless would just ignore it without passing.

My work in Higher Ed Advancement says that if they complain, that means they care about it. If they don't care of find it 'meaningless' you'll never know because they won't say a word.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 24, 2016, 02:37:18 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 24, 2016, 09:45:31 AM
Unfortunately just an exhibition for both teams, but an impressive win by Benedictine over NAIA D2 defending national champ Indiana Wesleyan...

http://www.d3hoops.com/seasons/men/2016-17/contrib/2016122102n4b8

I believe safe to say Indiana Wesleyan is much closer to a really strong D2 team than a top D3 team.

Being an exhibition, I'm not clear if both teams played their starters...but this result definitely caught by attention.

I can only speak for Indiana Wesleayn (they're a hobby of mine) their star 6-7 kid Mahurin and 6-3 Sr. G Peters did not play in the game. Both were All-Crossroads League last year. The minutes distribution looks relatively normal otherwise. They are a very deep team.

Its going to be quite a battle between IWU and St. Francis for the Crossroads and probably also the NAIA II title.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PeterEscobar on December 24, 2016, 03:20:41 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 24, 2016, 04:50:21 AM
Try to lay it at my doorstep if you want

You honestly think voters do not vote for Marietta because of you?

#MakeMariettaGreatAgain

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 24, 2016, 04:58:04 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 24, 2016, 01:43:18 PM
Normal people who think the Top 25 poll is meaningless would just ignore it without passing.

My work in Higher Ed Advancement says that if they complain, that means they care about it. If they don't care of find it 'meaningless' you'll never know because they won't say a word.

Did I say meaningless? I don't think I would have said that. Maybe I did, feel free to look it up if I did.

It has meaning because people use it for PR for their program, for recruiting, etc. Which is why it's important to give teams credit for their accomplishments at that point in time, rather than playing favorites based on history or geography.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 24, 2016, 05:19:03 PM

Even Massey starts the season with history baked into his ratings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PeterEscobar on December 24, 2016, 05:22:03 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 24, 2016, 04:58:04 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 24, 2016, 01:43:18 PM
Normal people who think the Top 25 poll is meaningless would just ignore it without passing.

My work in Higher Ed Advancement says that if they complain, that means they care about it. If they don't care of find it 'meaningless' you'll never know because they won't say a word.

Did I say meaningless? I don't think I would have said that. Maybe I did, feel free to look it up if I did.

It has meaning because people use it for PR for their program, for recruiting, etc. Which is why it's important to give teams credit for their accomplishments at that point in time, rather than playing favorites based on history or geography.

Actually, you did....

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 24, 2016, 04:50:21 AM
You'll be disappointed. The poll is just a collection of knee-jerk reactions that mean nothing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PeterEscobar on December 24, 2016, 05:24:45 PM

Quote from: augie77 on December 24, 2016, 03:29:51 AM
Does anybody else have the sneaking suspicion that our President-Elect*** is a closet Marietta fan? Recent posts sound very much like tweets we've come to see. Everything he's associated with is "the greatest", no acknowledgement of weakness, and if you disagree you're a loser. There are many other similarities....

Could it be??

Make Marietta Great Again! ;D

***Not a political statement; rather an observation regarding temperament.

He has the same people doing fact-check, that's for sure... **see previous two posts**

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 24, 2016, 06:06:53 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 24, 2016, 05:19:03 PM
Even Massey starts the season with history baked into his ratings.

I think Sagarin and KenPom do too, at least until there are enough games so teams get connected to each other.

The RPI doesn't, but the RPI is like the SOS in that it allows a team to schedule it's way to a good rating (i.e. the NESCAC method in playing good teams from poor leagues, which some D-1 coaches accuse the Atlantic 10, Mountain West, and Missouri Valley in doing constantly.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 24, 2016, 06:32:27 PM

Dear readers of Top 25 talk on D3boards.com,

In recognition of the holiday season and in the interest of preserving goodwill among people, I am locking the Top 25 talk board here on D3boards.com for the next 24-plus hours.

I hope you use this time to reflect on what's important in life, on how best to interact with your fellow human beings, how to disagree in a humane manner rather than resorting to name-calling, ridicule and a generally intolerant tone.

It matters fairly little to me how you may think this board got this way. That answer isn't nearly as simple as has been suggested around here. The point is, the tone will not be allowed to continue. However, I would like for it to return to normal in a natural way, rather than my having to remove posters, as it were, from the site of competition.

I, for one, will enjoy spending my Christmas Eve and Christmas Day in peace, not having to deal with the latest missiles fired from one poster to another. And I hope the rest of you will find some time for self-examination about how to debate and discuss in a manner that allows for the possibility that, in fact, you as a poster do not have all the answers, and in fact, someone else might indeed be right.

From all of us at D3sports.com, happy holidays.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 26, 2016, 08:55:49 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Here are the results of the past week, plus those coming up as we await next Monday's new poll.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	609	Babson	9-1	12/31 at #26 Chicago
#2	597	Whitman	9-0	def. (n) King's, 80-62; def. (n) #4 Marietta, 72-71; 12/30 vs. Crown; 12/31 vs. Buena Vista
#3	573	Amherst	8-1	12/31 vs. Keystone
#4	549	Marietta	8-3	LOST to (n) #17 Wesleyan, 65-81; LOST to (n) #2 Whitman, 71-72
#5	480	Salisbury	8-0	12/28 vs. T#33 Ramapo; 12/29 vs. Hardin-Simmons
#6	474	Rochester	10-0	IDLE
#7	471	St. Norbert	5-2	LOST at UW-Oshkosh, 45-58; 12/29 vs. Finlandia; 12/30 vs. TBA
#8	449	Whitworth	8-1	won at Chapman, 78-69; def. (n) Alma, 99-72; 12/30 vs. Buena Vista; 12/31 vs. Crown
#9	422	Christopher Newport	6-2	12/28 vs. Pitt-Greensburg; 12/29 vs. TBD; 01/01 vs. #32 Virginia Wesleyan
#10	392	Tufts	8-2	IDLE
#11	351	UW-Eau Claire	8-1	12/28 vs. Gustavus Adolphus; 12/29 vs. UC Santa Cruz
#12	318	Benedictine	7-3	LOST to (n) Menlo, 70-72; 12/31 vs. Concordia (Wis.)
#13	241	North Park	8-1	won at Albion, 84-65; 12/30 vs. Manchester
#14	230	Susquehanna	9-1	def. (n) Eastern, 82-76
#15	219	Hope	7-2	def. Spalding, 79-51; def. Johnson and Wales, 100-75; 12/29 vs. #37 Williams; 12/30 vs. TBA
#16	212	UW-Whitewater	9-0	def. Trine, 85-60; def. T#41 Ripon, 109-96; 12/29 vs. Lawrence; 12/30 vs. Central
#17	209	Wesleyan	11-0	def. (n) Washington and Lee, 66-61; def. (n) #4 Marietta, 81-65
#18	191	Illinois Wesleyan	8-2	def. #26 Chicago, 72-54; 12/29 vs. T#29 Middlebury; 12/30 vs. TBD
#19	173	Wartburg	9-2	def. (n) SUNYIT, 70-56; LOST to (n) #20 North Central (Ill.), 91-94 2OT; 12/31 at Waldorf
#20	149	North Central (Ill.)	8-3	def. (n) #19 Wartburg, 94-91 2OT; def. (n) Wheaton (Mass.), 89-77; 12/29 at UW-Stevens Point
#21	136	Swarthmore	8-1	12/30 at Hood
#22	113	UW-River Falls	9-1	12/30 vs. St. Olaf
#23	68	Neumann	8-0	12/30 vs. Scranton
#24	67	Denison	8-1	IDLE
#25	60	Washington U.	6-3	12/29 vs. Ohio Wesleyan; 12/30 at T#43 Wooster

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	53	Chicago	8-2	LOST at #18 Illinois Wesleyan, 54-72; 12/31 vs. #1 Babson
#27	50	New Jersey City	9-1	12/29 vs. Gettysburg; 12/30 vs. TBA
#28	39	Emory	6-2	12/29 vs. Berry; 12/31 vs. Hampden-Sydney
T#29	35	Lycoming	10-1	12/29 vs. Fredonia; 12/30 vs. TBD
T#29	35	Middlebury	7-1	12/29 vs. #18 Illinois Wesleyan; 12/30 vs. TBA
#31	26	Keene State	6-2	12/28 at #40 WPI; 12/30 vs. University of New England
#32	25	Virginia Wesleyan	7-2	12/30 vs. Mary Washington; 01/01 at #9 Christopher Newport
T#33	20	Brockport	8-1	IDLE
T#33	20	Ramapo	9-0	12/28 vs. #5 Salisbury; 12/29 vs. Gustavus Adolphus
#35	19	Endicott	6-2	12/29 vs. Southern Maine; 12/30 vs. Regis (Mass.)
#36	11	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	6-1	12/28 vs. Emerson; 12/29 vs. Oberlin
#37	9	Williams	8-1	12/29 vs. #15 Hope; 12/30 vs. TBA
#38	8	Bethel	7-1	12/30 vs. UW-Superior
#39	6	Carroll	6-3	won at Milwaukee Engineering, 87-70; LOST at Loras, 78-85; 12/29 at University of Dallas; 12/31 at Austin
#40	4	WPI	7-2	12/28 vs. #31 Keene State; 12/30 vs. Eastern Nazarene
T#41	3	Capital	8-3	IDLE
T#41	3	Ripon	6-1	LOST at #16 UW-Whitewater, 96-109; 12/29 at Willamette; 12/30 at Pacific
T#43	2	UW-La Crosse	7-3	won at Northland, 62-45; 12/31 vs. Coe
T#43	2	Wooster	5-5	LOST at Lewis and Clark, 82-87; 12/29 vs. Hobart; 12/30 vs. #25 Washington U.
T#45	1	Misericordia	8-1	12/29 vs. TBD; 12/30 vs. TBD
T#45	1	St. Thomas	6-3	IDLE

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 26, 2016, 10:14:58 AM

Thanks for the update, Darryl! A nice way to start off the D3hoops morning.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on December 26, 2016, 10:41:05 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 26, 2016, 10:14:58 AM
Thanks for the update, Darryl! A nice way to start off the D3hoops morning.

I agree. +1 Darryl. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie77 on December 26, 2016, 10:47:37 AM

This is a day late, but here's wishing everyone on this board the merriest of Christmases.

I'd like to apologize for my part in crossing a line in fair decorum with our Marietta booster. I've been a long time follower of this board (seldom poster), but at some point I began piling on, unnecessarily. We've made it clear what we thought of his tone, but wouldn't let it go. That's on the rest of us. I was going to give myself a spite, but it won't let me. Somebody else should do this--please).

Here's hoping that all of us can confine ourselves to positive discussion.

Thanks, Pat, for reopening this page and for doing all you do as founder and guru of all D3boards!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 26, 2016, 09:26:44 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on December 23, 2016, 11:37:40 AMBabson has not played any Midwest teams, so there is no way to compare them to a Midwest team based on any kind of reliable statistic.

Babson's taking on a fairly decent U of Chicago team on Saturday afternoon in the Ratner Center. I'm psyched about seeing this one in person.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 26, 2016, 11:33:09 PM

That seems like an interesting trip. That far for just one game...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 27, 2016, 12:07:08 AM

C'mon, the old Tom wouldn't have thought twice about doing it!

(Of course, the old Tom was a carefree bachelor who didn't face any domestic consequences for hopping in a car and spending the better part of a day away from home in order to watch a game in which he had no rooting interest. ;))

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 27, 2016, 08:57:04 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 26, 2016, 11:33:09 PM
That seems like an interesting trip. That far for just one game...

I believe I read on another board that there was an alum that funded this trip.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 27, 2016, 11:06:33 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 27, 2016, 12:07:08 AM
C'mon, the old Tom wouldn't have thought twice about doing it!

(Of course, the old Tom was a carefree bachelor who didn't face any domestic consequences for hopping in a car and spending the better part of a day away from home in order to watch a game in which he had no rooting interest. ;))

You make a very good point. Ironically, my wife is trying to broker a deal to head to nearby Wausau (a half hour from Stevens Point) to visit the waterpark in exchange for the Pointer game against either NCC or Augustana! Not sure the hotel bill is worth the trip.

And, although seeing Babson would be nice, if I had a choice, I'd probably go over to Wisconsin Dells to see 4 games that involve 2 WIAC teams, and Lawrence and Central.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 27, 2016, 07:08:20 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 27, 2016, 08:57:04 AM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 26, 2016, 11:33:09 PM
That seems like an interesting trip. That far for just one game...

I believe I read on another board that there was an alum that funded this trip.

It was in an Around the Nation column! Yes, there is a Chicago-based Babson alum who helps fund the trip as a way of exposing the team to the city.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 27, 2016, 07:16:02 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 27, 2016, 07:08:20 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 27, 2016, 08:57:04 AM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 26, 2016, 11:33:09 PM
That seems like an interesting trip. That far for just one game...

I believe I read on another board that there was an alum that funded this trip.

It was in an Around the Nation column! Yes, there is a Chicago-based Babson alum who helps fund the trip as a way of exposing the team to the city.

Sounds like a great idea. Look for the Illinois Wesleyan Titans to be playing games in Dallas somewhere down the road!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 27, 2016, 10:16:41 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 27, 2016, 07:08:20 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 27, 2016, 08:57:04 AM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 26, 2016, 11:33:09 PM
That seems like an interesting trip. That far for just one game...

I believe I read on another board that there was an alum that funded this trip.

It was in an Around the Nation column! Yes, there is a Chicago-based Babson alum who helps fund the trip as a way of exposing the team to the city.

That! :) Yes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 27, 2016, 10:29:19 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 27, 2016, 11:06:33 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 27, 2016, 12:07:08 AM
C'mon, the old Tom wouldn't have thought twice about doing it!

(Of course, the old Tom was a carefree bachelor who didn't face any domestic consequences for hopping in a car and spending the better part of a day away from home in order to watch a game in which he had no rooting interest. ;))

You make a very good point. Ironically, my wife is trying to broker a deal to head to nearby Wausau (a half hour from Stevens Point) to visit the waterpark in exchange for the Pointer game against either NCC or Augustana! Not sure the hotel bill is worth the trip.

And, although seeing Babson would be nice, if I had a choice, I'd probably go over to Wisconsin Dells to see 4 games that involve 2 WIAC teams, and Lawrence and Central.

For what it's worth, that water park is pretty fun. 'Course we had a Groupon, such helped.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 28, 2016, 01:23:43 AM

We've been up there several times. I'll have to see if I can find a current groupon too!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 28, 2016, 01:31:37 AM

Phew! I get tied up with football and travel, not to mention Christmas and trying to spend time with the family, and I don't stay caught up... my mistake. Wow. That took longer than it should have. LOL

In Vegas and REALLY looking forward to seeing Salisbury, Ramapo, Hardin-Simmons (or is it Mary Hardin-Simmons?) on the men's side (along with the others). Should be some good games, I hope.

I have thought long and hard about the Top 25 in the last few weeks... these holiday tournaments have not made it any easier. I am just not sure any team truly is the best or the Top 25... I think you could make easy arguments fro 50 or so teams to be on the poll. We have gotten to a point in Division III where it is really difficult to truly gauge teams on the men's side. That is not a bad thing at all. We have parity and a lot of teams are good which makes all games fun and not predictable. However, it does make you wonder if a voter like myself has to change with the times. I think I have to some degree. Twice in the last year I have not removed my number one vote after a loss. Multiple times I have not moved a team downward for a loss. Many, many times I have not moved lower teams down for losses to higher teams and sometimes even moved teams up after losses. The Top2 5 is FAR more fluid than it has been in a long, long time (and nearly like a flood-ravaged river compared to the women's poll) and that makes it not only fun for fans of Division III, but a serious exercise in due diligence for voters. The next poll is going to be very, very interesting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 28, 2016, 05:06:01 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 28, 2016, 01:31:37 AM
Phew! I get tied up with football and travel, not to mention Christmas and trying to spend time with the family, and I don't stay caught up... my mistake. Wow. That took longer than it should have. LOL

In Vegas and REALLY looking forward to seeing Salisbury, Ramapo, Hardin-Simmons (or is it Mary Hardin-Simmons?) on the men's side (along with the others). Should be some good games, I hope.

I have thought long and hard about the Top 25 in the last few weeks... these holiday tournaments have not made it any easier. I am just not sure any team truly is the best or the Top 25... I think you could make easy arguments fro 50 or so teams to be on the poll. We have gotten to a point in Division III where it is really difficult to truly gauge teams on the men's side. That is not a bad thing at all. We have parity and a lot of teams are good which makes all games fun and not predictable. However, it does make you wonder if a voter like myself has to change with the times. I think I have to some degree. Twice in the last year I have not removed my number one vote after a loss. Multiple times I have not moved a team downward for a loss. Many, many times I have not moved lower teams down for losses to higher teams and sometimes even moved teams up after losses. The Top2 5 is FAR more fluid than it has been in a long, long time (and nearly like a flood-ravaged river compared to the women's poll) and that makes it not only fun for fans of Division III, but a serious exercise in due diligence for voters. The next poll is going to be very, very interesting.

John Gresham Hardin became a major benefactor to cash strapped Texas colleges in the Depression including 3 in D3, Hardin-Simmons University, Howard Payne and UMHB.
https://tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/fha62

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 28, 2016, 09:05:18 PM

Previously unbeaten and #5 Salisbury falls to still unbeaten but not yet ranked Ramapo, 66-65. The two teams combined for enough bricks for Trump to build his wall - 84 rebounds is a ton of missed shots. With both teams coming in undefeated, I'd assume great defense, except that both teams shot UNDER 50% from the charity stripe! Unless the zebras decided to allow defense on FTs, it appears that both teams were severely offensively impaired tonite (or maybe just severely offensive :o).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 28, 2016, 10:25:53 PM

Salisbury and Ramapo combined to go 23-49 from the free-throw line. Both shot under 50%.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 28, 2016, 11:29:17 PM

Was it in an empty gym with a bad shooting background?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 29, 2016, 04:40:41 AM

SMH... amazing how some don't realize the game was broadcast... by us... from Las Vegas... in front of a pretty decent crowd for this event's standards (due to location and time of the year). Could have watched a pretty entertaining game with some pretty good defense that equated to those missed shots. There was also two teams who clearly were trying a little too hard at times with the pressure of the game clearly on their shoulders.

BTW - check out this highlight from Ramapo in the game... Soanes seemed to come out of nowhere: https://youtu.be/O0fWYNOy58A

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 29, 2016, 09:44:44 AM

Must have been revolutionary mental defense on the free throws.

IMO it's better to play these type games on campus sites in facilities made for small school basketball. Have seen the same thing in high school basketball tournaments in Ohio. Players have a hard time adjusting to the open background if they aren't used to it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on December 29, 2016, 11:57:53 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 29, 2016, 09:44:44 AM
...(t)hese type games on campus sites in facilities made for small school basketball. Have seen the same thing in high school basketball tournaments in Ohio. Players have a hard time adjusting to the open background if they aren't used to it.

Free throws are muscle memory. Should not matter at all what's behind the backboard.

Below are all facilities "made for small school basketball"... If Augie can fill their 4,000 person stadium and if Hope and Calvin can fill their 3,400 and 5,000 seat stadiums for volleyball, I don't think the problem is in the South Point Hotel's 4,400 seat stadium. Not to mention the national broadcast by D3hoops or the experience for the players travelling to Las Vegas and playing against teams they otherwise would never have scheduled due to regional issues...

(https://i2.wp.com/anchor.hope.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/page12_sports2.jpg?resize=536%2C286&ssl=1)(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CteiUJgWAAEoAt_.jpg:large)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.augiemirror.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F02%2Farena.png&hash=1af70bbcdd095d63dbb93650a76374b2ca55246e)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AO on December 29, 2016, 12:44:06 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on December 29, 2016, 11:57:53 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 29, 2016, 09:44:44 AM
...(t)hese type games on campus sites in facilities made for small school basketball. Have seen the same thing in high school basketball tournaments in Ohio. Players have a hard time adjusting to the open background if they aren't used to it.

Free throws are muscle memory. Should not matter at all what's behind the backboard.

Below are all facilities "made for small school basketball"... If Augie can fill their 4,000 person stadium and if Hope and Calvin can fill their 3,400 and 5,000 seat stadiums for volleyball, I don't think the problem is in the South Point Hotel's 4,400 seat stadium. Not to mention the national broadcast by D3hoops or the experience for the players travelling to Las Vegas and playing against teams they otherwise would never have scheduled due to regional issues...

(https://i2.wp.com/anchor.hope.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/page12_sports2.jpg?resize=536%2C286&ssl=1)(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CteiUJgWAAEoAt_.jpg:large)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.augiemirror.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F02%2Farena.png&hash=1af70bbcdd095d63dbb93650a76374b2ca55246e)

I agree with you but did you mean to post pictures from Indiana's Assembly Hall and the D2 South Dakota Augustana?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 29, 2016, 01:06:47 PM

Quote from: AO on December 29, 2016, 12:44:06 PM
Quote from: HOPEful on December 29, 2016, 11:57:53 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 29, 2016, 09:44:44 AM
...(t)hese type games on campus sites in facilities made for small school basketball. Have seen the same thing in high school basketball tournaments in Ohio. Players have a hard time adjusting to the open background if they aren't used to it.

Free throws are muscle memory. Should not matter at all what's behind the backboard.

Below are all facilities "made for small school basketball"... If Augie can fill their 4,000 person stadium and if Hope and Calvin can fill their 3,400 and 5,000 seat stadiums for volleyball, I don't think the problem is in the South Point Hotel's 4,400 seat stadium. Not to mention the national broadcast by D3hoops or the experience for the players travelling to Las Vegas and playing against teams they otherwise would never have scheduled due to regional issues...

(https://i2.wp.com/anchor.hope.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/page12_sports2.jpg?resize=536%2C286&ssl=1)(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CteiUJgWAAEoAt_.jpg:large)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.augiemirror.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F02%2Farena.png&hash=1af70bbcdd095d63dbb93650a76374b2ca55246e)
I agree with you but did you mean to post pictures from Indiana's Assembly Hall and the D2 South Dakota Augustana?

Yep. Here's the D3 Augustana's gym (the Carver P.E. Center):

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs3.amazonaws.com%2Fsidearm.sites%2Faugustana.sidearmsports.com%2Fimages%2F2015%2F3%2F8%2FIMG_2153.JPG&hash=3558ee68453360e11e05ee398d30724f77115e4b)

Carver has a listed capacity of 3,200 on Augie's d3hoops.com page, but that's outdated information. The school's website lists the capacity at 1,900, (http://www.athletics.augustana.edu/sports/2013/7/24/MBB_0724132550.aspx?id=474) following a seating renovation in the summer of 2008, and that number's pretty accurate.

Aside from that, though, I completely agree with HOPEful's point. Really, where are the "facilities made for small-school basketball" in Vegas, anyway? The only school of higher education in the city that has a basketball program besides UNLV is the College of Southern Nevada, a juco, and the CSN Sports Center is about as big as a modestly-sized church gym:

(https://coyotestudentnews.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/ricky-picture-2-e1349470484148.jpg)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on December 29, 2016, 01:19:01 PM

Hahahahaha... nope. I didn't... I won't even change it cause I think it's funny.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AO on December 29, 2016, 01:31:25 PM

You also forgot to include a picture of Salisbury's Maggs Physical Activities Center.
(https://blog.tickpick.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/s100214_002-stadium1.jpg)
You'd think they'd be used to the open background.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 29, 2016, 02:07:10 PM

Take it up with Ken Pomeroy.

https://kenpom.com/blog/the-nrg-effect/

Unless someone has better data. I can't imagine NRG is materially different than most other places of its sort -- big D1 programs are used to 10k seat arenas or so, but NRG is much larger than that.

D3 programs mostly are used to 2kish with relatively little space between the basket and a wall. So the type places that these neutral events seem to be staged in are much different than that.

Is there a reason these events can't be held in a right-sized facility, like a high school or small college gym? Vegas, not Vegas, who cares? It's not like most D3 programs are anywhere near Vegas anyway.

It will be interesting to see if there is a preference when the Great Lakes event starts next year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 29, 2016, 02:32:41 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 29, 2016, 02:07:10 PMIs there a reason these events can't be held in a right-sized facility, like a high school or small college gym? Vegas, not Vegas, who cares?

The D3hoops.com Classic is held in Las Vegas. Are you suggesting that they find a gym somewhere outside of the city? Well, then, that's the problem; there really isn't much of anything outside of the city, except dirt and mesquite brush.

So, yeah, there is a reason why it's held where it is, rather than what you term a "right-sized facility". I've already shown you the one small-college gym in Las Vegas, and, while the shooting background at the CSN Sports Center is no doubt quite lovely, it's obviously a completely unsuitable venue for a tournament that consists of six games per day and involves dozens of teams of both genders. Shooting background isn't the only consideration when it comes to staging an event of the magnitude of the D3hoops.com Classic. In fact, it's likely not even that far up the list. Locker room facilities, transportation and/or proximity to on-site housing and dining, technical specs relating to game management and media access, etc., are all no doubt bigger priorities, and I'm sure that Pat and Gordon and D-Mac can chime in on the logistics even better than I can.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 29, 2016, 03:52:12 PM

Bad shooting backdrop or not, 10 other teams played on that floor the same day and nine managed to shoot above 50% from the stripe.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 29, 2016, 03:58:31 PM

Did it occur to anyone that the Salem Civic Center's walls are 50 feet, at least, of the baselines as well? The seats at the South Point Arena are actually closer behind the one basket than the Civic Center's walls. And on the other end of the SPA there is a backdrop that is closer to the baseline than most Division III schools I attend. Yes, there is a deep spot on one side, but it isn't that big a deal and IMHO just another thing to complain about.

I can talk about logistics when I am not calling and producing six games in a day.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 29, 2016, 04:01:10 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 29, 2016, 02:32:41 PM
The D3hoops.com Classic is held in Las Vegas. Are you suggesting that they find a gym somewhere outside of the city? Well, then, that's the problem; there really isn't much of anything outside of the city, except dirt and mesquite brush.

So, yeah, there is a reason why it's held where it is, rather than what you term a "right-sized facility". I've already shown you the one small-college gym in Las Vegas, and, while the shooting background at the CSN Sports Center is no doubt quite lovely, it's obviously a completely unsuitable venue for a tournament that consists of six games per day and involves dozens of teams of both genders. Shooting background isn't the only consideration when it comes to staging an event of the magnitude of the D3hoops.com Classic. In fact, it's likely not even that far up the list. Locker room facilities, transportation and/or proximity to on-site housing and dining, technical specs relating to game management and media access, etc., are all no doubt bigger priorities, and I'm sure that Pat and Gordon and D-Mac can chime in on the logistics even better than I can.

The other tournaments in Vegas have taken place in a YMCA, or in a high school gym, and teams have to bus from the hotel to practice and to games. Here they can walk, and that's something coaches rave about every time we ask them for their feedback.

The national championship of Division III is played in a large gym with deep shooting backgrounds. Good enough for the national championship, good enough for the D3hoops.com Classic. Why should we limit ourselves to small-time feels for these kind of events? Coaches generally enjoy the facility.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 29, 2016, 06:43:06 PM

Good enough for the NCAA is sometimes not that high a bar.

But whatever. if the coaches are getting what they want then there's no reason to change. I guess ones that want that kind of experience can go there and the ones that want something else can go to Great Lakes or the Hoopville, or a traditional campus tournament like Mose Hole or something.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie on December 29, 2016, 06:54:41 PM

That is true what pat said a gym 45 minutes outside the city.I remember the first tournament I went to in Vegas it was held at UNLV practice facility which wasn't bad.But nothing beats Southpoint everything you need is there.20 minutes outside the strip so actually it is convenient for teams and family and fans.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 29, 2016, 07:05:24 PM

Williams 91 #15 Hope 85 OT

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 29, 2016, 07:12:08 PM

Middlebury beat IWU by 2 in New York.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on December 29, 2016, 08:06:39 PM

So, how about the NESCAC this year? 8-)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 29, 2016, 08:38:15 PM

Quote from: Fifth and Putnam on December 29, 2016, 08:06:39 PM
So, how about the NESCAC this year? 8-)

Not TOO shabby - 3 teams currently in the top 25 (none of whom lost since the last poll), Williams a near lock to make it into the next poll, and Middlebury a definite possibility (though they only had 9 points in the last one, and IWU was their first 'defining' win). That's 4 (conceivably 5) teams in, and Conn Col. still only has one loss (though no signature wins). I'd say they are definitely in the top half of conferences! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 29, 2016, 09:13:11 PM

Quote from: Fifth and Putnam on December 29, 2016, 08:06:39 PM
So, how about the NESCAC this year? 8-)

Geez I wish they played a round-robin

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 29, 2016, 09:26:40 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 29, 2016, 06:43:06 PM
Good enough for the NCAA is sometimes not that high a bar.

But whatever. if the coaches are getting what they want then there's no reason to change. I guess ones that want that kind of experience can go there and the ones that want something else can go to Great Lakes or the Hoopville, or a traditional campus tournament like Mose Hole or something.

There's room for all sorts of these events. Orlando, Las Vegas, Owings Mills, etc.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 29, 2016, 09:27:11 PM

Quote from: sac on December 29, 2016, 09:13:11 PM
Quote from: Fifth and Putnam on December 29, 2016, 08:06:39 PM
So, how about the NESCAC this year? 8-)

Geez I wish they played a round-robin

They do. You really want them to play two.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 29, 2016, 09:29:19 PM

Quote from: sac on December 29, 2016, 09:13:11 PM
Quote from: Fifth and Putnam on December 29, 2016, 08:06:39 PM
So, how about the NESCAC this year? 8-)

Geez I wish they played a round-robin

I would like to see the NCAA institute a rule that would require leagues to hold double round-robins in basketball in order to receive an automatic bid. But that's wishful thinking, as the NCAA is typically pretty hands-off in terms of how leagues go about their business of scheduling.

Meanwhile, the NESCAC is the glaring exception in D3 by being the only league to have merely a single round-robin.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 29, 2016, 09:44:15 PM

NESCAC plays a single round robin? Wow, I had no idea.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 29, 2016, 09:51:10 PM

LOL!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 29, 2016, 09:55:50 PM

UWSP nips #20 North Central, 65-63, in central Wisconsin on a pair of Ethan Bublitz free throws with two seconds remaining.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 29, 2016, 10:10:41 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on December 29, 2016, 09:44:15 PM
NESCAC plays a single round robin? Wow, I had no idea.

Everyone who follows the national D3 scene respects NESCAC. Everyone who follows the national D3 scene is also pissed off that A) NESCAC is the only conference that doesn't cannibalize itself with a double round-robin and B) mostly mediocre (to flat-out bad) D3 conferences are so thick on the ground in New England that NESCAC can cherry-pick weak teams who will have good records to achieve phenomenal SOS without even touching their multi-billion$ endowments. ::) Oh, and C) they always seem to have the easiest road to Salem. :P

Did I forget any of the standard complaints? :D But I would really love to see Amherst, Williams, or whomever, play a couple of conference seasons in the CCIW or WIAC! :o ;D They MIGHT show how good they are, or it might get brutal! :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 29, 2016, 10:15:00 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 29, 2016, 10:10:41 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on December 29, 2016, 09:44:15 PM
NESCAC plays a single round robin? Wow, I had no idea.

Everyone who follows the national D3 scene respects NESCAC. Everyone who follows the national D3 scene is also pissed off that A) NESCAC is the only conference that doesn't cannibalize itself with a double round-robin and B) mostly mediocre (to flat-out bad) D3 conferences are so thick on the ground in New England that NESCAC can cherry-pick weak teams who will have good records to achieve phenomenal SOS without even touching their multi-billion$ endowments. ::) Oh, and C) they always seem to have the easiest road to Salem. :P

Did I forget any of the standard complaints? :D But I would really love to see Amherst, Williams, or whomever, play a couple of conference seasons in the CCIW or WIAC! :o ;D They MIGHT show how good they are, or it might get brutal! :P

There's no need to explain this to nescac1, Chuck. He's had this argument thrown his way eight thousand times over the years on d3boards.com. Let's face it -- we all have our opinions on this issue, but at this point it's about as tired a rehash as the ol' the-WIAC-should-leave-D3-and-join-D2 argument.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 29, 2016, 10:19:48 PM

Tell you what: considering that Williams has lost three titles games to WIAC teams, two on the final possession, I'll happily endorse a double round robin for NESCAC in exchange for WIAC's departure!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 29, 2016, 10:23:41 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on December 29, 2016, 10:19:48 PM
Tell you what: considering that Williams has lost three titles games to WIAC teams, two on the final possession, I'll happily endorse a double round robin for NESCAC in exchange for WIAC's departure!

And as a CCIW guy, I'd happily endorse your suggestion! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 29, 2016, 11:56:57 PM

FYI - the "NCAA" mandating the NESCAC (or any conference) play a double-round-robin play is actually the schools/programs of Division III mandating it. Remember, Indy does nothing that the schools, presidents, committees made up of Division III institutions don't mandate themselves. Indy just carries out what has been voted on/approved accordingly. You would think that there would be enough numbers to force that kind of decision on one conference ... but at the same time, presidents, ADs, conference commissioners are very aware that one model doesn't work for everyone and thus will not force things like this or roster restrictions (enrollment restrictions).

Would it be nice? Sure. They kind of do. Some coaches in the conference actually WANT it... but when it comes to a lot of things, old school, hypotrical, thinking plays a role in the NESCAC and it is hard to show why one way of thinking isn't across the board... or right... but alas... those are the playing grounds we have.

BTW consider this, the MIAA (probably not the only one) plays a double-round-robin in soccer... there are extremes to the idea and that is certainly one of them!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 30, 2016, 12:00:12 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 29, 2016, 10:23:41 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on December 29, 2016, 10:19:48 PM
Tell you what: considering that Williams has lost three titles games to WIAC teams, two on the final possession, I'll happily endorse a double round robin for NESCAC in exchange for WIAC's departure!

And as a CCIW guy, I'd happily endorse your suggestion! ;D

Obviously, mandating a double round-robin is unfeasible. That could be anywhere from 12 to 22 games, depending on the conference. But a setup where you have to play 60% or 67% or 70% of your schedule against conference opponents in order to qualify for an automatic bid? That sounds reasonable to me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 30, 2016, 12:01:30 AM

Hah -- you can tell when halftime comes in Vegas. That's when Dave and I get on the boards for a minute. Back to writing. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 30, 2016, 12:55:10 AM

Yep... game is over... back to reading the boards - though, I am SO far behind thanks to football, Christmas, and Vegas. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 30, 2016, 02:54:14 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 29, 2016, 10:23:41 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on December 29, 2016, 10:19:48 PM
Tell you what: considering that Williams has lost three titles games to WIAC teams, two on the final possession, I'll happily endorse a double round robin for NESCAC in exchange for WIAC's departure!

And as a CCIW guy, I'd happily endorse your suggestion! ;D

Hey now! Be nice!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 30, 2016, 12:47:49 PM

I enjoy the banter about 'appropriate' gym sizes, etc.

In Indiana, my home state, we have High School gyms that rival many D-1 gym sizes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Largest_high_school_gyms_in_the_United_States

The arena where we played the regionals in the old, real, single class tournament was the gym used in Blue Chips, and we went there frequently since Frankfort was in our conference.

And I've seen a lot of small D-1 gyms. Quaint. There are a lot of D-1 programs and conferences that don't draw.

http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/m_basketball_RB/Reports/attend/2016.pdf

The gyms in the WCC aside from BYU are pretty much like D-3 gyms. Maybe a little larger, but not much.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AO on December 30, 2016, 01:48:36 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 30, 2016, 12:47:49 PM
I enjoy the banter about 'appropriate' gym sizes, etc.

In Indiana, my home state, we have High School gyms that rival many D-1 gym sizes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Largest_high_school_gyms_in_the_United_States

The arena where we played the regionals in the old, real, single class tournament was the gym used in Blue Chips, and we went there frequently since Frankfort was in our conference.

And I've seen a lot of small D-1 gyms. Quaint. There are a lot of D-1 programs and conferences that don't draw.

http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/m_basketball_RB/Reports/attend/2016.pdf

The gyms in the WCC aside from BYU are pretty much like D-3 gyms. Maybe a little larger, but not much.

The NEC and MAAC have 10-15 teams with gyms at or under 3,000.

Even though I wasn't much of a long-distance shooter in college, I can attest to the fact that extra empty space behind the background does negatively affect shooting, but since it's the same for both teams I don't think it's much of a reason to choose a different gym.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 30, 2016, 04:33:46 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 30, 2016, 12:47:49 PM
I enjoy the banter about 'appropriate' gym sizes, etc.

In Indiana, my home state, we have High School gyms that rival many D-1 gym sizes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Largest_high_school_gyms_in_the_United_States

The arena where we played the regionals in the old, real, single class tournament was the gym used in Blue Chips, and we went there frequently since Frankfort was in our conference.

And I've seen a lot of small D-1 gyms. Quaint. There are a lot of D-1 programs and conferences that don't draw.

http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/m_basketball_RB/Reports/attend/2016.pdf

The gyms in the WCC aside from BYU are pretty much like D-3 gyms. Maybe a little larger, but not much.

My high school doesn't crack the top 20 in Indiana with a mere 5,500 capacity. But that's more than 3.5 times FC's capacity of 1500

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 30, 2016, 05:15:05 PM

Ephs should, I expect, join the top 25 for the first time in a few years (I believe) after gutting out two tough wins versus strong opponents. Williams was up ten but nearly fumbled this one away late, still, the Ephs played great defense all day and hung tough despite a second straight rough shooting day from deep.

I've seen three guys who look like all-Americans to me so far this year in Williams games: the Ephs' Dan Aronowitz, Mount Union's DeAllen Jackson and Hope's Harrison Blackledge. If those aren't three of the top 20 guys in the country, I'd be very curious to see who is. All three carry very heavy burdens for their respective teams and do it very efficiently. Springfield's Jake Ross is very close behind and he is roughly on the same level despite being a frosh. I predict he will be at LEAST a two-time All-American.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 31, 2016, 12:10:20 AM

Speaking of All-Americans, #13 North Park rode its two preseason All-Americans to victory tonight over a lightly-regarded but stubborn Manchester team, 93-84. Jordan Robinson had a 32 and 11 double-double and may find himself ranked #1 in the nation in three-point shooting when the next NCAA statistical rankings come out (he was trailing only UWW's Zach Knoblauch, and I'm pretty sure that Robinson's outshot Knoblauch from downtown since that last ranking), and the other Vikings star, Juwan Henry, had 23 points and seven assists.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 31, 2016, 01:00:47 AM

Anyone else here happy Sager gets to post on this board with relevance now. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 31, 2016, 01:39:27 AM

It does still feel a bit weird to be able to legitimately post about my team in this particular room.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 31, 2016, 11:57:51 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 31, 2016, 12:10:20 AM
Speaking of All-Americans, #13 North Park rode its two preseason All-Americans to victory tonight over a lightly-regarded but stubborn Manchester team, 93-84. Jordan Robinson had a 32 and 11 double-double and may find himself ranked #1 in the nation in three-point shooting when the next NCAA statistical rankings come out (he was trailing only UWW's Zach Knoblauch, and I'm pretty sure that Robinson's outshot Knoblauch from downtown since that last ranking), and the other Vikings star, Juwan Henry, had 23 points and seven assists.

Robinson is at .608, Keith Richardson is .595, Knoblauch is .590. I don't know when the next rankings come out but would imagine Robinson is leading for now.

Whitewater is shooting better than 48% from 3 as a team!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie77 on December 31, 2016, 01:07:37 PM

That's good research. Thanks! +k

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 31, 2016, 02:02:11 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 31, 2016, 11:57:51 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 31, 2016, 12:10:20 AM
Speaking of All-Americans, #13 North Park rode its two preseason All-Americans to victory tonight over a lightly-regarded but stubborn Manchester team, 93-84. Jordan Robinson had a 32 and 11 double-double and may find himself ranked #1 in the nation in three-point shooting when the next NCAA statistical rankings come out (he was trailing only UWW's Zach Knoblauch, and I'm pretty sure that Robinson's outshot Knoblauch from downtown since that last ranking), and the other Vikings star, Juwan Henry, had 23 points and seven assists.

Robinson is at .608, Keith Richardson is .595, Knoblauch is .590. I don't know when the next rankings come out but would imagine Robinson is leading for now.

Whitewater is shooting better than 48% from 3 as a team!

I don't want to take anything away from what Whitewater has done this year, including in their shooting and 11-0 start, they've only played one away game (and two neutral site games). And they also haven't played a really hard schedule.

It will be interesting to see what happens when the WIAC schedule begins (and when they are truly defended hard for the first time).

Whitewater is averaging 90 per game. Everybody else in the WIAC but Stout is holding teams under 70. Something's gotta give, and I think it will be WW's offense.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 31, 2016, 02:34:24 PM

Quote from: John Gleich on December 31, 2016, 02:02:11 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 31, 2016, 11:57:51 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 31, 2016, 12:10:20 AM
Speaking of All-Americans, #13 North Park rode its two preseason All-Americans to victory tonight over a lightly-regarded but stubborn Manchester team, 93-84. Jordan Robinson had a 32 and 11 double-double and may find himself ranked #1 in the nation in three-point shooting when the next NCAA statistical rankings come out (he was trailing only UWW's Zach Knoblauch, and I'm pretty sure that Robinson's outshot Knoblauch from downtown since that last ranking), and the other Vikings star, Juwan Henry, had 23 points and seven assists.

Robinson is at .608, Keith Richardson is .595, Knoblauch is .590. I don't know when the next rankings come out but would imagine Robinson is leading for now.

Whitewater is shooting better than 48% from 3 as a team!

I don't want to take anything away from what Whitewater has done this year, including in their shooting and 11-0 start, they've only played one away game (and two neutral site games). And they also haven't played a really hard schedule.

No one seems to mind when Babson does it. And they don't have a top conference like WW and WIAC.

It's highly unlikely that Whitewater will do as well against the toughest league ine D3 than against non-con. But it's weird how this is a mark against them but not against new england teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 31, 2016, 02:55:00 PM

If only New England teams would play some quality teams from the Midwest, I guess we'd see how overrated they are ... right??

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 31, 2016, 07:34:53 PM

Other people may have made that argument, but not me. I've seen plenty of Babson online over the past two seasons, so I knew when I walked into Ratner this afternoon that I would see a team that would give the Maroons all that they could handle. And that was certainly the case.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 31, 2016, 07:50:27 PM

Quote from: John Gleich on December 31, 2016, 02:02:11 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 31, 2016, 11:57:51 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 31, 2016, 12:10:20 AM
Speaking of All-Americans, #13 North Park rode its two preseason All-Americans to victory tonight over a lightly-regarded but stubborn Manchester team, 93-84. Jordan Robinson had a 32 and 11 double-double and may find himself ranked #1 in the nation in three-point shooting when the next NCAA statistical rankings come out (he was trailing only UWW's Zach Knoblauch, and I'm pretty sure that Robinson's outshot Knoblauch from downtown since that last ranking), and the other Vikings star, Juwan Henry, had 23 points and seven assists.

Robinson is at .608, Keith Richardson is .595, Knoblauch is .590. I don't know when the next rankings come out but would imagine Robinson is leading for now.

Whitewater is shooting better than 48% from 3 as a team!

I don't want to take anything away from what Whitewater has done this year, including in their shooting and 11-0 start, they've only played one away game (and two neutral site games). And they also haven't played a really hard schedule.

It will be interesting to see what happens when the WIAC schedule begins (and when they are truly defended hard for the first time).

Whitewater is averaging 90 per game. Everybody else in the WIAC but Stout is holding teams under 70. Something's gotta give, and I think it will be WW's offense.

I take it, then, that you do not find ShineTime's ideas intriguing, and you do not wish to subscribe to his newsletter. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 31, 2016, 07:51:15 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on December 31, 2016, 02:55:00 PM
If only New England teams would play some quality teams from the Midwest, I guess we'd see how overrated they are ... right??

You mean the team that hasn't won a tournament game since 2001? Is that your definition of quality where defending Babson's schedule is concerned, but yet it's open season on Whitewater?

IWU beat Chicago by more than Babson did and led at halftime.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 31, 2016, 07:56:25 PM

Don't get caught up in the comparative scores game. Babson is better than Illinois Wesleyan.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 31, 2016, 08:03:54 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 31, 2016, 07:56:25 PM
Don't get caught up in the comparative scores game. Babson is better than Illinois Wesleyan.

So one game result matters when it's Babson but not IWU.

The hypocrisy surrounding this school just grows and seemingly knows no bounds.

Why is everyone so hot on Babson that they're willing to throw logic and argumentative integrity out the window? Does anyone other than someone on a propaganda mission really think that Chicago is the measuring stick for Midwestern programs?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 31, 2016, 08:14:32 PM

How They Fared (Nearly Complete)

There's only one men's game scheduled for tomorrow, but it's between two teams on this list. However, I'll go ahead and post the very-nearly-complete report now, and edit the report tomorrow to add in that final result.

EDIT: I moved the whole report (with the final result added) HERE (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4097.msg1783078#msg1783078)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 31, 2016, 09:14:07 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 31, 2016, 08:03:54 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 31, 2016, 07:56:25 PM
Don't get caught up in the comparative scores game. Babson is better than Illinois Wesleyan.

So one game result matters when it's Babson but not IWU.

The hypocrisy surrounding this school just grows and seemingly knows no bounds.

Why is everyone so hot on Babson that they're willing to throw logic and argumentative integrity out the window? Does anyone other than someone on a propaganda mission really think that Chicago is the measuring stick for Midwestern programs?

I've seen Illinois Wesleyan multiple times. I've seen Babson multiple times, and today I saw the Beavers in person.

Babson is better than Illinois Wesleyan.

It's not that complicated, Spence. It isn't a conspiracy, willful blindness, groupthink, or any other excuse. And I am not using Chicago as a measuring stick. In fact, I'm the one who just pointed out that Chicago shouldn't be a measuring stick when I warned against putting too much stock in comparative scores.

You're the Massey cheerleader who thinks that the D3 men's basketball championships committee should be using the Massey Ratings for its Selection Monday determinations. Well, as of this moment, Babson is #8 and Illinois Wesleyan is #16, according to Massey. And that's without taking today's Babson win at Ratner into consideration.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 01, 2017, 03:07:49 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 31, 2016, 11:57:51 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 31, 2016, 12:10:20 AM
Speaking of All-Americans, #13 North Park rode its two preseason All-Americans to victory tonight over a lightly-regarded but stubborn Manchester team, 93-84. Jordan Robinson had a 32 and 11 double-double and may find himself ranked #1 in the nation in three-point shooting when the next NCAA statistical rankings come out (he was trailing only UWW's Zach Knoblauch, and I'm pretty sure that Robinson's outshot Knoblauch from downtown since that last ranking), and the other Vikings star, Juwan Henry, had 23 points and seven assists.

Robinson is at .608, Keith Richardson is .595, Knoblauch is .590. I don't know when the next rankings come out but would imagine Robinson is leading for now.

Whitewater is shooting better than 48% from 3 as a team!

Quote from: augie77 on December 31, 2016, 01:07:37 PM
That's good research. Thanks! +k

Not that I'm interested in stirring up trouble between the two of you again, but Spence's info -- or at least the implication behind it -- is a little off. Yes, Keith Richardson of Marietta is shooting .595 from beyond the arc, but he does not qualify for the NCAA statistical ranking in that category. The NCAA's ranking for three-point FG% requires a minimum of 2.5 successful treys per game, and Richardson only averages 2 made treys per game. He's made 22 in Marietta's eleven games to date. He didn't qualify for last week's ranking, and he won't qualify for this coming week's, either.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 09:17:31 AM

I was speaking generally about the collective impressive showing for some of New England's best against a slew of strong Midwest teams: Chicago, Mount Union, Hope, IWU, Marietta. You want to talk comparative scores? Babson beat Endicott, who is a very good team you've unfairly derided as a tomato can, by double digits. Endicott beat Midd, who beat IWU. Babson has played a VERY tough schedule -- Amherst, Bowdoin, Bates, Tufts, Endicott, Chicago. I'll put those six games against nearly any group of six out of conference opponents in the country. Not a tomato can among them. How many of those teams have you ever seen play, by the way?? If you've never even watched them once you aren't really qualified to deride the level of play. Just because you don't follow New England teams closely doesn't mean those teams aren't talented.

Since you swear by Massey, New England is now kicking butt in the Massey top 12 too, and trust me, Amherst is way underrated right now.

I never derided Whitewater and I wouldn't. But how many times do Northeast teams need to beat top 25 Midwest teams for you to change your totally uninformed, inflexible opinion?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 09:19:39 AM

And by the way given the results so far and ridiculous collection of talent on the roster (four JC / higher division transfers) I'd say Whitewater is the odds on favorite to win the title. Babson is surely in the top 3-4 in those odds. But that's a different discussion altogether.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 01, 2017, 09:20:00 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 09:17:31 AM
How many of those teams have you ever seen play, by the way?? If you've never even watched them once you aren't really qualified to deride the level of play.

I'll amend this. If you haven't seen teams play, you should admit as much with each mention of them and seriously tone down the volume of posts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 01, 2017, 10:21:56 AM

I have watched a lot of games across a lot of regions so far this season. The team I follow has played a number of strong teams (Ohio Wesleyan, North Central, North Park, Wash U, Chicago, Middlebury) and I've also been able to catch several other games of interest - like the Chicago/Babson game yesterday. My biggest takeaway on 2016-17 so far is that there is tremendous parity in Division III men's basketball. A few thoughts within that...

I am confident there is a group of 4-5 teams that are the favorites to win the national championship, but it's not really even obvious to me who those teams are yet. Early indications, to me, are that group includes Babson, Whitman, Amherst, and UW-Whitewater. It's possible there is another team or two that belongs in that group...it's also possible that not all of those teams I listed belong in that elite tier. Having watched Babson yesterday against Chicago, I like the Beavers as the best team I've seen. I like that they have a 1st Team All-American to give the ball to when times get tough, I like the other impressive talent around Flannery, and I like the way they go about their business on the floor.

Starting immediately after that "elite tier" I mentioned above, I see a huge pack of extremely even teams that spans from about 5 down to 25. For example, here are teams I have watched that I really can't find any significant separation between (going down the current Top 25) - #4-Marietta, #7-St. Norbert, #11-UW-Eau Claire, #12-Benedictine, #13-North Park, #15 Hope, #17 Wesleyan, #18 Illinois Wesleyan, #20 North Central, #25 Wash U, Middlebury (not ranked), Augustana (not ranked), UW-Stevens Point (not ranked). If any of these two teams played each other on a neutral court, I'd have to call it a "pick 'em." I'm guessing most of those other Top 25 teams and candiates I have not seen belong in this pack too.

And finally, while I do see separation between that small top tier and the big second tier, I don't think that separation is very big. For example, Greg mentioned #1-Babson vs #18-Illinois Wesleyan. I agree that Babson is better overall than Illinois Wesleyan and certainly should be ranked higher, but if those two teams played on a neutral court I believe that would be an incredibly close and competitive game that IWU could absolutely win. The combination of 6-8 Trevor Seibring and IWU's great outside attack would give Babson a lot of problems. (In the same way IWU played a barn-burner at North Central on 12/3 when North Central had Connor Raridon.) Or replace IWU in my point above with Middlebury or Wash U or North Park or Marietta, etc. There might be 3-4 points of difference, in terms of a point spread, between the top 4-5 teams and that second tier. Those games could end up going either way.

Trying to sort out the Top 25 is always fun but when there is this much parity, I doubt there will be many concrete answers until things get settled in the tournament. The tournament, by the way, should be awesome. It's probably a year where any of the 21 Pool C teams could legitimately make a Final Four run.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 10:57:27 AM

Amen Titan Q, I do think this is a year without juggernauts. Whitewater (who I admittedly haven't seen) MIGHT emerge as a team on a whole different level just because of all the transfer and frosh talent they have added to a core of some other solid players. On paper (both statistically and looking at roster talent) they appear scary. But that is speculative right now. I have not seen Whitman either. Babson and Amherst are definitely the best I've seen, but both have flaws -- for Babson it's a thin bench, for Amherst it's the opposite issue, the lack of a consistent superstar performer -- and plenty of teams could beat either on any given day, including from NESCAC alone, Wesleyan, Midd, Williams and maybe Tufts if Palleschi returns to form. There is very likely to be at least one, maybe two, teams in the Final Four this year who are big surprises.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 01, 2017, 12:17:57 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 10:57:27 AM
Whitewater (who I admittedly haven't seen) MIGHT emerge as a team on a whole different level just because of all the transfer and frosh talent they have added to a core of some other solid players. On paper (both statistically and looking at roster talent) they appear scary. But that is speculative right now.

Yes, UW-Whitewater is extremely talented. They have 4 key transfers:

* Chris Jones, 6-0 Jr. G, 21.7 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 3.7 apg, .529 3-point (Wabash Valley JC, Iowa Lakes JC)
* Scotty Tyler, 6-8 Jr. F, 16.3 ppg, 7.1 rpg (D1 Idaho State, D1 UW-Milwaukee)
* Derek Rongstad, 6-5 So. G/F, 8.5 ppg (D1 UW-Milwaukee)
* Demetrius Woodley, 6-4 Jr. G/F, 7.2 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 2.1 apg (Mid Plains JC, Iowa Lakes JC)

In terms of pure talent, the Warhawks are probably at a different level than the other top teams...just a matter of seeing if all those new parts mesh with the returning parts over the course of a full season.

UW-Whitewater operates with a much different personnel model than most Division III schools.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 01, 2017, 01:52:19 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 31, 2016, 07:34:53 PM
Other people may have made that argument, but not me. I've seen plenty of Babson online over the past two seasons, so I knew when I walked into Ratner this afternoon that I would see a team that would give the Maroons all that they could handle. And that was certainly the case.

Wish they'd handed you a mic! Missed having PBP on that game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 01, 2017, 02:28:29 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 09:17:31 AM
I was speaking generally about the collective impressive showing for some of New England's best against a slew of strong Midwest teams: Chicago, Mount Union, Hope, IWU, Marietta. You want to talk comparative scores? Babson beat Endicott, who is a very good team you've unfairly derided as a tomato can, by double digits. Endicott beat Midd, who beat IWU. Babson has played a VERY tough schedule -- Amherst, Bowdoin, Bates, Tufts, Endicott, Chicago. I'll put those six games against nearly any group of six out of conference opponents in the country. Not a tomato can among them. How many of those teams have you ever seen play, by the way?? If you've never even watched them once you aren't really qualified to deride the level of play. Just because you don't follow New England teams closely doesn't mean those teams aren't talented.

Since you swear by Massey, New England is now kicking butt in the Massey top 12 too, and trust me, Amherst is way underrated right now.

I never derided Whitewater and I wouldn't. But how many times do Northeast teams need to beat top 25 Midwest teams for you to change your totally uninformed, inflexible opinion?

If this is directed at me rather than at Spence, then I plead guilty on underrating Endicott sight unseen. But, aside from Endicott, what you've said doesn't really conflict with anything that I've said about the Northeast Region. I've always maintained that the NESCAC is right there with any other region's upper crust, and over the past few years I've added the top teams of the NEWMAC to that category. (I was very impressed by the MIT teams from a half-decade ago or so, for example.) In fact, I'm pretty sure that I said all that in this room the other day. It's the sheer density of the Northeast in terms of its number of teams that drags the region's overall level down, because there seems to be about two lower-tier leagues in the Northeast for every one lower-tier league found in another region -- and that sheer density is the key reason why it's easier for Northeast Region powers to schedule strategically with Pool C and tourney hosting privileges in mind.

As for the rest of it, my thinking is pretty much in line with Bob's in terms of the national picture, including his assertion that the gap between the first tier and the second tier isn't huge enough to guarantee a win for one of the half-dozen or so national-title favorites in a game against a UWSP or a Middlebury or a Christopher Newport. I also agree with Bob that this means that the tournament in March could be an absolutely awesome free-for-all.

Quote from: Titan Q on January 01, 2017, 12:17:57 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 10:57:27 AM
Whitewater (who I admittedly haven't seen) MIGHT emerge as a team on a whole different level just because of all the transfer and frosh talent they have added to a core of some other solid players. On paper (both statistically and looking at roster talent) they appear scary. But that is speculative right now.

Yes, UW-Whitewater is extremely talented. They have 4 key transfers:

* Chris Jones, 6-0 Jr. G, 21.7 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 3.7 apg, .529 3-point (Wabash Valley JC, Iowa Lakes JC)
* Scotty Tyler, 6-8 Jr. F, 16.3 ppg, 7.1 rpg (D1 Idaho State, D1 UW-Milwaukee)
* Derek Rongstad, 6-5 So. G/F, 8.5 ppg (D1 UW-Milwaukee)
* Demetrius Woodley, 6-4 Jr. G/F, 7.2 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 2.1 apg (Mid Plains JC, Iowa Lakes JC)

In terms of pure talent, the Warhawks are probably at a different level than the other top teams...just a matter of seeing if all those new parts mesh with the returning parts over the course of a full season.

UW-Whitewater operates with a much different personnel model than most Division III schools.

In that vein, this post from the WIAC room is worth considering as well:

Quote from: fredfalcon on January 01, 2017, 12:07:44 PM
Here is a sign showing Whitewater is much improved over last year: Cole van Schyndel, all-conference last season, played four minutes and scored no points in the most recent Whitewater game. I don't think he was injured. But maybe Badger Warhawk can straighten me out.

And, no, this doesn't mean that I'm buying into ShineTime's rantings about UWW, which are of tinfoil-hat quality in terms of their relationship to the historical reality of D3 men's basketball, any more than John Gleich is.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 01, 2017, 01:52:19 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 31, 2016, 07:34:53 PM
Other people may have made that argument, but not me. I've seen plenty of Babson online over the past two seasons, so I knew when I walked into Ratner this afternoon that I would see a team that would give the Maroons all that they could handle. And that was certainly the case.

Wish they'd handed you a mic! Missed having PBP on that game.

I thought about that when I looked up to the top of the Ratner stands when I arrived and didn't see anyone at the broadcast table. Perhaps I should've e-mailed Mike McGrath ahead of time and volunteered my services.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 02:48:30 PM

re: Endicott, I was referring not to you but rather to the claims by Spencer that Babson has played a bunch of tomato cans / a weak schedule. That's clearly not the case.

Scary bit of info on Whitewater. This squad sounds a bit like the 1996 Rowan team in terms of its composition; that Rowan team might not be the best TEAM I've seen in D3 but it was easily the most individually talented. Cabrini and AMC have also used similar models to build programs in the recent past so Whitewater is hardly unique.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 01, 2017, 04:06:58 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 02:48:30 PM
Scary bit of info on Whitewater. This squad sounds a bit like the 1996 Rowan team in terms of its composition; that Rowan team might not be the best TEAM I've seen in D3 but it was easily the most individually talented.

I'm confident Whitewater is not as talented as the '96 Rowan team - and probably not even all that close. Unfortunately I saw the Profs close up (Rowan 79 IWU 77, national semifinal in Salem) and that was a whole different level. Antwan Dasher was the the 5th all-time leading scorer in D1 Fairleigh Dickinson history, and accomplished that in 3 years; 6-10 Demetrius Pole was a good player at D1 St. Joseph's; Roscoe Harris was the most talented, having started at D1 Villanova for 3 years, playing alongside Kerry Kittles (Harris scored 24 vs Georgetown); and Terrance Stewart, the homegrown Rowan guy, was probably the most valuable player on the team.

There has not been a D3 team anywhere near as talented as the 1996 Rowan team since then and I doubt there ever will be again...unless the NCAA opens that loophole back up again.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:14:36 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 31, 2016, 09:14:07 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 31, 2016, 08:03:54 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 31, 2016, 07:56:25 PM
Don't get caught up in the comparative scores game. Babson is better than Illinois Wesleyan.

So one game result matters when it's Babson but not IWU.

The hypocrisy surrounding this school just grows and seemingly knows no bounds.

Why is everyone so hot on Babson that they're willing to throw logic and argumentative integrity out the window? Does anyone other than someone on a propaganda mission really think that Chicago is the measuring stick for Midwestern programs?

I've seen Illinois Wesleyan multiple times. I've seen Babson multiple times, and today I saw the Beavers in person.

Babson is better than Illinois Wesleyan.

It's not that complicated, Spence. It isn't a conspiracy, willful blindness, groupthink, or any other excuse. And I am not using Chicago as a measuring stick. In fact, I'm the one who just pointed out that Chicago shouldn't be a measuring stick when I warned against putting too much stock in comparative scores.

You're the Massey cheerleader who thinks that the D3 men's basketball championships committee should be using the Massey Ratings for its Selection Monday determinations. Well, as of this moment, Babson is #8 and Illinois Wesleyan is #16, according to Massey. And that's without taking today's Babson win at Ratner into consideration.

I didn't say you were using Chicago as a measuring stick. The Babson cheerleader (I can't remember the name) was, as if Chicago was comparable to Whitewater or IWU.

I think IWU is quite good, actually. Wouldn't surprise me if they were better than Babson if you actually got them on a court together. Beating Wash U on the road is a better win than any that Babson has, and none of IWU's losses are anything to be embarrassed about. When you play good teams, sometimes you're going to lose because someone has to and you can't play an A game every time (otherwise an A game would be your C game!).

Babson usually loses to the first proven and tested team they run into, and I imagine it'll be the same this year after their walk through their conference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:19:42 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 01, 2017, 03:07:49 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 31, 2016, 11:57:51 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 31, 2016, 12:10:20 AM
Speaking of All-Americans, #13 North Park rode its two preseason All-Americans to victory tonight over a lightly-regarded but stubborn Manchester team, 93-84. Jordan Robinson had a 32 and 11 double-double and may find himself ranked #1 in the nation in three-point shooting when the next NCAA statistical rankings come out (he was trailing only UWW's Zach Knoblauch, and I'm pretty sure that Robinson's outshot Knoblauch from downtown since that last ranking), and the other Vikings star, Juwan Henry, had 23 points and seven assists.

Robinson is at .608, Keith Richardson is .595, Knoblauch is .590. I don't know when the next rankings come out but would imagine Robinson is leading for now.

Whitewater is shooting better than 48% from 3 as a team!

Quote from: augie77 on December 31, 2016, 01:07:37 PM
That's good research. Thanks! +k

Not that I'm interested in stirring up trouble between the two of you again, but Spence's info -- or at least the implication behind it -- is a little off. Yes, Keith Richardson of Marietta is shooting .595 from beyond the arc, but he does not qualify for the NCAA statistical ranking in that category. The NCAA's ranking for three-point FG% requires a minimum of 2.5 successful treys per game, and Richardson only averages 2 made treys per game. He's made 22 in Marietta's eleven games to date. He didn't qualify for last week's ranking, and he won't qualify for this coming week's, either.

My fault. I thought it was 1.5. Richardson only plays 20 mpg, though. He's good. 2.5 made per game is kind of a lot. Seems like that penalizes some really good shooters for just not chucking it enough or their team using them differently. But it is what it is.
Muskingum has a dude that's at like 58%, too, not sure the number of makes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:25:55 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 09:17:31 AM

I never derided Whitewater and I wouldn't. But how many times do Northeast teams need to beat top 25 Midwest teams for you to change your totally uninformed, inflexible opinion?

How about when this trend changes?

1975 LeMoyne-Owen
1976 Scranton
1977 Wittenberg
1978 North Park
1979 North Park
1980 North Park
1981 Potsdam State
1982 Wabash
1983 Scranton
1984 UW-Whitewater
1985 North Park
1986 Potsdam State
1987 North Park
1988 Ohio Wesleyan
1989 UW-Whitewater
1990 Rochester
1991 UW-Platteville
1992 Calvin
1993 Ohio Northern
1994 Lebanon Valley
1995 UW-Platteville
1996 Rowan
1997 Illinois Wesleyan
1998 UW-Platteville
1999 UW-Platteville
2000 Calvin
2001 Catholic U.
2002 Otterbein
2003 Williams
2004 UW-Stevens Point
2005 UW-Stevens Point
2006 Virginia Wesleyan
2007 Amherst
2008 Washington U.
2009 Washington U.
2010 UW-Stevens Point
2011 St. Thomas
2012 UW-Whitewater
2013 Amherst
2014 UW-Whitewater
2015 UW-Stevens Point
2016 St. Thomas

3 New England champs in the history of D3, two the same school.

Uninformed? Inflexible? Or just playing the percentages?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:29:00 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 01, 2017, 10:21:56 AM

Trying to sort out the Top 25 is always fun but when there is this much parity, I doubt there will be many concrete answers until things get settled in the tournament. The tournament, by the way, should be awesome. It's probably a year where any of the 21 Pool C teams could legitimately make a Final Four run.

If this is true, it'll be the first time ever. I don't think it will be. There are always some teams wrongly put in and teams snubbed that would have been better. Usually about half the Pool C's are legitimately good, the rest are pretty much making up the numbers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:30:39 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 01, 2017, 12:17:57 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 10:57:27 AM
Whitewater (who I admittedly haven't seen) MIGHT emerge as a team on a whole different level just because of all the transfer and frosh talent they have added to a core of some other solid players. On paper (both statistically and looking at roster talent) they appear scary. But that is speculative right now.

Yes, UW-Whitewater is extremely talented. They have 4 key transfers:

* Chris Jones, 6-0 Jr. G, 21.7 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 3.7 apg, .529 3-point (Wabash Valley JC, Iowa Lakes JC)
* Scotty Tyler, 6-8 Jr. F, 16.3 ppg, 7.1 rpg (D1 Idaho State, D1 UW-Milwaukee)
* Derek Rongstad, 6-5 So. G/F, 8.5 ppg (D1 UW-Milwaukee)
* Demetrius Woodley, 6-4 Jr. G/F, 7.2 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 2.1 apg (Mid Plains JC, Iowa Lakes JC)

In terms of pure talent, the Warhawks are probably at a different level than the other top teams...just a matter of seeing if all those new parts mesh with the returning parts over the course of a full season.

UW-Whitewater operates with a much different personnel model than most Division III schools.

This is a great argument for them being D-2.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 01, 2017, 04:32:30 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:19:42 PM
... Muskingum has a dude that's at like 58%, too, not sure the number of makes.

I saw the Muskies play Friday and Saturday at Bluffton; the player in question (Rickey Wilson) has 22 treys in 11 games -- exactly 2.0/game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 04:35:18 PM

ELR you clearly don't know much about D3 history. New England's best conference was only eligible to participate in the tourney starting in 1994. Since then: seven title game appearances and three titles for New England. Enough said. Also I guess you weren't paying attention during, say, the last two weeks of play. Sheesh.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 04:36:34 PM

Basically, over the last fifteen years it's been (1) WIAC (2) NESCAC (3) everyone else.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:39:56 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 02:48:30 PM
re: Endicott, I was referring not to you but rather to the claims by Spencer that Babson has played a bunch of tomato cans / a weak schedule. That's clearly not the case.

Endicott and Tufts are nothing special. Be like an OAC school touting a home win over Capital, Mount Union, John Carroll. Would you all consider those "proof"? There are probably 8-10 D3 schools in Ohio as good as Endicott and Tufts (not just in OAC, but NCAC as well). Certainly not all of them will end up in the tournament or even particularly close because of the competition level.

And it's not like we're talking about a power conference team here. Their best chance to put together "proof" is in their non-conference, and the best they come up with is a loss to Amherst and beating Chicago?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:42:49 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 04:35:18 PM
ELR you clearly don't know much about D3 history. New England's best conference was only eligible to participate in the tourney starting in 1994. Since then: seven title game appearances and three titles for New England. Enough said. Also I guess you weren't paying attention during, say, the last two weeks of play. Sheesh.

So what teams would have won the national title from there before 1994? You think they had something for an Ohio Northern teams with 3 D-1 transfers?

Unless you prove that the NESCAC would have won something in those years they didn't participate, this is just trivia.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 01, 2017, 04:49:26 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:42:49 PM
Unless you prove that the NESCAC would have won something in those years they didn't participate, this is just trivia.

Clearly there's no way to prove anything like this but considering the NESCAC's success in the postseason since they've been allowed to participate, it's more than just trivia or a footnote -- it's a significant fact that is worth bringing forward. Knocking New England for winning three titles in 42 seasons is disingenuous when the best teams have only been eligible for about half of those.

If we're arbitrarily cutting off, it's worth throwing out there that in the automatic bid/pools era (2000 and beyond), New England has won three titles and the Great Lakes two.

And if we're talking about the current state of New England basketball, I'm not sure how relevant 1975-1994 (or 2004) is anyway.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:55:22 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 01, 2017, 04:49:26 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:42:49 PM
Unless you prove that the NESCAC would have won something in those years they didn't participate, this is just trivia.

Clearly there's no way to prove anything like this but considering the NESCAC's success in the postseason since they've been allowed to participate, it's more than just trivia or a footnote -- it's a significant fact that is worth bringing forward. Knocking New England for winning three titles in 42 seasons is disingenuous when the best teams have only been eligible for about half of those.

If we're arbitrarily cutting off, it's worth throwing out there that in the automatic bid/pools era (2000 and beyond), New England has won three titles and the Great Lakes two.

And if we're talking about the current state of New England basketball, I'm not sure how relevant 1975-1994 (or 2004) is anyway.

It's not disingenous if you didn't know, but no one has showed any reason to think it mattered. If there was some undefeated team or well tested 1-2 loss team that spanked the eventual national champ or something, that might be compelling. It should be easy for the NESCAC historian to bring those forward.

But if nothing before 2004 is relevant, then pretty much the NESCAC history becomes Amherst anyway.

Point is for all the bluster about New England, there's not a lot of reason to think they're actually the best, especially if you're not talking about Amherst being that standard-bearer.

Region has really lost all meaning with how the brackets are done now, but I certainly wouldn't the OAC side by side with the CCIW or WIAC (another truly ridiculous statement by the NESCAC propagandist, putting that league above the CCIW). Never mind that Babson's not in the NESCAC, not that that really matters much with the NESCAC playing such a gimmicky schedule anyway.

The New England teams have mostly just gamed the system better.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 04:58:23 PM

Yeah. I have no clue, and I'm sure you don't either, about how New England would have done prior to 1994. I will say that the early 1990s Colby teams were legendary, led by a national POY. But in all events it's totally irrelevant. I'm talking about right now: and New England just proved itself as totally legit. Or did you forget when Marietta just lost to a team that finished in the bottom half of NESCAC last year? Either Marietta stinks or New England is a lot better than you claim. There is no option c.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 01, 2017, 04:59:50 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:55:22 PM
Point is for all the bluster about New England, there's not a lot of reason to think they're actually the best, especially if you're not talking about Amherst being that standard-bearer.

Are there people here saying New England is the best? I think the current status of the discussion is as follows:

ElRetornodelEspencio: Babson plays a bunch of tomato cans.
Others: New England is better than that.

I'm sure others have read more about this than I have, but I think the 1981-82 Hamilton team is the one that had the best shot at a national title, had the NESCAC presidents allowed them to play.

http://web1.ncaa.org/app_data/statsPDFArchive/MBB2/C/Men's%20Basketball_Men's_Division%20III_1982_267_Hamilton%20College.pdf
http://www.d3hoops.com/archives/men/1982

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 05:00:41 PM

Ummmm, dude, learn to read. 1994. Since that time, Williams has played in seven final fours, four title games, and has one title. In other words, better than any other league combined saved for WIAC. Amherst only? Get a clue dude.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 05:06:55 PM

Also, Midd, Trinity, and Conn have all appeared in final fours, Tufts in the elite eight. Babson and MIT have recently made final fours from NEWMAC. There is good D3 basketball played outside of Ohio, Wisconsin, and Illinois. Which everyone save for one dude seems to acknowledge.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Stoppable on January 01, 2017, 05:12:26 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:25:55 PM
3 New England champs in the history of D3, two the same school.

Quote from: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 04:35:18 PM
New England's best conference was only eligible to participate in the tourney starting in 1994. Since then: seven title game appearances and three titles for New England.

I feel like this is oversimplifying the discussion. There's a lot more to a conference's strength than just its elite team(s), depth also matters as well. Otherwise, you'd be saying the NACC was just about the best conferences in the country last year! (And as someone who follows it closely, the NACC was not one of the best conferences in the country last year.)

And with as little inter-regional play as there is, it's hard to really get data to measure that. Sometimes you do just have to use the eye test.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 01, 2017, 05:36:28 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:19:42 PMMy fault. I thought it was 1.5. Richardson only plays 20 mpg, though. He's good. 2.5 made per game is kind of a lot. Seems like that penalizes some really good shooters for just not chucking it enough or their team using them differently. But it is what it is.

Nobody on that list ought to have the verb "chuck" or the participle "chucking" used in connection with their three-point shooting. I've never seen "chuck" or "chucking" used in connection with a shooter in a way that has anything but a negative connotation.

Any cutoff point is arbitrary on a rate stat (holy cow, I'm dipping my toe in KnightSlappy waters!), but I'd argue that 2.5 treys per game is a good spot to place the boundary. At this point of the year, D3's top 100 is still well above 41% with that cutoff point in use, and the common consensus is that if you can knock down two out of every five trey attempts, you're really good at it. If you can knock down two out of every five while attempting them in high volume, you deserve to have your name on the NCAA's leaderboard.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 01, 2017, 06:09:56 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 04:36:34 PM
Basically, over the last fifteen years it's been (1) WIAC (2) NESCAC (3) everyone else.

Disagree. The CCIW has been in the Final Four for four out of the past five years, and over the course of the fifteen-year period that you mentioned the CCIW has made it to Salem as many times as the WIAC has. What's more, four different CCIW programs -- Augustana, Carthage, Illinois Wesleyan, and North Central -- reached the Final Four during that fifteen-year time frame, while the NESCAC and WIAC were only represented by two programs apiece, demonstrating the overall strength of the league. While you can argue that the CCIW doesn't measure up because that league hasn't hauled home the Big Doorstop in any of those six trips to Salem over the last decade and a half, look at the margins in those Final Four games in which the CCIW team was eliminated. The CCIW entrant in Salem lost by four in 2002, by two in 2006, by three in 2012, by eight in 2013, by eight in 2014, and then the aberration of a 16-point loss in the 2015 national championship game. In every case but one, the team that beat the CCIW team was the team that cut down the nets on Saturday in the Salem Civic Center.

No other league aside from the MAC has ever been represented in the Final Four for four straight seasons (and the CCIW's now done it twice) -- and when the MAC did it in the late '70s, that league's ranks were so swollen that it seemed as though half of all of the institutions of higher learning in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania were in that league. (It had three compass-point divisions back then, before being re-shaped into the MAC Freedom and the MAC Commonwealth divisions.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 01, 2017, 06:22:18 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:14:36 PMI think IWU is quite good, actually. Wouldn't surprise me if they were better than Babson if you actually got them on a court together. Beating Wash U on the road is a better win than any that Babson has, and none of IWU's losses are anything to be embarrassed about. When you play good teams, sometimes you're going to lose because someone has to and you can't play an A game every time (otherwise an A game would be your C game!).

Illinois Wesleyan is quite good. The Titans are a legit contender for the CCIW title, and the CCIW champion is annually in the national-title picture practically by default. But the Titans aren't better than Babson. Yes, if the Beavers and the Titans were to meet up, the Titans would have a fair chance of winning on any given night, because, again as Bob said, the second-tier teams this year (of which I agree IWU is one) aren't that far off from the top-tier teams (a category in which everybody who posts here except for you includes Babson). But in an NBA-style seven-game series, the smart money would go on the Beavers, because they're simply the better team of the two. If you don't want to take my word for it, take the word of a former broadcaster for the Titans, an IWU alumnus who's been running a blog about his alma mater's men's basketball program for two decades now:

Quote from: Titan Q on January 01, 2017, 10:21:56 AMFor example, Greg mentioned #1-Babson vs #18-Illinois Wesleyan. I agree that Babson is better overall than Illinois Wesleyan and certainly should be ranked higher, but if those two teams played on a neutral court I believe that would be an incredibly close and competitive game that IWU could absolutely win.

Moving right along ...

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:14:36 PMBabson usually loses to the first proven and tested team they run into, and I imagine it'll be the same this year after their walk through their conference.

Chicago is a good team, and the Beavers decisively beat the Maroons on Chicago's floor. I wouldn't classify Chicago as the favorite to win the UAA, but it would not shock me if the Maroons beat out Rochester, Wash U, and Emory for that league's title -- and the UAA is an eminently respectable D3 league. The reason why I say that Chicago has a shot at the UAA title is because the team's biggest problem is free throws; the Maroons shoot a ghastly 61% from the line. But that's the Achilles heel of Rochester (63.5%) and Wash U (65%) as well, which may nullify the problem for the Maroons when they meet those two league foes. It's also a fixable problem, to a certain degree (although it's just as fixable for Luke Flockerzi at Rochester and Mark Edwards at Wash U as it is for Mike McGrath at the U of C).

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:30:39 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 01, 2017, 12:17:57 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 10:57:27 AM
Whitewater (who I admittedly haven't seen) MIGHT emerge as a team on a whole different level just because of all the transfer and frosh talent they have added to a core of some other solid players. On paper (both statistically and looking at roster talent) they appear scary. But that is speculative right now.

Yes, UW-Whitewater is extremely talented. They have 4 key transfers:

* Chris Jones, 6-0 Jr. G, 21.7 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 3.7 apg, .529 3-point (Wabash Valley JC, Iowa Lakes JC)
* Scotty Tyler, 6-8 Jr. F, 16.3 ppg, 7.1 rpg (D1 Idaho State, D1 UW-Milwaukee)
* Derek Rongstad, 6-5 So. G/F, 8.5 ppg (D1 UW-Milwaukee)
* Demetrius Woodley, 6-4 Jr. G/F, 7.2 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 2.1 apg (Mid Plains JC, Iowa Lakes JC)

In terms of pure talent, the Warhawks are probably at a different level than the other top teams...just a matter of seeing if all those new parts mesh with the returning parts over the course of a full season.

UW-Whitewater operates with a much different personnel model than most Division III schools.

This is a great argument for them being D-2.

Oh, is this the week for that argument again? ::)

Quote from: Ryan Stoppable on January 01, 2017, 05:12:26 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:25:55 PM
3 New England champs in the history of D3, two the same school.

Quote from: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 04:35:18 PM
New England's best conference was only eligible to participate in the tourney starting in 1994. Since then: seven title game appearances and three titles for New England.

I feel like this is oversimplifying the discussion. There's a lot more to a conference's strength than just its elite team(s), depth also matters as well. Otherwise, you'd be saying the NACC was just about the best conferences in the country last year! (And as someone who follows it closely, the NACC was not one of the best conferences in the country last year.)

And with as little inter-regional play as there is, it's hard to really get data to measure that. Sometimes you do just have to use the eye test.

Two excellent points, Ryan.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 01, 2017, 06:25:08 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

As I added in the final result* (today's only game), I decided to re-post the whole report here (at roughly the time it would usually show up) -- so that some future historian, examining the archives of this discussion board while writing a treatise on D3 basketball, will not mistakenly think that there was no report just before the January 2 poll.

And also so that sac won't have to bump it. (Well, he still might, but I'll take a shot.)

*I'm reasonably confident in the result, but not 100% sure the score is really final; the live stats are stuck at 0:08. I suppose that it's possible that VWC staged a miracle comeback in those final eight seconds, but I'm not going to wait for further confirmation.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	609	Babson	10-1	won at #26 Chicago, 82-70
#2	597	Whitman	11-0	def. (n) King's, 80-62; def. (n) #4 Marietta, 72-71; def. Crown, 105-57; def. Buena Vista, 103-90
#3	573	Amherst	9-1	def. Keystone, 119-69
#4	549	Marietta	8-3	LOST to (n) #17 Wesleyan, 65-81; LOST to (n) #2 Whitman, 71-72
#5	480	Salisbury	8-2	LOST to (n) T#33 Ramapo, 65-66; LOST to (n) Hardin-Simmons, 70-84
#6	474	Rochester	10-0	IDLE
#7	471	St. Norbert	7-2	LOST at UW-Oshkosh, 45-58; def. Finlandia, 88-35; def. UW-Platteville, 63-56
#8	449	Whitworth	10-1	won at Chapman, 78-69; def. (n) Alma, 99-72; def. (n) Buena Vista, 90-80; def. (n) Crown, 95-62
#9	422	Christopher Newport	9-2	def. Pitt-Greensburg, 96-43; def. SUNY-Old Westbury, 86-41; def. #32 Virginia Wesleyan, 86-75
#10	392	Tufts	8-2	IDLE
#11	351	UW-Eau Claire	10-1	def. (n) Gustavus Adolphus, 78-57; def. (n) UC Santa Cruz, 77-57
#12	318	Benedictine	8-3	LOST to (n) Menlo, 70-72; def. Concordia (Wis.), 81-64
#13	241	North Park	9-1	won at Albion, 84-65; def. Manchester, 93-84
#14	230	Susquehanna	9-1	def. (n) Eastern, 82-76
#15	219	Hope	7-4	def. Spalding, 79-51; def. Johnson and Wales, 100-75; LOST to (n) #37 Williams, 85-91 OT; LOST to (n) Wilkes, 74-76
#16	212	UW-Whitewater	11-0	def. Trine, 85-60; def. T#41 Ripon, 109-96; def. (n) Lawrence, 97-71; def. (n) Central, 79-68
#17	209	Wesleyan	11-0	def. (n) Washington and Lee, 66-61; def. (n) #4 Marietta, 81-65
#18	191	Illinois Wesleyan	9-3	def. #26 Chicago, 72-54; LOST to (n) T#29 Middlebury, 75-77; def. (n) Bridgewater (Va.), 79-60
#19	173	Wartburg	10-2	def. (n) SUNYIT, 70-56; LOST to (n) #20 North Central (Ill.), 91-94 2OT; won at Waldorf, 92-90
#20	149	North Central (Ill.)	8-4	def. (n) #19 Wartburg, 94-91 2OT; def. (n) Wheaton (Mass.), 89-77; LOST at UW-Stevens Point, 63-65
#21	136	Swarthmore	9-1	won at Hood, 72-63 OT
#22	113	UW-River Falls	10-1	def. St. Olaf, 66-51
#23	68	Neumann	9-0	def. Scranton, 89-66
#24	67	Denison	8-1	IDLE
#25	60	Washington U.	8-3	def. (n) Ohio Wesleyan, 82-66; won at T#43 Wooster, 94-91 OT

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	53	Chicago	8-3	LOST at #18 Illinois Wesleyan, 54-72; LOST to #1 Babson, 70-82
#27	50	New Jersey City	11-1	def. (n) Gettysburg, 61-57; def. (n) T#45 Misericordia, 87-72
#28	39	Emory	8-2	def. Berry, 91-80; def. Hampden-Sydney, 87-64
T#29	35	Lycoming	12-1	def. Fredonia, 65-47; def. Delaware Valley, 65-63
T#29	35	Middlebury	9-1	def. (n) #18 Illinois Wesleyan, 77-75; won at Staten Island, 70-59
#31	26	Keene State	6-4	LOST at #40 WPI, 67-72; LOST to University of New England, 69-95
#32	25	Virginia Wesleyan	8-3	def. Mary Washington, 100-85; LOST at #9 Christopher Newport, 75-86
T#33	20	Brockport	8-1	IDLE
T#33	20	Ramapo	11-0	def. (n) #5 Salisbury, 66-65; def. (n) Gustavus Adolphus, 77-62
#35	19	Endicott	8-2	def. (n) Southern Maine, 73-62; def. (n) Regis (Mass.), 79-67
#36	11	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	8-1	def. Emerson, 84-73; def. Oberlin, 60-57
#37	9	Williams	10-1	def. (n) #15 Hope, 91-85 OT; won at Mount Union, 70-67
#38	8	Bethel	8-1	def. UW-Superior, 97-57
#39	6	Carroll	6-5	won at Milwaukee Engineering, 87-70; LOST at Loras, 78-85; LOST at University of Dallas, 67-72; LOST at Austin, 60-75
#40	4	WPI	9-2	def. #31 Keene State, 72-67; def. Eastern Nazarene, 88-72
T#41	3	Capital	8-3	IDLE
T#41	3	Ripon	8-1	LOST at #16 UW-Whitewater, 96-109; won at Willamette, 87-57; won at Pacific, 75-72
T#43	2	UW-La Crosse	8-3	won at Northland, 62-45; def. Coe, 74-67
T#43	2	Wooster	6-6	LOST at Lewis and Clark, 82-87; def. Hobart, 85-72; LOST to #25 Washington U., 91-94 OT
T#45	1	Misericordia	9-2	won at Albright, 87-78; LOST to (n) #27 New Jersey City, 72-87
T#45	1	St. Thomas	6-3	IDLE

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Bucket on January 01, 2017, 06:26:16 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:14:36 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 31, 2016, 09:14:07 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 31, 2016, 08:03:54 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 31, 2016, 07:56:25 PM
Don't get caught up in the comparative scores game. Babson is better than Illinois Wesleyan.

So one game result matters when it's Babson but not IWU.

The hypocrisy surrounding this school just grows and seemingly knows no bounds.

Why is everyone so hot on Babson that they're willing to throw logic and argumentative integrity out the window? Does anyone other than someone on a propaganda mission really think that Chicago is the measuring stick for Midwestern programs?

I've seen Illinois Wesleyan multiple times. I've seen Babson multiple times, and today I saw the Beavers in person.

Babson is better than Illinois Wesleyan.

It's not that complicated, Spence. It isn't a conspiracy, willful blindness, groupthink, or any other excuse. And I am not using Chicago as a measuring stick. In fact, I'm the one who just pointed out that Chicago shouldn't be a measuring stick when I warned against putting too much stock in comparative scores.

You're the Massey cheerleader who thinks that the D3 men's basketball championships committee should be using the Massey Ratings for its Selection Monday determinations. Well, as of this moment, Babson is #8 and Illinois Wesleyan is #16, according to Massey. And that's without taking today's Babson win at Ratner into consideration.

I didn't say you were using Chicago as a measuring stick. The Babson cheerleader (I can't remember the name) was, as if Chicago was comparable to Whitewater or IWU.

I think IWU is quite good, actually. Wouldn't surprise me if they were better than Babson if you actually got them on a court together. Beating Wash U on the road is a better win than any that Babson has, and none of IWU's losses are anything to be embarrassed about. When you play good teams, sometimes you're going to lose because someone has to and you can't play an A game every time (otherwise an A game would be your C game!).

Babson usually loses to the first proven and tested team they run into, and I imagine it'll be the same this year after their walk through their conference.

Middlebury beat IWU, and I don't think the Panthers are as good as Babson right now. And I say this as a Panther diehard! FWIW.

(And Midd did so without it's second-leading scorer and leading rebounder, whose athleticism would have given IWU further fits.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 01, 2017, 06:59:24 PM

2 point margin doesn't really make anything definitive.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 07:21:53 PM

Greg, in the last fifteen years three (Midd!) NESCAC programs have made the Final Four. In three different years, two NESCAC teams were represented. Three titles total, seven title game appearances (two of which were lost on final possession). I think 13 final fours total in that period of time. Granted NESCAC has often had an easier path but averaging nearly one final four per year and one title game every other year over 15 years is pretty solid. WIAC is number one easily but that resume speaks for itself. And I think two other programs have made elite 8 during that timeframe showcasing the league's depth.

This is all a tangent. My whole original point is that Babson's schedule was unfairly maligned which I think is now uncontroversial.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 01, 2017, 07:50:37 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 07:21:53 PM
Greg, in the last fifteen years three (Midd!) NESCAC programs have made the Final Four.

Yep, you're right. Sorry about that, Bucket. ;)

Quote from: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 07:21:53 PMIn three different years, two NESCAC teams were represented. Three titles total, seven title game appearances (two of which were lost on final possession). I think 13 final fours total in that period of time. Granted NESCAC has often had an easier path but averaging nearly one final four per year and one title game every other year over 15 years is pretty solid.

I agree with everything in that last sentence except for the inclusion of the word "often". :D

Quote from: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 07:21:53 PMWIAC is number one easily but that resume speaks for itself. And I think two other programs have made elite 8 during that timeframe showcasing the league's depth.

Nope, just one: UW-Oshkosh, back in 2003.

Quote from: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 07:21:53 PMThis is all a tangent. My whole original point is that Babson's schedule was unfairly maligned which I think is now uncontroversial.

... except in the mind of one poster who, trust me, is going to continue to work it over like a terrier with a bone. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Bucket on January 01, 2017, 07:53:11 PM

Quote from: sac on January 01, 2017, 06:59:24 PM
2 point margin doesn't really make anything definitive.

Definitive? No, of course not.

But he specifically said, "Wouldn't surprise me if they were better than Babson if you actually got them on a court together." On the court together. They were on the court together with Middlebury, and they weren't better than a short-handed Middlebury. And Midd isn't as good as Babson. (Again, I say this as a Midd fan.)

So, by the measuring stick of getting on the court with a team, as he wrote, they failed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 08:05:51 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 04:58:23 PM
Yeah. I have no clue, and I'm sure you don't either, about how New England would have done prior to 1994.

But you complain about me not knowing history. At least I know my conference's history.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 08:10:35 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 01, 2017, 04:59:50 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:55:22 PM
Point is for all the bluster about New England, there's not a lot of reason to think they're actually the best, especially if you're not talking about Amherst being that standard-bearer.

Are there people here saying New England is the best? I think the current status of the discussion is as follows:

ElRetornodelEspencio: Babson plays a bunch of tomato cans.
Others: New England is better than that.

I'm sure others have read more about this than I have, but I think the 1981-82 Hamilton team is the one that had the best shot at a national title, had the NESCAC presidents allowed them to play.

http://web1.ncaa.org/app_data/statsPDFArchive/MBB2/C/Men's%20Basketball_Men's_Division%20III_1982_267_Hamilton%20College.pdf
http://www.d3hoops.com/archives/men/1982

Their two best rebounders were 6-4 and 6-1. Surely you don't think they had anything for Wabash.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 08:13:36 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 01, 2017, 07:50:37 PM

... except in the mind of one poster who, trust me, is going to continue to work it over like a terrier with a bone. ::)

We'll see what happens when Babson faces a quality team again. They failed in their first test of that sort, just as they did in basically all of them last year. And in most of those, their star became a late 30s Kobe-esque volume shooting machine.

Tufts at neutral and Endicott at home does not qualify for a team that is being fancied a potential champion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 08:25:41 PM

Quote from: Bucket on January 01, 2017, 07:53:11 PM
Quote from: sac on January 01, 2017, 06:59:24 PM
2 point margin doesn't really make anything definitive.

Definitive? No, of course not.

But he specifically said, "Wouldn't surprise me if they were better than Babson if you actually got them on a court together." On the court together. They were on the court together with Middlebury, and they weren't better than a short-handed Middlebury. And Midd isn't as good as Babson. (Again, I say this as a Midd fan.)

So, by the measuring stick of getting on the court with a team, as he wrote, they failed.

You can't be this stupid.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 01, 2017, 08:53:40 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 08:25:41 PM

You can't be this stupid.

OK -- well, we can hold your posts in a queue for moderation for a while.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 01, 2017, 09:52:29 PM

What is it with the OAC wanting state schools to be D2?

Anyway...

Ramapo may be the biggest gainer, in terms of rating and points.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PeterEscobar on January 01, 2017, 10:08:49 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 01, 2017, 04:06:58 PM
There has not been a D3 team anywhere near as talented as the 1996 Rowan team since then and I doubt there ever will be again...unless the NCAA opens that loophole back up again.

What loophole? Genuinely curious how that team got assembled as it sounds like a hell of a mid-major DI program haha

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 01, 2017, 10:15:27 PM

Quote from: PeterEscobar on January 01, 2017, 10:08:49 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 01, 2017, 04:06:58 PM
There has not been a D3 team anywhere near as talented as the 1996 Rowan team since then and I doubt there ever will be again...unless the NCAA opens that loophole back up again.
What loophole? Genuinely curious how that team got assembled as it sounds like a hell of a mid-major DI program haha

Back then D1 players who lost a year of eligibility due to lousy test scores coming into college (Prop 48, I think it was) could transfer to a D3 school to play a year after their D1 eligibility was up. After that season, the "Rowan Rule" was passed to close that loophole.

IWU and Hope (the two teams who lost to Rowan in Salem) want a time machine game to settle the 'real' national champion that year! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PeterEscobar on January 01, 2017, 10:17:11 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 01, 2017, 10:15:27 PM
Quote from: PeterEscobar on January 01, 2017, 10:08:49 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 01, 2017, 04:06:58 PM
There has not been a D3 team anywhere near as talented as the 1996 Rowan team since then and I doubt there ever will be again...unless the NCAA opens that loophole back up again.
What loophole? Genuinely curious how that team got assembled as it sounds like a hell of a mid-major DI program haha

Back then D1 players who lost a year of eligibility due to lousy test scores coming into college (Prop 48, I think it was) could transfer to a D3 school to play a year after their D1 eligibility was up. After that season, the "Rowan Rule" was passed to close that loophole.

IWU and Hope (the two teams who lost to Rowan in Salem) want a time machine game to settle the 'real' national champion that year! ;D

That is fantastic hahahaha

Also, with all this talk of IWU vs Babson I am sure that a pick-up game could have been arranged last night when they were presumably both flying in and out of Midway or O'Hare around the same time yesterday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 11:26:24 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 01, 2017, 09:52:29 PM
What is it with the OAC wanting state schools to be D2?

Just struck me as a particularly D2 roster construction strategy -- most D3 can't just take Johnny C-minus from mediocre D1s or JUCOs.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 01, 2017, 11:28:50 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 01, 2017, 10:15:27 PM
Quote from: PeterEscobar on January 01, 2017, 10:08:49 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 01, 2017, 04:06:58 PM
There has not been a D3 team anywhere near as talented as the 1996 Rowan team since then and I doubt there ever will be again...unless the NCAA opens that loophole back up again.
What loophole? Genuinely curious how that team got assembled as it sounds like a hell of a mid-major DI program haha

Back then D1 players who lost a year of eligibility due to lousy test scores coming into college (Prop 48, I think it was) could transfer to a D3 school to play a year after their D1 eligibility was up. After that season, the "Rowan Rule" was passed to close that loophole.

IWU and Hope (the two teams who lost to Rowan in Salem) want a time machine game to settle the 'real' national champion that year! ;D

Again with this "real" national champion stuff? Why do I have to keep repeating this: Rowan was the real national champ in 1996. The Profs did not break any rules. John Giannini was completely within the letter of the law of the NCAA and D3 when he assembled that team. Yeah, it was ridiculous that nobody from the NCAA saw beforehand that not restricting Prop 48 players to only three years of eligibility on every level was going to be seen as an opportunity for those players to use their fifth year of schooling to play out that fourth season of eligibility on a D3 team, but, nevertheless, nobody did. Kudos to Giannini for finding that loophole (and then parlaying the resulting national championship into a D1 head coaching career).

Yeah, that Rowan title felt like it had a sort of tawdry vibe to it, inasmuch as it's a mystery as to whether or not any of those Prop 48 guys got their bachelor's degrees after five years of college. (I know that Terrence Stewart got his from a different New Jersey state school, Edison State, but he was the homegrown star on that '96 Profs team, not one of the Prop 48 imports.) But that title was nevertheless legit. Put the blame where it belongs -- on the organization that has eight million rules about everything and anything under the sun but didn't have a rule about the back end of the careers of Prop 48 student-athletes. As Bob said in one of the previous go-rounds on this topic back in 2010:

Quote from: Titan Q on March 22, 2010, 10:06:14 PM
I've always felt like in a perfect world, IWU and Hope would have gotten a chance to play for the national title in 1996. But the D3 rules were what they were and Rowan won it fair and square.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 02, 2017, 12:14:20 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 11:23:15 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 01, 2017, 08:53:40 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 08:25:41 PM

You can't be this stupid.

OK -- well, we can hold your posts in a queue for moderation for a while.

Oh come on, I said *can't be*...isn't that giving credit? Like "well this is complete rubbish, but..."

I don't think a reasonable person sees your post as anything but an insult, no. And it had no other redeeming value.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2017, 12:18:37 AM

Lighten up, Greg. Apparently the ;D emoji has lost all meaning to you.

Of course they broke no rules (that's why the "Rowan Rule" was quickly passed after the fact). But in my opinion they definitely violated the spirit of the rules (and the spirit of D3 itself), and I would rather have lost in 1996 than won the way they did. I hope it is a consolation to the 6 seniors on the 1996 team (IMO probably the greatest IWU team ever except maybe for one of the Jack Sikma teams), that they won it all the next season with Bryan Crabtree and the JV'ers!

I'm still hoping for a time machine so Hope and IWU can play for the 'real' Division Three title in 1996! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 02, 2017, 12:49:52 AM

Of course, Mr. Ypsi, the Williams team that might have beaten Rowan on the road in the Sweet 16 but for a horribly-timed Geoff Chapin migraine might well have beaten either that year :). That Eph squad was downright nasty and subststially better than the next two years' Final Four teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 02, 2017, 01:01:49 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 01, 2017, 11:28:50 PM
Yeah, that Rowan title felt like it had a sort of tawdry vibe to it, inasmuch as it's a mystery as to whether or not any of those Prop 48 guys got their bachelor's degrees after five years of college. (I know that Terrence Stewart got his from a different New Jersey state school, Edison State, but he was the homegrown star on that '96 Profs team, not one of the Prop 48 imports.) But that title was nevertheless legit. Put the blame where it belongs -- on the organization that has eight million rules about everything and anything under the sun but didn't have a rule about the back end of the careers of Prop 48 student-athletes. As Bob said in one of the previous go-rounds on this topic back in 2010:

The 3 main guys for Rowan in 1996
Terrence Stewart played all 4 years at Rown and graduated
Antwan Dasher I believe did graduate from Rowan after 3 years at a previous D1
Roscoe Harris unfortunately was the victim of murder reportedly before finishing his degree at another NJ state school though that is unclear after so many years. I just remember hearing about this many years ago, probably here on d3hoops. http://hudsonreporter.com/view/full_story/2373211/article-Hoops-star-mourned-Police-still-investigating-murder-of-local-basketballer--friend-in-custody

People also forget Rowan was in the Final Four 2 of the previous 3 years with a team centered around Terrence Stewart and were "favorites" in 1995 before being upset in the semi's by Steve Alford coached Manchester. It wasn't like the two D1 and one D2 transfers in 1996 made them a flash in the pan champion.

If not for a Sectional Final loss in OT to NYU in '94 Rowan would have been to 4 straight Final Fours.

One interesting thing about Prop 48 is that a former member of Hope admissions helped write the standards for Prop 48 while employed at a Big Ten school. Though they had no authority or interest in post 4 year eligibility stuff.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 02, 2017, 01:46:45 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2017, 12:18:37 AM
Lighten up, Greg. Apparently the ;D emoji has lost all meaning to you.

Lightening the mood with an emoji doesn't take away the fact that you've already been over this ground a few times before. The joke gets old, Chuck, and it's not entirely fair to Rowan, either. That's all I'm saying.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2017, 12:18:37 AMOf course they broke no rules (that's why the "Rowan Rule" was quickly passed after the fact). But in my opinion they definitely violated the spirit of the rules (and the spirit of D3 itself), and I would rather have lost in 1996 than won the way they did.

That doesn't read like the stance of a guy who is making an emoji-laden joke, Chuck. It sounds like you really do believe that Rowan doesn't deserve that Walnut & Bronze in the school's trophy case.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2017, 12:18:37 AMI hope it is a consolation to the 6 seniors on the 1996 team (IMO probably the greatest IWU team ever except maybe for one of the Jack Sikma teams)

I just shake my head in wonderment that you have an opinion about the comparative strength of IWU teams that you never saw. This is all secondhand stuff to you, and yet you put an IMO next to your assessment of these teams?

Quote from: sac on January 02, 2017, 01:01:49 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 01, 2017, 11:28:50 PM
Yeah, that Rowan title felt like it had a sort of tawdry vibe to it, inasmuch as it's a mystery as to whether or not any of those Prop 48 guys got their bachelor's degrees after five years of college. (I know that Terrence Stewart got his from a different New Jersey state school, Edison State, but he was the homegrown star on that '96 Profs team, not one of the Prop 48 imports.) But that title was nevertheless legit. Put the blame where it belongs -- on the organization that has eight million rules about everything and anything under the sun but didn't have a rule about the back end of the careers of Prop 48 student-athletes. As Bob said in one of the previous go-rounds on this topic back in 2010:

The 3 main guys for Rowan that year.
Terrence Stewart I think played all 4 years at Rown and graduated

Yes, as I mentioned earlier, he eventually graduated from Thomas Edison State University, a New Jersey state school that doesn't have athletics. He was the head coach at D3 Immaculata for awhile; he is currently the head coach at D2 Georgian Court University in New Jersey.

Quote from: sac on January 02, 2017, 01:01:49 AMAntwan Dasher I believe did graduate from Rowan after 3 years at a previous D1
Roscoe Harris unfortunately was the victim of murder reportedly before finishing his degree at another NJ state school though that is unclear after so many years. I just remember hearing about this many years ago, probably here on d3hoops. http://hudsonreporter.com/view/full_story/2373211/article-Hoops-star-mourned-Police-still-investigating-murder-of-local-basketballer--friend-in-custody

Didn't know about Dasher. Did know about Harris, unfortunately. But wouldn't Dasher have spent four years at Fairleigh Dickinson? The point to Prop 48 was to make a non-qualifying player ineligible as a D1 freshman, and if he maintained his grades as a freshman he was then granted eligibility for his final three years at that D1 school, which would've made Dasher, Poles, and Harris fifth-year seniors.

Anyway, one more piece to the mystery solved. Thanks, sac!

Quote from: sac on January 02, 2017, 01:01:49 AMOne interesting thing about Prop 48 is that a former member of Hope admissions helped write the standards for Prop 48 while employed at a Big Ten school.

That certainly added a level of irony to the saga of Holstege, Bosma & Co., didn't it?

Prop 48 was a step in the right direction in terms of restoring proper equilibrium to D1 between academics and sports, even though it was eventually superseded by Prop 16 and other policies. As far as I'm concerned, if their time at Rowan resulted in those guys getting their degrees, or got them closer to it, then the presumptive academic purpose behind their stay at that school was realized and that whole "spirit of the law" accusation goes away.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 02, 2017, 01:56:08 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 02, 2017, 12:49:52 AM
Of course, Mr. Ypsi, the Williams team that might have beaten Rowan on the road in the Sweet 16 but for a horribly-timed Geoff Chapin migraine might well have beaten either that year :). That Eph squad was downright nasty and subststially better than the next two years' Final Four teams.

The '95-'96 Rowan team may have been the most talented aggregation of ballplayers in the Salem era of D3, but those Profs weren't invincible. They lost four games that season: New Jersey City beat them by thirteen, Catholic beat them by three, Stockton beat them by one, and then Stockton beat them again in the NJAC tourney title game by thirteen. Rowan later exacted revenge upon Stockton by beating the Ospreys in the sectional finals the night after they beat your Ephs, as the Profs prevailed by a whopping 28 points to even the season series with Stockton at 2-2 (with the Profs, of course, having the bragging rights in terms of the most important contest out of those four). Point is, though, that they didn't run the table the way that Bo Ryan's UW-Platteville teams did a couple of times during that decade.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 02, 2017, 08:48:34 AM

Agreed. I wrote earlier in the thread that they were the most talented team, but not the best TEAM. The Bo Ryan juggernaut deserves that honor even though the best guy from any of those squads wouldn't have been in the top three players on Rowan. But man could they play together, especially on the defensive end. I've never seen anyone get more out the talent on hand in either D1 or D3 than Ryan (and he worked with plenty of talent, to boot).

Williams finally ended the Rowan string of Final Fours in the Sweet 16 in 1997, but that team was a shadow of the 1996 title team ... even still a tough out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on January 02, 2017, 10:25:57 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 02, 2017, 01:56:08 AM
Quote from: nescac1 on January 02, 2017, 12:49:52 AM
Of course, Mr. Ypsi, the Williams team that might have beaten Rowan on the road in the Sweet 16 but for a horribly-timed Geoff Chapin migraine might well have beaten either that year :). That Eph squad was downright nasty and subststially better than the next two years' Final Four teams.

The '95-'96 Rowan team may have been the most talented aggregation of ballplayers in the Salem era of D3, but those Profs weren't invincible. They lost four games that season: New Jersey City beat them by thirteen, Catholic beat them by three, Stockton beat them by one, and then Stockton beat them again in the NJAC tourney title game by thirteen. Rowan later exacted revenge upon Stockton by beating the Ospreys in the sectional finals the night after they beat your Ephs, as the Profs prevailed by a whopping 28 points to even the season series with Stockton at 2-2 (with the Profs, of course, having the bragging rights in terms of the most important contest out of those four). Point is, though, that they didn't run the table the way that Bo Ryan's UW-Platteville teams did a couple of times during that decade.

You beat me to it Greg, that Rowan team did not have a cakewalk through the NJAC. The game against JCSC (now NJCU) were some great games. That may have been the era when the NJAC was in its prime. JCSC, Rowan, Montclair and Stockton were the cream of the crop but the rest were no slouch. That was when Jose Rembibas was building a defensive powerhouse at William Paterson, Ramapo had just hired Chuck McBreen around then and Kean, TCNJ and Rutgers Newark were tough opponents that you could not sleep on.

Roscoe was attending classes at JCSC trying to finish up his degree when he was murdered. It was a shame, he was one of the nicest people you could meet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 02, 2017, 06:09:28 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 08:10:35 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 01, 2017, 04:59:50 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:55:22 PM
Point is for all the bluster about New England, there's not a lot of reason to think they're actually the best, especially if you're not talking about Amherst being that standard-bearer.

Are there people here saying New England is the best? I think the current status of the discussion is as follows:

ElRetornodelEspencio: Babson plays a bunch of tomato cans.
Others: New England is better than that.

I'm sure others have read more about this than I have, but I think the 1981-82 Hamilton team is the one that had the best shot at a national title, had the NESCAC presidents allowed them to play.

http://web1.ncaa.org/app_data/statsPDFArchive/MBB2/C/Men's%20Basketball_Men's_Division%20III_1982_267_Hamilton%20College.pdf
http://www.d3hoops.com/archives/men/1982

Their two best rebounders were 6-4 and 6-1. Surely you don't think they had anything for Wabash.

UW-Stevens Point's best rebounders where 6-1 and 6-0 when they won the national championship two years ago... the second two were 6-4 and 6-4... not to mention the fact, teams were far smaller in the 80s than they are now. Not sure what point you are trying to make in an attempt to dismiss Hamilton.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2017, 06:37:20 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 02, 2017, 12:49:52 AM
Of course, Mr. Ypsi, the Williams team that might have beaten Rowan on the road in the Sweet 16 but for a horribly-timed Geoff Chapin migraine might well have beaten either that year :). That Eph squad was downright nasty and subststially better than the next two years' Final Four teams.

Maybe. There is probably usually at least one championship-caliber team who loses in an early round due to some unfortunate situation (or flat-out upset). I went the easy route and just considered the teams in Salem, and the fourth team, Franklin & Marshall was totally overwhelmed by both Hope and IWU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2017, 06:48:22 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 02, 2017, 01:46:45 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2017, 12:18:37 AM
I hope it is a consolation to the 6 seniors on the 1996 team (IMO probably the greatest IWU team ever except maybe for one of the Jack Sikma teams)

I just shake my head in wonderment that you have an opinion about the comparative strength of IWU teams that you never saw. This is all secondhand stuff to you, and yet you put an IMO next to your assessment of these teams?

There are other sources of information besides first-hand observation. I also have opinions about Civil War events, and even events in ancient Rome and Greece! ;D Even if the information is secondhand, it is still my (consolidated and considered) opinion, so why wouldn't I put IMO? (BTW, I should add the 1970 team, which I DID see MANY times, and the next-to-last team ever to go undefeated in the CCIW, as maybe better than 1996.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2017, 06:54:17 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 02, 2017, 01:56:08 AM
Quote from: nescac1 on January 02, 2017, 12:49:52 AM
Of course, Mr. Ypsi, the Williams team that might have beaten Rowan on the road in the Sweet 16 but for a horribly-timed Geoff Chapin migraine might well have beaten either that year :). That Eph squad was downright nasty and subststially better than the next two years' Final Four teams.

The '95-'96 Rowan team may have been the most talented aggregation of ballplayers in the Salem era of D3, but those Profs weren't invincible. They lost four games that season: New Jersey City beat them by thirteen, Catholic beat them by three, Stockton beat them by one, and then Stockton beat them again in the NJAC tourney title game by thirteen. Rowan later exacted revenge upon Stockton by beating the Ospreys in the sectional finals the night after they beat your Ephs, as the Profs prevailed by a whopping 28 points to even the season series with Stockton at 2-2 (with the Profs, of course, having the bragging rights in terms of the most important contest out of those four). Point is, though, that they didn't run the table the way that Bo Ryan's UW-Platteville teams did a couple of times during that decade.

Never said (or thought) that they were invincible - after all, we came oh-so-close to 'vincing' them! They got three shots in the final 7 seconds, and the final tip-in was finally the winner. Oh! For ONE more defensive rebound! :(

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 02, 2017, 08:43:37 PM

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2016-17/week5

So new poll is out if anyone cares.

4 new entrants, 2 NJAC teams and 2 NESCAC teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on January 02, 2017, 08:56:57 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 02, 2017, 08:43:37 PM
http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2016-17/week5

So new poll is out if anyone cares.

4 new entrants, 2 NJAC teams and 2 NESCAC teams.

It looks like all the undefeated teams are ranked in the Top 25. Will any of those teams drop out with a loss this week? Time will tell.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on January 02, 2017, 09:18:09 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 02, 2017, 01:46:45 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2017, 12:18:37 AM
Lighten up, Greg. Apparently the ;D emoji has lost all meaning to you.

Lightening the mood with an emoji doesn't take away the fact that you've already been over this ground a few times before. The joke gets old, Chuck, and it's not entirely fair to Rowan, either. That's all I'm saying.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2017, 12:18:37 AMOf course they broke no rules (that's why the "Rowan Rule" was quickly passed after the fact). But in my opinion they definitely violated the spirit of the rules (and the spirit of D3 itself), and I would rather have lost in 1996 than won the way they did.

That doesn't read like the stance of a guy who is making an emoji-laden joke, Chuck. It sounds like you really do believe that Rowan doesn't deserve that Walnut & Bronze in the school's trophy case.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2017, 12:18:37 AMI hope it is a consolation to the 6 seniors on the 1996 team (IMO probably the greatest IWU team ever except maybe for one of the Jack Sikma teams)

I just shake my head in wonderment that you have an opinion about the comparative strength of IWU teams that you never saw. This is all secondhand stuff to you, and yet you put an IMO next to your assessment of these teams?

Quote from: sac on January 02, 2017, 01:01:49 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 01, 2017, 11:28:50 PM
Yeah, that Rowan title felt like it had a sort of tawdry vibe to it, inasmuch as it's a mystery as to whether or not any of those Prop 48 guys got their bachelor's degrees after five years of college. (I know that Terrence Stewart got his from a different New Jersey state school, Edison State, but he was the homegrown star on that '96 Profs team, not one of the Prop 48 imports.) But that title was nevertheless legit. Put the blame where it belongs -- on the organization that has eight million rules about everything and anything under the sun but didn't have a rule about the back end of the careers of Prop 48 student-athletes. As Bob said in one of the previous go-rounds on this topic back in 2010:

The 3 main guys for Rowan that year.
Terrence Stewart I think played all 4 years at Rown and graduated

Yes, as I mentioned earlier, he eventually graduated from Thomas Edison State University, a New Jersey state school that doesn't have athletics. He was the head coach at D3 Immaculata for awhile; he is currently the head coach at D2 Georgian Court University in New Jersey.

Quote from: sac on January 02, 2017, 01:01:49 AMAntwan Dasher I believe did graduate from Rowan after 3 years at a previous D1
Roscoe Harris unfortunately was the victim of murder reportedly before finishing his degree at another NJ state school though that is unclear after so many years. I just remember hearing about this many years ago, probably here on d3hoops. http://hudsonreporter.com/view/full_story/2373211/article-Hoops-star-mourned-Police-still-investigating-murder-of-local-basketballer--friend-in-custody

Didn't know about Dasher. Did know about Harris, unfortunately. But wouldn't Dasher have spent four years at Fairleigh Dickinson? The point to Prop 48 was to make a non-qualifying player ineligible as a D1 freshman, and if he maintained his grades as a freshman he was then granted eligibility for his final three years at that D1 school, which would've made Dasher, Poles, and Harris fifth-year seniors.

Anyway, one more piece to the mystery solved. Thanks, sac!

Quote from: sac on January 02, 2017, 01:01:49 AMOne interesting thing about Prop 48 is that a former member of Hope admissions helped write the standards for Prop 48 while employed at a Big Ten school.

That certainly added a level of irony to the saga of Holstege, Bosma & Co., didn't it?

Prop 48 was a step in the right direction in terms of restoring proper equilibrium to D1 between academics and sports, even though it was eventually superseded by Prop 16 and other policies. As far as I'm concerned, if their time at Rowan resulted in those guys getting their degrees, or got them closer to it, then the presumptive academic purpose behind their stay at that school was realized and that whole "spirit of the law" accusation goes away.

Just a quick note on Thomas Edison State College, they are an accredited college with only a very small campus. They take your transcript if you have not finished your degree and tell you what is needed for your degree and you can take classes at a school close to home and when you have met their requirements they will award you a degree. I know several people who have finished their education with them after dropping out of school due to work, family or other reasons.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on January 02, 2017, 09:24:33 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 02, 2017, 08:43:37 PM
http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2016-17/week5

So new poll is out if anyone cares.

4 new entrants, 2 NJAC teams and 2 NESCAC teams.

No, it can't be, those conferences don't play tough competition. ::)

Sometimes, I just can't help myself.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 02, 2017, 09:26:47 PM

It seems very odd that Wash U is ranked ahead of Illinois Wesleyan.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 02, 2017, 10:07:38 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 02, 2017, 06:09:28 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 08:10:35 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 01, 2017, 04:59:50 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:55:22 PM
Point is for all the bluster about New England, there's not a lot of reason to think they're actually the best, especially if you're not talking about Amherst being that standard-bearer.

Are there people here saying New England is the best? I think the current status of the discussion is as follows:

ElRetornodelEspencio: Babson plays a bunch of tomato cans.
Others: New England is better than that.

I'm sure others have read more about this than I have, but I think the 1981-82 Hamilton team is the one that had the best shot at a national title, had the NESCAC presidents allowed them to play.

http://web1.ncaa.org/app_data/statsPDFArchive/MBB2/C/Men's%20Basketball_Men's_Division%20III_1982_267_Hamilton%20College.pdf
http://www.d3hoops.com/archives/men/1982

Their two best rebounders were 6-4 and 6-1. Surely you don't think they had anything for Wabash.

UW-Stevens Point's best rebounders where 6-1 and 6-0 when they won the national championship two years ago... the second two were 6-4 and 6-4... not to mention the fact, teams were far smaller in the 80s than they are now. Not sure what point you are trying to make in an attempt to dismiss Hamilton.

The people who saw Jeff Gibbs play for Otterbein in '02 would like to have a word with Spence, too.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2017, 06:48:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 02, 2017, 01:46:45 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2017, 12:18:37 AM
I hope it is a consolation to the 6 seniors on the 1996 team (IMO probably the greatest IWU team ever except maybe for one of the Jack Sikma teams)

I just shake my head in wonderment that you have an opinion about the comparative strength of IWU teams that you never saw. This is all secondhand stuff to you, and yet you put an IMO next to your assessment of these teams?

There are other sources of information besides first-hand observation. I also have opinions about Civil War events, and even events in ancient Rome and Greece! ;D Even if the information is secondhand, it is still my (consolidated and considered) opinion, so why wouldn't I put IMO? (BTW, I should add the 1970 team, which I DID see MANY times, and the next-to-last team ever to go undefeated in the CCIW, as maybe better than 1996.)

Bob's our resident expert on Illinois Wesleyan men's basketball, and you never see him make declarations like that about IWU teams that he didn't see. He always qualifies any statements he makes about, say, the 1987-88 team with the preface, "I never saw them, but ..." or "Long-time fans tell me ...". But to each his own, I guess.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2017, 06:54:17 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 02, 2017, 01:56:08 AM
Quote from: nescac1 on January 02, 2017, 12:49:52 AM
Of course, Mr. Ypsi, the Williams team that might have beaten Rowan on the road in the Sweet 16 but for a horribly-timed Geoff Chapin migraine might well have beaten either that year :). That Eph squad was downright nasty and subststially better than the next two years' Final Four teams.

The '95-'96 Rowan team may have been the most talented aggregation of ballplayers in the Salem era of D3, but those Profs weren't invincible. They lost four games that season: New Jersey City beat them by thirteen, Catholic beat them by three, Stockton beat them by one, and then Stockton beat them again in the NJAC tourney title game by thirteen. Rowan later exacted revenge upon Stockton by beating the Ospreys in the sectional finals the night after they beat your Ephs, as the Profs prevailed by a whopping 28 points to even the season series with Stockton at 2-2 (with the Profs, of course, having the bragging rights in terms of the most important contest out of those four). Point is, though, that they didn't run the table the way that Bo Ryan's UW-Platteville teams did a couple of times during that decade.

Never said (or thought) that they were invincible - after all, we came oh-so-close to 'vincing' them! They got three shots in the final 7 seconds, and the final tip-in was finally the winner. Oh! For ONE more defensive rebound! :(

That wasn't directed at you. That was simply a general comment on the subject of the 1995-96 Profs and their putative status as the greatest team (or, alternatively, the greatest collection of players) of D3's Salem era.

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 02, 2017, 08:43:37 PM
http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2016-17/week5

So new poll is out if anyone cares.

4 new entrants, 2 NJAC teams and 2 NESCAC teams.

... and NPU's first-ever appearance in the top ten! This is a big day for the Vikings program, and a sign of how far it has come since Tom Slyder took over as head coach four and a half seasons ago.

Now the Vikings have to prove that they belong there by beating Carthage (8-3, 2-1) and North Central (8-4, 2-1) this week, neither of which is going to be an easy task.

Quote from: Knightstalker on January 02, 2017, 09:18:09 PMJust a quick note on Thomas Edison State College, they are an accredited college with only a very small campus. They take your transcript if you have not finished your degree and tell you what is needed for your degree and you can take classes at a school close to home and when you have met their requirements they will award you a degree. I know several people who have finished their education with them after dropping out of school due to work, family or other reasons.

That's a useful and valuable kind of institution to have around.

Quote from: Titan Q on January 02, 2017, 09:26:47 PM
It seems very odd that Wash U is ranked ahead of Illinois Wesleyan.

... especially given how recent the Titans' win over the Bears was. I could possibly see Wash U getting the nod over IWU if their game had been played back in November, if other factors favored the Bears, but that game was only played two weeks ago. And while it was only a one-point decision, it was played in St. Louis on Wash U's home floor.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 02, 2017, 10:24:57 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 02, 2017, 09:26:47 PM
It seems very odd that Wash U is ranked ahead of Illinois Wesleyan.

Me too. Didn't IWU beat WU?
Of course there are teams who have beaten three teams ranked above them so there is just no explaining some things.

But don't worry Q. WU's next two games are away against teams with 8-3 and 9-2 records while Wesleyan gets to play both of it's next two at home against teams with losing records. As such, it looks like you'll only have to suffer for a week as it appears that after the next poll WU will be looking up at you. 😊

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on January 02, 2017, 10:27:04 PM

Quote
Quote from: Titan Q on January 02, 2017, 09:26:47 PM
It seems very odd that Wash U is ranked ahead of Illinois Wesleyan.

... especially given how recent the Titans' win over the Bears was. I could possibly see Wash U getting the nod over IWU if their game had been played back in November, if other factors favored the Bears, but that game was only played two weeks ago. And while it was only a one-point decision, it was played in St. Louis on Wash U's home floor.

Could it be midwest bias? ;D

I'm sorry I couldn't help myself. ;D ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 02, 2017, 10:27:31 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 02, 2017, 10:07:38 PM
... especially given how recent the Titans' win over the Bears was. I could possibly see Wash U getting the nod over IWU if their game had been played back in November, if other factors favored the Bears, but that game was only played two weeks ago. And while it was only a one-point decision, it was played in St. Louis on Wash U's home floor.

And outside of the recent head-to-head IWU win at Wash U, I don't see what in Wash U's resume would trump that...

Wash U Losses
* at home vs #7 UW-Eau Claire by 14
* at Central (no votes) by 4
* at home vs Illinois Wesleyan by 1

Illinois Wesleyan Losses
* at North Central (receiving votes) by 9
* at home vs #10 North Park by 4
* neutral court vs #22 Middlebury by 2

As far as "good wins", IWU has an 18-point win over Chicago (receiving votes). Wash U has wins at Augustana and at Wooster (neither are receiving votes). IWU won at Ohio Wesleyan by 18...Wash U beat Ohio Wesleyan by 16 on a neutral floor.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 02, 2017, 10:35:10 PM

WashU is coming off two wins over Ohio Wesleyan and Wooster two names that carry a lot of weight with voters. Whether they really should carry a lot of weight this year is yet to be determined.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 02, 2017, 10:40:22 PM

Quote from: sac on January 02, 2017, 10:35:10 PM
WashU is coming off two wins over Ohio Wesleyan and Wooster two names that carry a lot of weight with voters. Whether they really should carry a lot of weight this year is yet to be determined.

Well sure, but IWU beat the same Ohio Wesleyan team at Ohio Wesleyan...and Wooster is 6-6. Neither OWU or Wooster has any votes in this week's poll.

During the same voting period, IWU had an 18-point win vs Chicago (receiving votes) and a 2-point neutral court loss vs #22 Middlebury.

Seems strange that those results would trump IWU's head-to-head win at Wash U.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 02, 2017, 10:54:15 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 02, 2017, 10:40:22 PM
Quote from: sac on January 02, 2017, 10:35:10 PM
WashU is coming off two wins over Ohio Wesleyan and Wooster two names that carry a lot of weight with voters. Whether they really should carry a lot of weight this year is yet to be determined.

Well sure, but IWU beat the same Ohio Wesleyan team at Ohio Wesleyan...and Wooster is 6-6. Neither OWU or Wooster has any votes in this week's poll.

During the same voting period, IWU had an 18-point win vs Chicago (receiving votes) and a 2-point neutral court loss vs #22 Middlebury.

Seems strange that those results would ~~trump~~ outweigh IWU's head-to-head win at Wash U.

I fixed it for you. 🃏 :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2017, 11:08:34 PM

Quote from: AndOne on January 02, 2017, 10:54:15 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 02, 2017, 10:40:22 PM
Quote from: sac on January 02, 2017, 10:35:10 PM
WashU is coming off two wins over Ohio Wesleyan and Wooster two names that carry a lot of weight with voters. Whether they really should carry a lot of weight this year is yet to be determined.

Well sure, but IWU beat the same Ohio Wesleyan team at Ohio Wesleyan...and Wooster is 6-6. Neither OWU or Wooster has any votes in this week's poll.

During the same voting period, IWU had an 18-point win vs Chicago (receiving votes) and a 2-point neutral court loss vs #22 Middlebury.

Seems strange that those results would ~~trump~~ outweigh IWU's head-to-head win at Wash U.

I fixed it for you. 🃏 :)

No "Trump" was the right word. The Russians hacked this week's d3hoops.com poll! :o ;D They have it in for Ron Rose, because rose is not red enough. And Putin is terrified of a Green Revolution.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 02, 2017, 11:16:29 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2017, 11:08:34 PM
Quote from: AndOne on January 02, 2017, 10:54:15 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 02, 2017, 10:40:22 PM
Quote from: sac on January 02, 2017, 10:35:10 PM
WashU is coming off two wins over Ohio Wesleyan and Wooster two names that carry a lot of weight with voters. Whether they really should carry a lot of weight this year is yet to be determined.

Well sure, but IWU beat the same Ohio Wesleyan team at Ohio Wesleyan...and Wooster is 6-6. Neither OWU or Wooster has any votes in this week's poll.

During the same voting period, IWU had an 18-point win vs Chicago (receiving votes) and a 2-point neutral court loss vs #22 Middlebury.

Seems strange that those results would ~~trump~~ outweigh IWU's head-to-head win at Wash U.

I fixed it for you. 🃏 :)

No "Trump" was the right word. The Russians hacked this week's d3hoops.com poll! :o ;D They have it in for Ron Rose, because rose is not red enough. And Putin is terrified of a Green Revolution.

Problem is, Wash U wears green, too.

It's a new year, so instead of blaming it on the Russians I choose to blame the aberrant favoring of Wash U over Illinois Wesleyan on Mariah Carey. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 02, 2017, 11:22:43 PM

Thomas Edison State College was a client of mine as a consultant. They also work with quite a few military personnel in their quest for degrees. Their 'campus' is a building near the statehouse and the monolithic department of taxation. They used to have a lot of competition against the for-profit schools, but I think they've overcome that with the gradual demise of that market.

And now...back to the show....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2017, 11:28:51 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 02, 2017, 11:16:29 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2017, 11:08:34 PM
Quote from: AndOne on January 02, 2017, 10:54:15 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 02, 2017, 10:40:22 PM
Quote from: sac on January 02, 2017, 10:35:10 PM
WashU is coming off two wins over Ohio Wesleyan and Wooster two names that carry a lot of weight with voters. Whether they really should carry a lot of weight this year is yet to be determined.

Well sure, but IWU beat the same Ohio Wesleyan team at Ohio Wesleyan...and Wooster is 6-6. Neither OWU or Wooster has any votes in this week's poll.

During the same voting period, IWU had an 18-point win vs Chicago (receiving votes) and a 2-point neutral court loss vs #22 Middlebury.

Seems strange that those results would ~~trump~~ outweigh IWU's head-to-head win at Wash U.

I fixed it for you. 🃏 :)

No "Trump" was the right word. The Russians hacked this week's d3hoops.com poll! :o ;D They have it in for Ron Rose, because rose is not red enough. And Putin is terrified of a Green Revolution.

Problem is, Wash U wears green, too.

It's a new year, so instead of blaming it on the Russians I choose to blame the aberrant favoring of Wash U over Illinois Wesleyan on Mariah Carey. ;)

True on the green. But their history is replete with problems with 'rose'; I'm unaware of any problems with 'edwards'. And your Mariah Carey reference is too obscure for this old guy - please enlighten.

Until shown otherwise, I'll still stick with the KGB-led Russkies! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 02, 2017, 11:45:15 PM

We'll make a culturally cutting-edge kind of guy of you yet, Chuck. ;)

http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/01/arts/music/mariah-carey-new-years-eve-times-square.html?_r=0

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 02, 2017, 11:47:01 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 02, 2017, 11:45:15 PM
We'll make a culturally cutting-edge kind of guy of you yet, Chuck. ;)

I'd like to see the action plan on that. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 02, 2017, 11:51:02 PM

LOL!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 02, 2017, 11:57:21 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 02, 2017, 10:07:38 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2017, 06:48:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 02, 2017, 01:46:45 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2017, 12:18:37 AM
I hope it is a consolation to the 6 seniors on the 1996 team (IMO probably the greatest IWU team ever except maybe for one of the Jack Sikma teams)

I just shake my head in wonderment that you have an opinion about the comparative strength of IWU teams that you never saw. This is all secondhand stuff to you, and yet you put an IMO next to your assessment of these teams?

There are other sources of information besides first-hand observation. I also have opinions about Civil War events, and even events in ancient Rome and Greece! ;D Even if the information is secondhand, it is still my (consolidated and considered) opinion, so why wouldn't I put IMO? (BTW, I should add the 1970 team, which I DID see MANY times, and the next-to-last team ever to go undefeated in the CCIW, as maybe better than 1996.)

Bob's our resident expert on Illinois Wesleyan men's basketball, and you never see him make declarations like that about IWU teams that he didn't see. He always qualifies any statements he makes about, say, the 1987-88 team with the preface, "I never saw them, but ..." or "Long-time fans tell me ...". But to each his own, I guess.

Greg,

Certainly you're not discounting the role research can play in the formulation of an opinion about a historical event, sporting or otherwise.
I suspect you, yourself often do research before regaling us with one of your frequent lectures on an obscure game or season.

Additionally, I think you need to give Ypsi the benefit of the doubt here. i sense he isn't in the habit of just throwing out a totally unsupported opinion about something he didn't personally witness without doing some degree of research on the subject beforehand.

Also, with regard to Bob never failing to include qualifying language when posting about a Wesleyan event that he did witness, I think those of us who have been reading his posts for any length of time pretty much know exactly what his opinion on any Wesleyan subject is, qualifying language or not. And this is not a criticism, but rather, an observation.

Lastly, yes, to each his own. Often there are two ways of doing things-one just as right or wrong as the other. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 12:24:31 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 02, 2017, 08:43:37 PM
http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2016-17/week5

So new poll is out if anyone cares.

4 new entrants, 2 NJAC teams and 2 NESCAC teams.

Nah, no east coast bias at all.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 03, 2017, 12:24:49 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 02, 2017, 11:47:01 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 02, 2017, 11:45:15 PM
We'll make a culturally cutting-edge kind of guy of you yet, Chuck. ;)

I'd like to see the action plan on that. :)

I checked out the link that Greg had. Quite frankly, I have no interest in being a 'cutting-edge kind of guy'! I'm quite content with Casablanca as the all-time greatest movie, the Beatles as the best rock-group ever, AND having the neighbors' kids play on my front lawn whenever they want to! :o

Peace out, dudes! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 12:25:21 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 02, 2017, 06:09:28 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 08:10:35 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 01, 2017, 04:59:50 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:55:22 PM
Point is for all the bluster about New England, there's not a lot of reason to think they're actually the best, especially if you're not talking about Amherst being that standard-bearer.

Are there people here saying New England is the best? I think the current status of the discussion is as follows:

ElRetornodelEspencio: Babson plays a bunch of tomato cans.
Others: New England is better than that.

I'm sure others have read more about this than I have, but I think the 1981-82 Hamilton team is the one that had the best shot at a national title, had the NESCAC presidents allowed them to play.

http://web1.ncaa.org/app_data/statsPDFArchive/MBB2/C/Men's%20Basketball_Men's_Division%20III_1982_267_Hamilton%20College.pdf
http://www.d3hoops.com/archives/men/1982

Their two best rebounders were 6-4 and 6-1. Surely you don't think they had anything for Wabash.

UW-Stevens Point's best rebounders where 6-1 and 6-0 when they won the national championship two years ago... the second two were 6-4 and 6-4... not to mention the fact, teams were far smaller in the 80s than they are now. Not sure what point you are trying to make in an attempt to dismiss Hamilton.

Missing the point as usual...

What does 2010s Stevens Point have to do with 1982?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 12:26:41 AM

Quote from: Knightstalker on January 02, 2017, 09:24:33 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 02, 2017, 08:43:37 PM
http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2016-17/week5

So new poll is out if anyone cares.

4 new entrants, 2 NJAC teams and 2 NESCAC teams.

No, it can't be, those conferences don't play tough competition. ::)

Sometimes, I just can't help myself.

What does being ranked have to do with playing tough competition? Obviously they arent connected at all.

Swing and a miss.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 03, 2017, 12:49:22 AM

Quote from: AndOne on January 02, 2017, 11:57:21 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 02, 2017, 10:07:38 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2017, 06:48:22 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 02, 2017, 01:46:45 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 02, 2017, 12:18:37 AM
I hope it is a consolation to the 6 seniors on the 1996 team (IMO probably the greatest IWU team ever except maybe for one of the Jack Sikma teams)

I just shake my head in wonderment that you have an opinion about the comparative strength of IWU teams that you never saw. This is all secondhand stuff to you, and yet you put an IMO next to your assessment of these teams?

There are other sources of information besides first-hand observation. I also have opinions about Civil War events, and even events in ancient Rome and Greece! ;D Even if the information is secondhand, it is still my (consolidated and considered) opinion, so why wouldn't I put IMO? (BTW, I should add the 1970 team, which I DID see MANY times, and the next-to-last team ever to go undefeated in the CCIW, as maybe better than 1996.)

Bob's our resident expert on Illinois Wesleyan men's basketball, and you never see him make declarations like that about IWU teams that he didn't see. He always qualifies any statements he makes about, say, the 1987-88 team with the preface, "I never saw them, but ..." or "Long-time fans tell me ...". But to each his own, I guess.

Greg,

Certainly you're not discounting the role research can play in the formulation of an opinion about a historical event, sporting or otherwise.
I suspect you, yourself often do research before regaling us with one of your frequent lectures on an obscure game or season.

Of course I'm not discounting it. But research is one thing. Making a subjective conclusion about the comparative abilities of teams is something else entirely, whether it's buttressed by research or not. Take a look at the context here, Mark. This was a conversational thread about teams that were not necessarily contemporaneous (e.g., the undefeated UW-Platteville teams of 1994-95 and 1997-98 versus the 1995-96 Rowan team, and the various IWU teams versus each other). Research will only take you just so far in such a conversation. Thus, these are necessarily subjective comparisons, and the customary way to make a subjective assertion is to put oneself forth as an eyewitness. I know how good Team A was, because I saw them myself. How can you put down Team B when you've never even seen them? That's the way such conversations go on all the time, whether here or on barstools.

Quote from: AndOne on January 02, 2017, 11:57:21 PMAdditionally, I think you need to give Ypsi the benefit of the doubt here. i sense he isn't in the habit of just throwing out a totally unsupported opinion about something he didn't personally witness without doing some degree of research on the subject beforehand.

I didn't accuse him of saying something that was unsupported. In fact, what he's basically done is to repeat what various other long-time Titans fans have said on CCIW Chat when the topic of which IWU team was the best came up, since those other fans were constant eyewitnesses of the program who didn't have thirty-year gaps in following the Titans. If remembering those opinions of others counts as "research" prior to regurgitating them as his own, then so be it. But my point is, how does someone pass them off as his own opinions, then, in the very same forum in which they were first presented by others? They're really the opinions of those other posters who saw those teams. At least say as much, as Bob does.

I'm beginning to sound like a bully here, and that's really not what I'm trying to do. I'm not looking to bash Chuck (although it's probably too late for me to say that). I'm just saying that a certain amount of discretion is called for when making authoritative-sounding assertions about teams you've never seen. And we've all done it from time to time (some of us more often than others). I admitted myself yesterday in this room that I shouldn't have dismissed Endicott out of hand when I haven't seen the Gulls play yet this season.

Quote from: AndOne on January 02, 2017, 11:57:21 PMLastly, with regard to Bob never failing to include qualifying language when posting about a Wesleyan event that he did witness, I think those of us who have been reading his posts for any length of time pretty much know exactly what his opinion on any Wesleyan subject is, qualifying language or not. And this is not a criticism, but rather, an observation.

You're casting too wide a net on Bob here, Mark. This isn't about his overall boosterism with regard to his alma mater. This is about an in-house comparison between various Titans teams. And give him credit for his integrity on this score; he does not make claims to firsthand knowledge when he makes those comparisons regarding Titans teams he never saw.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2017, 12:53:10 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 03, 2017, 12:49:22 AM
I'm just saying that a certain amount of discretion is called for when making authoritative-sounding assertions about teams you've never seen.

I think you could be more precise here and call for discretion about talking about a team where you didn't know the results of the season until reading them in the alumni magazine months later. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 03, 2017, 12:56:55 AM

Pat, in case I've never told you this, I do appreciate it when you allow me to play the good cop by your taking on the role of the bad cop. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 03, 2017, 01:09:17 AM

I'm pretty sure every CCIW program but Millikin and Carroll(first year in the league) have been ranked in the top 10 at some time in d3hoops.com polls history. This is the polls 18th year.

I can't imagine there are a lot of conference that can point to 7 different programs being in the top 10 at one point or another.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 03, 2017, 01:45:43 AM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 12:25:21 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 02, 2017, 06:09:28 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 08:10:35 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 01, 2017, 04:59:50 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:55:22 PM
Point is for all the bluster about New England, there's not a lot of reason to think they're actually the best, especially if you're not talking about Amherst being that standard-bearer.

Are there people here saying New England is the best? I think the current status of the discussion is as follows:

ElRetornodelEspencio: Babson plays a bunch of tomato cans.
Others: New England is better than that.

I'm sure others have read more about this than I have, but I think the 1981-82 Hamilton team is the one that had the best shot at a national title, had the NESCAC presidents allowed them to play.

http://web1.ncaa.org/app_data/statsPDFArchive/MBB2/C/Men's%20Basketball_Men's_Division%20III_1982_267_Hamilton%20College.pdf
http://www.d3hoops.com/archives/men/1982

Their two best rebounders were 6-4 and 6-1. Surely you don't think they had anything for Wabash.

UW-Stevens Point's best rebounders where 6-1 and 6-0 when they won the national championship two years ago... the second two were 6-4 and 6-4... not to mention the fact, teams were far smaller in the 80s than they are now. Not sure what point you are trying to make in an attempt to dismiss Hamilton.

Missing the point as usual...

What does 2010s Stevens Point have to do with 1982?

You questioned whether a team whose best rebounders were 6'4" and 6'1" were capable of beating a top team... Dave provided evidence that they can indeed by mentioning a team with even shorter rebounders who have won a title.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2017, 01:48:37 AM

The implication is that those guys may not have had much effect against the eventual national champ of that year. The ESPN broadcast of that title game is on our 1982 NCAA Tournament page.

http://www.d3hoops.com/archives/men/1982

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 02:04:19 AM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 03, 2017, 01:45:43 AM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 12:25:21 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 02, 2017, 06:09:28 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 08:10:35 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 01, 2017, 04:59:50 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:55:22 PM
Point is for all the bluster about New England, there's not a lot of reason to think they're actually the best, especially if you're not talking about Amherst being that standard-bearer.

Are there people here saying New England is the best? I think the current status of the discussion is as follows:

ElRetornodelEspencio: Babson plays a bunch of tomato cans.
Others: New England is better than that.

I'm sure others have read more about this than I have, but I think the 1981-82 Hamilton team is the one that had the best shot at a national title, had the NESCAC presidents allowed them to play.

http://web1.ncaa.org/app_data/statsPDFArchive/MBB2/C/Men's%20Basketball_Men's_Division%20III_1982_267_Hamilton%20College.pdf
http://www.d3hoops.com/archives/men/1982

Their two best rebounders were 6-4 and 6-1. Surely you don't think they had anything for Wabash.

UW-Stevens Point's best rebounders where 6-1 and 6-0 when they won the national championship two years ago... the second two were 6-4 and 6-4... not to mention the fact, teams were far smaller in the 80s than they are now. Not sure what point you are trying to make in an attempt to dismiss Hamilton.

Missing the point as usual...

What does 2010s Stevens Point have to do with 1982?
You questioned whether a team whose best rebounders were 6'4" and 6'1" were capable of beating a top team... Dave provided evidence that they can indeed by mentioning a team with even shorter rebounders who have won a title.

Never said a thing about beating an unnamed top team. I think it is highly, highly, HIGHLY unlikely that a team playing Lilliputians at forward would have had anything for the 1982 champions.

Potsdam had decent size for D3, was the defending champions. And they got steamrolled.

What in the world happened to Potsdam basketball, anyway?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 02:12:04 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2017, 01:48:37 AM
The implication is that those guys may not have had much effect against the eventual national champ of that year. The ESPN broadcast of that title game is on our 1982 NCAA Tournament page.

http://www.d3hoops.com/archives/men/1982

Quite right. I can't believe all these so-called experts here that have so much shade to throw at me didn't know who Pete Metzelaars is. I assume the only D3 basketball champion to play in the championship of a major US sport. One of the best players in D3 history. Maybe the best ever center.

This board isn't going to live this one down for a long time. You all just got exposed.

Plus the game was pre 3-point era, pre shot clock. I'm not sure anyone that's ever played in the championship game since would have beaten Wabash the way they played under those rules. I just don't see a way you could deal with someone like Metzelaars under those conditions. He had great hands and was a great passer to boot. A similar (but shorter, and arguably less good shooter) D1 player led a MAC team to the Elite 8. People on this board would have written Wabash off when they started 5-4, probably.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 03, 2017, 02:46:34 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 03, 2017, 12:49:22 AM

Quote from: AndOne on January 02, 2017, 11:57:21 PMLastly, with regard to Bob never failing to include qualifying language when posting about a Wesleyan event that he did witness, I think those of us who have been reading his posts for any length of time pretty much know exactly what his opinion on any Wesleyan subject is, qualifying language or not. And this is not a criticism, but rather, an observation.

You're casting too wide a net on Bob here, Mark. This isn't about his overall boosterism with regard to his alma mater. This is about an in-house comparison between various Titans teams. And give him credit for his integrity on this score; he does not make claims to firsthand knowledge when he makes those comparisons regarding Titans teams he never saw.

In all honesty, I was probably focusing more on Bob's boundless boosterism of all things Green, as is to be expected. And, as I indicated, I was not criticizing, just relaying something commonly observed. :)
No aspersions were even attempted to be cast in his direction regarding teams he may have commented about that he never saw so this was never a point of contention.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on January 03, 2017, 09:58:09 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2017, 01:48:37 AM
The implication is that those guys may not have had much effect against the eventual national champ of that year. The ESPN broadcast of that title game is on our 1982 NCAA Tournament page.

http://www.d3hoops.com/archives/men/1982

Pat,
Does this mean that you don't have the broadcast of the 1983 championship game(Scranton-Wittenberg)? I have a VCR tape of it, but it would be easier to watch if there were an online version. Maybe, I should ask the Scranton SID if they have it in their archive.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2017, 09:59:27 AM

Quote from: ronk on January 03, 2017, 09:58:09 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2017, 01:48:37 AM
The implication is that those guys may not have had much effect against the eventual national champ of that year. The ESPN broadcast of that title game is on our 1982 NCAA Tournament page.

http://www.d3hoops.com/archives/men/1982

Pat,
Does this mean that you don't have the broadcast of the 1983 championship game(Scranton-Wittenberg)? I have a VCR tape of it, but it would be easier to watch if there were an online version. Maybe, I should ask the Scranton SID if they have it in their archive.

I don't even have the 1982 one -- it's Wabash's YouTube video and we just embed it on the page. Would gladly embed other old title games if they are on YouTube.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 03, 2017, 10:25:18 AM

Posted my Top 25 ballot this morning... here for you to peruse: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2017/01/03/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-5/

I will freely admit there is plenty of room to argue who should and shouldn't be on my ballot... but I don't have countless hours each week. At some point, I have to cut-bait and post my ballot to the system.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on January 03, 2017, 10:37:19 AM

Quote from: sac on January 03, 2017, 01:09:17 AM
I'm pretty sure every CCIW program but Millikin and Carroll(first year in the league) have been ranked in the top 10 at some time in d3hoops.com polls history. This is the polls 18th year.

I can't imagine there are a lot of conference that can point to 7 different programs being in the top 10 at one point or another.

ODAC might have -- Guilford, Eastern Mennonite, Hampden-Sydney, Lynchburg, Randolph, Randolph-Macon, Virginia Wesleyan I believe have all been ranked at some point. Not sure about Bridgewater, Emory & Henry, Shenandoah (somewhat new to the conference, maybe 4 or 5 years), Roanoke, Washington & Lee. But the ODAC is a 12 team conference, the CCIW has only 9 --and only 8 before this season, right?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 03, 2017, 10:54:13 AM

I wondered if a conference ever had five teams in the top 25 simultaneously like the NESCAC does right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 03, 2017, 10:58:42 AM

Quote from: gordonmann on January 03, 2017, 10:54:13 AM
I wondered if a conference ever had five teams in the top 25 simultaneously like the NESCAC does right now.

Those curious... I am working on a historical record of the Top 25 in the coming days/weeks... so we can have answers like this immediately.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 03, 2017, 12:52:48 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 02:12:04 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2017, 01:48:37 AM
The implication is that those guys may not have had much effect against the eventual national champ of that year. The ESPN broadcast of that title game is on our 1982 NCAA Tournament page.

http://www.d3hoops.com/archives/men/1982

Quite right. I can't believe all these so-called experts here that have so much shade to throw at me didn't know who Pete Metzelaars is. I assume the only D3 basketball champion to play in the championship of a major US sport. One of the best players in D3 history. Maybe the best ever center.

This board isn't going to live this one down for a long time. You all just got exposed.

Whoa. Back off, Spence. Just because nobody mentioned Metzelaars doesn't mean that none of us were aware of him or of the fact that he was an All-American basketball player for the 1981-82 champion Little Giants. I, for one, am well aware of Metzelaars -- not just because I've been following D3 men's basketball since the late '70s, but because I'm a hardcore Buffalo Bills fan as well. Plus, that '82 title game link has been around for a long time, and I've watched that game full through at least twice that I can remember.

Metzelaars was a great basketball player, indeed. I wouldn't slot him as the best-ever D3 center, but he's certainly in the conversation. But that doesn't mean that there was no contemporary or subsequent team in D3 history that happened to have smaller centers, including '82 Hamilton, that could have beaten '82 Wabash. For one thing, one big man doesn't necessarily dictate the entire pulse of a game, even in the rebounding department. One of the essential and eternal truths of basketball is that big men are dependent upon the little men who give them the ball. Also, I have seen plenty of good teams that have smaller centers do an excellent job on the boards through teamwork (rebounding's not just a one-man job, you know), athleticism, discipline, and hustle. The UWSP team of two years ago that's already been cited is an excellent example of that. Finally, there have been fantastic centers in their own right at this level who weren't blessed with overactive pituitary glands. I already cited one: Jeff Gibbs from the '02 national champion Otterbein team, a three-time All-American and two-time OAC POY. Like Metzelaars he was a dual-sport All-American in both football and basketball. Unlike Metzelaars, he was not particularly tall. He was listed on the Cardinals' basketball roster at 6'3, but on their football roster he was 6'1. And in the national championship game that year he had a 25 and 25 double-double, rivaling Metzelaar's '82 performance as the best game that any individual has ever had in a D3 title contest.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 02:12:04 AMPlus the game was pre 3-point era, pre shot clock. I'm not sure anyone that's ever played in the championship game since would have beaten Wabash the way they played under those rules.

There were plenty of ways to beat a team with a good big man during the pre-shot-clock era. I don't want to spend the day arguing with you over vintage-epoch basketball coaching styles, but it could be done and it was done on plenty of occasions.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 02:12:04 AMI just don't see a way you could deal with someone like Metzelaars under those conditions. He had great hands and was a great passer to boot. A similar (but shorter, and arguably less good shooter) D1 player led a MAC team to the Elite 8. People on this board would have written Wabash off when they started 5-4, probably.

I understand that you have a me-against-the-world mentality, but you're really not helping your case every time that you lump all of the posters in this room together like that. This is a very diverse room as far as thoughts and opinions about D3 basketball are concerned.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 02:04:19 AM
What in the world happened to Potsdam basketball, anyway?

Jerry Welsh left for Iona in 1991, and the magic (i.e., recruiting acumen) left the North Country with him. Sherry Dobbs briefly revived the program in the mid-'00s, going 3-2 in the tourney in two appearances and reaching the Elite Eight in '05, but he couldn't sustain it and the Bears soon fell back to the bottom half of the SUNYAC.

Look at a map of New York state. Potsdam's not the easiest place in the world for a basketball coach to recruit. It makes what Welsh accomplished in the late '70s and the '80s all the more amazing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 03, 2017, 01:00:04 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 03, 2017, 10:58:42 AM
Quote from: gordonmann on January 03, 2017, 10:54:13 AM
I wondered if a conference ever had five teams in the top 25 simultaneously like the NESCAC does right now.

Those curious... I am working on a historical record of the Top 25 in the coming days/weeks... so we can have answers like this immediately.

I hope that you can answer y_jack's question about the ODAC and top-ten rankings as well. I'm curious to see if the CCIW has or has not had more programs make the top ten than any other league.

As for Gordon's question, I would be interested in hearing from nescac1 or the other NESCAC posters as to whether or not that league has ever had an across-the-board class of seniors like this one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 03, 2017, 01:38:28 PM

NESCAC has a tremendous and in particular tremendously deep senior class this year (and a strangely weak junior class, so expect some league-wide regression next year). The class of 2014 was stronger at the top (Toomey, Mayer, Kizell) but I'd say not nearly as deep. 2008 was another year with a very strong, very deep senior class (Andrew Olson, Fletcher Walters, Russ Martin, Robert Taylor, Chris Rose, Chris Shalvoy, Jake Weitzen, Andrew Hippert, Bryan Wholly, Charles Stone, that was a loaded year and fairly comparable to 2014). I'm sure there are others I'm not thinking of. This year does feature a lot of really good seniors (especially senior big men) on teams in the bottom-half of the league, which is unusual. And of course Amherst has the benefit of six of its top eight guys being seniors. Only Bowdoin and Colby are largely devoid of senior talent.

I don't think the talent level in this year's senior class is historically unique because there isn't that single transcendent player, somewhat mitigating the incredible depth. Now, if Duncan Robinson and Hunter Sabety hadn't transferred to D1 (both would be seniors right now), then there is no question this senior class would be the best in NESCAC history. But there isn't any one player nearly as strong as a Toomey, Mayer or Olson (or Robinson) in this class.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 03, 2017, 01:46:12 PM

Even so, one single transcendent player isn't going to affect five teams. I think that, when you're talking about an entire league, breadth of talent is a much better indicator of a class's overall rank than whether or not it has that one or two great standouts, especially when that breadth of talent reflects upon that league's national stature in a given season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 03, 2017, 01:55:02 PM

Fair enough Greg. Looking at the NESCAC teams ranked (and I think all five deserrve to be ranked, although I continue to be surprised at how high Tufts is), there is definitely a strong senior presence. Amherst is of course the most senior-dependant. Midd is led by St. Amour and Brown plus brings Jones off the bench. Wesleyan has Kuo, Rafferty and Reed. Tufts, Palleschi and Tarik Smith, plus back-up center Madsen. Williams, which is a sophomore-dominated team, is the youngest of the bunch, but even the Ephs are led by a star senior in Aronowitz. Bates, Trinity and Conn College all have strong groups of seniors as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 03, 2017, 02:45:40 PM

Speaking of Duncan Robinson, there was a story in yesterday's New York Times about him:

http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/02/sports/ncaabasketball/duncan-robinson-michigan-williams.html?smprod=nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share&_r=0

(Warning: The author's condescension towards D3 just oozes off of the page.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 03:54:04 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 03, 2017, 10:25:18 AM
Posted my Top 25 ballot this morning... here for you to peruse: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2017/01/03/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-5/

I will freely admit there is plenty of room to argue who should and shouldn't be on my ballot... but I don't have countless hours each week. At some point, I have to cut-bait and post my ballot to the system.

Are you even aware that Marietta was missing their tallest player for those games (well other than a guy that plays sparingly)? Take a competent 6-6 guy off pretty much any D3 team and I imagine it's going to hurt, even if he doesn't do things that show up on the stat sheet (post defense and box out responsibilities on the boards are important too). Leaving aside your ranking itself, the nature of your criticism is way, way off base. The Whitman game was basically a toss up. The other games MC lost because they shot poorly and committed turnovers (partly because the officiating in FL was awful with a capital A).

I understand that you don't have unlimited time, but in that case don't write like you have detailed knowledge that you don't.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 03, 2017, 04:11:41 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 03, 2017, 02:45:40 PM
Speaking of Duncan Robinson, there was a story in yesterday's New York Times about him:

http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/02/sports/ncaabasketball/duncan-robinson-michigan-williams.html?smprod=nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share&_r=0

(Warning: The author's condescension towards D3 just oozes off of the page.)

Just like so many others who refer to D3 with disdain. >:(
I think many, not all, sports columnists must somehow be related to many, again not all, AAU coaches.
A large percentage of both groups wants little too nothing to do with non D1 level players. :o
That's because D3 level players don't generate much interest among the columnists, nor much money for the AAU coaches.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AO on January 03, 2017, 05:03:14 PM

Quote from: AndOne on January 03, 2017, 04:11:41 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 03, 2017, 02:45:40 PM
Speaking of Duncan Robinson, there was a story in yesterday's New York Times about him:

http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/02/sports/ncaabasketball/duncan-robinson-michigan-williams.html?smprod=nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share&_r=0

(Warning: The author's condescension towards D3 just oozes off of the page.)

Just like so many others who refer to D3 with disdain. >:(
I think many, not all, sports columnists must somehow be related to many, again not all, AAU coaches.
A large percentage of both groups wants little too nothing to do with non D1 level players. :o
That's because D3 level players don't generate much interest among the columnists, nor much money for the AAU coaches.

The comparison to a sixth-grade Christmas pageant was a little ridiculous.

I can understand some of the resistance AAU coaches and high school coaches have against sending players to D3 schools. I read Bob Hurley Sr.'s book and his experience with some of his players going to Ramapo for a couple years just to end up with a bunch of debt and no degree.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 03, 2017, 05:24:18 PM

Quote from: AndOne on January 03, 2017, 04:11:41 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 03, 2017, 02:45:40 PM
Speaking of Duncan Robinson, there was a story in yesterday's New York Times about him:

http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/02/sports/ncaabasketball/duncan-robinson-michigan-williams.html?smprod=nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share&_r=0

(Warning: The author's condescension towards D3 just oozes off of the page.)

Just like so many others who refer to D3 with disdain. >:(
I think many, not all, sports columnists must somehow be related to many, again not all, AAU coaches.
A large percentage of both groups wants little too nothing to do with non D1 level players. :o
That's because D3 level players don't generate much interest among the columnists, nor much money for the AAU coaches.

Another reason why a lot of journalists look down upon D3 is the same reason why a lot of sports fans in general do so: Sheer ignorance. And in David Waldstein's case, it's compounded by the fact that he's not even a college basketball writer; he's a NYT baseball columnist. I don't know if his editor at the sports desk of the Off-White Dowager assigned him this story or if he volunteered for it because he's a Michigan alumnus, but this is not his normal bailiwick.

The fact that Waldstein graduated from Michigan also helps to explain the whole "wow, Williams is really tiny" vibe and the crack about the NESCAC being "quaint" in his piece. The reader definitely gets the sense that "bigger is better" applies not only to basketball but to the whole college experience as well, as though Williams was the minor leagues of academia in general and Duncan Robinson's family was just being narrow-minded and straitjacketed in their thinking when they expressed their reservations about his transfer to Michigan.

Quote from: AO on January 03, 2017, 05:03:14 PM
The comparison to a sixth-grade Christmas pageant was a little ridiculous.

Just "a little"?

Quote from: AO on January 03, 2017, 05:03:14 PMI can understand some of the resistance AAU coaches and high school coaches have against sending players to D3 schools. I read Bob Hurley Sr.'s book and his experience with some of his players going to Ramapo for a couple years just to end up with a bunch of debt and no degree.

If Ramapo was indicative of the whole, Hurley's comments would be a plausible criticism. But D3 is the NCAA's largest division by far, with 440 members and a lot more diversity in its ranks than you see in D1 or D2. And, while I don't have the facts and figures in front of me to prove it, I'm willing to bet that the graduation rate for D3 men's basketball players is a lot higher than it is for their D1 counterparts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 03, 2017, 05:37:17 PM

David Waldstein promoted his story on Duncan Robinson with a ridiculous Tweet.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FNNcsiIW.jpg&hash=cf5d63dd1f6a7d04a9bf3f4a4626bafe230153ba)

Basketball-wise, David Waldstein is the rough equivalent of my three-year old shooting on his Little Tikes basketball hoop, in the backyard...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 03, 2017, 05:48:04 PM

A "chap"? Wow, that's a stilted way to refer to somebody even in a formal print article. On Twitter it's beyond goofy and an invitation to open ridicule.

I doubt that even Oxbridge types refer to men as "chaps" anymore. The only place you're likely to see that word is on a cattle ranch or in a leather bar.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 06:26:39 PM

You're really stretching to find an insult in that tweet or that article.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2017, 06:31:17 PM

If there's a general-interest publication you could count on to be stilted and formal, though, wouldn't it be that one?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 06:36:29 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 03, 2017, 12:52:48 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 02:12:04 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2017, 01:48:37 AM
The implication is that those guys may not have had much effect against the eventual national champ of that year. The ESPN broadcast of that title game is on our 1982 NCAA Tournament page.

http://www.d3hoops.com/archives/men/1982

Quite right. I can't believe all these so-called experts here that have so much shade to throw at me didn't know who Pete Metzelaars is. I assume the only D3 basketball champion to play in the championship of a major US sport. One of the best players in D3 history. Maybe the best ever center.

This board isn't going to live this one down for a long time. You all just got exposed.

Whoa. Back off, Spence.

I'm sorry, this is uncalled for. You have no right to say this to me. Whatever you thikn of me, I don't try to tell people what to say or do. I give my unvarnished opinion of what they do and say, but I will and have defended the right of anyone to say it.

Hopefully Pat will let this go through htis time rather than editorializing.

I have a lot of disagreements about the Metzelaars thing but it's pretty obvious you're wrong and backpedaling with your condescending demand. Anyone can watch the video and see the dude was unstoppable even by a team with talent and height and athleticism. Still had no chance.

But standing up for myself against bullying like this is a lot more important, really.

(FYI, I've probably forgotten more about Jeff Gibbs' time in the OAC than you ever knew. One thing I haven't forgotten is that he didn't always guard the other team's 5 man, specifically because of his height. Weird that your example that's supposed to prove me wrong and catch me out was that one.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 03, 2017, 06:49:32 PM

Sure, if it's the NYT itself. But on a tweet?

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 06:26:39 PM
You're really stretching to find an insult in that tweet or that article.

Maybe we should've talked about the bad shooting background in the Twitter pic.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on January 03, 2017, 06:55:47 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 03, 2017, 02:45:40 PM
Speaking of Duncan Robinson, there was a story in yesterday's New York Times about him:

http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/02/sports/ncaabasketball/duncan-robinson-michigan-williams.html?smprod=nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share&_r=0

(Warning: The author's condescension towards D3 just oozes off of the page.)

Read the article. Sure, a few things seemed a bit dismissive of D3, but it didn't strike me as condescension oozing off the page.

I was amused by this paragraph: "If that happens, it is believed Robinson will be the first player from Williams College to play in the league. There were two players from William & Mary in the N.B.A., and two from William Paterson University. But according to the Basketball Reference website, no one from Williams College has made it."

It's as though any school with "William" in it's name must be D3 even though William & Mary isn't.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2017, 07:00:36 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 06:36:29 PM
Hopefully Pat will let this go through htis time rather than editorializing.

Considering you significantly toned down your post on the second try, yes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on January 03, 2017, 07:12:47 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 06:36:29 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 03, 2017, 12:52:48 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 02:12:04 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2017, 01:48:37 AM
The implication is that those guys may not have had much effect against the eventual national champ of that year. The ESPN broadcast of that title game is on our 1982 NCAA Tournament page.

http://www.d3hoops.com/archives/men/1982

Quite right. I can't believe all these so-called experts here that have so much shade to throw at me didn't know who Pete Metzelaars is. I assume the only D3 basketball champion to play in the championship of a major US sport. One of the best players in D3 history. Maybe the best ever center.

This board isn't going to live this one down for a long time. You all just got exposed.

Whoa. Back off, Spence.

I'm sorry, this is uncalled for. You have no right to say this to me. Whatever you thikn of me, I don't try to tell people what to say or do. I give my unvarnished opinion of what they do and say, but I will and have defended the right of anyone to say it.

Hopefully Pat will let this go through htis time rather than editorializing.

I have a lot of disagreements about the Metzelaars thing but it's pretty obvious you're wrong and backpedaling with your condescending demand. Anyone can watch the video and see the dude was unstoppable even by a team with talent and height and athleticism. Still had no chance.

But standing up for myself against bullying like this is a lot more important, really.

(FYI, I've probably forgotten more about Jeff Gibbs' time in the OAC than you ever knew. One thing I haven't forgotten is that he didn't always guard the other team's 5 man, specifically because of his height. Weird that your example that's supposed to prove me wrong and catch me out was that one.)

Scrolling, scrolling, still scrolling

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2017, 07:13:17 PM

Sager has heard of Metzelaars as a basketball player before this conversation, in case there was any doubt. Doesn't include the seven years of posting before the current board database.

Quote from: Gregory Sager on August 05, 2007, 01:10:08 AM
Like Metzelaars, Gibbs was a tight end in college. And also like the big Dutchman from Wabash, Gibbs led his basketball team to a D3 national title. Both Metzelaars and Gibbs were named tourney MVP in the process of leading their respective teams to the Walnut and Bronze.

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 27, 2009, 02:12:00 PM
Well, let me start off by saying that there's a lot of D3 stars that I wish I had seen, but never did: Pete Metzelaars, Ron Stewart, Leroy Witherspoon, Shannon Lilly, Bill Bessoir, Dick Hempy, Greg Grant, Scott Tedder, Lamont Strothers, T.J. Van Wie, Merrill Brunson, Dave Jannuzzi, Devean George, Horace Jenkins, Andy Panko, and Jeff Gibbs being the guys who immediately come to mind.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 03, 2017, 07:13:48 PM

As a Wabash grad, I'm enamored with that 1982 team, and Pete & Barb Metzelaars. He's probably the best tight end Wabash ever had, for sure. And he was a very solid D3 hoops player, but his game wasn't nuanced. That Wabash team had many ways to beat you besides just lobbing the ball into Pete. They started 5-4 but Mac Petty and the AD knew they had a great team and wanted to play tough competition in the early season to get them ready for the tourney.

The freshmen on the 1982 team overlapped with me - as they were seniors when I was a freshman. I was fraternity brothers with Pete's freshman backup.

Pete reminded me of Artis Gilmore (in a D-3 frame) - an inside force on the boards and in the paint. Obviously an excellent player, but unequivocally calling him the best center ever in D-3 is a little much without really doing a deep dive into the other contenders.

That Wabash team was our fifth 'Wonder Five" - which is a great nickname for great teams from back in the day. The others were the "World Champions" in 1908, the 1917 team led by Homer Stonebraker (Wingate, IN, salute!) , the 1922 "National Champs", and the 1925 team which had one loss - to Wisconsin.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 03, 2017, 07:14:59 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 06:36:29 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 03, 2017, 12:52:48 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 02:12:04 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2017, 01:48:37 AM
The implication is that those guys may not have had much effect against the eventual national champ of that year. The ESPN broadcast of that title game is on our 1982 NCAA Tournament page.

http://www.d3hoops.com/archives/men/1982

Quite right. I can't believe all these so-called experts here that have so much shade to throw at me didn't know who Pete Metzelaars is. I assume the only D3 basketball champion to play in the championship of a major US sport. One of the best players in D3 history. Maybe the best ever center.

This board isn't going to live this one down for a long time. You all just got exposed.

Whoa. Back off, Spence.

I'm sorry, this is uncalled for. You have no right to say this to me. Whatever you thikn of me, I don't try to tell people what to say or do. I give my unvarnished opinion of what they do and say, but I will and have defended the right of anyone to say it.

I have every right to call you out on something when you incorrectly claim that I "got exposed."

And you're not sorry, either.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 06:36:29 PMHopefully Pat will let this go through htis time rather than editorializing.

I have a lot of disagreements about the Metzelaars thing but it's pretty obvious you're wrong and backpedaling with your condescending demand.

Au contraire. You gleefully claimed that you had just administered a facial to the entire room with your "Nyah, nyah, didn't mention Metzelaars!" rant. I called you out on it. That's all. No backpedaling.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 06:36:29 PMAnyone can watch the video and see the dude was unstoppable even by a team with talent and height and athleticism. Still had no chance.

And anyone can completely disagree with your opinion on this, as I do, and that will simply be the end of it. Why? Because we give our unvarnished opinions of what you do and say, but we will and have defended the right of you to say it.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 06:36:29 PMBut standing up for myself against bullying like this is a lot more important, really.

Pot, meet kettle.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 06:36:29 PM(FYI, I've probably forgotten more about Jeff Gibbs' time in the OAC than you ever knew. One thing I haven't forgotten is that he didn't always guard the other team's 5 man, specifically because of his height. Weird that your example that's supposed to prove me wrong and catch me out was that one.)

Fine. I'll give you that one, since you're an OAC guy. But there's plenty of other examples, such as the '15 UWSP team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 03, 2017, 07:20:02 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2017, 07:13:17 PM
Sager has heard of Metzelaars as a basketball player before this conversation, in case there was any doubt. Doesn't include the seven years of posting before the current board database.

Quote from: Gregory Sager on August 05, 2007, 01:10:08 AM
Like Metzelaars, Gibbs was a tight end in college. And also like the big Dutchman from Wabash, Gibbs led his basketball team to a D3 national title. Both Metzelaars and Gibbs were named tourney MVP in the process of leading their respective teams to the Walnut and Bronze.

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 27, 2009, 02:12:00 PM
Well, let me start off by saying that there's a lot of D3 stars that I wish I had seen, but never did: Pete Metzelaars, Ron Stewart, Leroy Witherspoon, Shannon Lilly, Bill Bessoir, Dick Hempy, Greg Grant, Scott Tedder, Lamont Strothers, T.J. Van Wie, Merrill Brunson, Dave Jannuzzi, Devean George, Horace Jenkins, Andy Panko, and Jeff Gibbs being the guys who immediately come to mind.

Thanks, Pat. What I should add is that the '09 post was before the link to the '82 championship game was made available ... and I've since seen archived footage of Jenkins and George as well.

I'd suggest that somebody set up a "D3 Classic Network" in their spare hours, but it'd probably be immediately pointed out to me that I seem to have more spare hours than anybody else around here. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 03, 2017, 07:20:17 PM

Also, I think most all of the long-time posters know the great D3 players and teams of the past.

Frankly, it takes me a while to recall any player from 15-20 years ago unless it was a team I followed greatly. When I was a kid, I used to know all of the players for the top ranked teams in D-1, mainly by reading the box scores. Not now, since I have lots of gunk in my brain.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AO on January 03, 2017, 07:25:41 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 03, 2017, 05:24:18 PM

Quote from: AO on January 03, 2017, 05:03:14 PMI can understand some of the resistance AAU coaches and high school coaches have against sending players to D3 schools. I read Bob Hurley Sr.'s book and his experience with some of his players going to Ramapo for a couple years just to end up with a bunch of debt and no degree.

If Ramapo was indicative of the whole, Hurley's comments would be a plausible criticism. But D3 is the NCAA's largest division by far, with 440 members and a lot more diversity in its ranks than you see in D1 or D2. And, while I don't have the facts and figures in front of me to prove it, I'm willing to bet that the graduation rate for D3 men's basketball players is a lot higher than it is for their D1 counterparts.

I can't find the reference right now, so I'll give Hurley the benefit of the doubt and say it was a specific criticism of Ramapo and not D3 as a whole.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 03, 2017, 07:32:57 PM

While I haven't read Hurley's book I would guess that it probably was directed specifically at Ramapo, since it wouldn't make much sense for a still-active high-school basketball coach to indict all of D3 like that. While I don't claim to know all that much about Hurley or his coaching career at St. Anthony HS other than the stray article I've read here and there (that usually spends as much or more time talking about his sons), I have to think that he's had St. Anthony players go on to other D3 schools where they were successful student-athletes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 03, 2017, 07:55:43 PM

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 06:26:39 PM
You're really stretching to find an insult in that tweet or that article.

You're really stretching to find the suggestion of an insult in our posts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 08:09:07 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 03, 2017, 07:13:48 PM
As a Wabash grad, I'm enamored with that 1982 team, and Pete & Barb Metzelaars. He's probably the best tight end Wabash ever had, for sure. And he was a very solid D3 hoops player, but his game wasn't nuanced. That Wabash team had many ways to beat you besides just lobbing the ball into Pete. They started 5-4 but Mac Petty and the AD knew they had a great team and wanted to play tough competition in the early season to get them ready for the tourney.

The freshmen on the 1982 team overlapped with me - as they were seniors when I was a freshman. I was fraternity brothers with Pete's freshman backup.

Pete reminded me of Artis Gilmore (in a D-3 frame) - an inside force on the boards and in the paint. Obviously an excellent player, but unequivocally calling him the best center ever in D-3 is a little much without really doing a deep dive into the other contenders.

That Wabash team was our fifth 'Wonder Five" - which is a great nickname for great teams from back in the day. The others were the "World Champions" in 1908, the 1917 team led by Homer Stonebraker (Wingate, IN, salute!) , the 1922 "National Champs", and the 1925 team which had one loss - to Wisconsin.

Well feel free to dive, then. There's no doubt that without Metzelaars, that team doesn't come close to beating Potsdam.

And actually what I think I've more strongly said is best center on a team in the championship game, which has led to the Jeff Gibbs mentions because that's pretty much all anyone has got.

You don't really need nuance when you have what he had. But his hands were outstanding, obviously, so it's not like you could just surround him and count on him not to make the tough catches. Good passer, smart, unselfish, good positioning. And obviously, extremely great at converting once he got the ball.

I wondered...assumed might be a better word, that Metzelaars needed a bit of time after football to get into basketball rhythm and shape, and that accounted for the early struggles. I suppose that could be wrong, but seemed more than logical.

Aside from luck, I still would like to hear how a D3 team would have dealt with him without having the 3, and without having a shot clock. Potsdam pressed, didn't work in part because they could just throw it in Pete's general direction and he would come down with it in the frontcourt. Other part because they did have some good ballhandling guards.

Marietta had a guy in the mid 90s that played a similar game to Metzelaars (led the nation in FG%, averaged like 18 a game), but wasn't nearly as effective and could be shut down (though it was tough). There was a big difference between him and Metzelaars.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 08:33:59 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 03, 2017, 07:14:59 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 06:36:29 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 03, 2017, 12:52:48 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 02:12:04 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2017, 01:48:37 AM
The implication is that those guys may not have had much effect against the eventual national champ of that year. The ESPN broadcast of that title game is on our 1982 NCAA Tournament page.

http://www.d3hoops.com/archives/men/1982

Quite right. I can't believe all these so-called experts here that have so much shade to throw at me didn't know who Pete Metzelaars is. I assume the only D3 basketball champion to play in the championship of a major US sport. One of the best players in D3 history. Maybe the best ever center.

This board isn't going to live this one down for a long time. You all just got exposed.

Whoa. Back off, Spence.

I'm sorry, this is uncalled for. You have no right to say this to me. Whatever you thikn of me, I don't try to tell people what to say or do. I give my unvarnished opinion of what they do and say, but I will and have defended the right of anyone to say it.

I have every right to call you out on something when you incorrectly claim that I "got exposed."

And you're not sorry, either.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 06:36:29 PMHopefully Pat will let this go through htis time rather than editorializing.

I have a lot of disagreements about the Metzelaars thing but it's pretty obvious you're wrong and backpedaling with your condescending demand.

Au contraire. You gleefully claimed that you had just administered a facial to the entire room with your "Nyah, nyah, didn't mention Metzelaars!" rant. I called you out on it. That's all. No backpedaling.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 06:36:29 PMAnyone can watch the video and see the dude was unstoppable even by a team with talent and height and athleticism. Still had no chance.

And anyone can completely disagree with your opinion on this, as I do, and that will simply be the end of it. Why? Because we give our unvarnished opinions of what you do and say, but we will and have defended the right of you to say it.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 06:36:29 PMBut standing up for myself against bullying like this is a lot more important, really.

Pot, meet kettle.

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 06:36:29 PM(FYI, I've probably forgotten more about Jeff Gibbs' time in the OAC than you ever knew. One thing I haven't forgotten is that he didn't always guard the other team's 5 man, specifically because of his height. Weird that your example that's supposed to prove me wrong and catch me out was that one.)

Fine. I'll give you that one, since you're an OAC guy. But there's plenty of other examples, such as the '15 UWSP team.

I know you probably think all of this made sense, but it didn't.

And I am sorry that now I'm going to be blamed for taking the thread off topic to address your inappropriate and condescending statement.

Bottom line is dress it up all you want, but I've never tried to intimidate someone into posting or not posting as I please. You have.

I wouldn't suggest trying it in person if we ever meet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 03, 2017, 08:41:28 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 03, 2017, 07:32:57 PM
While I haven't read Hurley's book I would guess that it probably was directed specifically at Ramapo, since it wouldn't make much sense for a still-active high-school basketball coach to indict all of D3 like that. While I don't claim to know all that much about Hurley or his coaching career at St. Anthony HS other than the stray article I've read here and there (that usually spends as much or more time talking about his sons), I have to think that he's had St. Anthony players go on to other D3 schools where they were successful student-athletes.

Why wouldn't it make sense if that's his experience and frame of reference? It's not his job to know everything about D3, and it's not his goal with a program like his to send kids to D3.

This is one of the realities implicit in D3. You're known by the company you keep. One reason I think there should be some real standards for membership and for eligibility.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 03, 2017, 08:52:41 PM

#4-Rochester 73
RIT 72

Final play (video) - https://twitter.com/IWUhoopscom/status/816460793835384832

Tucker Knox made both FTs with no time on the clock for the 1-point win.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 4samuy on January 03, 2017, 08:57:01 PM

Amherst gets it handed to them by a very avg Eastern Conneticut squad 87-75

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PeterEscobar on January 03, 2017, 09:01:08 PM

Quote from: 4samuy on January 03, 2017, 08:57:01 PM
Amherst gets it handed to them by a very avg Eastern Conneticut squad 87-75

As Wesleyan falls to RIC, who despite having Dominique Bull (formerly of Mizzu & a summer semester at GWU) are coming off a 30+ point loss to MIT.

Wonder if the two NESCAC teams were overlooking their Tuesday game for the first weekend of conference play.

Or maybe it was the lighting/officiating/shooting back drops :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on January 03, 2017, 09:04:46 PM

At the half #20 Neumann is trailing by 3 to winless Marywood 38-35.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 4samuy on January 03, 2017, 09:27:34 PM

Quote from: PeterEscobar on January 03, 2017, 09:01:08 PM
Quote from: 4samuy on January 03, 2017, 08:57:01 PM
Amherst gets it handed to them by a very avg Eastern Conneticut squad 87-75
As Wesleyan falls to RIC, who despite having Dominique Bull (formerly of Mizzu & a summer semester at GWU) are coming off a 30+ point loss to MIT.

Wonder if the two NESCAC teams were overlooking their Tuesday game for the first weekend of conference play.

Or maybe it was the lighting/officiating/shooting back drops :)

Come on Peterescobar, really, shooting background, referees, lighting? Please tell me you're not serious. I noticed the emoji and am hoping your comment was a joke. The final score didn't reflect how bad Amherst was beaten. How bout Amherst is overrated. I think the Massey ratings are a much better gauge as where Amherst should be rated at #19.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2017, 09:28:28 PM

He's referencing inside jokes that are recent on this board -- I don't think he was actually making excuses for the loss.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 4samuy on January 03, 2017, 09:37:03 PM

As I said, I'm hoping your comments are a joke. No offense.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 4samuy on January 03, 2017, 09:41:11 PM

As I said, I'm hoping your comments are a joke. No offense.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 03, 2017, 09:41:45 PM

Quote from: 4samuy on January 03, 2017, 09:27:34 PM
Quote from: PeterEscobar on January 03, 2017, 09:01:08 PM
Quote from: 4samuy on January 03, 2017, 08:57:01 PM
Amherst gets it handed to them by a very avg Eastern Conneticut squad 87-75
As Wesleyan falls to RIC, who despite having Dominique Bull (formerly of Mizzu & a summer semester at GWU) are coming off a 30+ point loss to MIT.

Wonder if the two NESCAC teams were overlooking their Tuesday game for the first weekend of conference play.

Or maybe it was the lighting/officiating/shooting back drops :)

Come on Peterescobar, really, shooting background, referees, lighting? Please tell me you're not serious. I noticed the emoji and am hoping your comment was a joke. The final score didn't reflect how bad Amherst was beaten. How bout Amherst is overrated. I think the Massey ratings are a much better gauge as where Amherst should be rated at #19.

Blasphemy! :o
The NESCACers, especially those from Amherst, have probably already put out a bounty on your head.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 03, 2017, 09:48:38 PM

Since Massey gets talked about so much in this room, I thought I'd run a comparison of today's d3hoops.com Top 25 with their corresponding Massey ratings:

#	School (1st votes)	W-L	Pts	Prev	*Massey*
1	Babson (15)	10-1	610	1	5
2	Whitman (9)	11-0	603	2	2
3	Amherst (1)	9-1	576	3	19
4	Rochester	11-0	507	6	14
5	Whitworth	10-1	497	8	7
6	Christopher Newport	9-2	463	9	13
7	UW-Eau Claire	10-1	443	11	8
8	Tufts	8-2	393	10	53
9	Wesleyan	11-0	386	22	6
10	North Park	9-1	342	13	10
11	UW-Whitewater	11-0	336	16	3
12	St. Norbert	7-2	333	7	22
13	Marietta	8-3	325	4	16
14	Susquehanna	9-1	295	14	27
15	Salisbury	9-2	230	5	23
16	Benedictine	8-3	222	12	18
17	UW-River Falls	10-1	186	22	4
18	Swarthmore	9-0	184	21	47
19	Ramapo	11-0	167	--	12
20	Neumann	9-0	166	23	1
21	Denison	8-1	110	24	43
22	Middlebury	9-1	106	--	17
23	New Jersey City	11-1	103	--	42
24	Washington (MO)	8-3	88	24	21
25	Williams	10-1	74	--	9

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on January 03, 2017, 10:03:43 PM

So much for trailing at the half. Neumann rolls 91-70. Of course the stream went down with 4+ minutes to go in the game. Guessing a lot of people tuned in late.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 4samuy on January 03, 2017, 10:43:10 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 03, 2017, 09:48:38 PM
Since Massey gets talked about so much in this room, I thought I'd run a comparison of today's d3hoops.com Top 25 with their corresponding Massey ratings:

# School (1st votes) W-L Pts Prev Massey
1 Babson (15) 10-1 610 1 5
2 Whitman (9) 11-0 603 2 2
3 Amherst (1) 9-1 576 3 19
4 Rochester 11-0 507 6 14
5 Whitworth 10-1 497 8 7
6 Christopher Newport 9-2 463 9 13
7 UW-Eau Claire 10-1 443 11 8
8 Tufts 8-2 393 10 53
9 Wesleyan 11-0 386 22 6
10 North Park 9-1 342 13 10
11 UW-Whitewater 11-0 336 16 3
12 St. Norbert 7-2 333 7 22
13 Marietta 8-3 325 4 16
14 Susquehanna 9-1 295 14 27
15 Salisbury 9-2 230 5 23
16 Benedictine 8-3 222 12 18
17 UW-River Falls 10-1 186 22 4
18 Swarthmore 9-0 184 21 47
19 Ramapo 11-0 167 -- 12
20 Neumann 9-0 166 23 1
21 Denison 8-1 110 24 43
22 Middlebury 9-1 106 -- 17
23 New Jersey City 11-1 103 -- 42
24 Washington (MO) 8-3 88 24 21
25 Williams 10-1 74 -- 9

Nicely done! Love the comparison.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on January 03, 2017, 11:09:38 PM

^^^ There are 20 teams that appear in the top 25 of both Massey and D3hoops. The five that D3hoops has in that Massey doesn't are: Tufts, Susquehannah, Swarthmore, Denison, and NJC. What are the 5 in the Massey top 25 that aren't in the D3hoops top 25?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 03, 2017, 11:32:01 PM

Quote from: y_jack_lok on January 03, 2017, 11:09:38 PM
^^^ There are 20 teams that appear in the top 25 of both Massey and D3hoops. The five that D3hoops has in that Massey doesn't are: Tufts, Susquehannah, Swarthmore, Denison, and NJC. What are the 5 in the Massey top 25 that aren't in the D3hoops top 25?

Bethel (11th Massey, 35th D3h), Illinois Wesleyan (15th M, 26th D3h), Augustana (20th M, NR D3h), C-M-S (24th M, 33rd D3h), Wartburg (25th M, T27th D3h)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on January 03, 2017, 11:52:12 PM

Everyone...

Relax.

Find your happy places.

Take a deep cleansing breath.

Meditate.

Far too early in the new year for this outbreak of angst... :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on January 04, 2017, 12:29:21 AM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 03, 2017, 11:32:01 PM
Quote from: y_jack_lok on January 03, 2017, 11:09:38 PM
^^^ There are 20 teams that appear in the top 25 of both Massey and D3hoops. The five that D3hoops has in that Massey doesn't are: Tufts, Susquehannah, Swarthmore, Denison, and NJC. What are the 5 in the Massey top 25 that aren't in the D3hoops top 25?
Bethel (11th Massey, 35th D3h), Illinois Wesleyan (15th M, 26th D3h), Augustana (20th M, NR D3h), C-M-S (24th M, 33rd D3h), Wartburg (25th M, T27th D3h)

Thanks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 04, 2017, 12:41:11 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2017, 09:28:28 PM
He's referencing inside jokes that are recent on this board -- I don't think he was actually making excuses for the loss.

Perhaps the lighting and backdrop in here are bad. Multi-million dollar budget, that's TGHIJGSTO!!! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 04, 2017, 08:44:50 AM

Quote from: sac on January 04, 2017, 12:41:11 AM
Perhaps the lighting and backdrop in here are bad. Multi-million dollar budget, that's TGHIJGSTO!!! ;)

Come on, sac. Don't undervalue D3 hoops.

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 09:00:44 PM
yes i dcid, this is a multi billionh dollar year indudtry, ... if you cant see it, you need glasses

(I also thought that I should demystify that inside joke for newer readers ... although "demystifying" might not be the actual effect of reading messages that era of this board.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 04, 2017, 09:03:02 AM

Based on the Massey comparison, I've concluded that D3hoops has a major anti-Pennsylvania bias, because Neumann. Also, a major pro-Pennsylvania bias, because Swarthmore. Or maybe it's just a pro-Quaker bias ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on January 04, 2017, 09:27:17 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 04, 2017, 09:03:02 AM
Based on the Massey comparison, I've concluded that D3hoops has a major anti-Pennsylvania bias, because Neumann. Also, a major pro-Pennsylvania bias, because Swarthmore. Or maybe it's just a pro-Quaker bias ...

I knew it! NEUMANN!!! >:( ;D ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on January 04, 2017, 11:12:53 AM

(https://cdn.meme.am/Instance/Preview?imageID=7370975&generatorTypeID=&panels=&text0=&text1=Neumann!!&text2=&text3=)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 04, 2017, 11:29:51 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 04, 2017, 09:03:02 AM
Based on the Massey comparison, I've concluded that D3hoops has a major anti-Pennsylvania bias, because Neumann. Also, a major pro-Pennsylvania bias, because Swarthmore. Or maybe it's just a pro-Quaker bias ...

I'm looking for Earlham and George Fox to skyrocket in the next poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 04, 2017, 11:31:20 AM

I've taken the pleasure of adding my efficiency rankings as well.
http://detroitjockcity.com/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency-ratings/

I'm only including games through Sunday below but the up-to-date numbers are available at the site.

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 03, 2017, 09:48:38 PM
Since Massey gets talked about so much in this room, I thought I'd run a comparison of today's d3hoops.com Top 25 with their corresponding Massey ratings:

# School (1st votes) W-L Pts Prev Massey KS Efficiency
1 Babson (15) 10-1 610 1 5 2
2 Whitman (9) 11-0 603 2 2 6
3 Amherst (1) 9-1 576 3 19 7
4 Rochester 11-0 507 6 14 18
5 Whitworth 10-1 497 8 7 19
6 Christopher Newport 9-2 463 9 13 4
7 UW-Eau Claire 10-1 443 11 8 9
8 Tufts 8-2 393 10 53 61
9 Wesleyan 11-0 386 22 6 14
10 North Park 9-1 342 13 10 27
11 UW-Whitewater 11-0 336 16 3 16
12 St. Norbert 7-2 333 7 22 5
13 Marietta 8-3 325 4 16 3
14 Susquehanna 9-1 295 14 27 46
15 Salisbury 9-2 230 5 23 13
16 Benedictine 8-3 222 12 18 20
17 UW-River Falls 10-1 186 22 4 8
18 Swarthmore 9-0 184 21 47 56
19 Ramapo 11-0 167 -- 12 15
20 Neumann 9-0 166 23 1 1
21 Denison 8-1 110 24 43 90
22 Middlebury 9-1 106 -- 17 22
23 New Jersey City 11-1 103 -- 42 52
24 Washington (MO) 8-3 88 24 21 34
25 Williams 10-1 74 -- 9 23

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PeterEscobar on January 04, 2017, 11:55:56 AM

Quote from: 4samuy on January 03, 2017, 09:27:34 PM
Quote from: PeterEscobar on January 03, 2017, 09:01:08 PM
Quote from: 4samuy on January 03, 2017, 08:57:01 PM
Amherst gets it handed to them by a very avg Eastern Conneticut squad 87-75
As Wesleyan falls to RIC, who despite having Dominique Bull (formerly of Mizzu & a summer semester at GWU) are coming off a 30+ point loss to MIT.

Wonder if the two NESCAC teams were overlooking their Tuesday game for the first weekend of conference play.

Or maybe it was the lighting/officiating/shooting back drops :)

Come on Peterescobar, really, shooting background, referees, lighting? Please tell me you're not serious. I noticed the emoji and am hoping your comment was a joke. The final score didn't reflect how bad Amherst was beaten. How bout Amherst is overrated. I think the Massey ratings are a much better gauge as where Amherst should be rated at #19.

Please see below:

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 03, 2017, 09:28:28 PM
He's referencing inside jokes that are recent on this board -- I don't think he was actually making excuses for the loss.

I was 100000% joking...

All that being said, pretty impressive that Babson is ranked in top 5 in both Massey KS Eff. Ratings, Bennett Rank & D3hoops. Chronically overrated team, tho ::)

Neumann is only other team in top 5 in both Massey & KS eff. rating.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 04, 2017, 12:17:49 PM

(https://cdn.meme.am/Instance/Preview?imageID=7370975&generatorTypeID=&panels=&text0=&text1=Neumann!&text2=&text3=)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 04, 2017, 12:34:14 PM

Seriopus question

Is Neumann going to be challenged between now and selection Sunday?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 04, 2017, 12:38:54 PM

Quote from: sac on January 04, 2017, 12:34:14 PM
Seriopus question

Is Neumann going to be challenged between now and selection Sunday?

Well, they have two games against Cabrini including one this week. They also have two(?) against Gwynedd-Mercy. I think both will give them games. Outside of that, it will be a matter of whether they remain focused. In offline conversations I have had with others, the real concern in that conference for the top teams over the years is being motivated to play many of those in the conference. I can see that being a challenge. Are you really up for playing Marywood? As we saw last night, probably not. That said, I think Neumann is "new" enough that Cabrini and GMC will give them some good games because those two opponents are pretty good and Neumann probably has some growing pains to get over. Could they sweep the conference? Absolutely. If they lost to either of those two schools it wouldn't surprise or disappoint me. Drop one to Keystone or any of the northern teams... that would be a sign they aren't focused enough at the task at hand.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on January 04, 2017, 12:39:39 PM

Quote from: sac on January 04, 2017, 12:34:14 PM
Seriopus question

Is Neumann going to be challenged between now and selection Sunday?

Leaning towards either one of the two times they play Cabrini or no...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 04, 2017, 12:40:51 PM

Quote from: sac on January 04, 2017, 12:34:14 PM
Seriopus question

Is Neumann going to be challenged between now and selection Sunday?

Oof. I just checked their Massey probabilities for the remaining schedule. They're 97%+ chance to win in 13 of 16 games with the other three being 78% (at Cabrini), 84% (vs. Gwynedd Mercy), and 89% (vs. Cabrini).

They've already beaten Gwynedd Mercy on the road (by 12).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 04, 2017, 01:22:49 PM

QuoteBased on the Massey comparison, I've concluded that D3hoops has a major anti-Pennsylvania bias, because Neumann. Also, a major pro-Pennsylvania bias, because Swarthmore. Or maybe it's just a pro-Quaker bias ...

I went to Penn for grad school and they are my favorite D1 team. Maybe you're on to something...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 04, 2017, 03:42:53 PM

Quote from: sac on January 04, 2017, 12:34:14 PM
Seriopus question

Is Neumann going to be challenged between now and selection Sunday?

TGHIJGSTO!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 04, 2017, 04:01:14 PM

No lie... he found a way around Facebook and has messaged me in a rather inappropriate way once again... just a short time ago.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 04, 2017, 04:22:42 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 04, 2017, 03:42:53 PM
Quote from: sac on January 04, 2017, 12:34:14 PM
Seriopus question

Is Neumann going to be challenged between now and selection Sunday?

TGHIJGSTO!

Once again, to provide context for the newcomers (emphasis added):

Quote from: hplc2222 on January 27, 2014, 08:56:15 PM
oh, it takes a person, really??????????????? well that persoin should not have a job of it it is 2 hpours latewter and it still says 450-409,... you thing these peopkme deserve to get paid gor theie qoute unquote job

come on man

what if you were making a medicaqtion in aq phrama, and you boss waqs like, oh werll , fill olut the aperwork when you caqn

lol

are you seriopus?

When I went off in search of these old messages, I was struck that his cumulative karma was a relatively tame +9/-29 by the time he was banished (after 183 posts). Were we less likely to smite him because we attributed his combative (and often incoherent) posts to self-medication?

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 04, 2017, 04:01:14 PM
No lie... he found a way around Facebook and has messaged me in a rather inappropriate way once again... just a short time ago.

Yikes. Is he still composing his messages under the influence?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on January 04, 2017, 04:51:44 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 04, 2017, 12:40:51 PM
Quote from: sac on January 04, 2017, 12:34:14 PM
Seriopus question

Is Neumann going to be challenged between now and selection Sunday?

Oof. I just checked their Massey probabilities for the remaining schedule. They're 97%+ chance to win in 13 of 16 games with the other three being 78% (at Cabrini), 84% (vs. Gwynedd Mercy), and 89% (vs. Cabrini).

They've already beaten Gwynedd Mercy on the road (by 12).

I'm looking for a victory. Word is Neumann is really looking to put a hurtin on Cabrini. Last time they met was in the CSAC semis. Many of us know how that game turned out. Should be a great game. Could be nasty too. School not in session yet but there could be a police presence, unfortunately :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 04, 2017, 05:25:37 PM

That CSAC tournament final at Nerney Fieldhouse from a couple years ago -- Aaron Walton-Moss' finale -- was one of the most intense environments I've been in recently. The tension was very tangible.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 04, 2017, 05:33:36 PM

Quote from: mailsy on January 04, 2017, 04:51:44 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 04, 2017, 12:40:51 PM
Quote from: sac on January 04, 2017, 12:34:14 PM
Seriopus question

Is Neumann going to be challenged between now and selection Sunday?

Oof. I just checked their Massey probabilities for the remaining schedule. They're 97%+ chance to win in 13 of 16 games with the other three being 78% (at Cabrini), 84% (vs. Gwynedd Mercy), and 89% (vs. Cabrini).

They've already beaten Gwynedd Mercy on the road (by 12).

I'm looking for a victory. Word is Neumann is really looking to put a hurtin on Cabrini. Last time they met was in the CSAC semis. Many of us know how that game turned out. Should be a great game. Could be nasty too. School not in session yet but there could be a police presence, unfortunately :-\

Gonna be a real matchup problem for Cabrini - very similar teams and styles and Neumann is better. Butler hasn't played since Catholic, though - so whether he's injured or inelligible, but it might give Cabrini a chance - he was the leading scorer and rebounder first semester.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on January 04, 2017, 08:50:09 PM

Ramapo down 20 at the half to 0-8 Rutgers-Camden. :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 04, 2017, 09:05:19 PM

So I can't assert, from my own school, and knowledge from the coach who lived in my neighborhood, that Wabash wouldn't have won the title without that supporting cast around Metzelaars? I didn't say they'd win without Pete. I'm saying they needed the rest to augment Pete.

Just learning the rules here.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 04, 2017, 09:07:47 PM

It's my total guesstimate that whenever we all think a team can't be beaten with their remaining schedule, they somehow do get a loss.

Your mileage may vary.

And I'll admit I TGHIJGSTO! that...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 04, 2017, 09:31:55 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 04, 2017, 09:07:47 PM
It's my total guesstimate that whenever we all think a team can't be beaten with their remaining schedule, they somehow do get a loss.

Your mileage may vary.

And I'll admit I TGHIJGSTO! that...

Yeah, I had the same problem in reverse. Right after Millikin lost to 4 SLIAC schools AND Earlham, I predicted an 0-for-the-season. They immediately proceeded to a two-game winning streak against generally respectable to downright good RHIT and Calvin

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 04, 2017, 10:09:41 PM

Several Top 25 losses tonight... UWEC on a last second three and a free-for-all final possession... NJCU because they played defense but forgot to play offense... NCC because - well, I don't know... and Ramapo nearly lost because, well, the spot light is now on them?

SMH

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 04, 2017, 10:13:06 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 04, 2017, 10:09:41 PM
Several Top 25 losses tonight... UWEC on a last second three and a free-for-all final possession... NJCU because they played defense but forgot to play offense... NCC because - well, I don't know... and Ramapo nearly lost because, well, the spot light is now on them?

SMH

And UWW was crushed by double-digits by UW-LaX.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on January 04, 2017, 10:21:52 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 04, 2017, 10:09:41 PM
Several Top 25 losses tonight... UWEC on a last second three and a free-for-all final possession... NJCU because they played defense but forgot to play offense... NCC because - well, I don't know... and Ramapo nearly lost because, well, the spot light is now on them?

SMH

Dave,

NCC is not in the top 25. Did you mean North Park? ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 04, 2017, 10:39:29 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 04, 2017, 10:13:06 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 04, 2017, 10:09:41 PM
Several Top 25 losses tonight... UWEC on a last second three and a free-for-all final possession... NJCU because they played defense but forgot to play offense... NCC because - well, I don't know... and Ramapo nearly lost because, well, the spot light is now on them?

SMH

And UWW was crushed by double-digits by UW-LaX.

Yep... forgot about them.

Quote from: mailsy on January 04, 2017, 10:21:52 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 04, 2017, 10:09:41 PM
Several Top 25 losses tonight... UWEC on a last second three and a free-for-all final possession... NJCU because they played defense but forgot to play offense... NCC because - well, I don't know... and Ramapo nearly lost because, well, the spot light is now on them?

SMH

Dave,

NCC is not in the top 25. Did you mean North Park? ???

Yep, I think my brain short-circuited from all the action tonight. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 04, 2017, 11:43:00 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 04, 2017, 10:39:29 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 04, 2017, 10:13:06 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 04, 2017, 10:09:41 PM
Several Top 25 losses tonight... UWEC on a last second three and a free-for-all final possession... NJCU because they played defense but forgot to play offense... NCC because - well, I don't know... and Ramapo nearly lost because, well, the spot light is now on them?

SMH

And UWW was crushed by double-digits by UW-LaX.

Yep... forgot about them.

Quote from: mailsy on January 04, 2017, 10:21:52 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 04, 2017, 10:09:41 PM
Several Top 25 losses tonight... UWEC on a last second three and a free-for-all final possession... NJCU because they played defense but forgot to play offense... NCC because - well, I don't know... and Ramapo nearly lost because, well, the spot light is now on them?

SMH

Dave,

NCC is not in the top 25. Did you mean North Park? ???

Yep, I think my brain short-circuited from all the action tonight. LOL

Twice in two days, D-Mac. We are not the Cardinals. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 05, 2017, 12:12:51 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 04, 2017, 11:43:00 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 04, 2017, 10:39:29 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 04, 2017, 10:13:06 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 04, 2017, 10:09:41 PM
Several Top 25 losses tonight... UWEC on a last second three and a free-for-all final possession... NJCU because they played defense but forgot to play offense... NCC because - well, I don't know... and Ramapo nearly lost because, well, the spot light is now on them?

SMH

And UWW was crushed by double-digits by UW-LaX.

Yep... forgot about them.

Quote from: mailsy on January 04, 2017, 10:21:52 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 04, 2017, 10:09:41 PM
Several Top 25 losses tonight... UWEC on a last second three and a free-for-all final possession... NJCU because they played defense but forgot to play offense... NCC because - well, I don't know... and Ramapo nearly lost because, well, the spot light is now on them?

SMH

Dave,

NCC is not in the top 25. Did you mean North Park? ???

Yep, I think my brain short-circuited from all the action tonight. LOL

Twice in two days, D-Mac. We are not the Cardinals. ;)

HAHA Well played. Well played indeed. Didn't even realize I made that connection again. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 05, 2017, 04:00:46 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

(edit) removed a couple of errors that crept in--mostly several games marked (incorrectly) as having gone to overtime. Thanks to HOPEful for pointing this out. (Now to track down the corresponding flaw in the program.)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	610	Babson	11-1	won at Emerson, 100-76; 01/07 at Springfield
#2	603	Whitman	11-0	01/06 vs. Linfield; 01/07 vs. Pacific
#3	576	Amherst	9-2	LOST at Eastern Connecticut, 75-87; 01/06 at #25 Williams
#4	507	Rochester	11-0	won at Rochester Tech, 73-72; 01/07 vs. T#27 Emory
#5	497	Whitworth	10-1	01/06 vs. Pacific; 01/07 vs. Linfield
#6	463	Christopher Newport	10-2	won at Wesley, 71-62; 01/07 at Marymount
#7	443	UW-Eau Claire	10-2	LOST at #17 UW-River Falls, 59-60; 01/07 vs. #11 UW-Whitewater
#8	393	Tufts	9-2	def. Lesley, 88-58; 01/06 at Bowdoin; 01/07 at Colby
#9	386	Wesleyan	11-1	LOST to Rhode Island College, 55-62; 01/06 at #22 Middlebury; 01/07 at Hamilton
#10	342	North Park	9-2	LOST to Carthage, 76-82; 01/07 at #30 North Central (Ill.)
#11	336	UW-Whitewater	11-1	LOST to UW-La Crosse, 68-82; 01/07 at #7 UW-Eau Claire
#12	333	St. Norbert	8-2	won at Beloit, 72-51; 01/06 vs. Grinnell
#13	325	Marietta	9-3	won at Muskingum, 100-64; 01/07 at Ohio Northern
#14	295	Susquehanna	10-1	won at Dickinson, 76-66; 01/05 vs. Lancaster Bible; 01/07 vs. Moravian
#15	230	Salisbury	9-2	won at Washington College, 99-84; 01/05 at Mary Washington; 01/07 vs. Frostburg State
#16	222	Benedictine	9-3	won at Dominican, 88-82; 01/07 at Wisconsin Lutheran
#17	186	UW-River Falls	11-1	def. #7 UW-Eau Claire, 60-59; 01/07 vs. UW-Platteville
#18	184	Swarthmore	10-1	won at Catholic, 88-51; 01/07 at Gettysburg
#19	167	Ramapo	12-0	won at Rutgers-Camden, 94-86; 01/07 vs. TCNJ
#20	166	Neumann	10-0	def. Marywood, 91-70; 01/05 at Cabrini; 01/07 at Cairn
#21	110	Denison	10-1	won at Brooklyn, 79-52; won at Mount St. Vincent, 72-64; 01/05 vs. Ohio Wesleyan; 01/07 vs. Allegheny
#22	106	Middlebury	9-1	01/06 vs. #9 Wesleyan; 01/07 vs. Connecticut College
#23	103	New Jersey City	11-2	LOST at Montclair State, 46-48; 01/07 vs. Rowan
#24	88	Washington U.	8-3	01/07 at #36 Chicago
#25	74	Williams	11-1	def. SUNY Oneonta, 74-62; 01/06 vs. #3 Amherst; 01/08 vs. Trinity (Conn.)

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	67	Illinois Wesleyan	10-3	def. Millikin, 73-64; 01/07 vs. Wheaton (Ill.)
T#27	58	Emory	9-2	def. Oglethorpe, 93-68; 01/07 at #4 Rochester
T#27	58	Wartburg	10-3	LOST to Loras, 75-84; 01/07 vs. Dubuque
#29	41	Lycoming	12-2	LOST to Lebanon Valley, 72-80; 01/07 at Stevenson
#30	34	North Central (Ill.)	8-5	LOST to Augustana, 71-82; 01/07 vs. #10 North Park
#31	33	Endicott	9-2	def. Wentworth, 76-67; 01/05 vs. Gordon; 01/07 at Western New England
#32	25	Brockport	8-2	LOST at Carnegie Mellon, 66-89; 01/06 vs. St. Lawrence; 01/07 at SUNY Geneseo
#33	15	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	8-1	01/05 at Redlands; 01/07 vs. Caltech
#34	11	Hope	8-4	won at Albion, 85-79; 01/07 vs. Olivet
#35	8	Bethel	9-2	won at Carleton, 70-63 OT; LOST to #42 St. Thomas, 74-83; 01/07 vs. Augsburg
#36	7	Chicago	8-3	01/07 vs. #24 Washington U.
#37	6	Hardin-Simmons	9-4	01/05 at University of the Ozarks; 01/07 at Texas-Dallas
T#38	5	Virginia Wesleyan	8-4	LOST at Randolph-Macon, 63-67; 01/07 vs. Washington and Lee
T#38	5	WPI	9-3	LOST to Springfield, 63-71; 01/07 at MIT
#40	4	Misericordia	10-2	def. Manhattanville, 83-54; 01/07 at FDU-Florham
#41	3	Ripon	9-1	def. Grinnell, 98-82; 01/07 at Lake Forest
#42	1	St. Thomas	8-3	won at Gustavus Adolphus, 83-65; won at #35 Bethel, 83-74; 01/07 at Carleton

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on January 05, 2017, 07:56:02 AM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 05, 2017, 04:00:46 AM
How They Fared (So Far)
...
Top 25

#34 11 Hope 8-4 won at Albion, 85-79 OT; 01/07 vs. Olivet
...

Not that it matters a ton, but Hope's win was in regulation, not OT

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 05, 2017, 11:04:40 AM

I posed this question before, but forgot where I asked it, so I'm not sure if I ever got an answer...

Where is the buzzer beaters page? I can't find it navigating around and when I google it, it comes up with last year's link.

Thanks!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 05, 2017, 11:33:07 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 05, 2017, 11:04:40 AM
I posed this question before, but forgot where I asked it, so I'm not sure if I ever got an answer...

Where is the buzzer beaters page? I can't find it navigating around and when I google it, it comes up with last year's link.

Thanks!

With everything going on, I think we haven't gotten this year's created. On the list... apologize for the delay... our plate(s) has been overflowing this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 05, 2017, 12:21:33 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 05, 2017, 11:33:07 AM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 05, 2017, 11:04:40 AM
I posed this question before, but forgot where I asked it, so I'm not sure if I ever got an answer...

Where is the buzzer beaters page? I can't find it navigating around and when I google it, it comes up with last year's link.

Thanks!

With everything going on, I think we haven't gotten this year's created. On the list... apologize for the delay... our plate(s) has been overflowing this year.

Actually, buzzer beaters is likely going to be one of the casualties of the regime change at D3hoops. We just don't have the resources to take it on this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 05, 2017, 03:08:42 PM

That's too bad, but understandable. Thanks for all the things you guys do.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 05, 2017, 05:00:22 PM

The Division III basketball season is back from the holiday "break" - though not much of a break for many of the teams - and with the start of the 2017 part of the schedule comes plenty to talk about. Upsets in the men's Top 25 and the shocking news at out UW-Stevens Point.

Thursday night on Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave McHugh tries to get everything wrapped up in the discarded Christmas wrapping left behind. Bob Semling suspended, Geneseo women deal with another tragedy, Top 25 teams sputtering as conference season heats up, and teams trying to make an impact from under the radar.\

Hoopsville hits the air at 7:00 PM ET. You can tune in live, watch it on Facebook Live, or catch-up on Demand here: http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2016-17/jan5

Tonight's guest list (in order of appearance):
- Daley Ryman, Sports Director, NewsChannel 7 (WSAW) - UWSP Suspensions
- Cheri Harrer, Baldwin Wallace women's coach
- Scott Hemer, SUNY Geneseo women's coach
- Chad Dickman, Hood men's coach
- Eric Bridgeland, No. 2 Whitman men's coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on January 05, 2017, 08:47:41 PM

At the half. #20 Neumann leads Cabrini 42-38. Neumann's big man Darien Barnes got 2 T's in half and is gone. Should be an interesting 2nd half.

GO CAVS!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 05, 2017, 09:26:38 PM

#21 Denison 83 Ohio Wesleyan 80

Dave Meurer's long 3 with 1.5 seconds left wins it for the Big Red, OWU got a decent look to tie it but no dice. Denison now in sole possession of the NCAC lead.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 05, 2017, 11:40:36 PM

Quote from: sac on January 04, 2017, 12:34:14 PM
Seriopus question

Is Neumann going to be challenged between now and selection Sunday?

Actually a seriopus question is one that will require a lot of hard work to find the answer.
TGHIJGSTO indeed!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 05, 2017, 11:44:33 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 02, 2017, 11:45:15 PM
We'll make a culturally cutting-edge kind of guy of you yet, Chuck. ;)

http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/01/arts/music/mariah-carey-new-years-eve-times-square.html?_r=0

Catching up on my reading...

That would be a Sisyphean task, if there ever was one! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 07, 2017, 01:32:51 AM

Middlebury beat Wesleyan pretty handily tonight.

Whitworth lost to Pacific. First time they lost a conference game to anyone but Whitman since Feb 21, 2014.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 07, 2017, 09:31:17 PM

Marietta also lost today... this parity thing is getting old. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Bucket on January 07, 2017, 10:50:09 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 07, 2017, 09:31:17 PM
Marietta also lost today... this parity thing is getting old. LOL

Or...the teams you thought were very good aren't as good as you thought.

Just as likely an explanation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 07, 2017, 11:01:17 PM

Quote from: Bucket on January 07, 2017, 10:50:09 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 07, 2017, 09:31:17 PM
Marietta also lost today... this parity thing is getting old. LOL

Or...the teams you thought were very good aren't as good as you thought.

Just as likely an explanation.

Huh... really? Considering I saw them in person dismantle CNU and there are a ton of others who saw the same... I don't think that is the case. Did you think Marietta wasn't that good in mid-December or are you just taking pop-shots after the fact because it is easy?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 08, 2017, 03:05:59 AM

Its possible for good teams to lose against anyone and still be good, and for bad teams to win against good teams and still be bad.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BeRightOn on January 08, 2017, 08:27:31 AM

Swarthmore has dominated its last two opponents, Catholic University and Gettysburg. I'm wondering if d-mac might re-instate them to his Top 25 ballot this week...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 08, 2017, 11:23:39 AM

Quote from: BeRightOn on January 08, 2017, 08:27:31 AM
Swarthmore has dominated its last two opponents, Catholic University and Gettysburg. I'm wondering if d-mac might re-instate them to his Top 25 ballot this week...

Them and 35 others teams are under consideration.

Nothing against the win(s), but I don't think much of a win over Catholic this year (they are average until proven otherwise) and Gettysburg is hot and cold. So, I really can't assess that until I look farther into it.

They have been on my radar much of the year... just not sure if those two games will stand out over other results once I start diving into the info.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Bucket on January 08, 2017, 11:37:15 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 07, 2017, 11:01:17 PM
Quote from: Bucket on January 07, 2017, 10:50:09 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 07, 2017, 09:31:17 PM
Marietta also lost today... this parity thing is getting old. LOL

Or...the teams you thought were very good aren't as good as you thought.

Just as likely an explanation.

Huh... really? Considering I saw them in person dismantle CNU and there are a ton of others who saw the same... I don't think that is the case. Did you think Marietta wasn't that good in mid-December or are you just taking pop-shots after the fact because it is easy?

Not a pop shot, and it wasn't as much a comment on Marietta as it was the notion of "parity." Though I can obviously see how it could have been taken that way. (As both a pop shot and a comment on Marietta.)

My greater point is: how much do we really know about all of these teams? Our knowledge can be only so deep—very few of us see many of these teams (in person, multiple times)—so it's not that much of a surprise (at least to me) when teams folks thought were very good then drop games these same folks thought they shouldn't.

Is it parity? Or is it a case of it being too hard to get a handle on who is really good and who isn't? (In Division III, at this point of the season, etc.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 08, 2017, 12:52:52 PM

Quote from: Bucket on January 08, 2017, 11:37:15 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 07, 2017, 11:01:17 PM
Quote from: Bucket on January 07, 2017, 10:50:09 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 07, 2017, 09:31:17 PM
Marietta also lost today... this parity thing is getting old. LOL

Or...the teams you thought were very good aren't as good as you thought.

Just as likely an explanation.

Huh... really? Considering I saw them in person dismantle CNU and there are a ton of others who saw the same... I don't think that is the case. Did you think Marietta wasn't that good in mid-December or are you just taking pop-shots after the fact because it is easy?

Not a pop shot, and it wasn't as much a comment on Marietta as it was the notion of "parity." Though I can obviously see how it could have been taken that way. (As both a pop shot and a comment on Marietta.)

My greater point is: how much do we really know about all of these teams? Our knowledge can be only so deep—very few of us see many of these teams (in person, multiple times)—so it's not that much of a surprise (at least to me) when teams folks thought were very good then drop games these same folks thought they shouldn't.

Is it parity? Or is it a case of it being too hard to get a handle on who is really good and who isn't? (In Division III, at this point of the season, etc.)

I have seen a lot of teams this year via video, but most importantly via video... Marietta was damn good when I saw them this year and continued to watch them online. Something is off.

And yes, parity is very much a factor right now. We have far more depth in Division III than ever before. The last few years that has increased each and every year. More and more teams can compete with the top level and the top group can no longer dominate. I think in reality, we can see far more games and be able to understand far more teams thanks to video web streaming... which allows us to understand teams far better. But the talent alone has completely changed the landscape of Division III on the men's side.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 08, 2017, 12:52:59 PM

As the season continues to march along, we continue to see more and more twists. There aren't many more answers despite being about halfway through the season.

Sunday night on Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave continues the coverage of the UWSP investigation and punishments. Athletics Director Brad Duckworth will join the show to discuss everything that lead up to the decision to suspend Bob Semling the rest of the season and why they handed the program over to Kent Dernbach.

Also tonight, the WBCA Center Court segment makes its season debut. The first guest this season will be Emory women's coach Christy Thomaskutty. Not only will we learn more about why Thomaskutty has been so intregal as a member of the WBCA board, but learn why she thinks it is important to give back to the game she loves. We will also learn more about the Eagles who have their first game in UAA action now complete.

We will also dip into the Northeast, Atlantic, South, and Central regions to get a sense of how some teams off the radar, and others very much on, are doing as the midseason turn arrives. You can also contribute to the new "Hoopsville Mailbag." Email questions you may have to the show at hoopsville@d3hoops.com.

Watch Hoopsville starting at 7:00 PM here (http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2016-17/jan8) or on Facebook Live. You can also watch the show On Demand download and or listen to the podcast(s). Information below.

Guests and/or topics include (in order):
- Brad Duckworth, UW-Stevens Point Athletics Director
- Alex Lang, Brooklyn women's coach
- Christy Thomaskutty, Emory women's coach (WBCA Center Court)
- Charlie Averkamp, Benedictine women's coach
- Kevin Bettencourt, Endicott men's coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Red and black on January 08, 2017, 04:37:52 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 08, 2017, 11:23:39 AM
Quote from: BeRightOn on January 08, 2017, 08:27:31 AM
Swarthmore has dominated its last two opponents, Catholic University and Gettysburg. I'm wondering if d-mac might re-instate them to his Top 25 ballot this week...

Them and 35 others teams are under consideration.

Nothing against the win(s), but I don't think much of a win over Catholic this year (they are average until proven otherwise) and Gettysburg is hot and cold. So, I really can't assess that until I look farther into it.

They have been on my radar much of the year... just not sure if those two games will stand out over other results once I start diving into the info.

Is Carthage College one of those 35 under consideration?

10-3 Overall, 4-1 and currently atop the CCIW standings.

Wins @ then #9 North Central (with a full and healthy team that included Connor Raridon)
@ UW-Oshkosh
@ #10 North Park University

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 08, 2017, 04:47:49 PM

Just as a note, even if Carthage isn't one of the 35 teams on Dave's list doesn't mean that they won't get Top 25 votes from one of the other 24 voters. Dave's just talking about his ballot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 08, 2017, 05:05:42 PM

The CCIW has 4 teams deserving of Top 25 consideration. Massey has them in the following order...

#10 - Augustana
#13 - Illinois Wesleyan
#19 - North Park (last night's win at NCC not included yet)
#25 - Carthage

http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?s=cb2017&sub=11620

You could probably find a way to justify any order of those 4 teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 08, 2017, 05:30:08 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

(Post #1001 -- after posting #1000 on the women's board)

~~Christopher Newport vs. Marymount is just underway; will edit in the result when complete.~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	610	Babson	12-1	won at Emerson, 100-76; won at Springfield, 73-68
#2	603	Whitman	13-0	def. Linfield, 90-81; def. Pacific, 99-69
#3	576	Amherst	10-2	LOST at Eastern Connecticut, 75-87; won at #25 Williams, 80-72
#4	507	Rochester	12-0	won at Rochester Tech, 73-72; def. T#27 Emory, 84-54
#5	497	Whitworth	11-2	LOST to Pacific, 88-90; def. Linfield, 87-81
#6	463	Christopher Newport	11-2	won at Wesley, 71-62; won at Marymount, 70-57
#7	443	UW-Eau Claire	11-2	LOST at #17 UW-River Falls, 59-60; def. #11 UW-Whitewater, 68-63
#8	393	Tufts	11-2	def. Lesley, 88-58; won at Bowdoin, 77-54; won at Colby, 84-70
#9	386	Wesleyan	11-3	LOST to Rhode Island College, 55-62; LOST at #22 Middlebury, 65-83; LOST at Hamilton, 76-92
#10	342	North Park	10-2	LOST to Carthage, 76-82; won at #30 North Central (Ill.), 76-73
#11	336	UW-Whitewater	11-2	LOST to UW-La Crosse, 68-82; LOST at #7 UW-Eau Claire, 63-68
#12	333	St. Norbert	9-2	won at Beloit, 72-51; def. Grinnell, 100-73
#13	325	Marietta	9-4	won at Muskingum, 100-64; LOST at Ohio Northern, 91-101
#14	295	Susquehanna	12-1	won at Dickinson, 76-66; def. Lancaster Bible, 87-66; def. Moravian, 86-74
#15	230	Salisbury	11-2	won at Washington College, 99-84; won at Mary Washington, 78-70; def. Frostburg State, 81-65
#16	222	Benedictine	10-3	won at Dominican, 88-82; won at Wisconsin Lutheran, 90-78
#17	186	UW-River Falls	12-1	def. #7 UW-Eau Claire, 60-59; def. UW-Platteville, 78-57
#18	184	Swarthmore	11-1	won at Catholic, 88-51; won at Gettysburg, 75-58
#19	167	Ramapo	13-0	won at Rutgers-Camden, 94-86; def. TCNJ, 98-90
#20	166	Neumann	12-0	def. Marywood, 91-70; won at Cabrini, 84-76; won at Cairn, 84-71
#21	110	Denison	12-1	won at Brooklyn, 79-52; won at Mount St. Vincent, 72-64; def. Ohio Wesleyan, 83-80; def. Allegheny, 104-63
#22	106	Middlebury	11-1	def. #9 Wesleyan, 83-65; def. Connecticut College, 97-89
#23	103	New Jersey City	11-2	LOST at Montclair State, 46-48
#24	88	Washington U.	9-3	won at #36 Chicago, 70-68
#25	74	Williams	11-3	def. SUNY Oneonta, 74-62; LOST to #3 Amherst, 72-80; LOST to Trinity (Conn.), 63-65

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	67	Illinois Wesleyan	11-3	def. Millikin, 73-64; def. Wheaton (Ill.), 84-75
T#27	58	Emory	9-3	def. Oglethorpe, 93-68; LOST at #4 Rochester, 54-84
T#27	58	Wartburg	11-3	LOST to Loras, 75-84; def. Dubuque, 94-74
#29	41	Lycoming	13-2	LOST to Lebanon Valley, 72-80; won at Stevenson, 85-78
#30	34	North Central (Ill.)	8-6	LOST to Augustana, 71-82; LOST to #10 North Park, 73-76
#31	33	Endicott	10-3	def. Wentworth, 76-67; def. Gordon, 84-83; LOST at Western New England, 70-74
#32	25	Brockport	9-3	LOST at Carnegie Mellon, 66-89; def. St. Lawrence, 79-73; LOST at SUNY Geneseo, 66-86
#33	15	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	10-1	won at Redlands, 75-59; def. Caltech, 78-53
#34	11	Hope	9-4	won at Albion, 85-79; def. Olivet, 97-76
#35	8	Bethel	10-2	won at Carleton, 70-63 OT; LOST to #42 St. Thomas, 74-83; def. Augsburg, 89-71
#36	7	Chicago	8-4	LOST to #24 Washington U., 68-70
#37	6	Hardin-Simmons	11-4	won at University of the Ozarks, 135-95; won at Texas-Dallas, 75-68
T#38	5	Virginia Wesleyan	9-4	LOST at Randolph-Macon, 63-67; def. Washington and Lee, 72-58
T#38	5	WPI	9-4	LOST to Springfield, 63-71; LOST at MIT, 63-75
#40	4	Misericordia	10-3	def. Manhattanville, 83-54; LOST at FDU-Florham, 70-71
#41	3	Ripon	10-1	def. Grinnell, 98-82; won at Lake Forest, 80-63
#42	1	St. Thomas	9-3	won at Gustavus Adolphus, 83-65; won at #35 Bethel, 83-74; won at Carleton, 62-61 OT

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 08, 2017, 05:57:14 PM

Quote from: Red and black on January 08, 2017, 04:37:52 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 08, 2017, 11:23:39 AM
Quote from: BeRightOn on January 08, 2017, 08:27:31 AM
Swarthmore has dominated its last two opponents, Catholic University and Gettysburg. I'm wondering if d-mac might re-instate them to his Top 25 ballot this week...

Them and 35 others teams are under consideration.

Nothing against the win(s), but I don't think much of a win over Catholic this year (they are average until proven otherwise) and Gettysburg is hot and cold. So, I really can't assess that until I look farther into it.

They have been on my radar much of the year... just not sure if those two games will stand out over other results once I start diving into the info.

Is Carthage College one of those 35 under consideration?

10-3 Overall, 4-1 and currently atop the CCIW standings.

Wins @ then #9 North Central (with a full and healthy team that included Connor Raridon)
@ UW-Oshkosh
@ #10 North Park University

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 08, 2017, 04:47:49 PM
Just as a note, even if Carthage isn't one of the 35 teams on Dave's list doesn't mean that they won't get Top 25 votes from one of the other 24 voters. Dave's just talking about his ballot.

Just to clarify as well... 35 teams who are NOT already on my Top 25... yeah... I easily am considering 50+ teams every week.

Carthage is certainly under consideration... but Bob is right, even if I don't vote for them... I am sure someone will. It is honestly hard for me to tell you right now who is getting on my ballot tomorrow night. Today has been a bit busier than usual getting ready for Hoopsville, so my usual time to dive into the unknown hasn't started, yet.

Tomorrow will be a long one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 4samuy on January 08, 2017, 10:57:05 PM

Quote from: Red and black on January 08, 2017, 04:37:52 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 08, 2017, 11:23:39 AM
Quote from: BeRightOn on January 08, 2017, 08:27:31 AM
Swarthmore has dominated its last two opponents, Catholic University and Gettysburg. I'm wondering if d-mac might re-instate them to his Top 25 ballot this week...

Them and 35 others teams are under consideration.

Nothing against the win(s), but I don't think much of a win over Catholic this year (they are average until proven otherwise) and Gettysburg is hot and cold. So, I really can't assess that until I look farther into it.

They have been on my radar much of the year... just not sure if those two games will stand out over other results once I start diving into the info.

Is Carthage College one of those 35 under consideration?

10-3 Overall, 4-1 and currently atop the CCIW standings.

Wins @ then #9 North Central (with a full and healthy team that included Connor Raridon)
@ UW-Oshkosh
@ #10 North Park University

Carthage has been playing well winning six out of last seven on the road. They did take a pretty good beat down at Augustana, however.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 4samuy on January 08, 2017, 11:00:13 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 08, 2017, 12:52:59 PM
As the season continues to march along, we continue to see more and more twists. There aren't many more answers despite being about halfway through the season.

Sunday night on Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave continues the coverage of the UWSP investigation and punishments. Athletics Director Brad Duckworth will join the show to discuss everything that lead up to the decision to suspend Bob Semling the rest of the season and why they handed the program over to Kent Dernbach.

Also tonight, the WBCA Center Court segment makes its season debut. The first guest this season will be Emory women's coach Christy Thomaskutty. Not only will we learn more about why Thomaskutty has been so intregal as a member of the WBCA board, but learn why she thinks it is important to give back to the game she loves. We will also learn more about the Eagles who have their first game in UAA action now complete.

We will also dip into the Northeast, Atlantic, South, and Central regions to get a sense of how some teams off the radar, and others very much on, are doing as the midseason turn arrives. You can also contribute to the new "Hoopsville Mailbag." Email questions you may have to the show at hoopsville@d3hoops.com.

Watch Hoopsville starting at 7:00 PM here (http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2016-17/jan8) or on Facebook Live. You can also watch the show On Demand download and or listen to the podcast(s). Information below.

Guests and/or topics include (in order):
- Brad Duckworth, UW-Stevens Point Athletics Director
- Alex Lang, Brooklyn women's coach
- Christy Thomaskutty, Emory women's coach (WBCA Center Court)
- Charlie Averkamp, Benedictine women's coach
- Kevin Bettencourt, Endicott men's coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Great interview with Brad Duckworth. Really looking forward to the follow-up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 08, 2017, 11:25:57 PM

Thank you. I do appreciate that. It was a tough day/show behind the scenes, so I am glad that didn't take away from the segment.

I hate to be covering these topics, but if I have to let's get to the bottom of it is my mentality. It means a lot to have that appreciated.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Red and black on January 09, 2017, 12:14:46 AM

Quote from: 4samuy on January 08, 2017, 10:57:05 PM
Quote from: Red and black on January 08, 2017, 04:37:52 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 08, 2017, 11:23:39 AM
Quote from: BeRightOn on January 08, 2017, 08:27:31 AM
Swarthmore has dominated its last two opponents, Catholic University and Gettysburg. I'm wondering if d-mac might re-instate them to his Top 25 ballot this week...

Them and 35 others teams are under consideration.

Nothing against the win(s), but I don't think much of a win over Catholic this year (they are average until proven otherwise) and Gettysburg is hot and cold. So, I really can't assess that until I look farther into it.

They have been on my radar much of the year... just not sure if those two games will stand out over other results once I start diving into the info.

Is Carthage College one of those 35 under consideration?

10-3 Overall, 4-1 and currently atop the CCIW standings.

Wins @ then #9 North Central (with a full and healthy team that included Connor Raridon)
@ UW-Oshkosh
@ #10 North Park University

Carthage has been playing well winning six out of last seven on the road. They did take a pretty good beat down at Augustana, however.

I think "beat down" is a little bit of a stretch. Carthage got behind early, but cut it to a basket or two pretty quickly in the second half. Without looking up the game, I think Carthage was trailing Augie by four with under five minutes to go. Augie ended with Three straight breakaways to stretch out the final score.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 09, 2017, 06:58:20 PM

New poll http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2016-17/week6

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on January 09, 2017, 11:29:07 PM

So how much do think the loss by #17 Neumann to a 1-9(now 2-9) Rutgers-Camden team will drop them in the polls?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 4samuy on January 09, 2017, 11:55:57 PM

One thing I've realized IMHO with the D3.com pollsters this year is that the voters seem to be putting much more emphasis on who you have beat than who you have lost to, especially with the teams in the top 25. I would look at Amherst as a good example. Two losses to average teams in Springfield and Eastern Conneticut, but were able to beat the #1 team in Babson, which has kept them in the top five in rankings despite 2 losses. I haven't seen Neumans schedule, but if they have had a couple wins against top 25-30 opponents, I don't see them dropping very much. If not, then they may drop a few spots.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 10, 2017, 07:15:49 AM

They don't really have any big wins and, being in the CSAC, its unlikely too many voters have seen them. I went to the Scranton game in person. They have been missing their leading scorer and rebounder since Xmas - no word on whether its an injury or academics. Still, from what I saw they are very much the kind of team that doesn't put in a ton of effort unless the opponent is good - which makes for some head scratching losses like this one.

That being said, Camden did take Ramapo to the brink earlier this week - maybe they're improving?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 10, 2017, 11:15:36 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 10, 2017, 07:15:49 AM

They don't really have any big wins and, being in the CSAC, its unlikely too many voters have seen them. I went to the Scranton game in person. They have been missing their leading scorer and rebounder since Xmas - no word on whether its an injury or academics. Still, from what I saw they are very much the kind of team that doesn't put in a ton of effort unless the opponent is good - which makes for some head scratching losses like this one.

Having seen parts of two Neumann games, I'd agree with that assessment. The Knights also seem to have some discipline problems, as reflected by their multiple player technicals (seven thus far this season, including five in the last five games). The atmosphere of the Neumann @ Cabrini game felt like a brawl waiting to happen. I could see the Knights blowing up and losing another game that they shouldn't, simply because they can't hold it together. Having said all that, I certainly think that it's a talented team that could cause opponents a lot of problems in March.

I really hope that the Knights aren't missing their leading scorer and rebounder due to academics, since he's a senior.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 10, 2017, 11:29:08 AM

QuoteHaving seen parts of two Neumann games, I'd agree with that assessment. The Knights also seem to have some discipline problems, as reflected by their multiple player technicals (seven thus far this season, including five in the last five games). The atmosphere of the Neumann @ Cabrini game felt like a brawl waiting to happen.

Yes, I got the same impression. Plus there was a brawl there after the CSAC final between those two teams two seasons ago, though I think it was unrelated to the game itself -- two fans from the same side.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on January 10, 2017, 12:26:04 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on January 10, 2017, 11:29:08 AM
QuoteHaving seen parts of two Neumann games, I'd agree with that assessment. The Knights also seem to have some discipline problems, as reflected by their multiple player technicals (seven thus far this season, including five in the last five games). The atmosphere of the Neumann @ Cabrini game felt like a brawl waiting to happen.

Yes, I got the same impression. Plus there was a brawl there after the CSAC final between those two teams two seasons ago, though I think it was unrelated to the game itself -- two fans from the same side.

There always seems to be a problem whether at Cabrini or Neumann when these two teams play. I've seen a few instances over the years. :-[

I swear I neither started or was involved in any of them. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 11, 2017, 03:08:48 PM

Quote from: 4samuy on January 09, 2017, 11:55:57 PM
One thing I've realized IMHO with the D3.com pollsters this year is that the voters seem to be putting much more emphasis on who you have beat than who you have lost to, especially with the teams in the top 25. I would look at Amherst as a good example. Two losses to average teams in Springfield and Eastern Conneticut, but were able to beat the #1 team in Babson, which has kept them in the top five in rankings despite 2 losses. I haven't seen Neumans schedule, but if they have had a couple wins against top 25-30 opponents, I don't see them dropping very much. If not, then they may drop a few spots.

I believe that game was in Amherst.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 11, 2017, 04:47:23 PM

I think he's saying that Babson was the No. 1 team, not that the game was played at Babson.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 11, 2017, 10:58:39 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	612	Babson	13-1	def. WPI, 65-59; 01/14 vs. Wheaton (Mass.)
#2	609	Whitman	13-0	01/13 vs. Pacific Lutheran; 01/14 vs. Puget Sound
#3	549	Rochester	12-0	01/13 vs. T#40 Chicago; 01/15 vs. #20 Washington U.
#4	533	Christopher Newport	12-2	def. St. Mary's (Md.), 68-60; 01/14 at Penn State-Harrisburg
#5	480	Amherst	10-2	01/13 at T#27 Wesleyan; 01/14 at Connecticut College
#6	458	Tufts	11-2	01/13 vs. #15 Middlebury; 01/14 vs. T#37 Hamilton
#7	403	UW-River Falls	13-1	won at #21 UW-Whitewater, 90-74; 01/14 vs. UW-Stevens Point
#8	400	Whitworth	11-2	01/13 vs. Puget Sound; 01/14 vs. Pacific Lutheran
#9	399	St. Norbert	9-2	01/13 vs. Illinois College; 01/14 vs. Monmouth
#10	398	UW-Eau Claire	12-2	won at UW-La Crosse, 62-58; 01/14 vs. UW-Oshkosh
#11	377	Susquehanna	12-2	LOST to Scranton, 68-76; 01/14 vs. Elizabethtown
#12	337	Salisbury	12-2	def. Marymount, 80-60; 01/14 at York (Pa.)
#13	314	Ramapo	14-0	def. Rowan, 96-78; 01/14 at #24 New Jersey City
#14	279	Benedictine	10-3	01/12 vs. Concordia-Chicago; 01/14 at Concordia (Wis.)
#15	268	Middlebury	11-1	01/13 at #6 Tufts; 01/14 at Bates
#16	263	Swarthmore	12-1	def. McDaniel, 65-60 OT; 01/12 at Johns Hopkins; 01/14 vs. Franklin and Marshall
#17	251	Neumann	13-1	LOST at Rutgers-Camden, 67-68; won at Immaculata, 92-79; 01/14 vs. Centenary (N.J.)
#18	246	North Park	11-2	def. Wheaton (Ill.), 87-83; 01/14 vs. Elmhurst
#19	221	Denison	13-1	def. DePauw, 74-61; 01/14 at Wabash
#20	139	Washington U.	9-3	01/13 at #36 Emory; 01/15 at #3 Rochester
#21	103	UW-Whitewater	11-3	LOST to #7 UW-River Falls, 74-90; 01/14 vs. UW-Platteville
#22	98	Illinois Wesleyan	11-4	LOST at #26 Augustana, 77-92; 01/14 vs. T#27 Carthage
#23	95	Marietta	10-4	def. Mount Union, 96-78; 01/14 vs. Heidelberg
#24	52	New Jersey City	12-3	def. Rowan, 89-72; LOST at Stockton, 65-70; 01/14 vs. #13 Ramapo
#25	51	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	10-1	IDLE

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	40	Augustana	11-3	def. #22 Illinois Wesleyan, 92-77; 01/14 vs. Carroll
T#27	19	Carthage	11-3	def. Illinois Tech, 81-79; 01/14 at #22 Illinois Wesleyan
T#27	19	Wesleyan	11-3	01/13 vs. #5 Amherst; 01/14 vs. Trinity (Conn.)
#29	17	Ripon	10-1	01/13 vs. Monmouth; 01/14 vs. Cornell
#30	16	Guilford	12-2	won at Randolph, 77-60; 01/14 vs. Bridgewater (Va.)
#31	14	Lycoming	14-2	won at Albright, 76-70; 01/15 vs. Arcadia
#32	11	Hope	10-4	def. Alma, 88-77; 01/14 at Trine
#33	10	Endicott	11-3	won at Salve Regina, 82-66; 01/14 vs. Nichols
#34	9	Wartburg	11-4	LOST at Buena Vista, 79-86 0:04 remaining; 01/14 vs. Central
#35	8	Hardin-Simmons	11-4	01/12 vs. Howard Payne; 01/14 vs. Sul Ross State
#36	7	Emory	9-3	01/13 vs. #20 Washington U.; 01/15 vs. T#40 Chicago
T#37	5	Hamilton	10-2	01/13 at Bates; 01/14 at #6 Tufts
T#37	5	St. Thomas	9-4	LOST to St. Olaf, 56-64; 01/14 vs. Concordia-Moorhead
#39	4	Williams	11-3	01/13 at Colby; 01/14 at Bowdoin
T#40	2	Chicago	8-4	01/13 at #3 Rochester; 01/15 at #36 Emory
T#40	2	Maryville (Tenn.)	11-1	won at Covenant, 83-75; 01/13 at Greensboro; 01/14 at Methodist
T#40	2	UW-Stout	11-3	LOST at UW-Stevens Point, 68-71; 01/14 vs. UW-La Crosse

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 12, 2017, 09:40:27 PM

Johns Hopkins 70
#16 Swarthmore 52

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 12, 2017, 11:41:27 PM

...With Franklin and Marshall coming to town on Saturday, too.

The Garnett really, really need that win now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 13, 2017, 12:27:42 AM

Usually I make sure to alert people of who is on Hoopsville prior to the show. Unfortunately, Thursday was a challenge production wise and I was a bit distracted. So, I hope you don't mind finding out after the fact considering you can watch the show On Demand or listen to the podcast(s).

As the season turns from the first to the second half, we are starting to see which teams are doing more than just getting off to good starts. Now conference races are starting to take shape and we get an idea of how the rest of the season may play out.

On Thursday's edition of Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave chatted with several coaches whose teams are either leading their conferences or in the battle for first place. Are these teams going to still be near the top come late February? What do they have to do to maintain their level of success. Dave even hit the road to Washington, DC to chat with several of his guests.

Dave also talked to a coach who now has the second-most wins in Division III history. Wooster's Steve Moore won his 787th (700th at Wooster) Wednesday night. Moore joined Dave in the NABC Coach's Corner to discuss the incredible milestone and all the milestones along the way.

You can watch Hoopsville On Demand or listen to the podcast by downloading it from SoundCloud and iTunes by clicking here: http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2016-17/jan12

And don't forget about the Hoopsville Mailbag segment! Email questions you may have to the show at hoopsville@d3hoops.com and we will answer them on a future show.

Guest appearances (in order):
- Steve Moore, Wooster men's coach - NABC Coach's Corner
- Kevin Kovacs, Gallaudet men's coach
- Matt Donohue, Catholic women's coach
- Chuck Winkelman, Calvin women's coach
- Dale Wellman, Nebraska Wesleyan men's coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 13, 2017, 08:49:03 PM

Wesleyan 73
#5 Amherst 59

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 13, 2017, 08:58:02 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 13, 2017, 08:49:03 PM
Wesleyan 73
#5 Amherst 59

Gonna be a big rollercoaster for Wesleyan, if the Cardinals beat Trinity tomorrow.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 13, 2017, 09:18:54 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 13, 2017, 08:49:03 PM
Wesleyan 73
#5 Amherst 59

Wow. SMH. Wow.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 13, 2017, 09:22:39 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 13, 2017, 09:18:54 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 13, 2017, 08:49:03 PM
Wesleyan 73
#5 Amherst 59

Wow. SMH. Wow.

I watched the first half, in which the Cardinals didn't look strong at all, then moved over to watching the Chicago @ Rochester game. Next time I checked in at Middletown, Wesleyan was up by 13 ... so I'm not quite sure what happened in the interim.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 13, 2017, 09:55:41 PM

At the Palestra, #3 Rochester came from behind to knock off Chicago, 88-82, behind a 38-point effort by senior guard Sam Borst-Smith.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 13, 2017, 10:05:58 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 13, 2017, 09:22:39 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 13, 2017, 09:18:54 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 13, 2017, 08:49:03 PM
Wesleyan 73
#5 Amherst 59

Wow. SMH. Wow.

I watched the first half, in which the Cardinals didn't look strong at all, then moved over to watching the Chicago @ Rochester game. Next time I checked in at Middletown, Wesleyan was up by 13 ... so I'm not quite sure what happened in the interim.

Amherst had an 11 minutes stretch in the middle of the second half where they could only muster 2 made fg's and a handful of FT's, you can extend that out to about 15 minutes and make it 3 made fg's after a 3-pointer to start the second half. Wesleyan dominated the boards and made some shots, 12 point deficit was quickly erased and big mo carried them to a 16 point lead.

Credit Wesleyan for making a bunch of shots in the 2nd because that first half was pretty ugly all-around.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on January 13, 2017, 10:14:51 PM

Very good win on the road for #20 Wash-U, 71-63 at Emory...free-throw shooting troubles late aside. Limiting Emory to 32% overall shooting and 27% from 3-point range, on its home floor, is an outstanding defensive effort. Bears got 18 points from 12 Emory turnovers, a nice ratio of 1.5 points per opponent turnover. A 36-7 edge in bench points is always nice, too.

Jake Knupp, one of the Wash-U reserves, had 15 points/7 rebounds/4 assists. Another reserve, the steady Matt Highsmith, added 13 points on 6-12 shooting.

Very very important early-UAA slate game on Sunday at the Palestra...it will be fun to see who gets the upper hand as Wash-U takes a happy flight tonight to Rochester.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 13, 2017, 10:49:38 PM

#6 Tufts 71
#15 Middlebury 65

The game was played in Medford, so I can't imagine that the pollsters will penalize the Panthers much for this loss.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 4samuy on January 13, 2017, 11:17:43 PM

I agree, but come on, they have to start penalizing Amherst. They are starting to give too many games away. I know they beat Babson, but Let's not give credit to teams that have had previous success. I would prefer to have each season rest on its own and Amherst is just not steping up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 14, 2017, 11:12:26 AM

22 of 25 ranked teams play today. #3 Rochester and #20 Wash U played yesterday and tomorrow. #25 CMS was too cool to play this weekend.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 14, 2017, 07:16:26 PM

Formerly unbeaten and #13 Ramapo falls in OT to #24 New Jersey City, 76-71.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 14, 2017, 07:19:47 PM

Good game in Jersey City. Both teams acquitted themselves well.

Look forward to the rematch on Ramapo's floor in February.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on January 14, 2017, 07:32:01 PM

I followed it on live stats from the woods, I decided to go bow hunting this afternoon. I enjoy being out in the snow. Maybe I should have stayed home and watched on video, looks like it was a great game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: irapthor on January 15, 2017, 12:52:19 AM

Knightstalker, since you already have the bow, come out and be the Gothic Knight mascot for the next game. It's a paying gig!

Special thanks to Gordon Mann of D3hoops, who came out and called the game for us here in Jersey City. Wish I could have provided a high def signal, but when your video budget is meager, you manage however you can!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: warriorcat on January 15, 2017, 10:01:14 AM

I had the chance to watch a number of games online yesterday. I realized how spoiled I have been by the quality of the high def signals that programs produce. Trying to watch some of the low def games I had to remind myself that not too long ago watching the games was only a dream.

Thank you to all of the Div 3 athletic programs who provide this service mostly free of charge.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on January 15, 2017, 02:09:05 PM

#20 Wash-U knocks off #3 Rochester at the Palestra this afternoon, 81-76. Whitman now the lone remaining unbeaten team in men's D3 hoops.

Wash-U had a double-digit lead just past the midway point of the 2nd half, but withstood a determined Rochester rally. Jackets got within 2, but Matt Highsmith's jumper with 29 seconds left with the shot clock winding down was huge, keeping the lead at 2 possessions for the rest of the final minute. Andrew Sanders did yeoman work inside in 2nd half despite getting buzzed by Yellowjackets. Michael Bregman had a clutch 3 as well down the stretch. And, the Bears sprinkled in some important free throws to finish off the mild upset bid.
Wash-U was only 4-7 in its last 11 visits to Rochester, before today's victory.

As JC Delass mentioned throughout the radio broadcast, Rochester fell a little bit too much in love with the 3s...led to a big Wash-U edge in rebounding and kept the Jackets from parlaying their edge in FT shooting through attacks to the basket. Bears also took good care of the ball throughout...at one point in the final 5 minutes or so, Rochester had 14 turnovers to Wash-U's 7.

Very, very big weekend for Wash-U's men!

Five road wins in a row for Wash-U...good robust sauce to use for some home cooking in the upcoming UAA home-opening weekend.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on January 15, 2017, 02:21:18 PM

Added postscript:

Balanced scoring for the Bears: Andrew Sanders 18, Clinton Hooks 16 (carried Wash-U early in 1st half), Michael Bregman 15 on 6-10 shooting, Highsmith 10 off the bench, and Jake Knupp added 9 from the bench.

Rochester's Mack Montague and Sam Borst-Smith had 18 apiece...SBS held to 18, on 5-12 shooting overall and 2-8 from 3-point range. Andrew Lundstrom had 14 and Ryan Clamage 10, both off the bench, to help lead the comeback that fell just short in the final minute.

Wash-U had rebounding edges of 46-36 overall and 16-7 on the offensive glass. That couplet of stats was the key to the win for the Bears, now 3-0 in early UAA play. Rochester drops to 2-1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 15, 2017, 03:08:35 PM

The saying in the NFL is: "on any given Sunday." The idea being that anyone can win a game no matter the match up because, well, things happen. The same could be true in Division III basketball. On any given night, someone will pull off an upset. And in some weeks we see multiple upsets.

What to make of it all? Tune into Sunday's edition of Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) as Dave tries to make sense of most of it with guests from around the country who can provide their insight.

Also on tap for tonight, can Amherst women run the table? What to make of William Peace men's basketball. And why one coach is highly regarded in the Chinese-American culture.

Tune in starting at 7:00 PM ET here: http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2016-17/jan15 - or via Facebook Live. If you can't watch the show live, you can catch up On Demand once it is off the air or download the podcast via SoundCloud or iTunes.

Guests scheduled (in order of appearance):
- G.P. Gromacki, No. 2 Amherst women's head coach
- Claude Shields, William Peace men's coach
- Carol Jue, Chapman women's coach - WBCA Center Court
- Mark Beinborn, Augustana women's coach
- Ira Thor, New Jersey City SID - Atlantic Regional Reporter

And don't forget about the Hoopsville Mailbag segment! Email questions you may have to the show at hoopsville@d3hoops.com and we will answer them tonight or on a future show.

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 15, 2017, 05:01:58 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	612	Babson	14-1	def. WPI, 65-59; def. Wheaton (Mass.), 76-57
#2	609	Whitman	15-0	def. Pacific Lutheran, 87-71; def. Puget Sound, 90-70
#3	549	Rochester	13-1	def. T#40 Chicago, 88-82; LOST to #20 Washington U., 76-81
#4	533	Christopher Newport	13-2	def. St. Mary's (Md.), 68-60; won at Penn State-Harrisburg, 73-55
#5	480	Amherst	10-4	LOST at T#27 Wesleyan, 59-73; LOST at Connecticut College, 76-83 OT
#6	458	Tufts	13-2	def. #15 Middlebury, 91-85; def. T#37 Hamilton, 94-81
#7	403	UW-River Falls	14-1	won at #21 UW-Whitewater, 90-74; def. UW-Stevens Point, 69-68
#8	400	Whitworth	13-2	def. Puget Sound, 77-65; def. Pacific Lutheran, 80-72
#9	399	St. Norbert	11-2	def. Illinois College, 83-60; def. Monmouth, 65-40
#10	398	UW-Eau Claire	12-3	won at UW-La Crosse, 62-58; LOST to UW-Oshkosh, 62-70
#11	377	Susquehanna	13-2	LOST to Scranton, 68-76; def. Elizabethtown, 73-61
#12	337	Salisbury	12-3	def. Marymount, 80-60; LOST at York (Pa.), 74-78
#13	314	Ramapo	14-1	def. Rowan, 96-78; LOST at #24 New Jersey City, 71-76 OT
#14	279	Benedictine	11-4	def. Concordia-Chicago, 109-84; LOST at Concordia (Wis.), 80-83
#15	268	Middlebury	12-2	LOST at #6 Tufts, 85-91; won at Bates, 79-71
#16	263	Swarthmore	12-3	def. McDaniel, 65-60 OT; LOST at Johns Hopkins, 52-70; LOST to Franklin and Marshall, 66-83
#17	251	Neumann	14-1	LOST at Rutgers-Camden, 67-68; won at Immaculata, 92-79; def. Centenary (N.J.), 95-56
#18	246	North Park	12-2	def. Wheaton (Ill.), 87-83; def. Elmhurst, 74-72
#19	221	Denison	14-1	def. DePauw, 74-61; won at Wabash, 66-53
#20	139	Washington U.	11-3	won at #36 Emory, 71-63; won at #3 Rochester, 81-76
#21	103	UW-Whitewater	12-3	LOST to #7 UW-River Falls, 74-90; def. UW-Platteville, 68-66
#22	98	Illinois Wesleyan	12-4	LOST at #26 Augustana, 77-92; def. T#27 Carthage, 77-74
#23	95	Marietta	11-4	def. Mount Union, 96-78; def. Heidelberg, 94-72
#24	52	New Jersey City	13-3	def. Rowan, 89-72; LOST at Stockton, 65-70; def. #13 Ramapo, 76-71 OT
#25	51	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	10-1	IDLE

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	40	Augustana	12-3	def. #22 Illinois Wesleyan, 92-77; def. Carroll, 85-66
T#27	19	Carthage	11-4	def. Illinois Tech, 81-79; LOST at #22 Illinois Wesleyan, 74-77
T#27	19	Wesleyan	13-3	def. #5 Amherst, 73-59; def. Trinity (Conn.), 65-61
#29	17	Ripon	11-2	LOST to Monmouth, 70-79; def. Cornell, 78-66
#30	16	Guilford	13-2	won at Randolph, 77-60; def. Bridgewater (Va.), 64-48
#31	14	Lycoming	15-2	won at Albright, 76-70; def. Arcadia, 69-67
#32	11	Hope	11-4	def. Alma, 88-77; won at Trine, 78-74
#33	10	Endicott	12-3	won at Salve Regina, 82-66; def. Nichols, 93-80
#34	9	Wartburg	11-5	LOST at Buena Vista, 79-86; LOST to Central, 90-94
#35	8	Hardin-Simmons	13-4	def. Howard Payne, 100-85; def. Sul Ross State, 84-80
#36	7	Emory	10-4	LOST to #20 Washington U., 63-71; def. T#40 Chicago, 80-72
T#37	5	Hamilton	10-4	LOST at Bates, 78-83; LOST at #6 Tufts, 81-94
T#37	5	St. Thomas	10-4	LOST to St. Olaf, 56-64; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 90-58
#39	4	Williams	12-4	won at Colby, 72-66; LOST at Bowdoin, 71-81
T#40	2	Chicago	8-6	LOST at #3 Rochester, 82-88; LOST at #36 Emory, 72-80
T#40	2	Maryville (Tenn.)	11-3	won at Covenant, 83-75; LOST at Greensboro, 77-81; LOST at Methodist, 76-80
T#40	2	UW-Stout	12-3	LOST at UW-Stevens Point, 68-71; def. UW-La Crosse, 65-60

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 15, 2017, 05:53:32 PM

Over half of the Top 25 lost this past week ... and a couple of them lost twice.

Ten of the seventeen ORVs lost this past week ... and four of them lost twice.

Have fun, pollsters!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 15, 2017, 06:25:28 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 15, 2017, 05:53:32 PM
Over half of the Top 25 lost this past week ... and a couple of them lost twice.

Ten of the seventeen ORVs lost this past week ... and four of them lost twice.

Have fun, pollsters!

There are no words...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 16, 2017, 07:39:08 PM

Newly minted top 10 North Park goes down at Manchester

Manchester 89 #9 North Park 77

Sager can clarify but it sounds like Manchester might have a pretty good transfer that arrived recently?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on January 16, 2017, 07:43:35 PM

New poll out.

http://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2016-17/week7

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 16, 2017, 09:02:40 PM

Quote from: sac on January 16, 2017, 07:39:08 PM
Newly minted top 10 North Park goes down at Manchester

Manchester 89 #9 North Park 77

Sager can clarify but it sounds like Manchester might have a pretty good transfer that arrived recently?

The only person I think you could be talking about would be Tyler Alexander who was 2nd team All-Great Lakes last year for conference foe Defiance but he's been with Manchester all season.
It's not often I get to bring some HCAC knowledge to this room :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 16, 2017, 09:56:06 PM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 16, 2017, 09:02:40 PM
Quote from: sac on January 16, 2017, 07:39:08 PM
Newly minted top 10 North Park goes down at Manchester

Manchester 89 #9 North Park 77

Sager can clarify but it sounds like Manchester might have a pretty good transfer that arrived recently?
The only person I think you could be talking about would be Tyler Alexander who was 2nd team All-Great Lakes last year for conference foe Defiance but he's been with Manchester all season.
It's not often I get to bring some HCAC knowledge to this room :-\

I only caught the last 6 or 7 minutes, heard the radio say "transfer" a couple times, just didn't know exactly what they were talking about, noted that Manchester had won 3 games since the calendar flipped.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 16, 2017, 11:31:09 PM

Quote from: sac on January 16, 2017, 09:56:06 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 16, 2017, 09:02:40 PM
Quote from: sac on January 16, 2017, 07:39:08 PM
Newly minted top 10 North Park goes down at Manchester

Manchester 89 #9 North Park 77

Sager can clarify but it sounds like Manchester might have a pretty good transfer that arrived recently?
The only person I think you could be talking about would be Tyler Alexander who was 2nd team All-Great Lakes last year for conference foe Defiance but he's been with Manchester all season.
It's not often I get to bring some HCAC knowledge to this room :-\

I only caught the last 6 or 7 minutes, heard the radio say "transfer" a couple times, just didn't know exactly what they were talking about, noted that Manchester had won 3 games since the calendar flipped.

Indeed, Tyler Alexander is the guy who puts the MAN in Manchester. He scored 30 in their earlier loss to NPU, but got no help. This time he scored 23 but got lots of help.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 17, 2017, 02:08:51 AM

Quote from: mailsy on January 16, 2017, 07:43:35 PM
New poll out.

http://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2016-17/week7

NPU seems to be allergic to the top ten. >:( That's twice now that the Vikings have climbed up that far this month, and twice that they've immediately gone and lost their first game after the promotion.

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 16, 2017, 09:02:40 PM
Quote from: sac on January 16, 2017, 07:39:08 PM
Newly minted top 10 North Park goes down at Manchester

Manchester 89 #9 North Park 77

Sager can clarify but it sounds like Manchester might have a pretty good transfer that arrived recently?
The only person I think you could be talking about would be Tyler Alexander who was 2nd team All-Great Lakes last year for conference foe Defiance but he's been with Manchester all season.
It's not often I get to bring some HCAC knowledge to this room :-\

Alexander was also the HCAC MVP last season for Defiance. (http://heartlandconf.org/sports/mbkb/2015-16/releases/3_1_mbb_all_hcac) I'm not quite sure where you got "recently" from the broadcast, sac, since I merely mentioned that he had been the star of the Yellowjackets last season. As FCGriz mentioned, he's been a Spartan all season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 17, 2017, 10:13:51 AM

Quote
Alexander was also the HCAC MVP last season for Defiance. (http://heartlandconf.org/sports/mbkb/2015-16/releases/3_1_mbb_all_hcac) I'm not quite sure where you got "recently" from the broadcast, sac, since I merely mentioned that he had been the star of the Yellowjackets last season. As FCGriz mentioned, he's been a Spartan all season.

This is probably where I admit to watching and listening to the Manchester announcers and not the high quality North Park announcing team. :-[

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 17, 2017, 01:50:45 PM

Gotcha! :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 17, 2017, 03:30:45 PM

I missed last week due to being a little too busy, but back to my blog for Week 7. Here is it: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2017/01/17/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-7/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Swish3 on January 18, 2017, 08:17:31 AM

Thanks for sharing, Dave...in your opinion, what are the Captains' flaws, especially inside?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 17, 2017, 03:30:45 PM
I missed last week due to being a little too busy, but back to my blog for Week 7. Here is it: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2017/01/17/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-7/

Just my novice opinion, but of course I am going to suggest that you are underselling Washington University. Not so much with the number you assigned, but in your rationale...

Here are a few thoughts on your post:

The Bears played one of the toughest schedules in the nation this season. No. 4 in the nation with a No. 4 overall ranking according to Massey. Not arguing for a No. 4 in D3Hoops.com...humans correct for the shortcomings of the computer in this case, but those numbers are worth mentioning.

They did lose to UW-Eau Claire by 14, but they were down by 4 with over a minute left. The Bears did not play well in the game. Eau Claire is underrated in my novice opinion...and I could find others who would agree.

They destroyed a two-loss Hanover team that Massey has at No. 47. I do not expect you to list every OK win, but I'll mention this and a few others because I am discussing Washington University specifically.

Central sure looked better then than they do now...not sure what is happening to them, but they are still No. 59.

Illinois Wesleyan is underrated in my opinion...time will tell...

Wooster may be down, but keeping it in context, that was still a very good road win. Massey has them at No. 55.

I would say that Washington University barely avoided overtime rather than barely survived Chicago...the Maroons tied the game on that second to last possession. Waller Perez had been scoring a little too easy in that last quarter, but I see no reason to hand that game to the Maroons in overtime based on the way either team was playing.

You did acknowledge the Rochester win, but then left out the convincing road win over Augustana. Both of those were very nice wins in which the Bears played very well. Nothing ugly about them.

No comeback needed against Emory...Washington University lead wire to wire against Massey No. 62. Not bad for a conference game on the road. At the risk over overselling the all bets are off in a rivalry game meme, that was a big time win.

Maybe I am overselling wins against the Top 50-60 in the nation, but I think those wins say a lot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 18, 2017, 04:05:24 PM

Quote from: Swish3 on January 18, 2017, 08:17:31 AM
Thanks for sharing, Dave...in your opinion, what are the Captains' flaws, especially inside?

I think Daly can disappear far too often and they can get out-sized too often for my liking. I feel like they would be unstoppable if they had a true big man inside. Daly is more like a 4 or even a 3 who is playing a 5. While it was at the beginning of the season, Marietta exposed CNU quite a bit and I can't get that out of my head... and Marietta is a team that can easily be exposed inside as well.

Daly may be 6-6 but he seems to play more like 6-4 and tends to be slowed than those he is playing against... the three biggest players (6-7 and up) are averaging less than four points a game and less than 2.5 rebounds. When Daly is in trouble or needs help, there isn't much to go to. I think it is a problem that will continue to be exposed especially when they get to the tournament.

I think CNU is a really good team, but I think they can be completely exposed inside which also then shuts down the outside game from being a threat.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 17, 2017, 03:30:45 PM
I missed last week due to being a little too busy, but back to my blog for Week 7. Here is it: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2017/01/17/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-7/

Just my novice opinion, but of course I am going to suggest that you are underselling Washington University. Not so much with the number you assigned, but in your rationale...

I certainly won't deny I might be underselling WashU, but there is something about them that just doesn't blow me away. And to be honest, wins over Massey Top 50-60 doesn't blow me away, either.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
The Bears played one of the toughest schedules in the nation this season. No. 4 in the nation with a No. 4 overall ranking according to Massey. Not arguing for a No. 4 in D3Hoops.com...humans correct for the shortcomings of the computer in this case, but those numbers are worth mentioning.

Debatable... that strength number will continue to change throughout the season as more and more teams take losses. Furthermore, I believe some higher-division games are influencing that particular strength number per WashU's opponents, but I would have to double-check that more before I would be that confident about that assertion.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
They did lose to UW-Eau Claire by 14, but they were down by 4 with over a minute left. The Bears did not play well in the game. Eau Claire is underrated in my novice opinion...and I could find others who would agree.

You will notice, I do not think UWEC is underrated. I forgot to indicate teams I had seen in person on this week's blog, but I have seen UWEC in action this season... in person... they are a very good team. And while I understand WashU was within 4, they let the game get away from them. That is worth noting as well. UWEC is very good, but from where I have them ranked and downward there are a LOT of teams that could fit into that area. It gets to splitting hairs to get teams onto the ballot.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
They destroyed a two-loss Hanover team that Massey has at No. 47. I do not expect you to list every OK win, but I'll mention this and a few others because I am discussing Washington University specifically.

I am watching Hanover... we shall see. They have been up and down. But yeah, it was an okay win for now. If Hanover starts to change in my eye in a positive manner, it will certainly affect WashU.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
Central sure looked better then than they do now...not sure what is happening to them, but they are still No. 59.

Kind of like Hanover, but in reverse. Might have looked good at one point, but isn't looking as good now.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
Illinois Wesleyan is underrated in my opinion...time will tell...

Maybe... but Seibring is injured and I can't figure the Titans out. They have been in and out of my Top 25 this season. At one point I did not include them because they had lost to WashU and I didn't have WashU on my ballot. WashU is there for now, IWU is not... and until Seibring comes back healthy, they may not be... but time will tell.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
Wooster may be down, but keeping it in context, that was still a very good road win. Massey has them at No. 55.

I am keeping it in context... Wooster isn't as good this season as people are used to. Plain and simple. Just over .500 and still half of the conference schedule ahead. I hate to say it, but the Wooster game doesn't do much for me no matter where Massey has them. And I don't expect a miracle run to the end like they had last year.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
I would say that Washington University barely avoided overtime rather than barely survived Chicago...the Maroons tied the game on that second to last possession. Waller Perez had been scoring a little too easy in that last quarter, but I see no reason to hand that game to the Maroons in overtime based on the way either team was playing.

Couldn't you argue that barely avoiding overtime is the same as barely surviving? If not for a buzzer beater, they head to overtime against Chicago... so they barely survived and barely avoided overtime. I like Chicago and think they are a pretty good team, but now-a-days with so much parity, I am looking for more than a lot of close games. Chicago's result may come back and be a more positive result in my mind in the future... but for now it just seems odd especially on the heals of playing overtime against a sub-par Wooster squad.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
You did acknowledge the Rochester win, but then left out the convincing road win over Augustana. Both of those were very nice wins in which the Bears played very well. Nothing ugly about them.

I am struggling with Augustana. I know they are on top of the conference and appear to have retooled in a hurry, but I also wonder if they are there because North Central isn't as good as they should be due to Raridon's injury and North Park isn't as good as they should be because they can't play consistently. So is Augustana really that good or is they have just risen to the top for now? As a result, hard to then gauge WashU's game against them.

If they had lost to Rochester, this wouldn't be a conversation for me. WashU wouldn't be in the poll. However, they did beat Rochester and thus why I am voting for them. That was a game I took notice of...

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
No comeback needed against Emory...Washington University lead wire to wire against Massey No. 62. Not bad for a conference game on the road. At the risk over overselling the all bets are off in a rivalry game meme, that was a big time win.

Then I am confusing it with another result... I thought it was a comeback, but I was trying to get the blog done more importantly. It isn't a bad win, but if WashU is that good they have to win that first game of this particular road stretch. If they had lost to Emory and beaten Rochester, they wouldn't have been on my ballot. But rivalry game? Sounds like overselling to me. I know the UAA has a lot of heated games, but WashU's rivals would be Chicago and NYU from what I can tell - or at least the games they get the most up for. Not sure if Emory is on that list, though they are in the second tier in terms of WashU's UAA opponents when emotions get involved. Just my opinion from my vantage point.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
Maybe I am overselling wins against the Top 50-60 in the nation, but I think those wins say a lot.

You are welcome to oversell if you need. I have probably oversold a few teams on my ballot as well. I appreciate why you think they are big wins, I just don't have the same opinion for some of those results.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on January 18, 2017, 05:27:39 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 17, 2017, 03:30:45 PM
I missed last week due to being a little too busy, but back to my blog for Week 7. Here is it: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2017/01/17/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-7/

Dave,
Is Susquehanna(#11 last week) the highest ranked team ever that u haven't included on your ballot? Understand, I'm not saying you're wrong, just that you're at one end of the parade that's going in the opposite direction. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 18, 2017, 05:41:01 PM

Quote from: ronk on January 18, 2017, 05:27:39 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 17, 2017, 03:30:45 PM
I missed last week due to being a little too busy, but back to my blog for Week 7. Here is it: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2017/01/17/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-7/

Dave,
Is Susquehanna(#11 last week) the highest ranked team ever that u haven't included on your ballot? Understand, I'm not saying you're wrong, just that you're at one end of the parade that's going in the opposite direction. ::)

Susquehanna fell from 11 to 14 this week. Which way is this parade going? :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on January 18, 2017, 06:43:50 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 18, 2017, 05:41:01 PM
Quote from: ronk on January 18, 2017, 05:27:39 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 17, 2017, 03:30:45 PM
I missed last week due to being a little too busy, but back to my blog for Week 7. Here is it: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2017/01/17/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-7/

Dave,
Is Susquehanna(#11 last week) the highest ranked team ever that u haven't included on your ballot? Understand, I'm not saying you're wrong, just that you're at one end of the parade that's going in the opposite direction. ::)

Susquehanna fell from 11 to 14 this week. Which way is this parade going? :)

It's led by the Animal House band that just ran into the wall. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 18, 2017, 07:38:56 PM

The #1 team in the country has managed to score just 17 points in the first half as Babson trails MIT 30-17 at the break.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 18, 2017, 08:05:38 PM

Quote from: ronk on January 18, 2017, 05:27:39 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 17, 2017, 03:30:45 PM
I missed last week due to being a little too busy, but back to my blog for Week 7. Here is it: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2017/01/17/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-7/

Dave,
Is Susquehanna(#11 last week) the highest ranked team ever that u haven't included on your ballot? Understand, I'm not saying you're wrong, just that you're at one end of the parade that's going in the opposite direction. ::)

I'd have to go look, but off the top of my head, probably. Haven't been voting for them that high when I do vote for them. But this week they lost to Scranton to got beat by Goucher. Scranton hasn't blown me away this season and if Susquehanna can't handle the Royals (and barely handle Moravian after that), not sure I am enticed to vote for them.

But I have been on the opposite side of whatever parade on a few teams this season. I just voted for WashU this week and they have been pretty high in the polls. Whitewater hasn't gotten a single vote from me and has been as high as 11? Not surprising this year with so many, many teams to consider.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 18, 2017, 08:15:25 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 18, 2017, 08:05:38 PM
Quote from: ronk on January 18, 2017, 05:27:39 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 17, 2017, 03:30:45 PM
I missed last week due to being a little too busy, but back to my blog for Week 7. Here is it: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2017/01/17/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-7/

Dave,
Is Susquehanna(#11 last week) the highest ranked team ever that u haven't included on your ballot? Understand, I'm not saying you're wrong, just that you're at one end of the parade that's going in the opposite direction. ::)

I'd have to go look, but off the top of my head, probably. Haven't been voting for them that high when I do vote for them. But this week they lost to Scranton to got beat by Goucher. Scranton hasn't blown me away this season and if Susquehanna can't handle the Royals (and barely handle Moravian after that), not sure I am enticed to vote for them.

But I have been on the opposite side of whatever parade on a few teams this season. I just voted for WashU this week and they have been pretty high in the polls. Whitewater hasn't gotten a single vote from me and has been as high as 11? Not surprising this year with so many, many teams to consider.

UWW was indeed #11 in week 5, before their tumble.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: middhoops on January 18, 2017, 08:24:26 PM

Quote from: magicman on January 18, 2017, 07:38:56 PM
The #1 team in the country has managed to score just 17 points in the first half as Babson trails MIT 30-17 at the break.

Babson came out in the 2nd half and lit it up. The Beavers were 18-23 late in the game.
Not sure how anyone beats them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on January 18, 2017, 08:36:14 PM

Babson wins 71-65 over MIT to complete the comeback.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 18, 2017, 11:10:59 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	615	Babson	15-1	won at #34 MIT, 71-65; 01/21 at Coast Guard
#2	610	Whitman	15-0	01/20 at George Fox; 01/21 at Lewis and Clark
#3	562	Christopher Newport	14-2	def. Mary Washington, 81-65; 01/21 at Frostburg State
#4	525	Tufts	13-2	01/20 vs. #24 Wesleyan; 01/21 vs. Connecticut College
#5	490	UW-River Falls	15-1	won at UW-La Crosse, 91-76; 01/21 at UW-Oshkosh
#6	473	Whitworth	13-2	01/20 at Lewis and Clark; 01/21 at George Fox
#7	465	St. Norbert	11-3	LOST at Ripon, 55-81; 01/21 vs. Knox
#8	448	Rochester	13-1	01/20 at Carnegie Mellon; 01/22 at Case Western Reserve
#9	393	North Park	13-3	LOST at Manchester, 77-89; won at Millikin, 89-61; 01/21 at Illinois Tech
#10	353	Denison	15-1	won at Hiram, 83-77; 01/21 at Kenyon
#11	345	Washington U.	11-3	01/20 vs. New York University; 01/22 vs. Brandeis
#12	321	UW-Eau Claire	13-3	def. UW-Stout, 80-62; 01/21 at UW-Stevens Point
#13	269	Ramapo	15-1	def. William Paterson, 108-85; 01/21 at Stockton
#14	259	Susquehanna	14-2	won at Juniata, 74-59; 01/21 at Drew
#15	258	Middlebury	13-2	def. Green Mountain, 104-75; 01/22 at Williams
#16	257	Amherst	10-4	01/20 vs. Bowdoin; 01/21 vs. Colby
#17	241	Salisbury	13-3	def. Wesley, 70-68; 01/21 at Marymount
#18	174	Marietta	12-4	won at Capital, 78-65; 01/21 vs. John Carroll
#19	161	Benedictine	12-4	def. Dominican, 79-54
#20	159	Augustana	13-3	won at Elmhurst, 85-69; 01/21 at Millikin
#21	130	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	11-1	def. Occidental, 63-58; 01/19 at Chapman; 01/21 at Cal Lutheran
#22	102	New Jersey City	14-3	won at Rutgers-Newark, 67-52; 01/21 at Rutgers-Camden
#23	101	Neumann	15-1	def. Rosemont, 85-83 OT; 01/21 vs. Clarks Summit
#24	90	Wesleyan	14-3	def. Emmanuel, 80-50; 01/20 at #4 Tufts; 01/21 at Bates
#25	79	UW-Whitewater	13-3	won at UW-Oshkosh, 73-67; 01/21 at UW-Stout

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	62	Guilford	14-2	won at Emory and Henry, 76-59; 01/21 vs. Hampden-Sydney
#27	36	Illinois Wesleyan	12-4	01/21 at Carroll
#28	29	Lycoming	15-2	01/21 at Hood
#29	28	Swarthmore	13-3	def. Haverford, 89-68; 01/21 at Dickinson
#30	24	Hardin-Simmons	13-4	01/21 vs. McMurry
T#31	17	Endicott	12-4	LOST at Roger Williams, 66-73; 01/21 vs. Eastern Nazarene
T#31	17	Hope	12-4	def. Adrian, 75-65; 01/21 at Kalamazoo
#33	15	Bethel	11-4	LOST at St. John's, 81-87; LOST at Concordia-Moorhead, 70-72; 01/21 vs. Hamline
#34	6	MIT	12-4	LOST to #1 Babson, 65-71; 01/21 at Emerson
#35	4	Hanover	13-2	won at Franklin, 78-57; 01/21 at Anderson
T#36	3	Brockport	12-3	01/20 vs. Plattsburgh State; 01/21 vs. SUNY Potsdam
T#36	3	Catholic	13-3	won at Goucher, 81-61; 01/21 at Scranton
#38	1	Carthage	11-5	LOST to Carroll, 76-81; 01/21 at Wheaton (Ill.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 19, 2017, 12:05:24 AM

Quote from: ronk on January 18, 2017, 06:43:50 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 18, 2017, 05:41:01 PM
Quote from: ronk on January 18, 2017, 05:27:39 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 17, 2017, 03:30:45 PM
I missed last week due to being a little too busy, but back to my blog for Week 7. Here is it: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2017/01/17/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-7/

Dave,
Is Susquehanna(#11 last week) the highest ranked team ever that u haven't included on your ballot? Understand, I'm not saying you're wrong, just that you're at one end of the parade that's going in the opposite direction. ::)

Susquehanna fell from 11 to 14 this week. Which way is this parade going? :)

It's led by the Animal House band that just ran into the wall. :)

... and a new meme is born:

(https://jaypgreene.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/48b56-marchingband_zpsb8f193d8.gif?w=410&h=230)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on January 19, 2017, 12:14:34 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 19, 2017, 12:05:24 AM
Quote from: ronk on January 18, 2017, 06:43:50 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 18, 2017, 05:41:01 PM
Quote from: ronk on January 18, 2017, 05:27:39 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 17, 2017, 03:30:45 PM
I missed last week due to being a little too busy, but back to my blog for Week 7. Here is it: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2017/01/17/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-7/

Dave,
Is Susquehanna(#11 last week) the highest ranked team ever that u haven't included on your ballot? Understand, I'm not saying you're wrong, just that you're at one end of the parade that's going in the opposite direction. ::)

Susquehanna fell from 11 to 14 this week. Which way is this parade going? :)

It's led by the Animal House band that just ran into the wall. :)

... and a new meme is born:

(https://jaypgreene.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/48b56-marchingband_zpsb8f193d8.gif?w=410&h=230)

That's what I was hoping for; +1 K to you, Greg.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 19, 2017, 08:58:27 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 18, 2017, 04:05:24 PM
Maybe... but Seibring is injured and I can't figure the Titans out. They have been in and out of my Top 25 this season. At one point I did not include them because they had lost to WashU and I didn't have WashU on my ballot. WashU is there for now, IWU is not... and until Seibring comes back healthy, they may not be... but time will tell.

IWU beat Wash U, Dave...in St. Louis.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2017, 11:50:55 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 19, 2017, 08:58:27 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 18, 2017, 04:05:24 PM
Maybe... but Seibring is injured and I can't figure the Titans out. They have been in and out of my Top 25 this season. At one point I did not include them because they had lost to WashU and I didn't have WashU on my ballot. WashU is there for now, IWU is not... and until Seibring comes back healthy, they may not be... but time will tell.

IWU beat Wash U, Dave...in St. Louis.

Yes sorry... I actually meant to say that and got all backwards... that's what I get when I try and reply while announcing a rather unexciting basketball game... should have known better.

My point was to say I went to vote for WashU, IWU had beat them, which meant including IWU, and I couldn't pull that trigger... but I got it all backwards.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 19, 2017, 01:33:14 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 18, 2017, 04:05:24 PM
Then I am confusing it with another result... I thought it was a comeback, but I was trying to get the blog done more importantly. It isn't a bad win, but if WashU is that good they have to win that first game of this particular road stretch. If they had lost to Emory and beaten Rochester, they wouldn't have been on my ballot. But rivalry game? Sounds like overselling to me. I know the UAA has a lot of heated games, but WashU's rivals would be Chicago and NYU from what I can tell - or at least the games they get the most up for. Not sure if Emory is on that list, though they are in the second tier in terms of WashU's UAA opponents when emotions get involved. Just my opinion from my vantage point.

Thanks as always for taking the time to respond. Much appreciated!

The thing about UAA rivalries...even the first tier rivalries are mediocre by MIAA or WIAC standards. Between the historical and geographical limitations, the UAA rivalries are certainly more fluid and based on the level of competition. The rivals are to an extent, the other schools who are in contention for a conference title.

Washington University and Emory have been Top 10 finishers in the Director's Cup for a while with the teams finishing 2nd and 3rd last season.

The teams share rivals to an extent, so if the biggest match of the year in Volleyball or Tennis is against Emory, that matters.

The NYU game is unique for road games because it regularly draws more Washington University fans than NYU fans (or at least it seems that way), so there is the excitement of a home game atmosphere away from home.

Emory is definitely a tier 1 rivalry.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Swish3 on January 19, 2017, 02:35:38 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 18, 2017, 04:05:24 PM
Quote from: Swish3 on January 18, 2017, 08:17:31 AM
Thanks for sharing, Dave...in your opinion, what are the Captains' flaws, especially inside?
I think Daly can disappear far too often and they can get out-sized too often for my liking. I feel like they would be unstoppable if they had a true big man inside. Daly is more like a 4 or even a 3 who is playing a 5. While it was at the beginning of the season, Marietta exposed CNU quite a bit and I can't get that out of my head... and Marietta is a team that can easily be exposed inside as well.

Daly may be 6-6 but he seems to play more like 6-4 and tends to be slowed than those he is playing against... the three biggest players (6-7 and up) are averaging less than four points a game and less than 2.5 rebounds. When Daly is in trouble or needs help, there isn't much to go to. I think it is a problem that will continue to be exposed especially when they get to the tournament.

I think CNU is a really good team, but I think they can be completely exposed inside which also then shuts down the outside game from being a threat.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 17, 2017, 03:30:45 PM
I missed last week due to being a little too busy, but back to my blog for Week 7. Here is it: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2017/01/17/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-7/

Just my novice opinion, but of course I am going to suggest that you are underselling Washington University. Not so much with the number you assigned, but in your rationale...
I certainly won't deny I might be underselling WashU, but there is something about them that just doesn't blow me away. And to be honest, wins over Massey Top 50-60 doesn't blow me away, either.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
The Bears played one of the toughest schedules in the nation this season. No. 4 in the nation with a No. 4 overall ranking according to Massey. Not arguing for a No. 4 in D3Hoops.com...humans correct for the shortcomings of the computer in this case, but those numbers are worth mentioning.
Debatable... that strength number will continue to change throughout the season as more and more teams take losses. Furthermore, I believe some higher-division games are influencing that particular strength number per WashU's opponents, but I would have to double-check that more before I would be that confident about that assertion.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
They did lose to UW-Eau Claire by 14, but they were down by 4 with over a minute left. The Bears did not play well in the game. Eau Claire is underrated in my novice opinion...and I could find others who would agree.
You will notice, I do not think UWEC is underrated. I forgot to indicate teams I had seen in person on this week's blog, but I have seen UWEC in action this season... in person... they are a very good team. And while I understand WashU was within 4, they let the game get away from them. That is worth noting as well. UWEC is very good, but from where I have them ranked and downward there are a LOT of teams that could fit into that area. It gets to splitting hairs to get teams onto the ballot.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
They destroyed a two-loss Hanover team that Massey has at No. 47. I do not expect you to list every OK win, but I'll mention this and a few others because I am discussing Washington University specifically.
I am watching Hanover... we shall see. They have been up and down. But yeah, it was an okay win for now. If Hanover starts to change in my eye in a positive manner, it will certainly affect WashU.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
Central sure looked better then than they do now...not sure what is happening to them, but they are still No. 59.
Kind of like Hanover, but in reverse. Might have looked good at one point, but isn't looking as good now.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
Illinois Wesleyan is underrated in my opinion...time will tell...
Maybe... but Seibring is injured and I can't figure the Titans out. They have been in and out of my Top 25 this season. At one point I did not include them because they had lost to WashU and I didn't have WashU on my ballot. WashU is there for now, IWU is not... and until Seibring comes back healthy, they may not be... but time will tell.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
Wooster may be down, but keeping it in context, that was still a very good road win. Massey has them at No. 55.
I am keeping it in context... Wooster isn't as good this season as people are used to. Plain and simple. Just over .500 and still half of the conference schedule ahead. I hate to say it, but the Wooster game doesn't do much for me no matter where Massey has them. And I don't expect a miracle run to the end like they had last year.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
I would say that Washington University barely avoided overtime rather than barely survived Chicago...the Maroons tied the game on that second to last possession. Waller Perez had been scoring a little too easy in that last quarter, but I see no reason to hand that game to the Maroons in overtime based on the way either team was playing.
Couldn't you argue that barely avoiding overtime is the same as barely surviving? If not for a buzzer beater, they head to overtime against Chicago... so they barely survived and barely avoided overtime. I like Chicago and think they are a pretty good team, but now-a-days with so much parity, I am looking for more than a lot of close games. Chicago's result may come back and be a more positive result in my mind in the future... but for now it just seems odd especially on the heals of playing overtime against a sub-par Wooster squad.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
You did acknowledge the Rochester win, but then left out the convincing road win over Augustana. Both of those were very nice wins in which the Bears played very well. Nothing ugly about them.
I am struggling with Augustana. I know they are on top of the conference and appear to have retooled in a hurry, but I also wonder if they are there because North Central isn't as good as they should be due to Raridon's injury and North Park isn't as good as they should be because they can't play consistently. So is Augustana really that good or is they have just risen to the top for now? As a result, hard to then gauge WashU's game against them.

If they had lost to Rochester, this wouldn't be a conversation for me. WashU wouldn't be in the poll. However, they did beat Rochester and thus why I am voting for them. That was a game I took notice of...

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
No comeback needed against Emory...Washington University lead wire to wire against Massey No. 62. Not bad for a conference game on the road. At the risk over overselling the all bets are off in a rivalry game meme, that was a big time win.
Then I am confusing it with another result... I thought it was a comeback, but I was trying to get the blog done more importantly. It isn't a bad win, but if WashU is that good they have to win that first game of this particular road stretch. If they had lost to Emory and beaten Rochester, they wouldn't have been on my ballot. But rivalry game? Sounds like overselling to me. I know the UAA has a lot of heated games, but WashU's rivals would be Chicago and NYU from what I can tell - or at least the games they get the most up for. Not sure if Emory is on that list, though they are in the second tier in terms of WashU's UAA opponents when emotions get involved. Just my opinion from my vantage point.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
Maybe I am overselling wins against the Top 50-60 in the nation, but I think those wins say a lot.

You are welcome to oversell if you need. I have probably oversold a few teams on my ballot as well. I appreciate why you think they are big wins, I just don't have the same opinion for some of those results.

I had a nice little response to this, but an IT guy came and fiddled w/my computer before I could post it...anyway, I tend to agree w/your comments, but when Daly is aggressive from the jump, he goes to the basket and moves his feet pretty well...if he would do that from start to finish every game, CNU would consistently be that much better.

I can be critical of my team, as well, but need to keep in mind that the majority of their wins have been by double digits, while having a huge target on their back...now, I realize they haven't played the toughest of schedules, but it's been solid overall...in terms of being a top 5 team right now? Doesn't seem unreasonable, but I'm hoping they'll take it up a notch and really start putting everything together, in terms of Daly and their other two best players who have been inconsistent at times, especially Carter.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2017, 04:37:47 PM

In every season there are surprises. Teams who rise to the top at some point making everyone take a second look at what is going on. For most, it is a matter of making sure they are still around come the midway part of the season. Are they still for real?

On Thursday's night's Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave chats with teams who clearly aren't just start-to-the-season flash-in-the-pans. Some conference races are not shaping up how many expected when the season began and for these squads they are perfectly fine with that.

Don't forget tonight's coverage looks primarily at the East, Mid-Atlantic, Great Lakes, and West Regions, but will also include taking a look at this week's NCAA Convention and other news around Division III basketball.

Hoopsville hits the air live at 7:00 PM ET. You can watch the show on the following link or on Facebook Live: http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2016-17/jan19. If you are unable to watch the show live, you can catch up On Demand or listen (or download) the podcasts (available when the show concludes).

Don't forget to contribute to the new "Hoopsville Mailbag" segment. Email questions you may have to hoopsville@d3hoops.com. Dave will answer them on air tonight or on a future show.

Guests scheduled to appear (in order of appearance):
- Mike Miller, Messiah women's head coach
- Chris Downs, St. Lawrence men's head coach
- Jon Miller, Hanover men's head coach
- Chris Novak, Bethel men's head coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 19, 2017, 06:35:43 PM

Quote from: WUH on January 19, 2017, 01:33:14 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 18, 2017, 04:05:24 PM
Then I am confusing it with another result... I thought it was a comeback, but I was trying to get the blog done more importantly. It isn't a bad win, but if WashU is that good they have to win that first game of this particular road stretch. If they had lost to Emory and beaten Rochester, they wouldn't have been on my ballot. But rivalry game? Sounds like overselling to me. I know the UAA has a lot of heated games, but WashU's rivals would be Chicago and NYU from what I can tell - or at least the games they get the most up for. Not sure if Emory is on that list, though they are in the second tier in terms of WashU's UAA opponents when emotions get involved. Just my opinion from my vantage point.

Thanks as always for taking the time to respond. Much appreciated!

The thing about UAA rivalries...even the first tier rivalries are mediocre by MIAA or WIAC standards. Between the historical and geographical limitations, the UAA rivalries are certainly more fluid and based on the level of competition. The rivals are to an extent, the other schools who are in contention for a conference title.

Washington University and Emory have been Top 10 finishers in the Director's Cup for a while with the teams finishing 2nd and 3rd last season.

The teams share rivals to an extent, so if the biggest match of the year in Volleyball or Tennis is against Emory, that matters.

The NYU game is unique for road games because it regularly draws more Washington University fans than NYU fans (or at least it seems that way), so there is the excitement of a home game atmosphere away from home.

Emory is definitely a tier 1 rivalry.

I'm still something of a UAA outsider, although I attend a fair number of games at Ratner. But it does seem to me that Chicago and Wash U is a legit rivalry, not so much because of the Chicago/St. Louis thing but because Wash U recruits Chicagoland so heavily, and there are thus always a pretty fair number of Bears fans at Ratner when the two teams play.

Of course, this all needs to be put into perspective on an institutional basis. We're talking about universities whose sports teams play a distinctly minor role in campus life as compared to a lot of other D3 schools. I'm pretty sure that, even when the Maroons play Wash U, you could find ten times as many undergraduates in Regenstein Library during that Saturday afternoon than you could find in Ratner. There's a good reason why U of C students wear maroon t-shirts that say, "Where fun goes to die."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PeterEscobar on January 19, 2017, 07:45:34 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 19, 2017, 06:35:43 PM
There's a good reason why U of C students wear maroon t-shirts that say, "Where fun goes to die."

Maybe opposing coaches should make sure to include this in recruiting ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2017, 08:22:45 PM

Quote from: Swish3 on January 19, 2017, 02:35:38 PM

I had a nice little response to this, but an IT guy came and fiddled w/my computer before I could post it...anyway, I tend to agree w/your comments, but when Daly is aggressive from the jump, he goes to the basket and moves his feet pretty well...if he would do that from start to finish every game, CNU would consistently be that much better.

I can be critical of my team, as well, but need to keep in mind that the majority of their wins have been by double digits, while having a huge target on their back...now, I realize they haven't played the toughest of schedules, but it's been solid overall...in terms of being a top 5 team right now? Doesn't seem unreasonable, but I'm hoping they'll take it up a notch and really start putting everything together, in terms of Daly and their other two best players who have been inconsistent at times, especially Carter.

Damn IT guys!!! LOL

Yeah... I have the same read on Daly and the rest. He came out slow against Marietta and never got into the game. And the rest of the team is so inconsistent... it is rather interesting to watch because I can't figure out why.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 19, 2017, 10:23:11 PM

Quote from: PeterEscobar on January 19, 2017, 07:45:34 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 19, 2017, 06:35:43 PM
There's a good reason why U of C students wear maroon t-shirts that say, "Where fun goes to die."
Maybe opposing coaches should make sure to include this in recruiting ;)

I'm sure that they do ... except that other UAA schools have largely the same reputation as being repositories of "grinds" as far as student makeup is concerned.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 4samuy on January 19, 2017, 10:29:44 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 18, 2017, 04:05:24 PM
Quote from: Swish3 on January 18, 2017, 08:17:31 AM
Thanks for sharing, Dave...in your opinion, what are the Captains' flaws, especially inside?
I think Daly can disappear far too often and they can get out-sized too often for my liking. I feel like they would be unstoppable if they had a true big man inside. Daly is more like a 4 or even a 3 who is playing a 5. While it was at the beginning of the season, Marietta exposed CNU quite a bit and I can't get that out of my head... and Marietta is a team that can easily be exposed inside as well.

Daly may be 6-6 but he seems to play more like 6-4 and tends to be slowed than those he is playing against... the three biggest players (6-7 and up) are averaging less than four points a game and less than 2.5 rebounds. When Daly is in trouble or needs help, there isn't much to go to. I think it is a problem that will continue to be exposed especially when they get to the tournament.

I think CNU is a really good team, but I think they can be completely exposed inside which also then shuts down the outside game from being a threat.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 17, 2017, 03:30:45 PM
I missed last week due to being a little too busy, but back to my blog for Week 7. Here is it: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2017/01/17/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-7/

Just my novice opinion, but of course I am going to suggest that you are underselling Washington University. Not so much with the number you assigned, but in your rationale...
I certainly won't deny I might be underselling WashU, but there is something about them that just doesn't blow me away. And to be honest, wins over Massey Top 50-60 doesn't blow me away, either.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
The Bears played one of the toughest schedules in the nation this season. No. 4 in the nation with a No. 4 overall ranking according to Massey. Not arguing for a No. 4 in D3Hoops.com...humans correct for the shortcomings of the computer in this case, but those numbers are worth mentioning.
Debatable... that strength number will continue to change throughout the season as more and more teams take losses. Furthermore, I believe some higher-division games are influencing that particular strength number per WashU's opponents, but I would have to double-check that more before I would be that confident about that assertion.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
They did lose to UW-Eau Claire by 14, but they were down by 4 with over a minute left. The Bears did not play well in the game. Eau Claire is underrated in my novice opinion...and I could find others who would agree.
You will notice, I do not think UWEC is underrated. I forgot to indicate teams I had seen in person on this week's blog, but I have seen UWEC in action this season... in person... they are a very good team. And while I understand WashU was within 4, they let the game get away from them. That is worth noting as well. UWEC is very good, but from where I have them ranked and downward there are a LOT of teams that could fit into that area. It gets to splitting hairs to get teams onto the ballot.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
They destroyed a two-loss Hanover team that Massey has at No. 47. I do not expect you to list every OK win, but I'll mention this and a few others because I am discussing Washington University specifically.
I am watching Hanover... we shall see. They have been up and down. But yeah, it was an okay win for now. If Hanover starts to change in my eye in a positive manner, it will certainly affect WashU.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
Central sure looked better then than they do now...not sure what is happening to them, but they are still No. 59.
Kind of like Hanover, but in reverse. Might have looked good at one point, but isn't looking as good now.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
Illinois Wesleyan is underrated in my opinion...time will tell...
Maybe... but Seibring is injured and I can't figure the Titans out. They have been in and out of my Top 25 this season. At one point I did not include them because they had lost to WashU and I didn't have WashU on my ballot. WashU is there for now, IWU is not... and until Seibring comes back healthy, they may not be... but time will tell.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
Wooster may be down, but keeping it in context, that was still a very good road win. Massey has them at No. 55.
I am keeping it in context... Wooster isn't as good this season as people are used to. Plain and simple. Just over .500 and still half of the conference schedule ahead. I hate to say it, but the Wooster game doesn't do much for me no matter where Massey has them. And I don't expect a miracle run to the end like they had last year.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
I would say that Washington University barely avoided overtime rather than barely survived Chicago...the Maroons tied the game on that second to last possession. Waller Perez had been scoring a little too easy in that last quarter, but I see no reason to hand that game to the Maroons in overtime based on the way either team was playing.
Couldn't you argue that barely avoiding overtime is the same as barely surviving? If not for a buzzer beater, they head to overtime against Chicago... so they barely survived and barely avoided overtime. I like Chicago and think they are a pretty good team, but now-a-days with so much parity, I am looking for more than a lot of close games. Chicago's result may come back and be a more positive result in my mind in the future... but for now it just seems odd especially on the heals of playing overtime against a sub-par Wooster squad.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
You did acknowledge the Rochester win, but then left out the convincing road win over Augustana. Both of those were very nice wins in which the Bears played very well. Nothing ugly about them.
I am struggling with Augustana. I know they are on top of the conference and appear to have retooled in a hurry, but I also wonder if they are there because North Central isn't as good as they should be due to Raridon's injury and North Park isn't as good as they should be because they can't play consistently. So is Augustana really that good or is they have just risen to the top for now? As a result, hard to then gauge WashU's game against them.

If they had lost to Rochester, this wouldn't be a conversation for me. WashU wouldn't be in the poll. However, they did beat Rochester and thus why I am voting for them. That was a game I took notice of...

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
No comeback needed against Emory...Washington University lead wire to wire against Massey No. 62. Not bad for a conference game on the road. At the risk over overselling the all bets are off in a rivalry game meme, that was a big time win.
Then I am confusing it with another result... I thought it was a comeback, but I was trying to get the blog done more importantly. It isn't a bad win, but if WashU is that good they have to win that first game of this particular road stretch. If they had lost to Emory and beaten Rochester, they wouldn't have been on my ballot. But rivalry game? Sounds like overselling to me. I know the UAA has a lot of heated games, but WashU's rivals would be Chicago and NYU from what I can tell - or at least the games they get the most up for. Not sure if Emory is on that list, though they are in the second tier in terms of WashU's UAA opponents when emotions get involved. Just my opinion from my vantage point.

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2017, 12:15:00 PM
Maybe I am overselling wins against the Top 50-60 in the nation, but I think those wins say a lot.

You are welcome to oversell if you need. I have probably oversold a few teams on my ballot as well. I appreciate why you think they are big wins, I just don't have the same opinion for some of those results.

Dave,

Watching many games in the Central Region and a few in the Northeast, Augustana, who struggled a bit early after losing an outstanding senior class and lost to some quality veteran teams in WashU and North Park, is really good. Don't underestimate them and Giovanine. Yes they are young, but they are talented, deep and long going 6'10, 6'9 and 6'8 in the post with a multitude of scorers on the perimeter. This is probably the first time in the Giovanine era that the offense is ahead of the defense which will balance itself as the season goes on. IMHO the regular season title will come down to the North h Park vs Augie game at the end of the regular season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Swish3 on January 20, 2017, 09:07:12 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2017, 08:22:45 PM
Quote from: Swish3 on January 19, 2017, 02:35:38 PM

I had a nice little response to this, but an IT guy came and fiddled w/my computer before I could post it...anyway, I tend to agree w/your comments, but when Daly is aggressive from the jump, he goes to the basket and moves his feet pretty well...if he would do that from start to finish every game, CNU would consistently be that much better.

I can be critical of my team, as well, but need to keep in mind that the majority of their wins have been by double digits, while having a huge target on their back...now, I realize they haven't played the toughest of schedules, but it's been solid overall...in terms of being a top 5 team right now? Doesn't seem unreasonable, but I'm hoping they'll take it up a notch and really start putting everything together, in terms of Daly and their other two best players who have been inconsistent at times, especially Carter.

Damn IT guys!!! LOL

Yeah... I have the same read on Daly and the rest. He came out slow against Marietta and never got into the game. And the rest of the team is so inconsistent... it is rather interesting to watch because I can't figure out why.

I don't understand it myself...sometimes, I think they try too hard to get the best possible shot and said players lose sight of their strengths and aggressiveness. If you're a shooter, you shoot...if you're good at getting to the basket, you drive...I get not trying to force things, but geez, don't forget what got you here!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 22, 2017, 05:26:46 PM

On almost any night you can expect there is something to talk about in Division III basketball. From upsets to dominating results, when thousands of games are being played there never is a moment that goes by that shouldn't be discussed.

That's what we hope to do on Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) every show.

Sunday night is no different. There are plenty of upsets to discuss along with figuring out just exactly who are the best teams in the country. Sometimes that discussion means talking to those who won, those who lost, and those who are helping determine conference races.

On Sunday's show, Dave talks to several teams who are in the conversation around the country. From a men's team who ended a 72-game conference winnings streak to another men's squad whose undefeated conference run ended. Also, a women's squad who is already having the best season in four years and another being led by a man who has overcome more than most do and trying to lead by examble by staying focused despite his battled with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

Dave will also update a few items voted on this week at the NCAA Convention that will affect basketball starting next season.

You can watch Hoopsville live or watch it on Facebook Live (simulcast): http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2016-17/jan22. If you missed the show live, you can watch the video On Demand in the same manner or listen to or download the podcast (available when the show concludes).

Don't forget to contribute to the new "Hoopsville Mailbag" segment. Email questions you may have to hoopsville@d3hoops.com. Dave will answer them on air tonight or on a future show.

Guests scheduled to appear (in order of appearance):
- Michael Coppolino, Mount St. Mary women's head coach
- Paul Culpo, Castleton men's coach
- Derek James, MacMurray women's coach - WBCA Center Court
- Ryan Kane, Ripon men's coach
- Tom Palombo, Guilford men's coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 22, 2017, 06:06:21 PM

How They Fared (~~almost~~ Complete)

~~Whitman @ George Fox tips off in about an hour; I'll edit that in later this evening.~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	615	Babson	16-1	won at #34 MIT, 71-65; won at Coast Guard, 87-72
#2	610	Whitman	17-0	won at Lewis and Clark, 82-69; won at George Fox, 95-80
#3	562	Christopher Newport	15-2	def. Mary Washington, 81-65; won at Frostburg State, 93-67
#4	525	Tufts	15-2	def. #24 Wesleyan, 77-73; def. Connecticut College, 100-83
#5	490	UW-River Falls	16-1	won at UW-La Crosse, 91-76; won at UW-Oshkosh, 79-57
#6	473	Whitworth	15-2	won at Lewis and Clark, 66-61; won at George Fox, 83-53
#7	465	St. Norbert	12-3	LOST at Ripon, 55-81; def. Knox, 65-48
#8	448	Rochester	15-1	won at Carnegie Mellon, 87-56; won at Case Western Reserve, 80-61
#9	393	North Park	13-4	LOST at Manchester, 77-89; won at Millikin, 89-61; LOST at Illinois Tech, 77-81
#10	353	Denison	16-1	won at Hiram, 83-77; won at Kenyon, 82-67
#11	345	Washington U.	13-3	def. New York University, 89-72; def. Brandeis, 88-61
#12	321	UW-Eau Claire	13-4	def. UW-Stout, 80-62; LOST at UW-Stevens Point, 69-89
#13	269	Ramapo	16-1	def. William Paterson, 108-85; won at Stockton, 89-81
#14	259	Susquehanna	15-2	won at Juniata, 74-59; won at Drew, 81-75
#15	258	Middlebury	13-3	def. Green Mountain, 104-75; LOST at Williams, 65-89
#16	257	Amherst	12-4	def. Bowdoin, 66-64; def. Colby, 81-67
#17	241	Salisbury	14-3	def. Wesley, 70-68; won at Marymount, 57-56
#18	174	Marietta	13-4	won at Capital, 78-65; def. John Carroll, 86-81
#19	161	Benedictine	12-4	def. Dominican, 79-54
#20	159	Augustana	14-3	won at Elmhurst, 85-69; won at Millikin, 69-53
#21	130	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	13-1	def. Occidental, 63-58; won at Chapman, 62-44; won at Cal Lutheran, 86-71
#22	102	New Jersey City	15-3	won at Rutgers-Newark, 67-52; won at Rutgers-Camden, 70-63
#23	101	Neumann	16-1	def. Rosemont, 85-83 OT; def. Clarks Summit, 87-47
#24	90	Wesleyan	15-4	def. Emmanuel, 80-50; LOST at #4 Tufts, 73-77; won at Bates, 67-64
#25	79	UW-Whitewater	14-3	won at UW-Oshkosh, 73-67; won at UW-Stout, 65-51

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	62	Guilford	14-3	won at Emory and Henry, 76-59; LOST to Hampden-Sydney, 58-64
#27	36	Illinois Wesleyan	12-5	LOST at Carroll, 63-67
#28	29	Lycoming	16-2	won at Hood, 73-68
#29	28	Swarthmore	14-3	def. Haverford, 89-68; won at Dickinson, 66-53
#30	24	Hardin-Simmons	14-4	def. McMurry, 87-83
T#31	17	Endicott	13-4	LOST at Roger Williams, 66-73; def. Eastern Nazarene, 80-67
T#31	17	Hope	13-4	def. Adrian, 75-65; won at Kalamazoo, 78-58
#33	15	Bethel	12-4	LOST at St. John's, 81-87; LOST at Concordia-Moorhead, 70-72; def. Hamline, 94-70
#34	6	MIT	13-4	LOST to #1 Babson, 65-71; won at Emerson, 76-67
#35	4	Hanover	14-2	won at Franklin, 78-57; won at Anderson, 74-65
T#36	3	Brockport	14-3	def. Plattsburgh State, 96-87; def. SUNY Potsdam, 92-62
T#36	3	Catholic	13-4	won at Goucher, 81-61; LOST at Scranton, 71-92
#38	1	Carthage	11-6	LOST to Carroll, 76-81; LOST at Wheaton (Ill.), 78-85

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PeterEscobar on January 23, 2017, 08:46:27 PM

Interesting to see UW-River Falls ranked #1 by both Massey (http://masseyratings.com/rate.php?s=cb2017&sub=11620) & the DII eff. rankings (http://detroitjockcity.com/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency-ratings/) yet not receiving one first-place vote. Not disagreeing, just curious as I know next to nothing about mid-west DIII hoops.

Likewise, the computers do not seem to like Tufts (10/20), Whitworth (14/27), or Denison (20/54).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 23, 2017, 10:54:17 PM

Denison's non-conference wasn't that strong, and the loss to Capital hurts their power rating profile.

UW-RF is kind of an outsider in a way. I'm not surprised they haven't received a first place vote.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 23, 2017, 11:10:45 PM

One might suspect that name-brand bias is what holds UWRF back in the eyes of the pollsters. But, then again, Babson and Whitman aren't exactly powerhouses of long standing, either, even though both of them have been nationally ascendant and tourney participants in recent seasons. Also, one could argue that UWRF's conference affiliation makes up for the lack of prestige attached to the Falcons program itself; I wouldn't be surprised if all 25 pollsters were to acknowledge that they each give a WIAC team with a gaudy record more credence than they'd give to teams with similar records from other conferences.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 23, 2017, 11:11:07 PM

Yeah, it's hard sometimes for voters to flip teams that high in the poll without losses. But right now I'd put River Falls ahead of Tufts and Christopher Newport based on who they beat.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 24, 2017, 08:47:54 AM

I came very close to putting RF second and dropping Whitman, but as Gordon said, it's tough to do to a team when they're winning everything in front of them. And it's not like I'm super confident in RF that high anyway.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on January 24, 2017, 09:40:28 AM

What I want to know is who gave a vote to Albertus Magnus?! Their best win is a 1 point home victory against 10-7 Lasell. They lost to Babson by 20 and NJ City by 21. Add another loss to Johnson and Wales (7-8) and this team should not even be on anyone's radar to be ranked. The resumes of unranked teams like Hope, Hanover, Loras, etc. are much much better...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 24, 2017, 01:04:37 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on January 24, 2017, 09:40:28 AM
What I want to know is who gave a vote to Albertus Magnus?! Their best win is a 1 point home victory against 10-7 Lasell. They lost to Babson by 20 and NJ City by 21. Add another loss to Johnson and Wales (7-8) and this team should not even be on anyone's radar to be ranked. The resumes of unranked teams like Hope, Hanover, Loras, etc. are much much better...

It was probably the same pollster who put Elmhurst #25 on his preseason ballot. ::)

I still can't get over that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 24, 2017, 01:22:37 PM

It could be lack of name recognition too, foe River Falls. When you think WIAC, it's Whitewater and Point...and further back, Platteville. The Falcons' NC schedule wasn't super challenging, topping St. Thomas and losing at Hope. But they are 6-0 in conference, topping ranked Eau Claire and Whitewater. Eau Claire had a tougher NC schedule, I thought, beating St. Norbert, winning at Wash U, topping IIAC 1st place team BVU, only losing to Wartburg. But the Blugolds have stumbled in conference, one of 5 teams at just 3-3. The WIAC had one of the best nonconference winning % this year and when River Falls is undefeated in the league and already leading by 3 games, they don't seem to be a flash in the pan. I still think Eau Claire can be a very good team and watch out for Whitewater. They started out 0-3 in conference, but are now 3-3 with Chris Jones back from injury and semester transfer Derek Rongstad integrated into the team now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Swish3 on January 24, 2017, 01:27:36 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on January 23, 2017, 11:11:07 PM
Yeah, it's hard sometimes for voters to flip teams that high in the poll without losses. But right now I'd put River Falls ahead of Tufts and Christopher Newport based on who they beat.

How dare you! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on January 24, 2017, 02:14:12 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 24, 2017, 01:22:37 PM
It could be lack of name recognition too, foe River Falls. When you think WIAC, it's Whitewater and Point...and further back, Platteville. The Falcons' NC schedule wasn't super challenging, topping St. Thomas and losing at Hope. But they are 6-0 in conference, topping ranked Eau Claire and Whitewater. Eau Claire had a tougher NC schedule, I thought, beating St. Norbert, winning at Wash U, topping IIAC 1st place team BVU, only losing to Wartburg. But the Blugolds have stumbled in conference, one of 5 teams at just 3-3. The WIAC had one of the best nonconference winning % this year and when River Falls is undefeated in the league and already leading by 3 games, they don't seem to be a flash in the pan. I still think Eau Claire can be a very good team and watch out for Whitewater. They started out 0-3 in conference, but are now 3-3 with Chris Jones back from injury and semester transfer Derek Rongstad integrated into the team now.

Just clarifying - that game was a neutral site game at Stout

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 24, 2017, 03:48:48 PM

QuoteWhat I want to know is who gave a vote to Albertus Magnus?! Their best win is a 1 point home victory against 10-7 Lasell. They lost to Babson by 20 and NJ City by 21. Add another loss to Johnson and Wales (7-8) and this team should not even be on anyone's radar to be ranked. The resumes of unranked teams like Hope, Hanover, Loras, etc. are much much better...

It was probably the same pollster who put Elmhurst #25 on his preseason ballot. ::)

I still can't get over that.]What I want to know is who gave a vote to Albertus Magnus?! Their best win is a 1 point home victory against 10-7 Lasell. They lost to Babson by 20 and NJ City by 21. Add another loss to Johnson and Wales (7-8) and this team should not even be on anyone's radar to be ranked. The resumes of unranked teams like Hope, Hanover, Loras, etc. are much much better...

It was probably the same pollster who put Elmhurst #25 on his preseason ballot. ::)

I still can't get over that.

Or the voter(s) who put Carroll over Illinois Wesleyan. Remember when we were complaining about that? :)

I don't think it's worth worrying too much about teams that get single votes. It's possible that Albertus has improved since Babson and NJCU blew them away. And the best team in the GNAC (including Albertus itself) has been competitive with ranked teams from better conferences in recent seasons. Would anyone really be stunned if Tufts or Amherst beat Albertus Magnus by less than 10 points in an NCAA tournament game?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 24, 2017, 04:08:34 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on January 24, 2017, 03:48:48 PM
QuoteWhat I want to know is who gave a vote to Albertus Magnus?! Their best win is a 1 point home victory against 10-7 Lasell. They lost to Babson by 20 and NJ City by 21. Add another loss to Johnson and Wales (7-8) and this team should not even be on anyone's radar to be ranked. The resumes of unranked teams like Hope, Hanover, Loras, etc. are much much better...

It was probably the same pollster who put Elmhurst #25 on his preseason ballot. ::)

I still can't get over that.]What I want to know is who gave a vote to Albertus Magnus?! Their best win is a 1 point home victory against 10-7 Lasell. They lost to Babson by 20 and NJ City by 21. Add another loss to Johnson and Wales (7-8) and this team should not even be on anyone's radar to be ranked. The resumes of unranked teams like Hope, Hanover, Loras, etc. are much much better...

It was probably the same pollster who put Elmhurst #25 on his preseason ballot. ::)

I still can't get over that.

Or the voter(s) who put Carroll over Illinois Wesleyan. Remember when we were complaining about that? :)

Not the same thing at all, though. Elmhurst lost nine seniors -- almost the entire rotation -- from its 2015-16 roster. Of the two players coming back who'd had any extensive varsity experience at all for the Bluejays, one had yo-yo'ed between varsity and JV so often that he was clearly suspect, and the other was coming off of a torn knee ligament that had shortened his 2015-16 campaign. Carroll, on the other hand, returned three starters and the top two reserves from a team that went 20-5 in 2015-16, so it was reasonable to deduce that the Pioneers would be decent this year, even while playing in a tougher league. Illinois Wesleyan returned a substantial portion of its 2015-16 rotation as well, but that 2015-16 team had gone 13-13.

In other words, it was a defensible argument to put Carroll over Illinois Wesleyan, even though it was a minority opinion. By contrast, the only way that someone could put Elmhurst on his preseason ballot was if he had done absolutely no research whatsoever on the team, to the point of disregarding whatever info you had provided to him about the Bluejays prior to the balloting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 24, 2017, 06:14:56 PM

Fair point.

I was comparing the two because both of those votes were heavily lampooned on the message boards to the point where I apologized to the Illinois Wesleyan fans for not explicitly directing the voters to consider the Titans. And now that Carroll vote looks more sensible, albeit with an injury to one of IWU's best players that the voters couldn't have predicted.

I think the Albertus Magnus vote has a better chance of being one that looks reasonable later on (like Carroll) than it does a vote that looked pretty strange then and now (like Elmhurst).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 24, 2017, 09:41:26 PM

Albertus did pick up a 6'9" freshman who hasn't played yet, so maybe that voter is projecting forward.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 24, 2017, 11:31:08 PM

I voted for Albertus Magnus... the reason....

Um... no I didn't... just couldn't resist having some fun. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 25, 2017, 01:11:13 AM

#2 Whitman 91 #6 Whitworth 75

Whitman led comfortably pretty much the whole way.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 25, 2017, 11:41:51 AM

CBS news is now projecting that Whitman will win the Northwest Conference.

CBS projects Whitman will receive the Conference's top seed in the playoffs, an NCAA tournament birth and the NWC's 15 electoral votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on January 25, 2017, 12:08:44 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on January 24, 2017, 03:48:48 PM
I don't think it's worth worrying too much about teams that get single votes...

Noted. And I agree completely. One vote in Week 8 is as close to meaningless as it gets in the grand scheme of things. Still thought it was worth bringing up.

If I were to wager a guess, the vote was going to the 1st place team in the GNAC, regardless of their record or resume. Albertus Magnus is 135th according to Massey. They are #24 in the Northeast Region according to Knightslappy's regional ranking data (http://detroitjockcity.com/division-iii-mens-basketball-regional-rankings-data/ (http://detroitjockcity.com/division-iii-mens-basketball-regional-rankings-data/))... It's a very seemingly small thing, but if voters put teams on ballots that don' t belong there based on regional bias and just because they can, doesn't it (if even a very minimal amount) reduce the integrity of the entire poll?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 25, 2017, 01:19:09 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on January 25, 2017, 12:08:44 PM
Quote from: gordonmann on January 24, 2017, 03:48:48 PM
I don't think it's worth worrying too much about teams that get single votes...

Noted. And I agree completely. One vote in Week 8 is as close to meaningless as it gets in the grand scheme of things. Still thought it was worth bringing up.

If I were to wager a guess, the vote was going to the 1st place team in the GNAC, regardless of their record or resume. Albertus Magnus is 135th according to Massey. They are #24 in the Northeast Region according to Knightslappy's regional ranking data (http://detroitjockcity.com/division-iii-mens-basketball-regional-rankings-data/ (http://detroitjockcity.com/division-iii-mens-basketball-regional-rankings-data/))... It's a very seemingly small thing, but if voters put teams on ballots that don' t belong there based on regional bias and just because they can, doesn't it (if even a very minimal amount) reduce the integrity of the entire poll?

You don't think that maybe AMC has a track record and last year was the only time they were "down" in the last five or so? Or maybe the voter has seen them and liked what they saw?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 25, 2017, 01:30:56 PM

QuoteIt's a very seemingly small thing, but if voters put teams on ballots that don' t belong there based on regional bias and just because they can, doesn't it (if even a very minimal amount) reduce the integrity of the entire poll?

No, I don't think so.

These types of polls are subjective by nature. We're asking top 25 people to select the 25 teams they think are best. It's not a question with an objectively right answer or even one where the person can report their own behavior (like political polls that ask the respondent whom they're voting for). Subjectivity doesn't detract from the poll's integrity in my mind.

We protect against regional bias by balancing the panel by region and conference, though obviously not every conference is represented. So one person can't get a team into the Top 25 based on their own bias, even if they inexplicably voted them No. 1.

I have access to everyone's ballots, and I've promised all the voters that their votes will be kept confidential, unless they want to release them (like Dave does). So I won't say too much about who voted for Albertus Magnus.

All I'll say is that sometimes the odd vote comes from the type of voter you can predict (like someone from the same conference or region) and sometimes it doesn't. So you shouldn't assume that those random votes are because of geographic bias. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 25, 2017, 01:42:16 PM

I'm sure HOPEful saw the same game I did back in December.

Olivet 79 J&W 78

The fact that J&W has beaten Albertus Magnus (in OT 75-70) and that J&W has gone back East and is smoking much of the competition that Albertus Magnus is also playing doesn't help a person in the MidWest feel that great about that particular vote.

.....and I understand all the odd results happen arguments, yada yada yada.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 25, 2017, 01:50:52 PM

It's one point out of 8,125 points.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 25, 2017, 02:44:34 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on January 25, 2017, 11:41:51 AM
CBS news is now projecting that Whitman will win the Northwest Conference.

CBS projects Whitman will receive the Conference's top seed in the playoffs, an NCAA tournament birth and the NWC's 15 electoral votes.

+1 I didn't realize the NWC got that many electoral votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on January 25, 2017, 02:49:22 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 25, 2017, 01:50:52 PM
It's one point out of 8,125 points.

Again. Not about the point. The point in of itself is as close to meaningless as you can get. More about the overall accountability and integrity of the process.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 25, 2017, 03:57:53 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on January 25, 2017, 02:49:22 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 25, 2017, 01:50:52 PM
It's one point out of 8,125 points.

Again. Not about the point. The point in of itself is as close to meaningless as you can get. More about the overall accountability and integrity of the process.

But it's still about subjectivity. I didn't vote for Susquehanna at all. I don't see what voters see in them. I've watched a couple of their games and examined their schedule and results and I just don't see it. I'd pick them ahead of Albertus Magnus for sure, but if they can get 323 votes, I don't think its a stretch that someone would give Albertus one. I don't think Susquehanna is that much better.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 25, 2017, 04:29:14 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on January 25, 2017, 02:49:22 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 25, 2017, 01:50:52 PM
It's one point out of 8,125 points.

Again. Not about the point. The point in of itself is as close to meaningless as you can get. More about the overall accountability and integrity of the process.

Not sure you can accuse one single vote going to a team as then a problem with integrity. I think that is a major reach. If someone voted Albertus Magnus #1 and refused to change that vote... then you have an argument. But not a single 25th vote... and especially not in a time when parity is so strong there are 50 or teams being considered on a weekly basis.

I am working on the history of the Top 25... on the men's side so far the lowest number of teams to ever be ranked is less than 40... there are other years it is well over 50. Just some perspective.

Please don't argue integrity when arguing a single point amongst 8100+. If you see others being swayed, you'd maybe have an argument... but no one has been.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 25, 2017, 07:10:15 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 25, 2017, 04:29:14 PM
Quote from: HOPEful on January 25, 2017, 02:49:22 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 25, 2017, 01:50:52 PM
It's one point out of 8,125 points.

Again. Not about the point. The point in of itself is as close to meaningless as you can get. More about the overall accountability and integrity of the process.

Not sure you can accuse one single vote going to a team as then a problem with integrity. I think that is a major reach. If someone voted Albertus Magnus #1 and refused to change that vote... then you have an argument. But not a single 25th vote... and especially not in a time when parity is so strong there are 50 or teams being considered on a weekly basis.

I am working on the history of the Top 25... on the men's side so far the lowest number of teams to ever be ranked is less than 40... there are other years it is well over 50. Just some perspective.

Please don't argue integrity when arguing a single point amongst 8100+. If you see others being swayed, you'd maybe have an argument... but no one has been.

I have reviewed an posted on the Football Boards about the number of teams receiving votes on that poll.

The trend in football is to tighten up about Week #9 and Week #10. Then it increases again. Since basketball has about 60% more teams participating, 50 teams receiving votes is not that unusual.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 25, 2017, 09:07:40 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 25, 2017, 07:10:15 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 25, 2017, 04:29:14 PM
Quote from: HOPEful on January 25, 2017, 02:49:22 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 25, 2017, 01:50:52 PM
It's one point out of 8,125 points.

Again. Not about the point. The point in of itself is as close to meaningless as you can get. More about the overall accountability and integrity of the process.

Not sure you can accuse one single vote going to a team as then a problem with integrity. I think that is a major reach. If someone voted Albertus Magnus #1 and refused to change that vote... then you have an argument. But not a single 25th vote... and especially not in a time when parity is so strong there are 50 or teams being considered on a weekly basis.

I am working on the history of the Top 25... on the men's side so far the lowest number of teams to ever be ranked is less than 40... there are other years it is well over 50. Just some perspective.

Please don't argue integrity when arguing a single point amongst 8100+. If you see others being swayed, you'd maybe have an argument... but no one has been.
I have reviewed an posted on the Football Boards about the number of teams receiving votes on that poll.

The trend in football is to tighten up about Week #9 and Week #10. Then it increases again. Since basketball has about 60% more teams participating, 50 teams receiving votes is not that unusual.

I was giving a rough estimate since I don't have the complete history finished. I was just surprised one year when it was below 40.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 25, 2017, 11:04:23 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	613	Babson	17-1	def. Clark, 90-81; 01/28 vs. Emerson
#2	610	Whitman	18-0	won at #6 Whitworth, 91-75; 01/28 vs. Willamette
#3	555	Christopher Newport	16-2	def. #12 Salisbury, 55-53; 01/28 vs. Penn State-Harrisburg
#4	531	Tufts	15-2	01/26 vs. Newbury; 01/28 at Bates
#5	524	UW-River Falls	17-1	def. UW-Stout, 70-58; 01/28 at UW-Stevens Point
#6	489	Whitworth	15-3	LOST to #2 Whitman, 75-91; 01/27 vs. Willamette
#7	457	Rochester	15-1	01/27 vs. New York University; 01/29 vs. Brandeis
#8	423	Washington U.	13-3	01/27 at Carnegie Mellon; 01/29 at Case Western Reserve
#9	420	Denison	17-1	def. Oberlin, 89-73; 01/28 vs. Wittenberg
#10	373	Ramapo	18-1	won at York (N.Y.), 97-63; def. Montclair State, 80-68; 01/28 at Kean
#11	323	Susquehanna	16-2	won at Catholic, 89-83; 01/28 at Moravian
#12	300	Salisbury	14-4	LOST at #3 Christopher Newport, 53-55; 01/28 vs. Mary Washington
#13	296	St. Norbert	13-3	won at Lawrence, 77-57; 01/28 vs. Cornell
#14	282	Amherst	13-4	def. Williams, 72-64; 01/28 vs. Trinity (Conn.)
#15	250	Marietta	14-4	def. Otterbein, 94-75; 01/28 vs. Baldwin Wallace
#16	240	Augustana	15-3	def. Elmhurst, 87-76; 01/28 at Carthage
#17	187	UW-Eau Claire	14-4	def. UW-Platteville, 83-58; 01/28 at UW-Oshkosh
#18	181	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	13-1	01/26 vs. La Verne; 01/28 at Pomona-Pitzer
#19	177	Benedictine	14-4	def. Milwaukee Engineering, 87-74; won at Rockford, 106-76; 01/28 at Lakeland
#20	148	New Jersey City	16-3	def. William Paterson, 70-60; 01/28 at TCNJ
#21	144	Neumann	17-1	won at Keystone, 99-76; 01/28 vs. Gwynedd Mercy
#22	142	Middlebury	14-3	def. Lyndon State, 100-90; 01/28 vs. Hamilton
#23	117	North Park	14-4	def. Illinois Wesleyan, 96-86; 01/28 at Elmhurst
#24	101	UW-Whitewater	15-3	def. UW-Stevens Point, 80-74; 01/28 at UW-La Crosse
#25	53	Wesleyan	15-4	01/28 at Connecticut College

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	37	Swarthmore	14-3	01/26 at Washington College; 01/28 vs. Gettysburg
#27	36	Lycoming	16-3	LOST to Messiah, 80-91; 01/28 vs. Widener
#28	29	Hope	14-4	won at Calvin, 87-67; 01/28 vs. Albion
#29	24	Hardin-Simmons	14-4	01/26 at Mary Hardin-Baylor; 01/28 at Concordia (Texas)
#30	15	Eastern Connecticut	13-6	LOST at Keene State, 92-99; 01/28 vs. Rhode Island College
T#31	11	Guilford	15-3	won at Lynchburg, 72-60; 01/28 vs. Virginia Wesleyan
T#31	11	Hanover	14-3	LOST to Rose-Hulman, 68-73; 01/28 vs. Defiance
T#33	8	Brockport	15-3	def. Fredonia, 97-61; 01/27 at Oswego State; 01/28 at Cortland
T#33	8	Ripon	13-3	def. Beloit, 70-58; 01/28 vs. Illinois College
T#33	8	St. Lawrence	14-3	LOST at Skidmore, 66-83; 01/27 vs. RPI; 01/28 vs. Union
T#36	1	Albertus Magnus	14-3	def. Rivier, 93-76; 01/28 at St. Joseph's (Maine)
T#36	1	Randolph-Macon	13-5	won at Virginia Wesleyan, 76-57; 01/28 vs. Washington and Lee

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: irapthor on January 25, 2017, 11:55:12 PM

For the record, I am a Top 25 voter (and have been for 15 years now)...While I did not vote for Albertus, I did consider them. NJCU played them back in December and despite our convincing win, there was just something about the Falcons that made me keep an eye on them...I don't think they were fully healthy back then...They appear to be now and are on a nice little run...Not enough to crack my 25 teams, but at least enough to be among the next 15-20 teams I'm keeping an eye on.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on January 26, 2017, 08:30:31 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 25, 2017, 04:29:14 PM
Not sure you can accuse one single vote going to a team as then a problem with integrity.

Integrity of the process, not the person.

Sorry all. Clearly this has already gotten blown out of proportion. I just think it would be nice to know who the voters are and who they each voted for. Better yet, a quick weekly rationale like Dave does would be ideal ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 26, 2017, 08:49:41 AM

Ok. So you find out who the voter was that gave them a 25th place single vote...then what? Are you going to personally critize that person? Really though, it's not like that single voter voted Albertus Magnus #1. Their only 2 nc losses were to 2 opponents that are currently ranked #1 and #20. Voting them 25th is a reach, for sure, but not completely out of the question, IMO.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 26, 2017, 12:39:40 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on January 26, 2017, 08:30:31 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 25, 2017, 04:29:14 PM
Not sure you can accuse one single vote going to a team as then a problem with integrity.

Integrity of the process, not the person.

Sorry all. Clearly this has already gotten blown out of proportion. I just think it would be nice to know who the voters are and who they each voted for. Better yet, a quick weekly rationale like Dave does would be ideal ;D

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 26, 2017, 08:49:41 AM
Ok. So you find out who the voter was that gave them a 25th place single vote...then what? Are you going to personally critize that person? Really though, it's not like that single voter voted Albertus Magnus #1. Their only 2 nc losses were to 2 opponents that are currently ranked #1 and #20. Voting them 25th is a reach, for sure, but not completely out of the question, IMO.

Yeah... that is the key here... you aren't going to get a list of voters from us for two reasons.
- The first, we don't want those voters "lobbied" by others to vote for teams or in a certain way. It happens everywhere. I remember laughing when I was a senior sports producer in my local TV life and getting plenty of mail enticing me or my boss to vote for so-and-so for the Heisman. I didn't have a vote, by the way... not even sure he did.
- The second reason is what Greek Tragedy alluded to... now people can pinpoint voters and go after them for how they did vote... or perceived to have voted. This isn't the Baseball Hall of Fame where the voting has become a political, hot-button issue and writers have chosen to stand on certain issues and brag about how they voted (or didn't vote). We don't need our voters to feel pressure or retaliation for how they vote.

I have put my vote out there. Why? Mainly because I am talking about it on Hoopsville and found that it is difficult to discuss the Top 25 without revealing how I voted. So I show people my ballot (most weeks when I have time). I was inspired a bit by Keith McMillian at D3football (who used to show his 26-50 group; don't ask, I won't do that) and I have enjoyed the process and such. But that is my choice. No other voter should be subject to releasing their names or their votes. Especially those like the coaches we have to face pressure or criticism from their colleagues in and out of their conferences.

I know HOPEful has stated this has gotten blown out of proportion and I don't think we need to belabor it, but I did feel I needed to say something about the idea of releasing names and votes. I will point out there aren't that many Top 25 Anythings where you know who is voting and how.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 26, 2017, 12:41:45 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 26, 2017, 08:49:41 AM
Ok. So you find out who the voter was that gave them a 25th place single vote...then what? Are you going to personally critize that person? Really though, it's not like that single voter voted Albertus Magnus #1. Their only 2 nc losses were to 2 opponents that are currently ranked #1 and #20. Voting them 25th is a reach, for sure, but not completely out of the question, IMO.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmgoblog.com%2Fsites%2Fmgoblog.com%2Ffiles%2Fimages%2FBand-To-Dallas-Brandon-On-Jerryworld-Dol_BD2D%2FTorchGang_thumb.jpg&hash=26e1214a2de5f344e12a4af385a0503d6b8d850e)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 26, 2017, 05:24:42 PM

All of the sudden the month of January is coming to a close! It wasn't that long ago we were watching how teams would perform during holiday tournaments and after long breaks. Now, we are wondering how most teams will weather the second half of conference play.

Thursday night on Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave tries to take the temperature of Division III basketball. Just how good are the teams nationally ranked and near the top of some conference? Are there teams lurking who are about to emerge and disrupt things?

Of course the focus on this show will primarily be the East, Mid-Atlantic, Great Lakes, and West Regions, but there is still plenty to talk about nationwide including the common theme: upsets and parity.

Guests will include a coach who won his 400th on Wednesday, three nationally ranked teams, and seven total losses.

Dave also discusses the recently launch Hoopsville Fundraising efforts and the upcoming annual marathon show. For more information on the fundraiser, click here: https://igg.me/at/hoopsville-fundraiser-2017

Tune in starting at 7:00 PM LIVE via this link: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2016-17/jan26 (or the Facebook Live simulcast). If you can't make it live, watch the show On Demand to listen (download) the podcast to the right (available after the show concludes).

Don't forget to contribute to the new "Hoopsville Mailbag" segment. Email questions you may have to hoopsville@d3hoops.com. Dave will answer them tonight or on a future show.

Guests scheduled to appear (in order of appearance):
- Frank Marcinek, No. 11 Susquehanna men's coach
- Luke Flockerzi, No. 7 Rochester men's coach
- Don Mulhern, UW-Superior women's coach
- Michele Durand, No. 8 Ohio Northern women's coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville
Fundraiser: https://igg.me/at/hoopsville-fundraiser-2017

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D710%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3Dkepf0%2Fnauvv4e6dlawogt6.jpg&hash=85a48d080a455858e70625e1f7ab43b4abccf840)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 4samuy on January 26, 2017, 11:31:55 PM

Dave,

Another fabulous show. Can you give me the link to the fund raising site. Thanks!
Disregard. I see the link.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2017, 10:34:34 AM

Quote from: 4samuy on January 26, 2017, 11:31:55 PM
Dave,

Another fabulous show. Can you give me the link to the fund raising site. Thanks!
Disregard. I see the link.

Thank you. I appreciate the kind comments.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: irapthor on January 27, 2017, 10:39:05 AM

Quote from: HOPEful on January 26, 2017, 08:30:31 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 25, 2017, 04:29:14 PM
Not sure you can accuse one single vote going to a team as then a problem with integrity.

Integrity of the process, not the person.

Sorry all. Clearly this has already gotten blown out of proportion. I just think it would be nice to know who the voters are and who they each voted for. Better yet, a quick weekly rationale like Dave does would be ideal ;D

A quick weekly rationale is not as quick as you may think...what Dave writes is very time-consuming.

FWIW, I spend 30-45 min. each week doing my ballot. It's never been a responsibility I take lightly. I'm wrong sometimes and may put more stock into a team than they deserve, which is what makes it subjective. But I'd like to think after all these years that I sorta know what I'm talking about and am right a lot more than I am wrong.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 29, 2017, 04:54:10 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	613	Babson	18-1	def. Clark, 90-81; def. Emerson, 78-42
#2	610	Whitman	19-0	won at #6 Whitworth, 91-75; def. Willamette, 100-59
#3	555	Christopher Newport	17-2	def. #12 Salisbury, 55-53; def. Penn State-Harrisburg, 75-47
#4	531	Tufts	16-3	def. Newbury, 113-74; LOST at Bates, 72-84
#5	524	UW-River Falls	18-1	def. UW-Stout, 70-58; won at UW-Stevens Point, 67-51
#6	489	Whitworth	16-3	LOST to #2 Whitman, 75-91; def. Willamette, 77-55
#7	457	Rochester	17-1	def. New York University, 96-71; def. Brandeis, 67-56
#8	423	Washington U.	15-3	won at Carnegie Mellon, 70-47; won at Case Western Reserve, 88-77
#9	420	Denison	17-2	def. Oberlin, 89-73; LOST to Wittenberg, 70-71
#10	373	Ramapo	19-1	won at York (N.Y.), 97-63; def. Montclair State, 80-68; won at Kean, 82-62
#11	323	Susquehanna	16-3	won at Catholic, 89-83; LOST at Moravian, 77-80
#12	300	Salisbury	15-4	LOST at #3 Christopher Newport, 53-55; def. Mary Washington, 67-63
#13	296	St. Norbert	14-3	won at Lawrence, 77-57; def. Cornell, 67-57
#14	282	Amherst	14-4	def. Williams, 72-64; def. Trinity (Conn.), 66-53
#15	250	Marietta	15-4	def. Otterbein, 94-75; def. Baldwin Wallace, 100-91
#16	240	Augustana	15-4	def. Elmhurst, 87-76; LOST at Carthage, 70-74 OT
#17	187	UW-Eau Claire	14-5	def. UW-Platteville, 83-58; LOST at UW-Oshkosh, 66-79
#18	181	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	15-1	def. La Verne, 90-81; won at Pomona-Pitzer, 73-67
#19	177	Benedictine	15-4	def. Milwaukee Engineering, 87-74; won at Rockford, 106-76; won at Lakeland, 85-65
#20	148	New Jersey City	16-4	def. William Paterson, 70-60; LOST at TCNJ, 69-75
#21	144	Neumann	18-1	won at Keystone, 99-76; def. Gwynedd Mercy, 92-77
#22	142	Middlebury	15-3	def. Lyndon State, 100-90; def. Hamilton, 115-82
#23	117	North Park	15-4	def. Illinois Wesleyan, 96-86; won at Elmhurst, 70-62
#24	101	UW-Whitewater	16-3	def. UW-Stevens Point, 80-74; won at UW-La Crosse, 67-62
#25	53	Wesleyan	16-4	won at Connecticut College, 85-75

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	37	Swarthmore	15-4	won at Washington College, 84-61; LOST to Gettysburg, 65-76
#27	36	Lycoming	16-4	LOST to Messiah, 80-91; LOST to Widener, 70-72
#28	29	Hope	15-4	won at Calvin, 87-67; def. Albion, 82-70
#29	24	Hardin-Simmons	15-5	won at Mary Hardin-Baylor, 120-112 2OT; LOST at Concordia (Texas), 89-95
#30	15	Eastern Connecticut	14-6	LOST at Keene State, 92-99; def. Rhode Island College, 86-62
T#31	11	Guilford	16-3	won at Lynchburg, 72-60; def. Virginia Wesleyan, 83-66
T#31	11	Hanover	15-3	LOST to Rose-Hulman, 68-73; def. Defiance, 77-60
T#33	8	Brockport	15-5	def. Fredonia, 97-61; LOST at Oswego State, 75-78; LOST at Cortland, 70-77
T#33	8	Ripon	14-3	def. Beloit, 70-58; def. Illinois College, 86-73
T#33	8	St. Lawrence	16-3	LOST at Skidmore, 66-83; def. RPI, 88-81; def. Union, 90-85
T#36	1	Albertus Magnus	14-4	def. Rivier, 93-76; LOST at St. Joseph's (Maine), 90-95
T#36	1	Randolph-Macon	14-5	won at Virginia Wesleyan, 76-57; def. Washington and Lee, 65-57

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 29, 2017, 05:20:49 PM

Believe it or not... there is just one more month remaining in Division III basketball's regular season. In other words, time is running out for teams looking to play in March. One month from today, most conference champions will be crowned and the conversation will be who may be in and will be out of the NCAA championship tournament.

So as the season head's for the home stretch, what programs will we be talking about in a month? Who may emerge from some tight conferences races to prove they are the best?

Sunday night on Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave hopes to turn the spotlight on a few programs others may not be paying attention to as much. Tufts' men's program is seperating themselves from the rest of the NESCAC, Elmhurst women are making the CCIW race more interesting than expected, LeTourneau men have turned their program around and now lead their ASC division, and Montclair State women have a battle on their hands in the NJAC.

Also on Sunday night, we head to the WBCA Center Court and talk to one of the up and coming women's basketball coaches. Already honored for his success at a young age, what has Alex Richay done to turn the Oglethorpe program around?

Dave will also preview the upcoming annual Hoopsville Marathon and give an update to this season's fundraising efforts.

Tune in starting at 7:00 PM ET to watch the show live here: http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2016-17/jan29 (or via Facebook Live). If you miss any of it, you can watch the show On Demand or listen (download) the podcast.

Don't forget to contribute to the new "Hoopsville Mailbag" segment. Email questions you may have to hoopsville@d3hoops.com. Dave will answer them tonight or on a future show.

Guests schedule (in order of appearance):
- Bob Sheldon, No. 4 Tufts men's coach
- Tethanie Carriollo, Elmhurst women's coach
- Alex Richay, Oglethorpe women's coach (WBCA Center Court)
- Dan Miller, LeTourneau men's coach
- Karin Harvey, No. 18 Montclair State women's coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville
Fundraiser: https://igg.me/at/hoopsville-fundraiser-2017

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D710%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3Dkk0fp%2Fg85ouv94hm35yfei.jpg&hash=11a11145be8748fcb682bb041a834ffe8f0fbf3a)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 29, 2017, 09:17:13 PM

Guess we won't have to worry about Albertus Magnus in this week's poll, eh HOPEful? :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on January 30, 2017, 12:09:14 AM

Is it just me or has the Others Receiving Votes teams this year been quite bad week in and week out? Now this could be a common thing I am just picking up now, just curious.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2017, 12:13:59 AM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on January 30, 2017, 12:09:14 AM
Is it just me or has the Others Receiving Votes teams this year been quite bad week in and week out? Now this could be a common thing I am just picking up now, just curious.

You might need to cite any specific examples.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 30, 2017, 12:43:41 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2017, 12:13:59 AM
Quote from: Smitty Oom on January 30, 2017, 12:09:14 AM
Is it just me or has the Others Receiving Votes teams this year been quite bad week in and week out? Now this could be a common thing I am just picking up now, just curious.

You might need to cite any specific examples.

I don't know if he is referencing any specific results, but I feel the same 'vibe'. After following the Top 25 for many years, it seems the ORV's are getting beaten up more than usual. Parity?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 30, 2017, 12:44:56 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 30, 2017, 12:43:41 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2017, 12:13:59 AM
Quote from: Smitty Oom on January 30, 2017, 12:09:14 AM
Is it just me or has the Others Receiving Votes teams this year been quite bad week in and week out? Now this could be a common thing I am just picking up now, just curious.

You might need to cite any specific examples.

I don't know if he is referencing any specific results, but I feel the same 'vibe'. After following the Top 25 for many years, it seems the ORV's are getting beaten up more than usual. Parity?

Yeah - I think parity. There are a ton of teams to consider and everyone is taking losses this season. Until the last week or two, there were double-digit losses in the Top 25 alone. If there are that many losses in the Top 25, the ORV is going to be the same if not worse.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 30, 2017, 06:50:47 PM

This week's poll is out:

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2016-17/week9

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 30, 2017, 07:37:28 PM

In light of the parity discussion, out of idle curiosity this afternoon I went back and looked at the Week Eight polls from the past several seasons to see how many losses the ranked teams had suffered at that point in the season. This is what I found:

season	undefeated	one loss	two losses	three losses	four losses	five losses	avg. # of losses
2009-10	0	8	10	6	1	0	2.00
2010-11	5	3	6	6	5	0	2.12
2011-12	1	11	5	6	2	0	1.88
2012-13	4	5	11	3	2	0	1.76
2013-14	3	7	5	7	3	0	2.00
2014-15	2	3	13	5	2	0	2.08
2015-16	4	5	5	6	3	2	2.20
2016-17	1	7	4	7	6	0	2.40

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 30, 2017, 07:40:15 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 30, 2017, 07:37:28 PM
In light of the parity discussion, out of idle curiosity this afternoon I went back and looked at the Week Eight polls from the past several seasons to see how many losses the ranked teams had suffered at that point in the season. This is what I found:

season undefeated one loss two losses three losses four losses five losses avg. # of losses
2009-10 0 8 10 6 1 0 2.00
2010-11 5 3 6 6 5 0 2.12
2011-12 1 11 5 6 2 0 1.88
2012-13 4 5 11 3 2 0 1.76
2013-14 3 7 5 7 3 0 2.00
2014-15 2 3 13 5 2 0 2.08
2015-16 4 5 5 6 3 2 2.20
2016-17 1 7 4 7 6 0 2.40

I think parity goes deeper than how many losses are in the Top 25. I think conferences in the last few years have grown deeper and more competitive. Look at the NESCAC this year and where it was say four years ago. There are more teams outside the Top 25 who have just as good an argument as most of those in the Top 25. I think you will find more losses at the bottom of the Top 25 than in years past and thus more losses of those receiving votes as well. While the top is still pretty strong, it has gotten more crowded and those at the top are almost expected to take a loss in any given week than we expected in the past. I think that is where parity is these days. The top of Division III is far, far deeper than five or ten years ago and, again, far more conferences are competitive at the top then they ever were in the past.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on January 30, 2017, 07:42:19 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 30, 2017, 12:43:41 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2017, 12:13:59 AM
Quote from: Smitty Oom on January 30, 2017, 12:09:14 AM
Is it just me or has the Others Receiving Votes teams this year been quite bad week in and week out? Now this could be a common thing I am just picking up now, just curious.

You might need to cite any specific examples.

I don't know if he is referencing any specific results, but I feel the same 'vibe'. After following the Top 25 for many years, it seems the ORV's are getting beaten up more than usual. Parity?

The only thing I can really "Cite" here is the past couple weeks...

Last week 8 of 12 teams in the ORV lost a game that week. Week before it was 4 of 10 teams. 3 weeks ago it was 7 of 13. I just think that seems high to me and yes, a tribute to the parity this year. Which is backed up by Sager's research as this is the highest avg. number of losses, although that is ranked teams and we are talking ORV.

So quoting Ypsi... it is just the "vibe" I am getting as a casual fan of the top 25 ranks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 30, 2017, 07:55:34 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 30, 2017, 07:40:15 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 30, 2017, 07:37:28 PM
In light of the parity discussion, out of idle curiosity this afternoon I went back and looked at the Week Eight polls from the past several seasons to see how many losses the ranked teams had suffered at that point in the season. This is what I found:

season undefeated one loss two losses three losses four losses five losses avg. # of losses
2009-10 0 8 10 6 1 0 2.00
2010-11 5 3 6 6 5 0 2.12
2011-12 1 11 5 6 2 0 1.88
2012-13 4 5 11 3 2 0 1.76
2013-14 3 7 5 7 3 0 2.00
2014-15 2 3 13 5 2 0 2.08
2015-16 4 5 5 6 3 2 2.20
2016-17 1 7 4 7 6 0 2.40

I think parity goes deeper than how many losses are in the Top 25.

Oh, I agree. But give me a break ... I only had about a half-hour, so I had to stop at the ranked teams. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 30, 2017, 08:25:14 PM

I find it very hard to believe that a team that regularly gets to play teams with 1, 5, 6, and 7 wins is the 10th best team in the country. When they play teams with 12 or 14 wins they lose. Anxious to see how they fare in the national tournament when they have to face a good team from day one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 30, 2017, 08:29:22 PM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on January 30, 2017, 07:42:19 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 30, 2017, 12:43:41 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 30, 2017, 12:13:59 AM
Quote from: Smitty Oom on January 30, 2017, 12:09:14 AM
Is it just me or has the Others Receiving Votes teams this year been quite bad week in and week out? Now this could be a common thing I am just picking up now, just curious.

You might need to cite any specific examples.

I don't know if he is referencing any specific results, but I feel the same 'vibe'. After following the Top 25 for many years, it seems the ORV's are getting beaten up more than usual. Parity?

The only thing I can really "Cite" here is the past couple weeks...

Last week 8 of 12 teams in the ORV lost a game that week. Week before it was 4 of 10 teams. 3 weeks ago it was 7 of 13. I just think that seems high to me and yes, a tribute to the parity this year. Which is backed up by Sager's research as this is the highest avg. number of losses, although that is ranked teams and we are talking ORV.

So quoting Ypsi... it is just the "vibe" I am getting as a casual fan of the top 25 ranks.

You'd probably need to compare from year to year at the same time. It feels like this is the part of the season where ORV teams are losing to teams ranked higher in conference play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on January 30, 2017, 11:47:51 PM

Usually wouldn't throw this out there, but since it is the defending Natty Champs I will just mention that UST has looked very solid as of late and are making Tauer's patented late Jan. into playoff season charge. Their two best players returned from injuries at the halfway turn of the MIAC schedule and they have been dominant with their stellar D and consistent offense ever since. I noticed they got a couple of votes in this weeks poll for first time in a couple weeks, but I assume that they will see quite a few more votes after a big win against the other top MIAC team tonight in Bethel. Interested to see how long until/if they make the top 25 again (already swept St. John's and Bethel who are strong teams and sitting at 2nd in 3rd in the MIAC right now).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 31, 2017, 07:05:19 AM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on January 30, 2017, 11:47:51 PM
Usually wouldn't throw this out there, but since it is the defending Natty Champs I will just mention that UST has looked very solid as of late and are making Tauer's patented late Jan. into playoff season charge. Their two best players returned from injuries at the halfway turn of the MIAC schedule and they have been dominant with their stellar D and consistent offense ever since. I noticed they got a couple of votes in this weeks poll for first time in a couple weeks, but I assume that they will see quite a few more votes after a big win against the other top MIAC team tonight in Bethel. Interested to see how long until/if they make the top 25 again (already swept St. John's and Bethel who are strong teams and sitting at 2nd in 3rd in the MIAC right now).

UST was sitting #26 on my ballot. Unfortunately we only get to vote for 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: irapthor on January 31, 2017, 06:52:55 PM

St. Thomas was also among the next 5 teams I was considering...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 31, 2017, 09:10:56 PM

I had them in my final five, ten as well. Just want to see if this turn around continues. Didn't have anything compelling to put them in as of yet, but I am closely monitoring them. It would be a pretty impressive turn-around.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 31, 2017, 11:36:01 PM

Mass-Dartmouth 92 #9 Tufts 81

2 losses in a row for Tufts, at Trinity and at Amherst this weekend.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Bucket on February 01, 2017, 09:53:34 AM

Quote from: sac on January 31, 2017, 11:36:01 PM
Mass-Dartmouth 92 #9 Tufts 81

2 losses in a row for Tufts, at Trinity and at Amherst this weekend.

The Jumbos have been in a tailspin since losing Tom Palleschi, their most valuable—if not their best—player. Gut check time for Tufts as they try to figure out a way to win without him.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 01, 2017, 03:05:56 PM

Quote from: Bucket on February 01, 2017, 09:53:34 AM
Quote from: sac on January 31, 2017, 11:36:01 PM
Mass-Dartmouth 92 #9 Tufts 81

2 losses in a row for Tufts, at Trinity and at Amherst this weekend.

The Jumbos have been in a tailspin since losing Tom Palleschi, their most valuable—if not their best—player. Gut check time for Tufts as they try to figure out a way to win without him.

What happened? Out for the year?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Bucket on February 01, 2017, 03:48:56 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 01, 2017, 03:05:56 PM
Quote from: Bucket on February 01, 2017, 09:53:34 AM
Quote from: sac on January 31, 2017, 11:36:01 PM
Mass-Dartmouth 92 #9 Tufts 81

2 losses in a row for Tufts, at Trinity and at Amherst this weekend.

The Jumbos have been in a tailspin since losing Tom Palleschi, their most valuable—if not their best—player. Gut check time for Tufts as they try to figure out a way to win without him.

What happened? Out for the year?

Knee injury. Rumbling out of Medford is that there is some hope he can give it a go in 2-3 weeks, but that's just speculation at this point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 01, 2017, 11:18:31 PM

Quote from: Bucket on February 01, 2017, 03:48:56 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 01, 2017, 03:05:56 PM
Quote from: Bucket on February 01, 2017, 09:53:34 AM
Quote from: sac on January 31, 2017, 11:36:01 PM
Mass-Dartmouth 92 #9 Tufts 81

2 losses in a row for Tufts, at Trinity and at Amherst this weekend.

The Jumbos have been in a tailspin since losing Tom Palleschi, their most valuable—if not their best—player. Gut check time for Tufts as they try to figure out a way to win without him.

What happened? Out for the year?

Knee injury. Rumbling out of Medford is that there is some hope he can give it a go in 2-3 weeks, but that's just speculation at this point.

Not really a rumbling... Coach Sheldon said on Hoopsville Sunday he might be back 2-3 weeks, but it is because they still aren't positive what the injury is. He talked some-what openly about it. He didn't seem confident in his return ... and if he did return he didn't seem confident he could go 100%.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 02, 2017, 08:47:40 AM

Cracks in the Denison armor starting to show. A 1-pt loss at home to Wittenberg last week and another loss last night to OWU. Wooster this weekend. OWU, Woo and Denison at 11-2, and, according to knightslappy, their SoS is a paltry .447, which isn't going to get them very far.

http://detroitjockcity.com/division-iii-mens-basketball-regional-rankings-data/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 02, 2017, 08:58:04 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	613	Babson	19-1	won at Wheaton (Mass.), 78-64; 02/04 at WPI
#2	611	Whitman	19-0	02/03 at Pacific; 02/04 at Linfield
#3	557	Christopher Newport	18-2	won at Mary Washington, 73-63; 02/04 at St. Mary's (Md.)
#4	552	UW-River Falls	19-1	def. UW-La Crosse, 73-59; 02/04 vs. UW-Oshkosh
#5	493	Rochester	17-1	02/03 at New York University; 02/05 at Brandeis
#6	485	Washington U.	15-3	02/03 vs. Carnegie Mellon; 02/05 vs. Case Western Reserve
#7	440	Ramapo	20-1	def. Rutgers-Newark, 68-63; 02/04 at T#35 TCNJ
#8	435	Whitworth	16-3	02/03 at Linfield; 02/04 at Pacific
#9	430	Tufts	16-4	LOST at Mass-Dartmouth, 82-91; 02/03 at Trinity (Conn.); 02/04 at #11 Amherst
#10	360	St. Norbert	15-3	def. #28 Ripon, 79-62; 02/04 at Monmouth
#11	337	Amherst	14-4	~~01/31 at Rhode Island College~~ postponed; 02/03 vs. Bates; 02/04 vs. #9 Tufts
#12	321	Denison	17-3	LOST at Ohio Wesleyan, 77-82; 02/04 vs. Wooster
#13	294	Marietta	16-4	won at Mount Union, 82-75; 02/04 at Heidelberg
#14	267	Salisbury	16-4	won at Wesley, 81-70; 02/04 vs. York (Pa.)
#15	257	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	15-1	02/02 at Caltech; 02/04 vs. Redlands
#16	215	Middlebury	16-3	def. Keene State, 89-77; 02/03 at Colby; 02/04 at Bowdoin
#17	213	Neumann	19-1	def. Immaculata, 93-82; 02/04 at Centenary (N.J.)
#18	203	Benedictine	16-4	def. Aurora, 103-76; 02/02 vs. Marian; 02/04 vs. Wisconsin Lutheran
#19	191	Susquehanna	17-3	def. Juniata, 83-57; 02/04 vs. Goucher
#20	155	North Park	15-4	02/04 vs. North Central (Ill.)
#21	151	UW-Whitewater	17-3	won at UW-Platteville, 68-64; 02/04 vs. UW-Stout
#22	120	Augustana	16-4	won at Wheaton (Ill.), 59-57; 02/04 vs. Millikin
#23	112	Wesleyan	16-4	02/03 at Williams
#24	60	New Jersey City	17-4	def. Kean, 78-60; 02/04 at Rowan
#25	58	UW-Eau Claire	15-5	won at UW-Stout, 95-91; 02/04 vs. UW-Stevens Point

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	54	Hope	16-4	won at Olivet, 93-88; 02/04 at Alma
#27	53	Guilford	17-3	def. Randolph, 69-61; 02/04 at Washington and Lee
#28	21	Ripon	14-4	LOST at #10 St. Norbert, 62-79; 02/04 vs. Lake Forest
#29	16	Swarthmore	16-4	def. Muhlenberg, 70-50; 02/04 at McDaniel
T#30	9	Eastern Connecticut	14-6	02/04 at Plymouth State
T#30	9	St. Lawrence	16-3	02/03 at Hobart; 02/04 at Rochester Tech
#32	8	Hardin-Simmons	15-5	02/02 at Sul Ross State; 02/04 at Howard Payne
#33	7	Hanover	16-3	won at Transylvania, 70-69; 02/04 at Manchester
#34	5	Oswego State	15-4	02/03 vs. SUNY Potsdam; 02/04 vs. Plattsburgh State
T#35	4	Brockport	15-5	02/03 vs. SUNY Geneseo
T#35	4	TCNJ	15-6	LOST at Rowan, 74-88; 02/04 vs. #7 Ramapo
#37	3	St. Thomas	16-4	def. Bethel, 78-58; def. Gustavus Adolphus, 59-57
T#38	1	MIT	15-5	won at Springfield, 73-62; 02/04 vs. Coast Guard
T#38	1	Randolph-Macon	14-6	LOST at Hampden-Sydney, 56-63; 02/04 at Randolph

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Bucket on February 02, 2017, 01:36:04 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 01, 2017, 11:18:31 PM
Quote from: Bucket on February 01, 2017, 03:48:56 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 01, 2017, 03:05:56 PM
Quote from: Bucket on February 01, 2017, 09:53:34 AM
Quote from: sac on January 31, 2017, 11:36:01 PM
Mass-Dartmouth 92 #9 Tufts 81

2 losses in a row for Tufts, at Trinity and at Amherst this weekend.

The Jumbos have been in a tailspin since losing Tom Palleschi, their most valuable—if not their best—player. Gut check time for Tufts as they try to figure out a way to win without him.

What happened? Out for the year?

Knee injury. Rumbling out of Medford is that there is some hope he can give it a go in 2-3 weeks, but that's just speculation at this point.

Not really a rumbling... Coach Sheldon said on Hoopsville Sunday he might be back 2-3 weeks, but it is because they still aren't positive what the injury is. He talked some-what openly about it. He didn't seem confident in his return ... and if he did return he didn't seem confident he could go 100%.

And I've heard other things from other folks, as well as variations on the original theme. Thus the rumbling characterization.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 02, 2017, 01:49:15 PM

Quote from: Bucket on February 02, 2017, 01:36:04 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 01, 2017, 11:18:31 PM
Quote from: Bucket on February 01, 2017, 03:48:56 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 01, 2017, 03:05:56 PM
Quote from: Bucket on February 01, 2017, 09:53:34 AM
Quote from: sac on January 31, 2017, 11:36:01 PM
Mass-Dartmouth 92 #9 Tufts 81

2 losses in a row for Tufts, at Trinity and at Amherst this weekend.

The Jumbos have been in a tailspin since losing Tom Palleschi, their most valuable—if not their best—player. Gut check time for Tufts as they try to figure out a way to win without him.

What happened? Out for the year?

Knee injury. Rumbling out of Medford is that there is some hope he can give it a go in 2-3 weeks, but that's just speculation at this point.

Not really a rumbling... Coach Sheldon said on Hoopsville Sunday he might be back 2-3 weeks, but it is because they still aren't positive what the injury is. He talked some-what openly about it. He didn't seem confident in his return ... and if he did return he didn't seem confident he could go 100%.

And I've heard other things from other folks, as well as variations on the original theme. Thus the rumbling characterization.

Well, Coach didn't rule out the fact he could be out for the season, either, so... think it is understood. He may be back in 3-weeks, but it is on the other side of 50/50.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on February 04, 2017, 11:57:25 PM

I feel like this is hopefans job but I am going to do it anyways ;D

1   Babson (14)   18-1   613   1
2   Whitman (11)   19-0   611   2
3   Christopher N   17-2   557   3
4   UW-River Falls   18-1   552   5
5   Rochester     17-1   493   7
6   Washington U.    15-3   485   8
7   Ramapo     19-1   440   10
8   Whitworth     16-3   435   6
9   Tufts     16-3   430   4
10   St. Norbert   14-3   360   13
11   Amherst     14-4   337   14
12   Denison     17-2   321   9
13   Marietta     15-4   294   15
14   Salisbury     15-4   267   12
15   Claremont-MS   15-1   257   18
16   Middlebury   15-3   215   22
17   Neumann     18-1   213   21
18   Benedictine   15-4   203   19
19   Susquehanna   16-3   191   11
20   North Park     15-4   155   23
21   UW-Whitewater   16-3   151   24
22   Augustana     15-4   120   16
23   Wesleyan     16-4   112   25
24   New Jersey City   16-4   60   20
25   UW-Eau Claire   14-5   58   17

Highlighted are the teams that could possibly fall out of the top 25 this week... Could see 6 new teams after a couple weeks of no teams dropping out! What does everyone think about Tufts and Denison for the upcoming poll?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on February 05, 2017, 02:51:52 AM

Honestly I don't think either Tufts or Denison will fall out and possibly North Park as well. Not because I think they deserve to stay in, but because who is going to jump in?
Hope and Guilford will certainly move in, but then who else? Swarthmore perhaps, and then anyone else would have to jump from not appearing on most ballots (and garnering single digit votes if any at all) to the top 25. The next highest ranked team that didn't lose this week is Hanover.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 05, 2017, 03:08:27 PM

How They Fared (Complete)
All relevant men's games are complete for the day; the women's games will have to wait for a bit.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	613	Babson	20-1	won at Wheaton (Mass.), 78-64; won at WPI, 62-45
#2	611	Whitman	21-0	won at Pacific, 90-79; won at Linfield, 67-65
#3	557	Christopher Newport	19-2	won at Mary Washington, 73-63; won at St. Mary's (Md.), 88-61
#4	552	UW-River Falls	19-2	def. UW-La Crosse, 73-59; LOST to UW-Oshkosh, 60-65
#5	493	Rochester	19-1	won at New York University, 101-58; won at Brandeis, 78-51
#6	485	Washington U.	17-3	def. Carnegie Mellon, 93-80; def. Case Western Reserve, 102-97
#7	440	Ramapo	20-2	def. Rutgers-Newark, 68-63; LOST at T#35 TCNJ, 78-84
#8	435	Whitworth	18-3	won at Linfield, 79-63; won at Pacific, 63-58
#9	430	Tufts	17-5	LOST at Mass-Dartmouth, 82-91; won at Trinity (Conn.), 78-75 OT; LOST at #11 Amherst, 71-84
#10	360	St. Norbert	16-3	def. #28 Ripon, 79-62; won at Monmouth, 91-62
#11	337	Amherst	16-4	~~01/31 at Rhode Island College~~ postponed; def. Bates, 74-65; def. #9 Tufts, 84-71
#12	321	Denison	17-4	LOST at Ohio Wesleyan, 77-82; LOST to Wooster, 62-77
#13	294	Marietta	17-4	won at Mount Union, 82-75; won at Heidelberg, 103-90
#14	267	Salisbury	17-4	won at Wesley, 81-70; def. York (Pa.), 77-72
#15	257	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	17-1	won at Caltech, 66-61; def. Redlands, 69-64
#16	215	Middlebury	18-3	def. Keene State, 89-77; won at Colby, 84-75; won at Bowdoin, 87-57
#17	213	Neumann	20-1	def. Immaculata, 93-82; won at Centenary (N.J.), 96-73
#18	203	Benedictine	18-4	def. Aurora, 103-76; def. Marian, 106-73; def. Wisconsin Lutheran, 79-58
#19	191	Susquehanna	18-3	def. Juniata, 83-57; def. Goucher, 84-63
#20	155	North Park	15-5	LOST to North Central (Ill.), 67-73
#21	151	UW-Whitewater	18-3	won at UW-Platteville, 68-64; def. UW-Stout, 83-48
#22	120	Augustana	17-4	won at Wheaton (Ill.), 59-57; def. Millikin, 75-39
#23	112	Wesleyan	16-5	LOST at Williams, 60-62
#24	60	New Jersey City	17-5	def. Kean, 78-60; LOST at Rowan, 88-91
#25	58	UW-Eau Claire	15-6	won at UW-Stout, 95-91; LOST to UW-Stevens Point, 54-61

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	54	Hope	17-4	won at Olivet, 93-88; won at Alma, 76-71
#27	53	Guilford	18-3	def. Randolph, 69-61; won at Washington and Lee, 68-66
#28	21	Ripon	14-5	LOST at #10 St. Norbert, 62-79; LOST to Lake Forest, 73-75
#29	16	Swarthmore	17-4	def. Muhlenberg, 70-50; won at McDaniel, 89-81 OT
T#30	9	Eastern Connecticut	14-7	LOST at Plymouth State, 79-83
T#30	9	St. Lawrence	17-4	LOST at Hobart, 78-92; won at Rochester Tech, 83-74
#32	8	Hardin-Simmons	16-6	LOST at Sul Ross State, 79-83 OT; won at Howard Payne, 89-75
#33	7	Hanover	17-3	won at Transylvania, 70-69; won at Manchester, 67-58
#34	5	Oswego State	17-4	def. SUNY Potsdam, 93-60; def. Plattsburgh State, 77-75
T#35	4	Brockport	16-5	def. SUNY Geneseo, 98-79
T#35	4	TCNJ	16-6	LOST at Rowan, 74-88; def. #7 Ramapo, 84-78
#37	3	St. Thomas	16-4	def. Bethel, 78-58; def. Gustavus Adolphus, 59-57
T#38	1	MIT	16-5	won at Springfield, 73-62; def. Coast Guard, 73-63
T#38	1	Randolph-Macon	15-6	LOST at Hampden-Sydney, 56-63; won at Randolph, 85-66

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on February 06, 2017, 06:28:00 PM

New poll posted.

http://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2016-17/week10

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 07, 2017, 03:36:53 PM

Sorry to miss out the last two weeks in getting my blog posted... lots going on. However, I caught up this week. The blog includes my ballots from the last two weeks as well.

http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2017/02/07/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-10/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 08, 2017, 10:42:16 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	614	Babson	21-1	def. Springfield, 95-77; 02/11 at Clark
#2	611	Whitman	21-0	02/10 at Puget Sound; 02/11 at Pacific Lutheran
#3	568	Christopher Newport	20-2	def. Marymount, 72-52; 02/11 vs. Wesley
#4	520	Rochester	19-1	02/10 at Chicago; 02/12 at #5 Washington U.
#5	515	Washington U.	17-3	02/10 vs. Emory; 02/12 vs. #4 Rochester
#6	478	Whitworth	18-3	02/10 at Pacific Lutheran; 02/11 at Puget Sound
#7	476	UW-River Falls	20-2	won at UW-Stout, 92-51; 02/11 vs. #18 UW-Whitewater
#8	418	Amherst	16-5	LOST to #30 Wesleyan, 72-73 OT; 02/10 at #13 Middlebury; 02/11 at Hamilton
#9	411	St. Norbert	17-3	won at Lake Forest, 59-52; 02/11 at Grinnell
#10	368	Marietta	18-4	def. Capital, 94-78; 02/11 at Wilmington
#11	333	Ramapo	21-2	def. Rutgers-Camden, 87-64; 02/11 vs. #29 New Jersey City
#12	313	Salisbury	18-4	def. Penn State-Harrisburg, 83-67; 02/11 vs. Southern Virginia
#13	306	Middlebury	18-3	02/10 vs. #8 Amherst; 02/11 vs. Trinity (Conn.)
#14	300	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	17-2	LOST to Pomona-Pitzer, 61-80; 02/09 vs. Whittier; 02/11 at La Verne
#15	267	Neumann	20-2	LOST at Rosemont, 96-97 OT; 02/11 vs. Cairn
#16	245	Benedictine	19-4	won at Concordia-Chicago, 106-84; 02/11 at Edgewood
#17	226	Tufts	18-5	def. Pine Manor, 106-87; 02/10 vs. T#35 Williams
#18	211	UW-Whitewater	19-3	won at UW-Stevens Point, 56-55; 02/11 at #7 UW-River Falls
#19	203	Susquehanna	19-3	def. Catholic, 88-64; 02/11 vs. Drew
#20	173	Augustana	18-4	def. North Central (Ill.), 72-66; 02/11 at Carroll
#21	118	Hope	18-4	def. Trine, 83-76 OT; 02/11 at Adrian
#22	105	Guilford	18-4	LOST at Roanoke, 46-72; 02/11 vs. Randolph-Macon
#23	95	Denison	18-4	won at DePauw, 70-62; 02/11 at Allegheny
#24	42	Swarthmore	18-4	def. Ursinus, 84-74; 02/11 vs. Johns Hopkins
#25	37	North Park	15-6	LOST at Carthage, 88-91 2OT; 02/11 at Wheaton (Ill.)

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	36	St. Thomas	17-4	won at Hamline, 83-66; 02/11 vs. Carleton
#27	31	Hanover	18-3	def. Franklin, 92-70; 02/11 vs. Earlham
#28	28	Oswego State	17-4	02/10 at Fredonia; 02/11 at Buffalo State
#29	24	New Jersey City	18-5	def. Montclair State, 78-72; 02/11 at #11 Ramapo
#30	23	Wesleyan	17-5	won at #8 Amherst, 73-72 OT; 02/10 vs. Bowdoin; 02/11 vs. Colby
T#31	8	Brockport	16-5	02/10 at SUNY New Paltz; 02/11 at SUNY Oneonta
T#31	8	Endicott	17-5	LOST at Nichols, 87-92; 02/11 vs. Roger Williams
T#33	4	MIT	17-5	won at WPI, 68-66 OT; 02/11 vs. Wheaton (Mass.)
T#33	4	TCNJ	17-6	won at William Paterson, 90-85; 02/11 at Montclair State
T#35	2	Williams	16-6	02/10 at #17 Tufts; 02/12 at Bates
T#35	2	UW-Eau Claire	16-6	won at UW-Platteville, 83-66; 02/11 vs. UW-La Crosse
T#35	2	Wooster	16-6	def. Allegheny, 95-49; 02/11 at Ohio Wesleyan

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on February 08, 2017, 10:49:09 PM

Darryl,

That Neumann score was actually 97-96 favor Rosemont in OT. Livestats was incorrect.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 09, 2017, 09:00:45 AM

Quote from: mailsy on February 08, 2017, 10:49:09 PM
Darryl,

That Neumann score was actually 97-96 favor Rosemont in OT. Livestats was incorrect.

Fixed it - thanks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 12, 2017, 02:10:53 PM

The focus of Division III basketball now turns towards the second Regional Rankings. At the same time, conference regular seasons are wrapping up and the pressure of conference tournaments is increasing.

Teams are still trying to jockey themselves for the chance to keep playing in March, but sometimes focusing on March causes teams to lose focus of the next game. Upsets and trip-ups seem to happen often once Regional Rankings start coming out.

On Sunday night's Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave chats with teams who are hoping to remain on top of their conference standings and thus eventually punch their ticket automatically to the NCAA tournament. But what about the distractions? What about the pressures? Or has it become somewhat routine for some teams?

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio starting at 7:00 PM ET LIVE. You can watch the show on the official show page here: http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2016-17/feb12 ... or you can watch the live simulcast on Facebook Live (http://www.facebook.com/Hoopsville). If you miss the show, you can catch-up on Demand or listen to the podcasts (which will be uploaded at the conclusion of the show).

A reminder the Sunday edition of Hoopsville primarily covers the Northeast, Atlantic, South, and Central regions, but we will answer any questions about all of Division III throughout the show. You can also send your questions to the show and have them featured on the Hoopsville Mailbag segment. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com.

And please consider helping Hoopsville stay on the air like you might help your public television station. The annual fundraising campaign has less than three weeks remaining, but we are no where close to reaching our goal. Click here for more information: Hoopsville Fundraising Page (https://igg.me/at/hoopsville-fundraiser-2017/x/6029509)

Guests include (in order of appearance):
- Mark Edwards, No. 5 Washington Univ. men's coach
- Mitch Oliver, Albertus Magnus men's coach
- Judy Blinstrub, Babson women's coach (WBCA Center Court)
- Darrin Travillian, Maryville (Tenn.) women's coach
- Eric McNelley, Eastern men's coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville
Fundraiser: https://igg.me/at/hoopsville-fundraiser-2017

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D710%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3Dl9zpu%2F86525gi5c71shxxe.jpg&hash=f2b361aa447fa404a5c44d8e9ee6bc08c9b4a73d)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 12, 2017, 05:15:22 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	614	Babson	22-1	def. Springfield, 95-77; won at Clark, 77-50
#2	611	Whitman	23-0	won at Puget Sound, 92-87; won at Pacific Lutheran, 87-58
#3	568	Christopher Newport	21-2	def. Marymount, 72-52; def. Wesley, 90-50
#4	520	Rochester	20-2	LOST at Chicago, 87-90; won at #5 Washington U., 74-61
#5	515	Washington U.	18-4	def. Emory, 94-65; LOST to #4 Rochester, 61-74
#6	478	Whitworth	20-3	won at Pacific Lutheran, 72-48; won at Puget Sound, 69-62
#7	476	UW-River Falls	21-2	won at UW-Stout, 92-51; def. #18 UW-Whitewater, 68-63
#8	418	Amherst	17-6	LOST to #30 Wesleyan, 72-73 OT; LOST at #13 Middlebury, 91-106; won at Hamilton, 86-75
#9	411	St. Norbert	17-4	won at Lake Forest, 59-52; LOST at Grinnell, 87-91
#10	368	Marietta	19-4	def. Capital, 94-78; won at Wilmington, 94-79
#11	333	Ramapo	22-2	def. Rutgers-Camden, 87-64; def. #29 New Jersey City, 78-70
#12	313	Salisbury	19-4	def. Penn State-Harrisburg, 83-67; def. Southern Virginia, 77-67
#13	306	Middlebury	20-3	def. #8 Amherst, 106-91; def. Trinity (Conn.), 97-80
#14	300	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	18-3	LOST to Pomona-Pitzer, 61-80; def. Whittier, 87-67; LOST at La Verne, 68-75
#15	267	Neumann	21-2	LOST at Rosemont, 96-97 OT; def. Cairn, 103-74
#16	245	Benedictine	20-4	won at Concordia-Chicago, 106-84; won at Edgewood, 107-67
#17	226	Tufts	19-5	def. Pine Manor, 106-87; def. T#35 Williams, 93-68
#18	211	UW-Whitewater	19-4	won at UW-Stevens Point, 56-55; LOST at #7 UW-River Falls, 63-68
#19	203	Susquehanna	20-3	def. Catholic, 88-64; def. Drew, 85-74
#20	173	Augustana	18-5	def. North Central (Ill.), 72-66 OT; LOST at Carroll, 70-75
#21	118	Hope	19-4	def. Trine, 83-76 OT; won at Adrian, 82-62
#22	105	Guilford	19-4	LOST at Roanoke, 46-72; def. Randolph-Macon, 67-53
#23	95	Denison	19-4	won at DePauw, 70-62; won at Allegheny, 98-78
#24	42	Swarthmore	19-4	def. Ursinus, 84-74; def. Johns Hopkins, 70-48
#25	37	North Park	15-7	LOST at Carthage, 88-91 2OT; LOST at Wheaton (Ill.), 67-70

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	36	St. Thomas	17-5	won at Hamline, 83-66; LOST to Carleton, 63-79
#27	31	Hanover	19-3	def. Franklin, 92-70; def. Earlham, 66-53
#28	28	Oswego State	18-5	LOST at Fredonia, 75-76; won at Buffalo State, 69-68
#29	24	New Jersey City	18-6	def. Montclair State, 78-72; LOST at #11 Ramapo, 70-78
#30	23	Wesleyan	19-5	won at #8 Amherst, 73-72 OT; def. Bowdoin, 93-73; def. Colby, 82-67
T#31	8	Brockport	18-5	won at SUNY New Paltz, 84-70; won at SUNY Oneonta, 89-86
T#31	8	Endicott	18-5	LOST at Nichols, 87-92; def. Roger Williams, 101-71
T#33	4	MIT	18-5	won at WPI, 68-66 OT; def. Wheaton (Mass.), 75-67
T#33	4	TCNJ	17-7	won at William Paterson, 90-85; LOST at Montclair State, 63-70
T#35	2	Williams	17-7	LOST at #17 Tufts, 68-93; won at Bates, 65-62
T#35	2	UW-Eau Claire	17-6	won at UW-Platteville, 83-66; def. UW-La Crosse, 88-69
T#35	2	Wooster	16-7	def. Allegheny, 95-49; LOST at Ohio Wesleyan, 72-81

[edit - Monday morning]

Quote from: Darryl Nester on February 09, 2017, 09:00:45 AM
Quote from: mailsy on February 08, 2017, 10:49:09 PM
That Neumann score was actually 97-96 favor Rosemont in OT. Livestats was incorrect.
Fixed it - thanks.

Now I fixed it again -- still listed as 99-96 in the d3hoops database.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 12, 2017, 10:22:06 PM

So, I've been working for two hours to talk myself into a #25 on my ballot this week. I honestly have no idea where I'm going to go. I've never been this stumped.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on February 13, 2017, 04:09:20 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 12, 2017, 10:22:06 PM

So, I've been working for two hours to talk myself into a #25 on my ballot this week. I honestly have no idea where I'm going to go. I've never been this stumped.

Let me help you out. NJCU ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 13, 2017, 04:42:16 PM

I'll admit... the Top 25 is more confusing. I feel like it is a turnstile in terms of teams moving in and out of the ballot. The only thing I am comfortable with, and that's a stretch, is the top 7.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on February 13, 2017, 07:21:42 PM

I see the new top 25 is out.

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2016-17/week11

I see Neumann dropped a wee bit. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 14, 2017, 02:59:58 PM

My Top 25 thoughts this week: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2017/02/14/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-11/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on February 14, 2017, 04:52:58 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 14, 2017, 02:59:58 PM
My Top 25 thoughts this week: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2017/02/14/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-11/

I was a little surprised by that Chicago win over Rochester. Their schedule and record, duly noted, but two losses to Emory and two losses to Carnegie Mellon... The buzzer beater win over Case Western Reserve could not have been a closer call...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 14, 2017, 05:24:16 PM

Chicago is a very talented team that is absolutely atrocious at the free-throw line. At .617 the Maroons rank 400th out of 412 teams in D3 in free-throw shooting. Given what are otherwise outstanding shooting splits by the South Siders (.497 FG%, good for 12th in D3, and .388 trey%, good for 31st in D3), their persistent clankitude from the charity stripe is inexplicable. It's cost the Maroons at least a couple of losses (including, I admit, the one they suffered at the hands of my alma mater), and it's a very big reason why the game at CWRU and the win over Wheaton went right down to the wire.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 14, 2017, 10:56:43 PM

Ouch. That's rank, alright.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on February 14, 2017, 11:00:48 PM

Makes sense. Pat and I watched the Rochester game online and I said the Maroons would've won going away if they could hit free throws.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on February 14, 2017, 11:37:35 PM

I never could understand not being able to hit free throws. I think part of the problem is players are no longer coached to use the backboard to hit them. I sometimes think that players should learn the old Rick Barry between the knees shot. His son just broke the Florida consecutive free throw record using his dads "granny shot". I tried to teach the Stalkerette to use it, but she hasn't listened yet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Swish3 on February 15, 2017, 08:27:46 AM

Quote from: Knightstalker on February 14, 2017, 11:37:35 PM
I never could understand not being able to hit free throws. I think part of the problem is players are no longer coached to use the backboard to hit them. I sometimes think that players should learn the old Rick Barry between the knees shot. His son just broke the Florida consecutive free throw record using his dads "granny shot". I tried to teach the Stalkerette to use it, but she hasn't listened yet.

Umm, I don't know about any others, but I haven't ever heard of a coach teaching their players to shoot free throws off the backboard....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on February 15, 2017, 09:47:18 AM

Quote from: Swish3 on February 15, 2017, 08:27:46 AM
Quote from: Knightstalker on February 14, 2017, 11:37:35 PM
I never could understand not being able to hit free throws. I think part of the problem is players are no longer coached to use the backboard to hit them. I sometimes think that players should learn the old Rick Barry between the knees shot. His son just broke the Florida consecutive free throw record using his dads "granny shot". I tried to teach the Stalkerette to use it, but she hasn't listened yet.

Umm, I don't know about any others, but I haven't ever heard of a coach teaching their players to shoot free throws off the backboard....

Well when I played youth basketball and freshman basketball back in the 70's we were coached to use the backboard on free throws. We were coached to use the backboard on all shots, layups, jump shots and free throws. There was no thing as "nothing but net" for us. Of course that was also when high school final scores were quite often 21-18. There was no 3 point shot except in the ABA, we ran half court offenses almost exclusively and played grind it out games and you needed your basketball helmet and shoulder pads.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Swish3 on February 15, 2017, 10:06:21 AM

Quote from: Knightstalker on February 15, 2017, 09:47:18 AM
Quote from: Swish3 on February 15, 2017, 08:27:46 AM
Quote from: Knightstalker on February 14, 2017, 11:37:35 PM
I never could understand not being able to hit free throws. I think part of the problem is players are no longer coached to use the backboard to hit them. I sometimes think that players should learn the old Rick Barry between the knees shot. His son just broke the Florida consecutive free throw record using his dads "granny shot". I tried to teach the Stalkerette to use it, but she hasn't listened yet.

Umm, I don't know about any others, but I haven't ever heard of a coach teaching their players to shoot free throws off the backboard....

Well when I played youth basketball and freshman basketball back in the 70's we were coached to use the backboard on free throws. We were coached to use the backboard on all shots, layups, jump shots and free throws. There was no thing as "nothing but net" for us. Of course that was also when high school final scores were quite often 21-18. There was no 3 point shot except in the ABA, we ran half court offenses almost exclusively and played grind it out games and you needed your basketball helmet and shoulder pads.

Players should absolutely use the backboard from a 45 degree angle, but using it from straight on seems odd to me...anyway, I enjoyed your commentary...always fun to reminisce!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on February 15, 2017, 10:18:27 AM

Quote from: Knightstalker on February 15, 2017, 09:47:18 AM
Well when I played youth basketball and freshman basketball back in the 70's we were coached to use the backboard on free throws. We were coached to use the backboard on all shots, layups, jump shots and free throws.

This was true in the mid 80's as well.

To your point about the lower hand free throw, maybe if the coaches punished players who shot below the team benchmark for free throw percentage to use only that technique in subsequent practices, players would work harder to practice and execute free throws.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on February 15, 2017, 10:26:50 AM

Quote from: WUH on February 15, 2017, 10:18:27 AM
Quote from: Knightstalker on February 15, 2017, 09:47:18 AM
Well when I played youth basketball and freshman basketball back in the 70's we were coached to use the backboard on free throws. We were coached to use the backboard on all shots, layups, jump shots and free throws.

This was true in the mid 80's as well.

To your point about the lower hand free throw, maybe if the coaches punished players who shot below the team benchmark for free throw percentage to use only that technique in subsequent practices, players would work harder to practice and execute free throws.

When I first started to play basketball my mom taught me the granny shot. That is how girls basketball players shot free throws in the early 40's when she was in high school. That was also when girls were not allowed to play interscholastic sports just intramural sports. My mom was a good athlete back then, my uncles used to talk about how some boys would get pissed off at her because she was picked before them for baseball and basketball pick up games. She also taught me how to hit a baseball. Dad couldn't hit a baseball well, but he could hammer a spaldine. He grew up in Brooklyn playing stick ball.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on February 15, 2017, 10:48:19 AM

Quote from: Knightstalker on February 15, 2017, 10:26:50 AM
When I first started to play basketball my mom taught me the granny shot. That is how girls basketball players shot free throws in the early 40's when she was in high school. That was also when girls were not allowed to play interscholastic sports just intramural sports. My mom was a good athlete back then, my uncles used to talk about how some boys would get pissed off at her because she was picked before them for baseball and basketball pick up games.

That is an awesome story...

I had a chance to follow a high school girls program for a few years...I still remember the first game I watched. I know I was not the only one thinking this is not how girls are supposed to play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on February 15, 2017, 10:48:47 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 14, 2017, 05:24:16 PM
It's cost the Maroons at least a couple of losses (including, I admit, the one they suffered at the hands of my alma mater), and it's a very big reason why the game at CWRU and the win over Wheaton went right down to the wire.

I can agree that free throw shooting can be a deciding factor in games...

There are games such as Rochester-Rochester Tech which was decided by two free throws awarded as the clock expired. Then, there is Chicago-Case Western in which Chicago shot 11-32 from the line. And, the box score does not record those missed opportunities at the line.

As the games get closer though, the art and science of the discussion gets much more difficult...

For example, look at Washington University vs. Chicago in which the Maroons shot 55% on 5-9 shooting. Even if we were to account for the additional second chances that an 80% shooting effort would have added, we are left guessing how both teams would have played the last minute and the last 10 minutes for that matter as teams adjust to the score.

Not saying anything you don't already know, just saying...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 15, 2017, 01:07:25 PM

That's why I was only specific about one loss, the defeat at the hands of NPU on opening night. The Maroons went 12-23 (52%) from the line in that game and lost it when the Vikings came back from a five-point deficit in the final 12 seconds, culminating in their hitting the game-winner on a stepback fadeaway trey that was in midair when the buzzer went off. Chicago missed two free throws in the final 31 seconds of that game, so it's pretty evident that poor Maroons free-throw shooting was what caused the game to be even slightly winnable for NPU in those final 12 seconds.

There are three other Chicago losses in which halfway-decent FT shooting by Mike McGrath's boys would have at least shaped the endgame differently and could have led to a Maroons win. You mentioned the Wash U game, and to that I would add the road loss at Rochester (the Maroons missed the front end of a one-and-one while up by three with three and a half minutes left, and then a minute later missed another front end of a one-and-one while down by two) and the overtime loss at home to Carnegie Mellon (the Maroons went 4-10 from the stripe in the second half). Between those three losses, it's reasonable to guess that Chicago would've won at least one of them, if not more.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 16, 2017, 02:29:35 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

Wow ... I ran this report last night, copied it, previewed it ... but must have forgotten to hit post. Ah, well, better late than never.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	614	Babson	23-1	def. Coast Guard, 103-88; 02/18 vs. #28 MIT
#2	611	Whitman	23-0	02/17 vs. Lewis and Clark; 02/18 vs. George Fox
#3	573	Christopher Newport	22-2	won at Southern Virginia, 69-45; 02/18 at York (Pa.)
#4	528	UW-River Falls	21-3	LOST at #31 UW-Eau Claire, 80-83; 02/18 at UW-Platteville
#5	520	Whitworth	20-3	02/17 vs. George Fox; 02/18 vs. Lewis and Clark
#6	483	Rochester	20-2	02/17 vs. Carnegie Mellon; 02/19 vs. Case Western Reserve
#7	450	Washington U.	18-4	02/17 at New York University; 02/19 at Brandeis
#8	431	Ramapo	23-2	won at Rowan, 90-71
#9	426	Marietta	20-4	def. Muskingum, 94-76; 02/18 vs. T#34 Ohio Northern
#10	410	Middlebury	21-3	won at Plattsburgh State, 91-70; 02/18 vs. Bates
#11	373	Salisbury	19-5	LOST at St. Mary's (Md.), 73-85; 02/18 at Frostburg State
#12	320	Benedictine	20-4	02/18 vs. Lakeland
#13	295	Tufts	19-5	02/18 vs. Hamilton
#14	290	St. Norbert	18-4	def. Lake Forest, 64-58; 02/18 vs. Beloit
#15	281	Susquehanna	20-4	LOST at Scranton, 66-75; 02/18 at Elizabethtown
#16	247	Hope	20-4	def. Kalamazoo, 72-65; 02/18 vs. Calvin
#17	199	UW-Whitewater	19-5	LOST to UW-Oshkosh, 63-67; 02/18 vs. #31 UW-Eau Claire
#18	194	Amherst	17-6	02/18 vs. Williams
#19	165	Denison	20-4	def. Hiram, 80-66; 02/18 vs. Wabash
#20	137	Neumann	22-2	def. Cabrini, 73-69; 02/18 at Marywood
#21	130	Swarthmore	20-4	won at Haverford, 86-63; 02/18 at Franklin and Marshall
#22	88	Hanover	20-3	won at Mount St. Joseph, 72-64; 02/18 at Bluffton
#23	84	Augustana	18-5	02/18 at North Park
#24	83	Wesleyan	19-5	02/18 vs. Trinity (Conn.)
#25	59	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	18-3	02/16 vs. Cal Lutheran; 02/18 vs. Chapman

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	47	Guilford	19-5	LOST to Emory and Henry, 60-65; 02/18 at Bridgewater (Va.)
#27	18	New Jersey City	19-6	def. Stockton, 73-63
#28	17	MIT	19-5	def. Emerson, 74-70 OT; 02/18 at #1 Babson
#29	14	Brockport	18-5	02/17 vs. Cortland; 02/18 vs. #32 Oswego State
#30	10	Ohio Wesleyan	18-6	won at Wittenberg, 72-70; 02/18 at Allegheny
#31	8	UW-Eau Claire	18-6	def. #4 UW-River Falls, 83-80; 02/18 at #17 UW-Whitewater
#32	5	Oswego State	18-5	02/17 at SUNY Geneseo; 02/18 at #29 Brockport
#33	4	John Carroll	17-6	won at Heidelberg, 88-75; 02/18 vs. Capital
T#34	2	Endicott	19-5	def. Salve Regina, 79-44; 02/18 vs. Western New England
T#34	2	Illinois Wesleyan	16-7	LOST at Wheaton (Ill.), 67-81; 02/18 vs. North Central (Ill.)
T#34	2	Ohio Northern	16-8	def. Otterbein, 98-55; 02/18 at #9 Marietta
T#34	2	St. John Fisher	18-5	def. Elmira, 75-63; 02/17 at Stevens; 02/18 at Hartwick
T#34	2	St. Thomas	18-6	LOST at St. Olaf, 65-74; def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 65-57; 02/18 at Concordia-Moorhead
#39	1	Carleton	16-8	def. Concordia-Moorhead, 84-58; won at St. Olaf, 67-49; 02/18 at Gustavus Adolphus

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 16, 2017, 06:43:46 PM

The Division III season has officially entered "Crunch Time." Regular season schedules are wrapping up, conference tournaments are about to begin, teams are jockeying for conference position or trying to win home-court advantage. And it is all happening the uncertainty of whether NCAA tournament berths are available for a lot of teams.

On Thursday night's Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave McHugh not only takes another look at this week's Regional Rankings, but also tries to read the tea leaves. He also chats with four teams that all still have something to play for. Whether it is to better position themselves in the eyes of the NCAA committees or just to turn more heads in their conference tournament, these teams are still pushing to continue their seasons.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio starting at 7:00 PM ET LIVE. You can watch the show on the official show page here: http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2016-17/feb16 ... or you can watch the live simulcast on Facebook Live (http://www.facebook.com/Hoopsville). If you miss the show, you can catch-up on Demand or listen to the podcasts (which will be uploaded at the conclusion of the show).

A reminder the Thursday edition of Hoopsville primarily covers the East, Mid-Atlantic, Great Lakes, and West regions, but we will answer any questions about all of Division III throughout the show. You can also send your questions to the show and have them featured on the Hoopsville Mailbag segment. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com.

And please consider helping Hoopsville stay on the air like you might help your public television station. The annual fundraising campaign has less than three weeks remaining, but we are no where close to reaching our goal. Click here for more information: Hoopsville Fundraising Page (https://igg.me/at/hoopsville-fundraiser-2017/x/6029509)

Guests include (in order of appearance):
- Michael Meek, No. 24 George Fox women's coach
- Katherine Bixby, Dickinson women's coach
- Greg Mitchell, No. 16 Hope men's coach
- Rob Kornaker, St. John Fisher men's coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville
Fundraiser: https://igg.me/at/hoopsville-fundraiser-2017

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D710%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3Dlhl4x%2F4z02xle8ples8o79.jpg&hash=713fd03ae5aa5b62527b16c7f48ebea9d8407d06)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 17, 2017, 01:29:42 AM

Cal Lutheran 61 #25 Claremont MS 58

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 17, 2017, 08:09:08 AM

Quote from: sac on February 17, 2017, 01:29:42 AM
Cal Lutheran 61 #25 Claremont MS 58

Three out of four now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on February 19, 2017, 01:47:25 PM

SUNDAYS IN THE UAA!

7-16 (2-10) CASE WESTERN RESERVE KNOCKS OFF NO. 6 ROCHESTER, 76-72.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 19, 2017, 05:35:20 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	614	Babson	24-1	def. Coast Guard, 103-88; def. #28 MIT, 70-67
#2	611	Whitman	25-0	def. Lewis and Clark, 97-73; def. George Fox, 109-95
#3	573	Christopher Newport	23-2	won at Southern Virginia, 69-45; won at York (Pa.), 70-59
#4	528	UW-River Falls	22-3	LOST at #31 UW-Eau Claire, 80-83; won at UW-Platteville, 65-61
#5	520	Whitworth	22-3	def. George Fox, 91-70; def. Lewis and Clark, 82-73
#6	483	Rochester	21-3	def. Carnegie Mellon, 82-67; LOST to Case Western Reserve, 72-76
#7	450	Washington U.	20-4	won at New York University, 91-66; won at Brandeis, 95-91
#8	431	Ramapo	23-2	won at Rowan, 90-71
#9	426	Marietta	21-4	def. Muskingum, 94-76; def. T#34 Ohio Northern, 100-85
#10	410	Middlebury	22-3	won at Plattsburgh State, 91-70; def. Bates, 88-84
#11	373	Salisbury	19-6	LOST at St. Mary's (Md.), 73-85; LOST at Frostburg State, 80-86 OT
#12	320	Benedictine	21-4	def. Lakeland, 78-67
#13	295	Tufts	20-5	def. Hamilton, 81-63
#14	290	St. Norbert	19-4	def. Lake Forest, 64-58; def. Beloit, 73-62
#15	281	Susquehanna	21-4	LOST at Scranton, 66-75; won at Elizabethtown, 82-69
#16	247	Hope	20-5	def. Kalamazoo, 72-65; LOST to Calvin, 62-65 OT
#17	199	UW-Whitewater	20-5	LOST to UW-Oshkosh, 63-67; def. #31 UW-Eau Claire, 70-68 OT
#18	194	Amherst	17-7	LOST to Williams, 69-76
#19	165	Denison	21-4	def. Hiram, 80-66; def. Wabash, 76-65
#20	137	Neumann	23-2	def. Cabrini, 73-69; won at Marywood, 86-66
#21	130	Swarthmore	20-5	won at Haverford, 86-63; LOST at Franklin and Marshall, 66-93
#22	88	Hanover	21-3	won at Mount St. Joseph, 72-64; won at Bluffton, 65-64
#23	84	Augustana	18-6	LOST at North Park, 82-87 OT
#24	83	Wesleyan	19-6	LOST to Trinity (Conn.), 49-51
#25	59	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	19-4	LOST to Cal Lutheran, 58-61; def. Chapman, 62-50

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	47	Guilford	20-5	LOST to Emory and Henry, 60-65; won at Bridgewater (Va.), 63-57
#27	18	New Jersey City	20-6	def. Stockton, 73-63; def. Stockton, 97-87
#28	17	MIT	19-6	def. Emerson, 74-70 OT; LOST at #1 Babson, 67-70
#29	14	Brockport	19-6	LOST to Cortland, 74-79; def. #32 Oswego State, 80-75
#30	10	Ohio Wesleyan	19-6	won at Wittenberg, 72-70; won at Allegheny, 110-55
#31	8	UW-Eau Claire	18-7	def. #4 UW-River Falls, 83-80; LOST at #17 UW-Whitewater, 68-70 OT
#32	5	Oswego State	19-6	won at SUNY Geneseo, 80-75; LOST at #29 Brockport, 75-80
#33	4	John Carroll	17-7	won at Heidelberg, 88-75; LOST to Capital, 75-76
T#34	2	Endicott	20-5	def. Salve Regina, 79-44; def. Western New England, 84-72
T#34	2	Illinois Wesleyan	16-8	LOST at Wheaton (Ill.), 67-81; LOST to North Central (Ill.), 80-82 OT
T#34	2	Ohio Northern	16-9	def. Otterbein, 98-55; LOST at #9 Marietta, 85-100
T#34	2	St. John Fisher	20-5	def. Elmira, 75-63; won at Stevens, 94-86 OT; won at Hartwick, 90-88 OT
T#34	2	St. Thomas	19-6	LOST at St. Olaf, 65-74; def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 65-57; won at Concordia-Moorhead, 81-70
#39	1	Carleton	17-8	def. Concordia-Moorhead, 84-58; won at St. Olaf, 67-49; won at Gustavus Adolphus, 63-60

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 19, 2017, 06:11:47 PM

Wow. The poll's bottom four, and eight of the bottom eleven, all lost last week ... and none of them lost to a fellow ranked team. In fact, none of them lost to a team that was even in the ORV category.

Speaking of which, nine of the fourteen ORV teams lost last week, one of them (Illinois Wesleyan) twice. And only three of those nine ORV teams that lost fell victim to a ranked team, although one of them lost to a fellow ORV team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 19, 2017, 08:21:50 PM

Ran out of time today to get this out before the show started, but taking care if it now while I have the opportunity (during the show).

The time is now. Teams who want or think they should be playing in March need to get the job done now. This week all conferences, except the UAA, will dive into conference tournaments to determine who will win an automatic bid to the NCAA Championship Tournament. For those who can't win the AQ, then they have to make sure to present the best resume possible to the national committees and that means taking care of business the best they can.

Who is in and who is out? We will figure that out over the course of next week and on next week's Hoopsville Special. In the meantime on tonight's Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave McHugh talks to a few teams who are looking to position themselves to be in the conversation. We also preview many of the conference races and look at who may already be in trouble when it comes to playing basketball in March.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio starting LIVE at 7:00 PM ET. You can watch the show in the video player above or via the simulcast on Facebook Live. If you missed the show, you can catch up On Demand in the video player or listen to the podcasts located to the right (available after the show is off the air).

A reminder the Sunday edition of Hoopsville primarily covers the Northeast, Atlantic, South, and Central regions, but we will answer any questions about all of Division III throughout the show. You can also send your questions to the show and have them featured on the Hoopsville Mailbag segment. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com.

And please consider helping Hoopsville stay on the air like you might help your public television station. The annual fundraising campaign has less than three weeks remaining, but we are no where close to reaching our goal. Click here for more information: Hoopsville Fundraising Page (https://igg.me/at/hoopsville-fundraiser-2017/x/6029509)

Guests scheduled (in order of appearance):
- Mia Smith, Illinois Wesleyan women's coach
- Stan Bonewitz, Concordia (Texas) men's coach
- Matt Ducharme, Mass-Dartmouth women's coach
- Andrea Kendall, Randolph women's coach (WBCA Center Court)
- Tim McDonald, Cabrini men's coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville
Fundraiser: https://igg.me/at/hoopsville-fundraiser-2017

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D710%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3Dln4m3%2Fi1j4ezki4963qtmg.jpg&hash=e73df38ca84148ed8b0d8152604441c2ab195c8b)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on February 20, 2017, 12:28:30 AM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on February 19, 2017, 05:35:20 PM
How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#1 614 Babson 24-1 def. Coast Guard, 103-88; def. #28 MIT, 70-67
#2 611 Whitman 25-0 def. Lewis and Clark, 97-73; def. George Fox, 109-95
#3 573 Christopher Newport 23-2 won at Southern Virginia, 69-45; won at York (Pa.), 70-59
#4 528 UW-River Falls 22-3 LOST at #31 UW-Eau Claire, 80-83; won at UW-Platteville, 65-61
#5 520 Whitworth 22-3 def. George Fox, 91-70; def. Lewis and Clark, 82-73
#6 483 Rochester 21-3 def. Carnegie Mellon, 82-67; LOST to Case Western Reserve, 72-76
#7 450 Washington U. 20-4 won at New York University, 91-66; won at Brandeis, 95-91
#8 431 Ramapo 23-2 won at Rowan, 90-71
#9 426 Marietta 21-4 def. Muskingum, 94-76; def. T#34 Ohio Northern, 100-85
#10 410 Middlebury 22-3 won at Plattsburgh State, 91-70; def. Bates, 88-84
#11 373 Salisbury 19-6 LOST at St. Mary's (Md.), 73-85; LOST at Frostburg State, 80-86 OT
#12 320 Benedictine 21-4 def. Lakeland, 78-67
#13 295 Tufts 20-5 def. Hamilton, 81-63
#14 290 St. Norbert 19-4 def. Lake Forest, 64-58; def. Beloit, 73-62
#15 281 Susquehanna 21-4 LOST at Scranton, 66-75; won at Elizabethtown, 82-69
#16 247 Hope 20-5 def. Kalamazoo, 72-65; LOST to Calvin, 62-65 OT
#17 199 UW-Whitewater 20-5 LOST to UW-Oshkosh, 63-67; def. #31 UW-Eau Claire, 70-68 OT
#18 194 Amherst 17-7 LOST to Williams, 69-76
#19 165 Denison 21-4 def. Hiram, 80-66; def. Wabash, 76-65
#20 137 Neumann 23-2 def. Cabrini, 73-69; won at Marywood, 86-66
#21 130 Swarthmore 20-5 won at Haverford, 86-63; LOST at Franklin and Marshall, 66-93
#22 88 Hanover 21-3 won at Mount St. Joseph, 72-64; won at Bluffton, 65-64
#23 84 Augustana 18-6 LOST at North Park, 82-87 OT
#24 83 Wesleyan 19-6 LOST to Trinity (Conn.), 49-51
#25 59 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps 19-4 LOST to Cal Lutheran, 58-61; def. Chapman, 62-50

Others receiving votes
Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#26 47 Guilford 20-5 LOST to Emory and Henry, 60-65; won at Bridgewater (Va.), 63-57
#27 18 New Jersey City 20-6 def. Stockton, 73-63; def. Stockton, 97-87
#28 17 MIT 19-6 def. Emerson, 74-70 OT; LOST at #1 Babson, 67-70
#29 14 Brockport 19-6 LOST to Cortland, 74-79; def. #32 Oswego State, 80-75
#30 10 Ohio Wesleyan 19-6 won at Wittenberg, 72-70; won at Allegheny, 110-55
#31 8 UW-Eau Claire 18-7 def. #4 UW-River Falls, 83-80; LOST at #17 UW-Whitewater, 68-70 OT
#32 5 Oswego State 19-6 won at SUNY Geneseo, 80-75; LOST at #29 Brockport, 75-80
#33 4 John Carroll 17-7 won at Heidelberg, 88-75; LOST to Capital, 75-76
T#34 2 Endicott 20-5 def. Salve Regina, 79-44; def. Western New England, 84-72
T#34 2 Illinois Wesleyan 16-8 LOST at Wheaton (Ill.), 67-81; LOST to North Central (Ill.), 80-82 OT
T#34 2 Ohio Northern 16-9 def. Otterbein, 98-55; LOST at #9 Marietta, 85-100
T#34 2 St. John Fisher 20-5 def. Elmira, 75-63; won at Stevens, 94-86 OT; won at Hartwick, 90-88 OT
T#34 2 St. Thomas 19-6 LOST at St. Olaf, 65-74; def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 65-57; won at Concordia-Moorhead, 81-70
#39 1 Carleton 17-8 def. Concordia-Moorhead, 84-58; won at St. Olaf, 67-49; won at Gustavus Adolphus, 63-60

Will be interesting to see what happens to Carleton in the polls today...They have to be one of the hottest teams in the nation currently. They will be on more ballots for sure this week around but will it be enough to get into the top 25? Probably not, but a strong case could (and should IMO) be made for them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 20, 2017, 01:43:04 AM

While exceptions could be made for Belt^TH holders who pulled obvious upsets and then almost immediately lost It^TM, anyone who has successfully defended The Belt^{TM /sup] (sorry - by decree of Just Bill, as long as Carleton can succeed in defense, it shall be known as The Goat Belt^TM) as many times as they have should not just be in the top 25 but probably the top 10! ;D}

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2017, 06:19:39 PM

New Top 25 is out: http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2016-17/week12

And because I needed to get ahead of things (and the wife could take care of the kids today), here is my blog already done! http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2017/02/20/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-12/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 20, 2017, 07:03:51 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 20, 2017, 01:43:04 AM
While exceptions could be made for Belt^TH holders who pulled obvious upsets and then almost immediately lost It^TM, anyone who has successfully defended The Belt^{TM /sup] (sorry - by decree of Just Bill, as long as Carleton can succeed in defense, it shall be known as The Goat Belt^TM ) as many times as they have should not just be in the top 25 but probably the top 10! ;D}

The Goat Belt^TM is not getting proper respect! :o ;D At least Carleton did rise from 1 point to 8 points.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on February 20, 2017, 10:13:50 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 20, 2017, 07:03:51 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 20, 2017, 01:43:04 AM
While exceptions could be made for Belt^TH holders who pulled obvious upsets and then almost immediately lost It^TM, anyone who has successfully defended The Belt^{TM /sup] (sorry - by decree of Just Bill, as long as Carleton can succeed in defense, it shall be known as The Goat Belt^TM ) as many times as they have should not just be in the top 25 but probably the top 10! ;D}

The Goat Belt^TM is not getting proper respect! :o ;D At least Carleton did rise from 1 point to 8 points.

Could not agree more!! The Goat Belt^TM has been playing some punishing D and rebounding at an unbelievable clip, both things will get you far this time of the year. Interestingly enough Bethel also had 9 votes, topping MIAC foes Carleton with only 8 and St. Thomas with 2.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: txg on February 21, 2017, 06:36:13 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2017, 06:19:39 PM
And because I needed to get ahead of things (and the wife could take care of the kids today), here is my blog already done! http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2017/02/20/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-12/

I had to check and make sure Swarthmore didn't change their name, but they are still the Garnet.

True story, back a few decades there was a mild push to change the team name to the Swarming Earthworms, because earthworms is an anagram of Swarthmore. Fortunately (or perhaps tragically) this never materialized.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 21, 2017, 11:25:24 AM

Quote from: txg on February 21, 2017, 06:36:13 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2017, 06:19:39 PM
And because I needed to get ahead of things (and the wife could take care of the kids today), here is my blog already done! http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2017/02/20/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-12/

I had to check and make sure Swarthmore didn't change their name, but they are still the Garnet.

True story, back a few decades there was a mild push to change the team name to the Swarming Earthworms, because earthworms is an anagram of Swarthmore. Fortunately (or perhaps tragically) this never materialized.

Yeah - haven't fixed that, yet... I am struggling with the "S" teams apparently this week more than I realized. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on February 21, 2017, 03:12:17 PM

Waiting to see what #11 Benedictine (21-4) and #13 St. Norbert (19-4) do once they get into the national tournament and have to play teams outside of their very weak conferences. I'm not saying either BU or StN isn't a decent team. However, by playing in the NACC, where 7 of the other 10 teams do not have winning records, BU gets to rack up a high number of basically automatic wins. Likewise, StN enjoys dominating the equally weak MWC where teams are limited to 23 regular season games, and 6 of the other 9 teams will finish at .500 or below. The #3 seed in the Midwest Conference tournament has only a 12-11 record, and will almost assuredly lose it's 1st round game to finish the season at a robust .500.
If either BU or STN played in conferences such as the CCIW, WIAC, or NESCAC, they would be middle of the pack teams, and wouldn't be enjoying national #11 and #13 rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on February 21, 2017, 04:27:26 PM

Same goes for Neumann. Other than Cabrini and Gwynedd Mercy, the CSAC is even weaker than those two conferences.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HSHOOP on February 21, 2017, 06:30:27 PM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on February 20, 2017, 10:13:50 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 20, 2017, 07:03:51 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 20, 2017, 01:43:04 AM
While exceptions could be made for Belt^TH holders who pulled obvious upsets and then almost immediately lost It^TM, anyone who has successfully defended The Belt^{TM /sup] (sorry - by decree of Just Bill, as long as Carleton can succeed in defense, it shall be known as The Goat Belt^TM ) as many times as they have should not just be in the top 25 but probably the top 10! ;D}

The Goat Belt^TM is not getting proper respect! :o ;D At least Carleton did rise from 1 point to 8 points.

Could not agree more!! The Goat Belt^TM has been playing some punishing D and rebounding at an unbelievable clip, both things will get you far this time of the year. Interestingly enough Bethel also had 9 votes, topping MIAC foes Carleton with only 8 and St. Thomas with 2.

Interesting indeed considering St. Thomas beat Bethel twice, has a better record than Carleton and went 5-1 against the top 4 seeds while Carleton went 3-3 against top 4 MIAC Seeds and Bethel went 1-5 against the same top MIAC teams.(St. Thomas seeded 1 in MIAC playoffs)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 23, 2017, 09:18:36 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	615	Babson	24-1	02/25 vs. Springfield; 02/26 vs. NEWMAC Tournament Finals
#2	610	Whitman	25-0	02/23 vs. George Fox
#3	573	Christopher Newport	23-2	02/23 vs. Marymount
#4	518	Whitworth	22-3	02/23 vs. Linfield
#5	492	Washington U.	20-4	02/25 vs. Chicago
#6	489	UW-River Falls	22-3	02/23 vs. UW-La Crosse
#7	476	Ramapo	24-2	def. Rowan, 110-101; 02/24 vs. #21 New Jersey City
#8	458	Marietta	22-4	def. Heidelberg, 94-80 OT; 02/23 vs. Mount Union
#9	446	Middlebury	22-3	02/25 vs. Trinity (Conn.)
#10	400	Rochester	21-3	02/25 at Emory
#11	374	Benedictine	21-4	02/24 vs. Wisconsin Lutheran
#12	349	Tufts	20-5	02/25 vs. T#35 Williams
#13	326	St. Norbert	19-4	02/24 vs. Lake Forest
#14	252	Denison	22-4	def. DePauw, 85-79; 02/24 vs. Wooster
#15	251	Neumann	24-2	def. Rosemont, 87-69; 02/25 vs. Gwynedd Mercy
#16	240	Hanover	21-3	02/25 vs. TBA
#17	207	Susquehanna	21-5	LOST at Moravian, 69-81
#18	204	Hope	20-5	02/24 vs. Alma; 02/25 vs. TBA (MIAA)
#19	158	UW-Whitewater	21-5	def. UW-Stout, 78-69; 02/23 at UW-Oshkosh
#20	123	Salisbury	19-6	02/23 vs. York (Pa.); 02/25 vs. TBD
#21	86	New Jersey City	21-6	won at TCNJ, 77-69; 02/24 at #7 Ramapo
#22	70	Ohio Wesleyan	20-6	def. Kenyon, 89-81; 02/24 vs. Wittenberg
#23	67	Amherst	17-7	IDLE
#24	50	Augustana	18-7	LOST at Illinois Wesleyan, 77-107; 02/24 vs. North Park
#25	42	Lycoming	22-4	def. Lebanon Valley, 88-64; 02/25 vs. Albright

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	38	Swarthmore	20-5	02/24 vs. Ursinus
#27	36	St. John Fisher	20-5	02/24 vs. Nazareth
#28	31	Endicott	21-5	def. Salve Regina, 110-64; 02/23 vs. Eastern Nazarene; 02/25 at CCC Championship
#29	28	Wesleyan	19-6	IDLE
#30	25	UW-Eau Claire	18-8	LOST to UW-La Crosse, 66-76
#31	21	MIT	19-6	02/25 vs. WPI
#32	18	Guilford	20-5	02/23 vs. Hampden-Sydney
T#33	9	Albertus Magnus	21-4	def. Anna Maria, 92-67; 02/23 vs. Mount Ida
T#33	9	Bethel	19-6	02/23 vs. T#35 Carleton
T#35	8	Carleton	18-8	def. Augsburg, 66-63; 02/23 at T#33 Bethel
T#35	8	Williams	18-7	02/25 at #12 Tufts
T#37	4	Brockport	19-6	02/24 vs. SUNY Oneonta
T#37	4	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	20-4	won at Occidental, 70-66 OT; 02/24 vs. Pomona-Pitzer
T#37	4	Staten Island	20-6	def. (n) Baruch, 71-54; 02/24 at CCNY
T#40	2	Scranton	20-6	def. Catholic, 75-68; 02/25 vs. Moravian
T#40	2	St. Thomas	19-6	02/23 vs. St. John's
T#42	1	Hardin-Simmons	19-6	02/23 vs. East Texas Baptist; 02/24 vs. TBD; 02/25 vs. TBD
T#42	1	Ripon	18-5	02/24 vs. Cornell

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 23, 2017, 03:26:53 PM

I still think Benedictine is better than some think. They lost to SNC by 1, to an NCC team with Raridon, by 3, to Menlo by 2 and to conference foe Concordia (WI) by 3. They are a veteran team and I think they'll do well in the NCAAs, if they get the Pool A.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 23, 2017, 05:56:58 PM

We are midway through what is always the craziest week of the entire season. Teams are already hitting the at-large bubble and that is already popping some other team's hopes of making the NCAA tournament. Upsets are everywhere and it promises to continue.

Tonight on Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave not only recaps the crazy week, but looks ahead at what might happen this weekend. Plus, Dave and others will look at the last regular season Regional Rankings and try and start reading the tea leaves. Just who may be safe and who already is in trouble on plans to be playing in March.

Dave will also talk to a few teams making waves. The Union men's program is in their first conference finals in 11 years and helping turn the East Region on its head. Plus the winner of tonight's York (Pa.) at No. 20 Salisbury men's game will join us live to talk about the game. And a few reports from varying areas along with questions from fans.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch the show live starting at 7:00 PM ET in the video player above or on our Facebook Live simulcast. If you missed any of the show, you can watch it On Demand or listen to the podcasts located to the right (available after the show is off the air).

We will answer any questions about all of Division III throughout the show. You can also send your questions to the show and have them featured on the Hoopsville Mailbag segment or simply answer immediately on air. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com. You can also tweet them to us.

And please consider helping Hoopsville stay on the air like you might help your public television station. The annual fundraising campaign has less than three weeks remaining, but we are no where close to reaching our goal. Click here for more information: Hoopsville Fundraising Page (https://igg.me/at/hoopsville-fundraiser-2017)

Guests scheduled (in order of appearance):
- Chris Murphy, Union men's coach
- James Wagner, Atlantic Region Report
- Salisbury or York (Pa.) winning coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville
Fundraiser: https://igg.me/at/hoopsville-fundraiser-2017

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D710%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3Dlumdn%2F1fcxz1zynec58nrz.jpg&hash=6ba504f5598b6c7fc0b161d81c5ea05b8c98bf8b)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 24, 2017, 07:58:59 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 23, 2017, 03:26:53 PM
I still think Benedictine is better than some think. They lost to SNC by 1, to an NCC team with Raridon, by 3, to Menlo by 2 and to conference foe Concordia (WI) by 3. They are a veteran team and I think they'll do well in the NCAAs, if they get the Pool A.

Benedictine has three fantastic players in Harvey, Blaczyzk, and Reynolds. I watched them in Salem last year and told Pat and Dave then I thought they could get back, even losing Luke Johnson. Those guys can play. Now, obviously, that part of the country makes just about every Final Four run a miracle because of the depth and challenge, so they could just as easily lose first round, but I wouldn't be surprised to see them in Salem again either.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AppletonRocks on February 24, 2017, 08:44:08 AM

Ryan,

I have been chastised for thinking being really good in the 2nd half matters. Take out your calculator, or watch the committee do it, and accept it. The best teams in more than a few leagues, and the country, won't get in the tourney.

I think my Grandpa had a Babson milking machine in his barn in Michigan.

AR

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 24, 2017, 03:40:24 PM

Quote from: AppletonRocks on February 24, 2017, 08:44:08 AM
Ryan,

I have been chastised for thinking being really good in the 2nd half matters. Take out your calculator, or watch the committee do it, and accept it. The best teams in more than a few leagues, and the country, won't get in the tourney.

I think my Grandpa had a Babson milking machine in his barn in Michigan.

AR

Where is Ryan talking about the second half? No, it doesn't matter as you know... but Ryan certainly knows how this all works. Not sure where the argument is. He is just saying they are a very good team... nothing much else than that.

And yes, good teams won't get in this year for varying reasons... but that even happens in the D1 tournament where they famously take inferior teams from big conferences for no good reason. The fact Syracuse is on a "bubble" conversation is a joke.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Swish3 on February 24, 2017, 04:45:08 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 24, 2017, 03:40:24 PM
Quote from: AppletonRocks on February 24, 2017, 08:44:08 AM
Ryan,

I have been chastised for thinking being really good in the 2nd half matters. Take out your calculator, or watch the committee do it, and accept it. The best teams in more than a few leagues, and the country, won't get in the tourney.

I think my Grandpa had a Babson milking machine in his barn in Michigan.

AR

Where is Ryan talking about the second half? No, it doesn't matter as you know... but Ryan certainly knows how this all works. Not sure where the argument is. He is just saying they are a very good team... nothing much else than that.

And yes, good teams won't get in this year for varying reasons... but that even happens in the D1 tournament where they famously take inferior teams from big conferences for no good reason. The fact Syracuse is on a "bubble" conversation is a joke.

I don't think it's a joke...the ACC is brutally deep this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 24, 2017, 06:03:09 PM

Quote from: Swish3 on February 24, 2017, 04:45:08 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 24, 2017, 03:40:24 PM
Quote from: AppletonRocks on February 24, 2017, 08:44:08 AM
Ryan,

I have been chastised for thinking being really good in the 2nd half matters. Take out your calculator, or watch the committee do it, and accept it. The best teams in more than a few leagues, and the country, won't get in the tourney.

I think my Grandpa had a Babson milking machine in his barn in Michigan.

AR

Where is Ryan talking about the second half? No, it doesn't matter as you know... but Ryan certainly knows how this all works. Not sure where the argument is. He is just saying they are a very good team... nothing much else than that.

And yes, good teams won't get in this year for varying reasons... but that even happens in the D1 tournament where they famously take inferior teams from big conferences for no good reason. The fact Syracuse is on a "bubble" conversation is a joke.

I don't think it's a joke...the ACC is brutally deep this year.

Sure, the ACC is deep - on the left side of the conference... but at some point you need to win games. But a .586 winning percentage is considered bubble... you can have the toughest schedule in the country, but if you can't win at least 2/3s or 70% of your games... you shouldn't be rewarded for it. And deep also isn't necessarily a sign of better than others. The MAC Commonwealth may be perennial the deepest conference in Division III men's basketball... doesn't mean the top of the conference is better than the rest. It isn't.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 25, 2017, 09:19:22 PM

This is a weird year. There aren't many good mid-majors unless weird things happen in conference tournaments. I really support mid-majors getting into the tourney but this is a year where you have locks like Gonzaga, St. Mary's, and Wichita State. (Not counting the Big East or American). Then Dayton is #31 on Ken Pom so they're probably in. Then Middle Tennessee is 41 and Illinois State is 43, and VCU is 45.

The dilemma is this. NC-Wilmington is 26-5 and leading the Colonial by one game of College of Charleston. Their worst two losses were road conference losses to William and Mary and Elon. The Colonial is a decent league, too. But they really didn't play or beat anyone special in the non-conference (best wins were East Tennessee St. at home and St. Bonaventure on the road). They also played two non-D1 games. So if they don't win the Colonial, they may be out even with that gaudy record.

I'm sure there are many in D-3 land like that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 26, 2017, 04:55:29 PM

How They Fared (Complete) -- final report for 2016-17

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	615	Babson	25-2	def. Springfield, 67-62; LOST to #31 MIT, 62-65
#2	610	Whitman	27-0	def. George Fox, 105-75; def. #4 Whitworth, 86-83 OT
#3	573	Christopher Newport	25-2	def. Marymount, 78-53; def. #20 Salisbury, 63-62
#4	518	Whitworth	23-4	def. Linfield, 76-64; LOST at #2 Whitman, 83-86 OT
#5	492	Washington U.	20-5	LOST to Chicago, 74-81
#6	489	UW-River Falls	24-3	def. UW-La Crosse, 68-55; def. UW-Oshkosh, 60-59
#7	476	Ramapo	25-2	def. Rowan, 110-101; def. #21 New Jersey City, 67-64
#8	458	Marietta	24-4	def. Heidelberg, 94-80 OT; def. Mount Union, 100-78; def. Baldwin Wallace, 83-74
#9	446	Middlebury	24-3	def. (n) Trinity (Conn.), 76-60; def. (n) T#35 Williams, 84-62
#10	400	Rochester	21-4	LOST at Emory, 62-63
#11	374	Benedictine	23-4	def. Wisconsin Lutheran, 72-63; def. Concordia (Wis.), 93-89 2nd
#12	349	Tufts	20-6	LOST to T#35 Williams, 65-81
#13	326	St. Norbert	19-5	LOST to Lake Forest, 70-73
#14	252	Denison	22-5	def. DePauw, 85-79; LOST to (n) Wooster, 77-87
#15	251	Neumann	25-2	def. Rosemont, 87-69; def. Gwynedd Mercy, 77-53
#16	240	Hanover	23-3	def. Transylvania, 78-76; def. Mount St. Joseph, 58-51
#17	207	Susquehanna	21-5	LOST at Moravian, 69-81
#18	204	Hope	21-6	def. Alma, 63-45; LOST to Calvin, 83-86
#19	158	UW-Whitewater	21-6	def. UW-Stout, 78-69; LOST at UW-Oshkosh, 61-75
#20	123	Salisbury	20-7	def. York (Pa.), 86-80 2OT; LOST at #3 Christopher Newport, 62-63
#21	86	New Jersey City	21-7	won at TCNJ, 77-69; LOST at #7 Ramapo, 64-67
#22	70	Ohio Wesleyan	21-7	def. Kenyon, 89-81; def. Wittenberg, 77-68; LOST to Wooster, 72-76
#23	67	Amherst	17-7	IDLE
#24	50	Augustana	19-8	LOST at Illinois Wesleyan, 77-107; def. (n) North Park, 86-70; LOST to North Central (Ill.), 64-69
#25	42	Lycoming	23-4	def. Lebanon Valley, 88-64; def. Albright, 76-62

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	38	Swarthmore	22-5	def. Ursinus, 86-66; def. Dickinson, 68-64
#27	36	St. John Fisher	22-5	def. Nazareth, 76-69; def. Stevens, 80-69
#28	31	Endicott	22-6	def. Salve Regina, 110-64; def. Eastern Nazarene, 84-66; LOST at Nichols, 64-67
#29	28	Wesleyan	19-6	IDLE
#30	25	UW-Eau Claire	18-8	LOST to UW-La Crosse, 66-76
#31	21	MIT	21-6	def. (n) WPI, 63-61; won at #1 Babson, 67-62
#32	18	Guilford	23-5	def. (n) Hampden-Sydney, 63-53; def. (n) Virginia Wesleyan, 67-64; def. (n) Emory and Henry, 64-54
T#33	9	Albertus Magnus	23-4	def. Anna Maria, 92-67; def. Mount Ida, 107-68; def. Lasell, 101-83
T#33	9	Bethel	21-6	def. T#35 Carleton, 57-53; def. St. John's, 79-75
T#35	8	Carleton	18-9	def. Augsburg, 66-63; LOST at T#33 Bethel, 53-57
T#35	8	Williams	19-8	won at #12 Tufts, 81-65; LOST to (n) #9 Middlebury, 62-84
T#37	4	Brockport	19-7	LOST to (n) SUNY Oneonta, 72-85
T#37	4	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	22-4	won at Occidental, 70-66 OT; def. Pomona-Pitzer, 70-64; def. Cal Lutheran, 77-71
T#37	4	Staten Island	21-6	def. (n) Baruch, 71-54; won at CCNY, 77-66
T#40	2	Scranton	21-6	def. Catholic, 75-68; def. Moravian, 68-63
T#40	2	St. Thomas	19-7	LOST to St. John's, 78-80
T#42	1	Hardin-Simmons	22-6	def. (n) East Texas Baptist, 89-80; def. (n) Texas-Dallas, 76-61; won at LeTourneau, 104-92
T#42	1	Ripon	20-5	def. (n) Cornell, 80-79; def. (n) Lake Forest, 81-72

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: monsoon on February 26, 2017, 06:30:03 PM

Thanks for running these again this year, Darryl!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Canvas Hightops on February 26, 2017, 06:31:13 PM

Babson loses to MIT
Middlebury beats Williams.
Babson has a better record, Middlebury has higher SoS and RPI.
Who gets the higher seed?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 27, 2017, 11:19:24 AM

I think Midd actually had an argument even before this weekend. Now? Midd has to be the top seed in the northeast. Look at Midd's array of impressive wins: Williams, Amherst, Wesleyan, Skidmore, Illinois Wesleyan, Keene State, Trinity x2. Looks like 6-3 vs. regionally ranked opponents. Really solid. And they are on an 11 game winning streak, most of which have come by huge margins despite playing quality opponents. Babson's best wins? Tufts, Endicott and MIT x2. I think Babson is only 4-2 vs. regionally ranked opponents, with only one win vs. a team in the top five of New England. Not bad, but Midd has more quality wins, and Babson is stumbling (due I suspect to key injuries) into the tourney following two straight narrow escapes and a loss, all of them at home.

Oddly, Babson beat two of the teams who beat Midd -- Tufts and Endicott, and Midd beat one of the two teams who beat Babson -- Amherst.

I'd be stunned if Babson gets seeded above Midd when all is said and done -- but we will find out soon!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 02, 2017, 06:54:54 PM

It is nearly time to tip up the ball on the NCAA Division III Basketball Tournaments. Who will end up in Grand Rapids and Salem with a chance at a national title?

On Thursday's nights Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave McHugh gives his preview of the two tournaments and who may be the surprises, who can pull off an upset, who are the favorites to make a run, and who just might walk away with the walnut and bronze.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs LIVE starting at 7:00 PM ET from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch the show here: http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2016-17/mar2 --- or via the simulcast on Facebook Live (http://www.facebook.com/Hoopsville). If you miss the show live, you can watch it On Demand or listen to the podcasts.

The show is jammed packed with guests, but Dave will also have time for your questions. Make sure to email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com. You can also tweet them to us.

And please consider helping Hoopsville stay on the air like you might help your public television station. The annual fundraising campaign was extended a few days because we had only raised 52% of our goal. Click the following link for more information and to make a donation: Hoopsville Fundraising Page (https://igg.me/at/hoopsville-fundraiser-2017)

Guests scheduled (in order of appearance):
- Carl Danzig, Scranton men's coach
- Abby Pyzik Smith, Lynchburg women's coach
- Brad Fischer, No. 13 UW-Oshkosh women's coach
- Michael Blaine, Medialle men's coach
- Jeff Brown, No. 6 Middlbury men's coach
- Cameron Hill, No. 7 Trinity (Texas) women's coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville
Fundraiser: https://igg.me/at/hoopsville-fundraiser-2017

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D710%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3Dm7hyu%2F67im4wp2kqxj36iu.jpg&hash=3709a0096397bb9a1cdf10b99328b2589a46785f)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on March 03, 2017, 09:55:08 PM

Quote from: AndOne on February 21, 2017, 03:12:17 PM
Waiting to see what current #11 Benedictine (21-4) and #13 St. Norbert (19-4) do once they get into the national tournament and have to play teams outside of their very weak conferences. I'm not saying either BU or StN isn't a decent team. However, by playing in the NACC, where 7 of the other 10 teams do not have winning records, BU gets to rack up a high number of basically automatic wins. Likewise, StN enjoys dominating the equally weak MWC where teams are limited to 23 regular season games, and 6 of the other 9 teams will finish at .500 or below. The #3 seed in the Midwest Conference tournament has only a 12-11 record, and will almost assuredly lose it's 1st round game to finish the season at a robust .500.
If either BU or STN played in conferences such as the CCIW, WIAC, or NESCAC, they would be middle of the pack teams, and wouldn't be enjoying national #11 and #13 rankings.

As I thought.

Norbert's schedule was so weak they weren't even selected for the tournament despite a 19-5 record! I bet they mention that a lot on the recruiting trail. :-[

#10 Benedictine (395 points in the latest poll and 23-4 coming in) was plastered by 26 points by Wartburg who received all of 1 point in the same current poll. :-[

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on March 09, 2017, 11:04:50 AM

A little look back to see how the preseason poll (http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2016-17/preseason) has fared...

#	School (1st votes)	Pts	Tournament
1	Amherst (10)	590	R1 Keene St
2	Christopher Newport (6)	582	S16
3	Babson (6)	545	S16
4	~~St. Norbert~~	~~531~~	~~None~~
5	Tufts	465	S16
6	Benedictine (2)	457	R1 Wartburg
7	Wooster	446	R1 North Central
8	~~Ohio Wesleyan~~	~~388~~	~~None~~
9	Whitman	384	S16
10	St. Thomas (1)	344	R1 Augustana
11	~~John Carroll~~	~~306~~	~~None~~
12	Whitworth	289	R1 C-M-S
13	North Central (Ill.)	286	R2 Hanover
14	~~Alma~~	~~261~~	~~None~~
15	Emory	254	R2 Hardin-Simmons
16	~~Virginia Wesleyan~~	~~234~~	~~None~~
17	Marietta	200	S16
18	Augustana	164	S16
19	Keene State	146	S16
20	Washington U.	139	R2 Hope
21	UW-Oshkosh	128	R1 Hope
22	Hope	127	S16
23	~~Franklin & Marshall~~	~~117~~	~~None~~
24	Middlebury	88	S16
25	Susquehanna	86	S16
--	--	--	--
26	Endicott	79	S16
36	Rochester	18	S16
40	Hardin-Simmons	11	S16
NR	Hanover	0	S16
NR	Wartburg	0	S16
NR	Williams	0	S16

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on March 09, 2017, 11:12:55 AM

11 of the top 26 have made the Sweet 16, 3 made the 2nd round (1 lost to another ranked team), 6 lost 1st round (4 to other ranked teams), and 6 missed the tournament
60% of the teams either made the Sweet 16 or were beaten by another team in the rankings.

Considering how much we talk about preseason polls not meaning anything and whether the first poll should wait until January... I think that it wasn't a bad effort at guessing the last 16 this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 09, 2017, 11:37:16 AM

Thanks for doing this, Grizz. It would be interesting to look back at previous seasons to give a basis for comparison in terms of how well the pollsters fared with this preseason poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 09, 2017, 06:43:21 PM

The Division III NCAA tournaments have already seen their fair share of twists and turns. Both defending champions eliminated on the opening night, several home teams beaten, off-the-radar squads tearing Top 10 teams apart, and much more.

It has been an exciting start. What's next?

Can the home teams parlay a perceived advantage into a Championship Weekend appearence? What Cinderalla team will hear the chimes of midnight? What program will continue to make history? How will the battle of Top 25 teams shake out? And will a storied career end this weekend or in Salem?

There is plenty to talk about ahead of the Sectional Weekend and Dave McHugh has a super-sized list of guests on Thursday night's Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com).

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch the show LIVE staring at 7:00 p.m. ET here: http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2016-17/mar9 --- or via the Facebook Live (http://www.facebook.com/Hoopsville) simulcast. If you missed any part of the show, you can watch it On Demand or listen to the podcast.

Despite the large list of guests, Dave will find time to answer questions as well. Make sure to email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or tweet them and Dave will answer them on air.

Guests scheduled (in order of appearance):
- Brian Morehouse, No. 18 Hope women's coach
- Trevor Woodruff, No. 17 Scranton women's coach
- Craig Carse, Hardin-Simmons men's coach
- Ruth Sinn, No. 2 St. Thomas women's coach
- Michelle Ferenz, No. 16 Whitman women's coach
- Kevin App, Williams men's coach
- Grey Giovanine, Augustana men's coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D710%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3Dmkbzw%2Fjt7zn7grjzpwzjzp.jpg&hash=414d7f84435fe6b5e2fae50fd683c7781d50601a)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on March 19, 2017, 01:15:17 PM

Who back in December thought Babson was terribly overrated? :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 19, 2017, 02:24:53 PM

Quote from: smedindy on March 19, 2017, 01:15:17 PM
Who back in December thought Babson was terribly overrated? :D

Not me. It's hard to overrate a team with Joey Flannery. :D

But more to the point, who three weeks ago thought Augie could come within one point of the title?! :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 19, 2017, 07:08:16 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 19, 2017, 02:24:53 PM
Quote from: smedindy on March 19, 2017, 01:15:17 PM
Who back in December thought Babson was terribly overrated? :D

Not me. It's hard to overrate a team with Joey Flannery. :D

But more to the point, who three weeks ago thought Augie could come within one point of the title?! :o

Not even Augie.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 19, 2017, 07:11:42 PM

I just finished my final poll. I had 11 teams on the final poll who also appeared on my preseason ballot. I did have Babson #2 then and quickly moved them to #1. Whatever else I got wrong in the tourney preview (and there was A LOT I got wrong), I did correctly predict the champion, although I never imagined, even Friday afternoon, that Augie could ever get that close.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 19, 2017, 07:33:42 PM

I'm eager to see whether the pollsters have Augie or Whitman #2 in the final poll. Despite Augie coming within a blocked lay-up (by the national POY, no less) of the title, I'd lean towards Whitman - 1 loss vs. 8 losses is a pretty big difference.

In the women's poll, #2 is easy, IMO. Tufts was 30-0 against everyone not named Amherst, so 3 losses vs. the 1 loss of several teams is by no means disqualifying.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 19, 2017, 07:46:41 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 19, 2017, 07:33:42 PM
I'm eager to see whether the pollsters have Augie or Whitman #2 in the final poll. Despite Augie coming within a blocked lay-up (by the national POY, no less) of the title, I'd lean towards Whitman - 1 loss vs. 8 losses is a pretty big difference.

In the women's poll, #2 is easy, IMO. Tufts was 30-0 against everyone not named Amherst, so 3 losses vs. the 1 loss of several teams is by no means disqualifying.

I have Whitman #2. I think if Babson had played on Friday the way they played on Saturday, Whitman would be the champ right now. That's not to take anything away from Augie, but even with as much as this young team has improved, they do still have some weaknesses. I also put Rochester at #3 - they had some struggles towards the end of the season, but their tourney performance was stellar.

The sky really does seem the limit for Augustana, but that might better be reflected in next year's preseason poll. I find it hard to believe Whitman can get a whole lot better than they were this year, but Augustana can be pretty significantly better than they were even yesterday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 19, 2017, 08:09:36 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 19, 2017, 07:46:41 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 19, 2017, 07:33:42 PM
I'm eager to see whether the pollsters have Augie or Whitman #2 in the final poll. Despite Augie coming within a blocked lay-up (by the national POY, no less) of the title, I'd lean towards Whitman - 1 loss vs. 8 losses is a pretty big difference.

In the women's poll, #2 is easy, IMO. Tufts was 30-0 against everyone not named Amherst, so 3 losses vs. the 1 loss of several teams is by no means disqualifying.

I have Whitman #2. I think if Babson had played on Friday the way they played on Saturday, Whitman would be the champ right now. That's not to take anything away from Augie, but even with as much as this young team has improved, they do still have some weaknesses. I also put Rochester at #3 - they had some struggles towards the end of the season, but their tourney performance was stellar.

The sky really does seem the limit for Augustana, but that might better be reflected in next year's preseason poll. I find it hard to believe Whitman can get a whole lot better than they were this year, but Augustana can be pretty significantly better than they were even yesterday.

Yet, ironically, Augie may not even be picked to win the CCIW! Assuming preseason AA Connor Raridon returns as good as ever from injury, and with 2nd team all-region Alex Sorenson also returning, NCC may be the conference favorite.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 19, 2017, 09:26:44 PM

This is where the eventual Final Four teams were picked in each of the d3hoops.com annual preseason polls (if they were picked at all):

year	champ	2nd	3rd	4th
2000	Calvin (#22)	Wisconsin-Eau Claire (#19)	Salem State (ORV)	Franklin & Marshall (#5)
2001	Catholic (#7)	William Paterson (#2)	Illinois Wesleyan (#25)	Ohio Northern (ORV)
2002	Otterbein (no votes)	Elizabethtown (ORV)	Carthage (#1)	Rochester (no votes)
2003	Williams (#11)	Gustavus Adolphus (ORV)	Wooster (ORV)	Hampden-Sydney (#7)
2004	Wisconsin-Stevens Point (#3)	Williams (#1)	John Carroll (#12)	Amherst (#14)
2005	Wisconsin-Stevens Point (#1)	Rochester (#5)	Calvin (no votes)	York (PA) (no votes)
2006	Virginia Wesleyan (#11)	Wittenberg (#10)	Illinois Wesleyan (#1)	Amherst (#5)
2007	Amherst (#3)	Virginia Wesleyan (#1)	Washington (MO) (ORV)	Wooster (#2)
2008	Washington (MO) (#1)	Amherst (#2)	Hope (#11)	Ursinus (no votes)
2009	Washington (MO) (#1)	Stockton (ORV)	Guilford (ORV)	Franklin & Marshall (no votes)
2010	Wisconsin-Stevens Point (#10)	Williams (ORV)	*Guilford (#3)	*Randolph-Macon (#19)
2011	St. Thomas (#13)	Wooster (#6)	*Middlebury (#9)	*Williams (#8)
2012	Wisconsin-Whitewater (ORV)	Cabrini (#14)	*Illinois Wesleyan (ORV)	*MIT (#10)
2013	Amherst (#5)	Mary Hardin-Baylor (ORV)	*North Central (IL) (#6)	*St. Thomas (#11)
2014	Wisconsin-Whitewater (#13)	Williams (#3)	*Amherst (#1)	*Illinois Wesleyan (#2)
2015	Wisconsin-Stevens Point (#7)	Augustana (#3)	*Babson (#23)	*Virginia Wesleyan (#19)
2016	St. Thomas (#4)	Benedictine (no votes)	*Amherst (#5)	*Christopher Newport (ORV)
2017	Babson (#3)	Augustana (#18)	*Whitman (#9)	*Williams (no votes)

*tied for 3rd

Preseason poll points
per Final Four
2000: 750
2001: 1064
2002: 620
2003: 839
2004: 1604
2005: 1028
2006: 1644
2007: 1676
2008: 1529
2009: 680
2010: 1068
2011: 1473
2012: 579
2013: 1205
2014: 1934
2015: 1206
2016: 863
2017: 1093

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 19, 2017, 11:09:22 PM

There's a function here of not only the voters getting the right teams, but also the bracket being set up to give the right teams the chance to get there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 19, 2017, 11:23:48 PM

True, which mitigates the ability of the pollsters to ever hit the top four on the nose without overemphasizing regionality. But, especially in recent seasons in which the committee has shown some flexibility and creativity with the bracketing, that's becoming less of an issue.

I was actually more curious about the misses -- the ORVs and the no-votes -- when I decided to make this chart than I was with how close to the top the Final Four teams that were in the preseason poll had been slotted.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: redman822 on March 20, 2017, 09:17:49 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 19, 2017, 02:24:53 PM
Quote from: smedindy on March 19, 2017, 01:15:17 PM
Who back in December thought Babson was terribly overrated? :D

Not me. It's hard to overrate a team with Joey Flannery. :D

But more to the point, who three weeks ago thought Augie could come within one point of the title?! :o

Actually, they were two points from the title, games can't end in a tie... ;)

But honestly, not many people would have seen that as a possibility...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on March 21, 2017, 09:43:47 PM

Here's the Final Top 25 poll.

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2016-17/final

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on August 03, 2017, 11:30:45 PM

Thanks to a lot of heavy lifting by Dave McHugh and the inspiration of David Collinge, we have a new resource for the Top 25 entering next season.

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/archive

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on August 04, 2017, 10:19:54 AM

Quote from: gordonmann on August 03, 2017, 11:30:45 PM
Thanks to a lot of heavy lifting by Dave McHugh and the inspiration of David Collinge, we have a new resource for the Top 25 entering next season.

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/archive

So, this is awesome!

Thanks Dave...and David and Gordon.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on August 04, 2017, 11:22:07 AM

Quote from: WUH on August 04, 2017, 10:19:54 AM
Quote from: gordonmann on August 03, 2017, 11:30:45 PM
Thanks to a lot of heavy lifting by Dave McHugh and the inspiration of David Collinge, we have a new resource for the Top 25 entering next season.

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/archive

So, this is awesome!

Thanks Dave...and David and Gordon.

You are welcome. I plan to add some interesting tidbits, milestones in the coming weeks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on August 04, 2017, 12:23:37 PM

Nary a single ranking for my SLIAC men :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[

Who else is in that "unmentioned" club? Oh my gosh... NO ONE...

Every other conference had at least that one bright moment when a member made the rankings.... the President's Conf had its Bethany, the CCC had its Endicott, the Liberty had its Hobart, the NAC had its Husson, the UMAC had its Northwestern...

But the SLIAC, well...... Never..... Which goes along with our winless record in the NCAA tourney, though a couple of "close but no cigar" experiences.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on August 04, 2017, 12:31:43 PM

To add to your misery, the former GSAC even had a member make the Top 25. I know... rubbing salt in the wounds. Sorry.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on August 04, 2017, 01:16:22 PM

Quote from: WUH on August 04, 2017, 10:19:54 AM
Quote from: gordonmann on August 03, 2017, 11:30:45 PM
Thanks to a lot of heavy lifting by Dave McHugh and the inspiration of David Collinge, we have a new resource for the Top 25 entering next season.

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/archive

So, this is awesome!

Thanks Dave...and David and Gordon.

Agreed! This is really cool... A few takeaways

1. The MIAA has a decent shot to join the list of teams with every member having been ranked. Olivet is the only team that hasn't, and expectations are high for the Comets after adding ex Oregon Duck Trevor Manuel this off-season.

2. The CCIW has 7 different teams that have been #1 during this time period and NONE of them won it all.

3. If you go by seasons ranked during this time period, Christopher Newport is the "best" team to have never achieved #1. If you go by times ranked, that honor goes to Franklin and Marshall.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on August 04, 2017, 01:55:45 PM

Yep - Gordon mentioned a few of those... my favorite was the WIAC was the first to see all of its teams ranked and they did it, I think, in the first three or so years of the poll!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on August 04, 2017, 02:08:17 PM

Quote from: hopefan on August 04, 2017, 12:23:37 PM
Nary a single ranking for my SLIAC men :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[

Who else is in that "unmentioned" club? Oh my gosh... NO ONE...

Every other conference had at least that one bright moment when a member made the rankings.... the President's Conf had its Bethany, the CCC had its Endicott, the Liberty had its Hobart, the NAC had its Husson, the UMAC had its Northwestern...

But the SLIAC, well...... Never..... Which goes along with our winless record in the NCAA tourney, though a couple of "close but no cigar" experiences.

I think Fontbonne was receiving votes some years ago when they had Fogarty, Storandt, Fournie, McCoy, Branch (?), Trevor White (?), etc. Guess they never made it to #25. On the women's side Webster was ranked in 2001-02.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on August 04, 2017, 02:16:34 PM

I can tell you for sure.. they never made it into the poll. I didn't track those receiving votes... that would have made the project far more difficult. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on August 04, 2017, 03:06:20 PM

Yeah, I made the same editorial decision in putting the women's archive together.

The number of teams that receive votes is massive and, in many cases, not very meaningful when it's single digit points.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on August 04, 2017, 03:10:23 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on August 04, 2017, 02:16:34 PM
I can tell you for sure.. they never made it into the poll. I didn't track those receiving votes... that would have made the project far more difficult. :)

Thanks. I guess I'm remembering talk on the boards about whether the Fontbonne team might get some votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on August 05, 2017, 02:01:09 AM

Gordon,
What does the *** mean in the women's chart?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on August 10, 2017, 05:14:48 PM

That signals that a team was ranked No. 1 at some point in the season. I didn't add that marker for men for no good reason. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on August 15, 2017, 02:03:25 PM

So, who is likely to start next season at number one? I have to think it's a toss-up between Whitman and Augustana, both look absolutely loaded next season. Lots of teams in contention for numbers three through five -- Williams, North Central, Whitewater, River-Falls, Marietta, Christopher Newport, Hanover, Ramapo all look intriguing as well -- but those two, on paper, seem to be head-and-shoulders above the field.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on August 15, 2017, 03:27:42 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on August 15, 2017, 02:03:25 PM
So, who is likely to start next season at number one? I have to think it's a toss-up between Whitman and Augustana, both look absolutely loaded next season. Lots of teams in contention for numbers three through five -- Williams, North Central, Whitewater, River-Falls, Marietta, Christopher Newport, Hanover, Ramapo all look intriguing as well -- but those two, on paper, seem to be head-and-shoulders above the field.

I would bet that is going to be the Blues, they made it to Salem after an outstanding year (if I remember correctly, the final four loss to eventual champion Babson was their sole blemish) in the '16-'17 campaign. Augustana will probably be number 2 after narrowly losing the championship game and returning just about everybody for this season. They get "downgraded" to number two since they didn't have as dominating of a regular season as Whitman, even though they do have a tougher conference. I would put North Central at 3, although that one is probably more up for debate.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on August 15, 2017, 03:38:39 PM

As a voter... something spectacular is going to have to keep me from voting Whitman #1 in the preseason.

First off, Babson loses far too much to keep my #1 vote. I do know of voters who will continue to vote for the champ until they lose. I am not of that mentality and have no reason to keep Babson #1.

Secondly, Whitman returns EVERYONE from a team that didn't lose a single game in the season until the semi-finals when Babson stormed back to beat them and go on to win the championship. It is the very reason I voted Whitman #2 and Augustana #3 in my final poll (no one says you have to vote for the runner-up #2 in the poll if you have good reason). If I get information in the preseason that says Whitman has lose some key components for whatever reason from that team... THEN I will consider looking for another option. I will say Whitman will have to deal with a massive target on their back now. They snuck through at least half of last year before that target got big. It will be big starting October 15. That could cause them to have a tough year. However, they are also a stellar team who beat some damn good teams especially in the NCAA tournament last year.

As for Augustana... they are certainly good and made a nice run to the championship game, but I don't see a reason for them to surplant Whitman in anyway. There were a lot of questions about the Aggies last season. They will probably improve, but I think they may also be exposed. They certainly won't be able to get the the CCIW without getting beat up themselves. I think Augustana will be good next year, but I have no reasons right now to vote them #1 in the preseason.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on August 15, 2017, 04:18:40 PM

Yeah, Whitman does seem like a solid choice. Agree that Babson barring a miraculous incoming class isn't even in consideration -- Flannery alone is SUCH a massive loss for them and they lose several other key guys as well from a very thin rotation.

But, the argument for Augustana is that (1) they are a more balanced team in terms of positional talent and (2) they were a team heavily featuring a ton of guys who were new to the team (or at least their roles) that naturally took some time to come together last year. I was really impressed by their three frosh who played in the Final Four, who have a very high upside and should be a lot better next year. The two frosh big man, in particular Micah Martin, are going to grow a ton as players -- Martin is going to be a truly fearsome rim protector even next season and will emerge on offense over time. Very, very talented. Nolan Ebel seemed to really grow in confidence and impact in the NCAA tourney as well. Lucas Simon will make a much bigger impact (just looks like a future star down the line) and Chrishawn Orange is already an all-American talent despite being an underclassman last year. Williams also had no answer for Brett Benning who was also in his first year in the program and should be a much bigger factor; I see him as an upgrade over the lone graduating senior --himself a very good player -- who I presume he will replace in the lineup. Of the CCIW teams I've seen, their overall size, speed and athletic talent really stood out, and those are things you can't teach. All of those guys are just scratching the surface. I just think Augustana has more guys with a lot more unrealized upside potential than Whitman.

Whitman as good and as talented and experienced as they are does have one glaring weakness and that is on the interior ... Babson really exposed that with a 45-26 rebound advantage in the semifinal round, despite not really having a truly dominant big guy (they were of course very tough up front in the aggregate). And Rochester also handily outrebounded them. At least based on what they return, they lack much size and strength, but of course more than make up for it with speed, skill, and depth. Still, that to me limits their upside just a tad. I'd also say that Auggie's NCAA victories -- Williams, Hanover, Wartburg, Whitewater, and St. Thomas were five pretty tough wins in a row -- were significantly more impressive than Whitman's overall. Not surprising since they went one round deeper and started as a lower seed. I think you are right that they will have a worse record than Whitman but Whitman's conference is obviously a lot weaker, especially with its traditional top rival Whitworth looking very down on paper (four starters graduating). Whitman just may not be very battle-tested heading into the tourney.

All that being said, for the reasons you've said I'd probably tag Whitman number one as well; hard to go against a team that returns everyone after that level of success. But I do think it is a much closer call than you suggest and that there is an argument to be made for Augustana. And still we have never seen a team from Whitman's conference even appear in a title game despite consistently getting high seeds and rankings, which shows that in some cases they may be paper tigers (not saying that was Whitman last year, but I'd like to see one of these teams get it done on the biggest stage just once).

As for North Central, their record last year (and I know injuries played a role) seems pretty weak for a preseason number 3 team. All of the candidates have big question marks. I think Williams will probably get that spot, deservedly, based on its post-season run, although I'd rather actually see the Ephs start a bit lower to temper expectations ... as great as they played in the NCAA tourney, they weren't even a top-25 caliber team until, really, the NESCAC tournament last year, and they do lose their star to graduation. So it's unclear just how good Williams will be to start the season (and honestly, like Augustana I see Williams as likely peaking in 2018-19). Williams on the other hand benefits from a much weaker New England region this year. Last year, New England was just absolutely loaded -- four elite 8 teams (note, the Ephs went 3-2 in games vs. those teams), two final four squads, and of course the national champion (whose only full-stregth loss came to yet another talented New England team). This year I'd be stunned if there were any more than 2 elite 8 teams (if that) and one final four squad emerging from the region. A HUGE number of talented guys (including of course the national POY) graduated from the region in 2017.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie77 on August 16, 2017, 12:23:19 AM

Add Junior Pierson Wofford to the discussion on Augustana. Wofford was removed from last year's team by the college (not a coaching decision) in late January, so he wasn't part of the playoff run. Circumstances of the dismissal were a bit hazy, but he is now listed on the 2017-2018 roster. Wofford was the team's number 2 rebounder and was averaging over 10 points per game at the time of his dismissal. The return of the highly athletic Wofford will be a significant addition for this year's Viking roster.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on August 16, 2017, 08:40:50 AM

As Dave said, there would have to be major revelations for me not to vote Whitman #1. They were the second best team I saw last year and the best team lost six guys. Augustana has a lot of potential, but many of those guys are still pretty young - I'll want to see some marked improvement from the young guys down low and some more championship level ball-handlers before I'm ready to get on the Augustana train. Obviously there's a long season of actual games, but for preseason, I'm definitely rewarding Whitman for the work they did last year (and bringing literally everyone back again).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on August 16, 2017, 12:41:13 PM

Quote from: augie77 on August 16, 2017, 12:23:19 AM
Add Junior Pierson Wofford to the discussion on Augustana. Wofford was removed from last year's team by the college (not a coaching decision) in late January, so he wasn't part of the playoff run. Circumstances of the dismissal were a bit hazy, but he is now listed on the 2017-2018 roster. Wofford was the team's number 2 rebounder and was averaging over 10 points per game at the time of his dismissal. The return of the highly athletic Wofford will be a significant addition for this year's Viking roster.

That's all and good... but I think this actually raises more questions than it answers... especially, how long until Wofford potentially gets into trouble again and is off the roster. I will take this news with a grain of sand and wait a bit before it peaks my interest.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on August 16, 2017, 01:08:18 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on August 16, 2017, 12:41:13 PM
That's all and good... but I think this actually raises more questions than it answers... especially, how long until Wofford potentially gets into trouble again and is off the roster. I will take this news with a grain of sand and wait a bit before it peaks my interest.

I do appreciate your skepticism, but this makes me think that I missed something. Has Wofford been dismissed more than once?

Incidentally, I trust what everyone else has said, but when I looked to see if Augustana had the time listed for their visit to St. Louis, I also clicked on the roster tab and the list of players is from last season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on August 16, 2017, 01:21:01 PM

Quote from: WUH on August 16, 2017, 01:08:18 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on August 16, 2017, 12:41:13 PM
That's all and good... but I think this actually raises more questions than it answers... especially, how long until Wofford potentially gets into trouble again and is off the roster. I will take this news with a grain of sand and wait a bit before it peaks my interest.

I do appreciate your skepticism, but this makes me think that I missed something. Has Wofford been dismissed more than once?

Incidentally, I trust what everyone else has said, but when I looked to see if Augustana had the time listed for their visit to St. Louis, I also clicked on the roster tab and the list of players is from last season.

There was at least one incident, though who was at fault and who wasn't seems a bit murky, that he was involved in... then suddenly he was released from school in the middle of the season. Too many questions, not enough answers to understand what has been happening.

And I did check out Augustana's roster myself... I see it is last season's and unlike some websites, I don't know the backdoor to their site to determine what this year's roster might (let's remember, it is mid August after all) look like. To that point, Wofford was not listed on the site as he was pulled from the roster last year. So... I am not sure where Auggie sees Wofford's name in the first place.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on August 16, 2017, 02:10:58 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on August 15, 2017, 04:18:40 PM

But, the argument for Augustana is that (1) they are a more balanced team in terms of positional talent and (2) they were a team heavily featuring a ton of guys who were new to the team (or at least their roles) that naturally took some time to come together last year. I was really impressed by their three frosh who played in the Final Four, who have a very high upside and should be a lot better next year. The two frosh big man, in particular Micah Martin, are going to grow a ton as players -- Martin is going to be a truly fearsome rim protector even next season and will emerge on offense over time. Very, very talented. Nolan Ebel seemed to really grow in confidence and impact in the NCAA tourney as well. Lucas Simon will make a much bigger impact (just looks like a future star down the line) and Chrishawn Orange is already an all-American talent despite being an underclassman last year. Williams also had no answer for Brett Benning who was also in his first year in the program and should be a much bigger factor; I see him as an upgrade over the lone graduating senior --himself a very good player -- who I presume he will replace in the lineup. Of the CCIW teams I've seen, their overall size, speed and athletic talent really stood out, and those are things you can't teach. All of those guys are just scratching the surface. I just think Augustana has more guys with a lot more unrealized upside potential than Whitman.

As for North Central, their record last year (and I know injuries played a role) seems pretty weak for a preseason number 3 team. All of the candidates have big question marks. I think Williams will probably get that spot, deservedly, based on its post-season run, although I'd rather actually see the Ephs start a bit lower to temper expectations ... as great as they played in the NCAA tourney, they weren't even a top-25 caliber team until, really, the NESCAC tournament last year, and they do lose their star to graduation. So it's unclear just how good Williams will be to start the season (and honestly, like Augustana I see Williams as likely peaking in 2018-19). Williams on the other hand benefits from a much weaker New England region this year. Last year, New England was just absolutely loaded -- four elite 8 teams (note, the Ephs went 3-2 in games vs. those teams), two final four squads, and of course the national champion (whose only full-stregth loss came to yet another talented New England team). This year I'd be stunned if there were any more than 2 elite 8 teams (if that) and one final four squad emerging from the region. A HUGE number of talented guys (including of course the national POY) graduated from the region in 2017.

A role? Make that a BIG role. Especially, considering the injury was to a pre-season All-American.

Also, exactly what relevance does last year's "pretty weak" record carry as far as how a team is expected to do this season? Especially when they will get the All-American back, and have added a D2 transfer who was ranked as the #41 player in Illinois two years ago, and another transfer who led his (D3) team and was 5th in the conference in scoring last season.

Lastly, keep in mind that last year's pretty weak record included a win over Augustana in the CCIW conference tournament, a win over a consistently strong Wooster team in the first round of the national tournament, and a one point loss to Elite Eight member Hanover (at Hanover) in the second round.

Augustana is a great team. But remember, they had 9 losses last year. They got hot at the right time. I fully expect them to carry their excellence throughout this campaign. However, North Central ain't too bad either. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on August 16, 2017, 02:25:29 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on August 16, 2017, 12:41:13 PM
Quote from: augie77 on August 16, 2017, 12:23:19 AM
Add Junior Pierson Wofford to the discussion on Augustana. Wofford was removed from last year's team by the college (not a coaching decision) in late January, so he wasn't part of the playoff run. Circumstances of the dismissal were a bit hazy, but he is now listed on the 2017-2018 roster. Wofford was the team's number 2 rebounder and was averaging over 10 points per game at the time of his dismissal. The return of the highly athletic Wofford will be a significant addition for this year's Viking roster.

That's all and good... but I think this actually raises more questions than it answers... especially, how long until Wofford potentially gets into trouble again and is off the roster. I will take this news with a grain of sand and wait a bit before it peaks my interest.

Its highly curious why an offense serious enough for the school to remove a player from the team didn't elicit the same measure of action from the head coach, Grey Giovanine.
What was Giovanine looking at? Or, evidently, not looking at even though it was apparently obvious to the school administration. :-\ :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on August 16, 2017, 02:39:45 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on August 16, 2017, 01:21:01 PM
There was at least one incident, though who was at fault and who wasn't seems a bit murky, that he was involved in... then suddenly he was released from school in the middle of the season. Too many questions, not enough answers to understand what has been happening.

It is interesting to see a player dropped from the school and team with an open possibility of returning.

It has been an interesting time though in judicial affairs as the Title IX Dear Colleague letter had everyone revisiting their campus policies. And, clearly in many cases, being much more cautious than just a few years ago. Not suggesting that this is Title IX related, but that regulatory changes have ripple effects.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on August 16, 2017, 02:40:34 PM

Quote from: AndOne link=topic=4097.msg1807323#msg1807323 date=150290
Also, exactly what relevance doesu]last[/u] year's "pretty weak" record carry as far as how a team is expected to do this season? Especially when they will get the All-American back, and have added a D2 transfer who was ranked as the #41 player in Illinois two years ago, and another transfer who led his (D3) team and was 5th in the conference in scoring last season.

Lastly, keep in mind that last year's pretty weak record included a win over Augustana in the CCIW conference tournament, a win over a consistently strong Wooster team in the first round of the national tournament, and a one point loss to Elite Eight member Hanover (at Hanover) in the second round.

Augustana is a great team. But remember, they had 9 losses last year. They got hot at the right time. I fully expect them to carry their excellence throughout this campaign. However, North Central ain't too bad either. :)

So much to agree with here. Generally, I can't stand pre-season rankings. I understand some voters are better than others at reassessing their votes based on actual performance, but for the most part, I see a lot of "I can't move ______ up because no one ahead of them lost..." At this point, we can only say that on paper, Whitman and North Central both have the chance to be EXCEPTIONALLY GOOD next season.

As for Augustana, I think we are going a little overboard on the hype train after their playoff run. Sure they strung together a bunch of great wins. But St. Thomas, Whitewater, Wartburg, Hanover, Williams wasn't exactly the same as going through Husson, Skidmore, Tufts, Keene State, and Whitman like Babson did... Of those wins, @ Whitewater might have been the best win on the list, and last years Whitewater team wasn't the same as we've seen in years past.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on August 16, 2017, 03:15:37 PM

As for North Central, personally, I would have them in the 4-7 range to start the season. That is a pretty massive leap for a team that finished last year with double-digit losses and entirely outside the top 25. I think pre-season rankings have to at least SOMEWHAT account for how a team finished the season, wouldn't you? Obviously North Central looks much better on paper next year than they did to end last year. But if they are ranked, say, 5th, that reflects an enormous and highly unusual leap forward for a team that finished entirely unranked. I think that in their case, that type of leap is warranted. But it's hardly the egregious insult you seem to be suggesting to say that, hey, maybe top THREE is a tiny bit high when you take last year's performance into account, especially considering three of last year's four Final Four teams graduated two contributors COMBINED between the three of them, and several other highly ranked squads bring back pretty stacked rosters too (Hanover in particular, who edged out North Central in the tourney and returns all but one guy). North Central has several different new/returning pieces as you note next year vs. how they ended the season. But a team isn't just a collection of brilliant individual talents -- if it was, Whitewater would have gone undefeated, as at least on Whitewater fan predicted, based solely on the pedigree of its roster. It remains to be seen how the pieces will fit together. But clearly they are in the top-five in terms of collections of individual talent.

Babson and Augustana were dead even in the title game, as reflected by a game-saving play required to secure the victory. I'd say that Augustana's string of wins heading into the title game was actually tougher than Babson's string of wins (Keene barely made the tourney at all, Tufts was very good but also pretty banged up when they played, and Husson was not an impressive win, whereas all of Auggie's wins were vs. tough and talented opponents), but at worst, I'd say they were roughly equal. There is no question that, at the END of the season, Augustana was playing at essentially as high a level as any team in the country -- and they return pretty much the same team, with a lot of room for upside growth considering how many young guys they relied upon. Usually players make a much bigger jump from frosh to sophomores than they do from juniors to seniors, so that is why I think they will actually be far tougher next year with three rising sophomores returning to the rotation (plus three key rising juniors).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on August 16, 2017, 03:28:54 PM

Per the idea that the college pulled the player and not the coach... I think the initial reference didn't need to mention the coach and the follow-up then assumed the point was the coach wouldn't do it.

We don't know what happened and in the grand scheme of things, if something happened severe enough for the college to remove a student... it doesn't matter what the coach wanted to do or not - even if he would have done the same. The college trumps all. I don't think Giovanine had anything to do with it. He has to abide by what the college wants to do and to suggest (or allude as I think happened purposely or not) he didn't remove Wofford or wouldn't have done it is a step too far an assumption. The college chose to remove the student. There is no need to care otherwise.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on August 16, 2017, 04:27:55 PM

nescac1,

I think when you base an analysis of something current on "how they finished last year," you might need to differentiate between how they finished with regard to what their total record was and how they fonished playing at the end of the year. North Central finished 18-11. Not that impressive overall. However, to only consider those numbers in assessing this season's team is, I believe, a bit shortsighted. Because equally important is how they finished playing near the end of the year. And, in NCC's case, they were playing some of their best basketball at season's end. Over the last 12 games they finished 9-3 with the 3 losses being a 6 point overtime loss to the national champion runner up (Augie), a 4 point overtime loss to the CCIW tourney #1 seed (Carthage), and a 1 point loss to Elite Eight member Hanover. Incidentally, they beat both Carthage and Augie in the conference tourney.
So, if you're asking if last year's record should be the primary factor in this year's assessment, my answers is no. I think how they were actually playing over the final part of the season is more important than their final record.

Lastly, just to be clear. There is no way in hell I was suggesting NCC should be the pre-season #1-3 team.
I agree with you that 4-7 is about right. The main thing is that, given the last time they played NCC won, the Cardinals shouldn't be more than one or two spots behind wherever Augie is placed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on August 16, 2017, 04:50:14 PM

I think we are rougly on the same page in terms of actual rankings AndOne-- were I ranking (and I am not one of the rankers) barring something dramatic in terms of preseason injuries, etc. I'd probably also go Whitworth (when all is said and done they have earned the top spot even though I think it's very close), Augustana, and then it gets really tricky. I think Williams will end up in the number 3 spot, I don't know if they are likely to be quite THAT good but there is no other obvious better choice really, then maybe North Central, Marietta, Hanover, Whitewater, Eau-Claire, Christopher Newport, Tufts, Babson, Ramapo, Swarthmore, something along those lines. I'm sure I am forgetting a few teams with top-10 caliber groups returning.

I may be a bit biased on Augustana because they played SO well vs. Williams in Salem. The Ephs came into that game on a major role including upsetting an elite offensive Middlebury team on the road in the Elite 8. But while the Ephs (during the course of the year, typically a stronger defensive team) played well on offense other than missing a slew of (for them) very makeable three point shots, they simply could not slow Auggie's offense down. Now, it might have been a somewhat aberrant offensive performance ... Auggie seemingly could not miss from anywhere early in the game, including some really deep threes, and Orange hit a bunch of shots with a very good defender draped all over him. But man did Auggie seem scary in light of just how inexperienced a roster they put out there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on August 16, 2017, 07:20:40 PM

As all of us who know the difference between a 🏀 and a hole in the wall know, even very good teams sometimes have very stinky games.
Last season, in the next to the last CCIW game, NCC beat IWU (probably the CCIW's #3 team) by 2 points in OT. Three nights later, with Augustana playing to try to host the conference tourney, IWU basically obliterated Augie by 30! It was Augie's third loss in a row. Two games later NCC beat Augie in the conference tourney final. Augie then reignited and rode a hot streak to the national title game.
Sometimes you just don't know what you're gonna get. 🤔

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on August 16, 2017, 10:49:59 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on August 16, 2017, 04:50:14 PM
[...] I don't know if they are likely to be quite THAT good but there is no other obvious better choice really, then maybe North Central, Marietta, Hanover, Whitewater, Eau-Claire, Christopher Newport, Tufts, Babson, Ramapo, Swarthmore, something along those lines. I'm sure I am forgetting a few teams with top-10 caliber groups returning.

I was looking at Tufts recently as they are coming to St. Louis for a possible match-up with Washington University. They are losing two seniors that started nearly ever game and scored in double figures, but have a lot of rising seniors who either started or play off the bench. If you do not mind me asking: what am I missing on the stat sheet?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Red and black on August 16, 2017, 11:25:55 PM

Quote from: AndOne on August 16, 2017, 04:27:55 PM
nescac1,

I think when you base an analysis of something current on "how they finished last year," you might need to differentiate between how they finished with regard to what their total record was and how they fonished playing at the end of the year. North Central finished 18-11. Not that impressive overall. However, to only consider those numbers in assessing this season's team is, I believe, a bit shortsighted. Because equally important is how they finished playing near the end of the year. And, in NCC's case, they were playing some of their best basketball at season's end. Over the last 12 games they finished 9-3 with the 3 losses being a 6 point overtime loss to the national champion runner up (Augie), a 4 point overtime loss to the CCIW tourney #1 seed (Carthage), and a 1 point loss to Elite Eight member Hanover. Incidentally, they beat both Carthage and Augie in the conference tourney.
So, if you're asking if last year's record should be the primary factor in this year's assessment, my answers is no. I think how they were actually playing over the final part of the season is more important than their final record.

Lastly, just to be clear. There is no way in hell I was suggesting NCC should be the pre-season #1-3 team.
I agree with you that 4-7 is about right. The main thing is that, given the last time they played NCC won, the Cardinals shouldn't be more than one or two spots behind wherever Augie is placed.

Based off of this post, where do you have carthage? As you referenced they were the CCIW #1 seed. Have majority of key contributors back and as you pointed out is important, had a very successful finish to the year. They went 7-1 in the back half of the CCIW round robin Including wins vs Augie and their 2nd win against north central.

I could see north central 4-7 as well, but you would have to really convince me how they could be far ahead of Carthage.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on August 17, 2017, 08:25:07 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on August 16, 2017, 03:15:37 PM
Babson and Augustana were dead even in the title game, as reflected by a game-saving play required to secure the victory. I'd say that Augustana's string of wins heading into the title game was actually tougher than Babson's string of wins (Keene barely made the tourney at all, Tufts was very good but also pretty banged up when they played, and Husson was not an impressive win, whereas all of Auggie's wins were vs. tough and talented opponents), but at worst, I'd say they were roughly equal.

That's part of the quandry for a voter, though. Babson played much, much better against Whitman than they did against Augustana and Whitman found themselves in a similar place at the end of their game - how do I factor that in? Augustana's rate of improvement over the course of February/March was pretty spectacular, which adds some wrinkles in ranking them - they were markedly better in Salem than they were even the weekend before; that makes it tough. Honestly, Babson probably wasn't "better" than either of those teams - like, if they played 100 times, I don't know that I'd pick Babson to win 50 - but Babson is definitely the team I'd pick to win one game when it mattered. That's even more confusing.

There's a still a couple months of pontificating to do, but right now, Whitman appears the more consistent, mature squad - although if Augustana can improve over the course of this season like they did last year, they could be all-time good by the end of it. Deep, big, talented - a tough matchup for anyone.

I'm just glad we've got a lot of great teams this year - so many squads were junior heavy last season. It's going to be great fun.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on August 17, 2017, 10:40:14 AM

Admittedly, I know nothing about Carthage so won't opine on them ... I'm sure they aren't the only candidate for a top-10 slot that I failed to mention.

As for Tufts, they are notoriously hard to predict from year to year and at times even from game to game, historically. Usually they have a lot talent, but play up to their talent level some years more than others. They play very very fast and can be hard to deal with if you aren't prepared for their style. Next year Tufts has LOADS of talent and depth returning on the wings but as you note big question marks at the key positions of point guard and center. The center position in particular poses an issue. They play a four-out one-in style that requires a strong center who can rebound, provide a post presence on offense, and protect the rim, and with their top two centers departing and only one guy (Patrick Racy, who is OK but a bit undersized and not really a dominant presence inside) who even remotely resembles a big man on the returning roster, that is by far the biggest question mark. But perhaps they have someone coming in who can play the 5 (I imagine they probably do).

On the plus side, Vinny Pace is a legit all-American talent who was limited all of last year after returning from an ACL tear suffered in the 2016 NCAAs. He showed what he can do in the St. John Fisher game in the NCAAs. Along with Savage, Dayton, Engvall, Feldman, and Garrett, they have a slew of fairly interchangeable talented, experienced guys to play at the 2-3-4, which is basically the same position at Tufts. The only true point guard who has played at all is Thomas Lapham, who is a steady, experienced guy who can shoot, but who has been banged up a lot over his career and is a lot less dynamic of a creator than the guy he replaces, Tarik Smith. Still, as a senior I think he will be solid enough with all the talent around him, and if not, it's possible that one of the natural two guards slides to the point or that Vinny Pace plays as a point-forward.

But if they can't find a big man who can help as a frosh or transfer, they are going to be murdered inside next year, just as they were last year when Palleschi was hurt (they were 6-4 in the games he missed / his first game back when he was a non-factor, and 19-3 in the games he played in, with two of those three losses coming against Babson, so the difference was dramatic). Palleschi just did SO much for them especially on the defensive end where he was an elite rim protector. And again, his backup Drew Madsen, who did a capable job at least of filling in, also graduates.

For those reasons, I could see Tufts topping out at a top-10 team again next year, or entirely out of the top 25 ... it all depends on whether they can figure something out at the 5.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on August 17, 2017, 11:40:18 AM

Let's keep something in mind... no team... NO TEAM... has gone from preseason to championship as the number one team in every poll in the history of the D3hoops.com MBB Top 25. That isn't a knock on the voters. That is an indication of a number of things including how hard it is to rank teams, how many top teams there are, and how it could be anyone's night at any given time in men's basketball.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on August 17, 2017, 01:02:17 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on August 16, 2017, 03:28:54 PM
Per the idea that the college pulled the player and not the coach... I think the initial reference didn't need to mention the coach and the follow-up then assumed the point was the coach wouldn't do it.

We don't know what happened and in the grand scheme of things, if something happened severe enough for the college to remove a student... it doesn't matter what the coach wanted to do or not - even if he would have done the same. The college trumps all. I don't think Giovanine had anything to do with it. He has to abide by what the college wants to do and to suggest (or allude as I think happened purposely or not) he didn't remove Wofford or wouldn't have done it is a step too far an assumption. The college chose to remove the student. There is no need to care otherwise.

as I recall, this was basically a non- basketball situation wherein the college administration made the decisions, and the athletic department was basically told to not get involved. If I were the AD or head coach, I do not make a move roster or otherwise, until the college administration renders a decision and sets out the action to be taken and when it is to be taken. It was an unfortunate set of circumstances, and hopefully the student learned a lesson albeit the hard way.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on August 17, 2017, 01:17:04 PM

Quote from: iwumichigander on August 17, 2017, 01:02:17 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on August 16, 2017, 03:28:54 PM
Per the idea that the college pulled the player and not the coach... I think the initial reference didn't need to mention the coach and the follow-up then assumed the point was the coach wouldn't do it.

We don't know what happened and in the grand scheme of things, if something happened severe enough for the college to remove a student... it doesn't matter what the coach wanted to do or not - even if he would have done the same. The college trumps all. I don't think Giovanine had anything to do with it. He has to abide by what the college wants to do and to suggest (or allude as I think happened purposely or not) he didn't remove Wofford or wouldn't have done it is a step too far an assumption. The college chose to remove the student. There is no need to care otherwise.
as I recall, this was basically a non- basketball situation wherein the college administration made the decisions, and the athletic department was basically told to not get involved. If I were the AD or head coach, I do not make a move roster or otherwise, until the college administration renders a decision and sets out the action to be taken and when it is to be taken. It was an unfortunate set of circumstances, and hopefully the student learned a lesson albeit the hard way.

Exactly on all points.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on August 17, 2017, 01:52:21 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on August 17, 2017, 10:40:14 AM
As for Tufts, they are notoriously hard to predict from year to year and at times even from game to game, historically. Usually they have a lot talent, but play up to their talent level some years more than others. They play very very fast and can be hard to deal with if you aren't prepared for their style. [...]

Thanks for the detailed response.

Tufts and Washington University will play Webster and Wabash respectively and meet in game two should they both advance (or lose). Looking forward to it.

No one would be surprised to hear me say that Washington University is a Top 10 team this season as they were a season ago.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on August 17, 2017, 02:04:48 PM

Quote from: WUH on August 17, 2017, 01:52:21 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on August 17, 2017, 10:40:14 AM
As for Tufts, they are notoriously hard to predict from year to year and at times even from game to game, historically. Usually they have a lot talent, but play up to their talent level some years more than others. They play very very fast and can be hard to deal with if you aren't prepared for their style. [...]

Thanks for the detailed response.

Tufts and Washington University will play Webster and Wabash respectively and meet in game two should they both advance (or lose). Looking forward to it.

No one would be surprised to hear me say that Washington University is a Top 10 team this season as they were a season ago.

That's the funny thing... I just haven't seen WashU that good (Top 10 good) in a few years. It isn't a knock or anything... I just have expected better and maybe I have gotten so used to the great teams WashU has had that the recent teams have left me yearning for more. I can't remember how I voted last year off the top of my head, but I do remember not being high on the Bears for several seasons now. I would love to see WashU return to the days of incredibly tough-to-stop basketball... but I think with more parity in Division III men's basketball either no one will be able to achieve that level of greatness or I need to adjust my expectations ... again (LOL).

FYI - not trying to stir the pot here. WashU was 21-6 last season after a surprising 15-10 the season before. And an underwhelming 20-6 in 2014-15. I need to research the team more and chat with some people before I am willing to buy in they are a Top 10 team to start the season. Not saying they won't be... sometimes teams like WashU rise to the surface (top). I am just not seeing it at this point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on August 17, 2017, 02:32:21 PM

WashU was a top 10 quality team last year, easy. They got a bad break having to play the tournament on the road at Holland. If they host that first weekend which they were certainly in line to do they're likely a Sweet 16 team and certainly capable of beating Augustana and making the Final Four.

Totally different narrative entering 2018 if that had happened.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on August 17, 2017, 03:29:19 PM

Quote from: sac on August 17, 2017, 02:32:21 PM
WashU was a top 10 quality team last year, easy. They got a bad break having to play the tournament on the road at Holland....

Or against a Senior who went 10 for 11 from 3 point land...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on August 17, 2017, 03:35:04 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on August 17, 2017, 02:04:48 PM
That's the funny thing... I just haven't seen WashU that good (Top 10 good) in a few years. It isn't a knock or anything... I just have expected better and maybe I have gotten so used to the great teams WashU has had that the recent teams have left me yearning for more. I can't remember how I voted last year off the top of my head, but I do remember not being high on the Bears for several seasons now. I would love to see WashU return to the days of incredibly tough-to-stop basketball... but I think with more parity in Division III men's basketball either no one will be able to achieve that level of greatness or I need to adjust my expectations ... again (LOL).

FYI - not trying to stir the pot here. WashU was 21-6 last season after a surprising 15-10 the season before. And an underwhelming 20-6 in 2014-15. I need to research the team more and chat with some people before I am willing to buy in they are a Top 10 team to start the season. Not saying they won't be... sometimes teams like WashU rise to the surface (top). I am just not seeing it at this point.

I was going to make a joke about you and your preseason ballot, but I gave you a hard time last season on more than one occasion (you probably do not remember). And, it is hard to convey a friendly disagreement when you disagree repeatedly on the same issue.

The 2015-2016 season was tough, but the Bears returned only one starter and one reserve who played around 10 minutes. 2016-2017 was a very successful regular season in my mind, but the postseason...

If you think about the program, they have only missed two postseasons since the national championships, but they have not be able to make it past the first or second round. And, five of those games were played at home. I understand how that may weigh on the mind of the voters.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on August 17, 2017, 03:41:49 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on August 17, 2017, 03:29:19 PM
Or against a Senior who went 10 for 11 from 3 point land...

I know I do not need to tell you, but in deference to another great performance, Dante Hawkins had a magnificent game too, though Cody Stuive was just... :'(

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on August 17, 2017, 04:34:05 PM

Quote from: WUH on August 17, 2017, 01:52:21 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on August 17, 2017, 10:40:14 AM
As for Tufts, they are notoriously hard to predict from year to year and at times even from game to game, historically. Usually they have a lot talent, but play up to their talent level some years more than others. They play very very fast and can be hard to deal with if you aren't prepared for their style. [...]

Thanks for the detailed response.

Tufts and Washington University will play Webster and Wabash respectively and meet in game two should they both advance (or lose). Looking forward to it.

No one would be surprised to hear me say that Washington University is a Top 10 team this season as they were a season ago.

I have to agree with WUH that Wash U is a top 10 candidate... their inside game is absolutely loaded, and they have 3 small quick guards who understand the flow of the offense and get the ball to the big men. The one thing missing would seem to be a pure perimeter shooter... there seems to be no one to go to if the ball is going inside out... Knupp, Kucera, Nester are all pretty much penetrate and dish guys, and the big men are 15 feet and in shooters.... maybe a new face can help?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on August 17, 2017, 05:16:00 PM

I was really confused because I was thinking that Wash U. was not even a prospective top-25 team, until I looked again and realized they have already posted next season's roster! I thought all those seniors had graduated ... :). I'd say they certainly have the look of a pre-season top 5 team with a loaded senior class featuring five likely starters. The early game against (maybe) Tufts would be very interesting indeed. Tufts will surely look to make the pace frenetic, where they have an advantage vs. most teams, because there is no way they can hang with all of Wash U's size in the half court. As usual Wash U. seems to have a brutal non-conference schedule but should post a gaudy record anyway because the UAA doesn't seem all that strong next year, relative to historical standards, outside of them. Rochester and CMU in particular are likely to be dramatically worse.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on August 17, 2017, 05:33:43 PM

Quote from: hopefan on August 17, 2017, 04:34:05 PM
The one thing missing would seem to be a pure perimeter shooter... there seems to be no one to go to if the ball is going inside out... Knupp, Kucera, Nester are all pretty much penetrate and dish guys, and the big men are 15 feet and in shooters.... maybe a new face can help?

Definitely an issue.

As with the last few seasons, this team is going to be winning games two points at a time. They may be scoring three points the old fashioned way more than from outside.

Knupp was a 40 percent shooter as a sophomore. I have no way of knowing, but I am going to bet that he gets asked to take a lot more shots. Nester was a 45% shooter in high school and was the best three point shooter a season ago at 38 percent. He will probably take a lot more shots.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on August 17, 2017, 06:07:52 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on August 17, 2017, 05:16:00 PM
As usual Wash U. seems to have a brutal non-conference schedule but should post a gaudy record anyway because the UAA doesn't seem all that strong next year, relative to historical standards, outside of them. Rochester and CMU in particular are likely to be dramatically worse.

The conference will be weak next season.

I think they will have 4-5 teams that have nice seasons and maybe they find a way to get two in the tourney. I was down on Emory, but I have been coming around lately.

Maybe I am just mesmerized by the fact that they have a incoming freshmen who scored 2,300 in high school.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on August 17, 2017, 06:38:38 PM

Quote from: Red and black on August 16, 2017, 11:25:55 PM
Quote from: AndOne on August 16, 2017, 04:27:55 PM
nescac1,

I think when you base an analysis of something current on "how they finished last year," you might need to differentiate between how they finished with regard to what their total record was and how they fonished playing at the end of the year. North Central finished 18-11. Not that impressive overall. However, to only consider those numbers in assessing this season's team is, I believe, a bit shortsighted. Because equally important is how they finished playing near the end of the year. And, in NCC's case, they were playing some of their best basketball at season's end. Over the last 12 games they finished 9-3 with the 3 losses being a 6 point overtime loss to the national champion runner up (Augie), a 4 point overtime loss to the CCIW tourney #1 seed (Carthage), and a 1 point loss to Elite Eight member Hanover. Incidentally, they beat both Carthage and Augie in the conference tourney.
So, if you're asking if last year's record should be the primary factor in this year's assessment, my answers is no. I think how they were actually playing over the final part of the season is more important than their final record.

Lastly, just to be clear. There is no way in hell I was suggesting NCC should be the pre-season #1-3 team.
I agree with you that 4-7 is about right. The main thing is that, given the last time they played NCC won, the Cardinals shouldn't be more than one or two spots behind wherever Augie is placed.

Based off of this post, where do you have carthage? As you referenced they were the CCIW #1 seed. Have majority of key contributors back and as you pointed out is important, had a very successful finish to the year. They went 7-1 in the back half of the CCIW round robin Including wins vs Augie and their 2nd win against north central.

I could see north central 4-7 as well, but you would have to really convince me how they could be far ahead of Carthage.

First of all, I think that the failure of Carthage to finish in last season's final Top 25, or even in the ORV, will hurt their chances of being included in either category in this year's pre-season rankings, if that's what you're asking.

You mentioned that they were the #1 seed in the conference tourney, have several key contributors back, and finished well including a 2nd win against NCC before losing to them in the conference tournament. However, keep in mind that two other schools won as many conference games as they did, that they lost both their leading scorer and their (very underrated) leading assist guy, and that the game they really needed in the conference tourney got away (to NCC).

Pluses for the upcoming season include the possible further development of Brad Perry, the emergence of Kienan Baltimore as a future all-conference player, the all-around play of Brad Kruse, and the big shot making ability of Jordan Thomas. Questions needing consideration include who will assume the top scorer position, who will QB the team and get the ball to the shooters/scorers mentioned above, and did they recruit any newbie who will emerge as a significant contributor. Disappointment should reign if CC doesn't finish in the top four of the conference and qualify for the tournament. I can see CC and IWU being top contenders for the 3rd and 4th spots. If they can get into the national tourney and win a game there, final Top 20-25 or ORV ranking is possible.

Lastly, as a direct comparison between CC and NCC heading into this season, keep in mind that in addition to what they had last year NCC gets Connor Raridon back, adds a D2 transfer, adds another transfer who led his team in scoring and was 5th in conference scoring, and adds, among others, a super athletic freshman who is both explosive on the offensive interior and plays a smothering brand of defense, along with another freshman who finished second in scoring in DuPage County, a great provider of top level D3 talent. IDK what noteworthy additions CC is making which helps lead me to the conclusion that there is a rather large gap between where NCC is likely to be ranked pre-season, and where CC may be ranked.
Hope that answers your question.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Red and black on August 17, 2017, 11:42:46 PM

Quote from: AndOne on August 17, 2017, 06:38:38 PM
Quote from: Red and black on August 16, 2017, 11:25:55 PM
Quote from: AndOne on August 16, 2017, 04:27:55 PM
nescac1,

I think when you base an analysis of something current on "how they finished last year," you might need to differentiate between how they finished with regard to what their total record was and how they fonished playing at the end of the year. North Central finished 18-11. Not that impressive overall. However, to only consider those numbers in assessing this season's team is, I believe, a bit shortsighted. Because equally important is how they finished playing near the end of the year. And, in NCC's case, they were playing some of their best basketball at season's end. Over the last 12 games they finished 9-3 with the 3 losses being a 6 point overtime loss to the national champion runner up (Augie), a 4 point overtime loss to the CCIW tourney #1 seed (Carthage), and a 1 point loss to Elite Eight member Hanover. Incidentally, they beat both Carthage and Augie in the conference tourney.
So, if you're asking if last year's record should be the primary factor in this year's assessment, my answers is no. I think how they were actually playing over the final part of the season is more important than their final record.

Lastly, just to be clear. There is no way in hell I was suggesting NCC should be the pre-season #1-3 team.
I agree with you that 4-7 is about right. The main thing is that, given the last time they played NCC won, the Cardinals shouldn't be more than one or two spots behind wherever Augie is placed.

Based off of this post, where do you have carthage? As you referenced they were the CCIW #1 seed. Have majority of key contributors back and as you pointed out is important, had a very successful finish to the year. They went 7-1 in the back half of the CCIW round robin Including wins vs Augie and their 2nd win against north central.

I could see north central 4-7 as well, but you would have to really convince me how they could be far ahead of Carthage.

First of all, I think that the failure of Carthage to finish in last season's final Top 25, or even in the ORV, will hurt their chances of being included in either category in this year's pre-season rankings, if that's what you're asking.

You mentioned that they were the #1 seed in the conference tourney, have several key contributors back, and finished well including a 2nd win against NCC before losing to them in the conference tournament. However, keep in mind that two other schools won as many conference games as they did, that they lost both their leading scorer and their (very underrated) leading assist guy, and that the game they really needed in the conference tourney got away (to NCC).

Pluses for the upcoming season include the possible further development of Brad Perry, the emergence of Kienan Baltimore as a future all-conference player, the all-around play of Brad Kruse, and the big shot making ability of Jordan Thomas. Questions needing consideration include who will assume the top scorer position, who will QB the team and get the ball to the shooters/scorers mentioned above, and did they recruit any newbie who will emerge as a significant contributor. Disappointment should reign if CC doesn't finish in the top four of the conference and qualify for the tournament. I can see CC and IWU being top contenders for the 3rd and 4th spots. If they can get into the national tourney and win a game there, final Top 20-25 or ORV ranking is possible.

Lastly, as a direct comparison between CC and NCC heading into this season, keep in mind that in addition to what they had last year NCC gets Connor Raridon back, adds a D2 transfer, adds another transfer who led his team in scoring and was 5th in conference scoring, and adds, among others, a super athletic freshman who is both explosive on the offensive interior and plays a smothering brand of defense, along with another freshman who finished second in scoring in DuPage County, a great provider of top level D3 talent. IDK what noteworthy additions CC is making which helps lead me to the conclusion that there is a rather large gap between where NCC is likely to be ranked pre-season, and where CC may be ranked.
Hope that answers your question.

First off, I am in no way stating I believe Carthage to be a top 10 team at this point, and I agree with most on here about the high preseason ranking of Augie and North Central. What I guess I am arguing, is based off of last season the gap clearly isn't that big. Carthage went 1-1 against what many see as 1 or 2 ranked Augie and they went 2-1 against what you are saying you see as a 4-7 nationally ranked NCC.

Carthage has 4 of their top 5 back including Perry and Baltimore. They finished the regular season 7-1 and Baltimore finished that stretch of games averaging 16 points and Perry, the regional rookie of the year, was roughly 12 PPG and 8 RPG. With any improvement they should be a load to go against together. As for the "QB" of the team, I think it will still be Brad Kruse who was all conference last year.

I am not nearly as close to the Carthage program as you are the North Central. I am merely an alum and a fan. I have very little communication with coaching staff so I can't politic for my school like you can regarding new coming players. What I have heard, is that the Carthage staff is very pleased with their incoming class. They also get their PG back who transferred in before last season. He was starting ahead of their PG from last season before a season ending injury in their 2nd scrimmage.

Again I am in no way taking anything away from any other program, in fact I would like to think the CCIW deserves more teams in the discussion of top 25. Based off of what is returning alone and not even including any potential new adds, and based off of Carthage's success against top teams last year I just don't see how they can be left without serious consideration.

I will head back up north for the Carthage home coming game in a month or so. Hopefully I can get more inside info then! These posts are really getting me excited for the season now. Can it be October already!?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PeterEscobar on August 27, 2017, 09:59:46 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on August 15, 2017, 03:38:39 PM
As a voter... something spectacular is going to have to keep me from voting Whitman #1 in the preseason.

First off, Babson loses far too much to keep my #1 vote. I do know of voters who will continue to vote for the champ until they lose. I am not of that mentality and have no reason to keep Babson #1.

First and foremost, I agree 100% Whitman should be #1 to begin the season. And Augustana and Williams deserve to be top 5. I did want to shed some light on Babson for 2017-18... They return the starting point guard from the six NCAA tournament games and two All-Conference players in Nick Comenale and Bradley Jacks... And they added three Division I transfers. Graham Dolan, who redshirted last season at U Buffalo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGaJakR6D98), Brandon Johnson, a two year player at Boston University (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brjGRJEx9Pk), and Tim Hasbargen, a transfer from Cleveland State who played nine minutes a game and shot 40% from 3 in the Horizon League as a sophomore. The freshman is Andrew Jaworski who averaged over 30 points per game in the state tournament (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iw-uq1qlLVo). So maybe don't sleep so hard on the Beavers...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on August 28, 2017, 08:35:53 AM

I suppose we'll all do a what and see approach. Looking at their schedule, they have a killer schedule...if they used the opponents' rosters from last year. Endicott, Amherst, Albertus Magnus and Lasell, among others, all suffer huge graduation losses.

And all because you are a D1 transfer doesn't guarantee immediate success. But, like I said, we'll see what they look like at the beginning of December. I still think they'll be ranked outside the Top 15.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PeterEscobar on August 28, 2017, 07:49:57 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on August 28, 2017, 08:35:53 AM
And all because you are a D1 transfer doesn't guarantee immediate success. But, like I said, we'll see what they look like at the beginning of December. I still think they'll be ranked outside the Top 15.

Agree just because someone is a DI transfer, it does not guarantee success. However, if just one of the three is an impact player you are looking at a team with two all-conference seniors, a point guard who just won six straight NCAA tournament games and another impact player. In the NEWMAC, which looks to have MIT and Springfield competing on a regional level and WPI seemingly always a lock for 20 wins, that bodes well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on August 29, 2017, 10:18:17 AM

Quote from: PeterEscobar on August 28, 2017, 07:49:57 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on August 28, 2017, 08:35:53 AM
And all because you are a D1 transfer doesn't guarantee immediate success. But, like I said, we'll see what they look like at the beginning of December. I still think they'll be ranked outside the Top 15.
Agree just because someone is a DI transfer, it does not guarantee success. However, if just one of the three is an impact player you are looking at a team with two all-conference seniors, a point guard who just won six straight NCAA tournament games and another impact player. In the NEWMAC, which looks to have MIT and Springfield competing on a regional level and WPI seemingly always a lock for 20 wins, that bodes well.

They've got a great coach and tons of experience - Comenale is also a much better player than he needed to show last year. I think he's one of those guys who can really excel in a system where they're counting on him to score more. He can shoot lights out, but he's also long and quick and has a pretty good handle. Obviously, it's a huge drop off losing all those guys and I won't be giving them the benefit of the doubt to start the year, but that cupboard is not entirely bare.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on August 29, 2017, 12:53:17 PM

Augustana arguably lost more the previous year than Babson did this past year and Augustana was ranked #18 in this past season's preseason poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on August 29, 2017, 01:16:39 PM

I do think Babson's schedule is weaker than it appears on paper. Last year was the deepest and most balanced I've seen in New England, as reflected by the tourney results (5 of the top 11 in the final poll, four teams in the elite 8, two in the final four, and the national champion, hard to do much better). But a LOT of teams were unusually senior-heavy. The region will be fairly wide open this season, I think, with lots of surprises.

WPI is usually sollid but really trending down ... 17-9 was their worst year in awhile, and the two guys who graduated were the top scorers and rebounders on the team; no double-digit scorers returning. Endicott's whole starting five graduated and they figure to be WAY down. Amherst graduated six of its top eight guys (although still have plenty of young talent on hand as always). Becker should be pretty good but does lose one of its two stars from a top-heavy team. Bates loses its twin big men. MIT should be good but there is usually unexpected roster attrition due to the academic load there, so who knows. Brandeis has a great incoming frosh class but really only one strong returning player and probably won't pose much of a threat. Tufts will still be tough, but unlikely to be as good as last season. At Bowdoin could be a very tough game this year and Springfield I think is a major sleeper and is my pick to win NEWMAC if everyone is back -- Jake Ross is absolutely legit, I thought as a frosh he was even better than Flannery, and the entire roster returns including a really talented rising sophomore class that should be much tougher this year. But the bottom half of NEWMAC looks very weak. And Babson avoids three of what I consider the top-five preseason squads in the region: Williams, Middlebury, and Nichols.

Babson should still be able to post a gaudy W-L record even if they are significantly down from last year's elite level, especially if they have better injury luck. It was really amazing that Babson was able to pull out that title run with two starters out with injuries ... they basically played six guys down the stretch last year, and this year with the impressive additions figure to be deeper, at least. They probably warrant a top 10-12 pre-season ranking, something in that range, I figure.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PeterEscobar on August 29, 2017, 06:39:29 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on August 29, 2017, 01:16:39 PM
I do think Babson's schedule is weaker than it appears on paper. Last year was the deepest and most balanced I've seen in New England, as reflected by the tourney results (5 of the top 11 in the final poll, four teams in the elite 8, two in the final four, and the national champion, hard to do much better). But a LOT of teams were unusually senior-heavy. The region will be fairly wide open this season, I think, with lots of surprises.

WPI is usually sollid but really trending down ... 17-9 was their worst year in awhile, and the two guys who graduated were the top scorers and rebounders on the team; no double-digit scorers returning. Endicott's whole starting five graduated and they figure to be WAY down. Amherst graduated six of its top eight guys (although still have plenty of young talent on hand as always). Becker should be pretty good but does lose one of its two stars from a top-heavy team. Bates loses its twin big men. MIT should be good but there is usually unexpected roster attrition due to the academic load there, so who knows. Brandeis has a great incoming frosh class but really only one strong returning player and probably won't pose much of a threat. Tufts will still be tough, but unlikely to be as good as last season. At Bowdoin could be a very tough game this year and Springfield I think is a major sleeper and is my pick to win NEWMAC if everyone is back -- Jake Ross is absolutely legit, I thought as a frosh he was even better than Flannery, and the entire roster returns including a really talented rising sophomore class that should be much tougher this year. But the bottom half of NEWMAC looks very weak. And Babson avoids three of what I consider the top-five preseason squads in the region: Williams, Middlebury, and Nichols.

Babson should still be able to post a gaudy W-L record even if they are significantly down from last year's elite level, especially if they have better injury luck. It was really amazing that Babson was able to pull out that title run with two starters out with injuries ... they basically played six guys down the stretch last year, and this year with the impressive additions figure to be deeper, at least. They probably warrant a top 10-12 pre-season ranking, something in that range, I figure.

Agree pretty much across the board here, except for Ross being better than Flannery but that's neither here nor there in this thread. Definitely was not lobbying for Babson to be ranked #1 again haha but definitely agree with 10-12 ranking seeming fair to start the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on August 29, 2017, 07:43:11 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on August 29, 2017, 12:53:17 PM
Augustana arguably lost more the previous year than Babson did this past year and Augustana was ranked #18 in this past season's preseason poll.

This is a good point, but also raises an interesting point of view: I didn't vote for Augustana in the preseason because I felt they lost far too much. I, and others of the same mentality, was offset by some who ranked them very highly.

I would also say that the big difference between what Augustana lost (in numbers) is that Babson lost a far better individual (player of the year) which I think makes a bigger impact potentially. Not positive how I will vote for Babson because I haven't broken it all down, but the loss of players plus Flannery is a key factor.

And yeah... not sure I can put Ross on the same level as Flannery.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on August 29, 2017, 11:12:11 PM

Augustana entered the tournament unranked, they were #18 in the pre-season poll

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on August 30, 2017, 08:05:35 AM

Dave,

If I had a vote, I wouldn't have voted for Augie either. As for quality over quantity, Babson had the POTY, but Augie did graduate 1st and 2nd team All-Americans. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BaboNation on September 12, 2017, 11:55:31 AM

This is my first ever post, though I've followed the board since I first came upon it a few years ago.
(There are a LOT of great posters on this board, and the D3 Hoops crew is first-rate).

I'm a Babson grad from many years ago and I'm on Cloud 9. Never in my wildest dreams did I ever envision the possibility of the school ever winning a national championship in basketball. Athletically it was always highly competitive in soccer, but basketball ... not so much. And the facilities back in the day, were less than ideal to put it charitably.

I grew up with Peavey Gym, which at the time was probably on a par with the typical middle school gym in terms of seating and general facilities. It was pretty bad. I remember the side with no seats had about 4 or 5 feet between the line and the unforgiving masonry wall. Many people (even students back then) don't know that in the Celtics heydey they held training camps at the college (from 1959-1966 - all championship years) and even had an exhibition game there. I can only imagine what Russell, Cousy, etc. thought about the showers.

As for this past year's team I have to start - where else - with Joey Flannery. I only got to see him play live once (I live out of state), but I've watched him play numerous times through game streaming. A player of the year? At Babson? If I hadn't seen it myself I never would have believed it.

In Flannery's first 2 years his skill level was obvious but I don't think the surrounding cast and tempo best suited his game. I'm not trying to diminish any players but it was a much slower paced offense which featured positioning the bigs at the low post and methodically working for shots around the rim. Nothing wrong with that in and of itself, but Joey's game is best when the action is faster and the points come from anywhere on the court.

The addition of Nelson to the roster was huge. He could post up or take his man outside. My only fear ever with him was his penchant to get it early foul trouble on a team with little depth.

Bradley Jacks really came into his own as well. When he went down I thought Babson would have all it could handle just winning the NEWMAC post-season, let alone making any deep run in the NCAAs. When he returned in March he was obviously still hurt, a shell of the defensive force he was in December and early January.

Comenale was a perfect fit. Great in the up-tempo offense, helps spacing on the floor, can't be left alone above the arc, and plays better when the games get late.

Bohmiller was a tough loss. I knew they'd miss his offense but I especially thought it would cripple the team's already limited depth.

As the team moved deeper and deeper into the post-season I kept thinking, yeah it has been a great season but if only they had a healthy Bradley and Sam they'd really be able to make some noise.

When they fell behind Whitman by 25 I felt as I did in the Superbowl (lifelong Pats fan here) ... it was a great run but this is where it ends. I turned off the game til the start of the second half and watched the epic comeback in awe. Everyone contributed but Rice had the best game I've ever seen him play.

In the title game I thought Augustana's depth might wear Babson down, particularly if Nelson got in foul trouble. With a lead late in the game I permitted myself to imagine a national championship. And then I suffered through the missed front-end free throws, including one from Mr. Automatic! Even after Joey's block and a second on the clock I worried until the final whistle.

Magical.

As for the future, I have no illusions about Babson's prospects. Flannery was a once in a generation transcendent talent for the school. Regionally and nationally there are powerhouses that seem destined to be in the mix for years to come. Some of them were on Babson's run in '17: Amherst, Whitman, and Augustana.

If I were forced to make a pick for 2018 champion it would be Augustana. They have a solid program, can play with anyone in the country and they are due.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on September 12, 2017, 06:13:01 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on August 17, 2017, 11:40:18 AM
Let's keep something in mind... no team... NO TEAM... has gone from preseason to championship as the number one team in every poll in the history of the D3hoops.com MBB Top 25. That isn't a knock on the voters. That is an indication of a number of things including how hard it is to rank teams, how many top teams there are, and how it could be anyone's night at any given time in men's basketball.

Only three schools have started and ended the year at #1 too:

2004-05 - UWSP
2007-08 - Wash U
2008-09 - Wash U

And 12 years, the title was won by a team that hadn't been ranked #1 all season (until they hoisted the Walnut and Bronze).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 4samuy on September 28, 2017, 10:17:18 AM

Not sure how much they follow D 3 Hoops, but just got a peek at Street and Smiths preseason top 10.

1. Babson (31-2)
2. Ramapo (26-3)
3. Williams (23-9)
4. Whitman (31-1)
5. Augustana (24-9)
6. Wisconsin Whitewater (22-7)
7. Hanover (26-4)
8. St. Johns (19-9)
9. Swarthmore (23-6)
10. North Central (18-11)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on September 28, 2017, 11:06:30 AM

That's actually pretty solid -- better than Street and Smiths usually does, I'd say. Babson at number 1 seems kind of nuts, I know they have some interesting guys coming in but in light of losing Flannery plus some other firepower, they belong in the bottom of the top ten, at best, probably a bit lower. Ramapo is also too high. I'd say that Whitman, Augustana, Williams, Whitewater, Hanover, and North Central are all rock-solid choices for top ten slots, and all will almost surely be in the D3hoops top ten to start the season. Ramapo, St. Johns, and Swarthmore are also solid choices who will start the year, likely, as top-15 D3hoops squads at worst. The biggest omissions are Marietta, River Falls and Wash U. I'd probably put those three in the top ten in place of Swarthmore, Babson and St. John's, but certainly, all of Street & Smith's inclusions in the top ten teams are defensible, even if the order is a bit off. Other than Babson, all of the squads pegged by Street and Smith return most, if not all, of their firepower from last season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on September 28, 2017, 06:05:05 PM

Hanover at No. 7 seems a little generous, but they did get two impressive wins in the tourney and return a lot. Who knows?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on September 28, 2017, 08:02:22 PM

Hanover seems legit to me -- a four loss, Sweet 16 team that loses only one guy and features a likely first-team (at worst second) pre-season all American ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on September 28, 2017, 08:49:22 PM

Babson lost 3 guys who started in the championship game. Still #1 after that? Don't think so.

Re Hanover - keep in mind they were lucky to win their 2nd round game by a single point over a North Central team that was playing without one of it's pre-season All-Americans. A good team that will have a high number of wins due to playing in a weaker conference. But, number 7 in the country, NOT!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on September 28, 2017, 10:09:08 PM

Hanover does lose a 14 points, 7 rebounds per game center in Corey Muchmore. They may have someone else ready to step up, but this is a big loss.

I'll simply say that I do not know.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on September 29, 2017, 09:20:41 AM

Quote from: AndOne on September 28, 2017, 08:49:22 PM
Babson lost 3 guys who started in the championship game. Still #1 after that? Don't think so.

Re Hanover - keep in mind they were lucky to win their 2nd round game by a single point over a North Central team that was playing without one of it's pre-season All-Americans. A good team that will have a high number of wins due to playing in a weaker conference. But, number 7 in the country, NOT!

That argument is getting a little old. So basically every team that beat NCC was lucky because CR32 wasn't playing? Were there other circumstances during that specific game that made Hanover lucky to win that game? I mean, they did beat Hope on their home floor the following weekend.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on September 29, 2017, 09:20:46 AM

North Central was missing a preseason All-American? Hadn't heard.

Come on, man -- you're getting into Ypsi territory with your repeating that over and over. People get it. And it's not like he went down the night before the game. They had months to adjust.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on September 29, 2017, 09:57:01 AM

On a related note, Augustana was lucky to beat Williams, because had Duncan Robinson not transferred to Michigan, he would have been a senior and very likely the two-time national POY ... :).

In all seriousness, you want to talk about bad luck? How about Babson losing two of its top five players, from a fairly thin squad to begin with, to injuries late in the season ... and they STILL won the title. I remain amazed by that accomplishment. Every team has to overcome its share of adversity.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on September 29, 2017, 10:11:10 AM

Lose that and still win the National Championship? I'd call that good luck!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on September 29, 2017, 10:24:27 AM

FYI on Ramapo... they pretty much return the entire team (heck, may not lose anyone) from last year's squad. Maybe #2 is too high, but don't discount them. They are coming off one of the best season's in program history and will most likely be a bit miffed at how last year finished. Don't discount them a bit.

As for Street and Smith's efforts... eh.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on September 29, 2017, 11:18:03 AM

They do lose Aminu. He was the #3 scorer and top rebounder (6.9). Bonacum was at 6.6 rpg. So definitely a loss, but everyone else of significance returns. Sounds played in all 29 games, but averaged just 13 minutes a games and just over 6 ppg.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on September 29, 2017, 11:34:18 AM

Oh, I think Ramapo is worthy of a fairly high pre-season ranking, somewhere in the 10-15 range, but I do think anything in the top 5 is too high. Last year they put up a gaudy record but didn't beat a single team that finished in the top 25, and the NJAC had a fairly down year overall. And as GT notes they apparently do lose a top big guy.

I'm not really sure what happened to the NJAC -- I recall it being right there with NESCAC, CCIW, etc. certainly through the 1990s and probably for the 2000s as well, but has really dropped off this decade (no final four squads since 2009, for starters). It feels like it's been awhile since a NJAC team was in real title contention, and there have been some flame-outs fairly early in the tourney. Last year, the league as a whole, outside of Ramapo, was around .500 in aggregate out-of-conference play, and it's not as if they play in one of the stronger regions. All of which is odd for a traditional power conference that can draw on a huge pool of really talented New Jersey, Philly, and NYC-area players.

I see that Ramapo is playing vs. RMC about a mile from my house in November, so hopefully I can check that one out!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on September 29, 2017, 11:39:18 AM

I will say this... not sure there will be a consensus Top 5 or maybe Top 10... and I think we will see another significant gap somewhere... meaning maybe the number 6 team doesn't feel like they should be sixth, but someone has to be slotted in those places. I have spoken about that a lot. So teams, like Ramapo, may end up higher than you think they should be... but that's because no one really feels like they should be in those spots.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on September 29, 2017, 11:47:30 AM

Fair enough. It does seem like there is a pretty clear top 2, and then another bigger group behind them which are fairly close ... as an Eph fan I could see Williams anywhere from 3 to around 12, depending on how much you weigh last year's up-and-down regular season performance vs. the dramatically upgraded post-season version of the squad.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Caz Bombers on September 29, 2017, 12:18:38 PM

Ramapo is also wasting a couple important OOC opportunities on Medgar Evers and Yeshiva, plus they have to hope Farmingdale State both dominates the Skyline again and does a little better OOC itself.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 4samuy on September 29, 2017, 01:22:21 PM

Quote from: WUH on September 28, 2017, 10:09:08 PM
Hanover does lose a 14 points, 7 rebounds per game center in Corey Muchmore. They may have someone else ready to step up, but this is a big loss.

I'll simply say that I do not know.

I agree with you on Muchmore. As talented as McKinney and Fails are, IMHO Muchmore was the Glue to that Hanover team and a real "cagey" player who did all all the dirty work underneath to open space and driving lanes on the perimeter. He had a great run in the tourney and will be tough to replace.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on September 29, 2017, 03:16:54 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on September 29, 2017, 09:20:41 AM
Quote from: AndOne on September 28, 2017, 08:49:22 PM
Babson lost 3 guys who started in the championship game. Still #1 after that? Don't think so.

Re Hanover - keep in mind they were lucky to win their 2nd round game by a single point over a North Central team that was playing without one of it's pre-season All-Americans. A good team that will have a high number of wins due to playing in a weaker conference. But, number 7 in the country, NOT!

That argument is getting a little old. So basically every team that beat NCC was lucky because CR32 wasn't playing? Were there other circumstances during that specific game that made Hanover lucky to win that game? I mean, they did beat Hope on their home floor the following weekend.

It might be getting a little old Greek, but it's still true.

And nice job twisting what I said which wasn't that every team that beat NCC was lucky. I do think NCC would have been about 5 games better last year if CR was available for the entire season.

Not sure why it's so difficult for you to comprehend the chances are very high that, especially in a one point game, the presence of a player who averaged 18 PPG, 7 RPG, and 6 APG before being injured would likely have made a difference.

Have you never seen or watched a close game where your team, or any team for that matter, was missing a top player and you felt the outcome would have been different had he been able to play?
Yet, in this case, you seem to discount the possibility entirely. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on September 29, 2017, 03:57:51 PM

Quote from: AndOne on September 29, 2017, 03:16:54 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on September 29, 2017, 09:20:41 AM
Quote from: AndOne on September 28, 2017, 08:49:22 PM
Babson lost 3 guys who started in the championship game. Still #1 after that? Don't think so.

Re Hanover - keep in mind they were lucky to win their 2nd round game by a single point over a North Central team that was playing without one of it's pre-season All-Americans. A good team that will have a high number of wins due to playing in a weaker conference. But, number 7 in the country, NOT!

That argument is getting a little old. So basically every team that beat NCC was lucky because CR32 wasn't playing? Were there other circumstances during that specific game that made Hanover lucky to win that game? I mean, they did beat Hope on their home floor the following weekend.

It might be getting a little old Greek, but it's still true.

And nice job twisting what I said which wasn't that every team that beat NCC was lucky. I do think NCC would have been about 5 games better last year if CR was available for the entire season.

Not sure why it's so difficult for you to comprehend the chances are very high that, especially in a one point game, the presence of a player who averaged 18 PPG, 7 RPG, and 6 APG before being injured would likely have made a difference.

Have you never seen or watched a close game where your team, or any team for that matter, was missing a top player and you felt the outcome would have been different had he been able to play?
Yet, in this case, you seem to discount the possibility entirely. ::)

So if my team will be missing its top player this entire year, I guess I can use the same argument all year long? Never mind that the reason is he graduated. What's the difference dude? An unavailable player is just that, unavailable. If ifs and buts were candy and nuts we'd all have a Merry Christmas!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on September 29, 2017, 04:40:50 PM

The validity of your argument decreases as time passes. NCC had 3 months to adjust to life without Raridon. They had their bumps including losing 4 straight (and 3 conference games) at the beginning of January. Even then, I could buy that argument as they were getting into the meat of the conference schedule. But they adjusted well and played 21 games without Raridon before their loss to Hanover on a neutral court. The previous weekend they beat #1 seed Carthage on their home court and then knocked off future title game participant Augustana the next night. So, to say Hanover was lucky to beat a Raridonless NCC team 3 months and 22 games after the injury doesn't hold weight, IMO. Had Raridon got hurt the previous weekend, I'd double down on your argument. I'm not discounting his value, but the injury happened in December, not March.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on September 29, 2017, 04:45:26 PM

Outside Babson, I'd say that's the best S&S have done maybe ever. Ramapo is going to be good. I think they'll be better than last year. Their week spot was ball-handling, but more from lack of experience than talent. An extra year will help that. I don't know how they'll stack up nationally, but I'll be voting them pretty high to start. Bonacum is a very smart player with great court vision and a really broad game. I think he'll have more of an impact without Aminu in the middle.

We never really know what'll happen, but I think nine of those teams are Top-10 contenders, even if I wouldn't necessarily put them there. Babson might be a Top 25 team still, although a lot will depend on the transfer class.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 04, 2017, 10:12:53 AM

Not really a Top 25 question, but at least I won't forget to check this board.

Is Kalamazoo the closest D3 to Sturgis, Michigan?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Just Bill on October 04, 2017, 10:19:12 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 04, 2017, 10:12:53 AM
Not really a Top 25 question, but at least I won't forget to check this board.

Is Kalamazoo the closest D3 to Sturgis, Michigan?

I think that would be Trine in Angola, Indiana. 36 miles.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on October 04, 2017, 12:09:22 PM

Quote from: Just Bill on October 04, 2017, 10:19:12 AM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 04, 2017, 10:12:53 AM
Not really a Top 25 question, but at least I won't forget to check this board.

Is Kalamazoo the closest D3 to Sturgis, Michigan?

I think that would be Trine in Angola, Indiana. 36 miles.

Agreed. Trine would be a 45 minute drive. Kalamazoo, Olivet, and Albion would all be just over an hour. Technically, St. Mary's in South Bend is a D3 College, as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dunkin3117 on October 04, 2017, 04:40:36 PM

Thoughts on a team out of the IIAC cracking the Top 25 to start the season. Wartburg had an impressive run into the Sweet 16 last year and finished #18 in the final poll, but have lost 3 starters. Nebraska Wesleyan returns all but 1 (bench player) from a roster that went 18-8 and had a share of the regular season title with Loras, who also went 18-8, and also lost 3 of its starters. In my opinion, all 3 have a shot at breaking through the top 25 at some point in the year, curious to know everyones thoughts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 04, 2017, 07:19:40 PM

I think Nebraska Wesleyan has the best shot. They return nearly everyone and it seems a lot of the teams in the conference seem to lose multiple players of impact.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 05, 2017, 06:02:07 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 04, 2017, 07:19:40 PM
I think Nebraska Wesleyan has the best shot. They return nearly everyone and it seems a lot of the teams in the conference seem to lose multiple players of impact.

They don't really have a schedule conducive to it, unless they got undefeated for quite a while.

Also, notice they've got a Grinnell game on the schedule. NebWes doesn't play The System, but they run like crazy and routinely score over 100 points. With a young team just getting more experienced every year, that one could be a barn burner. System vs System games are usually a disappointment, but if one team is willing to give up easy buckets and the other is really good at finding them quickly, there could be a lot of offense.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 05, 2017, 07:35:23 AM

I understand that Neb. Wesleyan's schedule hardly screams demanding, but I think they'll be the best team in the IIAC based on returning players. BVU and Wartburg both play several WIAC teams and Lora's has an OK schedule too, but if I don't think they'll win all those games, obviously they won't be ranked. I think NWU has a better shot to go undefeated in the nonconference than the other teams posting solid 1 or 2 loss nonconference records. I guess we'll see!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on October 05, 2017, 09:40:18 AM

One caveat on Swathmore -- their pre-season roster lists only seven returning players (one of whom wasn't a rotation guy last year). In addition to graduating two senior starters, they apparently lose four non-seniors who did not return, one of whom was a significant contributor. I believe they only have five frosh recruits coming in, so barring some more guys joining the squad it will likely be an incredibly thin roster, and -- unless at least three frosh are ready to play right away -- it may be tough to live up to a top-10 billing with so little depth, especially if they don't have great luck with injuries. On the other hand, Cam Wiley, Zack Yonda, and highly-regarding frosh Conor Harkins should form a nationally-elite backcourt, and they have some good young centers to anchor the middle. But there is little margin for error ...

http://swarthmoreathletics.com/roster.aspx?path=mbball

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 06, 2017, 07:35:52 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on October 05, 2017, 09:40:18 AM
One caveat on Swathmore -- their pre-season roster lists only seven returning players (one of whom wasn't a rotation guy last year). In addition to graduating two senior starters, they apparently lose four non-seniors who did not return, one of whom was a significant contributor. I believe they only have five frosh recruits coming in, so barring some more guys joining the squad it will likely be an incredibly thin roster, and -- unless at least three frosh are ready to play right away -- it may be tough to live up to a top-10 billing with so little depth, especially if they don't have great luck with injuries. On the other hand, Cam Wiley, Zack Yonda, and highly-regarding frosh Conor Harkins should form a nationally-elite backcourt, and they have some good young centers to anchor the middle. But there is little margin for error ...

http://swarthmoreathletics.com/roster.aspx?path=mbball

You can't really rely on a roster at this point. They may well be down a few players, or they may just be waiting until the season starts to add the rest or somebody hasn't filled out their bio information sheet yet - there's a lot of reasons. I tend not to trust it until Nov 15th, but I'm a little cautious. Still, all their big names are on it right now. I think they'll be ok.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 06, 2017, 01:14:53 PM

I have a rule that I don't trust a player(s) is on a team until, they appear at practices, on the roster, in a uniform, at a game, and then into a game. LOL

Until all of those are met and in order (most likely)... I don't trust rosters. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 4samuy on October 19, 2017, 10:21:32 PM

Just got a look at the most recent publication of Small College Hoops and their preseason rankings.

1. Augustana
2. Whitman
3. Marietta
4. Chris. Newport
5. Amherst
6. Emory
7. Wis. River Falls
8. Williams
9. Hanover
10. Ramapo

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on October 19, 2017, 11:10:01 PM

Quote from: 4samuy on October 19, 2017, 10:21:32 PM
Just got a look at the most recent publication of Small College Hoops and their preseason rankings.

1. Augustana
2. Whitman
3. Marietta
4. Chris. Newport
5. Amherst
6. Emory
7. Wis. River Falls
8. Williams
9. Hanover
10. Ramapo

(https://media.giphy.com/media/ly8G39g1ujpNm/giphy.gif)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on October 20, 2017, 08:36:15 AM

Hahaha... WUH, that meme literally made my laugh out loud in my office. Thank you!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on October 20, 2017, 10:28:54 AM

Thanks! Emory may finish with the UAA player of the year and the freshman of the year and may very well finish second in the league (though that is not saying much this season), but they are not a Top 25 team. Definitely not a Top 10 team. Not yet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 20, 2017, 10:40:07 AM

Quote from: HOPEful on October 20, 2017, 08:36:15 AM
Hahaha... WUH, that meme literally made my laugh out loud in my office. Thank you!

Yeah. The early days of The Office was, by far, my favorite show.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on October 20, 2017, 11:37:41 AM

Amherst's inclusion is, ummm, questionable as well. They graduate six seniors who played big roles and return only two starters plus one deep rotation guy from a 17-8 team that played poorly down the stretch. Now, they certainly have enough (mostly unproven) talent that ending the year in the top 10 would not be a total shock, but to start the year, on paper they look like about the 5th or 6th best team in NESCAC, not the nation. At PG and C, they will be playing highly regarded recruits — but recruits who have never played a minute of meaningful college hoops.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 21, 2017, 07:36:23 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on October 20, 2017, 11:37:41 AM
Amherst's inclusion is, ummm, questionable as well. They graduate six seniors who played big roles and return only two starters plus one deep rotation guy from a 17-8 team that played poorly down the stretch. Now, they certainly have enough (mostly unproven) talent that ending the year in the top 10 would not be a total shock, but to start the year, on paper they look like about the 5th or 6th best team in NESCAC, not the nation. At PG and C, they will be playing highly regarded recruits — but recruits who have never played a minute of meaningful college hoops.

Yes, but if you're putting together a top ten with very little specific knowledge, Amherst is a good-odds play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 21, 2017, 08:45:07 AM

In this example, I would say no. I'm sure there are at least 10 teams out there that have more returning players, were better last year and should be better this year than Amherst, at least to start the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: middhoops on October 23, 2017, 02:18:47 PM

At least one NESCAC coach thinks Amherst will be demonstrably better than last season.
"...if for chemistry, alone."
They have some bigs who could be very good and two senior wings who are very very good already. The rest is a crapshoot.
Probably over rated by a fair bit.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 24, 2017, 10:42:02 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 21, 2017, 08:45:07 AM
In this example, I would say no. I'm sure there are at least 10 teams out there that have more returning players, were better last year and should be better this year than Amherst, at least to start the season.

You're assuming more research on their part than I am.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jmcozenlaw on October 24, 2017, 12:44:37 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on September 29, 2017, 04:45:26 PM

Outside Babson, I'd say that's the best S&S have done maybe ever. Ramapo is going to be good. I think they'll be better than last year. Their week spot was ball-handling, but more from lack of experience than talent. An extra year will help that. I don't know how they'll stack up nationally, but I'll be voting them pretty high to start. Bonacum is a very smart player with great court vision and a really broad game. I think he'll have more of an impact without Aminu in the middle.

We never really know what'll happen, but I think nine of those teams are Top-10 contenders, even if I wouldn't necessarily put them there. Babson might be a Top 25 team still, although a lot will depend on the transfer class.

The "transfer class"? Makes me think about the Rowan football teams under K.C. Keeler back in the day and the D-1/D-1AA/D-2 pipeline that SOMEHOW magically found it's way to Glassboro each year. Shhhh.................I'll never tell. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 25, 2017, 06:29:43 AM

Quote from: jmcozenlaw on October 24, 2017, 12:44:37 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on September 29, 2017, 04:45:26 PM

Outside Babson, I'd say that's the best S&S have done maybe ever. Ramapo is going to be good. I think they'll be better than last year. Their week spot was ball-handling, but more from lack of experience than talent. An extra year will help that. I don't know how they'll stack up nationally, but I'll be voting them pretty high to start. Bonacum is a very smart player with great court vision and a really broad game. I think he'll have more of an impact without Aminu in the middle.

We never really know what'll happen, but I think nine of those teams are Top-10 contenders, even if I wouldn't necessarily put them there. Babson might be a Top 25 team still, although a lot will depend on the transfer class.

The "transfer class"? Makes me think about the Rowan football teams under K.C. Keeler back in the day and the D-1/D-1AA/D-2 pipeline that SOMEHOW magically found it's way to Glassboro each year. Shhhh.................I'll never tell. ;)

I think we mentioned this earlier in the summer. Babson, with the highly ranked business department, tends to be a good fit for a lot of guys who maybe chased a scholarship and found out it wasn't what they thought. I also mentioned that because I was told they may have three transfer getting minutes this year. We, of course, have to wait to see who shows up on Nov 15th.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on October 26, 2017, 12:52:44 AM

The website says the school took in 50 transfers last fall and 15 in the spring. I really don't think they pull any shenanigans - they have an academic reputation to uphold.

It was five seasons ago they were about .500 for the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 26, 2017, 06:05:36 AM

Quote from: smedindy on October 26, 2017, 12:52:44 AM
The website says the school took in 50 transfers last fall and 15 in the spring. I really don't think they pull any shenanigans - they have an academic reputation to uphold.

It was five seasons ago they were about .500 for the season.

I hope I didn't imply that. I was just combining a few generalizations - it might be interesting to see what transfers end up majoring in, but I feel like a lot of them end up in business, so, to me, it makes sense that a school with a great business reputation and a great basketball program would be a logical landing place.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on October 26, 2017, 11:39:30 AM

I agreed with your sentiment. I was pointing to the "Rowan" generalization (which is BS anyway, because transfers are definitely part of the NJAC schools academic footprint).

We had some discussion on the D-3 football board about North Central. They always have transfers. This year they have 10 total, which for the NCAC was unthinkable. But North Central is a good magnet for transfers anyway (kids coming home to the Chicago suburbs after a breakup, or homesickness, or whatever).

Kids are going to transfer, and they will transfer somewhere that's a better fit for them. If the kids are eligible, and they graduate, why complain?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on October 27, 2017, 02:08:11 PM

1st game of the season tonight - Thomas More vs Kentucky 7 PM on SEC cable network; hopefully, a better outcome than the game against Henry VIII a few seasons ago.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 27, 2017, 02:38:06 PM

Quote from: ronk on October 27, 2017, 02:08:11 PM
1st game of the season tonight - Thomas More vs Kentucky 7 PM on SEC cable network; hopefully, a better outcome than the game against Henry VIII a few seasons ago.

Well not really, ronk, as for neither team does the game actually count. Yes, it is on TV as an exhibition, but let's not call that the first game of the season. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on October 27, 2017, 03:01:31 PM

I would call it the first game of the season, but that one is not going to be a game. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NEPAFAN on October 27, 2017, 03:13:23 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 27, 2017, 02:38:06 PM
Quote from: ronk on October 27, 2017, 02:08:11 PM
1st game of the season tonight - Thomas More vs Kentucky 7 PM on SEC cable network; hopefully, a better outcome than the game against Henry VIII a few seasons ago.

Well not really, ronk, as for neither team does the game actually count. Yes, it is on TV as an exhibition, but let's not call that the first game of the season. :)

::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on October 27, 2017, 04:01:35 PM

I'm once again running KenPom-like efficiency ratings for D3 this season.

http://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com/p/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency.html

I have preseason ratings up which weight the last three seasons for each team plus regress toward D3 average. The sorting is by efficiency margin. It's all rather meaningless at this point, but I find this sort of thing to be fun and wanted to share (daily calculated score predictions are on the page as well).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on October 29, 2017, 10:22:53 AM

Quote from: NEPAFAN on October 27, 2017, 03:13:23 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 27, 2017, 02:38:06 PM
Quote from: ronk on October 27, 2017, 02:08:11 PM
1st game of the season tonight - Thomas More vs Kentucky 7 PM on SEC cable network; hopefully, a better outcome than the game against Henry VIII a few seasons ago.

Well not really, ronk, as for neither team does the game actually count. Yes, it is on TV as an exhibition, but let's not call that the first game of the season. :)

::)

Guy who promotes D3 basketball, chucks bucket of cold water.

Kentucky won in case anyone wonders and the D3 kids (many of whom probably grew up dreaming of playing for Kentucky) had an amazing experience playing one of NCAA basketballs greatest historical programs in Rupp Arena, one of college basketballs great venues.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on October 29, 2017, 04:57:09 PM

Quote from: sac on October 29, 2017, 10:22:53 AM
Quote from: NEPAFAN on October 27, 2017, 03:13:23 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 27, 2017, 02:38:06 PM
Quote from: ronk on October 27, 2017, 02:08:11 PM
1st game of the season tonight - Thomas More vs Kentucky 7 PM on SEC cable network; hopefully, a better outcome than the game against Henry VIII a few seasons ago.

Well not really, ronk, as for neither team does the game actually count. Yes, it is on TV as an exhibition, but let's not call that the first game of the season. :)

::)

Guy who promotes D3 basketball, chucks bucket of cold water.

Kentucky won in case anyone wonders and the D3 kids (many of whom probably grew up dreaming of playing for Kentucky) had an amazing experience playing one of NCAA basketballs greatest historical programs in Rupp Arena, one of college basketballs great venues.

Yes, it was a game, whether preseason, exhibition, or in-season and I think a highlight for the Thomas More team and fans. I know the highlight of my limited career was playing in the mecca of college basketball(at the time), the U of Penn Palestra in the opening game of a triple-header involving 3 of the Philly Big 5(Temple, St. Joe, and Penn) and seeing how the other half lived. It was even a thrill eating in the Penn athletic dining facility for our pregame meal. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 30, 2017, 11:18:59 AM

I am not trying to throw a bucket of cold water on anything... however, I am realistic that when people make it seem like a real game ... there ends up being a lot of confused people who contact myself or others trying to understand a whole mess of questions. Just trying to keep people within the lines sometimes to help those who we welcome new every year to the division.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on October 30, 2017, 03:31:28 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 30, 2017, 11:18:59 AM
I am not trying to throw a bucket of cold water on anything... however, I am realistic that when people make it seem like a real game ... there ends up being a lot of confused people who contact myself or others trying to understand a whole mess of questions. Just trying to keep people within the lines sometimes to help those who we welcome new every year to the division.

So if it wasn't a real game, we talkin' bout practice?

Sorry - I couldn't resist

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 30, 2017, 03:48:25 PM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on October 30, 2017, 03:31:28 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 30, 2017, 11:18:59 AM
I am not trying to throw a bucket of cold water on anything... however, I am realistic that when people make it seem like a real game ... there ends up being a lot of confused people who contact myself or others trying to understand a whole mess of questions. Just trying to keep people within the lines sometimes to help those who we welcome new every year to the division.

So if it wasn't a real game, we talkin' bout practice?

Sorry - I couldn't resist

Well done... used that in a tweet recently, actually. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 31, 2017, 10:31:04 PM

Dave posted the women's Top 25, mentioned on fb, and said the men's will be out this week! Yeah!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 01, 2017, 08:40:50 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 30, 2017, 11:18:59 AM
I am not trying to throw a bucket of cold water on anything... however, I am realistic that when people make it seem like a real game ... there ends up being a lot of confused people who contact myself or others trying to understand a whole mess of questions. Just trying to keep people within the lines sometimes to help those who we welcome new every year to the division.

Guy holding bucket, claims he didn't do it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 01, 2017, 11:30:46 AM

Quote from: sac on November 01, 2017, 08:40:50 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 30, 2017, 11:18:59 AM
I am not trying to throw a bucket of cold water on anything... however, I am realistic that when people make it seem like a real game ... there ends up being a lot of confused people who contact myself or others trying to understand a whole mess of questions. Just trying to keep people within the lines sometimes to help those who we welcome new every year to the division.

Guy holding bucket, claims he didn't do it.

You can claim that all you want... I know what I was saying.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on November 01, 2017, 12:25:23 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 01, 2017, 11:30:46 AM
Quote from: sac on November 01, 2017, 08:40:50 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 30, 2017, 11:18:59 AM
I am not trying to throw a bucket of cold water on anything... however, I am realistic that when people make it seem like a real game ... there ends up being a lot of confused people who contact myself or others trying to understand a whole mess of questions. Just trying to keep people within the lines sometimes to help those who we welcome new every year to the division.

Guy holding bucket, claims he didn't do it.

You can claim that all you want... I know what I was saying.

Dave - anytime someone leads off a sentence like that (bolded emphasis is mine) the "however" and whatever follows is really the same thing as doing what you just said you weren't going to do. At the very least the "however" implies that....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 01, 2017, 12:34:02 PM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on November 01, 2017, 12:25:23 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 01, 2017, 11:30:46 AM
Quote from: sac on November 01, 2017, 08:40:50 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 30, 2017, 11:18:59 AM
I am not trying to throw a bucket of cold water on anything... however, I am realistic that when people make it seem like a real game ... there ends up being a lot of confused people who contact myself or others trying to understand a whole mess of questions. Just trying to keep people within the lines sometimes to help those who we welcome new every year to the division.

Guy holding bucket, claims he didn't do it.

You can claim that all you want... I know what I was saying.

Dave - anytime someone leads off a sentence like that (bolded emphasis is mine) the "however" and whatever follows is really the same thing as doing what you just said you weren't going to do.

No... my opening words are an effort to counter. I am not doing something... I am saying such and such. Reverse the wording, same message.

I am realistic that when people make things seem like a real game ... there ends up being a lot of confused people who contact myself or others trying to understand a whole mess of questions. I am not trying to throw a buck of cold water on anything, I am just trying to keep people within the lines sometimes to help those who we welcome new every year to the division.

See what I mean?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on November 01, 2017, 02:06:18 PM

It depends upon what the meaning of the word "is" is.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 01, 2017, 02:23:24 PM

that buckets filled with something else now. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 01, 2017, 02:40:06 PM

Hey guys, can we get back to basketball?

Too bad that poll is not out yet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 01, 2017, 03:10:56 PM

Quote from: WUH on November 01, 2017, 02:40:06 PM
Hey guys, can we get back to basketball?

Too bad that poll is not out yet.

Patience, my friend. Patience. In the preseason, we always release one poll and give it a couple days to breathe on its own before releasing the other. We are on the same timeline as always. Men's is coming. Voting has concluded. It is okay.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 01, 2017, 05:23:44 PM

preseason polls are meaningless

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwpmedia.nationalpost.com%2F2014%2F08%2Fbushice.gif%3Fw%3D640&hash=694b7e5dca1b859e2dfde96522933504edd48420)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 01, 2017, 05:37:56 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 01, 2017, 03:10:56 PM
We are on the same timeline as always. Men's is coming. Voting has concluded. It is okay.

That was not meant as a slight to you or anyone else involved with D3Hoops.com or the poll. I just meant that as a too bad the basketball poll is not out because that would be an easy way to get back to the topic of basketball.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 01, 2017, 09:08:59 PM

Quote from: WUH on November 01, 2017, 05:37:56 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 01, 2017, 03:10:56 PM
We are on the same timeline as always. Men's is coming. Voting has concluded. It is okay.

That was not meant as a slight to you or anyone else involved with D3Hoops.com or the poll. I just meant that as a too bad the basketball poll is not out because that would be an easy way to get back to the topic of basketball.

Totally understand. I promise you that you will be rewarded soon enough.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 01, 2017, 09:13:51 PM

Quote from: sac on November 01, 2017, 05:23:44 PM
preseason polls are meaningless

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwpmedia.nationalpost.com%2F2014%2F08%2Fbushice.gif%3Fw%3D640&hash=694b7e5dca1b859e2dfde96522933504edd48420)

Did someone piss in your Wheaties today, sac? Jeez man... let it go.

And if you are trying to insult or rile up someone like myself ... don't bother. You not caring about preseason rankings is the least of my concerns or priorities. LOL

BTW - I bet you would care about the rankings if your team was vying for #1. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 01, 2017, 10:58:00 PM

let it go......says the man who had 3 opportunities to not post anything.. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Just Bill on November 01, 2017, 10:59:58 PM

Pissing in your Wheaties could only improve the taste.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on November 01, 2017, 11:47:26 PM

Here you go.

http://d3hoops.com/notables/2017/11/preseason-top25-men

Not surprised Whitman is No. 1 but I'm a little surprised it was nearly unanimous. I thought Augustana or even Williams might get a vote or two.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 02, 2017, 12:09:27 AM

Wow... Gordon giving it out here earlier than it hits social media tomorrow. You guy are lucky. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 02, 2017, 12:14:06 AM

Quote from: gordonmann on November 01, 2017, 11:47:26 PM
http://d3hoops.com/notables/2017/11/preseason-top25-men

I don't see Olivet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on November 02, 2017, 12:33:14 AM

I like to reward my closest friends. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on November 02, 2017, 07:29:51 AM

From a New England perspective, a few thoughts:

The ranked teams look mostly about right. Tufts, while worthy of a top 25 ranking, looks a bit high to me after losing Tarik Smith (top-notch PG), Drew Madsen and Tom Palleschi (two of their only three bigs, Palleschi when healthy was key to their entire D) to graduation and sharp-shooter Ethan Feldman to transfer. The Jumbos have loads of wing/guard talent for sure, including some promising newcomers, but a massive hole up front — unclear who will board and protect the paint for this team. Then again, I thought that Tufts was ranked too high to start last year and they made the Elite 8. And perhaps the voters know something about a new player to fill the gaping interior hole, since the roster is not out. Babson, with three higher-level transfers trying to fill the massive Flannery void, is of course the big unknown. They could be a top-five team or not even in the top 30, depending on how good those newcomers are.

Smart of the voters who recognized Nichols (just outside of the top 25). Deonte Bruton and Marcos Echevarria form a legit star backcourt, one of the best anywhere. So quick, and can really shoot it. Those two guys, now more experienced, can definitely play and they have two more years together. Their emerging star big man, Jerome Cunningham, should be better as a sophomore. And keep an eye on newcomer Cameron Jordan, a guy who is a D-1 talent on the wing. If he can give them a third major scoring threat to bolster an already-potent offense they could do big things this year. With Endicott way down, Nichols should run roughshod over their weak league. Will be interesting to see how they do in back to back road games vs Nescac squads early in the year. Albertus Magnus, with its usual slate of impact transfers, is as always the regional wildcard. One of these years they are bound to break through.

New England looks very rich in individual talent this year, but not nearly as deep in obvious great teams as last season. Ty Nichols, Jake Ross, Tarchee Brown, Jack Simonds are four really good players — potentially all-American good, especially Ross — with mostly question marks surrounding them. I do like Springfield's starting five a lot, and Ross is just a monster, but their depth could be very suspect as a bunch of underclassmen on last year's roster, including multiple rotation guys, did not return. Keene State, in addition to graduating a ton from the Sweet 16 squad, also appears to have suffered some attrition.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 02, 2017, 11:05:24 AM

I am a little surprised to see Rochester and Emory in the rankings...

Rochester in particular as they lost three all-UAA starters and the 45 points and 15 rebounds per game the trio contributed. They have one of the best point guards in the league and one of the best three point shooters along with three or four more potential starters who provided significant contributions last season. But, they still have a lot to prove.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 02, 2017, 01:30:18 PM

If anyone is interested, here is my preseason Top 25 ballot and blog: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2017/11/02/daves-top-25-ballot-preseason-17-18/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 02, 2017, 02:50:53 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 02, 2017, 01:30:18 PM
If anyone is interested, here is my preseason Top 25 ballot and blog: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2017/11/02/daves-top-25-ballot-preseason-17-18/

(https://media.giphy.com/media/WK9RP2sfM2kUg/giphy.gif)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on November 02, 2017, 03:43:53 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 02, 2017, 01:30:18 PM
If anyone is interested, here is my preseason Top 25 ballot and blog: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2017/11/02/daves-top-25-ballot-preseason-17-18/

North Central at #5 ???
Your sanity will be questioned numerous times.
Actually, I think you are a very smart man. Of course, my sanity is often questioned, so there you go. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 02, 2017, 03:45:46 PM

Quote from: AndOne on November 02, 2017, 03:43:53 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 02, 2017, 01:30:18 PM
If anyone is interested, here is my preseason Top 25 ballot and blog: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2017/11/02/daves-top-25-ballot-preseason-17-18/

North Central at #5 ???
Your sanity will be questioned numerous times.
Actually, I think you are a very smart man. Of course, my sanity is often questioned, so there you go. :)

I think I stated my thoughts on NCC as ... maybe confused. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 02, 2017, 04:18:23 PM

Quote from: AndOne on November 02, 2017, 03:43:53 PM
North Central at #5
Your sanity will be questioned numerous times.
Actually, I think you are a very smart man. Of course, my sanity is often questioned, so there you go. :)

As often as I have questioned his judgement about a particular St. Louis area basketball team, I have never made it in to the blog, but in regards to North Central, he did work in this line...

Quote(if you ask some fans, his season-ending injury still affected the team 20 games after the fact)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 02, 2017, 05:09:07 PM

Quote from: WUH on November 02, 2017, 04:18:23 PM
Quote from: AndOne on November 02, 2017, 03:43:53 PM
North Central at #5
Your sanity will be questioned numerous times.
Actually, I think you are a very smart man. Of course, my sanity is often questioned, so there you go. :)

As often as I have questioned his judgement about a particular St. Louis area basketball team, I have never made it in to the blog, but in regards to North Central, he did work in this line...

Quote(if you ask some fans, his season-ending injury still affected the team 20 games after the fact)

If you are challenging me to get you quoted, WUH... don't dare me. :)

And I just couldn't resist. It was actually a test to see who is and isn't reading it. :)

Let me add... you have made it in the blog in the last year or two for questioning me, just not as overtly. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 02, 2017, 06:22:23 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 02, 2017, 05:09:07 PM
Let me add... you have made it in the blog in the last year or two for questioning me, just not as overtly.

+1 Ha, ha! Looking ahead to another fun year of basketball, blogs and Hoopsville.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 03, 2017, 06:28:06 AM

So a fellow WIACer pointed out that Stevens Point is scheduled to play #1 Whitman, #2 Augustana, #10 River Falls, #11 Whitewater, #21 Wartburg and then four teams who also received votes: #29 Hope, #34 Oshkosh, #37 St. Norbert and #39 St. Thomas. That accounts for 12 of their 25 games this season.

Point plays Augustana, Wartburg, Whitman and River Falls in consecutive games at the end of December and the first game in January.

Obviously it's only the preseason rankings and a lot can happen, but that's seems like a pretty daunting schedule on paper.

Glancing through the Top 25, is there any other team that has a similarly tough schedule? Just curious.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on November 03, 2017, 08:22:50 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 03, 2017, 06:28:06 AM
So a fellow WIACer pointed out that Stevens Point is scheduled to play #1 Whitman, #2 Augustana, #10 River Falls, #11 Whitewater, #21 Wartburg and then four teams who also received votes: #29 Hope, #34 Oshkosh, #37 St. Norbert and #39 St. Thomas. That accounts for 12 of their 25 games this season.

Point plays Augustana, Wartburg, Whitman and River Falls in consecutive games at the end of December and the first game in January.

Obviously it's only the preseason rankings and a lot can happen, but that's seems like a pretty daunting schedule on paper.

Glancing through the Top 25, is there any other team that has a similarly tough schedule? Just curious.

Not at Point's level of difficulty, but Alma's season starts with #2 Augustana, #9 Washington, and #12 North Central in 3 of their first 6 games. The other 3 are @ IWU, @ Elmhurst, and @ ONU... Not an easy 6 game stretch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 03, 2017, 09:45:05 PM

New pool! If you want to play, post your picks in the fantasy league board, NOT HERE!

Here's the idea. The preseason Top 25 has now been released. The object is to pick a team NOT in the preseason poll who received ANY votes, including Oswego St, who received just one vote.

Then, throughout the season, we'll keep track if any of the teams get votes and sustain Top 25 status. At the end of the season, we'll have 2 winners. The poster who picked the team who garnered the most votes during the season and the team who finished the highest in the final poll (the one after the tourney is complete).

Hopefully we can even get some of those "experts" to play since all you have to do is pick a team before the season starts and that's all you have to do!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 03, 2017, 11:13:07 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 03, 2017, 09:45:05 PM
New pool! If you want to play, post your picks in the fantasy league board, NOT HERE!

Here's the idea. The preseason Top 25 has now been released. The object is to pick a team NOT in the preseason poll who received ANY votes, including Oswego St, who received just one vote.

Then, throughout the season, we'll keep track if any of the teams get votes and sustain Top 25 status. At the end of the season, we'll have 2 winners. The poster who picked the team who garnered the most votes during the season and the team who finished the highest in the final poll (the one after the tourney is complete).

Hopefully we can even get some of those "experts" to play since all you have to do is pick a team before the season starts and that's all you have to do!

Very tempting! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on November 05, 2017, 11:00:21 AM

Hoping we'll see more Coach's polls of league standings come out this week... not too many out so far..

I've seen:
ASC
CCIW
HCAC
IIAC
MACC
MACF
NATHC
OAC
ODAC
SLIAC
UAA
USAC

Would be nice (and easier to find) if readers would post here as more become available...Thanks

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 05, 2017, 12:03:32 PM

WIAC

http://www.wiacsports.com/news/2017/11/3/uw-river-falls-selected-to-win-mens-basketball-title.aspx?path=mbball

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on November 05, 2017, 10:00:38 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 05, 2017, 12:03:32 PM
WIAC

http://www.wiacsports.com/news/2017/11/3/uw-river-falls-selected-to-win-mens-basketball-title.aspx?path=mbball

Thanks G.T.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 07, 2017, 06:36:17 AM

Had a request to share this info:

I found roku channels for Centennial, MIAC, ASC, SAA, IIAC, SCIAC, E8, CAC, Landmark, NWC, LEC, GNAC, NECC, and the MWC, plus WashU, Neumann, Stevenson, and Denison have their own channel just for the athletic dept.

It's still the web stream, but you can watch on your TV!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 07, 2017, 09:17:43 AM

ASC: http://ascsports.org/news/2017/10/25/mens-basketball-letourneau-concordia-texas-picked-to-win-mens-hoops.aspx?path=mbball

CCIW: http://www.cciw.org/news/2017/10/25/augustana-picked-to-win-2017-18-cciw-mens-basketball-title.aspx

HCAC: http://heartlandconf.org/sports/mbkb/2017-18/releases/20171025h6v61a

IIAC: http://www.iowaconference.com/news/2017/10/18/iiac-mens-basketball-coaches-tab-nebraska-wesleyan-as-preseason-front-runner.aspx?path=general

MACC & MACF (go to preseason poll link): http://www.gomacsports.com/index.aspx?path=mbball

NACC: http://www.naccsports.org/sports/mbkb/2017-18/releases/20171023x4yenu

OAC: http://www.oac.org/sports/mbkb/2017-18/releases/2017_Basketball_poll.pdf

ODAC: http://www.odaconline.com/sports/mbkb/2017-18/releases/102617-mbkb-preseasonpoll

SLIAC: http://sliac.org/sports/mbkb/2017-18/releases/20171026fg2etz

UAA: http://uaasports.info/sports/wbkb/2017-18/releases/uaapreseasonpoll

USAC: http://www.usasouth.net/sports/mbkb/2017-18/releases/20171023od2pqb

WIAC: http://www.wiacsports.com/news/2017/11/3/uw-river-falls-selected-to-win-mens-basketball-title.aspx?path=mbball

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on November 08, 2017, 06:35:33 PM

CSAC now up...
http://csacsports.org/news/2017/11/8/mens-basketball-cabrini-nets-top-honors-in-csac-mbb-preseason-poll.aspx

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on November 08, 2017, 08:51:42 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 07, 2017, 06:36:17 AM

Had a request to share this info:

I found roku channels for Centennial, MIAC, ASC, SAA, IIAC, SCIAC, E8, CAC, Landmark, NWC, LEC, GNAC, NECC, and the MWC, plus WashU, Neumann, Stevenson, and Denison have their own channel just for the athletic dept.

It's still the web stream, but you can watch on your TV!

Ryan,
What does 1 need(software,hardware) to watch Landmark basketball, for example, on Roku? Feel free to be simple in explaining to someone who still uses a flip-phone.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 08, 2017, 09:37:45 PM

Ronk - do you have roku, Amazon Fire, Apple TV, or other types of what are basically called OTT (Over The Top) device?

If you have one of those devices, you most likely can see Landmark games. You basically download their "app" to the device - or move over to their "channel" - and watch from there. Basically the portal is like you would have going to the Landmark portal on the internet, only you are using your remote and pushing buttons on the options you want. And you are watching on your TV not computer.

I am seriously considering mounting an extra TV of ours in the Hoopsville studio to allow me to watch more games. LOL

More info here: http://www.landmarkconference.org/news/2017-18/10242017ottapps

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on November 08, 2017, 11:09:01 PM

I have the MIAC one downloaded on my Apple TV, and it is super easy to turn on a football game from the app on a Saturday afternoon. I need to download some other conferences so I can catch a couple minutes of good games this winter! I will have to look into UAA first to see if they have an app... WUH would be proud to know they are my 2nd favorite conference! This is great for us D3 junkies!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 08, 2017, 11:15:59 PM

UAA does not last I checked, but WashU does.

There are a LOT as Ryan has listed previously.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 09, 2017, 11:47:04 AM

Shocking news in the MWC.

http://www.midwestconference.org/news/2017/11/9/mens-basketball-st-norbert-picked-to-win-sixth-straight-title.aspx?path=mbball

St. Norbert picked again.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 09, 2017, 03:33:21 PM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on November 08, 2017, 11:09:01 PM
I will have to look into UAA first to see if they have an app... WUH would be proud to know they are my 2nd favorite conference! This is great for us D3 junkies!

+1 The UAA may be the best candidate for second favorite conference. At least for those who follow a conference that generally features Wednesday and Saturday games. Basketball season is too short to watch games just twice a week.

Hey, quick question on the Roku, the Roku channel makes it easier (less clicks) to bring up a game, but Roku has always allowed for live streaming on a television. The quality of the stream is the same, yes?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 09, 2017, 04:45:45 PM

Quote from: WUH on November 09, 2017, 03:33:21 PM
Quote from: Smitty Oom on November 08, 2017, 11:09:01 PM
I will have to look into UAA first to see if they have an app... WUH would be proud to know they are my 2nd favorite conference! This is great for us D3 junkies!

+1 The UAA may be the best candidate for second favorite conference. At least for those who follow a conference that generally features Wednesday and Saturday games. Basketball season is too short to watch games just twice a week.

Hey, quick question on the Roku, the Roku channel makes it easier (less clicks) to bring up a game, but Roku has always allowed for live streaming on a television. The quality of the stream is the same, yes?

Stream quality is the same, although typically a roku or similar device never has trouble with buffering, etc - it cuts out most technical problems on the viewer's end. It can't help the technical problems at the venue, though - whatever they may be.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on November 09, 2017, 04:46:08 PM

MIAA is posted:

http://www.miaa.org/sports/mbkb/2017-18/releases/2017PreseasonPoll

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on November 10, 2017, 01:06:01 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 09, 2017, 11:47:04 AM
Shocking news in the MWC.

http://www.midwestconference.org/news/2017/11/9/mens-basketball-st-norbert-picked-to-win-sixth-straight-title.aspx?path=mbball

St. Norbert picked again.

Another year in which the Norbs record will sparkle, but won't be invited to the big dance because whatever non-con teams they play that may be decent won't be able to offset all their MWC games against so many weak opponents?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 10, 2017, 01:36:12 PM

Quote from: AndOne on November 10, 2017, 01:06:01 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 09, 2017, 11:47:04 AM
Shocking news in the MWC.

http://www.midwestconference.org/news/2017/11/9/mens-basketball-st-norbert-picked-to-win-sixth-straight-title.aspx?path=mbball

St. Norbert picked again.

Another year in which the Norbs record will sparkle, but won't be invited to the big dance because whatever non-con teams they play that may be decent won't be able to offset all their MWC games against so many weak opponents?

It's obvious no one else in the conference has faith in themselves as everyone picked the Green Knights. They do have a good nonconference schedule with half the WIAC and Benedictine, even though they are a shell of what they've been the last 2 or 3 years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 11, 2017, 08:49:24 AM

Shameless plug.

For all you diehards out there, I'm running a pretty cool All-American pool over in the fantasy league page.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 14, 2017, 03:08:29 PM

The fourth, and final, preseason podcast has been released. Dave chats with four coaches who have their own unique roads to their new jobs.
- Greg Polkowski, UW-Superior men's coach
- Pete Moran, John Carroll men's coach
- Casey Kushiyama, Puget Sound women's coach
- Kent Dernbach, UW-Lacrosse men's coach

You can find the podcast along with the previous four here: http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2017-18/preseason-podcasts

A reminder that Hoopsville returns for it's season debut on Thursday, November 16 at 7:00 PM ET!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on November 15, 2017, 02:04:11 AM

The first game of the 2016-18 season is a final as Clark defeats Worcester State in a down to the wire contest by a 92-89 score.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on November 15, 2017, 04:49:51 AM

Quote from: magicman on November 15, 2017, 02:04:11 AM
The first game of the 2016-18 season is a final as Clark defeats Worcester State in a down to the wire contest by a 92-89 score.

a darned good game and a super D3 atmosphere... great enthusiasm from fans of both schools!!! Place was packed, standing room only!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on November 15, 2017, 05:32:05 AM

The second game of the 2017-18 season is in the books, which saw Whitworth defeating La Verne by a final score of 95-73. Whitworth is receiving votes in the preseason poll. Jordan Lester led all Pirates in his Whitworth debut, scoring 26 points.

I decided to get some sleep after watching some of the first half of the Clark vs Worcester State game with no audio in the feed. I got up to watch the Whitworth game in its entirety. Did the Clark feed ever get the sound turned on in the second half? Just curious.

I enjoyed the Whitworth webcast with the radio commentary. Well worth staying up or getting up early to watch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on November 15, 2017, 10:11:00 AM

Quote from: deiscanton on November 15, 2017, 05:32:05 AM
The second game of the 2017-18 season is in the books, which saw Whitworth defeating La Verne by a final score of 95-73. Whitworth is receiving votes in the preseason poll. Jordan Lester led all Pirates in his Whitworth debut, scoring 26 points.

I decided to get some sleep after watching some of the first half of the Clark vs Worcester State game with no audio in the feed. I got up to watch the Whitworth game in its entirety. Did the Clark feed ever get the sound turned on in the second half? Just curious.

I enjoyed the Whitworth webcast with the radio commentary. Well worth staying up or getting up early to watch.

no, never any sound, but the scoring worked in the 2nd half!! I woke up and it was half time of Whitworth game... score was double digits margin, back to bed....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on November 15, 2017, 10:16:12 AM

Just a tidbit... these conferences do not or have not yet posted a preseason coach's poll:

CUNYAC
E8
NEAC
NESCAC
SAA
SUNYAC

The other 37 all have posted polls....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 15, 2017, 10:48:48 AM

Quote from: hopefan on November 15, 2017, 10:16:12 AM
Just a tidbit... these conferences do not or have not yet posted a preseason coach's poll:

CUNYAC
E8
NEAC
NESCAC
SAA
SUNYAC

The other 37 all have posted polls....

Not all of them do. I am pretty confident the SUNYAC, NESCAC, and E8 has gotten rid of them. I am pretty sure the same is true with the rest of them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on November 15, 2017, 10:54:28 AM

Here are the No 1 teams in each conference from the Coach's polls.... will be interesting to see how they compare at end of the season!!

Cabrini     CSAC   ATL
Misericordia     MACF   ATL
Ramapo     NJAC   ATL
Farmingdale State     SKY   ATL
Augustana     CCIW   Cen
St. Norbert     MWC   Cen
Aurora     NATHC   Cen
Westminster (Mo.)     SLIAC   Cen
Washington U.     UAA   Cen
UW-River Falls     WIAC   Cen
Hobart     LL     EAST
La Roche     AMCC   GL
Hanover     HCAC   GL
Hope     MIAA   GL
Wooster     NCAC   GL
Marietta     OAC   GL
St. Vincent     PrAC   GL
Christopher Newport     CAC   MA
Swarthmore     CC     MA
Scranton     LAND   MA
Lycoming     MACC   MA
Nichols     CCC   NE
Albertus Magnus     GNAC   NE
Eastern Connecticut     LEC   NE
Salem State     MASCAC   NE
Husson     NAC   NE
Becker     NECC   NE
MIT     NEWMAC   NE
LeTourneau     ASC   SOUTH
Concordia (Texas)     ASC   SOUTH
Guilford     ODAC   SOUTH
Colorado College     SCAC   SOUTH
Methodist     USA South   SOUTH
Maryville (Tenn.)     USA South   SOUTH
Nebraska Wesleyan     IIAC   WEST
St. John's     MIAC   WEST
Whitman     NWC   WEST
Claremont-Mudd-Scripps   SCIAC   WEST
St. Scholastica     UMAC   WEST

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Mo on November 15, 2017, 11:14:54 AM

Fired up for the potential Wash U vs Tufts matchup in the Lopata Classic this weekend. Are there any other Top 25 matchups this weekend?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 15, 2017, 12:00:26 PM

Quote from: Mr. Mo on November 15, 2017, 11:14:54 AM
Fired up for the potential Wash U vs Tufts matchup in the Lopata Classic this weekend. Are there any other Top 25 matchups this weekend?

Great Lakes Tournament has a couple, I believe. Starting to become more common as teams try to bolster their SOS numbers in the early parts of the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on November 15, 2017, 12:57:58 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 15, 2017, 12:00:26 PM
Quote from: Mr. Mo on November 15, 2017, 11:14:54 AM
Fired up for the potential Wash U vs Tufts matchup in the Lopata Classic this weekend. Are there any other Top 25 matchups this weekend?

Great Lakes Tournament has a couple, I believe. Starting to become more common as teams try to bolster their SOS numbers in the early parts of the season.

No Top 25 match ups but several between teams getting votes (last years records in parenthesis)

Friday, November 17, 2017:
2:00 p.m. — Wittenberg (18-9) vs. Mount St. Joseph (20-7)
4:00 p.m. — Birmingham-Southern (14-14) vs. #19 St. John Fisher (23-6)
6:00 p.m. — St. Thomas (19-8) vs. Dickinson (16-11)
8:00 p.m. — #13 Marietta (26-5) vs. Hope (23-7)

Saturday, November 18, 2017:
1:00 p.m. — Wittenberg vs. Birmingham-Southern
3:00 p.m. — Hope vs. #19 St. John Fisher
5:00 p.m. — Mount St. Joseph vs. Dickinson
7:00 p.m. — #13 Marietta vs. St. Thomas

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on November 15, 2017, 12:58:51 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 15, 2017, 12:00:26 PM
Quote from: Mr. Mo on November 15, 2017, 11:14:54 AM
Fired up for the potential Wash U vs Tufts matchup in the Lopata Classic this weekend. Are there any other Top 25 matchups this weekend?

Great Lakes Tournament has a couple, I believe. Starting to become more common as teams try to bolster their SOS numbers in the early parts of the season.

What happened to the Hoopsville Classic affair?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on November 15, 2017, 01:13:10 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 15, 2017, 12:00:26 PM
Quote from: Mr. Mo on November 15, 2017, 11:14:54 AM
Fired up for the potential Wash U vs Tufts matchup in the Lopata Classic this weekend. Are there any other Top 25 matchups this weekend?

Great Lakes Tournament has a couple, I believe. Starting to become more common as teams try to bolster their SOS numbers in the early parts of the season.

Games through the weekend (including others ranked, only including scheduled matchups; I found no other potential ranked matchups besides the Wash U-Tufts game)

11/15 UW-Oshkosh(34) vs Benedictine (42 t)
11/17 Marietta (13) vs Hope (29)
11/17 UW-Whitewater (11) vs Claremont Mudd Scripps (15)
11/18 Hamilton (45 t) vs Oswego st (45 t)
11/18 St. John Fisher (19) vs Hope (29)
11/18 Marietta (13) vs St. Thomas (37 t)
11/18 St Norbert (37 t) vs Benedictine (42 t)
11/18 Plattsburgh St (40 t) vs Keene St. (31)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 15, 2017, 01:45:13 PM

Quote from: ronk on November 15, 2017, 12:58:51 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 15, 2017, 12:00:26 PM
Quote from: Mr. Mo on November 15, 2017, 11:14:54 AM
Fired up for the potential Wash U vs Tufts matchup in the Lopata Classic this weekend. Are there any other Top 25 matchups this weekend?

Great Lakes Tournament has a couple, I believe. Starting to become more common as teams try to bolster their SOS numbers in the early parts of the season.

What happened to the Hoopsville Classic affair?

Taking a brief, we hope, break.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 15, 2017, 02:46:48 PM

Quote from: hopefan on November 15, 2017, 01:13:10 PM
Games through the weekend (including others ranked, only including scheduled matchups; I found no other potential ranked matchups besides the Wash U-Tufts game)

11/15 UW-Oshkosh(34) vs Benedictine (42 t)
11/17 Marietta (13) vs Hope (29)
11/17 UW-Whitewater (11) vs Claremont Mudd Scripps (15)
11/18 Hamilton (45 t) vs Oswego st (45 t)
11/18 St. John Fisher (19) vs Hope (29)
11/18 Marietta (13) vs St. Thomas (37 t)
11/18 St Norbert (37 t) vs Benedictine (42 t)
11/18 Plattsburgh St (40 t) vs Keene St. (31)

Had I been on top of my game, I might have seen this discussion earlier and realized that this would be a good time to fire up my program (which, I'm happy to say, worked correctly the first time; it usually needs a little tweaking at the start of the season).

Better late than never: Here's the list of upcoming games through 11/26 (the last games before the first in-season poll), with teams-receiving-votes matchups in bold. Note - lots of "TBAs" for season tipoff tournaments.

How They Fared (Preseason edition): At this point, only one score in ... holy crap, Whitworth/La Verne played at midnight!?!? I'm glad I was not the announcer for that game; I don't think I'd have made it to the end.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	621	Whitman	0-0	11/17 vs. Waynesburg; 11/18 vs. Gallaudet; 11/22 at Walla Walla
#2	596	Augustana	0-0	11/15 vs. Heidelberg; 11/17 vs. Calvin; 11/18 vs. Alma; 11/22 at Illinois; 11/26 vs. MacMurray
#3	561	Williams	0-0	11/17 vs. Salem State; 11/18 vs. TBD; 11/21 at Massachusetts College; 11/26 vs. Yeshiva
#4	496	Hanover	0-0	11/17 vs. Kent State Tuscarawas; 11/18 vs. Otterbein; 11/21 at Spalding; 11/25 at #30 Wooster
#5	457	Ramapo	0-0	11/18 vs. Randolph-Macon; 11/19 vs. TBA; 11/21 vs. William Paterson
#6	441	Tufts	0-0	11/17 vs. Webster; 11/18 vs. Lopata Classic; 11/21 vs. #36 MIT
#7	436	Babson	0-0	11/15 vs. Lasell; 11/18 vs. Worcester State; 11/19 vs. TBA; 11/21 at Becker; 11/26 at Bowdoin
#8	433	Middlebury	0-0	11/17 vs. Fitchburg State; 11/18 vs. TBD; 11/21 at Johnson State; 11/26 at Endicott
#9	403	Washington U.	0-0	11/17 vs. Wabash; 11/18 vs. Tufts/Webster; 11/21 at Principia; 11/25 vs. Ohio Northern; 11/26 at T#45 Mount St. Joseph
#10	402	UW-River Falls	0-0	11/15 vs. Central; 11/17 vs. Baldwin Wallace; 11/18 vs. TBA; 11/21 vs. UW-Superior; 11/25 vs. Hamline
#11	327	UW-Whitewater	0-0	11/17 vs. #15 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps; 11/18 vs. Waldorf; 11/21 vs. Monmouth; 11/25 vs. Anderson
#12	319	North Central (Ill.)	0-0	11/18 at Heidelberg; 11/21 vs. T#42 Benedictine; 11/24 vs. T#32 Whitworth; 11/25 vs. Lewis and Clark
#13	300	Marietta	0-0	11/17 vs. #29 Hope; 11/18 vs. T#37 St. Thomas; 11/21 at Frostburg State; 11/26 at Bethany
#14	262	Christopher Newport	0-0	11/15 at Randolph-Macon; 11/18 vs. Catholic; 11/19 vs. TBD; 11/26 vs. Dickinson
#15	217	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	0-0	11/17 at #11 UW-Whitewater; 11/18 at UW-Platteville; 11/24 vs. George Fox; 11/25 vs. Puget Sound
#16	198	Rochester	0-0	11/17 vs. Bard; 11/18 vs. TBA; 11/21 at Hobart; 11/25 vs. SUNY-Canton; 11/26 vs. TBA
#17	177	Emory	0-0	11/15 vs. Piedmont; 11/21 at Berry; 11/25 at LaGrange; 11/26 vs. Maryville (Tenn.)
#18	158	Guilford	0-0	11/15 at Greensboro; 11/17 vs. Concordia (Texas); 11/18 vs. Huntingdon; 11/21 vs. Averett
#19	152	St. John Fisher	0-0	11/15 at Hobart; 11/17 vs. Birmingham-Southern; 11/18 vs. #29 Hope; 11/21 vs. #30 Wooster
#20	141	St. John's	0-0	11/17 vs. St. Scholastica; 11/18 at St. Cloud St.; 11/22 at UW-La Crosse
#21	104	Wartburg	0-0	11/17 vs. TBD; 11/18 vs. TBD; 11/24 vs. Graceland (Iowa); 11/25 at Waldorf
#22	98	Lycoming	0-0	11/15 at Medgar Evers; 11/17 vs. Penn St.-Wilkes Barre; 11/18 vs. TBD; 11/21 vs. #26 Susquehanna; 11/26 vs. Penn College
#23	95	Cabrini	0-0	11/15 at Eastern; 11/18 vs. Denison; 11/19 vs. TBD
#24	94	Scranton	0-0	11/17 vs. Penn State-Berks; 11/18 vs. TBA; 11/21 at Widener; 11/25 vs. King's; 11/26 vs. Wilkes
#25	73	Swarthmore	0-0	11/15 vs. Hood; 11/18 vs. Albertus Magnus; 11/21 at Washington College; 11/26 vs. Misericordia

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	71	Susquehanna	0-0	11/15 vs. Bethany; 11/17 vs. King's; 11/18 vs. TBA; 11/21 at #22 Lycoming
#27	68	Nichols	0-0	11/15 vs. Newbury; 11/18 at Lasell; 11/21 at Wesleyan; 11/26 at Trinity (Conn.)
#28	54	Skidmore	0-0	11/15 at Castleton; 11/18 at Hartwick; 11/20 vs. T#40 Plattsburgh State
#29	51	Hope	0-0	11/17 at #13 Marietta; 11/18 vs. #19 St. John Fisher; 11/24 at Cornerstone; 11/25 at Aquinas
#30	47	Wooster	0-0	11/15 vs. Oberlin; 11/18 vs. Medaille; 11/21 at #19 St. John Fisher; 11/25 vs. #4 Hanover
#31	44	Keene State	0-0	11/15 at Southern Vermont; 11/18 at T#40 Plattsburgh State; 11/21 at Springfield; 11/25 at #36 MIT
T#32	42	Ohio Wesleyan	0-0	11/17 vs. Trine; 11/18 vs. Albion; 11/21 vs. Otterbein; 11/26 vs. Capital
T#32	42	Whitworth	1-0	def. La Verne, 95-73; 11/17 vs. Gallaudet; 11/18 vs. Waynesburg; 11/24 vs. #12 North Central (Ill.); 11/25 vs. Arcadia
#34	37	UW-Oskhosh	0-0	11/17 vs. Sewanee; 11/18 at Centre; 11/25 vs. Westminster (Mo.); 11/26 at TBA
#35	22	Amherst	0-0	11/17 vs. Sarah Lawrence; 11/18 vs. TBD; 11/20 at Westfield State
#36	17	MIT	0-0	11/15 vs. Bridgewater State; 11/18 vs. Eastern Nazarene; 11/21 at #6 Tufts; 11/25 vs. #31 Keene State
T#37	13	St. Norbert	0-0	11/15 vs. UW-Eau Claire; 11/18 vs. T#42 Benedictine; 11/21 vs. UW-Oshkosh; 11/25 vs. UW-Stevens Point
T#37	13	St. Thomas	0-0	11/17 vs. Dickinson; 11/18 at #13 Marietta; 11/21 at St. Scholastica
#39	8	St Lawrence	0-0	11/17 vs. Lake Forest; 11/18 vs. Louisiana College; 11/21 vs. T#45 Loras
T#40	7	Carthage	0-0	11/17 vs. Rockford; 11/18 vs. TBA; 11/24 vs. Centre; 11/25 vs. TBD
T#40	7	Plattsburgh State	0-0	11/18 vs. #31 Keene State; 11/20 at #28 Skidmore
T#42	5	Benedictine	0-0	11/15 at UW-Oshkosh; 11/18 at T#37 St. Norbert; 11/21 at #12 North Central (Ill.); 11/25 vs. Marian
T#42	5	Eastern Connecticut	0-0	11/17 vs. Dean; 11/18 vs. TBA; 11/21 at Connecticut College; 11/25 vs. Montclair State; 11/26 vs. TBA
T#42	5	Hardin-Simmons	0-0	11/16 at Southwestern; 11/24 at Texas Lutheran; 11/25 at Schreiner
T#45	1	Hamilton	0-0	11/18 vs. T#45 Oswego State; 11/19 at TBA; 11/21 at Western Connecticut
T#45	1	Loras	0-0	11/15 at Lake Forest; 11/18 at Concordia-Chicago; 11/21 at Concordia (Wis.); 11/25 vs. Ripon
T#45	1	Mount St. Joseph	0-0	11/17 vs. Wittenberg; 11/18 vs. Dickinson; 11/21 vs. Wilmington; 11/25 vs. Ohio Northern vs Wash U; 11/25 vs. Case Western Reserve; 11/26 vs. #9 Washington U.; 11/26 vs. Ohio Northern vs Case Western
T#45	1	Nebraska Wesleyan	0-0	11/17 at North Central (Minn.); 11/18 at Northwestern (Minn.); 11/24 vs. Iowa Wesleyan; 11/25 vs. Bethany Lutheran
T#45	1	New Jersey City	0-0	11/15 vs. Stevens; 11/18 vs. Gwynedd Mercy; 11/19 vs. TBA; 11/21 at Rutgers-Newark; 11/25 at Farmingdale State
T#45	1	Oswego State	0-0	11/18 vs. T#45 Hamilton; 11/19 vs. TBA; 11/19 at Elmira; 11/21 at Clarkson

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TheOsprey on November 15, 2017, 09:42:43 PM

I believe that #18 Guilford defeated Greensboro 98 to 88 according to Greensboro website. ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 15, 2017, 09:46:30 PM

Quote from: TheOsprey on November 15, 2017, 09:42:43 PM
I believe that #18 Guilford defeated Greensboro 98 to 88 according to Greensboro website. ???

Guilford's site and this site has them getting beat 82-48. Ouch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 15, 2017, 09:54:43 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 15, 2017, 09:46:30 PM
Quote from: TheOsprey on November 15, 2017, 09:42:43 PM
I believe that #18 Guilford defeated Greensboro 98 to 88 according to Greensboro website. ???

Guilford's site and this site has them getting beat 82-48. Ouch.

Guilford twitter (https://twitter.com/goquakers/status/930983235311587328) says 98-88. There must be some opening night technical glitches to work out. Everyone and everything still not in midseason form yet ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 15, 2017, 11:04:19 PM

It was me. I got the Greensboros mixed up. NC Wesleyan lost to UNC-Greensboro tonight as well. First night, first scoreboard mistake.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TheOsprey on November 15, 2017, 11:35:56 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 15, 2017, 11:04:19 PM

It was me. I got the Greensboros mixed up. NC Wesleyan lost to UNC-Greensboro tonight as well. First night, first scoreboard mistake.

+k for honesty

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on November 16, 2017, 07:48:36 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 15, 2017, 11:04:19 PM

It was me. I got the Greensboros mixed up. NC Wesleyan lost to UNC-Greensboro tonight as well. First night, first scoreboard mistake.

AND... NC Wesleyan - UNC Greensboro was an exhibition game... should not have been on scoreboard...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 16, 2017, 08:42:00 AM

Quote from: hopefan on November 16, 2017, 07:48:36 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 15, 2017, 11:04:19 PM

It was me. I got the Greensboros mixed up. NC Wesleyan lost to UNC-Greensboro tonight as well. First night, first scoreboard mistake.

AND... NC Wesleyan - UNC Greensboro was an exhibition game... should not have been on scoreboard...

Well, exhibitions do go on the scoreboard if the schools themselves load them (of if they're a presto school).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 16, 2017, 10:13:17 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 16, 2017, 08:42:00 AM
Quote from: hopefan on November 16, 2017, 07:48:36 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 15, 2017, 11:04:19 PM

It was me. I got the Greensboros mixed up. NC Wesleyan lost to UNC-Greensboro tonight as well. First night, first scoreboard mistake.

AND... NC Wesleyan - UNC Greensboro was an exhibition game... should not have been on scoreboard...

Well, exhibitions do go on the scoreboard if the schools themselves load them (of if they're a presto school).

Even if we remove them from being seen on our site, that doesn't remove them from our backend where all the games are listed for a night. When one is cruising along and locked in on updating games, sometimes it takes a bit of effort to break the cycle and look up if the game "counts" or not.

I think we can give Ryan some slack here, especially the first night. There are D1 v D3 games that actually count, so we can't assume anything.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie_superfan on November 16, 2017, 10:26:35 AM

Is there a Hoopsville Classic this year?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 16, 2017, 10:34:03 AM

Quote from: augie_superfan on November 16, 2017, 10:26:35 AM
Is there a Hoopsville Classic this year?

Unfortunately no... not this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on November 16, 2017, 12:06:15 PM

As Dave and Ryan noted, managing exhibitions on our scoreboard and schedule pages is tricky because our scoreboard automatically takes whatever is fed to it by the schools participating.

If a D3 school enters a game and doesn't mark it as an exhibition (or incorrectly marks it as regional or lists a JV game for some reason), our scoreboard reflects that. The problem is further complicated when you have a game that counts for the D1 partners and they are a Presto client, which a bunch of small D1 conferences are (Southland, some Ivies).

We've been asked not to change the game as it is entered by the school itself since that messes with the school's own webpage. But we try to find ways to keep it out of our database, even if we have to catch it after the game occurred or can only remove the game from certain parts of our site. That's the reason none of the exhibitions appear on our team pages, though they do appear on the day-to-day scoreboards.

Long story long, we appreciate the corrections and we'll do our best to manage the database but a lot of the mistakes are because the scoreboard is group sourced.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 16, 2017, 05:19:06 PM

The Division III basketball season has begun and tonight Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) will hit the air for its 15th season!

In tonight's season premiere, Dave McHugh chats with the two preseason No. 1 teams, both national committee chairs, and gets an update on a new tournament featuring several Top 25 teams. Dave will also try and get everyone up to speed on the new season and take a look at what has already happened in early season games.

One thing fans may notice is no video for this season's debut. This is not a change in the production of the show, just a temporary decision. There has been a lot going on leading up to the premiere and not everything got up to speed in time. We hope to have actual video broadcasts return in short order. We appreciate everyone's patience.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch the show LIVE staring at 7:00 p.m. ET here: http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2017-18/nov16 --- or via the Facebook Live (http://www.facebook.com/Hoopsville) simulcast. If you missed any part of the show, you can watch it On Demand or listen to the podcast.

You can also send your questions to the show and have them featured on the Hoopsville Mailbag segment. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com.

Guests include (in order of appearance):
- Bobbi Morgan, Haverford women's coach and DIII National Basketball Committee Chair
- Tim Pitzpatrick, U.S. Coast Guard Academy Athletics Director and DIII National Basketball Committee Chair
- Eric Bridgeland, No. 1 Whitman men's coach
- Carla Berube, No. 1 Tufts women's coach
- Ryan Whitnabe, Great Lakes podcaster and Great Lakes Invitational creator

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 17, 2017, 09:11:40 PM

I haven't gone through every boxscore, but from what I've seen, Middlebury's Jack Daly produced the 2nd triple double this season, going for 10 pts, 12 assists and 15 rebounds.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 18, 2017, 12:31:10 AM

Just FYI - Whitewater beat CMS, but neither Chris Jones nor Michael Scarlett seem to have played.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on November 18, 2017, 11:00:39 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 18, 2017, 12:31:10 AM

Just FYI - Whitewater beat CMS, but neither Chris Jones nor Michael Scarlett seem to have played.

I was wondering about both when I looked at the boxscore and didn't see either of them. Any news on that front?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 18, 2017, 12:49:02 PM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on November 18, 2017, 11:00:39 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 18, 2017, 12:31:10 AM

Just FYI - Whitewater beat CMS, but neither Chris Jones nor Michael Scarlett seem to have played.

I was wondering about both when I looked at the boxscore and didn't see either of them. Any news on that front?

News from the west coast comes by wagon train, so...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 18, 2017, 12:59:22 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 18, 2017, 12:49:02 PM
Quote from: Smitty Oom on November 18, 2017, 11:00:39 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 18, 2017, 12:31:10 AM

Just FYI - Whitewater beat CMS, but neither Chris Jones nor Michael Scarlett seem to have played.

I was wondering about both when I looked at the boxscore and didn't see either of them. Any news on that front?

News from the west coast comes by wagon train, so...

News from Whitewater comes by beer truck, so...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 18, 2017, 02:45:53 PM

Heidelberg defeated No. 12 North Central 98-93 in double OT.

No. 4 Hanover trails 0-2 Otterbein by 12 at the half.

RESET: Hanover chased down Otterbein with three minutes left and staved off the upset with a 71-68 win.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on November 18, 2017, 03:23:50 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 18, 2017, 12:49:02 PM
Quote from: Smitty Oom on November 18, 2017, 11:00:39 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 18, 2017, 12:31:10 AM

Just FYI - Whitewater beat CMS, but neither Chris Jones nor Michael Scarlett seem to have played.

I was wondering about both when I looked at the boxscore and didn't see either of them. Any news on that front?

News from the west coast comes by wagon train, so...

Well I think those Pacific Time Zone west coasters just woke up to start their weekend! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on November 18, 2017, 08:52:46 PM

UST and #13 Marietta in a great game right now at the Great Lakes Invitational finale! Tied game and the Toms have the ball with the shot clock off.

http://pioneers.marietta.edu/sports/2017/8/31/live-video.aspx (http://pioneers.marietta.edu/sports/2017/8/31/live-video.aspx)

EDIT: Tommies settle for a long 2, not a great shot but didn't leave any time for Marietta and we have OT!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie77 on November 18, 2017, 10:34:41 PM

What's the unofficial point spread for Wednesday's exhibition of Augustana at Illinois (Fighting Illini)? It counts as a real game for the Illini (4-0), and I expect the Vikings will approach it similarly. Thoughts?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 18, 2017, 11:46:58 PM

I spent the weekend at the Great Lakes Invitational. I think four of these teams are deserving of Top 25 votes - Marietta was clearly the class of the tournament, but St. Thomas is going to be a beast. 8 of 10 players played their first ever college minutes this weekend and they were noticeably better today. When they get back some of their injured vets, they'll be even better.

I also thought Hope and St John Fisher were very good as well. All the teams were good, really, but those four stood out.

Not sure if I'll vote for all of them, but I expect someone will be voting for all of them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 19, 2017, 12:00:56 AM

Even with Hope's PG expected to miss some weeks with an injury?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 19, 2017, 12:33:14 AM

Quote from: sac on November 19, 2017, 12:00:56 AM
Even with Hope's PG expected to miss some weeks with an injury?

Yeah, the other guards really stepped up to fill in. I think they'll be better when Hawkins gets back because of it. They really couldn't do anything on offense Friday once Hawkins was out. They were really good today; I was impressed with their ability to come back and put away a very good SJF team. I'm sure they'll have some bumps in the road, but the MIAA is not exactly barnstorming right now and I suspect they'll be at or near the top of the standings again.

Couple that with how many teams really didn't perform well this weekend, I think there's plenty of room for a few Hope votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on November 19, 2017, 11:07:56 AM

Just out of curiosity, how does a win against non-D3 opponents effect most voters ballots? I know that those games get thrown out for SOS and WP come March when the NCAA committee is selecting Pool C teams but that doesnt neesarily means voters throw it out for d3hoops top 25. St. John's beat SCSU yesterday who was projected to finish 6th out of 16 in a usually tough NSIC (Division 2). Would a win against Illinois for Augie (even thought its an exhibition) do anything either?

Thanks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 19, 2017, 04:30:40 PM

Endicott just upset No. 7 Babson, 90-80 behind a 45 point performance (10-15 from three) by Keith Brown.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on November 19, 2017, 05:09:57 PM

Check out Brown's first two games. 20-34 from 3, that ain't easy vs air. All I can say is, wow ..

http://www.ecgulls.com/sports/mbkb/2017-18/bios/brown_keith_4754

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 19, 2017, 06:01:24 PM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on November 19, 2017, 11:07:56 AM
Just out of curiosity, how does a win against non-D3 opponents effect most voters ballots? I know that those games get thrown out for SOS and WP come March when the NCAA committee is selecting Pool C teams but that doesnt neesarily means voters throw it out for d3hoops top 25. St. John's beat SCSU yesterday who was projected to finish 6th out of 16 in a usually tough NSIC (Division 2). Would a win against Illinois for Augie (even thought its an exhibition) do anything either?

Thanks.

The Augustana vs U. of Illinois game is a real game for Illinois, exhibition for Augie.

I would hope a D3 win over a Big Ten team would count for a whole bunch to the voters...and that a loss by 25 points would be a non-factor.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 19, 2017, 06:09:02 PM

Quote from: augie77 on November 18, 2017, 10:34:41 PM
What's the unofficial point spread for Wednesday's exhibition of Augustana at Illinois (Fighting Illini)? It counts as a real game for the Illini (3-0 heading into Sundays game versus Marshall), and I expect the Vikings will approach it similarly. Thoughts?

I have it at 17.5.

IWU faced the Illini back in 2005-06 in a similar situation - Titans ranked #1 in D3, Illini rebuilding. IWU was down 37-31 at half and had the game tied at the 14:38 mark of the 2nd half. Illinois went on a 30-10 run and it was over. The Illini won by 22. https://sun.iwu.edu/~iwunews/sports/mbb2006/ill-iwu.htm

Wash U played Illinois just last year and hung around the entire game, losing just 82-75. http://washubears.com/sports/mbkb/2016-17/boxscores/20161030_7xqg.xml?view=boxscore

The unique thing about this matchup is that Augie really isn't giving up any size at the 5, with 40 minutes of 6-11/240 Micah Martin and 6-9/221 Donovan Ferguson. And with Chrishawn Orange and Pierson Wofford on the floor, Augie can hang athletically.

I might have the number too high, but I guess I feel like at some point the Illini will pull away. I'll say this though - if ever a small college team was poised to beat the Illini, this is it.

Starters...

Illinois
G - Te'Jon Lucas, 6-1/180 So.
G - Mark Smith, 6-4/225 Fr.
G - Mark Alstork, 6-5/190 Gr.
F - Leron Black, 6-7/230 Jr.
F - Michael Finke, 6-10/235 Jr.

Augustana
G - Nolan Ebel, 6-1/175 Jr.
G - Chrishawn Orange, 6-2/180 Jr.
G - Dylan Sortillo, 6-3/180 Sr.
F - Pierson Wofford, 6-4/202 Jr.
C - Micah Martin, 6-11/240 So.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 19, 2017, 06:41:52 PM

There are always a lot of games on the opening weekend of the Division III basketball season, but that doesn't always translate into headlines. Not this season. There is plenty to talk about and Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is the place to find out what many of it means... if anything.

On Sunday's show, Dave will not only take a look at some of the incredible streaks that were broken. With the help of several guests, Dave will also get a look at who looked best at the Great Lakes Invitational while also talking to a few teams looking for solid seasons ahead.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch the show LIVE starting at 7:00 pm ET be advised, the show will not feature video until after the Thanskgiving break): http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2017-18/nov19. You can also listen to the podcast, located to the right, after the show is off the air.

You can also send your questions to the show and have them featured on the Hoopsville Mailbag segment. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com.

Guests include (in order of appearance):
- Ryan Scott, D3hoops.com Around the Nation columnist
- Darrin Travillian, Maryville (Tenn.) women's coach
- Tom Palombo, No. 18 Guilford men's coach
- Jon Miller, No. 4 Hanover men's coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 4samuy on November 19, 2017, 10:11:08 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 19, 2017, 06:09:02 PM
Quote from: augie77 on November 18, 2017, 10:34:41 PM
What's the unofficial point spread for Wednesday's exhibition of Augustana at Illinois (Fighting Illini)? It counts as a real game for the Illini (3-0 heading into Sundays game versus Marshall), and I expect the Vikings will approach it similarly. Thoughts?

I have it at 17.5.

IWU faced the Illini back in 2005-06 in a similar situation - Titans ranked #1 in D3, Illini rebuilding. IWU was down 37-31 at half and had the game tied at the 14:38 mark of the 2nd half. Illinois went on a 30-10 run and it was over. The Illini won by 22. https://sun.iwu.edu/~iwunews/sports/mbb2006/ill-iwu.htm

Wash U played Illinois just last year and hung around the entire game, losing just 82-75. http://washubears.com/sports/mbkb/2016-17/boxscores/20161030_7xqg.xml?view=boxscore

The unique thing about this matchup is that Augie really isn't giving up any size at the 5, with 40 minutes of 6-11/240 Micah Martin and 6-9/221 Donovan Ferguson. And with Chrishawn Orange and Pierson Wofford on the floor, Augie can hang athletically.

I might have the number too high, but I guess I feel like at some point the Illini will pull away. I'll say this though - if ever a small college team was poised to beat the Illini, this is it.

Starters...

Illinois
G - Te'Jon Lucas, 6-1/180 So.
G - Mark Smith, 6-4/225 Fr.
G - Mark Alstork, 6-5/190 Gr.
F - Leron Black, 6-7/230 Jr.
F - Michael Finke, 6-10/235 Jr.

Augustana
G - Nolan Ebel, 6-1/175 Jr.
G - Chrishawn Orange, 6-2/180 Jr.
G - Dylan Sortillo, 6-3/180 So.
F - Pierson Wofford, 6-4/202 Jr.
C - Micah Martin, 6-11/240 So.

One quick correction Titan Q, Which I'm sure is a typo, Sortillo is a senior. Also, I believe the previously referenced games were exhibitions for both teams, correct? Because it is an actual regular season game for the Illini and they've had their rotation set for a few weeks I would take the over in this game, but you never know. Maybe they will tinker with their lineup a bit. Great experience for the d3 kids.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 19, 2017, 10:16:38 PM

Quote from: 4samuy on November 19, 2017, 10:11:08 PM

One quick correction Titan Q, Which I'm sure is a typo, Sortillo is a senior. Also, I believe the previously referenced games were exhibitions for both teams, correct? Because it is an actual regular season game for the Illini and they've had their rotation set for a few weeks I would take the over in this game, but you never know. Maybe they will tinker with their lineup a bit. Great experience for the d3 kids.

Thanks, yes, Sortillo is a senior.

The fact it is a real game for the Illini is why I floated the line up to 17.5.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 20, 2017, 11:08:39 AM

Quote from: 4samuy on November 19, 2017, 10:11:08 PM
Because it is an actual regular season game for the Illini and they've had their rotation set for a few weeks I would take the over in this game, but you never know.

The game against Washington University was certainly an exhibition for both teams, but worth mentioning that the Illini had a veteran squad and had to play their regular rotation in order to prevent the upset. They would play more or less the same line-up (and only one less player) against Missouri two months later.

It is too bad that Augustana fans (and fans everywhere) will have to pay to watch the game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 23, 2017, 08:13:58 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	621	Whitman	3-0	def. Waynesburg, 113-74; def. Gallaudet, 122-58; won at Walla Walla, 116-78
#2	596	Augustana	3-0	def. (n) Heidelberg, 73-64; def. Calvin, 80-69; def. Alma, 65-53; LOST (exh.) at Illinois, 62-96; 11/26 vs. MacMurray
#3	561	Williams	3-0	def. Salem State, 80-68; def. Stevens, 73-55; won at Massachusetts College, 97-72; 11/26 vs. Yeshiva
#4	496	Hanover	3-0	def. (n) Kent State Tuscarawas, 103-49; def. (n) Otterbein, 71-68; won at Spalding, 83-47; 11/25 at #30 Wooster
#5	457	Ramapo	2-1	LOST to (n) Randolph-Macon, 61-79; won at Marymount, 80-67; def. William Paterson, 87-65
#6	441	Tufts	1-2	def. (n) Webster, 83-68; LOST at #9 Washington U., 94-98; LOST to #36 MIT, 83-93
#7	436	Babson	3-1	def. Lasell, 95-64; def. Worcester State, 101-52; LOST to Endicott, 80-90; won at Becker, 83-66; 11/26 at Bowdoin
#8	433	Middlebury	3-0	def. Fitchburg State, 111-72; def. Wentworth, 74-58; won at Johnson State, 84-77; 11/26 at Endicott
#9	403	Washington U.	3-0	def. Wabash, 82-70; def. #6 Tufts, 98-94; won at Principia, 71-57; 11/25 vs. Ohio Northern; 11/26 at T#45 Mount St. Joseph
#10	402	UW-River Falls	3-1	def. Central, 85-73; LOST to (n) Baldwin Wallace, 65-68; def. (n) DePauw, 72-69 OT; def. UW-Superior, 98-68; 11/25 vs. Hamline
#11	327	UW-Whitewater	3-0	def. #15 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 82-66; def. Waldorf, 75-57; def. Monmouth, 66-50; 11/25 vs. Anderson
#12	319	North Central (Ill.)	1-1	LOST at Heidelberg, 93-98 2OT; def. T#42 Benedictine, 82-79; 11/24 vs. T#32 Whitworth; 11/25 vs. Lewis and Clark
#13	300	Marietta	3-0	def. #29 Hope, 102-71; def. T#37 St. Thomas, 85-83 OT; won at Frostburg State, 91-77; 11/26 at Bethany
#14	262	Christopher Newport	3-0	won at Randolph-Macon, 69-64; def. (n) Catholic, 80-78; def. (n) Wilmington, 82-64; 11/26 vs. Dickinson
#15	217	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	0-2	LOST at #11 UW-Whitewater, 66-82; LOST at UW-Platteville, 57-74; 11/24 vs. George Fox; 11/25 vs. Puget Sound
#16	198	Rochester	2-1	def. Bard, 73-54; def. Utica, 72-67; LOST at Hobart, 61-72; 11/25 vs. SUNY-Canton; 11/26 vs. TBA
#17	177	Emory	2-0	def. Piedmont, 83-64; won at Berry, 109-103; 11/25 at LaGrange; 11/26 vs. Maryville (Tenn.)
#18	158	Guilford	2-2	won at Greensboro, 98-88; LOST to Concordia (Texas), 67-68; def. Huntingdon, 90-63; LOST to Averett, 69-82
#19	152	St. John Fisher	2-2	LOST at Hobart, 75-87; def. (n) Birmingham-Southern, 94-75; LOST to (n) #29 Hope, 86-97; def. #30 Wooster, 90-57
#20	141	St. John's	2-1	def. (n) St. Scholastica, 94-71; won at St. Cloud St., 73-67; LOST at UW-La Crosse, 63-65
#21	104	Wartburg	2-1	LOST at Northern Iowa, 43-72; def. Crown, 91-88; def. Aurora, 80-66; 11/24 vs. Graceland (Iowa); 11/25 at Waldorf
#22	98	Lycoming	4-0	won at Medgar Evers, 101-81; def. Penn St.-Wilkes Barre, 94-84; def. SUNY Oneonta, 108-86; def. #26 Susquehanna, 89-70; 11/26 vs. Penn College
#23	95	Cabrini	2-1	won at Eastern, 82-68; LOST to (n) Denison, 70-90; def. (n) Randolph, 88-72
#24	94	Scranton	1-2	def. Penn State-Berks, 78-63; LOST to York (Pa.), 70-84; LOST at Widener, 75-82; 11/25 vs. King's; 11/26 vs. Wilkes
#25	73	Swarthmore	3-0	def. Hood, 111-89; def. Albertus Magnus, 95-85; won at Washington College, 79-70; 11/26 vs. Misericordia

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	71	Susquehanna	1-3	def. Bethany, 75-73; LOST to King's, 89-93; LOST to Rowan, 72-88; LOST at #22 Lycoming, 70-89
#27	68	Nichols	2-1	def. Newbury, 117-72; won at Lasell, 91-80; LOST at Wesleyan, 61-80; 11/26 at Trinity (Conn.)
#28	54	Skidmore	3-0	won at Castleton, 89-79; won at Hartwick, 96-85; def. T#40 Plattsburgh State, 88-62
#29	51	Hope	1-1	LOST at #13 Marietta, 71-102; def. (n) #19 St. John Fisher, 97-86; 11/24 vs. Cornerstone; 11/25 at Aquinas
#30	47	Wooster	2-1	def. Oberlin, 70-64; def. Medaille, 86-76; LOST at #19 St. John Fisher, 57-90; 11/25 vs. #4 Hanover
#31	44	Keene State	1-2	LOST at Southern Vermont, 67-73; won at T#40 Plattsburgh State, 73-66; LOST at Springfield, 67-73; 11/25 at #36 MIT
T#32	42	Ohio Wesleyan	3-0	def. (n) Trine, 99-96; def. (n) Albion, 98-60; def. (n) Otterbein, 81-59; 11/26 vs. Capital
T#32	42	Whitworth	3-0	def. La Verne, 95-73; def. Gallaudet, 92-56; def. Waynesburg, 83-58; 11/24 vs. #12 North Central (Ill.); 11/25 vs. Arcadia
#34	37	UW-Oshkosh	3-0	def. T#42 Benedictine, 74-68; won at T#37 St. Norbert, 60-57; def. Edgewood, 78-66
#35	22	Amherst	3-0	def. Sarah Lawrence, 83-51; def. Western New England, 73-61; won at Westfield State, 84-48
#36	17	MIT	3-0	def. Bridgewater State, 91-52; def. Eastern Nazarene, 80-50; won at #6 Tufts, 93-83; 11/25 vs. #31 Keene State
T#37	13	St. Norbert	2-1	def. UW-Eau Claire, 77-69; def. T#42 Benedictine, 70-53; LOST to #34 UW-Oshkosh, 57-60; 11/25 vs. UW-Stevens Point
T#37	13	St. Thomas	2-1	def. (n) Dickinson, 73-68; LOST at #13 Marietta, 83-85 OT; won at St. Scholastica, 80-56
#39	8	St. Lawrence	1-2	LOST to (n) Bowdoin, 74-80; LOST to (n) Lehman, 86-90; won at SUNY-Canton, 89-78
T#40	7	Carthage	1-1	def. Rockford, 86-66; LOST to Lake Forest, 65-71; 11/24 vs. Centre; 11/25 vs. TBD
T#40	7	Plattsburgh State	0-2	LOST to #31 Keene State, 66-73; LOST at #28 Skidmore, 62-88
T#42	5	Benedictine	0-3	LOST at #34 UW-Oshkosh, 68-74; LOST at T#37 St. Norbert, 53-70; LOST at #12 North Central (Ill.), 79-82; 11/25 vs. Marian
T#42	5	Eastern Connecticut	3-0	def. (n) Dean, 87-64; won at WPI, 78-68; won at Connecticut College, 89-77; 11/25 vs. Montclair State; 11/26 vs. TBA
T#42	5	Hardin-Simmons	0-1	LOST at Southwestern, 77-83; 11/24 at Texas Lutheran; 11/25 at Schreiner
T#45	1	Hamilton	3-0	def. (n) T#45 Oswego State, 75-69; def. (n) Keystone, 97-60; won at Western Connecticut, 97-88
T#45	1	Loras	2-1	won at Lake Forest, 84-81; won at Concordia-Chicago, 104-87; LOST at Concordia (Wis.), 86-101; 11/25 vs. Ripon
T#45	1	Mount St. Joseph	1-2	LOST to (n) Wittenberg, 74-78; LOST to (n) Dickinson, 64-80; def. Wilmington, 75-72; 11/25 vs. Ohio Northern vs Wash U; 11/25 vs. Case Western Reserve; 11/26 vs. #9 Washington U.; 11/26 vs. Ohio Northern vs Case Western
T#45	1	Nebraska Wesleyan	2-0	won at North Central (Minn.), 122-84; won at Northwestern (Minn.), 78-67; 11/24 vs. Iowa Wesleyan; 11/25 vs. Bethany Lutheran
T#45	1	New Jersey City	4-0	def. Stevens, 77-73; def. (n) Gwynedd Mercy, 82-76; won at Drew, 76-72; won at Rutgers-Newark, 68-54; 11/25 at Farmingdale State
T#45	1	Oswego State	1-2	LOST to (n) T#45 Hamilton, 69-75; LOST at Elmira, 90-103; won at Clarkson, 82-66

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on November 23, 2017, 08:49:24 AM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on November 23, 2017, 08:13:58 AM
How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#1 621 Whitman 3-0 def. Waynesburg, 113-74; def. Gallaudet, 122-58; won at Walla Walla, 116-78
#2 596 Augustana 3-1 def. (n) Heidelberg, 73-64; def. Calvin, 80-69; def. Alma, 65-53; LOST at Illinois, 62-96; 11/26 vs. MacMurray
#3 561 Williams 3-0 def. Salem State, 80-68; def. Stevens, 73-55; won at Massachusetts College, 97-72; 11/26 vs. Yeshiva
#4 496 Hanover 3-0 def. (n) Kent State Tuscarawas, 103-49; def. (n) Otterbein, 71-68; won at Spalding, 83-47; 11/25 at #30 Wooster
#5 457 Ramapo 2-1 LOST to (n) Randolph-Macon, 61-79; won at Marymount, 80-67; def. William Paterson, 87-65
#6 441 Tufts 1-2 def. (n) Webster, 83-68; LOST at #9 Washington U., 94-98; LOST to #36 MIT, 83-93
#7 436 Babson 3-1 def. Lasell, 95-64; def. Worcester State, 101-52; LOST to Endicott, 80-90; won at Becker, 83-66;
11/26 at Bowdoin
#8 433 Middlebury 3-0 def. Fitchburg State, 111-72; def. Wentworth, 74-58; won at Johnson State, 84-77; 11/26 at Endicott
#9 403 Washington U. 3-0 def. Wabash, 82-70; def. #6 Tufts, 98-94; won at Principia, 71-57; 11/25 vs. Ohio Northern;
11/26 at T#45 Mount St. Joseph
#10 402 UW-River Falls 3-1 def. Central, 85-73; LOST to (n) Baldwin Wallace, 65-68; def. (n) DePauw, 72-69 OT; def. UW-Superior, 98-68;
11/25 vs. Hamline
#11 327 UW-Whitewater 3-0 def. #15 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 82-66; def. Waldorf, 75-57; def. Monmouth, 66-50; 11/25 vs. Anderson
#12 319 North Central (Ill.) 1-1 LOST at Heidelberg, 93-98 2OT; def. T#42 Benedictine, 82-79; 11/24 vs. T#32 Whitworth;
11/25 vs. Lewis and Clark
#13 300 Marietta 3-0 def. #29 Hope, 102-71; def. T#37 St. Thomas, 85-83 OT; won at Frostburg State, 91-77; 11/26 at Bethany
#14 262 Christopher Newport 3-0 won at Randolph-Macon, 69-64; def. (n) Catholic, 80-78; def. (n) Wilmington, 82-64; 11/26 vs. Dickinson
#15 217 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps 0-2 LOST at #11 UW-Whitewater, 66-82; LOST at UW-Platteville, 57-74; 11/24 vs. George Fox; 11/25 vs. Puget Sound
#16 198 Rochester 2-1 def. Bard, 73-54; def. Utica, 72-67; LOST at Hobart, 61-72; 11/25 vs. SUNY-Canton; 11/26 vs. TBA
#17 177 Emory 2-0 def. Piedmont, 83-64; won at Berry, 109-103; 11/25 at LaGrange; 11/26 vs. Maryville (Tenn.)
#18 158 Guilford 2-2 won at Greensboro, 98-88; LOST to Concordia (Texas), 67-68; def. Huntingdon, 90-63; LOST to Averett, 69-82
#19 152 St. John Fisher 2-2 LOST at Hobart, 75-87; def. (n) Birmingham-Southern, 94-75; LOST to (n) #29 Hope, 86-97;
def. #30 Wooster, 90-57
#20 141 St. John's 2-1 def. (n) St. Scholastica, 94-71; won at St. Cloud St., 73-67; LOST at UW-La Crosse, 63-65
#21 104 Wartburg 2-1 LOST at Northern Iowa, 43-72; def. Crown, 91-88; def. Aurora, 80-66; 11/24 vs. Graceland (Iowa);
11/25 at Waldorf
#22 98 Lycoming 4-0 won at Medgar Evers, 101-81; def. Penn St.-Wilkes Barre, 94-84; def. SUNY Oneonta, 108-86;
def. #26 Susquehanna, 89-70; 11/26 vs. Penn College
#23 95 Cabrini 2-1 won at Eastern, 82-68; LOST to (n) Denison, 70-90; def. (n) Randolph, 88-72
#24 94 Scranton 1-2 def. Penn State-Berks, 78-63; LOST to York (Pa.), 70-84; LOST at Widener, 75-82; 11/25 vs. King's;
11/26 vs. Wilkes
#25 73 Swarthmore 3-0 def. Hood, 111-89; def. Albertus Magnus, 95-85; won at Washington College, 79-70; 11/26 vs. Misericordia

Others receiving votes
Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#26 71 Susquehanna 1-3 def. Bethany, 75-73; LOST to King's, 89-93; LOST to Rowan, 72-88; LOST at #22 Lycoming, 70-89
#27 68 Nichols 2-1 def. Newbury, 117-72; won at Lasell, 91-80; LOST at Wesleyan, 61-80; 11/26 at Trinity (Conn.)
#28 54 Skidmore 3-0 won at Castleton, 89-79; won at Hartwick, 96-85; def. T#40 Plattsburgh State, 88-62
#29 51 Hope 1-1 LOST at #13 Marietta, 71-102; def. (n) #19 St. John Fisher, 97-86; 11/24 vs. Cornerstone; 11/25 at Aquinas
#30 47 Wooster 2-1 def. Oberlin, 70-64; def. Medaille, 86-76; LOST at #19 St. John Fisher, 57-90; 11/25 vs. #4 Hanover
#31 44 Keene State 1-2 LOST at Southern Vermont, 67-73; won at T#40 Plattsburgh State, 73-66; LOST at Springfield, 67-73;
11/25 at #36 MIT
T#32 42 Ohio Wesleyan 3-0 def. (n) Trine, 99-96; def. (n) Albion, 98-60; def. (n) Otterbein, 81-59; 11/26 vs. Capital
T#32 42 Whitworth 3-0 def. La Verne, 95-73; def. Gallaudet, 92-56; def. Waynesburg, 83-58; 11/24 vs. #12 North Central (Ill.);
11/25 vs. Arcadia
#34 37 UW-Oshkosh 3-0 def. T#42 Benedictine, 74-68; won at T#37 St. Norbert, 60-57; def. Edgewood, 78-66
#35 22 Amherst 3-0 def. Sarah Lawrence, 83-51; def. Western New England, 73-61; won at Westfield State, 84-48
#36 17 MIT 3-0 def. Bridgewater State, 91-52; def. Eastern Nazarene, 80-50; won at #6 Tufts, 93-83; 11/25 vs. #31 Keene State
T#37 13 St. Norbert 2-1 def. UW-Eau Claire, 77-69; def. T#42 Benedictine, 70-53; LOST to #34 UW-Oshkosh, 57-60; 11/25 vs. UW-Stevens Point
T#37 13 St. Thomas 2-1 def. (n) Dickinson, 73-68; LOST at #13 Marietta, 83-85 OT; won at St. Scholastica, 80-56
#39 8 St. Lawrence 1-2 LOST to (n) Bowdoin, 74-80; LOST to (n) Lehman, 86-90; won at SUNY-Canton, 89-78
T#40 7 Carthage 1-1 def. Rockford, 86-66; LOST to Lake Forest, 65-71; 11/24 vs. Centre; 11/25 vs. TBD
T#40 7 Plattsburgh State 0-2 LOST to #31 Keene State, 66-73; LOST at #28 Skidmore, 62-88
T#42 5 Benedictine 0-3 LOST at #34 UW-Oshkosh, 68-74; LOST at T#37 St. Norbert, 53-70; LOST at #12 North Central (Ill.), 79-82;
11/25 vs. Marian
T#42 5 Eastern Connecticut 3-0 def. (n) Dean, 87-64; won at WPI, 78-68; won at Connecticut College, 89-77; 11/25 vs. Montclair State;
11/26 vs. TBA
T#42 5 Hardin-Simmons 0-1 LOST at Southwestern, 77-83; 11/24 at Texas Lutheran; 11/25 at Schreiner
T#45 1 Hamilton 3-0 def. (n) T#45 Oswego State, 75-69; def. (n) Keystone, 97-60; won at Western Connecticut, 97-88
T#45 1 Loras 2-1 won at Lake Forest, 84-81; won at Concordia-Chicago, 104-87; LOST at Concordia (Wis.), 86-101; 11/25 vs. Ripon
T#45 1 Mount St. Joseph 1-2 LOST to (n) Wittenberg, 74-78; LOST to (n) Dickinson, 64-80; def. Wilmington, 75-72;
11/25 vs. Ohio Northern vs Wash U; 11/25 vs. Case Western Reserve; 11/26 vs. #9 Washington U.;
11/26 vs. Ohio Northern vs Case Western
T#45 1 Nebraska Wesleyan 2-0 won at North Central (Minn.), 122-84; won at Northwestern (Minn.), 78-67; 11/24 vs. Iowa Wesleyan;
11/25 vs. Bethany Lutheran
T#45 1 New Jersey City 4-0 def. Stevens, 77-73; def. (n) Gwynedd Mercy, 82-76; won at Drew, 76-72; won at Rutgers-Newark, 68-54;
11/25 at Farmingdale State
T#45 1 Oswego State 1-2 LOST to (n) T#45 Hamilton, 69-75; LOST at Elmira, 90-103; won at Clarkson, 82-66

Darryl.. don't invoke the wrath of the CCIW fans.. Augie remains undefeated... the game vs Illinois was an exhibition game for Augie, no matter what D3hoops says!!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 23, 2017, 09:52:45 AM

Quote from: hopefan on November 23, 2017, 08:49:24 AM
Darryl.. don't invoke the wrath of the CCIW fans.. Augie remains undefeated... the game vs Illinois was an exhibition game for Augie, no matter what D3hoops says!!!!

edited to note that the Illinois game was an exhibition.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie77 on November 23, 2017, 09:53:43 AM

Yes, Augustana is still 3-0, but Illinois counts it as win, moving to 5-0. The loss of Forward Pierson Wofford to a torn ACL is very real, however. He was leading the Vikings in both scoring and rebounding.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 23, 2017, 10:41:33 AM

Quote from: augie77 on November 23, 2017, 09:53:43 AM
Yes, Augustana is still 3-0, but Illinois counts it as win, moving to 5-0. The loss of Forward Pierson Wofford to a torn ACL is very real, however. He was leading the Vikings in both scoring and rebounding.

Wait, so if the game didn't count for Augi, why does the ACL tear count?

In all seriousness, that's too bad, for any player and team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 26, 2017, 06:04:49 PM

There is always a large gathering of friends and family around a large table with plenty of food that helps ring in the new basketball season. Many call it Thanksgiving, we tend to call it the second weekend of the Division III season.

And one again the early weeks of the season have not disappointed... nor been lacking surprises.

Preseason Top 25 teams have lost as often as turkeys have been overcooked this holiday week. Teams who have had surprise starts have followed up with continued surprises or more head-scratching results. However, no matter the games and no matter the wins and losses, we are thankful to have the season here and be able to talk about it.

On Sunday's Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave tries to gobble up the leftovers and figure out who was granted their wish after the snap of the wishbone. At the same time, we take the time to recognize a milestone at D3hoops.com: 20 years of being ... D3hoops.com - the home of Division III men's and women's basketball.

Dave also chats with a new dynamic duo in Baltimore. Hope Josh Loeffler and Catherine Bixby are settling into jobs that have seen the same coaches (Bill Nelson and Nancy Funk) in over thirty years.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch the show LIVE starting at 7:00 PM ET (or On Demand) here: http://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2017-18/nov19. You can also listen to the podcast, located to the right, after the show is off the air.

You can also send your questions to the show and have them featured on the Hoopsville Mailbag segment. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com.

Guests include (in order of appearance):
- Pat Coleman, Editor-in-Chief, D3sports.com
- Tim Sweeney, Hobart men's coach
- Josh Loeffler, Johns Hopkins men's coach
- Katherine Bixby, Johns Hopkins women's coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 26, 2017, 06:07:54 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	621	Whitman	3-0	def. Waynesburg, 113-74; def. Gallaudet, 122-58; won at Walla Walla, 116-78
#2	596	Augustana	4-0	def. (n) Heidelberg, 73-64; def. Calvin, 80-69; def. Alma, 65-53; def. MacMurray, 89-57
#3	561	Williams	4-0	def. Salem State, 80-68; def. Stevens, 73-55; won at Massachusetts College, 97-72; def. Yeshiva, 78-65
#4	496	Hanover	3-1	def. (n) Kent State Tuscarawas, 103-49; def. (n) Otterbein, 71-68; won at Spalding, 83-47; LOST at #30 Wooster, 79-87
#5	457	Ramapo	2-1	LOST to (n) Randolph-Macon, 61-79; won at Marymount, 80-67; def. William Paterson, 87-65
#6	441	Tufts	1-2	def. (n) Webster, 83-68; LOST at #9 Washington U., 94-98; LOST to #36 MIT, 83-93
#7	436	Babson	3-2	def. Lasell, 95-64; def. Worcester State, 101-52; LOST to Endicott, 80-90; won at Becker, 83-66; LOST at Bowdoin, 71-80
#8	433	Middlebury	4-0	def. Fitchburg State, 111-72; def. Wentworth, 74-58; won at Johnson State, 84-77; won at Endicott, 78-67
#9	403	Washington U.	4-1	def. Wabash, 82-70; def. #6 Tufts, 98-94; won at Principia, 71-57; def. (n) Ohio Northern, 77-73; LOST at T#45 Mount St. Joseph, 74-96
#10	402	UW-River Falls	4-1	def. Central, 85-73; LOST to (n) Baldwin Wallace, 65-68; def. (n) DePauw, 72-69 OT; def. UW-Superior, 98-68; def. Hamline, 68-60
#11	327	UW-Whitewater	4-0	def. #15 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 82-66; def. Waldorf, 75-57; def. Monmouth, 66-50; def. Anderson, 79-70
#12	319	North Central (Ill.)	2-2	LOST at Heidelberg, 93-98 2OT; def. T#42 Benedictine, 82-79; LOST to (n) T#32 Whitworth, 72-75; def. (n) Lewis and Clark, 83-53
#13	300	Marietta	4-0	def. #29 Hope, 102-71; def. T#37 St. Thomas, 85-83 OT; won at Frostburg State, 91-77; won at Bethany, 83-70
#14	262	Christopher Newport	3-1	won at Randolph-Macon, 69-64; def. (n) Catholic, 80-78; def. (n) Wilmington, 82-64; LOST to Dickinson, 54-64
#15	217	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	0-4	LOST at #11 UW-Whitewater, 66-82; LOST at UW-Platteville, 57-74; LOST to George Fox, 73-91; LOST to Puget Sound, 74-87
#16	198	Rochester	4-1	def. Bard, 73-54; def. Utica, 72-67; LOST at Hobart, 61-72; def. SUNY-Canton, 84-51; def. Stockton, 64-56
#17	177	Emory	3-1	def. Piedmont, 83-64; won at Berry, 109-103; LOST at LaGrange, 78-84; def. (n) Maryville (Tenn.), 102-92
#18	158	Guilford	2-2	won at Greensboro, 98-88; LOST to Concordia (Texas), 67-68; def. Huntingdon, 90-63; LOST to Averett, 69-82
#19	152	St. John Fisher	2-2	LOST at Hobart, 75-87; def. (n) Birmingham-Southern, 94-75; LOST to (n) #29 Hope, 86-97; def. #30 Wooster, 90-57
#20	141	St. John's	2-1	def. (n) St. Scholastica, 94-71; won at St. Cloud St., 73-67; LOST at UW-La Crosse, 63-65
#21	104	Wartburg	4-1	LOST at Northern Iowa, 43-72; def. Crown, 91-88; def. Aurora, 80-66; def. (n) Graceland (Iowa), 78-71; won at Waldorf, 78-67
#22	98	Lycoming	5-0	won at Medgar Evers, 101-81; def. Penn St.-Wilkes Barre, 94-84; def. SUNY Oneonta, 108-86; def. #26 Susquehanna, 89-70; def. Penn College, 92-70
#23	95	Cabrini	2-1	won at Eastern, 82-68; LOST to (n) Denison, 70-90; def. (n) Randolph, 88-72
#24	94	Scranton	2-3	def. Penn State-Berks, 78-63; LOST to York (Pa.), 70-84; LOST at Widener, 75-82; def. King's, 85-79; LOST to Wilkes, 45-52
#25	73	Swarthmore	4-0	def. Hood, 111-89; def. Albertus Magnus, 95-85; won at Washington College, 79-70; def. Misericordia, 93-75

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	71	Susquehanna	1-3	def. Bethany, 75-73; LOST to King's, 89-93; LOST to Rowan, 72-88; LOST at #22 Lycoming, 70-89
#27	68	Nichols	3-1	def. Newbury, 117-72; won at Lasell, 91-80; LOST at Wesleyan, 61-80; won at Trinity (Conn.), 89-75
#28	54	Skidmore	3-0	won at Castleton, 89-79; won at Hartwick, 96-85; def. T#40 Plattsburgh State, 88-62
#29	51	Hope	2-2	LOST at #13 Marietta, 71-102; def. (n) #19 St. John Fisher, 97-86; LOST to (n) Cornerstone, 61-88; won at Aquinas, 89-83
#30	47	Wooster	3-1	def. Oberlin, 70-64; def. Medaille, 86-76; LOST at #19 St. John Fisher, 57-90; def. #4 Hanover, 87-79
#31	44	Keene State	2-2	LOST at Southern Vermont, 67-73; won at T#40 Plattsburgh State, 73-66; LOST at Springfield, 67-73; won at #36 MIT, 67-63
T#32	42	Ohio Wesleyan	4-0	def. (n) Trine, 99-96; def. (n) Albion, 98-60; def. (n) Otterbein, 81-59; won at Capital, 87-70
T#32	42	Whitworth	5-0	def. La Verne, 95-73; def. Gallaudet, 92-56; def. Waynesburg, 83-58; def. (n) #12 North Central (Ill.), 75-72; def. (n) Arcadia, 75-66
#34	37	UW-Oskhosh	3-0	def. T#42 Benedictine, 74-68; won at T#37 St. Norbert, 60-57; def. Edgewood, 78-66
#35	22	Amherst	3-0	def. Sarah Lawrence, 83-51; def. Western New England, 73-61; won at Westfield State, 84-48
#36	17	MIT	3-1	def. Bridgewater State, 91-52; def. Eastern Nazarene, 80-50; won at #6 Tufts, 93-83; LOST to #31 Keene State, 63-67
T#37	13	St. Norbert	3-1	def. UW-Eau Claire, 77-69; def. T#42 Benedictine, 70-53; LOST to UW-Oshkosh, 57-60; def. UW-Stevens Point, 58-54
T#37	13	St. Thomas	2-1	def. (n) Dickinson, 73-68; LOST at #13 Marietta, 83-85 OT; won at St. Scholastica, 80-56
#39	8	St Lawrence	1-2	LOST to (n) Bowdoin, 74-80; LOST to (n) Lehman, 86-90; won at SUNY-Canton, 89-78
T#40	7	Carthage	3-1	def. Rockford, 86-66; LOST to Lake Forest, 65-71; def. (n) Centre, 61-41; def. (n) Coe, 83-72
T#40	7	Plattsburgh State	0-2	LOST to #31 Keene State, 66-73; LOST at #28 Skidmore, 62-88
T#42	5	Benedictine	1-3	LOST at UW-Oshkosh, 68-74; LOST at T#37 St. Norbert, 53-70; LOST at #12 North Central (Ill.), 79-82; def. Marian, 82-77
T#42	5	Eastern Connecticut	5-0	def. (n) Dean, 87-64; won at WPI, 78-68; won at Connecticut College, 89-77; def. (n) Montclair State, 72-55; won at Colby, 83-77
T#42	5	Hardin-Simmons	0-3	LOST at Southwestern, 77-83; LOST at Texas Lutheran, 74-82; LOST at Schreiner, 84-93
T#45	1	Hamilton	3-0	def. (n) T#45 Oswego State, 75-69; def. (n) Keystone, 97-60; won at Western Connecticut, 97-88
T#45	1	Loras	3-1	won at Lake Forest, 84-81; won at Concordia-Chicago, 104-87; LOST at Concordia (Wis.), 86-101; def. Ripon, 90-88
T#45	1	Mount St. Joseph	2-3	LOST to (n) Wittenberg, 74-78; LOST to (n) Dickinson, 64-80; def. Wilmington, 75-72; LOST to Case Western Reserve, 69-74; def. #9 Washington U., 96-74
T#45	1	Nebraska Wesleyan	4-0	won at North Central (Minn.), 122-84; won at Northwestern (Minn.), 78-67; def. Iowa Wesleyan, 117-54; def. Bethany Lutheran, 95-78
T#45	1	New Jersey City	5-0	def. Stevens, 77-73; def. (n) Gwynedd Mercy, 82-76; won at Drew, 76-72; won at Rutgers-Newark, 68-54; won at Farmingdale State, 77-71
T#45	1	Oswego State	1-2	LOST to (n) T#45 Hamilton, 69-75; LOST at Elmira, 90-103; won at Clarkson, 82-66

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 26, 2017, 07:58:25 PM

Yow, has a pre-season Top25 ever gone 0-4 like Claremont MS before the next poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 26, 2017, 09:17:58 PM

Quote from: sac on November 26, 2017, 07:58:25 PM
Yow, has a pre-season Top25 ever gone 0-4 like Claremont MS before the next poll.

If we'd known Scarlett was out, the chances of them being Top 25 probably would've been slim.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 27, 2017, 11:04:02 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 26, 2017, 09:17:58 PM
Quote from: sac on November 26, 2017, 07:58:25 PM
Yow, has a pre-season Top25 ever gone 0-4 like Claremont MS before the next poll.

If we'd known Scarlett was out, the chances of them being Top 25 probably would've been slim.

Absolutely agree!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on November 27, 2017, 01:16:16 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 27, 2017, 11:04:02 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 26, 2017, 09:17:58 PM
Quote from: sac on November 26, 2017, 07:58:25 PM
Yow, has a pre-season Top25 ever gone 0-4 like Claremont MS before the next poll.

If we'd known Scarlett was out, the chances of them being Top 25 probably would've been slim.

Absolutely agree!

Frankly Scarlett, I don't give a damn... :) :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on November 27, 2017, 01:24:27 PM

Maybe this is typical with early-season uncertainly, but it seems like a lot of highly regarded teams, both inside and just outside the top 25, suffered a lot of unexpected losses in the first few weeks.

Tufts, Babson, North Central, Claremont, Guilford, St. John Fisher and Scranton all with multiple losses are likely not going to be ranked next week, same deal with Cabrini after getting blown out by Denison. That would open up eight spots, and I would guess that the six undefeated teams who received more than 1 vote in the preseason will likely sneak in: Skidmore, Ohio Wesleyan, Whitworth, UW-Oshkosh, Amherst, and Eastern Conn. All six of those are strong programs with at least one (if not more) prominent individual players, and seem deserving. Wooster I think makes it in thanks to a win over Hanover and a strong pedigree as well. The last spot seems like anyone's guess ... Wesleyan, St. Thomas, Hamilton and St. Norbert all have pretty solid resumes though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 27, 2017, 01:34:34 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on November 27, 2017, 01:24:27 PM
Maybe this is typical with early-season uncertainly, but it seems like a lot of highly regarded teams, both inside and just outside the top 25, suffered a lot of unexpected losses in the first few weeks.

Tufts, Babson, North Central, Claremont, Guilford, St. John Fisher and Scranton all with multiple losses are likely not going to be ranked next week, same deal with Cabrini after getting blown out by Denison. That would open up eight spots, and I would guess that the six undefeated teams who received more than 1 vote in the preseason will likely sneak in: Skidmore, Ohio Wesleyan, Whitworth, UW-Oshkosh, Amherst, and Eastern Conn. All six of those are strong programs with at least one (if not more) prominent individual players, and seem deserving. Wooster I think makes it in thanks to a win over Hanover and a strong pedigree as well. The last spot seems like anyone's guess ... Wesleyan, St. Thomas, Hamilton and St. Norbert all have pretty solid resumes though.

You are assuming all eight of those fall out of the poll. I am not sure all of them fall out. You could make an argument for all of them, but with 25 voters and with those teams in different places on their ballots, not sure they all fall.

As for who takes their place... is it too early to throw darts this season?

I kid for those who don't know the long-running joke. I do anything but throw darts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on November 27, 2017, 02:01:11 PM

I don't know (of course) that all eight fall out. But I believe they should. None have beaten a single top 25 team. All have lost to at least one unranked team. Babson and Tufts do have a long way to fall, but Babson has two losses to pretty good (but not great) teams and was already a big question mark given all the losses from last year's squad. Tufts also lost a lot, is decimated by injuries (at least one long term), and has only one win on its resume. Also several New England teams with good talent and no losses (Amherst, Wesleyan, Bowdoin, Eastern Conn) plus one-loss MIT all deserve to leapfrog them. They got the benefit of the doubt from last year, fairly, but both are playing with very different rosters.

North Central to me has the best case for staying ranked. The other seven? I just don't see it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 27, 2017, 07:09:17 PM

It's out. http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2017-18/week-1

Lots of new faces, but maybe not enough?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 27, 2017, 10:13:09 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 27, 2017, 11:04:02 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 26, 2017, 09:17:58 PM
Quote from: sac on November 26, 2017, 07:58:25 PM
Yow, has a pre-season Top25 ever gone 0-4 like Claremont MS before the next poll.

If we'd known Scarlett was out, the chances of them being Top 25 probably would've been slim.

Absolutely agree!

Do we have a time table for Scarlett's return?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 27, 2017, 10:14:39 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 27, 2017, 10:13:09 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 27, 2017, 11:04:02 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 26, 2017, 09:17:58 PM
Quote from: sac on November 26, 2017, 07:58:25 PM
Yow, has a pre-season Top25 ever gone 0-4 like Claremont MS before the next poll.

If we'd known Scarlett was out, the chances of them being Top 25 probably would've been slim.

Absolutely agree!

Do we have a time table for Scarlett's return?

I haven't been able to get any information as of yet.. and not sure what information I get that I will be able to share. Will update if I can.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 30, 2017, 12:57:57 AM

I'll tweet this in the morning (automated), but I don't have time to time that tweet in here... so here you go for you late-night readers.

I apologize in advance, this is a bit lengthy. I went to edit it down and then decided I have far more pressing things to do, so read what you want and skip what you need... I won't take it personally... this week. LOL: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/wp-admin/post.php?post=2944&action=edit

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 30, 2017, 09:00:14 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

After last week's report, I had to refill the red ink cartridge on my browser. Less carnage so far this week.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Whitman	3-0	12/01 at Pacific Lutheran; 12/02 at T#50 Puget Sound
#2	597	Augustana	4-0	12/02 at #18 UW-Oshkosh
#3	575	Williams	5-0	won at Vassar, 90-57; 12/02 vs. #36 Wesleyan
#4	540	Middlebury	4-0	IDLE
#5	514	UW-Whitewater	4-0	12/01 vs. Caltech; 12/02 at Redlands
#6	494	Marietta	5-0	won at Otterbein, 86-60; 12/02 vs. Baldwin Wallace
#7	418	Hanover	4-1	def. #16 Ohio Wesleyan, 84-83; 12/02 at Franklin
#8	369	Ramapo	4-1	won at Medgar Evers, 82-58; def. Montclair State, 70-56; 12/02 at Stockton
#9	343	Washington U.	4-1	12/03 at Alma
#10	322	UW-River Falls	5-1	def. Carthage, 77-71; 12/02 vs. Carleton
#11	295	Lycoming	6-0	def. Messiah, 55-36; 12/02 at Hood
#12	286	Swarthmore	4-0	11/30 vs. Muhlenberg; 12/02 at #35 Dickinson
#13	244	Whitworth	5-0	12/01 at T#50 Puget Sound; 12/02 at Pacific Lutheran
#14	226	Wartburg	5-1	won at Dubuque, 77-51; 12/02 vs. UW-Eau Claire
#15	181	Rochester	5-1	won at Union, 77-66
#16	179	Ohio Wesleyan	4-1	LOST at #7 Hanover, 83-84; 12/02 vs. DePauw
#17	176	Christopher Newport	4-1	def. Salisbury, 71-66; 12/02 vs. Frostburg State
#18	166	UW-Oshkosh	4-0	won at North Park, 71-58; 12/02 vs. #2 Augustana
#19	158	Hobart	2-1	LOST at Brockport, 83-89; 12/01 at Union; 12/02 at Vassar
#20	154	Skidmore	4-0	won at Worcester State, 83-67; 12/01 vs. St. Lawrence; 12/02 vs. Clarkson
#21	146	Amherst	3-0	12/02 at Emerson
#22	111	Bowdoin	5-0	won at Southern Maine, 84-72; 11/30 at Anna Maria; 12/02 at Colby
#23	102	Emory	4-1	def. Birmingham-Southern, 91-86; 12/02 at Hampden-Sydney
#24	100	Eastern Connecticut	5-0	12/02 at Rhode Island College
#25	99	Wooster	3-2	LOST at Denison, 61-75; 12/02 vs. Wabash

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	94	Babson	3-3	LOST at Albertus Magnus, 81-85; 12/02 vs. Brandeis; 12/03 vs. TBA
#27	91	Tufts	2-2	won at WPI, 88-67; 11/30 at Newbury; 12/02 vs. Salem State; 12/03 vs. New England Big 4 Challenge
#28	68	St. Thomas	3-1	def. Concordia-Moorhead, 80-71; 12/02 at Hamline
#29	63	New Jersey City	6-0	def. William Paterson, 87-83 OT; 12/02 at Rutgers-Camden
#30	59	St. John's	3-1	won at Minnesota-Morris, 110-79; 12/02 vs. T#40 Bethel
#31	47	North Central (Ill.)	2-2	12/02 at North Park
#32	37	MIT	4-1	won at Mass-Boston, 88-60; 11/30 vs. Salem State; 12/02 at Lasell
T#33	31	Illinois Wesleyan	5-0	12/02 vs. Carthage
T#33	31	Randolph-Macon	4-1	won at Roanoke, 71-60; 12/02 vs. Lynchburg
#35	26	Dickinson	3-1	11/30 vs. McDaniel; 12/02 vs. #12 Swarthmore
#36	22	Wesleyan	5-0	won at Emmanuel, 88-68; 12/02 at #3 Williams
#37	20	St. Norbert	3-1	12/01 vs. Knox; 12/02 vs. Illinois College
#38	19	Hamilton	4-0	def. SUNY New Paltz, 104-66; 12/01 vs. Utica; 12/02 vs. Eastern
#39	18	Endicott	2-2	LOST at T#40 Nichols, 82-105; 12/02 vs. Curry
T#40	13	Bethel	4-1	LOST to Augsburg, 74-87; 12/02 at #30 St. John's
T#40	13	John Carroll	4-0	12/02 vs. Muskingum
T#40	13	Nichols	4-1	def. #39 Endicott, 105-82; 12/02 vs. Gordon
T#43	7	Cabrini	3-1	def. Scranton, 71-67; 12/02 vs. Immaculata
T#43	7	Guilford	2-3	LOST to Washington and Lee, 90-94; 12/02 at Bridgewater (Va.)
T#43	7	Mount St. Joseph	2-3	12/02 vs. Manchester
#46	6	St. John Fisher	2-2	11/30 at Cortland
#47	5	Keene State	3-2	def. Lasell, 73-62; 11/30 at Colby-Sawyer; 12/02 vs. Mass-Boston
#48	3	Franklin and Marshall	5-0	11/30 at Ursinus; 12/02 vs. Haverford
#49	2	Nebraska Wesleyan	4-0	12/02 vs. Simpson
T#50	1	Lake Forest	4-1	12/01 vs. Cornell; 12/02 vs. Grinnell
T#50	1	Loras	4-1	won at Coe, 81-76; 12/02 vs. Luther
T#50	1	Puget Sound	6-0	12/01 vs. #13 Whitworth; 12/02 vs. #1 Whitman

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on December 02, 2017, 11:26:14 PM

The parity is real... Pool C talk will be so fun in Feb! Fun start to the season so far.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 03, 2017, 11:25:31 AM

C'mon Darryl, with only one ranked team playing today, can we get the update early? I think I'll need extra time to work on my ballot. This weekly post is always helpful to see everything in one place.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 03, 2017, 05:37:31 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 03, 2017, 11:25:31 AM
C'mon Darryl, with only one ranked team playing today, can we get the update early? I think I'll need extra time to work on my ballot. This weekly post is always helpful to see everything in one place.

Sorry, Ryan, I did not see this note until just now. Still early, just not extraordinarily so.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Whitman	5-0	won at Pacific Lutheran, 107-50; won at T#50 Puget Sound, 111-108
#2	597	Augustana	4-1	LOST at #18 UW-Oshkosh, 89-95 2OT
#3	575	Williams	5-1	won at Vassar, 90-57; LOST to #36 Wesleyan, 67-72 OT
#4	540	Middlebury	4-0	IDLE
#5	514	UW-Whitewater	6-0	def. (n) Caltech, 78-61; won at Redlands, 69-60
#6	494	Marietta	5-1	won at Otterbein, 86-60; LOST to Baldwin Wallace, 72-73
#7	418	Hanover	5-1	def. #16 Ohio Wesleyan, 84-83; won at Franklin, 75-68
#8	369	Ramapo	5-1	won at Medgar Evers, 82-58; def. Montclair State, 70-56; won at Stockton, 81-67
#9	343	Washington U.	5-1	won at Alma, 96-86
#10	322	UW-River Falls	6-1	def. Carthage, 77-71; def. Carleton, 72-69
#11	295	Lycoming	7-0	def. Messiah, 55-36; won at Hood, 83-77
#12	286	Swarthmore	6-0	def. Muhlenberg, 81-69; won at #35 Dickinson, 78-66
#13	244	Whitworth	7-0	won at T#50 Puget Sound, 95-84; won at Pacific Lutheran, 88-70
#14	226	Wartburg	6-1	won at Dubuque, 77-51; def. UW-Eau Claire, 66-55
#15	181	Rochester	5-1	won at Union, 77-66
#16	179	Ohio Wesleyan	5-1	LOST at #7 Hanover, 83-84; def. DePauw, 105-71
#17	176	Christopher Newport	4-2	def. Salisbury, 71-66; LOST to Frostburg State, 81-83 OT
#18	166	UW-Oshkosh	5-0	won at North Park, 71-58; def. #2 Augustana, 95-89 2OT
#19	158	Hobart	3-2	LOST at Brockport, 83-89; LOST at Union, 62-67; won at Vassar, 85-73
#20	154	Skidmore	6-0	won at Worcester State, 83-67; def. St. Lawrence, 81-56; def. Clarkson, 77-60
#21	146	Amherst	4-0	won at Emerson, 78-65
#22	111	Bowdoin	6-1	won at Southern Maine, 84-72; won at Anna Maria, 101-69; LOST at Colby, 84-89
#23	102	Emory	4-2	def. Birmingham-Southern, 91-86; LOST at Hampden-Sydney, 85-90
#24	100	Eastern Connecticut	6-0	won at Rhode Island College, 86-61
#25	99	Wooster	3-3	LOST at Denison, 61-75; LOST to Wabash, 72-85

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	94	Babson	4-4	LOST at Albertus Magnus, 81-85; won at Brandeis, 89-81; LOST at Salem State, 70-75
#27	91	Tufts	4-3	won at WPI, 88-67; won at Newbury, 84-71; LOST to Salem State, 67-77; def. Brandeis, 76-74
#28	68	St. Thomas	3-2	def. Concordia-Moorhead, 80-71; LOST at Hamline, 61-69
#29	63	New Jersey City	7-0	def. William Paterson, 87-83 OT; won at Rutgers-Camden, 86-83
#30	59	St. John's	4-1	won at Minnesota-Morris, 110-79; def. T#40 Bethel, 79-63
#31	47	North Central (Ill.)	3-2	won at North Park, 88-71
#32	37	MIT	6-1	won at Mass-Boston, 88-60; def. Salem State, 93-45; won at Lasell, 64-49
T#33	31	Illinois Wesleyan	5-1	LOST to Carthage, 72-74
T#33	31	Randolph-Macon	5-1	won at Roanoke, 71-60; def. Lynchburg, 88-72
#35	26	Dickinson	4-2	def. McDaniel, 74-56; LOST to #12 Swarthmore, 66-78
#36	22	Wesleyan	6-0	won at Emmanuel, 88-68; won at #3 Williams, 72-67 OT
#37	20	St. Norbert	5-1	def. Knox, 81-69; def. Illinois College, 75-56
#38	19	Hamilton	6-0	def. SUNY New Paltz, 104-66; def. Utica, 90-85; def. Eastern, 99-87
#39	18	Endicott	3-2	LOST at T#40 Nichols, 82-105; def. Curry, 88-48
T#40	13	Bethel	4-2	LOST to Augsburg, 74-87; LOST at #30 St. John's, 63-79
T#40	13	John Carroll	5-0	def. Muskingum, 115-74
T#40	13	Nichols	5-1	def. #39 Endicott, 105-82; def. Gordon, 100-86
T#43	7	Cabrini	4-1	def. Scranton, 71-67; def. Immaculata, 107-97
T#43	7	Guilford	3-3	LOST to Washington and Lee, 90-94; won at Bridgewater (Va.), 92-86
T#43	7	Mount St. Joseph	3-3	def. Manchester, 75-60
#46	6	St. John Fisher	2-3	LOST at Cortland, 69-70
#47	5	Keene State	5-2	def. Lasell, 73-62; won at Colby-Sawyer, 100-88; def. Mass-Boston, 85-45
#48	3	Franklin and Marshall	7-0	won at Ursinus, 77-69; def. Haverford, 83-56
#49	2	Nebraska Wesleyan	5-0	def. Simpson, 94-85
T#50	1	Lake Forest	6-1	def. Cornell, 80-55; def. Grinnell, 104-91
T#50	1	Loras	5-1	won at Coe, 81-76; def. Luther, 71-51
T#50	1	Puget Sound	6-2	LOST to #13 Whitworth, 84-95; LOST to #1 Whitman, 108-111

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on December 05, 2017, 12:56:24 AM

Latest poll released late:

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2017-18/week2

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 05, 2017, 10:18:56 AM

For those curious, here is my Top 25 ballot: http://bit.ly/2A5qrPB

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 05, 2017, 12:17:22 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 05, 2017, 10:18:56 AM
For those curious, here is my Top 25 ballot: http://bit.ly/2A5qrPB

Lake Forest...hmmm...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 05, 2017, 12:27:03 PM

Quote from: WUH on December 05, 2017, 12:17:22 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 05, 2017, 10:18:56 AM
For those curious, here is my Top 25 ballot: http://bit.ly/2A5qrPB

Lake Forest...hmmm...

Clearly, I am not the only one, either. I only account for four of their seven points.

Interestingly, only three teams in the ORV category are on my ballot. Not sure I have been that consistent with the Top 25 this early in the season in a long time. I certainly didn't expect it this early in this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 05, 2017, 12:39:51 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 05, 2017, 12:27:03 PM
Clearly, I am not the only one, either. I only account for four of their seven points.

I think it is great and it is proof that the you do take the time to look beyond the big names.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 05, 2017, 12:48:10 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 05, 2017, 10:18:56 AM
For those curious, here is my Top 25 ballot: http://bit.ly/2A5qrPB

BW beat River Falls, not Eau Claire, which is fine because beating River Falls is a bigger deal than topping Eau Claire. Josh Weix, the leading scorer last year, did not return this season and the Blugolds also lost 2 other starters for a team that didn't make the NCAAs last year. I'm not sure how big of a deal it will be to beat Eau Claire this year (you mentioned them with your Wartburg vote as well, I believe).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 05, 2017, 01:08:55 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 05, 2017, 12:48:10 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 05, 2017, 10:18:56 AM
For those curious, here is my Top 25 ballot: http://bit.ly/2A5qrPB

BW beat River Falls, not Eau Claire, which is fine because beating River Falls is a bigger deal than topping Eau Claire. Josh Weix, the leading scorer last year, did not return this season and the Blugolds also lost 2 other starters for a team that didn't make the NCAAs last year. I'm not sure how big of a deal it will be to beat Eau Claire this year (you mentioned them with your Wartburg vote as well, I believe).

Sorry... I'll fix that. Brain has been toast for a few days and I just didn't check that one.

I do realize how much Eau Claire lost, but I also know they are well coached and a solid program all the same. There aren't many "easy" programs to beat in the WIAC in general.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 07, 2017, 06:48:13 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Whitman	5-0	12/08 vs. Colorado College
#2	580	Middlebury	5-0	def. Plattsburgh State, 92-68; 12/08 at #16 Skidmore
#3	560	UW-Whitewater	6-0	12/08 vs. Adrian; 12/09 at Trine
#4	514	Augustana	5-1	def. #28 North Central (Ill.), 79-72; 12/09 at Carthage
#5	440	Hanover	5-2	LOST at Transylvania, 81-95; 12/09 vs. Bluffton
#6	436	Williams	6-1	won at Westfield State, 70-63; 12/07 vs. Fitchburg State; 12/09 vs. T#47 Springfield
#7	419	Ramapo	6-1	def. Rutgers-Newark, 60-47; 12/09 at Kean
#8	407	UW-Oshkosh	6-0	def. Finlandia, 104-60; 12/09 at Calvin
#9	391	Whitworth	7-0	12/10 vs. Colorado College
#10	371	UW-River Falls	6-1	12/09 vs. St. Thomas
#11	369	Washington U.	5-1	12/09 vs. Central
#12	364	Lycoming	8-0	won at Alvernia, 73-62; 12/09 vs. Widener
#13	354	Marietta	6-1	won at La Roche, 81-75; 12/09 vs. T#29 John Carroll
#14	343	Swarthmore	7-0	def. Ursinus, 67-60; 12/09 at Delaware Valley
#15	270	Wartburg	7-1	def. #39 Loras, 98-87; 12/10 vs. UW-La Crosse
#16	222	Skidmore	6-0	12/08 vs. #2 Middlebury
#17	219	Rochester	6-1	won at SUNY Geneseo, 82-60; 12/07 vs. St. John Fisher; 12/09 vs. Nazareth
#18	193	Wesleyan	7-0	won at Vassar, 83-68; 12/09 vs. Brandeis
#19	175	Ohio Wesleyan	6-1	won at Wabash, 81-74; 12/09 at Oberlin
#20	148	Eastern Connecticut	7-0	def. Manhattanville, 78-59; 12/07 vs. WPI; 12/09 vs. Plymouth State
#21	142	Amherst	5-0	def. Anna Maria, 78-41; 12/07 at Babson; 12/09 at Lasell
#22	81	Baldwin Wallace	4-1	12/09 at Muskingum
#23	79	New Jersey City	8-0	def. Kean, 87-76; 12/09 at TCNJ
#24	73	St. John's	5-1	won at Macalester, 114-96; 12/09 vs. St. Olaf
#25	39	Franklin and Marshall	8-0	def. Johns Hopkins, 65-59; 12/08 at Albright

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	38	MIT	7-1	won at Emmanuel, 80-56; 12/07 vs. Rhode Island College; 12/09 at Fitchburg State
#27	36	Christopher Newport	5-2	won at St. Mary's (Md.), 76-52; 12/10 vs. Wesley
#28	34	North Central (Ill.)	3-3	LOST at #4 Augustana, 72-79; 12/09 vs. T#37 Illinois Wesleyan
T#29	27	Bowdoin	6-2	LOST to St. Joseph's (Maine), 58-77; 12/07 vs. Bates; 12/10 vs. Maine-Farmington
T#29	27	John Carroll	5-1	LOST at Mount Union, 83-87; 12/09 at #13 Marietta
#31	22	Nichols	6-1	won at Roger Williams, 91-79; 12/07 at Becker; 12/09 at Anna Maria
#32	21	St. Norbert	6-1	won at Lawrence, 73-59; 12/09 vs. Cornell
#33	18	Hamilton	7-0	won at SUNYIT, 112-96; 12/09 vs. Bard
#34	15	Randolph-Macon	5-1	12/09 vs. TBA
#35	9	Cabrini	5-1	won at Cairn, 80-70; 12/09 at Gwynedd Mercy
#36	8	Dickinson	5-2	won at Gettysburg, 73-68
T#37	7	Illinois Wesleyan	6-1	won at #46 Wheaton (Ill.), 82-79; 12/09 at #28 North Central (Ill.)
T#37	7	Lake Forest	7-1	def. Illinois College, 79-62
#39	6	Loras	5-2	LOST at #15 Wartburg, 87-98; 12/09 at Augsburg
T#40	5	Colby	6-1	12/09 vs. Bates
T#40	5	Keene State	6-2	def. Albertus Magnus, 78-67; 12/09 vs. Southern Maine
T#40	5	York (Pa.)	6-0	def. Frostburg State, 92-75; 12/09 at Marymount
T#43	4	Emory	5-2	def. Covenant, 80-73
T#43	4	Virginia Wesleyan	7-1	LOST to Averett, 59-63; 12/09 vs. Roanoke
T#43	4	Wooster	4-3	def. Hiram, 91-70; 12/09 at DePauw
#46	3	Wheaton (Ill.)	5-2	LOST to T#37 Illinois Wesleyan, 79-82; 12/09 at Elmhurst
T#47	2	Hobart	3-2	12/09 at Carnegie Mellon
T#47	2	Springfield	4-0	12/07 vs. Trinity (Conn.); 12/09 at #6 Williams
T#49	1	Puget Sound	6-2	IDLE
T#49	1	Salem State	6-2	12/09 at WPI

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on December 07, 2017, 08:53:51 AM

^^^ Not that anyone else cares, but in the interest of accuracy, Randolph-Macon's next game is 12/8 vs Misericordia at the Juniata tournament then 12/9 vs either Juniata or St. Joseph (VT). And speaking of Juniata, maybe they are flyiing under the radar at 6-0 and no votes??? I know nothing about their opposition to date but they have won all games but one by 20+ points and the other by 11.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on December 07, 2017, 09:22:06 AM

Quote from: y_jack_lok on December 07, 2017, 08:53:51 AM
^^^ Not that anyone else cares, but in the interest of accuracy, Randolph-Macon's next game is 12/8 vs Misericordia at the Juniata tournament then 12/9 vs either Juniata or St. Joseph (VT). And speaking of Juniata, maybe they are flyiing under the radar at 6-0 and no votes??? I lnow nothing about their opposition to date but they have won all games but one by 20+ points and the other by 11.

The men's strength of schedule, as of last season, does have a home/away multiplier. I don't believe that men's basketball has scrapped it for this season. However, not including a home/away multiplier, and excluding their results vs Juniata-- Juniata's opponents have a record of 11 wins and 22 losses. Only LaGrange and Carnegie Mellon have a .500 record outside of the Juniata game-- the other opponents are under .500. I would need a signature win in those 6 games to make a case for Juniata getting a top 25 vote at this point.

Of the 6 opponents Juniata faced, only Scranton was regionally ranked last season-- #2 in the Middle Atlantic. Currently, Scranton has a 2-6 overall record this season. The other 5 opponents were not regionally ranked in the NCAA's final rankings last season.

However, if Juniata goes through most of their conference undefeated, then a case can be made for top 25 votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on December 07, 2017, 09:26:47 AM

^^^ Thanks for the insights. Even with a low opponents' winning percentage it's hard to ignore Juniata's margins of victory in their games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on December 07, 2017, 09:38:48 AM

Quote from: y_jack_lok on December 07, 2017, 09:26:47 AM
^^^ Thanks for the insights. Even with a low opponents' winning percentage it's hard to ignore Juniata's margins of victory in their games.

I guess you could make an argument for Scranton being that signature win for top 25 votes, but Scranton seems so far down at this point that it would be hard to see the Royals regionally ranked on February 21, 2018.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 07, 2017, 11:12:42 AM

Juniata is on voters' minds, trust me. Discussed them with several voters so far. I think they currently fall into two categories:
- A lot of wins, even significant, over teams that don't have great records (for whatever reason)
- Squad that has come out of nowhere and thus, what are they really about?

I know people hate when those kind of factors, especially the second, are talked about... but they are real. Juanita's OPP% isn't great especially thanks to a head-scratching Scranton team. They also have been in the middle of the Landmark for sometime with no signs they could break into the top of the conference. They are good and well coached. Seen them every season. However, they just didn't seem like a squad who was going to be at the top this season.

That all adds up to voters trying to better understand the team and thus, personally speaking, waiting to see a little more data to see if this is all real.

That and coupled with a LOT of teams who have gaudy records and the pool is very deep while the poll is very shallow.

I would be surprised if they aren't getting votes next week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on December 07, 2017, 04:01:57 PM

^^^ Thanks, Dave. Especially appreciate the insight into how voters evaluate teams when considering them for a ballot spot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 07, 2017, 07:39:19 PM

It is the time of the season when managing practices and games around finals and soon-to-be holiday breaks can be difficult, especially as most conferences have begun in-conference games while there are still non-conference battles on tap.

On Thursday's edition of Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave chats with a number of coaches who have had significant starts to the season, but are now managing their seasons. How are the highs and lows massaged and how to keep student-athletes focused not only on their studies (and finals), but also the game.

Results at this time of the year will be a factor come the end of the season.

Dave will also discuss, and update if able, the breaking news out of St. Norbert where the women's basketball team has been suspended ten games due to a number of players' actions.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch the show starting at 7:00 pm ET here: http://bit.ly/2ADCaC3.

After the show is over, you can watch it On Demand or listen to the podcast (info below).

You can also send your questions to the show and have them featured on the Hoopsville Mailbag segment. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com.

Guests include (in order of appearance):
- Dan Lukes, St. Norbert Assistant Athletics Director/Athletics Communications
- David Doino, Averett men's coach
- Ken Davis, Lake Forest men's coach
- Klay Knueppel, Wisconsin Lutheran women's coach
- Michelle Filander, Austin women's coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on December 08, 2017, 09:04:08 PM

Whitewater goes down by 13 to Adrian on a neutral court.

Wait, what?

Should be interesting to see how far they fall. Poll near the top has been pretty sticky for one loss teams except for one team that dropped like 8 spots on a buzzer beater. Hanover lost to a meh team and somehow ended up higher for it a couple of weeks later. Augustana and Williams barely moved after losing.

Whitewater had played a weak schedule and was probably pretty overrated, but would think this result is still a surprise. But it seems the closer your loss is the more you drop so maybe they won't drop at all? Having a tough time figuring out poll voter logic.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 08, 2017, 09:33:21 PM

I wouldn't say Transylvania is a "meh" team. Pretty good start from them and we know they can produce some decent squads.

Admittedly, I think Whitewater was too high, but I also had them in the Top 10 - nervously.

Something I think you need to consider: not everything is in a vacuum of one team. There are lots of things happening at the same time. As I wrote in my blog, there are so many teams losing and so many I don't think should be any higher, that a lot of times I left teams who loss alone and didn't move them. I certainly couldn't move them up, but if I chose to move them down ... who in the world was I going to put above them? Those below them have lost or also have what seems like light schedules so far.

I would not say the close your loss the more you drop. You selected one team it happened to for whatever reason (though, it didn't happen with me). There are 25 voters. There are other teams moving around besides that single team you are looking at.

Best way to really gauge what voters are thinking isn't to look at where the teams are slotted, but what is going on with their points AND what other teams are moving. Case in point, I moved Oshkosh up significantly with their win over Augustana - that affected something like seven other schools and their ranking.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on December 08, 2017, 09:54:37 PM

Hanover's first loss that they didn't drop from was to Wooster. There hasn't been a poll after their second loss yet. I'd say Transy is probably better than Wooster this year, tbh. Winning at More by 10+ is a good win. If not for the Hanover win, Wooster's season would be looking really rough.

I would think Whitewater would drop precipitously after this game, regardless of what else happens. Not all losses are equal is my point and the how the voters seem value losses seems highly inconsistent both within a poll week and from week to week.

About this time of year is when i start looking at computer rankings and thinking they're probably more accurate than the polls. Less than 5 games and it's not really enough.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 08, 2017, 09:59:43 PM

Whitewater was definitely overrated, IMO. They always seem to play a generally weak NC schedule. There has been a "problem" (not physical) with last year's leading scorer, Chris Jones, who hasn't played yet and may not at all. One of last year's starters, Demetrius Woodley, decided not to return, part-time starter, Zach Knobloch, transferred and another starter from last year, 2nd leading scorer and top rebounder Scotty Tyler, from a year ago, has been hurt half the time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 08, 2017, 10:03:26 PM

Quote from: me on December 08, 2017, 09:54:37 PM
Hanover's first loss that they didn't drop from was to Wooster. There hasn't been a poll after their second loss yet. I'd say Transy is probably better than Wooster this year, tbh. Winning at More by 10+ is a good win. If not for the Hanover win, Wooster's season would be looking really rough.

Hanover's first loss was in the first week and half of the season. The first poll came out on the second Monday of this season. There was a LOT of results to work through. Voters had a lot of moving parts. I personally had 26 losses from 16 teams on my ballot from the preseason. Hanover's loss was basically absorbed by their other results and results from around the rest of the country.

Quote from: me on December 08, 2017, 09:54:37 PM
I would think Whitewater would drop precipitously after this game, regardless of what else happens. Not all losses are equal is my point and the how the voters seem value losses seems highly inconsistent both within a poll week and from week to week.

Agreed... not all losses are equal. There are 25 voters. Thus there are 25 different opinions on any team's loss. However, I say again, look at the points and how they shake out more than where teams are ranked. It gives you better insight. Secondly, remember that one team's loss isn't happening on it's own. There are other teams losing, winning, etc. There are a lot of things to consider besides one single loss. You think it is inconsistent, but each week is different and all the results are different. One week a team's loss may have a different affect than if it happened the next week. Who they lost to and what that team's season is like changes things. For example, a loss to a team may look horrible one week, but a month later that winning team suddenly looks like one of the best in the country... that loss now no longer looks as bad.

You are looking for consistency in something that is no where near consistent.

Quote from: me on December 08, 2017, 09:54:37 PM
About this time of year is when i start looking at computer rankings and thinking they're probably more accurate than the polls. Less than 5 games and it's not really enough.

I would argue computer rankings can be just as flawed depending on how they are designed and tested. Not enough data, data included that is pointless or irrelevant, etc. We have shown that numerous times in the old BCS. Not saying there aren't computer models that do make sense, but there was a reason the BCS didn't come out with its rankings until October. The Heal Point system in Maine athletics didn't come out early in the seasons, either.

The poll is literally a breathing system. 25 voters, different opinions, constantly changing based the constantly changing results week to week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on December 08, 2017, 10:09:12 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 08, 2017, 09:59:43 PM
Whitewater was definitely overrated, IMO. They always seem to play a generally weak NC schedule. There has been a "problem" (not physical) with last year's leading scorer, Chris Jones, who hasn't played yet and may not at all. One of last year's starters, Demetrius Woodley, decided not to return, part-time starter, Zach Knobloch, transferred and another starter from last year, 2nd leading scorer and top rebounder Scotty Tyler, from a year ago, has been hurt half the time.

Didn't know all this but I thought their performance in CA was a canary in the coal mine. They won but not in a way you would expect a real top 5 team to play. Still definitely didn't expect them to get blown out by Adrian.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on December 08, 2017, 10:30:09 PM

I don't know really how to delete parts of quotes and leave others without janking the whole thing up.

When you have good teams being dropped for losses to other good teams (good enough to actually move into the poll), and other good teams not being dropped for losses to less good teams (as defined by the voters), it's just very strange. So not sure if the voters write off a loss like with Whitewater or not, it's impossible to tell because there's no consistency. And there should be, because programs use this stuff to promote their teams, to recruit, etc.

As far as the BCS, October in football is not that many more games than we've had in basketball. There are just fewer games in a football season.

I don't have much else to say about it. Just something I noticed in the last few weeks that this unexpected result and the poll implications got me thinking more about. Ironically, if Whitewater was dropped significantly it would actually be inconsistent with the norm, yet more correct.

I don't pay much attention to polls in D1, maybe I shouldn't in D3 either but since the schools aren't on TV or anything, being ranked is a pretty big flag to say you're a good program aside from an actual championship which only comes at the end of the year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 08, 2017, 10:43:03 PM

Quote from: me on December 08, 2017, 10:30:09 PM
I don't know really how to delete parts of quotes and leave others without janking the whole thing up.

It really isn't that hard to do. Takes some trial and error, but "[/quote]" is your friend. :)

Quote from: me on December 08, 2017, 10:30:09 PM
When you have good teams being dropped for losses to other good teams (good enough to actually move into the poll), and other good teams not being dropped for losses to less good teams (as defined by the voters), it's just very strange. So not sure if the voters write off a loss like with Whitewater or not, it's impossible to tell because there's no consistency. And there should be, because programs use this stuff to promote their teams, to recruit, etc.

All of this is your opinion. Like I said, there are 25 different opinions from around the country seeing it from their perspective. I am not sure what exactly you are looking for in terms of consistency. Are teams supposed to rise or fall a certain number of ranking positions or gain or lose a certain number of points based on the type of wins or losses? You are asking for something absolute in something that is no where close to absolute. There are a ton of variables, scenarios, and results and you seem to want consistency. I don't quite get it to be honest.

You also have to consider what we have been talking about for a long time: parity. There are a LOT of good teams in Division III. Maybe not so many great ones, but a lot of good ones. That means more losses are to be expected especially from the Top 10 and such.

Something to also think about, you will find more movement near the bottom of a poll than you will at the top. The top tends to be where more points are and more voters have those teams high on their ballots. Any shift will not be as noticed (again, look at the point totals). Towards the bottom is where fewer voters are involved. Depending on a poll, but as little as ten voters could put a team in their bottom five and they could get ranked. If they lose and half of them remove them form their poll and the other half only move them down slightly, they will jump out of the poll. Again... points.

Quote from: me on December 08, 2017, 10:30:09 PM
As far as the BCS, October in football is not that many more games than we've had in basketball. There are just fewer games in a football season.

My point has nothing to do with how many games... it has to do with waiting until there is at least some data that is worth compiling and crunching before releasing the poll. There was no reason to release a BCS computer poll the first five or so weeks of the season because there weren't enough games played by any team to have enough data to truly have a ranking. They waited until about half the season was played in football to do it.

Basketball actually has more games because there are more teams playing the sport and far more diversity. The football poll released about halfway through the season; that is about the time I look at computer polls with at least one eye just to see if I am missing something.

Quote from: me on December 08, 2017, 10:30:09 PM
I don't have much else to say about it. Just something I noticed in the last few weeks that this unexpected result and the poll implications got me thinking more about. Ironically, if Whitewater was dropped significantly it would actually be inconsistent with the norm, yet more correct.

I just feel you have a premonition of how teams should move based on results and all in a vacuum. One team's loss is not the only factor and I think I have said that a few times LOL. It just feels you are being too absolute and not understanding 440 or so other teams had results in the same week that actually affects one team's results.

Quote from: me on December 08, 2017, 10:30:09 PM
I don't pay much attention to polls in D1, maybe I shouldn't in D3 either but since the schools aren't on TV or anything, being ranked is a pretty big flag to say you're a good program aside from an actual championship which only comes at the end of the year.

There is always web streaming and now OTTs that offer games. You can watch a lot of games around the country rather easily now-a-days.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on December 08, 2017, 10:59:26 PM

You're eager to make your points without really processing mine. So I'm done here.

Realistically not that many people are watching streams. It's not like D1 where TV is a big part of the prestige and promotion of a program.

That said I'm about to watch a bit of Whitman to see if they might get a competitive game. If not it could be a while before they do.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 08, 2017, 11:13:20 PM

I am absolutely processing your points. I have read them over and over to make sure I get what you are saying. I just don't understand why you want to see consistency in something that isn't consistent.

And more people watch streaming than many realize. I certainly don't turn on games non-stop, but I know games are being watched via streaming FAR more in the last few years than even five years ago. The technology has been able to make Division III far more interesting and exciting.

Per the Whitman game, I want to see the Colorado College sophomore who played Rezball. He fascinates me, but I am bias after interviewing him. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on December 08, 2017, 11:28:09 PM

Answer: no. This team doesn't look very good and also doesn't look like they've ever played against a press before. Refs being slanted doesn't help but is only widening the margin. Whitman is in 2nd gear and cruising.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on December 08, 2017, 11:31:19 PM

Games like this make me question the talk of so much parity. Colorado was supposed to be decent and they look like a high school team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 09, 2017, 05:57:53 AM

Quote from: me on December 08, 2017, 11:31:19 PM
Games like this make me question the talk of so much parity. Colorado was supposed to be decent and they look like a high school team.

I think Whitman is making a lot of teams look like high school teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on December 09, 2017, 07:55:50 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 09, 2017, 05:57:53 AM
Quote from: me on December 08, 2017, 11:31:19 PM
Games like this make me question the talk of so much parity. Colorado was supposed to be decent and they look like a high school team.

I think Whitman is making a lot of teams look like high school teams.

A lot of not so good teams. Puget Sound played them really tight. Really the only team they've played.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 09, 2017, 09:50:13 AM

CC is down a starting guard and their ballhandling isn't great to begin with - plus they had some real foul trouble. I'm sure they're better than they played last night. One thing's for clear, you can't replicate what Whitman does in practice. Maybe a team like MArietta that goes 20 deep could pull it off, but for the most parts, it's going to matter how quickly a team's backcourt can adjust to the speed and pressure. One thing that's hard to see on the feed is how big the Whitman guys are. They're throwing 6'3" guys with quickness and long arms at you all over the place. Very few teams could handle it last year and it looks like they've only gotten better.

Whitman is missing two starters, but don't seem to really have missed a beat. UPS had to hit 17 threes the other night to even be in the game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on December 09, 2017, 10:02:44 AM

But if you can bust their stuff, that's what you're going to get. Wide open shots and layups. Colorado even when they broke the press didn't attack it. Puget Sound knew what to do against it and did it well and nearly got the win.

And yes the officials calling two different games didn't help at all, but they were beat before they even got into the penalty.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on December 09, 2017, 10:06:26 AM

Also, 17 3s isn't far off UPS's average. They take 40 a game. It looks like that's who they are.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 09, 2017, 07:55:24 PM

Does Whitman play a variation of the Mayhem defense? (I really should know, but you know how things are). That is, press, press, press, go for steals, close guarding all of the time, and utilize a quick offense taking the first good shot.

Alaska Anchorage's women play it and their box scores are similar.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 09, 2017, 09:01:09 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 09, 2017, 07:55:24 PM
Does Whitman play a variation of the Mayhem defense? (I really should know, but you know how things are). That is, press, press, press, go for steals, close guarding all of the time, and utilize a quick offense taking the first good shot.

Alaska Anchorage's women play it and their box scores are similar.

It's aggressive, all-out defense. I'm not sure its anything specific. They just pressure the ball at all times and trust their team speed to cover open spots and passing lanes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BigMike33 on December 10, 2017, 04:16:20 AM

Ryan,

You just watched Middlebury Skidmore

Does Middlebury's speed compare to Whitman???

Also does Middlebury's size give Whitman a problem. It is very athletic size

Appreciate your perspective and work

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on December 10, 2017, 08:01:01 AM

Quote from: smedindy on December 09, 2017, 07:55:24 PM
Does Whitman play a variation of the Mayhem defense? (I really should know, but you know how things are). That is, press, press, press, go for steals, close guarding all of the time, and utilize a quick offense taking the first good shot.

Alaska Anchorage's women play it and their box scores are similar.

It's as you describe but I don't know if they call it that.

Bridgeland coached under Vance Walberg and uses the same offense Calipari used at Memphis and early in his tenure at Kentucky, which was Walberg's dribble-drive offense. Defensively they press 94 feet and it's not a token press at all. More similar to West Virginia except the refs have taken WVU out of their press most games this year by making themselves the center of attention with ticky tack fouls.

So if you've seen any of that, you might have some idea of what they are.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 10, 2017, 12:33:52 PM

Quote from: BigMike33 on December 10, 2017, 04:16:20 AM
Ryan,

You just watched Middlebury Skidmore

Does Middlebury's speed compare to Whitman???

Also does Middlebury's size give Whitman a problem. It is very athletic size

Appreciate your perspective and work

Nobody compares to Whitman's speed. The Babson team that beat them last year did so more by simply withstanding the punch and being incredibly physical. Middlebury takes care of the ball and moves with confidence, which means they can probably hang. The teams that gave Whitman trouble last year (Rochester and Babson) simply didn't make turnovers and had very confident ball handlers.

Size might be an issue for Whitman this year without Jojo Wiggins, but they're pretty big and they just don't let teams into halfcourt sets very often. Babson had Isaiah Nelsen down low, but his effectiveness was generally the speed with which he could receive a pass and get to the rim.

There are definitely teams out there who can compete with Whitman - we saw four CCIW schools play last night who have the capability. I suspect there are a handful more. I'm really just not sure you can replicate Whitman's pace in practice, maybe unless you put a sixth defender out there on the press?

This Whitman team, talent-wise, is not as good as last year's, but I do think they're more confident and more focused, which can be its own problem.

They're #1 for a reason, but I don't think it's a runaway juggernaut or anything - the tournament will be tough, especially with how the brackets may work out. A lot of good teams in the West and Central this year and moving enough of them out could be geographically impossible. A long way to go before that, though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on December 10, 2017, 02:21:33 PM

Most important thing is when you beat their press, you have to punish it. If you wait, you just end up having to go through the fun house again.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 10, 2017, 05:07:52 PM

First semester finals may have started, or about to start, but that hasn't stopped the action on the hardcourt from being formidable. Even the first winter storm of the season didn't stop the games on the East Coast.

On Sunday night's episode of Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave tries not to scratch his hair (out) as he and guests try and decipher the action of the past few nights and week. While the women seem to have settled in this week, the men's side continues to produce results that make things more complicated. Are there any great teams in Division III?

It just may be too early, still, to really know.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch the show LIVE starting at 7:00 p.m. ET right here: http://bit.ly/2kjEiau

You can also send your questions to the show and have them featured on the Hoopsville Mailbag segment. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com.

Guests include (in order of appearance):
- Carissa Sain Knoche, Chicago women's coach
- Brian Morehouse, No. 8 Hope women's coach
- Dan Raymond, Ithaca women's coach
- Jeff Brown, No. 2 Middlebury men's coach
- Matt Goldsmith, TCNJ men's coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D710%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D0rlol%2Fqu8vo271byd7rofu.jpg&hash=6494073f4236f20f0017f0a5c15ee9a644bc8ca9)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 10, 2017, 06:13:26 PM

How They Fared (~~Nearly~~ Complete)

~~Wisconsin-LaCrosse @ #15 Wartburg started at 6:00 instead of 4:00 -- I will edit that result in when it goes final.~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Whitman	6-0	def. Colorado College, 111-69
#2	580	Middlebury	6-0	def. Plattsburgh State, 92-68; won at #16 Skidmore, 91-76
#3	560	UW-Whitewater	7-1	LOST to (n) Adrian, 53-66; won at Trine, 64-53
#4	514	Augustana	6-1	def. #28 North Central (Ill.), 79-72; won at Carthage, 70-61
#5	440	Hanover	6-2	LOST at Transylvania, 81-95; def. Bluffton, 59-54
#6	436	Williams	8-1	won at Westfield State, 70-63; def. Fitchburg State, 106-56; def. T#47 Springfield, 68-51
#7	419	Ramapo	7-1	def. Rutgers-Newark, 60-47; won at Kean, 95-57
#8	407	UW-Oshkosh	7-0	def. Finlandia, 104-60; won at Calvin, 79-74
#9	391	Whitworth	8-0	def. Colorado College, 85-73
#10	371	UW-River Falls	7-1	def. St. Thomas, 71-57
#11	369	Washington U.	6-1	def. Central, 87-83
#12	364	Lycoming	9-0	won at Alvernia, 73-62; def. Widener, 74-63
#13	354	Marietta	6-2	won at La Roche, 81-75; LOST to T#29 John Carroll, 82-93
#14	343	Swarthmore	8-0	def. Ursinus, 67-60; won at Delaware Valley, 75-61
#15	270	Wartburg	8-1	def. #39 Loras, 98-87; def. UW-La Crosse, 72-69
#16	222	Skidmore	6-1	LOST to #2 Middlebury, 76-91
#17	219	Rochester	8-1	won at SUNY Geneseo, 82-60; def. (n) St. John Fisher, 82-64; def. (n) Nazareth, 75-63
#18	193	Wesleyan	8-0	won at Vassar, 83-68; def. Brandeis, 71-61
#19	175	Ohio Wesleyan	7-1	won at Wabash, 81-74; won at Oberlin, 67-58
#20	148	Eastern Connecticut	8-1	def. Manhattanville, 78-59; LOST to WPI, 70-75; def. Plymouth State, 107-55
#21	142	Amherst	6-1	def. Anna Maria, 78-41; LOST at Babson, 71-72; won at Lasell, 89-62
#22	81	Baldwin Wallace	4-2	LOST at Muskingum, 78-91
#23	79	New Jersey City	8-0	def. Kean, 87-76; ~~12/09 at TCNJ~~ postponed
#24	73	St. John's	6-1	won at Macalester, 114-96; def. St. Olaf, 72-46
#25	39	Franklin and Marshall	8-1	def. Johns Hopkins, 65-59; LOST at Albright, 63-79

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	38	MIT	9-1	won at Emmanuel, 80-56; def. Rhode Island College, 76-63; won at Fitchburg State, 85-63
#27	36	Christopher Newport	6-2	won at St. Mary's (Md.), 76-52; def. Wesley, 83-69
#28	34	North Central (Ill.)	3-4	LOST at #4 Augustana, 72-79; LOST to T#37 Illinois Wesleyan, 66-68
T#29	27	Bowdoin	8-2	LOST to St. Joseph's (Maine), 58-77; def. Bates, 70-63; def. Maine-Farmington, 87-67
T#29	27	John Carroll	6-1	LOST at Mount Union, 83-87; won at #13 Marietta, 93-82
#31	22	Nichols	8-1	won at Roger Williams, 91-79; won at Becker, 90-77; won at Anna Maria, 106-76
#32	21	St. Norbert	7-1	won at Lawrence, 73-59; def. Cornell, 61-51
#33	18	Hamilton	8-0	won at SUNYIT, 112-96; def. Bard, 89-83
#34	15	Randolph-Macon	6-2	def. (n) Misericordia, 67-56; LOST at Juniata, 64-75
#35	9	Cabrini	5-2	won at Cairn, 80-70; LOST at Gwynedd Mercy, 92-103 OT
#36	8	Dickinson	5-2	won at Gettysburg, 73-68
T#37	7	Illinois Wesleyan	7-1	won at #46 Wheaton (Ill.), 82-79; won at #28 North Central (Ill.), 68-66
T#37	7	Lake Forest	7-1	def. Illinois College, 79-62
#39	6	Loras	5-3	LOST at #15 Wartburg, 87-98; LOST at Augsburg, 78-79
T#40	5	Colby	6-2	LOST to Bates, 79-82
T#40	5	Keene State	7-2	def. Albertus Magnus, 78-67; def. Southern Maine, 73-58
T#40	5	York (Pa.)	7-0	def. Frostburg State, 92-75; won at Marymount, 88-76
T#43	4	Emory	5-2	def. Covenant, 80-73
T#43	4	Virginia Wesleyan	8-1	LOST to Averett, 59-63; def. Roanoke, 58-55
T#43	4	Wooster	5-3	def. Hiram, 91-70; won at DePauw, 83-63
#46	3	Wheaton (Ill.)	6-2	LOST to T#37 Illinois Wesleyan, 79-82; won at Elmhurst, 98-95 2OT
T#47	2	Hobart	4-2	won at Carnegie Mellon, 89-75
T#47	2	Springfield	4-2	LOST to Trinity (Conn.), 54-72; LOST at #6 Williams, 51-68
T#49	1	Puget Sound	6-2	IDLE
T#49	1	Salem State	7-2	won at WPI, 96-91 OT

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 10, 2017, 06:48:14 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 09, 2017, 09:01:09 PM
Quote from: smedindy on December 09, 2017, 07:55:24 PM
Does Whitman play a variation of the Mayhem defense? (I really should know, but you know how things are). That is, press, press, press, go for steals, close guarding all of the time, and utilize a quick offense taking the first good shot.

Alaska Anchorage's women play it and their box scores are similar.

It's aggressive, all-out defense. I'm not sure its anything specific. They just pressure the ball at all times and trust their team speed to cover open spots and passing lanes.

Yeah, it's probably the same principles. This got popular with VCU and Shaka Smart a few years ago.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: (509)Rat on December 10, 2017, 08:55:19 PM

Just as in years past, you have to be careful using point differential when determining how good Whitman is compared to other top 10 type programs/teams. They exploit average teams with the pressure and you see 30-50 point wins against those average teams. Teams that usually also make the trip to Spokane to play Whitworth where the Pirates may only win by 10-20. When they get into the last few rounds of the playoffs, they are going to play against teams that aren't nearly as bothered by the pressure. This year, Whitman and its opponents were both shooting around 50% (not sure how much that's changed in the last week). They need more possessions than their opponents to win, and the further they go the less likely they are to get em. Compare that to another NWC team in Whitworth that is holding opponents to something like 37% from the field. Scores are closer but offensive volume doesn't matter as much.

I don't think UWSP or OWU have a chance against Whitman, but I also don't think Whitman will have the luxury of playing reserves more minutes than Howell like they have recently.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on December 11, 2017, 10:40:22 AM

I agree for the most part.

I watched Whitman/Colorado College on Friday night. It was clear that CC had no way to deal with the pressure and Whitman pretty much could've named the score they wanted. Whitman is the best team in the country in my mind, but the margin of victory on Friday night isn't a useful metric for measuring the Blues against other teams.

I also like what I've seen from Whitworth a lot. Most of my D3 viewing is now west coast games. Looking forward to the two games between those teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 11, 2017, 09:57:22 PM

New poll. Not a ton of movement.

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2017-18/week3

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 11, 2017, 11:38:08 PM

This is sort of odd: Marietta is #20 the highest ranked OAC team but currently sits 2 full games back in the OAC with 2 home losses to contenders JCU and Baldwin Wallace already. :-\

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 14, 2017, 07:50:44 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Finals week for many schools, so very limited action (so far, and coming up).

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Whitman	6-0	12/17 at Occidental
#2	595	Middlebury	6-0	IDLE
#3	548	Augustana	7-1	def. Rockford, 109-51; 12/16 at Central
#4	487	UW-Oshkosh	7-0	IDLE
#5	475	Williams	8-1	IDLE
#6	468	Ramapo	7-1	12/15 vs. Farmingdale State
#7	449	Whitworth	8-0	IDLE
#8	428	UW-River Falls	7-1	12/16 at Northwestern (Minn.)
#9	397	Lycoming	9-0	12/16 vs. York (N.Y.); 12/17 vs. Marywood
#10	392	UW-Whitewater	8-1	won at Beloit, 83-58
#11	391	Washington U.	7-1	won at Fontbonne, 98-68; 12/17 at T#28 Illinois Wesleyan
#12	380	Swarthmore	8-1	LOST at #34 York (Pa.), 79-83
#13	291	Wartburg	8-1	IDLE
#14	276	Wesleyan	8-0	IDLE
#15	264	Rochester	8-2	LOST to Ithaca, 68-71
#16	263	Hanover	6-2	12/16 at Defiance
#17	218	Ohio Wesleyan	7-1	12/16 at Kenyon
#18	181	Skidmore	6-1	IDLE
#19	157	New Jersey City	8-0	12/16 at Albertus Magnus
#20	142	Marietta	6-2	12/16 at Wilmington
#21	138	St. John's	7-1	def. Hamline, 77-74
#22	102	MIT	10-1	def. Mass-Dartmouth, 88-68
#23	71	Amherst	7-1	def. Springfield, 71-66
#24	45	Nichols	8-1	IDLE
#25	40	Eastern Connecticut	8-1	IDLE

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	34	Wittenberg	8-0	IDLE
#27	31	Hamilton	8-0	IDLE
T#28	29	Illinois Wesleyan	7-1	12/17 vs. #11 Washington U.
T#28	29	John Carroll	6-1	12/16 vs. Ohio Northern
#30	27	Juniata	8-0	IDLE
#31	25	St. Norbert	7-1	IDLE
#32	23	Christopher Newport	6-2	IDLE
#33	17	Lake Forest	7-1	12/16 vs. North Park
#34	14	York (Pa.)	8-0	def. #12 Swarthmore, 83-79
#35	12	Albright	7-1	IDLE
#36	9	Carthage	5-3	12/16 at Calvin
#37	8	Baldwin Wallace	4-2	12/14 at Heidelberg; 12/16 at Capital
T#38	6	Dickinson	5-2	IDLE
T#38	6	Nebraska Wesleyan	8-0	12/17 at Gallaudet
#40	5	Keene State	7-2	IDLE
T#41	4	Cortland	7-1	12/16 at SUNY-Old Westbury
T#41	4	Salem State	7-3	LOST to Endicott, 79-96
T#43	3	Emory	5-2	12/16 vs. Guilford
T#43	3	Franklin and Marshall	8-1	IDLE
T#45	1	North Central (Ill.)	4-4	won at Aurora, 83-68; 12/15 at Alma
T#45	1	Puget Sound	6-2	IDLE

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 17, 2017, 04:28:48 PM

The basketball season always experiences a lull a month after starting the season. It is one of just a few sports that experiences the ups and downs of scheduling. With finals complete and students headed home for the holidays, teams are left to either take a very long stretch of time off as well or find a way to stay active.

Sunday night on Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave chats with a few coaches whose programs are at a cross-roads: finding a way to keep playing or take a break after squeezing in nearly half the season in the opening four weeks. Dave will also take a look at the Top 25 and wonder if things have settled down especially on the men's side.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch the show LIVE starting at 7pm ET right here: http://bit.ly/2CM1ExW

You can also send your questions to the show and have them featured on the Hoopsville Mailbag segment. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com.

Guests include (in order of appearance):
- Keri Carollo, No. 13 UW-Whitewater women's coach
- Matt Hunter, York (Pa.) men's coach
- Larry Anderson, No. 22 MIT men's coach
- Ryan Scott, D3hoops.com Around the Nation columnist

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D710%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D14iwc%2Fvwcxwbh8ef5114po.jpg&hash=284a82b5bd8bbe28f46c808f78b8dae04fe120d7)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 17, 2017, 04:41:23 PM

How They Fared (Complete)
~~(Whitman @ Oxy to be edited in when complete)~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Whitman	7-0	won at Occidental, 73-69
#2	595	Middlebury	6-0	IDLE
#3	548	Augustana	8-1	def. Rockford, 109-51; won at Central, 82-73
#4	487	UW-Oshkosh	7-0	IDLE
#5	475	Williams	8-1	IDLE
#6	468	Ramapo	8-1	def. Farmingdale State, 87-49
#7	449	Whitworth	8-0	IDLE
#8	428	UW-River Falls	8-1	won at Northwestern (Minn.), 69-65
#9	397	Lycoming	11-0	def. York (N.Y.), 75-67; def. Marywood, 82-69
#10	392	UW-Whitewater	8-1	won at Beloit, 83-58
#11	391	Washington U.	8-1	won at Fontbonne, 98-68; won at T#28 Illinois Wesleyan, 95-69
#12	380	Swarthmore	8-1	LOST at #34 York (Pa.), 79-83
#13	291	Wartburg	8-1	IDLE
#14	276	Wesleyan	8-0	IDLE
#15	264	Rochester	8-2	LOST to Ithaca, 68-71
#16	263	Hanover	7-2	won at Defiance, 74-51
#17	218	Ohio Wesleyan	8-1	won at Kenyon, 82-60
#18	181	Skidmore	6-1	IDLE
#19	157	New Jersey City	9-0	won at Albertus Magnus, 81-80
#20	142	Marietta	7-2	won at Wilmington, 100-71
#21	138	St. John's	7-1	def. Hamline, 77-74
#22	102	MIT	10-1	def. Mass-Dartmouth, 88-68
#23	71	Amherst	7-1	def. Springfield, 71-66
#24	45	Nichols	8-1	IDLE
#25	40	Eastern Connecticut	8-1	IDLE

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	34	Wittenberg	8-0	IDLE
#27	31	Hamilton	8-0	IDLE
T#28	29	Illinois Wesleyan	7-2	LOST to #11 Washington U., 69-95
T#28	29	John Carroll	7-1	def. Ohio Northern, 101-95
#30	27	Juniata	8-0	IDLE
#31	25	St. Norbert	7-1	IDLE
#32	23	Christopher Newport	6-2	IDLE
#33	17	Lake Forest	7-2	LOST to North Park, 59-64
#34	14	York (Pa.)	8-0	def. #12 Swarthmore, 83-79
#35	12	Albright	7-1	IDLE
#36	9	Carthage	5-4	LOST at Calvin, 75-79 OT
#37	8	Baldwin Wallace	6-2	won at Heidelberg, 92-86; won at Capital, 83-69
T#38	6	Dickinson	5-2	IDLE
T#38	6	Nebraska Wesleyan	9-0	won at Gallaudet, 99-77
#40	5	Keene State	7-2	IDLE
T#41	4	Cortland	8-1	won at SUNY-Old Westbury, 90-66
T#41	4	Salem State	7-3	LOST to Endicott, 79-96
T#43	3	Emory	6-2	def. Guilford, 84-58
T#43	3	Franklin and Marshall	8-1	IDLE
T#45	1	North Central (Ill.)	5-4	won at Aurora, 83-68; won at Alma, 73-52
T#45	1	Puget Sound	6-2	IDLE

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on December 18, 2017, 07:39:18 PM

Here's the last poll of the 2017 calendar year.

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2017-18/week4

No poll next week on Christmas day. We plan to do one on January 2nd (Tuesday) since it'll be tough to wrangle 25 ballots on New Year's Eve and New Year's morning.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 19, 2017, 01:07:01 PM

Here is my ballot for Week 4 (sorry about not having one for Week 3): http://bit.ly/2klDkeI

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 20, 2017, 02:32:10 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 19, 2017, 01:07:01 PM
Here is my ballot for Week 4 (sorry about not having one for Week 3): http://bit.ly/2klDkeI

So I'm guessing Harrison and Wiggins have significant injuries since neither have played all year? Also, is Scadlock done for the season as well?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 20, 2017, 04:10:46 PM

Kyle Scadlock has indeed been reported as out for the year with an injury. Tough blow for him, and for the Ephs, as he was playing like an all-American prior to getting hurt. I don't know about the Whitman guys, but if one or both are hurt, that would make for a pretty tough first semester for the pre-season top 3 (including Augustana losing Wofford). Such are the breaks in hoops. And then Whitewater, another one of the pre-season favorites, seems to be missing some firepower as well. Looks like it's going to be a WIDE open year in D3, for sure, with some of the most talented squads already hurting ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 20, 2017, 09:13:01 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

It's almost two weeks until the next poll is released, but here's what's happened so far, and what's coming up.

(edit -- see the slightly-more-up-to-date report below.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 21, 2017, 10:40:02 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 20, 2017, 02:32:10 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 19, 2017, 01:07:01 PM
Here is my ballot for Week 4 (sorry about not having one for Week 3): http://bit.ly/2klDkeI

So I'm guessing Harrison and Wiggins have significant injuries since neither have played all year? Also, is Scadlock done for the season as well?

Quote from: nescac1 on December 20, 2017, 04:10:46 PM
Kyle Scadlock has indeed been reported as out for the year with an injury. Tough blow for him, and for the Ephs, as he was playing like an all-American prior to getting hurt. I don't know about the Whitman guys, but if one or both are hurt, that would make for a pretty tough first semester for the pre-season top 3 (including Augustana losing Wofford). Such are the breaks in hoops. And then Whitewater, another one of the pre-season favorites, seems to be missing some firepower as well. Looks like it's going to be a WIDE open year in D3, for sure, with some of the most talented squads already hurting ...

Yes... Scadlock, as noted above, is out for the season - Williams mentioned it in a game recap which I applaud them for... and not sure exactly what is up with Harrison and Wiggins... hopefully we learn something officially at the D3hoops.com Classic next week. Interestingly, Bridgeland didn't mention anything about the two when we discussed the entire team returning in the opening Hoopsville of the season ... unless I am forgetting something.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 28, 2017, 10:53:37 PM

How They Fared (So Far)
Only a few more results in this update. On the women's side, it includes upcoming games through Monday, January 1 (because Gordon Mann said that the next poll will come out on Jan. 2). As it turns out, there are no ranked mens' teams scheduled to play on Monday, so I will post the completed men's report on Sunday night, with the women's report on Monday night.

(deleted -- superseded by the complete report which follows)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 31, 2017, 05:24:49 PM

How They Fared (Complete)
~~One last result (#12 Wesleyan @ Springfield, tip off 6:30) will be edited in later this evening.~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Whitman	11-0	won at La Verne, 96-67; won at Redlands, 119-93; def. (n) T#42 UW-Stevens Point, 77-64; def. (n) #14 Ohio Wesleyan, 92-90
#2	595	Middlebury	7-1	LOST to (n) #25 York (Pa.), 87-90 OT; def. (n) Clarks Summit, 81-58
#3	559	Augustana	10-1	won at T#42 UW-Stevens Point, 74-58; won at #10 Washington U., 72-57
#4	504	UW-Oshkosh	10-1	won at George Fox, 79-58; won at Willamette, 77-57; def. (n) St. Mary's (Minn.), 87-50; LOST to (n) Ripon, 80-83
#5	501	Williams	9-2	LOST to (n) Hamline, 71-73; won at Cal Lutheran, 82-71
#6	488	Ramapo	9-3	won at Yeshiva, 90-71; LOST to (n) #14 Ohio Wesleyan, 69-98; LOST to (n) Central, 69-74
#7	450	Whitworth	10-1	LOST to Wheaton (Ill.), 84-92; def. UW-Stout, 79-71; def. Calvin, 88-58
#8	435	UW-River Falls	9-1	def. (n) St. Olaf, 72-49
#9	412	Lycoming	13-0	def. SUNY New Paltz, 89-68; def. Carnegie Mellon, 88-71
#10	409	Washington U.	9-2	LOST to #3 Augustana, 57-72; def. Westminster (Mo.), 79-71
#11	390	UW-Whitewater	10-1	def. (n) Finlandia, 90-60; won at #31 St. Norbert, 89-78
#12	320	Wesleyan	9-1	def. (n) Fitchburg State, 79-62; LOST at Springfield, 67-72
#13	313	Wartburg	9-2	def. (n) T#42 UW-Stevens Point, 75-66; LOST to (n) Augsburg, 64-68
#14	243	Ohio Wesleyan	9-2	def. (n) #6 Ramapo, 98-69; LOST to (n) #1 Whitman, 90-92
#15	231	Swarthmore	9-1	def. Framingham State, 80-48
#16	223	Hanover	8-3	LOST to (n) #19 Marietta, 53-63; def. (n) Ohio-Chillicothe, 93-54
#17	213	New Jersey City	10-1	LOST to (n) Johns Hopkins, 56-72; def. (n) Shenandoah, 68-55
#18	194	Skidmore	6-2	LOST at Guilford, 77-80
#19	149	Marietta	8-3	def. (n) #16 Hanover, 63-53; LOST at #30 Wittenberg, 70-83
#20	146	MIT	10-1	IDLE
#21	139	St. John's	8-1	def. UW-Superior, 89-67
#22	110	Rochester	8-2	IDLE
#23	89	Amherst	7-2	LOST at Southeastern (Fla.), 65-76
#24	75	Nichols	8-1	IDLE
#25	68	York (Pa.)	11-0	won at T#34 Dickinson, 66-63; def. (n) #2 Middlebury, 90-87 OT; won at Washington and Lee, 118-110 OT

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	37	John Carroll	9-2	def. La Roche, 108-86; def. (n) Olivet, 111-90; LOST at Hope, 94-104
#27	35	Eastern Connecticut	9-2	def. (n) Penn State-Behrend, 63-60; LOST to (n) Cabrini, 76-87
#28	34	Hamilton	10-0	def. (n) Lebanon Valley, 102-83; won at Moravian, 98-94
#29	29	Juniata	11-0	def. Pitt-Bradford, 95-62; def. Penn State-Abington, 92-69; def. Manhattanville, 96-54
#30	24	Wittenberg	11-0	won at Heidelberg, 89-85; def. Ohio University Chillicothe, 95-46; def. #19 Marietta, 83-70
#31	23	St. Norbert	9-2	def. North Central (Minn.), 75-62; def. Blackburn, 65-52; LOST to #11 UW-Whitewater, 78-89
#32	15	Christopher Newport	9-2	won at Virginia Wesleyan, 71-68; def. Shenandoah, 74-71; def. Johns Hopkins, 54-44
#33	9	Illinois Wesleyan	9-3	won at Chicago, 76-65; LOST at T#36 Emory, 56-72; def. (n) Birmingham-Southern, 81-74
T#34	6	Albright	10-1	def. Wilkes, 72-65; def. Penn State-Harrisburg, 91-85; def. TCNJ, 69-64
T#34	6	Dickinson	6-4	LOST at Lebanon Valley, 55-86; LOST to #25 York (Pa.), 63-66; def. Misericordia, 60-59
T#36	5	Emory	8-2	def. #33 Illinois Wesleyan, 72-56; def. Transylvania, 87-83
T#36	5	Franklin and Marshall	10-1	def. Randolph, 78-53; def. Delaware Valley, 89-62
T#36	5	Nebraska Wesleyan	11-0	won at Marymount, 87-46; won at Grinnell, 121-103
#39	4	Cortland	9-2	def. (n) Southern Vermont, 94-85; LOST to (n) Washington and Lee, 72-93
T#40	2	Baldwin Wallace	9-2	def. (n) St. Vincent, 77-60; def. (n) Hope, 79-71; def. Bethany, 94-71
T#40	2	Bethel	8-2	won at UW-Superior, 84-71
T#42	1	North Central (Ill.)	7-4	def. Albion, 92-78; def. Robert Morris-Chicago, 117-72
T#42	1	Puget Sound	7-3	LOST to (n) Calvin, 84-93; def. (n) UW-Stout, 96-86
T#42	1	UW-Stevens Point	6-5	won at Edgewood, 71-64; LOST to #3 Augustana, 58-74; LOST to (n) #13 Wartburg, 66-75; LOST to (n) #1 Whitman, 64-77

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 02, 2018, 11:21:42 PM

Umm. Not really sure to put this, but it's interesting to know that in the Principia v Blackburn game, Principia's starters each played the whole game. Not one bench player even logged a second of floor time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 03, 2018, 11:50:48 PM

Wow...

#2 Augie loses by 19 to IWU
#3 River Falls loses by 25 to UWSP (at home, after leading 15-2)
#6 Lycoming loses by 10 to Leb Valley
#7 Oshkosh loses by 26 to #5 Whitewater (at home)

Happy New Year I guess

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 04, 2018, 09:45:49 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Whitman	11-0	01/05 vs. Pacific; 01/06 vs. Lewis and Clark
#2	599	Augustana	10-2	LOST at Illinois Wesleyan, 53-72; 01/06 vs. Millikin
#3	516	UW-River Falls	9-2	LOST to UW-Stevens Point, 48-73; 01/06 at #5 UW-Whitewater
#4	514	Middlebury	7-2	LOST to #12 Swarthmore, 75-91; 01/05 at Connecticut College; 01/06 at #14 Wesleyan
#5	500	UW-Whitewater	11-1	won at #7 UW-Oshkosh, 83-57; 01/06 vs. #3 UW-River Falls
#6	493	Lycoming	13-1	LOST at Lebanon Valley, 71-81; 01/06 vs. Stevenson
#7	447	UW-Oshkosh	10-2	LOST to #5 UW-Whitewater, 57-83; 01/06 at UW-La Crosse
#8	392	Whitworth	10-1	01/05 vs. Lewis and Clark; 01/06 vs. Pacific
#9	379	Ohio Wesleyan	10-2	def. Denison, 89-70; 01/06 vs. Wooster
#10	370	Washington U.	9-2	01/06 vs. Chicago
#11	362	Williams	9-2	01/05 at #14 Wesleyan; 01/06 at Connecticut College
#12	326	Swarthmore	10-1	won at #4 Middlebury, 91-75; 01/06 vs. Gettysburg
#13	320	York (Pa.)	12-0	won at Salisbury, 84-81; 01/06 at Southern Virginia
#14	310	Wesleyan	9-1	01/05 vs. #11 Williams; 01/06 vs. #4 Middlebury
#15	259	MIT	11-1	won at WPI, 94-58; 01/06 vs. Coast Guard
#16	206	St. John's	9-1	won at Concordia-Moorhead, 72-55; 01/06 vs. St. Mary's (Minn.)
#17	203	Wittenberg	12-0	won at Kenyon, 87-67; 01/06 vs. Hiram
#18	200	Wartburg	10-2	def. Central, 80-65; 01/06 at Coe
#19	143	Ramapo	10-3	def. Rutgers-Camden, 93-74; 01/06 at TCNJ
#20	125	New Jersey City	10-2	LOST to Montclair State, 66-76; 01/06 at Rowan
#21	114	Nichols	9-1	def. Southern Maine, 86-71; 01/04 at University of New England; 01/06 vs. Western New England
#22	111	Rochester	9-2	def. Rochester Tech, 69-49; 01/06 at #37 Emory
#23	83	Juniata	12-0	won at Lancaster Bible, 57-54; 01/06 at Catholic
#24	80	Hamilton	10-0	01/05 vs. Wells; 01/07 at Trinity (Conn.)
#25	67	Marietta	9-3	def. Muskingum, 104-86; 01/06 vs. Ohio Northern

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	65	Hanover	8-4	LOST to Rose-Hulman, 69-71; 01/06 at Manchester
#27	46	Albright	11-1	won at Hood, 106-93; 01/06 vs. Lebanon Valley
#28	39	Christopher Newport	10-2	def. Penn State-Harrisburg, 73-63; 01/06 at Marymount
#29	35	Amherst	7-3	LOST to T#33 Eastern Connecticut, 92-95; 01/05 at Trinity (Conn.)
#30	34	Nebraska Wesleyan	11-1	LOST to Buena Vista, 75-91; 01/06 vs. Luther
#31	32	Baldwin Wallace	10-2	def. Mount Union, 96-93; 01/06 at Wilmington
#32	29	Skidmore	6-2	01/05 vs. RPI; 01/06 at Union
T#33	19	Eastern Connecticut	10-2	won at #29 Amherst, 95-92; 01/06 at Mass-Boston
T#33	19	Franklin and Marshall	10-1	01/06 vs. McDaniel
T#33	19	John Carroll	10-2	won at Heidelberg, 100-94; 01/06 vs. Capital
#36	16	St. Norbert	10-2	def. Beloit, 73-57; 01/06 vs. Grinnell
#37	10	Emory	9-2	won at Oglethorpe, 88-82; 01/06 vs. #22 Rochester
#38	8	UW-Platteville	11-1	won at UW-Stout, 73-54; 01/06 vs. UW-Eau Claire
T#39	3	Bethel	8-3	LOST to St. Olaf, 82-83
T#39	3	North Central (Ill.)	8-4	def. Carthage, 77-67; 01/06 at Carroll
#41	2	Westminster (Pa.)	9-2	LOST at Thomas More, 65-72; 01/06 vs. Waynesburg
T#42	1	Gwynedd Mercy	9-1	01/06 at Immaculata
T#42	1	Salem State	9-3	01/06 at Worcester State

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on January 04, 2018, 12:04:49 PM

Quote from: John Gleich on January 03, 2018, 11:50:48 PM
Wow...

#2 Augie loses by 19 to IWU
#3 River Falls loses by 25 to UWSP (at home, after leading 15-2)
#6 Lycoming loses by 10 to Leb Valley
#7 Oshkosh loses by 26 to #5 Whitewater (at home)

Happy New Year I guess

This is what makes conference play so fascinating.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 04, 2018, 05:37:32 PM

The holidays brought us many presents in Division III basketball. From upsets to impressive performances, many teams made an impression. As a result, there is plenty to recap as Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) returns to the air after the holiday break.

Join Dave as he talks to guests around the country and recaps an incredible few weeks - or tries to recap. From an assistant coach who made a life saving decision, a women's coach who has been fighting cancer without missing time with his team, to coaches around the country who have teams that have many wondering ... just how good are they?

With the midseason return of Hoopsville comes with it some of the more structured aspects of the show. For starters, Thursday nights are dedicated primarily to the East, Mid-Atlantic, Great Lakes, and West Regions for guests. Tonight also sees the season debut of the "WBCA Center Court" which is a segment that allows viewers to learn more about coaches and what they are involved in outside of basketball.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch the show LIVE starting at 7pm ET right here: http://bit.ly/2CoVJhv.

You can also send your questions to the show and have them featured on the Hoopsville Mailbag segment. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com.

Guests include (in order of appearance):
- Justin Smith, Dubuque women's assistant coach
- Brian Newhall, Occidental men's coach
- Guy Rancourt, No. 6 Lycoming men's coach
- Matt Dempsey, Merchant Marine women's coach (WBCA Center Court)
- Jeff Hans, No. 8 Thomas More women's coach
- Joe Burke, Skidmore men's coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D710%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D21wqn%2Fekvrelz2zzgflrpy.jpg&hash=129d32d5e88e33c1bbf933a5f81bfffab07037a4)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 04, 2018, 09:44:11 PM

It is a little late by now, but figured some might be interested... here is my Top 25 ballot for this week: http://bit.ly/2lX4PvX

Random thoughts as I tried to get that done before things got too crazy this week...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 05, 2018, 02:10:20 AM

Don't you have to wonder how 7-2 Midflebury got to be the #4 team in the country? Those 7 wins are several fewer than many teams that also have only 2 losses. Were the 7 wins against powerhouse teams? If not, what's the rationale that merits a #4 ranking? Is this team being bolstered by it's past results/reputation? If not, the question of what makes them the 4th best team in the country appears to be a valid one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on January 05, 2018, 04:30:59 AM

Middlebury's 2nd loss of the season to Swarthmore is not yet factored in the rankings. That loss will be taken into account in next week's poll, along with all of the other top 25 losses from January 2 to January 7, 2018. Middlebury only had 1 loss at the time of the current published rankings, and the Panthers started the season as the preseason #2 from their Elite 8 run in the NCAAs last season.

There have been 6 losses among the top 25 so far this week, and 5 losses among the teams in the others receiving votes category, and the NESCAC and UAA still have to start conference play before the next top 25 poll gets voted on.

As Dave McHugh points out constantly, this season we have a lot of good teams, but maybe not a lot of great teams. Top 25 teams taking losses every week is probably going to be the new norm. The postseason will probably settle the true rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 05, 2018, 10:46:41 AM

I argue with myself every week... who really is the number four team in the country?

I have said in my blog a few times... there are teams I have, say, tenth, that I rather have maybe 17th... but I can't leave 7 spot empty.

And while I realize people may not like this answer: in the preseason and start of the year a voter felt Middlebury was a top 10 squad... what have they done to disprove that assertion? Yes, if you are voting on them based on nothing but seven wins over okay schools (BTW, Skidmore is a solid win and Endicott isn't something to dismiss) than it might be harder to say they are 4th. However, if a voter already feels they were 4th, Middlebury also hasn't had anything to say otherwise. Not all votes are simplistic.

I will also say, I wanted to move Middlebury as I did Augustana, Oshkosh, WashU, etc... but to where? I still think those teams are better than OWU, UWRF, St. John's, Williams, etc. Someone has to be slotted into each spot on the ballot.

And again... their second loss wasn't a factor in the poll this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 05, 2018, 02:11:07 PM

Thanks to deiscanton and Dave for the above.

I guess my question, even before the 2nd loss, is why is a team with only 7 wins ranked as high as #4 when, at the same time, there were several teams with 8, 9, 10, or 11 wins. Were those 7 wins against such high quality teams that they would carry more weight than teams with up to 4 more wins than Middlebury? If a team with, lets say, 10 wins at the same time Middlebury has only 7, and that team is good enough to be ranked 7th or 8th, it's hard to understand how they couldn't be ranked higher than a team with 3 less wins. Did Middlebury's 7 wins come against teams that, combined, were that much better than the 10 teams that others had beaten? And no, I am not picking on Mid here. Just using them as an example as I noticed they had so many fewer wins. Again, a team with 7 wins is better than a team with 10 or 11? ???
Just hard to understand unless the 10-11 win teams had played all their games against teams with only 1 or 2 wins. That's all I'm asking. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on January 05, 2018, 02:31:02 PM

I think Dave does a great job of explaining his own thinking about his own ballot. But to truly understand why Middlebury is ranked #4 at this point would require the other 24 people who are in on the balloting to go to the trouble to do what Dave does -- and that's not likely to happen. I've toyed with the idea of making up my own Top 25, only to realize I don't know enough to do an adequate job. So I've decided to respect the "pros" who do this for us. It gives us something to mull over and wonder what the rankings will look like next week after another week of games. That's the fun part for me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 05, 2018, 02:36:15 PM

There's a preseason poll. Everyone has zero wins and losses to start. Middlebury was likely ranked ahead of those other teams that now have 9-11 wins.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 05, 2018, 02:46:44 PM

Quote from: y_jack_lok on January 05, 2018, 02:31:02 PM
I think Dave does a great job of explaining his own thinking about his own ballot. But to truly understand why Middlebury is ranked #4 at this point would require the other 24 people who are in on the balloting to go to the trouble to do what Dave does -- and that's not likely to happen. I've toyed with the idea of making up my own Top 25, only to realize I don't know enough to do an adequate job. So I've decided to respect the "pros" who do this for us. It gives us something to mull over and wonder what the rankings will look like next week after another week of games. That's the fun part for me.

Thanks. Yeah. I only know of two others who occasionally post their ballots. I wouldn't expect the entire group to do it. There is a lot of time required. Since I am technically jobless right now, I (sadly) have the time to do it.

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 05, 2018, 02:36:15 PM
There's a preseason poll. Everyone has zero wins and losses to start. Middlebury was likely ranked ahead of those other teams that now have 9-11 wins.

Yes... basically what I am trying to say. I had Middlebury higher than others and not much has changed my mind about it especially when nearly everyone has taken losses this season.

AndOne - I don't want to be negative or disrespectful, but many people tend to look at these things though a vacuum... which is a common thing to say. Not a big deal, but I think it makes a difference.

I'll start with this: a team's ranking position is never based on just itself. It is based on all the teams around them and teams being consider not only in the Top 25 but the 40 or so teams being consider by a voter in total (I think my number is 40+ most weeks). So, Middlebury's resume isn't being looked at just based on themselves or a couple of teams, but via a number of teams. Same thing happens in regional rankings and such.

I am not necessarily a voter who dismisses a team for not playing as many games as some one else. Sometimes playing more or less than others can hurt or help. One loss in five games versus one loss in nine will be a difference to be sure. However, there are other elements to consider and one of them I know with Middlebury was the reasons for a long lay-off during December. Just because they can't play as many games at this current moment isn't something I think I should down-grade them for over a team who happens to be able to play more. Ultimately, all teams are going to play within one to three games of each other, so I don't think it should be as big a factor earlier in the season. Kind of like a team who jam-packs the start of the season with five games in ten days. Sure, it gives me more info, but they aren't necessarily better because of ten games than the team who played five.

If that makes sense.

Again, I don't disagree that Middlebury's seven wins aren't spectacular, but they aren't horrible either. They have a better WL% of their opponents than a lot of teams I have been considering even adding to my ballot (read my blog). However, I go back to this: in the preseason, I felt Middlebury was a Top 10 program. Despite loss to York (which I think speaks more about York than Middlebury), they are still a Top 10 team to some degree. I will most likely downgrade them next week, but nothing else on their schedule has disproven my feeling they are in the top part of the poll.

Nearly everyone are losing games and I have said many times - I do not expect anyone to be undefeated by the end of the regular season. With that mentality, I am not going to necessarily over-react to any losses. The more that pile up, sure I going to react more. One here and there, not going to go crazy ... mainly because everyone are taking losses.

Another thought: I only think there are two or three teams which are Top 10 worthy to begin with. I feel more comfortable if Middlebury was maybe 11th or 12th. However, I only have three I think should be in the Top 10. I have to fill those slots in and I don't necessarily think there are a lot of teams better than Middlebury right now.

I am not counting their last loss to Swarthmore in this conversation because I think that will only muddy the waters. I won't reconsider Middlebury's position in the poll until Sunday night. Same reason as the one given to the fan wondering if Ramapo would stay in the Top 25 after Vegas. So many things depend on other teams. Wednesday night is a great example with how many losses took place in the Top 10 and the Top 25 (and outside). So Middlebury lost to Swarthmore, but Oshkosh, Augustana, and others have already lost and we still have the weekend to go. All of those results affect Middlebury's case as well.

I realize Middlebury is just the team to use as an example. One can take my thoughts and expand them to a lot of teams, though the exact nature of the argument would change with each team.

The part I really want to emphasize... there are a lot of teams probably higher than they would be in any "normal" year of say three to five years ago. We had more "premiere" and "great" teams than we have now. That isn't a knock, we just have more talent spread around and that means a lot of good teams. It results in changing the mentality a bit of what a Top 10 team really indicates, possibly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 05, 2018, 02:49:46 PM

This year seems like one of the toughest ever for folks doing these ballots. Number one is a no-brainer (although even they have looked vulnerable), if Whitewater beats River Falls, they are probably a no-brainer for number two. But with a sweep of the remaining games this week, I think you could put the next 15 teams in ANY order and it would be totally defensible. That's crazy for this point of the season, but a lot of teams have head-scratchingly inconsistent results ... if Wesleyan sweeps Williams and Midd this weekend (a very tall order) to add to their prior wins at Williams and over Nichols, I'd go with them at number three, if not, I'd go with York, personally, because they are undefeated with two big-time wins. Obviously some of this will be answered by results, but man, it sure does seem like a year where almost any result involving any two teams in the top 25 (and in many cases teams outside the top 25) would not be much of a surprise at all, and in many cases will just be match-up dependent. As a result, I have a feeling the teams that end up in the Final Four may include some major surprises ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on January 05, 2018, 05:00:37 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 05, 2018, 02:49:46 PM
This year seems like one of the toughest ever for folks doing these ballots. Number one is a no-brainer (although even they have looked vulnerable), if Whitewater beats River Falls, they are probably a no-brainer for number two. But with a sweep of the remaining games this week, I think you could put the next 15 teams in ANY order and it would be totally defensible. That's crazy for this point of the season, but a lot of teams have head-scratchingly inconsistent results ... if Wesleyan sweeps Williams and Midd this weekend (a very tall order) to add to their prior wins at Williams and over Nichols, I'd go with them at number three, if not, I'd go with York, personally, because they are undefeated with two big-time wins. Obviously some of this will be answered by results, but man, it sure does seem like a year where almost any result involving any two teams in the top 25 (and in many cases teams outside the top 25) would not be much of a surprise at all, and in many cases will just be match-up dependent. As a result, I have a feeling the teams that end up in the Final Four may include some major surprises ...

I agree with a lot of this, nescac1! If yorkpa remains undfeated until next poll I think they should rise up the ranks. They have been so solid this year, can't ask them to do much more. Plus, they are the holder of The Belt^TM, so that should be a couple bonus points!

But mainly, March will be so great this year in D3 world. Will be fun to get some new blood to the final four... The MITs, St. John's, Yorks, OWU's...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiko on January 05, 2018, 06:36:03 PM

Quote from: AndOne on January 05, 2018, 02:11:07 PM
Thanks to deiscanton and Dave for the above.

I guess my question, even before the 2nd loss, is why is a team with only 7 wins ranked as high as #4 when, at the same time, there were several teams with 8, 9, 10, or 11 wins. Were those 7 wins against such high quality teams that they would carry more weight than teams with up to 4 more wins than Middlebury? If a team with, lets say, 10 wins at the same time Middlebury has only 7, and that team is good enough to be ranked 7th or 8th, it's hard to understand how they couldn't be ranked higher than a team with 3 less wins. Did Middlebury's 7 wins come against teams that, combined, were that much better than the 10 teams that others had beaten? And no, I am not picking on Mid here. Just using them as an example as I noticed they had so many fewer wins. Again, a team with 7 wins is better than a team with 10 or 11? ???
Just hard to understand unless the 10-11 win teams had played all their games against teams with only 1 or 2 wins. That's all I'm asking. :)

The simple answer to this is "because I believe the 7-win team is better than the 11-win team". I'm not sure why you would consider the absolute number of wins as a factor. Strength/impressiveness of results would play a role, sure, but just because I am impressed with Team A's win doesn't automatically mean I think they are better than a Team B who gorged on a cupcake.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 05, 2018, 10:25:41 PM

Quote from: kiko on January 05, 2018, 06:36:03 PM
Quote from: AndOne on January 05, 2018, 02:11:07 PM
Thanks to deiscanton and Dave for the above.

I guess my question, even before the 2nd loss, is why is a team with only 7 wins ranked as high as #4 when, at the same time, there were several teams with 8, 9, 10, or 11 wins. Were those 7 wins against such high quality teams that they would carry more weight than teams with up to 4 more wins than Middlebury? If a team with, lets say, 10 wins at the same time Middlebury has only 7, and that team is good enough to be ranked 7th or 8th, it's hard to understand how they couldn't be ranked higher than a team with 3 less wins. Did Middlebury's 7 wins come against teams that, combined, were that much better than the 10 teams that others had beaten? And no, I am not picking on Mid here. Just using them as an example as I noticed they had so many fewer wins. Again, a team with 7 wins is better than a team with 10 or 11? ???
Just hard to understand unless the 10-11 win teams had played all their games against teams with only 1 or 2 wins. That's all I'm asking. :)

The simple answer to this is "because I believe the 7-win team is better than the 11-win team". I'm not sure why you would consider the absolute number of wins as a factor. Strength/impressiveness of results would play a role, sure, but just because I am impressed with Team A's win doesn't automatically mean I think they are better than a Team B who gorged on a cupcake.

This argument that "I believe the 7 win team is better than the 11 win team" doesn't hold much water. Why? Because Middlebury's 7 wins before tonight came against teams with a combined record of 36-35. One game over .500. Not exactly numbers that would strongly support a #4 national ranking. And tonight, they beat a team that that is now 5-7. Middlebury's now 8-2 record has been compiled against teams with a combined losing record of 41-42! This doesn't even sound like the record of a top 20 team, let alone a top 10 team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 05, 2018, 10:30:26 PM

AndOne... go through the rest of the Top 25... Middlebury isn't the exception in that case. I am not voting for Lycoming because their opponent's record is low (far lower than Middlebury's if memory serves) yet they are 6th in the poll. That argument isn't going to work because you are going to find a LOT of teams in similar situations. If anything, it makes me feel better about my selection of Middlebury in my Top 25 and maybe higher, because I have been leaving out teams like Lyco, Juniata, Whitman, and others with their opponent's records being far lower (in some cases FAR lower).

And again... making an argument about a team's current ranking based on now two games worth information after the poll was voted on isn't fair, either. You are adding data and information to an argument that the voters haven't had the chance to decide on as of yet including a loss. Stick with their resume prior to the latest poll or it just gets too convoluted.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 05, 2018, 10:36:57 PM

You're moving the goalposts here, AndOne, so I'm only going to address the original argument -- a variation of a couple of wins in the raw number in the 'W' column is a pretty poor way to determine a ballot. Everyone is going to end up with 24 or 25 regular season games, so as a voter, I wouldn't have cared so much if they were played in December or January.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 05, 2018, 11:22:10 PM

Knightslappy has Middlebury at #7 on his RPI chart. They're in the ballpark of where they should probably be ranked. Good teams sometimes lose, it happens.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiko on January 06, 2018, 12:50:44 AM

Quote from: AndOne on January 05, 2018, 10:25:41 PM
Quote from: kiko on January 05, 2018, 06:36:03 PM
Quote from: AndOne on January 05, 2018, 02:11:07 PM
Thanks to deiscanton and Dave for the above.

I guess my question, even before the 2nd loss, is why is a team with only 7 wins ranked as high as #4 when, at the same time, there were several teams with 8, 9, 10, or 11 wins. Were those 7 wins against such high quality teams that they would carry more weight than teams with up to 4 more wins than Middlebury? If a team with, lets say, 10 wins at the same time Middlebury has only 7, and that team is good enough to be ranked 7th or 8th, it's hard to understand how they couldn't be ranked higher than a team with 3 less wins. Did Middlebury's 7 wins come against teams that, combined, were that much better than the 10 teams that others had beaten? And no, I am not picking on Mid here. Just using them as an example as I noticed they had so many fewer wins. Again, a team with 7 wins is better than a team with 10 or 11? ???
Just hard to understand unless the 10-11 win teams had played all their games against teams with only 1 or 2 wins. That's all I'm asking. :)

The simple answer to this is "because I believe the 7-win team is better than the 11-win team". I'm not sure why you would consider the absolute number of wins as a factor. Strength/impressiveness of results would play a role, sure, but just because I am impressed with Team A's win doesn't automatically mean I think they are better than a Team B who gorged on a cupcake.

This argument that "I believe the 7 win team is better than the 11 win team" doesn't hold much water. Why? Because Middlebury's 7 wins before tonight came against teams with a combined record of 36-35. One game over .500. Not exactly numbers that would strongly support a #4 national ranking. And tonight, they beat a team that that is now 5-7. Middlebury's now 8-2 record has been compiled against teams with a combined losing record of 41-42! This doesn't even sound like the record of a top 20 team, let alone a top 10 team.

This is rather unique... I guess it is supposed to be logic. That 8-2 record sounds like a team that lost to two very good teams who sit within shouting distance of Middlebury in the rankings. (At the time the rankings were made, the only loss was in OT on the road to a team that is undefeated and sits just outside the top ten). And it sounds like they have beaten a lot of teams that I would expect the #4 team in the country to beat. Those wins don't tell me that Middlebury is the #4 team in the country, but they also don't tell me that Middlebury is *not* the #4 team in the country. They are simply games that I would expect #4 to win, which Middlebury did.

You seem to be penalizing them for not beating teams that are not actually on their schedule.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 06, 2018, 01:49:42 AM

No, I'm not penalizing them for not beating teams that aren't on their schedule. What I am doing is just not rewarding them with the distinction of being the #4 team in the country when, as of the date of the most recent poll, they only had 7 wins against teams with a combined record of 36-35.

Now consider, let's say, York. Not only did they beat Middlebury head to head, but, as of the date of the most recent poll, they had 11 wins (Vs 7 for Midd), against teams with a combined record of 64-62. Thus, York's wins came against teams that were a combined 2 games over .500 while Midd's opponents were a combined 1 game over. Not a big difference, but York had 4 more wins (or are you going to penalize them for scheduling more earlier games?), than Midd at the time, AND beat Midd head to head. Given this, it just doesn't seem either logical or right that Midd was ranked #4 while York was down at #13. Sorry, but given this information, there is just no way you can say Midd was better than York, as of the date of the most recent poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 06, 2018, 08:26:46 AM

Who cares about the combined record? Most of the teams on everyone's schedule aren't very good. That's just fact. When I'm voting, I'm looking for the good teams they beat and the bad teams to whom they lost. Especially early in the season, it's all about one or two games that might (repeat: might) tell us something about them. At this point in the season, I also rely more heavily on seeing a team play. Things change when you get to the end of the season, when conference strength enters into the equation and the separation between "good" schedule and "weak" schedule come into play.

I've had both Middlebury and Swarthmore in my Top 5 from almost the beginning of the season. That game was slightly surprising, because I didn't think Swat would have as easy of a time of it as they did. I'm sure Dave and I will discuss it a bit on Sunday (if our segment is still on the schedule).

Honestly, though, every team has its weaknesses - more stark, in most cases, than a typical year - I tend to vote on what teams seem strongest in the moment. I considered switching my #1 vote to Augie last week and I'm glad I didn't, because we saw some new weaknesses exposed.

It's not all the games that really matter, but the few that are most telling - at least right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 06, 2018, 09:29:39 AM

The toughest thing about voting in the Top 25 is comparing a team w/ a weak schedule (and a great record) to a team w/ a strong schedule (and more losses).

Use Illinois Wesleyan as an example. IWU is 10-3 vs this schedule - http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Illinois_Wesleyan/men/2017-18/index.

What would Whitman's record be vs that schedule? Middlebury's? UWW's? Lycoming's? Swarthmore's? Juniata's?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiko on January 06, 2018, 11:54:10 AM

Quote from: AndOne on January 06, 2018, 01:49:42 AM
No, I'm not penalizing them for not beating teams that aren't on their schedule. What I am doing is just not rewarding them with the distinction of being the #4 team in the country when, as of the date of the most recent poll, they only had 7 wins against teams with a combined record of 36-35.

Now consider, let's say, York. Not only did they beat Middlebury head to head, but, as of the date of the most recent poll, they had 11 wins (Vs 7 for Midd), against teams with a combined record of 64-62. Thus, York's wins came against teams that were a combined 2 games over .500 while Midd's opponents were a combined 1 game over. Not a big difference, but York had 4 more wins (or are you going to penalize them for scheduling more earlier games?), than Midd at the time, AND beat Midd head to head. Given this, it just doesn't seem either logical or right that Midd was ranked #4 while York was down at #13. Sorry, but given this information, there is just no way you can say Midd was better than York, as of the date of the most recent poll.

This is nonsensical. York has eleven wins against teams that, collectively are roughly .500. Middlebury has seven wins against teams that, collectively, are roughly .500. I am at a loss for how you extrapolate these four extra wins, which were over teams that I would expect either school to beat, as somehow providing a difference-maker from a ranking standpoint. Especially, as the landlord pointed out, since everyone is going to play 24 or 25 in the end anyway.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 06, 2018, 01:11:46 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 06, 2018, 09:29:39 AM
The toughest thing about voting in the Top 25 is comparing a team w/ a weak schedule (and a great record) to a team w/ a strong schedule (and more losses).

Use Illinois Wesleyan as an example. IWU is 10-3 vs this schedule - http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Illinois_Wesleyan/men/2017-18/index.

What would Whitman's record be vs that schedule? Middlebury's? UWW's? Lycoming's? Swarthmore's? Juniata's?

There are measures out there that normalize all of that noise and make a strong signal.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 06, 2018, 01:28:28 PM

Fine, throw out the the combined records of the opponents both Midd and York beat.
By the time the most recent poll came out, York had BEAT Midd and had 4 more wins than Midd.
I think that's a fair argument supporting the assertion that Midd should not have been ranked higher than York.
By the end of the season, sure, Midd could easily end up being the better of the two. But as of 1/2/18 the facts showed otherwise.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiko on January 06, 2018, 02:38:51 PM

Quote from: AndOne on January 06, 2018, 01:28:28 PM
Fine, throw out the the combined records of the opponents both Midd and York beat.
By the time the most recent poll came out, York had BEAT Midd and had 4 more wins than Midd.
I think that's a fair argument supporting the assertion that Midd should not have been ranked higher than York.
By the end of the season, sure, Midd could easily end up being the better of the two. But as of 1/2/18 the facts showed otherwise.

Sure, it is reasonable for a voter to rank York above Middlebury. It's also reasonable for a voter to come to the reverse conclusion since York's win came by three points in OT at home.

But that's not what you were arguing. You were wailing about the unfairness of a team that had beaten seven teams being ranked over a bunch of teams that had beaten eleven. Which is a really embarrassing argument to make if you think about if for more than four seconds. You're essentially arguing that if Middlebury had scheduled and beaten four additional .500ish teams just prior to Christmas, it would have somehow proven something to you about their place in the top 25 pecking order, which entirely consists of teams a lot better than .500? Unless we've somehow teleported back to the 1950s, when this passed for sound analytics, that is some pretty astonishing reasoning.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 06, 2018, 02:46:31 PM

While I agree you can argue that York should be ahead of Middlebury, the fact that they had 4 more wins is not the reason. Similar SoS, with a H2H win, and 1 fewer loss is why. It's not like football when everyone has played roughly the same amount of games at any point during the season. How can a team that's played 8 games possibly have 11 wins?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 06, 2018, 04:49:17 PM

Middlebury about to lose again. Maybe they'll fall out of the top 5.

One look at the poll vs. the Massey ratings and it seems to me that it is very clear that the poll is a complete joke this year.

Me thinks some folks are mailing it in this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 06, 2018, 05:06:59 PM

Quote from: me on January 06, 2018, 04:49:17 PM
Middlebury about to lose again. Maybe they'll fall out of the top 5.

One look at the poll vs. the Massey ratings and it seems to me that it is very clear that the poll is a complete joke this year.

Me thinks some folks are mailing it in this year.

Haven't heard that one before. ::)

So what is it about Massey that is so much better than the voters? 1 loss St John's as #1 ahead of Whitman? Pfeiffer at #8? 7-5 Stevens Point at #32?

Me thinks some folks are mailing in their excuses this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 06, 2018, 05:13:10 PM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on January 05, 2018, 05:00:37 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on January 05, 2018, 02:49:46 PM
This year seems like one of the toughest ever for folks doing these ballots. Number one is a no-brainer (although even they have looked vulnerable), if Whitewater beats River Falls, they are probably a no-brainer for number two. But with a sweep of the remaining games this week, I think you could put the next 15 teams in ANY order and it would be totally defensible. That's crazy for this point of the season, but a lot of teams have head-scratchingly inconsistent results ... if Wesleyan sweeps Williams and Midd this weekend (a very tall order) to add to their prior wins at Williams and over Nichols, I'd go with them at number three, if not, I'd go with York, personally, because they are undefeated with two big-time wins. Obviously some of this will be answered by results, but man, it sure does seem like a year where almost any result involving any two teams in the top 25 (and in many cases teams outside the top 25) would not be much of a surprise at all, and in many cases will just be match-up dependent. As a result, I have a feeling the teams that end up in the Final Four may include some major surprises ...

I agree with a lot of this, nescac1! If yorkpa remains undfeated until next poll I think they should rise up the ranks. They have been so solid this year, can't ask them to do much more. Plus, they are the holder of The Belt^TM, so that should be a couple bonus points!

But mainly, March will be so great this year in D3 world. Will be fun to get some new blood to the final four... The MITs, St. John's, Yorks, OWU's...

St. John's is criminally underranked. They have easily the most impressive win of any D3 team this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 06, 2018, 05:31:22 PM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 06, 2018, 05:06:59 PM
Quote from: me on January 06, 2018, 04:49:17 PM
Middlebury about to lose again. Maybe they'll fall out of the top 5.

One look at the poll vs. the Massey ratings and it seems to me that it is very clear that the poll is a complete joke this year.

Me thinks some folks are mailing it in this year.
Haven't heard that one before. ::)

So what is it about Massey that is so much better than the voters? 1 loss St John's as #1 ahead of Whitman? Pfeiffer at #8? 7-5 Stevens Point at #32?

Me thinks some folks are mailing in their excuses this year.

Whitman has had a 2 game season. Their games against Whitworth are the only ones the rest of the year that really given any sort of useful data about them. And yet they're still ranked #2, which says more in favor of the computer rankings than against it that despite all the pretty pointless games Whitman has played, the computer has still been able to parse out that they're good.

St. John's lost a tough road game but also beat a legit D2 program. St. Cloud State is a good D2 basketball team, and St. John's beat them. They're ridiculously underranked.

And it's not hard at all to believe that Pfeiffer is good. Don't they still have players that were recruited with scholarships?

Pulling out #32 is obviously cherry-picking, but UWSP has played a tremendous schedule and won enough to get some lift out of it. Similar to Hope and St. Thomas, who are ranked around 50 with .500 records. This is correct, the schedule should be an important consideration.

Even these things you've pulled out as argument points still are more easily explained than the state of the poll, tbh.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 06, 2018, 11:19:06 PM

Quote from: kiko on January 06, 2018, 02:38:51 PM
Quote from: AndOne on January 06, 2018, 01:28:28 PM
Fine, throw out the the combined records of the opponents both Midd and York beat.
By the time the most recent poll came out, York had BEAT Midd and had 4 more wins than Midd.
I think that's a fair argument supporting the assertion that Midd should not have been ranked higher than York.
By the end of the season, sure, Midd could easily end up being the better of the two. But as of 1/2/18 the facts showed otherwise.

Sure, it is reasonable for a voter to rank York above Middlebury. It's also reasonable for a voter to come to the reverse conclusion since York's win came by three points in OT at home.

But that's not what you were arguing. You were wailing about the unfairness of a team that had beaten seven teams being ranked over a bunch of teams that had beaten eleven. Which is a really embarrassing argument to make if you think about if for more than four seconds. You're essentially arguing that if Middlebury had scheduled and beaten four additional .500ish teams just prior to Christmas, it would have somehow proven something to you about their place in the top 25 pecking order, which entirely consists of teams a lot better than .500? Unless we've somehow teleported back to the 1950s, when this passed for sound analytics, that is some pretty astonishing reasoning.

This is nonsensical jibberish. A poll is supposed to recognize how teams compare to each other on that date. If a team has 11 wins and another has only 7 against teams with comparable overall records, are you really going to say 7 wins carry more weight than 11? Remedial math teachers would like to have a talk with you. And, if you insist on making that mistake what about that in head to head competition, the team with 11 wins beat the team with only 7. Or are you now going to try to diminish York's head to head win because it was only by 3 points and game at home? 🤦‍♂️

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2018, 11:21:55 PM

Quote from: AndOne on January 06, 2018, 11:19:06 PM
This is nonsensical jibberish. A poll is supposed to recognize how teams compare to each other on that date. If a team has 11 wins and another has only 7 against teams with comparable overall records, are you really going to say 7 wins carry more weight than 11? Remedial math teachers would like to have a talk with you. And, if you insist on making that mistake what about that in head to head competition, the team with 11 wins beat the team with only 7. Or are you now going to try to diminish York's head to head win because it was only by 3 points and game at home? 🤦‍♂️

It's like you want these to be standings, where there would be a difference between 11 wins and 7.

They're not. They're rankings.

Frankly, the only jibberish is you continuing to belabor this point. You seem to be kind of alone on this.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 06, 2018, 11:30:07 PM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 06, 2018, 02:46:31 PM
While I agree you can argue that York should be ahead of Middlebury, the fact that they had 4 more wins is not the reason. Similar SoS, with a H2H win, and 1 fewer loss is why. It's not like football when everyone has played roughly the same amount of games at any point during the season. How can a team that's played 8 games possibly have 11 wins?

Of course a team thats only played 7-8 games can't have 11 wins.
But why would you want to penalize a team because they have played (and won) more games as of a specified date? 🤔
Sounds like one of those famous D1 classes where extra credit is given for work not completed. 🤫

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on January 06, 2018, 11:32:59 PM

Can someone direct me to the link where you can simulate games and it gives proposed win percentages? Thanks.

I thought Massey Rankings had division 3 teams and simulations but I cant find it right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 06, 2018, 11:41:29 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2018, 11:21:55 PM
Quote from: AndOne on January 06, 2018, 11:19:06 PM
This is nonsensical jibberish. A poll is supposed to recognize how teams compare to each other on that date. If a team has 11 wins and another has only 7 against teams with comparable overall records, are you really going to say 7 wins carry more weight than 11? Remedial math teachers would like to have a talk with you. And, if you insist on making that mistake what about that in head to head competition, the team with 11 wins beat the team with only 7. Or are you now going to try to diminish York's head to head win because it was only by 3 points and game at home? 🤦‍♂️

It's like you want these to be standings, where there would be a difference between 11 wins and 7.

They're not. They're rankings.

Frankly, the only jibberish is you continuing to belabor this point. You seem to be kind of alone on this.

I AM kind of alone on this, Pat.
But maybe that's because more people haven't read about the subject and considered the point. :D

* And even if I am alone on this, am I not entitled to my opinion? I thought an open exchange of ideas about D3 was one of the primary reasons for these boards. Am I mistaken?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Team First on January 06, 2018, 11:41:47 PM

https://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?s=cb2018&sub=11620

Or go to: https://www.masseyratings.com/ then Men NCAA DI basketball ratings, then drop down tab to NCAA DIII, then find team, click on team and you can view the remaining schedule and predicted score and win percentage. They update DIII info on Mondays.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 06, 2018, 11:45:49 PM

Team First nailed it for you Smitty.
As he said, you just have to remember to scroll down and click on NCAA D3!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 06, 2018, 11:47:03 PM

Quote from: AndOne on January 06, 2018, 11:30:07 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 06, 2018, 02:46:31 PM
While I agree you can argue that York should be ahead of Middlebury, the fact that they had 4 more wins is not the reason. Similar SoS, with a H2H win, and 1 fewer loss is why. It's not like football when everyone has played roughly the same amount of games at any point during the season. How can a team that's played 8 games possibly have 11 wins?

Of course a team thats only played 7-8 games can't have 11 wins.
But why would you want to penalize a team because they have played (and won) more games as of a specified date? 🤔
Sounds like one of those famous D1 classes where extra credit is given for work not completed. 🤫

That's the point we're trying to make... no one should be penalized because they've played a couple less or a couple more as of a specified date. The sheer number of games doesn't matter, the performance in those games do.
I'll say again, York could and probably should have been ranked ahead of Middlebury (9 spots behind seems inexcusable) but it's not because they had played more games.

Had Middlebury played and beaten (using examples of the next two teams that are on their schedule) 5-5 Morrisville St and 7-4 Bates (records before this week) before the poll and the Panthers were 9-1 would they somehow have been a better team than they were at 7-1?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on January 07, 2018, 12:52:26 AM

Quote from: AndOne on January 06, 2018, 11:45:49 PM
Team First nailed it for you Smitty.
As he said, you just have to remember to scroll down and click on NCAA D3!

Hahaha, thanks. And thanks Team First!

So doing some simulations, according to Massey and records as of Monday, Middlebury has a 97% chance to beat Connecticut College (5-6), a 90% chance to beat Bates (7-4), a 95% chance to beat Morrisville St. (5-5). Morrisville St. and Bates are the next two teams for Middlebury, CT College was the first game for Middlebury this week. These teams have a 17-15 (.531%) record, better than both Middlebury and Yorkpa's opponent records.

The chance that Middlebury wins all three of those games is roughly 83%. So 5 out of 6 times Middlebury will sweep all three of those opponents. Its not a guarantee but I would take those odds.

So to bring back to the point at hand, Middlebury should not be penalized IMO for only playing 8 games while Yorkpa has played 11. Given an average schedule and extrapolating the 3 simulated game results from Monday, 82% of the time Middlebury would be 10-1. I think those odds are significant enough to overlook the total wins number and use other criteria while making rankings instead.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 07, 2018, 12:59:57 AM

I'm a data and metrics guy, but Massey is just a tool, much like the tools some of our posters have put together. But it offers an unbiased ranking.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 07, 2018, 01:18:09 AM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on January 07, 2018, 12:52:26 AM
Quote from: AndOne on January 06, 2018, 11:45:49 PM
Team First nailed it for you Smitty.
As he said, you just have to remember to scroll down and click on NCAA D3!

Hahaha, thanks. And thanks Team First!

So doing some simulations, according to Massey and records as of Monday, Middlebury has a 97% chance to beat Connecticut College (5-6), a 90% chance to beat Bates (7-4), a 95% chance to beat Morrisville St. (5-5). Morrisville St. and Bates are the next two teams for Middlebury, CT College was the first game for Middlebury this week. These teams have a 17-15 (.531%) record, better than both Middlebury and Yorkpa's opponent records.

The chance that Middlebury wins all four of those games is roughly 83%. So 5 out of 6 times Middlebury will sweep all four of those opponents. Its not a guarantee but I would take those odds.

So to bring back to the point at hand, Middlebury should not be penalized IMO for only playing 8 games while Yorkpa has played 11. Given an average schedule and extrapolating the 3 simulated game results from Monday, 82% of the time Middlebury would be 10-1. I think those odds are significant enough to overlook the total wins number and use other criteria while making rankings instead.

+1 for using Yorkpa

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 07, 2018, 01:19:18 AM

Quote from: AndOne on January 06, 2018, 11:41:29 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2018, 11:21:55 PM
Quote from: AndOne on January 06, 2018, 11:19:06 PM
This is nonsensical jibberish. A poll is supposed to recognize how teams compare to each other on that date. If a team has 11 wins and another has only 7 against teams with comparable overall records, are you really going to say 7 wins carry more weight than 11? Remedial math teachers would like to have a talk with you. And, if you insist on making that mistake what about that in head to head competition, the team with 11 wins beat the team with only 7. Or are you now going to try to diminish York's head to head win because it was only by 3 points and game at home? 🤦‍♂️

It's like you want these to be standings, where there would be a difference between 11 wins and 7.

They're not. They're rankings.

Frankly, the only jibberish is you continuing to belabor this point. You seem to be kind of alone on this.

I AM kind of alone on this, Pat.
But maybe that's because more people haven't read about the subject and considered the point. :D

* And even if I am alone on this, am I not entitled to my opinion? I thought an open exchange of ideas about D3 was one of the primary reasons for these boards. Am I mistaken?

Yes

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on January 07, 2018, 01:21:11 AM

Quote from: smedindy on January 07, 2018, 12:59:57 AM
I'm a data and metrics guy, but Massey is just a tool, much like the tools some of our posters have put together. But it offers an unbiased ranking.

I agree it is just a tool. My main point was use Massey (or any other tool) to show that "raw win total" doesn't matter because Middlebury has a good chance (80ish%) at catching up to that win total over time as the schedule plays out. Given they play a middle-of-the-road remaining schedule, which most teams will face.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 07, 2018, 01:32:39 AM

Quote from: sac on January 07, 2018, 01:19:18 AM
Quote from: AndOne on January 06, 2018, 11:41:29 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2018, 11:21:55 PM
Quote from: AndOne on January 06, 2018, 11:19:06 PM
This is nonsensical jibberish. A poll is supposed to recognize how teams compare to each other on that date. If a team has 11 wins and another has only 7 against teams with comparable overall records, are you really going to say 7 wins carry more weight than 11? Remedial math teachers would like to have a talk with you. And, if you insist on making that mistake what about that in head to head competition, the team with 11 wins beat the team with only 7. Or are you now going to try to diminish York's head to head win because it was only by 3 points and game at home? 🤦‍♂️

It's like you want these to be standings, where there would be a difference between 11 wins and 7.

They're not. They're rankings.

Frankly, the only jibberish is you continuing to belabor this point. You seem to be kind of alone on this.

I AM kind of alone on this, Pat.
But maybe that's because more people haven't read about the subject and considered the point. :D

* And even if I am alone on this, am I not entitled to my opinion? I thought an open exchange of ideas about D3 was one of the primary reasons for these boards. Am I mistaken?

Yes

Disagree. He IS entitled to his opinion, and an open exchange of ideas IS the primary reason for these boards. He just can't stop beating a dead horse. ;)

It will all be moot this week, when York goes ahead of Middlebury.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2018, 01:01:31 PM

Indeed, open exchange of ideas. Even open forum to say the same thing over and over again ... but also open forum for someone else to say, yes, we hear you and you don't have to keep saying the same thing over and over again.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 07, 2018, 02:17:36 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 07, 2018, 12:59:57 AM
I'm a data and metrics guy, but Massey is just a tool, much like the tools some of our posters have put together. But it offers an unbiased ranking.

It's not just a tool. It's the best tool that we have for D3, with no close second.

What's worse is that I don't think the voters use it much at all. At the very least it ought to be a sanity check, which would lead to asking some serious questions about Middlebury (#42 in Massey even before this weekend) and Lycoming (#44) among others -- aforementioned St. John's, Wartburg, Williams, Ramapo, River Falls, Hanover effectively at 26th (#115!), and on the other side...pretty much the top half of the OAC minus Marietta (who is probably not too far from where they should be, maybe got punished a bit too much for a buzzer beater loss to BW), and several teams that aren't even getting votes that might be top 25 (like Augsburg). Probably some others. It's a mess, and there's no reason it should be.

I think the best thing in Massey this year is pegging Ohio Northern as a good team while no one else has given them any credit, including in their own conference's preseason coaches' poll!

The biggest weakness (only?) of Massey is dealing with weak schedules, because it just means there's not as much useful data for differentiating between good teams. Is Nebraska Wesleyan really borderline top 10? Based on what Buena Vista did to them, probably not.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2018, 02:27:20 PM

I think generally the weakness for Massey is that it tends to highly rate Minnesota/Wisconsin teams, more so than they deserve. Not really sure why, but it's enough for me to not really pay much attention to Massey.

Like all of the computer ratings that rate across all of college basketball/football, Massey is fine-tuned so it makes sense at the Division I level. That doesn't mean it's going to continue to be well tuned at the other end of the spectrum.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 07, 2018, 02:42:50 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2018, 02:27:20 PM
I think generally the weakness for Massey is that it tends to highly rate Minnesota/Wisconsin teams, more so than they deserve. Not really sure why, but it's enough for me to not really pay much attention to Massey.

Like all of the computer ratings that rate across all of college basketball/football, Massey is fine-tuned so it makes sense at the Division I level. That doesn't mean it's going to continue to be well tuned at the other end of the spectrum.

What makes you think that about MN/WI teams? Since you don't get much out of region play until the national semifinals (maybe a bit during sectionals depending), how would you disprove it? It's not like D1 where everyone gets spread out among the brackets intentionally. I think there were definitely midwestern first-round matchups that could have been sectional finals, like Augustana-St. Thomas, and Hope-Oshkosh.

One reason that Massey logically gives those teams credit is because most of them play strong schedules, including non D3 regular season games. Like St. John's this year, or Wartburg beating a credible NAIA program. And Massey isn't going to punish them for losing to Northern Iowa. It's also not going to punish them for playing home and home in the league,in contrast to the NESCAC artificially boosting their records by only playing each other once.

6 of the last 8 years, a team from Wisconsin or Minnesota has won the national championship. So I really don't know how you could credibly say that they don't deserve the credit Massey gives them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2018, 02:48:23 PM

Quote from: me on January 07, 2018, 02:42:50 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2018, 02:27:20 PM
I think generally the weakness for Massey is that it tends to highly rate Minnesota/Wisconsin teams, more so than they deserve. Not really sure why, but it's enough for me to not really pay much attention to Massey.

Like all of the computer ratings that rate across all of college basketball/football, Massey is fine-tuned so it makes sense at the Division I level. That doesn't mean it's going to continue to be well tuned at the other end of the spectrum.

What makes you think that about MN/WI teams? Since you don't get much out of region play until the national semifinals (maybe a bit during sectionals depending), how would you disprove it? It's not like D1 where everyone gets spread out among the brackets intentionally. I think there were definitely midwestern first-round matchups that could have been sectional finals, like Augustana-St. Thomas, and Hope-Oshkosh.

One reason that Massey logically gives those teams credit is because most of them play strong schedules, including non D3 regular season games. Like St. John's this year, or Wartburg beating a credible NAIA program. And Massey isn't going to punish them for losing to Northern Iowa. It's also not going to punish them for playing home and home in the league,in contrast to the NESCAC artificially boosting their records by only playing each other once.

6 of the last 8 years, a team from Wisconsin or Minnesota has won the national championship. So I really don't know how you could credibly say that they don't deserve the credit Massey gives them.

Yes, but *a* team -- whereas often there are 5-7 MIAC teams highly ranked in Massey. I just don't think it makes sense.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 07, 2018, 03:08:46 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2018, 02:48:23 PM
Quote from: me on January 07, 2018, 02:42:50 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2018, 02:27:20 PM
I think generally the weakness for Massey is that it tends to highly rate Minnesota/Wisconsin teams, more so than they deserve. Not really sure why, but it's enough for me to not really pay much attention to Massey.

Like all of the computer ratings that rate across all of college basketball/football, Massey is fine-tuned so it makes sense at the Division I level. That doesn't mean it's going to continue to be well tuned at the other end of the spectrum.

What makes you think that about MN/WI teams? Since you don't get much out of region play until the national semifinals (maybe a bit during sectionals depending), how would you disprove it? It's not like D1 where everyone gets spread out among the brackets intentionally. I think there were definitely midwestern first-round matchups that could have been sectional finals, like Augustana-St. Thomas, and Hope-Oshkosh.

One reason that Massey logically gives those teams credit is because most of them play strong schedules, including non D3 regular season games. Like St. John's this year, or Wartburg beating a credible NAIA program. And Massey isn't going to punish them for losing to Northern Iowa. It's also not going to punish them for playing home and home in the league,in contrast to the NESCAC artificially boosting their records by only playing each other once.

6 of the last 8 years, a team from Wisconsin or Minnesota has won the national championship. So I really don't know how you could credibly say that they don't deserve the credit Massey gives them.

Yes, but *a* team -- whereas often there are 5-7 MIAC teams highly ranked in Massey. I just don't think it makes sense.

But it's pretty hard to get more than that. You don't get half a conference or more worth of teams in the tournament like you can in D1 and they aren't spread out where several of them can make the Final Four. So that's not really a valid consideration.

You seem to have a preconception that there is balance among the conferences in D3 such that it's inherently ridiculous that there could be 5-7 good teams from one conference. But why can't there be? And how do you know that's a logical assumption?

Minnesota and Wisconsin schools play each other enough to get a good number of network connections for an algorithm to evaluate. Obviously, Massey's algo sees MN schools winning enough games to be considered not at but near the level of the WIAC, which is obviously the best conference in the country (as it is for football and baseball as well, if we have an argument here I don't know what to say). WI and MI teams also play outside the area, establishing data points to compare regions. Apparently they do pretty well there also.

I tend to think that Massey is more right than the D3 conventional wisdom, which unduly punishes losses to good teams, which is why the NESCAC gambit has worked.

Massey's algo is no different for D1 or several separate leagues of European soccer than it is for D3. Data analysis's primary purpose is to contradict human bias. But if we simply dismiss what it tells us, it can't really do that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 07, 2018, 03:35:36 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Whitman	13-0	def. Pacific, 116-86; def. Lewis and Clark, 79-72
#2	599	Augustana	11-2	LOST at Illinois Wesleyan, 53-72; def. Millikin, 66-49
#3	516	UW-River Falls	10-2	LOST to UW-Stevens Point, 48-73; won at #5 UW-Whitewater, 81-80
#4	514	Middlebury	8-3	LOST to #12 Swarthmore, 75-91; won at Connecticut College, 82-60; LOST at #14 Wesleyan, 70-80
#5	500	UW-Whitewater	11-2	won at #7 UW-Oshkosh, 83-57; LOST to #3 UW-River Falls, 80-81
#6	493	Lycoming	14-1	LOST at Lebanon Valley, 71-81; def. Stevenson, 83-71
#7	447	UW-Oshkosh	11-2	LOST to #5 UW-Whitewater, 57-83; won at UW-La Crosse, 72-65
#8	392	Whitworth	12-1	def. Lewis and Clark, 98-91; def. Pacific, 83-71
#9	379	Ohio Wesleyan	10-3	def. Denison, 89-70; LOST to Wooster, 70-73
#10	370	Washington U.	10-2	def. (n) Chicago, 79-78
#11	362	Williams	11-2	won at #14 Wesleyan, 76-68 OT; won at Connecticut College, 91-57
#12	326	Swarthmore	11-1	won at #4 Middlebury, 91-75; def. Gettysburg, 69-61
#13	320	York (Pa.)	13-0	won at Salisbury, 84-81; won at Southern Virginia, 85-69
#14	310	Wesleyan	10-2	LOST to #11 Williams, 68-76 OT; def. #4 Middlebury, 80-70
#15	259	MIT	12-1	won at WPI, 94-58; def. Coast Guard, 74-65
#16	206	St. John's	10-1	won at Concordia-Moorhead, 72-55; def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 82-52
#17	203	Wittenberg	13-0	won at Kenyon, 87-67; def. Hiram, 81-61
#18	200	Wartburg	10-3	def. Central, 80-65; LOST at Coe, 65-69
#19	143	Ramapo	10-4	def. Rutgers-Camden, 93-74; LOST at TCNJ, 64-66
#20	125	New Jersey City	11-2	LOST to Montclair State, 66-76; won at Rowan, 79-76
#21	114	Nichols	9-2	def. Southern Maine, 86-71; LOST to Western New England, 94-100 OT
#22	111	Rochester	9-3	def. Rochester Tech, 69-49; LOST at #37 Emory, 62-80
#23	83	Juniata	12-1	won at Lancaster Bible, 57-54; LOST at Catholic, 70-82
#24	80	Hamilton	12-0	def. Wells, 97-61; won at Trinity (Conn.), 78-55
#25	67	Marietta	10-3	def. Muskingum, 104-86; def. Ohio Northern, 90-86

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	65	Hanover	9-4	LOST to Rose-Hulman, 69-71; won at Manchester, 77-69
#27	46	Albright	11-2	won at Hood, 106-93; LOST to Lebanon Valley, 70-78
#28	39	Christopher Newport	10-3	def. Penn State-Harrisburg, 73-63; LOST at Marymount, 58-60
#29	35	Amherst	7-4	LOST to T#33 Eastern Connecticut, 92-95; LOST at Trinity (Conn.), 63-69
#30	34	Nebraska Wesleyan	12-1	LOST to Buena Vista, 75-91; def. Luther, 117-66
#31	32	Baldwin Wallace	11-2	def. Mount Union, 96-93; won at Wilmington, 87-69
#32	29	Skidmore	8-2	def. RPI, 76-56; def. Union, 94-83 OT
T#33	19	Eastern Connecticut	11-2	won at #29 Amherst, 95-92; won at Mass-Boston, 80-54
T#33	19	Franklin and Marshall	11-1	def. McDaniel, 70-50
T#33	19	John Carroll	11-2	won at Heidelberg, 100-94; def. Capital, 95-74
#36	16	St. Norbert	11-2	def. Beloit, 73-57; def. Grinnell, 97-85
#37	10	Emory	10-2	won at Oglethorpe, 88-82; def. #22 Rochester, 80-62
#38	8	UW-Platteville	12-1	won at UW-Stout, 73-54; def. UW-Eau Claire, 74-64
T#39	3	Bethel	8-3	LOST to St. Olaf, 82-83
T#39	3	North Central (Ill.)	9-4	def. Carthage, 77-67; won at Carroll, 73-54
#41	2	Westminster (Pa.)	10-2	LOST at Thomas More, 65-72; def. Waynesburg, 91-73
T#42	1	Gwynedd Mercy	9-2	LOST at Immaculata, 70-71
T#42	1	Salem State	10-3	won at Worcester State, 104-92

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 07, 2018, 03:38:49 PM

MN and WI teams in Massey top 100 before this weekend:
1 St. John's
7 Whitewater
9 Platteville
17 River Falls
23 Augsburg
25 La Crosse
26 Oshkosh
27 Bethel
30 St. Olaf
32 Stevens Point
35 Carleton
41 St. Norbert
45 Eau Claire
52 St. Thomas
75 Hamline
86 Gustavus

None of that seems really wrong to me, and we're only a dozen games into the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 07, 2018, 03:48:26 PM

Looking at the above top 25 and votes, I think I've cracked what the issue is.

The voters overemphasize the loss column, and don't scrutinize the win column enough.

That helps explain why teams like Baldwin-Wallace and John Carroll aren't close to being ranked, and teams like Lycoming and Middlebury are (and probably still will be now that they've become a beneficiary of anchoring bias).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on January 07, 2018, 03:49:10 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2018, 01:01:31 PM
Indeed, open exchange of ideas. Even open forum to say the same thing over and over again ... but also open forum for someone else to say, yes, we hear you and you don't have to keep saying the same thing over and over again.

can you repeat that pleez :o ::) ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 07, 2018, 04:20:50 PM

Quote from: iwumichigander on January 07, 2018, 03:49:10 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2018, 01:01:31 PM
Indeed, open exchange of ideas. Even open forum to say the same thing over and over again ... but also open forum for someone else to say, yes, we hear you and you don't have to keep saying the same thing over and over again.
can you repeat that pleez :o ::) ;D

Consider that perhaps the problem with what seems like a lot of over and over stems from the fact that it often takes a pretty large dose of repetition for the majority to admit the minority does indeed have a (at least one) point. 🤔 :o 😏

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 07, 2018, 04:27:03 PM

With so many of the highly ranked teams taking a recent loss, or losses, the next poll should be highly interesting! 8-) ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 07, 2018, 04:42:51 PM

Quote from: AndOne on January 07, 2018, 04:27:03 PM
With so many of the highly ranked teams taking a recent loss, or losses, the next poll should be highly interesting! 8-) ;D

Should blow it up and start over, with a bigger emphasis on quality wins and not getting so hung up about who took a random loss to another good team by a couple of points.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 07, 2018, 04:53:35 PM

Quote from: me on January 07, 2018, 04:42:51 PM
Quote from: AndOne on January 07, 2018, 04:27:03 PM
With so many of the highly ranked teams taking a recent loss, or losses, the next poll should be highly interesting! 8-) ;D

Should blow it up and start over, with a bigger emphasis on quality wins and not getting so hung up about who took a random loss to another good team by a couple of points.

I'll be starting to work on my ballot in about twenty minutes or so. I don't typically blow up the whole thing at this time of year, but I probably will be today, just because things have been so unpredictable. As always, I'll use any many sources of information as possible to gauge which teams I think are the best.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 07, 2018, 06:51:07 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 07, 2018, 04:53:35 PM
Quote from: me on January 07, 2018, 04:42:51 PM
Quote from: AndOne on January 07, 2018, 04:27:03 PM
With so many of the highly ranked teams taking a recent loss, or losses, the next poll should be highly interesting! 8-) ;D

Should blow it up and start over, with a bigger emphasis on quality wins and not getting so hung up about who took a random loss to another good team by a couple of points.

I'll be starting to work on my ballot in about twenty minutes or so. I don't typically blow up the whole thing at this time of year, but I probably will be today, just because things have been so unpredictable. As always, I'll use any many sources of information as possible to gauge which teams I think are the best.

All anyone can ask. It happens. I've been there in high school rankings when I used to have votes in that.

I hope all the voters do the same thing.

One example among several: for me John Carroll and Baldwin Wallace should be ranked ahead of Marietta until further evidence reveals itself. Better records, strong schedules, and won on the road.

When basically everyone has losses, the quality of wins becomes even more important. Pretty much everyone has shown they can have a bad night and lose.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 07, 2018, 07:20:40 PM

Regarding the CCIW, I believe IWU should be the 2nd team voters are looking at (behind Augustana). North Central (9-4, 3-2) was the only other CCIW team to get votes in the Week #5 poll, but IWU (11-3, 4-1) won at North Central. With IWU's win vs Augustana this week, it seems IWU should clearly be the CCIW team with the second most poll points.

Good Wins
at Wheaton
at North Central
vs #2-Augustana
vs Elmhurst

Losses
vs Carthage
vs #10-Wash U
at Emory

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 07, 2018, 07:39:26 PM

It seems to me that the IWU loss to Emory will end up being a loss to a ranked Emory after tomorrow.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 07, 2018, 08:00:22 PM

I like where this is going. Hopefully more people chime in with teams they think are being overlooked.

I'll give another I referenced earlier: Augsburg. I reserve the right to regret this in 26 or so hours.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 07, 2018, 08:53:32 PM

We're reviving the Posters Poll (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4188.msg1849037#msg1849037) so if you think certain polls are wrong, why not show it by providing your own ballot? We're hoping for at least 10 and we're well on our way to that.
AndOne? me? smed?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on January 07, 2018, 09:07:01 PM

Quote from: me on January 07, 2018, 08:00:22 PM
I like where this is going. Hopefully more people chime in with teams they think are being overlooked.

I'll give another I referenced earlier: Augsburg. I reserve the right to regret this in 26 or so hours.

I mentioned it on the MIAC page but they have quite the week... 3 games. Bethel, St. Johns and St. Thomas.

I agree with you, they are tough and physical on D and have multiple above average scorers on offense. Good wins against Wart, Loras and Bethel.

Carleton, who lost their last MIAC game in 360 days (The followers of The Belt^TM should remember their run quite fondly from last year) is also a solid MIAC team that should be gaining votes instead of Bethel IMO.

Me, you should join the Posters Poll that Grizz referenced!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 07, 2018, 09:40:56 PM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 07, 2018, 08:53:32 PM
We're reviving the Posters Poll (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4188.msg1849037#msg1849037) so if you think certain polls are wrong, why not show it by providing your own ballot? We're hoping for at least 10 and we're well on our way to that.
AndOne? me? smed?

Where do we submit? And when? I might give it a shot. Can I just copy and paste the Massey top 25? :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 07, 2018, 10:19:54 PM

Quote from: me on January 07, 2018, 08:00:22 PM
I like where this is going. Hopefully more people chime in with teams they think are being overlooked.

I'll give another I referenced earlier: Augsburg. I reserve the right to regret this in 26 or so hours.

I got you on that one; they're getting a few points from me.

Quote from: me on January 07, 2018, 06:51:07 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 07, 2018, 04:53:35 PM
Quote from: me on January 07, 2018, 04:42:51 PM
Quote from: AndOne on January 07, 2018, 04:27:03 PM
With so many of the highly ranked teams taking a recent loss, or losses, the next poll should be highly interesting! 8-) ;D

Should blow it up and start over, with a bigger emphasis on quality wins and not getting so hung up about who took a random loss to another good team by a couple of points.

I'll be starting to work on my ballot in about twenty minutes or so. I don't typically blow up the whole thing at this time of year, but I probably will be today, just because things have been so unpredictable. As always, I'll use any many sources of information as possible to gauge which teams I think are the best.

All anyone can ask. It happens. I've been there in high school rankings when I used to have votes in that.

I hope all the voters do the same thing.

One example among several: for me John Carroll and Baldwin Wallace should be ranked ahead of Marietta until further evidence reveals itself. Better records, strong schedules, and won on the road.

When basically everyone has losses, the quality of wins becomes even more important. Pretty much everyone has shown they can have a bad night and lose.

Here we'll have to agree to disagree. I've seen Marietta in person. I watched most of both the JCU loss and the B-W loss. At no point did I think the team that won was the better team. It just didn't look that way. Marietta has some losses I don't like, but none of them are bad - not a single one. The other two both have bad losses, excusable maybe, but that factors in. I've got Marietta very near the bottom of my Top 25 and Baldwin Wallace just outside it. I'm going to need to see a larger body of work from them. I do think, though, that the OAC has four teams capable of winning games in the national tournament, which is pretty impressive.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on January 07, 2018, 10:22:16 PM

Quote from: me on January 07, 2018, 09:40:56 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 07, 2018, 08:53:32 PM
We're reviving the Posters Poll (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4188.msg1849037#msg1849037) so if you think certain polls are wrong, why not show it by providing your own ballot? We're hoping for at least 10 and we're well on our way to that.
AndOne? me? smed?

Where do we submit? And when? I might give it a shot. Can I just copy and paste the Massey top 25? :)

You can post any top 25 you want! We would post the ranks in the "Poster Poll" thread on the Multi-Regional topic. Grizz posted the link in that message. We would post a new set of rankings each week, preferably on Monday!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 07, 2018, 10:30:12 PM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on January 07, 2018, 10:22:16 PM
Quote from: me on January 07, 2018, 09:40:56 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 07, 2018, 08:53:32 PM
We're reviving the Posters Poll (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4188.msg1849037#msg1849037) so if you think certain polls are wrong, why not show it by providing your own ballot? We're hoping for at least 10 and we're well on our way to that.
AndOne? me? smed?

Where do we submit? And when? I might give it a shot. Can I just copy and paste the Massey top 25? :)

You can post any top 25 you want! We would post the ranks in the "Poster Poll" thread on the Multi-Regional topic. Grizz posted the link in that message. We would post a new set of rankings each week, preferably on Monday!

You would PM your ballot to me and then I'd compile and post the results. Here's how the final football poll (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=7065.msg1847136#msg1847136) looked for reference. I don't reveal who voted for who but voters are free to reveal their ballot if they wish.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 07, 2018, 10:42:12 PM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on January 07, 2018, 09:07:01 PM
Quote from: me on January 07, 2018, 08:00:22 PM
I like where this is going. Hopefully more people chime in with teams they think are being overlooked.

I'll give another I referenced earlier: Augsburg. I reserve the right to regret this in 26 or so hours.

I mentioned it on the MIAC page but they have quite the week... 3 games. Bethel, St. Johns and St. Thomas.

I agree with you, they are tough and physical on D and have multiple above average scorers on offense. Good wins against Wart, Loras and Bethel.

Carleton, who lost their last MIAC game in 360 days (The followers of The Belt^TM should remember their run quite fondly from last year) is also a solid MIAC team that should be gaining votes instead of Bethel IMO.

Me, you should join the Posters Poll that Grizz referenced!

I know the kid made a decision to try to further his basketball career, but I can't help but think what might have been for Carleton. They would be such a handful. As they stand, I'm not sure where they slot in. 2-6 is basically up in the air for me, but they're all good.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 07, 2018, 10:59:36 PM

me - your attacks (and I see them as such) on the Top 25 voters for not voting how you see fit not withstanding, I post by ballot nearly every week. You are welcome to read it. You might find some info in there a bit ... surprising. You assertion that voters aren't doing certain things would be proven wrong in many cases.

My opinion about Massey and Bennett (the other ranking system in DIII) is that I find them helpful in reminding me of teams I am either overlooking or overbuying, but I don't find they have enough data to rely on at this time. I but into them not for a few more weeks - kind of like why we don't get earlier regional rankings because the SOS can vary wildly from game to game, week to week. They are helpful for me in making me look (or re-look) at teams, but I am not going to suddenly change how I vote because I have a team 20th and Massey has them 5th (a made-up example, not intended to be a real scenario). Or rather, Massey has them in the Top 10 and I don't even have them on my ballot.

You would actually be amazed at how many teams are ranked high in the overall Top 25 that aren't getting any votes from me. I am amazed myself. I am either way off this year or everyone else is.

But that last part isn't it, actually.

Someone said something like the following a few pages back - we have a wide open season currently and 25 voters are trying to make head and tails about it. We have teams who were either slowly building to better and better seasons or others who have come out of nowhere in the conversation with ridiculously gaudy records that now have to be evaluated, or re-evaluated, against another group of teams we all know are good and have been for some time.

I understand that people don't want "history" to play a role, but when I look at Ohio Wesleyan, I understand the talents of Nate Axelrod and others because they have been in this conversation in the past. I know how Mike DeWitt is as a coach and I can make some fair evaluations on how good, or off, the team is at any given moment during the season. In comparison, I have struggled for a few weeks now with Emory & Henry. They have some darn good results to teams whose resumes are improving themselves. (I dismissed their loss to Wooster, but the Scots are now 10-3 and making me re-evaluate E&H and others including Wooster themselves.) I don't E&H's team as well. They aren't that far removed from 4 and 5-win seasons. Their coach, a former DIII player, seems to have them tracking in the right direction, but I don't really know them well. They were under the radar, though third in the ODAC last season... but that doesn't mean voters know what they bring to the table. It is hard to buy in with so much unknown - and very hard to learn in 24-36 hours (the window to vote each week).

As a result, voters have a lot in front of them and saying they should just trust in Massey (or Bennett) and move on isn't fair to the process. Those two systems can't account for players being ill for a loss that voters know would have been different otherwise. Just as those two systems can weed through some of the stuff that voters may glaze over. As Ryan stated earlier, voters should have the ability to use as much information as they want to make logical choices and if they don't vote the same way a computer system spits out rankings they shouldn't be criticized for it.

Saying you figured out the system that losses are taken too seriously over quality wins is an interesting point (and again, read my blog), but your "attack" towards voters for doing so isn't helpful. I have stated for years (again... read my blog) that voters seem to ding teams for losses more than maybe the collective should. I have used ranked teams playing as a great example. The lower ranked team is expected to lose and suddenly drop three spots after a loss to a higher ranked team as if it was a surprise.

However, I will also say that for a long time in Division III, losses were a significant indicator. Only in the last two, maybe three, years including this season have we seen so many losses throughout the Top 25 and beyond. It was a surprising move when I did NOT remove Augustana from #1 after they lost a few seasons ago. The normal reaction was to do that because the top team(s) in the country tended to go into the NCAA tournament undefeated or with a single loss. Now-a-days with parity as thick as it is, losses are starting to become common-place and I think the voting panel is adjusting. It takes time to adjust how one votes because it takes time to understand the landscape has changed.

I remember when I barely used to move teams in my Top 10 and moved a lot in 15-25. I have to physically get out of my habits these days and be willing to make drastic changes each week. It is against my norm, because the norm has changed. It isn't easy to do when you worked in a system that worked for you. We can thank the fact Division III has gotten so much better and now each night brings terrific basketball.

Feel free to make suggestions, ask questions, and debate the Top 25 and teams in, out, or misplaced... but let's not make comments like voters are mailing it in. It simply isn't the case. And to have it from someone who clearly has never put a Top 25 ballot together (at least in Division III)... it just seems like an attack.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 07, 2018, 11:07:48 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 07, 2018, 10:19:54 PM
Quote from: me on January 07, 2018, 08:00:22 PM
I like where this is going. Hopefully more people chime in with teams they think are being overlooked.

I'll give another I referenced earlier: Augsburg. I reserve the right to regret this in 26 or so hours.

I got you on that one; they're getting a few points from me.

Quote from: me on January 07, 2018, 06:51:07 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 07, 2018, 04:53:35 PM
Quote from: me on January 07, 2018, 04:42:51 PM
Quote from: AndOne on January 07, 2018, 04:27:03 PM
With so many of the highly ranked teams taking a recent loss, or losses, the next poll should be highly interesting! 8-) ;D

Should blow it up and start over, with a bigger emphasis on quality wins and not getting so hung up about who took a random loss to another good team by a couple of points.

I'll be starting to work on my ballot in about twenty minutes or so. I don't typically blow up the whole thing at this time of year, but I probably will be today, just because things have been so unpredictable. As always, I'll use any many sources of information as possible to gauge which teams I think are the best.

All anyone can ask. It happens. I've been there in high school rankings when I used to have votes in that.

I hope all the voters do the same thing.

One example among several: for me John Carroll and Baldwin Wallace should be ranked ahead of Marietta until further evidence reveals itself. Better records, strong schedules, and won on the road.

When basically everyone has losses, the quality of wins becomes even more important. Pretty much everyone has shown they can have a bad night and lose.

Here we'll have to agree to disagree. I've seen Marietta in person. I watched most of both the JCU loss and the B-W loss. At no point did I think the team that won was the better team. It just didn't look that way. Marietta has some losses I don't like, but none of them are bad - not a single one. The other two both have bad losses, excusable maybe, but that factors in. I've got Marietta very near the bottom of my Top 25 and Baldwin Wallace just outside it. I'm going to need to see a larger body of work from them. I do think, though, that the OAC has four teams capable of winning games in the national tournament, which is pretty impressive.

For me they've gotta prove it on the court. Marietta might have some bigtime talent, but you can't drop games like that at home. The BW game I can see basically counting as a null, but they just got beat by John Carroll. They all 4 have similar schedule strength. I don't see much difference there.

And the more we see of St. Thomas, the more that looks like not as great a win as it seemed. Less like 'wow maybe St. Thomas is pretty good' to 'hrm maybe Marietta's not so great'.

So I dunno. I feel like if I was BW or JCU, I would feel pretty hard done to be ranked below Marietta, but I don't imagine they're too concerned since they control their own destiny in the league. I also don't think John Carroll's losses are bad. Mount Union and Hope have both played very strong schedules. Mount had a couple of rough ones early but not many are going to win at ONU, Hope or BW. That's what I mean about focusing too much on losses. Most of Hope's losses are similarly crazy -- I don't know how smart scheduling two different WIAC road games back to back was, but they did it. And they'd probably 4-2 in the OAC too if they played a couple more of them :)

I don't mean to just pick on Marietta and the OAC, just one of a few things that stands out to me as odd.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 07, 2018, 11:13:54 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 07, 2018, 10:59:36 PM
me - your attacks (and I see them as such)

No one else seems to have reacted to them as an attack. On the contrary it seems like I've started a conversation and lit a fire a bit.

That's all I'm really going to say about that.

I can understand the hesitancy on Emory & Henry. The number of gimmes on their early schedule makes it tough to figure what they are.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 08, 2018, 12:02:53 AM

Quote from: me on January 06, 2018, 04:49:17 PM
One look at the poll vs. the Massey ratings and it seems to me that it is very clear that the poll is a complete joke this year.

Me thinks some folks are mailing it in this year.

I can see where this would be attacking the integrity of voters ... perhaps a different set of words would be taken differently?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 08, 2018, 12:42:41 AM

Well too late for that.

This week is a good opportunity to prove those words wrong. No excuse for not going back to square one now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Mo on January 08, 2018, 01:53:06 AM

I think the quant models are interesting input for the voters, but are not the sole answer.

I think the college football playoff is a good example of why the numbers alone are not enough. UCF's strength of schedule leaves it out of the playoff, then it lays the wood to Auburn (who beat two of the playoff teams).

I think informed humans will still give you the best result.

If you want to improve the D2 and D3 basketball championships, I would suggest getting rid of the regional model, and filling the brackets with the best teams (regardless of geography).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 08, 2018, 06:43:10 AM

Quote from: Mr. Mo on January 08, 2018, 01:53:06 AM
I think the quant models are interesting input for the voters, but are not the sole answer.

I think the college football playoff is a good example of why the numbers alone are not enough. UCF's strength of schedule leaves it out of the playoff, then it lays the wood to Auburn (who beat two of the playoff teams).

I think informed humans will still give you the best result.

If you want to improve the D2 and D3 basketball championships, I would suggest getting rid of the regional model, and filling the brackets with the best teams (regardless of geography).

There's really no regional influence in d3 anymore. Since they went to "every d3 game is regional so long as you play 75% of games in your region" a teams whole schedule is selected, so every team gets a fair shot. There's no spots guaranteed (other than conference AQs). I'm not sure how D2 does it, but geography only plays into things for d3 in bracketing - and that's never going to change.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on January 08, 2018, 09:19:00 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 08, 2018, 06:43:10 AM
Quote from: Mr. Mo on January 08, 2018, 01:53:06 AM
I think the quant models are interesting input for the voters, but are not the sole answer.

I think the college football playoff is a good example of why the numbers alone are not enough. UCF’s strength of schedule leaves it out of the playoff, then it lays the wood to Auburn (who beat two of the playoff teams).

I think informed humans will still give you the best result.

If you want to improve the D2 and D3 basketball championships, I would suggest getting rid of the regional model, and filling the brackets with the best teams (regardless of geography).

There's really no regional influence in d3 anymore. Since they went to "every d3 game is regional so long as you play 75% of games in your region" a teams whole schedule is selected, so every team gets a fair shot. There's no spots guaranteed (other than conference AQs). I'm not sure how D2 does it, but geography only plays into things for d3 in bracketing - and that's never going to change.

D2 still does the regional model for their NCAA basketball tournaments, as well as practically all of their team sports. The Northeast 10, which is the local d2 conference where I live, is in the East Region. The East Region has their 3 conferences with AQs, and 5 at large bids go to the top 5 teams in the final East Region rankings that did not win their league tournaments. The #1 team in the region gets to host the regional tournament, and the winner of that regional tournament goes to the Elite Eight. The regional champions are reseeded at the Elite Eight. Each region has 3 conferences, so there are only 24 AQs for the d2 tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 08, 2018, 12:52:35 PM

DIII got rid of regional selections a long, long time ago (even though I refuse to believe it has been that long; I am not getting that old!). We have regional rankings, but those exist across the NCAA in all divisions. However, selections are not slotted per regions (specific number) like they do in DII.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 08, 2018, 02:56:50 PM

Hey Pat, I think I've debunked this before - you first brought it up when a MIAC team beat the undefeated D2 defending national champs, and boosted themselves and everyone touching it.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2018, 02:27:20 PM
I think generally the weakness for Massey is that it tends to highly rate Minnesota/Wisconsin teams, more so than they deserve. Not really sure why, but it's enough for me to not really pay much attention to Massey.

Like all of the computer ratings that rate across all of college basketball/football, Massey is fine-tuned so it makes sense at the Division I level. That doesn't mean it's going to continue to be well tuned at the other end of the spectrum.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 08, 2018, 03:00:57 PM

The system is what's rigged against UCF, not the metrics.

They should move to an 8 or 16 team playoff. In fact, a 32 team playoff emulating the D3 model would really really be the best, but, yanno, bowl games.

Quote from: Mr. Mo on January 08, 2018, 01:53:06 AM
I think the quant models are interesting input for the voters, but are not the sole answer.

I think the college football playoff is a good example of why the numbers alone are not enough. UCF's strength of schedule leaves it out of the playoff, then it lays the wood to Auburn (who beat two of the playoff teams).

I think informed humans will still give you the best result.

If you want to improve the D2 and D3 basketball championships, I would suggest getting rid of the regional model, and filling the brackets with the best teams (regardless of geography).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 08, 2018, 03:49:07 PM

I really don't care about D1 football. They have a 4-team playoff and there's complaints that it should be 8. The 9th place team will complain that it should be 16 and then the 17th place team will complain that it should be 24. Sooner or later, that 5-5 bowl eligible team will make the 64-team playoffs! Maybe they'll add play-in games called "1st round" games because they don't want to call them "play-in" games. Personally, I think it's dumb to have a regular season and then wait 6 weeks to play the playoffs.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 08, 2018, 07:38:41 PM

I think the D1 football playoffs are pretty much as they should be now.

Still a lot of emphasis on the regular season, and getting into the playoff is tough enough that there's a lot of focus and interest on that (as opposed to D1 basketball). And the time in between end of regular season and start of playoffs just gives time for everyone to take a breather, and then get fired up for the playoff games. And they've managed to keep at least some interest in some of the bowls, though you'll never convince me that Auburn was as motivated to play UCF as they were Alabama and Georgia.

Let's be honest, D3 football playoffs are usually a massive snoozefest until semis anyway. No one should want to recreate that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 08, 2018, 09:54:18 PM

Apparently the first round was missed by someone...

Do you just like to be negative? Where is the support of these teams, student-athletes, etc?

I think many would want to recreate playoffs considering the ONLY sport the NCAA has that doesn't have some kind of legit championship is CFP - and thus no NCAA title is given out and the NCAA is barely involved.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 4samuy on January 08, 2018, 10:50:43 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 07, 2018, 07:20:40 PM
Regarding the CCIW, I believe IWU should be the 2nd team voters are looking at (behind Augustana). North Central (9-4, 3-2) was the only other CCIW team to get votes in the Week #5 poll, but IWU (11-3, 4-1) won at North Central. With IWU's win vs Augustana this week, it seems IWU should clearly be the CCIW team with the second most poll points.

Good Wins
at Wheaton
at North Central
vs #2-Augustana
vs Elmhurst

Losses
vs Carthage
vs #10-Wash U
at Emory

Q,

I would agree with you for the most part, and the new poll seems to agree. But, I would look at both wheaton 10-3 (4-1) with wins over two top 25 teams Baldwin Wallace and at Whitworth and winners of 5 of their last 6 as well as North Central 9-4 (3-2) who look to really have started putting things together, winners of their last 6. Wheaton could really put their mark on the polls with a positive result at Augustana on Wednesday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 09, 2018, 11:33:20 AM

I voted for Wheaton and Illinois Wesleyan in my poster poll. I think I was the only one to vote for Wheaton.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D3ball1845 on January 09, 2018, 01:26:25 PM

Does anyone have some insight into why Salem State is still getting votes for the Top 25 sitting at 10-3? Sure, record wise they're a having a strong season. However, they had a 10+ loss to Williams, 48 point loss to MIT, and 17 point loss to Endicott. While two of these teams are ranked, and Endicott is a decent team, how can you ignore the 48 point loss? Additionally, their only wins that stand out to me are the wins against Tufts and Babson (who is barely sitting above .500 this season and is nowhere near the championship caliber team they were last year). Maybe it's just me, but something doesn't seem to be adding up right.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 09, 2018, 01:50:11 PM

I'm just guessing here, but I think the voters voting for Salem State are basically discounting the MIT result as an anomaly.

I've done that in casting my ballot on the women's side where that's the only way I could make sense of Tufts losing to Albright or CNU getting crushed by Thomas More. If I rely too heavily on those two results, then I'm not voting for two teams that I believe are among the 25 best in the country.

Similarly these voters might be saying, "I know MIT is better than Salem State but not 48 points better. So I'll keep MIT in front of Salem State but ignore the margin of victory."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D3ball1845 on January 09, 2018, 02:15:29 PM

Fair enough. I understand that the 48 point margin was likely an outlier and would not happen if the two teams met again. I just don't understand how they could be receiving votes at 10-3 without any quality wins besides Tufts and maybe uMass Dartmouth? I acknowledge the fact that I'm not aware of the SOS numbers either but I feel like the voters are giving them too much credit for their win over Babson. Again, they are certainly having a good year I just am puzzled how they are receiving Top 25 attention.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 09, 2018, 04:05:42 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2018, 02:27:20 PM
I think generally the weakness for Massey is that it tends to highly rate Minnesota/Wisconsin teams, more so than they deserve. Not really sure why, but it's enough for me to not really pay much attention to Massey.

Like all of the computer ratings that rate across all of college basketball/football, Massey is fine-tuned so it makes sense at the Division I level. That doesn't mean it's going to continue to be well tuned at the other end of the spectrum.

1. If you discount Massey, is your feeling the same about the ratings compiled by Matt Snyder, or do you feel they carry more weight/validity?
2. As far as the discounting of the Massey ratings and your feeling that they tend to give more credit to Minnesota and Wisconsin teams than they deserve, doesn't it seem a bit contradictory when you consider that the D3Hoops poll has 4 teams out of the Top 15 from WIS and MN? If there are 4 teams from those states in not just the Top 25, but the Top 15, how do you see Massey as giving too much credit to teams from those states?
3. Due to the preponderance of teams in the northeast and east, my impression is that there has historically been a fair amount of discussion among fans in the Great Lakes and Midwest/Central that centers on the fact many in those areas feel that northeastern and eastern teams often get more consideration/credit than might be deserved. As you would probably know more about this than others, do you have any sense that, either currently or moreso historically, such might be the case and, if so, to what degree?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 09, 2018, 04:52:35 PM

Quote from: AndOne on January 09, 2018, 04:05:42 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2018, 02:27:20 PM
I think generally the weakness for Massey is that it tends to highly rate Minnesota/Wisconsin teams, more so than they deserve. Not really sure why, but it's enough for me to not really pay much attention to Massey.

Like all of the computer ratings that rate across all of college basketball/football, Massey is fine-tuned so it makes sense at the Division I level. That doesn't mean it's going to continue to be well tuned at the other end of the spectrum.

1. If you discount Massey, is your feeling the same about the ratings compiled by Matt Snyder, or do you feel they carry more weight/validity?
2. As far as the discounting of the Massey ratings and your feeling that they tend to give more credit to Minnesota and Wisconsin teams than they deserve, doesn't it seem a bit contradictory when you consider that the D3Hoops poll has 4 teams out of the Top 15 from WIS and MN? If there are 4 teams from those states in not just the Top 25, but the Top 15, how do you see Massey as giving too much credit to teams from those states?
3. Due to the preponderance of teams in the northeast and east, my impression is that there has historically been a fair amount of discussion among fans in the Great Lakes and Midwest/Central that centers on the fact many in those areas feel that northeastern and eastern teams often get more consideration/credit than might be deserved. As you would probably know more about this than others, do you have any sense that, either currently or moreso historically, such might be the case and, if so, to what degree?

The problem is that Massey always gives the best SOS rankings to the teams from the WIAC and MIAC, regardless of the strength of those conferences. By the end of the year, I think Massey's pretty good, but early on it's a big jumble of non-conference results and those teams tend to play and beat "better" teams more often.

The number Matt Snyder puts together aren't rankings, they're just using the NCAA formula and an RPI to predict the regional rankings. I think just about anyone will admit that "the numbers" sometimes need a dose of the eye test now and then.

By the way, Massey's system is designed to be more accurate with more data (as I imagine any numerical system would be). Massey's numbers rely heavily (maybe too much) on SOS and one or two games against a D2 or NAIA1 squad can skew them more than is probably reflective of reality.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 09, 2018, 05:02:13 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 09, 2018, 04:52:35 PM
The number Matt Snyder puts together aren't rankings, they're just using the NCAA formula and an RPI to predict the regional rankings. I think just about anyone will admit that "the numbers" sometimes need a dose of the eye test now and then.

I started running true ratings numbers last season as well as the SOS data stuff. I'm mirroring the KenPom method using only D3 vs. D3 games.

http://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com/p/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency.html

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 09, 2018, 05:52:30 PM

Quote from: AndOne on January 09, 2018, 04:05:42 PM
1. If you discount Massey, is your feeling the same about the ratings compiled by Matt Snyder, or do you feel they carry more weight/validity?

Ryan and Matt cover this already -- but you can assume that if we link to it and not Massey, then we think there's some validity. Also, we know that Matt will make sure his ratings make Division III basketball sense, since that's where they focus.

Quote from: AndOne on January 09, 2018, 04:05:42 PM
2. As far as the discounting of the Massey ratings and your feeling that they tend to give more credit to Minnesota and Wisconsin teams than they deserve, doesn't it seem a bit contradictory when you consider that the D3Hoops poll has 4 teams out of the Top 15 from WIS and MN? If there are 4 teams from those states in not just the Top 25, but the Top 15, how do you see Massey as giving too much credit to teams from those states?

No doubt. But when you get Bethel at 26, St. Olaf 35, St. Thomas 38, Carleton 40 ... or UW-Stevens Point 29, UW-La Crosse 31, UW-Eau Claire 44, that's a significant difference. Division III has more than 15 teams, so it's good to compare a little deeper than just the top 15.

Quote from: AndOne on January 09, 2018, 04:05:42 PM
3. Due to the preponderance of teams in the northeast and east, my impression is that there has historically been a fair amount of discussion among fans in the Great Lakes and Midwest/Central that centers on the fact many in those areas feel that northeastern and eastern teams often get more consideration/credit than might be deserved. As you would probably know more about this than others, do you have any sense that, either currently or moreso historically, such might be the case and, if so, to what degree?

I don't think the East has gotten much credit from our voters at all. Empire 8 teams have been ranked 68 times in more than 200 polls (48 of them St. John Fisher), peaking at No. 3. Liberty League teams have been ranked 12 times, peaking at No. 16. NEAC teams have been ranked 12 times, peaking at No. 14. SUNYAC teams have been ranked the most -- 112 times, peaking at No. 4. The University of Rochester has been ranked 110 times by itself and has been No. 1. (Also the only East Region team to play in the Final Four in the time span covered by the poll.)

Northeastern teams have gotten credit. They've gotten to the Final Four (of course, their path is often easier) and have won four national titles -- three different programs, two different conferences. We all wish the NESCAC would play a few more conference games to help us and the regional and national committees compare them better, but haven't they performed on the final weekend enough to merit some credit?

Also, it's just good to remember that the Northeast has 76 teams, which makes it the largest region by a good amount. If all were equal, they'd get more teams ranked because there are more teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 09, 2018, 06:05:09 PM

Thank you.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 09, 2018, 06:15:13 PM

Quote from: AndOne on January 09, 2018, 06:05:09 PM
Thank you.

There certainly have been instances where individual NE teams have been overrated -- however, I'd have a hard time quantifying whether it would be a statistical outlier. Certainly there have been numerous times individual teams from power conferences in other regions have been overrated as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on January 09, 2018, 06:21:53 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 09, 2018, 04:52:35 PM
Quote from: AndOne on January 09, 2018, 04:05:42 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2018, 02:27:20 PM
I think generally the weakness for Massey is that it tends to highly rate Minnesota/Wisconsin teams, more so than they deserve. Not really sure why, but it's enough for me to not really pay much attention to Massey.

Like all of the computer ratings that rate across all of college basketball/football, Massey is fine-tuned so it makes sense at the Division I level. That doesn't mean it's going to continue to be well tuned at the other end of the spectrum.

1. If you discount Massey, is your feeling the same about the ratings compiled by Matt Snyder, or do you feel they carry more weight/validity?
2. As far as the discounting of the Massey ratings and your feeling that they tend to give more credit to Minnesota and Wisconsin teams than they deserve, doesn't it seem a bit contradictory when you consider that the D3Hoops poll has 4 teams out of the Top 15 from WIS and MN? If there are 4 teams from those states in not just the Top 25, but the Top 15, how do you see Massey as giving too much credit to teams from those states?
3. Due to the preponderance of teams in the northeast and east, my impression is that there has historically been a fair amount of discussion among fans in the Great Lakes and Midwest/Central that centers on the fact many in those areas feel that northeastern and eastern teams often get more consideration/credit than might be deserved. As you would probably know more about this than others, do you have any sense that, either currently or moreso historically, such might be the case and, if so, to what degree?

The problem is that Massey always gives the best SOS rankings to the teams from the WIAC and MIAC, regardless of the strength of those conferences. By the end of the year, I think Massey's pretty good, but early on it's a big jumble of non-conference results and those teams tend to play and beat "better" teams more often.

The number Matt Snyder puts together aren't rankings, they're just using the NCAA formula and an RPI to predict the regional rankings. I think just about anyone will admit that "the numbers" sometimes need a dose of the eye test now and then.

By the way, Massey's system is designed to be more accurate with more data (as I imagine any numerical system would be). Massey's numbers rely heavily (maybe too much) on SOS and one or two games against a D2 or NAIA1 squad can skew them more than is probably reflective of reality.

St. John's, according to hopefans great posts, was the only D3 team to beat a D2 team in St. Cloud state. I assume this helps the Johnnies with their ranking (which is number one) and then in turn bolsters all the Midwest teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 09, 2018, 07:52:55 PM

Finally got my blog out... kind of like I finally got my ballot done yesterday: http://bit.ly/2ALd0Qj

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 09, 2018, 11:56:44 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 09, 2018, 04:52:35 PM
Quote from: AndOne on January 09, 2018, 04:05:42 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2018, 02:27:20 PM
I think generally the weakness for Massey is that it tends to highly rate Minnesota/Wisconsin teams, more so than they deserve. Not really sure why, but it's enough for me to not really pay much attention to Massey.

Like all of the computer ratings that rate across all of college basketball/football, Massey is fine-tuned so it makes sense at the Division I level. That doesn't mean it's going to continue to be well tuned at the other end of the spectrum.

1. If you discount Massey, is your feeling the same about the ratings compiled by Matt Snyder, or do you feel they carry more weight/validity?
2. As far as the discounting of the Massey ratings and your feeling that they tend to give more credit to Minnesota and Wisconsin teams than they deserve, doesn't it seem a bit contradictory when you consider that the D3Hoops poll has 4 teams out of the Top 15 from WIS and MN? If there are 4 teams from those states in not just the Top 25, but the Top 15, how do you see Massey as giving too much credit to teams from those states?
3. Due to the preponderance of teams in the northeast and east, my impression is that there has historically been a fair amount of discussion among fans in the Great Lakes and Midwest/Central that centers on the fact many in those areas feel that northeastern and eastern teams often get more consideration/credit than might be deserved. As you would probably know more about this than others, do you have any sense that, either currently or moreso historically, such might be the case and, if so, to what degree?

The problem is that Massey always gives the best SOS rankings to the teams from the WIAC and MIAC, regardless of the strength of those conferences. By the end of the year, I think Massey's pretty good, but early on it's a big jumble of non-conference results and those teams tend to play and beat "better" teams more often.

The number Matt Snyder puts together aren't rankings, they're just using the NCAA formula and an RPI to predict the regional rankings. I think just about anyone will admit that "the numbers" sometimes need a dose of the eye test now and then.

By the way, Massey's system is designed to be more accurate with more data (as I imagine any numerical system would be). Massey's numbers rely heavily (maybe too much) on SOS and one or two games against a D2 or NAIA1 squad can skew them more than is probably reflective of reality.

Eh it's not designed to be more accurate with more data, it just is. But it has more than enough data now to have significant validity.

No one has provided any backup for their slamming the WIAC and MIAC other than their out of hand opinion. Again, 6 of the last 8 national champions. Would it be more if they didn't have to climb over each other to get to Salem? Maybe. Probably. And yes that's only one but we know there's more than one good team up north. There have been several win national titles.

If I'm going to get accused of slamming the pollsters, I think it's fair to be critical of that completely unsupported biased statement from two people associated with this site.

Massey almost always has the WIAC #1 and hardly ever is that wrong. MIAC is usually somewhere in the top 6 or 8 or so and rarely is that wrong.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 10, 2018, 01:39:32 AM

Just to put some facts to this:
Massey
2009: 1 WIAC, 2 CCIW, 3 NWC, 7 MIAC
2010: 1 WIAC, 2 MIAC, 3 CCIW
2011: 1 WIAC, 2 MIAC, 3 NESCAC, 4 CCIW
2012: 1 WIAC, 2 UAA, 3 CCIW, 4 NEWMAC, 16 MIAC
2013: 1 WIAC, 2 CCIW, 3 UAA, 10 MIAC
2014: 1 CCIW, 2 UAA, 3 WIAC, 4 NESCAC, 29 MIAC
2015: 1 CCIW, 2 WIAC, 3 UAA, 5 MIAC, 6 NESCAC
2016: 1 CCIW, 2 UAA, 3 MIAC, 4 WIAC, 5 NESCAC
2017: 1 WIAC, 2 NESCAC, 3 CCIW, 6 MIAC
2018: 1 WIAC, 2 CCIW, 3 OAC, 5 MIAC, 7 NESCAC

Does anyone dispute that the WIAC, CCIW and UAA are really outstanding leagues? Seems accurate to me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 10, 2018, 02:22:47 AM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on January 09, 2018, 06:21:53 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 09, 2018, 04:52:35 PM
Quote from: AndOne on January 09, 2018, 04:05:42 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2018, 02:27:20 PM
I think generally the weakness for Massey is that it tends to highly rate Minnesota/Wisconsin teams, more so than they deserve. Not really sure why, but it's enough for me to not really pay much attention to Massey.

Like all of the computer ratings that rate across all of college basketball/football, Massey is fine-tuned so it makes sense at the Division I level. That doesn't mean it's going to continue to be well tuned at the other end of the spectrum.

1. If you discount Massey, is your feeling the same about the ratings compiled by Matt Snyder, or do you feel they carry more weight/validity?
2. As far as the discounting of the Massey ratings and your feeling that they tend to give more credit to Minnesota and Wisconsin teams than they deserve, doesn't it seem a bit contradictory when you consider that the D3Hoops poll has 4 teams out of the Top 15 from WIS and MN? If there are 4 teams from those states in not just the Top 25, but the Top 15, how do you see Massey as giving too much credit to teams from those states?
3. Due to the preponderance of teams in the northeast and east, my impression is that there has historically been a fair amount of discussion among fans in the Great Lakes and Midwest/Central that centers on the fact many in those areas feel that northeastern and eastern teams often get more consideration/credit than might be deserved. As you would probably know more about this than others, do you have any sense that, either currently or moreso historically, such might be the case and, if so, to what degree?

The problem is that Massey always gives the best SOS rankings to the teams from the WIAC and MIAC, regardless of the strength of those conferences. By the end of the year, I think Massey's pretty good, but early on it's a big jumble of non-conference results and those teams tend to play and beat "better" teams more often.

The number Matt Snyder puts together aren't rankings, they're just using the NCAA formula and an RPI to predict the regional rankings. I think just about anyone will admit that "the numbers" sometimes need a dose of the eye test now and then.

By the way, Massey's system is designed to be more accurate with more data (as I imagine any numerical system would be). Massey's numbers rely heavily (maybe too much) on SOS and one or two games against a D2 or NAIA1 squad can skew them more than is probably reflective of reality.

St. John's, according to hopefans great posts, was the only D3 team to beat a D2 team in St. Cloud state. I assume this helps the Johnnies with their ranking (which is number one) and then in turn bolsters all the Midwest teams.

And St. Cloud is legit. They're not a lower D2. They're 11-4, and Massey has them 26th in D2. The two teams they've lost to since St. John's are 17 and 25.

It's easily the most impressive win by a D3 team this year. No close second.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on January 10, 2018, 04:12:01 AM

Quote from: me on January 10, 2018, 02:22:47 AM
Quote from: Smitty Oom on January 09, 2018, 06:21:53 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 09, 2018, 04:52:35 PM
Quote from: AndOne on January 09, 2018, 04:05:42 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2018, 02:27:20 PM
I think generally the weakness for Massey is that it tends to highly rate Minnesota/Wisconsin teams, more so than they deserve. Not really sure why, but it's enough for me to not really pay much attention to Massey.

Like all of the computer ratings that rate across all of college basketball/football, Massey is fine-tuned so it makes sense at the Division I level. That doesn't mean it's going to continue to be well tuned at the other end of the spectrum.

1. If you discount Massey, is your feeling the same about the ratings compiled by Matt Snyder, or do you feel they carry more weight/validity?
2. As far as the discounting of the Massey ratings and your feeling that they tend to give more credit to Minnesota and Wisconsin teams than they deserve, doesn’t it seem a bit contradictory when you consider that the D3Hoops poll has 4 teams out of the Top 15 from WIS and MN? If there are 4 teams from those states in not just the Top 25, but the Top 15, how do you see Massey as giving too much credit to teams from those states?
3. Due to the preponderance of teams in the northeast and east, my impression is that there has historically been a fair amount of discussion among fans in the Great Lakes and Midwest/Central that centers on the fact many in those areas feel that northeastern and eastern teams often get more consideration/credit than might be deserved. As you would probably know more about this than others, do you have any sense that, either currently or moreso historically, such might be the case and, if so, to what degree?

The problem is that Massey always gives the best SOS rankings to the teams from the WIAC and MIAC, regardless of the strength of those conferences. By the end of the year, I think Massey's pretty good, but early on it's a big jumble of non-conference results and those teams tend to play and beat "better" teams more often.

The number Matt Snyder puts together aren't rankings, they're just using the NCAA formula and an RPI to predict the regional rankings. I think just about anyone will admit that "the numbers" sometimes need a dose of the eye test now and then.

By the way, Massey's system is designed to be more accurate with more data (as I imagine any numerical system would be). Massey's numbers rely heavily (maybe too much) on SOS and one or two games against a D2 or NAIA1 squad can skew them more than is probably reflective of reality.

St. John's, according to hopefans great posts, was the only D3 team to beat a D2 team in St. Cloud state. I assume this helps the Johnnies with their ranking (which is number one) and then in turn bolsters all the Midwest teams.

And St. Cloud is legit. They're not a lower D2. They're 11-4, and Massey has them 26th in D2. The two teams they've lost to since St. John's are 17 and 25.

It's easily the most impressive win by a D3 team this year. No close second.

St. Cloud St is not receiving votes in the NABC Coaches or D2SIDA Top 25 polls this week, however. . D2 uses the regional model in competitions, and they mandate that a D2 team not play a national schedule-- it is required that a DII team play at least 18 of their 22 DII mandated regular season contests against teams in their defined evaluation region. Therefore, a high Massey rating in DII may not translate to a top 25 national ranking in DII. The only thing you can conclude is that St Cloud State is one of the better teams this season in DII's Central Region.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 10, 2018, 11:35:38 AM

Issues I have with Massey and Bennett can be best explained this way:

Augustana's record on Massey's website has them with three losses. They are counting the game against Illinois on Augustana's resume. It was an exhibition game for Augustana. It is a quirk with lower divisions, but it happens (unlike Catholic who chose to play Maryland as a real contest). Yes, Illinois counts the game, by rule, as a real game, but Augustana didn't.

That game greatly impacts Augustana's resume with Massey and thus everyone they play. And they aren't the only one. The struggle with Massey to not count games is frustrating and in the Central part of the country a lot of these cross over games affect the system in my opinion. I know there are cross-over games, but I have not found any games against DII, DI, NAIA, etc. to have any impact on Division III... but Massey and Bennett is affected.

Sadly, DIII can't have their games isolated to just the division or games that actually count on a consistent basis and thus the rankings are affected.

I also went through both rankings this week with the 47 teams I was looking at for Top 25 reasons. I found some odd discrepencies across the board. I can write them up later, but I was shocked at how one team ranked high in both despite horrible SOS numbers (Bennett) while another with better numbers was ranked lower.

Another thing about Bennett, I don't like how the points for and points against seem to have a significant impact. The game is far too complicated to use points for and against as part of a barometer. John Carroll puts up a ton of points, while giving up a ton as well, does that mean they are better or worse than a team who doesn't need to score a lot because their defense is so stingy?

I too have found the WIAC and MIAC ranked highly by these systems, but the national championships isn't a good enough excuse to say it is right. Sure, the top teams have won. Great. No one is denying that. It is the number of teams so highly ranked in the MIAC, especially, that gets odd. I have stated the WIAC may be the best conference in the country this year with the most depth, so I am not surprised if they rank well. I have also said the MIAC is far more competitive than it has ever been. However, I don't feel more than three or four of the MIAC teams could compete well on a national level and yet the rankings make it seem like six or seven (off the cuff) could compete. That just doesn't add up to reality in Division III.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 10, 2018, 12:39:51 PM

A. Dave, the affect is overstated, and by the end of the year, it's one small data point in a big sea of connected data points. It'd rather have unbiased opinions. In fact, I think these can help a D3 team just as much as they hurt them. Linfield's close exhibition loss to CWU probably helped their ranking in the long run.

Also, Dave, can you substantiate 'greatly effects' for Augie's loss to Illinois, when in fact they're #5 in Massey and were on top of Massey before their loss to IWU? That's not 'greatly effects'.

B. The 'eye test' is something that these systems are trying to eliminate - shaking up what we think we know with data.

C. Early on, with any system, there's part of the last year baked in. Over time that disappears.

D. I do feel that the one year a middling MIAC team beat a MIAC team that beat the undefeated defending national champs got peoples panties in a bunch. But anomalous results effect every rating system, human based or computer based. Remember, it's just one data point out of several interlocking data points in a big data universe. Trust data.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 10, 2018, 12:43:48 PM

The 5th and 6th place team from any year in the WIAC would win a lot of D3 leagues.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 10, 2018, 12:45:27 PM

Quote from: deiscanton on January 10, 2018, 04:12:01 AM
St. Cloud St is not receiving votes in the NABC Coaches or D2SIDA Top 25 polls this week, however. . D2 uses the regional model in competitions, and they mandate that a D2 team not play a national schedule-- it is required that a DII team play at least 18 of their 22 DII mandated regular season contests against teams in their defined evaluation region. Therefore, a high Massey rating in DII may not translate to a top 25 national ranking in DII. The only thing you can conclude is that St Cloud State is one of the better teams this season in DII's Central Region.

There is enough crossover games in D2 through the division to allow the data points to all connect, and thus give a reasonable rating nationally.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 10, 2018, 12:51:17 PM

Quote from: sac on January 10, 2018, 12:43:48 PM
The 5th and 6th place team from any year in the WIAC would win a lot of D3 leagues.

Notice... I didn't mention the WIAC when talking about the 5th and 6th place teams. This year, I think the WIAC may be the deepest it has ever been starting at the top. I have stated this numerous times through the year on the boards and on air. I mentioned the MIAC.

Quote from: smedindy on January 10, 2018, 12:39:51 PM
A. Dave, the affect is overstated, and by the end of the year, it's one small data point in a big sea of connected data points. It'd rather have unbiased opinions. In fact, I think these can help a D3 team just as much as they hurt them. Linfield's close exhibition loss to CWU probably helped their ranking in the long run.

Also, Dave, can you substantiate 'greatly effects' for Augie's loss to Illinois, when in fact they're #5 in Massey and were on top of Massey before their loss to IWU? That's not 'greatly effects'.

B. The 'eye test' is something that these systems are trying to eliminate - shaking up what we think we know with data.

C. Early on, with any system, there's part of the last year baked in. Over time that disappears.

D. I do feel that the one year a middling MIAC team beat a MIAC team that beat the undefeated defending national champs got peoples panties in a bunch. But anomalous results effect every rating system, human based or computer based. Remember, it's just one data point out of several interlocking data points in a big data universe. Trust data.

I have also stated that at this point in the season I have trouble with Massey and Bennett. Overall, by some time in February, the numbers come together for me and I appreciate the data. The same goes for the SOS and why I understand why national committees don't like releasing regional rankings any earlier. The data is all over the place. I get that.

Thus, people put a lot of stock in numbers that even by your admission aren't quite hashed out. I understand they aren't quite hashed out, but then the arguments come in that Bennett and Massey are being ignored when clearly they aren't quite there in terms of measuring teams. The data isn't there and it can change wildly. Bennett and Massey are far more interesting later in the season, as is the SOS, when that data has come together more, past season's info is further in the rear-view mirror, etc.

I just don't trust the numbers completely this time of the year. I trust them more later in the year. Thus, I don't think telling Top 25 voters to look at those rankings and put more stock in them right now is a reasonable argument. I stated in this week's blog that I did peak at Massey and Bennett just to see what they were saying and while some things made sense others were all over the place. I am not going to put a lot of stock in rankings that need more data.

And my Augustana question is simple: how would they rank if NOT for the Illinois game. How much is it pushing that ranking up. I have Augustana as my second best team. That is my opinion. Massey has them fifth, but includes a game that shouldn't be included. I am curious, if Massey and Bennett rankings are to be at least respected or considered, what the actual numbers would be without games that shouldn't be considered.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 10, 2018, 12:51:45 PM

Do we know for a fact that Massey considers Division I and Division II games in the rankings?

I have always assumed so, but was never 100% sure because Massey does differentiate between the divisions. If you go to the Division III ratings and click on a particular team profile. Then, click on Division III on the menu bar, both the record and the list of results changes to reflect Division III only.

I do not follow Massey close enough to watch for evidence, but when I look at a team such as No. 151 Eureka, it is hard for me to imagine that they should be ranked so high when we know Massey considers margin of victory and they were defeated by three Division I teams and one Division II team by an average margin of victory of 35 points. My guess is that these teams are excluded from the rankings.

Then again, Eureka may be proof that the other divisions are being considered. Maybe Eureka is rewarded for playing significantly higher rated teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 10, 2018, 12:55:45 PM

At present, Massey has 6 WIAC and MIAC teams in his top 25, Matt Snyder has 4 on his efficiency chart, the other two are just outside his top 25 at 31 and 32.

Using Matt's RPI chart, he either has 6 or 7 in the top 25.

There doesn't appear to be anything egregiously biased about massey towards the WIAC and MIAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 10, 2018, 12:58:57 PM

The fact that Massey HAD Augie at #1 before their loss to IWU invalidates your concern. I'm sure other voters had Augie around 5. With 530 points, they're losing 70 points somewhere among the 25 voters from being a unanimous #2.

Right now is not like December, which I do think is too early to really rely on the ratings. Now, conferences have started and most teams have 10-12 games under their belt.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 10, 2018, 01:13:12 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 10, 2018, 12:58:57 PM
The fact that Massey HAD Augie at #1 before their loss to IWU invalidates your concern. I'm sure other voters had Augie around 5. With 530 points, they're losing 70 points somewhere among the 25 voters from being a unanimous #2.

Right now is not like December, which I do think is too early to really rely on the ratings. Now, conferences have started and most teams have 10-12 games under their belt.

Just curious - how in the world does any of that invalidate my concern? I am curious where Augie would rank without the game. That includes them being number one at one point. And I am not comparing it to the voters - again, I have had Augie #2 almost by default for weeks now. I am simply asking... where would Augie actually slot in in Massey without the Illinois game as part of their data resume. Again, just because they fell out of the top spot doesn't actually invalidate anything.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 10, 2018, 01:49:08 PM

Quote from: WUH on January 10, 2018, 12:51:45 PM
Do we know for a fact that Massey considers Division I and Division II games in the rankings?

I have always assumed so, but was never 100% sure because Massey does differentiate between the divisions. If you go to the Division III ratings and click on a particular team profile. Then, click on Division III on the menu bar, both the record and the list of results changes to reflect Division III only.

I do not follow Massey close enough to watch for evidence, but when I look at a team such as No. 151 Eureka, it is hard for me to imagine that they should be ranked so high when we know Massey considers margin of victory and they were defeated by three Division I teams and one Division II team by an average margin of victory of 35 points. My guess is that these teams are excluded from the rankings.

Then again, Eureka may be proof that the other divisions are being considered. Maybe Eureka is rewarded for playing significantly higher rated teams.

Massey does include D1, D2, NAIA games in the calculations, and also takes into account the relative ratings of the team. A 35-point loss to a D1 is not a bad result for the average D3 team.

In a good system, a win is not always positive (in terms of rating) and neither is a loss always a negative. A single-digit road loss to Whitman should boost the rating of most D3 teams. Similarly, a single-possession home win over Goucher (sorry Dave!) should been seen as a negative for most teams.

When it comes to Augustana/Illinois, my guess is that it has very little bearing on their ranking. I think (and we're on very dangerous ground here with me thinking) I remember that Massey discounts the results of games between extremely mismatched teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 10, 2018, 01:58:49 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 10, 2018, 01:49:08 PM
Massey does include D1, D2, NAIA games in the calculations, and also takes into account the relative ratings of the team. A 35-point loss to a D1 is not a bad result for the average D3 team.

Both possibilities seemed plausible.

Thanks for the clarification.

I wonder what the thought process is for including teams across divisions and sanctioning bodies.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 10, 2018, 02:04:41 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 10, 2018, 01:49:08 PM
Quote from: WUH on January 10, 2018, 12:51:45 PM
Do we know for a fact that Massey considers Division I and Division II games in the rankings?

I have always assumed so, but was never 100% sure because Massey does differentiate between the divisions. If you go to the Division III ratings and click on a particular team profile. Then, click on Division III on the menu bar, both the record and the list of results changes to reflect Division III only.

I do not follow Massey close enough to watch for evidence, but when I look at a team such as No. 151 Eureka, it is hard for me to imagine that they should be ranked so high when we know Massey considers margin of victory and they were defeated by three Division I teams and one Division II team by an average margin of victory of 35 points. My guess is that these teams are excluded from the rankings.

Then again, Eureka may be proof that the other divisions are being considered. Maybe Eureka is rewarded for playing significantly higher rated teams.

Massey does include D1, D2, NAIA games in the calculations, and also takes into account the relative ratings of the team. A 35-point loss to a D1 is not a bad result for the average D3 team.

In a good system, a win is not always positive (in terms of rating) and neither is a loss always a negative. A single-digit road loss to Whitman should boost the rating of most D3 teams. Similarly, a single-possession home win over Goucher (sorry Dave!) should been seen as a negative for most teams.

When it comes to Augustana/Illinois, my guess is that it has very little bearing on their ranking. I think (and we're on very dangerous ground here with me thinking) I remember that Massey discounts the results of games between extremely mismatched teams.

Per the shot at Goucher... no worries from me. Fine example. I would have used it, too. :)

As for the last part... the problem I have is that it isn't a game for Augustana. It shouldn't factor in at all. If Augustana played that game as a real game, so be it. I wouldn't like the non-DIII games considered, but it is a game on their schedule like Catholic's game against Maryland. However, Augustana played that game as an exhibition game. For Augustana, it does not count. The fact it is factored in is an issue for me. And Augustana is not the only team in this boat and thus why I think the numbers start to get fuzzy.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 10, 2018, 02:49:46 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 10, 2018, 02:04:41 PM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 10, 2018, 01:49:08 PM
Quote from: WUH on January 10, 2018, 12:51:45 PM
Do we know for a fact that Massey considers Division I and Division II games in the rankings?

I have always assumed so, but was never 100% sure because Massey does differentiate between the divisions. If you go to the Division III ratings and click on a particular team profile. Then, click on Division III on the menu bar, both the record and the list of results changes to reflect Division III only.

I do not follow Massey close enough to watch for evidence, but when I look at a team such as No. 151 Eureka, it is hard for me to imagine that they should be ranked so high when we know Massey considers margin of victory and they were defeated by three Division I teams and one Division II team by an average margin of victory of 35 points. My guess is that these teams are excluded from the rankings.

Then again, Eureka may be proof that the other divisions are being considered. Maybe Eureka is rewarded for playing significantly higher rated teams.

Massey does include D1, D2, NAIA games in the calculations, and also takes into account the relative ratings of the team. A 35-point loss to a D1 is not a bad result for the average D3 team.

In a good system, a win is not always positive (in terms of rating) and neither is a loss always a negative. A single-digit road loss to Whitman should boost the rating of most D3 teams. Similarly, a single-possession home win over Goucher (sorry Dave!) should been seen as a negative for most teams.

When it comes to Augustana/Illinois, my guess is that it has very little bearing on their ranking. I think (and we're on very dangerous ground here with me thinking) I remember that Massey discounts the results of games between extremely mismatched teams.

Per the shot at Goucher... no worries from me. Fine example. I would have used it, too. :)

As for the last part... the problem I have is that it isn't a game for Augustana. It shouldn't factor in at all. If Augustana played that game as a real game, so be it. I wouldn't like the non-DIII games considered, but it is a game on their schedule like Catholic's game against Maryland. However, Augustana played that game as an exhibition game. For Augustana, it does not count. The fact it is factored in is an issue for me. And Augustana is not the only team in this boat and thus why I think the numbers start to get fuzzy.

I agree that games that are exhibitions for one and not the other are problematic. I think the difference it makes (particularly once we get to January) are quite small. Particularly if you're using Massey et al. as a general guide rather than hard and fast numbers

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 10, 2018, 03:01:40 PM

Again - I don't disagree that as we get further towards February, things get less minute and I am fine with that... and said I look at Bennett and Massey when we get to February because I trust their numbers more.

Thus... those who get on voters for not using the info in early January should understand why.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 10, 2018, 05:26:34 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 10, 2018, 12:39:51 PM
D. I do feel that the one year a middling MIAC team beat a MIAC team that beat the undefeated defending national champs got peoples panties in a bunch. But anomalous results effect every rating system, human based or computer based. Remember, it's just one data point out of several interlocking data points in a big data universe. Trust data.

You've mentioned this twice but just to clarify -- I have had this opinion of Massey's ratings effectiveness at the D-III basketball level for longer than that.

Trust data, sure. Trust the formula, though ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 10, 2018, 08:49:16 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 10, 2018, 11:35:38 AM
Issues I have with Massey and Bennett can be best explained this way:

Augustana's record on Massey's website has them with three losses. They are counting the game against Illinois on Augustana's resume. It was an exhibition game for Augustana. It is a quirk with lower divisions, but it happens (unlike Catholic who chose to play Maryland as a real contest). Yes, Illinois counts the game, by rule, as a real game, but Augustana didn't.

That game greatly impacts Augustana's resume with Massey and thus everyone they play. And they aren't the only one. The struggle with Massey to not count games is frustrating and in the Central part of the country a lot of these cross over games affect the system in my opinion. I know there are cross-over games, but I have not found any games against DII, DI, NAIA, etc. to have any impact on Division III... but Massey and Bennett is affected.

Sadly, DIII can't have their games isolated to just the division or games that actually count on a consistent basis and thus the rankings are affected.

I also went through both rankings this week with the 47 teams I was looking at for Top 25 reasons. I found some odd discrepencies across the board. I can write them up later, but I was shocked at how one team ranked high in both despite horrible SOS numbers (Bennett) while another with better numbers was ranked lower.

Another thing about Bennett, I don't like how the points for and points against seem to have a significant impact. The game is far too complicated to use points for and against as part of a barometer. John Carroll puts up a ton of points, while giving up a ton as well, does that mean they are better or worse than a team who doesn't need to score a lot because their defense is so stingy?

I too have found the WIAC and MIAC ranked highly by these systems, but the national championships isn't a good enough excuse to say it is right. Sure, the top teams have won. Great. No one is denying that. It is the number of teams so highly ranked in the MIAC, especially, that gets odd. I have stated the WIAC may be the best conference in the country this year with the most depth, so I am not surprised if they rank well. I have also said the MIAC is far more competitive than it has ever been. However, I don't feel more than three or four of the MIAC teams could compete well on a national level and yet the rankings make it seem like six or seven (off the cuff) could compete. That just doesn't add up to reality in Division III.

MIAC plays good teams, particularly in the WIAC, and does well enough to get some lift from it. If they were just getting hammered every year it would show. In the year when they were ranked 29th I imagine they did just that.

The WIAC is just a great league.

I'm not bothered about the D1 games because the fact that they count for D1 means that they're going to play to win, and the algo is not going to punish a D3 team for losing to a good D1. But if you can beat one, I'm sure it would reward that handsomely, and surely should. If they were exhibitions for D1 and counted for D3, you could have a problem with D1s not taking them seriously. But it's not, so that's not a problem.

Also this is a pretty new development in that regard having the games that count for one and not the other, and the WIAC being highly ranked is much much longer-term than that.

I'm hearing a lot of "well they just can't be that good, I don't think they are and so they aren't".

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 10, 2018, 08:51:51 PM

Quote from: WUH on January 10, 2018, 12:51:45 PM
Do we know for a fact that Massey considers Division I and Division II games in the rankings?

I have always assumed so, but was never 100% sure because Massey does differentiate between the divisions. If you go to the Division III ratings and click on a particular team profile. Then, click on Division III on the menu bar, both the record and the list of results changes to reflect Division III only.

I do not follow Massey close enough to watch for evidence, but when I look at a team such as No. 151 Eureka, it is hard for me to imagine that they should be ranked so high when we know Massey considers margin of victory and they were defeated by three Division I teams and one Division II team by an average margin of victory of 35 points. My guess is that these teams are excluded from the rankings.

Then again, Eureka may be proof that the other divisions are being considered. Maybe Eureka is rewarded for playing significantly higher rated teams.

Essentially, it's all one college basketball ranking that is then split into divisions. So yes, definitely games vs. D1 and D2 are considered, as IMO they should be.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on January 10, 2018, 09:16:13 PM

Quote from: me on January 10, 2018, 08:49:16 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 10, 2018, 11:35:38 AM
Issues I have with Massey and Bennett can be best explained this way:

Augustana's record on Massey's website has them with three losses. They are counting the game against Illinois on Augustana's resume. It was an exhibition game for Augustana. It is a quirk with lower divisions, but it happens (unlike Catholic who chose to play Maryland as a real contest). Yes, Illinois counts the game, by rule, as a real game, but Augustana didn't.

That game greatly impacts Augustana's resume with Massey and thus everyone they play. And they aren't the only one. The struggle with Massey to not count games is frustrating and in the Central part of the country a lot of these cross over games affect the system in my opinion. I know there are cross-over games, but I have not found any games against DII, DI, NAIA, etc. to have any impact on Division III... but Massey and Bennett is affected.

Sadly, DIII can't have their games isolated to just the division or games that actually count on a consistent basis and thus the rankings are affected.

I also went through both rankings this week with the 47 teams I was looking at for Top 25 reasons. I found some odd discrepencies across the board. I can write them up later, but I was shocked at how one team ranked high in both despite horrible SOS numbers (Bennett) while another with better numbers was ranked lower.

Another thing about Bennett, I don't like how the points for and points against seem to have a significant impact. The game is far too complicated to use points for and against as part of a barometer. John Carroll puts up a ton of points, while giving up a ton as well, does that mean they are better or worse than a team who doesn't need to score a lot because their defense is so stingy?

I too have found the WIAC and MIAC ranked highly by these systems, but the national championships isn't a good enough excuse to say it is right. Sure, the top teams have won. Great. No one is denying that. It is the number of teams so highly ranked in the MIAC, especially, that gets odd. I have stated the WIAC may be the best conference in the country this year with the most depth, so I am not surprised if they rank well. I have also said the MIAC is far more competitive than it has ever been. However, I don't feel more than three or four of the MIAC teams could compete well on a national level and yet the rankings make it seem like six or seven (off the cuff) could compete. That just doesn't add up to reality in Division III.

MIAC plays good teams, particularly in the WIAC, and does well enough to get some lift from it. If they were just getting hammered every year it would show. In the year when they were ranked 29th I imagine they did just that.

The WIAC is just a great league.

I'm not bothered about the D1 games because the fact that they count for D1 means that they're going to play to win, and the algo is not going to punish a D3 team for losing to a good D1. But if you can beat one, I'm sure it would reward that handsomely, and surely should. If they were exhibitions for D1 and counted for D3, you could have a problem with D1s not taking them seriously. But it's not, so that's not a problem.

Also this is a pretty new development in that regard having the games that count for one and not the other, and the WIAC being highly ranked is much much longer-term than that.

I'm hearing a lot of "well they just can't be that good, I don't think they are and so they aren't".

I am a MIAC guy, and I was shocked how high some of the teams were. I really like the Johnnies this year but I was stunned when I noticed they were no.1 according to Massey. Teams like Gustavus and St. Olaf are solid middle of the road teams but should not be considered in the top 50 teams in all of division 3. I personally think that although it is more competitive this year, the MIAC overall is down in talent when compared to the past couple years, especially 2015-2016 when the Tommies won the national championship. The top teams like John's and Augsburg are very solid, but the middle and lower tiers are (and should) be easier wins for the top tier this year.

Me, the MIAC does play a lot of games against the WIAC, but the majority of non0conference games are against UMAC teams. And frankly, those are not good games/teams for the most part. So I wouldn't say they necessarily have a tougher non-conference schedule than others.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 10, 2018, 09:20:43 PM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on January 10, 2018, 09:16:13 PM
Quote from: me on January 10, 2018, 08:49:16 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 10, 2018, 11:35:38 AM
Issues I have with Massey and Bennett can be best explained this way:

Augustana's record on Massey's website has them with three losses. They are counting the game against Illinois on Augustana's resume. It was an exhibition game for Augustana. It is a quirk with lower divisions, but it happens (unlike Catholic who chose to play Maryland as a real contest). Yes, Illinois counts the game, by rule, as a real game, but Augustana didn't.

That game greatly impacts Augustana's resume with Massey and thus everyone they play. And they aren't the only one. The struggle with Massey to not count games is frustrating and in the Central part of the country a lot of these cross over games affect the system in my opinion. I know there are cross-over games, but I have not found any games against DII, DI, NAIA, etc. to have any impact on Division III... but Massey and Bennett is affected.

Sadly, DIII can't have their games isolated to just the division or games that actually count on a consistent basis and thus the rankings are affected.

I also went through both rankings this week with the 47 teams I was looking at for Top 25 reasons. I found some odd discrepencies across the board. I can write them up later, but I was shocked at how one team ranked high in both despite horrible SOS numbers (Bennett) while another with better numbers was ranked lower.

Another thing about Bennett, I don't like how the points for and points against seem to have a significant impact. The game is far too complicated to use points for and against as part of a barometer. John Carroll puts up a ton of points, while giving up a ton as well, does that mean they are better or worse than a team who doesn't need to score a lot because their defense is so stingy?

I too have found the WIAC and MIAC ranked highly by these systems, but the national championships isn't a good enough excuse to say it is right. Sure, the top teams have won. Great. No one is denying that. It is the number of teams so highly ranked in the MIAC, especially, that gets odd. I have stated the WIAC may be the best conference in the country this year with the most depth, so I am not surprised if they rank well. I have also said the MIAC is far more competitive than it has ever been. However, I don't feel more than three or four of the MIAC teams could compete well on a national level and yet the rankings make it seem like six or seven (off the cuff) could compete. That just doesn't add up to reality in Division III.

MIAC plays good teams, particularly in the WIAC, and does well enough to get some lift from it. If they were just getting hammered every year it would show. In the year when they were ranked 29th I imagine they did just that.

The WIAC is just a great league.

I'm not bothered about the D1 games because the fact that they count for D1 means that they're going to play to win, and the algo is not going to punish a D3 team for losing to a good D1. But if you can beat one, I'm sure it would reward that handsomely, and surely should. If they were exhibitions for D1 and counted for D3, you could have a problem with D1s not taking them seriously. But it's not, so that's not a problem.

Also this is a pretty new development in that regard having the games that count for one and not the other, and the WIAC being highly ranked is much much longer-term than that.

I'm hearing a lot of "well they just can't be that good, I don't think they are and so they aren't".

I am a MIAC guy, and I was shocked how high some of the teams were. I really like the Johnnies this year but I was stunned when I noticed they were no.1 according to Massey. Teams like Gustavus and St. Olaf are solid middle of the road teams but should not be considered in the top 50 teams in all of division 3. I personally think that although it is more competitive this year, the MIAC overall is down in talent when compared to the past couple years, especially 2015-2016 when the Tommies won the national championship. The top teams like John's and Augsburg are very solid, but the middle and lower tiers are (and should) be easier wins for the top tier this year.

Me, the MIAC does play a lot of games against the WIAC, but the majority of non0conference games are against UMAC teams. And frankly, those are not good games/teams for the most part. So I wouldn't say they necessarily have a tougher non-conference schedule than others.

Why shouldn't they be considered in top 50? Half or more of D3 treats athletics as recreational and is hardly ever going to be good.

I guess we'll see how much depth there is in the league. It looks so far like a lot. Behind St. John's is 6 teams with either 2 or 3 league losses.

St. John's non-con win we know.
Augsburg beat Wartburg and Loras. Bethel beat UWL and Simpson. St. Olaf beat Stevens Point and Eau Claire (probably a big part of why people don't think they're very good). St. Thomas beat Dickinson. Carleton beat Platteville. Hamline beat Williams.

There are obvious reasons to think there are several capable MIAC teams this year.

And Bethel beats Augsburg on the road. And Hamline beats Carleton.

This is what happens in power conferences. They beat each other up. It's not a sign of weakness, it's a sign of strength.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 10, 2018, 11:11:37 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Whitman	14-0	def. #3 Whitworth, 91-75; 01/12 vs. George Fox
#2	530	Augustana	11-3	LOST to Wheaton (Ill.), 81-86; 01/13 vs. Carroll
#3	512	Whitworth	12-2	LOST at #1 Whitman, 75-91; 01/13 vs. George Fox
#4	479	Williams	11-2	01/12 vs. #44 Tufts; 01/13 vs. Bates
#5	473	UW-Whitewater	12-2	won at UW-Eau Claire, 78-65; 01/13 vs. UW-Stout
#6	461	Washington U.	10-2	01/12 vs. Brandeis; 01/14 vs. New York University
#7	459	UW-River Falls	11-2	def. #27 UW-Platteville, 91-84; 01/13 at #13 UW-Oshkosh
#8	458	York (Pa.)	14-0	def. Penn State-Harrisburg, 88-78; 01/13 vs. T#33 Christopher Newport
#9	452	Swarthmore	12-1	won at McDaniel, 80-49; 01/11 vs. Johns Hopkins; 01/13 at #22 Franklin and Marshall
#10	359	Wittenberg	14-0	won at Wabash, 72-58; 01/13 at T#35 Wooster
#11	352	MIT	13-1	def. Emerson, 83-69; 01/13 at Wheaton (Mass.)
#12	349	Lycoming	15-1	def. #38 Albright, 86-85; 01/13 at Arcadia
#13	345	UW-Oshkosh	12-2	def. UW-Stout, 89-66; 01/13 vs. #7 UW-River Falls
#14	306	Wesleyan	10-2	01/12 at #18 Hamilton; 01/13 at Amherst
#15	287	St. John's	11-1	won at Carleton, 69-68; 01/13 at T#39 Augsburg
#16	258	Middlebury	9-3	def. Morrisville State, 85-64; 01/12 vs. Bates; 01/13 vs. #44 Tufts
#17	249	Ohio Wesleyan	10-4	LOST to Hiram, 79-88; 01/13 at Allegheny
#18	219	Hamilton	12-0	01/12 vs. #14 Wesleyan; 01/13 vs. Connecticut College
#19	115	Marietta	11-3	won at Mount Union, 78-57; 01/13 at Heidelberg
#20	111	Emory	10-2	01/12 vs. Carnegie Mellon; 01/14 vs. Case Western Reserve
#21	84	Wartburg	11-3	def. Luther, 73-51; 01/13 at Simpson
#22	77	Franklin and Marshall	11-2	LOST at Muhlenberg, 80-82; 01/11 at Washington College; 01/13 vs. #9 Swarthmore
#23	70	John Carroll	12-2	def. Otterbein, 122-66; 01/13 at Wilmington
#24	59	Eastern Connecticut	12-2	def. Mass-Dartmouth, 101-77; 01/13 at Southern Maine
#25	56	Baldwin Wallace	11-3	LOST to Ohio Northern, 73-80; 01/13 at Otterbein

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	55	New Jersey City	12-2	def. Stockton, 81-67; 01/13 at T#35 Ramapo
#27	48	UW-Platteville	12-2	LOST at #7 UW-River Falls, 84-91; 01/13 vs. UW-La Crosse
#28	46	St. Norbert	11-2	01/12 at Illinois College; 01/13 at Monmouth
#29	40	Juniata	13-1	def. Goucher, 64-53; 01/13 at Drew
#30	39	Skidmore	8-3	LOST at Vassar, 59-67; 01/12 at Rochester Tech; 01/13 at Hobart
#31	25	Rochester	9-3	01/12 vs. Case Western Reserve; 01/14 vs. Carnegie Mellon
#32	23	Illinois Wesleyan	11-3	01/13 at North Park
T#33	13	Christopher Newport	11-3	won at Southern Virginia, 83-58; 01/13 at #8 York (Pa.)
T#33	13	Nichols	10-2	won at Curry, 100-68; 01/11 vs. Salve Regina; 01/13 at Wentworth
T#35	11	Ramapo	11-4	won at Rowan, 86-76; 01/13 vs. #26 New Jersey City
T#35	11	Wooster	11-3	def. Allegheny, 79-58; 01/13 vs. #10 Wittenberg
#37	10	Salem State	11-3	def. Fitchburg State, 80-63; 01/13 at Framingham State
#38	9	Albright	11-3	LOST at #12 Lycoming, 85-86; 01/13 vs. Messiah
T#39	7	Augsburg	11-3	won at St. Thomas, 62-52; LOST to Bethel, 67-78; 01/13 vs. #15 St. John's
T#39	7	Buena Vista	12-2	won at Dubuque, 96-87; 01/13 vs. Loras
T#39	7	Emory and Henry	13-1	def. Roanoke, 75-73; 01/13 at Hampden-Sydney
T#39	7	Hanover	10-4	def. Earlham, 90-54; 01/13 at Anderson
#43	4	Nebraska Wesleyan	12-2	LOST at Loras, 87-97 OT; 01/13 vs. Dubuque
#44	3	Tufts	11-3	01/12 at #4 Williams; 01/13 at #16 Middlebury
#45	2	Lebanon Valley	11-5	LOST to Arcadia, 82-94

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 10, 2018, 11:20:04 PM

Quote from: me on January 10, 2018, 09:17:19 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 10, 2018, 05:26:34 PM
Quote from: smedindy on January 10, 2018, 12:39:51 PM
D. I do feel that the one year a middling MIAC team beat a MIAC team that beat the undefeated defending national champs got peoples panties in a bunch. But anomalous results effect every rating system, human based or computer based. Remember, it's just one data point out of several interlocking data points in a big data universe. Trust data.

You've mentioned this twice but just to clarify -- I have had this opinion of Massey's ratings effectiveness at the D-III basketball level for longer than that.

Trust data, sure. Trust the formula, though ...

If you don't trust the Massey formula, I'd venture to guess you don't trust much of anything. The guy does quality ratings of sports around the world with the same basic formula.

But that doesn't mean it works for Division III basketball.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 10, 2018, 11:42:00 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 10, 2018, 11:20:04 PM
Quote from: me on January 10, 2018, 09:17:19 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 10, 2018, 05:26:34 PM
Quote from: smedindy on January 10, 2018, 12:39:51 PM
D. I do feel that the one year a middling MIAC team beat a MIAC team that beat the undefeated defending national champs got peoples panties in a bunch. But anomalous results effect every rating system, human based or computer based. Remember, it's just one data point out of several interlocking data points in a big data universe. Trust data.

You've mentioned this twice but just to clarify -- I have had this opinion of Massey's ratings effectiveness at the D-III basketball level for longer than that.

Trust data, sure. Trust the formula, though ...

If you don't trust the Massey formula, I'd venture to guess you don't trust much of anything. The guy does quality ratings of sports around the world with the same basic formula.

But that doesn't mean it works for Division III basketball.

It's obviously better than just random chance, but it's certainly not perfect either. It's somewhere in the middle meaning it can be useful as a tool but not as the only tool.
Just looking over Saturday's games, out of the 184 predicted winners, only 131 were correct or a 71.2% accuracy rate. Not exactly spectacular.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 10, 2018, 11:56:26 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 10, 2018, 11:20:04 PM
Quote from: me on January 10, 2018, 09:17:19 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 10, 2018, 05:26:34 PM
Quote from: smedindy on January 10, 2018, 12:39:51 PM
D. I do feel that the one year a middling MIAC team beat a MIAC team that beat the undefeated defending national champs got peoples panties in a bunch. But anomalous results effect every rating system, human based or computer based. Remember, it's just one data point out of several interlocking data points in a big data universe. Trust data.

You've mentioned this twice but just to clarify -- I have had this opinion of Massey's ratings effectiveness at the D-III basketball level for longer than that.

Trust data, sure. Trust the formula, though ...

If you don't trust the Massey formula, I'd venture to guess you don't trust much of anything. The guy does quality ratings of sports around the world with the same basic formula.

But that doesn't mean it works for Division III basketball.

Doesn't mean it doesn't, and it's much more likely that it does. It's not like it's rigged to work for D1 or something.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 10, 2018, 11:57:39 PM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 10, 2018, 11:42:00 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 10, 2018, 11:20:04 PM
Quote from: me on January 10, 2018, 09:17:19 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 10, 2018, 05:26:34 PM
Quote from: smedindy on January 10, 2018, 12:39:51 PM
D. I do feel that the one year a middling MIAC team beat a MIAC team that beat the undefeated defending national champs got peoples panties in a bunch. But anomalous results effect every rating system, human based or computer based. Remember, it's just one data point out of several interlocking data points in a big data universe. Trust data.

You've mentioned this twice but just to clarify -- I have had this opinion of Massey's ratings effectiveness at the D-III basketball level for longer than that.

Trust data, sure. Trust the formula, though ...

If you don't trust the Massey formula, I'd venture to guess you don't trust much of anything. The guy does quality ratings of sports around the world with the same basic formula.

But that doesn't mean it works for Division III basketball.
It's obviously better than just random chance, but it's certainly not perfect either. It's somewhere in the middle meaning it can be useful as a tool but not as the only tool.
Just looking over Saturday's games, out of the 184 predicted winners, only 131 were correct or a 71.2% accuracy rate. Not exactly spectacular.

LOL wow. nothing like a totally out of context number to prove a point, I guess.

In the interest of trying to be helpful rather than just critical, one way to evaluate predictions might be to group all the games where the ratings said the prob was 60-40 or less for either team. And then see what the results were. Same for 70-30, etc.

Another way would be compare the ratings prediction accuracy to other methods.

I have a feeling 71% for the whole country is just fine.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 11, 2018, 12:03:27 AM

TGHIJGSTO!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 11, 2018, 12:20:15 AM

Quote from: me on January 10, 2018, 11:57:39 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 10, 2018, 11:42:00 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 10, 2018, 11:20:04 PM
Quote from: me on January 10, 2018, 09:17:19 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 10, 2018, 05:26:34 PM
Quote from: smedindy on January 10, 2018, 12:39:51 PM
D. I do feel that the one year a middling MIAC team beat a MIAC team that beat the undefeated defending national champs got peoples panties in a bunch. But anomalous results effect every rating system, human based or computer based. Remember, it's just one data point out of several interlocking data points in a big data universe. Trust data.

You've mentioned this twice but just to clarify -- I have had this opinion of Massey's ratings effectiveness at the D-III basketball level for longer than that.

Trust data, sure. Trust the formula, though ...

If you don't trust the Massey formula, I'd venture to guess you don't trust much of anything. The guy does quality ratings of sports around the world with the same basic formula.

But that doesn't mean it works for Division III basketball.
It's obviously better than just random chance, but it's certainly not perfect either. It's somewhere in the middle meaning it can be useful as a tool but not as the only tool.
Just looking over Saturday's games, out of the 184 predicted winners, only 131 were correct or a 71.2% accuracy rate. Not exactly spectacular.

LOL wow. nothing like a totally out of context number to prove a point, I guess.

Ok, how large of a sample size would you like then?
Sunday 9 of 11, Saturday 131 of 184, Friday 29 of 37, Thursday 10 of 11, Wednesday 87 of 124, Tuesday 14 of 22, Monday 2 of 2

So to start January off it's 282 of 391... a whopping 72.1%.

I guess the question is, do you consider that predictive rate to be indicative of a model that is any better than what a D3 voter or follower could muster? In my opinion it's not but I'd like to hear your thought.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 11, 2018, 12:26:02 AM

I have no idea why but the message wouldn't send without deleting the other stuff.

We're not even to the point where sample size matters, because no one has any idea if 72% is actually good or not. I don't.

I actually just added a bit to my previous post before seeing you posted this. Basically if the probability of a given team winning was 55%, then it's pretty hard to knock the computer for getting 5 or 6 out of 10 those right over a significant period. Bigger problem would be if it was getting 3 or 8 of 10.

Just quickly counting up the 90%+'s, 37 of 39 of those came in, for 94.8%. That is pretty spot on assuming that the distribution between 90-100 is uniform.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 11, 2018, 01:47:41 AM

Quote from: me on January 10, 2018, 11:57:39 PM
In the interest of trying to be helpful rather than just critical, one way to evaluate predictions might be to group all the games where the ratings said the prob was 60-40 or less for either team. And then see what the results were. Same for 70-30, etc.

Another way would be compare the ratings prediction accuracy to other methods.

I have a feeling 71% for the whole country is just fine.

Here's the winning percentage for all of the games Jan 1-7. The 50/50 games did have a chosen winner for each (likely a 50.2%/49.8% type of split) so I've listed whether it was the favorite or underdog

4%-1; 8%-1; 10%-1;
90%-5; 91%-10; 92%-8; 93%-5; 94%-5; 95%-7; 96%-8; 97%-6; 98%-8; 99%-9; 100%-5

11%-1; 12%-2; 13%-1; 15%-1; 16%-1; 17%-3; 18%-1; 19%-1; 20%-1
80%-8; 81%-8; 82%-2; 83%-3; 84%-5; 85%-9; 86%-9; 87%-4; 88%-5; 89%-6

21%-3; 22%-4; 23%-4; 25%-4; 26%-3; 27%-1; 28%- 3; 29%-1; 30%-4
70%-4; 71%-5; 72%-13; 73%-6; 74%-8; 75%-6; 76%-9; 77%-2; 78%-7; 79%-7

31%-2; 32%-3; 33%-2; 34%-3; 35%-4; 36%-3; 37%-2; 38%-3; 40%-1
60%-5; 61%-3; 62%-1; 63%-8; 64%-5; 65%-4; 66%-4; 67%-3; 68%-7; 69%-3

41%-5; 42%-1; 43%-6; 44%-8; 45%-4; 46%-1; 47%-4; 48%-2; 49%-4; 50%(underdog)-7
50%(favorite)-4; 51%-5; 52%-4; 53%-2; 54%-2; 55%-3; 56%-6; 57%-5; 58%-3; 59%-5

90+ favorites win 76 of 79... 96.2%
80-89 favorites win 59 of 71... 83.1%
70-79 favorites win 67 of 94... 71.3%
60-69 favorites win 43 of 66... 65.2%
50-59 favorites win 39 of 81... 48.1%

76+ favorites win 160 of 186...86.0%
50-75 favorites win 124 of 205... 60.5%

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 11, 2018, 07:57:28 AM

So all of that seems pretty close to what you'd expect, given the 1 week sample.

I hope you didn't count all that up by hand and then tabulate it by 1% buckets. The 10% summaries would have been more than sufficent I think, and then just assume there aren't a lot more 89%s than 81%s, and figure for 80-89 you should see ~85%. Looking at just 1 week you're probably not going to see a number that precise anyway.

Looks like the 70s group was a little low, but that could just be something unusual about this week (either randomness, or something else that isn't random but isn't immediately evident, maybe coming off holidays has an effect on favorites - I don't know). But overall I think this looks pretty much as it should.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on January 11, 2018, 10:06:31 AM

Whatever FCGrGr did to figure all that out is impressive. +1K.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 11, 2018, 01:49:29 PM

I guess the best thing is to compare that rate to KenPom.

One thing that Pat, Dave, etc. should consider is that expected results don't move the needle. So the inclusion of the Augie - Illinois game probably doesn't matter much, because it was expected.

If, say, a UMAC team would upset a top MIAC team, then....that would have a some effect.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 11, 2018, 02:05:14 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 11, 2018, 01:49:29 PM
I guess the best thing is to compare that rate to KenPom.

One thing that Pat, Dave, etc. should consider is that expected results don't move the needle. So the inclusion of the Augie - Illinois game probably doesn't matter much, because it was expected.

If, say, a UMAC team would upset a top MIAC team, then....that would have a some effect.

My only curiosity is... despite comments that it doesn't matter much... is how much does it inflate (or not) their resume and thus the resume of those they play (i.e. like it would in the SOS math for OWP and OOWP; though, SOS is only DIII teams - so not a direct comparison).

Here is the deal: the comments made were voters need to look at Massey and Bennett because teams highly ranked there are not highly ranked in our poll and visa versa. The premise being those rankings are telling us things that we voters are not paying attention to or are not willing to factor in, thus we aren't correctly ranking teams.

My contention is I am not sure whether to believe the numbers especially when I find fault in some of the information. While I am ranking Augustana high and Massey is as well, I used Augustana as an example because it jumped right out at me. At the time I looked at them, Massey had Augustana at three losses when in reality it was two and I knew the rankings were factoring in the Illinois game. IF the system is factoring in Illinois, we do not know how much influence it is or isn't giving it. Thus, if they are doing that for Augustana, then I have to assume they are doing it for others AND it would be affecting opponents of those teams. That starts to raise questions in my head about the rankings I am looking at.

Is Augustana really that good in the ranking's eyes if they didn't include Illinois? How much would they go down or up in the rankings if the game wasn't included (and how much would it affect their opponents; remember, Augustana's schedule is also affected by being in contact with at least the Big Ten). What about other teams whose games are being considered and shouldn't? Which direction would they move and what numbers would go up or down accordingly?

With that in mind... why should voters be implored to use a ranking system that doesn't seem to be accurately ranking the teams when it is factoring games that aren't relevant or count.

Again... I am curious about this. I am trying not to attack the rankings. I am trying to better understand them if I am going to use (or trust) them any more than I am now.

If one wants me to use those as measuring sticks and I see a flaw I can't understand its impact, isn't a fair to question how accurate really is the ranking? Maybe I am over-selling Augustana myself. The lost again. I need to make an adjustment. However, if I should look at Massey and they keep them high or drops them a bit (what if) based on not necessarily accurate information, how am I to factor that in?

I hope that makes sense. I am just trying to grasp the concept of being told these rankings should be utilized as reliable information when I see a unreliability issue and the impact of that issue can't be truly explained or understood.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 11, 2018, 05:59:08 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 11, 2018, 01:49:29 PM
I guess the best thing is to compare that rate to KenPom.

One thing that Pat, Dave, etc. should consider is that expected results don't move the needle. So the inclusion of the Augie - Illinois game probably doesn't matter much, because it was expected.

If, say, a UMAC team would upset a top MIAC team, then....that would have a some effect.

Does Kenpom do D3 though? I didn't think so, but I'm not sub so I can't even get anything past the front page there anymore.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 11, 2018, 05:59:30 PM

It is always an exciting and surprising point in the season. The midway point. We are already halfway through another thrilling Division III basketball season. The best part, we have plenty more basketball to come. The hard part, we are also closer to the season coming to a close.

On Thursday night's Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave will try and pull out his crystal ball and read the tea leaves on who can sustain their momentum, who may fall off, and which teams could make a run to the end. While we won't have all the answers, some of Dave's guests will be able to give us their insight on their own squad's chances.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch the show LIVE starting at 7pm here: http://bit.ly/2D3pOrw.

A reminder the Thursday edition of Hoopsville primarily covers the East, Mid-Atlantic, Great Lakes, and West regions, but we will answer any questions about all of Division III throughout the show. You can also send your questions to the show and have them featured on the Hoopsville Mailbag segment. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com.

Guests include (in order of appearance):
- Matt Croci, No. 10 Wittenberg men's coach
- Jim Scheible, No. 7 Rochester women's coach
- Lori Kerans, Millikin women's coach (WBCA Center Court)
- Danny Young-Uhrich, No. 17 Juniata women's
- Pat McKenzie, No. 15 St. John's men's coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D710%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D2es9e%2Fvkkxswj8fvkvf4sj.jpg&hash=94347381e6dc0fd41089594ce597296f33b8e5dc)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 11, 2018, 06:34:36 PM

Quote from: me on January 11, 2018, 05:59:08 PM
Quote from: smedindy on January 11, 2018, 01:49:29 PM
I guess the best thing is to compare that rate to KenPom.

One thing that Pat, Dave, etc. should consider is that expected results don't move the needle. So the inclusion of the Augie - Illinois game probably doesn't matter much, because it was expected.

If, say, a UMAC team would upset a top MIAC team, then....that would have a some effect.

Does Kenpom do D3 though? I didn't think so, but I'm not sub so I can't even get anything past the front page there anymore.

No, he doesn't. But we can see how well his predictions do against Massey's. It may not be that far off.

Sagarin is now doing predictions, too.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 11, 2018, 07:05:15 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 11, 2018, 02:05:14 PM
Quote from: smedindy on January 11, 2018, 01:49:29 PM
I guess the best thing is to compare that rate to KenPom.

One thing that Pat, Dave, etc. should consider is that expected results don't move the needle. So the inclusion of the Augie - Illinois game probably doesn't matter much, because it was expected.

If, say, a UMAC team would upset a top MIAC team, then....that would have a some effect.

My only curiosity is... despite comments that it doesn't matter much... is how much does it inflate (or not) their resume and thus the resume of those they play (i.e. like it would in the SOS math for OWP and OOWP; though, SOS is only DIII teams - so not a direct comparison).

Here is the deal: the comments made were voters need to look at Massey and Bennett because teams highly ranked there are not highly ranked in our poll and visa versa. The premise being those rankings are telling us things that we voters are not paying attention to or are not willing to factor in, thus we aren't correctly ranking teams.

My contention is I am not sure whether to believe the numbers especially when I find fault in some of the information. While I am ranking Augustana high and Massey is as well, I used Augustana as an example because it jumped right out at me. At the time I looked at them, Massey had Augustana at three losses when in reality it was two and I knew the rankings were factoring in the Illinois game. IF the system is factoring in Illinois, we do not know how much influence it is or isn't giving it. Thus, if they are doing that for Augustana, then I have to assume they are doing it for others AND it would be affecting opponents of those teams. That starts to raise questions in my head about the rankings I am looking at.

Is Augustana really that good in the ranking's eyes if they didn't include Illinois? How much would they go down or up in the rankings if the game wasn't included (and how much would it affect their opponents; remember, Augustana's schedule is also affected by being in contact with at least the Big Ten). What about other teams whose games are being considered and shouldn't? Which direction would they move and what numbers would go up or down accordingly?

With that in mind... why should voters be implored to use a ranking system that doesn't seem to be accurately ranking the teams when it is factoring games that aren't relevant or count.

Again... I am curious about this. I am trying not to attack the rankings. I am trying to better understand them if I am going to use (or trust) them any more than I am now.

If one wants me to use those as measuring sticks and I see a flaw I can't understand its impact, isn't a fair to question how accurate really is the ranking? Maybe I am over-selling Augustana myself. The lost again. I need to make an adjustment. However, if I should look at Massey and they keep them high or drops them a bit (what if) based on not necessarily accurate information, how am I to factor that in?

I hope that makes sense. I am just trying to grasp the concept of being told these rankings should be utilized as reliable information when I see a unreliability issue and the impact of that issue can't be truly explained or understood.

Well, again, they do include it, and do show Augie with an extra loss, but:

1. Augie was going to lose to Illinois 95% of the time, or more.
2. The margin wouldn't be close.
3. The rankings already predict #1 and #2.
4. Thus the factors that go into the rankings aren't affected, really, by an expected result.

There would be nothing revelatory about that game that isn't baked in to all of the other results for Illinois or Augie.

Also, while it seems SOS factors into the ratings too much, it actually makes sense since you should get more juice for playing and beating the prediction for good teams (or hitting the prediction), and be penalized for beating a backmarker by 12 when you should win by 24. But after about a dozen games, that one result will kind of wash away a bit, especially when other results pile on top of it.

BASICALLY - Augie's loss to Illinois is kind of a nothingburger data point in the Massey world. They lost convincingly (where the diminishing returns factor kicked in) to a team that they were expected to lose to - one ranked 285 spots ahead of it.

Think of it this way, Dave - would you think Augie would beat Wisconsin Superior (285 spots behind it) convincingly in the same way Illinois whacked Augie? I would.

BTW, the crux of the matter is the exhibition / non-exhibition thing. In order for the whole thing to balance, you have to have everything in the universe count. Massey does the entire basketball universe, so a game counts if it counts for one team. Otherwise, it'd be out of balance, and the model would work even worse. I'm not that familiar with Bennett, but I looked on Augie's page and saw they were 11-3, 3-2, which is right. But it doesn't seem Bennett gets really in the weeds like Massey, Ken Pom, and Sagarin. Ken Pom and Sagarin are only dealing with D-1.

BUT - I don't think I've ever said that you should just use the computer rankings. I think you definitely need to consider the data as one of the points used in ranking - especially adding in the nuance a calculation can't (injuries, illness, travel issues). But those same nuances, I think, get missed some by human rankings too.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 11, 2018, 08:14:24 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 11, 2018, 06:34:36 PM
Quote from: me on January 11, 2018, 05:59:08 PM
Quote from: smedindy on January 11, 2018, 01:49:29 PM
I guess the best thing is to compare that rate to KenPom.

One thing that Pat, Dave, etc. should consider is that expected results don't move the needle. So the inclusion of the Augie - Illinois game probably doesn't matter much, because it was expected.

If, say, a UMAC team would upset a top MIAC team, then....that would have a some effect.

Does Kenpom do D3 though? I didn't think so, but I'm not sub so I can't even get anything past the front page there anymore.

No, he doesn't. But we can see how well his predictions do against Massey's. It may not be that far off.

Sagarin is now doing predictions, too.

But if they don't do predictions for D3 then people here will say it's not valid, right?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 11, 2018, 09:14:37 PM

Listening to the beginning of Hoopsville, and it's becoming clear why Dave is confused about the Massey ratings and Augustana.

He says "I don't favor the northeast, I have 4 teams from the NESCAC in my top 25, but I have 4 teams from the WIAC too."

This is a fundamental misrepresentation of what bias is. Equality is not a lack of bias. If you have 4 teams in the top 25 but in reality (whatever reality is), none of them actually are top 25, then that is either random, or a bias.

I certainly don't see 4 teams in the Northeast that should be ranked top 25. That's not the point, though. The point is that presenting this as proof of lack of favoritism is just fundamentally incorrect. And so now I'm not surprised that he also doesn't understand how the Illinois thing could be a non-factor.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 11, 2018, 10:36:04 PM

uh oh

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 11, 2018, 11:02:31 PM

Quote from: sac on January 11, 2018, 10:36:04 PM
uh oh

Am I wrong? (Hint: I'm not)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2018, 11:08:43 PM

Quote from: me on January 11, 2018, 11:02:31 PM
Quote from: sac on January 11, 2018, 10:36:04 PM
uh oh

Am I wrong? (Hint: I'm not)

Yes, you're wrong. Sorry.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 11, 2018, 11:16:35 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2018, 11:08:43 PM
Quote from: me on January 11, 2018, 11:02:31 PM
Quote from: sac on January 11, 2018, 10:36:04 PM
uh oh

Am I wrong? (Hint: I'm not)

Yes, you're wrong. Sorry.

No, I'm not. I know what bias is and is not. Data analysis is literally my job.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 11, 2018, 11:27:18 PM

Quote from: me on January 11, 2018, 09:14:37 PM
Listening to the beginning of Hoopsville, and it's becoming clear why Dave is confused about the Massey ratings and Augustana.

He says "I don't favor the northeast, I have 4 teams from the NESCAC in my top 25, but I have 4 teams from the WIAC too."

This is a fundamental misrepresentation of what bias is. Equality is not a lack of bias. If you have 4 teams in the top 25 but in reality (whatever reality is), none of them actually are top 25, then that is either random, or a bias.

I certainly don't see 4 teams in the Northeast that should be ranked top 25. That's not the point, though. The point is that presenting this as proof of lack of favoritism is just fundamentally incorrect. And so now I'm not surprised that he also doesn't understand how the Illinois thing could be a non-factor.

No where does the word bias come up. All he said was he didn't favor the northeast and gave an example showing that while he has 4 from a NE conference in his top 25 (which may seem biased towards the NE by having that many from one conference), he also has 4 from a non-NE conference as well.
Just because you may not think 4 NESCAC teams are top 25 doesn't mean he's biased.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 11, 2018, 11:35:27 PM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 11, 2018, 11:27:18 PM
Quote from: me on January 11, 2018, 09:14:37 PM
Listening to the beginning of Hoopsville, and it's becoming clear why Dave is confused about the Massey ratings and Augustana.

He says "I don't favor the northeast, I have 4 teams from the NESCAC in my top 25, but I have 4 teams from the WIAC too."

This is a fundamental misrepresentation of what bias is. Equality is not a lack of bias. If you have 4 teams in the top 25 but in reality (whatever reality is), none of them actually are top 25, then that is either random, or a bias.

I certainly don't see 4 teams in the Northeast that should be ranked top 25. That's not the point, though. The point is that presenting this as proof of lack of favoritism is just fundamentally incorrect. And so now I'm not surprised that he also doesn't understand how the Illinois thing could be a non-factor.
No where does the word bias come up. All he said was he didn't favor the northeast and gave an example showing that while he has 4 from a NE conference in his top 25 (which may seem biased towards the NE by having that many from one conference), he also has 4 from a non-NE conference as well.
Just because you may not think 4 NESCAC teams are top 25 doesn't mean he's biased.

OMG I literally said my point wasn't to say whether there were 4 NESCAC teams that should be ranked or not.

favor and bias could be synonyms or they could be two sides of the same coin. But they're definitely related and just because I used the statistical term instead of the word he used doesn't change that. He was claiming that his voting shows that he's not biased...same as saying favor. But his ballot doesn't show that, does nothing to show that without proving that those schools deserve those votes.

I didn't say he was biased at all. Deary me.

I think I'm just going to talk to the like 2 other people that have shown they have some clue on statistics from now on. This is pointless.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 11, 2018, 11:38:13 PM

Quote from: me on January 11, 2018, 11:35:27 PM
I think I'm just going to talk to the like 2 other people that have shown they have some clue on statistics from now on. This is pointless.

I think you're going to find most people here don't have the experience to have or the interest in having the type of conversation you describe. Most of us will define bias as laymen.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 11, 2018, 11:45:06 PM

And yet there continue to be seemingly serious arguments that rankings done by a PhD that has been doing highly reputable sports rankings for many leagues and sports for decades are not valid for D3 basketball.

That's where we are here. People who can't define bias critiquing one of the most respected rankings algorithms in the world of sports.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 11, 2018, 11:53:57 PM

As someone who has watched a lot of Division III basketball, indeed, they seem to overrate MIAC teams. Your citations of stuff from actual statistics courses aren't going to have much impact on me here in the basketball world -- I was basically an English major.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2018, 11:54:37 PM

Quote from: me on January 11, 2018, 11:16:35 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2018, 11:08:43 PM
Quote from: me on January 11, 2018, 11:02:31 PM
Quote from: sac on January 11, 2018, 10:36:04 PM
uh oh

Am I wrong? (Hint: I'm not)

Yes, you're wrong. Sorry.

No, I'm not. I know what bias is and is not. Data analysis is literally my job.

Yeah, and I taught both statistics and research methodology my whole university career. Now that we have the self-promoting puffery out of the way, what exactly is your complaint? That D-mac had 4 NESCAC teams in the top 25? (I'd have three; I'm guessing his 4th is Tufts. But I'd have AT LEAST four Northeast teams in - 3 NESCAC plus MIT, and probably E. Conn.)

I agree that D-mac kinda stumbled with his 4-each of NESCAC and WIAC (reminded me of Archie Bunker denying prejudice because he liked Sammy Davis!), but disagree with you that Massey is INHERENTLY better (or less biased) than the d3 poll. Statistical models are no better than than the assumptions built into them. Massey is a useful tool (which gets gradually better the farther into the season we go); it is NOT necessarily better than than the consensus opinions of 25 conscientious and well-informed voters.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 12, 2018, 12:10:45 AM

While I was in the shower I thought of the perfect way to describe this, in layman's terms.

Say Pat and I ran a 5k race. Pat won by 1000 meters. He was clearly faster. But because I'm heavier (likely true) the race is called a tie.

So am I as good a runner as Pat? Or were the "rules" of the race biased to favor me over him?

That's the same as saying "I took 4 from this conference and 4 from that conference, so clearly I'm not favoring (or biased toward) either one."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 12, 2018, 12:29:18 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2018, 11:54:37 PM
Quote from: me on January 11, 2018, 11:16:35 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 11, 2018, 11:08:43 PM
Quote from: me on January 11, 2018, 11:02:31 PM
Quote from: sac on January 11, 2018, 10:36:04 PM
uh oh

Am I wrong? (Hint: I'm not)

Yes, you're wrong. Sorry.

No, I'm not. I know what bias is and is not. Data analysis is literally my job.

Yeah, and I taught both statistics and research methodology my whole university career. Now that we have the self-promoting puffery out of the way, what exactly is your complaint? That D-mac had 4 NESCAC teams in the top 25? (I'd have three; I'm guessing his 4th is Tufts. But I'd have AT LEAST four Northeast teams in - 3 NESCAC plus MIT, and probably E. Conn.)

I agree that D-mac kinda stumbled with his 4-each of NESCAC and WIAC (reminded me of Archie Bunker denying prejudice because he liked Sammy Davis!), but disagree with you that Massey is INHERENTLY better (or less biased) than the d3 poll. Statistical models are no better than than the assumptions built into them. Massey is a useful tool (which gets gradually better the farther into the season we go); it is NOT necessarily better than than the consensus opinions of 25 conscientious and well-informed voters.

Well, then who is going to volunteer as tribute to go against the Massey algorithm picking every game in D3 the rest of the year? :)

And to make it interesting, a further rule that the tribute can't use the Massey ratings or win probabilities? :)

It would be even more interesting if all of the poll voters picked all of the games and their "win probability" was compared to Massey's. But pretty sure that's not going to happen.

Prob the best idea is compare the win probs to actual results. Then we would see if there is really bias in the ratings or if the bias is on the human side of the equation. We could certainly do that now past seasons for anyone that is interested enough to put in the time. I'm not. I'm happy with "keep calm and trust the algorithm" until proven otherwise.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 12, 2018, 12:33:01 AM

shower revelations that basically describes sailing handicapping in a top 25 board on a d3 website get a bump of the top 25

Quote from: Darryl Nester on January 10, 2018, 11:11:37 PM
How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#1 625 Whitman 14-0 def. #3 Whitworth, 91-75; 01/12 vs. George Fox
#2 530 Augustana 11-3 LOST to Wheaton (Ill.), 81-86; 01/13 vs. Carroll
#3 512 Whitworth 12-2 LOST at #1 Whitman, 75-91; 01/13 vs. George Fox
#4 479 Williams 11-2 01/12 vs. #44 Tufts; 01/13 vs. Bates
#5 473 UW-Whitewater 12-2 won at UW-Eau Claire, 78-65; 01/13 vs. UW-Stout
#6 461 Washington U. 10-2 01/12 vs. Brandeis; 01/14 vs. New York University
#7 459 UW-River Falls 11-2 def. #27 UW-Platteville, 91-84; 01/13 at #13 UW-Oshkosh
#8 458 York (Pa.) 14-0 def. Penn State-Harrisburg, 88-78; 01/13 vs. T#33 Christopher Newport
#9 452 Swarthmore 12-1 won at McDaniel, 80-49; 01/11 vs. Johns Hopkins; 01/13 at #22 Franklin and Marshall
#10 359 Wittenberg 14-0 won at Wabash, 72-58; 01/13 at T#35 Wooster
#11 352 MIT 13-1 def. Emerson, 83-69; 01/13 at Wheaton (Mass.)
#12 349 Lycoming 15-1 def. #38 Albright, 86-85; 01/13 at Arcadia
#13 345 UW-Oshkosh 12-2 def. UW-Stout, 89-66; 01/13 vs. #7 UW-River Falls
#14 306 Wesleyan 10-2 01/12 at #18 Hamilton; 01/13 at Amherst
#15 287 St. John's 11-1 won at Carleton, 69-68; 01/13 at T#39 Augsburg
#16 258 Middlebury 9-3 def. Morrisville State, 85-64; 01/12 vs. Bates; 01/13 vs. #44 Tufts
#17 249 Ohio Wesleyan 10-4 LOST to Hiram, 79-88; 01/13 at Allegheny
#18 219 Hamilton 12-0 01/12 vs. #14 Wesleyan; 01/13 vs. Connecticut College
#19 115 Marietta 11-3 won at Mount Union, 78-57; 01/13 at Heidelberg
#20 111 Emory 10-2 01/12 vs. Carnegie Mellon; 01/14 vs. Case Western Reserve
#21 84 Wartburg 11-3 def. Luther, 73-51; 01/13 at Simpson
#22 77 Franklin and Marshall 11-2 LOST at Muhlenberg, 80-82; 01/11 at Washington College; 01/13 vs. #9 Swarthmore
#23 70 John Carroll 12-2 def. Otterbein, 122-66; 01/13 at Wilmington
#24 59 Eastern Connecticut 12-2 def. Mass-Dartmouth, 101-77; 01/13 at Southern Maine
#25 56 Baldwin Wallace 11-3 LOST to Ohio Northern, 73-80; 01/13 at Otterbein

Others receiving votes
Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#26 55 New Jersey City 12-2 def. Stockton, 81-67; 01/13 at T#35 Ramapo
#27 48 UW-Platteville 12-2 LOST at #7 UW-River Falls, 84-91; 01/13 vs. UW-La Crosse
#28 46 St. Norbert 11-2 01/12 at Illinois College; 01/13 at Monmouth
#29 40 Juniata 13-1 def. Goucher, 64-53; 01/13 at Drew
#30 39 Skidmore 8-3 LOST at Vassar, 59-67; 01/12 at Rochester Tech; 01/13 at Hobart
#31 25 Rochester 9-3 01/12 vs. Case Western Reserve; 01/14 vs. Carnegie Mellon
#32 23 Illinois Wesleyan 11-3 01/13 at North Park
T#33 13 Christopher Newport 11-3 won at Southern Virginia, 83-58; 01/13 at #8 York (Pa.)
T#33 13 Nichols 10-2 won at Curry, 100-68; 01/11 vs. Salve Regina; 01/13 at Wentworth
T#35 11 Ramapo 11-4 won at Rowan, 86-76; 01/13 vs. #26 New Jersey City
T#35 11 Wooster 11-3 def. Allegheny, 79-58; 01/13 vs. #10 Wittenberg
#37 10 Salem State 11-3 def. Fitchburg State, 80-63; 01/13 at Framingham State
#38 9 Albright 11-3 LOST at #12 Lycoming, 85-86; 01/13 vs. Messiah
T#39 7 Augsburg 11-3 won at St. Thomas, 62-52; LOST to Bethel, 67-78; 01/13 vs. #15 St. John's
T#39 7 Buena Vista 12-2 won at Dubuque, 96-87; 01/13 vs. Loras
T#39 7 Emory and Henry 13-1 def. Roanoke, 75-73; 01/13 at Hampden-Sydney
T#39 7 Hanover 10-4 def. Earlham, 90-54; 01/13 at Anderson
#43 4 Nebraska Wesleyan 12-2 LOST at Loras, 87-97 OT; 01/13 vs. Dubuque
#44 3 Tufts 11-3 01/12 at #4 Williams; 01/13 at #16 Middlebury
#45 2 Lebanon Valley 11-5 LOST to Arcadia, 82-94

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 12, 2018, 12:37:33 AM

Quote from: sac on January 12, 2018, 12:33:01 AM
shower revelations that basically describes sailing handicapping in a top 25 board on a d3 website get a bump of the top 25

Well, I would probably make a better boat than a runner.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TheOsprey on January 12, 2018, 01:01:31 AM

Homena, homena, homena!!! ;D ??? :P

https://youtu.be/WiKTO0ujK_k

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on January 12, 2018, 09:23:20 AM

Quote from: TheOsprey on January 12, 2018, 01:01:31 AM
Homena, homena, homena!!! ;D ??? :P

https://youtu.be/WiKTO0ujK_k

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 12, 2018, 11:16:50 AM

I'm a data guy too, (Director of Data Analytics) but I try to be nice about it when Pat and Dave have the feels. ;D

I do like a debate, but I rarely get really riled up now. Maybe it's the Paxil and Wellbutrin!

What I've learned from the baseball wars about advanced metrics is that being a smarty-pants and / or a Jerky McJerkface won't help your cause. Joe Sheehan and Ketih Law are brilliant, but their demeanor turns off a lot of "luddites".

Also, in my field 'fundraising' - we use data to target certain people or groups - but there's still a human element to it all since people are people. A prospect that you think has the interest, capacity, and affinity may not give a major gift, while someone else who isn't rated as high may give a major gift because he was properly cultivated (the human element).

So I can say that I believe Pat is incorrect when the algorithm in Massey overrates the MIAC based on the data, but since human beings play basketball games the algorithms may not work on a day-to-day basis. That, and the differences in individual ranking points are pretty minute, and rankings like this should perhaps be separated into quintiles or groups of 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 12, 2018, 11:18:07 AM

One thing I appreciate about Logan Hansen's work on football is that he acknowledges his algorithm isn't perfect, and he's working to make it better there are still times where he picks against his algorithm - or at least I thought he did.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 12, 2018, 01:10:53 PM

OK, I must be totally out of it because who the pf#$% is Pfeiffer?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on January 12, 2018, 01:38:36 PM

Quote from: WUH on January 12, 2018, 01:10:53 PM
OK, I must be totally out of it because who the pf#$% is Pfeiffer?

Pfeiffer University is in North Carolina, and is a 1st year reclassifying institution in the transition process from DII to DIII. Pfeiffer will become a full member of DIII in the 2021-22 season, if all goes well. Pfeiffer is one of the newest members of USA South. Apparently, one computer model, StatGeek, ranked Pfeiffer #1 in DIII in the first week of January, believe it or not.

Fortunately, DIII does not use outside polls or computer rankings in the selection process. Pfeiffer is not eligible for the NCAA DIII tournament until the 2021-22 season, anyway. This year, games vs Pfeiffer are secondary criteria games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AO on January 12, 2018, 01:40:19 PM

Quote from: WUH on January 12, 2018, 01:10:53 PM
OK, I must be totally out of it because who the pf#$% is Pfeiffer?

Pfeiffer enrollment: 1200
Small school in a small town in central North Carolina.
They are in their first year of provisional D3 membership, moving from D2.
The players that were on the roster prior to their move can remain on scholarship including their top guard Josh Calhoun who is averaging 27.6 ppg.

The loss to Illinois hurts Augustana a bit since they lost by 36 instead of the predicted 20. It's not much of a negative impact but it will continue to hurt the Vikings and the rest of their opponents throughout the season. This is not the NCAA SoS where just the fact that you played a good team will help you. Again it will have very little effect on Augustana's ranking or any of the other teams in the CCIW, but the effect that it does have is negative.

For the MIAC doubters, what have you seen thus far that makes you doubt? The top 8 teams down to Gustavus and Hamline have been incredibly impressive to me in person.

By the way, you can ask Massey questions on twitter if you're curious. https://twitter.com/masseyratings (https://twitter.com/masseyratings)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 12, 2018, 01:46:25 PM

+1 Thanks guys! Much appreciated.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 12, 2018, 02:27:14 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 12, 2018, 11:16:50 AM
I'm a data guy too, (Director of Data Analytics) but I try to be nice about it when Pat and Dave have the feels. ;D

I do like a debate, but I rarely get really riled up now. Maybe it's the Paxil and Wellbutrin!

What I've learned from the baseball wars about advanced metrics is that being a smarty-pants and / or a Jerky McJerkface won't help your cause. Joe Sheehan and Ketih Law are brilliant, but their demeanor turns off a lot of "luddites".

Also, in my field 'fundraising' - we use data to target certain people or groups - but there's still a human element to it all since people are people. A prospect that you think has the interest, capacity, and affinity may not give a major gift, while someone else who isn't rated as high may give a major gift because he was properly cultivated (the human element).

So I can say that I believe Pat is incorrect when the algorithm in Massey overrates the MIAC based on the data, but since human beings play basketball games the algorithms may not work on a day-to-day basis. That, and the differences in individual ranking points are pretty minute, and rankings like this should perhaps be separated into quintiles or groups of 25.

I love everything about this post. :) You were one of the people I could tell was savvy about this, but I like what you said about the human element and you're right. I did go on to qualify that in context of what has happened here, but I don't want to restart anything, so I'll just leave it at that.

There is usually more of a separation at the top, and then a big peloton. This year there's not as much, at least not yet, because no one is really that good. In past years there have been teams ranked higher than 200 in the composite, and this year #1 is outside of 300. Even still, the difference between 1 and 7 is the same is the difference from 7 to 24, and 24 to 51.

So not sure a quintile approach would work, but I do keep this in mind when I'm looking down the chart a bit, which is why I ranked Wheaton despite being ranked 41 bc of having a couple of dumb losses (which I'm convinced just about any team in the nation this year could have if played a decent schedule). So I do still use my own noggin. :) BC basically 25-50 is pretty close.

I'm interested to see what Massey does with some of the losses that have happened this week. I think Ohio Northern's win over BW says more about them than it does about BW. The OAC is not as overall strong a conference as WIAC and CCIW, but it has some really really good teams at the top.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 12, 2018, 02:33:51 PM

Quote from: deiscanton on January 12, 2018, 01:38:36 PM
Quote from: WUH on January 12, 2018, 01:10:53 PM
OK, I must be totally out of it because who the pf#$% is Pfeiffer?

Pfeiffer University is in North Carolina, and is a 1st year reclassifying institution in the transition process from DII to DIII. Pfeiffer will become a full member of DIII in the 2021-22 season, if all goes well. Pfeiffer is one of the newest members of USA South. Apparently, one computer model, StatGeek, ranked Pfeiffer #1 in DIII in the first week of January, believe it or not.

Fortunately, DIII does not use outside polls or computer rankings in the selection process. Pfeiffer is not eligible for the NCAA DIII tournament until the 2021-22 season, anyway. This year, games vs Pfeiffer are secondary criteria games.

I have no problem believing Pfeiffer is the best team playing a D3 schedule (sort of) this year. They were 26-5 or something last year playing D2. I'm sure they still have at least some of those players. I would guess they're actually underrated bc of playing an awful schedule (understandable bc lot of teams wouldn't want to play them).

I'm really interested to see how they do after reclassification. They've had some really good teams in the past, before falling on some hard times before this recent resurgence. Geographically, they seem ideally situated to be able to recruit really well. But you never know how it's going to do. A lot of people in that part of the south have no real clue what D3 is.

But saying small school in small town is a little misleading. They're just outside suburban range of Charlotte. Easy, peasey drive from Charlotte. Been a long time since I've been there, but I'm assuming it's still a nice area as it was then.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AO on January 12, 2018, 03:01:36 PM

Quote from: me on January 12, 2018, 02:33:51 PM
But saying small school in small town is a little misleading. They're just outside suburban range of Charlotte. Easy, peasey drive from Charlotte. Been a long time since I've been there, but I'm assuming it's still a nice area as it was then.

I stand by my 30 seconds of google maps research. Hour from downtown Charlotte not including traffic, half hour from the suburbs. That's far enough to meet people who go to the big city once a year or less.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: warriorcat on January 12, 2018, 03:21:10 PM

I lived in the Lake Norman region (Davidson and Cornelius) of North Carolina for seventeen years and worked at a school in Concord (home of Lowe's Motor Speedway) about 30 minutes from Misenheimer. It is a very small town well off the beaten path. It will be interesting how they will fare athletically without benefit of scholarships. Their present roster has only 5 local kids (4 freshman who have not played a minute) on a 26 person roster.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 12, 2018, 03:30:40 PM

Two points of clarification:

1) Pfeiffer isn't eligible for our poll because they are reclassifying. Voters couldn't vote for them if they wanted to. None of the transitional or reclassifying members are eligible. Sorry guys -- (full)membership has its privileges.

2) As the poll administrator, I want voters who can give an informed perspective on the top 25 teams in the country. I'm less interested in whether they can predict the winners for mid or low level teams, especially those outside their region. I don't care how many people who can tell me who's going to win that game between Del Val and FDU-Florham eight days from now.

That said, I've enjoyed the conversation, appreciation me's perspective and would have no problem with any voter leaning heavily on Massy when casting their vote. I personally lean toward the data analysis side and am more inclined to say, "Show me what's true with numbers. Don't just tell me why you think something is true." That's hard to do with a poll, though, and I try with varying levels of success to keep an open mind to alternate approaches.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 12, 2018, 03:35:06 PM

You mean pfull-membership?

Sorry, I will never make that joke ever again.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 12, 2018, 04:14:04 PM

Quote from: AO on January 12, 2018, 03:01:36 PM
Hour from downtown Charlotte not including traffic, half hour from the suburbs. That's far enough to meet people who go to the big city once a year or less.

So, like Crown?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AO on January 12, 2018, 04:29:26 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 12, 2018, 04:14:04 PM
Quote from: AO on January 12, 2018, 03:01:36 PM
Hour from downtown Charlotte not including traffic, half hour from the suburbs. That's far enough to meet people who go to the big city once a year or less.

So, like Crown?

That's a pretty fair comparison. If you don't have a car at Crown I'm sure you feel like you're in the middle of nowhere.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 12, 2018, 04:58:31 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 12, 2018, 04:14:04 PM
Quote from: AO on January 12, 2018, 03:01:36 PM
Hour from downtown Charlotte not including traffic, half hour from the suburbs. That's far enough to meet people who go to the big city once a year or less.

So, like Crown?

I remember when I drove by the Crown turnoff on MN5 the first time, I thought, "Who the heck would put a college HERE?" I know lots of colleges are in small towns, but Crown's just out there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 12, 2018, 05:06:43 PM

I'm pretty sure the general consensus was simply that Massey isn't as reliable until it has more data. I'm pretty sure that's how every numerical system works, right? Some people may be more inclined to trust the numbers earlier, but I don't think it's out of the question for people to doubt a statistical model that's lacking its full complement of data.

I've always thought Massey was pretty accurate (or at least as accurate as possible) by the end of February and while I do think it overrates some of the MN/WI teams early in the season, I also believe it's justified in doing so based on the data.

I was more objecting to the notion that people are somehow ignorant if they're unwilling to trust an incomplete statistical model. It's a pretty obnoxious contention.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 12, 2018, 05:08:11 PM

I'll also point out there is a fantasy board wherein regular viewers of d3 basketball attempt to pick a 10 game slate of games each week. I doubt it would be too hard for someone to go back and add Massey's predictive record to the comparison.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 12, 2018, 08:20:40 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 12, 2018, 05:08:11 PM

I'll also point out there is a fantasy board wherein regular viewers of d3 basketball attempt to pick a 10 game slate of games each week. I doubt it would be too hard for someone to go back and add Massey's predictive record to the comparison.

You're cherry picking at that point though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 12, 2018, 08:33:55 PM

Quote from: AO on January 12, 2018, 03:01:36 PM
Quote from: me on January 12, 2018, 02:33:51 PM
But saying small school in small town is a little misleading. They're just outside suburban range of Charlotte. Easy, peasey drive from Charlotte. Been a long time since I've been there, but I'm assuming it's still a nice area as it was then.
I stand by my 30 seconds of google maps research. Hour from downtown Charlotte not including traffic, half hour from the suburbs. That's far enough to meet people who go to the big city once a year or less.

Sounds ideal to me if I'm a kid, though. Far enough that you're generally away from the parents, close enough that you can take your laundry home once a month. :)

It's an hour from Winston Salem and Greensboro too. I know some schools that would like to be within an hour of one city that size, let alone 2 plus a much larger one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 12, 2018, 08:36:32 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on January 12, 2018, 03:30:40 PM
Two points of clarification:

1) Pfeiffer isn't eligible for our poll because they are reclassifying. Voters couldn't vote for them if they wanted to. None of the transitional or reclassifying members are eligible. Sorry guys -- (full)membership has its privileges.

I agree. That's why i said it the way I did about them playing a D3 schedule (kind of), not "in D3". I don't think they should be eligible. But someone earlier acted like they were unduly highly ranked in Massey, and I don't think that's true at all. if anything they're probably underranked.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 12, 2018, 08:58:59 PM

Williams beaten by a mediocre performance by Tufts. Hamilton about to stay undefeated with a win over higher-ranked Wesleyan.

Looks like everything is coming good for me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 12, 2018, 11:11:58 PM

Quote from: me on January 12, 2018, 08:58:59 PM
Williams beaten by a mediocre performance by Tufts. Hamilton about to stay undefeated with a win over higher-ranked Wesleyan.

Looks like everything is coming good for me.

Williams is in free fall and Tufts is on the rise. Six point loss at Hamilton for two teams that are pretty even. Sounds like pretty typical, expected results to me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Bucket on January 12, 2018, 11:56:09 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 12, 2018, 11:11:58 PM
Quote from: me on January 12, 2018, 08:58:59 PM
Williams beaten by a mediocre performance by Tufts. Hamilton about to stay undefeated with a win over higher-ranked Wesleyan.

Looks like everything is coming good for me.

Williams is in free fall and Tufts is on the rise. Six point loss at Hamilton for two teams that are pretty even. Sounds like pretty typical, expected results to me.

Williams is in freefall? Winners of 6 of 8 and 3 of last 4 including loss to Tufts. Just moved up in the rankings to #4 before Tufts game. I don't follow...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 13, 2018, 12:39:50 AM

Quote from: Bucket on January 12, 2018, 11:56:09 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 12, 2018, 11:11:58 PM
Quote from: me on January 12, 2018, 08:58:59 PM
Williams beaten by a mediocre performance by Tufts. Hamilton about to stay undefeated with a win over higher-ranked Wesleyan.

Looks like everything is coming good for me.

Williams is in free fall and Tufts is on the rise. Six point loss at Hamilton for two teams that are pretty even. Sounds like pretty typical, expected results to me.

Williams is in freefall? Winners of 6 of 8 and 3 of last 4 including loss to Tufts. Just moved up in the rankings to #4 before Tufts game. I don't follow...

Good point made here. Not sure how you can be in freefall and be in top 5 in national rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 13, 2018, 08:01:48 AM

Quote from: me on January 13, 2018, 12:39:50 AM
Quote from: Bucket on January 12, 2018, 11:56:09 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 12, 2018, 11:11:58 PM
Quote from: me on January 12, 2018, 08:58:59 PM
Williams beaten by a mediocre performance by Tufts. Hamilton about to stay undefeated with a win over higher-ranked Wesleyan.

Looks like everything is coming good for me.

Williams is in free fall and Tufts is on the rise. Six point loss at Hamilton for two teams that are pretty even. Sounds like pretty typical, expected results to me.

Williams is in freefall? Winners of 6 of 8 and 3 of last 4 including loss to Tufts. Just moved up in the rankings to #4 before Tufts game. I don't follow...

Good point made here. Not sure how you can be in freefall and be in top 5 in national rankings.

Me either.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 13, 2018, 09:14:46 AM

A look at the current D3hoops.com Top 25, w/ Massey SOS added. I added schedules for every SOS above #100.

1. Whitman (15-0), #220 - http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Whitman/men/2017-18/index
2. Augustana (11-3), #1
3. Whitworth (12-2), #72
4. Williams (11-3), #201 - http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Williams/men/2017-18/index
5. UW-Whitewater (12-2), #48
6. Washington U. (11-2), #32
7. UW-River Falls (11-2), #14
8. York, Pa.(14-0), #39
9. Swarthmore (13-1), #113 - http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Swarthmore/men/2017-18/index
10. Wittenberg (14-0), #86
11. MIT (13-1), #167 - http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/MIT/men/2017-18/index
12. Lycoming (15-1), #268 - http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Lycoming/men/2017-18/index
13. UW-Oshkosh (12-2), #45
14. Wesleyan (10-3), #189 - http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Wesleyan/men/2017-18/index
15. St. John's (11-1), #28
16. Middlebury (10-3), #127 - http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Middlebury/men/2017-18/index
17. Ohio Wesleyan (10-4), #46
18. Hamilton (13-0), #173 - http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Hamilton/men/2017-18/index
19. Marietta (11-3), #13
20. Emory (11-2), #57
21. Wartburg (11-3), #4
22. Franklin & Marshall (12-2), #154 - http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Franklin_and_Marshall/men/2017-18/index
23. John Carroll (12-2), #29
24. Eastern Connecticut (12-2), #213 - http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Eastern_Connecticut/men/2017-18/index
25. Baldwin Wallace (11-3), #17

I voted in the D3hoops.com Top 25 for its first 10 years or so. It's really tough. The biggest challenge is weighing strength of schedule -- comparing the great W/L team vs the team with some losses. Realistically, you just don't have enough time on your hands to completely dig into all of the facts for every Top 25 candidate.

I think the current rankings demonstrate the challenge of dealing with SOS. There are some teams ranked right now - some highly - that have played very weak schedules.

By the way, I am not suggesting that a team should have to have a great SOS to be ranked, or ranked highly. Sometimes great teams play weak schedules. But there are teams here floating into and up the poll that are probably not deserving of being ranked until they prove more.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 13, 2018, 10:12:14 AM

Here are the teams currently ranked by D3hoops.com that seem significantly too high to me based on 2017-18 resumes to date:

3. Whitworth (12-2) - http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Whitworth/men/2017-18/index

4. Williams (11-3) - http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Williams/men/2017-18/index

9. Swarthmore (13-1) - http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Swarthmore/men/2017-18/index

11. MIT (13-1) - http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/MIT/men/2017-18/index

12. Lycoming (15-1) - http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Lycoming/men/2017-18/index

14. Wesleyan (10-3) - http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Wesleyan/men/2017-18/index

16. Middlebury (10-3) - http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Middlebury/men/2017-18/index

22. Franklin & Marshall (12-2) - http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Franklin_and_Marshall/men/2017-18/index

24. Eastern Connecticut (12-2) - http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Eastern_Connecticut/men/2017-18/index

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 13, 2018, 10:37:54 AM

One thing to note: Massey right now is running further behind than usual. Results updates normally run a couple of days behind, but right now I don't see anything updated for the entire week. I don't know why that is.

But obviously a 200ish schedule is not likely to become top 50 from one or two games.

When I made my pollster poll last week, Saturday's games were not updated in it. So obviously when it catches up, Augustana, NE Wesleyan, Baldwin Wallace, Augsburg and Ohio Wesleyan will be at least a bit lower (BW and Augsburg probably not that much, as Massey had Bethel and ONU in or near top 25), and Bethel, Ohio Northern and Wheaton will be higher.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 13, 2018, 11:22:01 AM

Quote from: me on January 13, 2018, 10:37:54 AM
One thing to note: Massey right now is running further behind than usual. Results updates normally run a couple of days behind, but right now I don't see anything updated for the entire week. I don't know why that is.

Looks to me like Massey is updated through last night? https://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?s=cb2018&sub=11620

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 13, 2018, 11:32:33 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 13, 2018, 11:22:01 AM
Quote from: me on January 13, 2018, 10:37:54 AM
One thing to note: Massey right now is running further behind than usual. Results updates normally run a couple of days behind, but right now I don't see anything updated for the entire week. I don't know why that is.

Looks to me like Massey is updated through last night? https://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?s=cb2018&sub=11620

Massey ratings always get a full update on Monday mornings. Sometimes results get updated between that (it seems). I'm not sure what the schedule is with his code except that Mondays by about noon are the most up-to-date.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 13, 2018, 12:34:23 PM

The Central Region is very complicated to sort out in terms of ranking.

The D3hoops.com Top 25 has the order as:
#2 Augustana
#5 UW-Whitewater
#6 Wash U
#7 UW-River Falls
#13 UW-Oshkosh

D Mac, who generously posts his Top 25 ballot so the rest of us can take pot shots at him, has:
#2 Augustana
#3 Wash U
#5 UW-River Falls
#9 UW-Whitewater
#10 UW-Oshkosh
#18 St. Norbert
#23 UW-Platteville

Massey has:
#4 UW-Platteville
#5 Augustana
#11 UW-Whitewater
#12 UW-River Falls
#19 UW-Oshkosh
#23 Illinois Wesleyan
#24 Wash U

KnightSlappy's efficiency rating has:
#5 UW-Platteville
#10 Augustana
#13 UW-Whitewater
#19 North Central
#25 UW-Oshkosh

KnightSlappy's simulated regional ranking has:
1. UW-River Falls
2. Augustana
3. UW-Stevens Point
4. Wash U
5. UW-Whitewater
6. UW-Platteville
7. Illinois Wesleyan
8. St. Norbert
9. UW-Oshkosh
10. Wheaton

As of this morning, I would have the Central order as follows for purposes of poll voting. I added what I considered to be wins over "Top 25 candidates."

1. UW-River Falls (11-2, 2-1 WIAC) - at UW-Whitewater, vs UW-Platteville
2. Wash U (11-2, 2-0 UAA) - vs Tufts, at Illinois Wesleyan
3. UW-Oshkosh (12-2, 2-1 WIAC) - at St. Norbert, vs Augustana
4. Illinois Wesleyan (11-3, 4-1 CCIW) - at Wheaton, vs Augustana
5. Wheaton (11-3, 5-1 CCIW) - vs Baldwin Wallace, at Whitworth, at Augustana
6. Augustana (11-3, 2-2 CCIW) - at Wash U
7. UW-Whitewater (12-2, 2-1 WIAC) vs St. Norbert
---------
8. UW-Platteville (12-2, 2-1 WIAC) - none
9. St. Norbert (12-2, 7-0 MWC) - none

(I'd probably put the top 7 in a Top 25...maybe 8 depending on how the bottom of my ballot looked.)

D Mac, I don't get the St. Norbert (#18) thing. Their best win is against 9-5 UW-Stevens Point. To get votes, don't they have to at least win one of those home games vs UW-Oshkosh and UW-Whitewater?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 13, 2018, 11:43:29 PM

My updated Central Region rankings (teams deserving of Top 25 consideration)...

(wins vs Top 25 candidates)

1. UW-Oshkosh (13-2, 3-1 WIAC) - vs Augustana, vs UW-River Falls
2. Wash U (11-2, 2-0 UAA) - vs Tufts, at Illinois Wesleyan
3. Illinois Wesleyan (12-3, 5-1 CCIW) - at North Central, at Wheaton, vs Augustana
4. UW-River Falls (11-3, 2-2 WIAC) - at UW-Whitewater, vs UW-Platteville
5. Wheaton (11-4, 5-2 CCIW) - vs Baldwin Wallace, at Whitworth, at Augustana
6. Augustana (12-3, 3-2 CCIW) - vs North Central, at Wash U
7. UW-Whitewater (13-2, 3-1 WIAC) none
8. UW-Platteville (13-2, 3-1 WIAC) - none
9. North Central (11-4, 5-2 CCIW) - vs Wheaton

Will be interesting to see if the D3hoops.com Top 25 voters officially remove all preseason expectations from their voting mindset in the Week 7 poll. Because based on 2017-18 resumes, I don't see how current #2 Augustana can be ranked ahead of currently unranked Illinois Wesleyan. I feel the same way about Wheaton - seems Wheaton should be ranked ahead of Augie too.

Gonna be an interesting poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 13, 2018, 11:51:25 PM

Didn't Whitewater beat Oshkosh by like a million at Oshkosh?

I have them ordinally as Whitewater, Wash U, Oshkosh, IWU, Augustana, River Falls, Platteville, Wheaton, all between #6 and #17 lol. So pretty much it's the top 5, then the Central Region plus OAC, then um...some other teams. And after today I actually have North Central #25.

Not a ton of difference between them, though. I think someone in my current top 16 will win the national championship. That's about as far as I'm willing to go.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 14, 2018, 08:13:28 AM

Quote from: me on January 13, 2018, 11:51:25 PM
Didn't Whitewater beat Oshkosh by like a million at Oshkosh?

I have them ordinally as Whitewater, Wash U, Oshkosh, IWU, Augustana, River Falls, Platteville, Wheaton, all between #6 and #17 lol. So pretty much it's the top 5, then the Central Region plus OAC, then um...some other teams. And after today I actually have North Central #25.

Not a ton of difference between them, though. I think someone in my current top 16 will win the national championship. That's about as far as I'm willing to go.

Yes. I knew I was missing some key result in this Central Region mess...and that was it.

Will update and correct...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 14, 2018, 08:27:15 AM

My updated Central Region rankings (teams deserving of Top 25 consideration)...

(wins vs Top 25 candidates)

1. UW-Whitewater (13-2, 3-1 WIAC) at UW-Oshkosh
2. Wash U (11-2, 2-0 UAA) - vs Tufts, at Illinois Wesleyan
3. Illinois Wesleyan (12-3, 5-1 CCIW) - at North Central, at Wheaton, vs Augustana
4. UW-Oshkosh (13-2, 3-1 WIAC) - vs Augustana, vs UW-River Falls
5. UW-River Falls (11-3, 2-2 WIAC) - at UW-Whitewater, vs UW-Platteville
6. Wheaton (11-4, 5-2 CCIW) - vs Baldwin Wallace, at Whitworth, at Augustana
7. Augustana (12-3, 3-2 CCIW) - vs North Central, at Wash U
8. UW-Platteville (13-2, 3-1 WIAC) - none
9. North Central (11-4, 5-2 CCIW) - vs Wheaton

Also worth noting that UW-Stevens Point is currently all alone atop the WIAC standings at 4-0. I think with 5 losses, though, you wait until the upcoming 1/17 game at UW-Whitewater to sort out the Pointers. And you pray UWW wins...otherwise your head will explode trying to sort out the WIAC order.

WIAC Standings (road wins noted)
UW-Stevens Point 4-0 at River Falls, at Stout
UW-Whitewater 3-1 at Oshkosh, at Eau Claire
UW-Oshkosh 3-1 at La Crosse
UW-Platteville 3-1 at Stout
UW-River Falls 2-2 at Whitewater
UW-La Crosse 1-3 at Eau Claire
UW-Eau Claire 0-4
UW-Stout 0-4

CCIW Standings (road wins noted)
Illinois Wesleyan 5-1 at Wheaton, at North Central, at North Park
North Central 5-2 at North Park, at Carroll, at Millikin
Wheaton 5-2 at Elmhurst, at Augustana
Augustana 4-2 at Carthage
Carthage 4-2 at Illinois Wesleyan
Elmhurst 3-3 at Millikin, at North Park
Millikin 1-5
North Park 1-5
Carroll 0-6

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 14, 2018, 09:08:49 AM

I watched a lot of the Wittenberg/Wooster game yesterday and was really impressed with Witt. They have all of the pieces - a really good big guy (6-9), great perimeter play, and some great intangibles (just a level of toughness about them I guess).

Wittenberg is easily a Final Four-caliber team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on January 14, 2018, 09:41:01 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 14, 2018, 09:08:49 AM
I watched a lot of the Wittenberg/Wooster game yesterday and was really impressed with Witt. They have all of the pieces - a really good big guy (6-9), great perimeter play, and some great intangibles (just a level of toughness about them I guess).

Wittenberg is easily a Final Four-caliber team.

I try to watch a variety of teams and get an idea of who has what...but this year I have found myself gravitating over to Witt games. I agree...most thought they were a year or two away but they are talented and disciplined and they can win big THIS year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 14, 2018, 11:30:09 AM

Nice work, Q, but I'm not praying Whitewater wins this week and Superior isn't in the WIAC anymore. ;D :) :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 14, 2018, 12:05:48 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 14, 2018, 11:30:09 AM
Nice work, Q, but I'm not praying Whitewater wins this week and Superior isn't in the WIAC anymore. ;D :) :D

Thanks, Greek. And let me clarify. As a guy looking to sort out the Central Region, I seek clarity. But as an IWU fan, I hope all of the teams in your league up there beat the daylights out of each other...and would love to see UWW lose that game to a team with 5 losses already!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 14, 2018, 12:26:39 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 14, 2018, 12:05:48 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 14, 2018, 11:30:09 AM
Nice work, Q, but I'm not praying Whitewater wins this week and Superior isn't in the WIAC anymore. ;D :) :D

Thanks, Greek. And let me clarify. As a guy looking to sort out the Central Region, I seek clarity. But as an IWU fan, I hope all of the teams in your league up there beat the daylights out of each other...and would love to see UWW lose that game to a team with 5 losses already!

Ha! The feelings are mutual! I want to see all the CCIW teams beat up on each other to benefit the WIAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 14, 2018, 12:47:49 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 14, 2018, 12:26:39 PM
Ha! The feelings are mutual! I want to see all the CCIW teams beat up on each other to benefit the WIAC.

Probably safe this will happen in both leagues...looks like it's already in progress.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 14, 2018, 02:42:26 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

The men's games wrapped up a little earlier than usual today.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Whitman	15-0	def. #3 Whitworth, 91-75; def. George Fox, 117-63
#2	530	Augustana	12-3	LOST to Wheaton (Ill.), 81-86; def. Carroll, 66-62
#3	512	Whitworth	13-2	LOST at #1 Whitman, 75-91; def. George Fox, 89-77
#4	479	Williams	12-3	LOST to #44 Tufts, 63-69; def. Bates, 79-68
#5	473	UW-Whitewater	13-2	won at UW-Eau Claire, 78-65; def. UW-Stout, 69-55
#6	461	Washington U.	12-2	def. Brandeis, 84-56; def. New York University, 113-75
#7	459	UW-River Falls	11-3	def. #27 UW-Platteville, 91-84; LOST at #13 UW-Oshkosh, 58-67
#8	458	York (Pa.)	15-0	def. Penn State-Harrisburg, 88-78; def. T#33 Christopher Newport, 79-69
#9	452	Swarthmore	13-2	won at McDaniel, 80-49; def. Johns Hopkins, 79-70; LOST at #22 Franklin and Marshall, 68-74
#10	359	Wittenberg	15-0	won at Wabash, 72-58; won at T#35 Wooster, 86-75
#11	352	MIT	14-1	def. Emerson, 83-69; won at Wheaton (Mass.), 91-65
#12	349	Lycoming	16-1	def. #38 Albright, 86-85; won at Arcadia, 79-75
#13	345	UW-Oshkosh	13-2	def. UW-Stout, 89-66; def. #7 UW-River Falls, 67-58
#14	306	Wesleyan	11-3	LOST at #18 Hamilton, 70-76; won at Amherst, 70-66
#15	287	St. John's	12-1	won at Carleton, 69-68; won at T#39 Augsburg, 85-75
#16	258	Middlebury	11-3	def. Morrisville State, 85-64; def. Bates, 82-76; def. #44 Tufts, 78-63
#17	249	Ohio Wesleyan	11-4	LOST to Hiram, 79-88; won at Allegheny, 110-48
#18	219	Hamilton	14-0	def. #14 Wesleyan, 76-70; def. Connecticut College, 102-77
#19	115	Marietta	12-3	won at Mount Union, 78-57; won at Heidelberg, 75-62
#20	111	Emory	12-2	def. Carnegie Mellon, 82-77; def. Case Western Reserve, 91-59
#21	84	Wartburg	11-4	def. Luther, 73-51; LOST at Simpson, 81-86
#22	77	Franklin and Marshall	13-2	LOST at Muhlenberg, 80-82; won at Washington College, 82-73; def. #9 Swarthmore, 74-68
#23	70	John Carroll	13-2	def. Otterbein, 122-66; won at Wilmington, 105-97
#24	59	Eastern Connecticut	13-2	def. Mass-Dartmouth, 101-77; won at Southern Maine, 90-52
#25	56	Baldwin Wallace	12-3	LOST to Ohio Northern, 73-80; won at Otterbein, 79-66

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	55	New Jersey City	12-3	def. Stockton, 81-67; LOST at T#35 Ramapo, 84-85 OT
#27	48	UW-Platteville	13-2	LOST at #7 UW-River Falls, 84-91; def. UW-La Crosse, 63-62
#28	46	St. Norbert	12-3	won at Illinois College, 73-63; LOST at Monmouth, 67-70 OT
#29	40	Juniata	13-2	def. Goucher, 64-53; LOST at Drew, 74-75
#30	39	Skidmore	9-4	LOST at Vassar, 59-67; won at Rochester Tech, 77-76 OT; LOST at Hobart, 74-89
#31	25	Rochester	11-3	def. Case Western Reserve, 90-71; def. Carnegie Mellon, 68-56
#32	23	Illinois Wesleyan	12-3	won at North Park, 76-75
T#33	13	Christopher Newport	11-4	won at Southern Virginia, 83-58; LOST at #8 York (Pa.), 69-79
T#33	13	Nichols	12-2	won at Curry, 100-68; def. Salve Regina, 90-64; won at Wentworth, 72-65
T#35	11	Ramapo	12-4	won at Rowan, 86-76; def. #26 New Jersey City, 85-84 OT
T#35	11	Wooster	11-4	def. Allegheny, 79-58; LOST to #10 Wittenberg, 75-86
#37	10	Salem State	12-3	def. Fitchburg State, 80-63; won at Framingham State, 77-38
#38	9	Albright	11-4	LOST at #12 Lycoming, 85-86; LOST to Messiah, 100-101 3OT
T#39	7	Augsburg	11-4	won at St. Thomas, 62-52; LOST to Bethel, 67-78; LOST to #15 St. John's, 75-85
T#39	7	Buena Vista	12-3	won at Dubuque, 96-87; LOST to Loras, 80-82
T#39	7	Emory and Henry	14-1	def. Roanoke, 75-73; won at Hampden-Sydney, 86-75
T#39	7	Hanover	11-4	def. Earlham, 90-54; won at Anderson, 81-74
#43	4	Nebraska Wesleyan	13-2	LOST at Loras, 87-97 OT; def. Dubuque, 103-94
#44	3	Tufts	12-4	won at #4 Williams, 69-63; LOST at #16 Middlebury, 63-78
#45	2	Lebanon Valley	11-5	LOST to Arcadia, 82-94

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 14, 2018, 04:33:38 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 13, 2018, 11:22:01 AM
Quote from: me on January 13, 2018, 10:37:54 AM
One thing to note: Massey right now is running further behind than usual. Results updates normally run a couple of days behind, but right now I don't see anything updated for the entire week. I don't know why that is.

Looks to me like Massey is updated through last night? https://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?s=cb2018&sub=11620

As of this second, it looks like the last results Massey has posted are for games played on 1/6/18.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 14, 2018, 04:39:01 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 12, 2018, 11:18:07 AM
One thing I appreciate about Logan Hansen's work on football is that he acknowledges his algorithm isn't perfect, and he's working to make it better there are still times where he picks against his algorithm - or at least I thought he did.

Catching up on the boards... (Day jobs are a mixed blessing!)

Here are the standings of the Final ASC Pick'ems for 2017. Hansen was used as one of the indexes (plus Atomic Football, Bornpowerindex and Lazindex). I have also used the projections of the pre-season rankings from Kickoff since the beginning.

Notice how Kickoff and Hansen tied and Atomic Football was the best INdex.

Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 17, 2017, 06:37:03 PM
Bornpowerindex won the week. GillCJ1 swallowed his Purple Pride to competitive instincts to edge into a first place tie with crufootball. Crufootball noted that the humans beat the indexes (altho' the authors of the indexes are really great guys). I also want to point out that Kickoff made the predictions for the entire season in August, when it came out. I encourage all fans to buy a copy of Kickoff next season.

crufootball 111 0 0
GillCJ1 111 1 1
Atomic Football 110 0 0
BornPowerIndex 109 1 2
Ralph Turner 108 1 1
Gray Fox 107 0 0
Kickoff 106 0 0
FCGrizzliesGrad 106 0 1
HansenRatings 106 1 1
LazIndex 103 0 0
baddog 103 1 1
Chess4Me 86 0 0
DesertCat1 77 0 0
Jmancru 65 0 0
Jayhawkdaddy 50 0 0

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 14, 2018, 04:47:11 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 14, 2018, 12:26:39 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 14, 2018, 12:05:48 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 14, 2018, 11:30:09 AM
Nice work, Q, but I'm not praying Whitewater wins this week and Superior isn't in the WIAC anymore. ;D :) :D

Thanks, Greek. And let me clarify. As a guy looking to sort out the Central Region, I seek clarity. But as an IWU fan, I hope all of the teams in your league up there beat the daylights out of each other...and would love to see UWW lose that game to a team with 5 losses already!

Ha! The feelings are mutual! I want to see all the CCIW teams beat up on each other to benefit the WIAC.

... and why I would have no trouble with 8 of the 25 teams coming from the CCIW and the WIAC

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 14, 2018, 05:00:45 PM

QuoteI watched a lot of the Wittenberg/Wooster game yesterday and was really impressed with Witt. They have all of the pieces - a really good big guy (6-9), great perimeter play, and some great intangibles (just a level of toughness about them I guess).

Wittenberg is easily a Final Four-caliber team.

Ditto.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 14, 2018, 05:51:25 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 14, 2018, 04:47:11 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 14, 2018, 12:26:39 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 14, 2018, 12:05:48 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 14, 2018, 11:30:09 AM
Nice work, Q, but I'm not praying Whitewater wins this week and Superior isn't in the WIAC anymore. ;D :) :D

Thanks, Greek. And let me clarify. As a guy looking to sort out the Central Region, I seek clarity. But as an IWU fan, I hope all of the teams in your league up there beat the daylights out of each other...and would love to see UWW lose that game to a team with 5 losses already!

Ha! The feelings are mutual! I want to see all the CCIW teams beat up on each other to benefit the WIAC.
... and why I would have no trouble with 8 of the 25 teams coming from the CCIW and the WIAC

8 of 25 teams?

There's 21 Pool C teams this year, if that's what you're referring to. I'm not sure though...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 14, 2018, 05:54:12 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 14, 2018, 05:51:25 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 14, 2018, 04:47:11 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 14, 2018, 12:26:39 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 14, 2018, 12:05:48 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 14, 2018, 11:30:09 AM
Nice work, Q, but I'm not praying Whitewater wins this week and Superior isn't in the WIAC anymore. ;D :) :D

Thanks, Greek. And let me clarify. As a guy looking to sort out the Central Region, I seek clarity. But as an IWU fan, I hope all of the teams in your league up there beat the daylights out of each other...and would love to see UWW lose that game to a team with 5 losses already!

Ha! The feelings are mutual! I want to see all the CCIW teams beat up on each other to benefit the WIAC.
... and why I would have no trouble with 8 of the 25 teams coming from the CCIW and the WIAC

8 of 25 teams?

There's 21 Pool C teams this year, if that's what you're referring to. I'm not sure though...

No, 8 of the CCIW/WIAC Teams on a Top 25 Ballot.

Just remembering the machinations of the Committee Deliberations for Pool C, I can imagine 3 or 4 of the 21 Pool C bids coming from the Central Region alone.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 14, 2018, 07:48:56 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 14, 2018, 05:54:12 PM

Just remembering the machinations of the Committee Deliberations for Pool C, I can imagine 3 or 4 of the 21 Pool C bids coming from the Central Region alone.

They had 3 last year Whitewater, Augustana and Oshkosh. Though Oshkosh was outside the norm for previous Pool C bids with 10 losses.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 14, 2018, 10:52:32 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 14, 2018, 05:54:12 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 14, 2018, 05:51:25 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on January 14, 2018, 04:47:11 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 14, 2018, 12:26:39 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 14, 2018, 12:05:48 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 14, 2018, 11:30:09 AM
Nice work, Q, but I'm not praying Whitewater wins this week and Superior isn't in the WIAC anymore. ;D :) :D

Thanks, Greek. And let me clarify. As a guy looking to sort out the Central Region, I seek clarity. But as an IWU fan, I hope all of the teams in your league up there beat the daylights out of each other...and would love to see UWW lose that game to a team with 5 losses already!

Ha! The feelings are mutual! I want to see all the CCIW teams beat up on each other to benefit the WIAC.
... and why I would have no trouble with 8 of the 25 teams coming from the CCIW and the WIAC

8 of 25 teams?

There's 21 Pool C teams this year, if that's what you're referring to. I'm not sure though...
No, 8 of the CCIW/WIAC Teams on a Top 25 Ballot.

Just remembering the machinations of the Committee Deliberations for Pool C, I can imagine 3 or 4 of the 21 Pool C bids coming from the Central Region alone.

The fact that this is the TOP 25 board, I probably should've guessed that instead... ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 15, 2018, 06:32:12 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 13, 2018, 11:32:33 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 13, 2018, 11:22:01 AM
Quote from: me on January 13, 2018, 10:37:54 AM
One thing to note: Massey right now is running further behind than usual. Results updates normally run a couple of days behind, but right now I don't see anything updated for the entire week. I don't know why that is.

Looks to me like Massey is updated through last night? https://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?s=cb2018&sub=11620

Massey ratings always get a full update on Monday mornings. Sometimes results get updated between that (it seems). I'm not sure what the schedule is with his code except that Mondays by about noon are the most up-to-date.

And so it is. And there are some...surprises. Even to me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 15, 2018, 11:31:23 PM

Not nearly as crazy as the new poll, though.

East Coast bias is strong with this one.

Fortunately the selection committee showed last year they have more regard for strength of schedule than the poll voters. Unfortunately they can't balance out the brackets to really expose the difference in quality.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 16, 2018, 06:33:30 AM

Quote from: me on January 15, 2018, 11:31:23 PM
Not nearly as crazy as the new poll, though.

East Coast bias is strong with this one.

Fortunately the selection committee showed last year they have more regard for strength of schedule than the poll voters. Unfortunately they can't balance out the brackets to really expose the difference in quality.

Of course you have to trust the SOS number. Massey has JCU at 37 right now - they've played only four marginally decent opponents - I'd argue it's really only been two - I just included the other two because JCU lost to them. If that's the 37th best schedule, I'm very confused.

Maybe it's a strange year and that's properly rated, but it feels odd not to be able to trust the 37th best schedule at this point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 16, 2018, 09:20:36 AM

I have to say I thought both of your choices in the sort of overlooked/um...underlooked? segment were spot on. So I'm less inclined to give you stick (I watch too much soccer) than many.

13-2 vs. #37 schedule is pretty good, especially this year.

Olivet are 2 wins that are probably better than it looks. They've played a lot of out of division -- no idea which counted and which didn't, don't really care. Winning at Marietta is still noteworthy, they beat Ohio Northern, and they've only really played a couple of just not good teams.

This week will certainly give us a lot more information. Just to give an idea though, in the total Massey universe, D3 top 25 is about 500 on the schedule page. 50 (which right now is Williams) is around 650. And 100 (Nichols) is around 800. 150 is 950-1000.

So shorthand: top 1000 is top half of D3 or so. 800 is a top 100 win.

So JCU has only played about 5 games against teams below 150 D3 caliber and is 5-2 vs. top 100ish.

Compare to Whitman having 10 games below that 150 line (and some of those a lot below).

Wittenberg is closer but still has more bad games and fewer top 100ish games. Looking only at schedules for the top few teams.

So maybe this explains in the context of the rankings how they got there.

OAC also right now is rated #1 in SOS (though projected to fall to 2), so not losing many schedule points there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 16, 2018, 10:12:19 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 16, 2018, 06:33:30 AM
Quote from: me on January 15, 2018, 11:31:23 PM
Not nearly as crazy as the new poll, though.

East Coast bias is strong with this one.

Fortunately the selection committee showed last year they have more regard for strength of schedule than the poll voters. Unfortunately they can't balance out the brackets to really expose the difference in quality.

Of course you have to trust the SOS number. Massey has JCU at 37 right now - they've played only four marginally decent opponents - I'd argue it's really only been two - I just included the other two because JCU lost to them. If that's the 37th best schedule, I'm very confused.

Maybe it's a strange year and that's properly rated, but it feels odd not to be able to trust the 37th best schedule at this point.

I think you're conflating opponent record and opponent quality.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 16, 2018, 02:08:42 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 16, 2018, 06:33:30 AM
Quote from: me on January 15, 2018, 11:31:23 PM
Not nearly as crazy as the new poll, though.

East Coast bias is strong with this one.

Fortunately the selection committee showed last year they have more regard for strength of schedule than the poll voters. Unfortunately they can't balance out the brackets to really expose the difference in quality.

Of course you have to trust the SOS number. Massey has JCU at 37 right now - they've played only four marginally decent opponents - I'd argue it's really only been two - I just included the other two because JCU lost to them. If that's the 37th best schedule, I'm very confused.

Maybe it's a strange year and that's properly rated, but it feels odd not to be able to trust the 37th best schedule at this point.

Lots of fair-to-middlin' teams on their schedule (I think that's the OAC motto - "Most of us are fair-to-middlin') I think that outweighs the "really tough or really stinky" schedules.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 16, 2018, 02:14:31 PM

Quote from: me on January 15, 2018, 11:31:23 PM
Not nearly as crazy as the new poll, though.

East Coast bias is strong with this one.

Fortunately the selection committee showed last year they have more regard for strength of schedule than the poll voters. Unfortunately they can't balance out the brackets to really expose the difference in quality.

To bring up the SOS isn't exactly a fair use of the tactic. First off, the national committee MUST use the SOS the NCAA provides as part of the primary criteria (and new this year, non-conference SOS as part of the secondary criteria). However, that number at this point in the season is still all over the place. Numbers well north and south of .500 will be brought back to the middle for a vast majority of teams as they start to finish off the first half of their conference schedules and start the second half of usually double-round-robins. So, the SOS numbers aren't really a good indication of truly what a team's SOS is in the eyes of the NCAA. That is one of the biggest reasons the committees don't like coming out with a regional ranking set one week earlier. The numbers change too much. The SOS starts to settle down a bit in February.

Also keep in mind, the national committee doesn't look at Massey, Bennett, or our Top 25. It isn't part of their criteria.

As for Top 25 voters, they can use whatever they want. Now you are advocating for the SOS numbers when earlier it was Massey and Bennett. Voters can use what they want, including eye test, injuries, illnesses, etc. to make a determination. Nothing says everything has to be based on data only. D1 football has proven how messy that has gotten and has proven they can't even find a reasonable way to solve it, either.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 16, 2018, 02:51:05 PM

While we're talking about schedule strength indicators, I've added a new one to my efficiency ratings page.

http://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com/p/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency.html

SOS Win50 is the median of each team's opponent's efficiency rating. This is a simplified version of what Sagarin (and now KenPom) does for the D1 ratings systems. It's basically the Efficiency Margin each team would need to go .500 against their to-date schedule.

My previous SOS (which is also still on there as SOS OppEM) is a simple average of each opponent's efficiency rating. Straight averaging is more susceptible to swings caused by one or three particularly strong (or poor) opponents, though I find both methods to be somewhat useful.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 16, 2018, 04:51:16 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 16, 2018, 10:12:19 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 16, 2018, 06:33:30 AM
Quote from: me on January 15, 2018, 11:31:23 PM
Not nearly as crazy as the new poll, though.

East Coast bias is strong with this one.

Fortunately the selection committee showed last year they have more regard for strength of schedule than the poll voters. Unfortunately they can't balance out the brackets to really expose the difference in quality.

Of course you have to trust the SOS number. Massey has JCU at 37 right now - they've played only four marginally decent opponents - I'd argue it's really only been two - I just included the other two because JCU lost to them. If that's the 37th best schedule, I'm very confused.

Maybe it's a strange year and that's properly rated, but it feels odd not to be able to trust the 37th best schedule at this point.

I think you're conflating opponent record and opponent quality.

I was just looking at Marietta and ONU being good games (both wins) and trying to give them the benefit of the doubt that Mt Union and Hope were marginally good (because those were the losses). In reality, there are only two games on there that really tell us much.

LaRoche could maybe be thrown in with Hope and Mount, but I just don't see anyone else on there that's overly impressive. I'm willing to grant that perhaps they have actually played the 37th best schedule so far - I just think if that's true, there's probably not a whole lot we can tell by the 37th best schedule.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 16, 2018, 05:42:31 PM

I think saying they've only won 2 games that matter underrates the chance of losing to a team in the top 100, especially away from home.

River Falls is only 48% to win at LaCrosse, for example, even though UWRF is #12 and UW-Lax is #34.

Mount Union at 62 is only 75% to win at Muskingum who is 182.

John Carroll has only played 5 home games out of 15 games.

There's a big difference between playing a Heidelberg, who has played well against some really good teams but just not quite well enough to win (most of the time), and playing bottom half of the country fodder.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 16, 2018, 05:47:29 PM

Sorry if I missed this, but which teams specifically do you think are too highly ranked and which ones are too low?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 16, 2018, 05:49:41 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 16, 2018, 02:14:31 PM
Quote from: me on January 15, 2018, 11:31:23 PM
Not nearly as crazy as the new poll, though.

East Coast bias is strong with this one.

Fortunately the selection committee showed last year they have more regard for strength of schedule than the poll voters. Unfortunately they can't balance out the brackets to really expose the difference in quality.

To bring up the SOS isn't exactly a fair use of the tactic. First off, the national committee MUST use the SOS the NCAA provides as part of the primary criteria (and new this year, non-conference SOS as part of the secondary criteria). However, that number at this point in the season is still all over the place. Numbers well north and south of .500 will be brought back to the middle for a vast majority of teams as they start to finish off the first half of their conference schedules and start the second half of usually double-round-robins. So, the SOS numbers aren't really a good indication of truly what a team's SOS is in the eyes of the NCAA. That is one of the biggest reasons the committees don't like coming out with a regional ranking set one week earlier. The numbers change too much. The SOS starts to settle down a bit in February.

Also keep in mind, the national committee doesn't look at Massey, Bennett, or our Top 25. It isn't part of their criteria.

As for Top 25 voters, they can use whatever they want. Now you are advocating for the SOS numbers when earlier it was Massey and Bennett. Voters can use what they want, including eye test, injuries, illnesses, etc. to make a determination. Nothing says everything has to be based on data only. D1 football has proven how messy that has gotten and has proven they can't even find a reasonable way to solve it, either.

Look, I know you hate me and want to get one over on me and that's whatever.

But you don't get your own set of facts.

The committee, clearly and unique to any precedent, weighed strength of schedule heavily. Massey has a strength of schedule component too, you know, and you don't know what influences opinion more generally even if "this is the official SOS". But regardless of all of that, everyone knows that Oshkosh was selected because they played a great schedule, and won enough games against it to convince.

I never said anything about "the official SOS". Maybe I need air quotes or something.

Pretty sure Massey had Alabama and Georgia as the top 2 teams before the championship game, btw.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 16, 2018, 05:59:35 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 16, 2018, 02:08:42 PM
Lots of fair-to-middlin' teams on their schedule (I think that's the OAC motto - "Most of us are fair-to-middlin')

I always thought that the OAC motto was: "Throw away everything you thought you knew about us ... it's conference tournament time!"

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 16, 2018, 06:00:37 PM

So Spence is back, then? I'm beginning to recognize the pattern. That's a non-expiring ban.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 17, 2018, 10:04:27 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 16, 2018, 06:00:37 PM
So Spence is back, then? I'm beginning to recognize the pattern. That's a non-expiring ban.

TGHIJGSTO!?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on January 17, 2018, 11:40:01 AM

"So does Dave really hate me (you) or is it you, me"

Abbott and Costello after reading this board... :) :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 17, 2018, 12:06:48 PM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on January 17, 2018, 11:40:01 AM
"So does Dave really hate me (you) or is it you, me"

Abbott and Costello after reading this board... :) :P

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3zUGmigO5A

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 17, 2018, 12:07:19 PM

I don't hate anyone and I am not trying to get anything over anyone... just trying to make sure when we talk about certain things like SOS, we don't throw it around generally. On these board, usually SOS indicates what the NCAA produces and what the committees use to rank.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 17, 2018, 12:08:47 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 16, 2018, 06:00:37 PM
So Spence is back, then? I'm beginning to recognize the pattern. That's a non-expiring ban.

I read this... didn't really put it together... stepped away to do something else, and then it slammed into me. Wow, the pattern is there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 17, 2018, 12:19:49 PM

If it's true, he's done a creditable job of masking it, since I haven't seen the alleged undercover exile refer even once to Marietta.

Let's test him, though:

Has anybody seen 'etta play lately?

;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 17, 2018, 01:27:54 PM

picturing a guy staring at his monitor unable to log into his banned account.

"who the heck is spence?"

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 17, 2018, 02:56:56 PM

Quote from: me on January 16, 2018, 05:49:41 PM

Pretty sure Massey had Alabama and Georgia as the top 2 teams before the championship game, btw.

This is not helping your Massey argument, though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 17, 2018, 03:00:12 PM

Quote from: sac on January 17, 2018, 01:27:54 PM
picturing a guy staring at his monitor unable to log into his banned account.

"who the heck is spence?"

He used to go by the handle "ElRetornodelEspencio". He was a real squabble jockey here last season, and not a very well-mannered one at that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 17, 2018, 10:04:05 PM

Stevens Point, who was 6-5 in nonconference play, just knocked off #2 Whitewater on the road, 75-69, to improve to 5-0 in the WIAC...

#6 Oshkosh lost at Platteville 72-57
#13 River Falls lost at La Crosse 62-54

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: warriorcat on January 17, 2018, 10:06:12 PM

I can not figure out the WIAC. On any given night, anyone can win home or away.

Platteville over Oshkosh ?

LaCrosse Over River Falls ?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 17, 2018, 10:27:02 PM

How They Fared (So Far)
~~Occidental @ Chapman scores will be edited in later (probably tomorrow morning).~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Whitman	15-0	01/19 at Linfield; 01/20 at Willamette
#2	555	UW-Whitewater	13-3	LOST to UW-Stevens Point, 69-75; 01/20 at UW-La Crosse
#3	541	Washington U.	12-2	01/19 at Case Western Reserve; 01/21 at Carnegie Mellon
#4	519	York (Pa.)	16-0	won at St. Mary's (Md.), 88-74; 01/20 at Mary Washington
#5	497	Wittenberg	16-0	def. #23 Ohio Wesleyan, 93-72; 01/20 at Allegheny
#6	444	UW-Oshkosh	13-3	LOST at #29 UW-Platteville, 57-72; 01/20 at UW-Eau Claire
#7	440	Whitworth	13-2	01/19 at Willamette; 01/20 at Linfield
#8	434	Augustana	13-3	won at Elmhurst, 90-80; 01/20 at North Park
#9	415	MIT	14-2	LOST to Springfield, 65-68; 01/20 at Babson
#10	371	Lycoming	16-1	01/20 vs. Hood
#11	357	Williams	13-3	def. Amherst, 72-69; 01/20 at #16 Middlebury
#12	347	St. John's	13-1	def. Macalester, 133-80; 01/20 vs. St. Thomas
#13	346	UW-River Falls	11-4	LOST at UW-La Crosse, 54-62; 01/20 vs. UW-Stout
#14	331	Hamilton	15-0	def. SUNY Geneseo, 74-70; 01/20 at Amherst
#15	295	Swarthmore	14-2	won at Haverford, 65-60 OT; 01/20 vs. Dickinson
#16	268	Middlebury	12-3	def. Albertus Magnus, 77-73 OT; 01/20 vs. #11 Williams; 01/21 at Pine Manor
#17	212	Emory	12-2	01/19 at New York University; 01/21 at Brandeis
#18	189	Marietta	13-3	def. Capital, 82-68; 01/20 at #20 John Carroll
#19	176	Wesleyan	11-3	01/18 at Johnson and Wales; 01/20 vs. Connecticut College
#20	121	John Carroll	13-3	LOST at T#37 Baldwin Wallace, 79-88; 01/20 vs. #18 Marietta
#21	106	Franklin and Marshall	13-3	LOST at Dickinson, 50-55; 01/20 at Haverford
#22	104	Eastern Connecticut	14-2	won at #39 Keene State, 70-64; 01/20 vs. Rhode Island College
#23	84	Ohio Wesleyan	11-5	LOST at #5 Wittenberg, 72-93; 01/20 at DePauw
#24	66	Illinois Wesleyan	13-3	def. Millikin, 78-62; 01/20 at Carroll
#25	41	Rochester	11-3	01/19 at Brandeis; 01/21 at New York University

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	38	Emory and Henry	14-1	01/18 vs. Lynchburg; 01/20 vs. T#41 Randolph-Macon
#27	33	Nichols	13-2	won at Eastern Nazarene, 79-76; 01/20 vs. Roger Williams
#28	31	Tufts	12-4	01/20 vs. Bates
#29	28	UW-Platteville	14-2	def. #6 UW-Oshkosh, 72-57; 01/20 at UW-Stevens Point
#30	18	New Jersey City	13-3	def. Rutgers-Newark, 80-68; 01/20 vs. Rutgers-Camden
#31	15	Wartburg	12-4	def. Buena Vista, 85-65; LOST at Nebraska Wesleyan, 60-99
#32	13	Adrian	13-3	LOST to Olivet, 62-65; 01/20 at Alma
T#33	11	Ramapo	13-4	won at William Paterson, 73-61; 01/20 vs. Stockton
T#33	11	Salem State	14-3	won at Bates, 83-81; def. Bridgewater State, 85-79; 01/20 vs. Westfield State
#35	9	Juniata	13-3	LOST at Susquehanna, 68-70; 01/20 vs. Moravian
#36	7	Cabrini	13-2	def. Neumann, 105-76; 01/19 at Marywood
T#37	5	Baldwin Wallace	13-3	def. #20 John Carroll, 88-79; 01/20 vs. Muskingum
T#37	5	Hanover	12-4	won at Mount St. Joseph, 64-41; 01/20 vs. Franklin
#39	4	Keene State	11-5	LOST to #22 Eastern Connecticut, 64-70; 01/20 at Mass-Boston
#40	3	Bethel	11-4	LOST at St. Thomas, 78-81; 01/20 at Carleton
T#41	2	Loras	13-4	def. Central, 109-92; 01/20 at Luther
T#41	2	Occidental	13-2	won at Chapman, 70-60; 01/20 at Redlands
T#41	2	Randolph-Macon	12-3	01/18 vs. Hampden-Sydney; 01/20 at #26 Emory and Henry
T#41	2	Wheaton (Ill.)	12-4	won at Carthage, 90-81; 01/20 vs. Illinois Tech
T#45	1	North Central (Ill.)	12-4	def. Finlandia, 102-50; 01/20 at Elmhurst
T#45	1	Wooster	12-4	won at Kenyon, 75-55; 01/20 at Wabash

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 17, 2018, 10:36:45 PM

Quote from: warriorcat on January 17, 2018, 10:06:12 PM
I can not figure out the WIAC. On any given night, anyone can win home or away.

Platteville over Oshkosh ?

LaCrosse Over River Falls ?

It's a great league. Good teams beating other good teams. LaCrosse is also the only team to beat St. John's. WIAC has 6 teams that are all good and any of them could beat anyone else and most of them could probably beat most non-conference teams.

Was basically a toss up game and UW-L grabbed it. River Falls has Stout and Eau Claire next, so every chance to right the ship and get back in the race.

Platteville served some notice against Oshkosh though. They dominated from start to finish. Their reward is playing at Stevens Point and at Whitewater. Pretty much either Stevens Point beats Platteville and goes into the halfway mark the team to beat, or they lose and it's all a big mess.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 18, 2018, 01:41:24 AM

???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 18, 2018, 02:59:13 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 17, 2018, 10:04:05 PM
Stevens Point, who was 6-5 in nonconference play, just knocked off #2 Whitewater on the road, 75-69, to improve to 5-0 in the WIAC...

#6 Oshkosh lost at Platteville 72-57
#13 River Falls lost at La Crosse 62-54

That is why we refer to the league as "WIAC-ky", in almost every sport!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 18, 2018, 09:00:34 AM

Quote from: warriorcat on January 17, 2018, 10:06:12 PM
I can not figure out the WIAC. On any given night, anyone can win home or away.

Platteville over Oshkosh ?

LaCrosse Over River Falls ?

Those who follow the efficiency ratings will know that neither of these results were particularly surprising. Platteville and LaCrosse had odds of 76% and 67% to-win according to this system. (Stevens Point was only 25%).

http://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com/p/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency.html

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 18, 2018, 09:52:17 AM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 18, 2018, 09:00:34 AM
Quote from: warriorcat on January 17, 2018, 10:06:12 PM
I can not figure out the WIAC. On any given night, anyone can win home or away.

Platteville over Oshkosh ?

LaCrosse Over River Falls ?

Those who follow the efficiency ratings will know that neither of these results were particularly surprising. Platteville and LaCrosse had odds of 76% and 67% to-win according to this system. (Stevens Point was only 25%).

http://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com/p/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency.html

Well excuuuuuuuuse me! LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 18, 2018, 04:54:36 PM

It is already the midway point of January. In a month's time, we will be looking at conference tournaments and discussing who has a chance to make the NCAA tournaments. However, there is still a lot of basketball to be played and many teams are starting to take the turn into the second half of conference play.

On Thursday's edition of Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave will chat with a number of guests to get a landscape of where things are in Division III. The conversation will include checking in at the NCAA Convention where legislation will be voted on by DIII members and conferences on whether to start the season a week earlier.

Dave then talks to some of the hotter teams in the country. Two women's programs (ranked and unranked) who are leading their respective conferences and looking to build on recent success. Also two men's programs one of which is not in the spotlight as much as they traditionally are along with a program we haven't talked to in a number of years.

This week's WBCA Center Court will feature a women's coach who is doing what she can to spread the word about women's basketball including giving more of her time to make sure her colleagues are taken care of and heard.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch the show LIVE starting at 7:00 p.m. ET here: http://bit.ly/2DmSR9D

You can also send your questions to the show and have them featured on the Hoopsville Mailbag segment. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com.

Guests include (in order of appearance):
- James Wagner, CSAC Assistant Commissioner
- Bobby Hurley, Stevens men's coach
- Kris Huffman, No. 9 DePauw women's coach
- Polly Thomason, Texas-Dallas women's coach (WBCA Center Court)
- Matt Logie, No. 7 Whitworth men's coach
- Ashlee Rogers, Marymount women's coach

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D710%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D2rsh2%2Frej59edr1em87ftw.jpg&hash=ab208210dbcea0cb6b78ddb648fe9f3a436cda07)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 18, 2018, 06:45:10 PM

Is it just me or is Logie one of a few former D-I players to be head coach in D3? Maybe I'm just ignorant and there are a lot more than I think.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 18, 2018, 09:50:21 PM

Quote from: me on January 18, 2018, 06:45:10 PM
Is it just me or is Logie one of a few former D-I players to be head coach in D3? Maybe I'm just ignorant and there are a lot more than I think.

I can name three and my knowledge of the national scene is limited so it makes me think you may be surprised...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 18, 2018, 09:52:13 PM

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2018, 09:50:21 PM
Quote from: me on January 18, 2018, 06:45:10 PM
Is it just me or is Logie one of a few former D-I players to be head coach in D3? Maybe I'm just ignorant and there are a lot more than I think.

I can name three and my knowledge of the national scene is limited so it makes me think you may be surprised...

Could be. Who do you know?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 18, 2018, 11:06:01 PM

In Men's Basketball...

Zimmerman at Emory
Mitchell at Westminster
Thornhill at Fontbonne

Zimmerman is one of the best players every to wear a Davidson uniform.

It may be a fluke of course that I can name three.

I believe the is a UW Green Bay alum who is actively coaching in Division III but I an drawing a blank.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: warriorcat on January 18, 2018, 11:29:55 PM

Kosmalski at Swarthmore

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 19, 2018, 07:52:51 AM

Bettencourt at Endicott was on the Bucknell team that beat Kansas in the first round a while back.

Marc Brown at NJCU was an all-american at Siena.

There's quite a few.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on January 19, 2018, 08:02:38 AM

K.C. Hunt at Wilmington College (OAC) was an outstanding player at Wichita State (Top 10 All-Time in both steals and assists)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dunkin3117 on January 19, 2018, 08:58:28 AM

The IIAC has 2 former D1 players as coaches. Seiverding (UNI) at Dubuque, Peth (Iowa) at Wartburg

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 19, 2018, 09:17:24 AM

Stan Bonewitz Concordia-Texas

QuoteBonewitz was a decorated collegiate student-athlete at Texas Tech. He garnered All-Southwest Conference Freshmen Team honors in 1995-96 and earned honorable-mention All-Big 12 honors two years later. As a point guard, Bonewitz led the Red Raiders to a 30-2 ledger, SWC title and a NCAA Sweet Sixteen appearance in 1995-96. He graduated as the all-time assist leader for Texas Tech with 435 helpers and held the record until it was broken by John Roberson during the 2009-10 season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 19, 2018, 09:48:42 AM

Guy Neal - Bluffton

QuoteFollowing high school, Neal played his freshman season at the University of North Carolina-Charlotte before transferring to Bowling Green State University for the final three seasons of his collegiate career.

As a player at BGSU, Neal was a member of the 1980-81 squad that won the Mid-American Conference championship. Two seasons later in 1982-83 as a graduate assistant, Neal helped lead the Falcons to another MAC title. Neal has made two trips to the National Invitational Tournament during his career as a player in 1980 and as a graduate assistant in 1983.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 19, 2018, 10:05:20 AM

Quote from: WUH on January 18, 2018, 11:06:01 PM
In Men's Basketball...

Zimmerman at Emory
Mitchell at Westminster
Thornhill at Fontbonne

Zimmerman is one of the best players every to wear a Davidson uniform.

It may be a fluke of course that I can name three.

I believe the is a UW Green Bay alum who is actively coaching in Division III but I an drawing a blank.

Gary Grzesk played at UWGB and now coaches St. Norbert in nearby DePere.

http://www.snc.edu/athletics/profiles/gary.grzesk.html

He's probably best known for guarding Jason Kidd in the Phoenix's shocking upset NCAA tournament win over California.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 19, 2018, 02:57:02 PM

Swarthmore's tremendous coach is another Davidson alum.

In NESCAC, Coach App played for Cornell and Coach Brown for UVM. 6/11, however, are NESCAC alums.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 19, 2018, 03:22:27 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 19, 2018, 02:57:02 PM
Swarthmore's tremendous coach is another Davidson alum.

Already mentioned by warriorcat, in case someone's tallying these up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 19, 2018, 05:35:29 PM

Not there now, but long time Wabash coach Mac Petty played at Tennessee.

Bill Fenlon at DePauw is a Northwestern grad.

Steve Alford started his career as a head coach at Manchester.

I bet if you go into assistants, there are quite a few former D-1 players. You gotta start your careers where you can get a job and then you make your bones as a head coach if that's what you want.
D-1 assistants drop down to D-2 and D-3 with some regularity to run a program.

Here's a path - Eric Bridgeland at Whitman graduated at the U of Manitoba, and his coaching career has taken him to UC Santa Cruz, Cal, SF Austin, Colorado Mines, Pepperdine (as an interim head coach to boot), Puget Sound and now Whitman.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie77 on January 19, 2018, 06:39:13 PM

Augustana's Grey Giovanine played at D-2 Central Missouri State and later was Head Coach at D-1 Lamar. Lamar was making progress as a program when Coach G chose to move up to D-3 and Augustana. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 19, 2018, 09:18:29 PM

Wow OK point proven, I'm a moron! :)

I'm glad though (not that I look like a moron, but...well...). Kosmalski I knew but forgot about. A lot of other ones I didn't. I'm glad it's not a one-way train and some D1 guys find the D3 ranks to their liking.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 19, 2018, 09:32:14 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 19, 2018, 07:52:51 AM

Bettencourt at Endicott was on the Bucknell team that beat Kansas in the first round a while back.

Marc Brown at NJCU was an all-american at Siena.

There's quite a few.

Obviously there are a ton more than I thought.

Replying to this one to say that was an awesome story on Gibbs.

He put them on his back like few ever have. Pete Metzelaars maybe, but you expect a 6-6 guy with NFL receiver athletic ability to be good. You don't expect a 6-1 post to be an elite big man.

If not for D3, Gibbs would likely never have been given a chance to play his game at the collegiate level and prove himself worthy of a shot in the pros.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 19, 2018, 11:57:08 PM

I don't know who is going to win this Whitman-Linfield game, but I know Linfield is a very well-coached team. Impressive against the press and discipline and savvy to know when to push and when not to. Don't have the talent Whitman does but staying in it and doing the most with what they have.

Whitman showing good ability to play defense in the halfcourt, not just on the press. Not making free throws though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 20, 2018, 01:24:50 AM

Was a good game until the refs started calling different games depending on who had the ball. More than once Whitman just surrounded a guy, mugged him, took the ball no call. When Whitman had the ball, it was touch fouls all over.

I haven't watched much Whitman because most of their schedule is garbage. I thought this might be one of the few games where they might have to battle, but the refs took care of that for them. No wonder they never lose out there if this is the norm.

I stayed up late for this. Won't be making that mistake again soon. What a joke. I don't know Linfield's coach kept from getting a technical. One guy fouled out on a loose ball after there should have been about 3 fouls called during their possession. I thought reducing physical play and increasing freedom of movement and not letting defenders bump the ballhandler with their body was a point of emphasis.

Linfield's not that good and might not have won anyway, but they had no chance with the help Whitman was given.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CMSfan on January 20, 2018, 01:36:35 AM

I decided to tune in to see how Whitman looks this year and, yeah, it was typical D3 reffing, but hardly one-sided. Whitman didn't look great, but they caused a lot of turnovers and were able to make up for some sloppy play and poor shooting by out-hustling Linfield.

The NWC is tougher top to bottom than many think. Any road win is a good win.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 20, 2018, 11:25:19 AM

Ref discussion aside, if Linfield can get some talent, they can be very good. I was really impressed with the coaching. I don't think Linfield was outhustled, they just can't get places on the court as quickly as Whitman.

I know Linfield is in the process of building a program, and it seems like they're doing that well. A 3rd legit program in the NWC would be a big help to the conference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on January 20, 2018, 02:32:41 PM

https://portal.stretchinternet.com/csbsju/portal.htm?eventId=399094&streamType=video

The Tommie-Johnnie game in Collegeville is going on right now. If you are unaware of this storied rivalry, take a quick look at the crowd at the game currently and that will tell you all you need to know.

Also, a great excuse to watch the #12 Johnnies play!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 20, 2018, 02:36:44 PM

So who has the longest tenure in the poll if Marietta falls out? lol.

Down 20-2 or something to start. Absolutely no idea what the score is now, but assuming there's no coming back from that against John Carroll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 20, 2018, 02:45:31 PM

Good question.

I'll have to look.

Maybe Whitman?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 20, 2018, 02:46:22 PM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on January 20, 2018, 02:32:41 PM
https://portal.stretchinternet.com/csbsju/portal.htm?eventId=399094&streamType=video

The Tommie-Johnnie game in Collegeville is going on right now. If you are unaware of this storied rivalry, take a quick look at the crowd at the game currently and that will tell you all you need to know.

Also, a great excuse to watch the #12 Johnnies play!

How many students do they have? However many I think they're all in that building. And unlike another game I watched earlier, the student section is rowdy but in control and well-behaved.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on January 20, 2018, 02:50:41 PM

Whitman has the next longest streak after Marietta. They are the only other team besides Marietta whose Top 25 streak predates the 2016-17 season. Wash U is next followed by UW-River Falls and UW-Whitewater.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on January 20, 2018, 02:55:03 PM

Quote from: me on January 20, 2018, 02:46:22 PM
Quote from: Smitty Oom on January 20, 2018, 02:32:41 PM
https://portal.stretchinternet.com/csbsju/portal.htm?eventId=399094&streamType=video

The Tommie-Johnnie game in Collegeville is going on right now. If you are unaware of this storied rivalry, take a quick look at the crowd at the game currently and that will tell you all you need to know.

Also, a great excuse to watch the #12 Johnnies play!

How many students do they have? However many I think they're all in that building. And unlike another game I watched earlier, the student section is rowdy but in control and well-behaved.

St. John's is just under 2,000. However it is an all male school and the sister school, St. Benedict, is just across town and is about the same size.

For those of you that don't follow d3football, the football teams played their game at Target Field (Home field for the MN Twins) this year and it was packed.

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fblog-media.startribune.com%2Frandball%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2017%2F09%2F25141357%2Ftommiesjohnnies.jpg&hash=67a80fe733a7b5f8c42b24ec5897ff3b17fe44d0)

Both schools have great athletic departments and fans! Such a fun rivalry to take in.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 20, 2018, 05:09:36 PM

No. 4 York (Pa.) 57 Mary Washington 59 Final

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 20, 2018, 06:59:13 PM

Linfield played CWU on December 30th. I was impressed by them (and not so impressed with the team of my employer) and they were in it the entire way. They hit threes and forced turnovers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 20, 2018, 10:08:48 PM

Point improved to 6-0 in the WIAC, a full two games ahead of the field. They now sit at 12-5. They won AT #2 Whitewater midweek and then topped #29 Platteville at home tonight. I still don't think they deserve to crack the Top 25 next week. They still have 5 losses and only Ohio Wesleyan at 11-4 has more than 3 losses. OWU is surely to drop out anyway after losing midweek to Wittenberg.

#2 Whitewater - went 1-1 including an OT win at La Crosse
#6 Oshkosh - 0-2, two road losses
#13 River Falls - 1-1
#29 Platteville - 1-1 including a win over Oshkosh

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 20, 2018, 10:15:20 PM

I think someone is trying to stay under the radar. :)

I have them #14. Just can't see the teams below them being better. If the other teams were in the WIAC they'd probably have multiple losses. They're going to go into the halfway mark in the WIAC in first place regardless of what happens in the next game. That's far from insignificant. And they've played a great schedule. They haven't lost to anyone that isn't good, and they've beaten good teams too.

The point of a season isn't just to kill time until postseason. It's to see who is best at the end of the season, which presumably means you try to get better between the beginning and end. And clearly Stevens Point has done a lot of getting better.

If La Crosse had pulled that game out I would say they should have been in too.

Just not a lot of teams in that 20 and below area doing much to impress. I wish it was a top 20 lol.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on January 20, 2018, 10:16:33 PM

Someone beat me to the punch..... ::)

#6 UW Oshkosh gives away a 38-29 halftime lead and loses at previously WIAC winless UW Eau Claire.

Elsewhere, #2 (for now) UW Whitewater ties it after being down 4 with 12 seconds left and wins it in OT 67-64 over UW La Crosse

#13 UW River Falls demolishes UW Stout 96-68. That's just one point less than Stout loss to Wisconsin in a preseason exhibition... ::)

Finally, UW Stevens Point rises to 6-0 in the WIAC after beating UW Platteville 80-74. Point has a two-game lead on the WIAC field. Given their wins at River Falls (then #3), Whitewater (currently #2), I wonder if they'll start to get some attention in the polls again. Not sure if it says more about Stevens Point's success, though, or the other teams' weaknesses?

Big game on Wednesday... first half of the WIAC slate ends as Point travels to #6 Oshkosh.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on January 20, 2018, 10:26:41 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 19, 2018, 07:52:51 AM

Bettencourt at Endicott was on the Bucknell team that beat Kansas in the first round a while back.

Marc Brown at NJCU was an all-american at Siena.

There's quite a few.

Anothert from NJ. Although no longer there long time William Paterson coach Jose Rembibas played for PJ Carlessimo's Seton Hall team that lost to Michigan in the final four in 89.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 20, 2018, 10:30:43 PM

Quote from: John Gleich on January 20, 2018, 10:16:33 PM
Someone beat me to the punch..... ::)

#6 UW Oshkosh gives away a 38-29 halftime lead and loses at previously WIAC winless UW Eau Claire.

Elsewhere, #2 (for now) UW Whitewater ties it after being down 4 with 12 seconds left and wins it in OT 67-64 over UW La Crosse

#13 UW River Falls demolishes UW Stout 96-68. That's just one point less than Stout loss to Wisconsin in a preseason exhibition... ::)

Finally, UW Stevens Point rises to 6-0 in the WIAC after beating UW Platteville 80-74. Point has a two-game lead on the WIAC field. Given their wins at River Falls (then #3), AT Whitewater (currently #2), I wonder if they'll start to get some attention in the polls again. Not sure if it says more about Stevens Point's success, though, or the other teams' weaknesses?

Big game on Wednesday... first half of the WIAC slate ends as Point travels to #6 Oshkosh.

Sorry dude! The win vs Whitewater was AT Whitewater too. If that matters to the voters, which I'm sure it does a little.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 09:45:24 AM

My updated Central Region rankings. This is the order I believe the Central region teams should be stacked up for consideration in the D3hoops.com Top 25 poll...

("notable wins" - wins vs teams in the Top 25 conversation)

My Central Region Ranking
1. Wash U (13-2, 4-0 UAA) - vs Tufts, at Illinois Wesleyan
2. Illinois Wesleyan (14-3, 7-1 CCIW) - at North Central, at Wheaton, vs Augustana
3. Augustana (14-3, 6-2 CCIW) - vs North Central, vs UW-Stevens Point (neutral), at Wash U
4. UW-Stevens Point (12-5, 6-0 WIAC) - at UW-River Falls, at UW-Whitewater, vs UW-Platteville
5. Wheaton (13-4, 6-2 CCIW) - vs Baldwin Wallace, at Whitworth, at Augustana
6. UW-River Falls (12-4, 3-3 WIAC) - at UW-Whitewater, vs UW-Platteville
7. UW-Whitewater (14-3, 4-2 WIAC) at UW-Oshkosh
8. UW-Oshkosh (13-4, 3-3 WIAC) - vs Augustana, vs UW-River Falls
-----
9. UW-Platteville (14-3, 4-2 WIAC) - vs UW-Oshkosh
10. North Central (12-5, 5-3 CCIW) - vs Wheaton

I'd probably have the top 8 in a Top 25 ballot at this point...and would be ready to swap out that 4th WIAC spot next week based on results.

As I have posted about on the CCIW board, the current gap between Augustana (#8, 434 points) and Illinois Wesleyan (#24, 66 points) is ridiculous. As is the gap between Augustana (#8, 434 points) and Wheaton (ORV, 2 points). These gaps are based on preseason expectations...and we're just too far into the 2017-18 season for that bias. And let me stress -- I think Augustana is a great team. But there should not be any Top 25 separation between the Vikings and IWU. And not much between these teams and Wheaton.

WIAC Standings Through 1/20 (road wins noted)
*UW-Stevens Point 6-0 at River Falls, at Stout, at Whitewater
*UW-Platteville 4-2 at Stout
*UW-Whitewater 4-2 at Oshkosh, at Eau Claire, at La Crosse
*UW-Oshkosh 3-3 at La Crosse
*UW-River Falls 3-3 at Whitewater
*UW-La Crosse 2-4 at Eau Claire
*UW-Eau Claire 1-5
*UW-Stout 1-5

CCIW Standings Through 1/20 (road wins noted)
*Illinois Wesleyan 7-1 at Wheaton, at North Central, at North Park, at Carroll
*Wheaton 6-2 at Elmhurst, at Augustana, at Carthage
*Augustana 6-2 at Carthage, at Elmhurst, at North Park
*North Central 5-3 at North Park, at Carroll, at Millikin
*Carthage 5-3 at Illinois Wesleyan, at Millikin
*Elmhurst 4-4 at Millikin, at North Park
*Millikin 1-7
*North Park 1-7
*Carroll 1-7

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on January 21, 2018, 09:55:39 AM

I feel like the Central is absolutely loaded this year with good teams. WashU has been the most consistent, but all other teams have shown dominance and all have very good, resume bolstering wins. It will be interesting to see how much they beat each other up, as they are all good pool C options, in my opinion.

It is interesting to note that the #2 team in the nation is listed at #7 in the regional ranks. It shows how good the central is, granted they did take a loss this week, which Q's ranking show and the Top 25 doesn't. But there will still be the gap in tomorrows ballot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 09:56:58 AM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on January 21, 2018, 09:55:39 AM
I feel like the Central is absolutely loaded this year with good teams. WashU has been the most consistent, but all other teams have shown dominance and all have very good, resume bolstering wins. It will be interesting to see how much they beat each other up, as they are all good pool C options, in my opinion.

It is interesting to note that the #2 team in the nation is listed at #7 in the regional ranks. It shows how good the central is, granted they did take a loss this week, which Q's ranking show and the Top 25 doesn't. But there will still be the gap in tomorrows ballot.

It is definitely tough to sort out, Smitty.

I looked at that UW-Whitewater placement quite a bit...but I feel like I have the Warhawks in the right place based on the complete picture at this point. At this point UWW's only notable win is at UW-Oshkosh. This doesn't seem like a #2 resume to me - http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/UW-Whitewater/men/2017-18/index. And I had the Warhawks at the top of the Central ranking last week...but this is the ultimate fluid ranking situation and results from week to week make a huge impact when things are this close.

The pollsters need to be open to blowing up their ballots and looking at where things stand. Using last week's ballot and moving a few teams up and down just won't produce an accurate poll with what's going on here.

#24 Illinois Wesleyan (66 points) vs #2 UW-Whitewater (555 points) - who should be ranked higher?

http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/UW-Whitewater/men/2017-18/index

http://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Illinois_Wesleyan/men/2017-18/index

Seems like IWU has a stronger Top 25 resume.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 21, 2018, 10:33:58 AM

Whitewater plays a cupcake NC schedule every year. The main reason they are #2 is because everyone else around them is losing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 4samuy on January 21, 2018, 11:08:20 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 09:45:24 AM
My updated Central Region rankings. This is the order I believe the Central region teams should be stacked up for consideration in the D3hoops.com Top 25 poll...

("notable wins" - wins vs teams in the Top 25 conversation)

My Central Region Ranking
1. Wash U (13-2, 4-0 UAA) - vs Tufts, at Illinois Wesleyan
2. Illinois Wesleyan (14-3, 7-1 CCIW) - at North Central, at Wheaton, vs Augustana
3. UW-Stevens Point (12-5, 6-0 WIAC) - at UW-River Falls, at UW-Whitewater, vs UW-Platteville
4. Wheaton (13-4, 6-2 CCIW) - vs Baldwin Wallace, at Whitworth, at Augustana
5. Augustana (14-3, 6-2 CCIW) - vs North Central, at Wash U
6. UW-River Falls (12-4, 3-3 WIAC) - at UW-Whitewater, vs UW-Platteville
7. UW-Whitewater (14-3, 4-2 WIAC) at UW-Oshkosh
8. UW-Oshkosh (13-4, 3-3 WIAC) - vs Augustana, vs UW-River Falls
-----
9. UW-Platteville (14-3, 4-2 WIAC) - vs UW-Oshkosh
10. North Central (12-5, 5-3 CCIW) - vs Wheaton

I'd probably have the top 8 in a Top 25 ballot at this point...and would be ready to swap out that 4th WIAC spot next week based on results.

As I have posted about on the CCIW board, the current gap between Augustana (#8, 434 points) and Illinois Wesleyan (#24, 66 points) is ridiculous. As is the gap between Augustana (#8, 434 points) and Wheaton (ORV, 2 points). These gaps are based on preseason expectations...and we're just too far into the 2017-18 season for that bias. And let me stress -- I think Augustana is a great team. But there should not be any significant Top 25 separation between the Vikings and IWU and Wheaton.

WIAC Standings Through 1/20 (road wins noted)
*UW-Stevens Point 6-0 at River Falls, at Stout, at Whitewater
*UW-Platteville 4-2 at Stout
*UW-Whitewater 4-2 at Oshkosh, at Eau Claire, at La Crosse
*UW-Oshkosh 3-3 at La Crosse
*UW-River Falls 3-3 at Whitewater
*UW-La Crosse 2-4 at Eau Claire
*UW-Eau Claire 1-5
*UW-Stout 1-5

CCIW Standings Through 1/20 (road wins noted)
*Illinois Wesleyan 7-1 at Wheaton, at North Central, at North Park, at Carroll
*Wheaton 6-2 at Elmhurst, at Augustana, at Carthage
*Augustana 6-2 at Carthage, at Elmhurst, at North Park
*North Central 5-3 at North Park, at Carroll, at Millikin
*Carthage 5-3 at Illinois Wesleyan, at Millikin
*Elmhurst 4-4 at Millikin, at North Park
*Millikin 1-7
*North Park 1-7
*Carroll 1-7

Nicely done Q!

Also remember, although they are not in the top 25 but are third in your regional top ten, Stevens Point was handled pretty good by Augustana at a neutral site in the Dells.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 11:38:46 AM

Quote from: 4samuy on January 21, 2018, 11:08:20 AM
Nicely done Q!

Also remember, although they are not in the top 25 but are third in your regional top ten, Stevens Point was handled pretty good by Augustana at a neutral site in the Dells.

Totally forgot about that game because last week I wasn't looking at UW-Stevens Point as a "Top 25 team." Thank you.

So re-thinking that a bit...I think that game is significant. Enough for me to make a little change...

My Central Region Ranking
1. Wash U (13-2, 4-0 UAA) - vs Tufts, at Illinois Wesleyan
2. Illinois Wesleyan (14-3, 7-1 CCIW) - at North Central, at Wheaton, vs Augustana
3. Augustana (14-3, 6-2 CCIW) - vs North Central, vs UW-Stevens Point (neutral), at Wash U
4. UW-Stevens Point (12-5, 6-0 WIAC) - at UW-River Falls, at UW-Whitewater, vs UW-Platteville
5. Wheaton (13-4, 6-2 CCIW) - vs Baldwin Wallace, at Whitworth, at Augustana
6. UW-River Falls (12-4, 3-3 WIAC) - at UW-Whitewater, vs UW-Platteville
7. UW-Whitewater (14-3, 4-2 WIAC) at UW-Oshkosh
8. UW-Oshkosh (13-4, 3-3 WIAC) - vs Augustana, vs UW-River Falls
-----
9. UW-Platteville (14-3, 4-2 WIAC) - vs UW-Oshkosh
10. North Central (12-5, 5-3 CCIW) - vs Wheaton

A good thing for the rest of the Central Region (Wash U, the CCIW, etc) is that WIAC situation is so messy. When the team out in front of the league by 2 games has 5 non-conference losses...that is a fuzzy picture.

Keep it up, WIAC!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 11:51:50 AM

I would be interesting to take all 25 currently ranked teams and capture wins against "top 25 caliber" teams...as I have done for the Central Region. I am pretty sure we'd find teams that have floated up the poll with 0 or 1 of these types of wins.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on January 21, 2018, 12:04:42 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 11:51:50 AM
I would be interesting to take all 25 currently ranked teams and capture wins against "top 25 caliber" teams...as I have done for the Central Region. I am pretty sure we'd find teams that have floated up the poll with 0 or 1 of these types of wins.

I actually started doing this for the west region last night. I will post it later today hopefully. The IIAC is like the WIAC-lite. 4 solid teams are beating up on each other.

The West doesn't have as many top teams as the Central so it makes my job a little easier, but still would interesting if we could get one from each region.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 21, 2018, 12:22:06 PM

The issue with this, of course, is "what is 'top 25 caliber'?"

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on January 21, 2018, 12:24:35 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 11:51:50 AM
I would be interesting to take all 25 currently ranked teams and capture wins against "top 25 caliber" teams...as I have done for the Central Region. I am pretty sure we'd find teams that have floated up the poll with 0 or 1 of these types of wins.

Good idea! I'll do the Mid-Atlantic later today before the Eagles take the field.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 12:45:21 PM

Quote from: me on January 21, 2018, 12:22:06 PM
The issue with this, of course, is "what is 'top 25 caliber'?"

Teams that could legitimately get Top 25 consideration/votes?

It's OK if there is subjectivity to it. I don't think that gray area is as big/problematic as it might seem.

I would love to see each region...that would be cool.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 21, 2018, 12:51:19 PM

I guess I've got the Great Lakes... honestly have no predictions on how it'll turn out once I actually look at the teams

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 21, 2018, 01:01:55 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 12:45:21 PM
Quote from: me on January 21, 2018, 12:22:06 PM
The issue with this, of course, is "what is 'top 25 caliber'?"

Teams that could legitimately get Top 25 consideration/votes?

It's OK if there is subjectivity to it. I don't think that gray area is as big/problematic as it might seem.

I would love to see each region...that would be cool.

Sure it is. What is Williams, for example? They're probably like 60ish in Massey now.

There needs to be some objective definition of "top 25 caliber" for this to mean anything.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 02:05:46 PM

Quote from: me on January 21, 2018, 01:01:55 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 12:45:21 PM
Quote from: me on January 21, 2018, 12:22:06 PM
The issue with this, of course, is "what is 'top 25 caliber'?"

Teams that could legitimately get Top 25 consideration/votes?

It's OK if there is subjectivity to it. I don't think that gray area is as big/problematic as it might seem.

I would love to see each region...that would be cool.

Sure it is. What is Williams, for example? They're probably like 60ish in Massey now.

There needs to be some objective definition of "top 25 caliber" for this to mean anything.

"Top 25 Caliber" = a team that meets any of the following 3 criteria.

* In the current D3hoops.com Top 25 or ORV - http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2017-18/week7

* In the current Massey top 25 - https://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?s=cb2018&sub=11620

* In the top 25 of KnightSlappy's D3 Efficiency Rating - http://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com/p/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency.html

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 21, 2018, 02:16:07 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 02:05:46 PM
Quote from: me on January 21, 2018, 01:01:55 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 12:45:21 PM
Quote from: me on January 21, 2018, 12:22:06 PM
The issue with this, of course, is "what is 'top 25 caliber'?"

Teams that could legitimately get Top 25 consideration/votes?

It's OK if there is subjectivity to it. I don't think that gray area is as big/problematic as it might seem.

I would love to see each region...that would be cool.

Sure it is. What is Williams, for example? They're probably like 60ish in Massey now.

There needs to be some objective definition of "top 25 caliber" for this to mean anything.

"Top 25 Caliber" = a team that meets any of the following 3 criteria.

* In the current D3hoops.com Top 25 or ORV - http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2017-18/week7

* In the current Massey Top 25 - https://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?s=cb2018&sub=11620

* In the top 25 of KnightSlappy's D3 Efficiency Rating - http://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com/p/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency.html

The problem with Massey (for today anyways) is that it appears to only be updating on Mondays so no results from this week have factored in to the rankings yet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 21, 2018, 02:16:54 PM

Why does the D3 poll get more than 25 but not Massey or KS?

Really you should just use Massey and KS and leave the biased humans out of it. And 25 is too restrictive anyway, so the #26 team just isn't any good?

This is why computer rankings and algorithms exist. They can do this job better than humans, and not establish subjective thresholds needlessly. Something thresholding is useful, but more often it's a heuristic trade-off for the benefit of humans.

It's funny how people want to try to reinvent the wheel, but then complain about how the wheel that's already been invented doesn't work.

If you want to go down this road though you should establish buckets or clusters or some such to account for the actual difference in the teams in the rankings, rather than an ordinal which assumes the same amount of difference between 1 and 6 as between 41 and 46, which is almost certainly not true.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 21, 2018, 02:17:29 PM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 21, 2018, 02:16:07 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 02:05:46 PM
Quote from: me on January 21, 2018, 01:01:55 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 12:45:21 PM
Quote from: me on January 21, 2018, 12:22:06 PM
The issue with this, of course, is "what is 'top 25 caliber'?"

Teams that could legitimately get Top 25 consideration/votes?

It's OK if there is subjectivity to it. I don't think that gray area is as big/problematic as it might seem.

I would love to see each region...that would be cool.

Sure it is. What is Williams, for example? They're probably like 60ish in Massey now.

There needs to be some objective definition of "top 25 caliber" for this to mean anything.

"Top 25 Caliber" = a team that meets any of the following 3 criteria.

* In the current D3hoops.com Top 25 or ORV - http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2017-18/week7

* In the current Massey Top 25 - https://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?s=cb2018&sub=11620

* In the top 25 of KnightSlappy's D3 Efficiency Rating - http://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com/p/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency.html
The problem with Massey (for today anyways) is that it appears to only be updating on Mondays so no results from this week have factored in to the rankings yet.

There won't be a new poll today either. Is that a problem?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 02:21:16 PM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 21, 2018, 02:16:07 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 02:05:46 PM
Quote from: me on January 21, 2018, 01:01:55 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 12:45:21 PM
Quote from: me on January 21, 2018, 12:22:06 PM
The issue with this, of course, is "what is 'top 25 caliber'?"

Teams that could legitimately get Top 25 consideration/votes?

It's OK if there is subjectivity to it. I don't think that gray area is as big/problematic as it might seem.

I would love to see each region...that would be cool.

Sure it is. What is Williams, for example? They're probably like 60ish in Massey now.

There needs to be some objective definition of "top 25 caliber" for this to mean anything.

"Top 25 Caliber" = a team that meets any of the following 3 criteria.

* In the current D3hoops.com Top 25 or ORV - http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2017-18/week7

* In the current Massey Top 25 - https://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?s=cb2018&sub=11620

* In the top 25 of KnightSlappy's D3 Efficiency Rating - http://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com/p/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency.html
The problem with Massey (for today anyways) is that it appears to only be updating on Mondays so no results from this week have factored in to the rankings yet.

Just roll with it...it's what we have for today.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 02:23:17 PM

Quote from: me on January 21, 2018, 02:16:54 PM
Why does the D3 poll get more than 25 but not Massey or KS?

Because all of the D3hoops.com ORV teams are on at least one pollster's top 25 ballot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 21, 2018, 02:25:31 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 02:21:16 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 21, 2018, 02:16:07 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 02:05:46 PM
Quote from: me on January 21, 2018, 01:01:55 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 12:45:21 PM
Quote from: me on January 21, 2018, 12:22:06 PM
The issue with this, of course, is "what is 'top 25 caliber'?"

Teams that could legitimately get Top 25 consideration/votes?

It's OK if there is subjectivity to it. I don't think that gray area is as big/problematic as it might seem.

I would love to see each region...that would be cool.

Sure it is. What is Williams, for example? They're probably like 60ish in Massey now.

There needs to be some objective definition of "top 25 caliber" for this to mean anything.

"Top 25 Caliber" = a team that meets any of the following 3 criteria.

* In the current D3hoops.com Top 25 or ORV - http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2017-18/week7

* In the current Massey Top 25 - https://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?s=cb2018&sub=11620

* In the top 25 of KnightSlappy's D3 Efficiency Rating - http://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com/p/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency.html
The problem with Massey (for today anyways) is that it appears to only be updating on Mondays so no results from this week have factored in to the rankings yet.

Just roll with it...it's what we have for today.

Might be interesting to see how much it changes in a week vs. how much the polls do. I have a feeling the computer rankings are much less viscous.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 02:25:42 PM

Quote from: me on January 21, 2018, 02:16:54 PM
Why does the D3 poll get more than 25 but not Massey or KS?

Really you should just use Massey and KS and leave the biased humans out of it. And 25 is too restrictive anyway, so the #26 team just isn't any good?

This is why computer rankings and algorithms exist. They can do this job better than humans, and not establish subjective thresholds needlessly. Something thresholding is useful, but more often it's a heuristic trade-off for the benefit of humans.

It's funny how people want to try to reinvent the wheel, but then complain about how the wheel that's already been invented doesn't work.

If you want to go down this road though you should establish buckets or clusters or some such to account for the actual difference in the teams in the rankings, rather than an ordinal which assumes the same amount of difference between 1 and 6 as between 41 and 46, which is almost certainly not true.

Not really looking for any buckets or clusters or talk of algorithms.

You asked for a definition of "top 25 caliber" so I gave you one.

Just roll with it. It will be all good, I promise. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on January 21, 2018, 02:26:52 PM

My West Region Rankings
1. Whitman Blues (17-0, 8-0 NWC) - vs. Occidental, vs. UW-Stevens Point (Las Vegas), vs. Ohio Wesleyan (Las Vegas), vs. Whitworth .... W at Walla Walla University (NAIA)
2. St. John's Johnnies (14-1, 10-0 MIAC) - vs. Bethel, at Augsburg ... W at St. Cloud State University (D2)
3. Whitworth Pirates (15-2, 7-1 NWC) - vs. North Central
4. Nebraska Wesleyan Prairie Wolves (16-2, 7-2 IIAC) - vs. Wartburg ... W vs. Doane University (NAIA)
5. Loras Duhawks (14-4, 7-2 IIAC) - vs. Nebraska Wesleyan, at Buena Vista
6. Augsburg Auggies (13-4, 8-4 MIAC) - vs. Loras, vs. Wartburg (Las vegas), at Bethel
7. Bethel Royals (12-4, 7-4 MIAC) - at Augsburg
8. Buena Vista Beavers (14-4, 7-2 IIAC) - ~~vs. Elmhurst,~~ at Nebraska Wesleyan
9. Wartburg Knights (12-5, 5-3 IIAC) - vs. Loras, vs. UW-Stevens Point (Las Vegas), vs. Buena Vista ... L at UNI (D1), W at Graceland University (NAIA), W at Waldorf University (NAIA)
10. Occidental Tigers (14-2, 7-0 SCIAC) - ... W vs. West Coast Baptist (NCCAA), W vs. Cal Mirmar University (USCAA), W vs. Cal Mirmar University (USCAA), W vs. UC Mercid (NAIA), L at West Coast Baptist (NCCAA), W vs. Westcliff (USCAA)

Top three I felt pretty confident about. I think you could have Loras/Neb Wesleyan in either order. Loras won the head to head in OT on their home floor. Not super convincing. NWU doesn't have as bad of losses (Loras lost at Simpson and Concordia (WI)), so I put them one slot higher. Augsburg and Bethel are pretty close as well, splitting the season head to head, but Augsburg has some solid wins over IIAC opponents Warty and Loras that props them ahead of Bethel, who lacks a solid non-conference result. Wartburg and Occidental are hurt by playing so many non-d3 opponents in my opinion.

I feel like I was more generous including "Top 25 consideration" teams than Titan Q was. Like I included as a win at Elmhurst as a good result, even though that may have some pushback. I also included a win over a team that was on this top 10 list, such as Whitman over Occidental, even though some would say Oxy isn't in the "conversation" of top 25.

Feels weird not having St. Thomas on here...

EDIT: I just noticed all of the new posts here, all of the results I included (besides Elmhurst) met one of the top 25 criteria. I crossed those out, will adjust and repost.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 02:29:05 PM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on January 21, 2018, 02:26:52 PM
My West Region Rankings
1. Whitman Blues (17-0, 8-0 NWC) - vs. Occidental, vs. UW-Stevens Point (Las Vegas), vs. Ohio Wesleyan (Las Vegas), vs. Whitworth .... W at Walla Walla University (NAIA)
2. St. John's Johnnies (14-1, 10-0 MIAC) - vs. Bethel, at Augsburg ... W at St. Cloud State University (D2)
3. Whitworth Pirates (15-2, 7-1 NWC) - vs. North Central
4. Nebraska Wesleyan Prairie Wolves (16-2, 7-2 IIAC) - vs. Wartburg ... W vs. Doane University (NAIA)
5. Loras Duhawks (14-4, 7-2 IIAC) - vs. Nebraska Wesleyan, at Buena Vista
6. Augsburg Auggies (13-4, 8-4 MIAC) - vs. Loras, vs. Wartburg (Las vegas), at Bethel
7. Bethel Royals (12-4, 7-4 MIAC) - at Augsburg
8. Buena Vista Beavers (14-4, 7-2 IIAC) - vs. Elmhurst, at Nebraska Wesleyan
9. Wartburg Knights (12-5, 5-3 IIAC) - vs. Loras, vs. UW-Stevens Point (Las Vegas), vs. Buena Vista ... L at UNI (D1), W at Graceland University (NAIA), W at Waldorf University (NAIA)
10. Occidental Tigers (14-2, 7-0 SCIAC) - ... W vs. West Coast Baptist (NCCAA), W vs. Cal Mirmar University (USCAA), W vs. Cal Mirmar University (USCAA), W vs. UC Mercid (NAIA), L at West Coast Baptist (NCCAA), W vs. Westcliff (USCAA)

Top three I felt pretty confident about. I think you could have Loras/Neb Wesleyan in either order. Loras won the head to head in OT on their home floor. Not super convincing. NWU doesn't have as bad of losses (Loras lost at Simpson and Concordia (WI)), so I put them one slot higher. Augsburg and Bethel are pretty close as well, splitting the season head to head, but Augsburg has some solid wins over IIAC opponents Warty and Loras that props them ahead of Bethel, who lacks a solid non-conference result. Wartburg and Occidental are hurt by playing so many non-d3 opponents in my opinion.

I feel like I was more generous including "Top 25 consideration" teams than Titan Q was. Like I included as a win at Elmhurst as a good result, even though that may have some pushback. I also included a win over a team that was on this top 10 list, such as Whitman over Occidental, even though some would say Oxy isn't in the "conversation" of top 25.

Feels weird not having St. Thomas on here...

Thanks Smitty! Please apply the new "top 25 caliber" criteria. That will give us some consistency.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 02:31:10 PM

Quote from: me on January 21, 2018, 02:26:35 PM

That's not really an answer. This is giving more credence to biased humans than objective data-driven formulas.

You asked for the rule...and I made it.

It's all good man, I promise. Humans are OK too.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 02:35:12 PM

Smitty, let's take all the non-D3 wins out...that will get too messy.

Great job, man...thank you!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 21, 2018, 02:35:32 PM

Quote from: me on January 21, 2018, 02:17:29 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 21, 2018, 02:16:07 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 02:05:46 PM
Quote from: me on January 21, 2018, 01:01:55 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 12:45:21 PM
Quote from: me on January 21, 2018, 12:22:06 PM
The issue with this, of course, is "what is 'top 25 caliber'?"

Teams that could legitimately get Top 25 consideration/votes?

It's OK if there is subjectivity to it. I don't think that gray area is as big/problematic as it might seem.

I would love to see each region...that would be cool.

Sure it is. What is Williams, for example? They're probably like 60ish in Massey now.

There needs to be some objective definition of "top 25 caliber" for this to mean anything.

"Top 25 Caliber" = a team that meets any of the following 3 criteria.

* In the current D3hoops.com Top 25 or ORV - http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2017-18/week7

* In the current Massey Top 25 - https://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?s=cb2018&sub=11620

* In the top 25 of KnightSlappy's D3 Efficiency Rating - http://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com/p/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency.html
The problem with Massey (for today anyways) is that it appears to only be updating on Mondays so no results from this week have factored in to the rankings yet.

There won't be a new poll today either. Is that a problem?

Fair point. I think it's that I'm used to Massey updating more frequently than this that causes me to think it's far out of date.

For my list I'm listing three types of results... wins over good teams, losses to good teams (good teams being defined as teams that are on my consideration list for this exercise and similar teams from other regions), and losses to weaker teams (basically around .500 and worse)
It's pretty obvious who #1 in the GL is... after that it's a cluster.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on January 21, 2018, 02:37:07 PM

My West Region Rankings
1. Whitman Blues (17-0, 8-0 NWC) - vs. Occidental, vs. UW-Stevens Point (Las Vegas), vs. Ohio Wesleyan (Las Vegas), vs. Whitworth
2. St. John's Johnnies (14-1, 10-0 MIAC) - vs. Bethel, at Augsburg
3. Whitworth Pirates (15-2, 7-1 NWC) - vs. North Central
4. Nebraska Wesleyan Prairie Wolves (16-2, 7-2 IIAC) - vs. Wartburg
5. Loras Duhawks (14-4, 7-2 IIAC) - vs. Nebraska Wesleyan, at Buena Vista
6. Augsburg Auggies (13-4, 8-4 MIAC) - vs. Loras, vs. Wartburg (Las vegas), at Bethel
7. Bethel Royals (12-4, 7-4 MIAC) - at Augsburg
8. Buena Vista Beavers (14-4, 7-2 IIAC) - at Nebraska Wesleyan
9. Wartburg Knights (12-5, 5-3 IIAC) - vs. Loras, vs. UW-Stevens Point (Las Vegas), vs. Buena Vista
10. Occidental Tigers (14-2, 7-0 SCIAC) -

Top three I felt pretty confident about. I think you could have Loras/Neb Wesleyan in either order. Loras won the head to head in OT on their home floor. Not super convincing. NWU doesn't have as bad of losses (Loras lost at Simpson and Concordia (WI)), so I put them one slot higher. Augsburg and Bethel are pretty close as well, splitting the season head to head, but Augsburg has some solid wins over IIAC opponents Warty and Loras that props them ahead of Bethel, who lacks a solid non-conference result. Wartburg and Occidental are hurt by playing so many non-d3 opponents in my opinion.

UW-Stevens Point is the only opponent I have listed that doesn't meet any of the criteria. They are 27 in Massey and 38 in Snyders efficiency ratings with no votes in d3hoops poll. I kept them in because I would be shocked if they don't qualify for one of those 3 criteria with the newest updates coming tomorrow.

Surprisingly, all 10 teams crack the top 25 (or D3 ORV) in one of the three criteria!

Feels weird not having St. Thomas on here...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 21, 2018, 02:39:14 PM

Quote from: me on January 21, 2018, 02:26:35 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 02:23:17 PM
Quote from: me on January 21, 2018, 02:16:54 PM
Why does the D3 poll get more than 25 but not Massey or KS?

Because all of the D3hoops.com ORV teams are on at least one pollster's top 25 ballot.

That's not really an answer. This is giving more credence to biased humans than objective data-driven formulas.

But the formulas are only as good as those pesky humans that make them. If they were truly objective I'd think that the computers would spit out pretty much the same rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on January 21, 2018, 02:42:49 PM

Quote from: me on January 21, 2018, 02:37:04 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 02:35:12 PM
Smitty, let's take all the non-D3 wins out...that will get too messy.

Great job, man...thank you!

Haha so you don't think beating a good D2 team is significant?

It is not primary consideration for the selection committee, so unfortunately no it is not significant to the exercise.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on January 21, 2018, 02:45:44 PM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 21, 2018, 02:35:32 PM
Fair point. I think it's that I'm used to Massey updating more frequently than this that causes me to think it's far out of date.

For my list I'm listing three types of results... wins over good teams, losses to good teams (good teams being defined as teams that are on my consideration list for this exercise and similar teams from other regions), and losses to weaker teams (basically around .500 and worse)
It's pretty obvious who #1 in the GL is... after that it's a cluster.

I just decided to go with the same format from Q. I also have the same 'good losses' and 'bad losses' but plan to use those in a "West Region" thread I will start soon, updating the full resumes of the top west teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 02:47:11 PM

Quote from: me on January 21, 2018, 02:37:04 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 02:35:12 PM
Smitty, let's take all the non-D3 wins out...that will get too messy.

Great job, man...thank you!

Haha so you don't think beating a good D2 team is significant?

I do. But I think it gets messy.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 02:50:16 PM

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on January 21, 2018, 02:52:06 PM

Algorithms or humans... it doesn't matter, I really like this. Hope we can get each region covered!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 21, 2018, 03:06:37 PM

The Great Lakes is a muddled pile of sludge. After Wittenberg there should be a couple blank spots in the rankings. There's three teams with 3 losses (one because of a weak schedule) and then everyone else with 4 or more losses. Sort of like the Central region but worse.
I'll probably come up with a top 10 tomorrow because my brain hurts from trying to sort out this mess for so long.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 03:19:25 PM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 21, 2018, 03:06:37 PM
The Great Lakes is a muddled pile of sludge. After Wittenberg there should be a couple blank spots in the rankings. There's three teams with 3 losses (one because of a weak schedule) and then everyone else with 4 or more losses. Sort of like the Central region but worse.
I'll probably come up with a top 10 tomorrow because my brain hurts from trying to sort out this mess for so long.

Grind through it, FC..we need ya! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 21, 2018, 03:20:50 PM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 21, 2018, 02:39:14 PM
Quote from: me on January 21, 2018, 02:26:35 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 02:23:17 PM
Quote from: me on January 21, 2018, 02:16:54 PM
Why does the D3 poll get more than 25 but not Massey or KS?

Because all of the D3hoops.com ORV teams are on at least one pollster's top 25 ballot.

That's not really an answer. This is giving more credence to biased humans than objective data-driven formulas.
But the formulas are only as good as those pesky humans that make them. If they were truly objective I'd think that the computers would spit out pretty much the same rankings.

Some formulas are better than others, sure.

I'm pretty sure the guy that got picked to be part the NCAA I-A championship's selections would have a pretty decent one, though. Call me crazy.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 21, 2018, 03:23:11 PM

Thanks for all the -k's, easily offended people.

I've deleted most of my posts and am washing my hands of this pointless exercise. Do your worst.

Titan gives himself away when he said he's not interested in clusters. He's interested in an inaccurate, subjective heuristic that confirms human biases.

Whatever, I'm out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 03:33:14 PM

Quote from: me on January 21, 2018, 03:23:11 PM
Thanks for all the -k's, easily offended people.

I've deleted most of my posts and am washing my hands of this pointless exercise. Do your worst.

Titan gives himself away when he said he's not interested in clusters. He's interested in an inaccurate, subjective heuristic that confirms human biases.

Whatever, I'm out.

I am just trying to rank some basketball teams without a lot of drama. That is all, dude.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 21, 2018, 03:36:19 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 02:50:16 PM
Smitty Oom's West Region
1. Whitman Blues (17-0, 8-0 NWC) - vs. Occidental, vs. UW-Stevens Point (Las Vegas), vs. Ohio Wesleyan (Las Vegas), vs. Whitworth
2. St. John's Johnnies (14-1, 10-0 MIAC) - vs. Bethel, at Augsburg
3. Whitworth Pirates (15-2, 7-1 NWC) - vs. North Central
4. Nebraska Wesleyan Prairie Wolves (16-2, 7-2 IIAC) - vs. Wartburg
5. Loras Duhawks (14-4, 7-2 IIAC) - vs. Nebraska Wesleyan, at Buena Vista
6. Augsburg Auggies (13-4, 8-4 MIAC) - vs. Loras, vs. Wartburg (Las vegas), at Bethel
7. Bethel Royals (12-4, 7-4 MIAC) - at Augsburg
8. Buena Vista Beavers (14-4, 7-2 IIAC) - at Nebraska Wesleyan
9. Wartburg Knights (12-5, 5-3 IIAC) - vs. Loras, vs. UW-Stevens Point (Las Vegas), vs. Buena Vista
10. Occidental Tigers (14-2, 7-0 SCIAC) -

Titan Q's Central Region
1. Wash U (13-2, 4-0 UAA) - vs Tufts, vs Ohio Northern, at Illinois Wesleyan
2. Illinois Wesleyan (14-3, 7-1 CCIW) - at North Central, at Wheaton, vs Augustana
3. Augustana (14-3, 6-2 CCIW) - vs North Central, vs UW-Stevens Point (neutral), at Wash U
4. UW-Stevens Point (12-5, 6-0 WIAC) - at Buena Vista, at UW-River Falls, at UW-Whitewater, vs UW-Platteville
5. Wheaton (13-4, 6-2 CCIW) - vs Baldwin Wallace, at Whitworth, at Augustana
6. UW-River Falls (12-4, 3-3 WIAC) - at UW-Whitewater, vs UW-Platteville
7. UW-Whitewater (14-3, 4-2 WIAC) at UW-Oshkosh
8. UW-Oshkosh (13-4, 3-3 WIAC) - vs Augustana, vs UW-River Falls
9. UW-Platteville (14-3, 4-2 WIAC) - vs UW-Oshkosh
10. North Central (12-5, 5-3 CCIW) - vs Wheaton

Shouldn't this be in the Pool C thread?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 03:54:17 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 21, 2018, 03:36:19 PM

Shouldn't this be in the Pool C thread?

This is not about Pool C. It's about how teams stack up for Top 25 rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 21, 2018, 03:57:10 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 03:54:17 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 21, 2018, 03:36:19 PM

Shouldn't this be in the Pool C thread?

This is not about Pool C. It's about how teams stack up for Top 25 rankings.

Are they not the same thing? And if not isn't that admitting the entire problem with the polls?

Y'all can take back all those -k's now. Y'all aren't even in the right thread for your pointless biased list-making that totally has nothing to do with Pool C.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 03:58:40 PM

Quote from: me on January 21, 2018, 03:57:10 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 03:54:17 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 21, 2018, 03:36:19 PM

Shouldn't this be in the Pool C thread?

This is not about Pool C. It's about how teams stack up for Top 25 rankings.

Are they not the same thing?

Y'all can take back all those -k's now. Y'all aren't even in the right thread for your pointless biased list-making that totally has nothing to do with Pool C.

The D3hoops.com Top 25 and Pool C rankings are completely different things, me.

On the exercise I'm advocating for here related to the Top 25, I simply believe it helps a lot to take a look at each region, and try to get the order right by region. It helps to look at things in smaller chunks (regions) when trying to sort out so many teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 21, 2018, 04:15:45 PM

By this point in most seasons, the usual names appear at the top of conferences races and conversations surround the usual suspects. Not the case this year. There are new names at the top, or in the mix, of conferences around the country.

That excitement is what is driving the 2017-18 season and makes any night in Division III must-watch.

On Sunday's episode of Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave talks to some new face leading or in the mix in their respective conferences from four or the regions around the country. Can these teams keep their success through the end of the season or has the challenge just gotten that much more difficult as the second half of conference schedules begins.

There is also some Top 25 discussion to be had. Ryan Scott makes his weekly appearance in "Top 25 Double-take."

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch the show LIVE starting at 7:00 p.m. ET right here: http://bit.ly/2DnzrgG.

A reminder that Sunday shows tend to focus on the Northeast, Atlantic, South, and Central regions primarily.

If you have questions, feel free to interact witht he show (information to the right) or send an email (hoopsville@d3hoops.com) and maybe have your question be featured on the Hoopsville Mailbag segment.

Guests include (in order of appearance):
- Rusty Rogers, Concordia-Chicago women's coach
- Adam Stockwell, No. 14 Hamilton men's coach
- Katie Pearson, Cabrini women's coach
- David Smith, Methodist men's coach
- Ryan Scott, "Top 25 Double-take"

You can also tune into the podcast(s) after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hoopsville/id1059517087
and VERY Soon on Google Play (waiting for verification)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D710%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D2x8ep%2Flcx70ze9gjran8ui.jpg&hash=b0ce0f8b222c8253c7d00595879aa9834368efa1)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 21, 2018, 04:42:21 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Whitman	17-0	won at Linfield, 82-78; won at Willamette, 75-59
#2	555	UW-Whitewater	14-3	LOST to UW-Stevens Point, 69-75; won at UW-La Crosse, 67-64 OT
#3	541	Washington U.	14-2	won at Case Western Reserve, 100-64; won at Carnegie Mellon, 104-70
#4	519	York (Pa.)	16-1	won at St. Mary's (Md.), 88-74; LOST at Mary Washington, 57-59
#5	497	Wittenberg	17-0	def. #23 Ohio Wesleyan, 93-72; won at Allegheny, 87-58
#6	444	UW-Oshkosh	13-4	LOST at #29 UW-Platteville, 57-72; LOST at UW-Eau Claire, 57-60
#7	440	Whitworth	15-2	won at Willamette, 67-65; won at Linfield, 63-55
#8	434	Augustana	14-3	won at Elmhurst, 90-80; won at North Park, 74-60
#9	415	MIT	15-2	LOST to Springfield, 65-68; won at Babson, 80-78 OT
#10	371	Lycoming	17-1	def. Hood, 106-100 OT
#11	357	Williams	13-4	def. Amherst, 72-69; LOST at #16 Middlebury, 66-70
#12	347	St. John's	14-1	def. Macalester, 133-80; def. St. Thomas, 77-62
#13	346	UW-River Falls	12-4	LOST at UW-La Crosse, 54-62; def. UW-Stout, 96-68
#14	331	Hamilton	15-1	def. SUNY Geneseo, 74-70; LOST at Amherst, 49-75
#15	295	Swarthmore	15-2	won at Haverford, 65-60 OT; def. Dickinson, 82-74
#16	268	Middlebury	14-3	def. Albertus Magnus, 77-73 OT; def. #11 Williams, 70-66; won at Pine Manor, 87-62
#17	212	Emory	14-2	won at New York University, 73-68; won at Brandeis, 90-57
#18	189	Marietta	13-4	def. Capital, 82-68; LOST at #20 John Carroll, 77-99
#19	176	Wesleyan	13-3	won at Johnson and Wales, 69-45; def. Connecticut College, 89-51
#20	121	John Carroll	14-3	LOST at T#37 Baldwin Wallace, 79-88; def. #18 Marietta, 99-77
#21	106	Franklin and Marshall	14-3	LOST at Dickinson, 50-55; won at Haverford, 79-68
#22	104	Eastern Connecticut	15-2	won at #39 Keene State, 70-64; def. Rhode Island College, 61-49
#23	84	Ohio Wesleyan	12-5	LOST at #5 Wittenberg, 72-93; won at DePauw, 77-72
#24	66	Illinois Wesleyan	14-3	def. Millikin, 78-62; won at Carroll, 82-70
#25	41	Rochester	13-3	won at Brandeis, 75-66; won at New York University, 87-82

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	38	Emory and Henry	16-1	def. Lynchburg, 102-81; def. T#41 Randolph-Macon, 75-65
#27	33	Nichols	14-2	won at Eastern Nazarene, 79-76; def. Roger Williams, 82-79
#28	31	Tufts	12-5	LOST to Bates, 75-77
#29	28	UW-Platteville	14-3	def. #6 UW-Oshkosh, 72-57; LOST at UW-Stevens Point, 74-80
#30	18	New Jersey City	14-3	def. Rutgers-Newark, 80-68; def. Rutgers-Camden, 76-54
#31	15	Wartburg	12-5	def. Buena Vista, 85-65; LOST at Nebraska Wesleyan, 60-99
#32	13	Adrian	13-4	LOST to Olivet, 62-65; LOST at Alma, 66-73
T#33	11	Ramapo	14-4	won at William Paterson, 73-61; def. Stockton, 89-60
T#33	11	Salem State	15-3	won at Bates, 83-81; def. Bridgewater State, 85-79; def. Westfield State, 107-85
#35	9	Juniata	14-3	LOST at Susquehanna, 68-70; def. Moravian, 76-65
#36	7	Cabrini	14-2	def. Neumann, 105-76; won at Marywood, 87-76
T#37	5	Baldwin Wallace	14-3	def. #20 John Carroll, 88-79; def. Muskingum, 99-70
T#37	5	Hanover	13-4	won at Mount St. Joseph, 64-41; def. Franklin, 74-65
#39	4	Keene State	12-5	LOST to #22 Eastern Connecticut, 64-70; won at Mass-Boston, 82-76
#40	3	Bethel	12-4	LOST at St. Thomas, 78-81; won at Carleton, 68-57
T#41	2	Loras	14-4	def. Central, 109-92; won at Luther, 85-38
T#41	2	Occidental	14-2	won at Chapman, 70-60; won at Redlands, 67-62
T#41	2	Randolph-Macon	13-4	def. Hampden-Sydney, 81-50; LOST at #26 Emory and Henry, 65-75
T#41	2	Wheaton (Ill.)	13-4	won at Carthage, 90-81; def. Illinois Tech, 76-55
T#45	1	North Central (Ill.)	12-5	def. Finlandia, 102-50; LOST at Elmhurst, 77-91
T#45	1	Wooster	13-4	won at Kenyon, 75-55; won at Wabash, 80-72

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 21, 2018, 04:55:06 PM

Thank you, Darryl. Helpful as always, especially for me on air.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 21, 2018, 05:25:32 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 21, 2018, 04:55:06 PM
Thank you, Darryl. Helpful as always, especially for me on air.

Happy to help, Dave.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on January 21, 2018, 06:36:35 PM

I'll be glad to take a shot at the Great Lakes as well. Probably will get around to it tomorrow. Just need to carve out some time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on January 21, 2018, 06:49:36 PM

I took a stab at the Atlantic Region. I used the criteria Titan Q specified and listed what I feel were the three best wins for each team. I added up the rankings and divided by three if listed in the D3 poll or 2 if only listed in Massey and KS polls. I am not a numbers person and this was the best I could come up with.

1. Gwynedd Mercy vs Cabrini, at Rosemont, vs Neumann
2. Ramapo vs MSU, at Stockton, vs NJCU
3. Cabrini vs Eastern CT, at Rosemont, vs Nuemann
4. NJCU vs Stevens Tech, vs Gwynedd Mercy, at Albertus Magnus
5. Nuemann vs Eastern, vs Rosemont, vs Marywood
6. TCNJ at Rowan, vs Ramapo, at Montclair
7. DeSales at Rosemont, vs Wilkes, vs Catholic
8. Montclair at Eastern CT, at NJCU, vs Stockton
9. Lehman vs Mt. St. Vincent, vs Southern Vermont, at Staten Island
10. Stockton vs William Paterson, at Linfield, vs Rowan

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 07:13:08 PM

Quote from: Knightstalker on January 21, 2018, 06:49:36 PM
I took a stab at the Atlantic Region. I used the criteria Titan Q specified and listed what I feel were the three best wins for each team. I added up the rankings and divided by three if listed in the D3 poll or 2 if only listed in Massey and KS polls. I am not a numbers person and this was the best I could come up with.

1. Gwynedd Mercy vs Cabrini, at Rosemont, vs Neumann
2. Ramapo vs MSU, at Stockton, vs NJCU
3. Cabrini vs Eastern CT, at Rosemont, vs Nuemann
4. NJCU vs Stevens Tech, vs Gwynedd Mercy, at Albertus Magnus
5. Nuemann vs Eastern, vs Rosemont, vs Marywood
6. TCNJ at Rowan, vs Ramapo, at Montclair
7. DeSales at Rosemont, vs Wilkes, vs Catholic
8. Montclair at Eastern CT, at NJCU, vs Stockton
9. Lehman vs Mt. St. Vincent, vs Southern Vermont, at Staten Island
10. Stockton vs William Paterson, at Linfield, vs Rowan

Thanks, Knighstalker! Really appreciate it.

On those best wins, can you filter out the ones that are not one of the following: 1) current D3hoops.com Top 25 + ORV, 2) current Massey top 25, 3) current Knightslappy efficiency top 25. Just making sure we keep it consistent. Thanks again!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on January 21, 2018, 07:20:55 PM

Mid-Atlantic rankings

1. York(PA) (16-1, 9-1 CAC) Swarthmore, Middlebury(N), CNU, split with the holder of The Belt(UMW)
2. Swarthmore (15-2, 9-1 CC) @ Middlebury
3. F&M (14-3, 8-2 CC) Swarthmore
4. Lycoming (17-1, 8-1 MACC)
5. Johns Hopkins (13-4, 7-3 CC) New Jersey City(N)
6. Drew (13-4, 6-0 LAND) Juniata
7. Juniata (14-3, 3-3 LAND)
The current holder of The Belt
8. Mary Washington (12-5, 6-4 CAC) York(PA)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 21, 2018, 07:31:14 PM

Finished my Top 25 ballot a little bit ago. This was actually the easiest one so far. It took a lot of work to get teams slotted in where I wanted them, but it feels like we've got enough results now to feel confident in where teams ended up. Losses will still change things moving forward, but it feels like we've reached a point where I don't have to start from scratch every week. Definitely the latest in the year I've gotten to that point since I've been voting.

To go by region, on my ballot:

NE - 5 (and the last 1-2 were begrudgingly); E and A - 0; MA - 3; S - 3; GL - 2; C - 9; W - 3

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 07:38:07 PM

Quote from: ronk on January 21, 2018, 07:20:55 PM
Mid-Atlantic rankings

1. York(PA) (16-1, 9-1 CAC) Swarthmore, Middlebury(N), CNU, split with the holder of The Belt(UMW)
2. Swarthmore (15-2, 9-1 CC) @ Middlebury
3. F&M (14-3, 8-2 CC) Swarthmore
4. Lycoming (17-1, 8-1 MACC)
5. Johns Hopkins (13-4, 7-3 CC) New Jersey City(N)
6. Drew (13-4, 6-0 LAND) Juniata
7. Juniata (14-3, 3-3 LAND)
The current holder of The Belt
8. Mary Washington (12-5, 6-4 CAC) York(PA)

Thanks, Ronk!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: me on January 21, 2018, 07:50:17 PM

So I'm not seeing a lot of anything regarding top 25 in this. These look a lot more like regional rankings to me. Surely no one thinks Lehman is top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on January 21, 2018, 07:50:34 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 07:13:08 PM
Quote from: Knightstalker on January 21, 2018, 06:49:36 PM
I took a stab at the Atlantic Region. I used the criteria Titan Q specified and listed what I feel were the three best wins for each team. I added up the rankings and divided by three if listed in the D3 poll or 2 if only listed in Massey and KS polls. I am not a numbers person and this was the best I could come up with.

1. Gwynedd Mercy vs Cabrini, at Rosemont, vs Neumann
2. Ramapo vs MSU, at Stockton, vs NJCU
3. Cabrini vs Eastern CT, at Rosemont, vs Nuemann
4. NJCU vs Stevens Tech, vs Gwynedd Mercy, at Albertus Magnus
5. Nuemann vs Eastern, vs Rosemont, vs Marywood
6. TCNJ at Rowan, vs Ramapo, at Montclair
7. DeSales at Rosemont, vs Wilkes, vs Catholic
8. Montclair at Eastern CT, at NJCU, vs Stockton
9. Lehman vs Mt. St. Vincent, vs Southern Vermont, at Staten Island
10. Stockton vs William Paterson, at Linfield, vs Rowan

Thanks, Knighstalker! Really appreciate it.

On those best wins, can you filter out the ones that are not one of the following: 1) current D3hoops.com Top 25 + ORV, 2) current Massey top 25, 3) current Knightslappy efficiency top 25. Just making sure we keep it consistent. Thanks again!

I will go through the list and edit the wins. I also forgot to put in records.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on January 21, 2018, 08:21:12 PM

I took a stab at the Atlantic Region. I used the criteria Titan Q specified and listed what I feel were the three best wins for each team. I added up the rankings and divided by three if listed in the D3 poll or 2 if only listed in Massey and KS polls. I am not a numbers person and this was the best I could come up with.

1. Gwynedd Mercy (13-2, 8-1 CSAC) vs Cabrini
2. Ramapo (14-4, 10-1 NJAC) vs NJCU
3. Cabrini (14-2, 8-1 CSAC) vs Eastern CT
4. NJCU (14-3, 8-2 NJAC)
5. Nuemann (12-4, 7-3 CSAC)
6. TCNJ (14-3, 9-1 NJAC) vs Ramapo
7. DeSales (13-4, 4-2 MACF)
8. Montclair (13-5, 9-4 NJAC) at Eastern CT, at NJCU
9. Lehman (13-4, 8-1 CUNYAC)
10. Stockton (11-7, 5-6 NJAC)

Edited the best wins as Titan Q requested and added in records. I was originally going to only rank 8 teams as that is what the Atlantic gets in the regional rankings but decided to stretch it out to ten.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 08:53:42 PM

Smitty Oom's West Region
1. Whitman Blues (17-0, 8-0 NWC) - vs. Occidental, vs. UW-Stevens Point (Las Vegas), vs. Ohio Wesleyan (Las Vegas), vs. Whitworth
2. St. John's Johnnies (14-1, 10-0 MIAC) - vs. Bethel, at Augsburg
3. Whitworth Pirates (15-2, 7-1 NWC) - vs. North Central
4. Nebraska Wesleyan Prairie Wolves (16-2, 7-2 IIAC) - vs. Wartburg
5. Loras Duhawks (14-4, 7-2 IIAC) - vs. Nebraska Wesleyan, at Buena Vista
6. Augsburg Auggies (13-4, 8-4 MIAC) - vs. Loras, vs. Wartburg (Las vegas), at Bethel
7. Bethel Royals (12-4, 7-4 MIAC) - at Augsburg
8. Buena Vista Beavers (14-4, 7-2 IIAC) - at Nebraska Wesleyan
9. Wartburg Knights (12-5, 5-3 IIAC) - vs. Loras, vs. UW-Stevens Point (Las Vegas), vs. Buena Vista
10. Occidental Tigers (14-2, 7-0 SCIAC) -

Titan Q's Central Region
1. Wash U (14-2, 5-0 UAA) - vs Tufts, vs Ohio Northern, at Illinois Wesleyan
2. Illinois Wesleyan (14-3, 7-1 CCIW) - at North Central, at Wheaton, vs Augustana
3. Augustana (14-3, 6-2 CCIW) - vs North Central, vs UW-Stevens Point (neutral), at Wash U
4. UW-Stevens Point (12-5, 6-0 WIAC) - at Buena Vista, at UW-River Falls, at UW-Whitewater, vs UW-Platteville
5. Wheaton (13-4, 6-2 CCIW) - vs Baldwin Wallace, at Whitworth, at Augustana
6. UW-River Falls (12-4, 3-3 WIAC) - at UW-Whitewater, vs UW-Platteville
7. UW-Whitewater (14-3, 4-2 WIAC) at UW-Oshkosh
8. UW-Oshkosh (13-4, 3-3 WIAC) - vs Augustana, vs UW-River Falls
9. UW-Platteville (14-3, 4-2 WIAC) - vs UW-Oshkosh
10. North Central (12-5, 5-3 CCIW) - vs Wheaton

Ronk's Mid-Atlantic Region
1. York(PA) (16-1, 9-1 CAC) Swarthmore, Middlebury(N), CNU, split with the holder of The Belt(UMW)
2. Swarthmore (15-2, 9-1 CC) @ Middlebury
3. F&M (14-3, 8-2 CC) Swarthmore
4. Lycoming (17-1, 8-1 MACC)
5. Johns Hopkins (13-4, 7-3 CC) New Jersey City(N)
6. Drew (13-4, 6-0 LAND) Juniata
7. Juniata (14-3, 3-3 LAND)
The current holder of The Belt
8. Mary Washington (12-5, 6-4 CAC) York(PA)

Knightstalker's Atlantic Region
1. Gwynedd Mercy (13-2, 8-1 CSAC) vs Cabrini
2. Ramapo (14-4, 10-1 NJAC) vs NJCU
3. Cabrini (14-2, 8-1 CSAC) vs Eastern CT
4. NJCU (14-3, 8-2 NJAC)
5. Nuemann (12-4, 7-3 CSAC)
6. TCNJ (14-3, 9-1 NJAC) vs Ramapo
7. DeSales (13-4, 4-2 MACF)
8. Montclair (13-5, 9-4 NJAC)
9. Lehman (13-4, 8-1 CUNYAC)
10. Stockton (11-7, 5-6 NJAC)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: warriorcat on January 21, 2018, 08:56:42 PM

Quote from: Knightstalker on January 21, 2018, 08:21:12 PM
I took a stab at the Atlantic Region. I used the criteria Titan Q specified and listed what I feel were the three best wins for each team. I added up the rankings and divided by three if listed in the D3 poll or 2 if only listed in Massey and KS polls. I am not a numbers person and this was the best I could come up with.

1. Gwynedd Mercy (13-2, 8-1 CSAC) vs Cabrini
2. Ramapo (14-4, 10-1 NJAC) vs NJCU
3. Cabrini (14-2, 8-1 CSAC) vs Eastern CT
4. NJCU (14-3, 8-2 NJAC)
5. Nuemann (12-4, 7-3 CSAC)
6. TCNJ (14-3, 9-1 NJAC) vs Ramapo
7. DeSales (13-4, 4-2 MACF)
8. Montclair (13-5, 9-4 NJAC) at Eastern CT, at NJCU
9. Lehman (13-4, 8-1 CUNYAC)
10. Stockton (11-7, 5-6 NJAC)

Edited the best wins as Titan Q requested and added in records. I was originally going to only rank 8 teams as that is what the Atlantic gets in the regional rankings but decided to stretch it out to ten.

I believe hat Montclair lost to Eastern CT

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on January 21, 2018, 09:00:07 PM

Quote from: warriorcat on January 21, 2018, 08:56:42 PM
Quote from: Knightstalker on January 21, 2018, 08:21:12 PM
I took a stab at the Atlantic Region. I used the criteria Titan Q specified and listed what I feel were the three best wins for each team. I added up the rankings and divided by three if listed in the D3 poll or 2 if only listed in Massey and KS polls. I am not a numbers person and this was the best I could come up with.

1. Gwynedd Mercy (13-2, 8-1 CSAC) vs Cabrini
2. Ramapo (14-4, 10-1 NJAC) vs NJCU
3. Cabrini (14-2, 8-1 CSAC) vs Eastern CT
4. NJCU (14-3, 8-2 NJAC)
5. Nuemann (12-4, 7-3 CSAC)
6. TCNJ (14-3, 9-1 NJAC) vs Ramapo
7. DeSales (13-4, 4-2 MACF)
8. Montclair (13-5, 9-4 NJAC) at Eastern CT, at NJCU
9. Lehman (13-4, 8-1 CUNYAC)
10. Stockton (11-7, 5-6 NJAC)

Edited the best wins as Titan Q requested and added in records. I was originally going to only rank 8 teams as that is what the Atlantic gets in the regional rankings but decided to stretch it out to ten.

I believe hat Montclair lost to Eastern CT

You are correct, I got cross eyed on that one, I looked at Eastern CT and my eyes drifted to the Kean results right above it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 21, 2018, 09:20:44 PM

Quote from: me on January 21, 2018, 03:23:11 PM
Thanks for all the -k's, easily offended people.

I've deleted most of my posts and am washing my hands of this pointless exercise. Do your worst.

Titan gives himself away when he said he's not interested in clusters. He's interested in an inaccurate, subjective heuristic that confirms human biases.

Whatever, I'm out.

Why do you keep coming back if you are only going to leave again?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 21, 2018, 10:52:26 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 21, 2018, 03:54:17 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 21, 2018, 03:36:19 PM

Shouldn't this be in the Pool C thread?

This is not about Pool C. It's about how teams stack up for Top 25 rankings.

OK, just kind of looked like Regional Rankings to me! ??? ;D :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on January 22, 2018, 08:37:28 AM

Taking a stab at the GL this morning...using resumes and what I've seen from these teams with my eyes.

Fifth and Putnam's Great Lakes Region
1. Wittenberg (17-0, 10-0 NCAC) - vs Marietta, vs Ohio Wesleyan, at Wooster
2. Baldwin Wallace (14-3, 8-2 OAC) - at UW-River Falls, at Marietta, vs. John Carroll
3. John Carroll (14-3, 8-2 OAC) - @ Marietta, vs. Marietta, vs. Ohio Northern
4. Marietta (13-4, 7-3 OAC) - vs. Ohio Northern, vs. Hanover
5. Ohio Northern (12-5, 7-3 OAC) - @ Baldwin Wallace, vs. Keene State
6. Wooster (13-4, 7-3 NCAC) vs. Emory and Henry, at Ohio Wesleyan, vs. Hanover
7. Ohio Wesleyan (12-5, 7-3 NCAC) vs. Ramapo
8. Mount St. Joseph (12-5, 9-1 HCAC) - vs Wash U.
9. Hope (10-7, 4-2 MIAA) - vs. John Carroll
10. Transylvania (13-4, 8-2 HCAC) - vs. Hanover

It's probably not perfect and I can see where people will probably say Team A should be here over Team B, or Team C should not be here at all. It is what it is.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Onward on, John Carroll on January 22, 2018, 09:43:32 AM

Quote from: Fifth and Putnam on January 22, 2018, 08:37:28 AM
Taking a stab at the GL this morning...using resumes and what I've seen from these teams with my eyes.

Fifth and Putnam's Great Lakes Region
1. Wittenberg (17-0, 10-0 NCAC) - vs Marietta, vs Ohio Wesleyan, at Wooster
2. Baldwin Wallace (14-3, 8-2 OAC) - at UW-River Falls, at Marietta, vs. John Carroll
3. John Carroll (14-3, 8-2 OAC) - @ Marietta, vs. Marietta, vs. Ohio Northern
4. Marietta (13-4, 7-3 OAC) - vs. Ohio Northern, vs. Hanover
5. Ohio Northern (12-5, 7-3 OAC) - @ Baldwin Wallace, vs. Keene State
6. Wooster (13-4, 7-3 NCAC) vs. Emory and Henry, at Ohio Wesleyan, vs. Hanover
7. Ohio Wesleyan (12-5, 7-3 NCAC) vs. Ramapo
8. Mount St. Joseph (12-5, 9-1 HCAC) - vs Wash U.
9. Hope (10-7, 4-2 MIAA) - vs. John Carroll
10. Transylvania (13-4, 8-2 HCAC) - vs. Hanover

It's probably not perfect and I can see where people will probably say Team A should be here over Team B, or Team C should not be here at all. It is what it is.

You are right, you could quibble about this team or that team being ranked a slot or two too high or too low but I think you have a solid group of teams there, F&P. I think the OAC could get 3 in again this year if things fall right and all of these teams -- BW, JCU, Etta and ONU -- avoid the upset bug to the other 6 teams in the league (JCU already dropped one to Mount) and keep each other in the regional rankings. Of course, they could each get upset and, with losses to each other, lose 3 more games each and find themselves in a situation where it is an OAC Tourney Title-or-Die situation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 22, 2018, 09:59:04 AM

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on January 22, 2018, 10:01:45 AM

Quote from: Onward on, John Carroll on January 22, 2018, 09:43:32 AM
Quote from: Fifth and Putnam on January 22, 2018, 08:37:28 AM
Taking a stab at the GL this morning...using resumes and what I've seen from these teams with my eyes.

Fifth and Putnam's Great Lakes Region
1. Wittenberg (17-0, 10-0 NCAC) - vs Marietta, vs Ohio Wesleyan, at Wooster
2. Baldwin Wallace (14-3, 8-2 OAC) - at UW-River Falls, at Marietta, vs. John Carroll
3. John Carroll (14-3, 8-2 OAC) - @ Marietta, vs. Marietta, vs. Ohio Northern
4. Marietta (13-4, 7-3 OAC) - vs. Ohio Northern, vs. Hanover
5. Ohio Northern (12-5, 7-3 OAC) - @ Baldwin Wallace, vs. Keene State
6. Wooster (13-4, 7-3 NCAC) vs. Emory and Henry, at Ohio Wesleyan, vs. Hanover
7. Ohio Wesleyan (12-5, 7-3 NCAC) vs. Ramapo
8. Mount St. Joseph (12-5, 9-1 HCAC) - vs Wash U.
9. Hope (10-7, 4-2 MIAA) - vs. John Carroll
10. Transylvania (13-4, 8-2 HCAC) - vs. Hanover

It's probably not perfect and I can see where people will probably say Team A should be here over Team B, or Team C should not be here at all. It is what it is.

You are right, you could quibble about this team or that team being ranked a slot or two too high or too low but I think you have a solid group of teams there, F&P. I think the OAC could get 3 in again this year if things fall right and all of these teams -- BW, JCU, Etta and ONU -- avoid the upset bug to the other 6 teams in the league (JCU already dropped one to Mount) and keep each other in the regional rankings. Of course, they could each get upset and, with losses to each other, lose 3 more games each and find themselves in a situation where it is an OAC Tourney Title-or-Die situation.

The OAC got three teams in a couple of years ago with the trio of Marietta, Mount Union, and John Carroll (both MAR and Mount got to the 2nd weekend). The one thing you worry about is somebody like a Heidelberg, a Mount Union, or even a Muskingum biting one of those top 4 teams (HEID got ONU this past week).

I think 3 OAC teams getting in is very possible again this year (Marietta needs to get healthy) and I think the Top 4 teams are all good enough to win NCAA Tournament games. Should be a fascinating final 4 weeks and conference tournament.

Looking back, I'd probably flip Wooster and Ohio Northern.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Onward on, John Carroll on January 22, 2018, 10:03:58 AM

Is KnightSlappy going to put together mock regional rankings this year in advance of February 7th's release? I look forward to his and fantastic50's analysis.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 22, 2018, 10:59:38 AM

Quote from: Onward on, John Carroll on January 22, 2018, 10:03:58 AM
Is KnightSlappy going to put together mock regional rankings this year in advance of February 7th's release? I look forward to his and fantastic50's analysis.

He's been updating them all year, I assume this is what you mean.
http://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com/p/division-iii-mens-regional-rankings.html

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on January 22, 2018, 11:53:17 AM

Quote from: sac on January 22, 2018, 10:59:38 AM
Quote from: Onward on, John Carroll on January 22, 2018, 10:03:58 AM
Is KnightSlappy going to put together mock regional rankings this year in advance of February 7th's release? I look forward to his and fantastic50's analysis.

He's been updating them all year, I assume this is what you mean.
http://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com/p/division-iii-mens-regional-rankings.html

I like the way he breaks it down on that spreadsheet. Wish I had this to look at when I was trying to determine the top 10 in the Atlantic region.

We need a sticky or child board for the links to KS rankings and some of the others or if we have on I missed it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Onward on, John Carroll on January 22, 2018, 11:55:17 AM

Quote from: sac on January 22, 2018, 10:59:38 AM
Quote from: Onward on, John Carroll on January 22, 2018, 10:03:58 AM
Is KnightSlappy going to put together mock regional rankings this year in advance of February 7th's release? I look forward to his and fantastic50's analysis.

He's been updating them all year, I assume this is what you mean.
http://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com/p/division-iii-mens-regional-rankings.html

It is but on my computer it has not shown the data all season. Maybe it is my browser. I need to figure this out. I was under the (mistaken) impression that he had not posted it yet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 22, 2018, 12:16:46 PM

Quote from: Knightstalker on January 22, 2018, 11:53:17 AM
Quote from: sac on January 22, 2018, 10:59:38 AM
Quote from: Onward on, John Carroll on January 22, 2018, 10:03:58 AM
Is KnightSlappy going to put together mock regional rankings this year in advance of February 7th's release? I look forward to his and fantastic50's analysis.

He's been updating them all year, I assume this is what you mean.
http://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com/p/division-iii-mens-regional-rankings.html

I like the way he breaks it down on that spreadsheet. Wish I had this to look at when I was trying to determine the top 10 in the Atlantic region.

We need a sticky or child board for the links to KS rankings and some of the others or if we have on I missed it.

It's linked from the front page of D3hoops.com -- under News, as Strength of Schedule.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Knightstalker on January 22, 2018, 12:50:51 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 22, 2018, 12:16:46 PM
Quote from: Knightstalker on January 22, 2018, 11:53:17 AM
Quote from: sac on January 22, 2018, 10:59:38 AM
Quote from: Onward on, John Carroll on January 22, 2018, 10:03:58 AM
Is KnightSlappy going to put together mock regional rankings this year in advance of February 7th's release? I look forward to his and fantastic50's analysis.

He's been updating them all year, I assume this is what you mean.
http://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com/p/division-iii-mens-regional-rankings.html

I like the way he breaks it down on that spreadsheet. Wish I had this to look at when I was trying to determine the top 10 in the Atlantic region.

We need a sticky or child board for the links to KS rankings and some of the others or if we have on I missed it.

It's linked from the front page of D3hoops.com -- under News, as Strength of Schedule.

Thanks Pat, I did not realize that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on January 22, 2018, 02:09:21 PM

Quote from: Onward on, John Carroll on January 22, 2018, 11:55:17 AM
Quote from: sac on January 22, 2018, 10:59:38 AM
Quote from: Onward on, John Carroll on January 22, 2018, 10:03:58 AM
Is KnightSlappy going to put together mock regional rankings this year in advance of February 7th's release? I look forward to his and fantastic50's analysis.

He's been updating them all year, I assume this is what you mean.
http://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com/p/division-iii-mens-regional-rankings.html
It is but on my computer it has not shown the data all season. Maybe it is my browser. I need to figure this out. I was under the (mistaken) impression that he had not posted it yet.

Browser - at least it was for me initially. If you pull it up on Windows Exploder (or whatever they call the current versions) it's blank. Works fine on Chrome and Firefox for me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fantastic50 on January 22, 2018, 02:16:58 PM

Quote from: Onward on, John Carroll on January 22, 2018, 10:03:58 AM
Is KnightSlappy going to put together mock regional rankings this year in advance of February 7th's release? I look forward to his and fantastic50's analysis.

Just in the last couple of days, I have gotten my stuff up and running. I have mock regional rankings and Pool C info posted. The data collection & analysis are automated this year, so I will be able to update it more frequently. Hopefully, this will be a useful supplement to what Matt Snyder compiles.
http://www.fantastic50.net/d3h_men.html (http://www.fantastic50.net/d3h_men.html)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Onward on, John Carroll on January 22, 2018, 02:33:39 PM

Quote from: fantastic50 on January 22, 2018, 02:16:58 PM
Quote from: Onward on, John Carroll on January 22, 2018, 10:03:58 AM
Is KnightSlappy going to put together mock regional rankings this year in advance of February 7th's release? I look forward to his and fantastic50's analysis.

Just in the last couple of days, I have gotten my stuff up and running. I have mock regional rankings and Pool C info posted. The data collection & analysis are automated this year, so I will be able to update it more frequently. Hopefully, this will be a useful supplement to what Matt Snyder compiles.
http://www.fantastic50.net/d3h_men.html (http://www.fantastic50.net/d3h_men.html)

Thank you, professor. I enjoy both your OHSAA and D3 work.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 22, 2018, 07:03:15 PM

New Top 25 is out: http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2017-18/week8

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiko on January 23, 2018, 02:58:40 AM

Quote from: ronk on January 21, 2018, 07:20:55 PM
The current holder of The Belt
8. Mary Washington (12-5, 6-4 CAC) York(PA)

I'm trying to remember if holding the Belt^TM is a primary or a secondary criteria in the eyes of the NCAA...

In all seriousness, I'm usually pretty parochial in my efforts to follow the D3 landscape, so appreciate the broader national perspective that I find in this room.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 23, 2018, 10:17:14 AM

Despite being 12-5, Stevens Point just misses out on the Top 25, coming in at #26 with 45 points, 9 behind #25 Marietta. Point travels to Oshkosh tomorrow.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on January 23, 2018, 10:24:23 AM

Quote from: kiko on January 23, 2018, 02:58:40 AM
Quote from: ronk on January 21, 2018, 07:20:55 PM
The current holder of The Belt
8. Mary Washington (12-5, 6-4 CAC) York(PA)

I'm trying to remember if holding the Belt^TM is a primary or a secondary criteria in the eyes of the NCAA...

In all seriousness, I'm usually pretty parochial in my efforts to follow the D3 landscape, so appreciate the broader national perspective that I find in this room.

I'm not quite the historian of The Belt^TM like others of us on the board, but I believe The Belt^TM has made the NCAA tournament every year. It^TM always has found a way in March to fulfill the original primary criteria, win the conference tournament AQ bid.

Many of us are longing for the day where a conference bottom feeder snatches The Belt^TM from a conference playoff team in the last regular season game of the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 23, 2018, 11:03:07 AM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on January 23, 2018, 10:24:23 AM
Quote from: kiko on January 23, 2018, 02:58:40 AM
Quote from: ronk on January 21, 2018, 07:20:55 PM
The current holder of The Belt
8. Mary Washington (12-5, 6-4 CAC) York(PA)

I'm trying to remember if holding the Belt^TM is a primary or a secondary criteria in the eyes of the NCAA...

In all seriousness, I'm usually pretty parochial in my efforts to follow the D3 landscape, so appreciate the broader national perspective that I find in this room.

I'm not quite the historian of The Belt^TM like others of us on the board, but I believe The Belt^TM has made the NCAA tournament every year. It^TM always has found a way in March to fulfill the original primary criteria, win the conference tournament AQ bid.

Many of us are longing for the day where a conference bottom feeder snatches The Belt^TM from a conference playoff team in the last regular season game of the season.

I think d3hoops.com is legally required to only recognize The Belt^TM holder as the true national champion at the end of the season. That's part of the reason why the dark overlord Pat Coleman has been trying to shut it down for years now. It would cause his site some problems if The Belt^TM holder did not qualify for the AQ tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 23, 2018, 11:09:57 AM

Pat has said a few times that he's made his peace with The Belt^TM. I'm not entirely convinced. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 23, 2018, 01:12:48 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 23, 2018, 10:17:14 AM
~~Despite~~ In light of being 12-5, Stevens Point just misses out on the Top 25,

FTFY. Can't so quickly and easily slough off the five non-conference losses. (Or, at least, the ones that voters think a Top 25 team shouldn't have.)

UWSP would have been on my ballot this week, if I'd had one, but I can see where other voters want to be cautious for another week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 23, 2018, 03:12:10 PM

Here is my ballot: http://bit.ly/2G8GETA

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 23, 2018, 03:59:46 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 23, 2018, 01:12:48 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 23, 2018, 10:17:14 AM
~~Despite~~ In light of being 12-5, Stevens Point just misses out on the Top 25,

FTFY. Can't so quickly and easily slough off the five non-conference losses. (Or, at least, the ones that voters think a Top 25 team shouldn't have.)

UWSP would have been on my ballot this week, if I'd had one, but I can see where other voters want to be cautious for another week.

I'm surprised they got that many. I'm not trying to get them in.

St. Olaf (11-5, 7-4)
St. Norbert (13-4, 8-2)
Augustana (14-3, 6-2)
Wartburg (12-5, 5-3)
Whitman (17-0, 8-0)

Record-wise, that's a pretty good group. SNC was getting votes when they played, I think, and of course Augie, Wartburg and Whitman were all ranked.

As of now, Just Augie and Whitman are ranked and Point has beaten currently ranked Whitewater and River Falls on the road. If they sweep this week, with a tough one at Oshkosh, they'll be in next week, IN LIGHT OF 5 losses...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 23, 2018, 04:48:28 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 23, 2018, 03:59:46 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 23, 2018, 01:12:48 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 23, 2018, 10:17:14 AM
~~Despite~~ In light of being 12-5, Stevens Point just misses out on the Top 25,

FTFY. Can't so quickly and easily slough off the five non-conference losses. (Or, at least, the ones that voters think a Top 25 team shouldn't have.)

UWSP would have been on my ballot this week, if I'd had one, but I can see where other voters want to be cautious for another week.

I'm surprised they got that many. I'm not trying to get them in.

St. Olaf (11-5, 7-4)
St. Norbert (13-4, 8-2)
Augustana (14-3, 6-2)
Wartburg (12-5, 5-3)
Whitman (17-0, 8-0)

Record-wise, that's a pretty good group. SNC was getting votes when they played, I think, and of course Augie, Wartburg and Whitman were all ranked.

As of now, Just Augie and Whitman are ranked and Point has beaten currently ranked Whitewater and River Falls on the road. If they sweep this week, with a tough one at Oshkosh, they'll be in next week, IN LIGHT OF 5 losses...

None of those losses are embarrassing, which, at some point, counts for something.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 23, 2018, 11:21:20 PM

I did make some time tonight, so here is my ballot revealed and explained:

http://onemorethingblog.blogspot.com/2018/01/d3hoops-top-25-ballot-january-22-2018.html

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 23, 2018, 11:29:49 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 23, 2018, 11:21:20 PM

I did make some time tonight, so here is my ballot revealed and explained:

http://onemorethingblog.blogspot.com/2018/01/d3hoops-top-25-ballot-january-22-2018.html

FIVE WIAC schools? ??? ::) :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 24, 2018, 07:32:33 PM

I think this Jim Mora press conference sums up anyone who is trying to vote this year:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHipzGL4dwM

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on January 24, 2018, 07:56:19 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 23, 2018, 11:21:20 PM

I did make some time tonight, so here is my ballot revealed and explained:

http://onemorethingblog.blogspot.com/2018/01/d3hoops-top-25-ballot-january-22-2018.html

Thanks, Ryan! I know how long this must take. I really enjoyed reading it.

Same goes for you, Dave!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 24, 2018, 10:38:18 PM

Quote from: smedindy on January 24, 2018, 07:32:33 PM
I think this Jim Mora press conference sums up anyone who is trying to vote this year:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHipzGL4dwM

HA! I might bring that to Hoopsville. Well done. Well put.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 25, 2018, 06:51:00 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Whitman	17-0	01/26 vs. Puget Sound; 01/27 vs. Pacific Lutheran
#2	585	Washington U.	14-2	01/26 at #22 Rochester; 01/28 at #13 Emory
#3	574	Wittenberg	18-0	def. DePauw, 76-64; 01/27 vs. Denison
#4	486	Whitworth	15-2	01/26 vs. Pacific Lutheran; 01/27 vs. Puget Sound
#5	480	Augustana	15-3	won at #34 Wheaton (Ill.), 86-84; 01/27 vs. Carthage
#6	461	St. John's	15-1	won at Hamline, 69-62; 01/27 at Bethel
#7	449	York (Pa.)	16-2	LOST at Frostburg State, 85-95; 01/27 vs. Marymount
#8	439	UW-Whitewater	14-4	LOST to #27 UW-Platteville, 67-84; 01/27 vs. UW-Eau Claire
#9	431	Lycoming	18-1	won at Messiah, 68-57; 01/27 at Widener
#10	399	Middlebury	14-3	01/28 at Trinity (Conn.)
#11	392	Swarthmore	15-2	01/25 vs. Washington College; 01/27 at Gettysburg
#12	321	MIT	16-2	def. Clark, 89-58; 01/27 at Emerson
#13	320	Emory	14-2	01/26 vs. Chicago; 01/28 vs. #2 Washington U.
#14	268	Wesleyan	14-4	LOST at SUNY-Purchase, 68-71; def. Farmingdale State, 86-71; 01/26 vs. Bates; 01/27 vs. Tufts
#15	241	Williams	14-4	def. St. Joseph's (Vt.), 104-49; 01/26 at Trinity (Conn.)
#16	209	Hamilton	16-1	def. Cazenovia, 96-77; 01/26 at Bowdoin; 01/27 at Colby
#17	196	Eastern Connecticut	16-2	def. Western Connecticut, 88-80; 01/27 at Plymouth State
#18	194	Illinois Wesleyan	15-3	won at Elmhurst, 93-76; 01/27 vs. North Park
#19	183	UW-Oshkosh	14-4	def. #26 UW-Stevens Point, 68-53; 01/27 at #20 UW-River Falls
#20	161	UW-River Falls	13-4	won at UW-Eau Claire, 77-63; 01/27 vs. #19 UW-Oshkosh
#21	131	Emory and Henry	17-1	won at Randolph, 85-74; 01/27 vs. Bridgewater (Va.)
#22	112	Rochester	13-3	01/26 vs. #2 Washington U.; 01/28 vs. Chicago
#23	76	John Carroll	15-3	def. Mount Union, 98-66; 01/27 at Muskingum
#24	71	Baldwin Wallace	14-4	LOST to Heidelberg, 80-82 OT; 01/27 vs. #25 Marietta
#25	54	Marietta	14-4	def. Otterbein, 87-68; 01/27 at #24 Baldwin Wallace

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	45	UW-Stevens Point	12-6	LOST at #19 UW-Oshkosh, 53-68; 01/27 at UW-La Crosse
#27	31	UW-Platteville	15-3	won at #8 UW-Whitewater, 84-67; 01/27 vs. UW-Stout
#28	28	New Jersey City	15-4	LOST at TCNJ, 60-67; won at William Paterson, 101-85; 01/27 vs. TCNJ
#29	25	Nichols	15-3	LOST at University of New England, 85-99; won at Endicott, 83-63; 01/27 at Gordon
#30	24	Franklin and Marshall	14-3	01/25 vs. Gettysburg; 01/27 at McDaniel
#31	19	Salem State	16-3	won at Massachusetts College, 88-77; 01/27 vs. Worcester State
#32	18	Nebraska Wesleyan	17-2	won at Luther, 82-70; 01/27 at Simpson
#33	17	Ramapo	14-5	LOST at Montclair State, 60-74; 01/27 vs. Kean
#34	14	Wheaton (Ill.)	13-5	LOST to #5 Augustana, 84-86; 01/27 at Millikin
#35	11	Cabrini	15-3	LOST at Neumann, 83-92; def. Cairn, 100-67; 01/27 vs. Centenary (N.J.)
#36	9	Ohio Wesleyan	13-5	def. Wabash, 88-76; 01/27 vs. Oberlin
#37	8	Hanover	14-4	def. Transylvania, 93-56; 01/27 at Bluffton
#38	6	Maryville (Tenn.)	14-4	def. Berea, 70-61
#39	5	Gwynedd Mercy	15-2	won at Keystone, 96-77; won at Rosemont, 72-71; 01/27 vs. Cairn
#40	4	Wooster	14-4	won at Hiram, 78-70 OT; 01/27 vs. DePauw
T#41	1	Juniata	15-3	def. Elizabethtown, 75-64; 01/27 vs. Catholic
T#41	1	Plattsburgh State	12-4	won at SUNY Potsdam, 99-55; 01/26 at SUNY New Paltz; 01/27 at SUNY Oneonta
T#41	1	Sul Ross State	14-4	01/25 at Concordia (Texas); 01/27 at Mary Hardin-Baylor

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 25, 2018, 04:28:35 PM

It doesn't matter what night you tune in to Division III basketball, something will surprise you. There are teams leading conferences that weren't expected to be in the conversation, there are programs who continue their record-setting starts to the season, and others who seem to be defying expectations - well, at least those outside of the locker room.

On Thursday's edition of Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave chats with a few coaches who have programs currently excelling - even if they have hit some bumps in the road recently. One has his program off to the best start in a storied program's history, another is leading a conference that has it's traditional leaders off the pace a bit, a third who was never thought would be on top, and a fourth looking to try and change national minds.

There is also a coach who is doing her best to help those with communications challenges, working on diversity and inclusion, all while leading Gallaudet to bigger and better results. Stephanie Stevens is this week's WBCA Center Court guest and will talk about what drew her to the deaf and hard of hearing university and what else keeps her busy off the basketball court. Stevens was a recent honoree of the WBCA Thirty Under 30.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch the show LIVE starting at 7:00 p.m. ET here: http://bit.ly/2ndxRHj.

If you have questions for Dave or his guests, feel free to interact with the show (info to the right) or send them via email. Some may even be featured on the Hoopsville Mailbag segment. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com.

Guests include (in order of appearance):
- Bob Amsberry, No. 2 Wartburg women's coach
- Amy Reed, RIT women's coach
- Stephanie Stevens, Gallaudet women's coach (WBCA Center Court)
- Darryl Keckler, Drew men's coach
- Kyle Lindsay, Adrian men's coach

You can also tune into (or subscribe) to the podcast after the show has aired:
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D710%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34kyv%2Fcouafz0vzo0kxjo9.jpg&hash=89ebe64117a48aa900bfbe0652b75e3203129e74)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 28, 2018, 07:08:46 AM

Carthage 81
#5-Augustana 78

(at Augustana)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 28, 2018, 07:48:38 AM

My updated Central Region ranking (games through Saturday 1/27)...

(wins over other "Top 25 candidates")

1. Wash U (15-2, 6-0 UAA) - vs Tufts, vs Ohio Northern, at Illinois Wesleyan, at Rochester
2. UW-Platteville (16-3, 6-2 WIAC) - vs UW-Oshkosh, at UW-Whitewater, at UW-River Falls
3. Illinois Wesleyan (16-3, 9-1 CCIW) - at North Central, vs Augustana
4. UW-Oshkosh (15-4, 5-3 WIAC) - vs Augustana, vs UW-River Falls
5. Augustana (15-4, 7-3 CCIW) - vs North Central, vs UW-Stevens Point (neutral), at Wash U
6. UW-Stevens Point (13-6, 7-1 WIAC) - at Buena Vista, at UW-River Falls, at UW-Whitewater, vs UW-Platteville
7. UW-River Falls (13-5, 4-4 WIAC) - at UW-Whitewater, vs UW-Platteville
8. UW-Whitewater (15-4, 5-3 WIAC) - at UW-Oshkosh
9. North Central (14-5, 7-3 CCIW) - n/a

* Wash U plays at Emory today...obviously a big one.

* With two losses this week (at home to Augustana, at Millikin) I have removed Wheaton as a Top 25 candidate.

* UW-Platteville was my big mover this week - I believe the Pioneers have the strongest Top 25 resume in the WIAC.
----------

WIAC Standings Through 1/27 (road wins noted)
*UW-Stevens Point 7-1 at River Falls, at Stout, at Whitewater, at La Crosse
*UW-Platteville 6-2 at Stout, at UW-Whitewater
*UW-Oshkosh 5-3 at La Crosse, at River Falls
*UW-Whitewater 5-3 at Oshkosh, at Eau Claire, at La Crosse
*UW-River Falls 4-4 at Whitewater, at Eau Claire
*UW-La Crosse 3-5 at Eau Claire, at Stout
*UW-Eau Claire 1-7 n/a
*UW-Stout 1-8 n/a

CCIW Standings Through 1/27 (road wins noted)
*Illinois Wesleyan 9-1 at Wheaton, at North Central, at North Park, at Carroll, at Elmhurst
*Augustana 7-3 at Carthage, at Elmhurst, at North Park, at Wheaton
*North Central 7-3 at North Park, at Carroll, at Millikin
*Carthage 6-3 at Illinois Wesleyan, at Millikin, at Augustana
*Wheaton 6-4 at Elmhurst, at Augustana, at Carthage
*Elmhurst 4-6 at Millikin, at North Park
*Carroll 2-7 at North Park
*Millikin 2-8 n/a
*North Park 1-9 n/a
----------

With 2 games less data, the Week 8 D3hoops.com Top 25 has the Central as:

#2 Wash U (585 points)
#5 Augustana (480)
#8 UW-Whitewater (439)
#18 Illinois Wesleyan (194)
#19 UW-Oshkosh (183)
#20 UW-River Falls (161)
ORV UW-Stevens Point (45)
ORV UW-Platteville (31)
ORV Wheaton (14)

Will the pollsters' love affair with #5-Augustana and #8 Whitewater relative to other CCIW/WIAC teams continue in Week 9? We shall see.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 28, 2018, 10:23:02 AM

Good work, Titan. One correction, Platteville didn't beat Point. Point's only conference loss is at Oshkosh this past Wednesday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2018, 03:11:14 PM

There is a first time for everything. Right?

On Sunday's Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave chats with a number of programs who have never been on the show. All of them are in conference races and yearning to position themselves well for conference tournaments. Not sure any of them were expected to be in this position.

It seems to be a theme that's pretty common of late.

At the same time, one coach has been so consistent that winning number 600 almost seemed like a forgone conclusion, but a player she has on the team now may be one of the best no one is talking about.

And what to make, again, with the men's Top 25? And who will be the last women's team(s) to stay undefeated this season? Ryan Scott joins Dave to chat in the Top 25 Double-take segment.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch the show LIVE starting at 7:00 p.m. ET here: http://bit.ly/2GoBKlL

If you have questions, be sure to interact with the show on social media (see below) or email us your questions (hoopsville@d3hoops.com).

Guests include (in order of appearance):
- Jeff Gard, UW-Platteville men's coach
- James Mooney, Mount Saint Vincent men's coach
- Carroll LaHaye, Randolph-Macon women's coach
- Lynn Hersay, Smith women's coach
- Ryan Scott, D3hoops.com columnist (Top 25 Double-take)

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts instead, you can get access to them or subscribe one of the three following ways (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D710%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D3a682%2F5saeqnu1c1l6bxb8.jpg&hash=5930439e350259bff21a1712567c945c7f59c57f)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 28, 2018, 05:57:35 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Whitman	19-0	def. Puget Sound, 136-109; def. Pacific Lutheran, 111-77
#2	585	Washington U.	16-2	won at #22 Rochester, 77-62; won at #13 Emory, 84-67
#3	574	Wittenberg	19-0	def. DePauw, 76-64; def. Denison, 84-61
#4	486	Whitworth	17-2	def. Pacific Lutheran, 81-69; def. Puget Sound, 111-97
#5	480	Augustana	15-4	won at #34 Wheaton (Ill.), 86-84; LOST to Carthage, 78-81
#6	461	St. John's	16-1	won at Hamline, 69-62; won at Bethel, 84-80 OT
#7	449	York (Pa.)	17-2	LOST at Frostburg State, 85-95; def. Marymount, 81-58
#8	439	UW-Whitewater	15-4	LOST to #27 UW-Platteville, 67-84; def. UW-Eau Claire, 75-59
#9	431	Lycoming	18-2	won at Messiah, 68-57; LOST at Widener, 65-66
#10	399	Middlebury	15-3	won at Trinity (Conn.), 87-81
#11	392	Swarthmore	17-2	def. Washington College, 62-47; won at Gettysburg, 78-64
#12	321	MIT	17-2	def. Clark, 89-58; won at Emerson, 77-51
#13	320	Emory	15-3	def. Chicago, 71-66; LOST to #2 Washington U., 67-84
#14	268	Wesleyan	16-4	LOST at SUNY-Purchase, 68-71; def. Farmingdale State, 86-71; def. Bates, 68-50; def. Tufts, 60-52
#15	241	Williams	15-4	def. St. Joseph's (Vt.), 104-49; won at Trinity (Conn.), 75-58
#16	209	Hamilton	17-2	def. Cazenovia, 96-77; LOST at Bowdoin, 68-72; won at Colby, 76-67 OT
#17	196	Eastern Connecticut	17-2	def. Western Connecticut, 88-80; won at Plymouth State, 85-73
#18	194	Illinois Wesleyan	16-3	won at Elmhurst, 93-76; def. North Park, 87-47
#19	183	UW-Oshkosh	15-4	def. #26 UW-Stevens Point, 68-53; won at #20 UW-River Falls, 78-57
#20	161	UW-River Falls	13-5	won at UW-Eau Claire, 77-63; LOST to #19 UW-Oshkosh, 57-78
#21	131	Emory and Henry	18-1	won at Randolph, 85-74; def. Bridgewater (Va.), 90-73
#22	112	Rochester	13-5	LOST to #2 Washington U., 62-77; LOST to Chicago, 65-72
#23	76	John Carroll	15-4	def. Mount Union, 98-66; LOST at Muskingum, 103-112
#24	71	Baldwin Wallace	14-5	LOST to Heidelberg, 80-82 OT; LOST to #25 Marietta, 52-65
#25	54	Marietta	15-4	def. Otterbein, 87-68; won at #24 Baldwin Wallace, 65-52

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	45	UW-Stevens Point	13-6	LOST at #19 UW-Oshkosh, 53-68; won at UW-La Crosse, 76-62
#27	31	UW-Platteville	16-3	won at #8 UW-Whitewater, 84-67; def. UW-Stout, 86-69
#28	28	New Jersey City	16-4	LOST at TCNJ, 60-67; won at William Paterson, 101-85; def. TCNJ, 80-79
#29	25	Nichols	16-3	LOST at University of New England, 85-99; won at Endicott, 83-63; won at Gordon, 97-74
#30	24	Franklin and Marshall	16-3	def. Gettysburg, 79-53; won at McDaniel, 62-51
#31	19	Salem State	17-3	won at Massachusetts College, 88-77; def. Worcester State, 98-56
#32	18	Nebraska Wesleyan	17-3	won at Luther, 82-70; LOST at Simpson, 97-102 OT
#33	17	Ramapo	15-5	LOST at Montclair State, 60-74; def. Kean, 82-67
#34	14	Wheaton (Ill.)	13-6	LOST to #5 Augustana, 84-86; LOST at Millikin, 75-94
#35	11	Cabrini	16-3	LOST at Neumann, 83-92; def. Cairn, 100-67; def. Centenary (N.J.), 92-64
#36	9	Ohio Wesleyan	14-5	def. Wabash, 88-76; def. Oberlin, 78-71
#37	8	Hanover	15-4	def. Transylvania, 93-56; won at Bluffton, 71-70
#38	6	Maryville (Tenn.)	14-4	def. Berea, 70-61
#39	5	Gwynedd Mercy	16-2	won at Keystone, 96-77; won at Rosemont, 72-71; def. Cairn, 81-67
#40	4	Wooster	15-4	won at Hiram, 78-70 OT; def. DePauw, 65-57
T#41	1	Juniata	16-3	def. Elizabethtown, 75-64; def. Catholic, 70-62
T#41	1	Plattsburgh State	14-4	won at SUNY Potsdam, 99-55; won at SUNY New Paltz, 100-71; won at SUNY Oneonta, 97-60
T#41	1	Sul Ross State	15-5	LOST at Concordia (Texas), 94-95; won at Mary Hardin-Baylor, 97-95

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on January 30, 2018, 01:09:36 AM

It looks like no one decided to give Wash U a #1 vote this week.

Looking forward to the rematch with Emory on Sunday.

Update: Also looking forward to the rematch with Rochester on Friday as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on January 30, 2018, 03:05:43 PM

Quote from: deiscanton on January 30, 2018, 01:09:36 AM
It looks like no one decided to give Wash U a #1 vote this week.

Looking forward to the rematch with Emory on Sunday.

I initially posted this quote in the UAA Men's Basketball page-- at least, I believe that I did so. A little discussion ensued, but I did enjoy the discussion on Wash U v Whitman with d-mac and Ryan Scott on Hoopsville a few days ago.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 30, 2018, 09:00:41 PM

I should be sharing the segment on here, but I keep forgetting to do it. Here is this week's Hoopsville Top 25 Double-take segment: https://youtu.be/_a6vFTt7vZU?t=1h52m18s

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on January 31, 2018, 12:52:01 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 30, 2018, 09:00:41 PM
I should be sharing the segment on here, but I keep forgetting to do it. Here is this week's Hoopsville Top 25 Double-take segment: https://youtu.be/_a6vFTt7vZU?t=1h52m18s

I really love these segments!

You guys talked about Plattsburgh State, but didn't mention that their best player and probably the best player in the SUNYAC Jon Patron sat out the first semester this year. This is when the Cardinals lost most of their games. Not saying that this makes their resume look better in the eyes of the NCAA, but definitely does give them a reason for some of the losses you noted.

Also Dave, St. John's as your "Deep Dive"? Maryville (TN) was a good one but I had to give you a little crap about having a top 5 team as your deep dive. ;)

With that said, maybe you guys could add a 4th D "Disagree." Dave could Disagree on the ranking of SJU or Emory as he had those teams higher than the poll did. You could also disagree on the poll having Augustana higher than IWU, which has been a big debate in the CCIW recently. I get there is definitely some overlap with "Disagree" but it does open up some leeway in what you guys talk about.

Just an idea, not telling you how to do your job but I wanted to share this with you guys!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 31, 2018, 04:56:50 PM

We don't want to necessarily "disagree" with other pollsters. We are two pollsters and there are 23 others. I don't want them to think we are telling them how to vote or even think we are stirring things. I think the deep dive, debate, and dubious do the "disagreeing" while not actually disagreeing. You might have to read between the lines. LOL

Yeah, I didn't have as much time to research my choices this week. Hoping to carve out more time moving forward. My Deep Dive did come with a caveat... I am voting for them, but not sure if others aren't voting high enough - i.e. St. John's. Technically deep dive should be teams not getting votes that Ryan and I notice, but that well is already running dry. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 01, 2018, 01:31:05 AM

So IWU ahead of Augustana now right?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 01, 2018, 06:47:24 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Whitman	19-0	02/02 at Lewis and Clark; 02/03 at Pacific
#2	589	Washington U.	16-2	02/02 vs. T#42 Rochester; 02/04 vs. #15 Emory
#3	574	Wittenberg	20-0	def. Kenyon, 78-63; 02/03 at Oberlin
#4	524	St. John's	18-1	def. Gustavus Adolphus, 76-54; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 86-72; 02/03 at St. Olaf
#5	510	Whitworth	17-2	02/02 at Pacific; 02/03 at Lewis and Clark
#6	488	Middlebury	16-3	won at T#42 Keene State, 84-78; 02/02 vs. Bowdoin; 02/03 vs. Colby
#7	463	Swarthmore	17-3	LOST at Muhlenberg, 88-91 OT; 02/03 vs. McDaniel
#8	415	MIT	17-3	LOST to Babson, 71-84 OT; 02/03 vs. Wheaton (Mass.)
#9	368	Augustana	16-4	def. #14 Illinois Wesleyan, 88-79; 02/03 at Carroll
#10	351	York (Pa.)	18-2	def. Wesley, 76-64; 02/03 vs. Southern Virginia
#11	310	Lycoming	19-2	def. Alvernia, 79-66; 02/03 vs. Arcadia
#12	309	UW-Whitewater	15-5	LOST at #25 UW-Stevens Point, 60-74; 02/03 at UW-Stout
#13	299	Williams	16-4	won at SUNY Oneonta, 75-56; 02/02 vs. Colby; 02/03 vs. Bowdoin
#14	279	Illinois Wesleyan	16-4	LOST at #9 Augustana, 79-88
#15	277	Emory	15-3	02/02 at Chicago; 02/04 at #2 Washington U.
#16	269	Eastern Connecticut	18-2	def. Trinity (Conn.), 72-56; 02/03 vs. Mass-Boston
#17	261	Wesleyan	16-4	02/02 at Trinity (Conn.)
#18	222	UW-Oshkosh	15-5	LOST to #20 UW-Platteville, 62-68; 02/03 vs. UW-Eau Claire
#19	210	Emory and Henry	18-2	LOST at Roanoke, 68-76; 02/03 at Lynchburg
#20	198	UW-Platteville	17-3	won at #18 UW-Oshkosh, 68-62; 02/03 at UW-La Crosse
#21	148	Hamilton	17-2	02/02 at Bates; 02/03 at Tufts
#22	106	Marietta	16-4	def. Mount Union, 80-71; 02/03 vs. Heidelberg
#23	50	Franklin and Marshall	17-3	def. Ursinus, 80-74; 02/03 vs. Muhlenberg
#24	40	UW-River Falls	14-5	def. UW-La Crosse, 77-74 OT; 02/03 at #25 UW-Stevens Point
#25	29	UW-Stevens Point	14-6	def. #12 UW-Whitewater, 74-60; 02/03 vs. #24 UW-River Falls

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	25	Salem State	18-3	won at Fitchburg State, 93-85; 02/03 vs. Framingham State
T#27	23	Gwynedd Mercy	16-3	LOST at T#40 Cabrini, 88-92; 02/03 at Lehman
T#27	23	New Jersey City	17-4	won at Kean, 75-63; 02/03 vs. Rowan
#29	22	John Carroll	16-4	won at Otterbein, 97-71; 02/03 vs. Wilmington
#30	21	Wooster	16-4	won at Oberlin, 89-59; 02/03 vs. Denison
#31	16	Nichols	17-3	def. Curry, 94-69; 02/03 vs. University of New England
#32	15	Ohio Wesleyan	14-6	LOST at Denison, 62-83; 02/03 vs. Kenyon
#33	14	Hanover	15-5	LOST at Rose-Hulman, 66-68 OT; 02/03 vs. Anderson
#34	10	Hobart	16-3	def. RPI, 77-69; 02/02 vs. St. Lawrence; 02/03 vs. Clarkson
T#35	9	Juniata	17-3	def. Susquehanna, 75-66; 02/03 at Scranton
T#35	9	Maryville (Tenn.)	14-5	LOST at Covenant, 73-80; 02/02 at William Peace
#37	8	Plattsburgh State	15-4	def. SUNY-Canton, 88-58; 02/02 vs. Oswego State; 02/03 vs. Cortland
T#38	4	Baldwin Wallace	14-6	LOST at Ohio Northern, 74-85 OT; 02/03 vs. Otterbein
T#38	4	Occidental	16-2	02/03 at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps
T#40	3	Cabrini	17-3	def. T#27 Gwynedd Mercy, 92-88; 02/03 vs. TBD
T#40	3	TCNJ	16-5	LOST to Rowan, 84-93; 02/03 at Ramapo
T#42	1	Keene State	14-6	LOST to #6 Middlebury, 78-84; 02/03 vs. Rhode Island College
T#42	1	Rochester	13-5	02/02 at #2 Washington U.; 02/04 at Chicago

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 01, 2018, 08:17:19 AM

Quote from: sac on February 01, 2018, 01:31:05 AM
So IWU ahead of Augustana now right?

Duh!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on February 01, 2018, 12:01:57 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on February 01, 2018, 06:47:24 AM
How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#1 625 Whitman 19-0 02/02 at Lewis and Clark; 02/03 at Pacific
#2 589 Washington U. 16-2 02/02 vs. T#42 Rochester; 02/04 vs. #15 Emory
#3 574 Wittenberg 20-0 def. Kenyon, 78-63; 02/03 at Oberlin
#4 524 St. John's 18-1 def. Gustavus Adolphus, 76-54; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 86-72; 02/03 at St. Olaf
#5 510 Whitworth 17-2 02/02 at Pacific; 02/03 at Lewis and Clark
#6 488 Middlebury 16-3 won at T#42 Keene State, 84-78; 02/02 vs. Bowdoin; 02/03 vs. Colby
#7 463 Swarthmore 17-3 LOST at Muhlenberg, 88-91 OT; 02/03 vs. McDaniel
#8 415 MIT 17-3 LOST to Babson, 71-84 OT; 02/03 vs. Wheaton (Mass.)
#9 368 Augustana 16-4 def. #14 Illinois Wesleyan, 88-79; 02/03 at Carroll
#10 351 York (Pa.) 18-2 def. Wesley, 76-64; 02/03 vs. Southern Virginia
#11 310 Lycoming 19-2 def. Alvernia, 79-66; 02/03 vs. Arcadia
#12 309 UW-Whitewater 15-5 LOST at #25 UW-Stevens Point, 60-74; 02/03 at UW-Stout
#13 299 Williams 16-4 won at SUNY Oneonta, 75-56; 02/02 vs. Colby; 02/03 vs. Bowdoin
#14 279 Illinois Wesleyan 16-4 LOST at #9 Augustana, 79-88
#15 277 Emory 15-3 02/02 at Chicago; 02/04 at #2 Washington U.
#16 269 Eastern Connecticut 18-2 def. Trinity (Conn.), 72-56; 02/03 vs. Mass-Boston
#17 261 Wesleyan 16-4 02/02 at Trinity (Conn.)
#18 222 UW-Oshkosh 15-5 LOST to #20 UW-Platteville, 62-68; 02/03 vs. UW-Eau Claire
#19 210 Emory and Henry 18-2 LOST at Roanoke, 68-76; 02/03 at Lynchburg
#20 198 UW-Platteville 17-3 won at #18 UW-Oshkosh, 68-62; 02/03 at UW-La Crosse
#21 148 Hamilton 17-2 02/02 at Bates; 02/03 at Tufts
#22 106 Marietta 16-4 def. Mount Union, 80-71; 02/03 vs. Heidelberg
#23 50 Franklin and Marshall 17-3 def. Ursinus, 80-74; 02/03 vs. Muhlenberg
#24 40 UW-River Falls 14-5 def. UW-La Crosse, 77-74 OT; 02/03 at #25 UW-Stevens Point
#25 29 UW-Stevens Point 14-6 def. #12 UW-Whitewater, 74-60; 02/03 vs. #24 UW-River Falls

Others receiving votes
Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#26 25 Salem State 18-3 won at Fitchburg State, 93-85; 02/03 vs. Framingham State
T#27 23 Gwynedd Mercy 16-3 LOST at T#40 Cabrini, 88-92; 02/03 at Lehman
T#27 23 New Jersey City 17-4 won at Kean, 75-63; 02/03 vs. Rowan
#29 22 John Carroll 16-4 won at Otterbein, 97-71; 02/03 vs. Wilmington
#30 21 Wooster 16-4 won at Oberlin, 89-59; 02/03 vs. Denison
#31 16 Nichols 17-3 def. Curry, 94-69; 02/03 vs. University of New England
#32 15 Ohio Wesleyan 14-6 LOST at Denison, 62-83; 02/03 vs. Kenyon
#33 14 Hanover 15-5 LOST at Rose-Hulman, 66-68 OT; 02/03 vs. Anderson
#34 10 Hobart 16-3 def. RPI, 77-69; 02/02 vs. St. Lawrence; 02/03 vs. Clarkson
T#35 9 Juniata 17-3 def. Susquehanna, 75-66; 02/03 at Scranton
T#35 9 Maryville (Tenn.) 14-5 LOST at Covenant, 73-80; 02/02 at William Peace
#37 8 Plattsburgh State 15-4 def. SUNY-Canton, 88-58; 02/02 vs. Oswego State; 02/03 vs. Cortland
T#38 4 Baldwin Wallace 14-6 LOST at Ohio Northern, 74-85 OT; 02/03 vs. Otterbein
T#38 4 Occidental 16-2 02/03 at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps
T#40 3 Cabrini 17-3 def. T#27 Gwynedd Mercy, 92-88; 02/03 vs. Staten Island
T#40 3 TCNJ 16-5 LOST to Rowan, 84-93; 02/03 at Ramapo
T#42 1 Keene State 14-6 LOST to #6 Middlebury, 78-84; 02/03 vs. Rhode Island College
T#42 1 Rochester 13-5 02/02 at #2 Washington U.; 02/04 at Chicago

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 02, 2018, 12:12:18 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 01, 2018, 08:17:19 AM
Quote from: sac on February 01, 2018, 01:31:05 AM
So IWU ahead of Augustana now right?

Duh!

Actually, that could still be quite reasonably argued.

As Titan Q noted, the argument was always MORE about the unjustifiably huge gap in poll points by Augie over IWU, than about which should be ahead. But as far as the h-to-h's, IWU demolished Augie in B'town (ahead by double-digits for the vast majority of the game, and won by 19), while Augie led by ONE point with 70 seconds left in the game, before winning by 9 by making FTs. Other results are obviously a mixed bag, since they have identical records against mostly the same opponents, with IWU still up in the conference standings.

Personally my Posters' Poll ballot will still have IWU ahead, though (if Augie wins on Saturday, while IWU is idle) probably only by a single slot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Yogao on February 02, 2018, 07:08:16 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 02, 2018, 12:12:18 AM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 01, 2018, 08:17:19 AM
Quote from: sac on February 01, 2018, 01:31:05 AM
So IWU ahead of Augustana now right?

Duh!

Actually, that could still be quite reasonably argued.

As Titan Q noted, the argument was always MORE about the unjustifiably huge gap in poll points by Augie over IWU, than about which should be ahead. But as far as the h-to-h's, IWU demolished Augie in B'town (ahead by double-digits for the vast majority of the game, and won by 19), while Augie led by ONE point with 70 seconds left in the game, before winning by 9 by making FTs. Other results are obviously a mixed bag, since they have identical records against mostly the same opponents, with IWU still up in the conference standings.

Personally my Posters' Poll ballot will still have IWU ahead, though (if Augie wins on Saturday, while IWU is idle) probably only by a single slot.

Augie was also up by 8 with 124 seconds to play prior to the 4 point play (4/5 free throws made) and then the 3point basket to cut it to 1 point. Augie led by 6-8 points for most of the contest, and IWU didn't have a lead in the game. Granted they couldn't put IWU away like IWU did earlier in the year, when they destroyed Augie at the Shirk but they still won. Did you forget about the common opponent in Wash U that Augie won by double digits on the road, while IWU had them at home and lost by double digits

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 03, 2018, 05:49:25 PM

Early upsets

St Olaf beats #4 St Johns 75-62
Arcadia beat #11 Lycoming 101-91
Lynchburg beat #19 Emory & Henry 81-79
Heidelberg beat #22 Marietta 71-65

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 03, 2018, 07:35:32 PM

... and Carroll beat #9 Augustana, 77-69.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 03, 2018, 10:26:45 PM

Not an upset... But #25 UW Stevens Point completed the sweep against # 24 UW River Falls.

On Wednesday, first place back on the line in the WIAC as 9-1 #25 UWSP travels to 8-2 #20 Platteville.

Also third place: 6-4 #18 Oshkosh goes to #12 6-4 Whitewater

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on February 04, 2018, 01:46:05 PM

#2 Wash U 82, #15 Emory 69

Wash U takes a 2 game lead in the UAA with 5 left to play and has swept the head to head series with Emory.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 04, 2018, 02:39:17 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Whitman	21-0	won at Lewis and Clark, 74-60; won at Pacific, 112-69
#2	589	Washington U.	18-2	def. T#42 Rochester, 77-63; def. #15 Emory, 82-69
#3	574	Wittenberg	21-0	def. Kenyon, 78-63; won at Oberlin, 77-56
#4	524	St. John's	18-2	def. Gustavus Adolphus, 76-54; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 86-72; LOST at St. Olaf, 62-75
#5	510	Whitworth	19-2	won at Pacific, 89-67; won at Lewis and Clark, 76-70
#6	488	Middlebury	18-3	won at T#42 Keene State, 84-78; def. Bowdoin, 72-70; def. Colby, 75-56
#7	463	Swarthmore	18-3	LOST at Muhlenberg, 88-91 OT; def. McDaniel, 60-54
#8	415	MIT	18-3	LOST to Babson, 71-84 OT; def. Wheaton (Mass.), 96-91 OT
#9	368	Augustana	16-5	def. #14 Illinois Wesleyan, 88-79; LOST at Carroll, 69-77
#10	351	York (Pa.)	19-2	def. Wesley, 76-64; def. Southern Virginia, 93-78
#11	310	Lycoming	19-3	def. Alvernia, 79-66; LOST to Arcadia, 91-101
#12	309	UW-Whitewater	16-5	LOST at #25 UW-Stevens Point, 60-74; won at UW-Stout, 74-55
#13	299	Williams	18-4	won at SUNY Oneonta, 75-56; def. Colby, 77-49; def. Bowdoin, 72-55
#14	279	Illinois Wesleyan	16-4	LOST at #9 Augustana, 79-88
#15	277	Emory	16-4	won at Chicago, 66-61; LOST at #2 Washington U., 69-82
#16	269	Eastern Connecticut	19-2	def. Trinity (Conn.), 72-56; def. Mass-Boston, 84-70
#17	261	Wesleyan	16-5	LOST at Trinity (Conn.), 60-73
#18	222	UW-Oshkosh	16-5	LOST to #20 UW-Platteville, 62-68; def. UW-Eau Claire, 77-72
#19	210	Emory and Henry	18-3	LOST at Roanoke, 68-76; LOST at Lynchburg, 79-81
#20	198	UW-Platteville	18-3	won at #18 UW-Oshkosh, 68-62; won at UW-La Crosse, 74-67
#21	148	Hamilton	19-2	won at Bates, 89-57; won at Tufts, 74-57
#22	106	Marietta	16-5	def. Mount Union, 80-71; LOST to Heidelberg, 65-71
#23	50	Frankin and Marshall	18-3	def. Ursinus, 80-77; def. Muhlenberg, 77-70
#24	40	UW-River Falls	14-6	def. UW-La Crosse, 77-74 OT; LOST at #25 UW-Stevens Point, 64-66
#25	29	UW-Stevens Point	15-6	def. #12 UW-Whitewater, 74-60; def. #24 UW-River Falls, 66-64

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	25	Salem State	19-3	won at Fitchburg State, 93-85; def. Framingham State, 93-67
T#27	23	Gwynedd Mercy	16-4	LOST at T#40 Cabrini, 88-92; LOST at Lehman, 68-85
T#27	23	New Jersey City	17-5	won at Kean, 75-63; LOST to Rowan, 66-67
#29	22	John Carroll	17-4	won at Otterbein, 97-71; def. Wilmington, 109-81
#30	21	Wooster	17-4	won at Oberlin, 89-59; def. Denison, 73-70
#31	16	Nichols	18-3	def. Curry, 94-69; def. University of New England, 116-85
#32	15	Ohio Wesleyan	15-6	LOST at Denison, 62-83; def. Kenyon, 108-82
#33	14	Hanover	16-5	LOST at Rose-Hulman, 66-68 OT; def. Anderson, 80-77
#34	10	Hobart	18-3	def. RPI, 77-69; def. St. Lawrence, 92-56; def. Clarkson, 67-48
T#35	9	Juniata	18-3	def. Susquehanna, 75-66; won at Scranton, 74-71
T#35	9	Maryville (Tenn.)	15-5	LOST at Covenant, 73-80; won at William Peace, 79-54
#37	8	Plattsburgh State	17-4	def. SUNY-Canton, 88-58; def. Oswego State, 74-60; def. Cortland, 90-67
T#38	4	Baldwin Wallace	15-6	LOST at Ohio Northern, 74-85 OT; def. Otterbein, 76-61
T#38	4	Occidental	16-3	LOST at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 60-70
T#40	3	Cabrini	18-3	def. T#27 Gwynedd Mercy, 92-88; def. Staten Island, 76-74
T#40	3	TCNJ	16-6	LOST to Rowan, 84-93; LOST at Ramapo, 60-64
T#42	1	Keene State	15-6	LOST to #6 Middlebury, 78-84; def. Rhode Island College, 77-49
T#42	1	Rochester	13-7	LOST at #2 Washington U., 63-77; LOST at Chicago, 83-90

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on February 04, 2018, 03:54:31 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on February 04, 2018, 02:39:17 PM
How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#1 625 Whitman 21-0 won at Lewis and Clark, 74-60; won at Pacific, 112-69
#2 589 Washington U. 18-2 def. T#42 Rochester, 77-63; def. #15 Emory, 82-69
#3 574 Wittenberg 21-0 def. Kenyon, 78-63; won at Oberlin, 77-56
#4 524 St. John's 18-2 def. Gustavus Adolphus, 76-54; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 86-72; LOST at St. Olaf, 62-75
#5 510 Whitworth 19-2 won at Pacific, 89-67; won at Lewis and Clark, 76-70
#6 488 Middlebury 18-3 won at T#42 Keene State, 84-78; def. Bowdoin, 72-70; def. Colby, 75-56
#7 463 Swarthmore 18-3 LOST at Muhlenberg, 88-91 OT; def. McDaniel, 60-54
#8 415 MIT 18-3 LOST to Babson, 71-84 OT; def. Wheaton (Mass.), 96-91 OT
#9 368 Augustana 16-5 def. #14 Illinois Wesleyan, 88-79; LOST at Carroll, 69-77
#10 351 York (Pa.) 19-2 def. Wesley, 76-64; def. Southern Virginia, 93-78
#11 310 Lycoming 19-3 def. Alvernia, 79-66; LOST to Arcadia, 91-101
#12 309 UW-Whitewater 16-5 LOST at #25 UW-Stevens Point, 60-74; won at UW-Stout, 74-55
#13 299 Williams 18-4 won at SUNY Oneonta, 75-56; def. Colby, 77-49; def. Bowdoin, 72-55
#14 279 Illinois Wesleyan 16-4 LOST at #9 Augustana, 79-88
#15 277 Emory 16-4 won at Chicago, 66-61; LOST at #2 Washington U., 69-82
#16 269 Eastern Connecticut 19-2 def. Trinity (Conn.), 72-56; def. Mass-Boston, 84-70
#17 261 Wesleyan 16-5 LOST at Trinity (Conn.), 60-73
#18 222 UW-Oshkosh 16-5 LOST to #20 UW-Platteville, 62-68; def. UW-Eau Claire, 77-72
#19 210 Emory and Henry 18-3 LOST at Roanoke, 68-76; LOST at Lynchburg, 79-81
#20 198 UW-Platteville 18-3 won at #18 UW-Oshkosh, 68-62; won at UW-La Crosse, 74-67
#21 148 Hamilton 19-2 won at Bates, 89-57; won at Tufts, 74-57
#22 106 Marietta 16-5 def. Mount Union, 80-71; LOST to Heidelberg, 65-71
#23 50 Frankin and Marshall 18-3 def. Ursinus, 80-77; def. Muhlenberg, 77-70
#24 40 UW-River Falls 14-6 def. UW-La Crosse, 77-74 OT; LOST at #25 UW-Stevens Point, 64-66
#25 29 UW-Stevens Point 15-6 def. #12 UW-Whitewater, 74-60; def. #24 UW-River Falls, 66-64

Others receiving votes
Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#26 25 Salem State 19-3 won at Fitchburg State, 93-85; def. Framingham State, 93-67
T#27 23 Gwynedd Mercy 16-4 LOST at T#40 Cabrini, 88-92; LOST at Lehman, 68-85
T#27 23 New Jersey City 17-5 won at Kean, 75-63; LOST to Rowan, 66-67
#29 22 John Carroll 17-4 won at Otterbein, 97-71; def. Wilmington, 109-81
#30 21 Wooster 17-4 won at Oberlin, 89-59; def. Denison, 73-70
#31 16 Nichols 18-3 def. Curry, 94-69; def. University of New England, 116-85
#32 15 Ohio Wesleyan 15-6 LOST at Denison, 62-83; def. Kenyon, 108-82
#33 14 Hanover 16-5 LOST at Rose-Hulman, 66-68 OT; def. Anderson, 80-77
#34 10 Hobart 18-3 def. RPI, 77-69; def. St. Lawrence, 92-56; def. Clarkson, 67-48
T#35 9 Juniata 18-3 def. Susquehanna, 75-66; won at Scranton, 74-71
T#35 9 Maryville (Tenn.) 15-5 LOST at Covenant, 73-80; won at William Peace, 79-54
#37 8 Plattsburgh State 17-4 def. SUNY-Canton, 88-58; def. Oswego State, 74-60; def. Cortland, 90-67
T#38 4 Baldwin Wallace 15-6 LOST at Ohio Northern, 74-85 OT; def. Otterbein, 76-61
T#38 4 Occidental 16-3 LOST at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 60-70
T#40 3 Cabrini 18-3 def. T#27 Gwynedd Mercy, 92-88; def. Staten Island, 76-74
T#40 3 TCNJ 16-6 LOST to Rowan, 84-93; LOST at Ramapo, 60-64
T#42 1 Keene State 15-6 LOST to #6 Middlebury, 78-84; def. Rhode Island College, 77-49
T#42 1 Rochester 13-7 LOST at #2 Washington U., 63-77; LOST at Chicago, 83-90

A lot of red, will be interesting to see how things how things shake out in the poll tomorrow.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 05, 2018, 01:04:01 PM

The big game is over, so now it's time to focus only on basketball. Division III basketball to be exact.

Join Dave and a number of guests on this special Monday edition of Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com). There is plenty to talk about including another crazy weekend of results that will have Top 25 voters scratching their heads and maybe pulling hair off their head as well. Plus, the first regional rankings come out later this week. While predictions are hard, there at least will be some reminding of how this all works.

And maybe even a preview of what this evening's Top 25s look like.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch the show starting at 2:00 p.m. ET here: http://bit.ly/2FOQ7hX

If you have questions, be sure to email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or interact with the show via the social media.

Guests include (in order of appearance):
- Marc Edwards, No. 2 WashU men's coach
- Chris Harvey, Salem State men's coach
- Bill Fenlon, DePauw men's coach (NABC Coach's Corner)
- Caitlin Hadzimichalis, King's women's coach
- Cameron Hill, Trinity (Texas), women's coach

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts instead, you can get access to them or subscribe one of the three following ways (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D710%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D3otcl%2F4jqbajxp1927q4lt.jpg&hash=548f21c8fc71f3b507fa66bfd6193b90a937d497)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on February 05, 2018, 11:24:08 PM

Latest Top 25 with a familiar face returning in the No. 24 spot.

http://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2017-18/week10

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Rofrog on February 05, 2018, 11:32:21 PM

Just a question to the voters in the top 25 men's polls.How is it that a team at 15- 6 is in the top 25?Please explain thank you .

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 05, 2018, 11:36:02 PM

Quote from: Rofrog on February 05, 2018, 11:32:21 PM
Just a question to the voters in the top 25 men's polls.How is it that a team at 15- 6 is in the top 25?Please explain thank you .

The voters probably think going 9-1 so far in the WIAC is worthy of a ranking. Hard to argue with that.

It might be helpful to click on their name and see who they've played. It's a pretty good schedule overall.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 05, 2018, 11:39:09 PM

Quote from: Rofrog on February 05, 2018, 11:32:21 PM
Just a question to the voters in the top 25 men's polls.How is it that a team at 15- 6 is in the top 25?Please explain thank you .

Since the turn of the year, they've played 5 of their 10 games vs ranked opponents and only lost one of those, on the road.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Rofrog on February 06, 2018, 12:25:05 AM

Thanks for the explanation.But I think there are teams out there that deserve to be there before a 15-6 team just my thought.No argument here but they did lose to some okay teams except Whitman 21-0.Losses to.St Olaf 17-5,St Norbert 15-6,Augustana 16-5 and 13-8 Wartburg.It is just thought there is some teams that have 3 losses that can be ahead of them.They jumped from 25 to 18 that is a big jump for a team with 6 losses.Just my opinion not an argument thank you

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Rofrog on February 06, 2018, 12:27:48 AM

Greek I have no fight in this but if the voters use that strategy then use it for all teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 06, 2018, 08:25:16 AM

Quote from: Rofrog on February 06, 2018, 12:27:48 AM
Greek I have no fight in this but if the voters use that strategy then use it for all teams.

They do. Obviously, you have to win some games, but a gaudy record doesn't mean too much if the opponents aren't great. Stevens Point would be heavy favorites against a lot of teams with better records right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fantastic50 on February 06, 2018, 08:45:28 AM

UWSP is the only tournament contender with an SOS over .600, and no one else is close to that mark. By tournament time, they will likely have ten games against regionally ranked opponents and outside of the NESCAC, the only other team likely to reach that mark is NJCU. Despite the losses, Ken Massey has them in the top ten, and the same is true in my predictive rankings. There is certainly a difference between "most deserving" and "best". I'm talking about the latter, and the Pointers are a team that I would not want to see across from my team in a first-weekend pod.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 06, 2018, 08:49:50 AM

Quote from: Rofrog on February 06, 2018, 12:25:05 AM
Thanks for the explanation.But I think there are teams out there that deserve to be there before a 15-6 team just my thought.No argument here but they did lose to some okay teams except Whitman 21-0.Losses to.St Olaf 17-5,St Norbert 15-6,Augustana 16-5 and 13-8 Wartburg.It is just thought there is some teams that have 3 losses that can be ahead of them.They jumped from 25 to 18 that is a big jump for a team with 6 losses.Just my opinion not an argument thank you

Fair enough. In YOUR opinion, who are some of those teams?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Onward on, John Carroll on February 06, 2018, 09:37:41 AM

Quote from: gordonmann on February 05, 2018, 11:24:08 PM
Latest Top 25 with a familiar face returning in the No. 24 spot.

http://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2017-18/week10

I think this team breaks out in hives when they earn a ranking in the Top 25. This almost guarantees that they will drop a game to either BW or ONU. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 06, 2018, 01:33:25 PM

Took a while despite trying to cut back, but here is my ballot: http://bit.ly/2FTiZWa

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on February 06, 2018, 04:28:44 PM

Quote from: Onward on, John Carroll on February 06, 2018, 09:37:41 AM
Quote from: gordonmann on February 05, 2018, 11:24:08 PM
Latest Top 25 with a familiar face returning in the No. 24 spot.

http://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2017-18/week10

I think this team breaks out in hives when they earn a ranking in the Top 25. This almost guarantees that they will drop a game to either BW or ONU. :D

Dropping both wouldn't be the worst thing in the world either. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: irapthor on February 06, 2018, 06:28:59 PM

Quote from: Rofrog on February 06, 2018, 12:25:05 AM
Thanks for the explanation.But I think there are teams out there that deserve to be there before a 15-6 team just my thought.No argument here but they did lose to some okay teams except Whitman 21-0.Losses to.St Olaf 17-5,St Norbert 15-6,Augustana 16-5 and 13-8 Wartburg.It is just thought there is some teams that have 3 losses that can be ahead of them.They jumped from 25 to 18 that is a big jump for a team with 6 losses.Just my opinion not an argument thank you

When I vote, I weigh a lot of factors and take a lot of time to try to get this right. After a rocky start, I had a wait and see attitude with UWSP. I've waited and I've seen. What they have done in the WIAC through 10 games is eye-opening. They deserve to be ranked. Too bad some fans only look at a team with a gaudy record...team's that don't play anyone...and assume they must be good. If you're in a weak conference and don't challenge yourself outside your league, it will take a lot for me to vote for you unless you're undefeated or a 1-loss team (which in any league is impressive).

You want to be considered one of the best? Play someone. And win most of those games when you do.

I'm voting for UWSP 15th in the country because they've proven to me they're an elite team. I have four WIAC teams in my Top 25 right now. Platteville, Stevens Point, Whitewater and Oshkosh. I had River Falls before they faded.

You will not see a lot of 18-3 teams on my ballot with a .475 SOS. There will be a few, but to me if you want to be a Top 25 team, you need to be great, not just in your conference. Because come March, you won't be playing conference games anymore and we've seen tons of gaudy records make quick first-round exits over the years to teams that they shouldn't lose to if you're just looking at the records.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 06, 2018, 07:53:43 PM

Well, there's a couple of things:

1. SOS isn't a very good measure of strength of schedule, despite the name.
2. It's easy to say "Play Somebody" - some schools cannot due to travel restrictions, number of conference games, or no one will play them. It takes two.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 06, 2018, 08:34:56 PM

What's a good measure for strength of schedule? I understand it takes two to schedule. Definitely a valid point there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: irapthor on February 06, 2018, 09:17:03 PM

Quote from: smedindy on February 06, 2018, 07:53:43 PM
Well, there's a couple of things:

1. SOS isn't a very good measure of strength of schedule, despite the name.
2. It's easy to say "Play Somebody" - some schools cannot due to travel restrictions, number of conference games, or no one will play them. It takes two.

In the case of our program, I know our head coach makes hundreds of phone calls every year just to schedule seven non-conference games. There are a number of current Top 25 teams, past and present, who won't play us. Particularly in the Eastern portion of the country, if you really want to play someone there are ample opportunities to do so.

In the end, we made it work and our strength of schedule is among the highest in the country because our coach believes in playing the hardest non-conference schedule we can afford to. That will help come NCAA Tournament time.

But as a voter for 15+ years, I absolutely scrutinize who you play. That's my responsibility. I'm not just throwing schools on the wall and throwing darts. You've got to earn it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: irapthor on February 06, 2018, 09:20:51 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 06, 2018, 08:34:56 PM
What's a good measure for strength of schedule? I understand it takes two to schedule. Definitely a valid point there.

A great example BTW in our case is Albertus Magnus. They've been perennially the best team in the GNAC but if they don't win their conference title, probably don't make the NCAA Tournament because the league's strength of schedule is very low. So Albertus Magnus chooses to challenge itself and we have played them in four of the last five seasons. It's a 3+ hour trip but it's become a really good rivalry of two teams that more often than not will compete for an NCAA Tournament berth.

How does it help either of our programs to play a 1-8 non-conference opponent?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fantastic50 on February 06, 2018, 09:22:22 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on February 06, 2018, 08:34:56 PM
What's a good measure for strength of schedule? I understand it takes two to schedule. Definitely a valid point there.

I prefer something along the lines of "strength of record." The usual version of it gives the probability that a hypothetical team of some specified rating would have an equally good or better record against the same schedule. An alternative version is based on what rating would be needed to have a 50% probability of an equal or better record against that schedule.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on February 06, 2018, 11:17:19 PM

https://portal.stretchinternet.com/whitworth/portal.htm?eventId=385188&streamType=video

#1 Whitman at #4 Whitworth

This game has been as fun as advertised so far. If anyone is still up, I advise tuning in.

BONUS: Download the NWC app on your Roku/Apple TV to watch on the big TV while your comfortably on your couch or laying down in bed!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Rofrog on February 06, 2018, 11:35:53 PM

Thanks guys for the explanation.That is why you guys are the experts.Sos where would I get those numbers for women also?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 07, 2018, 12:02:56 AM

Quote from: Rofrog on February 06, 2018, 11:35:53 PM
Thanks guys for the explanation.That is why you guys are the experts.Sos where would I get those numbers for women also?

Check D3hoops.com and under "news" for women you will find it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 07, 2018, 01:11:28 AM

#1 Whitman 100
#4 Whitworth 99

Fantastic game. Fantastic atmosphere. Fantastic production -- multiple cameras, excellent shots.

This was a showcase for D3 if I've ever seen one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on February 07, 2018, 01:12:01 AM

Whitman up 2 inbounding with under 25 seconds left... slips out of bounds...
Ben College hits a 3 to give Whitworth a 99-98 lead.
Tim Howell drives and gets the foul with 0.9 on the clock and hits both free throws to take the lead.
Whitworth had a final shot but it was partially blocked.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BluesBrother on February 07, 2018, 01:19:12 AM

Wow, what a game! Howell is unfazed in the huge moments (slip notwithstanding). Butler did it all. Whitworth played a great game and came up just short. I'm glad Whitman probably won't have to go to Spokane again this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on February 07, 2018, 01:20:52 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 07, 2018, 01:11:28 AM
#1 Whitman 100
#4 Whitworth 99

Fantastic game. Fantastic atmosphere. Fantastic production -- multiple cameras, excellent shots.

This was a showcase for D3 if I've ever seen one.

It was worth staying up to watch this one. I fell asleep and missed the 1st meeting of the season between these two, but I am glad that I did not make that mistake this time.

This game deserves to be archived and made available to watch again for those people who could not stay up to watch it-- at the very least, some video highlights should be made available.

However, because this game was a local TV broadcast streamed over the web, the TV station and the Northwest Conference probably won't allow a full game replay to be made available for viewing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on February 07, 2018, 06:57:30 AM

Video highlights of last night's game between #1 Whitman and #4 Whitworth are now available courtesy of the Spokane, WA local TV station SWX Right Now.

Sorry, I can't directly give you the links, but I can give you the link to their video page:

swxrightnow.com/category/160222/video-center (http://swxrightnow.com/category/160222/video-center)

From there, look for the clips on their latest video page for (1) Whitman vs Whitworth men's basketball highlights, and (2) Whitworth loses heartbreaker to Whitman, 100-99.

These highlights are also available on SWX Right Now's Facebook page.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on February 07, 2018, 07:46:20 AM

Whitworth game recap:

Whitman edges Whitworth 100-99 in NWC thriller (http://whitworthpirates.com/sports/mbkb/2017-18/releases/2018020738thiq)

Whitman game recap:

Howell free throws sink Pirates (http://athletics.whitman.edu/news/2018/2/7/mens-basketball-howell-free-throws-sink-pirates.aspx)

Both of these game recaps are must-reads. Whitman's recap really gave a flavor of the game for people who could not stay up to watch it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 07, 2018, 11:06:14 AM

Wow, just watched that highlight. As a totally neutral observer, I really, really don't like that last foul call, especially in that situation. Looked like the defender was in excellent position and the refs bailed out a wild drive not even in the direction of the basket. To lose the game on that one is brutal.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 07, 2018, 11:22:02 AM

Disagree. Kyle Roach is a great player, but he made a mistake in sliding over to impede Tim Howell on that final drive, because, as you said, Howell was driving too far to the right to get to the rim. Roach would've been better off just holding his ground and forcing Howell to shoot a pull-up. It was clearly a blocking foul. I thought so last night, and I'm even more convinced after watching the replay a few times this morning.

As for the decision to make the call, the ref did his job properly. A good official makes the same call with 0.9 seconds left that he would make in the previous 39:59.1. The game situation is irrelevant. All that matters is whether or not it was a foul. It was, and he made the right call.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 07, 2018, 11:35:04 AM

Quote from: BluesBrother on February 07, 2018, 01:19:12 AM
Wow, what a game! Howell is unfazed in the huge moments (slip notwithstanding). Butler did it all. Whitworth played a great game and came up just short. I'm glad Whitman probably won't have to go to Spokane again this year.

Don't agree with your Howell comment. If the foul isn't called, he looks like a fool for trying that stunt. He got lucky.

Quote from: nescac1 on February 07, 2018, 11:06:14 AM
Wow, just watched that highlight. As a totally neutral observer, I really, really don't like that last foul call, especially in that situation. Looked like the defender was in excellent position and the refs bailed out a wild drive not even in the direction of the basket. To lose the game on that one is brutal.

It was a foul. Maybe the whistled it on the wrong guy, but I saw the big man come over and body check Howell in the hips and upper body. The replay showed me that. Howell is lucky the foul was called, but Whitworth has to be a little more careful there. Roach was also a bit too close and looked to have an arm bar pushing Howell.

Agreed with Sager, let's not play the game of "swallow the whistle" late when the clock is running down. That isn't fair to the game by any stretch and should never be an expectation.

The broadcasters at times fairly noted odd calls, but they also got stuck in a rut with it and missed the fact that some calls (or non-calls) were spot on. Their discussion of the block on the break-away dunk by Roach was laughable. It was all-ball and they just couldn't admit it. They also liked to look at the play on the ball on blocking calls when the body or other hand was pushing. Officials weren't great, but they weren't as bad as the broadcasters were making them out to be.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 07, 2018, 11:49:10 AM

Fair points. I'm not one for swallow-the-whistle, I just think that if it can go either way, I don't like to bail out a player who is not in any sort of position to score on a game-deciding call. If it's a clear foul, though, yes it should be called no matter what. I didn't see a clear foul there, I thought a good play by the defender to move his feet and get to that spot, but admittedly it is a very tough bang-bang sort of call. I didn't watch the game, just saw that replay so can't put it in context of other calls.

Not sure what is meant by the Howell's "stunt" but that is of course a response to some other commentator ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Onward on, John Carroll on February 07, 2018, 11:52:29 AM

Quote from: Fifth and Putnam on February 06, 2018, 04:28:44 PM
Quote from: Onward on, John Carroll on February 06, 2018, 09:37:41 AM
Quote from: gordonmann on February 05, 2018, 11:24:08 PM
Latest Top 25 with a familiar face returning in the No. 24 spot.

http://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2017-18/week10

I think this team breaks out in hives when they earn a ranking in the Top 25. This almost guarantees that they will drop a game to either BW or ONU. :D

Dropping both wouldn't be the worst thing in the world either. ;D

It is all about perspective, isn't it, F&P? I hope to see your Pioneers in about two and a half weeks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 07, 2018, 12:40:06 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on February 07, 2018, 11:49:10 AM
Fair points. I'm not one for swallow-the-whistle, I just think that if it can go either way, I don't like to bail out a player who is not in any sort of position to score on a game-deciding call. If it's a clear foul, though, yes it should be called no matter what. I didn't see a clear foul there, I thought a good play by the defender to move his feet and get to that spot, but admittedly it is a very tough bang-bang sort of call. I didn't watch the game, just saw that replay so can't put it in context of other calls.

Not sure what is meant by the Howell's "stunt" but that is of course a response to some other commentator ...

While one defender may have been moving his feet well, I saw him pushing with his arm as well. The other defender was also moving his feet, but still moving them as he ran into Howell. Yes, it bailed Howell out, but it was a two-shot situation there no matter what. If Howell is just driving and doesn't throw up a shot... he still got fouled and still has two free throws.

As for Howell's actions... what I saw was his exuberance and pounding of his feet after making both free throws. It would be a very long list and a lot of time pointing out every single player in Division III and out that has done that in a big moment. I give leash on those things... to a degree. He didn't get to that degree.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 07, 2018, 02:41:48 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 07, 2018, 11:35:04 AM
Quote from: BluesBrother on February 07, 2018, 01:19:12 AM
Wow, what a game! Howell is unfazed in the huge moments (slip notwithstanding). Butler did it all. Whitworth played a great game and came up just short. I'm glad Whitman probably won't have to go to Spokane again this year.

Don't agree with your Howell comment. If the foul isn't called, he looks like a fool for trying that stunt. He got lucky.

He also would've looked like a fool if Roach hadn't moved laterally to his left and fouled him. As nescac1 pointed out, Howell wasn't even heading in the direction of the basket. He was driving too far to the right.

As for Butler, he's clearly an extremely talented player. But he also plays out of control a bit too often, and he's a terrible free-throw shooter.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 07, 2018, 11:35:04 AM
Quote from: nescac1 on February 07, 2018, 11:06:14 AM
Wow, just watched that highlight. As a totally neutral observer, I really, really don't like that last foul call, especially in that situation. Looked like the defender was in excellent position and the refs bailed out a wild drive not even in the direction of the basket. To lose the game on that one is brutal.

It was a foul. Maybe the whistled it on the wrong guy, but I saw the big man come over and body check Howell in the hips and upper body. The replay showed me that. Howell is lucky the foul was called, but Whitworth has to be a little more careful there. Roach was also a bit too close and looked to have an arm bar pushing Howell.

Agreed with Sager, let's not play the game of "swallow the whistle" late when the clock is running down. That isn't fair to the game by any stretch and should never be an expectation.

The broadcasters at times fairly noted odd calls, but they also got stuck in a rut with it and missed the fact that some calls (or non-calls) were spot on. Their discussion of the block on the break-away dunk by Roach was laughable. It was all-ball and they just couldn't admit it. They also liked to look at the play on the ball on blocking calls when the body or other hand was pushing. Officials weren't great, but they weren't as bad as the broadcasters were making them out to be.

Yeah, I thought the same thing on both counts.

Quote from: nescac1 on February 07, 2018, 11:49:10 AM
Fair points. I'm not one for swallow-the-whistle, I just think that if it can go either way, I don't like to bail out a player who is not in any sort of position to score on a game-deciding call. If it's a clear foul, though, yes it should be called no matter what. I didn't see a clear foul there, I thought a good play by the defender to move his feet and get to that spot, but admittedly it is a very tough bang-bang sort of call. I didn't watch the game, just saw that replay so can't put it in context of other calls.

It was clearer on the broadcast last night. The replay posted this morning used the overhead angle, while the broadcast replay last night used the angle from the endline camera at the other end of the floor. It was much more apparent from that angle that Roach was moving laterally into Howell's path when the two made contact. That behind-the-play angle was the view that the ref who blew the whistle had as well, so he clearly saw that it was a blocking foul and not a could-go-either-way-I'll-just-pick-an-offender sort of collision.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 07, 2018, 02:54:59 PM

Agree with Sager about the camera shot that showed the foul. It was coming from midcourt, to be detailed (sorry, producer/director in me) and really showed that foul well. Again, they could have called on Roach or the help defense.

What was so tough with that situation was that Howell wasn't headed to the basket. Leave him alone and make him throw up a prayer (which is why I felt he wasn't as great as others thought he was; he was okay and has been okay all season). A foul there is two shots no matter what happens. They were in the double-bonus. I understand the pressure of the moment, but they got too aggressive with him. If he hits an off the wall, off balance shot there... god bless him.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on February 07, 2018, 04:25:09 PM

The full game replay from last night is currently available on-demand on the Whitworth streaming service, but I do not know how long it will remain available. The first meeting between Whitman and Whitworth in Walla Walla got immediately password protected after the game on Whitman's service. I watched the final three minutes of last night's game this afternoon. I thank Whitworth for at least allowing a full game replay to be made available on-demand today for those people who could not stay up to watch it live last night.

Update-- the full game on-demand replay of Tuesday night's game is no longer available as of early Thursday morning. Glad I stayed up to watch it live.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on February 07, 2018, 08:31:15 PM

NESCAC:

For what it's worth, I had the same reaction you did when I saw it live. It looked like a bailout call on a terrible shot decision. But I guess the replay shows a better angle of what happened. I didn't see Whitworth's coaching staff explode, which might've been telling. The players were clearly upset with one starting to trail the refs off the court to the locker room before he was restrained by a teammate but who knows what the genesis for that was.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BluesBrother on February 08, 2018, 12:01:13 AM

Agreed that Howell put himself in a bad spot in that last play and got bailed out by Whitworth. But I think the fact that he hit a similar shot a minute earlier (a better shot, but similar) played into Whitworth's over aggressiveness that led to the foul. Regardless, stepping up and burying two free throws in that atmosphere is what I call unfazed.

Butler's game has some big flaws, but the number of incredible plays he makes defensively and his ability to penetrate and get high percentage shots, not to mention his offensive rebounding adds a ton of value. He's in the perfect system for his game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 08, 2018, 06:46:45 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Whitman	22-0	won at #4 Whitworth, 100-99; 02/10 at George Fox
#2	596	Washington U.	18-2	02/09 at Brandeis; 02/11 at New York University
#3	576	Wittenberg	22-0	def. Wabash, 84-72; 02/10 at Hiram
#4	523	Whitworth	19-3	LOST to #1 Whitman, 99-100; 02/09 at George Fox
#5	521	Middlebury	19-3	won at SUNY-Canton, 79-57; 02/09 at #15 Hamilton; 02/10 at Amherst
#6	465	St. John's	20-2	won at St. Mary's (Minn.), 79-46; def. Carleton, 78-57; 02/10 vs. Augsburg
#7	461	York (Pa.)	19-2	02/08 at Penn State-Harrisburg; 02/10 vs. Salisbury
#8	414	Williams	18-4	02/09 at Amherst; 02/10 at #15 Hamilton
#9	376	UW-Platteville	19-3	def. #18 UW-Stevens Point, 56-47; 02/10 at UW-Eau Claire
#10	363	Eastern Connecticut	19-2	02/08 vs. T#39 Keene State; 02/10 at Mass-Dartmouth
#11	358	Swarthmore	19-3	won at Ursinus, 84-62; 02/10 at Johns Hopkins
#12	319	MIT	18-3	02/08 at Coast Guard; 02/10 at Springfield
#13	269	Emory	16-4	02/09 at Carnegie Mellon; 02/11 at Case Western Reserve
#14	264	Augustana	17-5	won at North Central (Ill.), 71-65; 02/10 at Millikin
#15	247	Hamilton	19-2	02/09 vs. #5 Middlebury; 02/10 vs. #8 Williams
#16	240	Lycoming	19-3	02/10 at Stevenson
#17	231	Illinois Wesleyan	16-5	LOST to Wheaton (Ill.), 95-107; 02/10 vs. Carroll
#18	210	UW-Stevens Point	15-7	LOST at #9 UW-Platteville, 47-56; 02/10 vs. UW-Stout
#19	196	UW-Whitewater	16-6	LOST to #21 UW-Oshkosh, 67-69; 02/10 at #32 UW-River Falls
#20	150	Franklin and Marshall	18-4	LOST at Johns Hopkins, 86-89 2OT; 02/10 vs. Washington College
#21	125	UW-Oshkosh	17-5	won at #19 UW-Whitewater, 69-67; 02/10 vs. UW-La Crosse
#22	116	Wesleyan	17-5	def. Amherst, 71-57; 02/09 at Colby; 02/10 at Bowdoin
#23	77	Wooster	18-4	won at Allegheny, 72-59; 02/10 vs. T#33 Ohio Wesleyan
#24	63	John Carroll	18-4	def. Baldwin Wallace, 77-70; 02/10 at #38 Ohio Northern
#25	57	Hobart	18-3	02/09 at Skidmore; 02/10 at Bard

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	40	Salem State	20-3	won at Bridgewater State, 88-73; 02/10 at Westfield State
#27	37	Plattsburgh State	17-4	02/10 vs. SUNY Potsdam
#28	36	Cabrini	18-3	02/08 at Keystone; 02/10 vs. Rosemont
T#29	35	Emory and Henry	18-4	LOST to Guilford, 64-79; 02/10 at Randolph-Macon
T#29	35	Marietta	17-5	won at Capital, 79-74; 02/10 vs. Wilmington
#31	33	Nichols	18-3	02/08 at Salve Regina; 02/10 at Western New England
#32	14	UW-River Falls	14-7	LOST at UW-Stout, 81-82; 02/10 vs. #19 UW-Whitewater
T#33	10	Juniata	18-3	02/08 at Elizabethtown; 02/10 at Moravian
T#33	10	Ohio Wesleyan	15-7	LOST at Hiram, 66-72; 02/10 at #23 Wooster
T#33	10	St. Olaf	17-5	won at Augsburg, 68-67; 02/10 vs. St. Thomas
#36	9	Ramapo	17-5	02/08 at Rutgers-Camden; 02/10 at #37 New Jersey City
#37	6	New Jersey City	18-5	won at Montclair State, 84-76; 02/10 vs. #36 Ramapo
#38	4	Ohio Northern	16-6	won at Heidelberg, 74-67; 02/10 vs. #24 John Carroll
T#39	1	Keene State	15-6	02/08 at #10 Eastern Connecticut; 02/10 vs. Western Connecticut
T#39	1	Lehman	18-4	02/08 at Medgar Evers; 02/10 vs. Staten Island
T#39	1	Maryville (Tenn.)	16-5	def. Brevard, 80-69; 02/10 at Berea
T#39	1	Sul Ross State	16-5	02/08 at Hardin-Simmons; 02/10 at McMurry

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 08, 2018, 03:39:31 PM

The first regional rankings are out which in itself brings on a lot of conversation, but the jockeying and positioning contines in conferences around the country for teams trying to keep their seasons going into March.

On Thursday's edition of Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave talks to a number of high-ranking squads about the pressure to stay atop their respective conference races while also positioning themselves well in the regional rankings.

Dave also welcomes a coach who has played in DIII, coached in both DII and DIII, and coached both men and women. He talks about the road, possibly, less traveled in the "WBCA Center Court" segment.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch the show LIVE starting at 7:00 p.m. ET here: http://bit.ly/2EROVeC

If you have questions, be sure to interact with the show on social media (see below) or email us your questions (hoopsville@d3hoops.com).

Guests include (in order of appearance):
- Ryan Gould, No. 7 Trine women's coach
- Michelle Ferenz, No. 5 Whitman women's coach
- Charlie Just, Spalding women's coach (WBCA Center Court)
- Landry Kosmalski, No. 11 Swarthmore men's coach
- Tom Curle, Plattsburgh State men's coach

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts instead, you can get access to them or subscribe one of the three following ways (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D710%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D3ukj5%2Fwtlpxm038e0ui89c.jpg&hash=afc48efa8c411216054ef388e0b22151387eb8f1)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 08, 2018, 04:21:51 PM

Dave or Gordon or anyone,

Where is the DIII Final Four being held this year? Salem again or a new site?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on February 08, 2018, 04:28:51 PM

Salem

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 08, 2018, 04:31:55 PM

Quote from: mailsy on February 08, 2018, 04:28:51 PM
Salem

Thanks mailsy.

plus k

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on February 09, 2018, 07:41:34 PM

Quote from: irapthor on February 06, 2018, 09:17:03 PM
Quote from: smedindy on February 06, 2018, 07:53:43 PM
Well, there's a couple of things:

1. SOS isn't a very good measure of strength of schedule, despite the name.
2. It's easy to say "Play Somebody" - some schools cannot due to travel restrictions, number of conference games, or no one will play them. It takes two.

In the case of our program, I know our head coach makes hundreds of phone calls every year just to schedule seven non-conference games. There are a number of current Top 25 teams, past and present, who won't play us. Particularly in the Eastern portion of the country, if you really want to play someone there are ample opportunities to do so.

In the end, we made it work and our strength of schedule is among the highest in the country because our coach believes in playing the hardest non-conference schedule we can afford to. That will help come NCAA Tournament time.

But as a voter for 15+ years, I absolutely scrutinize who you play. That's my responsibility. I'm not just throwing schools on the wall and throwing darts. You've got to earn it.

I guess my point is that not every school has that luxury or opportunity. So the 'play somebody' cry isn't always feasible

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 09, 2018, 08:57:20 PM

Two top 8 teams fell this evening but I'm not sure either can really be considered an upset, except perhaps by the margins of defeat. #5 Middlebury fell AT #15 Hamilton by a 102-83 margin. #8 Williams fell AT unranked Amherst by a 72-57 margin - considering Amherst's recent bball history, how young the Williams team is, and the intensity of the rivalry (Hope/Calvin is the only D3 rivalry that I'm pretty sure is even more intense), is this even an upset?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: irapthor on February 10, 2018, 12:02:48 AM

Quote from: smedindy on February 09, 2018, 07:41:34 PM
Quote from: irapthor on February 06, 2018, 09:17:03 PM
Quote from: smedindy on February 06, 2018, 07:53:43 PM
Well, there's a couple of things:

1. SOS isn't a very good measure of strength of schedule, despite the name.
2. It's easy to say "Play Somebody" - some schools cannot due to travel restrictions, number of conference games, or no one will play them. It takes two.

In the case of our program, I know our head coach makes hundreds of phone calls every year just to schedule seven non-conference games. There are a number of current Top 25 teams, past and present, who won't play us. Particularly in the Eastern portion of the country, if you really want to play someone there are ample opportunities to do so.

In the end, we made it work and our strength of schedule is among the highest in the country because our coach believes in playing the hardest non-conference schedule we can afford to. That will help come NCAA Tournament time.

But as a voter for 15+ years, I absolutely scrutinize who you play. That's my responsibility. I'm not just throwing schools on the wall and throwing darts. You've got to earn it.

I guess my point is that not every school has that luxury or opportunity. So the 'play somebody' cry isn't always feasible

Oh, there are certainly exceptions. And I'm sure many of us voters study the data and if teams have similar records, more often than not, the nod is going to go to the team with the better resume. There are some portions of the country where it's very tough to travel to face good competition. There are other areas where you can drive 2 hours in any direction and have more than a hundred schools to choose from.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on February 10, 2018, 05:17:56 PM

A lot of red about to show up on Darryl's "How they fared" from this saturday...

#3 Wittenberg, #7 York, #5 Middlebury, #15 Hamilton, #12 MIT and #10 Eastern CT have all lost already today.

Plus #11 Swarthmore and Johns Hopkins (not receiving votes, but are having a very solid year and in pool C consideration) are in Double OT currently.

Not to mention quite a few top 25 teams have yet to tip off today!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on February 10, 2018, 08:31:07 PM

Add #19 Whitewater to that list.

River Falls said if we can't be ranked, you can't be either.

RF wins 76-66 over WW

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 11, 2018, 11:49:19 AM

Wait... what?! Who won? Hold on, who lost?!

How did... but they... so... wow... okay.

Another crazy week(end) of Division III basketball leaves us more questions to answer, heads to scratch, and what-ifs to contemplate.

Sunday night's episode of Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) promises to ... hmm, maybe we shouldn't promise too much if this season is a lesson in anything. Nothing is guaranteed.

Tune in LIVE starting at 7pm ET as Dave is joined by a few guests from around the country, but more importantly takes the time to look at some of the more interesting conference races and upcoming tournaments. There is plenty to dissect just two weeks away from the close of the regular season.

There will be plenty of questions from fans, so don't forget to interact with the show (more information is n the right) and be sure to email your questions and comments to hoopsville@d3hoops.com to have them answerer or featured show.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch the show LIVE starting at 7:00 p.m. ET here: http://bit.ly/2EiXbmB. Guests appear on the Hoopsville Hotline presented by the City of Salem.

Guests include (in order of appearance):
- Lauren Johnson, Ripon women's coach
- Kelly Thompson, Roger Williams women's coach
- Clif Carroll, Sul Ross State men's coach
- Ryan Scott, "Top 25 Double-take"

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts instead, you can get access to them or subscribe one of the three following ways (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D710%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D3zur5%2Ffvkfymyayxz341xu.jpg&hash=730a2c4712754c6ee12ed54fc941127064806fb0)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 11, 2018, 01:43:02 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 11, 2018, 11:49:19 AM
Wait... what?! Who won? Hold on, who lost?!

See below to find out. And of course, you should also:

Quote
Tune in LIVE starting at 7pm ET ...

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Whitman	23-0	won at #4 Whitworth, 100-99; won at George Fox, 97-80
#2	596	Washington U.	20-2	won at Brandeis, 87-75; won at New York University, 99-72
#3	576	Wittenberg	22-1	def. Wabash, 84-72; LOST at Hiram, 71-94
#4	523	Whitworth	20-3	LOST to #1 Whitman, 99-100; won at George Fox, 101-98 OT
#5	521	Middlebury	19-5	won at SUNY-Canton, 79-57; LOST at #15 Hamilton, 83-102; LOST at Amherst, 68-80
#6	465	St. John's	21-2	won at St. Mary's (Minn.), 79-46; def. Carleton, 78-57; def. Augsburg, 85-73
#7	461	York (Pa.)	20-3	won at Penn State-Harrisburg, 75-64; LOST to Salisbury, 75-83
#8	414	Williams	19-5	LOST at Amherst, 57-72; won at #15 Hamilton, 81-67
#9	376	UW-Platteville	20-3	def. #18 UW-Stevens Point, 56-47; won at UW-Eau Claire, 87-50
#10	363	Eastern Connecticut	20-3	def. T#39 Keene State, 83-78; LOST at Mass-Dartmouth, 99-101 OT
#11	358	Swarthmore	19-4	won at Ursinus, 84-62; LOST at Johns Hopkins, 91-93 2OT
#12	319	MIT	18-5	LOST at Coast Guard, 71-74; LOST at Springfield, 62-69
#13	269	Emory	18-4	won at Carnegie Mellon, 82-80; won at Case Western Reserve, 75-72
#14	264	Augustana	18-5	won at North Central (Ill.), 71-65; won at Millikin, 83-74
#15	247	Hamilton	20-3	def. #5 Middlebury, 102-83; LOST to #8 Williams, 67-81
#16	240	Lycoming	19-4	LOST at Stevenson, 68-71
#17	231	Illinois Wesleyan	17-5	LOST to Wheaton (Ill.), 95-107; def. Carroll, 70-61
#18	210	UW-Stevens Point	16-7	LOST at #9 UW-Platteville, 47-56; def. UW-Stout, 80-63
#19	196	UW-Whitewater	16-7	LOST to #21 UW-Oshkosh, 67-69; LOST at #32 UW-River Falls, 65-76
#20	150	Franklin and Marshall	19-4	LOST at Johns Hopkins, 86-89 2OT; def. Washington College, 65-59
#21	125	UW-Oshkosh	18-5	won at #19 UW-Whitewater, 69-67; def. UW-La Crosse, 70-54
#22	116	Wesleyan	19-5	def. Amherst, 71-57; won at Colby, 87-71; won at Bowdoin, 74-65
#23	77	Wooster	19-4	won at Allegheny, 72-59; def. T#33 Ohio Wesleyan, 75-72
#24	63	John Carroll	19-4	def. Baldwin Wallace, 77-70; won at #38 Ohio Northern, 90-80
#25	57	Hobart	20-3	won at Skidmore, 78-62; won at Bard, 82-72

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	40	Salem State	21-3	won at Bridgewater State, 88-73; won at Westfield State, 90-74
#27	37	Plattsburgh State	18-4	def. SUNY Potsdam, 104-76
#28	36	Cabrini	20-3	won at Keystone, 92-72; def. Rosemont, 88-83
T#29	35	Emory and Henry	18-5	LOST to Guilford, 64-79; LOST at Randolph-Macon, 59-63
T#29	35	Marietta	18-5	won at Capital, 79-74; def. Wilmington, 80-65
#31	33	Nichols	20-3	won at Salve Regina, 93-67; won at Western New England, 73-61
#32	14	UW-River Falls	15-7	LOST at UW-Stout, 81-82; def. #19 UW-Whitewater, 76-65
T#33	10	Juniata	19-4	won at Elizabethtown, 75-48; LOST at Moravian, 84-96
T#33	10	Ohio Wesleyan	15-8	LOST at Hiram, 66-72; LOST at #23 Wooster, 72-75
T#33	10	St. Olaf	18-5	won at Augsburg, 68-67; def. St. Thomas, 66-57
#36	9	Ramapo	18-6	won at Rutgers-Camden, 75-55; LOST at #37 New Jersey City, 84-89
#37	6	New Jersey City	19-5	won at Montclair State, 84-76; def. #36 Ramapo, 89-84
#38	4	Ohio Northern	16-7	won at Heidelberg, 74-67; LOST to #24 John Carroll, 80-90
T#39	1	Keene State	16-7	LOST at #10 Eastern Connecticut, 78-83; def. Western Connecticut, 84-71
T#39	1	Lehman	20-4	won at Medgar Evers, 91-68; def. Staten Island, 83-82
T#39	1	Maryville (Tenn.)	17-5	def. Brevard, 80-69; won at Berea, 94-65
T#39	1	Sul Ross State	18-5	won at Hardin-Simmons, 86-69; won at McMurry, 76-57

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 11, 2018, 03:27:06 PM

Well played, Darryl... and thanks for the love.

(https://media.giphy.com/media/xT9DPybeuKfVL8wslq/giphy.gif)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 12, 2018, 03:09:51 PM

If curious, here is Ryan and I discussing things during the Hoopsville Top 25 Double-take last night: https://youtu.be/GyLuhnnwD4s?t=1h46m11s

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Onward on, John Carroll on February 12, 2018, 03:32:37 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 12, 2018, 03:09:51 PM
If curious, here is Ryan and I discussing things during the Hoopsville Top 25 Double-take last night: https://youtu.be/GyLuhnnwD4s?t=1h46m11s

You seem so pained, Dave, every time you talk about OWU. I almost want to go back and watch those two games in December because they must have really been something.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 12, 2018, 03:34:28 PM

Quote from: Onward on, John Carroll on February 12, 2018, 03:32:37 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 12, 2018, 03:09:51 PM
If curious, here is Ryan and I discussing things during the Hoopsville Top 25 Double-take last night: https://youtu.be/GyLuhnnwD4s?t=1h46m11s

You seem so pained, Dave, every time you talk about OWU. I almost want to go back and watch those two games in December because they must have really been something.

Highly recommend it. Game for the ages.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-N7VQ1CRNJs&feature=youtu.be

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 12, 2018, 03:36:37 PM

Oh they were incredible, especially the Whitman game. That one was one of the best I've seen in person, period.

Just insane how they are 6-7 in their last 13. Just ... insane.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on February 12, 2018, 04:41:09 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 12, 2018, 03:09:51 PM
If curious, here is Ryan and I discussing things during the Hoopsville Top 25 Double-take last night: https://youtu.be/GyLuhnnwD4s?t=1h46m11s

I was not surprised to hear Emory as a dubious pick...

Admittedly, I have been up and down and all over the place on the Eagles.

Last season, the Eagles had a win over (arguably) the best Rochester team in a long time, but they also had losses to the youngest UAA team ever in NYU along with a loss and overtime win over Brandeis. They got MURDERED on the road at Rochester and Washington University. And, finished the season with 8 losses. I had them as my fourth or fifth place team in the UAA going in to this season before I was able to see the freshmen and I was surprised to see them in the D3Hoops.com pre-season rankings, though I do not pay much attention beyond the Central division.

This season, I took notice after they ran with Lipscomb until the final 2-3 minutes in a game that was arguably more impressive than the MIT exhibition with Harvard. And I finally started to buy-in after the wins over Transy and IWU along with the 80-62 win over Rochester to start league play. At the same time, I was willing to temper my concerns with the two non-conference losses because of the injury to Whit Rapp who is one of the best point guards in the nation (e.g. No. 3 in career assists among active players).

I was not surprised to see Carnegie Mellon and Case Western Reserve, and Chicago for that matter, challenge Emory, but the Tartans and Maroons did it twice. This in a season in which the overall strength of the UAA is questionable (in 10 years, I have never seen the conference ranked so low by Massey).

I still go back and forth...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on February 12, 2018, 08:30:09 PM

New top 25 out.

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2017-18/week11

Cabrini got more votes than week 10, but not enough to get in the top 25. Maybe next week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fantastic50 on February 12, 2018, 09:22:42 PM

If D3H was a stock market (new fantasy game?) set by the polls, I would be buying Nebraska Wesleyan, the OAC, MIAC, and CCIW. On the flip side, I would sell Emory, York, E. Connecticut, Lycoming, and Salem State.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on February 12, 2018, 10:08:44 PM

Me: [checks the latest Top 25 rankings]

Me: Wait, what?

Me: [remembers a post from October]

Quote from: WUPHF on October 19, 2017, 11:10:01 PM
Quote from: 4samuy on October 19, 2017, 10:21:32 PM
Just got a look at the most recent publication of Small College Hoops and their preseason rankings.

1. Augustana
2. Whitman
3. Marietta
4. Chris. Newport
5. Amherst
6. Emory
7. Wis. River Falls
8. Williams
9. Hanover
10. Ramapo

(https://media.giphy.com/media/ly8G39g1ujpNm/giphy.gif)

Me:

(https://media.giphy.com/media/VqbAGndWSt0NG/giphy.gif)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 12, 2018, 10:48:10 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on February 12, 2018, 04:41:09 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 12, 2018, 03:09:51 PM
If curious, here is Ryan and I discussing things during the Hoopsville Top 25 Double-take last night: https://youtu.be/GyLuhnnwD4s?t=1h46m11s

I was not surprised to hear Emory as a dubious pick...

... and yet they jumped six places in this week's poll, from #13 to #7. Go figure.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 12, 2018, 10:57:01 PM

WUPHF... that might be the most epic of posts ... at least in quite some time.

Well done. +k

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on February 13, 2018, 09:32:00 AM

Thanks Dave! Looking forward to the blog to see where you had Emory. By the way, has there ever been a better season for Division III fans who love upsets, underdogs and parity? What do you think Greg?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 13, 2018, 12:24:12 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on February 13, 2018, 09:32:00 AM
Thanks Dave! Looking forward to the blog to see where you had Emory. By the way, has there ever been a better season for Division III fans who love upsets, underdogs and parity? What do you think Greg?

Blog will be out shortly... and what I did with Emory will surprise you.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 13, 2018, 12:43:10 PM

Here you go: http://bit.ly/2G9RKH8

(https://media.giphy.com/media/3ohzdMk3uz9WSpdTvW/giphy.gif)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Onward on, John Carroll on February 13, 2018, 01:38:30 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 13, 2018, 12:43:10 PM
Here you go: http://bit.ly/2G9RKH8

(https://media.giphy.com/media/3ohzdMk3uz9WSpdTvW/giphy.gif)

Come on, Dave, a little love for the Blue Streaks? On January 16, you rank us 14th and on January 23 you admit to mistakenly leaving them off your ballot (but state you are OK with that omission). We go 6-2 in the interim and we can't find our way to the bottom of your ballot?

That Muskingum loss must have really put a bad taste in your mouth (me too). JCU has two bad losses (Mount and Musky), one good loss (to a fellow OAC contender, BW) and an average loss (to Hope, at their place and over the holiday). If you feel the OAC is weak this year, you have them in the right place - off your ballot. I disagree.

Thanks for all you do.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on February 13, 2018, 02:01:47 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 13, 2018, 12:24:12 PM
Blog will be out shortly... and what I did with Emory will surprise you.

Surprised and not surprised at all.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 13, 2018, 03:10:49 PM

Quote from: Onward on, John Carroll on February 13, 2018, 01:38:30 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 13, 2018, 12:43:10 PM
Here you go: http://bit.ly/2G9RKH8

(https://media.giphy.com/media/3ohzdMk3uz9WSpdTvW/giphy.gif)

Come on, Dave, a little love for the Blue Streaks? On January 16, you rank us 14th and on January 23 you admit to mistakenly leaving them off your ballot (but state you are OK with that omission). We go 6-2 in the interim and we can't find our way to the bottom of your ballot?

That Muskingum loss must have really put a bad taste in your mouth (me too). JCU has two bad losses (Mount and Musky), one good loss (to a fellow OAC contender, BW) and an average loss (to Hope, at their place and over the holiday). If you feel the OAC is weak this year, you have them in the right place - off your ballot. I disagree.

Thanks for all you do.

On my list. Nearly made it. You seem to think I should ignore the "2" in that 6-2 :).

I don't think the OAC is weak, just as I don't think the WIAC is weak... but that doesn't indicate teams are automatically great or weak accordingly. JCU just missed out this week. I want to see how the following week progresses.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Onward on, John Carroll on February 13, 2018, 03:36:23 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 13, 2018, 03:10:49 PM
Quote from: Onward on, John Carroll on February 13, 2018, 01:38:30 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 13, 2018, 12:43:10 PM
Here you go: http://bit.ly/2G9RKH8

(https://media.giphy.com/media/3ohzdMk3uz9WSpdTvW/giphy.gif)

Come on, Dave, a little love for the Blue Streaks? On January 16, you rank us 14th and on January 23 you admit to mistakenly leaving them off your ballot (but state you are OK with that omission). We go 6-2 in the interim and we can't find our way to the bottom of your ballot?

That Muskingum loss must have really put a bad taste in your mouth (me too). JCU has two bad losses (Mount and Musky), one good loss (to a fellow OAC contender, BW) and an average loss (to Hope, at their place and over the holiday). If you feel the OAC is weak this year, you have them in the right place - off your ballot. I disagree.

Thanks for all you do.

On my list. Nearly made it. You seem to think I should ignore the "2" in that 6-2 :).

I don't think the OAC is weak, just as I don't think the WIAC is weak... but that doesn't indicate teams are automatically great or weak accordingly. JCU just missed out this week. I want to see how the following week progresses.

I absolutely want you to ignore the 2 in that 6-2. :D The Muskingum loss was bad and they suffered in the polls accordingly. However the BW loss was just a good game between two very good teams. They avenged that loss and own 4 more wins against Etta and ONU.

If they get knocked off this week (and either of these teams, especially the Berg), I would not vote us very either. I really want them to rattle off 5 in a row so they can get hosting duties (might even get them if they are 4-1 down the stretch) but I think that may be a stretch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 13, 2018, 03:41:45 PM

Welp - not ignoring the two losses. :)

I am sure MIT would love me to lose their three losses. Or E&H their four. OWU I think is one of the best teams in the country, but they are 6-7 in the last 13. I can't ignore those losses. ;D

I know it is tongue-and-cheek... but there are a LOT of losses this year and ignoring bad games isn't something in the cards. I wanted to shift Wittenberg WAY down for their loss to Hiram... just couldn't do it when everyone else is losing, too. I did move some teams up after losses, but not because I wanted to.

I did consider moving JCU you. They were on my ballot half a dozen times until the very, very end. Will watch intently to see how this week works out.

(As an aside, I hate voting anew for a team one week and then removing them the next week. Bugs me to no end. Makes me think I made the wrong choice originally.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Onward on, John Carroll on February 13, 2018, 04:18:31 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 13, 2018, 03:41:45 PM
Welp - not ignoring the two losses. :)

I am sure MIT would love me to lose their three losses. Or E&H their four. OWU I think is one of the best teams in the country, but they are 6-7 in the last 13. I can't ignore those losses. ;D

I know it is tongue-and-cheek... but there are a LOT of losses this year and ignoring bad games isn't something in the cards. I wanted to shift Wittenberg WAY down for their loss to Hiram... just couldn't do it when everyone else is losing, too. I did move some teams up after losses, but not because I wanted to.

I did consider moving JCU you. They were on my ballot half a dozen times until the very, very end. Will watch intently to see how this week works out.

(As an aside, I hate voting anew for a team one week and then removing them the next week. Bugs me to no end. Makes me think I made the wrong choice originally.)

Your love for OWU this season, despite their record and the fact they are under .500 in a rather pedestrian NCAC (the usual two horse race between Woo and Witt), is entertaining to no end. I respect your loyalty.

I just hope JCU keeps it together (my viewpoint) or puts it together (your viewpoint) as the season hits the homestretch. If I had known how long it would be before we made our next Sweet Sixteen, I sure would have enjoyed the previous trips a lot more.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 13, 2018, 04:38:46 PM

Quote from: Onward on, John Carroll on February 13, 2018, 04:18:31 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 13, 2018, 03:41:45 PM
Welp - not ignoring the two losses. :)

I am sure MIT would love me to lose their three losses. Or E&H their four. OWU I think is one of the best teams in the country, but they are 6-7 in the last 13. I can't ignore those losses. ;D

I know it is tongue-and-cheek... but there are a LOT of losses this year and ignoring bad games isn't something in the cards. I wanted to shift Wittenberg WAY down for their loss to Hiram... just couldn't do it when everyone else is losing, too. I did move some teams up after losses, but not because I wanted to.

I did consider moving JCU you. They were on my ballot half a dozen times until the very, very end. Will watch intently to see how this week works out.

(As an aside, I hate voting anew for a team one week and then removing them the next week. Bugs me to no end. Makes me think I made the wrong choice originally.)

Your love for OWU this season, despite their record and the fact they are under .500 in a rather pedestrian NCAC (the usual two horse race between Woo and Witt), is entertaining to no end. I respect your loyalty.

I just hope JCU keeps it together (my viewpoint) or puts it together (your viewpoint) as the season hits the homestretch. If I had known how long it would be before we made our next Sweet Sixteen, I sure would have enjoyed the previous trips a lot more.

If I loved them, they would be in my ballot, right? Haven't been for quite awhile now.

I saw them in front of me play two of the more incredible games I have seen in years. They have the best point guard in the country. You may think the NCAC is pedestrian, but it is a far better conference than you are giving it credit for. That said, they have fallen apart. I was using the example as an extreme in a tongue-and-cheek comment. I could pick out a lot of other examples as well (Whitewater).

It isn't loyalty, it is appreciation for what I saw and I am not the only one who is a) impressed with what we saw and b) amazed that they have come unglued.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on February 14, 2018, 12:24:26 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 13, 2018, 03:41:45 PM
Welp - not ignoring the two losses. :)

I am sure MIT would love me to lose their three losses. Or E&H their four. OWU I think is one of the best teams in the country, but they are 6-7 in the last 13. I can't ignore those losses. ;D

I know it is tongue-and-cheek... but there are a LOT of losses this year and ignoring bad games isn't something in the cards. I wanted to shift Wittenberg WAY down for their loss to Hiram... just couldn't do it when everyone else is losing, too. I did move some teams up after losses, but not because I wanted to.

I did consider moving JCU you. They were on my ballot half a dozen times until the very, very end. Will watch intently to see how this week works out.

(As an aside, I hate voting anew for a team one week and then removing them the next week. Bugs me to no end. Makes me think I made the wrong choice originally.)

For a team who looked as good as Witt has this year to want to move them "WAY" down doesn't seem fair. I know you will bring up the lopsided score of 20ish points, but it is a single blemish to a decent team in a solid conference on the road on senior night. Teams lose, opposing teams hit shots and the ball may not bounce your way one day. I have been thinking this all season, a loss to solid/average team for all of these top tier teams are not the end of the world. Especially when you think about everybody getting their best shot. If it becomes a trend like it has for E&H or OWU I totally get it but just one loss for Witt did not make me significantly change their ranking in the poster poll

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on February 14, 2018, 12:28:42 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 13, 2018, 03:41:45 PM
Welp - not ignoring the two losses. :)

I am sure MIT would love me to lose their three losses. Or E&H their four. OWU I think is one of the best teams in the country, but they are 6-7 in the last 13. I can't ignore those losses. ;D

I know it is tongue-and-cheek... but there are a LOT of losses this year and ignoring bad games isn't something in the cards. I wanted to shift Wittenberg WAY down for their loss to Hiram... just couldn't do it when everyone else is losing, too. I did move some teams up after losses, but not because I wanted to.

I did consider moving JCU you. They were on my ballot half a dozen times until the very, very end. Will watch intently to see how this week works out.

(As an aside, I hate voting anew for a team one week and then removing them the next week. Bugs me to no end. Makes me think I made the wrong choice originally.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on February 14, 2018, 06:59:57 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 13, 2018, 12:43:10 PM
Here you go: http://bit.ly/2G9RKH8

(https://media.giphy.com/media/3ohzdMk3uz9WSpdTvW/giphy.gif)

Pleasantly surprised to see you had the Plattsburgh State Cardinals so high in your rankings this week (#12). I know most voters look at those 4 losses and have a tendency to dismiss them but as you noted, all 4 losses came with their best player (and most likely the SUNYAC Player of the Year), Jon Patron, missing from the lineup. With Jon, who averages 22.4 ppg and 10.3 rpg, they are undefeated and now boast the 2nd longest current winning streak in the country, 15 games, behind only Whitman.

They end the regular season with a pair of home conference games this weekend against 2 teams they have already beaten on the road by 37 and 29 points respectively, so I think they will win out and enter the SUNYAC tournament with a 17 game winning streak and a 20-4 record. Their last 8 games against the top teams in the conference have all been double digit wins

Hopefully some of your fellow voters will hop on the Cardinals bandwagon this coming week and they will finally make the Top 25. I think they were hurt last week when they only played a single game and everyone jumped on the Johns Hopkins train because of their two big wins.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Onward on, John Carroll on February 14, 2018, 09:05:26 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 13, 2018, 04:38:46 PM
Quote from: Onward on, John Carroll on February 13, 2018, 04:18:31 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 13, 2018, 03:41:45 PM
Welp - not ignoring the two losses. :)

I am sure MIT would love me to lose their three losses. Or E&H their four. OWU I think is one of the best teams in the country, but they are 6-7 in the last 13. I can't ignore those losses. ;D

I know it is tongue-and-cheek... but there are a LOT of losses this year and ignoring bad games isn't something in the cards. I wanted to shift Wittenberg WAY down for their loss to Hiram... just couldn't do it when everyone else is losing, too. I did move some teams up after losses, but not because I wanted to.

I did consider moving JCU you. They were on my ballot half a dozen times until the very, very end. Will watch intently to see how this week works out.

(As an aside, I hate voting anew for a team one week and then removing them the next week. Bugs me to no end. Makes me think I made the wrong choice originally.)

Your love for OWU this season, despite their record and the fact they are under .500 in a rather pedestrian NCAC (the usual two horse race between Woo and Witt), is entertaining to no end. I respect your loyalty.

I just hope JCU keeps it together (my viewpoint) or puts it together (your viewpoint) as the season hits the homestretch. If I had known how long it would be before we made our next Sweet Sixteen, I sure would have enjoyed the previous trips a lot more.

If I loved them, they would be in my ballot, right? Haven't been for quite awhile now.

I saw them in front of me play two of the more incredible games I have seen in years. They have the best point guard in the country. You may think the NCAC is pedestrian, but it is a far better conference than you are giving it credit for. That said, they have fallen apart. I was using the example as an extreme in a tongue-and-cheek comment. I could pick out a lot of other examples as well (Whitewater).

It isn't loyalty, it is appreciation for what I saw and I am not the only one who is a) impressed with what we saw and b) amazed that they have come unglued.

Perhaps loyalty was the wrong word and I certainly did not mean to imply that you were voting for them as I know that you are not. I just get a chuckle because you cannot say the words Ohio Wesleyan on Hoopsville without a sign of disappointment before mentioning how good they looked to you in December. You can love a team and not want to vote for them. I believe you when you say that they looked sooooo good in December and so many of us have followed a team that we know is good but just keeps losing ball games. I can certainly relate and I can name two John Carroll teams in the past 20 years that I still cannot figure out how they lost as many games as they did.

FWIW, I did talk to a Wooster fan who said that NO ONE in the region should want OWU to win the NCAC tournament because if they get it back together and get things rolling, that would be as nasty a bid thief as there could be. I asked "What if that knocks out Etta and they are fully healthy?" He still though OWU was more dangerous. Like you said, there are others saying just what you are saying.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 14, 2018, 11:17:57 AM

Ohio Wesleyan could finish with one win against a team with a winning record significantly above .500. Ramapo

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 14, 2018, 02:17:46 PM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on February 14, 2018, 12:28:42 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 13, 2018, 03:41:45 PM
Welp - not ignoring the two losses. :)

I am sure MIT would love me to lose their three losses. Or E&H their four. OWU I think is one of the best teams in the country, but they are 6-7 in the last 13. I can't ignore those losses. ;D

I know it is tongue-and-cheek... but there are a LOT of losses this year and ignoring bad games isn't something in the cards. I wanted to shift Wittenberg WAY down for their loss to Hiram... just couldn't do it when everyone else is losing, too. I did move some teams up after losses, but not because I wanted to.

I did consider moving JCU you. They were on my ballot half a dozen times until the very, very end. Will watch intently to see how this week works out.

(As an aside, I hate voting anew for a team one week and then removing them the next week. Bugs me to no end. Makes me think I made the wrong choice originally.)

For a team who looked as good as Witt has this year to want to move them "WAY" down doesn't seem fair. I know you will bring up the lopsided score of 20ish points, but it is a single blemish to a decent team in a solid conference on the road on senior night. Teams lose, opposing teams hit shots and the ball may not bounce your way one day. I have been thinking this all season, a loss to solid/average team for all of these top tier teams are not the end of the world. Especially when you think about everybody getting their best shot. If it becomes a trend like it has for E&H or OWU I totally get it but just one loss for Witt did not make me significantly change their ranking in the poster poll.

That said you only moved witt down one spot and mentioned some of the reasons i did above in your blog. I guess I agree with your actions, just not the theory that losing needs to be accomponied by the feeling of needing to move a team "WAY down."

You are taking my one comment about one team and then extrapolating out that I would do it for all teams. "Theory that losing needs to be accomponied by the feeling of needing to move a team 'WAY down.'"

If you have read my blogs or listened to my show enough times, you would know that is not true. I don't move teams based on losses a LOT. Heck, in the last few years probably a majority of the time. However, that doesn't meant there aren't exceptions. Wittenberg lost by 20+ to Hiram! Really?! If they lost to Wooster, I wouldn't be inclined to move them down as much. If they lost to OWU (that was a shot across the bow at Onward), I wouldn't do it... but it was Hiram. But I also know Hiram is 14-9 this season and I did take that into account.

But please don't assume because I said I wanted to move Wittenberg way down that I mean to do that with every team that takes a loss. That loss, how it happened, and the spread.. concerned me. That kind of loss can open a door...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Onward on, John Carroll on February 14, 2018, 02:30:02 PM

As I used to say during a rousing game of Battleship with my brother: Hit

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 14, 2018, 02:30:46 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 14, 2018, 02:17:46 PM
Quote from: Smitty Oom on February 14, 2018, 12:28:42 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 13, 2018, 03:41:45 PM
Welp - not ignoring the two losses. :)

I am sure MIT would love me to lose their three losses. Or E&H their four. OWU I think is one of the best teams in the country, but they are 6-7 in the last 13. I can't ignore those losses. ;D

I know it is tongue-and-cheek... but there are a LOT of losses this year and ignoring bad games isn't something in the cards. I wanted to shift Wittenberg WAY down for their loss to Hiram... just couldn't do it when everyone else is losing, too. I did move some teams up after losses, but not because I wanted to.

I did consider moving JCU you. They were on my ballot half a dozen times until the very, very end. Will watch intently to see how this week works out.

(As an aside, I hate voting anew for a team one week and then removing them the next week. Bugs me to no end. Makes me think I made the wrong choice originally.)

For a team who looked as good as Witt has this year to want to move them "WAY" down doesn't seem fair. I know you will bring up the lopsided score of 20ish points, but it is a single blemish to a decent team in a solid conference on the road on senior night. Teams lose, opposing teams hit shots and the ball may not bounce your way one day. I have been thinking this all season, a loss to solid/average team for all of these top tier teams are not the end of the world. Especially when you think about everybody getting their best shot. If it becomes a trend like it has for E&H or OWU I totally get it but just one loss for Witt did not make me significantly change their ranking in the poster poll.

That said you only moved witt down one spot and mentioned some of the reasons i did above in your blog. I guess I agree with your actions, just not the theory that losing needs to be accomponied by the feeling of needing to move a team "WAY down."

You are taking my one comment about one team and then extrapolating out that I would do it for all teams. "Theory that losing needs to be accomponied by the feeling of needing to move a team 'WAY down.'"

If you have read my blogs or listened to my show enough times, you would know that is not true. I don't move teams based on losses a LOT. Heck, in the last few years probably a majority of the time. However, that doesn't meant there aren't exceptions. Wittenberg lost by 20+ to Hiram! Really?! If they lost to Wooster, I wouldn't be inclined to move them down as much. If they lost to OWU (that was a shot across the bow at Onward), I wouldn't do it... but it was Hiram. But I also know Hiram is 14-9 this season and I did take that into account.

But please don't assume because I said I wanted to move Wittenberg way down that I mean to do that with every team that takes a loss. That loss, how it happened, and the spread.. concerned me. That kind of loss can open a door...

That's the same Hiram team that's already swept your Battling Bishops, Dave. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 14, 2018, 03:17:15 PM

Ain't my Battling Bishops who also are not living up to their battling moniker. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 14, 2018, 04:27:54 PM

I know. I'm just yanking your chain, a la OOJC, with regard to your gushing praises of OWU this season. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Onward on, John Carroll on February 14, 2018, 05:50:08 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 14, 2018, 04:27:54 PM
I know. I'm just yanking your chain, a la OOJC, with regard to your gushing praises of OWU this season. ;)

It's fun- I have to admit. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fantastic50 on February 14, 2018, 08:13:10 PM

OWU falls behind Wittenberg 29-10 before the Bishops make a 24-4 run, and end up taking a 38-37 lead into the locker room.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fantastic50 on February 14, 2018, 09:15:34 PM

Ohio Wesleyan 85, #5 Wittenberg 80 (Final)

Also in the Great Lakes, #16 Wooster is trying to come back from a 15-point deficit against Kenyon.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 14, 2018, 09:25:18 PM

Quote from: fantastic50 on February 14, 2018, 09:15:34 PM
Ohio Wesleyan 85, #5 Wittenberg 80 (Final)

Also in the Great Lakes, #16 Wooster is trying to come back from a 15-point deficit against Kenyon.

Congrats to d-mac, who still has a man-crush on OWU, and wanted to drop Witt much further after their loss to Hiram than he ended up doing! 8-)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fantastic50 on February 14, 2018, 09:45:48 PM

Kenyon (7-17, 4-13 NCAC) shoots the lights out from 3 and nearly ends a 50-game losing streak to #16 Wooster. Down 15 in the middle of the second half, the Scots (20-4, 14-3) rally to win, 81-79, and claim their 22nd consecutive 20-win season. Saturday night's Wooster-Wittenberg game will decide the top seed in the NCAC tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 14, 2018, 09:57:22 PM

Quote from: fantastic50 on February 14, 2018, 09:45:48 PM
Kenyon (7-17, 4-13 NCAC) shoots the lights out from 3 and nearly ends a 50-game losing streak to #16 Wooster. Down 15 in the middle of the second half, the Scots (20-4, 14-3) rally to win, 81-79, and claim their 22nd consecutive 20-win season. Saturday night's Wooster-Wittenberg game will decide the top seed in the NCAC tournament.

50-game losing streak? Wow! What is that? The Bush-41 Administration?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fantastic50 on February 14, 2018, 10:33:30 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 14, 2018, 09:57:22 PM
Quote from: fantastic50 on February 14, 2018, 09:45:48 PM
Kenyon (7-17, 4-13 NCAC) shoots the lights out from 3 and nearly ends a 50-game losing streak to #16 Wooster. Down 15 in the middle of the second half, the Scots (20-4, 14-3) rally to win, 81-79, and claim their 22nd consecutive 20-win season. Saturday night's Wooster-Wittenberg game will decide the top seed in the NCAC tournament.
50-game losing streak? Wow! What is that? The Bush-41 Administration?

Not quite that old, but close... Kenyon ousted Wooster from the 1995 NCAA tournament, and that was the last time they beat the Scots. Steve Moore's teams have long been known for focus and preparation, and (if I recall) also hold lengthy active streaks vs Oberlin (nearly ended in this year's opener) and Allegheny. Hiram ended theirs two years ago (and then beat the Scots again the next season.)

As an aside, Wooster had an 80+ game baseball winning streak against Oberlin, before it was broken earlier this decade.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on February 14, 2018, 10:38:13 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 14, 2018, 09:25:18 PM
Quote from: fantastic50 on February 14, 2018, 09:15:34 PM
Ohio Wesleyan 85, #5 Wittenberg 80 (Final)

Also in the Great Lakes, #16 Wooster is trying to come back from a 15-point deficit against Kenyon.

Congrats to d-mac, who still has a man-crush on OWU, and wanted to drop Witt much further after their loss to Hiram than he ended up doing! 8-)

Yup, seems that Dave might have been on to something! Obviously you aren't rooting for a team to lose but you said it yourself, it may have been a slight opening of the flood gates...

(https://media1.tenor.com/images/10c45635398e82d9e36cb80f75be2b76/tenor.gif?itemid=7890251)

I still think as a whole we have been too hard on top tier teams taking losses and not enjoying the raise of the D3 middle class teams as much as we should have this year, but I digress...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 14, 2018, 11:12:04 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Whitman	23-0	02/16 vs. Willamette; 02/17 vs. Linfield
#2	600	Washington U.	20-2	02/16 vs. Case Western Reserve; 02/18 vs. Carnegie Mellon
#3	546	St. John's	22-2	won at Gustavus Adolphus, 78-73; 02/17 at St. Thomas
#4	534	Whitworth	20-3	02/16 vs. Linfield; 02/17 vs. Willamette
#5	526	Wittenberg	22-2	LOST at Ohio Wesleyan, 80-85; 02/17 vs. #16 Wooster
#6	525	UW-Platteville	21-3	def. T#32 UW-Whitewater, 70-66; 02/17 vs. T#42 UW-River Falls
#7	408	Emory	18-4	02/16 vs. New York University; 02/18 vs. Brandeis
#8	391	York (Pa.)	21-3	def. St. Mary's (Md.), 81-78; 02/17 at Christopher Newport
#9	376	Williams	19-5	02/17 vs. Trinity (Conn.)
#10	362	Augustana	18-5	02/17 vs. North Park
#11	328	Eastern Connecticut	21-3	won at Western Connecticut, 106-82; 02/17 vs. Southern Maine
#12	321	Swarthmore	20-4	def. Haverford, 81-69; 02/17 vs. #24 Franklin and Marshall
#13	285	Middlebury	19-5	02/17 at #17 Wesleyan
#14	266	UW-Oshkosh	18-6	LOST at #19 UW-Stevens Point, 70-77; 02/17 at UW-Stout
#15	265	Hamilton	21-3	def. SUNY-Cobleskill, 84-51; 02/17 vs. Tufts
#16	211	Wooster	20-4	def. Kenyon, 81-79; 02/17 at #5 Wittenberg
#17	206	Wesleyan	19-5	02/17 vs. #13 Middlebury
#18	155	John Carroll	20-4	def. Heidelberg, 91-78; 02/17 at Capital
#19	144	UW-Stevens Point	17-7	def. #14 UW-Oshkosh, 77-70; 02/17 at UW-Eau Claire
#20	126	Lycoming	19-5	LOST to Lebanon Valley, 79-82; 02/17 at T#39 Albright
#21	120	Hobart	20-3	02/16 vs. Vassar; 02/17 vs. Union
#22	114	Johns Hopkins	20-4	won at Washington College, 81-63; 02/17 at Haverford
#23	105	Illinois Wesleyan	18-5	won at Millikin, 65-56; 02/17 at Carthage
#24	94	Franklin and Marshall	20-4	def. Dickinson, 64-57; 02/17 at #12 Swarthmore
#25	87	Salem State	22-3	def. Massachusetts College, 91-81

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	63	Nichols	21-3	def. Eastern Nazarene, 93-83; 02/17 vs. Wentworth
#27	62	MIT	19-5	won at Clark, 85-42; 02/17 vs. WPI
T#28	61	Cabrini	21-3	won at Immaculata, 87-75; 02/17 vs. Clarks Summit
T#28	61	Plattsburgh State	18-4	02/16 vs. SUNY Oneonta; 02/17 vs. SUNY New Paltz
#30	52	Marietta	19-5	won at Muskingum, 107-100 OT; 02/17 at Ohio Northern
#31	22	St. Olaf	18-6	LOST at Carleton, 58-72; 02/17 at Concordia-Moorhead
T#32	20	Amherst	16-8	02/17 vs. Bowdoin
T#32	20	UW-Whitewater	16-8	LOST at #6 UW-Platteville, 66-70; 02/17 vs. UW-La Crosse
#34	19	New Jersey City	19-6	LOST at Stockton, 66-87; 02/17 vs. William Paterson
#35	7	Sul Ross State	18-5	02/15 vs. Mary Hardin-Baylor; 02/17 vs. Concordia (Texas)
#36	4	Emory and Henry	18-6	LOST to Washington and Lee, 87-92; 02/17 at Eastern Mennonite
T#37	3	Juniata	20-4	won at Goucher, 82-71; 02/17 vs. Drew
T#37	3	Lehman	21-4	def. Hunter, 66-52
T#39	2	Albright	18-5	02/17 vs. #20 Lycoming
T#39	2	Keene State	16-8	LOST at Plymouth State, 75-84 OT; 02/17 at Mass-Dartmouth
T#39	2	Maryville (Tenn.)	18-5	won at Piedmont, 75-72; 02/17 vs. Huntingdon; 02/18 vs. LaGrange
T#42	1	Randolph-Macon	18-6	won at Hampden-Sydney, 67-56; 02/17 at Washington and Lee
T#42	1	UW-River Falls	16-7	def. UW-Eau Claire, 77-61; 02/17 at #6 UW-Platteville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 15, 2018, 12:19:25 PM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on February 14, 2018, 10:38:13 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 14, 2018, 09:25:18 PM
Quote from: fantastic50 on February 14, 2018, 09:15:34 PM
Ohio Wesleyan 85, #5 Wittenberg 80 (Final)

Also in the Great Lakes, #16 Wooster is trying to come back from a 15-point deficit against Kenyon.

Congrats to d-mac, who still has a man-crush on OWU, and wanted to drop Witt much further after their loss to Hiram than he ended up doing! 8-)

Yup, seems that Dave might have been on to something! Obviously you aren't rooting for a team to lose but you said it yourself, it may have been a slight opening of the flood gates...

(https://media1.tenor.com/images/10c45635398e82d9e36cb80f75be2b76/tenor.gif?itemid=7890251)

I still think as a whole we have been too hard on top tier teams taking losses and not enjoying the raise of the D3 middle class teams as much as we should have this year, but I digress...

If I wasn't so sick (had to cancel just my second Goucher game in 23 seasons last night), I'd spend time responding... but yeah, I did smirk a bit when I saw the score last night.

Though, your last thought did make me think... I feel we have been enjoying the rise of the "middle class." We have talked extensively on Hoopsville about just how great parity in the last few years and especially this year... and how much it has made each night fun and "must watch." Sure, I roll my eyes and lament on how challenging the Top 25 is to put together, but I always follow that it is fun to talk about new teams, discuss how great games are, etc.

As for too hard on top teams losing... I think that falls under the "is there a great team in DIII" conversation. I also think it will take us all some time to get used to the fact that maybe the era of "great" teams and being separate from everyone else is gone. This may be the new norm and it has moved higher up the chain than I think we expected. Just going to take time to get used to that and shift the conversation.

Remember, I have said I didn't think any would get through the regular season undefeated. That includes Whitman, though the opportunities for that to happen are now running out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Onward on, John Carroll on February 15, 2018, 12:53:21 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 15, 2018, 12:19:25 PM
Quote from: Smitty Oom on February 14, 2018, 10:38:13 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 14, 2018, 09:25:18 PM
Quote from: fantastic50 on February 14, 2018, 09:15:34 PM
Ohio Wesleyan 85, #5 Wittenberg 80 (Final)

Also in the Great Lakes, #16 Wooster is trying to come back from a 15-point deficit against Kenyon.

Congrats to d-mac, who still has a man-crush on OWU, and wanted to drop Witt much further after their loss to Hiram than he ended up doing! 8-)

Yup, seems that Dave might have been on to something! Obviously you aren't rooting for a team to lose but you said it yourself, it may have been a slight opening of the flood gates...

(https://media1.tenor.com/images/10c45635398e82d9e36cb80f75be2b76/tenor.gif?itemid=7890251)

I still think as a whole we have been too hard on top tier teams taking losses and not enjoying the raise of the D3 middle class teams as much as we should have this year, but I digress...

If I wasn't so sick (had to cancel just my second Goucher game in 23 seasons last night), I'd spend time responding... but yeah, I did smirk a bit when I saw the score last night.

Though, your last thought did make me think... I feel we have been enjoying the rise of the "middle class." We have talked extensively on Hoopsville about just how great parity in the last few years and especially this year... and how much it has made each night fun and "must watch." Sure, I roll my eyes and lament on how challenging the Top 25 is to put together, but I always follow that it is fun to talk about new teams, discuss how great games are, etc.

As for too hard on top teams losing... I think that falls under the "is there a great team in DIII" conversation. I also think it will take us all some time to get used to the fact that maybe the era of "great" teams and being separate from everyone else is gone. This may be the new norm and it has moved higher up the chain than I think we expected. Just going to take time to get used to that and shift the conversation.

Remember, I have said I didn't think any would get through the regular season undefeated. That includes Whitman, though the opportunities for that to happen are now running out.

I smirked too, Dave. Maybe they'll win the NCAC tourney and you can really enjoy the ride.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on February 15, 2018, 01:07:40 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 15, 2018, 12:19:25 PM
Though, your last thought did make me think... I feel we have been enjoying the rise of the "middle class." We have talked extensively on Hoopsville about just how great parity in the last few years and especially this year... and how much it has made each night fun and "must watch." Sure, I roll my eyes and lament on how challenging the Top 25 is to put together, but I always follow that it is fun to talk about new teams, discuss how great games are, etc.

As for too hard on top teams losing... I think that falls under the "is there a great team in DIII" conversation. I also think it will take us all some time to get used to the fact that maybe the era of "great" teams and being separate from everyone else is gone. This may be the new norm and it has moved higher up the chain than I think we expected. Just going to take time to get used to that and shift the conversation.

I think this was very well stated, Dave. And I 100% agree. I personally think that this is great for the entire landscape of d3 hoops. It is fun to have blue bloods like Wooster, Amherst, UWSP, etc but it is also great to get new teams in the national stage and have these talented players getting recognized. It also pushes these great programs to get even better, or they are in danger of getting passed. Long live the parity!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 15, 2018, 10:58:36 PM

As the regular season draws ever closer to the end, the intensity of conference races increases. There are very few teams in both the men's and women's side of Division III basketball that seem comfortable at the top. With conference tournaments starting, being at the top is important, but it also comes with a big target.

This Thursday's Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is a special podcast edition - not live.

On the show, Dave talks to several coaches who teams seem like they have wrapped up their conferences races and one who may not be able to take the top spot, but is in great position to win it all their first time in the league.

We also talk to a coach who has more time than it seems anyone else. How she is using that time to help her school's SAAC in many ways and how that help is allowing the student-athletes at Southern Maine to give back to the school, the community, and many more.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can listen to this week's podcast here: http://bit.ly/2EtvKH0

If you have questions, be sure to email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or interact with the show via the social media avenues.

A reminder, Hoopsville will return to live shows on Sunday, February 18, starting at 7:00 p.m. ET.

Guests include (in order of appearance):
- Pete Moran, No. 18 John Carroll men's coach
- Allison Coleman, Sage women's coach
- Samantha Allen, Southern Maine women's coach (WBCA Center Court)
- Trevor Woodruff, No. 13 Scranton women's coach

To get access to all the podcasts during the season, there are three ways (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.psbin.com%2Fi%2F5%2Fvz58th1jnqkn9i%2FHoopsville-2-15-18.jpg&hash=064980f1454ccae422d001087d4a4d5a40b23fe3)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on February 17, 2018, 02:15:11 PM

This John Carroll at Capital game has been worth watching.

Capital leads 65-59.

7:18 left in the game if you happen to be reading this.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: rlgyank on February 17, 2018, 02:31:48 PM

Quote from: fantastic50 on February 12, 2018, 09:22:42 PM
If D3H was a stock market (new fantasy game?) set by the polls, I would be buying Nebraska Wesleyan, the OAC, MIAC, and CCIW. On the flip side, I would sell Emory, York, E. Connecticut, Lycoming, and Salem State.

It is absolutely amazing to me that Nebraska Wesleyan did not get any votes in the poll. I am new to the D3 scene as of last year, but it looks like to me that the top 25 is just like a good ole boys club. In the week 10 poll, 42 teams received votes. Those 42 teams went on to lose 26 games during the week. Of those 42 teams, 39 of them received votes in week 11. Only 4 new teams received votes. Nebraska Wesleyan was 21-3 when the poll was taken. Of their 3 losses, 2 were in OT on the road to the 2nd & 4th place teams in the conference. They are leading, by the 2 computer models that I know of, the 3rd or 4th best conference. They are 5th & 6th in the 2 computer models. I realize that their SOS is not the greatest, but it isn't like they are barely beating those teams, they are 2nd in the country in scoring margin. I know they tried to schedule some good teams this year, but it has not worked out that way. The 8 D3 non conference teams that they have on their schedule this year had a winning pct. last year of .573, this year that pct. has dropped to .385. Comparison scores on not perfect by any means, but I will throw out the following anyway. Washington University beat Central 87-83 at home. Augustana beat Central at Central 82-73. Nebraska Wesleyan won at Central 99-86 and won at home against Central 104-80. York (PA) won at Marymount 88-76 and at home against Marymount 81-58. Johns Hopkins beat Marymount at home 82-60. Nebraska Wesleyan won at Marymount 87-46. Wisconsin - Stephens Point lost to Wartburg on a neutral court 66-75. Nebraska Wesleyan won at home against Wartburg 99-60 and won at Wartburg 90-81.

It doesn't really matter what the D3 poll says, what matters is what the NCAA selection committee thinks. And thankfully they think more of Nebraska Wesleyan than the 25 members of the poll. Maybe 1 day some of the IIAC teams will become a member of the club.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on February 17, 2018, 02:40:14 PM

Capital gets the upset over John Carroll if there is such a thing in 2017-2018. The final score: 85-80.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 17, 2018, 05:07:53 PM

Quote from: rlgyank on February 17, 2018, 02:31:48 PM
Quote from: fantastic50 on February 12, 2018, 09:22:42 PM
If D3H was a stock market (new fantasy game?) set by the polls, I would be buying Nebraska Wesleyan, the OAC, MIAC, and CCIW. On the flip side, I would sell Emory, York, E. Connecticut, Lycoming, and Salem State.

It is absolutely amazing to me that Nebraska Wesleyan did not get any votes in the poll. I am new to the D3 scene as of last year, but it looks like to me that the top 25 is just like a good ole boys club. In the week 10 poll, 42 teams received votes. Those 42 teams went on to lose 26 games during the week. Of those 42 teams, 39 of them received votes in week 11. Only 4 new teams received votes. Nebraska Wesleyan was 21-3 when the poll was taken. Of their 3 losses, 2 were in OT on the road to the 2nd & 4th place teams in the conference. They are leading, by the 2 computer models that I know of, the 3rd or 4th best conference. They are 5th & 6th in the 2 computer models. I realize that their SOS is not the greatest, but it isn't like they are barely beating those teams, they are 2nd in the country in scoring margin. I know they tried to schedule some good teams this year, but it has not worked out that way. The 8 D3 non conference teams that they have on their schedule this year had a winning pct. last year of .573, this year that pct. has dropped to .385. Comparison scores on not perfect by any means, but I will throw out the following anyway. Washington University beat Central 87-83 at home. Augustana beat Central at Central 82-73. Nebraska Wesleyan won at Central 99-86 and won at home against Central 104-80. York (PA) won at Marymount 88-76 and at home against Marymount 81-58. Johns Hopkins beat Marymount at home 82-60. Nebraska Wesleyan won at Marymount 87-46. Wisconsin - Stephens Point lost to Wartburg on a neutral court 66-75. Nebraska Wesleyan won at home against Wartburg 99-60 and won at Wartburg 90-81.

It doesn't really matter what the D3 poll says, what matters is what the NCAA selection committee thinks. And thankfully they think more of Nebraska Wesleyan than the 25 members of the poll. Maybe 1 day some of the IIAC teams will become a member of the club.

Welcome to the Boards. Neb Wes was off the radar for so long. The voters probably don't have a real handle on them yet. This is by far the best NebWes team in years.

We followed Neb Wes all those years that it was in D-3 Pool B while playing in the Great Plains AC. There was little during those years for us to consider.

The other dynamic is that each voter only casts for his/her best 25. With the 64-team format, a voter can legitimately omit 7 first round playoff winners for the 2018 tourney without compromising his/her ballot.

I for one am glad to get NebWes into a conference and out of Pool B. Best wishes in the post-season.

(I am glad to have a former D-3 National Champion contending in the post-season again.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 17, 2018, 07:00:39 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 17, 2018, 05:07:53 PM
(I am glad to have a former D-3 National Champion contending in the post-season again.)

Nebraska Wesleyan has never won the national championship. The Prairie Wolves (ne Plainsmen) have finished second on one occasion (1997) and third on three others (1985, 1986, and 1988).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 18, 2018, 12:13:48 AM

I struggle with the fact that Nebraska Wesleyan built much of its resume against a pretty below-average opponents list... and then as much as we can point to good wins in the conference, we can also point to head-scratching results (i.e. Simpson in OT; Buena Vista 91-75).

I have thought that Nebraska Wesleyan had the potential of having a pretty good team, but hard to really gauge how good they really are. I have looked at them as an option a LOT of times. I have been leaning more on NWC in the last few weeks, though. They were one of the last teams I didn't vote for last week.

As for the "good old boys" comment... there isn't really any proof there. We have had a host of first-time Top 25 squads this year and there have been a lot of teams who have climbed to heights they have never seen in the Top 25 in their history. The men's Top 25 has been one of the most wide-open and constantly moving polls of most sports in Division III. That said, voters don't just toss their votes around on anyone. It may seem that from time to time and this occasion one individual may not realize that... but it does tend to be true.

There is an entire Top 25 archive you can look through. You will see just how many teams in the history of the Top 25 have earned their way on the poll (207 to be sure) - including Nebraska Wesleyan in its history: http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/archive

Stick around following DIII more and you can see how this develops. We welcome you to the boards and to the division - to some degree - but also stick around so we can get a better idea of Nebraska Wesleyan and you can appreciate how it all comes together a bit more.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 18, 2018, 02:23:12 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 17, 2018, 05:07:53 PM
Welcome to the Boards. Neb Wes was off the radar for so long. The voters probably don't have a real handle on them yet. This is by far the best NebWes team in years.

While this is a nice storyline, Ralph, the voters pay more attention than this. Dave has already spoken at length about this but I'll boil it down. Here's what a voter sees when looking at Nebraska Wesleyan's resume:

Nov. 17   7:30 PM   at North Central (Minn.) (7-18) •   W, 122-84
Nov. 18   5:00 PM   at Northwestern (Minn.) (13-12) •   W, 78-67
Nov. 24   7:00 PM   Iowa Wesleyan (5-20) •   W, 117-54
Nov. 25   5:00 PM   Bethany Lutheran (17-8) •   W, 95-78
Four games to open the season against the UMAC, the worst conference in the region.

... removed the GPAC team. Glad it's just one non-Division III opponent.

Dec. 10   12:00 PM   at Austin (4-21) •   W, 92-67
Dec. 17   2:00 PM   at Gallaudet (9-16) •   W, 99-77
Dec. 18   7:00 PM   at Marymount (8-17) •   W, 87-46
Dec. 30   4:00 PM   at Grinnell (13-11) •   W, 121-103

Is Grinnell the best non-conference team NWU faced?

With a non-conference slate like this, and an average (to below-average) conference, it's hard to get onto too many ballots.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 18, 2018, 02:29:04 PM

Not to mention inconsistent play. There were games where NebWes looked lights out, but there were other games where they looked really out of sync. You factor in that defense has also been spotty and it's tough to vote for them. Surviving the IIAC on top is helpful. We'll have to see how things are this week. They're certainly in the mix for votes, but they haven't done anything to earn the benefit of the doubt just yet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 18, 2018, 05:24:49 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Whitman	25-0	def. Willamette, 93-67; def. Linfield, 100-69
#2	600	Washington U.	22-2	def. Case Western Reserve, 101-60; def. Carnegie Mellon, 86-71
#3	546	St. John's	23-2	won at Gustavus Adolphus, 78-73; won at St. Thomas, 57-50
#4	534	Whitworth	22-3	def. Linfield, 86-75; def. Willamette, 76-60
#5	526	Wittenberg	23-2	LOST at Ohio Wesleyan, 80-85; def. #16 Wooster, 78-77 OT
#6	525	UW-Platteville	22-3	def. T#32 UW-Whitewater, 70-66; def. T#42 UW-River Falls, 81-69
#7	408	Emory	20-4	def. New York University, 96-85; def. Brandeis, 82-69
#8	391	York (Pa.)	21-4	def. St. Mary's (Md.), 81-78; LOST at Christopher Newport, 71-81
#9	376	Williams	20-5	def. Trinity (Conn.), 73-71
#10	362	Augustana	19-5	def. North Park, 77-60
#11	328	Eastern Connecticut	22-3	won at Western Connecticut, 106-82; def. Southern Maine, 89-42
#12	321	Swarthmore	21-4	def. Haverford, 81-69; def. #24 Franklin and Marshall, 58-56
#13	285	Middlebury	19-6	LOST at #17 Wesleyan, 65-73
#14	266	UW-Oshkosh	19-6	LOST at #19 UW-Stevens Point, 70-77; won at UW-Stout, 91-70
#15	265	Hamilton	22-3	def. SUNY-Cobleskill, 84-51; def. Tufts, 91-82
#16	211	Wooster	20-5	def. Kenyon, 81-79; LOST at #5 Wittenberg, 77-78 OT
#17	206	Wesleyan	20-5	def. #13 Middlebury, 73-65
#18	155	John Carroll	20-5	def. Heidelberg, 91-78; LOST at Capital, 80-85
#19	144	UW-Stevens Point	17-8	def. #14 UW-Oshkosh, 77-70; LOST at UW-Eau Claire, 54-55
#20	126	Lycoming	19-6	LOST to Lebanon Valley, 79-82; LOST at T#39 Albright, 80-87 OT
#21	120	Hobart	21-4	def. Vassar, 79-74; LOST to Union, 77-80
#22	114	Johns Hopkins	21-4	won at Washington College, 81-63; won at Haverford, 70-52
#23	105	Illinois Wesleyan	19-5	won at Millikin, 65-56; won at Carthage, 92-63
#24	94	Franklin and Marshall	20-5	def. Dickinson, 64-57; LOST at #12 Swarthmore, 56-58
#25	87	Salem State	22-3	def. Massachusetts College, 91-81

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	63	Nichols	22-3	def. Eastern Nazarene, 93-83; def. Wentworth, 81-72
#27	62	MIT	20-5	won at Clark, 85-42; def. WPI, 71-59
T#28	61	Cabrini	22-3	won at Immaculata, 87-75; def. Clarks Summit, 97-70
T#28	61	Plattsburgh State	20-4	def. SUNY Oneonta, 95-74; def. SUNY New Paltz, 102-69
#30	52	Marietta	20-5	won at Muskingum, 107-100 OT; won at Ohio Northern, 88-68
#31	22	St. Olaf	19-6	LOST at Carleton, 58-69; won at Concordia-Moorhead, 90-60
T#32	20	Amherst	17-8	def. Bowdoin, 71-70
T#32	20	UW-Whitewater	16-9	LOST at #6 UW-Platteville, 66-70; LOST to UW-La Crosse, 55-60
#34	19	New Jersey City	19-7	LOST at Stockton, 66-87; LOST to William Paterson, 78-81
#35	7	Sul Ross State	19-6	LOST to Mary Hardin-Baylor, 78-79; def. Concordia (Texas), 84-73
#36	4	Emory and Henry	19-6	LOST to Washington and Lee, 87-92; won at Eastern Mennonite, 74-56
T#37	3	Juniata	21-4	won at Goucher, 82-71; def. Drew, 73-64
T#37	3	Lehman	21-4	def. Hunter, 66-52
T#39	2	Albright	19-5	def. #20 Lycoming, 87-80 OT
T#39	2	Keene State	17-8	LOST at Plymouth State, 75-84 OT; won at Mass-Dartmouth, 73-71
T#39	2	Maryville (Tenn.)	19-6	won at Piedmont, 75-72; LOST to Huntingdon, 93-94 OT; def. LaGrange, 84-58
T#42	1	Randolph-Macon	18-7	won at Hampden-Sydney, 67-56; LOST at Washington and Lee, 76-84
T#42	1	UW-River Falls	16-8	def. UW-Eau Claire, 77-61; LOST at #6 UW-Platteville, 69-81

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 18, 2018, 05:35:04 PM

The final week of the 2017-18 season is upon us. In a week's time, the topic will be who has punched their tickets to the NCAA tournaments and who is hoping to get selected. This week... we don't know many of the answers and some questions have yet to be considered.

url=http://www.d3hoopsville.com]Hoopsville[/url] returns to the air LIVE this Sunday night with a jam-packed, and super-sized, edition. Dave welcomes guests from around the country and looks at a lot of the conference tournaments which are getting underway. Can some of the top teams take advantage of home-court advantage? Who may surprise? Who do some NOT want to see lose if they hope to make the tournament themselves?

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch the show LIVE starting at 7:00 p.m. ET here: http://bit.ly/2EyN7G9

If you have questions, be sure to email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or interact with the show via the social media avenues located to the right.

Guests include (in order of appearance):
- Tom Glynn, Nichols men's coach
- Anne Crutchfield, Emory & Henry women's coach
- Kevin Broderick, Nazareth men's coach
- Zach Otto-Fisher, UW-Superior interim women's coach
- Jon Prevo, No. 24 Rose-Hulman women's coach
- Brendan Gulick, Baldwin Wallace broadcaster (Great Lakes recap)
- Ryan Scott, "Top 25 Double-take"

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts instead, you can get access to them or subscribe one of the three following ways (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D710%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D4d99w%2Fxi30otvz7gow1bon.jpg&hash=e9669b02c4d9e5d090b49c897acada4a3f2fd336)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 19, 2018, 07:18:13 PM

New Top 25 is out: http://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2017-18/week12

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 19, 2018, 11:06:20 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 17, 2018, 07:00:39 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 17, 2018, 05:07:53 PM
(I am glad to have a former D-3 National Champion contending in the post-season again.)

Nebraska Wesleyan has never won the national championship. The Prairie Wolves (ne Plainsmen) have finished second on one occasion (1997) and third on three others (1985, 1986, and 1988).

My bad! Of course the Sagerman would recall the 1985 game! +1 to Sager!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 19, 2018, 11:08:49 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 19, 2018, 11:06:20 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 17, 2018, 07:00:39 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 17, 2018, 05:07:53 PM
(I am glad to have a former D-3 National Champion contending in the post-season again.)

Nebraska Wesleyan has never won the national championship. The Prairie Wolves (ne Plainsmen) have finished second on one occasion (1997) and third on three others (1985, 1986, and 1988).
My bad! Of course the Sagerman would recall the 1985 game! +1 to Sager!

And I certainly remember the 1997 game (being IWU's only title)! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2018, 01:18:46 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 19, 2018, 11:08:49 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 19, 2018, 11:06:20 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 17, 2018, 07:00:39 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 17, 2018, 05:07:53 PM
(I am glad to have a former D-3 National Champion contending in the post-season again.)

Nebraska Wesleyan has never won the national championship. The Prairie Wolves (ne Plainsmen) have finished second on one occasion (1997) and third on three others (1985, 1986, and 1988).
My bad! Of course the Sagerman would recall the 1985 game! +1 to Sager!

And I certainly remember the 1997 game (being IWU's only title)! ;D

From reading it in the alumni magazine months later. We all know. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 20, 2018, 09:52:48 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2018, 01:18:46 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 19, 2018, 11:08:49 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 19, 2018, 11:06:20 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 17, 2018, 07:00:39 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 17, 2018, 05:07:53 PM
(I am glad to have a former D-3 National Champion contending in the post-season again.)

Nebraska Wesleyan has never won the national championship. The Prairie Wolves (ne Plainsmen) have finished second on one occasion (1997) and third on three others (1985, 1986, and 1988).
My bad! Of course the Sagerman would recall the 1985 game! +1 to Sager!

And I certainly remember the 1997 game (being IWU's only title)! ;D

From reading it in the alumni magazine months later. We all know. :)

Well, if you had started this site earlier ... :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2018, 01:42:18 PM

Here is my ballot for this week: http://bit.ly/2GuMa2f

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 20, 2018, 02:01:17 PM

Interesting to see Wesleyan ranked a good bit down from Hamilton and Williams in your poll (and also in the poll as a whole) when I see those three teams as essentially dead-even. I feel like Wesleyan is a bit under the radar this year relative to how well they have played, and most NESCAC observers (including me) seem to believe that, while the conference semis are just about a four-team toss-up, Wesleyan is probably the team to beat in NESCAC and the NESCAC squad best equipped for a deep tourney run ... Wesleyan has a lot of impressive wins on its resume: beating Amherst twice, Middlebury twice, Williams (splitting with the Ephs in two OT games, these two teams could not possibly be more evenly-matched), Nichols, and Tufts. I'd certainly put them above Salem State (which has feasted on a never-good but atypically-horrible MASCAC this year).

Wesleyan has won eight out of nine and in its three losses since January 5th, Kevin O'Brien missed two of them and barely played in the third. In fact, Wesleyan has lost only one game in which O'Brien started (the second Williams game). His numbers aren't really reflective of his impact since he played limited minues in a number of games while recovering from a mid-season illness, but he now seems all the way back. O'Brien is critical to what Wesleyan does on both ends. He is the team's second-best overall defender and top guard defender but more importantly the whole offense runs through him when he is on the floor, and the Cards don't have anyone else who can come close to replicating his role as a creator (Austin Hutcherson comes closest but is only a frosh and still a bit up and down). Against Midd this past weekend he had a vintage game: 17 boards, 9 boards, 7 assists, and 2 steals, outplaying (on paper) national assist leader and likely all-American Jack Daly. Believe me, nobody wants to play the Cards right now as they can lock absolutely anyone down on defense. That being said, no one would be surprised if Amherst beat them at Saturday, especially in Lefrak which is a very tough place to win.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2018, 02:05:50 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 20, 2018, 09:52:48 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2018, 01:18:46 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 19, 2018, 11:08:49 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 19, 2018, 11:06:20 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 17, 2018, 07:00:39 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 17, 2018, 05:07:53 PM
(I am glad to have a former D-3 National Champion contending in the post-season again.)

Nebraska Wesleyan has never won the national championship. The Prairie Wolves (ne Plainsmen) have finished second on one occasion (1997) and third on three others (1985, 1986, and 1988).
My bad! Of course the Sagerman would recall the 1985 game! +1 to Sager!

And I certainly remember the 1997 game (being IWU's only title)! ;D

From reading it in the alumni magazine months later. We all know. :)

Well, if you had started this site earlier ... :P

Tell me what your internet access was like in 1997! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2018, 02:06:14 PM

First off all... I could put every team from 6 downward in a bowl, mix them up, and pick a different order and I wouldn't be happy. For weeks I have said how I could rank them all on the same spot if I could. Don't put that much stock in the difference.

That said, I don't have as much confidence in Wesleyan despite what they have done in recent weeks. I don't put as much stock in the wins over Amherst, Middlebury, or Tufts as you do - especially since all three are off my ballot.

Also, I would love to bring Hamilton and Williams down, but I just haven't found the right spot for them ... see that top paragraph again.

Finally, yeah Salem State might be high. I am torn with them as well. They keep winning, but I do agree I could have them too high. That said, they at least have a pretty good out of conference schedule as well.

BTW - we talked about Wesleyan in the Top 25 chat we linked to on Hoopsville Sunday. You are welcome to hear me talk more about the Cardinals there. You may not like it, but ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 20, 2018, 02:11:53 PM

Believe me, I take no offense to your take on Wesleyan -- certainly not a team I root for! Just one that I would fear if I was playing them right now. Amherst is playing very well right now (much better than their W-L record) and Wesleyan manhandled them two weeks ago. The NESCAC tourney this weekend may clear some things up. But more likely, it will continue to be a muddle (like it seems much of the Top 25 after the very top group) of good-but-not-elite squads who on any given night can look spectacular or mediocre. I truly believe that depending on match-ups NESCAC has five teams who could just as easily make a run to Salem or get knocked out in the first round.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2018, 02:17:30 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on February 20, 2018, 02:11:53 PM
Believe me, I take no offense to your take on Wesleyan -- certainly not a team I root for! Just one that I would fear if I was playing them right now. Amherst is playing very well right now (much better than their W-L record) and Wesleyan manhandled them two weeks ago. The NESCAC tourney this weekend may clear some things up. But more likely, it will continue to be a muddle (like it seems much of the Top 25 after the very top group) of good-but-not-elite squads who on any given night can look spectacular or mediocre. I truly believe that depending on match-ups NESCAC has five teams who could just as easily make a run to Salem or get knocked out in the first round.

You may have that confidence... I do not. I do realize it will depend on the brackets, but I think the NESCAC is a bit more exposed this year and will have tougher battles. I think last year was the hint at this when two NESCACs lost in the opening round (Amherst and Wesleyan). Granted, there is too many unknowns for me to be sure, but I am not sure we see a NESCAC in Salem this year.

As for your Amherst comment, I do realize they are playing better, but I still don't think the Wesleyan game two weeks ago is in the conversation. I think the Amherst light went on after that game. Too many inconsistencies in this conference to buy into any strength. That could also be said across the board this year in all conferences which has made voting a challenge.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 20, 2018, 02:32:41 PM

Two lost in the first round ... but then the other three made deep tourney runs. I agree however that it is unlikely for there to be a few NESCAC teams like Midd and Williams who easily storm through the early rounds of action, no one at the top of the league is quite that good, hence why I think there could be some upsets. But I also think that there are four teams playing very well right now (all I'd say better than last year's Wesleyan and Amherst teams at this time of the year) and a fifth (Middlebury) that has shown the ability to do so and could easily get back on track, and as you note there is SO much parity and SO many question marks throughout the entire country that NESCAC is hardly unique in that regard.

I would not like any NESCAC squad's chance against, say, Wash U. or Whitworth right now. But most likely, they will mainly be playing vs. teams in New England, Mid-Atlantic, South, New York and the Atlantic ... and it doesn't seem like ANY squad from any of those regions has really been playing like any sort of powerhouse ... but loads of them are quite solid. Which is why I think any of five NESCAC squads are easily capable of a fairly deep run, or a very early exit.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Swish3 on February 20, 2018, 02:42:19 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2018, 01:42:18 PM
Here is my ballot for this week: http://bit.ly/2GuMa2f

Read your ballot and saw where you had CNU at #24...strictly out of curiosity, what were you expecting from CNU this season? Personally, I wasn't sure what to expect...I knew Carter and McFarland would be back to carry the load, but beyond them, there wasn't anyone else that was proven. That said, when Carter went out, I was pretty concerned...for the Captains to be in the position they are is a testament to the players and coaches. As you mentioned, some kids that were less experienced had to mature more quickly...and, no, CNU definitely isn't better than they were the last two years, but they're coming around, knock on wood! :)

Also, do you recall how far into the segment you and Ryan talked about CNU?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2018, 02:45:31 PM

Quote from: Swish3 on February 20, 2018, 02:42:19 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2018, 01:42:18 PM
Here is my ballot for this week: http://bit.ly/2GuMa2f

Read your ballot and saw where you had CNU at #24...strictly out of curiosity, what were you expecting from CNU this season? Personally, I wasn't sure what to expect...I knew Carter and McFarland would be back to carry the load, but beyond them, there wasn't anyone else that was proven. That said, when Carter went out, I was pretty concerned...for the Captains to be in the position they are is a testament to the players and coaches. As you mentioned, some kids that were less experienced had to mature more quickly...and, no, CNU definitely isn't better than they were the last two years, but they're coming around, knock on wood! :)

You are welcome to look back at my preseason stuff.. I thought with Carter and McFarland back that CNU would be a Top 25 squad most of the season and lead the CAC from start to finish. The injuries and such all season really took their toll. Saw them in person at YCP and wasn't blown away. They had some nice pieces that were coming together and I took note of that. They have gotten stronger from that point, but I really didn't think they would be caught in the muck of of the conference this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: toad22 on February 20, 2018, 02:47:08 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2018, 02:06:14 PM
First off all... I could put every team from 6 downward in a bowl, mix them up, and pick a different order and I wouldn't be happy. For weeks I have said how I could rank them all on the same spot if I could. Don't put that much stock in the difference.

That said, I don't have as much confidence in Wesleyan despite what they have done in recent weeks. I don't put as much stock in the wins over Amherst, Middlebury, or Tufts as you do - especially since all three are off my ballot.

Also, I would love to bring Hamilton and Williams down, but I just haven't found the right spot for them ... see that top paragraph

Finally, yeah Salem State might be high. I am torn with them as well. They keep winning, but I do agree I could have them too high. That said, they at least have a pretty good out of conference schedule as well.

BTW - we talked about Wesleyan in the Top 25 chat we linked to on Hoopsville Sunday. You are welcome to hear me talk more about the Cardinals there. You may not like it, but ...

My perception of the NESCAC is quite similar to your perception of the top 25 (except for the top half dozen or so). I don's see any super teams in the NESCAC. Williams would be pretty super if Kyle Scadlock hadn't torn his ACL, but there is no accounting for the injury bug. I do think that the two best teams are Williams and Wesleyan. Wesleyan is scarily hard to play offense against. When their offense is decent, they are very tough. As nescac1 says, Kevin O'Brien makes them go. As for Williams, they have the two best scorers in the NESCAC this year, and a very tough defense. They can play very well in slowdown, defensive struggles, or in high scoring shootouts. It will be fun to see what happens this weekend. I do think that all four teams are pretty close.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Swish3 on February 20, 2018, 03:15:37 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2018, 02:45:31 PM
Quote from: Swish3 on February 20, 2018, 02:42:19 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2018, 01:42:18 PM
Here is my ballot for this week: http://bit.ly/2GuMa2f

Read your ballot and saw where you had CNU at #24...strictly out of curiosity, what were you expecting from CNU this season? Personally, I wasn't sure what to expect...I knew Carter and McFarland would be back to carry the load, but beyond them, there wasn't anyone else that was proven. That said, when Carter went out, I was pretty concerned...for the Captains to be in the position they are is a testament to the players and coaches. As you mentioned, some kids that were less experienced had to mature more quickly...and, no, CNU definitely isn't better than they were the last two years, but they're coming around, knock on wood! :)

You are welcome to look back at my preseason stuff.. I thought with Carter and McFarland back that CNU would be a Top 25 squad most of the season and lead the CAC from start to finish. The injuries and such all season really took their toll. Saw them in person at YCP and wasn't blown away. They had some nice pieces that were coming together and I took note of that. They have gotten stronger from that point, but I really didn't think they would be caught in the muck of of the conference this season.

I guess I was a little more guarded, even assuming those two were healthy...CNU is young overall, and I wasn't sure who else might step up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 20, 2018, 03:16:40 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2018, 02:05:50 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 20, 2018, 09:52:48 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2018, 01:18:46 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 19, 2018, 11:08:49 PM

And I certainly remember the 1997 game (being IWU's only title)! ;D

From reading it in the alumni magazine months later. We all know. :)

Well, if you had started this site earlier ... :P

Tell me what your internet access was like in 1997! :)

Touche'! Internet was basically inaccessible from home (dial-up modem and so slow it wasn't worth it), but had very good (by 1997 standards) access at work. But, yeah, probably a pretty low population of potential users back then.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: rlgyank on February 20, 2018, 07:43:21 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 18, 2018, 02:23:12 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 17, 2018, 05:07:53 PM
Welcome to the Boards. Neb Wes was off the radar for so long. The voters probably don't have a real handle on them yet. This is by far the best NebWes team in years.

While this is a nice storyline, Ralph, the voters pay more attention than this. Dave has already spoken at length about this but I'll boil it down. Here's what a voter sees when looking at Nebraska Wesleyan's resume:

Nov. 17   7:30 PM   at North Central (Minn.) (7-18) •   W, 122-84
Nov. 18   5:00 PM   at Northwestern (Minn.) (13-12) •   W, 78-67
Nov. 24   7:00 PM   Iowa Wesleyan (5-20) •   W, 117-54
Nov. 25   5:00 PM   Bethany Lutheran (17-8) •   W, 95-78
Four games to open the season against the UMAC, the worst conference in the region.

... removed the GPAC team. Glad it's just one non-Division III opponent.

Dec. 10   12:00 PM   at Austin (4-21) •   W, 92-67
Dec. 17   2:00 PM   at Gallaudet (9-16) •   W, 99-77
Dec. 18   7:00 PM   at Marymount (8-17) •   W, 87-46
Dec. 30   4:00 PM   at Grinnell (13-11) •   W, 121-103

Is Grinnell the best non-conference team NWU faced?

With a non-conference slate like this, and an average (to below-average) conference, it's hard to get onto too many ballots.

I won't/can't defend the non conference schedule, it has not turned out to be very good, as I said in my original post.

As far as the IIAC being an average or below average conference, all I can say is you are a tough grader. The IIAC is the 3rd rated conference in the Massey ratings, the 2nd rated conference in the Hero sports ratings, and basically tied for the 4th rated conference using the rpi ratings. That is out of 43 conferences. I am glad you weren't my accounting teacher in college.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2018, 09:54:06 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 20, 2018, 03:16:40 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2018, 02:05:50 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 20, 2018, 09:52:48 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2018, 01:18:46 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 19, 2018, 11:08:49 PM

And I certainly remember the 1997 game (being IWU's only title)! ;D

From reading it in the alumni magazine months later. We all know. :)

Well, if you had started this site earlier ... :P

Tell me what your internet access was like in 1997! :)

Touche'! Internet was basically inaccessible from home (dial-up modem and so slow it wasn't worth it), but had very good (by 1997 standards) access at work. But, yeah, probably a pretty low population of potential users back then.

You could have learned about it on my predecessor site. Here it is from archive.org:
https://web.archive.org/web/19970815024939/http://www.cua.edu:80/www/athl/cac/mpairs.htm

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2018, 10:11:36 PM

Here's details from back in the day.

http://www.d3hoops.com/seasons/men/1996-97/contrib/20180220r5ojh2
http://www.d3hoops.com/seasons/men/1996-97/contrib/20180220tz68xr

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on February 20, 2018, 10:17:07 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2018, 09:54:06 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 20, 2018, 03:16:40 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2018, 02:05:50 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 20, 2018, 09:52:48 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2018, 01:18:46 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 19, 2018, 11:08:49 PM

And I certainly remember the 1997 game (being IWU's only title)! ;D

From reading it in the alumni magazine months later. We all know. :)

Well, if you had started this site earlier ... :P

Tell me what your internet access was like in 1997! :)

Touche'! Internet was basically inaccessible from home (dial-up modem and so slow it wasn't worth it), but had very good (by 1997 standards) access at work. But, yeah, probably a pretty low population of potential users back then.

You could have learned about it on my predecessor site. Here it is from archive.org:
https://web.archive.org/web/19970815024939/http://www.cua.edu:80/www/athl/cac/mpairs.htm

That is almost like viewing the Dead Sea Scrolls!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2018, 10:28:19 PM

Tell me about it ... especially as the publisher.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on February 20, 2018, 10:31:14 PM

Thanks Pat. I forgot that was the year Alvernia got to the final 4.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiko on February 21, 2018, 01:01:53 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2018, 10:28:19 PM
Tell me about it ... especially as the publisher.

The linked page from the wayback machine notes "Some of the links will expire over time. Please let me know if they have."

I just wanted to let you know that some of them no longer work... ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D3ball1845 on February 21, 2018, 10:44:31 AM

Quote from: D3ball1845 on January 09, 2018, 01:26:25 PM
Does anyone have some insight into why Salem State is still getting votes for the Top 25 sitting at 10-3? Sure, record wise they're a having a strong season. However, they had a 10+ loss to Williams, 48 point loss to MIT, and 17 point loss to Endicott. While two of these teams are ranked, and Endicott is a decent team, how can you ignore the 48 point loss? Additionally, their only wins that stand out to me are the wins against Tufts and Babson (who is barely sitting above .500 this season and is nowhere near the championship caliber team they were last year). Maybe it's just me, but something doesn't seem to be adding up right.

I posted this over a month ago regarding Salem State. While they have continued to win, it is in the conference of the MASCAC, which to be fair has less than stellar competition. I think Salem State is getting way too much credit despite their winning streak. They currently sit at #20 in the country and their best win is against a decent/good Tufts team. As I previously stated and Ryan Scott discussed on the most recent Hoopsville, their games against caliber teams have resulted in losses (MIT, Williams, and Endicott (maybe a stretch to call the Gulls a caliber team)). We could compare Salem State to a team like Nichols, who plays in the CCC. Granted the CCC isn't seen as the most competitive conference either, which those who follow my posts know I strongly disagree with. However, the CCC is a much stronger conference than the MASCAC; you look at the games between the two conferences and the CCC is 7-1 against the MASCAC. Nichols has beaten Endicott twice this season and Salem State lost to them by 17 when they played them. Nichols and Salem State have the same record, as they both sit at 22-3. And before anyone claims that two of Nichols losses were to subpar teams like WNE and UNE, they were without their second best player, DeAnte Bruton, in both of those games. How is Nichols not ranked above Salem State in the national poll? Seems like a no brainer to me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 21, 2018, 12:00:05 PM

No brainer to one person is not a no brainer to another.

Salem State is at least winning when others seem to lose to anyone and everyone, in strong and weak conferences. I have admitted Salem State might be a little high in on my ballot, but I can adjust it next week accordingly.

Voters I think are looking for consistency when we haven't gotten much over the season. So a team not stumbling even against weaker competition (and we can point to a number of teams with gaudy records who can't get through easy conferences unscathed this season)... voters may lean on them a little more this season.

As for Nichols, when Bruton came back they still seemed to struggle. Ryan and I have discussed it and several other voters I think saw the same thing and were concerned. I think Nichols is coming back and back in stride and will move up accordingly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 21, 2018, 12:26:33 PM

I do think Salem is a tough call. They definitely have solid talent in my view, not elite talent but I view them as kind of a mid-tier NESCAC team along the lines of Bowdoin, Bates or Trinity. If they were in NESCAC, my guess is they would probably have finished in the 6-9 range in the conference with something like a 15-9 record overall. The MASCAC is just absolutely terrible this year (the worst I have ever seen for that league), outside of Salem no one is any good, so it's hard to tell if Salem is playing really well, just feating on awful competition, or (probably) a bit of both. I'm not sure why MASCAC is struggling so much to attract talent, as the league used to have typically 2-3 reasonably strong teams in any given year and was more of a mid-tier league in the region than such an awful one.

Look at Fitchburg State, which is 6-6 in that league. They lost to Middlebury by 39 and to Williams by 50. Bridgewater State is in second place in the league at 9-3, and they lost to MIT by 39. Westfield State is pretty much the only MASCAC team other than Salem to keep it close against strong competition (they lost to Bowdoin, Springfield and Williams, but all in competitive games), but even they managed to lose to Amherst by 36. Salem is the only team in the entire conference that has even one strong out-of-league win. Salem does have solid wins over Tufts, Babson, and WPI, but man, it's hard to know much based on those league games. And they also got absolutely crushed by MIT.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on February 21, 2018, 12:51:20 PM

My question is how is Salem St or Nichols getting so many votes when LeTourneau with an identical record (and in my opinion a better schedule) has 0 votes? Someone even picked Lehman over LeTourneau ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 21, 2018, 01:01:08 PM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on February 21, 2018, 12:51:20 PM
My question is how is Salem St or Nichols getting so many votes when LeTourneau with an identical record (and in my opinion a better schedule) has 0 votes? Someone even picked Lehman over LeTourneau ???

I was just looking at LETU's resume as I did extensively on Monday. There just isn't anything there I was ready to pull the trigger on this week. I want to see how this week unfolds. They get through and I assure you they will be on my ballot.

But comparing them to Nichols and Salem State... it is a fair comparison. Resumes could be argued as being similar. I have said from about 5 on down (6 this week) it is wide open for me. Someone I have 15th could easily be replaced by someone else or moved anywhere between 6-25. There is a lot of equality in there and thus I have about 40 teams for 20 spots. I could change my mind each week and swap nearly the entire group out if I felt like it. Thus why Plattsburgh jumped onto my rankings midway up last week.

LETU is on my radar just as 15 other schools are sitting there as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 21, 2018, 02:37:53 PM

The NCAA men's basketball regional advisory committees released their third set of rankings, and as expected, the Atlantic Region was among those getting shuffled. Here's the full list: http://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2018/02/men-regional-rankings-third

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D600%2Fmh%3D600%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D4ima3%2Fdinflo07zg1qa2ww.jpg&hash=686d8e036c15a7019bc8f4723e2af35008adc158)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 22, 2018, 06:58:25 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

I had to double-check Illinois Wesleyan's schedule; their loss to NC was their regular-season finale, and the conference tournament begins tomorrow.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Whitman	25-0	02/22 vs. Linfield
#2	600	Washington U.	22-2	02/24 at Chicago
#3	560	St. John's	23-2	02/23 vs. Augsburg
#4	538	Whitworth	22-3	02/22 vs. Puget Sound
#5	533	UW-Platteville	22-3	02/23 vs. #37 UW-River Falls
#6	459	Wittenberg	24-2	def. Oberlin, 70-54; 02/23 vs. Denison
#7	457	Emory	20-4	02/24 at Rochester
#8	421	Williams	20-5	02/24 vs. #13 Hamilton
#9	389	Augustana	20-5	def. Elmhurst, 79-77; 02/23 vs. Wheaton (Ill.)
#10	376	Eastern Connecticut	23-3	def. Plymouth State, 107-67; 02/23 vs. Western Connecticut; 02/24 at TBA
#11	359	Swarthmore	21-4	02/23 vs. Ursinus
#12	320	York (Pa.)	21-4	02/22 vs. Salisbury; 02/24 vs. TBD
#13	312	Hamilton	22-3	02/24 vs. #8 Williams
#14	279	Wesleyan	20-5	02/24 at #30 Amherst; 02/25 vs. NESCAC Championship Finals
#15	218	Illinois Wesleyan	19-6	LOST to North Central (Ill.), 74-83; 02/23 vs. North Central (Ill.)
#16	202	Johns Hopkins	21-4	02/23 vs. #27 Franklin and Marshall
#17	199	Wooster	21-5	def. DePauw, 70-63; 02/23 vs. Ohio Wesleyan; 02/24 at TBA
#18	170	Middlebury	19-6	IDLE
#19	165	UW-Oshkosh	20-6	def. UW-La Crosse, 76-74; 02/23 at TBA; 02/23 at #23 UW-Stevens Point; 02/25 at TBA
#20	135	Salem State	22-3	02/22 vs. Fitchburg State
#21	92	Plattsburgh State	20-4	02/23 vs. Oswego State
#22	91	Nichols	23-3	def. Western New England, 100-68; 02/22 vs. Roger Williams
#23	85	UW-Stevens Point	17-8	02/23 vs. #19 UW-Oshkosh
#24	83	Marietta	21-5	def. Wilmington, 86-71; 02/22 vs. Ohio Northern
#25	82	MIT	20-5	02/24 vs. Babson

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	81	John Carroll	21-5	def. Heidelberg, 86-65; 02/22 vs. Baldwin Wallace
#27	61	Franklin and Marshall	20-5	02/23 vs. #16 Johns Hopkins; 02/24 vs. TBA
#28	59	Hobart	21-4	02/24 vs. Skidmore
#29	58	Cabrini	23-3	def. Rosemont, 91-72; 02/24 vs. Neumann
#30	26	Amherst	17-8	02/24 vs. #14 Wesleyan
#31	24	Nebraska Wesleyan	22-3	02/22 vs. Wartburg
#32	18	Lycoming	19-7	LOST at Lebanon Valley, 75-76 OT
#33	14	St. Olaf	19-6	02/23 vs. Bethel
#34	13	Juniata	22-4	def. Catholic, 77-70; 02/24 vs. Moravian
#35	10	Christopher Newport	20-5	02/22 vs. Mary Washington
#36	7	Albright	20-5	def. Arcadia, 58-45; 02/24 vs. Lebanon Valley
#37	2	UW-River Falls	17-8	def. UW-Whitewater, 79-68; 02/23 at #5 UW-Platteville
T#38	1	Brockport	19-6	02/23 vs. SUNY Oneonta
T#38	1	Lehman	22-4	def. (n) John Jay, 78-55; 02/23 vs. Staten Island

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 22, 2018, 04:42:31 PM

It is down to the final week of the regular season. It is now or never. Win the conference tournament, earn the automatic qualifier, and a team will be playing in March. Don't win it and either hold out hope for an at-large selection or the season is over.

The season continues or ends on the bounce of a ball from here on out.

So who may be in jeopardy and who is sitting pretty? On Thursday's edition of Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), we start to read the tea leaves while also chatting with teams who are hoping to punch their ticket for the Road to Salem or Rochester themselves. Plus, we get a preview of what could be a fascinating weekend of NESCAC tournament action at Amherst.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch the show LIVE starting at 7:00 p.m. ET here: http://bit.ly/2BIbiUe

If you have questions, be sure to email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or interact with the show via the social media avenues located to the right.

Guests include (in order of appearance):
- Steve Schulman, Lehman men's coach
- Matt Ducharme, UMass-Dartmouth women's coach
- Jamie Purdy, Piedmont women's coach
- Grey Giovanine, No. 9 Augustana men's coach
- Michele Durand, No. 24 Ohio Northern women's coach (WBCA Center Court)
- Howard Herman, Berkshire Eagle writer (NESCAC tournaments preview)

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts instead, you can get access to them or subscribe one of the three following ways (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D710%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D4kldv%2Fvwjyuttsqre06ce4.jpg&hash=8ecd83f889b8772896b1a7599820481753b9df0b)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on February 24, 2018, 05:48:08 PM

Final

Chicago 86, #2 Wash U 77

Wash U finishes at 13-1 in the UAA

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: (509)Rat on February 25, 2018, 12:00:10 AM

Final
Whitworth 91
@Whitman 88

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on February 25, 2018, 12:05:13 AM

Wow! Last undefeated goes down.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on February 25, 2018, 12:12:11 AM

Quote from: mailsy on February 25, 2018, 12:05:13 AM
Wow! Last undefeated goes down.

So ... who's #1 this week? Whitman, WashU, and SJU all lost; Whitworth didn't. My money's on Whitman staying there. They are still the only 1-loss team, and went 2-1 over Whitworth for the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 25, 2018, 03:50:16 PM

The regular season is over. Conference titles have been crowned and most teams are either getting ready for the NCAA tournament or packing up their locker rooms.

However, there are quite a few programs who are now sitting and waiting ... waiting to hear whether they have been selected to compete for a national title as well.

Who may be in and who may be left out of the NCAA selections? On Sunday's Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) Special, Dave McHugh is joined by those who know Division III inside and out to try and figure out who will make up the two 64-team brackets.

The Hoospville Special: Selection Sunday gave us plenty of time to not only make our mock selections, but also talk to programs who have either earned NCAA berths or are waiting to find out if they will make it.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch it the show LIVE here: http://bit.ly/2GI6LA6

If you have questions, be sure to email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or interact with the show via our social media avenues.

Guests scheduled (in order of appearance and subject to change):
- Josh Loeffler, No. 16 Johns Hopkins men's coach
- Kerry Jenkins, Oberlin women's coach
- Todd Skrivseth, Monmouth men's coach
- Brad McAlester, Lebanon Valley men's coach
- ODAC men's winning coach (TBD)
- Tim McDonald, Cabrini men's coach (to air during mock selections)
- Dale Wellerman, Nebraska Wesleyan men's coach (to air during mock selections)
- Carey Harveycutter, Dir. of Tourism, City of Salem, Division III men's basketball Tournament Director
- Megan Haughtey, Stevens women's coach (to air during mock selections)
- Ruth Sinn, No. 8 St. Thomas women's coach (to air during mock selections)
- Alex Lang, Brooklyn women's coach (to air during mock selections)

Men's mock selections experts for the show:
- Dave McHugh, Hoopsville Host
- Ryan Scott, D3hoops.com columnist
- Bob Quillman, D3 basketball aficionado

Women's mock selections experts for the show:
- Dave McHugh, Hoopsville Host
- Gordon Mann, D3hoops.com Editor-in-Chief
- James Wagner, CSAC Assistant Commissioner
- BJ Spigelmyer, DeSales Sports Information Director

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts instead, you can get access to them or subscribe one of the three following ways (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D710%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D4o2h3%2F5qe4yd77benqfa7a.jpg&hash=d7fca5b5a92ac4ea026dbe5e37a63c72b9ba5dc3)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 25, 2018, 04:35:53 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

~~The WIAC championship game result will be edited in when it finishes (currently at halftime).~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Whitman	26-1	def. Linfield, 87-76; LOST to #4 Whitworth, 88-91
#2	600	Washington U.	22-3	LOST at Chicago, 77-86
#3	560	St. John's	23-3	LOST to Augsburg, 68-80
#4	538	Whitworth	24-3	def. Puget Sound, 97-79; won at #1 Whitman, 91-88
#5	533	UW-Platteville	22-4	LOST to #37 UW-River Falls, 66-71
#6	459	Wittenberg	26-2	def. Oberlin, 70-54; def. Denison, 97-73; def. Ohio Wesleyan, 82-70
#7	457	Emory	21-4	won at Rochester, 71-61
#8	421	Williams	22-5	def. (n) #13 Hamilton, 76-73; def. (n) #14 Wesleyan, 70-58
#9	389	Augustana	22-5	def. Elmhurst, 79-77; def. Wheaton (Ill.), 72-64; def. North Central (Ill.), 77-74
#10	376	Eastern Connecticut	25-3	def. Plymouth State, 107-67; def. Western Connecticut, 92-82; def. Keene State, 79-62
#11	359	Swarthmore	22-5	def. Ursinus, 68-49; LOST to #16 Johns Hopkins, 57-61
#12	320	York (Pa.)	23-4	def. Salisbury, 75-59; won at #35 Christopher Newport, 82-73
#13	312	Hamilton	22-4	LOST to (n) #8 Williams, 73-76
#14	279	Wesleyan	21-6	won at #30 Amherst, 65-63; LOST to (n) #8 Williams, 58-70
#15	218	Illinois Wesleyan	19-7	LOST to North Central (Ill.), 74-83; LOST to North Central (Ill.), 64-70
#16	202	Johns Hopkins	23-4	def. (n) #27 Franklin and Marshall, 50-49; won at #11 Swarthmore, 61-57
#17	199	Wooster	21-6	def. DePauw, 70-63; LOST to (n) Ohio Wesleyan, 87-88 OT
#18	170	Middlebury	19-6	IDLE
#19	165	UW-Oshkosh	20-7	def. UW-La Crosse, 76-74; LOST at #23 UW-Stevens Point, 63-71
#20	135	Salem State	22-4	LOST to Fitchburg State, 81-90 OT
#21	92	Plattsburgh State	22-4	def. Oswego State, 89-76; def. SUNY Oneonta, 93-80
#22	91	Nichols	25-3	def. Western New England, 100-68; def. Roger Williams, 89-75; def. Endicott, 98-89
#23	85	UW-Stevens Point	19-8	def. #19 UW-Oshkosh, 71-63; def. #37 UW-River Falls, 59-44
#24	83	Marietta	21-6	def. Wilmington, 86-71; LOST to Ohio Northern, 88-94
#25	82	MIT	22-5	def. (n) Babson, 70-61; def. (n) WPI, 63-57

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	81	John Carroll	23-5	def. Heidelberg, 86-65; def. Baldwin Wallace, 93-72; def. Ohio Northern, 94-77
#27	61	Franklin and Marshall	20-6	LOST to (n) #16 Johns Hopkins, 49-50
#28	59	Hobart	21-5	LOST to Skidmore, 60-63
#29	58	Cabrini	24-3	def. Rosemont, 91-72; def. Neumann, 89-76
#30	26	Amherst	17-9	LOST to #14 Wesleyan, 63-65
#31	24	Nebraska Wesleyan	24-3	def. Wartburg, 94-77; def. Central, 82-78
#32	18	Lycoming	19-7	LOST at Lebanon Valley, 75-76 OT
#33	14	St. Olaf	19-7	LOST to Bethel, 57-79
#34	13	Juniata	22-5	def. Catholic, 77-70; LOST to Moravian, 78-81
#35	10	Christopher Newport	21-6	def. Mary Washington, 90-74; LOST to #12 York (Pa.), 73-82
#36	7	Albright	20-6	def. Arcadia, 58-45; LOST to Lebanon Valley, 68-70
#37	2	UW-River Falls	18-9	def. UW-Whitewater, 79-68; won at #5 UW-Platteville, 71-66; LOST at #23 UW-Stevens Point, 44-59
T#38	1	Brockport	19-7	LOST to (n) SUNY Oneonta, 77-82
T#38	1	Lehman	22-5	def. (n) John Jay, 78-55; LOST to (n) Staten Island, 75-77

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 27, 2018, 03:20:35 PM

We forgot to post this yesterday... or more realistically, didn't have time...

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D710%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D4rx4o%2Fst0zrjaanjidvo5o.jpg&hash=ed02c34abc0f003fecf525fd9a62e18641c4e00a)

The NCAA Division III tournaments are set. We know which 128 teams will be playing for the national championship. But there were some surprises, maybe some controversy, and certainly a lot of questions.

On a special edition of Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave McHugh was joined by Ryan Scott as they answered questions, tried to understand some of the decisions made, and pointed to some of the more interesting games to watch.

Dave also had a chance to talk more in depth about one of the big stories in the men's bracket, Yeshiva. Men's coach Elliot Steinmetz discussed the team's first ever conference title, NCAA tournament berth, and some of the scheduling changes that will take place to accommodate the school's religious background.

Dave will also talked to the men's committee chairs, Tim Fitzpatrick (Coast Guard Athletics Director), later in the show.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Monday's show here: http://bit.ly/2GFVq3M

Also, all podcasts from Sunday's and Monday's shows are available through their respective show pages... or the info below (where you can also subscribe to the podcast; (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 01, 2018, 06:50:11 PM

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D710%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D4xipm%2Fzu5evwom5j13laim.jpg&hash=b4e5c35ca6f6238a681a71f413d9bb512cc94cff)

The Division III men's and women's national tournaments are set, teams are where they need to be, and practices underway. Now, it's just a matter of tipping off the games.

But before we tip them off, we need some final thoughts.

Tune in Thursday night to Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) where Dave will talk to a number of guests about their programs and their chances in the NCAA tournament. You can't starting heading down the Road to Rochester or the Road to Salem without getting an idea of who may be joining you, either. Dave will give some insight on how some of the pods just may shake out as well.

Also, earlier in the day, Dave talked with Women's Basketball Nationall Committee chair Bobbi Morgan (also head coach at Haverford) and asked her a lot about the selection process and bracketing for this year's tournament. You can hear that special podcast here: http://bit.ly/2GUbfE0

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. Thursday's edition hits the air at 7:00 p.m. ET. You can tune in live here: http://bit.ly/2HSi9ed.

If you have questions, be sure to email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or interact with the show via the social media avenues.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Marc Brown & Sam Toney, New Jersey City men's coach and star player
- Nate Davis, Gettysburg women's coach
- Jeff Rogers, Berry men's coach
- Alex Richey, Oglethorpe women's coach (WBCA Center Court)
- Dan Englestad, Southern Vermont men's coach
- Ken Scalmanini, Claremont-Mudd-Scripps men's coach

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts instead, you can get access to them or subscribe one of the three following ways (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 4samuy on March 08, 2018, 11:07:40 AM

Quote from: 4samuy on September 28, 2017, 10:17:18 AM
Not sure how much they follow D 3 Hoops, but just got a peek at Street and Smiths preseason top 10.

1. Babson (31-2)
2. Ramapo (26-3)
3. Williams (23-9)
4. Whitman (31-1)
5. Augustana (24-9)
6. Wisconsin Whitewater (22-7)
7. Hanover (26-4)
8. St. Johns (19-9)
9. Swarthmore (23-6)
10. North Central (18-11)

Yeah, most of us know what a crap shoot pre season rankings can be, but sometimes it can be fun to go back and share the rankings of other publications as they prognosticated the '17-'18 season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 08, 2018, 11:49:09 AM

Street and Smith generally has a laughable preseason top 10, but this one's actually turned out to be not too bad as prognostications go -- once you get past the ridiculous #1 pick of Babson, that is. ("Joey Flannery? Who's that?") Hanover probably didn't belong in the top 10, either, although including the Panthers wasn't as glaring an error as picking Babson to repeat, but the rest of these picks actually make sense in hindsight. UW-Whitewater would've been a powerhouse if preseason All-American Chris Jones (the WIAC's leading scorer last season at 17.9 ppg) hadn't gone AWOL and 6'8 Scotty Tyler (14.4 and 6.0 in 2016-17) hadn't been limited to forty minutes spread out over five games before Christmas due to injury. And Williams and North Central would've been much more effective postseason participants this season if they hadn't lost Kyle Scadlock (18 and 8.6) and Erwin Henry (13.8 ppg), respectively, to season-ending injuries.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 4samuy on March 08, 2018, 02:18:32 PM

I agree with you Greg on Street and Smith. I do however, find it interesting that 3 out of the ten are now hosting sectionals this week in the sweet 16.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 08, 2018, 02:58:47 PM

Yet Williams was probably still the favorite to come out of that part of the bracket.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 08, 2018, 05:13:09 PM

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D710%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D5ajuw%2Fgtu1g3i7fl653gzv.jpg&hash=d93435fe93f9f4e79118596764d2dd1c17888224)

The Sectional Round games are here. Soon 16 teams on both the men's and women's brackets will be whittled to eight ... and before we know it just four will remain.

Who will advance, who will fall short of the final weekend, and who is best prepared? Hard to answer all of those questions, but on Thursday's edition of Hoopsville Dave will have plenty of guests who will give us their insight on their programs.

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch the show LIVE starting at 7pm ET right here:http://bit.ly/2FBCA0N.

If you have questions, be sure to email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or interact with the show via the social media avenues.

Guests include (in order of appearance):
- Bob Amsberry, No. 2 Wartburg women's coach
- Brian Morehouse, No. 4 Hope women's coach (WBCA Center Court)
- Glenn Robinson, Franklin & Marshall men's coach
- Charlie Brock, Springfield men's coach
- Eric Bridgeland, No. 1 Whitman men's coach
- Jim Scheible, No. 16 Rochester women's coach

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts instead, you can get access to them or subscribe one of the three following ways (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Just Bill on March 13, 2018, 04:14:59 PM

This would be a year in which the Top 25 voters would be entirely justified in not voting the national champion as the #1 team in the final poll. I'm pretty sure that's never happened, but I wouldn't object if it played out that way this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on March 14, 2018, 11:44:53 AM

I was also wondering if that would happen.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on March 14, 2018, 12:19:56 PM

I hope this doesn't come out sounding accusatory or anything like that. I truly appreciate the work it has taken (especially this year) to try to vote for the 25 best teams in the nation. And I also fully acknowledge that winning the Walnut & Bronze does not mean you are necessarily the best team in the nation. I just think this a legitimate question to ask and debate.

Do you/we think that is likely to happen because:

a) the best team(s) were simply upset by "lesser" teams in the tournament

OR

b) the voters are "protecting" themselves from missing out on their evaluation of teams throughout the year that lead them to their votes.

I do not have a horse in this race either way - the comments by Just Bill and gordonmann just put that thought in my head and I'm curious on others thoughts...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 14, 2018, 12:24:53 PM

In all the years of the poll, we've only had one person inquire about actually voting for someone other than the champion No. 1 and I told that person I would really appreciate it if they voted for the champ.

I could see that being different this year but I expect to be casting a ballot and I'll cast it for the team that wins Saturday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on March 14, 2018, 12:51:38 PM

We'll have to see how things play out but on my posters poll ballot I'm very open to not voting the champ #1 because I take into account the whole season. Going into the tournament I had Nebraska Wesleyan 16, Oshkosh was just off, with Springfield and Ramapo not too close. If Nebraska Wesleyan wins then they'll probably be my #1. Oshkosh I'm sure many would put #1, I'd have to think about it. Springfield and Ramapo I don't see any reason why I'd move them ahead of a team such as Whitman who was #1 going in to the tournament and made the Elite 8.

Just as an extreme example... let's say Berry ended up going all the way and were champions. They were 11-17 entering the tournament. I bet a couple people would vote them #1 simply because they were champs but most wouldn't. The question then becomes where's the line of how bad of a regular season can you have before it outweighs a great tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 14, 2018, 02:47:34 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 14, 2018, 12:24:53 PM
In all the years of the poll, we've only had one person inquire about actually voting for someone other than the champion No. 1 and I told that person I would really appreciate it if they voted for the champ.

I could see that being different this year but I expect to be casting a ballot and I'll cast it for the team that wins Saturday.

Wow. Pat strong arming voters. Did you make them an offer they couldn't refuse? Did you send your "friends" from Chicago to pay a visit? Did they wake up with a horse's head in their bed? ??? 8-) :o ::) :P ;D ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 14, 2018, 02:54:06 PM

I had my goons handle it. Come on now. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 14, 2018, 02:56:56 PM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on March 14, 2018, 12:51:38 PM
We'll have to see how things play out but on my posters poll ballot I'm very open to not voting the champ #1 because I take into account the whole season. Going into the tournament I had Nebraska Wesleyan 16, Oshkosh was just off, with Springfield and Ramapo not too close. If Nebraska Wesleyan wins then they'll probably be my #1. Oshkosh I'm sure many would put #1, I'd have to think about it. Springfield and Ramapo I don't see any reason why I'd move them ahead of a team such as Whitman who was #1 going in to the tournament and made the Elite 8.

Just as an extreme example... let's say Berry ended up going all the way and were champions. They were 11-17 entering the tournament. I bet a couple people would vote them #1 simply because they were champs but most wouldn't. The question then becomes where's the line of how bad of a regular season can you have before it outweighs a great tournament.

The National Champion 2010 IWU baseball team was sub .500 going into the last week of the regular season. How dramatic a turnaround do you need?

If some team overcomes 1:1000 odds, then fine!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 14, 2018, 03:37:26 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 14, 2018, 02:54:06 PM
I had my goons handle it. Come on now. :)

LOL!

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 14, 2018, 02:56:56 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on March 14, 2018, 12:51:38 PM
We'll have to see how things play out but on my posters poll ballot I'm very open to not voting the champ #1 because I take into account the whole season. Going into the tournament I had Nebraska Wesleyan 16, Oshkosh was just off, with Springfield and Ramapo not too close. If Nebraska Wesleyan wins then they'll probably be my #1. Oshkosh I'm sure many would put #1, I'd have to think about it. Springfield and Ramapo I don't see any reason why I'd move them ahead of a team such as Whitman who was #1 going in to the tournament and made the Elite 8.

Just as an extreme example... let's say Berry ended up going all the way and were champions. They were 11-17 entering the tournament. I bet a couple people would vote them #1 simply because they were champs but most wouldn't. The question then becomes where's the line of how bad of a regular season can you have before it outweighs a great tournament.
The National Champion 2010 IWU baseball team was sub .500 going into the last week of the regular season. How dramatic a turnaround do you need?

Mr. Ypsi says that your check is in the mail, Ralph. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 14, 2018, 03:41:39 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 14, 2018, 02:56:56 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on March 14, 2018, 12:51:38 PM
We'll have to see how things play out but on my posters poll ballot I'm very open to not voting the champ #1 because I take into account the whole season. Going into the tournament I had Nebraska Wesleyan 16, Oshkosh was just off, with Springfield and Ramapo not too close. If Nebraska Wesleyan wins then they'll probably be my #1. Oshkosh I'm sure many would put #1, I'd have to think about it. Springfield and Ramapo I don't see any reason why I'd move them ahead of a team such as Whitman who was #1 going in to the tournament and made the Elite 8.

Just as an extreme example... let's say Berry ended up going all the way and were champions. They were 11-17 entering the tournament. I bet a couple people would vote them #1 simply because they were champs but most wouldn't. The question then becomes where's the line of how bad of a regular season can you have before it outweighs a great tournament.
The National Champion 2010 IWU baseball team was sub .500 going into the last week of the regular season. How dramatic a turnaround do you need?

If some team overcomes 1:1000 odds, then fine!

The 2010 IWU team was voted #1, but it is the only non-unanimous #1 national champion I can ever recall. I bleed green, but even I admitted on the tourney boards at the time that I doubted they were #1 if the whole year is taken into account (but added that they were clearly #1 for a couple of weeks in May and June and that was good enough to make me very happy! ;D)

When I submit my posters' poll ballot early next week, I suspect I'll be like FCGG - if Neb Wes wins it all, they will almost certainly be #1 (and MAYBE the same for UWO); if someone else wins I will seriously consider putting someone else #1 (probably Whitman, as they are guaranteed of finishing the year with the best winning % regardless of the FF).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 14, 2018, 05:25:24 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 14, 2018, 03:41:39 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 14, 2018, 02:56:56 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on March 14, 2018, 12:51:38 PM
We'll have to see how things play out but on my posters poll ballot I'm very open to not voting the champ #1 because I take into account the whole season. Going into the tournament I had Nebraska Wesleyan 16, Oshkosh was just off, with Springfield and Ramapo not too close. If Nebraska Wesleyan wins then they'll probably be my #1. Oshkosh I'm sure many would put #1, I'd have to think about it. Springfield and Ramapo I don't see any reason why I'd move them ahead of a team such as Whitman who was #1 going in to the tournament and made the Elite 8.

Just as an extreme example... let's say Berry ended up going all the way and were champions. They were 11-17 entering the tournament. I bet a couple people would vote them #1 simply because they were champs but most wouldn't. The question then becomes where's the line of how bad of a regular season can you have before it outweighs a great tournament.
The National Champion 2010 IWU baseball team was sub .500 going into the last week of the regular season. How dramatic a turnaround do you need?

If some team overcomes 1:1000 odds, then fine!

The 2010 IWU team was voted #1, but it is the only non-unanimous #1 national champion I can ever recall. I bleed green, but even I admitted on the tourney boards at the time that I doubted they were #1 if the whole year is taken into account (but added that they were clearly #1 for a couple of weeks in May and June and that was good enough to make me very happy! ;D)

When I submit my posters' poll ballot early next week, I suspect I'll be like FCGG - if Neb Wes wins it all, they will almost certainly be #1 (and MAYBE the same for UWO); if someone else wins I will seriously consider putting someone else #1 (probably Whitman, as they are guaranteed of finishing the year with the best winning % regardless of the FF).

As proud and supportive of the island teams (ASC/SCAC/SCIAC/NWC), I was surprised that Whitman did not beat Schreiner by more than 10. In any case, a rested Whitman (no more than ~ 25 minutes for any player) should not have been taken to OT in the second game of the tourney on their home court.

They have the best winning percentage, but I cannot give a first place vote to them on that basis. Neb Wes just controlled them and that upscale style of play is not foreign to Whitman.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 14, 2018, 06:12:33 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 14, 2018, 05:25:24 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 14, 2018, 03:41:39 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 14, 2018, 02:56:56 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on March 14, 2018, 12:51:38 PM
We'll have to see how things play out but on my posters poll ballot I'm very open to not voting the champ #1 because I take into account the whole season. Going into the tournament I had Nebraska Wesleyan 16, Oshkosh was just off, with Springfield and Ramapo not too close. If Nebraska Wesleyan wins then they'll probably be my #1. Oshkosh I'm sure many would put #1, I'd have to think about it. Springfield and Ramapo I don't see any reason why I'd move them ahead of a team such as Whitman who was #1 going in to the tournament and made the Elite 8.

Just as an extreme example... let's say Berry ended up going all the way and were champions. They were 11-17 entering the tournament. I bet a couple people would vote them #1 simply because they were champs but most wouldn't. The question then becomes where's the line of how bad of a regular season can you have before it outweighs a great tournament.
The National Champion 2010 IWU baseball team was sub .500 going into the last week of the regular season. How dramatic a turnaround do you need?

If some team overcomes 1:1000 odds, then fine!

The 2010 IWU team was voted #1, but it is the only non-unanimous #1 national champion I can ever recall. I bleed green, but even I admitted on the tourney boards at the time that I doubted they were #1 if the whole year is taken into account (but added that they were clearly #1 for a couple of weeks in May and June and that was good enough to make me very happy! ;D)

When I submit my posters' poll ballot early next week, I suspect I'll be like FCGG - if Neb Wes wins it all, they will almost certainly be #1 (and MAYBE the same for UWO); if someone else wins I will seriously consider putting someone else #1 (probably Whitman, as they are guaranteed of finishing the year with the best winning % regardless of the FF).
As proud and supportive of the island teams (ASC/SCAC/SCIAC/NWC), I was surprised that Whitman did not beat Schreiner by more than 10. In any case, a rested Whitman (no more than ~ 25 minutes for any player) should not have been taken to OT in the second game of the tourney on their home court.

They have the best winning percentage, but I cannot give a first place vote to them on that basis. Neb Wes just controlled them and that upscale style of play is not foreign to Whitman.

As to round 2, I think CMS was seriously underrated by the end of the season - missing their best player for so long early on, their record kept voters from recognizing how good they were later. As to your second paragraph, that does give me pause. A #1 team should not get so TOTALLY dominated as they were by Neb Wes. (I'll generally give any team ONE Mulligan, but THIRTY-THREE POINTS?! :o) WashU and Witt would also be in the running - and perhaps even Neb Wes if I can come up with a legitimate-sounding reason why they lost in the FF?!

BTW, Greg apparently misunderstood: I only send checks to doctors who have treated me, and even then hope Medicare and my backup insurance will keep me from having to! ;) Bringing up a factual point about D3 poll history (even if for a different sport) doesn't change that, even if it involves IWU! 8-)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 14, 2018, 06:34:09 PM

IF Oshkosh wins it, I don't see how anyone can't give them the #1 nod. They went through THREE Top 10 teams just to get to the Final Four, two on their home courts. (at #3 Wittenberg, #6, Emory, and at #9 Augustana)...and ORV Marietta, who just dropped out in the last poll. And despite being #9, many probably thought Augustana was a favorite to make it to the Final Four.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 14, 2018, 07:49:16 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 14, 2018, 06:12:33 PM
As to round 2, I think CMS was seriously underrated by the end of the season - missing their best player for so long early on, their record kept voters from recognizing how good they were later.

That, and the fact that CMS is from the SCIAC, a league that's perennially non-competitive in March.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 14, 2018, 06:12:33 PM
As to your second paragraph, that does give me pause. A #1 team should not get so TOTALLY dominated as they were by Neb Wes. (I'll generally give any team ONE Mulligan, but THIRTY-THREE POINTS?! :o) WashU and Witt would also be in the running - and perhaps even Neb Wes if I can come up with a legitimate-sounding reason why they lost in the FF?!

There were questions all season long as to whether Whitman's schedule was giving people a clear picture of the team, to the point where some were wondering if Wash U, whose record was not as good as that of the Blues, really ought to be #1. Put those concerns together with the barely-scraped-by home win in OT over CMS and the rout at the hands of NebWes, and you get a Whitman team whose case for #1 in a year in which it didn't even get to the Final Four is by no means totally convincing.

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 14, 2018, 06:34:09 PM
IF Oshkosh wins it, I don't see how anyone can't give them the #1 nod. They went through THREE Top 10 teams just to get to the Final Four, two on their home courts. (at #3 Wittenberg, #6, Emory, and at #9 Augustana)...and ORV Marietta, who just dropped out in the last poll. And despite being #9, many probably thought Augustana was a favorite to make it to the Final Four.

I agree. If UW-Oshkosh wins the Big Doorstop, then the Titans really ought to be #1 on everybody's ballots.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on March 14, 2018, 08:49:50 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 14, 2018, 07:49:16 PM
There were questions all season long as to whether Whitman's schedule was giving people a clear picture of the team, to the point where some were wondering if Wash U, whose record was not as good as that of the Blues, really ought to be #1. Put those concerns together with the barely-scraped-by home win in OT over CMS and the rout at the hands of NebWes, and you get a Whitman team whose case for #1 in a year in which it didn't even get to the Final Four is by no means totally convincing.

No it is not convincing, but nobody has a convincing resume for #1 at this point. Here are all teams getting votes for #1 in the pre-tourney poll:

- WashU (1 votes) ended the season losing two in a row, one of which was on their home court in the first round to Aurora.
- Witt (2 votes) lost in the second round at home, but it was to UW-Osh so not that bad of a loss considering how well they are playing right now.
- Whitworth (4 votes) will lose all of their first place after a first round loss to CMS (although I agree they were much better than their resume showed due to the injury to Scarlett).
- Williams had a great year winning the NESCAC tourney, but the 5 regular season losses + losing at home to Ramapo makes it hard to jump the other teams receiving 1st place votes.

More I think about it, I think the team that leaves Salem with ~~The Belt^TM~~....the Walnut and Bronze should be #1 in the 2018 postseason poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on March 14, 2018, 10:32:27 PM

To me, being the champion is not the same as being #1 for the season. It means you had 6 good games in March. The rankings should reflect the whole year not a 20% section of it. Getting a trophy doesn't erase 3+ months of play.
People don't say they want to be ranked #1 at the end of the year... they say they want to be champions.

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 14, 2018, 02:56:56 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on March 14, 2018, 12:51:38 PM
We'll have to see how things play out but on my posters poll ballot I'm very open to not voting the champ #1 because I take into account the whole season. Going into the tournament I had Nebraska Wesleyan 16, Oshkosh was just off, with Springfield and Ramapo not too close. If Nebraska Wesleyan wins then they'll probably be my #1. Oshkosh I'm sure many would put #1, I'd have to think about it. Springfield and Ramapo I don't see any reason why I'd move them ahead of a team such as Whitman who was #1 going in to the tournament and made the Elite 8.

Just as an extreme example... let's say Berry ended up going all the way and were champions. They were 11-17 entering the tournament. I bet a couple people would vote them #1 simply because they were champs but most wouldn't. The question then becomes where's the line of how bad of a regular season can you have before it outweighs a great tournament.
The National Champion 2010 IWU baseball team was sub .500 going into the last week of the regular season. How dramatic a turnaround do you need?

If some team overcomes 1:1000 odds, then fine!

Good for them on winning the title but I wouldn't have had them #1. IWU finished 31-21 while Cortland St were 40-10-1... and they split the two games they played against each other. Without digging deeper into the schedules to see just how hard or easy each team had it (admittedly I don't follow baseball too much), I'd have Cortland easily ahead of IWU in my rankings.

A couple years ago when Golden State went 73-9 but lost in the finals to Cleveland (who were 57-25)... if I had to give an NBA Top 25 ballot, I absolutely would have had GS as #1 even though they didn't win the title.

Ultimately whoever wins the title won't care if they're not unanimous #1 or if they fail to be #1. It's just us who have nothing better to do than to ~~argue~~ ~~complain~~ discuss something while we wait all week for the action. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 14, 2018, 10:59:57 PM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on March 14, 2018, 10:32:27 PM
To me, being the champion is not the same as being #1 for the season. It means you had 6 good games in March. The rankings should reflect the whole year not a 20% section of it. Getting a trophy doesn't erase 3+ months of play.
People don't say they want to be ranked #1 at the end of the year... they say they want to be champions.

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 14, 2018, 02:56:56 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on March 14, 2018, 12:51:38 PM
We'll have to see how things play out but on my posters poll ballot I'm very open to not voting the champ #1 because I take into account the whole season. Going into the tournament I had Nebraska Wesleyan 16, Oshkosh was just off, with Springfield and Ramapo not too close. If Nebraska Wesleyan wins then they'll probably be my #1. Oshkosh I'm sure many would put #1, I'd have to think about it. Springfield and Ramapo I don't see any reason why I'd move them ahead of a team such as Whitman who was #1 going in to the tournament and made the Elite 8.

Just as an extreme example... let's say Berry ended up going all the way and were champions. They were 11-17 entering the tournament. I bet a couple people would vote them #1 simply because they were champs but most wouldn't. The question then becomes where's the line of how bad of a regular season can you have before it outweighs a great tournament.
The National Champion 2010 IWU baseball team was sub .500 going into the last week of the regular season. How dramatic a turnaround do you need?

If some team overcomes 1:1000 odds, then fine!
Good for them on winning the title but I wouldn't have had them #1. IWU finished 31-21 while Cortland St were 40-10-1... and they split the two games they played against each other. Without digging deeper into the schedules to see just how hard or easy each team had it (admittedly I don't follow baseball too much), I'd have Cortland easily ahead of IWU in my rankings.

A couple years ago when Golden State went 73-9 but lost in the finals to Cleveland (who were 57-25)... if I had to give an NBA Top 25 ballot, I absolutely would have had GS as #1 even though they didn't win the title.

Ultimately whoever wins the title won't care if they're not unanimous #1 or if they fail to be #1. It's just us who have nothing better to do than to ~~argue~~ ~~complain~~ discuss something while we wait all week for the action. :)

True, but the first game was win-or-go-home for Cortland, while IWU was already guaranteed the title game. Cortland won by 1. In the title game, IWU led by 17-2 after 5, then coasted home to a 17-5 win. I, too, would probably have voted Cortland (and perhaps several others) ahead of IWU for the season, but the head-to-head comparison is not exactly a point in your favor! ;D

And I am overall quite ambivalent on how to vote - total season or NOW. Teams can change significantly over the course of the season. Which SHOULD be more important is to me an open question.

And, of course, if you vote for NOW, you run into the 'small sample' problem. I doubt there is a RIGHT answer.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 15, 2018, 09:09:18 AM

I agree that the final #1 doesn't have to be the tourney winner; they are separate. However, usually those six games in March, even if they aren't all over world-beaters, is usually enough to boost the resume sufficiently. The only real scenario where I wouldn't vote for the champion is if that champion was clearly on a roll over "getting it together late," AND there was a clear dominant team all year that had one bad game (or shot). Think a 23-10 champ and a 31-1 alternative who lost in the semis or something.

The thing with a six round tournament is that you usually can't maintain a hot streak over three weeks. You might have a sketchy team who peaks at the right time, but they're rarely pretenders.

To me, it's more about having a dominant team not winning the title than the relative strength of the champion. We don't have an alternative team this year.

I still think both Hamilton and Swarthmore are "better" teams than Springfield, but the Pride beat both of them. There's not enough difference between them for my eyes to overrule the results on the court.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 15, 2018, 09:47:15 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 15, 2018, 09:09:18 AM

I agree that the final #1 doesn't have to be the tourney winner; they are separate. However, usually those six games in March, even if they aren't all over world-beaters, is usually enough to boost the resume sufficiently. The only real scenario where I wouldn't vote for the champion is if that champion was clearly on a roll over "getting it together late," AND there was a clear dominant team all year that had one bad game (or shot). Think a 23-10 champ and a 31-1 alternative who lost in the semis or something.

The thing with a six round tournament is that you usually can't maintain a hot streak over three weeks. You might have a sketchy team who peaks at the right time, but they're rarely pretenders.

To me, it's more about having a dominant team not winning the title than the relative strength of the champion. We don't have an alternative team this year.

I still think both Hamilton and Swarthmore are "better" teams than Springfield, but the Pride beat both of them. There's not enough difference between them for my eyes to overrule the results on the court.

With anywhere from 2-4 tourney games in the conference post-season tournaments, excepting the UAA, the run is even more impressive.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on March 15, 2018, 10:08:54 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 15, 2018, 09:47:15 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 15, 2018, 09:09:18 AM

I agree that the final #1 doesn't have to be the tourney winner; they are separate. However, usually those six games in March, even if they aren't all over world-beaters, is usually enough to boost the resume sufficiently. The only real scenario where I wouldn't vote for the champion is if that champion was clearly on a roll over "getting it together late," AND there was a clear dominant team all year that had one bad game (or shot). Think a 23-10 champ and a 31-1 alternative who lost in the semis or something.

The thing with a six round tournament is that you usually can't maintain a hot streak over three weeks. You might have a sketchy team who peaks at the right time, but they're rarely pretenders.

To me, it's more about having a dominant team not winning the title than the relative strength of the champion. We don't have an alternative team this year.

I still think both Hamilton and Swarthmore are "better" teams than Springfield, but the Pride beat both of them. There's not enough difference between them for my eyes to overrule the results on the court.
With anywhere from 2-4 tourney games in the conference post-season tournaments, excepting the UAA, the run is even more impressive.

Except that Springfield (0-1) and Oshkosh (1-1) lost in their respective conference semifinals.
Ramapo and Nebraska Wesleyan both went 2-0 and won their tournaments.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 15, 2018, 12:45:59 PM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on March 15, 2018, 10:08:54 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 15, 2018, 09:47:15 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 15, 2018, 09:09:18 AM

I agree that the final #1 doesn't have to be the tourney winner; they are separate. However, usually those six games in March, even if they aren't all over world-beaters, is usually enough to boost the resume sufficiently. The only real scenario where I wouldn't vote for the champion is if that champion was clearly on a roll over "getting it together late," AND there was a clear dominant team all year that had one bad game (or shot). Think a 23-10 champ and a 31-1 alternative who lost in the semis or something.

The thing with a six round tournament is that you usually can't maintain a hot streak over three weeks. You might have a sketchy team who peaks at the right time, but they're rarely pretenders.

To me, it's more about having a dominant team not winning the title than the relative strength of the champion. We don't have an alternative team this year.

I still think both Hamilton and Swarthmore are "better" teams than Springfield, but the Pride beat both of them. There's not enough difference between them for my eyes to overrule the results on the court.
With anywhere from 2-4 tourney games in the conference post-season tournaments, excepting the UAA, the run is even more impressive.
Except that Springfield (0-1) and Oshkosh (1-1) lost in their respective conference semifinals.
Ramapo and Nebraska Wesleyan both went 2-0 and won their tournaments.

Thanks for the response FCGG.

We have a circuitous discussion going on the Pool C and Top 25 boards. We are wanting to expand the number of Pool C bids, either with play-in games with extra Pool C bids or restricting the access to the tourney by weaker Pool A conference winners.

One comment is whether the last Pool C bid could win the national championship. With our Final Four, we have the whole range of possible scenarios.

Springfield -- unranked in the Top 25, and not receiving votes, who got its Pool C bid in the later rounds (maybe #19)
UW-Oshkosh -- Ranked and Pool C from a "Power Conference". Was Pick #13 in the Mock Selection.

Neb Wesleyan -- unranked Pool A, receiving votes at "#26", who is the new kid on the block.
Ramapo -- Pool A from a respectable historic conference but not receiving votes.

Elsewhere I postulated that we have ~19 Pool A bids from quality conferences, 21 Pool C bids coming from 14 of those best (19) conferences and then 24 Pool A bids from the rest of D3. We are getting the Top 40 teams.

I caution us (and the Top 25 voters) on the hubris of not thinking one of these Final Four teams is unworthy of a #1 vote.

From my perspective of the ASC and whom we play in the early rounds, just once would I like to see an ASC team play in the "Springfield regional" bracket instead of playing in a bracket that takes us early into the Central and West Region teams.

who is the new kid on the block. Props to GS. I should have put quotation marks around "new". All those years that I posted about NebWes on the Pool B, were not in keeping with their legacy in pre-historic D3. (Pre-historic for most of us is before the creation of D3Hoops.com, or the first 1 million posts on the message board that used to be shown on the home page. ;). )

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 15, 2018, 12:53:03 PM

Although I realize that the other three teams have all made D3 tourney appearances since the last time that Nebraska Wesleyan was in the field, the Prairie Wolves are pretty old for a new kid on the block. This is NWU's 15th D3 tourney appearance, and fifth D3 Final Four appearance.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 15, 2018, 01:48:41 PM

This year, though, you do need to look at the other considerations. NWU was without their best player for half the season. Springfield is pretty young and grew into their wins (like both Augie and Williams last year). There's a point where the whole season has to be considered, but you're also ranking teams at the end of the season. Progression and growth have to be part of it. Ramapo is a talented team that needed most of the season to figure themselves out. Do you hold that against them or not, especially if they're playing well at the end of the year? Oshkosh is a lot the same - they didn't play up to their talent for sections of the season, but they got around to it in March.

It's all a balance. I'd have to see a really dominant team not win to consider ignoring the tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 15, 2018, 03:28:07 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 15, 2018, 01:48:41 PM

This year, though, you do need to look at the other considerations. NWU was without their best player for half the season. Springfield is pretty young and grew into their wins (like both Augie and Williams last year). There's a point where the whole season has to be considered, but you're also ranking teams at the end of the season. Progression and growth have to be part of it. Ramapo is a talented team that needed most of the season to figure themselves out. Do you hold that against them or not, especially if they're playing well at the end of the year? Oshkosh is a lot the same - they didn't play up to their talent for sections of the season, but they got around to it in March.

It's all a balance. I'd have to see a really dominant team not win to consider ignoring the tournament.

Not completely sure about the Oshkosh part. They really only had one real bad game and that was against a Ripon team coming in with a losing record at Wisconsin Dells over holiday break. Oshkosh lost their next game to Whitewater, but that's when Whitewater was still (presumably) really good (they were actually ranked ahead of Oshkosh at the time of the game). The only other possible head scratcher would be losing at Eau Claire, but Point also lost up at Zorn too. Besides that, 4 of their losses came at the hands of Stevens Point (both on the road, one in the conference tourney) and Platteville. I've said this before, I think the general feeling was that Oshkosh was the best team in the conference (even Stevens Point head coach Bob Semling said that on one of his post-game interviews). The Titans have definitely saved their best for March.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 15, 2018, 05:45:12 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 15, 2018, 03:28:07 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 15, 2018, 01:48:41 PM

This year, though, you do need to look at the other considerations. NWU was without their best player for half the season. Springfield is pretty young and grew into their wins (like both Augie and Williams last year). There's a point where the whole season has to be considered, but you're also ranking teams at the end of the season. Progression and growth have to be part of it. Ramapo is a talented team that needed most of the season to figure themselves out. Do you hold that against them or not, especially if they're playing well at the end of the year? Oshkosh is a lot the same - they didn't play up to their talent for sections of the season, but they got around to it in March.

It's all a balance. I'd have to see a really dominant team not win to consider ignoring the tournament.

Not completely sure about the Oshkosh part. They really only had one real bad game and that was against a Ripon team coming in with a losing record at Wisconsin Dells over holiday break. Oshkosh lost their next game to Whitewater, but that's when Whitewater was still (presumably) really good (they were actually ranked ahead of Oshkosh at the time of the game). The only other possible head scratcher would be losing at Eau Claire, but Point also lost up at Zorn too. Besides that, 4 of their losses came at the hands of Stevens Point (both on the road, one in the conference tourney) and Platteville. I've said this before, I think the general feeling was that Oshkosh was the best team in the conference (even Stevens Point head coach Bob Semling said that on one of his post-game interviews). The Titans have definitely saved their best for March.

That's my point, I guess, they were the best team in the conference and they didn't finish first. To me, that's playing below your talent. Maybe not a ton, but it wasn't the season I expected until March.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on March 16, 2018, 09:39:07 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 15, 2018, 05:45:12 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 15, 2018, 03:28:07 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 15, 2018, 01:48:41 PM

This year, though, you do need to look at the other considerations. NWU was without their best player for half the season. Springfield is pretty young and grew into their wins (like both Augie and Williams last year). There's a point where the whole season has to be considered, but you're also ranking teams at the end of the season. Progression and growth have to be part of it. Ramapo is a talented team that needed most of the season to figure themselves out. Do you hold that against them or not, especially if they're playing well at the end of the year? Oshkosh is a lot the same - they didn't play up to their talent for sections of the season, but they got around to it in March.

It's all a balance. I'd have to see a really dominant team not win to consider ignoring the tournament.

Not completely sure about the Oshkosh part. They really only had one real bad game and that was against a Ripon team coming in with a losing record at Wisconsin Dells over holiday break. Oshkosh lost their next game to Whitewater, but that's when Whitewater was still (presumably) really good (they were actually ranked ahead of Oshkosh at the time of the game). The only other possible head scratcher would be losing at Eau Claire, but Point also lost up at Zorn too. Besides that, 4 of their losses came at the hands of Stevens Point (both on the road, one in the conference tourney) and Platteville. I've said this before, I think the general feeling was that Oshkosh was the best team in the conference (even Stevens Point head coach Bob Semling said that on one of his post-game interviews). The Titans have definitely saved their best for March.

That's my point, I guess, they were the best team in the conference and they didn't finish first. To me, that's playing below your talent. Maybe not a ton, but it wasn't the season I expected until March.

Sometimes it is all about peaking at the right time. I also think a few losses makes a team better.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 18, 2018, 03:20:57 PM

While it's fresh, and before everyone forgets about hoops for several months, this is a good place for posters to share thoughts on Top 25 preseason candidates for 2018-19 -- teams that had very good seasons and return a lot.

I believe the CCIW has two...

Augustana (25-6, 12-4 CCIW Co-Champ; Lost in Elite 8 to UW-Oshkosh)
G - Nolan Ebel, 6-1/175 Jr. 16.4 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 3.8 apg
G - Chrishawn Orange, 6-2/180 Jr. 15.6 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 2.5 apg
G - Dylan Sortillo, 6/3/180 Sr. 12.7 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 2.7 apg
F - Brett Benning, 6-6/191 Jr. 10.7 ppg, 5.0 rpg
C - Micah Martin, 6-11/240 So. 7.6 ppg, 4.4 rpg

F - Pierson Wofford, 6-4/202 Jr. 14.7 ppg 11.7 rpg (3 games) ??
C - A.J. Dollmeyer, 6-9/260 Sr. 3.5 ppg, 2.2 rpg
G - Joe Kellen, 6-1/180 Jr. 3.3 ppg
F - Donovan Ferguson, 6-9/221 So. 3.2 ppg, 3.7 rpg

Illinois Wesleyan (19-8, 12-4 CCIW Co-Champ; Lost in Round 1 to Wooster)
G - Brady Rose, 6-3/185 Jr. 21.4 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 3.1 apg
G - Colin Bonnett, 6-4/190 Jr. 12.3 ppg, 2.8 rpg, 2.6 apg
G - Jason Gregoire, 6-4/195 Jr. 8.1 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 1.9 apg
F - Jaylen Beasley, 6-6/185 Sr. 5.3 ppg, 6.4 rpg
C - Alex O'Neill, 6-9/245 So. 9.2 ppg, 5.5 rpg

G - Zach Knobloch, 6-2/180 So. 7.3 ppg
F - Miles Curry, 6-6/205 So. 4.3 ppg, 4.2 rpg
G - Grant Wolfe, 5-11/175 Fr. 4.1 ppg, 2.0 rpg, 2.2 apg

Augie probably an easy Top 5 preseason pick.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 18, 2018, 03:48:10 PM

Oshkosh only loses Noone. Stevens Point loses MJ Delmore, but Ethan Bublitz returns after being hurt nearly all year. Platteville loses a ton. Whitewater should be back in the mix and, of course, Nebraska Wesleyan returns everyone except Wells-Ross.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on March 18, 2018, 05:45:09 PM

Will NWU be voted #1 in the final poll? Should they be?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 18, 2018, 05:49:27 PM

Quote from: AndOne on March 18, 2018, 05:45:09 PM
Will NWU be voted #1 in the final poll? Should they be?

Yes and yes. They were more than impressive. Oshkosh was incredible; they broke or tied just about all the final four 3pt records in the championship game and still came up short. That's a well earned victory - plus when you add in Platteville and Whitman, that's plenty of resume to make up for the non-conference schedule.

What's more impressive is how the guys handled themselves. Rarely do you see a team so even keeled and unflappable, even moreso when they're as young as these guys are. Immediately after the game was over, to a man, they were all talking about getting better for next year and winning more titles. It didn't feel like they'd achieved a goal so much as just done what they expected to do. Pretty impressive.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dunkin3117 on March 18, 2018, 08:44:41 PM

Quote from: AndOne on March 18, 2018, 05:45:09 PM
Will NWU be voted #1 in the final poll? Should they be?

Loras losses 1 senior. It will be a fun battle in the IIAC next year between these 2 programs.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 18, 2018, 08:46:27 PM

I first posted this is the 2018 tourney room two weeks ago, but this seems like a better place for it:

The preseason d3hoops.com poll and the Final Four

year	champ	2nd	3rd	4th
2000	Calvin (#22)	Wisconsin-Eau Claire (#19)	Salem State (ORV)	Franklin & Marshall (#5)
2001	Catholic (#7)	William Paterson (#2)	Illinois Wesleyan (#25)	Ohio Northern (ORV)
2002	Otterbein (no votes)	Elizabethtown (ORV)	Carthage (#1)	Rochester (no votes)
2003	Williams (#11)	Gustavus Adolphus (ORV)	Wooster (ORV)	Hampden-Sydney (#7)
2004	Wisconsin-Stevens Point (#3)	Williams (#1)	John Carroll (#12)	Amherst (#14)
2005	Wisconsin-Stevens Point (#1)	Rochester (#5)	Calvin (no votes)	York (PA) (no votes)
2006	Virginia Wesleyan (#11)	Wittenberg (#10)	Illinois Wesleyan (#1)	Amherst (#5)
2007	Amherst (#3)	Virginia Wesleyan (#1)	Washington (MO) (ORV)	Wooster (#2)
2008	Washington (MO) (#1)	Amherst (#2)	Hope (#11)	Ursinus (no votes)
2009	Washington (MO) (#1)	Stockton (ORV)	Guilford (ORV)	Franklin & Marshall (no votes)
2010	Wisconsin-Stevens Point (#10)	Williams (ORV)	*Guilford (#3)	*Randolph-Macon (#19)
2011	St. Thomas (#13)	Wooster (#6)	*Middlebury (#9)	*Williams (#8)
2012	Wisconsin-Whitewater (ORV)	Cabrini (#14)	*Illinois Wesleyan (ORV)	*MIT (#10)
2013	Amherst (#5)	Mary Hardin-Baylor (ORV)	*North Central (IL) (#6)	*St. Thomas (#11)
2014	Wisconsin-Whitewater (#13)	Williams (#3)	*Amherst (#1)	*Illinois Wesleyan (#2)
2015	Wisconsin-Stevens Point (#7)	Augustana (#3)	*Babson (#23)	*Virginia Wesleyan (#19)
2016	St. Thomas (#4)	Benedictine (no votes)	*Amherst (#5)	*Christopher Newport (ORV)
2017	Babson (#3)	Augustana (#18)	*Whitman (#9)	*Williams (no votes)
2018	Nebraska Wesleyan (ORV)	Wisconsin-Oshkosh (ORV)	*Ramapo (#5)	*Springfield (no votes)

* Third-place finish following elimination of national consolation game

Poll points per Final Four
2000: 750
2001: 1064
2002: 620
2003: 839
2004: 1604
2005: 1028
2006: 1644
2007: 1676
2008: 1529
2009: 680
2010: 1068
2011: 1473
2012: 579
2013: 1205
2014: 1934
2015: 1206
2016: 863
2017: 1093
2018: 495

* * * * * * * *

The pre-tournament d3hoops.com poll and the Final Four

year	champ	2nd	3rd	4th
2000	Calvin (#1)	Wisconsin-Eau Claire (#15)	Salem State (#21)	Franklin & Marshall (#19)
2001	Catholic (#14)	William Paterson (#11)	Illinois Wesleyan (#17)	Ohio Northern (#3)
2002	Otterbein (#6)	Elizabethtown (#4)	Carthage (#1)	Rochester (#18)
2003	Williams (#3)	Gustavus Adolphus (#24)	Wooster (#6)	Hampden-Sydney (#4)
2004	Wisconsin-Stevens Point (#10)	Williams (#1)	John Carroll (#13)	Amherst (#5)
2005	Wisconsin-Stevens Point (#1)	Rochester (#21)	Calvin (#14)	York (PA) (#19)
2006	Virginia Wesleyan (#7)	Wittenberg (#3)	Illinois Wesleyan (#11)	Amherst (#4)
2007	Amherst (#6)	Virginia Wesleyan (#4)	Washington (MO) (#8)	Wooster (#2)
2008	Washington (MO) (#11)	Amherst (#3)	Hope (#1)	Ursinus (#16)
2009	Washington (MO) (#2)	Stockton (#6)	Guilford (#23)	Franklin & Marshall (ORV)
2010	Wisconsin-Stevens Point (#5)	Williams (#2)	*Guilford (#3)	*Randolph-Macon (#16)
2011	St. Thomas (#8)	Wooster (#5)	*Middlebury (#2)	*Williams (#4)
2012	Wisconsin-Whitewater (#8)	Cabrini (#5)	*Illinois Wesleyan (ORV)	*MIT (#3)
2013	Amherst (#2)	Mary Hardin-Baylor (no votes)	*North Central (IL) (#3)	*St. Thomas (#1)
2014	Wisconsin-Whitewater (#3)	Williams (#9)	*Amherst (#7)	*Illinois Wesleyan (#6)
2015	Wisconsin-Stevens Point (#8)	Augustana (#6)	*Babson (#4)	*Virginia Wesleyan (#9)
2016	St. Thomas (#8)	Benedictine (#2)	*Amherst (#15)	*Christopher Newport (#4)
2017	Babson (#3)	Augustana (ORV)	*Whitman (#1)	*Williams (ORV)
2018	Nebraska Wesleyan (ORV)	Wisconsin-Oshkosh (#24)	*Ramapo (no votes)	*Springfield (no votes)

* Third-place finish following elimination of national consolation game

Poll points per Final Four
2000: 1172
2001: 1383
2002: 1852
2003: 1653
2004: 1802
2005: 1182
2006: 1801
2007: 2059
2008: 1967
2009: 1170
2010: 1904
2011: 2153
2012: 1515
2013: 1789
2014: 1945
2015: 1847
2016: 1849
2017: 1227
2018: 158

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 18, 2018, 11:00:43 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 18, 2018, 03:48:10 PM
Oshkosh only loses Noone. Stevens Point loses MJ Delmore, but Ethan Bublitz returns after being hurt nearly all year. Platteville loses ~~a ton~~ two starters. Whitewater should be back in the mix and, of course, Nebraska Wesleyan returns everyone except Wells-Ross.

Platteville players with double-digit minutes *denotes starter, 3 pts/game
*Duax - 15.8/4.6
*Oestreich - 11.2/3.7
*Voelker - 10.3/3.7
Shields - 10.2/3.2
*Gerds - 7.9/6.0
*Showalter - 6.6/2.4
Ranney - 4.4/2.1

Oshkosh
*Boots - 16.0/3.6
*Flynn - 12.8/7.0
*Fravert - 12.3/7.5
*Wittchow - 10.9/3.9
*Noone - 10.2/2.4
Duax - 3.3/2.8
Vlotho - 3.1/2.0

Stevens Point
*Delmore - 12.0/2.5
*Dodge - 11.6/3.1
*O-Heron - 11.1/3.5
*Fredrickson - 7.9/3.6
Nelson, M - 7.3/3.2
*Tauber - 5.8/5.0
Nelson, G - 3.4/1.1
Koerner - 3.3/1.5

Bublitz - played in one game this season averaged 14.3/4.2 in 2016-2017, tops in both categories.

River Falls loses their top two scorers and rebounders in Herink and Witt, and also loses a 3rd starter in Buckley.

Whitewater returns their top 7 players and that doesn't include Scotty Tyler, who only played 5 games. I don't know if there's any possibility of a return of Chris Jones.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on March 19, 2018, 10:23:39 AM

Next year's likely pre-season top 10 looks loaded with very experienced teams. Nebraska Wesleyan will clearly be number one as they only lose one guy. WIAC looks ridiculously stacked next season. CCIW's top two look like they will be better on paper. Whitworth looks better and Whitman brings back plenty. And the Northeast region has a number of stacked teams to toss into the potentential top-10 mix, all of whom look like legit contenders:

MIT graduates NO seniors from a team that barely missed the Final Four (losing in Ramapo in the Elite 8) and dealt with some significant injury issues, especially to top playmaker Jomard, who wasn't all the way back in the tourney games for sure. Hamilton Forsythe should be a big time star now that he has some experience, and MIT's senior class is loaded. With four big-time shooters (Jurko, Forsythe, Hinkley, Korb) returning, MIT has the potential to be one of the best outside shooting teams we've seen in D3.

Williams after winning NESCAC but losing to Ramapo in the second round returns the NESCAC POY in James Heskett (someone whose game still has plenty of room for growth), a first-team all-league player in Bobby Casey, Kyle Scadlock, who was the team's leading scorer and rebounder before blowing out his knee in game 8, uber-talented big guy Matt Karpowicz, who was dominant in stretches and who is expected to be a bigger factor as a junior, plus two other defensive specialists who were at least part-time starters in Feinberg and Kempton. The Ephs also have a very strong recruiting class coming in. The Ephs lose two backcourt starters in Teal and Greenman and their back-up point guard in Galvin, but their combined statistical impact was not massive (about 17 ppg and 6 apg, while shooting a combined 35 percent from the field and 29 percent from 3) and there are some intriguing possible replacements.

Hamilton brings back its top five players (one, Groll, was a bench guy but was more productive / impactful than the starter), four seniors and one junior, from a team that lost in heartbreaking fashion to Springfield in the Sweet 16. They graduate two seniors both of whom were role players who didn't score very often. Very experienced group: they average about two years as starters between them. Kena Gilmour has developed into one of the top players in the country and should have a big junior season, and two-time all-league player Peter Hoffmann is a great second option.

Springfield brings back Jake Ross, Heath Post, and Cam Earle. The Pride does however graduate 3 of their top 6 guys. There is not a ton returning around that tremendous top three, but as we saw this year Ross alone makes them very dangerous and Post is great secondary star. If the Pride bring in another few capable players, they will be back in the mix again.

Middlebury, Wesleyan, Nichols, Endicott and Keene State all look like potential top-25 teams from the northeast as well. But all have more question marks than the aforementioned group or the other teams folks have been discussing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 19, 2018, 11:16:13 AM

Wittenberg loses All-American center Chad Roy, but everybody else of consequence is back -- including double-digit scorers Mitchell Balser, Jacob Bertemes, and Connor Seipel, and the two leading rebounders for the Tigers in Seipel and Jordan Pumroy. Speedy 6'2 freshman guard Rashaad Ali-Shakir came on at the end of the season, scoring 15 in the NCAC tourney championship game against Ohio Wesleyan and following that up with 10 points against Misericordia in the first round of the D3 tourney; he looks like he could be a breakout player next season.

Wooster loses leading scorer Spencer Williams, but the next four leading scorers for the Fighting Scots -- Danyon Hempy (15.0), Reece Dupler (14.4), Blake Blair (7.5), and Eric Bulic (6.9 and 7.2 rpg) -- all return.

Marietta could be scary next season. The Pioneers lose their leading scorer, PG Dillon Young, but return a pair of All-OAC performers in Kyle Dixon (13.1) and Anthony Wallace (12.9), plus leading rebounder Avery Williams (11.6 and 7.5) as well as DeVaughn Wingard (10.2) and Caleb Hoyng (7.9) and part-time starters Mel Schuler and Mike Hall. They'll all be seniors next season, except for Hoyng and Hall, who will be juniors.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on March 19, 2018, 11:23:17 AM

Wow, Greg, even more stacked teams heading into next year.

This may have been discussed before but I'm not really well-versed on Wooster-Wittenberg. Interesting to me that one of Wittenberg's key guys, Balser, is a Wooster transfer. How often in D3 do we see key players transfer from one rival school to another, especially among the most prominent rivalries? I certainly can't think of any Williams-Amherst transfers of consequence, for example.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on March 19, 2018, 11:23:49 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 19, 2018, 11:16:13 AM
Wittenberg loses All-American center Chad Roy, but everybody else of consequence is back -- including double-digit scorers Mitchell Balser, Jacob Bertemes, and Connor Seipel, and the two leading rebounders for the Tigers in Seipel and Jordan Pumroy. Speedy 6'2 freshman guard Rashaad Ali-Shakir came on at the end of the season, scoring 15 in the NCAC tourney championship game against Ohio Wesleyan and following that up with 10 points against Misericordia in the first round of the D3 tourney; he looks like he could be a breakout player next season.

Wooster loses leading scorer Spencer Williams, but the next four leading scorers for the Fighting Scots -- Danyon Hempy (15.0), Reece Dupler (14.4), Blake Blair (7.5), and Eric Bulic (6.9 and 7.2 rpg) -- all return.

Marietta could be scary next season. The Pioneers lose their leading scorer, PG Dillon Young, but return a pair of All-OAC performers in Kyle Dixon (13.1) and Anthony Wallace (12.9), plus leading rebounder Avery Williams (11.6 and 7.5) as well as DeVaughn Wingard (10.2) and Caleb Hoyng (7.9) and part-time starters Mel Schuler and Mike Hall. They'll all be seniors next season, except for Hoyng and Hall, who will be juniors.

If Marietta is going to make a serious run, next year is the year to do it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 19, 2018, 11:30:30 AM

We were having similar discussions as we were debating the All-America teams and looking down the list for players for next year's preseason. We could end up having a similar season to this year because of all the talent returning.

Should be fun!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on March 19, 2018, 11:43:30 AM

If I had to evaluate the UAA for Top 25 worthy teams based on what I imagine a Top 25 team looks like after following Division III for 10 seasons, I would say no UAA team will be in the Top 25.

If I evaluated the teams based on what the Top 25 looked like this season, Emory is likely in the Top 25 next season to begin and likely to stay in the Top 25 depending on the non-conference schedule. They return Gebereal Baitey who scored 11 points per game in 29 minutes and Beau Bommarito who averaged 7 points per game in 26 minutes along with four freshmen that averaged 30 points and 10 rebounds per game. I have said it many times and I'll say it again: the Emory freshmen that are not a household name yet are going to be very good.

Rochester has a shot at a sustained Top 25 ranking as they return everyone except Tucker Knox who averaged 6 points and 4 rebounds per game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiltedbryan on March 19, 2018, 01:15:21 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on March 19, 2018, 11:23:17 AM
Wow, Greg, even more stacked teams heading into next year.

This may have been discussed before but I'm not really well-versed on Wooster-Wittenberg. Interesting to me that one of Wittenberg's key guys, Balser, is a Wooster transfer. How often in D3 do we see key players transfer from one rival school to another, especially among the most prominent rivalries? I certainly can't think of any Williams-Amherst transfers of consequence, for example.

I've followed Wooster for a long time, and I can't recall any other direct transfer between the programs. Admittedly, I don't follow every roster move, but it's surely not common. Balser's transfer (and Witt's '17-'18 resurgence) added some spice back into a Woo-Witt rivalry that had slanted in Wooster's direction in recent seasons: the Scots went 11-1 overall against the Tigers from the start of the '12-'13 season through the end of the '16-'17 year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 19, 2018, 01:19:37 PM

I'd be curious to know if there's ever been a Hope-to-Calvin men's basketball transfer, or vice-versa.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on March 19, 2018, 01:39:13 PM

Siblings Carrie Snikkers (Hope) and Tom Snikkers (Calvin) is the best I can come up with, though the Verkaik sisters who played at Calvin were babysitters for Hope Coach Brian Morehouse.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on March 19, 2018, 01:57:17 PM

Interesting, thanks kiltedbryan.

So, in terms of teams returning the most impressive rosters, seems like (going roughly from West to East) the following squads are all in the mix:

Whitman, Whitworth, Nebraska Wesleyan, Whitewater, Plattesville, Stevens-Point, Oshkosh, Illinois Wesleyan, Augustana, Marietta, Wooster, Wittinberg, Hamilton, Swarthmore, Williams, Springfield, MIT all seem to be in the mix (I tossed Swarthmore and Johns Hopkins in, they appear to easily be the class of the Mid-Atlantic next year). That's 17 teams with, in my view, viable pre-season top 10 resumes. I imagine there may be a few others as well ...

The only top-tier / noteworthy teams from this season that look likely to be headed for major drop-offs are Wash U., St. John's (MN), Eastern Conn, Ramapo and York, all of whom are fairly decimated by graduation.

I think after an unpredictable and often cryptic season this year, next year is going to very strong and consisten at the top. But, of course, much can change between now and November!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: rlgyank on March 19, 2018, 02:07:17 PM

As a Nebraska Wesleyan fan and an IIAC fan, I would throw Loras in there as a pre season top 25 team for next year. They only lose 1 senior. He was a starter but was not a major contributor, at least stats wise. I don't know about his leadership and things like that.

They should probably get some consideration for the top 25 in the season ending poll this year also.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on March 19, 2018, 02:09:39 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 19, 2018, 01:19:37 PM
I'd be curious to know if there's ever been a Hope-to-Calvin men's basketball transfer, or vice-versa.

Quote from: gordonmann on March 19, 2018, 01:39:13 PM
Siblings Carrie Snikkers (Hope) and Tom Snikkers (Calvin) is the best I can come up with, though the Verkaik sisters who played at Calvin were babysitters for Hope Coach Brian Morehouse.

Going back to the mid-2000s, Dustin Smith played football at Hope for a year then transferred to Calvin to play basketball for the remainder of his career.

Tom Morrison, on Calvin's current roster, went to Hope for a year as part of their JV basketball team. He transferred to Calvin and now plays with his younger brother.

I'm sure there are several others that I've forgotten or was unaware of.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 19, 2018, 02:20:16 PM

Quote from: rlgyank on March 19, 2018, 02:07:17 PM
As a Nebraska Wesleyan fan and an IIAC fan, I would throw Loras in there as a pre season top 25 team for next year. They only lose 1 senior. He was a starter but was not a major contributor, at least stats wise. I don't know about his leadership and things like that.

They should probably get some consideration for the top 25 in the season ending poll this year also.

Among those Loras returnees is All-Region second-team guard Josh Ruggles, who averaged 22.4 ppg and 4.7 rpg and had an assist:turnover ratio of nearly 3:1. If the d3hoops.com guys don't put Ruggles on their preseason All-American list next fall, then they're not doing their jobs. His running mate Ryan DeCario overaged 17.8 and 7.1. The Duhawks will be heard from next season.

One team that hasn't been mentioned thus far that really intrigues me is New Jersey City. The Gothic Knights, who made the D3 tourney field this month as an at-large, will return every player of consequence from this season's team, including All-American Sam Toney (20.6 and 9.7) and All-NJAC pick Lavonne Green (14.3). Don't sleep on the Knights.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 19, 2018, 02:30:17 PM

Ruggles was one of the last guys off the AA list and definitely on the radar for next year. No worries.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 19, 2018, 02:33:52 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on March 19, 2018, 01:57:17 PMThe only top-tier / noteworthy teams from this season that look likely to be headed for major drop-offs are Wash U., St. John's (MN), Eastern Conn, Ramapo and York, all of whom are fairly decimated by graduation.

North Central, as it stands now, could fall off as well. NCC's 6'8 All-American center Alex Sorenson is going to be very difficult to replace, and, although the Cardinals somewhat got used to playing without their two-time All-CCIW senior swingman Erwin Henry after losing him to injury late in the season, it'll be another thing entirely to be without him altogether going into next season. Of course, the Cardinals have one of the best all-around players in D3 in 6'6 G/F Connor Raridon, so if they can find a CCIW-ready big man somewhere (scuttlebutt is that they have a 6'9 freshman from South Sudan coming in, but nobody should ever bank upon a freshman recruit filling an All-American's shoes) they could bounce back next season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 19, 2018, 02:46:52 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 19, 2018, 02:20:16 PM
Quote from: rlgyank on March 19, 2018, 02:07:17 PM
As a Nebraska Wesleyan fan and an IIAC fan, I would throw Loras in there as a pre season top 25 team for next year. They only lose 1 senior. He was a starter but was not a major contributor, at least stats wise. I don't know about his leadership and things like that.

They should probably get some consideration for the top 25 in the season ending poll this year also.

Among those Loras returnees is All-Region second-team guard Josh Ruggles, who averaged 22.4 ppg and 4.7 rpg and had an assist:turnover ratio of nearly 3:1. If the d3hoops.com guys don't put Ruggles on their preseason All-American list next fall, then they're not doing their jobs. His running mate Ryan DeCario overaged 17.8 and 7.1. The Duhawks will be heard from next season.

One team that hasn't been mentioned thus far that really intrigues me is New Jersey City. The Gothic Knights, who made the D3 tourney field this month as an at-large, will return every player of consequence from this season's team, including All-American Sam Toney (20.6 and 9.7) and All-NJAC pick Lavonne Green (14.3). Don't sleep on the Knights.

Like they did in the 1st round? ::) :o ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 19, 2018, 02:57:14 PM

I feel bad for Whitworth. They'll again play in the shadow of Whitman and their stock will fall in the fantasy leagues because of that. They return everyone and, I'm assuming, they'll get Lester back as well. The NCAA has to find out a way to separate the Whits the 1st weekend.

For the CCIWers out there, how will Wheaton fair? They were the 4th best team in the conference and also were in and out of the regional rankings. They lose #2 scorer Samuelson, but return everyone else. Some guy named Francis might be able to carry the load (again). Can they leapfrog NCC and grab a Pool C bid next season? I haven't really looked into Carthage either.

Hope should again rule the MIAA as they only lose Hawkins. Everyone else comes back as far as I know. I'm guessing Marietta will win the OAC. JCU loses two starters but also leading scorer Csuhran. Ohio Northern, close to getting a Pool C, loses Burger and #3 scorer DiOrio, but returns Bruns.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 19, 2018, 03:02:42 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 19, 2018, 02:57:14 PM
I feel bad for Whitworth. They'll again play in the shadow of Whitman and their stock will fall in the fantasy leagues because of that. They return everyone and, I'm assuming, they'll get Lester back as well. The NCAA has to find out a way to separate the Whits the 1st weekend.

From what I have learned for weeks... the men's committee really, really wanted to split the Whits, but basically got handcuffed by the fact there were no schools who put into bid in Texas. The trickle-down affect of that was too much for the committee to overcome, understandably. However, there were strong indications they had planned to split them.

What would help is if both beefed up their criteria to help make the argument more than just a Top 25 one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 19, 2018, 03:06:01 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 19, 2018, 03:02:42 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 19, 2018, 02:57:14 PM
I feel bad for Whitworth. They'll again play in the shadow of Whitman and their stock will fall in the fantasy leagues because of that. They return everyone and, I'm assuming, they'll get Lester back as well. The NCAA has to find out a way to separate the Whits the 1st weekend.

From what I have learned for weeks... the men's committee really, really wanted to split the Whits, but basically got handcuffed by the fact there were no schools who put into bid in Texas. The trickle-down affect of that was too much for the committee to overcome, understandably. However, there were strong indications they had planned to split them.

What would help is if both beefed up their criteria to help make the argument more than just a Top 25 one.

So basically, we should just blame the Texas schools. ;D

I don't know how the facilities are down there, but did they just not put in a bid because they think they don't have a shot at hosting?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on March 19, 2018, 03:06:07 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 19, 2018, 02:57:14 PM
I feel bad for Whitworth. They'll again play in the shadow of Whitman and their stock will fall in the fantasy leagues because of that.

I heard that Whitworth is really concerned with their Fantasy league stock... ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 19, 2018, 03:07:59 PM

Quote from: John Gleich on March 19, 2018, 03:06:07 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 19, 2018, 02:57:14 PM
I feel bad for Whitworth. They'll again play in the shadow of Whitman and their stock will fall in the fantasy leagues because of that.

I heard that Whitworth is really concerned with their Fantasy league stock... ::)

It is very concerning. :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 19, 2018, 03:08:14 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 19, 2018, 03:06:01 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 19, 2018, 03:02:42 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 19, 2018, 02:57:14 PM
I feel bad for Whitworth. They'll again play in the shadow of Whitman and their stock will fall in the fantasy leagues because of that. They return everyone and, I'm assuming, they'll get Lester back as well. The NCAA has to find out a way to separate the Whits the 1st weekend.

From what I have learned for weeks... the men's committee really, really wanted to split the Whits, but basically got handcuffed by the fact there were no schools who put into bid in Texas. The trickle-down affect of that was too much for the committee to overcome, understandably. However, there were strong indications they had planned to split them.

What would help is if both beefed up their criteria to help make the argument more than just a Top 25 one.

So basically, we should just blame the Texas schools. ;D

Basically... yes. I am quite confident if one Texas school had put in to host... Whitworth would have at least been flown out and they would have made it work. There was some talk (I really can't say much more) that the NCAA was restricting things to three flights, the committee wanted more and got four. Three flights would have allowed it to work (off the top of my head).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: lmitzel on March 19, 2018, 03:19:37 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 19, 2018, 02:57:14 PM
For the CCIWers out there, how will Wheaton fair? They were the 4th best team in the conference and also were in and out of the regional rankings. They lose #2 scorer Samuelson, but return everyone else. Some guy named Francis might be able to carry the load (again). Can they leapfrog NCC and grab a Pool C bid next season? I haven't really looked into Carthage either.

I'd think Wheaton would be a team in contention even without Samuelson as long as Aston Francis keeps doing Aston Francis things and the rest of the team can continue to complement him like they did last year. Carthage is an interesting case. They have those young, talented bigs in Perry and Johnson plus should have a full year of Kienan Baltimore, but the question might be with their backcourt. They lose Derek Mason, but still have Jordan Thomas. If everybody's healthy they'll probably be in the mix too.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on March 19, 2018, 03:31:50 PM

Just very, very quick thoughts on what I see moving into next year for the GL conferences:

OAC: Marietta returns everyone except their PG. John Carroll will be talented but lose some to graduation and I think ONU will drop off a bit despite returning Bruns. Way to early favorite: Marietta

MIAA: Hope only loses Hawkins and appears have a lot of really young talented pieces. Olivet also will be tough again next year but Hope is certainly the team to beat again next year. Hope's my early favorite.

AMCC: La Roche loses their big guy and a guard but will be a contender again but Behrend brings the entire cast back. Behrend is a team to watch next year. My pick: Behrend

PAC: Thomas More leaves the conference so this one opens up for someone new to take the crown. St. Vincent graduated a ton of talent and will need to rebuild as well. This conference is wide open next year. My pick: *shrugs*

NCAC: Wittenberg was supposed to be the favorite next year, not this year. A lot of young guys got a lot of experience winning basketball games this year. That will pay dividends next year as well. Witt is the pick.

HCAC: Hanover lose McKinney and Buck...MSJ loses Finley which is a big piece. Hulman brings back most everyone. This could be another tight race with multiple teams in it. My pick: Hanover

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 19, 2018, 03:58:27 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 19, 2018, 02:46:52 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 19, 2018, 02:20:16 PM
Quote from: rlgyank on March 19, 2018, 02:07:17 PM
As a Nebraska Wesleyan fan and an IIAC fan, I would throw Loras in there as a pre season top 25 team for next year. They only lose 1 senior. He was a starter but was not a major contributor, at least stats wise. I don't know about his leadership and things like that.

They should probably get some consideration for the top 25 in the season ending poll this year also.

Among those Loras returnees is All-Region second-team guard Josh Ruggles, who averaged 22.4 ppg and 4.7 rpg and had an assist:turnover ratio of nearly 3:1. If the d3hoops.com guys don't put Ruggles on their preseason All-American list next fall, then they're not doing their jobs. His running mate Ryan DeCario overaged 17.8 and 7.1. The Duhawks will be heard from next season.

One team that hasn't been mentioned thus far that really intrigues me is New Jersey City. The Gothic Knights, who made the D3 tourney field this month as an at-large, will return every player of consequence from this season's team, including All-American Sam Toney (20.6 and 9.7) and All-NJAC pick Lavonne Green (14.3). Don't sleep on the Knights.

Like they did in the 1st round? ::) :o ;D

That was this year. Next year is next year.

Thirty-two teams lost in the first round this month. That doesn't mean that they're all doomed to failure next season.

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 19, 2018, 02:57:14 PMFor the CCIWers out there, how will Wheaton fair? They were the 4th best team in the conference and also were in and out of the regional rankings. They lose #2 scorer Samuelson, but return everyone else. Some guy named Francis might be able to carry the load (again). Can they leapfrog NCC and grab a Pool C bid next season? I haven't really looked into Carthage either.

Samuelson is a big loss. He would've been third in the nation in trey percentage if he'd made six more of them; somewhere in that gargantuan number of attempted treys by Francis should've been the dozen attempts he could've spared for Samuelson so that his running mate could've ranked among D3's official leaders. Samuelson came into the league as nothing more than a spot-up shooter with a quick release, but he left as a very well-rounded player who could score off the dribble or via cuts as well.

The other problems for Wheaton moving forward are getting consistent play out of their rotating cast of centers (Peterson, Spencer, Gunter, and Alioth) and finding a useful third guard, assuming that Michael Kvam will take the place of departing Luke Peters at the point, to spell Francis and Kvam.

Carthage returns an incredible amount of size in the low post in a pair of contrasting 6'11 guys, the endomorphic Brad Perry and the ectomorphic Sean Johnson. Thing is, Bosko Djurickovic can't play the two of them together. He doesn't really need to, as he has a rising star at PF in 6'5 Kienen Baltimore, and he's got a good shooting guard in 5'11 Jordan Thomas. But he really needs a PG; he might hand that job to inexperienced rising sophomore T.J. Best, and he might not. He doesn't have a lot of experienced guards, period. And he loses his do-everything small forward Brad Kruse, who was probably the most complete player in the CCIW this past season. The Red Men have some holes to fill.

Right now, I might give the nod for third place to Elmhurst. But a lot can (and will) change between now and November.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 19, 2018, 04:27:11 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 19, 2018, 03:08:14 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 19, 2018, 03:06:01 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 19, 2018, 03:02:42 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 19, 2018, 02:57:14 PM
I feel bad for Whitworth. They'll again play in the shadow of Whitman and their stock will fall in the fantasy leagues because of that. They return everyone and, I'm assuming, they'll get Lester back as well. The NCAA has to find out a way to separate the Whits the 1st weekend.

From what I have learned for weeks... the men's committee really, really wanted to split the Whits, but basically got handcuffed by the fact there were no schools who put into bid in Texas. The trickle-down affect of that was too much for the committee to overcome, understandably. However, there were strong indications they had planned to split them.

What would help is if both beefed up their criteria to help make the argument more than just a Top 25 one.

So basically, we should just blame the Texas schools. ;D

Basically... yes. I am quite confident if one Texas school had put in to host... Whitworth would have at least been flown out and they would have made it work. There was some talk (I really can't say much more) that the NCAA was restricting things to three flights, the committee wanted more and got four. Three flights would have allowed it to work (off the top of my head).

The impression I got from my "gleaning" was that it's really in Whitman's court (or at least was this year) - if they hadn't put into host, they wouldn't have been in the same pod as Whitworth. They're essentially choosing whether they want to go on the road or potentially play Whitworth.

Of course, they haven't actually had to play each other in the tournament two straight years now, so maybe it's less of an issue.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on March 19, 2018, 05:10:21 PM

Provokes the strategy of no one of the geographical outliers bidding to host next year so that every one flies. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 19, 2018, 05:29:23 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 19, 2018, 04:27:11 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 19, 2018, 03:08:14 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 19, 2018, 03:06:01 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 19, 2018, 03:02:42 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 19, 2018, 02:57:14 PM
I feel bad for Whitworth. They'll again play in the shadow of Whitman and their stock will fall in the fantasy leagues because of that. They return everyone and, I'm assuming, they'll get Lester back as well. The NCAA has to find out a way to separate the Whits the 1st weekend.

From what I have learned for weeks... the men's committee really, really wanted to split the Whits, but basically got handcuffed by the fact there were no schools who put into bid in Texas. The trickle-down affect of that was too much for the committee to overcome, understandably. However, there were strong indications they had planned to split them.

What would help is if both beefed up their criteria to help make the argument more than just a Top 25 one.

So basically, we should just blame the Texas schools. ;D

Basically... yes. I am quite confident if one Texas school had put in to host... Whitworth would have at least been flown out and they would have made it work. There was some talk (I really can't say much more) that the NCAA was restricting things to three flights, the committee wanted more and got four. Three flights would have allowed it to work (off the top of my head).

The impression I got from my "gleaning" was that it's really in Whitman's court (or at least was this year) - if they hadn't put into host, they wouldn't have been in the same pod as Whitworth. They're essentially choosing whether they want to go on the road or potentially play Whitworth.

Of course, they haven't actually had to play each other in the tournament two straight years now, so maybe it's less of an issue.

I'm pretty sure I'm putting in a bid to host every year even if, heaven forbid, I have the possibility to play Whitworth in the 2nd round. Whitworth returns everyone, so who's to say Whitworth will be better than Whitman next year. I suppose we won't find that out for awhile!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 19, 2018, 05:40:22 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 19, 2018, 05:29:23 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 19, 2018, 04:27:11 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 19, 2018, 03:08:14 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 19, 2018, 03:06:01 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 19, 2018, 03:02:42 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 19, 2018, 02:57:14 PM
I feel bad for Whitworth. They'll again play in the shadow of Whitman and their stock will fall in the fantasy leagues because of that. They return everyone and, I'm assuming, they'll get Lester back as well. The NCAA has to find out a way to separate the Whits the 1st weekend.

From what I have learned for weeks... the men's committee really, really wanted to split the Whits, but basically got handcuffed by the fact there were no schools who put into bid in Texas. The trickle-down affect of that was too much for the committee to overcome, understandably. However, there were strong indications they had planned to split them.

What would help is if both beefed up their criteria to help make the argument more than just a Top 25 one.

So basically, we should just blame the Texas schools. ;D

Basically... yes. I am quite confident if one Texas school had put in to host... Whitworth would have at least been flown out and they would have made it work. There was some talk (I really can't say much more) that the NCAA was restricting things to three flights, the committee wanted more and got four. Three flights would have allowed it to work (off the top of my head).

The impression I got from my "gleaning" was that it's really in Whitman's court (or at least was this year) - if they hadn't put into host, they wouldn't have been in the same pod as Whitworth. They're essentially choosing whether they want to go on the road or potentially play Whitworth.

Of course, they haven't actually had to play each other in the tournament two straight years now, so maybe it's less of an issue.

I'm pretty sure I'm putting in a bid to host every year even if, heaven forbid, I have the possibility to play Whitworth in the 2nd round. Whitworth returns everyone, so who's to say Whitworth will be better than Whitman next year. I suppose we won't find that out for awhile!

None of the three Texas schools put in to host - we heard rumor that was a strategic decision because they didn't want to play each other. I'm sure there are pros and cons to both strategies.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 19, 2018, 06:11:32 PM

First off.. the rumor was just that... a rumor. It came certainly from those who have experience in these things, but they were speculating and not basing it on anything but their experience. I talked to sources in Texas: the schools did not team up and not put in to host as a plan. The Texas schools happened to not put in bidding papers.

Not sure what you were able to glean, Ryan, but I did not get that impression at all from my conversations with people. The committee was very interested in moving the two apart from one another AND having Whitman host at the same time. I think if one of the Texas schools could have hosted (say Schreiner) it would have worked out perfectly from the committee's point of view. I do NOT think there is any indication that either Whit should NOT put in to host. I think it is a double-edged sword.

I also think it depends on the national committee. There are times in the past that no hosts seem available and the committee has called on a school to host despite the lack of paperwork. I can think of a few occasions in the second round, for example. However, in recent years the committees have seemed to decide they aren't going to reward schools who forget to do their due diligence nor are they going to arrange brackets and make decisions that could benefit others when not everyone is doing their jobs - as it where.

If both Whits don't put in to host, they very well could solve the bracketing problem... but they also force the idea of traveling back and forth from Washington three weekends in a row if that successful. That can wear a program out. They also risk leaving their home fans wanting and having to watch games at different times far away from their own homes. While the idea is novel and could result in some interesting ideas... I don't think it necessarily is in the best interest of those involved.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TheOsprey on March 19, 2018, 08:29:44 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 19, 2018, 02:46:52 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 19, 2018, 02:20:16 PM
Quote from: rlgyank on March 19, 2018, 02:07:17 PM
As a Nebraska Wesleyan fan and an IIAC fan, I would throw Loras in there as a pre season top 25 team for next year. They only lose 1 senior. He was a starter but was not a major contributor, at least stats wise. I don't know about his leadership and things like that.

They should probably get some consideration for the top 25 in the season ending poll this year also.

Among those Loras returnees is All-Region second-team guard Josh Ruggles, who averaged 22.4 ppg and 4.7 rpg and had an assist:turnover ratio of nearly 3:1. If the d3hoops.com guys don't put Ruggles on their preseason All-American list next fall, then they're not doing their jobs. His running mate Ryan DeCario overaged 17.8 and 7.1. The Duhawks will be heard from next season.

One team that hasn't been mentioned thus far that really intrigues me is New Jersey City. The Gothic Knights, who made the D3 tourney field this month as an at-large, will return every player of consequence from this season's team, including All-American Sam Toney (20.6 and 9.7) and All-NJAC pick Lavonne Green (14.3). Don't sleep on the Knights.

Like they did in the 1st round? ::) :o ;D

Like UWO vs Hope LAST year. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on March 20, 2018, 12:30:36 AM

MIAC is laking a clear cut favorite or a great returning roster that will fight for a top 25 preseason selection, especially given the current landscape of D3 and some of the loaded rosters for next year.

- St. Olaf was quite the surprise this year, as they were picked to be 8th (I think...) in the preseason poll and ended up 2nd with an At-Large bid into the NCAA tourney. They lose their best all-around player, Robert Tobroxen who was great on both ends of the court, but return everyone else. I think they will probably be the MIAC favorite for next season and may even sneak into the bottom of some peoples preseason top 25, but for some reason I just can't fully buy into the Oles, even though they keep proving me wrong!

- The Johnnies lose a lot, especially C Tyler Weiss, but return enough players to be very good again next year. After a disappointing Junior year, if David Stokman finds his Sophomore year form Johnnies could find their way into the top 25 next year. They have a lot of talent on that roster still, especially in Jubie Alade who appears capable of taking on an expanded role next year after two very solid years of being an "instant offense" 6th man.

- Bethel could also play their way into the top 25 if things go right for the Royals next year. They return their 3 best players, but lose two seniors who were good players and they were not deep last year. Probably 3rd on my list in the MIAC, but they always seem to be in the mix as of late come February.

- Augsburg had a very good year, being in the Pool C discussion before winning the MIAC playoff, but this was largely attributed to 1st Team All-American Collin Olmsheid. He will be a tough one to replace... I think they will be alright, but no where near the top 25 mix like they were this year.

- UST can reload in a hurry and always bring in solid bball players year after year, but they need to prove that before they are in this top 25 discussion again.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on March 20, 2018, 12:51:42 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 18, 2018, 05:49:27 PM
Quote from: AndOne on March 18, 2018, 05:45:09 PM
Will NWU be voted #1 in the final poll? Should they be?

Yes and yes. They were more than impressive. Oshkosh was incredible; they broke or tied just about all the final four 3pt records in the championship game and still came up short. That's a well earned victory - plus when you add in Platteville and Whitman, that's plenty of resume to make up for the non-conference schedule.

What's more impressive is how the guys handled themselves. Rarely do you see a team so even keeled and unflappable, even moreso when they're as young as these guys are. Immediately after the game was over, to a man, they were all talking about getting better for next year and winning more titles. It didn't feel like they'd achieved a goal so much as just done what they expected to do. Pretty impressive.

Final Top 25 Poll does indeed have NWU as #1

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2017-18/final

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on March 20, 2018, 12:02:55 PM

It seems that in the locker room at Platteville before the Whitman game, NWU Coach Dale Wellman wrote a message on the board;

To be the best, we have to beat the best.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on March 20, 2018, 12:22:40 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on March 19, 2018, 02:09:39 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 19, 2018, 01:19:37 PM
I'd be curious to know if there's ever been a Hope-to-Calvin men's basketball transfer, or vice-versa.

Quote from: gordonmann on March 19, 2018, 01:39:13 PM
Siblings Carrie Snikkers (Hope) and Tom Snikkers (Calvin) is the best I can come up with, though the Verkaik sisters who played at Calvin were babysitters for Hope Coach Brian Morehouse.

Going back to the mid-2000s, Dustin Smith played football at Hope for a year then transferred to Calvin to play basketball for the remainder of his career.

Tom Morrison, on Calvin's current roster, went to Hope for a year as part of their JV basketball team. He transferred to Calvin and now plays with his younger brother.

I'm sure there are several others that I've forgotten or was unaware of.

Tom Morrison was actually at Hope for two years.

Hope AD Ryan Schoonveld originally attended Calvin before an injury sidelined him. He took a year or two off and finished out at Hope though he did not play basketball.

I think I remember Ryan Klein (mid/lates '00's) actually spent a week at Calvin before enrolling at Hope his Fr. year. Might have that wrong though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 20, 2018, 01:59:45 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 19, 2018, 06:11:32 PM
First off.. the rumor was just that... a rumor. It came certainly from those who have experience in these things, but they were speculating and not basing it on anything but their experience. I talked to sources in Texas: the schools did not team up and not put in to host as a plan. The Texas schools happened to not put in bidding papers.

Not sure what you were able to glean, Ryan, but I did not get that impression at all from my conversations with people. The committee was very interested in moving the two apart from one another AND having Whitman host at the same time. I think if one of the Texas schools could have hosted (say Schreiner) it would have worked out perfectly from the committee's point of view. I do NOT think there is any indication that either Whit should NOT put in to host. I think it is a double-edged sword.

I also think it depends on the national committee. There are times in the past that no hosts seem available and the committee has called on a school to host despite the lack of paperwork. I can think of a few occasions in the second round, for example. However, in recent years the committees have seemed to decide they aren't going to reward schools who forget to do their due diligence nor are they going to arrange brackets and make decisions that could benefit others when not everyone is doing their jobs - as it where.

If both Whits don't put in to host, they very well could solve the bracketing problem... but they also force the idea of traveling back and forth from Washington three weekends in a row if that successful. That can wear a program out. They also risk leaving their home fans wanting and having to watch games at different times far away from their own homes. While the idea is novel and could result in some interesting ideas... I don't think it necessarily is in the best interest of those involved.

I have not been in Schreiner's gym, but had Schreiner (13-12 regular season and 15-12 pre-NCAA record) put in the bid, then SRSU and LeTU could have been bussed.

SRSU in Alpine (which has a very nice gym, the Gallego Center) would have require 2 flights. (It is almost equidistant from LeTU in Longview Tx to Atlanta GA, Emory, and Alpine TX, SRSU, > 600 miles)

I have been in LeTU's gym, but my impression is that UT-Tyler, UTD, UMHB, HSU, McMurry, Howard Payne, Louisiana College and possibly even Concordia TX in the ASC have better facilities, and meeting criteria to host (just my humble opinion).

So we have one flight from someone to Texas, and then 2 more flights into Washington.

CMS made sure to prevent the Whitworth-Whitman rematch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 20, 2018, 02:05:25 PM

Schreiner would have been the solution. CMS didn't do anything to the bracket to force anything because a California school was coming out no matter what the equation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 20, 2018, 07:53:04 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 20, 2018, 02:05:25 PM
Schreiner would have been the solution. CMS didn't do anything to the bracket to force anything because a California school was coming out no matter what the equation.

Thanks for the comment.

If we have the Schreiner bracket, then we have 2 ASC teams who can bus to Kerrville TX and we fly in Whitworth:

"South #7" Schreiner (15-12) playing South #2 Sul Ross State (22-6 from the ASC-West)

West #2 Whitworth (24-3) playing South #3 LeTourneau (23-4 from the ASC-East) who lost at Sul Ross 92-82 in the regular season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 21, 2018, 11:04:27 AM

Most likely, Ralph. CMS goes to Whitman and they fly two teams in there... it is still four flights, but a bracket we (including the cmte) would rather have had.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 22, 2018, 12:04:47 PM

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.psbin.com%2Fo%2F3%2F2rl1ni3j1za5w6%2FHoopsville-3-22-18.jpg&hash=6ac6c4ab5f0e502c4567955de394f1478a9241e1)

The 2017-18 season is now complete. Congratulations to Nebraska Wesleyan and Amherst on their Division III national championships!

However, there is still some business to take care of ... we need to wrap up the season on Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com).

Tune in Thursday, March 22 as Dave McHugh is joined by a few guests as we look back at the Championship Weekends along with looking ahead at what should be a busy off-season and exciting 2018-19 season.

Plus, it what may be surprising to some and expected from others, we talk to the now-retiring Mark Edwards of WashU men's basketball. We chat about 37 incredible years and why he feels it is time to walk off the court for good.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch the show LIVE starting at 2:00 p.m. ET on Thursday in the video player above.

If you have questions, be sure to email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or interact with the show via the social media avenues.

Guests include (in order of appearance; subject to change):
- Mark Edwards, No. 15 WashU men's head coach
- Dale Wellman, No. 1 Nebraska Wesleyan head coach (from Sunday's postgame show)
- Tim Fitzpatrick, Coast Guard AD and men's basketball committee chair (from Sunday's postgame show)
- Gordon Mann interview with Emma McCarthy, No. 1 Amherst sophomore forward
- Max Pearce, SUNY Purchase Senior guard participating in the State Farm College Slam Dunk Championship in San Antonio
- Nathan Dennison, VP of Sales at Allen County War Memorial Coliseum, Fort Wayne, Ind. (from Sunday's postgame show)

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts instead, you can get access to them or subscribe one of the three following ways (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on September 20, 2018, 10:52:19 AM

Since we are three and half weeks til preseason starts and the season starts a week earlier this year; is the preseason top 25 poll going to come out any earlier than around Nov 1, as it did last year?

You know we're all itching for b ball to begin. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on September 20, 2018, 11:23:31 AM

Quote from: mailsy on September 20, 2018, 10:52:19 AM
Since we are three and half weeks til preseason starts and the season starts a week earlier this year; is the preseason top 25 poll going to come out any earlier than around Nov 1, as it did last year?

You know we're all itching for b ball to begin. ;D

Probably. We're making a final push for help from schools in posting schedules and then we can really move on preseason stuff.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 29, 2018, 05:53:31 PM

If I had to submit a ballot for the D3hoops.com Preseason Top 25 poll at this early stage (Sept 29), it would look something like this...

(Top three returning scorers for each team noted.)

#1) Nebraska Wesleyan (30-3, 13-3 IIAC, IIAC Champ, NCAA National Championship)
* Cooper Cook, 6-5 Sr F; 16.8 ppg, 5.8 rpg
* Ryan Garver; 6-3 Sr G; 14.2 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 4.6 apg
* Jack Hiller; 6-6 Jr G; 13.5 ppg, 4.3 rpg

#2) Springfield (22-9, 12-2 NEWMAC, NEWMAC Champ; NCAA National Semifinal Game)
* Jake Ross, 6-4 Jr G; 24.8 ppg, 9.8 ppg, 4.3 rpg
* Heath Post, 6-6 Jr F; 12.6 ppg, 9.2 rpg, 2.1 apg
* Cam Earle, 6-5 Sr G; 9.4 ppg, 2.6 rpg

#3) UW-Oshkosh (25-8, 9-5 WIAC, WIAC 3rd, NCAA National Runner Up)
* Ben Boots, 6-1 Sr G; 16.0 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 4.4 apg
* Jack Flynn, 6-8 Jr C; 12.8 ppg, 7.0 rpg
* Adam Fravert, 6-8 Jr F; 12.3 ppg, 7.5 rpg, 2.9 apg

#4) Augustana (25-6, 12-4 CCIW, CCIW Co-Champ, NCAA 4th Round)
* Nolan Ebel, 6-1 Sr G; 16.4 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 3.8 apg
* Chrishawn Orange, 6-2 Sr G; 15.6 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 2.5 apg
* Brett Benning, 6-6 Sr G; 10.7 ppg, 5.0 rpg
(*Pierson Wofford, 6-4 Jr F; 14.7 ppg, 11.7 rpg, 3.0 apg[/i]; 3 games/injured)

#5) Williams (23-6, 7-3 NESCAC, NESCAC Co-champ, NCAA 2nd Round)
* James Heskett, 6-8 Sr F; 19.3 ppg, 3.7 rpg
* Kyle Scadlock, 6-8 Sr F; 18.0 ppg, 8.6 rpg, 2.3 apg
* Bobby Casey, 6-3 Sr G; 15.8 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 2.1 apg

#6) Swarthmore (25-6, 15-3 CC, CC Co-champ, NCAA 4th Round)
* Cam Wiley, 6-0 Sr G; 16.3 ppg, 4.4 rpg
* Zac O'Dell, 6-7 Jr F; 10.6 ppg, 8.2 rpg
* Nate Shafer, 6-6 Jr F; 9.7 ppg, 6.4 rpg

#7) UW-Platteville (24-5, 12-2 WIAC, WIAC Champ, NCAA 3rd Round)
* Robert Duax, 6-4 Sr F; 15.8 ppg, 4.6 rpg, 2.2 apg
* Carter Voelker, 6-3 Jr G; 10.3 ppg, 3.7 rpg, 2.2 apg
* Quentin Shields, 5-8 So G; 10.2 ppg, 3.2 rpg

#8) Hamilton (24-5, 7-3 NESCAC, NESCAC Co-Champ, NCAA 3rd Round
* Kena Gimour, 6-3 Jr G; 18.5 ppg, 7.2 rpg
* Peter Hoffman, 6-5 Sr F; 13.9 ppg, 5.0 rpg
* Michael Grassey, 6-4 Sr F; 12.8 ppg, 7.1 rpg

#9) MIT (25-6, 10-4 NEWMAC, NEWMAC Co-champ; NCAA 4th Round)
* Bradley Jomard, 6-6 Sr G; 15.5 ppg, 5.4 rpg, 6.0 apg
* AJ Jurko, 6-3 Sr G; 14.2 ppg; 4.7 rpg, 5.9 apg
* Cameron Korb, 6-1 Sr G; 14.0 ppg, 3.0 rpg

#10) Whitman (29-2, 16-0 NWC, NWC Champ, NCAA 4th Round)
* Joey Hewitt, 6-2 Sr G; 16.9 ppg, 4.5 rpg
* Darne Duckett, 5-11 So G; 10.3 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 2.9 apg
* Trevor Osborne, 6-2 Jr F; 9.7 ppg, 3.6 rpg

#11) Illinois Wesleyan (19-8, 12-4 CCIW, CCIW Co-champ, NCAA 1st Round)
* Brady Rose, 6-3 Sr G; 21.4 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 3.1 apg
* Colin Bonnett, 6-4 Sr G; 12.3 ppg, 2.8 rpg, 2.6 apg
* Alex O'Neil, 6-9 Jr C; 9.2 ppg, 5.5 rpg

#12) Plattsburgh State (24-5, 17-1 SUNYAC, SUNYAC Champ, NCAA 3rd Round)
* Jonathan Patron, 6-2 Sr F; 23.7 ppg, 10.4 rpg
* Brandon Johnson, 5-10 Sr G; 8.8 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 2.6 apg
* Nick DeAngelis, 6-4 Jr G; 8.1 ppg, 2.2 rpg

#13) Whitworth (24-4, 14-2 NWC, NWC 2nd, NCAA 1st Round
* Kyle Roach, 6-5 Sr G; 18.7 ppg, 5.2 rpg, 3.8 apg
* Ben College, 6-1 Jr G; 16.5 ppg, 2.1 apg
* Jordan Lester, 6-2 Sr G; 15.7 ppg, 5.3 rpg, 4.6 apg

#14) UW-Stevens Point (21-9, 11-3 WIAC, WIAC 2nd, NCAA 3rd Round)
* Nate Dodge, 6-3 Sr G; 11.6 ppg, 3.1 rpg
* Canon O'Heron, 6-5 Sr F; 10.9 ppg, 3.4 rpg
* Drew Frederickson, 6-0 Sr G; 7.9 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 2.2 apg
(Ethan Bublitz, 6-2 Sr G; returning from injury)

#15) Loras (19-7, 12-4 IIAC, IIAC 2nd, NCAA n/a)
* Josh Ruggles, 6-2 Sr G; 22.4 ppg, 4.7 rpg, 3.5 apg
* Ryan Dicanio, 6-3 Sr G; 17.8 ppg, 7.1 rpg, 4.7 apg
* Rowan McGowen, 6-4 So G; 10.5 ppg, 3.2 rpg

#16) Marietta (21-7, 14-4 OAC, OAC Co-champ, NCAA 1st Round
* Kyle Dixon, 6-3 Sr G; 14.3 ppg, 3.7 rpg, 3.8 apg
* Anthony Wallace, 6-2 Sr G; 12.9 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 2.0 apg
* Avery Williams, 6-7 Sr F; 11.6 ppg, 7.5 rpg

#17) Wittenberg (27-3, 16-2 NCAC, NCAC Champ, NCAA 2nd Round)
* Mitchell Balser, 6-0 Sr G; 12.2 ppg, 3.2 ppg, 3.5 apg
* Connor Seipel, 6-6 Jr F; 11.0 ppg, 6.8 rpg
* Jacob Bertemes, 5-11 Jr G; 11.0 ppg, 2.4 ppg, 3.2 apg

#18) Emory (23-5, 12-2 UAA, UAA 2nd, NCAA 3rd Round)
* Romin Williams, 5-9 So G; 15.1 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 2.6 apg
* Gebereal Baitey, 6-2 Sr G; 11.0 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 2.8 apg
* Matt Davet, 6-7 So F; 8.4 ppg, 3.1 rpg

#19) Middlebury (21-7, 7-3 NESCAC, NESCAC Co-champ, NCAA 3rd Round)
* Matt Folger, 6-8 Jr F; 13.7 ppg, 6.9 rpg
* Eric McCord, 6-7 Sr F; 8.5 ppg, 6.8 rpg
* Jack Farrell, 6-1 So G; 8.3 ppg, 3.0 rpg

#20) Johns Hopkins (24-5, 15-3 CC, CC Champ, NCAA 2nd Round)
* Michael Gardner, 6-2 Sr G; 14.2 ppg, 4.1 rpg
* Conner Delaney, 6-0 So G; 10.7 ppg, 3.6 rpg
* Joey Kern, 6-1 So G; 8.9 ppg, 2.9 rpg

#21) St. John's (23-4, 19-1 MIAC, MIAC Champ, NCAA 1st Round)
* David Stokman, 6-2 Sr G; 13.8 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 3.2 rpg
* Jubie Alade, 6-4 Jr F; 11.0 ppg, 3.4 rpg
* Lucas Walford, 6-8 Jr C; 9.0 ppg, 9.3 rpg

#22) St. Olaf (20-8, 15-5 MIAC, MIAC 2nd, NCAA 2nd Round)
* Austin Korba, 6-5 Sr F; 14.1 ppg, 5.6 rpg
* Nate Albers, 6-3 Jr G; 12.5 ppg, 3.4 rpg
* Dominic Bledsoe, 6-0 So G; 10.0 ppg, 2.5 rpg

#23) Wooster (22-7, 14-4 NCAC, NCAC 2nd, NCAA 2nd Round)
* Danyon Hempy, 6-5 Jr G; 15.0 ppg, 3.7 rpg
* Reece Dupler, 6-2 Sr G; 14.4 ppg, 4.3 rpg
* Blake Blair, 6-2 Sr G; 7.5 ppg, 3.8 rpg

#24) Hope (19-10, 10-4 MIAA, MIAA Co-champ; NCAA 2nd Round)
* Jason Beckman, 5-11 Sr G; 22.3 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 3.1 apg
* Preston Granger, 6-6 So C; 9.8 ppg, 4.6 rpg
* Teddy Ray, 6-5 Sr F; 9.7 ppg, 7.4 rpg

#25) Wesleyan (22-7, 7-3 NESCAC, NESCAC Co-champ; NCAA 2nd Round)
* Jordan Bonner, 6-4 Sr G; 15.5 ppg, 4.7 rpg
* Austin Hutcherson, 6-6 So G; 12.0 ppg, 3.7 rpg, 2.7 apg
* Antone Walker, 6-0 So G; 7.6 ppg
------------------------
First Two Out:

#26) Bethel (21-7, 14-6 MIAC, MIAC 3rd; NCAA n/a)
* Granger Kingland, 6-4 Jr G; 14.4 ppg, 6.3 rpg
* Matt Ambriz, 6-2 Sr G; 13.1 ppg, 2.6 rpg
* Jack Jenson, 6-1 Jr G; 11.4 ppg, 4.9 rpg

#27) Maryville TN (22-7, 14-2 USAC, USAC Champ; NCAA 1st Round)
* Dante Hoppa, 6-5 Sr. F; 12.7 ppg, 5.1 ppg, 2.2 apg
* Calvin Songster, 6-2 Sr G; 12.7 ppg, 2.6 ppg, 2.5 apg
* Emier Bowman, 6-3 Sr F; 12.1 ppg, 6.7 rpg

There are many teams I'd keep an eye on outside of the 27 above. That list would include, but certainly not be limited to: New Jersey City; Washington U (re-loading with a very talented nucleus); North Central and Wheaton from the CCIW; UW-Whitewater; and Amherst.

I'm sure I am missing a few legit Top 25 contenders above. Any thoughts on who those are?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on September 30, 2018, 09:22:44 AM

UChicago may be ORV by December with the potential for a Top 25 ranking if they can get it done against a relatively tough schedule.

IWU on the road to start the season.
Claremont Mudd Scripps (not sure how good they are this season) and Ohio Wesleyan or Springfield at home.
Lake Forest on the road. (not sure how good they are this season)
Wheaton on the road.

I think they have a legitimate shot to knock off a few of these teams. They lose two good players who had great senior campaigns, but they currently have 4-5 seniors who have the potential to be great.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 30, 2018, 09:28:36 AM

Quote from: WUPHF on September 30, 2018, 09:22:44 AM
UChicago may be ORV by December with the potential for a Top 25 ranking if they can get it done against a relatively tough schedule.

IWU on the road to start the season.
Claremont Mudd Scripps (not sure how good they are this season) and Ohio Wesleyan or Springfield at home.
Lake Forest on the road. (not sure how good they are this season)
Wheaton on the road.

I think they have a legitimate shot to knock off a few of these teams. They lose two good players who had great senior campaigns, but they currently have 4-5 seniors who have the potential to be great.

I believe CMS graduated their top 2-3 guys.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 30, 2018, 09:31:47 AM

I looked at the UAA pretty closely as it seems like the league should have 2 Top 25 teams. Emory seems like the top pick. But after that I couldn't figure out who the second should be.

I think Wash U will emerge as that team. Jack Nolan is an absolutely stud and the Hardy kid (freshman) is a scholarship level player too. But hard to rank Wash U in the preseason.

Maybe Chicago emerges as a Top 25 team...obviously hard to rank the Maroons in preseason.

Wash U just picked up a D1-caliber recruit for next year - Boehm. Juckem is rolling.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on September 30, 2018, 10:22:12 AM

Chicago does have a freshman guard who had two Division I scholarship offers. Time will tell with the Maroons.

Otherwise, I could not agree more about the UAA and Washington University. The league may only have one ranked team by the end of the season though. I do expect a lot of carnage.

As good as Jack Nolan, I do think the story for the Bears will be the combination of Nolan and Matt Nester. Fans who watched their first round loss caught a glimpse. He is certainly going to lead the league in assists this season.

Admittedly, I want to see signing day come and go before I celebrate the Boehm announcement, but yeah, that is big.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: irapthor on September 30, 2018, 12:11:56 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on September 29, 2018, 05:53:31 PM
If I had to submit a ballot for the D3hoops.com Preseason Top 25 poll at this early stage (Sept 29), it would look something like this...

(Top three returning scorers for each team noted.)

#1) Nebraska Wesleyan (30-3, 13-3 IIAC, IIAC Champ, NCAA National Championship)
* Cooper Cook, 6-5 Sr F; 16.8 ppg, 5.8 rpg
* Ryan Garver; 6-3 Sr G; 14.2 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 4.6 apg
* Jack Hiller; 6-6 Jr G; 13.5 ppg, 4.3 rpg

#2) Springfield (22-9, 12-2 NEWMAC, NEWMAC Champ; NCAA National Semifinal Game)
* Jake Ross, 6-4 Jr G; 24.8 ppg, 9.8 ppg, 4.3 rpg
* Heath Post, 6-6 Jr F; 12.6 ppg, 9.2 rpg, 2.1 apg
* Cam Earle, 6-5 Sr G; 9.4 ppg, 2.6 rpg

#3) UW-Oshkosh (25-8, 9-5 WIAC, WIAC 3rd, NCAA National Runner Up)
* Ben Boots, 6-1 Sr G; 16.0 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 4.4 apg
* Jack Flynn, 6-8 Jr C; 12.8 ppg, 7.0 rpg
* Adam Fravert, 6-8 Jr F; 12.3 ppg, 7.5 rpg, 2.9 apg

#4) Augustana (25-6, 12-4 CCIW, CCIW Co-Champ, NCAA 4th Round)
* Nolan Ebel, 6-1 Sr G; 16.4 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 3.8 apg
* Chrishawn Orange, 6-2 Sr G; 15.6 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 2.5 apg
* Brett Benning, 6-6 Sr G; 10.7 ppg, 5.0 rpg
(*Pierson Wofford, 6-4 Jr F; 14.7 ppg, 11.7 rpg, 3.0 apg[/i]; 3 games/injured)

#5) Williams (23-6, 7-3 NESCAC, NESCAC Co-champ, NCAA 2nd Round)
* James Heskett, 6-8 Sr F; 19.3 ppg, 3.7 rpg
* Kyle Scadlock, 6-8 Sr F; 18.0 ppg, 8.6 rpg, 2.3 apg
* Bobby Casey, 6-3 Sr G; 15.8 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 2.1 apg

#6) Swarthmore (25-6, 15-3 CC, CC Co-champ, NCAA 4th Round)
* Cam Wiley, 6-0 Sr G; 16.3 ppg, 4.4 rpg
* Zac O'Dell, 6-7 Jr F; 10.6 ppg, 8.2 rpg
* Nate Shafer, 6-6 Jr F; 9.7 ppg, 6.4 rpg

#7) UW-Platteville (24-5, 12-2 WIAC, WIAC Champ, NCAA 3rd Round)
* Robert Duax, 6-4 Sr F; 15.8 ppg, 4.6 rpg, 2.2 apg
* Carter Voelker, 6-3 Jr G; 10.3 ppg, 3.7 rpg, 2.2 apg
* Quentin Shields, 5-8 So G; 10.2 ppg, 3.2 rpg

#8) Hamilton (24-5, 7-3 NESCAC, NESCAC Co-Champ, NCAA 3rd Round
* Kena Gimour, 6-3 Jr G; 18.5 ppg, 7.2 rpg
* Peter Hoffman, 6-5 Sr F; 13.9 ppg, 5.0 rpg
* Michael Grassey, 6-4 Sr F; 12.8 ppg, 7.1 rpg

#9) MIT (25-6, 10-4 NEWMAC, NEWMAC Co-champ; NCAA 4th Round)
* Bradley Jomard, 6-6 Sr G; 15.5 ppg, 5.4 rpg, 6.0 apg
* AJ Jurko, 6-3 Sr G; 14.2 ppg; 4.7 rpg, 5.9 apg
* Cameron Korb, 6-1 Sr G; 14.0 ppg, 3.0 rpg

#10) Whitman (29-2, 16-0 NWC, NWC Champ, NCAA 4th Round)
* Joey Hewitt, 6-2 Sr G; 16.9 ppg, 4.5 rpg
* Darne Duckett, 5-11 So G; 10.3 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 2.9 apg
* Trevor Osborne, 6-2 Jr F; 9.7 ppg, 3.6 rpg

#11) Illinois Wesleyan (19-8, 12-4 CCIW, CCIW Co-champ, NCAA 1st Round)
* Brady Rose, 6-3 Sr G; 21.4 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 3.1 apg
* Colin Bonnett, 6-4 Sr G; 12.3 ppg, 2.8 rpg, 2.6 apg
* Alex O'Neil, 6-9 Jr C; 9.2 ppg, 5.5 rpg

#12) Plattsburgh State (24-5, 17-1 SUNYAC, SUNYAC Champ, NCAA 3rd Round)
* Jonathan Patron, 6-2 Sr F; 23.7 ppg, 10.4 rpg
* Brandon Johnson, 5-10 Sr G; 8.8 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 2.6 apg
* Nick DeAngelis, 6-4 Jr G; 8.1 ppg, 2.2 rpg

#13) Whitworth (24-4, 14-2 NWC, NWC 2nd, NCAA 1st Round
* Kyle Roach, 6-5 Sr G; 18.7 ppg, 5.2 rpg, 3.8 apg
* Ben College, 6-1 Jr G; 16.5 ppg, 2.1 apg
* Jordan Lester, 6-2 Sr G; 15.7 ppg, 5.3 rpg, 4.6 apg

#14) UW-Stevens Point (21-9, 11-3 WIAC, WIAC 2nd, NCAA 3rd Round)
* Nate Dodge, 6-3 Sr G; 11.6 ppg, 3.1 rpg
* Canon O'Heron, 6-5 Sr F; 10.9 ppg, 3.4 rpg
* Drew Frederickson, 6-0 Sr G; 7.9 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 2.2 apg

#15) Loras (19-7, 12-4 IIAC, IIAC 2nd, NCAA n/a)
* Josh Ruggles, 6-2 Sr G; 22.4 ppg, 4.7 rpg, 3.5 apg
* Ryan Dicanio, 6-3 Sr G; 17.8 ppg, 7.1 rpg, 4.7 apg
* Rowan McGowen, 6-4 So G; 10.5 ppg, 3.2 rpg

#16) Marietta (21-7, 14-4 OAC, OAC Co-champ, NCAA 1st Round
* Kyle Dixon, 6-3 Sr G; 14.3 ppg, 3.7 rpg, 3.8 apg
* Anthony Wallace, 6-2 Sr G; 12.9 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 2.0 apg
* Avery Williams, 6-7 Sr F; 11.6 ppg, 7.5 rpg

#17) Wittenberg (27-3, 16-2 NCAC, NCAC Champ, NCAA 2nd Round)
* Mitchell Balser, 6-0 Sr G; 12.2 ppg, 3.2 ppg, 3.5 apg
* Connor Seipel, 6-6 Jr F; 11.0 ppg, 6.8 rpg
* Jacob Bertemes, 5-11 Jr G; 11.0 ppg, 2.4 ppg, 3.2 apg

#18) Emory (23-5, 12-2 UAA, UAA 2nd, NCAA 3rd Round)
* Romin Williams, 5-9 So G; 15.1 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 2.6 apg
* Gebereal Baitey, 6-2 Sr G; 11.0 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 2.8 apg
* Matt Davet, 6-7 So F; 8.4 ppg, 3.1 rpg

#19) Middlebury (21-7, 7-3 NESCAC, NESCAC Co-champ, NCAA 3rd Round)
* Matt Folger, 6-8 Jr F; 13.7 ppg, 6.9 rpg
* Eric McCord, 6-7 Sr F; 8.5 ppg, 6.8 rpg
* Jack Farrell, 6-1 So G; 8.3 ppg, 3.0 rpg

#20) Johns Hopkins (24-5, 15-3 CC, CC Champ, NCAA 2nd Round)
* Michael Gardner, 6-2 Sr G; 14.2 ppg, 4.1 rpg
* Conner Delaney, 6-0 So G; 10.7 ppg, 3.6 rpg
* Joey Kern, 6-1 So G; 8.9 ppg, 2.9 rpg

#21) St. John's (23-4, 19-1 MIAC, MIAC Champ, NCAA 1st Round)
* David Stokman, 6-2 Sr G; 13.8 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 3.2 rpg
* Jubie Alade, 6-4 Jr F; 11.0 ppg, 3.4 rpg
* Lucas Walford, 6-8 Jr C; 9.0 ppg, 9.3 rpg

#22) St. Olaf (20-8, 15-5 MIAC, MIAC 2nd, NCAA 2nd Round)
* Austin Korba, 6-5 Sr F; 14.1 ppg, 5.6 rpg
* Nate Albers, 6-3 Jr G; 12.5 ppg, 3.4 rpg
* Dominic Bledsoe, 6-0 So G; 10.0 ppg, 2.5 rpg

#23) Wooster (22-7, 14-4 NCAC, NCAC 2nd, NCAA 2nd Round)
* Danyon Hempy, 6-5 Jr G; 15.0 ppg, 3.7 rpg
* Reece Dupler, 6-2 Sr G; 14.4 ppg, 4.3 rpg
* Blake Blair, 6-2 Sr G; 7.5 ppg, 3.8 rpg

#24) Hope (19-10, 10-4 MIAA, MIAA Co-champ; NCAA 2nd Round)
* Jason Beckman, 5-11 Sr G; 22.3 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 3.1 apg
* Preston Granger, 6-6 So C; 9.8 ppg, 4.6 rpg
* Teddy Ray, 6-5 Sr F; 9.7 ppg, 7.4 rpg

#25) Wesleyan (22-7, 7-3 NESCAC, NESCAC Co-champ; NCAA 2nd Round)
* Jordan Bonner, 6-4 Sr G; 15.5 ppg, 4.7 rpg
* Austin Hutcherson, 6-6 So G; 12.0 ppg, 3.7 rpg, 2.7 apg
* Antone Walker, 6-0 So G; 7.6 ppg
------------------------
First Two Out:

#26) Bethel (21-7, 14-6 MIAC, MIAC 3rd; NCAA n/a)
* Granger Kingland, 6-4 Jr G; 14.4 ppg, 6.3 rpg
* Matt Ambriz, 6-2 Sr G; 13.1 ppg, 2.6 rpg
* Jack Jenson, 6-1 Jr G; 11.4 ppg, 4.9 rpg

#27) Maryville TN (22-7, 14-2 USAC, USAC Champ; NCAA 1st Round)
* Dante Hoppa, 6-5 Sr. F; 12.7 ppg, 5.1 ppg, 2.2 apg
* Calvin Songster, 6-2 Sr G; 12.7 ppg, 2.6 ppg, 2.5 apg
* Emier Bowman, 6-3 Sr F; 12.1 ppg, 6.7 rpg

There are many teams I'd keep an eye on outside of the 27 above. That list would include, but certainly not be limited to: New Jersey City; Washington U (re-loading with a very talented nucleus); North Central and Wheaton from the CCIW; UW-Whitewater; and Amherst.

I'm sure I am missing a few legit Top 25 contenders above. Any thoughts on who those are?

Hey, I'll tell you this much... NJCU is loaded.... easily the best team we've had since the 1992 Final Four squad... we have all 5 starters back and likely ONLY Sam Toney will be an opening day starter among the five ... we are THAT deep. We a couple of pieces coming at midyear...we lost two letter winners out of 16 players and both were third teamers

We are without a doubt a Top 15 team to start the year.

Also, watch out for Montclair State... they are young but they will be excellent this year. I think they're the one team that could challenge us for the NJAC title this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 30, 2018, 01:05:41 PM

Quote from: irapthor on September 30, 2018, 12:11:56 PM

Hey, I'll tell you this much... NJCU is loaded.... easily the best team we've had since the 1992 Final Four squad... we have all 5 starters back and likely ONLY Sam Toney will be an opening day starter among the five ... we are THAT deep. We a couple of pieces coming at midyear...we lost two letter winners out of 16 players and both were third teamers

We are without a doubt a Top 15 team to start the year.

Also, watch out for Montclair State... they are young but they will be excellent this year. I think they're the one team that could challenge us for the NJAC title this year.

Thanks. That is why I asked...sounds like I missed on NJCU. I will go back and check them out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on September 30, 2018, 01:08:02 PM

Looks pretty solid Titan Q. WIAC will be just brutal this year. I'd probably drop Springfield about ten spots as they lost two key guys from a team that was very thin already. Even though Ross is clearly the best player in the country.

Midd seems a bit high to me too. I'd drop them below Wesleyan to the bottom of top 25-30 after losing Daly and a few quality bigs.

Roanoke seems like a team that merits inclusion. Look like the class of the ODAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 30, 2018, 01:23:54 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on September 30, 2018, 01:08:02 PM
Looks pretty solid Titan Q. WIAC will be just brutal this year. I'd probably drop Springfield about ten spots as they lost two key guys from a team that was very thin already. Even though Ross is clearly the best player in the country.

Midd seems a bit high to me too. I'd drop them below Wesleyan to the bottom of top 25-30 after losing Daly and a few quality bigs.

Roanoke seems like a team that merits inclusion. Look like the class of the ODAC.

Thanks.

So in your opinion, what should be the preseason poll order of the NESCAC candidates?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: coachwilson55555 on September 30, 2018, 01:35:58 PM

Thank you for doing this list! I'm looking forward to the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on September 30, 2018, 01:37:15 PM

Not mentioned as a "top 3 returning scorers" for Stevens Point is the return of Ethan Bublitz who missed all but one game last year. The previous year he led the team in scoring, rebounding, assists and steals, I think.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 30, 2018, 01:43:06 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on September 30, 2018, 01:37:15 PM
Not mentioned as a "top 3 returning scorers" for Stevens Point is the return of Ethan Bublitz who missed all but one game last year. The previous year he led the team in scoring, rebounding, assists and steals, I think.

Thanks. I edited my original post to include Bublitz.

Greek, what is your preseason WIAC order (in terms of poll ranking candidates)?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on September 30, 2018, 02:10:38 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on September 30, 2018, 01:08:02 PM
Looks pretty solid Titan Q. WIAC will be just brutal this year. I'd probably drop Springfield about ten spots as they lost two key guys from a team that was very thin already. Even though Ross is clearly the best player in the country.

Midd seems a bit high to me too. I'd drop them below Wesleyan to the bottom of top 25-30 after losing Daly and a few quality bigs.

Roanoke seems like a team that merits inclusion. Look like the class of the ODAC.

I think it's hard to know if any ODAC team is a top 25 candidate. At this point, probably not. Emory & Henry had the best overall record last season (22-7) and won the conference tournament. W&L seems on the rise under their new coach. Roanoke surprised last season. I don't know what those teams lost to graduation, though. Randolph-Macon has a solid senior class this season and graduated only one last year. Va. Wesleyan is always a team to watch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 30, 2018, 02:33:32 PM

Quote from: y_jack_lok on September 30, 2018, 02:10:38 PM
I think it's hard to know if any ODAC team is a top 25 candidate. At this point, probably not. Emory & Henry had the best overall record last season (22-7) and won the conference tournament. W&L seems on the rise under their new coach. Roanoke surprised last season. I don't know what those teams lost to graduation, though. Randolph-Macon has a solid senior class this season and graduated only one last year. Va. Wesleyan is always a team to watch.

I looked at the ODAC pretty closely, thinking there should be an ODAC team in the Top 25, but I had trouble making a case for one in the preseason.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on September 30, 2018, 02:42:00 PM

My preseason northeast guess goes like this:

Williams, Hamilton, MIT (top ten teams), Springfield (right behind), Wesleyan (top 25).

I think Midd and Keene State are in the 25-35 range but either could break through. Endicott another team to watch. I would not be shocked to see Bowdoin or Amherst in the top 25 at some point especially Amherst because of a ridiculously soft first semester schedule. But I think the middle of Nescac is down a bit and the bottom way up so the records could be pretty bunched up 3-10.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on September 30, 2018, 03:02:11 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on September 30, 2018, 02:33:32 PM
Quote from: y_jack_lok on September 30, 2018, 02:10:38 PM
I think it's hard to know if any ODAC team is a top 25 candidate. At this point, probably not. Emory & Henry had the best overall record last season (22-7) and won the conference tournament. W&L seems on the rise under their new coach. Roanoke surprised last season. I don't know what those teams lost to graduation, though. Randolph-Macon has a solid senior class this season and graduated only one last year. Va. Wesleyan is always a team to watch.

I looked at the ODAC pretty closely, thinking there should be an ODAC team in the Top 25, but I had trouble making a case for one in the preseason.

The ODAC is a conference with five or six good teams, but no really outstanding, All-America type players. The Nov 25th game between R-MC and Emory (your #18) will answer questons about both teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: rlgyank on September 30, 2018, 08:34:32 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on September 29, 2018, 05:53:31 PM
If I had to submit a ballot for the D3hoops.com Preseason Top 25 poll at this early stage (Sept 29), it would look something like this...

(Top three returning scorers for each team noted.)

#1) Nebraska Wesleyan (30-3, 13-3 IIAC, IIAC Champ, NCAA National Championship)
* Cooper Cook, 6-5 Sr F; 16.8 ppg, 5.8 rpg
* Ryan Garver; 6-3 Sr G; 14.2 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 4.6 apg
* Jack Hiller; 6-6 Jr G; 13.5 ppg, 4.3 rpg

#2) Springfield (22-9, 12-2 NEWMAC, NEWMAC Champ; NCAA National Semifinal Game)
* Jake Ross, 6-4 Jr G; 24.8 ppg, 9.8 ppg, 4.3 rpg
* Heath Post, 6-6 Jr F; 12.6 ppg, 9.2 rpg, 2.1 apg
* Cam Earle, 6-5 Sr G; 9.4 ppg, 2.6 rpg

#3) UW-Oshkosh (25-8, 9-5 WIAC, WIAC 3rd, NCAA National Runner Up)
* Ben Boots, 6-1 Sr G; 16.0 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 4.4 apg
* Jack Flynn, 6-8 Jr C; 12.8 ppg, 7.0 rpg
* Adam Fravert, 6-8 Jr F; 12.3 ppg, 7.5 rpg, 2.9 apg

#4) Augustana (25-6, 12-4 CCIW, CCIW Co-Champ, NCAA 4th Round)
* Nolan Ebel, 6-1 Sr G; 16.4 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 3.8 apg
* Chrishawn Orange, 6-2 Sr G; 15.6 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 2.5 apg
* Brett Benning, 6-6 Sr G; 10.7 ppg, 5.0 rpg
(*Pierson Wofford, 6-4 Jr F; 14.7 ppg, 11.7 rpg, 3.0 apg[/i]; 3 games/injured)

#5) Williams (23-6, 7-3 NESCAC, NESCAC Co-champ, NCAA 2nd Round)
* James Heskett, 6-8 Sr F; 19.3 ppg, 3.7 rpg
* Kyle Scadlock, 6-8 Sr F; 18.0 ppg, 8.6 rpg, 2.3 apg
* Bobby Casey, 6-3 Sr G; 15.8 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 2.1 apg

#6) Swarthmore (25-6, 15-3 CC, CC Co-champ, NCAA 4th Round)
* Cam Wiley, 6-0 Sr G; 16.3 ppg, 4.4 rpg
* Zac O'Dell, 6-7 Jr F; 10.6 ppg, 8.2 rpg
* Nate Shafer, 6-6 Jr F; 9.7 ppg, 6.4 rpg

#7) UW-Platteville (24-5, 12-2 WIAC, WIAC Champ, NCAA 3rd Round)
* Robert Duax, 6-4 Sr F; 15.8 ppg, 4.6 rpg, 2.2 apg
* Carter Voelker, 6-3 Jr G; 10.3 ppg, 3.7 rpg, 2.2 apg
* Quentin Shields, 5-8 So G; 10.2 ppg, 3.2 rpg

#8) Hamilton (24-5, 7-3 NESCAC, NESCAC Co-Champ, NCAA 3rd Round
* Kena Gimour, 6-3 Jr G; 18.5 ppg, 7.2 rpg
* Peter Hoffman, 6-5 Sr F; 13.9 ppg, 5.0 rpg
* Michael Grassey, 6-4 Sr F; 12.8 ppg, 7.1 rpg

#9) MIT (25-6, 10-4 NEWMAC, NEWMAC Co-champ; NCAA 4th Round)
* Bradley Jomard, 6-6 Sr G; 15.5 ppg, 5.4 rpg, 6.0 apg
* AJ Jurko, 6-3 Sr G; 14.2 ppg; 4.7 rpg, 5.9 apg
* Cameron Korb, 6-1 Sr G; 14.0 ppg, 3.0 rpg

#10) Whitman (29-2, 16-0 NWC, NWC Champ, NCAA 4th Round)
* Joey Hewitt, 6-2 Sr G; 16.9 ppg, 4.5 rpg
* Darne Duckett, 5-11 So G; 10.3 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 2.9 apg
* Trevor Osborne, 6-2 Jr F; 9.7 ppg, 3.6 rpg

#11) Illinois Wesleyan (19-8, 12-4 CCIW, CCIW Co-champ, NCAA 1st Round)
* Brady Rose, 6-3 Sr G; 21.4 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 3.1 apg
* Colin Bonnett, 6-4 Sr G; 12.3 ppg, 2.8 rpg, 2.6 apg
* Alex O'Neil, 6-9 Jr C; 9.2 ppg, 5.5 rpg

#12) Plattsburgh State (24-5, 17-1 SUNYAC, SUNYAC Champ, NCAA 3rd Round)
* Jonathan Patron, 6-2 Sr F; 23.7 ppg, 10.4 rpg
* Brandon Johnson, 5-10 Sr G; 8.8 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 2.6 apg
* Nick DeAngelis, 6-4 Jr G; 8.1 ppg, 2.2 rpg

#13) Whitworth (24-4, 14-2 NWC, NWC 2nd, NCAA 1st Round
* Kyle Roach, 6-5 Sr G; 18.7 ppg, 5.2 rpg, 3.8 apg
* Ben College, 6-1 Jr G; 16.5 ppg, 2.1 apg
* Jordan Lester, 6-2 Sr G; 15.7 ppg, 5.3 rpg, 4.6 apg

#14) UW-Stevens Point (21-9, 11-3 WIAC, WIAC 2nd, NCAA 3rd Round)
* Nate Dodge, 6-3 Sr G; 11.6 ppg, 3.1 rpg
* Canon O'Heron, 6-5 Sr F; 10.9 ppg, 3.4 rpg
* Drew Frederickson, 6-0 Sr G; 7.9 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 2.2 apg
(Ethan Bublitz, 6-2 Sr G; returning from injury)

#15) Loras (19-7, 12-4 IIAC, IIAC 2nd, NCAA n/a)
* Josh Ruggles, 6-2 Sr G; 22.4 ppg, 4.7 rpg, 3.5 apg
* Ryan Dicanio, 6-3 Sr G; 17.8 ppg, 7.1 rpg, 4.7 apg
* Rowan McGowen, 6-4 So G; 10.5 ppg, 3.2 rpg

#16) Marietta (21-7, 14-4 OAC, OAC Co-champ, NCAA 1st Round
* Kyle Dixon, 6-3 Sr G; 14.3 ppg, 3.7 rpg, 3.8 apg
* Anthony Wallace, 6-2 Sr G; 12.9 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 2.0 apg
* Avery Williams, 6-7 Sr F; 11.6 ppg, 7.5 rpg

#17) Wittenberg (27-3, 16-2 NCAC, NCAC Champ, NCAA 2nd Round)
* Mitchell Balser, 6-0 Sr G; 12.2 ppg, 3.2 ppg, 3.5 apg
* Connor Seipel, 6-6 Jr F; 11.0 ppg, 6.8 rpg
* Jacob Bertemes, 5-11 Jr G; 11.0 ppg, 2.4 ppg, 3.2 apg

#18) Emory (23-5, 12-2 UAA, UAA 2nd, NCAA 3rd Round)
* Romin Williams, 5-9 So G; 15.1 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 2.6 apg
* Gebereal Baitey, 6-2 Sr G; 11.0 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 2.8 apg
* Matt Davet, 6-7 So F; 8.4 ppg, 3.1 rpg

#19) Middlebury (21-7, 7-3 NESCAC, NESCAC Co-champ, NCAA 3rd Round)
* Matt Folger, 6-8 Jr F; 13.7 ppg, 6.9 rpg
* Eric McCord, 6-7 Sr F; 8.5 ppg, 6.8 rpg
* Jack Farrell, 6-1 So G; 8.3 ppg, 3.0 rpg

#20) Johns Hopkins (24-5, 15-3 CC, CC Champ, NCAA 2nd Round)
* Michael Gardner, 6-2 Sr G; 14.2 ppg, 4.1 rpg
* Conner Delaney, 6-0 So G; 10.7 ppg, 3.6 rpg
* Joey Kern, 6-1 So G; 8.9 ppg, 2.9 rpg

#21) St. John's (23-4, 19-1 MIAC, MIAC Champ, NCAA 1st Round)
* David Stokman, 6-2 Sr G; 13.8 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 3.2 rpg
* Jubie Alade, 6-4 Jr F; 11.0 ppg, 3.4 rpg
* Lucas Walford, 6-8 Jr C; 9.0 ppg, 9.3 rpg

#22) St. Olaf (20-8, 15-5 MIAC, MIAC 2nd, NCAA 2nd Round)
* Austin Korba, 6-5 Sr F; 14.1 ppg, 5.6 rpg
* Nate Albers, 6-3 Jr G; 12.5 ppg, 3.4 rpg
* Dominic Bledsoe, 6-0 So G; 10.0 ppg, 2.5 rpg

#23) Wooster (22-7, 14-4 NCAC, NCAC 2nd, NCAA 2nd Round)
* Danyon Hempy, 6-5 Jr G; 15.0 ppg, 3.7 rpg
* Reece Dupler, 6-2 Sr G; 14.4 ppg, 4.3 rpg
* Blake Blair, 6-2 Sr G; 7.5 ppg, 3.8 rpg

#24) Hope (19-10, 10-4 MIAA, MIAA Co-champ; NCAA 2nd Round)
* Jason Beckman, 5-11 Sr G; 22.3 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 3.1 apg
* Preston Granger, 6-6 So C; 9.8 ppg, 4.6 rpg
* Teddy Ray, 6-5 Sr F; 9.7 ppg, 7.4 rpg

#25) Wesleyan (22-7, 7-3 NESCAC, NESCAC Co-champ; NCAA 2nd Round)
* Jordan Bonner, 6-4 Sr G; 15.5 ppg, 4.7 rpg
* Austin Hutcherson, 6-6 So G; 12.0 ppg, 3.7 rpg, 2.7 apg
* Antone Walker, 6-0 So G; 7.6 ppg
------------------------
First Two Out:

#26) Bethel (21-7, 14-6 MIAC, MIAC 3rd; NCAA n/a)
* Granger Kingland, 6-4 Jr G; 14.4 ppg, 6.3 rpg
* Matt Ambriz, 6-2 Sr G; 13.1 ppg, 2.6 rpg
* Jack Jenson, 6-1 Jr G; 11.4 ppg, 4.9 rpg

#27) Maryville TN (22-7, 14-2 USAC, USAC Champ; NCAA 1st Round)
* Dante Hoppa, 6-5 Sr. F; 12.7 ppg, 5.1 ppg, 2.2 apg
* Calvin Songster, 6-2 Sr G; 12.7 ppg, 2.6 ppg, 2.5 apg
* Emier Bowman, 6-3 Sr F; 12.1 ppg, 6.7 rpg

There are many teams I'd keep an eye on outside of the 27 above. That list would include, but certainly not be limited to: New Jersey City; Washington U (re-loading with a very talented nucleus); North Central and Wheaton from the CCIW; UW-Whitewater; and Amherst.

I'm sure I am missing a few legit Top 25 contenders above. Any thoughts on who those are?

I'm glad you have Loras in your top 25. At the end of last season, they were ranked by Massey & Bennett in the mid teens. They have most of their team returning. Offensively they are one of the top teams in the nation, but defensively they need to improve. Out of 416 ranked teams, they were 390th in scoring defense, 410th in fg% defense, and 308th in 3 pt fg% defense. If they can do that, they will really be tough. They were only 1 game behind NWU during the regular season last year. The IIAC, oops, I mean the ARC, needs to get some more love this year.

The season is fast approaching, I can't wait!!!!!!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on October 01, 2018, 08:53:56 AM

Kind of surprised to see that you had 3 MIAC teams in your top 26! I definitely agree that in the preseason you nailed the top 3 teams with SJU, St. Olaf and Bethel. I would also probably rank them in that order. I am expecting St. Olaf and Bethel to be in the ORV category on the d3hoops.com preseason ranks.

Two years in a row we aren't talking about UST in the top 3 of the MIAC... with that said there is a lot of rumblings about a great recruiting class this year to go with a lot of freshman who saw extended playing time last year. They may be young, but making some noise may be in the range of possibilities.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on October 01, 2018, 10:34:16 AM

The more I think about it the more I think Keene State is a candidate for a major break-out team this season out of New England. I think Ryan Cain is an excellent young coach from a great coaching tree. Ty Nichols is likely to be an all-American, he's legit. And Cain's first recruiting class was stellar ... by season's end 5 of the top 7 guys were frosh, led by emerging star James Anozie. Those guys should contribute a lot more this year.

Keene plays an absolutely brutal non-league schedule this year (MIT, Middlebury, Hamilton, Springfield, four brutal non-league games, plus potentially-tough games against Albertus Magnus, Salem State, and possibly F&M, wow) so might have a number of early losses, but they should cruise through the Little East, where no one else is likely to be at their level this year (Eastern Conn looks a bit down and no one else looks especially up), yet they will be battle-toughened for the post-season because of their early schedule.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Hoosiersfan2323 on October 01, 2018, 12:12:13 PM

Quote from: rlgyank on September 30, 2018, 08:34:32 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on September 29, 2018, 05:53:31 PM
If I had to submit a ballot for the D3hoops.com Preseason Top 25 poll at this early stage (Sept 29), it would look something like this...

(Top three returning scorers for each team noted.)

#1) Nebraska Wesleyan (30-3, 13-3 IIAC, IIAC Champ, NCAA National Championship)
* Cooper Cook, 6-5 Sr F; 16.8 ppg, 5.8 rpg
* Ryan Garver; 6-3 Sr G; 14.2 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 4.6 apg
* Jack Hiller; 6-6 Jr G; 13.5 ppg, 4.3 rpg

#2) Springfield (22-9, 12-2 NEWMAC, NEWMAC Champ; NCAA National Semifinal Game)
* Jake Ross, 6-4 Jr G; 24.8 ppg, 9.8 ppg, 4.3 rpg
* Heath Post, 6-6 Jr F; 12.6 ppg, 9.2 rpg, 2.1 apg
* Cam Earle, 6-5 Sr G; 9.4 ppg, 2.6 rpg

#3) UW-Oshkosh (25-8, 9-5 WIAC, WIAC 3rd, NCAA National Runner Up)
* Ben Boots, 6-1 Sr G; 16.0 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 4.4 apg
* Jack Flynn, 6-8 Jr C; 12.8 ppg, 7.0 rpg
* Adam Fravert, 6-8 Jr F; 12.3 ppg, 7.5 rpg, 2.9 apg

#4) Augustana (25-6, 12-4 CCIW, CCIW Co-Champ, NCAA 4th Round)
* Nolan Ebel, 6-1 Sr G; 16.4 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 3.8 apg
* Chrishawn Orange, 6-2 Sr G; 15.6 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 2.5 apg
* Brett Benning, 6-6 Sr G; 10.7 ppg, 5.0 rpg
(*Pierson Wofford, 6-4 Jr F; 14.7 ppg, 11.7 rpg, 3.0 apg[/i]; 3 games/injured)

#5) Williams (23-6, 7-3 NESCAC, NESCAC Co-champ, NCAA 2nd Round)
* James Heskett, 6-8 Sr F; 19.3 ppg, 3.7 rpg
* Kyle Scadlock, 6-8 Sr F; 18.0 ppg, 8.6 rpg, 2.3 apg
* Bobby Casey, 6-3 Sr G; 15.8 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 2.1 apg

#6) Swarthmore (25-6, 15-3 CC, CC Co-champ, NCAA 4th Round)
* Cam Wiley, 6-0 Sr G; 16.3 ppg, 4.4 rpg
* Zac O'Dell, 6-7 Jr F; 10.6 ppg, 8.2 rpg
* Nate Shafer, 6-6 Jr F; 9.7 ppg, 6.4 rpg

#7) UW-Platteville (24-5, 12-2 WIAC, WIAC Champ, NCAA 3rd Round)
* Robert Duax, 6-4 Sr F; 15.8 ppg, 4.6 rpg, 2.2 apg
* Carter Voelker, 6-3 Jr G; 10.3 ppg, 3.7 rpg, 2.2 apg
* Quentin Shields, 5-8 So G; 10.2 ppg, 3.2 rpg

#8) Hamilton (24-5, 7-3 NESCAC, NESCAC Co-Champ, NCAA 3rd Round
* Kena Gimour, 6-3 Jr G; 18.5 ppg, 7.2 rpg
* Peter Hoffman, 6-5 Sr F; 13.9 ppg, 5.0 rpg
* Michael Grassey, 6-4 Sr F; 12.8 ppg, 7.1 rpg

#9) MIT (25-6, 10-4 NEWMAC, NEWMAC Co-champ; NCAA 4th Round)
* Bradley Jomard, 6-6 Sr G; 15.5 ppg, 5.4 rpg, 6.0 apg
* AJ Jurko, 6-3 Sr G; 14.2 ppg; 4.7 rpg, 5.9 apg
* Cameron Korb, 6-1 Sr G; 14.0 ppg, 3.0 rpg

#10) Whitman (29-2, 16-0 NWC, NWC Champ, NCAA 4th Round)
* Joey Hewitt, 6-2 Sr G; 16.9 ppg, 4.5 rpg
* Darne Duckett, 5-11 So G; 10.3 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 2.9 apg
* Trevor Osborne, 6-2 Jr F; 9.7 ppg, 3.6 rpg

#11) Illinois Wesleyan (19-8, 12-4 CCIW, CCIW Co-champ, NCAA 1st Round)
* Brady Rose, 6-3 Sr G; 21.4 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 3.1 apg
* Colin Bonnett, 6-4 Sr G; 12.3 ppg, 2.8 rpg, 2.6 apg
* Alex O'Neil, 6-9 Jr C; 9.2 ppg, 5.5 rpg

#12) Plattsburgh State (24-5, 17-1 SUNYAC, SUNYAC Champ, NCAA 3rd Round)
* Jonathan Patron, 6-2 Sr F; 23.7 ppg, 10.4 rpg
* Brandon Johnson, 5-10 Sr G; 8.8 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 2.6 apg
* Nick DeAngelis, 6-4 Jr G; 8.1 ppg, 2.2 rpg

#13) Whitworth (24-4, 14-2 NWC, NWC 2nd, NCAA 1st Round
* Kyle Roach, 6-5 Sr G; 18.7 ppg, 5.2 rpg, 3.8 apg
* Ben College, 6-1 Jr G; 16.5 ppg, 2.1 apg
* Jordan Lester, 6-2 Sr G; 15.7 ppg, 5.3 rpg, 4.6 apg

#14) UW-Stevens Point (21-9, 11-3 WIAC, WIAC 2nd, NCAA 3rd Round)
* Nate Dodge, 6-3 Sr G; 11.6 ppg, 3.1 rpg
* Canon O'Heron, 6-5 Sr F; 10.9 ppg, 3.4 rpg
* Drew Frederickson, 6-0 Sr G; 7.9 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 2.2 apg
(Ethan Bublitz, 6-2 Sr G; returning from injury)

#15) Loras (19-7, 12-4 IIAC, IIAC 2nd, NCAA n/a)
* Josh Ruggles, 6-2 Sr G; 22.4 ppg, 4.7 rpg, 3.5 apg
* Ryan Dicanio, 6-3 Sr G; 17.8 ppg, 7.1 rpg, 4.7 apg
* Rowan McGowen, 6-4 So G; 10.5 ppg, 3.2 rpg

#16) Marietta (21-7, 14-4 OAC, OAC Co-champ, NCAA 1st Round
* Kyle Dixon, 6-3 Sr G; 14.3 ppg, 3.7 rpg, 3.8 apg
* Anthony Wallace, 6-2 Sr G; 12.9 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 2.0 apg
* Avery Williams, 6-7 Sr F; 11.6 ppg, 7.5 rpg

#17) Wittenberg (27-3, 16-2 NCAC, NCAC Champ, NCAA 2nd Round)
* Mitchell Balser, 6-0 Sr G; 12.2 ppg, 3.2 ppg, 3.5 apg
* Connor Seipel, 6-6 Jr F; 11.0 ppg, 6.8 rpg
* Jacob Bertemes, 5-11 Jr G; 11.0 ppg, 2.4 ppg, 3.2 apg

#18) Emory (23-5, 12-2 UAA, UAA 2nd, NCAA 3rd Round)
* Romin Williams, 5-9 So G; 15.1 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 2.6 apg
* Gebereal Baitey, 6-2 Sr G; 11.0 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 2.8 apg
* Matt Davet, 6-7 So F; 8.4 ppg, 3.1 rpg

#19) Middlebury (21-7, 7-3 NESCAC, NESCAC Co-champ, NCAA 3rd Round)
* Matt Folger, 6-8 Jr F; 13.7 ppg, 6.9 rpg
* Eric McCord, 6-7 Sr F; 8.5 ppg, 6.8 rpg
* Jack Farrell, 6-1 So G; 8.3 ppg, 3.0 rpg

#20) Johns Hopkins (24-5, 15-3 CC, CC Champ, NCAA 2nd Round)
* Michael Gardner, 6-2 Sr G; 14.2 ppg, 4.1 rpg
* Conner Delaney, 6-0 So G; 10.7 ppg, 3.6 rpg
* Joey Kern, 6-1 So G; 8.9 ppg, 2.9 rpg

#21) St. John's (23-4, 19-1 MIAC, MIAC Champ, NCAA 1st Round)
* David Stokman, 6-2 Sr G; 13.8 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 3.2 rpg
* Jubie Alade, 6-4 Jr F; 11.0 ppg, 3.4 rpg
* Lucas Walford, 6-8 Jr C; 9.0 ppg, 9.3 rpg

#22) St. Olaf (20-8, 15-5 MIAC, MIAC 2nd, NCAA 2nd Round)
* Austin Korba, 6-5 Sr F; 14.1 ppg, 5.6 rpg
* Nate Albers, 6-3 Jr G; 12.5 ppg, 3.4 rpg
* Dominic Bledsoe, 6-0 So G; 10.0 ppg, 2.5 rpg

#23) Wooster (22-7, 14-4 NCAC, NCAC 2nd, NCAA 2nd Round)
* Danyon Hempy, 6-5 Jr G; 15.0 ppg, 3.7 rpg
* Reece Dupler, 6-2 Sr G; 14.4 ppg, 4.3 rpg
* Blake Blair, 6-2 Sr G; 7.5 ppg, 3.8 rpg

#24) Hope (19-10, 10-4 MIAA, MIAA Co-champ; NCAA 2nd Round)
* Jason Beckman, 5-11 Sr G; 22.3 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 3.1 apg
* Preston Granger, 6-6 So C; 9.8 ppg, 4.6 rpg
* Teddy Ray, 6-5 Sr F; 9.7 ppg, 7.4 rpg

#25) Wesleyan (22-7, 7-3 NESCAC, NESCAC Co-champ; NCAA 2nd Round)
* Jordan Bonner, 6-4 Sr G; 15.5 ppg, 4.7 rpg
* Austin Hutcherson, 6-6 So G; 12.0 ppg, 3.7 rpg, 2.7 apg
* Antone Walker, 6-0 So G; 7.6 ppg
------------------------
First Two Out:

#26) Bethel (21-7, 14-6 MIAC, MIAC 3rd; NCAA n/a)
* Granger Kingland, 6-4 Jr G; 14.4 ppg, 6.3 rpg
* Matt Ambriz, 6-2 Sr G; 13.1 ppg, 2.6 rpg
* Jack Jenson, 6-1 Jr G; 11.4 ppg, 4.9 rpg

#27) Maryville TN (22-7, 14-2 USAC, USAC Champ; NCAA 1st Round)
* Dante Hoppa, 6-5 Sr. F; 12.7 ppg, 5.1 ppg, 2.2 apg
* Calvin Songster, 6-2 Sr G; 12.7 ppg, 2.6 ppg, 2.5 apg
* Emier Bowman, 6-3 Sr F; 12.1 ppg, 6.7 rpg

There are many teams I'd keep an eye on outside of the 27 above. That list would include, but certainly not be limited to: New Jersey City; Washington U (re-loading with a very talented nucleus); North Central and Wheaton from the CCIW; UW-Whitewater; and Amherst.

I'm sure I am missing a few legit Top 25 contenders above. Any thoughts on who those are?

I'm glad you have Loras in your top 25. At the end of last season, they were ranked by Massey & Bennett in the mid teens. They have most of their team returning. Offensively they are one of the top teams in the nation, but defensively they need to improve. Out of 416 ranked teams, they were 390th in scoring defense, 410th in fg% defense, and 308th in 3 pt fg% defense. If they can do that, they will really be tough. They were only 1 game behind NWU during the regular season last year. The IIAC, oops, I mean the ARC, needs to get some more love this year.

The season is fast approaching, I can't wait!!!!!!!

As a pretty avid IIAC (ugh, ARC) follower, couldn't agree more on this Loras take. 8 months ago, Loras appeared to have solved their defensive woes with the commitment of Chicagoland stud shot-blocker Jared Crutcher, but he ultimately decommitted and ended up on full scholarship at Lewis. But then, Loras reloaded by adding freshman big Jordan Boyd, who had several D2 full scholarship offers before committing to Loras. He's supposed to be a high-flyer, and if he can be a strong defensive presence inside, that Loras team (which has a core of guards that can compete with any other lineup of guards in the country) could get over the hump. The ARC is going to be a lot of fun this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 02, 2018, 06:25:50 AM

Not to spoil what I'll probably say on Hoopsville (of course, only the real die hards are on the boards right now anyway), but Maryville is my preseason sleeper this year. They return the entire team and they gave the eventual champs a pretty decent showing in the first round last season. There's a few others I think are "to-watch" teams, but maybe we'll save something for the show.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on October 02, 2018, 09:20:36 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 02, 2018, 06:25:50 AM

Not to spoil what I'll probably say on Hoopsville (of course, only the real die hards are on the boards right now anyway), but Maryville is my preseason sleeper this year. They return the entire team and they gave the eventual champs a pretty decent showing in the first round last season. There's a few others I think are "to-watch" teams, but maybe we'll save something for the show.

You must have better rationale than this, they were down 22 at halftime.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on October 02, 2018, 10:10:09 AM

I hate to pile on, but I watched the NWU-Maryville game in person and Maryville had a pretty decent showing through the first 10 minutes before NWU hit the gas and it was over.

They played a better early season game against Emory, but the Eagles quickly jumped out to a double digit lead and held that lead for most of the game and topped the century mark for the second and final time last season.

I agree though, you got to like any tournament team who returns everyone.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 02, 2018, 10:15:33 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on September 30, 2018, 01:43:06 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on September 30, 2018, 01:37:15 PM
Not mentioned as a "top 3 returning scorers" for Stevens Point is the return of Ethan Bublitz who missed all but one game last year. The previous year he led the team in scoring, rebounding, assists and steals, I think.

Thanks. I edited my original post to include Bublitz.

Greek, what is your preseason WIAC order (in terms of poll ranking candidates)?

It'll be interesting to see how everyone votes the WIAC teams to start the year. The obvious choice would be to put Oshkosh in the Top 5 and probably should be as they only lose one starter in Noone, and he was the 5th leading scorer. But, more importantly, they lose their coach. The new head coach is in-house, so hopefully there won't be much of an adjustment period.

I'm thinking Point may be ranked ahead of Platteville. They lose leading scorer MJ Delmore, but get back Ethan Bublitz from injury. So, you could say they return everyone.

Platteville loses two starters, so that could be an advantage to Point in terms of rankings.

Whitewater may not start in the Top 25, but could be in there before the conference season kicks off. They actually have a pretty good nc schedule, at least for them, so they'll have their opportunities to prove themselves. I don't think anyone know what went wrong there last year, but expect a bounce back season with everyone returning.

So, Oshkosh will probably be Top 5, Point and Platteville in the low teens and Whitewater getting some votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 03, 2018, 06:40:36 AM

Quote from: sac on October 02, 2018, 09:20:36 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 02, 2018, 06:25:50 AM

Not to spoil what I'll probably say on Hoopsville (of course, only the real die hards are on the boards right now anyway), but Maryville is my preseason sleeper this year. They return the entire team and they gave the eventual champs a pretty decent showing in the first round last season. There's a few others I think are "to-watch" teams, but maybe we'll save something for the show.

You must have better rationale than this, they were down 22 at halftime.

As opposed to Whitman or Aurora? I mean, half the teams in the tournament stuck with them and half didn't. I didn't think Maryville played poorly - maybe like a team near the bottom of the Top 25 would've played. They also improved as the year went on. I guess there could be some disagreement over what "sleeper" means - mine is usually more broad than "title contender" although I would've given (and probably did) this same description about NWU at this time last year. You never know.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on October 03, 2018, 09:45:54 AM

Where does Yeshiva fit in? Bascially everyone back and the incoming frosh Ryan Turell is one of the most acclaimed to come into D3 that I can recall (in the Kent Raymond / Duncan Robinson / Aaron Toomey catetgory in terms of hype, though who knows if he will be that good) ... if he is the real deal, they should be very interesting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on October 03, 2018, 10:16:45 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on October 03, 2018, 09:45:54 AM
Where does Yeshiva fit in? Bascially everyone back and the incoming frosh Ryan Turell is one of the most acclaimed to come into D3 that I can recall (in the Kent Raymond / Duncan Robinson / Aaron Toomey catetgory in terms of hype, though who knows if he will be that good) ... if he is the real deal, they should be very interesting.

In the same line of thinking, keep an eye on Olivet. Former Oregon Duck, 6'10" Trevor Manuel will be suiting up for the Comets this season. Olivet shared the MIAA regular season title with Hope last year and the former 4 star, ESPN Top 100 recruit should turn a few heads.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 03, 2018, 12:33:14 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on October 03, 2018, 09:45:54 AM
Where does Yeshiva fit in? Bascially everyone back and the incoming frosh Ryan Turell is one of the most acclaimed to come into D3 that I can recall (in the Kent Raymond / Duncan Robinson / Aaron Toomey catetgory in terms of hype, though who knows if he will be that good) ... if he is the real deal, they should be very interesting.

My worthless opinion is that they won't sniff the Top 25 unless they put together an unbeaten run before the new year. They were only 3rd in the Skyline and although they did make the NCAAs, they were beaten pretty handedly. Last year, they lost to Ramapo and Williams by large margins, so they would probably have to beat both this year to turn some heads. Farmingdale only loses one starter, so they may win the SKY again, and I'm pretty sure Farmingdale didn't see any Top 25 votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 03, 2018, 12:39:37 PM

Who is eligible and will suit up for Yeshiva? That's the overarching question here, for sure.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on October 03, 2018, 10:42:43 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on October 03, 2018, 10:16:45 AM
Quote from: nescac1 on October 03, 2018, 09:45:54 AM
Where does Yeshiva fit in? Bascially everyone back and the incoming frosh Ryan Turell is one of the most acclaimed to come into D3 that I can recall (in the Kent Raymond / Duncan Robinson / Aaron Toomey catetgory in terms of hype, though who knows if he will be that good) ... if he is the real deal, they should be very interesting.
In the same line of thinking, keep an eye on Olivet. Former Oregon Duck, 6'10" Trevor Manuel will be suiting up for the Comets this season. Olivet shared the MIAA regular season title with Hope last year and the former 4 star, ESPN Top 100 recruit should turn a few heads.

I think Olivet could be good eventually, but that schedule is punishing. Comets are replacing 3 starters and 5 of their 9 regular rotation guys.

Manuel is like for like with Jalen Adams statistically probably after that though its quite a few fresh faces and unknowns. Noted they've pulled in several JC guys this year. so they'll be mostly Sr's/Jr's again.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on October 04, 2018, 01:15:18 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 02, 2018, 10:15:33 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on September 30, 2018, 01:43:06 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on September 30, 2018, 01:37:15 PM
Not mentioned as a "top 3 returning scorers" for Stevens Point is the return of Ethan Bublitz who missed all but one game last year. The previous year he led the team in scoring, rebounding, assists and steals, I think.

Thanks. I edited my original post to include Bublitz.

Greek, what is your preseason WIAC order (in terms of poll ranking candidates)?

It'll be interesting to see how everyone votes the WIAC teams to start the year. The obvious choice would be to put Oshkosh in the Top 5 and probably should be as they only lose one starter in Noone, and he was the 5th leading scorer. But, more importantly, they lose their coach. The new head coach is in-house, so hopefully there won't be much of an adjustment period.

I'm thinking Point may be ranked ahead of Platteville. They lose leading scorer MJ Delmore, but get back Ethan Bublitz from injury. So, you could say they return everyone.

Platteville loses two starters, so that could be an advantage to Point in terms of rankings.

Whitewater may not start in the Top 25, but could be in there before the conference season kicks off. They actually have a pretty good nc schedule, at least for them, so they'll have their opportunities to prove themselves. I don't think anyone know what went wrong there last year, but expect a bounce back season with everyone returning.

So, Oshkosh will probably be Top 5, Point and Platteville in the low teens and Whitewater getting some votes.

I think one thing that definitely went wrong at Whitewater last season was the mysterious non return to school of Chris Jones, UWW's leading scorer in 2016-2017. Having pursued academic excellence at 3, or was it 4, schools on his journey to Whitewater and the NBA, the Poster Boy of Transfer unexpectedly didn't show up for what would have been his senior year. The fact that his no show was an unexpected event is evidenced by the fact that he was named a pre-season All-American last season. Obviously, if his had been known, D3Hoops wouldn't have wasted their time considering him for inclusion on the team. At any rate, Jones' being MIA left a huge void.

Another thing that was a problem and certainly didn't help things was WW's poor A/TO ratio, and their commission of more TOs than assists.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 04, 2018, 06:35:40 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 03, 2018, 12:33:14 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on October 03, 2018, 09:45:54 AM
Where does Yeshiva fit in? Bascially everyone back and the incoming frosh Ryan Turell is one of the most acclaimed to come into D3 that I can recall (in the Kent Raymond / Duncan Robinson / Aaron Toomey catetgory in terms of hype, though who knows if he will be that good) ... if he is the real deal, they should be very interesting.

My worthless opinion is that they won't sniff the Top 25 unless they put together an unbeaten run before the new year. They were only 3rd in the Skyline and although they did make the NCAAs, they were beaten pretty handedly. Last year, they lost to Ramapo and Williams by large margins, so they would probably have to beat both this year to turn some heads. Farmingdale only loses one starter, so they may win the SKY again, and I'm pretty sure Farmingdale didn't see any Top 25 votes.

I was there in person. A lot will depend on the roster, but their top four guys from last year were more than legit - pretty quick drop off after that. The coach has been recruiting hard nationally - including bringing in a very good freshman from California. He told me last year, if this kid showed up, he'd be the best player on the team day 1. A lot of ifs, but if he's there, everyone is back, and they've added some depth, that team is at least in the conversation. Maybe not preseason - and you're right, teams from weak conferences do tend to have to prove themselves on the court, but they're potentially nobody to be messed with. We'll know a decent amount early, since they host Williams around Thanksgiving.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on October 04, 2018, 07:54:19 AM

Quote from: sac on October 03, 2018, 10:42:43 PM
I think Olivet could be good eventually, but that schedule is punishing. Comets are replacing 3 starters and 5 of their 9 regular rotation guys.

Manuel is like for like with Jalen Adams statistically probably after that though its quite a few fresh faces and unknowns. Noted they've pulled in several JC guys this year. so they'll be mostly Sr's/Jr's again.

Agreed. That schedule is INSANE.

Also, saying Manuel is like-for-like statistically with last years MIAA MVP, plus a couple inches in height... you have my attention.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on October 04, 2018, 10:01:14 AM

Quote from: HOPEful on October 04, 2018, 07:54:19 AM
Quote from: sac on October 03, 2018, 10:42:43 PM
I think Olivet could be good eventually, but that schedule is punishing. Comets are replacing 3 starters and 5 of their 9 regular rotation guys.

Manuel is like for like with Jalen Adams statistically probably after that though its quite a few fresh faces and unknowns. Noted they've pulled in several JC guys this year. so they'll be mostly Sr's/Jr's again.
Agreed. That schedule is INSANE.

Also, saying Manuel is like-for-like statistically with last years MIAA MVP, plus a couple inches in height... you have my attention.

Oh I just mean he's a 20 and 10 kind of player, the right things have to happen for anyone to get those high averages Adams had. Manuel has a better outside game than Adams but is less of a slash to the basket kind of player, yet he'll get a lot of points around the basket.

Not sure he's the jumping jack rebounder Adams was either, but he'll get his fair share. I think his biggest impact is going to be on the defensive end. School and MIAA shot blocking records are within his reach. Think of Olivet's games a year ago and now erase about 10 opponent points each game.

I should have added about the schedule that they could be really good but a 7-4 record at New Years won't turn many heads of people who don't look into their schedule deeply.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on October 04, 2018, 10:52:32 AM

Quote from: sac on October 04, 2018, 10:01:14 AM
I should have added about the schedule that they could be really good but a 7-4 record at New Years won't turn many heads of people who don't look into their schedule deeply.

Agreed. 4 games against D2 teams (one exhibition) and a trip west to play Dubuque, Loras, Greenville, and NWU... Throw in Thomas More, Carthage, Wheaton, and Elmhurst... good grief. They could go 6-6 through that and still be a good team!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 04, 2018, 02:02:01 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 04, 2018, 06:35:40 AM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 03, 2018, 12:33:14 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on October 03, 2018, 09:45:54 AM
Where does Yeshiva fit in? Bascially everyone back and the incoming frosh Ryan Turell is one of the most acclaimed to come into D3 that I can recall (in the Kent Raymond / Duncan Robinson / Aaron Toomey catetgory in terms of hype, though who knows if he will be that good) ... if he is the real deal, they should be very interesting.

My worthless opinion is that they won't sniff the Top 25 unless they put together an unbeaten run before the new year. They were only 3rd in the Skyline and although they did make the NCAAs, they were beaten pretty handedly. Last year, they lost to Ramapo and Williams by large margins, so they would probably have to beat both this year to turn some heads. Farmingdale only loses one starter, so they may win the SKY again, and I'm pretty sure Farmingdale didn't see any Top 25 votes.

I was there in person. A lot will depend on the roster, but their top four guys from last year were more than legit - pretty quick drop off after that. The coach has been recruiting hard nationally - including bringing in a very good freshman from California. He told me last year, if this kid showed up, he'd be the best player on the team day 1. A lot of ifs, but if he's there, everyone is back, and they've added some depth, that team is at least in the conversation. Maybe not preseason - and you're right, teams from weak conferences do tend to have to prove themselves on the court, but they're potentially nobody to be messed with. We'll know a decent amount early, since they host Williams around Thanksgiving.

From what I've been told ... they got that kid. Just a matter of whether their top player from last year will be back.

They do have a chance to turn some heads. Their out of conference includes Williams, Ramapo, and Brandeis (I think off the top of my head).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 04, 2018, 02:58:39 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 04, 2018, 02:02:01 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 04, 2018, 06:35:40 AM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 03, 2018, 12:33:14 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on October 03, 2018, 09:45:54 AM
Where does Yeshiva fit in? Bascially everyone back and the incoming frosh Ryan Turell is one of the most acclaimed to come into D3 that I can recall (in the Kent Raymond / Duncan Robinson / Aaron Toomey catetgory in terms of hype, though who knows if he will be that good) ... if he is the real deal, they should be very interesting.

My worthless opinion is that they won't sniff the Top 25 unless they put together an unbeaten run before the new year. They were only 3rd in the Skyline and although they did make the NCAAs, they were beaten pretty handedly. Last year, they lost to Ramapo and Williams by large margins, so they would probably have to beat both this year to turn some heads. Farmingdale only loses one starter, so they may win the SKY again, and I'm pretty sure Farmingdale didn't see any Top 25 votes.

I was there in person. A lot will depend on the roster, but their top four guys from last year were more than legit - pretty quick drop off after that. The coach has been recruiting hard nationally - including bringing in a very good freshman from California. He told me last year, if this kid showed up, he'd be the best player on the team day 1. A lot of ifs, but if he's there, everyone is back, and they've added some depth, that team is at least in the conversation. Maybe not preseason - and you're right, teams from weak conferences do tend to have to prove themselves on the court, but they're potentially nobody to be messed with. We'll know a decent amount early, since they host Williams around Thanksgiving.

From what I've been told ... they got that kid. Just a matter of whether their top player from last year will be back.

They do have a chance to turn some heads. Their out of conference includes Williams, Ramapo, and Brandeis (I think off the top of my head).

They did get him. I just didn't want to presume any freshmen would actually be as good as the coach says he'll be.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BluesBrother on October 11, 2018, 12:50:10 AM

Don't snooze on the Blues! Whitman graduated Howell but they have the rest of last year's very strong team back, plus Wiggins and Harrison returning from injury, and they added transfers Andrew Vickers (2nd team all NWC) and Michael Gutierrez (2nd team all MIAC) and some good-looking freshmen. They're probably better than last year's team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 11, 2018, 09:52:44 AM

Quote from: BluesBrother on October 11, 2018, 12:50:10 AM
Don't snooze on the Blues! Whitman graduated Howell but they have the rest of last year's very strong team back, plus Wiggins and Harrison returning from injury, and they added transfers Andrew Vickers (2nd team all NWC) and Michael Gutierrez (2nd team all MIAC) and some good-looking freshmen. They're probably better than last year's team.

Is anyone snoozing on Whitman? I think they've got ten guys who'd challenge for starting spots on every team in the country - just an incredibly impressive roster. I hope Bridgeland can get everyone on the same page, because it just feels like a really special team to watch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on October 11, 2018, 10:19:08 AM

Wow, that's crazy re: Whitman. Perhaps the only downside would be too MUCH talent with so many guys who are capable of being (and in many cases have already been) the number 1 or number 2 option who will be 4-10 in the rotation. I know Whitman tends to play guys short minutes so everyone will get some time, but some guys may still feel underutilized. But that's a nice problem to have and I think basically any coach would gladly trade places! Whitworth also seems much stronger on paper this year so there should be some titanic showdowns (as usual) between those two out West.

In general, the top 10-12 teams in D3 looks as deep on paper as any in recent memory in my view. Williams, Hamilton, and MIT were three of the top teams in the Northeast and all should be significantly improved. Augustana looks loaded yet again. Swarthmore and Johns Hopkins should be about as good or better in the mid-Atlantic. The WIAC seems much stronger at the top this year than last, with three really loaded teams, and it was pretty darn strong last year. And of course the national champion loses only one guy. Part of what makes this year intriguing is how many teams who are already pretty stacked return guys who missed most or all of last year - the two Whitman guys, Scadlock at Williams, Wofford at Augustana, Bublitz at Stevens Point. Also Bradley Jomard was never at full strength in the post-season for MIT. While Springfield loses a few key guys, they also get back last year's top recruit, who missed the entire season with an injury.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 11, 2018, 12:38:17 PM

The D3hoops.com Preseason Top 25 comes out today.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on October 11, 2018, 03:23:11 PM

I did not expect a Rochester team that went 16-9 last season to end up two spots outside the Top 25. They do return all but one player who featured heavily in the rotation. But, they were not in the final rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 11, 2018, 03:26:04 PM

Link: http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2018-19/preseason

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 11, 2018, 03:29:58 PM

Pat,

When can we expect the women's poll?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 11, 2018, 03:38:11 PM

Either end of next week or beginning of the following.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jekelish on October 11, 2018, 03:51:14 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 11, 2018, 03:38:11 PM
Either end of next week or beginning of the following.

Purely out of curiosity Pat, why such a big gap between the two?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 11, 2018, 03:51:36 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 11, 2018, 03:26:04 PM
Link: http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2018-19/preseason

Here is my Top 10 blog: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2018/10/11/daves-preseason-ballot-18-19-the-top-10/

Yep... Top 10. I thought I would get a bit cheeky. Rest of the ballot to come out soon enough. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 11, 2018, 03:52:02 PM

Quote from: jekelish on October 11, 2018, 03:51:14 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 11, 2018, 03:38:11 PM
Either end of next week or beginning of the following.

Purely out of curiosity Pat, why such a big gap between the two?

To give each of the polls their just due is one reason.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 11, 2018, 03:53:38 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 11, 2018, 03:52:02 PM
Quote from: jekelish on October 11, 2018, 03:51:14 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 11, 2018, 03:38:11 PM
Either end of next week or beginning of the following.

Purely out of curiosity Pat, why such a big gap between the two?

To give each of the polls their just due is one reason.

Yes, and it's not unusual for us, either. It's a big undertaking to collect all of this information and get it out and in the years where one person was managing both polls (which is *every* year until this year), it was really difficult to do two preseason polls well at the same time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on October 11, 2018, 03:58:41 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 11, 2018, 03:26:04 PM
Link: http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2018-19/preseason

We're not allowed to just post the list?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 11, 2018, 04:03:17 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on October 11, 2018, 03:58:41 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 11, 2018, 03:26:04 PM
Link: http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2018-19/preseason

We're not allowed to just post the list?

It would be nice for the ads on our website to get a little love ... so we can continue trying to cover DIII sports. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 11, 2018, 04:34:37 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 11, 2018, 03:51:36 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 11, 2018, 03:26:04 PM
Link: http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2018-19/preseason

Here is my Top 10 blog: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2018/10/11/daves-preseason-ballot-18-19-the-top-10/

Yep... Top 10. I thought I would get a bit cheeky. Rest of the ballot to come out soon enough. :)

Did you purposely call Scadlock "Scadlove"?

If you did, that's awesome and hilarious at the same time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 11, 2018, 04:39:45 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 11, 2018, 04:34:37 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 11, 2018, 03:51:36 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 11, 2018, 03:26:04 PM
Link: http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2018-19/preseason

Here is my Top 10 blog: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2018/10/11/daves-preseason-ballot-18-19-the-top-10/

Yep... Top 10. I thought I would get a bit cheeky. Rest of the ballot to come out soon enough. :)

Did you purposely call Scadlock "Scadlove"?

If you did, that's awesome and hilarious at the same time.

Ha. So the sad part is I know I had Scadlove on my mind for some reason, but I also know I was thinking Scadlock. Clearly, the other side of my brain kicked in and I missed it even in the multiple proof-reads. :)

I will fix it in a bit ... have to run and get the kids right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 11, 2018, 05:28:13 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on October 11, 2018, 03:58:41 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 11, 2018, 03:26:04 PM
Link: http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2018-19/preseason

We're not allowed to just post the list?

We have a website devoted to Division III basketball and I'd sure love to make sure it gets a few more clicks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on October 11, 2018, 05:33:46 PM

That is entirely fair. Maybe next time explain that when deleting. I am sure I am far from the only one that posted the list.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 11, 2018, 06:24:23 PM

So far you are today, but not the first ever in the 19 years we've had both a message board and a ranking. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 11, 2018, 07:07:11 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 11, 2018, 06:24:23 PM
So far you are today, but not the first ever in the 19 years we've had both a message board and a ranking. :)

We're all afraid to. That's why. ;D ::) :P :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 11, 2018, 07:16:53 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on October 11, 2018, 03:23:11 PM
I did not expect a Rochester team that went 16-9 last season to end up two spots outside the Top 25. They do return all but one player who featured heavily in the rotation. But, they were not in the final rankings.

It got surprisingly dicey near the bottom for me - lots of question marks. I included Rochester on my ballot partially because they have fewer question marks. I prefer to let teams with something to prove actually prove it before voting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on October 11, 2018, 08:20:19 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 11, 2018, 07:16:53 PM
It got surprisingly dicey near the bottom for me - lots of question marks. I included Rochester on my ballot partially because they have fewer question marks. I prefer to let teams with something to prove actually prove it before voting.

That does make sense.

Rochester should see more playing time from one or two guys who were injured last year too.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 11, 2018, 10:55:39 PM

There are a few teams I think received too many poll points, and a few with too little, but overall I think this is a rock-solid preseason poll - maybe the best I can remember. I like that teams seem to be generally lined up in the correct order within conferences and regions in terms of preseason expectations. And there is not a head-scratching team in the Top 25.

#20 John Carroll is the team I think got too much love based on what they lost. And ORV Loras is the team I think deserved more love.

I also think Wittenberg, at #11, is too high for the preseason poll. 6-10 Chad Roy (16.0 ppg, 6.1 rpg) was such a huge part of what made them tick last year...seems like they got a free pass for his graduation.

But again, pretty minor stuff overall. This is a great poll to start with.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 11, 2018, 11:00:29 PM

I was a bit surprised at the Augustana #1 vote. Let me clarify - I had Augustana #2 and I think the Vikings are easily as good as Nebraska Wesleyan. But just seems like when the defending national champion returns this much, they are #1 until game results show otherwise.

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

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 11, 2018, 11:52:08 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 11, 2018, 11:00:29 PM
I was a bit surprised at the Augustana #1 vote. Let me clarify - I had Augustana #2 and I think the Vikings are easily as good as Nebraska Wesleyan. But just seems like when the defending national champion returns this much, they are #1 until game results show otherwise.

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

This surprised me as well and for a lot of the reasons you described. I am all for not just automatically penciling in defending champions as the preseason #1 (I know those who have and disagree with the idea), but at the same time ... NWU looks even better than last year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on October 12, 2018, 12:30:38 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 11, 2018, 10:55:39 PM
There are a few teams I think received too many poll points, and a few with too little, but overall I think this is a rock-solid preseason poll - maybe the best I can remember. I like that teams seem to be generally lined up in the correct order within conferences and regions in terms of preseason expectations. And there is not a head-scratching team in the Top 25.

#20 John Carroll is the team I think got too much love based on what they lost. And ORV Loras is the team I think deserved more love.

I also think Wittenberg, at #11, is too high for the preseason poll. 6-10 Chad Roy (16.0 ppg, 6.1 rpg) was such a huge part of what made them tick last year...seems like they got a free pass for his graduation.

But again, pretty minor stuff overall. This is a great poll to start with.

This point is what gives me pause on Wittenberg. The rest of the pieces are all back and on paper they look all set for another run. But I am curious to see how the whole thing gels without his presence.

I left JCU off my Top 25 (if I was ranking 28 teams, they are probably on there)...they lost some really key guys. Moran had an excellent recruiting class this year and JCU is going to be a household name for many more years but I am curious to see how some of the new guys step into bigger roles.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 12, 2018, 01:06:34 PM

My latest blog post... spots 11-20: https://t.co/nOaIySyIAJ

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 12, 2018, 02:54:06 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 11, 2018, 11:00:29 PM
I was a bit surprised at the Augustana #1 vote. Let me clarify - I had Augustana #2 and I think the Vikings are easily as good as Nebraska Wesleyan. But just seems like when the defending national champion returns this much, they are #1 until game results show otherwise.

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

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

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 12, 2018, 02:58:04 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 12, 2018, 02:54:06 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on October 11, 2018, 11:00:29 PM
I was a bit surprised at the Augustana #1 vote. Let me clarify - I had Augustana #2 and I think the Vikings are easily as good as Nebraska Wesleyan. But just seems like when the defending national champion returns this much, they are #1 until game results show otherwise.

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

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

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

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

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 12, 2018, 03:17:58 PM

Just glad it didn't have to be me! I'm on the record as being someone who will cast a dissenting vote just to remind people that anything can happen and we shouldn't be too sure who the best team is.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 12, 2018, 03:22:40 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 12, 2018, 02:54:06 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on October 11, 2018, 11:00:29 PM
I was a bit surprised at the Augustana #1 vote. Let me clarify - I had Augustana #2 and I think the Vikings are easily as good as Nebraska Wesleyan. But just seems like when the defending national champion returns this much, they are #1 until game results show otherwise.

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

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

What I'm saying is I think it's great a voter who truly feels Augustana is the best team had the conviction to rank them #1...instead of just picking NWU.

It's not like there is a ton of separation here between these top teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 4samuy on October 12, 2018, 09:27:34 PM

Seems pretty obvious. Giovanine hacked into the polls. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on October 12, 2018, 09:33:16 PM

Or, Giovanine found one of the voters and camped out on the edge of his or her office and proceeded to scream and yell until the voter finally relented...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 4samuy on October 12, 2018, 09:40:48 PM

I'm a big fan of Grey Giovanine. I'm not going there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 12, 2018, 09:50:32 PM

He threatened to hit the voter with his jacket throw. ;D

Actually, I'm a bit surprised Augie got only one #1 vote. NebWes is the defending champ and has almost everyone back, but they seem like the 2010 IWU baseball team - a team that got hotter than hell at the right time, but probably not the BEST overall team for the season (neither was even in the Top 25 entering the tourney). On the other hand, Augie brings almost everyone back AND returns Wofford. If I had a vote, I would've gone like the 'unknown voter'.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 12, 2018, 10:19:53 PM

Grey and I talked quite a bit the other day ... he never threatened me ... and you can see how I voted: http://bit.ly/2yf0J8C ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 12, 2018, 10:25:50 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 12, 2018, 02:54:06 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on October 11, 2018, 11:00:29 PM
I was a bit surprised at the Augustana #1 vote. Let me clarify - I had Augustana #2 and I think the Vikings are easily as good as Nebraska Wesleyan. But just seems like when the defending national champion returns this much, they are #1 until game results show otherwise.

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

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

I was going to vote Whitman #1 until I saw the transfers coming in to NWU. They'll more than replace what they lost, which, to me, earns them that top spot. If they were only returning four starters and relying on bench guys for replacement, then Whitman would've been my #1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on October 12, 2018, 10:49:49 PM

Quote from: 4samuy on October 12, 2018, 09:40:48 PM
I'm a big fan of Grey Giovanine. I'm not going there.

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

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

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 12, 2018, 10:53:18 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on October 12, 2018, 10:49:49 PM
Quote from: 4samuy on October 12, 2018, 09:40:48 PM
I'm a big fan of Grey Giovanine. I'm not going there.

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

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

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

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 4samuy on October 12, 2018, 11:18:27 PM

I'm pretty sure I said That I'm a Grey Giovanine fan. Did I mention Augustana?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 12, 2018, 11:21:42 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 12, 2018, 09:50:32 PM
He threatened to hit the voter with his jacket throw. ;D

Actually, I'm a bit surprised Augie got only one #1 vote. NebWes is the defending champ and has almost everyone back, but they seem like the 2010 IWU baseball team - a team that got hotter than hell at the right time, but probably not the BEST overall team for the season (neither was even in the Top 25 entering the tourney).

(https://thumbs.gfycat.com/JubilantEverlastingAldabratortoise-max-1mb.gif)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on October 12, 2018, 11:24:05 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 12, 2018, 10:53:18 PM
I don't know many coaches who wouldn't have tried the same. Heck, I'm guilty of the same in a soccer game knowing the ref might by me knowing the rules, maybe, better than him. LOL

In the don't know category, I don't know many coaches who can work the officials like Giovanine.

I am not upset that he tried, I am upset that it worked.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on October 12, 2018, 11:29:59 PM

^^^ So your beef is really with the official???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on October 13, 2018, 12:16:26 AM

No.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on October 13, 2018, 09:12:26 AM

Been busy and I just caught up on all the top 25 talk. Titan Q nailed it when he said he is surprised Loras is so low in ORV. I would probably put them in the tail end of my personal top 25. Many of you know that I am a MIAC guy, love seeing success for all teams, even the team in St. Paul that wears purple, so believe me when saying St. Thomas does not deserve their 23 poll points compared to Loras' 17. Now, UST has had two straight amazing recruiting classes (or so I have been told) but I need to see it on the court first before they enter the top 25. They lose their only consistently good player last year in Ryan Boll, makes for a lot of question marks for Johnny Tauer's team as they enter the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on October 13, 2018, 01:50:00 PM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on October 13, 2018, 09:12:26 AM
Been busy and I just caught up on all the top 25 talk. Titan Q nailed it when he said he is surprised Loras is so low in ORV. I would probably put them in the tail end of my personal top 25. Many of you know that I am a MIAC guy, love seeing success for all teams, even the team in St. Paul that wears purple, so believe me when saying St. Thomas does not deserve their 23 poll points compared to Loras' 17. Now, UST has had two straight amazing recruiting classes (or so I have been told) but I need to see it on the court first before they enter the top 25. They lose their only consistently good player last year in Ryan Boll, makes for a lot of question marks for Johnny Tauer's team as they enter the season.

Absolutely, Smitty. And we've all seen recruits with very lofty HS stats not amount to much at the college level no matter how much hype they've received prior to matriculation. Often these guys have compiled those stats against less than sterling competition at the HS level. But now, at the college level, they're going up against guys that were their HS team's best player almost every night. Big difference.
Conversely, we've all seen kids from larger schools that generally face tougher competition fall flat in college while many small school kids excel. It becomes a question of don't tell me what you've got, show me what you've got. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 15, 2018, 01:15:21 PM

My final blog is out with the final five spots on my preseason ballot: http://bit.ly/2P2qiDl

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

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 15, 2018, 02:39:49 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 15, 2018, 01:15:21 PM
My final blog is out with the final five spots on my preseason ballot: http://bit.ly/2P2qiDl

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

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

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 15, 2018, 02:47:37 PM

I'm puzzled by this comment in your blog, Dave:

QuoteThe MIAA certainly had an off year last season. Hope and Olivet tied atop the standings with four in-conference losses and Adrian and Trine finished third with six losses. Calvin was fifth with eight! You can't expect the conference to stay down for long.

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

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

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

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 15, 2018, 03:40:28 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 15, 2018, 02:39:49 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 15, 2018, 01:15:21 PM
My final blog is out with the final five spots on my preseason ballot: http://bit.ly/2P2qiDl

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

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

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

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 15, 2018, 03:41:54 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 15, 2018, 02:47:37 PM
I'm puzzled by this comment in your blog, Dave:

QuoteThe MIAA certainly had an off year last season. Hope and Olivet tied atop the standings with four in-conference losses and Adrian and Trine finished third with six losses. Calvin was fifth with eight! You can't expect the conference to stay down for long.

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

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

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

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

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 15, 2018, 04:16:03 PM

I'm not overthinking it at all, Dave. Your statement doesn't add up. The fact that the internal results of the league were anomalous by MIAA standards doesn't mean that the league was down, for the reasons that I explained. You're citing something that isn't a valid barometer. A league can be just as strong -- or even stronger -- if it's more internally competitive, with a plethora of decent-but-not-great teams, than it would be if it had two great teams steamrolling over a large cast of subpar also-rans twice per week.

It wouldn't have taken you five pages to cite that the league didn't have two tournament teams the way that it had the year before, when both Hope and Calvin got to dance (Hope was the only MIAA team in last season's tourney), or that Hope got bounced last March in the second round after having reached the Sweet Sixteen in 2016-17, since tourney performance is a common way of gauging league strength from year to year. Of course, non-conference W-L results as a whole, which is generally considered to be the best way to gauge an entire league's performance (because the strength of a league is best measured all the way from top to bottom), wouldn't have helped your thesis; last season the MIAA went 44-53 after having gone 43-54 the year before, which meant that (at least in terms of raw numbers) it was slightly better against other leagues last season than it had been the year previous.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 15, 2018, 05:01:58 PM

Sager - I know full well what I am writing, what I am thinking, and how I want to present things.

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

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

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

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

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

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 15, 2018, 06:16:01 PM

Over on the football site, we'd generally define a conference being up or down by their non-conference results (including the postseason), but we'd also consider in-conference results a positive for a conference in the event that the conference results include a new team at the top. That seems to be a sign that the lower teams in a conference are competitive, if one of them comes up and wins the thing. Intra-conference cannibalization isn't really something that helps us determine whether a conference is up or down -- that has to be something we look at on a case-by-case basis.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 15, 2018, 06:45:13 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 15, 2018, 05:01:58 PM
Sager - I know full well what I am writing, what I am thinking, and how I want to present things.

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

Yes, and my point is that your example is invalid. To be specific, it's a non causa pro causa, also known as a false-cause fallacy. In other words, in a season in which the top finishers in the MIAA took more losses in conference play than is usually the case for MIAA top finishers, it's entirely possible that the league was down as a whole -- but you can't prove it that way, because internal results remain constant from one year to the next. In 2016-17 the MIAA as a whole went 56-56 in league play. In 2017-18 the MIAA as a whole went 56-56 in league play. And, if Vegas was taking odds on how the MIAA would fare internally this coming season, I'd empty my savings account and let it all ride on the MIAA going 56-56 in league play this upcoming season.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 15, 2018, 05:01:58 PMIf you read any of the rest of my blogs, you will notice I made a comment about the ODAC not being as good at the top and thus maybe falling out of the Top 5 conferences conversation, BUT added that the depth of the conference from top to bottom could arguably keep the conference in that top five. Hint, hint ... I try not to use the same reasoning for every team or every situation. I try and keep it a bit mixed up. If that was my plan for the ODAC, it wasn't going to be my plan for the MIAA

I fully understood and applaud your reasoning for mixing it up from league to league. But that's not really the issue. The issue is whether your case for each league is valid. It is for the ODAC, because you're citing the accepted standard that league strength is measured from top to bottom. But your case isn't valid for the MIAA, because you based it upon internally-produced W-L numbers.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 15, 2018, 05:01:58 PM- furthermore, I don't think the MIAA was a better conference because there were more losses in the conference.

Again, there weren't more losses in the conference. The MIAA went .500 in league play last season, just like the season before and just like it will this coming season -- and just like it always did back in the day when Hope and Calvin were gutting the rest of the league like they were lake trout on a good day of fishing.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 15, 2018, 05:01:58 PMI am FULLY aware of how a conference can be deep and thus the conference can be very good. I am also fully aware that the top can come down while the bottom doesn't really improve much. That last example is where I was going with with the MIAA

... and that's a very valid thesis. But you didn't choose the proper supporting evidence for it. Your supporting evidence should've been external; in other words, you should've demonstrated that the bottom didn't improve much by proving it via non-conference W-L results.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 15, 2018, 05:01:58 PM... I (and MANY others) felt the top came down a bit last year and I do not feel the bottom of the conference improved itself. Thus, while you can try and make arguments for depth, I don't feel it was there for the MIAA.

I'm not making arguments for depth. I'm not making any arguments at all, pro or con, about the performance of the MIAA last season. I'm simply saying that any arguments made about how the 2017-18 MIAA compared to the league's previous seasons has to be made using valid criteria. In other words, my criticism is about your methodology, not about your analysis of the league's collective basketball prowess.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 15, 2018, 05:01:58 PMThat was the direction I chose. Not having two tournament teams I don't think is worth mentioning because there are a number of good (better than the MIAA) conferences who didn't have two tournament teams ... and we can start with the ODAC!

Agreed. I have always maintained that a league's tournament performance, while better than nothing (or better than an internal indicator), is not nearly as valid a proof of a league's strength as is overall non-conference W-L results. I'm not ready to promote the ARC to power-conference status on the basis of Nebraska Wesleyan's national championship, and I think that any serious and objective fan of an ARC men's basketball program would agree with me about that -- although the league is certainly better in this sport than it was before NWU was admitted into membership a few years ago.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 15, 2018, 05:01:58 PMI chose one out of about half a dozen ideas for why I wanted to present the point of view. You would have chosen something else. I don't honestly care as it was my blog and I felt the shorter reason and the one that jumped out to me more than any was more conference losses for the top of the conference. Feel free to write your own blog and your own Top 25 ballot, Greg.

No need to get snippy. I do appreciate your blog and (generally) your reasoning on such matters, and I likewise appreciate that you're the one d3hoops.com Top 25 pollster who regularly displays public transparency with his ballot. I simply take issue with the validity of your "shorter reason," that's all.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 15, 2018, 06:50:57 PM

Greg - I am going to get snippy when you tell me that my argument is invalid... it's my argument, thank you. I will make it as I see fit.

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

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 15, 2018, 06:58:03 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 15, 2018, 06:16:01 PM
Over on the football site, we'd generally define a conference being up or down by their non-conference results (including the postseason), but we'd also consider in-conference results a positive for a conference in the event that the conference results include a new team at the top. That seems to be a sign that the lower teams in a conference are competitive, if one of them comes up and wins the thing. Intra-conference cannibalization isn't really something that helps us determine whether a conference is up or down -- that has to be something we look at on a case-by-case basis.

Yep. A new team at the top constitutes what I refer to on CCIW Chat as "churn" -- the phenomenon in which there is regular turnover in terms of which teams are atop the standings, rather than the decades-long hegemony of the two Rivalry schools that characterized the MIAA for so long (and the NCAC as well throughout the long stretch of seasons when it was Wittenberg-Wooster-and-a-pantry-full-of-cupcakes).

I remember a few years ago when Bob Quillman said something to the effect of how, when it appeared that Matt Nadelhoffer was finally starting to build something at Millikin, it was a great thing for the CCIW because it meant that every program in the league was really "getting after it," in his words, and was fully doing everything it could possibly do to be as successful as possible. That's the kind of thing that typically shows up in non-conference play, as the teams that end up at the bottom of the standings in a given season will still win more often in November and December outside of the circuit. That was another way of stating that churn was in effect. Of course, churn's not always possible for everybody; institutional factors, for example, can keep a program from ever being competitive enough to rise to the top of the league (Caltech in the SCIAC is the obvious example in men's basketball). But, yeah, churn has a lot to do with identifying a league getting stronger, too, in my opinion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 15, 2018, 06:59:49 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 15, 2018, 06:50:57 PM
Greg - I am going to get snippy when you tell me that my argument is invalid... it's my argument, thank you. I will make it as I see fit.

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

I'm not forgetting anything, Dave. I'm simply saying that extra conference losses among the top teams in the league doesn't indicate anything at all, absent any other evidence.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on October 16, 2018, 11:47:45 AM

I agree with Sager. Wher I normally see it is in the middle tier of the best leagues. Teams just a skosh over .500 in league play could be much better than the runaway champ of another. When that middle tier starts winning against the upper tier, it probably means the league is BETTER, not worse, even with lesser W/L records.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on October 16, 2018, 01:35:36 PM

FWIW, I thought Adrian and Trine were better 3rd and 4th place teams than many previous years. We've been a little spoiled having had a few recent years where 3 or 4 MIAA teams have been quite good. I thought Olivet was inconsistent, but a good team last season. Hope's young team got better every week and if Sortillo doesn't go 7-10 from three, they might have gone down to Augustana and won. (He was just returning the favor after what Cody Stuive did to WashU the season prior).

I think when you have two schools that are traditional powerhouses (Hope and calvin) and have a history of dominating the conference, when one of those schools struggles, the perception is going to be that the conference is down. If Olivet wins the conference this season, I hope the national dialog becomes "Look at what Steve Ernst is doing at Olivet!" and not "What's wrong with the MIAA?" Now, inevitably, if the knights have another season like the last,...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on October 18, 2018, 11:44:54 AM

I'll cite Massey because that's what I do.

MIAA's ranking among D3 conferences:
2018: 8
2017: 13
2016: 6
2015: 11
2014: 18
2013: 11
2012: 18
2011: 7
2010: 11

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 02, 2018, 07:22:44 AM

In exhibition play, Loras defeated NCAA Division II power Augustana (SD) last night, 81-76. The vikings won the D2 national title in 2016.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dunkin3117 on November 02, 2018, 03:25:31 PM

An impressive win by the Duhawks, even if the Vikings are 'young' this year. You don't hear Calipari or K using that as an excuse :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: duckfan41 on November 02, 2018, 04:08:17 PM

Quote from: dunkin3117 on November 02, 2018, 03:25:31 PM
An impressive win by the Duhawks, even if the Vikings are 'young' this year. You don't hear Calipari or K using that as an excuse :)

Made more impressive with how balanced the scoring effort was. DiCanio lead them with 20, then they got 14 from both George and McGowan, and then 9 from Ruggles. This team is going to be fun to follow throughout the season, especially since they get to play #1 NWU twice within conference play. Another marquee game for them is when they welcome the D3 Augustana to Dubuque during the week of Thanksgiving on Nov. 21st.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 02, 2018, 05:22:24 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on October 18, 2018, 11:44:54 AM
I'll cite Massey because that's what I do.

MIAA's ranking among D3 conferences:
2018: 8
2017: 13
2016: 6
2015: 11
2014: 18
2013: 11
2012: 18
2011: 7
2010: 11

I don't think the MIAA was down last year, but I wouldn't call it the strongest either. What it is right now is very balanced, more so than at any point probably in the 30 or so years I've been following along. I like massey but I think last year the MIAA got a bit too much credit for playing very difficult out of conference schedules (it well be even more so this year). I can't really recall the league having a signature win last year other than Hope over John Carroll, the league didn't beat any other ranked programs that I can think of right now other than Hope beating Augsburg in the tournament.

Our pair of champions last year were probably the weakest we've presented at the end of a season in that 30 years (that's using efficiency and the like so caveats's apply). However teams 3 and 4 were equally as good and one or two different results in close margin games (and we had a ton of those) and either Adrian or Trine could have won the MIAA as well. Our #5 and #7 were hit with the injury bugs, full strength and they'd be right up there too. Calvin went 3-5 vs the top 4 even without their best player.

This year will most likely be the same but I hope a little better in those big regional games against the ranked team kind, and I'll even submit our #8 is going to be the best #8 team we've probably ever had. Its just someone has to finish last.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 15, 2018, 06:50:57 PM
Greg - I am going to get snippy when you tell me that my argument is invalid... it's my argument, thank you. I will make it as I see fit.

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

But an argument about whether a conference is up or down should include all teams not just the top half. The bottom of the MIAA won more games than they've
collectively won in quite a long time I'd bet. The leagues worst team record was 8-17. The only conference around the MIAA (Great Lakes and Central Regions) that didn't have at least one team with a worse overall record was the WIAC and that was 8-17 Stout.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 02, 2018, 05:32:56 PM

Yes... the bottom of the league won more games. I haven't argued they didn't. That is not unexected when the top of the league is losing more games. Those losses result in wins.

My contention is this: while the top of the league lost more games and the bottom of the league won more games .. I do NOT think it is because the bottom of the league improved. I feel it was because the top of the league had declined and thus they were more prone to losses they normally never take.

You even said so yourself in saying the top two teams were probably the weakest seen in the last 30 years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 02, 2018, 06:56:49 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 02, 2018, 05:32:56 PM
Yes... the bottom of the league won more games. I haven't argued they didn't. That is not unexected when the top of the league is losing more games. Those losses result in wins.

My contention is this: while the top of the league lost more games and the bottom of the league won more games .. I do NOT think it is because the bottom of the league improved. I feel it was because the top of the league had declined and thus they were more prone to losses they normally never take.

You even said so yourself in saying the top two teams were probably the weakest seen in the last 30 years.

Weakest in comparison to other MIAA Champions which are usually but not always historically top 15 or better squads. I'd also emphatically say the bottom of the league was a lot better than any of the other years I've been watching.. The league was compressed top to bottom.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dunkin3117 on November 02, 2018, 09:01:25 PM

Quote from: duckfan41 on November 02, 2018, 04:08:17 PM
Quote from: dunkin3117 on November 02, 2018, 03:25:31 PM
An impressive win by the Duhawks, even if the Vikings are 'young' this year. You don't hear Calipari or K using that as an excuse :)

Made more impressive with how balanced the scoring effort was. DiCanio lead them with 20, then they got 14 from both George and McGowan, and then 9 from Ruggles. This team is going to be fun to follow throughout the season, especially since they get to play #1 NWU twice within conference play. Another marquee game for them is when they welcome the D3 Augustana to Dubuque during the week of Thanksgiving on Nov. 21st.

UW-Whitewater will also be making the trip to Dubuque. Some big games for this Duhawk team

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 04, 2018, 04:01:00 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=hose0/hok5qio2xsm38omm.jpg)

Welcome to the 2018-19 Division III basketball season!

The season also gets tipped off a week earlier than normal as the new start is now November 8. With an earlier start date comes an earlier start (and more total shows) for Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) as well.

On the season debut of the 16th season of Hoopsville, Dave McHugh will chat with the two preseason top picks, and defending champions, along with a coach who made a big move in the offseason.

Dave will also talk about a lot of the hot topics entering the season including not only normal coaching changes, but also last minute changes including in the Top 10 of women's basketball.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. Sunday's debut will hit the air at 7:00 p.m. ET. You can watch the show here: http://bit.ly/2PHzL3o

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or share them on social media.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Dale Wellman, No. 1 Nebraska Wesleyan men's head coach
- Pat Juckem, WashU men's head coach
- G.P. Gromacki, No. 1 Amherst women's head coach

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts instead, you can get access to them or subscribe one of the three following ways (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on November 05, 2018, 12:10:40 AM

Dave and company, the first half of the show didn't record and was not on the apple podcast show and when I go to soundcloud. You probably know but just thought I would inform you here to make sure.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 05, 2018, 12:30:11 PM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on November 05, 2018, 12:10:40 AM
Dave and company, the first half of the show didn't record and was not on the apple podcast show and when I go to soundcloud. You probably know but just thought I would inform you here to make sure.

Hmm... I think I know what happened. Going to take a bit to fix. Will be updated when I can. I assume you are talking about ONLY the podcast.

Not sure what's up with Apple... need to figure out what might have changed there. That's all automated.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 05, 2018, 12:39:24 PM

I am in the process of replacing the file on SoundCloud (which will populate the other three sources) with the correct file. There is a bunch of "what?!" in that file. I think I know what happened, but can't really recreate it. It appears it is a stupid glitch with my audio editing software that sometimes ignores where i put the cursor, timeline indicator.

As for Apple... I see it when I'm looking at the podcast information in the "Apple Store." It did not automatically download to my computer, but I also may not have had it set-up right after an update on my end. I don't know how quickly or not Apple updates podcasts when they are uploaded. I will watch to see when it may "update" with the newer version.

Thanks for letting me know. I have made the necessary fixes, I hope. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 05, 2018, 04:24:47 PM

To follow up on Apple Podcasts ... it hasn't updated with the new version of our show, but I did read it can take 24 hours for Apple to populate. Not sure when they might update our episode... also not sure if that's why it wasn't ready when you went to look for it AndOne.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on November 05, 2018, 10:08:35 PM

Dave, it's all fixed!!

I usually listen to the podcast version of Hoopsville on apple podcasts. But when I went to listen last night it started with the interview of the Amherst WBB coach... I tried to listen from computer through SoundCloud and it started at the same spot. Anyways, although it didn't notify me a new podcast is available when I tried to listen tonight it started from the beginning of your show!

Glad you were able to fix it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 05, 2018, 11:07:14 PM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on November 05, 2018, 10:08:35 PM
Dave, it's all fixed!!

I usually listen to the podcast version of Hoopsville on apple podcasts. But when I went to listen last night it started with the interview of the Amherst WBB coach... I tried to listen from computer through SoundCloud and it started at the same spot. Anyways, although it didn't notify me a new podcast is available when I tried to listen tonight it started from the beginning of your show!

Glad you were able to fix it.

Well, the reason it was the same on Apple as it was SoundCloud is because we don't upload to all of our providers. We upload to one source and that then is populated (via RSS) to the other providers. That's basically how that works for everyone.

Like I said, it was a stupid editing thing I didn't spot. It is a long explanation that only frustrates me. However, if you had listened for about 38 minutes ... you would have probably noticed an abrupt switch to the first half of the show :).

Yes, I am not surprised you didn't get a notification. That's because to keep from losing the analytical data, I simply replaced the audio file at our source. That simply re-populates our providers again. Thus, there isn't a "new" podcast ... we just replaced the content of that podcast. :)

Thanks for the understanding. I need to remember the glitch to watch out for ... again. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 06, 2018, 02:13:20 PM

Figured we could try and promote some of the hard work our columnists, like Ryan Scott, do on a weekly basis... so here it goes:

Around the Nation: Facing a new challenge

The 2018-19 season brings new challenges for coaches across Division III. For Pat Juckem, it's leaving a national finalist to follow a legendary coach at Wash U. For his replacement, it's keeping the Oshkosh momentum going. And for Bob Amsberry, it's replacing the best class in Wartburg women's basketball history. Ryan Scott has more: http://www.d3hoops.com/columns/around-the-nation/index

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=hsbh0/14nk4j76y2d5h3j9.jpg)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 08, 2018, 12:57:14 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=hvyzk/c7ilgsb2hi8om3w0.jpg)

The 2018-19 season is officially underway and so is Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com). While normally Dave McHugh would be coming to you live from the WBCA/NABC Studio, with the tip-off of the season also comes with it basketball games for Dave.

Thursday's show is a pre-taped preview of the upcoming season. Can either of the preseason number one teams stay on top the entire season? How many teams have a legitamate chance of playing for a national title? Who could possibly be sleepers or surprise? What games should fans be watching early on to get a sense of the season ahead?

The answers to those questions are completely different if you are talking men's or women's basketball. So, on Thursday's show Dave brings in colleagues to give the answers. Gordon Mann and Ryan Scott lend their opinions and insight on the season ahead.

Also, one of the more surprising coaching developments in the last year was the fact Hall of Fame, and former UConn, coach Jim Calhoun was throwing his hat in the DIII ring. We chat with him about why he decided to lead the St. Joseph's (Conn.) program and what to expect out of it's first season.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. Thursday's edition will be available at 7:00 p.m. ET here: http://bit.ly/2qBF3Pz

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or use any of our social media options listed below.

Guest Schedule:
- Gordon Mann, Deputy Editor, D3hoops.com
- Jim Calhoun, St. Joseph's (Conn.) men's head coach
- Ryan Scott, Columnist, D3hoops.com

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts instead, you can get access to them or subscribe one of the three following ways (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Caz Bombers on November 08, 2018, 01:41:21 PM

Nice pull getting Calhoun on your podcast, congrats Dave!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 08, 2018, 01:45:53 PM

Quote from: Caz Bombers on November 08, 2018, 01:41:21 PM
Nice pull getting Calhoun on your podcast, congrats Dave!

Dave has "people".

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 08, 2018, 03:39:54 PM

Quote from: Caz Bombers on November 08, 2018, 01:41:21 PM
Nice pull getting Calhoun on your podcast, congrats Dave!

Thank you ... I appreciate that when we call or email, that people know we are legit. That helps as well.

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 08, 2018, 01:45:53 PM
Dave has "people".

Sometimes we do ... sometimes we are lucky. Let's say this might be in the middle. :)

Coach Calhoun has some nice words at the start of the interview. Oh, and we did ask him the "NABC Coach's Corner" quiz because ... well, why not?!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 08, 2018, 04:23:13 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 08, 2018, 01:45:53 PM
Quote from: Caz Bombers on November 08, 2018, 01:41:21 PM
Nice pull getting Calhoun on your podcast, congrats Dave!

Dave has "people".

In Chicago, we say "guy", as in:

"How we gonna fix da plumbing in da community center? We don' have dat much money."

"Don' worry, I godda guy."

When it comes to securing interviews with Hall of Fame bigshots, Dave's godda guy.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 08, 2018, 08:14:34 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 08, 2018, 04:23:13 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 08, 2018, 01:45:53 PM
Quote from: Caz Bombers on November 08, 2018, 01:41:21 PM
Nice pull getting Calhoun on your podcast, congrats Dave!

Dave has "people".

In Chicago, we say "guy", as in:

"How we gonna fix da plumbing in da community center? We don' have dat much money."

"Don' worry, I godda guy."

When it comes to securing interviews with Hall of Fame bigshots, Dave's godda guy.

HAHA I say that "guy" thing to this day. You can take a person out of Chicago, but you can't take Chicago out of a ... guy. :)

Interview and show delayed. No idea how, but we uploaded it and "scheduled" it to release . It has, instead, disappeared. Worst case, it will be up when I get home from my game. SMH

Sorry folks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on November 08, 2018, 10:40:56 PM

With Olaf losing to Eau Claire, the first top 25 has officially lost a game in the 2018-2019 season... let the craziness and unreal parity of this D3 season ensue!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 09, 2018, 08:46:09 AM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on November 08, 2018, 10:40:56 PM
With Olaf losing to Eau Claire, the first top 25 has officially lost a game in the 2018-2019 season... let the craziness and unreal parity of this D3 season ensue!

That's a big upset. Sure St. Olaf is "only ranked" 23rd, but Eau Claire was 4-10 in the WIAC last year and they were picked 7th this season. They lost their top two big scorers and the their top returning scorer averaged 6.7 pts a game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on November 09, 2018, 02:05:03 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 09, 2018, 08:46:09 AM
Quote from: Smitty Oom on November 08, 2018, 10:40:56 PM
With Olaf losing to Eau Claire, the first top 25 has officially lost a game in the 2018-2019 season... let the craziness and unreal parity of this D3 season ensue!

That's a big upset. Sure St. Olaf is "only ranked" 23rd, but Eau Claire was 4-10 in the WIAC last year and they were picked 7th this season. They lost their top two big scorers and the their top returning scorer averaged 6.7 pts a game.

The FFTMAG Ratings predicted a 4-point Eau Claire win, so the result wasn't a huge surprise to everyone. ;)

http://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com/p/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency.html

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 09, 2018, 03:12:45 PM

Well, regardless of what your computers say, I still think it was a pretty big upset. I would guess that most would agree. I mean, the pollsters gave the Oles 92 more points than Eau Claire and I'm sure no one thought of giving them any votes. 🤔😎😋😂

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fantastic50 on November 09, 2018, 03:29:50 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on November 09, 2018, 02:05:03 PM

The FFTMAG Ratings predicted a 4-point Eau Claire win, so the result wasn't a huge surprise to everyone. ;)

http://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com/p/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency.html

How are the preseason "priors" for those rankings computed? Wooster starting at #142 stands out a bit.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on November 10, 2018, 12:31:52 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 09, 2018, 03:12:45 PM
Well, regardless of what your computers say, I still think it was a pretty big upset. I would guess that most would agree. I mean, the pollsters gave the Oles 92 more points than Eau Claire and I'm sure no one thought of giving them any votes. 🤔😎😋😂

The computer is never wrong.

Quote from: fantastic50 on November 09, 2018, 03:29:50 PM
How are the preseason "priors" for those rankings computed? Wooster starting at #142 stands out a bit.

Yeah, it definitely looks like the computer might be wrong there. I'll check it in the morning.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 10, 2018, 12:35:57 AM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on November 10, 2018, 12:31:52 AM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 09, 2018, 03:12:45 PM
Well, regardless of what your computers say, I still think it was a pretty big upset. I would guess that most would agree. I mean, the pollsters gave the Oles 92 more points than Eau Claire and I'm sure no one thought of giving them any votes. 🤔😎😋😂

The computer is never wrong.

Quote from: fantastic50 on November 09, 2018, 03:29:50 PM
How are the preseason "priors" for those rankings computed? Wooster starting at #142 stands out a bit.

Yeah, it definitely looks like the computer might be wrong there. I'll check it in the morning.

DAMN IT MAN! I can NEVER trust you again. NEVER I SAY!

Just kidding. :)

And yes, this will be used in the future. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on November 10, 2018, 12:50:09 AM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on November 10, 2018, 12:31:52 AM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 09, 2018, 03:12:45 PM
Well, regardless of what your computers say, I still think it was a pretty big upset. I would guess that most would agree. I mean, the pollsters gave the Oles 92 more points than Eau Claire and I'm sure no one thought of giving them any votes. 🤔😎😋😂

The computer is never wrong.

Quote from: fantastic50 on November 09, 2018, 03:29:50 PM
How are the preseason "priors" for those rankings computed? Wooster starting at #142 stands out a bit.

Yeah, it definitely looks like the computer might be wrong there. I'll check it in the morning.

OK, I couldn't sleep with this sort of thing hanging over me so I went ahead and fixed it. How does #22 sound for Wooster? The formulas weren't copied down all the way to the W's somehow.

Aside: If anyone wants to teach me Python so I don't have to use Excel like a dummy, that would be great.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 10, 2018, 09:27:00 AM

I can only use Excel like a dummy. I am pretty sure I stopped learning new Excel functionality sometime in 1998.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 10, 2018, 10:05:05 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 10, 2018, 09:27:00 AM
I can only use Excel like a dummy. I am pretty sure I stopped learning new Excel functionality sometime in 1998.

I don't feel too bad now. I use the free version of Excel in Open Office.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on November 10, 2018, 10:20:18 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 10, 2018, 10:05:05 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 10, 2018, 09:27:00 AM
I can only use Excel like a dummy. I am pretty sure I stopped learning new Excel functionality sometime in 1998.

I don't feel too bad now. I use the free version of Excel in Open Office.

Just to make sure we're all good, the dummy comment was pointed at myself and myself only.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 10, 2018, 11:10:21 AM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on November 10, 2018, 10:20:18 AM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 10, 2018, 10:05:05 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 10, 2018, 09:27:00 AM
I can only use Excel like a dummy. I am pretty sure I stopped learning new Excel functionality sometime in 1998.

I don't feel too bad now. I use the free version of Excel in Open Office.

Just to make sure we're all good, the dummy comment was pointed at myself and myself only.

If you were calling anyone who uses Excel a "dummy," speaking for myself and myself only, I've been called worse. 🤔😋

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 10, 2018, 12:13:23 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 10, 2018, 10:05:05 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 10, 2018, 09:27:00 AM
I can only use Excel like a dummy. I am pretty sure I stopped learning new Excel functionality sometime in 1998.

I don't feel too bad now. I use the free version of Excel in Open Office.

I also use the Open Office suite. Completely free and has all the functionality of M$ products

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 11, 2018, 04:02:17 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=i1q1b/rnrfjfjup0a26thl.jpg)

The season is kind of, sort of, possibly underway in Division III. With the earlier start being decided less than ten months prior, not every program was able to take advantage of the new date. There are still teams who haven't tipped off their seasons while others have already played two or three games this season.

That doesn't mean we can't find topics to talk about on Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com)!

Sunday, Dave is back live in studio with plenty of DIII conversation. Plus coaches talk about (high) expectations and being in charge of a program for the first time. Can St. Thomas women take the next step as a program? How will MIT's season be engineered? And from All-American to head coach, what it's like to take over a program for the first time.

Plus, the winningest men's coach in Division III history will not start the season on the bench. More on what has lead Glenn Robinson to take a medical leave of absence.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. Sunday's show will hit the air at 7:00 p.m. ET and be watched here: http://bit.ly/2PPm16G. If you miss the show, you can always watch it On Demand. An audio-only podcast will also be available on the right side of the page (available shortly after the show goes off air).

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or use any of the social media options to the right.

Guests Scheduled (order subject to change):
- Larry Anderson, No. 5 MIT men's coach
- Ruth Sinn, No. 5 St. Thomas women's head coach
- Mike McGarvey, Lycoming men's coach

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts instead, you can get access to them or subscribe one of the three following ways (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 11, 2018, 04:40:46 PM

I watched the Yeshiva game today. The Macs played pretty poorly in the first half and were still comfortably ahead at the break. They got the lead up to 18 early in the second half - to the place where good teams extend and put the game away. Yeshiva got lazy, settling for bad shots and not playing 100% - they let FDU-Florham back into the game and ultimately to win a game they should've lost by 30.

A lot of progress necessary there, but still there's a lot more talent than they had last year. I don't regret my vote.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BaboNation on November 12, 2018, 06:59:40 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 08, 2018, 03:39:54 PM
Quote from: Caz Bombers on November 08, 2018, 01:41:21 PM
Nice pull getting Calhoun on your podcast, congrats Dave!

Thank you ... I appreciate that when we call or email, that people know we are legit. That helps as well.

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 08, 2018, 01:45:53 PM
Dave has "people".

Sometimes we do ... sometimes we are lucky. Let's say this might be in the middle. :)

Coach Calhoun has some nice words at the start of the interview. Oh, and we did ask him the "NABC Coach's Corner" quiz because ... well, why not?!

This is going to really date me, but earlier in the Holocene epoch I regularly went to games in Boston. I had a friend who played at UMaine and whenever they came to town I'd attend. When they played Northeastern Calhoun was coaching, and when they played BU (as in Boston U) Pitino was coaching.
No one had any idea what amazing careers they would have.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fantastic50 on November 13, 2018, 02:39:29 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on November 10, 2018, 12:50:09 AM
Quote from: KnightSlappy on November 10, 2018, 12:31:52 AM

Quote from: fantastic50 on November 09, 2018, 03:29:50 PM
How are the preseason "priors" for those rankings computed? Wooster starting at #142 stands out a bit.

Yeah, it definitely looks like the computer might be wrong there. I'll check it in the morning.

OK, I couldn't sleep with this sort of thing hanging over me so I went ahead and fixed it. How does #22 sound for Wooster? The formulas weren't copied down all the way to the W's somehow.

Aside: If anyone wants to teach me Python so I don't have to use Excel like a dummy, that would be great.

The formula copying issue sounds like a mistake I would make! As someone who does computer rankings, I hate to be the guy that asks, "Why is ____ ranked so low?" but that one stood out just a bit too far. #22 seems more than fair, given the losses to graduation. Thanks!

A decade ago, I switched from Excel to MATLAB for most data-driven projects, but now need to make the jump to Python, as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on November 13, 2018, 03:16:35 PM

Quote from: fantastic50 on November 13, 2018, 02:39:29 PM
A decade ago, I switched from Excel to MATLAB for most data-driven projects, but now need to make the jump to Python, as well.

Maybe we can collaborate on a project.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 13, 2018, 03:36:41 PM

Maybe one, any, of you can explain to me how to grab XML or other data on the internet ... to save me a ton of work when I put my game sheets together (using Excel). :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fantastic50 on November 14, 2018, 04:52:15 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on November 13, 2018, 03:16:35 PM
Quote from: fantastic50 on November 13, 2018, 02:39:29 PM
A decade ago, I switched from Excel to MATLAB for most data-driven projects, but now need to make the jump to Python, as well.

Maybe we can collaborate on a project.

That would be cool. I have some students signed up for my spring Math Modeling course (the class that did predictions of the Pool C teams last year) who might be interested in sports-related final projects, so if you have an idea that seems to fit, send me an email at some point between now & February.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 15, 2018, 07:06:59 AM

How They Fared (So Far)
It's that time of year again ... because of the early start date, it's possible my program might have missed a game here or there ...

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	624	Nebraska Wesleyan	2-0	def. Grinnell, 143-90; def. Bethany Lutheran, 104-85; 11/16 vs. Carroll; 11/17 vs. St. Norbert
#2	567	UW-Oshkosh	0-0	11/16 vs. Piedmont; 11/17 vs. TBA
#3	539	Augustana	0-0	11/16 vs. Alma; 11/17 vs. Calvin
#4	529	Whitman	1-0	def. #32 LeTourneau, 104-90; 11/16 vs. Sul Ross State; 11/17 vs. Concordia (Texas)
#5	463	MIT	0-0	11/15 vs. Endicott; 11/17 vs. Eastern Nazarene
#6	462	Whitworth	0-0	11/16 vs. #23 St. Olaf; 11/17 vs. Whittier
#7	431	Springfield	2-0	def. Western New England, 95-84; def. T#52 Keene State, 89-81; 11/17 vs. Ohio Wesleyan; 11/18 vs. TBA
#8	417	Williams	0-0	11/17 vs. T#52 Salem State; 11/18 vs. TBA
#9	400	Hamilton	0-0	11/17 vs. Centenary (N.J.); 11/18 vs. York (N.Y.)
#10	367	UW-Platteville	0-0	11/16 vs. Concordia (Wis.); 11/17 vs. #25 St. John's
#11	366	Wittenberg	0-0	11/16 vs. Goucher; 11/17 vs. Juniata
#12	356	UW-Stevens Point	1-0	def. #23 St. Olaf, 54-41; 11/17 vs. Buena Vista
#13	329	Swarthmore	1-0	def. TCNJ, 82-65; 11/17 vs. Delaware Valley
#14	214	Plattsburgh State	2-0	def. Clarkson, 105-95; def. Skidmore, 83-75; 11/16 vs. SUNY-Canton
#15	206	Johns Hopkins	1-1	def. Moravian, 81-75; LOST to York (Pa.), 72-78; 11/16 vs. DeSales; 11/17 vs. TBA
#16	179	New Jersey City	0-1	LOST to Stevens, 72-76; 11/16 vs. Eastern Mennonite; 11/17 vs. Bridgewater (Va.)
#17	166	Middlebury	0-0	11/18 vs. Vermont Tech
#18	147	Emory	1-0	def. Piedmont, 98-80; 11/16 vs. Staten Island; 11/17 vs. Roanoke/Keuka
#19	142	Illinois Wesleyan	1-0	def. Chicago, 81-73; 11/16 vs. Calvin; 11/17 vs. Alma
#20	129	John Carroll	0-0	11/16 vs. Johnson and Wales; 11/17 vs. Buffalo State
#21	107	Wooster	1-0	def. Muskingum, 108-100; 11/17 vs. Mount St. Joseph
#22	95	Maryville (Tenn.)	0-0	11/17 vs. Eastern; 11/18 vs. T#50 Emory and Henry
#23	92	St. Olaf	0-2	LOST to UW-Eau Claire, 75-80; LOST to #12 UW-Stevens Point, 41-54; 11/16 vs. #6 Whitworth; 11/17 vs. George Fox
#24	81	UW-Whitewater	1-0	def. Anderson, 98-82; 11/16 vs. #25 St. John's; 11/17 vs. Concordia (Wis.)
#25	77	St. John's	1-0	def. Minnesota-Morris, 95-54; 11/16 vs. #24 UW-Whitewater; 11/17 vs. #10 UW-Platteville

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	76	Hope	0-0	11/16 vs. Greenville; 11/17 vs. TBD
#27	67	Rochester	1-0	def. Rochester Tech, 68-43; 11/16 vs. Houghton; 11/17 vs. TBA
#28	60	Nazareth	0-0	11/16 vs. Hiram; 11/17 vs. TBA
#29	47	Marietta	2-0	def. Bethany, 93-63; def. Otterbein, 98-66; 11/16 vs. La Roche
#30	42	Roanoke	1-1	LOST to Ursinus, 64-72; def. (n) Clarks Summit, 90-47; 11/16 vs. Keuka; 11/17 vs. Championship/Consolation
#31	36	Amherst	0-0	11/16 vs. Framingham State; 11/17 vs. TBA
#32	35	LeTourneau	1-1	def. Willamette, 73-72; LOST to Whitman, 90-104; 11/16 vs. Schreiner; 11/17 vs. Texas Lutheran
#33	33	Ramapo	2-0	def. Western Connecticut, 83-80; def. #55 Yeshiva, 72-69; 11/16 vs. Gordon; 11/17 vs. TBA
#34	26	Penn State-Behrend	0-0	11/17 vs. Carnegie Mellon
#35	25	Nichols	1-0	def. Fitchburg State, 84-75; 11/17 vs. Lasell
#36	23	St. Thomas	0-0	11/15 vs. Brooklyn; 11/17 vs. Emerson
#37	20	Washington U.	1-1	def. Illinois College, 91-62; LOST to Webster, 64-72
T#38	19	Aurora	0-0	IDLE
T#38	19	North Central (Ill.)	0-0	11/17 vs. Heidelberg
#40	17	Loras	1-0	def. Greenville, 147-129; 11/16 vs. St. Scholastica; 11/17 vs. Olivet
T#41	14	Cabrini	0-1	LOST to Eastern, 77-84; 11/16 vs. Baldwin Wallace; 11/17 vs. TBA
T#41	14	Franklin and Marshall	1-0	def. Albright, 81-74; 11/16 vs. Alvernia; 11/17 vs. TBA
#43	11	Pomona-Pitzer	0-0	11/17 vs. Biola
#44	10	Wesleyan	0-0	11/16 vs. Becker; 11/17 vs. TBD; 11/17 vs. TBD
#45	9	Montclair State	1-0	def. Staten Island, 84-70; 11/16 vs. Penn College; 11/17 vs. CCNY
#46	8	Eastern Connecticut	0-0	11/16 vs. William Paterson; 11/17 vs. TBA
#47	6	Christopher Newport	0-0	11/17 vs. Trinity (Texas); 11/18 vs. TBA
T#48	5	Hanover	1-0	def. Spalding, 78-55; 11/16 vs. Akron-Wayne; 11/17 vs. Kent State - Tuscarawas
T#48	5	Bethel	0-0	11/16 vs. UW-Eau Claire; 11/17 vs. UW-Stout
T#50	3	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	0-0	11/17 vs. Chicago; 11/18 vs. TBA
T#50	3	Emory and Henry	2-0	def. Thomas More, 72-65; def. Transylvania, 95-73; 11/17 vs. Webster; 11/18 vs. #22 Maryville (Tenn.)
T#52	2	Keene State	1-1	def. T#52 Salem State, 89-64; LOST to #7 Springfield, 81-89
T#52	2	Ohio Northern	1-0	def. Defiance, 99-61; 11/17 vs. Denison
T#52	2	Salem State	1-1	LOST to T#52 Keene State, 64-89; def. Mass-Dartmouth, 87-85; 11/17 vs. #8 Williams; 11/18 vs. TBD
#55	1	Yeshiva	0-2	LOST to FDU-Florham, 68-69; LOST to #33 Ramapo, 69-72

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 15, 2018, 02:47:41 PM

Long road ahead for Thomas More

It's going to be a long road ahead for Thomas More, writes Ryan Scott, while Whitman brought back a ton of talent from last year's team and has to somehow find playing time for even more people! Check it out in this week's Around the Nation.

https://www.d3hoops.com/columns/around-the-nation/index

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=i7y32/3smrnzi3wuek4o6r.jpg)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 15, 2018, 04:41:25 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=i9689/vzqsd01yy00xoief.jpg)

The season is a week old. There have been some interest results and certainly some early upsets, but the bulk of games really gets going in earnest now.

On Thursday's episode of Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave chats with a couple of programs who are getting some national attention, but not everyone may know who they are. One features an All-America selection. The other have plenty of options to give any defense fits.

But not all the news is positive, Dave also breaks down the Fitchburg State incident (https://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2018/11/fitchburg-state-kewan-platt-decks-opponent-ejected-suspended) in their game against Nichols.

Thursday's show also features Karin Harvey, Montclair State women's coach and chair of the National Women's Basketball Committee. Harvey is entering her third year on the national committee, but first as chair. The conversation will encompass what, if any, changes fans and others should expect from the Regional Ranking and national tournament process.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. Thursday's edition will air starting at 7:00 pm.m ET here: http://bit.ly/2qNG3Ag.

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or use any of the social media options to the right.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Karin Harvey, No. 24 Montclair St. head coach & Chair, National Women's Basketball Committee
- Rich Bensman, Ohio Northern men's coach
- Anne Crutchfield, No. 23 Emory & Henry women's coach

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts instead, you can get access to them or subscribe one of the three following ways (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on November 15, 2018, 07:39:57 PM

yikes....Endicott 52 #5 MIT 32 at half..... Endicott raining down 3 pointers....12 of 23

FINAL Endicott 90 MIT 73

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 16, 2018, 09:35:45 AM

Pardon me if I've missed this in the recent discussion ... Will the first in-season poll be released on November 26? That would correspond to the date of the first poll from last year, but given the earlier start this season, I did not want to assume ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 16, 2018, 12:10:30 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on November 16, 2018, 09:35:45 AM
Pardon me if I've missed this in the recent discussion ... Will the first in-season poll be released on November 26? That would correspond to the date of the first poll from last year, but given the earlier start this season, I did not want to assume ...

Yes - I believe that is the timing. All kind of oddities this year with (a) starting earlier and (b) having a "longer" November (five Thursdays). Unless something changed, that is the plan at this time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 16, 2018, 02:59:53 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 16, 2018, 12:10:30 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on November 16, 2018, 09:35:45 AM
Pardon me if I've missed this in the recent discussion ... Will the first in-season poll be released on November 26? That would correspond to the date of the first poll from last year, but given the earlier start this season, I did not want to assume ...

Yes - I believe that is the timing. All kind of oddities this year with (a) starting earlier and (b) having a "longer" November (five Thursdays). Unless something changed, that is the plan at this time.

We also have the odd timing of the season change - most schools had their schedules set already, which meant to too many games before the 15th to begin with.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 16, 2018, 08:24:51 PM

That is the timing, yes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 18, 2018, 05:51:46 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	624	Nebraska Wesleyan	4-0	def. Grinnell, 143-90; def. Bethany Lutheran, 104-85; def. Carroll, 70-64; def. (n) St. Norbert, 77-67; 11/23 vs. Redlands; 11/24 vs. Olivet
#2	567	UW-Oshkosh	1-1	def. (n) Piedmont, 86-77; LOST to Wheaton (Ill.), 74-86; 11/20 vs. Edgewood
#3	539	Augustana	2-0	def. Alma, 85-74; def. Calvin, 86-67; 11/21 vs. #40 Loras; 11/24 vs. Rockford
#4	529	Whitman	3-0	def. #32 LeTourneau, 104-90; def. Sul Ross State, 97-61; def. Concordia (Texas), 124-92; 11/23 vs. T#50 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps; 11/24 vs. #43 Pomona-Pitzer
#5	463	MIT	1-1	LOST to Endicott, 73-90; def. Eastern Nazarene, 86-55; 11/20 vs. Tufts; 11/24 vs. T#52 Keene State
#6	462	Whitworth	2-0	def. (n) #23 St. Olaf, 75-55; def. (n) Whittier, 90-76; 11/23 vs. Trinity (Texas); 11/24 vs. Texas-Dallas
#7	431	Springfield	2-2	def. Western New England, 95-84; def. T#52 Keene State, 89-81; LOST to (n) Ohio Wesleyan, 66-80; LOST to (n) T#50 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 64-85
#8	417	Williams	2-0	def. T#52 Salem State, 91-79; def. Southern Vermont, 88-57; 11/20 vs. Massachusetts College; 11/24 vs. Manhattanville; 11/25 vs. #55 Yeshiva
#9	400	Hamilton	2-0	def. Centenary (N.J.), 97-72; def. York (N.Y.), 125-65; 11/20 vs. Bard; 11/24 vs. Transylvania; 11/25 vs. TBA
#10	367	UW-Platteville	1-1	def. Concordia (Wis.), 74-60; LOST to #25 St. John's, 55-71; 11/20 vs. Simpson
#11	366	Wittenberg	2-0	def. (n) Goucher, 65-51; def. (n) Juniata, 80-60; 11/20 vs. Capital; 11/25 vs. Otterbein
#12	356	UW-Stevens Point	2-0	def. #23 St. Olaf, 54-41; def. Buena Vista, 87-72; 11/24 vs. Edgewood
#13	329	Swarthmore	2-0	def. TCNJ, 82-65; def. Delaware Valley, 88-55; 11/20 vs. Washington College; 11/25 vs. Arcadia
#14	214	Plattsburgh State	3-0	def. Clarkson, 105-95; def. Skidmore, 83-75; def. SUNY-Canton, 87-71
#15	206	Johns Hopkins	2-2	def. Moravian, 81-75; LOST to York (Pa.), 72-78; def. (n) DeSales, 85-78; LOST to Salisbury, 69-78; 11/20 vs. McDaniel; 11/25 vs. Marymount
#16	179	New Jersey City	2-1	LOST to Stevens, 72-76; def. Eastern Mennonite, 76-67; def. (n) Bridgewater (Va.), 73-70 OT; 11/20 vs. Kean; 11/24 vs. Farmingdale State
#17	166	Middlebury	1-0	def. Vermont Tech, 99-65; 11/20 vs. NVU-Johnson; 11/25 vs. Endicott
#18	147	Emory	3-0	def. Piedmont, 98-80; def. (n) Staten Island, 86-68; def. (n) Keuka, 109-73; 11/24 vs. #22 Maryville (Tenn.); 11/25 vs. Randolph-Macon
#19	142	Illinois Wesleyan	3-0	def. Chicago, 81-73; def. Calvin, 68-62; def. Alma, 86-81; 11/20 vs. #37 Washington U.; 11/23 vs. Westminster (Mo.); 11/24 vs. Webster
#20	129	John Carroll	2-0	def. (n) Johnson and Wales, 88-79; def. Buffalo State, 99-94; 11/24 vs. Thomas More; 11/25 vs. TBA
#21	107	Wooster	2-0	def. Muskingum, 108-100; def. Mount St. Joseph, 84-54; 11/20 vs. T#48 Hanover; 11/25 vs. T#52 Ohio Northern
#22	95	Maryville (Tenn.)	0-2	LOST to Eastern, 65-68; LOST to T#50 Emory and Henry, 74-86; 11/24 vs. #18 Emory; 11/25 vs. Oglethorpe
#23	92	St. Olaf	0-4	LOST to UW-Eau Claire, 75-80; LOST to #12 UW-Stevens Point, 41-54; LOST to (n) #6 Whitworth, 55-75; LOST to George Fox, 88-91 OT; 11/24 vs. Bethany Lutheran
#24	81	UW-Whitewater	3-0	def. Anderson, 98-82; def. #25 St. John's, 83-72; def. Concordia (Wis.), 89-70; 11/20 vs. Monmouth
#25	77	St. John's	2-1	def. Minnesota-Morris, 95-54; LOST to #24 UW-Whitewater, 72-83; def. #10 UW-Platteville, 71-55; 11/20 vs. UW-La Crosse

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	76	Hope	1-1	def. (n) Greenville, 139-129; LOST to (n) Simpson, 55-73; 11/20 vs. T#52 Ohio Northern; 11/23 vs. Aquinas; 11/24 vs. Cornerstone
#27	67	Rochester	3-0	def. Rochester Tech, 68-43; def. Houghton, 73-64; def. Baldwin Wallace, 64-55; 11/20 vs. Hobart; 11/24 vs. Elmira; 11/25 vs. TBA
#28	60	Nazareth	2-0	def. Hiram, 88-81; def. TCNJ, 99-95 OT; 11/20 vs. Medaille
#29	47	Marietta	4-0	def. Bethany, 93-63; def. Otterbein, 98-66; def. La Roche, 91-87; def. St. Vincent, 115-68; 11/20 vs. Frostburg State
#30	42	Roanoke	2-2	LOST to (n) Ursinus, 64-72; def. (n) Clarks Summit, 90-47; LOST to Keuka, 54-58; def. Staten Island, 88-57; 11/25 vs. Hampden-Sydney
#31	36	Amherst	2-0	def. Framingham State, 96-62; def. Kean, 101-52; 11/20 vs. Westfield State
#32	35	LeTourneau	2-2	def. Willamette, 73-72; LOST to Whitman, 90-104; def. Schreiner, 77-69; LOST to Texas Lutheran, 79-80; 11/20 vs. Austin; 11/24 vs. Wheaton (Ill.)
#33	33	Ramapo	4-0	def. Western Connecticut, 83-80; def. #55 Yeshiva, 72-69; def. (n) Gordon, 82-66; def. Westfield State, 61-60; 11/20 vs. Rutgers-Newark
#34	26	Penn State-Behrend	1-0	def. Carnegie Mellon, 81-72; 11/19 vs. Thiel; 11/24 vs. Allegheny
#35	25	Nichols	2-0	def. Fitchburg State, 84-75; def. Lasell, 88-73; 11/20 vs. #44 Wesleyan; 11/25 vs. Trinity (Conn.)
#36	23	St. Thomas	1-1	LOST to Brooklyn, 77-78; def. Emerson, 83-78; 11/20 vs. St. Scholastica
#37	20	Washington U.	1-1	def. Illinois College, 91-62; LOST to Webster, 64-72; 11/20 vs. #19 Illinois Wesleyan; 11/24 vs. Carroll; 11/25 vs. Carthage
T#38	19	Aurora	0-0	11/21 vs. Millikin
T#38	19	North Central (Ill.)	1-0	def. Heidelberg, 68-57; 11/20 vs. Benedictine; 11/24 vs. Alma
#40	17	Loras	3-0	def. Greenville, 147-129; def. St. Scholastica, 81-80; def. Olivet, 105-88; 11/21 vs. #3 Augustana
T#41	14	Cabrini	1-2	LOST to Eastern, 77-84; LOST to (n) Baldwin Wallace, 61-75; def. (n) Houghton, 90-73; 11/20 vs. Rosemont
T#41	14	Franklin and Marshall	3-0	def. Albright, 81-74; def. Alvernia, 63-50; def. Hobart, 85-84; 11/20 vs. Gettysburg; 11/25 vs. York (Pa.)
#43	11	Pomona-Pitzer	1-0	def. Biola, 92-67; 11/20 vs. LIFE Pacific; 11/23 vs. Willamette; 11/24 vs. Whitman
#44	10	Wesleyan	2-0	def. Becker, 91-51; def. Western New England, 80-72; 11/20 vs. #35 Nichols; 11/25 vs. #46 Eastern Connecticut
#45	9	Montclair State	3-0	def. Staten Island, 84-70; def. Penn College, 92-62; def. CCNY, 101-76; 11/20 vs. William Paterson; 11/24 vs. RPI; 11/25 vs. TBA
#46	8	Eastern Connecticut	1-1	LOST to (n) William Paterson, 79-86; def. (n) SUNY Potsdam, 89-81; 11/20 vs. Connecticut College; 11/25 vs. #44 Wesleyan
#47	6	Christopher Newport	2-0	def. Trinity (Texas), 67-51; def. Marymount, 66-56; 11/24 vs. Methodist
T#48	5	Hanover	3-0	def. Spalding, 78-55; def. (n) Akron-Wayne, 104-67; def. (n) Kent State - Tuscarawas, 85-47; 11/20 vs. #21 Wooster
T#48	5	Bethel	1-1	def. (n) UW-Eau Claire, 72-56; LOST to UW-Stout, 80-91; 11/20 vs. Crown; 11/24 vs. UW-La Crosse
T#50	3	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	1-1	LOST to Chicago, 43-51; def. (n) #7 Springfield, 85-64; 11/23 vs. Whitman; 11/24 vs. Willamette
T#50	3	Emory and Henry	4-0	def. Thomas More, 72-65; def. Transylvania, 95-73; def. (n) Webster, 84-55; def. #22 Maryville (Tenn.), 86-74; 11/21 vs. William Peace; 11/25 vs. Shenandoah
T#52	2	Keene State	1-1	def. T#52 Salem State, 89-64; LOST to #7 Springfield, 81-89; 11/20 vs. Albertus Magnus; 11/24 vs. #5 MIT
T#52	2	Ohio Northern	2-0	def. Defiance, 99-61; def. Denison, 86-66; 11/20 vs. #26 Hope; 11/25 vs. #21 Wooster
T#52	2	Salem State	2-2	LOST to T#52 Keene State, 64-89; def. Mass-Dartmouth, 87-85; LOST to #8 Williams, 79-91; def. Mount St. Vincent, 97-85; 11/20 vs. Gordon; 11/25 vs. Bates
#55	1	Yeshiva	0-2	LOST to FDU-Florham, 68-69; LOST to #33 Ramapo, 69-72; 11/20 vs. Sarah Lawrence; 11/25 vs. #8 Williams

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on November 19, 2018, 08:43:55 AM

As always, there will be a lot of turnover in the second top 25 poll. What teams have made some large statements to vault from no votes to in consideration? I'm not holding anyone to their post here, just want to know some teams that have had good results.

Two that come to my mind are :
Wheaton (Ill)
Endicott

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 19, 2018, 09:15:27 AM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on November 19, 2018, 08:43:55 AM
As always, there will be a lot of turnover in the second top 25 poll. What teams have made some large statements to vault from no votes to in consideration? I'm not holding anyone to their post here, just want to know some teams that have had good results.

Two that come to my mind are :
Wheaton (Ill)
Endicott

There's still another week to go before the first poll, so things may change even further.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on November 19, 2018, 09:16:43 AM

^^^ Randolph-Macon is 4-0, though not the toughest of competition -- Immaculata, Hood, Albright, and Gettysburg. Games coming up before the next poll are Ferrum, Oglethorpe, and Emory. The Emory game will tell us more about R-MC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on November 19, 2018, 09:35:15 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 19, 2018, 09:15:27 AM
Quote from: Smitty Oom on November 19, 2018, 08:43:55 AM
As always, there will be a lot of turnover in the second top 25 poll. What teams have made some large statements to vault from no votes to in consideration? I'm not holding anyone to their post here, just want to know some teams that have had good results.

Two that come to my mind are :
Wheaton (Ill)
Endicott

There's still another week to go before the first poll, so things may change even further.

I know but I wasn't able to follow scores closely this opening week outside of the MIAC/UMAC/ARC so I was hoping I could get a couple of potential candidates for the top 25 as it stands now.

R-MC starting 4-0 and having three more before the next poll is crazy, as noted a win over Emory and a clean sweep of 7-0 would definitely put them on right in the mix!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 19, 2018, 01:00:40 PM

Another team similar to Randolph-Macon is Millikin. They're also 4-0 with some good games coming up against Simpson on Sunday then at North Central to open conference play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 20, 2018, 04:08:07 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=ii5do/mx3j34ppk6lpaljk.jpg)

The first full weekend of Division III basketball did not disappoint. Upsets, close games, thrilling outcomes. There was a little of everything.

Before you sit down to the Thanksgiving table this week, be sure to sit down with Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com). Dave and guests not only recap the first incredible two weeks of the season, but also chat about the surprises and head-scratching items early on in the season.

We promise to give you your fill of Division III basketball before you get full on turkey, stuffing, potatoes, and anything else you can stuff in with family and friends.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Tuesday's special On Demand or listen to the Podcast here:http://bit.ly/2qSj0V8.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Kevin Bettencourt, Endicott men's coach
- Michael Shauer, Wheaton (Ill.) men's coach
- Mike Miller, No. 11 Messiah women's coach

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts instead, you can get access to them or subscribe one of the three following ways (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 22, 2018, 09:12:21 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Happy Turkey Day, everyone. One last update, before Sunday's final report before the first poll.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	624	Nebraska Wesleyan	4-0	def. Grinnell, 143-90; def. Bethany Lutheran, 104-85; def. Carroll, 70-64; def. (n) St. Norbert, 77-67; 11/23 vs. Redlands; 11/24 vs. Olivet
#2	567	UW-Oshkosh	2-1	def. (n) Piedmont, 86-77; LOST to Wheaton (Ill.), 74-86; def. Edgewood, 93-79
#3	539	Augustana	2-1	def. Alma, 85-74; def. Calvin, 86-67; LOST to #40 Loras, 73-74; 11/24 vs. Rockford
#4	529	Whitman	3-0	def. #32 LeTourneau, 104-90; def. Sul Ross State, 97-61; def. Concordia (Texas), 124-92; 11/23 vs. T#50 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps; 11/24 vs. #43 Pomona-Pitzer
#5	463	MIT	2-1	LOST to Endicott, 73-90; def. Eastern Nazarene, 86-55; def. Tufts, 98-92 OT; 11/24 vs. T#52 Keene State
#6	462	Whitworth	2-0	def. (n) #23 St. Olaf, 75-55; def. (n) Whittier, 90-76; 11/23 vs. Trinity (Texas); 11/24 vs. Texas-Dallas
#7	431	Springfield	2-2	def. Western New England, 95-84; def. T#52 Keene State, 89-81; LOST to (n) Ohio Wesleyan, 66-80; LOST to (n) T#50 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 64-85
#8	417	Williams	3-0	def. T#52 Salem State, 91-79; def. Southern Vermont, 88-57; def. Massachusetts College, 117-34; 11/24 vs. Manhattanville; 11/25 vs. #55 Yeshiva
#9	400	Hamilton	3-0	def. Centenary (N.J.), 97-72; def. York (N.Y.), 125-65; def. Bard, 97-88; 11/24 vs. Transylvania; 11/25 vs. TBA
#10	367	UW-Platteville	1-2	def. Concordia (Wis.), 74-60; LOST to #25 St. John's, 55-71; LOST to Simpson, 86-97
#11	366	Wittenberg	3-0	def. (n) Goucher, 65-51; def. (n) Juniata, 80-60; def. (n) Capital, 88-78; 11/25 vs. Otterbein
#12	356	UW-Stevens Point	2-0	def. #23 St. Olaf, 54-41; def. Buena Vista, 87-72; 11/24 vs. Edgewood
#13	329	Swarthmore	3-0	def. TCNJ, 82-65; def. Delaware Valley, 88-55; def. Washington College, 83-51; 11/25 vs. Arcadia
#14	214	Plattsburgh State	3-0	def. Clarkson, 105-95; def. Skidmore, 83-75; def. SUNY-Canton, 87-71
#15	206	Johns Hopkins	3-2	def. Moravian, 81-75; LOST to York (Pa.), 72-78; def. (n) DeSales, 85-78; LOST to Salisbury, 69-78; def. McDaniel, 77-61; 11/25 vs. Marymount
#16	179	New Jersey City	3-1	LOST to Stevens, 72-76; def. Eastern Mennonite, 76-67; def. (n) Bridgewater (Va.), 73-70 OT; def. Kean, 92-67; 11/24 vs. Farmingdale State
#17	166	Middlebury	2-0	def. Vermont Tech, 99-65; def. NVU-Johnson, 83-37; 11/25 vs. Endicott
#18	147	Emory	3-0	def. Piedmont, 98-80; def. (n) Staten Island, 86-68; def. (n) Keuka, 109-73; 11/24 vs. #22 Maryville (Tenn.); 11/25 vs. Randolph-Macon
#19	142	Illinois Wesleyan	4-0	def. Chicago, 81-73; def. Calvin, 68-62; def. Alma, 86-81; def. #37 Washington U., 92-85; 11/23 vs. Westminster (Mo.); 11/24 vs. Webster
#20	129	John Carroll	2-0	def. (n) Johnson and Wales, 88-79; def. Buffalo State, 99-94; 11/24 vs. Thomas More; 11/25 vs. TBA
#21	107	Wooster	3-0	def. Muskingum, 108-100; def. Mount St. Joseph, 84-54; def. T#48 Hanover, 57-47; 11/25 vs. T#52 Ohio Northern
#22	95	Maryville (Tenn.)	0-2	LOST to Eastern, 65-68; LOST to T#50 Emory and Henry, 74-86; 11/24 vs. #18 Emory; 11/25 vs. Oglethorpe
#23	92	St. Olaf	0-4	LOST to UW-Eau Claire, 75-80; LOST to #12 UW-Stevens Point, 41-54; LOST to (n) #6 Whitworth, 55-75; LOST to George Fox, 88-91 OT; 11/24 vs. Bethany Lutheran
#24	81	UW-Whitewater	4-0	def. Anderson, 98-82; def. #25 St. John's, 83-72; def. Concordia (Wis.), 89-70; def. Monmouth, 83-55
#25	77	St. John's	3-1	def. Minnesota-Morris, 95-54; LOST to #24 UW-Whitewater, 72-83; def. #10 UW-Platteville, 71-55; def. UW-La Crosse, 84-79

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	76	Hope	2-1	def. (n) Greenville, 139-129; LOST to (n) Simpson, 55-73; def. T#52 Ohio Northern, 84-77; 11/23 vs. Aquinas; 11/24 vs. Cornerstone
#27	67	Rochester	4-0	def. Rochester Tech, 68-43; def. Houghton, 73-64; def. Baldwin Wallace, 64-55; def. Hobart, 81-63; 11/24 vs. Elmira; 11/25 vs. TBA
#28	60	Nazareth	3-0	def. Hiram, 88-81; def. TCNJ, 99-95 OT; def. Medaille, 81-68
#29	47	Marietta	5-0	def. Bethany, 93-63; def. Otterbein, 98-66; def. La Roche, 91-87; def. St. Vincent, 115-68; def. Frostburg State, 84-59
#30	42	Roanoke	2-2	LOST to (n) Ursinus, 64-72; def. (n) Clarks Summit, 90-47; LOST to Keuka, 54-58; def. Staten Island, 88-57; 11/25 vs. Hampden-Sydney
#31	36	Amherst	3-0	def. Framingham State, 96-62; def. Kean, 101-52; def. Westfield State, 101-71
#32	35	LeTourneau	3-2	def. Willamette, 73-72; LOST to Whitman, 90-104; def. Schreiner, 77-69; LOST to Texas Lutheran, 79-80; def. Austin, 108-69; 11/24 vs. Wheaton (Ill.)
#33	33	Ramapo	5-0	def. Western Connecticut, 83-80; def. #55 Yeshiva, 72-69; def. (n) Gordon, 82-66; def. Westfield State, 61-60; def. Rutgers-Newark, 61-50
#34	26	Penn State-Behrend	2-0	def. Carnegie Mellon, 81-72; def. Thiel, 63-46; 11/24 vs. Allegheny
#35	25	Nichols	3-0	def. Fitchburg State, 84-75; def. Lasell, 88-73; def. #44 Wesleyan, 85-66; 11/25 vs. Trinity (Conn.)
#36	23	St. Thomas	2-1	LOST to Brooklyn, 77-78; def. Emerson, 83-78; def. St. Scholastica, 98-72
#37	20	Washington U.	1-2	def. Illinois College, 91-62; LOST to Webster, 64-72; LOST to #19 Illinois Wesleyan, 85-92; 11/24 vs. Carroll; 11/25 vs. Carthage
T#38	19	Aurora	1-0	def. Millikin, 90-65
T#38	19	North Central (Ill.)	2-0	def. Heidelberg, 68-57; def. Benedictine, 74-60; 11/24 vs. Alma
#40	17	Loras	4-0	def. Greenville, 147-129; def. St. Scholastica, 81-80; def. Olivet, 105-88; def. #3 Augustana, 74-73
T#41	14	Cabrini	2-2	LOST to Eastern, 77-84; LOST to (n) Baldwin Wallace, 61-75; def. (n) Houghton, 90-73; def. Rosemont, 85-84
T#41	14	Franklin and Marshall	3-1	def. Albright, 81-74; def. Alvernia, 63-50; def. Hobart, 85-84; LOST to Gettysburg, 71-84; 11/25 vs. York (Pa.)
#43	11	Pomona-Pitzer	2-0	def. Biola, 92-67; def. LIFE Pacific, 68-59; 11/23 vs. Willamette; 11/24 vs. Whitman
#44	10	Wesleyan	2-1	def. Becker, 91-51; def. Western New England, 80-72; LOST to #35 Nichols, 66-85; 11/25 vs. #46 Eastern Connecticut
#45	9	Montclair State	4-0	def. Staten Island, 84-70; def. Penn College, 92-62; def. CCNY, 101-76; def. William Paterson, 63-61; 11/24 vs. RPI; 11/25 vs. TBA
#46	8	Eastern Connecticut	2-1	LOST to (n) William Paterson, 79-86; def. (n) SUNY Potsdam, 89-81; def. Connecticut College, 93-70; 11/25 vs. #44 Wesleyan
#47	6	Christopher Newport	2-0	def. Trinity (Texas), 67-51; def. Marymount, 66-56; 11/24 vs. Methodist
T#48	5	Hanover	3-1	def. Spalding, 78-55; def. (n) Akron-Wayne, 104-67; def. (n) Kent State - Tuscarawas, 85-47; LOST to #21 Wooster, 47-57
T#48	5	Bethel	2-1	def. (n) UW-Eau Claire, 72-56; LOST to UW-Stout, 80-91; def. Crown, 100-79; 11/24 vs. UW-La Crosse
T#50	3	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	1-1	LOST to Chicago, 43-51; def. (n) #7 Springfield, 85-64; 11/23 vs. Whitman; 11/24 vs. Willamette
T#50	3	Emory and Henry	5-0	def. Thomas More, 72-65; def. Transylvania, 95-73; def. (n) Webster, 84-55; def. #22 Maryville (Tenn.), 86-74; def. William Peace, 79-74; 11/25 vs. Shenandoah
T#52	2	Keene State	2-1	def. T#52 Salem State, 89-64; LOST to #7 Springfield, 81-89; def. Albertus Magnus, 105-96 OT; 11/24 vs. #5 MIT
T#52	2	Ohio Northern	2-1	def. Defiance, 99-61; def. Denison, 86-66; LOST to #26 Hope, 77-84; 11/25 vs. #21 Wooster
T#52	2	Salem State	2-3	LOST to T#52 Keene State, 64-89; def. Mass-Dartmouth, 87-85; LOST to #8 Williams, 79-91; def. Mount St. Vincent, 97-85; LOST to Gordon, 81-98; 11/25 vs. Bates
#55	1	Yeshiva	0-3	LOST to FDU-Florham, 68-69; LOST to #33 Ramapo, 69-72; LOST to Sarah Lawrence, 88-91; 11/25 vs. #8 Williams

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 22, 2018, 09:13:45 AM

Additional info (that would not fit with the rest of the report because of the character limit on posts): Résumés for Wheaton, Endicott, Randolph-Macon, and Millikin (as suggested by Smitty Oom, y_jack_lok, and FCGrizzliesGrad), although Millikin looks a little less shiny after getting blasted by Aurora last night.

Other teams to watch (as suggested by posters on this board)

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
---	---	Wheaton (Ill.)	4-0	def. Ripon, 74-67; def. Coe, 79-77; def. #2 UW-Oshkosh, 86-74; def. Calvin, 86-71; 11/24 vs. #32 LeTourneau
---	---	Endicott	4-0	def. Eastern Nazarene, 95-81; def. #5 MIT, 90-73; def. (n) Suffolk, 85-62; def. Babson, 97-88; 11/25 vs. #17 Middlebury
---	---	Randolph-Macon	5-0	def. Immaculata, 83-56; def. Hood, 91-61; def. (n) Albright, 82-69; def. Gettysburg, 88-67; def. Ferrum, 73-54; 11/24 vs. Oglethorpe; 11/25 vs. #18 Emory
---	---	Millikin	4-1	def. Dubuque, 76-71; def. Principia, 96-76; def. Coe, 85-71; def. Westminster (Mo.), 74-69; LOST to T#38 Aurora, 65-90; 11/25 vs. Simpson

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 25, 2018, 09:30:00 AM

Darryl, this is very helpful...thanks for doing it again this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 25, 2018, 10:29:42 AM

I put the curse on Millikin last time. But another team with a couple good wins early is Lake Forest.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 25, 2018, 10:51:35 AM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 25, 2018, 10:29:42 AM
I put the curse on Millikin last time. But another team with a couple good wins early is Lake Forest.

Boy, you put the curse on 'em good. Aurora jumped out to a 24-3 lead in that game and never looked back. I wouldn't show your face in Decatur for awhile if I were you. (For most people, that's a hardship that they would not consider to be an undue burden. ;))

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 25, 2018, 03:37:08 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=irm8k/2ybvra99oy7rwj60.jpg)

'Tis the season of ... upsets? There have been plenty. 13 of the D3hoops.com Men's Preseason Top 25 have lost and even the women have seen some shockers (Eastern Connecticut over Amherst!). So, I guess there are many teams thankful this time of year?

Sunday on Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave recaps a wacky few weeks of basketball and previews what could be very topsy-turvy first in-season Top 25s. Dave also welcomes one of the teams which pulled off one of the larger upsets in the last week, Loras, who defeated No. 3 Augustana.

Division III also hears from the new men's basketball committee chair for the first time this season. Gallaudet Associate Athletic Director for Communications Sam Atkinson joins Dave in studio live to talk about the new-look national committee, how the work has evolved not only over the years but also the last few months, and take questions from viewers.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. Sunday's show hits the air at 7:00 p.m. ET. You can watch the show here: http://bit.ly/2RdmAom

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or use any of the social media options to the right.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Chris Martin, Loras men's coach
- Sam Atkinson, Gallaudet Assoc. Athletic Director of Communications & Men's National Committee Chair
- Bob Quillman, Central Region expert

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts instead, you can get access to them or subscribe one of the three following ways (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on November 25, 2018, 06:34:51 PM

#21 Wooster moves to 4-0 on the season with another win today.

In the past week, Wooster has notched solid road wins AT Hanover and AT Ohio Northern. In Wooster's win today at ONU, the Scots held First Team Preseason All American Ryan Bruns to only 8 points on 3 of 12 shooting from the floor. Wooster played a great defensive game and only allowed ONU to make 7 field goals total in the second half.

Despite some national voters who conveniently forget head to head results ???, Wooster beat Illinois Wesleyan in the NCAA tourney last year. Wooster's top three scorers in the win over IWU were Reece Dupler, Danyon Hempy and Trenton Tipton. Take a guess who lead Wooster in scoring today at ONU -- that's right....Hempy, Dupler and Tipton. This season, Wooster has also added a transfer 6'7" center, Dontae Williams, who started 12 games for a Division II school last year. Perhaps, Wooster will get some top 15 votes in the next poll? ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 25, 2018, 06:59:13 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on November 25, 2018, 06:34:51 PMDespite some national voters who conveniently forget head to head results ???, Wooster beat Illinois Wesleyan in the NCAA tourney last year.

Why would the voters look at that? As you said, that was last year. Turn the page on your calendar. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 25, 2018, 07:00:50 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	624	Nebraska Wesleyan	6-0	def. Grinnell, 143-90; def. Bethany Lutheran, 104-85; def. Carroll, 70-64; def. (n) St. Norbert, 77-67; def. Redlands, 99-77; def. Olivet, 100-70
#2	567	UW-Oshkosh	2-1	def. (n) Piedmont, 86-77; LOST to Wheaton (Ill.), 74-86; def. Edgewood, 93-79
#3	539	Augustana	3-1	def. Alma, 85-74; def. Calvin, 86-67; LOST to #40 Loras, 73-74; def. Rockford, 78-64
#4	529	Whitman	4-1	def. #32 LeTourneau, 104-90; def. Sul Ross State, 97-61; def. Concordia (Texas), 124-92; def. T#50 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 84-75; LOST to #43 Pomona-Pitzer, 109-112 2OT
#5	463	MIT	3-1	LOST to Endicott, 73-90; def. Eastern Nazarene, 86-55; def. Tufts, 98-92 OT; def. T#52 Keene State, 96-76
#6	462	Whitworth	3-1	def. (n) #23 St. Olaf, 75-55; def. (n) Whittier, 90-76; def. Trinity (Texas), 76-65; LOST to (n) Texas-Dallas, 79-88
#7	431	Springfield	2-2	def. Western New England, 95-84; def. T#52 Keene State, 89-81; LOST to (n) Ohio Wesleyan, 66-80; LOST to (n) T#50 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 64-85
#8	417	Williams	5-0	def. T#52 Salem State, 91-79; def. Southern Vermont, 88-57; def. Massachusetts College, 117-34; def. Manhattanville, 85-73; def. #55 Yeshiva, 85-64
#9	400	Hamilton	5-0	def. Centenary (N.J.), 97-72; def. York (N.Y.), 125-65; def. Bard, 97-88; def. (n) Transylvania, 73-63; def. Carnegie Mellon, 79-71
#10	367	UW-Platteville	1-2	def. Concordia (Wis.), 74-60; LOST to #25 St. John's, 55-71; LOST to Simpson, 86-97
#11	366	Wittenberg	4-0	def. (n) Goucher, 65-51; def. (n) Juniata, 80-60; def. (n) Capital, 88-78; def. (n) Otterbein, 89-67
#12	356	UW-Stevens Point	3-0	def. #23 St. Olaf, 54-41; def. Buena Vista, 87-72; def. Edgewood, 73-54
#13	329	Swarthmore	4-0	def. TCNJ, 82-65; def. Delaware Valley, 88-55; def. Washington College, 83-51; def. Arcadia, 82-77
#14	214	Plattsburgh State	3-0	def. Clarkson, 105-95; def. Skidmore, 83-75; def. SUNY-Canton, 87-71
#15	206	Johns Hopkins	4-2	def. Moravian, 81-75; LOST to York (Pa.), 72-78; def. (n) DeSales, 85-78; LOST to Salisbury, 69-78; def. McDaniel, 77-61; def. Marymount, 57-41
#16	179	New Jersey City	4-1	LOST to Stevens, 72-76; def. Eastern Mennonite, 76-67; def. (n) Bridgewater (Va.), 73-70 OT; def. Kean, 92-67; def. Farmingdale State, 85-77
#17	166	Middlebury	3-0	def. Vermont Tech, 99-65; def. NVU-Johnson, 83-37; def. Endicott, 101-96
#18	147	Emory	4-1	def. Piedmont, 98-80; def. (n) Staten Island, 86-68; def. (n) Keuka, 109-73; def. #22 Maryville (Tenn.), 96-93 OT; LOST to Randolph-Macon, 74-94
#19	142	Illinois Wesleyan	6-0	def. Chicago, 81-73; def. Calvin, 68-62; def. Alma, 86-81; def. #37 Washington U., 92-85; def. (n) Westminster (Mo.), 95-64; def. Webster, 77-62
#20	129	John Carroll	3-1	def. (n) Johnson and Wales, 88-79; def. Buffalo State, 99-94; def. (n) Thomas More, 79-74; LOST to #47 Christopher Newport, 73-109
#21	107	Wooster	4-0	def. Muskingum, 108-100; def. Mount St. Joseph, 84-54; def. T#48 Hanover, 57-47; def. T#52 Ohio Northern, 61-52
#22	95	Maryville (Tenn.)	1-3	LOST to Eastern, 65-68; LOST to T#50 Emory and Henry, 74-86; LOST to #18 Emory, 93-96 OT; def. (n) Oglethorpe, 65-56
#23	92	St. Olaf	1-4	LOST to UW-Eau Claire, 75-80; LOST to #12 UW-Stevens Point, 41-54; LOST to (n) #6 Whitworth, 55-75; LOST to George Fox, 88-91 OT; def. Bethany Lutheran, 81-68
#24	81	UW-Whitewater	4-0	def. Anderson, 98-82; def. #25 St. John's, 83-72; def. Concordia (Wis.), 89-70; def. Monmouth, 83-55
#25	77	St. John's	3-1	def. Minnesota-Morris, 95-54; LOST to #24 UW-Whitewater, 72-83; def. #10 UW-Platteville, 71-55; def. UW-La Crosse, 84-79

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	76	Hope	3-2	def. (n) Greenville, 139-129; LOST to (n) Simpson, 55-73; def. T#52 Ohio Northern, 84-77; def. (n) Aquinas, 78-63; LOST to (n) Cornerstone, 58-70
#27	67	Rochester	6-0	def. Rochester Tech, 68-43; def. Houghton, 73-64; def. Baldwin Wallace, 64-55; def. Hobart, 81-63; def. Elmira, 84-73; def. #45 Montclair State, 54-45
#28	60	Nazareth	3-0	def. Hiram, 88-81; def. TCNJ, 99-95 OT; def. Medaille, 81-68
#29	47	Marietta	5-0	def. Bethany, 93-63; def. Otterbein, 98-66; def. La Roche, 91-87; def. St. Vincent, 115-68; def. Frostburg State, 84-59
#30	42	Roanoke	3-2	LOST to (n) Ursinus, 64-72; def. (n) Clarks Summit, 90-47; LOST to Keuka, 54-58; def. Staten Island, 88-57; def. Hampden-Sydney, 93-48
#31	36	Amherst	3-0	def. Framingham State, 96-62; def. Kean, 101-52; def. Westfield State, 101-71
#32	35	LeTourneau	3-3	def. Willamette, 73-72; LOST to Whitman, 90-104; def. Schreiner, 77-69; LOST to Texas Lutheran, 79-80; def. Austin, 108-69; LOST to Wheaton (Ill.), 87-89
#33	33	Ramapo	5-0	def. Western Connecticut, 83-80; def. #55 Yeshiva, 72-69; def. (n) Gordon, 82-66; def. Westfield State, 61-60; def. Rutgers-Newark, 61-50
#34	26	Penn State-Behrend	3-0	def. Carnegie Mellon, 81-72; def. Thiel, 63-46; def. Allegheny, 80-77
#35	25	Nichols	4-0	def. Fitchburg State, 84-75; def. Lasell, 88-73; def. #44 Wesleyan, 85-66; def. Trinity (Conn.), 84-67
#36	23	St. Thomas	2-1	LOST to Brooklyn, 77-78; def. Emerson, 83-78; def. St. Scholastica, 98-72
#37	20	Washington U.	3-2	def. Illinois College, 91-62; LOST to Webster, 64-72; LOST to #19 Illinois Wesleyan, 85-92; def. Carroll, 71-69; def. (n) Carthage, 89-70
T#38	19	Aurora	1-0	def. Millikin, 90-65
T#38	19	North Central (Ill.)	3-0	def. Heidelberg, 68-57; def. Benedictine, 74-60; def. Alma, 87-67
#40	17	Loras	4-0	def. Greenville, 147-129; def. St. Scholastica, 81-80; def. Olivet, 105-88; def. #3 Augustana, 74-73
T#41	14	Cabrini	2-2	LOST to Eastern, 77-84; LOST to (n) Baldwin Wallace, 61-75; def. (n) Houghton, 90-73; def. Rosemont, 85-84
T#41	14	Franklin and Marshall	3-2	def. Albright, 81-74; def. Alvernia, 63-50; def. Hobart, 85-84; LOST to Gettysburg, 71-84; LOST to York (Pa.), 74-78 OT
#43	11	Pomona-Pitzer	4-0	def. Biola, 92-67; def. LIFE Pacific, 68-59; def. (n) Willamette, 85-71; def. Whitman, 112-109 2OT
#44	10	Wesleyan	2-2	def. Becker, 91-51; def. Western New England, 80-72; LOST to #35 Nichols, 66-85; LOST to #46 Eastern Connecticut, 50-70
#45	9	Montclair State	5-1	def. Staten Island, 84-70; def. Penn College, 92-62; def. CCNY, 101-76; def. William Paterson, 63-61; def. (n) RPI, 76-73; LOST to #27 Rochester, 45-54
#46	8	Eastern Connecticut	3-1	LOST to (n) William Paterson, 79-86; def. (n) SUNY Potsdam, 89-81; def. Connecticut College, 93-70; def. #44 Wesleyan, 70-50
#47	6	Christopher Newport	4-0	def. Trinity (Texas), 67-51; def. Marymount, 66-56; def. Methodist, 73-59; def. #20 John Carroll, 109-73
T#48	5	Hanover	3-1	def. Spalding, 78-55; def. (n) Akron-Wayne, 104-67; def. (n) Kent State - Tuscarawas, 85-47; LOST to #21 Wooster, 47-57
T#48	5	Bethel	2-2	def. (n) UW-Eau Claire, 72-56; LOST to UW-Stout, 80-91; def. Crown, 100-79; LOST to UW-La Crosse, 64-69
T#50	3	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	2-2	LOST to Chicago, 43-51; def. (n) #7 Springfield, 85-64; LOST to Whitman, 75-84; def. (n) Willamette, 70-43
T#50	3	Emory and Henry	6-0	def. Thomas More, 72-65; def. Transylvania, 95-73; def. (n) Webster, 84-55; def. #22 Maryville (Tenn.), 86-74; def. William Peace, 79-74; def. Shenandoah, 97-69
T#52	2	Keene State	2-2	def. T#52 Salem State, 89-64; LOST to #7 Springfield, 81-89; def. Albertus Magnus, 105-96 OT; LOST to #5 MIT, 76-96
T#52	2	Ohio Northern	2-2	def. Defiance, 99-61; def. Denison, 86-66; LOST to #26 Hope, 77-84; LOST to #21 Wooster, 52-61
T#52	2	Salem State	2-4	LOST to T#52 Keene State, 64-89; def. Mass-Dartmouth, 87-85; LOST to #8 Williams, 79-91; def. Mount St. Vincent, 97-85; LOST to Gordon, 81-98; LOST to Bates, 73-93
#55	1	Yeshiva	0-4	LOST to FDU-Florham, 68-69; LOST to #33 Ramapo, 69-72; LOST to Sarah Lawrence, 88-91; LOST to #8 Williams, 64-85

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 25, 2018, 07:02:31 PM

And a few more ...

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
---	---	Wheaton (Ill.)	5-0	def. Ripon, 74-67; def. Coe, 79-77; def. #2 UW-Oshkosh, 86-74; def. Calvin, 86-71; def. #32 LeTourneau, 89-87
---	---	Endicott	4-1	def. Eastern Nazarene, 95-81; def. #5 MIT, 90-73; def. (n) Suffolk, 85-62; def. Babson, 97-88; LOST to #17 Middlebury, 96-101
---	---	Millikin	4-1	def. Dubuque, 76-71; def. Principia, 96-76; def. Coe, 85-71; def. Westminster (Mo.), 74-69; LOST to T#38 Aurora, 65-90; (11/25 vs Simpson -- listed as cancelled)
---	---	Randolph-Macon	7-0	def. Immaculata, 83-56; def. Hood, 91-61; def. (n) Albright, 82-69; def. Gettysburg, 88-67; def. Ferrum, 73-54; def. (n) Oglethorpe, 73-56; def. #18 Emory, 94-74

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on November 27, 2018, 07:06:16 AM

With the new Top 25 list out yesterday, let's look at who is NOT in.

Here are undefeated teams that have yet to catch any voters eye:

Sewanee (6-0)
Mary Hardin-Baylor (5-0)
Millsaps (5-0)
Alfred (4-0)
Utica (4–0)
Mass-Boston (4-0)
Wilkes (4-0)
MSOE (4-0)
St. Elizabeth (4-0)
New England College (4-0)
Coast Guard (4-0)
Rowan (4-0)
Lynchburg (4-0)
Centre (4-0)
Johnson and Wales (Colo) (4-0)
Union(3-0)
Augsburg (3-0)
DePauw (3-0)
Wabash (3-0)
Occidental (3-0)
Oswego State (3-0)
SUNY Oneonta (3-0)
Pfeiffer (3-0)
Mount St. Mary (2-0)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on November 27, 2018, 09:24:41 AM

^^^ Good one. +1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 27, 2018, 09:58:05 AM

Pfeiffer and J&W (CO) are both provisional members. They are ineligible. Pfeiffer hasn't played a D3 opponent yet, actually just 2-0, not ,3-0. If J&W were eligible, I think they would be prime candidates to get in the Top 25 sometime this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on November 27, 2018, 10:38:26 AM

Ugh. Included Pfeiffer game vs Carolina Christian which was an exhibition. Thanks.
Note. Pfeiffer does play a full USAC Schedule. Will be interesting to see how they do.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: noonhooper on November 27, 2018, 12:12:15 PM

Went ahead and put the Massey Strength of Schedule next to all the teams on the list. I think we can see why none of those records have sparkled in the eyes of the voters.

Quote from: hopefan on November 27, 2018, 07:06:16 AM
With the new Top 25 list out yesterday, let's look at who is NOT in.

Here are undefeated teams that have yet to catch any voters eye:
Mary Hardin-Baylor (5-0) 177
Millsaps (5-0) 249
Alfred (4-0) 326
Utica (4–0) 277
Mass-Boston (4-0) 355
Wilkes (4-0) 313
MSOE (4-0) 305
St. Elizabeth (4-0) 425
New England College (4-0) 427
Coast Guard (4-0) 392
Rowan (4-0) 255
Lynchburg (4-0) 353
Centre (4-0) 181
Union(3-0) 382
Augsburg (3-0) 187
DePauw (3-0) 325
Wabash (3-0) 160
Occidental (3-0) 346
Oswego State (3-0) 388
SUNY Oneonta (3-0) 146
Mount St. Mary (2-0) 352

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 27, 2018, 12:33:58 PM

Quote from: hopefan on November 27, 2018, 10:38:26 AM
Ugh. Included Pfeiffer game vs Carolina Christian which was an exhibition. Thanks.
Note. Pfeiffer does play a full USAC Schedule. Will be interesting to see how they do.

They actually did last year too, I believe..and they did very well.

Quote from: noonhooper on November 27, 2018, 12:12:15 PM
Went ahead and put the Massey Strength of Schedule next to all the teams on the list. I think we can see why none of those records have sparkled in the eyes of the voters.

Quote from: hopefan on November 27, 2018, 07:06:16 AM
With the new Top 25 list out yesterday, let's look at who is NOT in.

Here are undefeated teams that have yet to catch any voters eye:
Mary Hardin-Baylor (5-0) 177
Millsaps (5-0) 249
Alfred (4-0) 326
Utica (4–0) 277
Mass-Boston (4-0) 355
Wilkes (4-0) 313
MSOE (4-0) 305
St. Elizabeth (4-0) 425
New England College (4-0) 427
Coast Guard (4-0) 392
Rowan (4-0) 255
Lynchburg (4-0) 353
Centre (4-0) 181
Union(3-0) 382
Augsburg (3-0) 187
DePauw (3-0) 325
Wabash (3-0) 160
Occidental (3-0) 346
Oswego State (3-0) 388
SUNY Oneonta (3-0) 146
Mount St. Mary (2-0) 352

I'd like to see the ratings for the Top 25 if you have time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 27, 2018, 12:37:58 PM

It is very interesting to include the Massey Ratings, but the usual disclaimers apply.

Wabash, for example, has only one result on the Massey Ratings books. The win over Rose-Hulman will help a little when that eventually gets included.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: noonhooper on November 27, 2018, 01:10:51 PM

If disclaimers stopped us then no one would post on this thread until February. Wild speculation, small sample-sizes and huge jumps to conclusions are what a November poll is for!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: noonhooper on November 27, 2018, 01:56:18 PM

Finding the Massey SOS for the top25 was waaaay easier than hunting for the other group. I don't think you can actually take anything from these numbers, but it is an interesting look at what kind of non-conf schedule people are playing early. I have made schedules before and I would say the teams in the 80-180 range are probably pretty balanced and tried to get some good teams on the schedule but didn't overdo it. Teams with a top-80 SOS either want to be challenged and feel great about their team or know that their conference won't give them any boost. Its the teams in the 200s and below after four or five games that definitely chose to play cupcakes. **Some teams are stuck with schedules because of location, finances, administrative decisions etc, I know**

1   Nebraska Wesleyan 84
2   Williams   342
3   Hamilton   312
4   UW-Stevens Point 93
5   Augustana     39
6   Whitman    18
7   Wittenberg 226
8   Swarthmore 171
9   UW-Oshkosh   68
10   Illinois Wesleyan 50
11   MIT   21
12   Middlebury 350
13   Plattsburgh State 314
14   Whitworth    94
15   UW-Whitewater    79
16   Wooster   119
17   Randolph-Macon 180
18   Wheaton (Ill.)   17
19   Loras   81
20   Rochester    202
21   Marietta   180
22   Christopher Newport   104
23   Emory   157
24   New Jersey City     197
25   Pomona-Pitzer 63

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 27, 2018, 02:10:19 PM

Quote from: noonhooper on November 27, 2018, 01:10:51 PM
If disclaimers stopped us then no one would post on this thread until February. Wild speculation, small sample-sizes and huge jumps to conclusions are what a November poll is for!

I do honestly find the Massey Ratings interesting and I absolutely agree with your point (I mentioned the ratings elsewhere in regards to a conference), but Massey appears to be further behind this season and the utility of the ratings varies from program to program.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 27, 2018, 04:17:10 PM

Still, it's hard not to notice the trend for the NESCAC teams. All three NESCAC entrants are well below 300, and two of them (Williams and Middlebury) are in the bottom quartile of D3 as a whole. And none of the teams in that league are "stuck with schedules because of location, finances, administrative decisions, etc."

For what it's worth, I don't think it's that big of a deal at this point. After all, we're still only in November. But, as I said, it's hard not to notice it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 27, 2018, 04:32:47 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 27, 2018, 04:17:10 PM
Still, it's hard not to notice the trend for the NESCAC teams. All three NESCAC entrants are well below 300, and two of them (Williams and Middlebury) are in the bottom quartile of D3 as a whole. And none of the teams in that league are "stuck with schedules because of location, finances, administrative decisions, etc."

For what it's worth, I don't think it's that big of a deal at this point. After all, we're still only in November. But, as I said, it's hard not to notice it.

Two things the NESCACs do have to deal with ... they do have to schedule MORE non-conference games than many, most, others do ... and that does result in some weaker opponents by default. They, MBB primarily, also have a tendency to schedule those weaker opponents at the start of the season to help ease into the season. (I've notice the WBB side tends to not mind scheduling tough opponents to start to some degree.)

Remember, NESCAC still isn't allowed to start practices until Nov. 1 and they are not allowed to start play until the Friday before Thanksgiving - despite the recent change to allow the season to start on Nov. 8 for the rest of Division III. That could be really interesting in a few years when that Friday is Nov. 22 ... while most others will have started a full two weeks prior.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 27, 2018, 04:41:22 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 27, 2018, 04:17:10 PM
Still, it's hard not to notice the trend for the NESCAC teams. All three NESCAC entrants are well below 300, and two of them (Williams and Middlebury) are in the bottom quartile of D3 as a whole. And none of the teams in that league are "stuck with schedules because of location, finances, administrative decisions, etc."

For what it's worth, I don't think it's that big of a deal at this point. After all, we're still only in November. But, as I said, it's hard not to notice it.

And certainly not constrained by lack of non-con games (being the only(?) conference in D3 with a single round-robin) or geographically available cupcakes to choose from (unlike 'island' teams). And it is not THAT early for most teams - many have already completed 1/5th to 1/4th of their season.

No, the weak scheduling is purely a choice. Medical warning to NESCAC teams: a steady diet of cupcakes may lead to obesity, diabetes, and heart problems. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on November 27, 2018, 04:48:49 PM

Thanks, Dave, for weighing in, and I believe exactly right on all counts. It seem that the NESCAC out-of-league schedules start getting a LOT more interesting this week, and into future weeks, for many teams. Williams for example has a fairly strong group of five games coming up soon that should seriously amp up its strength of non-conference schedule (Wesleyan / Union / Springfield / Montclair / Moravian). And that is typical among its peers. Middlebury's schedule looks really weak due to two putrid opening games (and Middlebury does suffer from a lack of ANY credible in-state opponents, nothing they can do about that), but the Panthers just played Endicott and have loads of quality opponents ahead (Plattsburgh, Swarthmore, Skidmore and Keene St. in particular). Hamilton is geographically situated in a weak region, but then again does seem to avoid playing the stronger SUNYAC schools from year to year. Whether that is Hamilton's decision, or the SUNYAC powers, I'm not sure ...

One other point to consider: scheduling is a two-way street. Some schools are not eager to pick up likely losses against NESCAC powers in non-conference play, and are generally hesitant to schedule Williams/Amherst/Middlebury accordingly.

In some ways I wish the NESCAC schools would start practice earlier, but on the other, basketball is a VERY long season and perhaps there is benefit in reducing the overall length of the practice grind. I'm not really sure which way it cuts by January, but for sure in those mid-November games, NESCAC teams often look very rusty / sloppy relative to their peers, so it would be foolish to frontload non-conference schedules. E.g. when the Williams team that featured Duncan Robinson and Michael Mayer and made it to the title game lost its opening game to Southern Vermont ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 27, 2018, 06:02:17 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on November 27, 2018, 04:48:49 PM
Thanks, Dave, for weighing in, and I believe exactly right on all counts. It seem that the NESCAC out-of-league schedules start getting a LOT more interesting this week, and into future weeks, for many teams. Williams for example has a fairly strong group of five games coming up soon that should seriously amp up its strength of non-conference schedule (Wesleyan / Union / Springfield / Montclair / Moravian). And that is typical among its peers. Middlebury's schedule looks really weak due to two putrid opening games (and Middlebury does suffer from a lack of ANY credible in-state opponents, nothing they can do about that), but the Panthers just played Endicott and have loads of quality opponents ahead (Plattsburgh, Swarthmore, Skidmore and Keene St. in particular). Hamilton is geographically situated in a weak region, but then again does seem to avoid playing the stronger SUNYAC schools from year to year. Whether that is Hamilton's decision, or the SUNYAC powers, I'm not sure ...

One other point to consider: scheduling is a two-way street. Some schools are not eager to pick up likely losses against NESCAC powers in non-conference play, and are generally hesitant to schedule Williams/Amherst/Middlebury accordingly.

In some ways I wish the NESCAC schools would start practice earlier, but on the other, basketball is a VERY long season and perhaps there is benefit in reducing the overall length of the practice grind. I'm not really sure which way it cuts by January, but for sure in those mid-November games, NESCAC teams often look very rusty / sloppy relative to their peers, so it would be foolish to frontload non-conference schedules. E.g. when the Williams team that featured Duncan Robinson and Michael Mayer and made it to the title game lost its opening game to Southern Vermont ...

That MAY not be a good example. Robinson was a freshman, and presumably improved tremendously over the season. Mayer was injured much of the season and probably wasn't really 100% until the postseason. That was also the season that Amherst beat Williams fairly comfortably THREE times, then was completely run out of Salem in the FF. (By the FF I'm fairly confident in saying Mayer was the best player in D3, but zero chance of national POY based on the total season.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on November 27, 2018, 06:36:26 PM

It's all for phony baloney show anyway to have the NESCAC be that way. Other academically elite schools somehow struggle on with the usual practice start dates and competition dates.

Also, I think the SOS bump, even losing to an Amherst, etc, would help a bubble team. Maybe.

And, the NESCAC schools could flash some green at some teams, pay for hotels or something like that.

Sorry, I'm just...well...feeling stabby today. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on November 27, 2018, 07:12:49 PM

Mayer was healthy for the Southern Vermont game and Duncan was already very good, though obviously improved a ton. I've watched a lot of early season Nescac basketball. There is no question that they are way behind other teams in the season's first week and are not on an even footing for a few weeks. You can call a focus on academics phoney baloney if you want, but the coaches have no say in a league-wide longstanding policy (believe me they would all choose differently if an option) and they would be fools to schedule tough opponents on the opening weekend. But hey, I'm glad we've added yet another complaint to the ever-growing list of grumbles about Nescac!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 27, 2018, 07:54:26 PM

I believe the GNAC is playing a single round robin this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 27, 2018, 08:21:27 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on November 27, 2018, 07:12:49 PM
Mayer was healthy for the Southern Vermont game and Duncan was already very good, though obviously improved a ton. I've watched a lot of early season Nescac basketball. There is no question that they are way behind other teams in the season's first week and are not on an even footing for a few weeks. You can call a focus on academics phoney baloney if you want, but the coaches have no say in a league-wide longstanding policy (believe me they would all choose differently if an option) and they would be fools to schedule tough opponents on the opening weekend. But hey, I'm glad we've added yet another complaint to the ever-growing list of grumbles about Nescac!

I suspected Mayer was healthy for So. VT - he got hurt in what the 4th or 5th game? Duncan was 'very good' for a h.s. player, but probably not yet good for a college player. And So. VT was pretty good that year - no disgrace.

As a college teacher my whole career, I would be the last person to cry 'phony baloney' on a focus on academics, but schools with pedigrees like NESCAC somehow survive with seasons starting earlier. I have little doubt that NESCAC coaches disagree with the policy - I cry 'phony baloney' on the administrators.

Although it was inadvertent, I take pride in adding to your list of NESCAC grumbles! 8-) But you might want to consider the possibility that they are not ALL jealousy of the NESCAC. I'm from the CCIW, which is generally ranked above the NESCAC. (Though I AM jealous that you often get more teams into the tourney, just because you don't cannibalize each other.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on November 27, 2018, 09:32:50 PM

I didn't speculate on the reason for the grumbles ... but there is no doubt that they appear about some topic or another (usually schedule-related) like clockwork every year here :). In the end, coaches everywhere are the same - they are going to work the system the best they can given the constraints they have.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on November 28, 2018, 01:29:15 PM

Look, I didn't blame the coaches. It just seems the NESCAC scheduling cupcakes early is like the D-1 schools who schedule the MEAC and SWAC tomato cans. And for cripes sake, Davidson is a #10 ranked Liberal Arts college and they play D-1 and have football! There's CMS and Carleton and Grinnell and Washington & Lee among the Top 20 that play football, participate in the post season, and somehow their colleges are still ranked highly.

It may be picking on the NESCAC but their model seems elitist and sanctimonious to many.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fantastic50 on November 28, 2018, 01:36:16 PM

Quote from: smedindy on November 28, 2018, 01:29:15 PM
And for cripes sake, Davidson is a #10 ranked Liberal Arts college and they play D-1 and have football!

Davidson barely plays D-1 football. The Wildcats are in the Pioneer Football League, one of the weakest conferences in FCS, with no football scholarships allowed. Also, Davidson played only D-2 and D-3 teams in their non-conference games this fall.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on November 28, 2018, 01:46:14 PM

NESCAC schedules cupcakes (generally) for all of roughly three games, and for very good reasons that you seem to completely ignore. We are talking about basketball, not football, and none of the schools you list start practices two weeks after everyone else in D3. Why do you care so much? By two weeks into the season, NESCAC teams are generally playing consistently strong or at least reasonably strong opponents. Would it really make a difference to you if NESCAC played tougher out-of-conference games on week one as opposed to week 3 or 4? In all events, so long as multiple NESCAC teams keep advancing deep in NCAA tourneys regularly, it's hard to say that their scheduling approach is somehow problematic. Clearly, they are battle-tested enough by the time they get to the post-season to thrive.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on November 28, 2018, 04:13:09 PM

Quote from: fantastic50 on November 28, 2018, 01:36:16 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 28, 2018, 01:29:15 PM
And for cripes sake, Davidson is a #10 ranked Liberal Arts college and they play D-1 and have football!

Davidson barely plays D-1 football. The Wildcats are in the Pioneer Football League, one of the weakest conferences in FCS, with no football scholarships allowed. Also, Davidson played only D-2 and D-3 teams in their non-conference games this fall.

They still offer it. I'm well aware of the Pioneer League, so no need to 'football splain' it to me. They have to travel to the Midwest, New York, and California to play in this league. That ain't hay.

San Diego won first round games in 2016 and 2017 in the playoffs, so it's not like they're hapless backwaters of D-1A.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: toad22 on November 28, 2018, 06:57:21 PM

Every school makes their own decisions about how they want to operate. I hate the fact that Williams can't start Practice until November 1. That we only get 24 games, including any exhibitions or scrimmages. The decision to play 10 NESCAC games instead of as many as 20 was made by the college presidents. This is where we are. Nobody (but the presidents) can change any of this. Travel time to non-league games is scrutinized to be sure that the minimum amount of class time is being missed. I wish there was more flexibility. The last piece of this is that Williams has been dropped by a bunch of better opponents because they were sick of losing to us (I am very thankful for Salem State and Springfield, they always want to play)!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 29, 2018, 06:50:00 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

No extra teams listed in this report; hopefan's list of the remaining undefeated teams with no votes was longer than I wanted to tackle this week.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Nebraska Wesleyan	7-0	def. Central, 91-83; 12/01 vs. Dubuque
#2	545	Williams	5-0	11/29 vs. Fitchburg State; 12/01 vs. Wesleyan
#3	508	Hamilton	5-0	11/29 vs. Utica; 12/01 vs. Johnson and Wales
#4	496	UW-Stevens Point	3-1	LOST to #5 Augustana, 84-86 OT; 12/01 vs. UW-Superior
#5	473	Augustana	4-1	def. #4 UW-Stevens Point, 86-84 OT; 12/01 vs. Carroll
#6	471	Whitman	4-1	11/30 vs. Pacific; 12/01 vs. Willamette
#7	454	Wittenberg	4-1	LOST to #21 Marietta, 74-84; 12/01 vs. Oberlin
#8	428	Swarthmore	4-0	11/29 vs. T#35 Johns Hopkins; 12/01 vs. Franklin and Marshall
#9	420	UW-Oshkosh	3-1	def. North Park, 86-53; 12/01 vs. Elmhurst
#10	360	Illinois Wesleyan	6-0	12/01 vs. Carthage
#11	340	MIT	3-1	11/29 vs. Pine Manor; 12/01 vs. Lasell
#12	317	Middlebury	4-0	def. Morrisville State, 78-63; 11/29 vs. New England College; 12/01 vs. Keene State
#13	295	Plattsburgh State	4-0	def. St. Lawrence, 93-64; 11/30 vs. SUNY New Paltz; 12/01 vs. SUNY Oneonta
#14	290	Whitworth	3-1	11/30 vs. Willamette; 12/01 vs. Pacific
#15	258	UW-Whitewater	5-0	def. Beloit, 92-65
#16	251	Wooster	5-0	def. Kenyon, 90-70; 12/01 vs. Hiram
#17	191	Randolph-Macon	8-0	def. Washington and Lee, 84-76; 12/01 vs. #33 Emory and Henry
#18	184	Wheaton (Ill.)	5-0	11/29 vs. Chicago; 12/01 vs. North Park
#19	175	Loras	4-1	LOST to Dubuque, 73-78; 12/01 vs. Buena Vista
#20	135	Rochester	6-0	IDLE
#21	108	Marietta	6-0	def. #7 Wittenberg, 84-74; 12/01 vs. #26 John Carroll
#22	94	Christopher Newport	5-0	def. Shenandoah, 91-78; 12/01 vs. Randolph; 12/02 vs. Lynchburg
#23	75	Emory	4-2	LOST to Sewanee, 70-83; 12/01 vs. Trinity (Texas)
#24	71	New Jersey City	4-2	LOST to William Paterson, 72-88; 12/01 vs. Rowan
#25	60	Pomona-Pitzer	4-0	11/30 vs. Washington U.; 12/01 vs. TBA

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	57	John Carroll	3-1	12/01 vs. #21 Marietta
#27	49	North Central (Ill.)	4-0	def. Finlandia, 83-58; 12/01 vs. Millikin
#28	47	Springfield	2-3	LOST to Becker, 70-74
#29	46	St. John's	4-1	def. Bethel, 90-55; 12/01 vs. Gustavus Adolphus
#30	44	Amherst	4-0	def. Anna Maria, 98-58; 12/01 vs. Emerson
#31	42	Endicott	5-1	def. Curry, 105-58; 12/01 vs. #37 Nichols
#32	32	Nazareth	3-1	LOST to Oswego State, 55-70
#33	28	Emory and Henry	6-1	LOST to Lynchburg, 66-87; 12/01 vs. #17 Randolph-Macon
#34	24	Ramapo	5-1	LOST to #43 Montclair State, 75-95; 12/01 vs. Stockton
T#35	22	UW-Platteville	1-2	11/30 vs. Alma; 12/01 vs. TBA
T#35	22	Johns Hopkins	4-2	11/29 vs. #8 Swarthmore; 12/01 vs. Washington College
#37	19	Nichols	5-0	def. Salve Regina, 106-79; 12/01 vs. #31 Endicott
#38	15	Penn State-Behrend	3-1	LOST to La Roche, 64-74; 12/01 vs. Pitt-Bradford
#39	13	Salisbury	6-0	def. Washington College, 68-62; def. Goucher, 101-71; 12/01 vs. St. Mary's (Md.)
#40	9	Aurora	1-1	LOST to Wisconsin Lutheran, 82-96; 12/01 vs. Illinois Tech
#41	8	Scranton	5-0	def. Cabrini, 90-80; 12/01 vs. Goucher
#42	7	Maryville (Tenn.)	1-4	LOST to Covenant, 58-79; 12/01 vs. Greensboro; 12/02 vs. Methodist
#43	6	Montclair State	6-1	def. #34 Ramapo, 95-75; 12/01 vs. Kean
#44	5	WPI	5-0	def. Tufts, 89-66; 12/01 vs. Fitchburg State
#45	3	Roanoke	4-2	def. Southern Virginia, 79-76; 12/01 vs. Averett
T#46	1	Hope	3-2	IDLE
T#46	1	Lake Forest	3-0	11/30 vs. Grinnell; 12/01 vs. Cornell
T#46	1	St. Thomas	3-1	def. Macalester, 83-61; 11/30 vs. UW-River Falls

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 29, 2018, 10:06:57 AM

Quote from: hopefan on November 27, 2018, 07:06:16 AM
With the new Top 25 list out yesterday, let's look at who is NOT in.

Here are undefeated teams that have yet to catch any voters eye: ...

Quote from: Darryl Nester on November 29, 2018, 06:50:00 AM
How They Fared (So Far)

No extra teams listed in this report; hopefan's list of the remaining undefeated teams with no votes was longer than I wanted to tackle this week.

jk ...

Team	W-L	Results
Sewanee	7-0	def. #23 Emory, 83-70; 12/01 vs. Centre
Mary Hardin-Baylor	5-0	def. Schreiner, 103-80; 11/29 vs. East Texas Baptist; 12/01 vs. LeTourneau
Millsaps	6-0	def. Centenary (La.), 70-55; 11/30 vs. Austin; 12/01 vs. University of Dallas
Alfred	4-1	LOST to SUNY Geneseo, 73-89
Utica	4-0	11/29 vs. #3 Hamilton
Mass-Boston	4-1	LOST to Keene State, 77-92; 12/01 vs. Eastern Connecticut
Wilkes	4-1	LOST to Drew, 65-67; 12/01 vs. Clarks Summit
MSOE	5-0	def. Rockford, 108-89; 12/01 vs. Marian
St. Elizabeth	5-0	def. King's (N.Y.), 96-72; def. Penn College, 87-57; 12/01 vs. Lancaster Bible
New England College	4-0	11/29 vs. #12 Middlebury
Coast Guard	5-0	def. Fisher, 91-70; 12/02 vs. Merchant Marine
Rowan	4-1	LOST to TCNJ, 75-79; 12/01 vs. #24 New Jersey City
Lynchburg	5-0	def. Emory and Henry, 87-66; 12/01 vs. Mary Washington; 12/02 vs. #22 Christopher Newport
Centre	5-0	def. Franklin, 80-71; 12/01 vs. Sewanee
Johnson and Wales (Colo.)	4-0	12/01 vs. Whittier; 12/02 vs. UC Santa Cruz
Union	3-0	11/30 vs. Hobart; 12/01 vs. Rochester Tech
Augsburg	4-0	def. Carleton, 74-46; 12/01 vs. Bethel
DePauw	4-0	def. Rose-Hulman, 71-67; 12/01 vs. Kenyon
Wabash	4-0	def. Rose-Hulman, 77-74; def. Elmhurst, 95-71; 12/01 vs. Denison
Occidental	4-0	def. Cal Miramar, 91-59; 12/01 vs. West Coast Baptist
Oswego State	4-0	def. Nazareth, 70-55; 11/30 vs. SUNY Geneseo; 12/01 vs. Brockport
SUNY Oneonta	3-1	LOST to Hartwick, 72-83; 11/30 vs. SUNY Potsdam; 12/01 vs. #13 Plattsburgh State
Pfeiffer	2-1	LOST to Methodist, 77-85; 11/30 vs. Johnson (Tenn.); 12/01 vs. Piedmont International
Mount St. Mary	2-0	def. Hunter, 61-56; 11/29 vs. Yeshiva; 12/01 vs. St. Joseph's (Bklyn.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 29, 2018, 10:23:33 AM

Point lost on the road to annual powerhouse Augustana. I think their 4th loss in a row to them. I guess they should've taken NESCAC's lead and scheduled Cupcake University instead. I'm kidding!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fantastic50 on November 29, 2018, 11:50:23 AM

Quote from: smedindy on November 28, 2018, 04:13:09 PM
Quote from: fantastic50 on November 28, 2018, 01:36:16 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 28, 2018, 01:29:15 PM
And for cripes sake, Davidson is a #10 ranked Liberal Arts college and they play D-1 and have football!

Davidson barely plays D-1 football. The Wildcats are in the Pioneer Football League, one of the weakest conferences in FCS, with no football scholarships allowed. Also, Davidson played only D-2 and D-3 teams in their non-conference games this fall.

They still offer it. I'm well aware of the Pioneer League, so no need to 'football splain' it to me. They have to travel to the Midwest, New York, and California to play in this league. That ain't hay.

San Diego won first round games in 2016 and 2017 in the playoffs, so it's not like they're hapless backwaters of D-1A.

No disrespect to you or Davidson intended, just trying to point out the difference between fielding a D-1 football team and being highly competitive at the FCS level as an SLAC (as with Wofford or Richmond in recent years, for example)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on November 29, 2018, 02:32:18 PM

Quote from: fantastic50 on November 29, 2018, 11:50:23 AM
Quote from: smedindy on November 28, 2018, 04:13:09 PM
Quote from: fantastic50 on November 28, 2018, 01:36:16 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 28, 2018, 01:29:15 PM
And for cripes sake, Davidson is a #10 ranked Liberal Arts college and they play D-1 and have football!

Davidson barely plays D-1 football. The Wildcats are in the Pioneer Football League, one of the weakest conferences in FCS, with no football scholarships allowed. Also, Davidson played only D-2 and D-3 teams in their non-conference games this fall.

They still offer it. I'm well aware of the Pioneer League, so no need to 'football splain' it to me. They have to travel to the Midwest, New York, and California to play in this league. That ain't hay.

San Diego won first round games in 2016 and 2017 in the playoffs, so it's not like they're hapless backwaters of D-1A.

No disrespect to you or Davidson intended, just trying to point out the difference between fielding a D-1 football team and being highly competitive at the FCS level as an SLAC (as with Wofford or Richmond in recent years, for example)

I almost picked Richmond for this example, BTW.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on November 29, 2018, 02:33:22 PM

Quote from: toad22 on November 28, 2018, 06:57:21 PM
Every school makes their own decisions about how they want to operate. I hate the fact that Williams can't start Practice until November 1. That we only get 24 games, including any exhibitions or scrimmages. The decision to play 10 NESCAC games instead of as many as 20 was made by the college presidents. This is where we are. Nobody (but the presidents) can change any of this. Travel time to non-league games is scrutinized to be sure that the minimum amount of class time is being missed. I wish there was more flexibility. The last piece of this is that Williams has been dropped by a bunch of better opponents because they were sick of losing to us (I am very thankful for Salem State and Springfield, they always want to play)!

We know all of that - and again a little green helps soothe the losing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on November 29, 2018, 03:09:24 PM

It is interesting that the top-ranked team in Division 3, the loaded-with-talent defending national champion, did not schedule for this season a single team ranked in the pre-season D3hoops top 25. By contrast, Williams plays three such teams (as well as SEVEN more games against pre-season ORV teams), and Middlebury four (as well as three more games against pre-season ORV teams). Yet I haven't heard many (any?) complaints about Nebraska Wesleyan scheduling ... just sayin :). And even two of Williams' first five games, which admittedly is the easiest stretch on the schedule by far, were vs. ORV teams - it's hardly Williams' fault that those teams have yet to play to expectations.

[I do not say this to bash Nebraska Wesleyan, which I am sure has very good reasons, geographical and otherwise, for playing the schedule it does. Just noting that teams, and not just NESCAC teams, have a wide variety of scheduling constraints].

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on November 29, 2018, 03:35:22 PM

The closest non-conference team in the top 25 or ORV to Nebraska Wesleyan is Augustana. 363 miles, 5 hours 20 min.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on November 29, 2018, 03:45:53 PM

Like I said, Nebraska Wesleyan has good reasons for scheduling as it does (although I do note they managed to take two trips to Wisconsin and Minnesota without playing any of the many ranked WIAC/MIAC teams). And I'm not trying to impugn NWU's overall schedule in any way - like everyone else in D3, including NESCAC, they work within certain constraints that higher divisions simply don't have to deal with. I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of attacking NESCAC teams in particular on this, when they do actually schedule a lot of very credible opponents, at least judging by D3hoops' primary metric.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 29, 2018, 05:28:35 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on November 29, 2018, 03:45:53 PM
Like I said, Nebraska Wesleyan has good reasons for scheduling as it does (although I do note they managed to take two trips to Wisconsin and Minnesota without playing any of the many ranked WIAC/MIAC teams). And I'm not trying to impugn NWU's overall schedule in any way - like everyone else in D3, including NESCAC, they work within certain constraints that higher divisions simply don't have to deal with. I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of attacking NESCAC teams in particular on this, when they do actually schedule a lot of very credible opponents, at least judging by D3hoops' primary metric.

I think it was you that previously stated that it takes two to dance as well. Others have to be willing to schedule NESCAC powers (and maybe NWU) knowing there will probably be rewarded with a loss. Initially, I always find it hard to believe that Stevens Point can't fill their nonconference schedule some years. There are tons of options in the Midwest. Coach Semling pointed out to me one time that he would, "show me the stack of "no's" he has on his desk" from teams that didn't want to play them. I loved the Terry Porter tip-off tourney they used to have and the Sentry Classic over the holidays. Long gone are those tournaments. I guess it cost too much to run...and maybe they had a hard time finding 3 other teams to come to Point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 29, 2018, 06:56:18 PM

The big thing for NESCAC Presidents is the travel and class time - many of the schools simply aren't allowed to travel outside a relatively small radius before the semester ends.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fantastic50 on November 30, 2018, 08:49:42 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 29, 2018, 06:56:18 PM

The big thing for NESCAC Presidents is the travel and class time

In the NCAC, the same two priorities drive scheduling, although our geographic location allows for meeting top-quality opponents without too much travel. Also, unlike the NESCAC, we play midweek games (but only within about a three-hour driving distance.) I imagine that the issues are similar in other conferences with high-end academic standards, such as the Centennial, NEWMAC, and Liberty League, among others.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 30, 2018, 07:18:38 PM

Quote from: fantastic50 on November 30, 2018, 08:49:42 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 29, 2018, 06:56:18 PM

The big thing for NESCAC Presidents is the travel and class time

In the NCAC, the same two priorities drive scheduling, although our geographic location allows for meeting top-quality opponents without too much travel. Also, unlike the NESCAC, we play midweek games (but only within about a three-hour driving distance.) I imagine that the issues are similar in other conferences with high-end academic standards, such as the Centennial, NEWMAC, and Liberty League, among others.

...which is why we like D-3. The idea is to allow student-athletes to opportunity to compete in a framework consistent with their academic pursuits.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 01, 2018, 02:18:26 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 29, 2018, 06:56:18 PM

The big thing for NESCAC Presidents is the travel and class time - many of the schools simply aren't allowed to travel outside a relatively small radius before the semester ends.

Of course, the academic lightweights of the UAA go everywhere - on weekends yes - but still....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 01, 2018, 11:07:16 AM

Quote from: smedindy on December 01, 2018, 02:18:26 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 29, 2018, 06:56:18 PM

The big thing for NESCAC Presidents is the travel and class time - many of the schools simply aren't allowed to travel outside a relatively small radius before the semester ends.

Of course, the academic lightweights of the UAA go everywhere - on weekends yes - but still....

Hey, I didn't say I agree with it, but I do think perception is a big thing when it comes to NESCAC athletic rules.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 02, 2018, 05:22:06 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Nebraska Wesleyan	8-0	def. Central, 91-83; def. Dubuque, 92-78
#2	545	Williams	7-0	def. Fitchburg State, 109-41; def. Wesleyan, 80-65
#3	508	Hamilton	7-0	def. Utica, 73-58; def. Johnson and Wales, 91-71
#4	496	UW-Stevens Point	4-1	LOST to #5 Augustana, 84-86 OT; def. UW-Superior, 79-36
#5	473	Augustana	5-1	def. #4 UW-Stevens Point, 86-84 OT; def. Carroll, 68-56
#6	471	Whitman	6-1	def. Pacific, 128-83; def. Willamette, 104-59
#7	454	Wittenberg	5-1	LOST to #21 Marietta, 74-84; def. Oberlin, 79-66
#8	428	Swarthmore	4-2	LOST to T#35 Johns Hopkins, 57-59; LOST to Franklin and Marshall, 51-53
#9	420	UW-Oshkosh	4-1	def. North Park, 86-53; def. Elmhurst, 68-57
#10	360	Illinois Wesleyan	7-0	def. Carthage, 75-67 OT
#11	340	MIT	5-1	def. Pine Manor, 97-54; def. Lasell, 96-64
#12	317	Middlebury	5-1	def. Morrisville State, 78-63; def. New England College, 97-68; LOST to Keene State, 88-93
#13	295	Plattsburgh State	6-0	def. St. Lawrence, 93-64; def. SUNY New Paltz, 85-75; def. SUNY Oneonta, 84-69
#14	290	Whitworth	5-1	def. Willamette, 86-69; def. Pacific, 123-98
#15	258	UW-Whitewater	5-0	def. Beloit, 92-65
#16	251	Wooster	6-0	def. Kenyon, 90-70; def. Hiram, 79-55
#17	191	Randolph-Macon	9-0	def. Washington and Lee, 84-76; def. #33 Emory and Henry, 79-68
#18	184	Wheaton (Ill.)	5-2	LOST to Chicago, 60-90; LOST to North Park, 65-68
#19	175	Loras	4-1	LOST to Dubuque, 73-78; ~~12/01 vs. Buena Vista~~ postponed
#20	135	Rochester	6-0	IDLE
#21	108	Marietta	7-0	def. #7 Wittenberg, 84-74; def. #26 John Carroll, 82-75
#22	94	Christopher Newport	6-1	def. Shenandoah, 91-78; def. (n) Randolph, 82-48; LOST to Lynchburg, 64-77
#23	75	Emory	5-2	LOST to Sewanee, 70-83; def. Trinity (Texas), 116-77
#24	71	New Jersey City	5-2	LOST to William Paterson, 72-88; def. Rowan, 76-68
#25	60	Pomona-Pitzer	5-1	LOST to Washington U., 62-66; def. (n) Alma, 88-76

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	57	John Carroll	3-2	LOST to #21 Marietta, 75-82
#27	49	North Central (Ill.)	5-0	def. Finlandia, 83-58; def. Millikin, 75-64
#28	47	Springfield	2-3	LOST to Becker, 70-74
#29	46	St. John's	5-1	def. Bethel, 90-55; def. Gustavus Adolphus, 83-71
#30	44	Amherst	5-0	def. Anna Maria, 98-58; def. Emerson, 85-62
#31	42	Endicott	5-2	def. Curry, 105-58; LOST to #37 Nichols, 64-85
#32	32	Nazareth	3-1	LOST to Oswego State, 55-70
#33	28	Emory and Henry	6-2	LOST to Lynchburg, 66-87; LOST to #17 Randolph-Macon, 68-79
#34	24	Ramapo	6-1	LOST to #43 Montclair State, 75-95; def. Stockton, 77-50
T#35	22	UW-Platteville	3-2	def. (n) Alma, 88-61; def. Washington U., 64-62
T#35	22	Johns Hopkins	6-2	def. #8 Swarthmore, 59-57; def. Washington College, 82-64
#37	19	Nichols	6-0	def. Salve Regina, 106-79; def. #31 Endicott, 85-64
#38	15	Penn State-Behrend	4-1	LOST to La Roche, 64-74; def. Pitt-Bradford, 101-59
#39	13	Salisbury	7-0	def. Washington College, 68-62; def. Goucher, 101-71; def. St. Mary's (Md.), 96-94
#40	9	Aurora	2-1	LOST to Wisconsin Lutheran, 82-96; def. Illinois Tech, 73-57
#41	8	Scranton	6-0	def. Cabrini, 90-80; def. Goucher, 85-66
#42	7	Maryville (Tenn.)	3-4	LOST to Covenant, 58-79; def. Greensboro, 85-84; def. Methodist, 93-67
#43	6	Montclair State	7-1	def. #34 Ramapo, 95-75; def. Kean, 79-59
#44	5	WPI	6-0	def. Tufts, 89-66; def. Fitchburg State, 63-56
#45	3	Roanoke	5-2	def. Southern Virginia, 79-76; def. Averett, 72-46
T#46	1	Hope	3-2	IDLE
T#46	1	Lake Forest	4-1	LOST to Grinnell, 100-108; def. Cornell, 90-88
T#46	1	St. Thomas	4-1	def. Macalester, 83-61; def. (n) UW-River Falls, 85-70

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 02, 2018, 05:31:40 PM

... and the current/formerly undefeated teams from hopefan's list -- minus a few teams that had a particularly rough week:

Team	W-L	Results
Millsaps	8-0	def. Centenary (La.), 70-55; def. Austin, 90-67; def. University of Dallas, 70-60
MSOE	6-0	def. Rockford, 108-89; def. Marian, 76-64
Coast Guard	6-0	def. Fisher, 91-70; def. Merchant Marine, 69-42
Lynchburg	7-0	def. #33 Emory and Henry, 87-66; def. Mary Washington, 69-64; def. #22 Christopher Newport, 77-64
Centre	6-0	def. Franklin, 80-71; def. Sewanee, 80-71 OT
DePauw	5-0	def. Rose-Hulman, 71-67; def. Kenyon, 83-75
Wabash	5-0	def. Rose-Hulman, 77-74; def. Elmhurst, 95-71; def. Denison, 83-57
Occidental	5-0	def. Cal Miramar, 91-59; def. West Coast Baptist, 98-66
Oswego State	6-0	def. #32 Nazareth, 70-55; def. SUNY Geneseo, 68-58; def. Brockport, 73-63

Sewanee	7-1	def. #23 Emory, 83-70; LOST to Centre, 71-80 OT
Mary Hardin-Baylor	6-1	def. Schreiner, 103-80; def. East Texas Baptist, 98-95; LOST to LeTourneau, 82-87
Utica	4-1	LOST to #3 Hamilton, 58-73
St. Elizabeth	5-1	def. King's (N.Y.), 96-72; def. Penn College, 87-57; LOST to Lancaster Bible, 59-73
New England College	4-1	LOST to #12 Middlebury, 68-97
Johnson and Wales	5-1	def. Whittier, 99-87; LOST to UC Santa Cruz, 69-73
Union	4-1	LOST to Hobart, 66-73; def. Rochester Tech, 74-68
Augsburg	4-1	def. Carleton, 74-46; LOST to Bethel, 84-90 OT
Mount St. Mary	3-1	def. Hunter, 61-56; def. Yeshiva, 70-63; LOST to St. Joseph's (Bklyn.), 94-98 OT
Alfred	4-1	LOST to SUNY Geneseo, 73-89
Wilkes	5-1	LOST to Drew, 65-67; def. Clarks Summit, 106-55
Rowan	4-2	LOST to TCNJ, 75-79; LOST to #24 New Jersey City, 68-76

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 03, 2018, 02:34:15 AM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=j5e7f/air603b6yr9p3t16.jpg)

The carnage continues!

Ok, maybe some hyperbole there, but it doesn't take away from the fact nine men's Top 25 teams lost (account for 12 losses). Even the women are taking more losses this time of year than maybe we are used to from that Top 25 group. Five more took losses this past week, granted some were to other Top 25 opponents.

What could the second Top 25 poll of the season look like when it's released Monday evening? What other teams are surprising or maybe flying under the radar?

Join Dave McHugh as he's returned from his soccer soiree to recap another incredible week of Division III basketball. Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) will air at a special time on Monday - starting at 11:00 am Eastern.

McHugh will be joined by a few teams stealing the spotlight early in the season. Plus, Ryan Scott helps Dave get back up to speed and tries to read the tea leaves ahead of the latest Top 25.

Dave will also talk to the latest coach to join the 600-win club. DePauw women's coach Kris Huffman talks about the accomplishment and this season's seemingly low-octane squad.

Oh ... and we get the sights and sounds of a game between UW-River Falls and St. Thomas from US Bank Stadium, home of the Minnesota Vikings, in Minneapolis.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Monday's special episode live right here: http://bit.ly/2DXh0ma

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or use any of the social media options to the right.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Mark Morefield, No. 25 UMHB women's coach
- Kris Huffman, No. 21 DePauw women's coach
- Josh Merkel, No. 17 Randolph-Macon men's coach
- Ryan Scott, D3hoops.com Around the Nation columnist

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts instead, you can get access to them or subscribe one of the three following ways (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Riley056 on December 03, 2018, 08:45:21 PM

https://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2018-19/week2

*Random thoughts
- Randolph Macon has played 9 games already!
- This year is going to be fun
- The top 8 teams in poll are all really good

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fantastic50 on December 03, 2018, 09:53:33 PM

Quote from: smedindy on December 01, 2018, 02:18:26 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 29, 2018, 06:56:18 PM

The big thing for NESCAC Presidents is the travel and class time - many of the schools simply aren't allowed to travel outside a relatively small radius before the semester ends.

Of course, the academic lightweights of the UAA go everywhere - on weekends yes - but still....

The UAA is a different animal because of distance. They do miss a lot of Friday classes in some sports for travel, but they also have the money to fly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on December 03, 2018, 10:04:57 PM

Angels must be looking out for Loras. They lose to an unranked team that didn't receive a single vote, and that already has 3 losses, and they only drop 2 places, from 19th to 21st. ??? :o

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 03, 2018, 10:24:19 PM

Quote from: AndOne on December 03, 2018, 10:04:57 PM
Angels must be looking out for Loras. They lose to an unranked team that didn't receive a single vote, and that already has 3 losses, and they only drop 2 places, from 19th to 21st. ??? :o

Well they did drop from 175 points to 85 which is only 17 ahead of 25th. And 85 would have only been 23rd in the previous poll.
They were jumped by 4 teams (Marietta, Rochester, Amherst and North Central (IL)) while moving ahead of 2 who lost two games (Swarthmore and Wheaton (IL)). In fact, of the 15 teams directly after Loras in the previous poll, 10 picked up a loss, and 4 of the 5 who didn't lose moved ahead. Only St John's didn't lose and didn't jump Loras.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on December 03, 2018, 10:43:39 PM

Maybe it's just me, but I don't really care about points. In MHO, the only thing that matters is what number you're ranked at.
For example, you don't hear someone say, "we rec'd 85 points in the latest national poll." They say "we're ranked 21st in the latest national poll."

Specifically, not only was the team Loras lost to unranked, but they already have 3 losses this season.
And the kicker is while it was a road game for Loras, the other school is in the same town, and only 0.7 Miles, and 2 minutes away so travel fatigue is not an adequate defense. ;)
Just seems a loss like that would merit more than a 2 spot drop. That's all. It's not a biggie. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 03, 2018, 10:57:17 PM

Quote from: AndOne on December 03, 2018, 10:43:39 PM
Maybe it's just me, but I don't really care about points. In MHO, the only thing that matters is what number you're ranked at.

Super basic. When you're in third place, do you notice whether you're one game out of second or two games out of second?

Looks like you just described a rivalry game, AndOne! Congrats!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: duckfan41 on December 03, 2018, 11:04:03 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 03, 2018, 10:57:17 PM
Quote from: AndOne on December 03, 2018, 10:43:39 PM
Maybe it's just me, but I don't really care about points. In MHO, the only thing that matters is what number you're ranked at.

Super basic. When you're in third place, do you notice whether you're one game out of second or two games out of second?

Looks like you just described a rivalry game, AndOne! Congrats!

Glad that someone mentioned this! UD and Loras is a huge rivalry game within the ARC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 03, 2018, 11:09:37 PM

Quote from: AndOne on December 03, 2018, 10:43:39 PM
Maybe it's just me, but I don't really care about points. In MHO, the only thing that matters is what number you're ranked at.
For example, you don't hear someone say, "we rec'd 85 points in the latest national poll." They say "we're ranked 21st in the latest national poll."

Specifically, not only was the team Loras lost to unranked, but they already have 3 losses this season.
And the kicker is while it was a road game for Loras, the other school is in the same town, and only 0.7 Miles, and 2 minutes away so travel fatigue is not an adequate defense. ;)
Just seems a loss like that would merit more than a 2 spot drop. That's all. It's not a biggie. ;)

You can't evaluate a team in isolation. Should they have dropped below teams who did even worse than them that week?!

FCGG explained the situation quite well - reread his post.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 03, 2018, 11:23:02 PM

Quote from: AndOne on December 03, 2018, 10:43:39 PM
Maybe it's just me, but I don't really care about points. In MHO, the only thing that matters is what number you're ranked at.

But the what number you're ranked at part is directly a function of the points.

Loras lost 90 points.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on December 03, 2018, 11:35:32 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 03, 2018, 10:57:17 PM
Quote from: AndOne on December 03, 2018, 10:43:39 PM
Maybe it's just me, but I don't really care about points. In MHO, the only thing that matters is what number you're ranked at.

Super basic. When you're in third place, do you notice whether you're one game out of second or two games out of second?

Looks like you just described a rivalry game, AndOne! Congrats!

Try to see it my way......................we can work it out. :)

If I'm playing in a football game and we score 80 points but lose 82-80, I care not how many points we scored, only that we lost.
If we get 85 points in a poll, I could care less. What I care about is what number we're ranked at. Like I said before people really don't say "we got 85 points." They say "we're ranked 21st in the poll." I don't think you can honestly argue with that.
Doesn't mean my view is the only way to go. But I also don't think you can say my outlook on the subject doesn't make any sense. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on December 03, 2018, 11:42:12 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 03, 2018, 11:23:02 PM
Quote from: AndOne on December 03, 2018, 10:43:39 PM
Maybe it's just me, but I don't really care about points. In MHO, the only thing that matters is what number you're ranked at.

But the what number you're ranked at part is directly a function of the points.

Loras lost 90 points.

But they lost to an unranked team with 3 losses. I just think that should have cost more than 2 spots in the poll.

Are you happier that your team is ranked #10 in the country or that they got 438 points?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 03, 2018, 11:50:08 PM

Quote from: AndOne on December 03, 2018, 11:35:32 PM
If I'm playing in a football game and we score 80 points but lose 82-80, I care not how many points we scored, only that we lost. Apples to oranges, though. That has a whole range of different connotations, as it is a completely different scenario.
If we get 85 points in a poll, I could care less. What I care about is what number we're ranked at. Like I said before people really don't say "we got 85 points." They say "we're ranked 21st in the poll." I don't think you can honestly argue with that. Many people already have, for what it's worth.
Doesn't mean my view is the only way to go. But I also don't think you can say my outlook on the subject doesn't make any sense. ;)

I feel like my analogy is most apt -- after all, most people want rankings to be standings anyway, so I'm sure you can see the similarities.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 04, 2018, 12:05:29 AM

Quote from: AndOne on December 03, 2018, 11:42:12 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 03, 2018, 11:23:02 PM
Quote from: AndOne on December 03, 2018, 10:43:39 PM
Maybe it's just me, but I don't really care about points. In MHO, the only thing that matters is what number you're ranked at.

But the what number you're ranked at part is directly a function of the points.

Loras lost 90 points.

But they lost to an unranked team with 3 losses. I just think that should have cost more than 2 spots in the poll.

Are you happier that your team is ranked #10 in the country or that they got 438 points?

They lost more than half their points. 90 points is an average of 3.6 spots lost per ballot. Sometimes polls do weird things. In the football fan poll this year we had a case where a team was ranked higher in the poll than on any ballot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on December 04, 2018, 12:09:55 AM

Nobody wants this to go on forever so I'll close with two thoughts.

1. I'm happy my team is currently ranked #20. No matter how many points it took to get there.

2. I think anybody whose team is ranked is going to say "we're ranked (whatever #) in the current poll," before they say "we got 406 points in the latest poll."

The defense rests. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 04, 2018, 12:21:45 AM

Quote from: AndOne on December 03, 2018, 11:35:32 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 03, 2018, 10:57:17 PM
Quote from: AndOne on December 03, 2018, 10:43:39 PM
Maybe it's just me, but I don't really care about points. In MHO, the only thing that matters is what number you're ranked at.

Super basic. When you're in third place, do you notice whether you're one game out of second or two games out of second?

Looks like you just described a rivalry game, AndOne! Congrats!

Try to see it my way......................we can work it out. :)

If I'm playing in a football game and we score 80 points but lose 82-80, I care not how many points we scored, only that we lost.
If we get 85 points in a poll, I could care less. What I care about is what number we're ranked at. Like I said before people really don't say "we got 85 points." They say "we're ranked 21st in the poll." I don't think you can honestly argue with that.
Doesn't mean my view is the only way to go. But I also don't think you can say my outlook on the subject doesn't make any sense. ;)

They're not saying that your outlook on the subject doesn't make any sense, Mark. They're saying that your outlook on the subject is shallow. There's a difference. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 04, 2018, 12:22:12 AM

Quote from: AndOne on December 04, 2018, 12:09:55 AM
Nobody wants this to go on forever so I'll close with two thoughts.

1. I'm happy my team is currently ranked #20. No matter how many points it took to get there.

2. I think anybody whose team is ranked is going to say "we're ranked (whatever #) in the current poll," before they say "we got 406 points in the latest poll."

The defense rests. :)

It's certainly simpler for someone to say 'we're ranked #14' and leave it at that but it doesn't really paint the full picture. Middlebury is 18th and Amherst is 19th. But the gap between that single place is 3x bigger than between Amherst and Nichols in 25th even though that's 6 spots.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 04, 2018, 12:48:56 AM

I can't imagine that Mark hasn't seen any of the hundreds of times in the past 15 years or so where I've said you can't look at one team in the Top 25 in a vacuum.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 04, 2018, 06:30:22 AM

Quote from: AndOne on December 04, 2018, 12:09:55 AM
Nobody wants this to go on forever so I'll close with two thoughts.

1. I'm happy my team is currently ranked #20. No matter how many points it took to get there.

2. I think anybody whose team is ranked is going to say "we're ranked (whatever #) in the current poll," before they say "we got 406 points in the latest poll."

The defense rests.

It's fine to say teams, fans, and players care more about the spot than the points, but you can't use that argument to criticize the voters. The voters dropped them; they lost more than 50% of their support in the poll. I wasn't voting for them last week, so it's hard to vote for them less this week.

If we all got together and discussed each team and collectively ranked them, then, yeah, the voters might deserve some criticism, but this is 25 individual ballots - the points are literally the only way to tell when a team goes up or down in perception.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on December 04, 2018, 02:12:24 PM

I'm glad someone finally acknowledges what I think is important to most teams, fans, and players. Namely, the primary thing they're interested in is where they're ranked, not how many points they garnered.

AND (BIG AND) your explanation helps me understand the process more as a whole process than solely as a team by team analysis.
So, thank you very much. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 04, 2018, 02:27:51 PM

Quote from: AndOne on December 04, 2018, 02:12:24 PM
I'm glad someone finally acknowledges what I think is important to most teams, fans, and players. Namely, the primary thing they're interested in is where they're ranked, not how many points they garnered.

AND (BIG AND) your explanation helps me understand the process more as a whole process than solely as a team by team analysis.
So, thank you very much. :)

It isn't any different than has been said an incredible number of times in the past 15 or so years. It's really new to you?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 04, 2018, 03:06:42 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 04, 2018, 02:27:51 PM
Quote from: AndOne on December 04, 2018, 02:12:24 PM
I'm glad someone finally acknowledges what I think is important to most teams, fans, and players. Namely, the primary thing they're interested in is where they're ranked, not how many points they garnered.

AND (BIG AND) your explanation helps me understand the process more as a whole process than solely as a team by team analysis.
So, thank you very much. :)

It isn't any different than has been said an incredible number of times in the past 15 or so years. It's really new to you?

I kind of have the same point of view, Mark. What has been described by Ryan has been said on these boards in many ways for many years. I've also said it on Hoopsville more times than I can count. Now, I am used to repeating myself for those who are new to this (every year), but you aren't new to this ... thus, I find it interesting that you still beat on it.

Yes, we will continue to repeat in the future, but I honestly thought you understood this process and how this works far better than the average fan.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 06, 2018, 06:50:52 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Nebraska Wesleyan	8-0	12/08 vs. Colorado College
#2	567	Williams	7-0	12/06 vs. Union; 12/08 vs. Springfield
#3	546	Augustana	6-1	def. MacMurray, 78-54; 12/08 vs. #8 Illinois Wesleyan
#4	541	Hamilton	7-0	12/06 vs. SUNYIT; 12/08 vs. Elmira
#5	515	Whitman	6-1	12/08 vs. Eastern Ore.
#6	488	UW-Stevens Point	4-1	12/08 vs. T#44 Hope
#7	439	UW-Oshkosh	5-1	def. Finlandia, 95-48; 12/07 vs. Alma; 12/08 vs. Calvin
#8	438	Illinois Wesleyan	7-1	LOST to #28 Wheaton (Ill.), 88-90; 12/08 vs. #3 Augustana
#9	390	MIT	6-1	def. Mass-Dartmouth, 86-64; 12/06 vs. Salem State; 12/08 vs. Fitchburg State
#10	368	Plattsburgh State	7-0	def. #18 Middlebury, 92-83; 12/07 vs. Brockport; 12/08 vs. SUNY Geneseo
#11	344	Whitworth	5-1	12/08 vs. La Verne
#12	338	UW-Whitewater	5-0	12/07 vs. Calvin; 12/08 vs. Alma
#13	322	Marietta	7-0	12/08 vs. Baldwin Wallace
#14	315	Wittenberg	6-1	def. DePauw, 77-66; 12/08 vs. Allegheny
#15	302	Wooster	7-0	def. Allegheny, 101-84; 12/08 vs. Wabash
#16	288	Randolph-Macon	10-0	def. Hampden-Sydney, 92-71; 12/08 vs. #27 Christopher Newport
#17	230	Rochester	7-0	def. SUNY Geneseo, 91-67; 12/06 vs. St. John Fisher; 12/08 vs. Nazareth
#18	197	Middlebury	5-2	LOST to #10 Plattsburgh State, 83-92; 12/08 vs. Skidmore
#19	99	Amherst	5-0	12/06 vs. Babson; 12/08 vs. Lasell
#20	86	North Central (Ill.)	6-0	def. Carroll, 61-47; 12/08 vs. North Park
#21	85	Loras	5-1	def. Wartburg, 91-90; 12/08 vs. Lake Forest
#22	76	Lynchburg	7-1	LOST to Guilford, 78-82; 12/08 vs. Methodist
#23	74	Swarthmore	5-2	def. Ursinus, 61-53; 12/08 vs. Muhlenberg
#24	70	St. John's	5-1	12/08 vs. Hamline
#25	68	Nichols	7-0	def. Curry, 120-76; 12/08 vs. Anna Maria

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	57	Salisbury	8-0	def. Marymount, 67-65 OT; 12/09 vs. Wesley
#27	49	Christopher Newport	6-1	12/08 vs. #16 Randolph-Macon
#28	26	Wheaton (Ill.)	6-2	def. #8 Illinois Wesleyan, 90-88; 12/08 vs. Olivet
#29	25	Montclair State	8-1	def. #30 New Jersey City, 81-76; 12/08 vs. TCNJ
#30	22	New Jersey City	6-3	def. Albertus Magnus, 104-83; LOST to #29 Montclair State, 76-81; 12/08 vs. Rutgers-Newark
#31	21	UW-Platteville	4-2	def. Cardinal Stritch, 95-60; 12/08 vs. Central
#32	20	Johns Hopkins	7-2	def. Gettysburg, 81-56; 12/08 vs. Dickinson
#33	19	Pomona-Pitzer	5-1	12/06 vs. Claremont-Mudd-Scripps
#34	16	Scranton	7-0	def. York (Pa.), 87-68
#35	12	Oswego State	6-0	12/07 vs. Buffalo State; 12/08 vs. Fredonia
#36	10	WPI	7-0	def. Framingham State, 70-61; 12/08 vs. Salem State
#37	9	Eastern Connecticut	5-2	LOST to Western Connecticut, 75-85; 12/08 vs. Plymouth State
#38	7	Emory	6-2	def. LaGrange, 96-87
#39	6	John Carroll	3-3	LOST to Mount Union, 74-95; 12/08 vs. Muskingum
T#40	4	Centre	6-0	IDLE
T#40	4	Endicott	5-2	12/08 vs. Bridgewater State
#42	3	Roanoke	6-2	def. Ferrum, 82-68; 12/08 vs. Virginia Wesleyan
#43	2	St. Thomas	5-1	def. Bethel, 68-65; 12/08 vs. Carleton
T#44	1	Hope	4-2	def. Grace Bible, 89-78; 12/08 vs. #6 UW-Stevens Point
T#44	1	Keene State	5-2	def. Rhode Island College, 98-85; 12/08 vs. Mass-Dartmouth

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fantastic50 on December 06, 2018, 08:57:02 AM

On the others-to-watch list, Wabash won at Ohio Wesleyan last night. The Little Giants will host #15 Wooster on Saturday, in a battle of undefeated teams. With the game being in Crawfordsville, where Wabash is a respectable 4-6 against the Scots over the last decade, and both teams in the midst of preparing for final exams next week, this could be one to watch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 06, 2018, 03:31:31 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=jbz35/1i0m0nedc9s84jgm.jpg)

The Division III basketball season is nearly a month along. We have reached the first quarter pole of the season to evaluate where everyone is and where teams are headed. There have been plenty of surprises, upsets, teams stubbing their toes, and more. There are also some who are doing well despite maybe not being fully saddled when they left the gate.

On Thursday's edition of Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave takes a look at three programs which had very late coaching decisions and how those decisions have affected the programs. Two teams, Salisbury men and Trine women, saw their coaches suspended and then fired in the month leading up to their first games. Another, Brandeis men, saw their coach make national headlines, be fired, an interim hired, but then that decision reversed and a new coach hired just two weeks before practices began.

All three, are off to terrific starts accounting for a total of two losses on the season so far.

What is it like to adjust to a last minute coaching change? What is it like to take over a program, or enter an athletic department and school, in such perceived turmoil? How hard is it to put the blinders on and focus at the task at hand? We follow up Ryan Scott's terrific story last week with a chat with two players and a coach on the experience of dealing with change.

Plus, after years of waiting it finally happened! Division III women's basketball is getting it's own All-Star Game! Williams' coach Pat Manning discusses the long journey to the announcement, how they found a sponsor, and why the game will be the center piece of changing the women's Championship Weekend altogether.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Thursday's show live starting at 7:00 p.m. ET here: http://bit.ly/2E4YCb4.

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or use any of the social media options below.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Jean Bain, Brandeis men's coach
- Chase Kumor, Salisbury men's senior
- Cassidy Williams, No. 11 Trine women's senior
- Pat Manning, Williams' head coach & WBCA All-Star Game Committee member

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts instead, you can get access to them or subscribe one of the three following ways (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: John Gleich on December 08, 2018, 05:13:23 PM

Quote from: fantastic50 on December 06, 2018, 08:57:02 AM
On the others-to-watch list, Wabash won at Ohio Wesleyan last night. The Little Giants will host #15 Wooster on Saturday, in a battle of undefeated teams. With the game being in Crawfordsville, where Wabash is a respectable 4-6 against the Scots over the last decade, and both teams in the midst of preparing for final exams next week, this could be one to watch.

Wabash won 62-60 (according to the scoreboard)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 09, 2018, 08:48:43 AM

How They Fared (~~Just-Shy-Of~~ Complete)

Just one Sunday game in this group of teams (Wesley @ Salisbury, 4pm)~~, which I will edit in this evening~~.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Nebraska Wesleyan	9-0	def. Colorado College, 103-63
#2	567	Williams	9-0	def. Union, 87-70; def. Springfield, 75-71
#3	546	Augustana	7-1	def. MacMurray, 78-54; def. #8 Illinois Wesleyan, 67-60
#4	541	Hamilton	9-0	def. SUNYIT, 102-62; def. Elmira, 98-67
#5	515	Whitman	6-1	IDLE
#6	488	UW-Stevens Point	5-1	def. T#44 Hope, 82-74
#7	439	UW-Oshkosh	7-1	def. Finlandia, 95-48; def. Alma, 99-74; def. Calvin, 92-56
#8	438	Illinois Wesleyan	7-2	LOST to #28 Wheaton (Ill.), 88-90; LOST to #3 Augustana, 60-67
#9	390	MIT	8-1	def. Mass-Dartmouth, 86-64; def. Salem State, 86-55; def. Fitchburg State, 89-55
#10	368	Plattsburgh State	8-1	def. #18 Middlebury, 92-83; LOST to Brockport, 78-79; def. SUNY Geneseo, 65-57
#11	344	Whitworth	6-1	def. La Verne, 115-65
#12	338	UW-Whitewater	7-0	def. Calvin, 68-63; def. Alma, 101-97 OT
#13	322	Marietta	8-0	def. Baldwin Wallace, 87-68
#14	315	Wittenberg	7-1	def. DePauw, 77-66; def. Allegheny, 92-69
#15	302	Wooster	7-1	def. Allegheny, 101-84; LOST to Wabash, 60-62
#16	288	Randolph-Macon	10-1	def. Hampden-Sydney, 92-71; LOST to #27 Christopher Newport, 61-72
#17	230	Rochester	9-0	def. SUNY Geneseo, 91-67; def. St. John Fisher, 86-82 OT; def. (n) Nazareth, 75-66
#18	197	Middlebury	6-2	LOST to #10 Plattsburgh State, 83-92; def. Skidmore, 71-54
#19	99	Amherst	6-1	LOST to Babson, 55-68; def. Lasell, 91-64
#20	86	North Central (Ill.)	6-1	def. Carroll, 61-47; LOST to North Park, 88-95
#21	85	Loras	6-1	def. Wartburg, 91-90; def. Lake Forest, 118-92
#22	76	Lynchburg	8-1	LOST to Guilford, 78-82; def. Methodist, 78-76
#23	74	Swarthmore	6-2	def. Ursinus, 61-53; def. Muhlenberg, 83-65
#24	70	St. John's	6-1	def. Hamline, 92-63
#25	68	Nichols	8-0	def. Curry, 120-76; def. Anna Maria, 92-66

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	57	Salisbury	9-0	def. Marymount, 67-65 OT; def. Wesley, 91-89 OT
#27	49	Christopher Newport	7-1	def. #16 Randolph-Macon, 72-61
#28	26	Wheaton (Ill.)	7-2	def. #8 Illinois Wesleyan, 90-88; def. Olivet, 92-81
#29	25	Montclair State	8-2	def. #30 New Jersey City, 81-76; LOST to TCNJ, 83-93
#30	22	New Jersey City	7-3	def. Albertus Magnus, 104-83; LOST to #29 Montclair State, 76-81; def. Rutgers-Newark, 71-65
#31	21	UW-Platteville	5-2	def. Cardinal Stritch, 95-60; def. Central, 94-77
#32	20	Johns Hopkins	8-2	def. Gettysburg, 81-56; def. Dickinson, 65-58
#33	19	Pomona-Pitzer	6-1	def. Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 73-65
#34	16	Scranton	7-0	def. York (Pa.), 87-68
#35	12	Oswego	8-0	def. Buffalo State, 84-78; def. Fredonia, 77-43
#36	10	WPI	8-0	def. Framingham State, 70-61; def. Salem State, 83-67
#37	9	Eastern Connecticut	6-2	LOST to Western Connecticut, 75-85; def. Plymouth State, 77-62
#38	7	Emory	6-2	def. LaGrange, 96-87
#39	6	John Carroll	4-3	LOST to Mount Union, 74-95; def. Muskingum, 88-79
T#40	4	Centre	6-0	IDLE
T#40	4	Endicott	6-2	def. Bridgewater State, 84-69
#42	3	Roanoke	6-3	def. Ferrum, 82-68; LOST to Virginia Wesleyan, 56-63
#43	2	St. Thomas	6-1	def. Bethel, 68-65; def. Carleton, 99-50
T#44	1	Hope	4-3	def. Grace Bible, 89-78; LOST to #6 UW-Stevens Point, 74-82
T#44	1	Keene State	5-3	def. Rhode Island College, 98-85; LOST to Mass-Dartmouth, 71-80

Undefeated/Unranked teams (from hopefan's list on "The Undefeated and the Winless")

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
---	---	Millsaps	8-0	IDLE
---	---	Wabash	7-0	def. Ohio Wesleyan, 76-67; def. #15 Wooster, 62-60
---	---	Occidental	7-0	def. La Verne, 77-73; def. Cal Miramar, 96-61

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 09, 2018, 05:56:22 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=jhqan/jdp12wn4fnnrztq1.jpg)

There is plenty to distract this time of the season. Finals, holidays, even weather. Staying focused on each practice and game is just a bit more challenging in December.

Sunday on Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), we chat about those distractions with teams that are helping shake up not only their conferences, but also the national landscape. However, how do they stay focused? Especially when expectations start to increase each game. Also, how do they take advantage of opponents possibly losing focus?

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. Sunday's episode can be seen live starting at 7pm ET right here: http://bit.ly/2rrdjgW

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or use any of the social media options below.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Jon VanderWal, No. 13 Marietta men's coach
- Alisa Kintner, Widener women's coach
- Marlon Sears, Montclair State men's coach
- Ryan Scott, Around the Nation Columnist ("Top 25 Double-Take")

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts instead, you can get access to them or subscribe one of the three following ways (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 10, 2018, 06:56:38 AM

I looked at Massey after I submitted my ballot last night. I had 23 of my Top 25 in Massey's Top 30 and everyone I voted for was in his Top 50. I can't recall being that in synch with "the numbers" this early in the season before. The order is pretty different, of course, but I thought it was an interesting observation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Rofrog on December 10, 2018, 11:58:50 AM

Not trying to be a smart ... I wouldn't read to much into massey I checked on the outcome for Scranton vs York he gave Scranton a very slight chance 76-75 we know how that turned out !

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 10, 2018, 12:03:43 PM

Quote from: Rofrog on December 10, 2018, 11:58:50 AM
Not trying to be a smart ... I wouldn't read to much into massey I checked on the outcome for Scranton vs York he gave Scranton a very slight chance 76-75 we know how that turned out !

Any one result does not invalidate the data.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Rofrog on December 10, 2018, 02:03:02 PM

It wasnt just that it was many!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on December 10, 2018, 02:39:13 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on December 10, 2018, 12:03:43 PM
Quote from: Rofrog on December 10, 2018, 11:58:50 AM
Not trying to be a smart ... I wouldn't read to much into massey I checked on the outcome for Scranton vs York he gave Scranton a very slight chance 76-75 we know how that turned out !

Any one result does not invalidate the data.

Also, in reading the numbers, it's important to note that the distributions of outcomes are treated probabilistically. The model didn't say that York would win by 1 or even that they'd win at all, only that it seemed to be the most likely outcome of an entire range of possibilities. The model did predict that Scranton would win by 19 (or more!) points nearly 10% of the time. In any even-strength matchup there's something like a 40% chance that either team will win by 10+ points and a 10% chance that either team will win by 20 points.

It's not uncommon to have 200+ D3 games on any given Saturday. That means there will be a couple dozen games that Massey will "miss" badly (but, in fact, the model itself predicts that it will "miss" roughly that number of games!).

To say a model could predict the score exactly would be to say it could predict the exact order of all events in the game itself.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 10, 2018, 03:14:32 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on December 10, 2018, 02:39:13 PM
Quote from: WUPHF on December 10, 2018, 12:03:43 PM
Quote from: Rofrog on December 10, 2018, 11:58:50 AM
Not trying to be a smart ... I wouldn't read to much into massey I checked on the outcome for Scranton vs York he gave Scranton a very slight chance 76-75 we know how that turned out !

Any one result does not invalidate the data.

Also, in reading the numbers, it's important to note that the distributions of outcomes are treated probabilistically. The model didn't say that York would win by 1 or even that they'd win at all, only that it seemed to be the most likely outcome of an entire range of possibilities. The model did predict that Scranton would win by 19 (or more!) points nearly 10% of the time. In any even-strength matchup there's something like a 40% chance that either team will win by 10+ points and a 10% chance that either team will win by 20 points.

It's not uncommon to have 200+ D3 games on any given Saturday. That means there will be a couple dozen games that Massey will "miss" badly (but, in fact, the model itself predicts that it will "miss" roughly that number of games!).

To say a model could predict the score exactly would be to say it could predict the exact order of all events in the game itself.

I want to thank you for so many reason ... so, so many reasons.

It's like winter weather forecasting ... the models can sometimes be all over the place. Does it mean they are wrong? Not exactly. Computers don't control things ... if no one realized that. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: noonhooper on December 10, 2018, 06:24:50 PM

They dont control things ... YET

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 10, 2018, 08:28:10 PM

Usually I think I have fairly good insight for psyching out how poll voters will go, but occasionally they make me go WTF??!!

Wabash beat #15 Wooster by two at home and jumped from zero votes to 110, and #22. Wheaton beat #8 IWU by two on the road and rose FIVE points (26 to 31) to remain FAR short of #25. Wabash and Wheaton each had one other win against respectable by unranked opponents by 9 or 11 points. Anyone want to attempt an explanation?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 10, 2018, 08:32:29 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 10, 2018, 08:28:10 PM
Usually I think I have fairly good insight for psyching out how poll voters will go, but occasionally they make me go WTF??!!

Wabash beat #15 Wooster by two at home and jumped from zero votes to 110, and #22. Wheaton beat #8 IWU by two on the road and rose 15 points (16 to 31) to remain FAR short of #25. Wabash and Wheaton each had one other win against respectable by unranked opponents by 9 or 11 points. Anyone want to attempt an explanation?

Not sure what other voters are thinking ... and I have Wheaton ahead of Wabash on my ballot ... but Wheaton's resume includes a loss to North Park(!) and a 30-point drubbing by Chicago. Wabash is undefeated.

Sure, your single examples are interesting ... but there is a bigger resume out there as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on December 10, 2018, 08:42:49 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 10, 2018, 08:28:10 PM
Usually I think I have fairly good insight for psyching out how poll voters will go, but occasionally they make me go WTF??!!

Wabash beat #15 Wooster by two at home and jumped from zero votes to 110, and #22. Wheaton beat #8 IWU by two on the road and rose 15 points (16 to 31) to remain FAR short of #25. Wabash and Wheaton each had one other win against respectable by unranked opponents by 9 or 11 points. Anyone want to attempt an explanation?

Wheaton did not make my ballot and were probably in the next 5 (26-30) that I was considering. Wheaton has some good wins as you pointed out but also a couple head scratchers (North Park?) I think I just need to see a little consistency from them for a couple weeks before I feel comfortable knowing what they are at this point. Are they the team that beat IWU last week or the one who got blown out by Chicago and lost to North Park (for reference I had Wabash at 24).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Rofrog on December 10, 2018, 08:48:52 PM

Well according to one of the voters they said exactly what you said about using Massey rating dont read to much into it.So what is it use it to fit the narrative or not ?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 10, 2018, 08:51:31 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 10, 2018, 08:32:29 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 10, 2018, 08:28:10 PM
Usually I think I have fairly good insight for psyching out how poll voters will go, but occasionally they make me go WTF??!!

Wabash beat #15 Wooster by two at home and jumped from zero votes to 110, and #22. Wheaton beat #8 IWU by two on the road and rose 15 points (16 to 31) to remain FAR short of #25. Wabash and Wheaton each had one other win against respectable by unranked opponents by 9 or 11 points. Anyone want to attempt an explanation?

Not sure what other voters are thinking ... and I have Wheaton ahead of Wabash on my ballot ... but Wheaton's resume includes a loss to North Park(!)

Quote from: Fifth and Putnam on December 10, 2018, 08:42:49 PMWheaton did not make my ballot and were probably in the next 5 (26-30) that I was considering. Wheaton has some good wins as you pointed out but also a couple head scratchers (North Park?) I think I just need to see a little consistency from them for a couple weeks before I feel comfortable knowing what they are at this point. Are they the team that beat IWU last week or the one who got blown out by Chicago and lost to North Park (for reference I had Wabash at 24).

Are we officially in Let's Attach Punctuation & Brackets To North Park Week now? My bank calendar omitted it on the 2018 edition they gave me last winter.

Nobody at the corner of Foster & Kedzie is comparing North Park(!) to Nebraska Wesleyan, but I hasten to point out that (North Park?) convincingly beat then-undefeated-and-#20 North Central in the latter's gym on Saturday night.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 10, 2018, 08:56:09 PM

Sager - I realize that ... we are talking two of three victories in ten games, though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 10, 2018, 08:57:11 PM

Quote from: Rofrog on December 10, 2018, 08:48:52 PM
Well according to one of the voters they said exactly what you said about using Massey rating dont read to much into it.So what is it use it to fit the narrative or not ?

I have no idea what you are trying to say or argue here.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 10, 2018, 08:57:21 PM

As I said, Dave, nobody at the corner of Foster & Kedzie is comparing the Vikings to Nebraska Wesleyan. But we are talking about two games that have occurred within the past ten days.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 10, 2018, 08:58:33 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 10, 2018, 08:32:29 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 10, 2018, 08:28:10 PM
Usually I think I have fairly good insight for psyching out how poll voters will go, but occasionally they make me go WTF??!!

Wabash beat #15 Wooster by two at home and jumped from zero votes to 110, and #22. Wheaton beat #8 IWU by two on the road and rose 15 points (16 to 31) to remain FAR short of #25. Wabash and Wheaton each had one other win against respectable by unranked opponents by 9 or 11 points. Anyone want to attempt an explanation?

Not sure what other voters are thinking ... and I have Wheaton ahead of Wabash on my ballot ... but Wheaton's resume includes a loss to North Park(!) and a 30-point drubbing by Chicago. Wabash is undefeated.

Sure, your single examples are interesting ... but there is a bigger resume out there as well.

Sure, Wabash is still undefeated (as they were last week), while Wheaton has 2 losses (as they did last week), but that doesn't explain THIS week's moves. (And I've corrected my post above - I had mixed up Wheaton's men's and women's votes - they only rose FIVE points for beating the #8 ranked team on the road!.)

I sure hope this won't continue to happen - I feel dirty defending Wheaton! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 10, 2018, 09:01:35 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 10, 2018, 08:57:21 PM
As I said, Dave, nobody at the corner of Foster & Kedzie is comparing the Vikings to Nebraska Wesleyan. But we are talking about two games that have occurred within the past ten days.

Ok... but what is the argument? That because North Park put a couple of games together that suddenly we should be elevating others?

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 10, 2018, 08:58:33 PM

Sure, Wabash is still undefeated (as they were last week), while Wheaton has 2 losses (as they did last week), but that doesn't explain THIS week's moves. (And I've corrected my post above - I had mixed up Wheaton's men's and women's votes - they only rose FIVE points for beating the #8 ranked team on the road!.)

I sure hope this won't continue to happen - I feel dirty defending Wheaton! ;D

I am confused why people are dead set this MUST be a vote on this week's results only. That isn't how it works. Voters are weighing, differently for each, this week's results with the larger picture. I'm not going to ignore other results this season and only focus on this week's.

For example if I followed this week's results only, then I probably should have taken IWU from my Top 10 and removed them altogether... I mean ... they lost both games this week, right?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 10, 2018, 09:28:17 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 10, 2018, 09:01:35 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 10, 2018, 08:57:21 PM
As I said, Dave, nobody at the corner of Foster & Kedzie is comparing the Vikings to Nebraska Wesleyan. But we are talking about two games that have occurred within the past ten days.

Ok... but what is the argument? That because North Park put a couple of games together that suddenly we should be elevating others?

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 10, 2018, 08:58:33 PM

Sure, Wabash is still undefeated (as they were last week), while Wheaton has 2 losses (as they did last week), but that doesn't explain THIS week's moves. (And I've corrected my post above - I had mixed up Wheaton's men's and women's votes - they only rose FIVE points for beating the #8 ranked team on the road!.)

I sure hope this won't continue to happen - I feel dirty defending Wheaton! ;D

I am confused why people are dead set this MUST be a vote on this week's results only. That isn't how it works. Voters are weighing, differently for each, this week's results with the larger picture. I'm not going to ignore other results this season and only focus on this week's.

For example if I followed this week's results only, then I probably should have taken IWU from my Top 10 and removed them altogether... I mean ... they lost both games this week, right?

C'mon Dave. You know I'm not arguing for evaluating ONLY this week's results. But CHANGES this week should reflect MAINLY this week (with some re-evaluation of things not noticed before, or placed in a new context).

I just can't see how Wabash beating #8 Wooster at home by two (and beating OWU on the road by 9) jumps them 110 points, while Wheaton beating #8 IWU on the road (and Olivet by 11 at home) adds FIVE points to their total - it just makes no sense to me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 10, 2018, 09:29:34 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 10, 2018, 09:28:17 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 10, 2018, 09:01:35 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 10, 2018, 08:57:21 PM
As I said, Dave, nobody at the corner of Foster & Kedzie is comparing the Vikings to Nebraska Wesleyan. But we are talking about two games that have occurred within the past ten days.

Ok... but what is the argument? That because North Park put a couple of games together that suddenly we should be elevating others?

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 10, 2018, 08:58:33 PM

Sure, Wabash is still undefeated (as they were last week), while Wheaton has 2 losses (as they did last week), but that doesn't explain THIS week's moves. (And I've corrected my post above - I had mixed up Wheaton's men's and women's votes - they only rose FIVE points for beating the #8 ranked team on the road!.)

I sure hope this won't continue to happen - I feel dirty defending Wheaton! ;D

I am confused why people are dead set this MUST be a vote on this week's results only. That isn't how it works. Voters are weighing, differently for each, this week's results with the larger picture. I'm not going to ignore other results this season and only focus on this week's.

For example if I followed this week's results only, then I probably should have taken IWU from my Top 10 and removed them altogether... I mean ... they lost both games this week, right?

C'mon Dave. You know I'm not arguing for evaluating ONLY this week's results. But CHANGES this week should reflect MAINLY this week (with some re-evaluation of things not noticed before, or placed in a new context).

I just can't see how Wabash beating #8 Wooster at home by two (and beating OWU on the road by 9) jumps them 110 points, while Wheaton beating #8 IWU on the road (and Olivet by 11 at home) adds FIVE points to their total - it just makes no sense to me.

The lack of losses by Wheaton in this week doesn't erase either of the previous losses, right?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 10, 2018, 09:43:15 PM

No horse in this race, but weren't they already punished for last week's losses? They did drop 158 points from Week 1 to Week 2.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 10, 2018, 09:46:12 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 10, 2018, 09:43:15 PM
No horse in this race, but weren't they already punished for last week's losses? They did drop 158 points from Week 1 to Week 2.

Why is there a thinking they are being "punished." Voters moved them down... voters aren't ready to just forget and move them right back up. I just don't understand the beef here. Yeah. Wheaton got a bit win over IWU... which was also tempered by the fact that IWU lost to Augustana. Voters now have to decide, is that about IWU or is that about Wheaton? They also have 24 other teams they are looking at on their ballots and making decisions about them which impacts many other things.

Once again.. the thinking in these arguments is as if the only conversation voters were having was Wheaton and Wabash and that somehow they are related.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 10, 2018, 09:51:40 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 10, 2018, 09:01:35 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 10, 2018, 08:57:21 PM
As I said, Dave, nobody at the corner of Foster & Kedzie is comparing the Vikings to Nebraska Wesleyan. But we are talking about two games that have occurred within the past ten days.

Ok... but what is the argument? That because North Park put a couple of games together that suddenly we should be elevating others?

No, the argument is that NPU shouldn't be treated by posters as though nobody on the team is competent enough to tie his own shoelaces, and that beating Wheaton was therefore some sort of miraculous fluke. One victory over a Top 25 team? Sure, we can call that a miraculous fluke. But two of them, and both within the past ten days? I'm biased, of course, but two recent victories over Top 25 teams tells me that the Vikings (who have just one senior and one junior in the rotation) are rounding into a team that's capable of playing well against good opponents.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 10, 2018, 09:54:16 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 10, 2018, 09:43:15 PM
No horse in this race, but weren't they already punished for last week's losses? They did drop 158 points from Week 1 to Week 2.

Sure. But none of us knows where Wheaton is on those ballots. Are they 26? 36? 40? Not every voter will bring Wheaton back at the same rate.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 10, 2018, 09:59:22 PM

No beef here, Dave. I'm a little surprised they didn't gain more points than they did, but I honestly don't care, it was just a thought.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 10, 2018, 10:35:38 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 10, 2018, 09:51:40 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 10, 2018, 09:01:35 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 10, 2018, 08:57:21 PM
As I said, Dave, nobody at the corner of Foster & Kedzie is comparing the Vikings to Nebraska Wesleyan. But we are talking about two games that have occurred within the past ten days.

Ok... but what is the argument? That because North Park put a couple of games together that suddenly we should be elevating others?

No, the argument is that NPU shouldn't be treated by posters as though nobody on the team is competent enough to tie his own shoelaces, and that beating Wheaton was therefore some sort of miraculous fluke. One victory over a Top 25 team? Sure, we can call that a miraculous fluke. But two of them, and both within the past ten days? I'm biased, of course, but two recent victories over Top 25 teams tells me that the Vikings (who have just one senior and one junior in the rotation) are rounding into a team that's capable of playing well against good opponents.

Sager - did I say NPU was incompetent to tie it's own shoes? Did I say it was a miraculous fluke? I did not. Let's not put words in my mouth, thank you.

I indicated that Wheaton losing to NPU wasn't good. I am fully aware of NPU's resume and what they have and have not done (you are the one who conveniently eliminated the reference to losing to Chicago by 30 when you quoted my comment). My "!" was simply a reference that the loss to NPU was surprising considering who they had beaten as well. I am quite confident most of the voting panel and most DIII fans in general would agree that the NPU loss stands out considering who Wheaton has beaten. I didn't say anything more than that. You are assuming I have some other opinion, but never asked what that opinion was.

Yeah - you are bias ... NPU beat two solid teams. Congrats, but that isn't going to suddenly make voters do a 180 and change everything around because of it. They are still 3-7. They still have a 30-point drubbing by Chicago.

And let's not get the cart ahead of the horse here. Great, they beat two Top 25 teams ... but indicating that means they are rounding into something else takes more time. I was texted recently when a Top 25 team, which had been struggling, put the hammer down on a somewhat quality opponent. "We have woken up." The next game that wek they lost to a tough conference opponent and the following game, still that week, they watched a 17-point lead in the second half disappear and they barely won against someone from the middle to bottom of their conference (not talking CCIW here).

Maybe NPU is going to become better over time this season ... but you are expecting voters to take that leap of faith, which then means changing their opinions on Wheaton, and thus throw them higher up the poll ... because you think NPU is turning the corner?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 10, 2018, 11:40:47 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 10, 2018, 10:35:38 PM
Sager - did I say NPU was incompetent to tie it's own shoes? Did I say it was a miraculous fluke? I did not. Let's not put words in my mouth, thank you.

It's called "hyperbole", Dave. Exaggeration for effect. Surely you've come in contact with it at some point or another?

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 10, 2018, 10:35:38 PMI indicated that Wheaton losing to NPU wasn't good. I am fully aware of NPU's resume and what they have and have not done (you are the one who conveniently eliminated the reference to losing to Chicago by 30 when you quoted my comment).

"Conveniently eliminated"? How do I "conveniently eliminate" a reference that was never relevant in the first place? I cut it out because it had nothing to do with the topic I was discussing, which is the CCIW team that wears royal blue and gold -- not the CCIW team that wears navy blue and orange.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 10, 2018, 10:35:38 PMMy "!" was simply a reference that the loss to NPU was surprising considering who they had beaten as well. I am quite confident most of the voting panel and most DIII fans in general would agree that the NPU loss stands out considering who Wheaton has beaten.

It was surprising ... a week ago. That's the whole thrust of my statement. Since then, NPU has beaten #20 and previously-undefeated North Central, and in the airplane hangar, no less. That's a pretty important data point to overlook if you're going to state something that's "simply a reference that the loss [by Wheaton] to NPU was surprising" -- because it's a lot less surprising now than it was a week ago.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 10, 2018, 10:35:38 PMI didn't say anything more than that. You are assuming I have some other opinion, but never asked what that opinion was.

C'mon, Dave. An exclamation point inside a pair of brackets is a pretty obvious indicator that the team that beat Wheaton had no business doing so, and that the loss is therefore a shocker. Your context for making such a declaration became obsolete two days ago.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 10, 2018, 10:35:38 PMYeah - you are bias ...

Biased, Dave, not "bias". The proper form of the adjective resembles a past-tense verb form, but it isn't a past-tense verb. It's an adjective.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 10, 2018, 10:35:38 PMNPU beat two solid teams. Congrats, but that isn't going to suddenly make voters do a 180 and change everything around because of it.

Who's asking them to? What the voters do or don't do with regard to Wheaton doesn't matter a whit to me. It may matter to Chuck, but I'm not Chuck. What matters to me is how NPU is perceived. You continue to labor under the misconception that this discussion is about Wheaton from my perspective. It isn't. I don't give a rat's tuchus about Wheaton. This discussion, from my point of view, is about how North Park is perceived, with or without full data.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 10, 2018, 10:35:38 PM
They are still 3-7. They still have a 30-point drubbing by Chicago.

You're mixing up your facts, Dave. Wheaton lost by 30 to Chicago in an epic blowout that was 47-12 at one point late in the first half. North Park lost by 19 to Chicago in a game in which the Maroons' second-half lead ranged between 12 and 22 points.

Look, I'll make it simple. North Park was picked ninth in the CCIW preseason poll for a reason. To all observers, including myself, this looked like it was going to be a reprise of last year's crappy performance. (And, for all I know, it still could be -- I don't claim to have a crystal ball.) A very young team with no identity and no proven scorers got off to a very rough start. I never denied that. In fact, I referenced that (sarcastically, which you don't seem to have picked up on) not once, but twice, with the NebWes reference.

But you know as well as anybody, because I've heard you say this countless times on your show and in your blog, that teams do not remain static throughout the course of a season. Some teams improve. Some teams decline. Circumstances change. For an awful lot of teams, the course of a season is one of flux rather than consistent excellence or consistent stinkitude. And it's often the case with younger teams that they fall into the "improving as the season goes on" category, especially if they can come up with a signature win that rallies them and gives them heightened confidence as a unit.

I'm not saying that NPU is going to run the table in the CCIW. Heck, I don't know if NPU is even going to win on Saturday at Elmhurst. What I do know is this: The Vikings are playing much, much better now than they were a couple of weeks ago. The course of their improvement is uneven -- they laid an egg in Kenosha last Wednesday as well -- but two wins over Top 25 teams in the space of a week is one too many to be a fluke. That's all I'm saying.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 10, 2018, 10:35:38 PMAnd let's not get the cart ahead of the horse here. Great, they beat two Top 25 teams ... but indicating that means they are rounding into something else takes more time. I was texted recently when a Top 25 team, which had been struggling, put the hammer down on a somewhat quality opponent. "We have woken up." The next game that wek they lost to a tough conference opponent and the following game, still that week, they watched a 17-point lead in the second half disappear and they barely won against someone from the middle to bottom of their conference (not talking CCIW here).

Dave, every case and every team is different. You can't extrapolate from that example you just gave me that every team that announces "we have woken up" has in fact failed to do so. Just because this anonymous team that you've mentioned then proceeded to blow a 17-point second-half lead against somebody doesn't mean that NPU is going to need to "take more time" to round into something else. Anecdotal evidence doesn't work across teams that way.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 10, 2018, 10:35:38 PMMaybe NPU is going to become better over time this season ... but you are expecting voters to take that leap of faith, which then means changing their opinions on Wheaton, and thus throw them higher up the poll ... because you think NPU is turning the corner?

Again, you think that I'm discussing Wheaton and the poll. I'm not. You'd need a microscope to measure how little I care about Wheaton's status in the current Top 25 poll. I care about my alma mater's team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2018, 12:32:46 AM

Hey Sager - I'm done ... sometimes it is pointless to try and have a conversation when you, and others, twist things around to your own making - even when people, like myself, make mistakes thanks the constant twisting.

A couple of CCIWers asked why Wheaton didn't grab a significant amount of points ... while Wabash did. You didn't like the fact that I see the loss to NPU as significant and noteworthy. You rather I (and the rest of the voters) see what you see ... NPU turning a corner and should be recognized as such. "Look! They won two big games in ten days! Forget what happened otherwise." (See my note on sarcasm below.)

Maybe NPU has turned the corner, but I'm not making that rash judgement now. Maybe in January or February. Right now, Wheaton lost to NPU and Chicago (by 30) while also beating Oshkosh and IWU. Good for them. I think they have been rewarded accordingly while also knocked accordingly. As much as I'm voting for them, I see all of that as inconsistent and I suspect I am not the only voter who sees that as such. I really don't care if NPU is turning the corner in your opinion ... they are 3-7 and while two wins over two Top 25s are nice, they have seven losses against a variety of teams that doesn't provide me any "benefit" to give Wheaton for losing to NPU.

Wabash is undefeated. I included them in my last five slots for that fact, the win over Wooster, and other items I saw when I dove into their resume. BTW Wheaton is higher on my ballot ... but who really gives a damn.

And I really don't care who you are arguing for or not ... you seem to be arguing for everything and anything if it somehow helps your argument or can stir the pot.

BTW - you might have been hyperbolic, but I have to be sure that what I say is what I actually said. I am misquoted FAR too often on these boards, on the show, and in general. So while you might be having fun and doing it in jest ... others may not see it as such. They start touting the fact that "Dave said this" ... "Dave said that" and suddenly I'm saying things I didn't say. So it would be nice if you understood that I don't appreciate having words put in my mouth even if someone is being hyperbolic. You aren't the one who fields phone calls, texts, tweets, emails, etc. when some BS gets back to a coach or program that doesn't know any better. I've already had to deal with this twisting of what I've said one particular program resulting in a complete misrepresentation of what was actually said. So please, consider that when you decide to throw around "exaggeration for effect" regarding me.

And the sarcastic "surely you've come in contact with it at some point or another" comment can be put where the sun doesn't shine. You know full well I'm familiar with it .. but I am not interested in letting you use me as a punching bag of your occasional "higher than thou" approach because Mr. Right isn't on the soccer boards as often anymore.

And yes .. I'm frustrated and pissed. I try and convey simple points and perspective from a voter and some of you lose your freakin minds as if the world is falling down around you. Chill out. Don't keep trying to bash your logic and thinking through everyone else's heads just because they don't agree with you. Present the argument, I'm happy to counter with my perspective, and we can discuss from there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: duckfan41 on December 11, 2018, 12:33:40 AM

For what it's worth, I thought it was wishful thinking on my own part that Wheaton would crack into the Top 25 again this week. The NPU loss was a bad one (not taking anything away from the Vikings, but it was a bad loss), especially when also accounting for the 30 point beat down at home to Chicago earlier that week. Those losses should definitely still carry weight in this weeks poll because they happened.

I have nothing to do with the poll at all, but I would venture to say that Wheaton probably has to beat Platteville AND North Central this week to re-enter the Top 25. Or at worst lose a close one @Platteville and then win convincingly at home against North Central. I still feel like it's a little early to get wrapped up in who is ranked and who isn't, but I guess we saw how it can certainly generate conversation when games aren't being played for a couple days.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 11, 2018, 02:37:19 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2018, 12:32:46 AM
Hey Sager - I'm done ... sometimes it is pointless to try and have a conversation when you, and others, twist things around to your own making - even when people, like myself, make mistakes thanks the constant twisting.

Dave, I'm not twisting anything. I've been nothing but straightforward in this conversation. I don't care how Wheaton's poll position is affected from last week to this week. I care about North Park. That was the reason why I posted in the first place -- because I objected to the way that you and Fifth & Putnam characterized the Vikings with the brackets and the extraneous punctuation.

Nothing I've said here has twisted anything that you, or anyone else, has said. And your mistakes are your own responsibility, not mine.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2018, 12:32:46 AMA couple of CCIWers asked why Wheaton didn't grab a significant amount of points ... while Wabash did. You didn't like the fact that I see the loss to NPU as significant and noteworthy.

No, that's not true. Again, you're the one putting words into my mouth in this conversation, not the other way around. I don't care about Wheaton vis-a-vis its game with North Park. I care about North Park. Period. I care about the way that this current Vikings team is perceived, and what I saw as a slight by you and another poster regarding the Vikings, which does not ring true in the light of the NPU win over NCC on Saturday.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2018, 12:32:46 AMYou rather I (and the rest of the voters) see what you see ... NPU turning a corner and should be recognized as such. "Look! They won two big games in ten days! Forget what happened otherwise." (See my note on sarcasm below.)

Come on, Dave. Again you're putting words in my mouth. I never said "forget what happened otherwise," or anything of the sort. I said that the Vikings are improving, and that they've won two games over Top 25 teams within the past week. Those facts are indisputable.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2018, 12:32:46 AMMaybe NPU has turned the corner, but I'm not making that rash judgement now.

It's not a "rash judgment." It's a reasonable extrapolation based upon recent events. But it's not gospel truth, either. As I said before, I don't have a crystal ball. It remains to be seen what will happen to the Vikings from here on out. For all I know, those could be the only two CCIW wins that the Vikings pick up all season. But, equally for all I know, they could win a whole bunch more than just those two. Or it could be something in between. After all, "turn the corner" is a pretty subjective term.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2018, 12:32:46 AMMaybe in January or February. Right now, Wheaton lost to NPU and Chicago (by 30) while also beating Oshkosh and IWU. Good for them.

Don't care. Don't care, don't care, don't care, don't care, don't care.

I. Don't. Care.

My diploma says "North Park College" on it, not "Wheaton College". I broadcast for North Park University, not for Wheaton College. I root for North Park University, not for Wheat-- ... well, I think that we all know whom I don't root for. ;)

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2018, 12:32:46 AMI think they have been rewarded accordingly while also knocked accordingly. As much as I'm voting for them, I see all of that as inconsistent and I suspect I am not the only voter who sees that as such. I really don't care if NPU is turning the corner in your opinion ... they are 3-7 and while two wins over two Top 25s are nice, they have seven losses against a variety of teams that doesn't provide me any "benefit" to give Wheaton for losing to NPU.

All of which doesn't concern me at all. I've already expressed what my concern is in this conversation. That hasn't changed.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2018, 12:32:46 AMWabash is undefeated. I included them in my last five slots for that fact, the win over Wooster, and other items I saw when I dove into their resume. BTW Wheaton is higher on my ballot ... but who really gives a damn.

I think we both know the answer to that question. ;)

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2018, 12:32:46 AMAnd I really don't care who you are arguing for or not ... you seem to be arguing for everything and anything if it somehow helps your argument or can stir the pot.

That is total and utter crap, and you know it. Dave, I have a lot of respect for you. But you are coming close to crossing a dangerous line here with me.

Get this straight, Dave: I am not stirring anything. I am not arguing "for everything and anything." I care about my school's men's basketball program. That is my one and only concern here. If you think that I have any other interests in this discussion whatsoever, then I have sorely underestimated you.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2018, 12:32:46 AMBTW - you might have been hyperbolic, but I have to be sure that what I say is what I actually said. I am misquoted FAR too often on these boards, on the show, and in general. So while you might be having fun and doing it in jest ... others may not see it as such. They start touting the fact that "Dave said this" ... "Dave said that" and suddenly I'm saying things I didn't say. So it would be nice if you understood that I don't appreciate having words put in my mouth even if someone is being hyperbolic. You aren't the one who fields phone calls, texts, tweets, emails, etc. when some BS gets back to a coach or program that doesn't know any better. I've already had to deal with this twisting of what I've said one particular program resulting in a complete misrepresentation of what was actually said. So please, consider that when you decide to throw around "exaggeration for effect" regarding me.

That street runs both ways, Dave. You have consistently misrepresented me and put words in my mouth in this discussion. Some of it stems from a complete misunderstanding of my interests in starting the discussion in the first place -- you thought that I cared about Wheaton's ranking -- but some of it is just plain off-base. What I said initially about the Vikings being treated by posters as too incompetent to tie their own shoes was just a snarky comment. Seemed completely harmless to me, and it still does, but if it offends you or threatens you somehow, then I apologize for it. If anyone would have tried to read that as your words rather than mine, I would've been the first to correct them, and I think that you know that.

But, please, have enough self-perception to see how you are misrepresenting me in turn with comments such as, "Look! They won two big games in ten days! Forget what happened otherwise." and "you seem to be arguing for everything and anything if it somehow helps your argument or can stir the pot."

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2018, 12:32:46 AMAnd the sarcastic "surely you've come in contact with it at some point or another" comment can be put where the sun doesn't shine. You know full well I'm familiar with it .. but I am not interested in letting you use me as a punching bag of your occasional "higher than thou" approach because Mr. Right isn't on the soccer boards as often anymore.

What the heck does Mr. Right or soccer have to do with this?

Dave, I'm not the slightest bit interested in using you or anyone else as a punching bag. I am interested in the same thing that you are -- making my point with clarity. I presented what I see as a valid argument that the team I support has been mischaracterized. Bringing personalities into this in ad hominem fashion is about the last thing that I expected to see, or wanted to see, tonight.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 11, 2018, 12:32:46 AMAnd yes .. I'm frustrated and pissed. I try and convey simple points and perspective from a voter and some of you lose your freakin minds as if the world is falling down around you. Chill out. Don't keep trying to bash your logic and thinking through everyone else's heads just because they don't agree with you. Present the argument, I'm happy to counter with my perspective, and we can discuss from there.

Dave, I'm not the one who reached for an ad hominem here, and I'm not the one who is attempting to gauge the motivations of the other person. When it comes to "chill out" -- physician, heal thyself.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on December 11, 2018, 08:00:25 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 11, 2018, 02:37:19 AM
Don't care. Don't care, don't care, don't care, don't care, don't care.

I. Don't. Care.

AMEN a million times!!!! But then this is the top 25 board, not the NPU promotion board. ;D :o :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 11, 2018, 08:12:18 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 10, 2018, 09:28:17 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 10, 2018, 09:01:35 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 10, 2018, 08:57:21 PM
As I said, Dave, nobody at the corner of Foster & Kedzie is comparing the Vikings to Nebraska Wesleyan. But we are talking about two games that have occurred within the past ten days.

Ok... but what is the argument? That because North Park put a couple of games together that suddenly we should be elevating others?

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 10, 2018, 08:58:33 PM

Sure, Wabash is still undefeated (as they were last week), while Wheaton has 2 losses (as they did last week), but that doesn't explain THIS week's moves. (And I've corrected my post above - I had mixed up Wheaton's men's and women's votes - they only rose FIVE points for beating the #8 ranked team on the road!.)

I sure hope this won't continue to happen - I feel dirty defending Wheaton! ;D

I am confused why people are dead set this MUST be a vote on this week's results only. That isn't how it works. Voters are weighing, differently for each, this week's results with the larger picture. I'm not going to ignore other results this season and only focus on this week's.

For example if I followed this week's results only, then I probably should have taken IWU from my Top 10 and removed them altogether... I mean ... they lost both games this week, right?

C'mon Dave. You know I'm not arguing for evaluating ONLY this week's results. But CHANGES this week should reflect MAINLY this week (with some re-evaluation of things not noticed before, or placed in a new context).

I just can't see how Wabash beating #8 Wooster at home by two (and beating OWU on the road by 9) jumps them 110 points, while Wheaton beating #8 IWU on the road (and Olivet by 11 at home) adds FIVE points to their total - it just makes no sense to me.

I wasn't voting for Wheaton or Wabash last week; I have them both on my ballot this week (with Wheaton higher).

Honestly, the movement makes a lot of sense to me. Wabash was undefeated and had a strong resume, but they've not been a factor in recent years and the schedule left something to be desired. I imagine a lot of voters were saying, "Wabash looks good, but I want to hold off voting until they play Wooster." They beat Wooster, so people started voting for them. If 20 voters put them at 21, that's 100 points. With the losses that happened around the country last week, I could image voters needing filler near the bottom. An undefeated team that just beat Wooster might look a little better than a two-loss team that beat IWU. I'm just saying - not my rationale, but it makes a lot of sense to me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on December 11, 2018, 09:10:23 AM

I think a reasonable person could make an argument for Wheaton above Wabash, and I think another reasonable person could make an argument for Wabash above Wheaton.

I think North Park can tie their own shoes but I'm not confident they can walk, talk, and chew gum at the same time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NEPAFAN on December 11, 2018, 09:24:02 AM

This is cringe worthy stuff. Sager and Dave should take it offline, and I think Dave should resist the urge to respond to every nit of the Top 25. Too much energy and time spent on an uphill battle.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 11, 2018, 10:13:11 AM

Feeling a strange sense of deja vu...

Retreating to the UAA thread.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 11, 2018, 10:25:31 AM

Oy. I came back for this? ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 11, 2018, 11:36:05 AM

Wabash was 5-0 coming into last week, their best previous win was Elmhurst who is now 4-3 or Rose Hulman 4-4

Last week Wabash won at Ohio Wesleyan and at home vs Wooster. You might recognize those programs from the last 10+ years of D3hoops.com Top 25's.

Here me out here, but is it possible the huge point gain for Wabash is simply a re-evaluation of a team who came into this season with zero pre-season poll points, had no previous victorious to "move the needle", has an unblemished record and have now beaten 2 of the 3 big opponents in their particular conference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BaboNation on December 12, 2018, 01:32:21 PM

Probably not a good time to mention that WPI is 8-0 and at an arithmetic progression of 5 points/week they could be 28-0 come tourney time and still be among "Others receiving votes".

Never mind. I'll come back later. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 12, 2018, 01:52:30 PM

I imagine that the voters are justifiably skeptical of WPI's schedule. As a team that wasn't highly regarded in the preseason, they need a signature win. If still without a loss on 1/3, WPI is a lock to crack the rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 12, 2018, 02:25:33 PM

I was skeptical of Wabash until they beat Wooster.

I don't like voting for Wheaton, really, in anything, but that's the same about Wittenberg and DPU as well. I do think Wabash is better than Wheaton, objectively. But conference road games are tough no matter what teams and what conference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 13, 2018, 07:11:34 AM

How They Fared (So Far)
As usual, a light week of action as many schools are ending their fall semesters.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Nebraska Wesleyan	9-0	12/16 vs. George Fox
#2	575	Williams	9-0	IDLE
#3	558	Augustana	7-1	12/15 vs. Millikin
#4	531	Hamilton	9-0	IDLE
#5	529	Whitman	6-1	IDLE
#6	498	UW-Oshkosh	7-1	12/14 vs. Lawrence
#7	485	UW-Stevens Point	6-1	def. Ripon, 71-49; 12/15 vs. #39 St. Thomas
#8	423	MIT	9-1	def. Rhode Island College, 89-70; 12/13 vs. Bridgewater State
#9	408	Whitworth	7-1	def. D'Youville, 104-74
#10	395	Marietta	8-0	12/15 vs. Wilmington
#11	372	UW-Whitewater	7-0	12/15 vs. Ripon
#12	353	Wittenberg	7-1	12/15 vs. Kenyon
#13	305	Rochester	9-1	LOST to Ithaca, 70-85
#14	297	Plattsburgh State	8-1	IDLE
#15	226	Illinois Wesleyan	7-2	12/15 vs. Carroll
#16	195	Wooster	7-1	IDLE
#17	175	Randolph-Macon	10-1	IDLE
#18	139	Nichols	9-0	def. Johnson and Wales, 86-71
#19	128	St. John's	7-1	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 87-70
#20	125	Loras	6-1	12/13 vs. Buena Vista; 12/15 vs. Augsburg
#21	123	Christopher Newport	7-1	12/16 vs. Virginia Wesleyan
#22	110	Wabash	7-0	IDLE
#23	99	Salisbury	9-0	IDLE
#24	89	Swarthmore	7-2	def. York (Pa.), 93-68
#25	82	Middlebury	6-2	IDLE

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
T#26	37	Scranton	7-0	IDLE
T#26	37	Amherst	7-1	def. Springfield, 76-67
#28	35	Lynchburg	8-1	12/16 vs. McDaniel
#29	31	Wheaton (Ill.)	8-2	def. #35 UW-Platteville, 99-77; 12/15 vs. #30 North Central (Ill.)
#30	25	North Central (Ill.)	7-1	def. Aurora, 83-73; 12/15 vs. #29 Wheaton (Ill.)
#31	23	Oswego State	8-0	12/14 vs. St. Lawrence
#32	22	Pomona-Pitzer	6-1	12/13 vs. Bethesda University; 12/16 vs. UC Santa Cruz
#33	15	WPI	8-0	12/16 vs. Husson
#34	14	Johns Hopkins	8-2	IDLE
#35	12	UW-Platteville	5-3	LOST to #29 Wheaton (Ill.), 77-99; 12/15 vs. Hope
#36	11	Mount Union	8-1	12/15 vs. Heidelberg
#37	8	Montclair State	9-2	def. Rutgers-Newark, 59-55
#38	5	New Jersey City	7-3	12/15 vs. TCNJ
#39	3	St. Thomas	7-1	def. Concordia-Moorhead, 79-70; 12/15 vs. #7 UW-Stevens Point
#40	2	Endicott	6-3	LOST to Salem State, 91-94

Unbeaten teams with no votes (from hopefan's "The Undefeated and the Winless" list)

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
---	---	Millsaps	8-0	IDLE (next game Tuesday, 12/18)
---	---	Occidental	7-0	12/16 vs. Whittier
---	---	Centre	7-0	def. Spalding, 65-39; 12/15 vs. Boyce

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 13, 2018, 04:33:08 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=jp0bz/u7zs6itfa5znksk8.jpg)

We've entered the part of the season when teams are either off the court for an extended period of time or they are still practicing and playing occasional games leading up to a break around Christmas. It is an odd time of the season. You look away one night and forget there is a big game happening. You try and focus in another night only to realize there isn't much to watch (if anything).

Some schools are still wrapping up finals as well!

These few weeks can also be challenging to teams. Staying fresh even though there could be up to a month between games. Staying focused, even though academics are a much higher priority that what's happening on the court. And staying healthy despite travel to different parts of the country or back home to be with family.

Thursday night on Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave tries to work his way through the distractions to talk to a few teams all of which still have games this December and seem to be off to pretty good starts. We'll even hear from a student-athlete's perspective. How are finals, the holidays, and travel affecting these programs?

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. Thursday's episode will air live starting at 7:00 pm ET right here: http://bit.ly/2rA87rl (and via Facebook Live simulcast).

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or use any of the social media options below.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Charles Katsiaficas, Pomona-Pitzer men's coach
- Ron Rohn, Muhlenberg women's coach
- Madison Temple, No. 4 Thomas More Senior guard
- Matt Lewis, No. 6 UW-Oshkosh men's interim coach

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts instead, you can get access to them or subscribe one of the three following ways (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 16, 2018, 05:56:16 PM

How They Fared (~~Nearly~~ Complete)
~~Two games not yet complete (VWU @ CNU, Whittier @ Oxy - begins at 7:00pm EST).~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Nebraska Wesleyan	10-0	def. George Fox, 92-81
#2	575	Williams	9-0	IDLE
#3	558	Augustana	8-1	def. Millikin, 76-42
#4	531	Hamilton	9-0	IDLE
#5	529	Whitman	6-1	IDLE
#6	498	UW-Oshkosh	8-1	def. Lawrence, 91-53
#7	485	UW-Stevens Point	6-2	def. Ripon, 71-49; LOST to #39 St. Thomas, 57-73
#8	423	MIT	10-1	def. Rhode Island College, 89-70; def. Bridgewater State, 84-64
#9	408	Whitworth	7-1	def. D'Youville, 104-74
#10	395	Marietta	9-0	def. Wilmington, 86-69
#11	372	UW-Whitewater	8-0	def. Ripon, 83-61
#12	353	Wittenberg	8-1	def. Kenyon, 82-70
#13	305	Rochester	9-1	LOST to Ithaca, 70-85
#14	297	Plattsburgh State	8-1	IDLE
#15	226	Illinois Wesleyan	7-3	LOST to Carroll, 83-90
#16	195	Wooster	7-1	IDLE
#17	175	Randolph-Macon	10-1	IDLE
#18	139	Nichols	9-0	def. Johnson and Wales, 86-71
#19	128	St. John's	7-1	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 87-70
#20	125	Loras	8-1	def. Buena Vista, 104-85; def. Augsburg, 89-66
#21	123	Christopher Newport	8-1	def. Virginia Wesleyan, 97-67
#22	110	Wabash	7-0	IDLE
#23	99	Salisbury	9-0	IDLE
#24	89	Swarthmore	7-2	def. York (Pa.), 93-68
#25	82	Middlebury	6-2	IDLE

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
T#26	37	Scranton	7-0	IDLE
T#26	37	Amherst	7-1	def. Springfield, 76-67
#28	35	Lynchburg	9-1	def. McDaniel, 83-59
#29	31	Wheaton (Ill.)	8-3	def. #35 UW-Platteville, 99-77; LOST to #30 North Central (Ill.), 59-69
#30	25	North Central (Ill.)	8-1	def. Aurora, 83-73; def. #29 Wheaton (Ill.), 69-59
#31	23	Oswego State	9-0	def. St. Lawrence, 68-50
#32	22	Pomona-Pitzer	8-1	def. Bethesda University, 96-70; def. UC Santa Cruz, 83-75
#33	15	WPI	9-0	def. Husson, 86-71
#34	14	Johns Hopkins	8-2	IDLE
#35	12	UW-Platteville	5-4	LOST to #29 Wheaton (Ill.), 77-99; LOST to Hope, 71-78
#36	11	Mount Union	9-1	def. Heidelberg, 87-85
#37	8	Montclair State	9-2	def. Rutgers-Newark, 59-55
#38	5	New Jersey City	8-3	def. TCNJ, 82-57
#39	3	St. Thomas	8-1	def. Concordia-Moorhead, 79-70; def. #7 UW-Stevens Point, 73-57
#40	2	Endicott	6-3	LOST to Salem State, 91-94

Unbeaten teams with no votes (from hopefan's "The Undefeated and the Winless" list)

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
---	---	Millsaps	8-0	IDLE
---	---	Occidental	8-0	def. Whittier, 86-72
---	---	Centre	8-0	def. Spalding, 65-39; def. Boyce, 93-51

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 16, 2018, 09:58:42 PM

It might be after we aired, but still worth promoting ... watch the show On Demand or listen to the podcast!

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=jtest/wx24evzaiyx5mlhj.jpg)

The first semester is coming to a close. With it comes an opportunity to look back and evaluate what we've seen throughout Division III basketball so far. Did we get any early Christmas gifts? Or did some teams get some coal?

This is also the time of the year one starts to look around to see if any teams are flying a little under the radar. Off to good starts that maybe haven't been noticed or a big win or two here and there have people scratching their heads.

Sunday on Hoopsville, we not only shined a light on some programs off the radar, but also start pondered the opening, nearly, six weeks of the season. Be sure to tune in as we take the new "Buy or Sell" up a few notches.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. Sunday's episode is available to watch, in two parts, On Demand in the video player(s) above. You can also listen to the show, in it's entirety, via the audio-only podcast. You can find it here: http://bit.ly/2rFVWsQ

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Charlie Mason, New England men's coach
- Kate Vlahakis, Manhattanville women's coach
- Alex Richey, Oglethorpe women's coach
- Ryan Scott, Around the Nation Columnist, & Bob Quillman, DIII basketball aficionado ("Buy or Sell")

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 18, 2018, 11:26:05 PM

If anyone is interested or cares, my ballots so far this season: http://bit.ly/2SXOdSz

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: monsoon on December 19, 2018, 11:20:07 AM

Thanks, Dave.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: saratoga on December 19, 2018, 04:41:37 PM

Just guessing on this without an in-depth review but it looks like the Scranton men & women are the only schools with undefeated teams and both in the Top 25.

I guess the next question would be...which team loses first?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on December 19, 2018, 04:59:15 PM

Quote from: saratoga on December 19, 2018, 04:41:37 PM

Just guessing on this without an in-depth review but it looks like the Scranton men & women are the only schools with undefeated teams and both in the Top 25.

I guess the next question would be...which team loses first?

My guess - the men @ Moravian 1/9; the women might go unscathed with the injuries to good players of E-town, Juniata, and Catholic.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: saratoga on December 19, 2018, 06:44:57 PM

That's probably about right.

Regardless, it's been one heck of a nice run for two teams that are both very young.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 20, 2018, 07:11:02 AM

How They Fared (So Far)
Lots more games to come before the next poll. I'll post updates on the next two Thursdays before the final report on 1/6.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Nebraska Wesleyan	11-0	def. Linfield, 90-79; 01/02 vs. Buena Vista; 01/05 vs. #20 Loras
#2	572	Williams	9-0	12/30 vs. T#35 Montclair State; 12/31 vs. Moravian; 01/04 vs. Wesleyan; 01/05 vs. Connecticut College
#3	563	Augustana	10-1	def. #40 Centre, 90-64; def. Rhodes, 86-42; 12/29 vs. Washington U.; 01/02 vs. #33 North Central (Ill.); 01/05 vs. North Park
#4	533	Whitman	8-1	def. (n) #14 Wooster, 89-78; def. (n) Alma, 101-82; 12/28 vs. #26 Illinois Wesleyan; 12/29 vs. Cal Lutheran; 01/05 vs. Lewis and Clark
#5	531	Hamilton	9-0	12/28 vs. Ursinus; 12/29 vs. Ithaca; 01/03 vs. Keene State; 01/06 vs. Trinity (Conn.)
#6	507	UW-Oshkosh	9-1	def. St. Norbert, 79-68; 12/30 vs. Concordia (Wis.); 01/02 vs. UW-Platteville; 01/05 vs. UW-Stout
#7	440	MIT	10-1	01/02 vs. #29 WPI; 01/05 vs. Coast Guard
#8	435	Marietta	10-0	def. Muskingum, 89-67; 12/28 vs. Elmhurst; 01/05 vs. Heidelberg
#9	425	Whitworth	8-1	def. Concordia-Chicago, 143-95; 12/29 vs. #34 Johns Hopkins; 12/30 vs. Emory and Henry; 01/04 vs. Lewis and Clark
#10	401	UW-Whitewater	8-0	12/21 vs. #20 Loras; 12/28 vs. Sul Ross State; 12/29 vs. Concordia (Texas); 01/02 vs. #12 UW-Stevens Point; 01/05 vs. UW-Eau Claire
#11	384	Wittenberg	8-1	12/28 vs. Bryant-Stratton; 12/29 vs. Wilmington; 01/03 vs. Denison; 01/05 vs. Hiram
#12	293	UW-Stevens Point	6-2	12/28 vs. Cal Lutheran; 12/29 vs. #26 Illinois Wesleyan; 01/02 vs. #10 UW-Whitewater; 01/05 vs. UW-River Falls
#13	285	Plattsburgh State	8-2	LOST to (n) Wesleyan, 73-84; 12/20 vs. Case Western Reserve
#14	242	Wooster	7-3	LOST to (n) #4 Whitman, 78-89; LOST to (n) Sul Ross State, 84-88; 12/29 vs. Ohio Wesleyan; 12/30 vs. T#38 New Jersey City; 01/05 vs. DePauw
#15	202	Randolph-Macon	10-1	12/28 vs. Carroll; 12/29 vs. TBA; 01/03 vs. Virginia Wesleyan; 01/05 vs. Guilford
#16	199	Nichols	9-0	12/29 vs. Eastern Connecticut; 01/02 vs. Tufts; 01/05 vs. Gordon
#17	197	Rochester	9-1	01/02 vs. Catholic; 01/05 vs. Emory
#18	196	Christopher Newport	8-1	12/28 vs. Mount St. Mary; 01/02 vs. York (Pa.); 01/05 vs. Mary Washington
#19	186	St. John's	7-1	12/29 vs. UW-Superior; 01/02 vs. Augsburg; 01/05 vs. Macalester
#20	180	Loras	8-1	12/21 vs. #10 UW-Whitewater; 12/29 vs. Monmouth; 12/30 vs. Blackburn; 01/02 vs. Simpson; 01/05 vs. #1 Nebraska Wesleyan
#21	145	Wabash	8-0	def. Franklin, 98-69; 12/20 vs. Allegheny; 12/21 vs. Hiram; 12/28 vs. Wilmington; 12/29 vs. Bryant & Stratton (OH); 01/05 vs. Oberlin
#22	107	Salisbury	9-0	12/22 vs. Rowan; 12/29 vs. Springfield; 12/30 vs. TBD; 01/05 vs. Penn State-Harrisburg
#23	80	Swarthmore	7-2	12/30 vs. #24 Middlebury; 01/02 vs. Stockton; 01/05 vs. Eastern
#24	53	Middlebury	8-2	def. Pitt-Bradford, 72-53; def. Hilbert, 95-87; 12/30 vs. #23 Swarthmore; 01/01 vs. SUNY-Canton; 01/04 vs. Connecticut College; 01/05 vs. Wesleyan
#25	51	Scranton	8-0	def. Manhattanville, 106-75; 12/20 vs. TCNJ; 12/29 vs. Wilkes; 12/30 vs. King's; 01/02 vs. Gettysburg; 01/05 vs. Elizabethtown

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	43	Illinois Wesleyan	8-3	def. Anderson, 93-70; 12/28 vs. #4 Whitman; 12/29 vs. #12 UW-Stevens Point; 01/02 vs. North Park
#27	40	St. Thomas	8-1	01/02 vs. Gustavus Adolphus; 01/05 vs. Hamline
#28	31	Pomona-Pitzer	8-1	12/29 vs. Hardin-Simmons; 01/02 vs. Redlands; 01/05 vs. La Verne
#29	29	WPI	9-0	12/29 vs. Maryville (Tenn.); 12/30 vs. Tampa Bay Shootout; 01/02 vs. #7 MIT; 01/05 vs. Babson
#30	28	Oswego	9-0	12/29 vs. Emory; 12/30 vs. Denison
#31	22	Lynchburg	9-1	12/29 vs. Muskingum; 12/30 vs. Greensboro; 01/01 vs. Averett; 01/05 vs. Shenandoah
#32	18	Amherst	7-1	12/30 vs. Hunter; 01/02 vs. Keystone; 01/04 vs. Trinity (Conn.)
#33	15	North Central (Ill.)	9-1	def. Albion, 77-58; 12/22 vs. Illinois College; 12/27 vs. Husson; 12/28 vs. Ohio Northern; 01/02 vs. #3 Augustana; 01/05 vs. Elmhurst
#34	14	Johns Hopkins	8-2	12/28 vs. UW-Platteville; 12/29 vs. #9 Whitworth
T#35	11	Wheaton (Ill.)	8-3	12/29 vs. Illinois Tech; 01/02 vs. Carthage; 01/05 vs. Carroll
T#35	11	Montclair State	9-2	12/30 vs. #2 Williams; 12/31 vs. Virginia Wesleyan; 01/05 vs. Rowan
T#35	11	Mount Union	9-1	12/28 vs. Trine; 12/29 vs. Adrian; 01/05 vs. Capital
T#38	9	Wartburg	5-4	12/20 vs. New England College; 12/21 vs. SUNYIT; 12/30 vs. Bethel; 01/05 vs. Central
T#38	9	New Jersey City	8-3	12/29 vs. Thiel; 12/30 vs. #14 Wooster; 01/05 vs. Stockton
#40	2	Centre	9-1	LOST to #3 Augustana, 64-90; def. Blackburn, 86-72; 12/28 vs. Washington and Lee; 12/29 vs. TBA; 01/04 vs. Rhodes; 01/06 vs. Hendrix

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fantastic50 on December 20, 2018, 08:51:21 AM

Yesterday's loss was Wooster's third straight defeat (at #21 Wabash, neu #4 Whitman, neu Sul Ross St). The last time that a Scots team lost three in a row, Ronald Reagan was President and Steve Moore (now #2 on the D3 all-time wins list) was in his first season at Wooster.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 20, 2018, 01:27:35 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=k0r1k/abi1m6untdsnxua0.jpg)

Finals are done. Teams are getting a break, short or long. Everyone is taking a moment to slow down, enjoy time with family (hopefully), and take a breather.

That's what happens when the first semester comes to a close. Before long, the pressure will increase and games will be in full throat. This break will seem like a distant memory.

In an ode to those leaving work, campus early for the holidays - maybe hitting the road in the afternoon instead of evening, Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) wraps up the finale to the first semester with an early show on Thursday. Dave talks with a couple of programs who have captured his attention. He also chats with a conference commissioner who not only has had a direct impact on the evolution of Division IIII basketball, but is also hanging up his commissioner's hat at the end of the academic year.

And who wants to "buy or sell" women's programs? Gordon Mann joins Dave with his take on the first six weeks of the season. There isn't anyone better to break down DIIII women's hoops, than Gordon.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can tune into Thursday's special edition starting at 2:00 p.m. ET LIVE in the video player above. If you miss any of the show, you can watch it On Demand or listen to the audio-only podcast to the right (available shortly after the show goes off air).

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or use any of the social media options to the right.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
-Michelle Filander, No. 25 Austin women's coach
-Gordon Mann, D3hoops.com Deputy Editor ("Buy or Sell")
- Steve Ulrich, Centennial Conference commissioner
-Shanan Rosenberg, Linfield men's coach

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 21, 2018, 06:20:05 AM

Quote from: fantastic50 on December 20, 2018, 08:51:21 AM
Yesterday's loss was Wooster's third straight defeat (at #21 Wabash, neu #4 Whitman, neu Sul Ross St). The last time that a Scots team lost three in a row, Ronald Reagan was President and Steve Moore (now #2 on the D3 all-time wins list) was in his first season at Wooster.

That's a pretty amazing stat.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 27, 2018, 08:04:40 AM

How They Fared (So Far)
Halfway to the next poll ...

[removed; superseded by the 1/3 report, below]

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 03, 2019, 07:27:51 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

I added a line at the end for Occidental, the only undefeated team not receiving any votes.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Nebraska Wesleyan	12-0	def. Linfield, 90-79; def. Buena Vista, 83-59; 01/05 vs. #20 Loras
#2	572	Williams	11-0	def. (n) T#35 Montclair State, 73-59; def. Moravian, 81-72; 01/04 vs. Wesleyan; 01/05 vs. Connecticut College
#3	563	Augustana	12-1	def. #40 Centre, 90-64; def. Rhodes, 86-42; def. Washington U., 77-63; def. #33 North Central (Ill.), 76-59; 01/05 vs. North Park
#4	533	Whitman	10-1	def. (n) #14 Wooster, 89-78; def. (n) Alma, 101-82; def. (n) #26 Illinois Wesleyan, 105-103; def. Cal Lutheran, 104-56; 01/05 vs. Lewis and Clark
#5	531	Hamilton	11-0	def. (n) Ursinus, 114-101; def. (n) Ithaca, 92-77; 01/03 vs. Keene State; 01/06 vs. Trinity (Conn.)
#6	507	UW-Oshkosh	11-1	def. St. Norbert, 79-68; def. Concordia (Wis.), 90-68; def. UW-Platteville, 96-70; 01/05 vs. UW-Stout
#7	440	MIT	11-1	def. #29 WPI, 74-44; 01/05 vs. Coast Guard
#8	435	Marietta	11-1	def. Muskingum, 89-67; LOST to (n) Elmhurst, 72-76; def. (n) Lake Forest, 80-77; 01/05 vs. Heidelberg
#9	425	Whitworth	10-1	def. Concordia-Chicago, 143-95; def. (n) #34 Johns Hopkins, 76-74; def. (n) Emory and Henry, 87-80; 01/04 vs. Lewis and Clark
#10	401	UW-Whitewater	11-1	def. #20 Loras, 114-104; def. Sul Ross State, 79-59; def. Concordia (Texas), 96-81; LOST to #12 UW-Stevens Point, 51-64; 01/05 vs. UW-Eau Claire
#11	384	Wittenberg	10-1	def. Bryant-Stratton, 94-60; def. Wilmington, 74-52; 01/03 vs. Denison; 01/05 vs. Hiram
#12	293	UW-Stevens Point	9-2	def. Cal Lutheran, 76-57; def. (n) #26 Illinois Wesleyan, 76-70; def. #10 UW-Whitewater, 64-51; 01/05 vs. UW-River Falls
#13	285	Plattsburgh State	9-2	LOST to Wesleyan, 73-84; def. Case Western Reserve, 88-69
#14	242	Wooster	9-3	LOST to (n) #4 Whitman, 78-89; LOST to (n) Sul Ross State, 84-88; def. Ohio Wesleyan, 68-55; def. T#38 New Jersey City, 81-75; 01/05 vs. DePauw
#15	202	Randolph-Macon	12-1	def. Carroll, 78-64; def. Drew, 84-50; 01/03 vs. Virginia Wesleyan; 01/05 vs. Guilford
#16	199	Nichols	11-1	def. (n) Eastern Connecticut, 79-73; LOST to (n) #22 Salisbury, 71-78; def. Tufts, 87-81; 01/05 vs. Gordon
#17	197	Rochester	10-1	def. Catholic, 68-60; 01/05 vs. Emory
#18	196	Christopher Newport	11-1	def. Mount St. Mary, 80-47; def. Huntingdon, 79-52; def. York (Pa.), 73-71; 01/05 vs. Mary Washington
#19	186	St. John's	9-1	def. UW-Superior, 94-53; def. Augsburg, 78-58; 01/05 vs. Macalester
#20	180	Loras	11-2	LOST to #10 UW-Whitewater, 104-114; def. Monmouth, 83-70; def. Blackburn, 92-81; def. Simpson, 85-61; 01/05 vs. #1 Nebraska Wesleyan
#21	145	Wabash	11-1	def. Franklin, 98-69; def. Allegheny, 108-65; def. Hiram, 102-61; LOST to (n) Wilmington, 80-83; def. (n) Bryant & Stratton (OH), 104-57; 01/05 vs. Oberlin
#22	107	Salisbury	11-1	LOST to Rowan, 76-97; def. Springfield, 82-63; def. (n) #16 Nichols, 78-71; 01/05 vs. Penn State-Harrisburg
#23	80	Swarthmore	9-2	def. #24 Middlebury, 82-80; def. Stockton, 73-65; 01/05 vs. Eastern
#24	53	Middlebury	9-3	def. Pitt-Bradford, 72-53; def. Hilbert, 95-87; LOST to #23 Swarthmore, 80-82; def. SUNY-Canton, 100-66; 01/04 vs. Connecticut College; 01/05 vs. Wesleyan
#25	51	Scranton	12-0	def. Manhattanville, 106-75; def. TCNJ, 82-79; def. Wilkes, 74-64; def. King's, 75-72; def. Gettysburg, 71-59; 01/05 vs. Elizabethtown

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	43	Illinois Wesleyan	9-5	def. Anderson, 93-70; LOST to (n) #4 Whitman, 103-105; LOST to (n) #12 UW-Stevens Point, 70-76; def. North Park, 97-49
#27	40	St. Thomas	9-1	def. Gustavus Adolphus, 97-53; 01/05 vs. Hamline
#28	31	Pomona-Pitzer	10-1	def. Hardin-Simmons, 90-78; def. Redlands, 82-77; 01/05 vs. La Verne
#29	29	WPI	9-3	LOST to (n) Maryville (Tenn.), 60-67; LOST to (n) DePauw, 73-77; LOST to #7 MIT, 44-74; 01/05 vs. Babson
#30	28	Oswego	9-2	LOST to Emory, 73-91; LOST to (n) Denison, 50-61
#31	22	Lynchburg	12-1	def. (n) Muskingum, 75-66; def. (n) Greensboro, 82-74; def. Averett, 87-73; 01/05 vs. Shenandoah
#32	18	Amherst	9-1	def. Hunter, 96-41; def. Keystone, 88-61; 01/04 vs. Trinity (Conn.)
#33	15	North Central (Ill.)	11-3	def. Albion, 77-58; def. Illinois College, 67-63; def. (n) Husson, 93-51; LOST to (n) Ohio Northern, 61-63; LOST to #3 Augustana, 59-76; 01/05 vs. Elmhurst
#34	14	Johns Hopkins	8-4	LOST to (n) UW-Platteville, 70-75 OT; LOST to (n) #9 Whitworth, 74-76
T#35	11	Wheaton (Ill.)	9-4	LOST to Illinois Tech, 72-75; def. Carthage, 77-57; 01/05 vs. Carroll
T#35	11	Montclair State	10-3	LOST to (n) #2 Williams, 59-73; def. (n) Virginia Wesleyan, 80-77; 01/05 vs. Rowan
T#35	11	Mount Union	11-1	def. Trine, 105-66; def. Adrian, 76-52; 01/05 vs. Capital
T#38	9	Wartburg	7-5	def. (n) New England College, 79-58; def. (n) SUNYIT, 81-66; LOST to Bethel, 70-78; 01/05 vs. Central
T#38	9	New Jersey City	9-4	def. (n) Thiel, 106-60; LOST to #14 Wooster, 75-81; 01/05 vs. Stockton
#40	2	Centre	10-2	LOST to #3 Augustana, 64-90; def. Blackburn, 86-72; def. Washington and Lee, 93-85; LOST to (n) TCNJ, 65-69; 01/04 vs. Rhodes; 01/06 vs. Hendrix
---	---	Occidental	12-0	def. Principia, 80-62; def. Pacific, 112-80; def. UC Santa Cruz, 71-56; def. Chapman, 75-63; 01/05 vs. Caltech

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2019, 02:58:08 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=kxbkw/p3r6empzvge24slx.jpg)

The holidays are over and for many Division III basketball teams, the conference schedules are already in full swing. It doesn't take much time before a casual break ramps up into high-pressure games.

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is also back from it's holiday "break" on Sunday evening. Dave tries to get caught up after a couple of weeks of action and wild results. Who impressed during the holidays? Who (re)started conference play with a bang? What does the final two months of the regular season have in store? What will the new year's first Top 25 ballots look like?

Plus, there is a new wins leader in Division III women's basketball. It's not Mike Strong. It's Andy Yosinoff of Emmanuel. We chat with the all-time winningest coach in DIII history.

Sunday's episode of Hoopsville has guests primarily from the Atlantic, Central Northeast, and South Regions, but we try and talk about anything news worthy.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. Sunday's edition hits the air LIVE starting at 7:00 p.m. ET. Just click here: http://bit.ly/2SDjtqh

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or use any of the social media options below.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Andy Yosinoff, Emmanuel women's coach
- Greg Mason, Centre men's coach
- Greg Giovanine, No. 3 Augustana men's coach
- Ryan Scott, D3hoops.com columnist

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 06, 2019, 03:13:10 PM

Last night, the #10, 15, 16, 18, 24, and 25 teams all lost. Don't know if those games will be included in the next poll, but that should mess things up a bit.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2019, 03:15:44 PM

Quote from: AndOne on January 06, 2019, 03:13:10 PM
Last night, the #10, 15, 16, 18, 24, and 25 teams all lost. Don't know if those games will be included in the next poll, but that should mess things up a bit.

Yep... games through tonight will be in the data for voters to decide by tomorrow evening.

Usual data collection ends the Sunday evening head of the Monday vote.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 06, 2019, 04:30:00 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Nebraska Wesleyan	13-0	def. Linfield, 90-79; def. Buena Vista, 83-59; def. #20 Loras, 89-71
#2	572	Williams	13-0	def. (n) T#35 Montclair State, 73-59; def. Moravian, 81-72; def. Wesleyan, 68-54; def. Connecticut College, 95-69
#3	563	Augustana	13-1	def. #40 Centre, 90-64; def. Rhodes, 86-42; def. Washington U., 77-63; def. #33 North Central (Ill.), 76-59; def. North Park, 109-64
#4	533	Whitman	11-1	def. (n) #14 Wooster, 89-78; def. (n) Alma, 101-82; def. (n) #26 Illinois Wesleyan, 105-103; def. Cal Lutheran, 104-56; def. Lewis and Clark, 117-52
#5	531	Hamilton	13-0	def. (n) Ursinus, 114-101; def. (n) Ithaca, 92-77; def. Keene State, 85-80; def. Trinity (Conn.), 72-70
#6	507	UW-Oshkosh	12-1	def. St. Norbert, 79-68; def. Concordia (Wis.), 90-68; def. UW-Platteville, 96-70; def. UW-Stout, 77-75
#7	440	MIT	12-1	def. #29 WPI, 74-44; def. Coast Guard, 69-54
#8	435	Marietta	12-1	def. Muskingum, 89-67; LOST to (n) Elmhurst, 72-76; def. (n) Lake Forest, 80-77; def. Heidelberg, 67-64
#9	425	Whitworth	11-1	def. Concordia-Chicago, 143-95; def. (n) #34 Johns Hopkins, 76-74; def. (n) Emory and Henry, 87-80; def. Lewis and Clark, 89-77
#10	401	UW-Whitewater	11-2	def. #20 Loras, 114-104; def. Sul Ross State, 79-59; def. Concordia (Texas), 96-81; LOST to #12 UW-Stevens Point, 51-64; LOST to UW-Eau Claire, 65-69
#11	384	Wittenberg	11-2	def. Bryant-Stratton, 94-60; def. Wilmington, 74-52; LOST to Denison, 66-72; def. Hiram, 84-75 OT
#12	293	UW-Stevens Point	10-2	def. Cal Lutheran, 76-57; def. (n) #26 Illinois Wesleyan, 76-70; def. #10 UW-Whitewater, 64-51; def. UW-River Falls, 88-68
#13	285	Plattsburgh State	9-2	LOST to Wesleyan, 73-84; def. Case Western Reserve, 88-69
#14	242	Wooster	10-3	LOST to (n) #4 Whitman, 78-89; LOST to (n) Sul Ross State, 84-88; def. Ohio Wesleyan, 68-55; def. T#38 New Jersey City, 81-75; def. DePauw, 103-71
#15	202	Randolph-Macon	13-2	def. Carroll, 78-64; def. Drew, 84-50; def. Virginia Wesleyan, 72-67; LOST to Guilford, 63-64
#16	199	Nichols	11-2	def. (n) Eastern Connecticut, 79-73; LOST to (n) #22 Salisbury, 71-78; def. Tufts, 87-81; LOST to Gordon, 72-76
#17	197	Rochester	11-1	def. Catholic, 68-60; def. Emory, 87-76
#18	196	Christopher Newport	11-2	def. Mount St. Mary, 80-47; def. Huntingdon, 79-52; def. York (Pa.), 73-71; LOST to Mary Washington, 61-69
#19	186	St. John's	10-1	def. UW-Superior, 94-53; def. Augsburg, 78-58; def. Macalester, 92-50
#20	180	Loras	11-3	LOST to #10 UW-Whitewater, 104-114; def. Monmouth, 83-70; def. Blackburn, 92-81; def. Simpson, 85-61; LOST to #1 Nebraska Wesleyan, 71-89
#21	145	Wabash	12-1	def. Franklin, 98-69; def. Allegheny, 108-65; def. Hiram, 102-61; LOST to (n) Wilmington, 80-83; def. (n) Bryant & Stratton (OH), 104-57; def. Oberlin, 86-50
#22	107	Salisbury	12-1	LOST to Rowan, 76-97; def. Springfield, 82-63; def. (n) #16 Nichols, 78-71; def. Penn State-Harrisburg, 78-65
#23	80	Swarthmore	10-2	def. #24 Middlebury, 82-80; def. Stockton, 73-65; def. Eastern, 85-70
#24	53	Middlebury	10-4	def. Pitt-Bradford, 72-53; def. Hilbert, 95-87; LOST to #23 Swarthmore, 80-82; def. SUNY-Canton, 100-66; def. Connecticut College, 92-80; LOST to Wesleyan, 77-80
#25	51	Scranton	12-1	def. Manhattanville, 106-75; def. TCNJ, 82-79; def. Wilkes, 74-64; def. King's, 75-72; def. Gettysburg, 71-59; LOST to Elizabethtown, 64-67

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	43	Illinois Wesleyan	9-5	def. Anderson, 93-70; LOST to (n) #4 Whitman, 103-105; LOST to (n) #12 UW-Stevens Point, 70-76; def. North Park, 97-49
#27	40	St. Thomas	10-1	def. Gustavus Adolphus, 97-53; def. Hamline, 80-58
#28	31	Pomona-Pitzer	11-1	def. Hardin-Simmons, 90-78; def. Redlands, 82-77; def. La Verne, 89-46
#29	29	WPI	9-4	LOST to (n) Maryville (Tenn.), 60-67; LOST to (n) DePauw, 73-77; LOST to #7 MIT, 44-74; LOST to Babson, 60-64
#30	28	Oswego	9-2	LOST to Emory, 73-91; LOST to (n) Denison, 50-61
#31	22	Lynchburg	13-1	def. (n) Muskingum, 75-66; def. (n) Greensboro, 82-74; def. Averett, 87-73; def. Shenandoah, 89-75
#32	18	Amherst	10-1	def. Hunter, 96-41; def. Keystone, 88-61; def. Trinity (Conn.), 84-55
#33	15	North Central (Ill.)	12-3	def. Albion, 77-58; def. Illinois College, 67-63; def. (n) Husson, 93-51; LOST to (n) Ohio Northern, 61-63; LOST to #3 Augustana, 59-76; def. Elmhurst, 82-70
#34	14	Johns Hopkins	8-4	LOST to (n) UW-Platteville, 70-75 OT; LOST to (n) #9 Whitworth, 74-76
T#35	11	Wheaton (Ill.)	10-4	LOST to Illinois Tech, 72-75; def. Carthage, 77-57; def. Carroll, 79-61
T#35	11	Montclair State	10-4	LOST to (n) #2 Williams, 59-73; def. (n) Virginia Wesleyan, 80-77; LOST to Rowan, 61-71
T#35	11	Mount Union	11-2	def. Trine, 105-66; def. Adrian, 76-52; LOST to Capital, 63-71
T#38	9	Wartburg	8-5	def. (n) New England College, 79-58; def. (n) SUNYIT, 81-66; LOST to Bethel, 70-78; def. Central, 102-85
T#38	9	New Jersey City	10-4	def. (n) Thiel, 106-60; LOST to #14 Wooster, 75-81; def. Stockton, 79-67
#40	2	Centre	12-2	LOST to #3 Augustana, 64-90; def. Blackburn, 86-72; def. Washington and Lee, 93-85; LOST to (n) TCNJ, 65-69; def. Rhodes, 68-61; def. Hendrix, 72-56
---	---	Occidental	13-0	def. Principia, 80-62; def. Pacific, 112-80; def. UC Santa Cruz, 71-56; def. Chapman, 75-63; def. Caltech, 61-49

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fantastic50 on January 08, 2019, 02:49:58 PM

With the computer just now up & running for the season, here is my current top 25 (with yesterday's D3Hoops rankings in bold)...

1) Nebraska_Wesleyan (13-0, 4-0 ARC, SOS 0.603, 0-0 vRRO) 118.5 (1)
2) Augustana (13-1, 5-0 CCIW, SOS 0.541, 0-0 vRRO) 117.4 (2)
3) Whitman (11-1, 3-0 NWC, SOS 0.545, 0-0 vRRO) 117.0 (4)
4) St._John's (11-1, 7-0 MIAC, SOS 0.532, 0-0 vRRO) 116.2 (11)
5) UW-Stevens_Point (10-2, 2-0 WIAC, SOS 0.605, 0-0 vRRO) 115.1 (9)
6) St._Thomas (11-1, 7-0 MIAC, SOS 0.521, 0-0 vRRO) 114.3 (16)
7) Williams (13-0, 2-0 NESCAC, SOS 0.574, 0-0 vRRO) 113.8 (3)
8) UW-Oshkosh (12-1, 2-0 WIAC, SOS 0.482, 0-0 vRRO) 113.7 (5)
9) MIT (12-1, 2-0 NEWMAC, SOS 0.547, 0-0 vRRO) 113.5 (8)
10) Marietta (12-1, 6-0 OAC, SOS 0.558, 0-0 vRRO) 113.1 (10)
11) Wabash (10-1, 6-0 NCAC, SOS 0.542, 0-0 vRRO) 112.6 (20)
12) Christopher_Newport (11-2, 1-1 CAC, SOS 0.566, 0-0 vRRO) 112.3 (21)
13) Randolph-Macon (13-2, 5-1 ODAC, SOS 0.542, 0-0 vRRO) 112.2 (18)
14) UW-Whitewater (11-2, 0-2 WIAC, SOS 0.571, 0-0 vRRO) 111.4 (14)
15) Hamilton (13-0, 1-0 NESCAC, SOS 0.526, 0-0 vRRO) 111.2 (6)
16) Capital (11-2, 6-0 OAC, SOS 0.563, 0-0 vRRO) 111.2 (31)
17) Swarthmore (10-2, 3-2 CC, SOS 0.603, 0-0 vRRO) 111.1 (15)
18) Amherst (11-1, 1-0 NESCAC, SOS 0.434, 0-0 vRRO) 110.9 (24)
19) Loras (11-3, 3-2 ARC, SOS 0.623, 0-0 vRRO) 110.8 (26)
20) Whitworth (11-1, 3-0 NWC, SOS 0.476, 0-0 vRRO) 110.6 (7)
21) Pomona-Pitzer (9-1, 4-0 SCIAC, SOS 0.462, 0-0 vRRO) 110.3 (23)
22) Wooster (10-3, 5-1 NCAC, SOS 0.539, 0-0 vRRO) 110.2 (25)
23) Linfield (9-2, 4-0 NWC, SOS 0.479, 0-0 vRRO) 110.0 (32)
24) Mount_Union (11-2, 5-1 OAC, SOS 0.496, 0-0 vRRO) 109.6 (36)
25) North_Central_(Ill.) (12-3, 4-2 CCIW, SOS 0.525, 0-0 vRRO) 109.5 (not top 40)
---
26) Lynchburg (13-1, 4-1 ODAC, SOS 0.507, 0-0 vRRO) (22)
27) Wittenberg (10-2, 5-1 NCAC, SOS 0.524, 0-0 vRRO) (13)
28) Rochester (11-1, 1-0 UAA, SOS 0.552, 0-0 vRRO) (12)
29) Salisbury (12-1, 2-0 CAC, SOS 0.570, 0-0 vRRO) (19)
43) Plattsburgh_State (9-2, 3-1 SUNYAC, SOS 0.565, 0-0 vRRO) (17)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fantastic50 on January 08, 2019, 02:59:27 PM

It appears that my computer likes a lot of midwestern teams (including the Tommie/Johnnie rivalry, OAC upstarts Capital & Mt. Union, and North Central) and is unimpressed with Hamilton, Whitworth, Wittenberg, and Plattsburgh. I could be out in left field, but got one right last season, when NWU was receiving zero votes for the top 25.

Quote from: fantastic50 on February 12, 2018, 09:22:42 PM
If D3H was a stock market (new fantasy game?) set by the polls, I would be buying Nebraska Wesleyan, the OAC, MIAC, and CCIW. On the flip side, I would sell Emory, York, E. Connecticut, Lycoming, and Salem State.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scout on January 09, 2019, 12:43:11 PM

hey. is there a compilation of advanced metrics for d3 teams somewhere? i know massey produces ratings, but there isn't any kenpom-like evaluation of efficiency data. i did land on matt snyder's data (his forever faithful blog), but that's the only one i know.

who else produces ratings?

sorry if this is a misplaced post, i didn't want to start a whole new thread

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fantastic50 on January 09, 2019, 01:48:14 PM

Quote from: scout on January 09, 2019, 12:43:11 PM
hey. is there a compilation of advanced metrics for d3 teams somewhere? i know massey produces ratings, but there isn't any kenpom-like evaluation of efficiency data. i did land on matt snyder's data (his forever faithful blog), but that's the only one i know.

who else produces ratings?

sorry if this is a misplaced post, i didn't want to start a whole new thread

I think that Matt's blog is THE place for D3 men's tempo-free statistics.
http://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com/p/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency.html (http://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com/p/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency.html)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scout on January 09, 2019, 01:54:44 PM

Quote from: fantastic50 on January 09, 2019, 01:48:14 PM
Quote from: scout on January 09, 2019, 12:43:11 PM
hey. is there a compilation of advanced metrics for d3 teams somewhere? i know massey produces ratings, but there isn't any kenpom-like evaluation of efficiency data. i did land on matt snyder's data (his forever faithful blog), but that's the only one i know.

who else produces ratings?

sorry if this is a misplaced post, i didn't want to start a whole new thread

I think that Matt's blog is THE place for D3 men's tempo-free statistics.
http://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com/p/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency.html (http://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com/p/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency.html)

yea. i'll have to contact him. thanks!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 10, 2019, 07:09:11 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Nebraska Wesleyan	14-0	def. Simpson, 96-84; 01/12 vs. Wartburg
#2	567	Augustana	14-1	def. Elmhurst, 92-79; 01/12 vs. Carthage
#3	562	Williams	13-0	01/11 vs. Tufts; 01/12 vs. Bates
#4	551	Whitman	12-1	def. #7 Whitworth, 100-98; 01/11 vs. #32 Linfield; 01/12 vs. George Fox
#5	519	UW-Oshkosh	13-1	def. #9 UW-Stevens Point, 78-68; 01/12 vs. UW-River Falls
#6	517	Hamilton	13-0	01/11 vs. #34 Wesleyan; 01/12 vs. Connecticut College
#7	455	Whitworth	11-2	LOST to #4 Whitman, 98-100; 01/11 vs. George Fox; 01/12 vs. #32 Linfield
#8	454	MIT	12-2	LOST to Emerson, 65-84; 01/12 vs. Wheaton (Mass.)
#9	437	UW-Stevens Point	10-3	LOST to #5 UW-Oshkosh, 68-78; 01/12 vs. UW-Eau Claire
#10	371	Marietta	12-2	LOST to #31 Capital, 78-82; 01/12 vs. Ohio Northern
#11	318	St. John's	12-1	def. Concordia-Moorhead, 83-44; def. Gustavus Adolphus, 83-54; 01/12 vs. St. Olaf
#12	284	Rochester	11-1	01/11 vs. Chicago; 01/13 vs. Washington U.
#13	246	Wittenberg	11-3	LOST to #20 Wabash, 83-96; 01/12 vs. #25 Wooster
#14	243	UW-Whitewater	12-2	def. UW-Stout, 83-60; 01/12 vs. UW-La Crosse
#15	205	Swarthmore	11-2	def. Gettysburg, 77-47; 01/10 vs. Dickinson; 01/12 vs. McDaniel
#16	196	St. Thomas	11-1	def. St. Olaf, 89-63; 01/12 vs. Augsburg
#17	187	Plattsburgh State	10-2	def. SUNY Potsdam, 79-76; 01/11 vs. Fredonia; 01/12 vs. Buffalo State
#18	186	Randolph-Macon	14-2	def. Shenandoah, 117-60
#19	157	Salisbury	12-2	LOST to Mary Washington, 70-84; 01/12 vs. Southern Virginia
#20	138	Wabash	13-1	def. #13 Wittenberg, 96-83; 01/12 vs. Kenyon
#21	131	Christopher Newport	12-2	def. St. Mary's (Md.), 79-52; 01/12 vs. Frostburg State
#22	107	Lynchburg	14-1	def. Emory and Henry, 87-73; 01/12 vs. Virginia Wesleyan
#23	94	Pomona-Pitzer	13-1	def. Cal Lutheran, 76-51; def. Whittier, 77-75; 01/12 vs. Chapman
#24	92	Amherst	11-1	def. Brandeis, 65-52; 01/11 vs. Connecticut College; 01/12 vs. #34 Wesleyan
#25	91	Wooster	11-3	def. Oberlin, 78-53; 01/12 vs. #13 Wittenberg

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	89	Loras	11-3	01/12 vs. Coe
#27	62	Nichols	12-2	def. Western New England, 99-96; 01/10 vs. Wentworth; 01/12 vs. University of New England
#28	48	Scranton	12-2	LOST to Moravian, 67-80; 01/12 vs. Catholic
#29	39	Gordon	13-1	01/10 vs. Endicott; 01/12 vs. Roger Williams
#30	29	Occidental	13-1	LOST to Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 60-63; 01/12 vs. Cal Lutheran
#31	25	Capital	12-2	def. #10 Marietta, 82-78; 01/12 vs. John Carroll
#32	18	Linfield	11-2	01/11 vs. #4 Whitman; 01/12 vs. #7 Whitworth
#33	17	Illinois Wesleyan	9-6	LOST to North Central (Ill.), 83-85; 01/12 vs. Millikin
#34	11	Wesleyan	9-4	01/11 vs. #6 Hamilton; 01/12 vs. #24 Amherst
#35	10	Middlebury	11-4	def. Widener, 95-75; 01/11 vs. Bates; 01/12 vs. Tufts
T#36	8	Johns Hopkins	8-5	LOST to Muhlenberg, 52-56; 01/10 vs. Ursinus; 01/12 vs. Haverford
T#36	8	Mount Union	12-2	def. Muskingum, 83-80; 01/12 vs. Otterbein
T#38	7	New Jersey City	11-4	def. Ramapo, 86-71; 01/12 vs. Rutgers-Camden
T#38	7	Wheaton (Ill.)	11-4	def. Millikin, 68-62; 01/12 vs. Elmhurst
T#38	7	Arcadia	12-2	def. Lebanon Valley, 89-57; 01/12 vs. Messiah
#41	5	Guilford	10-5	LOST to Roanoke, 65-72; 01/12 vs. Randolph
T#42	1	Emory	9-3	01/11 vs. Washington U.; 01/13 vs. Chicago
T#42	1	Montclair State	11-4	def. Rutgers-Camden, 86-65; 01/12 vs. Stockton

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 10, 2019, 06:15:49 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=l4zv4/rac44cfsabpyqn6a.jpg)

The grind of conference play is in full gear. Nothing beats a team up or reveals how good one is like the grind of conference play.

Thursday night on Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) we take a look at the grind and how teams are surviving, surprising, and even impressing as the holidays and the break quickly become a distant memory in the rear view mirror.

The first of the season's "WBCA Center Court" segments also debuts with the dedication of one coach off the court and with her family. UW-Platteville women's coach Megan Wilson talks about her daughter's battle with cancer and the decision to step away from coaching to help her daughter fight.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Thursday's show, LIVE, starting at 7:00 p.m. ET here: http://bit.ly/2D0Qd7t

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or use any of the social media options below.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Pat McKenzie, No. 11 St. John's men's coach
- Ben Stachowski, No. 20 Wabash men's senior guard
- Alyssa Polosky, No. 14 SUNY Geneseo women's head coach
- Megan Willson, UW-Platteville women's head coach (WBCA Center Court)
- Trevor Woodruff, No. 3 Scranton women's head coach

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 12, 2019, 01:18:33 PM

Most of those make sense to me. I think the MIAC is just ok this year, would hesitate to say that there are other ranked teams besides those two, but those two are pretty good. There are probably at least one MIAC team better than some of the other receiving votes, though.

Capital wasted no time confirming your computer's faith, winning at Marietta.

Quote from: fantastic50 on January 08, 2019, 02:59:27 PM
It appears that my computer likes a lot of midwestern teams (including the Tommie/Johnnie rivalry, OAC upstarts Capital & Mt. Union, and North Central) and is unimpressed with Hamilton, Whitworth, Wittenberg, and Plattsburgh. I could be out in left field, but got one right last season, when NWU was receiving zero votes for the top 25.

Quote from: fantastic50 on February 12, 2018, 09:22:42 PM
If D3H was a stock market (new fantasy game?) set by the polls, I would be buying Nebraska Wesleyan, the OAC, MIAC, and CCIW. On the flip side, I would sell Emory, York, E. Connecticut, Lycoming, and Salem State.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 12, 2019, 05:47:42 PM

Poll points so far

* = teams that were in the preseason poll

*** = teams that were picked by posters in the Top 25 pool

Poster	Team	TOTAL	WK5	WK4	WK3	WK2	WK1	PRE
.	NWU*	3749	625	625	625	625	625	624
.	Augustana*	3246	567	563	558	546	473	539
.	Williams*	3238	562	572	575	567	545	417
.	Whitman*	3128	551	533	529	515	471	529
.	Hamilton*	3028	517	531	531	541	508	400
.	Oshkosh*	2950	519	507	498	439	420	567
.	Stevens Point*	2555	437	293	485	488	496	356
.	MIT*	2510	454	440	423	390	340	463
.	Whitworth*	2384	455	425	408	344	290	462
.	Wittenberg*	2118	246	384	353	315	454	366
.	Whitewater*	1693	243	401	372	338	258	81
.	Marietta*	1678	371	435	395	322	108	47
.	Plattsburgh St*	1646	187	285	297	368	295	214
.	IWU*	1226	17	43	226	438	360	142
.	Rochester*	1218	284	197	305	230	135	67
.	Swarthmore*	1205	205	80	89	74	428	329
.	Wooster*	1188	91	242	195	302	251	107
.	RMC	1042	186	202	175	288	191	0
.	St John's*	825	318	186	128	70	46	77
.	Middlebury*	825	10	53	82	197	317	166
.	Loras*	671	89	180	125	85	175	17
.	CNU*	599	131	196	123	49	94	6
.	Nichols*	512	62	199	139	68	19	25
.	Springfield*	478	0	0	0	0	47	431
.	Salisbury	433	157	107	99	57	13	0
.	Platteville*	422	0	0	12	21	22	367
.	Wabash	393	138	145	110	0	0	0
.	Amherst*	326	92	18	37	99	44	36
.	NJCU*	293	7	9	5	22	71	179
.	JHU*	284	8	14	14	20	22	206
.	St Thomas*	265	196	40	3	2	1	23
Greek	Wheaton IL***	259	7	11	31	26	184	0
.	Lynchburg	240	107	22	35	76	0	0
.	Pomona Pitzer*	237	94	31	22	19	60	11
.	Emory*	230	1	0	0	7	75	147
.	NCC*	194	0	15	25	86	49	19
.	JCU*	192	0	0	0	6	57	129
.	Scranton	160	48	51	37	16	8	0
.	Maryville*	102	0	0	0	0	7	95
.	Nazareth*	92	0	0	0	0	32	60
.	St Olaf*	92	0	0	0	0	0	92
.	Hope*	78	0	0	0	1	1	76
.	Oswego	63	0	28	23	12	0	0
.	Montclair St*	60	1	11	8	25	6	9
.	WPI	59	0	29	15	10	5	0
.	Ramapo*	57	0	0	0	0	24	33
.	Endicott	48	0	0	2	4	42	0
.	Roanoke*	48	0	0	0	3	3	42
.	PS Behrend*	41	0	0	0	0	15	26
.	Gordon	39	39	0	0	0	0	0
.	LeTourneau*	35	0	0	0	0	0	35
.	E&H*	31	0	0	0	0	28	3
.	Mount Union	30	8	11	11	0	0	0
nescac1	Occidental***	29	29	0	0	0	0	0
.	Aurora*	28	0	0	0	0	9	19
.	Capital	25	25	0	0	0	0	0
.	Wesleyan*	21	11	0	0	0	0	10
.	Wash U*	20	0	0	0	0	0	20
.	Linfield	18	18	0	0	0	0	0
.	E Conn*	17	0	0	0	9	0	8
.	Cabrini*	14	0	0	0	0	0	14
.	F&M*	14	0	0	0	0	0	14
.	Wartburg	9	0	9	0	0	0	0
.	Arcadia	7	7	0	0	0	0	0
.	Centre	6	0	2	0	4	0	0
.	Guilford	5	5	0	0	0	0	0
.	Bethel*	5	0	0	0	0	0	5
.	Hanover*	5	0	0	0	0	0	5
.	Keene St*	3	0	0	0	1	0	2
.	CMS*	3	0	0	0	0	0	3
.	ONU*	2	0	0	0	0	0	2
.	Salem St*	2	0	0	0	0	0	2
.	LFC	1	0	0	0	0	1	0
.	Yeshiva*	1	0	0	0	0	0	1
Express	Illinois Tech***	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Grizzlies	St Joseph CT***	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
hopefan	RPI***	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
HOPEful	Olivet***	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
magicman	Skidmore***	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
mailsy	Rosemont***	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
NCF	Bowdoin***	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Osprey	Hobart***	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
ronk	Moravian***	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Smedindy	Ohio Wes***	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Smitty	NEC***	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
WUPHF	U of Chicago***	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 13, 2019, 03:50:40 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Nebraska Wesleyan	15-0	def. Simpson, 96-84; def. Wartburg, 89-73
#2	567	Augustana	15-1	def. Elmhurst, 92-79; def. Carthage, 69-68
#3	562	Williams	15-0	def. Tufts, 85-61; def. Bates, 75-69
#4	551	Whitman	14-1	def. #7 Whitworth, 100-98; def. #32 Linfield, 98-89; def. George Fox, 81-69
#5	519	UW-Oshkosh	14-1	def. #9 UW-Stevens Point, 78-68; def. UW-River Falls, 91-56
#6	517	Hamilton	14-1	LOST to #34 Wesleyan, 69-73; def. Connecticut College, 91-46
#7	455	Whitworth	13-2	LOST to #4 Whitman, 98-100; def. George Fox, 88-85; def. #32 Linfield, 78-75
#8	454	MIT	13-2	LOST to Emerson, 65-84; def. Wheaton (Mass.), 84-69
#9	437	UW-Stevens Point	11-3	LOST to #5 UW-Oshkosh, 68-78; def. UW-Eau Claire, 68-53
#10	371	Marietta	13-2	LOST to #31 Capital, 78-82; def. Ohio Northern, 87-80 OT
#11	318	St. John's	13-1	def. Concordia-Moorhead, 83-44; def. Gustavus Adolphus, 83-54; def. St. Olaf, 87-60
#12	284	Rochester	11-3	LOST to Chicago, 80-85; LOST to Washington U., 62-93
#13	246	Wittenberg	11-4	LOST to #20 Wabash, 83-96; LOST to #25 Wooster, 65-73
#14	243	UW-Whitewater	12-3	def. UW-Stout, 83-60; LOST to UW-La Crosse, 60-75
#15	205	Swarthmore	13-2	def. Gettysburg, 77-47; def. Dickinson, 67-53; def. McDaniel, 78-53
#16	196	St. Thomas	12-1	def. St. Olaf, 89-63; def. Augsburg, 112-105 3OT
#17	187	Plattsburgh State	12-2	def. SUNY Potsdam, 79-76; def. Fredonia, 92-71; def. Buffalo State, 85-83
#18	186	Randolph-Macon	14-2	def. Shenandoah, 117-60
#19	157	Salisbury	13-2	LOST to Mary Washington, 70-84; def. Southern Virginia, 86-84
#20	138	Wabash	14-1	def. #13 Wittenberg, 96-83; def. Kenyon, 92-69
#21	131	Christopher Newport	13-2	def. St. Mary's (Md.), 79-52; def. Frostburg State, 75-65
#22	107	Lynchburg	15-1	def. Emory and Henry, 87-73; def. Virginia Wesleyan, 68-66
#23	94	Pomona-Pitzer	14-1	def. Cal Lutheran, 76-51; def. Whittier, 77-75; def. Chapman, 71-58
#24	92	Amherst	12-2	def. Brandeis, 65-52; def. Connecticut College, 88-60; LOST to #34 Wesleyan, 60-62
#25	91	Wooster	12-3	def. Oberlin, 78-53; def. #13 Wittenberg, 73-65

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	89	Loras	12-3	def. Coe, 86-85
#27	62	Nichols	14-2	def. Western New England, 99-96; def. Wentworth, 80-60; def. University of New England, 107-80
#28	48	Scranton	13-2	LOST to Moravian, 67-80; def. Catholic, 71-63
#29	39	Gordon	15-1	def. Endicott, 72-71; def. Roger Williams, 94-91 OT
#30	29	Occidental	14-1	LOST to Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 60-63; def. Cal Lutheran, 84-64
#31	25	Capital	13-2	def. #10 Marietta, 82-78; def. John Carroll, 98-85
#32	18	Linfield	11-4	LOST to #4 Whitman, 89-98; LOST to #7 Whitworth, 75-78
#33	17	Illinois Wesleyan	10-6	LOST to North Central (Ill.), 83-85; def. Millikin, 87-71
#34	11	Wesleyan	11-4	def. #6 Hamilton, 73-69; def. #24 Amherst, 62-60
#35	10	Middlebury	12-5	def. Widener, 95-75; def. Bates, 100-93; LOST to Tufts, 84-86
T#36	8	Johns Hopkins	10-5	LOST to Muhlenberg, 52-56; def. Ursinus, 66-57; def. Haverford, 60-48
T#36	8	Mount Union	13-2	def. Muskingum, 83-80; def. Otterbein, 95-68
T#38	7	New Jersey City	12-4	def. Ramapo, 86-71; def. Rutgers-Camden, 81-57
T#38	7	Wheaton (Ill.)	12-4	def. Millikin, 68-62; def. Elmhurst, 92-85
T#38	7	Arcadia	13-2	def. Lebanon Valley, 89-57; def. Messiah, 67-65
#41	5	Guilford	11-5	LOST to Roanoke, 65-72; def. Randolph, 60-51
T#42	1	Emory	10-4	def. Washington U., 108-98; LOST to Chicago, 86-96 OT
T#42	1	Montclair State	11-5	def. Rutgers-Camden, 86-65; LOST to Stockton, 63-66

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 13, 2019, 04:07:24 PM

The anticipated top six (I'm including St. John's) is about as loaded as any I can recall. All are upperclassman (and in particular senior) dominated teams with stellar efficiency ratings who have been crushing most of their opponents despite playing in power conferences. The top six features last year's two title game finalists, both of whom returned nearly everyone, plus three other teams that made final fours with sophomore cores two years ago, now two years more developed as players. And the sixth team, St. John's, has been perhaps the most impressive statistically. Between the six teams, at least ten likely all-American players. Whoever wins this year's title will really have to earn it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 13, 2019, 04:30:58 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=ladzg/q9e0wg6d3c0xl9oe.jpg)

The risk with basketball (and other sports) season? Weather. One or two storms can throw a monkey wrench into a well thought out schedule and travel plans.

The same can be said about trying to play with within a conference. Programs know each other so well that games can suddenly become rockier than anyone thought looking at the matchup on paper.

On Sunday's Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave will take a look at the "stormy weather" that both Mother Nature and conference schedules seem to have brought us. From postponements and travel challenges to head-scratching results and season-turning outcomes.

Tonight's highlights include a Williams men's team off to the best start in program history, a DeSales women's program that is blowing the doors off of games, and a Greenville men's squad that seems to have mastered the "System" pretty darn fast.

We will also debut the "NABC Coach's Corner" with a former DIII coach, turned administrator. Schreiner Athletics Director Bill Raleigh talks about his former days coaching and why being an athletic director is what drives him now. He also talks about his work on the NCAA Basketball Rules Committee and his continued work with the NABC in support of Division III.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. Sunday's episode hits the air at 7:00 p.m. ET and can be watched here: http://bit.ly/2VRm3Lh (or via Facebook Live & Periscope simulcasts).

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or use any of the social media options to the right.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Kevin App, No. 3 Williams men's head coach
- Morgan Birmelin, No. 22 DeSales women's senior guard
- Bill Raleigh, Schreiner Athletics Director (NABC Coach's Corner)
- George Barber, Greenville men's coach
- Ryan Scott, D3hoops.com lead columnist

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 13, 2019, 09:34:53 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 13, 2019, 04:07:24 PM
The anticipated top six (I'm including St. John's) is about as loaded as any I can recall. All are upperclassman (and in particular senior) dominated teams with stellar efficiency ratings who have been crushing most of their opponents despite playing in power conferences. The top six features last year's two title game finalists, both of whom returned nearly everyone, plus three other teams that made final fours with sophomore cores two years ago, now two years more developed as players. And the sixth team, St. John's, has been perhaps the most impressive statistically. Between the six teams, at least ten likely all-American players. Whoever wins this year's title will really have to earn it.

I don't see any reason for St. John's to jump Whitworth. Unlike some of the other losses, a two-point loss to No. 4 isn't reason to move a team down.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 13, 2019, 09:44:00 PM

I guess I see St. John's as a team that has been underrated for awhile. Only one loss and a very respectable one. Beating teams badly since then. A very strong two-season run. Absolutely killing it in efficiency ratings and Massey. Whitworth has a lot of narrow escapes, two losses, and their best wins look less impressive as JHU and E&H have faded.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 13, 2019, 10:07:54 PM

Respectable loss but three teams have beaten UWW in the last week so that loss looks "less impressive" as well. What's the best SJU win?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 13, 2019, 10:32:35 PM

Plattesville, Lacrosse and Augusburg are all solid wins. But also the consistent margins of victory are impressive.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on January 13, 2019, 10:35:31 PM

vsLAX or @Platte, both of which are solid wins, but aren't GREAT wins. The rest of the MIAC, outside of UST, being merely average or bad doesn't really help so they will have two more chances at resume bolstering wins.

I think if SJU could have stopped a red hot Bethany Lutheran team in Round 1 last year they could have made some noise. BLU had a top 5% outcome for them that night and SJU didn't bring their best to combat that. If SJU finished better in 2018 the polls could be different right now, being still early in the season.... not that it matters much at all besides a talking point.

EDIT: I know this doesn't matter much in the eyes of the committees, but SJU seems to be much better recently, just thrashing opponents since thanksgiving. Learning how to play without a handful of graduating seniors who played a lot of minutes last year and years past. Another game against UWW might be a different result.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 13, 2019, 10:39:23 PM

SJU's best wins would seem to be UW-LaX (11-4, 4-0 in WIAC) by 5 at home and Augsburg (10-4, and just took UST to triple OT) by 20 on the road. However, neither of them received a single vote in the last poll, so another answer could be 'nobody'.

I don't think SJU will jump Whitworth, and I kinda doubt they jump Hamilton. UWSP lost a respectably close game to #5, but it was their third loss, so I'd give about even odds on whether they can stay ahead of SJU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fantastic50 on January 14, 2019, 09:22:18 AM

I also view St. John's as an elite team, primarily because of their margins against good-but-not-great teams. By comparison, Whitworth has struggled to survive such games, but the close call against a truly elite opponent is a positive.

#3 St John's (13-1, 9-0 MIAC, 4-1 vs top 100)
W 84-79 H #19 UW-LaCrosse
L 72-83 A #20 UW-Whitewater
W 78-58 A #44 Augsburg
W 71-55 A #47 UW-Platteville
W 90-55 H #72 Bethel

#16 Whitworth (13-2, 5-1 NWC, 4-2 vs top 100)
L 98-100 H #2 Whitman
W 88-85 A #30 George Fox
L 79-88 N #31 Texas-Dallas
W 76-74 A #50 Johns Hopkins
W 78-75 A #69 Linfield
W 87-80 N #82 Emory & Henry

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 14, 2019, 02:24:29 PM

I'm moving St. John's up, but I would not consider moving them ahead of Whitworth right now. The Pirates have too many choices on offense - more than SJU has - and their have shown they can overcome their challenges (like a short bench).

I also consider Whitworth with just one loss - the game against Whitman was basically a draw. SJU doesn't have a Whitman type of game on their resume.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: guest323 on January 15, 2019, 11:03:28 PM

NC-Wesleyan should be ranked. Not even getting a vote is a joke.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 15, 2019, 11:05:19 PM

Quote from: guest323 on January 15, 2019, 11:03:28 PM
NC-Wesleyan should be ranked. Not even getting a vote is a joke.

Massey #65

https://www.masseyratings.com/cb2019/ncaa-d3/ratings

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 15, 2019, 11:26:32 PM

Let's break that down:

They have played Mid-Atlantic Christian twice. That's a USCAA squad which is 2-12 on the season. One of those games was reasonably close. MAC, by they way, got thumped by Southern Virginia. The rest of the resume is ... not quite helping NCW.

They also have Apprentice on their schedule - that doesn't help anyone who play them. I know they are 9-8, but they don't have a tremendous schedule.

Their opponent's winning percentage (only DIII opponents) is 69-98 (.413) including the results against NCW. They have wins over just three above .500 teams (and one of those opponents includes a loss - they split in a back-to-back scenario with Guilford SMH).

So the games they have won has an opponent's winning percentage of 58-85 (.406) - and that is only bolstered because they won the second game, ten days later, against Guilford. Don't count Guilford and that is worse (.370). And some of those games are CLOSE (two point win over Averett?!).

Their only significant games are Guilford (1-1), Babson (won), and La Grange (lost) - so they are 2-2 in that category. Can't make heads or tails of the Guilford games, Babson result is something the voters aren't going to put much stock in unless Babson proves otherwise, and the loss to La Grange is going to be a major problem for anyone to consider NCW seriously.

Only two teams on the rest of their schedule has an above .500 record - that could certainly change, but that doesn't bode well for voters to take NCW that seriously. Should they keep winning, voters will notice, but as a voter ... there is nothing there that tells me I should have NCW in over teams like Wesleyan, North Central, Nichols, Gordon, Rochester, Lynchburg, Wheaton, or Plattsburgh which encompass the bottom eight slots on my ballot (25 through 18 respectively).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 15, 2019, 11:27:38 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 15, 2019, 11:05:19 PM
Quote from: guest323 on January 15, 2019, 11:03:28 PM
NC-Wesleyan should be ranked. Not even getting a vote is a joke.

Massey #65

https://www.masseyratings.com/cb2019/ncaa-d3/ratings

Matt Snyder #75

http://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com/p/division-iii-mens-basketball-efficiency.html

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: guest323 on January 15, 2019, 11:54:32 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 15, 2019, 11:26:32 PM
Let's break that down:

They have played Mid-Atlantic Christian twice. That's a USCAA squad which is 2-12 on the season. One of those games was reasonably close. MAC, by they way, got thumped by Southern Virginia. The rest of the resume is ... not quite helping NCW.

They also have Apprentice on their schedule - that doesn't help anyone who play them. I know they are 9-8, but they don't have a tremendous schedule.

Their opponent's winning percentage (only DIII opponents) is 69-98 (.413) including the results against NCW. They have wins over just three above .500 teams (and one of those opponents includes a loss - they split in a back-to-back scenario with Guilford SMH).

So the games they have won has an opponent's winning percentage of 58-85 (.406) - and that is only bolstered because they won the second game, ten days later, against Guilford. Don't count Guilford and that is worse (.370). And some of those games are CLOSE (two point win over Averett?!).

Their only significant games are Guilford (1-1), Babson (won), and La Grange (lost) - so they are 2-2 in that category. Can't make heads or tails of the Guilford games, Babson result is something the voters aren't going to put much stock in unless Babson proves otherwise, and the loss to La Grange is going to be a major problem for anyone to consider NCW seriously.

Only two teams on the rest of their schedule has an above .500 record - that could certainly change, but that doesn't bode well for voters to take NCW that seriously. Should they keep winning, voters will notice, but as a voter ... there is nothing there that tells me I should have NCW in over teams like Wesleyan, North Central, Nichols, Gordon, Rochester, Lynchburg, Wheaton, or Plattsburgh which encompass the bottom eight slots on my ballot (25 through 18 respectively).

Have you or any voters seen them play online? I understand that it's only DIII games, but they took a DI to overtime (if I am not mistaken?) Even playing a team like Averett, they looked very impressive. Would a win over Pfeiffer change your thinking? To not get 1 vote still baffles me after seeing them play 4 times.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CollegeGolf18 on January 16, 2019, 12:45:04 AM

Quote from: guest323 on January 15, 2019, 11:54:32 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 15, 2019, 11:26:32 PM
Let's break that down:

They have played Mid-Atlantic Christian twice. That's a USCAA squad which is 2-12 on the season. One of those games was reasonably close. MAC, by they way, got thumped by Southern Virginia. The rest of the resume is ... not quite helping NCW.

They also have Apprentice on their schedule - that doesn't help anyone who play them. I know they are 9-8, but they don't have a tremendous schedule.

Their opponent's winning percentage (only DIII opponents) is 69-98 (.413) including the results against NCW. They have wins over just three above .500 teams (and one of those opponents includes a loss - they split in a back-to-back scenario with Guilford SMH).

So the games they have won has an opponent's winning percentage of 58-85 (.406) - and that is only bolstered because they won the second game, ten days later, against Guilford. Don't count Guilford and that is worse (.370). And some of those games are CLOSE (two point win over Averett?!).

Their only significant games are Guilford (1-1), Babson (won), and La Grange (lost) - so they are 2-2 in that category. Can't make heads or tails of the Guilford games, Babson result is something the voters aren't going to put much stock in unless Babson proves otherwise, and the loss to La Grange is going to be a major problem for anyone to consider NCW seriously.

Only two teams on the rest of their schedule has an above .500 record - that could certainly change, but that doesn't bode well for voters to take NCW that seriously. Should they keep winning, voters will notice, but as a voter ... there is nothing there that tells me I should have NCW in over teams like Wesleyan, North Central, Nichols, Gordon, Rochester, Lynchburg, Wheaton, or Plattsburgh which encompass the bottom eight slots on my ballot (25 through 18 respectively).

Have you or any voters seen them play online? I understand that it's only DIII games, but they took a DI to overtime (if I am not mistaken?) Even playing a team like Averett, they looked very impressive. Would a win over Pfeiffer change your thinking? To not get 1 vote still baffles me after seeing them play 4 times.

I don't think that Exhibition games really count...I mean take for example Wabash. They got KILLED by D1 Northern Kentucky and D2 Bellarmine (much better teams than High Point, and voters don't seem to care.) I certainly wouldn't take non D3 results into play for the most part.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 16, 2019, 06:42:25 AM

I've had my eye on NC Wesleyan all year. I thought they've looked pretty good. Losing to Lagrange at home hurt their chances in my eyes because the schedule's not super stellar. Like anyone, though, if they continue to win, they continue to build a better resume.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 16, 2019, 12:28:07 PM

One thing I've learned in my 2 or 3 years running efficiency metrics is the difference between #25 and #50 or even #75 is rather thin.

We often have 2-5 teams who are a clear cut above the rest. maybe 10 additional very excellent teams who are clear T25. And then we have the beginning of a long sloping range of good teams who are marginally different from each other.

For example, Mt. Union currently checks in at #25 for me with a 20.4 efficiency margin (that means they're 20.4 points per 100 possessions better than the average D3 team). NC Wesleyan is #75 with a 12.7 efficiency margin. That difference equates to a 5-6 point projected victory for Mt. Union on a neutral court and a nearly even matchup on NC Wesleyan's home court.

That 7.7 difference in efficiency margin from #25 to #75 is about equal to the difference between my #11 Wabash and #25 Mt. Union.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 16, 2019, 12:57:18 PM

Quote from: guest323 on January 15, 2019, 11:54:32 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 15, 2019, 11:26:32 PM
Let's break that down:

They have played Mid-Atlantic Christian twice. That's a USCAA squad which is 2-12 on the season. One of those games was reasonably close. MAC, by they way, got thumped by Southern Virginia. The rest of the resume is ... not quite helping NCW.

They also have Apprentice on their schedule - that doesn't help anyone who play them. I know they are 9-8, but they don't have a tremendous schedule.

Their opponent's winning percentage (only DIII opponents) is 69-98 (.413) including the results against NCW. They have wins over just three above .500 teams (and one of those opponents includes a loss - they split in a back-to-back scenario with Guilford SMH).

So the games they have won has an opponent's winning percentage of 58-85 (.406) - and that is only bolstered because they won the second game, ten days later, against Guilford. Don't count Guilford and that is worse (.370). And some of those games are CLOSE (two point win over Averett?!).

Their only significant games are Guilford (1-1), Babson (won), and La Grange (lost) - so they are 2-2 in that category. Can't make heads or tails of the Guilford games, Babson result is something the voters aren't going to put much stock in unless Babson proves otherwise, and the loss to La Grange is going to be a major problem for anyone to consider NCW seriously.

Only two teams on the rest of their schedule has an above .500 record - that could certainly change, but that doesn't bode well for voters to take NCW that seriously. Should they keep winning, voters will notice, but as a voter ... there is nothing there that tells me I should have NCW in over teams like Wesleyan, North Central, Nichols, Gordon, Rochester, Lynchburg, Wheaton, or Plattsburgh which encompass the bottom eight slots on my ballot (25 through 18 respectively).

Have you or any voters seen them play online? I understand that it's only DIII games, but they took a DI to overtime (if I am not mistaken?) Even playing a team like Averett, they looked very impressive. Would a win over Pfeiffer change your thinking? To not get 1 vote still baffles me after seeing them play 4 times.

North Carolina Wesleyan? Yes, I have caught some of their games online.

Pfeiffer is 7-7 ... so no, it wouldn't change my thinking. Like Ryan, the LaGrange loss is where their momentum with me was lost.

Do you know how many teams with 2-4 losses there are currently in DIII? They all can't have votes. It's impossible.

But here is the thing: you have seen them play four times and are comparing them to teams you are familiar with. Voters, especially like myself, are comparing them to teams we have seen across the country on a national level. The perspective is different. The perception is different. I've seen ten or so Top 25 caliber teams in person this year. I have seen 25-30 Top 25 caliber teams on video. I have seen twice that on video in general.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 16, 2019, 04:15:31 PM

A little late this week, but better than not doing it at all like last week.

Here is my Top 25 ballot if anyone cares: http://bit.ly/2RwqE7h

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: duckfan41 on January 16, 2019, 04:30:01 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 16, 2019, 04:15:31 PM
A little late this week, but better than not doing it at all like last week.

Here is my Top 25 ballot if anyone cares: http://bit.ly/2RwqE7h

Thank you for posting! It's always nice for someone to post stuff like this so the guys who want to know what the people who control the rankings are thinking.

One correction I'd have for you is Loras actually narrowly beat Augustana.

Thanks for your willingness to put your thought process and rationale out there for all of us to see.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 16, 2019, 04:54:10 PM

Yes, the ballot is much appreciated.

I still disagree on Rochester as does Massey, but if they go undefeated through the next two weekends, I'll change my mind. I only see two convincing wins on that resume and even then...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 17, 2019, 01:30:43 AM

How far does Williams move down? One of the weaker if not weakest schedules in the top 10-15 and lost to one of the few pretty good teams on their schedule. So you're probably not going to get many really useful data points.

I feel like if they were in the midwest/north, they'd have 3 or 4 losses and be nowhere near the top. Several too-close games against meh teams that would have been punished with losses out here.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 17, 2019, 06:42:41 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Nebraska Wesleyan	16-0	def. Coe, 80-72; 01/19 vs. Luther
#2	580	Augustana	16-1	def. #34 Wheaton (Ill.), 77-73; 01/19 vs. T#37 Illinois Wesleyan
#3	563	Williams	15-1	LOST to #28 Amherst, 62-63; 01/19 vs. T#37 Middlebury
#4	560	Whitman	14-1	01/18 vs. Pacific Lutheran; 01/19 vs. Puget Sound
#5	539	UW-Oshkosh	15-1	def. #23 UW-Whitewater, 82-75; 01/19 vs. UW-La Crosse
#6	468	Whitworth	13-2	01/18 vs. Puget Sound; 01/19 vs. Pacific Lutheran
#7	444	Hamilton	15-1	def. SUNY Geneseo, 68-43; 01/19 vs. #28 Amherst; 01/20 vs. Wells
#8	440	St. John's	13-1	01/19 vs. Carleton
#9	405	UW-Stevens Point	11-4	LOST to UW-La Crosse, 57-61; 01/19 vs. UW-Platteville
#10	343	Swarthmore	14-2	def. Muhlenberg, 84-54; 01/19 vs. Ursinus
#11	335	St. Thomas	13-1	def. Bethel, 86-75; 01/19 vs. St. Mary's (Minn.)
#12	315	MIT	14-2	def. Springfield, 77-59; 01/19 vs. Babson
#13	295	Marietta	14-2	def. T#35 Mount Union, 81-69; 01/19 vs. Baldwin Wallace
#14	271	Wabash	15-1	def. DePauw, 70-59; 01/19 vs. Denison
#15	254	Plattsburgh State	12-2	01/18 vs. Oswego State; 01/19 vs. Cortland
#16	221	Randolph-Macon	15-2	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 87-79 OT; 01/19 vs. Randolph
#17	190	Lynchburg	15-1	01/17 vs. Washington and Lee; 01/19 vs. Eastern Mennonite
#18	163	Christopher Newport	14-2	def. Southern Virginia, 77-54; 01/19 vs. Penn State-Harrisburg
#19	148	Pomona-Pitzer	15-1	def. T#35 Occidental, 70-65; 01/19 vs. Caltech
#20	141	Capital	13-3	LOST to Heidelberg, 62-63; 01/19 vs. Ohio Northern
#21	138	Wooster	13-3	def. Denison, 92-59; 01/19 vs. Hiram
#22	111	Rochester	11-3	01/18 vs. Carnegie Mellon; 01/20 vs. Case Western Reserve
#23	107	UW-Whitewater	12-4	LOST to #5 UW-Oshkosh, 75-82; 01/19 vs. UW-River Falls
#24	80	Salisbury	13-3	LOST to York (Pa.), 75-90; 01/19 vs. Frostburg State
#25	73	Wittenberg	12-4	def. Ohio Wesleyan, 98-94 OT; 01/19 vs. Oberlin

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	61	Loras	13-3	def. Luther, 86-78; 01/19 vs. Central
#27	57	Wesleyan	11-4	01/17 vs. Pine Manor; 01/19 vs. Connecticut College
#28	40	Amherst	13-2	def. #3 Williams, 63-62; 01/19 vs. #7 Hamilton
T#29	36	Gordon	16-1	def. Salve Regina, 79-70; 01/19 vs. Western New England
T#29	36	Nichols	15-2	def. Roger Williams, 89-84; 01/19 vs. Curry
#31	21	North Central (Ill.)	14-3	def. Carthage, 67-63; 01/19 vs. Carroll
T#32	12	New Jersey City	13-4	def. Kean, 84-60; 01/19 vs. Rowan
T#32	12	Arcadia	14-2	def. Widener, 73-66; 01/19 vs. Lycoming
#34	11	Wheaton (Ill.)	12-5	LOST to #2 Augustana, 73-77; 01/19 vs. North Park
T#35	8	Mount Union	13-3	LOST to #13 Marietta, 69-81; 01/19 vs. Wilmington
T#35	8	Occidental	14-3	LOST to #19 Pomona-Pitzer, 65-70; LOST to Redlands, 97-101
T#37	4	Illinois Wesleyan	11-6	def. Elmhurst, 82-80; 01/19 vs. #2 Augustana
T#37	4	Middlebury	13-5	def. Albertus Magnus, 103-92; 01/19 vs. #3 Williams
T#37	4	Linfield	12-4	def. George Fox, 83-69; 01/18 vs. Pacific
T#40	1	Centre	13-3	01/18 vs. Millsaps; 01/20 vs. Birmingham-Southern
T#40	1	Guilford	12-5	def. Ferrum, 75-44; 01/19 vs. Bridgewater (Va.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dunkin3117 on January 17, 2019, 09:05:37 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 16, 2019, 04:15:31 PM
A little late this week, but better than not doing it at all like last week.

Here is my Top 25 ballot if anyone cares: http://bit.ly/2RwqE7h

Thanks for sharing Dave. As a follower of the ARC, I would agree that Nebraska Wesleyan remain at the top of the polls, their starting 5 has been outstanding, especially after losing Hiller. Looking at Loras, I'm a little shocked that they have found themselves just outside of the top 25 for a second week in a row. I agree would agree that it is tough to tell which team will show up on a given night. A team that beat Simpson by 24 or the team that beat Coe by 1. But the fact is, they are still winning at 13-3 with key wins over #2 Augustana (16-1), Olivet (8-8, 4-1 in MIAA), Lake Forest (10-6) and Augsburg (11-4), losses were at Dubuque (11-5), #10 at the time UW-Whitewater, who is struggling as of late, and at #1 Neb Wesleyan.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 17, 2019, 10:23:20 AM

I really don't think Williams should be punished that much by a one point loss on the road in a rivalry game in which a good Amherst team shot the lights out from three. The vast majority of Williams' games have not been close (some of the scores got a bit closer in garbage time, but it wasn't like these games were going down to the wire or anything). The Ephs have two double-digit wins vs. a very good Wesleyan team. They also handled solid Montclair State and Moravian teams without a ton of difficulty. Yeshiva is also a pretty good win. If the Ephs bounce back and beat a good Middlebury team on Saturday, which would put them at 16-1, I think the Ephs shouldn't fall below sixth (and I do think that the Ephs are very much a legit top 6 team this year). If they lose to Midd, a different story entirely, of course.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 17, 2019, 10:45:46 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 17, 2019, 10:23:20 AM
I really don't think Williams should be punished that much by a one point loss on the road in a rivalry game in which a good Amherst team shot the lights out from three. [...]

It is interesting to read about Amherst shooting the lights out as a point of consideration and then look at the score. How often do we talk about a team shooting the lights out from three and only scoring 63? Your overall message is fair though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 17, 2019, 10:55:57 AM

Williams is a REALLY good defensive team (but has been struggling on offense just a bit over the past few weeks as the shooters have gone a bit cold). Amherst shot 11-23 from 3 and at least 3-4 of those makes were very high-degree-of-difficulty shots. But Amherst had trouble getting any sort of decent looks otherwise ... 12-40 from 2 and Williams had 10 blocks. So I think it is telling that Amherst (not an offensive juggernaut, much more of a defensive team themselves, but still) had to shoot it REALLY well from the perimeter just to get to 63 ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 17, 2019, 11:18:17 AM

Everything you said makes sense to me...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 17, 2019, 12:25:05 PM

Quote from: duckfan41 on January 16, 2019, 04:30:01 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 16, 2019, 04:15:31 PM
A little late this week, but better than not doing it at all like last week.

Here is my Top 25 ballot if anyone cares: http://bit.ly/2RwqE7h

Thank you for posting! It's always nice for someone to post stuff like this so the guys who want to know what the people who control the rankings are thinking.

One correction I'd have for you is Loras actually narrowly beat Augustana.

Thanks for your willingness to put your thought process and rationale out there for all of us to see.

Sorry about that. When writing that (way too late in the evening) and was double-checking their results, I saw the "L" for the Dubuque game, but eyes carried to Augustana. I actually remember thinking that seemed odd that I swore it was a win, but I went with it. Oops.

I changed that. Thanks for the head's up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 17, 2019, 04:18:46 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=lhts8/h2j8lpjymkzinibe.jpg)

Hope you didn't decide to take a night off or two from games? You would have missed some important results. While Wednesdays and Saturdays tend to be the big "nights" of any week in Division III, games on any night could have major ramifications.

The algebra this time of year is both simple and complicated. Conference schedules, for the most part, have moved into the second half and teams seeing teams a second time sometimes have an advantage. Rivals, of course, have an advantage. There are also distractions as some teams have been sitting on mostly empty campuses for several weeks and may be bored. Or second semester classes are beginning and changes to schedules can be an abrupt adjustment. There are also long road trips that can take a team's focus. Plus, the weather. Yeah, Mother Nature loves changing things around.

All of it can lead to upsets or strange outcomes. From blowouts to close battles. On any night, you are bound to see something you will be chatting about the next day.

Thursday's show includes guests from a couple of the hottest teams in men's basketball: Capital and Swarthmore. We also hear from an island squad and find out if the Whitman women's upset of George Fox should have been a surprise. And Springfield's Naomi Graves chats about how the U.S. Marine Corps has helped her coach and preach diversity.

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Thursday's show starting LIVE at 7:00 p.m. ET. in the video player above. If you miss any of the show, you can always watch it On Demand or listen to the audio-only podcast to the right (available shortly after the show goes off air).

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or use any of the social media options.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Damon Goodwin, No. 20 Capital men's coach
- Michelle Frentz, No. 24 Whitman women's coach
- Naomi Graves, Springfield women's coach (WBCA Center Court)
- Landry Kosmalski, No. 10 Swarthmore men's coach

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 18, 2019, 01:54:08 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 17, 2019, 10:23:20 AM
I really don't think Williams should be punished that much by a one point loss on the road in a rivalry game in which a good Amherst team shot the lights out from three. The vast majority of Williams' games have not been close (some of the scores got a bit closer in garbage time, but it wasn't like these games were going down to the wire or anything). The Ephs have two double-digit wins vs. a very good Wesleyan team. They also handled solid Montclair State and Moravian teams without a ton of difficulty. Yeshiva is also a pretty good win. If the Ephs bounce back and beat a good Middlebury team on Saturday, which would put them at 16-1, I think the Ephs shouldn't fall below sixth (and I do think that the Ephs are very much a legit top 6 team this year). If they lose to Midd, a different story entirely, of course.

I'm not buying much of that as quality wins. Yeshiva? Come on. Where would they be in a power league? Well we saw it early on.

No if you're even close to top whatever, those are wins you're expected to get.

Wesleyan is a pretty good win, I'll give you that one. But that's really the only one (two). Moravian and Montclair and Yeshiva just average. The rest of Williams schedule so far is not even that.

Middlebury is just decent this year (losing to teams like Keene State and Tufts, not so good) so not sure beating them at home makes up for losing when you're sitting top 5. Williams needs to drop. St. Thomas lost 1 game by 1 point and spent the whole year crawling all the way up from the non-ranked.

You don't get many real chances to evaluate eastern teams, and so they don't fall enough when they do lose bc people get starstruck by their won-lost record and don't think about that 10 of those wins were gimmies, or however many.

I wish the tournament was more nationally balanced. The west is just so much tougher.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 18, 2019, 01:49:37 PM

Just as a reference point for this conversation, here's the Massey ratings for Williams and the opponents of the Ephs that have been mentioned:

Williams	6
Amherst	23
Wesleyan	27
Middlebury	60
Montclair State	79
Moravian	119
Yeshiva	186

There are 428 teams listed by Massey as D3 (which includes provisionals as well as exploratories such as Pratt).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 18, 2019, 03:23:11 PM

I have Williams' schedule as being a bit tougher than either St. Thomas or St. Johns. Massey has the St.'s both being a bit tougher than Williams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 18, 2019, 03:51:21 PM

Playing number 23 (x2), number 27 (x2), two others in the top 80, plus Hamilton (which is another top-20 Massey team) seems like plenty of opportunities to evaluate Williams against good-to-very-good competition. Colby and Trinity are also pretty solid squads. That's five games against teams in the top ten percent of D3 and a few more against teams in the top twenty percent. And that's before the NESCAC tournament in which the top NESCAC teams are likely to face each other again. There are teams who play almost no one of consequence in posting gaudy records, and that is certainly not Williams. Of course, Williams has plenty of those games still to play, so they have to actually win them; if they lose a bunch more, this is all moot. But if they head into the NCAA tourney with between 1-3 losses, I think they have legitimized their top 10 ranking. Especially when you consider the efficiency rankings (very good for Williams) and recent program history (including a Final Four two years ago with many of the same players).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: toad22 on January 19, 2019, 12:16:23 AM

Quote from: SaintPaulite on January 17, 2019, 01:30:43 AM
How far does Williams move down? One of the weaker if not weakest schedules in the top 10-15 and lost to one of the few pretty good teams on their schedule. So you're probably not going to get many really useful data points.

I feel like if they were in the midwest/north, they'd have 3 or 4 losses and be nowhere near the top. Several too-close games against meh teams that would have been punished with losses out here.

Sounds a lot like standard regional bias to me. We fans in the East are used to it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 19, 2019, 02:06:12 AM

Quote from: toad22 on January 19, 2019, 12:16:23 AM
Quote from: SaintPaulite on January 17, 2019, 01:30:43 AM
How far does Williams move down? One of the weaker if not weakest schedules in the top 10-15 and lost to one of the few pretty good teams on their schedule. So you're probably not going to get many really useful data points.

I feel like if they were in the midwest/north, they'd have 3 or 4 losses and be nowhere near the top. Several too-close games against meh teams that would have been punished with losses out here.

Sounds a lot like standard regional bias to me. We fans in the East are used to it.

It's not bias if it's real.

Tell ya what, go back and find the last time Williams won a game against a team from Wisconsin or Minnesota. Even last year they lost to Hamline. I notice they didn't schedule that again.

You want to talk about bias, giving eastern teams a cakewalk to the final four every year, then just waiting for them to run into a midwestern team and go home. Imagine if they had to play a potential Final Four team in the first round like we do out here.

So you want to talk about bias, let's talk about that. Let's talk with the NCAA about sending Williams out of New England if you're so confident it's all bias.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 19, 2019, 02:11:22 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 18, 2019, 03:51:21 PM
Playing number 23 (x2), number 27 (x2), two others in the top 80, plus Hamilton (which is another top-20 Massey team) seems like plenty of opportunities to evaluate Williams against good-to-very-good competition. Colby and Trinity are also pretty solid squads. That's five games against teams in the top ten percent of D3 and a few more against teams in the top twenty percent. And that's before the NESCAC tournament in which the top NESCAC teams are likely to face each other again. There are teams who play almost no one of consequence in posting gaudy records, and that is certainly not Williams. Of course, Williams has plenty of those games still to play, so they have to actually win them; if they lose a bunch more, this is all moot. But if they head into the NCAA tourney with between 1-3 losses, I think they have legitimized their top 10 ranking. Especially when you consider the efficiency rankings (very good for Williams) and recent program history (including a Final Four two years ago with many of the same players).

Not even getting into all that mess. All of that is biased by the fact that the regions are so unbalanced and we see it almost every year in the postseason (not just with Williams, but especially with Williams). No computer ranking can account for that when a team (and not just one) hardly ever plays outside a few hundred miles.

Why is Williams gets 3 mulligans but St. Thomas had to fight from the bottom? If St. Thomas loses 2 more are they top 10?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 19, 2019, 02:14:56 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 18, 2019, 01:49:37 PM
Just as a reference point for this conversation, here's the Massey ratings for Williams and the opponents of the Ephs that have been mentioned:

Williams 6
Amherst 23
Wesleyan 27
Middlebury 60
Montclair State 79
Moravian 119
Yeshiva 186

There are 428 teams listed by Massey as D3 (which includes provisionals as well as exploratories such as Pratt).

If we're gonna talk about Massey, Massey has Williams 84% to beat Middlebury. Doesn't seem like much of a challenge to me.

If you claim to be top 10, games against 60, 80, and for goodness sakes definitely outside the top 100, are nothing special.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 19, 2019, 07:05:28 AM

Calm down, SaintPaulite. If you check I'm the one who said St. John's should be a top six team. And Williams has certainly played more tough teams than St. Thomas this year. And they certainly didn't lose to one like Brooklyn.

Run into a Midwest team and then lose? Whatever. Tell it to the four New England teams who won national titles in the past 15 years, and the four others who won games in the Final Four. New England teams have proven again and again that they belong when they make it to Final Fours. Even when they lose it's almost always close. Losing to two WIAC teams on last second shots in national title games hardly screams "lucky to be there," either. Nor did Midd's last second semis loss to St. Thomas. When New England teams finish the regular season ranked in the top five, they nearly always play to those rankings in the NCAA tourney. Period. That is not incompatible by the way with acknowledging that on the average year Midwest teams generally have tougher brackets.

But of course some segment of the D3 populace will never acknowledge that good hoops is also occasionally played outside of the Midwest. It's a broken record every year. And totally one-sided since NE folks always express admiration for the caliber of hoops played in other regions.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 19, 2019, 08:53:54 AM

One of the major themes in this argument seems to be that Williams doesn't travel to play good teams the way some of the MIAC schools do. From a competitive standpoint, that might be an argument to make, but one of the tenets of Division III has always been that a school doesn't get overly rewarded or punished for a decision like that. Could Williams afford to travel more? Of course, but a lot of schools couldn't and they deserve an equal shot at things.

St. John's is very good. The gap between them and Williams in the poll is negligible. When you get that high, it's a matter of nitpicking. There's often an argument about NE vs Midwest teams, but often that's about size. You're not going to find a bigger team anywhere in d3 this year than Williams. If they have a weakness, it's depth, not toughness.

I love the back and forth, but let's stick to actual issues, with concrete arguments about actual teams as opposed to the old cliches that get thrown back and forth.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: toad22 on January 19, 2019, 09:04:35 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 19, 2019, 07:05:28 AM
Calm down, SaintPaulite. If you check I'm the one who said St. John's should be a top six team. And Williams has certainly played more tough teams than St. Thomas this year. And they certainly didn't lose to one like Brooklyn.

Run into a Midwest team and then lose? Whatever. Tell it to the four New England teams who won national titles in the past 15 years, and the four others who won games in the Final Four. New England teams have proven again and again that they belong when they make it to Final Fours. Even when they lose it's almost always close. Losing to two WIAC teams on last second shots in national title games hardly screams "lucky to be there," either. Nor did Midd's last second semis loss to St. Thomas. When New England teams finish the regular season ranked in the top five, they nearly always play to those rankings in the NCAA tourney. Period.

But of course some segment of the D3 populace will never acknowledge that good hoops is also occasionally played outside of the Midwest. It's a broken record every year. And totally one-sided since NE folks always express admiration for the caliber of hoops played in other regions.

D3 is really a regional sport until the NCAA tournament rolls around. It is nearly impossible to get a handle on how teams from distant regions match up. For me that is part of the fun of it, like MLB when the American and National leagues didn't play each other until the World Series. I second Nescac1s admiration for the quality of play across the country. However, I feel like Northeast fans are forever having to defend the quality of their basketball. In the 1990s the bias was complete, after Williams won in 2003, things improved a little. Now, there shouldn't be much. Other than the WIAC, in my opinion the best league in D3 most years, the talent is pretty well spread around the country.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: toad22 on January 19, 2019, 09:24:46 AM

Ryan's comments above are on the money. I harbor no illusions about where Williams stands nationally. Having watched the last 25 years of Williams basketball quite closely, I know the current team ranks in the top 5-6. So, I know they will be competitive at the national level. At this point, that's about all I know. The team and coaches will have to determine just how good they are.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 19, 2019, 09:25:46 AM

hmm always felt the bias was against Atlantic/Mid-Atlantic who have traditionally been one and done in the FF or not there at all.

NESCAC's have earned their good reputation since allowed to compete in the tournament starting in 1998(?). They've really dominated that half of the bracket.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 19, 2019, 10:08:50 AM

There is no question the "midwest" is where the balance of D3 MBB power is. 30 of 44 national championship have come from these states...

- Wisconsin 12
- Illinois 6
- Ohio 4
- Michigan 2
- Missouri 2
- Minnesota 2
- Indiana 1
- Nebraska 1

9 of the last 11 have come from these states.

Looking at the 44 national titles by current region...

- Central = 20
- Great Lakes = 7
- Mid-Atlantic = 4
- Northeast = 4
- East = 3
- West = 3
- Atlantic = 1
- South = 1

(Lemoyne-Owen, 1975, not in D3 now...not included here.)

It's also true that the NESCAC is a powerhouse conference and the best NESCAC team each season is usually on par with the best 3-4 teams in the country.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 19, 2019, 10:16:18 AM

This season I believe there are two teams better than everyone else - Nebraska Wesleyan and Augustana. For me, this is a dead tie...and there is separation between these two teams and everyone else. These two teams have everything needed to win the national title and no significant flaws. If the bracket is set up the right way, that's probably your national championship game.

After that gap between Augustana and Nebraska Wesleyan, there are are bunch of great teams that are pretty close -- like Whitman, Williams, UW-Oshkosh, UW-Stevens Point, whoever the best in the MIAC is, etc.

Some will want to put Whitman in that Augustana/Nebraska Wesleyan grouping and don't agree with that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 19, 2019, 12:51:26 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 19, 2019, 10:08:50 AM
There is no question the "midwest" is where the balance of D3 MBB power is. 30 of 44 national championship have come from these states...

- Wisconsin 12
- Illinois 6
- Ohio 4
- Michigan 2
- Missouri 2
- Minnesota 2
- Indiana 1
- Nebraska 1

9 of the last 11 have come from these states.

Looking at the 44 national titles by current region...

- Central = 20
- Great Lakes = 7
- Mid-Atlantic = 4
- Northeast = 4
- East = 3
- West = 3
- Atlantic = 1
- South = 1

(Lemoyne-Owen, 1975, not in D3 now...not included here.)

It's also true that the NESCAC is a powerhouse conference and the best NESCAC team each season is usually on par with the best 3-4 teams in the country.

I agree with that statement, and I'll add to it that the NEWMAC deserves respect as well; Babson and MIT have fielded very strong Final Four teams in this decade, with Babson taking home the Big Doorstop two years ago, and WPI and Springfield have sent pretty good teams out onto the floor of late as well. But the Northeast, which is by far the most populous region of the eight in terms of the number of member schools, has a truckload of dross beyond those two leagues. That's not to say that the Northeast is totally devoid of talent beyond those two leagues -- Eastern Connecticut and Brandeis, for example, would be pretty competitive with much of the rest of the nation on a year-in, year-out basis, as the Judges, for example, have held their own in UAA play -- nor is it to say that the midwestern-based regions don't have dross of their own. Nobody here in flyover country is going to boast about the prowess of the SLIAC, the UMAC, the NACC, or the MWC. But the sheer volume of meh teams in the Northeast -- as well as the region's proximity to, and thus frequent crossover competition against, the very weak East Region -- mitigates against arguments on behalf of the region as a whole, as opposed to arguing on behalf of the NESCAC as a league or of Williams as a team within that league.

Quote from: toad22 on January 19, 2019, 09:04:35 AMD3 is really a regional sport until the NCAA tournament rolls around. It is nearly impossible to get a handle on how teams from distant regions match up. For me that is part of the fun of it, like MLB when the American and National leagues didn't play each other until the World Series.

Yep. I'm definitely with you on that.

Quote from: toad22 on January 19, 2019, 09:04:35 AMI second Nescac1s admiration for the quality of play across the country. However, I feel like Northeast fans are forever having to defend the quality of their basketball. In the 1990s the bias was complete, after Williams won in 2003, things improved a little. Now, there shouldn't be much. Other than the WIAC, in my opinion the best league in D3 most years, the talent is pretty well spread around the country.

I don't agree with that at all. Some regions -- the East, for example -- are really lamentable. The Atlantic's no prize, either; even though the top teams in the NJAC command respect, postseason performance indicates that the NJAC really isn't the power conference that it used to be. Last season's Ramapo team was the first NJAC squad to get to the Final Four in a decade, and the Roadrunners lost to UW-Oshkosh by 17 in the semis.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 19, 2019, 06:33:43 PM

Well now. Williams gets beaten soundly at home, and St. John's gets caught looking ahead to Monday by Carleton on Green Dot Day (one of the absolute coolest programs/promotions going, by the way). Unfortunately, the Williams mulligan rule is no longer in effect.

Please subscribe to my newsletter. Note to self: start a newsletter.

Cash me outside ... Schoenecker Arena on Monday night, if you have ideas for my newsletter.

3 of the top 10 down.

Neb Wesleyan, Augustana, Whitman and Oshkosh the clear top 4 for me. Williams outside of top 10, maybe even top 15 on this week's evidence.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 19, 2019, 06:43:47 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 19, 2019, 08:53:54 AM

One of the major themes in this argument seems to be that Williams doesn't travel to play good teams the way some of the MIAC schools do. From a competitive standpoint, that might be an argument to make, but one of the tenets of Division III has always been that a school doesn't get overly rewarded or punished for a decision like that. Could Williams afford to travel more? Of course, but a lot of schools couldn't and they deserve an equal shot at things.

St. John's is very good. The gap between them and Williams in the poll is negligible. When you get that high, it's a matter of nitpicking. There's often an argument about NE vs Midwest teams, but often that's about size. You're not going to find a bigger team anywhere in d3 this year than Williams. If they have a weakness, it's depth, not toughness.

I love the back and forth, but let's stick to actual issues, with concrete arguments about actual teams as opposed to the old cliches that get thrown back and forth.

It's almost a bit beside the point now, but things aren't equal, never were, despite whatever allowances might be made. Often recruiting battles in D3 are won not by coaches but by the financial aid office. I bet Williams doesn't lose too many of those.

Certainly other schools have their advantages, too, but let's not get carried away there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on January 19, 2019, 07:53:22 PM

From the look of the box score the best player for SJU was absent today... Stokman. SJU should be able to beat Carleton, even in the road without him, but hopefully he will be healthy come Monday for the game against UST.

EDIT: Never mind... looked at D3hoops.com box score and he was on there. My MIAC mobile app had him not playing. Good plug for the d3hoops.com site!! Still he was 3-15 and 0-10 from 3 for a career 50+% 3PT shooter. He basically was absent. Always tough to play in the West Gym in Northfield, Hopefully they can get back to normal for the Monday game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 19, 2019, 08:48:27 PM

I'm sure their heads never made it past the Twin Cities. If anything this just makes it tougher for St. Thomas because the Johnnies will be desperate to avoid going 0 for the trip now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 20, 2019, 01:22:53 PM

For the record... MIAC teams also only have to try and schedule five non-conference games and I know the coaches are thus very picky about who they want to play. They understand they need to pick power-houses so they can improve their SOS situation. Sadly, they shouldn't be playing as many conferences games, but that's a different topic for another day. They also have a lot of power-house programs not that far from them (relatively speaking). That is a compliment to the region and one MIAC teams have been, more of late, willing to take on. But that also means maybe one major road trip a year.

Williams and many in the NESCAC have to schedule a LOT more games and admittedly there is a steep decline in the quality of teams after the NESCAC and NEWMAC in New England and the greater region. While some will lament that Williams and others should schedule MORE powerhouse teams, something not considered is the costs of that. They have to schedule more major trips or tournaments as a result and that adds up financially.

I'm not defending the NESCAC, but I think a lot of people look at situations through the same prism they look at their schools or conferences. Williams has 14 non-conference games ... two of which are taken up by the Little Three ... leaving 12-non conference games. That is more than twice what MIAC teams have to contend with. So on the math that MIAC's schedule one major road trip a year (tournament, multi-day travel, or distance to play an opponent), that means Williams has to do two or more to compensate. Let's assume for a moment schools really can only afford one major trip (minority can afford two and no one is like Thomas More women this year), Williams is now in a situation where this becomes unpractical and expensive - and maybe shut down by budgets and administrators.

Just a different way of looking things from someone who has covered this sport for a long time ... and loves so many different teams and conferences in this Division.

In other words ... things aren't equal and I agree with many that NESCAC, NEWMAC, and other conferences have proven themselves despite what sometimes it looks like on paper to those looking at it through different colored glasses.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 20, 2019, 04:17:09 PM

How They Fared (~~Nearly~~ Complete)
~~Two games just underway, will be edited in later~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Nebraska Wesleyan	17-0	def. Coe, 80-72; def. Luther, 94-61
#2	580	Augustana	17-1	def. #34 Wheaton (Ill.), 77-73; def. T#37 Illinois Wesleyan, 87-65
#3	563	Williams	15-2	LOST to #28 Amherst, 62-63; LOST to T#37 Middlebury, 66-80
#4	560	Whitman	16-1	def. Pacific Lutheran, 113-63; def. Puget Sound, 115-81
#5	539	UW-Oshkosh	16-1	def. #23 UW-Whitewater, 82-75; def. UW-La Crosse, 72-66
#6	468	Whitworth	15-2	def. Puget Sound, 98-84; def. Pacific Lutheran, 71-56
#7	444	Hamilton	15-1	def. SUNY Geneseo, 68-43; ~~01/19 vs. #28 Amherst~~ postponed
#8	440	St. John's	13-2	LOST to Carleton, 63-66
#9	405	UW-Stevens Point	11-5	LOST to UW-La Crosse, 57-61; LOST to UW-Platteville, 60-61
#10	343	Swarthmore	14-3	def. Muhlenberg, 84-54; LOST to Ursinus, 88-94
#11	335	St. Thomas	14-1	def. Bethel, 86-75; def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 87-64
#12	315	MIT	15-2	def. Springfield, 77-59; def. Babson, 94-90 OT
#13	295	Marietta	15-2	def. T#35 Mount Union, 81-69; def. Baldwin Wallace, 71-65
#14	271	Wabash	16-1	def. DePauw, 70-59; def. Denison, 85-74
#15	254	Plattsburgh State	12-4	LOST to Oswego State, 84-86; LOST to Cortland, 63-65
#16	221	Randolph-Macon	16-2	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 87-79 OT; def. Randolph, 92-47
#17	190	Lynchburg	17-1	def. Washington and Lee, 82-79; def. Eastern Mennonite, 78-66 OT
#18	163	Christopher Newport	15-2	def. Southern Virginia, 77-54; def. Penn State-Harrisburg, 89-61
#19	148	Pomona-Pitzer	16-1	def. T#35 Occidental, 70-65; def. Caltech, 93-76
#20	141	Capital	14-3	LOST to Heidelberg, 62-63; def. Ohio Northern, 102-49
#21	138	Wooster	14-3	def. Denison, 92-59; def. Hiram, 106-80
#22	111	Rochester	12-3	def. Carnegie Mellon, 78-70
#23	107	UW-Whitewater	13-4	LOST to #5 UW-Oshkosh, 75-82; def. UW-River Falls, 87-85
#24	80	Salisbury	13-4	LOST to York (Pa.), 75-90; LOST to Frostburg State, 86-97
#25	73	Wittenberg	13-4	def. Ohio Wesleyan, 98-94 OT; def. Oberlin, 92-84 OT

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	61	Loras	14-3	def. Luther, 86-78; def. Central, 106-91
#27	57	Wesleyan	13-4	def. Pine Manor, 83-57; def. Connecticut College, 78-70
#28	40	Amherst	13-2	def. #3 Williams, 63-62; ~~01/19 vs. #7 Hamilton~~ postponed
T#29	36	Gordon	16-2	def. Salve Regina, 79-70; LOST to Western New England, 88-94
T#29	36	Nichols	16-2	def. Roger Williams, 89-84; def. Curry, 99-79
#31	21	North Central (Ill.)	15-3	def. Carthage, 67-63; def. Carroll, 75-52
T#32	12	New Jersey City	13-5	def. Kean, 84-60; LOST to Rowan, 80-84
T#32	12	Arcadia	15-2	def. Widener, 73-66; def. Lycoming, 78-51
#34	11	Wheaton (Ill.)	13-5	LOST to #2 Augustana, 73-77; def. North Park, 77-65
T#35	8	Mount Union	14-3	LOST to #13 Marietta, 69-81; def. Wilmington, 86-84
T#35	8	Occidental	14-3	LOST to #19 Pomona-Pitzer, 65-70; LOST to Redlands, 97-101
T#37	4	Illinois Wesleyan	11-7	def. Elmhurst, 82-80; LOST to #2 Augustana, 65-87
T#37	4	Middlebury	14-5	def. Albertus Magnus, 103-92; def. #3 Williams, 80-66
T#37	4	Linfield	13-4	def. George Fox, 83-69; def. Pacific, 105-83
T#40	1	Centre	15-3	def. Millsaps, 84-55; def. Birmingham-Southern, 84-74
T#40	1	Guilford	13-5	def. Ferrum, 75-44; def. Bridgewater (Va.), 78-55

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 20, 2019, 04:58:13 PM

Probably a bit too early to think about this is tons of details, but...

I am thinking the Men's Basketball Committee is going to have a big challenge with bracketing this year due to the power in the Central and West. Some current numbers per Matt Snyder - https://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com/p/division-iii-mens-regional-rankings.html.

RPI #1 - Nebraska Wesleyan (W): 1.000 WP, 0.589 SOS
RPI #2 - Whitman (W): 0.941 WP, 0.583 SOS
RPI #4 - Loras (W): 0.824 WP, 0.597 SOS
RPI #6 - Augustana (C): .944 WP, 0.547 SOS
RPI #7 - UW-Oshkosh (C): .941 WP, 0.538 SOS
RPI #11 - St. Thomas (W): 0.933 WP, 0.532 SOS
RPI #14- UW-Stevens Point (C): .688 WP, .607 SOS

(This doesn't even include Whitworth.)

I think Nebraska Wesleyan, Augustana, and Whitman are the overall top 3 seeds at the moment based on their resumes relative to the criteria. Is there a way to put all 3 in different quadrants? Put Whitman/Whitworth in a quadrant with a bunch of weaker teams from some other regions(s)? Then have NWU and Augustana heading up two other quadrants? Can you do that with the flight rules?

Now consider UW-Oshkosh...will probably be ranked #4 by D3hoops.com tomorrow. Could be a top 4 seed by criteria by Selection Sunday - NWU, Augustana, Whitman, UW-Oshkosh could easily be your best 4 teams. Where does Oshkosh go?

Bracketing is always hard because of the imbalance in regional power, but it seems to me the problem is magnified this year. The NE is strong, but the East, Atlantic, Mid-Atlantic, and South seem weak. And even the Great Lakes seems down compared to most years.

We are a long, long way from knowing what this picture will look like on Selection Sunday, but seems to me the committee is going to have get very creative to avoid having 2 brackets of death and 2 very weak brackets. If they stay true to the flight/travel rules, I think this is gonna be dicey.

#BracketOfDeath10YearAnniversary

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 20, 2019, 05:25:34 PM

Do you think if there are 2 NWC and 2 SCIAC teams in that they'd just stick them all together the first weekend or could we see one hosted by Whitman and one hosted by Pomona-Pitzer?

Quote from: Titan Q on January 20, 2019, 04:58:13 PM
I think Nebraska Wesleyan, Augustana, and Whitman are the overall top 3 seeds at the moment based on their resumes relative to the criteria. Is there a way to put all 3 in different quadrants? Put Whitman/Whitworth in a quadrant with a bunch of weaker teams from some other regions(s)? Then have NWU and Augustana heading up two other quadrants? Can you do that with the flight rules?

I don't think there's enough teams in the upper midwest to keep Nebraska Wesleyan and Augustana separated. You could ship a few weak teams from the northeast out to Whitman where teams have to fly anyways but I think you'd still have to have a pod shipped well out of position the 2nd weekend to make it work.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 20, 2019, 05:29:15 PM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 20, 2019, 05:25:34 PM
Do you think if there are 2 NWC and 2 SCIAC teams in that they'd just stick them all together the first weekend or could we see one hosted by Whitman and one hosted by Pomona-Pitzer?

Quote from: Titan Q on January 20, 2019, 04:58:13 PM
I think Nebraska Wesleyan, Augustana, and Whitman are the overall top 3 seeds at the moment based on their resumes relative to the criteria. Is there a way to put all 3 in different quadrants? Put Whitman/Whitworth in a quadrant with a bunch of weaker teams from some other regions(s)? Then have NWU and Augustana heading up two other quadrants? Can you do that with the flight rules?
I don't think there's enough teams in the upper midwest to keep Nebraska Wesleyan and Augustana separated. You could ship a few weak teams from the northeast out to Whitman where teams have to fly anyways but I think you'd still have to have a pod shipped well out of position the 2nd weekend to make it work.

Right.

I'm tellin' ya, it's dicey.

#BracketOfDeath10YearAnniversary

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 20, 2019, 05:41:50 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=lnhpb/vpgllqah88sl12kh.jpg)

Milestones, upsets, underdogs, under the radar, and giving back ... that's what's on tap for Sunday's Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com).

While in the conference grind, there are always results people don't expect. Whether an upset or a team flying under the radar finally pops up on everyone's radar, there are games and teams worth paying attention to outside the usual suspects. But even the top teams in the country have a story to tell.

On Sunday's episode, we will learn what it's like to be on the top team in the country, how a team can still fly under the radar with big results in on a difficult conference, how another team has emerged that no one was expecting on top of another competitive conference, how one of the top conferences in the county ticks and how the races there may turn out, and the importance of giving back to the community especially in honor of one of the country's greatest leaders.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. Sunday's show will air live starting at 7:00 p.m. ET here: http://bit.ly/2HoPIZf (and simulcast on Facebook Live and Periscope).

Oh ... and the show is definitely going to see some "overtime" tonight.

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or use any of the social media options to the right.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Hillary Scott, No. 17 Lynchburg men's coach
- Joe Crispin, Rowan men's coach
- Tim McDonald, Cabrini men's coach (NABC Coach's Corner)
- Chris Martin, CCIW Commissioner
- Abby Kelly, No. 1 Bowdoin senior guard
- Ryan Scott, D3hoops.com lead columnist (Top 25 Double-Take)

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 20, 2019, 05:46:36 PM

Neb Wesleyan is a tough host to fix because their 500 mile radius includes relatively few options to avoid flights. Which narrows even more if end up hosting the sweet 16 round and pretty impossible to avoid at least one flight.

CCIW fans ought to keep in mind you can get Illinois Wesleyan, Wheaton and North Central to Nebraska Wesleyan without a flight but not Elmhurst.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 20, 2019, 05:55:15 PM

Quote from: sac on January 20, 2019, 05:46:36 PM
Neb Wesleyan is a tough host to fix because their 500 mile radius includes relatively few options to avoid flights. Which narrows even more if end up hosting the sweet 16 round and pretty impossible to avoid at least one flight.

CCIW fans ought to keep in mind you can get Illinois Wesleyan, Wheaton and North Central to Nebraska Wesleyan without a flight but not Elmhurst.

Yes, having Nebraska Wesleyan and Whitman as top 4 national seeds causes all kinds of problems for the committee based on the travel rules.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 20, 2019, 08:51:50 PM

UMAC champ should be able to get Lincoln unless it's St. Scholastica. Grinnell could get there, but not sure anyone else in that league that is likely to win could.

Can get there from western Wisconsin, maybe not eastern. Chicagoland, but not Chicago. St. Louis can get there. How much fun would Grinnell vs. Greenville be?

Send some of those teams the eastern teams usually fatten up on in the early rounds out west. Flying is flying, send Pitzer or someone east and see what they can do.

HCAC and the MIAA can get to Augustana. Capital can if they're in it.

If the top 4 is NWU, Augie, Whitman and Oshkosh...that might become difficult. Well, it would be impossible, obviously. But I think you could get 3 of the 4 and center the 4th quad maybe around Swarthmore if they're in it, or Ramapo or Hamilton. If the true top 4 is none of them, then there should be no consideration given to "home court" bc none of them have earned it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 20, 2019, 08:58:33 PM

Quote from: SaintPaulite on January 20, 2019, 08:51:50 PM
UMAC champ should be able to get Lincoln unless it's St. Scholastica. Grinnell could get there, but not sure anyone else in that league that is likely to win could.

Can get there from western Wisconsin, maybe not eastern. Chicagoland, but not Chicago. St. Louis can get there. How much fun would Grinnell vs. Greenville be?

Send some of those teams the eastern teams usually fatten up on in the early rounds out west. Flying is flying, send Pitzer or someone east and see what they can do.

HCAC and the MIAA can get to Augustana. Capital can if they're in it.

If the top 4 is NWU, Augie, Whitman and Oshkosh...that might become difficult. Well, it would be impossible, obviously. But I think you could get 3 of the 4 and center the 4th quad maybe around Swarthmore if they're in it, or Ramapo or Hamilton. If the true top 4 is none of them, then there should be no consideration given to "home court" bc none of them have earned it.

Yes ... teams can get to those locations, but you also have to remember they have to get teams OUT of there to balance things off. That's usually the harder equation. Can they get some of the secondary teams (SJU or UST, second WIAC, second CCIW, etc.) out of the region and eastward (most likely) to allow a number of the teams you mentioned to those destinations. Or do they have to send those teams you mentioned to squads in the Great Lakes or the western side of the east coast to fill the holes those teams in the Central/West cannot because they cannot get there.

That's the real rub.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 20, 2019, 09:26:51 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 20, 2019, 01:22:53 PM
For the record... MIAC teams also only have to try and schedule five non-conference games and I know the coaches are thus very picky about who they want to play. They understand they need to pick power-houses so they can improve their SOS situation. Sadly, they shouldn't be playing as many conferences games, but that's a different topic for another day. They also have a lot of power-house programs not that far from them (relatively speaking). That is a compliment to the region and one MIAC teams have been, more of late, willing to take on. But that also means maybe one major road trip a year.

Williams and many in the NESCAC have to schedule a LOT more games and admittedly there is a steep decline in the quality of teams after the NESCAC and NEWMAC in New England and the greater region. While some will lament that Williams and others should schedule MORE powerhouse teams, something not considered is the costs of that. They have to schedule more major trips or tournaments as a result and that adds up financially.

I'm not defending the NESCAC, but I think a lot of people look at situations through the same prism they look at their schools or conferences. Williams has 14 non-conference games ... two of which are taken up by the Little Three ... leaving 12-non conference games. That is more than twice what MIAC teams have to contend with. So on the math that MIAC's schedule one major road trip a year (tournament, multi-day travel, or distance to play an opponent), that means Williams has to do two or more to compensate. Let's assume for a moment schools really can only afford one major trip (minority can afford two and no one is like Thomas More women this year), Williams is now in a situation where this becomes unpractical and expensive - and maybe shut down by budgets and administrators.

Just a different way of looking things from someone who has covered this sport for a long time ... and loves so many different teams and conferences in this Division.

In other words ... things aren't equal and I agree with many that NESCAC, NEWMAC, and other conferences have proven themselves despite what sometimes it looks like on paper to those looking at it through different colored glasses.

The convo has kind of moved on, but...

The lack of conference games in the NESCAC is created by the NESCAC. It's not a bug; it's a feature. If they wanted to play double round robin because it's just so hard to make a non-conference schedule, they could and they would. They don't and don't, bceause that's a problem they want. Just like the West Coast Conference in D1 dropped 2 conference games so that Gonzaga could schedule more non-conference.

As for the MIAC, I think it would be interesting if they did what Scottish soccer does: split the league. You'd play everyone once 10 games, and then the top 5 and bottom 6 split. Top 5 makes the conference tournament right then, and the bottom 6 play for the last chance spot. Details to be worked out of course, but I think the general idea makes sense.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 20, 2019, 09:38:17 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 20, 2019, 08:58:33 PM
Quote from: SaintPaulite on January 20, 2019, 08:51:50 PM
UMAC champ should be able to get Lincoln unless it's St. Scholastica. Grinnell could get there, but not sure anyone else in that league that is likely to win could.

Can get there from western Wisconsin, maybe not eastern. Chicagoland, but not Chicago. St. Louis can get there. How much fun would Grinnell vs. Greenville be?

Send some of those teams the eastern teams usually fatten up on in the early rounds out west. Flying is flying, send Pitzer or someone east and see what they can do.

HCAC and the MIAA can get to Augustana. Capital can if they're in it.

If the top 4 is NWU, Augie, Whitman and Oshkosh...that might become difficult. Well, it would be impossible, obviously. But I think you could get 3 of the 4 and center the 4th quad maybe around Swarthmore if they're in it, or Ramapo or Hamilton. If the true top 4 is none of them, then there should be no consideration given to "home court" bc none of them have earned it.

Yes ... teams can get to those locations, but you also have to remember they have to get teams OUT of there to balance things off. That's usually the harder equation. Can they get some of the secondary teams (SJU or UST, second WIAC, second CCIW, etc.) out of the region and eastward (most likely) to allow a number of the teams you mentioned to those destinations. Or do they have to send those teams you mentioned to squads in the Great Lakes or the western side of the east coast to fill the holes those teams in the Central/West cannot because they cannot get there.

That's the real rub.

Well job 1 is getting teams to Nebraska Wesleyan, as it stands, and as many of the right teams as you can. Everyone east should move west that can. That's why I looked at who can get to Augustana from Indiana or Ohio...etc. Fly teams out west and fly west teams that are going to fly anyway back east to back fill. It would be a complete injustice to put Whitman, Whitworth and Pitzer in the same quad. But they did an even more stupid thing last year with Oshkosh, Wittenberg and Marietta and they weren't even forced into that.

So...yeah.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 20, 2019, 09:44:43 PM

Looks like the Great Lakes hosts will end up being Marietta/Capital or Wabash/Wooster. Wabash being in Western Indiana would make it a little easier but its still just out of reach for Minneapolis schools.

More than likely the team that doesn't host between St. John's or St. Thomas is going to end up at Augustana, Neb Wesleyan or the WIAC host

You can get teams to Neb Wesleyan, you just can't be very creative like say at Marietta where you can pair teams from 5 different regions, maybe 6.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 20, 2019, 10:13:27 PM

Quote from: sac on January 20, 2019, 09:44:43 PM
Looks like the Great Lakes hosts will end up being Marietta/Capital or Wabash/Wooster. Wabash being in Western Indiana would make it a little easier but its still just out of reach for Minneapolis schools.

More than likely the team that doesn't host between St. John's or St. Thomas is going to end up at Augustana, Neb Wesleyan or the WIAC host

You can get teams to Neb Wesleyan, you just can't be very creative like say at Marietta where you can pair teams from 5 different regions, maybe 6.

Yeah, obviously not.

I would think that a lot of teams are gonna end up in the nominally Great Lakes sites from points east.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 20, 2019, 11:04:09 PM

Quote from: sac on January 20, 2019, 05:46:36 PM
Neb Wesleyan is a tough host to fix because their 500 mile radius includes relatively few options to avoid flights. Which narrows even more if end up hosting the sweet 16 round and pretty impossible to avoid at least one flight.

CCIW fans ought to keep in mind you can get Illinois Wesleyan, Wheaton and North Central to Nebraska Wesleyan without a flight but not Elmhurst.

Barring a CCIW tourney run by the Titans or the Bluejays that culminates in a win and a CCIW tourney trophy presentation to them by outgoing league commish Chris Martin in the Carver P.E. Center in Rock Island on February 23, the distance between Bloomington and Lincoln or between Elmhurst and Lincoln won't be relevant this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 20, 2019, 11:22:56 PM

Quote from: SaintPaulite on January 20, 2019, 08:51:50 PMHow much fun would Grinnell vs. Greenville be?

Fun, but extraordinarily unlikely in March.

Quote from: SaintPaulite on January 20, 2019, 09:26:51 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 20, 2019, 01:22:53 PM
For the record... MIAC teams also only have to try and schedule five non-conference games and I know the coaches are thus very picky about who they want to play. They understand they need to pick power-houses so they can improve their SOS situation. Sadly, they shouldn't be playing as many conferences games, but that's a different topic for another day. They also have a lot of power-house programs not that far from them (relatively speaking). That is a compliment to the region and one MIAC teams have been, more of late, willing to take on. But that also means maybe one major road trip a year.

Williams and many in the NESCAC have to schedule a LOT more games and admittedly there is a steep decline in the quality of teams after the NESCAC and NEWMAC in New England and the greater region. While some will lament that Williams and others should schedule MORE powerhouse teams, something not considered is the costs of that. They have to schedule more major trips or tournaments as a result and that adds up financially.

I'm not defending the NESCAC, but I think a lot of people look at situations through the same prism they look at their schools or conferences. Williams has 14 non-conference games ... two of which are taken up by the Little Three ... leaving 12-non conference games. That is more than twice what MIAC teams have to contend with. So on the math that MIAC's schedule one major road trip a year (tournament, multi-day travel, or distance to play an opponent), that means Williams has to do two or more to compensate. Let's assume for a moment schools really can only afford one major trip (minority can afford two and no one is like Thomas More women this year), Williams is now in a situation where this becomes unpractical and expensive - and maybe shut down by budgets and administrators.

Just a different way of looking things from someone who has covered this sport for a long time ... and loves so many different teams and conferences in this Division.

In other words ... things aren't equal and I agree with many that NESCAC, NEWMAC, and other conferences have proven themselves despite what sometimes it looks like on paper to those looking at it through different colored glasses.

The convo has kind of moved on, but...

The lack of conference games in the NESCAC is created by the NESCAC. It's not a bug; it's a feature. If they wanted to play double round robin because it's just so hard to make a non-conference schedule, they could and they would. They don't and don't, bceause that's a problem they want. Just like the West Coast Conference in D1 dropped 2 conference games so that Gonzaga could schedule more non-conference.

As for the MIAC, I think it would be interesting if they did what Scottish soccer does: split the league. You'd play everyone once 10 games, and then the top 5 and bottom 6 split. Top 5 makes the conference tournament right then, and the bottom 6 play for the last chance spot. Details to be worked out of course, but I think the general idea makes sense.

It's an interesting idea. I like it. The problem is that it could be logistically difficult from a facilities management point of view to not know if your team will be home or away on a given league night if you have other sports that use the gym in January and February (e.g., wrestling or men's volleyball).

Quote from: SaintPaulite on January 20, 2019, 09:38:17 PM
Well job 1 is getting teams to Nebraska Wesleyan, as it stands, and as many of the right teams as you can. Everyone east should move west that can. That's why I looked at who can get to Augustana from Indiana or Ohio...etc. Fly teams out west and fly west teams that are going to fly anyway back east to back fill. It would be a complete injustice to put Whitman, Whitworth and Pitzer in the same quad. But they did an even more stupid thing last year with Oshkosh, Wittenberg and Marietta and they weren't even forced into that.

So...yeah.

This seems to me to be the smartest way to handle it. Use two first-weekend flights to send teams from the East Coast to Walla Walla and a third to send the SCIAC rep somewhere. (Texas would be nice, if there are three teams in the field between the SCAC and ASC.) Use Capital, Wooster, and/or Marietta as funnels to draw in teams to the east of them while funneling the other Great Lakes teams westward to play @ Augie or @ UW-Oshkosh.

There's probably no way around a Bracket of Death this year, as Bob points out, but the injustice of it can be lessened if the committee is canny enough. An extra flight or two wouldn't hurt, of course, but I don't know how much budget flexibility D3 men's basketball is allowed in that regard.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 21, 2019, 09:16:11 AM

We've seen Grinnell and Greenville. The game takes three hours, there's 80 combined turnovers and 100 FTs.*

*I may be exaggerating, but it was excruciating to watch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 21, 2019, 09:26:41 AM

https://www.d3hoops.com/seasons/men/2016-17/boxscores/20161126_ccp8.xml?view=boxscore

There was only 59 turnovers. 🤔😎😋😂

99 free throws...close. Looks like that was Greenville's fault. Grinnell went to the line 71 times. Grinnell won151-128. I think some of us were picturing each team to score 180.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 21, 2019, 09:26:54 AM

There are always tricky considerations with the bracketing. What we found out from last year was that the committee picked the sixteen best teams, according to criteria, and essentially made those the hosts and made it work. Now, you can't always do that given the geographic and financial limitations, but it gives some insight into how they work: prioritizing the criteria. I think that's where we'd like them to be.

The reality is, though, that one team can change things so much (and which teams submit to host). It would be great to have a Texas orphan (or two) to play around with. It's why I always root for Colorado College to win the SCAC tournament. Then you've got odd possibilities - like Emory can get to Lynchburg, but not to RMC (if Emory is even in the picture this year).

Last year, doing the mock bracket, we had to basically move everyone as far East as we could get them for this same reason. I'm not too worried about the parity just yet, although I feel like the committee needs to lay down in front of a truck to keep Whitman and Whitworth from a potential first weekend meeting this year. We all deserve better, even if it costs $$$.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 21, 2019, 09:28:27 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 21, 2019, 09:26:41 AM
https://www.d3hoops.com/seasons/men/2016-17/boxscores/20161126_ccp8.xml?view=boxscore

There was only 59 turnovers. 🤔😎😋😂

99 free throws...close. Looks like that was Greenville's fault. Grinnell went to the line 71 times. Grinnell won151-128. I think some of us were picturing each team to score 180.

It perfectly illustrated what we're always saying: that The System is more about defense than offense. A sell-out press is just simply effective at forcing turnovers, even if you practice against it everyday. I will say, that Greenville team was very inexperienced; a matchup now would probably be a lot less sloppy.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on January 21, 2019, 11:56:38 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 21, 2019, 09:26:54 AM
There are always tricky considerations with the bracketing. What we found out from last year was that the committee picked the sixteen best teams, according to criteria, and essentially made those the hosts and made it work. Now, you can't always do that given the geographic and financial limitations, but it gives some insight into how they work: prioritizing the criteria. I think that's where we'd like them to be.

The reality is, though, that one team can change things so much (and which teams submit to host). It would be great to have a Texas orphan (or two) to play around with. It's why I always root for Colorado College to win the SCAC tournament. Then you've got odd possibilities - like Emory can get to Lynchburg, but not to RMC (if Emory is even in the picture this year).

Last year, doing the mock bracket, we had to basically move everyone as far East as we could get them for this same reason. I'm not too worried about the parity just yet, although I feel like the committee needs to lay down in front of a truck to keep Whitman and Whitworth from a potential first weekend meeting this year. We all deserve better, even if it costs $$$.

So, no more 2 from each of the 8 regions as hosts? Not protesting, just want to know the thinking before the hosts are selected.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 21, 2019, 03:16:21 PM

Quote from: ronk on January 21, 2019, 11:56:38 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 21, 2019, 09:26:54 AM
There are always tricky considerations with the bracketing. What we found out from last year was that the committee picked the sixteen best teams, according to criteria, and essentially made those the hosts and made it work. Now, you can't always do that given the geographic and financial limitations, but it gives some insight into how they work: prioritizing the criteria. I think that's where we'd like them to be.

The reality is, though, that one team can change things so much (and which teams submit to host). It would be great to have a Texas orphan (or two) to play around with. It's why I always root for Colorado College to win the SCAC tournament. Then you've got odd possibilities - like Emory can get to Lynchburg, but not to RMC (if Emory is even in the picture this year).

Last year, doing the mock bracket, we had to basically move everyone as far East as we could get them for this same reason. I'm not too worried about the parity just yet, although I feel like the committee needs to lay down in front of a truck to keep Whitman and Whitworth from a potential first weekend meeting this year. We all deserve better, even if it costs $$$.

So, no more 2 from each of the 8 regions as hosts? Not protesting, just want to know the thinking before the hosts are selected.

They moved away from guaranteeing two from each of the eight regions hosting several years ago. Sometimes it works out and they are conscious of the idea, but they are not slaved to it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 21, 2019, 03:26:50 PM

Quote from: SaintPaulite on January 20, 2019, 09:26:51 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 20, 2019, 01:22:53 PM
For the record... MIAC teams also only have to try and schedule five non-conference games and I know the coaches are thus very picky about who they want to play. They understand they need to pick power-houses so they can improve their SOS situation. Sadly, they shouldn't be playing as many conferences games, but that's a different topic for another day. They also have a lot of power-house programs not that far from them (relatively speaking). That is a compliment to the region and one MIAC teams have been, more of late, willing to take on. But that also means maybe one major road trip a year.

Williams and many in the NESCAC have to schedule a LOT more games and admittedly there is a steep decline in the quality of teams after the NESCAC and NEWMAC in New England and the greater region. While some will lament that Williams and others should schedule MORE powerhouse teams, something not considered is the costs of that. They have to schedule more major trips or tournaments as a result and that adds up financially.

I'm not defending the NESCAC, but I think a lot of people look at situations through the same prism they look at their schools or conferences. Williams has 14 non-conference games ... two of which are taken up by the Little Three ... leaving 12-non conference games. That is more than twice what MIAC teams have to contend with. So on the math that MIAC's schedule one major road trip a year (tournament, multi-day travel, or distance to play an opponent), that means Williams has to do two or more to compensate. Let's assume for a moment schools really can only afford one major trip (minority can afford two and no one is like Thomas More women this year), Williams is now in a situation where this becomes unpractical and expensive - and maybe shut down by budgets and administrators.

Just a different way of looking things from someone who has covered this sport for a long time ... and loves so many different teams and conferences in this Division.

In other words ... things aren't equal and I agree with many that NESCAC, NEWMAC, and other conferences have proven themselves despite what sometimes it looks like on paper to those looking at it through different colored glasses.

The convo has kind of moved on, but...

The lack of conference games in the NESCAC is created by the NESCAC. It's not a bug; it's a feature. If they wanted to play double round robin because it's just so hard to make a non-conference schedule, they could and they would. They don't and don't, bceause that's a problem they want. Just like the West Coast Conference in D1 dropped 2 conference games so that Gonzaga could schedule more non-conference.

If you tuned into Hoopsville when we talk to NESCAC coaches of late, a majority of the men we've talked to want to see a double-round-robin. The women has been a little more split, but we don't go as deep usually since the women's teams aren't as deep as the men's currently.

Remember, coaches don't run things as much as the presidents do in the NESCAC (i.e. football and other examples). While the coaches may end up being in favor of actually going to a double-round-robin (they actually have real fears about scheduling in a few years because of how the calendar is going to work out; two-plus weeks of basketball season before the NESCAC is allowed to start playing - weekend before Thanksgiving), but the presidents are ultimately going to have a say. So far, they have not wanted a trip to the extremes of the conference each year guarunteed. They believe that will mean lost class time and expenses they don't want to spend.

Yes, the presidents haven't seemed to see the big picture, but let's not make this a "the NESCAC wants this." It is more like a "this is how the NESCAC has done things and the presidents can't see it any other way." If the NESCAC presidents were fine with expenses and lost class time, NESCAC schools would have more than one "big" trip a year (a few do, but not consistently without a lot of alumni help) and they would most likely already playing in a double-round-robin.

It really isn't a problem "they want." As I alluded to before, coaches are worried about the schedule coming up in a few years. They aren't even allowed to start practices to Nov. 1 or play games until the weekend before Thanksgiving. In a few years, that times out to about two-plus weeks of basketball games without the NESCAC involved. The concern is most of their non-conference opponents will book up their non-conference games and not need the NESCAC to help fill. There will be, believe it or not, less teams to go around - because they certainly don't want to play just the bottom dwellers. I've heard that from multiple coaches now.

Also, the conversation about double-round-robin has been brought up, from what I can determine, at least each of the last two or three seasons in the NESCAC.

Quote from: SaintPaulite on January 20, 2019, 09:26:51 PM

As for the MIAC, I think it would be interesting if they did what Scottish soccer does: split the league. You'd play everyone once 10 games, and then the top 5 and bottom 6 split. Top 5 makes the conference tournament right then, and the bottom 6 play for the last chance spot. Details to be worked out of course, but I think the general idea makes sense.

MIAC isn't going to split the league. They are actually going in the opposite direction. BTW - several conferences in DIII already do this. USA South and ASC off the top of my head. (NJAC used to do it.) While the ODAC doesn't split the league, they do have the same scheduling model, though they adjust who teams play each season twice and once.

The MIAC women went to the "ODAC model" for the last few years. However, starting next season they are reversing course and moving back to the double-round-robin leaving them three non-conference games, I believe (men have five non-conf games).

The MIAC and others have to consider better scheduling models to free up more non-conference games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 21, 2019, 03:46:41 PM

Quote
Quote from: SaintPaulite on January 20, 2019, 09:26:51 PM

As for the MIAC, I think it would be interesting if they did what Scottish soccer does: split the league. You'd play everyone once 10 games, and then the top 5 and bottom 6 split. Top 5 makes the conference tournament right then, and the bottom 6 play for the last chance spot. Details to be worked out of course, but I think the general idea makes sense.

MIAC isn't going to split the league. They are actually going in the opposite direction. BTW - several conferences in DIII already do this. USA South and ASC off the top of my head. (NJAC used to do it.) While the ODAC doesn't split the league, they do have the same scheduling model, though they adjust who teams play each season twice and once.

The MIAC women went to the "ODAC model" for the last few years. However, starting next season they are reversing course and moving back to the double-round-robin leaving them three non-conference games, I believe (men have five non-conf games).

The MIAC and others have to consider better scheduling models to free up more non-conference games.

Just FYI what the ASC and ODAC do is not the Scottish model saintpaulie is talking about. The Scottish soccer model is a 12 team league they play 33 games, 3 against each other, after game 33 they split the league in two based on 1-6, 7-12 positions in the standings. Those groups then play 1 game against each other. They do this to match the 38 game schedule most of the rest of Europe's 20 team leagues follow along with allowing for more meaningful games at the end of the season.

The last 5 games of their season are open dates.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 21, 2019, 04:18:39 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 21, 2019, 09:26:54 AM
Last year, doing the mock bracket, we had to basically move everyone as far East as we could get them for this same reason. I'm not too worried about the parity just yet, although I feel like the committee needs to lay down in front of a truck to keep Whitman and Whitworth from a potential first weekend meeting this year. We all deserve better, even if it costs $$$.

What happens if the SCIAC also get 2 in (say PP run the table but lose in the conference final)? Do they stick the four west coast teams in a pod or split them up?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on January 21, 2019, 05:33:16 PM

Should we start a gofundme.com and all proceeds go towards an extra flight for splitting up the Whits?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 22, 2019, 01:14:28 AM

Quote from: sac on January 21, 2019, 03:46:41 PM
Quote
Quote from: SaintPaulite on January 20, 2019, 09:26:51 PM

As for the MIAC, I think it would be interesting if they did what Scottish soccer does: split the league. You'd play everyone once 10 games, and then the top 5 and bottom 6 split. Top 5 makes the conference tournament right then, and the bottom 6 play for the last chance spot. Details to be worked out of course, but I think the general idea makes sense.

MIAC isn't going to split the league. They are actually going in the opposite direction. BTW - several conferences in DIII already do this. USA South and ASC off the top of my head. (NJAC used to do it.) While the ODAC doesn't split the league, they do have the same scheduling model, though they adjust who teams play each season twice and once.

The MIAC women went to the "ODAC model" for the last few years. However, starting next season they are reversing course and moving back to the double-round-robin leaving them three non-conference games, I believe (men have five non-conf games).

The MIAC and others have to consider better scheduling models to free up more non-conference games.

Just FYI what the ASC and ODAC do is not the Scottish model saintpaulie is talking about. The Scottish soccer model is a 12 team league they play 33 games, 3 against each other, after game 33 they split the league in two based on 1-6, 7-12 positions in the standings. Those groups then play 1 game against each other. They do this to match the 38 game schedule most of the rest of Europe's 20 team leagues follow along with allowing for more meaningful games at the end of the season.

The last 5 games of their season are open dates.

I understand it isn't the Scottish model. I was trying to reference that other conferences split their divisions and double-round-robin in division and single-game the other division. The Scottish model doesn't really work over here, so I was trying to compare it to where conferences do split themselves up - though not based on standings obviously (though, the MAC does do that with their scheduling a little bit in football; top teams don't play the bottom teams based on the previous season's schedule ... though, like all good plans, I need to make sure they have stuck with the plan LOL).

Quote from: Smitty Oom on January 21, 2019, 05:33:16 PM
Should we start a gofundme.com and all proceeds go towards an extra flight for splitting up the Whits?

If only that would work ... or would be allowed. We went through this fact with Whitworth fans last season who didn't understand they couldn't control their destiny based on how much the alumni would or wouldn't put up to ship them out.

That said ... I know the committee is fully aware of the situation. Remember, they wanted to split up the Whits last season. That was their plan all along. Two things kept that from happening: no Texas teams had put into to host; the NCAA wouldn't allow all the flights that would result form that decision. One Texas team hosts, the NCAA may have been willing to spend the money.

Who knows what's going to happen this year. I don't think the SCIAC is in position to get a second team in right now. Those SOS numbers aren't going to look great, granted the SOS to WL% comparison is taking a back seat this season which may allow poor SOS numbers to be over-looked for strong WL% numbers ...

But now I am going down the rabbit hole WAY too soon. There is a LOT of basketball still to be played that is going to have a massive say in how these things shake out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 22, 2019, 06:44:54 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 21, 2019, 03:16:21 PM
Quote from: ronk on January 21, 2019, 11:56:38 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 21, 2019, 09:26:54 AM
There are always tricky considerations with the bracketing. What we found out from last year was that the committee picked the sixteen best teams, according to criteria, and essentially made those the hosts and made it work. Now, you can't always do that given the geographic and financial limitations, but it gives some insight into how they work: prioritizing the criteria. I think that's where we'd like them to be.

The reality is, though, that one team can change things so much (and which teams submit to host). It would be great to have a Texas orphan (or two) to play around with. It's why I always root for Colorado College to win the SCAC tournament. Then you've got odd possibilities - like Emory can get to Lynchburg, but not to RMC (if Emory is even in the picture this year).

Last year, doing the mock bracket, we had to basically move everyone as far East as we could get them for this same reason. I'm not too worried about the parity just yet, although I feel like the committee needs to lay down in front of a truck to keep Whitman and Whitworth from a potential first weekend meeting this year. We all deserve better, even if it costs $$$.

So, no more 2 from each of the 8 regions as hosts? Not protesting, just want to know the thinking before the hosts are selected.

They moved away from guaranteeing two from each of the eight regions hosting several years ago. Sometimes it works out and they are conscious of the idea, but they are not slaved to it.

I was more thinking about geography. Some years the bracket looks like one or more hosts got to host because it made the driving easier. That may not have been the case, but it definitely wasn't last year. That's all I'm saying.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 22, 2019, 04:30:10 PM

Here is my Week 7 ballot blog for those interested: http://bit.ly/2S0NYt7

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 22, 2019, 09:44:53 PM

Would it have mattered if you had known the result in Saint Paul?

For what it's worth (nothing) I thought both teams played hard and pretty well, but not sure either team has a go-to attribute or player. Stokman got his points but was pretty quiet in doing it. Of course he also did an excellent job on Nelson. If the Tommies can win up north, maybe they're a contender for one of those top 4 spots, but before that happens, too early to say IMO.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie77 on January 22, 2019, 10:25:04 PM

Between Nebraska Wesleyan, Augustana, Whitman and UW-Oshkosh, which team do you see as most likely to lose hosting privileges to the Tommies?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 22, 2019, 10:47:34 PM

Quote from: SaintPaulite on January 22, 2019, 09:44:53 PM
Would it have mattered if you had known the result in Saint Paul?

For what it's worth (nothing) I thought both teams played hard and pretty well, but not sure either team has a go-to attribute or player. Stokman got his points but was pretty quiet in doing it. Of course he also did an excellent job on Nelson. If the Tommies can win up north, maybe they're a contender for one of those top 4 spots, but before that happens, too early to say IMO.

No ... as the data and the voting are based on games through Sunday and I have never had to deal with a game that finished before our deadline.

And even if the Tommies win at SJU, I am not sure where I would put them. Too many games between now and then anyway.

I could also expand my top tier to include more teams. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 22, 2019, 11:02:30 PM

Quote from: augie77 on January 22, 2019, 10:25:04 PM
Between Nebraska Wesleyan, Augustana, Whitman and UW-Oshkosh, which team do you see as most likely to lose hosting privileges to the Tommies?

That is going to have to be based on other data, but amongst all of those teams, I think the SOS would favor all but UST considering they have less out of conference games.

I also eliminate Whitman from that conversation anyway ... as I don't see UST taking a hosting opportunity from Whitman (or Whitworth) in general. That decision will come down to other factors like one (or both) of the Whits implodes and only one team comes out of the NWC and hosting wouldn't be advantageous.

There is a real chance UWO could lose some games in the WIAC and that would open the door to UST/SJU ...

Though UST has one other problem to contend with for them to host ... the women's team. It is an odd year (2019) and thus, women have priority in the first weekend. Men will have priority in the second weekend. And for those who are new, no ... they both can't host together on the same weekend. No exceptions.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 23, 2019, 01:13:47 AM

Didn't think about that.

So probably UST wouldn't host the second weekend either if they got it. Seems unlikely it would be the best place for 4 teams to meet when the bracket was made to support a different first round host site.

Lot to happen before any of that matters.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 23, 2019, 03:51:14 PM

Quote from: SaintPaulite on January 23, 2019, 01:13:47 AM
Didn't think about that.

So probably UST wouldn't host the second weekend either if they got it. Seems unlikely it would be the best place for 4 teams to meet when the bracket was made to support a different first round host site.

Lot to happen before any of that matters.

Not necessarily true. We have seen second-round hosts who didn't host the first weekend often - especially when it was because of the women's hosting factor. A lot will go into that, but the problem UST will have it getting teams there. But if memory serves, the women at UST have hosted a second weekend.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Rofrog on January 24, 2019, 12:07:57 AM

Who would host the second weekend this year-is it the mens or womens turn I lose track?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on January 24, 2019, 12:22:01 AM

Women have priority 1st weekend, men the 2nd.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 24, 2019, 07:39:41 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Nebraska Wesleyan	18-0	def. Dubuque, 69-54; 01/26 vs. #22 Loras
#2	591	Augustana	18-1	def. Elmhurst, 78-73; 01/26 vs. Carroll
#3	573	Whitman	16-1	01/25 vs. Willamette; 01/26 vs. Pacific
#4	556	UW-Oshkosh	17-1	def. UW-Eau Claire, 85-63; 01/26 vs. UW-River Falls
#5	508	Whitworth	15-2	01/25 vs. Pacific; 01/26 vs. Willamette
#6	492	Hamilton	15-1	01/25 vs. Bowdoin; 01/26 vs. Colby
#7	463	St. Thomas	16-1	def. #13 St. John's, 74-72 OT; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 88-53; 01/26 vs. Carleton
#8	405	Williams	16-2	def. SUNY Oneonta, 73-54; 01/25 vs. Trinity (Conn.)
#9	391	MIT	16-2	def. Clark, 87-66; 01/26 vs. Emerson
#10	363	Marietta	16-2	def. Otterbein, 96-67; 01/26 vs. John Carroll
#11	362	Wabash	17-1	def. Ohio Wesleyan, 80-68; 01/26 vs. #18 Wooster
#12	320	Randolph-Macon	17-2	def. Virginia Wesleyan, 62-50; 01/26 vs. #14 Lynchburg
#13	319	St. John's	14-3	LOST to #7 St. Thomas, 72-74 OT; def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 89-58; 01/26 vs. Hamline
#14	308	Lynchburg	17-2	LOST to T#42 Guilford, 82-88 OT; 01/26 vs. #12 Randolph-Macon
#15	234	Christopher Newport	16-2	def. #33 Salisbury, 67-64; 01/26 vs. York (Pa.)
#16	232	Pomona-Pitzer	17-1	def. Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 73-57; 01/26 vs. La Verne
#17	223	Swarthmore	14-3	01/24 vs. Haverford; 01/26 vs. Franklin and Marshall
#18	198	Wooster	15-3	def. Allegheny, 81-72; 01/26 vs. #11 Wabash
#19	144	Amherst	14-2	def. T#36 Eastern Connecticut, 82-61; 01/25 vs. Colby; 01/26 vs. Bowdoin
#20	122	UW-Stevens Point	12-5	def. UW-Stout, 72-61; 01/26 vs. UW-Eau Claire
#21	117	Rochester	13-3	def. Case Western Reserve, 81-68; 01/25 vs. New York University; 01/27 vs. Brandeis
#22	99	Loras	15-4	def. Buena Vista, 75-74; LOST to Wartburg, 83-88; 01/26 vs. #1 Nebraska Wesleyan
#23	76	Capital	15-3	def. Muskingum, 89-69; 01/26 vs. Otterbein
#24	65	Wittenberg	13-5	LOST to DePauw, 75-77 OT; 01/26 vs. Allegheny
#25	61	Wesleyan	14-4	def. SUNY-Purchase, 91-80; 01/25 vs. Bates; 01/26 vs. Tufts

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	47	Nichols	17-2	def. Endicott, 76-69; 01/26 vs. Salve Regina
T#27	42	Plattsburgh State	12-4	01/25 vs. Brockport; 01/26 vs. SUNY Geneseo
T#27	42	North Central (Ill.)	16-3	def. Millikin, 93-92 OT; 01/26 vs. North Park
#29	27	Arcadia	15-3	LOST to Rosemont, 86-89; 01/26 vs. Stevenson
#30	25	UW-Whitewater	14-4	def. UW-Platteville, 88-80; 01/26 vs. #31 UW-La Crosse
#31	19	UW-La Crosse	13-5	def. UW-River Falls, 66-65; 01/26 vs. #30 UW-Whitewater
#32	18	Oswego State	14-2	def. SUNY Potsdam, 72-70; 01/25 vs. Fredonia; 01/26 vs. Buffalo State
#33	13	Salisbury	13-5	LOST to #15 Christopher Newport, 64-67; 01/26 vs. St. Mary's (Md.)
#34	10	Middlebury	14-5	01/27 vs. Trinity (Conn.)
#35	7	Gordon	17-2	def. University of New England, 100-71
T#36	6	Eastern Connecticut	14-4	LOST to #19 Amherst, 61-82; 01/26 vs. Plymouth State
T#36	6	Wheaton (Ill.)	14-5	def. Illinois Wesleyan, 86-77; 01/26 vs. Carthage
#38	5	Linfield	13-4	01/25 vs. Lewis and Clark; 01/26 vs. Pacific Lutheran
#39	4	Mary Washington	14-4	def. Southern Virginia, 75-73; 01/26 vs. Frostburg State
#40	3	Mount Union	14-4	LOST to John Carroll, 69-82; 01/26 vs. Ohio Northern
#41	2	Centre	15-3	01/25 vs. Millsaps; 01/27 vs. Birmingham-Southern
T#42	1	Guilford	14-5	def. #14 Lynchburg, 88-82 OT; 01/26 vs. Eastern Mennonite
T#42	1	Occidental	15-3	def. La Verne, 82-60 18:00; 01/26 vs. Caltech

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 24, 2019, 12:37:24 PM

The NCAA votes on a new Board of Governors composition this evening. All three divisions have to approve plan. This gives Division III an opportunity (w/Division II) to leverage for something better.

I have a couple of ideas, if it's not too late: bit.ly/2Huo4tV

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 24, 2019, 05:10:56 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=lusa4/54y1rrzkhahuuavu.jpg)

Suddenly the end of January is upon us! Where has the season gone? We are past the halfway point, conference action is now in it's second go-around (for most), and the matter of regional rankings and conference tournaments is becoming more real.

Teams who have had unbelievable starts, but have not faltered, are now in the spotlight. The question is no longer "can they keep this up?" But rather, the question has become, "how did they get this good?" Tonight, we ask versions of that last question.

Thursday on Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), We will hear from St. Thomas who hasn't been the MIAC dominator the last few years, but is back on top in a far more competitive conference. Oswego men have already knocked the SUNYAC boss, Plattsburgh off the pedestal. And Southern Virginia women have startled the entire conference. We find out how a first-year coach with no Division III experience has shocked everyone.

Plus, we chat with Oberlin's women's coach who has not only preached diversity, but created an environment for his program and the conference that reiterates open and safe environments. It has also thrust the team high into the NCAC race.

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. Thursday's edition will air live starting at 7:00 p.m. ET here: http://bit.ly/2FXlhXN (or via Facebook Live and Periscope simulcasts).

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or use any of the social media below.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- John Tauer, No. 7 St. Thomas men's coach
- Jason Leone, Oswego State men's coach
- Kerry Jenkins, Oberlin women's coach (WBCA Center Court)
- Matt Wardenburg, Southern Virginia women's coach
- James Wagner, CSAC Assistant Commissioner (NCAA Convention report)

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on January 26, 2019, 07:38:42 PM

What a week for 15-5 Colby. They beat a decent (not good) Husson team at home on Tuesday, then went on the road to beat #19 Amherst by 10 on Friday, and today beat #6 Hamilton by 8! Probably not enough to lift a team receiving zero votes into the top 25, but I'd be rather shocked if they again receive zero votes! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 26, 2019, 08:37:32 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on January 26, 2019, 07:38:42 PM
What a week for 15-5 Colby. They beat a decent (not good) Husson team at home on Tuesday, then went on the road to beat #19 Amherst by 10 on Friday, and today beat #6 Hamilton by 8! Probably not enough to lift a team receiving zero votes into the top 25, but I'd be rather shocked if they again receive zero votes! ;)

Really have to question the top 10 credentials of any NESCAC team now after this.

Fantastic50's data really shows why I'm standing by my view that the NESCAC has no desire to change its scheduling. Look at the SOS numbers they have. Then look at who they actually played and tell me that it's tougher than what St. Thomas (and others no doubt) has played.

The NESCAC benefits from the combination of the scheduling freedom they afford themselves, and a large number of teams and conferences to cherry pick from to boost their SOS with wins that look good on paper, but in reality aren't that great.

And you can see the result. Colby's not that bad, not that good. But the top of the NESCAC doesn't stand out against them. Because a lot of the NESCAC opposition is the same -- not that bad, not that good.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 26, 2019, 08:51:55 PM

I am quite confident that Colby is better than Emerson (a mediocre New England who St. Thomas beat by five) and significantly better than Brooklyn (who beat St. Thomas). St. Thomas has two very impressive wins. The rest of their schedule has been vs teams that aren't remotely close to top-25 caliber, so really a questionable comparison to make. Despite that, I don't question St. Thomas's top ten credentials.

Every year there are some surprises in Nescac precisely because it's a deep league with a lot of talented teams. Williams had a bad week of play, but seems to have recovered and has otherwise been rolling. The Ephs while not perfect are certainly top ten caliber as everyone below them has also had an off night (or two or three). Hamilton, Amherst, Midd and Wesleyan are all very good teams - maybe not top ten, but all top-30ish caliber. Midd and Wesleyan have both played a lot of very tough squads, with more to come. And Colby has waves of distance shooters. They are a boom or bust team but when they are shooting well they can look very good.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 26, 2019, 08:58:31 PM

Question: should Nebraska Wesleyan stay #1? They were an undisputed #1 before. They're the defending national champs. This is their first loss in regulation in more than a year, it's on the road, to a top 25 team that's a conference rival.

Augustana's loss is also at Loras.

Definitely looks like assuming that Whitman wins, the top 5 in Massey plus Whitworth, and possibly Pomona-Pitzer, are a pretty clear cut above the rest.

And man, Loras may not be in the top 10, but they may be who you don't want to see in your bracket in the first weekend if you are top 10.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 26, 2019, 09:40:37 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 26, 2019, 08:51:55 PM

Every year there are some surprises in Nescac precisely because it's a deep league with a lot of talented teams.

Didn't realize it was a NESCAC mulligan rule, not just Williams.

NESCAC is a decent high-end conference, but they're nothing unique. Losing to a midgrade team in that league at home is no better than in any of 10ish other comparable leagues.

You're really that confident that an Emerson team that beat MIT and Babson this month would lose to Colby at home? Really? Well...OK I guess.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 26, 2019, 11:01:59 PM

OK maybe not plus Whitworth lol.

I mean if it was a NESCAC team they'd get the benefit of the mulligan rule...

Turns out other conferences also have teams that present challenges, though more typically when the highly ranked team is on the road.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 27, 2019, 09:32:02 AM

Emerson got killed by Amherst, which just lost to Colby. Emerson beat MIT when they were missing half their roster. Again you are trashing the quality of teams who you know nothing about and likely have never seen play even once.

As for a "mulligan" rule it's you who have a double standard. Every team in the top 25 has at least one loss and the vast majority have two or more. By season's end most will have three or more. A fact that you seem to ignore completely. You seem to believe that if a Nescac team loses a game or two to a quality opponent they are immediately no longer top ten worthy and this confirms that they aren't any good. By that logic no team outside of maybe two are top-ten worthy. Lots of very good teams outside Nescac have a bad loss or two. Like, say, Brooklyn (certainly a worse loss than any top-tier Nescac team has suffered). It's not that Nescac gets a mulligan - everyone does. Or else we are just down to, everyone is overrated because no team is perfect and everyone is capable of losing to maybe 50 odd teams if they have a bad day. Pick nearly any top 25 team's worst result and it looks pretty bad in isolation.

Nescac year in and year out proves that it is a top-4 conference nationally. Saying it's a decent conference is like saying CCIW is a decent conference, nothing more. That's just silly. Other than WIAC there is no league in D3 clearly better than Nescac from year to year. Certainly not MIAC which is typically very top-heavy.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 27, 2019, 10:18:58 AM

I have not read through the "mulligan"-related posts closely enough yet to have complete context on the discussion, but just wanted to add...

I vote in the D3hoops.com Top 25. By this point, deep in the season, I basically give every team one mulligan. I have found that every single team will have at least one game over the course of the season that just doesn't line up with the rest of their results -- could be a loss, or maybe a win that was way closer than it should have been on paper.

Here is a very small sample of mulligan games I have been factoring in the last couple weeks:

* St. Thomas loss at Brooklyn
* Loras loss at Dubuque
* North Central home loss to North Park

I found that it was way too hard to sort things out when I was over-analyzing some of these anomaly games. When I implemented my own little "one mulligan" rule it got a lot easier to see the big picture. (I won't give two mulligans btw - the second clunker counts.)

Basketball games obviously are not played on a computer, with perfectly rationale results. Sometimes good teams play really bad...or the opponent plays really well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 27, 2019, 10:31:06 AM

I will be moving my #1 vote to Augustana. I think they are the best team...with Nebraska Wesleyan right there. I was waiting for the NWU @ Loras game to make the switch, as that provided a common opponent/location situation.

I think Augustana is better than NWU. I do think NWU's zone could potentially cause Augustana problems. NWU has great size and is one of the teams Augustana can't just physically manhandle. I like Augustana over NWU based on defense. Both teams are great defensively, but Augie opponents shoot just .391 (NWU opponents .415). The Vikings are elite defensively and that is just worth so much in terms of winning big games. For me this is the most likely national championship game...if the bracket allows for it.

I think Whitman is a great team but I think there is clear separation between the Blues and Augustana/NWU. Their full-court pressure defense is very unique and super effective, but good teams are going to get so many easy baskets off of it. I watched Whitman and Illinois Wesleyan play on a neutral court...a game Whitman one by 2 by hitting a 3 with 24 seconds to play. The stops IWU needed to get down the stretch...I think Augie and NWU get more than enough of those throughout the game to win comfortably.

I think UW-Oshkosh is better than Whitman. They are my #3.

And again, the bracket is gonna be interesting. The four best teams, probably, are in the Central + West.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 27, 2019, 12:52:10 PM

To be fair to the NESCAC, even the WIAC isn't clearly better than them year in and year out. Some, yes. Most, maybe.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 27, 2019, 01:19:06 PM

Good points all, Titan Q.

And by the way I don't want to suggest any disrespect for MIAC - Williams had two great battles deep in the tourney with really impressive MIAC squads, Gustavus in 2003 and St. Thomas in 2013. The Midd-St. Thomas semi in 2011 was a tremendous battle. And as it happens I'm married to a Hamline alum :).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2019, 03:56:06 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=m0130/8stsvt4e4lm36cnr.jpg)

Well, things certainly escalated quickly! Upsets a plenty. Conference races tightening. At the same time, some more clarity? Maybe not.

There will be plenty to talk about on Sunday's Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com).

Join us as Dave and his guests work to figure out what has happened in just the last few days, plus get a sense of what's to come. We will talk to teams who are near the top of their conferences races in the Northeast, Atlantic, South, and Central regions. Plus, we hear from a coach who continues to give back to the NABC and trying to improve how Division III is perceived within the coaching ranks.

Oh, and how will the Top 25s shake out on Monday?

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Sunday's show starting at 7:00 p.m. ET right here: http://bit.ly/2FQFb7v (or via Facebook Live and Periscope simulcasts).

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or use any of the social media options below.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Randy Tuggle, Greensboro women's coach
- Nicole Sarcone, Staten Island women's coach
- Gary Stewart, Stevenson men's coach (NABC Coach's Corner)
- Tod Murphy, Gordon men's coach
- Mike McGrath, UChicago men's coach
- Bob Quillman, IWUHoops.com (Top 25 Double-Take)

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 27, 2019, 04:10:48 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 27, 2019, 10:18:58 AM
I have not read through the "mulligan"-related posts closely enough yet to have complete context on the discussion, but just wanted to add...

I vote in the D3hoops.com Top 25. By this point, deep in the season, I basically give every team one mulligan. I have found that every single team will have at least one game over the course of the season that just doesn't line up with the rest of their results -- could be a loss, or maybe a win that was way closer than it should have been on paper.

Here is a very small sample of mulligan games I have been factoring in the last couple weeks:

* St. Thomas loss at Brooklyn
* Loras loss at Dubuque
* North Central home loss to North Park

I found that it was way too hard to sort things out when I was over-analyzing some of these anomaly games. When I implemented my own little "one mulligan" rule it got a lot easier to see the big picture. (I won't give two mulligans btw - the second clunker counts.)

Basketball games obviously are not played on a computer, with perfectly rationale results. Sometimes good teams play really bad...or the opponent plays really well.

I don't have a vote in the poll, but Bob's methodology is pretty sound, I think. If I did have a vote I'd probably tweak the one-mulligan rule a bit whenever possible to ensure that the head-scratcher in question was more definitively a case of the favorite playing really poorly than a case of the underdog playing really well -- exceptionally good or exceptionally lousy free-throw shooting is a classic example of this, since only one team takes part in a free throw -- but I like the one-mulligan idea.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2019, 04:18:47 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 27, 2019, 04:10:48 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 27, 2019, 10:18:58 AM
I have not read through the "mulligan"-related posts closely enough yet to have complete context on the discussion, but just wanted to add...

I vote in the D3hoops.com Top 25. By this point, deep in the season, I basically give every team one mulligan. I have found that every single team will have at least one game over the course of the season that just doesn't line up with the rest of their results -- could be a loss, or maybe a win that was way closer than it should have been on paper.

Here is a very small sample of mulligan games I have been factoring in the last couple weeks:

* St. Thomas loss at Brooklyn
* Loras loss at Dubuque
* North Central home loss to North Park

I found that it was way too hard to sort things out when I was over-analyzing some of these anomaly games. When I implemented my own little "one mulligan" rule it got a lot easier to see the big picture. (I won't give two mulligans btw - the second clunker counts.)

Basketball games obviously are not played on a computer, with perfectly rationale results. Sometimes good teams play really bad...or the opponent plays really well.

I don't have a vote in the poll, but Bob's methodology is pretty sound, I think. If I did have a vote I'd probably tweak the one-mulligan rule a bit whenever possible to ensure that the head-scratcher in question was more definitively a case of the favorite playing really poorly than a case of the underdog playing really well -- exceptionally good or exceptionally lousy free-throw shooting is a classic example of this, since only one team takes part in a free throw -- but I like the one-mulligan idea.

It gets to the point where you have to throw out a result from time to time especially now-a-days with so much parity.

It's why I tell people that when I vote for a #1 team - or any team really - I'm not expecting them to go undefeated. I am expecting teams to lose. That doesn't mean I still don't think they will be the best when they take that loss. And since no team really is going to go undefeated, one must have to either institute a mulligan or at least weigh that loss accordingly with all the rest of the teams out there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 27, 2019, 04:41:47 PM

JUST ASKING

Nebraska Wesleyan lost for the first time last night.
Augustana, Oshkosh, and Whitman already had one loss.
So what makes NWU's loss any worse than those of Augie, UWO, or Whitman? 🤷🏻‍♂️
Is it "worse" just because its more recent?
If not, why doesn't NWU deserve to maintain the #1 ranking? 🤔
After all, they don't have any more losses than anybody else.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 27, 2019, 04:54:31 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Nebraska Wesleyan	18-1	def. Dubuque, 69-54; LOST to #22 Loras, 76-84
#2	591	Augustana	19-1	def. Elmhurst, 78-73; def. Carroll, 68-56
#3	573	Whitman	18-1	def. Willamette, 120-78; def. Pacific, 108-77
#4	556	UW-Oshkosh	18-1	def. UW-Eau Claire, 85-63; def. UW-River Falls, 80-69
#5	508	Whitworth	16-3	def. Pacific, 116-107; LOST to Willamette, 93-95
#6	492	Hamilton	16-2	def. Bowdoin, 77-42; LOST to Colby, 78-86
#7	463	St. Thomas	17-1	def. #13 St. John's, 74-72 OT; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 88-53; def. Carleton, 72-45
#8	405	Williams	17-2	def. SUNY Oneonta, 73-54; def. Trinity (Conn.), 86-50
#9	391	MIT	17-2	def. Clark, 87-66; def. Emerson, 96-73
#10	363	Marietta	17-2	def. Otterbein, 96-67; def. John Carroll, 108-92
#11	362	Wabash	17-2	def. Ohio Wesleyan, 80-68; LOST to #18 Wooster, 84-91
#12	320	Randolph-Macon	18-2	def. Virginia Wesleyan, 62-50; def. #14 Lynchburg, 70-64
#13	319	St. John's	15-3	LOST to #7 St. Thomas, 72-74 OT; def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 89-58; def. Hamline, 74-62
#14	308	Lynchburg	17-3	LOST to T#42 Guilford, 82-88 OT; LOST to #12 Randolph-Macon, 64-70
#15	234	Christopher Newport	16-3	def. #33 Salisbury, 67-64; LOST to York (Pa.), 81-82
#16	232	Pomona-Pitzer	18-1	def. Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 73-57; def. La Verne, 100-61
#17	223	Swarthmore	16-3	def. Haverford, 64-62; def. Franklin and Marshall, 75-68
#18	198	Wooster	16-3	def. Allegheny, 81-72; def. #11 Wabash, 91-84
#19	144	Amherst	15-3	def. T#36 Eastern Connecticut, 82-61; LOST to Colby, 73-83; def. Bowdoin, 86-62
#20	122	UW-Stevens Point	13-5	def. UW-Stout, 72-61; def. UW-Eau Claire, 62-44
#21	117	Rochester	14-4	def. Case Western Reserve, 81-68; def. New York University, 71-55; LOST to Brandeis, 69-75
#22	99	Loras	16-4	def. Buena Vista, 75-74; LOST to Wartburg, 83-88; def. #1 Nebraska Wesleyan, 84-76
#23	76	Capital	16-3	def. Muskingum, 89-69; def. Otterbein, 93-61
#24	65	Wittenberg	14-5	LOST to DePauw, 75-77 OT; def. Allegheny, 80-58
#25	61	Wesleyan	15-5	def. SUNY-Purchase, 91-80; def. Bates, 85-75; LOST to Tufts, 71-75

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	47	Nichols	18-2	def. Endicott, 76-69; def. Salve Regina, 95-76
T#27	42	Plattsburgh State	14-4	def. Brockport, 88-82; def. SUNY Geneseo, 78-64
T#27	42	North Central (Ill.)	17-3	def. Millikin, 93-92 OT; def. North Park, 80-60
#29	27	Arcadia	16-3	LOST to Rosemont, 86-89; def. Stevenson, 79-78
#30	25	UW-Whitewater	14-5	def. UW-Platteville, 88-80; LOST to #31 UW-La Crosse, 63-82
#31	19	UW-La Crosse	14-5	def. UW-River Falls, 66-65; def. #30 UW-Whitewater, 82-63
#32	18	Oswego State	16-2	def. SUNY Potsdam, 72-70; def. Fredonia, 87-48; def. Buffalo State, 81-72
#33	13	Salisbury	14-5	LOST to #15 Christopher Newport, 64-67; def. St. Mary's (Md.), 97-77
#34	10	Middlebury	15-5	def. Trinity (Conn.), 75-38
#35	7	Gordon	17-2	def. University of New England, 100-71
T#36	6	Eastern Connecticut	15-4	LOST to #19 Amherst, 61-82; def. Plymouth State, 80-75
T#36	6	Wheaton (Ill.)	15-5	def. Illinois Wesleyan, 86-77; def. Carthage, 81-64
#38	5	Linfield	14-5	LOST to Lewis and Clark, 81-90; def. Pacific Lutheran, 81-50
#39	4	Mary Washington	14-5	def. Southern Virginia, 75-73; LOST to Frostburg State, 70-90
#40	3	Mount Union	15-4	LOST to John Carroll, 69-82; def. Ohio Northern, 79-71
#41	2	Centre	17-3	def. Millsaps, 68-57; def. Birmingham-Southern, 73-54
T#42	1	Guilford	15-5	def. #14 Lynchburg, 88-82 OT; def. Eastern Mennonite, 70-52
T#42	1	Occidental	16-3	def. La Verne, 82-60; def. Caltech, 72-62

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2019, 04:56:19 PM

Quote from: AndOne on January 27, 2019, 04:41:47 PM
JUST ASKING

Nebraska Wesleyan lost for the first time last night.
Augustana, Oshkosh, and Whitman already had one loss.
So what makes NWU's loss any worse than those of Augie, UWO, or Whitman? 🤷🏻‍♂️
Is it "worse" just because its more recent?
If not, why doesn't NWU deserve to maintain the #1 ranking? 🤔
After all, they don't have any more losses than anybody else.

You should tune into Hoopsville tonight ... that exact same debate will be had. I suspect you may be interested in the thoughts. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fantastic50 on January 27, 2019, 05:36:27 PM

Here's my new top 25, for what it's worth.
1) Whitman (18-1, 10-0 NWC, SOS 0.562)
2) Augustana (19-1, 11-0 CCIW, SOS 0.539)
3) Nebraska_Wesleyan (18-1, 9-1 ARC, SOS 0.594)
4) UW-Oshkosh (18-1, 8-0 WIAC, SOS 0.535)
5) St._Thomas (17-1, 13-0 MIAC, SOS 0.531)
6) St._John's (15-3, 11-2 MIAC, SOS 0.530)
7) Randolph-Macon (18-2, 10-1 ODAC, SOS 0.548)
8) Marietta (17-2, 11-1 OAC, SOS 0.549)
9) Wooster (16-3, 11-1 NCAC, SOS 0.550)
10) UW-La_Crosse (14-5, 7-1 WIAC, SOS 0.591)
11) Christopher_Newport (16-3, 6-2 CAC, SOS 0.547)
12) UW-Stevens_Point (13-5, 5-3 WIAC, SOS 0.583)
13) Wabash (15-2, 11-1 NCAC, SOS 0.529)
14) Williams (17-2, 5-1 NESCAC, SOS 0.575)
15) Capital (16-3, 11-1 OAC, SOS 0.525)
16) MIT (17-2, 7-1 NEWMAC, SOS 0.549)
17) Loras (16-4, 8-3 ARC, SOS 0.604)
18) Pomona-Pitzer (15-1, 10-0 SCIAC, SOS 0.489)
19) Amherst (15-3, 3-2 NESCAC, SOS 0.513)
20) North_Central_(Ill.) (17-3, 9-2 CCIW, SOS 0.505)
21) Swarthmore (16-3, 9-3 CC, SOS 0.556)
22) Wartburg (12-5, 8-3 ARC, SOS 0.582)
23) Hamilton (16-2, 3-2 NESCAC, SOS 0.540)
24) Wheaton_(Ill.) (15-5, 8-3 CCIW, SOS 0.564)
25) Whitworth (16-3, 8-2 NWC, SOS 0.509)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 27, 2019, 05:50:13 PM

Why place a team 3rd when they have no more losses than #1, and #2, and they have a higher SOS?
Why penalize them for having the same number of losses against a tougher schedule?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BobbyO on January 27, 2019, 05:58:06 PM

Quote from: AndOne on January 27, 2019, 04:41:47 PM
JUST ASKING

Nebraska Wesleyan lost for the first time last night.
Augustana, Oshkosh, and Whitman already had one loss.
So what makes NWU's loss any worse than those of Augie, UWO, or Whitman? 🤷🏻‍♂️
Is it "worse" just because its more recent?
If not, why doesn't NWU deserve to maintain the #1 ranking? 🤔
After all, they don't have any more losses than anybody else.

I will have to agree with you even though I am an Augie fan. Augie has had two lucky games, Carthage and Elmhurst, I would wait a week to see the results of the NC game in Naperville. An Augie win would make me think there might be time for a new lead dog. In the interim keep the target off of Augie's back.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 27, 2019, 06:06:41 PM

Quote from: fantastic50 on January 27, 2019, 05:36:27 PM
Here's my new top 25, for what it's worth.
1) Whitman (18-1, 10-0 NWC, SOS 0.562)
2) Augustana (19-1, 11-0 CCIW, SOS 0.539)
3) Nebraska_Wesleyan (18-1, 9-1 ARC, SOS 0.594)
4) UW-Oshkosh (18-1, 8-0 WIAC, SOS 0.535)
5) St._Thomas (17-1, 13-0 MIAC, SOS 0.531)
6) St._John's (15-3, 11-2 MIAC, SOS 0.530)
7) Randolph-Macon (18-2, 10-1 ODAC, SOS 0.548)
8) Marietta (17-2, 11-1 OAC, SOS 0.549)
9) Wooster (16-3, 11-1 NCAC, SOS 0.550)
10) UW-La_Crosse (14-5, 7-1 WIAC, SOS 0.591)
11) Christopher_Newport (16-3, 6-2 CAC, SOS 0.547)
12) UW-Stevens_Point (13-5, 5-3 WIAC, SOS 0.583)
13) Wabash (15-2, 11-1 NCAC, SOS 0.529)
14) Williams (17-2, 5-1 NESCAC, SOS 0.575)
15) Capital (16-3, 11-1 OAC, SOS 0.525)
16) MIT (17-2, 7-1 NEWMAC, SOS 0.549)
17) Loras (16-4, 8-3 ARC, SOS 0.604)
18) Pomona-Pitzer (15-1, 10-0 SCIAC, SOS 0.489)
19) Amherst (15-3, 3-2 NESCAC, SOS 0.513)
20) North_Central_(Ill.) (17-3, 9-2 CCIW, SOS 0.505)
21) Swarthmore (16-3, 9-3 CC, SOS 0.556)
22) Wartburg (12-5, 8-3 ARC, SOS 0.582)
23) Hamilton (16-2, 3-2 NESCAC, SOS 0.540)
24) Wheaton_(Ill.) (15-5, 8-3 CCIW, SOS 0.564)
25) Whitworth (16-3, 8-2 NWC, SOS 0.509)

I think this is really good. A few points of agreement that jump out...

* I think this has Whitworth much closer to where they belong...like last year, I think they have been way too high.

* I agree Rochester does not belong in the Top 25...and that for now, no UAA team belongs in. (One will emerge but has not yet.)

* I agree UW-La Crosse should be in...and fairly high.

* Agree on Hamilton positioning vs current D3hoops.com poll.

* Agree that both North Central and Wheaton from CCIW should be in.

* Agree with no Wittenberg

I mainly just disagree with your top 4 order. I like Augustana, Nebraska Wesleyan, UW-Oshkosh, Whitman. But I am mainly just going off the "eye test" there and one could arrange these almost any way really.

But really, really solid Top 25 here.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2019, 06:52:35 PM

As one who has seen Whitworth in person ... they aren't below a Top 10 team this season. This is the best Whitworth team I've seen take the court, period.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fantastic50 on January 27, 2019, 07:39:48 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2019, 06:52:35 PM
As one who has seen Whitworth in person ... they aren't below a Top 10 team this season. This is the best Whitworth team I've seen take the court, period.

Better than the 2011 team that took the #1 ranking into the postseason? That team missed out on Salem only because they had to play the sectiinal at Wooster, which pulled the upset in front of a packed & loud Timken Gym.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 27, 2019, 08:19:31 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 27, 2019, 10:31:06 AM
I will be moving my #1 vote to Augustana. I think they are the best team...with Nebraska Wesleyan right there. I was waiting for the NWU @ Loras game to make the switch, as that provided a common opponent/location situation.

I think Augustana is better than NWU. I do think NWU's zone could potentially cause Augustana problems. NWU has great size and is one of the teams Augustana can't just physically manhandle. I like Augustana over NWU based on defense. Both teams are great defensively, but Augie opponents shoot just .391 (NWU opponents .415). The Vikings are elite defensively and that is just worth so much in terms of winning big games. For me this is the most likely national championship game...if the bracket allows for it.

I think Whitman is a great team but I think there is clear separation between the Blues and Augustana/NWU. Their full-court pressure defense is very unique and super effective, but good teams are going to get so many easy baskets off of it. I watched Whitman and Illinois Wesleyan play on a neutral court...a game Whitman one by 2 by hitting a 3 with 24 seconds to play. The stops IWU needed to get down the stretch...I think Augie and NWU get more than enough of those throughout the game to win comfortably.

I think UW-Oshkosh is better than Whitman. They are my #3.

And again, the bracket is gonna be interesting. The four best teams, probably, are in the Central + West.

I don't know how to respond inline here, but whoa wait a minute here.

Didn't you say you give everyone a mulligan? I have no idea how that works (how do you decide what's a mulligan, what's a loss to a good team, etc.), but then you're dinging Whitman for a *win*? I feel like that's a foul for holding...a double standard. Did you scrutinize Augustana against *Carthage* the same way? I mean come on, please tell me that's not the basis for actual voting in the top 25. I would lose quite a bit of respect for the top 25 if that was the case.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 27, 2019, 08:42:33 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 27, 2019, 09:32:02 AM

Nescac year in and year out proves that it is a top-4 conference nationally. Saying it's a decent conference is like saying CCIW is a decent conference, nothing more. That's just silly. Other than WIAC there is no league in D3 clearly better than Nescac from year to year. Certainly not MIAC which is typically very top-heavy.

O rly? (not that I ever said the MIAC was top anything)
Per Massey:
2019 -- WIAC 1, NESCAC 5, MIAC 10; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC
2018 -- WIAC 1, MIAC 5, NESCAC 6; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC
2017 -- WIAC 1, NESCAC 2, MIAC 6; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC
2016 -- MIAC 3, WIAC 4, NESCAC 5; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC
2015 -- WIAC 2, MIAC 5, NESCAC 6; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC
2014 -- WIAC 3, NESCAC 4, MIAC 29; lowest SOS rank -- MIAC
2013 -- WIAC 1, NESCAC 8, MIAC 10; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC
2012 -- WIAC 1, NESCAC 10, MIAC 16; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC
2011 -- WIAC 1, MIAC 2, NESCAC 3; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC
2010 -- WIAC 1, MIAC 2, NESCAC 14; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC
2009 -- WIAC 1, MIAC 7, NESCAC 14; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC
2008 -- NESCAC 3, WIAC 4, MIAC 13; lowest SOS rank -- MIAC
2007 -- WIAC 2, NESCAC 8, MIAC 13; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC
2006 -- WIAC 2, NESCAC 7, MIAC 17; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC
2005 -- WIAC 1, MIAC 9, NESCAC 21; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC
2004 -- WIAC 1, MIAC 6, NESCAC 16; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC
2003 -- WIAC 1, MIAC 3, NESCAC 17; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC

Without getting ridiculously specific, that looks an awful lot like WIAC *well* better than both, year in, year out, and the MIAC and NESCAC off and on with neither really consistently in the top 4. I imagine the CCIW is the only other league that is *consistently* among the top 4 leagues.

And as I said before, the NESCAC fattens up their NCAA SOS artificially in a way that the NCAA doesn't detect, but Massey does.

Obviously, fantastic50's ranking system does as well, as he's deviated from NCAA SOS in several places in his top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 27, 2019, 08:54:02 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2019, 06:52:35 PM
As one who has seen Whitworth in person ... they aren't below a Top 10 team this season. This is the best Whitworth team I've seen take the court, period.

That can't really be valid reasoning.

It doesn't matter, though. Pomona and Whitworth might as well start scouting each other now, because they're gonna play in round 1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2019, 10:40:33 PM

Quote from: SaintPaulite on January 27, 2019, 08:54:02 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2019, 06:52:35 PM
As one who has seen Whitworth in person ... they aren't below a Top 10 team this season. This is the best Whitworth team I've seen take the court, period.

That can't really be valid reasoning.

It doesn't matter, though. Pomona and Whitworth might as well start scouting each other now, because they're gonna play in round 1.

Why can't that be a valid reason?

And yeah ... you might be surprised this postseason.

Stick around ... there is a lot we can reveal to you. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 27, 2019, 11:07:40 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2019, 10:40:33 PM
Quote from: SaintPaulite on January 27, 2019, 08:54:02 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2019, 06:52:35 PM
As one who has seen Whitworth in person ... they aren't below a Top 10 team this season. This is the best Whitworth team I've seen take the court, period.

That can't really be valid reasoning.

It doesn't matter, though. Pomona and Whitworth might as well start scouting each other now, because they're gonna play in round 1.

Why can't that be a valid reason?

And yeah ... you might be surprised this postseason.

Stick around ... there is a lot we can reveal to you. :)

Is there any objective data to support the assertion that they are a top 10 team? Maybe they have top 10 talent (or not, I don't know) but seems pretty well agreed that they don't have a top 10 body of work and it will be hard now for them to have.

Whitworth won't be seen as a team worthy of protection now after that loss, and while Pomona might be, I can't see the NCAA making an extra flight just to send them east and someone else west. I guess someone weird could win a conference tournament, and then 5 into 4 doesn't go and someone gets shipped east and that's probably one of Whitworth or Pomona. But that seems like the only way unless one of them just doesn't make the field.

Ironically, the old smaller bracket might have helped balance out bc someone would have had to go east (assuming Whitworth is in the field at all).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TheOsprey on January 27, 2019, 11:10:21 PM

I agree with D-Mac on Whitworth. I'd put their starting five up against any other first string. They should have beat Whitman and if it wasn't for the lame NCAA budget; the Pirates would have done some damage the past few years. Last year, they got beat by a more veteran team.

Whitman is the best team I've watched play this year, however, Augie has been my favorite for the past two years and I'm sticking with them.

Just my two cents.😌

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 27, 2019, 11:26:40 PM

Quote from: SaintPaulite on January 27, 2019, 08:19:31 PM

I don't know how to respond inline here, but whoa wait a minute here.

Didn't you say you give everyone a mulligan? I have no idea how that works (how do you decide what's a mulligan, what's a loss to a good team, etc.), but then you're dinging Whitman for a *win*? I feel like that's a foul for holding...a double standard. Did you scrutinize Augustana against *Carthage* the same way? I mean come on, please tell me that's not the basis for actual voting in the top 25. I would lose quite a bit of respect for the top 25 if that was the case.

No, I didn't ding Whitman at all for beating IWU in a close game. I simply said Augustana and NWU can guard them better than IWU did.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 27, 2019, 11:29:26 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 27, 2019, 11:26:40 PM
Quote from: SaintPaulite on January 27, 2019, 08:19:31 PM

I don't know how to respond inline here, but whoa wait a minute here.

Didn't you say you give everyone a mulligan? I have no idea how that works (how do you decide what's a mulligan, what's a loss to a good team, etc.), but then you're dinging Whitman for a *win*? I feel like that's a foul for holding...a double standard. Did you scrutinize Augustana against *Carthage* the same way? I mean come on, please tell me that's not the basis for actual voting in the top 25. I would lose quite a bit of respect for the top 25 if that was the case.

No, I didn't ding Whitman at all for beating IWU in a close game. I simply said Augustana and NWU can guard them better than IWU did.

No, you did. You downed them for winning a close game, then out the other side of your mouth gave Augustana credit for winning close games.

It's pure CCIW bias. At least you're not hiding it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 27, 2019, 11:38:45 PM

Quote from: TheOsprey on January 27, 2019, 11:10:21 PM
I agree with D-Mac on Whitworth. I'd put their starting five up against any other first string. They should have beat Whitman and if it wasn't for the lame NCAA budget; the Pirates would have done some damage the past few years. Last year, they got beat by a more veteran team.

Whitman is the best team I've watched play this year, however, Augie has been my favorite for the past two years and I'm sticking with them.

Just my two cents.😌

Then why has Whitworth lost 3? Well we know the reason -- defense. They gave up 202 points in two regulation games this weekend. They give up 46% from the field for the season and they don't have a great turnover ratio. They gave up 88, 100, and 95 in their losses.

If they don't win at Whitman this week, they may start to be a bubble team to even make the field. They'd be another non-Whitman loss away from being in real jeopardy.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on January 28, 2019, 12:00:46 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2019, 04:56:19 PM
Quote from: AndOne on January 27, 2019, 04:41:47 PM
JUST ASKING

Nebraska Wesleyan lost for the first time last night.
Augustana, Oshkosh, and Whitman already had one loss.
So what makes NWU's loss any worse than those of Augie, UWO, or Whitman? 🤷🏻‍♂️
Is it "worse" just because its more recent?
If not, why doesn't NWU deserve to maintain the #1 ranking? 🤔
After all, they don't have any more losses than anybody else.

You should tune into Hoopsville tonight ... that exact same debate will be had. I suspect you may be interested in the thoughts. :)

Dave,

Just so you're aware, I DID watch the show tonight. Two points.............

1. With regard to my assertion NWU should still be #1——Unless I misunderstood things, you agreed with me. I'm not sure why you couldn't just say that at the time I originally posted my opinion, but I am glad you voiced your concurrence. As further evidence NWU still deserves the #1 spot I would add that not only do they not have any more losses than Augie, Oshkosh, or Whitman, is that they have a higher SOS. So they have the same number of losses (1) as the other teams against a tougher overall schedule. 🤔

2. You stated you favor giving teams a "mulligan." However, you have a good degree of trepidation about 17-3 North Central belonging in the Top 25 mainly because of their two point loss to 4 win Ohio Northern in Las Vegas. However, you know NCC lost both their starting senior center (Bronec), and their starting senior point guard (Chang) to season and career ending injuries.
But it appears you forgot that it was only NCC's third game since losing Chang, and their first game since losing Bronec. It would seem that "mulligan" should include consideration of the fact they were naturally still adjusting to playing without the 2 senior starters. Their only loss since had been to one loss and possible new #1 Augustana. 😏

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 28, 2019, 12:16:58 AM

Quote from: AndOne on January 28, 2019, 12:00:46 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2019, 04:56:19 PM
Quote from: AndOne on January 27, 2019, 04:41:47 PM
JUST ASKING

Nebraska Wesleyan lost for the first time last night.
Augustana, Oshkosh, and Whitman already had one loss.
So what makes NWU's loss any worse than those of Augie, UWO, or Whitman? 🤷🏻‍♂️
Is it "worse" just because its more recent?
If not, why doesn't NWU deserve to maintain the #1 ranking? 🤔
After all, they don't have any more losses than anybody else.

You should tune into Hoopsville tonight ... that exact same debate will be had. I suspect you may be interested in the thoughts. :)

Dave,

Just so you're aware, I DID watch the show tonight. Two points.............

1. With regard to my assertion NWU should still be #1——Unless I misunderstood things, you agreed with me. I'm not sure why you couldn't just say that at the time I originally posted my opinion, but I am glad you voiced your concurrence. As further evidence NWU still deserves the #1 spot I would add that not only do they not have any more losses than Augie, Oshkosh, or Whitman, is that they have a higher SOS. So they have the same number of losses (1) as the other teams against a tougher overall schedule. 🤔

2. You stated you favor giving teams a "mulligan." However, you have a good degree of trepidation about 17-3 North Central belonging in the Top 25 mainly because of their two point loss to 4 win Ohio Northern in Las Vegas. However, you know NCC lost both their starting senior center (Bronec), and their starting senior point guard (Chang) to season and career ending injuries.
But it appears you forgot that it was only NCC's third game since losing Chang, and their first game since losing Bronec. It would seem that "mulligan" should include consideration of the fact they were naturally still adjusting to playing without the 2 senior starters. Their only loss since had been to one loss and possible new #1 Augustana. 😏

Yeah, the mulligan thing is pretty problematic. I said it mockingly, having no idea that people were actually going to find validity in it.

What's a mulligan game vs. just a loss to a good team? Does home/road make a difference? Time of year? Or is a mulligan game just whatever someone wants it to be? Do you get more credit if you haven't used your mulligan?

Judging teams by losses rather than wins is probably fraught with peril anyway.

This is the same as downing Whitman while crediting Augustana for a close win. The inconsistency that several respected people have shown today is really pretty shocking to me. I...didn't expect that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TheOsprey on January 28, 2019, 12:17:32 AM

Whitworth gave up less points @ home, than both the Tommies and Johnnies did against a common opponent. They also lost this past weekend to a lesser team as did the above squads.
Using the past two games for points allowed and fg % allowed are skewed by an opponent that runs the system is not even a fair assessment. They played their starters less than half the game against Pacific.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TheOsprey on January 28, 2019, 12:22:38 AM

Quote from: SaintPaulite on January 27, 2019, 11:38:45 PM
Quote from: TheOsprey on January 27, 2019, 11:10:21 PM
I agree with D-Mac on Whitworth. I'd put their starting five up against any other first string. They should have beat Whitman and if it wasn't for the lame NCAA budget; the Pirates would have done some damage the past few years. Last year, they got beat by a more veteran team.

Whitman is the best team I've watched play this year, however, Augie has been my favorite for the past two years and I'm sticking with them.

Just my two cents.😌

Then why has Whitworth lost 3? Well we know the reason -- defense. They gave up 202 points in two regulation games this weekend. They give up 46% from the field for the season and they don't have a great turnover ratio. They gave up 88, 100, and 95 in their losses.

If they don't win at Whitman this week, they may start to be a bubble team to even make the field. They'd be another non-Whitman loss away from being in real jeopardy.

And IF they do best their archrivals this week on the road, then the disagreement lessens.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 28, 2019, 12:27:34 AM

Quote from: TheOsprey on January 28, 2019, 12:22:38 AM
Quote from: SaintPaulite on January 27, 2019, 11:38:45 PM
Quote from: TheOsprey on January 27, 2019, 11:10:21 PM
I agree with D-Mac on Whitworth. I'd put their starting five up against any other first string. They should have beat Whitman and if it wasn't for the lame NCAA budget; the Pirates would have done some damage the past few years. Last year, they got beat by a more veteran team.

Whitman is the best team I've watched play this year, however, Augie has been my favorite for the past two years and I'm sticking with them.

Just my two cents.😌

Then why has Whitworth lost 3? Well we know the reason -- defense. They gave up 202 points in two regulation games this weekend. They give up 46% from the field for the season and they don't have a great turnover ratio. They gave up 88, 100, and 95 in their losses.

If they don't win at Whitman this week, they may start to be a bubble team to even make the field. They'd be another non-Whitman loss away from being in real jeopardy.

And IF they do best their archrivals this week on the road, then the disagreement lessens.

Absolutely. If they beat Whitman, it would be hard for them to play their way out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TheOsprey on January 28, 2019, 12:36:25 AM

Still alot of games to go and the regional rankings will be out soon. Then, the real arguments begin.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 28, 2019, 12:38:48 AM

Quote from: TheOsprey on January 28, 2019, 12:17:32 AM
Whitworth gave up less points @ home, than both the Tommies and Johnnies did against a common opponent. They also lost this past weekend to a lesser team as did the above squads.
Using the past two games for points allowed and fg % allowed are skewed by an opponent that runs the system is not even a fair assessment. They played their starters less than half the game against Pacific.

That FG% allowed was a season number. Oh they were way above that this weekend.

Only on this board could someone argue that winning by 20 is better than winning by 26 or 27. And how much did St. Thomas and St. Johns play their starters in that game? I don't know, and I don't care.

Unless they win at Whitman, top 10 seems like a real stretch. If they do win, it's still overlooking more than is overlooked for most teams to put them in the top 10, more than has been overlooked for Pomona.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CMSfan on January 28, 2019, 02:51:07 AM

I don't see a top-10 case for Whitworth at this point. I've watched a couple of their games and, yeah, they're good, but they lack depth and consistency. They've lost to UT Dallas and Willamette and I'm not seeing any signature wins. They played Whitman tough at home, but a) rivalry game; b) that game was UGLY all around; c) lol at folks saying they should have beat Whitman or considering that result a tie.

If they can go to Whitman on Tuesday and win, I'll eat my words. More likely, they end up with two more losses to Whitman and if they end up with five losses and no impressive wins, I'm not sure they make the tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 28, 2019, 02:51:34 AM

Quote from: SaintPaulite on January 27, 2019, 08:42:33 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on January 27, 2019, 09:32:02 AM

Nescac year in and year out proves that it is a top-4 conference nationally. Saying it's a decent conference is like saying CCIW is a decent conference, nothing more. That's just silly. Other than WIAC there is no league in D3 clearly better than Nescac from year to year. Certainly not MIAC which is typically very top-heavy.

O rly? (not that I ever said the MIAC was top anything)
Per Massey:
2019 -- WIAC 1, NESCAC 5, MIAC 10; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC
2018 -- WIAC 1, MIAC 5, NESCAC 6; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC
2017 -- WIAC 1, NESCAC 2, MIAC 6; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC
2016 -- MIAC 3, WIAC 4, NESCAC 5; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC
2015 -- WIAC 2, MIAC 5, NESCAC 6; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC
2014 -- WIAC 3, NESCAC 4, MIAC 29; lowest SOS rank -- MIAC
2013 -- WIAC 1, NESCAC 8, MIAC 10; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC
2012 -- WIAC 1, NESCAC 10, MIAC 16; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC
2011 -- WIAC 1, MIAC 2, NESCAC 3; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC
2010 -- WIAC 1, MIAC 2, NESCAC 14; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC
2009 -- WIAC 1, MIAC 7, NESCAC 14; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC
2008 -- NESCAC 3, WIAC 4, MIAC 13; lowest SOS rank -- MIAC
2007 -- WIAC 2, NESCAC 8, MIAC 13; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC
2006 -- WIAC 2, NESCAC 7, MIAC 17; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC
2005 -- WIAC 1, MIAC 9, NESCAC 21; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC
2004 -- WIAC 1, MIAC 6, NESCAC 16; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC
2003 -- WIAC 1, MIAC 3, NESCAC 17; lowest SOS rank -- NESCAC

Without getting ridiculously specific, that looks an awful lot like WIAC *well* better than both, year in, year out, and the MIAC and NESCAC off and on with neither really consistently in the top 4. I imagine the CCIW is the only other league that is *consistently* among the top 4 leagues.

And as I said before, the NESCAC fattens up their NCAA SOS artificially in a way that the NCAA doesn't detect, but Massey does.

Obviously, fantastic50's ranking system does as well, as he's deviated from NCAA SOS in several places in his top 25.

I agree with your thesis that the NESCAC benefits from playing a single round-robin, as I've been posting that here for years. But your use of Massey to hold up the MIAC as an alternative is flawed, because the MIAC also benefits from skewed scheduling. Your league is so big that its members can only play five non-conference games apiece (for a total of 55) while maintaining a double round-robin schedule. I don't disagree with the double round-robin; it's the only fair and honest way to determine a champ as far as I'm concerned, with everybody playing everybody else both home and away, and with no dodging of a return game against any of the other teams. But most of the other leagues in D3 play nine or eleven non-conference games apiece, so non-conference games (i.e., the games that provide Ken Massey's statistical program with its ability to cross-reference data across league boundaries) are a far greater proportion of the schedule for power conferences such as the WIAC, the CCIW, and the UAA than they are for the MIAC.

Compounding that is the issue of the MIAC"s relative isolation on the D3 map. Since Minnesota has no D3 schools to the north or to the west, MIAC teams are somewhat restricted by financial and classroom issues in terms of who they can play in non-conference games. As a result, MIAC teams end up playing a disproportionate number of non-con games against the UMAC, a weak league by D3 standards that happens to share the same footprint as the MIAC. This season, 20 of the 55 MIAC non-con contests (37% of the total) were crossovers with the UMAC.

Massey's not a perfect system as far as D3 men's basketball is concerned, and the MIAC is one of the leagues that gets distorted in terms of Massey's data set.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CMSfan on January 28, 2019, 02:54:38 AM

Quote from: TheOsprey on January 27, 2019, 11:10:21 PM
They should have beat Whitman and if it wasn't for the lame NCAA budget; the Pirates would have done some damage the past few years. Last year, they got beat by a more veteran team.

You're blaming the NCAA budget for Whitworth losing to CMS two consecutive years?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 28, 2019, 05:04:01 AM

Quote from: AndOne on January 28, 2019, 12:00:46 AM2. You stated you favor giving teams a "mulligan." However, you have a good degree of trepidation about 17-3 North Central belonging in the Top 25 mainly because of their two point loss to 4 win Ohio Northern in Las Vegas. However, you know NCC lost both their starting senior center (Bronec), and their starting senior point guard (Chang) to season and career ending injuries.
But it appears you forgot that it was only NCC's third game since losing Chang, and their first game since losing Bronec. It would seem that "mulligan" should include consideration of the fact they were naturally still adjusting to playing without the 2 senior starters. Their only loss since had been to one loss and possible new #1 Augustana. 😏

I'm never quite sure that you really get the point of the Top 25 poll, Mark. We went through this whole injury discussion with you two years ago when Connor Raridon got hurt. I don't think that you got it then, and I'm still not convinced that you get it now. The point of the Top 25 poll is to show how teams rank by their relative strength, as estimated by the pollsters. In other words, a team doesn't get extra credit for overcoming obstacles, whether perceived or real. The poll is simply an even-up judgment upon the collective competence of whatever players the coach is putting on the floor. Insinuating that NCC's loss of two role players -- because, starters or not, that's what Chang and Bronec were, role players who averaged only 43 mpg between the two of them and whose collective numbers added up to about ten points and six rebounds per game -- should allow the Cardinals to get a mulligan for losing to a bad Ohio Northern team, on the basis of a hypothesis that the Cardinals hadn't had enough time to adjust to a reconfigured rotation, is specious reasoning. Dave was in Vegas, remember; he called the game in which NCC eviscerated Husson (11-8) by 42 points the day before the Cardinals played ONU (4-15), and he called that Cardinals vs. Polar Bears game as well. And the guy who has picked up more of those missing 42 mpg than anybody else, Aaron Jones, went off for 18 points in 22 minutes against Husson (a game in which the end of the NCC bench got a full five minutes of garbage time, thereby taking away more minutes and points from Jones).

Whether they're on target or not, the pollsters have judged the Cardinals for who and what they are, not for who and what they used to be or could've been under happier circumstances. Besides, when the Cards were at full strength, they suffered an equally bad loss to another four-win team, North Park -- in fact, that was an arguably worse loss than the Vegas loss to the Polar Bears, because it didn't go down to the wire like the ONU game did and it occurred on North Central's home floor. Clearly, Chang and Bronec were not proof against mulligan-worthy losses.

Remember, I'm not trying to run down the Cardinals in this conversation. I know that Dave isn't sold on the Cardinals, but I am. I'm someone who has been advocating for North Central to be ranked since before the last poll, because my observation of D3 webcasts from across the country leads me to believe that there aren't 25 better teams in D3 than NCC. This is simply a matter of you picking the wrong argument on their behalf.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 28, 2019, 07:39:15 AM

Quote from: SaintPaulite on January 27, 2019, 11:29:26 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 27, 2019, 11:26:40 PM
Quote from: SaintPaulite on January 27, 2019, 08:19:31 PM

I don't know how to respond inline here, but whoa wait a minute here.

Didn't you say you give everyone a mulligan? I have no idea how that works (how do you decide what's a mulligan, what's a loss to a good team, etc.), but then you're dinging Whitman for a *win*? I feel like that's a foul for holding...a double standard. Did you scrutinize Augustana against *Carthage* the same way? I mean come on, please tell me that's not the basis for actual voting in the top 25. I would lose quite a bit of respect for the top 25 if that was the case.

No, I didn't ding Whitman at all for beating IWU in a close game. I simply said Augustana and NWU can guard them better than IWU did.

No, you did. You downed them for winning a close game, then out the other side of your mouth gave Augustana credit for winning close games.

It's pure CCIW bias. At least you're not hiding it.

Here is what I said:

"I think Whitman is a great team but I think there is clear separation between the Blues and Augustana/NWU. Their full-court pressure defense is very unique and super effective, but good teams are going to get so many easy baskets off of it. I watched Whitman and Illinois Wesleyan play on a neutral court...a game Whitman one by 2 by hitting a 3 with 24 seconds to play. The stops IWU needed to get down the stretch...I think Augie and NWU get more than enough of those throughout the game to win comfortably."

You are reading something into my statement that I did not intend. My point is simply that Whitman gives up a ton of easy baskets because of how they play (full court trapping defense). So it comes down to an opponent being able to stop them enough. IWU was not able to. I believe Augustana and NWU can based on their personnel and defensive schemes. That's all.

As far as CCIW bias, my voting in the D3hoops.com Top 25 has never reflected CCIW bias. Those who see my ballot each week could tell you that. Two votes ago I had just one CCIW team on my ballot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 28, 2019, 07:46:08 AM

Quote from: SaintPaulite on January 28, 2019, 12:16:58 AM
Yeah, the mulligan thing is pretty problematic. I said it mockingly, having no idea that people were actually going to find validity in it.

What's a mulligan game vs. just a loss to a good team? Does home/road make a difference? Time of year? Or is a mulligan game just whatever someone wants it to be? Do you get more credit if you haven't used your mulligan?

Judging teams by losses rather than wins is probably fraught with peril anyway.

This is the same as downing Whitman while crediting Augustana for a close win. The inconsistency that several respected people have shown today is really pretty shocking to me. I...didn't expect that.

What I have found from voting in a poll many years is that, late in the season, you drive yourself crazy trying to interpret the complete anomaly games - like North Central losing at home to North Park. You need to be able to dig into these games and kind of figure out what happened and why. And sometimes the answer is that a Top 25-caliber team really stunk up the gym. Or a below average team really played out of their minds. It's basketball...it happens.

I have found that voters often overreact to these types of games...and that the computer polls do a much better job with them, by just simply counting the data from these games and not overreacting to the "bad loss" or "bad game." So this is simply my way to trying to look at the big picture and making sense of it.

The D3hoops.com Top 25 is not a computer poll. It's a poll voted on by humans. So that brings in some human interpretations in the effort to determine what the right order is for the Top 25. We all do our best, and work extremely hard, to evaluate teams as best we can.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 28, 2019, 08:45:31 AM

Reading over the whole thread this morning, two things I want to bring up:

First, the only definitive data we really ever have for comparing two teams in a head-to-head match-up. Things like common opponents give us good data, but it's far from definitive for anything. The same goes for whatever formulas the various statistical rankings use to rank teams. That doesn't make them wrong. It might even (and often does) make them better than the human rankings, but none of it is really definitive.

Even when teams play each other, the small sample size doesn't actually prove anything other than who scored more points on a given night.

I don't do this religiously, but when ranking, I tend to look at good wins, acceptable losses, and head-scratchers (which includes both close wins over inferior teams and losses that don't make sense) and try to balance those factors with what I've seen on video. Sometimes that means a team like IWU, which should be better, just isn't, and it takes me longer to drop them.

Second,

Per Bob's comment on Whitman - I wonder if Whitworth is able to hang with them because Whitworth has a talented team that generally protects the ball well. Teams with a strong offense can often hang with Whitman, because the press provides a few open baskets. I actually believe Whitman would do better against those teams in a half-court set, because Whitman does really have a very strong half-court defense.

They don't have the same number of losses, but I wonder if Whitworth is more in the IWU camp (talent without consistent results) than in the Top Ten discussion. They have the talent for it, but there isn't a great schedules to give us the kind of evidence that would make me more comfortable understanding who they are.

I've still got them pretty high up, but now I'm wondering if even a good performance against Whitman this week should be enough to solidify the position.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2019, 01:02:55 PM

Quote from: AndOne on January 28, 2019, 12:00:46 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2019, 04:56:19 PM
Quote from: AndOne on January 27, 2019, 04:41:47 PM
JUST ASKING

Nebraska Wesleyan lost for the first time last night.
Augustana, Oshkosh, and Whitman already had one loss.
So what makes NWU's loss any worse than those of Augie, UWO, or Whitman? 🤷🏻‍♂️
Is it "worse" just because its more recent?
If not, why doesn't NWU deserve to maintain the #1 ranking? 🤔
After all, they don't have any more losses than anybody else.

You should tune into Hoopsville tonight ... that exact same debate will be had. I suspect you may be interested in the thoughts. :)

Dave,

Just so you're aware, I DID watch the show tonight. Two points.............

1. With regard to my assertion NWU should still be #1——Unless I misunderstood things, you agreed with me. I'm not sure why you couldn't just say that at the time I originally posted my opinion, but I am glad you voiced your concurrence. As further evidence NWU still deserves the #1 spot I would add that not only do they not have any more losses than Augie, Oshkosh, or Whitman, is that they have a higher SOS. So they have the same number of losses (1) as the other teams against a tougher overall schedule. 🤔

I didn't say it when you originally posted it ... because I want people to tune into the show. I would like to drive viewership if at all possible. The more watch, the better chance I have at getting advertisers interested in joining the program.

BTW - which SOS are you using? I eyeball the SOS until about this point in the season when I start to take the NCAA number a little more seriously and will glance at Massey to be sure I'm not missing someone or something.

The NCAA SOS is way out of balance until about this time of the season because of the number of conference games that have not been played. That is one of the biggest reasons questions about one earlier set of regional rankings has always been met with "the data would give us some really out-of-whack results." Something that holds up when the first regional rankings are out and some teams never are seen after that point.

And I think the flaws with Massey aren't tamped down by other results enough until this point of the season along with the conference games not allowing it's numbers to adjust either.

Quote from: AndOne on January 28, 2019, 12:00:46 AM
2. You stated you favor giving teams a "mulligan." However, you have a good degree of trepidation about 17-3 North Central belonging in the Top 25 mainly because of their two point loss to 4 win Ohio Northern in Las Vegas. However, you know NCC lost both their starting senior center (Bronec), and their starting senior point guard (Chang) to season and career ending injuries.
But it appears you forgot that it was only NCC's third game since losing Chang, and their first game since losing Bronec. It would seem that "mulligan" should include consideration of the fact they were naturally still adjusting to playing without the 2 senior starters. Their only loss since had been to one loss and possible new #1 Augustana. 😏

As has been pointed out, I am fully aware of where North Central was when I saw them in Vegas. It wasn't that hard to see Chang scooting along behind the bench - something we made light of during both games they played. Furthermore, I saw them dismantle Husson and then get dismantled by Ohio Northern. That causes more questions than answers.

But if we are talking mulligans, why are you stuck on the ONU result? If you want me to mulligan the ONU result, then I guess I should lean hard on the North Park result. There are TWO games for North Central that give me pause and if I were to mulligan just one, which one do you want me to do that? So, I mulligan North Park when they were basically at full strength? Or should I ignore that result and focus on the ones that have the roster they currently have at their disposal.

And while I understand your argument about they weren't at full-strength and still adjusting, the problem with that is they eviscerated Husson the night before. Husson v ONU might have been a draw. If the results had been in reverse, then I might buy into the argument a bit more.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2019, 01:05:55 PM

Quote from: CMSfan on January 28, 2019, 02:54:38 AM
Quote from: TheOsprey on January 27, 2019, 11:10:21 PM
They should have beat Whitman and if it wasn't for the lame NCAA budget; the Pirates would have done some damage the past few years. Last year, they got beat by a more veteran team.

You're blaming the NCAA budget for Whitworth losing to CMS two consecutive years?

I'd argue that was an unfair matchup for both teams. Both squads had the capabilities the last two seasons to be at least second weekend programs, but unfortunately had to face off in the first round.

And while Hopkins has six losses, I think their win of JHU is a bit more a result than you give them credit. I also put stock in their win over E&H, Linfield, and GFU (though, less so since they have been struggling of late). Those teams are better than maybe you are giving them credit.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 28, 2019, 02:02:55 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2019, 01:02:55 PM
As has been pointed out, I am fully aware of where North Central was when I saw them in Vegas. It wasn't that hard to see Chang scooting along behind the bench - something we made light of during both games they played. Furthermore, I saw them dismantle Husson and then get dismantled by Ohio Northern. That causes more questions than answers.

To be fair to Mark, North Central dismantled Husson but was not dismantled by Ohio Northern. The ONU vs. NCC contest ended up being a 63-61 decision that was only decided at the buzzer when Blaise Meredith missed a close-in shot that he should've been able to hit in his sleep. The Cardinals played a very crappy basketball game, but they still had a golden opportunity to send it into overtime and win, especially since ONU's leading scorer in that game (Daniel Donner) had already fouled out.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2019, 01:02:55 PMBut if we are talking mulligans, why are you stuck on the ONU result? If you want me to mulligan the ONU result, then I guess I should lean hard on the North Park result. There are TWO games for North Central that give me pause and if I were to mulligan just one, which one do you want me to do that? So, I mulligan North Park when they were basically at full strength? Or should I ignore that result and focus on the ones that have the roster they currently have at their disposal.

Yep, that's basically the point I made last night -- painfully, I might add, since I don't particularly enjoy using my alma mater as the catalyst for somebody else's bad loss.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2019, 01:02:55 PMAnd while I understand your argument about they weren't at full-strength and still adjusting, the problem with that is they eviscerated Husson the night before. Husson v ONU might have been a draw. If the results had been in reverse, then I might buy into the argument a bit more.

Exactly. The Husson game negates Mark's argument.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2019, 02:22:50 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 28, 2019, 02:02:55 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2019, 01:02:55 PM
As has been pointed out, I am fully aware of where North Central was when I saw them in Vegas. It wasn't that hard to see Chang scooting along behind the bench - something we made light of during both games they played. Furthermore, I saw them dismantle Husson and then get dismantled by Ohio Northern. That causes more questions than answers.

To be fair to Mark, North Central dismantled Husson but was not dismantled by Ohio Northern. The ONU vs. NCC contest ended up being a 63-61 decision that was only decided at the buzzer when Blaise Meredith missed a close-in shot that he should've been able to hit in his sleep. The Cardinals played a very crappy basketball game, but they still had a golden opportunity to send it into overtime and win, especially since ONU's leading scorer in that game (Daniel Donner) had already fouled out.

You are right ... i got excited with my word usage and didn't calm myself down. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 28, 2019, 03:03:26 PM

Poll:
https://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2018-19/week8

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CMSfan on January 28, 2019, 03:51:12 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2019, 01:05:55 PM
Quote from: CMSfan on January 28, 2019, 02:54:38 AM
Quote from: TheOsprey on January 27, 2019, 11:10:21 PM
They should have beat Whitman and if it wasn't for the lame NCAA budget; the Pirates would have done some damage the past few years. Last year, they got beat by a more veteran team.

You're blaming the NCAA budget for Whitworth losing to CMS two consecutive years?

I'd argue that was an unfair matchup for both teams. Both squads had the capabilities the last two seasons to be at least second weekend programs, but unfortunately had to face off in the first round.

I suppose, but even as a CMS fan I'm not sure the Stags did enough in the regular season either of the last two years to say it was unfair to play a team like Whitworth in the first round. It's not great to have Whitworth and Whitman in the same group for multiple reasons, but Whitman has not actually been Whitworth's stumbling block in the tournament.

My point is this: I think if Whitworth couldn't get past CMS the past two years, it's hard to say they "would have done some damage" in another group. I think it's more accurate to say that Whitworth has been a very good, but not particularly great team recently, despite being highly ranked. And I think they continue to be overrated this year.

I'd be curious to hear a rationale for Whitworth being a top-10 team based on actual results this year. They have a really bad recent loss to Willamette and an also-not-great loss to UT Dallas. Their wins over Linfield and George Fox were awfully close. And unless I'm missing something they have no wins over teams currently receiving votes. They have a strong starting 5 and pass the eye test, but with so many flaws (lack of depth, lack of consistency, etc.) I just find it curious that they continue to get so much love in the polls.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2019, 04:01:20 PM

I think moving CMS to another part of the country was very easy to do last year ... they didn't have to go to the Northwest especially since the Texas schools also had to be shipped out. The opportunity was there, but I think the committee missed it having to deal with the fact no Texas school had put into host. It got masked and missed.

Also, hard to say "Whitworth hasn't been Whitman's stumbling block in the tournament" since they haven't played in the tournament in several years. BTW - two years ago the only stumbling block Whitman ended up facing was in the national semifinals. Not too shabby. Though, Whitworth wasn't as good then as they are now.

Per your point in bold ... there are results on paper and then there is watching the team both on video and in person. I have seen Whitworth in person ... I walked away impressed with them more this year than any other time I've seen them up close. Yeah, the loss to Willamette is a head scratcher, but as I said on Hoopsville the two concerns I have for Whitworth have popped up in their two losses other than Whitman: deep bench not as talented (drop off) and not being focused on playing at a high level when playing lesser talent. That isn't unique to Whitworth as a lot of teams struggle with those two problems. I don't agree with the UT-Dallas result as much as you, but it still plays a roll and I moved Whitworth to 10 this week. I feel Linfield is a far better team than people realize (also saw them in person and watched a lot on video; remember, they had Nebraska Wesleyan on the ropes as well) and GFU isn't looking as strong now, but they have been a far better team this season.

I also don't put as much stock in the "no others receiving votes" thing with so much parity in DIII men's basketball now. There are very good teams not getting votes because we can't vote for everyone. There are teams who are going to make runs the rest of this season or in the conference (even NCAA) tournament that will surprise people because "they aren't on the Top 25 poll or votes." Parity is deep and just because one isn't being voted for in the Top 25 doesn't mean one isn't a good team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CMSfan on January 28, 2019, 04:38:04 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2019, 04:01:20 PM
Also, hard to say "Whitworth hasn't been Whitman's stumbling block in the tournament" since they haven't played in the tournament in several years.

Agreed, it would be really hard to say that...which is why I didn't say that. (These silly Whits are hard to keep straight...editing this post with Blues and Pirates!) I said the Blues haven't been the Pirates stumbling block. Simply making the point that the thing that has made the bracket unfair (Blues and Pirates in the same quad) hasn't actually been an issue for the Pirates. Unless you think having the Pirates and CMS in the same grouping was unfair in itself, which I think is a hard case to make.

I'll concede that the Pirates can look like a top-10 team at times, but they can also look like a team that's a lot worse than that. Perhaps I'm valuing consistency more than I should.

I'll also concede that with all the parity it's certainly muddy outside the top few teams. I'm probably hung up on my strong feeling that Pomona is better than the Pirates. I've seen both teams play and would definitely pick Pomona in a head-to-head matchup because they're deeper and more consistent. I know their SOS is weak, but with the win over the Blues and a few good conference wins (CMS twice, Oxy), I think their body of work is stronger than the Pirates.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on January 28, 2019, 07:32:18 PM

Not to throw Fantastic50's great data and projections in here... but that is exactly what I am doing, so I hope he does not mind ;D He actually has Whitworth on the outside looking in right now with only a 38% chance of making the tournament should they not win the NWC tourney. A lot of things CMSfan has stated come up in their resume. SOS hovering around.500, 2 interesting losses and lack of wins vs. teams that will be regionally ranked are all definitely hurting the Pirates. Probably would be a shock to most of the people around the program considering they have been in the top 25 all season long.

With that said, and I have only watched Whitworth once when they played Whitman, they did seem to be a very good team in that game. I will defer to people who watch more and know more about other teams nationally if their 'eye test' is top 10 caliber, as I do not have the time unfortunately to watch a lot of teams outside the West and Central regions.

Everyone has their own way of voting for the top 25. If you rely heavily on the data and resume you would be bearish on Whitworth based on their results to date, but if you rely more heavily on the eye test/players/talent on the roster it is reasonable to be more bullish on the team from Spokane.

I just find this case to be quite interesting because both sides of this dichotomy may not just have valid points, but both sides could be more correct than not.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiko on January 28, 2019, 09:07:58 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2019, 04:01:20 PM
I also don't put as much stock in the "no others receiving votes" thing with so much parity in DIII men's basketball now. There are very good teams not getting votes because we can't vote for everyone. There are teams who are going to make runs the rest of this season or in the conference (even NCAA) tournament that will surprise people because "they aren't on the Top 25 poll or votes." Parity is deep and just because one isn't being voted for in the Top 25 doesn't mean one isn't a good team.

To this point, and I don't typically agree with Dave on much:

Last year's final four entered the tournament with these rankings in the D3hoops.com poll:

Nebraska Wesleyan (winner): #26; 51 votes
UW-Oshkosh (runner-up): #24; 107 votes
Ramapo (semifinalist): unranked; received no votes
Springfield (semifinalist): unranked; received no votes

Springfield received a cumulative total of two points in the poll across the 13 polls taken before the tournament (both in Week 2). Ramapo fell out of the top 25 after Week 6 and received no votes from Week 11 onward.

More to the point, in the poll that mirrors this juncture of the season (Jan 26 last year), Oshkosh was ranked #18, and in that poll, neither Nebraska Wesleyan, Ramapo, nor Springfield received a single vote.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CMSfan on January 28, 2019, 10:43:38 PM

I dunno, I kind of think pointing out who is getting votes in the top 25 pool is relevant on a "Top 25 talk" board...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Rofrog on January 28, 2019, 10:51:53 PM

Agree

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiko on January 28, 2019, 11:31:14 PM

Quote from: CMSfan on January 28, 2019, 10:43:38 PM
I dunno, I kind of think pointing out who is getting votes in the top 25 pool is relevant on a "Top 25 talk" board...

You are correct -- it absolutely is relevant. Nobody is suggesting it isn't.

The point is that at least one voter (Dave) noted that he doesn't use "wins over teams receiving votes" as a criteria to differentiate in his ranking as he feels that, with parity being ever-present in today's D3 landscape, there are a lot of good teams not receiving votes. And last year's final four qualifiers, coupled with their ranking at this juncture of the season, suggests that he is right not to lean on this metric as three of our four eventual Salem qualifiers were not getting votes at this time last year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 29, 2019, 12:04:09 AM

Quote from: kiko on January 28, 2019, 11:31:14 PM
Quote from: CMSfan on January 28, 2019, 10:43:38 PM
I dunno, I kind of think pointing out who is getting votes in the top 25 pool is relevant on a "Top 25 talk" board...

You are correct -- it absolutely is relevant. Nobody is suggesting it isn't.

The point is that at least one voter (Dave) noted that he doesn't use "wins over teams receiving votes" as a criteria to differentiate in his ranking as he feels that, with parity being ever-present in today's D3 landscape, there are a lot of good teams not receiving votes. And last year's final four qualifiers, coupled with their ranking at this juncture of the season, suggests that he is right not to lean on this metric as three of our four eventual Salem qualifiers were not getting votes at this time last year.

Yep ... this.

Quote from: CMSfan on January 28, 2019, 04:38:04 PM

Agreed, it would be really hard to say that...which is why I didn't say that. (These silly Whits are hard to keep straight...editing this post with Blues and Pirates!) I said the Blues haven't been the Pirates stumbling block. Simply making the point that the thing that has made the bracket unfair (Blues and Pirates in the same quad) hasn't actually been an issue for the Pirates. Unless you think having the Pirates and CMS in the same grouping was unfair in itself, which I think is a hard case to make.

My mistake. Even reading your comments multiple times, I still messed the Whits up - something that can happen and will happen even with me. Blues and Pirates does make more sense. LOL

BTW, I did absolutely argue that having the Pirates and CMIS in the same grouping was unfair.

Here...

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2019, 01:05:55 PM
I'd argue that was an unfair matchup for both teams. Both squads had the capabilities the last two seasons to be at least second weekend programs, but unfortunately had to face off in the first round.

And here...

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2019, 04:01:20 PM
I think moving CMS to another part of the country was very easy to do last year ... they didn't have to go to the Northwest especially since the Texas schools also had to be shipped out. The opportunity was there, but I think the committee missed it having to deal with the fact no Texas school had put into host. It got masked and missed.

And I don't think it is that hard an argument to make. First off, the committee usually has a mandate, directive (or whatever), that they do not repeat first round match-ups. It became a bit of a joke on the women's side when Regis and Montclair State played each other in the first round three years in a row. Something we at D3hoops.com and Hoopsville made light of to the committee and they absolutely took note, finally (there was a lot of turnover on the committee in those years, but they also failed to really look at previous years' brackets). So knowing that, I feel the committee had a lot of justification to NOT have those two face off last season.

There was many opportunities and options to not have it happen. They were already shipping three teams out of Texas and CMS out of California. It doesn't matter where they go. Just because Whitman was "closer" to CMS doesn't mean they had to go there. The cost of a flight (flying a team), when bracketing, is considered flat - they don't consider what the costs are where they are sending them. Thus the adage, "a flight is a flight." So, the committee easily could have shipped in Sul Ross State into that bracket and had them face Whitworth. They then would have shipped CMS to Platteville.

I did not consider moving LeTourneau instead of Sul Ross State. Sending CMS to Atlanta isn't what I call the best option. I didn't like it when Whitworth was sent there a few years ago for the opening weekend, either.

BTW - THIS is why Whitworth was stuck in Washington State. Had ONE Texas team (Schreiner or LeTourneau) put in to host, OR the committee happened to pick East Texas Baptist as an at-large, then there would have been a bracket in Texas that Whitworth could have been shipped to (or other options). But because three Texas schools had to be flown out of the state, the NCAA was not going to give the committee a fifth flight, knowing there were other flights to come in the second weekend, to get Whitworth out of Washington.

Quote from: CMSfan on January 28, 2019, 04:38:04 PM
I'll concede that the Pirates can look like a top-10 team at times, but they can also look like a team that's a lot worse than that. Perhaps I'm valuing consistency more than I should.

Yep... I've said that. The inconsistencies and such are a concern. But I could also make that a concern for basically all but four teams in the country right now. Parity also has inconsistencies in it. That said, this is the strongest Top 10 (or so) I've seen in a number of years. In the past, I have struggled with teams I have in my Top 10 not feeling like Top 10 programs those seasons. This year, I still have a little uneasiness, but I also feel more confident. It is further down in the poll is where I get more uneasy.

Quote from: CMSfan on January 28, 2019, 04:38:04 PM
I'll also concede that with all the parity it's certainly muddy outside the top few teams. I'm probably hung up on my strong feeling that Pomona is better than the Pirates. I've seen both teams play and would definitely pick Pomona in a head-to-head matchup because they're deeper and more consistent. I know their SOS is weak, but with the win over the Blues and a few good conference wins (CMS twice, Oxy), I think their body of work is stronger than the Pirates.

My problem with Pomona (and much of the SCIAC) is their schedules leave a ton of question marks and unknowns. I've watched games, but hard to gauge when they aren't playing more than themselves or teams that can't give any relevance to the conversation. Their results are also all over the place. A 2OT win over Whitman was followed by a loss to WashU which was still trying to get it's feet underneath themselves. They also have close results against conference opponents that if they were really that good ... they should be dominating. However, I also realize that conference foes and the conference schedule can wear on a team, so I try and give that the benefit of the doubt.

And you may think that two wins over CMS (which isn't the same program as last season) and a win over Oxy is major accomplishments ... but the SCIAC hasn't really shown it's former glory of late and I think that leaves voters not sure if those games are truly significant or not.

I get the argument ... having seen both CMS and Whitworth on video and seen the Pirates in person. I just see a stronger team in the Pirates.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hopefan on January 29, 2019, 09:38:47 AM

Wahoo... Being the Major fan in the universe of the SLIAC, you know I love to see ANY little guy recognized... was ecstatic to see tiny La Roche garner a single vote this week!!! La Roche, which probably has far fewer students than Neighboring North Hills or North Allegheny High Schools in the beautiful northern suburbs of Pittsburgh (guess where hopefan was born and raised) fell short by just a couple points to Marietta and Hope, but has otherwise run through AMCC and other local competition... Their near miss vs Marietta seems to indicate that they may actually be able to be competitive in their first round NCAA tourney matchup, assuming they win the AMCC tourney or squeek into a "C" bid....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 29, 2019, 10:47:11 AM

Quote from: hopefan on January 29, 2019, 09:38:47 AM
Wahoo... Being the Major fan in the universe of the SLIAC, you know I love to see ANY little guy recognized... was ecstatic to see tiny La Roche garner a single vote this week!!! La Roche, which probably has far fewer students than Neighboring North Hills or North Allegheny High Schools in the beautiful northern suburbs of Pittsburgh

Looks like La Roche has about 1,100 undergrads and about 400 grad students.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on January 29, 2019, 11:41:22 AM

Quote from: hopefan on January 29, 2019, 09:38:47 AM
Wahoo... Being the Major fan in the universe of the SLIAC, you know I love to see ANY little guy recognized... was ecstatic to see tiny La Roche garner a single vote this week!!! La Roche, which probably has far fewer students than Neighboring North Hills or North Allegheny High Schools in the beautiful northern suburbs of Pittsburgh (guess where hopefan was born and raised) fell short by just a couple points to Marietta and Hope, but has otherwise run through AMCC and other local competition... Their near miss vs Marietta seems to indicate that they may actually be able to be competitive in their first round NCAA tourney matchup, assuming they win the AMCC tourney or squeek into a "C" bid....

I'll admit to being the La Roche vote. I've been contemplating it now for a couple of weeks. SOS numbers will scare folks away but I've had the chance to see them on several occasions this year and been very impressed. This is Coach Carmichael's best team (and he has had a few over the years) and they legitimately put a scare into Marietta on their home court. They really should have beaten Hope (lost a double digit lead in the 2nd half) on the road as well. The AMCC schedule is what it is, but they did as well as they could putting together a difficult OOC SOS (I am guessing they thought they would get more out of the John Carroll game). La Roche needs to just keep winning. They're a quality team and will be a dangerous opponent for a 1 or 2 seed in the pod if they can get to the tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 29, 2019, 05:32:16 PM

It is a busy week, but I finally got my Top 25 blog done. Here it is for those interested: http://bit.ly/2Tm9RAy

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 30, 2019, 01:13:32 AM

No. 3 Whitman controlled most of the game against No. 10 Whitworth, though the Pirates got it to within 8 with 3:30 remaining, but Blues win 110-98.

Whitman sweeps the season series for the third straight season.

Whitworth losses two in a row. First back-to-back regular season losses for the Pirates since Nov. 2014.

Kyle Roach was limited, though hit a shot to cut it to within eight - missed the ensuing free throw.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 30, 2019, 01:17:41 AM

Whitman 110, Whitworth 98.

Whitworth's defense is just not good. Even if they had been able to handle the press in the first half, they still wouldn't have won because they couldn't get stops, and that's with shooting 69% from the floor in the second half. They shot absolutely lights out and barely made a dent in the lead.

They didn't even look like a Pool C team to me. 312 points allowed in their last 3 games, the last 5 halves on really poor shot defense.

Whitman is very good, but it was just way too easy for them to score.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BluesBrother on January 30, 2019, 01:25:13 AM

Quote from: SaintPaulite on January 30, 2019, 01:17:41 AM
They didn't even look like a Pool C team to me.

Yup. I think they're closer to Linfield than Whitman this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 30, 2019, 01:51:33 AM

Quote from: BluesBrother on January 30, 2019, 01:25:13 AM
Quote from: SaintPaulite on January 30, 2019, 01:17:41 AM
They didn't even look like a Pool C team to me.

Yup. I think they're closer to Linfield than Whitman this year.

I don't usually watch west coast games, but it's -50 windchill and I'm not going to work tomorrow, so what else was I gonna do?

I wasn't really impressed. College is an outstanding shooter that I'm not sure why Whitman left alone in the second half. But again, their defense is just not good. I think a lot of teams would have success going against that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TheOsprey on January 30, 2019, 01:11:41 PM

I got to admit; I wasn't impressed with the first half Whitworth displayed last night. Taking care of the ball was their biggest issue.

However, the Blues are still the best team I have seen and will be a very formidable opponent to any tournament team. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 30, 2019, 01:44:17 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=m5lxl/o3h5z2xs7txn530n.jpg)

The Hoopsville Marathon Show ... is tomorrow!

Tune in starting at 12:00 p.m. ET as we talk to guests from around the country about nothing but #d3hoops.

It is all about celebrating the season, student-athletes, coaches, and an exciting season.

For more information, click here: http://bit.ly/2HGx0N3

We will share more about the show a little later.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 30, 2019, 02:44:05 PM

Quote from: TheOsprey on January 30, 2019, 01:11:41 PM
I got to admit; I wasn't impressed with the first half Whitworth displayed last night. Taking care of the ball was their biggest issue.

However, the Blues are still the best team I have seen and will be a very formidable opponent to any tournament team. ;)

Even if they had handled the ball well, they still didn't play good enough defense to win. Whitman is good but they didn't really shoot lights out, they just got a lot of very makeable shots. Other teams they beat have done a better job on defense against them but either turned it over too much or didn't make enough shots themselves.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 31, 2019, 06:57:13 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	607	Augustana	19-1	01/31 vs. #22 North Central (Ill.); 02/02 vs. North Park
#2	595	Nebraska Wesleyan	19-1	def. Central, 95-70; 02/02 vs. Buena Vista
#3	582	Whitman	19-1	def. #10 Whitworth, 110-98; 02/01 vs. Lewis and Clark
#4	564	UW-Oshkosh	18-1	~~01/30 vs. UW-Whitewater~~ postponed; 02/02 vs. UW-Stout
#5	510	St. Thomas	17-1	01/31 vs. Macalester; 02/02 vs. Hamline
#6	464	Williams	18-2	def. Albertus Magnus, 85-67; 02/01 vs. T#32 Colby; 02/02 vs. Bowdoin
#7	446	MIT	18-2	def. Babson, 88-77; 02/02 vs. Wheaton (Mass.)
#8	428	Marietta	17-2	01/31 vs. #19 Capital; 02/02 vs. Ohio Northern
#9	392	Randolph-Macon	19-2	def. Shenandoah, 96-76; 02/02 vs. Roanoke
#10	384	Whitworth	16-4	LOST to #3 Whitman, 98-110; 02/02 vs. Lewis and Clark
#11	371	Hamilton	17-2	def. Wells, 80-65; 02/01 vs. Bates; 02/02 vs. Tufts
#12	327	St. John's	15-3	01/31 vs. Bethel; 02/02 vs. Macalester
#13	304	Wooster	17-3	def. Kenyon, 105-67; 02/02 vs. Ohio Wesleyan
#14	291	Wabash	17-2	02/01 vs. Allegheny; 02/02 vs. Hiram
#15	288	Pomona-Pitzer	19-1	def. Redlands, 81-68; 02/02 vs. Chapman
#16	232	Swarthmore	17-3	def. Washington College, 84-61; 02/02 vs. Gettysburg
#17	196	Christopher Newport	17-3	def. St. Mary's (Md.), 79-76; 02/02 vs. Mary Washington
#18	179	Loras	16-5	LOST to Dubuque, 94-96 OT; 02/02 vs. Simpson
#19	164	Capital	16-3	01/31 vs. #8 Marietta; 02/02 vs. John Carroll
#20	155	UW-Stevens Point	13-5	01/31 vs. #25 UW-La Crosse; 02/02 vs. UW-River Falls
#21	129	Lynchburg	17-4	LOST to Roanoke, 56-78; 02/02 vs. Bridgewater (Va.)
#22	91	North Central (Ill.)	17-3	01/31 vs. #1 Augustana
#23	89	Amherst	15-3	02/01 vs. Tufts; 02/02 vs. Bates
#24	77	Nichols	19-2	def. Western New England, 82-63
#25	53	UW-La Crosse	14-5	01/31 vs. #20 UW-Stevens Point; 02/02 vs. UW-Platteville

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	47	Oswego State	17-2	def. SUNY New Paltz, 67-46; 02/02 vs. Cortland
#27	29	Plattsburgh State	15-4	def. SUNY Potsdam, 77-75 OT; 02/01 vs. Buffalo State; 02/02 vs. Fredonia
#28	21	Rochester	14-4	02/01 vs. New York University; 02/03 vs. Brandeis
#29	16	Centre	17-3	02/01 vs. Rhodes; 02/03 vs. Hendrix
#30	14	Emory	14-4	02/01 vs. Brandeis; 02/03 vs. New York University
#31	10	Gordon	18-2	def. Wentworth, 73-71; 02/02 vs. Roger Williams
T#32	9	Wesleyan	15-5	02/01 vs. Trinity (Conn.)
T#32	9	Wittenberg	15-5	def. Denison, 82-72; 02/02 vs. Kenyon
T#32	9	Middlebury	15-5	02/01 vs. Bowdoin; 02/02 vs. T#32 Colby
T#32	9	Colby	15-5	02/01 vs. #6 Williams; 02/02 vs. T#32 Middlebury
T#32	9	Guilford	15-5	02/02 vs. Hampden-Sydney
#37	6	Wheaton (Ill.)	15-5	01/31 vs. Carroll; 02/02 vs. Elmhurst
#38	5	New Jersey City	16-5	def. Montclair State, 74-66; 02/02 vs. Stockton
T#39	3	Arcadia	17-3	def. Albright, 77-69; 02/02 vs. Messiah
T#39	3	Occidental	17-3	def. Chapman, 59-46; 02/02 vs. Cal Lutheran
T#39	3	Scranton	16-4	LOST to Susquehanna, 81-89 OT; 02/02 vs. Catholic
T#42	2	Eastern Connecticut	16-4	def. Mass-Boston, 79-54; 02/02 vs. Mass-Dartmouth
T#42	2	WPI	16-4	def. Clark, 79-55; 02/02 vs. Coast Guard
#44	1	La Roche	17-2	01/31 vs. Penn State-Behrend; 02/02 vs. Pitt-Bradford

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 31, 2019, 08:34:04 PM

Well, Capital may have helped solve a couple of bracketing problems. They have to be in the driver's seat to host, and they may have sent Marietta to points south. #CNUislessthan500

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 31, 2019, 09:49:13 PM

#22 North Central 68
#1 Augustana 63

Nobody will go undefeated in CCIW play for the 46th straight season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on January 31, 2019, 10:10:08 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 31, 2019, 09:49:13 PM
#22 North Central 68
#1 Augustana 63

Nobody will go undefeated in CCIW play for the 46th straight season.

Vintage upset. Slow tempo, hit a bunch of 3, don't give up many, play defense.

If I understand what I heard from the selection committee guy on Hoopsville today, it sounds like the new methodology may favor a team like North Central. It sounded to me like it's going to be about who you beat, not who you lost to. So losing to North Park and Ohio Northern won't matter as much when you can say you beat Augustana.

Edit: I guess they only hit 7 3's. Seemed like more. Still +9 from 3, made the difference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 31, 2019, 10:56:06 PM

That, and the six straight stops the North Central defense got between 7:08 and 1:43 that were the key to an 8-0 run that allowed the Cards to flip a 56-52 deficit into a 60-56 lead.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fantastic50 on February 01, 2019, 09:38:34 AM

Quote from: SaintPaulite on January 31, 2019, 10:10:08 PM
If I understand what I heard from the selection committee guy on Hoopsville today, it sounds like the new methodology may favor a team like North Central. It sounded to me like it's going to be about who you beat, not who you lost to.

I have observed in previous years that the number of wins vs regionally-ranked opponents matters much more than the number of losses vs that same group. For example, 3-5 vRRO appears to get a better outcome than 2-2 vRRO. Also, it has been really tough to get a Pool C bid without at least two wins vRRO, no matter your SOS or who the schedule includes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on February 01, 2019, 02:41:16 PM

Quote from: fantastic50 on February 01, 2019, 09:38:34 AM
Quote from: SaintPaulite on January 31, 2019, 10:10:08 PM
If I understand what I heard from the selection committee guy on Hoopsville today, it sounds like the new methodology may favor a team like North Central. It sounded to me like it's going to be about who you beat, not who you lost to.

I have observed in previous years that the number of wins vs regionally-ranked opponents matters much more than the number of losses vs that same group. For example, 3-5 vRRO appears to get a better outcome than 2-2 vRRO. Also, it has been really tough to get a Pool C bid without at least two wins vRRO, no matter your SOS or who the schedule includes.

Definitely, I imagine if you did a computer something on it, wins vs. RRO would be more useful than record, because of that.

But I don't know if you heard the discussion with Sam, but if you didn't, I think it's worth it for almost anyone, but especially someone that spends a lot of time on Pool C/bracket exploration.

With him talking about how the .3/2 thing double rewarded schedule giants and doomed teams for reasons beyond their control, I was thinking that the effect of that would be that *IF* you had quality wins, SOS wouldn't be as important. My mind immediately jumped to Pomona-Pitzer. Only 1 likely win vs. RRO (maybe CMS or Oxy gets ranked), but what a win to have. Unfortunately they probably can't host for the same reason as having few quality opponents. And on the other side, someone like Stevens Point better start winning vs. those quality opponents soon.

I also wondered while listening if the committee might go even beyond regionally ranked in some cases. Like in the West -- UST, St. John, Whitman, Whitworth, Pomona-Pitzer, Nebraska Wesleyan and Loras are all lead-pipe locks to be regionally ranked. If you stick with only 8 regionally ranked in the West like last year, everyone else is fighting for one spot. So if Augsburg doesn't make it, does that mean beating Augsburg isn't worthy of notice? I don't think so. Same for others -- Augsburg just an example, and a team that has a potential national player of the year and lock for All-American.

Loved that he specifically called out the NESCAC game-playing and the converse of having a good team locked into a league where they play 18 SOS killers -- like Nichols, who is 3-0 vs. the NESCAC. Maybe now they have a better chance to host if they continue to play well.

This has probably gone off topic for top 25, but hopefully folks excuse the diversion. It doesn't really fit into Pool C either, so... *shrug*

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on February 01, 2019, 07:13:53 PM

Quote from: AndOne on January 27, 2019, 04:41:47 PM
JUST ASKING

Nebraska Wesleyan lost for the first time last night.
Augustana, Oshkosh, and Whitman already had one loss.
So what makes NWU's loss any worse than those of Augie, UWO, or Whitman? 🤷🏻‍♂️
Is it "worse" just because its more recent?
If not, why doesn't NWU deserve to maintain the #1 ranking? 🤔
After all, they don't have any more losses than anybody else.

Prior to the current poll I questioned the reasoning in removing NWU from the #1 position as it seemed to me some pollsters might want to do so only because NWU's loss was the most recent. Basically let's just make a change for change's sake.
On Hoopsville, Titan Q promoted slotting Augustana as the new #1 while Dave Mac seemed to favor keeping NWU as #1.
In the end Augustana gained the top spot in the current poll, but then promptly lost to current #22 North Central last night. I previously suggested NCC belonged in the Top 25 prior to the current poll, but this fell on deaf ears. It will be interesting to see what a victory over the #1 team and an 18-3 record (albeit with 2 losses to very undistinguished teams) will be worth in terms of movement in the next poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fantastic50 on February 01, 2019, 08:33:20 PM

After a 450-mile bus ride, #14 Wabash falls at Allegheny, 80-68.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SaintPaulite on February 01, 2019, 09:36:13 PM

Quote from: fantastic50 on February 01, 2019, 08:33:20 PM
After a 450-mile bus ride, #14 Wabash falls at Allegheny, 80-68.

They may be doing that again soon, in that case. How far is it to Oshkosh?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 02, 2019, 12:54:13 AM

Quote from: fantastic50 on February 01, 2019, 09:38:34 AM
Quote from: SaintPaulite on January 31, 2019, 10:10:08 PM
If I understand what I heard from the selection committee guy on Hoopsville today, it sounds like the new methodology may favor a team like North Central. It sounded to me like it's going to be about who you beat, not who you lost to.

I have observed in previous years that the number of wins vs regionally-ranked opponents matters much more than the number of losses vs that same group. For example, 3-5 vRRO appears to get a better outcome than 2-2 vRRO. Also, it has been really tough to get a Pool C bid without at least two wins vRRO, no matter your SOS or who the schedule includes.

I don't tend to agree with this. There are a lot of other things involved here. Not all 2-2s are equal; not all 3-5s are equal. I think it depends who each team beats along with who they lost to.

Hypothetical (not all results in the same region):

Let's say the 2-2 team had lost both games to teams in the top four spots of the region and won their two games against teams in slots 6-8.

The 3-5 team split with the #1 ranked team, also beat a #3, split with the #4 team, lost to the #2, lost to another #1, and lost to a #5 ... the 3-5 team is going to look a bit better because of their vRRO data, they may have played more and lost more, but they also beat better teams than the 2-2 team did. The 2-2 team didn't beat anyone in the upper tier and only beat those in the lower tier.

That can actually be a deciding factor. Yes, they lost more, but they beat better teams (or split with some as well).

I know that has been a deciding factor in the past. It isn't the raw number. It isn't the raw percentage. It is WHO they beat.

BTW - there is no "new" method. The criteria hasn't been changed. A tool that has been used is simply been pulled. The women's committee has been using the same criteria without the "tool." The men just have to adjust to not using something that clearly had probably become a shortcut. I think at one time the tool made sense. However, I can see that the data no longer makes the tool mechanics work anymore. We have also talked about for several seasons that maybe the tool was starting to be leaned on too much and giving us selections that maybe it shouldn't (UW-Oshkosh a few years ago, Amherst in recent years, others).

I think that tool being removed will allow the other criteria to be more in the conversation. It also won't guarantee a team with an insane SOS entry to the tournament. It won't eliminate a team with a low SOS. It also gives teams with strong WL% and average SOS numbers a better argument.

It ultimately may make our mock selections a lot more difficult, but I think I may enjoy it more.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: fantastic50 on February 02, 2019, 09:29:47 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 02, 2019, 12:54:13 AM
Quote from: fantastic50 on February 01, 2019, 09:38:34 AM
Quote from: SaintPaulite on January 31, 2019, 10:10:08 PM
If I understand what I heard from the selection committee guy on Hoopsville today, it sounds like the new methodology may favor a team like North Central. It sounded to me like it's going to be about who you beat, not who you lost to.

I have observed in previous years that the number of wins vs regionally-ranked opponents matters much more than the number of losses vs that same group. For example, 3-5 vRRO appears to get a better outcome than 2-2 vRRO. Also, it has been really tough to get a Pool C bid without at least two wins vRRO, no matter your SOS or who the schedule includes.

I don't tend to agree with this. There are a lot of other things involved here. Not all 2-2s are equal; not all 3-5s are equal. I think it depends who each team beats along with who they lost to.

Hypothetical (not all results in the same region):

Let's say the 2-2 team had lost both games to teams in the top four spots of the region and won their two games against teams in slots 6-8.

The 3-5 team split with the #1 ranked team, also beat a #3, split with the #4 team, lost to the #2, lost to another #1, and lost to a #5 ... the 3-5 team is going to look a bit better because of their vRRO data, they may have played more and lost more, but they also beat better teams than the 2-2 team did. The 2-2 team didn't beat anyone in the upper tier and only beat those in the lower tier.

That can actually be a deciding factor. Yes, they lost more, but they beat better teams (or split with some as well).

That's very true. I oversimplified it a bit. However, based on the trends in the numbers over the last 4-5 seasons, I stand by my statement that (quality of those ranked opponents being equal) the number of wins vRRO has had more impact in rankings/selections than the number of losses vRRO.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 02, 2019, 12:54:13 AM
BTW - there is no "new" method. The criteria hasn't been changed. A tool that has been used is simply been pulled. The women's committee has been using the same criteria without the "tool." The men just have to adjust to not using something that clearly had probably become a shortcut. I think at one time the tool made sense. However, I can see that the data no longer makes the tool mechanics work anymore. We have also talked about for several seasons that maybe the tool was starting to be leaned on too much and giving us selections that maybe it shouldn't (UW-Oshkosh a few years ago, Amherst in recent years, others).

I think that tool being removed will allow the other criteria to be more in the conversation. It also won't guarantee a team with an insane SOS entry to the tournament. It won't eliminate a team with a low SOS. It also gives teams with strong WL% and average SOS numbers a better argument.

It ultimately may make our mock selections a lot more difficult, but I think I may enjoy it more.

Based on what I'm hearing, I really like what we're hearing. D3 values regional competition, and geographically isolated teams (such as on the west coast) have limited opportunities to play strong opponents without unreasonable travel. If this results in Pomona-Pitzer (or Whitworth) getting a bid despite fewer quality wins or a lower SOS, I have no problem with that. Similarly, I think it does give a better chance to reward teams from weaker conferences who played quality opponents outside of their league, and avoids an unnecessarily large boost to teams that have a high SOS based on being in a deeper league. Overall, I think it is fully appropriate for the committee to dive deeply into all the criteria, resulting in a focus on rewarding those who beat good teams.

It will make things more challenging for pundits like me in the short term, but the committee's philosophy will be reflected in their rankings & selections, and we can adjust our (mental or computational) models accordingly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 03, 2019, 01:02:27 PM

How They Fared (~~Almost~~ Complete)

Several results still pending, but I am posting now because I'm not sure I'll have a chance to post later. (Power down at home; to walk to campus to access the Internet ...)

(Update - power's back on; two of four incomplete results posted.)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	607	Augustana	20-2	LOST to #22 North Central (Ill.), 63-68; def. North Park, 97-42
#2	595	Nebraska Wesleyan	20-1	def. Central, 95-70; def. Buena Vista, 89-86
#3	582	Whitman	20-1	def. #10 Whitworth, 110-98; def. Lewis and Clark, 93-72
#4	564	UW-Oshkosh	19-1	~~01/30 vs. UW-Whitewater~~ postponed; def. UW-Stout, 88-62
#5	510	St. Thomas	19-1	def. Macalester, 94-61; def. Hamline, 108-58
#6	464	Williams	19-3	def. Albertus Magnus, 85-67; def. T#32 Colby, 84-68; LOST to Bowdoin, 77-78 OT
#7	446	MIT	19-2	def. Babson, 88-77; def. Wheaton (Mass.), 88-63
#8	428	Marietta	18-3	LOST to #19 Capital, 57-74; def. Ohio Northern, 91-64
#9	392	Randolph-Macon	20-2	def. Shenandoah, 96-76; def. Roanoke, 71-51
#10	384	Whitworth	17-4	LOST to #3 Whitman, 98-110; def. Lewis and Clark, 77-75
#11	371	Hamilton	19-2	def. Wells, 80-65; def. Bates, 92-76; def. Tufts, 87-83
#12	327	St. John's	16-4	LOST to Bethel, 81-85; def. Macalester, 80-59
#13	304	Wooster	18-3	def. Kenyon, 105-67; def. Ohio Wesleyan, 76-74
#14	291	Wabash	18-3	LOST to Allegheny, 68-80; def. Hiram, 95-80
#15	288	Pomona-Pitzer	20-1	def. Redlands, 81-68; def. Chapman, 89-69
#16	232	Swarthmore	18-3	def. Washington College, 84-61; def. Gettysburg, 99-60
#17	196	Christopher Newport	18-3	def. St. Mary's (Md.), 79-76; def. Mary Washington, 80-66
#18	179	Loras	17-5	LOST to Dubuque, 94-96 OT; def. Simpson, 100-79
#19	164	Capital	17-4	def. #8 Marietta, 74-57; LOST to John Carroll, 69-88
#20	155	UW-Stevens Point	14-6	LOST to #25 UW-La Crosse, 52-60; def. UW-River Falls, 69-63
#21	129	Lynchburg	17-5	LOST to Roanoke, 56-78; LOST to Bridgewater (Va.), 77-80
#22	91	North Central (Ill.)	18-3	def. #1 Augustana, 68-63
#23	89	Amherst	17-3	def. Tufts, 85-55; def. Bates, 75-64
#24	77	Nichols	19-2	def. Western New England, 82-63
#25	53	UW-La Crosse	15-6	def. #20 UW-Stevens Point, 60-52; LOST to UW-Platteville, 55-68

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	47	Oswego State	17-3	def. SUNY New Paltz, 67-46; LOST to Cortland, 67-72
#27	29	Plattsburgh State	17-4	def. SUNY Potsdam, 77-75 OT; def. Fredonia, 87-70; def. Buffalo State, 91-77
#28	21	Rochester	16-4	def. New York University, 66-63; def. Brandeis, 78-52
#29	16	Centre	19-3	def. Rhodes, 79-57; def. Hendrix, 62-49
#30	14	Emory	16-4	def. Brandeis, 88-64; def. New York University, 75-67
#31	10	Gordon	19-2	def. Wentworth, 73-71; def. Roger Williams, 103-94
T#32	9	Wesleyan	15-6	LOST to Trinity (Conn.), 69-75
T#32	9	Wittenberg	16-5	def. Denison, 82-72; def. Kenyon, 95-67
T#32	9	Middlebury	17-5	def. Bowdoin, 63-51; def. T#32 Colby, 81-68
T#32	9	Colby	15-7	LOST to #6 Williams, 68-84; LOST to T#32 Middlebury, 68-81
T#32	9	Guilford	16-5	def. Hampden-Sydney, 74-41
#37	6	Wheaton (Ill.)	16-6	LOST to Carroll, 70-77; def. Elmhurst, 58-55
#38	5	New Jersey City	17-5	def. Montclair State, 74-66; def. Stockton, 85-75
T#39	3	Arcadia	18-3	def. Albright, 77-69; def. Messiah, 80-71
T#39	3	Occidental	18-3	def. Chapman, 59-46; def. Cal Lutheran, 70-67
T#39	3	Scranton	17-4	LOST to Susquehanna, 81-89 OT; def. Catholic, 63-61
T#42	2	Eastern Connecticut	16-5	def. Mass-Boston, 79-54; LOST to Mass-Dartmouth, 68-69
T#42	2	WPI	16-5	def. Clark, 79-55; LOST to Coast Guard, 58-73
#44	1	La Roche	19-2	def. Penn State-Behrend, 57-50; def. Pitt-Bradford, 80-54

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on February 03, 2019, 01:17:12 PM

Much was LOST recently. 11 of the Top 25 lost. That includes #1 being knocked off by #22, and one team losing twice. Big shakeup in the next poll?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 03, 2019, 01:23:37 PM

Quote from: AndOne on February 01, 2019, 07:13:53 PM
I previously suggested NCC belonged in the Top 25 prior to the current poll, but this fell on deaf ears.

Or no ears, since only a few voters read this board.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on February 03, 2019, 03:37:18 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 03, 2019, 01:23:37 PM
Quote from: AndOne on February 01, 2019, 07:13:53 PM
I previously suggested NCC belonged in the Top 25 prior to the current poll, but this fell on deaf ears.

Or no ears, since only a few voters read this board.

Well then. Perhaps, as a form of enlightenment, the others should follow the lead of those few! 🤔 ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 04, 2019, 05:02:10 PM

What a weekend!

It was one of those sets of days we have seen often in Division III where at every turn there was something to watch, a result to ponder, and upset to breakdown. The hardwoods across the country had games worth watching all with just three weeks left in the regular season.

It started with Dave and Pat's trip to Holland, Michigan to witness the 200th meeting of Calvin and Hope. The game at DeVos Fieldhouse lived up to expectations. From the crowd to the battle on the court, every moment was a thrill ride.

And the Super Weekend didn't stop there. A number of teams in both Top 25s took losses that not only will shake up the polls, but also shakes up conferences races and adds plenty of intrigue for the first Regional Rankings to be released this week. Oh, and a 200-point explosion from a high-powered offense!

On this special, Monday, edition of Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave and guests have plenty to try and breakdown. Dave will share his reactions from "The Rivalry" and you will hear one of the crazier stories on how a mom names a son. Plus, hear about the Greenville-Fontbonne game which saw 346 points put on the board. And coaches from Hamilton men and East Texas Baptist women along with one of the top players for WashU women give us insight on how their teams are doing.

Ryan Scott also joins Dave as they give their initial reactions to the latest Top 25 polls and more.

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. Monday's show can be see LIVE here: http://bit.ly/2UGhZw2 (and simulcast on Facebook Live and Periscope).

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to dave.mchugh@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options to the right.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- George Barber, Greenville men's head coach
- Adam Stockwell, No. 8 Hamilton
- Becca Clark-Callender, WashU. women's senior guard
- "What Is In a Name?," Dina Hackert, Hope '91
- Rusty Rainbolt, No. 15 East Texas Baptist women's coach
- Ryan Scott, D3hoops.com senior writer (Top 25 Double-Take)

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 06, 2019, 12:51:39 PM

For those interested, here is my Top 25 ballot this week: http://bit.ly/2Sfd1JV

Sorry for the delay ... Monday show and UWSP Investigation release yesterday delayed me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 06, 2019, 04:14:32 PM

Here are the first rankings for the men this season: https://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2019/02/men-regional-rankings-first

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 07, 2019, 09:49:50 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	616	Nebraska Wesleyan	21-1	def. Simpson, 102-71; 02/09 vs. Wartburg
#2	597	Whitman	20-1	02/08 vs. George Fox; 02/09 vs. Linfield
#3	577	UW-Oshkosh	21-1	def. UW-Whitewater, 85-67; def. UW-Platteville, 83-81 OT; 02/09 vs. #26 UW-Stevens Point
#4	548	Augustana	21-2	def. T#37 Wheaton (Ill.), 93-83; 02/09 vs. Millikin
#5	531	St. Thomas	21-1	def. Gustavus Adolphus, 74-66; def. St. Olaf, 85-78; 02/09 vs. T#37 Augsburg
#6	484	MIT	20-2	def. Coast Guard, 75-54; 02/09 vs. Springfield
#7	456	Randolph-Macon	21-2	def. Hampden-Sydney, 91-53; 02/09 vs. Randolph
#8	416	Hamilton	19-2	02/08 vs. T#29 Middlebury; 02/09 vs. #10 Williams
#9	400	Wooster	19-3	def. Denison, 73-63; 02/09 vs. Wittenberg
#10	391	Williams	19-3	02/08 vs. #19 Amherst; 02/09 vs. #8 Hamilton
#11	338	Marietta	18-4	LOST to Mount Union, 66-78; 02/09 vs. Wilmington
#12	334	Pomona-Pitzer	20-1	02/09 vs. Cal Lutheran
#13	286	North Central (Ill.)	18-4	LOST to Illinois Wesleyan, 64-72; 02/09 vs. T#37 Wheaton (Ill.)
#14	285	Swarthmore	19-3	def. Johns Hopkins, 73-55; 02/09 vs. Dickinson
#15	279	Whitworth	17-4	02/08 vs. Linfield; 02/09 vs. George Fox
#16	257	Christopher Newport	19-3	def. Southern Virginia, 67-64; 02/09 vs. Frostburg State
#17	244	St. John's	18-4	def. T#37 Augsburg, 82-71; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 70-69; 02/09 vs. St. Olaf
#18	195	Wabash	18-4	LOST to DePauw, 79-94; 02/09 vs. Kenyon
#19	181	Amherst	18-3	def. Wesleyan, 61-60; 02/08 vs. #10 Williams; 02/09 vs. T#29 Middlebury
#20	153	Nichols	20-2	def. Roger Williams, 110-77; 02/09 vs. University of New England
#21	118	Capital	18-4	def. Heidelberg, 86-80; 02/09 vs. Baldwin Wallace
#22	90	Loras	17-5	02/09 vs. Coe
#23	46	Plattsburgh State	17-4	02/08 vs. Cortland; 02/09 vs. #28 Oswego State
#24	41	Emory	16-4	02/08 vs. Washington U.; 02/10 vs. Chicago
#25	38	UW-La Crosse	15-7	LOST to UW-River Falls, 58-60; 02/09 vs. UW-Eau Claire

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	37	UW-Stevens Point	15-6	def. UW-Whitewater, 65-47; 02/09 vs. #3 UW-Oshkosh
#27	36	Rochester	16-4	02/08 vs. Chicago; 02/10 vs. Washington U.
#28	26	Oswego State	17-3	02/08 vs. SUNY Potsdam; 02/09 vs. #23 Plattsburgh State
T#29	21	Middlebury	17-5	02/08 vs. #8 Hamilton; 02/09 vs. #19 Amherst
T#29	21	Arcadia	19-3	def. Alvernia, 69-67; 02/09 vs. Lebanon Valley
#31	19	Centre	19-3	02/08 vs. Oglethorpe; 02/10 vs. Berry
T#32	14	Guilford	16-6	LOST to Roanoke, 59-76; 02/09 vs. Bridgewater (Va.)
T#32	14	Gordon	20-2	def. Curry, 88-75; 02/09 vs. Salve Regina
#34	13	New Jersey City	18-5	def. TCNJ, 75-59; 02/09 vs. Rutgers-Camden
T#35	9	Occidental	19-3	def. Redlands, 71-64; 02/09 vs. Whittier
T#35	9	La Roche	20-2	def. Franciscan (Ohio), 66-51; 02/09 vs. Medaille
T#37	2	Augsburg	16-6	LOST to #17 St. John's, 71-82; def. Gustavus Adolphus, 94-88; 02/09 vs. #5 St. Thomas
T#37	2	Wheaton (Ill.)	16-7	LOST to #4 Augustana, 83-93; 02/09 vs. #13 North Central (Ill.)
#39	1	Lynchburg	18-5	def. Ferrum, 76-64; 02/09 vs. Shenandoah

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 07, 2019, 03:33:35 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=mkm2d/olxm2z8cvr2ss6t7.jpg)

Thursday night's Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) will be an extended version of the show to cover both the conclusion of the UW Stevens Point men's basketball investigation and our normal programming this time of the season.

The show will begin with continuing coverage of the UW Stevens Point case that finally wrapped up after more than three-and-a-half years. Athletics Director Brad Duckworth will join us for an exclusive, in-depth, interview about the case, the findings, the punishments, and what it all means for UWSP and the basketball program.

We will then shift into what would be a normal Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) episode talking to teams that are making headlines in the final month of the season. Not only are teams surging, but with Regional Rankings now out the focus on who may be in or may be out of the NCAA Tournament starts to come into focus.

In the WBCA Center Court segment, Dave will also talk with a women's assistant coach who is turning heads not only in the program, but also in the conference and around the country.

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com (https://www.d3hoops.com) and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Thursday's extended show starting at 7:00 p.m. ET here: http://bit.ly/2SyWv6X (or video Facebook Live and Periscope simulcasts).

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to dave.mchugh@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options below.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Brad Duckworth, UW Stevens Point Athletics Director
- Lauren Hayden, Lynchburg women's assistant coach (WBCA Center Court)
- Juli Fulks, No. 21 Transylvania women's coach
- John Krikorian, No. 16 Christopher Newport men's coach
- Chris Downs, St. Lawrence men's coach
- Bob Amsberry, No. 15 Wartburg women's coach

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 10, 2019, 02:30:01 PM

*ranked or received votes in the preseason Top 25 poll.

Team	TOTAL	WK9	WK8	WK7	WK6	WK5	WK4	WK3	WK2	WK1	PRE
NWU*	6210	616	595	625	625	625	625	625	625	625	624
Augustana*	5572	548	607	591	580	567	563	558	546	473	539
Whitman*	5440	597	582	573	560	551	533	529	515	471	529
Oshkosh*	5186	577	564	556	539	519	507	498	439	420	567
Williams*	5061	391	464	405	563	562	572	575	567	545	417
Hamilton*	4751	416	371	492	444	517	531	531	541	508	400
MIT*	4146	484	446	391	315	454	440	423	390	340	463
Whitworth*	4023	279	384	508	468	455	425	408	344	290	462
Stevens Point*	3274	37	155	122	405	437	293	485	488	496	356
Marietta*	3102	338	428	363	295	371	435	395	322	108	47
RMC	2431	456	392	320	221	186	202	175	288	191	0
Swarthmore*	2288	285	232	223	343	205	80	89	74	428	329
Wittenberg*	2265	0	9	65	73	246	384	353	315	454	366
Wooster*	2228	400	304	198	138	91	242	195	302	251	107
St John's*	2155	244	327	319	440	318	186	128	70	46	77
St Thomas*	2104	531	510	463	335	196	40	3	2	1	23
Plattsburgh St*	2017	46	29	42	254	187	285	297	368	295	214
Whitewater*	1825	0	0	25	107	243	401	372	338	258	81
Wabash	1512	195	291	362	271	138	145	110	0	0	0
Rochester*	1503	36	21	117	111	284	197	305	230	135	67
CNU*	1449	257	196	234	163	131	196	123	49	94	6
Pomona Pitzer*	1239	334	288	232	148	94	31	22	19	60	11
IWU*	1230	0	0	0	4	17	43	226	438	360	142
Loras*	921	90	0	99	61	89	180	125	85	175	17
Middlebury*	869	21	9	10	4	10	53	82	197	317	166
Lynchburg	868	1	129	308	190	107	22	35	76	0	0
Nichols*	825	153	77	47	36	62	199	139	68	19	25
Amherst*	780	181	89	144	40	92	18	37	99	44	36
NCC*	634	286	91	42	21	0	15	25	86	49	19
Salisbury	526	0	0	13	80	157	107	99	57	13	0
Capital	524	118	164	76	141	25	0	0	0	0	0
Springfield*	478	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	47	431
Platteville*	422	0	0	0	0	0	0	12	21	22	367
NJCU*	323	13	5	0	12	7	9	5	22	71	179
Emory*	285	41	14	0	0	1	0	0	7	75	147
Wheaton IL (Greek)	284	2	6	6	11	7	11	31	26	184	0
JHU*	284	0	0	0	0	8	14	14	20	22	206
Linfield	206	0	179	5	4	18	0	0	0	0	0
JCU*	192	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	6	57	129
Scranton	163	0	3	0	0	48	51	37	16	8	0
Oswego St	154	26	47	18	0	0	28	23	12	0	0
Wesleyan*	148	0	9	61	57	11	0	0	0	0	10
La Crosse	110	38	53	19	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Gordon	106	14	10	7	36	39	0	0	0	0	0
Maryville*	102	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	7	95
Nazareth*	92	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	32	60
St Olaf*	92	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	92
Hope*	78	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	1	76
Arcadia	70	21	3	27	12	7	0	0	0	0	0
WPI	61	0	2	0	0	0	29	15	10	5	0
Montclair St*	60	0	0	0	0	1	11	8	25	6	9
Ramapo*	57	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	24	33
Occidental (nescac1)	50	9	3	1	8	29	0	0	0	0	0
Endicott	48	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	4	42	0
Roanoke*	48	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	3	3	42
Mount Union	41	0	0	3	8	8	11	11	0	0	0
PS Behrend*	41	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	15	26
LeTourneau*	35	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	35
E&H*	31	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	28	3
Guilford	30	14	9	1	1	5	0	0	0	0	0
Aurora*	28	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	9	19
Centre	25	0	16	2	1	0	2	0	4	0	0
E Conn*	25	0	2	6	0	0	0	0	9	0	8
Wash U*	20	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	20
Cabrini*	14	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	14
F&M*	14	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	14
La Roche	10	9	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Colby	9	0	9	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Wartburg	9	0	0	0	0	0	9	0	0	0	0
Bethel*	5	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	5
Hanover*	5	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	5
Mary Washington	4	0	0	4	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Keene St*	3	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	2
CMS*	3	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	3
Augsburg	2	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
ONU*	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	2
Salem St*	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	2
LFC	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0
Yeshiva*	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1
Bowdoin (NCF)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Hobart (Osprey)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Illinois Tech (7Express)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Moravian***	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
NEC (Smitty Oom)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Ohio Wes (Smedindy)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Olivet (HOPEful)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Rosemont (mailsy)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
RPI (hopefan)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Skidmore (magicman)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
St Joseph CT (FC Grizzlies)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
U of Chicago (WUPHF)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 10, 2019, 02:47:24 PM

So a little more than 21% of D3 programs received at least one Top 25 vote this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 10, 2019, 03:07:07 PM

How They Fared (~~Almost~~ Complete)

~~Centre/Berry is just underway. I'll be busy from 4 to 8, but will edit in the final score afterwards.~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	616	Nebraska Wesleyan	22-1	def. Simpson, 102-71; def. Wartburg, 85-82
#2	597	Whitman	22-1	def. George Fox, 107-84; def. Linfield, 105-100
#3	577	UW-Oshkosh	22-1	def. UW-Whitewater, 85-67; def. UW-Platteville, 83-81 OT; def. #26 UW-Stevens Point, 77-70
#4	548	Augustana	22-2	def. T#37 Wheaton (Ill.), 93-83; def. Millikin, 78-56
#5	531	St. Thomas	21-2	def. Gustavus Adolphus, 74-66; def. St. Olaf, 85-78; LOST to T#37 Augsburg, 86-88
#6	484	MIT	20-3	def. Coast Guard, 75-54; LOST to Springfield, 61-66
#7	456	Randolph-Macon	22-2	def. Hampden-Sydney, 91-53; def. Randolph, 87-45
#8	416	Hamilton	20-3	LOST to T#29 Middlebury, 79-80; def. #10 Williams, 77-70
#9	400	Wooster	19-4	def. Denison, 73-63; LOST to Wittenberg, 74-84
#10	391	Williams	19-5	LOST to #19 Amherst, 79-84; LOST to #8 Hamilton, 70-77
#11	338	Marietta	18-5	LOST to Mount Union, 66-78; LOST to Wilmington, 62-68
#12	334	Pomona-Pitzer	21-1	def. Cal Lutheran, 78-61
#13	286	North Central (Ill.)	18-5	LOST to Illinois Wesleyan, 64-72; LOST to T#37 Wheaton (Ill.), 71-82
#14	285	Swarthmore	20-3	def. Johns Hopkins, 73-55; def. Dickinson, 100-82
#15	279	Whitworth	19-4	def. Linfield, 74-73; def. George Fox, 107-98 OT
#16	257	Christopher Newport	20-3	def. Southern Virginia, 67-64; def. Frostburg State, 72-64
#17	244	St. John's	19-4	def. T#37 Augsburg, 82-71; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 70-69; def. St. Olaf, 74-57
#18	195	Wabash	19-4	LOST to DePauw, 79-94; def. Kenyon, 96-79
#19	181	Amherst	20-3	def. Wesleyan, 61-60; def. #10 Williams, 84-79; def. T#29 Middlebury, 97-93
#20	153	Nichols	21-2	def. Roger Williams, 110-77; def. University of New England, 83-61
#21	118	Capital	19-4	def. Heidelberg, 86-80; def. Baldwin Wallace, 81-76
#22	90	Loras	18-5	def. Coe, 74-71
#23	46	Plattsburgh State	19-4	def. Cortland, 71-67; def. #28 Oswego State, 67-56
#24	41	Emory	17-5	def. Washington U., 105-82; LOST to Chicago, 107-114
#25	38	UW-La Crosse	15-8	LOST to UW-River Falls, 58-60; LOST to UW-Eau Claire, 52-61

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	37	UW-Stevens Point	15-7	def. UW-Whitewater, 65-47; LOST to #3 UW-Oshkosh, 70-77
#27	36	Rochester	18-4	def. Chicago, 63-57; def. Washington U., 78-48
#28	26	Oswego State	18-4	def. SUNY Potsdam, 68-53; LOST to #23 Plattsburgh State, 56-67
T#29	21	Middlebury	18-6	def. #8 Hamilton, 80-79; LOST to #19 Amherst, 93-97
T#29	21	Arcadia	20-3	def. Alvernia, 69-67; def. Lebanon Valley, 75-62
#31	19	Centre	21-3	def. Oglethorpe, 75-54; def. Berry, 57-55
T#32	14	Guilford	17-6	LOST to Roanoke, 59-76; def. Bridgewater (Va.), 77-53
T#32	14	Gordon	21-2	def. Curry, 88-75; def. Salve Regina, 100-86
#34	13	New Jersey City	19-5	def. TCNJ, 75-59; def. Rutgers-Camden, 93-73
T#35	9	Occidental	20-3	def. Redlands, 71-64; def. Whittier, 86-68
T#35	9	La Roche	21-2	def. Franciscan (Ohio), 66-51; def. Medaille, 81-75
T#37	2	Augsburg	17-6	LOST to #17 St. John's, 71-82; def. Gustavus Adolphus, 94-88; def. #5 St. Thomas, 88-86
T#37	2	Wheaton (Ill.)	17-7	LOST to #4 Augustana, 83-93; def. #13 North Central (Ill.), 82-71
#39	1	Lynchburg	19-5	def. Ferrum, 76-64; def. Shenandoah, 96-70

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 10, 2019, 04:22:27 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=mq8fp/w04a4ehynkbwuptp.jpg)

The 2018-19 season has entered it's final weeks. For some teams, their final games are this week. For others, they are fighting to hopefully still be playing next week and maybe beyond. While others hope their season stretches into March, as long as they take care of business this week and next.

The season can really all boil down to a couple of games. While November is just as important, February games seem to have a different feel to them. Regional Rankings coming out gives everyone a new sense of where they stand if they have postseason plans. Conference tournaments getting ready to start also gives gives teams more incentive to lock up seedings or berths.

As a result: A lot of craziness and games to watch on any given night.

On Sunday's Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave and guests try and take the temperature of these final few weeks. Who has turned heads, who seems to be stumbling down the stretch, and who should we be talking about while we've been distracted by the usual suspects.

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. Sunday's show starts at 7:00 p.m. ET right here: http://bit.ly/2GkK7C6 (or video Facebook Live and Periscope simulcasts).

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to dave.mchugh@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options below.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Ashlee Rogers, Marymount women's coach
- Kristina Baugh, Mass-Boston women's coach
- Jarred Samples, UDallas men's coach and national committee member (NABC Coach's Corner)
- John Thompson, North Carolina Wesleyan men's coach
- Bob Quillman, IWUHoops.com (Central Region)
- Ryan Scott, D3hoops.com Senior Writer (Top 25 Double-Take with Quillman)

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 11, 2019, 02:23:16 PM

The D3hoops.com men's Top 25 is already out: https://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2018-19/week10. Voters got their votes in rather quickly, which is impressive.

For those interested, I actually got not only my ballot but also the blog done on a Monday afternoon - also a SNOW DAY with the kids at home - for a change: http://bit.ly/2GkrI8r. Oddly productive for my first down day in nearly a month.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 13, 2019, 03:21:33 PM

The second week Regional Rankings have been released: https://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2019/02/men-regional-rankings-second

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on February 13, 2019, 09:54:48 PM

Final: Wooster 94 Oberlin 86

With the win tonight, Wooster is now 20-4 on the season. Wooster also clinches their 18th NCAC regular season title.

Congratulations to Wooster Coaches Steve Moore, Doug Cline and their staff on 23 consecutive seasons of 20 wins or more! :)

Amazing streak which is a Division III record!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 14, 2019, 07:12:04 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

(removed; superseded by the complete report below)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 17, 2019, 02:40:48 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	618	Nebraska Wesleyan	24-1	def. Coe, 78-45; def. Luther, 90-66
#2	594	Whitman	24-1	def. Puget Sound, 85-77; def. Pacific Lutheran, 96-78
#3	582	UW-Oshkosh	23-2	LOST to UW-La Crosse, 61-66; def. UW-Eau Claire, 89-62
#4	555	Augustana	23-2	def. Carthage, 81-67
#5	510	Randolph-Macon	23-2	def. Eastern Mennonite, 91-65
#6	476	St. Thomas	22-3	LOST to #15 St. John's, 75-94; def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 94-81
#7	419	Swarthmore	22-3	def. Haverford, 79-57; def. McDaniel, 77-59
#8	402	MIT	22-3	def. Clark, 113-60; def. WPI, 84-81
#9	401	Pomona-Pitzer	22-2	def. Whittier, 94-71; LOST to T#31 Occidental, 63-64
#10	387	Hamilton	22-3	def. #11 Amherst, 81-77; def. Colby, 93-88
#11	335	Amherst	21-4	LOST to #10 Hamilton, 77-81; def. Wesleyan, 63-56
#12	330	Whitworth	20-5	def. Pacific Lutheran, 76-65; LOST to Puget Sound, 72-87
#13	329	Christopher Newport	22-3	def. Salisbury, 91-74; def. Penn State-Harrisburg, 96-52
#14	326	Wooster	21-4	def. Oberlin, 94-86; def. DePauw, 81-70
#15	300	St. John's	21-4	def. #6 St. Thomas, 94-75; def. Carleton, 78-40
#16	209	Capital	19-6	LOST to Wilmington, 62-67; LOST to #34 Mount Union, 71-91
#17	193	Nichols	23-2	def. T#31 Gordon, 107-93; def. Wentworth, 67-64
#18	168	Williams	20-5	def. Trinity (Conn.), 88-77
#19	148	Marietta	20-5	def. Muskingum, 98-73; def. Heidelberg, 83-66
#20	147	Loras	20-5	def. Luther, 87-84; def. Central, 111-80
#21	144	Plattsburgh State	20-5	LOST to SUNY Oneonta, 62-80; def. SUNY New Paltz, 80-73
#22	89	Rochester	20-4	def. Carnegie Mellon, 79-58; def. Case Western Reserve, 68-62
#23	79	North Central (Ill.)	20-5	def. Carthage, 85-54; def. Elmhurst, 78-71
#24	77	Wabash	20-5	LOST to T#29 Wittenberg, 62-76; def. Oberlin, 89-76
#25	51	Middlebury	18-7	LOST to Tufts, 76-85

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	47	Centre	21-4	LOST to Sewanee, 67-77
#27	34	Arcadia	20-5	LOST to Widener, 66-71; LOST to Hood, 81-91
#28	28	UW-Stevens Point	16-8	def. UW-Stout, 80-53; LOST to UW-Platteville, 50-55
T#29	22	Emory	19-5	def. Case Western Reserve, 83-71; def. Carnegie Mellon, 89-74
T#29	22	Wittenberg	20-5	def. #24 Wabash, 76-62; def. Hiram, 92-71
T#31	21	Occidental	21-4	LOST to Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 57-65; def. #9 Pomona-Pitzer, 64-63
T#31	21	Gordon	21-4	LOST to #17 Nichols, 93-107; LOST to Endicott, 71-80
#33	19	New Jersey City	19-6	LOST to Ramapo, 66-74
#34	12	Mount Union	20-5	LOST to Baldwin Wallace, 69-79; def. #16 Capital, 91-71
#35	9	Wheaton (Ill.)	18-7	def. Millikin, 81-73
#36	6	Oswego	20-5	LOST to SUNY Oneonta, 55-70; def. Brockport, 85-69; def. SUNY Geneseo, 69-63
#37	5	La Roche	23-2	def. Mount Aloysius, 62-57; def. Penn State-Altoona, 95-61
T#38	3	Augsburg	17-8	LOST to Macalester, 77-83; LOST to St. Olaf, 80-86
T#38	3	Illinois Wesleyan	17-8	def. North Park, 111-66; def. Carroll, 86-80
#40	2	Scranton	20-5	LOST to Drew, 52-64; def. Goucher, 59-45
T#41	1	Guilford	18-7	def. Emory and Henry, 67-60; LOST to Washington and Lee, 69-74
T#41	1	Lynchburg	20-5	def. Hampden-Sydney, 91-80

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 17, 2019, 05:04:16 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=n39hj/y3zd18adjie55k0v.jpg)

It is now or never.

The last week of the Division III basketball regular season is here. Conferences will decide who will earn automatic bids to the NCAA Tournaments and teams try and position themselves for at-large bids, hosting opportunities, and bracketing considerations.

For teams who have been faltering, this is the last chance to right the ship. For programs which have underachieved, this is the last opportunity to live up to expectations. And of course for those with Cinderella dreams, this is the chance to try on the glass slipper.

Sunday's Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) will cover it all in a special, extended, episode which for the first time (outside of Marathon programming) will feature a guest from each of the eight regions. We will also discuss which teams may be on the bubble, who has most likely secured at-large bid, and which teams need to win the AQs. Plus, we talk about how regions as we know it now could very well change in the future.

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. Sunday's show will hit the air at 6:00 p.m. ET. It can be watched live right here: http://bit.ly/2EeG5ZE (and simulcast on Facebook Live and Periscope).

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to dave.mchugh@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options below.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Katherine Bixby, Johns Hopkins women's coach
- Jonathan Crosthwaite, Occidental men's senior
- Marc Brown, NJCU men's coach
- Justin LeBlanc, Millsaps women's coach
- Jamie Seward, SUNY New Paltz women's coach
- Marcos Echevarria, No. 17 Nichols men's senior
- Herman Carmichael, La Roches men's coach
- Klay Knueppel, Wisconsin Luthern women's coach
- Brad Bankston, ODAC Commissioner
- Pat Coleman & Ryan Scott, D3hoops.com (Bubble Talk)

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2019, 03:37:17 PM

The third public NCAA Division III regional rankings are out: https://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2019/02/men-regional-rankings-third

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 21, 2019, 06:54:04 AM

How They Fared (So Far)
Lots of TBAs in the final week ...

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	621	Nebraska Wesleyan	24-1	02/21 vs. Simpson
#2	598	Whitman	24-1	02/21 vs. Puget Sound
#3	576	Augustana	23-2	02/22 vs. #37 Illinois Wesleyan
#4	535	UW-Oshkosh	23-2	02/21 vs. #31 UW-Stevens Point; 02/23 vs. TBA
#5	526	Randolph-Macon	23-2	02/21 vs. Randolph
#6	470	Swarthmore	22-3	02/22 vs. Washington College
#7	455	MIT	22-3	02/21 vs. WPI; 02/23 vs. NEWMAC Tournament - Championship
#8	440	Hamilton	22-3	02/23 vs. Tufts
#9	417	St. Thomas	22-3	02/21 vs. Augsburg
#10	376	St. John's	21-4	02/21 vs. Bethel
#11	359	Christopher Newport	23-3	def. Southern Virginia, 89-59; 02/21 vs. Salisbury
#12	347	Wooster	22-4	def. Allegheny, 91-89; 02/22 vs. DePauw; 02/23 vs. TBA
#13	312	Amherst	21-4	02/23 vs. #16 Williams
#14	280	Pomona-Pitzer	23-2	def. Caltech, 90-67; 02/22 vs. Redlands; 02/23 vs. SCIAC Final
#15	245	Nichols	23-2	02/21 vs. Western New England
#16	213	Williams	20-5	02/23 vs. #13 Amherst
#17	197	Marietta	20-6	LOST to John Carroll, 79-82
#18	191	Loras	20-5	02/21 vs. Dubuque
#19	175	Whitworth	20-5	02/21 vs. T#42 Linfield
#20	167	Rochester	20-4	02/23 vs. #23 Emory
#21	149	North Central (Ill.)	20-5	02/22 vs. #27 Wheaton (Ill.)
#22	94	Wittenberg	21-5	def. Ohio Wesleyan, 73-51; 02/22 vs. #25 Wabash
#23	60	Emory	19-5	02/23 vs. #20 Rochester
#24	58	Plattsburgh State	20-5	02/22 vs. Brockport
#25	36	Wabash	21-5	def. Hiram, 87-76; 02/22 vs. #22 Wittenberg

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	33	Capital	20-6	def. Muskingum, 79-60; 02/21 vs. Baldwin Wallace; 02/23 vs. TBD
#27	30	Wheaton (Ill.)	19-7	def. Elmhurst, 85-75; 02/22 vs. #21 North Central (Ill.)
#28	23	Middlebury	18-7	IDLE
#29	20	La Roche	23-2	02/23 vs. Mount Aloysius
#30	19	Occidental	21-4	02/22 vs. Claremont-Mudd-Scripps
#31	18	UW-Stevens Point	17-8	def. UW-Eau Claire, 89-61; 02/21 vs. #4 UW-Oshkosh
T#32	14	UW-La Crosse	17-8	02/21 vs. UW-Platteville
T#32	14	Mount Union	21-5	def. Heidelberg, 77-66; 02/21 vs. John Carroll
#34	12	New Jersey City	20-6	def. Ramapo, 66-58; 02/22 vs. Rowan
#35	11	Centre	21-4	02/22 vs. Rhodes; 02/23 vs. TBA; 02/24 vs. TBA
#36	10	Oswego	20-5	02/22 vs. SUNY Oneonta; 02/23 vs. TBA
#37	8	Illinois Wesleyan	18-8	def. Carroll, 82-73; 02/22 vs. #3 Augustana
#38	7	Lynchburg	20-5	02/21 vs. Roanoke
#39	3	Guilford	18-7	02/21 vs. Emory and Henry
T#40	2	Arcadia	20-5	02/21 vs. Albright
T#40	2	York (Pa.)	20-6	def. St. Mary's (Md.), 76-47; 02/21 vs. Mary Washington; 02/23 vs. TBA
T#42	1	Linfield	17-8	02/21 vs. #19 Whitworth
T#42	1	Texas-Dallas	21-4	02/21 vs. McMurry
T#42	1	Wartburg	17-9	LOST to Dubuque, 80-83

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 21, 2019, 01:49:11 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=nag43/okqvyloab8xsjr9h.jpg)

There are just days left in the regular season and conference tournaments are in full throat. And those vying to get into the NCAA Tournament are already sitting on the proverbial "bubble."

There are two ways to keep dancing in March, either win the conference automatic qualifier (i.e. tournament in most cases) or hope one's resume is good enough to be selected. However, with upsets in conference tournaments come some nervous times for those needing the at-large avenue.

Some teams are already on the bubble, but are they in trouble?

On Thursday's Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave brings in guests who either have already lost or may need to win. We also enjoy the thrill of victory. And hear from a coach in charge of off-season workouts and practices at her institution. What goes into such a job as most teams start to make the transition to next season.

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. Thursday's show can be seen LIVE starting at 7:00 p.m. ET right here: http://bit.ly/2NhkfYn (or via Facebook Live and Periscope simulcasts).

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to dave.mchugh@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options to the right.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Cameron Hill, Trinity (Texas) women's coach
- Kristin Karat, Cedar Crest women's coach & Assistant Director for Athletic Performance (WBCA Center Court)
- Jeff Brown, Middlebury men's coach

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 24, 2019, 04:50:21 PM

How They Fared (Complete)
The final report for the season; one game (La Roche v Penn State-Behrend) is delayed due to power outages on the La Roche campus.
(Edit - That game is now late in the first half. Given the unreliability of the power in my neck of the woods--due to high winds, which apparently was also the cause of the issues at La Roche, I am pleasantly surprised that they have been able to resume play. Our power has gone out intermittently all day long, never more than 5 seconds, but probably about 30 times since this morning.)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	621	Nebraska Wesleyan	26-1	def. Simpson, 85-80; def. #18 Loras, 97-79
#2	598	Whitman	26-1	def. Puget Sound, 128-81; def. #19 Whitworth, 107-102
#3	576	Augustana	24-3	def. #37 Illinois Wesleyan, 89-65; LOST to #21 North Central (Ill.), 65-72
#4	535	UW-Oshkosh	23-3	LOST to #31 UW-Stevens Point, 56-76
#5	526	Randolph-Macon	25-3	def. (n) Randolph, 79-42; def. (n) Washington and Lee, 65-57; LOST to (n) #39 Guilford, 59-70
#6	470	Swarthmore	24-3	def. Washington College, 77-59; def. Johns Hopkins, 79-61
#7	455	MIT	22-4	LOST to WPI, 53-55
#8	440	Hamilton	23-4	def. Tufts, 89-84; LOST to #13 Amherst, 56-62
#9	417	St. Thomas	22-4	LOST to Augsburg, 81-84
#10	376	St. John's	23-4	def. Bethel, 82-49; def. Augsburg, 82-79
#11	359	Christopher Newport	25-3	def. Southern Virginia, 89-59; def. Salisbury, 87-71; def. T#40 York (Pa.), 78-56
#12	347	Wooster	23-5	def. Allegheny, 91-89; def. DePauw, 73-52; LOST to #22 Wittenberg, 75-79
#13	312	Amherst	23-4	def. (n) #16 Williams, 74-69; def. #8 Hamilton, 62-56
#14	280	Pomona-Pitzer	25-2	def. Caltech, 90-67; def. Redlands, 79-77; def. #30 Occidental, 68-45
#15	245	Nichols	25-2	def. Western New England, 87-79; def. Gordon, 105-90
#16	213	Williams	20-6	LOST to (n) #13 Amherst, 69-74
#17	197	Marietta	20-6	LOST to John Carroll, 79-82
#18	191	Loras	21-6	def. Dubuque, 93-78; LOST to #1 Nebraska Wesleyan, 79-97
#19	175	Whitworth	21-6	def. T#42 Linfield, 88-69; LOST to #2 Whitman, 102-107
#20	167	Rochester	20-5	LOST to #23 Emory, 82-92
#21	149	North Central (Ill.)	22-5	def. #27 Wheaton (Ill.), 94-87; def. #3 Augustana, 72-65
#22	94	Wittenberg	23-5	def. Ohio Wesleyan, 73-51; def. (n) #25 Wabash, 89-75; def. #12 Wooster, 79-75
#23	60	Emory	20-5	def. #20 Rochester, 92-82
#24	58	Plattsburgh State	20-6	LOST to (n) Brockport, 85-86
#25	36	Wabash	21-6	def. Hiram, 87-76; LOST to (n) #22 Wittenberg, 75-89

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	33	Capital	20-7	def. Muskingum, 79-60; LOST to Baldwin Wallace, 67-81
#27	30	Wheaton (Ill.)	19-8	def. Elmhurst, 85-75; LOST to #21 North Central (Ill.), 87-94
#28	23	Middlebury	18-7	IDLE
#29	20	La Roche	24-3	def. Mount Aloysius, 70-62 OT; LOST to Penn State-Behrend, 67-65
#30	19	Occidental	22-5	def. Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 64-62 OT; LOST to #14 Pomona-Pitzer, 45-68
#31	18	UW-Stevens Point	18-9	def. UW-Eau Claire, 89-61; def. #4 UW-Oshkosh, 76-56; LOST to UW-Platteville, 57-70
T#32	14	UW-La Crosse	17-9	LOST to UW-Platteville, 51-61
T#32	14	Mount Union	22-6	def. Heidelberg, 77-66; def. John Carroll, 94-84; LOST to Baldwin Wallace, 75-79
#34	12	New Jersey City	20-7	def. Ramapo, 66-58; LOST to Rowan, 77-80
#35	11	Centre	23-5	def. Rhodes, 75-66; def. Oglethorpe, 75-72; LOST to Sewanee, 70-65
#36	10	Oswego	22-5	def. SUNY Oneonta, 73-69 2OT; def. Brockport, 55-50
#37	8	Illinois Wesleyan	18-9	def. Carroll, 82-73; LOST to #3 Augustana, 65-89
#38	7	Lynchburg	20-6	LOST to (n) Roanoke, 72-74
#39	3	Guilford	21-7	def. (n) Emory and Henry, 77-67; def. (n) Roanoke, 67-65; def. (n) #5 Randolph-Macon, 70-59
T#40	2	Arcadia	22-5	def. Albright, 77-73; def. Widener, 92-56
T#40	2	York (Pa.)	21-7	def. St. Mary's (Md.), 76-47; def. Mary Washington, 69-62; LOST to #11 Christopher Newport, 56-78
T#42	1	Linfield	17-9	LOST to #19 Whitworth, 69-88
T#42	1	Texas-Dallas	24-4	def. McMurry, 93-66; def. Concordia (Texas), 88-69; def. Hardin-Simmons, 88-74
T#42	1	Wartburg	17-9	LOST to Dubuque, 80-83

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 28, 2019, 05:32:44 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=nnprh/8dkw0vs268zljo93.jpg)

It is nearly time to tip off the 2019 Division III Men's and Women's Championship Tournaments, but not without checking with Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) first.

We talk to a number of programs getting ready for their first round games. From those dancing for the first time to those whose programs are a mainstay, we will cover the gamete on Thursday's show. Tune in starting at 7:00 p.m. ET to also hear who experts and friends of the show think will be in the final fours, even winning it all, in a few weeks time.

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Thursday's show in the video player above. If you miss any of the program, you can always watch it On Demand or listen to the audio-only podcast to the right (available shortly after the show goes off air).

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to dave.mchugh@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options to the right.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Matt Hunter, York (Pa.) men's coach
- Bobby Hughes, Rosemont men's coach
- Women's final four predictions
- Brian Morehouse, No. 10 Hope women's coach (WBCA Center Court)
- Brad Fischer, No. 13 UW-Oshkosh women's coach
- Terry Butterfield, Texas-Dallas men's coach
- Men's final four predictions

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 01, 2019, 03:14:08 PM

Not sure if anyone noticed, but 24 of the Top 25 teams are in the tournament. I know this has been discussed in previous years. I don't recall if all 25 have made it into the tournament, so 24 could be a record.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 02, 2019, 07:28:33 AM

Top 25 teams went an impressive 22-2. St. John's lost and Wittenberg beat Emory.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 03, 2019, 06:53:53 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=ntb5x/3u7xixj9qrgmdvn7.jpg)

We are down to 32. A great weekend of basketball has cut the NCAA tournament teams in half. There were some surprises, surprising outcomes, and fun environments around DIII. Even the end of the title defense of Nebraska Wesleyan.

On Sunday's Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), we try and recap it all while also hearing from several of the coaches who found themselves in the thick of it.

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. Sunday's show hits the air at 7:00 p.m. ET. You can watch it in the video player above. If you miss any of the show, you can watch it On Demand or listen the audio-only podcast to the right (available shortly after the show goes off air).

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to dave.mchugh@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options to the right.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Mike Schauer, Wheaton (Ill.) men's coach
- Tom Palombo, Guilford men's coach
- Randi Henderson, No. 22 WashU women's coach
- Fred Richter, No. 15 DeSales women's coach
- Bill Broderick, Christopher Newport women's coach
- Dave Hixon, No. 7 Amherst men's coach

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 07, 2019, 03:53:17 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=o0hph/9l54usrryjbt1lc9.jpg)

The second weekend of the DIII Men's and Women's Championship Tournaments is set to start. Can the upset minded teams continue to prevail? Can the "favorites" maintain their poise? What home team will enjoy their own cooking? And who will still be playing in Fort Wayne and Salem?

On Thursday's Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave is joined by a number of guests to get a look not only at the action ahead this weekend, but the action coming at the final fours. Which teams seemed ready to be playing one more weekend?

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. Thursday's show will air live starting at 7:00 p.m. ET. here: http://bit.ly/2C82LcA (or via Facebook Live and Periscope simulcasts).

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to dave.mchugh@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options below.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- John Taurer, No. 13 St. Thomas men's coach
- Dave Hixon, No. 7 Amherst men's coach
- Nathan Denison, VP for Sales, Memorial Coliseum (Fort Wayne, Ind.)
- Mark Morefield, No. 12 UMHB women's coach
- Carla Berube, No. 4 Tufts women's coach

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Rofrog on March 08, 2019, 11:54:01 PM

Just out of the top 10 there is only 3 teams remaining 4th Oshkosh 6th Swatmore and 9th CNU and two not ranked teams Wheaton,Guilford nice job!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiko on March 09, 2019, 12:53:29 AM

Quote from: Rofrog on March 08, 2019, 11:54:01 PM
Just out of the top 10 there is only 3 teams remaining 4th Oshkosh 6th Swatmore and 9th CNU and two not ranked teams Wheaton,Guilford nice job!

Last year's final four was:
#24 UW-Oshkosh
#26 Nebraska Wesleyan
Received no votes Ramapo
Received no votes Springfield

The level of parity in D3 seems to increase every year these days...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 09, 2019, 12:59:55 AM

Quote from: kiko on March 09, 2019, 12:53:29 AM
Quote from: Rofrog on March 08, 2019, 11:54:01 PM
Just out of the top 10 there is only 3 teams remaining 4th Oshkosh 6th Swatmore and 9th CNU and two not ranked teams Wheaton,Guilford nice job!

Last year's final four was:
#24 UW-Oshkosh
#26 Nebraska Wesleyan
Received no votes Ramapo
Received no votes Springfield

The level of parity in D3 seems to increase every year these days...

Either that or the poll voters get dumber every year! ;D (I prefer to believe it is your explanation. ;))

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on March 09, 2019, 03:27:14 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 09, 2019, 12:59:55 AM
Quote from: kiko on March 09, 2019, 12:53:29 AM
Quote from: Rofrog on March 08, 2019, 11:54:01 PM
Just out of the top 10 there is only 3 teams remaining 4th Oshkosh 6th Swatmore and 9th CNU and two not ranked teams Wheaton,Guilford nice job!

Last year's final four was:
#24 UW-Oshkosh
#26 Nebraska Wesleyan
Received no votes Ramapo
Received no votes Springfield

The level of parity in D3 seems to increase every year these days...

Either that or the poll voters get dumber every year! ;D (I prefer to believe it is your explanation. ;))

I must be looking at different numbers to everyone else. I thought poll voters seemed to do quite fine this year. 14 of the 16 playing the 2nd weekend were ranked including 8 of the top 10. Of the two unranked teams, Guilford was 27th (missing 25th by 7 points) and Wheaton 31st (receiving 16 points).

Comparing to last year, the worst case scenario would have #14, #19, #27, and #31 which is still an improvement. While the best case would have #4, #6, #9, #22.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 09, 2019, 01:08:13 PM

What's always funny to me, having done this for a little while now, is how similar my final ballot ends up being to my pre-season ballot, even if that doesn't seem at all likely during the season. There's always a few teams that crater and a few that come out of nowhere, but the teams often what we think they'll be - at least more often than one would expect.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 10, 2019, 05:53:08 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=o65k8/8g9z0il3ffqsli12.jpg)

The final fours are set! Eight of the best men's and women's teams remain to battle it out for two national titles. On the women's side, many of those expected to make it to Salem. On the men's side, none of the top four powers will be in Fort Wayne.

Sunday on Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave takes a look at both a record breaking performance on the men's side and chats with the four teams dancing on the women's side. (Due to the extensive coverage in Fort Wayne at the men's championship weekend, Sunday's show will have more women's coverage than men's.) How one man put up 62-points in a game and has already shattered the single-tournament scoring record. And how the four hosts on the women's side survived their weekends to advance.

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. Sunday's show can be seen LIVE starting at 7:00 p.m. ET right here: http://bit.ly/2NRnPZi (or via Facebook Live and Periscope simulcasts).

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to dave.mchugh@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options below.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Aston Francis, Wheaton (Ill.) senior guard
- Jeff Hans, No. 1 Thomas More women's coach
- Adrienne Schibles, No. 3 Bowdoin women's coach
- Ruth Sinn, No. 2 St. Thomas women's coach
- Bridgette Mann, No. 9 Scranton senior guard
- Carey Harveycutter, City of Salem (Vir.)

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 16, 2019, 05:38:21 AM

Now that Wheaton has lost, the question really doesn't need to be asked, but I'll ask it anyway for fun.

If Wheaton beat Swarthmore for the national championship, what final ranking would they end up as?

I assume there are a few voters that automatically put the champion as #1, but more probably don't. Top teams like NWU, Whitman and Augustana all fell fairly early. It would be real interesting to know where Wheaton would've been ranked as they would've beaten Augustana, Oshkosh and Swarthmore to the big door step.

On that note, I'm guessing Oshkosh or Swarthmore will be crowned #1 without a doubt. But will Wheaton be #3 or #4?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 16, 2019, 08:37:35 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 16, 2019, 05:38:21 AM
Now that Wheaton has lost, the question really doesn't need to be asked, but I'll ask it anyway for fun.

If Wheaton beat Swarthmore for the national championship, what final ranking would they end up as?

I assume there are a few voters that automatically put the champion as #1, but more probably don't. Top teams like NWU, Whitman and Augustana all fell fairly early. It would be real interesting to know where Wheaton would've been ranked as they would've beaten Augustana, Oshkosh and Swarthmore to the big door step.

On that note, I'm guessing Oshkosh or Swarthmore will be crowned #1 without a doubt. But will Wheaton be #3 or #4?

I won't have Wheaton in the top four on my final ballot. I believe UW-Oshkosh, Swarthmore, Augustana, Nebraska Wesleyan, and Loras are better. After those five I'd start considering North Central and Wheaton from the CCIW.

If Wheaton beat both UW-Oshkosh and Swarthmore this weekend (the best two teams I have seen this year) then, yes, I would have had Wheaton #1 on my final ballot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 16, 2019, 11:19:19 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 16, 2019, 05:38:21 AM
Now that Wheaton has lost, the question really doesn't need to be asked, but I'll ask it anyway for fun.

If Wheaton beat Swarthmore for the national championship, what final ranking would they end up as?

In the history of our poll, no voter has ever placed the winner of the NCAA Tournament/playoffs anywhere but No. 1. (True on D3hoops.com and D3football.com.) Legend has it that one voter requested to do so in the first few years of our poll, but I requested they reconsider and they obliged.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 16, 2019, 02:26:01 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 16, 2019, 11:19:19 AM
In the history of our poll, no voter has ever placed the winner of the NCAA Tournament/playoffs anywhere but No. 1. (True on D3hoops.com and D3football.com.) Legend has it that one voter requested to do so in the first few years of our poll, but I requested they reconsider and they obliged.

Pat straddles the line between legend and reality in one anecdote!

This is why he's the guru and we're not. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiko on March 17, 2019, 12:16:42 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 16, 2019, 02:26:01 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 16, 2019, 11:19:19 AM
In the history of our poll, no voter has ever placed the winner of the NCAA Tournament/playoffs anywhere but No. 1. (True on D3hoops.com and D3football.com.) Legend has it that one voter requested to do so in the first few years of our poll, but I requested they reconsider and they obliged.

Pat straddles the line between legend and reality in one anecdote!

This is why he's the guru and we're not. ;)

Plausible deniability... but anyone who reads his note can only take away "don't even think about it".

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 17, 2019, 01:05:53 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 16, 2019, 11:19:19 AM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 16, 2019, 05:38:21 AM
Now that Wheaton has lost, the question really doesn't need to be asked, but I'll ask it anyway for fun.

If Wheaton beat Swarthmore for the national championship, what final ranking would they end up as?

In the history of our poll, no voter has ever placed the winner of the NCAA Tournament/playoffs anywhere but No. 1. (True on D3hoops.com and D3football.com.) Legend has it that one voter requested to do so in the first few years of our poll, but I requested they reconsider and they obliged.

"but I requested they reconsider and they obliged." = I made him an offer he couldn't refuse (no horses were harmed in this offer, though)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 17, 2019, 09:31:37 AM

When you go back and look at scheduled, by the time a team has reached the championship game, they've beaten an array of teams that just can't compare to someone, even someone really good, who loses the first weekend. I doubt Wheaton will be in my top four, but I haven't started looking yet, so you never know. Oshkosh will definitely be #1, though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 17, 2019, 09:36:45 AM

One of the more interesting things that Mike Schauer said in the Wheaton postgame press conference on Friday night -- and Mike always says interesting things when you put a microphone in front of him -- was that the semifinal against UW-Oshkosh was the eighth game that Wheaton played this season against the three teams ranked atop the Central Region by the committee (Augie and North Central three times each, UWO twice). That's a quarter of all the games that Wheaton played this season, which is pretty amazing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 17, 2019, 03:10:13 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 17, 2019, 09:36:45 AM
One of the more interesting things that Mike Schauer said in the Wheaton postgame press conference on Friday night -- and Mike always says interesting things when you put a microphone in front of him -- was that the semifinal against UW-Oshkosh was the eighth game that Wheaton played this season against the three teams ranked atop the Central Region by the committee (Augie and North Central three times each, UWO twice). That's a quarter of all the games that Wheaton played this season, which is pretty amazing.

Wheaton went 3-5 against that group, beating each team once.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on March 17, 2019, 05:34:35 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 17, 2019, 03:10:13 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 17, 2019, 09:36:45 AM
One of the more interesting things that Mike Schauer said in the Wheaton postgame press conference on Friday night -- and Mike always says interesting things when you put a microphone in front of him -- was that the semifinal against UW-Oshkosh was the eighth game that Wheaton played this season against the three teams ranked atop the Central Region by the committee (Augie and North Central three times each, UWO twice). That's a quarter of all the games that Wheaton played this season, which is pretty amazing.
Wheaton went 3-5 against that group, beating each team once.

In the 3 wins Aston Francis averaged 42.3 PPG.
In the 5 losses he averaged 31.8 PPG.

Will WC be ranked above Augie and North Central both of which beat them 2 out of 3?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 17, 2019, 07:27:13 PM

Quote from: AndOne on March 17, 2019, 05:34:35 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 17, 2019, 03:10:13 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 17, 2019, 09:36:45 AM
One of the more interesting things that Mike Schauer said in the Wheaton postgame press conference on Friday night -- and Mike always says interesting things when you put a microphone in front of him -- was that the semifinal against UW-Oshkosh was the eighth game that Wheaton played this season against the three teams ranked atop the Central Region by the committee (Augie and North Central three times each, UWO twice). That's a quarter of all the games that Wheaton played this season, which is pretty amazing.
Wheaton went 3-5 against that group, beating each team once.

In the 3 wins Aston Francis averaged 42.3 PPG.
In the 5 losses he averaged 31.8 PPG.

Will WC be ranked above Augie and North Central both of which beat them 2 out of 3?

Possibly. Beat ranked Wooster, Augie and Marietta.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on March 17, 2019, 08:10:29 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 17, 2019, 07:27:13 PM
Quote from: AndOne on March 17, 2019, 05:34:35 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 17, 2019, 03:10:13 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 17, 2019, 09:36:45 AM
One of the more interesting things that Mike Schauer said in the Wheaton postgame press conference on Friday night -- and Mike always says interesting things when you put a microphone in front of him -- was that the semifinal against UW-Oshkosh was the eighth game that Wheaton played this season against the three teams ranked atop the Central Region by the committee (Augie and North Central three times each, UWO twice). That's a quarter of all the games that Wheaton played this season, which is pretty amazing.
Wheaton went 3-5 against that group, beating each team once.

In the 3 wins Aston Francis averaged 42.3 PPG.
In the 5 losses he averaged 31.8 PPG.

Will WC be ranked above Augie and North Central both of which beat them 2 out of 3?

Possibly. Beat ranked Wooster, Augie and Marietta.

My guess is above NCC, below Augie. But just a guess. I could argue ANY order of the three.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 18, 2019, 06:30:14 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 17, 2019, 08:10:29 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 17, 2019, 07:27:13 PM
Quote from: AndOne on March 17, 2019, 05:34:35 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 17, 2019, 03:10:13 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 17, 2019, 09:36:45 AM
One of the more interesting things that Mike Schauer said in the Wheaton postgame press conference on Friday night -- and Mike always says interesting things when you put a microphone in front of him -- was that the semifinal against UW-Oshkosh was the eighth game that Wheaton played this season against the three teams ranked atop the Central Region by the committee (Augie and North Central three times each, UWO twice). That's a quarter of all the games that Wheaton played this season, which is pretty amazing.
Wheaton went 3-5 against that group, beating each team once.

In the 3 wins Aston Francis averaged 42.3 PPG.
In the 5 losses he averaged 31.8 PPG.

Will WC be ranked above Augie and North Central both of which beat them 2 out of 3?

Possibly. Beat ranked Wooster, Augie and Marietta.

My guess is above NCC, below Augie. But just a guess. I could argue ANY order of the three.

That's where I ended up. For a while I had NCC as the best, since they were 2-1 against both Augie and Wheaton, but the other losses on the schedule (especially the loss to Loras) kept me from making my decision so CCIW dependent. Three great teams regardless.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on March 18, 2019, 10:05:14 PM

Hey... didn't Dave promise an early preseason top 25 before the weekend was over in one of the Live Fort Wayne shows? ??? ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 19, 2019, 06:28:46 AM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on March 18, 2019, 10:05:14 PM
Hey... didn't Dave promise an early preseason top 25 before the weekend was over in one of the Live Fort Wayne shows? ??? ;D

I think it was an early preseason All-American list.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 19, 2019, 01:18:26 PM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on March 18, 2019, 10:05:14 PM
Hey... didn't Dave promise an early preseason top 25 before the weekend was over in one of the Live Fort Wayne shows? ??? ;D

No ... I said I might have to start working on my preseason Top 25 while I had the data fresh in my head. :)

There was also talk in the same vein about preseason all-America selections.

And then continued to joke about how some entities do that in D1 once everything is done and how it is called the "way too early" stuff.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 19, 2019, 01:25:00 PM

Kind of like how we'll already be drafting teams and players for next year's tournament? ::) 12 of my 16 players I drafted last year at this time did make this year's tournament!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BluesBrother on March 19, 2019, 07:52:19 PM

Vote for Austin Butler to represent D3 in the Slam Dunk Contest at the Final Four!

http://www.darkhorsedunker.com/

(https://i.imgflip.com/2wgfi4.gif) (https://imgflip.com/gif/2wgfi4) (https://imgflip.com/gif-maker)

(https://i.imgflip.com/2wgek5.gif) (https://imgflip.com/gif/2wgek5) (https://imgflip.com/gif-maker)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 19, 2019, 08:13:10 PM

* = preseason poll

If there is a name (poster), that means it was part of the Top 25 pool.

RMC was the highest vote-getter not named in the preseason poll.

Team	TOTAL	FINAL	WK12	WK11	WK10	WK9	WK8	WK7	WK6	WK5	WK4	WK3	WK2	WK1	PRE
NWU*	8501	431	621	621	618	616	595	625	625	625	625	625	625	625	624
Augustana*	7717	471	543	576	555	548	607	591	580	567	563	558	546	473	539
Whitman*	7704	468	604	598	594	597	582	573	560	551	533	529	515	471	529
Oshkosh*	7449	625	521	535	582	577	564	556	539	519	507	498	439	420	567
Hamilton*	6273	316	379	440	387	416	371	492	444	517	531	531	541	508	400
Williams*	5996	383	171	213	168	391	464	405	563	562	572	575	567	545	417
MIT*	5543	191	349	455	402	484	446	391	315	454	440	423	390	340	463
Whitworth*	4660	27	105	175	330	279	384	508	468	455	425	408	344	290	462
RMC	4380	423	490	526	510	456	392	320	221	186	202	175	288	191	0
Swarthmore*	4256	597	482	470	419	285	232	223	343	205	80	89	74	428	329
Marietta*	3886	335	104	197	148	338	428	363	295	371	435	395	322	108	47
St Thomas*	3669	343	329	417	476	531	510	463	335	196	40	3	2	1	23
St John's*	3365	117	417	376	300	244	327	319	440	318	186	128	70	46	77
Stevens Point*	3352	7	25	18	28	37	155	122	405	437	293	485	488	496	356
Wooster*	3314	149	264	347	326	400	304	198	138	91	242	195	302	251	107
CNU*	3100	549	414	359	329	257	196	234	163	131	196	123	49	94	6
Wittenberg*	2790	150	259	94	22	0	9	65	73	246	384	353	315	454	366
Pomona Pitzer*	2507	211	376	280	401	334	288	232	148	94	31	22	19	60	11
Plattsburgh St*	2255	0	36	58	144	46	29	42	254	187	285	297	368	295	214
Amherst*	2187	322	438	312	335	181	89	144	40	92	18	37	99	44	36
Nichols*	1959	424	272	245	193	153	77	47	36	62	199	139	68	19	25
Rochester*	1888	48	81	167	89	36	21	117	111	284	197	305	230	135	67
Whitewater*	1825	0	0	0	0	0	0	25	107	243	401	372	338	258	81
Loras*	1678	267	152	191	147	90	0	99	61	89	180	125	85	175	17
Wabash	1629	0	4	36	77	195	291	362	271	138	145	110	0	0	0
NCC*	1346	213	271	149	79	286	91	42	21	0	15	25	86	49	19
IWU*	1251	5	5	8	3	0	0	0	4	17	43	226	438	360	142
Middlebury*	968	4	21	23	51	21	9	10	4	10	53	82	197	317	166
Lynchburg	876	0	0	7	1	1	129	308	190	107	22	35	76	0	0
Capital	839	29	44	33	209	118	164	76	141	25	0	0	0	0	0
Wheaton IL (Greek)	786	447	16	30	9	2	6	6	11	7	11	31	26	184	0
Emory*	574	35	172	60	22	41	14	0	0	1	0	0	7	75	147
Salisbury	526	0	0	0	0	0	0	13	80	157	107	99	57	13	0
Springfield*	478	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	47	431
Platteville*	438	1	15	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	12	21	22	367
Guilford	398	334	30	3	1	14	9	1	1	5	0	0	0	0	0
Oswego St	371	164	37	10	6	26	47	18	0	0	28	23	12	0	0
NJCU*	362	0	8	12	19	13	5	0	12	7	9	5	22	71	179
JHU*	286	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	8	14	14	20	22	206
Linfield	207	0	0	1	0	0	179	5	4	18	0	0	0	0	0
JCU*	192	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	6	57	129
Scranton	165	0	0	0	2	0	3	0	0	48	51	37	16	8	0
Wesleyan*	148	0	0	0	0	0	9	61	57	11	0	0	0	0	10
Arcadia	130	11	13	2	34	21	3	27	12	7	0	0	0	0	0
Gordon	128	0	1	0	21	14	10	7	36	39	0	0	0	0	0
La Crosse	124	0	0	14	0	38	53	19	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Occidental (nescac1)	106	4	12	19	21	9	3	1	8	29	0	0	0	0	0
Maryville*	102	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	7	95
St Olaf*	92	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	92
Nazareth*	92	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	32	60

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 19, 2019, 08:14:00 PM

Team	TOTAL	FINAL	WK12	WK11	WK10	WK9	WK8	WK7	WK6	WK5	WK4	WK3	WK2	WK1	PRE
Centre	84	0	1	11	47	0	16	2	1	0	2	0	4	0	0
Hope*	78	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	1	76
Mount Union	67	0	0	14	12	0	0	3	8	8	11	11	0	0	0
WPI	61	0	0	0	0	0	2	0	0	0	29	15	10	5	0
Montclair St*	60	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	11	8	25	6	9
Ramapo*	57	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	24	33
Endicott	48	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	4	42	0
Roanoke*	48	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	3	3	42
PS Behrend*	41	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	15	26
La Roche	37	1	1	20	5	9	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
LeTourneau*	35	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	35
E&H*	31	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	28	3
Aurora*	28	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	9	19
Rowan	26	9	17	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
E Conn*	25	0	0	0	0	0	2	6	0	0	0	0	9	0	8
Wash U*	20	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	20
Texas-Dallas	16	0	15	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Cabrini*	14	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	14
F&M*	14	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	14
York Pa	10	8	0	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Wartburg	10	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	9	0	0	0	0
Augsburg	9	0	4	0	3	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Colby	9	0	0	0	0	0	9	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Bethel*	5	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	5
Hanover*	5	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	5
Mary Washington	4	0	0	0	0	0	0	4	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Baldwin Wallace	3	0	3	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Sewanee	3	0	3	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Keene St*	3	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	2
CMS*	3	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	3
Gwynedd Mercy	2	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Moravian (ronk)	2	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
ONU*	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	2
Salem St*	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	2
LFC	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0
Yeshiva*	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1
Bowdoin (NCF)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Hobart (Osprey)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Illinois Tech (7Express)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
NEC (Smitty Oom)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Ohio Wes (Smedindy)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Olivet (HOPEful)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Rosemont (mailsy)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
RPI (hopefan)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Skidmore (magicman)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
St Joseph CT (Grizzlies)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
U of Chicago (WUPHF)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 19, 2019, 12:33:47 PM

Getting organized for my D3hoops.com Preseason Top 25 ballot.

Here is a look at what the final D3hoops.com Top 25 teams from last season lose and return. I'll use this, and info about other teams, to start putting a Top 25 together.

(Players noted below in "gone" and "back" averaged 8.0+ PPG last season. Obviously each team has other important lost/returning players, but that's where I drew the line for this analysis.)

(Also note, I'm not factoring in any newcomers -- transfers, freshmen. Just looking at guys who played last year. I'll usually wait to see a newcomer play to factor them in.)

#1 UW-Oshkosh (29-3/National Champs)
* Gone: Ben Boots, 6-1 G (15.7 ppg, 4.2 apg, 4.0 apg); Brett Wittchow, 6-4 G (14.0 påg, 4.7 rpg)
* Back: Jack Flynn, 6-8 Sr. C (15.5 ppg, 4.6 rpg); Adam Fravert, 6-8 Sr. F (14.8 peg, 7.9 rpg); Connor Duax, 6-5 Jr. F (9.5 ppg, 4.9 rpg)

#2 Swarthmore (29-4/National Runner Up)
* Gone: Cam Wiley, 6-0 G (15.2 ppg, 4.3 ppg, 4.1 apg)
* Back: Zac O'Dell, 6-7 Sr. F (13.3 ppg, 8.1 rpg); Conor Harkins, 6-3 Jr. G (13.0 ppg, 4.2 rpg); George Visconti, 6-3 So. G (11.6 ppg); Nate Shafer, 6-6 Sr. F (8.5 peg, 7.4 rpg)

#3 Christopher Newport (29-4/Final Four)
* Gone: Marcus Carter, 6-2 G (17.1 ppg, 7.1 rpg)
* Back: Jason Aigner, 6-2 Jr. G (15.2 ppg, 4.2 rpg); Cutch Ellis, 6-7 Sr. F (10.4 ppg, 6.5 rpg)

#4 Augustana (26-4/Sweet 16)
* Gone: Nolan Ebel, 6-1 G (16.6 ppg, 3.1 rpg, 3.1 apg); Chrishawn Orange, 6-2 G (12.1 ppg, 4.6 rpg, 3.2 apg); Brett Benning, 6-6 F (11.0 ppg, 4.2 rpg);
* Back: Pierson Wofford, 6-3 Sr. F (12.9 ppg, 5.8 rpg); Micah Martin, 6-11 Sr. C (8.1 ppg, 4.5 rpg)

#5 Whitman (28-2/Sweet 16)
* Gone: Joey Hewitt, 6-2 G (16.3 ppg, 4.1 rpg); Austin Butler, 6-3 G (11.7 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 4.4 apg); Jack Stewart, 6-3 G (11.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg); Cedric Jacobs-Jones, 6-2 G (8.9 ppg, 4.3 rpg)
* Back: Darne Ducket, 5-11 Jr. G (12.4 ppg); Trevor Osborne, 6-2 Sr G. (8.4 ppg); Andrew Vickers, 6-4 Sr. G (8.0 ppg, 3.4 rpg)

#6 Wheaton IL (23-9/Final Four)
* Gone: Aston Francis, 6-2 G (34.2 ppg, 7.9 rpg, 3.1 apg); Luke Peters, 6-3 G (8.0 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 4.2 apg)
* Back: Luke Anthony, 6-3 Jr G (8.7 ppg)

#7 Nebraska Wesleyan (27-2)
* Gone: Ryan Garver, 6-3 F (15.9 ppg, 5.9 rpg, 7.6 apg); Cooper Cook, 6-5 F (15.0 ppg, 7.0 rpg)
* Back: Nate Schimonitz, 6-4 Sr. G (16.5 ppg, 3.8 rpg, 4.4 rpg); Jack Hiller, 6-6 Sr. G (12.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg); Clay Reimers, 6-7 Sr. C (10.9 ppg, 6-2 rpg); Nate Bahe, 6-3 Sr. G (10.4 ppg, 3.7 rpg);

#8 Nichols (28-3/Elite 8)
* Gone: Marcos Echevarria, 5-10 G (20.3 ppg, 3.9 rpg, 3.9 apg)
* Back: Deante Bruton, 6-0 Sr. G (19.3 ppg, 4.4 rpg, 2.9 apg); Matt Morrow, 6-8 Jr. F (13.3 ppg, 7.2 rpg); Jerome Cunningham, 6-8 Sr. F (9.9 ppg, 8.8 rpg)

#9 Randolph-Macon (27-4/Sweet 16)
* Gone: Grayson Midulla, 6-4 F (10.9 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 2.5 apg); Luke Neeley, 6-8 F (9.7 ppg); Darryl Williams, 6-3 F (9.1 ppg, 3.3 rpg)
* Back: Buzz Anthony, 5-11 Jr.. G (15.6 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 5.8 apg); Corey Bays, 6-3 Sr. G (11.3 ppg, 4.1 rpg)

#10 Williams (23-7/Elite 8)
* Gone: Bobby Casey, 6-3 G (18.2 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 4.4 apg); James Heskett, 6-8 F (17.1 ppg, 3.6 rpg); Kyle Scadlock, 6-7 F (13.7 ppg, 7.5 rpg, 2.1 apg)
* Back: Matt Karpowicz, 6-8 Sr. C (11.8 ppg, 6.1 rpg)

#11 St. Thomas (24-5/Sweet 16)
* Gone: Connor Bair, 6-5 F (14.0 ppg, 4.7 rpg); Michael Hannon, 6-2 G (9.6 ppg)
* Back: Anders Nelson, 6-0 So. G (14.1 ppg, 4.8 rpg, 4.5 apg; Ryan Lindberg, 6-3 Jr. G (8.0 ppg, 2.1 rpg)

#12 Marietta (23-7/Elite 8)
* Gone: Anthony Wallace, 6-2 G (11.6 ppg, 3.4 rpg); Kyle Dixon, 6-3 G (10.2 ppg, 5.5 rpg)
* Back: Jason Ellis, 5-11 Jr. G (10.7 ppg, 2.6 rpg); Lucas Isaly, 5-10 So. G (8.6 ppg, 2.3 rpg); Caleb Hoyng, 6-4 Sr. F (8.5 ppg, 5.4 rpg)

#13 Guilford (24-8/Elite 8)
* Gone: Marcus Curry, 6-5 F (15.0 ppg, 7.0 rpg); Carson Long, 6-4 F (12.8 ppg, 4.5 rpg)
* Back: Kyler Gregory, 6-6 Sr. F (13.5 ppg, 8.1 rpg); Jaylen Gore, 5-11 Jr. G (10.1 ppg, 4.0 rpg, 4.2 rpg)

#14 Amherst (25-5/Sweet 16)
* Gone: n/a
* Back: Grant Robinson, 6-2 Jr. G (15.6 ppg, 4.8 rpg, 2.9 apg); Fru Che, 6-5 Jr. G (11.3 ppg, 4.7 rpg); Eric Sellew, 6-7 Sr. F (11.0 ppg, 8.3 rpg, 2.3 apg); Garrett Day, 6-1 Jr. G (8.0 ppg)

#15 Hamilton (25-5/Sweet 16)
* Gone: Peter Hoffman, 6-6 F (13.2 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 2.3 apg); Michael Grassey, 6-4 F (11.6 ppg, 6.8 rpg); Tim Doyle, 6-5 G (9.3 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 3.2 apg); Andrew Groll, 6-7 F (8.1 ppg, 6.1 rpg)
* Back: Kena Gilmour, 6-4 Sr. G (19.0 ppg, 5.8 rpg, 3.1 apg)

#16 Loras (23-7/Sweet 16)
* Gone: Ryan DiCanio, 6-3, G (19.1 ppg, 5.8 rpg, 4.3 apg); Josh Ruggles, 6-2 G (18.1 ppg, 4.3 rpg, 3.4 apg); Demond George, 6-0 G (11.9 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 3.2 apg)
* Back: Rowen McGowen, 6-4 Jr. G (10.9 ppg, 3.4 rpg); Jordan Boyd, 6-6 So. F (10.0 ppg, 4.7 rpg)

#17 North Central (23-6)
* Gone: n/a
* Back: Connor Raridon, 6-6 Sr. F (18.0 ppg, 7.3 rpg, 5.1 apg); Matt Cappelletti, 6-5 Sr. F (15.1 ppg, 8.0 rpg); Blaise Meredith, 6-4 Jr. G (10.4 ppg, 4.8 rpg)

#18 Pomona-Pitzer (26-3)
* Gone: Daniel Rosenbaum, 6-4 G (18.9 ppg, 5.9 rpg, 2.3 apg); Corbin Koch, 6-3 G (9.0 ppg, 5.2 rpg, 2.5 apg)
* Back: Micah Elan, 6-3 Sr. G (15.2 ppg, 5.2 rpg, 4.3 apg); Alex Preston, 6-9 Jr. F (12.2 ppg, 5.2 rpg)

#19 MIT (23-5)
* Gone: AJ Jurko, 6-3 G (18.2 ppg, 3.1 rpg, 7.4 apg); Bradley Jomard, 6-6 F (17.8 ppg, 4.8 rpg, 5.9 apg); Tim Roberts, 6-5 F (15.1 ppg, 10.8 rpg, 2.4 apg); Cameron Korb, 6-1 G (11.8 ppg, 2.5 rpg)
* Back: Ian Hinkley, 6-4 Jr. G (12.6 ppg, 4.7 rpg); Hamilton Forsythe, 6-8 Jr. F (11.1 ppg, 2.6 rpg)

#20 Oswego State (24-6/Sweet 16)
* Gone: Tyler Pierre, 6-6 C (13.4 ppg, 9.1 rpg); Quinn Carey, 6-3 G (11.3 ppg, 2.7 rpg)
* Back: Brandan Gartland, 6-3 Sr. G (13.0 ppg, 4.2 rpg); Liam Sanborn, 6-0 Jr. G (12.6 ppg, 4.6 rpg, 5.5 apg); Joe Sullivan, 6-5 Sr. F (9.9 ppg, 7.4 rpg)

#21 Wittenberg (24-6)
* Gone: Mitchell Balser, 6-0 G (11.8 ppg, 3.1 rpg, 2.4 apg)
* Back: Connor Seipel, 6-6 Sr. F (17.7 ppg, 10.3 ppg, 2.3 apg); Jake Bertemes, 5-11 Sr. G (11.8 ppg, 2.8 rpg, 2.7 apg); James Johnson, 6-6 Jr. F (11.2 ppg, 5.8 rpg)

#22 Wooster (24-6)
* Gone: Reece Dupler, 6-2 G (17.2 ppg, 3.7 rpg, 2.9 apg)
* Back: Danyon Hempy, 6-5 Sr. G (20.6 ppg, 5.3 rpg, 3.0 apg); Dontae Williams, 6-7 Jr. F (10.1 ppg, 6.1 rpg); Keonn Scott, 6-1 Jr. G (8.6 ppg)

#23 St. John's (23-5)
* Gone: David Stokman, 6-2 G (15.6 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 3.5 apg)
* Back: Jubie Alade, 6-4 Sr. F (13.1 ppg, 4.3 rpg, 3.0 apg; Lucas Walford, 6-8 Sr. F (11.5 ppg, 9.3 rpg; Zach Hanson, 6-6 Jr. F (10.9 ppg, 4.5 rpg)

#24 Rochester (21-6)
* Gone: Ryan Clamage, 6-5 G (16.0 ppg, 6.7 rpg, 3.4 apg); Jacob Wittig, 5-11 G (10.2 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 4.9 apg); Andrew Lundstrom, 6-7 F (9.7 ppg, 4.5 rpg)
* Back: Ryan Algier, 6-10 Jr. F (8.0 ppg, 3.4 rpg)

#25 Emory (20-6)
* Gone: Gabriel Baitey, 6-2 G (9.8 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 2.3 apg)
* Back: Roman Williams, 5-9 Jr. G (17.3 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 3.4 apg); Matt Davet, 6-7 Jr. F (16.6 ppg, 5.4 rpg); Lawrence Rowley, 6-5 Jr. F (14.5 ppg, 7.9 rpg); Matthew Schner, 6-4 Jr. G (13.8 ppg, 7.0 rpg, 2.6 apg); Nick Stuck, 6-2 Jr. G (8.7 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 4.7 apg)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 19, 2019, 12:42:22 PM

Who are the legitimate candidates for the Preseason Top 25 that are not on this list? Would be great to start identifying those.

For example, Wash U - I think they belong.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 19, 2019, 01:42:42 PM

Washington U - St. Louis (17-8 overall, 10-4 UAA)
* Gone: n/a
* Back: Jack Nolan, 6-1 Jr. G (16.1 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 2.4 apg); Justin Hardy, 6-5 So. F (14.6 ppg, 5.3 rpg, 3.0 apg); Matt Nester, 5-11 Sr. G (10.7 ppg, 2.8 rpg, 3.6 apg); Hank Hunter, 6-8 Sr. C (10.2 ppg, 7.3 rpg); DeVaughn Rucker, 6-5 Sr. F (8.5 ppg, 4.8 rpg).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on October 19, 2019, 03:28:23 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 19, 2019, 12:42:22 PM
Who are the legitimate candidates for the Preseason Top 25 that are not on this list? Would be great to start identifying those.

For example, Wash U - I think they belong.

I suggest my fave - Scranton.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on October 19, 2019, 03:57:11 PM

New England candidates (in order of most worthy of consideration):

Middlebury, Eastern Conn, Babson, WPI, Springfield, Colby, Tufts, Endicott, Trinity, St Joseph's CT

(A few of these factor in transfers, Midd adds a former all-SUNYAC guy and Babson a likely high impact D1 transfer).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on October 19, 2019, 04:26:41 PM

Great Lakes is usually out of my scope, but Wabash will be very good this year with Jack Davidson and company returning everyone that scored at least 5ppg last year. They ended up 21-6 last year.

I feel as if I had a list of teams that I made last year for this very exercise but I cannot find it, so I will have to rely on my memory/research to come up with other teams that meet this criteria.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 19, 2019, 06:16:15 PM

My very, very rough/work-in-progress Top 25 is something like...

1. UW-Oshkosh (lost two very important players, but tie goes to the champs for now)

2. Swarthmore (was really impressed with them in Fort Wayne)

3. Amherst (almost everyone back from a Sweet 16 team)

4. North Central (clear CCIW favorite, Connor Raridon is a D3 POY candidate)

5. Emory (a ton back from a 20-6/UAA champ season)

6. Middlebury (if Amherst is 1A in the NESCAC, seems Middlebury is 1B?)

7. Wash U (almost everyone back from 17-8/10-4 season including a couple All-American candidates)

8. Nebraska Wesleyan (lost a lot from a 27-2 team, but return a lot)

9. Wittenberg (getting tough now)

10. St. John's (see above and keep applying below)

11. Nichols

12. Augustana

13. Christopher Newport

14. St. Thomas

15. Wooster

16. Whitman

17. Oswego State

18. Wabash (getting super tough now)

19. Eastern Connecticut St (see above)

20. Randolph-Macon

21. Marietta

[My head hurts...final 4 spots as of now are TBD. Need to know who WIAC #2 and #3 are, and need more input from around the country on teams I am missing.]

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on October 19, 2019, 07:37:29 PM

In the SUNYAC conference, in addition to Oswego State, there are 2 other teams that return a ton of talent. Brockport State returns 6 of their top 8 players and also gets their top guard back, who missed most of last season with an injury. (A senior last year, he played 8 games before Christmas and then received an injury redshirt.)

Oneonta State returns everyone from last year's 9 man rotation and should be one of the favorites to battle for league supremacy.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 20, 2019, 09:21:05 AM

Here is a team I will have in...and pretty high.

Texas-Dallas (24-5, 13-3 ASC)
* Gone: n/a
* Back: Dimitrius Underwood, 6-2 Sr. G (20.5 ppg, 9.8 rpg, 3.4 apg); Hans Burwitz, 6-7 Sr. C (14.8 ppg, 6.8 rpg); Jalen Weber, 6-0 Sr. G (12.7 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 3.5 apg); Michael Forster, 6-7 Jr. F (9.9 ppg, 6.1 rpg)

One thing I am confused about though - https://utdcomets.com/news/2019/10/17/mens-basketball-comet-men-picked-as-favorites-in-asc-east-division.aspx.

In that release about UT-Dallas being picked to win the ASC East, it says three Comets were named Preseason Players to watch -- Hans Burwitz, Jalen Weber, and Kelden Pruitt. No Dimitrius Underwood (20.5 ppg, 9.8 rpg, 3.4 apg)? He was the ASC East Player of the Year last season, and is on the '19-20 roster - https://utdcomets.com/sports/mens-basketball/roster.

https://ascsports.org/news/2019/2/26/underwood-neal-highlight-asc-mens-basketball-award-winners.aspx

https://ascsports.org/news/2019/10/17/mens-basketball-utd-umhb-selected-to-win-asc-mens-hoops.aspx

Strange.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on October 20, 2019, 10:45:01 AM

TQ, I think you might be overrating Randolph-Macon and overlookimg Guilford in your top 25. R-MC graduated four guys who led them for three years. Guilford lost to UW-Oshkosh by three in the Elite Eight and returns quite a lot.

Just something for you to consider for your work-in-progress Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on October 20, 2019, 11:22:31 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 20, 2019, 09:21:05 AM
Here is a team I will have in...and pretty high.

Texas-Dallas (24-5, 13-3 ASC)
* Gone: n/a
* Back: Dimitrius Underwood, 6-2 Sr. G (20.5 ppg, 9.8 rpg, 3.4 apg); Hans Burwitz, 6-7 Sr. C (14.8 ppg, 6.8 rpg); Jalen Weber, 6-0 Sr. G (12.7 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 3.5 apg); Michael Forster, 6-7 Jr. F (9.9 ppg, 6.1 rpg)

One thing I am confused about though - https://utdcomets.com/news/2019/10/17/mens-basketball-comet-men-picked-as-favorites-in-asc-east-division.aspx.

In that release about UT-Dallas being picked to win the ASC East, it says three Comets were named Preseason Players to watch -- Hans Burwitz, Jalen Weber, and Kelden Pruitt. No Dimitrius Underwood (20.5 ppg, 9.8 rpg, 3.4 apg)? He was the ASC East Player of the Year last season, and is on the '19-20 roster - https://utdcomets.com/sports/mens-basketball/roster.

https://ascsports.org/news/2019/2/26/underwood-neal-highlight-asc-mens-basketball-award-winners.aspx

https://ascsports.org/news/2019/10/17/mens-basketball-utd-umhb-selected-to-win-asc-mens-hoops.aspx

Strange.

Of course, the Comets!

That is strange... since he is on the roster my guess is maybe they are just giving some publicity to other important players for UT-Dallas? But yes, definitely a team that deserves recognition with so much talent returning from a really good team last year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 20, 2019, 11:40:56 AM

Quote from: y_jack_lok on October 20, 2019, 10:45:01 AM
TQ, I think you might be overrating Randolph-Macon and overlookimg Guilford in your top 25. R-MC graduated four guys who led them for three years. Guilford lost to UW-Oshkosh by three in the Elite Eight and returns quite a lot.

Just something for you to consider for your work-in-progress Top 25.

Thanks, y_jak.

This is a good example of why I am posting all of this here and asking for feedback. I want to submit the best ballot I can and I figure with everyone chiming in here I can do that. "The wisdom is in the room" as one of my co-workers likes to say.

I have a placeholder Top 25 spot for the ODAC favorite. Has the preseason poll come out yet? And is there consensus on the ODAC board who the favorite is? I looked at it as a bit of a coin flip between the two on paper.

Thanks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 20, 2019, 11:47:59 AM

Do any WIAC fans have a good sense of who the preseason #2 and #3 teams will be? I almost always have 3 WIAC teams on my ballot - have placeholders waiting for at least one of these, maybe both.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on October 20, 2019, 12:15:24 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 20, 2019, 11:40:56 AM
Quote from: y_jack_lok on October 20, 2019, 10:45:01 AM
TQ, I think you might be overrating Randolph-Macon and overlookimg Guilford in your top 25. R-MC graduated four guys who led them for three years. Guilford lost to UW-Oshkosh by three in the Elite Eight and returns quite a lot.

Just something for you to consider for your work-in-progress Top 25.

Thanks, y_jak.

This is a good example of why I am posting all of this here and asking for feedback. I want to submit the best ballot I can and I figure with everyone chiming in here I can do that. "The wisdom is in the room" as one of my co-workers likes to say.

I have a placeholder Top 25 spot for the ODAC favorite. Has the preseason poll come out yet? And is there consensus on the ODAC board who the favorite is? I looked at it as a bit of a coin flip between the two on paper.

Thanks.

No preseason poll yet and very little acticity on the ODAC basketball board. Even the once very active ODAC football board has become fairly quiet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 20, 2019, 12:36:52 PM

The gap between Oshkosh and the rest of the WIAC is embarrassing.

La Crosse finished 3 games back and they lose four starters and their top 3 scorers.

Platteville was a further 2 games back, lose their top scorer but return 3 starters.

Point tied Platteville but lose four starters.

Eau Claire finished 7-7, lose three starters, but return four of their top five scorers.

Quick rough guess would be Platteville #2 because they return a lot and La Crosse #3 because they've recruited really well.

Whitewater hasn't been relevant for a couple of years now, so maybe they're due?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 20, 2019, 12:39:10 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 20, 2019, 12:36:52 PM
The gap between Oshkosh and the rest of the WIAC is embarrassing.

La Crosse finished 3 games back and they lose four starters and their top 3 scorers.

Platteville was a further 2 games back, lose their top scorer but return 3 starters.

Point tied Platteville but lose four starters.

Eau Claire finished 7-7, lose three starters, but return four of their top five scorers.

Quick rough guess would be Platteville #2 because they return a lot and La Crosse #3 because they've recruited really well.

Whitewater hasn't been relevant for a couple of years now, so maybe they're due?

[Reconsiders WIAC #2 and #3 placeholder spots.]

Thanks, Greek. Thinking I will put Platteville in, at like #25...and then just see how things play out once the season starts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 20, 2019, 01:50:39 PM

I know they might not have been big stats guys, Bob, but Amherst did lose three post players. They're bringing in a good class with size, but it's should definitely be a consideration that they'll have to look different on the floor.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 20, 2019, 01:58:49 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 20, 2019, 01:50:39 PM

I know they might not have been big stats guys, Bob, but Amherst did lose three post players. They're bringing in a good class with size, but it's should definitely be a consideration that they'll have to look different on the floor.

Agree, Ryan.

I am not 100% sure yet on the order of Amherst and Middlebury, but I am thinking both are somewhere in the top 7 ish. Seems to me both will be great.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Grutte Dirk on October 20, 2019, 06:36:57 PM

No M.I.A.A. ... have we fallen so far?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 20, 2019, 06:46:10 PM

Quote from: Bilk on October 20, 2019, 06:36:57 PM
No M.I.A.A. ... have we fallen so far?

At least temporarily, it appears so.

The MIAA didn't have a team in the final D3hoops.com poll in 2018-19 or 2017-18.

https://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2018-19/final

https://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2017-18/final

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 20, 2019, 07:57:25 PM

Don't forget Yeshiva. They're doing an early season trip down the Eastern Shore, so I'm going to get to see them in person!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on October 20, 2019, 11:53:55 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 19, 2019, 01:42:42 PM
Washington U - St. Louis (17-8 overall, 10-4 UAA)
* Gone: n/a
* Back: Jack Nolan, 6-1 Jr. G (16.1 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 2.4 apg); Justin Hardy, 6-5 So. F (14.6 ppg, 5.3 rpg, 3.0 apg); Matt Nester, 5-11 Sr. G (10.7 ppg, 2.8 rpg, 3.6 apg); Hank Hunter, 6-8 Sr. C (10.2 ppg, 7.3 rpg); DeVaughn Rucker, 6-5 Sr. F (8.5 ppg, 4.8 rpg); Jonathan Arenas (5.8 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 3.2 apg, UAA defensive player of the year candidate).

Added one player.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 21, 2019, 03:07:40 AM

Quote from: WUPHF on October 20, 2019, 11:53:55 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on October 19, 2019, 01:42:42 PM
Washington U - St. Louis (17-8 overall, 10-4 UAA)
* Gone: n/a
* Back: Jack Nolan, 6-1 Jr. G (16.1 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 2.4 apg); Justin Hardy, 6-5 So. F (14.6 ppg, 5.3 rpg, 3.0 apg); Matt Nester, 5-11 Sr. G (10.7 ppg, 2.8 rpg, 3.6 apg); Hank Hunter, 6-8 Sr. C (10.2 ppg, 7.3 rpg); DeVaughn Rucker, 6-5 Sr. F (8.5 ppg, 4.8 rpg); Jonathan Arenas (5.8 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 3.2 apg, UAA defensive player of the year candidate).

Added one player.

Quote from: Titan Q on October 19, 2019, 12:33:47 PM
(Players noted below in "gone" and "back" averaged 8.0+ PPG last season. Obviously each team has other important lost/returning players, but that's where I drew the line for this analysis.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on October 21, 2019, 10:47:55 AM

Reprimand noted.

The 8 points per game minimum as applied to the 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 preseason discussion of Washington University would have resulted in the exclusion of Cameron Smith who would go on to make the UAA all-association team both seasons despite averaging a mere 5 points per game.

The player I mentioned averaged 20 minutes per game last season.

I am not going to fault anyone who takes the time and effort to draft a thoughtful post on the boards, so no need for anyone to offer an explanation. I get it. But at some point, it might be helpful to fill in the blanks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 21, 2019, 11:04:42 AM

I certainly don't mind people adding to the returning player list. I just had to draw the line somewhere for my own sanity -- that work took about 3 hours and I didn't want it to take 4. :)

I will say that I generally think the 8+ mark paints a pretty good picture in terms of what teams lost and return (certainly not perfect). I think it is assumed that every team has role/complementary players not listed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on October 21, 2019, 02:12:23 PM

I was definitely operating under the assumption that every team mentioned will include role players and that a line has to be drawn. For evaluating this particular team, it is helpful to move that line behind Jonathan Arenas.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 21, 2019, 02:48:54 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on October 21, 2019, 02:12:23 PM
I was definitely operating under the assumption that every team mentioned will include role players and that a line has to be drawn. For evaluating this particular team, it is helpful to move that line behind Jonathan Arenas.

If I just rank Wash U as my preseason #1, are we good (no line adjustments needed)?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 21, 2019, 02:59:07 PM

Hey, Tom, since you run all of the contests here, tell us: Who had Q in the First Snarky Comment of the 2019-20 Season pick'em pool? ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on October 21, 2019, 03:07:47 PM

I am going to retreat quietly to the ghost town otherwise known as the UAA thread...

Incidentally, the exclusion of senior Cameron Smith might have meant the difference between preseason No. 1 and preseason something else 11 seasons ago so...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CollegeGolf18 on October 21, 2019, 03:27:54 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 19, 2019, 12:42:22 PM
Who are the legitimate candidates for the Preseason Top 25 that are not on this list? Would be great to start identifying those.

For example, Wash U - I think they belong.

Wabash should be. Finished 21-6 last year with a young roster.

Returning starters:
G: Jack Davidson, JR., 25.1 PPG - 26 GS
G: Connor Rotterman, JR. 7.3 PPG - 15 GS (stopped starting at midyear)
G: Tyler Watson, So. 9.4 PPG - 11 GS (started to start at midyear)
F: Alex Eberhard, Sr. 6.7 PPG - 27 GS
F: Harry Hallstrom, Sr. 12.6 PPG - 26 GS
W: Kellen Schrieber, So. 8.9 PPG - 5 GS (started in place of injuries)

Wabash averaged 86.2 points a game last year and only lose 8.7 PPG to graduation/transfers.
Senior wing Ben Stachowski started 24 games and scored 3.8 points a game
Senior post Logan White played in 26 games scoring 2.1 a game
Sophomore Conner Brens played in 25 games scoring 1.9 a game (not playing)
Freshman Niah Williamson played in 4 games scoring 0.8 a game (transfer, I believe for football)

The starting 5 will likely be

PG: Jack Davidson - JR
SG: Tyler Watson - SO
SF: Kellen Schreiber - SO
PF: Alex Eberhard - SR
C: Harry Hallstrom - SR

First couple guys off the bench will likely be: Connor Rotterman - JR, Jayden Edwards - SO, Colten Garland - SR
Players who can easily come off the bench but not likely in the top 8 are: Matt Chinn - JR, Parker Manges - SR

All of the above is based off of last year.

HOWEVER

Wabash has a very, very good freshman class and I would not be surprised in the least to see these two/three freshmen play huge minutes. They all were highly sought after (all had D1 interest).

Justin Hensley - 6'4 G
Ahmoni Jones - 6'4 G/W
Reis Thomas - 6'3 W/F (football player so he'll be working his way in)
Cam Chadd - 6'2 G (transfer in, sophomore)

They also have as incoming freshmen:

Jeremy Norvell - 5'10 G
Ty Bever - 5'11 G
Nate Butts - 5'9 G
Tristan Bufkin - 6'5 F
Trey Waddups - 6'1 G (I believe is a sophomore who didn't play last season)

This is going to be a team that plays very fast as they only have one true post player. They have a ton of guys who can slide down and play the five, however. Going to be a great year in Crawfordsville.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 21, 2019, 03:30:06 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on October 21, 2019, 03:07:47 PM
I am going to retreat quietly to the ghost town otherwise known as the UAA thread...

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.netanimations.net%2FTumbling-tumble-weed.gif&hash=d088fbceb4e19c13ad9d6f7db2480a756b175231)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on October 21, 2019, 03:36:38 PM

That is how it looks most of the time.

Then I pop online and it is:

(https://media.giphy.com/media/VfyC5j7sR4cso/giphy.gif)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 21, 2019, 03:59:28 PM

LOL!

(but in a poignant way)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 21, 2019, 04:11:41 PM

Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on October 21, 2019, 03:27:54 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on October 19, 2019, 12:42:22 PM
Who are the legitimate candidates for the Preseason Top 25 that are not on this list? Would be great to start identifying those.

For example, Wash U - I think they belong.

Wabash should be. Finished 21-6 last year with a young roster.

Returning starters:
G: Jack Davidson, JR., 25.1 PPG - 26 GS
G: Connor Rotterman, JR. 7.3 PPG - 15 GS (stopped starting at midyear)
G: Tyler Watson, So. 9.4 PPG - 11 GS (started to start at midyear)
F: Alex Eberhard, Sr. 6.7 PPG - 27 GS
F: Harry Hallstrom, Sr. 12.6 PPG - 26 GS
W: Kellen Schrieber, So. 8.9 PPG - 5 GS (started in place of injuries)

Wabash averaged 86.2 points a game last year and only lose 8.7 PPG to graduation/transfers.
Senior wing Ben Stachowski started 24 games and scored 3.8 points a game
Senior post Logan White played in 26 games scoring 2.1 a game
Sophomore Conner Brens played in 25 games scoring 1.9 a game (not playing)
Freshman Niah Williamson played in 4 games scoring 0.8 a game (transfer, I believe for football)

The starting 5 will likely be

PG: Jack Davidson - JR
SG: Tyler Watson - SO
SF: Kellen Schreiber - SO
PF: Alex Eberhard - SR
C: Harry Hallstrom - SR

First couple guys off the bench will likely be: Connor Rotterman - JR, Jayden Edwards - SO, Colten Garland - SR
Players who can easily come off the bench but not likely in the top 8 are: Matt Chinn - JR, Parker Manges - SR

All of the above is based off of last year.

HOWEVER

Wabash has a very, very good freshman class and I would not be surprised in the least to see these two/three freshmen play huge minutes. They all were highly sought after (all had D1 interest).

Justin Hensley - 6'4 G
Ahmoni Jones - 6'4 G/W
Reis Thomas - 6'3 W/F (football player so he'll be working his way in)
Cam Chadd - 6'2 G (transfer in, sophomore)

They also have as incoming freshmen:

Jeremy Norvell - 5'10 G
Ty Bever - 5'11 G
Nate Butts - 5'9 G
Tristan Bufkin - 6'5 F
Trey Waddups - 6'1 G (I believe is a sophomore who didn't play last season)

This is going to be a team that plays very fast as they only have one true post player. They have a ton of guys who can slide down and play the five, however. Going to be a great year in Crawfordsville.

This is very helpful, thank you!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: dunkin3117 on October 22, 2019, 09:37:23 AM

Just 1 ARC team on your radar, Titan? As deep and talented as this league has been the last few years, that is a tad surprising.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 22, 2019, 10:12:32 AM

Quote from: dunkin3117 on October 22, 2019, 09:37:23 AM
Just 1 ARC team on your radar, Titan? As deep and talented as this league has been the last few years, that is a tad surprising.

Loras loses Ruffles and DiCanio while Wartburg loses Sabus along with a couple of others. They'll have to prove they can win without their big guns. Simpson has to out up some wins too.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 22, 2019, 10:38:44 AM

Quote from: dunkin3117 on October 22, 2019, 09:37:23 AM
Just 1 ARC team on your radar, Titan? As deep and talented as this league has been the last few years, that is a tad surprising.

It's possible I will vote for a 2nd ARC team...but whoever that is, it would be a bit of a flyer I think (which is usually what spots 20-25 in the preseason poll are).

Loras lost a ton. I think they'll be good this year, but have they done enough yet consistently to just assume a reload? (Like with Wooster, I just always assume a reload - they are almost an automatic preseason Top 25 team for me each year.)

Maybe Simpson is the team?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 22, 2019, 01:22:25 PM

Augsburg could be a dark horse. They do lose two starters, but one averaged just 3.5 ppg and 2.4 rpg. Their top two players off the bench return and they got some guy named Booker Coplin who people say is pretty decent. They made it to the MIAC final knocking off St. Thomas and losing to St. John's by just 3.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 22, 2019, 04:26:19 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 22, 2019, 01:22:25 PM
Augsburg could be a dark horse. They do lose two starters, but one averaged just 3.5 ppg and 2.4 rpg. Their top two players off the bench return and they got some guy named Booker Coplin who people say is pretty decent. They made it to the MIAC final knocking off St. Thomas and losing to St. John's by just 3.

Very good call, Greek. Thanks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on October 22, 2019, 09:26:02 PM

Nice, Greek! Yes, I was going to add Augsburg to the mix.

One of the two starters you mention, Mark Delle Vedova, was used very minimally towards the end of the year. He would play the opening minutes of the game and then basically sit for the rest of the game.

I thought that the second best overall player for the Augies last year was Sophomore Matt Carik. He is a great ball handler, shooter and distributor. Average 11 points, 5.5 rebounds and 4.9 ast while shooting 40% from 3. Long, athletic guard that definitely would get more publicity if Booker Coplin wasn't taking the spotlight. Excited to see him take another step in his game this year.

I know I am biased as the MIAC guy around here, but I think Augsburg should be ranked ahead of the second WIAC team at this point with how little returns to UWLAX, UWPLAT, UWSP combined with how incredible Booker Coplin is and how much they return.

Unfortunately, the MIAC is pretty top heavy and I am not expecting any teams after those top 3 are worth consideration of top 25 talk this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 23, 2019, 09:07:09 AM

Looking more into Simpson...

According to a post in the ARC room, Simpson is picked 2nd in the preseason poll.

They lose four of their top eight players, but their top 3 scorers return.

*Riordan 18.2 ppg/3.8 rpg
*Wagner 14.3/4.3
*Reiter 13.6/7.5
*Barbee 8.5/3.8
Stumbo 8.5/3.4
*Rajewski 7.0/1.0
Fibert 6.9/4.2
Janssen 4.8/0.8

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 23, 2019, 09:13:24 AM

Augsburg does travel to La Crosse and hosts River Falls Thanksgiving week, so that may tell us something.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 23, 2019, 10:26:28 AM

Simpson should be pretty good. Definitely worth considering.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 23, 2019, 10:32:51 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 23, 2019, 09:07:09 AM
Looking more into Simpson...

According to a post in the ARC room, Simpson is picked 2nd in the preseason poll.

They lose four of their top right players, but their top 3 scorers return.

*Riordan 18.2 ppg/3.8 rpg
*Wagner 14.3/4.3
*Reiter 13.6/7.5
*Barbee 8.5/3.8
Stumbo 8.5/3.4
*Rajewski 7.0/1.0
Fibert 6.9/4.2
Janssen 4.8/0.8

Simpson was 16-10 last year (9-7 ARC). They beat UW-Platteville, which was an impressive win. They went 0-5 vs Loras and Nebraska Wesleyan in ARC play.

They return their top 3 scorers and are picked 2nd in a strong league -- Simpson is very much a team in Top 25 consideration. I think I will have them in, somewhere between 23 and 25. If I end up having to pick between UW-Platteville and Simpson, ties goes to the Storm via the 2018-19 head-to-head result.

As usual, spots 15-25 in the preseason poll are kind of a crap shoot.

Honestly, the whole preseason poll is kind of a crap shoot...but a fun one!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 23, 2019, 10:38:32 AM

I'm impressed you do this much work before the data sheet comes along.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 23, 2019, 10:41:53 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 23, 2019, 10:38:32 AM

I'm impressed you do this much work before the data sheet comes along.

I like getting the conversation going here on the board. This is really helping me identify Top 25 candidates.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 23, 2019, 10:49:07 AM

Here is the Street & Smith's preseason poll (came out a few weeks ago):

1. UW-Oshkosh
2. Nebraska Wesleyan
3. St. John's
4. Oswego St
5. North Central
6. Nichols
7. Trinity (CT)
8. St. Thomas
9. Augustana
10. Monmouth IL

Monmouth is really a stretch. 13-13 last year, 11-7 in MWC. Here are the 13 wins - Eureka, MacMurray, Illinois College, Grinnell, Knox, Beloit, Illinois College, Lake Forest, Ripon, Knox, Ripon, Cornell, St. Norbert. Lost by 28 to UW-Whitewater, lost by 13 to Loras.

I know Will Carius is a stud (25.5 ppg, 11.0 rpg), but man that seems like a #10 out of left field.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 23, 2019, 10:53:18 AM

Isn't Trinity more of a stretch than Monmouth?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 23, 2019, 10:58:50 AM

As usual, the Street & Smith preseason poll is worth posting only for giggles.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 23, 2019, 11:00:22 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 23, 2019, 10:53:18 AM

Isn't Trinity more of a stretch than Monmouth?

Yes!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 23, 2019, 11:03:53 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 23, 2019, 11:00:22 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 23, 2019, 10:53:18 AM

Isn't Trinity more of a stretch than Monmouth?

Yes!

Plus a Top 10 without Swarthmore on it is kind of silly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 23, 2019, 11:07:47 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 23, 2019, 11:03:53 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on October 23, 2019, 11:00:22 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 23, 2019, 10:53:18 AM

Isn't Trinity more of a stretch than Monmouth?

Yes!

Plus a Top 10 without Swarthmore on it is kind of silly.

Crazy.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 23, 2019, 11:12:15 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 23, 2019, 11:07:47 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 23, 2019, 11:03:53 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on October 23, 2019, 11:00:22 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 23, 2019, 10:53:18 AM

Isn't Trinity more of a stretch than Monmouth?

Yes!

Plus a Top 10 without Swarthmore on it is kind of silly.
Crazy.

Plus, from what I hear, Swat's freshman class is better than last year's.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 23, 2019, 11:39:52 AM

My work-in-progress ballot...

1. UW-Oshkosh
2. North Central
3. Swarthmore
4. Amherst
5. Middlebury
6. Emory
7. Wash U
8. Nebraska Wesleyan
9. Wittenberg
10. St. John's
11. Nichols
12. Augustana
13. Christopher Newport
14. St. Thomas
15. Wooster
16. Whitman
17. Texas-Dallas
18. Oswego State
19. Wabash
20. Eastern Connecticut St
21. Marietta
22. Augsburg
23. Randolph-Macon or Guilford
24. Simpson
25. Brockport St

Watch List When Season Starts (also a work-in-progress)
* UW-Platteville
* CCIW #3 (Illinois Wesleyan? Carthage?)
* WIAC #3
* UAA #3
* Randloph Macon or Guilford
* Babson
* WPI
* Oneonta St
* MIAA #1 (Albion? Trine? Calvin? Hope?)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: thebear on October 23, 2019, 01:15:39 PM

Having Oswego, & Brockport in the top 25 and Oneonta on the watch list, is probably not a realistic scenario. All three teams are good, but the SUNYAC with its 18 game double round robin tends to eat up favorites. Oswego loses 3 seniors with about 35% of their minutes. Oneonta, which took Oswego to overtime at Oswego in the SUNYAC tournament, has 97% of their minutes returning, and lots of inside size. Brockport loses two regulars, including one starter, but does get back a regular from a medical redshirt. I think the league is Oneonta's to lose out of the gate.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 23, 2019, 01:17:52 PM

Quote from: thebear on October 23, 2019, 01:15:39 PM
Having Oswego, & Brockport in the top 25 and Oneonta on the watch list, is probably not a realistic scenario. All three teams are good, but the SUNYAC with its 18 game double round robin tends to eat up favorites. Oswego loses 3 seniors with about 35% of their minutes. Oneonta, which took Oswego to overtime at Oswego in the SUNYAC tournament, has 97% of their minutes returning, and lots of inside size. Brockport loses two regulars, including one starter, but does get back a regular from a medical redshirt. I think the league is Oneonta's to lose out of the gate.

This helps.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on October 23, 2019, 07:15:37 PM

Just one Northeast poster's take but I think Middlebury is a little high at 5–return a lot of really good talent but lost in the quarterfinals of the NESCAC tournament as the 1 seed and lost in the first round of the NCAA tournament last season and quite frankly, neither looked like upsets. They could very well end the year in the top 5 but I think 12-15 is a more realistic spot.

I don't know which team it is, but there is a probably a 3rd NESCAC team in the top 25. Williams loses its 3 best players but does return 2 starters and has an experienced senior class as well as some potentially really good young talent. Hamilton loses 2 of its 3 best guys from a Sweet 16 team but the returner is conference POY and a 2nd team NABC all American.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 24, 2019, 08:14:18 AM

Lots of talk about CNU and for good reason, but fellow conference members Salisbury, York (Pa) and even Mary Washington could see some votes this season.

Salisbury finished 19-9 and was a tournament team last year. They lose 2nd leading scorer Blair Davis (14.0), but return top scorer Ward (14.9) and then 3-6 scorers as well. Along with Davis, Salisbury loses two other starters, but they combined for just 11.3 ppg and 5.8 rpg. Davis did step up in league play, averaging 17.9 ppg.

York was also a tournament team and finished 22-8. They lose Jason Bady (18.4 ppg), but return their next four top scorers, and they'll all be seniors.

Mary Washington returns four of their top five scorers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 24, 2019, 08:58:23 AM

St. John Fisher finished tied for 2nd in the E8, two games back of Alfred. However, Alfred loses their top three scorers. Nazareth loses all five starters, so SJF may take the league as they only lose top scorer Ryan Henderson and return everyone else from a 18-9 team.

Hanover loses Cam Fails but returns everyone else from their 21-7 tourney team.

Maybe a little stretch, but William Paterson returns everyone, while NJCU, Ramapo and Rowan all lose multiple players, so they could jump to the top of the NJAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on October 24, 2019, 10:44:19 AM

I'm surprised to see no love for Scranton, who seems like the number two team in their region this year (after Swarthmore). They return all five starters from a 20-6 team, and two of those starters were frosh last year, and a third a sophomore in his first year playing after an injury, so they figure to be much improved. They only graduated one senior total and add a very highly-regarded frosh guard to the mix. Given that their top competition (Drew and Moravian) look down and in light of a weak non-league schedule, I'd bet they cruise through the regular season with hardly any losses.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 24, 2019, 11:04:59 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on October 24, 2019, 10:44:19 AM
I'm surprised to see no love for Scranton, who seems like the number two team in their region this year (after Swarthmore). They return all five starters from a 20-6 team, and two of those starters were frosh last year, and a third a sophomore in his first year playing after an injury, so they figure to be much improved. They only graduated one senior total and add a very highly-regarded frosh guard to the mix. Given that their top competition (Drew and Moravian) look down and in light of a weak non-league schedule, I'd bet they cruise through the regular season with hardly any losses.

Love starts with someone posting some good details like this.

Consider the love activated now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 24, 2019, 11:14:33 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on October 24, 2019, 10:44:19 AM
I'm surprised to see no love for Scranton, who seems like the number two team in their region this year (after Swarthmore). They return all five starters from a 20-6 team, and two of those starters were frosh last year, and a third a sophomore in his first year playing after an injury, so they figure to be much improved. They only graduated one senior total and add a very highly-regarded frosh guard to the mix. Given that their top competition (Drew and Moravian) look down and in light of a weak non-league schedule, I'd bet they cruise through the regular season with hardly any losses.

I didn't look back, but for some reason, I thought someone mentioned Scranton already. Yeah, they could be the real deal with everyone back.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 24, 2019, 11:19:58 AM

My work-in-progress ballot 10/24. It is a very fluid situation.

1. UW-Oshkosh
2. North Central
3. Swarthmore
4. Amherst
5. Emory
6. Wash U
7. Nebraska Wesleyan
8. Wittenberg
9. Middlebury
10. St. John's
11. Texas-Dallas
12. Augustana
13. Christopher Newport
14. St. Thomas
15. Wooster
16. Whitman
17. Nichols
18. Wabash
19. Eastern Connecticut St
20. Marietta
21. Augsburg
22. Scranton
23. Guilford
24 & 25. [You Pick Two: WPI? Simpson? UW-Platteville? Oswego St? Oneonta St? Brockport St? Virginia Wesleyan? Other?]

Watch List When Season Starts (also a work-in-progress)
* WPI
* Simpson
* UW-Platteville
* Oswego St/Oneonta St/Brockport St
* Salem State
* St. John Fisher
* York (Pa)
* Virginia Wesleyan
* CCIW #3 (Illinois Wesleyan? Carthage?)
* WIAC #3
* Randolph-Macon
* UAA #3
* Babson
* WPI
* MIAA #1 (Albion? Trine? Calvin? Hope?)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 24, 2019, 11:23:39 AM

https://www.odaconline.com/sports/mbkb/2019-20/releases/102419-mbkb-preseasonpoll

Guilford!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 24, 2019, 11:27:14 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 24, 2019, 11:23:39 AM
https://www.odaconline.com/sports/mbkb/2019-20/releases/102419-mbkb-preseasonpoll

Guilford!

Nice...finally have a little ODAC clarity.

Guilford is officially on my ballot. Virginia Wesleyan and Randolph-Macon to the Watch List.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on October 24, 2019, 11:35:47 AM

UAA No. 3...I did not expect to see that...but let's see. That has to be Brandeis.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 24, 2019, 11:46:51 AM

Quote from: WUPHF on October 24, 2019, 11:35:47 AM
UAA No. 3...I did not expect to see that...but let's see. That has to be Brandeis.

I have no idea how good UAA #3 is this year, but in general I look 3 deep in the top leagues.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on October 24, 2019, 12:25:18 PM

Titan Q, that top 25 (and for sure that top 10) looks pretty much dead-on to me. Better than Street & Smith, certainly :). Personally, I'm less sold on Nichols than seemingly everyone else, because Echevarria did so much for them (even more than his stats suggest), and they were a pretty shallow team without an obvious replacement, and plus there is a coaching transition to deal with, but certainly that isn't unreasonable. I might move Eastern Conn up a bit and Nichols down, but again, I think I'm a bit of an outlier on Nichols.

I have a feeling that another New England team or two from the group of WPI, Babson, Williams, Hamilton, Tufts, Colby, Trinity, maybe even St. Joe's CT if their highly-regarded freshman is for real (although very likely a year early for them) will end up in the Top 25 by January, but among that group, I have no idea which. Babson to me probably has the best chance, assuming transfer Ainge makes a big impact, but any of them could make a decent case and any of those cases could be fairly shot down ....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on October 24, 2019, 12:54:10 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 24, 2019, 11:46:51 AM
Quote from: WUPHF on October 24, 2019, 11:35:47 AM
UAA No. 3...I did not expect to see that...but let's see. That has to be Brandeis.

I have no idea how good UAA #3 is this year, but in general I look 3 deep in the top leagues.

This does make sense to me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on October 24, 2019, 01:44:01 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 24, 2019, 11:14:33 AM
Quote from: nescac1 on October 24, 2019, 10:44:19 AM
I'm surprised to see no love for Scranton, who seems like the number two team in their region this year (after Swarthmore). They return all five starters from a 20-6 team, and two of those starters were frosh last year, and a third a sophomore in his first year playing after an injury, so they figure to be much improved. They only graduated one senior total and add a very highly-regarded frosh guard to the mix. Given that their top competition (Drew and Moravian) look down and in light of a weak non-league schedule, I'd bet they cruise through the regular season with hardly any losses.

I didn't look back, but for some reason, I thought someone mentioned Scranton already. Yeah, they could be the real deal with everyone back.

I did mention Scranton earlier, but didn't include any of the reasons that nescac accurately stated.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 24, 2019, 02:36:02 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on October 24, 2019, 12:25:18 PM
Titan Q, that top 25 (and for sure that top 10) looks pretty much dead-on to me. Better than Street & Smith, certainly :).

My goal is to be better than Street & Smith's. (I like to set the bar low.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 24, 2019, 02:45:02 PM

Herve Villechaize couldn't limbo underneath that bar, Bob.

(https://i0.wp.com/media.boingboing.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/herve.jpg?fit=595%2C432&ssl=1)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 24, 2019, 03:53:54 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 24, 2019, 02:45:02 PM
Herve Villechaize couldn't limbo underneath that bar, Bob.

(https://i0.wp.com/media.boingboing.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/herve.jpg?fit=595%2C432&ssl=1)

De plane.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 24, 2019, 04:57:17 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on October 24, 2019, 12:25:18 PM
Titan Q, that top 25 (and for sure that top 10) looks pretty much dead-on to me. Better than Street & Smith, certainly :). Personally, I'm less sold on Nichols than seemingly everyone else, because Echevarria did so much for them (even more than his stats suggest), and they were a pretty shallow team without an obvious replacement, and plus there is a coaching transition to deal with, but certainly that isn't unreasonable. I might move Eastern Conn up a bit and Nichols down, but again, I think I'm a bit of an outlier on Nichols.

I'm on the extreme opposite of the spectrum. Echevarria was a great leader and a big boost to team confidence, for sure, and the loss of that (along with another coach) is going to be hard to measure. I don't think he was very good defensively and I do think the Nichols roster is more than capable of making up his scoring (as prodigious as it was). There's a ton of talent there, plus all the experience these guys amassed as young players. I'm on board early; we'll see how the season plays out.

Another team that's popped onto my radar since I started looking more thoroughly is Covenant. They graduated their PG, but that's it. The rest of the team is back, including 6'9" Will Crumly - a legit All-American candidate.

I also didn't see you mention Springfield, Bob. Obviously a terrible season last year, but two really, really talented players (presumably both healthy). Might be another to consider near the bottom.

I'm also considering voting for Pomona-Pitzer. They lost an incredible talent in Daniel Rosenbaum, but I thought that was a really talented, deep team, with a great sense of unified play on both ends of the court. Bringing back all but two of those players could make for a formidable force.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 24, 2019, 07:20:44 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 24, 2019, 02:36:02 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on October 24, 2019, 12:25:18 PM
Titan Q, that top 25 (and for sure that top 10) looks pretty much dead-on to me. Better than Street & Smith, certainly :).

My goal is to be better than Street & Smith's. (I like to set the bar low.)

Pretty sure that bar is actually on the ground.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: middhoops on October 24, 2019, 07:42:38 PM

Love this stream. Lots to be learned here.
Titan Q, nescac1, Greek Tragedy and Ryan all chipping in preseason? Oh, yeah.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 25, 2019, 09:28:47 AM

I'm thinking a lot about #1 -- torn between UW-Oshkosh and North Central.

The great thing -- they play November 12!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 25, 2019, 03:20:04 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 25, 2019, 09:28:47 AM
I'm thinking a lot about #1 -- torn between UW-Oshkosh and North Central.

The great thing -- they play November 12!

If the defending champs are in the ballpark of #1, I always let the trophy break the title. I don't believe in automatically giving it to them, but I don't see much reason to ever vote the defending champs #2. That's just me, but I will judge you.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: thebear on October 25, 2019, 03:23:45 PM

Agreed, #1 is #1 until they aren't Potsdam grad, in 1984-85 they lost by a point in the Championship game, next year they were 32-0, then won their first 28 in the next year [and got sent on the road in the Elite 8] #1 should be #1 and host until someone beats them at home.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 25, 2019, 03:32:32 PM

Quote from: thebear on October 25, 2019, 03:23:45 PM
Agreed, #1 is #1 until they aren't Potsdam grad, in 1984-85 they lost by a point in the Championship game, next year they were 32-0, then won their first 28 in the next year [and got sent on the road in the Elite 8] #1 should be #1 and host until someone beats them at home.

I don't agree #1 is always #1. I think that's a terrible way to vote, because guys graduate and the team is different, but I do think winning should mean something if a returning squad is in contention for the top spot. If UWO had graduated six seniors or something like that, it wouldn't be appropriate to vote them #1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 25, 2019, 04:03:28 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 25, 2019, 03:32:32 PM
Quote from: thebear on October 25, 2019, 03:23:45 PM
Agreed, #1 is #1 until they aren't Potsdam grad, in 1984-85 they lost by a point in the Championship game, next year they were 32-0, then won their first 28 in the next year [and got sent on the road in the Elite 8] #1 should be #1 and host until someone beats them at home.

I don't agree #1 is always #1. I think that's a terrible way to vote, because guys graduate and the team is different, but I do think winning should mean something if a returning squad is in contention for the top spot. If UWO had graduated six seniors or something like that, it wouldn't be appropriate to vote them #1.

In this case, though, thebear is referring to a situation much like the current one. The 1985-86 Potsdam State team brought back six of the top eight scorers from the Bears team that had lost to North Park by one in the previous season's national championship game. And heading into the 1986-87 season the Bears brought back a 15.2 ppg, 7.5 rpg player and an 11.4 ppg, 7.1 rpg player from that 1985-86 team that had gone 32-0. I remember how shocked we were at North Park when we learned that the previously 28-0 Bears had lost their Elite Eight game to Clark (in front of 3,200 people, I might add) in March '87, because we were all certain that we were going to see North Park and Potsdam State square off in the national championship game for the third time in nine years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 25, 2019, 05:34:32 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 25, 2019, 03:20:04 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on October 25, 2019, 09:28:47 AM
I'm thinking a lot about #1 -- torn between UW-Oshkosh and North Central.

The great thing -- they play November 12!

If the defending champs are in the ballpark of #1, I always let the trophy break the title. I don't believe in automatically giving it to them, but I don't see much reason to ever vote the defending champs #2. That's just me, but I will judge you.

I guess I feel like PG Ben Boots (WIAC POY/1st Team All-American/15.7 ppg, 4.0 rpg, 4.2 apg) made UWO tick last year...and Brett Wittchow (1st Team All-WIAC/14.0 påg, 4.7 rpg) was a close second. It seemed to me like everything the Titans did was initiated by Boots. And both Boots and Wittchow were very key perimeter scorers for the team last year.

I think Oshkosh is going to be awesome - I'm sure they have talented guys ready to step it - but I think they lost the heart & soul of their 2018-19 team. We can't look at this like Oshkosh has everyone back -- they lost a ton.

For that reason, I am looking at NCC -- a team that returns pretty much every key piece from the CCIW's Pool A team. They don't have to figure anything out really as the season opens - they just keep building on last season.

I still might go UWO #1, but for me it is really close. I am leaning a bit towards NCC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 25, 2019, 06:01:28 PM

Quote from: thebear on October 25, 2019, 03:23:45 PM
Agreed, #1 is #1 until they aren't Potsdam grad, in 1984-85 they lost by a point in the Championship game, next year they were 32-0, then won their first 28 in the next year [and got sent on the road in the Elite 8] #1 should be #1 and host until someone beats them at home.

But again, Oshkosh lost two 1st Team All-WIAC players...including the WIAC Player of the Year. And Boots, also a 1st Team American, was their PG. Is there a bigger loss to a great team than an All-American PG?

It's not like the whole team is back.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 25, 2019, 08:32:09 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 25, 2019, 06:01:28 PM
Quote from: thebear on October 25, 2019, 03:23:45 PM
Agreed, #1 is #1 until they aren't Potsdam grad, in 1984-85 they lost by a point in the Championship game, next year they were 32-0, then won their first 28 in the next year [and got sent on the road in the Elite 8] #1 should be #1 and host until someone beats them at home.

But again, Oshkosh lost two 1st Team All-WIAC players...including the WIAC Player of the Year. And Boots was their PG. Is there a bigger loss to a great team than an All-American PG?

It's not like the whole team is back.

Yeah, it's a solid argument. Vlotho will slot right in and I hadn't heard many freshman talked about like Eric Peterson; I tend to believe those who think he'll move into the starting lineup without missing a beat. Of course, I expect the big man to only keep getting better.
Really, to me, their biggest question is depth. Depth would be the argument to put Swarthmore #1, which, who knows, may be the most popular choice when all is said and done.

This is always a fun time of year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 25, 2019, 08:33:38 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 25, 2019, 08:32:09 PM
This is always a fun time of year.

Yes!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 25, 2019, 08:34:24 PM

Wonder if these discussions were happening within the Street & Smith's poll voting panel?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 26, 2019, 12:23:45 AM

What Street & Smith voting panel?

(https://franklinsports.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/1/7/17in-paper-dartboard-3600-front-w-darts.jpg)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: magicman on October 26, 2019, 05:48:59 AM

You hit the bulls eye with that one Greg! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 26, 2019, 09:09:20 AM

With the official ballot due Monday at at 5pm ET on Monday, here is where I stand...

1. North Central (CCIW/Central)
2. UW-Oshkosh (WIAC/Central)
3. Swarthmore (Centennial/Mid Atlantic)
4. Amherst (NESCAC/Northeast)
5. Emory (UAA/South)
6. Wash U (UAA/Central)
7. Nebraska Wesleyan (ARC/West)
8. Wittenberg (NCAC/Great Lakes)
9. Middlebury (NESCAC/Northeast)
10. Christopher Newport (CAC/Mid Atlantic)
11. St. John's (MIAC/West)
12. Texas-Dallas (ASC/South)
13. Augustana (CCIW/Central)
14. Nichols (CCC/Northeast)
15. St. Thomas (MIAC/West)
16. Wooster (NCAC/Great Lakes)
17. Whitman (NWC/West)
18. Wabash (NCAC/Great Lakes)
19. Eastern Connecticut St (LEC/Northeast)
20. Marietta (OAC/Great Lakes)
21. Augsburg (MIAC/West)
22. Scranton (Landmark/Mid Atlantic)
23. Guilford (ODAC/South)
24. WPI (NEWMAC/Northeast)
25. UW-Platteville (WIAC/Central)
[26. SUNY Oneonta (SUNYAC/East]

Regions
Central = 5
Northeast = 5
West = 5
Great Lakes = 4
Mid Atlantic = 3
South = 3
East = 0
Atlantic = 0

Conferences
MIAC = 3
NCAC = 3
CCIW = 2
NESCAC = 2
UAA = 2
WIAC = 2
ARC = 1
ASC = 1
Centennial = 1
CAC = 1
CCC = 1
Landmark = 1
LEC = 1
NEWMAC = 1
NWC = 1
OAC = 1
ODAC = 1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 27, 2019, 08:43:34 AM

I hit "submit" on my preseason ballot today.

* From where I was yesterday, I went with SUNY Oneonta at #25 over UW-Platteville. I was trying to force a 2nd WIAC team in, but at this point in the preseason I don't think it's clear enough who the #2 and #3 WIAC teams are...and if they have a preseason Top 25 resume. I'll be looking to get another WIAC team or two in once we have results to evaluate.

* I looked very closely at Simpson, as I think the ARC has become a really strong league. But I spoke with an ARC coach that feels Simpson is more "watch list" than Top 25 heading in. And the fact Simpson went 0-5 vs Nebraska Wesleyan and Loras last year was probably the deciding factor for me. I'll be closely watching the Storm when the season starts. Loras too.

* Before finalizing I also looked at the ODAC one final time. I think if Randolph-Macon was picked 2nd in the preseason poll I would have slid them in #25. But Virginia Wesleyan is the #2 pick...and they were just 13-13 last year. So it sort of just made me think "watch list" with whoever ODAC #2 is.

* I've explained my thinking on not having UW-Oshkosh #1. But again, it's that they lost their PG who was the WIAC POY and 1st Team All-American. Meanwhile, North Central returns just about everyone from a team that earned the CCIW's Pool A bid last year -- in the CCIW tourney, the Cards beat #6 Wheaton and #4 Augustana (at Augie). They head into 2019-20 as the very clear favorite in one of the top two leagues in Division III, and with all the pieces necessary to have a special season. And in a wonderful twist of fate, on November 12 we get the following -- UW-Oshkosh at North Central.

Thank you for all of the help on this in the last week+. I feel good about my preseason ballot -- it will be nice to now see some games.

Bob Quillman's 2019-20 D3hoops.com Preseason Top 25 Ballot
1. North Central (CCIW/Central)
2. UW-Oshkosh (WIAC/Central)
3. Swarthmore (Centennial/Mid Atlantic)
4. Amherst (NESCAC/Northeast)
5. Emory (UAA/South)
6. Wash U (UAA/Central)
7. Nebraska Wesleyan (ARC/West)
8. Wittenberg (NCAC/Great Lakes)
9. Middlebury (NESCAC/Northeast)
10. Christopher Newport (CAC/Mid Atlantic)
11. St. John's (MIAC/West)
12. Texas-Dallas (ASC/South)
13. Augustana (CCIW/Central)
14. Nichols (CCC/Northeast)
15. St. Thomas (MIAC/West)
16. Wooster (NCAC/Great Lakes)
17. Whitman (NWC/West)
18. Wabash (NCAC/Great Lakes)
19. Eastern Connecticut St (LEC/Northeast)
20. Marietta (OAC/Great Lakes)
21. Augsburg (MIAC/West)
22. Scranton (Landmark/Mid Atlantic)
23. Guilford (ODAC/South)
24. WPI (NEWMAC/Northeast)
25. SUNY Oneonta (SUNYAC/East]

Regions
Northeast = 5
West = 5
Central = 4
Great Lakes = 4
Mid Atlantic = 3
South = 3
East = 1
Atlantic = 0

Conferences
MIAC = 3
NCAC = 3
CCIW = 2
NESCAC = 2
UAA = 2
ARC = 1
ASC = 1
Centennial = 1
CAC = 1
CCC = 1
Landmark = 1
LEC = 1
NEWMAC = 1
NWC = 1
OAC = 1
ODAC = 1
SUNYAC = 1
WIAC = 1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 27, 2019, 10:04:28 AM

FWIW Bob,

The top 3 ODAC teams...

1. Guilford 136 points (6 1st place votes)
2. VWU 131 (4)
3. RMC 131 (3)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 27, 2019, 10:31:40 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 27, 2019, 10:04:28 AM
FWIW Bob,

The top 3 ODAC teams...

1. Guilford 136 points (6 1st place votes)
2. VWU 131 (4)
3. RMC 131 (3)

I think that's what's I reflected above? Or am I missing something?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 27, 2019, 10:43:55 AM

I see what you mean - it's a tie for 2nd.

Same result for me though - if RMC isn't a clear 2, I'm not sold enough to put them in the preseason poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 27, 2019, 01:52:59 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 27, 2019, 10:43:55 AM
I see what you mean - it's a tie for 2nd.

Same result for me though - if RMC isn't a clear 2, I'm not sold enough to put them in the preseason poll.

Yeah, that's what I meant. It's was #2 and #3, but really a virtual tie.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on October 27, 2019, 03:00:57 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 25, 2019, 08:32:09 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on October 25, 2019, 06:01:28 PM
Quote from: thebear on October 25, 2019, 03:23:45 PM
Agreed, #1 is #1 until they aren't Potsdam grad, in 1984-85 they lost by a point in the Championship game, next year they were 32-0, then won their first 28 in the next year [and got sent on the road in the Elite 8] #1 should be #1 and host until someone beats them at home.

But again, Oshkosh lost two 1st Team All-WIAC players...including the WIAC Player of the Year. And Boots was their PG. Is there a bigger loss to a great team than an All-American PG?

It's not like the whole team is back.

Yeah, it's a solid argument. Vlotho will slot right in and I hadn't heard many freshman talked about like Eric Peterson; I tend to believe those who think he'll move into the starting lineup without missing a beat. Of course, I expect the big man to only keep getting better.
Really, to me, their biggest question is depth. Depth would be the argument to put Swarthmore #1 which, who knows, may be the most popular choice when all is said and done.

This is always a fun time of year.

If you want to talk depth, this is a good reason to rank NCC #1. Right now, the Cardinals have 2-3 possible starting lineups depending on how players perform in the remaining practices prior to the first game. In each possible lineup, the 6th-8th men could start or be first off the bench for either NCC or almost any other team. Additionally, don't forget that the Cardinals are led by a coach who has been at the helm for 30 years and has 536 wins.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 27, 2019, 03:10:45 PM

I honestly think depth is overrated, more so when it comes to postseason. I think really good teams can and have proven you can play 6 or maybe 7 guys for a tournament run.

The 25-game regular season is a little different, but it can be done with only the #6 and #7 guys barely breaking double digits in minutes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on October 27, 2019, 03:30:30 PM

Have to differ with you on the depth issue Greek. You never know when things such as foul trouble, illness, or a bad night by a player will necessitate an effective substitute in any single game. Or, if something such as a major injury might result in needing effective relief on a long term basis. These problems are solved with depth.
Last season, NCC lost their starting senior guard for the season in their 9th game, and their senior center for the season in the 11th game. Their depth was what provided effective relief to the point they were able to finish 2nd in the conference, win the conference tournament, advance to the national tournament, and finish 17th in the final poll.

Thinking this was possible due only to the valuable asset of depth.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 27, 2019, 08:41:05 PM

Bob and I have 20 of the same teams on our ballots.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 27, 2019, 08:46:49 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 27, 2019, 08:41:05 PM

Bob and I have 20 of the same teams on our ballots.

Did you vote for Yeshiva 5 times?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 28, 2019, 09:38:24 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 27, 2019, 08:46:49 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 27, 2019, 08:41:05 PM

Bob and I have 20 of the same teams on our ballots.
Did you vote for Yeshiva 5 times?

I've been trying to subtly hint at this, but I did not vote for Yeshiva this year. I happen to think they've got Top 25 talent, but they didn't finish last season strongly enough for me to justify a vote (especially with so many deserving squads out there). I am excited they're coming to the Eastern Shore in a couple weeks, though. I'll get to see them in person early. Hopefully the votes will come soon.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 28, 2019, 10:30:42 PM

Yeshiva started out 1-5 last season. Two of those losses were to Williams and Ramapo, but they never recovered from that start.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on October 29, 2019, 08:15:04 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 28, 2019, 09:38:24 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on October 27, 2019, 08:46:49 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 27, 2019, 08:41:05 PM

Bob and I have 20 of the same teams on our ballots.
Did you vote for Yeshiva 5 times?

I've been trying to subtly hint at this, but I did not vote for Yeshiva this year. I happen to think they've got Top 25 talent, but they didn't finish last season strongly enough for me to justify a vote (especially with so many deserving squads out there). I am excited they're coming to the Eastern Shore in a couple weeks, though. I'll get to see them in person early. Hopefully the votes will come soon.

To me, it sounds like Ryan is trying his best to win the Top 25 Pool over in the pick 'em league thread! ;D ;) :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 29, 2019, 08:41:23 AM

That's probably true, but he isn't/can't play that pool.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 29, 2019, 09:08:45 AM

https://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2019-20/preseason

Yeah!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 29, 2019, 09:55:29 AM

I promise, that Yeshiva vote was NOT me. I've converted someone!!

(pun intended)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 29, 2019, 10:58:13 AM

Quick reaction - awesome preseason poll!

The only thing I noticed that seems weird to me is the Wheaton votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 29, 2019, 11:00:12 AM

I see that Wheaton got 45 points in the preseason poll.

Perhaps Wheaton can oblige Pat by sending him copies of Aston Francis's diploma that he can pass along to those pollsters.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 29, 2019, 11:00:57 AM

(Once again, great minds think alike, Bob.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 29, 2019, 11:02:55 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 29, 2019, 11:00:12 AM
Perhaps Wheaton can oblige Pat by sending him copies of Aston Francis's diploma that he can pass along to those pollsters.

Bob can vouch for the fact that I was fairly outspoken with the voters about not voting based on last year's players if they are no longer in uniform.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 29, 2019, 11:04:03 AM

Those votes came from just five people.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 29, 2019, 11:19:19 AM

Yeah, but that's five pollsters who put Wheaton at an average of #17 on their ballots.

That's really negligent prep on their part, if you ask me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 29, 2019, 11:20:06 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 29, 2019, 11:02:55 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 29, 2019, 11:00:12 AM
Perhaps Wheaton can oblige Pat by sending him copies of Aston Francis's diploma that he can pass along to those pollsters.

Bob can vouch for the fact that I was fairly outspoken with the voters about not voting based on last year's players if they are no longer in uniform.

For sure...Pat's messaging was very clear.

I don't know who they are obviously, but I'm calling those 5 voters out for lazy voting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 29, 2019, 11:22:35 AM

Sí.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 29, 2019, 11:24:28 AM

BTW, I wasn't casting aspersions on you, Pat. I never doubt that you are annually straightforward with your pollsters this time of year about their responsibility to pay due diligence to this season's rosters as opposed to last season's.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on October 29, 2019, 12:08:40 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 29, 2019, 10:58:13 AM
Quick reaction - awesome preseason poll!

The only thing I noticed that seems weird to me is the Wheaton votes.

I feel the same about Randolph-Macon at #24 although, truthfully, I don't know much at all about the teams who received fewer votes. I guess I almost always expect NESCAC teams like Tufts and Williams to be at least as good as the top ODAC teams. But that just might reflect my lack of knowledge.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 29, 2019, 01:12:25 PM

Quote from: y_jack_lok on October 29, 2019, 12:08:40 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on October 29, 2019, 10:58:13 AM
Quick reaction - awesome preseason poll!

The only thing I noticed that seems weird to me is the Wheaton votes.

I feel the same about Randolph-Macon at #24 although, truthfully, I don't know much at all about the teams who received fewer votes. I guess I almost always expect NESCAC teams like Tufts and Williams to be at least as good as the top ODAC teams. But that just might reflect my lack of knowledge.

I had RMC at 26 - last team off for me. They lost a lot of seniors, but the underclassmen are VERY talented. They'll be consistent and tough.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 29, 2019, 03:10:31 PM

Finally chiming in ... I've been distracted with other things (including working postseason baseball!). I can explain more soon enough.

I am not blogging my ballot this preseason (for reasons I will explain ... like I said), but here is where I put teams.

1 - Swarthmore
2 - Emory
3 - Wash U
4 - UW-Oshkosh
5 - WPI
6 - Texas-Dallas
7 - North Central
8 - Amherst
9 - St. John's
10 - Middlebury
11 - Wabash
12 - Neb. Wesleyan
13 - Wittenberg
14 - UW-Platteville
15 - Augsburg
16 - Augustana
17 - Marietta
18 - Salem State
19 - Baldwin Wallace
20 - Oswego State
21 - Wooster
22 - Guilford
23 - St. John Fisher
24 - St. Thomas
25 - York (PA)

I am sure I am going to regret a few of those choices. I just didn't feel strongly about some teams. I felt up in the air about others. And some I decided to take a flyer on. We shall see when games begin. I will hopefully be up and running blog-wise by the first in-season ballot.

I did want to make a comment about Street and Smith. I finally had enough of their polls and DMed them on Twitter. They responded. And thanked me for my thoughts. It resulted in chatting with the head of the organization. Let's just say ... things will change, I suspect. I won't go into it now, but when I have coaches contacting me who are both in and out of the poll wondering what in the world is going on ... I think something has to be said. I think you will see a very different S&S preseason poll next year - they already made smart moves in football by having Keith McMillian of D3football.com (and the Washington Post) provide their preseason poll.

I will give S&S credit. I think they realized things had gone sideways with their smaller college coverage and were willing to be open to an "outsider's" point of view. They even admitted to me why they thought things had gone wrong. I look forward to the solution moving forward.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: monsoon on October 29, 2019, 03:53:38 PM

Thanks, Dave.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on October 29, 2019, 03:55:11 PM

As someone who is northeast based, I have to say I don't quite understand all of the love for WPI. I understand they return a top player from injury and the majority of their lineup--but they were the 5 seed in the NEWMAC last season and didn't even make the conference championship game. Can someone please explain this to me?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 29, 2019, 04:02:06 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on October 29, 2019, 03:55:11 PM
As someone who is northeast based, I have to say I don't quite understand all of the love for WPI. I understand they return a top player from injury and the majority of their lineup--but they were the 5 seed in the NEWMAC last season and didn't even make the conference championship game. Can someone please explain this to me?

They return 99% (+/-) of their scoring and usually when WPI has a unit that doesn't lose anyone (especially of note) they come together nicely and are a threat. Sure they didn't make the conference title game, but that conference is a dog fight every year and MIT, Springfield, and Babson were tough. They all might be tough once again, but they also all had larger question marks returning.

That said, I know I put them high and then crossed my fingers. When expectations have been high in the past, they haven't met those expectations. They also have had a habit of peaking early. However, those teams are this team and I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CollegeGolf18 on October 29, 2019, 04:03:58 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 29, 2019, 03:10:31 PM
11 - Wabash
13 - Wittenberg
21 - Wooster

Being an NCAC fan (Wabash '18), I wanted to hear your thoughts on your order for these three NCAC teams. Witt seems to be the strongest group only losing Balser, no?

I know the NCAC a little better than most I would say just because I've dove deep into it for the past 6+ years and I think I'd order these three teams Witt, Wabash, Wooster. I do love hearing others' opinions and am just curious about why you ordered them the way you did!

No problem if you don't have time!

Edit: I realize that might have possibly come off a little dickish. I would say I know the NCAC a little better than the average pollster, not you.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on October 29, 2019, 04:05:54 PM

Nice work on Street & Smith, Dave! Way to get results. On the downside, it will likely provide a lot less fodder for entertainment ... bummer :).

I too am curious about WPI being ranked so high in your poll. I like them as a bottom-tier-top-25 team (as they so often are) this year, with everyone back from a deep, quality team with a lot of solid but no truly great players, but five seems like quite a jump! Especially when I think Babson and Springfield can make an equally good case, roughly, in the NEWMAC this year.

Also interesting to see Salem State so high ... I like them this year, easily the class of the awful MASCAC and they have two legit stars returning, but the rest of the roster seems like a ????. They often get good JUCO transfers so maybe Dave knows something on that front? They play much of the class of New England in non-league play (Willliams, Amherst, WPI, Babson, Endicott, Gordon, MIT, possibly Tufts), so they will certainly get a chance to show what they can do vs. strong competition.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 29, 2019, 04:08:06 PM

I think you see my thoughts on the NCAC this year. I think Wabash will be stronger after last year's experience and bringing all that talent back. Witt will be strong, though the loss of Balser will be noted, but I think they can overcome that. Wooster I included for two reasons: They always seem to be in the Top 25 even years I doubt them and eventually vote for them; this is Steve Moore's last season and I think the team is going to rise to the occasion (or at least try to).

The NCAC isn't in the top five of conferences, but they are safely in the Top 10/15 for sure. The depth - or lack - is what kills the conference, but Wabash is clearly helping with that equation.

The Great Lakes is going to be a mud pit once again with a lot of teams getting stuck thanks to tough games and outcomes. I think last year it ended up beating up the best teams a bit too much and we didn't get to see the best in the NCAA tournament. I will be interested to see if that holds true this year. Wild cards like Mount Union could make things far more difficult in the region.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CollegeGolf18 on October 29, 2019, 04:12:20 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 29, 2019, 04:08:06 PM
I think you see my thoughts on the NCAC this year. I think Wabash will be stronger after last year's experience and bringing all that talent back. Witt will be strong, though the loss of Balser will be noted, but I think they can overcome that. Wooster I included for two reasons: They always seem to be in the Top 25 even years I doubt them and eventually vote for them; this is Steve Moore's last season and I think the team is going to rise to the occasion (or at least try to).

The NCAC isn't in the top five of conferences, but they are safely in the Top 10/15 for sure. The depth - or lack - is what kills the conference, but Wabash is clearly helping with that equation.

The Great Lakes is going to be a mud pit once again with a lot of teams getting stuck thanks to tough games and outcomes. I think last year it ended up beating up the best teams a bit too much and we didn't get to see the best in the NCAA tournament. I will be interested to see if that holds true this year. Wild cards like Mount Union could make things far more difficult in the region.

Thanks for your thoughts. I totally agree with you although Danyon Hempy scares me and I feel that if he gets going they can beat anyone.

Wabash will be better this year, no doubt. I just worry about their dismal depth at the five and if they finally prove they can win on the road...those are my two big questions.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 29, 2019, 04:13:05 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on October 29, 2019, 04:05:54 PM
Nice work on Street & Smith, Dave! Way to get results. On the downside, it will likely provide a lot less fodder for entertainment ... bummer :).

I too am curious about WPI being ranked so high in your poll. I like them as a bottom-tier-top-25 team (as they so often are) this year, with everyone back from a deep, quality team with a lot of solid but no truly great players, but five seems like quite a jump! Especially when I think Babson and Springfield can make an equally good case, roughly, in the NEWMAC this year.

Also interesting to see Salem State so high ... I like them this year, easily the class of the awful MASCAC and they have two legit stars returning, but the rest of the roster seems like a ????. They often get good JUCO transfers so maybe Dave knows something on that front? They play much of the class of New England in non-league play (Willliams, Amherst, WPI, Babson, Endicott, Gordon, MIT), so they will certainly get a chance to show what they can do vs. strong competition.

I think WPI is going to put it together this year. It's a flyer. No doubt, but something about what they have and maybe others being "down" might help them this time around. We shall see. It isn't a hill I'm going to die on for sure.

Salem State - took a flyer especially with 20+ point scorers returning. I think Nichols has gone through too much change to stay consistent. I looked at Endicott and decided a wait and see was better. I liked what I saw coming back from Salem State. That said, after I submitted my ballot I did go back about 15 minutes later wondering if I had put in the wrong team and meant someone else for the Salem State spot. I decided to just follow my gut instead. Though - my gut hasn't always been right LOL.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 29, 2019, 04:15:34 PM

Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on October 29, 2019, 04:12:20 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 29, 2019, 04:08:06 PM
I think you see my thoughts on the NCAC this year. I think Wabash will be stronger after last year's experience and bringing all that talent back. Witt will be strong, though the loss of Balser will be noted, but I think they can overcome that. Wooster I included for two reasons: They always seem to be in the Top 25 even years I doubt them and eventually vote for them; this is Steve Moore's last season and I think the team is going to rise to the occasion (or at least try to).

The NCAC isn't in the top five of conferences, but they are safely in the Top 10/15 for sure. The depth - or lack - is what kills the conference, but Wabash is clearly helping with that equation.

The Great Lakes is going to be a mud pit once again with a lot of teams getting stuck thanks to tough games and outcomes. I think last year it ended up beating up the best teams a bit too much and we didn't get to see the best in the NCAA tournament. I will be interested to see if that holds true this year. Wild cards like Mount Union could make things far more difficult in the region.

Thanks for your thoughts. I totally agree with you although Danyon Hempy scares me and I feel that if he gets going they can beat anyone.

Wabash will be better this year, no doubt. I just worry about their dismal depth at the five and if they finally prove they can win on the road...those are my two big questions.

The five spot I can understand being a concern, but also going small (which they can do) could prove to be an asset. They have 94% of their scoring coming back. That isn't something to shake a stick at and I think they also have a true center with more experience that could make things challenging.

Winning on the road is always a challenge especially in the NCAC - I can't take that much stock in that in the preseason right now. If they are struggling later in the season with that, then I'll use that accordingly. I try not to look at schedules as part of my ballot right now because there are too many unknowns.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on October 29, 2019, 04:16:44 PM

Haha, fair enough re: Salem! Sean Bryan is one of the less-talked-about REALLY good players around. He can flat out play, and would be a star anywhere. But they have basically no one of note returning after the two stars. I see they have two JUCO guys on the roster, so perhaps they will help right away.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 29, 2019, 04:19:36 PM

Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on October 29, 2019, 04:03:58 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 29, 2019, 03:10:31 PM
11 - Wabash
13 - Wittenberg
21 - Wooster

Being an NCAC fan (Wabash '18), I wanted to hear your thoughts on your order for these three NCAC teams. Witt seems to be the strongest group only losing Balser, no?

I know the NCAC a little better than most I would say just because I've dove deep into it for the past 6+ years and I think I'd order these three teams Witt, Wabash, Wooster. I do love hearing others' opinions and am just curious about why you ordered them the way you did!

No problem if you don't have time!

Edit: I realize that might have possibly come off a little dickish. I would say I know the NCAC a little better than the average pollster, not you.

Wabash travels to Bloomington, IL this Friday to scrimmage Illinois Wesleyan. While not a real game, I'm interested to see how that plays out. I should get pretty good scoop from that scrimmage from fans who attend.

I am very high on Wabash entering the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CollegeGolf18 on October 29, 2019, 04:20:03 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 29, 2019, 04:15:34 PM
Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on October 29, 2019, 04:12:20 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 29, 2019, 04:08:06 PM
I think you see my thoughts on the NCAC this year. I think Wabash will be stronger after last year's experience and bringing all that talent back. Witt will be strong, though the loss of Balser will be noted, but I think they can overcome that. Wooster I included for two reasons: They always seem to be in the Top 25 even years I doubt them and eventually vote for them; this is Steve Moore's last season and I think the team is going to rise to the occasion (or at least try to).

The NCAC isn't in the top five of conferences, but they are safely in the Top 10/15 for sure. The depth - or lack - is what kills the conference, but Wabash is clearly helping with that equation.

The Great Lakes is going to be a mud pit once again with a lot of teams getting stuck thanks to tough games and outcomes. I think last year it ended up beating up the best teams a bit too much and we didn't get to see the best in the NCAA tournament. I will be interested to see if that holds true this year. Wild cards like Mount Union could make things far more difficult in the region.

Thanks for your thoughts. I totally agree with you although Danyon Hempy scares me and I feel that if he gets going they can beat anyone.

Wabash will be better this year, no doubt. I just worry about their dismal depth at the five and if they finally prove they can win on the road...those are my two big questions.

The five spot I can understand being a concern, but also going small (which they can do) could prove to be an asset. They have 94% of their scoring coming back. That isn't something to shake a stick at and I think they also have a true center with more experience that could make things challenging.

Winning on the road is always a challenge especially in the NCAC - I can't take that much stock in that in the preseason right now. If they are struggling later in the season with that, then I'll use that accordingly. I try not to look at schedules as part of my ballot right now because there are too many unknowns.

Great points. They will show a small ball lineup quite a bit this year from what I hear. Excited to see how they look against Centre - could be a tough one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CollegeGolf18 on October 29, 2019, 04:21:10 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 29, 2019, 04:19:36 PM
Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on October 29, 2019, 04:03:58 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 29, 2019, 03:10:31 PM
11 - Wabash
13 - Wittenberg
21 - Wooster

Being an NCAC fan (Wabash '18), I wanted to hear your thoughts on your order for these three NCAC teams. Witt seems to be the strongest group only losing Balser, no?

I know the NCAC a little better than most I would say just because I've dove deep into it for the past 6+ years and I think I'd order these three teams Witt, Wabash, Wooster. I do love hearing others' opinions and am just curious about why you ordered them the way you did!

No problem if you don't have time!

Edit: I realize that might have possibly come off a little dickish. I would say I know the NCAC a little better than the average pollster, not you.

Wabash travels to Bloomington, IL this Friday to scrimmage Illinois Wesleyan. While not a real game, I'm interested to see how that plays out. I should get pretty good scoop from that scrimmage from fans who attend.

I am very high on Wabash entering the season.

I think they'll be very, very good. I tend to temper expectations so I am not too disappointed when the season is over. I am ready for basketball though, no doubt. That Centre game will be an early test.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 29, 2019, 04:35:11 PM

I saw Wittenberg two years ago opening weekend at the Great Lakes Invitational at Marietta and my takeaway was "I think I just saw my 2019-2020 preseason #1." That freshman class (and sophomores) now juniors and seniors are very talented and it's hard to replace the experience they've gotten playing so many minutes together these past two years. I didn't end up voting them #1, but I've got them very high and expect great things from them.

Wooster got a couple of well-pedigreed transfers - seems like they want to make Coach's last year a good one. I agree on Hempy; they could be dangerous. I ended up putting Wabash third, I think - mostly because they didn't finish the year well and I try not to automatically elevate a team just because they bring so much back. Sometimes a squad is what they'll be, even if they don't graduate anyone. I want Wabash to prove something on the floor before I put a lot of weight behind them.

I voted Salem State as well. Two really talented guys can take you a long way, especially in that conference. Also, those are two guys more talented than we've seen in the MASCAC of late. I'm willing to give that preseason love to proven players. My weakness is definitely potential, so I try hard to edit myself early on "what could be" verses what we've actually seen.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 29, 2019, 04:35:58 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on October 29, 2019, 03:55:11 PM
As someone who is northeast based, I have to say I don't quite understand all of the love for WPI. I understand they return a top player from injury and the majority of their lineup--but they were the 5 seed in the NEWMAC last season and didn't even make the conference championship game. Can someone please explain this to me?

In the voter information packet, WPI really jumped out.

* 19-9 last year
* They technically have 6 starters back (last year's 5, plus an injured starter who returns)
* 99% of scoring back
* 97% of rebounding
* 98% of assists

In looking at that, I was sold on including them -- I had WPI #24.

When you vote in the preseason poll, you are basically trying to predict the final poll. I feel pretty confident a team with those credentials will have a big season and finish the season somewhere in the poll.

We'll see.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on October 29, 2019, 04:52:25 PM

The NEWMAC is tough but the championship game last season was Emerson and an 11-15 Springfield team. MIT really fell off after Jurko got hurt. I can see them getting votes, but man, that is high. Like, really high.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CCD3Basketball on October 29, 2019, 04:58:46 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 28, 2019, 09:38:24 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on October 27, 2019, 08:46:49 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 27, 2019, 08:41:05 PM

Bob and I have 20 of the same teams on our ballots.
Did you vote for Yeshiva 5 times?

I've been trying to subtly hint at this, but I did not vote for Yeshiva this year. I happen to think they've got Top 25 talent, but they didn't finish last season strongly enough for me to justify a vote (especially with so many deserving squads out there). I am excited they're coming to the Eastern Shore in a couple weeks, though. I'll get to see them in person early. Hopefully the votes will come soon.

They've got quite the Eastern Shore road trip; 8pm on Saturday night against Salisbury and 2pm on Sunday afternoon against Washington College; a couple of pretty scrappy teams. We'll see what they've got in the tank pretty early.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CollegeGolf18 on October 29, 2019, 05:09:19 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 29, 2019, 04:35:11 PM

I saw Wittenberg two years ago opening weekend at the Great Lakes Invitational at Marietta and my takeaway was "I think I just saw my 2019-2020 preseason #1." That freshman class (and sophomores) now juniors and seniors are very talented and it's hard to replace the experience they've gotten playing so many minutes together these past two years. I didn't end up voting them #1, but I've got them very high and expect great things from them.

Wooster got a couple of well-pedigreed transfers - seems like they want to make Coach's last year a good one. I agree on Hempy; they could be dangerous. I ended up putting Wabash third, I think - mostly because they didn't finish the year well and I try not to automatically elevate a team just because they bring so much back. Sometimes a squad is what they'll be, even if they don't graduate anyone. I want Wabash to prove something on the floor before I put a lot of weight behind them.

I voted Salem State as well. Two really talented guys can take you a long way, especially in that conference. Also, those are two guys more talented than we've seen in the MASCAC of late. I'm willing to give that preseason love to proven players. My weakness is definitely potential, so I try hard to edit myself early on "what could be" verses what we've actually seen.

Who are Wooster's transfers? Your stance on Wabash is mine exactly, let's see if they can replicate 9-0 again through the early conference slate - this time with 6 road games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 29, 2019, 05:15:35 PM

Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on October 29, 2019, 05:09:19 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 29, 2019, 04:35:11 PM

I saw Wittenberg two years ago opening weekend at the Great Lakes Invitational at Marietta and my takeaway was "I think I just saw my 2019-2020 preseason #1." That freshman class (and sophomores) now juniors and seniors are very talented and it's hard to replace the experience they've gotten playing so many minutes together these past two years. I didn't end up voting them #1, but I've got them very high and expect great things from them.

Wooster got a couple of well-pedigreed transfers - seems like they want to make Coach's last year a good one. I agree on Hempy; they could be dangerous. I ended up putting Wabash third, I think - mostly because they didn't finish the year well and I try not to automatically elevate a team just because they bring so much back. Sometimes a squad is what they'll be, even if they don't graduate anyone. I want Wabash to prove something on the floor before I put a lot of weight behind them.

I voted Salem State as well. Two really talented guys can take you a long way, especially in that conference. Also, those are two guys more talented than we've seen in the MASCAC of late. I'm willing to give that preseason love to proven players. My weakness is definitely potential, so I try hard to edit myself early on "what could be" verses what we've actually seen.

Who are Wooster's transfers? Your stance on Wabash is mine exactly, let's see if they can replicate 9-0 again through the early conference slate - this time with 6 road games.

Wooster's roster is up. Jaylen Franklin was a walkon at UMass. He's a pretty talented kid - not sure how quickly he'll fit into the system, but Wooster could use the bodies and minutes for sure. Bennington and Bishop are transfers as well, not sure how they'll figure in. Heard good things about Adams, the freshman.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CollegeGolf18 on October 29, 2019, 06:32:29 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 29, 2019, 05:15:35 PM
Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on October 29, 2019, 05:09:19 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 29, 2019, 04:35:11 PM

I saw Wittenberg two years ago opening weekend at the Great Lakes Invitational at Marietta and my takeaway was "I think I just saw my 2019-2020 preseason #1." That freshman class (and sophomores) now juniors and seniors are very talented and it's hard to replace the experience they've gotten playing so many minutes together these past two years. I didn't end up voting them #1, but I've got them very high and expect great things from them.

Wooster got a couple of well-pedigreed transfers - seems like they want to make Coach's last year a good one. I agree on Hempy; they could be dangerous. I ended up putting Wabash third, I think - mostly because they didn't finish the year well and I try not to automatically elevate a team just because they bring so much back. Sometimes a squad is what they'll be, even if they don't graduate anyone. I want Wabash to prove something on the floor before I put a lot of weight behind them.

I voted Salem State as well. Two really talented guys can take you a long way, especially in that conference. Also, those are two guys more talented than we've seen in the MASCAC of late. I'm willing to give that preseason love to proven players. My weakness is definitely potential, so I try hard to edit myself early on "what could be" verses what we've actually seen.

Who are Wooster's transfers? Your stance on Wabash is mine exactly, let's see if they can replicate 9-0 again through the early conference slate - this time with 6 road games.

Wooster's roster is up. Jaylen Franklin was a walkon at UMass. He's a pretty talented kid - not sure how quickly he'll fit into the system, but Wooster could use the bodies and minutes for sure. Bennington and Bishop are transfers as well, not sure how they'll figure in. Heard good things about Adams, the freshman.

D1 walk-ons are always hard to gauge in my opinion.

Bennington played 4.8 minutes a game (9 games) scoring 2.0 PPG for a solid D2 program (Ashland, 23-7).
Bishop played in 26 games and scored 3.3 points a game for a bad NAIA (St. Xavier, 10-20)

Franklin appears to be a "senior" in terms of years in school but was just a manager for UMass his freshman year. So while he graduated high school in 2016, he is just a junior.

It seems like definite positions of need for Wooster, though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 30, 2019, 10:51:36 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 29, 2019, 10:58:13 AM
Quick reaction - awesome preseason poll!

The only thing I noticed that seems weird to me is the Wheaton votes.

45 poll points for the team picked 6th in the CCIW.

https://cciw.org/news/2019/10/30/north-central-picked-to-win-2019-20-cciw-mens-basketball-title.aspx

1. North Central
2. Augustana
3. IWU
4. Carthage
5. Elmhurst
6. Wheaton
7. Carroll
7. Millikin
9. North Park

See, I have been telling you guys for 20 years it is a strong league!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 30, 2019, 11:16:26 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 30, 2019, 10:51:36 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on October 29, 2019, 10:58:13 AM
Quick reaction - awesome preseason poll!

The only thing I noticed that seems weird to me is the Wheaton votes.

45 poll points for the team picked 6th in the CCIW.

https://cciw.org/news/2019/10/30/north-central-picked-to-win-2019-20-cciw-mens-basketball-title.aspx

1. North Central
2. Augustana
3. IWU
4. Carthage
5. Elmhurst
6. Wheaton
7. Carroll
7. Millikin
9. North Park

See, I have been telling you guys for 20 years it is a strong league!

Correct. But why ZERO votes for those voted 3rd, 4th, and 5th? Would a simpler explanation be that some of your fellow voters are idiots who don't realize that Aston Francis ain't walking thru that door? :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 31, 2019, 12:04:04 AM

"Idiots" is a little harsh. I suggested that they were guilty of skimping on their ballot preparation, and Bob used the word "lazy" to describe them. Not to speak for Bob, but I suspect that he'd agree with me that "idiots" is a bit over the top in describing the five Wheaton-voting pollsters.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on October 31, 2019, 01:02:27 AM

Maybe they think that Wheaton will be blessed by miracle performances?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 31, 2019, 06:50:55 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 31, 2019, 12:04:04 AM
"Idiots" is a little harsh. I suggested that they were guilty of skimping on their ballot preparation, and Bob used the word "lazy" to describe them. Not to speak for Bob, but I suspect that he'd agree with me that "idiots" is a bit over the top in describing the five Wheaton-voting pollsters.

"Idiots" is definitely way, way over the top.

I've chosen to be snarky on this Wheaton thing simply because most voters spent hours on the preseason ballot...while a small number didn't do a great job reviewing/using the info Pat provided to them. By poll-shaming the Wheaton voters I'm hoping they'll get locked in the rest of the way.

But they're certainly not idiots. These are media types, or SIDS, or coaches who were handpicked by D3hoops.com because of how much they know about D3 MBB, and how much they care. This basketball preseason time of year (October) is crazy for all three of these groups for different reasons. I'm guessing a few people got caught not setting aside enough time for their ballot, wanted to vote for a 3rd CCIW team, and plucked Wheaton off the final 2018-19 poll without looking at what they lost/return.

When Wheaton wins the national championship this year I expect to hear from these 5 voters.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 31, 2019, 07:35:52 AM

Those five voters are the only ones who know about the secret lab where they've been making clones. The starting lineup this season will include AsTWOn Francis, Aston FOURncis, Aston FranSIX, AsTEN Francis, and Anajuwon Spencer.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 31, 2019, 08:44:43 AM

I have no doubt Dave will disclose these five voters' contact information so everyone who is offended by Wheaton's placement in the poll can let their feelings be known. The offended posters can organize a march, protest, petition to get these voters kicked off the Top 25 panel and they can elect their own competent posters like Greg Sager, nescac1, WUPHF, hopefan and FC Grizzlies. Then the world, and poll, will be a better place.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on October 31, 2019, 08:48:21 AM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 31, 2019, 07:35:52 AM
Those five voters are the only ones who know about the secret lab where they've been making clones. The starting lineup this season will include AsTWOn Francis, Aston FOURncis, Aston FranSIX, AsTEN Francis, and Anajuwon Spencer.

In this case, those 5 pollsters are would actually be "idiots," as a team with 4 Aston Francis most certainly should be ranked #1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 31, 2019, 11:54:19 AM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on October 31, 2019, 07:35:52 AM
Those five voters are the only ones who know about the secret lab where they've been making clones. The starting lineup this season will include AsTWOn Francis, Aston FOURncis, Aston FranSIX, AsTEN Francis, and Anajuwon Spencer.

Something about those Aston Francis clones doesn't exactly look right:

(https://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/memoryalpha/images/e/e2/Weyoun.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20070429100901&path-prefix=de)

Quote from: Smitty Oom on October 31, 2019, 08:48:21 AM
In this case, those 5 pollsters are would actually be "idiots," as a team with 4 Aston Francis most certainly should be ranked #1.

Heck, a team with four Aston Francises would be pretty competent at the D2 level.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 31, 2019, 12:07:36 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 31, 2019, 08:44:43 AM
I have no doubt Dave will disclose these five voters' contact information so everyone who is offended by Wheaton's placement in the poll can let their feelings be known. The offended posters can organize a march, protest, petition to get these voters kicked off the Top 25 panel and they can elect their own competent posters like Greg Sager, nescac1, WUPHF, hopefan and FC Grizzlies. Then the world, and poll, will be a better place.

We're not saying that this is the end of the world, Tom. We're just saying that this negligence tarnishes the 2019-20 d3hoops.com preseason poll a bit. Given that this poll is the gold standard -- and that it's one of the reasons why we all make fun of the Street & Smith preseason poll -- it's worth commenting upon here.

Since Pat has put a lot of time and effort over the years into making d3hoops.com the go-to source for information about D3 men's basketball for both the media and for fans, I'm sure that he's even more annoyed by this negligent ballot work than we are. But, again, nobody here is exaggerating the importance of the five Wheaton-voting slackers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on October 31, 2019, 12:33:56 PM

With all due respect to Pat, Dave, et. al that obviously do terrific work on covering D3 sports and giving them their deserving due, is this poll the gold standard or just the best poll we have? The voters that are active on these boards do an incredible job of gathering information and giving it their best shot, but for most of the voters I would imagine it is nearly impossible to accurately cover 400+ teams. Hypothetically, if I'm a voter in the northeast, is it reasonable that I would be able to judge whether or a team in Ohio's sophomore class is able to take the jump and contribute as compared to a team from the Northwest who returns 4 starters but loses two key bench pieces? All of this continuing throughout the season when none of these teams have a chance to play each other out of region to give us actual insight. The poll is more accurate than it is inaccurate, but we see enough teams make runs in the tournament each year that get little to no national recognition to know that the best we can do is guess.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 31, 2019, 01:39:35 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on October 31, 2019, 12:33:56 PM
The poll is more accurate than it is inaccurate, but we see enough teams make runs in the tournament each year that get little to no national recognition to know that the best we can do is guess.

Such is the nature of the sport of basketball, and that is why we love it so much.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wally_wabash on October 31, 2019, 02:31:08 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 31, 2019, 08:44:43 AM
I have no doubt Dave will disclose these five voters' contact information so everyone who is offended by Wheaton's placement in the poll can let their feelings be known. The offended posters can organize a march, protest, petition to get these voters kicked off the Top 25 panel and they can elect their own competent posters like Greg Sager, nescac1, WUPHF, hopefan and FC Grizzlies. Then the world, and poll, will be a better place.

"I demand to know the name of the person who voted for [controversial team] and why they have a vote" guy is my favorite poll guy.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jamtod on October 31, 2019, 03:17:17 PM

Quote from: wally_wabash on October 31, 2019, 02:31:08 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 31, 2019, 08:44:43 AM
I have no doubt Dave will disclose these five voters' contact information so everyone who is offended by Wheaton's placement in the poll can let their feelings be known. The offended posters can organize a march, protest, petition to get these voters kicked off the Top 25 panel and they can elect their own competent posters like Greg Sager, nescac1, WUPHF, hopefan and FC Grizzlies. Then the world, and poll, will be a better place.

"I demand to know the name of the person who voted for [controversial team] and why they have a vote" guy is my favorite poll guy.

I'll work up a template for you for my next tweet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on October 31, 2019, 05:12:57 PM

Quote from: wally_wabash on October 31, 2019, 02:31:08 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 31, 2019, 08:44:43 AM
I have no doubt Dave will disclose these five voters' contact information so everyone who is offended by Wheaton's placement in the poll can let their feelings be known. The offended posters can organize a march, protest, petition to get these voters kicked off the Top 25 panel and they can elect their own competent posters like Greg Sager, nescac1, WUPHF, hopefan and FC Grizzlies. Then the world, and poll, will be a better place.

"I demand to know the name of the person who voted for [controversial team] and why they have a vote" guy is my favorite poll guy.

Right up there with, "Well, what about...."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 31, 2019, 05:32:21 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on October 31, 2019, 12:33:56 PM
With all due respect to Pat, Dave, et. al that obviously do terrific work on covering D3 sports and giving them their deserving due, is this poll the gold standard or just the best poll we have? The voters that are active on these boards do an incredible job of gathering information and giving it their best shot, but for most of the voters I would imagine it is nearly impossible to accurately cover 400+ teams. Hypothetically, if I'm a voter in the northeast, is it reasonable that I would be able to judge whether or a team in Ohio's sophomore class is able to take the jump and contribute as compared to a team from the Northwest who returns 4 starters but loses two key bench pieces? All of this continuing throughout the season when none of these teams have a chance to play each other out of region to give us actual insight. The poll is more accurate than it is inaccurate, but we see enough teams make runs in the tournament each year that get little to no national recognition to know that the best we can do is guess.

That's fine as far as it goes, but it doesn't really apply in this case. Aston Francis averaged 34.2 ppg, won every major individual award that there is to win in D3, and turned last March's D3 tournament into his own personal playpen. And when he got to D3's biggest stage, the Final Four, he scored 44 points in the semifinals before his team bowed out. That was in spite of the fact that he had to do it against the best team in the nation, which featured some really outstanding defenders. Seriously, you'd have to be living under a rock to be a D3 fan (as opposed to merely being the fan of one particular team) and not to have heard of Aston Francis -- and the point is that the pollsters are as far from living under a rock as can be. As Bob said, they're all credentialed professionals at this level whose willingness to take a blank ballot from Pat every week constitutes an implicit agreement to follow and evaluate D3 as a whole.

There's light-years' worth of difference between not knowing whether a team in Ohio's sophomore class is able to take the jump and contribute, and not knowing the current eligibility status of Aston Francis.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 31, 2019, 05:38:15 PM

Or maybe they genuinely thought the Wheaton supporting cast was better than Aston Francis allowed them to appear? I'm certainly biased as a voter and I don't know who any of those five are, but it's entirely possible they wanted to give the rest of the squad some credit. Personally, I don't think the last five or six teams on my ballot are all that strong and there could've been a couple dozen other names on those lines. I don't think Wheaton is one of them, but I don't think it's bonkers outrageous for someone else to think so. I'm wildly wrong about a number of teams every year and the truth is, we just don't know how good any of these teams will be.

St. John Fisher got ranked. I didn't vote for them. I don't think that squad is demonstrably better than what Wheaton has returning.

It's one thing to argue against the pick, it's another to assume the voters weren't paying attention just because they voted the way they did.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wally_wabash on October 31, 2019, 05:54:28 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 31, 2019, 05:38:15 PM
It's one thing to argue against the pick, it's another to assume the voters weren't paying attention just because they voted the way they did.

(https://i.imgur.com/nnoAnRB.gif)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on October 31, 2019, 07:47:37 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 31, 2019, 05:38:15 PM

Or maybe they genuinely thought the Wheaton supporting cast was better than Aston Francis allowed them to appear? I'm certainly biased as a voter and I don't know who any of those five are, but it's entirely possible they wanted to give the rest of the squad some credit. Personally, I don't think the last five or six teams on my ballot are all that strong and there could've been a couple dozen other names on those lines. I don't think Wheaton is one of them, but I don't think it's bonkers outrageous for someone else to think so. I'm wildly wrong about a number of teams every year and the truth is, we just don't know how good any of these teams will be.

St. John Fisher got ranked. I didn't vote for them. I don't think that squad is demonstrably better than what Wheaton has returning.

Keep in mind that Wheaton's best returning player, Luke Anthony, probably won't even be available for the first few games of the season. He is currently quarterbacking Wheaton's rather formidable football team who, barring a miracle, will finish the season undefeated. Should they reach the national championship game, Anthony would miss the first 10 games, or 40% of the regular season!
Additionally, Spencer Peterson, who likely would have been Wheaton's third best returning player, sustained an athletic career ending injury during the football season naturally resulting in his being unavailable for the entire basketball season.

It just seems Top 25 voters should have been aware of these well known facts, and having this knowledge would have rendered any Pre-Season Poll votes for Wheaton as being rather unfathomable.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on October 31, 2019, 08:45:56 PM

Quote from: AndOne on October 31, 2019, 07:47:37 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 31, 2019, 05:38:15 PM

Or maybe they genuinely thought the Wheaton supporting cast was better than Aston Francis allowed them to appear? I'm certainly biased as a voter and I don't know who any of those five are, but it's entirely possible they wanted to give the rest of the squad some credit. Personally, I don't think the last five or six teams on my ballot are all that strong and there could've been a couple dozen other names on those lines. I don't think Wheaton is one of them, but I don't think it's bonkers outrageous for someone else to think so. I'm wildly wrong about a number of teams every year and the truth is, we just don't know how good any of these teams will be.

St. John Fisher got ranked. I didn't vote for them. I don't think that squad is demonstrably better than what Wheaton has returning.

Keep in mind that Wheaton's best returning player, Luke Anthony, probably won't even be available for the first few games of the season. He is currently quarterbacking Wheaton's rather formidable football team who, barring a miracle, will finish the season undefeated. Should they reach the national championship game, Anthony would miss the first 10 games, or 40% of the regular season!
Additionally, Spencer Peterson, who likely would have been Wheaton's third best returning player, sustained an athletic career ending injury during the football season naturally resulting in his being unavailable for the entire basketball season.

It just seems Top 25 voters should have been aware of these well known facts, and having this knowledge would have rendered any Pre-Season Poll votes for Wheaton as being rather unfathomable.

These would be the exact things that are perhaps tough to know for every pollster--we don't even know who every pollster is and what their other obligations are--be they full time sports journalists or other such things that take up their time in the fall. Could we maybe just chalk this up to 5 people paying some respect to a team that made it to the Final Four last year?

We're two years removed from Babson being preseason 7th and receiving the only 2 1st place votes that didn't go to Whitman. I don't want this to be a Flannery vs. Francis debate but he made just as much of an impact if not more the year before.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 31, 2019, 09:28:29 PM

Quote from: AndOne on October 31, 2019, 07:47:37 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 31, 2019, 05:38:15 PM

Or maybe they genuinely thought the Wheaton supporting cast was better than Aston Francis allowed them to appear? I'm certainly biased as a voter and I don't know who any of those five are, but it's entirely possible they wanted to give the rest of the squad some credit. Personally, I don't think the last five or six teams on my ballot are all that strong and there could've been a couple dozen other names on those lines. I don't think Wheaton is one of them, but I don't think it's bonkers outrageous for someone else to think so. I'm wildly wrong about a number of teams every year and the truth is, we just don't know how good any of these teams will be.

St. John Fisher got ranked. I didn't vote for them. I don't think that squad is demonstrably better than what Wheaton has returning.

Keep in mind that Wheaton's best returning player, Luke Anthony, probably won't even be available for the first few games of the season. He is currently quarterbacking Wheaton's rather formidable football team who, barring a miracle, will finish the season undefeated. Should they reach the national championship game, Anthony would miss the first 10 games, or 40% of the regular season!
Additionally, Spencer Peterson, who likely would have been Wheaton's third best returning player, sustained an athletic career ending injury during the football season naturally resulting in his being unavailable for the entire basketball season.

It just seems Top 25 voters should have been aware of these well known facts, and having this knowledge would have rendered any Pre-Season Poll votes for Wheaton as being rather unfathomable.

Exactly. And the point that I mentioned earlier, which obviously needs to be restated, is that Pat has informed us that the 45 ballot points for Wheaton represent five pollsters. That averages out to nine points for Wheaton from each pollster. Since each spot on the Top 25 poll adds up to 26 -- 25 points for a #1 vote, 24 points for a #2 vote, 23 points for a #3 vote, etc., until you get to one point for a #25 vote -- that means that those five pollsters, on average, placed Wheaton at #17 on their ballots.

A Wheaton without Aston Francis, Luke Peters, Spencer Peterson, Kobe Eichelberger, Trevor Gunter, and Luke Anthony is a Wheaton that has lost 77% of its scoring, 60% of its rebounding, and 65% of its assists from last season.

Ryan, do you really think that putting Wheaton 17th on a ballot is an informed move?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 31, 2019, 09:36:27 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on October 31, 2019, 08:45:56 PM
Quote from: AndOne on October 31, 2019, 07:47:37 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 31, 2019, 05:38:15 PM

Or maybe they genuinely thought the Wheaton supporting cast was better than Aston Francis allowed them to appear? I'm certainly biased as a voter and I don't know who any of those five are, but it's entirely possible they wanted to give the rest of the squad some credit. Personally, I don't think the last five or six teams on my ballot are all that strong and there could've been a couple dozen other names on those lines. I don't think Wheaton is one of them, but I don't think it's bonkers outrageous for someone else to think so. I'm wildly wrong about a number of teams every year and the truth is, we just don't know how good any of these teams will be.

St. John Fisher got ranked. I didn't vote for them. I don't think that squad is demonstrably better than what Wheaton has returning.

Keep in mind that Wheaton's best returning player, Luke Anthony, probably won't even be available for the first few games of the season. He is currently quarterbacking Wheaton's rather formidable football team who, barring a miracle, will finish the season undefeated. Should they reach the national championship game, Anthony would miss the first 10 games, or 40% of the regular season!
Additionally, Spencer Peterson, who likely would have been Wheaton's third best returning player, sustained an athletic career ending injury during the football season naturally resulting in his being unavailable for the entire basketball season.

It just seems Top 25 voters should have been aware of these well known facts, and having this knowledge would have rendered any Pre-Season Poll votes for Wheaton as being rather unfathomable.

These would be the exact things that are perhaps tough to know for every pollster--we don't even know who every pollster is and what their other obligations are--be they full time sports journalists or other such things that take up their time in the fall.

This is exactly why Pat makes those information packets for each pollster.

Quote from: SpringSt7 on October 31, 2019, 08:45:56 PMCould we maybe just chalk this up to 5 people paying some respect to a team that made it to the Final Four last year?

You say that as though it exonerates them from their responsibility to examine this year's team before putting that team on their ballot.

That sort of bleedover from the year before is precisely what Pat's trying to avoid with his preseason poll. "Paying some respect to a team that made it to the Final Four last year" is Street & Smith thinking (which, as D-Mac has said, has now been recognized by that magazine as a flaw to be corrected).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 31, 2019, 09:48:37 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 31, 2019, 05:38:15 PM

Or maybe they genuinely thought the Wheaton supporting cast was better than Aston Francis allowed them to appear?

I guess it is possible, but I don't buy it.

I mean, the best guy in the supporting cast graduated too -- 6-3 PG Luke Peters. (The only other All-CCIW guy - https://cciw.org/sports/2019/2/18/MBB_0218192558.aspx.). So they are voting for a few returning role players, the best of which is the QB of the football team who won't be on the team for a few weeks?

If I'm one of those voters I'd rather just admit I didn't pay any attention (vs making a case for CCIW #6 in the preseason poll).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AndOne on October 31, 2019, 10:27:52 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on October 31, 2019, 08:45:56 PMCould we maybe just chalk this up to 5 people paying some respect to a team that made it to the Final Four last year?

You say that as though it exonerates them from their responsibility to examine this year's team before putting that team on their ballot.

That sort of bleedover from the year before is precisely what Pat's trying to avoid with his preseason poll. "Paying some respect to a team that made it to the Final Four last year" is Street & Smith thinking (which, as D-Mac has said, has now been recognized by that magazine as a flaw to be corrected).
[/quote]

Quote from: Titan Q on October 31, 2019, 09:48:37 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 31, 2019, 05:38:15 PM

Or maybe they genuinely thought the Wheaton supporting cast was better than Aston Francis allowed them to appear?

I guess it is possible, but I don't buy it.

I mean, the best guy in the supporting cast graduated too -- 6-3 PG Luke Peters. (The only other All-CCIW guy - https://cciw.org/sports/2019/2/18/MBB_0218192558.aspx.). So they are voting for a few returning role players, the best of which is the QB of the football team who won't be on the team for a few weeks?

If I'm one of those voters I'd rather just admit I didn't pay any attention (vs making a case for CCIW #6 in the preseason poll).

And, actually, I would submit that some "respect to a team that made it to the Final Four last year" WAS paid to Wheaton in the form of Luke Peters being named to the CCIW All-Conf Team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 31, 2019, 10:32:12 PM

Quote from: AndOne on October 31, 2019, 10:27:52 PM

And, actually, I would submit that some "respect to a team that made it to the Final Four last year" WAS paid to Wheaton in the form of Luke Peters being named to the CCIW All-Conf Team.

The CCIW all-conference team was announced before any NCAA tournament games were played.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 01, 2019, 08:07:19 PM

Nobody voted for them, but Johns Hopkins is putting a hurting on Loyola (MD) tonight. Up 19 at the half.

https://watchstadium.com/live/johns-hopkins-at-loyola-maryland/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: thebear on November 02, 2019, 07:46:46 PM

"You don't always have to win every game. You just have to win the right ones. 😏 (AndOne)"

Except if you are Jerry Welsh [1985-86] or Bo Ryan [1994-95 and 1997-98] :-)

.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 05, 2019, 10:29:05 AM

Not currently in the conversation, but certainly an oft-represented coach. Big news for D3 hoops!

https://www.godiplomats.com/sports/m-baskbl/2019-20/releases/20191104v3nw9h?fbclid=IwAR1NJqLetv4FNj3kxTmWJN8U3H9JcJENhKsmDuJwusmBzTonNWyF2sbBdUM

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 05, 2019, 12:35:13 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 05, 2019, 10:29:05 AM
Not currently in the conversation, but certainly an oft-represented coach. Big news for D3 hoops!

https://www.godiplomats.com/sports/m-baskbl/2019-20/releases/20191104v3nw9h?fbclid=IwAR1NJqLetv4FNj3kxTmWJN8U3H9JcJENhKsmDuJwusmBzTonNWyF2sbBdUM

Less than a week before the season starts? Ouch. Hope he told the players when practice started last month.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 05, 2019, 01:48:46 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 05, 2019, 12:35:13 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 05, 2019, 10:29:05 AM
Not currently in the conversation, but certainly an oft-represented coach. Big news for D3 hoops!

https://www.godiplomats.com/sports/m-baskbl/2019-20/releases/20191104v3nw9h?fbclid=IwAR1NJqLetv4FNj3kxTmWJN8U3H9JcJENhKsmDuJwusmBzTonNWyF2sbBdUM

Less than a week before the season starts? Ouch. Hope he told the players when practice started last month.

There is a joke in here that I'm trying not to post. If you know the joke, you are snickering along with me. :) If not, pretend I didn't post.

Sorry for my disappearance ... I'll post a bit more later.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on November 05, 2019, 03:24:38 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 05, 2019, 01:48:46 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 05, 2019, 12:35:13 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 05, 2019, 10:29:05 AM
Not currently in the conversation, but certainly an oft-represented coach. Big news for D3 hoops!

https://www.godiplomats.com/sports/m-baskbl/2019-20/releases/20191104v3nw9h?fbclid=IwAR1NJqLetv4FNj3kxTmWJN8U3H9JcJENhKsmDuJwusmBzTonNWyF2sbBdUM

Less than a week before the season starts? Ouch. Hope he told the players when practice started last month.

There is a joke in here that I'm trying not to post. If you know the joke, you are snickering along with me. :) If not, pretend I didn't post.

Sorry for my disappearance ... I'll post a bit more later.

Quite "diplomatic" of you not To post the joke...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 05, 2019, 03:35:15 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 05, 2019, 10:29:05 AM
Not currently in the conversation, but certainly an oft-represented coach. Big news for D3 hoops!

https://www.godiplomats.com/sports/m-baskbl/2019-20/releases/20191104v3nw9h?fbclid=IwAR1NJqLetv4FNj3kxTmWJN8U3H9JcJENhKsmDuJwusmBzTonNWyF2sbBdUM

I know nothing about this situation. But with the timing, is this a deal where Robinson is trying to make sure his top assistant has a full season to coach the team so he has an advantage when they hire?

Or is this truly that Robinson decided he just couldn't do it anymore, just days before the opener?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 05, 2019, 04:01:06 PM

My guess, Titan ... combo of the two. Having talked to him last season (off air), I got the sense the coaching fire was not gone. He wanted to get back out there. I also sensed he didn't want to hurt the team not being at 100%. We all know he missed a few games the last two seasons, at least, with health issues. He didn't want to be back on the bench unless he could give it his all.

I felt he would be back, but I wasn't sure when he might hang it up. During the off-season, I could have argued he would retire any day while also countering that argument that 1,000 wins and a couple of more years was something he seriously wanted to accomplish.

I suspect he went into this year thinking he was ready to go and found he wasn't really 100%. I also think he knew that it was possible he wasn't going to be able to return and wanted to make sure he could dictate who took over - we know those types of coaches. I bet he knew that if he retired in April or June, the school would be forced to do a national search. He controls things more this way - we have seen that before.

However I think there was still a part of Glenn Robinson was ready to coach this season. If the idea was simply to position his assistant, he could have made this decision a month ago and they still would have made the same interim decision.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 05, 2019, 07:19:27 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 05, 2019, 03:35:15 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 05, 2019, 10:29:05 AM
Not currently in the conversation, but certainly an oft-represented coach. Big news for D3 hoops!

https://www.godiplomats.com/sports/m-baskbl/2019-20/releases/20191104v3nw9h?fbclid=IwAR1NJqLetv4FNj3kxTmWJN8U3H9JcJENhKsmDuJwusmBzTonNWyF2sbBdUM

I know nothing about this situation. But with the timing, is this a deal where Robinson is trying to make sure his top assistant has a full season to coach the team so he has an advantage when they hire?

Or is this truly that Robinson decided he just couldn't do it anymore, just days before the opener?

Also, Nick has been the assistant there for seven or eight years now. He's the lead recruiter and very involved in the day to day. It'll be a very smooth transition. He's also led the team during Glenn's absences recently - no reason to doubt about how the program will proceed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on November 06, 2019, 09:12:59 AM

https://utdcomets.com/sports/mens-basketball/stats/2019-2020/ut-arlington-exhibition-/boxscore/4709 (https://utdcomets.com/sports/mens-basketball/stats/2019-2020/ut-arlington-exhibition-/boxscore/4709)

I know we had talked about this before, as Dimitrius Underwood was not mentioned in the conference preseaon write-up but is listed in the UT-Dallas 2019-2020 roster, but he did not log a minute in the exhibition last night against UT-Arlington... based on his twitter, looks like he is still at school there, but something to monitor.

He was in d3hoops.com pre-season All-American Team (rightfully so), maybe they have word on this situation?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 06, 2019, 09:37:40 AM

I don't know any more than the fact that he was listed as a returning player on the preseason questionnaire we sent to schools who were receiving Top 25 consideration.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 06, 2019, 02:51:03 PM

I promised an update yesterday ...

Posted in the Hoopsville post up page:

QuoteThe start of the #d3hoops season is days away. Many may be wondering when #Hoopsville will debut.

Hoopsville will be on the air for it's 17th season ... but it has become a question of when. Soon for sure.

More on the challenges we've been facing: http://bit.ly/2PSwDRV

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.d3blogs.com%2Fd3hoops%2Ffiles%2F2019%2F11%2FIMG_8140-768x576.jpeg&hash=f99a9bf678efcaeac5ab234d848cc9d74059fc4f)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 06, 2019, 03:06:37 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 06, 2019, 02:51:03 PM
I promised an update yesterday ...

Posted in the Hoopsville post up page:

QuoteThe start of the #d3hoops season is days away. Many may be wondering when #Hoopsville will debut.

Hoopsville will be on the air for it's 17th season ... but it has become a question of when. Soon for sure.

More on the challenges we've been facing: http://bit.ly/2PSwDRV

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.d3blogs.com%2Fd3hoops%2Ffiles%2F2019%2F11%2FIMG_8140-768x576.jpeg&hash=f99a9bf678efcaeac5ab234d848cc9d74059fc4f)

Just remember to put your 10,000th post on the Best Attendance board under the General Basketball heading. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 06, 2019, 03:22:12 PM

Holy cow! I didn't realize I was that close! I have to be careful ... now. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bbfan44 on November 08, 2019, 04:47:44 PM

I'm looking at this years "Street & Smith's" page on Division 3 preview. I'm wondering how much time and effort Chuck Mustovich of Basketball Times spends on this report. His top ten doesn't look much like d3 hoops top ten.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 08, 2019, 05:06:38 PM

Quote from: bbfan44 on November 08, 2019, 04:47:44 PM
I'm looking at this years "Street & Smith's" page on Division 3 preview. I'm wondering how much time and effort Chuck Mustovich of Basketball Times spends on this report. His top ten doesn't look much like d3 hoops top ten.

See below ...

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on October 29, 2019, 03:10:31 PM

I did want to make a comment about Street and Smith. I finally had enough of their polls and DMed them on Twitter. They responded. And thanked me for my thoughts. It resulted in chatting with the head of the organization. Let's just say ... things will change, I suspect. I won't go into it now, but when I have coaches contacting me who are both in and out of the poll wondering what in the world is going on ... I think something has to be said. I think you will see a very different S&S preseason poll next year - they already made smart moves in football by having Keith McMillian of D3football.com (and the Washington Post) provide their preseason poll.

I will give S&S credit. I think they realized things had gone sideways with their smaller college coverage and were willing to be open to an "outsider's" point of view. They even admitted to me why they thought things had gone wrong. I look forward to the solution moving forward.

I can say with an update that a solution is in the mix. I look forward to seeing if it works out. And no, it isn't me. I am a little too busy to help them when they need it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 08, 2019, 07:45:55 PM

From Redlands:

Texas-Dallas 74
Redlands 71 (OT)

Redlands was up 3 with 5 seconds to play in regulation after 2 FTs. They chose to not foul...UTD (Jalen Weber) hit a 3 at the buzzer to send to OT.

In OT Redlands seemed in control late but Weber hit 3 huge shots, including one to tie it, and one to win the game.

No Dimitrius Underwood (preseason 3rd Team All-American) in the boxscore for the Comets.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on November 08, 2019, 10:51:38 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 08, 2019, 07:45:55 PM
From Redlands:

Texas-Dallas 74
Redlands 71 (OT)

Redlands was up 3 with 5 seconds to play in regulation after 2 FTs. They chose to not foul...UTD (Jalen Weber) hit a 3 at the buzzer to send to OT.

In OT Redlands seemed in control late but Weber hit 3 huge shots, including one to tie it, and one to win the game.

+1 for the foul vs defend side. ::)

No Dimitrius Underwood (preseason 3rd Team All-American) in the boxscore for the Comets.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on November 08, 2019, 10:53:40 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 08, 2019, 07:45:55 PM
From Redlands:

Texas-Dallas 74
Redlands 71 (OT)

Redlands was up 3 with 5 seconds to play in regulation after 2 FTs. They chose to not foul...UTD (Jalen Weber) hit a 3 at the buzzer to send to OT.

In OT Redlands seemed in control late but Weber hit 3 huge shots, including one to tie it, and one to win the game.

No Dimitrius Underwood (preseason 3rd Team All-American) in the boxscore for the Comets.

+1 for the foul vs defend side. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on November 08, 2019, 11:17:30 PM

Quote from: ronk on November 08, 2019, 10:53:40 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on November 08, 2019, 07:45:55 PM
From Redlands:

Texas-Dallas 74
Redlands 71 (OT)

Redlands was up 3 with 5 seconds to play in regulation after 2 FTs. They chose to not foul...UTD (Jalen Weber) hit a 3 at the buzzer to send to OT.

In OT Redlands seemed in control late but Weber hit 3 huge shots, including one to tie it, and one to win the game.

No Dimitrius Underwood (preseason 3rd Team All-American) in the boxscore for the Comets.

+1 for the foul vs defend side. ::)

Elsewhere in DePauw, Coach Fenlon is shaking his head reading this post.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 09, 2019, 07:35:24 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 20, 2019, 09:21:05 AM
Here is a team I will have in...and pretty high.

Texas-Dallas (24-5, 13-3 ASC)
* Gone: n/a
* Back: Dimitrius Underwood, 6-2 Sr. G (20.5 ppg, 9.8 rpg, 3.4 apg); Hans Burwitz, 6-7 Sr. C (14.8 ppg, 6.8 rpg); Jalen Weber, 6-0 Sr. G (12.7 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 3.5 apg); Michael Forster, 6-7 Jr. F (9.9 ppg, 6.1 rpg)

One thing I am confused about though - https://utdcomets.com/news/2019/10/17/mens-basketball-comet-men-picked-as-favorites-in-asc-east-division.aspx.

In that release about UT-Dallas being picked to win the ASC East, it says three Comets were named Preseason Players to watch -- Hans Burwitz, Jalen Weber, and Kelden Pruitt. No Dimitrius Underwood (20.5 ppg, 9.8 rpg, 3.4 apg)? He was the ASC East Player of the Year last season, and is on the '19-20 roster - https://utdcomets.com/sports/mens-basketball/roster.

https://ascsports.org/news/2019/2/26/underwood-neal-highlight-asc-mens-basketball-award-winners.aspx

https://ascsports.org/news/2019/10/17/mens-basketball-utd-umhb-selected-to-win-asc-mens-hoops.aspx

Strange.

I wonder what the deal with Dimitrius Underwood is? Per above, he was not mentioned as a "Player to Watch" in that ASC preview.

He is on UTD's roster, but is the only guy who doesn't have a 2019-20 season picture (they used his 2018-19 picture) - https://utdcomets.com/sports/mens-basketball/roster.

He is mentioned in the UTD season preview - https://utdcomets.com/news/2019/11/5/mens-basketball-season-preview-comet-men-have-high-expectations-for-2019-20.aspx.

He did not play last night vs Redlands - https://utdcomets.com/sports/mens-basketball/stats/2019-2020/redlands/boxscore/4710.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 09, 2019, 07:51:23 AM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on November 08, 2019, 11:17:30 PM

Elsewhere in DePauw, Coach Fenlon is shaking his head reading this post.

https://c510383.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/ath/mbasket/images/up3.pdf

I was at both of those games he mentions early the article and can still see both shots going in. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 09, 2019, 08:19:40 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 05, 2019, 04:01:06 PM
My guess, Titan ... combo of the two. Having talked to him last season (off air), I got the sense the coaching fire was not gone. He wanted to get back out there. I also sensed he didn't want to hurt the team not being at 100%. We all know he missed a few games the last two seasons, at least, with health issues. He didn't want to be back on the bench unless he could give it his all.

I felt he would be back, but I wasn't sure when he might hang it up. During the off-season, I could have argued he would retire any day while also countering that argument that 1,000 wins and a couple of more years was something he seriously wanted to accomplish.

I suspect he went into this year thinking he was ready to go and found he wasn't really 100%. I also think he knew that it was possible he wasn't going to be able to return and wanted to make sure he could dictate who took over - we know those types of coaches. I bet he knew that if he retired in April or June, the school would be forced to do a national search. He controls things more this way - we have seen that before.

However I think there was still a part of Glenn Robinson was ready to coach this season. If the idea was simply to position his assistant, he could have made this decision a month ago and they still would have made the same interim decision.

Any tie at all between what happened at F&M last night and Glenn Robinson's departure? I know zero about this, but I think it's fair to ask this question, right?

https://www.pennlive.com/news/2019/11/student-protest-forces-postponement-of-basketball-game-at-franklin-and-marshall-college.html

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on November 09, 2019, 09:40:26 AM

^^^ Wow! The article does say "athletes" rather than basketball players, so maybe not???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 09, 2019, 09:42:32 AM

Quote from: y_jack_lok on November 09, 2019, 09:40:26 AM
^^^ Wow! The article does say "athletes" rather than basketball players, so maybe not???

"The sit-in came after a day of rallying by students who were responding to offensive Halloween costumes worn by multiple Franklin and Marshall athletes, including two basketball players."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on November 09, 2019, 09:46:53 AM

^^^ Oh, I missed the reference to basketball players. Hmmm.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 09, 2019, 11:04:56 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 09, 2019, 08:19:40 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 05, 2019, 04:01:06 PM
My guess, Titan ... combo of the two. Having talked to him last season (off air), I got the sense the coaching fire was not gone. He wanted to get back out there. I also sensed he didn't want to hurt the team not being at 100%. We all know he missed a few games the last two seasons, at least, with health issues. He didn't want to be back on the bench unless he could give it his all.

I felt he would be back, but I wasn't sure when he might hang it up. During the off-season, I could have argued he would retire any day while also countering that argument that 1,000 wins and a couple of more years was something he seriously wanted to accomplish.

I suspect he went into this year thinking he was ready to go and found he wasn't really 100%. I also think he knew that it was possible he wasn't going to be able to return and wanted to make sure he could dictate who took over - we know those types of coaches. I bet he knew that if he retired in April or June, the school would be forced to do a national search. He controls things more this way - we have seen that before.

However I think there was still a part of Glenn Robinson was ready to coach this season. If the idea was simply to position his assistant, he could have made this decision a month ago and they still would have made the same interim decision.

Any tie at all between what happened at F&M last night and Glenn Robinson's departure? I know zero about this, but I think it's fair to ask this question, right?

https://www.pennlive.com/news/2019/11/student-protest-forces-postponement-of-basketball-game-at-franklin-and-marshall-college.html

Unless that was Glenn Robinson himself wearing one of the offensive costumes -- I've seen the pictures, and they were offensive, and I'm not the easily-offended type -- I don't see how this has anything to do with his retirement. His successor has been helping to run the team for, what, seven years now? He's even served as acting head coach for a long stretch of a season when Robinson was in ill health. It seems to me that, despite the hoopla surrounding the retirement of college basketball's Grand Old Man, this has to be as close to a seamless transition for F&M as possible. I doubt that Robinson hung on over the past few seasons just because he had a lenient assistant and felt that someone with a whip hand needed to stay in charge.

Robinson or no Robinson, this is just another classic case of heedless and stupid post-adolescent-male behavior leading to predictable consequences.

What I'm curious about is how this will affect F&M's soccer team, since some of the costumed miscreants play soccer for the Diplomats. The Dips are hosting the Centennial Conference semifinals today and the finals tomorrow, with #1 F&M scheduled to play #5 Haverford in less than an hour. It seems highly likely that we'll see a reprise on the soccer pitch of what happened on the basketball court last night.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 09, 2019, 01:35:30 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 09, 2019, 07:35:24 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on October 20, 2019, 09:21:05 AM
Here is a team I will have in...and pretty high.

Texas-Dallas (24-5, 13-3 ASC)
* Gone: n/a
* Back: Dimitrius Underwood, 6-2 Sr. G (20.5 ppg, 9.8 rpg, 3.4 apg); Hans Burwitz, 6-7 Sr. C (14.8 ppg, 6.8 rpg); Jalen Weber, 6-0 Sr. G (12.7 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 3.5 apg); Michael Forster, 6-7 Jr. F (9.9 ppg, 6.1 rpg)

One thing I am confused about though - https://utdcomets.com/news/2019/10/17/mens-basketball-comet-men-picked-as-favorites-in-asc-east-division.aspx.

In that release about UT-Dallas being picked to win the ASC East, it says three Comets were named Preseason Players to watch -- Hans Burwitz, Jalen Weber, and Kelden Pruitt. No Dimitrius Underwood (20.5 ppg, 9.8 rpg, 3.4 apg)? He was the ASC East Player of the Year last season, and is on the '19-20 roster - https://utdcomets.com/sports/mens-basketball/roster.

https://ascsports.org/news/2019/2/26/underwood-neal-highlight-asc-mens-basketball-award-winners.aspx

https://ascsports.org/news/2019/10/17/mens-basketball-utd-umhb-selected-to-win-asc-mens-hoops.aspx

Strange.

I wonder what the deal with Dimitrius Underwood is? Per above, he was not mentioned as a "Player to Watch" in that ASC preview.

He is on UTD's roster, but is the only guy who doesn't have a 2019-20 season picture (they used his 2018-19 picture) - https://utdcomets.com/sports/mens-basketball/roster.

He is mentioned in the UTD season preview - https://utdcomets.com/news/2019/11/5/mens-basketball-season-preview-comet-men-have-high-expectations-for-2019-20.aspx.

He did not play last night vs Redlands - https://utdcomets.com/sports/mens-basketball/stats/2019-2020/redlands/boxscore/4710.

My initial guess was injury, but given the lack of pictures, maybe he's ineligible this semester? It seems pretty clear they expect him to play. I'll be seeing the team at Christopher Newport in a couple weeks, I'll try to figure it out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 09, 2019, 01:42:52 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 09, 2019, 11:04:56 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on November 09, 2019, 08:19:40 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 05, 2019, 04:01:06 PM
My guess, Titan ... combo of the two. Having talked to him last season (off air), I got the sense the coaching fire was not gone. He wanted to get back out there. I also sensed he didn't want to hurt the team not being at 100%. We all know he missed a few games the last two seasons, at least, with health issues. He didn't want to be back on the bench unless he could give it his all.

I felt he would be back, but I wasn't sure when he might hang it up. During the off-season, I could have argued he would retire any day while also countering that argument that 1,000 wins and a couple of more years was something he seriously wanted to accomplish.

I suspect he went into this year thinking he was ready to go and found he wasn't really 100%. I also think he knew that it was possible he wasn't going to be able to return and wanted to make sure he could dictate who took over - we know those types of coaches. I bet he knew that if he retired in April or June, the school would be forced to do a national search. He controls things more this way - we have seen that before.

However I think there was still a part of Glenn Robinson was ready to coach this season. If the idea was simply to position his assistant, he could have made this decision a month ago and they still would have made the same interim decision.

Any tie at all between what happened at F&M last night and Glenn Robinson's departure? I know zero about this, but I think it's fair to ask this question, right?

https://www.pennlive.com/news/2019/11/student-protest-forces-postponement-of-basketball-game-at-franklin-and-marshall-college.html

Unless that was Glenn Robinson himself wearing one of the offensive costumes -- I've seen the pictures, and they were offensive, and I'm not the easily-offended type -- I don't see how this has anything to do with his retirement. His successor has been helping to run the team for, what, seven years now? He's even served as acting head coach for a long stretch of a season when Robinson was in ill health. It seems to me that, despite the hoopla surrounding the retirement of college basketball's Grand Old Man, this has to be as close to a seamless transition for F&M as possible. I doubt that Robinson hung on over the past few seasons just because he had a lenient assistant and felt that someone with a whip hand needed to stay in charge.

Robinson or no Robinson, this is just another classic case of heedless and stupid post-adolescent-male behavior leading to predictable consequences.

What I'm curious about is how this will affect F&M's soccer team, since some of the costumed miscreants play soccer for the Diplomats. The Dips are hosting the Centennial Conference semifinals today and the finals tomorrow, with #1 F&M scheduled to play #5 Haverford in less than an hour. It seems highly likely that we'll see a reprise on the soccer pitch of what happened on the basketball court last night.

My understanding is that this is a bigger issue on campus with the costumes creating a flash point. Much of the protest centers around the athletes continuing to compete while student development works through the disciplinary process. I suspect what F&M is doing is pretty standard for any student misconduct, but maybe even d3 schools need to recognize that athletes play an out-sized role on campus. I suspect there's nothing to prevent the coaches of these athletes from instituting suspensions, etc as they see fit.

I've talked with Justin Kupa in the past. He's an impressive kid and although not a captain, the definitely leader of the basketball team. I expect him to assert some leadership through this, but it will be an interesting situation to monitor.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 09, 2019, 05:54:42 PM

Final from Greensboro:

#6-Emory 89
#19-Guilford 67

Emory is really good.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 09, 2019, 07:30:04 PM

Swarthmore looking fantastic out of the gate. Threes not dropping, but still put up 100 points, six guys in double figures. Nice start.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 09, 2019, 07:53:12 PM

Final from Whittier:

Whittier 91
#11 Texas-Dallas 86

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 09, 2019, 08:45:07 PM

Oshkosh leads Augustana by just 3 at the half. The champs are playing a lot of freshman and showing some real potential out there. Augie's outside shooting is keeping them in this one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 09, 2019, 09:51:43 PM

Final from Rock Island:

#2 UW-Oshkosh 74
#17 Augustana 67

* Adam Fravert: 14 pts, 11 reb
* Jack Flynn: 14 pts, 6 reb

Augie played without 6-11/240 C Micah Martin and their expected starting SG Austin Elledge.

Augie's 11 man rotation tonight included 3 freshmen, 2 transfers, and 1 player who was a full-time JV guy last year -- 55% of their personnel tonight was not in the rotation last year. They will very much be a work in progress this year. The Vikings were just 4-16 from 3 tonight -- outside shooting is a real question mark with this team.

I thought the Titans looked great. That 1-2 punch they have with Flynn and Fravert is so good.

#2 Oshkosh next gets #3 North Central, in Naperville.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 10, 2019, 07:53:43 AM

I did watch the first half of the Yeshiva game out at Oxy. The Macs are way talented - much more so than the previous two years. Alluf is back and the newcomers are excellent. Their problem, much like the slow start last season, is they're playing almost no defense at all. These guys are very capable, but they let Oxy shoot almost 50%. Not gonna work. They can't afford another 0 for non-conference. I hope they get it together. It's good for d3 if they reach their potential.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 10, 2019, 09:00:52 AM

Here is the rotation the defending champs used last night...

UW-Oshkosh
G - Eric Peterson, 6-4/200 So.
G - JT Petrie*, 6-3/190 So.
F - Connor Duax, 6-5/205 Jr.
F - Adam Fravert, 6-8/210 Sr.
C - Jack Flynn, 6-8/240 Sr.
--------
G - Will Mahoney*, 6-2/180 Fr.
G - David Vlotho, 6-3/205 Sr.
F - Levi Borchert*, 6-5/210 Fr.
F - Brian Wilman, 6-6/215 Sr.
G - Quinn Steckbauer*, 6-0/180 Fr.
G - Eddie Muench*, 6-5/190 Jr.

* Player was not in the rotation at the end of last season.

The Titans are the real deal -- that starting lineup, top to bottom, is about as big as it gets in Division III. A 6-4 PG is extremely rare, as is a 6-8 PF who can play both inside and outside. And obviously the big boy down low is a legit 1st Team All-American and a beast.

Seeing UWO play now has me wondering if I made the right call in voting for NCC #1 and Oshkosh #2. The Titans are a load. The crazy/great thing is that this Tuesday UWO plays at NCC...can't wait to see how that plays out. NCC is big and talented as well and that should be a classic.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 10, 2019, 02:34:14 PM

They really have a 6'8" PG - Fravert seemed to be doing a lot of the ball handling.

Were you with us, Bob, when we ran into Ben Boots in the lobby of the hotel after the championship? All he talked about was how good Eric Peterson was going to be. I don't mind saying I voted them #1 largely because I think they're going to be at least as good as last year.

(Although Swat's first game out was equally impressive, even if it wasn't against the same level of opponent).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 10, 2019, 04:42:56 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 10, 2019, 02:34:14 PM
Were you with us, Bob, when we ran into Ben Boots in the lobby of the hotel after the championship? All he talked about was how good Eric Peterson was going to be. I don't mind saying I voted them #1 largely because I think they're going to be at least as good as last year.

I was there, that was a fun scene. Always great hanging with the traveling party from the team that has just cut down the nets!

Eric Peterson was a combo guard at Batavia, so I wasn't quite picturing him moving right into the PG role. But he looked good last night. I still want to see that play out some more -- I feel like there is not a true PG in that starting lineup, and in some games that might hurt.

After watching one game, I think there is a very good chance the Titans are as good as last year...maybe better eventually.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 10, 2019, 08:51:43 PM

Idk. It's one game. And as you pointed out on the boards, Augie was missing Micah Martin and someone else. Oshkosh only won by single digits. Would you be playing a different tune had Augie won?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 12, 2019, 06:21:47 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 10, 2019, 08:51:43 PM
Idk. It's one game. And as you pointed out on the boards, Augie was missing Micah Martin and someone else. Oshkosh only won by single digits. Would you be playing a different tune had Augie won?

Well, yes...but Augie didn't win.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 12, 2019, 06:22:50 AM

Tonight in Naperville -- #2 UW-Oshkosh vs #3 North Central.

Just about a pick 'em...should be a great game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 12, 2019, 09:34:05 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 12, 2019, 06:22:50 AM
Tonight in Naperville -- #2 UW-Oshkosh vs #3 North Central.

Just about a pick 'em...should be a great game.

Based on Oshkosh's first game, I went with NCC in this one. A veteran squad with a lot of experience playing together against a team that's replacing key pieces and still figuring things out. It was close with Augustana and I expect NCC to be significantly better than Augie at this point in the season - plus home court.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 12, 2019, 03:34:29 PM

Update for those of you clamoring for Hoopsville (and those who may not or just have a small interest): http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=7139.msg1956864#msg1956864

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on November 12, 2019, 07:35:13 PM

Does anyone else have trouble with prestosports live stats on mobile devices? Like clicking on the various categories but menus don't expand?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NEPAFAN on November 12, 2019, 07:54:37 PM

yes to the issue with live stats

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on November 12, 2019, 07:57:04 PM

Yeah I feel like some broadcasts work better than others, but I have definitely had issues seeing live stats on some.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 12, 2019, 08:23:33 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on November 12, 2019, 07:35:13 PM
Does anyone else have trouble with prestosports live stats on mobile devices? Like clicking on the various categories but menus don't expand?

It doesn't work for me on the laptop either. I think they've got some issues with the tabs.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on November 12, 2019, 10:55:46 PM

Gotcha, thanks. Hopefully they will correct.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 13, 2019, 07:00:52 AM

Yeah. Same here. When I'm looking at a team's boxscore and then want to click on the other team's boxscore, it won't let me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 13, 2019, 07:16:20 AM

It started working for me late last night, so maybe they've fixed it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 14, 2019, 01:15:52 PM

We TOLD you there was BIG news coming.

We are thrilled to announce we have teamed up with BlueFrame Technology to take Hoopsville to a whole new level!

Read more: https://www.blueframetech.com/press/renowned-diii-basketball-show-hoopsville-partners-with-blueframe/

And get your OTT devices up and running!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 14, 2019, 01:25:29 PM

Awesome! Now if I can find time to watch it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 14, 2019, 01:46:17 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 14, 2019, 01:25:29 PM
Awesome! Now if I can find time to watch it.

Archives still available ... we give you every chance possibly my good sir. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on November 14, 2019, 06:19:54 PM

Im excited for this! I usually listen on podcast but this makes it much easier with my apple TV! Thanks, Dave. Looking forward to the first episode.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 14, 2019, 06:44:12 PM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on November 14, 2019, 06:19:54 PM
Im excited for this! I usually listen on podcast but this makes it much easier with my apple TV! Thanks, Dave. Looking forward to the first episode.

We also have some news about our podcast we may tweet out tomorrow. Nothing significant, but we are growing in that department as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NEPAFAN on November 14, 2019, 08:33:26 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 14, 2019, 01:25:29 PM
Awesome! Now if I can find time to watch it.

Don't you run like 30 fantasy games? Lol

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 14, 2019, 10:35:38 PM

From Crawfordsville:

Centre 77
#14-Wabash 76

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 14, 2019, 10:37:51 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 14, 2019, 10:35:38 PM
From Crawfordsville:

Centre 77
#14-Wabash 76

Wabash led by 8 points or so most of the game, seemed to have it in hand, but gave up the lead at the very end. Centre is not as flashy as Wabash, but they play really good basketball. I don't think there's a lot of difference between the two squads. Wabash has a higher ceiling, maybe, but it was a good one to watch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 15, 2019, 03:36:17 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

Friday afternoon is an unusual time for me to post my first HTF report, but I figured it was time for me to confirm that my program still worked correctly. (Happily, it does ... one of the few times I have not had to make some beginning-of-season tweaks to the code.)

This lists games through Sunday, November 24 ... but I can change that for my next report, depending on the date of the first in-season poll. If memory serves, it has typically been the first Monday after Thanksgiving, but everything feels different this year (with football season ending so late), so I was not sure.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	614	Swarthmore	1-0	won at Eastern, 100-74; 11/16 at Neumann; 11/20 vs. TCNJ; 11/23 vs. Stockton
#2	563	UW-Oshkosh	2-0	won at #17 Augustana, 74-67; won at #3 North Central (Ill.), 76-66; 11/19 at Carthage; 11/23 vs. Elmhurst
#3	510	North Central (Ill.)	0-1	LOST to #2 UW-Oshkosh, 66-76; 11/15 vs. Greenville
#4	469	Amherst	0-0	11/19 at Lasell; 11/22 vs. Elmira; 11/23 vs. Ken Wright Consolation/Championship Game
#5	455	Wittenberg	0-0	11/16 at Brooklyn; 11/23 vs. Mount St. Joseph
#6	418	Emory	2-0	won at #19 Guilford, 89-67; won at Berry, 99-85; 11/20 vs. Sewanee; 11/23 vs. Oglethorpe
#7	386	Washington U.	1-0	won at Illinois College, 85-76; 11/15 at UW-Whitewater; 11/16 at #29 UW-Platteville; 11/22 vs. Coe; 11/23 vs. Whitworth/UW-Eau Claire
#8	349	Nebraska Wesleyan	2-0	def. (n) #12 St. John's, 78-56; def. UW-Superior, 87-51; 11/16 vs. McMurry; 11/17 vs. Hardin-Simmons; 11/23 vs. #15 St. Thomas; 11/24 vs. TBA
#9	338	Christopher Newport	1-1	LOST at Johns Hopkins, 74-78; def. Shenandoah, 85-62; 11/15 vs. Marywood; 11/16 vs. TBA; 11/22 vs. Randolph; 11/23 vs. Lynchburg
#10	333	Nichols	0-0	11/15 vs. #39 Eastern Connecticut; 11/16 vs. TBA; 11/19 at Anna Maria; 11/23 vs. Worcester State
#11	313	Texas-Dallas	1-2	LOST at UTA, 50-84; won at Redlands, 74-71 OT; LOST at Whittier, 86-91; 11/17 vs. Trinity (Texas)
#12	295	St. John's	2-1	LOST to (n) #8 Nebraska Wesleyan, 56-78; won at Marian, 71-43; won at Minnesota-Morris, 86-80; 11/20 vs. Carleton
#13	282	Middlebury	0-0	11/15 vs. Bridgewater State; 11/16 vs. Wentworth; 11/19 at T#47 Keene State; 11/21 at SUNY-Canton; 11/23 at Skidmore
#14	269	Wabash	0-1	LOST to Centre, 76-77; 11/19 vs. Earlham; 11/22 vs. Greenville; 11/23 vs. TBA
#15	245	St. Thomas	1-0	won at #20 Whitman, 87-79; 11/16 at #40 Whitworth; 11/20 at St. Scholastica; 11/23 vs. #8 Nebraska Wesleyan; 11/24 vs. TBA
#16	239	WPI	1-0	def. T#47 Brandeis, 55-46; 11/15 vs. New England College; 11/16 vs. Ted Coghlin Memorial Tournament; 11/19 vs. #28 Salem State; 11/22 vs. Eastern Nazarene; 11/23 at Paula Titus Memorial Tournament
#17	229	Augustana	0-1	LOST to #2 UW-Oshkosh, 67-74; 11/15 vs. Alma; 11/16 vs. Calvin; 11/20 vs. T#47 Loras
#18	227	Marietta	0-0	11/15 vs. Eastern Mennonite; 11/16 vs. TBA; 11/20 at Emory and Henry
#19	216	Guilford	1-1	LOST to #6 Emory, 67-89; won at Greensboro, 87-75; 11/15 vs. Mary Hardin-Baylor; 11/17 vs. N.C. Wesleyan; 11/19 vs. Averett; 11/23 vs. Berry
#20	193	Whitman	1-1	def. Montclair State, 114-104; LOST to #15 St. Thomas, 79-87; 11/16 vs. Cal Lutheran; 11/22 vs. Sul Ross State; 11/23 vs. Concordia (Texas)
#21	167	Wooster	1-0	def. Medaille, 110-100; 11/20 vs. Hiram; 11/23 vs. Wilmington
#22	128	Baldwin Wallace	1-0	def. Bethany, 95-53; 11/15 vs. Hiram; 11/19 at Westminster (Pa.); 11/22 at Hobart
#23	113	Augsburg	1-0	def. Northland, 102-54; 11/23 at Concordia-Moorhead
#24	112	Randolph-Macon	2-0	def. (n) Washington College, 74-47; won at St. Mary's (Md.), 84-40; 11/15 vs. Ursinus; 11/16 vs. TBD; 11/20 at Washington and Lee; 11/23 at Hampden-Sydney
#25	93	St. John Fisher	0-1	LOST to Union, 71-89; 11/15 vs. Cazenovia; 11/16 vs. TBD; 11/21 at T#41 Rochester; 11/23 vs. Rochester Tech

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	83	Oswego	0-0	11/15 vs. Ithaca; 11/16 vs. TBA; 11/19 at Clarkson
#27	59	Hamilton	0-0	11/16 vs. TCNJ; 11/17 vs. TBA; 11/20 vs. Bard; 11/23 at T#47 Keene State
#28	58	Salem State	1-2	LOST to (n) Suffolk, 81-94; def. (n) Anna Maria, 89-76; LOST to Mass-Dartmouth, 87-91; 11/16 vs. T#47 Keene State; 11/19 at #16 WPI
#29	54	UW-Platteville	1-0	def. Finlandia, 112-49; 11/15 vs. Viterbo; 11/16 vs. #7 Washington U.; 11/20 vs. Concordia-Chicago
#30	49	York (Pa.)	1-0	won at Dickinson, 90-63; 11/15 vs. Johnson and Wales; 11/16 vs. Goucher or Roanoke; 11/20 vs. Lancaster Bible; 11/23 at Johns Hopkins
#31	45	Wheaton (Ill.)	0-0	11/15 vs. Principia; 11/16 vs. TBA; 11/19 vs. Lake Forest; 11/23 vs. Olivet
#32	35	MIT	0-1	LOST at T#36 Endicott, 64-100; 11/15 vs. Mass-Boston; 11/16 vs. Eastern Nazarene; 11/20 at Pine Manor; 11/23 at Lasell
#33	31	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	1-1	LOST at #40 Whitworth, 83-93; def. (n) George Fox, 80-72
#34	29	New Jersey City	0-1	LOST to Stevens, 75-81; 11/19 vs. Mount St. Vincent; 11/23 at Farmingdale State
#35	24	Scranton	1-0	def. Stevenson, 67-54; 11/15 vs. Houghton; 11/16 vs. TBA; 11/20 at Wilkes; 11/23 at Cabrini
T#36	18	Endicott	1-0	def. #32 MIT, 100-64; 11/15 at Springfield; 11/16 vs. Lesley; 11/19 at Eastern Nazarene; 11/23 at Bridgewater State
T#36	18	Mount Union	1-0	def. Albion, 71-52; 11/15 vs. Carnegie Mellon; 11/23 at Adrian; 11/24 at Trine
#38	15	Pomona-Pitzer	0-0	11/16 at Westmont; 11/21 at Biola; 11/23 vs. Cal Miramar
#39	14	Eastern Connecticut	0-0	11/15 vs. #10 Nichols; 11/16 vs. TBA; 11/21 at Johnson and Wales
#40	12	Whitworth	3-0	def. #33 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 93-83; def. Trinity (Texas), 96-73; def. Cal Lutheran, 105-51; 11/16 vs. #15 St. Thomas; 11/22 vs. UW-Eau Claire; 11/23 vs. TBA
T#41	5	Rochester	1-0	won at SUNY Geneseo, 72-61; 11/15 vs. Misericordia; 11/16 vs. TBA; 11/21 vs. #25 St. John Fisher; 11/23 vs. Nazareth
T#41	5	SUNY Oneonta	0-0	11/15 vs. Alvernia; 11/16 vs. TBA; 11/19 vs. #44 Williams; 11/21 at Hartwick
#43	4	Tufts	0-0	11/16 at Emerson; 11/19 vs. Mass-Dartmouth; 11/21 vs. Lasell; 11/23 vs. St. Joseph (Conn.)
#44	3	Williams	0-0	11/15 vs. Worcester State; 11/16 vs. TBD; 11/16 vs. TBD; 11/19 at T#41 SUNY Oneonta; 11/23 vs. Wesleyan
T#45	2	Brockport	0-1	LOST at Morrisville State, 70-73; 11/19 vs. Hobart; 11/23 at Medaille
T#45	2	Covenant	2-0	def. (n) Birmingham-Southern, 71-66; won at Sewanee, 71-62; 11/19 vs. Birmingham-Southern; 11/23 at Centre
T#47	1	Brandeis	1-1	LOST at #16 WPI, 46-55; won at Rivier, 91-56; 11/18 vs. Emerson; 11/20 at Suffolk; 11/23 vs. Rhode Island College
T#47	1	Keene State	0-1	LOST at Springfield, 101-106 OT; 11/16 at #28 Salem State; 11/19 vs. #13 Middlebury; 11/23 vs. #27 Hamilton
T#47	1	Loras	1-0	def. Concordia-Chicago, 108-85; 11/15 vs. Blackburn; 11/16 vs. Concordia (Wis.); 11/20 at #17 Augustana; 11/23 at St. Scholastica
T#47	1	Yeshiva	1-1	LOST at Occidental, 60-72; won at Caltech, 77-58; 11/16 at Salisbury; 11/17 at Washington College; 11/21 vs. Brooklyn; 11/23 at Mount St. Vincent

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 17, 2019, 12:47:55 PM

Going to see Yeshiva in person today at Washington College. They beat Salisbury last night and the freshman, Reef, had his first real big game. I know the coach is high on his abilities. I think they look pretty strong so far.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 17, 2019, 12:51:53 PM

I think I am going to go watch Texas-Dallas host Trinity (TX) today. I live just 15 minutes from UTD.

Looking forward to it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 17, 2019, 01:39:11 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 17, 2019, 12:51:53 PM
I think I am going to go watch Texas-Dallas host Trinity (TX) today. I live just 15 minutes from UTD.

Looking forward to it.

Find out what's up with Underwood!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 17, 2019, 01:48:52 PM

Daryl,

Our first regular-season poll will come out a week from Monday, on Nov. 25. Thanks as always for putting that report together -- it's a nice at-a-glance look.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on November 17, 2019, 04:38:54 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 17, 2019, 01:48:52 PM
Daryl,

Our first regular-season poll will come out a week from Monday, on Nov. 25. Thanks as always for putting that report together -- it's a nice at-a-glance look.

I echo Pat's thoughts Daryl. I appreciate the time you put into those each week...it certainly is one of the items sitting next to me as I put my ballot together each week. Certainly helps keep things in order and making sure I am not missing something.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 17, 2019, 04:41:12 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=158ef/lwcdpjeztuhoeq1f.jpg)

The season is underway, so it is about time we get Hoopsville on the air.

Most Division III basketball teams have finally tipped up their first games. That means there is plenty to talk about on Hoopsville!

Sunday, Dave debuts the show for its 17th season live in studio - with plenty of changes in the offseason. We chat about the changes not only in studio, but around the game. Plus, we talk to the preseason D3hoops.com No. 1 teams - Amherst and Swarthmore.

And what do some of the gurus of D3 basketball think about the start so far and the season ahead? Bob Quillman and Ryan Scott join Dave for the first Top 25 Double-Take.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Sunday's show LIVE here: www.d3hoopsville.com.

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or use any of the social media options to the right.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- G.P. Gromacki, No. 1 Amherst women's head coach
- Landry Kosmalski, No. 1 Swarthmore men's head coach
- Bob Quillman & Ryan Scott, Top 25 Double-Take

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

We also have the podcast now on iHeartRadio and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 17, 2019, 06:13:46 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 09, 2019, 07:35:24 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on October 20, 2019, 09:21:05 AM
Here is a team I will have in...and pretty high.

Texas-Dallas (24-5, 13-3 ASC)
* Gone: n/a
* Back: Dimitrius Underwood, 6-2 Sr. G (20.5 ppg, 9.8 rpg, 3.4 apg); Hans Burwitz, 6-7 Sr. C (14.8 ppg, 6.8 rpg); Jalen Weber, 6-0 Sr. G (12.7 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 3.5 apg); Michael Forster, 6-7 Jr. F (9.9 ppg, 6.1 rpg)

One thing I am confused about though - https://utdcomets.com/news/2019/10/17/mens-basketball-comet-men-picked-as-favorites-in-asc-east-division.aspx.

In that release about UT-Dallas being picked to win the ASC East, it says three Comets were named Preseason Players to watch -- Hans Burwitz, Jalen Weber, and Kelden Pruitt. No Dimitrius Underwood (20.5 ppg, 9.8 rpg, 3.4 apg)? He was the ASC East Player of the Year last season, and is on the '19-20 roster - https://utdcomets.com/sports/mens-basketball/roster.

https://ascsports.org/news/2019/2/26/underwood-neal-highlight-asc-mens-basketball-award-winners.aspx

https://ascsports.org/news/2019/10/17/mens-basketball-utd-umhb-selected-to-win-asc-mens-hoops.aspx

Strange.

I wonder what the deal with Dimitrius Underwood is? Per above, he was not mentioned as a "Player to Watch" in that ASC preview.

He is on UTD's roster, but is the only guy who doesn't have a 2019-20 season picture (they used his 2018-19 picture) - https://utdcomets.com/sports/mens-basketball/roster.

He is mentioned in the UTD season preview - https://utdcomets.com/news/2019/11/5/mens-basketball-season-preview-comet-men-have-high-expectations-for-2019-20.aspx.

He did not play last night vs Redlands - https://utdcomets.com/sports/mens-basketball/stats/2019-2020/redlands/boxscore/4710.

Went to the Texas-Dallas/Trinity TX game today - UTD won big.

Dimitrius Underwood is out indefinitely w/ a wrist injury he suffered last Spring. He could be back around January 1...or he could be out for the year.

Texas-Dallas is not a #11 team without Underwood, but I do think they are a #24 or #25 team - somewhere at the end of the Top 25. They are athletic on the perimeter, they have some nice size at the 3/4/5 spots, have multiple guys who can shoot it, they play tough and unselfishly, and they defend and rebound. They don't have a true 5 man that scores with his back to the basket in the low post...but that describes most Division III teams nowadays.

I was impressed with the Comets today. They seem to be well coached and play well together as a team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 17, 2019, 06:41:00 PM

Good investigative work, Bob! +1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 17, 2019, 07:41:52 PM

Yeshiva is still working through some injuries and figuring out roles for everyone, but they're much, much more talented than they were three years ago. Definitely worth whatever Top 25 votes they receive.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 17, 2019, 09:44:27 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 17, 2019, 07:41:52 PM

Yeshiva is still working through some injuries and figuring out roles for everyone, but they're much, much more talented than they were three years ago. Definitely worth whatever Top 25 votes they receive.

If they even get any.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 17, 2019, 11:55:58 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 17, 2019, 09:44:27 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 17, 2019, 07:41:52 PM

Yeshiva is still working through some injuries and figuring out roles for everyone, but they're much, much more talented than they were three years ago. Definitely worth whatever Top 25 votes they receive.

If they even get any.

They had one point in the preseason ... you think that voter changes his mind? And others don't join him? :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 18, 2019, 06:40:16 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 17, 2019, 11:55:58 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 17, 2019, 09:44:27 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 17, 2019, 07:41:52 PM

Yeshiva is still working through some injuries and figuring out roles for everyone, but they're much, much more talented than they were three years ago. Definitely worth whatever Top 25 votes they receive.

If they even get any.

They had one point in the preseason ... you think that voter changes his mind? And others don't join him? :)

Yeshiva lost to Occidental in its opener by 12 (was a 16 point game at half and I think only got as close as 12 in the 2nd).

Occidental had a good year last year -- 22-5/12-4 SCIAC. But they lost their top two scorers to graduation -- Zach Baines (20.4 ppg, 6.4 rpg) and Austin DeWitz (16.6 ppg, 8.1 rpg).

Probably a good chance a voter that took a flyer on Yeshiva at the #25 spot in the preseason poll would move away from them after an early loss and wait for a string of wins to go back to them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 18, 2019, 12:15:44 PM

What Bob said. But I'm not a voter. ::) ??? ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 18, 2019, 03:01:37 PM

My gut feeling says with ALL the other results in the Top 25/50, it isn't a slam dunk Yeshiva will lose that vote. Maybe they will, but when you look around I think one-loss will look somewhat "normal" right now. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on November 18, 2019, 03:13:50 PM

Very early, but so far the New England teams on the top 25 radar who aren't currently inside it:

Babson, Tufts, Springfield, Hamilton, Williams, Colby. All talented teams without a loss. I'd say Babson should prob replace WPI as NEWMAC's rep this week ... the rest need a few more weeks of winning ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 18, 2019, 06:48:41 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 18, 2019, 03:01:37 PM
My gut feeling says with ALL the other results in the Top 25/50, it isn't a slam dunk Yeshiva will lose that vote. Maybe they will, but when you look around I think one-loss will look somewhat "normal" right now. LOL

They'll definitely be getting a few votes they weren't getting before. I know that for sure. They'd have to lay a couple of REAL stinkers this week for me to leave them off. They looked very much like a Top 20 team to me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 18, 2019, 07:14:10 PM

I was just looking around.

Yeshiva is not going to have much of a chance to prove themselves this week with two winless teams on the schedule.

I have to think that voters will look at UW-Platteville, but I have my biases.

Johns Hopkins has York on the schedule this weekend.

Whitworth surely has the schedule this weekend to break in to the Top 25.

How many schools get dropped?

I guess we have to wait and see.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 18, 2019, 07:26:09 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on November 18, 2019, 07:14:10 PM
I was just looking around.

Yeshiva is not going to have much of a chance to prove themselves this week with two winless teams on the schedule.

I have to think that voters will look at UW-Platteville, but I have my biases.

Johns Hopkins has York on the schedule this weekend.

Whitworth surely has the schedule this weekend to break in to the Top 25.

How many schools get dropped?

I guess we have to wait and see.

I wouldn't even necessarily phrase it as "added" or "dropped." We're finally seeing teams on the court. I will, of course, take into consideration the past performance of the players who return, but most of my deliberation will be about what's happened on the court in this ten day period.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on November 18, 2019, 09:02:31 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on November 18, 2019, 03:13:50 PM
Very early, but so far the New England teams on the top 25 radar who aren't currently inside it:

Babson, Tufts, Springfield, Hamilton, Williams, Colby. All talented teams without a loss. I'd say Babson should prob replace WPI as NEWMAC's rep this week ... the rest need a few more weeks of winning ...

Says the guy who picked Babson in the top 25 pool... ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on November 18, 2019, 09:59:42 PM

Tough but fair SpringSt :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BaboNation on November 19, 2019, 07:28:03 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on November 18, 2019, 03:13:50 PM
Very early, but so far the New England teams on the top 25 radar who aren't currently inside it:

Babson, Tufts, Springfield, Hamilton, Williams, Colby. All talented teams without a loss. I'd say Babson should prob replace WPI as NEWMAC's rep this week ... the rest need a few more weeks of winning ...

Springfield has played a tougher schedule than Babson thus far. The teams Springfield has played are 8-0 in all other games. For Babson, the records are 2-6. And Springfields' opponents have far better Massey ratings.
While I think Babson is off to a good start, they really haven't beaten anyone to brag about. Springfield has.

Also, I think outside the NEWMAC, UM-Dartmouth might be worth "others receiving votes". Certainly more so than Babson based on games played.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 19, 2019, 07:34:25 PM

Nichols starting center, Jerome Cunningham has now missed a second straight game. We'll have to see how much time he misses with this injury. They did pull out a road win tonight against Anna Maria and Mike Rapoza, one of the best big men in New England.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 19, 2019, 10:06:16 PM

Carthage 64
#2 UW-Oshkosh 57

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 21, 2019, 02:25:28 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

I usually try to post this "so far" update Thursday morning, to see what's happened since the last poll, and to give a list of potentially noteworthy upcoming games. I forgot to do so this morning, but have now added events to my calendar to remind me for the rest of the regular season.

As has been my practice, the final report will be posted Sunday afternoon/evening (when possible, early enough that Dave can refer to it for his Sunday night Hoopsville broadcast, if he wishes to do so.)

Reminder: If you think a team is worthy of consideration, I can include them in this report if you send me a PM (or post their name here).

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	614	Swarthmore	3-0	won at Eastern, 100-74; won at Neumann, 86-76; def. TCNJ, 88-81; 11/23 vs. Stockton
#2	563	UW-Oshkosh	2-1	won at #17 Augustana, 74-67; won at #3 North Central (Ill.), 76-66; LOST at Carthage, 57-64; 11/23 vs. Elmhurst
#3	510	North Central (Ill.)	1-1	LOST to #2 UW-Oshkosh, 66-76; def. Greenville, 122-103
#4	469	Amherst	1-0	won at Lasell, 86-48; 11/22 vs. Elmira; 11/23 vs. Ken Wright Consolation/Championship Game
#5	455	Wittenberg	1-0	won at Brooklyn, 87-78; 11/23 vs. Mount St. Joseph
#6	418	Emory	3-0	won at #19 Guilford, 89-67; won at Berry, 99-85; def. Sewanee, 94-70; 11/23 vs. Oglethorpe
#7	386	Washington U.	2-1	won at Illinois College, 85-76; won at UW-Whitewater, 90-86; LOST at #29 UW-Platteville, 63-76; 11/22 vs. Coe; 11/23 vs. Whitworth/UW-Eau Claire
#8	349	Nebraska Wesleyan	4-0	def. (n) #12 St. John's, 78-56; def. UW-Superior, 87-51; def. McMurry, 108-86; def. Hardin-Simmons, 88-81; 11/23 vs. #15 St. Thomas; 11/24 vs. TBA
#9	338	Christopher Newport	3-1	LOST at Johns Hopkins, 74-78; def. Shenandoah, 85-62; def. (n) Marywood, 87-56; won at Franklin and Marshall, 74-66; 11/22 vs. Randolph; 11/23 vs. Lynchburg
#10	333	Nichols	3-0	def. (n) #39 Eastern Connecticut, 74-56; def. (n) New England College, 107-104; won at Anna Maria, 82-77; 11/23 vs. Worcester State
#11	313	Texas-Dallas	2-2	LOST at UTA, 50-84; won at Redlands, 74-71 OT; LOST at Whittier, 86-91; def. Trinity (Texas), 78-62
#12	295	St. John's	3-1	LOST to (n) #8 Nebraska Wesleyan, 56-78; won at Marian, 71-43; won at Minnesota-Morris, 86-80; def. Carleton, 79-60
#13	282	Middlebury	3-0	def. Bridgewater State, 85-81; def. Wentworth, 75-64; won at T#47 Keene State, 92-82; 11/21 at SUNY-Canton; 11/23 at Skidmore
#14	269	Wabash	1-1	LOST to Centre, 76-77; def. Earlham, 85-72; 11/22 vs. Greenville; 11/23 vs. TBA
#15	245	St. Thomas	2-1	won at #20 Whitman, 87-79; LOST at #40 Whitworth, 64-85; won at St. Scholastica, 110-64; 11/23 vs. #8 Nebraska Wesleyan; 11/24 vs. TBA
#16	239	WPI	3-1	def. T#47 Brandeis, 55-46; LOST to New England College, 73-78; def. #39 Eastern Connecticut, 88-63; def. #28 Salem State, 91-50; 11/22 vs. Eastern Nazarene; 11/23 at Paula Titus Memorial Tournament
#17	229	Augustana	3-1	LOST to #2 UW-Oshkosh, 67-74; def. Alma, 74-67; def. Calvin, 70-67; def. T#47 Loras, 88-59
#18	227	Marietta	3-0	def. Eastern Mennonite, 92-53; def. Mount St. Joseph, 96-71; won at Emory and Henry, 89-65
#19	216	Guilford	4-1	LOST to #6 Emory, 67-89; won at Greensboro, 87-75; def. Mary Hardin-Baylor, 60-52; def. N.C. Wesleyan, 67-50; def. Averett, 76-61; 11/23 vs. Berry
#20	193	Whitman	2-1	def. Montclair State, 114-104; LOST to #15 St. Thomas, 79-87; def. Cal Lutheran, 106-69; 11/22 vs. Sul Ross State; 11/23 vs. Concordia (Texas)
#21	167	Wooster	2-0	def. Medaille, 110-100; def. Hiram, 98-70; 11/23 vs. Wilmington
#22	128	Baldwin Wallace	2-1	def. Bethany, 95-53; def. Hiram, 81-71; LOST at Westminster (Pa.), 68-78; 11/22 at Hobart
#23	113	Augsburg	1-0	def. Northland, 102-54; 11/23 at Concordia-Moorhead
#24	112	Randolph-Macon	5-0	def. (n) Washington College, 74-47; won at St. Mary's (Md.), 84-40; def. Ursinus, 54-50; won at Messiah, 63-50; won at Washington and Lee, 79-68; 11/23 at Hampden-Sydney
#25	93	St. John Fisher	2-1	LOST to Union, 71-89; def. (n) Cazenovia, 98-81; won at Hilbert, 97-62; 11/21 at T#41 Rochester; 11/23 vs. Rochester Tech

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	83	Oswego	3-0	def. (n) Ithaca, 85-80; def. (n) Keystone, 92-81; won at Clarkson, 80-72
#27	59	Hamilton	3-0	def. (n) TCNJ, 88-81; won at Drew, 88-80; def. Bard, 101-57; 11/23 at T#47 Keene State
#28	58	Salem State	1-4	LOST to (n) Suffolk, 81-94; def. (n) Anna Maria, 89-76; LOST to Mass-Dartmouth, 87-91; LOST to T#47 Keene State, 91-99; LOST at #16 WPI, 50-91
#29	54	UW-Platteville	4-0	def. Finlandia, 112-49; def. Viterbo, 70-67; def. #7 Washington U., 76-63; def. Concordia-Chicago, 89-72
#30	49	York (Pa.)	3-1	won at Dickinson, 90-63; def. (n) Johnson and Wales, 84-55; LOST at Roanoke, 59-74; def. Lancaster Bible, 93-71; 11/23 at Johns Hopkins
#31	45	Wheaton (Ill.)	2-1	def. Principia, 90-71; def. UW-River Falls, 86-60; LOST to Lake Forest, 75-78; 11/23 vs. Olivet
#32	35	MIT	2-2	LOST at T#36 Endicott, 64-100; LOST to Mass-Boston, 64-71; def. Eastern Nazarene, 66-64; won at Pine Manor, 95-49; 11/23 at Lasell
#33	31	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	1-1	LOST at #40 Whitworth, 83-93; def. (n) George Fox, 80-72
#34	29	New Jersey City	1-1	LOST to Stevens, 75-81; def. Mount St. Vincent, 81-62; 11/23 at Farmingdale State
#35	24	Scranton	3-1	def. Stevenson, 67-54; def. Houghton, 89-69; LOST to William Paterson, 69-75; won at Wilkes, 91-62; 11/23 at Cabrini
T#36	18	Endicott	2-2	def. #32 MIT, 100-64; LOST to (n) Springfield, 82-92; def. (n) Lesley, 102-69; LOST at Eastern Nazarene, 79-91; 11/23 at Bridgewater State
T#36	18	Mount Union	2-0	def. Albion, 71-52; def. Carnegie Mellon, 94-72; 11/23 at Adrian; 11/24 at Trine
#38	15	Pomona-Pitzer	0-1	LOST at Westmont, 76-84; 11/21 at Biola; 11/23 vs. Cal Miramar
#39	14	Eastern Connecticut	0-2	LOST to (n) #10 Nichols, 56-74; LOST at #16 WPI, 63-88; 11/21 at Johnson and Wales
#40	12	Whitworth	4-0	def. #33 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 93-83; def. Trinity (Texas), 96-73; def. Cal Lutheran, 105-51; def. #15 St. Thomas, 85-64; 11/22 vs. UW-Eau Claire; 11/23 vs. TBA
T#41	5	Rochester	3-0	won at SUNY Geneseo, 72-61; def. Misericordia, 77-56; def. Heidelberg, 75-52; 11/21 vs. #25 St. John Fisher; 11/23 vs. Nazareth
T#41	5	SUNY Oneonta	1-2	LOST to Alvernia, 70-71; LOST to Wesley, 70-86; def. #44 Williams, 74-69 OT; 11/21 at Hartwick
#43	4	Tufts	2-0	won at Emerson, 103-82; def. Mass-Dartmouth, 91-78; 11/21 vs. Lasell; 11/23 vs. St. Joseph (Conn.)
#44	3	Williams	2-1	def. Worcester State, 70-51; def. SUNYIT, 83-48; LOST at T#41 SUNY Oneonta, 69-74 OT; 11/23 vs. Wesleyan
T#45	2	Brockport	1-1	LOST at Morrisville State, 70-73; def. Hobart, 75-74; 11/23 at Medaille
T#45	2	Covenant	3-0	def. (n) Birmingham-Southern, 71-66; won at Sewanee, 71-62; def. Birmingham-Southern, 88-72; 11/23 at Centre
T#47	1	Brandeis	2-2	LOST at #16 WPI, 46-55; won at Rivier, 91-56; def. Emerson, 76-74; LOST at Suffolk, 57-72; 11/23 vs. Rhode Island College
T#47	1	Keene State	1-2	LOST at Springfield, 101-106 OT; won at #28 Salem State, 99-91; LOST to #13 Middlebury, 82-92; 11/23 vs. #27 Hamilton
T#47	1	Loras	3-1	def. Concordia-Chicago, 108-85; def. Blackburn, 88-75; def. Concordia (Wis.), 85-65; LOST at #17 Augustana, 59-88; 11/23 at St. Scholastica
T#47	1	Yeshiva	3-1	LOST at Occidental, 60-72; won at Caltech, 77-58; won at Salisbury, 79-71; won at Washington College, 78-68; 11/21 vs. Brooklyn; 11/23 at Mount St. Vincent

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 21, 2019, 03:55:33 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=1cj4f/k12zeyewhehdvung.jpg)

It might be early in the 2019-20 season, but there are already big games being played, surprising results, and teams off to tremendous starts. It isn't even Thanksgiving ... yet.

We start prepping for the big day of Turkey by stuffing ourselves full of DIII basketball topics on Thursday's show. We talk retirement and coaching changes (since we didn't really talk about that Sunday), plus several teams have caught our attention for how they have started their campaigns.

On Thursday night's show, Dave chats with NYU women who are undefeated and defeated Stevens in their last time on the court. We also chat with Carthage men who knocked off the defending national champions recently. Plus, the dean of Division III coaching decided days before the season began to hang up the jacket. F&M's Glenn Robinson talks about why he decided to retire within distance of 1,000 wins.

And what should we expect on the women's side of things this season. D3hoops.com Senior Editor Gordon Mann joins the show to take a deep dive into the Top 25 and things he has seen in the first two weeks of the season.

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Thursday's show LIVE in the video player above starting at 7:00 p.m. ET. An audio-only podcast will also be available on the right side of the page shortly after the show is off the air.

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or use any of the social media options to the right.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Bosko Djurickovic, Carthage men's coach
- Glenn Robinson, former F&M men's coach
- Meg Barber, NYU women's head coach
- Gordon Mann, D3hoops.com Senior Editor

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

We also have the podcast now on iHeartRadio and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 21, 2019, 06:31:00 PM

Now it looks like Sobel is injured for Middlebury - only ten minutes last game, not playing tonight. Cunningham at Nichols. Kena Gilmour didn't play last night. I saw TCNJ; they're missing a starting forward. It feels like a lot of missed games early for top teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 22, 2019, 09:46:16 PM

Wabash edges Greenville in Waukesha tonight. First time seeing Jack Davidson in action. Man, that guy is smooth.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 23, 2019, 06:25:53 PM

Final from Oshkosh:

Elmhurst 97
#2 UW-Oshkosh 92

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 23, 2019, 07:14:20 PM

Whitworth is not as good as I expected (n = 2).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 24, 2019, 08:53:15 AM

We vote tomorrow, and this ballot is going to be a really good example of how confusing it is to vote in the Top 25 poll in the early going.

The preseason ballot (here is mine - http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4097.msg1951041#msg1951041) was obviously 100% based on what we think about teams. There are no 2019-20 results to go on. By mid-December, I try to eliminate all preseason opinions from my voting process and go 100% on results. But what about a vote on November 25 with teams playing just 2-5 games? What % should this ballot be based on preseason assumptions vs actual 2019-20 results? That gets tricky.

For example, below are a few things I am trying to sort out in my head just related to the CCIW and UW-Oshkosh.

How should CCIW teams be ordered in the week 2 ballot?
I think there are four CCIW teams that merit strong consideration:
* #3 North Central (1-1) - lost at home to #2 UW-Oshkosh by 10; beat Greenville by 19; clear preseason CCIW preseason favorite.
* #17 Augustana (3-1) - lost at home to #2 UW-Oshkosh; close wins over Alma and Calvin; dominated Loras; preseason CCIW #2.
* Carthage (5-0)- beat Beloit by 23; beat Greenville by 7; beat #2 UW-Oshkosh by 7; beat Finlandia by 58; beat Rose-H by 10; CCIW preseason #4.
* Elmhurst (3-0) - beat preseason MWC favorite St. Norbert by 25; beat Illinois Tech by 22; won at #2 UW-Oshkosh, led wire to wire; preseason CCIW 5.

(I am not yet looking at preseason CCIW #3 Illinois Wesleyan, 4-1, due to the home loss to Calvin, but the Titans look like a Top 25 team to me.)

Based on 2019-20 results, I have a hard time not going with this order:
* Elmhurst
* Carthage
* Augustana
* North Central

Elmhurst won at the defending champs by 5 in a game they never trailed, led by 10 at half, and led by an average of about 7 in the 2nd half.

Carthage beat Oshkosh at home by 7 in a game they led by 8 at the half, and led by an average of about 7 in the 2nd.

Augustana lost at home to Oshkosh by by 7. It was a 3-point game at the half and Oshkosh led by about 10 throughout the 2nd. Augustana played without 6/11/240 Micah Martin. They now have him back and he's averaging 17.7 ppg, 8.3 rpg.

NCC lost at home to Oshkosh by 10. It was a 12-point Oshkosh lead at the half, and the Titans led by an average of about 9 in the 2nd.

Do I continue to assume what everyone around the CCIW did coming in, that NCC is the best team? (Do I overlook the dramatically different head-to-head results between NCC and UWO and Elmhurst and UWO?)

I have decided to go based on the early results, and not the preseason. In this poll I will have Elmhurst as the highest CCIW team (maybe about #14 ish), followed by Carthage. I'll keep NCC ahead of Augustana for now -- the common opponent UWO result was really close.

On October 27, my preseason ballot, I had NCC #1. But I would just feel funny not having Elmhurst higher than NCC on this ballot. I would also feel funny having Elmhurst higher than maybe #14 (after not really having them on my radar before yesterday). So basically I am going NCC #1 to somewhere in the teens, and I realize that seems like a big drop, but every game matters -- and NCC lost a home game to a team that lost to Carthage and Elmhurst.

Where should UW-Oshkosh be ranked? How far should they fall?
The preseason poll had UW-Oshkosh #2. They have played 4 games, all against the CCIW - results noted above.
* at #17-Augustana: W by 7
* at #2- NCC: W by 10
* at Carthage: L by 7
* vs Elmhurst: L by 5

Do we assume NCC is really #2 and Augie #17 as we assess UWO's two wins? To me that is the first thing to sort out - are those wins as great as we assumed at the time?

How do we process the two UWO losses? Do we assume Carthage was just a tough road game where they shot it terribly? And how do we process the result yesterday, where the Titans were dominated by the team we thought was CCIW #5?

In general terms, do we drop Oshkosh from #2 to, like, #16? Is that about right? Too severe? Not severe enough?

In figuring out where to put Oshkosh...since strength of schedules vary so much we also have to look at all of that. For example, if #4 Amherst played Augustana, NCC, Carthage, and Elmhurst instead of Lassell, Elmira, and Fitchburg State, what do we think their record would be? Do we drop UWO a bunch for losing two games while being cool with Amherst scheduling Elmira and winning by 56?

Where should UW-Oshkosh be ranked relative to the 4 CCIW teams they have faced?
The biggie here is UWO vs Elmhurst. The Preseason Top 25 had UWO #2. Elmhurst didn't receive any votes...and, again, was #5 in the CCIW preseason poll.

But Elmhurst dominated the Titans yesterday -- they looked like the better team.

So, do we assume that was a bad performance by UWO? Or do we go by what we saw yesterday?

And how 'bout UWO vs Carthage. Carthage won head-to-head (at Carthage). Which team should be ranked higher?

I think UWO clearly has to be ranked ahead of NCC and Augustana -- head-to-head wins in their buildings.

I have landed on the following order of the teams I have discussed here:
* Elmhurst
* Oshkosh
* Carthage
* NCC
* Augustana

Oshkosh vs Carthage is a tough one for me -- I am gonna keep UWO like one spot higher.

I think you will agree this is all very complicated to figure out! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on November 24, 2019, 09:11:04 AM

Complicated, indeed. And you haven't even articulated in that analysis, though I'm sure you are thinking about, all the other teams from all the other conferences on the Top 25 radar. My mind would be fried. Thanks for sharing that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 24, 2019, 09:12:21 AM

Oh, and huge kudos to the teams that play good schedules. For me, there is nothing worse than trying to vote on teams in the upper half of the poll that play awful schedules.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 24, 2019, 09:13:39 AM

Quote from: y_jack_lok on November 24, 2019, 09:11:04 AM
Complicated, indeed. And you haven't even articulated in that analysis, though I'm sure you are thinking about, all the other teams from all the other conferences on the Top 25 radar. My mind would be fried. Thanks for sharing that.

Right, what I posted above is just related to one little sliver of the big picture. I have to now take that piece and sort it out vs the rest of the country.

Super tricky stuff! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 24, 2019, 10:08:44 AM

This is not my final ballot (I need to think about some more), but it is probably pretty close.

1. Swarthmore (4-0)
2. Emory (4-0)
3. Amherst (3-0)
4. Wittenberg (2-0)
5. Middlebury (5-0)
6. Nichols (4-0)
7. UW-Platteville (4-0)
8. St. Thomas (3-1)
9. Wash U (4-1)
10. Nebraska Wesleyan (4-1)
11. Johns Hopkins (4-0)
12. Elmhurst (3-0)
13. Christopher Newport 5-1)
14. St. John's (3-1)
15. UW-Oshkosh (2-2)
16. Carthage (5-0)
17. North Central (1-1)
18. Wooster (3-0)
19. Marietta (3-0)
20. Randolph-Macon (6-0)
21. Whitman (4-1)
22. Augsburg (2-0)
23. Whitworth (5-1)
24. Augustana (3-1)
25. Centre (4-1)
-----
Watch List:

Rochester (5-0)
Wabash (3-1)
Illinois Wesleyan (4-1)
Guilford (4-1)
Hope (3-0)
Buena Vista (6-0)
Springfield (5-0)
Oswego St (3-0)
Colby (5-0)
John Carroll (3-0)
Hamilton (4-0)
UW-La Crosse (4-0)
Monmouth (3-0)
Lake Forest (3-1)
WPI (5-1)
Yeshiva (5-1)
Texas-Dallas (2-2)
Muhlenberg (6-0)
Scranton (4-1)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Colby Hoops on November 24, 2019, 10:47:01 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 24, 2019, 10:08:44 AM
This is not my final ballot (I need to think about some more), but it is probably pretty close.

1. Swarthmore (4-0)
2. Emory (4-0)
3. Amherst (3-0)
4. Wittenberg (2-0)
5. Middlebury (5-0)
6. Nichols (4-0)
7. UW-Platteville (4-0)
8. St. Thomas (3-1)
9. Wash U (4-1)
10. Nebraska Wesleyan (4-1)
11. Johns Hopkins (4-0)
12. Elmhurst (3-0)
13. Christopher Newport 5-1)
14. St. John's (3-1)
15. UW-Oshkosh (2-2)
16. Carthage (5-0)
17. North Central (1-1)
18. Wooster (3-0)
19. Marietta (3-0)
20. Randolph-Macon (6-0)
21. Whitman (4-1)
22. Augsburg (2-0)
23. Whitworth (5-1)
24. Augustana (3-1)
25. Centre (4-1)
-----
Next up (watch list):

Wabash (3-1)
Oswego St (3-0)
Hamilton (4-0)
Illinois Wesleyan (4-1)
WPI (5-1)
Guilford (4-1)

(watch list not final/complete)

I do not envy this task, particularly so early in the season! I have an admittedly narrow view as I mostly watch Northeast teams. I'd add Tufts and Colby (obviously biased on that one!) to your watch list as well -- both have had impressive starts. I'd probably have both ahead of Hamilton to this point, but that's splitting hairs.

I'd also say Nichols is due for a fall at some point. They've barely beat New England College and Anna Maria -- two teams that have been blown out by other good teams to this point. The Anna Maria one is particularly inexplicable, as they've lost by large margins to every other good team they've played and don't have a win yet.

Just my two cents. Thanks as always for the time and thought you put into these, I'm always impressed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 24, 2019, 12:03:02 PM

Games today that could impact my ballot:

* Nebraska Wesleyan at Chicago, 1pm ET

* St. Thomas vs DePauw (at Chicago), 5pm ET

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 24, 2019, 04:07:44 PM

Quote from: Colby Hoops on November 24, 2019, 10:47:01 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on November 24, 2019, 10:08:44 AM
This is not my final ballot (I need to think about some more), but it is probably pretty close.

1. Swarthmore (4-0)
2. Emory (4-0)
3. Amherst (3-0)
4. Wittenberg (2-0)
5. Middlebury (5-0)
6. Nichols (4-0)
7. UW-Platteville (4-0)
8. St. Thomas (3-1)
9. Wash U (4-1)
10. Nebraska Wesleyan (4-1)
11. Johns Hopkins (4-0)
12. Elmhurst (3-0)
13. Christopher Newport 5-1)
14. St. John's (3-1)
15. UW-Oshkosh (2-2)
16. Carthage (5-0)
17. North Central (1-1)
18. Wooster (3-0)
19. Marietta (3-0)
20. Randolph-Macon (6-0)
21. Whitman (4-1)
22. Augsburg (2-0)
23. Whitworth (5-1)
24. Augustana (3-1)
25. Centre (4-1)
-----
Next up (watch list):

Wabash (3-1)
Oswego St (3-0)
Hamilton (4-0)
Illinois Wesleyan (4-1)
WPI (5-1)
Guilford (4-1)

(watch list not final/complete)

I do not envy this task, particularly so early in the season! I have an admittedly narrow view as I mostly watch Northeast teams. I'd add Tufts and Colby (obviously biased on that one!) to your watch list as well -- both have had impressive starts. I'd probably have both ahead of Hamilton to this point, but that's splitting hairs.

I'd also say Nichols is due for a fall at some point. They've barely beat New England College and Anna Maria -- two teams that have been blown out by other good teams to this point. The Anna Maria one is particularly inexplicable, as they've lost by large margins to every other good team they've played and don't have a win yet.

Just my two cents. Thanks as always for the time and thought you put into these, I'm always impressed.

Just a reminder: Nichols has been without their starting center for several games now. They don't have a ton of depth, so that's big for them. To pull of a Top 10 season with the team they have is a high degree of difficulty, but they certainly have the ability to do it.

It'll be interesting to see the conversation between Bob and myself on Hoopsville tonight. As you might expect, his ballot skews a little to the Midwest and mine skews a little to the East Coast. I feel like we're still two weeks out from really having a good handle on what teams can do. We also have to remember the ballot is not about who's playing well now - Pat always tells us we're attempting to gauge what we think the final ballot will look like in ~~March~~ April.

I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt to a team like Nichols that (I think) expects Cunningham back at some point, vs a team like UT-Dallas with a star who's return is still very much in question. I'm also willing to forgive Oshkosh a couple bad shooting nights against good teams. That good will won't last forever, but there just aren't that many teams more capable than they are.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CollegeGolf18 on November 24, 2019, 04:34:15 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 24, 2019, 10:08:44 AM
This is not my final ballot (I need to think about some more), but it is probably pretty close.

12. Elmhurst (3-0)

25. Centre (4-1)
-----
Watch List:
Wabash (3-1)

Centre beat Wabash on a last-second basket, would have been a good win for Wabash. Centre is very deserving of a spot IMO, although I'm not sure I agree with Wabash dropping out after losing on a last-second shot.

I think the Wabash/Elmhurst game next Saturday will tell us a lot about both squads.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 24, 2019, 05:00:51 PM

How They Fared (~~Nearly~~ Complete)
~~St Thomas/DePauw set to tip off shortly; I'll edit that result in later this evening.~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	614	Swarthmore	4-0	won at Eastern, 100-74; won at Neumann, 86-76; def. TCNJ, 88-81; def. Stockton, 84-54
#2	563	UW-Oshkosh	2-2	won at #17 Augustana, 74-67; won at #3 North Central (Ill.), 76-66; LOST at Carthage, 57-64; LOST to Elmhurst, 92-97
#3	510	North Central (Ill.)	1-1	LOST to #2 UW-Oshkosh, 66-76; def. Greenville, 122-103
#4	469	Amherst	3-0	won at Lasell, 86-48; def. Elmira, 89-33; def. Fitchburg State, 84-62
#5	455	Wittenberg	2-0	won at Brooklyn, 87-78; def. Mount St. Joseph, 92-58
#6	418	Emory	4-0	won at #19 Guilford, 89-67; won at Berry, 99-85; def. Sewanee, 94-70; def. Oglethorpe, 84-60
#7	386	Washington U.	4-1	won at Illinois College, 85-76; won at UW-Whitewater, 90-86; LOST at #29 UW-Platteville, 63-76; def. Coe, 93-79; def. UW-Eau Claire, 56-55
#8	349	Nebraska Wesleyan	5-1	def. (n) #12 St. John's, 78-56; def. UW-Superior, 87-51; def. McMurry, 108-86; def. Hardin-Simmons, 88-81; LOST to (n) #15 St. Thomas, 63-82; won at Chicago, 81-79
#9	338	Christopher Newport	5-1	LOST at Johns Hopkins, 74-78; def. Shenandoah, 85-62; def. (n) Marywood, 87-56; won at Franklin and Marshall, 74-66; def. Randolph, 66-58; def. Lynchburg, 79-77
#10	333	Nichols	4-0	def. (n) #39 Eastern Connecticut, 74-56; def. (n) New England College, 107-104; won at Anna Maria, 82-77; def. Worcester State, 89-53
#11	313	Texas-Dallas	2-2	LOST at UTA, 50-84; won at Redlands, 74-71 OT; LOST at Whittier, 86-91; def. Trinity (Texas), 78-62
#12	295	St. John's	3-1	LOST to (n) #8 Nebraska Wesleyan, 56-78; won at Marian, 71-43; won at Minnesota-Morris, 86-80; def. Carleton, 79-60
#13	282	Middlebury	5-0	def. Bridgewater State, 85-81; def. Wentworth, 75-64; won at T#47 Keene State, 92-82; won at SUNY-Canton, 89-68; won at Skidmore, 73-56
#14	269	Wabash	3-1	LOST to Centre, 76-77; def. Earlham, 85-72; def. Greenville, 137-131; won at Carroll, 86-78
#15	245	St. Thomas	4-1	won at #20 Whitman, 87-79; LOST at #40 Whitworth, 64-85; won at St. Scholastica, 110-64; def. (n) #8 Nebraska Wesleyan, 82-63; def. (n) DePauw, 84-66
#16	239	WPI	5-1	def. T#47 Brandeis, 55-46; LOST to New England College, 73-78; def. #39 Eastern Connecticut, 88-63; def. #28 Salem State, 91-50; def. (n) Eastern Nazarene, 83-69; won at Mass-Boston, 68-62
#17	229	Augustana	3-1	LOST to #2 UW-Oshkosh, 67-74; def. Alma, 74-67; def. Calvin, 70-67; def. T#47 Loras, 88-59
#18	227	Marietta	3-0	def. Eastern Mennonite, 92-53; def. Mount St. Joseph, 96-71; won at Emory and Henry, 89-65
#19	216	Guilford	5-1	LOST to #6 Emory, 67-89; won at Greensboro, 87-75; def. Mary Hardin-Baylor, 60-52; def. N.C. Wesleyan, 67-50; def. Averett, 76-61; def. Berry, 73-56
#20	193	Whitman	4-1	def. Montclair State, 114-104; LOST to #15 St. Thomas, 79-87; def. Cal Lutheran, 106-69; def. (n) Sul Ross State, 94-78; def. (n) Concordia (Texas), 101-88
#21	167	Wooster	3-0	def. Medaille, 110-100; def. Hiram, 98-70; def. Wilmington, 86-65
#22	128	Baldwin Wallace	2-2	def. Bethany, 95-53; def. Hiram, 81-71; LOST at Westminster (Pa.), 68-78; LOST at Hobart, 56-68
#23	113	Augsburg	2-0	def. Northland, 102-54; won at Concordia-Moorhead, 75-55
#24	112	Randolph-Macon	6-0	def. (n) Washington College, 74-47; won at St. Mary's (Md.), 84-40; def. Ursinus, 54-50; won at Messiah, 63-50; won at Washington and Lee, 79-68; won at Hampden-Sydney, 82-64
#25	93	St. John Fisher	3-2	LOST to Union, 71-89; def. (n) Cazenovia, 98-81; won at Hilbert, 97-62; LOST at T#41 Rochester, 75-78; def. (n) Rochester Tech, 80-70

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	83	Oswego	3-0	def. (n) Ithaca, 85-80; def. (n) Keystone, 92-81; won at Clarkson, 80-72
#27	59	Hamilton	4-0	def. (n) TCNJ, 88-81; won at Drew, 88-80; def. Bard, 101-57; won at T#47 Keene State, 83-70
#28	58	Salem State	1-4	LOST to (n) Suffolk, 81-94; def. (n) Anna Maria, 89-76; LOST to Mass-Dartmouth, 87-91; LOST to T#47 Keene State, 91-99; LOST at #16 WPI, 50-91
#29	54	UW-Platteville	4-0	def. Finlandia, 112-49; def. Viterbo, 70-67; def. #7 Washington U., 76-63; def. Concordia-Chicago, 89-72
#30	49	York (Pa.)	3-2	won at Dickinson, 90-63; def. (n) Johnson and Wales, 84-55; LOST at Roanoke, 59-74; def. Lancaster Bible, 93-71; LOST at Johns Hopkins, 57-67
#31	45	Wheaton (Ill.)	3-1	def. Principia, 90-71; def. UW-River Falls, 86-60; LOST to Lake Forest, 75-78; def. Olivet, 81-51
#32	35	MIT	3-2	LOST at T#36 Endicott, 64-100; LOST to Mass-Boston, 64-71; def. Eastern Nazarene, 66-64; won at Pine Manor, 95-49; won at Lasell, 84-70
#33	31	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	1-1	LOST at #40 Whitworth, 83-93; def. (n) George Fox, 80-72
#34	29	New Jersey City	2-1	LOST to Stevens, 75-81; def. Mount St. Vincent, 81-62; won at Farmingdale State, 66-61
#35	24	Scranton	4-1	def. Stevenson, 67-54; def. Houghton, 89-69; LOST to William Paterson, 69-75; won at Wilkes, 91-62; won at Cabrini, 93-86
T#36	18	Endicott	3-2	def. #32 MIT, 100-64; LOST to (n) Springfield, 82-92; def. (n) Lesley, 102-69; LOST at Eastern Nazarene, 79-91; won at Bridgewater State, 91-80
T#36	18	Mount Union	2-2	def. Albion, 71-52; def. Carnegie Mellon, 94-72; LOST at Adrian, 77-80; LOST at Trine, 78-80
#38	15	Pomona-Pitzer	1-2	LOST at Westmont, 76-84; LOST at Biola, 62-66; def. Cal Miramar, 116-78
#39	14	Eastern Connecticut	0-3	LOST to (n) #10 Nichols, 56-74; LOST at #16 WPI, 63-88; LOST at Johnson and Wales, 61-78
#40	12	Whitworth	5-1	def. #33 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 93-83; def. Trinity (Texas), 96-73; def. Cal Lutheran, 105-51; def. #15 St. Thomas, 85-64; LOST to (n) UW-Eau Claire, 75-77; def. (n) Coe, 73-59
T#41	5	Rochester	5-0	won at SUNY Geneseo, 72-61; def. Misericordia, 77-56; def. Heidelberg, 75-52; def. #25 St. John Fisher, 78-75; def. Nazareth, 77-56
T#41	5	SUNY Oneonta	1-3	LOST to Alvernia, 70-71; LOST to Wesley, 70-86; def. #44 Williams, 74-69 OT; LOST at Hartwick, 78-82
#43	4	Tufts	4-0	won at Emerson, 103-82; def. Mass-Dartmouth, 91-78; def. Lasell, 96-65; def. St. Joseph (Conn.), 89-71
#44	3	Williams	3-1	def. Worcester State, 70-51; def. SUNYIT, 83-48; LOST at T#41 SUNY Oneonta, 69-74 OT; def. Wesleyan, 77-52
T#45	2	Brockport	2-1	LOST at Morrisville State, 70-73; def. Hobart, 75-74; won at Medaille, 96-84
T#45	2	Covenant	3-1	def. (n) Birmingham-Southern, 71-66; won at Sewanee, 71-62; def. Birmingham-Southern, 88-72; LOST at Centre, 58-78
T#47	1	Brandeis	3-2	LOST at #16 WPI, 46-55; won at Rivier, 91-56; def. Emerson, 76-74; LOST at Suffolk, 57-72; def. Rhode Island College, 81-75
T#47	1	Keene State	1-3	LOST at Springfield, 101-106 OT; won at #28 Salem State, 99-91; LOST to #13 Middlebury, 82-92; LOST to #27 Hamilton, 70-83
T#47	1	Loras	4-1	def. Concordia-Chicago, 108-85; def. Blackburn, 88-75; def. Concordia (Wis.), 85-65; LOST at #17 Augustana, 59-88; won at St. Scholastica, 88-67
T#47	1	Yeshiva	5-1	LOST at Occidental, 60-72; won at Caltech, 77-58; won at Salisbury, 79-71; won at Washington College, 78-68; def. Brooklyn, 98-74; won at Mount St. Vincent, 102-73

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 24, 2019, 05:05:55 PM

Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on November 24, 2019, 04:34:15 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on November 24, 2019, 10:08:44 AM
This is not my final ballot (I need to think about some more), but it is probably pretty close.

12. Elmhurst (3-0)

25. Centre (4-1)
-----
Watch List:
Wabash (3-1)

Centre beat Wabash on a last-second basket, would have been a good win for Wabash. Centre is very deserving of a spot IMO, although I'm not sure I agree with Wabash dropping out after losing on a last-second shot.

Which team on my ballot would you take out to put Wabash in?

1. Swarthmore (4-0)
2. Emory (4-0)
3. Amherst (3-0)
4. Wittenberg (2-0)
5. Middlebury (5-0)
6. Nichols (4-0)
7. UW-Platteville (4-0)
8. St. Thomas (3-1)
9. Wash U (4-1)
10. Nebraska Wesleyan (4-1)
11. Johns Hopkins (4-0)
12. Elmhurst (3-0)
13. Christopher Newport 5-1)
14. St. John's (3-1)
15. UW-Oshkosh (2-2)
16. Carthage (5-0)
17. North Central (1-1)
18. Wooster (3-0)
19. Marietta (3-0)
20. Randolph-Macon (6-0)
21. Whitman (4-1)
22. Augsburg (2-0)
23. Whitworth (5-1)
24. Augustana (3-1)
25. Centre (4-1)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 24, 2019, 05:35:25 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on November 24, 2019, 05:00:51 PM
How They Fared (Nearly Complete)

Thanks for doing this again, Darryl...it is very helpful.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 24, 2019, 06:29:12 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=1i7wp/9iy83jvzxctpweb0.jpg)

Each season there are a few teams that get out to starts that makes everyone turn their heads. There are always a few "wait, what?!" "They beat who?!" And even a, "are they seriously (say record)?!"

Yes, they are. And thus we should talk to them.

On Sunday's Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), hear from a few coaches who have their teams out to blazing starts. UW-Platteville women are undefeated with wins over No. 18 Chicago and No. 4 Wartburg. William Peace women have equaled their win total from last season and defeated No. 15 Christopher Newport. And Oberlin men started undefeated and off to one of the program's best starts.

Hear from each of their coaches on what is working so well early in the season and if they can continue to surprise and steal headlines the rest of the season.

Plus, Bob Quillman and Ryan Scott return with a look at where the Top 25 now sits with the first in-season poll coming up on Monday. Find out who Bob, Ryan, and Dave select for their Dubious, Deep Dive, and Debatable selections are ahead of the Week 1 poll.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Sunday's show LIVE starting at 7:00 p.m. ET here: www.d3hoopsville.com or http://bit.ly/34fV7IZ.

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or use any of the social media options.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Kelly McNiff, UW-Platteville women's coach
- Grahm Smith, William Peace women's coach
- Isaiah Cavaco, Oberlin men's coach
- Bob Quillman & Ryan Scott, Top 25 Double-Take

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

We also have the podcast now on iHeartRadio and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CollegeGolf18 on November 24, 2019, 07:04:16 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 24, 2019, 05:05:55 PM
Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on November 24, 2019, 04:34:15 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on November 24, 2019, 10:08:44 AM
This is not my final ballot (I need to think about some more), but it is probably pretty close.

12. Elmhurst (3-0)

25. Centre (4-1)
-----
Watch List:
Wabash (3-1)

Centre beat Wabash on a last-second basket, would have been a good win for Wabash. Centre is very deserving of a spot IMO, although I'm not sure I agree with Wabash dropping out after losing on a last-second shot.

Which team on my ballot would you take out to put Wabash in?

1. Swarthmore (4-0)
2. Emory (4-0)
3. Amherst (3-0)
4. Wittenberg (2-0)
5. Middlebury (5-0)
6. Nichols (4-0)
7. UW-Platteville (4-0)
8. St. Thomas (3-1)
9. Wash U (4-1)
10. Nebraska Wesleyan (4-1)
11. Johns Hopkins (4-0)
12. Elmhurst (3-0)
13. Christopher Newport 5-1)
14. St. John's (3-1)
15. UW-Oshkosh (2-2)
16. Carthage (5-0)
17. North Central (1-1)
18. Wooster (3-0)
19. Marietta (3-0)
20. Randolph-Macon (6-0)
21. Whitman (4-1)
22. Augsburg (2-0)
23. Whitworth (5-1)
24. Augustana (3-1)
25. Centre (4-1)

That, I don't know without pouring over each team like yourself.

I guess I tend to take into account the preseason thoughts a little bit more.

I guess I just see a team that returned all five starters and went 22-6 last year losing a game to a very good team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 24, 2019, 07:33:26 PM

I do think there is an argument for Wabash ahead of Centre.

Incidentally, I would say Augustana ahead of Whitworth.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 24, 2019, 08:09:52 PM

I've been frustrated by the sample size at this point in the year. Who knows who's better at this point?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CCD3Basketball on November 24, 2019, 09:29:28 PM

At this point, it's just as much about going with your gut as it is looking at some of the early results. By the second week of December stuff will sort itself out a little more.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 24, 2019, 09:47:27 PM

Quote from: CCD3Basketball on November 24, 2019, 09:29:28 PM
At this point, it's just as much about going with your gut as it is looking at some of the early results. By the second week of December stuff will sort itself out a little more.

Yes, it STARTS to sort out about then. But the early uncertainty (where reputation can vastly outweigh actual results) is why, when I started and ran the Posters' Poll, the first ballot was not until early January.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PauldingLightUP on November 25, 2019, 12:00:50 AM

Great top 25 talk tonight gents. Oshkosh is an interesting team to say the least. I'm just not sure Elmhurst dominated Oshkosh Q. The Buejays dominated the first six minutes yes, but not the game. It's not like Bluejays put the game away early in the second and benches were emptied. Oshkosh made their runs and it was a one possession game under a minute. Oshkosh shot poorly to start both of these last two and just couldn't fully recover. I do agree their ball movement isn't as clean this year, great observation.

Just the way the schedule works, it's hard to envision Oshkosh heading to Atlanta with more than 2 loses. SNC and a MIAA weekend are interesting road tests however.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 25, 2019, 07:29:53 AM

Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on November 24, 2019, 07:04:16 PM

That, I don't know without pouring over each team like yourself.

I guess I tend to take into account the preseason thoughts a little bit more.

I guess I just see a team that returned all five starters and went 22-6 last year losing a game to a very good team.

I think Wabash is a very good team and they were very much in consideration for me (they are my #26). But when I worked through my list I simply found 25 teams I liked more for this ballot (listed above) -- including Centre, which has a head-to-head win over Wabash in Crawfordsville. I couldn't think of a good reason to put Wabash ahead of Centre.

The Wabash/Elmhurst game on Nov. 30 is big.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 25, 2019, 07:38:30 AM

Quote from: PauldingLightUP on November 25, 2019, 12:00:50 AM
Great top 25 talk tonight gents. Oshkosh is an interesting team to say the least. I'm just not sure Elmhurst dominated Oshkosh Q. The Buejays dominated the first six minutes yes, but not the game. It's not like Bluejays put the game away early in the second and benches were emptied. Oshkosh made their runs and it was a one possession game under a minute.

Thank you! We have fun with that!

Maybe "dominating" is too strong, but consider:
* Elmhurst had a 10 point lead at half.
* EC held an average lead of about 7 points throughout the 2nd.
* In the final 38 minutes of this game, UWO only had the ball and a chance to tie one time (0:48 2nd, Elmhurst 3-point lead); and never in those final 38 minutes had the ball and a chance to take the lead.

Whether the word is "dominating" or "convincing" or whatever, it was pretty impressive.

https://elmhurstbluejays.com/boxscore.aspx?id=4823&path=mbball

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 25, 2019, 09:33:37 AM

It was definitely an impressive and convincing win.

It is interesting, the language we use to describe games.

One man's grind it out, tough win is another man's but they led by 8-10 for the final 10 minutes and won by 14.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 25, 2019, 12:47:20 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on November 25, 2019, 09:33:37 AM
It was definitely an impressive and convincing win.

It is interesting, the language we use to describe games.

One man's grind it out, tough win is another man's but they led by 8-10 for the final 10 minutes and won by 14.

As I like to say, a person's school doesn't need to offer any Ph.D. programs for him to earn a doctorate in spin. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 25, 2019, 02:25:15 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 24, 2019, 10:08:44 AM
This is not my final ballot (I need to think about some more), but it is probably pretty close.

1. Swarthmore (4-0)
2. Emory (4-0)
3. Amherst (3-0)
4. Wittenberg (2-0)
5. Middlebury (5-0)
6. Nichols (4-0)
7. UW-Platteville (4-0)
8. St. Thomas (3-1)
9. Wash U (4-1)
10. Nebraska Wesleyan (4-1)
11. Johns Hopkins (4-0)
12. Elmhurst (3-0)
13. Christopher Newport 5-1)
14. St. John's (3-1)
15. UW-Oshkosh (2-2)
16. Carthage (5-0)
17. North Central (1-1)
18. Wooster (3-0)
19. Marietta (3-0)
20. Randolph-Macon (6-0)
21. Whitman (4-1)
22. Augsburg (2-0)
23. Whitworth (5-1)
24. Augustana (3-1)
25. Centre (4-1)
-----
Watch List:

Rochester (5-0)
Wabash (3-1)
Illinois Wesleyan (4-1)
Guilford (4-1)
Hope (3-0)
Buena Vista (6-0)
Springfield (5-0)
Oswego St (3-0)
Colby (5-0)
John Carroll (3-0)
Hamilton (4-0)
UW-La Crosse (4-0)
Monmouth (3-0)
Lake Forest (3-1)
WPI (5-1)
Yeshiva (5-1)
Texas-Dallas (2-2)
Muhlenberg (6-0)
Scranton (4-1)

I didn't make any changes here - this is the Week 1 ballot I submitted. I'm sure I will end up looking stupid on many of these - that is how it goes - but based on the data we have now that feels like a solid ballot to me.

The "watch list" is not necessarily complete - just a list of other teams I checked out. It helps when people post teams that are deserving of consideration here. It's impossible to catch them all.

Ryan had me watching my first Yeshiva game Thursday night. I didn't quite pull the trigger but they're on the radar!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 25, 2019, 02:26:50 PM

+1 For full disclosure, I am ABD at this point...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 25, 2019, 02:43:29 PM

We agree on 20 teams, Bob, not too bad - although four of the five I don't have are in your Top 15. So there's that.

Yeshiva plays Williams a little later this year. That might be a good one to watch. The Macs were outclassed in previous meetings, but I think those squads will be a lot more evenly matched this year. Turell continues to improve and, to quote Michael Jordan - His ceiling is the roof!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 25, 2019, 04:52:40 PM

That Top 25 was brutal.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 25, 2019, 06:31:31 PM

We have a poll!
https://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2019-20/week1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 25, 2019, 07:06:04 PM

People are still voting for Wheaton...wow.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on November 25, 2019, 08:29:00 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 25, 2019, 02:43:29 PM

We agree on 20 teams, Bob, not too bad - although four of the five I don't have are in your Top 15. So there's that.

Yeshiva plays Williams a little later this year. That might be a good one to watch. The Macs were outclassed in previous meetings, but I think those squads will be a lot more evenly matched this year. Turell continues to improve and, to quote Michael Jordan - His ceiling is the roof!

That game is much later this year than it had been the past two--think it's a mid week game in early February off the top of my head. Will certainly be a good game and probably better off for the Ephs as they are a young team that needs to gel, but it'll be much too late to serve as any sort of a litmus test.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 25, 2019, 10:49:00 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 25, 2019, 07:06:04 PM
People are still voting for Wheaton...wow.

They've looked better than I expected so far. I feel less bad about people voting for them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 25, 2019, 11:13:24 PM

They've looked better to me than I've expected, too. But they don't look like a Top 25 team -- at least not yet.

More time to gel and the (eventual) addition of Luke Anthony could very well change that down the road.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 25, 2019, 11:20:33 PM

Maybe the voter is looking to Ken Massey for advice.

Wheaton is currently rated No. 16.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 26, 2019, 02:09:45 AM

Shame on them if they are. Massey's database is woefully inadequate this early in the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 26, 2019, 08:45:29 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 25, 2019, 10:49:00 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on November 25, 2019, 07:06:04 PM
People are still voting for Wheaton...wow.

They've looked better than I expected so far. I feel less bad about people voting for them.

I'm still calling out "lazy voting" on this one.

If you were really digging into Wheaton's results, wouldn't you end up voting for Lake Forest instead? Lake Forest won at Wheaton in a game the home team never led.

And while I obviously do not have access to the Wheaton voters' ballots, I'll bet (strong gut feeling) they have Wheaton ranked ahead of Elmhurst or Carthage or both. I doubt they are voting for 5 CCIW teams -- NCC, Augie, Elmhurst, Carthage, and Wheaton. Having Wheaton ahead of any of those other 4 would be "lazy voting."

I can't prove my lazy voting theory, but I'm feeling pretty sure about it. I say protect the Whistlblower, but bring these D3hoops.com pollsters here to the board for some healthy ballot debate.

https://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Wheaton_(Ill.)/men/2019-20/index

https://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Lake_Forest/men/2019-20/index

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 26, 2019, 09:41:11 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 26, 2019, 02:09:45 AM
Shame on them if they are. Massey's database is woefully inadequate this early in the season.

I'm actually surprised how few outliers it has right now. If someone voted for Massey's Top 25 it would be hard to argue.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 26, 2019, 11:08:28 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 26, 2019, 09:41:11 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 26, 2019, 02:09:45 AM
Shame on them if they are. Massey's database is woefully inadequate this early in the season.

I'm actually surprised how few outliers it has right now. If someone voted for Massey's Top 25 it would be hard to argue.

Massey and D3hoops.com agree on 19 of 25. That is not bad for this early.

Massey has
Elmhurst (#10)
UW-Stevens Point (#11)
UW-La Crosse (#12)
Hamilton (#13)
Wheaton (#16)
Illinois Wesleyan (#25)
https://www.masseyratings.com/cb2020/ncaa-d3/ratings

D3hoops.com Has
St. Johns (#14)
Wash U (#15)
Guilford (#19)
Augsburg (#20)
Wabash (#23)
WPI (#25)
https://www.d3hoops.com/top25/index

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: blue_jays on November 26, 2019, 11:35:04 AM

After watching Nebraska Wesleyan this weekend, there's no way they're the #8 team in the country right now. St. Thomas ate their lunch and they almost lost to UChicago. Do they have the potential to be #8? Sure. But those two games should make them concerned.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: thebear on November 26, 2019, 11:45:25 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 26, 2019, 02:09:45 AM
Shame on them if they are. Massey's database is woefully inadequate this early in the season.

From my observation, it usually takes about 8-10 games for most of D-III for Massey's ratings to settle down.

That being said, most of the teams and programs that were good last year are good this year.

There are exceptions, for example Plattsburgh lost all 5 starters, most of its coaching staff and had a very late head coach hire.

Success tends to breed success and make it easier to recruit top student-athletes to replace the departures.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 26, 2019, 11:50:12 AM

Quote from: blue_jays on November 26, 2019, 11:35:04 AM
After watching Nebraska Wesleyan this weekend, there's no way they're the #8 team in the country right now. St. Thomas ate their lunch and they almost lost to UChicago. Do they have the potential to be #8? Sure. But those two games should make them concerned.

The Tommies ate their lunch last year in the tournament too, so there's that. Maybe they just know how to play them, maybe St. Thomas is just that much better? I don't know. You also have to remember that St. Thomas got smoked by Whitworth...and Nebraska Wesleyan beat preseason #12 St. John's by 22 on their home court.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 26, 2019, 11:55:32 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 26, 2019, 11:08:28 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 26, 2019, 09:41:11 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 26, 2019, 02:09:45 AM
Shame on them if they are. Massey's database is woefully inadequate this early in the season.

I'm actually surprised how few outliers it has right now. If someone voted for Massey's Top 25 it would be hard to argue.

Massey and D3hoops.com agree on 19 of 25. That is not bad for this early.

Massey has
Elmhurst (#10)
UW-Stevens Point (#11)
UW-La Crosse (#12)
Hamilton (#13)
Wheaton (#16)
Illinois Wesleyan (#25)
https://www.masseyratings.com/cb2020/ncaa-d3/ratings

D3hoops.com Has
St. Johns (#14)
Wash U (#15)
Guilford (#19)
Augsburg (#20)
Wabash (#23)
WPI (#25)
https://www.d3hoops.com/top25/index

Not really sure how Massey works, but how is Stevens Point #11 after beating St. Olaf and Edgewood?

Quote from: thebear on November 26, 2019, 11:45:25 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 26, 2019, 02:09:45 AM
Shame on them if they are. Massey's database is woefully inadequate this early in the season.

From my observation, it usually takes about 8-10 games for most of D-III for Massey's ratings to settle down.

That being said, most of the teams and programs that were good last year are good this year.

There are exceptions, for example Plattsburgh lost all 5 starters, most of its coaching staff and had a very late head coach hire.

Success tends to breed success and make it easier to recruit top student-athletes to replace the departures.

Stevens Point was good, but not great, last year. They missed the tournament, picked 4th in the WIAC this year and lost four of their 5 starters.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on November 26, 2019, 12:07:14 PM

Since a lot of the data is unconnected, pre-season rankings still affect his algorithm.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 26, 2019, 12:15:17 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 26, 2019, 11:08:28 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 26, 2019, 09:41:11 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 26, 2019, 02:09:45 AM
Shame on them if they are. Massey's database is woefully inadequate this early in the season.

I'm actually surprised how few outliers it has right now. If someone voted for Massey's Top 25 it would be hard to argue.

Massey and D3hoops.com agree on 19 of 25. That is not bad for this early.

Massey has
Elmhurst (#10)
UW-Stevens Point (#11)
UW-La Crosse (#12)
Hamilton (#13)
Wheaton (#16)
Illinois Wesleyan (#25)
https://www.masseyratings.com/cb2020/ncaa-d3/ratings

D3hoops.com Has
St. Johns (#14)
Wash U (#15)
Guilford (#19)
Augsburg (#20)
Wabash (#23)
WPI (#25)
https://www.d3hoops.com/top25/index

D3h poll with Massey rank
St. Johns (#14) #40
Wash U (#15) #34
Guilford (#19) #32
Augsburg (#20) #54
Wabash (#23) #38
WPI (#25) #41

Massey with D3h rank
Elmhurst (#10) #26
UW-Stevens Point (#11) NR
UW-La Crosse (#12) NR
Hamilton (#13) #29
Wheaton (#16) #36
Illinois Wesleyan (#25) NR

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: blue_jays on November 26, 2019, 02:08:04 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 26, 2019, 11:50:12 AM
Quote from: blue_jays on November 26, 2019, 11:35:04 AM
After watching Nebraska Wesleyan this weekend, there's no way they're the #8 team in the country right now. St. Thomas ate their lunch and they almost lost to UChicago. Do they have the potential to be #8? Sure. But those two games should make them concerned.

The Tommies ate their lunch last year in the tournament too, so there's that. Maybe they just know how to play them, maybe St. Thomas is just that much better? I don't know. You also have to remember that St. Thomas got smoked by Whitworth...and Nebraska Wesleyan beat preseason #12 St. John's by 22 on their home court.

IMO St. Thomas doesn't have better starters than Neb. Wes., but they have the right players to make them pay in that zone look. UST is more of death by a thousand cuts than a team that overwhelms you with talent, and they have a deeper bench than NWU. The weekend made me very skeptical of the zone they're using in general, puts a lot more pressure on NWU's offense to perform.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 26, 2019, 02:43:08 PM

Funny, the teams in our poll that Massey doesn't have in the Top 25 are all teams I'm still a little hesitant to endorse. I don't give Massey much weight beyond some good math, but that coincidence is interesting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on November 26, 2019, 09:55:59 PM

A couple of Top 10 upsets this evening:

Westfield State 68
#3 Amherst 67

Benedictine 56
#9 North Central 49

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on November 27, 2019, 10:32:42 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 26, 2019, 11:55:32 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on November 26, 2019, 11:08:28 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 26, 2019, 09:41:11 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 26, 2019, 02:09:45 AM
Shame on them if they are. Massey's database is woefully inadequate this early in the season.

I'm actually surprised how few outliers it has right now. If someone voted for Massey's Top 25 it would be hard to argue.

Massey and D3hoops.com agree on 19 of 25. That is not bad for this early.

Massey has
Elmhurst (#10)
UW-Stevens Point (#11)
UW-La Crosse (#12)
Hamilton (#13)
Wheaton (#16)
Illinois Wesleyan (#25)
https://www.masseyratings.com/cb2020/ncaa-d3/ratings

D3hoops.com Has
St. Johns (#14)
Wash U (#15)
Guilford (#19)
Augsburg (#20)
Wabash (#23)
WPI (#25)
https://www.d3hoops.com/top25/index

Not really sure how Massey works, but how is Stevens Point #11 after beating St. Olaf and Edgewood?

Quote from: thebear on November 26, 2019, 11:45:25 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 26, 2019, 02:09:45 AM
Shame on them if they are. Massey's database is woefully inadequate this early in the season.

From my observation, it usually takes about 8-10 games for most of D-III for Massey's ratings to settle down.

That being said, most of the teams and programs that were good last year are good this year.

There are exceptions, for example Plattsburgh lost all 5 starters, most of its coaching staff and had a very late head coach hire.

Success tends to breed success and make it easier to recruit top student-athletes to replace the departures.

Stevens Point was good, but not great, last year. They missed the tournament, picked 4th in the WIAC this year and lost four of their 5 starters.

The computers like Stevens Point a good bit last year. Massey was #14 on them and my efficiency ratings had them #13.

FWIW, I'd rather see a voter pick Wheaton than Guilford right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 27, 2019, 09:59:33 PM

How They Fared (So Far) - Thanksgiving Eve Edition

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	623	Swarthmore	5-0	def. Washington College, 68-56; 12/01 vs. Arcadia
#2	567	Emory	5-0	def. Covenant, 67-62; 11/30 vs. Pfeiffer; 12/01 at Maryville (Tenn.)
#3	550	Amherst	3-1	LOST at Westfield State, 67-68
#4	531	Wittenberg	3-0	won at Oberlin, 66-56
#5	479	Middlebury	6-0	won at NVU-Johnson, 87-77; 12/01 at Endicott
#6	418	Nichols	4-0	12/01 at Trinity (Conn.)
#7	387	St. Thomas	5-1	def. Carleton, 74-60
#8	379	Nebraska Wesleyan	5-1	11/29 vs. University of the Ozarks; 11/30 vs. Willamette
#9	354	North Central (Ill.)	2-2	def. Rose-Hulman, 77-54; LOST to Benedictine, 49-56; 11/30 at Olivet; 12/01 at Kalamazoo
#10	334	Marietta	4-0	won at Baldwin Wallace, 86-76
#11	311	Christopher Newport	5-1	11/30 vs. #34 Texas-Dallas; 12/01 vs. UW-Stevens Point
#12	303	Randolph-Macon	6-0	12/01 at Randolph
#13	301	UW-Oshkosh	3-2	def. Edgewood, 99-80; 12/01 vs. Lawrence
#14	273	St. John's	4-1	won at St. Mary's (Minn.), 77-63
#15	258	Washington U.	5-1	def. Webster, 80-58; 12/01 vs. #17 Augustana
#16	240	Wooster	3-1	LOST to Mount Union, 67-81
#17	187	Augustana	4-1	def. UW-Whitewater, 86-69; 12/01 at #15 Washington U.
#18	173	UW-Platteville	5-0	won at Illinois Tech, 70-35; 12/01 at Cardinal Stritch
#19	154	Guilford	6-1	def. Methodist, 62-60; 11/30 at Eastern Mennonite
#20	146	Augsburg	2-1	LOST at #45 UW-La Crosse, 71-79; 11/30 vs. UW-River Falls
#21	145	Whitman	4-1	11/29 vs. JWU-Denver; 11/30 at Colorado College
#22	134	Johns Hopkins	5-0	won at McDaniel, 82-62; 12/01 vs. Moravian
#23	133	Wabash	4-1	def. Mount St. Joseph, 84-72; 11/30 at #26 Elmhurst
#24	113	Whitworth	5-1	IDLE
#25	105	WPI	6-1	won at Worcester State, 68-47; 11/30 vs. Fitchburg State

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	87	Elmhurst	4-0	won at Lake Forest, 93-91; 11/30 vs. #23 Wabash
#27	84	Carthage	5-0	IDLE
#28	60	Oswego	4-0	won at Nazareth, 77-73
#29	54	Hamilton	5-0	won at Caltech, 94-82; 11/29 at Cal Lutheran
#30	40	Centre	5-1	won at Franklin, 74-72; 11/30 at Spalding
#31	34	Springfield	5-0	IDLE
#32	33	Rochester	5-1	LOST at Hobart, 53-57; 11/30 vs. Keuka; 12/01 vs. TBA
#33	27	Babson	5-0	12/01 at Bowdoin
#34	26	Texas-Dallas	2-1	11/30 at #11 Christopher Newport; 12/01 vs. Wilmington
#35	14	New Jersey City	3-1	def. Kean, 84-55; 11/30 vs. #40 Colby
#36	11	Wheaton (Ill.)	4-1	won at Chicago, 86-80; 11/30 at Ripon
#37	10	TCNJ	2-3	LOST to Stockton, 77-79
T#38	9	Tufts	5-0	def. MIT, 73-63
T#38	9	UW-Eau Claire	5-1	def. Wartburg, 79-70; 11/30 at Pacific Lutheran; 12/01 at Puget Sound
#40	8	Colby	5-0	11/30 at #35 New Jersey City; 12/01 at Kean
#41	7	St. John Fisher	4-2	won at Buffalo State, 89-83
T#42	5	Williams	4-1	won at Massachusetts College, 87-57; 12/01 at Albertus Magnus
T#42	5	Yeshiva	6-1	def. SUNY-Old Westbury, 94-79
#44	3	Pomona-Pitzer	1-2	11/29 vs. Pacific; 11/30 vs. Lewis and Clark
#45	1	UW-La Crosse	5-0	def. #20 Augsburg, 79-71; 11/30 vs. Wartburg

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CollegeGolf18 on November 28, 2019, 09:30:18 PM

Now how does the committee treat Wooster? Just lost to a Mount Union coming off two losses to Adrian (picked at the bottom of the MIAA) and Trine.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 28, 2019, 09:34:33 PM

Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on November 28, 2019, 09:30:18 PM
Now how does the committee treat Wooster? Just lost to a Mount Union coming off two losses to Adrian (picked at the bottom of the MIAA) and Trine.

Let's at least wait until the Stagg Bowl before we start in on basketball committees. The first regional rankings won't be for a couple months.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 28, 2019, 09:43:42 PM

I figured he was talking about the Top 25 voters as if they were a committee.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CollegeGolf18 on November 28, 2019, 11:04:03 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 28, 2019, 09:43:42 PM
I figured he was talking about the Top 25 voters as if they were a committee.

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 28, 2019, 09:34:33 PM
Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on November 28, 2019, 09:30:18 PM
Now how does the committee treat Wooster? Just lost to a Mount Union coming off two losses to Adrian (picked at the bottom of the MIAA) and Trine.
Let's at least wait until the Stagg Bowl before we start in on basketball committees. The first regional rankings won't be for a couple months.

HAHAHA. Yeah, I'm not sure why I wrote committee. I meant voters...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 28, 2019, 11:24:11 PM

Wooster has such good (historical) credentials that they may fall only into the 20's rather than totally out, but not a good loss (despite UMU's preseason accolades - their long-term credentials are not good enough to withstand the MIAA losses).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 29, 2019, 08:43:23 AM

Quote from: CollegeGolf18 on November 28, 2019, 09:30:18 PM
Now how does the committee treat Wooster? Just lost to a Mount Union coming off two losses to Adrian (picked at the bottom of the MIAA) and Trine.

Wooster will probably be out of my top 25. I had them in based on preseason assumptions, but once we get some real results to analyze I try my best to lean on those more that what I thought at the preseason ballot.

If Mount Union came in undefeated, I'd look at that result differently. But as you point out, Mount lost to Adrian and Trine. And the game was played at Wooster.

Massey has Mount Union #43, Wooster #44, North Central #45. Not that Massey has enough data to be great yet, but for now I generally agree these 3 teams are probably not top 25 right now. I do expect all 3 to contend for their league titles and be back in my top 25 eventually.

I guess it will just depend on what happens in other games between now and the next vote.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 29, 2019, 11:00:13 AM

I watched a lot of the Wooster-UMU game. I didn't see two super good teams there. Very good, for sure, but UMU was clearly better. It'll be quite the decision down towards the bottom of the poll this week. A lot of teams we just don't know much about yet - including those two!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 30, 2019, 10:46:43 PM

Elmhurst 83
#23-Wabash 66

https://elmhurstbluejays.com/boxscore.aspx?path=mbball&id=4824

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 01, 2019, 09:08:59 AM

Big Central Region matchup today - #17-Augustana vs #15-Wash U.

A few thoughts on this one from the CCIW board - http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4592.msg1963635#msg1963635.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 01, 2019, 09:33:31 AM

Still too early for Massey to have enough data, but 5 CCIW teams in the top 25 right now...

#2 Elmhurst
#4 Augustana
#18 Illinois Wesleyan
#20 Wheaton
#24 Carthage

https://www.masseyratings.com/cb2020/ncaa-d3/ratings

And this does not include preseason CCIW favorite North Central (Massey #33, D3hoops.com #9).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 01, 2019, 09:58:56 AM

Per Massey, here are the two worst strength of schedules of the current D3hoops.com Top 25 teams:

* #3 Amherst (Massey SOS #341)
* #5 Middlebury (Massey SOS #299)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 01, 2019, 11:28:34 AM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=1uri5/rwsnq1kvzzi88s9y.jpg)

Every off-season has it's headlines and surprising news. This past off-season seemed to have a few extra more surprising results. While we are nearly a month into the new season, decisions in the off-season are continuing to make waves throughout Division III.

On Sunday's Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave chats with a couple of coaches whose programs are dealing with some of the decisions made. Scranton women's basketball may have surprised some by hiring a coach from Division I - bucking a trend of hiring those who know the Royals program (to some degree). And St. Thomas men's basketball is trying to stay focused on the job at hand - this season - while moves have already been made to not only push the Tommies out of the MIAC, but possibly move them out of DIII altogether.

Plus, the Top 25s once again continue to be ... unsettled. We take a look at another turbulent week for ranked teams. Bob Quillman joins Dave for the Top 25 Double-Take.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Sunday's show LIVE starting at 7:00 PM ET here: www.d3hoopsville.com, www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville, or https://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2019-20/dec1 (http://bit.ly/2qaEXlB (http://bit.ly/2qaEXlB)). You can also watch on (and interact) on the Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/Hoopsville) and YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville) simulcasts.

You can also watch Hoopsville on our OTT app found on Amazon Fire, Android TV, Apple TV, and Roku. Just look for the Team1 Sports app (https://team1sports.com/) and you will either see it under the "live" section or search for Hoopsville.

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or use any of the social media options.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Nick DiPillo, No. 3 Scranton women's head coach
- John Taurer, No. 7 St. Thomas men's head coach
- Bob Quillman, Top 25 Double-Take

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

We also have the podcast now on iHeartRadio, Tune-In and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 01, 2019, 12:54:40 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 01, 2019, 09:33:31 AM
Still too early for Massey to have enough data, but 5 CCIW teams in the top 25 right now...

#2 Elmhurst
#4 Augustana
#18 Illinois Wesleyan
#20 Wheaton
#24 Carthage

https://www.masseyratings.com/cb2020/ncaa-d3/ratings

And this does not include preseason CCIW favorite North Central (Massey #33, D3hoops.com #9).

What's the minimum games before massey is no longer too early. Most D3's hit 6 games this weekend, or just under 25% of their season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on December 01, 2019, 02:40:56 PM

Quote from: sac on December 01, 2019, 12:54:40 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 01, 2019, 09:33:31 AM
Still too early for Massey to have enough data, but 5 CCIW teams in the top 25 right now...

#2 Elmhurst
#4 Augustana
#18 Illinois Wesleyan
#20 Wheaton
#24 Carthage

https://www.masseyratings.com/cb2020/ncaa-d3/ratings

And this does not include preseason CCIW favorite North Central (Massey #33, D3hoops.com #9).

What's the minimum games before massey is no longer too early. Most D3's hit 6 games this weekend, or just under 25% of their season.

I usually start looking at Massey once we get halfway through December. 10 games or so.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 01, 2019, 02:50:17 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 01, 2019, 09:08:59 AM
Big Central Region matchup today - #17-Augustana vs #15-Wash U.

A few thoughts on this one from the CCIW board - http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4592.msg1963635#msg1963635.

Wash U 73
Augustana 70

Based on my non-conference CCIW watching so far, I like Elmhurst and Carthage as the best two, followed very closely by a 3-way tie involving Illinois Wesleyan, North Central, and Augustana.

Honestly, I am real close to saying all 5 of these teams are dead even.

And I'd put Wash U right in this tie as well. It is a crazy season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 01, 2019, 06:01:06 PM

Final from Christopher Newport:

UW-Stevens Point 61
#11-Christopher Newport 58

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: frodotwo on December 01, 2019, 06:19:11 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 01, 2019, 06:01:06 PM
Final from Christopher Newport:

UW-Stevens Point 61
#11-Christopher Newport 58

Pointers sweep in Virginia by beating CNU 61-58. Led wire to wire and move to 5-0 on the season. Ethan Bublitz was 22-22 from the line during the weekend, now at 96% for the year. They may earn a couple of votes in the poll this week :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 01, 2019, 06:20:05 PM

How They Fared (~~Nearly~~ Complete)
~~One result to be edited in later.~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	623	Swarthmore	6-0	def. Washington College, 68-56; def. Arcadia, 89-72
#2	567	Emory	7-0	def. Covenant, 67-62; def. Pfeiffer, 124-112; won at Maryville (Tenn.), 95-82
#3	550	Amherst	3-1	LOST at Westfield State, 67-68
#4	531	Wittenberg	3-0	won at Oberlin, 66-56
#5	479	Middlebury	7-0	won at NVU-Johnson, 87-77; won at Endicott, 98-78
#6	418	Nichols	5-0	won at Trinity (Conn.), 66-58
#7	387	St. Thomas	5-1	def. Carleton, 74-60
#8	379	Nebraska Wesleyan	7-1	def. University of the Ozarks, 95-70; def. Willamette, 101-84
#9	354	North Central (Ill.)	4-2	def. Rose-Hulman, 77-54; LOST to Benedictine, 49-56; def. (n) Olivet, 93-53; won at Kalamazoo, 75-60
#10	334	Marietta	4-0	won at Baldwin Wallace, 86-76
#11	311	Christopher Newport	6-2	def. #34 Texas-Dallas, 90-62; LOST to UW-Stevens Point, 58-61
#12	303	Randolph-Macon	7-0	won at Randolph, 81-48
#13	301	UW-Oshkosh	4-2	def. Edgewood, 99-80; def. Lawrence, 92-66
#14	273	St. John's	4-1	won at St. Mary's (Minn.), 77-63
#15	258	Washington U.	6-1	def. Webster, 80-58; def. #17 Augustana, 73-70
#16	240	Wooster	3-1	LOST to Mount Union, 67-81
#17	187	Augustana	4-2	def. UW-Whitewater, 86-69; LOST at #15 Washington U., 70-73
#18	173	UW-Platteville	6-0	won at Illinois Tech, 70-35; won at Cardinal Stritch, 74-67
#19	154	Guilford	7-1	def. Methodist, 62-60; won at Eastern Mennonite, 71-52
#20	146	Augsburg	3-1	LOST at #45 UW-La Crosse, 71-79; def. UW-River Falls, 79-76
#21	145	Whitman	5-2	def. (n) JWU-Denver, 102-62; LOST at Colorado College, 92-95
#22	134	Johns Hopkins	6-0	won at McDaniel, 82-62; def. Moravian, 92-62
#23	133	Wabash	4-2	def. Mount St. Joseph, 84-72; LOST at #26 Elmhurst, 66-83
#24	113	Whitworth	5-1	IDLE
#25	105	WPI	7-1	won at Worcester State, 68-47; def. Fitchburg State, 89-74

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	87	Elmhurst	5-0	won at Lake Forest, 93-91; def. #23 Wabash, 83-66
#27	84	Carthage	5-0	IDLE
#28	60	Oswego	4-0	won at Nazareth, 77-73
#29	54	Hamilton	6-0	won at Caltech, 94-82; won at Cal Lutheran, 97-68
#30	40	Centre	6-1	won at Franklin, 74-72; won at Spalding, 78-63
#31	34	Springfield	5-0	IDLE
#32	33	Rochester	7-1	LOST at Hobart, 53-57; def. Keuka, 80-46; def. Utica, 69-58
#33	27	Babson	6-0	won at Bowdoin, 76-66
#34	26	Texas-Dallas	3-2	LOST at #11 Christopher Newport, 62-90; def. (n) Wilmington, 83-55
#35	14	New Jersey City	3-2	def. Kean, 84-55; LOST to #40 Colby, 67-81
#36	11	Wheaton (Ill.)	4-2	won at Chicago, 86-80; LOST at Ripon, 66-68 OT
#37	10	TCNJ	2-3	LOST to Stockton, 77-79
T#38	9	Tufts	5-0	def. MIT, 73-63
T#38	9	UW-Eau Claire	7-1	def. Wartburg, 79-70; won at Pacific Lutheran, 67-56; won at Puget Sound, 85-81 OT
#40	8	Colby	7-0	won at #35 New Jersey City, 81-67; won at Kean, 106-102
#41	7	St. John Fisher	4-2	won at Buffalo State, 89-83
T#42	5	Williams	4-2	won at Massachusetts College, 87-57; LOST at Albertus Magnus, 63-76
T#42	5	Yeshiva	6-1	def. SUNY-Old Westbury, 94-79
#44	3	Pomona-Pitzer	3-2	def. Pacific, 117-95; def. (n) Lewis and Clark, 92-72
#45	1	UW-La Crosse	6-0	def. #20 Augsburg, 79-71; def. Wartburg, 74-65

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on December 01, 2019, 10:25:55 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 01, 2019, 09:58:56 AM
Per Massey, here are the two worst strength of schedules of the current D3hoops.com Top 25 teams:

* #3 Amherst (Massey SOS #341)
* #5 Middlebury (Massey SOS #299)

Good to see the NESCAC bashing has started early this year. Amherst is notorious for scheduling creampuffs out of conference and Middlebury's schedule this year is just downright down for whatever reason. Amherst does have Babson, Springfield, and Whitewater before conference play gets rolling however.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 01, 2019, 11:02:21 PM

Is it bashing if it's true?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 01, 2019, 11:10:57 PM

The WIAC should get 5 teams with votes this week. Oshkosh, Platteville are already ranked. Eau Claire had 9 votes and went 3-0. La Crosse got a vote, but knocked off #20 Augsburg this week and Point could jump into the ORV category with their win over #11 CNU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 02, 2019, 08:27:50 AM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on December 01, 2019, 10:25:55 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 01, 2019, 09:58:56 AM
Per Massey, here are the two worst strength of schedules of the current D3hoops.com Top 25 teams:

* #3 Amherst (Massey SOS #341)
* #5 Middlebury (Massey SOS #299)

Good to see the NESCAC bashing has started early this year. Amherst is notorious for scheduling creampuffs out of conference and Middlebury's schedule this year is just downright down for whatever reason. Amherst does have Babson, Springfield, and Whitewater before conference play gets rolling however.

I was made aware of an angle I hadn't thought of the other night at Swarthmore. I was talking to one of the Swat parents and they mentioned how important it was for them that part of Landry's recruiting pitch was that the team would be back on campus by midnight unless they were on break. That focus on academics might be a bit of a straw man sometimes, but it definitely affects scheduling. If these "elite" schools are committed to keeping travel times low, there's only so many teams you can schedule. Middlebury sure traveled last season (including trips to Philly on consecutive weekends). It should definitely be taken into account, but I don't know that NESCAC schools are intentionally dodging anyone.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 02, 2019, 09:07:27 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 02, 2019, 08:27:50 AM
Quote from: SpringSt7 on December 01, 2019, 10:25:55 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 01, 2019, 09:58:56 AM
Per Massey, here are the two worst strength of schedules of the current D3hoops.com Top 25 teams:

* #3 Amherst (Massey SOS #341)
* #5 Middlebury (Massey SOS #299)

Good to see the NESCAC bashing has started early this year. Amherst is notorious for scheduling creampuffs out of conference and Middlebury's schedule this year is just downright down for whatever reason. Amherst does have Babson, Springfield, and Whitewater before conference play gets rolling however.

I was made aware of an angle I hadn't thought of the other night at Swarthmore. I was talking to one of the Swat parents and they mentioned how important it was for them that part of Landry's recruiting pitch was that the team would be back on campus by midnight unless they were on break. That focus on academics might be a bit of a straw man sometimes, but it definitely affects scheduling. If these "elite" schools are committed to keeping travel times low, there's only so many teams you can schedule. Middlebury sure traveled last season (including trips to Philly on consecutive weekends). It should definitely be taken into account, but I don't know that NESCAC schools are intentionally dodging anyone.

I don't know anything behind the "why" of the Amherst and Middlebury scheduling.

I just think strength of schedule has to be taken into account when voting for and considering the Top 25 poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 02, 2019, 09:41:18 AM

Working on my ballot now. I have a pretty solid Top 10 that I'm happy with - then I have 29 teams for the next 15 spots and I could justify any of those 29 in any of the 15 spots. I'm not even sure how to do this.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 02, 2019, 10:01:18 AM

From the northeast, there seems to be a legit group of eight potential top 25 teams that are very closely grouped together right now. I don't think WPI belongs, and Midd, Nichols and Amherst all seem ranked a bit high (of course Amherst will fall after the Westfield loss). Conversely, Babson, Springfield, Hamilton, Tufts, and Colby are all too low, especially when you compare some of their schedules to the teams ranked well above of them. It feels like those eight teams all belong in the 15-30 range (with Midd at the front of the pack, but not by a huge margin), and I think any of them could knock off any of the others on any given day. They start all playing each other over the coming weeks, so a clearer picture should begin to emerge of who is for real and who has fattened up on mostly-weak competition ... after that eight, then WPI I'd say ninth, there seems to be a drop-off to the next tier.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 02, 2019, 10:06:23 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on December 02, 2019, 10:01:18 AM
From the northeast, there seems to be a legit group of eight potential top 25 teams that are very closely grouped together right now. I don't think WPI belongs, and Midd, Nichols and Amherst all seem ranked a bit high (of course Amherst will fall after the Westfield loss). Conversely, Babson, Springfield, Hamilton, Tufts, and Colby are all too low, especially when you compare some of their schedules to the teams ranked well above of them. It feels like those eight teams all belong in the 15-30 range (with Midd at the front of the pack, but not by a huge margin), and I think any of them could knock off any of the others on any given day. They start all playing each other over the coming weeks, so a clearer picture should begin to emerge of who is for real and who has fattened up on mostly-weak competition ... after that eight, then WPI I'd say ninth, there seems to be a drop-off to the next tier.

I submitted a ballot that included Nichols, Midd, Hamilton, Colby, and Babson from the NE. I know Amherst is pretty good, but based on results thus far, it's tough to justify a vote. I have not voted for WPI at all this year. I've got Tufts and Springfield just off (along with Amherst).

With no word on when or if Jerome Cunningham will be back, I've started dropping Nichols. They're still a very good team, but without a lot of depth, losing a starter is a big deal.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 02, 2019, 10:34:08 AM

I think I'd include Amherst, just because of their talent level, but it's certainly a defensible omission in light of so many undefeated teams from the region. Otherwise, I think I'd have exactly the same teams on, and just off, from New England at this point. Colby looks really good. Hamilton's frosh class seems to be loaded with talent. I'm pretty high on Tufts, but they are down a starting guard, I'm guessing for the season just based on how the injury looked, which could limit their upside a bit.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 02, 2019, 11:39:58 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 02, 2019, 08:27:50 AM
Quote from: SpringSt7 on December 01, 2019, 10:25:55 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 01, 2019, 09:58:56 AM
Per Massey, here are the two worst strength of schedules of the current D3hoops.com Top 25 teams:

* #3 Amherst (Massey SOS #341)
* #5 Middlebury (Massey SOS #299)

Good to see the NESCAC bashing has started early this year. Amherst is notorious for scheduling creampuffs out of conference and Middlebury's schedule this year is just downright down for whatever reason. Amherst does have Babson, Springfield, and Whitewater before conference play gets rolling however.

I was made aware of an angle I hadn't thought of the other night at Swarthmore. I was talking to one of the Swat parents and they mentioned how important it was for them that part of Landry's recruiting pitch was that the team would be back on campus by midnight unless they were on break. That focus on academics might be a bit of a straw man sometimes, but it definitely affects scheduling. If these "elite" schools are committed to keeping travel times low, there's only so many teams you can schedule.

That's a legit excuse for Middlebury, located as it is in the underpopulated extreme northwest corner of New England and well apart from any cluster of D3 schools. But it doesn't work for Amherst, located as it is in the most D3-saturated state in the Union (https://twitter.com/D3_soccer/status/983115208829751296/photo/1). You can't throw a rock in Massachusetts without breaking a window on a D3 campus somewhere.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 02, 2019, 11:45:23 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 02, 2019, 11:39:58 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 02, 2019, 08:27:50 AM
Quote from: SpringSt7 on December 01, 2019, 10:25:55 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 01, 2019, 09:58:56 AM
Per Massey, here are the two worst strength of schedules of the current D3hoops.com Top 25 teams:

* #3 Amherst (Massey SOS #341)
* #5 Middlebury (Massey SOS #299)

Good to see the NESCAC bashing has started early this year. Amherst is notorious for scheduling creampuffs out of conference and Middlebury's schedule this year is just downright down for whatever reason. Amherst does have Babson, Springfield, and Whitewater before conference play gets rolling however.

I was made aware of an angle I hadn't thought of the other night at Swarthmore. I was talking to one of the Swat parents and they mentioned how important it was for them that part of Landry's recruiting pitch was that the team would be back on campus by midnight unless they were on break. That focus on academics might be a bit of a straw man sometimes, but it definitely affects scheduling. If these "elite" schools are committed to keeping travel times low, there's only so many teams you can schedule.

That's a legit excuse for Middlebury, located as it is in the underpopulated extreme northwest corner of New England and well apart from any cluster of D3 schools. But it doesn't work for Amherst, located as it is in the most D3-saturated state in the Union (https://twitter.com/D3_soccer/status/983115208829751296/photo/1). You can't throw a rock in Massachusetts without breaking a window on a D3 campus somewhere.

Yeah, but how many of those MA schools would satisfy the national audience as "of significance?" I do think they should get a little slack for Nov scheduling since they start practice so much later than everyone else. I won't defend the overall weakness compared to what some of the MW teams have done of late, but they bring in Babson and ECSU - there are only so many of those kinds of opponents to go around, though. I think the criticism is warranted, but maybe not on the level it's often delivered.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Colby Hoops on December 02, 2019, 11:49:13 AM

In Amherst's defense, weak out of conference schedules haven't hurt them in the past. They've always been ready to play come the big games at the end of the year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 02, 2019, 11:58:12 AM

Ryan makes a good point in that NESCAC coaches are loathe to schedule really tough teams in the first few weeks because doing so when those teams have had, at least in the first week or so of the season, TWICE as much practice, would put the NESCAC schools at a huge competitive disadvantage (particular schools in transition years with lots of new / young players). I think back to the 2014 Williams team which game within four seconds of a national title, and its sloppy loss to Southern Vermont on the first week of the season .... and believe me, the NESCAC hoops coaches are not to blame for the underlying NESCAC policy, which I'm sure none of them are fans of.

It also goes two ways ... a lot of quality programs in New England - or elsewhere! - are not necessarily eager to play a bunch of top-tier NESCAC teams in out-of-league play. At least Amherst, unlike Midd, gets the second Williams / Wesleyan games. This year, Amherst's out-of-league schedule is unusually weak because Eastern Conn, Wesleyan, and Williams all appear, at least at this point, to be significantly down from last year due to personnel losses, expected and unexpected (injury, transfer, graduation). Those are three games which are almost always really good match-ups. Even Whitewater, which would usually be a significant game, seems down relative to its typical level.

All of that being said, Amherst playing Baruch, Lesley, and Pine Manor later in the non-league schedule, after the usual early-season creampuffs, is pretty bad, especially for a veteran team that I'm sure views itself as a title contender. It's entirely fair to ding them a bit for those types of non-league games, as opposed to playing games against SLIGHTLY more competitive opponents, which certainly abound in MA and CT. In all events, Colby Hoops makes a good point ... it may not be fun from a competitive standpoint during the season, but Hixon's post-season results speak for themselves.

Middlebury, I agree, has a bitch of a time scheduling. No extra Little 3 games, and just no one of consequence for them to play remotely close to central Vermont, and a lot of teams are not eager to make that trip, especially in the winter months.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 02, 2019, 12:17:46 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on December 02, 2019, 11:58:12 AM
Ryan makes a good point in that NESCAC coaches are loathe to schedule really tough teams in the first few weeks because doing so when those teams have had, at least in the first week or so of the season, TWICE as much practice, would put the NESCAC schools at a huge competitive disadvantage (particular schools in transition years with lots of new / young players). I think back to the 2014 Williams team which game within four seconds of a national title, and its sloppy loss to Southern Vermont on the first week of the season .... and believe me, the NESCAC hoops coaches are not to blame for the underlying NESCAC policy, which I'm sure none of them are fans of.

It also goes two ways ... a lot of quality programs in New England - or elsewhere! - are not necessarily eager to play a bunch of top-tier NESCAC teams in out-of-league play. At least Amherst, unlike Midd, gets the second Williams / Wesleyan games. This year, Amherst's out-of-league schedule is unusually weak because Eastern Conn, Wesleyan, and Williams all appear, at least at this point, to be significantly down from last year due to personnel losses, expected and unexpected (injury, transfer, graduation). Those are three games which are almost always really good match-ups. Even Whitewater, which would usually be a significant game, seems down relative to its typical level.

All of that being said, Amherst playing Baruch, Lesley, and Pine Manor later in the non-league schedule, after the usual early-season creampuffs, is pretty bad, especially for a veteran team that I'm sure views itself as a title contender. It's entirely fair to ding them a bit for those types of non-league games, as opposed to playing games against SLIGHTLY more competitive opponents, which certainly abound in MA and CT. In all events, Colby Hoops makes a good point ... it may not be fun from a competitive standpoint during the season, but Hixon's post-season results speak for themselves.

Middlebury, I agree, has a bitch of a time scheduling. No extra Little 3 games, and just no one of consequence for them to play remotely close to central Vermont, and a lot of teams are not eager to make that trip, especially in the winter months.

Middlebury is a beautiful town, though, if any coaches are lurking here. I'd highly recommend a trip if you can swing it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 02, 2019, 12:21:19 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 02, 2019, 11:45:23 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 02, 2019, 11:39:58 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 02, 2019, 08:27:50 AM
Quote from: SpringSt7 on December 01, 2019, 10:25:55 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 01, 2019, 09:58:56 AM
Per Massey, here are the two worst strength of schedules of the current D3hoops.com Top 25 teams:

* #3 Amherst (Massey SOS #341)
* #5 Middlebury (Massey SOS #299)

Good to see the NESCAC bashing has started early this year. Amherst is notorious for scheduling creampuffs out of conference and Middlebury's schedule this year is just downright down for whatever reason. Amherst does have Babson, Springfield, and Whitewater before conference play gets rolling however.

I was made aware of an angle I hadn't thought of the other night at Swarthmore. I was talking to one of the Swat parents and they mentioned how important it was for them that part of Landry's recruiting pitch was that the team would be back on campus by midnight unless they were on break. That focus on academics might be a bit of a straw man sometimes, but it definitely affects scheduling. If these "elite" schools are committed to keeping travel times low, there's only so many teams you can schedule.

That's a legit excuse for Middlebury, located as it is in the underpopulated extreme northwest corner of New England and well apart from any cluster of D3 schools. But it doesn't work for Amherst, located as it is in the most D3-saturated state in the Union (https://twitter.com/D3_soccer/status/983115208829751296/photo/1). You can't throw a rock in Massachusetts without breaking a window on a D3 campus somewhere.

Yeah, but how many of those MA schools would satisfy the national audience as "of significance?" I do think they should get a little slack for Nov scheduling since they start practice so much later than everyone else. I won't defend the overall weakness compared to what some of the MW teams have done of late, but they bring in Babson and ECSU - there are only so many of those kinds of opponents to go around, though. I think the criticism is warranted, but maybe not on the level it's often delivered.

I agree that the late start of practice for NESCAC schools is a mitigating factor for pre-Thanksgiving games, and it's obvious that creampuff non-con schedules haven't held back Amherst's success over the years the way that they have (to pick the obvious example) NYU. But "only so many of those kinds of opponents to go around" just doesn't seem to wash when there's such a cornucopia of opponents from which to choose if you're located in the Bay State.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 02, 2019, 12:35:17 PM

I feel like I have to come to the defense of my UAA breathen...

Unfortunately, there is no way to run the counterfactual on the old adage about playing a tough non-conference schedule in order to better prepare for conference play.

I would argue that NYU has mostly performed at the level of their personnel.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 02, 2019, 12:48:19 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 02, 2019, 12:21:19 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 02, 2019, 11:45:23 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 02, 2019, 11:39:58 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 02, 2019, 08:27:50 AM
Quote from: SpringSt7 on December 01, 2019, 10:25:55 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 01, 2019, 09:58:56 AM
Per Massey, here are the two worst strength of schedules of the current D3hoops.com Top 25 teams:

* #3 Amherst (Massey SOS #341)
* #5 Middlebury (Massey SOS #299)

Good to see the NESCAC bashing has started early this year. Amherst is notorious for scheduling creampuffs out of conference and Middlebury's schedule this year is just downright down for whatever reason. Amherst does have Babson, Springfield, and Whitewater before conference play gets rolling however.

I was made aware of an angle I hadn't thought of the other night at Swarthmore. I was talking to one of the Swat parents and they mentioned how important it was for them that part of Landry's recruiting pitch was that the team would be back on campus by midnight unless they were on break. That focus on academics might be a bit of a straw man sometimes, but it definitely affects scheduling. If these "elite" schools are committed to keeping travel times low, there's only so many teams you can schedule.

That's a legit excuse for Middlebury, located as it is in the underpopulated extreme northwest corner of New England and well apart from any cluster of D3 schools. But it doesn't work for Amherst, located as it is in the most D3-saturated state in the Union (https://twitter.com/D3_soccer/status/983115208829751296/photo/1). You can't throw a rock in Massachusetts without breaking a window on a D3 campus somewhere.

Yeah, but how many of those MA schools would satisfy the national audience as "of significance?" I do think they should get a little slack for Nov scheduling since they start practice so much later than everyone else. I won't defend the overall weakness compared to what some of the MW teams have done of late, but they bring in Babson and ECSU - there are only so many of those kinds of opponents to go around, though. I think the criticism is warranted, but maybe not on the level it's often delivered.

I agree that the late start of practice for NESCAC schools is a mitigating factor for pre-Thanksgiving games, and it's obvious that creampuff non-con schedules haven't held back Amherst's success over the years the way that they have (to pick the obvious example) NYU. But "only so many of those kinds of opponents to go around" just doesn't seem to wash when there's such a cornucopia of opponents from which to choose if you're located in the Bay State.

I just mean you've got Babson, WPI, Springfield, ECSU, Nichols, Endicott, maybe Salem State and Anna Maria. Outside the NESCAC there aren't a ton of schools with national recognition and those schools often have a lot of teams asking to play them for that reason. It's not like Amherst can just pencil them all in every year, even if they wanted to. That was my point. You've got 100 schools all wanting to get the same 20 or so "big name" schools on the schedule.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 02, 2019, 01:33:03 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 02, 2019, 12:48:19 PM
I just mean you've got Babson, WPI, Springfield, ECSU, Nichols, Endicott, maybe Salem State and Anna Maria. Outside the NESCAC there aren't a ton of schools with national recognition and those schools often have a lot of teams asking to play them for that reason. It's not like Amherst can just pencil them all in every year, even if they wanted to. That was my point. You've got 100 schools all wanting to get the same 20 or so "big name" schools on the schedule.

We may be arguing at cross-purposes here. You're talking about "national recognition", i.e., so-called "big-name schools" within D3 men's basketball. I'm referring back to Bob's original point, which was about Massey SOS ratings. New England offers so many schools, and so many conferences, that I think it's well within reach for Amherst to construct a schedule that looks better from an SOS point of view than 341st out of 426 schools, even in early December.

Quote from: WUPHF on December 02, 2019, 12:35:17 PM
I feel like I have to come to the defense of my UAA breathen...

Unfortunately, there is no way to run the counterfactual on the old adage about playing a tough non-conference schedule in order to better prepare for conference play.

I would argue that NYU has mostly performed at the level of their personnel.

That may very well be. But, unlike other UAA schools, NYU has been notorious over the years for lining up tomato cans and knocking 'em down in November and December, thus coming into UAA play with either the league's gaudiest record or close to it ... at which point the Violets start taking their lumps at the hands of their league peers. And that false picture presented by the late-December, early-January record that the Violets have typically produced has led to a lot of hemming and hawing over the years from national D3 observers as to whether or not that particular season was the season that NYU would turn out to be for real. Few things in life have ever been as entertaining as watching Dave McHugh publicly agonize over whether or not to put NYU on one of his ballots prior to mid-season. :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 02, 2019, 01:36:47 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 02, 2019, 01:33:03 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 02, 2019, 12:48:19 PM
I just mean you've got Babson, WPI, Springfield, ECSU, Nichols, Endicott, maybe Salem State and Anna Maria. Outside the NESCAC there aren't a ton of schools with national recognition and those schools often have a lot of teams asking to play them for that reason. It's not like Amherst can just pencil them all in every year, even if they wanted to. That was my point. You've got 100 schools all wanting to get the same 20 or so "big name" schools on the schedule.

I guess we could ask Hixon and find out how easy it is to schedule some of those better squads. I don't think there are a ton of teams from NE excited to play Amherst. The whole "why kill the confidence of my team, which could compete in conference, by getting smashed by a NESCAC school in November" thing. That's less prevalent now than it was, say, a decade ago, but I think it's still a thing in New England, for sure.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 02, 2019, 02:02:39 PM

Why is this only a problem for Amherst, then?

team	Massey SOS rank
Tufts	156
Wesleyan	202
Trinity CT	225
Williams	228
Amherst	352

Ken's numbers just updated, and the Mammoths dropped another 11 spots in the SOS column.

Granted, none of these SOS rankings are anything to write home about; aside from Tufts, the other good NESCAC programs in lower New England are middle of the pack within D3 in terms of SOS. But the Mammoths are an extreme outlier in terms of the weakness of their schedule to date as compared to their peers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 02, 2019, 02:08:49 PM

Amherst has only played 4 games, 2 of their opponents are ranked 409 and 381 by massey. Their next 3 games are against teams Massey has in the top 100 #'s 25, 84, 53.

Sometimes its just the order you play them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 02, 2019, 02:15:37 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 02, 2019, 02:02:39 PM
Why is this only a problem for Amherst, then?

team Massey SOS rank
Tufts 156
Wesleyan 202
Trinity CT 225
Williams 228
Amherst 352

Ken's numbers just updated, and the Mammoths dropped another 11 spots in the SOS column.

Granted, none of these SOS rankings are anything to write home about; aside from Tufts, the other good NESCAC programs in lower New England are middle of the pack within D3 in terms of SOS. But the Mammoths are an extreme outlier in terms of the weakness of their schedule to date as compared to their peers.

Amherst always plays a weak first weekend. No way around it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on December 02, 2019, 02:19:16 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 02, 2019, 12:48:19 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 02, 2019, 12:21:19 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 02, 2019, 11:45:23 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 02, 2019, 11:39:58 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 02, 2019, 08:27:50 AM
Quote from: SpringSt7 on December 01, 2019, 10:25:55 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 01, 2019, 09:58:56 AM
Per Massey, here are the two worst strength of schedules of the current D3hoops.com Top 25 teams:

* #3 Amherst (Massey SOS #341)
* #5 Middlebury (Massey SOS #299)

Good to see the NESCAC bashing has started early this year. Amherst is notorious for scheduling creampuffs out of conference and Middlebury's schedule this year is just downright down for whatever reason. Amherst does have Babson, Springfield, and Whitewater before conference play gets rolling however.

I was made aware of an angle I hadn't thought of the other night at Swarthmore. I was talking to one of the Swat parents and they mentioned how important it was for them that part of Landry's recruiting pitch was that the team would be back on campus by midnight unless they were on break. That focus on academics might be a bit of a straw man sometimes, but it definitely affects scheduling. If these "elite" schools are committed to keeping travel times low, there's only so many teams you can schedule.

That's a legit excuse for Middlebury, located as it is in the underpopulated extreme northwest corner of New England and well apart from any cluster of D3 schools. But it doesn't work for Amherst, located as it is in the most D3-saturated state in the Union (https://twitter.com/D3_soccer/status/983115208829751296/photo/1). You can't throw a rock in Massachusetts without breaking a window on a D3 campus somewhere.

Yeah, but how many of those MA schools would satisfy the national audience as "of significance?" I do think they should get a little slack for Nov scheduling since they start practice so much later than everyone else. I won't defend the overall weakness compared to what some of the MW teams have done of late, but they bring in Babson and ECSU - there are only so many of those kinds of opponents to go around, though. I think the criticism is warranted, but maybe not on the level it's often delivered.

I agree that the late start of practice for NESCAC schools is a mitigating factor for pre-Thanksgiving games, and it's obvious that creampuff non-con schedules haven't held back Amherst's success over the years the way that they have (to pick the obvious example) NYU. But "only so many of those kinds of opponents to go around" just doesn't seem to wash when there's such a cornucopia of opponents from which to choose if you're located in the Bay State.

I just mean you've got Babson, WPI, Springfield, ECSU, Nichols, Endicott, maybe Salem State and Anna Maria. Outside the NESCAC there aren't a ton of schools with national recognition and those schools often have a lot of teams asking to play them for that reason. It's not like Amherst can just pencil them all in every year, even if they wanted to. That was my point. You've got 100 schools all wanting to get the same 20 or so "big name" schools on the schedule.

MIT, Keene St., Albertus Magnus, even New England College if you really wanted to, would all be upgrades from who they have now. There is an NCAA tournament team in every conference. But yes, we obviously have no clue what the scheduling entails.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Colby Hoops on December 02, 2019, 03:15:28 PM

Maybe we're looking at this all wrong... Amherst needs to make their schedule easier. Can't lose to Westfield State if you play MCLA instead! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on December 02, 2019, 05:35:34 PM

Quote from: Colby Hoops on December 02, 2019, 03:15:28 PM
Maybe we're looking at this all wrong... Amherst needs to make their schedule easier. Can't lose to Westfield State if you play MCLA instead! ;)

This response seems like a fitting end to the scheduling discussion! ;) ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Canvas Hightops on December 02, 2019, 06:51:57 PM

Has there been a year without this discussion?
Trash Amherst now if you choose. You don't want to see 'em in March.
The two teams I root for gotta play them. I scratch them up as losses.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 02, 2019, 07:12:59 PM

Has there been a year without [insert topic of discussion here] describes 90% of our conversations... :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 02, 2019, 07:38:39 PM

(https://rampages.us/fakefront/wp-content/uploads/sites/15826/2016/02/pointingup.gif)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on December 02, 2019, 07:55:00 PM

I actually think it leads (or could lead to) an interesting discussion about the strategy behind non-conference scheduling and how to best prepare for conference games. Sticking with Amherst, for example, in what was supposed to be a down year, the best non conference game they played before Christmas was a not very good Babson team, who they lost to. They nevertheless came into their first game against 15-0 #2 Williams with one loss and beat them in the final seconds, which kicked off a run that led them to win the NESCAC a Sweet 16 appearance, a year before they were supposed to be contenders again on the national level.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiko on December 03, 2019, 12:45:35 AM

I can't really get worked up about someone's SOS when we are one-fifth of the way through the season. Their SOS will drift toward a more typical level over the next couple of months, and the ~~Lord Jeffs~~ Mammoths won't be anywhere close to #341 when the rankings really start to matter.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 03, 2019, 02:38:11 PM

Quote from: kiko on December 03, 2019, 12:45:35 AM
I can't really get worked up about someone's SOS when we are one-fifth of the way through the season. Their SOS will drift toward a more typical level over the next couple of months, and the ~~Lord Jeffs~~ Mammoths won't be anywhere close to #341 when the rankings really start to matter.

That is why we are only talking about it here on the Top 25 board as it applies to Top 25 consideration in early-December.

It's not a regional ranking/primary criteria kinda convo.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: kiko on December 04, 2019, 12:45:01 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 03, 2019, 02:38:11 PM
Quote from: kiko on December 03, 2019, 12:45:35 AM
I can't really get worked up about someone's SOS when we are one-fifth of the way through the season. Their SOS will drift toward a more typical level over the next couple of months, and the ~~Lord Jeffs~~ Mammoths won't be anywhere close to #341 when the rankings really start to matter.

That is why we are only talking about it here on the Top 25 board as it applies to Top 25 consideration in early-December.

It's not a regional ranking/primary criteria kinda convo.

I get that, but the same logic applies. If I think Amherst slots into a particular spot in the rankings, that perception is not likely to evolve much assuming they take care of business against a couple of Red Velvet cupcakes. I just don't think I have new data points that would tell me I should think they are better or worse than I thought (assuming they beat their weaker opponents by comfortable margins, which we know Amherst did not do in recent games). My perception will eventually evolve based on their results against quality opponents as the season progresses, but the absence of those games early doesn't really make me think more or less of a school's relative position in the pecking order.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 05, 2019, 06:42:35 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	622	Swarthmore	7-0	won at Ursinus, 88-86; 12/07 vs. Gettysburg
#2	586	Emory	8-0	won at LaGrange, 98-89; 12/07 vs. Piedmont
#3	540	Wittenberg	4-0	won at DePauw, 88-63; 12/07 vs. Allegheny
#4	522	Middlebury	7-0	12/06 vs. New England College; 12/08 at Stevens
#5	466	St. Thomas	6-1	def. Macalester, 64-35; 12/07 vs. Gustavus Adolphus
#6	445	Nebraska Wesleyan	8-1	def. Buena Vista, 78-65; 12/07 at Dubuque
#7	429	Nichols	6-0	def. Wentworth, 72-64; 12/07 at Lasell
#8	423	Marietta	5-0	def. Otterbein, 78-56; 12/07 vs. John Carroll
#9	403	Randolph-Macon	8-0	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 97-55; 12/07 vs. #18 Christopher Newport
#10	356	Washington U.	7-1	def. Rhodes, 80-55
#11	330	UW-Platteville	6-0	12/06 vs. Hope; 12/08 vs. Olivet
#12	311	St. John's	5-1	def. Concordia-Moorhead, 66-41; 12/07 at Hamline
#13	296	UW-Oshkosh	4-2	12/06 at Alma; 12/07 at Calvin
#14	290	Amherst	3-2	LOST at #28 Babson, 82-87; 12/07 at Emerson
#15	250	Johns Hopkins	7-0	def. Gettysburg, 72-66; 12/07 at T#37 Muhlenberg
#16	244	Guilford	8-1	won at Roanoke, 74-58; 12/07 vs. Virginia Wesleyan
#17	228	Elmhurst	6-0	won at Millikin, 85-60
#18	163	Christopher Newport	7-2	def. William Peace, 83-60; 12/07 at #9 Randolph-Macon
#19	160	North Central (Ill.)	4-3	LOST at #21 Carthage, 81-83; 12/07 at North Park
#20	143	Whitworth	5-1	IDLE
#21	127	Carthage	6-0	def. #19 North Central (Ill.), 83-81; 12/07 at #39 Illinois Wesleyan
#22	109	WPI	8-1	def. #36 Tufts, 72-62; 12/07 at Albertus Magnus
#23	105	UW-La Crosse	6-0	IDLE
#24	82	Augustana	4-2	12/07 vs. Carroll
#25	64	Oswego State	4-1	LOST at St. Lawrence, 82-83 OT; 12/06 at Brockport; 12/07 at SUNY Geneseo

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	55	Hamilton	7-0	won at Hartwick, 91-81; 12/07 at SUNY-Purchase; 12/08 vs. Johnson and Wales
#27	53	UW-Stevens Point	5-0	12/07 vs. Hope
#28	49	Babson	7-0	def. #14 Amherst, 87-82; 12/07 at Salem State; 12/08 at TBA
#29	47	Wooster	4-1	won at Allegheny, 62-61; 12/07 vs. T#44 Wabash
#30	34	Augsburg	4-1	def. St. Olaf, 85-57; 12/07 vs. Carleton
#31	32	Centre	7-1	def. Boyce, 87-67; 12/07 at Sewanee
#32	29	Benedictine	7-1	def. Edgewood, 77-66; 12/07 vs. Dominican
#33	27	Colby	8-0	def. Thomas, 87-69; 12/07 at Colby-Sawyer
#34	25	Whitman	5-2	IDLE
#35	17	Springfield	6-0	def. Trinity (Conn.), 67-62; 12/07 at Williams
#36	14	Tufts	5-1	LOST at #22 WPI, 62-72; 12/07 vs. Brandeis; 12/08 vs. TBD
T#37	10	Muhlenberg	8-0	won at Washington College, 74-66; 12/07 vs. #15 Johns Hopkins
T#37	10	UW-Eau Claire	7-1	IDLE
#39	9	Illinois Wesleyan	5-2	LOST to Wheaton (Ill.), 60-76; 12/07 vs. #21 Carthage
#40	6	Yeshiva	7-1	won at St. Joseph's (Bklyn.), 85-51; 12/05 at Farmingdale State; 12/08 at St. Joseph's (L.I.)
#41	5	Rochester	7-1	IDLE
#42	4	Pomona-Pitzer	4-2	def. Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 51-48; 12/07 vs. Bethesda University
#43	2	Mary Hardin-Baylor	6-1	won at Texas Lutheran, 62-57
T#44	1	Mount Union	4-2	won at John Carroll, 96-79; 12/07 vs. Ohio Northern
T#44	1	Wabash	5-2	def. Ohio Wesleyan, 79-61; 12/07 at #29 Wooster

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 06, 2019, 08:54:42 PM

The live stats says Alma over Oshkosh.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 07, 2019, 09:13:23 AM

Quote from: WUPHF on December 06, 2019, 08:54:42 PM
The live stats says Alma over Oshkosh.

Alma 88
#13 UW-Oshkosh 81

https://www.d3hoops.com/seasons/men/2019-20/boxscores/20191206_syig.xml?view=boxscore

Another game with a bad A:TO ratio for UWO (10:14). On the season the Titans are a 0.9 A:TO, which is obviously not good. Last year they were 1.5. The ball just is not moving like it did last year with Ben Boots (134 A, 66 TO) and Brett Wittchow (92 A, 43 TO).

And another 3-point shooting struggle (5-25).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 07, 2019, 09:19:27 AM

Could we see preseason #2 UW-Oshkosh (4-3) and #3 North Central (4-3) both out of the Week 3 poll?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on December 07, 2019, 10:18:07 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 07, 2019, 09:19:27 AM
Could we see preseason #2 UW-Oshkosh (4-3) and #3 North Central (4-3) both out of the Week 3 poll?

That will be the true test for pollsters - a conglomeration of everything to consider: preseason info, inseason performance, eye test, historical bias, etc. You're going to have a busy weekend, conscientious Titan. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 07, 2019, 11:08:01 AM

Quote from: ronk on December 07, 2019, 10:18:07 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 07, 2019, 09:19:27 AM
Could we see preseason #2 UW-Oshkosh (4-3) and #3 North Central (4-3) both out of the Week 3 poll?

That will be the true test for pollsters - a conglomeration of everything to consider: preseason info, inseason performance, eye test, historical bias, etc. You're going to have a busy weekend, conscientious Titan. ;)

Even with the eye test, we have to ask whether one tremendous game against Augustana makes up for a bunch of mediocre ones. Becoming harder and harder to justify.

I have, I think, found a pretty decent method for making a ballot, at least early in the season. I got through the conferences, checking in on individual teams, examining record, schedule, circumstances, injuries, etc - and make a list of every notable team and kind of rank their resume. Typically I'll get 40-50 teams this way - sometimes more. I double check my Top 25, then, from among those Top 25, I try to rank them in terms of which team I'd favor in one neutral game tomorrow. If it gets tricky, I compare two or three teams to every team above them and see which I'd have more confidence in against the group.

It hasn't taken a terribly long time the last few weeks and while I've been proving wrong by results, I've turned in ballots I'm very happy with and feel comfortable defending.

It may not be a bad system for the rest of the year.

I say all that to say: Oshkosh is still plenty talented and they could beat a lot of teams, but if their resume gets so bad as to not be considered, they're probably falling off my ballot. An Alma loss is a lot harder to overlook than the others.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 07, 2019, 11:23:05 AM

Will be interesting to see how Oshkosh @ Calvin goes today. I think pretty safe to safe Calvin is a lot better than Alma.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 07, 2019, 11:47:28 AM

Several good ones today, including...

#18-Christopher Newport at #9-Randolph-Macon

John Carroll at #8-Marietta

#13-UW-Oshkosh at Calvin

Virginia Wesleyan at #16-Guilford

#15-Johns Hopkins at Muhlenberg (8-0)

Wabash at Wooster

#21-Carthage at Illinois Wesleyan

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 07, 2019, 04:52:56 PM

Lasell beats Nichols to improve to 1-8!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 07, 2019, 06:26:22 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on December 07, 2019, 04:52:56 PM
Lasell beats Nichols to improve to 1-8!

Without Cunningham Nichols is just a very different team on both ends of the floor. They're still very good, but not close to what they were going to be.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 07, 2019, 06:36:29 PM

OK, good to know.

Lasell actually looked good against Brandeis for what that is worth.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 07, 2019, 07:33:29 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 07, 2019, 11:23:05 AM
Will be interesting to see how Oshkosh @ Calvin goes today. I think pretty safe to safe Calvin is a lot better than Alma.

https://www.d3hoops.com/seasons/men/2019-20/boxscores/20191207_ibqy.xml?view=boxscore

Bad news for Calvin as Oshkosh takes out their frustrations on the Knights.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 08, 2019, 09:21:25 AM

From the Top 25 scoreboard...

Whitworth Alumni 106
#20-Whitworth 104

Guess I gotta drop Whitworth from my ballot because they lost to the alums?

https://www.d3hoops.com/scoreboard/men/2019-20/top25?date=2019-12-07

https://www.whitworthpirates.com/sports/mbkb/2019-20/stats/x1-alum.htm

https://www.whitworthpirates.com/sports/mbkb/2019-20/schedule

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on December 08, 2019, 09:58:36 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 08, 2019, 09:21:25 AM
From the Top 25 scoreboard...

Whitworth Alumni 106
#20-Whitworth 104

Guess I gotta drop Whitworth from my ballot because they lost to the alums?

https://www.d3hoops.com/scoreboard/men/2019-20/top25?date=2019-12-07

https://www.whitworthpirates.com/sports/mbkb/2019-20/stats/x1-alum.htm

https://www.whitworthpirates.com/sports/mbkb/2019-20/schedule

Good to see George Valle still has it, leading the team with 21 points over a top 25 team. He is squarely in the All-Region discussion in the West.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 08, 2019, 12:01:56 PM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on December 08, 2019, 09:58:36 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 08, 2019, 09:21:25 AM
From the Top 25 scoreboard...

Whitworth Alumni 106
#20-Whitworth 104

Guess I gotta drop Whitworth from my ballot because they lost to the alums?

https://www.d3hoops.com/scoreboard/men/2019-20/top25?date=2019-12-07

https://www.whitworthpirates.com/sports/mbkb/2019-20/stats/x1-alum.htm

https://www.whitworthpirates.com/sports/mbkb/2019-20/schedule

Good to see George Valle still has it, leading the team with 21 points over a top 25 team. He is squarely in the All-Region discussion in the West.

The big question is what's happened to D3hoops National Player of the Year, Michael Taylor? Only six points?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 08, 2019, 02:50:54 PM

How They Fared (~~Nearly~~ Complete)

~~4 results to be added later this evening.~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	622	Swarthmore	8-0	won at Ursinus, 88-86; def. Gettysburg, 95-63
#2	586	Emory	9-0	won at LaGrange, 98-89; def. Piedmont, 96-71
#3	540	Wittenberg	5-0	won at DePauw, 88-63; def. Allegheny, 78-60
#4	522	Middlebury	9-0	def. New England College, 88-87; won at Stevens, 76-66
#5	466	St. Thomas	7-1	def. Macalester, 64-35; def. Gustavus Adolphus, 90-66
#6	445	Nebraska Wesleyan	9-1	def. Buena Vista, 78-65; won at Dubuque, 88-63
#7	429	Nichols	6-1	def. Wentworth, 72-64; LOST at Lasell, 89-96
#8	423	Marietta	6-0	def. Otterbein, 78-56; def. John Carroll, 104-98
#9	403	Randolph-Macon	9-0	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 97-55; def. #18 Christopher Newport, 79-62
#10	356	Washington U.	7-1	def. Rhodes, 80-55
#11	330	UW-Platteville	8-0	def. Hope, 82-68; def. Olivet, 96-63
#12	311	St. John's	6-1	def. Concordia-Moorhead, 66-41; won at Hamline, 82-57
#13	296	UW-Oshkosh	5-3	LOST at Alma, 81-88; won at Calvin, 89-50
#14	290	Amherst	4-2	LOST at #28 Babson, 82-87; won at Emerson, 97-86
#15	250	Johns Hopkins	8-0	def. Gettysburg, 72-66; won at T#37 Muhlenberg, 59-55
#16	244	Guilford	8-2	won at Roanoke, 74-58; LOST to Virginia Wesleyan, 57-64
#17	228	Elmhurst	6-0	won at Millikin, 85-60
#18	163	Christopher Newport	7-3	def. William Peace, 83-60; LOST at #9 Randolph-Macon, 62-79
#19	160	North Central (Ill.)	5-3	LOST at #21 Carthage, 81-83; won at North Park, 78-56
#20	143	Whitworth	5-1	IDLE
#21	127	Carthage	6-1	def. #19 North Central (Ill.), 83-81; LOST at #39 Illinois Wesleyan, 91-95
#22	109	WPI	8-2	def. #36 Tufts, 72-62; LOST at Albertus Magnus, 60-71
#23	105	UW-La Crosse	6-0	IDLE
#24	82	Augustana	5-2	def. Carroll, 65-63
#25	64	Oswego State	5-2	LOST at St. Lawrence, 82-83 OT; LOST at Brockport, 67-68; won at SUNY Geneseo, 70-59

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	55	Hamilton	8-1	won at Hartwick, 91-81; LOST at SUNY-Purchase, 76-97; def. Johnson and Wales, 86-73
#27	53	UW-Stevens Point	6-0	def. Hope, 74-65
#28	49	Babson	9-0	def. #14 Amherst, 87-82; won at Salem State, 81-75; def. (n) #36 Tufts, 99-85
#29	47	Wooster	5-1	won at Allegheny, 62-61; def. T#44 Wabash, 79-74
#30	34	Augsburg	5-1	def. St. Olaf, 85-57; def. Carleton, 73-57
#31	32	Centre	7-2	def. Boyce, 87-67; LOST at Sewanee, 59-80
#32	29	Benedictine	8-1	def. Edgewood, 77-66; def. Dominican, 74-63
#33	27	Colby	9-0	def. Thomas, 87-69; won at Colby-Sawyer, 101-69
#34	25	Whitman	5-2	IDLE
#35	17	Springfield	7-0	def. Trinity (Conn.), 67-62; won at Williams, 76-75
#36	14	Tufts	6-2	LOST at #22 WPI, 62-72; def. (n) Brandeis, 68-61; LOST to (n) #28 Babson, 85-99
T#37	10	Muhlenberg	8-1	won at Washington College, 74-66; LOST to #15 Johns Hopkins, 55-59
T#37	10	UW-Eau Claire	7-1	IDLE
#39	9	Illinois Wesleyan	6-2	LOST to Wheaton (Ill.), 60-76; def. #21 Carthage, 95-91
#40	6	Yeshiva	9-1	won at St. Joseph's (Bklyn.), 85-51; won at Farmingdale State, 79-72; won at St. Joseph's (L.I.), 96-76
#41	5	Rochester	7-1	IDLE
#42	4	Pomona-Pitzer	5-2	def. Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 51-48; def. Bethesda University, 96-51
#43	2	Mary Hardin-Baylor	6-1	won at Texas Lutheran, 62-57
T#44	1	Mount Union	5-2	won at John Carroll, 96-79; def. Ohio Northern, 81-60
T#44	1	Wabash	5-3	def. Ohio Wesleyan, 79-61; LOST at #29 Wooster, 74-79

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 08, 2019, 04:52:07 PM

Thank you as always, Darryl!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 08, 2019, 05:27:41 PM

FWIW, comparing Massey to the D3hoops.com Top 25, Massey says...

https://www.masseyratings.com/cb2020/ncaa-d3/ratings

These teams are generally in the right spot in the D3hoops.com Top 25 (within 8 of Massey).
#1 Swarthmore (Massey #4)
#2 Emory (Massey #3)
#3 Wittenberg (Massey #11)
#5 St. Thomas (Massey #5)
#6 Nebraska Wesleyan (Massey #6)
#8 Marietta (Massey #9)
#9 Randolph-Macon (Massey #1)
#10 Wash U (Massey #18)
#11 UW-Platteville (Massey #7)
#13 UW-Oshkosh (Massey #14)
#15 Johns Hopkins (Massey #10)
#16 Guilford (Massey #21)
#18 Christopher Newport (Massey #25)
#20 Whitworth (Massey #20)

These teams are too high in the D3hoops.com Top 25 (Massey has 8+ lower...a difference of 20+ is highlighted).)
#4 Middlebury (Massey #19)
#7 Nichols (Massey #62)
#12 St. John's (Massey #36)
#14 Amherst (Massey #45)
#19 North Central (Massey #44)
#21 Carthage (Massey #30)
#22 WPI (Massey #48)
#25 Oswego State (Massey #113)

These teams are too low in the D3hoops.com Top 25 (Massey has 8+ higher...teams Massey has in top 25 and D3hoops does not are highlighted).
#17 Elmhurst (Massey #2)
#23 UW-La Crosse (Massey #12)
#24 Augustana (Massey #15)
(ORV) UW-Stevens Point (Massey #7)
(ORV) Colby (Massey #9)
(No Votes) Wheaton (Massey #16)
(ORV) Babson (Massey #17)
(ORV) Illinois Wesleyan (Massey #22)
(ORV) Mount Union (Massey #23)
(No Votes) Loras (Massey #24)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Colby Hoops on December 08, 2019, 06:12:03 PM

Babson has to make a huge jump, they've probably had the best results to date of any NE team. And I don't really see how Nichols or Amherst should be ahead of Colby at this point. Albertus Magnus is also deserving of some votes after a nice win over WPI.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 08, 2019, 06:17:10 PM

Quote from: Colby Hoops on December 08, 2019, 06:12:03 PM
Babson has to make a huge jump, they've probably had the best results to date of any NE team. And I don't really see how Nichols or Amherst should be ahead of Colby at this point. Albertus Magnus is also deserving of some votes after a nice win over WPI.

I watched Babson beat Tufts today. For the ballot tomorrow, I have them in and pretty high. I like them a lot.

I have Colby in.

I do not have Nichols or Amherst in.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 08, 2019, 09:41:30 PM

From a Top 25 standpoint, the Central region is pretty crazy.

* There are 5 legitimate Top 25 candidates in the WIAC -- Platteville, Stevens Point, La Crosse, Eau Claire, Oshkosh.

* There are 6 legitimate Top 25 candidates in the CCIW -- Elmhurst, Carthage, Augustana, Wheaton, IWU, North Central.

* And Wash U.

* And Benedictine.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mohoops on December 08, 2019, 10:01:22 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 08, 2019, 09:41:30 PM
From a Top 25 standpoint, the Central region is pretty crazy.

* There are 5 legitimate Top 25 candidates in the WIAC -- Platteville, Stevens Point, La Crosse, Eau Claire, Oshkosh.

* There are 6 legitimate Top 25 candidates in the CCIW -- Elmhurst, Carthage, Augustana, Wheaton, IWU, North Central.

* And Wash U.

* And Benedictine.

Can we please reevaluate the D2 and D3 selection criteria and take the best teams, rather than the regional system? The Central Region is the strongest in both divisions and always gets shorted on teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 08, 2019, 10:06:03 PM

Quote from: mohoops on December 08, 2019, 10:01:22 PM

Can we please reevaluate the D2 and D3 selection criteria and take the best teams, rather than the regional system? The Central Region is the strongest in both divisions and always gets shorted on teams.

The at-large bid process in Division III is national now...not regional. The regions are a big factor, of course, but there is no limit on the number of Pool C bids one region can get.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mohoops on December 08, 2019, 10:10:24 PM

Quote from: mohoops on December 08, 2019, 10:01:22 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 08, 2019, 09:41:30 PM
From a Top 25 standpoint, the Central region is pretty crazy.

* There are 5 legitimate Top 25 candidates in the WIAC -- Platteville, Stevens Point, La Crosse, Eau Claire, Oshkosh.

* There are 6 legitimate Top 25 candidates in the CCIW -- Elmhurst, Carthage, Augustana, Wheaton, IWU, North Central.

* And Wash U.

* And Benedictine.

Can we please reevaluate the D2 and D3 selection criteria and take the best teams, rather than the regional system? The Central Region is the strongest in both divisions and always gets shorted on teams.

7 of the last 10 champions in D2 and 10 of the last 12 in D3, unless I am mistaken.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 08, 2019, 10:20:06 PM

I believe the all-time D3 national title count by current region is:

Central = 21
Great Lakes = 7
Mid Atlantic = 4
Northeast = 4
East = 3
West = 3
Atlantic = 1
South = 1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mohoops on December 08, 2019, 10:22:49 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 08, 2019, 10:06:03 PM
Quote from: mohoops on December 08, 2019, 10:01:22 PM

Can we please reevaluate the D2 and D3 selection criteria and take the best teams, rather than the regional system? The Central Region is the strongest in both divisions and always gets shorted on teams.

The at-large bid process in Division III is national now...not regional. The regions are a big factor, of course, but there is no limit on the number of Pool C bids one region can get.

While I have not run the stats on this and am happy to be wrong, it still seems to me to track the regional rankings extremely closely. I should go back and look at how many Central teams were in last years 64.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 08, 2019, 10:24:17 PM

Quote from: mohoops on December 08, 2019, 10:22:49 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 08, 2019, 10:06:03 PM
Quote from: mohoops on December 08, 2019, 10:01:22 PM

Can we please reevaluate the D2 and D3 selection criteria and take the best teams, rather than the regional system? The Central Region is the strongest in both divisions and always gets shorted on teams.

The at-large bid process in Division III is national now...not regional. The regions are a big factor, of course, but there is no limit on the number of Pool C bids one region can get.
While I have not run the stats on this and am happy to be wrong, it still seems to me to track the regional rankings extremely closely. I should go back and look at how many Central teams were in last years 64.

I think the current process is actually very fair to the Central region. I don't have the numbers but the region seems to always come out OK.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 09, 2019, 09:13:19 AM

Central region teams in the tournament last season.

La Crosse - WIAC
Oshkosh - WIAC
Platteville - WIAC
Augustana - CCIW
Wheaton - CCIW
NCC - CCIW
Aurora - NACC
Eureka - SLIAC
LFC - MWC

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 09, 2019, 09:51:10 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 09, 2019, 09:13:19 AM
La Crosse - WIAC
Oshkosh - WIAC
Platteville - WIAC
Augustana - CCIW
Wheaton - CCIW
NCC - CCIW
Aurora - NACC
Eureka - SLIAC
LFC - MWC

I am not sure I follow...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 09, 2019, 10:16:09 AM

Quote from: WUPHF on December 09, 2019, 09:51:10 AM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 09, 2019, 09:13:19 AM
La Crosse - WIAC
Oshkosh - WIAC
Platteville - WIAC
Augustana - CCIW
Wheaton - CCIW
NCC - CCIW
Aurora - NACC
Eureka - SLIAC
LFC - MWC

I am not sure I follow...

Worry more about your picks in the Progressive Player League. LOL...

I edited my post. A response to a previous post.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TheOsprey on December 09, 2019, 10:43:09 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 08, 2019, 10:20:06 PM
I believe the all-time D3 national title count by current region is:

Central = 21
Great Lakes = 7
Mid Atlantic = 4
Northeast = 4
East = 3
West = 3
Atlantic = 1
South = 1

When is the NCAA going to add the two additional regions?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 09, 2019, 10:50:08 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 08, 2019, 10:24:17 PM
Quote from: mohoops on December 08, 2019, 10:22:49 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 08, 2019, 10:06:03 PM
Quote from: mohoops on December 08, 2019, 10:01:22 PM

Can we please reevaluate the D2 and D3 selection criteria and take the best teams, rather than the regional system? The Central Region is the strongest in both divisions and always gets shorted on teams.

The at-large bid process in Division III is national now...not regional. The regions are a big factor, of course, but there is no limit on the number of Pool C bids one region can get.
While I have not run the stats on this and am happy to be wrong, it still seems to me to track the regional rankings extremely closely. I should go back and look at how many Central teams were in last years 64.
I think the current process is actually very fair to the Central region. I don't have the numbers but the region seems to always come out OK.

Correct me if I'm wrong here but:
The Central has had two of the more "controversial" (maybe not the right word) Pool C picks in recent years. Oshkosh (16-10) in 2017 and LaCrosse (17-9) last year. But in both cases they were slotted ahead of other Central Region teams in the final rankings when maybe they shouldn't have been.

Pool C's By year:
2015: 4--Stevens Point, WashU, Ill. Wesleyan, Elmhurst
2016: 2--Elmhurst, North Central
2017: 3--Whitewater, Oshkosh, Augustana
2018: 4--Platteville, Oshkosh, North Central, Ill. Wesleyan
2019: 4--Augustana, Wheaton, Oshkosh, LaCrosse

Bold--reached Final Four

Central Region teams that get left out are usually pretty fringe types with 8 or 9 losses, even though on the basketball court they're probably more than worthy of being in the tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 09, 2019, 10:52:33 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on February 25, 2019, 07:20:26 PM
(I can't confirm the order of these selection...just my best guess at the time.)

2018-19 Season
1. (C) Augustana: .889, 24-3/.547/8-3
2. (S) Randolph-Macon: .893, 25-3/.534/6-3
3. (NE) Hamilton: .885, 23-3/.553/4-3
4. (NE) Williams: .769, 20-6/.598/6-5
5. (C) UW-Oshkosh: .885, 23-3/.542/3-3
6. (W) Loras: .778, 21-6/.587/2-2
7. (GL) Marietta: .769, 20-6/.549/6-4
8. (MA) York (Pa.): .750, 21-7/.561/6-4
9. (W) St. Thomas: .846, 22-4/.532/4-1
10. (GL) Wooster: .821, 23-5/.543/3-4
11. (E) Rochester: .800, 20-5/.539/5-2
12. (GL) Capital: .741, 20-7/.546/6-4
13. (E) Plattsburgh State: .760, 19-6/.531/6-6
14. (AT) New Jersey City: .741, 20-7/.551/6-6
15. (NE) MIT: .846, 22-4/.555/1-0
16. (NE) Middlebury: .708, 17-7/.600/4-5
17. (MA) Salisbury: .704, 19-8/.575/4-7
18. (C) Wheaton: .704, 19-8/.574/4-5
19. (AT) Ramapo: .667, 18-9/.567/8-5
20. (C) UW-La Crosse .654, 17-9/.574/4-4

2017-18 Season
1. Hamilton (NE/NESCAC): .846 (22-4)/.573/6-3
2. Wesleyan (NE/NESCAC): .778 (21-6)/.590/8-4
3. UW-Platteville (CE/WIAC: .833 (20-4)/.577/4-1
4. Whitman (WE/NWC): .962 (25-1)/.515/4-1
5. Swarthmore (MA/CC): .815 (22-5)/.542/3-4
6. St. John's (WE/MIAC): .880 (22-3)/.524/3-2
7. Middlebury (NE/NESCAC): .760 (19-6).590/4-6
8. Wooster (GL/NCAC): .778 (21-6)/.565/4-3
9. Marietta (GL/OAC): .778 (21-6)/.564/4-5
10. New Jersey City (AT/NJAC): .731 (19-7)/.567/6-4
11. Emory (SO/UAA): .840 (21-4)/.530/4-2
12. Christopher Newport (MA/CAC): .777 (21-6)/.546/3-2
13. UW-Oshkosh (CE/WIAC): .741 (20-7)/.554/2-4
14. St. Olaf (WE/MIAC): .731 (19-7)/.544/3-2
15. Albright (MA/Commonwealth): .769 (20-6)/.544/3-2
16. Franklin and Marshall (MA/CC): .769 (20-6)/.536/3-4
17. North Central (CE/CCIW): .692 (18-8)/.563/4-5
18. Illinois Wesleyan (CE/CCIW): .731 (19-7)/.550/3-6
19. Springfield (NE/NEWMAC): .692 (18-8)/.558/4-2
20. Brockport (E/SUNYAC): .731/.529/3-3
21. LeTourneau (SO/ASC): .852 (23-4)/.511/2-2

2016-17 Season
1. Babson (NE/NEWMAC): .926/.574/4-1
2. Williams (NE/NESCAC): .731/.592/7-4
3. Susquehanna (MA/LAND): .800/.556/4-4
4. UW-Whitewater (C/WIAC): .769/.567/3-5
5. Rochester (E/UAA): .840/.534/4-2
6. Amherst (NE/NESCAC): .708/.598/5-5
7. Tufts (NE/NESCAC): .769/.566/4-4
8. Wesleyan (NE/NESCAC): .760/.560/4-3
9. Whitworth (W/NWC): .852/.544/0-3
10. Salisbury (MA/CAC): .741/.546/3-4
11. New Jersey City (AT/NJAC): .750/.533/5-4
12. Hope (GL/MIAA): .800/.525/2-1
13. Cabrini (AT/CSAC): .760/.531/2-3
14. Emory (S/UAA): .720/.547/2-3
15. Skidmore (E/LL): .731/.527/6-1
16. St. Lawrence (E/LL): .769/.526/3-5
17. Augustana (C/CCIW): .704/.542/2-2
18. Keene State (NE/LEC): .679/.575/3-4
19. Endicott (NE/CCC): .786/.532/1-1
20. St. Thomas (W/MIAC): .731/.530/1-2
21. UW-Oshkosh: (C/WIAC): .630/.601/5-6

Pool C Bids: 2019/2018/2017 = Total
* Northeast: 4/4/7 = 15

* Central: 4/4/3 = 11

* Great Lakes: 3/2/2 = 7

* Mid Atlantic: 2/4/1 = 7

* West: 2/3/2 = 7

* East: 2/1/3 = 6

* Atlantic: 2/1/2 = 5

* South: 1/2/1 = 4

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: 89Pirate on December 09, 2019, 11:07:16 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 08, 2019, 12:01:56 PM
Quote from: Smitty Oom on December 08, 2019, 09:58:36 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 08, 2019, 09:21:25 AM
From the Top 25 scoreboard...

Whitworth Alumni 106
#20-Whitworth 104

Guess I gotta drop Whitworth from my ballot because they lost to the alums?

https://www.d3hoops.com/scoreboard/men/2019-20/top25?date=2019-12-07

https://www.whitworthpirates.com/sports/mbkb/2019-20/stats/x1-alum.htm

https://www.whitworthpirates.com/sports/mbkb/2019-20/schedule

Good to see George Valle still has it, leading the team with 21 points over a top 25 team. He is squarely in the All-Region discussion in the West.

The big question is what's happened to D3hoops National Player of the Year, Michael Taylor? Only six points?

This is the other Micheal Taylor we had. They did overlap I believe. The one you are referring to didn't play in the game

It was a fun game to watch for sure. Lots of great former Pirates going all the way back to the class of 2009 (Nakamura and Stockton). Won by a hard fought contested lay-up by Dustin McConnell with .2 seconds on the clock. The stat line for the Alumni was outstanding.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 09, 2019, 06:23:35 PM

Quote from: TheOsprey on December 09, 2019, 10:43:09 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 08, 2019, 10:20:06 PM
I believe the all-time D3 national title count by current region is:

Central = 21
Great Lakes = 7
Mid Atlantic = 4
Northeast = 4
East = 3
West = 3
Atlantic = 1
South = 1

When is the NCAA going to add the two additional regions?

If approved ... 2021-22 season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 09, 2019, 06:23:48 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=29l2c/imirq63hfdopt3vm.jpg)

The 2019-20 season started a month ago. Already there has been plenty to talk about with still three months of regular season basketball to be played. And just as things got rolling on the court, now is also a time when we see things slow down for finals and the holiday break.

On Monday's special edition of Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave chats with a few teams who are off to pretty good starts in the opening month. Some maybe surprising and others with still plenty of questions to be asked.

How good is Baldwin Wallace women and how hard with the OAC be this season? Are the Edgewood women as good as their incredible 9-0 start leads one to believe? And Whitworth men technically have a new coach at the helm, but is this the same Pirates program we've gotten used to over the years?

Plus, we react to what should be brand new men's and women's Top 25 polls.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Cheri Harrer, No. 20 Baldwin Wallace women's coach
- Chaia Huff, Edgewood women's head coach
- Damion Jablonski, No. 20 Whitworth men's coach
- Bob Quillman, Top 25 Double-Take

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Monday's show LIVE with the following options:
- Main page: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville
- Show page: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2019-20/dec9 or http://bit.ly/2PrIkwY
- Facebook Live Simulcast: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
- YouTube Simulcast: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville
- Team1 Sports: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville/
- Team1 Sports app (https://team1sports.com/) (Android TV, Amazon Fire, Apple TV, Roku) - you will either find it under the "live" section or search for the Hoopsville channel.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

We also have the podcast now on iHeartRadio, Tune-In and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 10, 2019, 01:04:10 AM

Compared to the kibitzing in the football selection, basketball seems fairly straight forward. Win your league, or play well against good teams around you. (Obligatory NESCAC schedule bashing sold separately)

I don't think any region is really hurt in the selection. The pairings of course (insert diatribe on teams on islands in Texas and the West Coast)...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 10, 2019, 01:25:28 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 08, 2019, 05:27:41 PM
FWIW, comparing Massey to the D3hoops.com Top 25, Massey says...

https://www.masseyratings.com/cb2020/ncaa-d3/ratings

These teams are generally in the right spot in the D3hoops.com Top 25 (within 8 of Massey).
#1 Swarthmore (Massey #4)
#2 Emory (Massey #3)
#3 Wittenberg (Massey #11)
#5 St. Thomas (Massey #5)
#6 Nebraska Wesleyan (Massey #6)
#8 Marietta (Massey #9)
#9 Randolph-Macon (Massey #1)
#10 Wash U (Massey #18)
#11 UW-Platteville (Massey #7)
#13 UW-Oshkosh (Massey #14)
#15 Johns Hopkins (Massey #10)
#16 Guilford (Massey #21)
#18 Christopher Newport (Massey #25)
#20 Whitworth (Massey #20)

These teams are too high in the D3hoops.com Top 25 (Massey has 8+ lower...a difference of 20+ is highlighted).)
#4 Middlebury (Massey #19)
#7 Nichols (Massey #62)
#12 St. John's (Massey #36)
#14 Amherst (Massey #45)
#19 North Central (Massey #44)
#21 Carthage (Massey #30)
#22 WPI (Massey #48)
#25 Oswego State (Massey #113)

These teams are too low in the D3hoops.com Top 25 (Massey has 8+ higher...teams Massey has in top 25 and D3hoops does not are highlighted).
#17 Elmhurst (Massey #2)
#23 UW-La Crosse (Massey #12)
#24 Augustana (Massey #15)
(ORV) UW-Stevens Point (Massey #7)
(ORV) Colby (Massey #9)
(No Votes) Wheaton (Massey #16)
(ORV) Babson (Massey #17)
(ORV) Illinois Wesleyan (Massey #22)
(ORV) Mount Union (Massey #23)
(No Votes) Loras (Massey #24)

Know that I am catching up here after a few days, but this is apples and oranges -- you were comparing current Massey to week-old D3hoops. Of course there are big differences.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on December 10, 2019, 04:00:56 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 10, 2019, 01:25:28 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 08, 2019, 05:27:41 PM
FWIW, comparing Massey to the D3hoops.com Top 25, Massey says...

https://www.masseyratings.com/cb2020/ncaa-d3/ratings

These teams are generally in the right spot in the D3hoops.com Top 25 (within 8 of Massey).
#1 Swarthmore (Massey #4)
#2 Emory (Massey #3)
#3 Wittenberg (Massey #11)
#5 St. Thomas (Massey #5)
#6 Nebraska Wesleyan (Massey #6)
#8 Marietta (Massey #9)
#9 Randolph-Macon (Massey #1)
#10 Wash U (Massey #18)
#11 UW-Platteville (Massey #7)
#13 UW-Oshkosh (Massey #14)
#15 Johns Hopkins (Massey #10)
#16 Guilford (Massey #21)
#18 Christopher Newport (Massey #25)
#20 Whitworth (Massey #20)

These teams are too high in the D3hoops.com Top 25 (Massey has 8+ lower...a difference of 20+ is highlighted).)
#4 Middlebury (Massey #19)
#7 Nichols (Massey #62)
#12 St. John's (Massey #36)
#14 Amherst (Massey #45)
#19 North Central (Massey #44)
#21 Carthage (Massey #30)
#22 WPI (Massey #48)
#25 Oswego State (Massey #113)

These teams are too low in the D3hoops.com Top 25 (Massey has 8+ higher...teams Massey has in top 25 and D3hoops does not are highlighted).
#17 Elmhurst (Massey #2)
#23 UW-La Crosse (Massey #12)
#24 Augustana (Massey #15)
(ORV) UW-Stevens Point (Massey #7)
(ORV) Colby (Massey #9)
(No Votes) Wheaton (Massey #16)
(ORV) Babson (Massey #17)
(ORV) Illinois Wesleyan (Massey #22)
(ORV) Mount Union (Massey #23)
(No Votes) Loras (Massey #24)

Know that I am catching up here after a few days, but this is apples and oranges -- you were comparing current Massey to week-old D3hoops. Of course there are big differences.

The solution is daily Top 25 voting! ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 10, 2019, 04:25:08 PM

Don't make me hurt you, KnightSlappy. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 10, 2019, 07:13:26 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 10, 2019, 01:25:28 PM
Know that I am catching up here after a few days, but this is apples and oranges -- you were comparing current Massey to week-old D3hoops. Of course there are big differences.

Of course. Relevant though on Sunday in thinking about potential changes to the poll coming the next day.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PauldingLightUP on December 11, 2019, 12:00:01 AM

'Tis the season for finals and holidays. The top two teams in the poll, who and I agree with what Dave said last night, have clearly separated some; will not play a game until the defending champions head to Atlanta to take on Emory two days before the new year. 18 days!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 11, 2019, 12:24:56 AM

Swarthmore plays a decent schedule and then gets a down to the wire, three-point win Johns Hopkins at home.

Emory gets the win over Guilford and then plays a decent schedule.

Have they separated themselves?

Or, is everyone still adjusting to the fact that so many preseason Top 25 teams have taken a loss and undefeated and previously unranked teams have emerged

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 11, 2019, 07:08:44 AM

Quote from: WUPHF on December 11, 2019, 12:24:56 AM
Swarthmore plays a decent schedule and then gets a down to the wire, three-point win Johns Hopkins at home.

Emory gets the win over Guilford and then plays a decent schedule.

Have they separated themselves?

Or, is everyone still adjusting to the fact that so many preseason Top 25 teams have taken a loss and undefeated and previously unranked teams have emerged

The Swarthmore win last night was not really down to the wire. Johns Hopkins did a nice job grinding out the last 3 minutes to get to that 3-point margin of defeat, but the Garnet really controlled the 2nd half. I don't think Hopkins had the ball and a chance to tie in the entire 2nd half from what I remember.

But your question is very fair.

I think Swarthmore and Emory should be #1 and #2 in the poll. I am very impressed by both. But I really do not see much, if any, separation between these two and whoever the next 10 or so are. I certainly could be wrong but from what I have seen, these teams vs, say, #9 Wash U or #12 Elmhurst (teams I have seen multiple times) would be a "pick 'em" on a neutral floor.

I'll go a step further to say the separation between these teams and teams way further down the poll is very small. UW-Oshkosh...the other CCIW teams getting votes (again, I am using the teams I have seen the most)...etc...I see very close games there that could go either way.

It's a great season to follow - so many teams can get to Fort Wayne and Atlanta.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 11, 2019, 08:29:59 AM

Hopkins had a terrific game plan, but Swarthmore did not play their best game last night. Obviously JHU is good enough to beat Swarthmore on any given night, but two disparity between the overall talent and ability of the teams was apparent. I believe JHU to be a year away. Maybe they'll get there by March, but they still rely a little too much on younger, less experienced players. Regardless of what happens, they should be near the top of our preseason rankings next year.

I think Swat and Emory are #1 and #2 right now, but I don't subscribe to the "separating themselves" narrative unless you include Randolph-Macon and maybe Elmhurst in that category. Witt might be there, too, but I still have more I want to see from them.

We just don't (and, I believe, won't) have a dominant team this season. Swarthmore has put together a tremendous system. They have a very disciplined team that plays 10 guys big minutes and isn't dependent on any one player, which allows them to be incredibly consistent and lends itself to very high win totals. That doesn't mean they're head and shoulders better than anyone else on a given night, though - it just drastically improves their odds of winning.

I'm voting them number one because I think the chances of Swarthmore being national champion are higher than anyone else's chances. But I also think the chances that one of the very good teams they'll have to face over the course of potentially six games in March will beat them is pretty high, too.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 11, 2019, 09:49:37 AM

As an addendum, those Massey SOS numbers after last night:

Swarthmore No. 79
Emory No. 96

Elmhurst No. 1
Augustana No. 6
Platteville No. 11
St. Thomas No. 31
Washington University No. 42
Randolph Macon No. 81
Carthage No. 87
Wittenburg No. 185
________
Insert Massey disclaimers

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on December 11, 2019, 02:23:05 PM

I've never had a strong feeling either way about the Massey Ratings, but we are allowed to use other factors than SOS to determine whether or not a team is good, especially if 1 of the teams in question returns close to their entire national championship finalist roster and is undefeated to start the season.

Maybe we should just focus a little bit more on watching the games, which I understand is easier said than done, especially this early in the season.

PS--Massey's overall ratings: Swarthmore 3, Emory 4.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 11, 2019, 02:55:47 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on December 11, 2019, 02:23:05 PM
I've never had a strong feeling either way about the Massey Ratings, but we are allowed to use other factors than SOS to determine whether or not a team is good, especially if 1 of the teams in question returns close to their entire national championship finalist roster and is undefeated to start the season.

Maybe we should just focus a little bit more on watching the games, which I understand is easier said than done, especially this early in the season.

Agreed and hence the addendum (ad·den·dum | \ ə-ˈden-dəm 1: supplement) remark.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on December 11, 2019, 04:30:47 PM

I watched the last few minutes of the first half and most of the second half of Middlebury vs Stevens on Sunday. Wondering what people think about Middlebury, currently ranked #4 with a Massey SOS of 183. Not much has been said about them here. They have a lot of height.

Also, not much has been said here about current #3 Wittenberg with a Massey SOS of 185 (noted above by WUPFH). Witt has only played five games so far, the fewest of any Top 25 team.

Not suggesting relatively high Massey SOS calls into question the rankings. Just looking for thoughts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on December 11, 2019, 04:46:24 PM

Quote from: y_jack_lok on December 11, 2019, 04:30:47 PM
I watched the last few minutes of the first half and most of the second half of Middlebury vs Stevens on Sunday. Wondering what people think about Middlebury, currently ranked #4 with a Massey SOS of 183. Not much has been said about them here. They have a lot of height.

Also, not much has been said here about current #3 Wittenberg with a Massey SOS of 185 (noted above by WUPFH). Witt has only played five games so far, the fewest of any Top 25 team.

Not suggesting relatively high Massey SOS calls into question the rankings. Just looking for thoughts.

Speaking from a NESCAC background, we're still waiting to see how we feel about Middlebury. The consensus right now seems to be that they have played down to their opponents at times, and the non-conference teams they traditionally play, such as Keene St. and Skidmore, are down this year, so their schedule is pretty weak. They returned their top 4 scorers and brought in a somewhat highly regarded transfer, so it seems like they might be struggling to find the right shots for the right guys. But on paper they have the best offensive talent in the league and with Amherst's early struggles, should still be the favorite to win the NESCAC. If I had a vote, they would be in the 8-12 range.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on December 11, 2019, 04:48:24 PM

^^^ Thanks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 11, 2019, 04:56:43 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on December 11, 2019, 04:46:24 PM
Quote from: y_jack_lok on December 11, 2019, 04:30:47 PM
I watched the last few minutes of the first half and most of the second half of Middlebury vs Stevens on Sunday. Wondering what people think about Middlebury, currently ranked #4 with a Massey SOS of 183. Not much has been said about them here. They have a lot of height.

Also, not much has been said here about current #3 Wittenberg with a Massey SOS of 185 (noted above by WUPFH). Witt has only played five games so far, the fewest of any Top 25 team.

Not suggesting relatively high Massey SOS calls into question the rankings. Just looking for thoughts.

Speaking from a NESCAC background, we're still waiting to see how we feel about Middlebury. The consensus right now seems to be that they have played down to their opponents at times, and the non-conference teams they traditionally play, such as Keene St. and Skidmore, are down this year, so their schedule is pretty weak. They returned their top 4 scorers and brought in a somewhat highly regarded transfer, so it seems like they might be struggling to find the right shots for the right guys. But on paper they have the best offensive talent in the league and with Amherst's early struggles, should still be the favorite to win the NESCAC. If I had a vote, they would be in the 8-12 range.

I'd agree. Middlebury has all the pieces, but they've underwhelmed thus far. I have them ranked farther down than the overall poll. As for Wittenberg, similarly they have all the pieces, but they haven't really played a schedule that will tell us too much just yet. I have them ranked pretty high almost by default. Both teams, fortunately, play in conferences that will give them ample opportunity to show themselves for whatever they happen to be.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on December 11, 2019, 05:02:09 PM

^^^ Thanks again.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: cacfan11 on December 11, 2019, 05:51:03 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 11, 2019, 04:56:43 PM
Quote from: SpringSt7 on December 11, 2019, 04:46:24 PM
Quote from: y_jack_lok on December 11, 2019, 04:30:47 PM
I watched the last few minutes of the first half and most of the second half of Middlebury vs Stevens on Sunday. Wondering what people think about Middlebury, currently ranked #4 with a Massey SOS of 183. Not much has been said about them here. They have a lot of height.

Also, not much has been said here about current #3 Wittenberg with a Massey SOS of 185 (noted above by WUPFH). Witt has only played five games so far, the fewest of any Top 25 team.

Not suggesting relatively high Massey SOS calls into question the rankings. Just looking for thoughts.

Speaking from a NESCAC background, we're still waiting to see how we feel about Middlebury. The consensus right now seems to be that they have played down to their opponents at times, and the non-conference teams they traditionally play, such as Keene St. and Skidmore, are down this year, so their schedule is pretty weak. They returned their top 4 scorers and brought in a somewhat highly regarded transfer, so it seems like they might be struggling to find the right shots for the right guys. But on paper they have the best offensive talent in the league and with Amherst's early struggles, should still be the favorite to win the NESCAC. If I had a vote, they would be in the 8-12 range.

I'd agree. Middlebury has all the pieces, but they've underwhelmed thus far. I have them ranked farther down than the overall poll. As for Wittenberg, similarly they have all the pieces, but they haven't really played a schedule that will tell us too much just yet. I have them ranked pretty high almost by default. Both teams, fortunately, play in conferences that will give them ample opportunity to show themselves for whatever they happen to be.

I would certainly vote for them as a top 5 team. They have the best and most versitile offense in the NESCAC, as well as a strong defense, their frontcourt, with solid two way players in folger and sobel is a hidden strength for a team that has such strong guard play. They have definitely played down to their opponents, but other then a couple minutes against a solid NEC they seemed to be in control of every game. Returning everyone and improving on a solid 2018 team that blew a ten point lead to Swarthmore in the final minutes last year. Expect this junior heavy team to make deep runs the next two years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 12, 2019, 07:42:38 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

As usual, a light schedule as many schools are at the end of the fall term.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	621	Swarthmore	9-0	def. #11 Johns Hopkins, 67-62
#2	592	Emory	9-0	IDLE
#3	546	Wittenberg	5-0	12/14 at Bridgewater (Va.); 12/15 vs. Eastern Mennonite
#4	528	Middlebury	9-0	IDLE
#5	493	St. Thomas	8-1	won at #28 Augsburg, 89-81
#6	467	Nebraska Wesleyan	9-1	12/14 at Wartburg
#7	466	Marietta	6-0	IDLE
#8	464	Randolph-Macon	9-0	IDLE
#9	416	Washington U.	8-1	won at Fontbonne, 86-44
#10	415	UW-Platteville	8-0	12/14 at Bethel
#11	349	Johns Hopkins	8-1	LOST at #1 Swarthmore, 62-67
#12	326	Elmhurst	6-0	12/14 vs. #32 North Central (Ill.)
#13	324	St. John's	7-1	won at Gustavus Adolphus, 66-52
#14	248	Babson	9-0	IDLE
#15	218	UW-La Crosse	7-0	def. Ripon, 54-53
#16	176	Whitworth	5-1	IDLE
#17	160	Nichols	7-1	won at Gordon, 76-73 OT; 12/14 at #33 Hamilton
#18	138	UW-Stevens Point	6-1	LOST to Bethel, 46-64; 12/14 at Ripon
#19	110	Colby	9-0	IDLE
#20	98	Guilford	8-2	IDLE
#21	97	Springfield	7-1	LOST at #25 Amherst, 70-76; 12/13 at Westfield State
#22	96	Carthage	6-1	12/14 vs. Alma
#23	94	Augustana	5-2	12/12 vs. MacMurray; 12/15 vs. T#40 Illinois Wesleyan
#24	86	Benedictine	8-1	IDLE
#25	78	Amherst	5-2	def. #21 Springfield, 76-70; 12/12 vs. Pine Manor

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	73	Wooster	5-1	12/15 vs. St. John Fisher
#27	63	UW-Oshkosh	5-3	IDLE
#28	61	Augsburg	5-2	LOST to #5 St. Thomas, 81-89
#29	57	Christopher Newport	7-3	12/15 at #36 Virginia Wesleyan
#30	49	WPI	8-2	IDLE
#31	48	UW-Eau Claire	8-1	def. Lawrence, 72-63; 12/14 at St. Norbert
#32	33	North Central (Ill.)	6-3	won at Aurora, 83-53; 12/14 at #12 Elmhurst
#33	20	Hamilton	8-1	12/14 vs. #17 Nichols
#34	17	Whitman	5-2	IDLE
#35	15	Rochester	8-1	def. Ithaca, 68-63
#36	14	Virginia Wesleyan	7-1	12/15 vs. #29 Christopher Newport
#37	13	Loras	7-1	12/14 vs. Adrian; 12/15 at Trine
#38	10	Muhlenberg	8-1	12/14 at Haverford
#39	9	Wheaton (Ill.)	7-2	won at Calvin, 76-67; 12/14 vs. North Park
T#40	7	Yeshiva	9-1	12/15 at Eastern Connecticut
T#40	7	Pomona-Pitzer	5-2	12/13 vs. Westcliff University
T#40	7	Illinois Wesleyan	6-2	12/15 at #23 Augustana
#43	5	Mount Union	5-2	12/14 vs. Wilmington
#44	4	Centre	7-2	IDLE
#45	3	Mary Hardin-Baylor	6-1	12/12 vs. St. Thomas (Texas); 12/15 vs. Concordia (Texas)
T#46	2	Albertus Magnus	8-1	12/14 vs. St. Lawrence
T#46	2	Widener	9-0	12/14 vs. Lycoming

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 12, 2019, 05:42:13 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=2f32h/3hyl0b8jvq4hveyi.jpg)

The basketball season now finds itself square in the middle of not only the holidays, but also finals. Teams are taking breaks to focus on academics and either not playing until the new year or finding openings to fit in games here and there.

And while the tempo of games subsides a bit, there is still plenty of news swirling around Division III. Tune in as Dave and guests tackle all of the news this week in what should be a jam-packed Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) on Thursday night.

Topics will include the latest news of two Capital Athletic Conference members announcing they are leaving for other conference homes. What is next for the CAC which will be down to just three members by 2021-22 season. The rumors about St. Thomas's future continue to swirl, we at least try and put some of those rumors to rest. And a MIAC president finally speaks out about the decision to push UST out the door. Maybe he should have not said anything.

Plus, there is a new number one team in women's basketball, a team that nearly completed an undefeated season has reemerged, another former champion is showing they may be back in the hunt, and a program we haven't talked about in a long time has made it known they are ready for the season.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Thursday's show LIVE with the following options:
- Main page: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville
- Show page: http://bit.ly/2rFn0MF (or www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2019-20/dec12)
- Facebook Live Simulcast: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
- YouTube Simulcast: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville
- Team1 Sports: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville/
- Team1 Sports app (https://team1sports.com/) (Android TV, Amazon Fire, Apple TV, Roku) - you will either find it under the "live" section or search for the Hoopsville channel

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or use any of the social media options to the right.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Doreen Carden, Albion women's coach
- Jill Pace, No. 1 Tufts women's coach
- Stephen Brennan, No. 14 Babson men's coach
- Keith Bunkenburg, No. 24 Benedictine coach

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)
(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/

We also have the podcast now on iHeartRadio (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/), Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 15, 2019, 09:17:44 AM

St. Norbert 70
UW-Eau Claire 58

St. Norbert's two losses are to #12-Elmhurst and #24-Benedictine.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 15, 2019, 05:12:34 PM

How They Fared (COMPLETE)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	621	Swarthmore	9-0	def. #11 Johns Hopkins, 67-62
#2	592	Emory	9-0	IDLE
#3	546	Wittenberg	7-0	won at Bridgewater (Va.), 96-74; def. (n) Eastern Mennonite, 80-59
#4	528	Middlebury	9-0	IDLE
#5	493	St. Thomas	8-1	won at #28 Augsburg, 89-81
#6	467	Nebraska Wesleyan	10-1	won at Wartburg, 85-69
#7	466	Marietta	6-0	IDLE
#8	464	Randolph-Macon	9-0	IDLE
#9	416	Washington U.	8-1	won at Fontbonne, 86-44
#10	415	UW-Platteville	9-0	won at Bethel, 65-54
#11	349	Johns Hopkins	8-1	LOST at #1 Swarthmore, 62-67
#12	326	Elmhurst	6-1	LOST to #32 North Central (Ill.), 74-76
#13	324	St. John's	7-1	won at Gustavus Adolphus, 66-52
#14	248	Babson	9-0	IDLE
#15	218	UW-La Crosse	7-0	def. Ripon, 54-53
#16	176	Whitworth	5-1	IDLE
#17	160	Nichols	7-2	won at Gordon, 76-73 OT; LOST at #33 Hamilton, 67-92
#18	138	UW-Stevens Point	7-1	LOST to Bethel, 46-64; won at Ripon, 72-49
#19	110	Colby	9-0	IDLE
#20	98	Guilford	8-2	IDLE
#21	97	Springfield	8-1	LOST at #25 Amherst, 70-76; won at Westfield State, 80-67
#22	96	Carthage	7-1	def. Alma, 98-94
#23	94	Augustana	6-3	def. MacMurray, 105-63; LOST to T#40 Illinois Wesleyan, 67-74 OT
#24	86	Benedictine	8-1	IDLE
#25	78	Amherst	6-2	def. #21 Springfield, 76-70; def. Pine Manor, 101-51

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	73	Wooster	6-1	won at St. John Fisher, 81-80
#27	63	UW-Oshkosh	5-3	IDLE
#28	61	Augsburg	5-2	LOST to #5 St. Thomas, 81-89
#29	57	Christopher Newport	7-4	LOST at #36 Virginia Wesleyan, 64-74
#30	49	WPI	8-2	IDLE
#31	48	UW-Eau Claire	8-2	def. Lawrence, 72-63; LOST at St. Norbert, 58-70
#32	33	North Central (Ill.)	7-3	won at Aurora, 83-53; won at #12 Elmhurst, 76-74
#33	20	Hamilton	9-1	def. #17 Nichols, 92-67
#34	17	Whitman	5-2	IDLE
#35	15	Rochester	8-1	def. Ithaca, 68-63
#36	14	Virginia Wesleyan	8-1	def. #29 Christopher Newport, 74-64
#37	13	Loras	8-2	LOST to (n) Adrian, 61-82; won at Trine, 72-70
#38	10	Muhlenberg	8-2	LOST at Haverford, 62-68
#39	9	Wheaton (Ill.)	8-2	won at Calvin, 76-67; def. North Park, 84-50
T#40	7	Yeshiva	10-1	won at Eastern Connecticut, 83-75
T#40	7	Pomona-Pitzer	6-2	def. Westcliff University, 83-68
T#40	7	Illinois Wesleyan	7-2	won at #23 Augustana, 74-67 OT
#43	5	Mount Union	6-2	def. Wilmington, 84-74
#44	4	Centre	7-2	IDLE
#45	3	Mary Hardin-Baylor	6-2	LOST to St. Thomas (Texas), 77-87
T#46	2	Albertus Magnus	9-1	def. St. Lawrence, 86-61
T#46	2	Widener	10-0	def. Lycoming, 57-54

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 15, 2019, 10:14:20 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=2ko2x/do6uhm8b20r3k0nr.jpg)
The 2019-20 season may end up seeing a lot of Division III coaches hit significant milestones throughout. On Sunday's Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com), Dave chats with three coaches who have already won milestone games this season.

Whether it's 500 or 600, the milestone is a sign of a coach who not only has been coaching a long time, but also successful at coaching. That is certainly the case for the three coaches on Sunday' show.

Plus, we look ahead at the final Top 25 polls before the holidays. Who might move up or down and which teams should either get more or less attention.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Sunday's show On Demand in the following ways:
- Main page: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville
- Show page: http://bit.ly/2RWf5FE (or www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2019-20/dec15)
- Facebook Live Simulcast: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
- YouTube Simulcast: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville
- Team1 Sports: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville/
- Team1 Sports app (https://team1sports.com/) (Android TV, Amazon Fire, Apple TV, Roku) - you will either find it under the "live" section or search for the Hoopsville channel

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Grey Giovanine, Augustana men's head coach
- Dave Niland, PSU-Behrend men's head coach
- Mary Beth Spirk, Moravian women's head coach
- Ryan Scott, Top 25 Double-Take

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=127/mh=38/cr=n/d=155od/msg7impgs5p0hnmg.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 16, 2019, 06:31:47 PM

With the numbers figured after yesterday's games, all of my Top 25 is in Massey's Top 50. I don't always agree with his specific rankings, but generally he's usually spot on. I can't think of a year where any legitimate Top 25 contender was outside Massey's Top 50. Obviously his rankings get better as the year goes along, but they seem to be rounding into form pretty well right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on December 16, 2019, 06:36:34 PM

The one Massey Top 25 team that kind of oddly stands out to me is St. Thomas (TX) at 21.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 16, 2019, 06:52:08 PM

Quote from: Fifth and Putnam on December 16, 2019, 06:36:34 PM
The one Massey Top 25 team that kind of oddly stands out to me is St. Thomas (TX) at 21.

Its the carry-over data from last season...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 16, 2019, 07:10:29 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on December 16, 2019, 06:52:08 PM
Quote from: Fifth and Putnam on December 16, 2019, 06:36:34 PM
The one Massey Top 25 team that kind of oddly stands out to me is St. Thomas (TX) at 21.

Its the carry-over data from last season...

They finished 707th overall last year as part of the NAIA and currently they're 544th overall so I don't think it's much to do with the carry-over. They've beaten UMHB (a team that picked up a couple votes in last week's poll), and had a 10 point loss (in an exhibition but counts in Massey) to a D1 team. Their other four games were all big wins (2 non D3, 2 Concordia TX). It will be interesting to see how they stack up against Rice on Thursday in another exhibition.
I know they're not NCAA tourney eligible but I think they could create some havoc in the SCAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 16, 2019, 07:15:46 PM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 16, 2019, 07:10:29 PM
Quote from: WUPHF on December 16, 2019, 06:52:08 PM
Quote from: Fifth and Putnam on December 16, 2019, 06:36:34 PM
The one Massey Top 25 team that kind of oddly stands out to me is St. Thomas (TX) at 21.

Its the carry-over data from last season...
They finished 707th overall last year as part of the NAIA and currently they're 544th overall so I don't think it's much to do with the carry-over. They've beaten UMHB (a team that picked up a couple votes in last week's poll), and had a 10 point loss (in an exhibition but counts in Massey) to a D1 team. Their other four games were all big wins (2 non D3, 2 Concordia TX). It will be interesting to see how they stack up against Rice on Thursday in another exhibition.
I know they're not NCAA tourney eligible but I think they could create some havoc in the SCAC.

The women's team is also very good. I believe both squads will be eligible for the SCAC tourney, just not the AQ if they win.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PauldingLightUP on December 16, 2019, 10:36:43 PM

Number 19 Benedictine has already lost, 72-90 to Concordia Chicago in NACC play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 17, 2019, 11:20:56 AM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 16, 2019, 07:10:29 PM
They finished 707th overall last year as part of the NAIA and currently they're 544th overall so I don't think it's much to do with the carry-over.

It depends how the data is used.

And it is not clear to me that we know how it is used.

For example, some people think that non-Division III games are figured in to the rankings. I am not sure for reasons I mentioned on the CCIW board.

St. Thomas finished 24th in the NAIA last season.

I would be surprised if if the 707 overall ranking matters.

I would not be surprised if there are flaws in bringing over the data when a school moves divisions or sanctioning bodies.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 17, 2019, 12:16:36 PM

No. Massey counts a game that counts for one as a game that counts for both. And it's agnostic of division. It's how you do against the CB universe (which includes EVERYTHING)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 17, 2019, 01:27:28 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on December 17, 2019, 11:20:56 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 16, 2019, 07:10:29 PM
They finished 707th overall last year as part of the NAIA and currently they're 544th overall so I don't think it's much to do with the carry-over.

It depends how the data is used.

And it is not clear to me that we know how it is used.

For example, some people think that non-Division III games are figured in to the rankings. I am not sure for reasons I mentioned on the CCIW board.

St. Thomas finished 24th in the NAIA last season.

I would be surprised if if the 707 overall ranking matters.

I would not be surprised if there are flaws in bringing over the data when a school moves divisions or sanctioning bodies.

Why would the overall ranking not matter? That's how Massey ranks all teams regardless of division or affiliation. There is no difference in the data regarding what division or sanctioning body they're part of. It's all just 1 big list of teams. NAIA isn't isolated from everyone like NESCAC football (which does cause issues in those rankings)

Currently 24th in the NAIA I rankings (where St Thomas finished last season) is Texas Wesleyan who is ranked 697th overall. To compare that to D3, LeTourneau is two spots ahead at 695th overall and 52nd in D3. If it was just carry-over from last season that's around the area I'd expect them to be, not 30 spots higher in D3 and 150 overall.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 17, 2019, 02:45:11 PM

So, I have no idea how Ken Massey has set-up his ratings, but I would be surprised if the overall rankings matter because there are not enough games played between NAIA and Division III schools.

I am not sure what Massey would say about the value of his rankings across divisions and sanctioning bodies but I think he would admit the flaws.

But let's say I am wrong as is often the case...

How else do we explain St. Thomas?

As to my point about non-Division III games counting, I am speaking specifically to the Division III rankings. As firm as the "No" response was, I would need to be convinced otherwise.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 17, 2019, 04:00:59 PM

As I understand it, Massey can't differentiate in a D1 v D3 game that the game for D1 counts and for D3 it is an exhibition. Thus, the D3 has that D1 influence. We see a lot more D3s playing these types of games and thus the data is going to be influenced by it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 17, 2019, 04:41:59 PM

This cannot be the case.

I think that Massey discounts all non-Division III games from the Division III ratings and here is my example as to why...

Massey has Illinois Wesleyan at No. 19 with a 7-3 record.

Click on the Illinois Wesleyan link and click on Division III and the record changes to 7-2 but the rating and SOS remain the same. Southern Illinois disappears from the schedule.

In Division II, Bellarmine would surely have the No. 1 SOS after playing both Louisville and Notre Dame.

Massey codes these programs for a reason.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 17, 2019, 04:51:41 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on December 17, 2019, 04:41:59 PM
This cannot be the case.

I think that Massey discounts all non-Division III games from the Division III ratings and here is my example as to why...

Massey has Illinois Wesleyan at No. 19 with a 7-3 record.

Click on the Illinois Wesleyan link and click on Division III and the record changes to 7-2 but the rating and SOS remain the same. Southern Illinois disappears from the schedule.

In Division II, Bellarmine would surely have the No. 1 SOS after playing both Louisville and Notre Dame.

Massey codes these programs for a reason.

This seems right.

Massey D3 ratings - https://www.masseyratings.com/cb2020/ncaa-d3/ratings.

IWU D3 page - https://www.masseyratings.com/team.php?t=3460&s=309912 (select NCAA D3).

Seems like the numbers used are identical -- meaning, only based on IWU's 9 D3 games. I don't see how the Southern Illinois game is factored in there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 17, 2019, 05:11:06 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on December 17, 2019, 04:41:59 PM
This cannot be the case.

I think that Massey discounts all non-Division III games from the Division III ratings and here is my example as to why...

Massey has Illinois Wesleyan at No. 19 with a 7-3 record.

Click on the Illinois Wesleyan link and click on Division III and the record changes to 7-2 but the rating and SOS remain the same. Southern Illinois disappears from the schedule.

In Division II, Bellarmine would surely have the No. 1 SOS after playing both Louisville and Notre Dame.

Massey codes these programs for a reason.

For Bellarmine, Louisville and Notre Dame are listed as exhibitions, and they are on both sides of the equation. So they are NOT counting for Bellarmine nor ND or Louisville.

Maybe Massey has tweaked it from the past. It used not to be that case. They have more menu options as well.

Good for him.

Still, for cross divisional comparisons, it includes everything.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on December 17, 2019, 05:11:39 PM

FYI - KenPom has now added in non-D1 results in his table. Sagarin still does not.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 18, 2019, 09:05:52 AM

From St. Norbert:

St. Norbert 96
UW-Oshkosh 95 (OT)

I watched this game - it was a great one. SNC hit a very difficult 3 with 1 second left in regulation to tie it. I assumed UWO would foul on this possession to prevent the 3-point attempt...they did not. Cue Bill Fenlon.

These are two good teams that are right in the middle of that mish mosh of teams from 15 to 35 ish. There are so many even teams it is crazy.

St. Norbert is now a pretty strong Top 25 candidate -- https://www.d3hoops.com/teams/St._Norbert/men/2019-20/index.

Also, St. Norbert has a chance to get in good shape in the Central region. If you look at their schedule, they might only lose 1 or 2 more the rest of the way. SNC has often had that kind of record, but this year they have the wins over Eau Claire and Oshkosh and a better SOS from those games and Elmhurst and Benedictine.

The Central region is really crazy this year in terms of depth.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on December 18, 2019, 09:18:36 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 18, 2019, 09:05:52 AM
From St. Norbert:

St. Norbert 96
UW-Oshkosh 95 (OT)

I watched this game - it was a great one. SNC hit a very difficult 3 with 1 second left in regulation to tie it. I assumed UWO would foul on this possession to prevent the 3-point attempt...they did not. Cue Bill Fenlon.

These are two good teams that are right in the middle of that mish mosh of teams from 15 to 35 ish. There are so many even teams it is crazy.

St. Norbert is now a pretty strong Top 25 candidate -- https://www.d3hoops.com/teams/St._Norbert/men/2019-20/index.

Also, St. Norbert has a chance to get in good shape in the Central region. If you look at their schedule, they might only lose 1 or 2 more the rest of the way. SNC has often had that kind of record, but this year they have the wins over Eau Claire and Oshkosh and a better SOS from those games and Elmhurst and Benedictine.

The Central region is really crazy this year in terms of depth.

Won't be long before we're talking "pods of death".

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 18, 2019, 09:46:49 AM

Quote from: Fifth and Putnam on December 18, 2019, 09:18:36 AM

Won't be long before we're talking "pods of death".

I don't think this a Bracket (or Pod) of Death kinda thing.

In that infamous year, you had a crazy amount of the top teams in the nation in one quadrant. This is different. I don't think any of the 14 Central Region Top 25 candidates is a top 5 type powerhouse. It's just that there are 14 teams in one region that are all "very good" (14 teams you could legitimately consider for a Top 25 vote), and probably on par with the teams around the #15 mark in the current poll. So when these teams get grouped together in the tournament, I don't think it will be unfair.

When Oshkosh goes to Emory and wins that game, I think we are going to see that the separation between the very top of the poll and the ORV category is very, very small.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 18, 2019, 10:09:34 AM

Just to clarify, the 14 Central teams I am referring to are:

#9 UW-Platteville
#10 Wash U
#15 UW-La Crosse
#16 Elmhurst
#18 Carthage
#19 Benedictine
#23 Illinois Wesleyan
#25 North Central
ORV UW-Oshkosh
ORV UW-Stevens Point
ORV Wheaton
ORV Augustana
ORV UW-Eau Claire
Plus: St. Norbert

I believe a voter could make a case for giving a vote to any of those teams.

I guess the one on the list you can make the least case for now is preseason #2 UW-Oshkosh at 5-4? Although worth noting, Massey has Oshkosh #19...SOS #2.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 18, 2019, 11:56:26 AM

I do think the Central SOS rankings are an interesting too and telling...

No. 1 Elmhurst
No. 2 Oshkosh

No. 4 Illinois Wesleyan
No. 5 Lake Forest

No. 7 St. Norbert
No. 8 Chicago
No. 9 Ripon
No. 10 Augustana

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on December 18, 2019, 02:44:38 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 18, 2019, 09:46:49 AM
When Oshkosh goes to Emory and wins that game, I think we are going to see that the separation between the very top of the poll and the ORV category is very, very small.

OR... Emory wins by 15-20 and maintain some strength at the very top of the ballot! ;D :) ;)

Obviously joking somewhat, but Im fairly bullish on Swat and Emory and am over giving UW-O the benefit of the doubt for the time being.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 18, 2019, 03:13:32 PM

Emory is going to light up Oshkosh, but the Eagles will have to find a way to slow down two 6-8 guys who are leading the Titans in scoring. This with a 6-7 forward who is basically a guard and a few other 6-5 guys who play much bigger than that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 19, 2019, 07:23:15 AM

How They Fared (So Far)
This shows games through Sunday, 12/29 ... although based on last year, the next poll might not happen until January 6.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	621	Swarthmore	9-0	IDLE
#2	596	Emory	9-0	12/29 vs. #26 UW-Oshkosh
#3	552	Wittenberg	8-0	def. Hanover, 69-52; 12/29 vs. Elmira
#4	528	Middlebury	10-0	def. Morrisville State, 72-55
#5	502	St. Thomas	8-1	IDLE
#6	476	Marietta	8-0	won at Transylvania, 107-61; def. (n) Albion, 96-70; 12/28 vs. Salisbury; 12/29 vs. York (Pa.)
#7	470	Randolph-Macon	9-0	12/29 vs. Lebanon Valley
#8	469	Nebraska Wesleyan	10-1	12/21 at UW-River Falls
#9	436	UW-Platteville	9-0	12/27 vs. LeTourneau; 12/28 at #43 Mary Hardin-Baylor
#10	429	Washington U.	8-1	12/19 at #23 Illinois Wesleyan
#11	346	St. John's	7-1	12/20 at Linfield; 12/21 at Willamette
#12	320	Babson	9-0	IDLE
#13	312	Johns Hopkins	8-1	12/29 vs. Drew
#14	276	Whitworth	6-1	def. Mary Washington, 78-73; 12/28 vs. John Carroll; 12/29 at #24 Wooster
#15	244	UW-La Crosse	7-0	12/20 at Willamette; 12/21 at George Fox; 12/29 vs. #41 Augustana
#16	241	Elmhurst	7-1	won at La Verne, 97-64; 12/19 at Caltech; 12/22 vs. Illinois College
#17	224	Colby	9-0	IDLE
#18	130	Carthage	8-1	def. (n) Albright, 73-65; 12/19 vs. Birmingham-Southern
#19	129	Benedictine	8-2	LOST at Concordia-Chicago, 72-90
#20	104	Amherst	6-2	12/29 vs. Baruch
#21	100	Guilford	8-2	12/29 vs. LaGrange
#22	85	Hamilton	9-1	IDLE
#23	68	Illinois Wesleyan	7-2	12/19 vs. #10 Washington U.; 12/29 at Concordia (Texas)
#24	63	Wooster	7-1	def. Brockport, 94-90; 12/28 vs. Keene State; 12/29 vs. #14 Whitworth
#25	51	North Central (Ill.)	7-3	12/28 at Concordia (Texas); 12/29 vs. Sul Ross State

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	44	UW-Oshkosh	5-4	LOST at St. Norbert, 95-96 OT; 12/29 at #2 Emory
#27	43	Virginia Wesleyan	8-1	12/29 at Cabrini
#28	41	UW-Stevens Point	7-1	12/22 vs. #41 Augustana; 12/28 at Texas-Dallas; 12/29 vs. T#44 East Texas Baptist
#29	31	Springfield	8-1	IDLE
#30	25	Augsburg	5-2	12/20 vs. Shenandoah; 12/21 vs. St. Mary's (Md.)
#31	23	Rochester	8-1	IDLE
T#32	22	WPI	8-2	IDLE
T#32	22	Widener	10-0	12/19 at Lafayette
#34	20	Nichols	7-2	IDLE
T#35	12	Wheaton (Ill.)	8-2	IDLE
T#35	12	Whitman	5-2	12/27 at #43 Mary Hardin-Baylor; 12/28 vs. LeTourneau
T#35	12	Yeshiva	11-1	def. New Jersey City, 97-92; 12/19 at Moravian
#38	11	Pomona-Pitzer	6-2	12/29 vs. Lake Forest
#39	10	Albertus Magnus	9-1	IDLE
#40	7	Mount Union	6-2	12/28 vs. Alfred; 12/29 vs. Union
#41	6	Augustana	6-3	12/22 at #28 UW-Stevens Point; 12/29 at #15 UW-La Crosse
#42	4	UW-Eau Claire	8-2	IDLE
#43	3	Mary Hardin-Baylor	7-2	def. Concordia (Texas), 102-93; 12/27 vs. T#35 Whitman; 12/28 vs. #9 UW-Platteville
T#44	2	Centre	7-2	12/19 vs. Marymount; 12/20 vs. Lawrence
T#44	2	East Texas Baptist	6-1	12/28 vs. Blackburn; 12/29 vs. #28 UW-Stevens Point
#46	1	Christopher Newport	7-4	12/28 vs. Bethany; 12/29 vs. TBA

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on December 19, 2019, 09:14:24 AM

I know this isn't the right thread but I assumed it would get most traffic here..

Hey guys, I listened to Hoopsville last night and have some possible talking points if you are planning on a little more casual show. Obviously this is late notice but maybe it would provide some good discussions or provoke some other interesting talking points.

- Early front runners for PotY in each region
- Surprise team (maybe a deep dive surprise team) from each region
- The five best D3 programs of the decade (being its the last show of 2010-19
- the all decade team (of players)
- Best gyms/campus/atmosphere you have watched a game at

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on December 19, 2019, 09:37:30 AM

Some good topics there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 19, 2019, 10:45:57 AM

Interesting question re: the top five D3 programs of the decade. Stevens Point, Whitewater, and St. Thomas are all locks (two titles each). That leaves two spots for Amherst, Williams, Babson, Wisconsin Oshkosh, Augustana, all of whom could make a case (along with maybe one or two others, but that group definitely comes to mind).

The case for Williams:

National runners-up in 2010 and 2014.
Final fours in 2011 and 2017
Elite 8s in 2013 and 2019
NCAA second round in 2018

NESCAC titles in 2010 and 2018, runners-up in 2011, 2013, 2014, 2017
Jostens National POY in 2010 (Blake Schultz)
National ROY in 2014 (Duncan Robinson, now an NBA starter)

D3 Hoops all-Americans (including HM):
Bobby Casey, James Heskett, Michael Mayer, Duncan Robinson, James Wang, Troy Whittington, Blake Schultz

Hayden Rooke-Ley set D3 record for most consecutive free throws made

For the all-decade team, from New England, Aaron Toomey, Jake Ross, and Joey Flannery all have to be represented in some capacity, I'd say, assuming going with several teams of guys. Duncan Robinson was obviously the best player to come through D3 this decade, but only played one year, which rules him out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 19, 2019, 10:58:53 AM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on December 19, 2019, 09:14:24 AM
- the all decade team (of players)

Off the top of my head, without a ton of research:

Toomey, DiBartolomeo, Flannery, Francis, Djurickovic.

Of course that's like four guards and a guard sized swing man, plus three of them are ball-dominant PGs, so you could never actually field this team, but those are probably the five best players of the decade (with the possible exception of Whitworth's Michael Taylor, who was only around for one season and I never really got a good handle on).

I didn't include guys who graduated in 09-10 (Stevie D was a junior).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 19, 2019, 11:07:22 AM

On the general topic of early award front-runners, RIC's Shion Darby is, statistically, having a ridiculous rookie season so far:

28.6-4.4-5.3, on respectable (especially given that volume) 45/33/74 shooting splits

For all decade, another name to consider, Aaron Walton-Moss, Cabrini.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Colby Hoops on December 19, 2019, 11:46:41 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on December 19, 2019, 11:07:22 AM
On the general topic of early award front-runners, RIC's Shion Darby is, statistically, having a ridiculous rookie season so far:

28.6-4.4-5.3, on respectable (especially given that volume) 45/33/74 shooting splits

And he's not even close to the most fun player on his team. Keyshaun Jacobs (a transfer from Morehouse) might be my favorite player in the country. He's made more three pointers than about 100 teams and attempted more three pointers than about 50 teams -- the guy has zero conscience. He's putting up 13.8 threes per game! And making a very solid 38 percent of them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 19, 2019, 11:57:19 AM

Quote from: Colby Hoops on December 19, 2019, 11:46:41 AM
Quote from: nescac1 on December 19, 2019, 11:07:22 AM
On the general topic of early award front-runners, RIC's Shion Darby is, statistically, having a ridiculous rookie season so far:

28.6-4.4-5.3, on respectable (especially given that volume) 45/33/74 shooting splits

And he's not even close to the most fun player on his team. Keyshaun Jacobs (a transfer from Morehouse) might be my favorite player in the country. He's made more three pointers than about 100 teams and attempted more three pointers than about 50 teams -- the guy has zero conscience. He's putting up 13.8 threes per game! And making a very solid 38 percent of them.

And his range is insane.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on December 19, 2019, 01:54:48 PM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on December 19, 2019, 09:14:24 AM
I know this isn't the right thread but I assumed it would get most traffic here..

Hey guys, I listened to Hoopsville last night and have some possible talking points if you are planning on a little more casual show. Obviously this is late notice but maybe it would provide some good discussions or provoke some other interesting talking points.

- Early front runners for PotY in each region
- Surprise team (maybe a deep dive surprise team) from each region
- The five best D3 programs of the decade (being its the last show of 2010-19
- the all decade team (of players)
- Best gyms/campus/atmosphere you have watched a game at

The all decade team last decade went over pretty well as I remember. ;) :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 19, 2019, 08:33:35 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=2rzjc/rwv59zqq04xkhrbv.jpg)

What a start to the 2019-20 season! As we head into the holidays "break," there is a lot to talk about. We don't have enough time in a show to cover it all, but we will do our best.

Tune into Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) Thursday night as Dave is joined not only by a couple of coaches who have their programs humming along, but also three of the show's best prognosticators who will open up a few Christmas gifts for Division III fans.

Marietta men are once again playing very well in the first half of the season, but do you know why the Pioneers are this good? Jon VanderWal gives us some insight of what is going on in Southern Ohio. Plus, the Augsburg women are one of four MIAC teams ranked in the Top 25 this past week. The Auggies are coming off an unprecedented win over St. Thomas (Minn.) as well. Ted Riverso discusses how it is the perfect bow before their three-week break.

Plus, Bob Quillman and Ryan Scott give us their individual takes on the first part of the season and what they expect in the final two months. And Gordon Mann gives us his exceptional takes on the women's side of the ledger. Who really are the best teams in the country and who should we be watching?

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Sunday's show On Demand in the following ways:
- Main page: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville
- Show page: http://bit.ly/2EBOzt2 (or www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2019-20/dec19)
- Facebook Live Simulcast: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville (only the first 45 minutes aired; may have had a copyright problem haha)
- YouTube Simulcast: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville
- Team1 Sports: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville/
- Team1 Sports app (https://team1sports.com/) (Android TV, Amazon Fire, Apple TV, Roku) - you will either find it under the "live" section or search for the Hoopsville channel

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Bob Quillman, Hoopsville contributor
- Jon VanderWal, No. 6 Marietta men's head coach
- Ryan Scott, D3hoops.com Around the Nation columnist
- Ted Riverso, No. 16 Augsburg women's head coach
- Gordon Mann, D3hoops.com Senior Editor

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=127/mh=38/cr=n/d=155od/msg7impgs5p0hnmg.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 19, 2019, 10:08:19 PM

Quote from: mohoops on December 19, 2019, 09:49:26 PM
WashU over IWU 97-88. Big night from Jack Nolan.
I may have seen this wrong on the streaming, but did the IWU coach skip the handshake line at the end of the game?

Ron Rose was the first guy in the handshake line.

https://portal.stretchinternet.com/iwu/portal.htm?eventId=571877&streamType=video

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mohoops on December 19, 2019, 10:10:12 PM

I stand corrected.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 21, 2019, 06:53:46 PM

UW-River Falls 84
#8-Nebraska Wesleyan 82

I didn't see that coming.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 21, 2019, 07:32:48 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 21, 2019, 06:53:46 PM
UW-River Falls 84
#8-Nebraska Wesleyan 82

I didn't see that coming.

I didn't see it at all. Both live stats were stuck on 4-3 with 17:28 to go and neither schedule had a final despite me looking after 5:00 central time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 22, 2019, 05:25:11 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

Results for the past week, and upcoming games for the next two weeks. There are still a few more games on the schedule for tonight, but because the next vote is (I assume) still two weeks away, I won't bother updating.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	621	Swarthmore	9-0	01/02 vs. #31 Rochester; 01/05 at Stevens
#2	596	Emory	9-0	12/29 vs. #26 UW-Oshkosh; 12/30 vs. #21 Guilford
#3	552	Wittenberg	8-0	def. Hanover, 69-52; 12/29 vs. Elmira; 12/30 vs. TBA; 01/04 vs. Kenyon
#4	528	Middlebury	10-0	def. Morrisville State, 72-55; 01/03 vs. Colby-Sawyer; 01/04 vs. TBA
#5	502	St. Thomas	8-1	01/04 at Concordia-Moorhead
#6	476	Marietta	8-0	won at Transylvania, 107-61; def. (n) Albion, 96-70; 12/28 vs. Salisbury; 12/29 vs. York (Pa.); 01/04 at Wilmington
#7	470	Randolph-Macon	9-0	12/29 vs. Lebanon Valley; 12/30 vs. TBD; 01/04 at Emory and Henry
#8	469	Nebraska Wesleyan	10-2	LOST at UW-River Falls, 82-84; 01/04 at Loras
#9	436	UW-Platteville	9-0	12/27 vs. LeTourneau; 12/28 at #43 Mary Hardin-Baylor; 01/04 vs. UW-Stout
#10	429	Washington U.	9-1	won at #23 Illinois Wesleyan, 97-88; 12/31 at Millikin
#11	346	St. John's	9-1	won at Linfield, 69-62; won at Willamette, 82-69; 01/04 vs. #30 Augsburg
#12	320	Babson	9-0	12/30 vs. Eastern Connecticut; 12/31 at TBA
#13	312	Johns Hopkins	8-1	12/29 vs. Drew; 12/30 vs. TBD
#14	276	Whitworth	6-1	def. Mary Washington, 78-73; 12/28 vs. John Carroll; 12/29 at #24 Wooster; 01/03 vs. Pacific Lutheran; 01/04 vs. Puget Sound
#15	244	UW-La Crosse	9-0	won at Willamette, 89-60; won at George Fox, 77-62; 12/29 vs. #41 Augustana; 01/04 at #26 UW-Oshkosh
#16	241	Elmhurst	8-1	won at La Verne, 97-64; won at Caltech, 87-78; 12/22 vs. Illinois College; 12/30 vs. Principia; 01/04 at Carroll
#17	224	Colby	9-0	12/31 at Southern Maine; 01/03 at Maine Maritime; 01/05 vs. Bowdoin
#18	130	Carthage	9-1	def. (n) Albright, 73-65; def. (n) Birmingham-Southern, 92-75; 12/31 at Olivet; 01/04 vs. #41 Augustana
#19	129	Benedictine	8-2	LOST at Concordia-Chicago, 72-90; 01/04 vs. Marian
#20	104	Amherst	6-2	12/29 vs. Baruch; 12/30 vs. UW-Whitewater; 01/04 vs. Lesley
#21	100	Guilford	8-2	12/29 vs. LaGrange; 12/30 at #2 Emory; 01/04 at Hampden-Sydney
#22	85	Hamilton	9-1	01/03 vs. Utica
#23	68	Illinois Wesleyan	7-3	LOST to #10 Washington U., 88-97; 12/29 at Concordia (Texas); 12/30 vs. Sul Ross State; 01/04 vs. Millikin
#24	63	Wooster	7-1	def. Brockport, 94-90; 12/28 vs. Keene State; 12/29 vs. #14 Whitworth; 01/04 at Ohio Wesleyan
#25	51	North Central (Ill.)	7-3	12/28 at Concordia (Texas); 12/29 vs. Sul Ross State; 01/04 vs. T#35 Wheaton (Ill.)

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	44	UW-Oshkosh	5-4	LOST at St. Norbert, 95-96 OT; 12/29 at #2 Emory; 12/30 vs. LaGrange; 01/04 vs. #15 UW-La Crosse
#27	43	Virginia Wesleyan	8-1	12/29 at Cabrini; 12/30 vs. TBA; 01/04 at Lynchburg
#28	41	UW-Stevens Point	7-1	12/22 vs. #41 Augustana; 12/28 at Texas-Dallas; 12/29 vs. T#44 East Texas Baptist; 01/04 at UW-River Falls
#29	31	Springfield	8-1	01/03 vs. Bridgewater State; 01/04 vs. TBA
#30	25	Augsburg	7-2	def. (n) Shenandoah, 72-60; def. (n) St. Mary's (Md.), 90-73; 01/04 at #11 St. John's
#31	23	Rochester	8-1	01/02 at #1 Swarthmore
T#32	22	WPI	8-2	01/04 at Framingham State
T#32	22	Widener	10-1	LOST at Lafayette, 56-96; 01/04 vs. #46 Christopher Newport
#34	20	Nichols	7-2	01/02 vs. Emerson; 01/04 vs. Tufts
T#35	12	Wheaton (Ill.)	8-2	12/30 vs. St. Mary's (Minn.); 12/31 vs. TBA; 01/04 at #25 North Central (Ill.)
T#35	12	Whitman	5-2	12/27 at #43 Mary Hardin-Baylor; 12/28 vs. LeTourneau; 01/03 vs. Puget Sound; 01/04 vs. Pacific Lutheran
T#35	12	Yeshiva	12-1	def. New Jersey City, 97-92; won at Moravian, 85-78
#38	11	Pomona-Pitzer	6-2	12/29 vs. Lake Forest; 12/31 vs. Gustavus Adolphus; 01/04 at Chapman
#39	10	Albertus Magnus	9-1	01/04 at York (Pa.); 01/05 vs. Coast Guard
#40	7	Mount Union	6-2	12/28 vs. Alfred; 12/29 vs. Union; 01/04 at Heidelberg
#41	6	Augustana	6-3	12/22 at #28 UW-Stevens Point; 12/29 at #15 UW-La Crosse; 01/04 at #18 Carthage
#42	4	UW-Eau Claire	8-2	12/30 at St. Olaf; 01/04 vs. UW-Whitewater
#43	3	Mary Hardin-Baylor	7-2	def. Concordia (Texas), 102-93; 12/27 vs. T#35 Whitman; 12/28 vs. #9 UW-Platteville; 01/02 vs. University of the Ozarks; 01/04 vs. Texas-Dallas
T#44	2	Centre	9-2	def. (n) Marymount, 72-62; def. (n) Lawrence, 85-60; 12/30 vs. Transylvania; 01/03 at Birmingham-Southern; 01/05 at Millsaps
T#44	2	East Texas Baptist	6-1	12/28 vs. Blackburn; 12/29 vs. #28 UW-Stevens Point; 01/02 at Hardin-Simmons; 01/04 at McMurry
#46	1	Christopher Newport	7-4	12/28 vs. Bethany; 12/29 vs. TBA; 01/02 at Washington College; 01/04 at T#32 Widener

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 29, 2019, 09:36:56 PM

Final: #24 Wooster 87 #14 Whitworth 82

Wooster was led by Keonn Scott with 29 points, Dontae Williams with 20 and Danyon Hempy with 18. Scots shot 55% from the floor and outrebounded the Pirates 32 to 29 to get the win.

Wooster is now 9-1 and Whitworth drops to 6-3 after losing both of their games in the Great Lakes Invitational

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Onward on, John Carroll on December 29, 2019, 10:00:53 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on December 29, 2019, 09:36:56 PM
Final: #24 Wooster 87 #14 Whitworth 82

Wooster was led by Keonn Scott with 29 points, Dontae Williams with 20 and Danyon Hempy with 18. Scots shot 55% from the floor and outrebounded the Pirates 32 to 29 to get the win.

Wooster is now 9-1 and Whitworth drops to 6-3 after losing both of their games in the Great Lakes Invitational

Does this count / how does this count as a regional and for the purposes of tournament selection?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 29, 2019, 10:07:56 PM

Quote from: Onward on, John Carroll on December 29, 2019, 10:00:53 PM
Quote from: wooscotsfan on December 29, 2019, 09:36:56 PM
Final: #24 Wooster 87 #14 Whitworth 82

Wooster was led by Keonn Scott with 29 points, Dontae Williams with 20 and Danyon Hempy with 18. Scots shot 55% from the floor and outrebounded the Pirates 32 to 29 to get the win.

Wooster is now 9-1 and Whitworth drops to 6-3 after losing both of their games in the Great Lakes Invitational

Does this count / how does this count as a regional and for the purposes of tournament selection?

So long as a team plays 70% of their games against regional opponents, all d3 results count for regional rankings. Whitworth was missing starting PG, Isaiah Hernandez for this one (he played 32 minutes last night, so no idea why he was out for this one), but a win is still a win in the eyes of the numbers. Good one for Wooster and a regrettable weekend for the Pirates. They look to be the class of the NWC, so hopefully they won't have to worry about Pool C anyway.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on December 29, 2019, 10:11:08 PM

Would also count as a win against a regionally ranked opponent if Whitworth is ranked in the West Region later this year in the NCAA regional rankings. Only other minor benefit could be lifting your Strength of Schedule slightly if Whitworth finishes the rest of the season with a strong record. Good chance that Whitworth will probably win their NWC conference this season, IMO.

Both John Carroll and Wooster need to hope that Whitworth is regionally ranked later this year. ;) Nice win by the Blue Streaks yesterday! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 30, 2019, 05:46:21 PM

Romin Williams hit a huge three to go up on Guilford with three seconds left. Guilford came right down and hit a running three to win it. Emory has been defeated.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on December 30, 2019, 05:47:24 PM

#21 Guilford defeats #2 Emory, 70-69, at the buzzer!

Emory finished non conference play at 10-1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on December 30, 2019, 06:01:04 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 30, 2019, 05:46:21 PM

Romin Williams hit a huge three to go up on Guilford with three seconds left. Guilford came right down and hit a running three to win it. Emory has been defeated.

Keys to the upset:

1.) Guilford slowed down the game.

2.). Spectacular performance from Guilford first year player Tyler Dearman 23 pts 10 rebounds -- 5-9 from 3 pt range. Dearman did not hit the buzzer beater.

3.). Guilford Jr guard Jaylen Gore hit the 3 at the buzzer to win it-- first and only 3 pt attempt of the game for him. He was 6-21 for the season from 3 pt range coming into the game and more known as an inside shooter statistically.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 03, 2020, 04:30:49 PM

I was glancing at the scores and noticed the 104-97 win by Utica over Hamilton.

Utica was knocked off by Rochester so I thought I would look closer.

61 fouls between the two teams.

Utica committed 25 fouls but the fouls were relatively evenly distributed. Utica was 48-59 from the line.

Hamilton committed 36 fouls, had two players disqualified and had three others with four fouls. They went 19-27 from the line.

Utica chain saw massacre!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 03, 2020, 09:22:36 PM

I watched the last quarter of the Utica-Hamilton game ... Utica nearly lost it. They had a sizable lead with 6:30 left and Hamilton outscored them something like 24-12 to close it down. Got to within three at the end, but couldn't close out from there.

I wasn't watching that closely, but fouls I was seeing were pretty fair. Neither team seemed to want to back off.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Colby Hoops on January 04, 2020, 09:16:24 AM

I thought it was called extremely tight, some touch fouls that you don't often see called. But, I thought Hamilton did a pretty poor job adjusting to the way the officials were calling it. At a certain point you have to realize the game is being called a certain way and adjust.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 04, 2020, 09:41:03 AM

Quote from: Colby Hoops on January 04, 2020, 09:16:24 AM
I thought it was called extremely tight, some touch fouls that you don't often see called. But, I thought Hamilton did a pretty poor job adjusting to the way the officials were calling it. At a certain point you have to realize the game is being called a certain way and adjust.

Also, I don't know how often Kena Gilmour is going to go 2-10 from three. He hits two of those or even passes off to someone shooting a little better that night, it's a totally different game. He was like 50% from the floor, so it's not as though the defense was really troubling him - he was just off from deep.

Utica's a good team, though, and Hamilton is very young. Young players, no matter how good, tend to struggle in tight games against good teams. That's one thing - for most players anyway - that can only be learned by experience.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 05, 2020, 05:16:04 PM

How They Fared (complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	621	Swarthmore	11-0	def. #31 Rochester, 59-56; won at Stevens, 74-71
#2	596	Emory	10-1	def. #26 UW-Oshkosh, 87-80; LOST to #21 Guilford, 69-70
#3	552	Wittenberg	11-0	def. Hanover, 69-52; def. Elmira, 81-51; def. Ohio Northern, 79-72; def. Kenyon, 75-65
#4	528	Middlebury	12-0	def. Morrisville State, 72-55; def. Colby-Sawyer, 91-80; won at #29 Springfield, 74-71
#5	502	St. Thomas	9-1	won at Concordia-Moorhead, 85-49
#6	476	Marietta	10-1	won at Transylvania, 107-61; def. (n) Albion, 96-70; LOST to (n) Salisbury, 80-88; def. (n) York (Pa.), 92-86; won at Wilmington, 75-64
#7	470	Randolph-Macon	12-0	def. Lebanon Valley, 94-56; def. Rowan, 73-66; won at Emory and Henry, 93-60
#8	469	Nebraska Wesleyan	11-2	LOST at UW-River Falls, 82-84; won at Loras, 99-85
#9	436	UW-Platteville	11-1	def. (n) LeTourneau, 74-66; LOST at #43 Mary Hardin-Baylor, 72-74; def. UW-Stout, 89-67
#10	429	Washington U.	9-2	won at #23 Illinois Wesleyan, 97-88; LOST at Millikin, 61-63
#11	346	St. John's	10-1	won at Linfield, 69-62; won at Willamette, 82-69; def. #30 Augsburg, 82-63
#12	320	Babson	10-1	LOST to Eastern Connecticut, 76-77; def. (n) Regis (Mass.), 84-59
#13	312	Johns Hopkins	9-2	def. (n) Drew, 81-70; LOST at Stevens, 65-72
#14	276	Whitworth	8-3	def. Mary Washington, 78-73; LOST to (n) John Carroll, 89-95; LOST at #24 Wooster, 82-87; def. Pacific Lutheran, 75-59; def. Puget Sound, 92-80
#15	244	UW-La Crosse	10-1	won at Willamette, 89-60; won at George Fox, 77-62; def. #41 Augustana, 64-62; LOST at #26 UW-Oshkosh, 63-79
#16	241	Elmhurst	11-1	won at La Verne, 97-64; won at Caltech, 87-78; def. Illinois College, 93-68; def. Principia, 89-64; won at Carroll, 82-81 2OT
#17	224	Colby	11-0	won at Maine Maritime, 79-59; def. Bowdoin, 108-62
#18	130	Carthage	9-3	def. (n) Albright, 73-65; def. (n) Birmingham-Southern, 92-75; LOST to (n) Olivet, 73-88; LOST to #41 Augustana, 68-84
#19	129	Benedictine	9-2	LOST at Concordia-Chicago, 72-90; def. Marian, 102-35
#20	104	Amherst	9-2	def. (n) Baruch, 89-63; def. (n) UW-Whitewater, 76-54; def. Lesley, 116-44
#21	100	Guilford	10-3	def. (n) LaGrange, 84-67; won at #2 Emory, 70-69; LOST at Hampden-Sydney, 52-54
#22	85	Hamilton	9-2	LOST to Utica, 97-104
#23	68	Illinois Wesleyan	9-4	LOST to #10 Washington U., 88-97; LOST at Concordia (Texas), 69-88; def. (n) Sul Ross State, 82-81; def. Millikin, 80-71
#24	63	Wooster	9-2	def. Brockport, 94-90; def. Keene State, 93-76; def. #14 Whitworth, 87-82; LOST at Ohio Wesleyan, 60-65
#25	51	North Central (Ill.)	10-3	won at Concordia (Texas), 83-71; def. (n) Sul Ross State, 83-79; def. T#35 Wheaton (Ill.), 74-71 OT

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	44	UW-Oshkosh	7-5	LOST at St. Norbert, 95-96 OT; LOST at #2 Emory, 80-87; def. (n) LaGrange, 93-76; def. #15 UW-La Crosse, 79-63
#27	43	Virginia Wesleyan	10-2	def. Cabrini, 104-64; won at FDU-Florham, 88-60; LOST at Lynchburg, 74-76
#28	41	UW-Stevens Point	9-3	LOST to #41 Augustana, 60-68; LOST at Texas-Dallas, 60-61; def. (n) T#44 East Texas Baptist, 62-60; won at UW-River Falls, 86-63
#29	31	Springfield	9-2	def. Bridgewater State, 77-45; LOST to #4 Middlebury, 71-74
#30	25	Augsburg	7-3	def. (n) Shenandoah, 72-60; def. (n) St. Mary's (Md.), 90-73; LOST at #11 St. John's, 63-82
#31	23	Rochester	8-2	LOST at #1 Swarthmore, 56-59
T#32	22	WPI	9-2	won at Framingham State, 90-38
T#32	22	Widener	10-2	LOST at Lafayette, 56-96; LOST to #46 Christopher Newport, 81-92
#34	20	Nichols	7-4	LOST to Emerson, 81-87 OT; LOST to Tufts, 65-75
T#35	12	Wheaton (Ill.)	9-4	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 77-67; LOST to Hanover, 65-76; LOST at #25 North Central (Ill.), 71-74 OT
T#35	12	Whitman	7-4	LOST at #43 Mary Hardin-Baylor, 95-107; LOST to (n) LeTourneau, 105-111; def. Puget Sound, 89-84; def. Pacific Lutheran, 84-66
T#35	12	Yeshiva	12-1	def. New Jersey City, 97-92; won at Moravian, 85-78
#38	11	Pomona-Pitzer	9-2	def. Lake Forest, 84-67; def. Gustavus Adolphus, 110-91; won at Chapman, 66-55
#39	10	Albertus Magnus	11-1	won at York (Pa.), 76-73; def. (n) Coast Guard, 103-95
#40	7	Mount Union	8-3	def. (n) Alfred, 84-66; def. (n) Union, 78-65; LOST at Heidelberg, 67-68
#41	6	Augustana	8-4	won at #28 UW-Stevens Point, 68-60; LOST at #15 UW-La Crosse, 62-64; won at #18 Carthage, 84-68
#42	4	UW-Eau Claire	10-2	won at St. Olaf, 76-70; def. UW-Whitewater, 66-59
#43	3	Mary Hardin-Baylor	10-2	def. Concordia (Texas), 102-93; def. T#35 Whitman, 107-95; def. #9 UW-Platteville, 74-72; def. University of the Ozarks, 84-80; LOST to Texas-Dallas, 77-89
T#44	2	Centre	12-2	def. (n) Marymount, 72-62; def. (n) Lawrence, 85-60; def. Transylvania, 86-71; won at Birmingham-Southern, 77-68; won at Millsaps, 78-71
T#44	2	East Texas Baptist	9-2	def. Blackburn, 88-69; LOST to (n) #28 UW-Stevens Point, 60-62; won at Hardin-Simmons, 94-84 OT; won at McMurry, 92-77
#46	1	Christopher Newport	11-4	def. Bethany, 96-52; def. Wesley, 97-78; won at Washington College, 89-57; won at T#32 Widener, 92-81

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 05, 2020, 06:56:33 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=3nnn9/l4zgfkym49g7z7yz.jpg)

The break for the holidays always has plenty of games to enjoy. It also has it's handful of results that make one scratch their head or an upset to enjoy. This holiday "season" saw plenty of all of that. Top 25 teams were not safe. Nearly all seemed to lose. There were results every day that made Division III coaches, fans, and many others take note.

Sunday night Hoopsville returns to the air from the holidays with plenty to talk about, but not enough time. We chat with teams that impressed, got a big win, continue to stay unscathed, and may end up in the new Top 25 polls. We also try and read the Top 25 tea leaves to figure out how voters may fill out their ballots on Monday (hint: it might be anyone's guess).

While we try and cover all Division III basketball news, now that we have entered January we split up the regions to cover as many teams as possible each week. Sundays the regions are Atlantic, Central, Northeast, and South.

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Sunday's show LIVE in the following ways:
- Main page: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville
- Show page: http://bit.ly/36stzBs (or www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2019-20/jan5)
- Facebook Live Simulcast: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville (only the first 45 minutes aired; may have had a copyright problem haha)
- YouTube Simulcast: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville
- Team1 Sports: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville/
- Team1 Sports app (https://team1sports.com/) (Android TV, Amazon Fire, Apple TV, Roku) - you will either find it under the "live" section or search for the Hoopsville channel

All men's basketball coaches are part of the NABC Coach's Corner. All guests appear on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or use any of the social media options.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Tom Palombo, No. 21 Guilford men's coach
- Bobby Hurley, Stevens men's coach
- Lynn Hersey, Smith women's coach
- Bob Quillman & Ryan Scott, Top 25 Double-Take

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=127/mh=38/cr=n/d=155od/msg7impgs5p0hnmg.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 06, 2020, 09:42:09 PM

2-8 Hamline and St Thomas are going to OT. #parity

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on January 08, 2020, 02:03:07 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on January 06, 2020, 09:42:09 PM
2-8 Hamline and St Thomas are going to OT. #parity

Pretty surprising game, as Hamline has not been very good this year. With that said, Anders Nelson (Last years Freshman of the year) had a big performance scoring 42 points to prevent the huge upset. Already getting excited for the SJU/UST game, as it is always a huge rivalry game, but both of these teams are currently in the top 10, as if the rivalry needed anything else...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 09, 2020, 07:39:05 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Swarthmore	11-0	01/09 at Muhlenberg; 01/11 at Franklin and Marshall
#2	578	Wittenberg	12-0	won at Denison, 80-63; 01/11 at Hiram
#3	562	Middlebury	13-0	def. Plattsburgh State, 99-60; 01/10 at #15 Amherst; 01/11 at T#32 Hamilton
#4	537	Randolph-Macon	12-1	LOST at Mary Washington, 65-70; 01/11 vs. Ferrum
#5	529	St. Thomas	11-1	won at Hamline, 92-83 OT; def. St. Olaf, 94-73; 01/11 vs. #7 St. John's
#6	518	Emory	10-1	01/11 vs. #26 Rochester
#7	429	St. John's	11-1	won at St. Olaf, 91-75; 01/11 at #5 St. Thomas
#8	414	Marietta	11-1	def. Muskingum, 95-73; 01/11 vs. Heidelberg
#9	410	UW-Platteville	12-1	won at #40 UW-Oshkosh, 74-70; 01/11 vs. T#37 UW-Eau Claire
#10	390	Nebraska Wesleyan	12-2	def. Simpson, 86-64; 01/11 vs. Luther
#11	375	Elmhurst	12-1	def. #36 Augustana, 80-71; 01/11 vs. North Park
#12	341	Colby	11-0	01/10 vs. Connecticut College; 01/11 vs. Trinity (Conn.)
#13	295	Washington U.	9-2	01/11 vs. Chicago
#14	271	Babson	10-2	LOST to #25 Springfield, 81-84; 01/11 at #23 WPI
#15	251	Amherst	9-3	LOST at Wesleyan, 77-79; 01/10 vs. #3 Middlebury; 01/11 vs. Williams
#16	249	Johns Hopkins	9-2	01/09 vs. Dickinson; 01/11 at Washington College
#17	247	UW-La Crosse	11-1	def. UW-River Falls, 80-72; 01/11 vs. #35 UW-Stevens Point
#18	162	North Central (Ill.)	11-3	def. #41 Illinois Wesleyan, 82-69; 01/11 vs. Carroll
#19	104	Guilford	10-4	LOST at Ferrum, 65-68; 01/11 vs. Bridgewater (Va.)
#20	99	Albertus Magnus	11-1	IDLE
#21	75	Benedictine	10-2	def. MSOE, 81-74; 01/11 at Wisconsin Lutheran
#22	72	Whitworth	8-3	01/10 vs. Willamette; 01/11 vs. Lewis and Clark
#23	66	WPI	10-2	def. MIT, 68-52; 01/11 vs. #14 Babson
#24	60	Wooster	10-2	won at Kenyon, 83-61; 01/11 at DePauw
#25	58	Springfield	10-2	won at #14 Babson, 84-81; 01/11 vs. Wheaton (Mass.)

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	49	Rochester	9-2	def. Rochester Tech, 76-57; 01/11 at #6 Emory
#27	45	Virginia Wesleyan	11-2	def. Hampden-Sydney, 77-65; 01/11 vs. Washington and Lee
#28	44	Mary Hardin-Baylor	10-2	01/09 at Belhaven; 01/11 at Louisiana College
#29	41	Pomona-Pitzer	10-2	won at La Verne, 88-63; 01/11 vs. Redlands
#30	36	St. Norbert	10-2	def. Illinois College, 96-67; 01/11 at Cornell
#31	28	Stevens	10-2	def. Delaware Valley, 85-73; 01/11 at Wilkes
T#32	23	Hamilton	10-2	def. SUNY Geneseo, 91-64; 01/10 vs. Williams; 01/11 vs. #3 Middlebury
T#32	23	Yeshiva	12-1	IDLE
#34	17	Tufts	10-2	01/10 at Wesleyan
#35	16	UW-Stevens Point	10-3	def. UW-Whitewater, 68-54; 01/11 at #17 UW-La Crosse
#36	15	Augustana	8-5	LOST at #11 Elmhurst, 71-80; 01/11 at Millikin
T#37	13	UW-Eau Claire	10-3	LOST to UW-Stout, 79-80; 01/11 at #9 UW-Platteville
T#37	13	Centre	12-2	01/10 vs. Berry; 01/12 vs. Oglethorpe
#39	10	Hobart	9-1	01/10 at Rochester Tech; 01/11 at Ithaca
#40	8	UW-Oshkosh	7-6	LOST to #9 UW-Platteville, 70-74; 01/11 at UW-Stout
#41	7	Illinois Wesleyan	9-5	LOST at #18 North Central (Ill.), 69-82
#42	5	Augsburg	9-3	won at St. Mary's (Minn.), 86-79; won at Bethel, 80-75; 01/11 vs. Macalester
#43	4	Loras	10-4	LOST to Buena Vista, 88-92 OT; 01/11 at Wartburg
T#44	3	Mount Union	9-3	won at Baldwin Wallace, 82-75; 01/11 vs. Capital
T#44	3	Christopher Newport	11-4	01/10 vs. York (Pa.)
T#46	2	Carthage	10-3	won at Carroll, 73-65; 01/11 at Wheaton (Ill.)
T#46	2	East Texas Baptist	9-2	01/09 vs. Texas-Dallas; 01/11 vs. University of the Ozarks
T#46	2	Widener	11-2	def. Messiah, 79-74; 01/11 at Stevenson

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 09, 2020, 05:35:01 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=3v0vj/6gxukfnazjaz94k1.jpg)

If you look at the calendar, we are midway through the 2019-20 regular season. While there are probably more games ahead than behind for many teams, we now find ourselves looking at the half of the campaign.

What have we learned so far? Anything?

We may not be able to answer all of those questions, but we will see if we can turn over a few more rocks to find more clues on Thursday night's Hoopsville.

We will chat with a men's program that has gone from obscurity to at least being in the conference and regional conversation (if not national). Another men's program is about as high as they can go in the national convo, but do we really know how good they are and is there pressure to win it all? Plus a women's team many of you might not be talking about now, but probably will be chatting about come tournament time.

Tonight is also the season debut of the WBCA Center Court segment. We talk to Randy Tuggle, the head coach at Greensboro, on why the season is the perfect distraction for a far bigger priority. Tuggle chats with us about his battle with pancreatic cancer and how his team (and family) have been there every step of the way.

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Sunday's show LIVE in the following ways:
- Main page: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville
- Show page: http://bit.ly/2QZpezb (or www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2019-20/jan9)
- Facebook Live Simulcast: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville (only the first 45 minutes aired; may have had a copyright problem haha)
- YouTube Simulcast: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville
- Team1 Sports: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville/
- Team1 Sports app (https://team1sports.com/) (Android TV, Amazon Fire, Apple TV, Roku) - you will either find it under the "live" section or search for the Hoopsville channel

Thursday's show primarily covers the East, Great Lakes, Mid-Atlantic, and West Regions while also featuring a women's coach in the WBCA Center Court segment. All men's coaches appear in the NABC Coach's Corner. And all guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or use any of the social media options.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Rich Murphy, Redlands women's coach
- Randy Tuggle, Greensboro women's coach (WBCA Center Court)
- Sean Coffey, Utica men's coach
- Matt Croci, No. 2 Wittenberg men's coach

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville
(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D39%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qaz%2Ffrghgxk7kqd172nn.jpg&hash=6ef41ddb2f5e1c3420db88961e4f9e8a76ca72de) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://www.d3boards.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdnak1.psbin.com%2Fimg%2Fmw%3D150%2Fmh%3D55%2Fcr%3Dn%2Fd%3D34qc6%2Fnv94ufhrqbnvt3d4.jpg&hash=c9b51356cf30d2646f6d744dc0ce47b431cec05e) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=150/mh=45/cr=n/d=hl01l/ir41q7iread2rbzq.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=127/mh=38/cr=n/d=155od/msg7impgs5p0hnmg.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 11, 2020, 03:39:40 PM

Current Top 25:

22. Whitworth with 3 Losses
24. Wooster with 2 Losses

It would be nice if the Top 25 voters would acknowledge head to head games as Wooster beat Whitworth in the last two weeks. ::) ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 11, 2020, 05:36:12 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on January 11, 2020, 03:39:40 PM
Current Top 25:

22. Whitworth with 3 Losses
24. Wooster with 2 Losses

It would be nice if the Top 25 voters would acknowledge head to head games as Wooster beat Whitworth in the last two weeks. ::) ::)

It was a close game and Whitworth was missing their PG (and second best player), plus it was at Wooster. Lots of caveats to cling to in that one. Wooster is definitely playing better now than they were in December, though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: wooscotsfan on January 11, 2020, 07:19:28 PM

and the dog ate my homework.....and it was a very long road trip.....the refs blew a few calls.... ;)

Any more excuses? ....that you would like to make to try to defend a ranking that makes no sense based on the FACTS!

BTW, in case you glossed over it, Whitworth has ONE MORE LOSS than Wooster AND Wooster beat them head to head. Two reasons why this ranking makes no sense.

The correct response to my post was: "You have a good point and we will highlight the head to head result in the notes that we send to the voters!"

Adios

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 11, 2020, 10:07:22 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on January 11, 2020, 07:19:28 PM
and the dog ate my homework.....and it was a very long road trip.....the refs blew a few calls.... ;)

Any more excuses? ....that you would like to make to try to defend a ranking that makes no sense based on the FACTS!

BTW, in case you glossed over it, Whitworth has ONE MORE LOSS than Wooster AND Wooster beat them head to head. Two reasons why this ranking makes no sense.

The correct response to my post was: "You have a good point and we will highlight the head to head result in the notes that we send to the voters!"

Adios

I don't often read posts on the board where I think someone is a a complete jerk - maybe one or two a year? But I read this three times and you come across as a complete jerk here.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 11, 2020, 10:26:56 PM

Quote from: wooscotsfan on January 11, 2020, 07:19:28 PM
The correct response to my post was: ...

I actually think Titan Q has the correct response.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 12, 2020, 02:56:26 PM

How They Fared (~~Two games left~~ Complete)

I have an odd schedule this afternoon, but will update the two remaining scores later.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Swarthmore	13-0	won at Muhlenberg, 85-74; won at Franklin and Marshall, 68-53
#2	578	Wittenberg	13-0	won at Denison, 80-63; won at Hiram, 100-82
#3	562	Middlebury	14-1	def. Plattsburgh State, 99-60; LOST at #15 Amherst, 69-81; won at T#32 Hamilton, 77-76
#4	537	Randolph-Macon	13-1	LOST at Mary Washington, 65-70; def. Ferrum, 57-40
#5	529	St. Thomas	11-2	won at Hamline, 92-83 OT; def. St. Olaf, 94-73; LOST to #7 St. John's, 70-87
#6	518	Emory	11-1	def. #26 Rochester, 75-57
#7	429	St. John's	12-1	won at St. Olaf, 91-75; won at #5 St. Thomas, 87-70
#8	414	Marietta	12-1	def. Muskingum, 95-73; def. Heidelberg, 96-75
#9	410	UW-Platteville	13-1	won at #40 UW-Oshkosh, 74-70; def. T#37 UW-Eau Claire, 60-53
#10	390	Nebraska Wesleyan	13-2	def. Simpson, 86-64; def. Luther, 80-66
#11	375	Elmhurst	13-1	def. #36 Augustana, 80-71; def. North Park, 96-81
#12	341	Colby	13-0	def. Connecticut College, 83-50; def. Trinity (Conn.), 91-77
#13	295	Washington U.	10-2	def. Chicago, 66-65
#14	271	Babson	11-2	LOST to #25 Springfield, 81-84; won at #23 WPI, 93-81
#15	251	Amherst	10-4	LOST at Wesleyan, 77-79; def. #3 Middlebury, 81-69; LOST to Williams, 69-72
#16	249	Johns Hopkins	11-2	def. Dickinson, 78-62; won at Washington College, 86-83 OT
#17	247	UW-La Crosse	12-1	def. UW-River Falls, 80-72; def. #35 UW-Stevens Point, 63-58
#18	162	North Central (Ill.)	12-3	def. #41 Illinois Wesleyan, 82-69; def. Carroll, 63-55
#19	104	Guilford	11-4	LOST at Ferrum, 65-68; def. Bridgewater (Va.), 80-58
#20	99	Albertus Magnus	11-1	IDLE
#21	75	Benedictine	10-3	def. MSOE, 81-74; LOST at Wisconsin Lutheran, 65-66
#22	72	Whitworth	10-3	def. Willamette, 97-56; def. Lewis and Clark, 86-60
#23	66	WPI	10-3	def. MIT, 68-52; LOST to #14 Babson, 81-93
#24	60	Wooster	11-2	won at Kenyon, 83-61; won at DePauw, 70-68
#25	58	Springfield	11-2	won at #14 Babson, 84-81; def. Wheaton (Mass.), 73-60

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	49	Rochester	9-3	def. Rochester Tech, 76-57; LOST at #6 Emory, 57-75
#27	45	Virginia Wesleyan	12-2	def. Hampden-Sydney, 77-65; def. Washington and Lee, 82-74
#28	44	Mary Hardin-Baylor	10-4	LOST at Belhaven, 71-75; LOST at Louisiana College, 86-92
#29	41	Pomona-Pitzer	11-2	won at La Verne, 88-63; def. Redlands, 86-74
#30	36	St. Norbert	11-2	def. Illinois College, 96-67; won at Cornell, 87-62
#31	28	Stevens	10-3	def. Delaware Valley, 85-73; LOST at Wilkes, 55-58
T#32	23	Hamilton	11-3	def. SUNY Geneseo, 91-64; def. Williams, 79-78; LOST to #3 Middlebury, 76-77
T#32	23	Yeshiva	12-1	IDLE
#34	17	Tufts	11-2	won at Wesleyan, 92-85
#35	16	UW-Stevens Point	10-4	def. UW-Whitewater, 68-54; LOST at #17 UW-La Crosse, 58-63
#36	15	Augustana	9-5	LOST at #11 Elmhurst, 71-80; won at Millikin, 83-58
T#37	13	UW-Eau Claire	10-4	LOST to UW-Stout, 79-80; LOST at #9 UW-Platteville, 53-60
T#37	13	Centre	14-2	def. Berry, 74-67; def. Oglethorpe, 81-63
#39	10	Hobart	11-1	won at Rochester Tech, 66-53; won at Ithaca, 74-65
#40	8	UW-Oshkosh	8-6	LOST to #9 UW-Platteville, 70-74; won at UW-Stout, 83-69
#41	7	Illinois Wesleyan	9-5	LOST at #18 North Central (Ill.), 69-82
#42	5	Augsburg	10-3	won at St. Mary's (Minn.), 86-79; won at Bethel, 80-75; def. Macalester, 90-76
#43	4	Loras	10-5	LOST to Buena Vista, 88-92 OT; LOST at Wartburg, 65-83
T#44	3	Mount Union	10-3	won at Baldwin Wallace, 82-75; def. Capital, 78-58
T#44	3	Christopher Newport	12-4	def. York (Pa.), 79-68
T#46	2	Carthage	10-3	won at Carroll, 73-65
T#46	2	East Texas Baptist	11-2	def. Texas-Dallas, 83-74; def. University of the Ozarks, 74-58
T#46	2	Widener	12-2	def. Messiah, 79-74; won at Stevenson, 79-76

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 12, 2020, 03:38:34 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=40eho/48pansgbf7er3ubi.jpg)

If you are a Top 25 team, or a conference leader, every team now thinks you can be beaten. Each night in Division III basketball we are seeing top teams take losses because even the best can't avoid even an okay team knocking them off.

Sunday on Hoopsville, we continue to talk about what seems like nightly upsets in DIII. Whether it's undefeateds who are no more or unexpected squads rising to the top of conference races. There just isn't any "normal" nights in the game anymore.

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Sunday's show LIVE in the following ways:
- Main page: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville
- Show page: http://bit.ly/2R89qdy (or www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2019-20/jan12)
- Facebook Live Simulcast: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
- YouTube Simulcast: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville
- Team1 Sports: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville/
- Team1 Sports app (https://team1sports.com/) (Android TV, Amazon Fire, Apple TV, Roku) - you will either find it under the "live" section or search for the Hoopsville channel

Sunday's show primarily covers the Atlantic, Central, South, and Northeast Regions. All men's coaches appear in the NABC Coach's Corner. And all guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or use any of the social media options to the right.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Demetrius Poles, Rowan women's coach
- Karen Middleton, No. 9 UW-Lacrosse women's coach
- Jeff Brown, No. 3 Middlebury men's coach
- Bob Quillman & Ryan Scott, Top 25 Double-Take

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: smedindy on January 15, 2020, 11:53:51 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 11, 2020, 10:07:22 PM
Quote from: wooscotsfan on January 11, 2020, 07:19:28 PM
and the dog ate my homework.....and it was a very long road trip.....the refs blew a few calls.... ;)

Any more excuses? ....that you would like to make to try to defend a ranking that makes no sense based on the FACTS!

BTW, in case you glossed over it, Whitworth has ONE MORE LOSS than Wooster AND Wooster beat them head to head. Two reasons why this ranking makes no sense.

The correct response to my post was: "You have a good point and we will highlight the head to head result in the notes that we send to the voters!"

Adios
I don't often read posts on the board where I think someone is a a complete jerk - maybe one or two a year? But I read this three times and you come across as a complete jerk here.

(https://pics.me.me/the-jerk-store-called-they-rerunning-out-of-you-17368151.png)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 15, 2020, 11:55:28 AM

Quote from: smedindy on January 15, 2020, 11:53:51 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 11, 2020, 10:07:22 PM
Quote from: wooscotsfan on January 11, 2020, 07:19:28 PM
and the dog ate my homework.....and it was a very long road trip.....the refs blew a few calls.... ;)

Any more excuses? ....that you would like to make to try to defend a ranking that makes no sense based on the FACTS!

BTW, in case you glossed over it, Whitworth has ONE MORE LOSS than Wooster AND Wooster beat them head to head. Two reasons why this ranking makes no sense.

The correct response to my post was: "You have a good point and we will highlight the head to head result in the notes that we send to the voters!"

Adios
I don't often read posts on the board where I think someone is a a complete jerk - maybe one or two a year? But I read this three times and you come across as a complete jerk here.

(https://pics.me.me/the-jerk-store-called-they-rerunning-out-of-you-17368151.png)

But you're their #1 best seller!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 16, 2020, 06:36:39 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Swarthmore	14-0	def. Haverford, 71-53; 01/18 at Dickinson
#2	587	Wittenberg	14-0	def. Wabash, 84-74; 01/18 at #20 Wooster
#3	552	Emory	11-1	01/17 at New York University; 01/19 at Brandeis
#4	543	St. John's	13-1	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 80-62; 01/18 vs. Bethel
#5	493	Middlebury	15-1	def. #18 Albertus Magnus, 84-76; 01/17 vs. #12 Colby; 01/18 vs. Bowdoin
#6	472	Randolph-Macon	14-1	won at Eastern Mennonite, 77-49; 01/18 vs. #32 Guilford
#7	461	UW-Platteville	13-2	LOST to UW-Stevens Point, 64-66; 01/18 at #14 UW-La Crosse
#8	436	Marietta	13-1	won at Capital, 75-47; 01/18 at Ohio Northern
#9	426	St. Thomas	12-2	won at Carleton, 77-64; 01/18 at St. Mary's (Minn.)
#10	404	Elmhurst	14-1	won at #42 Carthage, 88-84; 01/18 at Wheaton (Ill.)
#11	390	Nebraska Wesleyan	14-2	def. Coe, 82-76; 01/18 at Central
#12	360	Colby	13-0	01/17 at #5 Middlebury; 01/18 at Williams
#13	331	Washington U.	10-2	01/17 at Case Western Reserve; 01/19 at Carnegie Mellon
#14	297	UW-La Crosse	13-1	won at UW-Whitewater, 84-78 OT; 01/18 vs. #7 UW-Platteville
#15	238	Johns Hopkins	12-2	def. Franklin and Marshall, 76-59; 01/18 vs. Ursinus
#16	212	North Central (Ill.)	13-3	won at Millikin, 76-66
#17	196	Babson	12-2	def. Coast Guard, 94-92 OT; 01/18 at Clark
#18	157	Albertus Magnus	11-2	LOST at #5 Middlebury, 76-84; 01/18 vs. Colby-Sawyer
#19	147	Springfield	12-2	def. Clark, 100-65; 01/18 at Emerson
#20	127	Wooster	12-2	def. Oberlin, 94-92; 01/18 vs. #2 Wittenberg
#21	103	Whitworth	10-3	01/17 at George Fox; 01/18 at Pacific
#22	98	Amherst	10-4	01/17 at Bates; 01/18 at #27 Tufts
#23	72	Virginia Wesleyan	13-2	won at Shenandoah, 71-55; 01/18 at Roanoke
#24	60	Pomona-Pitzer	11-3	LOST to Whittier, 93-97; 01/18 at Cal Lutheran
#25	54	St. Norbert	12-2	won at Beloit, 72-55; 01/18 vs. Knox

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	45	Yeshiva	12-1	IDLE
#27	39	Tufts	11-3	LOST to Suffolk, 78-89; 01/17 vs. #38 Hamilton; 01/18 vs. #22 Amherst
#28	32	WPI	11-3	won at Wheaton (Mass.), 94-66; 01/18 at Coast Guard
#29	26	Augsburg	10-3	01/18 at Gustavus Adolphus
#30	22	Hobart	11-2	LOST at Union, 63-71; 01/17 vs. Vassar; 01/18 vs. RPI
#31	21	Centre	14-2	01/17 vs. Hendrix; 01/19 vs. Rhodes
#32	18	Guilford	12-4	won at Emory and Henry, 99-87; 01/18 at #6 Randolph-Macon
#33	15	Benedictine	11-3	def. Rockford, 79-61; 01/18 at Edgewood
#34	14	Rochester	9-3	01/17 at Brandeis; 01/19 at New York University
#35	10	Mount Union	11-3	won at Muskingum, 105-86; 01/18 at Otterbein
#36	9	Augustana	10-5	def. Wheaton (Ill.), 79-73; 01/18 at North Park
#37	8	East Texas Baptist	11-2	01/16 vs. Howard Payne; 01/18 vs. Sul Ross State
#38	7	Hamilton	11-3	01/17 at #27 Tufts; 01/18 at Bates
#39	6	Christopher Newport	13-4	won at Southern Virginia, 83-55; 01/18 at Mary Washington
#40	5	Widener	13-2	won at Albright, 98-84; 01/18 vs. Hood
#41	4	Albion	12-2	won at Alma, 74-53; 01/18 vs. Kalamazoo
#42	2	Carthage	10-5	LOST at Wheaton (Ill.), 68-71; LOST to #10 Elmhurst, 84-88; 01/18 vs. Millikin
#43	1	Stevens	11-3	won at King's, 76-60; 01/18 vs. Misericordia

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 16, 2020, 04:20:43 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=47wjf/1eg6msuhd922gxsd.jpg)

There are six weeks left in the regular season, but the grind of conference schedules can make it feel like the end is a long ways off.

As teams try and focus on each game in front of them, the ramifications of each outcome grow larger and larger. Conference tournament seeding (or even participating), at-large hopes, and to a larger degree opportunities to be home in March with the hopes of a national championship as the goal.

Thursday on Hoopsville, we chat with a few programs that are on top of their conference races (or were), but the standing could change in just one game. We chat about how teams deal with being everyone's target or how to survive the grind.

Plus, relationships with a program's alumni can go a long way to how successful the program becomes and even the institution on a larger scale. In this week's WBCA Center Court, MIT coach Sonia Raman discusses what prompted her to get alums more involved and how it has resulted in a significant increase in contributions as well.

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Thursday's show LIVE starting at 7:00 pm ET in the following ways:
- Main page: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville
- Show page: http://bit.ly/2TrjT6B (or www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2019-20/jan16)
- Facebook Live Simulcast: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
- YouTube Simulcast: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville
- Team1 Sports: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville/
- Team1 Sports app (https://team1sports.com/) (Android TV, Amazon Fire, Apple TV, Roku) - you will either find it under the "live" section or search for the Hoopsville channel

Thursday's show primarily covers the East, Great Lakes, Mid-Atlantic, and West Regions while also featuring a women's coach in the WBCA Center Court segment. All men's coaches appear in the NABC Coach's Corner. And all guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or use any of the social media options.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Sonia Raman, MIT women's coach (WBCA Center Court)
- Dale Wellman, No. 11 Nebraska Wesleyan men's coach (NABC Coach's Corner)
- Darryl Keckler, Drew men's coach (NABC Coach's Corner)
- Juli Fulks, No. 9 Transylvania women's coach

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2020, 02:31:29 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=4dbb8/j2b42qfyvio73k22.jpg)

With conference action always comes surprises. There are teams who upset those at the top of the conference and make the races a bit more interesting. That is especially true for programs who look to distance themselves from the rest of the conference, but a surprising loss keeps those plans at bay.

Sunday night on Hoopsville, we continue to dive into conferences races across the country and look at how the last week's results have either helped clear up races or made them more messy. Plus we talk to several conference leaders to find out how they are faring.

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Sunday's show LIVE starting at 7:00 pm ET in the following ways:
- Main page: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville
- Show page: http://bit.ly/37lbXrm (or www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2019-20/jan19)
- Facebook Live Simulcast: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
- YouTube Simulcast: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville
- Team1 Sports: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville/
- Team1 Sports app (https://team1sports.com/) (Android TV, Amazon Fire, Apple TV, Roku) - you will either find it under the "live" section or search for the Hoopsville channel

Sunday's show primarily covers the Atlantic, Central, South, and Northeast Regions. All men's coaches appear in the NABC Coach's Corner. And all guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to dave.mchugh@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options to the right.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Jenna Cosgrove, Rhode Island College women's coach
- John Baines, No. 10 Elmhurst men's coach (NABC Coach's Corner)
- Greg Mason, Centre men's coach (NABC Coach's Corner)
- Bob Quillman & Ryan Scott, Top 25 Double-Take

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 19, 2020, 04:58:06 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Swarthmore	15-0	def. Haverford, 71-53; won at Dickinson, 81-62
#2	587	Wittenberg	14-1	def. Wabash, 84-74; LOST at #20 Wooster, 86-98
#3	552	Emory	12-2	won at New York University, 83-69; LOST at Brandeis, 73-75
#4	543	St. John's	14-1	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 80-62; def. Bethel, 88-60
#5	493	Middlebury	16-2	def. #18 Albertus Magnus, 84-76; LOST to #12 Colby, 82-89; def. Bowdoin, 93-71
#6	472	Randolph-Macon	15-1	won at Eastern Mennonite, 77-49; def. #32 Guilford, 64-39
#7	461	UW-Platteville	14-2	LOST to UW-Stevens Point, 64-66; won at #14 UW-La Crosse, 69-67
#8	436	Marietta	14-1	won at Capital, 75-47; won at Ohio Northern, 78-55
#9	426	St. Thomas	13-2	won at Carleton, 77-64; won at St. Mary's (Minn.), 81-64
#10	404	Elmhurst	15-1	won at #42 Carthage, 88-84; won at Wheaton (Ill.), 82-75
#11	390	Nebraska Wesleyan	15-2	def. Coe, 82-76; won at Central, 115-69
#12	360	Colby	15-0	won at #5 Middlebury, 89-82; won at Williams, 73-61
#13	331	Washington U.	12-2	won at Case Western Reserve, 88-66; won at Carnegie Mellon, 80-72
#14	297	UW-La Crosse	13-2	won at UW-Whitewater, 84-78 OT; LOST to #7 UW-Platteville, 67-69
#15	238	Johns Hopkins	13-2	def. Franklin and Marshall, 76-59; def. Ursinus, 92-62
#16	212	North Central (Ill.)	13-3	won at Millikin, 76-66
#17	196	Babson	12-3	def. Coast Guard, 94-92 OT; LOST at Clark, 89-92 OT
#18	157	Albertus Magnus	12-2	LOST at #5 Middlebury, 76-84; def. Colby-Sawyer, 74-71
#19	147	Springfield	12-3	def. Clark, 100-65; LOST at Emerson, 70-74
#20	127	Wooster	13-2	def. Oberlin, 94-92; def. #2 Wittenberg, 98-86
#21	103	Whitworth	12-3	won at George Fox, 92-90; won at Pacific, 94-75
#22	98	Amherst	11-5	won at Bates, 85-71; LOST at #27 Tufts, 78-96
#23	72	Virginia Wesleyan	14-2	won at Shenandoah, 71-55; won at Roanoke, 67-62
#24	60	Pomona-Pitzer	12-3	LOST to Whittier, 93-97; won at Cal Lutheran, 70-48
#25	54	St. Norbert	13-2	won at Beloit, 72-55; def. Knox, 83-55

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	45	Yeshiva	12-1	IDLE
#27	39	Tufts	13-3	LOST to Suffolk, 78-89; def. #38 Hamilton, 78-72; def. #22 Amherst, 96-78
#28	32	WPI	12-3	won at Wheaton (Mass.), 94-66; won at Coast Guard, 79-67
#29	26	Augsburg	10-4	LOST at Gustavus Adolphus, 88-92
#30	22	Hobart	12-3	LOST at Union, 63-71; def. Vassar, 78-67; LOST to RPI, 53-65
#31	21	Centre	16-2	def. Hendrix, 80-58; def. Rhodes, 81-59
#32	18	Guilford	12-5	won at Emory and Henry, 99-87; LOST at #6 Randolph-Macon, 39-64
#33	15	Benedictine	12-3	def. Rockford, 79-61; won at Edgewood, 90-84
#34	14	Rochester	10-4	LOST at Brandeis, 54-76; won at New York University, 76-62
#35	10	Mount Union	12-3	won at Muskingum, 105-86; won at Otterbein, 79-67
#36	9	Augustana	11-5	def. Wheaton (Ill.), 79-73 OT; won at North Park, 73-54
#37	8	East Texas Baptist	13-2	def. Howard Payne, 104-79; def. Sul Ross State, 102-85
#38	7	Hamilton	11-5	LOST at #27 Tufts, 72-78; LOST at Bates, 81-98
#39	6	Christopher Newport	14-4	won at Southern Virginia, 83-55; won at Mary Washington, 97-84
#40	5	Widener	14-2	won at Albright, 98-84; def. Hood, 82-68
#41	4	Albion	13-2	won at Alma, 74-53; def. Kalamazoo, 109-94
#42	2	Carthage	11-5	LOST at Wheaton (Ill.), 68-71; LOST to #10 Elmhurst, 84-88; def. Millikin, 92-89 OT
#43	1	Stevens	12-3	won at King's, 76-60; def. Misericordia, 81-61

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BobbyO on January 20, 2020, 12:30:44 PM

This is my top 25 as of today.

School Record
Swartmore 15‐0     1
Colby     15‐0     2
St. Johns     14‐1     3
Randolph Macon 15‐1     4
Marrietta     14‐1 5
Wooster     13‐     6
Wittenburg   14‐1     7
St Thomas   13‐2     8
Nebraska Wesln   15‐2     9
Emory     12‐2     10
UW Platteville   14‐2     11
North Central IL   13‐3     12
Elmhurst     15‐1     13
Washington U   12‐2     14
UW La Crosse   13‐2     15
Johns Hopskins   13‐2     16
Middlebury 16‐2 17
Virginia Wesln   14‐2     18
Withworth     12‐3     19
St. Norbert   13‐2     20
Centre     16‐2     21
WPI     12‐3     22
Albertus Magnus12‐2     23
Benedictine   12‐3     24
Yeshiva     12‐1     25

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Colby Hoops on January 20, 2020, 12:38:31 PM

Quote from: BobbyO on January 20, 2020, 12:30:44 PM
This is my top 25 as of today.

Swartmore   15‐0   1
Colby   15‐0   2
St. Johns   14‐1   3
Randolph Macon   15‐1   4
Marrietta   14‐1   5
Wooster   13‐2   6
Wittenburg   14‐1   7
St Thomas   13‐2   8
Nebraska Wesleyan   15‐2   9
Emory   12‐2   10
UW Platteville   14‐2   11
North Central IL   13‐3   12
Elmhurst   15‐1   13
Washington U   12‐2   14
UW La Crosse   13‐2   15
Johns Hopskins   13‐2   16

Virginia Wesleyan   14‐2   18
Withworth   12‐3   19
St. Norbert   13‐2   20
Centre   16‐2   21
WPI   12‐3   22
Albertus Magnus   12‐2   23
Benedictine   12‐3   24
Yeshiva   12‐1   25

Only 24 listed -- assuming Middlebury was accidentally axed?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BobbyO on January 20, 2020, 12:40:48 PM

Quote from: Colby Hoops on January 20, 2020, 12:38:31 PM
Quote from: BobbyO on January 20, 2020, 12:30:44 PM
This is my top 25 as of today.

Swartmore   15‐0   1
Colby   15‐0   2
St. Johns   14‐1   3
Randolph Macon   15‐1   4
Marrietta   14‐1   5
Wooster   13‐2   6
Wittenburg   14‐1   7
St Thomas   13‐2   8
Nebraska Wesleyan   15‐2   9
Emory   12‐2   10
UW Platteville   14‐2   11
North Central IL   13‐3   12
Elmhurst   15‐1   13
Washington U   12‐2   14
UW La Crosse   13‐2   15
Johns Hopskins   13‐2   16

Virginia Wesleyan   14‐2   18
Withworth   12‐3   19
St. Norbert   13‐2   20
Centre   16‐2   21
WPI   12‐3   22
Albertus Magnus   12‐2   23
Benedictine   12‐3   24
Yeshiva   12‐1   25

Only 24 listed -- assuming Middlebury was accidentally axed?

Damn computer

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 21, 2020, 10:44:17 AM

Quote from: BobbyO on January 20, 2020, 12:30:44 PM
This is my top 25 as of today.

School Record
Swartmore 15‐0     1
Colby     15‐0     2
St. Johns     14‐1     3
Randolph Macon 15‐1     4
Marrietta     14‐1 5
Wooster     13‐     6
Wittenburg   14‐1     7
St Thomas   13‐2     8
Nebraska Wesln   15‐2     9
Emory     12‐2     10
UW Platteville   14‐2     11
North Central IL   13‐3     12
Elmhurst     15‐1     13
Washington U   12‐2     14
UW La Crosse   13‐2     15
Johns Hopskins   13‐2     16
Middlebury 16‐2 17
Virginia Wesln   14‐2     18
Withworth     12‐3     19
St. Norbert   13‐2     20
Centre     16‐2     21
WPI     12‐3     22
Albertus Magnus12‐2     23
Benedictine   12‐3     24
Yeshiva     12‐1     25

That's hard to read. You should format it as a table, Bobby.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 21, 2020, 02:54:19 PM

Come on, old man Sager, it's not that hard! LOL ::) :P ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BobbyO on January 21, 2020, 03:33:53 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 21, 2020, 10:44:17 AM
Quote from: BobbyO on January 20, 2020, 12:30:44 PM
This is my top 25 as of today.

School Record
Swartmore 15‐0     1
Colby     15‐0     2
St. Johns     14‐1     3
Randolph Macon 15‐1     4
Marrietta     14‐1 5
Wooster     13‐     6
Wittenburg   14‐1     7
St Thomas   13‐2     8
Nebraska Wesln   15‐2     9
Emory     12‐2     10
UW Platteville   14‐2     11
North Central IL   13‐3     12
Elmhurst     15‐1     13
Washington U   12‐2     14
UW La Crosse   13‐2     15
Johns Hopskins   13‐2     16
Middlebury 16‐2 17
Virginia Wesln   14‐2     18
Withworth     12‐3     19
St. Norbert   13‐2     20
Centre     16‐2     21
WPI     12‐3     22
Albertus Magnus12‐2     23
Benedictine   12‐3     24
Yeshiva     12‐1     25

That's hard to read. You should format it as a table, Bobby.

Thanks for the recommendation now only learn how to do that. I have the information in Excel but copy and paste did this to me and then when I tried to fix it then it posted it. I wish I was younger. My computer experience in college was Fortran, COBAL and Assembler. I quit after Assembler. If it wasn't for Professor Ray Ford's help I would have flunked!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 21, 2020, 05:00:19 PM

Quote from: BobbyO on January 21, 2020, 03:33:53 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 21, 2020, 10:44:17 AM
Quote from: BobbyO on January 20, 2020, 12:30:44 PM
This is my top 25 as of today.

School Record
Swartmore 15‐0     1
Colby     15‐0     2
St. Johns     14‐1     3
Randolph Macon 15‐1     4
Marrietta     14‐1 5
Wooster     13‐     6
Wittenburg   14‐1     7
St Thomas   13‐2     8
Nebraska Wesln   15‐2     9
Emory     12‐2     10
UW Platteville   14‐2     11
North Central IL   13‐3     12
Elmhurst     15‐1     13
Washington U   12‐2     14
UW La Crosse   13‐2     15
Johns Hopskins   13‐2     16
Middlebury 16‐2 17
Virginia Wesln   14‐2     18
Withworth     12‐3     19
St. Norbert   13‐2     20
Centre     16‐2     21
WPI     12‐3     22
Albertus Magnus12‐2     23
Benedictine   12‐3     24
Yeshiva     12‐1     25

That's hard to read. You should format it as a table, Bobby.
Thanks for the recommendation now only learn how to do that. I have the information in Excel but copy and paste did this to me and then when I tried to fix it then it posted it. I wish I was younger. My computer experience in college was Fortran, COBAL and Assembler. I quit after Assembler. If it wasn't for Professor Ray Ford's help I would have flunked!

Bobby, I'll show you how to do it. Check your personal messages.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 23, 2020, 02:21:39 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

A little jetlagged after switching to California time, but here it is ...

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Swarthmore	16-0	def. Ursinus, 81-76; 01/25 vs. McDaniel
#2	589	St. John's	16-1	def. Macalester, 90-60; won at Concordia-Moorhead, 73-38; 01/25 at Carleton
#3	543	Randolph-Macon	16-1	won at #18 Virginia Wesleyan, 67-61; 01/25 at Roanoke
#4	489	Elmhurst	16-1	def. Illinois Wesleyan, 89-72; 01/25 at North Park
#5	485	Colby	16-0	won at Husson, 97-70; 01/25 at Bowdoin
#6	476	Marietta	14-2	LOST at #29 Mount Union, 70-107; 01/25 vs. Baldwin Wallace
#7	472	Wittenberg	15-1	def. Ohio Wesleyan, 71-64; 01/25 vs. Oberlin
#8	449	Emory	12-2	01/24 vs. Carnegie Mellon; 01/26 vs. Case Western Reserve
#9	446	St. Thomas	15-2	def. Bethel, 69-50; won at Macalester, 80-59
#10	398	Nebraska Wesleyan	15-2	01/25 vs. Wartburg
#11	392	UW-Platteville	15-2	def. UW-Whitewater, 77-56; 01/25 at UW-River Falls
#12	382	Middlebury	16-2	01/25 vs. Williams
#13	313	Washington U.	12-2	01/24 vs. #24 Brandeis; 01/26 vs. New York University
#14	269	Wooster	13-3	LOST at Denison, 71-72; 01/25 at Hiram
#15	264	Johns Hopkins	14-2	won at Gettysburg, 77-71; 01/25 at Haverford
#16	255	North Central (Ill.)	14-3	def. T#40 Augustana, 54-53; 01/25 vs. Millikin
#17	228	UW-La Crosse	14-2	won at UW-Stout, 74-60; 01/25 at UW-Eau Claire
#18	156	Virginia Wesleyan	14-3	LOST to #3 Randolph-Macon, 61-67; 01/25 at Bridgewater (Va.)
#19	146	St. Norbert	14-2	won at Lake Forest, 86-52; 01/25 vs. Ripon
#20	137	Whitworth	12-4	LOST to T#37 Whitman, 80-89; 01/24 vs. Linfield
#21	121	Albertus Magnus	13-2	won at Regis (Mass.), 80-75 OT; 01/25 vs. St. Joseph's (Maine)
#22	76	Babson	13-3	won at Wheaton (Mass.), 76-51; 01/25 vs. MIT
#23	60	Tufts	13-3	01/25 vs. Bates
#24	57	Brandeis	11-3	01/24 at #13 Washington U.; 01/26 at Chicago
#25	51	Centre	16-2	01/24 at Hendrix; 01/26 at Rhodes

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	48	Springfield	13-3	won at MIT, 72-60; 01/25 at Coast Guard
#27	45	WPI	13-3	won at Emerson, 87-64; 01/25 vs. Clark
#28	38	Yeshiva	13-1	won at SUNY-Maritime, 94-56; 01/25 vs. Merchant Marine
#29	25	Mount Union	13-3	def. #6 Marietta, 107-70; 01/25 at Wilmington
#30	18	East Texas Baptist	13-2	01/23 at Louisiana College; 01/25 at Belhaven
#31	14	Albion	14-2	def. Adrian, 84-62; 01/25 at Trine
#32	11	Benedictine	13-3	def. Concordia-Chicago, 66-63; 01/25 at Dominican
#33	8	Pomona-Pitzer	13-3	won at Caltech, 101-62; 01/25 at Occidental
T#34	6	Augsburg	12-4	def. Hamline, 92-59; won at St. Olaf, 75-74; 01/25 vs. Concordia-Moorhead
T#34	6	Rochester	10-4	01/24 vs. Case Western Reserve; 01/26 vs. Carnegie Mellon
T#34	6	Widener	15-2	def. Arcadia, 90-72; 01/25 at Lycoming
T#37	5	Christopher Newport	14-4	01/25 at Salisbury
T#37	5	Whitman	12-4	won at #20 Whitworth, 89-80; 01/25 vs. Linfield
#39	3	Stevens	13-3	def. DeSales, 72-67; 01/25 at Eastern
T#40	2	Augustana	11-6	LOST at #16 North Central (Ill.), 53-54; 01/25 at Carroll
T#40	2	UW-Stevens Point	11-6	LOST at UW-Oshkosh, 95-105; 01/25 vs. UW-Stout
T#40	2	RPI	13-2	def. Bard, 89-49; 01/24 at Vassar; 01/25 at Ithaca
T#43	1	Amherst	11-6	LOST at Williams, 60-62; 01/25 vs. Hamilton
T#43	1	Oswego	11-3	LOST to SUNY Oneonta, 66-76; 01/24 at SUNY Potsdam; 01/25 at Plattsburgh State

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 23, 2020, 06:38:16 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=4l16h/d2ivtmmib15traho.jpg)

The Division III basketball season has reached the point where many conferences are making the turn into the second half of their double-round robins. The landscape of those conferences has gotten a little more in focus ... and there are some surprises.

Thursday on Hoopsville, we chat with a few coaches whose teams are on top of their conference races either surprising many with that simple fact or getting there with surprising outcomes.

Plus, we talk to a coach (whose team happens to be leading their conference as well) who become a head coach in a rather surprising manner. How she adapted and now finds herself in Division III and how the coaching community also came to her aid.

There is also breaking news out of the NCAA Convention regarding regional realignment and expansion. And much more to get everyone up to speed.

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Sunday's show LIVE starting at 7:00 pm ET in the following ways:
- Main page: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville
- Show page: http://bit.ly/2RjGcJP (or www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2019-20/jan23)
- Facebook Live Simulcast: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
- YouTube Simulcast: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville
- Team1 Sports: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville/
- Team1 Sports app (https://team1sports.com/) (Android TV, Amazon Fire, Apple TV, Roku) - you will either find it under the "live" section or search for the Hoopsville channel

Thursday's show primarily covers the East, Great Lakes, Mid-Atlantic, and West Regions while also featuring a women's coach in the WBCA Center Court segment. All men's coaches appear in the NABC Coach's Corner. And all guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to dave.mchugh@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options to the right.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Mike Fuline, Mount Union men's coach (NABC Coach's Corner)
- Jacey Brooks, Cortland women's coach
- Kristina Danella, Keyston women's coach (WBCA Center Court)
- Alecia Parker, Pacific women's coach

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 26, 2020, 05:51:08 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Swarthmore	17-0	def. Ursinus, 81-76; def. McDaniel, 80-44
#2	589	St. John's	17-1	def. Macalester, 90-60; won at Concordia-Moorhead, 73-38; won at Carleton, 78-71
#3	543	Randolph-Macon	17-1	won at #18 Virginia Wesleyan, 67-61; won at Roanoke, 52-42
#4	489	Elmhurst	17-1	def. Illinois Wesleyan, 89-72; won at North Park, 98-73
#5	485	Colby	17-0	won at Husson, 97-70; won at Bowdoin, 81-67
#6	476	Marietta	15-2	LOST at #29 Mount Union, 70-107; def. Baldwin Wallace, 85-76
#7	472	Wittenberg	16-1	def. Ohio Wesleyan, 71-64; def. Oberlin, 63-51
#8	449	Emory	14-2	def. Carnegie Mellon, 91-72; def. Case Western Reserve, 106-70
#9	446	St. Thomas	15-2	def. Bethel, 69-50; won at Macalester, 80-59
#10	398	Nebraska Wesleyan	16-2	def. Wartburg, 95-64
#11	392	UW-Platteville	15-3	def. UW-Whitewater, 77-56; LOST at UW-River Falls, 68-74
#12	382	Middlebury	17-2	def. Williams, 84-66
#13	313	Washington U.	14-2	def. #24 Brandeis, 70-60; def. New York University, 73-70
#14	269	Wooster	14-3	LOST at Denison, 71-72; won at Hiram, 98-76
#15	264	Johns Hopkins	15-2	won at Gettysburg, 77-71; won at Haverford, 80-79
#16	255	North Central (Ill.)	15-3	def. T#40 Augustana, 54-53; def. Millikin, 90-55
#17	228	UW-La Crosse	15-2	won at UW-Stout, 74-60; won at UW-Eau Claire, 75-59
#18	156	Virginia Wesleyan	15-3	LOST to #3 Randolph-Macon, 61-67; won at Bridgewater (Va.), 88-76
#19	146	St. Norbert	14-3	won at Lake Forest, 86-52; LOST to Ripon, 52-70
#20	137	Whitworth	13-4	LOST to T#37 Whitman, 80-89; def. Linfield, 98-95
#21	121	Albertus Magnus	14-2	won at Regis (Mass.), 80-75 OT; def. St. Joseph's (Maine), 99-93 OT
#22	76	Babson	14-3	won at Wheaton (Mass.), 76-51; def. MIT, 72-52
#23	60	Tufts	14-3	def. Bates, 76-72
#24	57	Brandeis	12-4	LOST at #13 Washington U., 60-70; won at Chicago, 63-60
#25	51	Centre	18-2	won at Hendrix, 72-56; won at Rhodes, 98-76

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	48	Springfield	14-3	won at MIT, 72-60; won at Coast Guard, 94-82
#27	45	WPI	14-3	won at Emerson, 87-64; won at Clark, 75-57
#28	38	Yeshiva	14-1	won at SUNY-Maritime, 94-56; def. Merchant Marine, 80-56
#29	25	Mount Union	14-3	def. #6 Marietta, 107-70; won at Wilmington, 92-84
#30	18	East Texas Baptist	14-3	won at Louisiana College, 84-81; LOST at Belhaven, 83-84
#31	14	Albion	15-2	def. Adrian, 84-62; won at Trine, 88-82
#32	11	Benedictine	14-3	def. Concordia-Chicago, 66-63; won at Dominican, 76-67
#33	8	Pomona-Pitzer	13-4	won at Caltech, 101-62; LOST at Occidental, 73-87
T#34	6	Augsburg	13-4	def. Hamline, 92-59; won at St. Olaf, 75-74; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 96-64
T#34	6	Rochester	12-4	def. Case Western Reserve, 88-86 OT; def. Carnegie Mellon, 78-62
T#34	6	Widener	15-3	def. Arcadia, 90-72; LOST at Lycoming, 79-91
T#37	5	Christopher Newport	15-4	won at Salisbury, 72-64
T#37	5	Whitman	13-4	won at #20 Whitworth, 89-80; def. Linfield, 99-82
#39	3	Stevens	13-4	def. DeSales, 72-67; LOST at Eastern, 65-73
T#40	2	Augustana	12-6	LOST at #16 North Central (Ill.), 53-54; won at Carroll, 69-65
T#40	2	UW-Stevens Point	12-6	LOST at UW-Oshkosh, 95-105; def. UW-Stout, 70-56
T#40	2	RPI	15-2	def. Bard, 89-49; won at Vassar, 59-56; won at Ithaca, 72-64
T#43	1	Amherst	12-6	LOST at Williams, 60-62; def. Hamilton, 76-69
T#43	1	Oswego	12-4	LOST to SUNY Oneonta, 66-76; LOST at SUNY Potsdam, 67-77; won at Plattsburgh State, 63-44

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 26, 2020, 06:09:07 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=4qj3x/8czl6t4shid2h85b.jpg)

When it comes to the game of basketball, we love celebrating not only the student-athletes in Division III, but also those who help carry the game forward sometimes outside of the spotlight.

Sunday on Hoopsville, we celebrate those who have made the game of basketball, especially at DIII, so great. Coaches who continue to excel in different parts of the country and programs who play for more than just themselves.

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Sunday's show LIVE starting at 7:00 pm ET in the following ways:
- Main page: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville
- Show page: http://bit.ly/38E7YXi (or www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2019-20/jan26)
- Facebook Live Simulcast: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
- YouTube Simulcast: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville
- Team1 Sports: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville/
- Team1 Sports app (https://team1sports.com/) (Android TV, Amazon Fire, Apple TV, Roku) - you will either find it under the "live" section or search for the Hoopsville channel
Sunday's show primarily covers the Atlantic, Central, South, and Northeast Regions. All men's coaches appear in the NABC Coach's Corner. And all guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to dave.mchugh@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options to the right.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Cameron Hill, No. 13 Trinity (Texas) women's coach
- Keri Carollo, No. 6 UW-Whitewater women's coach
- Damien Strahorn, No. 5 Colby men's coach
- Eliott Steinmetz, Yeshiva men's coach
- Ryan Scott, Top 25 Double-Take

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 29, 2020, 09:52:39 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=4w24l/es7kvekeakkuc1v8.jpg)

Time for a marathon!

Thursday, Hoopsville will be on the air for at least nine hours in the 7th Annual Hoopsville Marathon Show.

This year's show will feature coaches, administrators, and many others around Division III to give us a sense of the season to date and what is to come. There is only a month or so left in the regular season, so there is plenty to talk about.

For more information about the show and its impact, click here.

The show's guest list is below with a rough idea of when they were scheduled to appear during the live show.

The marathon is also a chance to fundraise of the show. Many fans of Hoopsville ask often how they can give to the program so we can continue doing our work into the future. In the first few years of the Marathon, the fundraising side was an important aspect. However in the last few years, we have shyed away from fundraising as we tried to find other means to financially run the program. After requests from many, we are do have a few ways fans can contribute.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch the entire Marathon show LIVE in the video player above. We will effort to turn around podcast episodes of the entire show. They will be available to the right (after the show is off the air).

Guests appear on the Hoopsville Hotline presented by BlueFrame Technology.

And don't forget to interact with the Dave and guests. You can use the social media option to the right and even email (dave.mchugh@d3sports.com) questions to the show.

When it comes to the game of basketball, we love celebrating not only the student-athletes in Division III, but also those who help carry the game forward sometimes outside of the spotlight.

Sunday on Hoopsville, we celebrate those who have made the game of basketball, especially at DIII, so great. Coaches who continue to excel in different parts of the country and programs who play for more than just themselves.

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Thursday's Marathon Show in the following ways:
- Main page: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville
- Show page: http://bit.ly/2GBqAuZ (or www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2019-20/marathon)
- Facebook Live Simulcast: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
- YouTube Simulcast: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville
- Team1 Sports: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville/
- Team1 Sports app (https://team1sports.com/) (Android TV, Amazon Fire, Apple TV, Roku) - you will either find it under the "live" section or search for the Hoopsville channel

All men's coaches appear in the NABC Coach's Corner. And all guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to dave.mchugh@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options.

Hoopsville Marathon Schedule
Timing approximate and subject to change

Time (ET)	Guest	School/Institution
12:20 p.m.	Jim Calhoun	St. Joseph's (Conn.) men's coach
12:40 p.m.	Pat Juckem	No. 11 WashU men's coach
1:00 p.m.	Brian Morehouse	No. 3 Hope women's coach
1:20 p.m.	Lauren Busalacchi	Ripon women's coach
1:40 p.m.	Ryan Hyland	John Jay men's coach
2:00 p.m.	Dan Dutcher	NCAA VP for Division III
2:40 p.m.	Karin Harvey	Montclair State women's coach, Women's National Committee chair
3:00 p.m.	Adrienne Shibles	No. 2 Bowdoin women's coach
3:20 p.m.	Kate Pearson	Cabrini women's coach
3:40 p.m.	Matt Gilbride	RPI men's coach
4:00 p.m.	Sam Atkinson	Gallaudet Associate AD for Comm., Men's National Committee Chair
4:20 p.m.	Matt Donohue	Catholic women's coach
4:40 p.m.	Charles Katsiaficas	Pomona-Pitzer men's coach
5:00 p.m.	Jon Herbrechtsmeyer	No. 5 Bethel women's coach
5:20 p.m.	Chris Carideo	Widener men's coach
5:40 p.m.	Dave Hixon	Amherst men's coach (sabbatical)
6:00 p.m.	Tricia Cullop	WBCA Board President, Toledo women's coach
6:20 p.m.	Alex Richey	No. 18 Oglethorpe women's coach
6:40 p.m.	Jody May	Albion men's coach
7:00 p.m.	Dave Macedo	No. 18 Virginia Wesleyan men's coach
7:20 p.m.	Melissa Kuberka	St. John Fisher women's coach
8:00 p.m.	HOOPSVILLE HAPPY HOUR	A gaggle of some of the shows friends - to be announced

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 30, 2020, 07:31:36 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

(superseded by complete report)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 02, 2020, 05:09:03 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Swarthmore	19-0	won at Washington College, 77-66; won at Gettysburg, 74-70
#2	590	St. John's	19-1	def. Gustavus Adolphus, 68-59; def. Hamline, 71-57
#3	554	Randolph-Macon	19-1	def. Shenandoah, 85-59; def. Emory and Henry, 79-54
#4	540	Elmhurst	18-2	LOST at #36 Augustana, 93-94; def. Wheaton (Ill.), 80-69
#5	523	Colby	18-1	won at Bates, 101-84; LOST at #22 Tufts, 67-80
#6	466	Wittenberg	18-1	def. DePauw, 90-59; won at Allegheny, 77-75
#7	450	St. Thomas	17-2	def. #39 Augsburg, 101-60; won at Gustavus Adolphus, 106-67
#8	446	Emory	16-2	won at Chicago, 83-66; won at #11 Washington U., 80-67
#9	428	Nebraska Wesleyan	18-2	won at Buena Vista, 97-80; def. Dubuque, 92-66
#10	395	Middlebury	18-3	LOST at Trinity (Conn.), 76-82; won at Connecticut College, 77-61
#11	380	Washington U.	15-3	def. #38 Rochester, 76-66; LOST to #8 Emory, 67-80
#12	360	Marietta	16-3	won at Otterbein, 76-54; LOST at John Carroll, 54-67
#13	297	North Central (Ill.)	16-4	LOST at Illinois Wesleyan, 71-77; def. North Park, 90-66
#14	293	Johns Hopkins	17-2	def. McDaniel, 76-60; def. Muhlenberg, 82-73
#15	274	UW-Platteville	16-3	def. T#34 UW-Oshkosh, 91-87 2OT
#16	261	UW-La Crosse	16-3	LOST to UW-Whitewater, 63-65; def. Crown, 77-63
#17	163	Wooster	14-5	LOST to Allegheny, 84-89; LOST at Wabash, 67-68
#18	133	Virginia Wesleyan	16-3	def. Lynchburg, 78-59
#19	130	Albertus Magnus	14-4	LOST to St. Joseph (Conn.), 79-98; LOST to (n) Suffolk, 68-81
#20	110	Mount Union	16-3	def. John Carroll, 88-85; won at Ohio Northern, 75-63
#21	104	Centre	20-2	def. Birmingham-Southern, 70-55; def. Millsaps, 82-70
#22	103	Tufts	16-4	LOST at New England College, 56-59; def. Bowdoin, 85-73; def. #5 Colby, 80-67
#23	80	Babson	16-3	def. Emerson, 86-84; won at Coast Guard, 96-84
#24	63	Yeshiva	17-1	won at Sarah Lawrence, 74-72; def. SUNY-Purchase, 86-73; def. Manhattanville, 100-79
#25	50	Brandeis	14-4	def. Case Western Reserve, 71-64; def. Carnegie Mellon, 87-68

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	47	Springfield	16-3	def. #27 WPI, 84-66; won at Clark, 90-71
#27	42	WPI	15-4	LOST at #26 Springfield, 66-84; def. Wheaton (Mass.), 86-73
#28	35	Whitworth	15-4	won at Puget Sound, 81-79; won at Pacific Lutheran, 87-81
T#29	33	Whitman	15-4	won at Pacific Lutheran, 77-66; won at Puget Sound, 90-87
T#29	33	St. Norbert	16-3	def. Grinnell, 109-79; def. Cornell, 77-57
#31	25	East Texas Baptist	15-4	LOST at LeTourneau, 85-92; LOST to LeTourneau, 71-81
#32	21	Albion	17-2	won at Olivet, 78-69; won at Calvin, 75-66
#33	17	Christopher Newport	17-4	def. St. Mary's (Md.), 93-58; def. Mary Washington, 81-68
T#34	13	UW-Oshkosh	12-7	LOST at #15 UW-Platteville, 87-91 2OT
T#34	13	Benedictine	16-3	def. Illinois Tech, 59-53; won at Marian, 81-64
#36	9	Augustana	14-6	def. #4 Elmhurst, 94-93; def. Millikin, 76-55
#37	8	RPI	17-2	won at Skidmore, 78-65; won at Union, 85-79
#38	7	Rochester	13-5	LOST at #11 Washington U., 66-76; won at Chicago, 64-59
#39	3	Augsburg	14-5	LOST at #7 St. Thomas, 60-101; won at Carleton, 93-89
#40	1	Pomona-Pitzer	15-4	def. La Verne, 109-83; def. Chapman, 75-63

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 06, 2020, 01:50:38 AM

The Division III basketball regular season has officially entered it's final month. Where has the time gone?

Seems like a perfect time to take a break for lunch. Chat about what is ahead and teams which have positioned themselves well to still be playing next month.

Thursday on Hoopsville (at a special time), we chat with not only a few of Top 25 programs, but also a team that has seemingly come out of nowhere to be contending in one of the more difficult conferences.

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Thursday's show LIVE starting at 12:00 pm ET in the following ways:
- Main page: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville
- Show page: http://bit.ly/36ZYxAo (or www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2019-20/feb6)
- Facebook Live Simulcast: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
- YouTube Simulcast: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville
- Team1 Sports: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville/
- Team1 Sports app (https://team1sports.com/) (Android TV, Amazon Fire, Apple TV, Roku) - you will either find it under the "live" section or search for the Hoopsville channel
Sunday's show primarily covers the Atlantic, Central, South, and Northeast Regions. All men's coaches appear in the NABC Coach's Corner. And all guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

Thursday's show primarily covers the East, Great Lakes, Mid-Atlantic, and West Regions. All men's coaches appear in the NABC Coach's Corner. And all guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3sports.com (notice, we fixed our email system with a slightly different email!) or use any of the social media options to the right.

Donate with PayPal button

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Pat McKenzie, No. 2 St. John's men's coach
- Nate Davis, No. 19 Gettysburg women's coach
- Kris Huffman, No. 4 DePauw women's coach
- Jim Bechtel, SUNY Potsdam men's coach.

Please also consider helping us out. We are accepting donations to show - which many of you have asked about. We have an initial goal to hit $5,000 by Feb. 16. We are currently at $2,330.20.

To donate, click our PayPal link here: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=BSRFLPUJQ9MKL&source=url

And thank you for your contributions.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 06, 2020, 06:29:35 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	620	Swarthmore	19-0	02/06 vs. Muhlenberg; 02/08 vs. Franklin and Marshall
#2	599	St. John's	20-1	def. St. Olaf, 68-53; 02/08 at Augsburg
#3	570	Randolph-Macon	20-1	won at Bridgewater (Va.), 83-69; 02/08 vs. Lynchburg
#4	522	St. Thomas	18-2	def. Hamline, 84-68; 02/08 vs. Concordia-Moorhead
#5	498	Wittenberg	19-1	def. Denison, 100-59; 02/08 at Kenyon
#6	491	Emory	16-2	02/07 vs. Chicago; 02/09 vs. #11 Washington U.
#7	471	Nebraska Wesleyan	19-2	won at Coe, 84-78; 02/08 at Luther
#8	464	Elmhurst	18-3	LOST to Carthage, 77-81; 02/08 at #17 North Central (Ill.)
#9	452	Colby	18-1	02/07 vs. Hamilton; 02/08 vs. Amherst
#10	378	Johns Hopkins	17-2	02/06 at Dickinson; 02/08 vs. Washington College
#11	328	Washington U.	15-3	02/07 at #39 Rochester; 02/09 at #6 Emory
#12	324	UW-Platteville	17-3	def. #18 UW-La Crosse, 83-75; 02/08 at UW-Stout
#13	308	Middlebury	18-3	02/09 at Wesleyan
#14	248	Mount Union	17-3	def. Muskingum, 85-63; 02/08 vs. Otterbein
#15	235	Virginia Wesleyan	17-3	won at Eastern Mennonite, 73-49; 02/08 vs. Randolph
#16	230	Marietta	17-3	def. Capital, 82-62; 02/08 vs. Ohio Northern
#17	217	North Central (Ill.)	16-4	02/08 vs. #8 Elmhurst
#18	178	UW-La Crosse	16-4	LOST at #12 UW-Platteville, 75-83; 02/08 vs. #32 UW-Oshkosh
#19	172	Centre	20-2	02/07 at Berry; 02/09 at Oglethorpe
#20	126	Babson	17-3	won at MIT, 90-85 OT; 02/08 vs. Clark
#21	125	Tufts	16-4	02/07 at Trinity (Conn.); 02/08 at Connecticut College
#22	96	Yeshiva	19-1	won at Williams, 77-68; won at Mount St. Mary, 82-65; 02/08 vs. Mount St. Vincent
#23	95	Springfield	17-3	def. Coast Guard, 105-99 2OT; 02/08 vs. Emerson
#24	63	Albion	18-2	def. Hope, 76-68; 02/08 vs. Alma
#25	56	Brandeis	14-4	02/07 at Case Western Reserve; 02/09 at Carnegie Mellon

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	55	St. Joseph (Conn.)	18-2	won at Lasell, 94-57; 02/08 vs. St. Joseph's (Maine)
#27	39	St. Norbert	17-3	def. Lawrence, 90-79; 02/08 at Illinois College
#28	29	Whitman	15-4	02/07 at Willamette; 02/08 at Lewis and Clark
#29	26	Christopher Newport	18-4	won at St. Mary's (Md.), 93-63; 02/08 at York (Pa.)
#30	19	Benedictine	17-3	def. Aurora, 82-45; 02/08 at Rockford
#31	17	RPI	17-2	02/07 vs. Ithaca; 02/08 vs. Vassar
#32	15	UW-Oshkosh	12-8	LOST to UW-Eau Claire, 76-78; 02/08 at #18 UW-La Crosse
#33	12	Whitworth	15-4	02/07 at Lewis and Clark; 02/08 at Willamette
#34	9	WPI	16-4	def. Clark, 102-62; 02/08 vs. Coast Guard
#35	8	Wooster	15-5	def. Kenyon, 76-57; 02/08 vs. Ohio Wesleyan
T#36	6	Brockport	16-3	won at Fredonia, 88-60; 02/07 at SUNY Oneonta; 02/08 at SUNY New Paltz
T#36	6	Augustana	15-6	won at Wheaton (Ill.), 79-68; 02/08 at #38 Illinois Wesleyan
#38	5	Illinois Wesleyan	14-6	won at Millikin, 76-74; 02/08 vs. T#36 Augustana
#39	4	Rochester	13-5	02/07 vs. #11 Washington U.; 02/09 vs. Chicago
#40	2	Widener	17-3	02/07 at Messiah
T#41	1	Hobart	16-3	02/07 vs. St. Lawrence; 02/08 vs. Clarkson
T#41	1	LeTourneau	15-4	02/06 at Texas-Dallas; 02/08 at University of the Ozarks
T#41	1	Washington and Lee	17-4	won at Shenandoah, 77-72

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on February 06, 2020, 09:59:54 AM

A lot of un-surprising results halfway through the week.

It really is time to no longer include UW-Oshkosh in the top 25. I know it is probably just a handful of pollsters, but 15 points is a decent amount for 7 losses, no matter how good they look on film. There are definitely more deserving teams that are just as good on film with better resumes, especially given the loss this week to UW- Eau Claire.. although they certainly will beat UW-LAX later in this week to keep those voters holding on haha!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 09, 2020, 04:33:02 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=5gakr/qeiwuaxs33tcp3oh.jpg)

Things are heating up in Division III as the first set of Regional Rankings are due out next week.

Sunday night on Hoopsville, we chat with a few teams not only trying to stay atop their conference races, but also hoping they are either in or near the top of the Regional Rankings.

We also take a look at the women's Top 25 poll. What changes might we see this week with not only one of the bigger in-season upsets in recent history, but also a number of other interesting results from the week before. And yes, we will chat about the men's Top 25 as well.

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Sunday's show LIVE starting at 7:00 pm ET in the following ways:
- Main page: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville
- Show page: http://bit.ly/38dt7YD (or www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2019-20/feb9)
- Facebook Live Simulcast: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
- YouTube Simulcast: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville
- Team1 Sports: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville/
- Team1 Sports app (https://team1sports.com/) (Android TV, Amazon Fire, Apple TV, Roku) - you will either find it under the "live" section or search for the Hoopsville channel

Sunday's show primarily covers the Atlantic, Central, South, and Northeast Regions. All men's coaches appear in the NABC Coach's Corner. And all guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options to the right.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Nicole Chaszar, Western New England women's coach
- Terry Butterfield, UT-Dallas men's coach
- Gary Grzesk, St. Norbert men's coach
- Gordon Mann, Top 25 Double-Take

Please also consider helping us out. We are accepting donations to the show - which many of you have asked about. We have an initial goal to hit $5,000 by Feb. 16. We are currently at $2,330.20.

To donate, click our PayPal link here: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=BSRFLPUJQ9MKL&source=url

And thank you for your contributions.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 09, 2020, 04:58:06 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	620	Swarthmore	21-0	def. Muhlenberg, 75-62; def. Franklin and Marshall, 85-68
#2	599	St. John's	21-1	def. St. Olaf, 68-53; won at Augsburg, 75-64
#3	570	Randolph-Macon	21-1	won at Bridgewater (Va.), 83-69; def. Lynchburg, 85-82 OT
#4	522	St. Thomas	19-2	def. Hamline, 84-68; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 97-58
#5	498	Wittenberg	20-1	def. Denison, 100-59; won at Kenyon, 83-63
#6	491	Emory	17-3	LOST to Chicago, 76-84; def. #11 Washington U., 73-68
#7	471	Nebraska Wesleyan	20-2	won at Coe, 84-78; won at Luther, 95-65
#8	464	Elmhurst	18-4	LOST to Carthage, 77-81; LOST at #17 North Central (Ill.), 45-56
#9	452	Colby	19-2	def. Hamilton, 78-74; LOST to Amherst, 69-87
#10	378	Johns Hopkins	19-2	won at Dickinson, 80-70; def. Washington College, 81-51
#11	328	Washington U.	16-4	won at #39 Rochester, 69-61; LOST at #6 Emory, 68-73
#12	324	UW-Platteville	18-3	def. #18 UW-La Crosse, 83-75; won at UW-Stout, 84-72
#13	308	Middlebury	19-3	won at Wesleyan, 95-79
#14	248	Mount Union	18-3	def. Muskingum, 85-63; def. Otterbein, 99-72
#15	235	Virginia Wesleyan	18-3	won at Eastern Mennonite, 73-49; def. Randolph, 72-53
#16	230	Marietta	18-3	def. Capital, 82-62; def. Ohio Northern, 93-61
#17	217	North Central (Ill.)	17-4	def. #8 Elmhurst, 56-45
#18	178	UW-La Crosse	16-5	LOST at #12 UW-Platteville, 75-83; LOST to #32 UW-Oshkosh, 74-79
#19	172	Centre	20-4	LOST at Berry, 58-60; LOST at Oglethorpe, 79-81
#20	126	Babson	18-3	won at MIT, 90-85 OT; def. Clark, 105-70
#21	125	Tufts	18-4	won at Trinity (Conn.), 88-58; won at Connecticut College, 87-61
#22	96	Yeshiva	20-1	won at Williams, 77-68; won at Mount St. Mary, 82-65; def. Mount St. Vincent, 95-80
#23	95	Springfield	18-3	def. Coast Guard, 105-99 2OT; def. Emerson, 86-76
#24	63	Albion	18-3	def. Hope, 76-68; LOST to Alma, 74-78
#25	56	Brandeis	15-5	LOST at Case Western Reserve, 76-84; won at Carnegie Mellon, 77-70

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	55	St. Joseph (Conn.)	19-2	won at Lasell, 94-57; def. St. Joseph's (Maine), 113-73
#27	39	St. Norbert	18-3	def. Lawrence, 90-79; won at Illinois College, 87-74
#28	29	Whitman	16-5	won at Willamette, 106-70; LOST at Lewis and Clark, 83-90
#29	26	Christopher Newport	18-5	won at St. Mary's (Md.), 93-63; LOST at York (Pa.), 97-101 2OT
#30	19	Benedictine	18-3	def. Aurora, 82-45; won at Rockford, 95-75
#31	17	RPI	18-3	def. Vassar, 61-49; LOST to Ithaca, 60-62
#32	15	UW-Oshkosh	13-8	LOST to UW-Eau Claire, 76-78; won at #18 UW-La Crosse, 79-74
#33	12	Whitworth	17-4	won at Lewis and Clark, 73-66; won at Willamette, 92-58
#34	9	WPI	17-4	def. Clark, 102-62; def. Coast Guard, 90-81
#35	8	Wooster	16-5	def. Kenyon, 76-57; def. Ohio Wesleyan, 80-71
T#36	6	Brockport	18-3	won at Fredonia, 88-60; won at SUNY Oneonta, 85-75; won at SUNY New Paltz, 81-59
T#36	6	Augustana	16-6	won at Wheaton (Ill.), 79-68; won at #38 Illinois Wesleyan, 78-64
#38	5	Illinois Wesleyan	14-7	won at Millikin, 76-74; LOST to T#36 Augustana, 64-78
#39	4	Rochester	13-7	LOST to #11 Washington U., 61-69; LOST to Chicago, 48-68
#40	2	Widener	18-3	won at Messiah, 87-81
T#41	1	Hobart	18-3	def. St. Lawrence, 66-52; def. Clarkson, 77-68
T#41	1	LeTourneau	16-5	LOST at Texas-Dallas, 89-105; won at University of the Ozarks, 79-74
T#41	1	Washington and Lee	17-4	won at Shenandoah, 77-72

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BaboNation on February 10, 2020, 06:21:37 PM

While I think the pollsters have gotten things right most of the season I'm puzzled how folks still have Springfield behind my Babson Beavers, though it's down to a slim 2 points now.

Springfield has the better SOS and beat Babson on it's home court back when Babson still had Oftring. So, if you vote mostly on past performance and SOS I give Springfield the nod, and if you vote to include current health, etc., I give the nod to Springfield there too. Babson has weathered the Oftring injury well from a W-L standpoint, but they'll do well to go 2-2 in their final 4 IMO. Tough games against WPI (H), Springfield (A), and Emerson (A).

FWIW, Massey has Springfield at 12 and Babson at 29.

Strictly from a New England perspective (which I watch most often) it's great to see St. Joe's finally crack the top 25.

My way-too-early projection of New England teams built to go farthest in the tournament are Middlebury, Springfield, and St. Joe's, in no particular order.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 11, 2020, 01:45:50 PM

I was unaware Oftring was still out. Is it a season-ending thing? I'm pretty sure I follow injuries as closely if not more closely than most voters. That's just not something easy to access. If he's out for the year, then it would change how I view Babson, for sure.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 11, 2020, 02:15:16 PM

I only brought Babson back onto my ballot this week for the first time in many weeks. Interestingly, if I decided not to vote for them (and I debated), Springfield would be ahead of Babson by a single point - though, 24 other voters could have made different decisions as well.

I put them back on because they are playing well despite Oftring or anything else they may be dealing with.

That said, I have Springfield significantly ahead of Babson.

One thing of concern about Springfield, though, despite their win head-to-head against Babson (which is one game in the grand scheme of things)... they are inconsistent. Babson seems more consistent. Double-overtime v CGA where you needed 55 points and 21 rebounds from Ross is not a good thing. It tells voters that if Ross has an off night or can be bottled up, Springfield may not be that good. Babson is proving despite injuries they can actually win the same games in conference without the "heroics" and such.

While I have Springfield higher, they have shown more of a chance of having a bad game (or even losing one) than Babson, IMO.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BaboNation on February 11, 2020, 05:44:10 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 11, 2020, 01:45:50 PM

I was unaware Oftring was still out. Is it a season-ending thing? I'm pretty sure I follow injuries as closely if not more closely than most voters. That's just not something easy to access. If he's out for the year, then it would change how I view Babson, for sure.

Yes, Oftring has been out since early in the 2nd half against Clark on Jan. 18th when they lost a 19-point lead, and the game in OT. He had also missed the ECST game earlier (another loss). He's had a leg wrapped all year.

While Bradanese has filled in admirably, he hasn't yet faced the likes of WPI (tomorrow) or Springfield (next week) for 30 minutes or more.

Oftring's injury is knee-related, I believe. Over the last few weeks he's been at games on crutches. It's hard for me to believe he'll be back, but I obviously hope for the best. He was on pace for 1st team NEWMAC IMO.

If you want to see him at his best (assuming tape is available) watch the show he put on against Tufts with Rogers, et al, finishing with a line of 29/10/4 in only 26 minutes. Rogers looked outmatched and finished with a quiet 6.

It's going to require a Herculean effort by the rest of the team to get far in the postseason without Oftring.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 11, 2020, 07:12:44 PM

Quote from: BaboNation on February 11, 2020, 05:44:10 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 11, 2020, 01:45:50 PM

I was unaware Oftring was still out. Is it a season-ending thing? I'm pretty sure I follow injuries as closely if not more closely than most voters. That's just not something easy to access. If he's out for the year, then it would change how I view Babson, for sure.

Yes, Oftring has been out since early in the 2nd half against Clark on Jan. 18th when they lost a 19-point lead, and the game in OT. He had also missed the ECST game earlier (another loss). He's had a leg wrapped all year.

While Bradanese has filled in admirably, he hasn't yet faced the likes of WPI (tomorrow) or Springfield (next week) for 30 minutes or more.

Oftring's injury is knee-related, I believe. Over the last few weeks he's been at games on crutches. It's hard for me to believe he'll be back, but I obviously hope for the best. He was on pace for 1st team NEWMAC IMO.

If you want to see him at his best (assuming tape is available) watch the show he put on against Tufts with Rogers, et al, finishing with a line of 29/10/4 in only 26 minutes. Rogers looked outmatched and finished with a quiet 6.

It's going to require a Herculean effort by the rest of the team to get far in the postseason without Oftring.

I knew he had missed some time with injury. I just hadn't realized it was that serious.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on February 13, 2020, 12:47:25 AM

https://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2020/02/wrapup-men-0212 (https://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2020/02/wrapup-men-0212)

Wilmington finished the game on a 15-4 run to defeat Muskingum 79-74, putting a damper on a milestone night for the Fighting Muskies' Marcus Dempsey. The nation's leading scorer at 30.7 points per game, Dempsey surpassed the 2,000-point mark for his career with his first point of the game. He was held to 20 on the night, while Jeffery Mansfield led the Fightin' Quakers with 33.

Although very unimportant, Eric Demers is actually the leading scorer in the nation at 33.7.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 13, 2020, 07:51:36 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	618	Swarthmore	22-0	won at #7 Johns Hopkins, 83-69; 02/15 vs. Dickinson
#2	602	St. John's	22-1	won at Macalester, 82-59; 02/15 vs. #4 St. Thomas
#3	570	Randolph-Macon	21-1	02/15 vs. T#40 Washington and Lee
#4	539	St. Thomas	20-2	won at Bethel, 65-60; 02/15 at #2 St. John's
#5	517	Wittenberg	21-1	won at Ohio Wesleyan, 77-61; 02/15 vs. #34 Wooster
#6	508	Nebraska Wesleyan	20-2	02/15 vs. Central
#7	440	Johns Hopkins	19-3	LOST to #1 Swarthmore, 69-83; 02/15 at Ursinus
#8	424	UW-Platteville	19-3	won at UW-Whitewater, 70-68; 02/15 vs. UW-River Falls
#9	397	Emory	17-3	02/14 vs. New York University; 02/16 vs. #35 Brandeis
#10	350	Middlebury	19-3	02/14 vs. #18 Tufts; 02/15 vs. Bates
#11	336	Mount Union	19-3	won at #15 Marietta, 81-67; 02/15 vs. Heidelberg
#12	320	Colby	20-2	def. Bates, 72-61; 02/14 vs. Wesleyan
#13	311	Virginia Wesleyan	19-3	won at Hampden-Sydney, 69-65; 02/15 at Emory and Henry
#14	301	North Central (Ill.)	18-4	won at #25 Augustana, 70-55; 02/15 at Carroll
#15	296	Marietta	18-4	LOST to #11 Mount Union, 67-81; 02/15 vs. Wilmington
#16	265	Washington U.	16-4	02/14 vs. Case Western Reserve; 02/16 vs. Carnegie Mellon
#17	219	Elmhurst	18-5	LOST at Illinois Wesleyan, 73-85; 02/15 vs. Millikin
#18	182	Tufts	18-4	02/14 at #10 Middlebury; 02/15 at Williams
#19	181	Babson	18-4	LOST to T#30 WPI, 56-75; 02/15 vs. Wheaton (Mass.)
#20	179	Springfield	19-3	won at Wheaton (Mass.), 100-76; 02/15 vs. MIT
#21	153	Yeshiva	21-1	def. St. Joseph's (Bklyn.), 94-62; 02/15 vs. Farmingdale State
#22	91	St. Joseph (Conn.)	20-2	won at Regis (Mass.), 91-73; 02/15 at Emmanuel
#23	79	St. Norbert	19-3	def. Beloit, 66-43; 02/15 at Grinnell
#24	42	Benedictine	18-4	LOST at MSOE, 64-65 OT; 02/15 at Lakeland
#25	28	Augustana	16-7	LOST to #14 North Central (Ill.), 55-70; 02/15 vs. Carthage

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	27	Albion	19-3	won at Kalamazoo, 96-70; 02/15 at Adrian
#27	20	UW-La Crosse	17-5	def. UW-Stout, 94-62; 02/15 at UW-Stevens Point
T#28	15	Brockport	19-3	def. Fredonia, 104-57; 02/15 vs. SUNY Geneseo
T#28	15	Whitworth	17-4	02/14 vs. Pacific; 02/15 vs. George Fox
T#30	14	WPI	18-4	won at #19 Babson, 75-56; 02/15 vs. Emerson
T#30	14	Amherst	16-6	02/14 vs. Trinity (Conn.); 02/15 vs. Connecticut College
#32	11	Christopher Newport	18-5	02/15 vs. Salisbury
#33	10	Centre	20-4	02/15 vs. Sewanee
#34	9	Wooster	17-5	def. Denison, 93-72; 02/15 at #5 Wittenberg
#35	8	Brandeis	15-5	02/14 at Rochester; 02/16 at #9 Emory
T#36	7	York (Pa.)	18-5	02/15 at Mary Washington
T#36	7	RPI	18-3	02/14 vs. #39 Hobart; 02/15 vs. Rochester Tech
#38	6	Texas-Dallas	16-5	02/13 at Belhaven; 02/15 at Louisiana College
#39	4	Hobart	18-3	02/14 at T#36 RPI; 02/15 at Vassar
T#40	3	Washington and Lee	18-4	won at Roanoke, 71-50; 02/15 at #3 Randolph-Macon
T#40	3	Widener	18-4	LOST to Albright, 71-74; 02/15 vs. Alvernia
#42	2	UW-Oshkosh	14-8	won at UW-Stevens Point, 66-59; 02/15 vs. UW-Stout
T#43	1	Stevens	18-4	won at DeSales, 76-64; 02/15 vs. Eastern
T#43	1	Whitman	16-5	02/14 vs. George Fox; 02/15 vs. Pacific

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 13, 2020, 09:21:50 AM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on February 13, 2020, 12:47:25 AM
https://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2020/02/wrapup-men-0212 (https://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2020/02/wrapup-men-0212)

Wilmington finished the game on a 15-4 run to defeat Muskingum 79-74, putting a damper on a milestone night for the Fighting Muskies' Marcus Dempsey. The nation's leading scorer at 30.7 points per game, Dempsey surpassed the 2,000-point mark for his career with his first point of the game. He was held to 20 on the night, while Jeffery Mansfield led the Fightin' Quakers with 33.

Although very unimportant, Eric Demers is actually the leading scorer in the nation at 33.7.

I really like that Mansfield kid. Very impressive player. Only a sophomore.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 13, 2020, 10:40:26 AM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on February 13, 2020, 12:47:25 AM
https://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2020/02/wrapup-men-0212 (https://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2020/02/wrapup-men-0212)He was held to 20 on the night, while Jeffery Mansfield led the Fightin' Quakers with 33.

Chuckling at that team nickname never gets old.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 13, 2020, 04:56:53 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=5np2b/9r1qtcw5du248pe6.jpg)

The first Regional Rankings of the season are out and there are plenty of reactions ... and questions.

On Thursday's Hoopsville, we chat with a few programs who are in those rankings and others who know the best way into the NCAA tournaments is to win their conference. Plus, we find out how a fast break is a solid investment in giving back. And do you really understand the Strength of Schedule math and what is does, and does not, tell the ranking committees?

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Thursday's show LIVE starting at 7:00 pm ET in the following ways:
- Main page: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville
- Show page: http://bit.ly/2OQhWxt (or www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2019-20/feb13)
- Facebook Live Simulcast: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
- YouTube Simulcast: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville
- Team1 Sports: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville/
- Team1 Sports app (https://team1sports.com/) (Android TV, Amazon Fire, Apple TV, Roku) - you will either find it under the "live" section or search for the Hoopsville channel

Thursday's show primarily covers the East, Great Lakes, Mid-Atlantic, and West Regions while also featuring a women's coach in the WBCA Center Court segment. All men's coaches appear in the NABC Coach's Corner. And all guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options to the right.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Steve Lamie, Grove City men's coach
- Lucia Robinson-Griggs, Vassar women's coach
- Tonja Englund, UW-Eau Claire women's coach (WBCA Center Court)
- Justin Heinzen, No. 10 Loras women's coach
- Matt Snyder, SOS guru

Please also consider helping us out. We are accepting donations to the show - which many of you have asked about. We have an initial goal to hit $5,000 by Feb. 16. We are currently at $2,330.20.

To donate, click our PayPal link here: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=BSRFLPUJQ9MKL&source=url

And thank you for your contributions.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 16, 2020, 04:56:14 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	618	Swarthmore	23-0	won at #7 Johns Hopkins, 83-69; def. Dickinson, 96-69
#2	602	St. John's	22-2	won at Macalester, 82-59; LOST to #4 St. Thomas, 66-71
#3	570	Randolph-Macon	22-1	def. T#40 Washington and Lee, 72-50
#4	539	St. Thomas	21-2	won at Bethel, 65-60; won at #2 St. John's, 71-66
#5	517	Wittenberg	22-1	won at Ohio Wesleyan, 77-61; def. #34 Wooster, 88-81
#6	508	Nebraska Wesleyan	21-2	def. Central, 91-70
#7	440	Johns Hopkins	20-3	LOST to #1 Swarthmore, 69-83; won at Ursinus, 74-68
#8	424	UW-Platteville	20-3	won at UW-Whitewater, 70-68; def. UW-River Falls, 94-54
#9	397	Emory	19-3	def. New York University, 99-81; def. #35 Brandeis, 93-65
#10	350	Middlebury	20-4	def. #18 Tufts, 86-74; LOST to Bates, 87-90
#11	336	Mount Union	20-3	won at #15 Marietta, 81-67; def. Heidelberg, 93-80
#12	320	Colby	21-2	def. Bates, 72-61; def. Wesleyan, 85-82
#13	311	Virginia Wesleyan	19-4	won at Hampden-Sydney, 69-65; LOST at Emory and Henry, 89-94 2OT
#14	301	North Central (Ill.)	19-4	won at #25 Augustana, 70-55; won at Carroll, 59-55
#15	296	Marietta	19-4	LOST to #11 Mount Union, 67-81; def. Wilmington, 105-74
#16	265	Washington U.	18-4	def. Case Western Reserve, 77-71; def. Carnegie Mellon, 99-68
#17	219	Elmhurst	19-5	LOST at Illinois Wesleyan, 73-85; def. Millikin, 87-75
#18	182	Tufts	18-6	LOST at #10 Middlebury, 74-86; LOST at Williams, 66-71
#19	181	Babson	19-4	LOST to T#30 WPI, 56-75; def. Wheaton (Mass.), 82-57
#20	179	Springfield	20-3	won at Wheaton (Mass.), 100-76; def. MIT, 66-62
#21	153	Yeshiva	22-1	def. St. Joseph's (Bklyn.), 94-62; def. Farmingdale State, 98-71
#22	91	St. Joseph (Conn.)	21-2	won at Regis (Mass.), 91-73; won at Emmanuel, 95-83
#23	79	St. Norbert	20-3	def. Beloit, 66-43; won at Grinnell, 116-113 OT
#24	42	Benedictine	19-4	LOST at MSOE, 64-65 OT; won at Lakeland, 73-70
#25	28	Augustana	17-7	LOST to #14 North Central (Ill.), 55-70; def. Carthage, 83-81

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	27	Albion	19-4	won at Kalamazoo, 96-70; LOST at Adrian, 78-79
#27	20	UW-La Crosse	18-5	def. UW-Stout, 94-62; won at UW-Stevens Point, 53-52
T#28	15	Brockport	20-3	def. Fredonia, 104-57; def. SUNY Geneseo, 88-56
T#28	15	Whitworth	19-4	def. Pacific, 91-78; def. George Fox, 83-76
T#30	14	WPI	19-4	won at #19 Babson, 75-56; def. Emerson, 85-64
T#30	14	Amherst	17-7	LOST to Trinity (Conn.), 85-89; def. Connecticut College, 76-67
#32	11	Christopher Newport	19-5	def. Salisbury, 82-64
#33	10	Centre	21-4	def. Sewanee, 71-69
#34	9	Wooster	17-6	def. Denison, 93-72; LOST at #5 Wittenberg, 81-88
#35	8	Brandeis	15-7	LOST at Rochester, 65-80; LOST at #9 Emory, 65-93
T#36	7	York (Pa.)	19-5	won at Mary Washington, 74-71
T#36	7	RPI	20-3	def. #39 Hobart, 58-54; def. Rochester Tech, 76-64
#38	6	Texas-Dallas	18-5	won at Belhaven, 85-81; won at Louisiana College, 74-56
#39	4	Hobart	19-4	LOST at T#36 RPI, 54-58; won at Vassar, 64-51
T#40	3	Washington and Lee	18-5	won at Roanoke, 71-50; LOST at #3 Randolph-Macon, 50-72
T#40	3	Widener	18-5	LOST to Albright, 71-74; LOST to Alvernia, 64-67
#42	2	UW-Oshkosh	15-8	won at UW-Stevens Point, 66-59; def. UW-Stout, 84-60
T#43	1	Stevens	19-4	won at DeSales, 76-64; def. Eastern, 75-61
T#43	1	Whitman	18-5	def. George Fox, 100-94; def. Pacific, 91-88

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 17, 2020, 04:56:06 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=5v3wn/rw46qdpbe3zw5xzo.jpg)

In two weeks, the regular season will be over. If teams want to still be playing in March, the time to get it done is now ... including conference tournaments, some of which start for some this week.

This week will also bring with it a better understanding of which teams are in position to be playing in the NCAA Tournaments.

Monday on Hoopsville, we will chat with several programs which have positioned themselves atop their conference races and hope home court will help them punch tickets to the NCAA tournaments. However, they also know the difference between playing at home or in the NCAAs could be a single game still to be played.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Charlie Averkamp, Benedictine women's coach
- Trent Milby, Berea women's coach
- Jake Ross, Springfield senior guard
- Dean Burrows, Wesley men's coach
- Bob Quillman & Ryan Scott, Top 25 Double-Take

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Monday's show LIVE starting at 7:00 pm ET in the following ways:
- Main page: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville
- Show page: http://bit.ly/3bQmnlR (or www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2019-20/feb17)
- Facebook Live Simulcast: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
- YouTube Simulcast: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville
- Team1 Sports: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville/
- Team1 Sports app (https://team1sports.com/) (Android TV, Amazon Fire, Apple TV, Roku) - you will either find it under the "live" section or search for the Hoopsville channel
Monday's show primarily covers the Atlantic, Central, South, and Northeast Regions. All men's coaches appear in the NABC Coach's Corner. And all guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options to the right.

Please also consider helping us out. We are accepting donations to the show - which many of you have asked about. We have an initial goal to hit $5,000 by the end of the show TONIGHT. We are currently at $2,659.32.

We will be raising the goal after tonight!

To donate, click our PayPal link here: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=BSRFLPUJQ9MKL&source=url

And thank you for your contributions.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpartyBlue on February 18, 2020, 11:36:30 AM

I only just discovered D-3 efficiency ratings. Question. Any thoughts on correlation between tempo and efficiency? It seems like there is a lot of emphasis put on tempo in basketball conversation, yet a quick look at the top 10 shows only one team in the top 100 in AdjT.

1. Swarthmore 240
2. RM 406
3. St. T 300
4. St. J 421
5. Wittenberg 233
6. NWU 280
7. UW-Platt 327
8. Emory 75
9. Mt. Union 303
10. JHU 324

Conversely, there are four top ten teams in D-1 in the top 100 in AdjT. Thoughts?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: thebear on February 18, 2020, 12:22:49 PM

This is not uncommon, great teams often are built around great defense.

Randolph Macon is giving up 55 points per game, and scoring 76. They lead Division III by 3.5 points in Team defense.

When Potsdam went 32-0 en route to their 60 game streak in the 80's, they averaged 81.4 and gave up only 57.3 points per game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 19, 2020, 11:03:46 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	620	Swarthmore	24-0	won at Haverford, 86-73; 02/22 at McDaniel
#2	587	Randolph-Macon	23-1	def. Hampden-Sydney, 84-58; 02/22 at Guilford
#3	581	St. Thomas	22-2	won at St. Olaf, 76-69; 02/22 vs. St. Mary's (Minn.)
#4	521	St. John's	22-2	02/22 at Bethel
#5	519	Wittenberg	23-1	won at Wabash, 78-69; 02/22 vs. Hiram
#6	515	Nebraska Wesleyan	21-3	LOST at Simpson, 59-86; 02/22 vs. Loras
#7	455	UW-Platteville	21-3	won at UW-Eau Claire, 80-56; 02/22 at UW-Stevens Point
#8	433	Emory	19-3	02/21 at Carnegie Mellon; 02/23 at Case Western Reserve
#9	411	Mount Union	21-3	def. Baldwin Wallace, 83-73; 02/22 at Capital
#10	407	Johns Hopkins	21-3	won at Franklin and Marshall, 64-53; 02/22 vs. Haverford
#11	368	North Central (Ill.)	20-4	def. Carthage, 70-69; 02/22 at Wheaton (Ill.)
#12	367	Colby	22-2	won at Southern Maine, 93-91; 02/22 vs. Bates
#13	317	Washington U.	18-4	02/21 at Brandeis; 02/23 at New York University
#14	259	Middlebury	20-4	02/22 at Trinity (Conn.)
#15	256	Springfield	21-3	won at #21 WPI, 80-64; 02/22 vs. #22 Babson
#16	230	Marietta	20-4	won at Muskingum, 102-82; 02/22 at Heidelberg
#17	213	Yeshiva	23-1	won at SUNY-Old Westbury, 87-63; 02/22 vs. St. Joseph's (L.I.)
#18	198	Virginia Wesleyan	20-4	def. Shenandoah, 75-71; 02/22 vs. Eastern Mennonite
#19	168	St. Joseph (Conn.)	22-2	def. Anna Maria, 96-81; 02/22 vs. Colby-Sawyer
#20	133	St. Norbert	21-3	won at Lawrence, 75-56; 02/22 vs. Monmouth
#21	99	WPI	19-5	LOST to #15 Springfield, 64-80; 02/22 at MIT
#22	76	Babson	20-4	won at Emerson, 92-77; 02/22 at #15 Springfield
#23	60	Elmhurst	20-5	def. Carroll, 62-59
#24	56	UW-La Crosse	19-5	won at UW-River Falls, 86-70; 02/22 vs. UW-Eau Claire
#25	53	Brockport	20-3	02/21 at Cortland; 02/22 at Oswego State

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	45	Whitworth	20-4	won at #38 Whitman, 87-82; 02/22 at Linfield
#27	27	Tufts	18-6	02/22 vs. Hamilton
#28	26	RPI	20-3	02/21 at Clarkson; 02/22 at St. Lawrence
T#29	19	Texas-Dallas	18-5	02/20 vs. Hardin-Simmons; 02/22 vs. McMurry
T#29	19	Centre	21-4	IDLE
#31	18	Augustana	17-7	02/22 vs. North Park
#32	17	UW-Oshkosh	16-8	def. UW-Whitewater, 86-65; 02/22 at UW-River Falls
#33	15	York (Pa.)	20-5	def. St. Mary's (Md.), 68-62
T#34	12	Christopher Newport	20-5	def. Southern Virginia, 84-66
T#34	12	Benedictine	20-4	def. Wisconsin Lutheran, 83-55; 02/22 at Concordia (Wis.)
#36	7	Stevens	20-4	won at FDU-Florham, 72-70; 02/22 vs. King's
#37	4	Albertus Magnus	19-4	def. Emmanuel, 97-82; 02/22 at Anna Maria
#38	2	Whitman	18-6	LOST to #26 Whitworth, 82-87; 02/21 at Linfield

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on February 20, 2020, 01:00:19 PM

Quote from: SpartyBlue on February 18, 2020, 11:36:30 AM
I only just discovered D-3 efficiency ratings. Question. Any thoughts on correlation between tempo and efficiency? It seems like there is a lot of emphasis put on tempo in basketball conversation, yet a quick look at the top 10 shows only one team in the top 100 in AdjT.

1. Swarthmore 240
2. RM 406
3. St. T 300
4. St. J 421
5. Wittenberg 233
6. NWU 280
7. UW-Platt 327
8. Emory 75
9. Mt. Union 303
10. JHU 324

Conversely, there are four top ten teams in D-1 in the top 100 in AdjT. Thoughts?

I've found almost no correlation between Tempo and overall efficiency, adjusted offensive efficiency or adjusted defensive efficiency.
In general, the faster teams are a bit less efficiency overall with that mostly being due to weaker defenses -- but this correlation is very, very weak.

BUT! Efficiency isn't really what you're trying to maximize. You're trying to maximize wins. Faster pace means more "confrontations" during the game, which would give the better of the two teams more opportunities. So it's possible a team could better maximize wins by sacrificing some efficiency for more possessions. I don't know if this would be true in practice, however.

Example:
If you're 0.1 points per possession than your opponent, you will tend to outscore them by 6 points over a 60 possession game. If you took a hit to, say, 0.08 points per possession while upping your possessions to 80 per game, you'd tend to outscore them by 6.4 points.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2020, 03:58:05 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=60mra/pxvrc8g36o76rvkj.jpg)

The second Regional Rankings are out, conference races are finishing up while some tournaments have begun. The frenetic finish to the regular season has begun.

On Thursday's Hoopsville, we chat to a few teams who are either leading their conference standings or could shake them up in their final scheduled games. Plus, a true #whyd3 way of approaching the season - giving back to the community while playing the game.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Sacha Santimano, Eastern Nazarene women's coach (WBCA Center Court)
- Matt Hunter, York (Pa.) men's coach
- Kevin Broderick, Nazareth men's coach
- Shanan Rosenberg, Linfield men's coach

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Thursday's show LIVE starting at 7:00 pm ET in the following ways:
- Main page: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville
- Show page: http://bit.ly/3bW9d6M (or www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2019-20/feb20)
- Facebook Live Simulcast: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
- YouTube Simulcast: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville
- Team1 Sports: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville/
- Team1 Sports app (https://team1sports.com/) (Android TV, Amazon Fire, Apple TV, Roku) - you will either find it under the "live" section or search for the Hoopsville channel
Monday's show primarily covers the Atlantic, Central, South, and Northeast Regions. All men's coaches appear in the NABC Coach's Corner. And all guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

Thursday's show primarily covers the East, Great Lakes, Mid-Atlantic, and West Regions while also featuring a women's coach in the WBCA Center Court segment. All men's coaches appear in the NABC Coach's Corner. And all guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options.

Please also consider helping us out. We are accepting donations to the show - which many of you have asked about. We have updated the goal to $7,500 by the end of Monday, March 2. We are currently at $3,712.52.

We will be raising the goal after tonight!

To donate, click our PayPal link here: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=BSRFLPUJQ9MKL&source=url

And thank you for your contributions.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 23, 2020, 04:05:52 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=6681c/pgqpljpvrn02b1tf.jpg)

There is just one week left in the regular season and with it comes conference chaos.

Some conference tournaments are already underway and have seen upsets. It will be the theme of the week. With conference tournaments come upsets. Those upsets will cause teams on the NCAA tournament bubble to have their hopes burst. And there will be some Cinderellas who will capture the headlines.

Could it be any more fun?

Sunday on Hoopsville (starting at a special earlier time) we chat with a few programs who are either looking to avoid the conference chaos or be a part of it.

Plus, there is changes coming to the way we look at the current regional structure. How the process started and flowed for the last 18 or more months. And what you can expect it all to look in the future.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Pat Devaney, Sr., NJCU women's coach
- Brad Bankston, ODAC Commissioner
- Josh Merkel, No. 2 Randolph-Macon men's coach
- Ashlee Rogers, Marymount women's coach
- Jeff Gard, No. 7 UW Platteville men's coach
- Bob Quillman & Ryan Scott, Top 25 Double-Take

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Sunday's show LIVE starting at 6:30 pm ET in the following ways:
- Main page: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville
- Show page: http://bit.ly/2T6OV1S (or www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2019-20/feb23)
- Facebook Live Simulcast: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
- YouTube Simulcast: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville
- Team1 Sports: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville/
- Team1 Sports app (https://team1sports.com/) (Android TV, Amazon Fire, Apple TV, Roku) - you will either find it under the "live" section or search for the Hoopsville channel
Monday's show primarily covers the Atlantic, Central, South, and Northeast Regions. All men's coaches appear in the NABC Coach's Corner. And all guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

Sunday's show primarily covers the Atlantic, Central, South, and Northeast Regions. All men's coaches appear in the NABC Coach's Corner. And all guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options to the right.

Please also consider helping us out. We are accepting donations to the show - which many of you have asked about. We have updated the goal to $7,500 by the end of Monday, March 2. We are currently at $3,712.52.

We will be raising the goal after tonight!

To donate, click our PayPal link here: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=BSRFLPUJQ9MKL&source=url

And thank you for your contributions.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 23, 2020, 04:52:43 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	620	Swarthmore	25-0	won at Haverford, 86-73; won at McDaniel, 79-42
#2	587	Randolph-Macon	23-2	def. Hampden-Sydney, 84-58; LOST at Guilford, 54-63
#3	581	St. Thomas	23-2	won at St. Olaf, 76-69; def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 74-72
#4	521	St. John's	23-2	won at Bethel, 73-66
#5	519	Wittenberg	24-1	won at Wabash, 78-69; def. Hiram, 93-65
#6	515	Nebraska Wesleyan	22-3	LOST at Simpson, 59-86; def. Loras, 88-73
#7	455	UW-Platteville	22-3	won at UW-Eau Claire, 80-56; won at UW-Stevens Point, 70-69
#8	433	Emory	20-4	won at Carnegie Mellon, 98-86; LOST at Case Western Reserve, 78-83
#9	411	Mount Union	22-3	def. Baldwin Wallace, 83-73; won at Capital, 82-67
#10	407	Johns Hopkins	22-3	won at Franklin and Marshall, 64-53; def. Haverford, 75-56
#11	368	North Central (Ill.)	21-4	def. Carthage, 70-69; won at Wheaton (Ill.), 78-71
#12	367	Colby	23-2	won at Southern Maine, 93-91; def. Bates, 102-94 3OT
#13	317	Washington U.	20-4	won at Brandeis, 77-70; won at New York University, 82-62
#14	259	Middlebury	20-5	LOST at Trinity (Conn.), 82-100
#15	256	Springfield	22-3	won at #21 WPI, 80-64; def. #22 Babson, 84-78 OT
#16	230	Marietta	20-5	won at Muskingum, 102-82; LOST at Heidelberg, 68-85
#17	213	Yeshiva	24-1	won at SUNY-Old Westbury, 87-63; def. St. Joseph's (L.I.), 83-69
#18	198	Virginia Wesleyan	21-4	def. Shenandoah, 75-71; def. Eastern Mennonite, 70-61
#19	168	St. Joseph (Conn.)	23-2	def. Anna Maria, 96-81; def. Colby-Sawyer, 93-76
#20	133	St. Norbert	22-3	won at Lawrence, 75-56; def. Monmouth, 71-62
#21	99	WPI	19-6	LOST to #15 Springfield, 64-80; LOST at MIT, 55-59
#22	76	Babson	20-5	won at Emerson, 92-77; LOST at #15 Springfield, 78-84 OT
#23	60	Elmhurst	20-5	def. Carroll, 62-59
#24	56	UW-La Crosse	20-5	won at UW-River Falls, 86-70; def. UW-Eau Claire, 64-54
#25	53	Brockport	22-3	won at Cortland, 86-80 OT; won at Oswego State, 85-80 OT

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	45	Whitworth	20-5	won at #38 Whitman, 87-82; LOST at Linfield, 80-91
#27	27	Tufts	19-6	def. Hamilton, 83-66
#28	26	RPI	22-3	won at Clarkson, 74-71; won at St. Lawrence, 73-63
T#29	19	Texas-Dallas	20-5	def. Hardin-Simmons, 70-66; def. McMurry, 100-73
T#29	19	Centre	22-4	def. Rhodes, 85-77
#31	18	Augustana	18-7	def. North Park, 96-73
#32	17	UW-Oshkosh	17-8	def. UW-Whitewater, 86-65; won at UW-River Falls, 74-64
#33	15	York (Pa.)	20-5	def. St. Mary's (Md.), 68-62
T#34	12	Christopher Newport	20-5	def. Southern Virginia, 84-66
T#34	12	Benedictine	20-5	def. Wisconsin Lutheran, 83-55; LOST at Concordia (Wis.), 79-88 OT
#36	7	Stevens	21-4	won at FDU-Florham, 72-70; def. King's, 82-68
#37	4	Albertus Magnus	20-4	def. Emmanuel, 97-82; won at Anna Maria, 98-79
#38	2	Whitman	18-7	LOST to #26 Whitworth, 82-87; LOST at Linfield, 70-73

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 23, 2020, 05:18:06 PM

Thank you for doing this again this season, Darryl! It is really helpful.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 27, 2020, 06:54:54 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Not much to see in the midweek report (although there were a couple of close games). The Sunday night report should be a little more interesting.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	623	Swarthmore	25-0	02/28 vs. Muhlenberg
#2	589	St. Thomas	23-2	02/27 vs. St. Mary's (Minn.)
#3	547	St. John's	23-2	02/27 vs. St. Olaf
#4	539	Wittenberg	25-1	def. Ohio Wesleyan, 69-55; 02/28 vs. Oberlin
#5	527	Randolph-Macon	23-2	02/28 vs. Hampden-Sydney
#6	489	UW-Platteville	22-3	02/27 vs. UW-Eau Claire
#7	456	Mount Union	23-3	def. Otterbein, 75-57; 02/27 vs. Heidelberg
#8	415	Johns Hopkins	22-3	02/28 vs. Haverford
#9	406	North Central (Ill.)	21-4	02/28 vs. #22 Elmhurst
#10	404	Nebraska Wesleyan	22-3	02/27 vs. Simpson
#11	393	Colby	23-2	02/29 vs. #37 Amherst
#12	343	Emory	20-4	02/29 at Rochester
#13	337	Washington U.	20-4	02/29 at Chicago
#14	304	Springfield	22-3	02/28 vs. Coast Guard
#15	254	Yeshiva	25-1	def. Merchant Marine, 75-57; 02/27 vs. Farmingdale State
#16	222	Virginia Wesleyan	21-4	02/28 vs. Ferrum
#17	214	St. Joseph (Conn.)	24-2	def. Regis (Mass.), 97-75; 02/27 vs. Anna Maria
#18	178	St. Norbert	22-3	02/28 vs. Cornell
#19	149	Middlebury	20-5	IDLE
#20	116	UW-La Crosse	21-5	def. UW-River Falls, 80-58; 02/27 at #31 UW-Oshkosh
#21	107	Marietta	21-5	def. Wilmington, 83-78; 02/27 vs. John Carroll
#22	102	Elmhurst	21-5	def. Wheaton (Ill.), 71-58; 02/28 at #9 North Central (Ill.)
#23	100	Brockport	22-3	02/28 vs. Oswego State
#24	58	RPI	22-3	02/29 vs. Union
#25	52	Babson	20-5	02/28 at #35 WPI; 03/01 at TBA

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	35	Tufts	19-6	02/29 vs. Trinity (Conn.)
#27	32	Centre	22-4	02/29 vs. Millsaps
#28	25	Christopher Newport	21-5	def. St. Mary's (Md.), 100-63; 02/29 vs. #32 York (Pa.)
#29	23	Texas-Dallas	20-5	02/27 vs. Hardin-Simmons
#30	21	Augustana	18-7	02/28 vs. Illinois Wesleyan
#31	20	UW-Oshkosh	17-8	02/27 vs. #20 UW-La Crosse; 02/29 vs. TBA
#32	16	York (Pa.)	21-5	def. Mary Washington, 74-60; 02/29 at #28 Christopher Newport
#33	10	Stevens	22-4	def. FDU-Florham, 72-53; 02/29 vs. Eastern
#34	6	Albion	21-4	02/28 vs. Trine
#35	4	WPI	19-6	02/28 vs. #25 Babson; 03/01 at NEWMAC Tournament Championship
#36	3	Washington and Lee	20-5	02/28 vs. Lynchburg
#37	2	Amherst	18-7	02/29 vs. #11 Colby
T#38	1	Albertus Magnus	21-4	def. Suffolk, 82-79; 02/27 vs. Lasell
T#38	1	Hobart	21-4	02/29 vs. Ithaca
T#38	1	Linfield	20-5	02/27 vs. Whitman
T#38	1	Whitworth	20-5	02/27 vs. Pacific Lutheran; 02/29 at TBA

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 27, 2020, 06:17:03 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=6dqwi/xzirszmgz31n83ev.jpg)

The race for conference championships and automatic bids to the NCAA tournaments is nearly at it's peak. In less than 72 hours, we will know who have punched their tickets to the 'dance' and who sits on the edge of their seat hoping to keep playing in March.

Thursday night on Hoopsville, we not only recap what has already happened in conference tournaments across Division III, but we also look ahead at what should be an exciting final weekend of the regular season. Conference champions crowned, upsets, and those who's hopes to still playing will see their bubbles burst.

We also talk to both national committee chairs about the work left ahead of them, what they hope people understand about the process, and how they see bracketing coming together. Plus, we look ahead at the second annual Beyond Sports & WBCA Division III Women's All-Star Game and championship weekend.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Dixie Jeffers, Capital women's coach (WBCA Center Court)
- Karin Harvey, Montclair State women's coach & DIII Women's National Committee Chair
- Sam Atkinson, Gallaudet Assoc. Dir. of Communications & DIII Men's National Committee Chair

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Sunday's show LIVE starting at 6:30 pm ET in the following ways:
- Main page: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville
- Show page: http://bit.ly/2HZkple (or www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2019-20/feb27)
- Facebook Live Simulcast: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
- YouTube Simulcast: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville
- Team1 Sports: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville/
- Team1 Sports app (https://team1sports.com/) (Android TV, Amazon Fire, Apple TV, Roku) - you will either find it under the "live" section or search for the Hoopsville channel
Monday's show primarily covers the Atlantic, Central, South, and Northeast Regions. All men's coaches appear in the NABC Coach's Corner. And all guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

Thursday's show will feature a women's coach in the WBCA Center Court segment. All men's coaches appear in the NABC Coach's Corner. And all guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options.

Please also consider helping us out. We are accepting donations to the show - which many of you have asked about. We have updated the goal to $7,500 by Monday night. We are approximately at $4,097.52 at the time of this posting.

We will be raising the goal after tonight!

To donate, click our PayPal link here: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=BSRFLPUJQ9MKL&source=url

And thank you for your contributions.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on March 01, 2020, 09:30:14 PM

Sorry this is so late; I'm back at my computer for the first time since just after noon. By now, I'm sure everyone has seen all the results, but for the sake of the historical record (or at least my personal sense of closure), here's the final report for 2019-20:

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	623	Swarthmore	26-1	def. Muhlenberg, 65-62; LOST to #8 Johns Hopkins, 71-73
#2	589	St. Thomas	24-3	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 79-66; LOST at #3 St. John's, 63-82
#3	547	St. John's	25-2	def. St. Olaf, 71-43; def. #2 St. Thomas, 82-63
#4	539	Wittenberg	26-2	def. Ohio Wesleyan, 69-55; def. Oberlin, 67-47; LOST to Wooster, 63-87
#5	527	Randolph-Macon	26-2	def. (n) Hampden-Sydney, 80-61; def. (n) Roanoke, 60-59; def. (n) #16 Virginia Wesleyan, 72-57
#6	489	UW-Platteville	22-4	LOST to UW-Eau Claire, 74-78
#7	456	Mount Union	25-3	def. Otterbein, 75-57; def. Heidelberg, 97-66; def. John Carroll, 85-74
#8	415	Johns Hopkins	24-3	def. (n) Haverford, 70-52; won at #1 Swarthmore, 73-71
#9	406	North Central (Ill.)	21-5	LOST to #22 Elmhurst, 60-71
#10	404	Nebraska Wesleyan	24-3	def. Simpson, 91-77; def. Coe, 76-50
#11	393	Colby	24-3	def. (n) #37 Amherst, 65-61; LOST at #26 Tufts, 94-102 2OT
#12	343	Emory	21-4	won at Rochester, 80-76
#13	337	Washington U.	20-5	LOST at Chicago, 70-77
#14	304	Springfield	22-4	LOST to Coast Guard, 82-88
#15	254	Yeshiva	27-1	def. Merchant Marine, 75-57; def. Farmingdale State, 74-69; def. SUNY-Purchase, 86-74
#16	222	Virginia Wesleyan	23-5	def. (n) Ferrum, 71-62; def. (n) Lynchburg, 70-67; LOST to (n) #5 Randolph-Macon, 57-72
#17	214	St. Joseph (Conn.)	26-2	def. Regis (Mass.), 97-75; def. Anna Maria, 94-79; def. T#38 Albertus Magnus, 88-84
#18	178	St. Norbert	23-4	def. Cornell, 89-75; LOST to Ripon, 71-84
#19	149	Middlebury	20-5	IDLE
#20	116	UW-La Crosse	21-6	def. UW-River Falls, 80-58; LOST at #31 UW-Oshkosh, 68-76 OT
#21	107	Marietta	21-6	def. Wilmington, 83-78; LOST to John Carroll, 79-86
#22	102	Elmhurst	23-5	def. Wheaton (Ill.), 71-58; won at #9 North Central (Ill.), 71-60; def. (n) Illinois Wesleyan, 78-72
#23	100	Brockport	24-3	def. Oswego State, 82-67; def. SUNY Potsdam, 102-75
#24	58	RPI	23-4	def. Union, 78-58; LOST to Ithaca, 69-80 OT
#25	52	Babson	20-6	LOST at #35 WPI, 58-73

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	35	Tufts	21-6	def. Trinity (Conn.), 87-73; def. #11 Colby, 102-94 2OT
#27	32	Centre	24-4	def. Millsaps, 90-70; def. Berry, 72-69
#28	25	Christopher Newport	21-6	def. St. Mary's (Md.), 100-63; LOST to #32 York (Pa.), 77-79
#29	23	Texas-Dallas	21-6	def. (n) Hardin-Simmons, 77-61; LOST to (n) East Texas Baptist, 45-59
#30	21	Augustana	18-8	LOST to Illinois Wesleyan, 70-74
#31	20	UW-Oshkosh	19-8	def. #20 UW-La Crosse, 76-68 OT; def. UW-Eau Claire, 78-72
#32	16	York (Pa.)	22-5	def. Mary Washington, 74-60; won at #28 Christopher Newport, 79-77
#33	10	Stevens	23-4	def. FDU-Florham, 72-53; def. Eastern, 77-59
#34	6	Albion	21-5	LOST to Trine, 73-77
#35	4	WPI	20-7	def. #25 Babson, 73-58; LOST to Coast Guard, 86-89 OT
#36	3	Washington and Lee	20-6	LOST to (n) Lynchburg, 83-84
#37	2	Amherst	18-8	LOST to (n) #11 Colby, 61-65
T#38	1	Albertus Magnus	22-5	def. Suffolk, 82-79; def. Lasell, 95-94; LOST at #17 St. Joseph (Conn.), 84-88
T#38	1	Hobart	21-5	LOST to (n) Ithaca, 72-80
T#38	1	Linfield	20-6	LOST to Whitman, 70-85
T#38	1	Whitworth	21-6	def. Pacific Lutheran, 87-57; LOST to Whitman, 80-86

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 05, 2020, 04:08:14 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=6qldo/d0hc2yt7zhtbhulo.jpg)

The Division III Men's and Women's Basketball Tournaments are set to get going. It all starts at 1:00 p.m. ET on Friday with the first men's game.

However, before you get fully wrapped up in the games make sure you go into it fully informed.

That means tuning into Hoopsville on Thursday night for our tournaments preview episode. We will not only take a fresh look at the brackets, but we will also talk to a number of coaches getting their teams ready for first-round games. From a Conference Cinderella, to a couple of Conference Champions, and a coach looking to finish his career with a bang.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Kevin Jaskiewicz, Coast Guard men's coach
- Steve Moore, Wooster men's coach
- Brian Lane, Transylvania men's coach
- Carissa Sain, No. 18 Chicago women's coach
- Mike Miller, No. 19 Messiah women's coach

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Thursday's show LIVE starting at 7:00 p.m. ET in the following ways:
- Main page: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville
- Show page: http://bit.ly/2TTWFVp (or www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2019-20/mar5)
- Facebook Live Simulcast: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
- YouTube Simulcast: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville
- Team1 Sports: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville/
- Team1 Sports app (https://team1sports.com/) (Android TV, Amazon Fire, Apple TV, Roku) - you will either find it under the "live" section or search for the Hoopsville channel
Monday's show primarily covers the Atlantic, Central, South, and Northeast Regions. All men's coaches appear in the NABC Coach's Corner. And all guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline

Men's coaches appear in the NABC Coach's Corner. And all guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options.

Please also consider helping us out. We are accepting donations to the show - which many of you have asked about. The goal is to raise $7,500. We are approximately at $4,600 at the time of this posting.

To donate, click our PayPal link here: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=BSRFLPUJQ9MKL&source=url

And thank you for your contributions.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 08, 2020, 11:17:41 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=6w8mk/1suiql8xe7b8ab8p.jpg)

What an opening weekend of the NCAA tournaments? Upsets a plenty. Gyms closed to fans. Incredible finishes. And so much more. Sunday night on Hoopsville we tried to cover it all.

The show started with extensive information on decisions surrounding COVID-19. We discussed decisions by Johns Hopkins and Amherst to close their doors to fans for the first weekend's games. We also had reactions and statements on the choice to return to Amherst this coming weekend for the Sectionals in women's basketball and the college's decision to, once again, ban fans from attending.

We also talked about the incredible stories coming out of the tournament of how teams are moving on and how seasons came to a sudden and emotional finish.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Pat Coleman, Editor-in-Chief, D3hoops.com
- Todd Raridon, No. 11 North Central (Ill.) men's coach
- Jackson Meshanic (sophomore) & Stefan Thompson (coach), Hobart men's team (Frank Rossi interviews)
- Greg Dunne, No. 18 Brockport men's coach
- Andy Rang, No. 23 Trine women's coach
- Pat Manning, Williams women's coach
- Bob Quillman & Ryan Scott

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Sunday's show On Demand in the following ways:
- Main page: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville
- Show page: http://bit.ly/2PWk7A7 (or www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2019-20/mar8)
- Facebook Live Simulcast: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
- YouTube Simulcast: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville
- Team1 Sports: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville/
- Team1 Sports app (https://team1sports.com/) (Android TV, Amazon Fire, Apple TV, Roku) - you will either find it under the "live" section or search for the Hoopsville channel

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, the show is already available, so choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

All men's coaches appear in the NABC Coach's Corner. And all guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options.

Please also consider helping us out. We are accepting donations to the show - which many of you have asked about. The goal is to raise $7,500. We are approximately at $5,200 at the time of this posting.

To donate, click our PayPal link here: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=BSRFLPUJQ9MKL&source=url
If you are interested in using Venmo, try this link: https://givebutter.com/ACF5w0

And thank you for your contributions.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 12, 2020, 05:27:14 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=73mrs/m6gg5jcihb76rihu.jpg)

And with that, the 2019-20 seasons have come to a sudden end.

What a week it has been in college basketball. Exactly a week ago, as we hit the air, the first signs that COVID-19 was going to impact the NCAA Tournaments was seen. Since then, it has been a whirlwind.

Tonight on Hoopsville, we try and make sense of one of the stranger finishes in history for NCAA events. What started with isolated closings of gyms for games ends a week later in all games being called off through the rest of the academic year.

We will chat with those who were preparing for games on Friday and hear their reactions to the seasons coming to a close so quickly.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Michelle Ferenze, No. 10 Whitman women's coach
- John Krikorian, Christopher Newport men's coach
- Cheri Harrer, No. 9 Baldwin Wallace women's coach

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Thursday's show LIVE starting at 7:00 p.m. ET in the following ways:
- Main page: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville
- Show page: http://bit.ly/3b1XeU3 (or www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2019-20/mar12)
- Facebook Live Simulcast: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
- YouTube Simulcast: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville
- Team1 Sports: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville/
- Team1 Sports app (https://team1sports.com/) (Android TV, Amazon Fire, Apple TV, Roku) - you will either find it under the "live" section or search for the Hoopsville channel
Monday's show primarily covers the Atlantic, Central, South, and Northeast Regions. All men's coaches appear in the NABC Coach's Corner. And all guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline

All men's coaches appear in the NABC Coach's Corner. And all guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options to the right.

Please also consider helping us out. We are accepting donations to the show - which many of you have asked about. The goal is to raise $7,500. We are approximately at $4,600 at the time of this posting.

To donate, click our PayPal link here: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=BSRFLPUJQ9MKL&source=url

And thank you for your contributions.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 12, 2020, 07:02:55 PM

So the last poll will be out next Tuesday?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 12, 2020, 08:35:46 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 12, 2020, 07:02:55 PM
So the last poll will be out next Tuesday?

Not really sure. Likely.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 13, 2020, 11:09:15 AM

Just finished my final Top 25 ballot. Really surprised at the teams who didn't make the cut. About ten teams I think are "Top 25" quality/worthy who didn't get in.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 14, 2020, 04:59:23 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 12, 2020, 07:02:55 PM
So the last poll will be out next Tuesday?

Voting deadline is noon Monday. If everyone gets their ballots in on time, we should have it well before 5 p.m.

Women's poll deadline is later.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 16, 2020, 07:46:37 PM

The 2019-20 men's Top 25 is out: https://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2019-20/final

FYI NABC Reece's DIII All Star Game Rosters will be announced officially on Hoopsville!

Tune in Tuesday night at 7:00 PM ET. We will then chat with Trinity (Texas) men's coach (retiring :() Pat Cunningham about the selections and much more.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 17, 2020, 05:26:40 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=7cvc8/alialn891hylm3oc.jpg)

While the season came to an abrupt end, there are still student-athletes, coaches, and programs to recognize for what they accomplished this season.

On a special edition of Hoopsville, we not only look at the final Top 25 polls of the season, but we also take a look at the All-Region awards. Plus, the NABC All Star Rosters are announced, exclusively, here tonight. We then will talk to long time NABC Board of Directors member Pat Cunningham about the team and the announcement he is retiring as Trinity (Texas) men's basketball coach.

And we have a round-table discussion of all things Division III basketball. Pat Coleman, Gordon Mann, Ryan Scott, and Bob Quillman saddle up to their computers and join us for a spirited chat and maybe even answer your questions.

Guests Schedule (order subject to change):
- Pat Cunningham, NABC Board of Directors & Trinity (Texas) men's coach
- Pat Coleman, D3hoops.com Editor-in-Chief
- Gordon Mann, D3hoops.com Senior Editor
- Ryan Scott, D3hoops.com National Columnist
- Bob Quillman, IWUHoops.com

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch Tuesday night's show LIVE starting at 7:00 p.m. ET in the following ways:
- Main page: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville
- Show page: http://bit.ly/2TYTxJ63 (or www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2019-20/mar17)
- Facebook Live Simulcast: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
- YouTube Simulcast: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville
- Team1 Sports: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville/
- Team1 Sports app (https://team1sports.com/) (Android TV, Amazon Fire, Apple TV, Roku) - you will either find it under the "live" section or search for the Hoopsville channel

All men's coaches appear in the NABC Coach's Corner. And all guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options to the right.

Please also consider helping us out. We are accepting donations to the show - which many of you have asked about. The goal is to raise $7,500. We are approximately at $5,200 at the time of this posting.

To donate, click our PayPal link here: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=BSRFLPUJQ9MKL&source=url

And thank you for your contributions.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 17, 2020, 06:36:40 PM

Season poll results

TEAM	TOTAL	FINAL	WK13	WK12	WK11	WK10	WK9	WK8	WK7	WK6	WK5	WK4	WK3	WK2	WK1	PRESEASON
Swarthmore	9296	608	606	623	620	618	620	625	625	625	625	621	621	622	623	614
Wittenberg	7670	452	418	539	519	517	498	466	472	587	578	552	546	540	531	455
RMC	7253	567	574	527	587	570	570	554	543	472	537	470	464	403	303	112
St. Thomas	7247	546	526	589	581	539	522	450	446	426	529	502	493	466	387	245
St. John's	7156	589	598	547	521	602	599	590	589	543	429	346	324	311	273	295
Emory	6979	209	382	343	433	397	491	446	449	552	518	596	592	586	567	418
Neb Wes	6327	261	453	404	515	508	471	428	398	390	390	469	467	445	379	349
Middlebury	5417	77	103	149	259	350	308	395	382	493	562	528	528	522	479	282
Platteville	5403	325	441	489	455	424	324	274	392	461	410	436	415	330	173	54
Wash U	5065	409	245	337	317	265	328	380	313	331	295	429	416	356	258	386
Marietta	4520		45	107	230	296	230	360	476	436	414	476	466	423	334	227
Johns Hopkins (WUPHF)	4499	277	493	415	407	440	378	293	264	238	249	312	349	250	134	0
Elmhurst	4170	365	270	102	60	219	464	540	489	404	375	241	326	228	87	0
North Central IL	4119	455	338	406	368	301	217	297	255	212	162	51	33	160	354	510
Colby	4081	142	329	393	367	320	452	523	485	360	341	224	110	27	8	0
Mount Union	2682	545	507	456	411	336	248	110	25	10	3	7	5	1	0	18
La Crosse	2053	19	63	116	56	20	178	261	228	297	247	244	218	105	1	0
Amherst	1857			2		14	0	0	1	98	251	104	78	290	550	469
Babson (nescac1)	1710	1	7	52	76	181	126	80	76	196	271	320	248	49	27	0
Springfield (SpringSt7)	1651	121	217	304	256	179	95	47	48	147	58	31	97	17	34	0
Virginia Wesleyan	1626	28	169	222	198	311	235	133	156	72	45	43	14	0	0	0
Yeshiva	1625	415	294	254	213	153	96	63	38	45	23	12	7	6	5	1
Oshkosh	1490	87	61	20	17	2	15	13	0	0	8	44	63	296	301	563
Nichols	1360						0	0	0	0	0	20	160	429	418	333
Whitworth	1315	175		1	45	15	12	35	137	103	72	276	176	143	113	12
Wooster	1240		14			9	8	163	269	127	60	63	73	47	240	167
Christopher Newport	1215	223	18	25	12	11	26	17	5	6	3	0	57	163	311	338
Tufts	1013	247	151	35	27	182	125	103	60	39	17	0	0	14	9	4
Guilford	934						0	0	0	18	104	100	98	244	154	216
St. Joseph CT	888	79	281	214	168	91	55	0	0	0	0	0	0			0
SNC (magicman)	832	52	82	178	133	79	39	33	146	54	36	0	0	0	0	0
WPI	809	1	5	4	99	14	9	42	45	0	66	22	49	109	105	239
Augustana	712		12	21	18	28	6	9	2	9	15	0	94	82	187	229
Brockport	691	331	184	100	53	15	6	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	2
Centre (CollegeGolf18)	566	15	51	32	19	10	172	104	51	21	13	2	4	32	40	0
Albertus Magnus	524			1	4		0	130	121	157	99	10	2	0	0	0
Whitman	472		10		2	1	29	33	5	0	0	12	17	25	145	193
Carthage (augie77)	441						0	0	0	2	2	130	96	127	84	0
Benedictine	431				12	42	19	13	11	15	75	129	86	29	0	0
Augsburg	419						0	3	6	26	5	25	61	34	146	113

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 17, 2020, 06:37:42 PM

TEAM	TOTAL	FINAL	WK13	WK12	WK11	WK10	WK9	WK8	WK7	WK6	WK5	WK4	WK3	WK2	WK1	PRESEASON
Wabash	403						0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	133	269
Texas-Dallas	403	5	11	23	19	6	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	26	313
Ponoma-Pitzer	382	230	2				0	1	8	60	41	11	7	4	3	15
Hamilton	303						0	0	0	7	23	85	20	55	54	59
Stevens Point	250						0	0	2	0	16	41	138	53	0	0
Hobart	210	172		1		4	1	0	0	22	10	0	0	0	0	0
Oswego	208						0	0	1	0	0	0	0	64	60	83
York Pa	198	51	60	16	15	7	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	49
Brandeis	172					8	56	50	57	0	0	0	0	0	0	1
Rochester	161						4	7	6	14	49	23	15	5	33	5
RPI	149	11	28	58	26	7	17	0	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Albion	135			6		27	63	21	14	4	0	0	0	0	0	0
Baldwin Wallace	128						0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	128
IWU (NCF)	110	6	8				5	0	0	0	7	68	7	9	0	0
SJF	100						0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	7	93
Stevens	93		43	10	7	1	0	0	3	1	28	0	0	0	0	0
Eau Claire	86	10	6				0	0	0	0	13	0	48	0	9	0
Wheaton IL	77						0	0	0	0	0	12	9	0	11	45
Salem St	58						0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	58
ETBU	53						0	25	18	8	2	0	0	0	0	0
Mary Hardin-Baylor	49						0	0	0	0	44	0	3	2	0	0
NJCU	43						0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	14	29
Widener	42					3	2	0	6	5	2	22	2	0	0	0
MIT	35						0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	35
CMS	31						0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	31
Scranton	24						0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	24
Muhlenberg	20						0	0	0	0	0	0	10	10	0	0
Loras	18						0	0	0	0	4	0	13	0	0	1
Endicott	18						0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	18
LeTourneau	17		16				1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
TCNJ	14	3	1				0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	0
E. Connecticut	14						0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	14
Ithaca	10	8	2				0	0	0	0			0
Williams	8						0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	5	3
Washington & Lee	7			3		3	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
PS Harrisburg	7	7					0	0		0
SUNY Oneonta	5						0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	5
Convenant	2						0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	2
Linfield (Smitty)	1			1			0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Keene St	1						0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1
Susquehanna	1	1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 21, 2020, 10:49:10 AM

In looking at the universe of the final D3hoops.com Top 25 teams, here are the # of wins vs other Top 25 teams...

#1-Swarthmore = 2
#2-St. John's = 2
#3-Randolph-Macon = 1
#4-St. Thomas = 3
#5-Mount Union = 0
#6-North Central = 3
#7-Wittenberg = 0
#8-Yeshiva = 0
#9-Wash U = 1
#10-Elmhurst = 2
#11-Brockport = 2
#12-UW-Platteville = 3
#13-Johns Hopkins = 2
#14-Nebraska Wesleyan = 1
#15-Tufts = 2
#16-Pomona-Pitzer = 1
#17-Christopher Newport = 1
#18-Emory = 3
#19-Whitworth = 1
#20-Hobart = 2
#21-Colby = 1
#22-Springfield = 0
#23-UW-Oshkosh = 1
#24-St. Joseph (Conn.) = 0
#25-Middlebury = 2

Four teams tied for the most (3).

Five teams tied for the least (0).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on March 22, 2020, 05:40:10 PM

Is that wins against the Top 25 as presently constructed, or the rankings as of when they played?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 22, 2020, 05:42:33 PM

I wonder if it would be interesting to put that list together, but eliminate Top 25 teams in conference. Non-conference Top 25 games tells us a lot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 22, 2020, 06:07:44 PM

Or losses against Top 25 teams as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on March 22, 2020, 06:13:08 PM

I was curious so, in looking at the universe of the final D3hoops.com Top 25 teams, here are the Top 25 teams with their Massey SOS.

Oshkosh had the toughest SOS at No. 1 followed by Elmhurst at No. 6
St. Joseph edged Yeshiva for the worst SOS at No. 254.

Interestingly, the top 11 teams in terms of Massey SOS were Central Division schools.
The top 20 teams featured 15 Central Division schools.

#1-Swarthmore = 50
#2-St. John's = 50
#3-Randolph-Macon = 38
#4-St. Thomas = 18
#5-Mount Union = 21
#6-North Central = 9
#7-Wittenberg = 142
#8-Yeshiva = 253
#9-Wash U = 11
#10-Elmhurst = 6
#11-Brockport = 161
]#12-UW-Platteville = 13
#13-Johns Hopkins = 115
#14-Nebraska Wesleyan = 49
#15-Tufts = 25
#16-Pomona-Pitzer = 78
#17-Christopher Newport = 43
#18-Emory = 16
#19-Whitworth = 55
#20-Hobart = 136
#21-Colby = 68
#22-Springfield = 63
#23-UW-Oshkosh = 1
#24-St. Joseph (Conn.) = 254
#25-Middlebury = 48

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 22, 2020, 08:47:25 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on March 22, 2020, 05:40:10 PM
Is that wins against the Top 25 as presently constructed, or the rankings as of when they played?

As presently constructed. A ranking from October, for example, means basically nil in March.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 25, 2020, 05:14:35 PM

@RowanAthletics
Oh do we have a good #RowanReplay tonight! Considered by most the best game of the 1996 NCAA Tournament, @RowanMBB used a dramatic last second tip-in by @metepoles4 to beat Illinois Wesleyan in the semifinals! Watch it live tonight 7pm
https://youtu.be/bAhnjpm1XxA

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 27, 2020, 12:19:33 PM

2020-21 Preseason Top 25 work...

I'd love to hear thoughts on the preseason predicted order at the top of conferences...and where the Top 25 line potentially falls.

For example...

CCIW
T1. Elmhurst (25-5/11-5) lock Top 25
T1. Illinois Wesleyan (19-9/11-5) lock Top 25
----
3. Wheaton (15-11/9-7) keep an eye on
4. North Central (23-5/14-2) lost too much
5. Augustana (18-8/12-4) lost too much

Thanks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on March 27, 2020, 12:28:23 PM

Landmark

1. Susquehanna possible Top 25
2. Scranton possible Top 25
3. Drew

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: tomt4525 on March 27, 2020, 12:40:40 PM

WIAC

1. Platteville - Lose All American Voelker but a lock to be top 25, Return a lot, top 10 I would think
2. Oshkosh - Lose a lot, Return good nucleus of Mahoney, Peterson, Borchert, near end of top 25 to start
3. La Crosse - Lose a couple starters but return some good parts and recruits, around same spot as Oshkosh
4. Eau Claire - lose best player Rabedeaux but return a lot, definitely a team to watch for top 25
5. Stevens Point - will be garbage unless the transfer market is extremely beneficial to them, lose 5 of top 6

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 27, 2020, 02:48:36 PM

Quote from: ronk on March 27, 2020, 12:28:23 PM
Landmark

1. Susquehanna possible Top 25
2. Scranton possible Top 25
3. Drew

Susquehanna - maybe, they only lose one of their top six scorers and have a lot of youth. But they didn't figure things out until late (inconsistent prior). I love what Frank Marcinek does there and I would hope they could be tough, but I also found them to be a bit undersized. I think I would wait to see on these guys despite how they finished the season.

Scranton - why? I think this is a wait and see. First, losing Mancuso and Verma will have an impact. I know they have other talent, but those are two huge losses. Secondly, they don't put together schedules that challenge them. They just inflate WL% numbers.

Drew - this could be interesting. While they lose two of their top scorers (and a good player in Riley), they have a lot of youth that really stepped up. I'm not sure I buy in for preseason, but they will be on my watch list.

Granted - this is off the top of my head. The Landmark is not that strong a conference ... it just doesn't build national teams and it really never has despite some teams either getting to the tournament or one miraculous run in 2012. And not many are willing to go out and put together really challenging schedules leaving a lot to be desired. Maybe they figure it out and maybe they produce some good teams ... but even as one who knows the conference well ... I'm going to wait and see.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on March 27, 2020, 03:04:10 PM

NESCAC

1. Tufts---return AA/POY Luke Rogers, only graduate one senior from a Sweet 16 team, should be borderline Top 10

2. Amherst--underwhelmed this year but still have main nucleus intact, Grant Robinson's health remains their biggest question mark, if he plays like he did when he was a sophomore they could make a claim for best backcourt in the country, plus Dave Hixon returns to the sidelines. 17-25 range

3. Middlebury--Stacked Class of 2021 finally seniors, but still yet to make the splash they've been expected to (2 postseason wins total in 3 years). Jack Farrell could be an All-American and junior transfer Tommy Eastman looked like one of the 5 best players in the NESCAC once he got comfortable and should also have a monster senior year. A lot depends on whether or not C Alex Sobel returns to the program after he left midway through this season. They are already very thin on depth, especially in the frontcourt. 17-25 range

----

One of Colby/Williams/Wesleyan should flirt with the Top 25 at some point in the year. New England as a region looks to be down next year and there should be better non-conference records. All three teams feature talented underclassmen but Colby and Williams both graduate key seniors and will be asking a lot of their younger guys. Wesleyan returns 6 of their top 7 scorers, but missed the NESCAC tournament. They need their talented freshman and sophomore classes to take big steps as sophomores and juniors.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 27, 2020, 03:05:23 PM

IF Hixon returns to the sideline ... you never know what a sabbatical year might reveal. Don't get me wrong, I want to see him back ... but I am understanding that things like this could happen.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on March 27, 2020, 03:21:04 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 27, 2020, 03:05:23 PM
IF Hixon returns to the sideline ... you never know what a sabbatical year might reveal. Don't get me wrong, I want to see him back ... but I am understanding that things like this could happen.

Agreed---I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt for now, however.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on March 27, 2020, 03:30:32 PM

OAC

1. Marietta - lose starters Hall and Hoyng but bring back the core of their scoring %
2. Mount Union - Bower-Malone, Carroll, and Friga will be big shoes to fill but I still expect a strong squad from the Purple Raiders with Gurley, Hill, and Poole returning.

---------------------------

3. Capital - Crusaders were a solid 9-9 squad last year that brings back everyone aside from Yahaya. Capital won't be down for long.

4/5/6/7/8/9 It really get's murky here as some of the perennial teams in the OAC (John Carroll, BW) that lose a lot of will mix with up and coming young squads on the rise (Wilmington, Otterbein, Ohio Northern, Berg).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 27, 2020, 03:38:13 PM

Centennial:

Swarthmore - they lose O'Dell and Shafer, but they bring back EVERYONE else and their bench is incredibly deep - they would run the second unit for large minutes in every game. I suspect they remain in the conversation for sure.

Johns Hopkins - they lose only Harry O'Neil and everyone else returns including Connor Delaney (who suffered an injury in the last game, but does not require surgery - as he did the previous season with a similar injury). They also probably grow stronger and while O'Neil is a huge loss inside, I suspect there are guys ready to step into that role and maybe even have two on the floor at the same time (to be determined). I always said Hopkins was a year ahead to some degree. I knew they would compete with Swat, but I expected them to be "Swat" next year.

There are also Ursinus, Muhlenberg, and Haverford. I think the Mules are the most likely to compete with the top group, but I am not sure they are ready for the Top 25 as of yet.

CAC:

CNU obviously is one you never forget, but YCP leaves the conference for the MAC Commonwealth. Hiding under them is Mary Washington who had a pretty decent season, though they lost more of their close games against good competition then they won. The conference is ... going to be different, but CNU and Mary Wash are the only two I think are in the Top 25 convo. Salisbury is still finding themselves.

MAC Commonwealth:

I'll add the MACC ... but there is a lot to figure out, I think. YCP enters and that certainly raises the national profile, but they also have Eastern enter from the Freedom (while Arcadia and Lyco leave for the Freedom and several other conferences in DIII get angry again). I think that shakes things up, but I'm not sure how it shakes out. Worth watching, but it will take some time. One thing will be for sure, the MAC Commonwealth will continue to be one of the more competitive conferences top to bottom and the Freedom gains a bit of strength it has been badly missing.

MAC Freedom:

Eastern leaves, but Arcadia and Lyco enter. This gives the Freedom some more competition. Stevens is the only one in the Top 25 convo right now and I'm not sure this conference will immediately become one to watch ... but in time they will.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: mailsy on March 27, 2020, 04:17:37 PM

Atlantic East
Possible top 25 listed in order.
1. ??
2. ??
3. ??
4. ??
5. ??
;D ;D ;D

I have way too much time on my hands!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 27, 2020, 06:03:59 PM

This is great. Keep it coming.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 27, 2020, 06:28:33 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on March 27, 2020, 06:03:59 PM
This is great. Keep it coming.

Then there is the CCIW ...

Just kidding ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 27, 2020, 08:07:03 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 27, 2020, 03:38:13 PM
Centennial:

Swarthmore - they lose O'Dell and Shafer, but they bring back EVERYONE else and their bench is incredibly deep - they would run the second unit for large minutes in every game. I suspect they remain in the conversation for sure.

Johns Hopkins - they lose only Harry O'Neil and everyone else returns including Connor Delaney (who suffered an injury in the last game, but does not require surgery - as he did the previous season with a similar injury). They also probably grow stronger and while O'Neil is a huge loss inside, I suspect there are guys ready to step into that role and maybe even have two on the floor at the same time (to be determined). I always said Hopkins was a year ahead to some degree. I knew they would compete with Swat, but I expected them to be "Swat" next year.

There are also Ursinus, Muhlenberg, and Haverford. I think the Mules are the most likely to compete with the top group, but I am not sure they are ready for the Top 25 as of yet.

CAC:

CNU obviously is one you never forget, but YCP leaves the conference for the MAC Commonwealth. Hiding under them is Mary Washington who had a pretty decent season, though they lost more of their close games against good competition then they won. The conference is ... going to be different, but CNU and Mary Wash are the only two I think are in the Top 25 convo. Salisbury is still finding themselves.

MAC Commonwealth:

I'll add the MACC ... but there is a lot to figure out, I think. YCP enters and that certainly raises the national profile, but they also have Eastern enter from the Freedom (while Arcadia and Lyco leave for the Freedom and several other conferences in DIII get angry again). I think that shakes things up, but I'm not sure how it shakes out. Worth watching, but it will take some time. One thing will be for sure, the MAC Commonwealth will continue to be one of the more competitive conferences top to bottom and the Freedom gains a bit of strength it has been badly missing.

MAC Freedom:

Eastern leaves, but Arcadia and Lyco enter. This gives the Freedom some more competition. Stevens is the only one in the Top 25 convo right now and I'm not sure this conference will immediately become one to watch ... but in time they will.

Swarthmore loses their two bigs, I haven't looked at their roster too indepth, but do they have bigs to replace them?

Stevens loses a ton. Really only returns two of their top 8. Lycoming moving over from the MACC returns 6 of their top 7. Not to say they are Top 25 worthy, but they could be the favorite. I just look at rosters, remember!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 27, 2020, 09:15:12 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 27, 2020, 08:07:03 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 27, 2020, 03:38:13 PM
Centennial:

Swarthmore - they lose O'Dell and Shafer, but they bring back EVERYONE else and their bench is incredibly deep - they would run the second unit for large minutes in every game. I suspect they remain in the conversation for sure.

Johns Hopkins - they lose only Harry O'Neil and everyone else returns including Connor Delaney (who suffered an injury in the last game, but does not require surgery - as he did the previous season with a similar injury). They also probably grow stronger and while O'Neil is a huge loss inside, I suspect there are guys ready to step into that role and maybe even have two on the floor at the same time (to be determined). I always said Hopkins was a year ahead to some degree. I knew they would compete with Swat, but I expected them to be "Swat" next year.

There are also Ursinus, Muhlenberg, and Haverford. I think the Mules are the most likely to compete with the top group, but I am not sure they are ready for the Top 25 as of yet.

CAC:

CNU obviously is one you never forget, but YCP leaves the conference for the MAC Commonwealth. Hiding under them is Mary Washington who had a pretty decent season, though they lost more of their close games against good competition then they won. The conference is ... going to be different, but CNU and Mary Wash are the only two I think are in the Top 25 convo. Salisbury is still finding themselves.

MAC Commonwealth:

I'll add the MACC ... but there is a lot to figure out, I think. YCP enters and that certainly raises the national profile, but they also have Eastern enter from the Freedom (while Arcadia and Lyco leave for the Freedom and several other conferences in DIII get angry again). I think that shakes things up, but I'm not sure how it shakes out. Worth watching, but it will take some time. One thing will be for sure, the MAC Commonwealth will continue to be one of the more competitive conferences top to bottom and the Freedom gains a bit of strength it has been badly missing.

MAC Freedom:

Eastern leaves, but Arcadia and Lyco enter. This gives the Freedom some more competition. Stevens is the only one in the Top 25 convo right now and I'm not sure this conference will immediately become one to watch ... but in time they will.

Swarthmore loses their two bigs, I haven't looked at their roster too indepth, but do they have bigs to replace them?

Stevens loses a ton. Really only returns two of their top 8. Lycoming moving over from the MACC returns 6 of their top 7. Not to say they are Top 25 worthy, but they could be the favorite. I just look at rosters, remember!

They have one right now. Michael Caprise is very talented. Needs some confidence, but a strong player. Also, this will be the first class Landry recruited off the national championship appearance, so I imagine he'll have some pretty decent bigs coming in.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on March 28, 2020, 09:30:30 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 27, 2020, 02:48:36 PM
Quote from: ronk on March 27, 2020, 12:28:23 PM
Landmark

1. Susquehanna possible Top 25
2. Scranton possible Top 25
3. Drew

Susquehanna - maybe, they only lose one of their top six scorers and have a lot of youth. But they didn't figure things out until late (inconsistent prior). I love what Frank Marcinek does there and I would hope they could be tough, but I also found them to be a bit undersized. I think I would wait to see on these guys despite how they finished the season.

Scranton - why? I think this is a wait and see. First, losing Mancuso and Verma will have an impact. I know they have other talent, but those are two huge losses. Secondly, they don't put together schedules that challenge them. They just inflate WL% numbers.

Drew - this could be interesting. While they lose two of their top scorers (and a good player in Riley), they have a lot of youth that really stepped up. I'm not sure I buy in for preseason, but they will be on my watch list.

Granted - this is off the top of my head. The Landmark is not that strong a conference ... it just doesn't build national teams and it really never has despite some teams either getting to the tournament or one miraculous run in 2012. And not many are willing to go out and put together really challenging schedules leaving a lot to be desired. Maybe they figure it out and maybe they produce some good teams ... but even as one who knows the conference well ... I'm going to wait and see.

Why the negativity about topics(strength of conference,scheduling) that are irrelevant to what was solicited, namely, which are the top teams in a conference and where should they be considered wrt Top 25 discussion?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 28, 2020, 09:59:50 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 27, 2020, 03:38:13 PM
Swarthmore - they lose O'Dell and Shafer, but they bring back EVERYONE else and their bench is incredibly deep - they would run the second unit for large minutes in every game. I suspect they remain in the conversation for sure.

I don't doubt they end up in the Top 25 conversation as the year goes on, but would you agree they should not be a preseason Top 25 team?

They lose their two most valuable players:
* Zac O'Dell: 10.7 ppg, 8.4 rpg, 2.3 apg
* Nate Shafer: 10.5 ppg, 7.6 rpg, 2.1 apg

Certainly a deep bench this year, but if you took O'Dell and Shafer off the team, Swarthmore would not have been a Top 25 team this year.

Seems like a team to put on the "watch list" and see how Nov/Dec plays out and if they do truly re-load?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 28, 2020, 10:03:09 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 27, 2020, 02:48:36 PM
Granted - this is off the top of my head. The Landmark is not that strong a conference ... it just doesn't build national teams and it really never has despite some teams either getting to the tournament or one miraculous run in 2012. And not many are willing to go out and put together really challenging schedules leaving a lot to be desired. Maybe they figure it out and maybe they produce some good teams ... but even as one who knows the conference well ... I'm going to wait and see.

A team can be from a bad conference and have a bad schedule and still be a Top 25 team though.

See Yeshiva. Probably a Top 5 preseason team next year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 28, 2020, 10:29:53 AM

So far from the comments here, and on some other boards, seems the following 14 teams are probable Top 25 teams for me...

(alphabetical)

* Amherst (18-8, 7-3)
* Elmhurst (25-5, 11-3)
* Emory (22-5, 11-3)
* Hobart (23-5, 15-3)
* Illinois Wesleyan (19-9, 11-5)
* Johns Hopkins (24-4, 16-2)
* Middlebury (21-6, 6-4)
* Randolph-Macon (28-2, 15-1)
* St. Thomas (26-3, 19-1)
* Tufts (23-6, 8-2)
* UW-Platteville (23-5, 12-2)
* Wash U (22-5, 11-3)
* WPI (20-8, 10-3)
* Yeshiva (29-1, 16-0)

I could be missing some obvious candidates. Just kind of a work-in-progress list.

Please keep the ideas coming.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 28, 2020, 11:10:09 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on March 28, 2020, 09:59:50 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 27, 2020, 03:38:13 PM
Swarthmore - they lose O'Dell and Shafer, but they bring back EVERYONE else and their bench is incredibly deep - they would run the second unit for large minutes in every game. I suspect they remain in the conversation for sure.

I don't doubt they end up in the Top 25 conversation as the year goes on, but would you agree they should not be a preseason Top 25 team?

They lose their two most valuable players:
* Zac O'Dell: 10.7 ppg, 8.4 rpg, 2.3 apg
* Nate Shafer: 10.5 ppg, 7.6 rpg, 2.1 apg

Certainly a deep bench this year, but if you took O'Dell and Shafer off the team, Swarthmore would not have been a Top 25 team this year.

Seems like a team to put on the "watch list" and see how Nov/Dec plays out and if they do truly re-load?

They do return their top THREE scorers on the team, from a very balanced team, as mentioned. They were the best team last year as well. I would probably put them near the high teens, low 20s. Nearly every team loses someone.

On paper, right now, are there 25 teams better than them? Your previous post kind of answers that...as a group, we have 14 and I'm not sure all of those 14 are better than Swarthmore.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: thebear on March 28, 2020, 11:36:41 AM

#11 - Brockport returns 6 of their top 9, I would add them to the list.

They return Jahidi Wallace (2nd team all region), Davante Hagins (former 1st team all-NYS player), Danny Ashley (former SUNYAC ROY), Tyree Grimsley, Antonio Alvarez, Tyler Sullivan.

Preseason AA Justin Summer was hurt for the middle of the season and came off the bench after his return.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 28, 2020, 11:42:22 AM

Looking back at the last regular season poll...you could probably add:

Swat - They lose two guys, return their top 3 scorers and a deep bench.
St. Joseph CT - In theory returns everyone, but someone said some could transfer to D1 or D2 schools.
Wash U - Lose three starters, but return Nolan and Hardy.
Marietta - Loses only one senior starter.

Others not in poll

Wabash
Texas-Dallas -Could have Underwood back
RPI
Albion
PS-Harrisburg - Made some noise in the NCAAs. Return everyone

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 28, 2020, 12:15:02 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 28, 2020, 11:10:09 AM
They do return their top THREE scorers on the team, from a very balanced team, as mentioned. They were the best team last year as well. I would probably put them near the high teens, low 20s. Nearly every team loses someone.

On paper, right now, are there 25 teams better than them? Your previous post kind of answers that...as a group, we have 14 and I'm not sure all of those 14 are better than Swarthmore.

But these two guys were the heart and soul of the team -- as accurately indicated in the all-region team. To me, that's an a ton to lose for preseason poll consideration. And it is not like they have Fravert and Flynn-caliber guys returning.

I guess it will come down to what the bottom of the ballot ends up looking like.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 28, 2020, 12:20:53 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 28, 2020, 11:42:22 AM
Looking back at the last regular season poll...you could probably add:

Swat - They lose two guys, return their top 3 scorers and a deep bench.
St. Joseph CT - In theory returns everyone, but someone said some could transfer to D1 or D2 schools.
Wash U - Lose three starters, but return Nolan and Hardy.
Marietta - Loses only one senior starter.

Others not in poll

Wabash
Texas-Dallas -Could have Underwood back
RPI
Albion
PS-Harrisburg - Made some noise in the NCAAs. Return everyone

I have Wash U in my list above.

As far as Texas-Dallas, I'd go more "watch list" there...even with Underwood. I went to 7 Comets games in person this year and losing PG Jalen Weber and 6-7 F/C Hans Burwitz is huge. Those were their MVPs this year -- and Burwitz their key big guy. I'll probably see how they are playing early on before going there in the preseason.

As far as Marietta, I didn't see them as a Top 25 team at the end of this year -- neither did any other voter. If they lose a key piece from that team....who knows. Bottom of the poll maybe?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 28, 2020, 12:22:39 PM

Quote from: thebear on March 28, 2020, 11:36:41 AM
#11 - Brockport returns 6 of their top 9, I would add them to the list.

They return Jahidi Wallace (2nd team all region), Davante Hagins (former 1st team all-NYS player), Danny Ashley (former SUNYAC ROY), Tyree Grimsley, Antonio Alvarez, Tyler Sullivan.

Preseason AA Justin Summer was hurt for the middle of the season and came off the bench after his return.

Agree, they should be in.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 28, 2020, 12:29:27 PM

Added Brockport.

So far from the comments here, and on some other boards, seems the following 15 teams are probable Top 25 teams for me...

(alphabetical)

* Amherst (18-8, 7-3)
* Brockport (26-3, 17-1)
* Elmhurst (25-5, 11-3)
* Emory (22-5, 11-3)
* Hobart (23-5, 15-3)
* Illinois Wesleyan (19-9, 11-5)
* Johns Hopkins (24-4, 16-2)
* Middlebury (21-6, 6-4)
* Randolph-Macon (28-2, 15-1)
* St. Thomas (26-3, 19-1)
* Tufts (23-6, 8-2)
* UW-Platteville (23-5, 12-2)
* Wash U (22-5, 11-3)
* WPI (20-8, 10-3)
* Yeshiva (29-1, 16-0)

I could be missing some obvious candidates. Just kind of a work-in-progress list.

Please keep the ideas coming.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on March 28, 2020, 12:40:57 PM

Not having a Swarthmore team that returns it's top 3 scorers from a team that lost one game at the buzzer as a Top 25 team doesn't make a whole lot of sense if you ask me. Shafer and O'Dell were their heart and soul, sure, but we're arguing Top 25, not Top 3 or Top 5. Plus their recruiting classes continue to get better and better and they have the national ROY. They'll be ranked to start the season for sure.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 28, 2020, 12:54:05 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on March 28, 2020, 12:40:57 PM
Not having a Swarthmore team that returns it's top 3 scorers from a team that lost one game at the buzzer as a Top 25 team doesn't make a whole lot of sense if you ask me. Shafer and O'Dell were their heart and soul, sure, but we're arguing Top 25, not Top 3 or Top 5. Plus their recruiting classes continue to get better and better and they have the national ROY. They'll be ranked to start the season for sure.

I don't see it that way, but I'm just 1 of 25 voters...so who knows.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on March 28, 2020, 03:47:04 PM

I think your group is pretty solid, all top 25 teams, Titan Q, but if we are talking top 15 I'd definitely swap Swarthmore for WPI or Hobart, both of whom seem like barely scraping into the top 25 types. WPI is who they almost always are, a solid, tough, balanced team without a real star, will probably squeeze into the tourney and lose early on, like most years. Hobart loses quite a bit it seems like to graduation including the top big guy and the guy who accounted for nearly half of their made 3's ....

St Joe's, Virginia Wesleyan, RPI, Marietta and Albion all seem like very solid top 25 squads too .... after that group of 21, it starts getting much dicier for the last few spots.

Oh and I agree completely with SpringSt's Nescac assessment. One of the easier years to handicap the league, an easy top three. Which probably means we will all be wrong :)!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on March 28, 2020, 05:52:25 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on March 28, 2020, 10:29:53 AM
So far from the comments here, and on some other boards, seems the following 14 teams are probable Top 25 teams for me...

(alphabetical)

* Amherst (18-8, 7-3)
* Elmhurst (25-5, 11-3)
* Emory (22-5, 11-3)
* Hobart (23-5, 15-3)
* Illinois Wesleyan (19-9, 11-5)
* Johns Hopkins (24-4, 16-2)
* Middlebury (21-6, 6-4)
* Randolph-Macon (28-2, 15-1)
* St. Thomas (26-3, 19-1)
* Tufts (23-6, 8-2)
* UW-Platteville (23-5, 12-2)
* Wash U (22-5, 11-3)
* WPI (20-8, 10-3)
* Yeshiva (29-1, 16-0)

I could be missing some obvious candidates. Just kind of a work-in-progress list.

Please keep the ideas coming.

Albion (21-5) brings the entire roster back and will be the OVERWHELMING favorite in the MIAA next year. Will certainly be in that preseason Top 25 mix.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 28, 2020, 07:41:53 PM

Quote from: Fifth and Putnam on March 28, 2020, 05:52:25 PM
Albion (21-5) brings the entire roster back and will be the OVERWHELMING favorite in the MIAA next year. Will certainly be in that preseason Top 25 mix.

I didn't realize they return everyone. Definitely a preseason Top 25 team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 28, 2020, 07:43:57 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on March 28, 2020, 03:47:04 PM
I think your group is pretty solid, all top 25 teams, Titan Q, but if we are talking top 15 I'd definitely swap Swarthmore for WPI or Hobart, both of whom seem like barely scraping into the top 25 types.

To clarify, my list is of potential preseason Top 25 teams. It is not meant to be a list of potential top 15 teams.

If I can get my list to 25, then all I have to do to come up with the order...no problem.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 28, 2020, 07:48:55 PM

Added Albion.

And jumped on the Swarthmore bandwagon for now. With 8 open spots still, it does seem realistic at this point that they're in.

Feeling good about these 17 teams for the 2020-21 preseason Top 25. Need 8 more.

(alphabetical order)

* Albion (21-5, 12-2)
* Amherst (18-8, 7-3)
* Brockport (26-3, 17-1)
* Elmhurst (25-5, 11-3)
* Emory (22-5, 11-3)
* Hobart (23-5, 15-3)
* Illinois Wesleyan (19-9, 11-5)
* Johns Hopkins (24-4, 16-2)
* Middlebury (21-6, 6-4)
* Randolph-Macon (28-2, 15-1)
* St. Thomas (26-3, 19-1)
* Swarthmore (28-1, 18-0)
* Tufts (23-6, 8-2)
* UW-Platteville (23-5, 12-2)
* Wash U (22-5, 11-3)
* WPI (20-8, 10-3)
* Yeshiva (29-1, 16-0)

I could be missing some obvious candidates. Just kind of a work-in-progress list.

Please keep the ideas coming.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 28, 2020, 07:50:37 PM

With 8 to go...

* The OAC favorite should be in I think. Will that be Marietta?

* What is the predicted top 3 order in the NCAC?

* I think UW-Oshkosh, which returns 3 really good perimeter players, is probably more in the mix than I assumed they would be.

* Wheaton (presumed CCIW #3 pick) could be closer to consideration than I assumed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 28, 2020, 08:23:26 PM

I'm glad you finally gave in with the Swarthmore argument. LOL

With that said, it seemed pretty easy to include Oshkosh in the mix. However, they were a bottom Top 25 team and they lose, arguably, better players in Fravert and Flynn (top two scorers and rebounders on the team) than Swarthmore does in O'Dell and Shafer (4th and 5th scorers, 1st and 2nd in rebounding, I believe). So, if you had a hard time including Swarthmore, #1 in the nation, Oshkosh shouldn't even be in the mix when they finished in the 20s. I would have no problem excluding the Titans from the Top 25 considering who they lose.

I think, for some reluctantly, you may have to include St. John's in the mix. They lose two senior starters and 2 other reserve seniors that combined for 9.5 points a game, but did average double-digit minutes. They were #2 in the nation at season's end and were in the Sweet 16. They won't be above the Tommies, but even losing two starters have to consider them Top 25 worthy. The Johnnies reload, not rebuild. The only way I'd drop someone like the Johnnies and that high in the previous poll, out of the poll completely, is if they lost all 5 starters like NWU.

RPI got a few votes at the end of the year, and they lose less than Hobart and Ithaca. They have the top 5 scorers back, but lose two senior starters (combined for 11.5 pts/gm and 7.5 reb/gm)

SNC finished #26 in the Final Poll and they'll again reign the MWC. They had wins vs Eau Claire and Oshkosh, losses to Elmhurst and Benedictine.

Wabash actually finished ahead of Wooster last year and they have Davidson back, but lose just Hallstrom. Woo loses Hempy and Tipton as starters and Witt loses Seipel, Bertemes and Pumroy as starters. Seipel and Hempy are huge losses, obviously.

Generally, with the turnover of a lot of teams, we're going to have to ease up on our expectations, even if teams at the end of this year weren't in the Top 25 or even didn't receive any votes. There are a few teams ranked in the final poll that I would take a look at and may not get any votes (or very few) in the preseason poll (NCC, NWU, Pomona-Pitzer etc).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 28, 2020, 08:31:01 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 28, 2020, 08:23:26 PM
I'm glad you finally gave in with the Swarthmore argument. LOL

With that said, it seemed pretty easy to include Oshkosh in the mix. However, they were a bottom Top 25 team and they lose, arguably, better players in Fravert and Flynn (top two scorers and rebounders on the team) than Swarthmore does in O'Dell and Shafer (4th and 5th scorers, 1st and 2nd in rebounding, I believe). So, if you had a hard time including Swarthmore, #1 in the nation, Oshkosh shouldn't even be in the mix when they finished in the 20s. I would have no problem excluding the Titans from the Top 25 considering who they lose.

Yes, let me be clear - I'm not saying I think Oshkosh will truly be a Top 25 caliber team entering next year. Just saying the Titans are "probably more in the mix than I assumed they would be." Meaning, I have 8 spots open...and have just one WIAC team in...and feel like the WIAC should always have at least two...and it seems to be the consensus that Oshkosh will be the WIAC #2 pick next year? So I mean they're in the conversation for sure.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Baldini on March 28, 2020, 10:08:47 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on March 28, 2020, 08:31:01 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 28, 2020, 08:23:26 PM
I'm glad you finally gave in with the Swarthmore argument. LOL

With that said, it seemed pretty easy to include Oshkosh in the mix. However, they were a bottom Top 25 team and they lose, arguably, better players in Fravert and Flynn (top two scorers and rebounders on the team) than Swarthmore does in O'Dell and Shafer (4th and 5th scorers, 1st and 2nd in rebounding, I believe). So, if you had a hard time including Swarthmore, #1 in the nation, Oshkosh shouldn't even be in the mix when they finished in the 20s. I would have no problem excluding the Titans from the Top 25 considering who they lose.

Yes, let me be clear - I'm not saying I think Oshkosh will truly be a Top 25 caliber team entering next year. Just saying the Titans are "probably more in the mix than I assumed they would be." Meaning, I have 8 spots open...and have just one WIAC team in...and feel like the WIAC should always have at least two...and it seems to be the consensus that Oshkosh will be the WIAC #2 pick next year? So I mean they're in the conversation for sure.

That is interesting that Oshkosh is viewed as the consensus #2. I was thinking the UW-La Crosse was the #2 in the WIAC for next season. They return Ethan Anderson and Wyatt Cook and most of the rest of their roster. The lose of Terek Nesheim are large shoes to replace, but the remaining core is there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 28, 2020, 10:30:47 PM

Quote from: Baldini on March 28, 2020, 10:08:47 PM
That is interesting that Oshkosh is viewed as the consensus #2. I was thinking the UW-La Crosse was the #2 in the WIAC for next season. They return Ethan Anderson and Wyatt Cook and most of the rest of their roster. The lose of Terek Nesheim are large shoes to replace, but the remaining core is there.

Sorry, "consensus" might be too strong.

Tom said this...

Quote from: tomt4525 on March 27, 2020, 12:40:40 PM
WIAC

1. Platteville - Lose All American Voelker but a lock to be top 25, Return a lot, top 10 I would think
2. Oshkosh - Lose a lot, Return good nucleus of Mahoney, Peterson, Borchert, near end of top 25 to start
3. La Crosse - Lose a couple starters but return some good parts and recruits, around same spot as Oshkosh
4. Eau Claire - lose best player Rabedeaux but return a lot, definitely a team to watch for top 25
5. Stevens Point - will be garbage unless the transfer market is extremely beneficial to them, lose 5 of top 6

And no one disagreed until now.

It is no longer a consensus.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 28, 2020, 11:14:02 PM

I think we, the WIAC, was in the same boat as last year going into THIS past season. Oshkosh was the #1 pick for basically anyone in the WIAC. After that, it was tough to figure out with Platteville, Stevens Point, La Crosse and Eau Claire figuring out who would challenge the Titans.

For this upcoming season, it's Platteville and everyone else. Oshkosh loses their two big guys, Eau Claire loses their top guy, Point loses a ton and La Crosse takes a hit. We're basically just flipping Platteville and Oshkosh. Year's past it seemed pretty easy...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 29, 2020, 10:02:23 AM

Added RPI, Marietta, Wabash, and St. Joseph (CT)...now up to 21 teams I feel good about for the 2020-21 Preseason Top 25.

(alphabetical order)

* Albion (21-5, 12-2)
* Amherst (18-8, 7-3)
* Brockport (26-3, 17-1)
* Elmhurst (25-5, 11-3)
* Emory (22-5, 11-3)
* Hobart (23-5, 15-3)
* Illinois Wesleyan (19-9, 11-5)
* Johns Hopkins (24-4, 16-2)
* Marietta (21-7, 14-4)
* Middlebury (21-6, 6-4)
* Randolph-Macon (28-2, 15-1)
* RPI (24-5, 17-1)
* St. Joseph CT (26-3, 11-0)
* St. Thomas (26-3, 19-1)
* Swarthmore (28-1, 18-0)
* Tufts (23-6, 8-2)
* UW-Platteville (23-5, 12-2)
* Wabash (17-9, 3-5)
* Wash U (22-5, 11-3)
* WPI (20-8, 10-3)
* Yeshiva (29-1, 16-0)

--------
Other candidates...

PSU-Harrisburg
Rochester
St. John's
Susquehanna
Texas-Dallas
UW-La Crosse
UW-Oshkosh
Virginia Wesleyan
Wheaton (IL)

Who else?

Who will be the favorite in the NWC?

---------
Please keep the ideas coming.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 29, 2020, 11:01:53 AM

Rochester loses almost no one from that roster. A VERY talented team. As Coach Flokerzi said to me, "We're tall, but not big." Some good weight work over the summer and another year of improvement is going to make them very formidable. I saw them play Swarthmore this year and if the Garnet are on your list for next season with what they lose, Rochester should certainly be on the list. I'm assuming that was a home and home, which means the return game in New York will likely be a great battle.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on March 29, 2020, 11:11:36 AM

Rochester returns almost everyone and I think we get more from Kailan Lee and Ryan Algier may contend for league player of the year, but they only had two wins over Massey Top 50 teams this season; an early season win over Ithaca and a conference win over the increasingly enigmatic Brandeis.

I would think they would have to work their way in rather than start off as a serious candidate.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 29, 2020, 12:01:41 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on March 29, 2020, 11:11:36 AM
Rochester returns almost everyone and I think we get more from Kailan Lee and Ryan Algier may contend for league player of the year, but they only had two wins over Massey Top 50 teams this season; an early season win over Ithaca and a conference win over the increasingly enigmatic Brandeis.

I would think they would have to work their way in rather than start off as a serious candidate.

Totally hear you on this - it's where I was on Swarthmore before I started digging into all of this. But as I'm looking at the options, I realize I have to say that ("I would think they would have to work their way in...") about a lot of teams that will end up in my preseason Top 25.

It starts to become about taking good gambles at some point around #15. Rochester could be a good gamble.

Rochester vs whoever the WIAC #2 is, for example -- seems Rochester has the better case going in.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 29, 2020, 12:17:45 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on March 29, 2020, 11:11:36 AM
Rochester returns almost everyone and I think we get more from Kailan Lee and Ryan Algier may contend for league player of the year, but they only had two wins over Massey Top 50 teams this season; an early season win over Ithaca and a conference win over the increasingly enigmatic Brandeis.

I would think they would have to work their way in rather than start off as a serious candidate.

I just mean, having seen Rochester play Swarthmore, and knowing what each team brings back, if you're going to include Swat in the poll, you should also include Rochester.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 29, 2020, 12:22:12 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 29, 2020, 12:17:45 PM
I just mean, having seen Rochester play Swarthmore, and knowing what each team brings back, if you're going to include Swat in the poll, you should also include Rochester.

If you had to vote today, Ryan, would you have Swat in?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 29, 2020, 12:30:57 PM

I will have Swarthmore in my preseason Top 25, based on what is projected to return here.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 29, 2020, 01:15:10 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 29, 2020, 12:30:57 PM
I will have Swarthmore in my preseason Top 25, based on what is projected to return here.

Yes, but you are not on the Top 25 Double Take. You are just the founder/owner/publisher guy.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 29, 2020, 01:19:00 PM

I didn't realize you guys were doing your bit. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jmcozenlaw on March 29, 2020, 01:26:49 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 29, 2020, 01:19:00 PM
I didn't realize you guys were doing your bit. :)

PSU-Harrisburg possibly in the "just outside the top 25" category

Returns everybody and has a transfer 6'5" guard coming from a D-I MAC program, to be closer to an ailing mother, or so I've heard. Don't know w name but will watch it closely.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 29, 2020, 01:36:47 PM

That would certainly be huge. Wish that program was still in the CAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 29, 2020, 02:08:29 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 29, 2020, 01:19:00 PM
I didn't realize you guys were doing your bit. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on March 29, 2020, 02:11:28 PM

U can take the boys out of the country but u can't take the country out of the boys. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on March 29, 2020, 02:14:45 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on March 29, 2020, 02:08:29 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 29, 2020, 01:19:00 PM
I didn't realize you guys were doing your bit. :)
:)

This is a hint that Pat is joining the D3 Double Take next year on Hoopsville?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 29, 2020, 02:44:32 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on March 29, 2020, 12:22:12 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 29, 2020, 12:17:45 PM
I just mean, having seen Rochester play Swarthmore, and knowing what each team brings back, if you're going to include Swat in the poll, you should also include Rochester.
If you had to vote today, Ryan, would you have Swat in?

I try not to make decision for next November in the Spring, because a lot will change, but I would expect to have Swarthmore somewhere around 15-20 to start next year. Maybe higher depending what other teams bring back.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on March 29, 2020, 06:07:38 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on March 29, 2020, 12:01:41 PM
It starts to become about taking good gambles at some point around #15. Rochester could be a good gamble.

Makes sense to me...

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 29, 2020, 12:17:45 PM
I just mean, having seen Rochester play Swarthmore, and knowing what each team brings back, if you're going to include Swat in the poll, you should also include Rochester.

Makes sense to me...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on March 30, 2020, 09:16:19 AM

With all this talk about next year's poll, I'm running a pool to see how many we can get right. Pick 25 teams you think will be in the preseason poll! Check out the fantasy board.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 30, 2020, 10:47:26 AM

Added Rochester...now up to 22 teams for the 2020-21 Preseason Top 25.

(alphabetical order)

* Albion (21-5, 12-2)
* Amherst (18-8, 7-3)
* Brockport (26-3, 17-1)
* Elmhurst (25-5, 11-3)
* Emory (22-5, 11-3)
* Hobart (23-5, 15-3)
* Illinois Wesleyan (19-9, 11-5)
* Johns Hopkins (24-4, 16-2)
* Marietta (21-7, 14-4)
* Middlebury (21-6, 6-4)
* Randolph-Macon (28-2, 15-1)
* Rochester (16-9/7-7)
* RPI (24-5, 17-1)
* St. Joseph CT (26-3, 11-0)
* St. Thomas (26-3, 19-1)
* Swarthmore (28-1, 18-0)
* Tufts (23-6, 8-2)
* UW-Platteville (23-5, 12-2)
* Wabash (17-9, 3-5)
* Wash U (22-5, 11-3)
* WPI (20-8, 10-3)
* Yeshiva (29-1, 16-0)

--------
Other candidates...

PSU-Harrisburg
St. John's
Susquehanna
Texas-Dallas
UW-La Crosse
UW-Oshkosh
Virginia Wesleyan
Wheaton (IL)

Who else?

Who will be the favorite in the NWC?

---------
Please keep the ideas coming.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 30, 2020, 11:58:49 AM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on March 29, 2020, 02:14:45 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on March 29, 2020, 02:08:29 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 29, 2020, 01:19:00 PM
I didn't realize you guys were doing your bit. :)
:)

This is a hint that Pat is joining the D3 Double Take next year on Hoopsville?

Wouldn't that make it the D3 Triple Take?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on March 30, 2020, 01:19:57 PM

I thought about this overnight as I am struggling with Covidsomnia.

Brandeis loses a quality senior, but returns everyone else including both all-Association players.

Brandeis is going to be picked third in the league over Rochester and is unquestionably the better team on paper.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 30, 2020, 01:53:18 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on March 30, 2020, 01:19:57 PM
I thought about this overnight as I am struggling with Covidsomnia.

Brandeis loses a quality senior, but returns everyone else including both all-Association players.

Brandeis is going to be picked third in the league over Rochester and is unquestionably the better team on paper.

Now you are messing me up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 30, 2020, 01:54:42 PM

Rochester removed as further UAA analysis continues.

Now up to 21 teams for the 2020-21 Preseason Top 25.

(alphabetical order)

* Albion (21-5, 12-2)
* Amherst (18-8, 7-3)
* Brockport (26-3, 17-1)
* Elmhurst (25-5, 11-3)
* Emory (22-5, 11-3)
* Hobart (23-5, 15-3)
* Illinois Wesleyan (19-9, 11-5)
* Johns Hopkins (24-4, 16-2)
* Marietta (21-7, 14-4)
* Middlebury (21-6, 6-4)
* Randolph-Macon (28-2, 15-1)
* RPI (24-5, 17-1)
* St. Joseph CT (26-3, 11-0)
* St. Thomas (26-3, 19-1)
* Swarthmore (28-1, 18-0)
* Tufts (23-6, 8-2)
* UW-Platteville (23-5, 12-2)
* Wabash (17-9, 3-5)
* Wash U (22-5, 11-3)
* WPI (20-8, 10-3)
* Yeshiva (29-1, 16-0)

--------
Other candidates...

Brandeis
PSU-Harrisburg
Rochester
St. John's
Susquehanna
Texas-Dallas
UW-La Crosse
UW-Oshkosh
Virginia Wesleyan
Wheaton (IL)

Who else?

Who will be the favorite in the NWC?

---------
Please keep the ideas coming.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on March 30, 2020, 02:23:30 PM

Whitman--- Graduates a senior class full of contributors but they have also tended to rely on a decent amount of transfers to come in and play right away.
Whitworth--- Graduates 4 of its 5 leading scorers including All-American Ben College.
Linfield---Returns 2 of their top 4 including Dempsey Roggenbuck from a team that went 20-6 and 14-2 in conference.

I would default to Whitman as the NWC favorites followed by Linfield, and then a huge drop off. I don't think any of the teams warrant Top 25 consideration.

As an aside, coming from a Northeast perspective, if WPI is going to be on that list then Brandeis undoubtably should too.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 30, 2020, 02:29:09 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on March 30, 2020, 02:23:30 PM
Whitman--- Graduates a senior class full of contributors but they have also tended to rely on a decent amount of transfers to come in and play right away.
Whitworth--- Graduates 4 of its 5 leading scorers including All-American Ben College.
Linfield---Returns 2 of their top 4 including Dempsey Roggenbuck from a team that went 20-6 and 14-2 in conference.

I would default to Whitman as the NWC favorites followed by Linfield, and then a huge drop off. I don't think any of the teams warrant Top 25 consideration.

As an aside, coming from a Northeast perspective, if WPI is going to be on that list then Brandeis undoubtably should too.

Seems like no NWC teams for the preseason ballot.

And yes, I think I am now swinging to the Brandeis side of things. And I am not voting for 4 UAA teams in the preseason...so Rochester is probably out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 30, 2020, 02:32:48 PM

Final Massey:

* Brandeis #45 (wins over Massey top 50 - vs #16 Emory)

* Rochester #52 (wins over Massey top 50 - vs #45 Brandeis, vs #29 Ithaca)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on March 30, 2020, 02:48:52 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on March 30, 2020, 01:53:18 PM
Now you are messing me up.

I apologize. I even read the Brandeis press release.

I do think Brandeis will be a Top 25 team eventually if Lawrence Sabir and everyone else remains healthy.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on March 30, 2020, 03:58:49 PM

Just for a frame of reference, last year's Preseason Top 25, plus the additional 25 teams that received votes, by conference:

Top 25 Teams---16 Conferences Represented:

MIAC: 3
NCAC: 3
NESCAC: 2
CCIW: 2
UAA: 2
OAC: 2
ODAC: 2
Centennial: 1
WIAC: 1
ARC: 1
CAC: 1
CCC: 1
ASC: 1
NEWMAC: 1
NWC: 1
E8: 1

Others Receiving Votes---18 Conferences Represented:
SUNYAC: 3
NESCAC: 3
UAA: 2
SCIAC: 2
LEC: 2
MASCAC: 1
WIAC: 1
CAC: 1
CCIW: 1
NEWMAC: 1
NJAC: 1
Landmark: 1
CCC: 1
OAC: 1
NWC: 1
USA South: 1
ARC: 1
Skyline: 1

Took the liberty of highlighting a couple of interesting conference trends, although I probably could've noted more. Such is the volatility of D3. My main takeaway would be that the conversation over the last handful of days in this board is probably overly concerned with which teams are losing what. This poll seems to be giving a decent amount of the tournament teams/conference tournament winners the benefit of the doubt.

An additional stat worth considering: The average previous year's record of the preseason Top 25 was 24-6

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on March 30, 2020, 05:06:39 PM

The 25 is a big range. Might be interesting to break that down on 1-10 and 11-25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on March 30, 2020, 05:53:51 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 30, 2020, 05:06:39 PM
The 25 is a big range. Might be interesting to break that down on 1-10 and 11-25.

A huge range. Maybe that will be tomorrow's task. Off the top of my head the only conference with two schools in the top 10 was the UAA.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 30, 2020, 07:12:07 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on March 30, 2020, 05:53:51 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 30, 2020, 05:06:39 PM
The 25 is a big range. Might be interesting to break that down on 1-10 and 11-25.

A huge range. Maybe that will be tomorrow's task. Off the top of my head the only conference with two schools in the top 10 was the UAA.

The Centennial had two in the Top Ten for much of the year, despite my best efforts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on March 30, 2020, 08:45:46 PM

We were talking about the preseason Top 25 poll—in which Johns Hopkins actually didn't receive a single vote.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nyhoopstalk on April 03, 2020, 09:54:44 AM

Stevens bringing back their AA Cook for a 5th year along with their talented post and point guard. Another team to look out for in the East will be Nazareth. Returning a ton from a 20 win team and should be the favorite to win the E8 next year.

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on March 27, 2020, 08:07:03 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 27, 2020, 03:38:13 PM
Centennial:

Swarthmore - they lose O'Dell and Shafer, but they bring back EVERYONE else and their bench is incredibly deep - they would run the second unit for large minutes in every game. I suspect they remain in the conversation for sure.

Johns Hopkins - they lose only Harry O'Neil and everyone else returns including Connor Delaney (who suffered an injury in the last game, but does not require surgery - as he did the previous season with a similar injury). They also probably grow stronger and while O'Neil is a huge loss inside, I suspect there are guys ready to step into that role and maybe even have two on the floor at the same time (to be determined). I always said Hopkins was a year ahead to some degree. I knew they would compete with Swat, but I expected them to be "Swat" next year.

There are also Ursinus, Muhlenberg, and Haverford. I think the Mules are the most likely to compete with the top group, but I am not sure they are ready for the Top 25 as of yet.

CAC:

CNU obviously is one you never forget, but YCP leaves the conference for the MAC Commonwealth. Hiding under them is Mary Washington who had a pretty decent season, though they lost more of their close games against good competition then they won. The conference is ... going to be different, but CNU and Mary Wash are the only two I think are in the Top 25 convo. Salisbury is still finding themselves.

MAC Commonwealth:

I'll add the MACC ... but there is a lot to figure out, I think. YCP enters and that certainly raises the national profile, but they also have Eastern enter from the Freedom (while Arcadia and Lyco leave for the Freedom and several other conferences in DIII get angry again). I think that shakes things up, but I'm not sure how it shakes out. Worth watching, but it will take some time. One thing will be for sure, the MAC Commonwealth will continue to be one of the more competitive conferences top to bottom and the Freedom gains a bit of strength it has been badly missing.

MAC Freedom:

Eastern leaves, but Arcadia and Lyco enter. This gives the Freedom some more competition. Stevens is the only one in the Top 25 convo right now and I'm not sure this conference will immediately become one to watch ... but in time they will.

Swarthmore loses their two bigs, I haven't looked at their roster too indepth, but do they have bigs to replace them?

Stevens loses a ton. Really only returns two of their top 8. Lycoming moving over from the MACC returns 6 of their top 7. Not to say they are Top 25 worthy, but they could be the favorite. I just look at rosters, remember!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on April 03, 2020, 03:34:25 PM

I realize he was hurt last year, giving him a 5th year (had I remembered, I may have drafted him in our fantasy league). Is he coming back for sure? I mean, some kids actually graduate in 4 years. College is expensive, all because he has an extra year of eligibility doesn't mean he's coming back to play. Just curious.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on April 05, 2020, 10:19:33 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on March 30, 2020, 01:54:42 PM
Rochester removed as further UAA analysis continues.

Now up to 21 teams for the 2020-21 Preseason Top 25.

(alphabetical order)

* Albion (21-5, 12-2)
* Amherst (18-8, 7-3)
* Brockport (26-3, 17-1)
* Elmhurst (25-5, 11-3)
* Emory (22-5, 11-3)
* Hobart (23-5, 15-3)
* Illinois Wesleyan (19-9, 11-5)
* Johns Hopkins (24-4, 16-2)
* Marietta (21-7, 14-4)
* Middlebury (21-6, 6-4)
* Randolph-Macon (28-2, 15-1)
* RPI (24-5, 17-1)
* St. Joseph CT (26-3, 11-0)
* St. Thomas (26-3, 19-1)
* Swarthmore (28-1, 18-0)
* Tufts (23-6, 8-2)
* UW-Platteville (23-5, 12-2)
* Wabash (17-9, 3-5)
* Wash U (22-5, 11-3)
* WPI (20-8, 10-3)
* Yeshiva (29-1, 16-0)

--------
Other candidates...

Brandeis
PSU-Harrisburg
Rochester
St. John's
Susquehanna
Texas-Dallas
UW-La Crosse
UW-Oshkosh
Virginia Wesleyan
Wheaton (IL)

Who else?

Who will be the favorite in the NWC?

---------
Please keep the ideas coming.

Regarding Rochester vs Brandeis, had a D3 head coach who knows the UAA well tell me yesterday: "If Colin Sawyer is back, Brandeis."

So I'm going with Brandeis for now.

(alphabetical order)

* Albion (21-5, 12-2)
* Amherst (18-8, 7-3)
* Brandeis (17-8, 9-5)
* Brockport (26-3, 17-1)
* Elmhurst (25-5, 11-3)
* Emory (22-5, 11-3)
* Hobart (23-5, 15-3)
* Illinois Wesleyan (19-9, 11-5)
* Johns Hopkins (24-4, 16-2)
* Marietta (21-7, 14-4)
* Middlebury (21-6, 6-4)
* Randolph-Macon (28-2, 15-1)
* RPI (24-5, 17-1)
* St. Joseph CT (26-3, 11-0)
* St. Thomas (26-3, 19-1)
* Swarthmore (28-1, 18-0)
* Tufts (23-6, 8-2)
* UW-Platteville (23-5, 12-2)
* Wabash (17-9, 3-5)
* Wash U (22-5, 11-3)
* WPI (20-8, 10-3)
* Yeshiva (29-1, 16-0)

--------
Other candidates...

PSU-Harrisburg
Rochester
St. John's
Susquehanna
Texas-Dallas
UW-La Crosse
UW-Oshkosh
Virginia Wesleyan
Wheaton (IL)

Who else?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on April 05, 2020, 11:51:23 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on April 05, 2020, 10:19:33 AM
Regarding Rochester vs Brandeis, had a D3 head coach who knows the UAA well tell me yesterday: "If Colin Sawyer is back, Brandeis."

I have no credentials other than a d3boards login and password (and it is not always clear I deserve those), but I am not sure Brandeis is a given. I brought them up with the idea that the first and second year players develop significantly next season.

This 2019-2020 team was mostly fueled by the players who had led the 2018-2019 team to the ECAC championship. The 2020-2021 team has potential, but they will need a few players to develop.

They do have a few interesting possibilities. Darret Justice started the first four games as a freshman, before settling in to a much more limited role off the bench. Does he figure things out? Dylan Lien should be a starter next season as a sophomore. Nolan Hagerty had a good sophomore campaign and is definitely a player to watch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on April 05, 2020, 12:40:56 PM

So now, trying to bucket these teams in Top 25 placement tiers...

(teams are in alphabetical order within tiers)

Tier 1 - The sure things in the preseason; poised to make a deep NCAA run; very few questions; Top 10 candidates.
* Albion (21-5, 12-2)
* Elmhurst (25-5, 11-3)
* Emory (22-5, 11-3)
* Illinois Wesleyan (19-9, 11-5)
* Johns Hopkins (24-4, 16-2)
* Middlebury (21-6, 6-4)
* Randolph-Macon (28-2, 15-1)
* St. Joseph CT (26-3, 11-0)
* St. Thomas (26-3, 19-1)
* Tufts (23-6, 8-2)
* UW-Platteville (23-5, 12-2)
* Yeshiva (29-1, 16-0)

Tier 2 - Safe preseason Top 25 teams; enough question though to not be Tier 1.
* Amherst (18-8, 7-3)
* Brockport (26-3, 17-1)
* Hobart (23-5, 15-3)
* Marietta (21-7, 14-4)
* RPI (24-5, 17-1)
* Swarthmore (28-1, 18-0)
* Wash U (22-5, 11-3)
* WPI (20-8, 10-3)

Tier 3 - The best bets after Tiers 1 and 2; but a lot of questions to be answered.
(pick 5)

* Brandeis (17-8, 9-5)
* PSU-Harrisburg (21-8, 14-2)
* Rochester (16-9, 7-7)
* St. John's (27-2, 19-1)
* Stevens (23-5, 12-2)
* Susquehanna (21-8, 11-3)
* Texas-Dallas (22-7, 14-2)
* UW-La Crosse (21-6, 9-5)
* UW-Oshkosh (20-9, 11-3)
* Virginia Wesleyan (23-5, 13-3)
* Wabash (17-9, 3-5)
* Wheaton IL (15-11, 9-7)

All opinions and ideas are encouraged.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on April 05, 2020, 12:48:44 PM

I really think St. John's will be ranked in the high teens, 18th? You have St. Thomas ranked in the Top 10 after they lose Hannah and Anderson. Hannah didn't start, but had starter numbers and was #2 in a balanced scoring attack. They also lose another senior with minimal impact. St. John's loses Alade and Walford, arguably better players to lose than St. Thomas, but still return 3 of their top 5 scorers. I don't think you can rank St. Thomas in the Top 10 and not rank St. John's at all. There'll be a gap, but the Johnnies aren't going down without a fight. Obviously, just my opinion. ::) ???

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on April 05, 2020, 12:54:11 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on April 05, 2020, 12:48:44 PM
I really think St. John's will be ranked in the high teens, 18th? You have St. Thomas ranked in the Top 10 after they lose Hannah and Anderson. Hannah didn't start, but had starter numbers and was #2 in a balanced scoring attack. They also lose another senior with minimal impact. St. John's loses Alade and Walford, arguably better players to lose than St. Thomas, but still return 3 of their top 5 scorers. I don't think you can rank St. Thomas in the Top 10 and not rank St. John's at all. There'll be a gap, but the Johnnies aren't going down without a fight. Obviously, just my opinion. ::) ???

I don't have anyone ranked in the top 10. I identified "top 10 candidates." One of those teams would be #1...another would be #12.

I could have St. Thomas in the wrong tier.

I didn't not rank St. John's. They are in the group of teams in Tier 3.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nyhoopstalk on April 06, 2020, 09:02:55 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on April 03, 2020, 03:34:25 PM
I realize he was hurt last year, giving him a 5th year (had I remembered, I may have drafted him in our fantasy league). Is he coming back for sure? I mean, some kids actually graduate in 4 years. College is expensive, all because he has an extra year of eligibility doesn't mean he's coming back to play. Just curious.

I am fairly certain I heard on one of their webcasts that he was intending on coming back. It makes Stevens a certain top 25 contender if he is back.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jamtod on April 06, 2020, 09:22:43 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on April 05, 2020, 12:54:11 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on April 05, 2020, 12:48:44 PM
I really think St. John's will be ranked in the high teens, 18th? You have St. Thomas ranked in the Top 10 after they lose Hannah and Anderson. Hannah didn't start, but had starter numbers and was #2 in a balanced scoring attack. They also lose another senior with minimal impact. St. John's loses Alade and Walford, arguably better players to lose than St. Thomas, but still return 3 of their top 5 scorers. I don't think you can rank St. Thomas in the Top 10 and not rank St. John's at all. There'll be a gap, but the Johnnies aren't going down without a fight. Obviously, just my opinion. ::) ???
I don't have anyone ranked in the top 10. I identified "top 10 candidates." One of those teams would be #1...another would be #12.

I could have St. Thomas in the wrong tier.

I didn't not rank St. John's. They are in the group of teams in Tier 3.

If St Thomas belonged in Tier 1 this year, I see no reason to believe they should fall next year. Anderson and Hannah both had their moments, but the Tommies played major minutes of some pivotal games with both of them on the bench. Anderson dealt with some injuries and foul trouble (and also Coach Tauer's willingness to play small ball). Hannah made an impact at times but was also quite erratic. Neither played true starters minutes or made the impact that Alade and Walford did for SJU, who also graduates Ryan and Sorenson, a couple of key reserves who played similar minutes to UST's departing seniors.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on April 07, 2020, 08:57:18 AM

You've also got a LONG track record of UST having their unsung players ready to step up when called upon. Even this year, without a lot of size, they performed well above expectations. I think Tauer and the Tommies have earned the benefit of the doubt, especially with so many contributors returning. They can fill holes pretty consistently.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on April 07, 2020, 11:31:35 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on April 07, 2020, 08:57:18 AM

You've also got a LONG track record of UST having their unsung players ready to step up when called upon. Even this year, without a lot of size, they performed well above expectations. I think Tauer and the Tommies have earned the benefit of the doubt, especially with so many contributors returning. They can fill holes pretty consistently.

I think we are missing the point of Greek's post. This is not about UST (we can all agree they belong in tier 1) as much as it is about SJU. Looking at the rest of the top teams in the nation, I do think SJU has a very valid argument for being in the back end of the top 25. They return enough good players and have been a great program for the last handful of years for the proactive voters + a great record/high rating last year for those voters that let recency bias effect some of their ranks. Tier 3 is probably right but I would not disagree with anyone who is wanting to put them in the tier 2 bucket as of right now. The past 3 years they have been a consistent top 25 team and have had key losses to graduation each year. So my point being, as of lately just like UST, SJU has been able to get a lot out of players when asked to increase their workload. I would be shocked to see them drop out of the top 2 in the MIAC this upcoming season, especially with the other top tier Usual Suspects like ~~Verbal Kint~~ Bethel and Augsburg losing so much production.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jamtod on April 07, 2020, 12:21:28 PM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on April 07, 2020, 11:31:35 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on April 07, 2020, 08:57:18 AM

You've also got a LONG track record of UST having their unsung players ready to step up when called upon. Even this year, without a lot of size, they performed well above expectations. I think Tauer and the Tommies have earned the benefit of the doubt, especially with so many contributors returning. They can fill holes pretty consistently.

I think we are missing the point of Greek's post. This is not about UST (we can all agree they belong in tier 1) as much as it is about SJU. Looking at the rest of the top teams in the nation, I do think SJU has a very valid argument for being in the back end of the top 25. They return enough good players and have been a great program for the last handful of years for the proactive voters + a great record/high rating last year for those voters that let recency bias effect some of their ranks. Tier 3 is probably right but I would not disagree with anyone who is wanting to put them in the tier 2 bucket as of right now. The past 3 years they have been a consistent top 25 team and have had key losses to graduation each year. So my point being, as of lately just like UST, SJU has been able to get a lot out of players when asked to increase their workload. I would be shocked to see them drop out of the top 2 in the MIAC this upcoming season, especially with the other top tier Usual Suspects like ~~Verbal Kint~~ Bethel and Augsburg losing so much production.

My response was to Titan Q, observing that maybe he has UST in the wrong tier. That's what Ryan and I addressed.
I agree with you that SJU belongs somewhere in this conversation. I don't think it's totally unreasonable to note that SJU is losing a lot (especially compared to UST) and it's possible they take a sizable step back next year, although as you note, they have been able to reload nicely.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on April 08, 2020, 05:43:38 PM

I have 10 more years to go...

WEEK 1	19-20	18-19	17-18	16-17	15-16	14-15	13-14	12-13	11-12	10-11	9-10
PRESEASON	Swat	NWU	W'man	Amherst	Augie	UWWW-	Amherst	MIT	VWU	UWSP	Wash U
WEEK 1	Swat	NWU	W'man	Amherst	Augie	Augie	Amherst	MIT	Augie	UWSP	Wash U
WEEK 2	Swat	NWU	W'man	Amherst	Augie	Augie	Amherst	VWU	Middlebury	Wooster	Wash U
WEEK 3	Swat	NWU	W'man	Amherst	Augie	UWWW	UWSP	VWU	Middlebury	Wooster	Wash U
WEEK 4	Swat	NWU	W'man	Babson	Augie	Wash U.	UWSP	VWU	Middlebury	Wooster	Wash U
WEEK 5	Swat	NWU	W'man	Babson	W'worth	Wash U.	UWSP	NCC	Middlebury	Wooster	RMC
WEEK 6	Swat	NWU	W'man	Babson	W'worth	Augie	UWSP	NCC	Middlebury	Wooster	RMC
WEEK 7	Swat	NWU	W'man	Babson	W'worth	Augie	UWSP	UST	Middlebury	Wooster	UWSP
WEEK 8	Swat	Augie	W'man	Babson	W'worth	UWWW	UWSP	UST	Middlebury	Wooster	UWSP
WEEK 9	Swat	NWU	W'man	Babson	Augie	UWWW	UWSP	U of R	Middlebury	Wooster	Guilford
WEEK 10	Swat	NWU	W'man	Babson	Augie	UWWW	UWSP	UST	Hope	W'worth	Guilford
WEEK 11	Swat	NWU	W'man	Babson	Augie	RMC	UWSP	UST	Hope	W'worth	Wash U
WEEK 12	Swat	NWU	W'man	Babson	Augie	RMC	UWSP	UST	Hope	Williams	Wash U
WEEK 13	Swat	-	W'man	W'man	-	RMC	UWSP	UST	Hope	W'worth	Wash U
FINAL	Swat*	Osh	NWU	Babson	UST	UWSP	UWWW	Amherst	Whitewater	UST	UWSP

#1	Swat-15	NWU-12	W'man-14	Amherst-4	Augie-9	UWWW-5	UWSP-11	UST-6	Middlebury-8	Wooster-8	Wash U-8
#1		Augie-1	NWU-1	Babson-10	W'worth-4	Augie-4	Amherst-3	VWU-3	Hope-4	W'worth-3	UWSP-3
#1		Osh-1		W'man-1	UST-1	RMC-3	UWWW-1	NCC-2	VWU-1	UWSP-2	RMC-2
#1						Wash U.-2		MIT-2	Augie-1	Williams-1	Guilford-2
#1						UWSP-1		U of R-1	Whitewater-1	UST-1
#1								Amherst-1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on April 08, 2020, 06:19:12 PM

Not quite sure what your goal is, but does our Top 25 archive help you here?

https://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/archive

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on April 08, 2020, 06:54:24 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on April 08, 2020, 06:19:12 PM
Not quite sure what your goal is, but does our Top 25 archive help you here?

https://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/archive

It certainly could save him a ton of time. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on April 08, 2020, 06:56:54 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on April 08, 2020, 06:54:24 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on April 08, 2020, 06:19:12 PM
Not quite sure what your goal is, but does our Top 25 archive help you here?

https://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/archive

It certainly could save him a ton of time. :)

If he's in 'lock-down' he might not want to save time! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on April 08, 2020, 06:59:17 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on April 08, 2020, 06:56:54 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on April 08, 2020, 06:54:24 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on April 08, 2020, 06:19:12 PM
Not quite sure what your goal is, but does our Top 25 archive help you here?

https://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/archive

It certainly could save him a ton of time. :)

If he's in 'lock-down' he might not want to save time! ;)

Ha ... touche ... though, still could get tedious. LOL
If he's in 'lock-down' he might not want to save time! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on April 08, 2020, 10:20:17 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on April 08, 2020, 06:19:12 PM
Not quite sure what your goal is, but does our Top 25 archive help you here?

https://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/archive

I know.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on April 11, 2020, 01:12:54 AM

Here's the first 10 years of the poll. Just more time wasting regarding #1 teams over the years.

WEEK	08-09	07-08	06-07	05-06	04-05	03-04	02-03	01-02	00-01	99-00
PRESEASON	Wash U	Wash U	VWU	IWU	UWSP	Williams	Wash U	Carthage	Calvin	Platteville
WEEK 1	Wash U	Amherst	VWU	IWU	UWSP	Williams	Wash U	Carthage	Calvin	Platteville
WEEK 2	Wash U	Amherst	Wooster	IWU	UWSP	Williams	Wash U	Carthage	Calvin	Platteville
WEEK 3	Wash U	Rochester	Wooster	IWU	UWSP	Williams	Wash U	Carthage	Carthage	Platteville
WEEK 4	Platteville	Rochester	Wooster	IWU	UWSP	Williams	Wash U	Carthage	Carthage	Platteville
WEEK 5	Wheaton IL	Rochester	UWSP	IWU	UWSP	Williams	Wash U	Carthage	Carthage	Hampden-Sydney
WEEK 6	Wheaton IL	Rochester	UWSP	Wittenberg	Wooster	Williams	Wash U	Carthage	Carthage	Hampden-Sydney
WEEK 7	Wheaton IL	Rochester	UWSP	Wittenberg	Wooster	Hampden-Sydney	Wash U	RMC	Carthage	Hampden-Sydney
WEEK 8	St. Thomas	Rochester	UWSP	Wittenberg	UWSP	Amherst	Wash U	RMC	Carthage	Hampden-Sydney
WEEK 9	St. Thomas	Wash U	Amherst	Wittenberg	UWSP	Rochester	Wash U	Carthage	Carthage	Hampden-Sydney
WEEK 10	St. Thomas	Amherst	Amherst	Wooster	x	Rochester	Wash U	Carthage	Carthage	Hampden-Sydney
WEEK 11	St. Thomas	Amherst	UWSP	Wooster	IWU	Williams	Wash U	Carthage	Carthage	Hampden-Sydney
WEEK 12	St. Thomas	Amherst	UWSP	Lawrence	UWSP	Williams	RMC	Carthage	Wooster	Hampden-Sydney
WEEK 13	St. Thomas	Amherst	UWSP	Lawrence	Wooster	Williams	RMC	Carthage	Carthage	Calvin
WEEK 14	x	Hope	x	x	UWSP	Williams	x	x	Chicago	x
FINAL	Wash U	Wash U	Amherst	VWU	UWSP	UWSP	Williams	Otterbein	Catholic	Calvin

#1	St. Thomas-6	Rochester-6	UWSP-7	IWU-6	UWSP-11	Williams-11	Wash U-12	Carthage-12	Carthage-10	Hampden-Sydney-8
#1	Wash U-5	Amherst-6	Wooster-3	Wittenberg-4	Wooster-3	Rochester-2	RMC-2	RMC-2	Calvin-3	Platteville-5
#1	Wheaton IL-3	Wash U-3	Amherst-3	Wooster-2	IWU-1	Hampden-Sydney-1	Williams-1	Otterbein-1	Chicago-1	Calvin-2
#1	Platteville-1	Hope-1	VWU-2	Lawrence-2		Amherst-1			Wooster-1
#1				VWU-1		UWSP-1			Catholic-1
#1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on April 11, 2020, 01:14:07 AM

Just putting them in back to back posts, even though I get criticized for wasting my own time.

I have 10 more years to go...

WEEK 1	19-20	18-19	17-18	16-17	15-16	14-15	13-14	12-13	11-12	10-11	9-10
PRESEASON	Swat	NWU	W'man	Amherst	Augie	UWWW-	Amherst	MIT	VWU	UWSP	Wash U
WEEK 1	Swat	NWU	W'man	Amherst	Augie	Augie	Amherst	MIT	Augie	UWSP	Wash U
WEEK 2	Swat	NWU	W'man	Amherst	Augie	Augie	Amherst	VWU	Middlebury	Wooster	Wash U
WEEK 3	Swat	NWU	W'man	Amherst	Augie	UWWW	UWSP	VWU	Middlebury	Wooster	Wash U
WEEK 4	Swat	NWU	W'man	Babson	Augie	Wash U.	UWSP	VWU	Middlebury	Wooster	Wash U
WEEK 5	Swat	NWU	W'man	Babson	W'worth	Wash U.	UWSP	NCC	Middlebury	Wooster	RMC
WEEK 6	Swat	NWU	W'man	Babson	W'worth	Augie	UWSP	NCC	Middlebury	Wooster	RMC
WEEK 7	Swat	NWU	W'man	Babson	W'worth	Augie	UWSP	UST	Middlebury	Wooster	UWSP
WEEK 8	Swat	Augie	W'man	Babson	W'worth	UWWW	UWSP	UST	Middlebury	Wooster	UWSP
WEEK 9	Swat	NWU	W'man	Babson	Augie	UWWW	UWSP	U of R	Middlebury	Wooster	Guilford
WEEK 10	Swat	NWU	W'man	Babson	Augie	UWWW	UWSP	UST	Hope	W'worth	Guilford
WEEK 11	Swat	NWU	W'man	Babson	Augie	RMC	UWSP	UST	Hope	W'worth	Wash U
WEEK 12	Swat	NWU	W'man	Babson	Augie	RMC	UWSP	UST	Hope	Williams	Wash U
WEEK 13	Swat	-	W'man	W'man	-	RMC	UWSP	UST	Hope	W'worth	Wash U
FINAL	Swat*	Osh	NWU	Babson	UST	UWSP	UWWW	Amherst	Whitewater	UST	UWSP

#1	Swat-15	NWU-12	W'man-14	Amherst-4	Augie-9	UWWW-5	UWSP-11	UST-6	Middlebury-8	Wooster-8	Wash U-8
#1		Augie-1	NWU-1	Babson-10	W'worth-4	Augie-4	Amherst-3	VWU-3	Hope-4	W'worth-3	UWSP-3
#1		Osh-1		W'man-1	UST-1	RMC-3	UWWW-1	NCC-2	VWU-1	UWSP-2	RMC-2
#1						Wash U.-2		MIT-2	Augie-1	Williams-1	Guilford-2
#1						UWSP-1		U of R-1	Whitewater-1	UST-1
#1								Amherst-1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on April 11, 2020, 01:18:56 AM

Of the 21 years of the poll, Swarthmore, this past season, is the only team to run the table for being #1 the whole season, preseason poll to the final poll. Of course, we never finished the tournament, so there's always going to be an asterisk next to that.

In the 21 years there's been a poll, there have been 316 weekly polls, including preseason polls.

Here's a rundown of how many times each team has been #1 and how many different years they've been #1

Oshkosh, Otterbein and Catholic's only #1 ranking was after they won the National Championship and were crowned #1 in the Final poll of the season.

Team	#1	Years
UWSP	36	7
Wash U	30	5
Carthage	22	2
Amherst	18	6
Wooster	17	5
Swarthmore	15	1
Whitman	15	2
Augie	15	4
St. Thomas	14	4
NWU	13	2
Williams	13	3
Babson	10	1
Hampden-Sydney	9	2
RMC	9	4
Middlebury	8	1
IWU	7	2
Whitworth	7	2
Rochester	9	3
UWWW	7	3
VWU	7	4
Platteville	6	2
Calvin	5	2
Hope	5	2
Wittenberg	4	1
Wheaton IL	3	1
Guilford	2	1
Lawrence	2	1
MIT	2	1
NCC	2	1
Catholic	1	1
Chicago	1	1
Oshkosh	1	1
Otterbein	1	1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on April 11, 2020, 01:55:18 AM

Here's a more indepth look at that. Times a team was #1 and what years.

TEAMS

Amherst-1 (12-13)

Amherst-1 (03-04)

Amherst-3 (13-14)

Amherst-3 (06-07)

Amherst-4 (16-17)

Amherst-6 (07-08)

Augie-1 (18-19)

Augie-1 (11-12)

Augie-4 (14-15)

Augie-9 (15-16)

Babson-10 (16-17)

Calvin-2 (99-00)

Calvin-3 (00-01)

Carthage-10 (00-01)

Carthage-12 (01-02)

Catholic-1 (00-01)

Chicago-1 (00-01)

Guilford-2 (09-10)

Hampden-Sydney-1 (03-04)

Hampden-Sydney-8 (99-00)

Hope-1 (07-08)

Hope-4 (11-12)

IWU-1 (04-05)

IWU-6 (05-06)

Lawrence-2 (05-06)

Middlebury-8 (11-12)

MIT-2 (12-13)

NCC-2 (12-13)

NWU-1 (17-18)

NWU-12 (18-19)

Oshkosh-1 (18-19)

Otterbein-1 (01-02)

Platteville-1 (08-09)

Platteville-5 (99-00)

RMC-2 (09-10)

RMC-2 (02-03)

RMC-2 (01-02)

RMC-3 (14-15)

Rochester-2 (03-04)

Rochester-6 (07-08)

Rochester-1 (12-13)

Swarthmore-15 (19-20)

St. Thomas-1 (15-16)

St. Thomas-1 (10-11)

St. Thomas-6 (12-13)

St. Thomas-6 (08-09)

UWSP-1 (14-15)

UWSP-1 (03-04)

UWSP-11 (13-14)

UWSP-11 (04-05)

UWSP-2 (10-11)

UWSP-3 (09-10)

UWSP-7 (06-07)

UWWW-1 (13-14)

UWWW-1 (11-12)

UWWW-5 (14-15)

VWU-1 (11-12)

VWU-1 (05-06)

VWU-2 (06-07)

VWU-3 (12-13)

Whitman-1 (16-17)

Whitman-14 (17-18)

Whitworth-3 (10-11)

Whitworth-4 (15-16)

Wash U-12 (02-03)

Wash U-3 (07-08)

Wash U-5 (08-09)

Wash U-8 (09-10)

Wash U.-2 (14-15)

Wheaton IL-3 (08-09)

Williams-1 (10-11)

Williams-1 (02-03)

Williams-11 (03-04)

Wittenberg-4 (05-06)

Wooster-1 (00-01)

Wooster-2 (05-06)

Wooster-3 (04-05)

Wooster-3 (06-07)

Wooster-8 (10-11)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on April 11, 2020, 02:00:00 AM

If you include Platteville's preseason ranking in 99-00 after winning the championship the previous year, only 11 or the 21 preseason polls had the previous year's national champion as #1 the following year.

Every National Champion was #1 in the Final poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on April 11, 2020, 06:54:37 PM

Good work Greek! Thanks

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on April 12, 2020, 08:56:19 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on April 11, 2020, 01:18:56 AM
Of the 21 years of the poll, Swarthmore, this past season, is the only team to run the table for being #1 the whole season, preseason poll to the final poll. Of course, we never finished the tournament, so there's always going to be an asterisk next to that.

Pretty big asterisk. Guessing no final D3hoops.com #1 team has ever had #29 as their best Massey win.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on April 12, 2020, 09:54:15 AM

And since I mentioned best Massey wins, for what it's worth...

According to Massey, here are the best 4 wins for each team in the final D3hoops.com Top 25.

https://www.masseyratings.com/cb2020/ncaa-d3/ratings

#1 Swarthmore
#29 Ithaca
#36 Johns Hopkins
#36 Johns Hopkins
#39 TCNJ

#2 St. John's
#2 St. Thomas
#2 St. Thomas
#26 UW-Eau Claire
#38 Ripon

#3 Randolph-Macon
#14 Christopher Newport
#27 Virginia Wesleyan
#27 Virginia Wesleyan
#39 TCNJ

#4 St. Thomas
#1 St. John's
#13 UW-Platteville
#22 Nebraska Wesleyan
#24 St. Norbert

#5 Mount Union
#20 York PA
#32 Albion
#34 Marietta
#34 Marietta

#6 North Central
#8 Elmhurst
#8 Elmhurst
#12 UW-Oshkosh
#19 Augustana

#7 Wittenberg
#59 Wooster
#67 Wabash
#67 Wabash
#75 Susquehanna

#8 Yeshiva
#58 WPI
#66 Williams
#153 New Jersey City
#156 PSU-Harrisburg

#9 Wash U
#19 Augustana
#22 Nebraska Wesleyan
#26 UW-Eau Claire
#28 Illinois Wesleyan

#10 Elmhurst
#6 North Central
#12 UW-Oshkosh
#19 Augustana
#24 St. Norbert

#11 Brockport
#23 Hobart
#33 Middlebury
#71 SUNY Potsdam
#71 SUNY Potsdam

#12 UW-Platteville
#9 Wash U
#12 UW-Oshkosh
#12 UW-Oshkosh
#17 UW-La Crosse

#13 Johns Hopkins
#5 Swarthmore
#14 Christopher Newport
#20 York PA
#80 Drew

#14 Nebraska Wesleyan
#1 St. John's
#70 Chicago
#78 Coe
#78 Coe

#15 Tufts
#21 Colby
#21 Colby
#31 St. Joseph CT
#41 RPI

#16 Pomona-Pitzer
#16 Emory
#48 Redlands
#48 Redlands
#50 Centre

#17 Christoper Newport
#20 York PA
#21 Colby
#46 Texas-Dallas
#62 Nichols

#18 Emory
#9 Wash U
#9 Wash U
#12 UW-Oshkosh
#43 Guilford

#19 Whitworth
#2 St. Thomas
#35 Le Tourneau
#46 Texas Dallas
#47 Linfield

#20 Hobart
#29 Ithaca
#29 Ithaca
#30 Springfield
#31 St. Joseph CT

#21 Colby
#33 Middlebury
#42 Amherst
#61 Trinity CT
#66 Williams

#22 Springfield
#56 Babson
#58 WPI
#58 WPI
#61 Trinity CT

#23 UW-Oshkosh
#6 North Central
#17 UW-La Crosse
#17 UW-La Crosse
#17 UW-La Crosse

#24 St. Joseph (Conn.)
#57 Albertus Magnus
#57 Albertus Magnus
#61 Trinity CT
#66 Williams

#25 Middlebury
#18 Tufts
#30 Springfield
#57 Albertus Magnus
#60 Stevens

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on April 12, 2020, 10:28:48 AM

Definitely some exceptions (2 MIAC teams, CCIW teams, UW-Platt), but for the most part not a huge difference in best wins prior to the Sweet Sixteen. A decent amount of teams have one of their best win coming from the tournament, such as Mount Union, Yeshiva and Swarthmore. A lot of posters thought these were 3 of the top favorites to win the tournament before it was canceled. Heck you take away SJU wins against UST and their two tournament wins made the top 4 wins. Not that this is too much of a surprise, as the tournament should have some of the best teams in the nation.

Anyways, knocking Swarthmore for not having a top 25 Massey win before they had a chance to play the Sweet Sixteen and beyond is a not too fair in my opinion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on April 12, 2020, 10:46:14 AM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on April 12, 2020, 10:28:48 AM
Anyways, knocking Swarthmore for not having a top 25 Massey win before they had a chance to play the Sweet Sixteen and beyond is a not too fair in my opinion.

I'm not sure I'm knocking Swarthmore. I'm simply emphasizing what Greek Tragedy pointed out - that there is an asterisk to his statement:

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on April 11, 2020, 01:18:56 AM
Of the 21 years of the poll, Swarthmore, this past season, is the only team to run the table for being #1 the whole season, preseason poll to the final poll.

Swarthmore finished #1 in a season that was not completed. To me the fact that "of the 21 years of the poll, Swarthmore, this past season, is the only team to run the table for being #1 the whole season, preseason poll to the final poll" is relatively meaningless.

Unfortunately Swarthmore didn't get a chance to prove where they belong in a true final poll - no one did - because we were cheated out of the final 4 rounds of the tournament. And without those final 4 rounds, there isn't a ton on Swarthmore's resume to cement that #1 spot in any type of historical context.

The poll is dramatically shaped by the tournament - as Greek said, the national champ has been the final #1 ever year - and unfortunately we didn't get to see the tournament play out. It's fun to have a final D3hoops.com Top 25 this year, but it's really just a novelty. It's not fair to compare other seasons (completed) to this whacky season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on April 12, 2020, 07:36:30 PM

It would put Q's statement in better perspective if someone were to check the success of regular season #1's in the final poll. The archive says only two teams ranked #1 have gone on to win the title, but I'm not sure if that is the answer to my question or not, and I'm far too lazy to check it out year-by-year! ;)

At any rate, I'm sure it would be safe to say that Swarthmore winning the 'big doorstop' (nod to Gregory Sager) would not be a given. D3 tourney championships are FAR less a given than UCLA men or UConn women during their reigns - with a possible exception for the reign of Thomas More on the women's side.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on April 12, 2020, 08:25:53 PM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on April 12, 2020, 07:36:30 PM
It would put Q's statement in better perspective if someone were to check the success of regular season #1's in the final poll. The archive says only two teams ranked #1 have gone on to win the title, but I'm not sure if that is the answer to my question or not, and I'm far too lazy to check it out year-by-year! ;)

At any rate, I'm sure it would be safe to say that Swarthmore winning the 'big doorstop' (nod to Gregory Sager) would not be a given. D3 tourney championships are FAR less a given than UCLA men or UConn women during their reigns - with a possible exception for the reign of Thomas More on the women's side.

So what are you asking?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on April 12, 2020, 10:21:44 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on April 12, 2020, 08:25:53 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on April 12, 2020, 07:36:30 PM
It would put Q's statement in better perspective if someone were to check the success of regular season #1's in the final poll. The archive says only two teams ranked #1 have gone on to win the title, but I'm not sure if that is the answer to my question or not, and I'm far too lazy to check it out year-by-year! ;)

At any rate, I'm sure it would be safe to say that Swarthmore winning the 'big doorstop' (nod to Gregory Sager) would not be a given. D3 tourney championships are FAR less a given than UCLA men or UConn women during their reigns - with a possible exception for the reign of Thomas More on the women's side.

So what are you asking?

How many of the teams ranked #1 in the final regular season poll have gone on to win the title? I suspect it is relatively few. If so, crowning Swarthmore as a start-to-finish #1 is rather dubious.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on April 12, 2020, 10:45:45 PM

Since every team that won the title finished #1 in the Final poll, it would be easy to figure out in my posts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on April 12, 2020, 10:50:19 PM

It's twice. 99-00 with Calvin and 04-05 with UWSP. That was the only two times Calvin was ranked #1 that year. Last regular season poll and Final poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on April 12, 2020, 10:57:40 PM

In other words, to say Swarthmore went #1 non-stop for the WHOLE season is rather dubious, if we consider the tourney to be a part of the 'whole' season. Maybe, but odds are, no.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on April 12, 2020, 11:48:13 PM

Washington University was ranked No. 2 in 2008-2009 going in to the national tournament and they received one No. 1 vote in that second to last poll. So close...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on April 13, 2020, 08:28:28 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on April 12, 2020, 10:57:40 PM
In other words, to say Swarthmore went #1 non-stop for the WHOLE season is rather dubious, if we consider the tourney to be a part of the 'whole' season. Maybe, but odds are, no.

As I pointed out, there will always be an asterisk next to their name.

Why don't we just say regular season polls and add Whitman to the list?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on April 13, 2020, 01:25:56 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on April 13, 2020, 08:28:28 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on April 12, 2020, 10:57:40 PM
In other words, to say Swarthmore went #1 non-stop for the WHOLE season is rather dubious, if we consider the tourney to be a part of the 'whole' season. Maybe, but odds are, no.

As I pointed out, there will always be an asterisk next to their name.

Why don't we just say regular season polls and add Whitman to the list?

Perfect.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on April 14, 2020, 01:53:26 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on March 27, 2020, 03:05:23 PM
IF Hixon returns to the sideline ... you never know what a sabbatical year might reveal. Don't get me wrong, I want to see him back ... but I am understanding that things like this could happen.

Touche.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on April 14, 2020, 02:54:03 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on April 13, 2020, 01:25:56 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on April 13, 2020, 08:28:28 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on April 12, 2020, 10:57:40 PM
In other words, to say Swarthmore went #1 non-stop for the WHOLE season is rather dubious, if we consider the tourney to be a part of the 'whole' season. Maybe, but odds are, no.

As I pointed out, there will always be an asterisk next to their name.

Why don't we just say regular season polls and add Whitman to the list?

Perfect.

Not sure what the big deal is anyway. I'm pretty sure Swarthmore doesn't have a banner hanging in the gym claiming to be the only team to start the season #1 and go the whole season #1 and finish there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on April 14, 2020, 03:07:48 PM

I can drive down the street and check for you if you like. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on April 14, 2020, 03:50:50 PM

Quote from: gordonmann on April 14, 2020, 03:07:48 PM
I can drive down the street and check for you if you like. :)

Sounds good. Take a picture!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: iwumichigander on April 14, 2020, 07:35:16 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on April 14, 2020, 03:50:50 PM
Quote from: gordonmann on April 14, 2020, 03:07:48 PM
I can drive down the street and check for you if you like. :)

Sounds good. Take a picture!

But wait - with schools closed Gordon May have check next season to determine if a banner went up

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on April 16, 2020, 10:10:05 AM

Bumping this up. Any schools we are missing on? Have in the wrong tier, etc?
-----
So now, trying to bucket these teams in Top 25 placement tiers...

(teams are in alphabetical order within tiers)

Tier 1 - The sure things in the preseason; poised to make a deep NCAA run; very few questions; Top 10 candidates.
* Albion (21-5, 12-2)
* Elmhurst (25-5, 11-5)
* Emory (22-5, 11-3)
* Illinois Wesleyan (19-9, 11-5)
* Johns Hopkins (24-4, 16-2)
* Middlebury (21-6, 6-4)
* Randolph-Macon (28-2, 15-1)
* St. Joseph CT (26-3, 11-0)
* St. Thomas (26-3, 19-1)
* Tufts (23-6, 8-2)
* UW-Platteville (23-5, 12-2)
* Yeshiva (29-1, 16-0)

Tier 2 - Safe preseason Top 25 teams; enough question though to not be Tier 1.
* Amherst (18-8, 7-3)
* Brockport (26-3, 17-1)
* Hobart (23-5, 15-3)
* Marietta (21-7, 14-4)
* RPI (24-5, 17-1)
* Swarthmore (28-1, 18-0)
* Wash U (22-5, 11-3)
* WPI (20-8, 10-3)

Tier 3 - The best bets after Tiers 1 and 2; but a lot of questions to be answered.
(pick 5)

* Brandeis (17-8, 9-5)
* Colby (24-4, 8-2)
* PSU-Harrisburg (21-8, 14-2)
* Rochester (16-9, 7-7)
* St. John's (27-2, 19-1)
* Stevens (23-5, 12-2)
* Susquehanna (21-8, 11-3)
* Texas-Dallas (22-7, 14-2)
* UW-La Crosse (21-6, 9-5)
* UW-Oshkosh (20-9, 11-3)
* Virginia Wesleyan (23-5, 13-3)
* Wabash (17-9, 3-5)
* Wheaton IL (15-11, 9-7)

All opinions and ideas are encouraged.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Colby Hoops on April 16, 2020, 10:43:12 AM

Obviously biased, and I know some of the other Nescac posters don't necessarily agree with me, but I think Colby isn't too far outside of this conversation. I'd probably have them somewhere in the 20-35 range. They lose All-American Sam Jefferson and a few other key senior contributors, but they also will have a very good senior backcourt and the last two conference Rookies of the Year. They have four very good players, with some big depth questions -- will rely on a couple of incoming freshman and a few guys who didn't play much last year, so there are certainly reasons to be more pessimistic. Yet, toward the end of the season, Colby beat Amherst and was a miracle 30-footer away from beating Tufts in the Nescac championship with a team that was running primarily through Will King, Matt Hanna and Noah Tyson -- all back next year.

I'm confident they will be good, but they probably don't have the firepower without Jefferson to be more than a back-end of the Top 25 team. I don't feel particularly strongly that they have to be included, but just another team in the general mix.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on April 16, 2020, 11:00:39 AM

Quote from: Colby Hoops on April 16, 2020, 10:43:12 AM
Obviously biased, and I know some of the other Nescac posters don't necessarily agree with me, but I think Colby isn't too far outside of this conversation. I'd probably have them somewhere in the 20-35 range. They lose All-American Sam Jefferson and a few other key senior contributors, but they also will have a very good senior backcourt and the last two conference Rookies of the Year. They have four very good players, with some big depth questions -- will rely on a couple of incoming freshman and a few guys who didn't play much last year, so there are certainly reasons to be more pessimistic. Yet, toward the end of the season, Colby beat Amherst and was a miracle 30-footer away from beating Tufts in the Nescac championship with a team that was running primarily through Will King, Matt Hanna and Noah Tyson -- all back next year.

I'm confident they will be good, but they probably don't have the firepower without Jefferson to be more than a back-end of the Top 25 team. I don't feel particularly strongly that they have to be included, but just another team in the general mix.

I wrote a couple weeks ago in here when discussing the NESCAC for next year that outside of the obvious top 3 (Amherst, Middlebury, Tufts), some 4th team would emerge as a top 25 team at some point in year, and named Colby, Wesleyan, and Williams as those potential 3 teams. Seeing how Colby has the least question marks of those three teams, I think it would be fair to slot them in at 4th for now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on April 16, 2020, 11:40:11 AM

Quote from: Colby Hoops on April 16, 2020, 10:43:12 AM
Obviously biased, and I know some of the other Nescac posters don't necessarily agree with me, but I think Colby isn't too far outside of this conversation. I'd probably have them somewhere in the 20-35 range. They lose All-American Sam Jefferson and a few other key senior contributors, but they also will have a very good senior backcourt and the last two conference Rookies of the Year. They have four very good players, with some big depth questions -- will rely on a couple of incoming freshman and a few guys who didn't play much last year, so there are certainly reasons to be more pessimistic. Yet, toward the end of the season, Colby beat Amherst and was a miracle 30-footer away from beating Tufts in the Nescac championship with a team that was running primarily through Will King, Matt Hanna and Noah Tyson -- all back next year.

I'm confident they will be good, but they probably don't have the firepower without Jefferson to be more than a back-end of the Top 25 team. I don't feel particularly strongly that they have to be included, but just another team in the general mix.

Added to Tier 3 above.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on April 16, 2020, 03:19:59 PM

A look at those 12 "Tier 1" teams...

(All players who scored 4.0 ppg+ in 2019-20. Roster year listed is from 2019-20.)

Albion (21-5, 12-2 MIAA)
F - Caden Ebeling, 6-7 Jr. 17.7 ppg, 8.3 rpg 1st Team All-MIAA
G - Jamezell Davis, Jr., 5-9 Jr. 16.6 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 3.0 apg 1st Team All-MIAA
F - Quinton Armstrong, 6-5 Jr. 12.4 ppg, 8.0 rpg
G - Cortez Garland, 6-0 So. 10.7 ppg, 2.2 rpg, 2.5 apg MIAA Defensive Player of the Year
G - MJ Barnes, 6-0 So. 7.3 ppg, 1.8 rpg
G - Juwan Perry, 6-2 Jr. 4.5 ppg, 2.5 rpg

Elmhurst (25-5, 11-5 CCIW)
G - Jake Rhode, 5-11 Jr. 20.8 ppg, 3.8 rpg, 4.1 apg 1st Team All-CCIW
F - Derek Dotlich, 6-3 Sr. 15.8 ppg, 3.9 rpg 2nd Team All-CCIW
C - Lavon Thomas, 6-5 Jr. 13.5 ppg, 8.1 rpg, 2.0 apg 2nd Team All-CCIW
F - Jay Militello, 6-4 Jr. 8.9 ppg, 5.9 rpg
G - Dominic Genco, 6-3 Jr. 7.1 ppg, 2.8 rpg
G - Wesley Hooker, 6-2 Fr. 5.3 ppg, 2.9 rpg
G - Nick Perry, 5-11 Jr. 4.5 ppg, 2.2 rpg, 2.5 apg
C - Ebrahim Jobe, 6-9 Jr. 4.5 ppg, 5.1 rpg

Emory (22-5, 11-3 UAA)
G - Romin Williams, 5-9 Jr. 16.3 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 2.1 apg 2nd Team All-UAA
G - Matthew Schner, 6-4 Jr. 15.5 ppg, 7.4 rpg, 2.9 apg 1st Team All-UAA, Co-UAA POY
F - Matt Davet, 6-7 Jr 14.0 ppg, 4.4 rpg
F - Lawrence Rowley, 6-5 Jr. 13.9 ppg, 8.6 rpg 2nd Team All-UAA, UAA Defensive POY
G - Nick Stuck, 6-2 Jr. 9.3 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 5.3 apg 2nd Team All-UAA
F - Mason Johnson, 6-7 So. 7.6 ppg, 4.3 rpg
G - Luke Morrison, 6-4 Jr. 4.3 ppg, 2.0 rpg

Illinois Wesleyan (19-9, 11-5 CCIW)
G - Grant Wolfe, 5-11 Jr. 18.0 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 3.6 apg (only played 7 games due to injury)
G - Peter Lambesis, 6-4 So. 12.3 ppg, 3.4 rpg, 2.5 apg 2nd Team All-CCIW
G - Keondre Schumacher, 5-11 So. 12.0 ppg, 1.9 apg
F - Doug Wallen, 6-5 Jr. 11.2 ppg, 5.6 rpg
F - Matt Leritz, 6-7 So. 10.9 ppg, 5.5 rpg 1st Team All-CCIW
G - Luke Yoder, 6-0 Fr. 10.4 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 2.3 apg CCIW Freshman of the Year
F - Charlie Bair, 6-7 Jr. 9.0 ppg, 8.3 rpg
G - Cory Noe, 6-2 So. 8.8 ppg, 2.3 rpg

Johns Hopkins (24-4, 16-2 Centennial)
G - Conner Delaney, 6-0 Jr. 17.5 ppg, 3.7 rpg, 4.9 apg 1st Team All-CC, CC POY
F - Tom Quarry, 6-6 So. 13.4 ppg, 4.5 rpg 2nd Team All-CC
G - Joey Kern, 6-1 Jr. 8.7 ppg, 3.1 rpg, 2.1 apg
G - Braeden Johnson, 6-6 So. 8.3 ppg, 3.2 rpg
F - Harry O'Neill, 6-6 Sr. 8.2 ppg, 4.7 rpg
G - Ethan Bartlett, 6-3 So. 8.0 ppg, 5.4 rpg
F - Chid Nnake, 6-6 So. 4.8 ppg, 4.3 rpg
G - Carson James, 6-2 Fr. 4.8 ppg, 2.1 rpg

Middlebury (21-6, 6-4 NESCAC)
G - Jack Farrell, 6-1 Jr. 16.8 ppg, 4.8 rpg, 3.4 apg 2nd Team All-NESCAC
G - Max Bosco, 6-0 Jr. 14.6 ppg, 2.9 rpg
G - Tommy Eastman, 6-4 Jr. 13.6 ppg, 6.7 rpg 2nd Team All-NESCAC
F - Matt Folger, 6-8 Sr. 11.7 ppg, 9.5 rpg, 2.0 apg
G - Griffin Kornaker, 6-1 Jr. 9.3 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 4.5 apg
F - Ryan Cahill, 6-7 Jr. 6.7 ppg, 3.6 rpg
~~G - Perry DeLorenzo, 6-4 Sr. 5.3 ppg, 1.5 rpg~~

Randolph-Macon (28-2, 15-1 ODAC)
G - Buzz Anthony, 5-11 Jr. 16.4 ppg, 5.7 rpg, 6.2 apg 1st Team All-ODAC, ODAC POY
F - Miles Mallory, 6-5 Fr. 12.3 ppg, 7.8 rpg ODAC Rookie of the Year
G - Josh Talbert, 6-2 Fr. 10.7 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 2.1 apg
F - Ian Robertson, 6-7 So. 8.5 ppg, 3.9 rpg
G - Corey Bays, 6-3 Sr. 7.7 ppg, 2.4 rpg
G - Terry Woods, 5-11 Jr. 7.3 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 2.6 apg
F - David Funderburg, 6-7 Jr. 5.6 ppg, 3.5 rpg
G - Korey Turner, 6-0 Sr. 4.2 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 2.7 apg

St. Joseph CT (26-3, 11-0 GNAC)
G - Delshawn Jackson Jr., 5-10 So. 21.5 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 2.7 apg 1st Team All-GNAC
F - Jordan Powell, 6-6 Jr. 15.3 ppg, 7.4 rpg 2nd Team All-GNAC
G - Jaecee Martin, 5-10 So. 14.9 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 7.5 apg 1st Team All-GNAC, Defensive POY
G - Taelon Martin, 6-5 Fr. 10.6 ppg, 3.9 rpg GNAC Rookie of the Year
G - Ryan O'Neill, 6-5 So. 10.0 ppg, 4.9 rpg
F - Tyree Mitchell, 6-4 So. 5.8 ppg, 1.9 rpg
F - Jake Sullivan, 6-5 So. 4.3 ppg, 3.9 rpg

St. Thomas (26-3, 19-1 MIAA)
G - Anders Nelson, 6-0 So. 15.9 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 2.4 apg 1st Team All-MIAC
F - Elijah Hannah, 6-3 Sr. 11.3 ppg, 3.8 rpg 3rd Team All-MIAC, Sixth Man of the Year
F - Tommy Anderson, 6-4 Sr. 10.7 ppg, 2.6 rpg 3rd Team All-MIAC
G - Riley Miller, 6-2 So. 8.5 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 2.7 apg 2nd Team All-MIAC
G - Burt Hedstrom, 6-4 Jr. 8.0 ppg, 4.7 rpg
G - Ryan Lindberg, 6-3 Jr. 6.8 ppg, 2.6 rpg HM All-MIAC, All Defensive Team
G - Zach Theisen, 6-0 So. 5.3 ppg, 1.9 rpg
G - Will Engels, 6-5 Fr. 4.6 ppg, 1.7 rpg
G - Kevin Cunningham, 6-0 So. 4.1 ppg, 1.8 rpg

Tufts (23-6, 8-2 NESCAC)
C - Luke Rogers, 6-8 Jr. 16.6 ppg, 11.9 rpg 1st Team All-NESCAC, NESCAC POY
G - Eric Savage, 6-3 Sr. 15.8 ppg, 6.9 ppg, 3.4 apg 2nd Team All-NESCAC
G - Brennan Morris, 6-6 Jr. 12.0 ppg, 3.8 rpg
G - Tyler Aronson, 6-2 So. 10.6 ppg, 3.0 ppg, 2.1 apg
G - Dylan Thoerner, 6-6 Fr. 7.5 ppg, 2.4 rpg, 1.1 apg
G - Carson Cohen, 6-3 So. 7.2 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 3.5 apg
G - Will Brady, 6-1 Jr. 4.4 ppg, 2.1 rpg

UW-Platteville (23-5, 12-2 WIAC)
G - Carter Voelker, 6-3 Sr. 15.5 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 3.8 apg All-WIAC, Co-WIAC POY
G - Quentin Shields, 5-9 Jr. 14.9 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 2.8 apg All-WIAC, All Defensive Team
F - Kyle Tuma, 6-5 So. 10.8 ppg, 5.9 rpg HM All-WIAC
F - Justin Stovall, 6-7 Jr. 10.2 ppg, 6.2 rpg HM All-WIAC, All Defensive Team
G - Blake McCann, 6-3 So. 8.1 ppg, 1.4 rpg
G - Drew Gunnink, 6-0 Jr. 7.0 ppg, 2.3 rpg
F - Justin Fox, 6-4 Jr. 5.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg

Yeshiva (29-1, 16-0 Skyline)
G - Ryan Turell, 6-7 So. 23.9 ppg, 5.9 rpg, 3.4 apg 1st Team All-Skyline, Skyline POY
G - Simcha Halpert, 6-3 Sr. 16.7 ppg, 2.8 rpg, 2.1 apg 2nd Team All-Skyline
F - Gabriel Leifer, 6-5 Sr. 16.0 ppg, 11.5 rpg, 6.6 apg 1st Team All-Skyline
G - Ofek Reef, 6-1 Fr. 10.7 ppg, 2.6 rpg Skyline Rookie of the Year
G - Eitan Halpert, 5-11 Jr. 6.2 ppg, 2.0 apg
~~G - Bar Alluf, 6-4 Sr. 5.4 ppg, 2.2 rpg~~
F - Caleb Milobsky, 6-6 Jr. 5.4 ppg, 3.6 rpg
~~F - Daniel Katz, 6-4 Sr. 4.8 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 2.2 apg~~

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on April 16, 2020, 03:20:33 PM

Would love to hear some takes on the order of those teams from #1 to #12 from a standpoint of the 2020-21 Preseason Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on April 16, 2020, 03:29:20 PM

I might go more in depth later this weekend, but personally I think I would go to the South for the first two spots. #1 Emory and #2 RMC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on April 16, 2020, 03:31:39 PM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on April 16, 2020, 03:29:20 PM
I might go more in depth later this weekend, but personally I think I would go to the South for the first two spots. #1 Emory and #2 RMC.

I think Emory would be my #1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on April 16, 2020, 04:45:05 PM

I know St. Thomas is getting booted from the MIAC next year, but I don't think they're playing in the MIAA this year. ??? :P ::) ;D :o ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on April 16, 2020, 04:46:17 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on April 16, 2020, 03:31:39 PM
Quote from: Smitty Oom on April 16, 2020, 03:29:20 PM
I might go more in depth later this weekend, but personally I think I would go to the South for the first two spots. #1 Emory and #2 RMC.

I think Emory would be my #1.

I think Ryan is putting Yeshiva #1. ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TheOsprey on April 16, 2020, 06:06:12 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on April 16, 2020, 04:46:17 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on April 16, 2020, 03:31:39 PM
Quote from: Smitty Oom on April 16, 2020, 03:29:20 PM
I might go more in depth later this weekend, but personally I think I would go to the South for the first two spots. #1 Emory and #2 RMC.

I think Emory would be my #1.

I think Ryan is putting Yeshiva #1. ;D

They'll probably end up there eventually I believe.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on April 16, 2020, 09:25:04 PM

Quote from: TheOsprey on April 16, 2020, 06:06:12 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on April 16, 2020, 04:46:17 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on April 16, 2020, 03:31:39 PM
Quote from: Smitty Oom on April 16, 2020, 03:29:20 PM
I might go more in depth later this weekend, but personally I think I would go to the South for the first two spots. #1 Emory and #2 RMC.

I think Emory would be my #1.

I think Ryan is putting Yeshiva #1. ;D
They'll probably end up there eventually I believe.

I think it depends on their schedule...or how hard they try to schedule better opponents. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on April 16, 2020, 09:31:39 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on April 16, 2020, 09:25:04 PM
I think it depends on their schedule...or how hard they try to schedule better opponents. ::)

https://yumacs.com/sports/mens-basketball/schedule/2020-21

Lycoming tourney: Lycoming, Neumann, Penn St Schuylkill.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nyhoopstalk on April 17, 2020, 08:54:51 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on April 16, 2020, 04:46:17 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on April 16, 2020, 03:31:39 PM
Quote from: Smitty Oom on April 16, 2020, 03:29:20 PM
I might go more in depth later this weekend, but personally I think I would go to the South for the first two spots. #1 Emory and #2 RMC.

I think Emory would be my #1.

I think Ryan is putting Yeshiva #1. ;D

Losing Halpert and Katz is going to be more difficult for Yeshiva than most may realize. The amount of big shots that Halpert made and his ability to space the floor is something they may not be able to replace with what they have returning. Katz was the ultimate glue guy in the paint.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on April 17, 2020, 09:51:10 AM

Quote from: nyhoopstalk on April 17, 2020, 08:54:51 AM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on April 16, 2020, 04:46:17 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on April 16, 2020, 03:31:39 PM
Quote from: Smitty Oom on April 16, 2020, 03:29:20 PM
I might go more in depth later this weekend, but personally I think I would go to the South for the first two spots. #1 Emory and #2 RMC.

I think Emory would be my #1.

I think Ryan is putting Yeshiva #1. ;D

Losing Halpert and Katz is going to be more difficult for Yeshiva than most may realize. The amount of big shots that Halpert made and his ability to space the floor is something they may not be able to replace with what they have returning. Katz was the ultimate glue guy in the paint.

I do think Yeshiva loses more than some here are acknowledging.

That said, this starting lineup should be great:
G - Eitan Halpert, 5-11 Jr. 6.2 ppg, 2.0 apg
G - Ofek Reef, 6-1 Fr. 10.7 ppg, 2.6 rpg Skyline Rookie of the Year
G - Ryan Turell, 6-7 So. 23.9 ppg, 5.9 rpg, 3.4 apg 1st Team All-Skyline, Skyline POY
F - Gabriel Leifer, 6-5 Sr. 16.0 ppg, 11.5 rpg, 6.6 apg 1st Team All-Skyline
F - Caleb Milobsky, 6-6 Jr. 5.4 ppg, 3.6 rpg

I continue to struggle to some degree with preseason placement of Yeshiva due to their lack of "signature wins" in 2019-20. More than any team in the Sweet 16, I was really looking forward to seeing how the rest of the NCAA tournament played out for the Macs to better understand just how good they are.

Quote from: Titan Q on April 12, 2020, 09:54:15 AM
#8 Yeshiva
#58 WPI
#66 Williams
#153 New Jersey City
#156 PSU-Harrisburg

I just do not have a very good feel for what Yeshiva's record would have been last year with, say, Illinois Wesleyan or UW-Oshkosh's schedule.

They will definitely be in my top 8. I just don't know if they should be closer to #1 or #8.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on April 17, 2020, 10:48:43 AM

In fairness, I think Yeshiva expected to get more out of having Williams, Eastern Conn, and NJCU on their schedule. If they keep those three for just next year their schedule should look better instantly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on April 17, 2020, 10:50:30 AM

I expect Emory and RMC to be at the top of the heap next year to start as well, luckily we'll get an early answer to the debate between the two at the Great Lakes Invite at Marietta.

The Jackets and Eagles will meet on the first night of the event (November 20). Crossing my fingers we're playing basketball at that point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on April 17, 2020, 10:59:17 AM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on April 17, 2020, 10:48:43 AM
In fairness, I think Yeshiva expected to get more out of having Williams, Eastern Conn, and NJCU on their schedule. If they keep those three for just next year their schedule should look better instantly.

I have spoken to some people in the know, and right now Yeshiva is finding it hard to get good teams to play them. They have reached out to a bunch a top programs who have said no.

I'm pushing hard to get an Illinois Wesleyan/Yeshiva game on the schedule for 2021-22 in NYC. The schools are talking. That would fun.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on April 17, 2020, 11:54:44 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on April 17, 2020, 10:59:17 AM
I have spoken to some people in the know, and right now Yeshiva is finding it hard to get good teams to play them. They have reached out to a bunch a top programs who have said no.

Non-conference scheduling is so tricky because basically you're trying to find a bunch of teams that are good enough wins that it helps your SOS but not good enough to threaten your WL. If you're a top team like an Illinois Wesleyan, there just isn't enough benefit to get a team like that on your schedule.

I think that's why you see these teams schedule out years in advance. Yeshiva has played Williams for three years now, presumably building to this type of moment. Williams beat the brakes off of them the first two years, and then just as Yeshiva was building a program for this to be a potentially huge game, Williams had their worst season in 20+ years. It's a crapshoot.

I do wonder if Yeshiva ended up getting better a little sooner than Steinmetz expected, or maybe even wanted, just from a strictly scheduling point of view. Probably something similar happening to St. Joe's as well. If you're a team in the top half of a multi-bid league, why would you want to play a team that is going to go 27-4 with a low SOS? It's a lose-lose.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on April 17, 2020, 12:01:00 PM

Yeshiva and Scranton played annually during my years many moons ago. I remember particularly the Scranton Jewish community coming out to support the Yeshiva team in Scranton.
Renewing the series now would help upgrade both teams' schedule; I'll probably suggest it to the Scranton scheduler.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on April 17, 2020, 12:12:29 PM

I think it would be great for Randolph-Macon to schedule Yeshiva for the 20-21 season, if that's possible at this point. They were supposed to meet at R-MC in the Sweet 16 before the virus won all games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on April 17, 2020, 01:16:43 PM

Quote from: nyhoopstalk on April 17, 2020, 08:54:51 AM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on April 16, 2020, 04:46:17 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on April 16, 2020, 03:31:39 PM
Quote from: Smitty Oom on April 16, 2020, 03:29:20 PM
I might go more in depth later this weekend, but personally I think I would go to the South for the first two spots. #1 Emory and #2 RMC.

I think Emory would be my #1.

I think Ryan is putting Yeshiva #1. ;D

Losing Halpert and Katz is going to be more difficult for Yeshiva than most may realize. The amount of big shots that Halpert made and his ability to space the floor is something they may not be able to replace with what they have returning. Katz was the ultimate glue guy in the paint.

Halpert is a junior ... they aren't losing him. Leifer is maybe who you are thinking of, but everything I've heard is he is coming back (he is listed as a senior based on academics not eligibility). They do lose Katz, but they have a few players on the bench that could step up and maybe provide a different look than Katz did ... also remember, Katz missed a good chunk of this season due to injury so they were already getting used to him not being there.

EDIT: Sorry ... I had the wrong Halpert in my head. Yes, they lose one Halpert, but again I think there are players on the bench people don't realize how good they are. Time will tell I guess.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on April 17, 2020, 01:21:57 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on April 17, 2020, 11:54:44 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on April 17, 2020, 10:59:17 AM
I have spoken to some people in the know, and right now Yeshiva is finding it hard to get good teams to play them. They have reached out to a bunch a top programs who have said no.

Non-conference scheduling is so tricky because basically you're trying to find a bunch of teams that are good enough wins that it helps your SOS but not good enough to threaten your WL. If you're a top team like an Illinois Wesleyan, there just isn't enough benefit to get a team like that on your schedule.

I think that's why you see these teams schedule out years in advance. Yeshiva has played Williams for three years now, presumably building to this type of moment. Williams beat the brakes off of them the first two years, and then just as Yeshiva was building a program for this to be a potentially huge game, Williams had their worst season in 20+ years. It's a crapshoot.

I do wonder if Yeshiva ended up getting better a little sooner than Steinmetz expected, or maybe even wanted, just from a strictly scheduling point of view. Probably something similar happening to St. Joe's as well. If you're a team in the top half of a multi-bid league, why would you want to play a team that is going to go 27-4 with a low SOS? It's a lose-lose.

No ... this is where Yeshiva expected to me at this point in their arc. Obviously, based on what recruits they got. But they expected to be this good with what they have.

Scheduling can be difficult, but as Titan Q alluded to they have also been shot down by some good programs for a variety of reasons. I think I mentioned on air their hopes of playing in Baltimore this past season but it didn't work out.

I think the more they stay strong the more others will change their minds and play them. There is probably two minds going on: the fear that a team could lose to someone that everyone else thinks they should beat (even though many of us know better) and the misrepresentation of Yeshiva being a team from the past versus what they are now. Their conference isn't helping the conversation because when you look at the SOS part of it that could cause teams to say no ... but then they aren't learning what many think the NESCAC have learned: play the top of a below average conference and it helps you.

I think Yeshiva's scheduling will continue to improve ... and I think now they have a leg up on the recruiting trails. When players like Turrell are willing to turn down D1 offers to play at Yeshiva ... that can only be a benefit moving forward.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on April 17, 2020, 01:29:51 PM

I agree that they expected to be good this year with what they have, but just from a logistics standpoint, if they first played Williams in 2017-18, they probably scheduled them in 2016-17, when Ryan Turell was a junior in high school. I don't think at that point they expected to be a top 10 team and in the Sweet 16 three years out. Turell and Leifer's emergence changed the trajectory of the program, but overall I don't see how this rise was anything other than meteoric.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on April 17, 2020, 01:34:00 PM

You can go back and listen to the interviews Steinmetz has had on Hoopsville for the last six seasons. Top ten? Maybe not, but six years ago he was looking to build a Top 25 program that would be able to compete and succeed in the NCAA tournament. And I would argue that guys like Turell were on his radar. They can recruit juniors in DIII (changed a few years ago) and so the idea that Turell was on their radar and plans even three or four years ago I think is a legit consideration.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on April 17, 2020, 02:25:51 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on April 17, 2020, 11:54:44 AM
Non-conference scheduling is so tricky because basically you're trying to find a bunch of teams that are good enough wins that it helps your SOS but not good enough to threaten your WL. If you're a top team like an Illinois Wesleyan, there just isn't enough benefit to get a team like that on your schedule.

I don't think that is how every program/head coach thinks about scheduling. I think many want to go play other good teams for the purposes of competing, getting better, and giving their players cool experiences.

And as I mentioned, Illinois Wesleyan (Massey SOS #2 last year) is in a conversation with Yeshiva about playing as part of a holiday trip to NYC in 2021-22.

We could all find dozens of examples of strong programs that play awesome non-conference chedules. I think about Augustana's last year...UW-Oshkosh's, etc. A lot of teams play several non-conf games that threaten their winning %.

But yes, many strong programs, unfortunately, do dodge other good teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on April 18, 2020, 04:52:57 PM

Yeshiva also benefits by hosting a huge, national Jewish HS basketball tournament every year. They get the very best players from their recruiting base on campus on a regular basis. This was a huge tournament even before the team got good.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nyhoopstalk on April 20, 2020, 09:33:34 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on April 17, 2020, 10:59:17 AM
Quote from: SpringSt7 on April 17, 2020, 10:48:43 AM
In fairness, I think Yeshiva expected to get more out of having Williams, Eastern Conn, and NJCU on their schedule. If they keep those three for just next year their schedule should look better instantly.

I have spoken to some people in the know, and right now Yeshiva is finding it hard to get good teams to play them. They have reached out to a bunch a top programs who have said no.

I'm pushing hard to get an Illinois Wesleyan/Yeshiva game on the schedule for 2021-22 in NYC. The schools are talking. That would fun.

Based on proximity and name recognition, NYU and Yeshiva should play every year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on April 20, 2020, 11:32:15 PM

Quote from: nyhoopstalk on April 20, 2020, 09:33:34 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on April 17, 2020, 10:59:17 AM
Quote from: SpringSt7 on April 17, 2020, 10:48:43 AM
In fairness, I think Yeshiva expected to get more out of having Williams, Eastern Conn, and NJCU on their schedule. If they keep those three for just next year their schedule should look better instantly.

I have spoken to some people in the know, and right now Yeshiva is finding it hard to get good teams to play them. They have reached out to a bunch a top programs who have said no.

I'm pushing hard to get an Illinois Wesleyan/Yeshiva game on the schedule for 2021-22 in NYC. The schools are talking. That would fun.

Based on proximity and name recognition, NYU and Yeshiva should play every year.

It would be nice ... I know many who would be for it. Tapping into the UAA wouldn't hurt, though NYU hasn't been all that strong of an opponent in the OWP category.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on April 21, 2020, 02:29:38 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on April 20, 2020, 11:32:15 PM
Tapping into the UAA wouldn't hurt, though NYU hasn't been ~~all that~~ strong of an opponent in the OWP category.

I fixed it for you.

Sadly, NYU has not been close to relevant since 2015-2016.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on April 21, 2020, 02:59:47 PM

Yeah ... I was trying to couch my comments. Some people like to read what I write here and take it out of context or blow it out of proportion. SMH

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on April 21, 2020, 06:07:43 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on April 21, 2020, 02:59:47 PM
Yeah ... I was trying to couch my comments. Some people like to read what I write here and take it out of context or blow it out of proportion. SMH

That actually happens? Shocking.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on April 21, 2020, 10:09:08 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on April 21, 2020, 06:07:43 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on April 21, 2020, 02:59:47 PM
Yeah ... I was trying to couch my comments. Some people like to read what I write here and take it out of context or blow it out of proportion. SMH

That actually happens? Shocking.

I know ... right?!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on April 21, 2020, 10:09:43 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=9627f/28be7sftqex75v5h.jpg)

It has been a few years since Division III found itself at a place where so many important decisions needed to be made along with other events needing time and attention. However, never in NCAA history have we found ourselves with winter championships cut short, no spring sports at all, and more questions than answers for what might happen with fall sports and beyond.

COVID-19 has certainly made it's mark.

However, the coronavirus isn't the only important item in front of Division III that requires attention and decisions. Expanding and realigning regions in all sports is nearing the end of a multi-year process. The NCAA's effort to revamp it's student-athlete rules with "Names, Images, Likeness" (NIL) is at critical juncture, especially in DIII. And with the shutdown of 'March Madness' brought with it a sudden budget deficit.

That's just what Division III is dealing with overall. Individual schools are fighting just to keep the doors open. That could result in cutting sports, teams, or other challenges. That could cause conferences to tackle sudden changes in membership or sports sponsorships.

And of course, student-athletes and their well-being is even more important.

Plenty to be thinking about in Division III even athletes and teams are not competing right now.

On this special Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) Podcast, NCAA Vice President for Division III Dan Dutcher joins Dave McHugh for an extensive, in-depth, and detailed conversation on the "State of DIII." Dutcher talks about how the decisions to shut down winter and spring championships came to be. Plus, how COVID-19 continues to impact the division, NCAA, schools, and conferences around the country. Dutcher explains how this year's DIII budget was impacted and if there will be any impact down the road. And Dutcher discusses how NIL is taking form in DIII along with the latest on Regional Realignment and Expansion.

You can listen to the podcast here: https://bit.ly/3apilyF

Hoopsville broadcasts from the WBCA/NABC Studio. All guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline. The offseason plan is to do a podcast each month. The shows will be audio-only leading up to the start of the 2020-21 when we will restart the video shows.

If you have questions, ideas, or want to interact with the show, feel free to send them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options to the right.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
Hoopsville Season Archive: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: centconfwatcher on April 22, 2020, 05:35:02 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on April 16, 2020, 03:19:59 PM
A look at those 12 "Tier 1" teams...

(All players who scored 4.0 ppg+ in 2019-20. Roster year listed is from 2019-20.)

Albion (21-5, 12-2 MIAA)
F - Caden Ebeling, 6-7 Jr. 17.7 ppg, 8.3 rpg 1st Team All-MIAA
G - Jamezell Davis, Jr., 5-9 Jr. 16.6 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 3.0 apg 1st Team All-MIAA
F - Quinton Armstrong, 6-5 Jr. 12.4 ppg, 8.0 rpg
G - Cortez Garland, 6-0 So. 10.7 ppg, 2.2 rpg, 2.5 apg MIAA Defensive Player of the Year
G - MJ Barnes, 6-0 So. 7.3 ppg, 1.8 rpg
G - Juwan Perry, 6-2 Jr. 4.5 ppg, 2.5 rpg

Elmhurst (25-5, 11-5 CCIW)
G - Jake Rhode, 5-11 Jr. 20.8 ppg, 3.8 rpg, 4.1 apg 1st Team All-CCIW
F - Derek Dotlich, 6-3 Sr. 15.8 ppg, 3.9 rpg 2nd Team All-CCIW
C - Lavon Thomas, 6-5 Jr. 13.5 ppg, 8.1 rpg, 2.0 apg 2nd Team All-CCIW
F - Jay Militello, 6-4 Jr. 8.9 ppg, 5.9 rpg
G - Dominic Genco, 6-3 Jr. 7.1 ppg, 2.8 rpg
G - Wesley Hooker, 6-2 Fr. 5.3 ppg, 2.9 rpg
G - Nick Perry, 5-11 Jr. 4.5 ppg, 2.2 rpg, 2.5 apg
C - Ebrahim Jobe, 6-9 Jr. 4.5 ppg, 5.1 rpg

Emory (22-5, 11-3 UAA)
G - Romin Williams, 5-9 Jr. 16.3 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 2.1 apg 2nd Team All-UAA
G - Matthew Schner, 6-4 Jr. 15.5 ppg, 7.4 rpg, 2.9 apg 1st Team All-UAA, Co-UAA POY
F - Matt Davet, 6-7 Jr 14.0 ppg, 4.4 rpg
F - Lawrence Rowley, 6-5 Jr. 13.9 ppg, 8.6 rpg 2nd Team All-UAA, UAA Defensive POY
G - Nick Stuck, 6-2 Jr. 9.3 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 5.3 apg 2nd Team All-UAA
F - Mason Johnson, 6-7 So. 7.6 ppg, 4.3 rpg
G - Luke Morrison, 6-4 Jr. 4.3 ppg, 2.0 rpg

Illinois Wesleyan (19-9, 11-5 CCIW)
G - Grant Wolfe, 5-11 Jr. 18.0 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 3.6 apg (only played 7 games due to injury)
G - Peter Lambesis, 6-4 So. 12.3 ppg, 3.4 rpg, 2.5 apg 2nd Team All-CCIW
G - Keondre Schumacher, 5-11 So. 12.0 ppg, 1.9 apg
F - Doug Wallen, 6-5 Jr. 11.2 ppg, 5.6 rpg
F - Matt Leritz, 6-7 So. 10.9 ppg, 5.5 rpg 1st Team All-CCIW
G - Luke Yoder, 6-0 Fr. 10.4 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 2.3 apg CCIW Freshman of the Year
F - Charlie Bair, 6-7 Jr. 9.0 ppg, 8.3 rpg
G - Cory Noe, 6-2 So. 8.8 ppg, 2.3 rpg

Johns Hopkins (24-4, 16-2 Centennial)
G - Conner Delaney, 6-0 Jr. 17.5 ppg, 3.7 rpg, 4.9 apg 1st Team All-CC, CC POY
F - Tom Quarry, 6-6 So. 13.4 ppg, 4.5 rpg 2nd Team All-CC
G - Joey Kern, 6-1 Jr. 8.7 ppg, 3.1 rpg, 2.1 apg
G - Braeden Johnson, 6-6 So. 8.3 ppg, 3.2 rpg
F - Harry O'Neill, 6-6 Sr. 8.2 ppg, 4.7 rpg
G - Ethan Bartlett, 6-3 So. 8.0 ppg, 5.4 rpg
F - Chid Nnake, 6-6 So. 4.8 ppg, 4.3 rpg
G - Carson James, 6-2 Fr. 4.8 ppg, 2.1 rpg

Middlebury (21-6, 6-4 NESCAC)
G - Jack Farrell, 6-1 Jr. 16.8 ppg, 4.8 rpg, 3.4 apg 2nd Team All-NESCAC
G - Max Bosco, 6-0 Jr. 14.6 ppg, 2.9 rpg
G - Tommy Eastman, 6-4 Jr. 13.6 ppg, 6.7 rpg 2nd Team All-NESCAC
F - Matt Folger, 6-8 Sr. 11.7 ppg, 9.5 rpg, 2.0 apg
G - Griffin Kornaker, 6-1 Jr. 9.3 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 4.5 apg
F - Ryan Cahill, 6-7 Jr. 6.7 ppg, 3.6 rpg
~~G - Perry DeLorenzo, 6-4 Sr. 5.3 ppg, 1.5 rpg~~

Randolph-Macon (28-2, 15-1 ODAC)
G - Buzz Anthony, 5-11 Jr. 16.4 ppg, 5.7 rpg, 6.2 apg 1st Team All-ODAC, ODAC POY
F - Miles Mallory, 6-5 Fr. 12.3 ppg, 7.8 rpg ODAC Rookie of the Year
G - Josh Talbert, 6-2 Fr. 10.7 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 2.1 apg
F - Ian Robertson, 6-7 So. 8.5 ppg, 3.9 rpg
G - Corey Bays, 6-3 Sr. 7.7 ppg, 2.4 rpg
G - Terry Woods, 5-11 Jr. 7.3 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 2.6 apg
F - David Funderburg, 6-7 Jr. 5.6 ppg, 3.5 rpg
G - Korey Turner, 6-0 Sr. 4.2 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 2.7 apg

St. Joseph CT (26-3, 11-0 GNAC)
G - Delshawn Jackson Jr., 5-10 So. 21.5 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 2.7 apg 1st Team All-GNAC
F - Jordan Powell, 6-6 Jr. 15.3 ppg, 7.4 rpg 2nd Team All-GNAC
G - Jaecee Martin, 5-10 So. 14.9 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 7.5 apg 1st Team All-GNAC, Defensive POY
G - Taelon Martin, 6-5 Fr. 10.6 ppg, 3.9 rpg GNAC Rookie of the Year
G - Ryan O'Neill, 6-5 So. 10.0 ppg, 4.9 rpg
F - Tyree Mitchell, 6-4 So. 5.8 ppg, 1.9 rpg
F - Jake Sullivan, 6-5 So. 4.3 ppg, 3.9 rpg

St. Thomas (26-3, 19-1 MIAA)
G - Anders Nelson, 6-0 So. 15.9 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 2.4 apg 1st Team All-MIAC
F - Elijah Hannah, 6-3 Sr. 11.3 ppg, 3.8 rpg 3rd Team All-MIAC, Sixth Man of the Year
F - Tommy Anderson, 6-4 Sr. 10.7 ppg, 2.6 rpg 3rd Team All-MIAC
G - Riley Miller, 6-2 So. 8.5 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 2.7 apg 2nd Team All-MIAC
G - Burt Hedstrom, 6-4 Jr. 8.0 ppg, 4.7 rpg
G - Ryan Lindberg, 6-3 Jr. 6.8 ppg, 2.6 rpg HM All-MIAC, All Defensive Team
G - Zach Theisen, 6-0 So. 5.3 ppg, 1.9 rpg
G - Will Engels, 6-5 Fr. 4.6 ppg, 1.7 rpg
G - Kevin Cunningham, 6-0 So. 4.1 ppg, 1.8 rpg

Tufts (23-6, 8-2 NESCAC)
C - Luke Rogers, 6-8 Jr. 16.6 ppg, 11.9 rpg 1st Team All-NESCAC, NESCAC POY
G - Eric Savage, 6-3 Sr. 15.8 ppg, 6.9 ppg, 3.4 apg 2nd Team All-NESCAC
G - Brennan Morris, 6-6 Jr. 12.0 ppg, 3.8 rpg
G - Tyler Aronson, 6-2 So. 10.6 ppg, 3.0 ppg, 2.1 apg
G - Dylan Thoerner, 6-6 Fr. 7.5 ppg, 2.4 rpg, 1.1 apg
G - Carson Cohen, 6-3 So. 7.2 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 3.5 apg
G - Will Brady, 6-1 Jr. 4.4 ppg, 2.1 rpg

UW-Platteville (23-5, 12-2 WIAC)
G - Carter Voelker, 6-3 Sr. 15.5 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 3.8 apg All-WIAC, Co-WIAC POY
G - Quentin Shields, 5-9 Jr. 14.9 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 2.8 apg All-WIAC, All Defensive Team
F - Kyle Tuma, 6-5 So. 10.8 ppg, 5.9 rpg HM All-WIAC
F - Justin Stovall, 6-7 Jr. 10.2 ppg, 6.2 rpg HM All-WIAC, All Defensive Team
G - Blake McCann, 6-3 So. 8.1 ppg, 1.4 rpg
G - Drew Gunnink, 6-0 Jr. 7.0 ppg, 2.3 rpg
F - Justin Fox, 6-4 Jr. 5.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg

Yeshiva (29-1, 16-0 Skyline)
G - Ryan Turell, 6-7 So. 23.9 ppg, 5.9 rpg, 3.4 apg 1st Team All-Skyline, Skyline POY
G - Simcha Halpert, 6-3 Sr. 16.7 ppg, 2.8 rpg, 2.1 apg 2nd Team All-Skyline
F - Gabriel Leifer, 6-5 Sr. 16.0 ppg, 11.5 rpg, 6.6 apg 1st Team All-Skyline
G - Ofek Reef, 6-1 Fr. 10.7 ppg, 2.6 rpg Skyline Rookie of the Year
G - Eitan Halpert, 5-11 Jr. 6.2 ppg, 2.0 apg
~~G - Bar Alluf, 6-4 Sr. 5.4 ppg, 2.2 rpg~~
F - Caleb Milobsky, 6-6 Jr. 5.4 ppg, 3.6 rpg
~~F - Daniel Katz, 6-4 Sr. 4.8 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 2.2 apg~~

I don't know if I'm as sold on Illinois Wesleyan as you are Titan Q, which is understandable, lol! But a 9 loss team being a sure fire top 10 team after playing some games last year (both Wheaton losses, getting blown out by Concordia Texas, two of those at full strength if I'm not mistaken) but we will see in the year to come, teams definitely get better and Freshmen can be a huge part of a team's success/identity.

I am very convinced that Swarthmore and Johns Hopkins are sure fire top 10 teams, if not top 5. The Centennial Conference championship game was the best D3 game I've watched all year and it seems like that could've been the game between the two best teams. Swarthmore loses Odell and Shafer but they play a style of basketball where their production is replaceable by guys waiting in the wings (Caprise, Tucker, among others) who in fact dominated when they got their chance against other centennial conference opponents. You add that to Harkins, Visconti, and how good Vinny Deangelo played down the stretch, that's a top ten team.

Also, Johns Hopkins was right on that Swarthmore level when they won the CC championship. Delaney is going to be a NPOY candidate in his senior year, maybe even the favorite and they only lose a single player from that year's team who's one of the best in school history. Chid Nnake, probably the 6th man of the year in the Centennial replaces that graduation senior center Harry O'Neil and this team is no doubt a top 5 team in the country.

Also, Muhlenberg, who was one shot away from the Centennial Conference Championship, loses one senior as well, Matt Gnias. They return all of their other scoring and sophomore sensation first-team all league Dan Gaines is without a doubt the second best point guard in the league.

Centennial should have 3 teams ranked and will most likely get three teams into the tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on April 22, 2020, 08:20:41 AM

Quote from: centconfwatcher on April 22, 2020, 05:35:02 AM
I don't know if I'm as sold on Illinois Wesleyan as you are Titan Q, which is understandable, lol! But a 9 loss team being a sure fire top 10 team after playing some games last year (both Wheaton losses, getting blown out by Concordia Texas, two of those at full strength if I'm not mistaken) but we will see in the year to come, teams definitely get better and Freshmen can be a huge part of a team's success/identity.

This is the purpose of the exercise - to get as many opinions in the conversation as possible.

Regarding IWU, to be exact, I have them in the top 12 (not 10). There are 12 teams in that "Tier 1."

The Titans certainly lost a couple bad ones. (You mentioned the Concordia loss in TX. IWU lost its starting PG and leading scorer, Grant Wolfe, the day before that game during a practice in TX.) On the flip side, they won 19 vs what Massey says was the 2nd strongest schedule in the country. IWU finished in a CCIW tie with Elmhurst, and had good wins vs North Central (Sweet 16), Elmhurst (Sweet 16), and 2 vs Augustana (per Massey, #19 and the 2nd best team not in the NCAA tourney field).

With IWU returning its top 8 scorers from a team that finished 3rd in the CCIW and played in the conference championship game, I guess the question is which 12 teams would you rank ahead of them? To come up with those 12 you'll have to dip into some teams that lose a bunch.

Based on what I am seeing in terms of who returns what, it seems to me both IWU and Elmhurst are pretty safe top 12 teams going in.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: centconfwatcher on April 22, 2020, 03:09:29 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on April 22, 2020, 08:20:41 AM
Quote from: centconfwatcher on April 22, 2020, 05:35:02 AM
I don't know if I'm as sold on Illinois Wesleyan as you are Titan Q, which is understandable, lol! But a 9 loss team being a sure fire top 10 team after playing some games last year (both Wheaton losses, getting blown out by Concordia Texas, two of those at full strength if I'm not mistaken) but we will see in the year to come, teams definitely get better and Freshmen can be a huge part of a team's success/identity.

This is the purpose of the exercise - to get as many opinions in the conversation as possible.

Regarding IWU, to be exact, I have them in the top 12 (not 10). There are 12 teams in that "Tier 1."

The Titans certainly lost a couple bad ones. (You mentioned the Concordia loss in TX. IWU lost its starting PG and leading scorer, Grant Wolfe, the day before that game during a practice in TX.) On the flip side, they won 19 vs what Massey says was the 2nd strongest schedule in the country. IWU finished in a CCIW tie with Elmhurst, and had good wins vs North Central (Sweet 16), Elmhurst (Sweet 16), and 2 vs Augustana (per Massey, #19 and the 2nd best team not in the NCAA tourney field).

With IWU returning its top 8 scorers from a team that finished 3rd in the CCIW and played in the conference championship game, I guess the question is which 12 teams would you rank ahead of them? To come up with those 12 you'll have to dip into some teams that lose a bunch.

Based on what I am seeing in terms of who returns what, it seems to me both IWU and Elmhurst are pretty safe top 12 teams going in.

I think IWU benefits from the CCIW being much deeper and having better teams in the middle and at the bottom of the pack than some leagues on the east coast. If you put a team like Christopher Newport say into the CCIW, I'm not sure that they don't win as many games or more than the league's top, but they lose out on a good strength of schedule number because of the conference games they have to play. My top 25 right now:

1. RMC
2. Emory
3. Johns Hopkins
4. Yeshiva
5. Swarthmore
6. Elmhurst
7. St. Thomas
8. Platteville
9. St. John's
10. NWU

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on April 22, 2020, 03:31:48 PM

But what is your Top 12?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on April 22, 2020, 06:20:38 PM

Quote from: centconfwatcher on April 22, 2020, 03:09:29 PM
1. RMC
2. Emory
3. Johns Hopkins
4. Yeshiva
5. Swarthmore
6. Elmhurst
7. St. Thomas
8. Platteville
9. St. John's
10. NWU

I'm curious why the separation between Elmhurst and IWU? Both 11-5 over the same CCIW schedule; regular season split; IWU lost a close game in the conference tournament title without Wolfe, Yoder, and Bair. IWU returns its top 8; Elmhurst loses 2nd leading scorer, 2nd Team All-CCIW Dotlich.

Nebraska Wesleyan #10 in the preseason after losing all 5 starters?
* Schimonitz (25.4 ppg, 3.9 rpg, 5.6 apg)
* Reimers (14.4 ppg, 8.4 rpg)
* Hiller (14.3 ppg, 5.4 rpg)
* Bahe (10.3 ppg, 6.0 rpg, 2.7 apg)
* Dirks (9.7 ppg, 5.1 rpg)

* Swarthmore #5 after losing O'Dell (10.7 ppg, 8.4 rpg, 2.3 apg) and Shafer (10.5 ppg, 7.6 rpg, 2.1)?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on April 22, 2020, 08:16:52 PM

IWU was very young and very injured; both of those things portend improvement in the year to come. They are very likely to be the best team in the CCIW. I can't easily recall a year that didn't mean Top 10 or near abouts, nationally.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jmcozenlaw on April 23, 2020, 10:59:18 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on April 22, 2020, 08:16:52 PM
IWU was very young and very injured; both of those things portend improvement in the year to come. They are very likely to be the best team in the CCIW. I can't easily recall a year that didn't mean Top 10 or near abouts, nationally.

Ryan, off topic question here but in your opinion, if football is moved to the Spring (something more and more folks are discussing at the D-1 level), in your opinion what would/could that mean for hoops and the mid-October start to practice and first week of November games?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on April 23, 2020, 01:37:25 PM

They won't move football to the Spring. I could see some conferences decide to do it, but there won't be any NCAA play in the Spring. There are just too many schools unequipped to do it.

They might do it for D1, but they almost can't do it for D3 - Dutcher basically said as much on Dave's podcast.

Again, I could see some big conferences doing it to keep things moving and give the kids a chance, but I still believe they'll have fall sports operate as usual, just without spectators. I guess this assumes we'll have decent testing capacity by then, but I'm optimistic on that front, too.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on April 23, 2020, 01:39:34 PM

Quote from: jmcozenlaw on April 23, 2020, 10:59:18 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on April 22, 2020, 08:16:52 PM
IWU was very young and very injured; both of those things portend improvement in the year to come. They are very likely to be the best team in the CCIW. I can't easily recall a year that didn't mean Top 10 or near abouts, nationally.

Ryan, off topic question here but in your opinion, if football is moved to the Spring (something more and more folks are discussing at the D-1 level), in your opinion what would/could that mean for hoops and the mid-October start to practice and first week of November games?

I'll jump in because this was kind of the topic of a wild card question with Dan Dutcher (everyone should listen to the podcast; long, but full of good info).

I don't think this is a topic worth discussing now because we are a ways a way from this, however I do get the sense from Dan and others I've talked to that in DIII this could be impossible. Fields, trainers, personnel, support staff, practice facilities, game availability, locker rooms, the list is LONG on things most DIII institutions are NOT going to have enough of for support even just football being added to the mix in the spring. Furthermore, DI FBS (specifically) is NOT technically an NCAA sport. Yes, the regular season is overseen by the NCAA and the bowls are "certified," but the NCAA has nothing to do with the bowl season and doesn't get a single penny from ANY football from the start until the end. So, FBS could do their own thing while the rest (FCS and down) do something else - or don't have it (just to point the extreme).

As for how it might impact basketball, the season isn't being shifted. Basketball would still start on time when we expect it. March Madness and that schedule will dictate that. I don't see any fall sports moving (though unlikely) to impact winter sports.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on April 23, 2020, 04:22:16 PM

I posted this elsewhere a couple of weeks ago, but it seems to fit here as well and definitely supports Dave's point about all the personnel involved beyond players and coaches.

"Sports Illustrated article on why sports are unlikely to return soon. Granted this is focused on pro sports, but most of the issues apply to sports at any level."

https://www.si.com/mlb/2020/04/10/sports-arent-coming-back-soon?fbclid=IwAR0_XGbPRbR1lVF-4vFGvzOWwGvSLGi8leT7VBQesBWiRA6beJwGQTLH8HI

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jmcozenlaw on April 23, 2020, 06:02:37 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on April 23, 2020, 01:37:25 PM

They won't move football to the Spring. I could see some conferences decide to do it, but there won't be any NCAA play in the Spring. There are just too many schools unequipped to do it.

They might do it for D1, but they almost can't do it for D3 - Dutcher basically said as much on Dave's podcast.

Again, I could see some big conferences doing it to keep things moving and give the kids a chance, but I still believe they'll have fall sports operate as usual, just without spectators. I guess this assumes we'll have decent testing capacity by then, but I'm optimistic on that front, too.

From your lips to God's ears!! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jmcozenlaw on April 23, 2020, 06:05:27 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on April 23, 2020, 01:39:34 PM
Quote from: jmcozenlaw on April 23, 2020, 10:59:18 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on April 22, 2020, 08:16:52 PM
IWU was very young and very injured; both of those things portend improvement in the year to come. They are very likely to be the best team in the CCIW. I can't easily recall a year that didn't mean Top 10 or near abouts, nationally.

Ryan, off topic question here but in your opinion, if football is moved to the Spring (something more and more folks are discussing at the D-1 level), in your opinion what would/could that mean for hoops and the mid-October start to practice and first week of November games?

I'll jump in because this was kind of the topic of a wild card question with Dan Dutcher (everyone should listen to the podcast; long, but full of good info).

I don't think this is a topic worth discussing now because we are a ways a way from this, however I do get the sense from Dan and others I've talked to that in DIII this could be impossible. Fields, trainers, personnel, support staff, practice facilities, game availability, locker rooms, the list is LONG on things most DIII institutions are NOT going to have enough of for support even just football being added to the mix in the spring. Furthermore, DI FBS (specifically) is NOT technically an NCAA sport. Yes, the regular season is overseen by the NCAA and the bowls are "certified," but the NCAA has nothing to do with the bowl season and doesn't get a single penny from ANY football from the start until the end. So, FBS could do their own thing while the rest (FCS and down) do something else - or don't have it (just to point the extreme).

As for how it might impact basketball, the season isn't being shifted. Basketball would still start on time when we expect it. March Madness and that schedule will dictate that. I don't see any fall sports moving (though unlikely) to impact winter sports.

Thanks Dave!! I will be enjoying that podcast, post-NFL Draft (yes, I am one of those geeks, especially this year;) ) on Sunday, at let's say, 7:00pm Eastern Time........as that time was so awesome on many Sunday's from November through March!! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on April 24, 2020, 01:03:01 PM

Quote from: jmcozenlaw on April 23, 2020, 06:05:27 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on April 23, 2020, 01:39:34 PM
Quote from: jmcozenlaw on April 23, 2020, 10:59:18 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on April 22, 2020, 08:16:52 PM
IWU was very young and very injured; both of those things portend improvement in the year to come. They are very likely to be the best team in the CCIW. I can't easily recall a year that didn't mean Top 10 or near abouts, nationally.

Ryan, off topic question here but in your opinion, if football is moved to the Spring (something more and more folks are discussing at the D-1 level), in your opinion what would/could that mean for hoops and the mid-October start to practice and first week of November games?

I'll jump in because this was kind of the topic of a wild card question with Dan Dutcher (everyone should listen to the podcast; long, but full of good info).

I don't think this is a topic worth discussing now because we are a ways a way from this, however I do get the sense from Dan and others I've talked to that in DIII this could be impossible. Fields, trainers, personnel, support staff, practice facilities, game availability, locker rooms, the list is LONG on things most DIII institutions are NOT going to have enough of for support even just football being added to the mix in the spring. Furthermore, DI FBS (specifically) is NOT technically an NCAA sport. Yes, the regular season is overseen by the NCAA and the bowls are "certified," but the NCAA has nothing to do with the bowl season and doesn't get a single penny from ANY football from the start until the end. So, FBS could do their own thing while the rest (FCS and down) do something else - or don't have it (just to point the extreme).

As for how it might impact basketball, the season isn't being shifted. Basketball would still start on time when we expect it. March Madness and that schedule will dictate that. I don't see any fall sports moving (though unlikely) to impact winter sports.

Thanks Dave!! I will be enjoying that podcast, post-NFL Draft (yes, I am one of those geeks, especially this year;) ) on Sunday, at let's say, 7:00pm Eastern Time........as that time was so awesome on many Sunday's from November through March!! :)

Glad to hear! Though, I think Thursday nights were pretty good on top of Sundays :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jmcozenlaw on April 24, 2020, 08:01:48 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on April 24, 2020, 01:03:01 PM
Quote from: jmcozenlaw on April 23, 2020, 06:05:27 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on April 23, 2020, 01:39:34 PM
Quote from: jmcozenlaw on April 23, 2020, 10:59:18 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on April 22, 2020, 08:16:52 PM
IWU was very young and very injured; both of those things portend improvement in the year to come. They are very likely to be the best team in the CCIW. I can't easily recall a year that didn't mean Top 10 or near abouts, nationally.

Ryan, off topic question here but in your opinion, if football is moved to the Spring (something more and more folks are discussing at the D-1 level), in your opinion what would/could that mean for hoops and the mid-October start to practice and first week of November games?

I'll jump in because this was kind of the topic of a wild card question with Dan Dutcher (everyone should listen to the podcast; long, but full of good info).

I don't think this is a topic worth discussing now because we are a ways a way from this, however I do get the sense from Dan and others I've talked to that in DIII this could be impossible. Fields, trainers, personnel, support staff, practice facilities, game availability, locker rooms, the list is LONG on things most DIII institutions are NOT going to have enough of for support even just football being added to the mix in the spring. Furthermore, DI FBS (specifically) is NOT technically an NCAA sport. Yes, the regular season is overseen by the NCAA and the bowls are "certified," but the NCAA has nothing to do with the bowl season and doesn't get a single penny from ANY football from the start until the end. So, FBS could do their own thing while the rest (FCS and down) do something else - or don't have it (just to point the extreme).

As for how it might impact basketball, the season isn't being shifted. Basketball would still start on time when we expect it. March Madness and that schedule will dictate that. I don't see any fall sports moving (though unlikely) to impact winter sports.

Thanks Dave!! I will be enjoying that podcast, post-NFL Draft (yes, I am one of those geeks, especially this year;) ) on Sunday, at let's say, 7:00pm Eastern Time........as that time was so awesome on many Sunday's from November through March!! :)

Glad to hear! Though, I think Thursday nights were pretty good on top of Sundays :)

Indeed!!!!! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on May 14, 2020, 09:37:18 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on April 16, 2020, 03:19:59 PM
A look at those 12 "Tier 1" teams...

(All players who scored 4.0 ppg+ in 2019-20. Roster year listed is from 2019-20.)

Albion (21-5, 12-2 MIAA)
F - Caden Ebeling, 6-7 Jr. 17.7 ppg, 8.3 rpg 1st Team All-MIAA
G - Jamezell Davis, Jr., 5-9 Jr. 16.6 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 3.0 apg 1st Team All-MIAA
F - Quinton Armstrong, 6-5 Jr. 12.4 ppg, 8.0 rpg
G - Cortez Garland, 6-0 So. 10.7 ppg, 2.2 rpg, 2.5 apg MIAA Defensive Player of the Year
G - MJ Barnes, 6-0 So. 7.3 ppg, 1.8 rpg
G - Juwan Perry, 6-2 Jr. 4.5 ppg, 2.5 rpg

Elmhurst (25-5, 11-5 CCIW)
G - Jake Rhode, 5-11 Jr. 20.8 ppg, 3.8 rpg, 4.1 apg 1st Team All-CCIW
F - Derek Dotlich, 6-3 Sr. 15.8 ppg, 3.9 rpg 2nd Team All-CCIW
C - Lavon Thomas, 6-5 Jr. 13.5 ppg, 8.1 rpg, 2.0 apg 2nd Team All-CCIW
F - Jay Militello, 6-4 Jr. 8.9 ppg, 5.9 rpg
G - Dominic Genco, 6-3 Jr. 7.1 ppg, 2.8 rpg
G - Wesley Hooker, 6-2 Fr. 5.3 ppg, 2.9 rpg
G - Nick Perry, 5-11 Jr. 4.5 ppg, 2.2 rpg, 2.5 apg
C - Ebrahim Jobe, 6-9 Jr. 4.5 ppg, 5.1 rpg

Emory (22-5, 11-3 UAA)
G - Romin Williams, 5-9 Jr. 16.3 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 2.1 apg 2nd Team All-UAA
G - Matthew Schner, 6-4 Jr. 15.5 ppg, 7.4 rpg, 2.9 apg 1st Team All-UAA, Co-UAA POY
F - Matt Davet, 6-7 Jr 14.0 ppg, 4.4 rpg
F - Lawrence Rowley, 6-5 Jr. 13.9 ppg, 8.6 rpg 2nd Team All-UAA, UAA Defensive POY
G - Nick Stuck, 6-2 Jr. 9.3 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 5.3 apg 2nd Team All-UAA
F - Mason Johnson, 6-7 So. 7.6 ppg, 4.3 rpg
G - Luke Morrison, 6-4 Jr. 4.3 ppg, 2.0 rpg

Illinois Wesleyan (19-9, 11-5 CCIW)
G - Grant Wolfe, 5-11 Jr. 18.0 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 3.6 apg (only played 7 games due to injury)
G - Peter Lambesis, 6-4 So. 12.3 ppg, 3.4 rpg, 2.5 apg 2nd Team All-CCIW
G - Keondre Schumacher, 5-11 So. 12.0 ppg, 1.9 apg
F - Doug Wallen, 6-5 Jr. 11.2 ppg, 5.6 rpg
F - Matt Leritz, 6-7 So. 10.9 ppg, 5.5 rpg 1st Team All-CCIW
G - Luke Yoder, 6-0 Fr. 10.4 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 2.3 apg CCIW Freshman of the Year
F - Charlie Bair, 6-7 Jr. 9.0 ppg, 8.3 rpg
G - Cory Noe, 6-2 So. 8.8 ppg, 2.3 rpg

Johns Hopkins (24-4, 16-2 Centennial)
G - Conner Delaney, 6-0 Jr. 17.5 ppg, 3.7 rpg, 4.9 apg 1st Team All-CC, CC POY
F - Tom Quarry, 6-6 So. 13.4 ppg, 4.5 rpg 2nd Team All-CC
G - Joey Kern, 6-1 Jr. 8.7 ppg, 3.1 rpg, 2.1 apg
G - Braeden Johnson, 6-6 So. 8.3 ppg, 3.2 rpg
F - Harry O'Neill, 6-6 Sr. 8.2 ppg, 4.7 rpg
G - Ethan Bartlett, 6-3 So. 8.0 ppg, 5.4 rpg
F - Chid Nnake, 6-6 So. 4.8 ppg, 4.3 rpg
G - Carson James, 6-2 Fr. 4.8 ppg, 2.1 rpg

Middlebury (21-6, 6-4 NESCAC)
G - Jack Farrell, 6-1 Jr. 16.8 ppg, 4.8 rpg, 3.4 apg 2nd Team All-NESCAC
G - Max Bosco, 6-0 Jr. 14.6 ppg, 2.9 rpg
G - Tommy Eastman, 6-4 Jr. 13.6 ppg, 6.7 rpg 2nd Team All-NESCAC
F - Matt Folger, 6-8 Sr. 11.7 ppg, 9.5 rpg, 2.0 apg
G - Griffin Kornaker, 6-1 Jr. 9.3 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 4.5 apg
F - Ryan Cahill, 6-7 Jr. 6.7 ppg, 3.6 rpg
~~G - Perry DeLorenzo, 6-4 Sr. 5.3 ppg, 1.5 rpg~~

Randolph-Macon (28-2, 15-1 ODAC)
G - Buzz Anthony, 5-11 Jr. 16.4 ppg, 5.7 rpg, 6.2 apg 1st Team All-ODAC, ODAC POY
F - Miles Mallory, 6-5 Fr. 12.3 ppg, 7.8 rpg ODAC Rookie of the Year
G - Josh Talbert, 6-2 Fr. 10.7 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 2.1 apg
F - Ian Robertson, 6-7 So. 8.5 ppg, 3.9 rpg
G - Corey Bays, 6-3 Sr. 7.7 ppg, 2.4 rpg
G - Terry Woods, 5-11 Jr. 7.3 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 2.6 apg
F - David Funderburg, 6-7 Jr. 5.6 ppg, 3.5 rpg
G - Korey Turner, 6-0 Sr. 4.2 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 2.7 apg

St. Joseph CT (26-3, 11-0 GNAC)
G - Delshawn Jackson Jr., 5-10 So. 21.5 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 2.7 apg 1st Team All-GNAC
F - Jordan Powell, 6-6 Jr. 15.3 ppg, 7.4 rpg 2nd Team All-GNAC
G - Jaecee Martin, 5-10 So. 14.9 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 7.5 apg 1st Team All-GNAC, Defensive POY
G - Taelon Martin, 6-5 Fr. 10.6 ppg, 3.9 rpg GNAC Rookie of the Year
G - Ryan O'Neill, 6-5 So. 10.0 ppg, 4.9 rpg
F - Tyree Mitchell, 6-4 So. 5.8 ppg, 1.9 rpg
F - Jake Sullivan, 6-5 So. 4.3 ppg, 3.9 rpg

St. Thomas (26-3, 19-1 MIAA)
G - Anders Nelson, 6-0 So. 15.9 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 2.4 apg 1st Team All-MIAC
F - Elijah Hannah, 6-3 Sr. 11.3 ppg, 3.8 rpg 3rd Team All-MIAC, Sixth Man of the Year
F - Tommy Anderson, 6-4 Sr. 10.7 ppg, 2.6 rpg 3rd Team All-MIAC
G - Riley Miller, 6-2 So. 8.5 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 2.7 apg 2nd Team All-MIAC
G - Burt Hedstrom, 6-4 Jr. 8.0 ppg, 4.7 rpg
G - Ryan Lindberg, 6-3 Jr. 6.8 ppg, 2.6 rpg HM All-MIAC, All Defensive Team
G - Zach Theisen, 6-0 So. 5.3 ppg, 1.9 rpg
G - Will Engels, 6-5 Fr. 4.6 ppg, 1.7 rpg
G - Kevin Cunningham, 6-0 So. 4.1 ppg, 1.8 rpg

Tufts (23-6, 8-2 NESCAC)
C - Luke Rogers, 6-8 Jr. 16.6 ppg, 11.9 rpg 1st Team All-NESCAC, NESCAC POY
G - Eric Savage, 6-3 Sr. 15.8 ppg, 6.9 ppg, 3.4 apg 2nd Team All-NESCAC
G - Brennan Morris, 6-6 Jr. 12.0 ppg, 3.8 rpg
G - Tyler Aronson, 6-2 So. 10.6 ppg, 3.0 ppg, 2.1 apg
G - Dylan Thoerner, 6-6 Fr. 7.5 ppg, 2.4 rpg, 1.1 apg
G - Carson Cohen, 6-3 So. 7.2 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 3.5 apg
G - Will Brady, 6-1 Jr. 4.4 ppg, 2.1 rpg

UW-Platteville (23-5, 12-2 WIAC)
G - Carter Voelker, 6-3 Sr. 15.5 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 3.8 apg All-WIAC, Co-WIAC POY
G - Quentin Shields, 5-9 Jr. 14.9 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 2.8 apg All-WIAC, All Defensive Team
F - Kyle Tuma, 6-5 So. 10.8 ppg, 5.9 rpg HM All-WIAC
F - Justin Stovall, 6-7 Jr. 10.2 ppg, 6.2 rpg HM All-WIAC, All Defensive Team
G - Blake McCann, 6-3 So. 8.1 ppg, 1.4 rpg
G - Drew Gunnink, 6-0 Jr. 7.0 ppg, 2.3 rpg
F - Justin Fox, 6-4 Jr. 5.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg

Yeshiva (29-1, 16-0 Skyline)
G - Ryan Turell, 6-7 So. 23.9 ppg, 5.9 rpg, 3.4 apg 1st Team All-Skyline, Skyline POY
G - Simcha Halpert, 6-3 Sr. 16.7 ppg, 2.8 rpg, 2.1 apg 2nd Team All-Skyline
F - Gabriel Leifer, 6-5 Sr. 16.0 ppg, 11.5 rpg, 6.6 apg 1st Team All-Skyline
G - Ofek Reef, 6-1 Fr. 10.7 ppg, 2.6 rpg Skyline Rookie of the Year
G - Eitan Halpert, 5-11 Jr. 6.2 ppg, 2.0 apg
~~G - Bar Alluf, 6-4 Sr. 5.4 ppg, 2.2 rpg~~
F - Caleb Milobsky, 6-6 Jr. 5.4 ppg, 3.6 rpg
~~F - Daniel Katz, 6-4 Sr. 4.8 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 2.2 apg~~

Whether from this list or not, I'd love to hear some opinions on the Top 10 for 2020-21 preseason.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on May 14, 2020, 11:08:08 AM

If I was making a list of New England contenders, it would go something like this:

1. Tufts - Eric Savage is a big loss but Tufts played two strong frosh at his position. Everyone else is back, and Rogers is a legit first-team all-American heading into the season. Top ten pre-season team.

2. St. Joseph's - I'm higher on them than most, and there is always a chance they lose a guy or two to transfer, but if they bring everyone back and add even one ace shooter (three point shooting was a big weakness last year), they will be really scary. Their backcourt duo is ridiculously good and now very experienced. They are also a destination for big time transfers for sure. Borderline top ten pre-season team.

3. Middlebury -- loaded senior class, probably right there with Emory and Elmhurst as the best in the country, but a bit thin behind that. If Alex Sobel returns (Midd folks seem to think he will), they are really loaded. If not, there is a big hole in the middle. With Sobel, a potential top ten team, without him, still top twenty.

4. WPI -- return nearly everyone and add a few highly-regarded big guy recruits. Very deep and very experienced. Top 25 pre-season team for sure, maybe as high as top 15. With Springfield way down and Babson down a bit, the class of the NEWMAC.

5. Amherst -- a lot of uncertainty with the coaching change, but if Grant Robinson is back to 100 percent, the veteran Robinson-Day backcourt is about as good as anyone's. Two-deep with talent 1-4, center is a bit of a question mark but there are three younger guys who are well-regarded who could step into that spot by committee. Top 25 pre-season team, despite the uncertainty.

That's probably the New England top 25 teams right there, after that, a bit of a gap ... others who would not surprise me, in no particular oder:

Williams -- absolutely loaded with young talent, tremendous size and athleticism everywhere, but still fairly inexperienced with no impactful rising senior returning, and graduated three seniors including their star from a team that was incredibly up and down. May be a year away, but the talent is there to beat anyone.

Colby -- lose half of their eight-man rotation to graduation. Return four really good players (including the last two NESCAC ROYs) but who else steps up is a bit of a mystery at this point.

Endicott -- looks like the class of the CCC despite losing Keith Brown. Added a really strong recruiting class to a talented veteran core.

Babson -- Ainge and Jaworski are a nationally-elite backcourt, but the frontcourt has some big question marks with no one over 6'5 returning.

Nichols, Albertus Magnus, Salve Regina, UMass-Dartmouth, Worcester State, New England College, MIT, Eastern Conn are the other regional teams to keep an eye on, but none of them seem like credible Top 25 contenders.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on May 14, 2020, 03:11:41 PM

This is going to be completely off the top of my head, just with a quick glimpse at the breakdown of key returners, and without trying to think too much. So take this all with a grain of salt.

1. Emory
2. Randolph-Macon
3. Elmhurst
4. Johns Hopkins
5. St. Thomas
6. Yeshiva
7. Illinois Wesleyan
8. UW-Platteville
9. Middlebury
10. St. Joseph's
11. Tufts
12. Albion

I don't feel good about that list at all, especially when you consider the question marks like players returning from injury, potential transfers, etc.,. I agree with nescac1's summary of the New England teams, but I think all of them have huge question marks at the top, probably the first year in a few in New England in which there isn't necessarily a clear favorite---I have to admit that he is higher on Tufts than I am. But in the absence of other clear cut contenders from other parts of the country, those 3 teams definitely belong. If Amherst had played closer to their potential this past year then I think they would be an easy top 10 team, but instead they have a lot of questions being asked of them as well, none bigger than who is going to replace Dave Hixon.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on May 14, 2020, 08:40:44 PM

Other than omitting Swarthmore, SpringSt7's list looks pretty dead-on to me ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on May 14, 2020, 09:17:39 PM

Let the record show that I took the lazy way out and only ranked the 12 Tier 1 teams that Titan compiled for us---I have nowhere near the knowledge nor the desire to try and attempt to put together my own! Those 12 were hard enough...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on May 15, 2020, 04:35:34 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=ae2e5/6bam6n5k2dg094d2.jpg)

With the number of significant retirements on the men's side of Division III basketball, there is plenty to talk about in the month of May. Thus, we needed a "Part 2" this month.

On this "Hoopsville Podcast: May Edition (Part 2)", we talk about what is arguably one of the most significant retirement classes of coaches in the history of Division III - especially on the men's side of things.

Pat Coleman, Ryan Scott, and Bob Quillman join Dave McHugh to chat about those who retired, the number of wins and the high-level of success they had, and even if trying to have a Mt. Rushmore of DIII coaching who might be considered (some coaches you may have forgotten about are mentioned).

Plus - if not for the number of significant retirements, the biggest news in Division III off-season so far would likely be Eric Bridgeland picking up and moving to Southern California. Bridgeland joins Dave to talk about his Whitman program, the success, and the decision to start anew at Redlands and the SCIAC.

You can listen to the podcast here: https://bit.ly/2zGESua

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) broadcasts from the WBCA/NABC Studio. All guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline. The offseason plan is to do a podcast each month. The shows will be audio-only leading up to the start of the 2020-21 when we will restart the video shows.

If you have questions, ideas, or want to interact with the show, feel free to send them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options in the right-hand panel.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3sports.com
Hoopsville Season Archive: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on June 06, 2020, 09:27:05 AM

If I had to vote in the D3hoops.com 2020-21 Preseason Top 25 today, this would be my Top 15.

(All players who scored 4.0 ppg+ in 2019-20. Roster year listed is from 2019-20.)

#1 Emory (22-5, 11-3 UAA)
G - Romin Williams, 5-9 Jr. 16.3 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 2.1 apg 2nd Team All-UAA
G - Matthew Schner, 6-4 Jr. 15.5 ppg, 7.4 rpg, 2.9 apg 1st Team All-UAA, Co-UAA POY
F - Matt Davet, 6-7 Jr 14.0 ppg, 4.4 rpg
F - Lawrence Rowley, 6-5 Jr. 13.9 ppg, 8.6 rpg 2nd Team All-UAA, UAA Defensive POY
G - Nick Stuck, 6-2 Jr. 9.3 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 5.3 apg 2nd Team All-UAA
F - Mason Johnson, 6-7 So. 7.6 ppg, 4.3 rpg
G - Luke Morrison, 6-4 Jr. 4.3 ppg, 2.0 rpg

#2 Randolph-Macon (28-2, 15-1 ODAC)
G - Buzz Anthony, 5-11 Jr. 16.4 ppg, 5.7 rpg, 6.2 apg 1st Team All-ODAC, ODAC POY
F - Miles Mallory, 6-5 Fr. 12.3 ppg, 7.8 rpg ODAC Rookie of the Year
G - Josh Talbert, 6-2 Fr. 10.7 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 2.1 apg
F - Ian Robertson, 6-7 So. 8.5 ppg, 3.9 rpg
G - Corey Bays, 6-3 Sr. 7.7 ppg, 2.4 rpg
G - Terry Woods, 5-11 Jr. 7.3 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 2.6 apg
F - David Funderburg, 6-7 Jr. 5.6 ppg, 3.5 rpg
G - Korey Turner, 6-0 Sr. 4.2 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 2.7 apg

#3 Illinois Wesleyan (19-9, 11-5 CCIW)
G - Grant Wolfe, 5-11 Jr. 18.0 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 3.6 apg (only played 7 games due to injury)
G - Peter Lambesis, 6-4 So. 12.3 ppg, 3.4 rpg, 2.5 apg 2nd Team All-CCIW
G - Keondre Schumacher, 5-11 So. 12.0 ppg, 1.9 apg
F - Doug Wallen, 6-5 Jr. 11.2 ppg, 5.6 rpg
F - Matt Leritz, 6-7 So. 10.9 ppg, 5.5 rpg 1st Team All-CCIW
G - Luke Yoder, 6-0 Fr. 10.4 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 2.3 apg CCIW Freshman of the Year
F - Charlie Bair, 6-7 Jr. 9.0 ppg, 8.3 rpg
G - Cory Noe, 6-2 So. 8.8 ppg, 2.3 rpg

#4 Elmhurst (25-5, 11-5 CCIW)
G - Jake Rhode, 5-11 Jr. 20.8 ppg, 3.8 rpg, 4.1 apg 1st Team All-CCIW
F - Derek Dotlich, 6-3 Sr. 15.8 ppg, 3.9 rpg 2nd Team All-CCIW
C - Lavon Thomas, 6-5 Jr. 13.5 ppg, 8.1 rpg, 2.0 apg 2nd Team All-CCIW
F - Jay Militello, 6-4 Jr. 8.9 ppg, 5.9 rpg
G - Dominic Genco, 6-3 Jr. 7.1 ppg, 2.8 rpg
G - Wesley Hooker, 6-2 Fr. 5.3 ppg, 2.9 rpg
G - Nick Perry, 5-11 Jr. 4.5 ppg, 2.2 rpg, 2.5 apg
C - Ebrahim Jobe, 6-9 Jr. 4.5 ppg, 5.1 rpg

#5 Yeshiva (29-1, 16-0 Skyline)
G - Ryan Turell, 6-7 So. 23.9 ppg, 5.9 rpg, 3.4 apg 1st Team All-Skyline, Skyline POY
G - Simcha Halpert, 6-3 Sr. 16.7 ppg, 2.8 rpg, 2.1 apg 2nd Team All-Skyline
F - Gabriel Leifer, 6-5 Sr. 16.0 ppg, 11.5 rpg, 6.6 apg 1st Team All-Skyline
G - Ofek Reef, 6-1 Fr. 10.7 ppg, 2.6 rpg Skyline Rookie of the Year
G - Eitan Halpert, 5-11 Jr. 6.2 ppg, 2.0 apg
~~G - Bar Alluf, 6-4 Sr. 5.4 ppg, 2.2 rpg~~
F - Caleb Milobsky, 6-6 Jr. 5.4 ppg, 3.6 rpg
~~F - Daniel Katz, 6-4 Sr. 4.8 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 2.2 apg~~

#6 Johns Hopkins (24-4, 16-2 Centennial)
G - Conner Delaney, 6-0 Jr. 17.5 ppg, 3.7 rpg, 4.9 apg 1st Team All-CC, CC POY
F - Tom Quarry, 6-6 So. 13.4 ppg, 4.5 rpg 2nd Team All-CC
G - Joey Kern, 6-1 Jr. 8.7 ppg, 3.1 rpg, 2.1 apg
G - Braeden Johnson, 6-6 So. 8.3 ppg, 3.2 rpg
F - Harry O'Neill, 6-6 Sr. 8.2 ppg, 4.7 rpg
G - Ethan Bartlett, 6-3 So. 8.0 ppg, 5.4 rpg
F - Chid Nnake, 6-6 So. 4.8 ppg, 4.3 rpg
G - Carson James, 6-2 Fr. 4.8 ppg, 2.1 rpg

#7 Tufts (23-6, 8-2 NESCAC)
C - Luke Rogers, 6-8 Jr. 16.6 ppg, 11.9 rpg 1st Team All-NESCAC, NESCAC POY
G - Eric Savage, 6-3 Sr. 15.8 ppg, 6.9 ppg, 3.4 apg 2nd Team All-NESCAC
G - Brennan Morris, 6-6 Jr. 12.0 ppg, 3.8 rpg
G - Tyler Aronson, 6-2 So. 10.6 ppg, 3.0 ppg, 2.1 apg
G - Dylan Thoerner, 6-6 Fr. 7.5 ppg, 2.4 rpg, 1.1 apg
G - Carson Cohen, 6-3 So. 7.2 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 3.5 apg
G - Will Brady, 6-1 Jr. 4.4 ppg, 2.1 rpg

#8 St. Joseph CT (26-3, 11-0 GNAC)
G - Delshawn Jackson Jr., 5-10 So. 21.5 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 2.7 apg 1st Team All-GNAC
F - Jordan Powell, 6-6 Jr. 15.3 ppg, 7.4 rpg 2nd Team All-GNAC
G - Jaecee Martin, 5-10 So. 14.9 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 7.5 apg 1st Team All-GNAC, Defensive POY
G - Taelon Martin, 6-5 Fr. 10.6 ppg, 3.9 rpg GNAC Rookie of the Year
G - Ryan O'Neill, 6-5 So. 10.0 ppg, 4.9 rpg
F - Tyree Mitchell, 6-4 So. 5.8 ppg, 1.9 rpg
F - Jake Sullivan, 6-5 So. 4.3 ppg, 3.9 rpg

#9 Albion (21-5, 12-2 MIAA)
F - Caden Ebeling, 6-7 Jr. 17.7 ppg, 8.3 rpg 1st Team All-MIAA
G - Jamezell Davis, Jr., 5-9 Jr. 16.6 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 3.0 apg 1st Team All-MIAA
F - Quinton Armstrong, 6-5 Jr. 12.4 ppg, 8.0 rpg
G - Cortez Garland, 6-0 So. 10.7 ppg, 2.2 rpg, 2.5 apg MIAA Defensive Player of the Year
G - MJ Barnes, 6-0 So. 7.3 ppg, 1.8 rpg
G - Juwan Perry, 6-2 Jr. 4.5 ppg, 2.5 rpg

#10 Middlebury (21-6, 6-4 NESCAC)
G - Jack Farrell, 6-1 Jr. 16.8 ppg, 4.8 rpg, 3.4 apg 2nd Team All-NESCAC
G - Max Bosco, 6-0 Jr. 14.6 ppg, 2.9 rpg
G - Tommy Eastman, 6-4 Jr. 13.6 ppg, 6.7 rpg 2nd Team All-NESCAC
F - Matt Folger, 6-8 Sr. 11.7 ppg, 9.5 rpg, 2.0 apg
G - Griffin Kornaker, 6-1 Jr. 9.3 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 4.5 apg
F - Ryan Cahill, 6-7 Jr. 6.7 ppg, 3.6 rpg
~~G - Perry DeLorenzo, 6-4 Sr. 5.3 ppg, 1.5 rpg~~

#11 St. Thomas (26-3, 19-1 MIAA)
G - Anders Nelson, 6-0 So. 15.9 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 2.4 apg 1st Team All-MIAC
F - Elijah Hannah, 6-3 Sr. 11.3 ppg, 3.8 rpg 3rd Team All-MIAC, Sixth Man of the Year
F - Tommy Anderson, 6-4 Sr. 10.7 ppg, 2.6 rpg 3rd Team All-MIAC
G - Riley Miller, 6-2 So. 8.5 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 2.7 apg 2nd Team All-MIAC
G - Burt Hedstrom, 6-4 Jr. 8.0 ppg, 4.7 rpg
G - Ryan Lindberg, 6-3 Jr. 6.8 ppg, 2.6 rpg HM All-MIAC, All Defensive Team
G - Zach Theisen, 6-0 So. 5.3 ppg, 1.9 rpg
G - Will Engels, 6-5 Fr. 4.6 ppg, 1.7 rpg
G - Kevin Cunningham, 6-0 So. 4.1 ppg, 1.8 rpg

#12 UW-Platteville (23-5, 12-2 WIAC)
G - Carter Voelker, 6-3 Sr. 15.5 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 3.8 apg All-WIAC, Co-WIAC POY
G - Quentin Shields, 5-9 Jr. 14.9 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 2.8 apg All-WIAC, All Defensive Team
F - Kyle Tuma, 6-5 So. 10.8 ppg, 5.9 rpg HM All-WIAC
F - Justin Stovall, 6-7 Jr. 10.2 ppg, 6.2 rpg HM All-WIAC, All Defensive Team
G - Blake McCann, 6-3 So. 8.1 ppg, 1.4 rpg
G - Drew Gunnink, 6-0 Jr. 7.0 ppg, 2.3 rpg
F - Justin Fox, 6-4 Jr. 5.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg

#13 Wash U (22-5, 11-3 UAA)
G - Jack Nolan, 6-1 Jr. 18.5 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 2.3 apg 1st Team All-UAA, Co-Player of the Year
F - Justin Hardy, 6-5 So. 14.3 ppg, 7.0 rpg, 2.6 apg 2nd Team All-UAA
F - DeVaughn Rucker, 6-5 Sr. 12.8 ppg, 6.7 rpg 1st Team All-UAA
C - Hank Hunter, 6-9 Sr. 8.0 ppg, 6.2 rpg
G - Payden Webb, 6-0 Jr. 7.7 ppg, 1.3 rpg
G - Matt Nester, 5-11 Sr. 6.7 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 2.3 apg
F - Kameron Mack, 6-6 So. 5.6 ppg, 2.2 rpg
F - Nate Bloedorn, 6-7 Fr. 4.1 ppg, 3.0 rpg
G - Charlie Jacob, 6-2 So. 4.1 ppg, 2.0 rpg
G - Jonathan Arenas, 6-3 Sr. 2.7 ppg, 6.1 rpg

#14 WPI (20-8, 10-3 NEWMAC)
C - Garrett Stephenson, 6-7 Jr. 15.9 ppg, 6.2 rpg 2nd Team All-NEWMAC
G - Colin McNamara, 6-0 Jr. 11.8 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 2.8 apg
G - Kahleb Downing, 6-1 Jr. 9.8 ppg, 3.8 rpg, 3.6 apg
F - Reid Walker, 6-4 Jr. 9.3 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 2.6 apg
F - Jake Wisniewski, 6-4 Sr. 9.0 ppg, 6.4 rpg 2nd Team All-NEWMAC, Defensive POY
F - John Lowther, 6-4 Fr. 8.9 ppg, 4.6 rpg NEWMAC Rookie of the Year
G - Jake Needleman, 5-8 Jr. 6.3 ppg, 1.8 rpg
F - Dakota Wheeler, 6-5 Jr. 6.2 ppg, 3.6 rpg

#15 Swarthmore (28-1, 18-0 Centennial)
G - George Visconti, 6-3 So. 12.3 ppg, 2.9 rpg 2nd Team All-CC
G - Vinny DeAngelo, 6-1 Fr. 11.6 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 2.9 apg HM All-CC, Rookie of the Year
G - Conor Harkins, 6-3 Jr. 11.1 ppg, 3.1 rpg
F - Zac O'Dell, 6-7 Sr. 10.7 ppg, 8.4 rpg, 2.3 rpg 1st Team All-CC
F - Nate Shafer, 6-6 Sr. 10.5 ppg, 7.6 rpg, 2.1 apg 1st Team All-CC, Defensive POY
G- Colin Shaw, 6-3 So. 8.7 ppg, 4.0 rpg
G - Ryan Ingram, 6-0 Jr. 6.5 ppg, 3.0 rpg
F - Justin Tucker, 6-6 So. 4.6 ppg, 2.3 apg

Other Safe Top 25 Picks
* Amherst (18-8, 7-3)
* Brockport (26-3, 17-1)
* Hobart (23-5, 15-3)
* Marietta (21-7, 14-4)
* RPI (24-5, 17-1)

Others in Consideration
* Brandeis (17-8, 9-5)
* Colby (24-4, 8-2)
* Loras (17-9, 10-6)
* PSU-Harrisburg (21-8, 14-2)
* Rochester (16-9, 7-7)
* St. John's (27-2, 19-1)
* Stevens (23-5, 12-2)
* Susquehanna (21-8, 11-3)
* Texas-Dallas (22-7, 14-2)
* UW-La Crosse (21-6, 9-5)
* UW-Oshkosh (20-9, 11-3)
* Virginia Wesleyan (23-5, 13-3)
* Wabash (17-9, 3-5)
* Wheaton IL (15-11, 9-7)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on June 06, 2020, 10:54:14 AM

Macon and Yeshiva are in the same boat, from my perspective - most of the talent comes back, but I want to see what chemistry looks like without those seniors; both schools are losing two really important leaders, even if not always on the stat sheet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on June 06, 2020, 11:08:38 AM

Have any non-conference schedules been posted yet? Wondering how teams are challenging themselves.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on June 06, 2020, 12:28:33 PM

Quote from: ronk on June 06, 2020, 11:08:38 AM
Have any non-conference schedules been posted yet? Wondering how teams are challenging themselves.

IWU's schedule...

https://www.iwuhoops.com/IWU%20MBB%2020-21%20Schedule.pdf

The other schools in the Jack Sikma Hall of Fame Tournament are UW-Oshkosh, Hope, and Ripon.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on June 06, 2020, 01:04:25 PM

Looks decent with road games w Wash U, Linfield, and Calvin and the chance to play Oshkosh.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on June 06, 2020, 02:28:20 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on June 06, 2020, 10:54:14 AM

Macon and Yeshiva are in the same boat, from my perspective - most of the talent comes back, but I want to see what chemistry looks like without those seniors; both schools are losing two really important leaders, even if not always on the stat sheet.

I could be getting things wrong, but I thought we realize Yeshiva was only losing one key senior.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jmcozenlaw on June 06, 2020, 10:14:30 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on June 06, 2020, 02:28:20 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on June 06, 2020, 10:54:14 AM

Macon and Yeshiva are in the same boat, from my perspective - most of the talent comes back, but I want to see what chemistry looks like without those seniors; both schools are losing two really important leaders, even if not always on the stat sheet.

I could be getting things wrong, but I thought we realize Yeshiva was only losing one key senior.

You might be talking about Leifer, who was a senior but has one more year of eligibility remaining. Alluf and Katz are definitely gone. I think Simcha Halpert is as well, but not 100% sure.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on June 07, 2020, 08:24:30 AM

Quote from: jmcozenlaw on June 06, 2020, 10:14:30 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on June 06, 2020, 02:28:20 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on June 06, 2020, 10:54:14 AM

Macon and Yeshiva are in the same boat, from my perspective - most of the talent comes back, but I want to see what chemistry looks like without those seniors; both schools are losing two really important leaders, even if not always on the stat sheet.

I could be getting things wrong, but I thought we realize Yeshiva was only losing one key senior.

You might be talking about Leifer, who was a senior but has one more year of eligibility remaining. Alluf and Katz are definitely gone. I think Simcha Halpert is as well, but not 100% sure.

Yes, Leifer was a senior academically last year but he returns for sure.

Simcha Halpert (16.7 ppg, 2.8 rpg, 2.1 apg) is a big loss.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on June 07, 2020, 10:48:14 AM

If I have the sense for Ryan's love of Yeshiva that I think I do, I'm going to step out and guess that the second senior he is referring to is starting center Dan Katz, who was a key cog in their motion offense as a screen setter and good passer out of the post, in particular skip passes to shooters on the weak side. He is definitely someone who will need to be replaced. However, I just don't think the departure of someone who averaged 5 points and 3 rebounds a game is something that warrants concern, especially if his backup was already outscoring and rebounding him in less minutes. Chemistry and leadership are important, but I don't know if, in this case, they're THAT important.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on June 07, 2020, 12:03:56 PM

I think that makes sense, though in watching the Washington University archives, I am still marveling at the impact of a player who averaged 19 minutes, 2.7 points, 6.1 rebounds, and 2.7 assists per game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jmcozenlaw on June 07, 2020, 04:19:24 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on June 07, 2020, 12:03:56 PM
I think that makes sense, though in watching the Washington University archives, I am still marveling at the impact of a player who averaged 19 minutes, 2.7 points, 6.1 rebounds, and 2.7 assists per game.

They have two players on the bench ready to step in and make a difference and word has it that they have a stud freshman (a not so mini-Turell type who will see major minutes) and are working on a major transfer, but it's no better than 50-50 at this point given all of the unknown about this upcoming school year and season. It might be shelved for a year. IF the transfer comes to fruition this year, the Top 5 Ranking will be more than justified. Katz's replacement is a better player and athlete than him, but just needs minutes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on June 07, 2020, 06:49:37 PM

I'm not doubting the production from either team, but chemistry matters, and both schools will have to replace very effective leaders. Totally possible, but you want to see it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on July 01, 2020, 09:08:42 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=ct7yu/5etuonp82pdix8za.jpg)

First, we apologize for the "June Podcast" showing up in early July. Computer problems caused havoc this month. Sadly, it delayed our production plans for several weeks, but we are calling this our June edition all the same.

When the season came to a sudden close, it left a lot of unfinished business on our end. We didn't have national champions to talk to, but we also had a lot of news to cover. This podcast we take some time to do some catching-up with the season's number one men's team and the Jostens Trophy winners - with Gordon Mann and Ryan Scott picking up the interviewing responsibilities.

And we all know the coronavirus has changed everything this year, but how close to home has it hit you? We talk to one coach who experienced it himself first hand while also having his wife be diagnosed with COVID-19 days after giving birth to their first child.

Guests include:
- Matt Airy, Aurora men's coach
- Sydney Kopp, No. 11 DePauw's Jostens Trophy winner (interviewed by Gordon Mann)
- Kena Gilmour, Hamilton's Jostens Trophy winner (interviewed by Ryan Scott)
- Landry Kosmolski, No. 1 Swarthmore men's coach

Oh, did we mention the Hoopsville Notebook? It is a jam-packed notebook this edition. Plenty of notes regarding coaching hires and changes, athletic decisions per COVID-19, Regional Ranking updates, and much more.

Dave also takes the time to say goodbye to Chris Wenzler, Sports Information Director at John Carroll University, who lost his 26-month battle with cancer. This month's show is dedicated in his honor.

You can listen to the podcast here: https://bit.ly/38i86Nc

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) broadcasts from the WBCA/NABC Studio. All guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline. The offseason plan is to do a podcast each month. The shows will be audio-only leading up to the start of the 2020-21 when we will restart the video shows.

If you have questions, ideas, or want to interact with the show, feel free to send them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options available.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3sports.com
Hoopsville Season Archive: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on August 10, 2020, 05:04:12 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=ev7hd/sv26ba99wwms5530.jpg)

The off season has hit August and with it has come news of Division III Fall Championships being canceled for the same reason Winter Championships were derailed and Spring Championships pulled earlier this year: COVID 19 Pandemic.

The decision came on the heals of a vast majority of DIII institutions curtailing fall sports and many pushing winter sports starts on their campuses until January at the earliest.

What does this mean for the 2020-21 season of college basketball? Specifically what does it mean for Division III? Will there be a basketball season? Will it be a six-week-or-so-sprint? Or is there a way to adjust things?

On the Mid-Summer edition of the Hoopsville Podcast, we try and get some answers to those questions. We talk to one coach who actually has put together a proposal to start the season in January, with some changes to make it work including crowning a champion in April. And we talk to an administrator who also serves on the DIII Management Council to better under stand the decisions made to cancel championships and if shift a season like basketball is even possible.

Plus, we honor the best of the best in the last decade of Division III women's basketball. Gordon Mann joins us to discuss how the 2nd D3hoops.com Women's All-Decade came together (and hints of work on the men's list).

Guests include:
- Philip Ponder, Oglethorpe men's coach
- Jason Fein, Bates Athletics Director and DIII Management Council member
- Gordon Mann, D3hoops.com Senior Editor

And of course, there is always the Hoopsville Notebook. A few things we take note of that have made headlines since the beginning of July. We also tip our hat to a few of those who have always helped the show be it's best.

You can listen to the podcast here: https://bit.ly/3kGZ962

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) broadcasts from the WBCA/NABC Studio. All guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline. The offseason plan is to do a podcast each month. The shows will be audio-only leading up to the start of the 2020-21 when we will restart the video shows.

If you have questions, ideas, or want to interact with the show, feel free to send them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options available.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3sports.com
Hoopsville Season Archive: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on September 10, 2020, 10:27:08 AM

Been off the boards since the dust settled on the cancelation of the NCAA tourney. Hope everyone is doing well.

Just listened to the podcast, I enjoyed it! Gordon you and the team did a great job with the All-Decade team. Always a sucker for pieces/teams like that. The profiles are an awesome touch. I am very excited to look at the Mens team!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on September 23, 2020, 06:25:20 PM

Will there be a 2020-21 NCAA Division III basketball season? If so what will it look like? What will the post-season look like?

It is on the mind of student-athletes, coaches, administrators, parents, and fans for several weeks, if not months, now. We are finally understanding what it may look like as a number of decisions or proposals are now making their way around Division III.

In this month's podcast, Dave McHugh not only downloads all the things being considered and the likely outcomes, but tries to give listeners an understanding of how much is still unknown despite some things becoming more clear.

McHugh also talks to Texas-Dallas women's basketball coach Polly Thomason for her take. Thomason has been in the Division III Women's Basketball National Committee for several years and is this season's chair of the committee. She also serves on the WBCA Board of Governors. Thomason not only provides her perspective on much of what is going on not only in Division III, but in women's basketball as well.

And of course, there is always the Hoopsville Notebook. Unfortunately, there is some sad news in the Notebook this month, but also news to celebrate especially when it comes to DIII alums making news in the NBA.

You can listen to the podcast here: https://bit.ly/3kMl0rZ

Hoopsville (http://www.d3hoopsville.com) broadcasts from the WBCA/NABC Studio. All guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline. The offseason plan is to do a podcast each month. The shows will be audio-only leading up to the start of the 2020-21 when we will restart the video shows.

If you have questions, ideas, or want to interact with the show, feel free to send them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options available.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3sports.com
Hoopsville Season Archive: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 04, 2021, 09:42:10 PM

Removing the teams that have opted out of the 2020-21 season for sure, here are my Top 10 candidates if I had to submit a Top 25 ballot today.

Years listed below are as of last season's roster.

Spots #1-5 candidates (alphabetical order):

Elmhurst (25-5, 11-5 CCIW)
G - Jake Rhode, 5-11 Jr. 20.8 ppg, 3.8 rpg, 4.1 apg 1st Team All-CCIW
~~F - Derek Dotlich, 6-3 Sr. 15.8 ppg, 3.9 rpg 2nd Team All-CCIW~~
C - Lavon Thomas, 6-5 Jr. 13.5 ppg, 8.1 rpg, 2.0 apg 2nd Team All-CCIW
F - Jay Militello, 6-4 Jr. 8.9 ppg, 5.9 rpg
G - Dominic Genco, 6-3 Jr. 7.1 ppg, 2.8 rpg
G - Wesley Hooker, 6-2 Fr. 5.3 ppg, 2.9 rpg
G - Nick Perry, 5-11 Jr. 4.5 ppg, 2.2 rpg, 2.5 apg
C - Ebrahim Jobe, 6-9 Jr. 4.5 ppg, 5.1 rpg

Illinois Wesleyan (19-9, 11-5 CCIW)
~~G - Grant Wolfe, 5-11 Jr. 18.0 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 3.6 apg~~ (only played 7 games due to injury; missed final 19 games)
G - Peter Lambesis, 6-4 So. 12.3 ppg, 3.4 rpg, 2.5 apg 2nd Team All-CCIW
G - Keondre Schumacher, 5-11 So. 12.0 ppg, 1.9 apg
F - Doug Wallen, 6-5 Jr. 11.2 ppg, 5.6 rpg
F - Matt Leritz, 6-7 So. 10.9 ppg, 5.5 rpg 1st Team All-CCIW
G - Luke Yoder, 6-0 Fr. 10.4 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 2.3 apg CCIW Freshman of the Year
F - Charlie Bair, 6-7 Jr. 9.0 ppg, 8.3 rpg
G - Cory Noe, 6-2 So. 8.8 ppg, 2.3 rpg

Johns Hopkins (24-4, 16-2 Centennial)
G - Conner Delaney, 6-0 Jr. 17.5 ppg, 3.7 rpg, 4.9 apg 1st Team All-CC, CC POY
F - Tom Quarry, 6-6 So. 13.4 ppg, 4.5 rpg 2nd Team All-CC
G - Joey Kern, 6-1 Jr. 8.7 ppg, 3.1 rpg, 2.1 apg
G - Braeden Johnson, 6-6 So. 8.3 ppg, 3.2 rpg
F - Harry O'Neill, 6-6 Sr. 8.2 ppg, 4.7 rpg
G - Ethan Bartlett, 6-3 So. 8.0 ppg, 5.4 rpg
F - Chid Nnake, 6-6 So. 4.8 ppg, 4.3 rpg
G - Carson James, 6-2 Fr. 4.8 ppg, 2.1 rpg

Randolph-Macon (28-2, 15-1 ODAC)
G - Buzz Anthony, 5-11 Jr. 16.4 ppg, 5.7 rpg, 6.2 apg 1st Team All-ODAC, ODAC POY
F - Miles Mallory, 6-5 Fr. 12.3 ppg, 7.8 rpg ODAC Rookie of the Year
G - Josh Talbert, 6-2 Fr. 10.7 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 2.1 apg
F - Ian Robertson, 6-7 So. 8.5 ppg, 3.9 rpg
~~G - Corey Bays, 6-3 Sr. 7.7 ppg, 2.4 rpg~~
G - Terry Woods, 5-11 Jr. 7.3 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 2.6 apg
F - David Funderburg, 6-7 Jr. 5.6 ppg, 3.5 rpg
~~G - Korey Turner, 6-0 Sr. 4.2 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 2.7 apg~~

Yeshiva (29-1, 16-0 Skyline)
G - Ryan Turell, 6-7 So. 23.9 ppg, 5.9 rpg, 3.4 apg 1st Team All-Skyline, Skyline POY
~~G - Simcha Halpert, 6-3 Sr. 16.7 ppg, 2.8 rpg, 2.1 apg 2nd Team All-Skyline~~
F - Gabriel Leifer, 6-5 Sr. 16.0 ppg, 11.5 rpg, 6.6 apg 1st Team All-Skyline
G - Ofek Reef, 6-1 Fr. 10.7 ppg, 2.6 rpg Skyline Rookie of the Year
G - Eitan Halpert, 5-11 Jr. 6.2 ppg, 2.0 apg
~~G - Bar Alluf, 6-4 Sr. 5.4 ppg, 2.2 rpg~~
F - Caleb Milobsky, 6-6 Jr. 5.4 ppg, 3.6 rpg
~~F - Daniel Katz, 6-4 Sr. 4.8 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 2.2 apg~~
----------
Spots #6-10 candidates (alphabetical order):

Albion (21-5, 12-2 MIAA)
F - Caden Ebeling, 6-7 Jr. 17.7 ppg, 8.3 rpg 1st Team All-MIAA
G - Jamezell Davis, Jr., 5-9 Jr. 16.6 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 3.0 apg 1st Team All-MIAA
F - Quinton Armstrong, 6-5 Jr. 12.4 ppg, 8.0 rpg
G - Cortez Garland, 6-0 So. 10.7 ppg, 2.2 rpg, 2.5 apg MIAA Defensive Player of the Year
G - MJ Barnes, 6-0 So. 7.3 ppg, 1.8 rpg
G - Juwan Perry, 6-2 Jr. 4.5 ppg, 2.5 rpg

St. Joseph CT (26-3, 11-0 GNAC)
G - Delshawn Jackson Jr., 5-10 So. 21.5 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 2.7 apg 1st Team All-GNAC
F - Jordan Powell, 6-6 Jr. 15.3 ppg, 7.4 rpg 2nd Team All-GNAC
G - Jaecee Martin, 5-10 So. 14.9 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 7.5 apg 1st Team All-GNAC, Defensive POY
G - Taelon Martin, 6-5 Fr. 10.6 ppg, 3.9 rpg GNAC Rookie of the Year
G - Ryan O'Neill, 6-5 So. 10.0 ppg, 4.9 rpg
F - Tyree Mitchell, 6-4 So. 5.8 ppg, 1.9 rpg
F - Jake Sullivan, 6-5 So. 4.3 ppg, 3.9 rpg

St. Thomas (26-3, 19-1 MIAA)
G - Anders Nelson, 6-0 So. 15.9 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 2.4 apg 1st Team All-MIAC
F - Elijah Hannah, 6-3 Sr. 11.3 ppg, 3.8 rpg 3rd Team All-MIAC, Sixth Man of the Year
F - Tommy Anderson, 6-4 Sr. 10.7 ppg, 2.6 rpg 3rd Team All-MIAC
G - Riley Miller, 6-2 So. 8.5 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 2.7 apg 2nd Team All-MIAC
G - Burt Hedstrom, 6-4 Jr. 8.0 ppg, 4.7 rpg
G - Ryan Lindberg, 6-3 Jr. 6.8 ppg, 2.6 rpg HM All-MIAC, All Defensive Team
G - Zach Theisen, 6-0 So. 5.3 ppg, 1.9 rpg
G - Will Engels, 6-5 Fr. 4.6 ppg, 1.7 rpg
G - Kevin Cunningham, 6-0 So. 4.1 ppg, 1.8 rpg

UW-Platteville (23-5, 12-2 WIAC)
~~G - Carter Voelker, 6-3 Sr. 15.5 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 3.8 apg All-WIAC, Co-WIAC POY~~
G - Quentin Shields, 5-9 Jr. 14.9 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 2.8 apg All-WIAC, All Defensive Team
F - Kyle Tuma, 6-5 So. 10.8 ppg, 5.9 rpg HM All-WIAC
F - Justin Stovall, 6-7 Jr. 10.2 ppg, 6.2 rpg HM All-WIAC, All Defensive Team
G - Blake McCann, 6-3 So. 8.1 ppg, 1.4 rpg
G - Drew Gunnink, 6-0 Jr. 7.0 ppg, 2.3 rpg
F - Justin Fox, 6-4 Jr. 5.0 ppg, 4.5 rpg

Wash U (22-5, 11-3 UAA)
G - Jack Nolan, 6-1 Jr. 18.5 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 2.3 apg 1st Team All-UAA, Co-Player of the Year
F - Justin Hardy, 6-5 So. 14.3 ppg, 7.0 rpg, 2.6 apg 2nd Team All-UAA
F - DeVaughn Rucker, 6-5 Sr. 12.8 ppg, 6.7 rpg 1st Team All-UAA
C - Hank Hunter, 6-9 Sr. 8.0 ppg, 6.2 rpg
G - Payden Webb, 6-0 Jr. 7.7 ppg, 1.3 rpg
~~G - Matt Nester, 5-11 Sr. 6.7 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 2.3 apg~~
F - Kameron Mack, 6-6 So. 5.6 ppg, 2.2 rpg
F - Nate Bloedorn, 6-7 Fr. 4.1 ppg, 3.0 rpg
G - Charlie Jacob, 6-2 So. 4.1 ppg, 2.0 rpg
~~G - Jonathan Arenas, 6-3 Sr. 2.7 ppg, 6.1 rpg~~

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 29, 2021, 07:15:31 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=npmg3/t0vp4323yzpeajt8.jpg)

The Division III basketball season technically started nearly three months ago, but it has taken until the end of January for it to start feeling like the season is really underway. Even so, only about a quarter of the division has played just a single game. Another quarter of the division will never take to the court. And in between is wide gulf of different options.

On the first video-version of Hoopsville this season, Dave McHugh is joined by much of the D3hoops.com crew, Pat Coleman and Ryan Scott, to react to what has been one of the more unique seasons ... to say it lightly.

We react to the challenges schools are facing, what coaches are grappling with on a daily basis - especially beyond games and practices, and why schools are making so many different decisions.

We also discuss what is likely the future of this season's NCAA Championship Tournaments and, more importantly, when the decision on those tournaments will be made.

Plus, will there be a Top 25? No. Well, yes. Kind of. Tune in to learn more on what's coming. Plus a lot more including Dave spinning off Pat's thoughts on those wishing to attend games.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch the show by clicking on the video player above. Or you can listen to the podcast available on any of the service options in the right panel.

If you have questions about Division III basketball, feel free to send them and we will answer them on a the show. Email them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options to the right.

You can WATCH the show or listen to the podcast here: https://bit.ly/3oASGKl or https://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2020-21/january

Hoopsville broadcasts from the WBCA/NABC Studio. All guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions, ideas, or want to interact with the show, feel free to send them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options available.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3sports.com
Hoopsville Season Archive: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 30, 2021, 06:47:30 PM

There will be a D3hoops.com poll coming out early this week. Watch here for details:

https://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2020-21/january

[48:15 start]

Most unique ballot ever.

Help me make sure I am considering the right teams (based on the criteria). I'm kind of looking at it in these buckets...

Top 10 Expectations Coming Into 2020-21 (see above and going back on this thread)
- Randolph-Macon (3-0)
- Illinois Wesleyan (1-0)
- Albion (1-0)

[These teams are locks for me.]

Other Top 25 Candidates Coming Into 2020-21
- Marietta (1-0)
- St. John's (1-0)
- Mount Union (3-0)
- Wheaton (3-0)
- Whitworth (4-3; 2-0 vs D3; 2 wins over D2 SPU)

[I believe I will have all of these teams in.]

Making a case based on 2020-21 results
- Bluffton (9-0)
- Trine (7-0)
- Dubuque (6-0)
- DePauw (3-0)
- Lynchburg (3-0)
- Buena Visita (2-0)
- Condordia WI (2-0)
- Heidelberg (2-0)
- Pacific Lutheran (2-0; 2 wins over Whitman)
- Trinity TX (5-1)
- Mary Hardin-Baylor (9-3)
- Covenant (7-4; 6-1 D3)
- Rose-Hulman (5-1)
- North Central (3-1)

[I have room for 7 from this list...plus any I am missing.]

Who else?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: augie77 on January 30, 2021, 07:09:08 PM

That's 14 out of 19 from the geographic Midwest. That seems unrealistic.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 30, 2021, 07:12:41 PM

Quote from: augie77 on January 30, 2021, 07:09:08 PM
That's 14 out of 19 from the geographic Midwest. That seems unrealistic.

You have to remember, certain parts of the country are not playing at all -- most of the teams from the E and NE part of the country have zero games.

Some of the top conferences have not played -- like the WIAC, NESCAC and UAA.

Some teams expected to be Top 10 teams coming in - like Yeshiva - have not played.

This is a weird ass ballot situation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 30, 2021, 08:17:50 PM

A top 10, using the "have to have played" criteria, from Akiva Poppers - broadcaster at Yeshiva...

https://twitter.com/PoppersMacsLive/status/1355685773371199491?s=20

He has been keeping a running Top 25 throughout the preseason and season. Has been putting a lot of time into watching teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 30, 2021, 11:28:42 PM

Covenant and Sul Ross

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 31, 2021, 08:19:39 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 30, 2021, 11:28:42 PM
Covenant and Sul Ross

Thanks, Ryan. What is your take on these two?

I went to the Sul Ross State at Texas-Dallas game yesterday here. I like both teams quite a bit actually, but I don't think I could consider either for a Top 15 ranking at this point. Sul Ross is 7-6 now (all games in D3). That's a lot of losses for Top 15 consideration.

I have not watched Covenant at all. They are 7-4...but 6-1 in D3. I don't know anything about them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 31, 2021, 08:23:33 AM

Trinity (TX) is 5-1.

https://www.d3hoops.com/teams/Trinity_(Texas)/men/2020-21/index

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 31, 2021, 08:31:45 AM

Teams that tip after the first ballot (strong candidates to enter in week 2)...

Locks...
-Yeshiva
-UW-Platteville
-St. Thomas

Probably...
-UW-Oshkosh
-UW-La Crosse

Keep an eye on...
-UW-Eau Claire

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 31, 2021, 09:09:47 AM

All the ASC teams have been inconsistent, which is both understandable and frustrating. UMHB is also very talented; they and Sul Ross seem to be the best of Texas right now.

Covenant was playing better in November than they are now, but they're experienced and confident.

I've not yet decided how I'm going to approach this ballot, but I'm leaning towards giving extra weight towards teams that have played more, at least for this first week. Of the teams that have been playing all season, Covenant might be the best. It feels like that should count for something, I'm just not sure how.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 31, 2021, 09:21:53 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 31, 2021, 09:09:47 AM
All the ASC teams have been inconsistent, which is both understandable and frustrating. UMHB is also very talented; they and Sul Ross seem to be the best of Texas right now.

Covenant was playing better in November than they are now, but they're experienced and confident.

I've not yet decided how I'm going to approach this ballot, but I'm leaning towards giving extra weight towards teams that have played more, at least for this first week. Of the teams that have been playing all season, Covenant might be the best. It feels like that should count for something, I'm just not sure how.

The ASC has become a league with nice depth and a lot of parity. I've gotten to know it the last few years from going to a lot of UTD games. Leagues with depth and parity are always the hardest to sort out.

Without factoring in records, I do think the two teams I saw yesterday (UTD, Sul Ross St) are Top 25 type candidates based on the good ole "eye test."

And does seem UMHB, at this point, is the best D3 in TX.

I need to dig into Covenant.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Smitty Oom on January 31, 2021, 09:59:20 AM

Sul Ross has already played 13 games? Wow! Just tuning in for the first time this season and checking in. Not very plugged in this year so will be leaning heavily on the boards for my news/opinions. Thanks for the updates. I certainly appreciate it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 31, 2021, 11:08:59 AM

Quote from: Smitty Oom on January 31, 2021, 09:59:20 AM
Sul Ross has already played 13 games? Wow! Just tuning in for the first time this season and checking in. Not very plugged in this year so will be leaning heavily on the boards for my news/opinions. Thanks for the updates. I certainly appreciate it.

Yeah, Sul Ross hasn't seen a lot of disruption to their year. They were supposed to bring in a couple out of region teams for a tourney, but they replaced them with non-d3s nearby and lots of non-conference games against ASC opponents. I believe they've only had one game cancelled so far.

Being geographically isolated in a small town has probably helped their ability to stay safe during COVID. I also suspect the Texas schools have had incentive to get these protocols right so they can get the kinks worked out for spring football. It is Texas, after all!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: KnightSlappy on January 31, 2021, 11:58:27 AM

I would put N.C. Wesleyan on the watch list. They're 5-0 vs. D3 so far and look favorable in my (questionably worthwhile this year) efficiency ratings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 31, 2021, 12:22:21 PM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 31, 2021, 11:58:27 AM
I would put N.C. Wesleyan on the watch list. They're 5-0 vs. D3 so far and look favorable in my (questionably worthwhile this year) efficiency ratings.

Good call.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PauldingLightUP on February 01, 2021, 08:18:26 PM

Nice job on the poll to the crew. Looks pretty good. Only 17 voters missing from a total of 50 combined men and women is good in a crazy season. Well done to all 33 who turned in a ballet. That is a accomplishment in itself.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 01, 2021, 10:59:46 PM

Good point that just getting a ballot out is a big deal this year.

Most of the voters who didn't file are ones who are in conferences which aren't participating this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 02, 2021, 08:36:54 AM

Yeshiva opens their season (hopefully) tonight. They had trouble with Moravian's press last season. I think a lot of us will be interested in how the Macs look right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on February 02, 2021, 10:58:12 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 02, 2021, 08:36:54 AM

Yeshiva opens their season (hopefully) tonight. They had trouble with Moravian's press last season. I think a lot of us will be interested in how the Macs look right now.

Some of us will be interested in how Moravian looks. ;) They've lost a lot in playing time from last year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: NEPAFAN on February 02, 2021, 12:43:06 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 02, 2021, 08:36:54 AM

Yeshiva opens their season (hopefully) tonight. They had trouble with Moravian's press last season. I think a lot of us will be interested in how the Macs look right now.

Game is off. Snow or COVID?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 02, 2021, 01:35:35 PM

Quote from: NEPAFAN on February 02, 2021, 12:43:06 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 02, 2021, 08:36:54 AM

Yeshiva opens their season (hopefully) tonight. They had trouble with Moravian's press last season. I think a lot of us will be interested in how the Macs look right now.

Game is off. Snow or COVID?

Probably snow - that entire area between the two schools got hit pretty hard by this storm with more falling today.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 02, 2021, 02:22:17 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 02, 2021, 01:35:35 PM
Quote from: NEPAFAN on February 02, 2021, 12:43:06 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 02, 2021, 08:36:54 AM

Yeshiva opens their season (hopefully) tonight. They had trouble with Moravian's press last season. I think a lot of us will be interested in how the Macs look right now.

Game is off. Snow or COVID?

Probably snow - that entire area between the two schools got hit pretty hard by this storm with more falling today.

Confirmed, it was due to weather.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on February 02, 2021, 02:37:42 PM

If they don't reschedule it for tomorrow, then unlikely til Moravian has a bye in their Landmark schedule since Moravian has games Fri/Sun.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 02, 2021, 03:12:03 PM

Quote from: ronk on February 02, 2021, 02:37:42 PM
If they don't reschedule it for tomorrow, then unlikely til Moravian has a bye in their Landmark schedule since Moravian has games Fri/Sun.

I suspect they will play at a later date.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 02, 2021, 06:37:20 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=nxkc8/h0bd39rk57cvhc5h.jpg)

He has been the Vice President for Division IIII since the position was created in 1996. And there are many who wish he remained a bit longer. However, he is now the former VP for #NCAAD3.

On this especially edition of #Hoopsville, Dave McHugh sits down with Dan Dutcher once again to look back at his career at the NCAA and especially DIII, the NCAA Convention, and much more. It is a bit of a "State of DIII" as Dutcher once again tries to give everyone an inside idea of how things work and why certain decisions are made. But the historic perspective is also so helpful when looking at such interesting times now.

Dutcher, who took early retirement and was one of 60 some-odd individuals to leave the NCAA headquarters recently, talks about his 35-plus years at the NCAA and numerous years guiding Division III. He also talks about what he will do with his time now and the emotions of walking out the NCAA doors for a final time.

You can listen to the podcast here: https://bit.ly/3tjaXzz or https://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2020-21/dutcher_interview

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops .com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. All guests appear on the @BlueFrameTech Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions, ideas, or want to interact with the show, feel free to send them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options available.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3sports.com
Hoopsville Season Archive: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 13, 2021, 11:47:07 AM

Whitworth returned to action last night, down four starters, and still performed quite well against UPS.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 13, 2021, 06:56:47 PM

Yeshiva opens tonight, 7:30pm ET at Manhattanville.

https://govaliants.com/watch/?Archive=1237&type=Live

https://govaliants.com/sidearmstats/mbball/summary

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 13, 2021, 10:19:47 PM

Yeshiva looked quite rusty, but performed as expected. The second half was a lot better than the first. They're going to need some more conditioning and the execution on both ends of the floor was sloppy. They looked darn good, though. It seems Turell has bulked up a bit since March, which is really just unfair. There's quite a cavalcade of newcomers on the bench with interesting stories. There shouldn't be any problem slotting these guys in very near the top of the poll this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 15, 2021, 10:33:27 PM

The 2021-22 preseason poll will be difficult due to uncertainly around which seniors are returning w/ the COVID waiver.

While 2020-21 is still fresh, wondering if we can compile a list of candidates here?

#1-Randolph-Macon (12-0) - returns top 4 (at least...maybe more) from ODAC champ.

#3-Yeshiva (7-0) - returns everyone (potentially; Leifer?) from 7-0 team.

#4-Illinois Wesleyan (8-1) - returns 8 of top 10 from CCIW champ.

#6-Trine (17-1) - returns everyone from MIAA champ.

#8-Wheaton (12-1) - returns everyone from CCIW 2nd place.
---
Elmhurst (7-3) - returns everyone from CCIW 3rd place and gets All-American Jake Rhode back.

These are ones I am familiar with. Who else?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on March 15, 2021, 11:13:06 PM

Emory has enough returning to be a Top 25 team all season long. Top 10 probably.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 16, 2021, 08:39:37 AM

St Joe's doesn't have any seniors. Rochester loses just one. So much depends on who's actually back.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: tomt4525 on March 16, 2021, 02:52:48 PM

The 1 senior in Oshkosh's rotation has plans to come back next season, they should definitely be a top 10 squad...possibly top 5.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 16, 2021, 03:42:22 PM

Quote from: tomt4525 on March 16, 2021, 02:52:48 PM
The 1 senior in Oshkosh's rotation has plans to come back next season, they should definitely be a top 10 squad...possibly top 5.

If they are all coming back, top 5 for sure as I see it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 16, 2021, 03:45:28 PM

IWU plays UW-Oshkosh and Yeshiva next season. Cool matchups.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on March 16, 2021, 07:54:25 PM

Marietta brings back all but one. Big aspirations next year for the Pioneers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpartyBlue on March 17, 2021, 11:46:35 AM

Dubuque belongs on a preseason list by virtue of going 14-0 in a top 10 conference, being a top 5 Massey offense, and the top three point shooting team in the nation. Very likely returns 9 of top 10 players and all 5 starters. I thought they deserved a top 5 ranking at the end of this season on the basis of undefeated record, but hard to carve out respect in a year like this, I suppose. Again, a shame there is no tournament, could have been settled on the court.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 18, 2021, 12:24:01 PM

Will keep a running/work in progress/unofficial preseason Top 25 list here based on info posted...

- Randolph-Macon
- Yeshiva (placement depends on Leifer decision)
- Illinois Wesleyan
- Marietta
- Trine
- UW-Oshkosh
- Dubuque
- Wheaton
- Emory
- St. Joseph (CT)
- Elmhurst
- Rochester

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 18, 2021, 06:11:21 PM

Thank you to Wheaton's Mike Schauer for joining me on episode #2 of the Q-cast!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_XlWlch4pk

0:00 Playing Through a Pandemic
6:30 National Committee Role
12:05 Why the 2021 D3 MBB/WBB Tournaments Were Cancelled
22:55 Selection/Seed Criteria
33:20 Wheaton Thunder 2021
38:54 Wheaton vs Illinois Wesleyan 2021 Title Game
43:00 Wheaton and CCIW 2021-22
46:12 The CCIW
48:45 IWU/Wheaton Rivalry; Perspective
54:23 Final Thoughts

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 18, 2021, 10:26:21 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on March 18, 2021, 06:11:21 PM
Will keep a running/work in progress/unofficial preseason Top 25 list here based on info posted...

- Randolph-Macon
- Yeshiva (placement depends on Leifer decision)
- Illinois Wesleyan
- Marietta
- Trine
- UW-Oshkosh
- Dubuque
- Wheaton
- Emory
- St. Joseph (CT)
- Elmhurst
- Rochester

UAA intel in reaction to this post...

* 5 of Emory's seniors not returning including Williams/Davet.

* 90% chance Jack Nolan does not return to WashU.

* All Brandeis guys back.

* Rochester will be picked 4th or 5th in UAA.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on March 19, 2021, 12:29:45 AM

You got all that from a reaction to a conversation with Mike Schauer?

In regards to Emory, they have 8 seniors so 5 is substantial, but not enough to keep them out of contention for the UAA.

I heard Rowley, Schner, Stuck, and Williams back with a relatively recent confirmation.

No way Rochester gets picked 5th, but as I said a year ago, they were not going to be a serious threat for the UAA championship in 2020-2021. They went 1-5 against the top 3 teams last season.

Rochester is a good team with a very good coach, but they are down from where they were a few years ago. They are losing a talented point guard, though his back-up looked good in games this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 19, 2021, 08:20:50 AM

Quote from: WUPHF on March 19, 2021, 12:29:45 AM
You got all that from a reaction to a conversation with Mike Schauer?

I quoted the wrong post...corrected above now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 19, 2021, 08:29:04 AM

Quote from: WUPHF on March 19, 2021, 12:29:45 AM
You got all that from a reaction to a conversation with Mike Schauer?

In regards to Emory, they have 8 seniors so 5 is substantial, but not enough to keep them out of contention for the UAA.

I heard Rowley, Schner, Stuck, and Williams back with a relatively recent confirmation.

No way Rochester gets picked 5th, but as I said a year ago, they were not going to be a serious threat for the UAA championship in 2020-2021. They went 1-5 against the top 3 teams last season.

Rochester is a good team with a very good coach, but they are down from where they were a few years ago. They are losing a talented point guard, though his back-up looked good in games this season.

The main point of the comments I received was basically:
- The UAA will be strong in 2021-22 and have 4-5 teams that could be NCAA tourney contenders.
- At this point it does not look like the league has a preseason top 10 team...unless Jack Nolan returns to WashU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on March 19, 2021, 08:44:28 AM

I got that from your post and was responding with additional thoughts. I was kidding about the Mike Schauer part of course. I really enjoyed both interviews by the way. Keep them coming.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 19, 2021, 10:55:03 AM

Quote from: WUPHF on March 19, 2021, 08:44:28 AM
I got that from your post and was responding with additional thoughts. I was kidding about the Mike Schauer part of course. I really enjoyed both interviews by the way. Keep them coming.

Thank you!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on March 19, 2021, 10:58:26 AM

Quote from: WUPHF on March 19, 2021, 12:29:45 AM
You got all that from a reaction to a conversation with Mike Schauer?

You've gotta hand it to Mike. He's really got his ear to the ground ... even regarding leagues other than his own.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on March 19, 2021, 12:01:51 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 19, 2021, 10:58:26 AM
Quote from: WUPHF on March 19, 2021, 12:29:45 AM
You got all that from a reaction to a conversation with Mike Schauer?

You've gotta hand it to Mike. He's really got his ear to the ground ... even regarding leagues other than his own.

Ha, ha! As the person who makes more mistakes than anyone, I know I should avoid pointing out the mistakes of others...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 20, 2021, 04:29:45 PM

My interview with Whitworth coach Damion Jablonski...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rt_Qyt2s54o&t=2157s

0:00 Playing Through a Pandemic
5:00 March Madness/Go Zags
6:52 Whitworth 2020-21 Season
13:18 Support from Former Whitworth President Beck Taylor
15:40 Damion's Unique Road to Coaching & Division III Basketball
27:00 Whitworth and the NWC
29:00 Building an NCAA Tourney Resume
31:45 2019-20 Whitworth NCAA Tourney Run
34:30 Cancellation of the 2020 NCAA Tournament
40:00 Division III Brand in the Pac NW/Recruiting to Whitworth
42:54 Thoughts on Division III After 10 Years
44:55 Whitworth 2021-22 Expectations
49:30 Final Thoughts

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on March 23, 2021, 09:44:10 PM

My conversation with Yeshiva head coach Elliot Steinmetz.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CROUfJyJfPw

0:00 Yeshiva University
8:00 Elliot's path to the Yeshiva MBB job
15:01 The last loss - Occidental, last season
17:32 The Skyline Conference
19:30 Chances of an at-large bid last year
22:17 Huge wins in NCAA rounds 1&2
24:53 The Sweet 16 game that didn't happen/The world changed
30:05 Being in the epicenter of the pandemic
31:53 Ryan Turell
37:35 Gabriel Leifer
41:32 This season - Rochester and St. Joseph (CT) games
46:53 The Illinois Wesleyan game - December 2021
49:26 Watching games this year
53:35 Playing for a lot
57:22 The Streak (36)
59:36 Student-athletes as leaders and role models

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on March 24, 2021, 07:30:59 AM

They never should've lost that Oxy game. A bit of a choke job down the stretch. Lot of guys from LA I think felt the pressure of playing before a big pro-YU crowd, although I suspect not being undefeated last year helped them throughout the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on April 06, 2021, 10:25:21 PM

My interview with UW-Oshkosh head coach Matt Lewis.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ki1G9YuQKI

0:00 Augusta/Amen Corner
4:24 Landing at Division III Cornell
9:25 Getting into coaching; D3 Rhodes, D1 Tulane
18:10 Getting the UW-Oshkosh assistant job
22:57 Pat Juckem influences
25:00 2017-18 NCAA game at Augustana; Ben Boots & Nolan Ebel
29:48 Pat leaves; interim gig
32:35 2018-19 Elite 8 vs Guilford
33:46 Wheaton & Aston Francis
38:48 Swarthmore game; Flynn, Fravert, Boots
43:05 Strong resume; removing the interim tag
44:45 2019-20 NCAA game vs North Central
49:11 2020-21; looking different
51:03 D2 vs D3
56:30 Loaded D3 landscape in 2021-22; COVID waiver
1:02:58 Illinois Wesleyan tourney next year; non-conf scheduling
1:04:52 D3hoops fashions; Cole Haan
1:08:34 Final thoughts

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on April 09, 2021, 10:33:17 AM

There will certainly be as always a few NESCAC teams in the top 25 as the season evolves, but there isn't great information on who is coming back yet, at least not for the top contenders, and it's a transition year in many ways for NESCAC, with three new coaches including at two of the top-tier programs (Tufts and Amherst).

Tufts supposedly has all its key seniors returning. If so, Tufts (even with a coaching vacancy - the retired coach was probably better at recruiting than game management, in any event) should definitely be very highly-ranked to start the season, as it graduated only one senior from the 2019-2020 title-contender squad and returns (if rumors are correct) NESCAC POY Luke Rogers, who will be a 5th year senior and made dramatic strides every year on the court. He is one of the most gifted big men I've seen in D3 in terms of his footwork and post moves. That's the only NESCAC team I can imagine being a top 5-10 type of team to start the season, and maybe even the only NESCAC team in the top 25 ... at least to start the year. But whoever the new coach is, if that senior class returns, there is enough talent on hand to contend for a national title.

Amherst has a fantastic backcourt returning in a presumably healthy Grant Robinson (he was a shell of himself in 2020) and Garrett Day, both of whom will be fifth-year seniors and first-team all-league caliber players when healthy. And there is plenty of talent, albeit largely unproven, around them. But it loses its three frontcourt starters and will, of course, have a new coach. I could see Amherst as a top 25 team eventually, a lot of perimeter talent there, but probably not to start the season.

Middlebury may have a few seniors back for a fifth year, but that is probably not enough to compensate for a very shallow pool (especially be Midd's standards) of underclass talent. Unless all five key seniors return (and Midd fans have been quiet, but my sense is that at least a few are not), I don't see Middlebury as a top-25 team. [Updated: confirmed that Midd's seniors are not returning, which knocks it entirely out of NESCAC contention]

Colby has a lot of good young talent but probably loses too much (5/8 rotation players) to repeat last season's success, they will be solid but I'd be surprised to see them in the top 25.

Williams is a big question mark but has a ton of young talent on the roster and I think should be ready to return to top 25 contention (though is likely a year away from being a top 10 type of team) after a down season. The Ephs employed a young rotation including a great frosh class, which suffered some hard knocks with a ton of early floor time in 2019-20, but which started to come together very late in the season. I think two years of development for the seven underclassmen who were rotation players by season's end, plus a tremendous 2024 recruiting class coming in (including three post grads, who will essentially be college juniors next years physically so should be far more ready than typical first-years) should make Williams very competitive for a top-three spot in NESCAC next year, and a powerhouse in the next few years thereafter.

It's hard to imagine anyone else in NESCAC sniffing the top 25 next year. Wesleyan could be a dark horse as it graduated no one of consequence and its top seniors are taking a fifth year, but losing Austin Hutcherson to transfer was such a blow to that program, and Wesleyan has a long way to rise from 2020's rough performance. Hamilton no longer has Kena Gilmour, and no one else in the league returns a huge amount of talent.

In sum, my VERY speculative guess at this point to start the year: Tufts is at worst a top-10 team, maybe top-5, nationally; no on else is in the top 25. By the end of the year, at least one, maybe two, from the Amherst/Williams/Colby/Wesleyan group, most likely Amherst or Williams, cracks the top 25, but none of them warrant that type of recognition to start the season.

Looking at New England more broadly, St. Joseph's is clearly a top-10 worthy team (they hung with Yeshiva despite missing their best guy due to, I presume, injury, and return either everyone or all but one guy). I think WPI is a lock for the top 20, seem to be the class of NEWMAC headed into next year with all the guys that Springfield and Babson have lost, and WPI keeps bringing in highly-regarded recruits. I can't think of anyone beyond those two and Tufts who are remotely within Top 25 contention to start the year, but I'm sure someone out there has two years of big time recruits coming in who is currently entirely off the radar ... perhaps Endicott could be interesting, if McDevitt (and maybe a few other seniors) is returning for a fifth year, but otherwise, not enough up front.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on April 30, 2021, 08:51:21 AM

Romin Williams returning at Emory...

https://twitter.com/rominwilliams/status/1387839380451217413?s=20

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on April 30, 2021, 09:07:50 AM

Quote from: WUPHF on March 19, 2021, 12:29:45 AM
I heard Rowley, Schner, Stuck, and Williams back with a relatively recent confirmation.

Told ya...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on April 30, 2021, 09:24:14 AM

Quote from: WUPHF on April 30, 2021, 09:07:50 AM
Quote from: WUPHF on March 19, 2021, 12:29:45 AM
I heard Rowley, Schner, Stuck, and Williams back with a relatively recent confirmation.

Told ya...

My usually reliable source gets a failing grade on that one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on April 30, 2021, 10:51:13 AM

So based on what we know or can reasonably speculate on, who are the top contenders for pre-season top 10 accolades? It's of course still incredibly hard to figure out with limited information, but based on what I've seen on and off these boards ...

Randolph Macon (is Anthony returning, that's a big question I guess?), Yeshiva, Swarthmore, Emory, Wisconsin-Oshkosh, IWU, Tufts, Marietta, Wheaton (IL), and Trine seem like the best bets. I'm sure I'm missing a few.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on April 30, 2021, 12:09:09 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on April 30, 2021, 09:24:14 AM
Quote from: WUPHF on April 30, 2021, 09:07:50 AM
Quote from: WUPHF on March 19, 2021, 12:29:45 AM
I heard Rowley, Schner, Stuck, and Williams back with a relatively recent confirmation.

Told ya...

My usually reliable source gets a failing grade on that one.

I should have included an emoticon because I have almost no sources, but I have an Emory source from outside the athletic department.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on April 30, 2021, 12:46:20 PM

In Chicagoese we would say, "WUPHF's godda guy at Emory."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on April 30, 2021, 02:22:47 PM

Or two or tri. #southside

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on April 30, 2021, 02:38:40 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on April 30, 2021, 02:22:47 PM
Or two or tri. #southside

This south side guy says your story checks out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on April 30, 2021, 03:44:48 PM

Ha, ha! One of the best parts of my day was stopping by the White Hen Pantry at Western and 103rd and getting a coffee for $1.03. Good coffee too.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on April 30, 2021, 04:21:57 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on April 30, 2021, 03:44:48 PM
Ha, ha! One of the best parts of my day was stopping by the White Hen Pantry at Western and 103rd and getting a coffee for $1.03. Good coffee too.

Just a couple blocks from Cork & Kerry!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: RogK on April 30, 2021, 07:40:12 PM

I been to duh innersection of Western an a hunnert-an-terd street !

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on April 30, 2021, 09:21:15 PM

Let it be known, if I die today, it will be from the laughing, not the pork chops or kielbasa.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on April 30, 2021, 11:34:15 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on April 30, 2021, 03:44:48 PM
Ha, ha! One of the best parts of my day was stopping by the White Hen Pantry at Western and 103rd and getting a coffee for $1.03. Good coffee too.

It's a 7-11 now, just like almost all of the rest of the former "Honky Chicken" convenience stores. (I knew a nerdy guy at North Park who called them that, and somehow it caught on around campus, to the point that that nickname leaps into my head whenever anyone mentions the old White Hen Pantry stores.)

Actually, I've never been to Western & 103rd, although I have a friend from North Park who lives down there in the Beverly neighborhood. Aside from Hyde Park, my experience in dealing with the South Side has been scant. Chicago really is two distinct cities that share a common downtown. Whenever I walk around Hyde Park before a Maroons game, I look at the house numbers getting bigger rather than smaller as I go further south, and it gives me vertigo.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on May 24, 2021, 02:10:39 PM

My conversation with UST's Johnny Tauer...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbhACpxSZ3o&feature=emb_logo

0:00 Mixed Emotions
2:15 His journey at St. Thomas
4:02 Incredible MBB success at St. Thomas
8:05 No more brackets of death
10:00 Getting kicked out of the MIAC
16:15 Leaving something (D3) that has meant a lot
19:35 Moving to D1/The Summit League
22:45 2019-20 and 2020-21 seasons (COVID)
27:48 Logistic of moving from D3 to D1 (scholarships, etc)
33:38 Returning players in 2021-22
39:10 Adjusting mindset from dominant program to building program
41:37 Mike Maker (Assistant Coach)
46:08 Chancey's battle w/ cancer
48:34 New addition to the family on the way
51:20 Jack going D3
57:26 What will he miss about D3?
1:00:27 Final thoughts

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on June 06, 2021, 04:59:57 PM

Anthony is returning. If Leifer returns, Yeshiva is a sure-thing top 4 pre-season team. IWU, RMC, and Trine are the other teams in that group of 4 which appears to rise above the rest on paper. Not sure which Emory seniors are staying for a 5th year. Tufts, WashU (Nolan returns, not sure about Webb), St. Joseph CT (if Powell returns), Wheaton, and UWO (if Meunch returns) all have the potential to be top-5, certainly top 10.

Quote from: nescac1 on April 30, 2021, 10:51:13 AM
So based on what we know or can reasonably speculate on, who are the top contenders for pre-season top 10 accolades? It's of course still incredibly hard to figure out with limited information, but based on what I've seen on and off these boards ...

Randolph Macon (is Anthony returning, that's a big question I guess?), Yeshiva, Swarthmore, Emory, Wisconsin-Oshkosh, IWU, Tufts, Marietta, Wheaton (IL), and Trine seem like the best bets. I'm sure I'm missing a few.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on June 06, 2021, 08:09:50 PM

Others have reported on these boards that Emory's key guys are back for a 5th year (or at least most of them). So they should be loaded. The UAA is gonna be really, really tough next year - it has a big advantage with every school having top-tier graduate programs, which makes a fifth year a much better option than conferences comprised of, say, liberal arts schools. Indeed, in addition to Nolan and the Emory guys, Brandeis, Case Western, and Rochester all landed important graduate transfers. Rochester may not be a top 5 contender, but they are certainly a team to watch ... they hung with Yeshiva last year and return all but one player, led by all-American Ryan Algier, and add Dan Masino, an all-Liberty League player.

I think Swarthmore has to be included in any list of potential pre-season top five teams. Based on their roster this year (only ONE guy listed) everyone is taking a gap year. That means they return their top three scorers (including the D3 national ROY), and all but two rotation players, from the squad that was the top team in the country for most of the 2020 season. Yes, they lose two great big guys, but they had some frosh big guys on the 2020 roster who should be ready to step in right away, and they bring in two highly ranked recruits from New England next year, one of whom is a big guy who could help early on. Kosmalski always makes the most of his talent, and each year, seems to be able to bring in more and more talented recruits. To me, Swarthmore, RMC, Yeshiva, IWU and Emory look like a pretty rock-solid top five, with maybe Emory getting bumped for someone like Trine, UWO, or Tufts. But those first four squads in particular look loaded.

Next year's top ten just looks ridiculously stacked over all. Of the ten guys on the first and second team all-American squads, I think 8-9 are returning. Plus throw in sure-fire all-Americans like Luke Rogers from Tufts and Nolan from Wash U. (among others) who didn't play at all last year. It's just gonna be a crazy stacked year in D3.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on June 06, 2021, 09:10:13 PM

I didn't know Rochester was bringing in Masino. That's a nice add. They should be borderline top-10. I'm not as high as you are on Swat yet--unless they bring in a stud forward transfer, they will offensively be quite a different team, a much smaller team, than 2019-20, which could take some time to come together. I don't believe they had practices last year, which also could hurt them when it comes to taking time to gel. I need to see them play a little before considering them as a top-5 team. Lastly, they won't land in anyone's top-10 to start the year, but Penn-State Harrisburg could certainly make their way into it. That team is stacked.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on June 07, 2021, 07:57:24 AM

My conversation with Ryan Whitnable...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDUCCvTVgPk&t=161s

0:00 Why D3 & Fit
6:50 Ryan's D3 story
8:32 Marietta MBB Program; Jon VanderWal era
14:38 2019 Elite 8 game
19:27 This Week in Great Lakes Basketball podcast
23:57 Importance of support from your spouse
25:34 Great Lakes Invitational tournament
32:38 Approaching the pandemic from a media perspective
35:45 Cancellation of the Division III Tournament
38:25 Finding common ground; driving conversation to find solutions
41:15 Voting in the D3hoops.com Top 25
49:23 2021-22 season expectations
53:05 Thoughts on Yeshiva
55:18 OAC vs NCAC
58:19 Hope & Calvin
1:01:13 Final thoughts

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on June 07, 2021, 08:24:47 AM

Regarding Swarthmore, I think Kosmalski is the best coach in D3 and he's been able to win a ton with less talent than he will have on hand next year. Whenever he loses a key guy to graduation, someone is ready to step in right away. And he's been able to attract more talent as the profile of the program had grown. Plus, 8 of the top 10 guys back, including the ROY, with two years of recruits added (including this year, two top-60 New England guys) is nothing to sneeze at!

His last three years:

25-6, elite 8
29-4, national title game
28-1, number one wire-to-wire

That's a pretty scary trend line.

I think so long as Swarthmore has the majority of its key guys back, and it seems that it will, it has to be no worse than number 3 to start the year and it's probably a toss-up with RMC for number one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on June 07, 2021, 08:51:10 AM

Does anyone know if Delaney or Kern are going to stay a 5th year at Hopkins? That's a team that was top-5 good on paper if they would have played last year, and they brought in a scary good recruiting class last year too.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on June 07, 2021, 09:08:41 AM

Quote from: PoppersMacsLive on June 07, 2021, 08:51:10 AM
Does anyone know if Delaney or Kern are going to stay a 5th year at Hopkins? That's a team that was top-5 good on paper if they would have played last year, and they brought in a scary good recruiting class last year too.

Delaney is expected back. Kern is walking on as a grad transfer at Minnesota.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on June 07, 2021, 10:57:22 AM

So then as of now, the list we have is

Teams which will almost definitely be Top 10 to start the season: RMC, IWU, Yeshiva, Swarthmore, Emory, Trine
Teams in Top 10 consideration to start the season: Tufts, Hopkins, Rochester, Saint Joseph CT, Oshkosh, Wheaton, Marietta, WashU
Teams which should be surefire Top 25 to start the season: WPI, Penn State-Harrisburg

That's 16.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on June 07, 2021, 11:37:13 AM

That looks pretty rock solid to me, PoppersMacLive.

The only team I can think to add to the "surefire top 25" category is Mary Hardin-Baylor, which returns a first-team all-American, and adds several scholarship-level transfers, including a highly-regarded D1 transfer.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: tomt4525 on June 07, 2021, 11:51:30 AM

UW-Lacrosse and UW-Platteville are top 25 teams for next season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on June 07, 2021, 12:11:00 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on June 07, 2021, 11:37:13 AM
That looks pretty rock solid to me, PoppersMacLive.

The only team I can think to add to the "surefire top 25" category is Mary Hardin-Baylor, which returns a first-team all-American, and adds several scholarship-level transfers, including a highly-regarded D1 transfer.

UMHB should be great...agree.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on June 07, 2021, 12:11:37 PM

Quote from: tomt4525 on June 07, 2021, 11:51:30 AM
UW-Lacrosse and UW-Platteville are top 25 teams for next season.

Without question.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on June 07, 2021, 02:55:05 PM

It's very difficult to make the kinds of lists early. I'd also want to guard against group think. It's very easy for familiarity to become consensus. Given the last 18 months, I'd say this is the most difficult season to predict we've probably ever had. I hope our preseason poll has 45 or 50 teams named. If we've got more than 10 teams on every single ballot, I'll worry about the diversity of the voting pool.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on June 07, 2021, 02:57:58 PM

Quote from: PoppersMacsLive on June 07, 2021, 10:57:22 AM
Teams in Top 10 consideration to start the season: Tufts, Hopkins, Rochester, Saint Joseph CT, Oshkosh, Wheaton, Marietta, WashU

I think Rochester will be good given who is returning and incoming and I liked the look of the back-up point guard for Rochester, but I'll stake my d3boards.com reputation on Brandeis finishing higher in the UAA. It will be a tight race either way.

But Rochester did play last season so they may get the benefit of the doubt.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on June 07, 2021, 04:44:42 PM

Is Cook returning for UWL?

Quote from: tomt4525 on June 07, 2021, 11:51:30 AM
UW-Lacrosse and UW-Platteville are top 25 teams for next season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: tomt4525 on June 07, 2021, 05:09:25 PM

Quote from: PoppersMacsLive on June 07, 2021, 04:44:42 PM
Is Cook returning for UWL?

Quote from: tomt4525 on June 07, 2021, 11:51:30 AM
UW-Lacrosse and UW-Platteville are top 25 teams for next season.

Yes, that's what I've heard.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on June 08, 2021, 03:48:50 PM

My conversation with Pat Coleman, Founder & Executive Editor of D3sports.com

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiPHnDkSBYA

0:00 Pat's D3 story
6:34 Looking back at the impact of D3sports.com
9:39 Original vision for D3hoops.com
12:10 The message boards (community)
18:25 Gordon Mann
21:58 Dave McHugh
25:29 Ryan Scott
27:03 Plea for SIDs to input scores
31:13 Balance between MBB and WBB from day one
34:02 Pat's D3 travels
38:50 D3hoops.com broadcasts
45:32 Catholic's 2001 national championship
51:37 Starting the All-American team
56:02 Creating the D3hoops.com Top 25
1:00:25 Changing landscape of media & content consumption
1:03:48 Value of D3hoops.com; financial support needed
1:12:19 Getting involved; joining the volunteer army
1:15:39 Final thoughts

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on June 10, 2021, 12:53:43 PM

I've heard Rochester All-American Ryan Algier, a 6-10 F, recently tore an ACL.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on June 17, 2021, 03:12:47 PM

WE ARE BACK!!!

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=uuzb2/e4yp3tp0qxev01jw.jpg)

Two years ago DIII was reeling with the news that fellow members of the MIAC had voted, in secret, to oust St. Thomas (Minn.) from the conference. It started a whirlwind of decisions and reactions on the UST campus and throughout the NCAA.

It also created a timeline: In two years time, UST would be leaving the MIAC and ultimately Division III. That meant watching two perennial basketball powers try and leave in style and on their terms. The Coronavirus Pandemic had other plans. Instead of celebrations, conference championships, and even national title chances... things have ended like a leaky ballon - just falling flat.

On the first Hoopsville podcast of the off-season, we chat with the two coaches who have kept their programs in the national conversation year in and year out and will now help them transition to Division I. Ruth Sinn and John Tauer join Dave McHugh to chat about the school and programs' history and love of Division III and how the change to DI will and will not change things.

It is a great conversation with two coaches who will be missed in DIII.

Plus, there are few things to note in the Hoopsville Notebook! Lots of coaching changes and a number of interesting twists with some of the searches. There are new rules that have been adopted for both sports. Plus what to expect from us, as a show, moving forward after taking some much need, and completely unintended, time off.

You can listen to the podcast here: https://bit.ly/3vzDQYm or https://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2020-21/june

Hoopsville broadcasts from the WBCA/NABC Studio. All guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline. The offseason plan is to do a podcast each month. The shows will be audio-only leading up to the start of the 2021-22 when we will restart the video shows.

If you have questions, ideas, or want to interact with the show, feel free to send them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options available.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3sports.com
Hoopsville Season Archive: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on June 23, 2021, 12:33:46 PM

Any word on if Ellis and Kreeger are returning for Marietta?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on June 26, 2021, 08:53:34 PM

Quote from: PoppersMacsLive on June 23, 2021, 12:33:46 PM
Any word on if Ellis and Kreeger are returning for Marietta?

Both are expected back.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on July 14, 2021, 02:03:49 PM

My conversation with Mike Rejniak, GM and Head Coach of We Are D3. The team is 2 days from its round 1 game of The Tournament in the Wichita regional - 6pm CT Friday on ESPN.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVbztjqBUR0

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on July 14, 2021, 03:53:52 PM

I really enjoyed the podcast.

I am looking forward to watching Ty Sabin after the Coach remarked about how far he has come. How much farther could he go?

I may have missed it in conversation or maybe this was mentioned elsewhere, but the Nerd Team does have two Division III players that could have a major impact. The players are John Di Bartomoleo from Rochester and the Willy Workman from Amherst.

Not as cool as a roster full of Division III players, but still great for the Division.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on July 15, 2021, 09:22:45 AM

I finally read the D3Hoops story. There are a lot Division III basketball players in The Tournament including a third on that Nerd Team. Lots of stories for fans to follow.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on July 15, 2021, 09:55:46 AM

Saw that Riley Hayes of Catholic is on the D3 team

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BaboNation on July 15, 2021, 02:50:37 PM

Great podcast!

We've knocked on the door a few times in the past. Hopefully this is the breakthrough year - it would be so special on a national telecast. Coach Rejniak really got my jaw to drop when he confidently stated "this game will come down to 1 possession." That tells me he really likes this group.

As a Babson fan too I think what Coach Droney adds to the staff is considerable. It's only a matter of time before he gets to be a HC somewhere.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on July 16, 2021, 09:08:26 AM

I've just confirmed with Coach Don Friday of Penn-State Harrisburg that Brandon Coleman will be returning. He suffered a season-ending injury after two games in 2019. Coach Friday called him their second best player (after Donyae Baylor-Carroll; although he was likely focusing on scorers, because Dylan Daniels is one of the best rim protectors in D3) in their NCAA Tournament post-game presser after beating Hopkins. This solidifies PSUH as a Top 25 preseason team, in my opinion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jmcozenlaw on July 16, 2021, 02:29:57 PM

Quote from: PoppersMacsLive on July 16, 2021, 09:08:26 AM
I've just confirmed with Coach Don Friday of Penn-State Harrisburg that Brandon Coleman will be returning. He suffered a season-ending injury after two games in 2019. Coach Friday called him their second best player (after Donyae Baylor-Carroll; although he was likely focusing on scorers, because Dylan Daniels is one of the best rim protectors in D3) in their NCAA Tournament post-game presser after beating Hopkins. This solidifies PSUH as a Top 25 preseason team, in my opinion.

.................and to think that little Lancaster Bible College had PSU-Harrisburg dead to rights late in the NEAC Championship game. LBC returns 8 of their top 9 players and has two incoming freshmen studs and two impact (both possibly starters) transfers for the 2021-2022 season. Those LBC vs. PSU-Harrisburg games should be interesting, but I'll give the nod to PSU with the quality of what they have coming back and coming in.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on July 16, 2021, 03:01:25 PM

Pretty wild, but I do think it is important to note that PSUH beat LB by 26 in both of their prior meetings.

Quote from: jmcozenlaw on July 16, 2021, 02:29:57 PM
Quote from: PoppersMacsLive on July 16, 2021, 09:08:26 AM
I've just confirmed with Coach Don Friday of Penn-State Harrisburg that Brandon Coleman will be returning. He suffered a season-ending injury after two games in 2019. Coach Friday called him their second best player (after Donyae Baylor-Carroll; although he was likely focusing on scorers, because Dylan Daniels is one of the best rim protectors in D3) in their NCAA Tournament post-game presser after beating Hopkins. This solidifies PSUH as a Top 25 preseason team, in my opinion.

.................and to think that little Lancaster Bible College had PSU-Harrisburg dead to rights late in the NEAC Championship game. LBC returns 8 of their top 9 players and has two incoming freshmen studs and two impact (both possibly starters) transfers for the 2021-2022 season. Those LBC vs. PSU-Harrisburg games should be interesting, but I'll give the nod to PSU with the quality of what they have coming back and coming in.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jmcozenlaw on July 17, 2021, 12:42:36 PM

LBC was an incredibly young (and lost) team for a chunk of the year, but when it mattered most (the NEAC Championship Game), they showed their growth and took PSU, on their homecourt, to OT. It truly was a season that came out of nowhere for LBC. PSU-Harrisburg should dominate in many sports, including basketball and baseball, in the current iteration (which won't be around, as is, for much longer, if at all) of the conference given their many advantages over all of the other NEAC schools.

Quote from: PoppersMacsLive on July 16, 2021, 03:01:25 PM
Pretty wild, but I do think it is important to note that PSUH beat LB by 26 in both of their prior meetings.

Quote from: jmcozenlaw on July 16, 2021, 02:29:57 PM
Quote from: PoppersMacsLive on July 16, 2021, 09:08:26 AM
I've just confirmed with Coach Don Friday of Penn-State Harrisburg that Brandon Coleman will be returning. He suffered a season-ending injury after two games in 2019. Coach Friday called him their second best player (after Donyae Baylor-Carroll; although he was likely focusing on scorers, because Dylan Daniels is one of the best rim protectors in D3) in their NCAA Tournament post-game presser after beating Hopkins. This solidifies PSUH as a Top 25 preseason team, in my opinion.

.................and to think that little Lancaster Bible College had PSU-Harrisburg dead to rights late in the NEAC Championship game. LBC returns 8 of their top 9 players and has two incoming freshmen studs and two impact (both possibly starters) transfers for the 2021-2022 season. Those LBC vs. PSU-Harrisburg games should be interesting, but I'll give the nod to PSU with the quality of what they have coming back and coming in.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on September 17, 2021, 10:42:19 AM

I'm getting word that Connor Delaney is back for Johns Hopkins. With a strong recruiting class last year and most of the 2019-20 team back, JHU is in my eyes a lock to be a top 10 preseason team, and should be borderline top 5.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 17, 2021, 02:16:44 PM

Yeshiva 6-6 All-American F Gabriel Leifer - 13.1 ppg, 10.4 rpg, 6.9 apg - will return to the Macs this season for a national title run.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on September 17, 2021, 05:45:37 PM

As will Eitan Halpert. 18.1 ppg last season, 47.1% from 3. Shot 50% from 3 in 2019-20.
Macs return top 8 point-scorers and minute-getters from last year's team.

Quote from: Titan Q on September 17, 2021, 02:16:44 PM
Yeshiva 6-6 All-American F Gabriel Leifer - 13.1 ppg, 10.4 rpg, 6.9 apg - will return to the Macs this season for a national title run.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on September 17, 2021, 07:37:01 PM

Son D3 should just skip the NCAA tournament for the 3rd year in a row and just crown the Macs the champs now?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 22, 2021, 11:05:45 AM

14 teams I see as contenders for the top 10 in the preseason poll...

Brandeis
Emory
Illinois Wesleyan
Johns Hopkins
Marietta
Mary Hardin-Baylor
Randolph-Macon
Swarthmore
Trine
Tufts
UW-Oshkosh
WashU
Wheaton (IL)
Yeshiva

Am I missing any other sure-bet Top 10 candidates?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on September 22, 2021, 12:04:50 PM

Brandeis looks likely to be very good this year but I would eliminate them from that group - if they are in contention I'd say St. Joseph (CT) and WPI should be too. I think all three are probably top 25 material, but not top 10 teams, ultimately, but if I had to pick one for top 10 contention, I'd go with WPI over Brandeis, especially with how strong the top of the UAA looks. As for the rest of your inclusions, I think you pretty much nailed it. In my view, Yeshiva, IWU, RMC, Oshkosh, Tufts, Emory, and Swarthmore are definitely in. Maybe Trine too? The last few spots, up for grabs in that group. I think I'd go with MHB and Wash U. for the last two spots.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 22, 2021, 12:28:20 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on September 22, 2021, 12:04:50 PM
Brandeis looks likely to be very good this year but I would eliminate them from that group - if they are in contention I'd say St. Joseph (CT) and WPI should be too. I think all three are probably top 25 material, but not top 10 teams, ultimately, but if I had to pick one for top 10 contention, I'd go with WPI over Brandeis, especially with how strong the top of the UAA looks. As for the rest of your inclusions, I think you pretty much nailed it. In my view, Yeshiva, IWU, RMC, Oshkosh, Tufts, Emory, and Swarthmore are definitely in. Maybe Trine too? The last few spots, up for grabs in that group. I think I'd go with MHB and Wash U. for the last two spots.

With Brandeis, just thinking they return basically the entire group from 2019-20...and add Middlebury's leading scorer. Seems like they are going to be loaded. I guess we'll see.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on September 22, 2021, 12:43:29 PM

The 1st and 3rd leading Brandeis scorers in 2020 were seniors. Is one or both back for a sixth year? I do love their additions. Eastman is legit, plus what looks like a big time D1 transfer and a very highly touted frosh from NC. But I'm less sold on the returning roster .... WPI has I believe most everyone back plus some highly touted recruits.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 22, 2021, 12:55:15 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on September 22, 2021, 12:43:29 PM
The 1st and 3rd leading Brandeis scorers in 2020 were seniors. Is one or both back for a sixth year? I do love their additions. Eastman is legit, plus what looks like a big time D1 transfer and a very highly touted frosh from NC. But I'm less sold on the returning roster .... WPI has I believe most everyone back plus some highly touted recruits.

Collin Sawyer (leading scorer from '19-20, 15.6 ppg) is back. Not sure about the 3rd leading scorer.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on September 22, 2021, 01:14:08 PM

So Collin Sawyer will be a 6th year senior? D'Aguanno played 103 games in 4 years before the pandemic so that would mean he's done.

Tufts is the only New England school that's in the hunt for a preseason top 10 spot this year in my opinion. Other teams will emerge as the year goes on obviously but with all of the uncertainty I don't see how you can take a Brandeis who hasn't really been ranked in a long time and just shoot them up the list. But I do expect them to be very good. Same deal with WPI or any of the top NEWMAC schools for that matter, the ones at the top will find their way up the rankings once the wins start rolling in, but from a preseason ranking standpoint they're just not at that level.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on September 22, 2021, 02:52:21 PM

My understanding is that Brandeis returns Sabir and Jones from the senior class in addition to Sawyer so yeah, they should be good. The core players (with Eric D'aguanno) went 1-1 against Rochester, 1-1 against Emory and 0-2 against Washington University two seasons ago.

I do think guys like Lien and Justice will play a much bigger role this season.

This team would not be good enough to start in the average Top 10, in my estimation, but definitely Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 22, 2021, 04:55:41 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on September 22, 2021, 11:05:45 AM
14 teams I see as contenders for the top 10 in the preseason poll...

Brandeis
Emory
Illinois Wesleyan
Johns Hopkins
Marietta
Mary Hardin-Baylor
Randolph-Macon
Swarthmore
Trine
Tufts
UW-Oshkosh
WashU
Wheaton (IL)
Yeshiva

Am I missing any other sure-bet Top 10 candidates?

Add UW-Platteville. I am hearing everyone is returning.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on September 22, 2021, 07:57:01 PM

The reality is that there's never ten teams that feel like Top Ten teams in preseason, you just have to rank them and follow you don't look silly in March. This year will be even more difficult.

The only locks on my board are Yeshiva, Macon, and IWU. There's a few more I'll add once I see rosters, but it's tough. We haven't really done a full ranking in 18 months. Who's to know who's good? I thought Emory and JHU were too highly rated in 2019-20, but that shouldn't really matter now, right?

I'll definitely be relying on the voter info more than ever before this time around.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on September 23, 2021, 11:59:54 PM

Quote from: PoppersMacsLive on September 17, 2021, 10:42:19 AM
I'm getting word that Connor Delaney is back for Johns Hopkins. With a strong recruiting class last year and most of the 2019-20 team back, JHU is in my eyes a lock to be a top 10 preseason team, and should be borderline top 5.

When I reported that he was playing lacrosse for Hopkins last year, we basically stated he would be back for his senior year.

Really the more surprising news is if he wasn't going to be back.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 24, 2021, 01:52:58 PM

17 candidates for my preseason Top 15.

Brandeis
Dubuque
Emory
Illinois Wesleyan
Johns Hopkins
Marietta
Randolph-Macon
Swarthmore
Trine
Tufts
UMHB
UW-Oshkosh
UW-Platteville
WashU
Wheaton (IL)
Whitworth
Yeshiva

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on September 24, 2021, 04:49:59 PM

I would not sleep on WPI and especially St Joe's. They hung with Yeshiva twice with their best player out, seemingly injured. They have basically the same group of guys (other than maybe their big guy not sure) from 2020, now will all be seniors, and each year seem to bring in 1-2 interesting transfers. They could be pretty loaded this year and their backcourt is absolutely legit. No one can match up with both those guys.

My pre-season New England ranking based on what we know to date (not a ton) goes Tufts, WPI / St. Joes, Brandeis, UMass Dartmouth, Amherst, Williams, Colby, Babson. Something like that ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on September 24, 2021, 08:18:39 PM

If all the guys are back, St. Joe's is a Top 10 team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 25, 2021, 09:33:42 AM

Another team to keep an eye on - Maryville (TN).

Won USA South reg season and tourney last yr.

Added 2 D1s transfers last yr - Myles Rasnick (ETSU) and Chase Ridenour (TN Tech). Rasnick averaged 15 & 5. Ridenour got hurt in 1st game. Both are back.

2 other all-conf guys back too: JR Sanders and Felix Uadiale.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 25, 2021, 09:49:06 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on September 24, 2021, 04:49:59 PM
I would not sleep on WPI and especially St Joe's. They hung with Yeshiva twice with their best player out, seemingly injured. They have basically the same group of guys (other than maybe their big guy not sure) from 2020, now will all be seniors, and each year seem to bring in 1-2 interesting transfers. They could be pretty loaded this year and their backcourt is absolutely legit. No one can match up with both those guys.

My pre-season New England ranking based on what we know to date (not a ton) goes Tufts, WPI / St. Joes, Brandeis, UMass Dartmouth, Amherst, Williams, Colby, Babson. Something like that ...

I will check both out early for sure. Based on what I saw last season, I would not have St. Joe's in a top 15...but if a key guy comes back, sure.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 25, 2021, 10:13:06 AM

My way too early Top 25 teams.

Berry
Brandeis
Dubuque
Elmhurst
Emory
IWU
Johns Hopkins
Marietta
Maryville TN
Linfield
New Jersey City
RMC
St. Joe's CT
Swarthmore
Trine
Tufts
UMHB
UW-La Crosse
UW-Oshkosh
UW-Platteville
WashU
Wheaton (IL)
Whitworth
WPI
Yeshiva

The teams in bold would be in my top 3 at this point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on September 25, 2021, 02:34:18 PM

Can we pump the brakes on Yeshiva just a little? I understand it's a great story and I understand that they have put together a great few years but the 2020 tournament getting cancelled has artificially boosted all 16 teams that were still in the dance. For all we know, Yeshiva might've been pasted by Randolph-Macon and we would think totally different than how we do now. Their best regular season win in 2019-20 was a 13-12 Williams team and they beat WPI in a game that got approved for play an hour before tip off and was the first game in the US to be played without fans.

I only say all of this to remind everyone how different the last 2 seasons have been and that a lot of what we're basing these predictions off of is a bunch of nothing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on September 25, 2021, 04:47:30 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on September 25, 2021, 02:34:18 PM
Their best regular season win in 2019-20 was a 13-12 Williams team and they beat WPI in a game that got approved for play an hour before tip off and was the first game in the US to be played without fans.

And without a few key reserves, right?

I like the Yeshiva story as much as anyone, but I am from the Show Me State, so I need to see them play more to believe that they are bold worthy.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on September 25, 2021, 05:10:22 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on September 25, 2021, 02:34:18 PM
Can we pump the brakes on Yeshiva just a little? I understand it's a great story and I understand that they have put together a great few years but the 2020 tournament getting cancelled has artificially boosted all 16 teams that were still in the dance. For all we know, Yeshiva might've been pasted by Randolph-Macon and we would think totally different than how we do now. Their best regular season win in 2019-20 was a 13-12 Williams team and they beat WPI in a game that got approved for play an hour before tip off and was the first game in the US to be played without fans.

I only say all of this to remind everyone how different the last 2 seasons have been and that a lot of what we're basing these predictions off of is a bunch of nothing.

You sound like Q, before he started watching them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on September 25, 2021, 05:20:17 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on September 25, 2021, 04:47:30 PM
Quote from: SpringSt7 on September 25, 2021, 02:34:18 PM
Their best regular season win in 2019-20 was a 13-12 Williams team and they beat WPI in a game that got approved for play an hour before tip off and was the first game in the US to be played without fans.

And without a few key reserves, right?

I like the Yeshiva story as much as anyone, but I am from the Show Me State, so I need to see them play more to believe that they are bold worthy.

The obvious question mark for Yeshiva is clearly consistency. They've never had to play their best game more than two or three in a row. I don't think, though, if you watched them against Rochester or St Joe's, or WPI in the tournament, you could say they didn't possess top level talent.

In a year with lots of unknowns, an experienced, talented, deep squad with two of the 10-15 best players in the country, is a pretty solid pick.

There may end up being 10 teams better than Yeshiva this year, but we couldn't know who they are right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on September 25, 2021, 05:32:17 PM

I did watch Yeshiva play Rochester last year.

I think Rochester has been overrated as of late, but a good, neutral court win for Yeshiva nonetheless. Turrell made some unbelievable shots in the final 10 minutes otherwise, that game would have gone down to the wire.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on September 25, 2021, 06:13:56 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on September 25, 2021, 05:32:17 PM
I did watch Yeshiva play Rochester last year.

I think Rochester has been overrated as of late, but a good, neutral court win for Yeshiva nonetheless. Turrell made some unbelievable shots in the final 10 minutes otherwise, that game would have gone down to the wire.

My hesitation with Yeshiva for three years has been the disperity between a good night and a bad one. So far, though, they've been ready when they've had to be. That's all you can ask, right?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on September 25, 2021, 08:18:55 PM

I assume the best player you are referring to is #1, Delshawn Jackson.
The story with him last year was sad but simple—he was severely out of shape. That's why he essentially didn't play.
Whether or not he is back in shape will, in my opinion, dictate whether or not St. Joe's is a Top 10 team.

Quote from: nescac1 on September 24, 2021, 04:49:59 PM
I would not sleep on WPI and especially St Joe's. They hung with Yeshiva twice with their best player out, seemingly injured. They have basically the same group of guys (other than maybe their big guy not sure) from 2020, now will all be seniors, and each year seem to bring in 1-2 interesting transfers. They could be pretty loaded this year and their backcourt is absolutely legit. No one can match up with both those guys.

My pre-season New England ranking based on what we know to date (not a ton) goes Tufts, WPI / St. Joes, Brandeis, UMass Dartmouth, Amherst, Williams, Colby, Babson. Something like that ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 25, 2021, 09:37:32 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on September 25, 2021, 05:20:17 PM
Quote from: WUPHF on September 25, 2021, 04:47:30 PM
Quote from: SpringSt7 on September 25, 2021, 02:34:18 PM
Their best regular season win in 2019-20 was a 13-12 Williams team and they beat WPI in a game that got approved for play an hour before tip off and was the first game in the US to be played without fans.

And without a few key reserves, right?

I like the Yeshiva story as much as anyone, but I am from the Show Me State, so I need to see them play more to believe that they are bold worthy.

The obvious question mark for Yeshiva is clearly consistency. They've never had to play their best game more than two or three in a row. I don't think, though, if you watched them against Rochester or St Joe's, or WPI in the tournament, you could say they didn't possess top level talent.

In a year with lots of unknowns, an experienced, talented, deep squad with two of the 10-15 best players in the country, is a pretty solid pick.

There may end up being 10 teams better than Yeshiva this year, but we couldn't know who they are right now.

The question mark for me with Yeshiva is how they handle WIAC/CCIW type size. 6-6 Leiffer is a great player...but is he big enough to handle the best D3 5s? I don't know.

IWU's 6-7/235 All-American F Matt Leritz is not a Jack Flynn type (Matt is more of a 4)...but Leiffer vs Leritz will be really interesting on 12/30 in NYC. And IWU will have a few more 6-7+ types in the low post rotation...I'm interested to see how Yeshiva handles that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on September 25, 2021, 10:21:54 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on September 25, 2021, 05:10:22 PM
Quote from: SpringSt7 on September 25, 2021, 02:34:18 PM
Can we pump the brakes on Yeshiva just a little? I understand it's a great story and I understand that they have put together a great few years but the 2020 tournament getting cancelled has artificially boosted all 16 teams that were still in the dance. For all we know, Yeshiva might've been pasted by Randolph-Macon and we would think totally different than how we do now. Their best regular season win in 2019-20 was a 13-12 Williams team and they beat WPI in a game that got approved for play an hour before tip off and was the first game in the US to be played without fans.

I only say all of this to remind everyone how different the last 2 seasons have been and that a lot of what we're basing these predictions off of is a bunch of nothing.

You sound like Q, before he started watching them.

Williams has had Yeshiva on the schedule since 2017 so I would actually say I've watched them for longer than most. They are a great team and I am glad to see the board recognizes concerns similar to the ones I have. If anything, I think based on the talk around Leifer in particular, people aren't watching him/them enough as his numbers severely overrate him as a player, although they probably still capture his impact. But when you are the only person on your team who goes for rebounds and you hold the ball at the top of the key for 20 seconds every possession, your rebound and assist numbers are going to be pretty good. I felt like Simcha Halpert was a better player than Leifer and a much more important player than he got credit for, because of his able to shoot off the catch and off the dribble, while being their only real PnR threat.

I guess I'm overthinking it a little as there are more question marks nationally than ever more and they are certainly a surer thing than most.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on September 25, 2021, 10:39:11 PM

Yeshiva does not run PnR...

Quote from: SpringSt7 on September 25, 2021, 10:21:54 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on September 25, 2021, 05:10:22 PM
Quote from: SpringSt7 on September 25, 2021, 02:34:18 PM
Can we pump the brakes on Yeshiva just a little? I understand it's a great story and I understand that they have put together a great few years but the 2020 tournament getting cancelled has artificially boosted all 16 teams that were still in the dance. For all we know, Yeshiva might've been pasted by Randolph-Macon and we would think totally different than how we do now. Their best regular season win in 2019-20 was a 13-12 Williams team and they beat WPI in a game that got approved for play an hour before tip off and was the first game in the US to be played without fans.

I only say all of this to remind everyone how different the last 2 seasons have been and that a lot of what we're basing these predictions off of is a bunch of nothing.

You sound like Q, before he started watching them.

Williams has had Yeshiva on the schedule since 2017 so I would actually say I've watched them for longer than most. They are a great team and I am glad to see the board recognizes concerns similar to the ones I have. If anything, I think based on the talk around Leifer in particular, people aren't watching him/them enough as his numbers severely overrate him as a player, although they probably still capture his impact. But when you are the only person on your team who goes for rebounds and you hold the ball at the top of the key for 20 seconds every possession, your rebound and assist numbers are going to be pretty good. I felt like Simcha Halpert was a better player than Leifer and a much more important player than he got credit for, because of his able to shoot off the catch and off the dribble, while being their only real PnR threat.

I guess I'm overthinking it a little as there are more question marks nationally than ever more and they are certainly a surer thing than most.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on September 25, 2021, 10:59:18 PM

Okay their offense does not feature heavy PnR but that doesn't mean it never happens and it also doesn't mean they didn't still lose a guy who shot 44% from 3 on heavy heavy volume.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on September 25, 2021, 11:08:47 PM

To clarify: Yeshiva has run 0 pick and rolls in the last four years.

Quote from: SpringSt7 on September 25, 2021, 10:59:18 PM
Okay their offense does not feature heavy PnR but that doesn't mean it never happens and it also doesn't mean they didn't still lose a guy who shot 44% from 3 on heavy heavy volume.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on September 26, 2021, 09:58:33 AM

I'd agree that Leifer's numbers detract from one's ability to see his real value. His understanding of positioning and where the ball needs to be is way ahead of most d3 bigs. He's got footwork and size that's also pretty rare. As Q said, he's not had to play much against similarly skilled, larger guys, so that's still the big question mark.

I don't think Yeshiva would be passing out of the high post so much if Leifer weren't so good at it.

The numbers are gaudy because they play fast and he never comes out, but they're not too far diminished against good teams, either.

I think we're all hoping for what we missed out on in 2020, which is a chance to see Yeshiva against a clear Top 10 team. I'm planning to be there in person Dec 30th to finally find out what it looks like.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on September 26, 2021, 10:19:50 AM

I think Titan Q'a top 25 looks solid. I have no squabbles at all. Here are my list of sleepers, teams that mostly do not warrant inclusion based on recent performance but I think have the potential to make a big leap forward. I bet at least a few end up in the top 25, even if they don't start off there:

Augsburg, Wooster, Nebraska Wesleyan, Redlands, Muhlenberg, Cornell, Williams, and super deep sleeper Salve Regina

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on September 26, 2021, 10:33:42 AM

I just messaged Delshawn Jackson—he says that everybody is back (meaning Powell—the big guy—is back) and fully healthy.

USJ belongs in the Preseason Top 10 discussion.

Quote from: nescac1 on September 24, 2021, 04:49:59 PM
I would not sleep on WPI and especially St Joe's. They hung with Yeshiva twice with their best player out, seemingly injured. They have basically the same group of guys (other than maybe their big guy not sure) from 2020, now will all be seniors, and each year seem to bring in 1-2 interesting transfers. They could be pretty loaded this year and their backcourt is absolutely legit. No one can match up with both those guys.

My pre-season New England ranking based on what we know to date (not a ton) goes Tufts, WPI / St. Joes, Brandeis, UMass Dartmouth, Amherst, Williams, Colby, Babson. Something like that ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on September 26, 2021, 11:03:21 AM

Good intel Poppers! Given that, St Joes is a top ten team. They are gonna be really really tough this year with a slew of seniors who have been playing big minutes together for four years now. And obviously very well-coached.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on September 26, 2021, 11:45:10 AM

Is this rough ranking of NE teams under the assumption that Garrett Stephenson is back? I have no clue if he's pulling a Leifer-esque move, but his LinkedIn indicates that he's graduated from WPI and is working full time at HP. If he's not back, I would surely think Brandeis slots in ahead of WPI, right?

Quote from: nescac1 on September 24, 2021, 04:49:59 PM
I would not sleep on WPI and especially St Joe's. They hung with Yeshiva twice with their best player out, seemingly injured. They have basically the same group of guys (other than maybe their big guy not sure) from 2020, now will all be seniors, and each year seem to bring in 1-2 interesting transfers. They could be pretty loaded this year and their backcourt is absolutely legit. No one can match up with both those guys.

My pre-season New England ranking based on what we know to date (not a ton) goes Tufts, WPI / St. Joes, Brandeis, UMass Dartmouth, Amherst, Williams, Colby, Babson. Something like that ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on September 26, 2021, 12:33:22 PM

Garrett Stephenson is not back but they return most of their team and replace him with maybe the highest ranked recruit in New England since Duncan Robinson in John Adams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on September 26, 2021, 12:49:01 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on September 26, 2021, 12:33:22 PM
Garrett Stephenson is not back but they return most of their team and replace him with maybe the highest ranked recruit in New England since Duncan Robinson in John Adams.

I think John Adams died in 1826.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on September 26, 2021, 01:05:25 PM

Thanks. I'm just struggling to see how WPI can be considered better on paper (which is what this specific discussion pretty much is given the fact that neither WPI nor Brandeis played last year) than Brandeis given the fact that WPI graduates their glue guy and go-to defender (Wisniewski) as well as their first choice offensively (Stephenson) from a team which did not finish Top 25 in 2019-20. Maybe I'm underrating the talent of their supporting cast from 2019-20 and recent recruits.

Quote from: SpringSt7 on September 26, 2021, 12:33:22 PM
Garrett Stephenson is not back but they return most of their team and replace him with maybe the highest ranked recruit in New England since Duncan Robinson in John Adams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on September 26, 2021, 01:09:26 PM

I think the logic would be that Lowther turns into an all-league guy and they get a healthy Reid Walker back, plus some of their other 5th year seniors. I think they have Downing and McNamara back. They would also qualify to me as a team that maybe shouldn't be that high up in a preseason top 25 but with their pedigree + a weaker NEWMAC you just know they're going to win 20 games anyways.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BaboNation on September 26, 2021, 08:55:45 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on September 26, 2021, 01:09:26 PM
I think the logic would be that Lowther turns into an all-league guy and they get a healthy Reid Walker back, plus some of their other 5th year seniors. I think they have Downing and McNamara back. They would also qualify to me as a team that maybe shouldn't be that high up in a preseason top 25 but with their pedigree + a weaker NEWMAC you just know they're going to win 20 games anyways.

I think this is pretty accurate. Arguably no team was hurt more by the Covid year than senior-laden WPI. Until their roster is finalized it's very hard to gauge how good they'll be with all they've lost thru graduation.
I've been impressed with Lowther from day 1. He's an example of why recruiting rankings aren't always what they purport to be. I do expect a weaker NEWMAC this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on September 26, 2021, 09:15:55 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on September 26, 2021, 12:49:01 PM
Quote from: SpringSt7 on September 26, 2021, 12:33:22 PM
Garrett Stephenson is not back but they return most of their team and replace him with maybe the highest ranked recruit in New England since Duncan Robinson in John Adams.

I think John Adams died in 1826.

July 4, 1826, 50 years after the Declaration of Independence. Both John Adams and Jefferson died on the same day. Jefferson supposedly died first.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on September 26, 2021, 09:26:36 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 26, 2021, 09:15:55 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on September 26, 2021, 12:49:01 PM
Quote from: SpringSt7 on September 26, 2021, 12:33:22 PM
Garrett Stephenson is not back but they return most of their team and replace him with maybe the highest ranked recruit in New England since Duncan Robinson in John Adams.

I think John Adams died in 1826.
July 4, 1826, 50 years after the Declaration of Independence. Both John Adams and Jefferson died on the same day. Jefferson supposedly died first.

And Adams' last words were "Jefferson remains." Which pretty much sums up the life of John Adams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on September 27, 2021, 02:20:47 PM

Alright, assuming that all info regarding returning players which has been posted on the boards is correct, here is my Preseason Top 20 (21-25 TBD):

1 Randolph-Macon
2 Yeshiva
3 Illinois Wesleyan
4 Emory
5 Johns Hopkins
6 Trine
7 Tufts
8 Marietta
9 WashU
10 Saint Joseph (CT)
11 UW-Platteville
12 Swarthmore
13 Penn State-Harrisburg
14 Mary Hardin-Baylor
15 UW-Oshkosh
16 Wheaton (IL)
17 Brandeis
18 UW-La Crosse
19 WPI
20 Elmhurst

Obviously if rosters which haven't come out yet conflict information posted on the boards, or if injuries pop up, this order would potentially change.

Well aware that I'm significantly lower on some teams here than the consensus, and higher on others. Posting this already to hopefully spark some discussion on those teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on September 27, 2021, 07:19:13 PM

Got confirmation today Elmhurst returns all seniors who played last year:

* Jake Rhode (All American), Jay Millitello, Dominic Genco, Lavon Thomas, Ebrahim Jobe

They also return all key JR, SO, and FR.

This is almost all of the nucleus that went to the Sweet 16 in '20 before the shutdown (with a home game vs Pomona-Pitzer to get to the Elite 8).

With Illinois Wesleyan, Wheaton, and Elmhurst probably leading the way, the CCIW is loaded.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 10, 2021, 09:19:54 AM

One of the things that helps in assembling a preseason Top 25 ballot is trying to understand the preseason order within each league.

I took a shot at the preseason top 3 in what I consider to be the best 7 leagues in D3 MBB. Let me know if I'm off anywhere here...and please add other leagues and your thoughts on top 3 within those.

WIAC
1. Platteville
2. Oshkosh
3. La Crosse

CCIW
1. IWU
2. Wheaton
3. Elmhurst

NESCAC
1. Tufts
2. Amherst
3. Williams

UAA
1. Emory
2. WashU
3. Brandeis

OAC
1. Marietta
2. Heidelberg
3. ONU

ARC
1. Dubuque
2. NWU
3. Buena Vista/Loras/Coe?

NCAC
1. Wabash
2. Wooster
3. Wittenberg

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on October 10, 2021, 09:26:42 AM

I think THIS year (though not always) Centennial is a top tier league because they have three great teams: Swarthmore, Hopkins, Muehlenberg.

Also no ODAC?

Your ranking in Nescac (insofar as anyone has any clue this year) looks fair ....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 10, 2021, 09:40:20 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on October 10, 2021, 09:26:42 AM
I think THIS year (though not always) Centennial is a top tier league because they have three great teams: Swarthmore, Hopkins, Muehlenberg.

Also no ODAC?

Your ranking in Nescac (insofar as anyone has any clue this year) looks fair ....

I personally have the 7 leagues I have above ahead of the Centennial and ODAC.

But #7 is close. I have the NCAC as #7 - I think it's deeper than the two you mention. But it's close.

I feel more confident in the first 6 leagues I listed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 10, 2021, 10:31:41 AM

It sounds like the NESCAC could be WAY down. Amherst and Williams are a very distant 2nd and 3rd behind Tufts. At least that's what I'm thinking after reading some posts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on October 10, 2021, 10:41:40 AM

Nescac is definitely way down in terms of veteran talent. There are a fair number of good Nescac players in grad programs elsewhere (or in one case playing on a Big Ten team) which is not great for the league. Only 2 of the top 10, and 9 of the top 25, scorers from 2019-2020 are still around. On the other hand, there are a lot of VERY strong recruits from the past few years that we've never seen, or barely seen, play - in particular at Williams, Amherst, Conn, Trinity, Wesleyan and Colby. So I'd expect that a few teams from that group will end up being very strong, featuring many guys who are entirely unknown quantities. It's just hard to say which right now ... but I'd still bet that Nescac has its typical 2-3 sweet 16 teams when all is said and done.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on October 10, 2021, 11:01:54 AM

I don't really feel a huge gap between Tufts and Amherst, or at least not the gap that some do. Like I mentioned earlier with Yeshiva, I think Tufts is overinflated due to the season ending in the Sweet 16 when they would've had a pretty uphill battle against SUNY Brockport. They won the NESCAC in 2020 which was a really weak year in the conference and should've lost to Colby without their best player, if not for a miracle heave by Eric Savage who I believe was better than Luke Rogers. Savage's graduation is a huge loss that is being overlooked and Rogers is being overhyped. If you dig into the archives of the NESCAC board in March 2020 most were arguing that Rogers should've been a 2nd team all-league player, no one was arguing for POY.

Amherst on the other hand will have arguably the two best guards in the league in Garrett Day and Grant Robinson and no one would be surprised if come March 2022 they were considered the best backcourt in the court. Both have been that good they just haven't been that good at the same time yet. No Dave Hixon is a huge wildcard but I was surprised to see no one named them in a potential preseason Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on October 10, 2021, 12:07:32 PM

I usually agree with SpringSt7 on most things Nescac, but I'm way higher on Tufts, Luke Rogers (who I think is an absolute monster in the paint and who improves a lot each year), and the replacements for Savage (Thoerner and McLaren, both very talented players), and way lower on Day (a spectacular three point shooter for one season who hadn't done that much else to impress in my view, a very good player but not in Rogers' class) and the replacements for Amherst's entire starting front court, which is mostly a mystery. And I think Tufts has a coaching upgrade from the previous season, whereas at Amherst it's much more of a question mark.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 10, 2021, 01:07:42 PM

I tend to go with what we've seen on the floor, especially when there's been such a layoff like the COVID break so many schools have experienced. Amherst wasn't playing up to par in 2019-20 - so even with a talent-filled lineup, I want to see them perform before I just give them credit for being Amherst. Tufts overplayed their talent in 2019-20, but at least they've shown it on the floor, with a lot, if not all, the major players coming back. I'm definitely going to give benefit of the doubt to performance over paper. It's the teams led by players we haven't seen much of that will truly be the surprises (one way or another) this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on October 10, 2021, 04:37:07 PM

Luke Rogers: 16.2/11.9/2.4 blocks per game on 56% shooting.

Eric Savage: 15.8/6.9/3.4 assists per game on 49/34/71 splits. Won them the NESCAC championship with 27/12/6 and a 35 foot bomb to force OT against a not great Colby team at the time. Rogers was 0-4 from the field with 1 point in the second half against a team with no center.

How do they graduate none of their major players?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Next Man Up on October 10, 2021, 10:49:31 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on October 10, 2021, 04:37:07 PM
Luke Rogers: 16.2/11.9/2.4 blocks per game on 56% shooting.

Eric Savage: 15.8/6.9/3.4 assists per game on 49/34/71 splits. Won them the NESCAC championship with 27/12/6 and a 35 foot bomb to force OT against a not great Colby team at the time. Rogers was 0-4 from the field with 1 point in the second half against a team with no center.

How do they graduate none of their major players?

There are several ways, especially when your institution offers graduate level programs, and you factor in an extra year for everyone due to the lost '20-'21 Coronavirus year. This season we'll see players on the six year plan.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on October 10, 2021, 11:29:02 PM

Eric Savage was a senior in 2020, he has no extra COVID year. He played 4 years and graduated in 2020.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Next Man Up on October 10, 2021, 11:49:48 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 10, 2021, 09:19:54 AM
One of the things that helps in assembling a preseason Top 25 ballot is trying to understand the preseason order within each league.

I took a shot at the preseason top 3 in what I consider to be the best 7 leagues in D3 MBB. Let me know if I'm off anywhere here...and please add other leagues and your thoughts on top 3 within those.

WIAC
1. Platteville
2. Oshkosh
3. La Crosse

CCIW
1. IWU
2. Wheaton
3. Elmhurst

ARC
1. Dubuque
2. NWU
3. Buena Vista/Loras/Coe?

JMHO..........

In the WIAC, I don't think it would be surprising to see Oshkosh take the top spot. They have a returning All-American, plus several other experienced players.

In the ARC, it seems like a real crapshoot behind DU. NWU had a limited and unimpressive 2020-2021.

In the CCIW, I believe that behind the 2022 National Champions, Elmhurst rates a little higher than Wheaton primarily due to 1) being an overall stronger and more physically imposing squad, and 2) depth/having more better players beyond the starters. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Colby Hoops on October 11, 2021, 09:37:17 AM

I'm with SpringSt7, think Amherst is a pretty clear #2 in the Nescac and think they can be very good if Grant Robinson returns to form. Not as sold on Williams as #3 in the conference -- certainly a lot of talent, but they were 13-12 and lost their best player. Either way, I don't see any Nescac teams beyond Tufts being preseason top 25 threats, although I wouldn't argue with Amherst as a back end top 25 team.

Also, might take a little issue with comments of Nescac being way down last season. I think Amherst and Williams not being good tinted that. Certainly not an elite year for the league, but I think a healthy Colby team was a very legitimate top 10 team -- obviously having Jefferson miss a month and then barely able to walk for the rest of the season led to a much lesser team (and, as a result, league) by tournament time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on October 11, 2021, 01:29:34 PM

Is Mahoney definitely not back for RPI? Haven't heard the Engineers mentioned in a while so I am under the assumption that he isn't back--if he is back then RPI is a no-brainer Top 25 team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: stlawus on October 11, 2021, 02:54:14 PM

I believe Mahoney is indeed a graduate student and will be playing this year. And I agree, RPI will be dangerous. They lose 2 starters from their 2019-2020 squad including their best shooter but they still have plenty of talent.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on October 11, 2021, 05:57:33 PM

Thanks stlawus. RPI looks like the class of the LL.

Here's my Preseason Top 25:

1 Randolph-Macon
2 Yeshiva
3 Illinois Wesleyan
4 Emory
5 Johns Hopkins
6 Trine
7 Tufts
8 Marietta
9 WashU
10 Saint Joseph (CT)
11 UW-Platteville
12 Swarthmore
13 Mary Hardin-Baylor
14 RPI
15 Penn State-Harrisburg
16 UW-Oshkosh
17 Wheaton (IL)
18 Brandeis
19 UW-La Crosse
20 WPI
21 Elmhurst
22 Rochester
23 Dubuque
24 Utica
25 Roanoke

Considered but excluded: St. John Fisher, Muhlenberg, Whitworth, Ripon, Amherst

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on October 11, 2021, 06:07:40 PM

Very solid top 25, other than Swarthmore is in my view way too low. 58-5 including a championship appearance and wire to wire number one ranking over last two seasons of play, and all but two guys back, including top three scorers - one of whom was National ROY. The bigs they lost were quality, but they have talented young guys behind them and Landry doesn't miss a beat when key guys graduate, they just get better each year. I see them as a sure-fire top five team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on October 11, 2021, 06:28:30 PM

I know I'm definitely lower on Swarthmore on paper (cannot stress this enough, because having not played in 2 years they are difficult to evaluate preseason) than most. My reasoning, in short, is twofold: 1) Although they were the #1 ranked team, I did not view them as the best team in the country in 2019-20 (I had them behind 3 other teams); 2) Swarthmore's ability to run their offense out of the post will be limited by the departure of their two star senior forwards, and while I'm sure Kosmalski will have his team ready to go for opening day, he stylistically would certainly like to play out of the post. I'm sure young guys will step up, but I don't see any indication on paper that they will be able to replace O'Dell and Shafer.

Quote from: nescac1 on October 11, 2021, 06:07:40 PM
Very solid top 25, other than Swarthmore is in my view way too low. 58-5 including a championship appearance and wire to wire number one ranking over last two seasons of play, and all but two guys back, including top three scorers - one of whom was National ROY. The bigs they lost were quality, but they have talented young guys behind them and Landry doesn't miss a beat when key guys graduate, they just get better each year. I see them as a sure-fire top five team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: stlawus on October 11, 2021, 07:25:20 PM

Interesting to see that you have Utica top 25. I've always thought that Utica (in all sports) should be better than they have been. SLU usually rolls with the same non-conference schedule outside of a game or 2 and I've always wanted them to schedule games against Utica.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on October 11, 2021, 07:37:41 PM

Utica won the E8 Championship over regular season champs St. John Fisher and return all 5 starters. Their two losses last year were to Nazareth and St. John Fisher, both of whom they then defeated in the E8 Conference Tournament. They were pretty impressive down the stretch last year, and certainly deserve Preseason Top 25 consideration, although I don't expect to see them in the D3hoops poll. Hopefully I'll be wrong about this!

Quote from: stlawus on October 11, 2021, 07:25:20 PM
Interesting to see that you have Utica top 25. I've always thought that Utica (in all sports) should be better than they have been. SLU usually rolls with the same non-conference schedule outside of a game or 2 and I've always wanted them to schedule games against Utica.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 11, 2021, 08:01:05 PM

Two notes:

I'm not sure Kosmalski will continue to play out of the post in the same way they did with O'Dell and Shafer. And, I've got Swat about five spots lower than Poppers. Until we see how the post works out, they've got a lot to prove, at least when it comes to top ten.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 11, 2021, 09:37:47 PM

I just got a peak at the Lynchburg roster for this season. They've got both Tharon Suggs and TC Thacker listed as grad students, returning. That makes them a very formidable team, definitely worth considering for the Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 12, 2021, 09:10:43 AM

The preseason Top 25 ballot I just submitted...

https://twitter.com/IWUhoopscom/status/1447912086156320770?s=20

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 12, 2021, 03:07:39 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on October 12, 2021, 09:10:43 AM
The preseason Top 25 ballot I just submitted...

https://twitter.com/IWUhoopscom/status/1447912086156320770?s=20

Saying Rensselaer might throw off a couple of casual fans. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 12, 2021, 03:20:21 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 12, 2021, 03:07:39 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on October 12, 2021, 09:10:43 AM
The preseason Top 25 ballot I just submitted...

https://twitter.com/IWUhoopscom/status/1447912086156320770?s=20

Saying Rensselaer might throw off a couple of casual fans. LOL

That's how they're listed in the system; we don't have a choice.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 12, 2021, 03:27:33 PM

Interesting. So RPI, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute is Rensselaer in the system, but WPI, Worcester Polytechnic Institute is WPI in the system? LOL. Ok...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 12, 2021, 03:30:05 PM

By the way, if the voters already didn't know, Patrick Mahoney is back for Rensselaer this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 12, 2021, 04:09:06 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 12, 2021, 03:27:33 PM
Interesting. So RPI, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute is Rensselaer in the system, but WPI, Worcester Polytechnic Institute is WPI in the system? LOL. Ok...

I think its a pre-existing system. It's not like Pat came up with it or anything. I'm assuming its pulled over from the Presto system that assigns names to all the schools by some inscrutable process.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 12, 2021, 05:20:08 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 12, 2021, 04:09:06 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 12, 2021, 03:27:33 PM
Interesting. So RPI, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute is Rensselaer in the system, but WPI, Worcester Polytechnic Institute is WPI in the system? LOL. Ok...

I think its a pre-existing system. It's not like Pat came up with it or anything. I'm assuming its pulled over from the Presto system that assigns names to all the schools by some inscrutable process.

Yes, inscrutable, but Rensselaer is how RPI refers to itself.

https://www.rpi.edu/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 12, 2021, 06:38:40 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 12, 2021, 04:09:06 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 12, 2021, 03:27:33 PM
Interesting. So RPI, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute is Rensselaer in the system, but WPI, Worcester Polytechnic Institute is WPI in the system? LOL. Ok...

I think its a pre-existing system. It's not like Pat came up with it or anything. I'm assuming its pulled over from the Presto system that assigns names to all the schools by some inscrutable process.

The folks at Presto are clearly Dutchophiles and Anglophobes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 14, 2021, 05:03:08 PM

My conversation today with Illinois Wesleyan head coach Ron Rose, on practice eve.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKmwQKO1cFA

0:00 Practice eve!
3:48 Fitness fanatics
6:15 Looking back at 2020-21
8:18 Recruiting class
10:23 Losing 4 key seniors
12:37 Matt Leritz, 6-7 F (All-American)
14:33 Pete Lambesis, 6-4 G/F
18:10 Luke Yoder, 6-1 PG
20:21 Cory Noe, 6-3 SG
22:04 Keondre Schumacher, 5-11 SG
23:58 Candidates for the open starting F spot
26:00 Ryan Sroka, 6-6 G
27:34 Crazy schedule/Yeshiva game
30:50 5th year players
32:53 Other elite Division III programs (Hope, Calvin, St. John's, Oshkosh)
35:00 Preseason rankings, expectations
38:55 Heading into practice #1
40:38 Final thoughts heading into the 2021-22 journey

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 15, 2021, 07:49:02 AM

When is the preseason poll coming out?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 15, 2021, 09:34:15 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 15, 2021, 07:49:02 AM
When is the preseason poll coming out?

I've been told today. Probably depends on whether all the voters met the deadline or if Pat has to track some ballots down. The first one is always a bit of a crap shoot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 15, 2021, 11:50:47 AM

https://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2021/10/preseason-mens-top-25

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BaboNation on October 15, 2021, 12:23:23 PM

Stunned by Springfield's ORV (7).

But, hey, you never know.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 15, 2021, 12:57:00 PM

Quote from: BaboNation on October 15, 2021, 12:23:23 PM
Stunned by Springfield's ORV (7).

But, hey, you never know.

We had a voter or two -- coaches -- voting on last tournament's results. Normally I would challenge some of them and ask them to reconsider, but hell, this year is so up in the air that I decided who are we to say?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BaboNation on October 15, 2021, 01:13:09 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 15, 2021, 12:57:00 PM
Quote from: BaboNation on October 15, 2021, 12:23:23 PM
Stunned by Springfield's ORV (7).

But, hey, you never know.

We had a voter or two -- coaches -- voting on last tournament's results. Normally I would challenge some of them and ask them to reconsider, but hell, this year is so up in the air that I decided who are we to say?

I totally understand that and I meant no disrespect to voters, especially coaches who have lots more to focus on after a year or more in mothballs.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 15, 2021, 01:15:49 PM

No worries -- I didn't take it as disrespect.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on October 15, 2021, 01:28:03 PM

Pat can you shine a little more light on the Top 25 panel selection process? I understand having coaches and legitimate media members is the most professional way to do it but it really does feel like year in and year out there are a lot of voters mailing it in for the preseason poll. Shouldn't this be avoidable with a panel of 25?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 15, 2021, 01:28:54 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on October 15, 2021, 01:28:03 PM
Pat can you shine a little more light on the Top 25 panel selection process? I understand having coaches and legitimate media members is the most professional way to do it but it really does feel like year in and year out there are a lot of voters mailing it in for the preseason poll. Shouldn't this be avoidable with a panel of 25?

I don't think there are "a lot of voters mailing it in" so ... I kind of reject your premise.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on October 15, 2021, 01:34:54 PM

It just looks like people copied last year's bracket into their poll. The ORV is a joke.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 15, 2021, 01:37:18 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on October 15, 2021, 01:34:54 PM
It just looks like people copied last year's bracket into their poll. The ORV is a joke.

I'm going to assume you're aware that some schools haven't played in 19 months. This year is going to be pretty crazy and unpredictable, so I'm not sure what order you want in the ORV.

Of the schools that did play, how many played anyone outside their conference?

What are you expecting voters to base their decisions on, exactly?

I'll hang up and listen.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on October 15, 2021, 01:42:33 PM

As someone with a NESCAC background for example---Middlebury lost basically their top 6 players, Colby graduated their top 2 shooters and Amherst lost their best wing and Hall of Fame coach. I actually think Amherst's ranking is fine and Colby's is a touch high but otherwise fine. My only point is that all of that information is publicly available and not a secret. I think if all of the voters just focused on who returned and who didn't that would be a much better system than "oh well COVID happened, I'll just do whatever!"

Again, my original question was how are the voters selected for the panel, because I'm under the impression that there are 25 voters and it seems like you could get better voters. Any interest in answering? I'll hang up and listen.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 15, 2021, 02:00:23 PM

So as I understand it, you are going to the mat over one person voting Middlebury 17th? Over Amherst, which received literally 0.46 percent of the vote?

It's never been a secret how voters are selected: In the eight-region format, they were set up as one coach, one SID and one media member in each region. Obviously some of that shuffles in the 10-region era, so we have to make do.

I look for people who have coached/worked in more than one region whenever possible. Newbies to D-III are not invited. Schools that don't send content to D3hoops.com are not typically rewarded with a slot on the panel. (This is not news either; I've posted that to Twitter in the past.)

Do coaches typically follow the most recent season's results in creating a preseason ballot? Any perusal of a conference preseason poll should garner that answer for you. Yeah. It happens. Occasionally one or two of our coach voters especially might be too heavily reliant on the previous year.

None of that is "a lot of voters mailing it in" or "pretty bad and useless" or "half the panel just wrote down last year's tournament results" as you have variously described it on multiple boards here.

So yes: I reject the premise.

Here's another nugget for you: We solicit information from dozens of schools. Not all of them actually reply, and some of them need to be asked three times before they do. So not everyone -- especially coaches who kind of have their own programs to worry about -- may have at their fingertips all the information you deem that they should. Nonetheless, we are not going to do a poll without coaches, or without SIDs, because just to have our staff and the other people whose ballots you see posted to Twitter would not be a credible poll, either.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 15, 2021, 02:34:15 PM

SpringSt7

If you feel inclined, we ran a Poster's Top 25 Poll a few years ago. In the hay day, we probably had 15 or more posters participating. It was created, not to compete with the site's respected poll, but just to give posters their own opinion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on October 15, 2021, 04:35:56 PM

I'm not interested in being a part of a poll because I don't have the requisite knowledge to participate. I'm also not going to the mat over Middlebury it was merely my example because it was one of instances I felt most comfortable on.

If getting coaches from every region and coaches that also have a wide variety of experience around the country then great, thanks for answering my question. In a perfect world obviously those coaches would be the most knowledgeable and have the most to offer in a poll.

My intention, and I'm sorry if it came across as otherwise, was just to illustrate that it seems like some of these voters take it a lot more seriously and put a lot more time into it than others.

As I type this out however, it would kind of be cool if we had a media and a coach's poll though. Sounds like it would be hard to pull off in the current format.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 15, 2021, 04:37:48 PM

Years ago there was a coaches' poll, but the NABC gave up doing it because ours was more accurate. Agreed that I wouldn't mind if there were more than one quality poll, but the old NABC poll had way too many stipulations for voters and required it to be tied to the regional rankings, which was just ... not a good idea.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 15, 2021, 04:39:08 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on October 15, 2021, 04:35:56 PM
... some of these voters take it a lot more seriously and put a lot more time into it than others.

If you had actually said this, I would have agreed with you. Although I think they all take it seriously, some certainly put more time into it than others do.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on October 15, 2021, 04:42:32 PM

I kind of figured if we were talking in the Top 25 talk thread we would all have a basic knowledge of how much effort some of the media members put into their poll. Hell, there are people who don't get a vote that put an impressive amount of time in as well/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 15, 2021, 05:25:05 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on October 15, 2021, 04:42:32 PM
I kind of figured if we were talking in the Top 25 talk thread we would all have a basic knowledge of how much effort some of the media members put into their poll.

But again -- what you said was "a lot of voters mailing it in" and that just isn't the case. If you say what you mean next time, I'll object less.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 15, 2021, 07:04:59 PM

The other thing to remember is that, with 25 voters, no individual ballot makes much difference on its own. Whitworth is 19th with what many believe is an odd and surprising #1 vote. If that voter had left Whitworth off their ballot entirely, Whitworth would still be 19th.

Are there voters who frustrate me with what I perceive to be less informed ballots? Yes. Are there enough of those to make any measurable difference in the poll? Not even close.

Preseason polls are not my favorite, but come December I really appreciate the outliers, because they provide perspective on what can easily become tunnel vision.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on October 15, 2021, 07:50:19 PM

Pat I'll be totally honest my brain just skipped over how the votes equate to points. That's my bad. A couple ill-researched teams placed down ballot probably isn't the biggest deal. I still stand by my original point that some of the panelists could make a greater effort if there are only going to be 25 of them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 15, 2021, 08:33:30 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on October 15, 2021, 07:50:19 PM
Pat I'll be totally honest my brain just skipped over how the votes equate to points. That's my bad. A couple ill-researched teams placed down ballot probably isn't the biggest deal. I still stand by my original point that some of the panelists could make a greater effort if there are only going to be 25 of them.

And there are still a few stalwarts who believe you get to keep your ranking until you lose it, giving programs a chance to replace graduates without losing status. You might disagree with that approach, but it's certainly valid.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jknezek on October 18, 2021, 10:55:55 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 15, 2021, 02:34:15 PM
SpringSt7

If you feel inclined, we ran a Poster's Top 25 Poll a few years ago. In the hay day, we probably had 15 or more posters participating. It was created, not to compete with the site's respected poll, but just to give posters their own opinion.

If there are posters interested I'll run a fan poll. However, I know almost nothing about basketball, and all I know about D3 basketball is R-MC is usually good and my W&L Generals... well, I'm happy when the headline says they won. So I would not be a voter.

I do, however, run Polls in 2 other spots on this board. So if someone wants to round up some voters, let me know. I don't even know the basketball posters, so I don't know who to approach.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 22, 2021, 10:13:23 AM

My conversation with RMC Head MBB coach Josh Merkel...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bt62jK0zrao

0:00 Excitement for 2021-22
1:02 Incredible success at RMC
4:14 2019-20 D3 tourney cancellation
7:45 2019-20 Sweet 16 matchup w/ Yeshiva
9:30 2020-21 season
13:12 Trine game
16:42 Feeling more normal heading into 2021-22
18:17 What does the #1-ranking mean?
20:58 Parity in D3 MBB
22:58 Buzz Anthony (All-American)
25:49 Miles Mallory
27:22 Ian Robertson, Josh Talbert, David Funderburg
29:30 Feeling good with this nucleus
30:25 2021-22 schedule, scheduling great competition
34:12 The ODAC
36:58 Final thoughts

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on October 22, 2021, 02:15:57 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 15, 2021, 07:04:59 PM
The other thing to remember is that, with 25 voters, no individual ballot makes much difference on its own. Whitworth is 19th with what many believe is an odd and surprising #1 vote.

TBH, that one's even odder than 3 votes for ETBU and 1 for Amherst on the women's side :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 22, 2021, 02:51:00 PM

Quote from: HOPEful on October 22, 2021, 02:15:57 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 15, 2021, 07:04:59 PM
The other thing to remember is that, with 25 voters, no individual ballot makes much difference on its own. Whitworth is 19th with what many believe is an odd and surprising #1 vote.
TBH, that one's even odder than 3 votes for ETBU and 1 for Amherst on the women's side :)

Or, maybe they know more than the rest of us?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 25, 2021, 10:41:58 AM

My conversation with Raul Placeres, Head MBB Coach at #23-Maryville (TN).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gVXOrGYsNoY

0:00 Raul's path to Maryville
3:41 Growing up in Miami
6:03 Mariel Boatlift; parents decision to leave Cuba
7:59 Playing professional basketball; becoming a HS head coach
9:56 Joining Coach Lambert's staff at Maryville
11:38 Maryville's D3 tradition
13:33 2020-21 season - winning the conf regular season and tourney
15:19 Loaded 2021-22 roster (including 2 D1 transfers)
18:51 2021-22 schedule
22:41 Scheduling philosophy
25:15 Difference in D3 MBB geographies; impact on recruiting
29:21 USA South conference
31:21 Travel in D3
32:31 Preseason #23 ranking
33:52 Building a culture at Maryville
35:34 Cafecito
36:39 Final thoughts

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D3RetiredHooper on October 25, 2021, 12:31:30 PM

To be fair to the pollsters, ranking a Top 25 in D3Hoops is nearly impossible during a regular season due to lack of cross pollination between regions. Now try making a preseason poll after a COVID season where a large portion of teams did not play and most of those who did play competed only within their conference, GOOD LUCK!

It's not like D1 where there are a lot of cross-country preseason games and teams from the BIG-10 play teams from the ACC or SEC play Big 12. For the most part, D3hoops is still a very regional sport. I'd love to see a WIAC vs NESCAC or UAA vs CCIW challenge but budgets don't allow for this. The D3Hoops Hoopsville Showcase or the Great Lakes Invitational are great but there are not a ton of these type of events. Pollsters usually go with the same regions and conferences because that is what they know but not always accurate.

Look at the 2017-18 season for example. Going into the NCAA tournament, a full regular season and conference postseason worth of data, the rankings for the Final-4 Teams were Oshkosh (24th), Neb Wesleyan (ORV), Ramapo (No Votes), and Springfield (No Votes).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 25, 2021, 02:17:06 PM

Quote from: D3RetiredHooper on October 25, 2021, 12:31:30 PMIt's not like D1 where there are a lot of cross-country preseason games and teams from the BIG-10 play teams from the ACC or SEC play Big 12.

Regular-season games. Those are regular-season games, of the non-conference variety.

Those games take place after the official starting date of men's basketball, depending upon which of the three divisions is involved. They count towards the records of both teams. They affect the selection of who gets into the Big Dance and who doesn't. Same goes with D2 and D3 non-conference games.

Preseason games don't matter. Regular-season games do. And the D1 games that you described ... matter.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on October 29, 2021, 04:44:20 PM

After a long hiatus, I was a little worried, but I'm happy to report that my program still works correctly (once I updated my openssl and wget installations).

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	618	Randolph-Macon	0-0	11/10 vs. Mary Washington; 11/19 vs. #13 Emory; 11/20 at #3 Marietta
#2	533	Yeshiva	0-0	11/10 vs. Eastern Connecticut; 11/14 at St. Joseph's (L.I.); 11/16 vs. Mount St. Vincent; 11/18 at St. Joseph's (Bklyn.); 11/21 at Sarah Lawrence
#3	496	Marietta	0-0	11/12 vs. T#34 Christopher Newport; 11/13 vs. TBA; 11/19 vs. #58 Wabash; 11/20 vs. #1 Randolph-Macon
#4	463	Illinois Wesleyan	0-0	11/12 vs. TBD; 11/12 vs. Hope; 11/13 vs. TBD; 11/19 at Alma; 11/20 at Calvin
#5	417	UW-Platteville	0-0	11/08 vs. Blackburn; 11/12 vs. #19 Whitworth; 11/13 vs. Gustavus Adolphus; 11/17 vs. Concordia (Wis.); 11/20 at Concordia-Chicago

(There's no reason to list all 64 teams at this point, but I'll post the whole report once a few games have actually taken place.)

Pat (or some other person with this knowledge) - when will the first in-season poll be released?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 29, 2021, 06:32:10 PM

I'm not Pat and have no inside info, but I suspect it'll be the 14th. Not enough teams play opening weekend.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 29, 2021, 06:32:33 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on October 29, 2021, 04:44:20 PM
After a long hiatus, I was a little worried, but I'm happy to report that my program still works correctly (once I updated my openssl and wget installations).

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#1 618 Randolph-Macon 0-0 11/10 vs. Mary Washington; 11/19 vs. #13 Emory; 11/20 at #3 Marietta
#2 533 Yeshiva 0-0 11/10 vs. Eastern Connecticut; 11/14 at St. Joseph's (L.I.); 11/16 vs. Mount St. Vincent;
11/18 at St. Joseph's (Bklyn.); 11/21 at Sarah Lawrence
#3 496 Marietta 0-0 11/12 vs. T#34 Christopher Newport; 11/13 vs. TBA; 11/19 vs. #58 Wabash; 11/20 vs. #1 Randolph-Macon
#4 463 Illinois Wesleyan 0-0 11/12 vs. TBD; 11/12 vs. Hope; 11/13 vs. TBD; 11/19 at Alma; 11/20 at Calvin
#5 417 UW-Platteville 0-0 11/08 vs. Blackburn; 11/12 vs. #19 Whitworth; 11/13 vs. Gustavus Adolphus; 11/17 vs. Concordia (Wis.);
11/20 at Concordia-Chicago

(There's no reason to list all 64 teams at this point, but I'll post the whole report once a few games have actually taken place.)

Pat (or some other person with this knowledge) - when will the first in-season poll be released?

Tentative date for release is Monday, Nov. 29.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 29, 2021, 06:33:33 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 29, 2021, 06:32:10 PM

I'm not Pat and have no inside info, but I suspect it'll be the 14th. Not enough teams play opening weekend.

We have been holding off later in recent years to try to give the first regular-season vote some distance from the preseason poll and limit the anchoring bias.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 29, 2021, 06:54:07 PM

If I understand correctly, the process of the preseason Top 25 poll goes something like this:

Pat and the like send out emails to all the schools asking for information from coaches etc. on their respective teams, mostly, who's returning and who's not, new recruits and possible transfers.

After getting information from the schools who actually send stuff in, Pat and his people put together a huge packet and send it out to the voters.

Based on that information, the voters vote on the Top 25.

My question is: can that packet be available to the general public or posted somewhere, maybe even a link? There are a lot of fans, like me, who speculate who's coming back and who's coming in and we all get excited with anticipation. Even if that info was made available AFTER the preseason poll is released, it would be cool to see that information. Normally, we just have the, "I heard [this player] was coming back/transferring etc.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on October 29, 2021, 08:52:35 PM

Huh. Not that I obsess over it, but sometime this evening I got smite #4. Not quite sure who I offended ...

(Also: Thanks, Pat.)

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 29, 2021, 06:32:33 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on October 29, 2021, 04:44:20 PM
...
Pat (or some other person with this knowledge) - when will the first in-season poll be released?

Tentative date for release is Monday, Nov. 29.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 29, 2021, 08:58:48 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 29, 2021, 06:54:07 PM
If I understand correctly, the process of the preseason Top 25 poll goes something like this:

Pat and the like send out emails to all the schools asking for information from coaches etc. on their respective teams, mostly, who's returning and who's not, new recruits and possible transfers.

After getting information from the schools who actually send stuff in, Pat and his people put together a huge packet and send it out to the voters.

Based on that information, the voters vote on the Top 25.

My question is: can that packet be available to the general public or posted somewhere, maybe even a link? There are a lot of fans, like me, who speculate who's coming back and who's coming in and we all get excited with anticipation. Even if that info was made available AFTER the preseason poll is released, it would be cool to see that information. Normally, we just have the, "I heard [this player] was coming back/transferring etc.

Gordon and I had a few conversations about doing some videos for Patreon where we went through some of that info, but, as you can see, we did not manage to find the time to do it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 30, 2021, 01:44:16 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on October 29, 2021, 08:52:35 PM
Huh. Not that I obsess over it, but sometime this evening I got smite #4. Not quite sure who I offended ...

If it's any comfort, Darryl, you still possess the best karma ratio on all of d3boards.com, by a huge margin.

And deservedly so, if you ask me. Your weekly top 25 breakdown is a tremendous aid to all serious D3 men's basketball fans.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 30, 2021, 01:55:56 PM

I'm at the Swarthmore scrimmage against D2 Wilmington University. New look for the Garnet. Four guard lineup, lots of man defense. Three freshmen in the eleven man rotation. Lots of work still to do. Wouldn't be surprised with some early losses. Not sure how they'd fare against size, but not sure how much size they'll see until March.

Just glad to be back watching basketball!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 30, 2021, 02:26:56 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on October 29, 2021, 08:52:35 PM
Huh. Not that I obsess over it, but sometime this evening I got smite #4. Not quite sure who I offended ...

(Also: Thanks, Pat.)

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 29, 2021, 06:32:33 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on October 29, 2021, 04:44:20 PM
...
Pat (or some other person with this knowledge) - when will the first in-season poll be released?

Tentative date for release is Monday, Nov. 29.

Anyone who smites you should probably be put on double secret probation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on November 02, 2021, 09:51:06 AM

Probably a Calvin fan. They're known to throw around smites like candy. And if they're also University of Michigan fans, they were feeling even more smiteful this past weekend...

I've learned to embrace the smite obviously :)

Quote from: Darryl Nester on October 29, 2021, 08:52:35 PM
Huh. Not that I obsess over it, but sometime this evening I got smite #4. Not quite sure who I offended ...

(Also: Thanks, Pat.)

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 29, 2021, 06:32:33 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on October 29, 2021, 04:44:20 PM
...
Pat (or some other person with this knowledge) - when will the first in-season poll be released?
Tentative date for release is Monday, Nov. 29.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on November 02, 2021, 09:54:08 AM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on October 29, 2021, 04:44:20 PM
After a long hiatus, I was a little worried, but I'm happy to report that my program still works correctly (once I updated my openssl and wget installations).

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#1 618 Randolph-Macon 0-0 11/10 vs. Mary Washington; 11/19 vs. #13 Emory; 11/20 at #3 Marietta
#2 533 Yeshiva 0-0 11/10 vs. Eastern Connecticut; 11/14 at St. Joseph's (L.I.); 11/16 vs. Mount St. Vincent;
11/18 at St. Joseph's (Bklyn.); 11/21 at Sarah Lawrence
#3 496 Marietta 0-0 11/12 vs. T#34 Christopher Newport; 11/13 vs. TBA; 11/19 vs. #58 Wabash; 11/20 vs. #1 Randolph-Macon
#4 463 Illinois Wesleyan 0-0 11/12 vs. TBD; 11/12 vs. Hope; 11/13 vs. TBD; 11/19 at Alma; 11/20 at Calvin
#5 417 UW-Platteville 0-0 11/08 vs. Blackburn; 11/12 vs. #19 Whitworth; 11/13 vs. Gustavus Adolphus; 11/17 vs. Concordia (Wis.);
11/20 at Concordia-Chicago

(There's no reason to list all 64 teams at this point, but I'll post the whole report once a few games have actually taken place.)

Pat (or some other person with this knowledge) - when will the first in-season poll be released?

Good info! CNU plays #3 on 11/12 and #1 on 11/28. Should be interesting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 02, 2021, 01:21:18 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 30, 2021, 02:26:56 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on October 29, 2021, 08:52:35 PM
Huh. Not that I obsess over it, but sometime this evening I got smite #4. Not quite sure who I offended ...

Anyone who smites you should probably be put on double secret probation.

I recall times in elementary school when the teacher would punish the entire class for the actions of a few. If we would protest, we were often told, "If you are innocent this time, I'm sure you can think of something else you have done to deserve it."

Even though that was never a particularly satisfactory explanation, it is probably fair in the grand scheme of things, and certainly applies to me now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: McBuckets on November 02, 2021, 02:08:15 PM

What is karma and spite? I have tried to find but could not. Probably bad karma for me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 02, 2021, 03:24:32 PM

Quote from: McBuckets on November 02, 2021, 02:08:15 PM
What is karma and spite? I have tried to find but could not. Probably bad karma for me.

You can read more about it in the documentation for the forum software: https://wiki.simplemachines.org/smf/Karma (https://wiki.simplemachines.org/smf/Karma)

Briefly: After you've been around for a while (some minimum number of posts, I think), you have the ability to "applaud" or "smite" other users, and others can see your running totals. For example, this is how I see your profile:
McBuckets
Junior Varsity
Posts: 13
Karma: +1/-5
[applaud] [smite]

The last line has hyperlinks that I could click (no more than once a day, I think) to change your totals. Until you reach the posting threshold, you won't see those links.

As of 1 minute ago, your Karma total is now +2/-5, because I just "applauded" you.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 02, 2021, 03:35:27 PM

You have to have a certain number of posts under your belt before you can give karma.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: McBuckets on November 02, 2021, 04:03:27 PM

Thanks much! I'll try and be a useful contributor!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 02, 2021, 04:32:54 PM

It's also illegal to smite Darryl Nester. The four posters that have are sleeping with the fishes now. Ok, not really. But seriously, there's no reason to smite that guy. Everyone else is fair game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 02, 2021, 04:34:12 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 02, 2021, 03:35:27 PM

You have to have a certain number of posts under your belt before you can give karma.

The karma threshold is 200 posts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 02, 2021, 04:58:34 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 02, 2021, 04:32:54 PM
It's also illegal to smite Darryl Nester. The four posters that have are sleeping with the fishes now. Ok, not really. But seriously, there's no reason to smite that guy. Everyone else is fair game.

The bulletproof vests of Darryl's four smiters have been returned to the Corleone compound with a couple of fish inside of each of them.

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/HsRvgCsLXWw/maxresdefault.jpg)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 02, 2021, 05:56:01 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 02, 2021, 04:32:54 PM
It's also illegal to smite Darryl Nester. The four posters that have are sleeping with the fishes now. Ok, not really. But seriously, there's no reason to smite that guy. Everyone else is fair game.

Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 02, 2021, 04:58:34 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 02, 2021, 04:32:54 PM
It's also illegal to smite Darryl Nester. The four posters that have are sleeping with the fishes now. Ok, not really. But seriously, there's no reason to smite that guy. Everyone else is fair game.

The bulletproof vests of Darryl's four smiters have been returned to the Corleone compound with a couple of fish inside of each of them.

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/HsRvgCsLXWw/maxresdefault.jpg)

-1 Just because...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PauldingLightUP on November 03, 2021, 01:46:45 PM

Will the be regular Hoopsville shows for the new season Thursday and/or Sunday this week? Thanks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 03, 2021, 01:48:52 PM

Quote from: PauldingLightUP on November 03, 2021, 01:46:45 PM
Will the be regular Hoopsville shows for the new season Thursday and/or Sunday this week? Thanks.

Dave's working on some shows. I think he's shooting for Sunday nights, although probably pretaped stuff.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 04, 2021, 03:32:03 PM

My conversation with Dave McHugh, the founder and host of Hoopsville.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8dZNJ9t9KQ

0:00 Catching up w/ Dave
3:45 Dave's D3 story
10:54 Day job, work outside of D3hoops
14:30 Importance of family support
17:16 Supporting Hoopsville
21:15 History/origins of Hoopsville
28:51 Balance of men's and women's coverage
36:06 19th season of Hoopsville (Sunday 11/7, 7pm ET)
39:35 2021-22 Preseason Top 25 ballot
45:19 New regional alignment
49:15 New alphabetical ranking trial for ranking #1
57:19 Most looking forward to in 2021-22?
1:00:20 Cancellation of 2020-21 tournament
1:03:00 Giving Dave the final word

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 04, 2021, 03:55:41 PM

Bumping this comment in recognition of smite #5:

Quote from: Darryl Nester on November 02, 2021, 01:21:18 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 30, 2021, 02:26:56 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on October 29, 2021, 08:52:35 PM
Huh. Not that I obsess over it, but sometime this evening I got smite #4. Not quite sure who I offended ...

Anyone who smites you should probably be put on double secret probation.

I recall times in elementary school when the teacher would punish the entire class for the actions of a few. If we would protest, we were often told, "If you are innocent this time, I'm sure you can think of something else you have done to deserve it."

Even though that was never a particularly satisfactory explanation, it is probably fair in the grand scheme of things, and certainly applies to me now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jamtod on November 05, 2021, 10:47:56 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 02, 2021, 04:32:54 PM
It's also illegal to smite Darryl Nester. The four posters that have are sleeping with the fishes now. Ok, not really. But seriously, there's no reason to smite that guy. Everyone else is fair game.

The number one rule about karma is: you don't talk about your negative karma. It's grounds for automatic smiting, imo.

I'd like to think I've earned every last one of my -k.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 05, 2021, 10:55:49 AM

Quote from: PauldingLightUP on November 03, 2021, 01:46:45 PM
Will the be regular Hoopsville shows for the new season Thursday and/or Sunday this week? Thanks.

We will hit the air with the season debut this Sunday at 7pm ET.

The month of November will be a bit more challenging than we expected due to a gig I could not turn down which will have me out of town for pretty much the rest of the month. I will try and do shows from that location as much as I can, but likely all pretaped due to circumstances. There is an outside chance the "guys" help out with a show or two maybe as well.

Plenty more details on Sunday's show.

Quote from: Titan Q on November 04, 2021, 03:32:03 PM
My conversation with Dave McHugh, the founder and host of Hoopsville.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8dZNJ9t9KQ

0:00 Catching up w/ Dave
3:45 Dave's D3 story
10:54 Day job, work outside of D3hoops
14:30 Importance of family support
17:16 Supporting Hoopsville
21:15 History/origins of Hoopsville
28:51 Balance of men's and women's coverage
36:06 19th season of Hoopsville (Sunday 11/7, 7pm ET)
39:35 2021-22 Preseason Top 25 ballot
45:19 New regional alignment
49:15 New alphabetical ranking trial for ranking #1
57:19 Most looking forward to in 2021-22?
1:00:20 Cancellation of 2020-21 tournament
1:03:00 Giving Dave the final word

I want to thank Bob for having me on the show. I am very appreciative of his kind words and the early feedback from those on Twitter. It was a bit strange being on the other side of the mic, per se. haha

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 05, 2021, 11:20:00 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 05, 2021, 10:55:49 AM
Quote from: PauldingLightUP on November 03, 2021, 01:46:45 PM
Will the be regular Hoopsville shows for the new season Thursday and/or Sunday this week? Thanks.

We will hit the air with the season debut this Sunday at 7pm ET.

The month of November will be a bit more challenging than we expected due to a gig I could not turn down which will have me out of town for pretty much the rest of the month.

Drew Carey needed a fill-in while he was on vacation?

(https://www.cheatsheet.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Drew-Carey-of-The-Price-is-Right.jpg?x72806)

;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 05, 2021, 11:39:22 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 05, 2021, 11:20:00 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 05, 2021, 10:55:49 AM
Quote from: PauldingLightUP on November 03, 2021, 01:46:45 PM
Will the be regular Hoopsville shows for the new season Thursday and/or Sunday this week? Thanks.

We will hit the air with the season debut this Sunday at 7pm ET.

The month of November will be a bit more challenging than we expected due to a gig I could not turn down which will have me out of town for pretty much the rest of the month.

Drew Carey needed a fill-in while he was on vacation?

(https://www.cheatsheet.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Drew-Carey-of-The-Price-is-Right.jpg?x72806)

;)

Ha... I will be a few hours from there ... so ............

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 05, 2021, 04:26:28 PM

My annual IWU MBB season preview -- this year in the form of a Q-cast interview.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzg1U7hTyTo&t=137s

0:00 113th season of IWU MBB
6:19 Preseason progress
11:56 Updates on 5 injuries
18:21 Four returning starters
19:58 Luke Yoder, 6-0 Jr PG
21:36 Cory Noe, 6-2 Sr SG
23:25 Pete Lambesis, 6-4 Sr G
24:51 Matt Leritz, 6-7 Sr F
26:42 Versatility in filling the open starter spot
28:02 Cody Mitchell, 6-7 Jr F
29:16 Ryan Sroka, 6-5 So G/F
30:35 Landon Wolfe, 6-5 Jr G/F
31:58 Lucas Heflen, 6-2 Jr G
33:57 Hakim Williams, 6-3 Fr G
35:18 Connor Heaton, 6-5 So G/F
37:28 Pryce Punkay, 6-3 So SG
39:12 Nick Roper, 6-7 Fr G/F
41:59 Grant Hardy, 6-8 So F
43:36 Evan Schneider, 6-6 So F
46:37 Parker Wolfe, 6-0 Fr PG
48:27 Nathan Valentine, 5-11 Fr PG
49:40 Shane Miller, 6-1 Fr G
50:59 Grant Taueg, 6-2 So G
52:10 Trey Bazzell, 6-3 Fr SG
53:36 Marko Anderson, 6-6 Fr F
55:04 Harrison Wilmsen, 6-9 F
57:36 Varsity Reserve season (20-game season)
58:42 The schedule
1:01:33 Jack Sikma Invitational Tournament
1:03:35 Academic All-American celebration
1:05:39 The CCIW
1:10:03 Keys to the season

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 07, 2021, 04:30:30 PM

The 19th season of Hoopsville debuts tonight!

Tune in as we talk to the two preseason #1 teams in Division III basketball plus two of the top experts in the division. We also take a look at how the season may unfold and how the opening weekend was just a teaser of things to come.

We talk some of the things that we are looking forward to and the question marks we will be considering from now until champions are claimed in March.

Tune in starting at 7:00 PM ET right here - www.d3hoopsville.com

Guests on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline include:
- Brian Morehouse, head coach of #1 Hope women's basketball
- Gordan Mann, D3hoops.com Senior Editor
- Josh Merkel, head coach of #1 Randolph-Macon men's basketball
- Pat Coleman, D3hoops.com Editor in Chief

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: monsoon on November 07, 2021, 08:27:27 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 07, 2021, 04:30:30 PM
The 19th season of Hoopsville debuts tonight!

Tune in as we talk to the two preseason #1 teams in Division III basketball plus two of the top experts in the division. We also take a look at how the season may unfold and how the opening weekend was just a teaser of things to come.

We talk some of the things that we are looking forward to and the question marks we will be considering from now until champions are claimed in March.

Tune in starting at 7:00 PM ET right here - www.d3hoopsville.com

Guests on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline include:
- Brian Morehouse, head coach of #1 Hope women's basketball
- Gordan Mann, D3hoops.com Senior Editor
- Josh Merkel, head coach of #1 Randolph-Macon men's basketball
- Pat Coleman, D3hoops.com Editor in Chief

Coach Mo was excellent, as usual. Thanks Dave!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 08, 2021, 11:44:32 AM

My conversation with Mike Schauer, MBB National Committee Chair, about the selection process...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMpILST1VyQ

0:00 Feeling good about 2021-22
3:40 Regional realignment (8 regions to 10)
6:15 Primary selection criteria
10:55 Average historical data for Pool C selections
13:26 Handling of non-D3 games
14:07 Balance of the primary criteria; secondary criteria
16:03 The importance of playing a strong non-conf schedule
20:00 Allocation of teams in 2021-22 tournament field
21:27 Regional rankings; alphabetical 1st ranking trial
35:00 Transparency in the process
39:08 D3 bracketing
45:30 COVID impacts on the 2021-22 tournament
46:45 Improvements in the D3 selection process over the years

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 08, 2021, 01:12:29 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 08, 2021, 11:45:11 AM
My conversation with Mike Schauer, MBB National Committee Chair, about the selection process...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMpILST1VyQ

0:00 Feeling good about 2021-22
3:40 Regional realignment (8 regions to 10)
6:15 Primary selection criteria
10:55 Average historical data for Pool C selections
13:26 Handling of non-D3 games
14:07 Balance of the primary criteria; secondary criteria
16:03 The importance of playing a strong non-conf schedule
20:00 Allocation of teams in 2021-22 tournament field
21:27 Regional rankings; alphabetical 1st ranking trial
35:00 Transparency in the process
39:08 D3 bracketing
45:30 COVID impacts on the 2021-22 tournament
46:45 Improvements in the D3 selection process over the years

Follow up tweet from Mike Schauer...

Michael Schauer
@ThunderMBB
One thing I would add after listening to this podcast with @IWUhoopscom that I explained poorly. We are not limited to a specific number of flights. We are charged with minimizing the number of flights. Historically this has been around 5. #d3hoops

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on November 08, 2021, 06:34:28 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on November 08, 2021, 11:44:32 AM
My conversation with Mike Schauer, MBB National Committee Chair, about the selection process...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMpILST1VyQ

0:00 Feeling good about 2021-22
3:40 Regional realignment (8 regions to 10)
6:15 Primary selection criteria
10:55 Average historical data for Pool C selections
13:26 Handling of non-D3 games
14:07 Balance of the primary criteria; secondary criteria
16:03 The importance of playing a strong non-conf schedule
20:00 Allocation of teams in 2021-22 tournament field
21:27 Regional rankings; alphabetical 1st ranking trial
35:00 Transparency in the process
39:08 D3 bracketing
45:30 COVID impacts on the 2021-22 tournament
46:45 Improvements in the D3 selection process over the years

That was really interesting. Thanks to both of you.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on November 08, 2021, 06:43:17 PM

Here's an article I wrote for MacsLive.com breaking down, analyzing, and providing my thoughts on the Preseason Top 25:
https://www.macslive.com/post/d3hoops-preseason-top-25-breakdown-analysis-and-opinions (https://www.macslive.com/post/d3hoops-preseason-top-25-breakdown-analysis-and-opinions)

Common thread: As many voters on the boards and on Twitter have noted, it was not only more difficult to do the rankings this year than in a normal season, but it's also impossible to argue with the placement of so many teams given the many 2020-21 season cancellations across the country.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 09, 2021, 10:48:37 AM

Quote from: PoppersMacsLive on November 08, 2021, 06:43:17 PM
Here's an article I wrote for MacsLive.com breaking down, analyzing, and providing my thoughts on the Preseason Top 25:
https://www.macslive.com/post/d3hoops-preseason-top-25-breakdown-analysis-and-opinions (https://www.macslive.com/post/d3hoops-preseason-top-25-breakdown-analysis-and-opinions)

Common thread: As many voters on the boards and on Twitter have noted, it was not only more difficult to do the rankings this year than in a normal season, but it's also impossible to argue with the placement of so many teams given the many 2020-21 season cancellations across the country.

This is pretty good. Did you watch PSU-Harrisburg's game this weekend? Definitely not Top 25 form just yet. I considered them for my preseason ballot, but glad I went a different direction. They may get there, but I want to see them play into it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on November 09, 2021, 10:52:52 AM

Thanks Ryan.

I watched some of the game against Mary Washington. They're definitely not in form yet, but are we expecting many of the teams with 2 year layoffs to be in form in early November? My thoughts on them in the article were talent-based. As of now, if I was a voter, I'd probably move them down a few spots from 15 to around 18 or so. But I'm still surprised that not a single voter put them on the ballot.

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 09, 2021, 10:48:37 AM
Quote from: PoppersMacsLive on November 08, 2021, 06:43:17 PM
Here's an article I wrote for MacsLive.com breaking down, analyzing, and providing my thoughts on the Preseason Top 25:
https://www.macslive.com/post/d3hoops-preseason-top-25-breakdown-analysis-and-opinions (https://www.macslive.com/post/d3hoops-preseason-top-25-breakdown-analysis-and-opinions)

Common thread: As many voters on the boards and on Twitter have noted, it was not only more difficult to do the rankings this year than in a normal season, but it's also impossible to argue with the placement of so many teams given the many 2020-21 season cancellations across the country.

This is pretty good. Did you watch PSU-Harrisburg's game this weekend? Definitely not Top 25 form just yet. I considered them for my preseason ballot, but glad I went a different direction. They may get there, but I want to see them play into it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 09, 2021, 05:11:44 PM

There have been 45 NCAA D3 MBB Final Fours, from 1974-75 thru 2018-19.

Here is how all-time MBB Final Four appearances break down by the new regions.

New Region/All-time Final Fours/Conference w/ Most Appearances

1   19   NESCAC 18
2   8   NEWMAC 6
3   13   SUNYAC 8
4   15   NJAC 12
5   21   Centennial 9, Landmark 6
6   13   ODAC 9
7   29   NCAC 15, MIAA 8, OAC 6
8   24   CCIW 20
9   24   WIAC 17
10   2   ASC 1, NWC 1

With the CCIW and WIAC now in different regions, the most loaded region has to be 7, w/ the NCAC, MIAA, and OAC.

The "midwest" state regions (7, 8, 9) account for 77 total appearances.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 09, 2021, 05:27:21 PM

There have been 45 NCAA D3 MBB championships, from 1974-75 thru 2018-19.

Here is how all-time MBB national championships break down by the new regions.

New Region/All-time Championships/Conference w/ Most Championships

1   3   NESCAC 3
2   1   NEWMAC 1
3   3   SUNYAC 2
4   1   NJAC 1
5   4   Landmark 3
6   1   ODAC 1
7   7   NCAC 3
8   8   CCIW 6
9   14   WIAC 13
10   0   N/A

(3 all-time champs are no longer D3, and are not counted above.)

The "midwest" state regions (7, 8, 9) account for 29 all-time championships.

In terms of conferences, no one is close to the WIAC's 13.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on November 09, 2021, 05:42:00 PM

I'm sure it's somewhere on this site but where can we see the lists of leagues in each region? When does this all go into effect?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 09, 2021, 05:45:58 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on November 09, 2021, 05:42:00 PM
I'm sure it's somewhere on this site but where can we see the lists of leagues in each region? When does this all go into effect?

Frontpage > "Teams"

It is in effect now...2021-22 season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on November 09, 2021, 06:32:20 PM

Thanks you!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 10, 2021, 08:12:28 AM

Here is how the 2021-22 D3hoops.com Preseason MBB Top 25 breaks down by region:

Region 1
#9 St. Joseph (CT)
#11 Tufts

Region 2
#25 Brandeis

Region 3
#2 Yeshiva

Region 4
#24 New Jersey City

Region 5
#8 Swarthmore
#14 Johns Hopkins

Region 6
#1 Randolph-Macon
#13 Emory
#20 Roanoke
#23 Maryville (TN)

Region 7
#3 Marietta
#7 Trine
#21 Mount Union
#22 Wittenberg

Region 8
#4 Illinois Wesleyan
#6 Wheaton
#10 Elmhurst
#18 Washington U

Region 9
#5 UW-Platteville
#15 UW-La Crosse
#16 Dubuque
#17 UW-Oshkosh

Region 10
#12 Mary Hardin-Baylor
#19 Whitworth

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 10, 2021, 09:19:50 AM

Is d3hoops going to keep the West, Atlantic, East etc regions for posting up purposes?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 10, 2021, 10:01:20 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 10, 2021, 09:19:50 AM
Is d3hoops going to keep the West, Atlantic, East etc regions for posting up purposes?

We're keeping them for now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 11, 2021, 04:19:28 PM

There are only a few results so far, but out of sheer impatience, here's my first report, with a list of all of the upcoming contests through 11/28 (the last day of competition before the first in-season poll).

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	618	Randolph-Macon	3-0	def. (n) Carnegie Mellon, 70-61; won at Hood, 84-63; def. Mary Washington, 57-53; 11/19 vs. #13 Emory; 11/20 at #3 Marietta; 11/27 vs. #24 New Jersey City; 11/28 at T#34 Christopher Newport
#2	533	Yeshiva	3-0	won at T#60 Lycoming, 90-54; def. (n) Penn St.-Schuylkill, 105-52; def. Eastern Connecticut, 99-69; 11/14 at St. Joseph's (L.I.); 11/16 vs. Mount St. Vincent; 11/18 at St. Joseph's (Bklyn.); 11/21 at Sarah Lawrence; 11/23 vs. SUNY-Purchase; 11/28 vs. Manhattanville
#3	496	Marietta	0-0	11/12 vs. T#34 Christopher Newport; 11/13 vs. TBA; 11/19 vs. #58 Wabash; 11/20 vs. #1 Randolph-Macon; 11/23 vs. Geneva
#4	463	Illinois Wesleyan	1-0	def. Lake Forest, 81-61; 11/12 vs. Hope; 11/13 vs. TBD; 11/19 at Alma; 11/20 at Calvin
#5	417	UW-Platteville	1-0	def. Blackburn, 83-44; 11/12 vs. #19 Whitworth; 11/13 vs. Gustavus Adolphus; 11/17 vs. Concordia (Wis.); 11/20 at Concordia-Chicago; 11/23 vs. Illinois Tech; 11/27 vs. Bethel
#6	411	Wheaton (Ill.)	1-0	def. Benedictine, 82-80; 11/16 at Lake Forest; 11/19 vs. TBD; 11/19 vs. Ohio Wesleyan; 11/20 vs. TBD; 11/23 at Chicago; 11/27 vs. #59 Ripon
#7	386	Trine	2-0	def. Mount St. Joseph, 61-52; won at Manchester, 82-71; 11/16 vs. Benedictine; 11/20 at Muskingum; 11/21 at #21 Mount Union; 11/28 vs. Baldwin Wallace
#8	344	Swarthmore	0-0	11/12 vs. Misericordia; 11/13 vs. TBA; 11/17 vs. Neumann; 11/20 vs. Widener; 11/23 at Muhlenberg
#9	316	St. Joseph (Conn.)	2-0	def. Me.-Augusta, 104-50; def. Alvernia, 76-55; 11/17 at T#51 Babson; 11/20 vs. #11 Tufts; 11/23 vs. Elms; 11/28 vs. Trinity (Conn.)
#10	313	Elmhurst	1-0	def. Kalamazoo, 78-58; 11/13 at Principia; 11/17 at Illinois Tech; 11/20 at St. Norbert; 11/23 vs. Alma; 11/28 vs. T#34 Buena Vista
#11	282	Tufts	0-0	11/16 at Mass-Dartmouth; 11/18 at Suffolk; 11/20 at #9 St. Joseph (Conn.); 11/23 at MIT; 11/27 vs. Lesley; 11/28 vs. Emerson
#12	280	Mary Hardin-Baylor	1-0	def. Southwestern, 100-80; 11/11 at Stephen F. Austin; 11/16 at Huston-Tillotson; 11/27 vs. Arlington Baptist
#13	278	Emory	0-0	11/11 at Piedmont; 11/19 vs. #1 Randolph-Macon; 11/20 vs. #58 Wabash; 11/27 vs. Guilford; 11/28 vs. #23 Maryville (Tenn.)
#14	276	Johns Hopkins	1-1	LOST at T#34 Christopher Newport, 62-64; def. Salisbury, 72-52; 11/17 at York (Pa.); 11/20 vs. St. Mary's (Md.); 11/23 vs. Gettysburg; 11/28 vs. T#60 Lycoming
#15	261	UW-La Crosse	2-0	def. (n) Methodist, 73-50; won at #31 Virginia Wesleyan, 65-54; 11/13 vs. Marian; 11/17 at Augsburg; 11/20 vs. T#34 Buena Vista; 11/23 at #59 Ripon; 11/27 at Wartburg
#16	250	Dubuque	1-0	def. Blackburn, 68-52; 11/12 at Augustana; 11/16 vs. Edgewood; 11/23 vs. Wartburg; 11/27 vs. #18 Washington U.; 11/28 vs. TBA
#17	235	UW-Oshkosh	2-0	def. Augustana, 90-70; won at Concordia (Wis.), 96-62; 11/12 vs. #26 St. John's; 11/13 vs. TBA; 11/17 at Lawrence; 11/20 vs. Carthage; 11/23 at Edgewood
#18	224	Washington U.	1-0	def. Millikin, 52-51; 11/16 at Webster; 11/20 at Blackburn; 11/23 vs. Webster; 11/27 vs. #16 Dubuque; 11/28 vs. Rhodes
#19	214	Whitworth	2-0	def. Greenville, 146-110; def. Redlands, 74-68; 11/12 at #5 UW-Platteville; 11/13 at UW-Whitewater; 11/26 at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps; 11/27 at #43 Pomona-Pitzer
#20	159	Roanoke	0-0	11/12 vs. Eastern; 11/13 vs. TBA; 11/17 vs. Methodist; 11/20 vs. Pfeiffer; 11/23 at Goucher
#21	157	Mount Union	2-0	won at T#54 Albion, 86-74; won at St. Vincent, 110-50; 11/20 vs. Adrian; 11/21 vs. #7 Trine; 11/24 vs. T#51 Wooster
#22	101	Wittenberg	0-0	11/19 vs. T#60 Hendrix; 11/20 vs. La Roche; 11/23 at Hanover
#23	96	Maryville (Tenn.)	1-0	won at Johnson (Tenn.), 87-65; 11/13 vs. Birmingham-Southern; 11/23 at Sewanee; 11/27 at Oglethorpe; 11/28 at #13 Emory
#24	92	New Jersey City	1-1	LOST to Alvernia, 60-70; def. (n) Me.-Augusta, 77-39; 11/13 vs. Farmingdale State; 11/17 at T#54 Stevens; 11/23 vs. Rutgers-Newark; 11/27 vs. #1 Randolph-Macon; 11/28 vs. Alvernia
#25	85	Brandeis	0-0	11/11 vs. Rivier; 11/18 at Emerson; 11/23 vs. Mass-Dartmouth; 11/27 at Mass-Boston

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	69	St. John's	2-0	def. (n) UW-River Falls, 85-67; won at UW-Superior, 67-45; 11/12 vs. #17 UW-Oshkosh; 11/13 vs. TBA; 11/20 at St. Scholastica; 11/24 at T#34 Buena Vista
#27	61	Berry	0-0	11/12 at Brevard; 11/14 at Pfeiffer; 11/20 vs. Warren Wilson; 11/21 vs. LaGrange; 11/23 at Huntingdon
#28	57	Colby	0-0	11/12 vs. New England College; 11/13 vs. TBA; 11/16 at Thomas; 11/20 at Johnson and Wales; 11/23 vs. T#51 Babson
#29	50	Rochester	1-0	def. SUNY Geneseo, 68-56; 11/12 vs. Cortland; 11/13 vs. TBA; 11/18 at Nazareth; 11/20 vs. #41 St. John Fisher; 11/23 vs. Hobart; 11/27 vs. Stockton; 11/28 vs. TBA
#30	49	RPI	0-0	11/12 vs. Medaille; 11/13 vs. TBA; 11/16 at SUNY Delhi; 11/23 vs. SUNY-Cobleskill
#31	47	Virginia Wesleyan	1-2	def. N.C. Wesleyan, 80-69; LOST to #15 UW-La Crosse, 54-65; LOST at Old Dominion, 60-80; 11/13 vs. Marymount; 11/20 at William Peace; 11/22 vs. Pfeiffer; 11/28 vs. Mary Washington
#32	46	DeSales	2-0	won at Hood, 78-74; def. Rosemont, 75-60; 11/13 at Montclair State; 11/17 vs. SUNY-Old Westbury; 11/20 vs. Scranton; 11/23 at Moravian
#33	43	Linfield	0-0	11/13 at Northwest (Wash.); 11/20 vs. Portland Bible; 11/23 at La Verne; 11/26 at #43 Pomona-Pitzer; 11/27 at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps
T#34	38	Christopher Newport	2-0	def. Washington College, 102-37; def. #14 Johns Hopkins, 64-62; 11/12 vs. #3 Marietta; 11/13 vs. TBA; 11/21 at T#51 Lynchburg; 11/27 vs. Alvernia; 11/28 vs. #1 Randolph-Macon
T#34	38	Buena Vista	0-0	11/12 vs. Westminster (Mo.); 11/13 at Fontbonne; 11/19 at UW-Stout; 11/20 at #15 UW-La Crosse; 11/24 vs. #26 St. John's; 11/27 at North Park; 11/28 at #10 Elmhurst
T#36	37	Amherst	0-0	11/14 at Rosemont; 11/17 vs. Colby-Sawyer; 11/19 vs. Massachusetts College; 11/20 vs. TBA; 11/23 vs. Westfield State
T#36	37	Brockport	1-1	LOST at Alfred, 72-82; def. Morrisville State, 69-61; 11/16 at Hobart; 11/23 at Brooklyn
#38	32	DePauw	0-1	LOST to Benedictine, 71-73; 11/12 vs. Earlham; 11/16 at Evansville; 11/21 vs. Kenyon; 11/28 at Rose-Hulman
#39	25	WPI	1-0	def. Worcester State, 88-64; 11/12 vs. St. Joseph's (Maine); 11/13 vs. Ted Coghlin Memorial Tournament; 11/20 vs. Mitchell; 11/21 at Wesleyan Tournament; 11/23 at Fitchburg State
#40	21	Pacific Lutheran	0-0	11/16 vs. Evergreen St.; 11/19 vs. Redlands; 11/20 vs. Claremont-Mudd-Scripps; 11/27 vs. Warner Pacific; 11/28 vs. Northwest Indian College
#41	19	St. John Fisher	0-2	LOST to (n) Ohio Northern, 65-72; LOST at Case Western Reserve, 51-76; 11/13 vs. Fredonia; 11/18 vs. Rochester Tech; 11/20 vs. #29 Rochester; 11/23 vs. Buffalo State
#42	18	North Central (Ill.)	0-1	LOST to Cal Lutheran, 79-80; 11/13 at Greenville; 11/23 at Benedictine; 11/27 vs. Aurora
#43	17	Pomona-Pitzer	0-0	11/13 at UC Santa Cruz; 11/16 vs. Biola; 11/20 vs. Denison; 11/21 at Midway Classic; 11/26 vs. #33 Linfield; 11/27 vs. #19 Whitworth
T#44	13	Heidelberg	0-0	11/13 vs. Berea; 11/14 at Mount St. Joseph; 11/17 vs. Bluffton; 11/23 at T#54 Albion; 11/27 vs. Ohio Wesleyan
T#44	13	Trinity (Texas)	1-0	def. Sul Ross State, 89-81; 11/12 at Hardin-Simmons; 11/13 at McMurry; 11/20 vs. Concordia (Texas); 11/21 vs. Texas-Dallas; 11/26 vs. Birmingham-Southern; 11/27 vs. Carleton
#46	11	Nebraska Wesleyan	0-0	11/13 at Minnesota-Morris; 11/19 vs. UW-Eau Claire; 11/20 vs. TBA; 11/26 vs. Howard Payne; 11/27 vs. East Texas Baptist
#47	10	Centenary (La.)	1-0	def. Arlington Baptist, 87-77; 11/16 at Louisiana College; 11/20 at East Texas Baptist; 11/21 at TBA; 11/23 at MUW
T#48	9	Middlebury	0-0	11/14 at Wentworth; 11/16 vs. Keene State; 11/19 vs. Anna Maria; 11/20 vs. TBA; 11/23 vs. NVU-Johnson; 11/28 vs. Endicott
T#48	9	TCNJ	0-1	LOST at Salisbury, 59-73; 11/12 vs. St. Elizabeth; 11/13 vs. TBA; 11/13 vs. Southern Virginia; 11/17 vs. Ursinus; 11/23 vs. Rowan
T#48	9	St. Mary's (Minn.)	0-0	11/12 vs. Crown; 11/16 at Augustana; 11/20 at Macalester; 11/23 at Hamline
T#51	8	Babson	3-0	def. Mass-Boston, 69-63; def. Suffolk, 91-66; def. Lasell, 70-67; 11/13 at Salve Regina; 11/17 vs. #9 St. Joseph (Conn.); 11/20 vs. Bates; 11/23 at #28 Colby; 11/28 vs. Bowdoin
T#51	8	Wooster	0-0	11/19 vs. St. Vincent; 11/20 vs. TBA; 11/24 at #21 Mount Union
T#51	8	Lynchburg	0-0	11/14 at Methodist; 11/19 at Mary Washington; 11/21 vs. T#34 Christopher Newport; 11/27 vs. N.C. Wesleyan
T#54	7	Albion	0-2	LOST to #21 Mount Union, 74-86; LOST at Rose-Hulman, 58-72; 11/13 vs. UW-Stout; 11/19 vs. TBA; 11/20 vs. TBA; 11/20 at Geneva; 11/23 vs. T#44 Heidelberg
T#54	7	Springfield	0-1	LOST at Western New England, 68-80; 11/12 at Roger Williams; 11/17 vs. Eastern Connecticut; 11/20 at Keene State
T#54	7	Stevens	0-0	11/13 vs. Skidmore; 11/17 vs. #24 New Jersey City; 11/20 vs. Catholic; 11/23 vs. Baruch; 11/28 vs. Rutgers-Newark
#57	5	Ithaca	0-0	11/12 at Alfred; 11/13 at Alfred State; 11/17 vs. Cortland; 11/20 at Susquehanna; 11/20 at Susquehanna
#58	3	Wabash	1-1	won at Centre, 74-70; LOST to Hanover, 81-83; 11/19 at #3 Marietta; 11/20 vs. #13 Emory; 11/28 at Denison
#59	2	Ripon	1-0	def. Luther, 70-51; 11/19 vs. Spalding; 11/20 vs. TBA; 11/23 vs. #15 UW-La Crosse; 11/27 at #6 Wheaton (Ill.)
T#60	1	Centenary (N.J.)	0-0	11/12 at Scranton; 11/13 vs. TBA; 11/15 vs. SUNY-Old Westbury; 11/17 vs. Rutgers-Newark; 11/20 vs. Montclair State; 11/22 vs. Valley Forge
T#60	1	Hendrix	1-0	def. University of the Ozarks, 68-62; 11/13 vs. University of Dallas; 11/14 vs. Austin; 11/19 vs. #22 Wittenberg; 11/20 vs. Wilmington; 11/27 at University of Dallas; 11/28 at Austin
T#60	1	Lycoming	1-1	LOST to #2 Yeshiva, 54-90; def. Clarks Summit, 76-55; 11/12 vs. Pitt-Greensburg; 11/13 vs. McDaniel; 11/20 at Penn College; 11/22 at Susquehanna; 11/28 at #14 Johns Hopkins
T#60	1	Utica	0-0	11/12 vs. Eureka; 11/13 vs. TBA; 11/16 at Morrisville State
T#60	1	Williams	0-0	11/16 vs. SUNY Oneonta; 11/20 vs. Curry; 11/21 vs. Salem State; 11/23 vs. Massachusetts College; 11/28 at SUNY Delhi

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 13, 2021, 07:58:19 AM

#4-Illinois Wesleyan and #17-UW-Oshkosh play tonight at 6pm CT in the championship of the Jack Sikma Invitational. After watching the games in person last night, I think these are both Top 5-caliber teams.

Oshkosh is just incredibly loaded with talent, and they play so well together, and with so much energy. They don't have much of a traditional low post game (no Jack Flynn), except for a really talented 6-8 freshman who gets a little time, but they still play extremely big and physical. UWO attacks the basket off the dribble as well as anyone in Division III, and all of their perimeter players are great at posting up smaller guards. 6-5 F Levi Borchert was a Preseason All-American, but D2 transfers Hunter Plamann (6-0 PG) and Eddie Muench (6-5 G) are just as good. I'd put Plamann up there with all of the elite PGs in D3 - Buzz Anthony, Jake Rhode, etc.

IWU is big, athletic, physical, and skilled. I think IWU might have the best low post duo in the country in 6-7 Cody Mitchell and 6-7 Matt Leritz, and the the Titans have two stud perimeter guys in 6-4 Pete Lambesis and 6-3 Cory Noe. IWU is very deep, going 10 or 11 deep in the rotation...the guys who come off the bench can all play.

Should be a great game. Two very different teams - will be a pretty fascinating Xs and Os matchup. I think both teams have pretty big matchup problems on the defensive end. IWU is much bigger than UWO at the 4 and 5 spots, so Oshkosh will have to contend with that. On the flip side, IWU's big guys will have to spend the entire game chasing guys around the perimeter.

Video of UWO's 89-55 win over St. John's: https://www.iwusports.com/watch/?Archive=172&type=Archive

Video of IWU's 87-74 win over Hope: https://www.iwusports.com/watch/?Archive=173&type=Archive

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on November 13, 2021, 09:33:42 AM

Another top 25 matchup today -- #3 Marietta at #20 Roanoke, 3 p.m. ET.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 13, 2021, 11:27:42 AM

Quote from: y_jack_lok on November 13, 2021, 09:33:42 AM
Another top 25 matchup today -- #3 Marietta at #20 Roanoke, 3 p.m. ET.

Appointment viewing for anyone who hasn't made up their mind on this Roanoke team yet.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TheOsprey on November 13, 2021, 05:16:26 PM

It looks like Roanoke has made their case for top 10 inclusion. RMC vs The Maroons will an interesting battle in the ODAC this season

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on November 14, 2021, 08:50:24 AM

Quote from: TheOsprey on November 13, 2021, 05:16:26 PM
It looks like Roanoke has made their case for top 10 inclusion. RMC vs The Maroons will an interesting battle in the ODAC this season

Before R-MC vs Roanoke (Dec 4th) there's R-MC at Marrietta this coming Saturday, for those like me who use results vs common opponents as a way of trying to predict results when two teams are about to play each other. Of course Roanoke was the home team vs Marietta but R-MC will be the visitor.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 14, 2021, 10:38:58 AM

Quote from: y_jack_lok on November 14, 2021, 08:50:24 AM
Quote from: TheOsprey on November 13, 2021, 05:16:26 PM
It looks like Roanoke has made their case for top 10 inclusion. RMC vs The Maroons will an interesting battle in the ODAC this season

Before R-MC vs Roanoke (Dec 4th) there's R-MC at Marrietta this coming Saturday, for those like me who use results vs common opponents as a way of trying to predict results when two teams are about to play each other. Of course Roanoke was the home team vs Marietta but R-MC will be the visitor.

I'm headed to Marietta this weekend and one of the big things I'll be looking for is rebounding. Marietta only outrebounded CNU by 1 and were crushed by Roanoke. With Marietta's size, they need to be better on the boards. We'll see if they get that fixed this week. They should outrebound RMC on a good day. I'll be watching that closely.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 16, 2021, 10:05:48 PM

Mass-Dartmouth 92
#11-Tufts 71

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 16, 2021, 10:06:19 PM

Webster 72
#18-WashU 60

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 25, 2021, 08:57:18 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

There are still a few games to come before the first in-season vote on Monday - after which this list should be short enough to fit in a single post! (The formatting codes required to make losses red and wins blue pushed this past the 16000-character limit.)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	618	Randolph-Macon	5-0	def. (n) Carnegie Mellon, 70-61; won at Hood, 84-63; def. Mary Washington, 57-53; def. (n) #13 Emory, 88-74; won at #3 Marietta, 82-74; 11/27 vs. #24 New Jersey City; 11/28 at T#34 Christopher Newport
#2	533	Yeshiva	7-0	won at T#60 Lycoming, 90-54; def. (n) Penn St.-Schuylkill, 105-52; def. Eastern Connecticut, 99-69; won at St. Joseph's (L.I.), 82-58; def. Mount St. Vincent, 81-49; won at St. Joseph's (Bklyn.), 94-57; def. SUNY-Purchase, 98-69; 11/28 vs. Manhattanville
#3	496	Marietta	3-2	def. (n) T#34 Christopher Newport, 86-83; LOST at #20 Roanoke, 68-77; def. #58 Wabash, 99-92; LOST to #1 Randolph-Macon, 74-82; def. Geneva, 102-70
#4	463	Illinois Wesleyan	5-0	def. Lake Forest, 81-61; def. Hope, 87-74; def. #17 UW-Oshkosh, 65-63; won at Alma, 91-74; won at Calvin, 81-72
#5	417	UW-Platteville	6-0	def. Blackburn, 83-44; def. #19 Whitworth, 90-69; def. Gustavus Adolphus, 77-62; def. Concordia (Wis.), 83-67; won at Concordia-Chicago, 88-60; def. Illinois Tech, 72-51; 11/27 vs. Bethel
#6	411	Wheaton (Ill.)	5-0	def. Benedictine, 82-80; won at Lake Forest, 95-70; def. Ohio Wesleyan, 84-62; def. UW-Eau Claire, 85-77; won at Chicago, 77-67; 11/27 vs. #59 Ripon
#7	386	Trine	4-1	def. Mount St. Joseph, 61-52; won at Manchester, 82-71; def. Benedictine, 75-67; won at Muskingum, 57-52; LOST at #21 Mount Union, 62-72; 11/28 vs. Baldwin Wallace
#8	344	Swarthmore	4-1	def. (n) Misericordia, 94-69; won at Scranton, 73-67; def. Neumann, 85-68; LOST to Widener, 66-77; won at Muhlenberg, 79-75
#9	316	St. Joseph (Conn.)	4-0	def. Me.-Augusta, 104-50; def. Alvernia, 76-55; won at T#51 Babson, 76-59; def. #11 Tufts, 75-62; ~~11/23 vs. Elms~~ postponed; 11/28 vs. Trinity (Conn.)
#10	313	Elmhurst	5-0	def. Kalamazoo, 78-58; won at Principia, 107-77; won at Illinois Tech, 71-44; won at St. Norbert, 70-55; def. Alma, 94-54; 11/28 vs. T#34 Buena Vista
#11	282	Tufts	0-4	LOST at Mass-Dartmouth, 71-92; LOST at Suffolk, 81-90; LOST at #9 St. Joseph (Conn.), 62-75; LOST at MIT, 65-66; 11/27 vs. Lesley; 11/28 vs. Emerson
#12	280	Mary Hardin-Baylor	2-0	def. Southwestern, 100-80; won at Huston-Tillotson, 92-87; 11/27 vs. Arlington Baptist
#13	278	Emory	1-2	won at Piedmont, 78-64; LOST to (n) #1 Randolph-Macon, 74-88; LOST to (n) #58 Wabash, 90-98; 11/27 vs. Guilford; 11/28 vs. #23 Maryville (Tenn.)
#14	276	Johns Hopkins	4-1	LOST at T#34 Christopher Newport, 62-64; def. Salisbury, 72-52; won at York (Pa.), 70-49; def. (n) St. Mary's (Md.), 75-53; def. Gettysburg, 88-56; 11/28 vs. T#60 Lycoming
#15	261	UW-La Crosse	6-0	def. (n) Methodist, 73-50; won at #31 Virginia Wesleyan, 65-54; def. Marian, 79-48; won at Augsburg, 75-74 OT; def. T#34 Buena Vista, 83-56; won at #59 Ripon, 75-74 OT; 11/27 at Wartburg
#16	250	Dubuque	2-2	def. Blackburn, 68-52; LOST at Augustana, 64-80; def. Edgewood, 79-62; LOST to Wartburg, 73-77; 11/27 vs. #18 Washington U.; 11/28 vs. TBA
#17	235	UW-Oshkosh	6-1	def. Augustana, 90-70; won at Concordia (Wis.), 96-62; def. (n) #26 St. John's, 89-55; LOST at #4 Illinois Wesleyan, 63-65; won at Lawrence, 80-74; def. Carthage, 81-66; won at Edgewood, 72-49
#18	224	Washington U.	3-1	def. Millikin, 52-51; LOST at Webster, 60-72; won at Blackburn, 90-59; def. Webster, 79-47; 11/27 vs. #16 Dubuque; 11/28 vs. Rhodes
#19	214	Whitworth	3-1	def. Greenville, 146-110; def. Redlands, 74-68; LOST at #5 UW-Platteville, 69-90; won at UW-Whitewater, 80-79; 11/26 at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps; 11/27 at #43 Pomona-Pitzer
#20	159	Roanoke	5-0	def. Eastern, 85-58; def. #3 Marietta, 77-68; def. Methodist, 65-63; def. Pfeiffer, 96-72; won at Goucher, 60-39
#21	157	Mount Union	5-0	won at T#54 Albion, 86-74; won at St. Vincent, 110-50; def. Adrian, 97-60; def. #7 Trine, 72-62; def. T#51 Wooster, 81-68
#22	101	Wittenberg	0-3	LOST to (n) T#60 Hendrix, 78-80; LOST to (n) La Roche, 83-89; LOST at Hanover, 69-76
#23	96	Maryville (Tenn.)	3-0	won at Johnson (Tenn.), 87-65; def. Birmingham-Southern, 66-57; won at Sewanee, 81-73; 11/27 at Oglethorpe; 11/28 at #13 Emory
#24	92	New Jersey City	3-2	LOST to Alvernia, 60-70; def. (n) Me.-Augusta, 77-39; def. Farmingdale State, 85-63; won at T#54 Stevens, 62-60; LOST to Rutgers-Newark, 58-68; 11/27 vs. #1 Randolph-Macon; 11/28 vs. Alvernia
#25	85	Brandeis	2-1	def. Rivier, 97-71; LOST at Emerson, 72-84; def. Mass-Dartmouth, 76-68; 11/27 at Mass-Boston

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 25, 2021, 08:58:27 AM

How They Fared (So Far) -- Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	69	St. John's	4-2	def. (n) UW-River Falls, 85-67; won at UW-Superior, 67-45; LOST to (n) #17 UW-Oshkosh, 55-89; LOST to (n) Hope, 58-62; won at St. Scholastica, 74-51; won at T#34 Buena Vista, 81-65
#27	61	Berry	5-0	won at Brevard, 71-68; won at Pfeiffer, 77-75; def. Warren Wilson, 86-60; def. LaGrange, 88-74; won at Huntingdon, 77-66
#28	57	Colby	4-1	def. (n) New England College, 94-84 OT; LOST at #39 WPI, 49-66; won at Thomas, 81-63; won at Johnson and Wales, 82-72; def. T#51 Babson, 78-74 OT
#29	50	Rochester	4-2	def. SUNY Geneseo, 68-56; def. Cortland, 79-53; def. Southern Virginia, 80-66; LOST at Nazareth, 73-81; LOST to (n) #41 St. John Fisher, 60-76; def. Hobart, 80-57; 11/27 vs. Stockton; 11/28 vs. TBA
#30	49	RPI	4-0	def. (n) Medaille, 87-52; won at Nazareth, 61-60; won at SUNY Delhi, 89-63; def. SUNY-Cobleskill, 101-48
#31	47	Virginia Wesleyan	3-3	def. N.C. Wesleyan, 80-69; LOST to #15 UW-La Crosse, 54-65; LOST at Old Dominion, 60-80; def. Marymount, 89-57; won at William Peace, 85-79; LOST to Pfeiffer, 64-67; 11/28 vs. Mary Washington
#32	46	DeSales	6-0	won at Hood, 78-74; def. Rosemont, 75-60; won at Montclair State, 79-67; def. SUNY-Old Westbury, 85-81; def. (n) Scranton, 72-66; won at Moravian, 94-63
#33	43	Linfield	2-0	def. Portland Bible, 114-61; won at La Verne, 84-67; 11/26 at #43 Pomona-Pitzer; 11/27 at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps
T#34	38	Christopher Newport	3-2	def. Washington College, 102-37; def. #14 Johns Hopkins, 64-62; LOST to (n) #3 Marietta, 83-86; def. (n) Eastern, 83-72; LOST at T#51 Lynchburg, 66-83; 11/27 vs. Alvernia; 11/28 vs. #1 Randolph-Macon
T#34	38	Buena Vista	2-3	LOST to (n) Westminster (Mo.), 67-70; won at Fontbonne, 84-72; won at UW-Stout, 102-84; LOST at #15 UW-La Crosse, 56-83; LOST to #26 St. John's, 65-81; 11/27 at North Park; 11/28 at #10 Elmhurst
T#36	37	Amherst	5-0	won at Rosemont, 92-56; def. Colby-Sawyer, 89-52; def. Massachusetts College, 100-38; def. SUNY Geneseo, 79-41; def. Westfield State, 89-59
T#36	37	Brockport	3-1	LOST at Alfred, 72-82; def. Morrisville State, 69-61; won at Hobart, 77-53; won at Brooklyn, 84-50
#38	32	DePauw	2-2	LOST to Benedictine, 71-73; def. Earlham, 67-58; LOST at Evansville, 58-69; def. Kenyon, 81-64; 11/28 at Rose-Hulman
#39	25	WPI	5-1	def. Worcester State, 88-64; def. St. Joseph's (Maine), 98-71; def. #28 Colby, 66-49; def. (n) Mitchell, 103-61; LOST at Wesleyan, 56-80; won at Fitchburg State, 82-65
#40	21	Pacific Lutheran	2-1	def. Evergreen St., 84-55; def. (n) Redlands, 84-83; LOST to (n) Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 60-66; 11/27 vs. Warner Pacific; 11/28 vs. Northwest Indian College
#41	19	St. John Fisher	4-2	LOST to (n) Ohio Northern, 65-72; LOST at Case Western Reserve, 51-76; def. Fredonia, 100-66; def. (n) Rochester Tech, 65-51; def. (n) #29 Rochester, 76-60; def. Buffalo State, 107-98
#42	18	North Central (Ill.)	2-1	LOST to Cal Lutheran, 79-80; won at Greenville, 137-108; won at Benedictine, 65-62; 11/27 vs. Aurora
#43	17	Pomona-Pitzer	3-1	won at UC Santa Cruz, 66-62; LOST to Biola, 70-76; def. (n) Denison, 74-59; won at Chicago, 64-63; 11/26 vs. #33 Linfield; 11/27 vs. #19 Whitworth
T#44	13	Heidelberg	4-0	def. (n) Berea, 77-70; won at Mount St. Joseph, 82-68; def. Bluffton, 92-68; won at T#54 Albion, 87-83; 11/27 vs. Ohio Wesleyan
T#44	13	Trinity (Texas)	5-0	def. Sul Ross State, 89-81; won at Hardin-Simmons, 72-69; won at McMurry, 90-74; def. (n) Concordia (Texas), 95-82; won at Texas-Dallas, 95-62; 11/26 vs. Birmingham-Southern; 11/27 vs. Carleton
#46	11	Nebraska Wesleyan	1-2	won at Minnesota-Morris, 104-92; LOST to (n) UW-Eau Claire, 56-72; LOST to (n) Ohio Wesleyan, 77-83; 11/26 vs. Howard Payne; 11/27 vs. East Texas Baptist
#47	10	Centenary (La.)	3-2	def. Arlington Baptist, 87-77; LOST at Louisiana College, 46-62; LOST to (n) East Texas Baptist, 60-75; won at Millsaps, 73-50; won at MUW, 73-52
T#48	9	Middlebury	3-2	won at Wentworth, 73-56; LOST to Keene State, 77-86; def. (n) Anna Maria, 99-96 2OT; LOST to (n) Eastern Nazarene, 75-85; def. NVU-Johnson, 79-54; 11/28 vs. Endicott
T#48	9	TCNJ	3-2	LOST at Salisbury, 59-73; def. St. Elizabeth, 73-49; def. Drew, 79-62; def. Ursinus, 79-63; LOST to Rowan, 77-85
T#48	9	St. Mary's (Minn.)	1-2	LOST at Augustana, 73-79 OT; won at Macalester, 63-61; LOST at Hamline, 64-67
T#51	8	Babson	4-3	def. Mass-Boston, 69-63; def. Suffolk, 91-66; def. Lasell, 70-67; LOST at Salve Regina, 70-78; LOST to #9 St. Joseph (Conn.), 59-76; def. Bates, 82-71; LOST at #28 Colby, 74-78 OT; 11/28 vs. Bowdoin
T#51	8	Wooster	2-1	def. St. Vincent, 75-57; def. #59 Ripon, 83-71; LOST at #21 Mount Union, 68-81
T#51	8	Lynchburg	2-1	won at Methodist, 83-70; LOST at Mary Washington, 65-68; def. T#34 Christopher Newport, 83-66; 11/27 vs. N.C. Wesleyan
T#54	7	Albion	2-4	LOST to #21 Mount Union, 74-86; LOST at Rose-Hulman, 58-72; LOST to UW-Stout, 75-86; def. (n) Grove City, 57-48; won at Geneva, 91-66; LOST to T#44 Heidelberg, 83-87
T#54	7	Springfield	0-4	LOST at Western New England, 68-80; LOST at Roger Williams, 67-82; LOST to Eastern Connecticut, 70-73; LOST at Keene State, 57-93
T#54	7	Stevens	1-3	LOST at Skidmore, 51-56; LOST to #24 New Jersey City, 60-62; LOST to Catholic, 62-75; def. Baruch, 83-75; 11/28 vs. Rutgers-Newark
#57	5	Ithaca	3-1	LOST at Alfred, 72-75; won at Alfred State, 124-80; def. Cortland, 72-63; won at Susquehanna, 87-56
#58	3	Wabash	2-2	won at Centre, 74-70; LOST to Hanover, 81-83; LOST at #3 Marietta, 92-99; def. (n) #13 Emory, 98-90; 11/28 at Denison
#59	2	Ripon	2-2	def. Luther, 70-51; def. (n) Spalding, 75-66; LOST at T#51 Wooster, 71-83; LOST to #15 UW-La Crosse, 74-75 OT; 11/27 at #6 Wheaton (Ill.)
T#60	1	Centenary (N.J.)	3-2	LOST at Scranton, 75-93; def. (n) Misericordia, 104-96 OT; def. Rutgers-Newark, 75-70; LOST to Montclair State, 106-107; def. Valley Forge, 104-84
T#60	1	Hendrix	4-1	def. University of the Ozarks, 68-62; def. University of Dallas, 78-59; def. Austin, 94-76; def. (n) #22 Wittenberg, 80-78; LOST to (n) Wilmington, 58-70; 11/27 at University of Dallas; 11/28 at Austin
T#60	1	Lycoming	4-2	LOST to #2 Yeshiva, 54-90; def. Clarks Summit, 76-55; def. Pitt-Greensburg, 75-64; LOST to McDaniel, 62-73; won at Penn College, 67-62 OT; won at Susquehanna, 75-56; 11/28 at #14 Johns Hopkins
T#60	1	Utica	3-1	def. (n) Eureka, 84-67; LOST at Rutgers-Newark, 48-66; won at Morrisville State, 86-46; won at Cazenovia, 81-59
T#60	1	Williams	4-0	def. SUNY Oneonta, 79-69 OT; def. Curry, 90-50; def. Salem State, 77-62; def. Massachusetts College, 89-62; 11/28 at SUNY Delhi

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 25, 2021, 09:32:44 AM

Where I'm sitting right now, I think I've got 18 teams I'm definitely voting for somewhere in the Top 25, so that leaves a lot of teams competing for the last 7 spots. I'll really have some research to do this weekend!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 25, 2021, 11:05:28 AM

You should really vote Emerson in so I can get some points in the Top 25 pool.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 28, 2021, 04:58:13 PM

~~Schedule is crazy today; will edit in pending results later.~~

How They Fared (~~almost~~ Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	618	Randolph-Macon	6-1	def. (n) Carnegie Mellon, 70-61; won at Hood, 84-63; def. Mary Washington, 57-53; def. (n) #13 Emory, 88-74; won at #3 Marietta, 82-74; def. (n) #24 New Jersey City, 78-58; LOST at T#34 Christopher Newport, 76-77 OT
#2	533	Yeshiva	8-0	won at T#60 Lycoming, 90-54; def. (n) Penn St.-Schuylkill, 105-52; def. Eastern Connecticut, 99-69; won at St. Joseph's (L.I.), 82-58; def. Mount St. Vincent, 81-49; won at St. Joseph's (Bklyn.), 94-57; def. SUNY-Purchase, 98-69; def. Manhattanville, 78-56
#3	496	Marietta	3-2	def. (n) T#34 Christopher Newport, 86-83; LOST at #20 Roanoke, 68-77; def. #58 Wabash, 99-92; LOST to #1 Randolph-Macon, 74-82; def. Geneva, 102-70
#4	463	Illinois Wesleyan	5-0	def. Lake Forest, 81-61; def. Hope, 87-74; def. #17 UW-Oshkosh, 65-63; won at Alma, 91-74; won at Calvin, 81-72
#5	417	UW-Platteville	7-0	def. Blackburn, 83-44; def. #19 Whitworth, 90-69; def. Gustavus Adolphus, 77-62; def. Concordia (Wis.), 83-67; won at Concordia-Chicago, 88-60; def. Illinois Tech, 72-51; def. Bethel, 81-64
#6	411	Wheaton (Ill.)	6-0	def. Benedictine, 82-80; won at Lake Forest, 95-70; def. Ohio Wesleyan, 84-62; def. UW-Eau Claire, 85-77; won at Chicago, 77-67; def. #59 Ripon, 66-62
#7	386	Trine	5-1	def. Mount St. Joseph, 61-52; won at Manchester, 82-71; def. Benedictine, 75-67; won at Muskingum, 57-52; LOST at #21 Mount Union, 62-72; def. Baldwin Wallace, 72-70
#8	344	Swarthmore	4-1	def. (n) Misericordia, 94-69; won at Scranton, 73-67; def. Neumann, 85-68; LOST to Widener, 66-77; won at Muhlenberg, 79-75
#9	316	St. Joseph (Conn.)	5-0	def. Me.-Augusta, 104-50; def. Alvernia, 76-55; won at T#51 Babson, 76-59; def. #11 Tufts, 75-62; ~~11/23 vs. Elms~~ postponed; def. Trinity (Conn.), 79-59
#10	313	Elmhurst	6-0	def. Kalamazoo, 78-58; won at Principia, 107-77; won at Illinois Tech, 71-44; won at St. Norbert, 70-55; def. Alma, 94-54; def. T#34 Buena Vista, 80-79
#11	282	Tufts	1-5	LOST at Mass-Dartmouth, 71-92; LOST at Suffolk, 81-90; LOST at #9 St. Joseph (Conn.), 62-75; LOST at MIT, 65-66; def. (n) Lesley, 99-76; LOST to Emerson, 72-75
#12	280	Mary Hardin-Baylor	3-0	def. Southwestern, 100-80; won at Huston-Tillotson, 92-87; def. Arlington Baptist, 110-91
#13	278	Emory	3-2	won at Piedmont, 78-64; LOST to (n) #1 Randolph-Macon, 74-88; LOST to (n) #58 Wabash, 90-98; def. Guilford, 66-55; def. #23 Maryville (Tenn.), 78-69
#14	276	Johns Hopkins	5-1	LOST at T#34 Christopher Newport, 62-64; def. Salisbury, 72-52; won at York (Pa.), 70-49; def. (n) St. Mary's (Md.), 75-53; def. Gettysburg, 88-56; def. T#60 Lycoming, 83-53
#15	261	UW-La Crosse	7-0	def. (n) Methodist, 73-50; won at #31 Virginia Wesleyan, 65-54; def. Marian, 79-48; won at Augsburg, 75-74 OT; def. T#34 Buena Vista, 83-56; won at #59 Ripon, 75-74 OT; won at Wartburg, 83-78
#16	250	Dubuque	3-3	def. Blackburn, 68-52; LOST at Augustana, 64-80; def. Edgewood, 79-62; LOST to Wartburg, 73-77; LOST to (n) #18 Washington U., 59-77; def. (n) Westminster (Mo.), 70-65
#17	235	UW-Oshkosh	6-1	def. Augustana, 90-70; won at Concordia (Wis.), 96-62; def. (n) #26 St. John's, 89-55; LOST at #4 Illinois Wesleyan, 63-65; won at Lawrence, 80-74; def. Carthage, 81-66; won at Edgewood, 72-49
#18	224	Washington U.	5-1	def. Millikin, 52-51; LOST at Webster, 60-72; won at Blackburn, 90-59; def. Webster, 79-47; def. (n) #16 Dubuque, 77-59; won at Rhodes, 78-57
#19	214	Whitworth	5-1	def. Greenville, 146-110; def. Redlands, 74-68; LOST at #5 UW-Platteville, 69-90; won at UW-Whitewater, 80-79; won at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 71-53; won at #43 Pomona-Pitzer, 73-58
#20	159	Roanoke	5-0	def. Eastern, 85-58; def. #3 Marietta, 77-68; def. Methodist, 65-63; def. Pfeiffer, 96-72; won at Goucher, 60-39
#21	157	Mount Union	5-0	won at T#54 Albion, 86-74; won at St. Vincent, 110-50; def. Adrian, 97-60; def. #7 Trine, 72-62; def. T#51 Wooster, 81-68
#22	101	Wittenberg	0-3	LOST to (n) T#60 Hendrix, 78-80; LOST to (n) La Roche, 83-89; LOST at Hanover, 69-76
#23	96	Maryville (Tenn.)	4-1	won at Johnson (Tenn.), 87-65; def. Birmingham-Southern, 66-57; won at Sewanee, 81-73; won at Oglethorpe, 81-72; LOST at #13 Emory, 69-78
#24	92	New Jersey City	3-4	LOST to Alvernia, 60-70; def. (n) Me.-Augusta, 77-39; def. Farmingdale State, 85-63; won at T#54 Stevens, 62-60; LOST to Rutgers-Newark, 58-68; LOST to (n) #1 Randolph-Macon, 58-78; LOST to (n) Alvernia, 64-70
#25	85	Brandeis	3-1	def. Rivier, 97-71; LOST at Emerson, 72-84; def. Mass-Dartmouth, 76-68; won at Mass-Boston, 63-54

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 28, 2021, 05:02:32 PM

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	69	St. John's	4-2	def. (n) UW-River Falls, 85-67; won at UW-Superior, 67-45; LOST to (n) #17 UW-Oshkosh, 55-89; LOST to (n) Hope, 58-62; won at St. Scholastica, 74-51; won at T#34 Buena Vista, 81-65
#27	61	Berry	5-0	won at Brevard, 71-68; won at Pfeiffer, 77-75; def. Warren Wilson, 86-60; def. LaGrange, 88-74; won at Huntingdon, 77-66
#28	57	Colby	4-1	def. (n) New England College, 94-84 OT; LOST at #39 WPI, 49-66; won at Thomas, 81-63; won at Johnson and Wales, 82-72; def. T#51 Babson, 78-74 OT
#29	50	Rochester	6-2	def. SUNY Geneseo, 68-56; def. Cortland, 79-53; def. Southern Virginia, 80-66; LOST at Nazareth, 73-81; LOST to (n) #41 St. John Fisher, 60-76; def. Hobart, 80-57; def. Stockton, 72-65; def. Olivet, 67-48
#30	49	RPI	4-0	def. (n) Medaille, 87-52; won at Nazareth, 61-60; won at SUNY Delhi, 89-63; def. SUNY-Cobleskill, 101-48
#31	47	Virginia Wesleyan	3-4	def. N.C. Wesleyan, 80-69; LOST to #15 UW-La Crosse, 54-65; LOST at Old Dominion, 60-80; def. Marymount, 89-57; won at William Peace, 85-79; LOST to Pfeiffer, 64-67; LOST to Mary Washington, 58-71
#32	46	DeSales	6-0	won at Hood, 78-74; def. Rosemont, 75-60; won at Montclair State, 79-67; def. SUNY-Old Westbury, 85-81; def. (n) Scranton, 72-66; won at Moravian, 94-63
#33	43	Linfield	2-2	def. Portland Bible, 114-61; won at La Verne, 84-67; LOST at #43 Pomona-Pitzer, 76-83 OT; LOST at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 72-79
T#34	38	Christopher Newport	5-2	def. Washington College, 102-37; def. #14 Johns Hopkins, 64-62; LOST to (n) #3 Marietta, 83-86; def. (n) Eastern, 83-72; LOST at T#51 Lynchburg, 66-83; def. Alvernia, 101-65; def. #1 Randolph-Macon, 77-76 OT
T#34	38	Buena Vista	2-5	LOST to (n) Westminster (Mo.), 67-70; won at Fontbonne, 84-72; won at UW-Stout, 102-84; LOST at #15 UW-La Crosse, 56-83; LOST to #26 St. John's, 65-81; LOST at North Park, 66-70; LOST at #10 Elmhurst, 79-80
T#36	37	Amherst	5-0	won at Rosemont, 92-56; def. Colby-Sawyer, 89-52; def. Massachusetts College, 100-38; def. SUNY Geneseo, 79-41; def. Westfield State, 89-59
T#36	37	Brockport	3-1	LOST at Alfred, 72-82; def. Morrisville State, 69-61; won at Hobart, 77-53; won at Brooklyn, 84-50
#38	32	DePauw	3-2	LOST to Benedictine, 71-73; def. Earlham, 67-58; LOST at Evansville, 58-69; def. Kenyon, 81-64; won at Rose-Hulman, 72-66
#39	25	WPI	5-1	def. Worcester State, 88-64; def. St. Joseph's (Maine), 98-71; def. #28 Colby, 66-49; def. (n) Mitchell, 103-61; LOST at Wesleyan, 56-80; won at Fitchburg State, 82-65
#40	21	Pacific Lutheran	3-2	def. Evergreen St., 84-55; def. (n) Redlands, 84-83; LOST to (n) Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 60-66; LOST to (n) Warner Pacific, 62-73; def. (n) Northwest Indian College, 90-56
#41	19	St. John Fisher	4-2	LOST to (n) Ohio Northern, 65-72; LOST at Case Western Reserve, 51-76; def. Fredonia, 100-66; def. (n) Rochester Tech, 65-51; def. (n) #29 Rochester, 76-60; def. Buffalo State, 107-98
#42	18	North Central (Ill.)	3-1	LOST to Cal Lutheran, 79-80; won at Greenville, 137-108; won at Benedictine, 65-62; def. Aurora, 76-44
#43	17	Pomona-Pitzer	4-2	won at UC Santa Cruz, 66-62; LOST to Biola, 70-76; def. (n) Denison, 74-59; won at Chicago, 64-63; def. #33 Linfield, 83-76 OT; LOST to #19 Whitworth, 58-73
T#44	13	Heidelberg	4-1	def. (n) Berea, 77-70; won at Mount St. Joseph, 82-68; def. Bluffton, 92-68; won at T#54 Albion, 87-83; LOST to Ohio Wesleyan, 72-81
T#44	13	Trinity (Texas)	6-1	def. Sul Ross State, 89-81; won at Hardin-Simmons, 72-69; won at McMurry, 90-74; def. (n) Concordia (Texas), 95-82; def. (n) Texas-Dallas, 95-62; def. Birmingham-Southern, 108-76; LOST to Carleton, 100-103
#46	11	Nebraska Wesleyan	3-2	won at Minnesota-Morris, 104-92; LOST to (n) UW-Eau Claire, 56-72; LOST to (n) Ohio Wesleyan, 77-83; def. Howard Payne, 112-104; def. East Texas Baptist, 76-73
#47	10	Centenary (La.)	3-2	def. Arlington Baptist, 87-77; LOST at Louisiana College, 46-62; LOST to (n) East Texas Baptist, 60-75; won at Millsaps, 73-50; won at MUW, 73-52
T#48	9	Middlebury	4-2	won at Wentworth, 73-56; LOST to Keene State, 77-86; def. (n) Anna Maria, 99-96 2OT; LOST to (n) Eastern Nazarene, 75-85; def. NVU-Johnson, 79-54; def. Endicott, 86-81
T#48	9	TCNJ	3-2	LOST at Salisbury, 59-73; def. St. Elizabeth, 73-49; def. Drew, 79-62; def. Ursinus, 79-63; LOST to Rowan, 77-85
T#48	9	St. Mary's (Minn.)	1-2	LOST at Augustana, 73-79 OT; won at Macalester, 63-61; LOST at Hamline, 64-67
T#51	8	Babson	5-3	def. Mass-Boston, 69-63; def. Suffolk, 91-66; def. Lasell, 70-67; LOST at Salve Regina, 70-78; LOST to #9 St. Joseph (Conn.), 59-76; def. Bates, 82-71; LOST at #28 Colby, 74-78 OT; def. Bowdoin, 78-54
T#51	8	Wooster	2-1	def. St. Vincent, 75-57; def. #59 Ripon, 83-71; LOST at #21 Mount Union, 68-81
T#51	8	Lynchburg	3-1	won at Methodist, 83-70; LOST at Mary Washington, 65-68; def. T#34 Christopher Newport, 83-66; def. N.C. Wesleyan, 79-51
T#54	7	Albion	2-4	LOST to #21 Mount Union, 74-86; LOST at Rose-Hulman, 58-72; LOST to UW-Stout, 75-86; def. (n) Grove City, 57-48; won at Geneva, 91-66; LOST to T#44 Heidelberg, 83-87
T#54	7	Springfield	0-4	LOST at Western New England, 68-80; LOST at Roger Williams, 67-82; LOST to Eastern Connecticut, 70-73; LOST at Keene State, 57-93
T#54	7	Stevens	2-3	LOST at Skidmore, 51-56; LOST to #24 New Jersey City, 60-62; LOST to Catholic, 62-75; def. Baruch, 83-75; def. Rutgers-Newark, 60-51
#57	5	Ithaca	3-1	LOST at Alfred, 72-75; won at Alfred State, 124-80; def. Cortland, 72-63; won at Susquehanna, 87-56
#58	3	Wabash	3-2	won at Centre, 74-70; LOST to Hanover, 81-83; LOST at #3 Marietta, 92-99; def. (n) #13 Emory, 98-90; won at Denison, 92-87
#59	2	Ripon	2-3	def. Luther, 70-51; def. (n) Spalding, 75-66; LOST at T#51 Wooster, 71-83; LOST to #15 UW-La Crosse, 74-75 OT; LOST at #6 Wheaton (Ill.), 62-66
T#60	1	Centenary (N.J.)	3-2	LOST at Scranton, 75-93; def. (n) Misericordia, 104-96 OT; def. Rutgers-Newark, 75-70; LOST to Montclair State, 106-107; def. Valley Forge, 104-84
T#60	1	Hendrix	6-1	def. University of the Ozarks, 68-62; def. University of Dallas, 78-59; def. Austin, 94-76; def. (n) #22 Wittenberg, 80-78; LOST to (n) Wilmington, 58-70; won at University of Dallas, 91-73; won at Austin, 94-69
T#60	1	Lycoming	4-3	LOST to #2 Yeshiva, 54-90; def. Clarks Summit, 76-55; def. Pitt-Greensburg, 75-64; LOST to McDaniel, 62-73; won at Penn College, 67-62 OT; won at Susquehanna, 75-56; LOST at #14 Johns Hopkins, 53-83
T#60	1	Utica	3-1	def. (n) Eureka, 84-67; LOST at Rutgers-Newark, 48-66; won at Morrisville State, 86-46; won at Cazenovia, 81-59
T#60	1	Williams	5-0	def. SUNY Oneonta, 79-69 OT; def. Curry, 90-50; def. Salem State, 77-62; def. Massachusetts College, 89-62; won at SUNY Delhi, 74-67

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on November 28, 2021, 06:31:24 PM

CNU!!!!! Defeats Randolph Macon in OT

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 28, 2021, 10:19:40 PM

Quote from: CNU85 on November 28, 2021, 06:31:24 PM
CNU!!!!! Defeats Randolph Macon in OT

If CNU takes care of the ball, they are a tough matchup for RMC. Macon was missing Josh Talbert, who was in sweats for the game, but it's a great win for CNU and certainly shows what they can do.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 28, 2021, 11:00:20 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=3ax47/39tcd26s8nwuldn6.jpg)

The DIII basketball season is nearly a month old and teams are settling into the first full season in two years. As we settle in, there are plenty of topics to discuss. On Sunday's show, Dave McHugh chats with the DIII men's and women's basketball committee chairs - Mike Schauer of Wheaton (Ill.) and Megan Wilson of Luther. Also joining the show is UMass-Boston men's basketball coach Jason Harris to chat about the first Black Coaches Classic and the significant coaching changes in the Northeast.

Tune in On Demand as Dave also takes a look back at some of the significant games and results in the past few weeks ahead of the first in-season Top 25 polls.

Guests appear on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

Tune in to the show On Demand here: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2021-22/nov28

You can also listen to the podcast wherever you listen to podcasts (and if we aren't on your favorite place, let us know).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on November 29, 2021, 05:04:33 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 28, 2021, 10:19:40 PM
Quote
CNU!!! Defeats Randolph Macon in OT

If CNU takes care of the ball, they are a tough matchup for RMC. Macon was missing Josh Talbert, who was in sweats for the game, but it's a great win for CNU and certainly shows what they can do.

It was a great game to watch. Both teams took care of the ball. Only 5 turnovers for CNU and only 6 for RMC. 17 assists for each team. Quality basketball for sure. I'm glad I drove back from Florida Saturday so I could go to this game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on November 29, 2021, 07:47:02 PM

Week 1 poll is out:

d3hoops.com/top25/men/2021-22/week1 (http://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2021-22/week1)

PS-- Happy Hanukkah, Poppers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpartyBlue on November 30, 2021, 11:20:01 AM

my eye test top 5. i don't think anyone in the country can match up with UWP.

1. UWP aggressive, big, athletic.
2. R-M athleticism makes them very dangerous despite CNU loss.
3. IWU Leyritz can fill it up and strong supporting cast, but I think they will drop a couple of CCIW games along the way. Titans have it all, however.
4. UWO again, very strong and athletic team, came within a hair of taking down IWU in Shirk. I don't think they'll beat UWP
5. Yeshiva great story, Turell is awesome, but will struggle to match up 1 through 5 with these other teams in my opinion. Taking the Titans to win on 12/30

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on November 30, 2021, 11:45:24 AM

Yeshiva is not overall as talented as those other teams, but they do, I'd say, have the best player in the country. There is certainly precedent for a truly transcendent individual talent to carry a good (but not necessarily elite), well-coached supporting cast to the final four, or even to a championship ... guys like Joey Flannery, Aston Francis, Mike Nogelo, Jeff Gibbs, Jake Ross and so on. Typically, if you have the best guy in the tourney, you can get really far. The question is, is Ryan Turrell on the level of those other guys? It seems like yes, and if so, that's enough to at least get Yeshiva into a final four, after which anything is possible.

The top of D3, really, the entire top 25, looks very strong this year, which is no surprise considering the sheer number of fifth-year seniors spread throughout so many of the top teams ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 30, 2021, 02:09:04 PM

It's funny. I have no problem saying Yeshiva is the best team on paper. I think they matchup well against all the top teams. I just struggle with how little genuine competition they have. There's still some sloppiness that a good team will make them pay for. They've showed, in the few big games they've been able to manage, that they can tighten it up when they need to, but I want to see the consistency you get from a team like RMC, where everything is locked down regardless of opponent, ever game, before I pull the #1 trigger.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BaboNation on November 30, 2021, 02:56:47 PM

Hats off to the poll voters. I think it may be the best early season submission in recent memory, all the way through ARV.

Lots of powerful teams in the Midwest.

If I'd been voting I'd have had IWU @ 1 and Yeshiva @ 3, but that's quibbling.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on November 30, 2021, 03:01:13 PM

I agree with Ryan on almost every point here. Yeshiva definitely looks like the best team on paper and even UWP and IWU, who I think present Yeshiva with the most matchup issues, themselves have matchup issues against the Macs.

Where I disagree with Ryan is that from a players' mentality perspective, it is difficult to focus night in and night out when you are playing severely inferior teams. On the Division I level, Gonzaga is a fantastic example of this; no one would argue about their talent level and how good they are as a team over the last few years, yet they often struggle in first halves against bad and average teams. It says A LOT about a teams' mentality when that team curb stomps inferior competition on a nightly basis (this is partially why I'm a bit higher on Amherst than the voting panel).

Yeshiva showed me the mentality I wanted to see from them in their first few games; I haven't seen that same mentality in the last few games (with the exception of @ SJC-BK). If Yeshiva continues to play the way in their next few games the way they have against Purchase and Manhattanville, I will probably drop Yeshiva down a spot or two (depending on what I see from UWP and IWU in their upcoming games, too). If Yeshiva shows me the mentality they had in their first few games of the year, I'll keep them at 1.

RMC is incredibly consistent and they are a fantastic team, but they don't appear to me to be a #1 team to me at this point in time. Also, part of their consistency is that they will often leave weaker opponents in games late due to slow pace of play and good, but not great, offensive play. It is rare to see Yeshiva, even in games where they play incredibly sloppily, not pick things up at one point; during the 44-game winning streak, the only 3 games where they didn't tighten things up in-game when they needed to were against Sarah Lawrence (won 74-72), against Farmingdale State in the Skyline Semifinals (won 74-69), and against Rochester (won 70-63). In all other games where they have played sloppily, Yeshiva will find a spark and go on a run at one point, often triggered by good defense leading into great transition offense.

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 30, 2021, 02:09:04 PM

It's funny. I have no problem saying Yeshiva is the best team on paper. I think they matchup well against all the top teams. I just struggle with how little genuine competition they have. There's still some sloppiness that a good team will make them pay for. They've showed, in the few big games they've been able to manage, that they can tighten it up when they need to, but I want to see the consistency you get from a team like RMC, where everything is locked down regardless of opponent, ever game, before I pull the #1 trigger.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on November 30, 2021, 03:29:51 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 30, 2021, 02:09:04 PM
They've showed, in the few big games they've been able to manage, that they can tighten it up when they need to, but I want to see the consistency you get from a team like RMC, where everything is locked down regardless of opponent, ever game, before I pull the #1 trigger.

The big games being Rochester and St. Joseph or are you also going back to Williams and the second round of the tournament from March 2020?

I like Yeshiva a lot and I agree with nearly everyone else in the world that they have the POY. But, the closest I can get is relatively big games.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 30, 2021, 05:27:51 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on November 30, 2021, 03:29:51 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 30, 2021, 02:09:04 PM
They've showed, in the few big games they've been able to manage, that they can tighten it up when they need to, but I want to see the consistency you get from a team like RMC, where everything is locked down regardless of opponent, ever game, before I pull the #1 trigger.

The big games being Rochester and St. Joseph or are you also going back to Williams and the second round of the tournament from March 2020?

I like Yeshiva a lot and I agree with nearly everyone else in the world that they have the POY. But, the closest I can get is relatively big games.

During the 44-game streak, has Yeshiva played a ranked team (at the moment of the game)?

WPI and PSU-Harrisburg were not ranked in Week 12 of 2019-20.

Will Illinois Wesleyan be the first ranked team the Macs have faced during the streak?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 30, 2021, 05:34:29 PM

Here is the ballot I submitted for this week's poll - https://twitter.com/IWUhoopscom/status/1465139981110890497?s=20.

I went:

1) RMC
2) Yeshiva
3) IWU
4) UW-Platteville
5) UW-Oshkosh

Even after the loss at CNU, I felt like RMC has the best overall #1 resume. RMC has really nice wins over Emory (neutral) and at Marietta. The Marietta win was especially impressive to me -- vs a great team in a packed, hostile environment. And I never penalize a team for losing on the road vs another great team...OT loss at my #10 CNU is a no biggie for me.

Yeshiva is hard to handle as a voter because of the SOS - Massey has their schedule #401 right now. So I just watch their games and go by the eye test as best as I can. They are really outstanding...I wish they played more good teams.

IWU has a tremendous win vs Oshkosh -- if that was on the road, I'd probably have IWU #1. I think IWU's wins over Hope and Calvin will turn out to be real good ones. The Titans have some big-time games coming up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on November 30, 2021, 06:47:49 PM

Yeshiva has not played a team ranked at the time of the game during the streak. Looks like IWU will be the first (assuming the streak is still intact on the morning of 12/30).

Quote from: Titan Q on November 30, 2021, 05:27:51 PM
Quote from: WUPHF on November 30, 2021, 03:29:51 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 30, 2021, 02:09:04 PM
They've showed, in the few big games they've been able to manage, that they can tighten it up when they need to, but I want to see the consistency you get from a team like RMC, where everything is locked down regardless of opponent, ever game, before I pull the #1 trigger.

The big games being Rochester and St. Joseph or are you also going back to Williams and the second round of the tournament from March 2020?

I like Yeshiva a lot and I agree with nearly everyone else in the world that they have the POY. But, the closest I can get is relatively big games.

During the 44-game streak, has Yeshiva played a ranked team (at the moment of the game)?

WPI and PSU-Harrisburg were not ranked in Week 12 of 2019-20.

Will Illinois Wesleyan be the first ranked team the Macs have faced during the streak?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on December 01, 2021, 08:34:03 AM

FYI-- here are the OWPs of the current top 5 ranked DIII teams in the D3Hoops.com Top 25 poll according to the NCAA stats through games of Monday, November 29, 2021

Source: http://stats.ncaa.org/rankings/change_sport_year_div (http://stats.ncaa.org/rankings/change_sport_year_div) Click on Men's Basketball for sport, 2021-22 for season, and III for Div. Then go to Misc Reports and select Toughest Schedule.

Reminder: OWP is 2/3 of SOS, and these are very early numbers. I would look at Cumulative OWP (OWP of past and future opposition) for a sense of whether the schedule gets tougher throughout the season.

1.) Yeshiva-- current OWP is .395 (ranked #309 among DIII men's basketball teams)/ Cumulative OWP is .405

2.) Illinois Wesleyan-- current OWP is .567 (ranked in a tie for #106 among DIII men's basketball teams)/ Cumulative OWP is .671

3.) Randolph-Macon-- current OWP is .730 (ranked #13 among DIII men's basketball teams)/ Cumulative OWP is .553

4.) UW-Platteville-- current OWP is .438 (ranked #261 among DIII men's basketball teams)/Cumulative OWP is .644

5.) Wheaton (IL)-- current OWP is .548 (ranked #129 among DIII men's basketball teams)/Cumulative OWP is .641

It will be interesting to recheck these numbers as the season goes along, as there is a lot more basketball still to be played.

BTW, Marietta of the OAC is tied with Purchase of Skyline for highest current OWP at .826, but Marietta's cumulative OWP is .754, while Purchase's cumulative OWP is .455

Just some tidbits....

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on December 01, 2021, 08:55:32 AM

If Yeshiva lost to Williams in 2020, which would have been their second loss of the season, they would've been a bubble team from a Pool C standpoint. That's how bad their SOS is. The great thing is that none of that matters once you're in the tournament, it's just too bad we didn't get a real postseason sample size.

You can also say this treatment of Yeshiva is unfair but it would be silly to act like the past performances of historically relevant programs and conferences isn't an understandable data point for discussing resumes. They've earned them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 01, 2021, 10:58:45 AM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on December 01, 2021, 08:55:32 AM
If Yeshiva lost to Williams in 2020, which would have been their second loss of the season, they would've been a bubble team from a Pool C standpoint. That's how bad their SOS is. The great thing is that none of that matters once you're in the tournament, it's just too bad we didn't get a real postseason sample size.

You can also say this treatment of Yeshiva is unfair but it would be silly to act like the past performances of historically relevant programs and conferences isn't an understandable data point for discussing resumes. They've earned them.

And it works the other way, too. At one point I told Bob, "just watch them," he did and became a covert. I don't know if they can win six tournament games in a row, but they can compete with any team in the country regardless of the conference they're in.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Baldini on December 01, 2021, 11:42:05 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 01, 2021, 10:58:45 AM
Quote from: SpringSt7 on December 01, 2021, 08:55:32 AM
If Yeshiva lost to Williams in 2020, which would have been their second loss of the season, they would've been a bubble team from a Pool C standpoint. That's how bad their SOS is. The great thing is that none of that matters once you're in the tournament, it's just too bad we didn't get a real postseason sample size.

You can also say this treatment of Yeshiva is unfair but it would be silly to act like the past performances of historically relevant programs and conferences isn't an understandable data point for discussing resumes. They've earned them.

And it works the other way, too. At one point I told Bob, "just watch them," he did and became a covert. I don't know if they can win six tournament games in a row, but they can compete with any team in the country regardless of the conference they're in.

The kind of wisdom that comes from reaching milestone birthdays in your life. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 01, 2021, 03:03:14 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 01, 2021, 10:58:45 AM
And it works the other way, too. At one point I told Bob, "just watch them," he did and became a covert. I don't know if they can win six tournament games in a row, but they can compete with any team in the country regardless of the conference they're in.

Possibly in more ways than one even if it is honorary, lol.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on December 01, 2021, 10:07:32 PM

I break down the D3hoops Week 1 Top 25 Poll and provide my analysis and opinions here:
https://www.macslive.com/post/d3hoops-top-25-week-1-breakdown-analysis-and-opinions (https://www.macslive.com/post/d3hoops-top-25-week-1-breakdown-analysis-and-opinions)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on December 01, 2021, 10:14:54 PM

Quote from: PoppersMacsLive on December 01, 2021, 10:07:32 PM
I break down the D3hoops Week 1 Top 25 Poll and provide my analysis and opinions here:
https://www.macslive.com/post/d3hoops-top-25-week-1-breakdown-analysis-and-opinions (https://www.macslive.com/post/d3hoops-top-25-week-1-breakdown-analysis-and-opinions)

Very nice analysis and thoughts. Thanks!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on December 02, 2021, 10:32:31 AM

Quote from: PoppersMacsLive on December 01, 2021, 10:07:32 PM
I break down the D3hoops Week 1 Top 25 Poll and provide my analysis and opinions here:
https://www.macslive.com/post/d3hoops-top-25-week-1-breakdown-analysis-and-opinions (https://www.macslive.com/post/d3hoops-top-25-week-1-breakdown-analysis-and-opinions)

That's good stuff. Really enjoyed reading it. Is there a way you can include W/L records next to each team you include in your analysis?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 02, 2021, 10:36:16 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Results since Monday's poll, and what's coming before the next poll.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	603	Yeshiva	9-0	won at Farmingdale State, 80-66; 12/04 vs. SUNY-Old Westbury
#2	586	Illinois Wesleyan	6-0	def. Chicago, 83-50; 12/04 vs. Carroll
#3	583	Randolph-Macon	7-1	def. Virginia Wesleyan, 65-53; 12/04 at #9 Roanoke
#4	562	UW-Platteville	8-0	won at #8 UW-La Crosse, 73-67; 12/04 vs. UW-River Falls
#5	471	Wheaton (Ill.)	7-0	won at Carthage, 65-64; 12/04 at #7 Elmhurst
#6	435	St. Joseph (Conn.)	5-0	12/04 at Dean
#7	420	Elmhurst	6-1	LOST at T#42 Calvin, 57-75; 12/04 vs. #5 Wheaton (Ill.)
#8	402	UW-La Crosse	7-1	LOST to #4 UW-Platteville, 67-73; 12/04 vs. #10 UW-Oshkosh
#9	385	Roanoke	6-0	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 83-58; 12/04 vs. #3 Randolph-Macon
#10	376	UW-Oshkosh	7-1	def. T#40 UW-Eau Claire, 69-60; 12/04 at #8 UW-La Crosse
#11	354	Mary Hardin-Baylor	3-0	12/03 vs. University of the Ozarks
#12	351	Mount Union	5-0	12/04 vs. Heidelberg
#13	320	Marietta	3-2	12/04 vs. Ohio Northern
#14	281	Trine	5-1	IDLE
#15	271	Johns Hopkins	6-1	def. Washington College, 92-61; 12/04 at Muhlenberg
#16	253	Whitworth	5-1	12/04 at Willamette
#17	221	Christopher Newport	5-2	12/04 vs. Averett
#18	220	Swarthmore	5-1	won at Haverford, 81-50; 12/04 vs. Dickinson
#19	159	Wesleyan	7-0	def. Worcester State, 81-73; 12/04 vs. #29 Williams
#20	146	Washington U.	5-1	12/03 vs. Hendrix; 12/04 vs. Hope/St. Thomas (Tex.)
#21	128	Amherst	6-0	def. Thomas, 79-54; 12/04 at St. Elizabeth
#22	105	Emory	4-2	def. LaGrange, 95-65
#23	78	RPI	4-0	12/03 vs. Hobart; 12/04 vs. Rochester Tech
#24	71	Maryville (Tenn.)	5-1	def. Asbury, 85-63; 12/04 vs. Huntingdon
#25	59	DeSales	7-0	won at Wilkes, 65-61; 12/04 vs. Arcadia

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	50	Berry	6-0	def. Huntingdon, 76-53; 12/04 at Oglethorpe
#27	36	WPI	6-1	won at #33 Brandeis, 79-60; 12/04 at Worcester State
#28	29	Lynchburg	4-1	won at Washington and Lee, 82-69; 12/04 vs. Bridgewater (Va.)
#29	23	Williams	5-0	12/02 vs. Worcester State; 12/04 at #19 Wesleyan
T#30	21	Mass-Dartmouth	7-1	IDLE
T#30	21	Cal Lutheran	7-0	def. Occidental, 76-60; 12/04 vs. Chapman; 12/05 at UC Santa Barb.
#32	19	Trinity (Texas)	6-1	12/04 at Schreiner
#33	18	Brandeis	3-2	LOST to #27 WPI, 60-79; 12/03 vs. Babson; 12/04 vs. TBA
#34	13	Case Western Reserve	7-1	12/04 at Adrian
#35	12	Wooster	3-1	won at Oberlin, 62-51; 12/04 vs. DePauw
#36	9	Colby	4-2	LOST to Southern Maine, 71-74; 12/03 at Bates; 12/05 at Bowdoin
#37	7	Rochester	6-2	IDLE
T#38	5	Dubuque	4-3	won at Buena Vista, 66-51; 12/04 vs. Central
T#38	5	Linfield	2-2	12/03 at Puget Sound; 12/04 vs. Lewis and Clark
T#40	4	UW-Eau Claire	5-3	LOST at #10 UW-Oshkosh, 60-69; 12/04 at UW-Stevens Point
T#40	4	Hanover	4-0	def. Anderson, 67-52; 12/04 vs. Bluffton
T#42	3	Calvin	5-2	def. #7 Elmhurst, 75-57
T#42	3	LeTourneau	4-0	12/02 vs. Sul Ross State; 12/04 vs. Howard Payne
T#44	1	Baldwin Wallace	4-2	LOST to Heidelberg, 59-92; 12/04 at Wilmington
T#44	1	Catholic	6-1	LOST to Marymount, 69-74; 12/04 vs. Scranton
T#44	1	Nichols	6-0	won at Salve Regina, 67-66; 12/04 vs. University of New England

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on December 02, 2021, 11:39:51 AM

Thanks!

Great idea, I will include that moving forward.

Quote from: y_jack_lok on December 02, 2021, 10:32:31 AM
Quote from: PoppersMacsLive on December 01, 2021, 10:07:32 PM
I break down the D3hoops Week 1 Top 25 Poll and provide my analysis and opinions here:
https://www.macslive.com/post/d3hoops-top-25-week-1-breakdown-analysis-and-opinions (https://www.macslive.com/post/d3hoops-top-25-week-1-breakdown-analysis-and-opinions)

That's good stuff. Really enjoyed reading it. Is there a way you can include W/L records next to each team you include in your analysis?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PauldingLightUP on December 02, 2021, 08:54:05 PM

There are three top ten matchups on Saturday.

Randolph Macon at Roanoke, Wheaton at Elmhurst, and Oshkosh at La Crosse.

Anyone have any stats on how rare this is? And has it happened this early in the season before? And has it happened before where all three are conference games?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 03, 2021, 04:22:32 PM

Quote from: PauldingLightUP on December 02, 2021, 08:54:05 PM
There are three top ten matchups on Saturday.

Randolph Macon at Roanoke, Wheaton at Elmhurst, and Oshkosh at La Crosse.

Anyone have any stats on how rare this is? And has it happened this early in the season before? And has it happened before where all three are conference games?

Awesome matchups.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 03, 2021, 08:18:15 PM

Watched WashU dismantle a good Hendrix team. They are back.

I think the Bears are legit Top 10 good now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 05, 2021, 09:16:04 AM

Yesterday #3-Randolph Macon won by 12 at #9-Roanoke.

RMC has wins over #22-Emory, #13-Marietta (road), and #9-Roanoke (road)...their loss is at #17-CNU in OT.

RMC will continue to be my #1.

https://www.rmcathletics.com/sports/mbkb/2021-22/boxscores/20211204_15nr.xml?view=boxscore

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 05, 2021, 09:46:23 AM

Not too many losses on my ballot this week, but it's still too early to work off last week's for me. I'll be starting from scratch sometime around 9pm tonight.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 05, 2021, 04:52:18 PM

How They Fared (almost Complete)

~~Colby/Bowdoin game not yet underway (6:00 start time).~~
Cal Lutheran/UCSB - not sure what's going on there, as it's on the master schedule, and the team home page, but not the CLU team page at d3hoops. (Edit: It is underway; CLU currently trailing 46-58 midway through the second half.)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	603	Yeshiva	10-0	won at Farmingdale State, 80-66; def. SUNY-Old Westbury, 105-77
#2	586	Illinois Wesleyan	7-0	def. Chicago, 83-50; def. Carroll, 63-44
#3	583	Randolph-Macon	8-1	def. Virginia Wesleyan, 65-53; won at #9 Roanoke, 62-50
#4	562	UW-Platteville	9-0	won at #8 UW-La Crosse, 73-67; def. UW-River Falls, 74-59
#5	471	Wheaton (Ill.)	7-1	won at Carthage, 65-64; LOST at #7 Elmhurst, 75-76
#6	435	St. Joseph (Conn.)	6-0	won at Dean, 98-67
#7	420	Elmhurst	7-1	LOST at T#42 Calvin, 57-75; def. #5 Wheaton (Ill.), 76-75
#8	402	UW-La Crosse	7-2	LOST to #4 UW-Platteville, 67-73; LOST to #10 UW-Oshkosh, 53-56
#9	385	Roanoke	6-1	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 83-58; LOST to #3 Randolph-Macon, 50-62
#10	376	UW-Oshkosh	8-1	def. T#40 UW-Eau Claire, 69-60; won at #8 UW-La Crosse, 56-53
#11	354	Mary Hardin-Baylor	4-0	def. University of the Ozarks, 87-67
#12	351	Mount Union	5-1	LOST to Heidelberg, 72-91
#13	320	Marietta	4-2	def. Ohio Northern, 94-59
#14	281	Trine	5-1	IDLE
#15	271	Johns Hopkins	7-1	def. Washington College, 92-61; won at Muhlenberg, 76-58
#16	253	Whitworth	6-1	won at Willamette, 94-81
#17	221	Christopher Newport	6-2	def. Averett, 76-54
#18	220	Swarthmore	6-1	won at Haverford, 81-50; def. Dickinson, 87-57
#19	159	Wesleyan	7-1	def. Worcester State, 81-73; LOST to #29 Williams, 60-69
#20	146	Washington U.	7-1	def. Hendrix, 80-46; def. St. Thomas (Texas), 59-51
#21	128	Amherst	7-0	def. Thomas, 79-54; won at St. Elizabeth, 73-51
#22	105	Emory	4-2	def. LaGrange, 95-65
#23	78	RPI	6-0	def. Hobart, 75-64; def. Rochester Tech, 69-51
#24	71	Maryville (Tenn.)	6-1	def. Asbury, 85-63; def. Huntingdon, 88-67
#25	59	DeSales	8-0	won at Wilkes, 65-61; def. Arcadia, 61-52

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	50	Berry	6-1	def. Huntingdon, 76-53; LOST at Oglethorpe, 80-83
#27	36	WPI	7-1	won at #33 Brandeis, 79-60; won at Worcester State, 85-63
#28	29	Lynchburg	5-1	won at Washington and Lee, 82-69; def. Bridgewater (Va.), 91-74
#29	23	Williams	7-0	def. Worcester State, 70-57; won at #19 Wesleyan, 69-60
T#30	21	Mass-Dartmouth	7-1	IDLE
T#30	21	Cal Lutheran	7-2	def. Occidental, 76-60; LOST to Chapman, 75-93; LOST at UCSB, 66-87
#32	19	Trinity (Texas)	7-1	won at Schreiner, 95-84 OT
#33	18	Brandeis	5-2	LOST to #27 WPI, 60-79; def. Babson, 72-65; def. Tufts, 108-102 5OT
#34	13	Case Western Reserve	8-1	won at Adrian, 98-90
#35	12	Wooster	4-1	won at Oberlin, 62-51; def. DePauw, 73-59
#36	9	Colby	5-3	LOST to Southern Maine, 71-74; won at Bates, 78-72; LOST at Bowdoin, 61-74
#37	7	Rochester	6-2	IDLE
T#38	5	Dubuque	5-3	won at Buena Vista, 66-51; def. Central, 76-58
T#38	5	Linfield	4-2	won at Puget Sound, 69-67; def. Lewis and Clark, 87-60
T#40	4	UW-Eau Claire	6-3	LOST at #10 UW-Oshkosh, 60-69; won at UW-Stevens Point, 72-56
T#40	4	Hanover	5-0	def. Anderson, 67-52; def. Bluffton, 75-64
T#42	3	Calvin	5-2	def. #7 Elmhurst, 75-57
T#42	3	LeTourneau	6-0	def. Sul Ross State, 67-58; def. Howard Payne, 81-80
T#44	1	Baldwin Wallace	5-2	LOST to Heidelberg, 59-92; won at Wilmington, 78-66
T#44	1	Catholic	7-1	LOST to Marymount, 69-74; def. Scranton, 75-73
T#44	1	Nichols	7-0	won at Salve Regina, 67-66; def. University of New England, 88-65

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Fifth and Putnam on December 05, 2021, 06:22:55 PM

As always Darryl, thanks for doing this every week. Always have your recap as part of the many tools I have open when voting each week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 05, 2021, 10:09:11 PM

My Q-cast conversation with WashU head coach Pat Juckem.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JC9ApvWGNlA

0:00 Grilling in the Lou
2:00 Last year
4:53 Disadvantage of not playing in 2020-21
11:45 2019-20 Sweet 16 that never was
14:58 7-1 start to 2021-22
18:29 Jack Nolan
26:45 Hayden Doyle
30:07 6-10 Kevin Davet and 6-10 Jake Wolf
35:54 Justin Hardy
40:20 Pat's D3 story
44:18 Tips for aspiring young coaches
49:53 Coe and the IIAC (ARC)
52:54 Building the Oshkosh program back up
58:17 Deciding to pursue the WashU job
1:01:20 Pat's kinda guys
1:04:20 Replacing a legend
1:08:40 The best non-conf rivalry in D3 MBB
1:13:49 The UAA
1:23:24 Final thoughts

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 06, 2021, 11:21:48 AM

Darryl, thank you as always for compiling "How they Fared." It's a tremendous help to me both as a fan and as a Top 25 voter.

Really appreciate all the time that goes into that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 06, 2021, 06:09:57 PM

MONDAY NIGHT SPECIAL

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=3psxd/s5m35wat79mo9rgr.jpg)

November is behind us and now comes the month of distractions. Exams, travel, holidays, academic breaks, etc. At the same time, early conference games are already shaping how the basketball season will unfold.

On tonight's Hoopsville, we chat with one team already making waves in their conference, against conference foes, but not in conference games ... Bates women's coach Alison Montgomery chats about her squad's start and the big win over Bowdoin.

And we talk to a coach who has found a new home after his college was unceremoniously closed. Mississippi College of Women's Dean Burrows talks about guiding a new men's program after the success he had at Wesley.

Plus, Bob Quillman and Ryan Scott join the show to give their reactions to the latest D3hoops.com Top 25 poll. Tune in starting at 7:00 PM ET to watch the latest edition of Hoopsville!

You can watch the show LIVE (or on demand) here: https://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2021-22/dec6

Hoopsville broadcasts from the NABC Studio. All guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions, ideas, or want to interact with the show, feel free to send them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options available.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3sports.com
Hoopsville Season Archive: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PauldingLightUP on December 07, 2021, 12:11:47 PM

The new top 25 came out last night. For completeness sake, is Rochester receiving 4 or 5 ranking points? If 5 they should be ahead of LeTourneau. If 4 then there is a typo.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on December 07, 2021, 07:17:04 PM

Here's my breakdown of the Week 2 Top 25:
https://www.macslive.com/post/d3hoops-top-25-week-2-breakdown-analysis-and-opinions (https://www.macslive.com/post/d3hoops-top-25-week-2-breakdown-analysis-and-opinions)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jknezek on December 09, 2021, 02:45:18 PM

I'll throw this out there one more time in case it got lost in the shuffle. If anyone wants to do a weekly basketball fan poll I'm happy to organize it. Just message me and if I can get a group together I'll let the interested people know.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on December 09, 2021, 03:20:46 PM

Quote from: PoppersMacsLive on December 07, 2021, 07:17:04 PM
Here's my breakdown of the Week 2 Top 25:
https://www.macslive.com/post/d3hoops-top-25-week-2-breakdown-analysis-and-opinions (https://www.macslive.com/post/d3hoops-top-25-week-2-breakdown-analysis-and-opinions)

Again, good stuff. And thanks for including the W/L records. Would you be willing to add a brief description of your methodology? Or is it proprietary? I ask because you mention one aspect of it in your comments re #13 (your #10) UW- La Crosse.

I really enjoy reading what you write. Keep up the great work!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 09, 2021, 03:30:16 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

Note that my program was not sure what to do with the vote-tally issue pointed out by PauldingLightUP, so the rankings at that point in the table are a little strange.

Quote from: PauldingLightUP on December 07, 2021, 12:11:47 PM
The new top 25 came out last night. For completeness sake, is Rochester receiving 4 or 5 ranking points? If 5 they should be ahead of LeTourneau. If 4 then there is a typo.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	603	Yeshiva	11-0	won at Brooklyn, 94-48; 12/09 vs. Washington College; 12/12 vs. Medgar Evers
#2	591	Randolph-Macon	8-1	IDLE
#3	590	Illinois Wesleyan	7-0	12/11 at #8 Wheaton (Ill.)
#4	563	UW-Platteville	9-0	12/10 at Olivet; 12/11 at Hope
#5	487	St. Joseph (Conn.)	6-0	12/09 vs. Elms; 12/11 vs. Anna Maria
#6	479	UW-Oshkosh	8-1	12/11 vs. North Central (Ill.)
#7	395	Elmhurst	8-1	won at Millikin, 79-61; 12/11 at North Park
#8	388	Wheaton (Ill.)	8-1	won at Carroll, 81-57; 12/11 vs. #3 Illinois Wesleyan
#9	379	Mary Hardin-Baylor	4-0	12/09 at McMurry; 12/11 at T#38 Hardin-Simmons
#10	357	Marietta	4-2	12/12 at Baldwin Wallace
#11	356	Roanoke	6-1	IDLE
#12	320	Johns Hopkins	7-1	IDLE
#13	310	UW-La Crosse	7-2	12/11 at #16 Trine
#14	300	Christopher Newport	6-2	12/12 vs. #27 Lynchburg
#15	276	Whitworth	7-1	def. Whitman, 82-71; 12/12 vs. Colorado College
#16	229	Trine	5-2	LOST to #36 Heidelberg, 67-72; 12/11 vs. #13 UW-La Crosse
#17	218	Mount Union	6-1	won at John Carroll, 93-83; 12/11 at Ohio Northern
#18	205	Washington U.	8-1	def. Fontbonne, 71-48
#19	197	Swarthmore	7-1	won at Susquehanna, 88-60
#20	164	Williams	7-0	12/09 vs. Union; 12/11 at Springfield
#21	121	Amherst	8-0	won at Springfield, 75-61
#22	106	RPI	7-0	won at Bard, 75-45; 12/11 at Mount St. Mary
#23	103	Emory	4-3	LOST at Covenant, 58-69 OT
#24	58	Maryville (Tenn.)	7-1	def. Johnson (Tenn.), 85-68
#25	51	DeSales	9-0	won at Stevens, 64-44; 12/11 vs. Misericordia

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	46	Wesleyan (Conn.)	7-1	12/09 vs. Manhattanville; 12/11 at Farmingdale State
#27	38	Lynchburg	5-1	12/11 at Salisbury; 12/12 at #14 Christopher Newport
#28	37	WPI	7-1	12/11 at Husson
#29	24	Calvin	5-2	IDLE
#30	19	Case Western Reserve	8-1	IDLE
#31	14	Wooster	5-1	def. Allegheny, 77-60; 12/11 vs. Hiram
#32	11	Widener	4-4	LOST to Eastern, 82-89; 12/11 vs. Ursinus
T#33	10	Oswego	6-1	12/11 at Fredonia
T#33	10	Cal Lutheran	7-1	IDLE
T#33	10	Mass-Dartmouth	7-2	LOST at Eastern Connecticut, 73-75
#36	9	Heidelberg	7-1	won at #16 Trine, 72-67; 12/11 vs. Wilmington
#37	8	Berry	6-1	IDLE
T#38	6	Colby	6-3	def. Maine-Farmington, 86-81 OT; 12/11 at #43 Brandeis
T#38	6	Hardin-Simmons	7-1	12/09 vs. Concordia (Texas); 12/11 vs. #9 Mary Hardin-Baylor
T#38	6	Trinity (Texas)	7-1	IDLE
T#41	4	LeTourneau	6-0	12/09 vs. Belhaven; 12/11 vs. East Texas Baptist
#42	5	Rochester	7-2	won at Ithaca, 81-76 OT
#43	4	Brandeis	6-2	def. Lasell, 88-44; 12/11 vs. T#38 Colby
T#44	2	Nazareth	6-1	won at SUNYIT, 79-78
T#44	2	Wartburg	7-1	12/09 vs. UW-Eau Claire; 12/11 at Simpson
T#46	1	Hanover	5-0	12/11 at Defiance
T#46	1	Mary Washington	8-2	12/11 vs. Eastern Mennonite
T#46	1	Nichols	8-1	def. Trinity (Conn.), 85-82 OT; LOST at Wentworth, 79-95; 12/11 at Tufts
T#46	1	Stockton	8-1	def. TCNJ, 75-55; 12/11 vs. Montclair State

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 09, 2021, 04:56:09 PM

Did anyone just add up the total points? That would give us an answer.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on December 09, 2021, 05:13:03 PM

Operating from a completely unfair premise of extra practice time, resources, etc, but is it fair to say this St. Thomas team would be #1 in D3 as of right now? They're 4-5 in their first year in D1 and are loaded with seniors. Seems like they should be moderately competitive in the Summit as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 09, 2021, 05:20:54 PM

I don't think it was meant to work this way, but it is interesting.

St. Thomas is No. 301 in Massey. Platteville is ranked No. 464 until you filter for Division III.

I love the St. Thomas story, but I would ask: did they pick up anyone who would not have attended otherwise? I think they got a Northwestern transfer in Dom Martinelli though he probably has to sit out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 09, 2021, 05:29:54 PM

I think St. Thomas would clearly be number one. And yeah, it's pretty amazing they are doing this well with 4/5 top guys originally being D3 recruits. It's becoming increasingly clear, whether it's those guys, Duncan Robinson, Matt Hart, Austin Hutcherson, (a guy at one of the Illinois schools who did well as a transfer last year, I'm forgetting who), etc., there are loads of D3 players who can be very effective Division 1 contributors, once they get into D1 weight training and practice regimens. If I was a low to mid-major D1 coach looking to get guys who are proven commodities, I'd definitely let it be known that I'm interested in offering scholarships to elite D3 underclassmen ..

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 09, 2021, 06:04:02 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=3vdsu/ypsmfff3ntqmfkdq.jpg)

For two programs this week, the number 25 is probably considered lucky. For many, it represents the bottom of a Top 25 ranking, but for those in the 25th slot ... it means they are ranked.

St. John Fisher hasn't been ranked since "Desperate Housewives," "Boston Legal," "The Shield," and "Fear Factor" where some of the most popular shows on television. The top movie was "Coach Carter." However, Coach Melissa Kuberka has gotten her Cardinals squad back into the rankings after a terrific start to the 2021-22 season. We talk to her about the team's success and how the rest of the season could shape up.

For DeSales, there were signs they were going to be good during the COVID season. Not all teams are able to duplicate that short-season success, but the Bulldogs are off to an undefeated start. Coach Scott Coval discusses just how good the team is and why we haven't seen the unit at it's very best. Plus, one can still break a backboard in today's game? DeSales found out it is possible.

Plus, Yeshiva is getting plenty of attention now that they have been ranked #1 in the D3hoops.com Top 25 poll the last few weeks. But do you really know the Macabees and their program? We talk to Gary Belsky who wrote an expose on the program for ESPN. It's a must read and a must listen to segment.

And UW-Eau Claire Athletics have big plans for future Blugolds and DIII championships. Introducing the $70 million Sonnetag Center. AD Dan Schumacher discusses the significant way UWEC could shift championships and even regional recruiting by 2024.

You can watch the show LIVE (or on demand) here: https://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2021-22/dec9

Guests List:
- #25 St. John Fisher women's coach Melissa Kuberka
- #25 DeSales men's coach Scott Coval
- ESPN Writer Gary Belsky
- UW-Eau Claire Director of Athletics Dan Schumacher

Hoopsville broadcasts from the NABC Studio. All guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions, ideas, or want to interact with the show, feel free to send them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options available.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3sports.com
Hoopsville Season Archive: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 09, 2021, 07:27:42 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 09, 2021, 04:56:09 PM

Did anyone just add up the total points? That would give us an answer.

Adds up to 8121, but with 25 voters, it should be 8125 ... so that doesn't quite clear it up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on December 10, 2021, 12:58:00 AM

Thanks.

Very briefly, I prioritize the eye test, take into account team mentality as justified by performance against both strong and weak competition (good teams should be blowing out bad teams and should not be getting blown out by good teams), and am guided along by results.

To quote the article and explain further: "They remain to me a borderline Top 10 team, and my methodology uses results as a secondary consideration, which is why I only dropped them one spot, whereas partially why the panel dropped La Crosse down by 5." Because I am only guided along by results/use results as a secondary consideration, I don't completely ignore results, but I'm more focused on what I see on the court regardless of result. I believed that UW-La Crosse was borderline Top 10 entering the week and despite both losses, left the week feeling the same way I did about them as I had beforehand. Ultimately, they lost a couple games, so I dropped them a spot. Some others have methodologies which prioritize (at least somewhat) results--not to say that this is wrong, different people have different methodologies. At the end of the day, such a voter might suggest that, even if they believe that UW-La Crosse is better than, let's say, #13, by the fact that they failed to win either home game, even against tough opponents, they will put them at #13, ie. punish the team for losing by dropping them several spots (which, again, is reasonable).

Quote from: y_jack_lok on December 09, 2021, 03:20:46 PM
Quote from: PoppersMacsLive on December 07, 2021, 07:17:04 PM
Here's my breakdown of the Week 2 Top 25:
https://www.macslive.com/post/d3hoops-top-25-week-2-breakdown-analysis-and-opinions (https://www.macslive.com/post/d3hoops-top-25-week-2-breakdown-analysis-and-opinions)

Again, good stuff. And thanks for including the W/L records. Would you be willing to add a brief description of your methodology? Or is it proprietary? I ask because you mention one aspect of it in your comments re #13 (your #10) UW- La Crosse.

I really enjoy reading what you write. Keep up the great work!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on December 10, 2021, 10:04:14 AM

^^^ Thanks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on December 10, 2021, 10:22:55 AM

What's the reasoning behind the 4 week break in January for Yeshiva and Skyline play not starting until the end of the month?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on December 10, 2021, 10:56:32 AM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on December 10, 2021, 10:22:55 AM
What's the reasoning behind the 4 week break in January for Yeshiva and Skyline play not starting until the end of the month?

Yeshiva has actually played about half of their 16 game conference schedule in the fall semester already-- Yeshiva is 7-0 in the Skyline heading into January finals and the January break. According to the academic schedule for Yeshiva, they have classes all through the month of December with the last day of classes for the fall semester being Tuesday, January 4, 2022. I believe that their finals are in January and then they go on break with the second semester starting on Monday, January 24, 2022. Yeshiva operates on the Hebrew luni-solar calendar (months marked according to the lunar cycle with an extra month added every few years to catch up , in which there is an extra month being added this year due to the relatively early High Holidays and Hanukkah (relatively early according to our solar calendar.) Therefore, this year on the Hebrew calendar has 2 months of Adar-- Purim is not celebrated in the first month of Adar, but is delayed 30 days to the second month of Adar. This will ensure that Passover is celebrated in its proper season, in the Spring-- after the vernal equinox.

Yeshiva is having classes throughout the entire month of December, because the fall semester really did not get going academically until the beginning of October this year-- after the High Holidays and the major holidays of Sukkot, Shemini Atzeret, and Simchat Torah. The month of Tishrei-- where all of these holidays occurred, took place in September this year. Today is the 6th of Tevet on the Hebrew calendar-- Hanukkah ended earlier this week. On Tuesday, Yeshiva will observe the public fast of the 10th of Tevet, which takes place from dawn to nightfall (No classes will take place on the fast day.) The January break is not mandated religiously (The New Year for Trees-- Tu B'Shevat falls on MLK's birthday this year) but since Yeshiva is having classes all through the month of December, it makes sense to have the winter break in January.

So, on January 26, 2022, the second half of Skyline conference play will begin for Yeshiva, and the rest of the Skyline Conference teams, which have only played about 1 to 3 games of league play so far, will catch up during Yeshiva's January break.

On the men's side, the Skyline conference is split into the North and South divisions, in which each men's team only has to play the teams in their own division twice (home and away), and the other teams once before conference tournament play. There are 12 teams on the men's side, with each division having 6 teams each. On the women's side, which only has 11 teams (Mariitme does not have a women's basketball program in the conference), each team plays the other teams home and away for a total of 20 conference games. The Yeshiva women will have played 10 conference games before the January break, and the other 10 games after the break.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 10, 2021, 11:50:35 AM

I've talked to Eliot Steinmetz several times on air and off air about their one-month break ...

They don't have to take the entire break off technically. They could come back earlier in January and I think they have in some occasions, but there is also a cost and approval side of things to consider. So while there is an element of the Jewish holidays and how the calendar is built by the university academically, they could return early like a lot of colleges do ... they just can't always afford the costs that are involved and other factors.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 10, 2021, 01:18:01 PM

The cost of keeping students over winter break is not something I have thought much about. What would those costs be?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 10, 2021, 01:24:37 PM

On 4/22/21, WashU senior Justin Hardy was diagnosed w/ Stage 4 stomach cancer. On 11/27/21, he had 28 pts & 11 reb.

His incredible and inspiring story is here...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRMVYfraa88

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 10, 2021, 03:43:27 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on December 10, 2021, 01:18:01 PM
The cost of keeping students over winter break is not something I have thought much about. What would those costs be?

All dependent on how each individual institution does things, but one example that is probably universal: meals.

Let's say the athletic department decides to use the school's cafeterias and other eating locations ... they have to pay for the meals (x3) for each of their students, student assistants, and whomever else they have on campus that would be utilizing those locations.

And, again, depending on each institutions, there could be the costs associated with being in the dorms for additional time and that list of costs could run long.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 10, 2021, 07:56:36 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 10, 2021, 03:43:27 PM
Quote from: WUPHF on December 10, 2021, 01:18:01 PM
The cost of keeping students over winter break is not something I have thought much about. What would those costs be?

All dependent on how each individual institution does things, but one example that is probably universal: meals.

Let's say the athletic department decides to use the school's cafeterias and other eating locations ... they have to pay for the meals (x3) for each of their students, student assistants, and whomever else they have on campus that would be utilizing those locations.

And, again, depending on each institutions, there could be the costs associated with being in the dorms for additional time and that list of costs could run long.

Some schools have empty dorm policies, too - students literally can't be in them, athlete or not. I know of several schools that have to pay for hotel rooms if they bring kids back during the break. I know Swarthmore's cafeteria is closed entirely - the kids are generally on their own for meals when they come back early.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 10, 2021, 08:26:36 PM

I would say that college and universities are more than ever keeping dorms open over winter break, though I do believe there are still schools that close. I think those are increasingly rare.

It was more common for dorms to close for good in my day.

Meals are often an issue. One more question though: can a school feed student-athletes for an extended period without running afoul of the regulations? Before it looks like an athletics related board scholarship? I figured student-athletes were own their own.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 10, 2021, 08:38:41 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on December 10, 2021, 08:26:36 PM
I would say that college and universities are more than ever keeping dorms open over winter break, though I do believe there are still schools that close. I think those are increasingly rare.

It was more common for dorms to close for good in my day.

Meals are often an issue. One more question though: can a school feed student-athletes for an extended period without running afoul of the regulations? Before it looks like an athletics related board scholarship? I figured student-athletes were own their own.

Well, they can do snacks now, but I think meals on non gamedays are still out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on December 10, 2021, 09:28:19 PM

CNU has many dorms that have 12 month terms. My daughter was in one for 2 years. You don't have to leave. However, the dining facilities close when classes are out for breaks. Students are on their own, which isn't a big deal. Her dorm for those 2 years was over a Panera, Moe's, a local place called Schooners, and a bunch of other places were nearby. Makes things convenient for CNU to be able to charge more for room & board and still save costs by closing dining halls.

Now if we could only solve the C2C and have an FRC - For Real Conference. ;D ;D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 12, 2021, 06:04:56 PM

How They Fared (~~Almost~~ Complete)

~~BW/Marietta not yet finished.~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	603	Yeshiva	13-0	won at Brooklyn, 94-48; def. Washington College, 85-76; def. Medgar Evers, 104-59
#2	591	Randolph-Macon	8-1	IDLE
#3	590	Illinois Wesleyan	7-1	LOST at #8 Wheaton (Ill.), 62-67
#4	563	UW-Platteville	11-0	won at Olivet, 63-57; won at Hope, 73-63
#5	487	St. Joseph (Conn.)	8-0	def. Elms, 86-60; def. Anna Maria, 91-68
#6	479	UW-Oshkosh	9-1	def. North Central (Ill.), 91-67
#7	395	Elmhurst	8-2	won at Millikin, 79-61; LOST at North Park, 67-69
#8	388	Wheaton (Ill.)	9-1	won at Carroll, 81-57; def. #3 Illinois Wesleyan, 67-62
#9	379	Mary Hardin-Baylor	5-1	won at McMurry, 86-67; LOST at T#38 Hardin-Simmons, 77-80
#10	357	Marietta	5-2	won at Baldwin Wallace, 83-71
#11	356	Roanoke	6-1	IDLE
#12	320	Johns Hopkins	7-1	IDLE
#13	310	UW-La Crosse	8-2	won at #16 Trine, 68-61
#14	300	Christopher Newport	7-2	def. #27 Lynchburg, 79-74
#15	276	Whitworth	8-1	def. Whitman, 82-71; def. Colorado College, 80-61
#16	229	Trine	5-3	LOST to #36 Heidelberg, 67-72; LOST to #13 UW-La Crosse, 61-68
#17	218	Mount Union	7-1	won at John Carroll, 93-83; won at Ohio Northern, 72-56
#18	205	Washington U.	8-1	def. Fontbonne, 71-48
#19	197	Swarthmore	7-1	won at Susquehanna, 88-60
#20	164	Williams	9-0	def. Union, 75-53; won at Springfield, 74-61
#21	121	Amherst	8-0	won at Springfield, 75-61
#22	106	RPI	8-0	won at Bard, 75-45; won at Mount St. Mary, 77-54
#23	103	Emory	4-3	LOST at Covenant, 58-69 OT
#24	58	Maryville (Tenn.)	7-1	def. Johnson (Tenn.), 85-68
#25	51	DeSales	10-0	won at Stevens, 64-44; def. Misericordia, 82-68

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	46	Wesleyan (Conn.)	9-1	def. Manhattanville, 74-60; won at Farmingdale State, 85-80
#27	38	Lynchburg	6-2	won at Salisbury, 77-75; LOST at #14 Christopher Newport, , 74-79
#28	37	WPI	8-1	won at Husson, 88-69
#29	24	Calvin	5-2	IDLE
#30	19	Case Western Reserve	8-1	IDLE
#31	14	Wooster	6-1	def. Allegheny, 77-60; def. Hiram, 82-53
#32	11	Widener	4-4	LOST to Eastern, 82-89
T#33	10	Oswego	7-1	won at Fredonia, 63-48
T#33	10	Cal Lutheran	7-2	LOST at San Diego, 55-84
T#33	10	Mass-Dartmouth	7-2	LOST at Eastern Connecticut, 73-75
#36	9	Heidelberg	8-1	won at #16 Trine, 72-67; def. Wilmington, 97-66
#37	8	Berry	6-1	IDLE
T#38	6	Colby	6-4	def. Maine-Farmington, 86-81 OT; LOST at #43 Brandeis, 68-69
T#38	6	Hardin-Simmons	9-1	def. Concordia (Texas), 99-76; def. #9 Mary Hardin-Baylor, 80-77
T#38	6	Trinity (Texas)	7-1	IDLE
T#41	4	LeTourneau	8-0	def. Belhaven, 78-66; def. East Texas Baptist, 71-70
#42	5	Rochester	7-2	won at Ithaca, 81-76 OT
#43	4	Brandeis	7-2	def. Lasell, 88-44; def. T#38 Colby, 69-68
T#44	2	Nazareth	6-1	won at SUNYIT, 79-78
T#44	2	Wartburg	9-1	def. UW-Eau Claire, 82-70; won at Simpson, 77-59
T#46	1	Hanover	5-1	LOST at Defiance, 73-74
T#46	1	Mary Washington	9-2	def. Eastern Mennonite, 80-57
T#46	1	Nichols	9-1	def. Trinity (Conn.), 85-82 OT; LOST at Wentworth, 79-95; won at Tufts, 90-85
T#46	1	Stockton	9-1	def. TCNJ, 75-55; def. Montclair State, 89-82

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 12, 2021, 06:21:54 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=40wx5/mbexwhcrlqcil3kt.jpg)

For some programs, the start to the 2021-22 season has been better than expected. For others, it has been recording breaking.

On Sunday's edition of Hoopsville, we chat with coaches of programs whose teams are off to strong starts. Some of those starts might have been expected, but not all of them.

We chat with Heidelberg and RPI men's basketball program plus York (Pa.) and No. 7 Trine women's programs.

You can watch the show LIVE (or on demand) here: https://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2021-22/dec9

We are also simulcasting on our Facebook Live page (www.facebook.com/Hoopsville (http://www.facebook.com/Hoopsville))

Guests List (order subject to change):
- Heidelberg men's coach Andy Bucheit
- York (Pa.) women's coach Betsy Witman
- #7 Trine women's coach Andy Rang
- RPI men's coach Mark Gilbride

Hoopsville is hosted by Dave McHugh from the NABC Studios. It is presented by D3hoops.com and thanks to our partners at the WBCA and BlueFrame Technology.

If you have questions, ideas, or want to interact with the show, feel free to send them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options available.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3sports.com
Hoopsville Season Archive: www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 14, 2021, 10:36:43 AM

Not Top 25 related...but if you aren't following SJF, you're missing out.

Connor Williams, listed at 7 feet, 360 lbs making the rounds on Twitter. Good stuff. Here's an article:

https://www-rochesterfirst-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.rochesterfirst.com/sports/college-sports/get-to-know-connor-williams-st-john-fisher-basketball-center-after-local-hoopers-viral-moment-victor-big-cat-barstool-sports-video-university-of-buffalo-pass-top-of-the-key-espn/amp/?amp_js_v=a6&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQIKAGwASCAAgM%3D#aoh=16394585953066&csi=0&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rochesterfirst.com%2Fsports%2Fcollege-sports%2Fget-to-know-connor-williams-st-john-fisher-basketball-center-after-local-hoopers-viral-moment-victor-big-cat-barstool-sports-video-university-of-buffalo-pass-top-of-the-key-espn%2F

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Next Man Up on December 14, 2021, 03:59:51 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 14, 2021, 10:36:43 AM
Not Top 25 related...but if you aren't following SJF, you're missing out.

Connor Williams, listed at 7 feet, 360 lbs making the rounds on Twitter. Good stuff. Here's an article:

https://www-rochesterfirst-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.rochesterfirst.com/sports/college-sports/get-to-know-connor-williams-st-john-fisher-basketball-center-after-local-hoopers-viral-moment-victor-big-cat-barstool-sports-video-university-of-buffalo-pass-top-of-the-key-espn/amp/?amp_js_v=a6&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQIKAGwASCAAgM%3D#aoh=16394585953066&csi=0&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rochesterfirst.com%2Fsports%2Fcollege-sports%2Fget-to-know-connor-williams-st-john-fisher-basketball-center-after-local-hoopers-viral-moment-victor-big-cat-barstool-sports-video-university-of-buffalo-pass-top-of-the-key-espn%2F

They showed a tape of him on Sports Sunday which is the special sports wrap up/highlights show following the 10:00 news every Sunday night on NBC, Channel 5 in Chicago.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Next Man Up on December 14, 2021, 04:07:30 PM

Seems a little odd that 9-1 Wheaton beat 7-1 Illinois Wesleyan on Saturday night, yet IWU is ranked higher in this week's Top 25 Poll.
Unlike rising inflation in many aspects of society currently, perhaps head-to-head competition has been discounted?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 14, 2021, 04:19:59 PM

So, the voters went with the team with the "better loss" and better strength of schedule. Always tough and interesting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 14, 2021, 04:51:49 PM

Quote from: Next Man Up on December 14, 2021, 04:07:30 PM
Seems a little odd that 9-1 Wheaton beat 7-1 Illinois Wesleyan on Saturday night, yet IWU is ranked higher in this week's Top 25 Poll.
Unlike rising inflation in many aspects of society currently, perhaps head-to-head competition has been discounted?

Personally, I ranked Wheaton ahead of IWU, but often voters will be forgiving with road losses to good teams. Playing at home is a distinct advantage, especially when teams are evenly matched. Voters similarly didn't count the close loss at IWU against Oshkosh all that much.

I've kept RMC in my #1 slot all along despite their loss for much the same reason. In my view a repeat loss is less than a 50/50 proposition. I suspect voters who've kept IWU ahead of Wheaton feel similarly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: USee on December 14, 2021, 05:41:59 PM

I admittedly don't understand the basketball world when it comes to rankings. But all this stuff you guys are talking about (better loss? Road loss?) trumps a HTH result? I mean they are going to play again @IWU anyway right? And Oshkosh lost to IWU but they aren't ranked ahead of IWU so that's not the same thing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PauldingLightUP on December 14, 2021, 06:30:02 PM

This is one of those classic A beats B and C beats A situations, that Dave mentions on Hoopsville from time to time, that puts voters in a tough spot. I think the top 10 is pretty good at this point including point differences in certain spots.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: USee on December 14, 2021, 06:55:20 PM

A,B,C?? Wheaton beat IWU head to head. How is that A v B v C?

In terms of losses, Wheaton's only loss is on a half court heave on the road to a top 10 team. IWU's loss is to a top 10 team by 5 on the road. I don't get it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PauldingLightUP on December 14, 2021, 08:53:46 PM

Quote from: USee on December 14, 2021, 06:55:20 PM
A,B,C?? Wheaton beat IWU head to head. How is that A v B v C?

In terms of losses, Wheaton's only loss is on a half court heave on the road to a top 10 team. IWU's loss is to a top 10 team by 5 on the road. I don't get it.

I misinterpreted you original post, but I was saying Wheaton beat IWU and IWU beat Oshkosh. You were looking to just compare Wheaton and IWU I think.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 15, 2021, 12:13:32 AM

Quote from: USee on December 14, 2021, 05:41:59 PM
I admittedly don't understand the basketball world when it comes to rankings. But all this stuff you guys are talking about (better loss? Road loss?) trumps a HTH result? I mean they are going to play again @IWU anyway right? And Oshkosh lost to IWU but they aren't ranked ahead of IWU so that's not the same thing.

A head to head only proves who's better on that night. Different voters approach the ranking in different ways. Not everybody is trying to rank teams in the moment.

When comparing teams, I tend to think about how they'd perform head to head over a lot of games. If they played 100 times, which would win more.

Head to heads help with that a lot, but they're not necessarily definitive. I moved Wheaton ahead of IWU more because of how they looked than because they won.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: stlawus on December 15, 2021, 12:36:05 AM

Folks also have to remember that these rankings are "unofficial" if you will. It's cool and interesting to see the top 25 no doubt, but it's still an arbitrary metric. You definitely want to see your team get national attention with a top 25 ranking, but if you feel snubbed you can take comfort knowing that a good team is a good team, and playing at the end of the year unranked can give you a feeling of playing with house money. All that matters is the regional rankings in the end.

Again, this isn't to take away from the top 25 poll. It's all we have to gauge the field before the regional rankings and it stokes the conversation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Next Man Up on December 15, 2021, 12:42:26 AM

I also sense some voters wouldn't give Wheaton that much credit for beating IWU because they did so on their own floor and they'd say the home team should win on it's own floor.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: USee on December 15, 2021, 01:14:15 AM

HCA is worth 3pts Wheaton won by 5. Should have been Wheaton 4, IWU 5 and UWO 6 if the voters need to anchor UWO to IWU. And if we are gonna wait until the end of the year then why have rankings at all during the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: stlawus on December 15, 2021, 01:51:38 AM

Quote from: USee on December 15, 2021, 01:14:15 AM
HCA is worth 3pts Wheaton won by 5. Should have been Wheaton 4, IWU 5 and UWO 6 if the voters need to anchor UWO to IWU. And if we are gonna wait until the end of the year then why have rankings at all during the season.

"It's all we have to gauge the field before the regional rankings and it stokes the conversation" as I just said.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 15, 2021, 06:24:48 AM

I don't think you can just look at who beat who. Look at the numbers.

Last week it was:

IWU 590 pts
Oshkosh 479 pts
Wheaton 388 pts

This week

IWU 517 pts
Oshkosh 510 pts
Wheaton 500 pts

Wheaton gained nearly 200 points on IWU. That's pretty significant.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: USee on December 15, 2021, 09:41:46 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 15, 2021, 06:24:48 AM
I don't think you can just look at who beat who. Look at the numbers.

Last week it was:

IWU 590 pts
Oshkosh 479 pts
Wheaton 388 pts

This week

IWU 517 pts
Oshkosh 510 pts
Wheaton 500 pts

Wheaton gained nearly 200 points on IWU. That's pretty significant.

It is significant but not the point. All that does is highlight the fact that there are voters who rank IWU ahead of Wheaton despite the obvious head to head. Again, the polls are what they are, the voters try and do a good job with the data they have. It seems like Head to head matters until it doesn't. For example, when Elmhurst was ranked 7th and Wheaton 5th and the Thunder lost on a halfcourt toss on the road to Elmhurst, in the poll the next week Elmhurst stays at 7 and Wheaton is ranked behind them at 8. Obviously the voters strongly considered the head to head as primary. #10 UWO loses by 2 on the road to IWU and they move up but stay anchored behind IWU, also giving the most consideration to the head to head result. But when #2 IWU loses on the road to #5 Wheaton by 5 (HCA is 3pts) they are behind IWU in the next poll? Wheaton is the only team to have played 2 top 10 teams and has 1 win and 1 half court toss loss. It's really early in the season still and all of these teams play each other and have big games coming up. I get it if a team is ranked at #23 and beats #1 there may not be a move ahead of that team but these teams were both in the top 10. There's plenty of time and games for things to get confusing so at this point it seems like HTH should trump the other stuff, like it has for other similar results.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 15, 2021, 10:40:08 AM

Randolph Macon lost to CNU, and I don't think a single voter moved CNU ahead of them. It's not always a given, unless you really see the teams as even going into the head to head matchup.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 15, 2021, 10:51:04 AM

Well, IWU will either defeat Yeshiva, becoming the hottest team in the country (assuming a win tonight) or will lose to Yeshiva and surely fall below Wheaton, so...

Wheaton did look very good on Saturday and as you pointed out, the return of the football players was a big part of that. The big guy was fun to watch on Leritz.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on December 15, 2021, 11:00:38 AM

Quote from: WUPHF on December 15, 2021, 10:51:04 AM
Well, IWU will either defeat Yeshiva, becoming the hottest team in the country (assuming a win tonight) or will lose to Yeshiva and surely fall below Wheaton, so...

Wheaton did look very good on Saturday and as you pointed out, the return of the football players was a big part of that. The big guy was fun to watch on Leritz.

I predict an IWU victory!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 15, 2021, 11:15:59 AM

I have watched Yeshiva and IWU twice this season so my sample size is limited, but I predict an IWU win. I added a poll. Maybe people will weigh in.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: USee on December 15, 2021, 11:44:55 AM

Quote from: WUPHF on December 15, 2021, 10:51:04 AM
Well, IWU will either defeat Yeshiva, becoming the hottest team in the country (assuming a win tonight) or will lose to Yeshiva and surely fall below Wheaton, so...

Wheaton did look very good on Saturday and as you pointed out, the return of the football players was a big part of that. The big guy was fun to watch on Leritz.

I agree. That's why this conversation has a shelf life.

I guess I am used to a 10 game football schedule where undefeated is likely vs a 28 game basketball schedule where undefeated is unlikely. Seems like the pollsters are forgiving of losses in basketball and unforgiving in football, which makes sense given the limited data. But having watched IWU and Wheaton, I don't see a lot of separation there when both are playing well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 15, 2021, 12:26:40 PM

Quote from: USee on December 15, 2021, 09:41:46 AM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 15, 2021, 06:24:48 AM
I don't think you can just look at who beat who. Look at the numbers.

Last week it was:

IWU 590 pts
Oshkosh 479 pts
Wheaton 388 pts

This week

IWU 517 pts
Oshkosh 510 pts
Wheaton 500 pts

Wheaton gained nearly 200 points on IWU. That's pretty significant.

It is significant but not the point. All that does is highlight the fact that there are voters who rank IWU ahead of Wheaton despite the obvious head to head. Again, the polls are what they are, the voters try and do a good job with the data they have. It seems like Head to head matters until it doesn't. For example, when Elmhurst was ranked 7th and Wheaton 5th and the Thunder lost on a halfcourt toss on the road to Elmhurst, in the poll the next week Elmhurst stays at 7 and Wheaton is ranked behind them at 8. Obviously the voters strongly considered the head to head as primary. #10 UWO loses by 2 on the road to IWU and they move up but stay anchored behind IWU, also giving the most consideration to the head to head result. But when #2 IWU loses on the road to #5 Wheaton by 5 (HCA is 3pts) they are behind IWU in the next poll? Wheaton is the only team to have played 2 top 10 teams and has 1 win and 1 half court toss loss. It's really early in the season still and all of these teams play each other and have big games coming up. I get it if a team is ranked at #23 and beats #1 there may not be a move ahead of that team but these teams were both in the top 10. There's plenty of time and games for things to get confusing so at this point it seems like HTH should trump the other stuff, like it has for other similar results.

It obviously matters a lot because they gained 200 points on them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: USee on December 15, 2021, 01:03:50 PM

They gained 200 pts because a number of voters put Wheaton ahead of IWU on their ballots. But a number of them kept them behind as well. Points are an output of the voting process, not the focus of it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 15, 2021, 01:14:07 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on December 15, 2021, 10:51:04 AM
Well, IWU will either defeat Yeshiva, becoming the hottest team in the country (assuming a win tonight) or will lose to Yeshiva and surely fall below Wheaton, so...

Correction: Wheaton will move ahead of IWU when the team that lost to Webster defeats IWU on Sunday, lol. How did I forget about that game?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: thebear on December 15, 2021, 09:31:43 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on December 15, 2021, 11:15:59 AM
I have watched Yeshiva and IWU twice this season so my sample size is limited, but I predict an IWU win. I added a poll. Maybe people will weigh in.

Yeshiva beat [6-6 Massey 144] NJCU, coached by former Siena great Marc Brown tonight in JC, 93-86 to go to 14-0. NCJU hung 58 on Yeshiva in the second half, but couldn't come back from a 21 point halftime deficit. Turell had 41 tonight in 40 minutes.

IWU has played a much tougher schedule. Three games against top 20, 5 against top 80.

For Yeshiva, Turell is a matchup problem, 6-7 with real guard skills, shooting 47% [47 makes] from three, not sure how IWU will defend him with 6-6 Leifer and 6-8 Armstrong also on the floor. Yeshiva shooting .416 from the arc [lots of players with international experience]. Halpert, who returned tonight after missing two games is shooting .512 [44 makes] from the arc.

I remember vividly over the years some interesting referee calls on visiting teams in the big city.

Should be worth watching

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on December 15, 2021, 09:59:56 PM

Leifer and Armstrong are not big matchup concerns because they don't really look to score. Turell, Reef, and Halpert are the ones that will cause trouble.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 16, 2021, 07:17:38 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

That eye-catching 2-0 win for Marietta is a COVID-induced "no contest":

QuoteMARIETTA, Ohio — The Ohio Athletic Conference men's basketball game between Marietta College and John Carroll University, scheduled for this Saturday (Dec. 18) in University Heights, has been canceled due to COVID-19 protocol issues at John Carroll.

Per OAC COVID guidelines, the game will officially be declared a no contest. However, for the purposes of OAC Tournament seeding and regular season conference standings, the game will be considered a win for Marietta and a loss for John Carroll.

Their d3hoops page shows Marietta's record as 7-2 (counting this as a win), but I changed it to the official 6-2 in the report.

Additionally, there are three postponed games on the list this week (also due to COVID?)

As usual, the schedule thins out a bit in mid-December. Based on past years, I'm assuming that a new poll will be issued next Monday, and then a long break until the next one (maybe January 3?).

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	605	Yeshiva	14-0	won at New Jersey City, 93-86
#2	603	Randolph-Macon	8-1	IDLE
#3	584	UW-Platteville	11-0	IDLE
#4	517	Illinois Wesleyan	8-1	won at North Central (Ill.), 73-48; 12/19 at #15 Washington U.
#5	510	UW-Oshkosh	9-1	IDLE
#6	500	Wheaton (Ill.)	9-1	12/18 at Olivet
#7	466	St. Joseph (Conn.)	8-0	IDLE
#8	396	Marietta	6-2	def. Otterbein, 87-62; won at John Carroll, 2-0* (see note above)
#9	373	UW-La Crosse	8-2	~~12/15 at St. Mary's (Minn.)~~ postponed; 12/18 at Crown
#10	371	Roanoke	6-1	12/19 vs. #37 Wartburg
#11	355	Johns Hopkins	7-1	IDLE
#12	341	Christopher Newport	8-2	won at Hampden-Sydney, 79-74; 12/17 vs. Virginia Wesleyan
#13	314	Whitworth	8-1	12/17 vs. Schreiner
#14	268	Elmhurst	8-2	12/18 vs. Carroll
#15	260	Washington U.	8-1	12/19 vs. #4 Illinois Wesleyan
#16	221	Mount Union	7-1	12/17 at Wilmington
#17	204	Williams	9-0	IDLE
#18	189	Swarthmore	7-1	IDLE
#19	173	Mary Hardin-Baylor	5-1	12/16 vs. Texas-Dallas; 12/18 vs. T#40 LeTourneau
#20	145	Amherst	8-0	IDLE
#21	144	RPI	8-0	IDLE
#22	79	Heidelberg	8-1	12/18 at Muskingum
#23	75	Maryville (Tenn.)	7-1	12/18 vs. Ferrum; 12/19 at Hampden-Sydney
#24	71	DeSales	10-0	IDLE
#25	68	Hardin-Simmons	9-1	12/16 vs. University of the Ozarks

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	43	Wesleyan	9-1	IDLE
#27	39	Lynchburg	7-2	won at William Peace, 92-60
#28	37	WPI	8-1	IDLE
#29	32	Calvin	5-2	IDLE
#30	29	Trine	5-3	12/18 at Anderson
#31	23	Case Western Reserve	8-1	12/17 vs. Kalamazoo
#32	12	Trinity (Texas)	7-1	12/17 at Austin; 12/19 at Centenary (La.)
#33	11	Wooster	6-1	12/18 at UC Santa Cruz; 12/19 vs. Lewis and Clark
T#34	10	Oswego	7-1	IDLE
T#34	10	Rochester	7-2	IDLE
#36	8	Berry	6-1	12/19 vs. Marywood
#37	7	Wartburg	9-1	12/19 vs. #10 Roanoke
#38	6	Emory	4-3	IDLE
#39	5	Cal Lutheran	7-2	12/17 vs. Loras
T#40	4	Brandeis	7-2	IDLE
T#40	4	Chapman	8-1	12/19 vs. SUNY Oneonta
T#40	4	LeTourneau	8-0	12/18 at #19 Mary Hardin-Baylor; 12/19 at Concordia (Texas)
#43	3	Nazareth	6-1	IDLE
T#44	2	Augsburg	7-1	~~12/15 at UW-River Falls~~ postponed; 12/19 vs. Stevenson
T#44	2	Stockton	9-1	12/18 at Rosemont
T#44	2	Mary Washington	9-2	~~12/14 at Averett~~ postponed; 12/18 at Hampden-Sydney; 12/19 vs. Ferrum

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 16, 2021, 07:27:34 AM

I do believe the WIAC games in Minnesota were do to weather, FWIW.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 16, 2021, 09:18:42 AM

Quote from: thebear on December 15, 2021, 09:31:43 PM
Should be worth watching

This is surely going to be among the Top 10 most streamed games of the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 16, 2021, 09:24:09 AM

When was the last time an undefeated number one team was an underdog at home? Because I think it's fair to say that in Massey or just in general perception, Yeshiva is the underdog (albeit slight) in this one ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 16, 2021, 09:38:21 AM

When was the last time the No. 1 team had a Massey strength of schedule anywhere close to No. 401? The scheduling challenges aside, this must be completely unprecedented.

For comparison, if you look at the final season rankings from 2019, you have to go to the 13th ranked team to find a SOS outside of 100 and to the 29th ranked team to find an SOS outside of 200 and that Nichols team (SOS 231) knocked off Amherst and Middlebury in the early season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 16, 2021, 10:07:08 AM

Yeah, good point. I imagine the strength of schedule will shoot up into the 200s after NJCU, IWU and Williams ... but then gradually fall back again (although not all the way to 401) during the rest of league play ... which obviously Yeshiva cannot control, so no one is blaming them for that.

Likewise, I'm very curious to see what happens to Williams' SOS (currently a very unimpressive 316) after a much tougher upcoming stretch: 120, 13, 97, 5, 172, 96, 5, 95, plus a possible game vs. 124 W&L. I imagine the Ephs' schedule will crack the top 100 following those games.

Part of the problem is that some typically strong New England teams (Eastern Conn and Springfield) are having down years, hurting the SOS of teams that schedule them expecting a tough game (in this case, Yeshiva and Williams/Amherst).

Amherst (not much better than Yeshiva at 381) will certainly benefit from league play, especially the four Wesleyan/Williams games, but man its SOS can only go so high with Lesley and Pratt (2 of the bottom 7 in D3) still left to play. Does any other team have THREE sub-400 teams on its non-league schedule (Amherst also beat up on winless St. Elizabeth)?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BaboNation on December 16, 2021, 11:15:02 AM

The Yeshiva run is somewhat reminiscent of Indiana State with Larry Bird, with Ryan T in the Bird role. Not a perfect comparison by any means ... Bird had far less roster support, but the schedule wasn't demanding until tournament time.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on December 16, 2021, 11:20:49 AM

Massey does show both a current SOS as well as a future SOS (using future opponents current record). Looking at that Yeshiva goes from current 401 to future 384. Amherst goes from current 381 to future 232.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 16, 2021, 11:52:06 AM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on December 16, 2021, 11:20:49 AM
Massey does show both a current SOS as well as a future SOS (using future opponents current record). Looking at that Yeshiva goes from current 401 to future 384. Amherst goes from current 381 to future 232.

+1 I have been looking at Massey for quite a long time and never noticed that.

HAL 9000 does it all.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 16, 2021, 11:56:46 AM

Wow, thanks FDF, great tip!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 16, 2021, 02:03:14 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on December 16, 2021, 11:52:06 AM
Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on December 16, 2021, 11:20:49 AM
Massey does show both a current SOS as well as a future SOS (using future opponents current record). Looking at that Yeshiva goes from current 401 to future 384. Amherst goes from current 381 to future 232.

+1 I have been looking at Massey for quite a long time and never noticed that.

HAL 9000 does it all.

You just have to remember that future SOS changes, too, as those teams play more teams. It's an estimate, at best, but it gives you an idea of how the schedule plays out going forward.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 16, 2021, 02:15:59 PM

Right, right!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 16, 2021, 04:06:33 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=482ln/jmmdazmdzbqpzmtw.jpg)

The closer we get to the New Year, the more DIII teams are into the season grind. Though, we also hit a time when some teams are not playing for a few weeks while others scatter games around the holidays.

On Thursday's Hoopsville, Dave McHugh chats with several teams that are making headlines with terrific starts or dominating performances. Tune in as we talk to several men's and women's programs that fit the bill around the country.

You can watch the show LIVE (or on demand) here: https://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2021-22/dec16 or http://www.d3hoops.com/x/fh5lq

We are also simulcasting on our Facebook Live page (www.facebook.com/Hoopsville (http://www.facebook.com/Hoopsville)) AND tonight on our YouTube page (http://www.youtube.com/Hoopsville (http://www.youtube.com/Hoopsville))

Guests include (order subject to change):
- Naomi Graves, No. 25 Springfield women's coach
- Pat Juckem, No. 15 WashU men's coach
- Scott Bittner, Stockton men's coach
- Bill Broderick, No. 6 Christopher Newport women's coach

Hoopsville is hosted by Dave McHugh from the the NABC Studio. It is presented by D3hoops.com and thanks to our partner WBCA. All guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions, ideas, or want to interact with the show, feel free to send them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options available.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Video Portal (and archives): www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3sports.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 17, 2021, 12:59:39 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on December 16, 2021, 11:52:06 AM
Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on December 16, 2021, 11:20:49 AM
Massey does show both a current SOS as well as a future SOS (using future opponents current record). Looking at that Yeshiva goes from current 401 to future 384. Amherst goes from current 381 to future 232.

+1 I have been looking at Massey for quite a long time and never noticed that.

HAL 9000 does it all.

(https://prod.brandnewskool.nl/app/uploads/sites/3/2018/11/HAL-9000.jpg)

"I've still got the greatest enthusiasm and confidence in the mission. And I want to help you."

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PauldingLightUP on December 17, 2021, 01:50:53 PM

FYI for Darryl and others. Dave said last night on Hoopsville that the next top 25 will be January 3rd. No, December 20th and 27th.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 17, 2021, 03:58:05 PM

Quote from: PauldingLightUP on December 17, 2021, 01:50:53 PM
FYI for Darryl and others. Dave said last night on Hoopsville that the next top 25 will be January 3rd. No, December 20th and 27th.

Thanks. In my next update, I'll include the complete list of games until then.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 19, 2021, 05:01:32 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

Results from the past week, plus upcoming games through January 2 (when the next poll will take place).

Note there are quite a few incomplete results for today, but I don't plan to update this post.
Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	605	Yeshiva	14-0	won at New Jersey City, 93-86; 12/30 vs. #4 Illinois Wesleyan; 01/02 vs. #17 Williams
#2	603	Randolph-Macon	8-1	12/29 vs. Rosemont; 12/30 vs. TBD
#3	584	UW-Platteville	11-0	12/29 vs. Beloit; 12/30 vs. TBD
#4	517	Illinois Wesleyan	8-1	won at North Central (Ill.), 73-48; 12/19 at #15 Washington U.; 12/29 at Mount St. Vincent; 12/30 at #1 Yeshiva
#5	510	UW-Oshkosh	9-1	12/21 vs. St. Norbert; 12/29 vs. #29 Calvin; 12/30 vs. Ripon
#6	500	Wheaton (Ill.)	10-1	won at Olivet, 91-82; 12/29 vs. #36 Berry; 12/30 vs. Edgewood; 12/31 vs. TBD
#7	466	St. Joseph (Conn.)	8-0	12/28 vs. Transylvania; 12/29 vs. #8 Marietta
#8	396	Marietta	6-2	def. Otterbein, 87-62; NO CONTEST at John Carroll; 12/28 vs. Chicago; 12/29 vs. #7 St. Joseph (Conn.)
#9	373	UW-La Crosse	9-2	1~~2/15 at St. Mary's (Minn.)~~; won at Crown, 67-43; 12/30 vs. Bethel
#10	371	Roanoke	7-1	def. (n) #37 Wartburg, 70-66; 12/20 vs. Dubuque; 12/29 vs. Messiah; 12/30 vs. TBA
#11	355	Johns Hopkins	7-1	12/29 vs. Manhattanville; 12/30 vs. TBD
#12	341	Christopher Newport	9-2	won at Hampden-Sydney, 79-74; def. Virginia Wesleyan, 80-72; 12/20 vs. Washington and Lee; 12/21 at Catholic; 12/29 vs. Merchant Marine; 12/30 vs. TBA; 01/02 vs. Widener
#13	314	Whitworth	9-1	def. Schreiner, 88-70; 12/30 vs. UW-River Falls
#14	268	Elmhurst	9-2	def. Carroll, 85-78; 12/21 at Manchester; 12/29 vs. Lake Forest
#15	260	Washington U.	8-1	12/19 vs. #4 Illinois Wesleyan; 12/31 vs. Westminster (Mo.)
#16	221	Mount Union	8-1	won at Wilmington, 89-71; 12/29 vs. Geneva; 12/30 vs. Lycoming
#17	204	Williams	9-0	12/29 vs. York (Pa.); 12/30 vs. TBA; 01/02 at #1 Yeshiva
#18	189	Swarthmore	7-1	12/30 at Immaculata; 01/02 vs. Stevens
#19	173	Mary Hardin-Baylor	7-1	def. Texas-Dallas, 79-69; def. T#40 LeTourneau, 91-86 OT; 12/29 vs. Pacific Lutheran; 12/30 vs. St. Mary's (Minn.)
#20	145	Amherst	8-0	12/28 at SUNY-Old Westbury; 12/31 vs. Babson
#21	144	RPI	8-0	12/29 vs. Oswego State; 12/30 vs. TBA
#22	79	Heidelberg	9-1	won at Muskingum, 96-76; 12/21 at Oberlin
#23	75	Maryville (Tenn.)	9-1	def. (n) Ferrum, 84-47; won at Hampden-Sydney, 85-84; 12/28 vs. Pacific Lutheran; 12/29 vs. UC Santa Cruz
#24	71	DeSales	10-0	12/20 at Muhlenberg; 12/29 vs. Neumann; 12/30 vs. TBA
#25	68	Hardin-Simmons	10-1	def. University of the Ozarks, 77-49

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	43	Wesleyan	9-1	12/29 vs. Wilkes; 12/30 vs. TBA
#27	39	Lynchburg	7-2	won at William Peace, 92-60; 12/29 vs. Muskingum; 12/30 vs. Wooster or La Roche
#28	37	WPI	8-1	12/29 vs. Endicott; 12/30 at Salem State
#29	32	Calvin	5-2	12/21 vs. Texas Lutheran; 12/22 at #32 Trinity (Texas); 12/29 at #5 UW-Oshkosh; 12/30 vs. UW-Stout
#30	29	Trine	5-4	LOST at Anderson, 57-65; 12/20 vs. UW-Stevens Point; 12/30 vs. Concordia-Chicago
#31	23	Case Western Reserve	9-1	def. Kalamazoo, 94-74
#32	12	Trinity (Texas)	8-2	won at Austin, 89-80; LOST at Centenary (La.), 78-87; 12/21 vs. Alma; 12/22 vs. #29 Calvin
#33	11	Wooster	7-1	won at UC Santa Cruz, 80-71; 12/19 vs. Lewis and Clark; 12/29 vs. La Roche; 12/30 vs. TBA
T#34	10	Oswego	7-1	12/29 vs. #21 RPI; 12/30 vs. TBA
T#34	10	Rochester	7-2	01/02 at DePauw
#36	8	Berry	7-1	def. (n) Marywood, 79-46; 12/20 vs. Albright; 12/29 vs. #6 Wheaton (Ill.); 12/30 vs. Carthage
#37	7	Wartburg	9-2	LOST to (n) #10 Roanoke, 66-70; 12/20 vs. Baldwin Wallace
#38	6	Emory	4-3	12/29 vs. UW-Whitewater; 12/30 vs. Birmingham-Southern; 01/02 at Oglethorpe
#39	5	Cal Lutheran	8-2	def. Loras, 90-82; 12/28 vs. Northwestern (Minn.); 12/29 vs. Benedictine; 01/01 vs. Pomona-Pitzer
T#40	4	Brandeis	7-2	12/30 vs. Union
T#40	4	Chapman	8-1	12/19 vs. SUNY Oneonta; 12/28 vs. Bethesda University; 01/01 at Redlands
T#40	4	LeTourneau	8-1	LOST at #19 Mary Hardin-Baylor, 86-91 OT; 12/19 at Concordia (Texas); 01/01 at Austin
#43	3	Nazareth	6-1	12/29 vs. Edgewood; 12/30 vs. Carroll
T#44	2	Augsburg	7-2	LOST at UW-River Falls, 67-86; 12/19 vs. Stevenson; 12/19 vs. Rhodes; 12/20 vs. DePauw
T#44	2	Stockton	10-1	won at Rosemont, 69-66
T#44	2	Mary Washington	9-3	~~12/14 at Averett;~~ LOST at Hampden-Sydney, 71-84; 12/19 vs. Ferrum; 12/29 vs. Goucher; 12/30 vs. TBA

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 19, 2021, 06:54:06 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on December 15, 2021, 01:14:07 PM
Quote from: WUPHF on December 15, 2021, 10:51:04 AM
Well, IWU will either defeat Yeshiva, becoming the hottest team in the country (assuming a win tonight) or will lose to Yeshiva and surely fall below Wheaton, so...

Correction: Wheaton will move ahead of IWU when the team that lost to Webster defeats IWU on Sunday, lol. How did I forget about that game?

You guys probably thought I was joking.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on December 19, 2021, 10:41:32 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=4dmbu/nf9o3araa2z895t0.jpg)

We are now into the holiday break period for Division III. Some programs are playing occasional games or in tournaments/classic, others are taking extended breaks as they prepare for the conference grind starting in January. So time to take the temperature of the season so far.

On Sunday's Hoopsville, Dave McHugh chatted with a couple of teams garnering headlines around DIII. He also got the perspective of the season so far from those who follow it the closest.

And we take the time to celebrate the life of Mike Freilich, an assistant coach who died unexpectedly on Friday and has left many saddened throughout Division III.

You can watch the show LIVE (or on demand) here: https://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2021-22/dec19 or http://www.d3hoops.com/x/lvmbp

Guests include (order subject to change):
- Polly Thomason, No. 18 Texas-Dallas women's coach
- Gordon Mann, D3hoops.com Senior Editor
- Gabe Leifer, No. 1 Yeshiva graduate student
- Ryan Scott, D3hoops.com columnist

Hoopsville is hosted by Dave McHugh from the the NABC Studio. It is presented by D3hoops.com and thanks to our partner WBCA. All guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions, ideas, or want to interact with the show, feel free to send them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options available.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Video Portal (and archives): www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3sports.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 26, 2021, 04:51:43 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

No games for a couple more days, but here's how things currently stand with one more week before the next poll.

I made a few manual adjustments to CNU's schedule (https://www.cnusports.com/sports/mens-basketball/schedule); d3hoops's schedule showed them playing four games over the space of three days.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	605	Yeshiva	14-0	won at New Jersey City, 93-86; 12/30 vs. #4 Illinois Wesleyan; 01/02 vs. #17 Williams
#2	603	Randolph-Macon	8-1	12/29 vs. Rosemont; 12/29 vs. Gettysburg; 12/30 vs. TBD
#3	584	UW-Platteville	11-0	12/29 vs. Beloit; 12/30 vs. TBD
#4	517	Illinois Wesleyan	8-2	won at North Central (Ill.), 73-48; LOST at #15 Washington U., 61-71; 12/29 at Mount St. Vincent; 12/30 at #1 Yeshiva
#5	510	UW-Oshkosh	10-1	def. St. Norbert, 73-54; 12/29 vs. #29 Calvin; 12/30 vs. Ripon
#6	500	Wheaton (Ill.)	10-1	won at Olivet, 91-82; 12/29 vs. #36 Berry; 12/30 vs. Edgewood; 12/31 vs. TBD
#7	466	St. Joseph (Conn.)	8-0	IDLE
#8	396	Marietta	7-2	def. Otterbein, 87-62; won at John Carroll, 2-0; 12/28 vs. Chicago; 12/29 vs. Transylvania
#9	373	UW-La Crosse	9-2	~~12/15 at St. Mary's (Minn.)~~ postponed; won at Crown, 67-43; 12/30 vs. Bethel
#10	371	Roanoke	7-2	won at #37 Wartburg, 70-66; LOST to Dubuque, 67-75; 12/29 vs. Keene State; 12/31 vs. Covenant
#11	355	Johns Hopkins	7-1	12/29 vs. Manhattanville; 12/30 vs. TBD
#12	341	Christopher Newport	10-2	won at Hampden-Sydney, 79-74; def. Virginia Wesleyan, 80-72; def. (n) Washington and Lee, 103-91; ~~12/21 at Catholic~~ postponed; 12/29 vs. Shenandoah; ~~12/29 vs. Merchant Marine~~ postponed; ~~12/30 vs. TBA~~ (error?); 12/31 vs. Southern Virginia; 01/02 vs. Widener
#13	314	Whitworth	9-1	def. Schreiner, 88-70; 12/30 vs. UW-River Falls
#14	268	Elmhurst	10-2	def. Carroll, 85-78; won at Manchester, 101-75; 12/29 vs. Lake Forest
#15	260	Washington U.	9-1	def. #4 Illinois Wesleyan, 71-61; 12/31 vs. Westminster (Mo.)
#16	221	Mount Union	8-1	won at Wilmington, 89-71; 12/29 vs. Geneva; 12/30 vs. Lycoming
#17	204	Williams	9-0	12/29 vs. York (Pa.); 12/30 vs. TBA; 01/02 at #1 Yeshiva
#18	189	Swarthmore	7-1	12/30 at Immaculata; 01/02 vs. Stevens
#19	173	Mary Hardin-Baylor	7-1	def. Texas-Dallas, 79-69; def. T#40 LeTourneau, 91-86 OT; 12/29 vs. Pacific Lutheran; 12/30 vs. St. Mary's (Minn.)
#20	145	Amherst	8-0	12/28 at SUNY-Old Westbury; 12/31 vs. Babson
#21	144	RPI	8-0	12/29 vs. Oswego State; 12/30 vs. TBA
#22	79	Heidelberg	9-1	won at Muskingum, 96-76; ~~12/21 at Oberlin~~ postponed
#23	75	Maryville (Tenn.)	9-1	def. (n) Ferrum, 84-47; won at Hampden-Sydney, 85-84; 12/28 vs. Pacific Lutheran; 12/29 vs. UC Santa Cruz
#24	71	DeSales	11-0	won at Muhlenberg, 72-60; 12/29 vs. Neumann; 12/30 vs. TBA
#25	68	Hardin-Simmons	10-1	def. University of the Ozarks, 77-49

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	43	Wesleyan	9-1	12/29 vs. Wilkes; 12/30 vs. TBA
#27	39	Lynchburg	7-2	won at William Peace, 92-60; 12/29 vs. Muskingum; 12/30 vs. Wooster or La Roche
#28	37	WPI	8-1	12/29 vs. Endicott; 12/30 at Salem State
#29	32	Calvin	6-3	def. (n) Texas Lutheran, 76-74 OT; LOST at #32 Trinity (Texas), 71-88; 12/29 at #5 UW-Oshkosh; 12/30 vs. UW-Stout
#30	29	Trine	6-4	LOST at Anderson, 57-65; def. UW-Stevens Point, 65-56; 12/30 vs. Concordia-Chicago
#31	23	Case Western Reserve	9-1	def. Kalamazoo, 94-74
#32	12	Trinity (Texas)	10-2	won at Austin, 89-80; LOST at Centenary (La.), 78-87; def. Alma, 103-64; def. #29 Calvin, 88-71
#33	11	Wooster	7-2	won at UC Santa Cruz, 80-71; LOST to (n) Lewis and Clark, 67-72; 12/29 vs. La Roche; 12/30 vs. TBA
T#34	10	Oswego	7-1	12/29 vs. #21 RPI; 12/30 vs. TBA
T#34	10	Rochester	7-2	01/02 at DePauw
#36	8	Berry	8-1	def. (n) Marywood, 79-46; def. (n) Albright, 74-54; 12/29 vs. #6 Wheaton (Ill.); 12/30 vs. Carthage
#37	7	Wartburg	10-2	LOST to #10 Roanoke, 66-70; won at Baldwin Wallace, 73-71
#38	6	Emory	4-3	12/29 vs. UW-Whitewater; 12/30 vs. Birmingham-Southern; 01/02 at Oglethorpe
#39	5	Cal Lutheran	8-2	def. Loras, 90-82; 12/28 vs. Northwestern (Minn.); 12/29 vs. Benedictine; 01/01 vs. Pomona-Pitzer
T#40	4	Brandeis	7-2	12/30 vs. Union
T#40	4	Chapman	9-1	def. SUNY Oneonta, 59-52; 12/28 vs. Bethesda University; 01/01 at Redlands
T#40	4	LeTourneau	8-2	LOST at #19 Mary Hardin-Baylor, 86-91 OT; LOST at Concordia (Texas), 87-89 OT; 01/01 at Austin
#43	3	Nazareth	6-1	12/29 vs. Edgewood; 12/30 vs. Carroll
T#44	2	Augsburg	9-2	LOST at UW-River Falls, 67-86; ~~12/19 vs. Stevenson~~ cancelled; def. (n) Rhodes, 70-60; def. (n) DePauw, 82-68
T#44	2	Stockton	10-1	won at Rosemont, 69-66
T#44	2	Mary Washington	10-3	~~12/14 at Averett~~ postponed; LOST at Hampden-Sydney, 71-84; def. (n) Ferrum, 86-55; 12/29 vs. Goucher; 12/30 vs. TBA

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 26, 2021, 05:31:09 PM

Darryl, just FYI, Mount Saint Vincent cancelled its game with IWU on 12/29 due to Covid issues.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 26, 2021, 06:19:18 PM

Quote from: Titan Q on December 26, 2021, 05:31:09 PM
Darryl, just FYI, Mount Saint Vincent cancelled its game with IWU on 12/29 due to Covid issues.

Thanks, Bob. With rare exceptions (like CNU), all of the upcoming schedules are taken from d3hoops, so that change should be reflected in the final report next Sunday, but I'll add it manually if not.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on December 27, 2021, 10:03:33 AM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 26, 2021, 06:19:18 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on December 26, 2021, 05:31:09 PM
Darryl, just FYI, Mount Saint Vincent cancelled its game with IWU on 12/29 due to Covid issues.

Thanks, Bob. With rare exceptions (like CNU), all of the upcoming schedules are taken from d3hoops, so that change should be reflected in the final report next Sunday, but I'll add it manually if not.

Great stuff. I look forward to this when you post it!

And you do have the CNU scheduled properly. They just changed the schedule slightly due to USMMA missing a tourney due to COVID. Shenandoah and SVU will play on the 30th at CNU. This way every team still plays 2 games and nobody has to stay an extra night in a hotel.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on December 27, 2021, 10:20:49 AM

FYI, Rosemont has pulled out of the 12/29-12/30 tournament at Randolph-Macon, replaced by Gettysburg. https://rmcathletics.com/sports/mbkb/2021-22/releases/20211222plts78

UPDATE: Here is the new Randolph-Macon schedule -- 12/29 vs Gettysburg, 12/31 vs Averett. https://rmcathletics.com/sports/mbkb/2021-22/releases/20211227lvtsqh?fbclid=IwAR2OLnvHMTDJneH2tI7-pCWxMEELdmTUOLvNsLh1GYiRHLzHsxiF4m6XMrc

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on December 30, 2021, 01:30:04 PM

Media timeouts tonight for #1 Yeshiva vs #4 Illinois Wesleyan, as the game is being broadcast live on JLTV-- Jewish Life Television, in addition to the usual Youtube broadcast on MacsLive and the Illinois Wesleyan radio away broadcast.

Coverage starts live on JLTV at 7:30 PM Eastern. My DVR is already programmed to record this one.

(PS-- The JLTV broadcast is a simulcast of the MacsLive Youtube streaming feed, so if you cannot get JLTV on your cable, satellite, or streaming TV (For those of you with Roku TVs, JLTV is available as a separate streaming channel called "JLNow" on Roku at no extra charge), you can watch the game feed on Youtube.)

Poppers tweeted to TitanQ that the media timeouts are only in effect for this particular Yeshiva home game-- Yeshiva does not usually play with media timeouts in the regular season. (Neither does Illinois Wesleyan).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on December 30, 2021, 07:01:08 PM

^^^Thanks for that information. I am now set up to watch on my tv via Roku/YouTube.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on December 30, 2021, 08:09:20 PM

I predict IWU by double digits.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 30, 2021, 08:43:50 PM

Late 1st half and the Titans lead the Maccabees 44-27... IWU is 8 of 12 from 3 while Yeshiva is 0 for 7.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Caz Bombers on December 30, 2021, 09:27:41 PM

Yeshiva can't be one of the top 50 teams in D3; #1 give me a frickin break.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on December 30, 2021, 09:53:04 PM

Quote from: Caz Bombers on December 30, 2021, 09:27:41 PM
Yeshiva can't be one of the top 50 teams in D3; #1 give me a frickin break.

I was thinking similar yet not as harsh. But you could be right. They either had the worst game in program history or they're def not a top 25. Passing was horrible. They're slow on D. Can't deal with pressure. No bench. With 10 minutes left in game they had 9 rebounds. 9. How in the heck does that happen? I was highly disappointed. I thought I was going out on a limb by predicting a double digit win by IWU. And I certainly didn't see anyone who would come close to being POY.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on December 30, 2021, 10:08:46 PM

It feels pretty dumb to rain on the Yeshiva parade after they had a 50 game win streak snapped but the reality is none of those 50 wins were against ranked teams, and consisted of 2 NCAA tournament games---WPI (the first team in the country to have players opt out due to COVID concerns) and PSU-Harrisburg, not exactly a murderer's row.

They have never had interior size and it was pretty obvious at the start of this year that Armstrong wasn't really going to solve any of their rebounding problems. Williams will be a serious problem on that front Sunday (if that game gets played) and any good tournament team is going to pulverize them on that end as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: thebear on December 30, 2021, 10:20:03 PM

Quote from: Caz Bombers on December 30, 2021, 09:27:41 PM
Yeshiva can't be one of the top 50 teams in D3; #1 give me a frickin break.

They play in a conference that ranks 42nd out of 47.

Excluding Yeshiva's 7 non conference wins, their conference has 25 wins and 57 losses against other opposition.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: thebear on December 30, 2021, 10:26:24 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on December 30, 2021, 10:08:46 PM
It feels pretty dumb to rain on the Yeshiva parade after they had a 50 game win streak snapped but the reality is none of those 50 wins were against ranked teams, and consisted of 2 NCAA tournament games---WPI (the first team in the country to have players opt out due to COVID concerns) and PSU-Harrisburg, not exactly a murderer's row.

They have never had interior size and it was pretty obvious at the start of this year that Armstrong wasn't really going to solve any of their rebounding problems. Williams will be a serious problem on that front Sunday (if that game gets played) and any good tournament team is going to pulverize them on that end as well.

To that point, I went back and looked up Potsdam's streak of 60 from 1985-1987. They were 60-1 and played opponents [whose records I can find] with a combined win percentage of .568 [excluding the Potsdam games]. They were 7-1 in the NCAA tournament, and 4-0 in their conference tournament. They had 12 wins against teams with 20+ wins.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on December 30, 2021, 10:47:23 PM

It was mainly a matchup problem tonight: Lambesis holding Turell to 15 shots; I'd be surprised if any of the other top 25 teams have someone who could do the same. The difference was 5 3-pters, 2 that IWU made over their average and 3 that Yeshiva didn't make for their normal average. As for defense, IWU had 8 more TOs, 5 fewer blocks, and 5 fewer steals. We'll get more info after the Williams game on Sunday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 30, 2021, 11:16:59 PM

Quote from: ronk on December 30, 2021, 10:47:23 PM
It was mainly a matchup problem tonight: Lambesis holding Turell to 15 shots; I'd be surprised if any of the other top 25 teams have someone who could do the same.

I am 100% confident that the 6-3 and 6-5 guys who held 6-7 Seth Stanley to a 3-9 performance against Washington University could do what Lambesis did tonight.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 31, 2021, 12:33:34 AM

25k views on the MacsLive YouTube channel. That has surely crushed all previous regular season records for viewership.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 31, 2021, 03:47:15 AM

Quote from: CNU85 on December 30, 2021, 09:53:04 PM
Quote from: Caz Bombers on December 30, 2021, 09:27:41 PM
Yeshiva can't be one of the top 50 teams in D3; #1 give me a frickin break.

I was thinking similar yet not as harsh. But you could be right. They either had the worst game in program history or they're def not a top 25. Passing was horrible. They're slow on D. Can't deal with pressure. No bench. With 10 minutes left in game they had 9 rebounds. 9. How in the heck does that happen? I was highly disappointed. I thought I was going out on a limb by predicting a double digit win by IWU. And I certainly didn't see anyone who would come close to being POY.

Maybe it's the difference seeing it live vs video, but that wasn't the impression I got at all. Yeshiva got socked out of the gate - weren't ready to match intensity, weren't moving well on either end, largely struggled to hold on to halftime - but they came out pretty well in the second. Both teams were gassed, but they did what they had to do to stay in it. Despite the first half shooting problems and getting entirely outrebounded, they competed well.

IWU executed a great game plan to perfection. I'm pretty confident a rematch between the two would be closer.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on December 31, 2021, 08:17:29 AM

#4-Illinois Wesleyan 73
#1-Yeshiva 59

https://www.iwusports.com/boxscore.aspx?id=13660&path=mbball

-Matt Leritz: 14 pts, 25 reb, 5 assists
-Luke Yoder: 15 pts, 4 reb, 2 assists
-Pete Lambesis: 13 pts, 2 reb, 5 assists
-Cory Noe: 11 pts
-Cody Mitchell: 10 pts, 5 reb

-Ryan Turell: 22 pts, 5 reb
-Eitan Halpert: 16 pts, 4 reb, 4 assists

Really an impressive performance by the Titans last night in what was probably the loudest, most electric opposing gym I can remember in my 32 years watching IWU play. The Titans played with incredible composure and poise right from the tip.

Pete Lambesis is an incredible defender. Pete and his teammates made everything so difficult for All-American Ryan Turell all evening.

Anyone who watched last night saw that IWU was by far the bigger, stronger, more physical, more aggressive team. Yeshiva looked like a team that had not seen anything close to that style of basketball. At one point IWU had a 30-10 rebound lead. It finished 42-21. The Titans physically dominated the Macs.

Matt Leritz broke IWU's single game rebounding record (25). The previous record (24) was held by Jack Sikma and Don Davidson.

IWU PG Luke Yoder had an incredible game - 4-5 FG (3-4 3-point), 4-4 FT. His shooting early was huge for the Titans, as was the job he did as a floor general. He was awesome.

6-7 junior Cody Mitchell really bottled up Yeshiva's 6-6 All-American Gabe Leifer. Cody is a lot bigger than Gabe and just really made it hard on him to do what he usually does.

Extremely proud of how the Titans played last night, and also how this group of young men carries themselves. They are impressive.

Kudos to Yeshiva's players, coaches, and fans. That is a special place with incredible people. I have made lifetime friends with so many people I have interacted with surrounding this game.

This game will make Yeshiva better come March.
-----

Pete Lambesis, Matt Leritz postgame on MacsLive: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suxaZcWdGaA

Article: https://forward.com/news/480240/yeshiva-winning-streak-broken-by-illinois-wesleyan/

Ron Rose, Matt Leritz, Pete Lambesis postgame on IWUsports.com: https://www.iwusports.com/watch/?Archive=194&type=Archive [1:57:15]

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BaboNation on December 31, 2021, 10:07:13 AM

First and foremost, credit to IWU. I'm sure I'm not alone in wishing it had been a more competitive game. IWU was clearly well prepared for the Yeshiva motion offense, and perhaps the game cancellations allowed them extra preparatory time.

I've seen enough Yeshiva games to say they are not as bad as they looked last night. I did expect an IWU victory, but YU did have plenty of open 3 looks (but not Turrell) that they usually make.

Just my take, but the 'Never beat a ranked opponent' narrative dismisses the home and away wins against St. Joe's (CT) last year, a team that would have been ranked in a 'normal' year. And YU was dismantling teams on their way to the sweet 16 the prior year before Covid shut things down.

Finally, I'd like to echo the sentiment of how classy the IWU stars were in their postgame comments.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GoPerry on December 31, 2021, 10:59:22 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 31, 2021, 03:47:15 AM
Quote from: CNU85 on December 30, 2021, 09:53:04 PM
Quote from: Caz Bombers on December 30, 2021, 09:27:41 PM
Yeshiva can't be one of the top 50 teams in D3; #1 give me a frickin break.

I was thinking similar yet not as harsh. But you could be right. They either had the worst game in program history or they're def not a top 25. Passing was horrible. They're slow on D. Can't deal with pressure. No bench. With 10 minutes left in game they had 9 rebounds. 9. How in the heck does that happen? I was highly disappointed. I thought I was going out on a limb by predicting a double digit win by IWU. And I certainly didn't see anyone who would come close to being POY.

Maybe it's the difference seeing it live vs video, but that wasn't the impression I got at all. Yeshiva got socked out of the gate - weren't ready to match intensity, weren't moving well on either end, largely struggled to hold on to halftime - but they came out pretty well in the second. Both teams were gassed, but they did what they had to do to stay in it. Despite the first half shooting problems and getting entirely outrebounded, they competed well.

IWU executed a great game plan to perfection. I'm pretty confident a rematch between the two would be closer.

The final was 73-59, a 14 pt margin but I don't think it was ever really that close Ryan. I thought Yeshiva might come out strong in the second half but instead IWU extended the 20 pt margin out to as much as 25. The only reason the margin narrowed was that the Titans got pretty uncharacteristically sloppy in the last 5 mins just trying to end a game that was already secure.

Yeshiva looked like a good team and I agree a rematch would likely be closer. Perhaps I'm biased having seen IWU numerous times already, but the visitors are clearly a better team in my opinion. In any case, I'll be interested to see how the D3Hoops voters rank them. I don't think they are top ten but I doubt they will drop that far.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 31, 2021, 11:50:14 AM

Yeah, to me the question is how many teams have the defenders to shut Yeshiva down like that? It's not just a one man team. We found out after the game, Leifer injured his toe on the first play, and the collision with Turell early on messed up his knee a bit, but he barely touched the ball all game.

We know St Joe's struggles to guard them. I don't think Marrietta has the personnel to do it (although they could probably hang on offense better than almost anyone). I'm not sure Platteville has the defenders to do it. Oshkosh probably does, CNU might.

Half of those 0-9 threes were good looks. If they make two and IWU hits two less (20% and 50% respectively is probably what you'd expect on a typical night, given the defense played, you're looking at maybe 8-12 point difference at the half, which changes everything for the second.

IWU dominated, for sure, but it wasn't easy. I don't think anyone who was in the building would take much away from Yeshiva.

Ron Rose walked right by us on his way to do his postgame and the first thing he said was "we were sure lucky those shots went down early." You really felt anything less than maximum effort from IWU for 40 minutes could've changed things.

Even when the crowd have up early in the second half, you still felt Yeshiva was poised for a run, if IWU let up at all. They just didn't, and that was really impressive.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on December 31, 2021, 03:23:24 PM

Quote from: BaboNation on December 31, 2021, 10:07:13 AM
Just my take, but the 'Never beat a ranked opponent' narrative dismisses the home and away wins against St. Joe's (CT) last year, a team that would have been ranked in a 'normal' year. And YU was dismantling teams on their way to the sweet 16 the prior year before Covid shut things down.

Agreed that the SJU wins would have been ranked, but they guarded Delshawn Jackson Jr. for a total of 8 minutes across those two games. A totally different team without him.

My biggest thing is how much harder it is for Leifer to operate against teams with adequate size. I know we touched on it before but his style of play is just so not suited for physical guys that can use their size and get up in his face and disrupt his passing from the high post.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 31, 2021, 04:55:11 PM

Williams v Yeshiva not happening...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BaboNation on December 31, 2021, 05:10:15 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on December 31, 2021, 03:23:24 PM
Quote from: BaboNation on December 31, 2021, 10:07:13 AM
Just my take, but the 'Never beat a ranked opponent' narrative dismisses the home and away wins against St. Joe's (CT) last year, a team that would have been ranked in a 'normal' year. And YU was dismantling teams on their way to the sweet 16 the prior year before Covid shut things down.

Agreed that the SJU wins would have been ranked, but they guarded Delshawn Jackson Jr. for a total of 8 minutes across those two games. A totally different team without him.

My biggest thing is how much harder it is for Leifer to operate against teams with adequate size. I know we touched on it before but his style of play is just so not suited for physical guys that can use their size and get up in his face and disrupt his passing from the high post.

I guess I'm just a lot higher on Leifer. Having said that, he had a horrible game yesterday. But spacing on the court is everything. Yesterday YU couldn't hit a 3 to save their life and space inside the arc shrank. Conversely, IWU was killing it from 3 and driving lanes opened up. Leifer, when the rest of the offense is holding its own, is mostly a facilitator, not looking for his own shot first. But he can operate down low effectively when afforded space. He's extremely strong and can finish against height inside. He had double-doubles in both games against St. Joe's last year on limited shots.

I think there are very few teams in the NorthEast that can match up well against YU. I expect to see them in the Sweet 16. After that, it depends on matchups.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 31, 2021, 07:15:29 PM

Part of the reason Leifer played all 40 minutes, he told us afterwards, was that his knee hurt so bad he couldn't bend it to sit down anyway. He was definitely bothered by the height on defense. I think he would've figured it out, but IWU never gave him much chance to try.

In my opinion, 2019-20 was his best season. Between grad school, marriage, and the 9-5 job, I have a hard time believing he's getting enough sleep, let alone practice.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 01, 2022, 10:52:09 AM

Here is a thread of screen shots of IWU's 9 1st half made 3-pointers Thursday vs Yeshiva.

All 9 were basically wide open. YU had a ton of trouble guarding IWU's offense (rotating, recovering after doubles, etc).

Good shooters are going to make a bunch of wide open 3s.

https://twitter.com/IWUhoopscom/status/1477302111725629447?s=20

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 01, 2022, 12:06:17 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 31, 2021, 11:50:14 AM
We know St Joe's struggles to guard them. I don't think Marrietta has the personnel to do it (although they could probably hang on offense better than almost anyone). I'm not sure Platteville has the defenders to do it. Oshkosh probably does, CNU might.

Only two maybe three teams in the nation have the personnel to defend Yeshiva, apparently.

I would counter with the neutral court game against Rochester, the first of the delayed season for the Yellowjackets squad that went 1-5 against the top 3 of the UAA the season prior.

That game was tied with two minutes left. Yeshiva capitalized on a Rochester defensive miscue for a three-pointer and Ryan Turrell hit two Aston Francis-like circus shots and the Macs walked away with a 70-63 win.

But sure, let's give the Massey SOS No. 393 team the benefit of the doubt because of the so-called eye test. Obviously, we need more data.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 01, 2022, 12:35:01 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on January 01, 2022, 12:06:17 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 31, 2021, 11:50:14 AM
We know St Joe's struggles to guard them. I don't think Marrietta has the personnel to do it (although they could probably hang on offense better than almost anyone). I'm not sure Platteville has the defenders to do it. Oshkosh probably does, CNU might.

Only two maybe three teams in the nation have the personnel to defend Yeshiva, apparently.

I would counter with the neutral court game against Rochester, the first of the delayed season for the Yellowjackets squad that went 1-5 against the top 3 of the UAA the season prior.

That game was tied with two minutes left. Yeshiva capitalized on a Rochester defensive miscue for a three-pointer and Ryan Turrell hit two Aston Francis-like circus shots and the Macs walked away with a 70-63 win.

But sure, let's give the Massey SOS No. 393 team the benefit of the doubt because of the so-called eye test. Obviously, we need more data.

Some other ranked teams for comparison with sub-300 SOS according to Massey... #7 St Joseph (357th), #17 Williams (323rd), #20 Amherst (364th), #21 RPI (375th), ORV #26 Wesleyan (331st)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 01, 2022, 12:59:21 PM

I guess I'm confused as to what people are saying about Yeshiva after this game. IWU lost to WashU in their previous game and didn't look super great doing it. If they'd played in NY like they did in St Louis, I'd've expected a similar result. Nobody has said that game is indicative of who IWU is as a team - no one was surprised when they came out and smoked Yeshiva.

I don't think the Yeshiva performance against IWU was all that different, but it seems a lot of people are entirely invalidating their abilities because of one loss to a good team in a situation they've never been in before.

Yes, the crap schedule is a big problem. We don't know if Yeshiva can step up in a high level game, because we've only got a sample size of one. It's always been the question with them - one we still don't have an answer to. I don't think anyone has unquestionably promoted them on anything but potential, because there was little besides potential to really know.

We got some feedback and they're going to be ranked accordingly until/if they have a change to prove themselves in March.

There's a difference between saying "they didn't play like one of the 50 best teams on the one night they really needed to" and saying "they're not one of the 50 best teams."

I've only been trying to point out the ways they struggled and explain why that's maybe not indicative of the team overall. Ultimately, we don't know - and everyone will have to decide for themselves whether the performance against IWU is who Yeshiva is or if it's a low point. I just don't think anybody can watch that one game and make a judgement.

Yes, they only put 25 good minutes together against Rochester last year - but they also played USJ tough in both games - a little sloppy, but certainly better. WPI was not a ranked team that season, but they always have a pretty good defense that moves well and slows people down; Yeshiva ran by them like they were standing still.

If we're saying, "Yeshiva would clearly struggle to beat any team in the Top 10" that makes a lot of sense - and it generally true of every team in the Top 10. If we're saying "Yeshiva is clearly inferior to every team in the Top 10," I think that's going a little too far.

The game that came to mind watching YU-IWU was the first time Marietta made the Elite 8. They got beat by 50 at Augustana, not because they were grossly inferior, but because the moment was beyond their experience. You see it happen all the time when a team plays at a level of competition they've not seen before. Judge the team for it, definitely, but don't judge too harshly; its usually not indicative of what the team is capable of doing or what they'll do when they get another opportunity.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on January 01, 2022, 12:59:58 PM

Williams and Amherst aren't ranked #1 in the country, they're ranked 17th and 20th for precisely that reason. They're not currently being held to the same standard. They've also combined to go to 15 Final Fours. They get a different level of benefit of the doubt.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 01, 2022, 02:04:01 PM

I am invalidating the point that there are two or three teams that can guard Yeshiva.

Also, maybe the defensive performance by IWU was nothing special, but instead Yeshiva had a let down. If that excuse works for Illinois Wesleyan...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 01, 2022, 02:05:24 PM

Also, the win over WPI will always have an asterisk.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GoPerry on January 01, 2022, 03:29:57 PM

As a neutral observer, I watched Yeshiva get dominated on their home floor with a packed homer crowd. I just don't believe there is any remaining evidence that they deserve a top ten ranking to say nothing of the #1 ranking before Thursday. And with tomorrow's game vs Williams cancelled, wherever they get ranked in the next poll is where they'll stay, or move up, since they will roll over everybody remaining on their schedule.

13 voters had them #1. 12 had them ranked high but weren't really sure. Thursday night should have validated any suspicion one should need. I just wonder if the 13 #1 voters will be able to drop Yeshiva out of their top five even.

The voting is subjective and one can use all sorts of qualifiers to justify a vote. Maybe here's another – if Yeshiva played a schedule similar to IWU so far this season (vs Oshkosh, @Wheaton, @WashU, @ Calvin, @NCC), would they have been undefeated going into Thursday? If not then where should they rank as a two loss team with a weak schedule? Or a three loss team? Again, all subjective.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 01, 2022, 04:36:31 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on January 01, 2022, 02:04:01 PM
I am invalidating the point that there are two or three teams that can guard Yeshiva.

Also, maybe the defensive performance by IWU was nothing special, but instead Yeshiva had a let down. If that excuse works for Illinois Wesleyan...

For the record, I didn't say 2-3 that can guard them, but 2-3 that can do to them what IWU did, in completely shutting down everybody. There are definitely more teams than that who can give Yeshiva trouble and make them work, and win, I just don't think there are very many who'll hold them to the .8 points per possession or whatever it is they ended up with in that game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 01, 2022, 04:38:06 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on January 01, 2022, 02:05:24 PM
Also, the win over WPI will always have an asterisk.

Why? Because there were no fans there? That probably benefited WPI.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 01, 2022, 04:53:54 PM

Quote from: GoPerry on January 01, 2022, 03:29:57 PM
The voting is subjective and one can use all sorts of qualifiers to justify a vote. Maybe here's another – if Yeshiva played a schedule similar to IWU so far this season (vs Oshkosh, @Wheaton, @WashU, @ Calvin, @NCC), would they have been undefeated going into Thursday? If not then where should they rank as a two loss team with a weak schedule? Or a three loss team? Again, all subjective.

This is the rub. You have to pick some formula, and there's not really one better than another. I don't tend to compare a team's best performance, but what I imagine to be their most likely performance. There are teams whose best performance, I believe, would beat RMC's best, but I'm still voting RMC #1, because I still think their typical performance is consistently high.

A team in a good conference, with a strong schedule, can really improve in my mind, by being consistently good. I have no qualms about dropping a team that didn't lose because some other team is playing better. My #1 vote right now is way less secure than it was a month ago, not because RMC has gone down in my estimation, but other teams are being more consistent.

I had Yeshiva higher, largely because they had generally stepped up enough to win, when challenged, even if they didn't always look as good as their talent indicated. Not doing it on a big stage changes that calculus. I have to lower my expectations of a typical performance.

How far that drops them is really not an easy calculation, but it will be significant. This isn't a loss you overlook, the way it was relatively easy to ignore RMC's loss to CNU or UWO's loss to IWU.

At the same time, after the top 7-8 teams, we're really not seeing a ton of consistency yet.

I'll be spending a lot of time tomorrow with this ballot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on January 01, 2022, 06:21:35 PM

Just in the interest of clarification, I'm in the camp of "Yeshiva was never the best team in the country to begin with" and shouldn't have been ranked number 1. I think, given how many unknowns there still are with no 20-21 season, they should be in the 12-17 range. To drop a team that has won 50 of its last 51 games, regardless of competition, out of the poll all together, would be a stretch for me. But (if this game gets played sooner rather than later) if they lose in a similar manner to Williams I would question their national credentials.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 01, 2022, 07:17:22 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on January 01, 2022, 06:21:35 PM
Just in the interest of clarification, I'm in the camp of "Yeshiva was never the best team in the country to begin with" and shouldn't have been ranked number 1. I think, given how many unknowns there still are with no 20-21 season, they should be in the 12-17 range. To drop a team that has won 50 of its last 51 games, regardless of competition, out of the poll all together, would be a stretch for me. But (if this game gets played sooner rather than later) if they lose in a similar manner to Williams I would question their national credentials.

I find none of this unreasonable. I'm not sure I'll have them 12-17, but it's not out of the realm of possibility when I look at all the data.

The Williams game is off, by the way, which makes analysis more difficult. Yeshiva heads into winter break now. They don't practice for three weeks and won't play again for four.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on January 01, 2022, 09:17:01 PM

Postponed. Teams are trying to find a make-up date

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 31, 2021, 04:55:11 PM
Williams v Yeshiva not happening...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 02, 2022, 08:30:12 AM

I've captured the Illinois Wesleyan vs #1-Yeshiva trip here.

I took many of these pics, not all. Thanks to those who did, including Catherine E. Dunlap.

Thanks to everyone on both sides of this matchup for once again showing #whyd3. No one at this game will ever forget it. It was more than a basketball game.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQM_lHAtLTg

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 02, 2022, 09:04:56 AM

This provides some pretty incredible context on how the IWU/Yeshiva game was bigger than basketball.

https://twitter.com/IWUhoopscom/status/1477639865185492993?s=20

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: McBuckets on January 02, 2022, 09:06:10 AM

Just a quick note of thanks to all with your collective commentary about the IWU and YU game. While relatively new to D3, I was one of the 25,000 watching online and while I hoped for a closer contest the excitement of the event and the fans certainly came through. The Titans really were efficient and played with great intensity and the Macs really never had a chance. Just watched TitanQ's video and it was fantastic.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 02, 2022, 09:29:05 AM

Quote from: PoppersMacsLive on January 01, 2022, 09:17:01 PM
Postponed. Teams are trying to find a make-up date

I have heard the same - that YU vs Williams will happen. Working on a date.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 02, 2022, 09:53:02 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on September 25, 2021, 09:37:32 PM
The question mark for me with Yeshiva is how they handle WIAC/CCIW type size. 6-6 Leiffer is a great player...but is he big enough to handle the best D3 5s? I don't know.

IWU's 6-7/235 All-American F Matt Leritz is not a Jack Flynn type (Matt is more of a 4)...but Leiffer vs Leritz will be really interesting on 12/30 in NYC. And IWU will have a few more 6-7+ types in the low post rotation...I'm interested to see how Yeshiva handles that.

Thursday's game demonstrated what I've been wondering about. I think Yeshiva matches up great with many Top 25 teams, but I think they would have challenges with the biggest, strongest, most physical teams - the top CCIW and WIAC teams, and WashU to name a few. The Macs were physically dominated against IWU -- look no further than IWU's +20 rebounding margin.

YU will have to find a way to adjust to this style of play between now and March.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on January 02, 2022, 11:20:30 AM

When Williams lost 77-69 to Yeshiva in February 2020, their centers (who both ran 6'8/6'9) combined for 28 points on 13-21 shooting. The rebounds were even, 32-32, with Gabe Leifer grabbing 15. I don't think it's very telling because Williams shot 5-21 from 3 and as Yeshiva found out against IWU, you can't rebound made shots. But that is really their only other data point in terms of size and physicality from this 3 year run.

That Williams team had okay size for their standards, this version that Yeshiva will hopefully play eventually will run bigger----the starting lineup will be something along the lines of 6'3/6'5/6'5/6'7/6'9 with 6'7/6'8/6'8 coming off the bench.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 02, 2022, 11:38:00 AM

The Williams bigs in recent years have often been a little slower, too. I think denying Leifer the ball is obviously a more effective strategy than trying to defend his post game.

I'd also note, while USJ is not as big, their post players more than held their own against Williams, and are still pretty big.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on January 02, 2022, 12:54:17 PM

I don't recall the Williams bigs being noticeably slower unless you're comparing them to Troy Whittington! Kempton, Karpowicz, and Karren are not speedsters but all move well for their size, Karpowicz in particular.

USJ's best post defense against Williams was their press. Karp had 14 points on 10 shots in the first half and finished with 18 points on 13 shots. They couldn't get him the ball because their guards could barely get the ball over halfcourt. Powell and Dixon-Thompson struggled to guard but Samuels did a good job off the bench.

I think ball pressure against Leifer is most effective rather than denying him or doubling the post. He's averaging 9 points a game on 48% shooting this year, you can live with him operating 1 on 1. It's when he can hold the ball outside the arc uninhibited and has all day to hit open cutters that you get in trouble.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on January 02, 2022, 12:58:59 PM

One other thing I would add that I hadn't really noticed in watching Yeshiva until it revealed itself against Illinois Wesleyan---they don't really have much shooting. Turell is shooting a blistering 47% and Halpert is at 49% (!), but those 2 combine for 95 of their 144 made threes. The rest of the team is 49-157 (31%). So when they throw the ball to Turell in an elbow isolation, you really only have to worry about Halpert off the ball. The rest of the guys on the court are not going to burn you shooting 3's. If you can reasonably handle their motion offense--which most good teams they will see should be able to do, to a degree, they don't have the personnel to beat you in a 3 point shooting contest.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 02, 2022, 01:52:23 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on January 02, 2022, 12:58:59 PM
One other thing I would add that I hadn't really noticed in watching Yeshiva until it revealed itself against Illinois Wesleyan---they don't really have much shooting. Turell is shooting a blistering 47% and Halpert is at 49% (!), but those 2 combine for 95 of their 144 made threes. The rest of the team is 49-157 (31%). So when they throw the ball to Turell in an elbow isolation, you really only have to worry about Halpert off the ball. The rest of the guys on the court are not going to burn you shooting 3's. If you can reasonably handle their motion offense--which most good teams they will see should be able to do, to a degree, they don't have the personnel to beat you in a 3 point shooting contest.

And when Yeshiva has Armstrong or Zucker in the game, it gives the defense a guy they don't have to guard anywhere but the low post. IWU played 10 feet off those guys and was able to help on Turell and others.

As an offense, I think very tough to have guys on the floor the defense doesn't have to worry about.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 02, 2022, 02:27:07 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 01, 2022, 04:36:31 PM
For the record, I didn't say 2-3 that can guard them, but 2-3 that can do to them what IWU did, in completely shutting down everybody. There are definitely more teams than that who can give Yeshiva trouble and make them work, and win, I just don't think there are very many who'll hold them to the .8 points per possession or whatever it is they ended up with in that game.

I understood what you meant.

My point is that we do not have enough evidence to make this assertion.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 02, 2022, 05:39:58 PM

Q-cast Season 2, Episode 10. Thanks to Ari Lamm for joining me to talk Yeshiva U. and the IWU/YU game.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZJLrfsm3ek&t=65s

0:00 Ari's background; his D3 story
9:40 Orthodox 101
20:51 Pre-game expectations
23:27 Initial impressions when game started
27:23 1st half analysis
31:30 Cody Mitchell & Luke Yoder
34:18 Ryan Turell 1st half
37:35 Thoughts going into 2nd half
38:43 Ryan Sroka
40:03 Boxing out & rebounding
47:58 "Midwest"
54:10 YU's schedule
57:58 YU recruiting
1:05:10 Where do the Macs go from here?
1:09:58 IWU/YU postgame interaction; more than just a game
1:17:59 Final thoughts

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 02, 2022, 05:44:39 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

"Postponed" in this report sometimes means "cancelled." There were so many that I decided not to sort out those details.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	605	Yeshiva	14-1	won at New Jersey City, 93-86; LOST to #4 Illinois Wesleyan, 59-73; ~~01/02 vs. #17 Williams~~ postponed
#2	603	Randolph-Macon	10-1	def. Gettysburg, 77-57; ~~12/29 vs. Rosemont~~ postponed; def. Averett, 68-54
#3	584	UW-Platteville	13-0	def. (n) Beloit, 74-46; won at St. Norbert, 82-57
#4	517	Illinois Wesleyan	9-2	won at North Central (Ill.), 73-48; LOST at #15 Washington U., 61-71; ~~12/29 at Mount St. Vincent~~ postponed; won at #1 Yeshiva, 73-59
#5	510	UW-Oshkosh	12-1	def. St. Norbert, 73-54; def. #29 Calvin, 78-56; def. Ripon, 86-59
#6	500	Wheaton (Ill.)	11-2	won at Olivet, 91-82; LOST to (n) #36 Berry, 72-78; def. (n) Edgewood, 79-61
#7	466	St. Joseph (Conn.)	8-0	IDLE
#8	396	Marietta	9-2	def. Otterbein, 87-62; won at John Carroll, 2-0; def. (n) Chicago, 78-65; won at Transylvania, 87-74
#9	373	UW-La Crosse	9-2	~~12/15 at St. Mary's (Minn.)~~ postponed; won at Crown, 67-43; ~~12/30 vs. Bethel~~ postponed
#10	371	Roanoke	9-2	def. (n) #37 Wartburg, 70-66; LOST to Dubuque, 67-75; def. Covenant, 59-51; def. Buena Vista, 87-66
#11	355	Johns Hopkins	7-1	~~12/29 vs. Manhattanville~~ postponed; ~~12/30 vs. TBD~~ postponed
#12	341	Christopher Newport	13-2	won at Hampden-Sydney, 79-74; def. Virginia Wesleyan, 80-72; def. (n) Washington and Lee, 103-91; ~~12/21 at Catholic~~ postponed; def. Shenandoah, 87-60; ~~12/29 vs. Merchant Marine~~ postponed; def. Southern Virginia, 74-65; def. Widener, 85-47
#13	314	Whitworth	9-1	def. Schreiner, 88-70; ~~12/30 vs. UW-River Falls~~ postponed
#14	268	Elmhurst	11-2	def. Carroll, 85-78; won at Manchester, 101-75; def. Lake Forest, 93-74
#15	260	Washington U.	10-1	def. #4 Illinois Wesleyan, 71-61; def. Westminster (Mo.), 86-57
#16	221	Mount Union	10-1	won at Wilmington, 89-71; ~~12/29 vs. Geneva~~ postponed; def. Lycoming, 107-61
#17	204	Williams	9-0	~~12/29 vs. York (Pa.)~~ postponed; ~~12/29 at SUNYIT~~ postponed; ~~12/30 at Utica~~ postponed; ~~01/02 at #1 Yeshiva~~ postponed
#18	189	Swarthmore	9-1	won at Immaculata, 80-57; def. Stevens, 89-63
#19	173	Mary Hardin-Baylor	9-1	def. Texas-Dallas, 79-69; def. T#40 LeTourneau, 91-86 OT; won at Pacific Lutheran, 56-53; def. (n) St. Mary's (Minn.), 84-64
#20	145	Amherst	8-1	~~12/28 at SUNY-Old Westbury~~ postponed; LOST to Babson, 59-70
#21	144	RPI	9-1	LOST to (n) Oswego State, 46-59; def. (n) Medaille, 81-67
#22	79	Heidelberg	9-1	won at Muskingum, 96-76; ~~12/21 at Oberlin~~ postponed
#23	75	Maryville (Tenn.)	11-1	def. (n) Ferrum, 84-47; won at Hampden-Sydney, 85-84; def. (n) Pacific Lutheran, 74-68; def. (n) Chicago, 83-73
#24	71	DeSales	12-1	won at Muhlenberg, 72-60; def. Neumann, 96-56; LOST to Drew, 54-71
#25	68	Hardin-Simmons	10-1	def. University of the Ozarks, 77-49

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	43	Wesleyan	11-1	def. (n) Wilkes, 108-87; def. (n) Franklin and Marshall, 79-47
#27	39	Lynchburg	8-3	won at William Peace, 92-60; def. (n) Muskingum, 94-90; LOST at #33 Wooster, 78-88 OT
#28	37	WPI	8-1	~~12/29 vs. Endicott~~ postponed; ~~12/30 at Salem State~~ postponed; ~~12/30 vs. Endicott~~ postponed
#29	32	Calvin	7-4	def. (n) Texas Lutheran, 76-74 OT; LOST at #32 Trinity (Texas), 71-88; LOST at #5 UW-Oshkosh, 56-78; def. (n) UW-Stout, 97-88
#30	29	Trine	7-4	LOST at Anderson, 57-65; def. UW-Stevens Point, 65-56; def. Concordia-Chicago, 88-56
#31	23	Case Western Reserve	9-1	def. Kalamazoo, 94-74
#32	12	Trinity (Texas)	10-2	won at Austin, 89-80; LOST at Centenary (La.), 78-87; def. Alma, 103-64; def. #29 Calvin, 88-71
#33	11	Wooster	8-3	won at UC Santa Cruz, 80-71; LOST to (n) Lewis and Clark, 67-72; ~~12/29 vs. La Roche~~ postponed; def. #27 Lynchburg, 88-78 OT; LOST to Muskingum, 66-68
T#34	10	Oswego	9-1	def. (n) #21 RPI, 59-46; won at St. John Fisher, 83-70
T#34	10	Rochester	7-2	~~01/02 at DePauw~~ postponed
#36	8	Berry	9-2	def. (n) Marywood, 79-46; def. (n) Albright, 74-54; def. (n) #6 Wheaton (Ill.), 78-72; LOST to (n) Carthage, 58-62
#37	7	Wartburg	10-2	LOST to (n) #10 Roanoke, 66-70; def. (n) Baldwin Wallace, 73-71
#38	6	Emory	7-3	def. UW-Whitewater, 91-70; def. Birmingham-Southern, 91-67; won at Oglethorpe, 87-65
#39	5	Cal Lutheran	8-3	def. Loras, 90-82; LOST to Northwestern (Minn.), 77-85; ~~12/29 vs. Benedictine~~ postponed; ~~01/01 vs. Pomona-Pitzer~~ postponed
T#40	4	Brandeis	7-2	~~12/30 vs. Union~~ postponed
T#40	4	Chapman	9-1	def. SUNY Oneonta, 59-52; ~~01/01 at Redlands~~ postponed
T#40	4	LeTourneau	9-2	LOST at #19 Mary Hardin-Baylor, 86-91 OT; LOST at Concordia (Texas), 87-89 OT; won at Austin, 99-84
#43	3	Nazareth	8-1	def. (n) Edgewood, 78-72; def. (n) Carroll, 72-58
T#44	2	Augsburg	9-2	~~12/15 at UW-River Falls~~ postponed; LOST at UW-River Falls, 67-86; ~~12/19 vs. Stevenson~~ postponed; def. (n) Rhodes, 70-60; def. (n) DePauw, 82-68
T#44	2	Stockton	10-1	won at Rosemont, 69-66
T#44	2	Mary Washington	12-3	~~12/14 at Averett~~ postponed; LOST at Hampden-Sydney, 71-84; def. (n) Ferrum, 86-55; def. (n) Goucher, 77-48; won at Albright, 85-69

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on January 02, 2022, 07:55:51 PM

Rewatching first half of Yeshiva/IWU. Do I have it correct that Steinmetz didn't use a timeout until they were down 20? I get that he's not accustomed to media timeouts but man, that seems like a self inflicted wound.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpartyBlue on January 02, 2022, 08:34:35 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 01, 2022, 12:59:21 PM
I guess I'm confused as to what people are saying about Yeshiva after this game. IWU lost to WashU in their previous game and didn't look super great doing it. If they'd played in NY like they did in St Louis, I'd've expected a similar result. Nobody has said that game is indicative of who IWU is as a team - no one was surprised when they came out and smoked Yeshiva.

I don't think the Yeshiva performance against IWU was all that different, but it seems a lot of people are entirely invalidating their abilities because of one loss to a good team in a situation they've never been in before.

Yes, the crap schedule is a big problem. We don't know if Yeshiva can step up in a high level game, because we've only got a sample size of one. It's always been the question with them - one we still don't have an answer to. I don't think anyone has unquestionably promoted them on anything but potential, because there was little besides potential to really know.

We got some feedback and they're going to be ranked accordingly until/if they have a change to prove themselves in March.

There's a difference between saying "they didn't play like one of the 50 best teams on the one night they really needed to" and saying "they're not one of the 50 best teams."

I've only been trying to point out the ways they struggled and explain why that's maybe not indicative of the team overall. Ultimately, we don't know - and everyone will have to decide for themselves whether the performance against IWU is who Yeshiva is or if it's a low point. I just don't think anybody can watch that one game and make a judgement.

Yes, they only put 25 good minutes together against Rochester last year - but they also played USJ tough in both games - a little sloppy, but certainly better. WPI was not a ranked team that season, but they always have a pretty good defense that moves well and slows people down; Yeshiva ran by them like they were standing still.

If we're saying, "Yeshiva would clearly struggle to beat any team in the Top 10" that makes a lot of sense - and it generally true of every team in the Top 10. If we're saying "Yeshiva is clearly inferior to every team in the Top 10," I think that's going a little too far.

The game that came to mind watching YU-IWU was the first time Marietta made the Elite 8. They got beat by 50 at Augustana, not because they were grossly inferior, but because the moment was beyond their experience. You see it happen all the time when a team plays at a level of competition they've not seen before. Judge the team for it, definitely, but don't judge too harshly; its usually not indicative of what the team is capable of doing or what they'll do when they get another opportunity.

My thoughts on IWU and Yeshiva are as follows--disclaimer:I'm a fan of both squads. I was not surprised at all that IWU did what they did, and that was thoroughly dominate from bell to bell.

SoS matters, and it's why there is way more than a sample size of one, YU simply was not prepared to face the aggressive style that IWU and many other teams in the "midwest" would give to YU. I think YU is a great story, they are fun to watch, but many of the games I've watched look like they're playing a random CCIW JV team (I understand this isn't their fault, doesn't change the reality). It doesn't mean YU isn't talented, it means they were not prepared to match up 1 through 5 with the physicality and pace of IWU. They simply were not. Yes, making a bunch of 3s early helps, but to me this was a physical and speed domination. I think you can reasonably extrapolate that YU probably isn't a top 10 team; doesn't mean they can't change things and make a run, but they will most likely struggle with many of the matchups they would encounter in the top 20 and frankly from the top half of several other conferences.

IWU. They are very good, but to me haven't proven they deserve to be ranked 1. Wash U's interior size and physicality on defense gave them trouble, as did a physical Wheaton team. The win over UWO was good quality, but again, matchup advantage to IWU as UWO is essentially a five guard team. We'll see how things play out for IWU; Elmhurst, NP, and obviously Wheaton rematch will provide challenges for the Titans.

My (meaningless) top 10

1. UWP 13-0
2. RM 10-1
3. IWU 9-2
4. UWO 12-1
5. Wash U 10-1
6. Marietta 9-2
7. UWL 9-2
8. Wheaton 11-2
9. CNU 13-2
10. Yeshiva 14-1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: thebear on January 02, 2022, 08:40:56 PM

Has anyone noticed that Massey hasn't updated in a while, since well before the new year?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 02, 2022, 08:49:10 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on January 02, 2022, 07:55:51 PM
Rewatching first half of Yeshiva/IWU. Do I have it correct that Steinmetz didn't use a timeout until they were down 20? I get that he's not accustomed to media timeouts but man, that seems like a self inflicted wound.

He tends to be of the John Wooden school of calling TOs (in that he doesn't usually do it, trusting the guys on the court to figure things out) - I'm more surprised he used it at all. Obviously, it was a pretty desperate spot, but Yeshiva doesn't really have other sets on offense or defense that they might switch to. That's one thing they might add moving forward coming out of this game - just a few set plays or some different defensive schemes if they're really getting toasted like they did on Thursday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 03, 2022, 12:11:08 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 02, 2022, 09:53:02 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on September 25, 2021, 09:37:32 PM
The question mark for me with Yeshiva is how they handle WIAC/CCIW type size. 6-6 Leiffer is a great player...but is he big enough to handle the best D3 5s? I don't know.

IWU's 6-7/235 All-American F Matt Leritz is not a Jack Flynn type (Matt is more of a 4)...but Leiffer vs Leritz will be really interesting on 12/30 in NYC. And IWU will have a few more 6-7+ types in the low post rotation...I'm interested to see how Yeshiva handles that.

Thursday's game demonstrated what I've been wondering about. I think Yeshiva matches up great with many Top 25 teams, but I think they would have challenges with the biggest, strongest, most physical teams - the top CCIW and WIAC teams, and WashU to name a few. The Macs were physically dominated against IWU -- look no further than IWU's +20 rebounding margin.

YU will have to find a way to adjust to this style of play between now and March.

Are there any teams "out East" with any size? I mean, if Yeshiva has to adjust, they probably won't have to worry about a WIAC/CCIW team until the Final Four or the Elite 8 at the earliest.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on January 03, 2022, 07:22:58 AM

Willlams starts 6'4" 6'6" 6'6" 6'8" 6'9"

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 03, 2022, 12:11:08 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 02, 2022, 09:53:02 AM
Quote from: Titan Q on September 25, 2021, 09:37:32 PM
The question mark for me with Yeshiva is how they handle WIAC/CCIW type size. 6-6 Leiffer is a great player...but is he big enough to handle the best D3 5s? I don't know.

IWU's 6-7/235 All-American F Matt Leritz is not a Jack Flynn type (Matt is more of a 4)...but Leiffer vs Leritz will be really interesting on 12/30 in NYC. And IWU will have a few more 6-7+ types in the low post rotation...I'm interested to see how Yeshiva handles that.

Thursday's game demonstrated what I've been wondering about. I think Yeshiva matches up great with many Top 25 teams, but I think they would have challenges with the biggest, strongest, most physical teams - the top CCIW and WIAC teams, and WashU to name a few. The Macs were physically dominated against IWU -- look no further than IWU's +20 rebounding margin.

YU will have to find a way to adjust to this style of play between now and March.

Are there any teams "out East" with any size? I mean, if Yeshiva has to adjust, they probably won't have to worry about a WIAC/CCIW team until the Final Four or the Elite 8 at the earliest.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: thebear on January 03, 2022, 09:15:33 AM

Rochester, who is in the same NCAA region as Yeshiva, has been starting 6-8, 6-7, 6-5, 6-4, 6-3, waiting for the return of All American Ryan Algier who is 6-10.

But it's not just size, I know there are teams around that play like NJCU, who hung 58 points on Yeshiva in the second half.
They don't have anyone over 6-4, and their point guard is 5-7 and his sub is 5-8.

I think that there are lots of teams in Region 3 that can compete with Yeshiva.

Turell is an excellent player, but I'd like to see what his team does against a quick athletic smothering defense like the kind Oswego State [56 ppg] plays.

I realize not being able to play on Friday nights and during the daylight hours on Saturday can be a scheduling problem, but there are certainly better choices from a strength of schedule perspective than #386 Brooklyn and #404 Medgar Evers if they really want to be recognized as a top team.

For example, NYU [87], William Paterson [158] , Rensselaer [60] [you can take the train] all have solid Strength of Schedules.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 03, 2022, 09:38:04 AM

Quote from: thebear on January 02, 2022, 08:40:56 PM
Has anyone noticed that Massey hasn't updated in a while, since well before the new year?

It updated this am.

https://masseyratings.com/cb2022/ncaa-d3/ratings

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 03, 2022, 09:40:51 AM

My week 4 ballot.

https://twitter.com/IWUhoopscom/status/1477829630522449923?s=20

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on January 03, 2022, 02:14:49 PM

Williams size as been discussed, WPI plays two bigs that are technically 6'4 and 6'8 but Lowther is a serious bruiser for his size---might be some PTSD from that NCAA blowout though. Wesleyan is another NESCAC school that could give them problems---they run some combo of 6'0/6'5/6'5/6'7/6'8 but they are always tough and physical. Plus Sam Peek is a 6'7 wing that would be really well suited to guarding Turell. Their only loss is to Williams so would be really nice if that game ever gets played.

Amherst doesn't run big but they don't run small either. Their centers max out at 6'7 but the wings are big and physical. Don't think they would dominate on the glass per se but they have a similar profile to IWU.

Yeshiva should really make an effort to schedule some good replacement games if possible because in 2019-20 when they were a 1 loss Skyline champ they got sent to Johns Hopkins as a 2/3 seed in the Macon region. The committee didn't reflect kindly on their SOS.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PauldingLightUP on January 03, 2022, 02:59:03 PM

By my count we are up to six public ballots for this weeks top 25. 24%.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 03, 2022, 02:59:33 PM

Teams also have to be willing to schedule Yeshiva. Has there been any cases where a team has said they were willing to schedule Yeshiva and got turned down? It takes two to tango.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 03, 2022, 06:05:20 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=55k2q/nwcvlg377aoq0h9x.jpg)

With the New Year comes not only a change to #Hoopsville, but increased concern about #COVID.

Tonight, Hoopsville returns from the holiday break with a move to Monday evenings (from the previous Sunday night position). With the return also comes the return to plenty of cancelations and postponements due to COVID. We chat with Jason Fein, Athletics Director at Bates College Athletics and member of the NCAA Division III Championships Committee and Management Council, about the challenges the Omicron variant is now throwing at college and athletics administrations. What may change in the coming weeks and what we may be talking about still when selections and brackets are released at the end of the season.

Plus, there are plenty of cancelations and postponements to try and weed through.

We also talk to two teams making headlines around #d3hoops. They include Drew Rangers women's basketball who are off to a program best 10-0 start. We chat with th Rangers head coach John Olenowski.

Plus, UW-Platteville Athletics men's basketball is undefeated and getting first place votes in the Top 25. Coach Jeff Guard joins us to talk about his Pioneers.

All that and we breakdown the new Top 25 polls! Ryan Scott and Bob Quillman join Dave to react to the men's poll and to give their Dubious, Deep Dive, and Debatable teams.

Tune LIVE starting at 7:00 PM ET!

You can watch the show LIVE (or on demand) here: https://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2021-22/jan3 or http://www.d3hoops.com/x/fh5lq

We are also simulcasting on our Facebook Live page (www.facebook.com/Hoopsville (http://www.facebook.com/Hoopsville)) AND tonight on our YouTube page (http://www.youtube.com/Hoopsville (http://www.youtube.com/Hoopsville))

Guests include (order subject to change):
- Jason Fein, Bates Athletics Director and DIII Management Council member
- John Olenowski, Drew women's coach
- Jeff Gard, No. 2 UW-Platteville men's coach
- Top 25 Double-Take with Bob Quillman and Ryan Scott

Hoopsville is hosted by Dave McHugh from the the NABC Studio. It is presented by D3hoops.com and thanks to our partner WBCA. All guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions, ideas, or want to interact with the show, feel free to send them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options available.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Video Portal (and archives): www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3sports.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 03, 2022, 06:06:49 PM

Quote from: PauldingLightUP on January 03, 2022, 02:59:03 PM
By my count we are up to six public ballots for this weeks top 25. 24%.

I may post something tomorrow, but you aren't going to get more ballots than that.

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 03, 2022, 02:59:33 PM
Teams also have to be willing to schedule Yeshiva. Has there been any cases where a team has said they were willing to schedule Yeshiva and got turned down? It takes two to tango.

I don't know of any games that Yeshiva has turned down other than logistical issues (I know we tried to get a big game organized last year but there were challenges all sides couldn't get around. I am aware and I am told of several solid opponents that have turned Yeshiva down.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: toad22 on January 03, 2022, 07:36:42 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 03, 2022, 02:59:33 PM
Teams also have to be willing to schedule Yeshiva. Has there been any cases where a team has said they were willing to schedule Yeshiva and got turned down? It takes two to tango.

I am told by a reliable source that a number of very good teams have said no to Yeshiva in the last several years.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 03, 2022, 07:53:09 PM

Quote from: thebear on January 03, 2022, 09:15:33 AM
For example, NYU [87], William Paterson [158] , Rensselaer [60] [you can take the train] all have solid Strength of Schedules.

NYU was a Top 250-300 school for the past few seasons and historically, they have long played a weak non-conference schedule. Their schedule is as weak as they come and they lost to 3-6 Hobart. But they look much better on paper this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 03, 2022, 09:48:41 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on January 03, 2022, 07:53:09 PM
Quote from: thebear on January 03, 2022, 09:15:33 AM
For example, NYU [87], William Paterson [158] , Rensselaer [60] [you can take the train] all have solid Strength of Schedules.

NYU was a Top 250-300 school for the past few seasons and historically, they have long played a weak non-conference schedule. Their schedule is as weak as they come and they lost to 3-6 Hobart. But they look much better on paper this season.

The issue for any school with deep tournament hopes is that Skyline SOS. NESCAC and CCIW teams don't care, because their conference schedule gets them all the SOS they'll ever need - but for, say, a Centennial squad, where the sheer volume of conference games is going to keep the SOS down - you might be hurting your Pool C position or your hosting chances by putting Yeshiva on the schedule. Is that worth risking a loss?

You can say you want to play the best all you want, but good teams have options for their non-conference schedule, especially on the east coast. You can play the best and improve your SOS number, you might take that game instead. It's not always as easy as just picking a date that works for both teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 03, 2022, 11:20:55 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 03, 2022, 09:48:41 PM
Quote from: WUPHF on January 03, 2022, 07:53:09 PM
Quote from: thebear on January 03, 2022, 09:15:33 AM
For example, NYU [87], William Paterson [158] , Rensselaer [60] [you can take the train] all have solid Strength of Schedules.

NYU was a Top 250-300 school for the past few seasons and historically, they have long played a weak non-conference schedule. Their schedule is as weak as they come and they lost to 3-6 Hobart. But they look much better on paper this season.

The issue for any school with deep tournament hopes is that Skyline SOS. NESCAC and CCIW teams don't care, because their conference schedule gets them all the SOS they'll ever need - but for, say, a Centennial squad, where the sheer volume of conference games is going to keep the SOS down - you might be hurting your Pool C position or your hosting chances by putting Yeshiva on the schedule. Is that worth risking a loss?

You can say you want to play the best all you want, but good teams have options for their non-conference schedule, especially on the east coast. You can play the best and improve your SOS number, you might take that game instead. It's not always as easy as just picking a date that works for both teams.

eh... from what I know, Williams is about the only NESCAC that has said yes in recent years. NESCACs are as bad as NYU at times.

Centennials might play ... I don't think many of them would worry about the Skyline. Hell, look at a lot of their out of conference schedules ... they don't think about the SOS enough, I'd argue.

Others simply over think the WL component and don't want to take the potential loss. And they over think the SOS... Yeshiva would be 2/3s of the equation with the Skyline being 1/3. One game against Yeshiva with other strong or reasonable scheduling wouldn't hurt a team that badly. It might actually help or offset.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on January 04, 2022, 03:58:01 AM

I just listened to the January 3, 2022 Hoopsville (Men's) Top 25 Double Take. (Will Hoopsville ever have a Women's Top 25 Double Take?)

About the Chicago v Marietta game from Las Vegas, I just took a look at the 2nd half play by play sheet.

Marietta led by 8 at halftime, and built their lead to as high as 18 points with just under 10 minutes left to play in the game before Chicago cut Marietta's lead to 9 points (3 possessions.) Chicago countered Marietta runs to keep you watching the live or archived stream, but never really got a possession with a chance to tie or take the lead in the second half.

WUPHF has Chicago only getting 5 wins in the UAA this season (assuming that the UAA gets a full schedule in)-- I was a little more generous, (you can usually depend on Chicago to get 7 to 9 UAA wins in a normal season), but even I don't think that Chicago will get 9 UAA victories this season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 04, 2022, 09:11:24 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 03, 2022, 11:20:55 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 03, 2022, 09:48:41 PM
Quote from: WUPHF on January 03, 2022, 07:53:09 PM
Quote from: thebear on January 03, 2022, 09:15:33 AM
For example, NYU [87], William Paterson [158] , Rensselaer [60] [you can take the train] all have solid Strength of Schedules.

NYU was a Top 250-300 school for the past few seasons and historically, they have long played a weak non-conference schedule. Their schedule is as weak as they come and they lost to 3-6 Hobart. But they look much better on paper this season.

The issue for any school with deep tournament hopes is that Skyline SOS. NESCAC and CCIW teams don't care, because their conference schedule gets them all the SOS they'll ever need - but for, say, a Centennial squad, where the sheer volume of conference games is going to keep the SOS down - you might be hurting your Pool C position or your hosting chances by putting Yeshiva on the schedule. Is that worth risking a loss?

You can say you want to play the best all you want, but good teams have options for their non-conference schedule, especially on the east coast. You can play the best and improve your SOS number, you might take that game instead. It's not always as easy as just picking a date that works for both teams.

eh... from what I know, Williams is about the only NESCAC that has said yes in recent years. NESCACs are as bad as NYU at times.

Centennials might play ... I don't think many of them would worry about the Skyline. Hell, look at a lot of their out of conference schedules ... they don't think about the SOS enough, I'd argue.

Others simply over think the WL component and don't want to take the potential loss. And they over think the SOS... Yeshiva would be 2/3s of the equation with the Skyline being 1/3. One game against Yeshiva with other strong or reasonable scheduling wouldn't hurt a team that badly. It might actually help or offset.

It might help right now, but a potential 4-5 loss YU program that might be more of a reality post Turell and Leifer, that's a bit different.

Easy solution: just apply to the UAA. Problem solved.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on January 04, 2022, 09:44:23 AM

I'm a Williams fan and I don't think they should get credit for scheduling Yeshiva because this program was a lot different in 2017 when they first played. Although if I'm Kevin App I probably don't love the way this turned out, getting them again with a 5th (5 and a half?) year Gabe Leifer and senior Ryan Turell. I think the original scheduling agreement ended after 3 years so maybe they do deserve credit for renewing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 04, 2022, 10:11:06 AM

In my mind, 9 wins in the UAA is much better than 7-8 and Chicago has only had 9 wins once in the last 10 years or so. It is true though, I think Chicago could finish at the bottom of the league along with NYU.

They have found a way to get a few big wins the last few seasons so I may pay for that comment as early as this weekend but I don't think so....

I did watch Chicago and Marrieta and did not feel that the outcome was in doubt. Just my gut.

They were rumors earlier this year among the soccer community that Chicago was considering leaving the UAA, but I feel like I hear a rumor every few years about someone.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 04, 2022, 02:05:06 PM

If the season ended today, I believe these would be the 4 top resumes. If (huge if) geography worked out, brackets would be built around these.

1) RMC: .909/.691/5-1

2) IWU: .818/.647/5-2

3) UWO: .923/.636/5-1

4) Marietta: .800/.687/3-2
----
5) CNU: .867/.636/4-2

Data courtesy of Matt Snyder: https://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com/p/division-iii-mens-regional-rankings.html

(RRO numbers are just my best guess as of today.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 04, 2022, 02:59:16 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on January 04, 2022, 10:11:06 AM
They were rumors earlier this year among the soccer community that Chicago was considering leaving the UAA, but I feel like I hear a rumor every few years about someone.

I haven't heard that, but your rumor mill might be built upon a sturdier foundation than my rumor mill.

I can't imagine Chicago ever leaving the UAA, which would mean leaving behind about 80%-90% of its peer institutions in D3. Travel expenses obviously aren't a problem, so the only possible motivation I could imagine for seceding from the UAA would be time spent off campus. But even that would be a questionable tradeoff. The likely candidate for conference membership if the U of C ever abandoned the UAA would be the MWC, Chicago's former home in the pre-UAA days and the current home of the Maroons football program as an associate member. But that would mean midweek trips to places like Ripon and Grinnell and Illinois College and Lawrence that are arguably more disruptive to a student-athlete's class schedule than the Friday/Sunday pattern of UAA travel (which only happens three times every year for each Maroons team).

It just doesn't make any sense to me. (And I can't imagine that the Maroons soccer players and coaches would support it, since the UAA is one of the two best soccer leagues in D3, while the MWC is ... well, let's be charitable and just say that the MWC is somewhat soccer-challenged. Then again, UAA to MWC would be a pretty significant step down in almost every sport that the UAA sponsors.)

It would really stink for you Wash U types as well, although you don't get any say in your archrival's decision-making.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on January 04, 2022, 03:44:01 PM

It wouldn't surprise me to see an eventual unraveling of the UAA in all sports.

I don't have any inside baseball information regarding that, just noticing a general slide in that direction over the years.

UAA dropped football when it became apparent that a conference really couldn't subsist on having just 4 teams. Those four teams went to become affiliate members in other conferences. Look at baseball and softball. A difference in the University of Chicago's semester format has kept it from competing with other UAA schools. As a result, UAA baseball has only five teams (also minus Carnegie Mellon) and thus has no AQ to play for. Carnegie competes in softball, but there are still only six softball teams in the UAA--again, no AQ to play for. Unless an additional school or two can be brought on as affiliates to the UAA, I could eventually see some of those baseball/softball playing schools in the UAA looking elsewhere.

Which leaves us with basketball and soccer (men's and women's). I would hope that the strong and entertaining competition among UAA teams in those sports will continue to entice those programs to stay in the UAA. But, let's now look at the current airline travel problems going on now--if these persist, do the UAA schools figure it's worth the hassle, expense, and risk of having to cancel games because of those problems? Or, do they start believing that regionally-based bus rides are more economical and present a better opportunity of getting scheduled games played as we move forward with COVID riding shotgun with us?

WashU's affiliate membership with the CCIW, in my opinion, was not just done with the short-sighted future of its football program in mind. It was a long-term move where WashU could end up seeking full CCIW membership if the UAA crumbled under the weight of the all the things I mentioned. Again, I have no inside information on this--just making some observations on what has happened, and what could happen, given the current situation that is blanketed heavily by COVID and its ripple effects on D3 college athletics.

I fervently hope that the UAA remains intact, and that will be up to the administrations of the universities involved in the conference. I think the allure is still there for basketball and soccer, but there are the aforementioned COVID-related issues that will serve as stressors to that allure.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: blue_jays on January 04, 2022, 04:01:01 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 04, 2022, 02:59:16 PM
Quote from: WUPHF on January 04, 2022, 10:11:06 AM
They were rumors earlier this year among the soccer community that Chicago was considering leaving the UAA, but I feel like I hear a rumor every few years about someone.

I haven't heard that, but your rumor mill might be built upon a sturdier foundation than my rumor mill.

I can't imagine Chicago ever leaving the UAA, which would mean leaving behind about 80%-90% of its peer institutions in D3. Travel expenses obviously aren't a problem, so the only possible motivation I could imagine for seceding from the UAA would be time spent off campus. But even that would be a questionable tradeoff. The likely candidate for conference membership if the U of C ever abandoned the UAA would be the MWC, Chicago's former home in the pre-UAA days and the current home of the Maroons football program as an associate member. But that would mean midweek trips to places like Ripon and Grinnell and Illinois College and Lawrence that are arguably more disruptive to a student-athlete's class schedule than the Friday/Sunday pattern of UAA travel (which only happens three times every year for each Maroons team).

It just doesn't make any sense to me. (And I can't imagine that the Maroons soccer players and coaches would support it, since the UAA is one of the two best soccer leagues in D3, while the MWC is ... well, let's be charitable and just say that the MWC is somewhat soccer-challenged. Then again, UAA to MWC would be a pretty significant step down in almost every sport that the UAA sponsors.)

It would really stink for you Wash U types as well, although you don't get any say in your archrival's decision-making.

The rumor is entirely made up. UChicago wants to stay in the UAA, it's a boon for their recruiting and prestige. No reason to look for greener pastures. It benefits them to stay in the UAA in every sport outside of football, baseball and softball. Leaving to join the MWC would only hurt them. And remember this factor as well: the University administration likes the fact UChicago is in the UAA as well, and that importance can not be discounted.
UChicago has been an independent in softball for decades and likes it that way. Baseball was in the same boat and finally latched onto MWC in recent years for the same reason football did: they were improving into a legitimate playoff threat and wanted to get a shot at an automatic bid.
Besides, the MWC has several member schools who want to boot UChicago out right now because of how immediately good they were in baseball and football. The chances of them getting full MWC membership are even more remote than them voluntarily leaving the UAA.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 04, 2022, 04:45:11 PM

If the UAA did ever break up, there would certainly be some leagues absolutely delighted to add those teams. Just for fun, I imagine it going like this:

Rochester - Liberty League (no brainer)
Brandeis - NEWMAC (no brainer)
NYU - probably Liberty League
Carnegie Mellon -- NCAC
Wash U -- CCIW
Chicago -- CCIW
Emory -- SAA
Case Western -- NCAC

I think Emory would be the biggest loser there. Rochester and NYU could together join an already strong conference and make it loaded. Wash U and Chicago would make the CCIW even stronger and certainly adding St. Louis and Chicago would be appealing to the league for recruiting purposes. Brandeis is a perfect fit in NEWMAC, which already has natural rivals in Babson and MIT. Case and Carnegie would together make already-solid NCAC a lot deeper in quality and could continue on as natural rivals. All of those leagues already have suitable academic profiles.

SAA is the only league Emory could really join and it might not be delighted to do so, but it would save a huge amount on travel if it did and would instantly dominate the league in nearly every sport, so it would be a guaranteed NCAA appearance for like 3/4 of Emory's teams each year, so not all bad!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 04, 2022, 04:55:39 PM

Wouldn't it be more likely the UAA would add two members than dissolve? If they're short on a few sports, that makes the most sense. Even at ten, you're only looking at four travel weekends.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 04, 2022, 05:10:26 PM

If they did want to add two members, Johns Hopkins and MIT would be the perfect fits. I'm not sure if they would want to leave their current situations, where they travel a heck of a lot less. They are already in high-caliber academic leagues and it's not like either school needs the small bump in prestige associated with the UAA. But they are easily the two most UAA-y schools not currently in the UAA. I can't even really think of another obvious candidate ..

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on January 04, 2022, 05:20:13 PM

It feels like all the UAA schools would take a big hit in academic reputation if that league dissolves. A lot of those schools obviously can stand on their own much like MIT and Hopkins regardless of the leagues they are in, but it really does benefit all of the members to stay associated with each other.

It would never happen in a million years but Tufts feels much more UAA-ish than Brandeis and would be a much more high profile Boston school, if for whatever reason they chose to go that direction. They probably don't standout as much as they would ultimately in the high academic echelon of Boston/New England.

A more interesting question would be whether or not the UAA could grab 2 schools that drop down from D1 to D3---they would be very attractive to schools looking to maintain a somewhat national profile and boost their academic standing. Coming from D1 probably wouldn't be as averse to rigorous travel.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 04, 2022, 05:25:38 PM

OK, I was probably a little careless to throw that rumor out there but I was surprised at the source. The person knows way more than my Emory source, lol.

I can imagine Chicago kicking around the idea in part because they need the group membership prestige less than any other member of the UAA and they are regularly thinking about important projects such as increasing socio-economic diversity and the like.

Having said that, I think the rumor is crazy-talk and that there is no way they leave. Especially given how well the Maroons have performed as an athletic department over the past few seasons. They are rolling.

I agree on the CCIW move as well. I have no idea how that worked out but it was a brilliant short term and long term move by Washington University. I hope the CCIW programs agree.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 04, 2022, 05:35:50 PM

But hey, that did prompt an interesting conversation on a slow new day so thanks guys. Tufts would be the most logical next choice and I am 99% was part of the conversation in 1985-1986. That conversation may have been entirely one-sided but a conversation nonetheless.

The prospect of a Division I school moving down is also interesting and one I never considered. I could see a Lehigh dropping down as an example. They have big plans to increase their already great academic profile and need to be financially prudent.

But yeah, I don't think there is any need to ponder a new member any time soon.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on January 04, 2022, 06:10:56 PM

Speaking of the UAA, you might find it interesting to read UAA Executive Vice President Richard Rasmussen's doctoral dissertation, which he wrote in 1997 in pursuit of his doctoral degree from the University of Rochester. Mr. Rasmussen has served the UAA from the beginning in 1987 in what was first known as the UAA Executive Secretary, and is now known as Executive Vice President. His 165 page dissertation is a case study in the formation of the University Athletic Association, and can be read here:

The Role of Intercollegiate Athletics in the Academy-- A Case Study in the Formation of the UAA (http://www.uaasports.info/information/forms/UAA_Case_Study.pdf)

It is worth noting to begin with that in addition to the 9 institutions that would become the charter members of the UAA: (Brandeis, Carnegie Mellon, Case Western Reserve, Chicago, Emory, Johns Hopkins, NYU, Rochester, Wash U), 4 other institutions were also invited to the meetings of 1985 and 1986 that would form the UAA. The 1985 meetings were held at Rochester, and the 1986 meetings were held at Wash U. These additional four that were invited to the meetings were MIT, Cal Tech, Rice, and Tulane, and of these four, MIT participated in the talks but decided not to join the UAA. The case study goes into further detail on these meetings, and gives a detail on why each of the charter members decided to join the UAA to begin with. It also goes into detail as to why MIT declined to join the UAA, and why Cal Tech, Rice, and Tulane chose not to participate in the UAA's formation meetings.

As you read the dissertation, it is reasonable to ask: How have circumstances changed between the mid 1980s and now that would make the UAA no longer a feasible association?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 04, 2022, 06:43:38 PM

That is awesome, thanks for sharing.... In regards to my Tufts conversation suggestion, I am referring to the preliminary conversations held with the Washington University Dean who engaged other schools in conversation to lay the groundwork. I believe his original list had 30 or so perspective schools. Maybe that is covered by the dissertation.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: thebear on January 04, 2022, 09:01:20 PM

Re: Liberty League, they already have 10 in basketball, Adding NYU & Rochester to get to 12 would probably mean going to divisions.

They also have 5 [Clarkson, RPI, RIT, SLU, & Union] of the hybrid programs that play D-I M & W Ice Hockey and D-III in all other sports.

Not sure that RIT would be thrilled with U of R also in the league.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: stlawus on January 04, 2022, 09:06:43 PM

UR is in the LL for baseball and football. They're kind of like what Hamilton used to be in the league. Technically a UAA member but are in the LL for certain sports.

I would take NYU in a heart beat if it meant kicking Bard out, but that will never happen.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 04, 2022, 10:42:05 PM

I think Yeshiva might be down for a new conference. I believe they're an internationally recognized research university, right?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 04, 2022, 11:23:34 PM

Yeshiva is not far off the UAA profile with graduate schools in law, social work and medicine among other areas. Maybe business. Definitely an outlier in the Skyline.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: thebear on January 05, 2022, 07:52:36 AM

Yeshiva does not play after sundown on Fridays or before sundown on Saturdays - so there's that. It is ranked 68 among US universities.

The UAA schools range from 6 [Chicago] to 42 [CWRU & Brandeis]

According to US News, the following top rated Non California non UAA D3 schools are: MIT (2), Johns Hopkins (9), Tufts (28), RPI (55) , WPI (63), Stevens (83).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 05, 2022, 09:09:16 AM

You're right, the travel would be difficult. If I recall, though, Hopkins has had opportunities to join in the past and decided against it, correct?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: thebear on January 05, 2022, 10:14:34 AM

Hopkins has a really nice travel situation.

Their average trip in their league is about 75 miles each way. The only "long" trip is to Muhlenberg, which is about 150 miles.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 05, 2022, 10:19:49 AM

Hopkins was a founding member of the UAA but left due to financial concerns. The year escapes me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Caz Bombers on January 05, 2022, 10:47:15 AM

Yeshiva might have built a decent men's basketball program but they'd be a million miles out of their depth in the UAA from an all-sports perspective. Their other men's sports are mid- to lower-tier in the Skyline at best and their women's programs...I intend no exaggeration nor rudeness when I say any high school junior varsity team you can name would beat them at any sport you can think of.

They simply do not value women's athletics in the slightest. They don't let the WBB or VB team use the Max Stern Center for home games and send them elsewhere in the NYC area, for example. (Due to COVID they had to let volleyball play on campus this fall, but ordinarily they do not allow it.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on January 05, 2022, 11:10:46 AM

Quote from: Caz Bombers on January 05, 2022, 10:47:15 AM
Yeshiva might have built a decent men's basketball program but they'd be a million miles out of their depth in the UAA from an all-sports perspective. Their other men's sports are mid- to lower-tier in the Skyline at best and their women's programs...I intend no exaggeration nor rudeness when I say any high school junior varsity team you can name would beat them at any sport you can think of.

They simply do not value women's athletics in the slightest. They don't let the WBB or VB team use the Max Stern Center for home games and send them elsewhere in the NYC area, for example. (Due to COVID they had to let volleyball play on campus this fall, but ordinarily they do not allow it.)

That is understandable under Orthodox Jewish tradition. I belong to a Conservative "Masorti" Egalitarian synagogue, but my synagogue currently leans more Reform in practice-- The Rabbinical Assembly/ United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism prayerbooks are used for services.-- "Siddur Sim Shalom" and "Siddur Lev Shalem for Shabbat and Festivals" in the case of my synagogue) Women do not count as part of the 10 for prayer in an Orthodox Jewish minyan, and an Orthdox Jewish minyan is otherwise known as a mechitzah minyan, where the women are kept separate from the men with a divider separating the two sections. In an Orthodox Jewish family, women have separate roles from the men. Of course, Orthodox Jewish families are very big families, as the women are commanded to "be fruitful and multiply." (Not to say that a woman's role is not important-- it is just different.) Modesty governs a woman's role in Orthodox Jewish tradition. Yeshiva University is essentially two colleges at the undergraduate level-- the women go to Stern College, and the men go to Yeshiva, and the populations are kept separate. Kind of like what Columbia/Barnard or Harvard/Radcliffe used to be.

Modern Orthodox Jewish tradition sometimes uses partnership minyans where they don't start service until 10 men and 10 women get together and the two pray as separate but equal minyans. In a Chabad minyan, they only need 10 men to start the service-- exclusively 10 men.

That is what separates Brandeis from Yeshiva-- Yeshiva is the Modern Orthodox Jewish university, while Brandeis was always intended to be a home for all faiths, even though the Jewish community founded Brandeis as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 05, 2022, 11:17:46 AM

The women aren't on the Washington Heights campus, so it doesn't make a ton of sense to send them up there for games.

I want being entirely serious with the suggestion. Beyond the travel issue, YU would have to seriously increase their athletic investment to do something like that. As we've seen with mbb, the athletes are there if the investment is, but it would likely be a priority shift they're not down for, which is fine.

The reality is, a lot of the more competitive leagues for them (like the Liberty League) do weekend doubles that probably wouldn't work for YU. Being in a conference with a small geographic footprint makes the most sense.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on January 05, 2022, 11:21:26 AM

Quote from: WUPHF on January 05, 2022, 10:19:49 AM
Hopkins was a founding member of the UAA but left due to financial concerns. The year escapes me.

Johns Hopkins left the UAA at the end of the 2000-2001 academic year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 05, 2022, 12:34:21 PM

Every time Johns Hopkins reenters the UAA convo I say the following - it is NOT going to happen. I have talked to more Hopkins people about this than I can remember at this point and it is a non-starter. They are not interested.

As for other possible schools, I can't believe no one mentions Tufts... I think they would be more realistic, even a stretch, than MIT or others in New England.

And I know another school west of the Mississippi who apparently has been making a play for the UAA, but it would take a few more years before they achieve the right status - and even then they don't quite fit properly.

AND you need to add by two members, not one at a time.

While Chicago rumors are interesting, those aren't where I've been focused. I think UAA could have everything dissolve, though I've been told by many around the league it isn't imminent nor realistic that members would leave ... but I know of where the most likely locations would be and it would likely result in the league folding - they simply couldn't find the members that fit.

Being a member of the Association of American Universities I think has been a pre-requisite as well, and Yeshiva is not on that list, by the way (neither is the institution I'm told is interested in joining, but I'm told they are trying to become part of that group thus the time it is taking). Also being a Tier 1 research institution, Yeshiva is not.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 05, 2022, 12:47:14 PM

I don't see any incentive for Tufts to join UAA. What would be the point? They are currently in an equally prestigious academic league which also happens to be the best overall athletic D3 league in the country. Tufts in recent years has won multiple national titles for each sport in men's soccer, men's lacrosse, women's softball, and had other title or contending teams in lots of other sports (field hockey, women's hoops, I think a few others). In other words, they are flying high from their current perch. They get to play against their traditional rivals, all of whom are an easy drive (other than Hamilton, I think all within 3.5 hours and half of the league more like 1-2 hours), and many of whom are some of their biggest overlaps for applicants (I think Tufts competes mostly with other NESCAC schools, perhaps Emory among UAA schools would be a big overlap too but with no UAA schools in New England it's a pretty different applicant group).

Instead of being the biggest school in the league and the only one with significant grad programs, which gives a competitive advantage, they become one of the smallest, which is a competitive disadvantage. Why switch leagues to one that (1) is not any better athletically OR academically and (2) requires a massively increased athletic budget (not to mention increased burdens on student-athletes) due to plane travel while (3) ditching traditional rivals like Amherst, Williams, Trinity and so on?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 05, 2022, 12:53:32 PM

Tufts was mentioned by two or three posters.

I even said they would be the next best candidate because Johns Hopkins is not coming back.

But I agree, I do not see Tufts leaving the NESCAC.

I do think that if an institution or two were to leave the UAA, the remaining schools would look at schools outside of the traditional profile (e.g. research university, AAU membership), but it all comes down to the Chancellors or Presidents and Provosts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 05, 2022, 01:02:03 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 04, 2022, 04:45:11 PM
If the UAA did ever break up, there would certainly be some leagues absolutely delighted to add those teams. Just for fun, I imagine it going like this:

Rochester - Liberty League (no brainer)
Brandeis - NEWMAC (no brainer)
NYU - probably Liberty League
Carnegie Mellon -- NCAC
Wash U -- CCIW
Chicago -- CCIW
Emory -- SAA
Case Western -- NCAC

I think Emory would be the biggest loser there. Rochester and NYU could together join an already strong conference and make it loaded. Wash U and Chicago would make the CCIW even stronger and certainly adding St. Louis and Chicago would be appealing to the league for recruiting purposes.

The CCIW would not be adding the city of Chicago to the league by bringing in the U of C. The CCIW already has a member school that is located in the Windy City, and that's been true for sixty years now. (https://www.northpark.edu/)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 05, 2022, 01:04:12 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 05, 2022, 09:09:16 AM

You're right, the travel would be difficult. If I recall, though, Hopkins has had opportunities to join in the past and decided against it, correct?

JHU was a partial member of the UAA in its early years. The Blue Jays would only take part in one round-robin in men's and women's basketball, f'instance, and were ineligible for the conference championship. It was never the kind of thing that made any sense, either for JHU or the UAA, so in the end the Blue Jays just quietly exited and went local in terms of their conference affiliation.

Quote from: WUPHF on January 05, 2022, 10:19:49 AM
Hopkins was a founding member of the UAA but left due to financial concerns. The year escapes me.

2001.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 05, 2022, 01:12:56 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 05, 2022, 12:47:14 PM
I don't see any incentive for Tufts to join UAA. What would be the point? They are currently in an equally prestigious academic league which also happens to be the best overall athletic D3 league in the country. Tufts in recent years has won multiple national titles for each sport in men's soccer, men's lacrosse, women's softball, and had other title or contending teams in lots of other sports (field hockey, women's hoops, I think a few others). In other words, they are flying high from their current perch. They get to play against their traditional rivals, all of whom are an easy drive (other than Hamilton, I think all within 3.5 hours and half of the league more like 1-2 hours), and many of whom are some of their biggest overlaps for applicants (I think Tufts competes mostly with other NESCAC schools, perhaps Emory among UAA schools would be a big overlap too but with no UAA schools in New England it's a pretty different applicant group).

Uh, are you sure about that? (https://www.brandeis.edu/) ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Caz Bombers on January 05, 2022, 01:33:07 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 05, 2022, 11:17:46 AM

The women aren't on the Washington Heights campus, so it doesn't make a ton of sense to send them up there for games.

I want being entirely serious with the suggestion. Beyond the travel issue, YU would have to seriously increase their athletic investment to do something like that. As we've seen with mbb, the athletes are there if the investment is, but it would likely be a priority shift they're not down for, which is fine.

The reality is, a lot of the more competitive leagues for them (like the Liberty League) do weekend doubles that probably wouldn't work for YU. Being in a conference with a small geographic footprint makes the most sense.

I admit I didn't know that about the Stern school not being in Washington Heights. Turns out it's at 34th/35th and Lex which makes WBB/VB's pre-COVID home base at Baruch only a dozen or so blocks away make a lot more sense.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 05, 2022, 01:34:46 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 05, 2022, 01:04:12 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 05, 2022, 09:09:16 AM

You're right, the travel would be difficult. If I recall, though, Hopkins has had opportunities to join in the past and decided against it, correct?

JHU was a partial member of the UAA in its early years. The Blue Jays would only take part in one round-robin in men's and women's basketball, f'instance, and were ineligible for the conference championship. It was never the kind of thing that made any sense, either for JHU or the UAA, so in the end the Blue Jays just quietly exited and went local in terms of their conference affiliation.

Hopkins was already local by being a dual-membership school. They competed in and were members of both the Centennial and the UAA for a time. When they left the UAA, they simply just solidified their Centennial membership - a conference they also are a founding member. Hopkins had been part of the football conference that pre-dated the full Centennial along with Dickinson, Franklin & Marshall, Gettysburg, Muhlenberg, Swarthmore, Ursinus, and McDaniel (formerly Western Maryland).

Hopkins was a dual member basically from the time the Centennial went full membership in 1992 until 2001 when they left the UAA.

As for Tufts, I didn't see it mentioned ... so sorry for that confusion. And I didn't say Tufts was leaving the NESCAC ... just saying they are a more likely choice than the others mentioned.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 05, 2022, 01:42:13 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 05, 2022, 01:34:46 PM
And I didn't say Tufts was leaving the NESCAC ... just saying they are a more likely choice than the others mentioned.

It really would be a great fit for a lot of reasons.

And if the UAA were to eventually lose a member or two, the majority of the speculation would involve schools that would seem like the longest of long shots.

I might suggest Washington and Lee and many of you would think I was crazy.

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute was mentioned and that is an intriguing choice, assuming that Rochester was one that stayed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jknezek on January 05, 2022, 02:07:26 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on January 05, 2022, 01:42:13 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 05, 2022, 01:34:46 PM
And I didn't say Tufts was leaving the NESCAC ... just saying they are a more likely choice than the others mentioned.

It really would be a great fit for a lot of reasons.

And if the UAA were to eventually lose a member or two, the majority of the speculation would involve schools that would seem like the longest of long shots.

I might suggest Washington and Lee and many of you would think I was crazy.

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute was mentioned and that is an intriguing choice, assuming that Rochester was one that stayed.

W&L is not a research school and the only grad school is Law. I don't think they fit in the UAA. If W&L wanted that much travel, I assume they would have been more interested in the SAA.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on January 05, 2022, 02:12:54 PM

Sheesh! Logged in and decided to check out the Top 25 room and I literally backed out twice to confirm I hadn't accidentally clicked on the UAA Discussion board (which are right next to one another the way I have them filtered) ::) ::) ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 05, 2022, 02:33:28 PM

Quote from: jknezek on January 05, 2022, 02:07:26 PM
W&L is not a research school and the only grad school is Law. I don't think they fit in the UAA. If W&L wanted that much travel, I assume they would have been more interested in the SAA.

Very true, but every UAA member has a relatively small undergraduate population with a strong liberal arts focus. That is why I said that the UAA may look more broadly for membership if necessary.

For me, this is an interesting thought exercise, but I do not see anything changing with the UAA.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 05, 2022, 02:41:04 PM

W&L would LOVE to be in the UAA, but they won't be in the conference for a host of reasons. Location is also chief among them.

W&L is interested in the SAA, but from what I'm told ... that interest is one-way.

Per the RPI idea, they are Tier 2. I've been told by those in the UAA that the conference would only take Tier 1 institutes that are also part of the Association of American Universities (which RPI is also not a member).

Maybe that AAU and Tier 1 ideas and mandates change, but ... I am not sure why at this point.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on January 05, 2022, 03:21:46 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 05, 2022, 12:34:21 PM
As for other possible schools, I can't believe no one mentions Tufts... I think they would be more realistic, even a stretch, than MIT or others in New England.

Everyone mentioned Tufts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 05, 2022, 03:56:38 PM

My bad on omitting Brandeis from Tufts' geographic orbit (I should not forget them considering I worked in Waltham District Court for six months!) and forgetting about North Park being in Chicago.

My point on Tufts was not to say they would not be a perfect fit for UAA or that UAA would not love to have them, just that I don't see any real benefit that would justify the massive travel costs entailed in switching leagues, from Tufts' perspective.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 05, 2022, 04:07:54 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on January 05, 2022, 03:21:46 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 05, 2022, 12:34:21 PM
As for other possible schools, I can't believe no one mentions Tufts... I think they would be more realistic, even a stretch, than MIT or others in New England.

Everyone mentioned Tufts.

Not everyone. I don't think Meadow Soprano mentions Tufts. She did visit Bates, Bowdoin and Colby though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on January 05, 2022, 06:24:54 PM

And like many NESCAC recruits, she opted for a single digit win Ivy program at the last minute.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jknezek on January 06, 2022, 08:59:08 AM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 05, 2022, 02:41:04 PM
W&L would LOVE to be in the UAA, but they won't be in the conference for a host of reasons. Location is also chief among them.

W&L is interested in the SAA, but from what I'm told ... that interest is one-way.

Interesting about W&L. When the SAA was formed I heard that W&L chose to stay in the ODAC due to travel simplicity. I was also told, even as the ODAC has struggled for football members, that the leadership in Lexington still prefers the ODAC versus any other option except the CC, but that the CC has no need or interest in the Generals outside of wrestling.

Just rumors of course and you would be more plugged in than me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 06, 2022, 10:27:46 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Seven cancelled or postponed games so far, plus two results listed as 2-0 forfeits. That's quite a bit fewer than the women's side (17+2), but there's still the weekend for the men to catch up.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	611	Randolph-Macon	10-1	01/08 vs. Guilford
#2	602	UW-Platteville	14-0	won at UW-Eau Claire, 60-46; 01/08 vs. UW-Stout
#3	570	Illinois Wesleyan	9-2	01/08 at Carthage
#4	540	UW-Oshkosh	12-2	LOST to UW-Whitewater, 78-82 OT; 01/08 at UW-River Falls
#5	477	Yeshiva	14-1	IDLE
#6	448	St. Joseph (Conn.)	8-0	01/06 at Albertus Magnus; 01/08 vs. Regis (Mass.)
#7	437	Washington U.	10-1	01/08 at Chicago
#8	434	Marietta	10-2	won at Muskingum, 92-72; 01/08 vs. Wilmington
#9	395	Wheaton (Ill.)	12-2	won at North Park, 89-64
#10	386	Christopher Newport	13-2	~~01/05 at Marymount~~ canc/ppd; 01/08 at York (Pa.)
#11	384	UW-La Crosse	10-2	won at UW-Stout, 89-85; 01/08 at UW-Stevens Point
#12	359	Johns Hopkins	8-1	def. Dickinson, 82-48; 01/08 at Haverford
#13	322	Whitworth	9-1	01/07 vs. Pacific; 01/08 vs. Linfield
#14	289	Elmhurst	11-2	IDLE
#15	257	Mount Union	10-1	def. Baldwin Wallace, 2-0; 01/07 vs. Capital
#16	253	Roanoke	9-2	~~01/05 vs. Ferrum~~ canc/ppd; 01/08 at Virginia Wesleyan
#17	218	Williams	9-0	01/07 vs. Hamilton; 01/08 vs. #28 Amherst
#18	191	Swarthmore	10-1	def. McDaniel, 78-37; 01/08 vs. Franklin and Marshall
#19	172	Mary Hardin-Baylor	10-1	def. Concordia (Texas), 111-101; 01/06 vs. Sul Ross State; 01/08 vs. Howard Payne
#20	167	Maryville (Tenn.)	11-1	~~01/04 vs. Brevard~~ canc/ppd; 01/08 at Mary Baldwin; 01/09 at Greensboro
#21	155	Heidelberg	10-1	def. John Carroll, 2-0; 01/08 vs. Otterbein
#22	104	Hardin-Simmons	10-1	01/06 vs. #42 LeTourneau; 01/08 vs. Texas-Dallas
#23	89	Wesleyan	12-1	won at #28 Amherst, 94-85 3OT; 01/07 at T#33 Tufts; 01/09 at Bates
#24	51	WPI	9-1	won at Springfield, 68-52; 01/08 vs. MIT
#25	39	RPI	9-1	01/07 at Ithaca; 01/08 at Union

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	25	Oswego	10-1	def. St. Lawrence, 74-60
#27	24	Case Western Reserve	10-1	won at Hilbert, 102-80; 01/08 at Carnegie Mellon
#28	22	Amherst	8-2	LOST to #23 Wesleyan, 85-94 3OT; 01/07 at Middlebury; 01/08 at #17 Williams
#29	15	DeSales	13-1	won at FDU-Florham, 102-63
T#30	14	Berry	9-2	01/07 at Rhodes; 01/09 at Hendrix
T#30	14	Trinity (Texas)	10-2	01/08 vs. Texas Lutheran
#32	11	Emory	7-3	~~01/04 vs. Huntingdon~~ canc/ppd; 01/08 at T#37 Rochester
T#33	9	Tufts	4-7	01/07 vs. #23 Wesleyan
T#33	9	Wartburg	11-2	won at Central, 58-35; 01/08 vs. Nebraska Wesleyan
#35	8	Brandeis	7-2	~~01/03 vs. Bates~~ canc/ppd; 01/08 vs. New York University
#36	6	Augsburg	9-2	01/08 vs. Macalester
T#37	5	Rochester	8-2	won at Buffalo State, 99-57; 01/08 vs. #32 Emory
T#37	5	Stockton	10-2	~~01/03 vs. Misericordia~~ canc/ppd; LOST at Kean, 75-83; 01/08 at William Paterson
#39	3	Chapman	9-1	~~01/05 at Whittier~~ canc/ppd
T#40	2	Hampden-Sydney	7-2	01/08 at Washington and Lee
T#40	2	Nazareth	9-1	def. Houghton, 74-50; 01/07 at Hartwick; 01/08 at Sage
#42	1	LeTourneau	9-2	01/06 at #22 Hardin-Simmons; 01/08 at McMurry

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2022, 12:37:22 PM

Quote from: jknezek on January 06, 2022, 08:59:08 AM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 05, 2022, 02:41:04 PM
W&L would LOVE to be in the UAA, but they won't be in the conference for a host of reasons. Location is also chief among them.

W&L is interested in the SAA, but from what I'm told ... that interest is one-way.

Interesting about W&L. When the SAA was formed I heard that W&L chose to stay in the ODAC due to travel simplicity. I was also told, even as the ODAC has struggled for football members, that the leadership in Lexington still prefers the ODAC versus any other option except the CC, but that the CC has no need or interest in the Generals outside of wrestling.

Just rumors of course and you would be more plugged in than me.

I know this has been discussed before, but W&L has talked about leaving the ODAC and that came to a head recently when Southern Virginia was considered for full ODAC membership. From what I was told by multiple sources, W&L basically told the ODAC or those that needed to know that should SVU be brought in, they would leave the ODAC.

Yes, they would like to be in the Centennial other than as an associate member for wrestling. That won't happen. Period. Centennial is NOT interested.

I've been told by multiple sources that W&L has been interested in being in the SAA, though travel certainly is a challenge to that idea. And at this time, no one is interested in bringing W&L in.

W&L has played a lot of cards to try and get their way, IMO, and they have no where to go. I think many know that despite Southern Virginia not being admitted to the ODAC. I think that decision had less to do with W&L and more to do with whether SVU was the right choice for the ODAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 06, 2022, 01:01:19 PM

Could W&L consider joining the eastern C2C teams and try to bring in a few more schools to make a conference? You'd have Washington & Lee, Mary Washington, Salisbury, and Chris Newport as 4 with the longest travel being W&L to Salisbury at just over 300 miles. Add a few more to the mix and you've got a conference

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2022, 04:17:23 PM

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 06, 2022, 01:01:19 PM
Could W&L consider joining the eastern C2C teams and try to bring in a few more schools to make a conference? You'd have Washington & Lee, Mary Washington, Salisbury, and Chris Newport as 4 with the longest travel being W&L to Salisbury at just over 300 miles. Add a few more to the mix and you've got a conference

Highly doubt it. They would lose access to a football AQ for starters.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2022, 05:42:21 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=5b4v9/8i67j61qwgtgel7l.jpg)

The start of the 2022 portion of the basketball season is off to a sluggish one. A number of teams are pausing team activities, postponing or canceling games, or a combination of all of the above as the Omicron variant of the COVID-19 virus blasts through every portion of life in our country.

Thursday night on Hoopsville, we chat about the impact positive test results has caused on the Division III basketball season so far. We also discuss how teams are trying to adjust to changes in schedules. And how this could impact things come late February and March.

Plus there are the teams who, for now, are still playing or trying to play. We talk to some teams who are making heads turn around the country.

You can watch the show LIVE (or on demand) here: https://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2021-22/jan6 or http://www.d3hoops.com/x/lvmbp

We are also simulcasting on our Facebook Live page (www.facebook.com/Hoopsville (http://www.facebook.com/Hoopsville)) AND tonight on our YouTube page (http://www.youtube.com/Hoopsville (http://www.youtube.com/Hoopsville))

Guests include:
- Brian Niemuth, No. 6 Simpson women's coach
- Juli Fulks, No. 4 Transylvania women's coach
- Kevin App, No. 17 Williams men's coach

Hoopsville is hosted by Dave McHugh from the the NABC Studio. It is presented by D3hoops.com and thanks to our partner WBCA. All guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions, ideas, or want to interact with the show, feel free to send them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options available.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Video Portal (and archives): www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3sports.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2022, 05:55:25 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2022, 04:17:23 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 06, 2022, 01:01:19 PM
Could W&L consider joining the eastern C2C teams and try to bring in a few more schools to make a conference? You'd have Washington & Lee, Mary Washington, Salisbury, and Chris Newport as 4 with the longest travel being W&L to Salisbury at just over 300 miles. Add a few more to the mix and you've got a conference

Highly doubt it. They would lose access to a football AQ for starters.

Considering the objections W&L has raised over multiple decades to private schools it considers beneath W&L academically, I can't imagine they would deign to join a conference made up of state schools.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on January 07, 2022, 12:22:12 AM

Very interesting reading and thoughts. There's a lot happening. Imagine what's happening that we know nothing about.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 07, 2022, 10:59:14 AM

Quote from: CNU85 on January 07, 2022, 12:22:12 AM
Very interesting reading and thoughts. There's a lot happening. Imagine what's happening that we know nothing about.

... it is crazy ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 07, 2022, 01:10:42 PM

Clark is 12-0 and no votes? They haven't played anyone? Apparently, Yeshiva hasn't either. Of course, Clark's record the last few years is a little less impressive than Yeshiva's. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 07, 2022, 02:05:23 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 07, 2022, 01:10:42 PM
Clark is 12-0 and no votes? They haven't played anyone? Apparently, Yeshiva hasn't either. Of course, Clark's record the last few years is a little less impressive than Yeshiva's. LOL

Congrats to Clark on their start... I know I had noticed it and hope to chat with them about it soon.

Just a couple of things that jumped out at me:

Clark's OWP is .380 while Yeshiva's is .414 (not even considering Williams who they didn't play; would have jumped that to .448).

Clark's margin of victory is 11.5. Yeshiva's is 31.4 in their wins and 28.4 overall.

As you noted ... Clark hasn't had one winning season (13-12) in the last 10 full seasons ... Yeshiva just got off a 50-game winning streak (even if you knock their schedule, they won the games).

Not saying Clark shouldn't get a deeper dive, but let's not just throw them into the Yeshiva pile because it seems simple enough.

NYU seems to always start the season on a tear and then when the chips are laid down in conference season, disappear. Many voters are likely looking at Clark and their non-conference season and wondering what is really behind the cover.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on January 07, 2022, 02:24:40 PM

Dave has a point about the NYU men. Last really strong NYU men's team was the 2015-16 season NYU men's basketball team that finished 3rd in the UAA with a 21-6 record, 9-5 in the UAA.

Very common for Joe Nesci coached NYU teams in the past to fade out once they get into the UAA schedule. The current NYU coach Dagan Nelson still has to prove that his young NYU team will get at least to a 5 to 7 win range in UAA games this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 07, 2022, 02:32:30 PM

Definitely not throwing Clark in Yeshiva's pile, but 12-0 and not a single vote...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BaboNation on January 07, 2022, 03:13:17 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on January 07, 2022, 01:10:42 PM
Clark is 12-0 and no votes? They haven't played anyone? Apparently, Yeshiva hasn't either. Of course, Clark's record the last few years is a little less impressive than Yeshiva's. LOL

Yeah, I made this point on R2/NEWMAC when they were 10-0 and asked, expecting the shutout at the next poll, whether there was any precedent for an 11-0 (now 12-0) team to get no ORV.

And they'll be 12-0 next week if there's a poll, because their Sat. game is postponed. Even now though Massey has them only 4th in a 8-team conference, so D3Hoops is not an outlier.

As an avid NEWMAC follower let me state in no uncertain terms that I don't think they are worthy of votes at this time. They aren't a top-30 team, which probably would be required to even sniff ORVs. But, things are definitely different this year. They may still fall on their face in conference, but having not seen them for 2 years, and seeing them now, they play a lot more under control. Their defense is still spotty (being charitable) but offensively they will give every conference opponent a challenge.

Davern, their grad post player is effective inside and from the arc. The 2 guys who have come out of nowhere are sophomore Saintilus and freshman Taylor, who leads the team in scoring. Both quick and athletic. 2/3 years ago it was mostly just iso-ball with either Davern or speedy guard Biko Gayman. I give a lot of credit to Gayman (now playing as a grad) who often defers to Taylor.

Coach Simms, now in his 2nd full year obviously deserves credit in getting the team to play within a system.

EDIT: And their OT win against MIT should be taken with some grain of salt, because MIT played w/o 2 of their best players in Hinkley and the Greek Geek. Still, it counts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 09, 2022, 03:37:27 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

While most software goes through alpha and beta versions, this program just got the omicron update; it now automatically notes games marked as postponements (42 total in this report), cancellations (19), and forfeits (4) - although I just discovered that some forfeits are listed in the database as (e.g.) "2 - 0 Canceled." Such games will be reported here as "Canceled" rather than forfeit wins/losses, unless I decide to update my program further.

FWIW, about 40% of the D3 games scheduled for yesterday were postponed or canceled.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	611	Randolph-Macon	10-1	~~01/08 vs. Guilford~~ postponed
#2	602	UW-Platteville	15-0	won at UW-Eau Claire, 60-46; def. UW-Stout, 93-86
#3	570	Illinois Wesleyan	9-2	~~01/08 at Carthage~~ postponed
#4	540	UW-Oshkosh	13-2	LOST to UW-Whitewater, 78-82 OT; won at UW-River Falls, 80-70
#5	477	Yeshiva	14-1	IDLE
#6	448	St. Joseph (Conn.)	9-0	~~01/06 at Albertus Magnus~~ postponed; def. Regis (Mass.), 95-54
#7	437	Washington U.	10-1	~~01/08 at Chicago~~ postponed
#8	434	Marietta	11-2	won at Muskingum, 92-72; def. Wilmington, 78-61
#9	395	Wheaton (Ill.)	12-2	won at North Park, 89-64
#10	386	Christopher Newport	14-2	~~01/05 at Marymount~~ canceled; ~~01/08 at York (Pa.)~~ postponed; won at Marymount, 91-66
#11	384	UW-La Crosse	11-2	won at UW-Stout, 89-85; won at UW-Stevens Point, 73-59
#12	359	Johns Hopkins	9-1	def. Dickinson, 82-48; won at Haverford, 80-61
#13	322	Whitworth	9-2	LOST at Whitman, 69-71
#14	289	Elmhurst	11-2	IDLE
#15	257	Mount Union	11-1	def. Baldwin Wallace, 2-0 (forfeit); def. Capital, 72-45
#16	253	Roanoke	9-2	~~01/05 vs. Ferrum~~ postponed; ~~01/08 at Virginia Wesleyan~~ postponed
#17	218	Williams	10-1	def. Hamilton, 61-45; LOST to #28 Amherst, 65-73
#18	191	Swarthmore	11-1	def. McDaniel, 78-37; def. Franklin and Marshall, 93-56
#19	172	Mary Hardin-Baylor	12-1	def. Concordia (Texas), 111-101; def. Sul Ross State, 94-81; def. Howard Payne, 94-59
#20	167	Maryville (Tenn.)	11-1	~~01/04 vs. Brevard~~ postponed; ~~01/08 at Mary Baldwin~~ canceled; ~~01/09 at Greensboro~~ canceled
#21	155	Heidelberg	11-1	def. John Carroll, 2-0 (forfeit); def. Otterbein, 75-72
#22	104	Hardin-Simmons	10-2	LOST to #42 LeTourneau, 77-85; ~~01/08 vs. Texas-Dallas~~ canceled
#23	89	Wesleyan	13-1	won at #28 Amherst, 94-85 3OT; ~~01/07 at T#33 Tufts~~ postponed; won at Bates, 81-72
#24	51	WPI	10-1	won at Springfield, 68-52; def. MIT, 67-49
#25	39	RPI	9-1	~~01/08 at Union~~ postponed

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	25	Oswego	10-1	def. St. Lawrence, 74-60
#27	24	Case Western Reserve	11-1	won at Hilbert, 102-80; won at Carnegie Mellon, 89-88
#28	22	Amherst	9-3	LOST to #23 Wesleyan, 85-94 3OT; LOST at Middlebury, 64-78; won at #17 Williams, 73-65
#29	15	DeSales	13-1	won at FDU-Florham, 102-63
T#30	14	Berry	11-2	won at Rhodes, 77-56; won at Hendrix, 77-66
T#30	14	Trinity (Texas)	10-2	~~01/08 vs. Texas Lutheran~~ postponed
#32	11	Emory	8-3	~~01/04 vs. Huntingdon~~ canceled; won at T#37 Rochester, 64-61
T#33	9	Tufts	4-7	~~01/07 vs. #23 Wesleyan~~ postponed
T#33	9	Wartburg	12-2	won at Central, 58-35; def. Nebraska Wesleyan, 81-65
#35	8	Brandeis	7-2	~~01/03 vs. Bates~~ postponed; ~~01/08 vs. New York University~~ postponed
#36	6	Augsburg	10-2	def. Macalester, 92-55
T#37	5	Rochester	8-3	won at Buffalo State, 99-57; LOST to #32 Emory, 61-64
T#37	5	Stockton	11-2	~~01/03 vs. Misericordia~~ postponed; LOST at Kean, 75-83; won at William Paterson, 75-69
#39	3	Chapman	9-1	~~01/05 at Whittier~~ postponed
T#40	2	Hampden-Sydney	7-3	LOST at Washington and Lee, 74-79
T#40	2	Nazareth	11-1	def. Houghton, 74-50; won at Hartwick, 81-44; won at Sage, 94-63
#42	1	LeTourneau	11-2	won at #22 Hardin-Simmons, 85-77; won at McMurry, 97-84

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 09, 2022, 03:45:08 PM

So some conference forfeits count as wins and losses in conference standings only, but not in overall standings. So, in essence teams could get a conference win AND schedule another game, staying under the 25 game schedule.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 09, 2022, 05:00:30 PM

Forfeits aren't counting for NCAA selection criteria. Our plan is to mark them as conference games, but non regional. There's some database cleanup to do, for sure.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on January 09, 2022, 07:16:30 PM

So we're really like a good 2-0 weekend from a sub .500 Tufts team being ranked? Doesn't that seem a little severe?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Bucket on January 09, 2022, 07:21:43 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 06, 2022, 05:55:25 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 06, 2022, 04:17:23 PM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 06, 2022, 01:01:19 PM
Could W&L consider joining the eastern C2C teams and try to bring in a few more schools to make a conference? You'd have Washington & Lee, Mary Washington, Salisbury, and Chris Newport as 4 with the longest travel being W&L to Salisbury at just over 300 miles. Add a few more to the mix and you've got a conference

Highly doubt it. They would lose access to a football AQ for starters.

Considering the objections W&L has raised over multiple decades to private schools it considers beneath W&L academically, I can't imagine they would deign to join a conference made up of state schools.

Yes, W&L would not leave the ODAC for a conference featuring schools with even worse academic profiles.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on January 09, 2022, 08:41:38 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on January 09, 2022, 07:16:30 PM
So we're really like a good 2-0 weekend from a sub .500 Tufts team being ranked? Doesn't that seem a little severe?

What's weirder? The fact that a 6-7 Tufts men's basketball team could be in the Top 25, or the fact that all 4 of Tufts's wins so far came on neutral courts?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 10, 2022, 05:40:11 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=5ihxb/a3usqzm5ioe26odq.jpg)

Schedules throughout Division III have become a moving target. We are all used to seeing some postponements or cancelations this time of year thanks to Mother Nature, but these mass changes are giving some PTSD to the 2020-21 "season."

Monday night on Hoopsville, we chat with teams who are still playing for now. Plus those who may deserve a little more attention thanks to tremendous starts to their seasons. And hear from those who are steadily flying slightly under the radar.

We also take a look at all the postponements and cancelations and discuss what may or may not happen as we move forward with the season.

Plus, we react to the latest D3hoops.com Top 25 polls released on Monday.

You can watch the show LIVE (or on demand) here: https://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2021-22/jan10

We are also simulcasting on our Facebook Live page (www.facebook.com/Hoopsville (http://www.facebook.com/Hoopsville)) AND tonight on our YouTube page (http://www.youtube.com/Hoopsville (http://www.youtube.com/Hoopsville))

Guests include (order subject to change):
- Klay Knueppel, No. 25 Wisconsin Lutheran women's coach
- Trevor Lydic, Berry men's interim coach
- Tyler Simms, Clark men's coach
- Bob Quillman & Ryan Scott, Top 25 Double-Take

Hoopsville is hosted by Dave McHugh from the the NABC Studio. It is presented by D3hoops.com and thanks to our partner WBCA. All guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions, ideas, or want to interact with the show, feel free to send them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options available.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Video Portal (and archives): www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3sports.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: thebear on January 10, 2022, 06:36:19 PM

Pardon my curiosity, but why is Rensselaer [RPI] ranked in the top 25 and Oswego not. Oswego is 47 in Massey, RPI is 56. Oswego has won their head to head matchup on a neutral court. Matt Snyder has Oswego ranked 1st in Region III with a Ratings Percentage Index [RPI] of .643 and a national rank of 18. Rensselaer has an RPI of .632 and a national rank of 26. Oswego also has a stronger SOS, and NC SOS. Snyder has then #1 in Region III, which includes Yeshiva who's RPI is .590 and Snyder rank of 72. Lakers last three wins were over teams with a combined 22-7 record. Just curious how thorough the voters are researching their rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on January 10, 2022, 06:51:10 PM

Quote from: thebear on January 10, 2022, 06:36:19 PM
Pardon my curiosity, but why is Rensselaer [RPI] ranked in the top 25 and Oswego not. Oswego is 47 in Massey, RPI is 56. Oswego has won their head to head matchup on a neutral court. Matt Snyder has Oswego ranked 1st in Region III with a Ratings Percentage Index [RPI] of .643 and a national rank of 18. Rensselaer has an RPI of .632 and a national rank of 26. Oswego also has a stronger SOS, and NC SOS. Snyder has then #1 in Region III, which includes Yeshiva who's RPI is .590 and Snyder rank of 72. Lakers last three wins were over teams with a combined 22-7 record. Just curious how thorough the voters are researching their rankings.

I wouldn't worry too much about the difference between RPI and Oswego. RPI has 41 points in the poll this week, while Oswego has 28 points. Apparently, some voters do believe that both teams are Top 25 teams, but not enough voters think that Oswego is a top 25 team. Many different methodologies between voters in ranking Top 25 teams. Ryan has his methodology, Dave McHugh has his methodology, PoppersMacsLive has his methodology, and TitanQ has his methodology. There are also other voters who prefer to remain private about their methodolgies in ranking the teams. The important thing is that they watch a lot of DIII basketball being played across the country. I have learned over many years not to pull my hair out over teams ranked in the bottom of the poll or those teams receiving votes, but not enough votes to be ranked.

The important thing is to play your best basketball in late February or March when it comes to crunch time in the conference tournaments (which most conferences have) or NCAA tournaments.

Apparently, thebear, you side with the voters who think that Oswego is a top 25 team, and that is fine.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 10, 2022, 08:20:29 PM

Quote from: thebear on January 10, 2022, 06:36:19 PM
Pardon my curiosity, but why is Rensselaer [RPI] ranked in the top 25 and Oswego not. Oswego is 47 in Massey, RPI is 56. Oswego has won their head to head matchup on a neutral court. Matt Snyder has Oswego ranked 1st in Region III with a Ratings Percentage Index [RPI] of .643 and a national rank of 18. Rensselaer has an RPI of .632 and a national rank of 26. Oswego also has a stronger SOS, and NC SOS. Snyder has then #1 in Region III, which includes Yeshiva who's RPI is .590 and Snyder rank of 72. Lakers last three wins were over teams with a combined 22-7 record. Just curious how thorough the voters are researching their rankings.

Very few voters ever look at Massey. That's a relatively irrelevant piece of data. Oswego beat RPI without Mahoney. I've had Oswego ahead of RPI even before that game, so I've left them there - but I can very easily see people writing off the loss because of the lineup.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: stlawus on January 10, 2022, 08:26:27 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 10, 2022, 08:20:29 PM
Quote from: thebear on January 10, 2022, 06:36:19 PM
Pardon my curiosity, but why is Rensselaer [RPI] ranked in the top 25 and Oswego not. Oswego is 47 in Massey, RPI is 56. Oswego has won their head to head matchup on a neutral court. Matt Snyder has Oswego ranked 1st in Region III with a Ratings Percentage Index [RPI] of .643 and a national rank of 18. Rensselaer has an RPI of .632 and a national rank of 26. Oswego also has a stronger SOS, and NC SOS. Snyder has then #1 in Region III, which includes Yeshiva who's RPI is .590 and Snyder rank of 72. Lakers last three wins were over teams with a combined 22-7 record. Just curious how thorough the voters are researching their rankings.

Very few voters ever look at Massey. That's a relatively irrelevant piece of data. Oswego beat RPI without Mahoney. I've had Oswego ahead of RPI even before that game, so I've left them there - but I can very easily see people writing off the loss because of the lineup.

Oswego was without starting PG Ahkee Anderson and starting center Jordan Brown. If voters are writing that loss off because of the lineup then they shouldn't be voters since it's really easy to see that Oswego had personnel losses as well. There's always an excuse from the voters when it comes to east region teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 10, 2022, 10:00:28 PM

And the problem I have with voting for Oswego, as I've stated on Hoopsville several times now ... they beat RPI ... who beat Nazareth ... who beat Oswego ... and all three are having good seasons ... but I don't have the room to put all three on my ballot because I think highly of all those on my Top 25.

I have room for one or two, but right now I can't split Oswego, Nazareth, and RPI enough to warrant only putting one or two of them in.

If I did have to put one of the three, it likely would be Oswego, but I am not ready to do so. Let's see where SUNYAC play takes things.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: stlawus on January 10, 2022, 10:03:35 PM

Those are good arguments against voting for Oswego. I just think that it's a poor excuse to not rank Oswego simply due to them beating RPI without Mahoney when Oswego had players missing too. There might not even be a voter who used this as an excuse and I could just be arguing with myself, but if there is then that is a poor methodology.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: AllStar on January 10, 2022, 11:50:43 PM

In what universe does Tufts at 4-7 deserve Top 25 votes?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 11, 2022, 07:41:02 AM

Quote from: AllStar on January 10, 2022, 11:50:43 PM
In what universe does Tufts at 4-7 deserve Top 25 votes?

They're 2-0 with Luke Rogers back in the lineup and his return seems to have helped the guards find their way, as well. They're the NESCAC team I have the most confidence in right now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 11, 2022, 09:20:35 AM

I just feel like a Top 25 has to reflect actual performance and not just theoretical potential based on prior seasons, especially when the season is half over. And if you are looking at performance, Tufts is WAY behind Wesleyan, Williams, Middlebury and Amherst. And it might be one thing if Tufts had actually BEATEN any of those teams with Rogers. But they've yet to play a really good team with him in the lineup other than UMD -- and with him, they lost the first half of that game by double-digits. The last two games were against one mediocre (last place in its league but has played a very tough schedule) and one bad team. I'm also not really sure what you mean about the Tufts guards playing better with him. Against Simpson (again, not a good team), starting perimeter players Brennan Morris went 0-4, Will Brady went 2-7, and Tyler Aronson went 1-8.

I was very high on Tufts to start the year. But their defense is (per the usual) not terribly good and they have really struggled to shoot the ball. 25 mpg of Rogers isn't going to magically cure all of their shooting woes. Their best shooter this year has been Jay Dieterle, but he's missed the last five games, so presumably has some sort of significant injury. The guys who are struggling to hit 3's have struggled the entire year, with or without Rogers (Morris, 23 percent, Cohen, 22 percent, Brady, 24 percent, Aronson, 28 percent). Now the upside for Tufts is for those guys to start hitting shots -- especially Morris, whose struggles are especially cryptic as he's been a knock-down shooter for his entire career and was expected to be at worst a borderline all-league guy. But those guys -- all of whom are in their fourth or fifth year in the program -- have to SHOW it a few times against good teams, because as of now, it's all just theoretical. If Tufts sweeps Hamilton and Amherst on the road this weekend and Morris rediscovers his shooting touch (and/or Dieterle returns and looks great), then I think there can at least start to be a conversation about them, because I could see them going on a pretty good roll given the schedule they face for the following few weeks after that. But right now, they are a 4-7 team that plays the worst D in NESCAC and shoots sub-30 percent from 3 on the year.

And to put them ahead of Williams, Amherst, Wesleyan, and Midd at this point? I just don't see it. Wesleyan and Williams each have only one loss and Wesleyan (which has been killing most teams) has big wins v. WPI and at Amherst, and Williams had a big win at Wesleyan. They both defend MUCH better than Tufts and shoot it way better as well. Midd has been playing better and better and Alex Sobel has been playing like a first-team all-American all year (at this point Rogers is certainly well behind him, individually, although Tufts does have a lot more depth than Midd). Amherst has three losses (a lot better than 7), and just beat Williams on the road, took Wesleyan to triple OT with a fairly depleted lineup, and if you want to focus on injuries, Grant Robinson being out for Amherst (when Amherst lost two games and although he played v. Midd, it was his first game back and I imagine he was rusty) was just as big as Luke Rogers being out for Tufts.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 11, 2022, 10:02:48 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 11, 2022, 07:41:02 AM
They're 2-0 with Luke Rogers back in the lineup and his return seems to have helped the guards find their way, as well. They're the NESCAC team I have the most confidence in right now.

This maybe your wildest take yet...and you have had some wild takes...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 11, 2022, 10:05:23 AM

Tufts gained way too many points between the last two polls considering what they did on the floor (exactly zero).

We are not halfway through the season, however.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on January 11, 2022, 10:18:22 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 11, 2022, 10:05:23 AM
Tufts gained way too many points between the last two polls considering what they did on the floor (exactly zero).

We are not halfway through the season, however.

Looks like when Tufts entered the Nashville holiday tournament at 2-7, and then went 2-0 in Nashville when Luke Rogers returned, that is exactly zero. (Tufts got 9 points in the January 2 poll with the 2 wins, and then gained an extra point this week without playing any games.) I wouldn't have voted Tufts Top 25 right now either as they are too far down the rabbit hole, but YMMV.

(To be technical, these games were played in the Nashville suburb of Gallatin, but I am calling it the Nashville holiday tournament and referring to "Nashville" as the area of the tournament.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Bucket on January 11, 2022, 10:54:40 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 11, 2022, 10:05:23 AM
Tufts gained way too many points between the last two polls considering what they did on the floor (exactly zero).

We are not halfway through the season, however.

LOL. Talk about splitting hairs. Tufts has played 11 games and has 13 remaining. So, after their next game, the Jumbos will be . . . halfway through their season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on January 11, 2022, 11:02:39 AM

Yeah I have no problem thinking that Tufts is one of the top 25 teams in the country with Rogers on the floor---for the record I would disagree with, but I don't mind the logic---I just don't think you can immediately throw them in there without actual results. If the results didn't matter, why play the games?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 11, 2022, 11:13:33 AM

Quote from: Bucket on January 11, 2022, 10:54:40 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 11, 2022, 10:05:23 AM
Tufts gained way too many points between the last two polls considering what they did on the floor (exactly zero).

We are not halfway through the season, however.

LOL. Talk about splitting hairs. Tufts has played 11 games and has 13 remaining. So, after their next game, the Jumbos will be . . . halfway through their season.

The schedule for a Top 25 team typically includes a couple of conference tournament games, so I am generally thinking the season for teams here is more like 26 or 27.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 11, 2022, 11:14:51 AM

Quote from: deiscanton on January 11, 2022, 10:18:22 AM
(Tufts got 9 points in the January 2 poll with the 2 wins, and then gained an extra point this week without playing any games.)

Thanks for that -- in my brain, Tufts had 6 points the previous week, but you are correct, it was 9. Going from 9 to 10 is not as severe.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 11, 2022, 11:38:21 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 11, 2022, 11:14:51 AM
Quote from: deiscanton on January 11, 2022, 10:18:22 AM
(Tufts got 9 points in the January 2 poll with the 2 wins, and then gained an extra point this week without playing any games.)

Thanks for that -- in my brain, Tufts had 6 points the previous week, but you are correct, it was 9. Going from 9 to 10 is not as severe.

I moved Whitworth down a few slots, so Tufts got bumped one by default, since I tried, but couldn't find a team I particularly wanted to jump up into Whitworth's former place.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 11, 2022, 11:48:31 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 11, 2022, 09:20:35 AM
I just feel like a Top 25 has to reflect actual performance and not just theoretical potential based on prior seasons, especially when the season is half over. And if you are looking at performance, Tufts is WAY behind Wesleyan, Williams, Middlebury and Amherst.

I don't quite look at the poll the same way. I always feel I'm trying to predict future performance with the poll - how likely is one team to beat another if they meet in the future. If I'm comparing two teams in the poll, my general mindset is "if they played 100 times, who would I expect to win more often."

In that sense, I definitely use past performance from the season to influence and weigh those decisions, but not exclusively so. You watch more NESCAC than me, so you're probably more correct. I've just been underwhelmed with the performance of the other teams in the conference thus far, especially when it comes to consistency. I know Tufts hasn't had much opportunity to look great, but I still have slightly more faith in them than the others at this moment. Obviously there are games coming up soon that could change that. As I said on Hoopsville last night, I think it has much more to do with my lack of trust in some of the other teams at 15-40 than it does my total commitment to Tufts.

For all of the many odd reasons we have this year, it feels like its just taking longer for teams to figure out who they are. I don't mind being wrong.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on January 11, 2022, 10:01:02 PM

Check out my breakdown, analysis, and opinions on the Week 5 Top 25 poll here:
https://www.macslive.com/post/d3hoops-top-25-week-5-breakdown-analysis-and-opinions (https://www.macslive.com/post/d3hoops-top-25-week-5-breakdown-analysis-and-opinions)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on January 11, 2022, 10:12:50 PM

Isn't the poll based on past results of the current season. The only poll that is based on future results is the preseason poll. I honestly don't pay too much attention to the poll, that's just my thought of what a poll is. If the #1 team loses, that usually reflects on the next week's poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on January 12, 2022, 11:22:14 AM

CNU just added a home game vs TCNJ on Monday Jan 17th 3pm.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 13, 2022, 07:01:47 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	615	Randolph-Macon	11-1	def. Eastern Mennonite, 82-55; 01/15 vs. T#39 Lynchburg
#2	607	UW-Platteville	15-0	~~01/12 at #35 UW-Whitewater~~ postponed; 01/15 vs. UW-Stevens Point
#3	569	Illinois Wesleyan	10-2	def. Millikin, 78-67; 01/15 vs. Augustana
#4	489	Washington U.	10-1	01/14 at #25 Emory; 01/16 at Rochester
#5	484	Yeshiva	14-1	IDLE
#6	481	UW-Oshkosh	13-2	~~01/12 vs. UW-Stevens Point~~ canceled; 01/15 at UW-Stout
#7	470	St. Joseph (Conn.)	9-0	~~01/12 at Elms~~ postponed; 01/15 vs. Colby-Sawyer
#8	450	Marietta	11-2	def. #14 Mount Union, 84-59; 01/15 vs. #19 Heidelberg
#9	422	Christopher Newport	14-2	IDLE
#10	396	Wheaton (Ill.)	12-3	LOST to Augustana, 73-79; 01/15 vs. North Central (Ill.)
#11	386	UW-La Crosse	12-2	def. UW-River Falls, 77-66; 01/15 at UW-Eau Claire
#12	366	Johns Hopkins	9-2	LOST to #16 Swarthmore, 69-78; 01/13 vs. McDaniel; 01/15 at Ursinus
#13	296	Elmhurst	11-2	~~01/12 vs. Carthage~~ postponed
#14	294	Mount Union	10-2	LOST at #8 Marietta, 59-84; 01/15 vs. Otterbein
#15	230	Roanoke	9-3	LOST at Guilford, 53-58; 01/15 vs. Washington and Lee
#16	226	Swarthmore	12-1	won at #12 Johns Hopkins, 78-69; 01/13 vs. Washington College; 01/15 at Gettysburg
#17	216	Mary Hardin-Baylor	12-1	01/13 at East Texas Baptist; 01/15 at Belhaven
#18	192	Maryville (Tenn.)	11-1	01/14 vs. Brevard
#19	178	Heidelberg	11-1	def. Capital, 87-66; 01/15 at #8 Marietta
#20	165	Whitworth	9-2	01/14 vs. Puget Sound; 01/15 vs. Pacific Lutheran
#21	136	Wesleyan	13-1	01/14 vs. Trinity (Conn.); 01/16 at Connecticut College
#22	88	Williams	10-1	01/14 at Bowdoin; 01/15 at Colby
#23	85	WPI	11-1	def. Babson, 88-57; 01/15 at Emerson
#24	41	RPI	9-1	01/14 at Clarkson; 01/15 at St. Lawrence
#25	40	Emory	8-3	01/14 vs. #4 Washington U.; 01/16 vs. Chicago

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	39	Case Western Reserve	11-1	01/14 at New York University; ~~01/16 at T#39 Brandeis~~ postponed
#27	28	Oswego	11-1	won at Buffalo State, 109-72; 01/13 at SUNY Potsdam; 01/14 at Plattsburgh State
#28	17	Hardin-Simmons	10-2	01/13 at Howard Payne; 01/15 at Sul Ross State
#29	16	DeSales	13-1	~~01/12 vs. King's~~ postponed; 01/15 at Lycoming
#30	14	Trinity (Texas)	11-2	def. University of Dallas, 74-65; 01/13 at St. Thomas (Texas); 01/15 at Colorado College
T#31	12	LeTourneau	11-2	~~01/13 vs. University of the Ozarks~~ canceled
T#31	12	Amherst	9-3	~~01/11 vs. Lesley~~ canceled; 01/14 vs. Bates; 01/15 vs. #34 Tufts
#33	11	Wartburg	13-2	def. Coe, 76-72; 01/15 vs. Buena Vista
#34	10	Tufts	4-7	~~01/10 vs. Mass-Boston~~ postponed; 01/14 at Hamilton; 01/15 at T#31 Amherst
#35	9	UW-Whitewater	11-4	~~01/12 vs. #2 UW-Platteville~~ postponed; 01/15 at UW-River Falls
T#36	8	Berry	11-2	01/14 vs. Centre; 01/16 vs. Sewanee
T#36	8	Augsburg	11-2	~~01/10 vs. St. Mary's (Minn.)~~ canceled; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 76-60; 01/15 at St. John's
#38	6	Nazareth	11-1	01/14 at Elmira; 01/15 vs. Utica
T#39	3	Brandeis	7-2	~~01/14 vs. Carnegie Mellon~~ postponed; ~~01/16 vs. #26 Case Western Reserve~~ postponed
T#39	3	Lynchburg	8-3	01/15 at #1 Randolph-Macon
T#41	2	Chapman	9-1	~~01/12 vs. La Verne~~ canceled; 01/15 vs. Claremont-Mudd-Scripps
T#41	2	Clark	12-1	LOST to Emerson, 59-72; 01/15 at Coast Guard
T#41	2	Mass-Dartmouth	8-2	01/15 vs. Castleton
#44	1	Middlebury	10-2	01/14 at Colby; 01/15 at Bowdoin

12 postponements 8 cancellations

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 13, 2022, 11:31:47 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=5o1qw/tjqzhjvixk205jq4.jpg)

Believe it or not, the Division III basketball season is basically at it's midway point - at least in terms of games played for most teams. Now everyone's focus turns towards the end of February and positioning themselves for conference tournaments and hopefully NCAA glory.

If COVID will allow, of course.

On Thursday's edition of Hoopsville, we talk with a few programs who appear to be in very good position midway through January. Of course, each will likely tell us there is a long way to go.

Plus we debut the women's edition of the Top 25 Double-Take. Gordon Mann and Riley Zayas, of Tru to the Cru, join the show with their Dubious, Deep Dive, and Debatable teams throughout Division III.

Watch the show On Demand here: https://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2021-22/jan13

Or the simulcast versions on our Facebook Live page (www.facebook.com/Hoopsville (http://www.facebook.com/Hoopsville)) and YouTube page (http://www.youtube.com/Hoopsville (http://www.youtube.com/Hoopsville))

Guests include:
- Aaron Griess, Augsburg men's coach
- Doreen Carden, Albion women's coach
- Dan Pruessner, Eastern men's coach
- Michele Davis, Utica women's coach
- Women's Top 25 Double-Take: Gordon Mann, D3hoops.com, Riley Zayas, True to the Cru

Hoopsville is hosted by Dave McHugh from the the NABC Studio. It is presented by D3hoops.com and thanks to our partner WBCA. All guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions, ideas, or want to interact with the show, feel free to send them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options available.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Video Portal (and archives): www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3sports.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 16, 2022, 06:52:10 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	615	Randolph-Macon	12-1	def. Eastern Mennonite, 82-55; def. T#39 Lynchburg, 84-65
#2	607	UW-Platteville	16-0	~~01/12 at #35 UW-Whitewater~~ postponed; def. UW-Stevens Point, 89-78
#3	569	Illinois Wesleyan	11-2	def. Millikin, 78-67; def. Augustana, 83-78
#4	489	Washington U.	12-1	won at #25 Emory, 72-61; won at Rochester, 70-61
#5	484	Yeshiva	14-1	IDLE
#6	481	UW-Oshkosh	13-2	~~01/12 vs. UW-Stevens Point~~ canceled; ~~01/15 at UW-Stout~~ canceled
#7	470	St. Joseph (Conn.)	10-0	~~01/12 at Elms~~ postponed; def. Colby-Sawyer, 103-62
#8	450	Marietta	12-2	def. #14 Mount Union, 84-59; def. #19 Heidelberg, 100-84
#9	422	Christopher Newport	14-2	IDLE
#10	396	Wheaton (Ill.)	13-3	LOST to Augustana, 73-79; def. North Central (Ill.), 83-79
#11	386	UW-La Crosse	13-2	def. UW-River Falls, 77-66; won at UW-Eau Claire, 67-60
#12	366	Johns Hopkins	11-2	LOST to #16 Swarthmore, 69-78; def. McDaniel, 70-65; won at Ursinus, 99-90
#13	296	Elmhurst	11-2	~~01/12 vs. Carthage~~ postponed
#14	294	Mount Union	11-2	LOST at #8 Marietta, 59-84; def. Otterbein, 74-59
#15	230	Roanoke	9-4	LOST at Guilford, 53-58; LOST to Washington and Lee, 57-77
#16	226	Swarthmore	14-1	won at #12 Johns Hopkins, 78-69; def. Washington College, 98-47; won at Gettysburg, 78-63
#17	216	Mary Hardin-Baylor	12-2	LOST at East Texas Baptist, 72-81; ~~01/15 at Belhaven~~ canceled
#18	192	Maryville (Tenn.)	12-1	def. Brevard, 98-74
#19	178	Heidelberg	11-2	def. Capital, 87-66; LOST at #8 Marietta, 84-100
#20	165	Whitworth	11-2	def. Puget Sound, 93-77; def. Pacific Lutheran, 97-69
#21	136	Wesleyan	15-1	def. Trinity (Conn.), 82-74; won at Connecticut College, 84-64
#22	88	Williams	12-1	won at Bowdoin, 82-53; won at Colby, 74-58
#23	85	WPI	12-1	def. Babson, 88-57; won at Emerson, 79-68
#24	41	RPI	11-1	won at Clarkson, 80-63; won at St. Lawrence, 59-41
#25	40	Emory	9-4	LOST to #4 Washington U., 61-72; def. Chicago, 83-68

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	39	Case Western Reserve	12-1	won at New York University, 98-71; ~~01/16 at T#39 Brandeis~~ postponed
#27	28	Oswego	13-1	won at Buffalo State, 109-72; won at SUNY Potsdam, 76-58; won at Plattsburgh State, 109-70
#28	17	Hardin-Simmons	10-4	LOST at Howard Payne, 60-75; LOST at Sul Ross State, 79-81
#29	16	DeSales	14-1	~~01/12 vs. King's~~ postponed; won at Lycoming, 54-53
#30	14	Trinity (Texas)	12-3	def. University of Dallas, 74-65; LOST at St. Thomas (Texas), 51-59; won at Colorado College, 80-76
T#31	12	LeTourneau	11-2	~~01/13 vs. University of the Ozarks~~ canceled
T#31	12	Amherst	10-4	~~01/11 vs. Lesley~~ canceled; def. Bates, 63-58; LOST to #34 Tufts, 66-74
#33	11	Wartburg	13-3	def. Coe, 76-72; LOST to Buena Vista, 84-88
#34	10	Tufts	5-8	~~01/10 vs. Mass-Boston~~ postponed; LOST at Hamilton, 64-77; won at T#31 Amherst, 74-66
#35	9	UW-Whitewater	11-5	~~01/12 vs. #2 UW-Platteville~~ postponed; LOST at UW-River Falls, 60-76
T#36	8	Berry	11-2	~~01/14 vs. Centre~~ canceled; ~~01/16 vs. Sewanee~~ canceled
T#36	8	Augsburg	12-2	~~01/10 vs. St. Mary's (Minn.)~~ canceled; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 76-60; won at St. John's, 67-66
#38	6	Nazareth	13-1	won at Elmira, 70-60; def. Utica, 79-39
T#39	3	Brandeis	7-2	~~01/14 vs. Carnegie Mellon~~ postponed; ~~01/16 vs. #26 Case Western Reserve~~ postponed
T#39	3	Lynchburg	8-4	LOST at #1 Randolph-Macon, 65-84
T#41	2	Chapman	9-2	~~01/12 vs. La Verne~~ canceled; LOST to Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 69-75
T#41	2	Clark	13-1	LOST to Emerson, 59-72; won at Coast Guard, 96-90
T#41	2	Mass-Dartmouth	9-2	def. Castleton, 90-68
#44	1	Middlebury	12-2	won at Colby, 81-66; won at Bowdoin, 78-64

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 17, 2022, 04:21:50 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=5vdn3/ygrt8a4adhj2pw2f.jpg)

Suddenly we are midway through January and in just six weeks the conversation will be about who is in or out of the NCAA Tournaments. Conference schedules intensify as teams try and position themselves for conference tournaments.

All this while COVID still impacts games and changes conference rules or allowances for postseason tournaments.

On Monday's edition of Hoopsville, we talk to a few more teams still flying a bit under the radar along with one who is just hoping to survive the conference schedule in the best shape as possible.
Plus, we react to the latest Top 25 men's poll in the Double-Take with Ryan Scott,D3hoops.com, and Bob Quillman, IWUHoops.com. And we preview not only the upcoming NCAA Convention but our special on the topic.

You can watch the show LIVE (or on demand) here: https://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2021-22/jan17

We are also simulcasting on our Facebook Live page (www.facebook.com/Hoopsville (http://www.facebook.com/Hoopsville)) and YouTube page (http://www.youtube.com/Hoopsville (http://www.youtube.com/Hoopsville))

Guests include (order subject to change):
- Steve Lanpham, Randolph women's coach
- Don Friday, PSU-Harrisburg men's coach
- Andy Yosinoff, Emmanuel women's coach
- Ron Rose, No. 4 Illinois Wesleyan men's coach
- Men's Top 25 Double-Take: Ryan Scott, D3hoops.com, and Bob Quillman, IWUHoops.com

Hoopsville is hosted by Dave McHugh from the the NABC Studio. It is presented by D3hoops.com and thanks to our partner WBCA. All guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions, ideas, or want to interact with the show, feel free to send them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options available.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Video Portal (and archives): www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3sports.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 18, 2022, 10:20:40 AM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=5w1vg/ix2avwecb0ua1b5f.jpg)

The annual NCAA Convention is this week and it is one of the most important gatherings of Association membership in the modern history of the NCAA. While a lot of eyes will be on Division I, all three Divisions must vote on a new NCAA Constitution. Division III has played an important role in crafting the new constitution as those in the division try and position DIII for the future.

And while the new NCAA Constitution will garner much of the attention this week in Indianapolis, it isn't the only piece of business that Division III needs to consider. There are a number of pieces of legislation DIII presidents, commissioners, and athletics directors will debate and likely vote on as well. Some of those items could have huge impacts on Division III including the sport of basketball.

In this special edition of Hoopsville, Dave McHugh gathers three ADs and a commissioner to have a round table discussion, and get insight, on the Constitution, DIII's role, and the legislation that will be considered. Plus, we react to what is ahead for DIII and the impact some of the legislation could have on DIII and it's student-athletes.

You can watch the show On Demand here: https://www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2021-22/ncaa_convention

Guests include:
- Dr. Angel Mason, Director of Athletics for Berry College
- Jason Fein, Director of Athletics for Bates College
- Stefanie 'Stevie' Baker-Watson, Associate Vice President for Wellness and Director of Athletics at DePauw University
- Brad Bankston, Commissioner of the Old Dominion Athletic Conference, former DIII Management Council and Championships Committee member
- Pat Coleman, Editor-in-Chief for D3sports.com

Hoopsville is hosted by Dave McHugh from the the NABC Studio. It is presented by D3hoops.com and thanks to our partner WBCA. All guests are featured on the BlueFrame Technology Hoopsville Hotline.

If you have questions, ideas, or want to interact with the show, feel free to send them to hoopsville@d3sports.com or use any of the social media options available.

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts, choose your favorite avenue to listen and/or subscribe via the the following four avenues (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/zp2t977dsfqmq2ng.jpg) (https://apple.co/2E9e0Bl)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/7jdya7ckqexrfad3.jpg) (http://bit.ly/2rFfr7Z)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gzu/0qxioniqi7kizek9.jpg) (https://spoti.fi/2qoExnV)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/qlios5f6juz7tij9.jpg) (https://www.iheart.com/podcast/256-hoopsville-30984615/)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkf/otimp41swikeb9uf.jpg) (https://castbox.fm/app/castbox/player/id332395)

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=300/mh=150/cr=n/d=40gkg/vpaw3ejt1tsc9r48.jpg) (https://radiopublic.com/hoopsville-6nkZN8)

We also have the podcast now on Tune-In (https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Hoopsville-p1153539/) and others coming. We will update them once we have better abilities to do so.

Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Video Portal (and archives): www.team1sports.com/Hoopsville
Twitter: @d3hoopsville (http://www.twitter.com/d3hoopsville) or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3sports.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/d3hoopsville

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on January 18, 2022, 02:11:14 PM

Yeshiva and Saint Joseph will make up their games vs Top 25 opponents which were cancelled (Williams and Marietta respectively) by playing each other on 2/17 at 8PM. Game will be at Yeshiva.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 19, 2022, 09:14:16 AM

Multiple wins against the current D3hoops.com MBB Top 25:
* Illinois Wesleyan = 3
* Marietta = 3
* UW-Platteville = 2
* Christopher Newport = 2

Most wins against the current Massey Top 50:
* Randolph Macon = 7
* Illinois Wesleyan = 6
* Christopher Newport =5
* Marietta = 5

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 20, 2022, 02:34:06 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	618	Randolph-Macon	13-1	won at Shenandoah, 92-54; 01/22 at Ferrum
#2	606	UW-Platteville	16-1	LOST to #5 UW-Oshkosh, 67-83; 01/22 at UW-Stout
#3	564	Illinois Wesleyan	13-2	def. #12 Elmhurst, 80-76; won at North Park, 63-58; 01/22 at Carroll
#4	547	Washington U.	12-1	01/21 vs. New York University; 01/23 vs. Brandeis
#5	484	UW-Oshkosh	14-2	won at #2 UW-Platteville, 83-67; 01/22 vs. UW-River Falls
#6	483	Marietta	13-2	won at Capital, 81-69; 01/22 at Ohio Northern
#7	469	Yeshiva	14-1	IDLE
#8	449	St. Joseph (Conn.)	11-0	def. Lasell, 90-56; 01/20 at St. Joseph's (Maine); 01/22 at Rivier
#9	437	Christopher Newport	15-2	def. TCNJ, 89-52; 01/21 at UC Santa Cruz; 01/22 at UC Santa Cruz
#10	409	UW-La Crosse	14-2	won at UW-Whitewater, 79-61; 01/22 vs. UW-Stevens Point
#11	354	Swarthmore	15-1	won at Ursinus, 78-61; 01/22 at Dickinson
#12	296	Elmhurst	12-3	LOST at #3 Illinois Wesleyan, 76-80; won at Augustana, 86-66; 01/22 at #14 Wheaton (Ill.)
#13	290	Johns Hopkins	12-2	won at Franklin and Marshall, 77-60; 01/22 vs. Muhlenberg
#14	253	Wheaton (Ill.)	13-4	LOST at Millikin, 51-76; 01/22 vs. #12 Elmhurst
#15	243	Wesleyan	15-1	01/22 at T#36 Mass-Dartmouth
#16	241	Maryville (Tenn.)	13-1	won at Berea, 80-61; 01/23 at LaGrange
#17	219	Mount Union	12-2	def. Muskingum, 72-61; 01/22 at #21 Heidelberg
#18	169	Whitworth	13-2	def. Linfield, 90-43; def. Pacific, 88-72; 01/21 at Lewis and Clark; 01/22 at George Fox
#19	162	WPI	13-1	def. #40 Clark, 74-66; 01/22 at Wheaton (Mass.); 01/23 vs. Hamilton
#20	158	Williams	13-1	won at Amherst, 60-54; 01/22 vs. #28 Middlebury
#21	142	Heidelberg	12-2	won at Ohio Northern, 74-71; 01/22 vs. #17 Mount Union
#22	94	Mary Hardin-Baylor	12-2	01/20 at University of the Ozarks
#23	92	RPI	11-1	01/21 vs. Vassar; 01/22 vs. Skidmore
#24	76	Case Western Reserve	12-1	01/21 vs. #27 Emory; 01/23 vs. T#36 Rochester
#25	52	Oswego State	14-1	def. SUNY Geneseo, 88-63; 01/22 at Cortland

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	36	Augsburg	13-2	won at St. Scholastica, 84-63; 01/22 vs. Hamline
#27	33	Emory	9-4	01/21 at #24 Case Western Reserve; 01/23 at Carnegie Mellon
#28	29	Middlebury	13-2	won at Plymouth State, 76-68; 01/22 at #20 Williams
#29	28	Nazareth	14-1	won at Keuka, 108-71
#30	25	DeSales	15-1	def. Delaware Valley, 90-66; 01/22 at Arcadia
#31	19	LeTourneau	12-2	def. Texas-Dallas, 85-84; 01/20 at Howard Payne; 01/22 at Sul Ross State
T#32	11	Roanoke	10-4	def. Ferrum, 84-60; 01/20 at #34 Lynchburg; 01/22 vs. Hampden-Sydney
T#32	11	Berry	11-2	01/21 at Birmingham-Southern; 01/23 at Millsaps
#34	7	Lynchburg	8-4	01/20 vs. T#32 Roanoke; 01/22 vs. Eastern Mennonite
#35	6	Tufts	6-8	def. New England College, 79-53; 01/22 at Bates
T#36	4	Mass-Dartmouth	11-2	def. Mass-Boston, 88-58; won at Rhode Island College, 80-73 OT; 01/22 vs. #15 Wesleyan
T#36	4	Rochester	9-4	01/21 at Carnegie Mellon; 01/23 at #24 Case Western Reserve
T#38	2	Eastern	13-2	won at Lebanon Valley, 68-54; 01/22 at Messiah
T#38	2	Wabash	12-3	def. DePauw, 96-70
#40	1	Clark	14-2	def. Wheaton (Mass.), 84-70; LOST at #19 WPI, 66-74; 01/22 at Springfield

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 20, 2022, 05:13:53 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=611ke/mscok1a0l4xqkq2p.jpg)

Hoopsville is live on the air tonight starting at 7:00 PM ET.

We will have the following guests:

Todd McGuinness, No. 24 Case Western Reserve men's coach
Margaret White, Marymount women's coach
Top 25 Women's Double-Take with Brendan Gulick and Scott Peterson
Jason Leone, No. 25 Oswego State men's coach
Rich Murphy, Redlands women's coach

Plus the latest from the NCAA Convention and much more.

It is a jam packed show! Tune in starting at 7:00 PM ET here: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2021-22/jan20 - the show will be available on demand and the audio podcast will be available shortly after the show as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 23, 2022, 05:19:18 PM

How They Fared (~~Almost~~ Complete)

~~Berry at Millsaps (currently early second half) will be updated later.~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	618	Randolph-Macon	14-1	won at Shenandoah, 92-54; won at Ferrum, 86-48
#2	606	UW-Platteville	17-1	LOST to #5 UW-Oshkosh, 67-83; won at UW-Stout, 74-72
#3	564	Illinois Wesleyan	14-2	def. #12 Elmhurst, 80-76; won at North Park, 63-58; won at Carroll, 72-54
#4	547	Washington U.	14-1	def. New York University, 97-61; def. Brandeis, 67-53
#5	484	UW-Oshkosh	15-2	won at #2 UW-Platteville, 83-67; def. UW-River Falls, 89-84
#6	483	Marietta	14-2	won at Capital, 81-69; won at Ohio Northern, 80-64
#7	469	Yeshiva	14-1	IDLE
#8	449	St. Joseph (Conn.)	13-0	def. Lasell, 90-56; won at St. Joseph's (Maine), 84-72; won at Rivier, 84-54
#9	437	Christopher Newport	17-2	def. TCNJ, 89-52; won at UC Santa Cruz, 85-62; won at UC Santa Cruz, 66-56
#10	409	UW-La Crosse	15-2	won at UW-Whitewater, 79-61; def. UW-Stevens Point, 64-44
#11	354	Swarthmore	15-2	won at Ursinus, 78-61; LOST at Dickinson, 48-52
#12	296	Elmhurst	12-4	LOST at #3 Illinois Wesleyan, 76-80; won at Augustana, 86-66; LOST at #14 Wheaton (Ill.), 83-84
#13	290	Johns Hopkins	13-2	won at Franklin and Marshall, 77-60; def. Muhlenberg, 83-63
#14	253	Wheaton (Ill.)	14-4	LOST at Millikin, 51-76; def. #12 Elmhurst, 84-83
#15	243	Wesleyan	15-2	LOST at T#36 Mass-Dartmouth, 94-104
#16	241	Maryville (Tenn.)	14-1	won at Berea, 80-61; won at LaGrange, 82-74
#17	219	Mount Union	13-2	def. Muskingum, 72-61; won at #21 Heidelberg, 82-56
#18	169	Whitworth	15-2	def. Linfield, 90-43; def. Pacific, 88-72; won at Lewis and Clark, 92-67; won at George Fox, 80-78
#19	162	WPI	15-1	def. #40 Clark, 74-66; won at Wheaton (Mass.), 80-77; def. Hamilton, 65-45
#20	158	Williams	14-1	won at Amherst, 60-54; def. #28 Middlebury, 78-53
#21	142	Heidelberg	12-3	won at Ohio Northern, 74-71; LOST to #17 Mount Union, 56-82
#22	94	Mary Hardin-Baylor	13-2	won at University of the Ozarks, 85-59
#23	92	RPI	12-2	LOST to Vassar, 56-73; def. Skidmore, 74-59
#24	76	Case Western Reserve	13-2	LOST to #27 Emory, 70-80; def. T#36 Rochester, 74-61
#25	52	Oswego State	15-1	def. SUNY Geneseo, 88-63; won at Cortland, 72-64

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	36	Augsburg	14-2	won at St. Scholastica, 84-63; def. Hamline, 79-69
#27	33	Emory	11-4	won at #24 Case Western Reserve, 80-70; won at Carnegie Mellon, 94-66
#28	29	Middlebury	13-3	won at Plymouth State, 76-68; LOST at #20 Williams, 53-78
#29	28	Nazareth	14-1	won at Keuka, 108-71
#30	25	DeSales	16-1	def. Delaware Valley, 90-66; won at Arcadia, 74-63
#31	19	LeTourneau	14-2	def. Texas-Dallas, 85-84; won at Howard Payne, 95-69; won at Sul Ross State, 98-96
T#32	11	Roanoke	12-4	def. Ferrum, 84-60; won at #34 Lynchburg, 71-54; def. Hampden-Sydney, 70-64
T#32	11	Berry	13-2	won at Birmingham-Southern, 77-74; won at Millsaps, 54-45
#34	7	Lynchburg	9-5	LOST to T#32 Roanoke, 54-71; def. Eastern Mennonite, 76-70
#35	6	Tufts	7-8	def. New England College, 79-53; won at Bates, 71-70
T#36	4	Mass-Dartmouth	12-2	def. Mass-Boston, 88-58; won at Rhode Island College, 80-73 OT; def. #15 Wesleyan, 104-94
T#36	4	Rochester	10-5	won at Carnegie Mellon, 71-60; LOST at #24 Case Western Reserve, 61-74
T#38	2	Eastern	13-3	won at Lebanon Valley, 68-54; LOST at Messiah, 73-83
T#38	2	Wabash	12-3	def. DePauw, 96-70
#40	1	Clark	14-3	def. Wheaton (Mass.), 84-70; LOST at #19 WPI, 66-74; LOST at Springfield, 70-82

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 24, 2022, 11:36:26 AM

Hoopsville is airing at 1:00 PM today and for the next several shows (due to schedule conflicts).

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=680ra/3hdr5hldff6ad7hi.jpg)

Here is what we have on tap today in terms of guests:
- Jordan Olufson, Webster women's coach
- Meg Barber, #9 NYU women's coach
- Sean Foster, Salve Regina men's coach
- Raul Placeres, #16 Maryville men's coach
- Ryan Scott & Mike Rejniak, Men's Top 25 Double-Take

We will recap the NCAA Convention and hit on some other notes as well.

Again, starting at 1:00 PM ET today. Watch the show here (or On Demand if you missed it): www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2021-22/jan24

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WPI89 on January 24, 2022, 04:04:53 PM

What time is the new top 25 generally announced each week?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on January 24, 2022, 04:30:01 PM

It is typically released between 5:30 and 7:30PM Eastern Time

Quote from: WPI89 on January 24, 2022, 04:04:53 PM
What time is the new top 25 generally announced each week?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 24, 2022, 05:45:26 PM

Massey is far from perfect, but it's interesting to compare Massey ratings to the D3hoops top 25 to see which leagues the voters seems more fond of than statistical rankings suggest.

CCIW: 2, 18, and 19 in D3hoops, 8, 23 and 26 in Massey
NESCAC: 14 and 17 in D3hoops, 11 and 12 in Massey
MIAC: zero votes (!) and 23 in D3hoops, 19 and 21 in Massey

Who knows whether the computers will end up being more on-target than the voters, but I do think this year, the top teams in NESCAC and MIAC have been just a bit underrated by the voters, and the top teams in CCIW, a bit consistently overrated, starting in the pre-season, I'd say (three in the top ten) - and as a result, the rankings of Wheaton and Elmhurst have arguably been a bit sticky. CCIW just had a lot of players and teams who were known commodities based on last season, relative to some other teams who have performed really well despite maybe not playing at all last year. I think Williams and Wesleyan are a bit under-rated relative to their results since both of them started the season (fairly) so far under the radar and have relied heavily on some new faces. MIAC, I think, has slipped too much from the attention of voters because of St. Thomas's absence ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on January 24, 2022, 06:45:14 PM

It is fascinating---I totally understand with the pandemic and the fact that we saw some teams last year and some teams didn't play at all, but when was the last time the highest ranked NESCAC team was 14-1 and ranked 14th? That would be an automatic top 5 in just about any other year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on January 24, 2022, 07:24:28 PM

I do think the top 10 is VERY stacked this year, tough for anyone to break into that group, those teams are going to have to start dropping games for anyone to move ahead of them. But I can't really understand how Williams (and not just Williams, a bunch of teams) is behind Hopkins and Maryville. Hopkins has two losses and ZERO wins against teams in the Massey top 100. (Williams has four, including #12). Maryville has the same record as Williams, and only one really good win (a one point win over Hampden Sydney, certainly nowhere near as impressive as wider margin over a better Wesleyan team). 1 through 11, I can't really complain about any of those teams, they have very strong resumes and except for undefeated St. Joe's have played very tough schedules. I think Williams, WPI and Wesleyan all have stronger resumes than either Hopkins or Maryville ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 24, 2022, 08:20:25 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on January 24, 2022, 05:45:26 PM
Massey is far from perfect, but it's interesting to compare Massey ratings to the D3hoops top 25 to see which leagues the voters seems more fond of than statistical rankings suggest.

CCIW: 2, 18, and 19 in D3hoops, 8, 23 and 26 in Massey
NESCAC: 14 and 17 in D3hoops, 11 and 12 in Massey
MIAC: zero votes (!) and 23 in D3hoops, 19 and 21 in Massey

Who knows whether the computers will end up being more on-target than the voters, but I do think this year, the top teams in NESCAC and MIAC have been just a bit underrated by the voters, and the top teams in CCIW, a bit consistently overrated, starting in the pre-season, I'd say (three in the top ten) - and as a result, the rankings of Wheaton and Elmhurst have arguably been a bit sticky. CCIW just had a lot of players and teams who were known commodities based on last season, relative to some other teams who have performed really well despite maybe not playing at all last year. I think Williams and Wesleyan are a bit under-rated relative to their results since both of them started the season (fairly) so far under the radar and have relied heavily on some new faces. MIAC, I think, has slipped too much from the attention of voters because of St. Thomas's absence ...

Massey has always rated the WIAC and MIAC schools quite highly. We don't usually quibble with the WIAC rankings, but the MIAC teams generally seem a little more highly ranked than I at least personally would like.

Best non-conference win for St. John's, River Falls? Sixth place in the WIAC. In previous years, not sure the third-best team in the MIAC gets a lot of votes and rarely ranked. I'm not too upset about SJU not being ranked but sure, they could get some votes somewhere.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on January 25, 2022, 08:24:20 AM

somebody thinks highly of CNU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WPI89 on January 25, 2022, 08:43:01 AM

Quote from: PoppersMacsLive on January 24, 2022, 04:30:01 PM
It is typically released between 5:30 and 7:30PM Eastern Time

Quote from: WPI89 on January 24, 2022, 04:04:53 PM
What time is the new top 25 generally announced each week?

Thanks!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 25, 2022, 09:44:18 AM

Schools with multiple wins vs the Week 7 Top 25:

* Illinois Wesleyan = 3
* Christopher Newport = 2
* Marietta = 2
* RMC = 2
* UW-Oshkosh = 2
* UW-Platteville = 2
* WashU = 2
* Wheaton = 2

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: scottiedawg on January 25, 2022, 09:59:07 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 24, 2022, 08:20:25 PM
Massey has always rated the WIAC and MIAC schools quite highly.

Do we have an idea why?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 25, 2022, 10:05:28 AM

Quote from: scottiedawg on January 25, 2022, 09:59:07 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 24, 2022, 08:20:25 PM
Massey has always rated the WIAC and MIAC schools quite highly.

Do we have an idea why?

They are really good, play good opponents.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 25, 2022, 01:57:21 PM

Quote from: scottiedawg on January 25, 2022, 09:59:07 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 24, 2022, 08:20:25 PM
Massey has always rated the WIAC and MIAC schools quite highly.

Do we have an idea why?

They also tend to have overlap with non d3 schools that are more highly ranked than a lot of d3 opponents. Throw a few d2 and good NAIA schools into a schedule and Massey laps it up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 25, 2022, 03:13:23 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 25, 2022, 01:57:21 PM
Quote from: scottiedawg on January 25, 2022, 09:59:07 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 24, 2022, 08:20:25 PM
Massey has always rated the WIAC and MIAC schools quite highly.

Do we have an idea why?

They also tend to have overlap with non d3 schools that are more highly ranked than a lot of d3 opponents. Throw a few d2 and good NAIA schools into a schedule and Massey laps it up.

This is my take on it as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 25, 2022, 04:24:46 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 25, 2022, 03:13:23 PM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 25, 2022, 01:57:21 PM
Quote from: scottiedawg on January 25, 2022, 09:59:07 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 24, 2022, 08:20:25 PM
Massey has always rated the WIAC and MIAC schools quite highly.

Do we have an idea why?

They also tend to have overlap with non d3 schools that are more highly ranked than a lot of d3 opponents. Throw a few d2 and good NAIA schools into a schedule and Massey laps it up.

This is my take on it as well.

Ryan says it better than I ever can when I try to ... also, Massey doesn't seem to be able to distinguish what is an exhibition game to the DIII and not to a DI, so games either side may or may not be taking seriously but are "real" for someone ... impact the data.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 25, 2022, 05:41:31 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 25, 2022, 04:24:46 PM
Ryan says it better than I ever can when I try to ... also, Massey doesn't seem to be able to distinguish what is an exhibition game to the DIII and not to a DI, so games either side may or may not be taking seriously but are "real" for someone ... impact the data.

I am sure Massey gets the data wrong in some cases, but by and large, Massey does distinguish between divisions.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 25, 2022, 10:01:02 PM

My conversation with Drew Pasteur (@d3bubble) and Matt Snyder (@FFTMAG) about the regional ranking and Pool C pictures across all 10 MBB regions.

Fun stuff...enjoy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5PS0VI_P74&t=81s

0:00 Matt and Drew's D3 story
8:04 The criteria
12:07 Region 1
18:50 Region 2
25:51 Region 3
34:28 Region 4
37:35 Region 5
42:55 Region 6
50:03 Region 7
58:51 Region 8
1:07:03 Region 9
1:15:13 Region 10
1:23:48 Final thoughts

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: txg on January 26, 2022, 08:47:49 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 25, 2022, 01:57:21 PM
Quote from: scottiedawg on January 25, 2022, 09:59:07 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 24, 2022, 08:20:25 PM
Massey has always rated the WIAC and MIAC schools quite highly.

Do we have an idea why?

They also tend to have overlap with non d3 schools that are more highly ranked than a lot of d3 opponents. Throw a few d2 and good NAIA schools into a schedule and Massey laps it up.

I really don't think this is a thing for the MIAC. They only get 5 NC games a year, which are usually some mixture of WIAC, UMAC, and maybe Iowa schools. With trips to tournaments thrown in sometimes. I just perused 5 MIAC schedules and didn't see a single non-D3 opponent.

I don't know about the WIAC in this regard, but are we really saying that its high rating is a quirk of the rating system? It seems like a pretty awesome conference to me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on January 26, 2022, 09:11:34 AM

Quote from: WUPHF on January 25, 2022, 10:05:28 AM
Quote from: scottiedawg on January 25, 2022, 09:59:07 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 24, 2022, 08:20:25 PM
Massey has always rated the WIAC and MIAC schools quite highly.

Do we have an idea why?

They are really good, play good opponents.

Yes, it is this.

I will continue to roll my eyes every time someone suggests the computer formulas are broken...just for the WIAC and MIAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 26, 2022, 09:19:39 AM

I don't think it's a problem, just a reality. I don't consider any non d3 games when I vote for a team, but the computers do. NE non d3 teams tend to be terrible. Non d3 teams in MN, WI, and MI tend to be pretty good. To me it's a perfectly legit explanation, in addition to a lack of real weakness available for non con play. Massey also (for good reasons) tends to value conferences where most teams have winning non con records. That helps.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 26, 2022, 09:41:11 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 26, 2022, 09:19:39 AM
I don't consider any non d3 games when I vote for a team, but the computers do.

Which computers?

Massey allows you to sort by Division and I have to assume that everyone does that, lest they be interested to know that Randolph Macon is the 386th team overall.

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 26, 2022, 09:19:39 AM
Massey also (for good reasons) tends to value conferences where most teams have winning non con records. That helps.

Massey does not factor conference membership in to the ratings. If Yeshiva had the exact same schedule as Oshkosh (that would be fun), they would be rated accordingly.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on January 26, 2022, 09:42:51 AM

The MIAC has always felt like a pretty top heavy league who consistently has the misfortune of having to beat WIAC or CCIW opponents in the NCAA tournament to advance, sometimes early.

Massey currently has them #9, behind the SCIAC. The 3 current top heavies are #19St. John's 13-3, #22Augsburg 14-2, #75Carleton 12-3 (carleton plays both this week btw) This doesn't seem out of line this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 26, 2022, 10:12:10 AM

Quote from: WUPHF on January 26, 2022, 09:41:11 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 26, 2022, 09:19:39 AM
I don't consider any non d3 games when I vote for a team, but the computers do.

Which computers?

Massey allows you to sort by Division and I have to assume that everyone does that, lest they be interested to know that Randolph Macon is the 386th team overall.

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 26, 2022, 09:19:39 AM
Massey also (for good reasons) tends to value conferences where most teams have winning non con records. That helps.

Massey does not factor conference membership in to the ratings. If Yeshiva had the exact same schedule as Oshkosh (that would be fun), they would be rated accordingly.

Massey counts all games, so a good performance against a good D2 team will boost a team more than a similar performance against an overall lower ranked d3 team. Getting good non d3 games and performing will in them boosts your profile.

The conference membership doesn't count for anything on its own, but getting two games against a bunch of teams with winning records does, which is a defacto advantage for being in a good conference. That's all I meant.

The computer rankings depend greatly on who you're playing and those midwest power leagues play much stronger schedules, which boosts those profiles quite a bit.

As I said, it's not a problem or a cheat, it's just reflection of reality. Those teams are just set up to do well in a computer rankings, and those rankings are pretty reliable.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 26, 2022, 10:37:59 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 26, 2022, 10:12:10 AM
Massey counts all games, so a good performance against a good D2 team will boost a team more than a similar performance against an overall lower ranked d3 team. Getting good non d3 games and performing will in them boosts your profile.

This is incorrect, unless you have it sorted for NCAA which surely no one does.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 26, 2022, 11:16:49 AM

Quote from: WUPHF on January 26, 2022, 10:37:59 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 26, 2022, 10:12:10 AM
Massey counts all games, so a good performance against a good D2 team will boost a team more than a similar performance against an overall lower ranked d3 team. Getting good non d3 games and performing will in them boosts your profile.

This is incorrect, unless you have it sorted for NCAA which surely no one does.

They don't exclude non d3 games just because you select them to be listed as only d3.

If you sort by d3 and click on Hope, the games with Cornerstone and Aquinas are still listed there. Massey includes all the games these teams play. It even includes the game with Western Michigan, because it counted for WMU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 26, 2022, 12:22:34 PM

If you click on Hope College, then click on Division III, it will filter out Cornerstone and Aquinas and the overall Division III rating will not change.

If you don't do that, you will notice that Cornerstone and Aquinas remain on the schedule but do not have a rating by their record.

There are problems with Massey (I have seen entire games missing for example), but this is not an issue in the vast majority of records.

If this was not the case, Webster would have a far better strength of schedule than 150 having played a Division I and two Division II schools.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 26, 2022, 01:48:41 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on January 26, 2022, 12:22:34 PM
If you click on Hope College, then click on Division III, it will filter out Cornerstone and Aquinas and the overall Division III rating will not change.

If you don't do that, you will notice that Cornerstone and Aquinas remain on the schedule but do not have a rating by their record.

There are problems with Massey (I have seen entire games missing for example), but this is not an issue in the vast majority of records.

If this was not the case, Webster would have a far better strength of schedule than 150 having played a Division I and two Division II schools.

Just clicking on d3 doesn't change the algorithm. It just shows you the d3 games they've played. You can contact Massey and ask, but I'm pretty confident every game listed on the schedule is factored into the rankings, regardless of how you sort them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 26, 2022, 02:01:24 PM

Clicking on Division III reveals the games that are being fed in to the Hal 9000 super computer.

I can tell you that Carnegie Mellon did not move when they beat a better than average Walsh University.

You can find many cases similar to the Carnegie Mellon and Webster SOS examples that reveal that by and large, Massey is looking at Division III data. I am sure there are problems including missing games, mislabeled provisional teams and so on...

People will always love the D3hoops.com poll, including those who prefer the human element can factor out fluke losses to Webster and such, but Massey is a useful tool that privileges those teams that play hard schedules and win.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 26, 2022, 02:17:58 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 26, 2022, 02:17:06 PM
This.

This is incorrect.

I'll e-mail Ken Massey.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 26, 2022, 02:19:46 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on January 26, 2022, 02:01:24 PM
Clicking on Division III reveals the games that are being fed in to the Hal 9000 super computer.

I can tell you that Carnegie Mellon did not move when they beat a better than average Walsh University.

You can find many cases similar to the Carnegie Mellon and Webster SOS examples that reveal that by and large, Massey is looking at Division III data. I am sure there are problems including missing games, mislabeled provisional teams and so on...

People will always love the D3hoops.com poll, including those who prefer the human element can factor out fluke losses to Webster and such, but Massey is a useful tool that privileges those teams that play hard schedules and win.

This is the last thing I'll say on it. The rating of the individual team doesn't change, regardless of how its sorted. When you're sorting every team in the database, the rating (not the rank) stays exactly the same across the board. Maybe the computer folks can chime in if I'm way off, but I don't know any way Massey could even compile an all-division ranking without including crossover games in there. The number is the number and its based on every game they play.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 26, 2022, 02:29:38 PM

Greg deleted his posts so he must be planning to return with the definitive tome on all things Massey.

By the way, Carnegie Mellon, to continue with that example, is rated No. 835 across all divisions. A simple database with teams properly coded (and some are not) could easily toggle back and forth.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on January 26, 2022, 06:25:57 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on January 26, 2022, 02:29:38 PM
Greg deleted his posts so he must be planning to return with the definitive tome on all things Massey.

Nah, I've just gotta pick and choose my discussions ... and this one looked like it was going to get involved, so I thought twice about it and deleted the post about thirty seconds after hitting the button. You caught it during that brief window and posted it as a quote with your reply.

It's a bit funny, because I've done that before, and this is the first time I've ever been caught (as it were).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 26, 2022, 07:57:23 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on January 26, 2022, 06:25:57 PM
Nah, I've just gotta pick and choose my discussions ... and this one looked like it was going to get involved, so I thought twice about it and deleted the post about thirty seconds after hitting the button. You caught it during that brief window and posted it as a quote with your reply.

Smart, smart!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 27, 2022, 06:37:41 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	623	Randolph-Macon	15-1	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 80-51; 01/27 at Hampden-Sydney; 01/29 at Washington and Lee
#2	577	Illinois Wesleyan	15-3	won at Carthage, 89-72; LOST at #19 Elmhurst, 66-74; 01/29 vs. Concordia-Chicago
#3	566	Washington U.	14-1	01/28 at Carnegie Mellon; 01/30 at #29 Case Western Reserve
#4	542	UW-Oshkosh	15-3	LOST at UW-Eau Claire, 72-74 OT
#5	526	UW-Platteville	18-1	def. #10 UW-La Crosse, 76-72
#6	490	Marietta	15-2	won at Otterbein, 66-57; 01/29 vs. Baldwin Wallace
#7	447	Yeshiva	15-1	won at Mount St. Mary, 89-49; 01/29 at SUNY-Maritime
#8	443	Christopher Newport	18-2	won at William Peace, 91-69
#9	440	St. Joseph (Conn.)	14-0	won at Johnson and Wales, 70-57; 01/28 at Elms; ~~01/29 at Regis (Mass.)~~ postponed
#10	423	UW-La Crosse	15-3	LOST at #5 UW-Platteville, 72-76; 01/29 vs. Bethel
#11	314	Mount Union	15-2	def. La Roche, 81-63; def. John Carroll, 89-80; 01/29 vs. Ohio Northern
#12	307	Johns Hopkins	13-2	01/27 at Gettysburg; 01/29 at #15 Swarthmore
#13	303	Maryville (Tenn.)	14-1	01/27 vs. Covenant; 01/29 vs. Piedmont
#14	236	Williams	14-1	~~01/25 at SUNY New Paltz~~ postponed; 01/28 vs. Connecticut College; 01/29 vs. Trinity (Conn.)
#15	235	Swarthmore	15-2	01/27 vs. Muhlenberg; 01/29 vs. #12 Johns Hopkins
#16	233	Whitworth	15-2	01/28 vs. Willamette
#17	230	WPI	15-2	LOST at Coast Guard, 55-77; 01/29 vs. Springfield
#18	201	Wheaton (Ill.)	15-4	def. Carroll, 94-73; 01/29 at North Central (Ill.)
#19	181	Elmhurst	13-5	LOST at North Central (Ill.), 70-79; def. #2 Illinois Wesleyan, 74-66; 01/29 vs. North Park
#20	144	Wesleyan	16-2	won at T#37 Tufts, 65-64; 01/28 vs. Amherst; 01/30 vs. Hamilton
#21	114	Mary Hardin-Baylor	13-2	01/27 vs. Hardin-Simmons; 01/29 vs. McMurry
#22	112	Oswego State	16-1	won at SUNY Geneseo, 78-68; 01/28 vs. SUNY Oneonta; 01/29 vs. SUNY New Paltz
#23	93	Augsburg	14-2	~~01/26 at Bethel~~ canceled; 01/29 at Carleton
#24	90	Emory	11-4	01/28 vs. T#39 Brandeis; 01/30 vs. New York University
#25	41	Nazareth	14-1	01/28 vs. Alfred; 01/29 at St. John Fisher

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	38	Mass-Dartmouth	13-2	def. Eastern Connecticut, 71-67; 01/28 vs. Western Connecticut
#27	37	Heidelberg	13-3	def. Baldwin Wallace, 65-64; 01/29 at Wilmington
#28	36	DeSales	16-2	LOST to Wilkes, 44-46; 01/29 at Misericordia
#29	32	Case Western Reserve	13-2	01/28 vs. Chicago; 01/30 vs. #3 Washington U.
#30	16	LeTourneau	14-2	01/27 at East Texas Baptist; 01/29 at Belhaven
#31	15	Berry	13-2	01/28 vs. Birmingham-Southern; 01/30 vs. Millsaps
#32	13	RPI	13-2	won at Ithaca, 66-61; 01/28 vs. Union; 01/29 vs. Ithaca
#33	10	Middlebury	13-3	~~01/25 at SUNY-Old Westbury~~ postponed; 01/28 vs. Trinity (Conn.); 01/29 vs. Connecticut College
#34	5	Wabash	13-3	won at Wittenberg, 87-69; 01/29 vs. Denison; 01/30 vs. Wooster
T#35	3	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	13-2	def. Caltech, 72-63; 01/29 vs. Occidental
T#35	3	Keene State	13-3	def. Eastern Connecticut, 89-74; LOST to Plymouth State, 56-68; 01/29 vs. Rhode Island College
T#37	2	Guilford	10-4	LOST at Hampden-Sydney, 58-62; 01/29 at Bridgewater (Va.)
T#37	2	Tufts	7-9	LOST to #20 Wesleyan, 64-65; 01/28 at Bowdoin; 01/29 at Colby
T#39	1	Brandeis	8-3	01/28 at #24 Emory; 01/30 at Rochester
T#39	1	Penn State-Harrisburg	14-1	01/28 at Wells; 01/29 at Morrisville State

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 27, 2022, 11:46:35 AM

Today on Hoopsville - we are once again hitting the air at 1:00 PM ET.

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=6dmac/jtwpsl5ygo0p9rya.jpg)

We will try and due justice to the crazy night that was in DIII basketball. We will look back at the results from Wednesday night in men's and women's play.

Plus we continue to chat with some teams that are flying a bit under the radar. Guests include:

Dan Roiger, St. Lawrence women's coach
Mike Miller, No. 24 Messiah women's coach
Kyle Brumett, Wabash men's coach
Damion Jablonski, No. 16 Whitworth men's coach
Top 25 Women's Double-Take with Scott Peterson and Riley Zayas

Tune into the show here: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2021-22/jan27 - an On Demand version and a podcast are available after the show gets off the air.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 30, 2022, 05:35:46 PM

How They Fared (~~Almost~~ Complete)

~~St Joseph's at Regis tips off at 7:00.~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	623	Randolph-Macon	17-1	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 80-51; won at Hampden-Sydney, 83-63; won at Washington and Lee, 77-72
#2	577	Illinois Wesleyan	15-4	won at Carthage, 89-72; LOST at #19 Elmhurst, 66-74; LOST to Concordia-Chicago, 75-81 OT
#3	566	Washington U.	14-3	LOST at Carnegie Mellon, 68-71 OT; LOST at #29 Case Western Reserve, 70-75
#4	542	UW-Oshkosh	15-3	LOST at UW-Eau Claire, 72-74 OT
#5	526	UW-Platteville	18-1	def. #10 UW-La Crosse, 76-72
#6	490	Marietta	16-2	won at Otterbein, 66-57; def. Baldwin Wallace, 94-82
#7	447	Yeshiva	16-1	won at Mount St. Mary, 89-49; won at SUNY-Maritime, 70-42
#8	443	Christopher Newport	18-2	won at William Peace, 91-69
#9	440	St. Joseph (Conn.)	16-0	won at Johnson and Wales, 70-57; won at Elms, 85-49; won at Regis (Mass.), 81-56
#10	423	UW-La Crosse	16-3	LOST at #5 UW-Platteville, 72-76; def. Bethel, 95-60
#11	314	Mount Union	16-2	def. La Roche, 81-63; def. John Carroll, 89-80; def. Ohio Northern, 93-71
#12	307	Johns Hopkins	14-3	won at Gettysburg, 67-57; LOST at #15 Swarthmore, 68-78
#13	303	Maryville (Tenn.)	16-1	def. Covenant, 95-63; def. Piedmont, 71-67
#14	236	Williams	14-1	~~01/25 at SUNY New Paltz~~ postponed; ~~01/28 vs. Connecticut College~~ postponed; ~~01/29 vs. Trinity (Conn.)~~ postponed
#15	235	Swarthmore	16-3	LOST to Muhlenberg, 60-76; def. #12 Johns Hopkins, 78-68
#16	233	Whitworth	16-2	def. Willamette, 102-89
#17	230	WPI	16-2	LOST at Coast Guard, 55-77; def. Springfield, 83-48
#18	201	Wheaton (Ill.)	16-4	def. Carroll, 94-73; won at North Central (Ill.), 75-71
#19	181	Elmhurst	14-5	LOST at North Central (Ill.), 70-79; def. #2 Illinois Wesleyan, 74-66; def. North Park, 89-59
#20	144	Wesleyan	17-3	won at T#37 Tufts, 65-64; LOST to Amherst, 81-83; def. Hamilton, 72-51
#21	114	Mary Hardin-Baylor	15-2	def. Hardin-Simmons, 82-76; def. McMurry, 93-75
#22	112	Oswego State	18-1	won at SUNY Geneseo, 78-68; def. SUNY Oneonta, 86-58; def. SUNY New Paltz, 82-53
#23	93	Augsburg	14-2	~~01/26 at Bethel~~ canceled; ~~01/29 at Carleton~~ canceled
#24	90	Emory	13-4	def. T#39 Brandeis, 83-75; def. New York University, 104-82
#25	41	Nazareth	16-1	def. Alfred, 75-66; won at St. John Fisher, 77-71

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	38	Mass-Dartmouth	14-2	def. Eastern Connecticut, 71-67; def. Western Connecticut, 110-55
#27	37	Heidelberg	14-3	def. Baldwin Wallace, 65-64; won at Wilmington, 86-60
#28	36	DeSales	17-2	LOST to Wilkes, 44-46; won at Misericordia, 84-82
#29	32	Case Western Reserve	15-2	def. Chicago, 84-66; def. #3 Washington U., 75-70
#30	16	LeTourneau	15-3	won at East Texas Baptist, 81-75; LOST at Belhaven, 73-88
#31	15	Berry	15-2	def. Birmingham-Southern, 81-75; def. Millsaps, 85-54
#32	13	RPI	15-2	won at Ithaca, 66-61; def. Union, 63-46; def. Ithaca, 73-71
#33	10	Middlebury	15-3	~~01/25 at SUNY-Old Westbury~~ postponed; def. Trinity (Conn.), 82-77 3OT; def. Connecticut College, 85-71
#34	5	Wabash	15-3	won at Wittenberg, 87-69; def. Denison, 86-63; def. Wooster, 94-80
T#35	3	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	13-3	def. Caltech, 72-63; LOST to Occidental, 66-79
T#35	3	Keene State	14-3	def. Eastern Connecticut, 89-74; LOST to Plymouth State, 56-68; def. Rhode Island College, 108-83
T#37	2	Guilford	11-4	LOST at Hampden-Sydney, 58-62; won at Bridgewater (Va.), 61-43
T#37	2	Tufts	8-9	LOST to #20 Wesleyan, 64-65; won at Bowdoin, 74-53
T#39	1	Brandeis	9-4	LOST at #24 Emory, 75-83; won at Rochester, 66-61
T#39	1	Penn State-Harrisburg	16-1	won at Wells, 89-67; won at Morrisville State, 80-72

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: DagarmanSpartan on January 30, 2022, 07:56:30 PM

CWRU's win over #3 Washington is literally a program defining win.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: stlawus on January 30, 2022, 09:32:47 PM

With regard to Massey, on more than one occasion have I seen a scrimmage or exhibition against a D3 opponent get counted as a regular season game. If you "lost" a scrimmage against a much lower ranked team your Massey rating is obviously going to suffer as well unless you email him to make the correction.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 31, 2022, 11:30:55 AM

It is Monday and you should try and spend your afternoon tuned into to Hoopsville!

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=6l1bn/vjmp8xw206qjsoad.jpg)

One month. That's all that's left in the DIII regular season. It doesn't seem that long ago when the holidays marked an early half-way point and there was still lots to figure out and games to enjoy watching.

There are still lots of games still to enjoy and there is plenty to still figure out. However, just a month remains before the regular season is over and the two 64-team NCAA Tournaments will be set.

Time is running out.

On this midday edition of Hoopsville (due to schedule conflicts), we focus our attention on Regions 1 & 2 (combined), 4, 6, and 8 (the old Northeast, Atlantic, South, and Central) to talk to programs still jockeying for home court advantage in their conference playoffs or to make sure they get into the NCAAs no matter the avenue.

Guests include:
- Rodney Rogan, Rhodes women's coach
- Jon Miller, Hanover men's coach
- Top 25 Men's Double-Take
- Steven Schulman, Lehman men's coach
- Craig Dagan, Maine Maritime women's coach

Hoopsville airs LIVE 1:00 PM ET: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2021-22/jan31 (you can also watch the show On Demand or listen to the podcast after the show goes off the air).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 31, 2022, 03:44:31 PM

Randolph-Macon is the unanimous #1 pick this week: https://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2021-22/week8

Lots of other movement in there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on January 31, 2022, 03:50:17 PM

Interesting new poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 03, 2022, 07:32:36 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Randolph-Macon	18-1	won at Randolph, 77-43; 02/03 vs. Guilford; 02/05 vs. Roanoke
#2	592	UW-Platteville	18-2	LOST at #5 UW-Oshkosh, 51-65; 02/05 at UW-Stevens Point
#3	567	Marietta	17-2	def. Muskingum, 84-64; 02/05 vs. John Carroll
#4	502	Christopher Newport	19-2	won at Salisbury, 62-55
#5	492	UW-Oshkosh	16-3	def. #2 UW-Platteville, 65-51; 02/05 vs. UW-Stout
#6	479	Yeshiva	17-1	def. Merchant Marine, 82-66; 02/03 at Sarah Lawrence; 02/05 vs. Farmingdale State
#7	478	St. Joseph (Conn.)	17-0	def. Dean, 89-73; 02/05 vs. Albertus Magnus; 02/07 at Albertus Magnus
#8	420	UW-La Crosse	17-3	def. UW-Whitewater, 80-68; 02/05 vs. UW-Eau Claire
#9	394	Washington U.	14-3	02/04 vs. Carnegie Mellon; 02/06 vs. #23 Case Western Reserve
#10	393	Illinois Wesleyan	15-4	02/05 vs. Carthage; 02/07 vs. North Park
#11	381	Mount Union	17-2	won at Baldwin Wallace, 94-71; 02/05 vs. Wilmington
#12	365	Maryville (Tenn.)	16-1	02/05 at Huntingdon
#13	302	Williams	14-1	02/04 vs. #26 Wesleyan
#14	279	Whitworth	16-2	02/04 at Linfield; 02/05 at Pacific
#15	238	Wheaton (Ill.)	17-4	won at Augustana, 74-63
#16	195	Swarthmore	17-3	won at Washington College, 65-56; 02/05 at Franklin and Marshall
#17	190	Oswego State	18-1	02/04 vs. SUNY Potsdam; 02/05 vs. Plattsburgh State
#18	180	Mary Hardin-Baylor	15-2	02/03 at #35 LeTourneau; 02/05 at Texas-Dallas
#19	163	Johns Hopkins	15-3	won at McDaniel, 81-40; 02/05 vs. Haverford
#20	138	Emory	13-4	02/04 at Brandeis; 02/06 at New York University
#21	136	Elmhurst	15-5	02/05 vs. North Central (Ill.); 02/07 at Carroll
#22	122	Augsburg	14-2	02/05 vs. St. Olaf; 02/07 vs. Gustavus Adolphus
#23	105	Case Western Reserve	15-2	02/04 at Chicago; 02/06 at #9 Washington U.
#24	102	WPI	17-2	def. Emerson, 76-47; 02/05 at Babson
#25	84	Nazareth	17-1	def. Elmira, 81-71; 02/04 vs. Sage; 02/05 vs. Hartwick

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	50	Wesleyan	17-3	02/04 at #13 Williams; 02/05 at #31 Middlebury
#27	48	Mass-Dartmouth	16-2	won at Mass-Boston, 77-62; 02/05 vs. Southern Maine; 02/06 at Southern Maine
#28	28	Heidelberg	15-3	won at John Carroll, 76-74; 02/05 vs. Muskingum
#29	25	Wabash	15-3	02/05 vs. Allegheny; 02/06 vs. Hiram
#30	22	Berry	15-2	02/04 vs. Rhodes; 02/06 vs. Hendrix
#31	9	Middlebury	15-3	02/05 vs. #26 Wesleyan
#32	5	Amherst	13-6	02/04 vs. Bowdoin; 02/05 vs. Colby; 02/07 vs. Emmanuel
T#33	4	Chapman	14-2	won at Pomona-Pitzer, 79-70; 02/05 vs. Redlands; 02/07 at Whittier
T#33	4	DeSales	18-2	def. Stevens, 63-51; 02/05 vs. FDU-Florham; 02/07 at Stockton
#35	3	LeTourneau	15-3	02/03 vs. #18 Mary Hardin-Baylor; 02/05 vs. Concordia (Texas)
#36	2	Hanover	15-3	LOST at Anderson, 71-91; 02/05 vs. Earlham
T#37	1	RPI	15-3	LOST at Union, 67-69; 02/04 at Skidmore; 02/05 at Vassar
T#37	1	St. John's	16-3	def. Bethel, 72-51; 02/05 vs. Macalester; 02/07 vs. Hamline
T#37	1	Trinity (Texas)	16-3	02/05 vs. Centenary (La.); 02/06 vs. Austin

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 03, 2022, 10:44:55 AM

The Hoopsville Marathon is here!

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=6pwgx/r9wqvnwufi9rtj30.jpg)

The show is hitting the air at 12:00 PM ET and going for at least NINE hours for the 8th Annual Hoopsville Marathon Show.

Show link: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2021-22/marathon

This year's show featured coaches, administrators, student-athletes, and many others around Division III who gave us a sense of the season to date and what is to come. There is only a month or so left in the regular season, so there was plenty to talk about.

The marathon is also a chance to celebrate the final month of the Division III basketball regular season.

Guests include (in order of appearance, subject to change):

Conner Delaney, Johns Hopkins men's senior
Frank Marcinek, Susquehanna men's coach
Dan Krikorian, Chapman men's coach and Co-Host of "Slappin' Glass" podcast
Minority Coaches Panel:
- Larry Anderson (MIT men's coach)
- Kam Gissendanner (La Roche women's coach)
- Jason Harris (UMass-Boston men's coach)
- Gary Stewart (Stevenson men's coach)
Gary Stewart, Stevenson men's coach and NABC Board member
National Committee Chairs:
- Michael Schauer, Wheaton men's coach and men's committee chair
- Megan Wilson, Luther Associate AD and women's committee chair
Dan Kenny, John Jay men's sophomore and volunteer firefighter
Cameron Hill, Trinity (Texas) women's coach
Stephen Gabel, Nazareth men's senior
State of DIII with Louise McCleary, Interim Vice President for Division III
Jim Haney, Division III Men's Officiating Coordinator
Fred Roggin, NBC4 LA Sports Anchor and AM570 LA Sports Host
Top 25 Women's Double-Take with Gordon Mann and Scott Peterson
"Happy Hour" with friends of Hoopsville and D3 basketball

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on February 06, 2022, 02:43:10 AM

Yeshiva lost at home in a Skyline Conference game to Farmingdale State a few hours ago. ??? :o Well, on any given night......

Now, especially because they lost a conference game in a league that they were expected to dominate, the Macs have to win the Skyline AQ to make it to the NCAA DIII tournament.

I will be interested in hearing what Farmingdale State did to win this game. Watching some of the replay now.

3:10 AM Eastern update (2/6/2022)-- Listening to the replay of halftime comments from Jack Turrell on MacsLive right now. Yeshiva not mentally focused on defense in the first half vs Farmingdale State-- (My reaction to this comment-- Farmingdale State is the historic conference archrival of the Maccabees, and Yeshiva was not ready to play them! What shnooks the Macs must be!

I am glad that I am not a Top 25 voter-- I would not even give the Macs a Top 25 vote this week based on this ~~sorry~~ first half performance. Farmingdale State outrebounded Yeshiva 29-24 on the boards and shot over 50% for the game? At Max Stern Athletic Center? Give me a break! Any top UAA team would have crushed Yeshiva by 30 at halftime last night given that first half performance that the Macs put on.)

4 AM Eastern update (2/6/2022)-- Yeshiva got into prime form in the final 10 minutes of the game, and actually took a 1 pt lead with a minute left. However, a top 25 team is ready to play from minute 1 of the game, not minute 30. Too many flops from the Maccabees as well, the ref should have given Yeshiva a few technical fouls last night for diving.

Congrats to Farmingdale State on the win.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on February 06, 2022, 10:51:58 AM

I watched minutes here and there in the game last night as well as a few minutes of the Illinois Wesleyan and Washington College games, so I know next to nothing about Yeshiva.

But, I have to think that the hype was getting to them.

This has to be the most hyped Division III team of all time by a factor of 10 if you adjust for the strength of schedule.

Maybe they can finally stop thinking about the national media coverage and the pressure that may come with playing for a people, being role models, and all the other perfectly laudable goals they talk about in the media profiles and focus on playing for each other.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 06, 2022, 02:59:14 PM

Quote from: deiscanton on February 06, 2022, 02:43:10 AM
3:10 AM Eastern update (2/6/2022)-- Listening to the replay of halftime comments from Jack Turrell on MacsLive right now. Yeshiva not mentally focused on defense in the first half vs Farmingdale State-- (My reaction to this comment-- Farmingdale State is the historic conference archrival of the Maccabees, and Yeshiva was not ready to play them! What shnooks the Macs must be!

And here I was going to ask you, Allen, if the Macs were the shlemiel or the shlimazel in this instance ... and you came up with option C. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 06, 2022, 05:18:23 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

~~Three games to be edited in later.~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Randolph-Macon	20-1	won at Randolph, 77-43; def. Guilford, 60-56; def. Roanoke, 72-67
#2	592	UW-Platteville	19-2	LOST at #5 UW-Oshkosh, 51-65; won at UW-Stevens Point, 72-58
#3	567	Marietta	18-2	def. Muskingum, 84-64; def. John Carroll, 88-74
#4	502	Christopher Newport	19-2	won at Salisbury, 62-55
#5	492	UW-Oshkosh	17-3	def. #2 UW-Platteville, 65-51; def. UW-Stout, 84-57
#6	479	Yeshiva	18-2	def. Merchant Marine, 82-66; won at Sarah Lawrence, 96-45; LOST to Farmingdale State, 75-79
#7	478	St. Joseph (Conn.)	18-0	def. Dean, 89-73; def. Albertus Magnus, 80-51
#8	420	UW-La Crosse	18-3	def. UW-Whitewater, 80-68; def. UW-Eau Claire, 73-64
#9	394	Washington U.	15-3	def. #23 Case Western Reserve, 76-68
#10	393	Illinois Wesleyan	16-4	def. Carthage, 66-57
#11	381	Mount Union	18-2	won at Baldwin Wallace, 94-71; def. Wilmington, 84-65
#12	365	Maryville (Tenn.)	17-1	won at Huntingdon, 95-80
#13	302	Williams	14-1	~~01/31 vs. TCNJ~~ canceled
#14	279	Whitworth	17-3	LOST at Linfield, 65-71; won at Pacific, 71-58
#15	238	Wheaton (Ill.)	17-4	won at Augustana, 74-63
#16	195	Swarthmore	18-3	won at Washington College, 65-56; won at Franklin and Marshall, 100-69
#17	190	Oswego State	20-1	def. SUNY Potsdam, 85-58; def. Plattsburgh State, 103-61
#18	180	Mary Hardin-Baylor	16-2	won at Texas-Dallas, 85-72
#19	163	Johns Hopkins	16-3	won at McDaniel, 81-40; def. Haverford, 71-47
#20	138	Emory	15-4	won at Brandeis, 86-80 OT; won at New York University, 91-74
#21	136	Elmhurst	16-5	def. Carthage, 88-74; def. North Central (Ill.), 86-67
#22	122	Augsburg	14-3	LOST to St. Olaf, 73-77
#23	105	Case Western Reserve	16-3	won at Chicago, 93-77; LOST at #9 Washington U., 68-76
#24	102	WPI	18-2	def. Emerson, 76-47; won at Babson, 83-64
#25	84	Nazareth	19-1	def. Elmira, 81-71; def. Sage, 93-72; def. Hartwick, 80-66

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	50	Wesleyan	18-3	won at #31 Middlebury, 83-67
#27	48	Mass-Dartmouth	18-2	won at Keene State, 76-60; won at Mass-Boston, 77-62; def. Southern Maine, 96-57; won at Southern Maine, 93-55
#28	28	Heidelberg	16-3	won at John Carroll, 76-74; def. Muskingum, 75-66
#29	25	Wabash	17-3	def. Allegheny, 104-89; def. Hiram, 103-83
#30	22	Berry	17-2	def. Rhodes, 73-58; def. Hendrix, 59-50
#31	9	Middlebury	15-4	LOST to #26 Wesleyan, 67-83
#32	5	Amherst	15-6	def. Colby, 74-60; def. Bowdoin, 68-56
T#33	4	Chapman	15-2	won at Pomona-Pitzer, 79-70; def. Redlands, 84-76
T#33	4	DeSales	19-2	def. Stevens, 63-51; def. FDU-Florham, 88-53
#35	3	LeTourneau	16-3	def. Concordia (Texas), 85-71
#36	2	Hanover	16-3	LOST at Anderson, 71-91; def. Earlham, 85-75
T#37	1	RPI	16-4	LOST at Union, 67-69; LOST at Skidmore, 65-71 OT; won at Vassar, 60-57
T#37	1	St. John's	17-3	def. Bethel, 72-51; def. Macalester, 59-45
T#37	1	Trinity (Texas)	18-3	def. Centenary (La.), 92-73; def. Austin, 78-69

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on February 07, 2022, 10:20:10 AM

Interesting to me how these two teams are being treated in their respective rankings:

Team A: 18-2 (17-2 vs D3), best win vs Massey 103, Avg Massey ranking of D3 wins 305
Team B: 17-0 (14-0 vs D3), best win vs Massey 84, Avg Massey ranking of D3 wins 253

Team A is of course Yeshiva MBB - currently ranked #6 but will no doubt fall in the next ranking due to their recent loss to Massey 196.

Team B is the Webster WBB team - has not had a single vote this entire season.

Yes, I get that MBB and WBB are two different worlds so to speak, just seems pretty interesting to me...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 07, 2022, 10:44:53 AM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on February 07, 2022, 10:20:10 AM
Interesting to me how these two teams are being treated in their respective rankings:

Team A: 18-2 (17-2 vs D3), best win vs Massey 103, Avg Massey ranking of D3 wins 305
Team B: 17-0 (14-0 vs D3), best win vs Massey 84, Avg Massey ranking of D3 wins 253

Team A is of course Yeshiva MBB - currently ranked #6 but will no doubt fall in the next ranking due to their recent loss to Massey 196.

Team B is the Webster WBB team - has not had a single vote this entire season.

Yes, I get that MBB and WBB are two different worlds so to speak, just seems pretty interesting to me...

They are quite different worlds.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 07, 2022, 12:09:16 PM

I get some strong Albertus Magnus circa 2015 vibes from Yeshiva.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 07, 2022, 12:50:21 PM

Good call. Albertus Magnus didn't get out of the first weekend of D3 tourney play that season.

I was thinking the other day that the poll voters should probably be treating Yeshiva more like how they treated Lancaster Bible in 2015-16. LBC was undefeated going into the tourney, but the voters had refused to rank the Chargers any higher than #14. The Chargers ended up bowing out in the opening round by 13 to Wooster on Catholic's home floor in the nation's capital.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on February 07, 2022, 01:06:22 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 07, 2022, 10:44:53 AM
Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on February 07, 2022, 10:20:10 AM
Interesting to me how these two teams are being treated in their respective rankings:

Team A: 18-2 (17-2 vs D3), best win vs Massey 103, Avg Massey ranking of D3 wins 305
Team B: 17-0 (14-0 vs D3), best win vs Massey 84, Avg Massey ranking of D3 wins 253

Team A is of course Yeshiva MBB - currently ranked #6 but will no doubt fall in the next ranking due to their recent loss to Massey 196.

Team B is the Webster WBB team - has not had a single vote this entire season.

Yes, I get that MBB and WBB are two different worlds so to speak, just seems pretty interesting to me...

They are quite different worlds.

Indeed they are - which I was I was merely interested at the difference.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on February 07, 2022, 01:13:51 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 07, 2022, 12:50:21 PM
I was thinking the other day that the poll voters should probably be treating Yeshiva more like how they treated Lancaster Bible in 2015-16. LBC was undefeated going into the tourney, but the voters had refused to rank the Chargers any higher than #14. The Chargers ended up bowing out in the opening round by 13 to Wooster on Catholic's home floor in the nation's capital.

This does not change your point (one that I agree with), but that was a great Wooster team that caught fire in the tournament before getting beat by a great Christopher Newport in the Elite Eight, a team that knocked off the last great NYU team...

Incidentally, I can still picture the Christopher Newport fan who had the big sign of a stylized Donald Trump and would hold it up when the opposing team was shooting free throws. Probably the most unique free-throw distraction technique I have ever seen.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 07, 2022, 01:30:28 PM

That Wooster team which lost to Denison in the NCAC final, lost to Hiram a couple weeks earlier? Great Wooster teams typically get home court, and this team was 21-7 entering the playoffs.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 07, 2022, 01:34:33 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on February 07, 2022, 01:13:51 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 07, 2022, 12:50:21 PM
I was thinking the other day that the poll voters should probably be treating Yeshiva more like how they treated Lancaster Bible in 2015-16. LBC was undefeated going into the tourney, but the voters had refused to rank the Chargers any higher than #14. The Chargers ended up bowing out in the opening round by 13 to Wooster on Catholic's home floor in the nation's capital.

This does not change your point (one that I agree with), but that was a great Wooster team that caught fire in the tournament before getting beat by a great Christopher Newport in the Elite Eight, a team that knocked off the last great NYU team...

Incidentally, I can still picture the Christopher Newport fan who had the big sign of a stylized Donald Trump and would hold it up when the opposing team was shooting free throws. Probably the most unique free-throw distraction technique I have ever seen.

A lot of great teams that year, apparently. ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on February 07, 2022, 01:46:50 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on February 07, 2022, 01:13:51 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 07, 2022, 12:50:21 PM
I was thinking the other day that the poll voters should probably be treating Yeshiva more like how they treated Lancaster Bible in 2015-16. LBC was undefeated going into the tourney, but the voters had refused to rank the Chargers any higher than #14. The Chargers ended up bowing out in the opening round by 13 to Wooster on Catholic's home floor in the nation's capital.

This does not change your point (one that I agree with), but that was a great Wooster team that caught fire in the tournament before getting beat by a great Christopher Newport in the Elite Eight, a team that knocked off the last great NYU team...

Incidentally, I can still picture the Christopher Newport fan who had the big sign of a stylized Donald Trump and would hold it up when the opposing team was shooting free throws. Probably the most unique free-throw distraction technique I have ever seen.

and the following weekend I drove to Salem to watch CNU lose to a great St. Thomas team!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on February 07, 2022, 01:48:00 PM

Non-great teams do not make it to the Elite Eight in my book.

Regardless of how you define great, the point still stands that dismissing Lancaster Bible after their early exit ignores the fact that they went up against a team that had a great postseason.

That was a great St. Thomas team for sure.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on February 07, 2022, 01:51:12 PM

I am prone to hyperbole as many of you know, but let's go with:

This does not change your point (one that I agree with), but that was a good Wooster team that caught fire in the tournament and had a great postseason before getting beat by a great (sticking with this) Christopher Newport in the Elite Eight, a team that knocked off the last good (probably more accurate) NYU team...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: thebear on February 07, 2022, 02:08:52 PM

Glad to see Oswego State getting some respect.

This is a very good team, Their lone loss was by 2 to another 1 loss team - Nazareth in the fourth game of the season.

Since then they have reeled off 17 straight.

At the semester break they added former D2 player and JUCO All-American Christian Simmons, who averages 10 pts and 5 rebounds in 15 minutes off the bench in 14 games since joining.

They are not long, tallest regular is 6-6, but very athletic and very deep, they play at least 11 in most games.

Like most great teams, it starts with defense, they give up 59 ppg, and hold teams to .275 from the arc, and .441 inside.
They are +90 in steals on the season. Their defense is a constant, it does not change when the subs enter.

Jeremiah Sparks is the glue that holds it all together, a 6'3 "point forward" he is a tweener, but does every thing his team needs for the W, scores, rebounds, leads them in assists, and plays tenacious D.

Devin Green, another JUCO transfer has 58 treys and is shooting .468 from three and adds 27/28 from the stripe, just a deadly shooter.

Ahkee Anderson, 2020 NY State HS class B player of the year, holds down the traditional point guard spot.
[It should be noted that nearby Syracuse University's point guard is the 2019 NY State HS class B player of the year JG-III].

This team is loaded with excellent basketball players.

They also play in an excellent facility - Max Ziel Gym, which could easily host a pod.

Look out for the Lakers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpartyBlue on February 07, 2022, 03:35:35 PM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on February 07, 2022, 01:06:22 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 07, 2022, 10:44:53 AM
Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on February 07, 2022, 10:20:10 AM
Interesting to me how these two teams are being treated in their respective rankings:

Team A: 18-2 (17-2 vs D3), best win vs Massey 103, Avg Massey ranking of D3 wins 305
Team B: 17-0 (14-0 vs D3), best win vs Massey 84, Avg Massey ranking of D3 wins 253

Team A is of course Yeshiva MBB - currently ranked #6 but will no doubt fall in the next ranking due to their recent loss to Massey 196.

Team B is the Webster WBB team - has not had a single vote this entire season.

Yes, I get that MBB and WBB are two different worlds so to speak, just seems pretty interesting to me...

They are quite different worlds.

Indeed they are - which I was I was merely interested at the difference.

I see a lot of voters online dropping Yeshiva completely out of the top 25, which I think is an overreaction. It's hard to run the table no matter SoS. Many of these voters have IWU, a four loss team who lost to a Massey 168 still in the top 10. And yeah, I understand IWU has a lot of quality wins, but I still think Yeshiva should get a bit of a break here at 18-2 and clearly top 25 talented.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on February 07, 2022, 04:15:28 PM

Quote from: SpartyBlue on February 07, 2022, 03:35:35 PM
Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on February 07, 2022, 01:06:22 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 07, 2022, 10:44:53 AM
Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on February 07, 2022, 10:20:10 AM
Interesting to me how these two teams are being treated in their respective rankings:

Team A: 18-2 (17-2 vs D3), best win vs Massey 103, Avg Massey ranking of D3 wins 305
Team B: 17-0 (14-0 vs D3), best win vs Massey 84, Avg Massey ranking of D3 wins 253

Team A is of course Yeshiva MBB - currently ranked #6 but will no doubt fall in the next ranking due to their recent loss to Massey 196.

Team B is the Webster WBB team - has not had a single vote this entire season.

Yes, I get that MBB and WBB are two different worlds so to speak, just seems pretty interesting to me...

They are quite different worlds.

Indeed they are - which I was I was merely interested at the difference.

I see a lot of voters online dropping Yeshiva completely out of the top 25, which I think is an overreaction. It's hard to run the table no matter SoS. Many of these voters have IWU, a four loss team who lost to a Massey 168 still in the top 10. And yeah, I understand IWU has a lot of quality wins, but I still think Yeshiva should get a bit of a break here at 18-2 and clearly top 25 talented.

But are they? Obviously lots of variation in opinions out there, since (as you say) multiple voters who publicly share their ballot are leaving them out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 07, 2022, 04:26:41 PM

We had another midday edition of Hoopsville on Monday. Great show with plenty of DIII chat, but also insightful conversations with each of our guests.

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=6x6bj/xkzawcsvjxaoshpv.jpg)

The basketball season is now fully into February and with conference tournaments looming, teams continue to ready themselves for the stretch run.

On Monday's Hoopsville, we chatted with several teams who are leading their conference races and making national headlines in the meantime. Plus, we look ahead at what will be ever-changing Top 25 polls. There is always plenty of upsets, close games, amazing feats, and surprising results to talk about in Division III.

Reminder, Monday shows' guests primarily come from Regions 1 & 2, 4, 6, and 8.

Guests included:
- Brian Baptiste, UMass-Dartmouth men's coach
- John Krikorian, No. 4 Christopher Newport men's coach
- Dixie Jeffers, former Capital women's coach & interim AD
- Mandy King, Kean women's coach
- Olivia Lett, Millikin women's coach

Watch the show here: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2021-22/feb7

Listen to the podcast here: https://soundcloud.com/hoopsville/1920-stretch-run?si=77077a5aa28a4c8c9f0bfa60e5c3b3c2&utm_source=clipboard&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=social_sharing

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 07, 2022, 04:27:40 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on February 07, 2022, 01:48:00 PM
Non-great teams do not make it to the Elite Eight in my book.

Regardless of how you define great, the point still stands that dismissing Lancaster Bible after their early exit ignores the fact that they went up against a team that had a great postseason.

That was a great St. Thomas team for sure.

Wooster beat that untested Lancaster Bible team on a neutral floor, Endicott (19-11) on a neutral floor and went to 22-9 Oswego State and won in overtime.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpartyBlue on February 07, 2022, 04:54:04 PM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on February 07, 2022, 04:15:28 PM
Quote from: SpartyBlue on February 07, 2022, 03:35:35 PM
Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on February 07, 2022, 01:06:22 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 07, 2022, 10:44:53 AM
Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on February 07, 2022, 10:20:10 AM
Interesting to me how these two teams are being treated in their respective rankings:

Team A: 18-2 (17-2 vs D3), best win vs Massey 103, Avg Massey ranking of D3 wins 305
Team B: 17-0 (14-0 vs D3), best win vs Massey 84, Avg Massey ranking of D3 wins 253

Team A is of course Yeshiva MBB - currently ranked #6 but will no doubt fall in the next ranking due to their recent loss to Massey 196.

Team B is the Webster WBB team - has not had a single vote this entire season.

Yes, I get that MBB and WBB are two different worlds so to speak, just seems pretty interesting to me...

They are quite different worlds.

Indeed they are - which I was I was merely interested at the difference.

I see a lot of voters online dropping Yeshiva completely out of the top 25, which I think is an overreaction. It's hard to run the table no matter SoS. Many of these voters have IWU, a four loss team who lost to a Massey 168 still in the top 10. And yeah, I understand IWU has a lot of quality wins, but I still think Yeshiva should get a bit of a break here at 18-2 and clearly top 25 talented.

But are they? Obviously lots of variation in opinions out there, since (as you say) multiple voters who publicly share their ballot are leaving them out.

Talent is always somewhat subjective, but if we're going to bring in the numbers (Massey, etc) I think the IWU example is apt. The ballots are an unscientific social media sampling, to be sure.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 07, 2022, 05:00:33 PM

Quote from: SpartyBlue on February 07, 2022, 04:54:04 PM

Talent is always somewhat subjective, but if we're going to bring in the numbers (Massey, etc) I think the IWU example is apt. The ballots are an unscientific social media sampling, to be sure.

They are. Yeshiva is on 19 of the 25 ballots this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on February 07, 2022, 06:14:37 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 07, 2022, 04:27:40 PM
Wooster beat that untested Lancaster Bible team on a neutral floor, Endicott (19-11) on a neutral floor and went to 22-9 Oswego State and won in overtime.

Thanks Pat, but I'll stick with my revision.

That is unless you want to move the fantasy league threads from the multi-regional thread and create a new one.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 07, 2022, 06:22:09 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on February 07, 2022, 06:14:37 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 07, 2022, 04:27:40 PM
Wooster beat that untested Lancaster Bible team on a neutral floor, Endicott (19-11) on a neutral floor and went to 22-9 Oswego State and won in overtime.

Thanks Pat, but I'll stick with my revision.

That is unless you want to move the fantasy league threads from the multi-regional thread and create a new one.

Not sure what the false equivalency is here, unless you are taking one thing that was debated on and decided years ago (threads) and combining it with another (2015-16 Wooster).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: sac on February 07, 2022, 10:36:42 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 07, 2022, 12:50:21 PM
Good call. Albertus Magnus didn't get out of the first weekend of D3 tourney play that season.

I was thinking the other day that the poll voters should probably be treating Yeshiva more like how they treated Lancaster Bible in 2015-16. LBC was undefeated going into the tourney, but the voters had refused to rank the Chargers any higher than #14. The Chargers ended up bowing out in the opening round by 13 to Wooster on Catholic's home floor in the nation's capital.

Albertus had a strong 3 or 4 year run of teams, even had one make the QF if I remember right. I think Yeshiva is very comparable to them and with a couple tournaments that didn't happen probably would have a similar success story line.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 08, 2022, 12:16:52 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 07, 2022, 04:27:40 PM
Quote from: WUPHF on February 07, 2022, 01:48:00 PM
Non-great teams do not make it to the Elite Eight in my book.

Regardless of how you define great, the point still stands that dismissing Lancaster Bible after their early exit ignores the fact that they went up against a team that had a great postseason.

That was a great St. Thomas team for sure.

Wooster beat that untested Lancaster Bible team on a neutral floor, Endicott (19-11) on a neutral floor and went to 22-9 Oswego State and won in overtime.

Wooster needed an NCAA record 21 of 25 night from Dan Fanelly to beat an LBC squad who's best player got hurt in warmups. Neither one of those teams is as good as Yeshiva, although they could both probably beat them, the way YU has been playing of late.

I was at that game in DC. One of the gutsiest individual performances I've ever witnessed, but there was nothing about that game that could be used to measure anything. Lots of odd circumstances.

I think the better comparison for Yeshiva might be that Albertus team who lost a battle at Dickinson during the tournament. Talented as all get out, but not tested.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WPI89 on February 08, 2022, 10:11:44 AM

Wasn't sure where to put this - figured here was the most active string. Does anyone know if the committee will take into account the Covid fan policy when choosing host sites for the tournament?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WPI89 on February 08, 2022, 10:13:07 AM

Oh - and thanks to Darryl for the weekly top 25 W/L updates - saves me tons of time..............................+1 Karma.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on February 08, 2022, 10:34:00 AM

Quote from: WPI89 on February 08, 2022, 10:11:44 AM
Wasn't sure where to put this - figured here was the most active string. Does anyone know if the committee will take into account the Covid fan policy when choosing host sites for the tournament?

One would think it could be considered under this criteria from the handbook:

2. Quality and availability of the facility and other necessary accommodations;

Just don't know the relative value(priority) of being placed in a less covid-restrictive state vs penalizing a more-deserving record-wise potential "host" in a restrictive state.
A question that Dave McHugh could bring up with the tourney chairs in the near future.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on February 08, 2022, 10:46:03 AM

I'm sure this has been discussed and I either missed it or....well....age.

Which year is this for hosting priority - men or women? I think it's men.

Thanks for the help!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on February 08, 2022, 11:06:27 AM

Men in even years, so your women should be on the road the 1st weekend.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on February 08, 2022, 11:10:05 AM

Thanks Ronk....or the AD could decide not to apply to host for men and have the women at home. Doubtful he will do that. I will ask his plans

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 08, 2022, 11:12:32 AM

Quote from: CNU85 on February 08, 2022, 11:10:05 AM
Thanks Ronk....or the AD could decide not to apply to host for men and have the women at home. Doubtful he will do that. I will ask his plans

I think that type of potential gaming of the system is exactly what this alternating-year setup was designed to avoid.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on February 08, 2022, 11:45:45 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 08, 2022, 11:12:32 AM
Quote from: CNU85 on February 08, 2022, 11:10:05 AM
Thanks Ronk....or the AD could decide not to apply to host for men and have the women at home. Doubtful he will do that. I will ask his plans

I think that type of potential gaming of the system is exactly what this alternating-year setup was designed to avoid.

I wouldn't call it "gaming the system"....rather...respecting and rewarding the #1 team in the country. But that's just me. Like I said, I'm sure CNU will apply to host both men and women and let the NCAA gurus do their thing. I believe, not long ago, the men's team was in the top 5 and had to hit the road when the women hosted and were not ranked as high. I can't remember the year and perhaps I have it reversed....but I remember something similar happening. (Maybe when the men went to Oswego????)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: thebear on February 08, 2022, 12:53:14 PM

Quote from: CNU85 on February 08, 2022, 11:45:45 AM

I wouldn't call it "gaming the system"....rather...respecting and rewarding the #1 team in the country. But that's just me. Like I said, I'm sure CNU will apply to host both men and women and let the NCAA gurus do their thing. I believe, not long ago, the men's team was in the top 5 and had to hit the road when the women hosted and were not ranked as high. I can't remember the year and perhaps I have it reversed....but I remember something similar happening. (Maybe when the men went to Oswego????)

The Oswego quarter/semifinal in 2016 was due to flights, CNU was the only team that had to fly, the others, Wooster and Keene State were close enough to bus. Any of the other sites would have required two or three flights based on the rules at that time.

As I understand it, the distance requiring a flight has been changed from 500 to 600 miles, so Oswego is now within that distance from CNU [and Randolph-Macon]. Williams is also within 600 miles, although last night probably knocks them out of contention and puts Wesleyan in the hosting pole position in Regions 1&2.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 08, 2022, 01:53:45 PM

As bear said ... that had to do with flights, not with who was hosting what at CNU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on February 08, 2022, 02:02:22 PM

but I do remember an issue with both teams hosting and the rule of even vs odd came into play and the higher ranked team had to hit the road. I'm still not sure what year that was...That's why I had the ?? in my parenthetic comment. I tried to do some quick research, but I failed.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 08, 2022, 02:35:35 PM

Quote from: CNU85 on February 08, 2022, 02:02:22 PM
but I do remember an issue with both teams hosting and the rule of even vs odd came into play and the higher ranked team had to hit the road. I'm still not sure what year that was...That's why I had the ?? in my parenthetic comment. I tried to do some quick research, but I failed.

Yes - that has happened. Ask Amherst :). It just didn't happen for that reason in that circumstance.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on February 08, 2022, 02:41:25 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 08, 2022, 02:35:35 PM
Quote from: CNU85 on February 08, 2022, 02:02:22 PM
but I do remember an issue with both teams hosting and the rule of even vs odd came into play and the higher ranked team had to hit the road. I'm still not sure what year that was...That's why I had the ?? in my parenthetic comment. I tried to do some quick research, but I failed.

Yes - that has happened. Ask Amherst :). It just didn't happen for that reason in that circumstance.

I told you I'm getting old(er)....my mind is a terrible thing!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on February 08, 2022, 02:42:10 PM

The regional alphabetical order is now out

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 08, 2022, 10:37:56 PM

My conversation today with Mike Schauer, MBB National Committee Chair, after the release of ranking #1.

Part 1 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLrxTX7UirI&t=26s

Part 2 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwDUb2uGVts

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: jaybird44 on February 09, 2022, 12:50:40 AM

Great interview Q, and kudos to Mike Schauer for being eager to pull the seemingly thick veil of the selection process away for all to see. I believe D3 fans this year will get to enjoy the most clarity and transparency that has ever been made available to them.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 09, 2022, 09:51:07 AM

It is definitely a nice makeup call after getting a regional ranking taken away from us, for all intents and purposes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Caz Bombers on February 09, 2022, 09:49:29 PM

Yeshiva has to go tooth and nail and rally late to beat 9-10 Old Westbury. I don't think these guys are getting out of the first round, let alone the first weekend.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on February 09, 2022, 10:07:09 PM

Amazing game tonight. UMW is a very good team. It's going to be tough next week to play in their house.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 09, 2022, 10:35:29 PM

Quote from: Caz Bombers on February 09, 2022, 09:49:29 PM
Yeshiva has to go tooth and nail and rally late to beat 9-10 Old Westbury. I don't think these guys are getting out of the first round, let alone the first weekend.

They have to get there. At this level of play, its going to be tough to win the conference tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 10, 2022, 07:39:14 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Randolph-Macon	20-1	02/10 at Bridgewater (Va.); 02/12 vs. Shenandoah
#2	584	Marietta	19-2	won at #10 Mount Union, 84-64; 02/12 at Wilmington
#3	560	UW-Oshkosh	18-3	won at UW-Stevens Point, 79-58; 02/12 vs. #7 UW-La Crosse
#4	535	Christopher Newport	20-2	def. Mary Washington, 78-71; 02/12 vs. Salisbury
#5	519	UW-Platteville	19-3	LOST to UW-Whitewater, 75-78; 02/12 at UW-River Falls
#6	496	St. Joseph (Conn.)	20-0	won at Albertus Magnus, 85-81; won at Lasell, 91-64; 02/12 vs. Emmanuel
#7	453	UW-La Crosse	19-3	won at UW-River Falls, 80-72; 02/12 at #3 UW-Oshkosh
#8	440	Washington U.	16-3	def. Carnegie Mellon, 65-63 OT; 02/11 vs. #18 Emory; 02/13 vs. Rochester
#9	411	Illinois Wesleyan	18-4	def. North Park, 73-49; won at Millikin, 51-49; 02/12 vs. #13 Wheaton (Ill.)
#10	384	Mount Union	18-3	LOST to #2 Marietta, 64-84; 02/12 at Capital
#11	376	Maryville (Tenn.)	18-1	won at Brevard, 96-81; 02/12 vs. LaGrange
#12	317	Williams	14-2	LOST to #26 Wesleyan, 52-97; 02/11 at Bates; 02/12 at Tufts
#13	284	Wheaton (Ill.)	18-4	def. Carthage, 87-71; 02/12 at #9 Illinois Wesleyan
#14	233	Oswego State	20-1	02/11 at SUNY New Paltz; 02/12 at SUNY Oneonta
#15	223	Yeshiva	19-2	won at SUNY-Old Westbury, 75-69; 02/12 vs. St. Joseph's (L.I.)
#16	218	Mary Hardin-Baylor	17-2	won at #34 LeTourneau, 79-77; 02/10 at Howard Payne; 02/12 at Sul Ross State
#17	209	Swarthmore	18-4	LOST to Ursinus, 86-95; 02/12 at McDaniel
#18	202	Emory	15-4	02/11 at #8 Washington U.; 02/13 at Chicago
#19	162	Johns Hopkins	17-3	def. Franklin and Marshall, 78-48; 02/12 at Dickinson
#20	157	Elmhurst	18-5	won at Carroll, 93-67; def. Augustana, 99-72
#21	130	Whitworth	17-3	02/11 at Pacific Lutheran; 02/12 at Puget Sound
#22	116	WPI	19-2	won at MIT, 66-41; 02/12 vs. Coast Guard
#23	101	Nazareth	19-2	LOST to St. John Fisher, 80-87; 02/11 at Utica; 02/12 vs. Keuka
#24	93	Case Western Reserve	16-3	02/11 vs. New York University; 02/13 vs. Brandeis
#25	86	Mass-Dartmouth	19-2	def. Keene State, 84-81; 02/12 at Plymouth State; 02/13 vs. Plymouth State

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	84	Wesleyan	19-3	won at #12 Williams, 97-52; 02/11 vs. Colby; 02/13 vs. Bowdoin
#27	40	Heidelberg	16-4	LOST at Capital, 68-73; 02/12 at Otterbein
#28	33	Wabash	18-3	def. Ohio Wesleyan, 88-74; 02/12 at Wooster
#29	20	Berry	17-2	02/11 at Centre; 02/13 at Sewanee
#30	11	Augsburg	15-4	LOST to Gustavus Adolphus, 81-84; won at St. Mary's (Minn.), 79-61; 02/12 vs. St. John's
#31	7	DeSales	20-3	LOST at Stockton, 60-83; won at King's, 80-54
T#32	4	Amherst	15-6	~~02/07 vs. Emmanuel~~ canceled; 02/11 at Trinity (Conn.); 02/12 at Connecticut College
T#32	4	Chapman	17-2	won at Whittier, 84-82; def. Occidental, 98-81; 02/12 at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps
#34	3	LeTourneau	16-4	LOST to #16 Mary Hardin-Baylor, 77-79; 02/10 vs. McMurry; 02/12 vs. Hardin-Simmons
T#35	2	Middlebury	16-4	02/12 at Bates; 02/13 at Tufts
T#35	2	Trinity (Texas)	18-4	LOST to Texas Lutheran, 67-69; 02/12 vs. Southwestern
#37	1	Nichols	18-2	won at Gordon, 91-62; 02/10 at Endicott; 02/12 at Western New England

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: midrangepullup on February 10, 2022, 02:13:35 PM

Wesleyan(CT) is a legit team, definitely the favorites to come out of the NESCAC tourney. Will be interesting to see where they end up in the tournament.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 13, 2022, 04:38:17 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

~~(one game still in progress)~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Randolph-Macon	22-1	won at Bridgewater (Va.), 81-50; def. Shenandoah, 102-60
#2	584	Marietta	20-2	won at #10 Mount Union, 84-64; won at Wilmington, 77-46
#3	560	UW-Oshkosh	19-3	won at UW-Stevens Point, 79-58; def. #7 UW-La Crosse, 80-77
#4	535	Christopher Newport	21-2	def. Mary Washington, 78-71; def. Salisbury, 80-76
#5	519	UW-Platteville	19-4	LOST to UW-Whitewater, 75-78; LOST at UW-River Falls, 71-74
#6	496	St. Joseph (Conn.)	21-0	won at Albertus Magnus, 85-81; won at Lasell, 91-64; def. Emmanuel, 79-60
#7	453	UW-La Crosse	19-4	won at UW-River Falls, 80-72; LOST at #3 UW-Oshkosh, 77-80
#8	440	Washington U.	16-5	def. Carnegie Mellon, 65-63 OT; LOST to #18 Emory, 57-67; LOST to Rochester, 71-72
#9	411	Illinois Wesleyan	19-4	def. North Park, 73-49; won at Millikin, 51-49; def. #13 Wheaton (Ill.), 79-71
#10	384	Mount Union	19-3	LOST to #2 Marietta, 64-84; won at Capital, 73-64
#11	376	Maryville (Tenn.)	18-2	won at Brevard, 96-81; LOST to LaGrange, 98-101 OT
#12	317	Williams	15-3	LOST to #26 Wesleyan, 52-97; LOST at Tufts, 66-81; won at Bates, 72-60
#13	284	Wheaton (Ill.)	18-5	def. Carthage, 87-71; LOST at #9 Illinois Wesleyan, 71-79
#14	233	Oswego State	21-2	LOST at SUNY New Paltz, 63-64; won at SUNY Oneonta, 63-53
#15	223	Yeshiva	19-3	won at SUNY-Old Westbury, 75-69; LOST to St. Joseph's (L.I.), 76-79
#16	218	Mary Hardin-Baylor	19-2	won at #34 LeTourneau, 79-77; won at Howard Payne, 92-80; won at Sul Ross State, 78-74
#17	209	Swarthmore	19-4	LOST to Ursinus, 86-95; won at McDaniel, 85-49
#18	202	Emory	16-5	won at #8 Washington U., 67-57; LOST at Chicago, 79-84
#19	162	Johns Hopkins	18-3	def. Franklin and Marshall, 78-48; won at Dickinson, 70-50
#20	157	Elmhurst	18-5	won at Carroll, 93-67; def. Augustana, 99-72
#21	130	Whitworth	18-4	LOST at Pacific Lutheran, 48-64; won at Puget Sound, 81-69
#22	116	WPI	20-2	won at MIT, 66-41; def. Coast Guard, 89-60
#23	101	Nazareth	20-3	LOST to St. John Fisher, 80-87; LOST at Utica, 67-82; def. Keuka, 72-57
#24	93	Case Western Reserve	17-4	LOST to New York University, 70-77; def. Brandeis, 80-66
#25	86	Mass-Dartmouth	20-3	def. Keene State, 84-81; LOST at Plymouth State, 74-75; def. Plymouth State, 91-66

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	84	Wesleyan	21-3	won at #12 Williams, 97-52; def. Colby, 87-70; def. Bowdoin, 101-65
#27	40	Heidelberg	16-5	LOST at Capital, 68-73; LOST at Otterbein, 78-88
#28	33	Wabash	19-3	def. Ohio Wesleyan, 88-74; won at Wooster, 97-75
#29	20	Berry	19-2	won at Centre, 83-61; won at Sewanee, 68-63
#30	11	Augsburg	15-5	LOST to Gustavus Adolphus, 81-84; won at St. Mary's (Minn.), 79-61; LOST to St. John's, 65-68
#31	7	DeSales	20-3	LOST at Stockton, 60-83; won at King's, 80-54
T#32	4	Amherst	15-8	~~02/07 vs. Emmanuel~~ canceled; LOST at Trinity (Conn.), 53-62; LOST at Connecticut College, 65-71
T#32	4	Chapman	18-2	won at Whittier, 84-82; def. Occidental, 98-81; won at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 71-58
#34	3	LeTourneau	18-4	LOST to #16 Mary Hardin-Baylor, 77-79; def. McMurry, 87-86 OT; def. Hardin-Simmons, 80-72
T#35	2	Middlebury	17-5	won at Bates, 69-52; LOST at Tufts, 73-81
T#35	2	Trinity (Texas)	19-4	LOST to Texas Lutheran, 67-69; def. Southwestern, 85-65
#37	1	Nichols	20-2	won at Gordon, 91-62; won at Endicott, 71-68; won at Western New England, 101-82

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: monsoon on February 13, 2022, 06:13:21 PM

There's a lot of red on there today. Thanks again for doing this each week, Darryl!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 14, 2022, 04:59:55 PM

After several weeks of midday shows, we are back to our regularly scheduled time of 7:00 PM ET - and we are super-sizing the show tonight to make up for not being able to be on air Thursday AND the craziness that has happened in the last week!

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=7bd24/9722xr4mzg4hms67.jpg)

Today is a day we celebrate those we love and for many of us that includes the student-athletes, coaches, administrators, and programs in Division III.

On Monday's Hoopsville, we super-size the show to cover everything that has happened in the last week while also trying to look ahead at conference tournaments which start soon. After all, we are just two weeks away from talking about who is in or out of the NCAA Tournaments.

Plus, we look at the latest Top 25 polls which will be released Monday evening and react to the men's poll which will clearly undergo some shakeup.

Guests included:

Jenna Cosgrove, Rhode Island women's coach
Jon VanderWal, No. 2 Marietta men's coach
Lance Thornhill, Fontbonne men's coach
James Wallace, LeTourneau men's coach
Keri Carollo, No. 7 UW Whitewater women's coach
Anthony Mason, Vassar women's coach
Top 25 Double-Take Super Sized: Akiva Poppers, Bob Quillman, Mike Rejniak, Ryan Whitnable

Watch the show here: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2021-22/feb14

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on February 15, 2022, 08:39:34 AM

I can't seem to find the release dates listed anywhere, but do we get weekly regional rankings here on out?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 15, 2022, 08:49:54 AM

Quote from: HOPEful on February 15, 2022, 08:39:34 AM
I can't seem to find the release dates listed anywhere, but do we get weekly regional rankings here on out?

Yes.

https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/championships/sports/basketball/d3/men/2021-22D3MBB_PreChampsManual.pdf

"Important Dates", page 11.

First numerical ranking today.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 15, 2022, 09:43:18 AM

Quote from: HOPEful on February 15, 2022, 08:39:34 AM
I can't seem to find the release dates listed anywhere, but do we get weekly regional rankings here on out?

One today, one next Tuesday, then it's just the final rankings on selection Sunday, which we usually get to see by late Monday or Tuesday of that week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HOPEful on February 15, 2022, 11:29:53 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on February 15, 2022, 08:49:54 AM
Quote from: HOPEful on February 15, 2022, 08:39:34 AM
I can't seem to find the release dates listed anywhere, but do we get weekly regional rankings here on out?

Yes.

https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/championships/sports/basketball/d3/men/2021-22D3MBB_PreChampsManual.pdf

"Important Dates", page 11.

First numerical ranking today.

Thank you! Buried on page 11 of a manual is why I couldn't find it! :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 15, 2022, 03:45:24 PM

Week 2 Regional Rankings - which are ranked now: https://d3hoops.com/notables/2022/02/men-regional-rankings-first

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on February 15, 2022, 09:56:13 PM

My conversation with Mike Schauer about regional ranking #2.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6e1mPneK7s

0:00 Process for ranking #2
4:17 Are we ranking too many teams?
7:45 Evaluating dramatically different resumes
9:45 Impact of teams ranked at bottom of regions
11:28 Buena Vista
13:35 St. Thomas (TX) error
15:48 SOS under .500
17:50 Common opponents & head-to-head
21:20 Quality of RRO wins
22:50 Does committee factor in injuries?
23:25 Results in November vs February
25:09 Top 16 reveal this week
28:00 Bracketing
29:35 Balancing time between nat'l committee and Thunder
31:51 Watching #d3hoops
33:14 Final thoughts

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 17, 2022, 10:23:34 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

Not as much red (yet) in this report as there was in last week's.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Randolph-Macon	23-1	def. Hampden-Sydney, 74-54; 02/19 at #34 Guilford
#2	592	Marietta	21-2	def. Capital, 82-74; 02/19 at Heidelberg
#3	573	UW-Oshkosh	20-3	won at UW-Whitewater, 48-46
#4	539	Christopher Newport	21-2	02/19 at Mary Washington
#5	517	St. Joseph (Conn.)	22-0	def. Johnson and Wales, 77-68; 02/17 at #24 Yeshiva; 02/19 at Norwich
#6	497	Illinois Wesleyan	20-4	def. North Central (Ill.), 78-65; 02/19 at Augustana
#7	452	UW-La Crosse	19-5	LOST to UW-Stout, 66-76
#8	408	UW-Platteville	20-4	def. UW-Eau Claire, 60-56 OT
#9	369	Mary Hardin-Baylor	20-2	won at Concordia (Texas), 82-73; 02/17 vs. Belhaven; 02/19 vs. East Texas Baptist
#10	365	Mount Union	20-3	won at Muskingum, 82-61; 02/19 at Otterbein
#11	306	Wheaton (Ill.)	19-5	def. North Park, 77-67; 02/19 vs. Millikin
#12	298	Johns Hopkins	19-3	won at Washington College, 77-61; 02/19 vs. Ursinus
#13	294	Wesleyan	21-3	02/20 vs. TBA
#14	274	Maryville (Tenn.)	19-2	def. Berea, 90-50; 02/17 at Piedmont; 02/19 at Covenant
#15	272	Elmhurst	18-6	LOST to Millikin, 64-74; 02/19 at Carthage
#16	251	WPI	21-2	def. Wheaton (Mass.), 76-62; 02/19 at Clark
#17	228	Washington U.	16-5	02/18 at New York University; 02/20 at Brandeis
#18	213	Emory	16-5	02/18 vs. #27 Case Western Reserve; 02/20 vs. Carnegie Mellon
#19	176	Oswego State	21-2	02/18 vs. Brockport; 02/19 vs. Fredonia
#20	163	Wabash	20-3	won at DePauw, 81-72; 02/19 vs. Kenyon
#21	154	Swarthmore	20-4	def. Haverford, 87-66; 02/19 vs. Gettysburg
#22	101	Williams	15-3	02/19 vs. Amherst
#23	70	Berry	20-2	def. Oglethorpe, 62-58
#24	68	Yeshiva	20-3	won at Mount St. Vincent, 90-69; 02/17 vs. #5 St. Joseph (Conn.); 02/19 vs. St. Joseph's (Bklyn.)
#25	62	Chapman	19-2	won at La Verne, 78-73; 02/19 vs. Cal Lutheran

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	58	Mass-Dartmouth	21-3	def. Rhode Island College, 76-72; 02/19 at Castleton
#27	46	Case Western Reserve	17-4	02/18 at #18 Emory; 02/20 at Rochester
#28	40	Whitworth	18-4	02/18 vs. George Fox; 02/19 vs. Lewis and Clark
#29	25	Nichols	21-3	LOST to Suffolk, 83-89; def. Endicott, 104-96 OT; 02/19 at Curry
#30	20	Pacific Lutheran	18-6	def. Puget Sound, 80-48; 02/18 vs. Linfield
T#31	10	RPI	19-4	02/18 at Rochester Tech; 02/19 at Hobart
T#31	10	Tufts	13-9	02/20 vs. Trinity or Bates
#33	9	St. John's	20-4	def. Gustavus Adolphus, 87-65
#34	8	Guilford	17-5	won at Roanoke, 65-57; 02/19 vs. #1 Randolph-Macon
#35	7	Stockton	21-4	won at New Jersey City, 89-70
T#36	6	Hanover	18-4	LOST to Transylvania, 81-86; 02/18 at Mount St. Joseph
T#36	6	LeTourneau	19-4	won at Texas-Dallas, 80-77; 02/19 at University of the Ozarks
#38	5	Nazareth	20-3	02/18 at Alfred; 02/19 at Houghton
#39	4	Penn State-Harrisburg	21-2	won at Penn State-Abington, 82-61; 02/19 at Lancaster Bible
#40	3	Calvin	17-7	LOST at Hope, 81-93; 02/19 vs. Albion
#41	1	DeSales	20-4	LOST at Delaware Valley, 67-75; 02/19 vs. Lycoming

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 18, 2022, 10:55:26 AM

The countdown is on! Ten more days until the regular season comes to a close and we find out who will be playing for the Walnut and Bronze!

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=7gryc/3okvdan6frefp2hp.jpg)

Thursday on Hoopsville, there is plenty to keep track of throughout Division III.

Hoopsville starts immediately following the NCAA Division III National Committee's announcement of the Top 16 "seeds" in both men's and women's rankings aired. We chatted with both national committee chairs, Michael Schauer of Wheaton (Ill.) and Megan Wilson of Luther, about the release, how they came to the decisions, and what they hope to inspire with the announcements. Plus more.

Then we talk to coaches around the country about their programs and how they are positioning themselves for conference tournaments.

Guests include:

National Committee Chairs

Michael Schauer, No. 11 Wheaton (Ill.) coach
Megan Wilson, Luther Associate Athletics Director

Brendan Twomey, Farmingdale State men's coach
Greg Mitchell, Hope men's coach
Nick DiPillo, No. 17 Scranton women's coach
Michelle Ferenz, No. 6 Whitman women's coach

We had scheduled to talk to Christine VanHook from PSU-Behrend women's basketball, but there was a last minute scheduling conflict. We hope to catch up with Coach VanHook in the next week.

Watch the show here: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2021-22/feb17

Podcast here: https://soundcloud.com/hoopsville/1922-10-more-days?utm_source=clipboard&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=social_sharing

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 20, 2022, 05:08:01 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Randolph-Macon	24-1	def. Hampden-Sydney, 74-54; won at #34 Guilford, 72-66
#2	592	Marietta	22-2	def. Capital, 82-74; won at Heidelberg, 86-62
#3	573	UW-Oshkosh	20-3	won at UW-Whitewater, 48-46
#4	539	Christopher Newport	22-2	won at Mary Washington, 68-67
#5	517	St. Joseph (Conn.)	23-1	def. Johnson and Wales, 77-68; LOST at #24 Yeshiva, 76-87; won at Norwich, 84-52
#6	497	Illinois Wesleyan	21-4	def. North Central (Ill.), 78-65; won at Augustana, 70-64
#7	452	UW-La Crosse	19-5	LOST to UW-Stout, 66-76
#8	408	UW-Platteville	20-4	def. UW-Eau Claire, 60-56 OT
#9	369	Mary Hardin-Baylor	22-2	won at Concordia (Texas), 82-73; def. Belhaven, 86-73; def. East Texas Baptist, 94-90
#10	365	Mount Union	21-3	won at Muskingum, 82-61; won at Otterbein, 63-61
#11	306	Wheaton (Ill.)	20-5	def. North Park, 77-67; def. Millikin, 88-63
#12	298	Johns Hopkins	20-3	won at Washington College, 77-61; def. Ursinus, 84-68
#13	294	Wesleyan	22-3	def. Colby, 82-71
#14	274	Maryville (Tenn.)	20-3	def. Berea, 90-50; won at Piedmont, 78-59; LOST at Covenant, 52-73
#15	272	Elmhurst	19-6	LOST to Millikin, 64-74; won at Carthage, 79-66
#16	251	WPI	22-2	def. Wheaton (Mass.), 76-62; won at Clark, 77-69
#17	228	Washington U.	16-7	LOST at New York University, 62-68; LOST at Brandeis, 65-84
#18	213	Emory	18-5	def. #27 Case Western Reserve, 88-84; def. Carnegie Mellon, 87-86 OT
#19	176	Oswego State	23-2	def. Brockport, 87-66; def. Fredonia, 104-55
#20	163	Wabash	21-3	won at DePauw, 81-72; def. Kenyon, 98-75
#21	154	Swarthmore	21-4	def. Haverford, 87-66; def. Gettysburg, 86-51
#22	101	Williams	16-3	def. Amherst, 70-66
#23	70	Berry	21-2	def. Oglethorpe, 62-58; def. Millsaps, 80-58
#24	68	Yeshiva	22-3	won at Mount St. Vincent, 90-69; def. #5 St. Joseph (Conn.), 87-76; def. St. Joseph's (Bklyn.), 84-58
#25	62	Chapman	19-3	won at La Verne, 78-73; LOST to Cal Lutheran, 72-82

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	58	Mass-Dartmouth	22-3	def. Rhode Island College, 76-72; won at Castleton, 88-74
#27	46	Case Western Reserve	17-6	LOST at #18 Emory, 84-88; LOST at Rochester, 70-80
#28	40	Whitworth	20-4	def. George Fox, 91-67; def. Lewis and Clark, 90-87
#29	25	Nichols	22-3	LOST to Suffolk, 83-89; def. Endicott, 104-96 OT; won at Curry, 103-83
#30	20	Pacific Lutheran	18-7	def. Puget Sound, 80-48; LOST to Linfield, 64-72
T#31	10	RPI	21-4	won at Rochester Tech, 74-53; won at Hobart, 79-54
T#31	10	Tufts	13-10	LOST to Trinity (Conn.), 76-90
#33	9	St. John's	20-4	def. Gustavus Adolphus, 87-65
#34	8	Guilford	17-6	won at Roanoke, 65-57; LOST to #1 Randolph-Macon, 66-72
#35	7	Stockton	21-4	won at New Jersey City, 89-70
T#36	6	Hanover	20-4	LOST to Transylvania, 81-86; won at Mount St. Joseph, 79-70; def. Mount St. Joseph, 73-67
T#36	6	LeTourneau	20-4	won at Texas-Dallas, 80-77; won at University of the Ozarks, 91-88
#38	5	Nazareth	21-4	LOST at Alfred, 55-69; won at Houghton, 92-65
#39	4	Penn State-Harrisburg	21-3	won at Penn State-Abington, 82-61; LOST at Lancaster Bible, 57-72
#40	3	Calvin	18-7	LOST at Hope, 81-93; def. Albion, 67-60
#41	1	DeSales	21-4	LOST at Delaware Valley, 67-75; def. Lycoming, 76-38

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Riley Zayas on February 21, 2022, 10:25:55 AM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on February 20, 2022, 05:08:01 PM
How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#1 625 Randolph-Macon 24-1 def. Hampden-Sydney, 74-54; won at #34 Guilford, 72-66
#2 592 Marietta 22-2 def. Capital, 82-74; won at Heidelberg, 86-62
#3 573 UW-Oshkosh 20-3 won at UW-Whitewater, 48-46
#4 539 Christopher Newport 22-2 won at Mary Washington, 68-67
#5 517 St. Joseph (Conn.) 23-1 def. Johnson and Wales, 77-68; LOST at #24 Yeshiva, 76-87; won at Norwich, 84-52
#6 497 Illinois Wesleyan 21-4 def. North Central (Ill.), 78-65; won at Augustana, 70-64
#7 452 UW-La Crosse 19-5 LOST to UW-Stout, 66-76
#8 408 UW-Platteville 20-4 def. UW-Eau Claire, 60-56 OT
#9 369 Mary Hardin-Baylor 22-2 won at Concordia (Texas), 82-73; def. Belhaven, 86-73; def. East Texas Baptist, 94-90
#10 365 Mount Union 21-3 won at Muskingum, 82-61; won at Otterbein, 63-61
#11 306 Wheaton (Ill.) 20-5 def. North Park, 77-67; def. Millikin, 88-63
#12 298 Johns Hopkins 20-3 won at Washington College, 77-61; def. Ursinus, 84-68
#13 294 Wesleyan 22-3 def. Colby, 82-71
#14 274 Maryville (Tenn.) 20-3 def. Berea, 90-50; won at Piedmont, 78-59; LOST at Covenant, 52-73
#15 272 Elmhurst 19-6 LOST to Millikin, 64-74; won at Carthage, 79-66
#16 251 WPI 22-2 def. Wheaton (Mass.), 76-62; won at Clark, 77-69
#17 228 Washington U. 16-7 LOST at New York University, 62-68; LOST at Brandeis, 65-84
#18 213 Emory 18-5 def. #27 Case Western Reserve, 88-84; def. Carnegie Mellon, 87-86 OT
#19 176 Oswego State 23-2 def. Brockport, 87-66; def. Fredonia, 104-55
#20 163 Wabash 21-3 won at DePauw, 81-72; def. Kenyon, 98-75
#21 154 Swarthmore 21-4 def. Haverford, 87-66; def. Gettysburg, 86-51
#22 101 Williams 16-3 def. Amherst, 70-66
#23 70 Berry 21-2 def. Oglethorpe, 62-58; def. Millsaps, 80-58
#24 68 Yeshiva 22-3 won at Mount St. Vincent, 90-69; def. #5 St. Joseph (Conn.), 87-76; def. St. Joseph's (Bklyn.), 84-58
#25 62 Chapman 19-3 won at La Verne, 78-73; LOST to Cal Lutheran, 72-82

Others receiving votes
Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#26 58 Mass-Dartmouth 22-3 def. Rhode Island College, 76-72; won at Castleton, 88-74
#27 46 Case Western Reserve 17-6 LOST at #18 Emory, 84-88; LOST at Rochester, 70-80
#28 40 Whitworth 20-4 def. George Fox, 91-67; def. Lewis and Clark, 90-87
#29 25 Nichols 22-3 LOST to Suffolk, 83-89; def. Endicott, 104-96 OT; won at Curry, 103-83
#30 20 Pacific Lutheran 18-7 def. Puget Sound, 80-48; LOST to Linfield, 64-72
T#31 10 RPI 21-4 won at Rochester Tech, 74-53; won at Hobart, 79-54
T#31 10 Tufts 13-10 LOST to Trinity (Conn.), 76-90
#33 9 St. John's 20-4 def. Gustavus Adolphus, 87-65
#34 8 Guilford 17-6 won at Roanoke, 65-57; LOST to #1 Randolph-Macon, 66-72
#35 7 Stockton 21-4 won at New Jersey City, 89-70
T#36 6 Hanover 20-4 LOST to Transylvania, 81-86; won at Mount St. Joseph, 79-70; def. Mount St. Joseph, 73-67
T#36 6 LeTourneau 20-4 won at Texas-Dallas, 80-77; won at University of the Ozarks, 91-88
#38 5 Nazareth 21-4 LOST at Alfred, 55-69; won at Houghton, 92-65
#39 4 Penn State-Harrisburg 21-3 won at Penn State-Abington, 82-61; LOST at Lancaster Bible, 57-72
#40 3 Calvin 18-7 LOST at Hope, 81-93; def. Albion, 67-60
#41 1 DeSales 21-4 LOST at Delaware Valley, 67-75; def. Lycoming, 76-38

Thanks Darryl. I really believe Whitworth deserves a Top 25 spot this week. 20-4 record with non-conference wins over a decent UWW team, as well as CMS and Pomona Pitzer, both teams I think pretty highly of. Also have dominant wins over quality teams in PacLu and Puget Sound.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on February 22, 2022, 11:53:21 AM

Does anyone have the time to look at the top 25 and figure out the W-L for each team against RRO?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 22, 2022, 12:25:58 PM

Did you miss Monday night's Hoopsville? No worries, you can catch up On Demand or via the podcast!

The final week of the D-III regular season is here. And most conferences are in full voice to determine who will automatically play in NCAA Tournaments.

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=7oald/l9f73din3e21tjm9.jpg)

On Monday's Hoopsville, we get you set for the final week - the final sprint - to the regular season finish line. While most conferences will be crowning champions at the end of the week, some teams have already punched their tickets to March post-season play and others are already on the bubble. We prepare you for the craziest week of every season.

Plus, we chat with teams in Regions 1 and 2, 4, 6, and 8 to see how they are preparing themselves for their conference finishes.

Guests include:

Heather Macy, Greensboro women's coach
Glen Miller, No. 12 St. Joseph's (Conn.) men's coach
Pat Coleman, Editor-in-Chief, D3hoops.com
Joe Crispin, Rowan men's coach
Amanda Leonhard-Perry, St. Norbert women's coach

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the NABC Studio. All guests appear on the BlueFrame Technology (http://www.blueframetech.com) Hoopsville Hotline.

Watch the show here: www.d3hoops.com/hoopsville/archives/2021-22/feb21

Podcast here: https://soundcloud.com/hoopsville/1923-conference-races?utm_source=clipboard&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=social_sharing

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 24, 2022, 05:22:03 PM

(https://cdn.prestosports.com/action/cdn/img/mw=710/cr=n/d=7twpu/z39bugp32053poh2.jpg)

Thursday on Hoopsville, we catch up with a number of teams which realize they have to keep winning this week if they want to keep playing next week. "There is no more next game ..."

There are plenty of guests to talk to, so we are jamming them into a super-sized show. Some have quietly emerged on top, or near the top, of their conference races and hope to use home court advantage to win an automatic bid. Others knowing they have to win to make sure to keep playing this season. And one coach who shows that there is a lot of things that are important during basketball season.

Guests include (order subject to change):

Chad Dickman, Hood men's coach
Sean Coffey, Utica men's coach
Pat McKenzie, St. John's men's coach
Jacey Brooks, SUNY Cortland women's coach
Christine VanHook, PSU-Behrend women's coach
Stephany Dunmyer, Oberlin women's coach
Todd Kent, UC Santa Cruz women's coach

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on February 25, 2022, 09:06:12 AM

The conference tournament tracker has UMW playing CNU at 5pm tonight and then playing Salisbury at 7pm tonight.

The 5pm game is between UCSC and CNU. UMW plays SU at 7pm. Should be some good games to see.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 25, 2022, 09:22:08 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

I usually post this on Thursday, but completely forgot ... so here is your belated preview of weekend games.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Randolph-Macon	25-1	def. (n) Bridgewater (Va.), 80-56; 02/26 vs. Roanoke
#2	595	Marietta	24-2	def. Ohio Northern, 99-63; def. Baldwin Wallace, 82-70
#3	574	UW-Oshkosh	21-3	def. UW-Whitewater, 86-77; 02/26 vs. #6 UW-Platteville
#4	550	Christopher Newport	22-2	02/25 vs. UC Santa Cruz
#5	521	Illinois Wesleyan	21-4	02/25 vs. North Central (Ill.)
#6	442	UW-Platteville	21-4	def. #9 UW-La Crosse, 74-51; 02/26 at #3 UW-Oshkosh
#7	406	Mary Hardin-Baylor	23-2	def. Concordia (Texas), 87-82
#8	405	Mount Union	23-3	def. John Carroll, 93-65; def. Heidelberg, 68-65
#9	376	UW-La Crosse	20-6	def. UW-Stevens Point, 74-70; LOST at #6 UW-Platteville, 51-74
#10	373	Wheaton (Ill.)	20-5	02/25 vs. #19 Elmhurst
#11	363	Wesleyan	22-3	02/26 vs. Trinity (Conn.)
#12	356	St. Joseph (Conn.)	24-1	def. St. Joseph's (Maine), 95-45; 02/26 vs. Anna Maria; 02/27 at TBA
#13	336	Johns Hopkins	20-3	02/25 vs. Ursinus
#14	307	WPI	23-2	def. MIT, 68-52; 02/26 vs. Emerson
#15	291	Emory	18-5	02/26 vs. #31 Rochester
#16	254	Wabash	22-3	def. Hiram, 101-79; 02/25 vs. Denison
#17	227	Oswego State	23-2	02/25 vs. SUNY New Paltz
#18	193	Swarthmore	21-4	02/25 vs. Gettysburg
#19	152	Elmhurst	20-6	def. Augustana, 81-63; 02/25 vs. #10 Wheaton (Ill.)
#20	146	Yeshiva	24-3	def. SUNY-Purchase, 101-66; def. Mount St. Vincent, 89-62
#21	131	Williams	16-3	02/26 vs. #37 Middlebury
#22	127	Maryville (Tenn.)	20-4	LOST to LaGrange, 62-65
#23	102	Berry	21-2	02/26 vs. Birmingham-Southern
#24	98	Mass-Dartmouth	24-3	def. Southern Maine, 81-75; def. Plymouth State, 98-86; 02/26 vs. Keene State; 02/26 vs. TBA
#25	28	Stockton	23-4	def. TCNJ, 71-67; def. Montclair State, 92-78; 02/26 vs. Rowan

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	26	St. John's	21-4	def. Hamline, 74-53; 02/25 vs. St. Olaf
#27	23	Whitworth	21-4	def. Pacific Lutheran, 80-72; 02/26 vs. Whitman
#28	18	Guilford	18-6	def. (n) Hampden-Sydney, 77-69; 02/26 vs. Virginia Wesleyan
#29	14	Linfield	18-7	LOST to Whitman, 79-82
#30	13	Washington U.	17-7	won at Chicago, 71-46; 02/26 vs. Chicago
#31	10	Rochester	17-7	won at Alfred State, 100-66; 02/26 at #15 Emory
T#32	8	Hope	20-6	def. Kalamazoo, 80-58; 02/25 vs. Albion; 02/26 at TBA
T#32	8	LeTourneau	21-4	def. (n) Sul Ross State, 73-61; 02/25 vs. Hardin-Simmons
T#34	7	Pomona-Pitzer	19-4	won at La Verne, 90-61; def. Occidental, 96-66; 02/25 vs. Cal Lutheran; 02/27 vs. SCIAC Tournament
T#34	7	Chapman	21-3	won at Caltech, 66-65; def. Whittier, 87-84 OT; 02/25 vs. Claremont-Mudd-Scripps
#36	5	RPI	21-4	02/26 vs. Skidmore
#37	4	Middlebury	18-5	02/26 vs. #21 Williams
#38	2	Hanover	20-4	02/25 vs. Transylvania
T#39	1	Susquehanna	22-4	def. Juniata, 59-52; 02/26 vs. Drew
T#39	1	Trinity (Texas)	21-4	02/26 vs. TBA

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 25, 2022, 09:52:51 AM

Quote from: CNU85 on February 25, 2022, 09:06:12 AM
The conference tournament tracker has UMW playing CNU at 5pm tonight and then playing Salisbury at 7pm tonight.

The 5pm game is between UCSC and CNU. UMW plays SU at 7pm. Should be some good games to see.

You would think the C2C office would be able to set up its games correctly on its own website but apparently not. They fixed it this morning.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on February 25, 2022, 02:13:28 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 25, 2022, 09:52:51 AM
Quote from: CNU85 on February 25, 2022, 09:06:12 AM
The conference tournament tracker has UMW playing CNU at 5pm tonight and then playing Salisbury at 7pm tonight.

The 5pm game is between UCSC and CNU. UMW plays SU at 7pm. Should be some good games to see.

You would think the C2C office would be able to set up its games correctly on its own website but apparently not. They fixed it this morning.

Cool. Just wanted to give you guys a heads up since you have more folks looking at your stuff than the C2C site. Thanks Pat!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 27, 2022, 05:09:45 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

~~(Chapman/Pomona Pitzer just underway at 5:00 EST.)~~ A wild end to the SCIAC title game brings the regular season to a close.
Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	625	Randolph-Macon	27-1	def. (n) Bridgewater (Va.), 80-56; def. Roanoke, 75-58; def. (n) Virginia Wesleyan, 74-59
#2	595	Marietta	25-2	def. Ohio Northern, 99-63; def. Baldwin Wallace, 82-70; def. #8 Mount Union, 63-61
#3	574	UW-Oshkosh	22-3	def. UW-Whitewater, 86-77; def. #6 UW-Platteville, 75-73
#4	550	Christopher Newport	24-2	def. UC Santa Cruz, 89-69; def. Mary Washington, 80-69
#5	521	Illinois Wesleyan	21-5	LOST to North Central (Ill.), 74-81
#6	442	UW-Platteville	21-5	def. #9 UW-La Crosse, 74-51; LOST at #3 UW-Oshkosh, 73-75
#7	406	Mary Hardin-Baylor	25-2	def. Concordia (Texas), 87-82; def. Texas-Dallas, 90-73; def. T#32 LeTourneau, 99-82
#8	405	Mount Union	23-4	def. John Carroll, 93-65; def. Heidelberg, 68-65; LOST at #2 Marietta, 61-63
#9	376	UW-La Crosse	20-6	def. UW-Stevens Point, 74-70; LOST at #6 UW-Platteville, 51-74
#10	373	Wheaton (Ill.)	20-6	LOST to (n) #19 Elmhurst, 68-74
#11	363	Wesleyan	24-3	def. Trinity (Conn.), 70-67; def. #21 Williams, 78-75 OT
#12	356	St. Joseph (Conn.)	26-1	def. St. Joseph's (Maine), 95-45; def. Anna Maria, 99-46; def. Albertus Magnus, 94-67
#13	336	Johns Hopkins	22-3	def. Ursinus, 81-75; def. #18 Swarthmore, 80-66
#14	307	WPI	24-2	def. MIT, 68-52; def. Emerson, 70-54
#15	291	Emory	19-5	def. #31 Rochester, 76-74
#16	254	Wabash	24-3	def. Hiram, 101-79; def. Denison, 98-74; def. Wooster, 85-84 OT
#17	227	Oswego State	25-2	def. SUNY New Paltz, 94-60; def. SUNY Oneonta, 81-60
#18	193	Swarthmore	22-5	def. (n) Gettysburg, 80-64; LOST at #13 Johns Hopkins, 66-80
#19	152	Elmhurst	22-6	def. Augustana, 81-63; def. (n) #10 Wheaton (Ill.), 74-68; def. (n) North Central (Ill.), 82-65
#20	146	Yeshiva	25-3	def. SUNY-Purchase, 101-66; def. Mount St. Vincent, 89-62; def. Manhattanville, 74-40
#21	131	Williams	17-4	def. (n) #37 Middlebury, 78-61; LOST at #11 Wesleyan, 75-78 OT
#22	127	Maryville (Tenn.)	20-4	LOST to LaGrange, 62-65
#23	102	Berry	23-2	def. Birmingham-Southern, 77-58; def. Oglethorpe, 63-62
#24	98	Mass-Dartmouth	24-4	def. Southern Maine, 81-75; def. Plymouth State, 98-86; LOST to Keene State, 69-71 OT
#25	28	Stockton	24-4	def. TCNJ, 71-67; def. Montclair State, 92-78; def. Rowan, 95-91

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	26	St. John's	23-4	def. Hamline, 74-53; def. (n) St. Olaf, 76-57; def. Macalester, 75-71
#27	23	Whitworth	22-4	def. Pacific Lutheran, 80-72; def. Whitman, 85-59
#28	18	Guilford	18-7	def. (n) Hampden-Sydney, 77-69; LOST to (n) Virginia Wesleyan, 74-77
#29	14	Linfield	18-7	LOST to Whitman, 79-82
#30	13	Washington U.	18-7	won at Chicago, 71-46; def. Chicago, 70-59
#31	10	Rochester	17-8	won at Alfred State, 100-66; LOST at #15 Emory, 74-76
T#32	8	Hope	22-6	def. Kalamazoo, 80-58; def. Albion, 94-82; def. Calvin, 76-68
T#32	8	LeTourneau	22-5	def. (n) Sul Ross State, 73-61; def. (n) Hardin-Simmons, 70-61; LOST at #7 Mary Hardin-Baylor, 82-99
T#34	7	Pomona-Pitzer	21-4	won at La Verne, 90-61; def. Occidental, 96-66; def. Cal Lutheran, 90-83; def. T#34 Chapman, 76-71
T#34	7	Chapman	22-4	won at Caltech, 66-65; def. Whittier, 87-84 OT; def. Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 78-75; LOST at T#34 Pomona-Pitzer, 71-76
#36	5	RPI	21-5	LOST to Skidmore, 53-70
#37	4	Middlebury	18-6	LOST to (n) #21 Williams, 61-78
#38	2	Hanover	21-5	def. Transylvania, 90-74; LOST to Franklin, 84-91
T#39	1	Susquehanna	23-4	def. Juniata, 59-52; def. Drew, 76-68
T#39	1	Trinity (Texas)	22-5	def. (n) Schreiner, 88-65; LOST to (n) St. Thomas (Texas), 58-77

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on March 21, 2022, 11:43:42 AM

Looking forward to your final wrap-up showing how the penultimate Top 25 performed in the NCAA's...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on April 08, 2022, 03:11:51 PM

I received a package in the mail at work today. Some wiseguy sent me a t-shirt - RMC National Champions!

well played!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on April 08, 2022, 07:18:26 PM

Quote from: CNU85 on April 08, 2022, 03:11:51 PM
I received a package in the mail at work today. Some wiseguy sent me a t-shirt - RMC National Champions!

well played!

That was nice of him. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on April 09, 2022, 12:02:05 AM

Quote from: CNU85 on April 08, 2022, 03:11:51 PM
I received a package in the mail at work today. Some wiseguy sent me a t-shirt - RMC National Champions!

well played!

Hey, you'll always need a rag with which to dry the car when you wash it in the driveway, or to wipe the grease off of your tools in the garage, right?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on April 09, 2022, 09:12:55 AM

Quote from: CNU85 on April 08, 2022, 03:11:51 PM
I received a package in the mail at work today. Some wiseguy sent me a t-shirt - RMC National Champions!

well played!

Hmmmm... Someone knows where you live.

Hoping mine arrives soon.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on April 09, 2022, 02:27:15 PM

I don't want to step on Titan Q's toes because I know this is his forte, but when do we start our way way way too early top 25 discussion?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on April 09, 2022, 07:44:46 PM

Whenever you want.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on April 10, 2022, 09:22:31 AM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on April 09, 2022, 02:27:15 PM
I don't want to step on Titan Q's toes because I know this is his forte, but when do we start our way way way too early top 25 discussion?

It's my understanding that Titan Q is no longer posting on the boards. At least he has left the CCIW board. Time for someone else to take over. Might as well be you.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on April 11, 2022, 07:53:41 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on April 09, 2022, 12:02:05 AM
Quote from: CNU85 on April 08, 2022, 03:11:51 PM
I received a package in the mail at work today. Some wiseguy sent me a t-shirt - RMC National Champions!

well played!

Hey, you'll always need a rag with which to dry the car when you wash it in the driveway, or to wipe the grease off of your tools in the garage, right?

Yep. Yard work. Painting. There will always be a good use for it!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on April 11, 2022, 07:56:40 AM

Quote from: y_jack_lok on April 09, 2022, 09:12:55 AM
Quote from: CNU85 on April 08, 2022, 03:11:51 PM
I received a package in the mail at work today. Some wiseguy sent me a t-shirt - RMC National Champions!

well played!

Hmmmm... Someone knows where you live.

Hoping mine arrives soon.

HAHA! He knows where I work. But he "smoothed" the business relationship by also sending a CNU Tervis tumbler and a nice CNU flag for the front yard! Quality guy. He reps RMC very well!

He also played 4 years football for RMC

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on April 11, 2022, 01:12:15 PM

Quote from: CNU85 on April 11, 2022, 07:53:41 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on April 09, 2022, 12:02:05 AM
Quote from: CNU85 on April 08, 2022, 03:11:51 PM
I received a package in the mail at work today. Some wiseguy sent me a t-shirt - RMC National Champions!

well played!

Hey, you'll always need a rag with which to dry the car when you wash it in the driveway, or to wipe the grease off of your tools in the garage, right?

Yep. Yard work. Painting. There will always be a good use for it!

Of if there is another run on toilet paper, resulting in another shortage.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: centennial fan on April 12, 2022, 12:40:19 PM

40 Way Too Early Top 25 Candidates (Alphabetical Order)

Amherst
Augastana
Buena Vista
Calvin
Case Western
CNU
Elmhurst
Emory
Gettysburg
Guilford
Hope
Ithaca
Johns Hopkins
La Crosse
Linfield
Marietta
Mary Hardin-Baylor
Maryville TN
Millikin
Mount Union
Nebraska Wesleyan
North Central IL
Oshkosh
Oswego
Pacific Lutheran
Platteville
RMC
RPI
St. John's MN
St. Norbert
Swarthmore
TCNJ
Trine
Tufts
Ursinus
WashU
Wheaton
Whitworth
Williams
WPI

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on April 12, 2022, 11:51:48 PM

You can replace Amherst and Tufts with Middlebury and Wesleyan for NESCAC candidates. I don't know what their arguments would be, especially Amherst. Middlebury should definitely be on there, they return everybody.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on April 13, 2022, 07:21:26 AM

Other omissions of note:

Roanoke, Stockton, Vassar, St Joe's, Whitewater, Rochester, Rowan

I'd exclude:

Calvin, Case, Elmhurst, TCNJ, Gettysburg, Guilford, Linfield, Millikin, Pacific Lutheran, Ursinus, Buena Vista, prob a few others ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on April 13, 2022, 10:12:17 AM

I'd take UW-Platteville and Wheaton off of that list as well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on April 20, 2022, 01:07:40 PM

I'd also take out Trine - lose 60% of their minutes, points, and rebounds to graduation

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: stlawus on April 20, 2022, 02:18:31 PM

Vassar was never close to top 25 last year and I doubt they will next season but it should be noted they return everyone. Whether that translates to a leap forward remains to be seen. It's not unusual for a team like that to actually regress the following season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on April 20, 2022, 06:31:01 PM

Whitworth loses a bunch of players, but Whitman retina nearly everyone.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on April 20, 2022, 07:01:11 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on April 20, 2022, 06:31:01 PM
Whitworth loses a bunch of players, but Whitman retina nearly everyone.

So they can see nearly everyone! ;D

Hope they don't get contracts (cataracts) ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: RogK on April 20, 2022, 07:16:33 PM

The odds of Whitman retina nearly everyone are Slim.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on April 20, 2022, 07:20:51 PM

Hard to imagine a cornea joke than we've seen on the posts on this topic this evening.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ralph Turner on April 20, 2022, 07:28:21 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on April 20, 2022, 06:31:01 PM
Whitworth loses a bunch of players, but Whitman retina nearly everyone.

Pat had the best one-liner.

Just curious, are you using a medical spellchecker?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on April 20, 2022, 07:43:52 PM

Hopefully they're all good pupils so they qualify academically ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on April 20, 2022, 09:58:47 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on April 20, 2022, 06:31:01 PM
Whitworth loses a bunch of players, but Whitman retina nearly everyone.

The Blues just refuse to be detached from their school. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on April 20, 2022, 11:04:06 PM

(https://media.giphy.com/media/iAYupOdWXQy5a4nVGk/giphy.gif)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: itsnotmeitsyou on April 20, 2022, 11:50:21 PM

Eye don't see the humor in this... ::)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Next Man Up on April 21, 2022, 12:53:46 AM

Quote from: itsnotmeitsyou on April 20, 2022, 11:50:21 PM
Eye don't see the humor in this... ::)

+ 1 for that whopper. :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on April 21, 2022, 07:30:09 AM

I'm glad my predictive text and lack of proof reading can amuse everyone. At least I'm not the butt of anyone's jokes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on April 21, 2022, 09:22:30 AM

:D :D :D :D :D

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on April 21, 2022, 12:03:26 PM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on April 20, 2022, 07:28:21 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on April 20, 2022, 06:31:01 PM
Whitworth loses a bunch of players, but Whitman retina nearly everyone.
Pat had the best one-liner.

Pat's was pretty good, but Rog's was right up there as well.

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on April 21, 2022, 07:30:09 AM
I'm glad my predictive text and lack of proof reading can amuse everyone.

Are you seriopus?!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on April 21, 2022, 01:09:08 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on April 20, 2022, 11:04:06 PM
(https://media.giphy.com/media/iAYupOdWXQy5a4nVGk/giphy.gif)

Usually, any reference to the Big Lebowski is the winner...or Office Space.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on April 21, 2022, 01:12:34 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on April 21, 2022, 01:09:08 PM
Quote from: WUPHF on April 20, 2022, 11:04:06 PM
(https://media.giphy.com/media/iAYupOdWXQy5a4nVGk/giphy.gif)

Usually, any reference to the Big Lebowski is the winner...or Office Space.

(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/39/57/11/395711d3eb6e60039576b05fc250fc75.gif)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: RogK on April 21, 2022, 09:39:44 PM

a late addition for retina humor :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=as_4O2ViPfc
(the caption should say "open" instead of "other")

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on April 26, 2022, 08:48:36 AM

Not sure of the best place to post this. Just thought some folks would find it interesting.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/04/25/herkimer-new-york-basketball/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F36ab71f%2F6266c281956121755a4f5382%2F5d8eba7eade4e23ecc892665%2F37%2F72%2F6266c281956121755a4f5382

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on September 22, 2022, 09:26:27 AM

List of teams which I think belong in the Preseason Top 25 discussion. Some of these are shoo-ins, others probably are doubtful to make many ballots. Who is missing from this list, and which teams don't belong?

Berry
CNU
CWRU
Dubuque
Elmhurst
Emerson
Emory
Hampden-Sydney
Heidelberg
Hope
IWU
John Carroll
Johns Hopkins
Keene State
LeTourneau
Marietta
Maryville (TN)
Middlebury
Mount Union
Mount Union
Oswego State
Pomona-Pitzer
RMC
Roanoke
Rochester
Rowan
Saint John's
Saint Joseph (CT)
St. Thomas (TX)
Stockton
Swarthmore
Trinity (TX)
UMHB
UW-La Crosse
UW-Oshkosh
UW-Platteville
UW-Whitewater
WashU
Wesleyan (CT)
Wheaton (IL)
Whitworth
Williams
WPI

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on September 22, 2022, 09:38:50 AM

I think the earliest I've seen games scheduled is Tuesday, November 8. I presume the preseason poll will be out at the end of October?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on September 22, 2022, 09:44:09 AM

I would move Emory to the do not belong category until further notice.

I am 100% sure they have talent, but they lose the best or second best point guard they have ever had and quite possibly the best player they have ever had. They return two sophomore forwards and a guard or two that have a lot of promise and a few solid upperclassman. The roster shows a transfer from Vanderbilt as well who averaged 2.4 minutes per game as a sophomore, so who knows... There are so many questions left to be answered.

If I was a voter, this team would not be on my radar.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on September 22, 2022, 09:51:54 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on September 22, 2022, 09:38:50 AM
I think the earliest I've seen games scheduled is Tuesday, November 8. I presume the preseason poll will be out at the end of October?

I mean, we would love to be closer to Oct. 15, but ramping up the process takes a while and I'm not sure if we can hit that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on September 22, 2022, 10:16:51 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 22, 2022, 09:51:54 AM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on September 22, 2022, 09:38:50 AM
I think the earliest I've seen games scheduled is Tuesday, November 8. I presume the preseason poll will be out at the end of October?

I mean, we would love to be closer to Oct. 15, but ramping up the process takes a while and I'm not sure if we can hit that.

So between Oct 15 and Oct 31. LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on September 22, 2022, 10:22:18 AM

Mount Union is going to be pretty good, but you probably only need to list them once. ;D

North Central (IL) will be in there with Matt Helwig back, I believe. Wooster probably the favorite in the NCAC with Wabash losing Davidson and Co.

Whitman before Whitworth.

Nichols brings back nearly everyone for their 6th year.

Hanover?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WPI89 on September 22, 2022, 10:56:51 AM

WPI has a midnight game the "night of Nov 7" - so 12:01 am the 8th - pretty sure that is the first game!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on September 22, 2022, 11:16:52 AM

Augustana has a chance to be a really good team in 2022-23.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on September 22, 2022, 01:00:48 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on September 22, 2022, 11:16:52 AM
Augustana has a chance to be a really good team in 2022-23.

The last I looked, Augustana lost key players to graduation and attrition, but maybe I am mistaken or maybe their newcomers are fantastic?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on September 22, 2022, 01:10:45 PM

Their freshman class was very solid last season, and they still have one of the foremost matchup problems in the midwest in Daniel Carr.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on September 22, 2022, 01:41:56 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on September 22, 2022, 01:10:45 PM
Their freshman class was very solid last season, and they still have one of the foremost matchup problems in the midwest in Daniel Carr.

It is going to be a challenge to rank the teams with so many talented players graduating, especially the fifth-year players, but Augustana does not look like the prototypical Top 25 team, but we should have a sense by the end of November, given their schedule.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on September 22, 2022, 02:03:44 PM

I'm telling you, the Doggies have a chance to be really good in 2022-23, especially in a CCIW that should be up for grabs.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on September 22, 2022, 02:34:36 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on September 22, 2022, 02:03:44 PM
I'm telling you, the Doggies have a chance to be really good in 2022-23, especially in a CCIW that should be up for grabs.

As one of three common opponents from the CCIW, I hope they do well.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on September 23, 2022, 10:33:59 AM

There is no doubt that there will be a few teams each from the UAA and CCIW who end up being very strong this year -- but it just seems like neither conference has anything close to an obvious top-10 team, and a lot of uncertainty and competitive balance from top to bottom. I imagine something like 4-5 teams in each could get a first place vote in a pre-season conference poll. Makes it very difficult to figure out who the inevitable top 25 squads emerging from those leagues will ultimately be ...

Compare that to say New England, where it just seems like every major league has a loaded team (or two) clearly at the top of the pre-season standings ... Williams / Midd in NESCAC, WPI / Emerson in NEWMAC, Keene State in LEC, Nichols in CCC, St. Joseph's in GNAC. All of those teams are at worst top 40 teams nationally and most are clearly top 20, but it's unclear where the depth in any of those leagues is going to come from.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on September 23, 2022, 12:33:15 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on September 23, 2022, 10:33:59 AM
There is no doubt that there will be a few teams each from the UAA and CCIW who end up being very strong this year -- but it just seems like neither conference has anything close to an obvious top-10 team, and a lot of uncertainty and competitive balance from top to bottom. I imagine something like 4-5 teams in each could get a first place vote in a pre-season conference poll. Makes it very difficult to figure out who the inevitable top 25 squads emerging from those leagues will ultimately be ...

That seems like an accurate read of both leagues to me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on September 23, 2022, 02:48:35 PM

Agreed! This should be a particularly fun season for both leagues for those reasons.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Next Man Up on September 23, 2022, 05:14:36 PM

Elmhurst lost All-American Rhode, plus top players Genco, Thomas, and Millitello. They still have Hooker and Johnson, but are they really still a Top 25 team after these significant losses?

Wheaton lost All-American Adom, plus Alioth, Anthony, and Uvegas. Top 25 without these top guys?

IWU lost All-American Leritz, plus Noe, Yoder, and Lambesis. However it seems what they have returning still puts them in the Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Next Man Up on September 23, 2022, 05:27:31 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on September 22, 2022, 10:22:18 AM
Mount Union is going to be pretty good, but you probably only need to list them once. ;D

North Central (IL) will be in there with Matt Helwig back, I believe.

North Central, honest? Are you talking about the same Matt Helwig who somehow couldn't even make All-American? Pshaw! ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on September 23, 2022, 05:32:33 PM

Quote from: Next Man Up on September 23, 2022, 05:14:36 PM
IWU lost All-American Leritz, plus Noe, Yoder, and Lambesis. However it seems what they have returning still puts them in the Top 25.

Is that a statement or question?

It is crazy because they are one starter in Mitchell (25 mpg) and then two reserves in Sroka (20 mpg) and Heflen (20 mpg) who will be surely starters and then a lot who knows?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Next Man Up on September 23, 2022, 06:47:54 PM

Quote from: WUPHF on September 23, 2022, 05:32:33 PM
Quote from: Next Man Up on September 23, 2022, 05:14:36 PM
IWU lost All-American Leritz, plus Noe, Yoder, and Lambesis. However it seems what they have returning still puts them in the Top 25.

Is that a statement or question?

It is crazy because they are one starter in Mitchell (25 mpg) and then two reserves in Sroka (20 mpg) and Heflen (20 mpg) who will be surely starters and then a lot who knows?

Preseason wise, I personally question the prospect. However, the Green Weenies will likely be voted #1 in the CCIW Coaches Poll, and I don't believe the Top 25 Voters will exclude the CCIW team voted to that position from the Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on September 23, 2022, 10:35:14 PM

Quote from: Next Man Up on September 23, 2022, 05:27:31 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on September 22, 2022, 10:22:18 AM
Mount Union is going to be pretty good, but you probably only need to list them once. ;D

North Central (IL) will be in there with Matt Helwig back, I believe.

North Central, honest? Are you talking about the same Matt Helwig who somehow couldn't even make All-American? Pshaw! ;)

He was 1st team All Region, unanimous 1st team all conference. Aside from Augustana's David Carr, Matt Helwig is the only 1st team all conference player coming back.

Pretty sure NCC will be pretty good and Helwig will be in the All American convo.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on September 24, 2022, 12:11:24 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on September 23, 2022, 10:35:14 PM
Quote from: Next Man Up on September 23, 2022, 05:27:31 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on September 22, 2022, 10:22:18 AM
Mount Union is going to be pretty good, but you probably only need to list them once. ;D

North Central (IL) will be in there with Matt Helwig back, I believe.

North Central, honest? Are you talking about the same Matt Helwig who somehow couldn't even make All-American? Pshaw! ;)

He was 1st team All Region, unanimous 1st team all conference. Aside from Augustana's David Carr, Matt Helwig is the only 1st team all conference player coming back.

Pretty sure NCC will be pretty good and Helwig will be in the All American convo.

I think it's safe to say Helwig was prominently involved in the conversations about 5th Team All Americans last year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on September 29, 2022, 11:22:22 AM

Watch out for Johns Hopkins, which just posted its roster. They have three grad students listed - returning starters Ethan Bartlett and Tom Quarry, plus UVA grad transfer Jayden Nixon (listed as Nix for some reason). Although a walk-on at UVA, Nixon was very highly regarded coming out of high school (would have been a top D3 recruit) and played four years in practice v. national championship level competition, earning a scholarship after one year. Although Delaney is a big loss, they are still very (maybe just as?) talented at PG between Nixon and Lincoln Yeutter, another former D1 guy who is an elite two-way athlete and I figure could really step up with a more defined role this year. Sydney Thybulle seemed to figure it out down the stretch, a physical dude who could be a big-time center for them as a senior.

More on Nixon here: https://www.si.com/college/virginia/basketball/jayden-nixon-to-play-fifth-year-at-johns-hopkins

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Stretch4 on September 29, 2022, 03:06:32 PM

Hopkins has been flying under the radar a bit this off-season/pre-season in discussions on top 25 level teams. I am sure they are fine with that. They are definitely loaded with 4 returning starters (which include a 1st team all conference player and an honorable mention all conference player), a very talented former D1 player in Yeutter who will certainly break out from Delaney's shadow this year, and the UVA grad transfer you mentioned. Tons of experience on the roster and a good deal of quality depth on the team. As the two-time defending Centennial Conference champion, it is interesting how JHU still seems to play second fiddle to Swarthmore in terms of national recognition from the conference. JHU has Christopher Newport in game 1 this year, so big opportunity.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on September 29, 2022, 03:19:43 PM

To be fair to the prognosticators on Hopkins, I'm not sure folks were aware of (a) the two returning starters attending graduate school and (b) the D1 transfer; that's probably three of Hopkins' top six players. Take away those three guys (plus Delaney), I don't think Hopkins is a top 30 team. But with them? To me at least, very clearly top 20 with a lot of upside beyond that. I agree that, looking at Swarthmore's roster and given how Swarthmore ended last season, Hopkins should be the Centennial favorite, then Swarthmore, then probably Gettysburg.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on September 29, 2022, 04:28:38 PM

Of course Swat is going to get a lot of attention. Just looking at their roster...back in April, they were returning 6 of their top 7 guys with only Conor Harkins not returning. Obviously, a lot has changed since then. Look at all the developing rosters from JCU getting 4 D1 transfers and Mount Union welcoming back Colleen Gurley, among other things. I'm sure we still have a few surprises in store once rosters come out.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PauldingLightUP on October 20, 2022, 02:41:54 PM

2023 NCAA Division III Men's Basketball Championship is set for 6pmET on Saturday March 18th on CBSSN per Paramount release.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hotdawg on October 25, 2022, 10:11:38 AM

I know HCAC doesn't get much love but I think Hanover should be in Top 25 consideration. Great Season last year ... won 21 games including at Wabash (turns out they were pretty good eh?) and bring a ton of talent back. Have great shooting with wings who can guard. Also return Munoz who could be POY in the conference ... Versatile/Skilled Big man. Hanover is going to be a Nightmare to guard.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ziggy on October 26, 2022, 10:08:54 AM

Quote from: hotdawg on October 25, 2022, 10:11:38 AM
I know HCAC doesn't get much love but I think Hanover should be in Top 25 consideration. Great Season last year ... won 21 games including at Wabash (turns out they were pretty good eh?) and bring a ton of talent back. Have great shooting with wings who can guard. Also return Munoz who could be POY in the conference ... Versatile/Skilled Big man. Hanover is going to be a Nightmare to guard.

The preseason Top 25 is supposed to come out today but I've been tracking a projected poll based on individual voters revealing their ballots. Seven voters have done that so far, so here is a look at the top 25 based on those ballots only: https://twitter.com/d3datacast/status/1585270025589604353

I can say going deeper in the data, Hanover has not been one of the 41 different schools to be named on at least one ballot.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: hotdawg on October 26, 2022, 10:36:35 AM

Quote from: ziggy on October 26, 2022, 10:08:54 AM
The preseason Top 25 is supposed to come out today but I've been tracking a projected poll based on individual voters revealing their ballots. Seven voters have done that so far, so here is a look at the top 25 based on those ballots only: https://twitter.com/d3datacast/status/1585270025589604353

I can say going deeper in the data, Hanover has not been one of the 41 different schools to be named on at least one ballot.

Interesting, well it looks like they may get a chance to make a statement vs a Top25 when they play at Wheaton November 18th.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ziggy on October 26, 2022, 11:31:41 AM

Preseason Top 25 has been announced: https://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2022-23/preseason

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 26, 2022, 11:35:51 AM

https://d3hoops.com/notables/2022/10/mens-poll-released

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on October 26, 2022, 01:21:48 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 26, 2022, 11:35:51 AM
https://d3hoops.com/notables/2022/10/mens-poll-released

Maybe it's just me, but even with 8 Seniors returning (3 are 5th yr guys) and a returning All-American, I'm still a little uneasy. We don't have Aigner shooting from beyond the 3 and we don't have Peterson who was a D2 transfer that really changed how CNU looked. We lost a lot of leadership.

We do have a D2 transfer from USC-Aiken and a transfer who was AMCC co-player of the year last year from Medaille. It's obviously way to early to tell if they will have a significant impact.

Let the games begin. Let's see what happens.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 27, 2022, 07:39:54 AM

Quote from: CNU85 on October 26, 2022, 01:21:48 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 26, 2022, 11:35:51 AM
https://d3hoops.com/notables/2022/10/mens-poll-released

Maybe it's just me, but even with 8 Seniors returning (3 are 5th yr guys) and a returning All-American, I'm still a little uneasy. We don't have Aigner shooting from beyond the 3 and we don't have Peterson who was a D2 transfer that really changed how CNU looked. We lost a lot of leadership.

We do have a D2 transfer from USC-Aiken and a transfer who was AMCC co-player of the year last year from Medaille. It's obviously way to early to tell if they will have a significant impact.

Let the games begin. Let's see what happens.

I think, for a lot of voters, it's a long track record of what Coach K can do with even a mildly talented team. This is 85-90% of one of his most talented ever.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 27, 2022, 10:44:01 AM

Yeah. I feel for you, CNU85. Must be rough to only bring back Anderson, Hines, Barber and Henderson, not to mention Graves coming in, among others. I suppose it could be worse like losing 4 starters, something Marietta and IWU are going through...and they're still ranked. I have no doubt you'll pull through these "uneasy" times for CNU. It could be a long season for you guys...as in, you may play 32 or 33 games! ::) ::) ::) ;D :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on October 28, 2022, 11:22:10 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 27, 2022, 10:44:01 AM
Yeah. I feel for you, CNU85. Must be rough to only bring back Anderson, Hines, Barber and Henderson, not to mention Graves coming in, among others. I suppose it could be worse like losing 4 starters, something Marietta and IWU are going through...and they're still ranked. I have no doubt you'll pull through these "uneasy" times for CNU. It could be a long season for you guys...as in, you may play 32 or 33 games! ::) ::) ::) ;D :P

:D :D

I just don't want to get over confident!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 28, 2022, 12:46:00 PM

If you want to start with low confidence, you can cheer on my Pointers with me. They were 4-17 last year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on October 28, 2022, 04:08:10 PM

I will cheer loudly for them. I predict a better record this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 08, 2022, 01:45:17 AM

Heck of an opening game for the D3 season. Big crowd, WPI band keeping everyone hype even at 1:30am.

#8 WPI led most of the way but Worcester St kept it within reach and took the lead in the final minute. WPI responds with a layup for a 71-70 lead with 21 seconds left.
After an offensive foul, John Adams left wide open (how do you not notice the big man?) on the inbound and gets an easy layup with 3.6 on the clock. 73-70
WPI opts for the foul up 3 with 1.2 left. WSU hits the first FT, missed the second but WPI gets the rebound and wins 73-71.

Hopefully this is a sign of how exciting the season will be :)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 17, 2022, 02:27:47 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

This lists games through Sunday, 11/26 (after which, I assume, we'll have the first in-season poll). Note: report split into two posts because of character limits.

edit[11/20]: Oops, this is through Saturday, 11/26, so next Sunday's games are not included here ...

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	593	Randolph-Macon	2-1	def. (n) Mary Baldwin, 71-49; won at Hood, 80-78 3OT; LOST at Mary Washington, 52-58; 11/19 vs. #43 Hampden-Sydney
#2	559	Mary Hardin-Baylor	2-1	LOST at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 70-81; won at Redlands, 92-82; won at #12 Pomona-Pitzer, 84-71
#3	556	UW-Oshkosh	2-1	def. Lawrence, 76-63; LOST at #39 Calvin, 56-59; won at #29 Hope, 67-56; 11/18 vs. #13 St. Joseph (Conn.); 11/19 vs. Nebraska Wesleyan; 11/22 vs. Edgewood; 11/26 vs. #21 Illinois Wesleyan
#4	551	Christopher Newport	2-0	won at #10 Johns Hopkins, 74-61; def. Lynchburg, 96-64; 11/18 vs. Washington and Lee; 11/19 vs. TBA; 11/22 vs. Methodist; 11/26 vs. Sarah Lawrence
#5	478	Oswego State	3-0	def. (n) Hobart, 65-53; won at Eastern Connecticut, 60-50; won at Clarkson, 94-69; 11/22 at T#53 Nazareth
#6	423	Williams	1-0	won at Worcester State, 79-60; 11/18 vs. Clarks Summit; 11/19 vs. SUNY Delhi; 11/22 at Massachusetts College
#7	383	Mount Union	2-0	def. #31 Whitworth, 84-74; def. T#50 Maryville (Tenn.), 99-75; 11/17 at Penn State-Behrend; 11/18 vs. Juniata; 11/23 at T#32 Wooster
#8	363	WPI	2-0	def. Worcester State, 73-71; def. Rutgers-Newark, 57-39; 11/18 vs. Maine-Farmington; 11/20 at Emmanuel; 11/22 vs. Fitchburg State
#9	293	Stockton	3-0	won at Baruch, 69-60; won at #59 Penn State-Harrisburg, 72-69; won at DeSales, 73-70 OT; 11/22 vs. T#32 Rowan; 11/26 vs. Widener
#10	284	Johns Hopkins	2-1	LOST to #4 Christopher Newport, 61-74; won at Salisbury, 67-53; def. York (Pa.), 82-63; 11/19 at Lycoming; 11/22 at Gettysburg
#11	275	Rochester	3-0	won at SUNY Geneseo, 79-62; def. Texas-Dallas, 79-69; def. #18 Trinity (Texas), 78-63; 11/17 vs. T#60 St. John Fisher; 11/19 vs. T#53 Nazareth; 11/22 at Hobart
#12	274	Pomona-Pitzer	0-2	LOST to Vanguard, 66-82; LOST to #2 Mary Hardin-Baylor, 71-84; 11/19 vs. Bethesda; 11/22 at Master's; 11/25 vs. UC Santa Cruz; 11/26 vs. Puget Sound
#13	272	St. Joseph (Conn.)	2-0	def. #40 Yeshiva, 69-60; def. #37 Babson, 77-56; 11/18 vs. #3 UW-Oshkosh; 11/19 vs. #21 Illinois Wesleyan
#14	261	Middlebury	0-0	11/18 at Westfield State; 11/19 vs. #42 Nichols; 11/22 at NVU-Johnson
#15	253	UW-La Crosse	3-0	def. #25 St. John's, 84-80; won at #17 Marietta, 83-75; def. (n) Guilford, 74-68; 11/18 vs. Cornell; 11/19 vs. TBA; 11/22 vs. Ripon
#16	229	Washington U.	2-1	def. Blackburn, 96-67; LOST at #26 Wabash, 67-70; won at Webster, 53-52; 11/22 vs. Millikin
#17	203	Marietta	1-1	LOST to #15 UW-La Crosse, 75-83; def. La Roche, 83-73; 11/18 at #26 Wabash; 11/19 vs. T#34 Keene State
#18	194	Trinity (Texas)	1-1	def. (n) Fredonia, 83-48; LOST at #11 Rochester, 63-78; 11/19 vs. Hamilton; 11/20 vs. T#56 LeTourneau; 11/23 at Sul Ross State; 11/25 vs. McMurry; 11/26 vs. T#46 Hardin-Simmons
#19	155	Case Western Reserve	4-0	def. Denison, 78-72; def. Oberlin, 78-66; def. Dickinson, 71-60; def. La Roche, 88-81; ~~11/18 at Buffalo State~~ postponed; ~~11/19 vs. Medaille~~ postponed
#20	147	RPI	3-0	def. (n) SUNY Potsdam, 65-53; won at Hilbert, 99-76; def. SUNY Delhi, 80-65; 11/18 vs. Centenary (N.J.); 11/19 vs. TBD
#21	128	Illinois Wesleyan	1-1	def. #40 Yeshiva, 76-71; LOST to UW-Stevens Point, 67-71; 11/18 vs. Nebraska Wesleyan; 11/19 vs. #13 St. Joseph (Conn.); 11/26 at #3 UW-Oshkosh
#22	121	Wesleyan	1-1	def. (n) Haverford, 83-74 OT; LOST at #28 Swarthmore, 61-79; 11/19 vs. T#32 Rowan; 11/22 at Emmanuel; 11/26 vs. Farmingdale State
#23	120	Elmhurst	3-0	def. Transylvania, 97-68; won at Alma, 110-74; won at Marian, 86-68; 11/19 at Buena Vista; 11/22 vs. Manchester
#24	106	Wheaton (Ill.)	2-0	won at Benedictine, 84-68; def. Transylvania, 82-63; 11/18 vs. T#60 Hanover; 11/19 vs. TBA; 11/22 at Lake Forest; 11/26 vs. Chicago
#25	104	St. John's	2-1	LOST at #15 UW-La Crosse, 80-84; def. UW-Eau Claire, 71-70 2OT; def. Buena Vista, 67-57; 11/19 at St. Olaf; 11/22 at Gustavus Adolphus

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	84	Wabash	3-0	def. Mount St. Joseph, 81-78; def. #16 Washington U., 70-67; won at T#60 Hanover, 79-69; 11/18 vs. #17 Marietta; 11/19 vs. T#50 Maryville (Tenn.); 11/22 at Anderson
#27	78	Emory	2-0	def. Piedmont, 85-67; won at Sewanee, 101-76; 11/19 vs. Guilford; 11/22 vs. Covenant
#28	68	Swarthmore	3-1	won at T#32 Rowan, 71-70; def. Bowdoin, 90-68; def. #22 Wesleyan, 79-61; LOST at Widener, 66-67; 11/19 at DeSales; 11/22 vs. Muhlenberg
#29	51	Hope	2-1	def. UW-Stout, 74-63; LOST to #3 UW-Oshkosh, 56-67; won at T#56 UW-Whitewater, 72-68; 11/19 vs. North Park; 11/26 vs. Rockford
#30	49	St. Thomas (Texas)	2-0	def. Arlington Baptist, 105-69; def. East Texas Baptist, 83-81; 11/18 at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps; 11/19 at Redlands; 11/23 at Texas-Dallas; 11/26 at Concordia (Texas)
#31	47	Whitworth	0-2	LOST at #7 Mount Union, 74-84; LOST to (n) T#46 Roanoke, 86-89; 11/17 vs. Sul Ross State; 11/22 vs. Cal Lutheran; 11/25 vs. Carleton; 11/26 vs. TBA
T#32	43	Rowan	0-2	LOST to #28 Swarthmore, 70-71; LOST at Marymount, 88-89; 11/19 at #22 Wesleyan; 11/22 at #9 Stockton
T#32	43	Wooster	0-0	11/18 vs. Mount Aloysius; 11/19 vs. TBA; 11/23 vs. #7 Mount Union
T#34	38	Keene State	2-0	won at Westfield State, 86-71; def. Rutgers-Newark, 102-66; 11/18 vs. T#50 Maryville (Tenn.); 11/19 at #17 Marietta; 11/22 at Springfield; 11/26 vs. MIT
T#34	38	Heidelberg	2-1	LOST to T#56 UW-Whitewater, 67-78; def. Olivet, 89-64; won at Bluffton, 66-61; 11/22 vs. Albion; 11/26 at #48 Ohio Wesleyan
#36	37	UW-Platteville	2-1	def. (n) Lawrence, 82-71; won at UW-Superior, 77-68; LOST at Ripon, 67-69; 11/18 vs. Mount Mercy; 11/22 at Augustana; 11/26 vs. Illinois Tech
#37	25	Babson	2-1	won at Lasell, 76-65; def. Salve Regina, 80-72; LOST at #13 St. Joseph (Conn.), 56-77; 11/19 at Tufts; 11/20 at TBA; 11/23 vs. Amherst
#38	23	Dubuque	2-1	LOST to (n) T#44 North Central (Ill.), 70-81; won at Carroll, 68-53; won at Edgewood, 82-71; 11/22 at Wartburg; 11/26 at Monmouth
#39	19	Calvin	4-0	def. Grace Bible, 93-53; def. #3 UW-Oshkosh, 59-56; def. UW-Stout, 76-63; won at Illinois Tech, 65-62; 11/22 vs. Hiram; 11/25 vs. Rockford; 11/26 vs. UW-Stevens Point
#40	18	Yeshiva	2-2	LOST at #13 St. Joseph (Conn.), 60-69; LOST at #21 Illinois Wesleyan, 71-76; def. (n) Webster, 75-58; def. St. Joseph's (Bklyn.), 102-65; 11/19 vs. Farmingdale State; 11/22 at SUNY-Purchase
#41	16	John Carroll	2-0	def. Wittenberg, 94-72; def. #48 Ohio Wesleyan, 70-55; 11/18 vs. UW-River Falls; 11/19 vs. TBA; 11/23 vs. Fredonia
#42	15	Nichols	2-1	def. Eastern Connecticut, 90-83; LOST at Trinity (Conn.), 55-74; won at Anna Maria, 94-75; 11/18 vs. New England College; 11/19 vs. #14 Middlebury; 11/22 vs. Thomas
#43	12	Hampden-Sydney	2-1	LOST at Greensboro, 77-82; def. (n) Alvernia, 79-62; won at Franklin and Marshall, 80-64; 11/19 at #1 Randolph-Macon; 11/22 at Mary Washington
T#44	11	Mass.-Dartmouth	1-1	def. Connecticut College, 57-52; LOST to Kean, 73-81; 11/19 at MIT; 11/22 vs. Brandeis
T#44	11	North Central (Ill.)	2-1	def. (n) #38 Dubuque, 81-70; def. (n) Whitman, 77-60; LOST at Aurora, 79-81 OT; 11/19 at T#56 UW-Whitewater; 11/22 vs. Benedictine
T#46	10	Hardin-Simmons	1-1	def. Texas Lutheran, 91-63; LOST to Schreiner, 68-76; 11/19 vs. Texas-Dallas; 11/25 at Southwestern; 11/26 at #18 Trinity (Texas)
T#46	10	Roanoke	1-1	LOST to (n) T#50 Maryville (Tenn.), 81-90; def. (n) #31 Whitworth, 89-86; 11/18 vs. Alfred; 11/18 vs. .; 11/19 vs. .; 11/19 vs. .
#48	8	Ohio Wesleyan	1-1	def. (n) Buffalo State, 79-63; LOST at #41 John Carroll, 55-70; 11/19 at Albion; 11/23 at Capital; 11/26 vs. T#34 Heidelberg
#49	6	Berry	4-0	def. Huntingdon, 86-66; def. (n) LaGrange, 88-83 OT; won at Huntingdon, 79-63; def. Belhaven, 62-57; 11/19 vs. Warren Wilson; 11/26 vs. Pfeiffer
T#50	5	Brockport	2-1	LOST to Alfred, 69-72; def. Keystone, 92-78; def. Hobart, 71-67; 11/22 at York (N.Y.)
T#50	5	Maryville (Tenn.)	2-1	def. Sewanee, 76-55; def. (n) T#46 Roanoke, 90-81; LOST at #7 Mount Union, 75-99; 11/18 vs. T#34 Keene State; 11/19 at #26 Wabash
T#50	5	Emerson	1-2	def. Gordon, 95-51; LOST to Tufts, 78-80 OT; LOST to Bridgewater State, 79-81; 11/19 at UMass Lowell; 11/22 vs. Suffolk

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 17, 2022, 02:29:09 PM

How They Fared (So Far), Part II

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
T#53	4	Ithaca	2-2	LOST to Cortland, 80-82; LOST at Montclair State, 79-93; won at Centenary (N.J.), 97-71; def. Keystone, 95-80
T#53	4	Nazareth	2-0	def. Gordon, 90-72; def. Cortland, 79-44; 11/17 at Rochester Tech; 11/19 vs. #11 Rochester; 11/22 vs. #5 Oswego State
T#53	4	Pacific Lutheran	2-0	won at Evergreen St., 100-67; def. Warner Pacific, 77-71; 11/19 vs. Cal Lutheran; 11/20 vs. Mont. St.-Northern
T#56	3	Stevens	0-3	LOST to (n) Vassar, 59-63; LOST to (n) SUNY Geneseo, 51-53; LOST at New Jersey City, 48-58; 11/19 vs. Scranton; 11/22 at Baruch
T#56	3	UW-Whitewater	3-1	won at Augustana, 95-90; won at T#34 Heidelberg, 78-67; def. (n) Pitt-Bradford, 86-74; LOST to #29 Hope, 68-72; 11/19 vs. T#44 North Central (Ill.); 11/26 vs. Ripon
T#56	3	LeTourneau	1-0	def. Texas College, 92-87 OT; 11/19 at Southwestern; 11/20 vs. #18 Trinity (Texas); 11/26 at Schreiner
#59	2	Penn State-Harrisburg	1-2	def. Chatham, 72-54; LOST to #9 Stockton, 69-72; LOST at Kean, 77-85; 11/19 vs. Bridgewater (Va.); 11/22 at Messiah
T#60	1	Hanover	1-1	won at Spalding, 73-42; LOST to #26 Wabash, 69-79; 11/18 at #24 Wheaton (Ill.); 11/19 vs. TBA
T#60	1	St. John Fisher	1-2	LOST at Hobart, 65-88; def. (n) Pfeiffer, 79-74; LOST at Virginia Wesleyan, 69-80; 11/17 vs. #11 Rochester; 11/19 at Rochester Tech

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: restling on November 18, 2022, 04:49:05 PM

This is awesome. Going to be a weekly post?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 18, 2022, 07:49:40 PM

Quote from: restling on November 18, 2022, 04:49:05 PM
This is awesome. Going to be a weekly post?

Hi, restling -
Yes, this is a tradition started a long time ago by [someone whose name I don't remember because I'm getting old, but I'm sure some other long-timer will fill in that detail.] I took over when I wrote a program that automates most of the work. I typically post a final report on Sunday night (the day before a new poll comes out), and sometimes (when I remember) post a mid-week report so you can see what noteworthy games may be coming up.

Edit: OK, curiosity got the better of me, so I went poking about in the early archives of this board, and found what appears to be the first such report, from Ryan Scott. I believe one or two others also posted reports before I started.

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 21, 2005, 11:19:17 AM

I'm not sure if there will be a new poll this week or if we're waiting until next week, but here it goes:

#1 IWU wins over TX-Dallas and Wabash
#2 Oshkosh hasn't played yet
#3 Wooster wins over Kalamazoo and Stout
...

(It appears that would make this coming Monday the 17th birthday of HTF.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 19, 2022, 10:53:08 AM

I believe there's no poll this week. Pat wanted to get a lot of these games done before we reassess, hopefully to limit how much the preseason poll affects things. As a voter, it's always nice to come to the list fresh, with actual results, as opposed to trying to move around slots of a preseason poll, which is really just guesswork to begin with.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 27, 2022, 05:48:15 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	593	Randolph-Macon	4-1	def. (n) Mary Baldwin, 71-49; won at Hood, 80-78 3OT; LOST at Mary Washington, 52-58; def. #43 Hampden-Sydney, 61-59; def. Randolph, 91-74
#2	559	Mary Hardin-Baylor	2-1	LOST at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 70-81; won at Redlands, 92-82; won at #12 Pomona-Pitzer, 84-71
#3	556	UW-Oshkosh	5-2	def. Lawrence, 76-63; LOST at #39 Calvin, 56-59; won at #29 Hope, 67-56; LOST to (n) #13 St. Joseph (Conn.), 44-60; def. (n) Nebraska Wesleyan, 63-57; def. Edgewood, 79-52; def. #21 Illinois Wesleyan, 66-47
#4	551	Christopher Newport	7-0	won at #10 Johns Hopkins, 74-61; def. Lynchburg, 96-64; def. (n) Washington and Lee, 85-84 OT; won at Susquehanna, 81-57; def. Methodist, 82-59; def. Sarah Lawrence, 87-52; def. N.C. Wesleyan, 79-71
#5	478	Oswego State	3-1	def. (n) Hobart, 65-53; won at Eastern Connecticut, 60-50; won at Clarkson, 94-69; LOST at T#53 Nazareth, 77-80
#6	423	Williams	5-0	won at Worcester State, 79-60; def. Clarks Summit, 98-54; def. SUNY Delhi, 95-68; won at Massachusetts College, 87-59; won at St. Lawrence, 50-47
#7	383	Mount Union	5-0	def. #31 Whitworth, 84-74; def. T#50 Maryville (Tenn.), 99-75; won at Penn State-Behrend, 76-63; def. (n) Juniata, 78-66; won at T#32 Wooster, 94-76
#8	363	WPI	5-0	def. Worcester State, 73-71; def. Rutgers-Newark, 57-39; def. Maine-Farmington, 67-46; won at Emmanuel, 74-62; def. Fitchburg State, 90-24
#9	293	Stockton	4-1	won at Baruch, 69-60; won at #59 Penn State-Harrisburg, 72-69; won at DeSales, 73-70 OT; LOST to T#32 Rowan, 98-109; def. Widener, 67-56
#10	284	Johns Hopkins	5-1	LOST to #4 Christopher Newport, 61-74; won at Salisbury, 67-53; def. York (Pa.), 82-63; won at Lycoming, 69-63; won at Gettysburg, 73-44; def. Mary Washington, 92-58
#11	275	Rochester	5-1	won at SUNY Geneseo, 79-62; def. Texas-Dallas, 79-69; def. #18 Trinity (Texas), 78-63; def. (n) T#60 St. John Fisher, 81-76; def. (n) T#53 Nazareth, 75-69; LOST at Hobart, 72-73
#12	274	Pomona-Pitzer	2-4	LOST to Vanguard, 66-82; LOST to #2 Mary Hardin-Baylor, 71-84; def. Bethesda, 85-70; LOST to Master's, 55-61; def. UC Santa Cruz, 73-69; LOST to (n) Puget Sound, 77-79
#13	272	St. Joseph (Conn.)	4-0	def. #40 Yeshiva, 69-60; def. #37 Babson, 77-56; def. (n) #3 UW-Oshkosh, 60-44; def. (n) #21 Illinois Wesleyan, 73-64 OT
#14	261	Middlebury	4-0	won at Westfield State, 64-57; def. (n) #42 Nichols, 91-80; won at NVU-Johnson, 65-57; won at Endicott, 74-63
#15	253	UW-La Crosse	6-0	def. #25 St. John's, 84-80; won at #17 Marietta, 83-75; def. (n) Guilford, 74-68; def. (n) Cornell, 66-48; won at Wartburg, 87-76; def. Ripon, 86-57
#16	229	Washington U.	4-1	def. Blackburn, 96-67; LOST at #26 Wabash, 67-70; won at Webster, 53-52; def. Millikin, 71-55; won at Augustana, 70-69
#17	203	Marietta	2-2	LOST to #15 UW-La Crosse, 75-83; def. La Roche, 83-73; won at #26 Wabash, 89-81 OT; LOST to (n) T#34 Keene State, 62-84
#18	194	Trinity (Texas)	5-2	def. (n) Fredonia, 83-48; LOST at #11 Rochester, 63-78; def. (n) Hamilton, 92-76; def. (n) T#56 LeTourneau, 88-84; LOST at Sul Ross State, 88-93; def. McMurry, 91-85; def. T#46 Hardin-Simmons, 70-67
#19	155	Case Western Reserve	4-0	def. Denison, 78-72; def. Oberlin, 78-66; def. Dickinson, 71-60; def. La Roche, 88-81; ~~11/18 at Buffalo State~~ postponed; ~~11/19 vs. Medaille~~ postponed
#20	147	RPI	5-0	def. (n) SUNY Potsdam, 65-53; won at Hilbert, 99-76; def. SUNY Delhi, 80-65; def. (n) Centenary (N.J.), 74-56; won at Western New England, 76-69
#21	128	Illinois Wesleyan	2-3	def. #40 Yeshiva, 76-71; LOST to UW-Stevens Point, 67-71; def. (n) Nebraska Wesleyan, 73-67; LOST to (n) #13 St. Joseph (Conn.), 64-73 OT; LOST at #3 UW-Oshkosh, 47-66
#22	121	Wesleyan	1-4	def. (n) Haverford, 83-74 OT; LOST at #28 Swarthmore, 61-79; LOST to T#32 Rowan, 55-80; LOST at Emmanuel, 68-72; LOST to Farmingdale State, 75-80
#23	120	Elmhurst	5-0	def. Transylvania, 97-68; won at Alma, 110-74; won at Marian, 86-68; won at Buena Vista, 88-60; def. Manchester, 88-72
#24	106	Wheaton (Ill.)	5-1	won at Benedictine, 84-68; def. Transylvania, 82-63; def. T#60 Hanover, 65-48; LOST to #41 John Carroll, 56-60; won at Lake Forest, 93-64; def. Chicago, 73-55
#25	104	St. John's	3-2	LOST at #15 UW-La Crosse, 80-84; def. UW-Eau Claire, 71-70 2OT; def. Buena Vista, 67-57; LOST at St. Olaf, 62-73; won at Gustavus Adolphus, 66-50

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	84	Wabash	5-1	def. Mount St. Joseph, 81-78; def. #16 Washington U., 70-67; won at T#60 Hanover, 79-69; LOST to #17 Marietta, 81-89 OT; def. T#50 Maryville (Tenn.), 84-74; won at Anderson, 87-85
#27	78	Emory	4-1	def. Piedmont, 85-67; won at Sewanee, 101-76; LOST to Guilford, 61-75; def. Covenant, 97-63; won at T#50 Maryville (Tenn.), 79-70
#28	68	Swarthmore	5-1	won at T#32 Rowan, 71-70; def. Bowdoin, 90-68; def. #22 Wesleyan, 79-61; LOST at Widener, 66-67; won at DeSales, 63-60; def. Muhlenberg, 85-80 OT
#29	51	Hope	4-1	def. UW-Stout, 74-63; LOST to #3 UW-Oshkosh, 56-67; won at T#56 UW-Whitewater, 72-68; def. North Park, 80-73; def. Rockford, 97-83
#30	49	St. Thomas (Texas)	5-1	def. Arlington Baptist, 105-69; def. East Texas Baptist, 83-81; won at Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 84-79; LOST at Redlands, 72-80; won at Texas-Dallas, 58-53; won at Concordia (Texas), 96-79
#31	47	Whitworth	3-3	LOST at #7 Mount Union, 74-84; LOST to (n) T#46 Roanoke, 86-89; def. Sul Ross State, 73-60; def. Cal Lutheran, 71-56; LOST to (n) Carleton, 59-76; won at Colorado College, 74-65
T#32	43	Rowan	2-2	LOST to #28 Swarthmore, 70-71; LOST at Marymount, 88-89; won at #22 Wesleyan, 80-55; won at #9 Stockton, 109-98
T#32	43	Wooster	2-1	def. Mount Aloysius, 86-56; def. Ohio Northern, 72-57; LOST to #7 Mount Union, 76-94
T#34	38	Keene State	6-0	won at Westfield State, 86-71; def. Rutgers-Newark, 102-66; def. (n) T#50 Maryville (Tenn.), 78-69; def. (n) #17 Marietta, 84-62; won at Springfield, 113-75; def. MIT, 102-90
T#34	38	Heidelberg	4-1	LOST to T#56 UW-Whitewater, 67-78; def. Olivet, 89-64; won at Bluffton, 66-61; def. Albion, 92-76; won at #48 Ohio Wesleyan, 72-70
#36	37	UW-Platteville	4-2	def. (n) Lawrence, 82-71; won at UW-Superior, 77-68; LOST at Ripon, 67-69; LOST to Mount Mercy, 71-74; won at Augustana, 81-73; def. Illinois Tech, 71-63
#37	25	Babson	4-3	won at Lasell, 76-65; def. Salve Regina, 80-72; LOST at #13 St. Joseph (Conn.), 56-77; LOST at Tufts, 73-82; def. (n) Salem State, 89-58; def. Amherst, 66-54; LOST at Bowdoin, 74-82
#38	23	Dubuque	5-1	LOST to (n) T#44 North Central (Ill.), 70-81; won at Carroll, 68-53; won at Edgewood, 82-71; won at Wartburg, 68-60; won at Monmouth, 77-74; won at Blackburn, 84-73
#39	19	Calvin	7-0	def. Grace Bible, 93-53; def. #3 UW-Oshkosh, 59-56; def. UW-Stout, 76-63; won at Illinois Tech, 65-62; def. Hiram, 91-61; def. Rockford, 76-68; def. UW-Stevens Point, 61-50
#40	18	Yeshiva	4-3	LOST at #13 St. Joseph (Conn.), 60-69; LOST at #21 Illinois Wesleyan, 71-76; def. (n) Webster, 75-58; def. St. Joseph's (Bklyn.), 102-65; LOST to Farmingdale State, 69-80; won at SUNY-Purchase, 82-72; def. Amherst, 61-57
#41	16	John Carroll	5-0	def. Wittenberg, 94-72; def. #48 Ohio Wesleyan, 70-55; def. (n) UW-River Falls, 80-73; won at #24 Wheaton (Ill.), 60-56; def. Fredonia, 78-68
#42	15	Nichols	4-2	def. Eastern Connecticut, 90-83; LOST at Trinity (Conn.), 55-74; won at Anna Maria, 92-75; def. (n) New England College, 111-79; LOST to (n) #14 Middlebury, 80-91; def. Thomas, 111-62
#43	12	Hampden-Sydney	3-3	LOST at Greensboro, 77-82; def. (n) Alvernia, 79-62; won at Franklin and Marshall, 80-64; LOST at #1 Randolph-Macon, 59-61; LOST at Mary Washington, 66-79; def. Washington and Lee, 92-76
T#44	11	Mass.-Dartmouth	1-3	def. Connecticut College, 57-52; LOST to Kean, 73-81; LOST at MIT, 91-97; LOST to Brandeis, 68-79
T#44	11	North Central (Ill.)	3-2	def. (n) #38 Dubuque, 81-70; def. (n) Whitman, 77-60; LOST at Aurora, 79-81 OT; won at T#56 UW-Whitewater, 87-86; LOST to Benedictine, 63-67

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 27, 2022, 05:50:37 PM

How They Fared (continued)

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
T#46	10	Hardin-Simmons	2-3	def. Texas Lutheran, 91-63; LOST to Schreiner, 68-76; LOST to Texas-Dallas, 75-83; won at Southwestern, 81-71; LOST at #18 Trinity (Texas), 67-70
T#46	10	Roanoke	3-1	LOST to (n) T#50 Maryville (Tenn.), 81-90; def. (n) #31 Whitworth, 89-86; def. Alfred, 87-56; def. Salisbury, 81-59
#48	8	Ohio Wesleyan	3-2	def. (n) Buffalo State, 79-63; LOST at #41 John Carroll, 55-70; won at Albion, 73-67; won at Capital, 67-65; LOST to T#34 Heidelberg, 70-72
#49	6	Berry	6-0	def. Huntingdon, 86-66; def. (n) LaGrange, 88-83 OT; won at Huntingdon, 79-63; def. Belhaven, 62-57; def. Warren Wilson, 105-63; def. Pfeiffer, 93-84
T#50	5	Brockport	3-1	LOST to Alfred, 69-72; def. Keystone, 92-78; def. Hobart, 71-67; won at York (N.Y.), 95-64
T#50	5	Maryville (Tenn.)	2-4	def. Sewanee, 76-55; def. (n) T#46 Roanoke, 90-81; LOST at #7 Mount Union, 75-99; LOST to (n) T#34 Keene State, 69-78; LOST at #26 Wabash, 74-84; LOST to #27 Emory, 70-79
T#50	5	Emerson	2-3	def. Gordon, 95-51; LOST to Tufts, 78-80 OT; LOST to Bridgewater State, 79-81; LOST at UMass Lowell, 53-105; def. Suffolk, 55-51
T#53	4	Ithaca	2-2	LOST to Cortland, 80-82; LOST at Montclair State, 79-93; won at Centenary (N.J.), 97-71; def. Keystone, 95-80
T#53	4	Nazareth	4-1	def. Gordon, 90-72; def. Cortland, 79-44; won at Rochester Tech, 79-58; LOST to (n) #11 Rochester, 69-75; def. #5 Oswego State, 80-77
T#53	4	Pacific Lutheran	2-2	won at Evergreen St., 100-67; def. Warner Pacific, 77-71; LOST to Cal Lutheran, 62-67; LOST to Mont. St.-Northern, 49-51
T#56	3	Stevens	1-5	LOST to (n) Vassar, 59-63; LOST to (n) SUNY Geneseo, 51-53; LOST at New Jersey City, 48-58; LOST to Scranton, 61-82; won at Baruch, 85-82 OT; LOST to Rutgers-Newark, 56-72
T#56	3	UW-Whitewater	4-2	won at Augustana, 95-90; won at T#34 Heidelberg, 78-67; def. (n) Pitt-Bradford, 86-74; LOST to #29 Hope, 68-72; LOST to T#44 North Central (Ill.), 86-87; def. Ripon, 70-69
T#56	3	LeTourneau	3-2	def. Texas College, 92-87 OT; won at Southwestern, 70-57; LOST to (n) #18 Trinity (Texas), 84-88; won at Schreiner, 82-75; LOST at Texas Lutheran, 72-74 OT
#59	2	Penn State-Harrisburg	3-2	def. Chatham, 72-54; LOST to #9 Stockton, 69-72; LOST at Kean, 77-85; def. Bridgewater (Va.), 75-63; won at Messiah, 59-48
T#60	1	Hanover	2-2	won at Spalding, 73-42; LOST to #26 Wabash, 69-79; LOST at #24 Wheaton (Ill.), 48-65; def. (n) UW-River Falls, 59-56
T#60	1	St. John Fisher	2-3	LOST at Hobart, 65-88; def. (n) Pfeiffer, 79-74; LOST at Virginia Wesleyan, 69-80; LOST to (n) #11 Rochester, 76-81; won at Rochester Tech, 89-81

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on November 27, 2022, 07:56:55 PM

Only 11 of the top 40 undefeated. That seems low for this point in the year, I think?

Who will make the bigger jump in this week's poll - Keene or Calvin? Should be a close call - Calvin will be ranked a bit lower but also starts five spots back. Those seem like the only two teams in the 26-40 range poised to make a massive leap (at least 20 spots) forward this week ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WPI89 on November 28, 2022, 11:55:15 AM

The first in-season poll comes out this week? Tonight? Tomorrow?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on November 28, 2022, 11:55:37 AM

Tonight

Quote from: WPI89 on November 28, 2022, 11:55:15 AM
The first in-season poll comes out this week? Tonight? Tomorrow?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on November 28, 2022, 08:33:24 PM

https://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2022-23/week1

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on November 28, 2022, 10:01:22 PM

I wish it was late March.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 28, 2022, 10:12:31 PM

Quote from: CNU85 on October 26, 2022, 01:21:48 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 26, 2022, 11:35:51 AM
https://d3hoops.com/notables/2022/10/mens-poll-released

Maybe it's just me, but even with 8 Seniors returning (3 are 5th yr guys) and a returning All-American, I'm still a little uneasy. We don't have Aigner shooting from beyond the 3 and we don't have Peterson who was a D2 transfer that really changed how CNU looked. We lost a lot of leadership.

We do have a D2 transfer from USC-Aiken and a transfer who was AMCC co-player of the year last year from Medaille. It's obviously way to early to tell if they will have a significant impact.

Let the games begin. Let's see what happens.

Still uneasy? LOL

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on November 29, 2022, 08:58:50 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 28, 2022, 10:12:31 PM
Quote from: CNU85 on October 26, 2022, 01:21:48 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 26, 2022, 11:35:51 AM
https://d3hoops.com/notables/2022/10/mens-poll-released

Maybe it's just me, but even with 8 Seniors returning (3 are 5th yr guys) and a returning All-American, I'm still a little uneasy. We don't have Aigner shooting from beyond the 3 and we don't have Peterson who was a D2 transfer that really changed how CNU looked. We lost a lot of leadership.

We do have a D2 transfer from USC-Aiken and a transfer who was AMCC co-player of the year last year from Medaille. It's obviously way to early to tell if they will have a significant impact.

Let the games begin. Let's see what happens.

Still uneasy? LOL

hahahaha....what can I say? Maybe it's my decades long training of being a Minnesota Vikings fan and watching those 4 SB losses (and 1 NFC championship game loss when 15-1) with pretty amazing teams. It has been ingrained in me to be "uneasy".

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on November 29, 2022, 09:02:43 AM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 28, 2022, 12:46:00 PM
If you want to start with low confidence, you can cheer on my Pointers with me. They were 4-17 last year.

Currently 4-2. So my prediction of a better record has a fairly good chance of coming to fruition!!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 29, 2022, 06:31:27 PM

Quote from: CNU85 on November 29, 2022, 09:02:43 AM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 28, 2022, 12:46:00 PM
If you want to start with low confidence, you can cheer on my Pointers with me. They were 4-17 last year.

Currently 4-2. So my prediction of a better record has a fairly good chance of coming to fruition!!

So you're saying they probably won't go 0-15 the rest of the way?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on November 29, 2022, 09:37:05 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on November 29, 2022, 06:31:27 PM
Quote from: CNU85 on November 29, 2022, 09:02:43 AM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 28, 2022, 12:46:00 PM
If you want to start with low confidence, you can cheer on my Pointers with me. They were 4-17 last year.

Currently 4-2. So my prediction of a better record has a fairly good chance of coming to fruition!!

So you're saying they probably won't go 0-15 the rest of the way?

I'd put money on it!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 01, 2022, 08:59:27 AM

How They Fared (So Far)

(removed - full report follows)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 04, 2022, 05:40:51 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	609	Christopher Newport	8-0	won at Averett, 71-54
#2	570	Mount Union	5-1	LOST at T#46 Heidelberg, 70-82
#3	543	St. Joseph (Conn.)	6-0	won at #28 Tufts, 77-57; won at Anna Maria, 90-63
#4	501	UW-La Crosse	8-0	won at UW-Whitewater, 88-74; def. UW-Eau Claire, 84-77
#5	491	Williams	8-0	def. #19 RPI, 58-40; def. Wesleyan, 72-58
#6	462	WPI	5-1	LOST at Hamilton, 77-86
#7	411	Johns Hopkins	6-2	won at Washington College, 88-56; LOST to Muhlenberg, 77-84
#8	405	Randolph-Macon	6-1	won at T#38 Virginia Wesleyan, 66-49; def. Washington and Lee, 84-71
#9	387	Mary Hardin-Baylor	2-2	LOST at Concordia (Texas), 77-81
#10	341	Rochester	7-1	def. Bowdoin, 83-67; def. #13 Middlebury, 72-70
#11	317	Elmhurst	5-2	LOST to T#41 Illinois Wesleyan, 54-68; LOST to Carthage, 85-89
#12	314	Oswego State	5-2	def. Fredonia, 79-60; LOST to Brockport, 47-58; won at Buffalo State, 106-64
#13	293	Middlebury	5-1	def. (n) Carnegie Mellon, 74-68; LOST at #10 Rochester, 70-72
#14	289	Keene State	8-0	def. Albertus Magnus, 82-71; won at Southern Maine, 83-70
#15	280	UW-Oshkosh	7-2	won at UW-Platteville, 75-66 OT; def. UW-Stout, 92-69
#16	257	John Carroll	6-0	def. Muskingum, 102-56
#17	254	Calvin	7-1	LOST at #21 Wheaton (Ill.), 73-74
#18	233	Case Western Reserve	6-0	won at Capital, 89-71; def. Adrian, 89-61
#19	159	RPI	7-1	LOST at #5 Williams, 40-58; won at T#44 Hobart, 59-58; won at Rochester Tech, 64-58
#20	143	Stockton	6-1	def. Rutgers-Camden, 75-57; won at Ramapo, 76-72
#21	136	Wheaton (Ill.)	7-1	def. Augustana, 75-61; def. #17 Calvin, 74-73
#22	127	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	7-1	def. Chapman, 93-71; def. Occidental, 78-41
#23	94	Washington U.	5-2	def. Eureka, 87-70; LOST to T#38 Pomona-Pitzer, 69-71 OT
#24	76	Mary Washington	6-1	def. Methodist, 64-47; won at Marymount, 71-65
#25	74	Wabash	6-2	LOST to Earlham, 57-65; def. Oberlin, 80-78

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	59	Emory	6-1	def. (n) Bates, 86-52; won at T#46 Colby, 80-66
#27	47	Nazareth	6-1	def. Elmira, 85-65; def. Alfred, 72-50
#28	40	Tufts	6-1	LOST to #3 St. Joseph (Conn.), 57-77; def. Mass-Dartmouth, 90-77
#29	39	St. Thomas (Texas)	8-1	def. Schreiner, 60-34; def. T#33 Trinity (Texas), 77-63
#30	38	Swarthmore	7-1	def. Haverford, 63-58; won at Dickinson, 84-47
#31	29	Hope	4-2	LOST at Hanover, 54-65
#32	26	Marietta	4-2	won at Otterbein, 66-61; won at Ohio Northern, 73-59
T#33	12	Rowan	4-2	won at TCNJ, 87-82; def. William Paterson, 106-80
T#33	12	Trinity (Texas)	5-4	LOST at Centenary (La.), 65-69; LOST at #29 St. Thomas (Texas), 63-77
#35	9	Guilford	7-2	def. Randolph, 76-49; won at Shenandoah, 56-39
#36	8	Trine	6-0	def. Anderson, 68-53
#37	6	Catholic	8-0	won at Marymount, 68-53; won at Moravian, 71-46
T#38	5	Pomona-Pitzer	5-4	won at Occidental, 69-61; def. (n) Olivet, 76-73; won at #23 Washington U., 71-69 OT
T#38	5	St. John's	5-2	def. St. Scholastica, 81-58; def. Augsburg, 78-50
T#38	5	Virginia Wesleyan	7-1	LOST to #8 Randolph-Macon, 49-66; won at Lynchburg, 84-76
T#41	4	Roanoke	5-1	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 78-60; won at Randolph, 78-55
T#41	4	Illinois Wesleyan	4-3	won at #11 Elmhurst, 68-54; won at Carroll, 73-59
#43	3	Redlands	5-1	won at Whittier, 87-78
T#44	2	Hobart	6-3	def. Keuka, 94-63; LOST to #19 RPI, 58-59; def. Vassar, 75-64
T#44	2	Montclair State	6-0	def. Rosemont, 88-74; def. Rutgers-Camden, 94-62
T#46	1	Berry	8-0	won at Maryville (Tenn.), 72-65; def. Oglethorpe, 78-62
T#46	1	Colby	8-1	won at Bowdoin, 68-52; def. Brandeis, 66-52; LOST to #26 Emory, 66-80
T#46	1	Heidelberg	6-1	def. Baldwin Wallace, 99-83; def. #2 Mount Union, 82-70
T#46	1	Nichols	5-3	LOST to Roger Williams, 67-87; won at Gordon, 103-63

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 04, 2022, 06:09:51 PM

Seems like Emory, Nazareth and St. Thomas (TX) are a pretty natural swap for Oswego, Wash U. and Wabash in next week's top 25 ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 04, 2022, 06:30:11 PM

Elmhurst is one spot ahead of Oswego St and they lost twice.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on December 05, 2022, 05:35:43 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on December 04, 2022, 06:09:51 PM
Seems like Emory, Nazareth and St. Thomas (TX) are a pretty natural swap for Oswego, Wash U. and Wabash in next week's top 25 ...

Emory has earned a Top 25 ranking this week, in my book. The Eagles flew to Maine (or flew to Boston and bussed from Boston to Maine, most likely-- more flights from Atlanta to Boston per day than from Atlanta to Portland Jetport, ME) and took care of business against Bates and Colby-- Brandeis lost to Colby, and Wash U lost the Lopata Classic title game to Pomona-Pitzer.

I am still looking forward to see how Brandeis plays at #1 Christopher Newport in January, assuming the Judges can beat Babson and Westfield State beforehand.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on December 05, 2022, 06:06:38 PM

Quote from: deiscanton on December 05, 2022, 05:35:43 AM
Emory has earned a Top 25 ranking this week, in my book. The Eagles flew to Maine (or flew to Boston and bussed from Boston to Maine, most likely-- more flights from Atlanta to Boston per day than from Atlanta to Portland Jetport, ME) and took care of business against Bates and Colby-- Brandeis lost to Colby, and Wash U lost the Lopata Classic title game to Pomona-Pitzer.

Emory does not have a great, prototypical Top 25 profile in my opinion, but in this crazy season, they are a Top 25 team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 05, 2022, 07:18:33 PM

MHB and Oswego are definitely the "on paper" teams in the Top 25. But for last year's performance, and the huge percentage of guys they brought back, they would not even be close to sniffing the top 25.

MHB 2-2 without a signature win (5-4 Pomona doesn't count) and with a pretty bad loss, and Oswego 5-2 without a top 25 win (Hobart is pretty good, the rest unimpressive) and two losses to teams outside the top 25. Nazareth CERTAINLY has a MUCH better resume than Oswego ... a win H-2-H and its only loss a very narrow road loss at a top ten team.

Those are the two who stand out to me ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 05, 2022, 07:28:12 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 04, 2022, 06:30:11 PM
Elmhurst is one spot ahead of Oswego St and they lost twice.

https://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2022-23/week2

Well, I was right about Elmhurst, at least. Oswego St barely stayed in.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 05, 2022, 07:56:55 PM

https://youtu.be/QgmyVLheqkQ

I was looking at the Top 25 and scrolled past Mary Washington and Mary Hardin Baylor, so I instinctively sang Run D.MC.'s Mary Mary. My wife asked me what I was saying, so I had to look up the video for her. Not impressed, but still one of my favorite bands growing up.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PauldingLightUP on December 09, 2022, 08:06:33 PM

2023 Pre Championship Manual is out!

Of note, combined championship coming back to Indy in 2026 based off future dates section.

Other stuff as you would expect, pretty much copy and paste from year to year except committees.

https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/championships/sports/basketball/d3/men/2022-23D3MBB_PreChampManual.pdf

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 11, 2022, 03:00:24 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

~~Several games still in progress; I will update those scores this evening (probably sometime after 6:00).~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	617	Christopher Newport	9-0	def. Marymount, 81-66
#2	588	St. Joseph (Conn.)	8-0	won at Elms, 86-51; def. Rivier, 94-52
#3	582	UW-La Crosse	9-1	won at Luther, 70-41; LOST to #33 Trine, 64-67
#4	538	Williams	10-0	won at SUNY Oneonta, 66-56; def. Springfield, 72-53
#5	460	Randolph-Macon	7-1	won at Eastern Mennonite, 75-48
#6	441	Mount Union	7-1	def. #9 John Carroll, 75-72; def. Ohio Northern, 89-71
#7	437	Rochester	9-1	def. Ithaca, 76-64; won at Wooster, 91-80
#8	435	Keene State	10-0	def. Plymouth State, 95-65; def. Rhode Island College, 98-60
#9	393	John Carroll	7-1	LOST at #6 Mount Union, 72-75; def. Capital, 77-59
#10	345	UW-Oshkosh	7-2	IDLE
#11	322	Wheaton (Ill.)	7-2	LOST to T#30 Elmhurst, 75-79 OT
#12	308	Middlebury	8-1	def. Plattsburgh State, 78-59; won at Skidmore, 73-53; def. Stevens, 76-53
#13	283	WPI	7-1	def. Husson, 76-49; won at Salem State, 77-62
#14	277	Case Western Reserve	7-0	won at Kalamazoo, 93-58
#15	257	Calvin	7-1	IDLE
#16	247	Johns Hopkins	6-2	IDLE
#17	203	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	8-1	def. Bethesda, 96-54
#18	134	RPI	9-1	def. SUNYIT, 52-49; def. Bard, 82-44
#19	129	Heidelberg	7-1	won at Wilmington, 90-73
#20	121	Stockton	8-1	won at Rutgers-Newark, 75-62; def. William Paterson, 76-63
#21	114	Emory	7-1	won at LaGrange, 86-68
#22	97	Mary Washington	6-1	IDLE
#23	95	St. Thomas (Texas)	8-1	IDLE
#24	86	Mary Hardin-Baylor	3-3	won at LeTourneau, 86-73; LOST at East Texas Baptist, 64-72
#25	82	Oswego State	7-2	won at SUNY Potsdam, 79-60; won at Plattsburgh State, 86-74

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	68	Swarthmore	8-1	def. Susquehanna, 84-65
#27	64	Nazareth	6-1	IDLE
#28	59	Marietta	6-2	def. Penn State-Altoona, 82-67; def. Baldwin Wallace, 78-73
#29	36	Tufts	8-1	won at #50 Clark, 97-90 OT; def. Suffolk, 90-82
T#30	35	Guilford	8-2	def. Greensboro, 88-47
T#30	35	Elmhurst	7-2	won at Kalamazoo, 81-61; won at #11 Wheaton (Ill.), 79-75 OT
#32	27	Berry	8-0	IDLE
#33	26	Trine	7-1	LOST at UW-Stevens Point, 49-53; won at #3 UW-La Crosse, 67-64
#34	23	Montclair State	8-0	won at William Paterson, 71-61; def. TCNJ, 83-70
T#35	21	Catholic	9-0	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 65-62
T#35	21	NYU	9-0	won at York (N.Y.), 98-62; def. Hunter, 138-92
#37	18	Trinity (Conn.)	9-1	def. Anna Maria, 91-61; def. CCNY, 88-33; LOST at Western New England, 78-80
#38	15	Kean	10-0	won at TCNJ, 78-62; def. New Jersey City, 93-67
T#39	14	Colby	10-1	def. Maine-Farmington, 81-70; def. Bates, 78-61
T#39	14	Muhlenberg	6-1	def. Drew, 84-61
#41	13	Washington U.	7-2	won at Fontbonne, 81-46; def. Principia, 89-56
T#42	7	Redlands	5-1	IDLE
T#42	7	Wabash	7-2	def. Denison, 74-66
T#44	6	Roanoke	7-1	won at Washington and Lee, 79-73; won at Pratt, 84-42
T#44	6	Illinois Wesleyan	5-3	def. North Central (Ill.), 87-85
T#46	4	North Park	7-1	def. Augustana, 70-59
T#46	4	St. John's	7-2	won at Macalester, 75-50; won at Hamline, 75-46
T#46	4	Concordia-Chicago	7-0	LOST (exhibition) at UW-Parkside (D2), 68-76; def. Marian, 95-87
#49	3	Whitman	8-1	def. Northwest Indian, 113-56
#50	2	Clark	8-1	LOST to #29 Tufts, 90-97 OT; def. John Jay, 92-59
T#51	1	Pomona-Pitzer	6-4	def. La Verne, 79-51
T#51	1	Western Connecticut	7-0	def. Mass-Boston, 82-66; won at York (N.Y.), 63-58

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on December 11, 2022, 03:43:20 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 11, 2022, 03:00:24 PM
T#46 4 Concordia-Chicago 7-1 LOST at Parkside, 68-76; def. Marian, 95-87

The loss to UW-Parkside, which is D2, was an exhibition for Concordia IL. Therefore, the Cougars are still undefeated at 7-0.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 11, 2022, 07:11:04 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 11, 2022, 03:43:20 PM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on December 11, 2022, 03:00:24 PM
T#46 4 Concordia-Chicago 7-1 LOST at Parkside, 68-76; def. Marian, 95-87

The loss to UW-Parkside, which is D2, was an exhibition for Concordia IL. Therefore, the Cougars are still undefeated at 7-0.

Thanks for the heads up, Gregory; I edited the report to reflect this information.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on December 12, 2022, 03:51:49 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 28, 2022, 12:46:00 PM
If you want to start with low confidence, you can cheer on my Pointers with me. They were 4-17 last year.

I was looking up something I heard the other day and wanted to verify. Since the start of the 2018-2019 season, CNU is 54-2 at home. The 2 losses came in the 2019-2020 season. The first loss that year was on December 1 -- against the Pointers!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 12, 2022, 05:06:27 PM

Quote from: CNU85 on December 12, 2022, 03:51:49 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 28, 2022, 12:46:00 PM
If you want to start with low confidence, you can cheer on my Pointers with me. They were 4-17 last year.

I was looking up something I heard the other day and wanted to verify. Since the start of the 2018-2019 season, CNU is 54-2 at home. The 2 losses came in the 2019-2020 season. The first loss that year was on December 1 -- against the Pointers!

I was at that game. On my birthday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on December 12, 2022, 10:21:45 PM

Quote from: CNU85 on December 12, 2022, 03:51:49 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 28, 2022, 12:46:00 PM
If you want to start with low confidence, you can cheer on my Pointers with me. They were 4-17 last year.

I was looking up something I heard the other day and wanted to verify. Since the start of the 2018-2019 season, CNU is 54-2 at home. The 2 losses came in the 2019-2020 season. The first loss that year was on December 1 -- against the Pointers!

Thought Scranton might have been the other loss but when I looked it up, it was 7 years ago in 2015. ::)
Time is fleeting.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 12, 2022, 10:52:33 PM

Point started off so well that year and then fell off dramatically. They were supposed to win the National Championship that season after winning in 2005, 2010 and 2015. They didn't even make the NCAAs, so I can't even blame Covid.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on December 13, 2022, 07:58:58 AM

Quote from: CNU85 on December 12, 2022, 03:51:49 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 28, 2022, 12:46:00 PM
If you want to start with low confidence, you can cheer on my Pointers with me. They were 4-17 last year.

I was looking up something I heard the other day and wanted to verify. Since the start of the 2018-2019 season, CNU is 54-2 at home. The 2 losses came in the 2019-2020 season. The first loss that year was on December 1 -- against the Pointers!

aahhhh. I remember that!

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 12, 2022, 05:06:27 PMI was at that game. On my birthday.

(modified by GS for formatting)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on December 13, 2022, 08:07:17 AM

Quote from: CNU85 on December 12, 2022, 03:51:49 PM
Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 28, 2022, 12:46:00 PM
If you want to start with low confidence, you can cheer on my Pointers with me. They were 4-17 last year.

I was looking up something I heard the other day and wanted to verify. Since the start of the 2018-2019 season, CNU is 54-2 at home. The 2 losses came in the 2019-2020 season. The first loss that year was on December 1 -- against the Pointers!

The other was against York in CAC Championship. We lost 77-79. That was an awesome game. CNU received a Pool C bid and defeated #11 Colby and then Nichols in Hoboken. Then we were at home and Hobart was on the floor in practice when the NCAA and COVID stopped everything.

And yes in the 15-16 season, CNU was 16-1 at home with the one loss vs Scranton in a holiday tournament. (How in the heck did we manage 17 home games!!!!). That was our first trip to the Final 4.

Quote from: ronk on December 12, 2022, 10:21:45 PMThought Scranton might have been the other loss but when I looked it up, it was 7 years ago in 2015. ::)
Time is fleeting.

(modified by GS for formatting)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on December 13, 2022, 09:35:05 PM

#1 Christopher Newport just suffered only their third home loss tonight since the start of the 2018-19 season, losing to Hampden-Sydney, 85-70. That loss snaps a 22 game home winning streak dating back to the start of the 2021-22 season for the Captains. Since the start of the 2018-19 season, CNU is now 54-3 in games played at the Freeman Center.

The CNU vs Hampden-Sydney game tonight was this week's D3 DataCast Game of the Week, and I watched this game as well-- I bought a Google Chromecast dongle device yesterday so that I could cast the game from my Chromebook onto my Roku TV, as CNU does not have a Roku app to automatically stream games on a Roku TV without Chromecasting the game. Amazon had the most recent HD Chromecast dongle on sale for $20.00 So far, the purchase has been an excellent one.

On Matt Snyder's D3 Efficiency Ratings coming into tonight, CNU came in at #5 in net efficiency, while Hampden-Sydney came in at #29 in net efficiency.

Among ODAC teams coming into today, only Randolph-Macon was ranked in the top 25, at #4. Roanoke received 8 votes in this week's poll, while Hampden-Sydney was not getting any Top 25 votes.

CNU next plays on Thursday night at Virginia Wesleyan. The Marlins are not receiving any Top 25 votes, but have a 10-1 record going into tonight.

I liked the presentation of the game with the CNU radio feed, BTW. The radio crew did a great job covering the game. The only complaint that I have is that the video feed cut before the post-game show ended, although it is not a requirement that the internet video stream do a simulcast of a radio post game show. However, I did appreciate hearing most of the CNU post-game show tonight before the video stream cut out.

Anyway, I will be looking forward to watching the video stream of the Brandeis game at Christopher Newport on January 2, 2023. This will be the first meeting ever between the Judges and the Captains.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on December 14, 2022, 08:19:38 AM

Quote from: deiscanton on December 13, 2022, 09:35:05 PM
#1 Christopher Newport just suffered only their third home loss tonight since the start of the 2018-19 season, losing to Hampden-Sydney, 85-70. That loss snaps a 22 game home winning streak dating back to the start of the 2021-22 season for the Captains. Since the start of the 2018-19 season, CNU is now 54-3 in games played at the Freeman Center.

The CNU vs Hampden-Sydney game tonight was this week's D3 DataCast Game of the Week, and I watched this game as well-- I bought a Google Chromecast dongle device yesterday so that I could cast the game from my Chromebook onto my Roku TV, as CNU does not have a Roku app to automatically stream games on a Roku TV without Chromecasting the game. Amazon had the most recent HD Chromecast dongle on sale for $20.00 So far, the purchase has been an excellent one.

On Matt Snyder's D3 Efficiency Ratings coming into tonight, CNU came in at #5 in net efficiency, while Hampden-Sydney came in at #29 in net efficiency.

Among ODAC teams coming into today, only Randolph-Macon was ranked in the top 25, at #4. Roanoke received 8 votes in this week's poll, while Hampden-Sydney was not getting any Top 25 votes.

CNU next plays on Thursday night at Virginia Wesleyan. The Marlins are not receiving any Top 25 votes, but have a 10-1 record going into tonight.

I liked the presentation of the game with the CNU radio feed, BTW. The radio crew did a great job covering the game. The only complaint that I have is that the video feed cut before the post-game show ended, although it is not a requirement that the internet video stream do a simulcast of a radio post game show. However, I did appreciate hearing most of the CNU post-game show tonight before the video stream cut out.

Anyway, I will be looking forward to watching the video stream of the Brandeis game at Christopher Newport on January 2, 2023. This will be the first meeting ever between the Judges and the Captains.

I will pass along your compliments to Francis and Tracey. They do a fantastic job covering the games. Francis came to CNU from St. Bonaventure. I think he started calling games at CNU in 1996. I know he has called every CNU football game that has ever been played. He is CNU's Sr. Director of Communications. Tracey has been around a long time as well. He has a day time job. He graduated from Roanoke College. I believe he holds the school record in the High Jump. They work very well together and are good friends.

I think the post game was cut off due to time. The coach took longer than normal to come back out for the post game interview. I was already home and sitting in my car in the driveway listening. In case you missed it, Krikorian said "we got kicked in the teeth". Not much time to recover and head across the water to play Va Wesleyan. The ODAC is a tough conference this year, like most.

As far as the Brandeis game....I'm looking forward to that game as well. Unfortunately, I may be in Florida that day. Not sure yet. And the students will still be on break, so there will not be the almost 100 member pep band, and the crowd will be smaller. Tune in to a CNU game when the semester is in full swing. It gets exciting! A good reason for the 54-3 record.

Cheers!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on December 14, 2022, 09:51:48 AM

Assuming the voters respond in kind, the CNU loss means St. Joseph's (CT) will rise to #1 in the first time in their program's history. They have played 98 games as a school.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on December 14, 2022, 11:26:03 AM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on December 14, 2022, 09:51:48 AM
Assuming the voters respond in kind, the CNU loss means St. Joseph's (CT) will rise to #1 in the first time in their program's history. They have played 98 games as a school.

If that happens, it would be the first time that the Great Northeast Athletic Conference would have a team ranked at #1 in the D3Hoops.com Top 25 poll in either men's or women's basketball in their history. Emmanuel was ranked as high as #3 in the D3Hoops.com Top 25 Women's Basketball poll in the 2001-02 season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: thebear on December 14, 2022, 05:41:09 PM

Quote from: SpringSt7 on December 14, 2022, 09:51:48 AM
Assuming the voters respond in kind, the CNU loss means St. Joseph's (CT) will rise to #1 in the first time in their program's history. They have played 98 games as a school.

Of the 12 undefeated teams, St. Joseph's has played the toughest schedule. They also are on top of Matt Snyder's rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 14, 2022, 08:01:39 PM

Of the 14 unbeatens, I'm surprised how few are ranked but at least they all received votes.

2) St Joseph (CT) (9-0) 596
3) Williams (9-0) 562
6) Keene St (10-0) 472
14) Case Western Reserve (8-0) 290
ORV:
Berry (8-0) 42
Catholic (9-0) 38
NYU (9-0) 29
Montclair St (8-0) 20
Kean (11-0) 17
Bethany Lutheran (9-0) 16
Concordia-Chicago (7-0) 13
Scranton (8-0) 13
Western Connecticut (8-0) 3
Utica (6-0) 2

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 15, 2022, 01:59:49 PM

Western Conn, NYU, Scranton, Catholic, Kean and Montclair (the latter four are pairs from the same league) each play two games vs. other currently-unbeaten teams, so all will have a chance to make their case soon enough after the break ...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BaboNation on December 15, 2022, 09:05:27 PM

I know I've become spoiled by watching games by streaming, but how many times does it have to happen that you get a flawless video like in the CNU-VWU game right up to the last 4 seconds and then miss the buzzer-beating game-winner because the camera didn't pan to the other end?

Anyone have a video of the game-winner?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on December 15, 2022, 09:12:31 PM

Virginia Wesleyan came from behind and defeated Christopher Newport tonight, 77-76, on a buzzer beater that the camera person missed because of neglect by the student cameraperson to quickly pan the camera to the Marlins front court after the Captains made a basket with less than 5 seconds left in regulation. No commentary from Virginia Wesleyan on the home video feed, but Christopher Newport had their crew doing an away radio feed.

I was initially Chromecasting the game to my Roku TV, but I took it off when the Captains had a healthy lead, only to put the Chromecast back on when the game got close with less than 5 minutes left in regulation.

Virginia Wesleyan was trailing throughout the game and did not take the lead, if I recall correctly, until there was less than 2 minutes left.

Second loss in a row for the #1 ranked Captains, and it will remain to be seen if Christopher Newport even remains in the top 5 when the poll comes out next week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on December 16, 2022, 09:54:35 AM

Here is a video of the game-winner ... it gave me flashbacks to Whitewater's 2014 title win over Williams, which ended in very similar fashion with I think the same amount of time on the clock for the final play (grrr).

https://twitter.com/search?q=virginia%20wesleyan&src=typed_query

As for CNU, I'd be pretty surprised if they stay in the top 5 after back-to-back losses. I'd expect that St. Joe's, Williams, RMC, Mount Union, Keene State, and Rochester will be the top six, with CNU, Lacrosse, Middlebury, Oshkosh, and JCU closely grouped (in some order) in the 7-11 range.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on December 16, 2022, 10:40:43 AM

I had a feeling that this week would be tough. After the beat down Tuesday night, it is difficult to turnaround in less than 48 hours and go on the road into a very hostile environment and an excellent team. I did not watch the game last night but it sounds like VW really fought back. Gotta love good basketball!

I'd rather collect an L now and learn from it, rather than collect the L in March and think about it all off season.

Can't wait to get Barber back!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 17, 2022, 11:31:01 PM

Ripon upsets Oshkosh 67-74 OT

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: thebear on December 18, 2022, 11:07:27 AM

Utica drops from the unbeaten ranks, losing at Home to SUNY Cortland 85-78. Pioneers controlled Cortland AA Austin Grunder, [14 pts 9 rebs] but Dragons had 5 in double figure points. No unbeaten teams remaining in Region 3.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 18, 2022, 06:48:47 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

I am assuming that the next poll will come out on January 2.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	623	Christopher Newport	9-2	LOST to Hampden-Sydney, 70-85; LOST at Virginia Wesleyan, 76-77; 12/20 vs. #34 Elmhurst; 12/21 vs. TCNJ; 12/29 vs. Cabrini; 12/30 vs. Wilmington
#2	596	St. Joseph (Conn.)	9-0	def. Westfield State, 97-54; 12/30 at #14 WPI
#3	562	Williams	9-0	12/29 at Clark; 12/30 vs. Anna Maria
#4	477	Randolph-Macon	7-1	12/19 vs. Merchant Marine; 12/20 vs. TBA; 12/29 vs. Lancaster Bible; 12/30 vs. TBA
#5	475	Mount Union	8-1	def. Wilmington, 96-69; 12/28 vs. Lebanon Valley; 12/29 vs. Gettysburg
#6	472	Keene State	10-0	12/30 vs. Emerson
#7	470	UW-La Crosse	9-2	LOST to St. Mary's (Minn.), 66-73; 12/22 at Augustana; 12/31 at Bethel
#8	458	Rochester	9-1	IDLE
#9	364	John Carroll	8-1	won at T#31 Marietta, 95-73; 12/29 vs. UW-Superior; 12/30 vs. Skidmore
#10	357	Middlebury	8-1	12/29 vs. SUNY New Paltz; 12/30 vs. TBA
#11	353	UW-Oshkosh	7-3	LOST at Ripon, 64-67 OT; 12/20 at St. Norbert; 12/29 vs. Ohio Wesleyan; 12/30 vs. Marian
#12	298	Calvin	7-1	My program was unable to read Calvin's schedule, and I don't have time to fix the bug right now. I should have it corrected before the final report.
#13	290	Case Western Reserve	9-0	won at Medaille, 94-71; def. Earlham, 85-55; 01/01 vs. Hilbert
#14	255	WPI	7-1	12/19 at SUNYIT; 12/30 vs. #2 St. Joseph (Conn.)
#15	235	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	9-1	def. Pacific, 83-60; 12/30 vs. Haverford
#16	207	Wheaton (Ill.)	8-2	won at #38 Illinois Wesleyan, 79-58; 12/29 vs. SUNY Oneonta; 12/30 vs. TBA
#17	186	Johns Hopkins	6-2	12/29 vs. Denison; 12/30 vs. Coe
#18	182	RPI	9-1	IDLE
#19	156	Emory	7-1	12/29 vs. Connecticut College; 12/30 vs. #28 Berry
#20	134	Heidelberg	8-1	def. Muskingum, 73-62; 12/29 vs. Carnegie Mellon; 12/30 at Wooster
#21	124	St. Thomas (Texas)	10-1	won at Texas Lutheran, 60-47; won at Southwestern, 68-53; 12/20 vs. LeTourneau; 12/30 vs. Austin; 12/31 vs. University of Dallas
#22	109	Stockton	8-1	12/19 vs. #23 Mary Washington; 12/20 vs. TBA
#23	87	Mary Washington	8-1	def. Averett, 65-46; def. Randolph, 74-67; 12/19 vs. #22 Stockton; 12/20 vs. TBA; 12/29 vs. TCNJ; 12/30 vs. TBA
#24	74	Swarthmore	8-1	12/30 vs. Immaculata
#25	62	Nazareth	6-1	12/29 vs. Anna Maria; 12/30 at Clark

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	56	Oswego	7-2	12/29 vs. Emmanuel; 12/30 vs. TBA
#27	53	Trine	9-1	def. Mount St. Joseph, 65-48; def. Lawrence, 71-56; 12/29 at Baldwin Wallace
#28	42	Berry	8-0	12/19 vs. T#43 Roanoke; 12/20 vs. Hampden-Sydney; 12/29 vs. Piedmont; 12/30 at #19 Emory
#29	40	Tufts	8-1	12/29 at Yeshiva
#30	38	Catholic	9-0	12/19 vs. Mount Aloysius; 12/21 vs. Southern Virginia
T#31	36	Guilford	8-2	12/29 vs. Bridgewater State; 12/30 vs. Centre
T#31	36	Marietta	6-3	LOST to #9 John Carroll, 73-95; 12/29 vs. Bates; 12/30 vs. Lebanon Valley
#33	29	NYU	9-0	12/29 vs. Hanover; 12/30 vs. TBD
#34	28	Elmhurst	7-3	LOST to North Central (Ill.), 71-78; 12/20 vs. #1 Christopher Newport; 12/21 vs. Lynchburg; 12/30 vs. #12 Calvin
#35	20	Montclair State	9-0	def. Centenary (N.J.), 96-81; 12/29 vs. TBD; 12/29 vs. Alvernia; 12/30 vs. TBA
#36	17	Kean	12-0	def. Albertus Magnus, 96-62; def. St. Mary's (Md.), 100-74
#37	16	Bethany Lutheran	10-1	won at Gustavus Adolphus, 96-88; LOST at Buena Vista, 85-98; 12/30 at Carleton
#38	15	Illinois Wesleyan	5-4	LOST to #16 Wheaton (Ill.), 58-79; 12/20 at Chicago; 12/29 at Linfield; 12/30 at George Fox
T#39	13	Concordia-Chicago	8-0	def. Benedictine, 87-74; 12/28 at Cal Lutheran; 12/29 vs. Whittier
T#39	13	Scranton	8-0	12/19 vs. Lycoming; 12/20 vs. Washington and Lee; 12/31 at King's
T#41	10	Muhlenberg	6-1	12/19 at DeSales; 12/29 at T#47 Whitman; 12/31 at Whitworth
T#41	10	East Texas Baptist	8-2	def. #46 Redlands, 97-91; LOST at LeTourneau, 65-70; 12/19 vs. Hendrix; 12/31 at Belhaven
T#43	8	North Park	7-1	12/19 vs. Blackburn; 12/20 at Dominican; 12/30 vs. St. Mary's (Minn.); 12/31 at Benedictine
T#43	8	Washington U.	7-2	12/30 at Westminster (Mo.)
T#43	8	Roanoke	7-1	12/19 vs. #28 Berry; 12/20 vs. Transylvania; 12/29 vs. Methodist; 12/29 vs. .; 12/30 vs. .; 12/30 vs. .
#46	6	Redlands	6-2	won at LeTourneau, 79-68; LOST at T#41 East Texas Baptist, 91-97; 12/20 vs. Lake Forest; 12/29 vs. Husson; 12/31 at La Verne
T#47	4	Wabash	7-3	LOST at Ohio Wesleyan, 75-76; 12/20 at Rose-Hulman; 12/30 vs. Edgewood
T#47	4	Whitman	8-1	12/19 vs. Millsaps; 12/29 vs. T#41 Muhlenberg
T#49	3	Mary Hardin-Baylor	5-3	def. Howard Payne, 87-65; def. Sul Ross State, 93-80; 12/20 vs. Linfield; 12/21 at Whitworth; 12/29 vs. Sul Ross State; 12/31 vs. Nebraska Wesleyan
T#49	3	Western Connecticut	8-0	won at St. Joseph's (Bklyn.), 87-41; 12/29 vs. CCNY; 12/30 vs. Coast Guard
#51	2	Utica	6-1	LOST to Cortland, 78-85; 12/29 vs. SUNY Delhi; 12/30 vs. TBA
#52	1	St. John's	7-2	12/20 at Whitworth; 12/21 vs. Linfield

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 20, 2022, 03:26:33 PM

It'll be Jan. 3 because we won't ask our voters to start voting on New Year's, but yes, that's the plan.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PauldingLightUP on December 21, 2022, 11:48:44 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 20, 2022, 03:26:33 PM
It'll be Jan. 3 because we won't ask our voters to start voting on New Year's, but yes, that's the plan.

Wow very surprising, but awesome. Normally two weeks without a poll for the holidays, so I was almost expecting not until Jan. 9 for new polls.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 21, 2022, 12:28:08 PM

Quote from: PauldingLightUP on December 21, 2022, 11:48:44 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 20, 2022, 03:26:33 PM
It'll be Jan. 3 because we won't ask our voters to start voting on New Year's, but yes, that's the plan.

Wow very surprising, but awesome. Normally two weeks without a poll for the holidays, so I was almost expecting not until Jan. 9 for new polls.

I don't think there was going to be a poll this week until both No. 1s lost.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 25, 2022, 07:24:29 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

Results from the past week, and what's coming up before the next poll.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	619	St. Joseph (Conn.)	9-0	12/30 at #14 WPI
#2	574	Williams	9-0	12/29 at Clark; 12/30 vs. Anna Maria
#3	550	Randolph-Macon	9-1	def. Merchant Marine, 86-35; def. #23 Stockton, 79-37; 12/29 vs. Lancaster Bible; 12/30 vs. TBA
#4	546	Mount Union	8-1	12/28 vs. Lebanon Valley; 12/29 vs. Gettysburg
#5	511	Rochester	9-1	IDLE
#6	501	Keene State	10-0	12/30 vs. Emerson
#7	434	Christopher Newport	11-2	def. (n) Elmhurst, 82-74; def. (n) TCNJ, 89-44; 12/29 vs. Cabrini; 12/30 vs. Wilmington
#8	431	John Carroll	8-1	12/29 vs. UW-Superior; 12/30 vs. Skidmore
#9	395	Middlebury	8-1	12/29 vs. SUNY New Paltz; 12/30 vs. TBA
#10	339	Case Western Reserve	9-0	01/01 vs. Hilbert
#11	333	Calvin	8-2	def. (n) Augsburg, 75-52; LOST to (n) Wooster, 64-66; 12/30 at Elmhurst
#12	299	UW-La Crosse	9-2	12/28 at Augustana; 12/31 at Bethel
#13	273	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	9-1	12/30 vs. Haverford
#14	253	WPI	8-1	won at SUNYIT, 77-41; 12/30 vs. #1 St. Joseph (Conn.)
#15	220	Wheaton (Ill.)	8-2	12/29 vs. SUNY Oneonta; 12/30 vs. TBA
#16	209	Emory	7-1	12/29 vs. Connecticut College; 12/30 vs. T#38 Berry
#17	208	Johns Hopkins	6-2	12/29 vs. Denison; 12/30 vs. Coe
#18	176	St. Thomas (Texas)	11-1	def. LeTourneau, 73-69; 12/30 vs. Austin; 12/31 vs. University of Dallas
#19	162	UW-Oshkosh	8-3	won at St. Norbert, 68-50; 12/29 vs. Ohio Wesleyan; 12/30 vs. Marian
#20	148	Mary Washington	9-2	LOST to (n) #23 Stockton, 66-80; def. (n) Merchant Marine, 68-46; 12/29 vs. TCNJ; 12/30 vs. TBA
#21	146	RPI	9-1	IDLE
#22	142	Heidelberg	8-1	12/29 vs. Carnegie Mellon; 12/30 at Wooster
#23	110	Stockton	9-2	def. (n) #20 Mary Washington, 80-66; LOST at #3 Randolph-Macon, 37-79
#24	102	Swarthmore	8-1	12/30 vs. Immaculata
#25	77	Nazareth	6-1	12/29 vs. Anna Maria; 12/30 at Clark

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	59	Oswego	7-2	12/29 vs. Emmanuel; 12/30 vs. TBA
#27	49	Trine	9-1	12/29 at Baldwin Wallace
#28	43	Virginia Wesleyan	11-1	IDLE
#29	36	Tufts	8-1	12/29 at Yeshiva
#30	29	Guilford	8-2	12/29 vs. Bridgewater State; 12/30 vs. Centre
#31	18	Catholic	11-0	def. Mount Aloysius, 100-57; def. Southern Virginia, 79-73
#32	14	Carthage	9-1	def. New England College, 98-78; def. (n) Mass-Dartmouth, 81-58; 12/31 at Greenville
#33	12	NYU	9-0	12/29 vs. Hanover; 12/30 vs. TBD
#34	11	North Park	9-1	def. Blackburn, 99-82; won at Dominican, 80-76; 12/30 vs. St. Mary's (Minn.); 12/31 at Benedictine
T#35	10	East Texas Baptist	9-2	def. Hendrix, 79-54; 12/31 at Belhaven
T#35	10	UW-Whitewater	8-3	12/29 vs. St. Scholastica; 12/30 vs. Northland
T#35	10	Muhlenberg	6-2	LOST at DeSales, 67-68; 12/29 at T#43 Whitman; 12/31 at Whitworth
T#38	9	Berry	8-2	LOST to (n) T#40 Roanoke, 76-82 OT; LOST to (n) #42 Hampden-Sydney, 64-83; 12/29 vs. Piedmont; 12/30 at #16 Emory
T#38	9	Montclair State	9-0	12/29 vs. TBD; 12/29 vs. Alvernia; 12/30 vs. TBA
T#40	8	Washington U.	7-2	12/30 at Westminster (Mo.)
T#40	8	Roanoke	9-1	def. (n) T#38 Berry, 82-76 OT; def. (n) Transylvania, 75-67; 12/29 vs. Methodist; 12/29 vs. .; 12/30 vs. .; 12/30 vs. .
#42	6	Hampden-Sydney	9-3	def. (n) Transylvania, 82-54; def. (n) T#38 Berry, 83-64
T#43	5	Kean	12-0	IDLE
T#43	5	Whitman	9-1	def. Millsaps, 80-53; 12/29 vs. T#35 Muhlenberg
T#43	5	St. John's	8-3	LOST at Whitworth, 56-65; def. (n) Linfield, 70-55
T#46	4	Mary Hardin-Baylor	7-3	def. (n) Linfield, 78-61; won at Whitworth, 93-74; 12/29 vs. Sul Ross State; 12/31 vs. Nebraska Wesleyan
T#46	4	Western Connecticut	8-0	12/29 vs. CCNY; 12/30 vs. Coast Guard
#48	2	Scranton	8-2	LOST to (n) Lycoming, 65-68; LOST to (n) Washington and Lee, 72-86; 12/31 at King's
#49	1	Redlands	6-3	LOST to Lake Forest, 66-70; 12/29 vs. Husson; 12/31 at La Verne

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: BaboNation on December 29, 2022, 09:11:47 AM

RE: The xfer of Tahmeen Dupree from Nichols to Keene State

I'll admit I don't keep track of moves like this, but it seems extremely rare for a transfer to occur once the season has started. Is there any recent instance of such a move at the D3 level?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: TheOsprey on December 29, 2022, 10:16:18 AM

Yes. It recently happened in the NJAC. Not sure who, but I believe it may have involved NJCU or Rowan.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: thebear on December 29, 2022, 05:24:54 PM

Last year, Jackson Brown, son of former D-I U Albany Coach Will Brown, transferred mid semester from SUNY Fredonia to Sage

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Bucket on December 31, 2022, 02:59:26 PM

Quote from: BaboNation on December 29, 2022, 09:11:47 AM
RE: The xfer of Tahmeen Dupree from Nichols to Keene State

I'll admit I don't keep track of moves like this, but it seems extremely rare for a transfer to occur once the season has started. Is there any recent instance of such a move at the D3 level?

Several years ago, Zach Baines transferred from Middlebury to Occidental midyear, playing for the Panthers in the fall semester and for the Tigers a few weeks later.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 02, 2023, 06:23:31 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

New poll comes out tomorrow; this report includes results through today (except for two late games).

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	619	St. Joseph (Conn.)	10-0	won at #14 WPI, 67-55
#2	574	Williams	11-0	won at Clark, 86-69; def. (n) Anna Maria, 85-47; 01/02 vs. Vassar
#3	550	Randolph-Macon	11-1	def. Merchant Marine, 86-35; def. #23 Stockton, 79-37; def. Lancaster Bible, 82-60; def. Maryville (Tenn.), 81-68
#4	546	Mount Union	10-1	def. (n) Lebanon Valley, 78-62; def. (n) Gettysburg, 82-61
#5	511	Rochester	9-1	IDLE
#6	501	Keene State	11-0	def. Emerson, 62-54
#7	434	Christopher Newport	13-2	def. (n) Elmhurst, 82-74; def. (n) TCNJ, 89-44; def. Cabrini, 76-55; def. Wilmington, 98-48; 01/02 vs. Brandeis
#8	431	John Carroll	9-2	LOST at UW-Superior, 76-87; def. (n) Skidmore, 83-78 OT
#9	395	Middlebury	10-1	def. (n) SUNY New Paltz, 77-61; won at Eastern Connecticut, 67-62
#10	339	Case Western Reserve	10-0	def. Hilbert, 96-78
#11	333	Calvin	8-3	def. (n) Augsburg, 75-52; LOST to (n) Wooster, 64-66; LOST at Elmhurst, 84-80
#12	299	UW-La Crosse	11-2	won at Augustana, 73-70; won at Bethel, 84-53
#13	273	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	10-1	def. Haverford, 71-44
#14	253	WPI	8-2	won at SUNYIT, 77-41; LOST to #1 St. Joseph (Conn.), 55-67
#15	220	Wheaton (Ill.)	10-2	def. (n) SUNY Oneonta, 79-67; won at Stevens, 74-55
#16	209	Emory	9-2	def. Connecticut College, 69-61; LOST to T#38 Berry, 74-79; def. Oglethorpe, 94-82
#17	208	Johns Hopkins	8-2	def. (n) Denison, 64-41; def. (n) Coe, 78-77
#18	176	St. Thomas (Texas)	13-1	def. LeTourneau, 73-69; def. Austin, 67-62; def. University of Dallas, 74-70
#19	162	UW-Oshkosh	9-4	won at St. Norbert, 68-50; def. Ohio Wesleyan, 64-52; LOST to Marian, 74-79
#20	148	Mary Washington	11-2	LOST to (n) #23 Stockton, 66-80; def. (n) Merchant Marine, 68-46; def. (n) TCNJ, 84-62; won at Washington and Lee, 103-95 2OT
#21	146	RPI	9-1	IDLE
#22	142	Heidelberg	9-2	def. (n) Carnegie Mellon, 91-85; LOST at Wooster, 65-68
#23	110	Stockton	9-2	def. (n) #20 Mary Washington, 80-66; LOST at #3 Randolph-Macon, 37-79
#24	102	Swarthmore	9-1	def. Immaculata, 87-57
#25	77	Nazareth	8-1	def. (n) Anna Maria, 78-52; won at Clark, 82-63

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	59	Oswego	9-2	def. (n) Emmanuel, 89-63; won at Utica, 79-59
#27	49	Trine	10-1	won at Baldwin Wallace, 62-60
#28	43	Virginia Wesleyan	11-1	IDLE
#29	36	Tufts	9-1	won at Yeshiva, 75-64
#30	29	Guilford	10-2	def. Bridgewater State, 98-45; def. Centre, 76-39
#31	18	Catholic	11-0	def. Mount Aloysius, 100-57; def. Southern Virginia, 79-73
#32	14	Carthage	10-1	def. New England College, 98-78; def. (n) Mass-Dartmouth, 81-58; won at Greenville, 132-106
#33	12	NYU	11-0	def. (n) Hanover, 78-60; won at T#40 Roanoke, 81-59
#34	11	North Park	10-2	def. Blackburn, 99-82; won at Dominican, 80-76; LOST to St. Mary's (Minn.), 82-83; won at Benedictine, 85-80
T#35	10	East Texas Baptist	10-2	def. Hendrix, 79-54; won at Belhaven, 94-57
T#35	10	UW-Whitewater	10-3	def. (n) St. Scholastica, 66-60; def. (n) Northland, 89-46
T#35	10	Muhlenberg	7-3	LOST at DeSales, 67-68; won at T#43 Whitman, 65-63; LOST at Whitworth, 51-73
T#38	9	Berry	10-2	LOST to (n) T#40 Roanoke, 76-82 OT; LOST to (n) #42 Hampden-Sydney, 64-83; def. (n) Piedmont, 92-53; won at #16 Emory, 79-74
T#38	9	Montclair State	10-1	def. (n) Alvernia, 61-54; LOST at DeSales, 94-96 3OT
T#40	8	Washington U.	8-2	won at Westminster (Mo.), 86-49
T#40	8	Roanoke	10-2	def. (n) T#38 Berry, 82-76 OT; def. (n) Transylvania, 75-67; def. Methodist, 94-55; LOST to New York University, 59-81
#42	6	Hampden-Sydney	9-3	def. (n) Transylvania, 82-54; def. (n) T#38 Berry, 83-64
T#43	5	Kean	12-0	IDLE
T#43	5	Whitman	9-2	def. Millsaps, 80-53; LOST to T#35 Muhlenberg, 63-65
T#43	5	St. John's	8-3	LOST at Whitworth, 56-65; def. (n) Linfield, 70-55
T#46	4	Mary Hardin-Baylor	8-4	def. (n) Linfield, 78-61; won at Whitworth, 93-74; LOST to Sul Ross State, 80-83; def. Nebraska Wesleyan, 74-67
T#46	4	Western Connecticut	10-0	def. CCNY, 94-59; def. SUNY-Maritime, 110-52
#48	2	Scranton	9-2	LOST to (n) Lycoming, 65-68; LOST to (n) Washington and Lee, 72-86; won at King's, 79-68
#49	1	Redlands	8-3	LOST to Lake Forest, 66-70; def. Husson, 101-65; won at La Verne, 89-76

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on January 03, 2023, 06:09:37 PM

New men's Top 25 poll is out:

http://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2022-23/week5 (http://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2022-23/week5)

St. Joe's CT remains at #1 this week, with 21 of the 25 first place votes.

Randolph-Macon remains at #2 this week, with 3 of the 25 first place votes.

Keene State is ranked #6, but has 1 first place vote.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 08, 2023, 05:26:17 PM

How They Fared (~~Almost~~ Complete)

~~Berry vs. Birmingham-Southern still underway (15 minutes remaining as I post this).~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	621	St. Joseph (Conn.)	13-0	def. Johnson and Wales, 67-55; def. Lasell, 98-39; won at Regis (Mass.), 70-59
#2	572	Randolph-Macon	13-1	won at #28 Hampden-Sydney, 69-57; def. #24 Guilford, 59-56
#3	565	Williams	13-1	LOST at Amherst, 51-53; won at Hamilton, 77-66
#4	531	Mount Union	12-1	won at Baldwin Wallace, 84-81 OT; won at Capital, 79-59
#5	518	Rochester	10-2	def. Rochester Tech, 88-79; LOST at #22 Emory, 76-87
#6	501	Keene State	13-0	won at Mass-Dartmouth, 100-72; def. T#45 Western Connecticut, 71-68 OT
#7	480	Christopher Newport	15-2	won at York (Pa.), 75-72 OT
#8	418	Middlebury	11-2	LOST at Hamilton, 56-65; won at Amherst, 53-46
#9	364	Case Western Reserve	11-0	~~01/04 at Buffalo State~~ canceled; def. Carnegie Mellon, 74-69
#10	349	UW-La Crosse	12-3	LOST to UW-Platteville, 41-64; won at UW-Stevens Point, 62-51
#11	317	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	11-2	LOST at La Verne, 88-92; def. Whittier, 98-87
#12	290	Wheaton (Ill.)	12-2	def. North Park, 76-71; won at Millikin, 65-61
#13	278	St. Thomas (Texas)	12-2	LOST at Hardin-Simmons, 63-66
#14	270	John Carroll	11-2	def. #32 Heidelberg, 81-76; def. Ohio Northern, 68-57
#15	230	Johns Hopkins	10-2	won at Dickinson, 71-54; def. Haverford, 75-45
#16	212	WPI	10-2	def. Springfield, 76-48; won at MIT, 88-40
#17	181	Swarthmore	11-1	won at McDaniel, 84-58; won at Franklin and Marshall, 94-93 2OT
#18	175	New York University	11-1	LOST at Brandeis, 61-81
#19	138	RPI	10-2	LOST to Ithaca, 53-64; def. Union, 65-49
#20	124	Nazareth	11-1	won at Keuka, 91-63; won at Medaille, 78-70; won at Houghton, 72-66
#21	112	Mary Washington	11-3	LOST to #35 Catholic, 69-79
#22	107	Emory	10-2	def. #5 Rochester, 87-76
#23	96	Calvin	10-3	def. Albion, 72-67; def. Alma, 71-51
#24	83	Guilford	11-3	def. Washington and Lee, 78-58; LOST at #2 Randolph-Macon, 56-59
#25	79	Trine	12-1	def. Hope, 89-84 2OT; won at Albion, 92-61

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	55	Wooster	10-3	def. Oberlin, 62-48; LOST at Wabash, 68-83
#27	54	Oswego State	12-2	won at St. Lawrence, 78-45; def. Buffalo State, 112-54; def. SUNY Geneseo, 86-63
#28	51	Hampden-Sydney	10-4	LOST to #2 Randolph-Macon, 57-69; won at Shenandoah, 76-54
#29	50	Virginia Wesleyan	11-3	LOST at Randolph, 62-75; LOST to #44 Roanoke, 64-65
#30	49	Tufts	9-2	LOST at Connecticut College, 55-63
#31	40	Stockton	11-2	won at TCNJ, 90-72; won at T#47 Montclair State, 71-55
#32	37	Heidelberg	10-3	LOST at #14 John Carroll, 76-81; won at Otterbein, 74-62
#33	31	Carthage	11-2	LOST at Carroll, 66-72; def. Illinois Wesleyan, 69-48
#34	30	East Texas Baptist	12-2	won at Howard Payne, 115-99; won at Sul Ross State, 95-85 OT
#35	26	Catholic	13-0	won at #21 Mary Washington, 79-69; def. Scranton, 80-59
#36	21	UW-Oshkosh	10-5	LOST at UW-Eau Claire, 48-51; def. UW-River Falls, 68-55
#37	16	Elmhurst	10-5	won at Millikin, 70-59; LOST at North Park, 75-79
#38	9	Berry	12-2	won at Millsaps, 64-59; won at Birmingham-Southern, 89-81 OT
#39	8	Kean	13-1	def. Rutgers-Camden, 87-60; LOST at Rowan, 70-87
T#40	7	Washington U.	10-2	won at Illinois Wesleyan, 63-61; def. Chicago, 71-54
T#40	7	UW-Whitewater	11-4	won at UW-Stevens Point, 79-76; LOST to UW-Eau Claire, 74-75
T#40	7	Mary Hardin-Baylor	10-4	won at University of the Ozarks, 101-80; won at T#45 Texas-Dallas, 99-93
#43	6	DeSales	11-2	won at Lycoming, 66-63
#44	4	Roanoke	12-2	def. Eastern Mennonite, 74-61; won at #29 Virginia Wesleyan, 65-64
T#45	2	Texas-Dallas	11-3	def. Concordia (Texas), 107-74; LOST to T#40 Mary Hardin-Baylor, 93-99
T#45	2	Western Connecticut	10-1	LOST at #6 Keene State, 68-71 OT
T#47	1	Montclair State	11-2	def. Ramapo, 78-70; LOST to #31 Stockton, 55-71
T#47	1	St. John's	8-4	LOST at St. Mary's (Minn.), 57-69

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 15, 2023, 05:16:27 PM

How They Fared (~~Almost~~ Complete)

~~Goucher at Catholic result pending (scheduled to tip at 7:30pm)~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	622	St. Joseph (Conn.)	15-0	won at Albertus Magnus, 83-69; def. St. Joseph's (Maine), 100-73
#2	591	Randolph-Macon	15-1	def. #5 Christopher Newport, 64-59; won at Lynchburg, 83-63
#3	561	Mount Union	14-1	def. Marietta, 73-71; won at Otterbein, 74-65
#4	535	Keene State	15-0	won at Eastern Connecticut, 70-58; won at Mass-Boston, 78-71
#5	519	Christopher Newport	16-3	LOST at #2 Randolph-Macon, 59-64; won at Bridgewater State, 90-79
#6	481	Williams	15-1	def. Colby, 79-70; def. Bowdoin, 79-64
#7	417	Case Western Reserve	11-2	LOST at #9 Rochester, 69-85; LOST at #16 Emory, 81-90 OT
#8	411	Wheaton (Ill.)	14-2	won at North Central (Ill.), 76-71; def. T#34 Carthage, 76-72
#9	409	Rochester	12-2	def. #7 Case Western Reserve, 85-69; def. Carnegie Mellon, 76-73
#10	361	John Carroll	13-2	won at Otterbein, 89-68; def. Wilmington, 66-64
#11	327	Johns Hopkins	12-3	LOST at #12 Swarthmore, 46-53; won at McDaniel, 64-45; def. Ursinus, 67-51
#12	308	Swarthmore	14-1	def. #11 Johns Hopkins, 53-46; won at Washington College, 97-74; def. Gettysburg, 81-71
#13	302	Middlebury	13-2	def. Bowdoin, 80-60; def. Colby, 72-63
#14	283	WPI	12-2	won at Babson, 61-49; def. Emerson, 64-53
#15	246	UW-La Crosse	13-4	won at UW-Stout, 71-68; LOST to UW-Oshkosh, 73-78
#16	242	Emory	11-3	LOST to Carnegie Mellon, 71-78; def. #7 Case Western Reserve, 90-81 OT
#17	202	St. Thomas (Texas)	15-2	won at Centenary (La.), 54-50; def. Colorado College, 87-52
#18	170	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	13-2	def. Cal Lutheran, 74-64; won at Caltech, 60-39
#19	164	Nazareth	11-2	LOST to Utica, 81-85 OT
#20	133	Trine	14-1	def. Olivet, 62-57; won at Kalamazoo, 77-73
#21	107	Guilford	13-3	def. Lynchburg, 75-59; def. Averett, 62-42
#22	106	Catholic	14-1	LOST to Susquehanna, 51-64; def. Goucher, 94-47
#23	105	Oswego State	13-2	won at Cortland, 81-65
#24	85	Calvin	12-3	won at Hope, 81-49; won at Adrian, 64-59
#25	68	RPI	11-3	def. Clarkson, 56-48; LOST to St. Lawrence, 37-50

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	61	New York University	12-2	won at Chicago, 69-64; LOST at #33 Washington U., 64-68
#27	45	East Texas Baptist	13-3	LOST to Texas-Dallas, 69-75; def. University of the Ozarks, 87-62
#28	44	Mary Washington	11-4	LOST to Hood, 63-65
T#29	32	Mary Hardin-Baylor	12-4	def. Hardin-Simmons, 92-77; def. McMurry, 77-75
T#29	32	Hampden-Sydney	12-4	def. Ferrum, 94-74; def. Bridgewater (Va.), 80-63
#31	31	Stockton	13-2	def. Kean, 82-77; won at New Jersey City, 79-74
#32	25	Berry	14-2	def. Sewanee, 75-62; def. Centre, 78-59
#33	22	Washington U.	12-2	def. Brandeis, 73-65; def. #26 New York University, 68-64
T#34	12	Carthage	12-3	won at North Park, 104-95; LOST at #8 Wheaton (Ill.), 72-76
T#34	12	Western Connecticut	13-1	def. Mass-Dartmouth, 85-81; won at Rhode Island College, 91-55; def. Southern Maine, 77-62
#36	11	Wooster	12-3	def. Kenyon, 81-67; won at Wittenberg, 79-76
T#37	10	Whitman	12-3	LOST to Whitworth, 58-72; def. George Fox, 86-81
T#37	10	Heidelberg	12-3	won at Capital, 84-72; def. Marietta, 82-76
T#37	10	DeSales	13-3	LOST at Shenandoah, 58-61; won at Delaware Valley, 70-61; def. Arcadia, 74-58
#40	8	Roanoke	14-2	won at Averett, 70-50; def. Shenandoah, 98-64
#41	4	UW-Eau Claire	11-6	LOST to UW-Platteville, 80-87; LOST at UW-Stevens Point, 70-73
#42	1	Redlands	12-3	won at Chapman, 86-77; def. Cal Lutheran, 102-71

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D3Navy on January 17, 2023, 07:14:55 PM

Prepare for some votes to go Trinity's way. 13-4 with a 7-game winning streak. One loss to #7 Rochester, one loss to Division I A&M Corpus Christi, one loss to #14 St. Thomas, and a narrow loss to 12-4 Centenary.

Lost their leading scorer before the season and other starters hurt. Some now returning and the team is starting to gel.

Look for them to win the SCAC tournament and reach the playoffs.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on January 17, 2023, 11:01:01 PM

Quote from: D3Navy on January 17, 2023, 07:14:55 PM
Prepare for some votes to go Trinity's way. 13-4 with a 7-game winning streak. One loss to #7 Rochester, one loss to Division I A&M Corpus Christi, one loss to #14 St. Thomas, and a narrow loss to 12-4 Centenary.

Lost their leading scorer before the season and other starters hurt. Some now returning and the team is starting to gel.

Look for them to win the SCAC tournament and reach the playoffs.

First of all, wash't the game vs Texas A & M--Corpus Christi an exhibition game-- in other words, that result does not count vs Trinity (TX)?

Second of all, what about the loss to Sul Ross State, which does count in Trinity's record?

Third of all, Trinity has not gotten their home wins vs Centenary and St. Thomas yet. Those home return fixtures vs these two teams are this upcoming weekend. Beat both of them this weekend and you can then at least ask for a deep dive on the Trinity (TX) men on Hoopsville's Top 25 Double Take.

Fourth of all, St. Thomas is still the favorite to win the SCAC tournament, last I checked.

Just my two cents on the Trinity (TX) men from the New England area,but I do not vote on the Top 25 poll, and I thank my stars that I probably never will...... LOL.

PS-- The Trinity (TX) women are ranked #1 this week. Enloy that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D3Navy on January 18, 2023, 09:52:34 AM

Quote from: deiscanton on January 17, 2023, 11:01:01 PM
Quote from: D3Navy on January 17, 2023, 07:14:55 PM
Prepare for some votes to go Trinity's way. 13-4 with a 7-game winning streak. One loss to #7 Rochester, one loss to Division I A&M Corpus Christi, one loss to #14 St. Thomas, and a narrow loss to 12-4 Centenary.

Lost their leading scorer before the season and other starters hurt. Some now returning and the team is starting to gel.

Look for them to win the SCAC tournament and reach the playoffs.

First of all, wash't the game vs Texas A & M--Corpus Christi an exhibition game-- in other words, that result does not count vs Trinity (TX)?

Second of all, what about the loss to Sul Ross State, which does count in Trinity's record?

Third of all, Trinity has not gotten their home wins vs Centenary and St. Thomas yet. Those home return fixtures vs these two teams are this upcoming weekend. Beat both of them this weekend and you can then at least ask for a deep dive on the Trinity (TX) men on Hoopsville's Top 25 Double Take.

Fourth of all, St. Thomas is still the favorite to win the SCAC tournament, last I checked.

Just my two cents on the Trinity (TX) men from the New England area,but I do not vote on the Top 25 poll, and I thank my stars that I probably never will...... LOL.

PS-- The Trinity (TX) women are ranked #1 this week. Enloy that.

It was exhibition. They did lose to SRS.

I'm predicting votes (not Top 25) after a successful weekend.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D3Navy on January 21, 2023, 01:11:55 PM

TU 80, Centenary 59.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D3Navy on January 21, 2023, 08:54:36 PM

St. Thomas 67, Trinity 59.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on January 21, 2023, 09:05:41 PM

Quote from: D3Navy on January 18, 2023, 09:52:34 AM
Quote from: deiscanton on January 17, 2023, 11:01:01 PM
Quote from: D3Navy on January 17, 2023, 07:14:55 PM
Prepare for some votes to go Trinity's way. 13-4 with a 7-game winning streak. One loss to #7 Rochester, one loss to Division I A&M Corpus Christi, one loss to #14 St. Thomas, and a narrow loss to 12-4 Centenary.

Lost their leading scorer before the season and other starters hurt. Some now returning and the team is starting to gel.

Look for them to win the SCAC tournament and reach the playoffs.

First of all, wash't the game vs Texas A & M--Corpus Christi an exhibition game-- in other words, that result does not count vs Trinity (TX)?

Second of all, what about the loss to Sul Ross State, which does count in Trinity's record?

Third of all, Trinity has not gotten their home wins vs Centenary and St. Thomas yet. Those home return fixtures vs these two teams are this upcoming weekend. Beat both of them this weekend and you can then at least ask for a deep dive on the Trinity (TX) men on Hoopsville's Top 25 Double Take.

Fourth of all, St. Thomas is still the favorite to win the SCAC tournament, last I checked.

Just my two cents on the Trinity (TX) men from the New England area,but I do not vote on the Top 25 poll, and I thank my stars that I probably never will...... LOL.

PS-- The Trinity (TX) women are ranked #1 this week. Enloy that.

It was exhibition. They did lose to SRS.

I'm predicting votes (not Top 25) after a successful weekend.

Should Trinity face St. Thomas in the SCAC tournament, Tiger fans would be wise to not give the Celts any more bulletin board material which they can use as rope to potentially end the season for the Trinity men's basketball team. Celts just held Trinity to under 60 points at Calgaard Gym and will most likely, as a result, go into the SCAC tourney as the #1 seed. It is small comfort to Trinity that the SCAC designated Calgaard Gym as the predetermined host site of the SCAC tourney this year.

BTW, as D3Navy himself just posted, final score tonight from Calgaard Gym-- #14 St. Thomas 67, Trinity (TX) 59.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 22, 2023, 04:05:46 PM

How They Fared - Complete ~~except Berry at Rhodes (tips 5:00 EST) and Mary Washington at Yeshiva (currently midway through 2nd half)~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	618	St. Joseph (Conn.)	18-0	won at Dean, 81-54; def. Regis (Mass.), 86-49; def. Norwich, 97-50
#2	599	Randolph-Macon	17-1	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 62-41; won at #26 Roanoke, 58-46
#3	564	Mount Union	16-1	won at Muskingum, 81-55; def. T#31 Heidelberg, 94-71
#4	550	Keene State	17-1	LOST to #11 Middlebury, 82-86; def. Castleton, 102-49; def. Southern Maine, 93-68
#5	484	Christopher Newport	17-3	won at Eastern Nazarene, 98-59
#6	477	Williams	16-2	def. Amherst, 66-65; LOST to #11 Middlebury, 55-60
#7	466	Rochester	13-3	LOST at Brandeis, 72-83; won at #34 New York University, 72-55
#8	443	Wheaton (Ill.)	16-2	won at Carroll, 71-58; def. Illinois Wesleyan, 72-71
#9	391	John Carroll	15-2	def. Baldwin Wallace, 96-91; won at Muskingum, 96-67
#10	390	Swarthmore	16-1	def. Ursinus, 63-61; def. Dickinson, 70-50
#11	319	Middlebury	15-2	won at #4 Keene State, 86-82; won at #6 Williams, 60-55
#12	296	WPI	14-2	won at Clark, 83-75; def. Wheaton (Mass.), 78-68
#13	280	Johns Hopkins	14-3	def. Franklin and Marshall, 89-60; won at Muhlenberg, 77-65
#14	260	St. Thomas (Texas)	16-2	won at Schreiner, 74-69; won at Trinity (Texas), 67-59
#15	222	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	14-3	won at T#43 Redlands, 81-78; LOST to Pomona-Pitzer, 76-80 OT
#16	210	Trine	15-2	won at Alma, 80-60; LOST to #21 Calvin, 47-54
#17	206	Guilford	15-3	def. #26 Roanoke, 61-50; won at Virginia Wesleyan, 65-47
#18	196	Emory	13-3	won at #34 New York University, 95-91; won at Brandeis, 73-71 OT
#19	177	Case Western Reserve	12-3	def. #22 Washington U., 90-75; LOST to Chicago, 77-85
#20	160	Oswego State	15-2	won at SUNY Oneonta, 76-68; won at SUNY New Paltz, 106-75
#21	128	Calvin	14-3	def. Kalamazoo, 74-65; won at Trine, 54-47
#22	101	Washington U.	12-4	LOST at #19 Case Western Reserve, 75-90; LOST at #45 Carnegie Mellon, 58-71
#23	98	UW-La Crosse	15-4	won at UW-River Falls, 67-61; won at #33 UW-Eau Claire, 68-66
#24	57	Mary Hardin-Baylor	13-4	def. Concordia (Texas), 95-92
#25	47	Nazareth	13-2	def. Sage, 99-80; def. Hartwick, 89-56

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	45	Roanoke	14-4	LOST at #17 Guilford, 50-61; LOST to #2 Randolph-Macon, 46-58
#27	44	Stockton	15-3	def. Rosemont, 86-75; LOST at Rowan, 69-107; def. Ramapo, 88-63
#28	40	Catholic	16-1	won at Elizabethtown, 97-50; won at Drew, 96-90 2OT
T#29	36	Hampden-Sydney	14-4	won at Randolph, 86-67; won at Salisbury, 77-64
T#29	36	Berry	15-2	won at Hendrix, 80-59; won at Rhodes, 94-74
T#31	27	UW-Oshkosh	14-5	def. UW-Stevens Point, 81-45; won at UW-Stout, 83-72
T#31	27	Heidelberg	12-5	LOST to Ohio Northern, 64-65; LOST at #3 Mount Union, 71-94
#33	22	UW-Eau Claire	12-7	def. UW-Stout, 95-86; LOST to #23 UW-La Crosse, 66-68
#34	21	New York University	12-4	LOST to #18 Emory, 91-95; LOST to #7 Rochester, 55-72
#35	19	RPI	13-4	won at Bard, 53-44; LOST at Vassar, 63-70 2OT; won at Skidmore, 70-57
#36	15	Wooster	14-3	def. Denison, 87-70; def. DePauw, 80-73
#37	13	Carthage	12-5	LOST to North Central (Ill.), 67-77; LOST to Elmhurst, 64-70
#38	10	Texas-Dallas	15-3	won at Sul Ross State, 82-68; won at Howard Payne, 96-66
#39	9	Western Connecticut	15-1	won at Eastern Connecticut, 98-91 OT; def. Plymouth State, 106-83
#40	6	Illinois College	17-1	def. Knox, 84-64; def. Beloit, 58-47
#41	5	Carleton	14-3	won at St. John's, 78-71; won at Hamline, 80-69; LOST to Gustavus Adolphus, 75-78
#42	4	East Texas Baptist	15-3	def. Hardin-Simmons, 85-81; def. McMurry, 98-90
T#43	3	Mary Washington	13-5	won at Eastern Mennonite, 89-71; won at Pratt, 65-45; LOST at Yeshiva, 64-69
T#43	3	Redlands	13-4	LOST to #15 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 78-81; won at Occidental, 72-66
#45	1	Carnegie Mellon	11-5	def. Chicago, 66-60; def. #22 Washington U., 71-58

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D3Navy on January 22, 2023, 09:28:31 PM

Quote from: deiscanton on January 21, 2023, 09:05:41 PM
Quote from: D3Navy on January 18, 2023, 09:52:34 AM
Quote from: deiscanton on January 17, 2023, 11:01:01 PM
Quote from: D3Navy on January 17, 2023, 07:14:55 PM
Prepare for some votes to go Trinity's way. 13-4 with a 7-game winning streak. One loss to #7 Rochester, one loss to Division I A&M Corpus Christi, one loss to #14 St. Thomas, and a narrow loss to 12-4 Centenary.

Lost their leading scorer before the season and other starters hurt. Some now returning and the team is starting to gel.

Look for them to win the SCAC tournament and reach the playoffs.

First of all, wash't the game vs Texas A & M--Corpus Christi an exhibition game-- in other words, that result does not count vs Trinity (TX)?

Second of all, what about the loss to Sul Ross State, which does count in Trinity's record?

Third of all, Trinity has not gotten their home wins vs Centenary and St. Thomas yet. Those home return fixtures vs these two teams are this upcoming weekend. Beat both of them this weekend and you can then at least ask for a deep dive on the Trinity (TX) men on Hoopsville's Top 25 Double Take.

Fourth of all, St. Thomas is still the favorite to win the SCAC tournament, last I checked.

Just my two cents on the Trinity (TX) men from the New England area,but I do not vote on the Top 25 poll, and I thank my stars that I probably never will...... LOL.

PS-- The Trinity (TX) women are ranked #1 this week. Enloy that.

It was exhibition. They did lose to SRS.

I'm predicting votes (not Top 25) after a successful weekend.

Should Trinity face St. Thomas in the SCAC tournament, Tiger fans would be wise to not give the Celts any more bulletin board material which they can use as rope to potentially end the season for the Trinity men's basketball team. Celts just held Trinity to under 60 points at Calgaard Gym and will most likely, as a result, go into the SCAC tourney as the #1 seed. It is small comfort to Trinity that the SCAC designated Calgaard Gym as the predetermined host site of the SCAC tourney this year.

BTW, as D3Navy himself just posted, final score tonight from Calgaard Gym-- #14 St. Thomas 67, Trinity (TX) 59.

I doubt my confidence and enthusiasm for the team is "rope" for opponents.

Looking forward to a rematch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on January 23, 2023, 08:51:30 AM

Would someone be kind enough to remind me again who will have priority for hosting in the 1st round of NCAA...men or women? I can never remember the odd/even year rotation.

Thanks!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on January 23, 2023, 09:22:39 AM

Believe it's the women's turn for priority. They don't appear to have given it to the women in 2022 despite the men having priority in 2020 so with the year of no tournament I can't remember for certain.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PoppersMacsLive on January 24, 2023, 08:56:29 AM

Women have first weekend priority this year, and men have second weekend priority.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on January 24, 2023, 11:38:15 AM

Thanks! Now let's see if I can remember that in a few weeks! haha!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 25, 2023, 08:02:56 AM

It's always odd and even - skipping the no tournament year would've thrown everyone off.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 25, 2023, 12:17:27 PM

Honestly, we didn't have a second weekend in 2020 anyway.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on January 25, 2023, 12:51:04 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 25, 2023, 08:02:56 AM

It's always odd and even - skipping the no tournament year would've thrown everyone off.

Hardly a sufficient reason not to do it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on January 25, 2023, 12:55:16 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 25, 2023, 12:17:27 PM
Honestly, we didn't have a second weekend in 2020 anyway.

But, we did have second weekend host sites.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 25, 2023, 01:44:51 PM

But nobody benefited from hosting that weekend.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on January 25, 2023, 02:01:46 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 25, 2023, 01:44:51 PM
But nobody benefited from hosting that weekend.

Well, by staying home we were able to stock up on water and toilet paper! :P

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on January 26, 2023, 09:31:01 PM

Upset watch... #1 St Joseph in a fight with Lasell. Under 4 minutes left and it's tied.
Blue Jays have won their last 14 by double digits, been over 2 months since Illinois Wesleyan took them to OT on a neutral court.

St Joseph pulls it out 73-66 thanks to finishing on an 8-0 run the final two minutes. It was a lot harder than the 98-39 win they had over Lasell a few weeks ago.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D3Navy on January 27, 2023, 09:07:57 AM

It was a good game and closer than the score indicates. Happy for Lasell; a confidence booster.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 29, 2023, 04:55:32 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	619	St. Joseph (Conn.)	20-0	won at Lasell, 73-66; won at Colby-Sawyer, 94-80
#2	604	Randolph-Macon	19-1	won at Averett, 86-48; def. Ferrum, 85-70
#3	568	Mount Union	17-2	LOST at #8 John Carroll, 72-74; won at Ohio Northern, 73-66
#4	523	Christopher Newport	18-3	def. Salisbury, 84-74
#5	490	Middlebury	17-2	def. Bates, 81-64; def. Tufts, 72-56
#6	471	Keene State	19-1	won at Plymouth State, 80-63; won at Rhode Island College, 90-68
#7	467	Wheaton (Ill.)	17-3	LOST at North Park, 63-66; won at Carthage, 76-60
#8	422	John Carroll	17-2	def. #3 Mount Union, 74-72; won at Capital, 73-65
#9	410	Swarthmore	17-2	won at Muhlenberg, 88-65; LOST at #12 Johns Hopkins, 67-77
#10	388	Williams	17-3	LOST to Tufts, 50-71; def. Bates, 75-59
#11	335	Rochester	14-4	LOST to #38 Washington U., 47-63; def. Chicago, 72-71 OT
#12	302	Johns Hopkins	16-3	def. Gettysburg, 76-60; def. #9 Swarthmore, 77-67
#13	301	WPI	16-2	def. Coast Guard, 77-49; won at Springfield, 83-58
#14	287	Guilford	16-4	LOST at #25 Hampden-Sydney, 57-64; def. Eastern Mennonite, 80-54
#15	279	St. Thomas (Texas)	19-2	def. Texas Lutheran, 77-70; def. Southwestern, 76-44
#16	259	Emory	14-4	def. Chicago, 79-75 OT; LOST to #38 Washington U., 69-72
#17	219	Oswego State	18-2	won at SUNY Geneseo, 100-62; def. Plattsburgh State, 97-61; def. SUNY Potsdam, 103-78
#18	217	Calvin	16-3	won at Olivet, 69-56; def. Adrian, 66-41
#19	121	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	16-3	won at Cal Lutheran, 66-64; def. Caltech, 68-55
#20	115	UW-La Crosse	15-5	LOST to UW-Whitewater, 71-74
#21	114	Trine	17-2	won at Adrian, 76-64; won at Olivet, 73-52
#22	83	Mary Hardin-Baylor	15-4	def. #34 East Texas Baptist, 89-78; def. LeTourneau, 75-74 OT
#23	82	Nazareth	15-3	LOST at St. John Fisher, 67-70; won at Alfred, 79-69; won at Elmira, 88-41
#24	73	UW-Oshkosh	15-5	def. UW-Platteville, 75-56
#25	70	Hampden-Sydney	16-4	def. #14 Guilford, 64-57; won at #36 Roanoke, 57-51

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	54	Case Western Reserve	14-3	won at Brandeis, 91-71; won at New York University, 88-82
#27	40	Rowan	17-3	def. TCNJ, 83-65; won at Ramapo, 97-66
#28	39	Wooster	15-4	def. Ohio Wesleyan, 72-64; LOST at Oberlin, 68-71
#29	38	Berry	18-2	def. Hendrix, 74-51; def. Rhodes, 55-54
#30	34	Catholic	18-1	def. Juniata, 82-48; def. Moravian, 82-60
#31	23	Texas-Dallas	16-3	won at University of the Ozarks, 73-69
#32	21	RPI	13-6	LOST at Union, 57-68; LOST at Ithaca, 52-63
#33	15	Western Connecticut	17-1	won at Mass-Boston, 79-75; won at Mass-Dartmouth, 98-80
#34	14	East Texas Baptist	15-5	LOST at #22 Mary Hardin-Baylor, 78-89; LOST at Concordia (Texas), 102-104
#35	10	Illinois College	18-2	LOST at Cornell, 56-64; won at Grinnell, 110-97
#36	7	Roanoke	15-5	won at Ferrum, 101-53; LOST to #25 Hampden-Sydney, 51-57
#37	5	Carnegie Mellon	12-6	LOST at New York University, 55-79; won at Brandeis, 65-64
#38	3	Washington U.	14-4	won at #11 Rochester, 63-47; won at #16 Emory, 72-69
#39	2	Wesleyan	13-7	def. Mass-Dartmouth, 80-75; LOST at Amherst, 67-71; LOST at Hamilton, 86-87
#40	1	Redlands	14-5	def. Chapman, 86-76; LOST at Cal Lutheran, 90-100

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: monsoon on January 29, 2023, 05:30:08 PM

Thanks for compiling these each week, Darryl; for both the men and women.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 05, 2023, 04:52:59 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

~~Berry vs. Birmingham-Southern is currently midway through the second half, with Berry up 61-49.~~
(Edited to correct Calvin's information)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	615	St. Joseph (Conn.)	22-0	def. Albertus Magnus, 88-64; def. Elms, 87-42
#2	609	Randolph-Macon	21-1	def. Shenandoah, 96-41; won at Bridgewater (Va.), 83-67
#3	540	Middlebury	19-3	def. New England College, 90-36; LOST at Wesleyan, 85-89; won at Trinity (Conn.), 65-64 OT
#4	539	Christopher Newport	20-3	won at Mary Washington, 67-53; def. UC Santa Cruz, 74-61
#5	502	Mount Union	19-2	def. Baldwin Wallace, 102-69; won at Wilmington, 97-85
#6	501	Keene State	21-1	def. Eastern Connecticut, 92-66; won at #32 Western Connecticut, 92-76
#7	492	John Carroll	19-2	won at Heidelberg, 91-82; def. Marietta, 89-75
#8	408	Wheaton (Ill.)	19-3	won at Augustana, 74-72; def. Millikin, 84-73
#9	400	Johns Hopkins	18-3	def. McDaniel, 72-52; won at Haverford, 59-56
#10	342	Swarthmore	19-2	def. Washington College, 86-56; def. Franklin and Marshall, 76-62
#11	324	St. Thomas (Texas)	21-2	won at Austin, 70-61; won at University of Dallas, 65-62
#12	313	WPI	17-3	LOST at Emerson, 66-71; def. Babson, 55-54
#13	295	Oswego State	20-2	def. SUNY New Paltz, 112-53; def. SUNY Oneonta, 58-51
#14	263	Calvin	18-3	won at Kalamazoo, 84-51; def. Olivet, 92-74
#15	218	Rochester	14-6	LOST at #21 Washington U., 61-79; LOST at Chicago, 72-88
#16	217	Guilford	18-4	won at Ferrum, 75-65; won at Randolph, 71-63
#17	215	Williams	19-3	won at Trinity (Conn.), 94-79; won at Wesleyan, 80-62
#18	169	Hampden-Sydney	18-4	won at Virginia Wesleyan, 73-66; def. Shenandoah, 74-55
#19	156	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	18-3	def. La Verne, 71-56; won at Whittier, 97-66
#20	145	Emory	15-5	won at Chicago, 77-70; LOST at #21 Washington U., 59-60
#21	140	Washington U.	16-4	def. #15 Rochester, 79-61; def. #20 Emory, 60-59
#22	117	Trine	19-2	def. Albion, 65-41; def. Alma, 67-59
#23	114	UW-Oshkosh	17-5	def. UW-Eau Claire, 74-63; won at UW-River Falls, 79-70
#24	100	Mary Hardin-Baylor	17-4	won at Sul Ross State, 68-55; won at Howard Payne, 95-47
#25	68	Rowan	19-3	def. Rutgers-Camden, 101-86; won at Kean, 95-88

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	53	Case Western Reserve	16-3	def. Brandeis, 101-73; def. New York University, 96-92
#27	52	Berry	20-2	def. Millsaps, 92-66; def. Birmingham-Southern, 91-71
T#28	50	Catholic	20-1	won at Goucher, 86-60; won at Scranton, 87-74
T#28	50	North Park	16-5	LOST to Millikin, 79-86 OT
#30	31	UW-La Crosse	17-5	won at UW-Platteville, 82-67; def. UW-Stevens Point, 81-58
#31	28	Texas-Dallas	17-3	def. Hardin-Simmons, 90-73
#32	20	Western Connecticut	19-2	def. Castleton, 106-86; def. Rhode Island College, 98-59; LOST to #6 Keene State, 76-92
#33	14	Nazareth	17-4	LOST at #37 Utica, 66-68; def. Houghton, 96-55; def. Medaille, 84-53
#34	10	Tufts	16-4	def. Colby, 63-54; def. Bowdoin, 74-68
#35	9	Pomona-Pitzer	15-5	won at Chapman, 74-58; won at Redlands, 77-73
#36	5	Wooster	17-4	won at Kenyon, 77-53; def. Wittenberg, 68-60
#37	1	Utica	18-2	def. #33 Nazareth, 68-66; def. Keuka, 78-72

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: monsoon on February 05, 2023, 07:33:10 PM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on February 05, 2023, 04:52:59 PM
How They Fared (Complete)

~~Berry vs. Birmingham-Southern is currently midway through the second half, with Berry up 61-49.~~

Top 25

Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#1 615 St. Joseph (Conn.) 22-0 def. Albertus Magnus, 88-64; def. Elms, 87-42
#2 609 Randolph-Macon 21-1 def. Shenandoah, 96-41; won at Bridgewater (Va.), 83-67
#3 540 Middlebury 19-3 def. New England College, 90-36; LOST at Wesleyan, 85-89; won at Trinity (Conn.), 65-64 OT
#4 539 Christopher Newport 20-3 won at Mary Washington, 67-53; def. UC Santa Cruz, 74-61
#5 502 Mount Union 19-2 def. Baldwin Wallace, 102-69; won at Wilmington, 97-85
#6 501 Keene State 21-1 def. Eastern Connecticut, 92-66; won at #32 Western Connecticut, 92-76
#7 492 John Carroll 19-2 won at Heidelberg, 91-82; def. Marietta, 89-75
#8 408 Wheaton (Ill.) 19-3 won at Augustana, 74-72; def. Millikin, 84-73
#9 400 Johns Hopkins 18-3 def. McDaniel, 72-52; won at Haverford, 59-56
#10 342 Swarthmore 19-2 def. Washington College, 86-56; def. Franklin and Marshall, 76-62
#11 324 St. Thomas (Texas) 21-2 won at Austin, 70-61; won at University of Dallas, 65-62
#12 313 WPI 17-3 LOST at Emerson, 66-71; def. Babson, 55-54
#13 295 Oswego State 20-2 def. SUNY New Paltz, 112-53; def. SUNY Oneonta, 58-51
#14 263 Calvin 18-3 IDLE
#15 218 Rochester 14-6 LOST at #21 Washington U., 61-79; LOST at Chicago, 72-88
#16 217 Guilford 18-4 won at Ferrum, 75-65; won at Randolph, 71-63
#17 215 Williams 19-3 won at Trinity (Conn.), 94-79; won at Wesleyan, 80-62
#18 169 Hampden-Sydney 18-4 won at Virginia Wesleyan, 73-66; def. Shenandoah, 74-55
#19 156 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps 18-3 def. La Verne, 71-56; won at Whittier, 97-66
#20 145 Emory 15-5 won at Chicago, 77-70; LOST at #21 Washington U., 59-60
#21 140 Washington U. 16-4 def. #15 Rochester, 79-61; def. #20 Emory, 60-59
#22 117 Trine 19-2 def. Albion, 65-41; def. Alma, 67-59
#23 114 UW-Oshkosh 17-5 def. UW-Eau Claire, 74-63; won at UW-River Falls, 79-70
#24 100 Mary Hardin-Baylor 17-4 won at Sul Ross State, 68-55; won at Howard Payne, 95-47
#25 68 Rowan 19-3 def. Rutgers-Camden, 101-86; won at Kean, 95-88

Others receiving votes
Rank Pts Team W-L Results
#26 53 Case Western Reserve 16-3 def. Brandeis, 101-73; def. New York University, 96-92
#27 52 Berry 20-2 def. Millsaps, 92-66; def. Birmingham-Southern, 91-71
T#28 50 Catholic 20-1 won at Goucher, 86-60; won at Scranton, 87-74
T#28 50 North Park 16-5 LOST to Millikin, 79-86 OT
#30 31 UW-La Crosse 17-5 won at UW-Platteville, 82-67; def. UW-Stevens Point, 81-58
#31 28 Texas-Dallas 17-3 def. Hardin-Simmons, 90-73
#32 20 Western Connecticut 19-2 def. Castleton, 106-86; def. Rhode Island College, 98-59; LOST to #6 Keene State, 76-92
#33 14 Nazareth 17-4 LOST at #37 Utica, 66-68; def. Houghton, 96-55; def. Medaille, 84-53
#34 10 Tufts 16-4 def. Colby, 63-54; def. Bowdoin, 74-68
#35 9 Pomona-Pitzer 15-5 won at Chapman, 74-58; won at Redlands, 77-73
#36 5 Wooster 17-4 won at Kenyon, 77-53; def. Wittenberg, 68-60
#37 1 Utica 18-2 def. #33 Nazareth, 68-66; def. Keuka, 78-72

For some reason your program lists Calvin as idle on both the men's and women's side even though they definitely played this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 05, 2023, 08:36:58 PM

Quote from: monsoon on February 05, 2023, 07:33:10 PM
For some reason your program lists Calvin as idle on both the men's and women's side even though they definitely played this week.

Oops, that's an issue that arose around Christmas. I've been too lazy to try to track down the reason for the issue, and had been correcting it manually ... but forgot to do so this time.

I'll edit to correct.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 12, 2023, 04:12:39 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

~~One result pending: Berry currently leads Centre 33-23 at halftime.~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	615	St. Joseph (Conn.)	24-0	won at Emmanuel, 92-70; def. Dean, 87-60
#2	609	Randolph-Macon	23-1	def. Averett, 53-51; def. Roanoke, 69-50
#3	544	Christopher Newport	21-3	won at Salisbury, 85-73
#4	532	Mount Union	21-2	won at Marietta, 77-68; def. Capital, 73-61
#5	513	Keene State	22-1	def. Mass-Dartmouth, 82-65
#6	506	John Carroll	21-2	def. Otterbein, 79-52; won at Ohio Northern, 95-89 OT
#7	450	Middlebury	19-4	LOST at Connecticut College, 49-60
#8	442	Wheaton (Ill.)	20-3	def. North Central (Ill.), 72-62
#9	404	Johns Hopkins	20-3	won at Franklin and Marshall, 71-59; def. Dickinson, 71-53
#10	372	Swarthmore	21-2	won at Ursinus, 74-58; def. McDaniel, 84-60
#11	324	Oswego State	21-2	def. Cortland, 102-62
#12	313	St. Thomas (Texas)	21-2	IDLE
#13	290	Calvin	20-3	won at Alma, 98-62; def. #21 Trine, 67-56
#14	253	Guilford	19-4	won at Lynchburg, 78-63
#15	239	Williams	21-3	def. SUNY New Paltz, 63-57; won at Connecticut College, 86-46
#16	232	Washington U.	17-5	won at Brandeis, 56-52; LOST at New York University, 52-65
#17	226	Hampden-Sydney	19-4	won at Ferrum, 82-77
#18	164	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	20-3	won at Chapman, 87-54; won at Occidental, 63-50
#19	151	UW-Oshkosh	19-5	won at UW-Whitewater, 72-68; def. #30 UW-La Crosse, 91-88
#20	135	WPI	19-3	def. MIT, 70-45; won at Coast Guard, 69-62
#21	124	Trine	20-3	won at Hope, 56-43; LOST at #13 Calvin, 56-67
#22	121	Mary Hardin-Baylor	19-4	def. #29 Texas-Dallas, 83-77 OT; def. University of the Ozarks, 90-65
#23	112	Rowan	20-4	LOST at New Jersey City, 71-73; def. Rutgers-Newark, 77-70
#24	77	Emory	15-7	LOST at #38 Carnegie Mellon, 60-63; LOST at #26 Case Western Reserve, 75-102
#25	75	Berry	22-2	won at Sewanee, 85-67; won at Centre, 77-68

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	68	Case Western Reserve	18-3	def. #33 Rochester, 90-87 OT; def. #24 Emory, 102-75
#27	57	Catholic	21-2	def. Elizabethtown, 88-65; LOST at Susquehanna, 77-78
#28	41	Pomona-Pitzer	17-5	def. Occidental, 87-69; won at La Verne, 89-72
#29	40	Texas-Dallas	19-4	def. McMurry, 105-79; LOST at #22 Mary Hardin-Baylor, 77-83 OT; won at Concordia (Texas), 87-82
#30	29	UW-La Crosse	18-6	def. UW-Stout, 82-42; LOST at #19 UW-Oshkosh, 88-91
#31	13	Tufts	18-5	def. Colby-Sawyer, 91-54; LOST at Wesleyan, 82-85; won at Trinity (Conn.), 74-59
#32	12	North Park	18-5	won at Carthage, 87-84; won at Elmhurst, 93-90 2OT
#33	9	Rochester	15-7	LOST at #26 Case Western Reserve, 87-90 OT; won at #38 Carnegie Mellon, 82-78
T#34	6	Utica	20-3	LOST at St. John Fisher, 63-65; won at Alfred, 56-52; won at Elmira, 73-59
T#34	6	Western Connecticut	21-2	def. SUNY-Old Westbury, 100-65; won at Castleton, 86-42
T#36	5	Wooster	18-4	won at Hiram, 74-66
T#36	5	Carleton	20-3	def. St. John's, 77-72; won at Macalester, 74-70
#38	4	Carnegie Mellon	15-7	def. #24 Emory, 63-60; LOST to #33 Rochester, 78-82
T#39	3	Nazareth	19-4	def. Keuka, 81-59; def. St. John Fisher, 94-88
T#39	3	Wabash	18-5	LOST at Denison, 61-68; def. Hiram, 80-70
#41	1	Stockton	21-3	def. TCNJ, 78-61; def. New Jersey City, 74-61

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 19, 2023, 04:48:21 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	615	St. Joseph (Conn.)	25-0	won at Johnson and Wales, 86-70
#2	609	Randolph-Macon	24-1	won at #14 Guilford, 61-58
#3	547	Christopher Newport	22-3	def. Mary Washington, 71-66
#4	517	Mount Union	23-2	def. Muskingum, 94-63; def. Otterbein, 88-76
#5	515	Keene State	24-1	won at Castleton, 63-35; def. Mass-Boston, 92-77
#6	505	John Carroll	22-3	LOST at Baldwin Wallace, 94-99; won at Wilmington, 85-72
#7	459	Wheaton (Ill.)	22-3	def. Carroll, 70-57; won at Elmhurst, 77-70
#8	391	Johns Hopkins	22-3	def. Washington College, 90-55; won at Ursinus, 85-76
#9	384	Swarthmore	22-3	won at Haverford, 71-58; LOST at Gettysburg, 65-78
#10	372	Oswego State	23-2	won at Brockport, 79-73; won at Fredonia, 85-70
#11	335	Calvin	21-4	LOST to Hope, 57-65; won at Albion, 77-58
#12	318	Middlebury	19-5	LOST to #32 Tufts, 80-89 2OT
#13	313	St. Thomas (Texas)	23-2	def. Centenary (La.), 68-55; won at Colorado College, 67-56
#14	284	Guilford	20-5	def. Ferrum, 61-47; LOST to #2 Randolph-Macon, 58-61
#15	277	Williams	22-3	def. Trinity (Conn.), 62-47
#16	259	Hampden-Sydney	20-5	def. Lynchburg, 109-73; LOST at Washington and Lee, 86-96
#17	221	UW-Oshkosh	20-5	won at UW-Stevens Point, 96-76
#18	181	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	21-3	def. Redlands, 79-64
#19	156	Mary Hardin-Baylor	21-4	won at McMurry, 97-79; won at Hardin-Simmons, 95-90
#20	155	WPI	21-3	won at Wheaton (Mass.), 68-48; def. Clark, 86-56
#21	151	Case Western Reserve	20-3	won at #22 Washington U., 75-74; won at Chicago, 76-67
#22	131	Washington U.	18-6	LOST to #21 Case Western Reserve, 74-75; def. Carnegie Mellon, 81-57
#23	85	Berry	24-2	won at Oglethorpe, 97-77; def. Centre, 86-64
#24	80	Trine	22-3	def. Kalamazoo, 72-45; def. Adrian, 86-48
#25	54	Pomona-Pitzer	19-5	won at Caltech, 67-57; def. Cal Lutheran, 75-67

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	38	Rowan	20-5	LOST to Montclair State, 100-104 OT
#27	29	Texas-Dallas	20-5	def. LeTourneau, 72-70; LOST to East Texas Baptist, 72-74
#28	27	UW-La Crosse	19-6	def. UW-River Falls, 74-61
T#29	26	North Park	20-5	def. Illinois Wesleyan, 63-57; won at Augustana, 73-65
T#29	26	Catholic	22-3	LOST at Juniata, 67-81; def. Drew, 81-76
#31	23	Carleton	22-3	won at Concordia-Moorhead, 81-64; won at St. Scholastica, 90-70
#32	13	Tufts	19-6	won at #12 Middlebury, 89-80 2OT
#33	8	Western Connecticut	21-4	LOST to Eastern Connecticut, 75-81; LOST at Southern Maine, 84-91 2OT
#34	6	Wooster	19-5	LOST at Denison, 70-78; def. Wabash, 75-74
T#35	5	Rochester	16-8	def. Brandeis, 79-65; LOST to New York University, 52-66
T#35	5	Nazareth	20-5	LOST at Hartwick, 54-66; won at Sage, 92-62
#37	4	Utica	22-3	def. Medaille, 73-66; def. Houghton, 77-55
#38	1	Whitman	21-4	def. Willamette, 85-64; def. Linfield, 79-65

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 26, 2023, 05:21:23 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	614	St. Joseph (Conn.)	27-1	def. Anna Maria, 101-62; def. St. Joseph's (Maine), 88-49; LOST to Albertus Magnus, 79-83
#2	610	Randolph-Macon	27-1	def. (n) Ferrum, 75-61; def. (n) Roanoke, 62-50; def. (n) #13 Guilford, 61-48
#3	579	Christopher Newport	24-3	def. UC Santa Cruz, 81-73; def. (n) Mary Washington, 65-52
#4	547	Mount Union	25-2	def. Heidelberg, 83-67; def. Marietta, 95-80
#5	523	Keene State	26-1	def. Eastern Connecticut, 83-61; def. Western Connecticut, 83-79 OT
#6	478	Wheaton (Ill.)	22-4	LOST to Elmhurst, 58-76
#7	425	Johns Hopkins	23-4	def. Muhlenberg, 85-51; LOST to #15 Swarthmore, 73-76
#8	414	John Carroll	22-4	LOST to Marietta, 75-79
#9	413	Oswego State	25-2	def. SUNY New Paltz, 73-68; def. Brockport, 74-63
#10	333	Williams	22-4	LOST to Colby, 51-66
#11	326	UW-Oshkosh	21-6	def. UW-Eau Claire, 82-62; LOST to UW-Whitewater, 79-92
#12	316	St. Thomas (Texas)	23-3	LOST to (n) Schreiner, 64-65
#13	280	Guilford	22-6	def. (n) Bridgewater (Va.), 94-90; def. (n) #20 Hampden-Sydney, 70-69; LOST to (n) #2 Randolph-Macon, 48-61
#14	276	Case Western Reserve	21-3	won at Carnegie Mellon, 95-91
#15	266	Swarthmore	24-3	def. Gettysburg, 95-81; won at #7 Johns Hopkins, 76-73
#16	244	Calvin	22-5	def. Olivet, 81-60; LOST to Hope, 54-61
#17	237	Mary Hardin-Baylor	21-5	LOST to Hardin-Simmons, 71-78
#18	212	Middlebury	19-5	IDLE
#19	206	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	21-5	LOST at #24 Pomona-Pitzer, 68-75; LOST to Redlands, 78-83
#20	178	Hampden-Sydney	21-6	def. (n) Virginia Wesleyan, 78-69; LOST to (n) #13 Guilford, 69-70
#21	172	WPI	22-4	def. Clark, 72-56; LOST to Babson, 53-59
#22	106	Berry	25-3	def. Birmingham-Southern, 78-63; LOST to Sewanee, 82-86
#23	73	Trine	22-4	LOST to (n) Hope, 56-67
#24	64	Pomona-Pitzer	20-6	def. #19 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 75-68; LOST to Cal Lutheran, 73-79
#25	61	Washington U.	19-6	won at Chicago, 63-62

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	39	North Park	22-5	def. Carthage, 82-62; def. Elmhurst, 81-75
#27	35	Carleton	24-3	def. Hamline, 68-51; def. St. John's, 86-76
#28	34	UW-La Crosse	19-7	LOST to UW-Whitewater, 68-72
#29	30	Tufts	19-7	LOST at Hamilton, 48-71
#30	16	Utica	22-4	LOST to St. John Fisher, 65-70
#31	14	Rowan	22-5	def. TCNJ, 96-83; def. Stockton, 103-88
#32	10	East Texas Baptist	23-5	def. LeTourneau, 77-65; won at #33 Texas-Dallas, 74-71; def. (n) Hardin-Simmons, 72-64
#33	9	Texas-Dallas	20-6	LOST to #32 East Texas Baptist, 71-74
#34	4	New York U.	18-7	def. Brandeis, 70-57
T#35	3	Rochester	16-9	LOST to Emory, 76-86
T#35	3	Illinois College	25-2	def. Ripon, 72-66; def. Cornell, 70-61
T#37	2	Whitman	22-5	def. George Fox, 86-64; LOST to Whitworth, 65-78
T#37	2	Catholic	22-4	LOST to Scranton, 63-70
#39	1	Montclair State	22-5	LOST at Stockton, 86-91

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on February 26, 2023, 05:29:20 PM

^^^ A lot of red ink there.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ziggy on October 23, 2023, 03:48:38 PM

While we are waiting for the official release of the preseason Top 25 poll, some voters have begun making their ballots public. I am aggregating them to get a view of how the Top 25 may be taking shape. Got this kicked off with three known ballots and will keep updating it as more are revealed: https://d3datacast.com/2023/10/23/unofficial-2023-24-preseason-top-25-poll-tracker/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on October 23, 2023, 04:00:15 PM

Thanks for the info Ziggy.

CNU has their roster posted on line. 12 returning players and 9 Freshmen. I imagine some of the Fr will get playing time. You can't always tell how a recruiting class will fare. But man, these new guys....wow!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 23, 2023, 04:00:26 PM

Thanks for doing that, Zac!

(I gotta wonder why Ryan Scott mentioned North Park in the surefire-Top-Ten segment of Bob Quillman's most recent Q-cast, and then completely left NPU off of his preseason ballot.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 23, 2023, 04:04:22 PM

Quote from: ziggy on October 23, 2023, 03:48:38 PM
While we are waiting for the official release of the preseason Top 25 poll, some voters have begun making their ballots public. I am aggregating them to get a view of how the Top 25 may be taking shape. Got this kicked off with three known ballots and will keep updating it as more are revealed: https://d3datacast.com/2023/10/23/unofficial-2023-24-preseason-top-25-poll-tracker/

Are those their FINAL preseason ballots?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ziggy on October 23, 2023, 04:07:36 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 23, 2023, 04:04:22 PM
Quote from: ziggy on October 23, 2023, 03:48:38 PM
While we are waiting for the official release of the preseason Top 25 poll, some voters have begun making their ballots public. I am aggregating them to get a view of how the Top 25 may be taking shape. Got this kicked off with three known ballots and will keep updating it as more are revealed: https://d3datacast.com/2023/10/23/unofficial-2023-24-preseason-top-25-poll-tracker/

Are those their FINAL preseason ballots?

Yes, the screenshots being posted on social media are directly from the voting interface (further, I believe that is the confirmation page after clicking submit)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 23, 2023, 04:24:53 PM

Thanks. We appreciate you doing this. Good to have it all centralized.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 24, 2023, 10:49:54 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 23, 2023, 04:00:26 PM
Thanks for doing that, Zac!

(I gotta wonder why Ryan Scott mentioned North Park in the surefire-Top-Ten segment of Bob Quillman's most recent Q-cast, and then completely left NPU off of his preseason ballot.)

I become convinced by the argument that their losses were significant enough to let them play their way on. The same happened, for me at least, with Swarthmore.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 24, 2023, 10:56:01 AM

Fair enough.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Stretch4 on October 24, 2023, 11:56:25 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 24, 2023, 10:49:54 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 23, 2023, 04:00:26 PM
Thanks for doing that, Zac!

(I gotta wonder why Ryan Scott mentioned North Park in the surefire-Top-Ten segment of Bob Quillman's most recent Q-cast, and then completely left NPU off of his preseason ballot.)

I become convinced by the argument that their losses were significant enough to let them play their way on. The same happened, for me at least, with Swarthmore.

That same logic could be applied to Randolph Macon in terms of significant losses, but they will deservedly get the benefit of the doubt. Swat will get their opportunity on the first weekend when they face Washington U and NYU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 24, 2023, 12:12:23 PM

Quote from: Stretch4 on October 24, 2023, 11:56:25 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on October 24, 2023, 10:49:54 AM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 23, 2023, 04:00:26 PM
Thanks for doing that, Zac!

(I gotta wonder why Ryan Scott mentioned North Park in the surefire-Top-Ten segment of Bob Quillman's most recent Q-cast, and then completely left NPU off of his preseason ballot.)

I become convinced by the argument that their losses were significant enough to let them play their way on. The same happened, for me at least, with Swarthmore.

That same logic could be applied to Randolph Macon in terms of significant losses, but they will deservedly get the benefit of the doubt. Swat will get their opportunity on the first weekend when they face Washington U and NYU.

You're right. I voted RMC 23rd and I shouldn't have. Not sure how that slipped through.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on October 24, 2023, 12:28:01 PM

I think RMC's losses are more significant than Swarthmore's (although both have in common consistently great programs led by elite coaches who maximize every inch of the talent on hand). RMC graduates by far its two best players including a multi-year all-American who was an elite two-way force, and doesn't return anyone who is a clear go-to guy offensively. In total, RMC graduates 32/72 ppg. They will defend the heck out of it as always but the offense could be pretty choppy barring some amazing recruits who are ready right away. And also, ODAG looks flat loaded this year, with HSC a top-ten caliber team and Guilford and VWC both bringing back a ton and poised to improve. I'd also note that RMC was 5-0 in games decided by 3 points or fewer last year and that sort of remarkable clutch performance will be hard to replicate without two battle-tested all-American caliber guys leading the offense.

While Swarthmore loses some key guys as well, in particular Visconti, they at least have an all-American they can rely upon as their centerpiece in DeAngelo and a second proven top-tier player to hold down the interior in Caprise. And they also seem to find a way to develop guards in that system who can shoot the lights out no matter who they lose. Colin Shaw is a great example as a guy who suddenly erupted as a lights-out shooter as a senior. Between Hanson, Paquette and Mulvey, or maybe a first-year or two, they will find guards who can shoot the ball. If Godfrey can step up into a bigger role as the second big guy they should be very tough once again.

Based on the pre-season ballots I've seen the two teams I think folks seem to be sleeping on too much are Nichols and Rowan. Both went pretty deep in the tourney last year, bring back some real star power, and added absolutely loaded recruiting classes including (for both) a pair of what could be big-time scholarship-level transfers. Each may take some time to gel with a lot of new faces but in terms of talent, they will be right there with the top ten teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ziggy on October 24, 2023, 12:43:20 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on October 24, 2023, 12:28:01 PM
Based on the pre-season ballots I've seen the two teams I think folks seem to be sleeping on too much are Nichols and Rowan. Both went pretty deep in the tourney last year, bring back some real star power, and added absolutely loaded recruiting classes including (for both) a pair of what could be big-time scholarship-level transfers. Each may take some time to gel with a lot of new faces but in terms of talent, they will be right there with the top ten teams.

I agree here. Nichols has not been named on any publicly released ballots and that total is up to six.
Rowan is a really interesting case. They are just outside the Top 25 based on the known ballots. They only have votes from two voters but both of those voters didn't really see them as a fringe team on their ballot - one at 19 and one at 15.

https://d3datacast.com/2023/10/23/unofficial-2023-24-preseason-top-25-poll-tracker/

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 24, 2023, 12:57:13 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on October 24, 2023, 12:28:01 PM
Based on the pre-season ballots I've seen the two teams I think folks seem to be sleeping on too much are Nichols and Rowan. Both went pretty deep in the tourney last year, bring back some real star power, and added absolutely loaded recruiting classes including (for both) a pair of what could be big-time scholarship-level transfers. Each may take some time to gel with a lot of new faces but in terms of talent, they will be right there with the top ten teams.

That situation describes North Park perfectly as well -- the some-folks-are-sleeping-on-them-too-much matter, the they-got-deep-into-last-season's-tourney thing, the returning star power, and the loaded recruiting class that includes more than one guy who should be playing D1 or D2 ball. But, as I told Ryan, I'm fine with NPU being stuck on the outside looking in with regard to some voters' preseason ballots. Let the Vikings convince their skeptics in the best way possible -- on the court rather than through social-media arguments.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: stlawus on October 24, 2023, 06:09:43 PM

Just because some people aren't voting for North Park in the top 25 doesn't mean people are "sleeping on them". Pretty much everyone thinks they are preseason CCIW favorites and they will likely be ranked to start the season.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 24, 2023, 07:18:10 PM

No one is sleeping on NPU. After their success last year, their coach getting National Coach of the Year and all the hype with transfers and incoming players, they're in the spotlight already. Polls and social media are for fun. If you take it more seriously than that, you're in the wrong business! LOL Good luck to everyone, ranked or not. Looking forward to the upcoming season...when aren't we??

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 24, 2023, 11:09:02 PM

Quote from: stlawus on October 24, 2023, 06:09:43 PM
Just because some people aren't voting for North Park in the top 25 doesn't mean people are "sleeping on them". Pretty much everyone thinks they are preseason CCIW favorites

Not true. Check this out -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qVBlxbLiLI -- the "Who do you pick to win the CCIW?" discussion starts at the 20:00 mark.

Quote from: stlawus on October 24, 2023, 06:09:43 PMand they will likely be ranked to start the season.

Are you following Zac Snyder's poll tracker? (https://d3datacast.com/2023/10/23/unofficial-2023-24-preseason-top-25-poll-tracker/) North Park is barely hanging on to #25 at the moment. The Vikings are two points away from being out.

The working premise of a power conference, in the minds of just about everybody who's ever been part of the discussion, is that its' top team is represented in the top 25, usually joined by other teams from that league. The CCIW is regarded by everyone who follows D3 men's basketball as a power conference. North Park is the #1 pick in the CCIW preseason coaches poll (albeit by the slimmest of margins), and so it stands to reason that NPU would be on, if not all 24 ballots, at least the great majority of them. But NPU is only on five of the nine ballots that have either been tweeted by the "sunshine voters", as I call them (Tim Calderwood, Pat Coleman, Dave McHugh, Akiva Poppers, Bob Quillman, Mike Rejniak, Ryan Scott, Matt Snyder, and Ryan Whitnable), or by the two anonymous voters who privately sent them to Zac.

Unless there's a considerable swing ahead in the voting trend, I'm going to stand by what I said about the Vikings being slept on.

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 24, 2023, 07:18:10 PM
No one is sleeping on NPU. After their success last year, their coach getting National Coach of the Year and all the hype with transfers and incoming players, they're in the spotlight already.

"in the spotlight" =/= not being slept on

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 24, 2023, 07:18:10 PMPolls and social media are for fun. If you take it more seriously than that, you're in the wrong business!

I guarantee that I don't take it all that seriously. You know me ... I like to feed discussion. And this is the time of year when there should be a lot of discussion. The first tipoff is right around the corner!

Besides, as I've already said, I'm perfectly fine with the idea of North Park not getting ranked in the preseason poll. In some ways, I think it helps the cause of the Vikings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ziggy on October 25, 2023, 01:20:37 PM

If I may add a different spin to the NPU/CCIW discussion... I find it interesting the coaches poll shows very little separation 1-4, whereas there are much more distinct tiers showing up in top 25 voting.

It seems through the ballots we know about that Carthage is being treated as the nominal favorite with North Park the other contender. Elmhurst and Illinois Wesleyan have both made at least one ballot each but are well back of the other two in known voting so far and neither appears to have a realistic chance at a preseason Top 25 ranking.

Coaches poll: North Park/Carthage/Elmhurst/Illinois Wesleyan ::shrug emoji::
Top 25 voting: Carthage -> North Park -> Elmhurst/Illinois Wesleyan

Also worth pointing out what we're seeing with the ASC teams. The coaches voted ETBU their preseason number one but UMHB is getting preference from Top 25 voters. The ETBU/UMHB dynamic looks very similar to the NPU/Carthage dynamic.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 25, 2023, 01:36:25 PM

That's a good point about the variation in tiers between conference polls and the D3hoops.com preseason balloting.

One correction, and I assume that it's just an oversight on your part unconsciously caused by yesterday's Twitter commotion that sprang from a D3 Region V fan's suggestion that Wheaton should be a preseason contender from the CCIW based upon Massey's (totally flawed) preseason ratings: You typed "Wheaton" in your second paragraph where I think you intended to type "Illinois Wesleyan".

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 25, 2023, 01:43:00 PM

Also, while I'm certain that both Carthage and Elmhurst are eminently capable of winning the CCIW this season and are both Top 25 worthy, if you put a gun to my head and told me that I had to pick one to finish better than the other, I'd pick Elmhurst. I think that the 'jays are ever-so-slightly better than the Firebirds ... but it's a difference that's well within the margin of error, to couch it in electoral-polling terms.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ziggy on October 25, 2023, 01:57:19 PM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on October 25, 2023, 01:36:25 PM
That's a good point about the variation in tiers between conference polls and the D3hoops.com preseason balloting.

One correction, and I assume that it's just an oversight on your part unconsciously caused by yesterday's Twitter commotion that sprang from a D3 Region V fan's suggestion that Wheaton should be a preseason contender from the CCIW based upon Massey's (totally flawed) preseason ratings: You typed "Wheaton" in your second paragraph where I think you intended to type "Illinois Wesleyan".

Yes, thank you for understanding what I meant and not what I wrote. :P
It has been fixed above.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 25, 2023, 02:01:12 PM

Behind-the-curtain stuff:

Nichols did not respond to our two requests for information, and neither did someone else who will nonetheless be getting a lot of votes and a high ranking.

Also, just remember that's just a sampling of the votes, and its generally "media" votes at that. The final vote could be quite different.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on October 25, 2023, 02:22:31 PM

Early take on best conferences this year:

1. UAA - absolutely loaded with NYU, CWRU, Wash U and Emory all potentially elite and Brandeis, UChicago, and CMU likely much improved sleeper teams. No league has benefited more from COVID transfer rules. Brutal, brutal league this year.
2. OAC - JCU and Mount Union are both top-tier contenders, Marietta should be much improved, Otterbein and Heidelberg are solid
3. WIAC - WIAC is WIAC but the top two leagues are so loaded that for now I'll stick them third and probably end up regretting it. Whitewater, Platteville and Oshkosh all look strong, particularly top-five team Whitewater.
4. ODAC - HSC looks loaded, and Guilford, RMC, W&L and Virginia Wesleyan could all be in contention for tourney spots.
5. CCIW - as discussed extensively on this thread, the top four look very closely grouped and all could make some noise
6. NESCAC - looks like, outside of Williams, a rebuilding year for NESCAC with loads of big time players lost to transfer and graduation and many teams in transition. But some younger players will surely step up and surprise.

Others to watch: ASC, Centennial, NJAC, MIAA

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ziggy on October 25, 2023, 02:33:33 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 25, 2023, 02:01:12 PM
Behind-the-curtain stuff:

Nichols did not respond to our two requests for information, and neither did someone else who will nonetheless be getting a lot of votes and a high ranking.

Also, just remember that's just a sampling of the votes, and its generally "media" votes at that. The final vote could be quite different.

Excellent reminder. Particularly at the bottom of the Top 25 there can be some big swings from what we think we know to what actually happens. This was the case last year where Wabash went from receiving no votes on the 7 ballots we knew about to being just outside the preseason Top 25 poll as the top ORV team. Elmhurst started the season in the poll after being named on only one of the seven public ballots. It seems the unknown ballots skew more heavily to "were good last season so I'm voting for them" than the known ballots.

The tracker did pretty well inside the top 21 last year. My suggestion for anyone following along for this preseason poll is to think of of the top 20 as a projected safe zone for getting ranked and look at the current ranking as +/- 5 spots.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ziggy on October 26, 2023, 01:56:22 PM

Preaseason poll has been released: https://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2023-24/preseason

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 26, 2023, 02:19:52 PM

Wheaton, which is almost entirely depleted from last season in terms of production and which doesn't appear to have brought in any big-splash newbies, got 45 points in the poll -- which means that multiple voters had WC on their ballots. I'm just shaking my head in disbelief over that.

The CCIW coaches, who know a lot more about their league than do the D3hoops.com voters (although their preseason-poll track record is far from perfect), have Wheaton right smack dab in the middle of their preseason poll at #5, a country mile behind #4 Illinois Wesleyan.

Quote from: ziggy on October 25, 2023, 02:33:33 PMIt seems the unknown ballots skew more heavily to "were good last season so I'm voting for them" than the known ballots.

True. But Pat goes to a lot of trouble to produce those information packets for his voters in order to give them some clue as to which players are returning and who's been added, complete with production figures. One almost gets the feeling that there are voters who just toss Pat's packet aside and say, "Well, this program is always good, and it got deep into the tourney last season, so what more do I need to know about them?"

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 26, 2023, 05:06:50 PM

Yeah, the coaches definitely know a lot more about their league than the D3hoops.com guys...they voted Wheaton's Mike Schauer Conference Coach of the Year while the D3hoops.com guys voted North Park's Sean Smith their National Coach of the Year. Clearly the guys at D3hoops.com have no idea what they are doing...

Sarcasm, Greg, sarcasm.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on October 26, 2023, 09:51:23 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on October 26, 2023, 05:06:50 PM
Yeah, the coaches definitely know a lot more about their league than the D3hoops.com guys...they voted Wheaton's Mike Schauer Conference Coach of the Year while the D3hoops.com guys voted North Park's Sean Smith their National Coach of the Year. Clearly the guys at D3hoops.com have no idea what they are doing...

Sarcasm, Greg, sarcasm.

Deflection, Tom, deflection. ;) It's got nothing to do with last year, and everything to do with this year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WUPHF on October 27, 2023, 11:45:52 AM

As NYU comes in ranked No. 1 in both the Men's and Women's UAA coaches polls and the highest among UAA schools in the d3hoops polls (or due to be highest), it is interesting to look back at prior conversations...

Examples include...

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on April 25, 2022, 04:15:04 PM
I keep hearing that the financial aid situation at NYU makes recruiting competitively with similar schools very difficult. I don't know all the details or even enough to evaluate that claim with any credibility, but I do hear it a lot.

Quote from: gordonmann on April 25, 2022, 05:56:27 PM
I interviewed Dagan when he took the job and asked him about recruiting. Not sure if it was on air or not, but he said that recruiting to NYU was very difficult because the school offered no financial aid. So, while schools like Williams (https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/04/20/williams-college-loans-financial-aid/) are going one direction, NYU was already going the other.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 19, 2023, 01:29:22 PM

It looks like my program still works!

I assume that the first in-season poll is coming out a week from tomorrow, so here is the report through today, as well as games coming up in the next week.

Let me know if you see anything "off" in this report; it is possible that a couple of exhibition results got included.

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	624	Christopher Newport	3-2	def. (n) Kenyon, 94-68; LOST at Marietta, 69-73; def. #14 Randolph-Macon, 64-54; def. #12 Johns Hopkins, 75-73; 11/25 vs. Buffalo State; 11/26 vs. #27 Rowan
#2	580	UW-Whitewater	3-0	def. Gustavus Adolphus, 88-59; def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 71-53; def. Carroll, 86-77; 11/21 vs. Augustana; 11/25 at Ripon
#3	519	John Carroll	4-0	def. (n) SUNY Geneseo, 76-66; won at SUNY Oneonta, 106-75; def. (n) Penn State-Harrisburg, 83-63; won at Susquehanna, 83-73
#4	507	Keene State	2-1	def. Western New England, 105-69; LOST to (n) #31 Stockton, 71-87; def. (n) #30 UW-Platteville, 93-75; 11/21 at Connecticut College; 11/25 at MIT
#5	496	Mount Union	4-0	def. (n) Gwynedd Mercy, 89-82 OT; won at Chatham, 97-73; won at Scranton, 80-76 OT; def. Pitt-Greensburg, 113-79; 11/22 vs. Wooster
#6	431	Oswego State	3-0	def. SUNYIT, 104-66; def. RPI, 73-45; def. Clarkson, 92-83; 11/21 vs. Nazareth
#7	389	Williams	4-1	LOST at T#43 WPI, 62-77; def. (n) Dickinson, 64-32; won at Vassar, 82-75; def. Worcester State, 69-62; def. St. Lawrence, 66-58 OT; 11/21 vs. Massachusetts College
#8	382	Hampden-Sydney	4-0	def. Greensboro, 74-48; def. (n) T#46 Widener, 72-63; def. (n) Rose-Hulman, 80-66
#9	332	New York University	3-1	def. #12 Johns Hopkins, 71-67; LOST to #11 Swarthmore, 70-71; won at Yeshiva, 97-78; 11/22 at Caltech; 11/25 at #49 Redlands
#10	326	Calvin	3-0	def. Denison, 75-64; def. (n) Marietta, 68-51; def. (n) La Roche, 74-54; 11/24 vs. Concordia (Wis.); 11/25 vs. Wilmington
#11	325	Swarthmore	3-1	LOST to (n) #22 Washington U., 56-76; won at #9 New York University, 71-70; won at Cabrini, 82-76; def. #35 DeSales, 68-64; 11/21 vs. Muhlenberg
#12	308	Johns Hopkins	2-3	LOST at #9 New York University, 67-71; LOST to (n) #22 Washington U., 61-67; won at York (Pa.), 64-62; LOST at #1 Christopher Newport, 73-75; 11/21 vs. Gettysburg
#13	275	Case Western Reserve	4-0	def. Pitt-Bradford, 104-73; def. Eastern, 82-72; won at La Roche, 78-58; won at Denison, 80-74 OT
#14	244	Randolph-Macon	1-2	def. (n) Pfeiffer, 84-59; LOST at Virginia Wesleyan, 44-49; LOST at #1 Christopher Newport, 54-64; 11/19 vs. Cal Lutheran
#15	234	Mary Hardin-Baylor	2-1	def. (n) UW-Stout, 84-71; won at #52 Illinois Wesleyan, 71-68; LOST at Texas Lutheran, 77-78; 11/24 at #34 St. Thomas (Texas)
#16	179	Wabash	2-2	LOST to Anderson, 67-72; def. (n) #21 North Park, 70-63; LOST at Illinois College, 53-68; 11/21 at Earlham; 11/26 vs. Rose-Hulman
#17	165	Catholic	3-0	def. Stevens, 79-74; def. (n) St. Mary's (Md.), 67-65; 11/19 vs. Hood; 11/21 vs. Marymount
#18	159	Carthage	3-1	won at Westminster (Pa.), 85-66; def. (n) Thiel, 70-66; LOST at Ripon, 71-76; won at Marian, 75-67; 11/20 vs. Anderson
#19	133	Emory	1-1	won at Piedmont, 91-83; LOST at #26 Guilford, 80-83 OT; 11/21 at Birmingham-Southern; 11/26 at T#41 Berry
#20	122	East Texas Baptist	0-2	LOST at #53 Pomona-Pitzer, 59-75; LOST at #49 Redlands, 65-99; 11/21 vs. #34 St. Thomas (Texas)
#21	120	North Park	2-2	def. Marian, 85-68; LOST to (n) #16 Wabash, 63-70; LOST to (n) Coe, 66-86; 11/25 at #25 UW-Oshkosh
#22	116	Washington U.	4-0	def. (n) #11 Swarthmore, 76-56; def. (n) #12 Johns Hopkins, 67-61; def. (n) #36 Babson, 90-85 OT; def. Hanover, 77-62; 11/22 vs. #52 Illinois Wesleyan; 11/26 at Rhodes
#23	113	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	2-0	def. UC Santa Cruz, 81-44; won at Southwestern, 61-59; 11/19 vs. Trinity (Texas); 11/24 vs. George Fox; 11/25 vs. #45 Carleton
#24	96	Middlebury	0-4	LOST to #29 St. Joseph (Conn.), 62-68; LOST at Clark, 66-70; LOST to (n) #49 Redlands, 58-83; LOST at Wittenberg, 73-76; 11/26 vs. Endicott
#25	93	UW-Oshkosh	2-1	def. (n) La Roche, 77-68; LOST to (n) #49 Redlands, 62-82; 11/21 at Edgewood; 11/25 vs. #21 North Park

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	89	Guilford	3-0	won at N.C. Wesleyan, 75-59; def. #19 Emory, 83-80 OT; 11/21 vs. Pfeiffer
#27	83	Rowan	3-0	def. (n) Maryville (Tenn.), 94-90; def. (n) Wooster, 78-77; won at Eastern, 114-86; 11/21 vs. #31 Stockton; 11/25 vs. T#32 Mary Washington; 11/26 at #1 Christopher Newport
#28	64	Nichols	3-1	def. Bridgewater State, 93-83; LOST at #29 St. Joseph (Conn.), 70-77; def. Anna Maria, 65-60; 11/19 at Yeshiva
#29	63	St. Joseph (Conn.)	4-1	won at #24 Middlebury, 68-62; def. #28 Nichols, 77-70; def. (n) Colby, 79-70; LOST to (n) #55 Trinity (Conn.), 58-70
#30	62	UW-Platteville	3-1	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 91-71; def. Gustavus Adolphus, 79-67; def. (n) St. John's, 80-78; LOST to (n) #4 Keene State, 75-93; 11/25 vs. Central
#31	53	Stockton	2-2	LOST to (n) Roanoke, 75-84; def. (n) King's, 91-75; def. (n) #4 Keene State, 87-71; LOST to (n) St. John's, 64-77; 11/21 at #27 Rowan
T#32	45	Wheaton (Ill.)	1-3	def. Lake Forest, 86-65; LOST to Piedmont, 66-79; LOST to Heidelberg, 60-78; 11/25 at Transylvania
T#32	45	Mary Washington	3-1	def. N.C. Wesleyan, 81-56; won at Hood, 81-72; def. Lynchburg, 79-52; 11/25 vs. #27 Rowan; 11/26 vs. Buffalo State
#34	41	St. Thomas (Texas)	3-1	def. Arlington Baptist, 97-61; def. Hardin-Simmons, 73-71; def. Texas-Dallas, 70-67; 11/21 at #20 East Texas Baptist; 11/24 vs. #15 Mary Hardin-Baylor; 11/26 vs. McMurry
#35	39	DeSales	2-1	def. Rosemont, 92-53; def. TCNJ, 72-62; LOST at #11 Swarthmore, 64-68; 11/21 at Moravian
#36	35	Babson	2-2	LOST at Albertus Magnus, 72-75; LOST to (n) #22 Washington U., 85-90 OT; def. (n) UW-Eau Claire, 78-71; 11/22 vs. Brandeis; 11/26 at Bates
#37	28	Elmhurst	3-0	def. Concordia-Chicago, 77-72; won at Transylvania, 87-63; won at Mount St. Joseph, 73-56; 11/25 at Olivet
#38	23	Utica	2-1	def. SUNY Potsdam, 86-70; LOST at Morrisville State, 72-85; won at Buffalo State, 86-57; 11/20 vs. SUNYIT
T#39	19	Hope	1-0	def. Manchester, 75-64; 11/24 vs. Wilmington; 11/25 vs. Concordia (Wis.)
T#39	19	Maryville	2-2	LOST to (n) #27 Rowan, 90-94; LOST at Rochester, 66-87; won at Sewanee, 73-70; def. (n) Westminster (Mo.), 87-68; 11/19 at Webster; 11/26 at Averett
T#41	18	Berry	1-2	LOST at Belhaven, 87-94; def. (n) Southern Virginia, 86-76; LOST at Roanoke, 58-79; 11/21 at LaGrange; 11/26 vs. #19 Emory
T#41	18	Trine	4-0	def. (n) Hanover, 85-63; won at Mount St. Joseph, 71-54; def. Franklin, 79-58; def. Baldwin Wallace, 76-70; 11/25 vs. Ohio Wesleyan
T#43	16	WPI	5-0	def. #7 Williams, 77-62; def. St. Joseph's (Maine), 69-49; def. (n) Johnson and Wales, 85-51; won at Bridgewater State, 84-65; 11/20 at Fitchburg State
T#43	16	Tufts	3-0	won at Endicott, 78-63; def. Emerson, 72-53; won at Suffolk, 76-62; 11/21 at MIT; 11/25 at Mass-Boston
#45	14	Carleton	1-0	def. North Central (Minn.), 57-50; 11/21 vs. St. John's; 11/24 at #53 Pomona-Pitzer; 11/25 at #23 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps
T#46	10	St. Norbert	3-0	won at UW-Eau Claire, 76-64; def. Lawrence, 86-55; 11/21 vs. Concordia-Chicago
T#46	10	Widener	4-1	def. King's, 105-80; def. Roanoke, 85-74; def. Ursinus, 86-73; LOST to (n) #8 Hampden-Sydney, 63-72; won at Wooster, 72-68; 11/26 vs. Salisbury
#48	9	Hamilton	1-1	LOST to Ithaca, 67-74; def. Morrisville State, 90-68; 11/19 vs. Neumann; 11/21 at Drew
#49	8	Redlands	4-0	def. Puget Sound, 112-82; def. #20 East Texas Baptist, 99-65; def. (n) #24 Middlebury, 83-58; def. (n) #25 UW-Oshkosh, 82-62; 11/25 vs. #9 New York University
T#50	7	Whitman	1-2	def. St. Olaf, 80-64; LOST to Carnegie Mellon, 75-86; LOST to (n) Trinity (Texas), 58-86; 11/19 at Southwestern; 11/22 at University of Dallas
T#50	7	Macalester	3-1	won at Wartburg, 75-72; won at UW-Stout, 102-93; won at MIT, 92-72; 11/21 vs. Concordia-Moorhead
#52	6	Illinois Wesleyan	2-2	def. Ohio Wesleyan, 84-55; LOST to #15 Mary Hardin-Baylor, 68-71; won at Wittenberg, 72-59; LOST to (n) Marietta, 63-67; 11/22 at #22 Washington U.; 11/25 vs. Chicago
#53	5	Pomona-Pitzer	3-0	def. #20 East Texas Baptist, 75-59; def. Stanton, 82-56; def. UC Santa Cruz, 74-66; 11/24 vs. #45 Carleton; 11/25 vs. George Fox
#54	4	Montclair State	2-1	won at Lycoming, 85-49; won at Penn College, 89-87; LOST to Albertus Magnus, 83-86 2OT; 11/21 vs. New Jersey City
#55	1	Trinity (Conn.)	5-0	won at Regis (Mass.), 71-56; def. Hartford, 74-38; def. Wheaton (Mass.), 74-57; won at Mass-Dartmouth, 84-52; def. (n) #29 St. Joseph (Conn.), 70-58; 11/21 at Elms

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpringSt7 on November 19, 2023, 02:35:36 PM

Good luck to the voters - lot of information to sort through for the first poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on November 20, 2023, 08:20:24 AM

Quote from: Darryl Nester on November 19, 2023, 01:29:22 PM
It looks like my program still works!

I assume that the first in-season poll is coming out a week from tomorrow, so here is the report through today, as well as games coming up in the next week.

Let me know if you see anything "off" in this report; it is possible that a couple of exhibition results got included.

Awesome to see you posting this again - thank you Darryl!!! One quick correction - appears that you are missing the scores for the CNU loss at Hampden-Sydney (74-53 on 11/8) - and it is also missing for H-S. You've got both teams records right but that game is not listed

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 20, 2023, 02:57:02 PM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on November 20, 2023, 08:20:24 AM
Quote from: Darryl Nester on November 19, 2023, 01:29:22 PM
It looks like my program still works!

I assume that the first in-season poll is coming out a week from tomorrow, so here is the report through today, as well as games coming up in the next week.

Let me know if you see anything "off" in this report; it is possible that a couple of exhibition results got included.

Awesome to see you posting this again - thank you Darryl!!! One quick correction - appears that you are missing the scores for the CNU loss at Hampden-Sydney (74-53 on 11/8) - and it is also missing for H-S. You've got both teams records right but that game is not listed

Thanks for the correction, FDF. It looks like I missed all of the results for 11/8; for the first run of the season, I have to manually specify when the season started, and I forgot that my program starts collecting scores from the day AFTER the one I specify.

I won't bother correcting the post above, but I'll make sure I get it right in next Sunday's report.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on November 20, 2023, 06:05:51 PM

Not sure if any future games count, but based on what has transpired to date, I'd guess that Hopkins, RMC, Wabash, Carthage, East Texas Baptist, North Park, Middlebury, Oshkosh are out, and replaced by:

Guilford, Redlands, WPI, Rowan, Elmhurst, Tufts, Trine, Trinity. Nichols and St. Joe's have a case but St. Joe's beat Nichols, Trinity beat St. Joe's, and Trinity has otherwise been undefeated so they squeeze in.

Biggest risers: Wash U., Redlands, WPI, Hampden Sydney, all of whom should rocket up.

Battle for number one: Whitewater, JCU and HSC are the top three contenders, but Oswego, Wash U., Calvin and Redlands all have an argument!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WPI89 on November 21, 2023, 08:15:34 AM

First in season poll is today, correct?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 21, 2023, 08:41:19 AM

Quote from: WPI89 on November 21, 2023, 08:15:34 AM
First in season poll is today, correct?

Next week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WPI89 on November 21, 2023, 10:46:54 AM

Gotcha - thanks!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 27, 2023, 09:50:23 AM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	624	Christopher Newport	5-2	LOST at #8 Hampden-Sydney, 53-74; def. (n) Kenyon, 94-68; LOST at Marietta, 69-73; def. #14 Randolph-Macon, 64-54; def. #12 Johns Hopkins, 75-73; def. Buffalo State, 90-54; def. #27 Rowan, 83-73
#2	580	UW-Whitewater	5-0	def. Gustavus Adolphus, 88-59; def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 71-53; def. Carroll, 86-77; def. Augustana, 93-79; won at Ripon, 77-56
#3	519	John Carroll	4-0	def. (n) SUNY Geneseo, 76-66; won at SUNY Oneonta, 106-75; def. (n) Penn State-Harrisburg, 83-63; won at Susquehanna, 83-73
#4	507	Keene State	4-1	def. Western New England, 105-69; LOST to (n) #31 Stockton, 71-87; def. (n) #30 UW-Platteville, 93-75; won at Connecticut College, 80-64; won at MIT, 119-81
#5	496	Mount Union	5-0	def. (n) Gwynedd Mercy, 89-82 OT; won at Chatham, 97-73; won at Scranton, 80-76 OT; def. Pitt-Greensburg, 113-79; def. Wooster, 75-51
#6	431	Oswego State	4-0	def. SUNYIT, 104-66; def. RPI, 73-45; def. Clarkson, 92-83; def. Nazareth, 79-68
#7	389	Williams	5-1	LOST at T#43 WPI, 62-77; def. (n) Dickinson, 64-32; won at Vassar, 82-75; def. Worcester State, 69-62; def. St. Lawrence, 66-58 OT; def. Massachusetts College, 56-41
#8	382	Hampden-Sydney	4-0	def. #1 Christopher Newport, 74-53; def. Greensboro, 74-48; def. (n) T#46 Widener, 72-63; def. (n) Rose-Hulman, 80-66
#9	332	New York University	5-1	def. Manhattanville, 77-60; def. #12 Johns Hopkins, 71-67; LOST to #11 Swarthmore, 70-71; won at Yeshiva, 97-78; won at Caltech, 78-69; won at #49 Redlands, 82-79
#10	326	Calvin	5-0	def. Denison, 75-64; def. (n) Marietta, 68-51; def. (n) La Roche, 74-54; def. Concordia (Wis.), 73-65; def. Wilmington, 75-45
#11	325	Swarthmore	4-1	LOST to (n) #22 Washington U., 56-76; won at #9 New York University, 71-70; won at Cabrini, 82-76; def. #35 DeSales, 68-64; def. Muhlenberg, 77-58
#12	308	Johns Hopkins	2-4	def. Marymount, 86-76; LOST at #9 New York University, 67-71; LOST to (n) #22 Washington U., 61-67; won at York (Pa.), 64-62; LOST at #1 Christopher Newport, 73-75; LOST to Gettysburg, 56-70
#13	275	Case Western Reserve	4-0	def. Pitt-Bradford, 104-73; def. Eastern, 82-72; won at La Roche, 78-58; won at Denison, 80-74 OT
#14	244	Randolph-Macon	2-2	def. (n) Pfeiffer, 84-59; LOST at Virginia Wesleyan, 44-49; LOST at #1 Christopher Newport, 54-64; def. Cal Lutheran, 60-51
#15	234	Mary Hardin-Baylor	2-2	def. (n) UW-Stout, 84-71; won at #52 Illinois Wesleyan, 71-68; LOST at Texas Lutheran, 77-78; LOST at #34 St. Thomas (Texas), 82-90 OT
#16	179	Wabash	4-2	won at Mount St. Joseph, 71-58; LOST to Anderson, 67-72; def. (n) #21 North Park, 70-63; LOST at Illinois College, 53-68; won at Earlham, 63-46; def. Rose-Hulman, 84-42
#17	165	Catholic	4-1	def. T#32 Mary Washington, 60-59; def. Stevens, 79-74; def. (n) St. Mary's (Md.), 67-65; LOST to (n) Hood, 63-65; def. Marymount, 66-59
#18	159	Carthage	4-1	won at Westminster (Pa.), 85-66; def. (n) Thiel, 70-66; LOST at Ripon, 71-76; won at Marian, 75-67; def. Anderson, 94-87
#19	133	Emory	3-1	won at Piedmont, 91-83; LOST at #26 Guilford, 80-83 OT; won at Birmingham-Southern, 99-70; won at T#41 Berry, 90-72
#20	122	East Texas Baptist	0-3	LOST at #53 Pomona-Pitzer, 59-75; LOST at #49 Redlands, 65-99; LOST to #34 St. Thomas (Texas), 58-68
#21	120	North Park	2-3	won at Lawrence, 84-57; def. Marian, 85-68; LOST to (n) #16 Wabash, 63-70; LOST to (n) Coe, 66-86; LOST at #25 UW-Oshkosh, 64-69
#22	116	Washington U.	5-1	def. (n) #11 Swarthmore, 76-56; def. (n) #12 Johns Hopkins, 67-61; def. #36 Babson, 90-85 OT; def. Hanover, 77-62; LOST to #52 Illinois Wesleyan, 50-76; won at Rhodes, 78-74
#23	113	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	2-3	def. UC Santa Cruz, 81-44; won at Southwestern, 61-59; LOST to (n) Trinity (Texas), 64-74; LOST to George Fox, 84-88; LOST to #45 Carleton, 75-83
#24	96	Middlebury	1-4	LOST to #29 St. Joseph (Conn.), 62-68; LOST at Clark, 66-70; LOST to (n) #49 Redlands, 58-83; LOST at Wittenberg, 73-76; def. Endicott, 90-86
#25	93	UW-Oshkosh	4-1	def. Illinois Tech, 88-58; def. (n) La Roche, 77-68; LOST to (n) #49 Redlands, 62-82; won at Edgewood, 82-67; def. #21 North Park, 69-64

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	89	Guilford	4-0	won at Methodist, 74-59; won at N.C. Wesleyan, 75-59; def. #19 Emory, 83-80 OT; def. Pfeiffer, 64-57
#27	83	Rowan	4-2	def. (n) Maryville (Tenn.), 94-90; def. (n) Wooster, 78-77; won at Eastern, 114-86; LOST to #31 Stockton, 73-76; def. (n) T#32 Mary Washington, 76-75 OT; LOST at #1 Christopher Newport, 73-83
#28	64	Nichols	4-1	def. Emmanuel, 86-70; def. Bridgewater State, 93-83; LOST at #29 St. Joseph (Conn.), 70-77; def. Anna Maria, 65-60; won at Yeshiva, 97-92
#29	63	St. Joseph (Conn.)	4-1	def. Yeshiva, 83-79; won at #24 Middlebury, 68-62; def. #28 Nichols, 77-70; def. (n) Colby, 79-70; LOST to (n) #55 Trinity (Conn.), 58-70
#30	62	UW-Platteville	4-1	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 91-71; def. Gustavus Adolphus, 79-67; def. (n) St. John's, 80-78; LOST to (n) #4 Keene State, 75-93; def. Central, 66-65

(split into two posts because of length restrictions)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 27, 2023, 09:51:47 AM

How They Fared (continued)

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#31	53	Stockton	3-2	LOST to (n) Roanoke, 75-84; def. (n) King's, 91-75; def. (n) #4 Keene State, 87-71; LOST to (n) St. John's, 64-77; won at #27 Rowan, 76-73
T#32	45	Wheaton (Ill.)	1-4	LOST to Benedictine, 59-60; def. Lake Forest, 86-65; LOST to Piedmont, 66-79; LOST to Heidelberg, 60-78; LOST at Transylvania, 65-71
T#32	45	Mary Washington	4-2	LOST at #17 Catholic, 59-60; def. N.C. Wesleyan, 81-56; won at Hood, 81-72; def. Lynchburg, 79-52; LOST to (n) #27 Rowan, 75-76 OT; def. (n) Buffalo State, 94-42
#34	41	St. Thomas (Texas)	6-1	LOST at LeTourneau, 69-72; def. Arlington Baptist, 97-61; def. Hardin-Simmons, 73-71; def. Texas-Dallas, 70-67; won at #20 East Texas Baptist, 68-58; def. #15 Mary Hardin-Baylor, 90-82 OT; def. McMurry, 89-76
#35	39	DeSales	3-1	def. Rosemont, 92-53; def. TCNJ, 72-62; LOST at #11 Swarthmore, 64-68; won at Moravian, 89-77
#36	35	Babson	4-2	def. Lasell, 86-53; LOST at Albertus Magnus, 72-75; LOST at #22 Washington U., 85-90 OT; def. (n) UW-Eau Claire, 78-71; def. Brandeis, 78-65; won at Bates, 77-53
#37	28	Elmhurst	4-0	def. Concordia-Chicago, 77-72; won at Transylvania, 87-63; won at Mount St. Joseph, 73-56; won at Olivet, 76-64
#38	23	Utica	3-1	def. SUNY Potsdam, 86-70; LOST at Morrisville State, 72-85; won at Buffalo State, 86-57; def. SUNYIT, 71-56
T#39	19	Hope	3-0	def. Manchester, 75-64; def. Wilmington, 92-68; def. Concordia (Wis.), 96-49
T#39	19	Maryville	4-2	LOST to (n) #27 Rowan, 90-94; LOST at Rochester, 66-87; won at Sewanee, 73-70; def. (n) Westminster (Mo.), 87-68; won at Webster, 77-54; won at Averett, 77-49
T#41	18	Berry	2-3	LOST at Belhaven, 87-94; def. (n) Southern Virginia, 86-76; LOST at Roanoke, 58-79; won at LaGrange, 91-69; LOST to #19 Emory, 72-90
T#41	18	Trine	5-0	def. (n) Hanover, 85-63; won at Mount St. Joseph, 71-54; def. Franklin, 79-58; def. Baldwin Wallace, 76-70; def. Ohio Wesleyan, 93-58
T#43	16	WPI	6-0	won at Worcester State, 77-65; def. #7 Williams, 77-62; def. St. Joseph's (Maine), 69-49; def. (n) Johnson and Wales, 85-51; won at Bridgewater State, 84-65; won at Fitchburg State, 75-69
T#43	16	Tufts	5-0	won at Endicott, 78-63; def. Emerson, 72-53; won at Suffolk, 76-62; won at MIT, 91-82; won at Mass-Boston, 83-41
#45	14	Carleton	2-2	def. North Central (Minn.), 57-50; LOST to St. John's, 72-74; LOST to (n) #53 Pomona-Pitzer, 64-67; won at #23 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 83-75
T#46	10	St. Norbert	4-0	def. Ripon, 82-77 OT; won at UW-Eau Claire, 76-64; def. Lawrence, 86-55; def. Concordia-Chicago, 86-80
T#46	10	Widener	5-1	def. King's, 105-80; def. Roanoke, 85-74; def. Ursinus, 86-73; LOST to (n) #8 Hampden-Sydney, 63-72; won at Wooster, 72-68; def. Salisbury, 71-49
#48	9	Hamilton	2-2	LOST to Ithaca, 67-74; def. Morrisville State, 90-68; def. Neumann, 83-65; LOST at Drew, 65-77
#49	8	Redlands	4-1	def. Puget Sound, 112-82; def. #20 East Texas Baptist, 99-65; def. (n) #24 Middlebury, 83-58; def. (n) #25 UW-Oshkosh, 82-62; LOST to #9 New York University, 79-82
T#50	7	Whitman	3-2	def. St. Olaf, 80-64; LOST to Carnegie Mellon, 75-86; LOST to (n) Trinity (Texas), 58-86; won at Southwestern, 82-73; won at University of Dallas, 85-81
T#50	7	Macalester	3-2	LOST to UW-Superior, 73-88; won at Wartburg, 75-72; won at UW-Stout, 102-93; won at MIT, 92-72; LOST to Concordia-Moorhead, 70-81
#52	6	Illinois Wesleyan	4-2	def. Ohio Wesleyan, 84-55; LOST to #15 Mary Hardin-Baylor, 68-71; won at Wittenberg, 72-59; LOST to (n) Marietta, 63-67; won at #22 Washington U., 76-50; def. Chicago, 75-69
#53	5	Pomona-Pitzer	5-0	def. #20 East Texas Baptist, 75-59; def. Stanton, 82-56; def. UC Santa Cruz, 74-66; def. (n) #45 Carleton, 67-64; def. George Fox, 79-65
#54	4	Montclair State	3-1	won at Lycoming, 85-49; won at Penn College, 89-87; LOST to Albertus Magnus, 83-86 2OT; def. New Jersey City, 83-82 OT
#55	1	Trinity (Conn.)	6-0	won at Regis (Mass.), 71-56; def. Hartford, 74-38; def. Wheaton (Mass.), 74-57; won at Mass-Dartmouth, 84-52; def. (n) #29 St. Joseph (Conn.), 70-58; won at Elms, 95-60

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpartyBlue on November 28, 2023, 11:15:19 AM

I'll put on my crash helmet here and just throw this out there--in my view IWU doesn't deserved to be ranked top 25 at this point. Two losses should disqualify you over other zero or one loss teams, no matter the nice win over Wash U. Obviously I'm a homer, but Coe and Dubuque out of the stronger at the moment ARC are deserving, teams like IC, Trinity Tx. and Albertus should have gotten in over IWU at this stage. Albertus in particular has a similar SoS as the Titans and is 5-0 and ranked 13 spots higher by Massey.

I understand the top 25 is rather unscientific, ultimately not super meaningful, and (it seems anyway) heavily influenced by social media voices; but it's still a nice piece of public relations for teams to be able to put out there and makes it more exciting for conferences in general.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 28, 2023, 11:43:01 AM

Quote from: SpartyBlue on November 28, 2023, 11:15:19 AM
I'll put on my crash helmet here and just throw this out there--in my view IWU doesn't deserved to be ranked top 25 at this point. Two losses should disqualify you over other zero or one loss teams, no matter the nice win over Wash U. Obviously I'm a homer, but Coe and Dubuque out of the stronger at the moment ARC are deserving, teams like IC, Trinity Tx. and Albertus should have gotten in over IWU at this stage. Albertus in particular has a similar SoS as the Titans and is 5-0 and ranked 13 spots higher by Massey.

I understand the top 25 is rather unscientific, ultimately not super meaningful, and (it seems anyway) heavily influenced by social media voices; but it's still a nice piece of public relations for teams to be able to put out there and makes it more exciting for conferences in general.

That's a fine take, for sure. Not going to argue, necessarily, but I also think there's a pretty strong case for them being on there.

With so few overall games and so many games between good teams early, there's a lot of guesswork. Personally, when I approached the ballot this week, I'd look at a team's schedule and first check the losses - if they're all "excusable" (meaning non-blowouts to good teams), I'd then proceed to look at the wins.

With IWU, there's the added benefit that I've seen them in person - my evaluation was that there's a lot of talent that doesn't really know how to properly express itself. The WashU win was an example of that. Does that mean they'll continue to put it together? Not necessarily, but they did follow it up with a pretty good performance against Chicago. I thought both of those games were better than the ones they'd played before, which shows improvement.

At this point, they've played a VERY good schedule, have a lot of talent, and seem to be getting better. That was enough for me to get them on the ballot - but there's an inordinate number of very good teams out there right now and nobody really separating themselves from anyone else.

I could list 50 teams, easily, and not be surprised if they beat or lost to any of the others. That's pretty rare.

It's reasonable to have IWU in the Top 25 right now and its quite reasonable not to do so.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: SpartyBlue on November 28, 2023, 02:29:36 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 28, 2023, 11:43:01 AM
Quote from: SpartyBlue on November 28, 2023, 11:15:19 AM
I'll put on my crash helmet here and just throw this out there--in my view IWU doesn't deserved to be ranked top 25 at this point. Two losses should disqualify you over other zero or one loss teams, no matter the nice win over Wash U. Obviously I'm a homer, but Coe and Dubuque out of the stronger at the moment ARC are deserving, teams like IC, Trinity Tx. and Albertus should have gotten in over IWU at this stage. Albertus in particular has a similar SoS as the Titans and is 5-0 and ranked 13 spots higher by Massey.

I understand the top 25 is rather unscientific, ultimately not super meaningful, and (it seems anyway) heavily influenced by social media voices; but it's still a nice piece of public relations for teams to be able to put out there and makes it more exciting for conferences in general.

That's a fine take, for sure. Not going to argue, necessarily, but I also think there's a pretty strong case for them being on there.

With so few overall games and so many games between good teams early, there's a lot of guesswork. Personally, when I approached the ballot this week, I'd look at a team's schedule and first check the losses - if they're all "excusable" (meaning non-blowouts to good teams), I'd then proceed to look at the wins.

With IWU, there's the added benefit that I've seen them in person - my evaluation was that there's a lot of talent that doesn't really know how to properly express itself. The WashU win was an example of that. Does that mean they'll continue to put it together? Not necessarily, but they did follow it up with a pretty good performance against Chicago. I thought both of those games were better than the ones they'd played before, which shows improvement.

At this point, they've played a VERY good schedule, have a lot of talent, and seem to be getting better. That was enough for me to get them on the ballot - but there's an inordinate number of very good teams out there right now and nobody really separating themselves from anyone else.

I could list 50 teams, easily, and not be surprised if they beat or lost to any of the others. That's pretty rare.

It's reasonable to have IWU in the Top 25 right now and its quite reasonable not to do so.

You're very knowledgeable and probably watch more than I do, but for my way of thinking, you more completely make my point with several of your arguments for.

1. Lots of talent...yes, maybe, some talented players for sure but..."hasn't found a way to express itself" to me means wait and see if they translate talent into more wins.

2. Excusable losses. To me, at this early stage, one loss may be excusable, two isn't. The teams with decent SoS who have found ways to stay undefeated or lost one to a really good opponent should be rewarded over a potentially very good team who still has lost twice.

3. Also, "pretty good" and "improvement" over a decent but not great Chicago aren't ringing endorsements.

Nonetheless, this is no criticism of you or knock on IWU--I understand the process is subjective and doesn't impact seeding as such--it's just, to me it feels like IWU is there due to their enhanced visibility over early season resume.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on November 28, 2023, 02:42:16 PM

I noted that we had 10 teams drop out of the Top 25 from the Preseason to Week 1 rankings. That felt to me like a big number, so I looked back at the archives for some perspective. Since the poll began (99-00 season) the average number of teams that drop out in week 1 is 5.5. The most ever is indeed 10, both this season and in 15-16. The best the pollseters have done was in that first poll (99-00) where 1 team dropped out in week 1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 28, 2023, 02:52:42 PM

Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on November 28, 2023, 02:42:16 PM
I noted that we had 10 teams drop out of the Top 25 from the Preseason to Week 1 rankings. That felt to me like a big number, so I looked back at the archives for some perspective. Since the poll began (99-00 season) the average number of teams that drop out in week 1 is 5.5. The most ever is indeed 10, both this season and in 15-16. The best the pollseters have done was in that first poll (99-00) where 1 team dropped out in week 1.

Did you happen to note the dates? If I recall, it's not always been three weeks between the start of the season and the first regular season poll.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 28, 2023, 02:54:09 PM

I'd say the number of losses that can be "excusable" is directly proportional to how many will knock them out of Pool C consideration.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Flying Dutch Fan on November 28, 2023, 03:38:55 PM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 28, 2023, 02:52:42 PM
Quote from: Flying Dutch Fan on November 28, 2023, 02:42:16 PM
I noted that we had 10 teams drop out of the Top 25 from the Preseason to Week 1 rankings. That felt to me like a big number, so I looked back at the archives for some perspective. Since the poll began (99-00 season) the average number of teams that drop out in week 1 is 5.5. The most ever is indeed 10, both this season and in 15-16. The best the pollseters have done was in that first poll (99-00) where 1 team dropped out in week 1.

Did you happen to note the dates? If I recall, it's not always been three weeks between the start of the season and the first regular season poll.

I did not. I assume (as you say) the time span varied as I recall some years most teams had only played 3 games by the week 1 rankings, while others (like this year) many are at 5 or 6.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ziggy on November 28, 2023, 04:55:47 PM

Quote from: SpartyBlue on November 28, 2023, 11:15:19 AM
I'll put on my crash helmet here and just throw this out there--in my view IWU doesn't deserved to be ranked top 25 at this point. Two losses should disqualify you over other zero or one loss teams, no matter the nice win over Wash U. Obviously I'm a homer, but Coe and Dubuque out of the stronger at the moment ARC are deserving, teams like IC, Trinity Tx. and Albertus should have gotten in over IWU at this stage. Albertus in particular has a similar SoS as the Titans and is 5-0 and ranked 13 spots higher by Massey.

I understand the top 25 is rather unscientific, ultimately not super meaningful, and (it seems anyway) heavily influenced by social media voices; but it's still a nice piece of public relations for teams to be able to put out there and makes it more exciting for conferences in general.

Beyond all the early-season caveats that apply with Massey, his system is having a massive problem with Hartford's move to D3. It is likely Albertus is getting more credit than actually deserved by beating Hartford, which the Massey Ratings have ranked 24 right now. I think we can all be pretty confident Hartford is not anywhere near a Top 25 team. We have Hartford ranked 227 in the D3 Datacast efficiency ratings (https://d3datacast.com/efficiency-ratings/).

I understand the concern with Illinois Wesleyan having two losses but I consider the win at WashU one of the more impressive wins so far this season considering the opponent, location and margin.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on November 28, 2023, 10:27:29 PM

Carthage 77
UW-Whitewater 73

What a fun game to watch! Each team had a massive run in the second half that swung the game by somewhere between 17 and 20 points -- Carthage early in the half, UWW in the final seven minutes. The Warhawks actually came all the way back from being 16 down at the seven-minute mark to take a one-point lead, but the Firebirds gutted it out by controlling the defensive boards and hitting 10-10 from the line in the final two minutes, with all ten of those makes courtesy of the Johnson brothers.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: stlawus on November 28, 2023, 10:33:10 PM

Quote from: SpartyBlue on November 28, 2023, 11:15:19 AM
I'll put on my crash helmet here and just throw this out there--in my view IWU doesn't deserved to be ranked top 25 at this point. Two losses should disqualify you over other zero or one loss teams, no matter the nice win over Wash U. Obviously I'm a homer, but Coe and Dubuque out of the stronger at the moment ARC are deserving, teams like IC, Trinity Tx. and Albertus should have gotten in over IWU at this stage. Albertus in particular has a similar SoS as the Titans and is 5-0 and ranked 13 spots higher by Massey.

I understand the top 25 is rather unscientific, ultimately not super meaningful, and (it seems anyway) heavily influenced by social media voices; but it's still a nice piece of public relations for teams to be able to put out there and makes it more exciting for conferences in general.

There does seem to be a circular feedback dynamic here. No one is going to complain about d3 basketball discussion and exposure on social media, but to me this has been apparent the past season or 2.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on November 28, 2023, 11:11:54 PM

You guys discussing IWU and whether they should be in the poll... you should have been around during football season. Mary Hardin-Baylor started the year ranked 3rd but played a brutal non-conference schedule and were 0-3 but still hanging in the poll at 23. The three teams that beat them were ranked 4, 6, and 7 in that poll (https://www.d3football.com/top25/2023/week3).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 28, 2023, 11:19:59 PM

There isn't really any similarity between basketball 's IWU Top 25 argument and football's UMHB argument. At best, IWU's losses to a ranked UMHB and an unranked Marietta should be a wash to their win at a mid-20s ranked Wash U. If Wash U was ranked in the top 5, I could see IWU's big jump into the rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on November 29, 2023, 09:43:54 AM

Quote from: SpartyBlue on November 28, 2023, 11:15:19 AM
I'll put on my crash helmet here and just throw this out there--in my view IWU doesn't deserved to be ranked top 25 at this point. Two losses should disqualify you over other zero or one loss teams, no matter the nice win over Wash U. Obviously I'm a homer, but Coe and Dubuque out of the stronger at the moment ARC are deserving, teams like IC, Trinity Tx. and Albertus should have gotten in over IWU at this stage. Albertus in particular has a similar SoS as the Titans and is 5-0 and ranked 13 spots higher by Massey.

I understand the top 25 is rather unscientific, ultimately not super meaningful, and (it seems anyway) heavily influenced by social media voices; but it's still a nice piece of public relations for teams to be able to put out there and makes it more exciting for conferences in general.

I watched all of the first half of Keene State at Albertus Magnus last night, and checked in throughout the second half. Keene was up by 4 with about 10 minutes to go, then outscored Albertus by 13 in the final 10 minutes to win 94-77. It was a pretty fast paced game and Albertus looked to be pretty quick. Neither defense looked very good, thus the fairly robust score. Not gonna weigh in on the merits of Albertus as a top 25 candidate. I think both teams would struggle against the better defensive teams in the country.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 03, 2023, 04:55:12 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

~~Maryville @ Warren Wilson currently 82-50 with 9:50 left.~~
~~UCSC @ Pomona-Pitzer tips off shortly.~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	607	UW-Whitewater	5-1	LOST at #30 Carthage, 73-77
#2	570	Hampden-Sydney	5-1	def. Averett, 88-60; LOST at #11 Guilford, 71-80
#3	568	John Carroll	6-0	won at Baldwin Wallace, 99-93 OT; def. Ohio Northern, 89-65
#4	529	Mount Union	5-1	LOST to Wilmington, 79-80
#5	522	Calvin	6-0	def. UW-La Crosse, 84-71
#6	504	Oswego State	7-0	def. St. Lawrence, 66-58; def. SUNY Potsdam, 98-60; def. Plattsburgh State, 101-72
#7	425	Keene State	6-1	won at #31 Albertus Magnus, 94-77; def. Southern Maine, 94-80
#8	401	New York University	6-1	won at Connecticut College, 78-73
#9	384	Case Western Reserve	6-0	def. Capital, 94-87; def. Kalamazoo, 100-73
#10	360	Christopher Newport	6-2	won at Mary Baldwin, 64-61
#11	309	Guilford	6-0	won at William Peace, 80-62; def. #2 Hampden-Sydney, 80-71
#12	291	WPI	6-1	LOST to #23 Tufts, 58-67
#13	245	Washington U.	7-1	def. Webster, 88-59; won at Millikin, 63-47
#14	237	Swarthmore	6-1	def. Washington College, 67-48; won at Dickinson, 67-55
#15	232	Williams	7-1	def. Emmanuel, 71-67; won at Wesleyan, 62-60
#16	221	Emory	6-1	def. Sewanee, 109-72; def. (n) Colby, 87-57; def. (n) Bates, 88-77
#17	175	Redlands	4-2	LOST to Cal Lutheran, 65-74
#18	172	Trinity (Conn.)	9-0	won at Anna Maria, 87-66; def. (n) Framingham State, 76-44; def. (n) Norwich, 72-54
#19	153	Marietta	4-2	LOST at Heidelberg, 65-84
#20	141	Illinois Wesleyan	5-3	LOST at T#38 Elmhurst, 73-90; def. Carroll, 79-69
#21	125	Virginia Wesleyan	7-1	LOST at #27 Randolph-Macon, 41-50; def. Lynchburg, 70-55
#22	106	UW-Oshkosh	4-1	IDLE
#23	73	Tufts	8-0	won at #12 WPI, 67-58; def. Clark, 75-71; won at Mass-Dartmouth, 76-64
#24	71	Trine	6-0	won at Heidelberg, 82-72
#25	70	Pomona-Pitzer	8-0	def. Whittier, 97-71; won at Caltech, 63-39; def. UC Santa Cruz, 77-73

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	68	Illinois College	7-0	won at Cornell, 83-56; won at Ripon, 72-62
#27	61	Randolph-Macon	4-2	def. #21 Virginia Wesleyan, 50-41; won at Randolph, 71-59
#28	54	Catholic	6-1	def. Elizabethtown, 98-54; def. Wilkes, 89-47
#29	52	St. Thomas (Texas)	7-2	LOST at University of Dallas, 78-81; won at Austin, 81-68
#30	50	Carthage	6-1	def. #1 UW-Whitewater, 77-73; def. Augustana, 85-79
#31	41	Albertus Magnus	6-1	LOST to #7 Keene State, 77-94; won at Colby-Sawyer, 82-74
#32	34	Trinity (Texas)	7-0	def. T#42 Mary Hardin-Baylor, 83-64; won at Southwestern, 87-75; won at Texas Lutheran, 70-60
#33	32	Widener	7-1	won at #41 DeSales, 92-77; def. T#53 Arcadia, 89-63
#34	30	St. Joseph (Conn.)	6-1	won at #44 Babson, 73-64; won at St. Joseph's (Maine), 92-73
#35	28	Rowan	5-3	LOST to TCNJ, 72-82; won at William Paterson, 86-61
#36	25	UW-Platteville	6-1	def. Ripon, 71-54; def. Olivet, 97-54
#37	20	Stockton	4-3	LOST at Rutgers-Camden, 61-64; def. Ramapo, 71-66
T#38	16	Coe	8-1	won at Simpson, 82-75; def. Buena Vista, 78-66
T#38	16	Elmhurst	6-0	def. #20 Illinois Wesleyan, 90-73; won at North Park, 74-69
#40	15	Wabash	6-2	def. DePauw, 62-61; won at Oberlin, 76-70
#41	14	DeSales	4-2	LOST to #33 Widener, 77-92; won at Alvernia, 68-63
T#42	12	Mary Hardin-Baylor	2-4	LOST at #32 Trinity (Texas), 64-83; LOST at Concordia (Texas), 82-88
T#42	12	Dubuque	7-0	won at Luther, 63-43; won at Simpson, 70-59
#44	11	Babson	4-3	LOST to #34 St. Joseph (Conn.), 64-73
T#45	10	Nichols	6-1	won at Hartford, 78-71; def. Curry, 84-67
T#45	10	St. Norbert	5-1	LOST to Illinois Tech, 76-92; def. Dominican, 77-61
#47	6	Hope	4-0	def. Hanover, 76-73 OT
T#48	3	Mary Washington	6-2	won at Southern Virginia, 73-48; def. Marymount, 52-49
T#48	3	Montclair State	4-2	LOST to Rutgers-Newark, 60-72; won at Rutgers-Camden, 72-70
T#48	3	Utica	5-1	won at Ithaca, 82-71; won at Houghton, 91-74
T#51	2	Maryville	7-2	won at Berry, 85-83; def. Washington and Lee, 87-84 OT; won at Warren Wilson, 112-61
T#51	2	UW-Superior	5-1	LOST to UW-Stevens Point, 53-58
T#53	1	Arcadia	5-2	LOST at York (Pa.), 77-83; LOST at #33 Widener, 63-89
T#53	1	Concordia-Moorhead	6-0	won at Bethel, 57-52

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: E.115 on December 04, 2023, 02:45:14 PM

^ Your format is easy on the eyes and super easy to follow--thanks for always doing this.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: thebear on December 04, 2023, 03:22:47 PM

I saw Oswego play this weekend, very deep and very talented.

I think there is little separation between John Carroll, Calvin, and Oswego for the #1 spot after this weekend's upsets.

From what I saw Oswego's second five is a very good D-III team.

Oswego plays CWRU and Pomona-Pitzer in Vegas at year end which should add some clarity.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ron Boerger on December 04, 2023, 05:12:34 PM

World's biggest Trinity(TX) homer here, but if you have the chance to catch one of their games (their broadcasts are really quite decent), they have a 6'8" freshman by the name of Christian Green who is already starting, leading the team in scoring (17.7ppg) and rebounding (8.7), and has a skill set I'm not sure Trinity has ever seen in my years of following the team. One of his dunks was recently boosted by the NCAA Division III Xitter account. He makes youthful mistakes to be sure, but there's so much potential there. Unfortunately after a nice 7-0 start they don't play again until the 15th.

They will be playing in the D3hoops Classic this month (the school's first appearance there) so anyone making that trek will have the chance to see him in person in what should be a good matchup with a likely undefeated Pomona-Pitzer (8-0 with only one game at bottom feeding La Sierra between now and then).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 05, 2023, 07:28:53 AM

Quote from: E.115 on December 04, 2023, 02:45:14 PM
^ Your format is easy on the eyes and super easy to follow--thanks for always doing this.

Thanks for the feedback - I'm happy to do it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WPI89 on December 05, 2023, 10:18:37 AM

Ditto, Darryl! It is a real highlight of the week to devour the info on your well-laid-out "chart"! Very much appreciated.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ziggy on December 05, 2023, 11:22:50 AM

Quote from: Ron Boerger on December 04, 2023, 05:12:34 PM
World's biggest Trinity(TX) homer here, but if you have the chance to catch one of their games (their broadcasts are really quite decent), they have a 6'8" freshman by the name of Christian Green who is already starting, leading the team in scoring (17.7ppg) and rebounding (8.7), and has a skill set I'm not sure Trinity has ever seen in my years of following the team. One of his dunks was recently boosted by the NCAA Division III Xitter account. He makes youthful mistakes to be sure, but there's so much potential there. Unfortunately after a nice 7-0 start they don't play again until the 15th.

They will be playing in the D3hoops Classic this month (the school's first appearance there) so anyone making that trek will have the chance to see him in person in what should be a good matchup with a likely undefeated Pomona-Pitzer (8-0 with only one game at bottom feeding La Sierra between now and then).

Here is the dunk mentioned: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/FaDchIUmaSw

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 10, 2023, 09:38:17 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	598	John Carroll	7-0	won at Muskingum, 87-84
#2	575	Calvin	7-0	def. Wheaton (Ill.), 77-54
#3	535	Guilford	9-0	won at Roanoke, 65-53; won at T#39 Mary Washington, 65-62; won at Greensboro, 60-45
#4	514	Oswego State	7-0	IDLE
#5	477	Keene State	8-2	def. Westfield State, 86-73; won at Plymouth State, 83-58; LOST to #12 Tufts, 63-65
#6	473	UW-Whitewater	6-1	won at Hope, 79-76
#7	470	Hampden-Sydney	6-1	won at #26 Randolph-Macon, 61-52
#8	448	Case Western Reserve	7-0	won at Adrian, 83-65
#9	441	New York University	7-1	def. Brooklyn, 111-66
#10	335	Christopher Newport	6-2	IDLE
#11	312	Mount Union	7-1	won at Muskingum, 82-48; won at Ohio Northern, 62-59
#12	311	Tufts	10-0	won at #27 St. Joseph (Conn.), 86-77; won at #5 Keene State, 65-63
#13	298	Trinity (Conn.)	11-0	def. Mitchell, 87-31; def. Western New England, 84-46
#14	270	Emory	6-1	IDLE
#15	263	Swarthmore	7-2	def. Ursinus, 82-66; LOST to #28 Widener, 57-77
#16	257	Washington U.	7-1	IDLE
#17	198	WPI	8-1	won at Salve Regina, 64-50; def. Babson, 61-49
#18	190	Williams	9-1	def. SUNY Oneonta, 70-65; won at Springfield, 61-56
#19	164	Trine	7-0	def. UW-Stevens Point, 79-78
#20	140	Pomona-Pitzer	8-0	IDLE
#21	138	Elmhurst	8-0	def. Marian, 88-65; def. #22 Carthage, 74-59
#22	132	Carthage	7-2	def. North Central (Ill.), 95-75; LOST at #21 Elmhurst, 59-74
#23	94	Trinity (Texas)	7-0	IDLE
#24	77	UW-Oshkosh	5-2	won at Whitworth, 79-68; LOST at Whitman, 60-68
#25	67	Illinois College	9-0	won at Monmouth, 71-39; def. Lawrence, 53-35

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	51	Randolph-Macon	5-3	def. T#39 Mary Washington, 79-51; LOST to #7 Hampden-Sydney, 52-61
#27	48	St. Joseph (Conn.)	7-2	LOST to #12 Tufts, 77-86; def. New England College, 81-56
#28	43	Widener	8-1	won at #15 Swarthmore, 77-57
#29	36	UW-Platteville	7-1	won at Hope, 61-57
#30	27	Redlands	4-2	IDLE
#31	26	Catholic	7-2	LOST at Susquehanna, 58-60; won at Moravian, 83-74
#32	19	Illinois_Wesleyan	7-3	def. North Park, 70-56; won at North Central (Ill.), 66-43
#33	16	Virginia Wesleyan	9-1	won at Averett, 49-46; def. Roanoke, 70-58
#34	15	Coe	9-1	won at #36 Central, 85-83 OT
#35	14	St. Thomas (Texas)	7-2	IDLE
#36	10	Central	7-2	LOST to #34 Coe, 83-85 OT
T#37	8	Nichols	6-2	LOST to Western New England, 66-68
T#37	8	Dubuque	7-0	IDLE
T#39	6	Mary Washington	6-4	LOST at #26 Randolph-Macon, 51-79; LOST to #3 Guilford, 62-65
T#39	6	Maryville (Tenn.)	7-2	IDLE
#41	5	Albertus Magnus	8-1	won at Amherst, 73-71; def. Dean, 105-77
#42	4	Marietta	6-2	def. Capital, 93-72; won at Wilmington, 82-69
#43	3	Utica	5-2	LOST to Hamilton, 53-60
#44	2	Concordia-Moorhead	7-2	won at St. Mary's (Minn.), 71-57; LOST to St. John's, 70-77; LOST to Hamline, 56-66
#45	1	Stevens	7-2	won at Brooklyn, 75-52; LOST to Middlebury, 77-84 OT

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on December 13, 2023, 12:07:09 AM

What's the schedule for D3 hoops classic in Las Vegas for both men and women?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on December 13, 2023, 06:49:43 AM

Quote from: ronk on December 13, 2023, 12:07:09 AM
What's the schedule for D3 hoops classic in Las Vegas for both men and women?

Sometimes there are changes after the schedule is set, but here's the published version:

https://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2023/08/d3hoops-classic-pairings

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 13, 2023, 08:16:47 AM

No offense to the other teams participating, but...

Oswego St v CWRU
Trinity TX v Pomona Pitzer
Oswego St v Pomona Pitzer

Wow.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on December 13, 2023, 12:20:23 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 13, 2023, 08:16:47 AM
No offense to the other teams participating, but...

Oswego St v CWRU
Trinity TX v Pomona Pitzer
Oswego St v Pomona Pitzer

Wow.

Don't sleep on Clark. 8-1 with a 4 point loss at unbeaten Tufts. They face Trinity (TX) and CWRU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 14, 2023, 01:08:16 PM

I did consider those games as well. I didn't include them because they weren't ranked and possibly not as well known...

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: PauldingLightUP on December 14, 2023, 01:22:30 PM

Quote from: Greek Tragedy on December 14, 2023, 01:08:16 PM
I did consider those games as well. I didn't include them because they weren't ranked and possibly not as well known...

Time to give Clark some recognition I think.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 18, 2023, 07:37:35 AM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	582	John Carroll	8-0	def. Wilmington, 92-54
#2	581	Calvin	8-0	won at St. Norbert, 88-66
#3	570	Guilford	9-0	IDLE
#4	544	Oswego State	7-0	IDLE
#5	493	Tufts	10-0	IDLE
#6	486	Hampden-Sydney	8-1	won at William Peace, 78-65; def. #25 Swarthmore, 67-46
#7	450	UW-Whitewater	7-1	def. Lawrence, 74-50
#8	432	Case Western Reserve	9-0	won at Earlham, 82-70
#9	411	New York University	8-1	def. Delaware Valley, 98-56
#10	352	Trinity (Conn.)	11-0	IDLE
#11	349	Keene State	8-2	IDLE
#12	313	Christopher Newport	8-3	LOST to T#31 Virginia Wesleyan, 68-74; won at Wilson, 68-49
#13	305	Mount Union	8-1	def. Capital, 79-68
#14	303	Emory	7-1	won at Oglethorpe, 98-78
#15	253	Elmhurst	9-0	def. Lawrence, 74-41
#16	230	WPI	8-1	IDLE
#17	225	Washington U.	9-1	def. Fontbonne, 96-75; def. Principia, 90-56
#18	177	Williams	9-1	IDLE
#19	172	Trine	7-0	IDLE
#20	156	Widener	8-1	IDLE
#21	146	Pomona-Pitzer	9-0	won at La Sierra, 78-63
#22	140	Trinity (Texas)	9-0	def. Austin, 89-54; def. University of Dallas, 87-52
#23	92	Illinois College	10-0	won at MSOE, 72-68
#24	61	UW-Platteville	8-1	won at North Central (Ill.), 80-65
#25	48	Swarthmore	7-3	LOST at #6 Hampden-Sydney, 46-67

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	42	Carthage	8-2	def. Illinois Tech, 83-79
#27	37	Illinois Wesleyan	7-3	IDLE
#28	32	St. Joseph (Conn.)	7-2	IDLE
#29	24	Redlands	4-2	IDLE
#30	19	Coe	11-1	def. Cornell, 73-53; def. North Central (Minn.), 72-70
T#31	18	Virginia Wesleyan	12-1	won at #12 Christopher Newport, 74-68; def. Johnson and Wales, 78-45; def. Belhaven, 67-61
T#31	18	Marietta	7-2	def. Ohio Northern, 103-102 2OT
#33	17	Randolph-Macon	7-3	def. (n) Marywood, 89-53; won at York (Pa.), 87-68
#34	10	St. Thomas (Texas)	8-2	def. Centenary (La.), 67-59
T#35	9	Maryville (Tenn.)	8-2	won at Greensboro, 70-62
T#35	9	Dubuque	7-0	IDLE
#37	8	Heidelberg	7-2	def. Muskingum, 84-70
#38	5	Stockton	6-5	LOST to TCNJ, 69-78; LOST to Eastern, 73-77
T#39	3	St. John's	7-2	IDLE
T#39	3	UW-Oshkosh	5-2	IDLE

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 25, 2024, 05:00:02 PM

It's good to be back ...

How They Fared (Complete)

Note: This report is also posted HERE (https://homepages.bluffton.edu/~nesterd/htf.html)—a process I started while d3boards was offline.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	619	Hampden-Sydney	26-2	def. (n) Ferrum, 81-61; def. (n) Virginia Wesleyan, 63-52; def. (n) Washington and Lee, 81-56
#2	587	Randolph-Macon	23-4	def. (n) Shenandoah, 71-68 OT; LOST to (n) Washington and Lee, 71-74
#3	546	John Carroll	25-2	def. Marietta, 88-69; def. #24 Mount Union, 88-86 OT
#4	537	Trinity (Conn.)	26-1	def. (n) #28 Tufts, 80-68; won at #20 Williams, 59-52
#5	512	Oswego State	25-2	def. Cortland, 76-68; LOST to SUNY New Paltz, 80-85
#6	449	Calvin	22-4	LOST to (n) Hope, 68-83
#7	447	Guilford	22-4	LOST to (n) Virginia Wesleyan, 60-67
#8	445	Cal Lutheran	23-4	def. Chapman, 85-76; LOST to #41 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 55-61
#9	421	Trine	23-4	def. Adrian, 74-70; LOST to Hope, 68-72 OT
#10	413	Trinity (Texas)	23-3	LOST to (n) Colorado College, 70-71
#11	401	Keene State	24-3	def. Rhode Island College, 83-68; def. T#34 Western Connecticut, 84-68
#12	386	Case Western Reserve	21-4	def. T#39 Carnegie Mellon, 76-75
#13	323	Widener	23-4	def. Alvernia, 80-70; LOST to Eastern, 69-98
#14	273	New York University	20-5	won at Brandeis, 74-68
#15	271	UW-Platteville	23-4	def. UW-Stout, 91-84; def. UW-River Falls, 97-74
#16	251	DeSales	24-3	def. Misericordia, 83-67; LOST to T#36 Stevens, 53-54
#17	218	Nebraska Wesleyan	23-4	def. #33 Dubuque, 73-67; LOST to #42 Loras, 76-85 OT
#18	213	Catholic	24-3	def. Wilkes, 93-88 OT; def. Susquehanna, 87-65
#19	127	Coe	21-5	LOST to #42 Loras, 73-76
#20	120	Williams	21-6	def. Amherst, 57-43; LOST to #4 Trinity (Conn.), 52-59
#21	84	Elmhurst	22-5	def. (n) Carthage, 80-66; won at #22 Illinois Wesleyan, 68-64
#22	68	Illinois Wesleyan	19-8	def. North Central (Ill.), 66-62; LOST to #21 Elmhurst, 64-68
#23	65	Johns Hopkins	20-7	def. Franklin and Marshall, 76-55; LOST to Swarthmore, 62-67
#24	47	Mount Union	20-7	def. Heidelberg, 91-85; LOST at #3 John Carroll, 86-88 OT
#25	39	Christopher Newport	21-6	def. UC Santa Cruz, 58-44; def. Mary Washington, 62-56

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	38	Rowan	19-7	LOST to TCNJ, 73-79
#27	35	St. John's	20-6	LOST to Hamline, 80-83
#28	29	Tufts	19-7	LOST to (n) #4 Trinity (Conn.), 68-80
#29	24	St. Joseph (Conn.)	24-4	def. Rivier, 97-65; def. Norwich, 69-60; def. St. Joseph's (Maine), 78-59
#30	20	Maryville	22-5	def. LaGrange, 92-68; def. Belhaven, 97-75
#31	17	WPI	21-5	LOST to Babson, 57-73
#32	16	Washington U.	18-7	def. Chicago, 61-58
#33	12	Dubuque	21-6	def. Central, 77-73; LOST at #17 Nebraska Wesleyan, 67-73
T#34	10	Western Connecticut	22-5	def. Mass-Dartmouth, 88-63; LOST at #11 Keene State, 68-84
T#34	10	Clark	20-7	def. Emerson, 78-70; LOST to Babson, 64-73
T#36	9	Stevens	22-5	def. (n) Arcadia, 73-70; won at #16 DeSales, 54-53
T#36	9	St. Thomas (Texas)	20-6	LOST to (n) Centenary (La.), 51-64
#38	7	Nichols	22-4	LOST to Roger Williams, 80-86
T#39	6	Hood	19-6	LOST to Eastern, 72-86
T#39	6	Carnegie Mellon	16-9	LOST at #12 Case Western Reserve, 75-76
#41	5	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	21-6	won at Whittier, 82-66; def. T#43 Pomona-Pitzer, 74-71; won at #8 Cal Lutheran, 61-55
#42	4	Loras	23-5	def. Buena Vista, 86-62; won at #19 Coe, 76-73; won at #17 Nebraska Wesleyan, 85-76 OT
T#43	3	Otterbein	17-9	LOST to Marietta, 67-73
T#43	3	Pomona-Pitzer	19-7	won at La Verne, 73-58; LOST at #41 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 71-74

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on April 07, 2024, 10:43:58 PM

Our men's basketball Top 25 archive (https://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/archive) has been updated through the end of the 2023-24 season.

Here are some nuggets from last season's national rankings.

Road to the top

Trine became the fourth team ever to win the national championship despite not being ranked in our preseason Top 25. The Thunder join Nebraska Wesleyan (2017-18), UW-Whitewater (2011-12), and Otterbein (2001-02). Trine appeared in the middle of a bunch of teams that "also received votes" in the preseason poll.

Trine had a rollercoaster ride to the top of the rankings: Unranked...24...19...12...11...7...3...2...7...9...13...1

First time for everything

Four teams made their first appearance in the Top 25. Coe is the only one that also finished the season nationally ranked. The others were Hood, Redlands, and Shenandoah.

Hitting the highwater mark

In addition to Trine and the four Top 25 debutants, five other teams reached their highest Top 25 placement last season: John Carroll (No. 1), Case Western (2), Trinity (Conn.) (3), Oswego State (4), and Cal Lutheran (8).

In the long run

Here are the five longest runs of consecutive Top 25 appearances entering next season:
1st Randolph-Macon: 83 straight (Every poll since Week 1 of the 2017-18 season)
T-2nd John Carroll: 28
T-2nd Keene State: 28
4th John Carroll: 23
5th Hampden-Sydney: 21

There was some movement in the list of programs with the most Top 25 appearances. Illinois Wesleyan and Randolph-Macon are now tied with Whitworth for the eighth most appearances (189). Williams has tied St. Thomas (Minn.) for fifth place all time and will likely pass the now-D1 Tommies next season.

The three programs with the most appearances remain Wooster (249), UW-Stevens Point (240), and Amherst (237), though none appeared in last season's national rankings. WashU (234) could move as high as second next season, unless the Pointers and Mammoths return to the rankings.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on April 08, 2024, 09:05:01 AM

^^^ Randolph-Macon dropped out of the Top 25 week 1 of the just concluded season. They re-entered in week 4.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: gordonmann on April 08, 2024, 01:06:23 PM

Oh! Good catch.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: HoopsDad34 on June 28, 2024, 09:50:16 PM

Fun little summer tourney here tomorrow: 5 teams in the final top 40: https://x.com/1on1basketball/status/1805731770026934751?s=46&t=HWcQ-GhmsuEklNmNTZJN6w

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on July 12, 2024, 05:26:01 AM

https://www.ncaa.org/news/2024/7/11/media-center-mens-basketball-committee-approves-single-site-for-2026-divisions-i-ii-and-iii-championships-and-nit-adopts-new-metrics-for-team-sheets

2026 will have the D1 Final Four, D2 and D3 championships, and NIT Final Four all in Indy on the same weekend . D1 will be at Lucas Oil Stadium (home of the Colts), D2 and D3 will be at Gainbridge Fieldhouse (home of the Pacers) on Sunday April 5th, and NIT will be at Hinkle Fieldhouse (home of Butler Bulldogs)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: OUVan59 on July 12, 2024, 05:48:42 PM

Will be interesting to see how this plays out since it pushes the championship game back a couple of weeks.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 14, 2024, 06:39:48 PM

I'm guessing the poll will be out in about two weeks. It was October 26 last year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on October 18, 2024, 10:36:11 AM

My preseason ballot.

https://x.com/IWUhoopscom/status/1847263163936354395

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on October 23, 2024, 12:41:43 PM

https://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2024-25/preseason

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on October 23, 2024, 12:47:16 PM

Nice job by the voters this year!

https://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2024-25/preseason

I think the top five looks rock solid, and I'm high on CNU to exceed even its high number five ranking with nearly everyone back from a very young team plus a potential impact transfer inside. One through seven feel like legit national title contenders, after that, feels like a crapshoot.

Teams that seem a smidge high: Emory, yeah they don't lose much at all, but they were only 15-10 last year and are getting a LOT of benefit of the doubt; IWU, which always seems to get a name reputation boost but seems like a borderline top 25 team at best after losing two of the top four guys from a team that didn't do much to earn an exalted ranking last year; Calvin, which brings back a lot but Overway was the guy who made everything work last year and is simply irreplaceable; and St. John's (MN).

Teams that seem a bit too low: Keene State, which seems stacked for a big year despite the loss of Hunter with a hugely impactful transfer class; Stevens Point, SOMEONE else from WIAC will be a top 25 team I suspect and they seem like the best bet; Gettysburg, seems like the class of the Centennial by far this year; Clark/Babson, one of these teams will be in the top 25 though not quite sure which; Virginia Wesleyan, which I think brings back a lot; and Carthage, not sure why they are ranked so far behind IWU, or really, ranked behind them at all.

The three ranked NESCAC teams all seem ... about right. Williams to me could be anywhere from the 15th best team in the country to the 50th this year, 25th if anything might be a bit high to start the year, though I think the team will finish the season better than it starts, much like last year. Wesleyan I think will end up as a top 25 team this year, but has to earn it after underperforming its talent level last year. Still, with everyone back I'm high on their potential.

Hampden Sydney, Case Western, NYU, and Guilford all seem like the biggest boom-bust teams, since all lose a TON but also bring in a ton in the transfer portal -- so, who the heck knows? Any of them could end up being really good especially Guilford which brings in some serious talent.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on November 02, 2024, 11:13:44 AM

Some recent Q-casts:

Sean Westerlund (Bryn Athyn):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=weJFNIfELAw&t=29s

B.J. Dunne (Gettysburg):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkCeaKJ_LMU&t=2050s

Tyler Simms (Clark):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nalEAaC-zaY&t=130s

Bill Sall (Calvin):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LB_d8aEHyaI&t=6s

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 22, 2024, 04:24:56 PM

A trial run of HTF for the new season.

I was not sure when the first in-season poll comes out; I ran this out to December 1.

I left off teams #42-#59 because the full table exceeded the character limit. When I post the final report (before the next poll), I will include everyone.

You can also find a copy of this report at homepages.bluffton.edu/~nesterd/htf.html (https://homepages.bluffton.edu/~nesterd/htf.html). (That address should always have the most recent posted report, provided I remember to update it.)

How They Fared (So Far)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	597	Trine	4-0	def. Mary Hardin-Baylor, 98-70; def. Wabash, 78-68; won at Baldwin Wallace, 78-49; def. Anderson, 89-84; 11/23 vs. Elmhurst; 11/30 at Ohio Wesleyan; 12/01 at Capital
#2	589	UW-Platteville	2-1	def. (n) #9 Calvin, 82-81; LOST at #16 Illinois Wesleyan, 66-86; def. T#49 Carthage, 85-72; 11/23 vs. North Central (Ill.); 11/26 vs. Augustana; 11/30 vs. T#56 Heidelberg; 12/01 vs. T#49 Gustavus Adolphus
#3	540	John Carroll	3-0	def. (n) Albertus Magnus, 108-90; won at Penn State-Harrisburg, 68-49; def. Brockport, 85-69; 11/22 vs. T#49 Johns Hopkins; 11/23 vs. #8 Emory
#4	517	Washington U.	3-0	def. Rhodes, 75-53; def. Rose-Hulman, 84-59; won at Webster, 92-66; 11/23 at Carroll; 11/30 vs. Colorado College; 12/01 at Rhodes
#5	502	Christopher Newport	4-1	def. (n) Greensboro, 78-61; won at N.C. Wesleyan, 85-77; won at Virginia Wesleyan, 74-72 OT; def. Wilson, 86-69; LOST to #23 Hampden-Sydney, 71-74; 11/23 vs. Kean; 11/25 at Averett; 11/30 vs. Transylvania; 12/01 vs. TBA
#6	462	Trinity (Conn.)	3-0	def. (n) Albertus Magnus, 81-59; def. (n) Husson, 77-62; won at Hartford, 79-54; 11/23 vs. Elms; 11/26 at Western New England; 12/01 vs. Yeshiva
#7	337	Randolph-Macon	2-2	def. (n) Salisbury, 79-66; LOST at Hood, 72-81; LOST at #23 Hampden-Sydney, 77-84; won at Mary Washington, 58-55
#8	333	Emory	2-0	def. Berry, 91-71; def. #17 Guilford, 75-61; 11/22 at #9 Calvin; 11/23 vs. #3 John Carroll; 11/26 vs. Piedmont
#9	332	Calvin	0-4	LOST to (n) #2 UW-Platteville, 81-82; LOST to (n) #24 Cal Lutheran, 71-81; LOST to (n) UW-Oshkosh, 67-75; LOST at T#56 Heidelberg, 78-85; 11/22 vs. #8 Emory; 11/23 vs. #12 St. John's
#10	314	Keene State	1-0	won at Western New England, 83-78; 11/23 vs. Thomas; 11/24 at #25 Williams; 11/30 vs. MIT
#11	294	Trinity (Texas)	2-0	def. (n) T#40 Bethany Lutheran, 99-82; def. (n) Pacific, 82-81 OT; 11/23 vs. UW-Superior; 11/29 vs. #32 Pomona-Pitzer; 11/30 at #27 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps
#12	293	St. John's	3-0	def. UW-Oshkosh, 73-62; won at Central, 78-60; won at Simpson, 75-52; 11/22 vs. #21 Hope; 11/23 at #9 Calvin; 11/27 vs. T#56 UW-La Crosse
#13	292	Tufts	3-0	won at Bridgewater State, 94-72; won at Emerson, 80-57; won at Suffolk, 76-57; 11/23 vs. Endicott; 11/26 vs. MIT; 11/30 vs. T#45 WPI
#14	268	Nebraska Wesleyan	2-2	LOST at UW-Eau Claire, 64-68; def. (n) T#56 UW-La Crosse, 82-73; def. (n) Franklin, 65-62; LOST at T#33 Illinois College, 57-66; 11/24 vs. Colorado College; 11/29 vs. Northwestern (Minn.); 11/30 vs. Concordia-Moorhead
#15	261	Wisconsin Lutheran	4-0	def. Elmhurst, 84-74; def. North Park, 114-81; won at Wheaton (Ill.), 81-66; won at Lawrence, 92-67; 11/23 at Benedictine; 11/26 at Concordia (Wis.)
#16	233	Illinois Wesleyan	3-0	def. #24 Cal Lutheran, 93-81; def. #2 UW-Platteville, 86-66; won at UW-Stout, 69-57; 11/22 vs. Westminster (Mo.); 11/23 at Webster; 11/27 at Chicago
#17	216	Guilford	3-1	won at Pfeiffer, 85-72; def. N.C. Wesleyan, 87-59; LOST at #8 Emory, 61-75; def. (n) Greensboro, 59-58; 11/26 vs. William Peace
#18	187	Carnegie Mellon	3-1	def. La Roche, 66-64; won at Chatham, 88-66; LOST at Denison, 78-79; def. Penn State-Behrend, 84-62; 11/23 at Earlham; 11/24 vs. Hanover
#19	183	Mount Union	2-1	LOST to Yeshiva, 81-86; won at Alfred State, 100-63; def. Brockport, 100-71; 11/22 vs. Bluffton; 11/23 vs. TBA
#20	162	Maryville (Tenn.)	3-2	LOST to Averett, 79-85; def. Sewanee, 79-77; LOST to (n) Mary Washington, 58-84; def. (n) UW-Eau Claire, 68-64; def. Berry, 82-77; 11/22 vs. T#38 Gettysburg; 11/23 vs. TBA; 11/26 at Berea
#21	152	Hope	2-1	LOST to Anderson, 78-80; won at Wilmington, 74-64; won at Wittenberg, 68-63; 11/22 vs. #12 St. John's; 11/23 vs. Marietta; 11/26 at Wheaton (Ill.)
#22	122	New York University	3-0	def. T#54 Babson, 86-74; def. T#38 Rowan, 102-78; won at Kean, 76-58; 11/23 at York (N.Y.); 11/26 at Farmingdale State
#23	118	Hampden-Sydney	3-0	won at T#33 Swarthmore, 81-64; def. #7 Randolph-Macon, 84-77; won at #5 Christopher Newport, 74-71; 11/22 vs. Pfeiffer; 11/23 vs. TBA
#24	92	Cal Lutheran	1-2	LOST at #16 Illinois Wesleyan, 81-93; def. (n) #9 Calvin, 81-71; LOST to T#43 Whitworth, 76-81; 11/30 vs. UC Santa Cruz
#25	91	Williams	2-0	won at SUNY Delhi, 62-49; won at SUNY Oneonta, 74-69; 11/23 vs. Castleton; 11/24 vs. #10 Keene State; 11/26 at Massachusetts College; 12/01 vs. Rhode Island College

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	62	TCNJ	4-0	def. (n) Centenary (N.J.), 92-62; def. (n) T#40 Drew, 103-102 OT; def. Baruch, 86-84; def. Connecticut College, 82-65; 11/23 at Ursinus; 11/26 at William Paterson
#27	60	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	2-1	def. Linfield, 92-64; won at Pacific Lutheran, 64-60; LOST at Puget Sound, 64-72; 11/22 at UC Santa Cruz; 11/23 vs. Whitman; 11/26 vs. La Verne; 11/29 vs. Southwestern; 11/30 vs. #11 Trinity (Texas)
#28	56	Loras	3-1	def. St. Scholastica, 104-71; def. Olivet, 84-76; def. Northland, 111-57; LOST at North Park, 64-73; 11/26 vs. T#30 Coe
#29	55	Case Western Reserve	3-2	def. Penn State-Altoona, 99-72; def. Brockport, 101-99 2OT; def. La Roche, 84-74; LOST at Houghton, 75-80; LOST at Bethany, 93-105
T#30	37	UW-Stevens Point	3-0	won at Lakeland, 91-59; def. MSOE, 72-47; won at Edgewood, 71-56; 11/22 at North Central (Minn.); 11/26 vs. Northland; 12/01 vs. St. Olaf
T#30	37	Coe	1-2	won at Cornell, 90-78; LOST at Augustana, 70-82; LOST to Cornell, 71-74; 11/23 at T#43 UW-Whitewater; 11/26 at #28 Loras; 11/30 at Edgewood
#32	32	Pomona-Pitzer	3-1	def. Nobel University, 85-43; won at UC Santa Cruz, 101-95 OT; LOST to (n) Lewis and Clark, 44-55; def. La Sierra, 95-59; 11/29 vs. #11 Trinity (Texas); 11/30 at Southwestern
T#33	29	Illinois College	5-0	won at Webster, 70-60; won at Blackburn, 76-58; def. Concordia (Wis.), 81-79; def. #14 Nebraska Wesleyan, 66-57; def. Millikin, 65-53; 11/23 vs. MSOE
T#33	29	Swarthmore	2-2	LOST to #23 Hampden-Sydney, 64-81; LOST at Albright, 59-64; def. Penn State-Harrisburg, 82-65; def. T#56 Stockton, 73-63; 11/23 vs. Rutgers-Camden; 11/26 at #35 Widener
#35	25	Widener	1-3	LOST at Ursinus, 85-90; LOST to Hamilton, 54-81; LOST to T#49 Catholic, 67-79; won at Neumann, 87-73; 11/26 vs. T#33 Swarthmore
#36	21	Oswego	3-1	def. (n) Muhlenberg, 79-65; def. (n) Muskingum, 79-67; LOST at St. Lawrence, 44-45; won at Brockport, 78-72; 11/26 at Nazareth
#37	20	Hardin-Simmons	2-3	won at Texas Lutheran, 87-76; LOST at Schreiner, 66-80; won at McMurry, 81-79 OT; LOST to St. Thomas (Texas), 55-62; LOST to Concordia (Texas), 92-94
T#38	19	Gettysburg	5-0	def. Arcadia, 70-56; def. Ohio Northern, 59-57; won at Mount Aloysius, 96-78; def. York (Pa.), 67-65 OT; won at Bryn Athyn, 77-72 OT; 11/22 vs. #20 Maryville (Tenn.); 11/23 vs. TBA
T#38	19	Rowan	1-2	LOST to (n) Ithaca, 92-93; LOST at #22 New York University, 78-102; def. Eastern, 79-61; 11/26 vs. Montclair State
T#40	18	Bethany Lutheran	1-3	LOST to (n) #11 Trinity (Texas), 82-99; LOST at Colorado College, 75-86; won at St. Mary's (Minn.), 95-94 OT; LOST at Carleton, 76-78; 11/23 vs. St. Scholastica
T#40	18	Drew	3-2	won at FDU-Florham, 100-70; LOST to (n) #26 TCNJ, 102-103 OT; LOST at Farmingdale State, 72-74; def. York (N.Y.), 115-65; won at Moravian, 82-75; 11/23 vs. Goucher

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on November 22, 2024, 07:07:00 PM

I think we're voting monday.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 23, 2024, 08:33:40 AM

I think last year it was after Thanksgiving, but Thanksgiving is late this year, so I see it being this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on November 24, 2024, 02:48:59 PM

I predict the following pre-season top 25 teams will not be in the top 25 after the week 1 vote:

John Carroll
Randolph-Macon
Calvin
Nebraska Wesleyan
Mount Union
Maryville (TN)
Hope
Cal Lutheran

Possible replacements (this is NOT a prediction, as there are many other viable candidates) include, in no particular order:

Gettysburg
Anderson
Hood
UW-LaCrosse
Marietta
UW-Stevens Point
TCNJ
St. Thomas (TX)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on November 24, 2024, 03:44:31 PM

*John Carroll probably won't drop all the way out from #3. Obviously their two losses over the weekend at the GLI aren't great, but they lost AA Luke Chicone Friday against a ORV JHU and Emory on Saturday is a Top 5 team.
*RMC probably stays in by the skin of their teeth. #7 to out is a big drop.
*Guys who vote still love Calvin. The best 1-5 team ever. They've played 4 ranked opponents of their 6 games. I could see them drop to the mid-20s, as unbelievable as that sounds. It helps that they beat #12 St. John's.
*NWU should probably drop out.
*Mount Union should drop out as well.
*Maryville, Hope and Cal Lutheran also out.

I can see Gettys, Anderson and Hood getting in. Marietta's big win is against Hope, who's dropping out. They got hammered by La Crosse, who only received votes. Marietta didn't get any votes in the preseason poll. They'll get votes, but not enough to get into the Top 25, IMO.

I'm thinking TCNJ gets in because they were basically #26 and they're 5-0.
Stevens Point is 4-0 but they've literally haven't played anyone.
Wooster? They beat Mount Union.
Middlebury? They St. Joseph (CT), preseason #1 in GNAC, Stevens preseason #1 in MACF and Clark, preseason #2 NEWMAC.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 24, 2024, 04:02:29 PM

It does say on the Top 25 page that the first regular season poll comes out tomorrow.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 24, 2024, 05:29:43 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 24, 2024, 04:02:29 PMIt does say on the Top 25 page that the first regular season poll comes out tomorrow.

Sorry, Pat, that was just me being too lazy to check.

How They Fared (Complete)

(ORV report posted separately to stay under the posting character limit.)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	597	Trine	5-0	def. Mary Hardin-Baylor, 98-70; def. Wabash, 78-68; won at Baldwin Wallace, 78-49; def. Anderson, 89-84; def. Elmhurst, 95-67
#2	589	UW-Platteville	3-1	def. (n) #9 Calvin, 82-81; LOST at #16 Illinois Wesleyan, 66-86; def. T#49 Carthage, 85-72; def. North Central (Ill.), 76-69 OT
#3	540	John Carroll	3-2	def. (n) Albertus Magnus, 108-90; won at Penn State-Harrisburg, 68-49; def. Brockport, 85-69; LOST to (n) T#49 Johns Hopkins, 69-84; LOST to (n) #8 Emory, 75-90
#4	517	Washington U.	4-0	def. Rhodes, 75-53; def. Rose-Hulman, 84-59; won at Webster, 92-66; won at Carroll, 81-66
#5	502	Christopher Newport	5-1	def. (n) Greensboro, 78-61; won at N.C. Wesleyan, 85-77; won at Virginia Wesleyan, 74-72 OT; def. Wilson, 86-69; LOST to #23 Hampden-Sydney, 71-74; def. Kean, 77-63
#6	462	Trinity (Conn.)	4-0	def. (n) Albertus Magnus, 81-59; def. (n) Husson, 77-62; won at Hartford, 79-54; def. Elms, 97-42
#7	337	Randolph-Macon	2-2	def. (n) Salisbury, 79-66; LOST at Hood, 72-81; LOST at #23 Hampden-Sydney, 77-84; won at Mary Washington, 58-55
#8	333	Emory	4-0	def. Berry, 91-71; def. #17 Guilford, 75-61; won at #9 Calvin, 83-74; def. (n) #3 John Carroll, 90-75
#9	332	Calvin	1-5	LOST to (n) #2 UW-Platteville, 81-82; LOST to (n) #24 Cal Lutheran, 71-81; LOST to (n) UW-Oshkosh, 67-75; LOST at T#56 Heidelberg, 78-85; LOST to #8 Emory, 74-83; def. #12 St. John's, 71-67
#10	314	Keene State	3-0	won at Western New England, 83-78; def. (n) Thomas, 109-78; won at #25 Williams, 75-71
#11	294	Trinity (Texas)	3-0	def. (n) T#40 Bethany Lutheran, 99-82; def. (n) Pacific, 82-81 OT; def. (n) UW-Superior, 84-76
#12	293	St. John's	4-1	def. UW-Oshkosh, 73-62; won at Central, 78-60; won at Simpson, 75-52; def. (n) #21 Hope, 64-48; LOST at #9 Calvin, 67-71
#13	292	Tufts	4-0	won at Bridgewater State, 94-72; won at Emerson, 80-57; won at Suffolk, 76-57; def. Endicott, 81-69
#14	268	Nebraska Wesleyan	3-2	LOST at UW-Eau Claire, 64-68; def. (n) T#56 UW-La Crosse, 82-73; def. (n) Franklin, 65-62; LOST at T#33 Illinois College, 57-66; def. Colorado College, 79-68
#15	261	Wisconsin Lutheran	5-0	def. Elmhurst, 84-74; def. North Park, 114-81; won at Wheaton (Ill.), 81-66; won at Lawrence, 92-67; won at Benedictine, 83-75
#16	233	Illinois Wesleyan	5-0	def. #24 Cal Lutheran, 93-81; def. #2 UW-Platteville, 86-66; won at UW-Stout, 69-57; def. (n) Westminster (Mo.), 82-63; won at Webster, 70-44
#17	216	Guilford	3-1	won at Pfeiffer, 85-72; def. N.C. Wesleyan, 87-59; LOST at #8 Emory, 61-75; def. (n) Greensboro, 59-58
#18	187	Carnegie Mellon	5-1	def. La Roche, 66-64; won at Chatham, 88-66; LOST at Denison, 78-79; def. Penn State-Behrend, 84-62; won at Earlham, 88-69; def. (n) Hanover, 90-89 OT
#19	183	Mount Union	3-2	LOST to Yeshiva, 81-86; won at Alfred State, 100-63; def. Brockport, 100-71; def. (n) Bluffton, 95-72; LOST at #48 Wooster, 73-79
#20	162	Maryville (Tenn.)	4-3	LOST to Averett, 79-85; def. Sewanee, 79-77; LOST to (n) Mary Washington, 58-84; def. (n) UW-Eau Claire, 68-64; def. Berry, 82-77; LOST to (n) T#38 Gettysburg, 78-84; def. (n) Pfeiffer, 81-68
#21	152	Hope	2-3	LOST to Anderson, 78-80; won at Wilmington, 74-64; won at Wittenberg, 68-63; LOST to (n) #12 St. John's, 48-64; LOST to (n) Marietta, 71-96
#22	122	New York University	4-0	def. T#54 Babson, 86-74; def. T#38 Rowan, 102-78; won at Kean, 76-58; won at York (N.Y.), 112-56
#23	118	Hampden-Sydney	4-1	won at T#33 Swarthmore, 81-64; def. #7 Randolph-Macon, 84-77; won at #5 Christopher Newport, 74-71; def. Pfeiffer, 96-67; LOST to T#38 Gettysburg, 78-81
#24	92	Cal Lutheran	1-2	LOST at #16 Illinois Wesleyan, 81-93; def. (n) #9 Calvin, 81-71; LOST to T#43 Whitworth, 76-81
#25	91	Williams	3-1	won at SUNY Delhi, 62-49; won at SUNY Oneonta, 74-69; def. Castleton, 85-36; LOST to #10 Keene State, 71-75

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on November 24, 2024, 05:30:13 PM

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	62	TCNJ	5-0	def. (n) Centenary (N.J.), 92-62; def. (n) T#40 Drew, 103-102 OT; def. Baruch, 86-84; def. Connecticut College, 82-65; won at Ursinus, 97-70
#27	60	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	3-2	def. Linfield, 92-64; won at Pacific Lutheran, 64-60; LOST at Puget Sound, 64-72; LOST at UC Santa Cruz, 64-67; def. (n) Whitman, 68-50
#28	56	Loras	3-1	def. St. Scholastica, 104-71; def. Olivet, 84-76; def. Northland, 111-57; LOST at North Park, 64-73
#29	55	Case Western Reserve	3-2	def. Penn State-Altoona, 99-72; def. Brockport, 101-99 2OT; def. La Roche, 84-74; LOST at Houghton, 75-80; LOST at Bethany, 93-105
T#30	37	UW-Stevens Point	4-0	won at Lakeland, 91-59; def. MSOE, 72-47; won at Edgewood, 71-56; won at North Central (Minn.), 65-62
T#30	37	Coe	2-2	won at Cornell, 90-78; LOST at Augustana, 70-82; LOST to Cornell, 71-74; won at T#43 UW-Whitewater, 74-60
#32	32	Pomona-Pitzer	3-1	def. Nobel University, 85-43; won at UC Santa Cruz, 101-95 OT; LOST to (n) Lewis and Clark, 44-55; def. La Sierra, 95-59
T#33	29	Illinois College	5-1	won at Webster, 70-60; won at Blackburn, 76-58; def. Concordia (Wis.), 81-79; def. #14 Nebraska Wesleyan, 66-57; def. Millikin, 65-53; LOST to MSOE, 59-61
T#33	29	Swarthmore	3-2	LOST to #23 Hampden-Sydney, 64-81; LOST at Albright, 59-64; def. Penn State-Harrisburg, 82-65; def. T#56 Stockton, 73-63; def. Rutgers-Camden, 65-53
#35	25	Widener	1-3	LOST at Ursinus, 85-90; LOST to Hamilton, 54-81; LOST to T#49 Catholic, 67-79; won at Neumann, 87-73
#36	21	Oswego	3-1	def. (n) Muhlenberg, 79-65; def. (n) Muskingum, 79-67; LOST at St. Lawrence, 44-45; won at Brockport, 78-72
#37	20	Hardin-Simmons	2-3	won at Texas Lutheran, 87-76; LOST at Schreiner, 66-80; won at McMurry, 81-79 OT; LOST to St. Thomas (Texas), 55-62; LOST to Concordia (Texas), 92-94
T#38	19	Gettysburg	7-0	def. Arcadia, 70-56; def. Ohio Northern, 59-57; won at Mount Aloysius, 96-78; def. York (Pa.), 67-65 OT; won at Bryn Athyn, 77-72 OT; def. (n) #20 Maryville (Tenn.), 84-78; won at #23 Hampden-Sydney, 81-78
T#38	19	Rowan	1-2	LOST to (n) Ithaca, 92-93; LOST at #22 New York University, 78-102; def. Eastern, 79-61
T#40	18	Bethany Lutheran	1-4	LOST to (n) #11 Trinity (Texas), 82-99; LOST at Colorado College, 75-86; won at St. Mary's (Minn.), 95-94 OT; LOST at Carleton, 76-78; LOST to St. Scholastica, 76-87
T#40	18	Drew	4-2	won at FDU-Florham, 100-70; LOST to (n) #26 TCNJ, 102-103 OT; LOST at Farmingdale State, 72-74; def. York (N.Y.), 115-65; won at Moravian, 82-75; def. Goucher, 96-76
#42	13	St. Joseph (Conn.)	2-1	def. T#49 Clark, 67-65; LOST to Middlebury, 63-64; def. T#54 Babson, 79-76
T#43	11	UW-Whitewater	3-2	won at Carroll, 77-71; LOST to (n) Cornell, 73-75 OT; def. (n) St. Olaf, 83-80; won at Aurora, 75-72; LOST to T#30 Coe, 60-74
T#43	11	Whitworth	4-0	def. East Texas Baptist, 84-69; def. Benedictine, 90-59; won at #24 Cal Lutheran, 81-76; won at Caltech, 87-44
T#45	9	Utica	5-1	def. (n) Lehman, 67-63; won at Rochester Tech, 73-67; def. Buffalo State, 80-63; won at SUNY Potsdam, 87-59; LOST to Ithaca, 78-82; def. Morrisville State, 82-59
T#45	9	Redlands	2-1	def. Schreiner, 116-100; def. (n) George Fox, 105-97; LOST at Pacific, 83-89
T#45	9	WPI	5-0	def. Worcester State, 99-55; def. St. Joseph's (Maine), 80-73; def. Amherst, 74-60; won at Mass-Dartmouth, 80-74; def. Salem State, 63-60
#48	6	Wooster	4-0	def. Yeshiva, 85-64; won at Otterbein, 88-77; def. La Roche, 84-58; def. #19 Mount Union, 79-73
T#49	4	Carthage	2-2	won at Illinois Tech, 82-56; def. Alma, 89-56; LOST at #2 UW-Platteville, 72-85; LOST at Anderson, 74-88
T#49	4	Clark	2-3	def. Roger Williams, 84-82; LOST at #42 St. Joseph (Conn.), 65-67; LOST at Nichols, 74-81; LOST at Middlebury, 68-75; def. Baruch, 79-69
T#49	4	Gustavus Adolphus	3-1	LOST to T#56 UW-La Crosse, 77-81; won at UW-Eau Claire, 86-80 OT; def. Central, 75-73; def. Simpson, 77-66
T#49	4	Catholic	4-1	won at T#54 Stevens, 78-76; LOST to (n) T#56 Stockton, 77-80; won at #35 Widener, 79-67; won at Elizabethtown, 89-71; won at Wilkes, 78-72
T#49	4	Johns Hopkins	3-2	won at Marymount, 75-69; def. York (Pa.), 70-56; LOST at Salisbury, 66-69; def. (n) #3 John Carroll, 84-69; LOST to (n) T#56 UW-La Crosse, 59-76
T#54	3	Stevens	3-2	LOST to T#49 Catholic, 76-78; won at St. Joseph's (L.I.), 90-59; def. Scranton, 83-55; won at New Jersey City, 62-53; LOST at Middlebury, 65-76
T#54	3	Babson	1-3	LOST at #22 New York University, 74-86; def. (n) Ithaca, 64-60; LOST at #42 St. Joseph (Conn.), 76-79; LOST to Mass-Dartmouth, 82-87
T#56	2	Heidelberg	3-2	def. (n) Wabash, 82-78; LOST to (n) Mary Hardin-Baylor, 75-79; LOST to Manchester, 88-92; def. #9 Calvin, 85-78; def. Kenyon, 80-59
T#56	2	Stockton	3-1	def. (n) T#49 Catholic, 80-77; def. (n) Hamilton, 84-71; LOST at T#33 Swarthmore, 63-73; won at Eastern, 100-94
T#56	2	UW-La Crosse	4-1	won at T#49 Gustavus Adolphus, 81-77; LOST to (n) #14 Nebraska Wesleyan, 73-82; def. North Park, 91-62; def. (n) Marietta, 99-75; def. (n) T#49 Johns Hopkins, 76-59
#59	1	SUNY New Paltz	3-0	won at John Jay, 80-76; won at Vassar, 79-71; won at Bard, 75-66

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WPI89 on November 24, 2024, 09:47:26 PM

Incredible amount of work in that Darryl, much appreciated!

Is thr first in season T25 this week?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WashedUp1 on November 25, 2024, 03:50:23 PM

First time in a long time doing a Top 25... But here is how I see it so far in 2024-25...

1) Trine
2) Hampden Sydney
3) Trinity (CT)
4) Randoplh-Macon [probably too high but played H-S close and got a lot of faith in them over the next few months continuing to get W's]
5) Emory
6) Keene State
7) Tufts
8) NYU
9) St. John's (MN)
10) Christopher Newport
11) Wash U
12) Guilford
13) Wisconsin Lutheran
14) Illinois Wesleyan
15) UW LaCrosse
16) WPI
17) Catholic
18) Wooster
19) TCNJ
20) John Carroll
21) Williams
22) Oswego State
23) Trinity (TX)
24) Mount Union
25) St. Thomas (TX)

Next up: Wesleyan (CT), Johnny Hopkins & Gettysburg

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on November 25, 2024, 06:10:50 PM

Quote from: y_jack_lok on November 24, 2024, 02:48:59 PMI predict the following pre-season top 25 teams will not be in the top 25 after the week 1 vote:

John Carroll
Randolph-Macon
Calvin
Nebraska Wesleyan
Mount Union
Maryville (TN)
Hope
Cal Lutheran

Possible replacements (this is NOT a prediction, as there are many other viable candidates) include, in no particular order:

Gettysburg
Anderson
Hood
UW-LaCrosse
Marietta
UW-Stevens Point
TCNJ
St. Thomas (TX)

So I correctly identified seven teams that dropped out of the top 25. John Carroll remains in, but Williams also dropped out.

Of the eight new teams in I correctly identified five -- Gettysburg, TCNJ, UW-LaCrosse, Hood, and Anderson. The three other new teams are Whitworth, WPI, and Wooster.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 01, 2024, 05:18:57 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	623	Trine	7-0	won at Ohio Wesleyan, 86-82; won at Capital, 85-55
#2	578	Washington U.	6-0	def. (n) Colorado College, 69-63; won at Rhodes, 60-54
#3	556	Emory	5-0	def. Piedmont, 103-74
#4	497	Illinois Wesleyan	6-0	won at Chicago, 80-74
#5	491	Trinity (Conn.)	6-0	won at Western New England, 60-57; def. T#51 Yeshiva, 84-43
#6	426	UW-Platteville	6-1	def. #32 Augustana, 77-50; def. Heidelberg, 87-75; def. Gustavus Adolphus, 65-52
#7	411	Keene State	4-0	def. MIT, 89-60
#8	406	Tufts	5-1	def. MIT, 80-68; LOST to #20 WPI, 61-74
#9	381	Trinity (Texas)	4-1	won at Pomona-Pitzer, 73-71; LOST at T#53 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 65-87
#10	379	Christopher Newport	7-2	LOST at Averett, 65-80; def. Transylvania, 81-61; def. Franklin and Marshall, 72-64
#11	372	Wisconsin Lutheran	6-0	won at Concordia (Wis.), 85-67
#12	357	Gettysburg	7-0	IDLE
#13	338	Hampden-Sydney	4-1	IDLE
#14	310	New York University	5-0	won at Farmingdale State, 70-61
#15	257	St. John's	4-2	LOST to #21 UW-La Crosse, 71-80
#16	209	Wooster	5-0	def. Oberlin, 92-80
#17	204	Guilford	4-1	def. William Peace, 96-63
#18	141	TCNJ	6-0	won at William Paterson, 95-55
#19	138	John Carroll	3-2	IDLE
#20	130	WPI	7-0	def. Fitchburg State, 79-60; won at #8 Tufts, 74-61
#21	128	UW-La Crosse	5-1	won at #15 St. John's, 80-71
#22	118	Carnegie Mellon	5-1	IDLE
#23	89	Whitworth	4-0	IDLE
#24	66	Hood	4-2	LOST at Shenandoah, 89-99; LOST at St. Vincent, 88-99
#25	64	Anderson	4-2	LOST at North Park, 64-72

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	52	Randolph-Macon	2-2	IDLE
#27	50	Williams	5-1	won at Massachusetts College, 83-69; def. Rhode Island College, 76-56
#28	43	Middlebury	5-0	def. Plattsburgh State, 90-60; won at Endicott, 90-78
#29	41	St. Thomas (Texas)	5-0	IDLE
#30	39	Illinois College	5-1	IDLE
#31	37	UW-Stevens Point	6-0	def. Northland, 77-52; def. St. Olaf, 72-50
#32	23	Augustana	4-1	LOST at #6 UW-Platteville, 50-77; def. Hamline, 60-57
#33	22	Nebraska Wesleyan	5-2	def. Northwestern (Minn.), 81-57; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 76-70 2OT
#34	17	Virginia Wesleyan	3-2	LOST to Salisbury, 69-72
#35	16	Marietta	4-1	IDLE
T#36	15	Wesleyan (Conn.)	6-0	def. Emmanuel, 82-59; def. Farmingdale State, 77-62
T#36	15	Catholic	5-1	won at T#43 Marymount, 72-69
#38	11	Cal Lutheran	2-2	def. UC Santa Cruz, 81-65
#39	10	Oswego	4-1	won at Nazareth, 86-68
T#40	9	Rochester	5-2	LOST at Hobart, 61-66
T#40	9	Johns Hopkins	3-3	LOST to Eastern, 74-78
#42	6	Chapman	5-1	IDLE
T#43	5	Loras	4-1	def. Coe, 90-74
T#43	5	Roanoke	5-1	def. Randolph, 88-82
T#43	5	Marymount	5-2	LOST to T#36 Catholic, 69-72
T#46	4	North Central (Ill.)	5-1	def. Benedictine, 86-78 OT; won at Illinois Tech, 74-60
T#46	4	Stockton	4-1	def. Kean, 94-87
T#46	4	UW-Oshkosh	5-1	def. Edgewood, 72-59
T#46	4	Denison	4-0	def. Otterbein, 58-44
#50	3	Schreiner	5-1	IDLE
T#51	2	St. Joseph (Conn.)	4-2	won at Nichols, 85-62; LOST to (n) Franklin and Marshall, 39-59; def. (n) Transylvania, 77-61
T#51	2	Yeshiva	3-2	LOST at #5 Trinity (Conn.), 43-84
T#53	1	Brandeis	5-1	LOST to Babson, 63-77
T#53	1	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	6-2	def. La Verne, 94-67; def. (n) Southwestern, 75-46; def. #9 Trinity (Texas), 87-65
T#53	1	SUNY New Paltz	4-0	won at Hunter, 90-60

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 02, 2024, 07:25:47 PM

https://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2024-25/week2

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 08, 2024, 04:21:34 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

~~#16 Tufts vs. Brandeis result will be added when available.~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	624	Trine	7-1	LOST at #27 UW-Stevens Point, 62-65
#2	574	Washington U.	8-0	def. Colby, 89-77; def. UC Santa Cruz, 91-72
#3	568	Emory	8-0	def. Oglethorpe, 103-63; def. (n) #21 Middlebury, 78-65; def. (n) Bowdoin, 69-59
#4	542	Trinity (Conn.)	8-0	def. Regis (Mass.), 78-55; def. Anna Maria, 93-51
#5	535	Illinois Wesleyan	7-1	LOST to Carthage, 68-77; won at Carroll, 70-66
#6	452	UW-Platteville	7-1	def. Hope, 71-64
#7	433	Keene State	4-1	LOST at #16 Tufts, 84-88
#8	412	Gettysburg	8-1	won at Stevenson, 72-62; LOST to Salisbury, 78-84 OT
#9	400	Wisconsin Lutheran	7-0	def. Concordia-Chicago, 91-67
#10	338	New York University	7-0	def. Marywood, 82-57; def. Connecticut College, 88-46
#11	337	WPI	8-1	def. Salve Regina, 86-65; LOST at Babson, 60-71
#12	321	Hampden-Sydney	6-1	def. T#39 Roanoke, 85-80; won at T#28 Randolph-Macon, 79-72
#13	310	Wooster	7-0	won at Hiram, 74-59; won at Case Western Reserve, 83-76
#14	252	UW-La Crosse	6-2	won at Bethany Lutheran, 99-97; LOST to Calvin, 57-58
#15	251	TCNJ	6-2	LOST to T#39 Stockton, 99-105; LOST at Kean, 77-82
#16	240	Tufts	9-1	won at Emmanuel, 86-51; def. #7 Keene State, 88-84; def. Rochester, 77-57; def. Brandeis, 87-72
#17	201	Guilford	5-2	LOST at T#28 Randolph-Macon, 55-86; won at Randolph, 91-82
#18	189	Christopher Newport	9-2	def. Marymount, 94-76; def. Mary Baldwin, 96-76
#19	176	Trinity (Texas)	4-1	IDLE
#20	129	Whitworth	6-0	def. Belhaven, 66-64; def. Hardin-Simmons, 77-73
#21	113	Middlebury	6-2	def. New England College, 76-64; LOST to (n) #3 Emory, 65-78; LOST at #22 Carnegie Mellon, 75-80
#22	102	Carnegie Mellon	7-1	def. Bowdoin, 69-66; def. #21 Middlebury, 80-75
#23	101	St. John's	6-2	def. St. Olaf, 75-60; def. Carleton, 72-66
#24	78	John Carroll	3-4	LOST to #42 Mount Union, 82-93; LOST to Ohio Northern, 84-85
#25	44	Williams	6-2	won at T#46 SUNY New Paltz, 74-59; LOST to #31 Wesleyan, 45-57

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	42	St. Thomas (Texas)	6-1	LOST at Mary Hardin-Baylor, 53-78; def. East Texas Baptist, 88-53
#27	40	UW-Stevens Point	7-0	def. #1 Trine, 65-62
T#28	37	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	7-2	def. Whittier, 93-71
T#28	37	Randolph-Macon	3-3	def. #17 Guilford, 86-55; LOST to #12 Hampden-Sydney, 72-79
#30	31	Averett	5-2	LOST at Ferrum, 54-66; LOST to Virginia Wesleyan, 50-67
#31	29	Wesleyan	9-0	won at Worcester State, 78-49; won at Lasell, 93-57; won at #25 Williams, 57-45
#32	25	Cal Lutheran	4-2	def. Pomona-Pitzer, 76-66; def. Redlands, 73-71
#33	22	Illinois College	6-2	LOST to Cornell, 67-71; def. Ripon, 65-52
#34	19	Nebraska Wesleyan	6-2	def. Luther, 69-54
T#35	18	RPI	8-0	won at St. Lawrence, 47-38; won at Clarkson, 71-56
T#35	18	Marietta	5-1	def. Wilmington, 71-57
T#35	18	Denison	6-1	def. Oberlin, 97-56; LOST to (n) UC Santa Cruz, 80-83 OT; def. (n) Colby, 86-76
#38	15	Catholic	7-1	def. Susquehanna, 75-51; def. Moravian, 73-49
T#39	12	Roanoke	5-2	LOST at #12 Hampden-Sydney, 80-85
T#39	12	Stockton	6-1	won at #15 TCNJ, 105-99; def. William Paterson, 81-55
#41	10	UW-Oshkosh	7-1	won at Ripon, 91-83; def. Calvin, 73-69
#42	5	Mount Union	5-2	won at #24 John Carroll, 93-82; def. Capital, 71-65
#43	4	Oswego State	6-1	def. SUNY Oneonta, 83-70; won at SUNY-Canton, 98-70
T#44	3	Anderson	6-2	won at Franklin, 99-85; def. Berea, 91-72
T#44	3	Schreiner	5-1	IDLE
T#46	1	Augustana	5-2	won at Elmhurst, 77-66; LOST at T#46 North Central (Ill.), 69-76
T#46	1	SUNY New Paltz	6-1	LOST to #25 Williams, 59-74; def. Fredonia, 75-60; def. Buffalo State, 84-68
T#46	1	North Central (Ill.)	6-2	LOST to Millikin, 67-73; def. T#46 Augustana, 76-69

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WashedUp1 on December 12, 2024, 08:28:04 AM

It's a little bit of an eye chart but I was curious as we head into finals and winter break at most schools, how the D3 poll stacked up when compared to Massey and D3 Datacast rankings...

Team	D3Hoops	Massey	D3 Datacast	Composite
Emory	1	1	3	1.7
Trinity (CT)	3	3	2	2.7
NYU	7	4	1	4.0
Trine	4	8	4	5.3
WashU	2	6	10	6.0
Hampden-Sydney	9	2	9	6.7
Wesleyan	17	5	5	9.0
Tufts	11	10	8	9.7
UW-Platteville	5	7	25	12.3
Wooster	8	9	22	13.0
Keene State	12	14	16	14.0
Wisconsin Lutheran	6	11	30	15.7
Catholic	24	22	6	17.3
WPI	16	23	13	17.3
UW-Lacrosse	20	15	19	18.0
Illinois-Wesleyan	10	17	29	18.7
St. John's	21	20	21	20.7
Stockton	23	19	24	22.0
Randolph Macon	45	12	11	22.7
Christopher Newport	18	21	36	25.0
UW-Stevens Point	14	25	37	25.3
UW-Oshkosh	26	13	47	28.7
Carnegie Mellon	19	32	39	30.0
Whitworth	15	16	63	31.3
Roanoke	46	34	15	31.7

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 15, 2024, 05:48:53 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

If we're on the same schedule as last year, the next poll is still two weeks away ... but here's what happened in the last week. ~~(#10 Illinois Wesleyan vs. Elmhurst result still pending.)~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	607	Emory	8-0	IDLE
#2	598	Washington U.	9-0	won at Fontbonne, 107-57
#3	561	Trinity (Conn.)	9-0	def. St. Joseph (Conn.), 86-60
#4	551	Trine	7-1	IDLE
#5	501	UW-Platteville	8-1	won at Central, 87-64
#6	435	Wisconsin Lutheran	7-1	LOST at Illinois Tech, 62-63
#7	428	New York University	8-0	def. Yeshiva, 89-53
#8	414	Wooster	8-0	def. DePauw, 84-53
#9	413	Hampden-Sydney	7-1	def. William Peace, 97-59
#10	391	Illinois Wesleyan	8-1	def. Elmhurst, 86-68
#11	353	Tufts	9-1	IDLE
#12	315	Keene State	6-1	def. Plymouth State, 93-63; won at Southern Maine, 116-81
#13	279	Gettysburg	8-1	IDLE
#14	278	UW-Stevens Point	8-0	def. Olivet, 73-36
#15	258	Whitworth	6-0	IDLE
#16	239	WPI	8-1	IDLE
#17	199	Wesleyan	9-0	IDLE
#18	185	Christopher Newport	9-2	IDLE
#19	177	Carnegie Mellon	7-1	IDLE
#20	134	UW-La Crosse	6-2	IDLE
#21	128	St. John's	8-2	won at Minnesota-Morris, 87-60; won at St. Mary's (Minn.), 75-61
#22	96	Trinity (Texas)	5-1	won at #42 Hardin-Simmons, 78-71
#23	75	Stockton	8-1	def. New Jersey City, 87-82; won at Rutgers-Newark, 63-60
#24	65	Catholic	7-1	IDLE
#25	64	Guilford	6-2	def. Methodist, 70-63

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	61	UW-Oshkosh	7-1	IDLE
#27	43	Cal Lutheran	6-2	def. (n) T#32 Mary Hardin-Baylor, 80-73; won at Whitman, 98-87
#28	34	Marietta	5-2	LOST at John Carroll, 74-78
#29	30	RPI	8-0	IDLE
#30	29	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	7-2	IDLE
#31	26	Carthage	7-2	won at Augustana, 82-70
T#32	20	Mary Hardin-Baylor	8-2	won at Whitman, 76-70; LOST to (n) #27 Cal Lutheran, 73-80
T#32	20	Nebraska Wesleyan	7-2	def. Dubuque, 74-72
#34	15	Williams	6-2	IDLE
#35	14	Oswego	6-1	IDLE
#36	12	St. Thomas (Texas)	7-1	def. Colorado College, 85-67
#37	11	Ferrum	7-1	LOST at Virginia Wesleyan, 45-65
T#38	10	Middlebury	6-2	IDLE
T#38	10	TCNJ	7-3	def. Rutgers-Camden, 76-62; LOST at Ramapo, 76-88
T#40	9	Illinois College	6-3	LOST at Lawrence, 75-77 2OT
T#40	9	Anderson	6-3	LOST at Rose-Hulman, 91-94
#42	7	Hardin-Simmons	4-5	LOST to #22 Trinity (Texas), 71-78
#43	6	Mount Union	6-2	won at Wilmington, 70-69
T#44	5	Denison	7-1	won at Case Western Reserve, 80-72
T#44	5	Randolph-Macon	3-3	IDLE
T#46	2	Roanoke	5-2	IDLE
T#46	2	Schreiner	7-1	won at Pacific, 85-83; won at George Fox, 94-87

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on December 18, 2024, 08:04:59 AM

Next poll: Jan. 7

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on December 22, 2024, 01:23:42 PM

How They Fared (So Far)

This includes a list of upcoming games between now and the next poll.

UMHB vs Albion currently underway, but I won't bother to wait for that score (or to edit it in later) as this is just a preliminary report anyway.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	612	Emory	8-0	12/29 vs. Kean; 12/30 vs. Union; 01/04 at #18 Christopher Newport
#2	588	Washington U.	9-1	LOST at #9 Illinois Wesleyan, 68-84; 01/04 at Wabash
#3	579	Trinity (Conn.)	9-0	12/30 vs. SUNY Geneseo; 12/31 vs. TBA; 12/31 vs. TBA; 01/04 at Babson
#4	522	Trine	7-1	12/28 at Franklin; 12/30 vs. Manchester; 01/04 vs. Illinois Tech
#5	495	UW-Platteville	8-1	12/29 vs. Bethany Lutheran; 12/30 vs. St. Norbert/Lake Forest; 01/04 at #11 UW-Stevens Point
#6	448	Wooster	10-0	def. (n) Johnson and Wales, 84-63; won at Hawaii Pacific, 45-43; 12/29 vs. Pitt-Bradford; 12/30 vs. Babson; 01/04 vs. Wittenberg
#7	433	Hampden-Sydney	9-2	def. Shenandoah, 80-63; LOST to John Carroll, 61-74; def. Eastern, 95-74; 01/04 at Lynchburg
#8	431	New York University	8-0	12/29 vs. SUNY-Purchase; 12/30 vs. TBA; 01/04 vs. Drew
#9	427	Illinois Wesleyan	9-1	def. #2 Washington U., 84-68; 12/29 vs. LeTourneau; 12/30 at T#35 Mary Hardin-Baylor; 01/04 at Wheaton (Ill.)
#10	383	Tufts	9-1	12/29 at Clark; 12/30 vs. Nichols; 01/02 at Yeshiva; 01/04 at Widener
#11	341	UW-Stevens Point	9-1	def. (n) #18 Christopher Newport, 70-68; LOST to (n) T#42 Randolph-Macon, 50-51; 12/30 vs. North Park; 01/04 vs. #5 UW-Platteville
#12	329	Keene State	6-1	12/29 at #26 UW-Oshkosh; 12/30 vs. #20 UW-La Crosse; 01/04 vs. Connecticut College
#13	303	Gettysburg	8-1	12/29 vs. Mary Washington; 12/30 at DeSales; 01/04 at #22 Stockton
#14	276	Whitworth	9-0	won at Southwestern, 87-64; won at T#40 Schreiner, 79-66; won at Texas Lutheran, 85-64; 01/03 vs. Pacific Lutheran; 01/04 vs. Puget Sound
#15	243	WPI	8-1	12/30 at Suffolk; 12/31 vs. TBA
#16	241	Wesleyan	11-0	def. (n) Wentworth, 83-62; def. (n) Widener, 94-65; 12/30 at Yeshiva; 01/04 vs. Amherst
#17	216	Wisconsin Lutheran	9-1	def. (n) Southwestern, 73-60; won at #23 Trinity (Texas), 79-70; 12/31 vs. Augustana; 01/04 vs. Marian
#18	205	Christopher Newport	10-3	LOST to (n) #11 UW-Stevens Point, 68-70; def. (n) Elmhurst, 82-80; 12/29 vs. Misericordia; 12/30 vs. TBA; 01/04 vs. #1 Emory
#19	163	Carnegie Mellon	7-2	LOST to Washington and Jefferson, 73-84; 01/04 at Ithaca
#20	149	UW-La Crosse	7-2	def. Ripon, 86-74; 12/29 vs. Hamline; 12/30 vs. #12 Keene State; 01/04 vs. T#40 UW-Eau Claire
#21	127	St. John's	10-2	def. (n) Marymount, 71-55; def. (n) Rowan, 91-66; 01/04 vs. Hamline
#22	120	Stockton	9-2	def. (n) Marywood, 92-63; LOST at York (Pa.), 94-96 OT; 01/04 vs. #13 Gettysburg
#23	94	Trinity (Texas)	6-2	def. Illinois College, 72-69; LOST to #17 Wisconsin Lutheran, 70-79; 12/31 at T#40 Schreiner; 01/04 vs. Rochester
#24	78	Catholic	8-2	LOST to Rowan, 71-85; def. Marymount, 68-50; 01/04 at Mary Washington
#25	56	Cal Lutheran	7-2	def. Lewis and Clark, 83-79; 12/29 vs. Oberlin; 12/30 vs. Messiah; 01/04 at Chapman

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	48	UW-Oshkosh	7-2	LOST at St. Norbert, 69-85; 12/29 vs. #12 Keene State; 12/30 vs. Hamline; 01/04 at UW-Stout
#27	35	Guilford	7-2	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 79-56; 12/29 vs. Sewanee; 12/30 vs. Belhaven; 01/04 at Ferrum
#28	32	RPI	8-0	12/29 vs. SUNY-Canton; 12/30 at St. John Fisher; 01/04 at Hobart
#29	26	Nebraska Wesleyan	7-2	12/29 vs. Pacific; 12/30 vs. Southern Maine; 01/04 at Loras
#30	23	Carthage	8-3	LOST to (n) Chatham, 60-62; def. (n) Spalding, 86-64; 01/04 vs. North Park
#31	20	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	7-2	12/30 vs. St. Mary's (Minn.); 01/04 vs. Swarthmore
#32	19	Oswego	6-1	01/03 vs. York (Pa.); 01/04 vs. TBA
#33	14	St. Thomas (Texas)	8-1	def. Pacific Lutheran, 81-65; 01/04 at Colorado College; 01/05 at UC Santa Cruz
#34	13	Denison	7-1	12/29 vs. Hanover; 12/30 vs. Olivet; 01/02 vs. Ohio Wesleyan; 01/04 at Kenyon
T#35	6	Mount Union	6-2	12/28 vs. Ramapo; 12/29 vs. Redlands; 01/04 at Otterbein
T#35	6	Mary Hardin-Baylor	8-3	LOST at Transylvania, 63-70; 12/22 vs. Albion; 12/29 vs. Concordia-Moorhead; 12/30 vs. #9 Illinois Wesleyan
T#37	5	Middlebury	6-2	12/30 vs. Brandeis; 01/03 vs. Vassar; 01/04 vs. TBA
T#37	5	Virginia Wesleyan	8-2	12/30 at Franklin and Marshall; 01/04 at Salisbury
#39	4	Hardin-Simmons	4-7	LOST at Colorado College, 76-95; LOST to (n) Willamette, 69-84; 12/27 vs. Redlands; 12/29 vs. SUNY New Paltz; 12/30 vs. Wittenberg; 01/04 at Concordia (Texas)
T#40	3	Schreiner	7-2	LOST to #14 Whitworth, 66-79; 12/31 vs. #23 Trinity (Texas)
T#40	3	UW-Eau Claire	7-3	12/30 vs. Carleton; 01/04 at #20 UW-La Crosse
T#42	2	Randolph-Macon	6-3	won at Eastern Mennonite, 80-60; def. (n) Elmhurst, 71-43; def. (n) #11 UW-Stevens Point, 51-50; 12/28 vs. Stevenson; 12/29 vs. TBA; 01/04 vs. Averett
T#42	2	Roanoke	7-2	def. (n) Montclair State, 93-73; def. (n) Coast Guard, 81-57; 12/29 vs. Bryn Athyn; 12/30 vs. TBA; 01/04 at Bridgewater (Va.)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on December 23, 2024, 04:20:05 AM

Just to add in the missing info until Darryl Nester does a new report next week--

12/22-- T #35 (6) Mary Hardin-Baylor def.(n) Albion, 63-47

Consolation game of the 2024 Don Lane Classic from Transylvania U in Lexington, Kentucky.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 05, 2025, 02:24:41 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

This report includes all results since the last poll (12/16 through 1/5), with one result pending:
St. Thomas (Texas) vs. UC Santa Cruz at Colorado College, set to tip at 4pm EST.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	612	Emory	10-1	def. Kean, 93-66; def. Union, 77-71; LOST at #18 Christopher Newport, 76-83
#2	588	Washington U.	10-1	LOST at #9 Illinois Wesleyan, 68-84; won at Wabash, 68-60
#3	579	Trinity (Conn.)	11-1	def. SUNY Geneseo, 72-44; def. Suffolk, 70-56; LOST at Babson, 89-99 2OT
#4	522	Trine	10-1	won at Franklin, 65-50; def. Manchester, 58-37; def. Illinois Tech, 75-57
#5	495	UW-Platteville	11-1	def. (n) Bethany Lutheran, 101-61; won at St. Norbert, 60-54 OT; won at #11 UW-Stevens Point, 79-64
#6	448	Wooster	12-1	def. (n) Johnson and Wales, 84-63; won at Hawaii Pacific, 45-43; def. Pitt-Bradford, 114-96; LOST to Babson, 61-69; def. Wittenberg, 67-57
#7	433	Hampden-Sydney	10-2	def. Shenandoah, 80-63; LOST to John Carroll, 61-74; def. Eastern, 95-74; won at Lynchburg, 78-67
#8	431	New York University	11-0	def. SUNY-Purchase, 74-54; def. Williams, 81-62; def. Drew, 75-67
#9	427	Illinois Wesleyan	11-2	def. #2 Washington U., 84-68; def. (n) LeTourneau, 85-67; LOST at T#35 Mary Hardin-Baylor, 77-78; won at Wheaton (Ill.), 85-80 OT
#10	383	Tufts	12-2	won at Clark, 87-61; LOST to (n) Nichols, 71-72; won at Yeshiva, 82-74; won at Widener, 78-64
#11	341	UW-Stevens Point	10-2	def. (n) #18 Christopher Newport, 70-68; LOST to (n) T#42 Randolph-Macon, 50-51; def. North Park, 90-73; LOST to #5 UW-Platteville, 64-79
#12	329	Keene State	7-3	LOST at #26 UW-Oshkosh, 76-105; LOST to (n) #20 UW-La Crosse, 66-81; def. Connecticut College, 69-64
#13	303	Gettysburg	9-3	LOST to (n) Mary Washington, 69-79; won at DeSales, 80-78; LOST at #22 Stockton, 85-96
#14	276	Whitworth	10-1	won at T#40 Schreiner, 79-66; won at Texas Lutheran, 85-64; LOST to Pacific Lutheran, 73-75; def. Puget Sound, 97-88
#15	243	WPI	9-2	LOST to (n) Suffolk, 53-65; def. (n) SUNY Geneseo, 79-48
#16	241	Wesleyan	13-0	def. (n) Wentworth, 83-62; def. (n) Widener, 94-65; won at Yeshiva, 72-55; def. Amherst, 82-69
#17	216	Wisconsin Lutheran	11-1	def. (n) Southwestern, 73-60; won at #23 Trinity (Texas), 79-70; def. Augustana, 68-54; def. Marian, 76-48
#18	205	Christopher Newport	13-3	LOST to (n) #11 UW-Stevens Point, 68-70; def. (n) Elmhurst, 82-80; def. Misericordia, 81-50; def. Berry, 79-71; def. #1 Emory, 83-76
#19	163	Carnegie Mellon	8-2	LOST to Washington and Jefferson, 73-84; won at Ithaca, 87-73
#20	149	UW-La Crosse	10-2	def. Ripon, 86-74; def. (n) Hamline, 70-63; def. (n) #12 Keene State, 81-66; def. T#40 UW-Eau Claire, 69-55
#21	127	St. John's	11-2	def. (n) Marymount, 71-55; def. (n) Rowan, 91-66; def. Hamline, 79-61
#22	120	Stockton	10-2	def. (n) Marywood, 92-63; LOST at York (Pa.), 94-96 OT; def. #13 Gettysburg, 96-85
#23	94	Trinity (Texas)	7-3	def. Illinois College, 72-69; LOST to #17 Wisconsin Lutheran, 70-79; LOST at T#40 Schreiner, 81-84; def. Rochester, 97-59
#24	78	Catholic	9-2	LOST to Rowan, 71-85; def. Marymount, 68-50; won at Mary Washington, 63-51
#25	56	Cal Lutheran	9-3	def. Lewis and Clark, 83-79; def. Oberlin, 84-63; def. Messiah, 81-46; LOST at Chapman, 71-79

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	48	UW-Oshkosh	9-3	LOST at St. Norbert, 69-85; def. #12 Keene State, 105-76; def. Hamline, 74-65; LOST at UW-Stout, 57-64
#27	35	Guilford	9-3	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 79-56; def. Sewanee, 90-68; LOST to Belhaven, 51-54; won at Ferrum, 63-59
#28	32	RPI	9-2	def. (n) SUNY-Canton, 62-48; LOST at St. John Fisher, 62-74; LOST at Hobart, 50-64
#29	26	Nebraska Wesleyan	9-3	def. (n) Pacific, 85-70; def. (n) Southern Maine, 84-61; LOST at Loras, 45-80
#30	23	Carthage	8-4	LOST to (n) Chatham, 60-62; def. (n) Spalding, 86-64; LOST to North Park, 68-69
#31	20	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	8-3	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 87-49; LOST to Swarthmore, 51-60
#32	19	Oswego	6-3	LOST to (n) York (Pa.), 71-78; LOST at Stevens, 67-82
#33	14	St. Thomas (Texas)	10-1	def. Pacific Lutheran, 81-65; won at Colorado College, 73-70; def. (n) UC Santa Cruz, 87-73
#34	13	Denison	11-1	def. (n) Hanover, 82-70; def. (n) Olivet, 78-67; def. Ohio Wesleyan, 92-63; won at Kenyon, 72-57
T#35	6	Mount Union	7-4	LOST to (n) Ramapo, 64-65; LOST to (n) Redlands, 69-91; won at Otterbein, 71-63
T#35	6	Mary Hardin-Baylor	11-3	LOST at Transylvania, 63-70; def. (n) Albion, 63-47; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 73-61; def. #9 Illinois Wesleyan, 78-77
T#37	5	Middlebury	7-4	LOST to Brandeis, 81-93; def. Vassar, 99-87; LOST to St. Joseph's (Maine), 82-93
T#37	5	Virginia Wesleyan	10-2	won at Franklin and Marshall, 70-66; won at Salisbury, 61-56
#39	4	Hardin-Simmons	7-8	LOST at Colorado College, 76-95; LOST to (n) Willamette, 69-84; LOST to (n) Redlands, 89-97; def. (n) SUNY New Paltz, 83-74; def. (n) Wittenberg, 64-53; won at Concordia (Texas), 107-78
T#40	3	Schreiner	8-2	LOST to #14 Whitworth, 66-79; def. #23 Trinity (Texas), 84-81
T#40	3	UW-Eau Claire	8-4	def. Carleton, 76-73; LOST at #20 UW-La Crosse, 55-69
T#42	2	Randolph-Macon	9-3	def. (n) Elmhurst, 71-43; def. (n) #11 UW-Stevens Point, 51-50; def. Stevenson, 79-48; def. Ursinus, 97-54; def. Averett, 77-54
T#42	2	Roanoke	9-3	won at Montclair State, 93-73; won at Coast Guard, 81-57; def. Bryn Athyn, 103-65; LOST to Maryville (Tenn.), 79-83; won at Bridgewater (Va.), 70-48

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 06, 2025, 12:32:52 AM

It may be a dumb decision, but I recorded the process of putting my ballot together tonight.

https://youtu.be/-G7MW5ORjTU

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on January 06, 2025, 08:18:32 AM

So #3 Trinity (CT) and #6 Wooster both lost to Babson, which was no receiving votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: deiscanton on January 06, 2025, 08:46:12 AM

Quote from: y_jack_lok on January 06, 2025, 08:18:32 AMSo #3 Trinity (CT) and #6 Wooster both lost to Babson, which was no receiving votes.

Babson will probably at least be in the RV category this week, if not in the Top 25. D3Datacast has Babson's NPI over 60 as of this morning's run. (#21 in DIII, #1 among NEWMAC teams in NPI unofficially as of the 7:10 AM ET run this morning.)

8:56 AM ET update-- Babson will definitely at least be in the RV category this evening, as the D3Datacast Episode 100 has just been released on Youtube this morning.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 06, 2025, 10:38:26 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 06, 2025, 12:32:52 AMIt may be a dumb decision, but I recorded the process of putting my ballot together tonight.

https://youtu.be/-G7MW5ORjTU

It's definitely more interesting than if I recorded my process of compiling the HTF report. (Run script, chase cats off laptop keyboard, copy/paste, ...)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on January 06, 2025, 08:38:26 PM

The new Top 25 poll is showing a total of 23 first place votes. Who got the other two votes? Or were there a couple of missing ballots?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on January 07, 2025, 10:29:42 AM

Quote from: y_jack_lok on January 06, 2025, 08:38:26 PMThe new Top 25 poll is showing a total of 23 first place votes. Who got the other two votes? Or were there a couple of missing ballots?

I see it got fixed. Thanks. Looks like Emory was the one missing 1st place votes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on January 07, 2025, 10:44:57 AM

It was NYU.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 12, 2025, 05:08:23 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	601	UW-Platteville	13-1	won at #14 UW-La Crosse, 83-75; def. #32 UW-Oshkosh, 79-64
#2	580	Emory	11-1	def. Rochester, 101-64
#3	572	Trine	12-1	def. Kalamazoo, 76-63; won at Olivet, 85-59
#4	527	New York University	12-0	def. Brandeis, 101-85
#5	501	Washington U.	10-1	LOST to Chicago, 66-71
#6	462	Trinity (Conn.)	13-2	def. Worcester State, 88-53; def. Middlebury, 71-54; LOST to Williams, 51-56
#7	444	Illinois Wesleyan	13-2	won at North Park, 80-69; def. North Central (Ill.), 99-91 3OT
#8	440	Hampden-Sydney	11-3	LOST at #33 Guilford, 68-77; def. Bridgewater (Va.), 75-68
#9	425	Wesleyan	16-0	won at Bridgewater State, 90-46; def. Williams, 67-61; def. Middlebury, 89-63
#10	408	Wooster	13-2	won at Kenyon, 84-71; LOST at Wabash, 48-54
#11	331	Wisconsin Lutheran	13-1	def. St. Norbert, 72-60; def. Illinois Tech, 96-48
#12	330	Christopher Newport	14-3	won at Johns Hopkins, 85-66
#13	316	Tufts	14-2	def. Bowdoin, 76-54; def. Colby, 90-82
#14	309	UW-La Crosse	11-3	LOST to #1 UW-Platteville, 75-83; won at #16 UW-Stevens Point, 84-83 OT
#15	278	St. John's	12-2	def. Bethel, 96-70
#16	264	UW-Stevens Point	11-3	won at UW-Whitewater, 86-67; LOST to #14 UW-La Crosse, 83-84 OT
#17	217	Whitworth	12-1	def. Willamette, 88-65; def. Lewis and Clark, 76-75 OT
#18	176	Randolph-Macon	11-3	def. Randolph, 95-69; won at Washington and Lee, 72-45
#19	165	Stockton	11-3	won at Rutgers-Camden, 88-59; LOST to Montclair State, 84-88
#20	79	Mary Hardin-Baylor	11-3	IDLE
#21	76	Catholic	10-3	won at Lycoming, 65-61; LOST to Drew, 71-76 OT
#22	75	WPI	11-2	def. Coast Guard, 73-60; won at Emerson, 88-65
#23	74	Redlands	11-2	def. La Verne, 88-84
#24	67	Carnegie Mellon	9-3	def. Dickinson, 101-92 OT; LOST at Case Western Reserve, 67-89
#25	59	Denison	13-1	def. Wabash, 64-58; won at Wittenberg, 56-54

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
T#26	50	Gettysburg	9-4	LOST to Johns Hopkins, 67-75
T#26	50	Keene State	9-3	def. Castleton, 101-55; won at Mass-Boston, 82-71
#28	43	Babson	8-5	LOST at Clark, 75-79; won at MIT, 103-68
T#29	42	St. Thomas (Texas)	12-1	won at Texas Lutheran, 83-71; won at Southwestern, 64-43
T#29	42	Cal Lutheran	9-3	~~01/11 at Occidental~~ postponed
#31	22	Hamilton	12-2	LOST to Franklin and Marshall, 62-65; won at Bates, 74-60
#32	21	UW-Oshkosh	9-5	LOST to UW-Eau Claire, 56-69; LOST at #1 UW-Platteville, 64-79
#33	18	Guilford	11-3	def. #8 Hampden-Sydney, 77-68; def. Eastern Mennonite, 70-39
#34	15	Virginia Wesleyan	11-3	def. Washington and Lee, 62-38; LOST at T#41 Roanoke, 67-77
#35	12	Trinity (Texas)	9-3	def. T#37 Schreiner, 83-56; def. McMurry, 76-40; def. Concordia (Texas), 88-80
#36	10	Chapman	10-4	LOST at Whittier, 67-68; LOST at Pomona-Pitzer, 60-74
T#37	6	Nebraska Wesleyan	11-3	won at Simpson, 81-60; def. Wartburg, 86-61
T#37	6	Schreiner	9-4	LOST at #35 Trinity (Texas), 56-83; def. Concordia (Texas), 84-83; LOST to McMurry, 65-67
#39	4	John Carroll	9-4	won at Otterbein, 71-59; won at Capital, 82-68
#40	3	Maryville (Tenn.)	9-4	def. Warren Wilson, 99-58; ~~01/11 at Belhaven~~ postponed
T#41	2	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	8-3	~~01/08 at Occidental~~ postponed; ~~01/11 at Caltech~~ postponed
T#41	2	Roanoke	11-3	won at Averett, 75-55; def. #34 Virginia Wesleyan, 77-67
#43	1	Anderson	11-3	won at Bluffton, 102-83; def. Mount St. Joseph, 69-66

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 19, 2025, 04:39:47 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

~~St Thomas (TX) v Concordia (TX) still underway.~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	620	UW-Platteville	15-1	def. UW-Eau Claire, 79-68; won at UW-River Falls, 75-66
#2	586	Emory	13-1	won at #4 New York University, 77-65; won at Brandeis, 88-77
#3	579	Trine	14-1	def. Alma, 77-48; def. Albion, 66-56
#4	545	New York University	13-1	LOST to #2 Emory, 65-77; def. Rochester, 79-54
#5	504	Wesleyan	18-0	won at Hamilton, 73-57; won at Amherst, 72-60
#6	485	Illinois Wesleyan	14-2	won at Millikin, 77-60
#7	406	Christopher Newport	14-4	LOST at #16 Randolph-Macon, 72-77
#8	400	Wisconsin Lutheran	14-1	won at Concordia-Chicago, 92-78
#9	369	Tufts	16-2	won at #34 Williams, 59-46; won at Middlebury, 77-57
#10	359	Hampden-Sydney	13-3	won at Washington and Lee, 69-59; won at Mary Washington, 74-69
#11	356	Washington U.	12-2	def. Case Western Reserve, 104-64; def. #36 Carnegie Mellon, 99-74
#12	346	Trinity (Conn.)	15-2	won at Amherst, 66-54; won at Hamilton, 72-60
#13	341	UW-La Crosse	13-3	won at UW-Stout, 84-77; def. #38 UW-Oshkosh, 75-62
#14	339	St. John's	14-2	won at Concordia-Moorhead, 75-60; def. St. Scholastica, 97-68
#15	240	Whitworth	13-2	LOST at George Fox, 81-87; won at Pacific, 82-74
#16	237	Randolph-Macon	13-3	def. #7 Christopher Newport, 77-72; won at Ferrum, 73-65
#17	228	Wooster	13-3	LOST at Ohio Wesleyan, 58-73
#18	195	UW-Stevens Point	13-3	won at UW-River Falls, 55-53; def. UW-Stout, 87-83 OT
#19	163	Denison	15-1	def. DePauw, 76-56; def. Hiram, 90-67
#20	143	Redlands	12-3	LOST at #41 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 97-99; def. Whittier, 87-74
#21	138	Mary Hardin-Baylor	11-4	LOST at Texas-Dallas, 69-72
#22	115	WPI	13-2	def. Clark, 58-49; def. Springfield, 64-54
#23	61	St. Thomas (Texas)	14-1	def. McMurry, 76-62; def. Concordia (Texas), 77-55
#24	59	Guilford	12-4	LOST to Virginia Wesleyan, 50-69; won at Washington and Lee, 72-51
#25	58	Stockton	12-4	LOST at Rowan, 100-106; def. Ramapo, 74-72

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	46	Cal Lutheran	11-3	won at La Verne, 95-62; def. Caltech, 95-42
#27	42	Chicago	11-3	LOST to #36 Carnegie Mellon, 57-63; def. Case Western Reserve, 71-60
#28	30	Trinity (Texas)	12-3	won at University of Dallas, 80-70; won at Austin, 82-61
#29	27	Keene State	12-3	won at Eastern Connecticut, 99-61; def. Western Connecticut, 100-62; def. Rhode Island College, 101-87
#30	15	Anderson	13-3	won at Manchester, 77-69; def. Earlham, 103-74
T#31	14	Roanoke	13-3	won at Lynchburg, 80-79; def. Shenandoah, 70-52
T#31	14	John Carroll	11-4	def. Heidelberg, 77-70; won at Muskingum, 91-64
#33	13	Catholic	12-3	won at Juniata, 72-38; won at Scranton, 82-62
#34	12	Williams	10-6	LOST to #9 Tufts, 46-59; LOST to Connecticut College, 58-62
#35	11	Nebraska Wesleyan	12-4	LOST to Central, 55-70; def. Coe, 71-59
#36	8	Carnegie Mellon	10-4	won at #27 Chicago, 63-57; LOST at #11 Washington U., 74-99
#37	6	Maryville (Tenn.)	12-4	def. Asbury, 100-61; won at LaGrange, 67-52; won at Huntingdon, 80-77
#38	5	UW-Oshkosh	9-7	LOST to UW-Whitewater, 56-59; LOST at #13 UW-La Crosse, 62-75
#39	4	Babson	9-6	def. Springfield, 70-53; LOST at Wheaton (Mass.), 71-73
#40	3	Gettysburg	11-4	won at Franklin and Marshall, 74-72; won at Ursinus, 100-88
#41	2	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	10-3	def. #20 Redlands, 99-97; def. Chapman, 71-69
#42	1	TCNJ	12-4	LOST to Montclair State, 71-78; won at New Jersey City, 74-72

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on January 26, 2025, 05:17:31 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	616	UW-Platteville	16-2	LOST to UW-Whitewater, 68-74; won at UW-Stout, 84-54
#2	598	Emory	13-3	LOST to T#38 Chicago, 70-80 OT; LOST to #11 Washington U., 63-81
#3	569	Trine	16-1	won at Adrian, 83-55; def. Hope, 77-54
#4	546	Wesleyan	19-0	won at #14 Trinity (Conn.), 72-63
#5	508	Illinois Wesleyan	16-2	def. Augustana, 82-52; def. Wheaton (Ill.), 90-68
#6	470	New York University	15-1	won at Carnegie Mellon, 96-90; won at Case Western Reserve, 80-73
#7	417	Wisconsin Lutheran	16-1	won at Marian, 79-66; def. Aurora, 91-78
#8	410	Hampden-Sydney	15-3	won at Randolph, 105-92; def. Ferrum, 78-67
#9	406	Tufts	17-2	def. Connecticut College, 71-42
#10	387	UW-La Crosse	15-3	def. UW-River Falls, 77-56; won at UW-Whitewater, 80-75
#11	380	Washington U.	14-2	won at Rochester, 99-82; won at #2 Emory, 81-63
#12	355	St. John's	15-2	won at Augsburg, 78-69
#13	342	Randolph-Macon	15-3	def. Bridgewater (Va.), 89-62; won at #27 Roanoke, 78-64
#14	337	Trinity (Conn.)	15-3	LOST to #4 Wesleyan, 63-72
#15	315	Christopher Newport	16-4	won at Cairn, 94-72; won at Pfeiffer, 99-77
#16	226	Denison	16-1	won at #26 Wooster, 77-65
#17	213	UW-Stevens Point	13-5	LOST to UW-Oshkosh, 43-60; LOST at UW-Eau Claire, 66-71
#18	152	Whitworth	15-2	def. Whitman, 69-64; def. Linfield, 77-62
#19	136	WPI	16-2	won at MIT, 104-67; won at Wheaton (Mass.), 68-55; won at Salve Regina, 58-56
#20	118	St. Thomas (Texas)	16-1	def. University of the Ozarks, 76-52; def. Centenary (La.), 70-58
#21	82	Redlands	15-3	def. Pomona-Pitzer, 94-67; won at Chapman, 80-62; won at Occidental, 87-75
#22	81	Cal Lutheran	14-3	def. Chapman, 98-88; won at T#28 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 78-76; won at Whittier, 83-78
#23	64	Keene State	15-3	def. Middlebury, 85-67; won at Mass-Dartmouth, 108-96; def. Southern Maine, 101-84
#24	54	John Carroll	13-4	won at Baldwin Wallace, 95-76; won at Ohio Northern, 64-61
#25	53	Mary Hardin-Baylor	12-5	LOST to East Texas Baptist, 63-65; def. LeTourneau, 94-71

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	50	Wooster	14-4	LOST to #16 Denison, 65-77; won at Oberlin, 83-59
#27	48	Roanoke	14-4	won at Ferrum, 98-66; LOST to #13 Randolph-Macon, 64-78
T#28	36	Trinity (Texas)	13-3	won at McMurry, 81-80; won at Concordia (Texas), 84-80
T#28	36	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	12-4	won at La Verne, 96-68; LOST to #22 Cal Lutheran, 76-78; won at Pomona-Pitzer, 72-71 2OT
#30	31	Virginia Wesleyan	15-3	won at Shenandoah, 88-62; won at Bridgewater (Va.), 62-59
#31	20	Anderson	15-3	def. Franklin, 77-62; won at Mount St. Joseph, 83-67
#32	19	Stockton	13-5	LOST at Kean, 79-89; won at William Paterson, 78-66
#33	14	Maryville (Tenn.)	13-5	def. Piedmont, 98-71; LOST to T#41 Belhaven, 83-91
#34	8	Guilford	14-4	def. Mary Washington, 72-59; def. Shenandoah, 67-63
T#35	6	Carthage	14-4	def. Carroll, 88-68; def. Augustana, 77-69
T#35	6	Catholic	14-3	def. Goucher, 80-62; def. Wilkes, 94-64
#37	4	Calvin	11-6	won at Hope, 65-60; def. Alma, 88-64
T#38	3	Chicago	13-3	won at #2 Emory, 80-70 OT; won at Rochester, 65-62
T#38	3	Drew	14-3	won at Elizabethtown, 103-77; won at Goucher, 98-69
#40	2	Hamilton	14-4	won at SUNY Potsdam, 83-60; def. Amherst, 84-60
T#41	1	Belhaven	15-3	won at Asbury, 87-74; won at #33 Maryville (Tenn.), 91-83
T#41	1	Gettysburg	13-4	won at Dickinson, 70-58; def. Swarthmore, 69-62
T#41	1	Pitt-Bradford	16-1	won at Penn State-Altoona, 90-88; won at Mount Aloysius, 130-94
T#41	1	Stevens	14-3	def. DeSales, 92-52; won at FDU-Florham, 90-67

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 02, 2025, 05:40:08 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	608	Wesleyan	21-0	def. #9 Tufts, 69-66; def. Connecticut College, 74-54
#2	603	Trine	17-2	LOST to #33 Calvin, 58-62; def. Adrian, 92-65
#3	552	Illinois Wesleyan	18-2	def. Carroll, 81-78 OT; won at Elmhurst, 77-46
#4	535	UW-Platteville	17-2	won at UW-Oshkosh, 86-73
#5	495	New York University	17-1	won at #22 Chicago, 83-66; won at #6 Washington U., 77-62
#6	468	Washington U.	15-3	def. T#35 Brandeis, 83-58; LOST to #5 New York University, 62-77
#7	440	Wisconsin Lutheran	18-1	def. Lakeland, 90-78; won at Rockford, 93-83
#8	434	Hampden-Sydney	17-3	def. Averett, 88-64; won at Eastern Mennonite, 75-44
#9	425	Tufts	17-4	LOST at #1 Wesleyan, 66-69; LOST at #16 Trinity (Conn.), 45-81
#10	399	UW-La Crosse	16-3	def. UW-Stout, 90-53
#11	391	Emory	15-3	def. Carnegie Mellon, 91-85; def. Case Western Reserve, 92-74
#12	375	St. John's	17-2	won at St. Olaf, 78-54; won at Carleton, 90-74
#13	347	Randolph-Macon	17-3	won at #25 Virginia Wesleyan, 56-49; def. Lynchburg, 80-55
#14	286	Christopher Newport	17-4	def. UC Santa Cruz, 76-57
#15	261	Denison	17-2	won at Oberlin, 72-59; LOST to Kenyon, 77-82 2OT
#16	237	Trinity (Conn.)	18-3	won at Bridgewater State, 75-51; def. Connecticut College, 60-53; def. #9 Tufts, 81-45
#17	190	Whitworth	17-2	won at Puget Sound, 60-58; won at Pacific Lutheran, 82-71
#18	165	WPI	18-2	def. Babson, 71-65; won at Coast Guard, 75-74 OT
#19	156	St. Thomas (Texas)	18-1	won at University of Dallas, 57-41; won at Austin, 75-71
#20	136	Redlands	16-3	won at Caltech, 104-52
#21	123	Cal Lutheran	16-3	won at Pomona-Pitzer, 85-83; def. Occidental, 87-76
#22	98	Chicago	14-4	LOST to #5 New York University, 66-83; def. T#35 Brandeis, 76-56
#23	92	John Carroll	14-5	def. Otterbein, 71-61; LOST at Marietta, 65-72
#24	87	Keene State	16-3	won at Plymouth State, 80-70
#25	53	Virginia Wesleyan	16-4	LOST to #13 Randolph-Macon, 49-56; def. Randolph, 96-72

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	31	Anderson	17-3	won at Earlham, 85-75; def. Transylvania, 85-74
#27	26	Trinity (Texas)	16-3	def. University of the Ozarks, 69-63; def. Centenary (La.), 76-68
#28	18	UW-Stevens Point	14-5	def. UW-Whitewater, 83-52
#29	15	Roanoke	15-4	won at Eastern Mennonite, 76-62
#30	11	Catholic	16-3	won at Susquehanna, 70-65; won at Moravian, 78-74 OT
T#31	10	Carthage	14-5	LOST at North Park, 82-93
T#31	10	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	14-4	won at Occidental, 86-68; def. Caltech, 96-67
#33	8	Calvin	13-6	won at #2 Trine, 62-58; def. Hope, 68-60
#34	7	Gustavus Adolphus	17-3	def. Macalester, 91-63; won at Augsburg, 88-68
T#35	6	Belhaven	17-3	won at LaGrange, 61-58; def. Piedmont, 82-63
T#35	6	Brandeis	12-6	LOST at #6 Washington U., 58-83; LOST at #22 Chicago, 56-76
T#35	6	Guilford	16-4	def. Lynchburg, 86-61; won at Averett, 91-71
#38	4	Stevens	16-3	won at Delaware Valley, 84-62; def. Lebanon Valley, 71-62
T#39	3	RPI	16-3	won at Rochester Tech, 78-73 OT; won at Skidmore, 75-43
T#39	3	TCNJ	15-5	LOST at Stockton, 57-85; def. Ramapo, 73-67
#41	2	Hamilton	16-4	won at Bowdoin, 75-70; won at Colby, 83-75
T#42	1	Drew	16-3	won at Scranton, 95-67; def. Lycoming, 93-62
T#42	1	Gettysburg	15-4	def. McDaniel, 69-53; def. Washington College, 83-69
T#42	1	Pitt-Bradford	17-1	def. La Roche, 101-81

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Stretch4 on February 04, 2025, 01:17:18 PM

Just an observation on this weeks Top 25 ... the three voters who gave Illinois Wesleyan their # 1 vote over Wesleyan in the latest poll either have their own agenda (I know Bob Q did not vote IWU #1 as he shares his votes on social media), or they are essentially not paying attention. One undefeated team in the country who plays in a top 3 conference in the country, and just defeated another top 10 team last week, and you give IWU who needed OT to get past a bad Carrol team last week your #1 vote? Of course IWU is a top 3 or top 5 team right now, but until Wesleyan loses a game you seriously cannot vote anyone else # 1.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 04, 2025, 02:09:10 PM

Quote from: Stretch4 on February 04, 2025, 01:17:18 PMJust an observation on this weeks Top 25 ... the three voters who gave Illinois Wesleyan their # 1 vote over Wesleyan in the latest poll either have their own agenda (I know Bob Q did not vote IWU #1 as he shares his votes on social media), or they are essentially not paying attention. One undefeated team in the country who plays in a top 3 conference in the country, and just defeated another top 10 team last week, and you give IWU who needed OT to get past a bad Carrol team last week your #1 vote? Of course IWU is a top 3 or top 5 team right now, but until Wesleyan loses a game you seriously cannot vote anyone else # 1.

They're probably looking more at IWU's wins against Top 25 teams, such as the one against Platteville. But I agree -- IWU did not look great in the Carroll game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 04, 2025, 04:43:02 PM

Quote from: Stretch4 on February 04, 2025, 01:17:18 PMJust an observation on this weeks Top 25 ... the three voters who gave Illinois Wesleyan their # 1 vote over Wesleyan in the latest poll either have their own agenda (I know Bob Q did not vote IWU #1 as he shares his votes on social media), or they are essentially not paying attention. One undefeated team in the country who plays in a top 3 conference in the country, and just defeated another top 10 team last week, and you give IWU who needed OT to get past a bad Carrol team last week your #1 vote? Of course IWU is a top 3 or top 5 team right now, but until Wesleyan loses a game you seriously cannot vote anyone else # 1.

I'm one of the three.

Wesleyan is good. They've proven on the court they're much better than I gave them credit for early on. Still, I'm not sure they're the top team. They probably have the best or second best backcourt in the country, but I'm also not entirely sure Trinity isn't ranked a little too high. I still have a few questions about them.

I voted Platteville last week, because I think you're getting their best game more consistently than IWU. However, despite a few disjointed games, I think when you get an A+ game out of IWU, they're pretty much unbeatable. The ceiling is super high.

I made a concerted effort this week to move away from ranking resumes and looking forward to which teams I have most confidence in to win in big moments in March.

Has IWU played down to the level of opponent from time to time? Yes. Absolutely. Have they shown up massively in pretty much every big game they've had? Also yes. I'm willing to roll the dice that they'll be ready to play when they need to.

I'm rooting for all three teams to make it to the Final Four so we can settle it on the court.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 05, 2025, 11:39:16 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 04, 2025, 04:43:02 PMHas IWU played down to the level of opponent from time to time? Yes. Absolutely.

"From time to time" is not a specific term, so let's talk specifics: In its eleven CCIW games to date, Illinois Wesleyan has lost once and been forced to win in overtime on three different occasions -- versus North Central (11-9, 4-7), versus Wheaton (3-16, 0-10), and versus Carroll (6-13, 2-8). The Titans' other game against Carroll, which they won by six, was tied with a minute and a half to go.

Your mileage may vary, but it seems to me that "from time to time" is doing a lot of heavy lifting in your description of the Titans.

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 04, 2025, 04:43:02 PMHave they shown up massively in pretty much every big game they've had? Also yes.

Carthage begs to differ. (https://cciw.org/boxscore.aspx?id=7ltyipP022aUJKmSgYVs3wXi7up73ghniwD5ElWyd07J7BNseBaMQePf0fY%2f3yUPU2iqzJuGrvibprNxltHfhvSADoY9MlcMj5D8NLPlZCJcCb49LMN9A4C%2fSwc5BoFa5OQ0TWkD2VnoiHX%2b5KOlktWdsn7d9hpv8D2ncL9CKmQ%3d&path=mbball)

Is Illinois Wesleyan a Top 5 team? Absolutely. Is Illinois Wesleyan still the favorite to win the CCIW? Absolutely. Is Illinois Wesleyan the #1 team in the country? No. And, since the most high-profile supporter of the Titans isn't even putting his alma mater at the top of his D3hoops.com Top 25 ballot, I think I'm pretty justified in saying that.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Stretch4 on February 05, 2025, 02:26:04 PM

Ryan - I appreciate you sharing your reasoning on why you voted IWU # 1 in your poll this past week. Like many of us, I think you may be over-analyzing things a bit. Maybe at their best IWU is the best team in the country. But in a weekly top 25 poll at this point in the season, I think it is the job of the voters to rank teams based on the accomplishments of the season to date. If you do that, then right now the vote has to be an undefeated Wesleyan team.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 05, 2025, 02:34:02 PM

Quote from: Stretch4 on February 05, 2025, 02:26:04 PMRyan - I appreciate you sharing your reasoning on why you voted IWU # 1 in your poll this past week. Like many of us, I think you may be over-analyzing things a bit. Maybe at their best IWU is the best team in the country. But in a weekly top 25 poll at this point in the season, I think it is the job of the voters to rank teams based on the accomplishments of the season to date. If you do that, then right now the vote has to be an undefeated Wesleyan team.

That's never my goal. From the preseason on, I try to rank the 25 teams as I expect them to be in March. Obviously, actual results on the floor affect that through the course of the year, as do injuries and other issues. In a world of sophisticated computer rankings, I, personally, don't think there's much value in a human poll trying to rank teams based solely on performance. We've got much better ways to measure that.

That also means I have to be comfortable being wrong and willing to take criticism. I've come to peace with both.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 05, 2025, 03:09:25 PM

Quote from: Stretch4 on February 05, 2025, 02:26:04 PMBut in a weekly top 25 poll at this point in the season, I think it is the job of the voters to rank teams based on the accomplishments of the season to date. If you do that, then right now the vote has to be an undefeated Wesleyan team.

I'm gonna push back on that. It's simply not true that "it is the job of the voters to rank teams based on the accomplishments of the season to date." One would hope that actual results on the floor are what's driving the ballot decisions of the voters (especially by February), but it's not required. To the best of my knowledge Pat Coleman has never given a written mandate by which a D3hoops.com voter must abide. The voter is welcome to use his or her own criteria in putting together a ballot, no matter how esoteric. I happen to agree with you that Ryan's methodology is a little out-there in this particular instance, but he is perfectly within his rights to construct his ballot in any way he sees fit.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 05, 2025, 04:35:35 PM

In the end, I had three teams. I ranked them in the order I'd pick them if they were playing each other. Obviously, at this level of talent, anyone can win on any given night, but it's a prediction game, and, right now, I think IWU's ceiling is pretty convincing.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 05, 2025, 04:39:28 PM

Quote from: Stretch4 on February 05, 2025, 02:26:04 PMI think it is the job of the voters to rank teams based on the accomplishments of the season to date.

I specifically do not ask them to do this. I ask them to rank teams, and they can choose the methodology.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: FCGrizzliesGrad on February 06, 2025, 03:24:12 AM

Just wanted to correct this from the front page

QuoteThe latest D3hoops.com men's basketball Top 25 includes the Anderson Ravens, who are in the poll for the first time in more than 14 years. Check out the full ranking.

Anderson was ranked 25th in week 1 this year when they were 4-1. They immediately lost to North Park to drop back out. But at 17-3 they're back in.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Stretch4 on February 07, 2025, 01:19:51 PM

I found it kind of funny after the discussion earlier this week that IWU went out and lost to an inferior team (not trying to slight North Central - just stating that in comparison to IWU they are inferior). Maybe the IWU ceiling isn't quite as high as some folks believe. ;)

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ziggy on February 07, 2025, 02:18:06 PM

Quote from: Stretch4 on February 07, 2025, 01:19:51 PMI found it kind of funny after the discussion earlier this week that IWU went out and lost to an inferior team (not trying to slight North Central - just stating that in comparison to IWU they are inferior). Maybe the IWU ceiling isn't quite as high as some folks believe. ;)

I don't question the ceiling at all, however they do seem to have a lower floor than other contenders.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: CNU85 on February 07, 2025, 02:48:33 PM

Very interesting insight in how things work and how individuals view things differently. Just for fun, I sat back and asked myself, how would I go about ranking the top 25? What approach would I take?

I came up with a 2 work reply:

Beats me!

Seriously, how would I be able to objectively (as possible) rank teams I am totally unfamiliar with? For those who vote, I say thank you. I'm assuming you spend some time in getting to understand the top teams and follow their progress. It's a lot of work. I'm glad I don't have to do it!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Greek Tragedy on February 07, 2025, 03:58:42 PM

Quote from: ziggy on February 07, 2025, 02:18:06 PM
Quote from: Stretch4 on February 07, 2025, 01:19:51 PMI found it kind of funny after the discussion earlier this week that IWU went out and lost to an inferior team (not trying to slight North Central - just stating that in comparison to IWU they are inferior). Maybe the IWU ceiling isn't quite as high as some folks believe. ;)

I don't question the ceiling at all, however they do seem to have a lower floor than other contenders.

IWU did beat NCC the first time around...in 3 OTs. I do think their floor is lower. It's taken them OTs to beat the 3 bottom teams in the CCIW.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 08, 2025, 02:08:45 PM

Quote from: ziggy on February 07, 2025, 02:18:06 PM
Quote from: Stretch4 on February 07, 2025, 01:19:51 PMI found it kind of funny after the discussion earlier this week that IWU went out and lost to an inferior team (not trying to slight North Central - just stating that in comparison to IWU they are inferior). Maybe the IWU ceiling isn't quite as high as some folks believe. ;)

I don't question the ceiling at all, however they do seem to have a lower floor than other contenders.

That's why I had them lower most of the year. Figures the week I decide to give them the benefit of the doubt they lose this game.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 08, 2025, 02:09:24 PM

Quote from: CNU85 on February 07, 2025, 02:48:33 PMVery interesting insight in how things work and how individuals view things differently. Just for fun, I sat back and asked myself, how would I go about ranking the top 25? What approach would I take?

I came up with a 2 work reply:

Beats me!

Seriously, how would I be able to objectively (as possible) rank teams I am totally unfamiliar with? For those who vote, I say thank you. I'm assuming you spend some time in getting to understand the top teams and follow their progress. It's a lot of work. I'm glad I don't have to do it!

Yeah, it takes a little while to get over the pressure and just trust yourself. Do your best and hopefully the collective wisdom of 25 people will cover over your glaring mistakes.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Jay Murry on February 08, 2025, 09:51:54 PM

It is fun to see the finished product, knowing that there are different interpretations of game results, different approaches of ranking teams, and pairs of eyes all across the country. At the end of the week, the final weekly poll is a pretty good blend of coffee from many kinds of beans.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 08, 2025, 09:58:31 PM

Quote from: ziggy on February 07, 2025, 02:18:06 PM
Quote from: Stretch4 on February 07, 2025, 01:19:51 PMI found it kind of funny after the discussion earlier this week that IWU went out and lost to an inferior team (not trying to slight North Central - just stating that in comparison to IWU they are inferior). Maybe the IWU ceiling isn't quite as high as some folks believe. ;)

I don't question the ceiling at all, however they do seem to have a lower floor than other contenders.

Good point about the floor, although Carthage, as I said on Wednesday, would beg to differ about the Titans having "shown up massively in pretty much every big game they've had." Today the Firebirds beat IWU by 11 in a game that Carthage led for almost the entire second half, including by as much as 14. As a result, Carthage has swept Illinois Wesleyan this season (although it's possible that the two teams will meet again in the CCIW tourney), and the Firebirds are now in first place in the CCIW.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 08, 2025, 11:43:51 PM

BTW, aside from pointing out that I disagree with ranking them #1, I'm not ragging on the Titans. The CCIW is an incredibly tough league, always has been. It's not a mere coincidence that nobody has gone undefeated in the CCIW since Richard Nixon was in the White House.

The flip side is that the CCIW double round-robin gauntlet is great preparation for tournament play if you manage to get your ticket to the dance punched.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 09, 2025, 11:55:30 AM

Ultimately, all the things that make voting for the Top 25 difficult this year are going to make for a fantastic tournament. Is there a favorite out there? No chance. Is there a team you'd be shocked to see lose in the first weekend? I don't think so.

It's going to be a great six weeks upcoming!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: GusD on February 09, 2025, 12:47:15 PM

Let me start out by saying that it would not be at all surprising if IWU stood at the top of the pile when the season's final buzzer sounds.
And, I'm not sure what anyone's floor or ceiling or whatever is, but now those supposedly #1 mighty (small m ;) ) Titans have lost two in a row. But granted, last night's loss wasn't to another "inferior" team as on Wednesday. Perhaps the Titans problem is winning away from the Taj Mahal, oops, Shirk Center? Although, aren't #1 teams supposed to also win on the road?
At any rate, floor, ceiling, or whatever, is there another team that more often profits in polls by it's past reputation than IWU?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 09, 2025, 03:56:29 PM

Quote from: GusD on February 09, 2025, 12:47:15 PMLet me start out by saying that it would not be at all surprising if IWU stood at the top of the pile when the season's final buzzer sounds.
And, I'm not sure what anyone's floor or ceiling or whatever is, but now those supposedly #1 mighty (small m ;) ) Titans have lost two in a row. But granted, last night's loss wasn't to another "inferior" team as on Wednesday. Perhaps the Titans problem is winning away from the Taj Mahal, oops, Shirk Center? Although, aren't #1 teams supposed to also win on the road?
At any rate, floor, ceiling, or whatever, is there another team that more often profits in polls by it's past reputation than IWU?

There's a whole class of blueblood programs who get the benefit of the doubt based on past performance. That's one of the ways to make decisions when it's unclear which teams are better. Williams, Randolph-Macon, Christopher Newport, WashU, Stevens Point, Whitworth, WPI.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 09, 2025, 04:28:19 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

~~#18 St Thomas (TX) currently leads Austin 56-47 with 10:58 to go.~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	621	Wesleyan	22-0	won at Bates, 73-67 OT
#2	578	Illinois Wesleyan	18-4	LOST at North Central (Ill.), 64-72; LOST at Carthage, 74-85
#3	566	New York University	19-1	def. #24 Chicago, 61-59; def. #10 Washington U., 77-58
#4	559	UW-Platteville	19-2	def. #6 UW-La Crosse, 83-73; def. UW-Stevens Point, 78-69
#5	454	Hampden-Sydney	19-3	def. #28 Virginia Wesleyan, 66-47; won at Bridgewater (Va.), 83-62
#6	449	UW-La Crosse	17-4	LOST at #4 UW-Platteville, 73-83; won at UW-Eau Claire, 60-55
#7	443	Trine	18-3	LOST at Hope, 71-79; won at Alma, 81-67
#8	442	Wisconsin Lutheran	20-1	def. Dominican, 93-90; def. Benedictine, 81-53
#9	404	St. John's	19-2	won at St. Scholastica, 100-66; def. Concordia-Moorhead, 80-73 OT
#10	401	Washington U.	15-5	LOST at Brandeis, 79-86; LOST at #3 New York University, 58-77
#11	397	Emory	17-3	won at Carnegie Mellon, 97-72; won at Case Western Reserve, 93-54
#12	392	Randolph-Macon	19-3	won at Shenandoah, 73-60; def. Eastern Mennonite, 78-48
#13	357	Trinity (Conn.)	19-3	won at Bates, 71-44
#14	306	Christopher Newport	18-4	won at Salisbury, 81-69
#15	240	Tufts	19-4	def. Amherst, 90-51; def. T#39 Hamilton, 84-69
#16	224	Whitworth	19-2	won at Lewis and Clark, 74-71; won at Willamette, 81-63
#17	178	WPI	19-2	def. Emerson, 72-46
#18	177	St. Thomas (Texas)	20-1	def. University of Dallas, 80-59; def. Austin, 85-59
#19	176	Redlands	18-3	def. #27 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 70-65; def. #20 Cal Lutheran, 77-65
#20	169	Cal Lutheran	17-4	def. La Verne, 87-66; LOST at #19 Redlands, 65-77
#21	138	Denison	19-2	won at Wabash, 53-51; def. Wittenberg, 64-56
#22	97	Keene State	18-3	won at Castleton, 92-75; def. Mass-Boston, 116-87
#23	63	Calvin	15-6	won at Alma, 74-52; won at Adrian, 92-55
#24	55	Chicago	15-5	LOST at #3 New York University, 59-61; won at Brandeis, 75-69
#25	43	Anderson	18-4	def. Manchester, 98-83; LOST to Rose-Hulman, 77-85

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	41	Trinity (Texas)	18-3	won at Texas Lutheran, 86-38; won at Southwestern, 82-57
#27	24	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	14-6	LOST at #19 Redlands, 65-70; LOST at Whittier, 71-76
#28	21	Virginia Wesleyan	16-5	LOST at #5 Hampden-Sydney, 47-66
#29	20	John Carroll	16-5	won at Mount Union, 77-72; won at Wilmington, 81-65
#30	16	Gustavus Adolphus	19-3	def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 65-55; won at Bethel, 104-75
#31	14	Roanoke	17-4	def. #35 Guilford, 78-53; won at Randolph, 94-66
T#32	10	Stevens	16-5	LOST to Arcadia, 63-66; LOST at Misericordia, 66-75
T#32	10	Catholic	18-3	def. Elizabethtown, 68-59; def. Scranton, 73-46
#34	9	RPI	17-4	LOST at Union, 77-79 OT; won at Ithaca, 54-51
#35	8	Guilford	17-5	LOST at #31 Roanoke, 53-78; def. Washington and Lee, 67-52
#36	7	Belhaven	19-3	won at Huntingdon, 71-67; def. Covenant, 103-80
T#37	4	Drew	18-3	def. Moravian, 86-65; won at Juniata, 90-66
T#37	4	Nebraska Wesleyan	16-5	LOST at Wartburg, 60-63
T#39	2	Hamilton	17-5	won at Connecticut College, 69-57; LOST at #15 Tufts, 69-84
T#39	2	North Park	14-8	LOST to Wheaton (Ill.), 89-102; LOST at North Central (Ill.), 81-86
T#39	2	Pitt-Bradford	19-1	won at Hilbert, 132-125 3OT; won at Carlow, 109-97
T#42	1	Gettysburg	16-5	LOST at Johns Hopkins, 66-72; won at Muhlenberg, 66-53
T#42	1	Stockton	16-6	won at New Jersey City, 73-72; LOST at Montclair State, 86-91

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WashedUp1 on February 16, 2025, 10:35:00 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 09, 2025, 03:56:29 PM
Quote from: GusD on February 09, 2025, 12:47:15 PMLet me start out by saying that it would not be at all surprising if IWU stood at the top of the pile when the season's final buzzer sounds.
And, I'm not sure what anyone's floor or ceiling or whatever is, but now those supposedly #1 mighty (small m ;) ) Titans have lost two in a row. But granted, last night's loss wasn't to another "inferior" team as on Wednesday. Perhaps the Titans problem is winning away from the Taj Mahal, oops, Shirk Center? Although, aren't #1 teams supposed to also win on the road?
At any rate, floor, ceiling, or whatever, is there another team that more often profits in polls by it's past reputation than IWU?

There's a whole class of blueblood programs who get the benefit of the doubt based on past performance. That's one of the ways to make decisions when it's unclear which teams are better. Williams, Randolph-Macon, Christopher Newport, WashU, Stevens Point, Whitworth, WPI.

Ryan - I have a ton of respect for you and all you do for D3. But putting WPI in the same "blueblood" group as Williams, RMC, CNU, WashU, Stevens Point & Whitworth?

Since the 2015-16 season, WPI has three tournament appearances total & three wins in the tournament. If that is what is considered a blueblood......

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 16, 2025, 05:39:39 PM

Quote from: WashedUp1 on February 16, 2025, 10:35:00 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 09, 2025, 03:56:29 PM
Quote from: GusD on February 09, 2025, 12:47:15 PMLet me start out by saying that it would not be at all surprising if IWU stood at the top of the pile when the season's final buzzer sounds.
And, I'm not sure what anyone's floor or ceiling or whatever is, but now those supposedly #1 mighty (small m ;) ) Titans have lost two in a row. But granted, last night's loss wasn't to another "inferior" team as on Wednesday. Perhaps the Titans problem is winning away from the Taj Mahal, oops, Shirk Center? Although, aren't #1 teams supposed to also win on the road?
At any rate, floor, ceiling, or whatever, is there another team that more often profits in polls by it's past reputation than IWU?

There's a whole class of blueblood programs who get the benefit of the doubt based on past performance. That's one of the ways to make decisions when it's unclear which teams are better. Williams, Randolph-Macon, Christopher Newport, WashU, Stevens Point, Whitworth, WPI.

Ryan - I have a ton of respect for you and all you do for D3. But putting WPI in the same "blueblood" group as Williams, RMC, CNU, WashU, Stevens Point & Whitworth?

Since the 2015-16 season, WPI has three tournament appearances total & three wins in the tournament. If that is what is considered a blueblood......

WPI has basically had a Top 20 team for two straight decades. They play great defense and compete with 95% of the teams in the division. That's reliability. When it comes to Top 25, if I'm stuck picking between WPI and a team on a hot streak for the first time in a decade for my #25 spot, I'm going with WPI almost every time.

I'd put Whitworth in the same category. They've rarely got teams capable of winning the title, but they've got Top 25 teams almost every year. That's blueblood to me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 16, 2025, 06:05:16 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	624	Wesleyan	24-0	won at Bowdoin, 84-73; won at Colby, 91-64
#2	591	New York University	21-1	won at #5 Emory, 82-79; won at Rochester, 86-69
#3	584	UW-Platteville	21-2	won at UW-Eau Claire, 72-50; def. UW-Stout, 76-58
#4	512	Hampden-Sydney	20-4	def. Guilford, 78-71; LOST at #28 Roanoke, 72-81
#5	481	Emory	18-4	LOST to #2 New York University, 79-82; def. Brandeis, 89-83 OT
#6	460	St. John's	20-3	def. Macalester, 80-63; LOST at #29 Gustavus Adolphus, 62-66
#7	455	Wisconsin Lutheran	21-2	LOST at MSOE, 83-91; won at Edgewood, 107-83
#8	448	Randolph-Macon	20-3	won at Lynchburg, 70-53
#9	434	UW-La Crosse	19-4	def. UW-Whitewater, 70-56; won at UW-Oshkosh, 75-69
#10	401	Trinity (Conn.)	21-3	won at Colby, 88-78; won at Bowdoin, 87-43
#11	352	Trine	20-3	won at Albion, 72-69; def. Olivet, 89-55
#12	350	Christopher Newport	20-4	def. Salisbury, 67-65; def. Mary Washington, 71-55
#13	321	Illinois Wesleyan	19-4	def. Millikin, 96-60
#14	304	Tufts	20-4	def. Bates, 83-75 OT
#15	248	Whitworth	21-2	def. Pacific, 84-65; def. George Fox, 92-87
#16	246	Redlands	20-3	won at La Verne, 86-78; def. Occidental, 69-67
#17	215	WPI	21-2	won at Clark, 67-64; def. MIT, 72-53
#18	187	St. Thomas (Texas)	21-2	LOST at University of the Ozarks, 76-78; won at Centenary (La.), 68-58
#19	158	Washington U.	17-5	won at Case Western Reserve, 86-68; won at Carnegie Mellon, 78-54
#20	153	Denison	21-2	won at DePauw, 77-62; won at Hiram, 77-64
#21	124	Keene State	19-4	def. Eastern Connecticut, 70-68; LOST at Western Connecticut, 73-74
#22	95	Calvin	17-6	won at Olivet, 80-75; def. Kalamazoo, 108-75
#23	76	Cal Lutheran	19-4	won at Occidental, 86-77; def. Whittier, 97-77
#24	67	Chicago	16-6	won at Carnegie Mellon, 82-68; LOST at Case Western Reserve, 79-83
#25	40	Trinity (Texas)	20-3	def. Texas Lutheran, 80-59; def. Southwestern, 94-63

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	35	Carthage	18-5	won at North Central (Ill.), 73-71; def. Wheaton (Ill.), 89-80
#27	28	Catholic	19-4	def. Juniata, 75-45; LOST at #31 Drew, 70-77
#28	27	Roanoke	19-4	won at Washington and Lee, 84-57; def. #4 Hampden-Sydney, 81-72
#29	25	Gustavus Adolphus	21-3	won at St. Olaf, 83-55; def. #6 St. John's, 66-62
#30	20	John Carroll	18-5	def. Baldwin Wallace, 82-55; def. Capital, 77-70
#31	18	Drew	20-3	won at Wilkes, 102-92; def. #27 Catholic, 77-70
#32	14	Belhaven	21-3	def. Huntingdon, 73-64; def. Asbury, 95-66
T#33	9	Virginia Wesleyan	18-5	def. Averett, 70-53; def. Bridgewater (Va.), 111-60
T#33	9	Pitt-Bradford	20-2	won at Alfred State, 108-84; LOST to Penn State-Behrend, 62-69
#35	7	Anderson	19-5	won at Hanover, 84-81; LOST at Berea, 71-96
#36	5	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	16-6	def. Occidental, 86-57; def. Pomona-Pitzer, 90-77
#37	2	Maryville	18-5	won at Asbury, 89-70

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WashedUp1 on February 18, 2025, 10:31:39 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 16, 2025, 05:39:39 PM
Quote from: WashedUp1 on February 16, 2025, 10:35:00 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 09, 2025, 03:56:29 PM
Quote from: GusD on February 09, 2025, 12:47:15 PMLet me start out by saying that it would not be at all surprising if IWU stood at the top of the pile when the season's final buzzer sounds.
And, I'm not sure what anyone's floor or ceiling or whatever is, but now those supposedly #1 mighty (small m ;) ) Titans have lost two in a row. But granted, last night's loss wasn't to another "inferior" team as on Wednesday. Perhaps the Titans problem is winning away from the Taj Mahal, oops, Shirk Center? Although, aren't #1 teams supposed to also win on the road?
At any rate, floor, ceiling, or whatever, is there another team that more often profits in polls by it's past reputation than IWU?

There's a whole class of blueblood programs who get the benefit of the doubt based on past performance. That's one of the ways to make decisions when it's unclear which teams are better. Williams, Randolph-Macon, Christopher Newport, WashU, Stevens Point, Whitworth, WPI.

Ryan - I have a ton of respect for you and all you do for D3. But putting WPI in the same "blueblood" group as Williams, RMC, CNU, WashU, Stevens Point & Whitworth?

Since the 2015-16 season, WPI has three tournament appearances total & three wins in the tournament. If that is what is considered a blueblood......

WPI has basically had a Top 20 team for two straight decades. They play great defense and compete with 95% of the teams in the division. That's reliability. When it comes to Top 25, if I'm stuck picking between WPI and a team on a hot streak for the first time in a decade for my #25 spot, I'm going with WPI almost every time.

I'd put Whitworth in the same category. They've rarely got teams capable of winning the title, but they've got Top 25 teams almost every year. That's blueblood to me.

It was shared earlier that the Top 25 poll is meant to be forward looking - trying to identify who will be the top 25 teams at the end of the year. I believe the statement was something along the lines of "if it was meant to be a retrospective, then we can look at computer polls for that."

So all these years of voting for WPI to be a top 25, you would think they would be routinely reaching the Round of 32 or the Sweet 16. Because that is where you would find the teams that are the top 25 in the country at the end of the year.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 18, 2025, 04:24:23 PM

Quote from: WashedUp1 on February 18, 2025, 10:31:39 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 16, 2025, 05:39:39 PM
Quote from: WashedUp1 on February 16, 2025, 10:35:00 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 09, 2025, 03:56:29 PM
Quote from: GusD on February 09, 2025, 12:47:15 PMLet me start out by saying that it would not be at all surprising if IWU stood at the top of the pile when the season's final buzzer sounds.
And, I'm not sure what anyone's floor or ceiling or whatever is, but now those supposedly #1 mighty (small m ;) ) Titans have lost two in a row. But granted, last night's loss wasn't to another "inferior" team as on Wednesday. Perhaps the Titans problem is winning away from the Taj Mahal, oops, Shirk Center? Although, aren't #1 teams supposed to also win on the road?
At any rate, floor, ceiling, or whatever, is there another team that more often profits in polls by it's past reputation than IWU?

There's a whole class of blueblood programs who get the benefit of the doubt based on past performance. That's one of the ways to make decisions when it's unclear which teams are better. Williams, Randolph-Macon, Christopher Newport, WashU, Stevens Point, Whitworth, WPI.

Ryan - I have a ton of respect for you and all you do for D3. But putting WPI in the same "blueblood" group as Williams, RMC, CNU, WashU, Stevens Point & Whitworth?

Since the 2015-16 season, WPI has three tournament appearances total & three wins in the tournament. If that is what is considered a blueblood......

WPI has basically had a Top 20 team for two straight decades. They play great defense and compete with 95% of the teams in the division. That's reliability. When it comes to Top 25, if I'm stuck picking between WPI and a team on a hot streak for the first time in a decade for my #25 spot, I'm going with WPI almost every time.

I'd put Whitworth in the same category. They've rarely got teams capable of winning the title, but they've got Top 25 teams almost every year. That's blueblood to me.
It was shared earlier that the Top 25 poll is meant to be forward looking - trying to identify who will be the top 25 teams at the end of the year. I believe the statement was something along the lines of "if it was meant to be a retrospective, then we can look at computer polls for that."

So all these years of voting for WPI to be a top 25, you would think they would be routinely reaching the Round of 32 or the Sweet 16. Because that is where you would find the teams that are the top 25 in the country at the end of the year.

Depending on who they get matched up against.

And just FYI, I think you're quoting Ryan but that's not an official descriptor of the Top 25.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: D3BBALL on February 18, 2025, 05:04:35 PM

I always thought top 25 was at that time of the vote, not looking forward or who is hot or not.
On WPI I would say they are somewhere in the middle in this argument. They have been dominant in their conference but as the NPI shows it does not value their conference that highly nor did the committee last year and the year before. I believe they were regular season champs, or tied, lost in conference playoffs and did not receive a bid the last 2 years. I believe both years they started in top 25 but by regular season end they were not. Both years only 1 team made NCAA out of the NEWMAC. This year unless they lose the conference championship, which is very possible, only 1 team gets in. This year not sure they're out of conference schedule was that good except tufts, who they did beat, but they lost to Suffolk on neutral court. No matter what they are in NCAA, but I don't view them as a contender for final 4. Since 2007 they have made it past the 2nd round once and been in the NCAA like 10 times. How many of those years were there multiple bids.
So I think they are close but not blue blood, as they haven't really had the benefit of blue bloods, as they have had good records and then don't make NCAA.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 18, 2025, 08:08:07 PM

I didn't vote for WPI this week.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WashedUp1 on February 19, 2025, 10:48:11 AM

Quote from: D3BBALL on February 18, 2025, 05:04:35 PMI always thought top 25 was at that time of the vote, not looking forward or who is hot or not.
On WPI I would say they are somewhere in the middle in this argument. They have been dominant in their conference but as the NPI shows it does not value their conference that highly nor did the committee last year and the year before. I believe they were regular season champs, or tied, lost in conference playoffs and did not receive a bid the last 2 years. I believe both years they started in top 25 but by regular season end they were not. Both years only 1 team made NCAA out of the NEWMAC. This year unless they lose the conference championship, which is very possible, only 1 team gets in. This year not sure they're out of conference schedule was that good except tufts, who they did beat, but they lost to Suffolk on neutral court. No matter what they are in NCAA, but I don't view them as a contender for final 4. Since 2007 they have made it past the 2nd round once and been in the NCAA like 10 times. How many of those years were there multiple bids.
So I think they are close but not blue blood, as they haven't really had the benefit of blue bloods, as they have had good records and then don't make NCAA.

And that was my only call out - the descriptor "blue blood." When someone says a blue blood you think of programs like Duke, Kentucky, Kansas, UNC, etc.

Coach Bartley does a great job recruiting & coaching his guys up. They just don't compete on the national stage the way that other schools do on a consistent basis.

Or at the D3 level I would say UW-Whitewater, UW Stevens Point, Williams, Amherst, Randolph-Macon and schools that regularly have reached Final Fours across multiple eras.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 19, 2025, 11:41:01 AM

I just meant to refer to teams you can reliably count on to be decent. Even if WPI has a couple down years, you can usually believe your eyes when they look good. The opposite example of this might be Easter, this season. Many of us thought they were going to be quite good and it turns out they've struggled mightily. It's going to be hard to trust your eyes there in a way it never will be with WPI.

I'd also argue, with 420 programs, if you're consistently in the Top 25-40 programs year in and year out, you're a blueblood.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on February 23, 2025, 05:55:41 PM

How They Fared (Complete)

~~One result (Trinity-Texas vs. Colorado College) pending.~~

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	623	Wesleyan	25-0	def. Amherst, 65-58
#2	596	New York University	23-1	def. Carnegie Mellon, 77-61; def. Case Western Reserve, 83-55
#3	581	UW-Platteville	23-2	won at UW-Whitewater, 78-62; def. UW-River Falls, 85-44
#4	510	Randolph-Macon	22-3	def. #31 Virginia Wesleyan, 80-59; won at Randolph, 109-54
#5	493	UW-La Crosse	21-4	won at UW-River Falls, 86-79; def. UW-Stevens Point, 74-60
#6	473	Trinity (Conn.)	22-3	def. Colby, 77-56
#7	434	Emory	19-5	won at #32 Chicago, 77-72; LOST at #18 Washington U., 75-85
#8	428	Hampden-Sydney	21-4	def. Eastern Mennonite, 95-78
#9	390	Trine	21-4	won at Kalamazoo, 81-49; LOST at #20 Calvin, 53-70
#10	386	Christopher Newport	21-4	won at Mary Washington, 72-58
#11	365	Illinois Wesleyan	20-5	def. North Park, 87-81; LOST at Augustana, 76-85
#12	362	St. John's	22-3	def. Augsburg, 110-63; won at Bethel, 89-62
#13	317	Tufts	21-4	def. Williams, 80-70
#14	286	Redlands	22-3	def. Chapman, 97-73; won at Whittier, 83-79
#15	275	Whitworth	22-3	LOST at Whitman, 63-79; won at Linfield, 72-71
#16	265	Wisconsin Lutheran	23-2	def. Concordia (Wis.), 90-59; won at Lakeland, 87-84
#17	243	WPI	23-2	won at Springfield, 58-52; def. Wheaton (Mass.), 92-56
#18	193	Washington U.	19-5	def. Rochester, 78-48; def. #7 Emory, 85-75
#19	178	Denison	22-3	LOST to Wooster, 72-75; won at Ohio Wesleyan, 67-62
#20	133	Calvin	19-6	won at Albion, 74-47; def. #9 Trine, 70-53
#21	115	Gustavus Adolphus	21-4	LOST at Carleton, 61-73
#22	94	Cal Lutheran	21-4	def. T#34 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 68-63; won at Caltech, 80-50
#23	90	Roanoke	21-4	def. Ferrum, 75-73 OT; def. Apprentice School, 92-64
#24	73	Trinity (Texas)	21-4	LOST at #25 St. Thomas (Texas), 69-81; won at Colorado College, 83-76
#25	56	St. Thomas (Texas)	23-2	def. #24 Trinity (Texas), 81-69; def. Schreiner, 63-61

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	46	Carthage	20-5	def. Elmhurst, 83-71; won at Millikin, 84-77
#27	42	Drew	22-3	def. Elizabethtown, 96-87; won at Susquehanna, 83-55
#28	24	Keene State	20-5	def. Mass-Dartmouth, 100-90; LOST at Rhode Island College, 66-67
#29	20	John Carroll	20-5	won at Heidelberg, 76-71; def. Muskingum, 90-84 OT
#30	16	Belhaven	21-4	LOST to #33 Maryville (Tenn.), 72-77
#31	7	Virginia Wesleyan	19-6	LOST at #4 Randolph-Macon, 59-80; won at Lynchburg, 75-66
#32	5	Chicago	17-7	LOST to #7 Emory, 72-77; def. Rochester, 89-68
#33	3	Maryville (Tenn.)	20-5	won at Covenant, 107-86; won at #30 Belhaven, 77-72
T#34	1	Catholic	21-4	won at Goucher, 78-61; def. Lycoming, 91-60
T#34	1	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	18-7	won at Caltech, 90-68; LOST at #22 Cal Lutheran, 63-68; won at Chapman, 74-63
T#34	1	Franklin and Marshall	19-6	won at Dickinson, 69-53; won at Gettysburg, 64-59

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WPI89 on February 24, 2025, 10:55:29 AM

I was in Worcester a week ago Saturday - and both WPI's final 8 teams were honored. It was a fun afternoon. I think WPI (under Bartley) for the last 20 years has been the model of consistency. They must be top 10 (maybe top 5?) in total wins over that span. However, I think you need to mix in a few final 4s and have at least 1 championship to be a Blue Blood.

No issues calling them a premier D3 basketball school - but Blue Blood means National Championships to me.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 25, 2025, 11:12:47 AM

WPI has to be on the short list for "best overall D3 program never to make a Final Four." Tufts, Whitworth, Hamilton, St. John's (MN), Maryville, Emory, and Johns Hopkins are some other that come to mind (and many of these schools have a shot at it this year!), but I think WPI has to be the most consistently strong program to have fallen JUST short.

Best D3 program never to have won a title would also be an interesting list, of course ... maybe Hampden-Sydney, F&M, Augustana, Wooster or Hope?

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Pat Coleman on February 26, 2025, 10:58:26 AM

I would trim that to F&M, Wooster and Hope. Hampden-Sydney has had a couple of big peaks of competitiveness but they were practically two decades apart. Augustana I could see in there especially with the historical aspect, though.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ziggy on February 26, 2025, 12:39:06 PM

Quote from: nescac1 on February 25, 2025, 11:12:47 AMWPI has to be on the short list for "best overall D3 program never to make a Final Four." Tufts, Whitworth, Hamilton, St. John's (MN), Maryville, Emory, and Johns Hopkins are some other that come to mind (and many of these schools have a shot at it this year!), but I think WPI has to be the most consistently strong program to have fallen JUST short.

Best D3 program never to have won a title would also be an interesting list, of course ... maybe Hampden-Sydney, F&M, Augustana, Wooster or Hope?

Over the offseason we took a look at the "Top ten D3 programs of all-time" list inspired by a point-based system used by CBSsports.com a few years ago to make a D1 program ranking.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rj0aCV_uEZM

F&M was tops in the list among programs without a championship, followed by Augustana, Wooster and Hope.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 26, 2025, 01:12:09 PM

WPI essentially had a Final Four level team three years ago, they just bracketed with Randolph-Macon. They got smoked like everyone else, but they hung with RMC as well as anyone and definitely matched up favorably against everyone else remaining. Sometimes it's just the way the bracket works.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: nescac1 on February 26, 2025, 01:57:11 PM

Yeah, hitting RMC at any time is generally bad luck. But for terrible luck with the COVID interruption just as RMC was peaking, we might be comparing this current RMC run to the Bo Ryan Platteville teams in terms of pure dominance, and I'm convinced Josh Merkel could have just as much success if he ever moves up to D1. Kind of stunned a strong D1 program hasn't recruited him away (though maybe he is happy dominating D3 in perpetuity). It doesn't really matter who graduates or if they seem undersized or too young or lack depth in a particular year, they are at a minimum nearly impossible to score on year after year, and when the roster is full of veterans, good luck.

2019: 27-4, one point loss in Sweet 16
2020: 28-2 (only one D3 loss), and probably the favorite to win the title before COVID
2021: 12-0, another loaded team that could have won the title
2022: 33-1, a one-point road loss to CNU short of a perfect season, maybe the most dominant D3 tournament run ever
2023: 29-2, number one for most of the year, tough loss in the Sweet 16
2024: 25-5, lost in the Sweet 16 in a "down" year
2025: 22-3, currently on a 19-game winning streak and looking poised for another deep tourney run

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on February 26, 2025, 02:47:55 PM

^^^ Nice summary there. In that 2020 28-2 season the two losses were to Mary Washington and Guilford. There was a third loss in a pre-season exhibition game to D1 University of Richmond.

Yellow Jacket fans all hope Coach Merkle is happy at RMC and chooses to remain for a long time. I heard him say several years ago, I think in an interview with Dave McHugh, that he likes being at RMC. Hopefully nothing will change that -- not even a lucrative D1 offer.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: WashedUp1 on February 27, 2025, 09:30:15 AM

Quote from: nescac1 on February 26, 2025, 01:57:11 PMYeah, hitting RMC at any time is generally bad luck. But for terrible luck with the COVID interruption just as RMC was peaking, we might be comparing this current RMC run to the Bo Ryan Platteville teams in terms of pure dominance, and I'm convinced Josh Merkel could have just as much success if he ever moves up to D1. Kind of stunned a strong D1 program hasn't recruited him away (though maybe he is happy dominating D3 in perpetuity). It doesn't really matter who graduates or if they seem undersized or too young or lack depth in a particular year, they are at a minimum nearly impossible to score on year after year, and when the roster is full of veterans, good luck.

2019: 27-4, one point loss in Sweet 16
2020: 28-2 (only one D3 loss), and probably the favorite to win the title before COVID
2021: 12-0, another loaded team that could have won the title
2022: 33-1, a one-point road loss to CNU short of a perfect season, maybe the most dominant D3 tournament run ever
2023: 29-2, number one for most of the year, tough loss in the Sweet 16
2024: 25-5, lost in the Sweet 16 in a "down" year
2025: 22-3, currently on a 19-game winning streak and looking poised for another deep tourney run

Beyond being a great coach, he is a great person as well. One of my all-time favorites. I too am a bit surprised that a mid-Atlantic low-major hasn't tried to woo him away yet but a lot of coaches will tell you you don't mess with happy!

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 27, 2025, 11:00:24 AM

I've talked to Merkel, not about him moving to D1, but about D3 coaches doing it in general, and he said, "the only benefit is the money," referencing all the other headaches that come with contemporary D1 basketball. So, I suspect, so long as he and his family are happy and comfortable in Ashland, he'll probably stick around.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on February 27, 2025, 11:04:08 AM

And if he needed any more disincentives, I would think the increasing factor of NIL in D1 would provide it.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Gregory Sager on February 27, 2025, 11:27:32 AM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 26, 2025, 10:58:26 AMI would trim that to F&M, Wooster and Hope. Hampden-Sydney has had a couple of big peaks of competitiveness but they were practically two decades apart. Augustana I could see in there especially with the historical aspect, though.

Augustana is 44-19 in D3 tourney play, and those 44 wins put Augie in the top five all-time in tourney victories. Augie's .698 winning percentage in the tournament is in the top ten all-time for programs that have played at least ten D3 tournament games. Augie has appeared in six Final Fours, which is tied for third-best all-time. And the Rock Islanders have played in four national championship games (and lost them all, of course; they're the Buffalo Bills or the Minnesota Vikings of D3 men's basketball); that ties them with Williams, UW-Oshkosh, UW-Platteville, UWSP, and Wittenberg behind only North Park for second place in that important category. And let's not overlook the fact that Augustana and Wittenberg are the only programs in D3 men's basketball that have reached the Final Four in four different decades, or that Augie and Witt are the only programs in D3 MBB that have played in a national championship game in three different decades.

(Wittenberg has a similar pedigree to Augie's, except that the Tigers have actually won a national championship. Among other things, Witt is tied with Hope for the most D3 tourney appearances, each having had their ticket to the dance punched 30 times. But I can see why people would omit Witt from these blueblood conversations, given that since the COVID stoppage Witt is only four games above .500 with zero D3 tourney appearances.)

Anyone who's going to indulge in this dubious "who's a D3 men's basketball blueblood and who isn't?" exercise has to admit that Augustana is one of the best programs to never have won a title.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: ronk on February 27, 2025, 11:41:29 AM

And I witnessed 1 of those Augie Final 4 losses in the '76 semi to eventual champ Scranton(over Witt).

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on March 02, 2025, 09:17:51 AM

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 27, 2025, 11:00:24 AMI've talked to Merkel, not about him moving to D1, but about D3 coaches doing it in general, and he said, "the only benefit is the money," referencing all the other headaches that come with contemporary D1 basketball. So, I suspect, so long as he and his family are happy and comfortable in Ashland, he'll probably stick around.

I'm sure that quote "the only benefit is the money" is true for Coach Merkle. But other former D3 coaches now in D1 might thrive on the perceived negatives of coaching at that level. I think of former RMC coach Mike Rhoades, now at Penn State. He must have a kind of personal ambition that allows him to deal with the pressure of being a D1 coach, especially in the Big 10. It seems he very intentionally charted a post-RMC path (assistant at VCU, head coach at Rice, head coach at VCU) to get to where he is now.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: bopol on March 02, 2025, 11:47:15 AM

Quote from: y_jack_lok on March 02, 2025, 09:17:51 AM
Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on February 27, 2025, 11:00:24 AMI've talked to Merkel, not about him moving to D1, but about D3 coaches doing it in general, and he said, "the only benefit is the money," referencing all the other headaches that come with contemporary D1 basketball. So, I suspect, so long as he and his family are happy and comfortable in Ashland, he'll probably stick around.

I'm sure that quote "the only benefit is the money" is true for Coach Merkle. But other former D3 coaches now in D1 might thrive on the perceived negatives of coaching at that level. I think of former RMC coach Mike Rhoades, now at Penn State. He must have a kind of personal ambition that allows him to deal with the pressure of being a D1 coach, especially in the Big 10. It seems he very intentionally charted a post-RMC path (assistant at VCU, head coach at Rice, head coach at VCU) to get to where he is now.

I'd say that a person that knows themselves well enough to know where they will be happy is a lucky person.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Darryl Nester on March 02, 2025, 06:10:12 PM

How They Fared (Complete)—~~still awaiting the result of CMS/Cal Lutheran (currently at halftime).~~

The final report of the 2024-25 season.

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	623	Wesleyan	26-1	def. T#33 Hamilton, 82-77 2OT; LOST to #6 Trinity (Conn.), 67-75
#2	593	New York University	24-1	won at Brandeis, 94-76
#3	584	UW-Platteville	25-2	def. UW-Stevens Point, 83-73; def. #4 UW-La Crosse, 89-68
#4	522	UW-La Crosse	22-5	def. UW-Eau Claire, 69-55; LOST at #3 UW-Platteville, 68-89
#5	503	Randolph-Macon	23-4	def. Shenandoah, 81-51; LOST to (n) Guilford, 49-52
#6	496	Trinity (Conn.)	24-3	def. (n) #9 Tufts, 74-51; won at #1 Wesleyan, 75-67
#7	457	Hampden-Sydney	21-5	LOST to Lynchburg, 66-72
#8	441	Christopher Newport	22-5	def. (n) UC Santa Cruz, 84-78; LOST to (n) Mary Washington, 66-71
#9	389	Tufts	21-5	LOST to (n) #6 Trinity (Conn.), 51-74
#10	359	St. John's	24-3	def. Hamline, 72-54; def. Carleton, 74-59
#11	340	Redlands	22-4	LOST to T#30 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 87-89
#12	317	Emory	20-5	won at Rochester, 103-70
#13	283	Washington U.	19-6	LOST at T#37 Chicago, 68-76
#14	268	WPI	24-3	def. Emerson, 93-73; LOST to Clark, 65-80
#15	267	Calvin	21-6	def. Olivet, 63-47; def. Hope, 62-59
#16	259	Illinois Wesleyan	22-5	def. Augustana, 70-65; won at #23 Carthage, 79-60
#17	238	Wisconsin Lutheran	25-3	def. Rockford, 86-57; def. Concordia (Wis.), 86-65; LOST to St. Norbert, 52-70
#18	233	Trine	21-5	LOST to (n) Hope, 62-64
#19	162	Roanoke	23-5	def. Ferrum, 89-75; def. (n) Lynchburg, 96-92 OT; LOST to (n) Guilford, 74-79
#20	151	Cal Lutheran	22-5	def. Whittier, 90-89; LOST to T#30 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps, 71-72
#21	141	Whitworth	22-4	LOST to Lewis and Clark, 64-71
#22	97	St. Thomas (Texas)	25-2	def. (n) Schreiner, 61-60; def. (n) #29 Trinity (Texas), 58-53 OT
#23	92	Carthage	21-6	def. North Central (Ill.), 84-83; LOST to #16 Illinois Wesleyan, 60-79
#24	80	Denison	24-3	def. Ohio Wesleyan, 74-70; def. Wooster, 79-68
#25	77	Drew	24-3	def. Susquehanna, 97-81; def. T#30 Catholic, 85-70

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	35	Gustavus Adolphus	21-5	LOST to Carleton, 64-75
#27	34	John Carroll	22-5	def. Muskingum, 80-62; def. Mount Union, 82-69
#28	26	Franklin and Marshall	21-6	def. Ursinus, 75-64; def. Johns Hopkins, 60-47
#29	25	Trinity (Texas)	22-5	def. (n) Colorado College, 67-50; LOST to (n) #22 St. Thomas (Texas), 53-58 OT
T#30	6	Claremont-Mudd-Scripps	20-7	won at #11 Redlands, 89-87; won at #20 Cal Lutheran, 72-71
T#30	6	Catholic	22-5	def. Wilkes, 96-76; LOST at #25 Drew, 70-85
T#30	6	Maryville (Tenn.)	21-6	def. Asbury, 91-73; LOST to Huntingdon, 92-93
T#33	4	Ramapo	20-7	def. Stockton, 88-81; LOST at T#37 Montclair State, 85-91 OT
T#33	4	Hamilton	20-6	LOST at #1 Wesleyan, 77-82 2OT
T#35	2	Anderson	22-6	def. Hanover, 84-69; LOST to Franklin, 66-72
T#35	2	Belhaven	21-5	LOST to (n) Huntingdon, 66-78
T#37	1	Chicago	18-7	def. #13 Washington U., 76-68
T#37	1	Montclair State	21-6	def. TCNJ, 80-62; def. T#33 Ramapo, 91-85 OT
T#37	1	Virginia Wesleyan	19-7	LOST to Guilford, 61-74

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: monsoon on March 02, 2025, 06:59:55 PM

Thanks for doing these again this year, Darryl; here and on the women's page.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: y_jack_lok on March 02, 2025, 10:23:06 PM

Fifteen of the top 25 lost in their conference tournaments. Four of them lost to other top 25 teams.

Title: Re: Top 25 talk
Post by: Titan Q on May 26, 2025, 11:03:44 AM

Matt Goldsmith (new Middlebury head coach) on the Q-cast...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2UjoLF7Dwc

Score by Periods	1st	2nd	OT	OT2	OT3	OT4	-	Total
William Paterson..............	22	32	8	7	2	5	-	76
Richard Stockton..............	21	33	8	7	2	6	-	77

D3boards.com

Division III basketball (Posting Up) => Men's Basketball => Multi-Regional Topics => Topic started by: Lurker on March 23, 2005, 09:02:04 AM